Nov 09, 2021 Planning Commission

I THINK OUR FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS, UH, CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.

UH,

[CITIZEN COMMUNICATION]

AND I THINK WE HAVE MR. CANTU GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS MARIO CANTU.

I JUST WANTED TO BRING THIS TO YOUR ATTENTION.

UH, ON-SITE PET AREAS, UH, WITH RENTALS, CONDOS DEVELOPMENT, IT'S GOING TO BE ESSENTIAL TO HAVE THESE ON-SITE PET AREAS NEXT, PLEASE, AUSTIN CITY PARKS ARE BEING INUNDATED A LOT WITH OUR FAMILY MEMBERS.

UH, WE HAVE CHILDREN AND WE HAVE PETS AND PETS ARE TREATED LIKE CHILDREN AS WELL.

WE ALSO HAVE OFF-LEASH VERSUS ON LEASH AREAS AT THE IMPACT

[00:05:01]

THAT IMPACT WITH OUR CITY.

IF YOU LOOK AT THIS IMAGE, YOU'LL SEE AN INDIVIDUAL, THIS IS A, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ON LEASH, AND WE HAVE TWO DOGS THERE THAT ARE KIND OF ROAMING AROUND PLAYING NEXT.

AND THIS IS JUST THE BASKETBALL COURT.

THAT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT AWAY FROM THAT FOR A SECOND IMAGE THAT YOU SAW THAT FIRST IMAGE THAT YOU CAN SEE THE GENTLEMAN KIND OF LOOKING WITH THE BASKETBALL KIND OF OFF TO THE LEFT THINKING, OKAY, WHAT'S GOING ON? AND THEN WE LOOK AT THE CHILDREN THAT ARE SITTING THERE WITH A LEASHED DOG.

THERE ARE LEASHED DOG, AND THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE REALLY HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.

UH, WHEN THESE DOGS BECOME LOOSE AND CONDOS ARE IN DATA WITH INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE A LOT OF PETS, THEY COME OVER HERE AND HAVE FUN WITH OFF-LEASH DOGS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE LEASHED NEXT.

AND SO THIS IS AN IMAGE OF A CONDO, AND YOU'LL SEE THE PERSON THERE AT THE CENTER WITH A DOG THAT'S LEASHED, UH, GREEN SPACE TO YOUR RIGHT, WITH THE TREES, WITH THE BICYCLE AND THE LARGE TREE THAT SPACE CREATES A, UH, AREA FOR THE DOGS TO GO OUT AND KIND OF HAVE FUN, WHICH IS AN EASEMENT CITY EASEMENT, UH, UH, NO ON-SITE AREA HERE NEXT, PLEASE.

AND THEN LASTLY, UH, WHO DO, WHO DO WE NEED TO PROTECT? WE NEED TO PROTECT ALL CITIZENS, ESPECIALLY THE CHILDREN THAT ARE WITHIN AND USING THE PARKS AND OTHER PETS AND FAMILY MEMBERS.

WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO HIGH CONSIDERATION THAT CHILDREN ARE VULNERABLE TO, UH, PETS, LOOSE PETS, LOOSE ANIMALS.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF MANY OF YOU ALL, BUT I HAVE SEEN VERY MANY KIDS GET HURT, UH, MANED BY DOGS AS ACCIDENTALLY.

A LOT OF TIMES ACCIDENTS DO HAPPEN.

AND THEN WHEN THIS HAPPENS, A LOT OF TIMES IT'S DONE TO THE FACE AND SHOULDERS.

AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS THERE, THEY HAVE TO GET A LOT OF SURGERY DONE AND THERE'LL BE, HAVE SOME CHANGES FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE.

UH, WE, WE AS INDIVIDUALS, NOT JUST MYSELF AS CITIZENS AND COMMISSIONERS CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

AND I PLEASE ASK THAT, UH, WHEN YOU HAVE CONDOS DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU ASK AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THESE IN PLACE, BECAUSE, UH, WE'RE GETTING MORE PEOPLE HERE AND MORE PEOPLE OR MORE FAMILY MEMBERS.

SO LET ME GO AND MAKE A READ THROUGH HERE.

THANK YOU, MR. CANTU.

IT'S NOW, UM, UH, ITEM ON OUR AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES.

UM, IT'S THE FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA? THE MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 26TH, 2021 WERE INCLUDED AS BACKUP.

DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THOSE MINUTES? OKAY.

UM, AND THEN, UH, GOING TO KIND OF INCLUDE THAT IN THE CONSENT AGENDA AND ROLLING INTO THE ITEMS THAT ARE ON CONSENT.

I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO A FIRST READING OF STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AND THEN, UM, I KNOW ANDREW WILL BE MONITORING FOLKS SIGNING UP, UH, TO SPEAK.

AND IF ANY, COME UP FOR THE ITEMS THAT ARE ON CONSENT, WE MAY PULL THOSE AND AS WELL OF COMMISSIONERS WANT TO PULL ANY ITEMS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW, UH, BEFORE WE, UH, CLOSE THE HEARING AND PUT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

[Reading of Agenda]

AND SO WE'VE GOT, WE HAVE GOT, UM, I'VE GOT AN UPDATED VERSION HERE.

I KIND OF NEED TO READ BOTH.

LET'S SAY WE HAVE ITEM A B ONE, WHICH IS, UH, WE WILL TAKE UP, UH, WELL ITEM TO BE ONE NT, UH, B2.

THESE ARE THE ZONING CASE AND PLAN AMENDMENT.

AND THESE ARE FOR, UH, 6, 7 0 5 AND 6, 5 0 1.

UH, UM, AND I'M GOING TO MISS FOR ANALYSIS.

IT'S A RIGID ROUTINE XEN ROAD.

AND, UH, IF YOU ALL, UH, COMMISSIONERS RECALL, WE HAD, UM, WE HAD HEARD THE, UM, STAFF AND WE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT AND WE POSTPONE THIS.

SO WE WILL, UH, PER TOMA.

WE NEED TO GO AHEAD.

AND IF THERE ARE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM THEM.

UH, BUT WE HAD ALREADY HAD OUR Q AND A SO THAT WE WILL MOVE RIGHT INTO DEBATE, UH, ON THE SIDE OF THEM.

SO IT SHOULD BE A LITTLE SHORTER THAN THE OTHER ONE.

UH, SO THOSE TWO WILL BE DISCUSSION AND THEN ITEM B3 BEFORE OUR CONSENT.

AND THEN WE HAVE ITEM THE FIVE AND SIX ARE APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

UH, THESE SEVEN IS APPLICANT

[00:10:01]

INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

WE HAVE THE EIGHT AND B NINE.

UH, THIS WILL TAKE UP IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UH, IT'S A DISCUSSION PLUS MOMENT.

UH, NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS TO DELAY THIS TO DECEMBER 14TH AND THE APPLICANT IS NOT IN AGREEMENT.

AND THIS IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S FIRST REQUEST, WHICH WE TYPICALLY HONOR, UH, AT LEAST ONE REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT.

UH, THAT'S FOR A, B BOTH VA B NINE, A PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING.

UH, WE HAVE , UH, WHICH IS AN NEIGHBORHOOD PLUS FOMENT UNTIL DECEMBER 17TH AND THE, UH, VIA 11, WHICH IS A REZONING CASE, ALSO NEIGHBORHOOD PLUS THOMAS TO DECEMBER, UH, 17TH.

AND, UH, THANK YOU, ANDREW.

I WILL GO BACK AND DO THAT.

SO, UM, SO THE, SO GOING BACK ON BEFORE, YES, I HAD FORGOT TO MENTION THIS ON BEFORE, WHICH IS A MAIN ROAD AND NORTHEAST DRIVE REZONING CASE.

UM, THERE ARE TWO ADDITIONAL PROHIBITED USES THAT I NEED TO MENTION, UH, THAT WE WANT TO INCLUDE IN THE CONSENT ON THIS CASE, UH, OFFSITE, ACCESSORY PARKING AND TEDDY CAB DISPATCH.

UH, SO I NEEDED TO MAKE THAT NOTE.

SO ANDREW, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS FOR ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS? SURE.

COMMISSION LAYS ON HANDOVER.

THE, UM, CONSENT AGENDA IS AS RED WITH THE NOTED CORRECTION OF THE POSTPONEMENT DATE FOR B 10 AND B 11 WOULD BE DECEMBER 14TH.

SO BE 10 AND 11 ARE DECEMBER 14TH.

UM, SO COMMISSIONERS, UH, COMMISSIONER CONWAY QUESTIONS.

QUICK QUESTION.

I KNOW THAT WE ALREADY, UH, DID Q AND A FOR ITEMS B ONE AND B TWO.

AND SO YOU SAID WE'RE MOVING STRAIGHT INTO DISCUSSION.

WOULD THAT MEAN THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR FROM THE, UH, APPLICANT AT ALL? UM, BECAUSE IT MAY BE THAT, UH, PARTS OF THE CASE HAVE, UH, CHANGED.

WE, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE POSTPONED IT WAS SO THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME MORE DIALOGUE AROUND IT AND IT MAY BE, UM, IMPORTANT FOR US TO HEAR FROM THEM AGAIN.

SO WE'LL GET TO HEAR FROM THOSE WHO ARE, UH, SIGN UP FOR OPPOSITION AND SPEAK IN FAVOR, AND THAT INCLUDES SOME FOLKS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT.

BUT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR.

UM, I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE

SO ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO, UH, ON THE ITEMS ON THE SKIN, UH, THAT ARE ON CONSENT, WANT TO PULL FOR DISCUSSION OR HAVE QUESTIONS ON, OKAY.

I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND READ IT ONE MORE TIME AND, UH, THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION HERE.

SO LET'S SEE, MOVING THROUGH, WE'VE GOT, UM, I'M AS B ONE AND, UH, B2.

UH, THIS IS A SIX US 6, 7 0 5 AND 6 5 0 1 REGINA ROAD.

AND WE'RE GOING TO, UM, AS WE SAID, MOVE INTO ACTION ON THOSE.

AFTER HEARING FROM THE SPEAKERS, UH, B3 BEFORE, UH, AROUND CONSENT, IT WOULD BE FIVE IS APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT, THESE SIX, UH, REZONING CASE APPLICANT, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT, THESE SEVEN APPLICANT, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

WE HAVE B EIGHT AND B NINE, UH, WHICH WE WILL TAKE UP TOGETHER AS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT CASE.

AND, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AS I SAID, IT'S OUR FIRST POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.

UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S ASKING FOR THIS TO BE POSTPONED IT'S DECEMBER 14TH AND, UM, APOLOGIES.

LET'S SEE B 10, UM, AND B 11 NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO DECEMBER 14TH AND APPLICANT IN AGREEMENT.

AND I NEED TO MAKE A SLIGHT CORRECTION.

I DID IT AGAIN, UH, ON BEFORE IT'S A CONSENT ITEM AND I NEED TO MENTION THE TWO ADDITIONAL PROHIBITED USES, UH, OUR OFFSITE, ACCESSORY PARKING AND PETTY CAB DISPATCH.

SO, UH, WITH THAT,

[Consent Agenda]

[00:15:01]

PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 26 AND THE CONSENT AGENDA C UH, COMMISSIONER OF US SHARON.

HEMPEL SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COX.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.

THAT WAS ON THE DAYAS.

THAT'S COMMISSIONER COX.

AND THAT'S EVERYBODY.

AND THOSE, UH, VIRTUALLY ALL RIGHT.

IS THAT A GREEN CARD COMMISSIONER? OKAY.

IT'S OKAY.

UH, SO WE HAVE, UH, ONE, UH, THANK YOU.

UM, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, UH, VOTES IN FAVOR, AND WE HAVE, UH, ABSTAINING IS, UH, COMMISSIONING ON HIS PLUTO.

SO THAT WOULD BE 11 ONE.

OH, THANK YOU.

8 0 1.

UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO THE FIRST, UM, SORRY.

THAT WAS BECAUSE COMMISSIONERS AREN'T.

OH, THAT'S RIGHT.

SO ACTUALLY THAT'S 9 0 1 WITH COMMISSIONER AS ARE NOW HERE.

[Items B8 & B9 (Part 1 of 2)]

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

SO OUR FIRST ITEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR IS THE, UH, DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT ON ITEMS B EIGHT AND B NINE.

AND SO, UH, WE HAVE, UH, TWO MINUTES FOR THE PRIMARIES, UM, SPEAKERS THREE MINUTES AND THEN TWO FOR ANY OTHERS.

AND SO YOU HAVE THE SPEAKERS LIST, UH, MR. RIVERA, DO YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND BRING UP THE FIRST SPEAKER FIRST HEAR FROM MR. MARIO TO FOLLOWED BY MISSILE IN DAVIS.

MY NAME IS MARIO I'M CHAIR OF THE SOUTH CONGRESS CONTACT TEAM.

UH, BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, RESIDENTS OF COLONIAL TRAILS REGARDING THIS CASE.

UH, THIS WILL BE OUR FIRST REQUEST FOR A POSTPONEMENT, AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO IS REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT.

UH, WE ARE REQUESTING AND WANT TO MEET WITH THE APPLICANT AND ALL PROJECT, UH, MEMBERS PRESENT FOR THE FINAL MEETING.

WE NEED TIME TO REVIEW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD FEELS THEY DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT NOTIFICATION.

NOW THEY RECEIVE POSTAL NOTIFICATION, OCTOBER 30TH, AND THAT'S WHEN I RECEIVED MINE AS WELL.

UH, WE HAVE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED BY THE APPLICANT AND WITH THE FULL TEAM PRESENT.

AND THIS FINAL MEETING, WE DON'T WANT UPDATES.

WE WANT THIS MEETING TO BE FINAL CRYSTAL CLEAR AND ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS BASED ON PREVIOUS INFORMATION THAT WE RECEIVED.

THANKS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

I THINK YOU KNOW WHAT WE'LL HEAR FROM MS. DAVIS, MS. DAVIS YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING.

CITY OF AUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS LYNN DAVIS.

I AM THE OWNER OF 4 0 8 COLONIAL PARK BOULEVARD.

I HAVE BEEN AN OWNER OF THAT RESIDENCE SINCE 2005.

UM, I THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK TONIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

UM, W SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD REASONS TO HUMBLY REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT OF THE HEARING OF THIS CASE.

UM, FIRST WE HAVE A NEIGHBOR WHO IS ELDERLY AND WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND TONIGHT.

UH, DRAKE MCKINNEY RECENTLY HAD PROSTATE SURGERY LAST WEEK AND IS CURRENTLY UNREST RESTRICTED MOBILITY.

NOW WE UNDERSTAND THAT INABILITY TO ATTEND DUE TO ILLNESS IS A VIABLE REASON FOR POSTPONEMENT.

AND WE HUMBLY ASK YOU TO CONSIDER THAT AS PART OF OUR REQUEST.

AND ALSO AS MARIO MENTIONED, THIS IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD'S FIRST REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT.

WE WANT TO IMPRESS THAT WE ARE A COLLEGIAL AND WILLING PARTNER TO THIS DEVELOPER TO FULLY EXPLORE THIS CASE.

HOWEVER, WE DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY HAVE SUCCESSFULLY POSTPONE THIS HEARING THREE TIMES FIRST ON MAY 25TH, SECOND ON JULY 13TH, THIRD ON AUGUST 24TH.

UM, FOR THIS REASON WE THINK IT'S REASONABLE, THIS BEING OUR FIRST TIME THAT WE REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT.

UM, WE HAVE ALSO NOT HAD TIME TO REVIEW SOME VERY LATE BREAKING STUFF, RECOMMENDATIONS WITH OUR

[00:20:01]

NEIGHBORHOOD.

UH, THE RECENT WE RECEIVED NOTICE OF THIS MEETING, UM, ONLY ON OCTOBER 30TH, UH, WE HUMBLY HAVE ASKED THE DEVELOPER IF THEY WOULD CONSIDER A POSTPONEMENT POST-MOMENT GIVEN, THEY HAVE POSTPONED MULTIPLE TIMES, WHICH THEY DECLINED.

UH, WE HAVE NOT HAD TIME TO NOTIFY AREA COMMERCIAL, UM, UH, IN BUSINESSES, UM, AND RESIDENTS THAT WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 103 HOMES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE HAVE NOT HAD SUFFICIENT NOTICE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR AREA COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES.

UM, WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO MEET WITH THE DEVELOPERS WITH A FULL TEAM PRESENT.

UM, WE HAD A MEETING WITH THEM IN SEPTEMBER THAT WAS NOT, UH, FULLY ATTENDED.

AND WE ASKED THAT WE FIRST MEET WITH THE FULL TEAM.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

LONG-TERM AFFORDABLE UNITS.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. ALICE GLASGOW, MS. GLASGOW YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS, ALICE CLASSICO REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.

I REACHED OUT TO MARIA ALMOST 18 MONTHS AGO, JUNE OF 2020.

I REACHED OUT TO MARIO CON TO THE CHAIR OF THE CONTACT TEAM ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND CASE.

AND I REACHED OUT TO ASK HIM IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD ALLOW US TO FILE AN OUT OF CYCLE APPLICATION.

SO WE HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THEM.

WE'VE MET FIVE TIMES WITH A CONTACT TEAM, AND THEN IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS MET WITH MARIO COME TWO, THREE TIMES ONE-ON-ONE AND THEN THE CITY STAFF IS REQUIRED TO HOST A COMMUNITY MEETING WHEN THERE'S ENABLED PLAN AMENDMENTS.

SO MARINE MEREDITH AND MARK WALTERS HOSTED A MEETING, UM, IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR AND WAS ATTENDED BY ABOUT SIX OF THE NEIGHBORS.

AND, UM, WE HAVE PROVIDED A LOT OF INFORMATION AT EVERY MEETING THAT WE'VE HAD.

WE'VE HAD OUR ENTIRE TEAM, OUR CIVIL ENGINEERS, OUR ARCHITECTS, AND OUR APPLICANTS DEVELOPERS.

SO WE'VE PROVIDED A LOT OF INFORMATION.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE STAFF REPORTS, YOU WILL SEE ALL THE COMMUNICATION, A SUMMARY OF ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED AT THE CITY STAFF INITIATE A HOSTED MEETING THERE ABOUT FOUR PAGES OF Q AND A'S.

AND, UM, WE'VE ANSWERED EVERY QUESTION.

WE SEND THEM A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION HAD THERE'S ALL THE INFORMATION BY THE LAST MEETING THAT WE HAD ON SEPTEMBER 27TH.

WE DO NOT HAVE ANY MORE INFORMATION TO OFFER THE LAST AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE SEPTEMBER 27TH MEETING, THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASKED US TO SEND THEM, UM, TO TELL THEM HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO PAY TO CONSTRUCT OUR SIDEWALKS THEN.

AND WE JUST SEND THAT INFORMATION LAST WEEK AND A COPY OF ALL OUR COMMUNICATION WITH THE GAS COMPANY, WE ARE PROPOSING TO BUILD 520 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND THOSE UNITS, SOME OF THEM WILL BE AFFORDABLE.

SO THE SOONER WE CAN GET THROUGH THE PROCESS, WE CAN THEN BEGIN AT LEAST GETTING TO THE CYPRESS ON STAGE SO WE CAN START GETTING OUR CIVIL PLANS READY FOR, FOR THE NEXT PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT.

SO WE WOULD APPRECIATE TO HAVE A HEARING TONIGHT AFTER FIVE MEETINGS, WE BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE PROVIDED ENOUGH INFORMATION AND, UH, WE REALLY DON'T SEE THAT THERE IS ANY MORE INFORMATION TO BE OFFERED.

UH, YOU KNOW, AFTER A YEAR AND A HALF, WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING.

WE CAN, WE DELAYED THE CASE BECAUSE THEY WANTED A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.

SO TO SEE THAT NOW, AS OPPOSED TO LATER.

SO ALTHOUGH STAFF HAD DEFERRED THE TIA TO THE SITE PLAN STAGE, WE WENT AHEAD AND VOLUNTEERED TO DO IT.

NOW WE'VE DONE THAT.

SO WE'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND BE HEARD SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD SOME HOUSING.

AND AGAIN, I SAID, SOME OF THOSE HOMES ARE GOING TO BE WE'RE VOLUNTEERING TO OFFER AFFORDABLE HOUSING LONG TERM, THE FOR SALE UNITS AND THE HOMES FOR RENT, UH, WILL BE AFFORDABLE AT LEAST UNDER THE AFFORDABILITY OPTIONS OF 10% FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY, UH, DEVELOPMENT AND FIVE AND FIVE.

SO IT WOULD LAP AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD SO WE CAN PROCEED AND, UM, GET TO THE NEXT STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU.

THIS CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS.

THEY'RE NOT, NOT SUBSTANTIAL.

UH, COMMISSIONERS.

WE'VE GOT, UM, QUESTIONS.

UH, WE'LL GO AHEAD.

AND WE DON'T NEED TO USE ALL EIGHT, BUT WE DO HAVE EIGHT SPOTS, FIVE MINUTES EACH, IF WE NEED THEM TO MAKE A DECISION COMMISSIONER COX, DO YOU WANT TO START US UP? YEAH.

QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

YOU MENTIONED, UH, THAT THE, THAT THE REQUIRED MEETING WAS HELD IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.

THE CITY INITIATIVE MEETING, CORRECT.

HAS ANY, HAS, HAS THERE BEEN SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL SINCE THAT TIME? UH,

[00:25:02]

THE NUMBER OF UNITS HAVE REMAINED PROBABLY LESS.

WE STARTED OFF WITH A FEW WERE FIVE 20.

WE WERE PROBABLY AT A FIVE 70 AND, UH, THE HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE RE REDUCED A HEIGHT.

WE WERE GOING TO PROPOSE 70 FEET.

WE'RE NOW AT 60 FEET BASED AT THE SAME ZONE THAT WE HAVE NOW, THE SITE IS ON CS AND CS ALLOWS YOU 60 FEET.

SO THE VOLUME, THE MASS OF THE BUILDINGS HAS NOT CHANGED AT ALL OTHER THAN JUST, YOU KNOW, THE HEIGHT.

AND SO YOU MENTIONED, YOU MENTIONED THAT TIA WAS PERFORMED, UM, WHEN, WHEN WERE, WAS THAT PROVIDED TO THE CONTACT TEAM AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND DO YOU KNOW WHEN THAT WAS PROVIDED? WE PROVIDED THE, UH, THE, THE LAST MEETING WE HAD WITH THEM WAS ON THE 27TH.

AND WE GAVE THEM A SUMMARY, A SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS OF THE MEMORY OF THE TIA 27TH OF SEPTEMBER, SEPTEMBER, SEPTEMBER 27TH.

UM, AND, AND JUST A FEW QUESTIONS FOR, I THINK THE LAST COMMUNITY SPEAKER THAT WE HAD JUST QUICK, A POINT OF ORDER WHILE WE'RE WAITING, UH, COMMISSIONERS, JUST REMEMBER, UH, WE'RE DISCUSSED THE MERITS OF THE POSTPONEMENT ONLY, NOT DETAILED, IS THAT THE CASE? SO I THANK YOU FOR COMING UP.

SO IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WERE TO GRANT A POSTPONEMENT FOR EITHER TWO WEEKS OR FOUR WEEKS SPECIFICALLY, COULD YOU CONVEY TO US WHAT YOU THINK WOULD BE ACCOMPLISHED IN THAT TIME? ABSOLUTELY.

SO, UM, THE INFORMATION THAT WAS JUST SHARED WITH YOU IS NOT COMPLETELY CORRECT.

UM, UH, WE, FIRST OF ALL, THAT SEPTEMBER 27TH MEETING DID NOT HAVE EVERY REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE DEVELOPER ON THAT MEETING.

THERE WAS SOMEONE VERY IMPORTANT ON THAT MEETING.

IT WAS AN ENGINEER WHO COULD GIVE US VERY VALID DETAILS ABOUT THE MOVING OF GAS LINES THAT THAT PERSON WAS NOT PRESENT.

WE WERE NOT PROVIDED UPDATES FROM THE PR PERSON THAT WE NEEDED, THAT WE HAD REQUESTED BY THE DEVELOPER.

UM, WE HAVE, UM, ASKED ABOUT MOVING THE TWO CAT GAS LINES AND THEIR EASEMENTS AND REROUTING, AND HAVE NOT RECEIVED INFORMATION ON THAT.

WE'VE ALSO ASKED ABOUT DRAINAGE AND HAVEN'T RECEIVED INFORMATION ABOUT THAT AS WELL.

WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS TO MEET WITH THE DEVELOPER, TO GET ALL OF OUR OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS ANSWERED WITHIN THIS TWO WEEKS, TO BE ABLE TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND BE ABLE TO COME FULLY PREPARED TO THE NEXT MEETING WITH OUR AGENDA.

SO IF, IF YOU DID HAVE SOME TIME, YOU FEEL CONFIDENT, CAUSE I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO SCHEDULE NEIGHBORHOOD INVOLVEMENT AND TRY TO GET EVERYONE IN THE SAME ROOM.

AND OBVIOUSLY THE DEVELOPER HAS TO GET 13 SCHEDULED.

YOU FEEL CONFIDENT THAT YOU COULD HAVE THAT MEETING ON YOUR END AND THAT Y'ALL WOULD BE AVAILABLE.

WE DO FEEL CONFIDENT THAT TWO WEEKS IS SUFFICIENT.

WE WILL BE FULLY PREPARED ON DECEMBER 14TH, GIVEN THE DEVELOPER IS OPEN TO MEETING US BETWEEN MEETING WITH US BETWEEN NOW AND THAT TIME.

LAST MINUTE I HAVE, I DON'T, DO WE HAVE ANYONE FROM STAFF THAT CAN EXPLAIN WHAT THE STAFF POSTPONEMENTS WERE IN REGARD TO CAUSE LIKE THE APPLICANT SAID THIS HAS BEEN POSTPONED MANY TIMES AND TWO OF THOSE TIMES I THINK WERE STAFF POSTPONEMENTS GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS WENDY ROSE WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

UH, THE STAFF POSTPONEMENTS IN THE SUMMER OR SUMMER OF THIS YEAR WERE FOR, UH, THE, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A TRAMP TRANSPORTATION STUDY.

I WANT TO SAY PERHAPS EARLY JUNE.

AND SO IT TOOK, UH, JULY OR JUNE, JULY AND AUGUST AND PART OF SEPTEMBER TO REVIEW THE APPLICANTS, TRANSPORTATION MEMO OR TRANSPORTATION STUDY AND PRODUCE THE MEMO THAT STATED THE 16TH OF SEPTEMBER.

SO THEY WERE LARGELY JUST BASED ON REVIEWING DOCUMENTS THAT THE DEVELOPER HAD SUBMITTED.

THERE, THERE, UH, TRANSPORTATION STUDY REQUIRES REVIEW BY ATD ENGINEERING STAFF.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

NOT ANSWERED THE TWO QUESTIONS THAT I ASKED FOR AND WHAT THE TWO QUESTIONS WERE.

UH, UH, COMMISSIONER SHEA, LET'S SAY I A, LET'S START WITH THE APPLICANT, SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND LIKE WHAT, WHEN WAS THE LAST SET OF INFORMATION THAT THEY ASKED FOR AND PROVIDED? I MEAN, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU SAID, THAT ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAD HAVE BEEN ANSWERED WHEN, WHEN WAS THE LAST EXCHANGE, THE LAST EXCHANGE WAS LAST, THE TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY WHEN THEY STAFF INFORMED ME THAT THEY, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTED A POSTPONEMENT AND THEIR REASONS FOR POSTPONEMENT WERE TWOFOLD.

ONE WAS THE, UM, THEY NEEDED TO MEET WITH US AGAIN.

AND, UM, BECAUSE WE HAD

[00:30:01]

AND I REPLIED BACK THE, UH, THE COST OF THE BOUNDARY IMPROVEMENT AND, UM, AND THE COMMUNICATION WITH OUR GAS COMPANY.

AND IT HAS ALL OF THAT.

THEY SEND THEM LAST WEEK, THEY HAVE ALL THAT INFORMATION.

AND BY THE WAY, WHEN WE HAD THE MEETING, THEN SEPTEMBER, OUR CIVIL ENGINEER WAS PRESENT IN THE CHAMBERS WAS AT THE, UH, THE ZOOM MEETING WE HAD WITH THEM ON SEPTEMBER 27.

SO WE HAD OUR ENTIRE TEAM PRESENT AT THAT MEETING.

SO IN ALL THE EMPHASIS, ALL THE INFORMATION THEY REQUESTED HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THEM, IT SOUNDS, YEAH.

YES IT HAS.

AND MOST INFORMATION THEY NEED ARE THINGS THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.

EVEN THOUGH THE MEETING WE GET, IF THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT DRAINAGE, WE HAVE A DRAINAGE SHOWN WHERE THE DETENTION POND IS GOING TO GO ON THE SIDE FRONT THAT THEY'VE BEEN SEEING FOR THE LAST 18 MONTHS.

I MEAN, AND, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE'RE, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT DATA AND WHAT IT PERTAINS AS IT PERTAINED TO WHAT WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO OUR COMMISSION, WHEN IT HAS ALL OF THE PLANNING ASPECT VERSUS, YOU KNOW, OR THE QUESTIONS MORE SITE PLAN RELATED AT A LATER TIME, WHICH COULD CHANGE ANYWAY.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE TO SEE IF THOSE, IF THAT WAS WHAT THE QUESTIONS WERE ABOUT NOW, IF SO, W W W WHAT'S THE HARM IN WAITING TWO WEEKS, YOU KNOW, AND, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.

IF HE CAN HELP, HELP US UNDERSTAND, LIKE, UM, YOU KNOW, CAUSE AS YOU HEARD, WE HAVE A COURTESY, BUT I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND LIKE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE RAMIFICATIONS OF A TWO WEEK DELAY, WELL, W OBVIOUSLY WITH ANY, WITH, WITH A HEARING, WE CAN AT LEAST HAVE AN, UH, AN INDICATION OF, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE COMMISSION STANDS AND IT HELPS US MOVE FORWARD IN AT LEAST MAINTAINING OUR, UH, OUR FUNDING, OR WE HAVE INVESTORS INVESTING IN THE PROPERTY.

SO, YOU KNOW, TH TH THE DELAYS CLAUSE UNCERTAINTY, AND THAT WAS REALLY, THAT'S ONE OF, ONE OF THE REASONS OF CLOSE THE SOONER WE HAVE SOME IDEA WE CAN BEGIN, UH, PLANNING ON THE NEXT, THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, AND IN TWO WEEKS, IS THAT A, IS THAT A CONSENT ITEM? THAT'S IN OUR CONSENT ONE, IS IT, OH, IT IS.

THAT IS THE SUB 17TH BELIEVE.

OH, SO WE CAN'T EVEN DO TWO WEEKS.

OH, WOW.

YEAH, IT TAKES, OKAY.

THEN, DOES THAT THROW YOU OFF FOR COUNCIL AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN COUNCIL? SO I'M LOOKING AT IT DOES, IT DOES THROW US COUNCIL WEEKEND.

WE CAN'T MAKE AN UNDERSTAND FOR THE COUNCIL MEETING.

THE LAST MEETING IS DECEMBER 9TH, SO WE WERE THROWN OFF.

IT'S NOT SCHEDULED FOR COUNSEL AT THIS TIME.

I SEE.

UM, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SOMEBODY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN COME UP SO WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, SHOULD WE HEAR IT TONIGHT? OR SHOULD WE WAIT? AND YEAH, WE'RE TRYING TO DECIDE, IS THIS NEW INFORMATION, CAN IT CHANGE, UM, HOW WE APPROACH, WHAT SHOULD GO THERE? UM, SO THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE YOU NEEDING, IS THAT, IS THAT SPECIFIC YOU THINK TO THE FORM OF THE BUILDING AND TRAFFIC, OR IS IT MORE INFRASTRUCTURE? I MEAN, MY, MY CONCERN IS, YOU KNOW, IS IT, IS IT STUFF THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO GET RESOLVED LATER? AND RIGHT NOW IT'S STILL CONCEPTUAL.

UM, AND THAT'S KIND OF HELPING US, CAN WE, YOU KNOW, TO DECIDE IF WE CAN HEAR IT NOW VERSUS LATER, IF YOU CAN KIND OF GIVE ME, UM, UH, WHAT, WHAT INFORMATION YOU THINK NEW INFORMATION IS GOING TO ACTUALLY CHANGE AFTER FIVE, SIX LOOKS LIKE HE HAD ALMOST SIX, SEVEN MEETINGS ALREADY.

NOW YOU SAID WE HAD SEVEN MEETINGS, THERE'S AT LEAST FIVE.

I THINK THERE WAS FIVE.

AND THEN THERE'S A COUPLE OTHER ONES.

IS THAT RIGHT? ANYWAY, BUT AROUND FIVE FOR SOME MEETINGS, RIGHT? THE QUESTION, UH, INITIALLY, UH, WHAT I HEARD WAS THAT IN THE VIRTUAL MEETING, THE INFORMATION THAT WE RECEIVED AT THAT TIME IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FOR WHAT WERE WE HEARD ON THE 27TH? SO YOU'RE THE AUNT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, LIKE YOU'RE SAYING, OKAY, WELL, IS IT MOBILITY? IS, IS IT WITH THE, THE DEVELOPMENT? IS IT WITH THE STREETS, ET CETERA? IT'S A COMBINATION.

IT'S A COMBINATION OF THINGS.

I THINK ONE VITAL THING THAT I WANTED TO PASS ON IS THAT THE ENGINEER WAS NOT PRESENT AT THAT LAST MEETING.

UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

I DON'T KNOW.

UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT HI.

SO IF, UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE COUNCIL DATE

[00:35:01]

IS TO BE DETERMINED AND IT MAY LIKELY PUSH INTO NEXT YEAR, 2022, UH, MAYBE THE JANUARY 27TH MEETING.

DOES THAT, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT YOUR TIMELINE IF THIS WERE TO BE DELAYED OR HEARD TONIGHT? WELL, AS I INDICATED EARLIER WITH A DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR ALMOST TWO YEARS NOW, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU LINE UP YOUR, YOUR, YOUR, YOUR FUNDING, YOUR INVESTOR.

SO TH THAT'S REALLY THE, UH, JUST AS THE POTENTIAL, OBVIOUSLY YOU DON'T HAVE CONTROL OF THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AND UP PREVIOUS DELAYS, BUT IT JUST HAS THE POTENTIAL OF, UM, OF LOSING FUNDING, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS.

SO WE'LL DO WHATEVER THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECIDES TO DO.

IT'S.

ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS OR THREE AND MAKE A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER COX I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, POSTPONEMENT REQUESTS TO DECEMBER 14TH.

UH, I SEE A SECOND, LIKE MR. ZAR, UH, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? YEAH, I MEAN, WE TYPICALLY HONOR FIRST POSTPONE REQUESTS FROM NEIGHBORHOODS.

UM, THERE, THIS HAS BEEN POSTPONED A LOT, BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S BEEN POSTPONED BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IT'S BECAUSE OF STAFF REVIEW, UH, APPLICANT GETTING THEIR DOCUMENTS TOGETHER, THAT SORT OF THING.

SO I DON'T SEE A REASON WHY NOT TO RESPECT THIS FIRST PO POSTPONEMENT REQUEST FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

ANY COMMISSIONERS WISH TO SPEAK FOR AGAINST OR LET'S? UH, GO AHEAD, MR. UH, LAST YEAR I'LL SPEAK AGAINST, I, I UNDERSTAND THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTING TO MEET, UM, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE TIMELINE OF HAVING BEEN OVER 18 MONTHS AND JUST WANTING TO KEEP THIS MOVING FORWARD.

UM, THE NEED FOR HOUSING UNITS AND AT LEAST TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT IF THE ZONING CHANGE IS APPROPRIATE.

SO THAT'S WHY I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST, UM, COMMISSIONERS.

ARE, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP SPEAKING ON PAPER? UM, SURE.

SO I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, I THINK IT WAS GOING TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER COX.

I THINK IT'S, IT'S SORT OF UNFORTUNATE TIMING THAT IT SLIPS THROUGH THE CRACKS IN THE END OF THE YEAR BETWEEN COUNCIL MEETING AND THE COMMISSION MEETINGS AND OUR, UM, YOU KNOW, POST DATA, HOW WE ARE GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH THE ALL CONSENT AGENDA.

BUT HAVING SAID THAT, I DO WANT TO HONOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST CONSIDERING THIS IS THEIR FIRST FORMAL REQUEST, UH, COMING TO SHAY.

YOU WANT TO SPEAK? UH, YEAH, I MEAN, THIS IS A TOUGH ONE.

I THINK IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE CONSENT, UM, AGENDA FOR THE NEXT TIME, I THINK I'D BE FINE WITH IT, BUT THROWING INTO DECEMBER AND THEN TRYING TO GET INTO COUNCIL AND WITH THEIR SCHEDULE, IT'S, IT'S PRETTY DIFFICULT.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WITH SO MANY MEETINGS, THEY'VE HAD A LOT OF INFORMATION GOING BACK AND FORTH.

I'M THINKING THAT ACTUALLY, IF IT WAS HEARD TONIGHT, IT MIGHT ACTUALLY HELP THE NEXT STAGE BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL.

UM, IT'LL, IT'LL BRING UP MORE QUESTIONS AND THEY CAN EVEN HASH THAT OUT.

AND THAT ALSO DOESN'T KEEP US FROM SAYING, HEY, NO, WE NEED MORE INFORMATION.

WE COULD POSTPONE IT AS WELL.

SO THAT OPTION IS THERE.

AND WE ENDED UP BEING A VESSEL TO BE ABLE TO ASSIST THEM IN THE PROCESS.

LIKE I SAID, IF WE HAVE TO DELAY IT, WE CAN ACTUALLY EVEN POSTPONE IT OURSELVES.

SO THAT MUST BE AGAINST IT.

I MEAN, I'M GOING VOTE AGAINST IT.

THANKS.

UH, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING IN FAVOR? COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, NEUTRAL.

NEUTRAL.

OKAY, GO AHEAD.

I GUESS I'M GOING TO ABSTAIN FROM THE VOTE BECAUSE MY, MY INSTINCT IS TO PROVIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, DELAY.

I DO FEEL LIKE THIS IS GOING TO GET DELAYED, YOU KNOW, MORE THAN A MONTH BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANOTHER TIME FOR THEM TO COME ON.

AND THEN THAT'S GOING TO PUT THEM, YOU KNOW, IN LATE DECEMBER GOING TO COUNCIL.

SO IT'S GOING TO DELAY THE PROJECT, YOU KNOW, UH, WHO KNOWS HOW LONG UNTIL THAT GETS DONE.

AND IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THE APPLICANT HERE HAS BEEN MOVING IN GOOD FAITH AND TRYING TO REACH OUT AND TRYING TO ACT.

AND I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE FAILING AS A CITY IF WE CAN'T BOTH HONOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ALLOW THEM SOME TIME TO, TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, BUT ALSO HONOR THE APPLICANT AND, AND MOVE FORWARD.

SO I, I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO VOTE EITHER WAY.

FOR THE DECEMBER 9TH MEETING.

UM, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THIS MOTION.

UH, JUST SO THAT THE COMMISSION HAS A INFORMATION BEFORE, PRIOR TO TAKING A VOTE DUE TO INTERNAL DEADLINES, THIS ITEM WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE SCHEDULED

[00:40:01]

IT'S LIKELY THAT IT WILL GO INTO THE JANUARY 27TH MAYBE.

IS THAT COUNCIL OKAY, SO SORRY, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION.

SO IT WOULD GO, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE DISCUSS IT OR NOT, IT WOULD BE POSTPONED.

I MEAN, IT WOULD, WOULDN'T BE HURT.

UH, LET'S GO AND VOTE ON THE MOTION.

UM, SO LET ME FIRST, THAT WAS ON THE DYESS, UH, IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECONDED BY CHEMISTRY, BIZARRE TO POSTPONE THIS TO DECEMBER 14TH, BOTH ITEMS, HOLD ON, UH, THE ITEMS B EIGHT AND B NINE.

UH, THOSE IN FAVOR.

THAT'S FIVE.

AND THEN LOOKING SIX AND THE NOSE AGAINST, LET ME SEE YOUR HANDS ON THE DYESS.

ONE, TWO, AND THEN, OH THREE.

AND THE, THOSE, UH, NEUTRAL OR FEIGNING.

UH, WE HAVE ONE, SO THAT MOTION FAILS.

UM, SO I GUESS THE ONLY OTHER OPTION IS WHAT, UH, I GUESS WE HAVE TO GO AND VOTE ON, WE TAKE UP THE HEARING.

IS THAT OKAY? ALL RIGHT.

SO WE'LL TAKE THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION THIS EVENING.

UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO THE FIRST DISCUSSION CASE.

[Items B1 & B2]

AND WE HAVE SPEAKERS, UH, FOR ITEMS A B ONE AND B TWO, UH, GREG ANDERSON'S CLASS.

IS HE HERE? UH, ONE MOMENT, UH, MR. RIVERA, DO WE HAVE, UH, IS, UH, GREG ANDERSON HERE? OKAY.

WE'LL RECOGNIZE HIM.

AND, UH, THE STUDENTS FROM UT RIGHT HERE AND WHEN HE GETS HERE, UH, SHOULD WE GO AND PROCEED WITH SPEAKERS? OKAY.

COMMISSIONER LANES ON A UNIVERSAL PRIOR, BEFORE TAKING THE SPEAKERS ON THIS, THIS ITEM IS THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED.

THE COMMISSION CAN DECIDE ON, ON THE NUMBER OF MINUTES OF PER THE SPEAKERS, AS YOU RECALL, UNDER THE TOMA RULES, ANYONE WHO'S REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON A CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL ALLOWED TO SPEAK, BUT THE COMMISSION HAS, UM, COMMONLY PROVIDED TWO MINUTES PER SPEAKER, ANY, UH, BUT HE WANT TO THAT'S I THINK TWO MINUTES SHOULD BE ADEQUATE.

UH, HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE SIGNED UP? SEVEN, TWO MINUTES EACH.

UH, I THINK WE'VE, I DON'T SEE ANYBODY OPPOSED.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT MR. RIVERA? WE DO.

SO WE'RE GONNA, UM, THIS AGENDA, WE ARE VOTING TO THIS IT'S A RULE SUSPENSION OR CHANGE.

NO, IT'S JUST, UM, PROVIDING THE PUBLIC THE, UM, KNOWLEDGE AT THE TIME.

HONEST, PALITO COMMISSIONER YANEZ.

SO LET'S GO AND VOTE ON TWO MINUTES.

UH, FIRST SPEAKER, UH, THOSE IN FAVOR.

LET'S SEE.

IT'S EVERYBODY HERE ON THE DAYAS IN FAVOR AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN.

LET'S SEE.

PLAY-DOH AND MR. HOWARD.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

SO TWO MINUTES PER SPEAKER, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LIAISON, AND VERUS OVER PROCEEDING TO THE SPEAKERS.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MISS ALIA BOZO FOR TWO MINUTES.

HELLO, COMMISSIONER EMILIYA BOGGIO WITH JENNER GROUP HERE, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.

WE DO HAVE A QUICK PRESENTATION TO GIVE YOU.

REQUESTING AN LAPD, A ZONING SCENT, WHICH IS SUMMARIZED HERE ON THE SLIDE.

SO I WOULD, UH, I JUST WANNA GIVE YOU A QUICK REFRESHER ON THIS CASE.

UM, THE SITE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS APPROXIMATELY 16 ACRES OF ENTIRELY VACANT LAND LOCATED ON 180 3 ADJACENT TO THE FUTURE GREENLINE CORRIDOR AND THE WALNUT CREEK TRAIL.

WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH CAP METRO ABOUT THE FUTURE STATION LOCATION, AS WELL AS WORKING WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONNECTIONS TO THE WALNUT CREEK TRAIL.

UM, THE PROJECT ISN'T INTENDED TO BE A MIXED USE HUB, DEDICATED AUSTIN'S CREATIVE COMMUNITY AND GOALS.

OOPS.

UM, IN ORDER TO FULFILL THAT VISION, WE'RE

[00:45:01]

THE NOTABLE PIECES ARE THAT, UM, WE'RE ADDING AS PERMITTED USES RESIDENTIAL AND BREWERY WITHIN 50 FOOT SETBACK OF ANY RESIDENTIAL USE, NOT JUST SINGLE FAMILY AS THE CODE SAYS TODAY.

UM, AND WE ARE PROHIBITING THE INTENSIVE INDUSTRIAL USES THAT ARE PERMITTED ON THE SITE TODAY, INCLUDING BASIC INDUSTRY RESOURCE EXTRACTION, GENERAL WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION AND RECYCLING CENTER.

WE'RE ALSO REQUESTING TO INCREASE THE HEAT, THE HEIGHT TO 275 FEET ON THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE.

WE CAN AGREE TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF ONE 20 ALONG THE EASTERN PART, ADJACENT TO THE SITE TO THE NORTH.

UM, BUT IT FEEL THAT, UM, GIVEN THE UP TO 400 FEET WAS RECENTLY APPROVED UNDER THE STATE TO THE NORTH.

WE ARE REQUESTING 2 75 FOR THE PORTION ALONG WHEN YOU DO THREE.

UM, WE HAVE THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE HAVEN'T MADE SEVERAL IMPORTANT COMMITMENTS.

AND I THINK YOU'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THESE, SO I WON'T SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON THEM.

UM, UH, THESE ARE COMMITMENTS TO THE PROJECT THAT WE'VE MADE WITH IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE EAST MLK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

UM, WE'VE BEEN MEETING WITH I'M SORRY, NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM.

WE'VE BEEN MEETING WITH THEM SINCE AUGUST OF 2020, AND WE HAVE WORKED HARD TO GET TO THIS POINT.

UM, ALL THREE OF THESE REQUESTS HAVE COME FROM THE TEAM.

UM, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUEST WAS IN PLACE WHEN I TALKED TO YOU LAST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.

UM, THE AFFORDABLE COMMERCIAL SPACE HAS CHANGED A LITTLE BIT PER THOSE DISCUSSIONS, BUT, UM, SO WE'RE GUARANTEEING 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF AFFORDABLE COMMERCIAL SPACE.

AND THEN THE WORKERS DEFENSE BETTER BUILDER PROGRAM, UM, WAS A COMMITMENT THAT WE HAD MADE LOOSELY BEFORE, BUT WE HAVE FINALIZED WITH A PLEDGE AT THIS POINT.

UM, SO I'M VERY HAPPY TO PRESENT THOSE COMMITMENTS TO YOU.

UM, I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT, UM, WHILE WE'VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON ALL OF THE NEIGHBORS REQUESTS, WE, WE HAVE MADE GREAT STRIDES AND THE DOOR IS STILL OPEN TO FURTHER CONVERSATIONS, UM, AS ITS OWN TODAY, THE SITE I'LL TRY TO WRAP UP REALLY QUICKLY.

UM, AS THIS ON TODAY, THIS SITE CAN INCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY USES, UM, ON THE PORTION CLOSEST TO 180 3, AND THEN ALL THOSE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES THAT I MENTIONED A MINUTE AGO.

UM, WE'RE PROPOSING TO PROHIBIT THOSE, BUT KEEP CERTAIN CLEAN INDUSTRIAL USES SO THAT ARTISTS AND CREATIVE CAN USE THOSE SPACES TO MAKE THINGS LIKE CERAMIC FOR CERAMICS, FURNITURE, JEWELRY, AND OTHER THINGS THAT SOMETIMES REQUIRE HEAVIER EQUIPMENT.

UM, AND THEN I JUST WANT TO SORT OF END BY POINTING OUT THAT, UM, THIS IS NOT WORKING.

WE NEED TO GO AND WRAP IT UP.

OKAY, THERE WE GO.

UM, THAT CENTRAL AUSTIN MANAGEMENT IS A LOCAL DEVELOPER WHO CREATES PLACES FOR AUSTIN CREATIVES AND HOLDS ONTO THEM CONTINUING TO MANAGE AND MAINTAIN THEM.

UM, TWO OF THEIR VERY WELL-KNOWN PROJECTS ARE SPRINGDALE GENERAL AND CANOPY.

THESE ARE VERY RESPECTED DEVELOPMENTS.

UM, AND I BRING THIS UP SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE AUSTIN LEADERS HAVE BEEN TALKING FOR A REALLY LONG TIME ABOUT MAKING SPACES FOR US SINCE CREATIVE COMMUNITY AND KIND OF NOT BEING ABLE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT.

AND I THINK THIS IS HOW YOU DO IT.

WELL, NOW, NOW, UM, I UNDERSTAND ONE SPEAKER MAY NEED TO LEAVE EARLY.

I DO HAVE A LIST OF OUR WE'RE MOVING TO THE OPPOSITION, OR ACTUALLY, UH, IS JUSTIN GASH SPEAKING.

MR. MR. GUS YOU'LL HAVE 10 MINUTES.

UH, MY NAME'S JUSTIN GASH.

I'M A MEMBER OF THE ARCHITECTURE TEAM.

UM, I'M HERE IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT AND HAPPY TO CLARIFY OR SUPPORT IN ANY WAY THE NECESSARY, BUT I DON'T NEED TO SPEAK.

THANK YOU, SIR.

NOW WE'LL MOVE TO THE OPPOSITION.

SO WE HAVE A SPEAKER WHO MAY HAVE NEED TO LEAVE.

DOES, UH, UM, IT'S JANUS AND BOOKOUT WANT TO GO FIRST? OKAY.

LET'S PICK OUT, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.

IT'S ALSO WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT SOLUTION.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANTED TO SAY, YOU KNOW, IT'S EASY TO THINK ABOUT LAND AS A COMMODITY, BUT IT'S NOT.

IT'S ALSO A COMMON PROPERTY.

I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE PUT THAT IN CONTEXT AND ALSO IN REFERENCE TO A 60 MFI 60 MFI IN AUSTIN IS $59,340 A YEAR, WHICH IS ABOUT $30 AN HOUR FOR A SINGLE FAMILY EARNER IN 7 8 7 2 1, WHICH IS WHERE THIS PROPERTY IS BEING PROPOSED.

THE MFI IS JUST UNDER 47,000, WHICH MEANS THEN THAT PROPERTY, EVEN THOUGH IT HAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THOSE AFFORDABLE UNIT UNITS ARE ACTUALLY DESIGNED FOR A HIGHER INCOME THAN WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO IT'S REASONABLE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO EXPECT CERTAIN ACCOMMODATIONS AND A REWARD BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.

THE, UM, UH, EAST MLK CONTACT TEAM HAS ASKED ME TO TALK ABOUT ONE OF THOSE POSSIBLE BENEFITS, WHICH IS CENTRAL TEXAS ALLIED HEALTH.

THERE ARE MANY, AND THEY CAN REFER TO THEM, BUT I'VE WORKED WITH THIS GROUP.

UM, CENTRAL TEXAS ALLIED HEALTH IS LOCATED IN 7, 8, 7 2 1.

THEY, UM, OFFER A THREE-PART, UM, SYSTEM OFFERING EQUITABLE TESTING IN VACCINATIONS, BUT ALSO WRAP AROUND SERVICES.

AND THEN THEY BUILD A TRUSTED MEDICAL WORKFORCE OF BLACK AND HISPANIC, LATIN X WORKFORCE.

UM, AND, AND IF YOU CAN SEE THERE, THE RESULTS THAT THEY'RE GETTING WITH VACCINATIONS AND TESTING IS OUTPERFORMING MANY OTHER, UM, SORT OF STANDARD OPERATIONS.

UH, 54% OF THEIR VACCINATIONS HAVE GONE TO THE HISPANIC, LATINO COMMUNITY AND 15% TO THE BLACK COMMUNITY,

[00:50:01]

UM, 8% ASIAN AND ONLY 20% WHITE, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT TO SEE, UM, IN EAST AUSTIN AND IN PARTICULARLY 7, 8, 7 2 1.

SO, UM, I JUST STRONGLY, UM, SUPPORT, UH, LISTENING TO THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY AND WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR AS AN OFFSET TO THE POTENTIAL HARM DONE BY THIS DEVELOPMENT COMING INTO THIS COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MS. DEANNA DEAN, MS. DEAN YOU'LL HAVE 10 MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS DIANA DANE AND I'M CO-CHAIR OF THE EAST MLK CONTACT TEAM AND OUR VISION FOR THE REGINA RURAL COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

I WANT TO START OUT WITH THE TWO MEETING SPACES.

THIS MEETING SPACE WILL BE USED FOR, I'M GOING TO SAY IT IN EXISTENCE, A REGINA COMMUNITY, UH, UH, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE EAST MLK CONTACT TEAM AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WITHIN THE CONTACT TEAM.

THERE ARE 12 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WITHIN THE CONTACT TEAM.

THIS WILL BE A PERFECT MEETING SPACE.

SO FOR THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS OR THE MLK CONTACT TEAM AND THE REGIME NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO ME TO TALK ABOUT DEVELOPMENT ISSUES, UH, GREEN SPACE, TRAFFIC ISSUES, AND DIFFERENT ISSUES, THAT'S GOING TO BE ON SITE ALREADY.

SO THAT'LL BE A GREAT SPACE FOR THAT.

AND ALSO THIS IS GOING TO BE A MASSIVE PROJECT, A CITY WITHIN A CITY.

SO IT WILL BE HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT MEETING SPACE.

AND ALSO THE TECHNOLOGY ON THE MEETING SPACE HYBRID MEETING, YOU KNOW, TO UPDATE THE TECHNOLOGY WOULD BE GREAT SO THAT THE CITY CAN ENGAGE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE EMAIL K CONTACTING SO THAT THEY CAN HAVE MORE IMPACTFUL MEETING.

UH, SECONDLY, UH, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT, UH, SITE USAGE AS A COMMUNITY BENEFIT, AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU A, UH, SHARED STORY AND LIVE A LIVED EXPERIENCE AS A PREGNANT TEENAGER IN HIGH SCHOOL.

UH, I GRADUATED AT, UH, AT 18.

I WAS ABLE TO WORK FULL TIME AT NIGHT AND GO TO SCHOOL FULL-TIME BECAUSE THE CCMS PROGRAM HELPED ME WITH THE AFFORDABILITY PIECE FOR MY CHILD.

I GRADUATED AT 20 YEARS OLD FROM AUSTIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE FROM, UH, AS A LICENSED VOCATIONAL NURSE.

AND THIS IS 45 YEARS LATER.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO PULL IN THAT THE REGINA COMMUNITY DAYCARE OR THE PRESCHOOL THAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED THERE, I'M JUST CALLING IT INTO EXISTENCE WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT IF THEY COULD HAVE SPOTS FOR CCMS, FOR THE, NOT ONLY THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE, BUT ALSO FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES, YOU KNOW, IN OUR, UM, THEY'LL NERVOUS HERE, BUT A LOT OF TIMES IN THE COMMUNITIES, WE HAVE THESE SPECIALIZED DAYCARES POPPING UP, BUT THERE'S NOT AFFORDABLE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE ARE IN THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. NADIA BARBEAU HELLO, COMMISSIONERS.

NADIA BARBEAU ECM.

CONTACT TEAM.

UM, CO-CHAIR THANKS AGAIN FOR THE EXTRA TIME.

UM, AND THE TWO WEEK DELAY LAST TIME.

UM, AND FOR THE LAST MEETING, WE REALLY LEARNED A LOT FROM ALL OF YOU.

UM, IN THAT LAST MEETING I MET WITH THE DEVELOPERS TEAM AND I'VE COME TO, UH, HAPPY THAT THEY'VE, WE'VE COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON THE BETTER BUILDER PROGRAM, AS LEAH SAID.

UM, AND THAT IT WILL BE APPLIED TO BE APPLIED TO MANY OF THE LARGE BUILDINGS ON THE PROJECT.

THIS WAS A BIG CHANGE.

WE UNDERSTAND, UM, FOR THEM.

AND WE APPLAUD THE DEVELOPER FOR UNDERSTANDING THAT WE NEED THAT COMMITMENT, UM, WITH TRUSTED ENTITIES IN THE COMMUNITY.

SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US.

UM, AND AT THE, AFTER THE LAST MEETING, UM, AND DOING ADDITIONAL CALCULATIONS TO UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THIS PROJECT, UM, WE FEEL DIFFERENTLY ABOUT THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

AND YOU HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT FROM, UH, JANICE, OUR FIRST SPEAKER, AND THEN DIANA, OUR SECOND SPEAKER, UM, WITH, UM, 500,000 TOTAL SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL AND 350 TO 750 APARTMENTS.

UM, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT, I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN REAL ESTATE STUFF.

IT SEEMS LIKE THIS PROJECT COULD STAND TO GENERATE EASILY 20 MILLION TO $30 MILLION ANNUALLY.

UM, AND AS WE SAID, LAST TIME, WE CREATED A CUSTOMIZED FRAMEWORK OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND THE DEVELOPER CONTINUES TO NOT COUNTER OR AMEND THE PROJECT, UM, IN ANY WAY, UM, AS A RESULT.

UM, SO WE ARE ASKING AND WE BELIEVE THE COMMUNITY DESERVES A SMALL PORTION OF THE INCREASED VALUE.

THE DEVELOPER WILL RECEIVE WITH THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AND THE ADDITIONAL USES THAT THIS REZONING ALLOWS.

UM, WE THINK YOU SHOULD DENY THIS UNTIL THERE ARE BETTER INVESTMENTS FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR THAT ARE LEFT IN THIS AREA, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

IT WILL NOT HEAR FROM MS. MELANIE HOUSE DIXON.

[00:55:02]

MY NAME IS MELANIE HOUSE DIXON, AND I SERVE AS CO-CHAIR FOR THE EAST OF MARTIN LUTHER KING CONTACT TEAM AND PRESIDENT FOR THE MARTIN LUTHER KING NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

I AM HERE TODAY TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ABSORBING FOR THE REGIME ROAD DEVELOPMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.

AUSTIN CENTRAL EAST SIDE IS, IS THE FERTILE GROUND FOR THIS VAST DEVELOPMENT AT WHICH COMPANIES, UM, HAVE BEEN DEVELOPING, UH, UH, AND, UH, UM, HAVE BEEN DEVELOPING, UM, THESE, THESE LARGE DEVELOPMENTS AT THE DETRIMENT OF THE COMMUNITY WHILE I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT.

THE DEVELOPER IS RELUCTANT TO PROVIDING SUFFICIENT BENEFITS, ASKED FOR BY THE COMMUNITY.

THIS REGIME DEVELOPMENT FOR FUTURE INVESTMENTS WILL PROFIT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE AUSTIN RESIDENTS.

WHEN WE LOOK AT ALL OF THE, OF THE INVESTMENT INCENTIVES PROVIDED TO THE DEVELOPMENT, IT IS NOT UNFAIR OR UNJUST TO EXPECT ADMIN AMENDMENTS GIVEN, EXCUSE ME, OR DEMANDS GIVING BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.

SINCE THIS PROJECT IS OF SUCH MAGNITUDE.

I ASKED THE COMMISSION NOT TO APPROVE THE SINCE THE DEVELOPMENT REFUSED, SINCE THE DEVELOPER REFUSES TO RECOGNIZE THE WILLINGNESS OF THE CONTACT TEAM AND THE COMMUNITY TO WORK OUT TERMS AND CONDITIONS PRESENTED BY, BY ALL, I DON'T FEEL A POSTPONEMENT IS NECESSARY AND WHAT WOULD BE, AND WHAT SET ASIDE THE REQUEST OF THE COMMUNITY.

SO I ASKED THE ZONING NOT BE APPROVED.

I THINK YOU WILL NOT HEAR FROM MR. GREG KELLER UM, I'M GREG KELLER.

I AM, UH, UH, THE LANDOWNER OF THE, ON A LARK CENTER WHERE SITAR, HE CURRENTLY WORKS.

SO IT WOULD JUST HAVE THAT BIAS, UH, OUT ON THE TABLE HERE, BUT, UM, I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION, UM, AND I'LL USE THE TIRED, OLD METAPHOR ABOUT RISING BOATS, UM, OR RISING TIDES LIFTING ALL BOATS.

UH, GENTRIFICATION FROM THIS PROJECT WILL HARM MANY OF THE EAST SIDE NEIGHBORS BOATS.

AGAIN, UH, OUR CITY HAS A HISTORY OF DOING THIS.

DEVELOPERS SHOULD HAVE A DIRECT HAND IN FIXING SOME OF THOSE BOATS.

AND SO THE TIDE DOES NOT SWAMP THEM ALL OUT OF AUSTIN.

SO TAHI ITSELF HAS GRADUATED THIS YEAR, 110 STUDENTS WHO OTHERWISE WOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO LIVING WAGE JOBS WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PROTECTING UNDESERVED, UH, UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES.

UH, THE CENTRAL TEXAS ALLIED HEALTH INSTITUTE HAS BUILT TRUST THROUGH WRAPAROUND SERVICES AND COMMUNITIES, UH, ESSENTIAL WORKERS WHO KEEP EAST WHO KEEP THESE SIDES SAFE AND LIVABLE FOR OLD AND NEW RESIDENTS.

UM, REALLY THE SPIRIT OF EAST AUSTIN PROJECT BACK IN 2015, STARTED A CONVERSATION.

THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY NEEDS TO GET REAL ABOUT SHARING THE BOUNTY OF THIS LAND AND MAKING SURE THAT WE MAKE IT EQUITABLE ON THE EAST SIDE FOR COMMUNITIES AS THESE DEVELOPMENTS COME IN.

UM, I OPPOSE, UH, MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS UNTIL THE BENEFITS FOR THE COMMUNITY, UH, EQUAL, UH, YOU KNOW, EQUAL THE COSTS THAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE COMMUNITY AS THAT GENTRIFICATION RIPPLES THROUGH AND FORCES THINGS TO CHANGE FOR EVERYONE ON THE EAST SIDE.

BENEVIDEZ HELLO COMMISSION.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. CLIFTON BAILING FOLLOWED BY ANGELA GARDEN.

UM, I'M NOT THE TYPE OF PERSON TO TALK WITH GLAMOROUS WORDS AND MAKE IT PRETTY AND SOUND GOOD TO MAKE PEOPLE LIKE ME.

I COME UP HERE TONIGHT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT KING KONG HIP'S KILLING AUSTIN, TEXAS, LOOK AT ALL THE CONDOS AND ALL THE BUILDINGS YOU SEE IN AROUND WHO ON OUR SIDE, THE PEOPLE LIVE A COMMUNITY COMMISSION.

I KNOW Y'ALL WORK HARD, BUT LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE THAT SAY, I KNOW Y'ALL JOB IS NOT WHERE WE VOTED YOU IN LIKE THE CITY COUNCIL, AND THEY NEED TO BE AWAKE.

THANKS FOR WHAT Y'ALL DO.

DELIVERING THEM THE GOODS.

I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I'LL OPPOSE IT.

FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE SEEN I'VE BEEN IN THIS CITY 45 YEARS, THIS LITTLE BLACK I'M IN THE TWILIGHT ZONE.

IT IS NOT GOOD FOR THE PEOPLES OF BOSTON.

Y'ALL HAVE FELLAS OVER AND OVER AGAIN, AND WE

[01:00:01]

ARE SICK AND TIRED WHEN Y'ALL GONNA LISTEN TO US, THEY'LL PLAY WELL.

WE ARE THE ONES Y'ALL CHILD SHOULD BE THESE ALL LEAVE BIG COMPANIES COMING IN HERE, EATING US UP.

HOW LONG BEFORE YOU LEAVE THE CITY AND BE SOMEWHERE ELSE IN TYLER, TEXAS, SOMEWHERE CALLED AUSTIN AND GOT TO THE POINT.

THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT US.

COOL, BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE.

DON'T MOST, I DON'T WALK AROUND, SEE MORE DAMN DOGS AND PEOPLE OR MEAT LOOK LIKE ME.

AND I AM SICK AND TIRED OF PEOPLE WALKING AROUND, LOOKING AT ME LIKE I DON'T BELONG IN THIS CITY NO MORE.

I LIVE ON THE EAST SIDE AND I'M PROUD TO SAY, I'M STILL THERE.

MY HOUSE IS NOT FOR SALE.

AND I'LL TELL YOU, I OPPOSE THIS.

I OPPOSE TO BE CALLED.

FIRST OF ALL, THEY DON'T COME TO US AND TALK TO US AND TREAT US, WHAT CAN YOU DO FOR MY COMMUNITY CAREGIVER, CHILD, INC.

WE NEED HELP PEOPLE.

WE CAN'T GET MOST OF IT FROM THE CITY.

WELL, Y'ALL SUPPORT US.

GIVE A DONATION.

SAY THEY WON'T HURT YOU.

IT'S A TAX.

WRITE OFF FOR THE KIDS OF AUSTIN, TEXAS.

THANK YOU, NOEL FROM MS. PRESENT.

HELLO COMMISSIONERS.

THANK YOU AGAIN.

ON BEHALF, NADIA STAYED AT GIVING US MORE TIME.

COMMISSIONER WE'D FIT YOUR INFORMATION AND WISDOM.

AND WE WENT TO WORK.

I THINK I EXHAUSTED.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING FOR FIVE DAYS STRAIGHT.

UM, I DO WANT TO LET YOU KNOW TO SPEAK TO WHAT LEAH STATED BACK IN AUGUST, 2020, WE WERE LOSING FAMILY MEMBERS TO COVID.

I LOST 11 FAMILY MEMBERS TO COVID.

SO I'M COMING BACK ON SO THAT WE CAN TRY TO GET BACK ON TRACK, BUT I CAN SAY THESE GREAT WOMEN BEHIND ME JOINED ME JUST IN MAY OF 2021.

AND WITHIN THAT TIME THEY HAVE ACHIEVED MORE THAN I HAVE SEEN ANY CONTACT TEAM OR HEARD OF ANY CONTACT TEAM ACHIEVING AND WORKING TOGETHER.

THE, WHAT I DO KNOW IS THIS WHAT THE WIND THAT WE RECEIVED OUT OF THIS WEEKEND, THE ONE WIN AND WE ARE PROGRESSING, AND THE NEGOTIATIONS ARE STILL FLUID RIGHT NOW, AS YOU CAN HEAR.

SO WOULD THE WIND WAS A BETTER BUILDERS AND IT TOOK A LOT OF TIME TO GET THERE.

I MEAN, A LOT OF TIME, WE CAN'T BELIEVE HOW MUCH TIME NOW, WHAT WE WERE SURPRISED BY IS THAT WHEN WE PROVIDED THE FRAMEWORK, AND THIS IS WHAT YOU ASKED US TO DO A COMMISSIONER, NOT ONLY DID THAT, WE DID A, WE ACTUALLY GOT ON THE PHONE WITH SOME COMMISSIONERS SO THAT WE COULD GET DIRECTION AND GUIDANCE.

SO WE DID A LOT, THERE WAS A TON OF WORK THAT HAPPENED HERE THAT NOT ONE THING WAS CONSIDERED AND I ALMOST WAS A BAY.

AND CAN, Y'ALL JUST DO, GIVE US A COUNTER ON BEHALF OF COMMUNITY, JUST GIVE US A COUNTER.

RIGHT? SO THIS IS WHERE THE EVERYTHING GOT STUCK.

IT WAS JUST LIKE, THERE WAS NO COUNTER ON THE ACTUAL FRAMEWORK.

AND WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS THAT IT'S A RABBIT HOLE.

DOWN WHAT WE DID IS WE WENT BACK WITH SOME OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND TALKED WITH THEM AND SAID, WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

HOW CAN WE INCREASE THAT IN SOME WAY TO GIVE THE COMMUNITY BACK SOMETHING? I MEAN, IT WAS JUST A BACK AND FORTH, BACK AND FORTH NEGOTIATIONS.

AND ON THE INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE FOR US, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT AN IN-BETWEEN, IT'S NOT A NEUTRAL IT'S NO, OR YES, YOU'RE NOT GIVING US ANYTHING TO VOTE IN BETWEEN.

SO I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT EVERY BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE HEARING, EVERYTHING IS STILL FLUID RIGHT NOW, BUT WE DID GET ONE WIN OUT OF IT SO FAR, BUT IT'S NOT DONE.

THERE'S STILL A LOT OF NEGOTIATING GOING ON.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'S RECENTLY REGISTERED? OKAY.

CHAIR THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS.

UM, EMOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, OR DID WE DID CLOSE IT CHEROKEE? YES.

GAUGE INTEREST.

IF THIS IS AT ALL POSSIBLE TO SUSPEND OUR RULES, TO BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS, UM, YOU CAN PUT FORTH THAT MOTION AND WE CAN VOTE ON IT.

WE WOULD NEED A MAJORITY JUST TO SUSPEND ROLES.

UH, ANDREW, I THINK WE CAN SUSPEND ROLES FOR MORE Q AND A IF WE NEED IT TO CORRECT.

SO IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND YEAH.

I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

SEE THAT'S ON THE DYESS AND FAVORITE.

UH, CAN YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW MANY COMMISSIONERS TIME AND HOW MANY MINUTES PER COMMISSIONER ON YOUR EMOTION? I WILL DEFER TO WHATEVER WE TYPICALLY DO.

WELL, THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE A LONG, THAT WOULD BE A LOT.

I WOULD ASK THAT WE, MAYBE WE, WE TYPICALLY DO EIGHT AT FIVE MINUTES EACH.

I THINK THAT'S A LOT OF MINUTES.

SO HOW ABOUT WE DO FOUR AT THREE MINUTES? I THINK THAT WOULD BE BETTER.

I WOULD PREFER THAT.

SO THAT'S THE MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND COMMISSIONER MOVE TODDLER, SECOND SET MOTION.

THAT'S UH, SO WE NEED A, UM, UM, UM, A, UH, THREE, FOUR QUARTERS OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WOULD BE AT LEAST NINE.

IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY.

UH, SO LET'S GO AND

[01:05:01]

THAT'S UM, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7.

AND THOSE, UH, ON THE SCREEN, I SEE ONE, UH, GIVE COMMISSIONER HOWARD TRYING TO SEE IF HE'S COMING BACK.

THAT'S TOO.

SO YOU HAVE SEVEN, TWO THAT'S, NINE IN FAVOR AND THOSE AGAINST ON THE DIAS.

UH, THOSE, UH, STANDING.

SO THAT'S ONE SO THAT, UH, WE HIT THAT, UH, THAT, UH, MOTION IS PASSED.

AND SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO SOME Q AND A, AND THAT WAS FOUR COMMISSIONERS, THREE MINUTES EACH, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER SHEA.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

SO, UM, THERE'S SO MANY, GOSH, I MEAN, THIS IS QUITE OVERWHELMING.

IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S SO MANY PIECES MOVING AROUND AND I'M TRYING TO ORGANIZE IT IN MY, IN MY HEAD, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN THE WORKFORCE.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNITY'S ASKING AND I MEAN, I KINDA NEED TO LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE IN THE FUTURE, THE PLANNING OF WHAT IS THIS REALLY, TRULY VISION CHANGE PLANNING WISE FOR THE CITY, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES AND CONCERNS THERE, AND THERE'S A VISION THAT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A STRUCTURE.

AND I COMMEND YOU ON, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, DOING THINGS LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, THE COMMERCIAL SPACE.

I MEAN THAT, WE'VE NEVER SEEN THAT.

I MEAN, HOW DOES THAT INFLUENCE, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT VISION FROM THE PLANNING ASPECT, YOU KNOW, HOW THIS WORKS.

UM, SO WE, WE VERY QUICKLY MOVED FROM, UM, THE ENTITLEMENT REQUESTS, WHICH WAS THE USES, THE HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WHAT THE, THE TOOLS ARE TO MAKE THIS SORT OF MIXED USE HUB WITH THIS VISION.

LIKE I WAS STARTING TO DESCRIBE, UM, FOR US AND CREATIVES, UM, AND PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO LIVE ON THE SITE AND VISIT IT AND HAVE RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS AND ALL THOSE THINGS COME TOGETHER.

WE, WE VERY QUICKLY MOVED FROM THAT VISION OF A REALLY AMAZING USE OF THIS CURRENTLY VACANT LAND WITH ACCESS TO 180 3, UM, INTO HOW CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT IT IS, UM, IT IS, UH, AVAILABLE TO A BROAD RANGE OF AUSTIN CREATIVES AND ARTISTS.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE THE 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF AFFORDABLE CREATIVE SPACE CAME IN.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT AUSTIN'S BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR A REALLY LONG TIME, UM, HOW TO MAKE SURE THAT WE SET ASIDE AFFORDABLE CREATIVE SPACE, THE SAME WAY WE SET ASIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SPACE.

WE FIGURED OUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING A LONG TIME AGO.

IT'S A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED TO DO CREATIVE SPACE, BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE EVER BEEN ABLE TO COME UP WITH AN AGREEMENT.

UM, WE'RE WORKING WITH AUSTIN CREATIVE ALLIANCE ON IT, UM, TO ACTUALLY HAVE A, AN ENFORCEABLE REQUIREMENT FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT, THAT THAT HAPPENS.

UM, THE DEVELOPER WAS HAPPY TO DO THAT FROM THE VERY OUTSET, EVEN BEFORE WE FIGURED OUT HOW TO DO IT BECAUSE, UM, AS I NAMED SOME OF HIS DEVELOPMENTS, HE'S ALL ABOUT THAT INCLUSIVITY AND WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, HE HAS A WHOLE VARIETY OF ARTISTS AND CREATIVE PEOPLE ON HIS SITES.

UM, AND SO IT WAS REALLY JUST ABOUT FIGURING OUT HOW TO PAY FOR IT.

AND I, I FEEL REALLY PROUD OF WHAT WE CAME UP WITH AND, UM, AND THE AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE WITH AUSTIN CREATIVE ALLIANCE ON THAT, I STILL HAVE LIKE A, AND AS FAR AS FOR THE AFFORDABILITY, I MEAN THE 10% AT 60%, I MEAN, HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU SEE THAT WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S SLIGHT DESTROYED, BUT HOW DOES THAT WORK WITH WHAT'S THE BALANCE OF THE AREA AGAIN, YOU KNOW, KIND OF PLANNING LOOKING FORWARD.

YEAH, SO ORIGINALLY THE REQUEST WAS 10% AT 80, BUT I THINK AS THIS BODY AS WELL, WHERE WE'VE, THE, THE CONVERSATION HAS REALLY BEEN MOVING TOWARDS 60% MFI.

UM, WE DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PARTNER YET FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY COMPONENT.

UM, BUT WE KNOW THAT 10% AT 60 IS A VERY STANDARD AGREEMENT THAT WE MAKE WITH BMU AND THINGS ACROSS THE CITY.

UM, AND SO WE FELT VERY COMFORTABLE MAKING THAT AGREEMENT IN ADDITION FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY COMPONENT, IN ADDITION TO THE, UM, AFFORDABLE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT FOR THE OTHER, AND THEN THE WORKER PROTECTIONS, WHICH WOULD APPLY ACROSS THE SITE.

SO WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE KIND OF TRIED TO, UM, PUT A COMMUNITY BENEFIT AROUND EACH PIECE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

UH, COMMISSIONER COX.

OH, YES.

UM, AND I'M PRETTY SURE ANDREW'S GOING TO SHOOT ME DOWN IF I TRY TO LIKE, INCLUDE SOME SORT OF CHILDCARE PROVISION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON THE ZONING CASE.

WELL, GO AHEAD AND YOUR NEXT, UM, I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR THE LAST SPEAKER FOR THE CONTACT TEAM.

SORRY, I DIDN'T CATCH YOUR NAME, ANGELA.

UM, SO Y'ALL ARE LIKE BLOWING MY MIND RIGHT NOW AND TALKING ABOUT ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT, THAT I HONESTLY NEVER IMAGINED WE'D BE TALKING ABOUT FOR A ZONING CASE.

UM, CAN I JUST SAY IT, AND I'M BLOWN BY ALL THESE WOMEN WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING IN THE YELLOW, YOU Y'ALL ARE DOING AN AMAZING JOB.

I ABSOLUTELY APPLAUD ALL OF Y'ALL, BUT, UM, SINCE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE QUESTIONED TIME, UM, I, WE'RE VERY LIMITED IN WHAT WE CAN DO.

I'M CONSTANTLY MAKING THAT GUY ANGRY BECAUSE I'M PUSHING, TRYING TO PUSH THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT WE CAN DO.

[01:10:01]

SO WHAT DO YOU, OTHER THAN JUST REJECTING OR DECLINING TO RECOMMEND THIS CASE? IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU SEE THAT THIS COMMISSION CAN DO TO HELP Y'ALL OTHER THAN AN OUTRIGHT REJECTION? IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE RELATED TO, YOU KNOW, THE CHAPTER 25 ITEMS THAT YOU THINK WOULD ASSIST IN YOUR NEGOTIATIONS? SO, SO I GOT ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE'VE HAD LISTENING SESSIONS WITH DEVELOPERS.

I THINK WE'RE THE FIRST CONTACT TEAM THAT'S DONE THAT AS WELL, SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND FROM THEIR POINT OF VIEW.

I THINK WHAT REALLY MADE IT DIFFICULT IS THAT WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE THE FINANCIALS IN FRONT OF US.

WE DIDN'T HAVE THE MARGINS PROJECTED MARGINS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

SO WE WERE LITERALLY, LITERALLY, YOU KNOW, THIS FRAMEWORK CAME IN MINDFULLY BY SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT THOUGHT OUT EXACTLY WHAT THE AREA NEEDS.

UM, THE OTHER OPTION THAT WE HAD, BECAUSE WE WERE HEARING FROM THE DEVELOPER THAT IT'S ACTUALLY A RABBIT HOLE.

I, I GET THAT.

BUT TH AND WE EXPLAINED IN WRITING THAT THIS IS A BLACK AND BROWN AREA, WE KNOW ABOUT THE FAIR LAWS, BUT WE KNOW THEY'RE NOT FAIR.

WE KNOW THE NUMBERS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A BLACK AND BROWN AREA THAT WE REALLY WANT TO SEE OUR BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE REALLY BEING SUCCESSFUL.

RIGHT? SO WE THOUGHT OF EVERYTHING THAT WE COULD PUT WITHIN THAT FRAMEWORK THAT WOULD SUPPORT BRAIN, BRAIN BEING THEM BEING SUCCESSFUL.

THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT ALEX MENTIONED, WHICH SHE'S NOT HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE SHE'S WORKING.

ALEX MENTIONED THAT ANOTHER POSSIBILITY, AND I JUST TALKED TO LEE ABOUT THIS, CAUSE NEGOTIATIONS STILL COULD HAPPEN HERE.

THAT ANOTHER POSSIBILITY IS MAYBE GET 10,000 SQUARE FEET AT DEEP AFFORDABILITY BASED ON A SKILLED SOMEBODY AFFORD WHAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY AFFORD.

BUT WE, AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW THEIR FINANCIALS AND AN ADDITIONAL 10,000 WOULD BE AT THE 60% MFI.

AGAIN, WE'RE DOING THAT BASED ON NOT KNOWING FINANCIALS, JUST TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, BRIDGE OVER WHAT WE'RE NOT GETTING ON A FRAMEWORK TO MAYBE PROVIDE MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE THAT NORMALLY WOULD NOT HAVE OPPORTUNITIES.

SO I WE'VE BEEN WORKING AROUND THE CLOCK FOR FIVE DAYS ON US TO KIND OF HELP YOU OUT.

THAT'S OUR THIRD COMMISSIONER.

UH, COMMISSIONER, MR. TODDLER, YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

UM, SORRY.

I JUST WANTED TO LET THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD KNOW THAT I ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER COX IS SAYING AND WHERE WE'RE KIND OF STUCK.

CAUSE WE HAVE TO RULE ON THE ZONING AND THE BASE ZONING IS FOR SF TWO AND LIMITED INDUSTRIAL.

SO IF WE DO NOTHING AND WE DENY IT, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD COME IN AND DEVELOP IT THAT WAY WITHOUT HAVING TO COME BEFORE US FOR ANYTHING.

SO IN TRYING TO GET THE BEST STUFF FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THAT KIND OF THING, I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE FOR LEAH THEN ON WHERE WE'RE AT.

I THINK YOU HAD LISTED THREE POINTS NOW IN ONE OF YOUR SLIDES, WE WERE SEEING THE 10% UNITS AT THE 60% MFI AND THEN THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT SPACE AND SIGNING UP WITH A BETTER BUILDER AGREEMENT.

IS THERE ANY, I MEAN, WE ARE COMING INTO A PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE COMMUNITY AREA.

WE'RE GETTING THE GREEN LINE THERE.

I MEAN, I REALIZE OUR HANDS ARE TIED AS A ZONING COMMISSION, BUT IS THERE ANY OTHER WAY, OR DO, ARE YOU GUYS SEEING ANYTHING THAT CAN HELP MAKE THIS BETTER FOR THE COMMUNITY? I THINK WE'D ALL LIKE TO SEE.

AWESOME.

ABSOLUTELY.

UM, SO I, I WOULD, UM, I WOULD SAY THAT I, I, FIRST OF ALL BELIEVED THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT, EVEN WITHOUT THOSE EXTRA VOLUNTARY THINGS IS AN EXCELLENT, UM, ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY AND IS GOING TO BE, UM, A BENEFIT IN AND OF ITSELF.

UM, THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, NOT ONLY ARE WE PROVIDING MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING, BUT WE'RE PROVIDING AN AFFORDABLE COMPONENT, NOT ONLY ARE WE CREATIVE AND COMMERCIAL SPACE, WE'RE PROVIDING AN AFFORDABLE COMPONENT TO THAT.

WE HAVE THE WORKER PROTECTIONS AND WE ARE STILL OPEN TO CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WAYS TO INVEST IN THE PROJECT IN WAYS THAT BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY.

I THINK WHERE WE SORT OF PARTED WAYS, UM, IS WHEN THE CONVERSATION TURNED TO MAKING CONTRIBUTIONS TO, UM, TWO WONDERFUL ORGANIZATIONS, BUT THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE NOT ACTUALLY RELATED TO THE PROJECT.

SO, UM, I, LIKE I SAID, IN MY COMMENTS EARLIER, I'M HAPPY TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WAYS THAT WE CAN INVEST IN THIS PROJECT AND CONTINUE TO MAKE THE PROJECT ITSELF, UM, BETTER AND BETTER FOR THE COMMUNITY.

AND I'M CONCERNED THAT THE, THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE 10% AT 60% MFI ARE, ARE, ARE PRETTY FAR REACHES FOR FOLKS IN THAT COMMUNITY.

AND IF THAT BRINGS THOSE PROPERTY VALUES UP, UM, THAT PUTS THEM IN A TOUGH SPOT.

[01:15:01]

WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT.

WE CAN CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT THAT AS WE MOVE ON TO C CONSOLE, IF YOU'D LIKE, ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER, CAN WE START CALMLY? HI, MY QUESTION IS FOR THAT AS FOR THE APPLICANT.

UM, AND SO JUST SOME OF THE POSSIBLE THIS THING SEEMS TO BE EVOLVING IN REAL TIME AND IT'S, IT'S A LOT.

UM, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS MENTIONED RIGHT NOW, UH, BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS THE POSSIBILITY OF A SLIDING SCALE, UM, AROUND THE AFFORDABLE COMMERCIAL SPACE.

IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IF I UNDERSTOOD THAT CORRECTLY.

UM, AND, UH, I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD REACT TO THAT IF YOU WERE MADE AWARE OF THAT AND IF YOU, UM, HOW, HOW, HOW, YEAH.

IF YOU JUST REACT TO THAT POSSIBILITY, UM, I, I CAN'T REALLY GIVE AN UP OR DOWN ON THAT IN THIS MOMENT, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY SAY THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT IT AND I WOULD BRING IT BACK TO MY CLIENT AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO DISCUSS IT WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

BUT YOU WERE MADE AWARE OF THAT OR YOU RECEIVED THAT SORT OF SITING SCALE IDEA PROPOSAL.

DID THAT MAKE IT TO YOU OR NO, WE RECEIVED THAT PROPOSAL IN WITH A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT WE WERE NOT WILLING TO CONSIDER.

AND SO I THINK MAYBE THAT WAS NOT THE, THOSE WERE NOT THE ITEMS THAT WERE REALLY DISCUSSED.

BUT WE CAN DISCUSS.

AND THEN JUST REAL QUICK, UM, CAUSE YOU HAD MENTIONED SORT OF THAT THE IDEA OF MAKING CONTRIBUTIONS TO THINGS THAT WEREN'T RELATED TO THE PROJECT AND OFFSITE WAS KIND OF A NON-STARTER, BUT, UM, THERE ARE SOME REQUESTS IN THE, IN THAT LIST, THERE ARE SOME REQUESTS THAT ARE TIED TO THE SITE, LIKE THE POSSIBILITY OF POTENTIALLY SOME MEETING SPACE BEING AVAILABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, OR SOME KIND OF CHILDCARE FACILITY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

AND, AND I'M JUST WONDERING HOW, HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THOSE OR HOW THE APPLICANT HAS SORT OF BEEN THINKING ABOUT THOSE.

I THINK, UM, WE, THOSE ARE THE, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WE, WE WILL, WE WOULD BE WILLING TO CONSIDER AS WE GO FORWARD.

UM, LIKE I SAID, THERE WASN'T REALLY A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THOSE ARE THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD UNFORTUNATELY HAVE REALLY BEEN KIND OF TIED UP IN THOSE OTHER ITEMS. UM, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT THOSE OTHER PIECES NOW, UM, AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

UM, AND, AND LIKE I SAID, ANYTHING THAT IS, UM, A PART OF THE PROJECT AND INVESTMENT IN THE PROJECT ITSELF, WE ARE OPEN TO DISCUSSING.

AND I HAVE A FEW MORE, A LITTLE MORE TIME.

CAN I ASK ONE QUICK QUESTION TO, UH, YEAH.

ANGELA FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TEAM, UM, IF, UH, THE ONSITE PARTS OF THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT, THAT ARE DISCUSSED, IF THOSE WERE POSSIBILITIES THAT COULD BE WORKED WITH, UM, WOULD, DO YOU THINK THAT THAT WOULD SORT OF SATISFY THE NEIGHBORHOODS, NEED TO SEE SOME COMMUNITY SORT OF BENEFIT SUPPORT OUT OF THE PROJECT? OR WOULD IT STILL COME BACK TO THE IDEA THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A DONATION? IT WOULD ALL DEPEND ON A NUMBERS AND HOW THAT WILL LOOK, SO WE WOULD BE OPEN TO, OKAY.

SO THIS IS YOU'RE OPEN TO THAT POSSIBILITY, BUT OKAY.

IT WAS ALL MY QUESTIONS.

SO THAT COMPLETES THE Q AND A, UH, COMMISSIONERS.

I JUST WANT TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION THOUGH, TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH CONDITIONS.

UM, THERE ARE QUITE A FEW THERE.

UH, THERE'S ALSO A TIA MEMO.

UM, THAT'S ATTACHED THAT HAS, UH, SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOTION, WE NEED TO BE VERY CLEAR, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING AND, AND WIT TO THOSE STEP, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, CONDITIONS THAT YOU WANT TO INCLUDE IN YOUR MOTION.

SO WE MIGHT NEED TO SPEND A LITTLE TIME AS HE EACH OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EMOTIONS THAT WERE, UH, PRESENTING, UH, HERE FOR, UH, TO VOTE ON.

SO WITH THAT, UH, I HAVE COMMISSIONERS, UH, A COMMISSIONER THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION, UM, BUT THIS MAY OR MAY NOT BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ANSWER, BUT IF WE MAKE A MOTION TO GO I'M, I'M, I'M ASSUMING THAT A LOT OF THE NEGOTIATIONS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE SORT OF TIED TO A LOT OF THE CONCESSIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ARE SORT OF TIED TO THE APPLICANTS REQUEST.

IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY.

SO IF WE MAKE A MOTION ON, UM, GOING WITH SOME OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTS, THEN WE WOULD BE POTENTIALLY HARMING SOME OF THOSE BENEFIT COMMITMENTS.

IS THAT, AM I, AM I MISUNDERSTANDING SOMETHING OR IF WE CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THAT'S FINE.

WE CAN JUST MOVE ON.

I WAS GOING TO ASK IF WE COULD GET THE CLARIFICATION ON ANY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION VERSUS WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED FOR.

WHAT WE'VE DONE BEFORE IS WHEN WE ENTERTAIN SOME OF THOSE STAFF CONDITIONS, UM, SOMETIMES WE, UH, RECOGNIZE THE APPLICANT AND ASK FOR WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD STILL HONOR SOME OF THOSE, UH, CONDITIONS.

SO WE'VE DONE THAT IN THE PAST.

SO LET'S MAYBE COMMISSIONER MITCH DOLLAR.

[01:20:01]

I THINK THESE WOULD BE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, RIGHT.

UM, THAT WE WANT TO ENTERTAIN.

SO I WOULD ALLOW, I GUESS, UM, IS IT WITHIN MY DISCRETION, ANDREW? I THINK UNTIL I, ONE MORE QUESTION OR DO WE NEED TO VOTE TO SPEND RULES AGAIN, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LAYS ON HOWEVER, THESE ARE THE COMMISSION RULES.

SO, UM, I WOULD LIKE, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD, UH, FOR STAFF TO EXPLAIN THEIR CONDITIONS.

AND SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, SUSPEND OUR RULES ONE MORE TIME ON TO MAKE A MOTION.

THE MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES AND ASK ONE MORE QUESTION FROM THE CHAIR.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? OKAY.

WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MITCH TODDLER.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE DYESS.

UH, THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

IT'S ON THE SCREEN.

UM, WE'RE, WE'RE VOTING TO ALLOW ONE MORE QUESTION.

OH, WE HAVE TO.

SO THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

SO, UM, DO YOU WANT ME TO GO AHEAD AND FILL OUT THE QUESTION? YOU, OKAY.

SO STAFF IN, UH, WE HAVE ON THIS CASE, WE HAVE, IF YOU CAN PLEASE COME AND EXPLAIN YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND THE, UM, CONDITIONS THAT YOU'RE PUTTING FORTH JUST FOR CONSIDERATION.

GOOD EVENING, HEATHER CHAFFIN, HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

UM, A SHORT SUMMARY OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE REQUEST AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS ON THE FRONT PAGE.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING 275 FEET OF BUILDING HEIGHT ON THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND A HUNDRED, 120 FEET ON THE EASTERN PORTION.

STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT 275.

WE SUPPORT 120 MAXIMUM ACROSS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY PROPERTY RIGHT NOW IS LIMITED TO 60 FEET IN HEIGHT.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING LIGHT MANUFACTURING LAND USE.

UH, MS. BOZO STATED BREWERY BREWERY IS A SUBSECTION IS ONE OF THE USES UNDER LIGHT MANUFACTURING.

SO AS A ZONING CASE, WE CAN ONLY TALK ABOUT THE OFFICIAL CATEGORY.

STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT LIGHT MANUFACTURING USE, BUT IF LIGHT MANUFACTURING LAND USE IS GRANTED OR PERMITTED APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING A 50 FOOT SETBACK BETWEEN BREWERIES AND ALL RESIDENTIAL, WE RECOMMEND THAT ANY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL LIGHT, I'M SORRY, LIGHT MANUFACTURING USE BE SETBACK 200 FEET FROM RESIDENTIAL THAT'S.

UH, WHENEVER THE DIFFERENCES IS THAT IS, UM, OR IT IT'S A SIMILARITY BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT, UH, IF IT WAS UNDER CURRENT CODE, IT WOULD ONLY BE A SETBACK TO SINGLE FAMILY.

UH, WE'RE IN AGREEMENT, THAT'D BE SET BACK FOR MULTI-FAMILY, UH, A STANDARD THING THAT THE T UH, TIA WAS PREPARED WITH THE SONY CASE.

AND WE DO A PUBLIC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, AND THEY'RE BOUND.

THE PROPERTY IS BOUND TO THOSE CONDITIONS.

UM, THEY ARE PROPOSING A 50%.

THOSE ARE THE DIFFERENCES.

UM, SOME OF THE DIFFERENCES FROM CODE THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING THE SIDES, THE HEIGHT IS THEY AGREED TO PROHIBIT SOME OF THE HEAVIER INDUSTRIAL USES THAT ARE ALREADY ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY.

ABOUT 90% OF THE PROPERTY IS ZONED LLI.

AND THEY'RE AGREEING TO PROHIBIT BASIC INDUSTRY GENERAL WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION RESOURCE EXTRACTION, RECYCLING CENTER, KENNELS, EXTERMINATING SERVICES, AND SOME OTHER OF THE HEAVIER COMMERCIAL USES.

THEY ARE PROPOSING PARKING REDUCTION TO 50%, WHICH WE SUPPORT, UH, NORMALLY IT'S 80%.

SO THE MAIN AREAS WHERE WE DO NOT AGREE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT ARE REGARDING LIGHT MANUFACTURING LAND, USE THE SETBACK BETWEEN LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND RESIDENTIAL, AND THEN THE HEIGHT YEAH.

SO, UH, REAL QUICK, UH, FOR, UM, MR. BOTTO, UM, CAUSE I, I THINK WHAT MR. CONLEY WAS INTERESTED IN IS IF WE DO, UM, VOTE ON, IN FAVOR OF THESE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF, HOW THAT MIGHT AFFECT ANY OF YOUR, UM, YOU KNOW, IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, WE ARE, UM, MAKING THESE, UH, COMMITMENTS BASED ON, UM, OUR REQUEST, UH, AND IN PARTICULAR AS THESE REQUESTS GROW AND THESE COMMITMENTS GROW, UM, WE NEED THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, IN ORDER TO SUPPORT

[01:25:01]

THOSE REQUESTS.

SO IT BECOMES EVEN MORE IMPORTANT AS WE CONTINUE TO NEGOTIATE.

SO SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD BE THE HEIGHT, UH, HOW ABOUT THE SETBACK THAT IS ALSO RELATED, BUT WE DO THAT, THAT'S ACTUALLY ONE OF THE TENANTS THAT IS THE FURTHEST ALONG IS A BREWERY.

AND IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE ONE OF THE FIRST TENANTS ON THE SITE AS A BREWERY.

SO YOU, YOU WOULD, YOU'RE WANTING THE 50 FOOT AT THE 200.

IT IS.

AND THEN, UH, THE TIN MEMO, ANY, UH, ISSUES WITH THAT? THE RECOMMENDATIONS? NOPE.

NOPE.

AND THEN 50% PARKING.

I THINK WE'RE GOOD THERE.

UH, DID YOU HAVE ANY, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND FOR STAFF.

NO, MY ONLY QUESTION ON THE, THE, UM, SETBACK, THE 50 FOOT VERSUS THE 200 FOOT, DO WE HAVE SAFETY CONCERNS? IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPERS PROPOSED LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES, IF WE'RE LIMITING THEM TO THEIR OWN SET OF LIGHT MANUFACTURING, DO WE HAVE ANY SAFETY CONCERNS, THE USE OR THE SUB USE THAT THEY'RE MOST INTERESTED IN BREWERIES? UH, THEY DID SOME EXTRA DUE DILIGENCE AND CHECK WITH FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND THERE ARE NOT, IF, IF THAT'S THE ONLY ONE OF THOSE LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES THAT THEY DO.

SO IN 50 FEET MATCHES WHAT IS ALLOWED, UH, FOR SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL AND BREWERIES IN TOWN.

AND WE ARE OUT OF TIME.

I AM AT A TIME.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT HELPED.

UM, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? CAN I ASK A LEGAL QUESTION? UH, GO AHEAD AND ASK.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN, WE'LL SEE IF WE, WELL, IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING ANDREW CAN ANSWER.

UM, ARE WE ABLE TO, TO PUT CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS DOWN TO THAT FINITE OF A USE OR ARE OUR CEO'S LIMITED TO JUST THE UPPER CATEGORY THAT HAS ALL OF THE OTHER USES? UM, IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE BREWERIES AND LIGHT MANUFACTURING? NO, WE CANNOT PARSE THAT OUT.

WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS WITH A LOT DEPARTMENT.

WE ALSO CANNOT MAKE ANY PRIVATE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, UH, ELEMENTS, A REQUIREMENT WITH THE ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO JUST TO JUST MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, WE CAN'T HAVE A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL THAT ALLOWS THE 50 FOOT SEPARATION FOR BREWERY USES, BUT 200 FOOT SEPARATION FOR ALL OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES.

THEY CAN'T DO THAT.

THAT POINT OF CLARIFICATION, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? OKAY.

COMMISSIONER SHEA.

SO I'M GOING TO THROW SOMETHING OUT.

SO AT LEAST WE CAN START DEBATING, BUT, UM, UH, IF I WANT TO MAKE IT JUST KIND OF STRAIGHTFORWARD SO WE CAN START, IT'S GOING TO BE THE APPLICANTS, UM, REQUEST WITH THE, UM, RESTRICTIONS THAT THEY'VE AGREED UPON WITH PRINTED USES, UH, PARKING REDUCTION.

UM, I GUESS WITH THE L I LIMITED THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING AT 50 FEET ALLOWED IS THAT I THINK A 50 FOOT SETBACK.

UM, AND THAT INCLUDES THE, YOU KNOW, ALSO THE TIA MEMO RECOMMENDATIONS.

I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S IT RIGHT.

DID I COVER ALL THE MPA AND IT DOES INCLUDE THE MPA.

SO I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THE APPLICANTS REQUESTS MERGED WITH, WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, UM, BESIDES, YOU KNOW, TO BE ADDED TO IT.

IT'S I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE START OF EMOTION AND LET'S SEE IF WE CAN, YOU KNOW, TAKE THAT AND THEN CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS.

CAN YOU KIND OF HEAR IT ONE MORE TIME? OKAY.

SO WE'RE GOING TO DO, UH, PRETTY MUCH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.

SO WE'RE GOING TO DO THE, TO THE, UM, WE'RE GOING TO DO THE, UH, LOOKS LIKE 2 75 FEET ON THE WESTERN PORTION, ONE 20 ON THE REMAINDER.

UH, WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THE, THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING WITH THE 50 FOOT SETBACK.

WE'RE GOING TO INCLUDE THE TIA MEMO AS A PUBLIC RESTRICTED COVENANT.

WE'RE GOING TO, UM, INCLUDE THE LIST OF PROHIBITED USES.

UM, I GUESS WE'RE GOING TO SUPPORT ALSO APPROVE THE PARKING REDUCTION AND WE'RE GONNA INCLUDE THE MPA.

IS THAT IT? I THINK, I THINK THAT'S THE LIST.

I THINK YOU'VE MISSED THE FAR THAT AGAIN, I THINK THE FAR IS ALSO INCLUDED SHOULD ALSO BE INCLUDED IN OUR REQUEST.

THAT'S THE, UM, UM, UH, DO YOU HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON THIS?

[01:30:02]

SO THE FAR I DIDN'T HEAR FROM STAFF ABOUT THE FAR CAN WE GET, WHAT WAS THE FAR REQUEST? I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T TWO TO ONE AND I BELIEVE STAFF IS IN SUPPORT.

AND THEN THE TWO TO ONE FAR.

EVERYTHING YOU SAID IS APPLICANT REQUEST PLUS THE TIA MEMO, WHICH WE ARE AGREEABLE TO, OF COURSE.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? DO WE HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT? UH, YES, YOU CAN.

YOU CAN PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT OR A SUBSTITUTION, BUT YOU NEED A SECOND FOR IT TO MOVE FORWARD.

UH, FIRST WE GOT LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THIS ONE.

WE HAVE, I SEE COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

YOU'RE SECONDING THIS MOTION.

SO DO YOU HAVE AN AMENDMENT OR A SUBSTITUTION COMMISSIONER? I DON'T EXACTLY KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.

SO I'LL ASK IF, IF MAYBE COMMISSIONERS SHAY WILL ENTERTAIN THIS AS A FRIENDLY WHATEVER.

UM, WE JUST DO AMENDMENTS AND SUBSTITUTIONS, SO SURE.

UH, TRY AND MEDITATE.

LET'S JUST SAY THAT LET'S DO AN AMENDMENT.

UM, WOULD WE, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE SETBACK AND THE FACT THAT OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES ARE LOUD, WOULD WE BE ABLE TO MAKE BREWERIES A CONDITIONAL USE AND THROUGH THAT PROCESS ALLOWED THEM TO HAVE LESS THE SETBACK.

SO, UM, LET'S ASK STAFF IF THAT, CAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A CATEGORY THAT SEE IF WE CAN MAKE THAT A CONDITIONAL, I CAN'T MAKE BREWERIES SPECIFICALLY A CONDITIONAL USE.

YOU COULD MAKE LIKE MANUFACTURING, A CONDITIONAL USE AND THAT'S BREWERIES AS ONE OF THE THINGS UNDER LIKE MANUFAC.

AND WILL WE BE ABLE TO ALLOW IF WE WERE TO SAY STAFF RECOMMENDATION, HUNDRED FOOT SETBACK, BUT MADE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CONDITION AND THEY CAME, I'M SORRY, LIGHT MANUFACTURING, MANUFACTURING.

COULD WE ALLOW A REDUCED SETBACK THROUGH THAT PROCESS? I I'M NOT SURE.

SO ANY, ANYTHING THAT FALLS INTO LIGHT MANUFACTURING WOULD COME BACK TO US? SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN MAKE THAT ONE USE, BUT NOT, UM, THE APPLICANT.

CAN YOU, DO YOU HAVE A CLARIFICATION REAL QUICK? I MEAN, I'M JUST, THE BREWERIES CANNOT BE SEPARATED UNDER THE USE.

SO ANYTHING THAT CATEGORY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK.

SO MY AMENDMENT, MY OFFERED AMENDMENT WOULD BE TO MAKE LIGHT MANUFACTURING, A CONDITIONAL USE SO WE CAN FIND, WE CAN FIND TUNE.

SETBACK.

UM, SO DO YOU HAVE A CLARIFICATION THAT MIGHT HELP US? I THINK I DO HAVE A CLARIFICATION THAT WOULD HELP YOU.

UM, BREWERY BREWERIES ARE A PARTICULAR USE UNDER LIGHT MANUFACTURING, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING USE.

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT IT'D BE PERMITTED.

IF WE HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, WE'RE GOING TO LOSE THIS TENANT AND PROBABLY MANY FUTURE TENANTS.

IT'S A VERY, UNFORTUNATELY A VERY CUMBERSOME PROCESS, BUT IN 25 TO 8 65 B, WHICH IS WHERE THE SPECIFIC OUTLINE SPECIFIC, UM, USE RESTRICTIONS ARE OUTLINED, THAT IS WHERE THOSE DISTANCE SETBACKS ARE.

SO I DO THINK YOU COULD SET A SPECIFIC SETBACK FOR BREWERIES THAT'S 50 FEET.

UM, SO CAN WE DO, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S JUST FROM LOOKING AT THE CODE SECTION, SO I'M THINKING THAT WE COULD TAKE AN AMENDMENT JUST DUE TO THE BREWERY AND THEN LET LEGAL HASH IT OUT BEFORE I LOVE DOING, I LOVE JUST MOVING FORWARD AND LETTING LEGAL HASHISH AGREE.

SO YOUR AMENDMENT GO AHEAD AND SAY, THEN MY, MY AMENDMENT IS TO, AND ANDREW'S GONNA TACKLE ME IN A SECOND.

MY AMENDMENT IS TO, IS TO, WELL NOW I DON'T KNOW HOW TO WORD IT.

UH IT'S TO MAKE BREWERY USE A 50, 50 FOOT SETBACK FOR ALL OTHER LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES A 200 FOOT SETBACK.

I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

AND THEN WE COULD SEE IF OUR SECOND WE'RE GOOD WITH THAT.

IF A SECOND, OR IS IT THE BODY? IT'S TO THE BONES.

TO THE BODY.

SO AT THIS POINT IT'S, IT'S THE BODY.

SO I'LL SECOND THAT, CAN I SECOND IT, I ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT.

SO WE NEED A SECOND FOR THAT.

MANUFACTURING, ARTISTS AND TABLES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

WE GOT A SECOND AND THEN WE CAN VOTE.

DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR AMENDMENT? I THINK I'VE SPOKEN ENOUGH ON IT.

OKAY, COMMISSIONER, UH, SO THAT'S THOSE IN FAVOR, THOSE AGAINST COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, I GUESS THE APPLICANT HASN'T REALLY SAID THIS, BUT IN, IN UNDERSTANDING, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA OF IT IS THAT IT IS GOING TO BE LIKE SPRINGDALE GENERAL AND THERE MIGHT BE ARTISTS, STUDIOS, AND LIGHT MANUFACTURER, SOMEBODY WHO'S

[01:35:01]

AND IF THEY HAVE TO COME FOR A CONDITIONAL USE, I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE, OR THEY HAVE TO BE 250 FEET BACK FROM APARTMENTS.

I THINK THAT CAN BE PROBLEMATIC.

I LIVE DIRECTLY BEHIND AN ART STUDIO AND, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THEY GET NOISY BANGING AWAY, MAKING, YOU KNOW, ARTISTS AND GREATS, BUT IT DOESN'T DISTURB MY LIFE TOO MUCH.

THEY DON'T.

AND I THINK THAT IF THIS IS A SINGLE OWNER, WHO'S, YOU KNOW, SORT OF OWNING AND DEVELOPING THESE APARTMENTS, THEY'RE GOING TO WANT IT TO BE A NICE LIFESTYLE FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE IN.

AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, UGLY, NOISY, STINKY, INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES BACK THERE.

UH, THOSE SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS TOUR COMMISSIONER.

I WASN'T EVER HERE BEFORE WE GO FORWARD, MR. COX, UM, COMMISSIONER COX, UM, MOUNT, WHETHER HE MEANT TO INCLUDE THAT AS A CONDITIONAL USE.

NO, IT WAS, IT WAS JUST A FINE TUNING.

THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN THE BREWERY USE AND ALL OTHER LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES.

I THINK THE, THE, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THE ARTISTS HAVE TO BE 250 FEET FROM ALL OF THE APARTMENTS, I THINK THAT COULD BE PROBLEMATIC.

SO CLARIFICATION HERE, I THOUGHT, OKAY, I'M GOING TO READ ABOUT A READ.

SO THE, THE AMENDMENT, IF THAT'S WHAT, UH, MR. RIVERA IS REFERRING TO IS TO IT'S DIDN'T WE SAY TO A CONDITIONAL USE FOR BREWERIES? NO, THE CONDITIONAL USE WAS JUST A STRATEGY BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD INITIALLY THAT WE COULD NOT FIND TUNE THE SETBACKS, BUT I THINK THERE'S A BIT OF DISCREPANCY AND MAYBE WE CAN'T ANSWER THAT NOW.

SO THE IDEA WAS TO JUST FINE TUNE THE SETBACKS WITHOUT MAKING THINGS THAT CONDITIONAL USE.

AND THEN IF LEGAL SHOOTS IT DOWN LATER, THEY CAN.

SO WHAT IS, I'M SORRY, THEN WHAT IS THE AMENDMENT? THE AMENDMENT IS TO ACCEPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR A SETBACK OF 200 FEET FROM LIGHT MANUFACTURING LAND USES, EXCEPT FOR THE BREWERY USE, WHICH WOULD BE A 50 FOOT SETBACK.

SO IS EVERYBODY CLEAR? I WAS NOT.

NOW I AM.

UM, OKAY, SO WE'VE CLARIFIED THAT.

SO MOVING DOWN OUR LIST, HAVE THOSE THREE CAN FAVOR.

OKAY, PLEASE.

NO, I WAS, I, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND NOT HAVING THEM HAVE TO COME BACK TO US FOR THAT.

BUT I AM CONCERNED WHEN WE TALK ABOUT APPROVING THINGS AT A LARGE BLANKET LEVEL ABOUT THE SAFETY.

SO WE DID HEAR FROM CITY STAFF THAT DEPENDING ON WHAT THE ACTUAL LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES, AND THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A BROAD CATEGORY WE COULD GET IN THE SAFETY CONCERNS FOR NEARBY RESIDENTS.

AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO BE CAREFUL.

AND I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT OUR INTENTION IS TO ALLOW ARTISTS IN THAT KIND OF CRAFT SPACE TO COME IN.

BUT IF FOR SOME REASON THAT WERE TO TAKE A TURN AND GO AWAY FROM THAT INTENDED USE, WE WANT TO A SAFETY BACKSTOP FOR RESIDENTS WHO ARE LIVING THERE, OR RESIDENTS WHO ARE NEARBY IN THE COMMUNITY.

I'D RATHER HAVE THEM COME BACK AND ASK FOR IT AND WE CAN, WE CAN PUSH IT THROUGH THE NEESY ARTISTS CASE, THAT KIND OF THING.

SO THAT, THAT'S WHY I'M IN FAVOR OF IT.

UH, THOSE SPEAKING AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT, UH, COMMISSIONER CALMLY, UM, YEAH.

I'D LIKE TO SPEAK AGAINST IT BECAUSE WHY ADD EXTRA LAYERS OF COMPLEXITY TO THIS THING? I DON'T SEE HOW IT HELPS.

FIRST OF ALL, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE SORT OF ASSUMING THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD DO SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THEIR OWN INTERESTS IN DEVELOPING THIS PROJECT.

IF THEY WERE TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT SPACE THAT WOULDN'T BE DESIRABLE TO LIVE NEXT TO, OR TO BE CLOSE TO, OR THAT CREATED SAFETY HAZARDS, THEY WOULD HARM THEIR OWN ABILITY TO RENT OUT PROPERTIES THAT THEY'RE DEVELOPING ON THAT SPACE.

SO THAT'S, IT'S JUST SEEMS TO ME, LIKE, WE'RE JUST COMING UP WITH ADDED LAYERS OF COMPLEXITY TO THIS THING.

I'M OUT OF A DESIRE TO MICROMANAGE SOMETHING THAT I JUST DON'T.

I WOULD NOT LIKE TO HAVE TO REVISIT THESE QUESTIONS, UM, ON THIS COMMISSION.

SO I'M SPEAKING AGAINST, OKAY.

THOSE, UH, THREE CAN FAVOR.

ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK? I HAVE ONE MORE SPOT SPEAKING AGAINST THAT'S THAT'S ON THE AMENDMENT.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION IF WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING, WHETHER IT BE 50 FEET OR 200 FEET BASED ON SAFETY IS THEY'RE ALREADY SELF-REGULATING THINGS FOR SETBACKS, BECAUSE YOU HAD MENTIONED BREWERIES DIDN'T HAVE MUCH OF ANYTHING.

UH, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE.

UH, LET ME SEE IF I GET THIS RIGHT.

SO THE AMENDMENT, UH, IS, UH, TO ACCEPT STAFF, UH, CONDITION OF A 200 FOOT FROM LIGHT, UH, SETBACK FOR LIGHT MANUFACTURING FROM ALL RESIDENTIAL USES, EXCEPT FOR BREWERIES, WHICH WILL BE A 50 FOOT SETBACK.

CAN I, CAN I ASK A QUESTION TO STAFF?

[01:40:01]

SO THAT MEANS OTHER ONES MIGHT.

AND SO ARE WE IN MAKING THIS COMPLEX WHEN IT'S ALREADY HAVE SOME TYPE OF SELF FIXING THING? WELL, BREWERIES ARE REQUIRED TO BE SET BACK 50 FEET FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

SO THAT'S BAKED IN, UM, EACH LAND USE THAT COMES IN, UH, PRESUMABLY SOMETIMES IT'S HARDER WHEN IT'S TENANTS IN A LEASE IN A BIG BUILDING.

UM, EACH USE THAT COMES IN FIRE, DEPARTMENT'S SUPPOSED TO REVIEW TO SEE IF THE SAFETY RULES ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.

SO THERE'S A CHECK AND BALANCES ANYWAY, IT SOUNDS LIKE, YES.

SO IF WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING BREWERIES ALREADY ALLOWED 50, BUT IF I CAME IN, DECIDED I WANTED TO DO GLASSBLOWING FIRE DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO TELL ME 200 FEET ANYWAY, FROM SINGLE FAMILY.

FOUR REGARDING THE BREWERY, SINGLE FAMILY.

UM, AND I KNOW THAT'S, YOU'RE ASKING WHAT'S OH, FOR THE OKAY.

FROM SINGLE FAMILY, NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL USES, BUT, UH, THE APPLICANT IS COMFORTABLE WITH A SETBACK FROM ALL RESIDENTIAL.

IT'S NOT JUST SO THIS AMENDMENT JUST TO CONFIRM THIS IS FOR ALL THE RISK, SEEING ALL RESIDENTIAL USES.

OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD.

AND THIS, CAN I MAKE A SUBSTITUTE AMENDMENT TO HER AMENDMENT JUST TO RESOLVE THE SAFETY CONCERNS? SO THIS IS WHERE IT GETS TRICKY FOR ME.

I THINK WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AMENDMENT OR, UH, LET ME SEE, CLAIRE.

ANDREW, CAN WE DO SUBSTITUTE TWO AMENDMENTS CHECK ON MICHELLE LADIES ON THE ANDOVER.

YOU CAN HAVE A, UM, AN AMENDMENT TO THE COX AMENDMENT, BUT IF YOU'RE MOVING A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, WE SHOULD PROBABLY, UH, DISPOSE OF RIGHT.

CAUSE SO THIS, AND I DON'T WANT TO SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

I JUST WANT TO PUT, IF, IF IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE, CAN, CAN WE MAKE IT SO THAT THE SETBACK IS THE LESSER OF SINGLE FAMILY OR MULTIFAMILY SETBACK FOR ANY PARTICULAR USE? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO, SO IF, IF, IF THE SETBACK IS, IF IT'S SAFETY, I'M ASSUMING THAT SAFETY FOR MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY IT'S FOR ALL RESIDENTIAL, AS OPPOSED TO A QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUE.

SOMETIMES PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT SETBACKS FOR QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY.

SO I'M SUGGESTING SINCE THE QUALITY OF WORK, WE'RE EXPECTING THE APPLICANTS TO MANAGE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF THEIR RESIDENTS IN, IN THE PROPERTY THAT THEY CONTROL.

UM, AND, AND TO PICK THE RIGHT USES FOR THAT QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE JUST SAY, IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE.

AND SO IF, IF, IF IT'S 50 FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND YOU KNOW, THEN WE'LL MAKE IT 50 FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY, OR IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, 50 FEET FOR MULTI-FAMILY, BUT 200 FEET FOR SINGLE FAMILY, W W IT WILL BE THE LESSER OF THAT TO BE ONLY 50 FEET TO BE THE LESSER OF WHATEVER IT IS FOR SINGLE FAMILY OR MULTI-FAMILY.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I, I, I, I THINK WE GET IT, BUT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE WHAT CAN I ASK A QUESTION TO THE STAFF IF IT'S, IF SOMETHING'S TO EXPLODE AND PUT OUT NOXIOUS FUMES THAT ARE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE, IT'S A SAFETY THING, THEN I WOULD HOPE THAT THEY, THAT THE CITY IS JUST AS CONCERNED ABOUT ONE FAMILY AS THEY ARE ABOUT A HUNDRED.

ARE SETBACKS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST IN CODE, UH, FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY.

SO THE CITY, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DOES REVIEW WHEN A USE COMES IN, THEY'RE GOING TO REVIEW IT.

WE, SO POINT OF ORDER HERE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND WE NEED TO FIRM UP THE MOTION.

I KNOW WE'VE ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT MOTION IS TO SET THE, THE SUB USES OF THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR LIGHT MANUFACTURING TO BE THE, THE SETBACKS TO BE THE LESSER OF EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY AND, OR MULTI-FAMILY SETBACKS.

DO WE KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE, BUT THERE'S A WHOLE TABLE OF, CAN WE, THE APPLICANT, DO YOU, SORRY, I'M GOING TO, SO, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD.

SO WHAT I BE MOTION? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL CAN I SECOND? IT I'LL SECOND.

IT, I GET IT.

I GET IT.

SO I I'LL SECOND.

IT, I DON'T GET IT.

SO THE MOTION THAT I HEAR IS THESE ARE ACTUALLY, THESE

[01:45:01]

SO WHERE THEY EXIST.

WE'RE, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON IS, UH, HIS AMENDMENT IS THAT WE, UM, ARE REQUIRING THE LESSER OF BETWEEN THE TWO, BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY AND THE MULTIFAMILY SETBACKS, UH, IN RELATIONSHIP TO THESE USES IT'S THE LESSER OF THE TWO CA THE TWO RESIDENTIAL CATEGORIES.

BUT DIDN'T, WE JUST HEAR FROM STAFF THAT THAT IS ONLY THE SINGLE FAMILY.

SO FOR ASSUMING THE LESSER THAN THERE'S NO STEP.

SO ARE THERE, THE QUESTION IS, ARE THERE SETBACKS FOR MULTIFAMILY IN THE CODE MOTION CURRENTLY BEING DISCUSSED IS MORE PERMISSIVE THAN WHAT STAFF AND THE APPLICANT AGREE TO REGARDING THE 50 FOOT SETBACK APPLY TO MULTI-FAMILY IN ADDITION TO SINGLE FAMILY.

SO I THINK THE PROPOSAL FROM THE APPLICANT AND STAFF IS TO NOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TWO CATEGORIES IN TERMS OF SETBACKS.

I THINK WE'VE, UH, SO WE HAD A SECOND, SO COMMISSIONER COX OR YOUR, WE HAVE, SO THIS BELONGS TO THE BODY.

SO WE'RE, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON? I JUST AM WANTING TO TREAT THE MULTI-FAMILY AND THE SINGLE FAMILY THE SAME, AS OPPOSED TO TREATING THEM SEPARATELY.

AND SO IF, IF I DON'T MEAN THERE TO BE NO SETBACK, SO MAYBE I WOULD EVEN THROW IN A, AT LEAST 50% 50, AND THEN THE LESSER OF, OKAY.

I THINK NEED TO PULL THIS ONE BACK AND START OVER.

SO CAN WE, THAT BELONGS TO THE BODY SO SORRY, WHO SAID THAT, OH, IT'S GONNA BE FROM YOUR STROLLER, UH, ON, ON PROCESSING PRESUMING WE CAN ARTICULATE EMOTION AND GET THIS FORWARD.

UM, DOES THIS THEN GO TO COUNCIL? YES.

AND CAN COUNCIL CHANGE WHAT WE'VE DONE? YES.

SO IF WE GET THIS WRONG COUNSEL CAN CHANGE IT BASED ON WHAT THE APPLICANT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ANY DISAGREEMENT WITH US.

OFF A 50 WE'RE NOW ESSENTIALLY GOING IN SAYING THAT 50 IS ONLY FOR THE BEAUTY USE, NOT FOR LIKE MANUFACTURING.

SO I GUESS MY POINT, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN FIX THIS AMENDMENT, UM, THE WAY IT WAS STATED, AND IT BELONGS TO THE BODY.

SO COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, DO WE NEED, DO YOU NEED TO, RECRAFT IT, DO WE NEED TO RESEND IT AND, AND REPHRASE IT? UM, I THINK THE LESSER OF THE TWO, I MEAN, MAYBE DO WE HAVE A TABLE THAT WE COULD SEE? OKAY.

OH, NO.

IF LIKE, CAN GO BACK TO CODE HAS A DIFFERENT REQUIREMENT FOR SETBACK FROM SINGLE FAMILY AND FROM MULTI-FAMILY, THAT IS NOT WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO HAVE THE SAME SETBACK FROM MULTIFAMILY AS SINGLE FAMILY.

SO BASICALLY THEY'RE BEING MORE GENEROUS TO MULTIFAMILY THAN IS IN CURRENT CODE.

SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THAT THEY MATCH AND STAFF AGREES WITH THAT.

WE JUST DISAGREE ABOUT THE DISTANCE, BUT, BUT YOU'RE SUGGESTING, AND YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT IT BE APPLICANT WANTS AT 50 FEET.

YOU WANT IT 250 FEET AND PEEP 200, 200 FEET.

AND PEOPLE UP HERE ARE SAYING, WELL, 200 FEET FOR BREWERY, BUT NOT FOR ANYTHING ELSE FOR BREWERY, BUT NOT FOR ANYTHING ELSE, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT THERE TO BE SAFETY ISSUES WITH, AND I'M JUST SUGGESTING, WELL, IF THERE ARE SAFETY ISSUES, I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD BE BUILT IN TO THE MINIMUM THAT IT COULD BE THERE.

SO IF WE JUST GO FOR THE MINIMUM FOR ALL OF THOSE USES, BECAUSE FOR THE MINIMUM, FOR SINGLE FAMILY, FOR BREWERY, IT IS 50 FEET.

BUT IF FOR, YOU KNOW, ARTISAN METAL WORK, IT'S, IT'S LARGER BECAUSE THEY HAVE PROPANE TACK TANKS BECAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE DOING WELDING THEN, AND IT NEEDS TO BE 200 FEET.

THEN LET'S MAKE IT 200 FEET FOR SAFETY ISSUES.

BUT NOT BECAUSE ARTISANS ARE NOISY SOMETIMES WHEN THEY'RE SO, AND OUR WELDING, WE, UH, SO I SEE A BUNCH OF HANDS GOING UP.

WE NEED TO CLARIFY THIS AND CAN I SPEAK AGAINST THE MOTION? YOU'LL ARE WE DONE WITH POINT OF CLARIFICATION? I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO A, UH, ANY KIND OF DISPLACED SHAUN SETBACKS.

I WAS JUST GOING TO CLARIFY MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE THE MOTION THAT THE BASE MOTION LEAVE, EVERYTHING ASIDE ESSENTIALLY SAID THAT LIGHT MANUFACTURING, WHICH INCLUDES BREWERIES IS AT A DISTANCE

[01:50:01]

I THINK THAT RESOLVES THE ISSUE CAN SHARE THOMPSON IF I CAN UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY, BECAUSE YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY, WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT ONLY FOR BREWERY IT'S 50 FOR EVERYTHING ELSE, IT IS WHAT IT IS.

WE'RE NOT SAYING ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT ANY OF THE OTHER USES AT ALL.

SO THAT WOULD THEN BE UP TO STAFF TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DISTANCE SHOULD BE FROM MULTIFAMILY.

I THINK THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTIONS AS THEY STACK UP THE, I DON'T BELIEVE THE DIFFERENCE IS REGARDING SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY, UH, STAFF AND THE APPLICANT HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT THAT WHATEVER THE SETBACK IS SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY BE TREATED THE SAME.

IT'S THIS GETTING INTO THE SUB-DISTRICTS OF LIGHT MANUFACTURING AS COMMISSIONER SHAY SAID, AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT WILL REVIEW, UH, METAL WORK WITH PROPANE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND IF THEY DETERMINE THAT 50 FOOT SETBACK ISN'T ENOUGH, THEN THEY CAN REQUIRE ANY, ANYTHING.

I DON'T KNOW THE FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS, IF IT WOULD BE, IT JUST DEPENDS.

BUT THE KEY THAT THE APPLICANT AND STAFF AGREE ON IS TREATING THE MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY THE SAME.

I THINK THE QUESTION THAT YOU GUYS ARE DISCUSSING IS DO WE, DO YOU TREAT BREWERIES AND LIGHT MANUFACTURING THE SAME? YEAH.

SO WE, WE REALLY NEED TO GET LET'S GO AND DEBATE.

UH, SO THOSE FIGHTING AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT COMMIT YOUR THOUGHTS.

YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP.

I WAS JUST GOING TO SPEAK AGAINST IT.

LET'S LET'S KEEP WELL.

SO WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY.

THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO DO THE REVIEW.

THEY LOOK AT WHERE LOCATIONS OF HAZMAT AND HIGHLY FLAMMABLE MATERIALS AND ALL THAT STUFF IS GOING TO BE, BUT, BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SPACES AND USES FOR THOSE SPACES.

AND SO WHILE SAFETY IS A FACTOR, THAT'S NOT THE ONLY THING THAT'S IN MY MIND IN TERMS OF THE AMENDMENT THAT I MADE, WHICH IS NOT CURRENTLY THE ACTIVE AMENDMENT BEING VOTED ON IT BREWERY, UH, WITHIN 50 FEET FEELS COMFORTABLE BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S THAT TYPE OF USE, BUT THERE ARE MANY, MANY OTHER LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES THAT FOR SAFETY AND OTHER REASONS WE SHOULD NOT BE BUDDING THAT UP AGAINST MULTI-FAMILY SINGLE FAMILY, WHATEVER RESIDENTIAL UNITS UNITS, WHICH IS WHY I THINK THE STAFF RECOMMENDED A LARGER SEPARATION BETWEEN LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND ALL RESIDENTIAL USES.

CAUSE THEY DIDN'T THINK THAT THOSE WERE COMPATIBLE USES TO HAVE A BIG AGAINST EACH OTHER BREWERY IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE ALL VERY FAMILIAR WITH.

UM, AND SO I THINK THAT THAT TYPE OF USE MAY BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE CLOSER TO RESIDENTIAL CAUSE WE'VE SEEN THAT HAPPEN BEFORE, BUT I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT ALL OF THE OTHER CATEGORIES IN LIGHT MANUFACTURING THAT MAY BE DON'T BELONG 50 FEET OR LESS, UH, FROM, FROM, UH, FROM OUR APARTMENT BUILDING OR CONDO.

SO THAT'S WHY I NOT I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST IT.

UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND COMMIT YOUR CONLEY.

IF YOU SPEAKING IN FAVOR, I'M SPEAKING NEUTRAL AND I'LL TRY TO BE LET'S LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET JUST, I'M SORRY THAT I DON'T WANT TO BE DISRESPECTFUL, BUT LET'S CAPTURE THOSE IN FAVOR AGAINST AND SEE IF WE HAVE KIND OF SPACE FOR NEUTRAL.

WE'LL SAY THAT.

SO, UM, I MEAN, I MEAN, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE WHAT, WHAT WE WERE WANTING WAS TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY BECAUSE VERSUS JUST BREWERIES, BUT THERE ARE OTHER USES THAT POTENTIALLY COULD BE CLOSE, BUT THE CONCERN WAS SAFETY.

BUT SO THE MOTION THAT'S ON THAT FOR THIS AMENDMENT RIGHT NOW IS ALLOWING THOSE COMPONENTS TO BE CLOSER BASED UPON SAFETY REGULATIONS.

AND IT'S ACTUALLY LOOSER BECAUSE IF THERE IS LET'S, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY WHO'S DOING LIKE ON AN, A 3D PRINTING OF SOMETHING AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT COMES IN, WELL, THAT'S MANUFACTURING AND YOU COULD BE 50 FEET, BUT THEN THE CITY SAYS, NO, THAT'S LIKE MANUFACTURING.

IT'S NOT COVERED.

YOU GOT TO BE 200 FEET.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO NOT GET INTO MY CONCERN WITH THE 200 FEET IT'S.

SO IT'S SO PRESCRIPTIVE.

BOOM.

IT SETS THAT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY HAVE TO COME BACK AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SAFETY.

IT JUST HAS TO DO WITH JUST BECAUSE IT'S A LABEL.

SO THEY'RE ALREADY SPECIFIC USES AND THERE'S ALSO CHECKS AND BALANCES TO ALLOW THESE THINGS TO BE THERE.

THE OTHER THING IS, AGAIN, IS THE DEVELOPMENT IS THERE TO ENSURE THE VIABILITY OF IT, OF THE ECOSYSTEM BETWEEN THE RESIDENTS AND, AND THE PATRONS OF IT.

SO WOULD THEY PUT SOMETHING DANGEROUS THERE? I HOPE NOT BECAUSE IT'S UNDER A SINGLE MANAGEMENT, SO I THINK THERE'S ENOUGH CHECKS AND BALANCES IN THAT.

THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M AT.

THOSE SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION.

UH, COMMISSIONER COMMONLY GUNS FEATURE, A NEUTRAL, YOU HAVE SPACE HAVE TIME.

ANY MORE IN FAVOR,

[01:55:02]

I APOLOGIZE.

I JUST, IN THE INTEREST, I THINK WE, UH, WE HAVE MORE JUST TO JUSTIFY WHY I DID THAT IS I THINK WE KIND OF GET MORE COMPELLING ARGUMENTS AND WE GO FOR AGAINST FIRST AND, AND THEN THOSE ARE NEUTRAL.

UH, YOU KNOW, SO YOU WANT TO GIVE IT A SHOT? WELL, JUST ALL I'LL SAY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE DISCUSSING THIS SORT OF SPECIFIC CASE OF THE BREWERY.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, NOW THERE'S SORT OF THE EXAMPLE OF POTENTIAL 3D PRINTING.

THE TRUTH IS THERE'S SO MANY OF THESE DIFFERENT POTENTIAL USES.

WHAT ABOUT SOMEONE MAKING HANDMADE JEWELRY? WHAT ABOUT SOMEONE MAKING, YOU KNOW, PAINTING? DOES THAT HAVE TO BE AT A 200 FOOT, 200 FOOT SETBACK? DOES A PAINTER HAVE TO BE 200 FEET AWAY FROM, YOU KNOW, MY APARTMENT? I, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE WHY NOT JUST LET THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DO WHAT IT'S ACTUALLY GOOD AT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO HAVE US PRETEND LIKE WE CAN DO THAT HERE ON THE DICE.

THAT JUST FEELS UNNECESSARY.

I THINK THAT WAS A GOOD COMMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

SO THIS IS THE AMENDMENT TO AN AMENDMENT.

UH, IT WAS, UM, BY COMMITTED TO THOMPSON SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SHEA.

AND I'M GOING TO READ WHAT I HAVE HERE JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR.

SO FOR SETBACKS FROM SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY, UH, USES SETBACKS FROM LIGHT MANUFACTURING FROM SINGLE AND MULTIFAMILY, IT IS WE WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE LESSER OF THE TWO SETBACKS, SORRY BETWEEN SAY THAT AGAIN.

I BELIEVE WHAT HE WAS SAYING IS THE LESSER OF THE TWO, WHICH IS THE 50 FOOT SETBACK.

SO TO CLARIFY, I THINK WHERE THERE, SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THERE IS NO SETBACK PUBLISHED.

IS THAT YOUR CONCERN COMMISSIONER COX MINUTES? IT'S NOT THAT ISN'T THAT WHAT I HEARD WAS THAT IF WE'RE TAKING THE LESSER OF MULTI-FAMILY SETBACK OR SINGLE FAMILY SETBACK, THEN FOR ALMOST ALL OF THESE USES, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ZERO SETBACK, RIGHT.

OR AM I WRONG? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT I HEARD.

UH, LET'S SEE.

UM, I BELIEVE IT, I BELIEVE IT WAS IN THE WORDING, UH, WHEN COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SAID THE LESSER OF, UM, IF HE WAS TRYING TO SAY, GO WITH MY UNDERSTANDING, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT, AND I, AND OF COURSE, TO CORRECT.

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING WAS A F THAT LIKE MANUFACTURING AS ALL TYPES, INCLUDING BREWERY BE THE 50 FOOT SETBACK.

UM, BECAUSE THAT'S THE LESSER OF THESE TWO DISTANCES WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT AND LESS COMMISSIONER THOMPSON IS PROPOSING THAT ANY OF THESE USES BE LESS THAN THAT, WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS THE INTENT.

SO I THINK THE CLARIFY, WE, YEAH.

SO IS THAT CLEAR TO EVERYONE THAT A, THE CLARIFICATION NEEDS TO BE THAT THERE'S A MINIMUM 50 FOOT SETBACK, WHICH IS NOT WHAT I'M HERE? WAS THAT IN YOUR MOTION? IT WASN'T, BUT I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

I, I ASSUMED THAT, THAT THERE WERE 50 FEET AND MORE ROCK.

NOT THAT THERE WERE 50 FEET.

I'M NOT, THAT'S MY ASSUMPTION AS WELL.

I THINK THERE'S 50 FEET AND NONE.

SO WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL.

SO WHEN YOU SAID NONE, IS IT, IS IT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SPEAK TO IT? IT'S NOT ENDORSE, IT ACTUALLY SAYS ZERO.

IF IT DOESN'T SPEAK TO IT, THEN IT DOESN'T SPEAK TO IT.

WELL, WHAT, WHAT I HEARD AND MAYBE I'M MISQUOTING STAFF WAS THAT IF WE WERE TO GO JUST STRICTLY OFF OF MULTIFAMILY SETBACKS, THEN THEN MANY OF THOSE USES WOULD HAVE ZERO FOOT SETBACKS.

AND WE'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE USING THE LESSER OF THE MULTIFAMILY AND THE SINGLE FAMILY, MEANING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ZERO.

SO, SO LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND CLARIFY.

CAUSE I MEAN, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM COMMISSIONER, UM, THOMPSON WAS, WAS THERE WAS GOING TO BE 50 FEET.

AND, AND THEN FROM THERE, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE LIKE NONE, I GUESS I WOULD, I WOULD WONDER IF, IF THERE, IF NORMALLY WE DON'T HAVE A SETBACK FROM, YOU KNOW, ARTISTS AND METAL WORK TO MULTI-FAMILY HOMES, WHY WE WOULD NEED ONE IN THIS CASE.

SO I THINK THAT'S A DEBATE, UH, WE'D NEED TO REALLY, SO WHAT I'M HEARING DOES THIS, ANY, EVERYBODY CLEAR ON THIS AMENDMENT? BECAUSE IF NOT, WE NEED TO, IF IT'S NOT WHAT WE, I'M STILL NOT CLEAR.

CAUSE SO I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, RESEND THIS, UH, MAKE A MOTION TO RESCIND THIS AND GIVE YOU ANOTHER CHANCE TO PROPOSE AMENDMENT OR WE NEED TO DECIDE IF IT'S ACTUALLY A SUBSTITUTE, ACTUALLY WHAT I'D LIKE TO, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THIS ACTUALLY SOUNDS TO ME MORE LIKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION AND NOT AN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT.

CLEAR NOW, BECAUSE I CAN'T TELL

[02:00:01]

I WOULD LIKE TO GO AND RESEND THIS MOTION, VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT AT HAND.

IF IT DOESN'T PASS, WE CAN TRY SOMETHING ELSE.

UM, DOES THAT PROCESS SOUND FAIR? UH, SO WE, IF ANYTHING, WE NEED TO RESEND THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION.

SO, UH, CAN WE GO AND VOTE, UM, ON, DO I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, I'LL GO IN MOTION FOR THE ASCENSION.

DO I, THE SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

SO LET'S GO AND VOTE ON RESENDING, UH, THE AMENDMENT BY THOMPSON.

UH, MR. HOWARD.

I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE IF YOU WANT TO VOTE ON THIS.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

SO WE'VE RESCINDED THAT AMENDMENT.

SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IT SOUNDED LIKE THE PATH WE WERE MOVING DOWN WITH MORE OF A SUBSTITUTION THAN AN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO GO AND VOTE ON COMMISSIONER COX'S AMENDMENT.

CAN I, CAN I AMEND MY AMENDMENT BECAUSE I THINK, NO, WE WOULD, WE, I WOULD ASK THAT WE WERE SEND YOURS AND START FRESH IF THAT IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING, UH, SURE.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO RESCIND COMMISSIONER.

COX'S MOTION VOTE.

IF THE, UH, UH, PROPOSER IS WITHDRAWING THE MOTION AND THERE'S NO OBJECTION.

YOU CAN JUST BEFORE ALL WITH ALL WITHDRAWAL.

YOU'RE GOING TO WITHDRAW AND MAKE A DIFFERENT ONE.

SO YOU'RE PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE, UH, BASE MOTION, WHICH IS, UH, COMMISSIONER SHAY SECONDED BY LET ME KNOW.

DID YOU SECONDED THAT MOTION? WE WOULD CALL A LONG TIME.

I THINK IT WAS THE ORIGINAL CHICAGO.

SHANE THOMPSON.

ALL RIGHT, GO AHEAD AND PROPOSE YOUR AMENDMENT.

IT'S GOING TO BE A HYBRID OF MR. THOMPSON'S, WHICH IS, WHICH IS WE ESTABLISHED A MINIMUM SETBACK FOR LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES OF 50 FEET OR THE LESSER OF THE TWO SETBACKS BETWEEN SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY IF THEY ARE GREATER THAN 50 FEET.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH, THERE'S PROBABLY A BETTER WAY TO WORD THAT, BUT YEAH, SO, SO THE BETTER WAY TO WORD THAT WOULD BE, UH, THE, THE LESSER OF THE TWO SETBACKS BETWEEN SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY, BUT A MINIMUM OF 50 FOOT SETBACK BETWEEN LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND RESIDENTIAL USES.

AND I THINK THAT IS GENERALLY IN LINE WITH WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING.

THAT THOUGHT, CAUSE I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO REPEAT THAT LATER BECAUSE I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WRITING IT DOWN RIGHT NOW.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD.

DO WE HAVE TO BE AT A SECOND TO THIS? OKAY.

YOU GOT TO YOU SECOND IT OKAY.

THAT'LL COME INTO THOMPSON SECONDS.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND SPEAK TO THIS AMENDMENT IF WE NEED TO.

I, I WON'T SAY A WHOLE LOT.

IT'S JUST, I, I LIKE TO GO INTO THESE THINGS, TRYING TO, IF WE'RE WILLING TO GIVE THE APPLICANT WHAT THEY WANT, MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S, WE'RE BOXING THEM INTO THAT.

UM, AND NOT, AND NOT HAVING POTENTIALLY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF APPROVING ZERO SETBACKS OR WHATEVER FOR LIGHT MANUFACTURING.

I JUST THINK THAT THAT'S A RISKY MOVE.

THE STAFF RECOMMENDED 200 FEET ACROSS THE BOARD.

THE APPLICANT WANTS 50 FEET ACROSS THE BOARD.

THIS TO ME IS A HAPPY MEDIUM BETWEEN BETWEEN THE TWO.

UH, ANY CONDITIONER SPEAKING AGAINST, UH, SPEAKING IN FAVOR, UH, COMMISSIONER MITCH, TYLER DITTO.

AND AGAIN, I'LL JUST REITERATE THAT COUNSEL CAN UNDO WHAT WE DID.

SO ANYONE ELSE, OR CAN WE MOVE FORWARD TO THE BOAT? LOOKING ON THE SCREEN? ANYONE? NOPE.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, VOTE.

THIS IS THE AMENDMENT.

AND IF YOU DON'T MIND RESTATING THAT COMMISSIONER COX, UM, WITH SECOND ENVIRONMENT ALLOWING THE LESSER SETBACK BETWEEN SINGLE-FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY, BUT HAVING A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 50 FEET BETWEEN A LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES AND RESIDENTIAL USES.

JUST A CORRECTION.

IT WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

LET'S GO AND VOTE ON THE DYESS, UH, IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, THIS AMENDMENT.

[02:05:01]

THAT'S SIX.

UM, THOSE, UM, AND SEVEN, EIGHT, THANK YOU.

AND THEN THOSE, UH, VOTING AGAINST THIS, THE DIAS, UH, THOSE ABSTAINING, WHICH KIND OF LIKE, OKAY, SO THAT KIND OF EIGHT TO ONE.

SO WE HAVE THAT AMENDMENT TO THE BASE.

UH, AND SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE BACK.

UH, SO THIS IS THE BASE AND THE AMENDMENT NOW WE'RE VOTING ON AND NOW I'VE GOT TO, WITHOUT COMMISSIONER SHAY HERE, WE'RE TRYING TO, MIGHT NEED SOME HELP HERE.

UM, SO WHAT HE PROPOSED AND THE SECOND VICE AND JUST COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, UH, WAS THE APPLICANT REQUEST.

UM, AND IT INCLUDED THE, UH, PUBLIC RC FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE TIA MEMO.

IT INCLUDED THE PROHIBITIVE USES PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT.

IT INCLUDED, HE MENTIONED THE PARKING REDUCTIONS, UM, PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT.

HE INCLUDED THE FAR OF TWO TO ONE REQUESTS BY THE APPLICANT.

SO IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE EMBEDDED IN THAT BASE MOTION? OH, THE HEIGHT, UH, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR HEIGHT AS WELL, SO, AND THE NPA AND WE'RE INCLUDING THE NPA AS WELL AS THE ZONING CASE.

SO DID I GET THAT RIGHT? IT IS A LONG LIST.

SO, AND ALSO THE AMENDMENT THAT IN BEDDED IN THERE AS THE AMENDMENT THAT WE VOTED ON, DO, UH, MR. RIVERA IS THERE, YOU CAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE YOU AND STAFF ARE CLEAR ON WHAT WERE THE MOTION HERE? COMMISSIONER, THE MOTION IS UNDERSTOOD IS, UM, READY FOR DISPOSALS.

SO THOSE ON THE DIOCESE, LET'S GO AND VOTE ON THE MOTION.

UM, IN FAVOR.

WE HAVE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, AND THEN, UH, THOSE ON, UH, ON THE SCREEN VOTING IN FAVOR SIX AND THEN DECIDING AGAINST ON THE DIOCESE AND THOSE VOTING AGAINST THEM, THE SPRINT.

AND THEN THOSE, UH, ABSTAINING TOO.

SO THAT MOTION FAILS, RIGHT? DO WE HAVE ANOTHER EMOTION? I'M HAPPY TO HELP MAKE ONE, BUT I DON'T, I GUESS I, I NEED SOMEBODY WHO VOTED AGAINST OR ABSTAIN TO MAYBE LEAD THE WAY ON WHAT THEY WERE HOPING TO SEE DIFFERENT.

IF THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN SEND RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL.

UM, I, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE WERE GOING TO GO STRAIGHT INTO THE VOTE, UM, OR I WOULD HAVE EXPLAINED WHY I ABSTAIN BECAUSE I ACTUALLY DO LIKE THIS PROJECT VERY MUCH.

UM, AND THERE'S A LOT TO BE SAID FOR IT.

UM, BUT I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO, UM, HOWEVER I WOULD, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE THAT WE SEND THIS TO COUNCIL WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION, BECAUSE I THINK THAT KEY PARTS OF THIS CONVERSATION NEED TO TAKE PLACE WITH COUNCIL.

THIS IS A VERY VULNERABLE PART OF THE CITY, UM, THAT HAS SUFFERED FROM DECADES OF DISINVESTMENT AND NEGLECT.

UM, SO I THINK THERE'S EXTRA CONCERNS.

I THINK SOME OF THE ONSITE COMMUNITY BENEFITS OF COMMUNITIES ASKING FOR THINGS THAT CAN BE WORKED OUT.

UM, BUT I WOULD LIKE, UH, THIS PROCESS TO HAPPEN, UM, AROUND PEOPLE THAT HAVE MORE ACCESS AND SUPPORT AND OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK THIS STUFF OUT THAN I DO WITH A VERY LIMITED TOOLBOX THAT I HAVE AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER.

SO I THINK THIS SHOULD GO TO COUNCIL WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION OR, YEAH.

SO THAT'S IT.

IF I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE MISSING PIECES ARE.

AND I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT, COMMISSIONER CONLEY.

YOU DID POINT OUT THAT WE DID NOT MOVE THROUGH THE FULL, UH, DEBATE ON THE CASE WE GOT PARTIALLY.

AND THEN WE GOT WITH THE AMENDMENT.

UM, I DON'T THINK, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD HAVE CHANGED THE VOTE.

UM, IF ANYBODY FEELS LIKE IT WOULD HAVE, WE CAN DEFINITELY, UM, ROLL THAT BACK, BUT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, UM, DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION OR TO, UH, PASS THIS ONTO COUNCIL WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION? SHE WASN'T AN INNOVATOR.

IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE COMMISSION, THERE'S NO ACTION.

THEY DID.

WHAT IF IT'S NOT THE DESIRE THAT COMMISSION, WELL, THEN I NEED A MOTION SO WE CAN DEBATE ANOTHER ONE.

SOMEBODY HAS ONE I'M AT A LOSS FOR THE TOOLS THAT WE NEED TO CRAFT.

WHAT WE WANT,

[02:10:02]

I JUST THINK IT'S POOR FORM TO NOT PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE THAT'S OUR JOB.

SO WE EITHER VOTE AGAINST IT OR WE VOTE FOR IT.

COUNSEL RELIES ON US TO BE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO DO THE VOTE FOR IT OR AGAINST IT.

SO CAN I, UM, ASK, UH, LET ME JUST PROPOSE THAT THOSE WERE THE HEAD'S CONCERNS.

UM, IF YOU CAN FIND A MOTION THAT ADDRESSES THOSE CONCERNS THAT WE MIGHT SPEND SOME DEBATE AND WE MIGHT FIND A WAY TO, UH, TO PASS SOMETHING HERE TONIGHT.

BUT I THINK IT WOULD TAKE THOSE THAT WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE LAST MOTION TO PROPOSE SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF.

UH, SO DO WE HAVE ANYTHING FROM THOSE PARTIES, UH, THAT COULD, WE COULD MAYBE DISCUSS, I THINK THE ISSUE IS THAT THERE ISN'T SOME SET OF THINGS THAT WE COULD CREATE HERE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SOME KIND OF CONDITIONAL OVERLAY OR FINE TUNE, SOME TWEAK THING HERE THAT WOULD REALLY SPEAK TO THE MAJOR CONCERNS THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ABOUT THIS PROJECT.

THEN THE MAJOR CONCERN THAT EVERYONE HAS IS THAT IT'S A LOW INCOME AREA AND WE'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING IN POTENTIALLY HIGHER INCOME TENANTS AND BUSINESSES AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.

SO IT'S KIND OF A UNIQUE CASE THAT SPEAKS TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT GENTRIFICATION, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, UH, SIMPLY REDUCING ENTITLEMENTS OR BLOCKING THAT WON'T SPEAK TO THE CONCERNS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS.

THERE'S ONGOING CONVERSATION.

THERE WAS CONVERSATION HAPPENING FIVE MINUTES BEFORE WE STARTED THIS MEETING.

SO, UM, MY DESIRE IS TO SEE THAT THAT CONVERSATION CONTINUES AND THAT THAT CONVERSATION CONTINUES TO RESOLVE ITSELF ON ITS WAY TO COUNCIL, BUT MAKE SURE THAT COUNCIL PAYS EXTRA CLOSE ATTENTION TO THIS.

CAN I MAKE A MOTION? YOU SURE CAN.

QUICK QUESTION.

THE NEXT MEETING DATE, THAT'S RESTRICTED IN TERMS OF WHAT CAN BE ON THAT.

OUR NEXT PC MEETING IS A CONSENT ONLY CONSENT ONLY.

YEAH, WE JUST DON'T HAVE TIME.

WE HAVE LIMITED TIME HERE, SO IT'S JUST A WAY TO MOVE CERTAIN CASES ALONG.

BUT, UH, YEAH, SO WE WON'T BE TAKING UP ANY DISCUSSION CASES.

I'M JUST GONNA THROW OUT THERE FOR SOMETHING THAT MAYBE WE CAN VOTE ON.

I DON'T THINK WE'LL GET THINGS.

UH, I, I VOTE THAT WE POSTPONE THIS CASE TO, UM, THE DECEMBER 14TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.

AND I'LL SPEAK TO THAT.

IF I GET A SECOND, WE HAVE A SECOND.

I'M NOT SEEING A SECOND.

DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER MOTIONS, ANDREW? IF WE CAN AGREE ON, YOU KNOW, PUSHING THIS, UH, WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION, DO WE NEED TO GO AND VOTE ON THAT? BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE ALL AGREE.

NO, THAT'S NOT NECESSARY.

SO NOBODY'S PROPOSING A MOTION, SO IT'LL JUST, OKAY.

YEP.

SO, UH, COMMISSIONERS, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER COX.

I DON'T LIKE IT WHEN WE PASS THINGS ALONG WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION.

UH, BUT I DO ALSO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER CODDLEY THAT IT'S VERY COMPLEX AND IT'S, UH, IT DEFINITELY DESERVES MORE PUBLIC INPUT AND THIS WILL GIVE COUNTS THAN THAT TIME BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL.

SO, UH, WE'LL MOVE THIS FORWARD WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION.

AND I FAILED TO YOU COMMISSIONER YADDA SPOLETO.

I DIDN'T SEE.

DID YOU EVER BE SORRY.

I WOULD HAVE CHIMED IN FOR THE DISCUSSION, BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER.

IT'S TOTALLY FINE.

UH, LET'S REGROUP HERE.

UM, LET'S GO AHEAD.

LET'S TAKE A QUICK BREAK.

JUST FIVE MINUTES.

LET'S SEE.

WHAT TIME IS IT? OH, VERY CONVENIENT.

8 25.

MR. RIVERA.

WE ARE JUST, UH, ARE WE ARE ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE.

WE'RE JUST WAITING ON A QUORUM AND THEN WE'LL GET STARTED HERE.

GOTTA WAIT FOR ONE MORE COMMISSIONER.

ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND RECONVENE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION

UH, JUST, THAT IS A GOOD THING TO POINT OUT.

WE NEED TO MAINTAIN, TO MAINTAIN QUORUM.

WE NEED ALL SEVEN THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE DIOCESE TO REMAIN HERE.

[02:15:41]

[Items B8 & B9 (Part 2 of 2)]

8 31.

AND WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM STAFF ON, UH, NO, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ON IT'S V EIGHT AND B NINE TOGETHER.

AND SO WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF ON THE, THE, UM, PLAN AMENDMENT FIRST MARINE MEREDITH HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

ITEM NUMBER B EIGHT IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 21 0 0 2 0 0.01 SHELBY LANE RESIDENCES.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 4 7 0 0 WEDA MAR LANE WITHIN THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.

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

IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

IT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE SELF CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM, AND THERE'S ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE IN THE STAFF CASE REPORT.

GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS WENDY ROSE WITH THE PLAN WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

UH, THIS IS THIS UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF TAMARA AND ITS TERMINUS, AND ALSO THE SOUTH SIDE OF SHELBY ALSO AT ITS TERMINUS ALONG AN S CURVE.

IT HAS HAD FCS CEO AND P ZONING SINCE THE, UH, SOUTH CONGRESS ZONINGS WERE ADOPTED IN 2005.

THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY IS FOR A 30 FOOT WIDE VEGETATIVE BUFFER ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE.

UH, THERE IS A 60 FOOT EASEMENT, UH, EXTENDING ALONG THE PROPERTY IN A NORTH TO SOUTH A DIRECTION.

IT CONTAINS TWO NATURAL GAS PIPELINES.

UH, ONE IS ACTIVE AND THE OTHER IS ABANDONED.

UH, THE NORTH SIDE OF SHELBY LANE NORTH OF THIS SITE AND EAST OF THE SITE HAVE ESTABLISHED, UH, INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES.

ALSO, THIS IS IN PROXIMITY TO AND EASTBOUND WHITE BOULEVARD ON THE, UH, TO THE SOUTH IS UNDEVELOPED LAND AT AN M AND A AUTO REPAIR FACILITY.

AND TO THE WEST ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES IN THE COLONIAL TRAIL SUBDIVISION.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE, HIGHEST DENSITY, CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, AND DEVELOP WITH UP TO 520 UNITS.

THE UNITS WOULD BE BOTH FOR SALE AND FOR RENT.

UH, THE, FOR SALE WOULD BE ALONG THE SHELBY LANE FRONT ON THE NORTH SIDE, AND THE UNITS FOR RENT WOULD BE ALONG THE WE'D HAVE OUR LANE FRONTAGE ON THE EAST SIDE.

THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WOULD CONTINUE THE 30 FOOT, UH, VEGETATIVE BUFFER ALONG THE WEST SIDE, AND ALSO A CAP BUILDING HEIGHT AT 60 FEET.

UH, AS INFORMATION, THE MF SIX DISTRICT DOES NOT HAVE A FLORIDA OR FLORIDA AREA RATIO LIMIT OR A MAXIMUM UNITS PER ACRE.

THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS CA THIS CASE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH AUSTIN IMAGINED.

IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT PROVIDES SUPPORT FOR INCREASING A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES.

UH, THE 60 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT DOES NOT EXCEED THAT ALLOWED ALREADY IN THE AREA.

THIS BEING THE CS, THE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONE PROPERTIES, THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER IS MAINTAINED.

THERE IS A, UH, SITE PLAN TO THE NORTH WEST OF THIS SITE FOR 136 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCES AND ABOUT 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE.

UM, AS WELL AS OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS IN THE GENERAL VICINITY, UM, MULTI-FAMILY WOULD BE SERVED BY COMMERCIAL USES ALONG SOUTH CONGRESS.

AND THERE WAS A TRANSPORTATION STUDY THAT WAS CONDUCTED AS PART OF THIS CASE, UH, THAT CALLS FOR UPGRADING THE PROPERTY'S FRONTAGE ON SHELBY AND WHEATON MAR UH, TO AN URBAN STANDARD, AND ALSO RECONSTRUCTING AN, AN INTERSECTION AT EAST ELMO AND TERRIO LANE TO A TYPICAL T INTERSECTION.

SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING THIS CASE WITH THE TWO CEOS I MENTIONED, UH, PREVIOUSLY AS WELL AS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION MEMO.

AND I APOLOGIZE.

YOU'VE NOT, I DO NOT BELIEVE I HAVE TRANSPORTATION LINE TRANSPORTATION STAFF ON THE LINE.

DID I APOLOGIZE? THAT'S MY FAULT.

BUFFER TO THE WEST IS A DETENTION AND WATER QUALITY PLAN.

THANK YOU, CHUCK MICHEL I'LL NEVER KNOW.

WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND WE'LL HAVE

[02:20:01]

A PRESENTATION.

UM, MS. GLASGOW, BEFORE YOU PROCEED, IS PAUL SHEPARD PRESENT NOTED IS MS. ELIZABETH MCFARLAND PRESENT NOTED MS. GLASGOW YOU'LL HAVE THE MAXIMUM 10 MINUTES.

IF THE CONTROLLER DOESN'T WORK JUST TO LET US KNOW NEXT SLIDE, GOOD EVENING PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS, AGAIN, ALICE GLASGOW REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, AND I'LL START AS SOON AS THE PRESENTATION IS PUT UP.

SO THERE WE GO.

SO AS A STAFF INDICATED THIS PROPERTY'S LOCATED AT 4,700 WHEAT IN MY LANE, IT'S CALLED SHELBY LANE RESIDENCES.

AND, UM, I HOPE, OH, SORRY.

THIS IS SPECIAL.

SO THE SITE IS INDICATED THERE WITH A YELLOW HASH LINES.

WE ARE, UM, WEST OF SHELBY AND TO THE WEST IS SOUTH CONGRESS TO THE NORTH OF TWO 90.

FROM A ZONING STANDPOINT, YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY SITE IS RIGHT THERE SHOWN THAT ITS OWN CURRENTLY HIS CS TO THE NORTH OF US.

YOU HAVE A VARIETY OF CSM VIEW.

THAT'S A PROJECT MS. RHODES JUST INDICATED WITH, WITH A BIG.TO THE WEST OF, UM, UH, TERRIO LANE THAT IS UNDER COUNTERS THAT ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

AND THEN, UM, TO THE WEST TO BE A CSM, YOU ALSO TO THE EAST OF WIDOM OUR LANE TO THE SOUTHEASTERN CSA ZONING WITH AN AUTOMOTIVE, UM, USE AND, UM, SHOP.

SO FROM A SURROUNDING LAND USES, YOU CAN SEE HERE, YOU HAVE, UM, UH, LAPD ALONG TWO 90, THAT ALLOWS RESIDENTIAL USES WITH A HEIGHT OF 75 FEET OR SO YOU HAVE ALL THE RESIDENTIAL USES THERE.

JUST KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT'S THERE.

THIS IS A TRANSIT MAP.

WE ARE 0.3, FOUR MILES FROM THE FUTURES PROJECT CONNECT, UH, BASSLINE, AND THEN TO THE WEST ON, WE ARE 0.6, NINE MILES FROM, UM, SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE FOR THE NEXT NEXT BUS STOP.

SO AS MS. RHODES INDICATED, OUR SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED CS AND UNDER CS, MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS 60 FEET.

AND IF WE WERE TO DEVELOP UNDER C ZONING, THE PROJECT THAT WE CAN BUILD HERE IS A HOTEL THAT WOULD RANGE FROM 800 TO 1000 ROOMS. THE, UM, OUR PROPOSED ZONING OF AS WITH A HEIGHT LIMIT OF 60 FEET WOULD ALLOW FOR 150 UNITS THAT ARE FOR SALE.

AND 370 UNITS ARE MULTI-FAMILY FOR RENT UPLOAD TO AREA RATIO.

AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS 1.5421 C S ZONING.

WE HAVE CURRENTLY TWO FAS TWO TO ONE, THE UNITS PER ACRE ARE 65.

AND THAT'S WHY WE DON'T FALL UNDER, UNDER MFR.

AND GIVES US THE, THIS KIND OF DENSITY WE HAVE VOLUNTEERED TO, UM, DEVELOP THIS UNDEVELOPED SITE IS OUR GREENFIELD IT'S EIGHT ACRES.

WE ARE VOLUNTEERING TO PROVIDE 5% OF THE FOR-SALE UNITS AT 80% MFI AND 5% AT A HUNDRED PERCENT MFI FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY FOR RENT UNITS.

UH, 10% OF THE UNITS AT 60% MFI FOR 40 YEARS.

AND FOR THE FOR-SALE UNITS WILL BE A LONG-TERM AFFORDABILITY FOR 99 YEARS.

THOSE, THOSE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS ARE TAKEN FROM THE GREENFIELD ORDINANCE THAT IS CALLED THE MF SIX GREENFIELD ORDINANCE.

WE'RE NOT USING IT BECAUSE IT REQUIRES YOU TO DO SMART HOUSING.

AND WE DON'T QUALIFY SMART HEALTH UNDER SMART HOUSING BECAUSE WE ARE NOT WITHIN HALF A MILE OF TRANSIT COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS ARE TRIGGERED, AND THEREFORE WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH A HEIGHT SET STEP BACKS THAT YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH UNDER COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.

AND I'LL SHOW YOU ON THE SITE PLAN SHORTLY, A MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER UNDER MULTI-FAMILY ZONING.

WE GET TO DO 60% MFI, BUT UNDER OUR CURRENT ZONING OF CS, IF WE BUILD A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS COVER UNDER THE WATERSHED ORDINANCES, 80% MFI.

SO YOU ARE THAT THERE ARE BENEFITS OF THE ZONING, AND BY THE WAY, WE ARE DOWN ZONING FROM , IT'S NOT AN OBSERVING.

THIS IS THE CONCEPTUAL SITE, AND WE'VE BEEN SHOWING THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR QUITE AWHILE.

THE YELLOW INDICATES THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ABOUT THE PROPERTY.

THE FOR SALE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE LIGHT YELLOW, AS YOU CAN SEE THERE.

AND, UM, WE HAVE SHOWN, UM, UH, THE GREEN

[02:25:01]

WE ARE ADHERING TO COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS AS NEWS ROADS INDICATED THE 30 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER THAT IS REQUIRED UNDER THE 2005 ZONING ORDINANCE IS GOING TO BE ROLLED OVER TO THE ZONING FOR THE MF SIX.

SO WE'LL MAINTAIN THAT.

AND, UM, THE, UM, MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS, UM, IN LIGHT ORANGE FACING WITHIN MY LANE.

AND, UM, THE, UM, THERE WAS A MENTION ABOUT THE, UH, THE PIPELINE.

WE HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE GAS COMPANY, THE GAS GAS LINE, THE GAS COMPANY WILL RELOCATE THE PIPELINE.

WE HAVE TO PAY THEM A FEE THAT THEY REQUIRE, AND THEY WILL DO THAT AT THE TIME THAT WE ARE READY TO PROCEED WITH DURING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT STAGE, WHEN WE HAVE TO PREP THE SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT.

SO ALL THAT HAS BEEN WORKED OUT WITH THE GAS COMPANY, THEY PREFER TO HAVE IT RUNNING ALONG THE ROAD ON WAIT IN MY LANE.

IT GIVES THEM ACCESS, EASY ACCESS TO MAINTAIN THAT GAS LINE, AS OPPOSED TO SITTING IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR PROPERTY.

SO I WILL START A PAUSE HERE AND OUR TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER, THE ONE THAT WHO WAS AT THE MEETING THAT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, CLAYTON STROLL IS GOING TO JOIN US.

HE'S BOTH HIS CIVIL ENGINEER AND TRAFFIC ENGINEER.

HE'LL COVER BOTH ASPECTS.

LEIGHTON IS NEXT.

LET ME, SHE KNOWS I'LL PHONE US UP QUESTIONS AFTER CLAYTON'S COMPLAINTS TO JUST POINT OF ORDER HERE.

UM, SO WE HAVE SPEAKER, WE WERE GIVEN 10 MINUTES.

SO IS THIS PART OF MS. GLASGOW'S TIME? THIS IS A NEW SPEAKER.

THAT WOULD BE A NEW SPEAKER.

I MISSTEPPED, BUT HE'S GOING TO JUST PUT ON A TEAM, MR. STOLL.

YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

UH, CLAYTON STROLLY.

UM, AND I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IN SOME, SOME EXHIBITS THAT WERE DONE.

SO, AS WAS MENTIONED BEFORE, UM, THERE WAS A, UM, A, A WAIVER OF THE TIA AS REQUIRED AS PART OF THE ZONING.

UH, BUT AS THEY GOT THROUGH THE, UH, PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT, THE STAFF CAME BACK AND ASKED US TO DO THE TIA INSTEAD OF, INSTEAD OF THE WAIVER, BECAUSE IT WAS GOING TO MFC.

SO IN THE MIDDLE OF IT THIS LAST SUMMER, THAT'S WHEN WE PUT THIS TOGETHER BASED ON THAT REQUEST FROM THE CITY AND ALL THOSE, UH, POSTPONEMENTS, AS YOU WERE MENTIONING, UM, AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH.

SO VERY SMALL.

UM, BUT I BELIEVE YOU GUYS HAVE THIS MEMO IN YOUR PACKET, BUT THE PRELIMINARY MITIGATION, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, SHELBY LANE, AND WE'D HAVE OUR LANE ACROSS THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE IMPROVED, UM, TO A STANDARD ROAD, UM, SECTION THAT IS AGREEABLE WITH, UM, STAFF AT THIS TIME.

UM, AND THEN ALSO HAVE THOSE TWO INTERSECTIONS AT EAST ST.

ELMO ROAD AND TERRIO LANE BE IMPROVED TO TEEN OR SECTIONS VERSUS THE, UM, WEIRD S CURVE THAT'S THERE.

NOW THAT KIND OF LIMITS VISIBILITY, IF YOU WILL.

SO I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF EXHIBITS HERE THAT SHOWS, UM, ONE ITEM THAT'S NOT MENTIONED IN HERE THAT WE DID ANALYZE CAUSE THEY, WE ANALYZE SEVEN INTERSECTIONS AROUND THIS WHOLE, UH, DEVELOPMENT WAS THE, UM, INTERSECTION OF SHELBY LANE AND THE ACCESS ROAD ON 35.

UM, IT WAS LOOKED AT TO PUT IN ANY RIGHT TURN LANES OR DIESEL LANES.

IT WAS NOT RECOMMENDED BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE OF THAT INTERSECTION.

AND WITH ALL THE EXISTING DRIVEWAYS, IT WOULDN'T MEET ANY OF THE TEXTILE STANDARDS.

SO KIND OF EXISTING CONDITIONS WOULD LIMIT ANYTHING WE COULD DO THERE.

AND IT WOULDN'T REALLY IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC AT ALL.

SO THIS WAS LEFT OUT OF THE, THE MEMO, UM, EXHIBIT ZERO THREE A IS THE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG SHELBY LANE, UM, WITH THE WIDENED ROADWAY, UH, SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES, UM, WITH SOME BIKE FACILITIES, UH, IF YOU WILL, ACROSS THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY, SAME THING ALONG THE DAMAR, UM, LANE ACROSS THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE OF THE SITE, UH, GETTING MORE TO THE, UM, 81, 80 FOOT WIDE RIGHT AWAY IN THE CROSS-SECTION THAT THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, MORE IN THIS AREA, UM, HERE'S EXHIBIT ZERO FOUR, WHICH SHOWS THIS WEIRD S CURVE, UM, THE YELLOW LINES KIND OF SHOW WHERE PEOPLE WOULD NORMALLY LIKE TO DO IF IT WAS A, IF IT WAS A T INTERSECTION VISIBILITY ON THIS IS A LITTLE SKETCHY.

UM, SO WE'RE TRYING TO IMPROVE IT WITH MORE PEOPLE MOVING IN HERE THAT AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA IT'LL KIND OF, UH, MAKE THIS MORE ACCESSIBLE, UH, IF YOU WILL, AND KIND OF LESS CONFUSION AS PEOPLE ARE RUNNING THROUGH IT.

SO THIS IS THE, YOU KNOW, THE PROPOSED RECONFIGURATION, IF YOU WILL, UM, JUST, UH, STOP SIGN, UH, INTERSECTIONS, UH, ON EAST ST ELMO ROAD, UH, AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH.

UM, AND AS ALICE MENTIONED, I AM THE ENGINEER THAT WAS ON THE CALL IN SEPTEMBER ABOUT THE GAS LINE.

THEY'VE GIVEN US A FEE, WE'VE PROVIDED THEM WITH OUR SITE PLAN AND OUR CAD FILES.

WE HAVEN'T AGREED ON THE EXACT LOCATION, BUT EVERY, UM, EVERY CONVERSATION IS MOVING FARTHER EAST.

UM, ONCE WE GET TO SITE PLAN, WE'LL GET THAT EASEMENT NAILED DOWN

[02:30:01]

BASED ON WHAT WE CAN DO.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

GERAWAN ON, WE MOVE TO THE OPPOSITION.

WE'LL BEGIN WITH MR. MARIO CON TO MR. CONTI.

YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

UM, WE'LL HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR YOUR, OR WE'LL HAVE YOUR PRESENTATION ON SHORTLY.

MY NAME IS MARIO KENTU I'M WITH A SOUTH CONGRESS CONTACT TEAM CHAIR.

UH, AS YOU LOOKED INTO THIS PHOTOGRAPH, YOU LOOK OVER TO THE RIGHT, UH, YOU SEE SOUTH CONGRESS, THAT'S THE CORRIDOR SOUTH CONGRESS CORRIDOR AND IN THE, ARE THE HOMES, UH, OF COLONIAL TRAILS.

AND TO YOUR LEFT, YOU SEE THIS KIND OF OPEN, UM, KIND OF DRIVE THROUGH WAY THAT'S WHERE THE GAS PIPELINES AT NEXT.

SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS AS MENTIONED EARLIER, YOU KNOW, W WHY WE WANTED THE POSTPONEMENT, UH, YOU KNOW, IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORS, WE DO NOT SUPPORT THE FLUNG CHANGE ON HERE.

WE WANT TO KEEP THE PROPERTY ZONE AS FOR COMMERCIAL USE.

UH, MAYBE LOCAL JOB CREATION WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE, UH, A LOT OF JOBS THERE FOR INDIVIDUALS TO ACTUALLY BIKE TO JOBS.

WE NEED A LOT OF JOBS IN AUSTIN.

THE FLUM AMENDMENT WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES.

CURRENT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ARE SINGLE STORY.

THIS WILL BE THE FIRST TIME OF FUNDING FROM AMENDMENT WITHIN THE CONTACT TEAM AREA WILL INCLUDE MOVING AND ADJUSTING A NATURAL GAS LINE, WHETHER THERE'S ONE OR TWO GAS MINES, ONE'S ABANDONED, ONE'S WORKING, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE 12 INCHES WIDE, ET CETERA.

UM, THE NEAREST METRO STATION IS ABOUT A HALF MILE AWAY WITH VERY NO NARROW SUBSTANDARD, UH, ROADS, NO SIDEWALKS OR SHOULDERS IN THIS AREA.

UH, AND WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND WE ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE REQUEST OF THE FLOODING HICKS.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP ON THE RIGHT, THAT SHOULD ACTUALLY A PHOTOGRAPH THAT I ACTUALLY TOOK OFF.

UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORANGE, THAT'S A MAJOR GAS LINE, THAT GAS LINE WHERE YOU SEE THE RED CIRCLE IS RIGHT IN THE VICINITY OF THAT FIRST IMAGE THAT YOU SAW.

I THINK PRIOR TO THIS, UH, TO ME SPEAKING THE CONTACT TEAM BEFORE MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORHOOD, NEIGHBORHOOD, NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S IMPORTANT TO REALLY LISTEN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UH, AND THEN I DID HEAR IN PREVIOUS THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY, WELL, HERE'S OUR SAFETY.

WELL, I THINK WE MIGHT NOT HAVE SAFETY.

SO THE RED CIRCLE, UH, US IS WHERE THIS GAS LINE IS AT.

SO WHO'S, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE AS MENTIONED THAT, OH, BASICALLY WE JUST, UH, PAY A FEE AND WE'RE DONE.

WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE AFFORDABILITY THAT MS KLASKO TALKS ABOUT, AND THE DEVELOPER TALKS ABOUT, IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT MFI EDDY MFI 60 MFI.

WELL, PART OF OUR QUESTIONING THAT WE WANTED TO HAVE WITH ALISON THE ENGINEER IS WHAT'S THE TIMELINE? HOW LONG IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO MOVE THIS GAS LINE? WHAT IT'S GOING TO ENTAIL, HOW MUCH TRAFFIC IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE STOPPED.

AND NUMBER TWO, WHO'S GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE IF SOMETHING HAPPENS, IF IT GUESTS LEAKS OUT AND DISPLACES THE FAMILY MEMBERS OR PERSON OR HOMES WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR THAT, WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT DISCUSSION COST TO THE DEVELOPER, OR THE DEVELOPER SAYS WE WILL PAY, AS YOU MENTIONED.

AND I WAS MENTIONED ABOUT THE MOBILITY FOR THE SIDEWALKS AND ALL THAT.

ONE OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU SAW IN THERE WAS THE LOWER PART OF, UH, THE MOTOR MILE, UH, MEYER.

OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY HAVE TO KIND OF CHANGE THINGS TO COME INTO, UH, THE WHEATON MAR AREA AND THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE WANTED TO HAVE AGAIN, WITH THEM AT THIS FINAL MEETING WAS, ARE THEY GOING TO PAY FOR THAT AS WELL? BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING, IF THEY WANT THIS, WHY IS IT THAT WE HAVE TO HELP PAY FOR THAT? WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

UH, AND SO WE CANNOT COMPARE THIS TO THE SOUTH CONGRESS.

I MEAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO COMPARE THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH THE HEIGHT AND AFFORDABILITY, AND IN FACT, WHEN IT COMES TO AFFORDABILITY, UH, IN THE BACKUP OR IN STUFF RECOMMENDATIONS, THIS IS CURRENTLY, THE APPLICANT HAS NO HAS NOT APPLIED FOR ANY OF THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAMS. SO WE NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT THIS INFORMATION FROM THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

[02:35:01]

WELL, HISTORICALLY, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO ESTABLISH 50% OF MINE, MFI, BUT AGAIN, WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

THINGS CHANGED AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

SO, UH, YOU KNOW, WE W WE WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN, I KNOW, UH, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS MENTIONED ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE CANCEL? SHOULD WE NOT? THEY MIGHT NOT MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, ESPECIALLY US WITH THE 50% MFI.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE STAR INSTILL A PANDEMIC.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON NEXT.

SO THERE'S THE GAS LINE RIGHT THERE, RIGHT ACROSS THE WAY.

AND IF YOU SEE THERE'S NOTHING THERE, IT'S ALL CONCRETE AND DARK NEXT.

AND THERE IT IS, AGAIN, CONCRETE AND DIRT, NO BUILDINGS LOOK AT THE 60 FEET HEIGHTS.

YOU DON'T SEE ANY ANYWHERE EXCEPT FOR THE FAR LEFT NEXT.

AND IT REMINDS ME OF THE TANK FARMS IN EAST AUSTIN.

YOU KNOW, THEY PUT THOSE A LONG TIME AGO AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED.

THEY HAD TO TAKE THEM AWAY.

WHAT ABOUT OUR GAS LINE? THANK YOU, BECKY.

NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MS. LYNN DAVIS IS MR. GEORGE KRAMER PRESENT NOTED MS. DAVIS YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

GREAT.

HI, COMMISSIONER IS THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR A LONG NIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

UM, I WANT TO START BY GIVING, UM, THE DEFINITION OF SPOT ZONING, AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THIS CASE.

SPOT ZONING REFERS TO THIS, TO THE DISCRIMINATORY ZONING OF A SMALL PARCEL PARCEL OF LAND THAT IS SURROUNDED BY LAND WITHIN A DIFFERENT ZONE.

SOME, UH, HAD THOUGHT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE REGARD THIS TO BE A BAD THING, NOT A GOOD THING, BECAUSE THIS SMACKS OF FAVORITISM TOWARD A CERTAIN DEVELOPER, A BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT THIS DEVELOPER, THIS DEVELOPER IS, UM, ALSO THE DEVELOPER WHO IS, UM, DOES IMPLEMENTING, DESIGNING THE STATION ST.

ELMO DEVELOPMENT AT THE END OF OUR STREET ON THE COLONIAL PARK BOULEVARD.

THIS WAS A MAJOR NATIONAL NEWS STORY IN MAY OF 2021.

THIS BUILDING SOLD OUT IN FIVE HOURS.

I CALLED THIS DEVELOPMENT 16 TIMES TO FIND OUT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS BUILDING AND ABOUT POSSIBLY BUYING A UNIT OR GETTING MORE INFORMATION.

I NEVER RECEIVED A CALL BACK.

IT IS OUR STRONG UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT BUILDING THOSE UNITS WERE SOLD TO INVESTORS.

ONLY NONE OF US FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD ANY OPPORTUNITY TO FIND OUT MORE INFORMATION OR POSSIBLY LOOK INTO ANY OF THOSE UNITS.

THIS DEVELOPER HAS SHOWN THIS KIND OF HISTORY, AND IT'S SOMETHING I DO.

I DO WANT YOU ALL TO CONSIDER AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS CASE, THIS SONY, UM, YOU KNOW, THE FUTURE LAND USE WAS RATIFIED IN 2005.

UM, AND WE DESIGNATED THIS AREA IN ST.

ELMO AS INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL.

THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO MULTIFAMILY RUNS COUNTER TO THE WISHES AND AGREEMENT OF THE SOUTH CONGRESS NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM.

SO THIS IS OUT OF FAVOR WITH WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY AGREED UPON A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY BELONGS ON THAT TRACT OF LAND, NOT A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

AND I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE NOT AGAINST DEVELOPMENT.

WE ARE NOT AGAINST PROGRESS.

WE ARE HOWEVER, AGAINST AN INAPPROPRIATE USE OF THAT LAND.

MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE VERY OUT OF CHARACTER WITH WHAT THE EXISTING LAND, THIS INDUSTRIAL AREA OF EAST ST.

ELMO.

I'M NOT SURE IF ANY OF YOU HAVE VISITED LATELY.

UH, IT'S BUSTLING, IT'S GOT A HUGE COMPLEX CALLED THE YARD.

IT'S GOT A COUPLE OF BREWERIES.

IT'S GOT A YOGA STUDIO, DEACON FOOD TRUCKS.

AND IT ALSO HAS BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 2030 YEARS.

THIS IS ONE OF THE CLOSEST INDUSTRIAL AREAS TO DOWNTOWN AUSTIN.

AND ONE OF THE FEW AFFORDABLE INDUSTRIAL AREAS LEFT IN THE CITY.

THERE REALLY AREN'T THAT MANY AREAS FOR THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS TO EMERGE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS.

AND WE WANT YOU TO CONSIDER THAT AS WELL, AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, ACCESS TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IS LIMITED.

IT'S CLOSE TO .

WE BELIEVE THIS WOULD INCREASE TRAFFIC ALONG THE CORRIDOR.

AND, UM, AS, AS MARIO MENTIONED, THIS DEVELOPER ALSO HAS NOT SHOWN A HISTORY OF OFFERING AFFORDABLE UNITS TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO WE FIND THAT TO BE DISTURBING AND PROBLEMATIC AS WELL.

OF COURSE, ONE OF OUR GREATEST CONCERNS IS THE GAS LINE.

AND WE, AS WE MENTIONED EARLIER, WE'RE NOT GIVEN SUFFICIENT.

WE WEREN'T GIVEN SUFFICIENT INFORMATION.

WE WEREN'T TOLD THAT THE GAS LINE WOULD BE SAFELY MOVED.

WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INSIGHT ABOUT THAT

[02:40:01]

TO REALLY DRAW A FAVORABLE CONCLUSION TOWARD THAT.

AS FAR AS TRAFFIC AND SAFETY, UM, WE BELIEVE THAT THE, THE ROAD CHANGE IN ALL OF THE, THE TRAFFIC AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROADS WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE BUSINESSES IN THAT AREA OVER A PERIOD OF AT LEAST TWO YEARS.

AND THESE BUSINESSES WILL NOT HAVE, THEY WILL LOSE THE ACCESS TO THEIR CUSTOMERS.

THEY WON'T HAVE THE KIND OF AVAILABILITY AND ACCESS THAT THEY'VE ENJOYED OVER THE PAST, OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS OR HOWEVER LONG THEY'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS.

UM, YOU KNOW, AND BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, IN SUMMARY, THIS IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS AGAINST THIS DEVELOPMENT.

WE ARE NOT AGAINST A DEVELOPMENT ON THIS TRACK.

WE WELCOME A COMMERCIAL BUILDING.

WE WELCOME A HOTEL.

WE ARE AGNOSTIC ABOUT WHAT KIND OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IS PUT IN THAT AREA.

WE DO NOT FEEL LIKE MULTIFAMILY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE FEEL THERE STRONGLY ARE SAFETY ISSUES INVOLVED WITH THE GAS LINES.

WE HAVEN'T BEEN IN.

GOOD FAITH, KEPT UP TO DATE, AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN INVITED INTO THE CONVERSATION WITH THIS DEVELOPER OR WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.

AND WE HAVE MAJOR CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.

UH, WE ARE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN.

WE ARE ASKING FOR VERY LITTLE, UH, WE SIMPLY WANT TO BE HEARD.

WE SIMPLY WANT TO HAVE OUR RIGHTS CONSIDERED.

AND I THINK ALL OF US ARE CONCERNED ABOUT AUSTIN BEING OVERTAKEN BY DEVELOPERS LIKE CASS BREWER, WHO IS BASED IN DALLAS, NOT IN AUSTIN.

THESE ARE MAJOR CONCERNS WE HAVE AS CITIZENS OF THE CITY.

AND WE DEFINITELY WANT YOU TO CONSIDER ARE OUR CONCERNS FOR THIS ISSUE TONIGHT.

AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. DACEY LONG PETER STIPA NINGO PRES NOTED.

MS. LONG, YOU WILL HAVE FOUR MINUTES PER STATION WILL BE UP SHORTLY.

HAVE THE OPPOSITE EFFECT.

HI, I'M GOOD EVENING PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS STACY LONG AND I LIVE IN COLONIAL PARK BOULEVARD IN THE COLONIAL CHARLES NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE COLONIAL TROVE RESIDENTS.

I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE DENY THE ZONE CHANGE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.

ONE, THE ZONE CHANGE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEW DEVELOPING ST ELMO DISTRICT.

THERE ARE NO PROPERTIES OR FUTURE PROPERTIES ZONE MULTIFAMILY, ZERO.

THE PROPERTIES IN THIS AREA HAVE ZONED COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, OR SINGLE FAMILY.

ALL THE CONDOMINIUMS ARE ZONED COMMERCIAL MULTI-USE OR MIXED USE, SORRY, OR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL MIXED USE.

YES, THERE'S A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT CLOSE TO THE WHEATON WARREN LANE PROPERTY CALLED THE STATION, BUT IT IS OWN COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, AND IT WILL HAVE BUSINESSES ALONG WITH 132 CONDOMINIUMS AND TOWNHOUSES.

THE COLONIAL TRAILS RESIDENTS FEEL THE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL MIXED USE PROPERTIES WELL WITH THE WAREHOUSE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

IN FACT, I REVIEWED RECENT ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEETS.

I LOOKED OVER THEM THAT WERE FOR THE NEARBY PROPERTIES OF THIS.

WE'D HAVE MORE LANE AND THEY ALL RECOMMENDED COMMERCIAL MIXED USE AND INDUSTRIAL MIXED USE FOR THIS AREA.

IF THE PROPERTY STAYS OAK NUMBER TWO, SORRY, IT'S THE PROPERTY STAYS COMMERCIAL.

THERE'S A HIGH POSSIBILITY THAT THE GAS LINE WILL NOT HAVE TO BE REROUTED.

THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO GAS LINES.

ONE WAS ABANDONED.

IT WAS A HIGH PRESSURE ONE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS THE ONE THAT WAS ABANDONED.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE WERE NEVER, UH, THAT WAS NEVER ANSWERED AT OUR SEPTEMBER 27TH MEETING.

SO THERE'S A HIGH PRESSURE GAS LINE.

AND THEN THERE'S A DISTRIBUTION LINE.

WE DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE WAS A MAN ABANDONED OR WHY IT WAS ABANDONED.

SO ANYWAY, BOTH OF THEM ARE IN THE EASEMENT, THE 60 FOOT EASEMENT, BUT ANYWAY, SO THERE'S A POSSIBILITY.

IT WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE REROUTED THE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, HAVE THE GAS LINE RUNNING THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY.

AND THEY'RE FINE.

WHY DO I MENTION THE GAS LINE? WELL, 70% OF ALL GAS LINE INCIDENTS ARE CAUSED FROM NEARBY CONSTRUCTION.

WE KNOW THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA CALLS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT ON TOP OF THAT, THAT WOULD REROUTE THE GAS LINE.

AND TO ADD TO THIS, THERE ARE SEVEN BUSINESSES THAT STORE FLAMMABLE GAS AND FLAMMABLE LIQUIDS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THIS LOCATION.

SIX OUT OF SEVEN OF THESE LIQUIDS AND GASES ARE RATED A, WHICH IS GRADED GREATEST RISK OR BE MODERATE RISK.

THERE'S ONLY ONE THAT IS A LOW RISK.

I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE CONSIDER THE SAFETY FOR ME, MY FAMILY AND HUNDREDS THAT WOULD BE PUT IN HARM'S WAY.

IMAGINE AUSTIN'S GOAL IS TO DECREASE TRAFFIC ON MADER MAJOR ROADWAYS.

THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AREA WILL

[02:45:01]

HERE'S WHY THE DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED SEVEN TENTHS OF A MILE FROM THE FUTURE SELF CONGRESS LIGHT RAIL LINE.

BUT THE IMAGINE AUSTIN MATRIX FOR NEW CONDOMINIUMS AND APARTMENTS HAS A CRITERIA OF A HALF A MILE, RIGHT TO TRANSIT STOPS.

KEEP THIS IN MIND BECAUSE THE PARKING GARAGE ENTRANCE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS A STRAIGHT SHOT TO I, 35 WITH A DISTANCE OF 1800 FEET.

SO THINK ABOUT IT.

RESIDENTS CHOOSE TO GET ON, GO ON A QUICK COMMUTE COMMUTE ON I 35 INSTEAD OF WALKING A ONE AND A HALF MILE ROUND TRIP THROUGH PARKING, LOTS OF INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES WHILE AVOIDING NUMEROUS SEMEN TRUCKS, DUMP TRUCKS AND DELIVERY TRUCKS.

PLUS HALF OF THE ROUTE WILL BE WITHOUT SIDEWALKS.

YES, WE KNOW THE DEVELOPERS PLANNING ON PUTTING SIDEWALKS, BUT THE REST OF ST.

ELMO WILL NOT HAVE ANY, IN FACT, ON THE MOBILITY PLAN, ST.

ELMO HAS A LOW PRIORITY RATING TO RECEIVING SIDEWALKS.

UM, IN SUMMARY, I CAN ASK YOU TO DO NY THE ZONE.

THIS IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE, CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF SPOT ZONING, WHICH WILL HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON EXISTING BUSINESSES.

LIKE I SAID, THEY'RE THERE FOR 30 YEARS.

AND FOR CURRENT RESIDENTS, I WANT TO SHOW YOU REALLY QUICK WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, HOW IT DOESN'T FIT.

IF YOU GO BACK TO THE FIRST PAGE.

OH GOSH.

SO THAT'S THE PROPERTY.

IF YOU GO SOUTH OF IT, THAT'S WHAT SOUTH OF IT.

NEXT SLIDE.

THAT'S AGAIN, SOUTH OF IT.

CAN YOU GO UP WHAT THAT IS EAST OF IT? THAT'S WHAT'S THERE BEEN THERE YEARS.

THEY'RE NOT MOVING.

CAN YOU GO UP AGAIN? THAT IS EAST OF IT ACROSS THE STREET.

THAT'S AN AUTOBODY SHOP.

LET ME DO ONE MORE.

THAT'S NORTH OF IT.

THAT'S GOING TO BE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET.

YOU CAN SEE THE GAS LINE GOES DIRECTLY IN THE CENTER OF THAT PROPERTY.

ANYWAY, IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WELL, NO, HERE FOR MISS ALICE GLASGOW FOR THE APPLICANT PEDAL FOR THREE MINUTES, PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS.

YOU GUYS HAVE SOWED HERE FOR QUITE A WHILE, AND YOU KNOW, THAT ZONING IS NOT A PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT.

ZONING JUST SIMPLY ALLOWS LAND USES.

SO, UM, AS THE FIRST ORDER OF PROCESS UNDER YOUR DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED CS AND UNDER CS, ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT GOES THERE, THE GAS LINE HAS TO BE RELOCATED.

AND THE GAS LINE, THE GAS COMPANY HANDLES THE RELOCATION AND THEY WILL FOR SAFETY TOO, SO THAT IT'S SAFE AND THEY PREFER IT TO BE ALONG THE, ALONG THE STREET RIGHT AWAY SO THAT THEY CAN ACCESS IT EASILY.

SO HAVING COMMERCIAL ZONING OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT CHANGE THAT.

TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, THE, UH, THE, THE PROVISIONS THAT WE ARE CITING UNDER THIS ORDINANCE, THE GREENFIELD ORDINANCE AND THE ORDINANCE NUMBER IS 2000 8 0 1 3 1 DASH 1 3 2.

WE ARE VOLUNTEERING VOLUNTARILY OFFERING THE AFFORDABILITY AND WE HAVE, UH, WE WILL TEAM UP WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.

THAT WILL BE THE ENTITY THAT WILL ENFORCE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT RELATING TO THE AFFORDABILITY.

AND, UM, REGARDING THE, UM, THE, UM, THE AFD, THE, THE CHEMICALS THAT ARE LESS SPEAKER SPOKE TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS SIGNED OFF ON THIS CASE.

AFD REVIEWS, ALL ZONING CASES.

AND IN FACT, BEFORE A ZONING CASE IS FILED, IT'S THEIR PREFERENCE THAT WE REACH OUT TO THEM SO THEY CAN LET YOU KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT PROXIMITY OF OTHER CHEMICALS WITHIN, AS CLOSE TO THE SITE THAT MAY CAUSE A PROBLEM BEFORE YOU FILED THE ZONING CASE.

WE DID ALL OF THAT.

AND THE COMMENTS TO CITY STAFF AFTER WE FILED THE CASE, ALSO INDICATE THAT THEY ARE PERFECTLY OKAY WITH HAVING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

HERE WE ARE DOWN ZONING.

THERE IS NO WITH SURROUNDING LAND USES THE CSM U M U X AS MFO, AS YOU ALL KNOW.

SO THE CONCERN THAT THERE ARE NO MULTI-FAMILY ZONINGS IN THE AREA, THAT'S NOT CORRECT.

THE LIP DAS.

I WORKED ON THE CELL EMO MARKET AND PUBLIC POCKET SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

THERE IS HOUSING THERE.

WE WORK THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP.

THEY OPPOSE THAT DEVELOPMENT.

AND TODAY YOU HAVE A PUBLIC MARKET, YOU HAVE 500 SOME HOUSING UNITS COMING ALONG.

IT'S TAKEN A WHILE TO GET HERE BECAUSE OF ALL THE DELAYS ON THE ST ELMO MARKET AND LOFTS.

SO THEY, THE AREA IS EVOLVING.

YOU HAVE A MIXTURE OF LAND USES.

THEY ALL WERE QUAIL.

AND I URGE YOU TO, TO SUPPORT THIS ZONING CHANGE.

AS, AS ATD ATD STAFF HAD DEFERRED THE TIA TO THE SITE.

AND I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

WE DO HAVE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.

THE, UH, THAT WE PREPARED AT THE REQUEST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS, ARE CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC.

AND WE'D SELL THAT INSTEAD OF WAITING UNTIL THE SITE ONE STAGE

[02:50:02]

ONE STATE, WE AGREE TO DO IT NOW WITH ZONING.

SO WE COULD HAVE ANSWERS FOR YOU, THE COMMISSION ON COUNCIL REGARDING WHAT IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE REQUIRED OF US.

AND WHAT ARE THE MITIGATION EFFORTS WE'LL BE WORKING WITH STAFF GOING FORWARD.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THINK YOU MENTIONED HER, SO LET'S GO AHEAD.

A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

MOST OF MY COMMENTS SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR.

LET'S GO AND VOTE TO BLOODS HEARING, UH, C UH, SHOWER.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO Q AND A, UH, DO YOU HAVE COMMISSIONERS WITH, UH, QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER CONLEY? YEAH.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UH, THE FOLKS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, WHOEVER, UH, WOULD PREFER TO SPEAK WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE SPEAKING, BUT I GUESS THE QUESTION IS INITIALLY YOU HAD ASKED FOR A POSTPONEMENT, UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE SORT OF FORCED YOU GUYS TO COME HERE AND MOVE THE CASE ALONG.

MY QUESTION IS YOU'VE MADE SOME PRETTY STRONG ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE CASE.

UM, AND WOULD A POSTPONEMENT STILL BE USEFUL TO, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT THIS STAGE? AND WOULD IT ESSENTIALLY CHANGE ANY OF THE KIND OF MAJOR POINTS BEING MADE AGAINST THIS? UM, YES, PLEASE, PLEASE.

ANYONE THAT MY TIME IS THE CLOCK IS TICKING.

JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND CAUSE THE CASE AGAINST IT WAS.

YEAH, BECAUSE W WE ASKED THEM ABOUT THE GAS LINE AND THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS WHEN WE HAD THE MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 27TH AND THE ENGINEER WASN'T THERE.

AND SO THE SPECIFIC QUESTION WAS, IS IT THE HIGH POWERED GAS LINE? IS THAT THE ONE THAT'S ABANDONED? IS THAT THE ONE THAT'S GOING TO BE REROUTED AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW.

AND THEY SAID, THEY'LL GET BACK TO US.

THEY NEVER GOT BACK TO US WITH IT.

AND THAT, THAT DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

THEN I ASKED ABOUT THE DRAINAGE.

I SAID, OKAY, WILL THIS HAVE ANY EFFECT ON OUR HOMES? BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE UP FROM US.

AND THEY SAID, WELL, WE HAVE THE RETENTION POND POND.

I SAID, YEAH, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN? AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

HE SAID, OH, WELL, THAT HASN'T BEEN IGNORED.

YES, WE HAVE LOOKED AT IT.

AND I SAID, BUT CAN WE LOOK AT IT? SORRY, I REALLY DON'T MEAN TO CUT YOU SHORT.

IT'S JUST THAT MY TIME IS TAKING, BUT, UM, WOULD ANSWERS AROUND THOSE THINGS, BE LIKELY TO SORT OF CHANGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD STANCE WITH REGARDS TO THIS, UM, FROM ITS STRONG OPPOSITION AT THIS MOMENT, UH, TO SOMETHING ELSE.

IS THERE, YOU KNOW, WHEN ANSWERS AROUND THE GAS LINES, FOR INSTANCE, UM, YEAH, WE, I THINK THAT WE COULD COME UP BE BETTER PREPARED AND INFORM THE OTHERS AND JUST HAVE A BETTER OVERALL FEELING JUST BECAUSE OF THERE'S SO MANY UNKNOWN QUESTIONS, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO OUR SAFETY.

AM I OUT OF TIME NOW? MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.

UM, CAUSE WE, WE WERE TOLD THAT, UH, WITH THE CURRENT ZONING, UM, OH, SORRY.

UH, MR. I APOLOGIZE.

IT'S JUST BECAUSE MY TIME IS TICKING.

SO WE WERE TOLD, UH, MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.

UM, WE WERE TOLD THAT WITH THE CURRENT ZONING, UH, THERE ALREADY WOULD HAVE TO REMOVE GAS LINES.

IS THAT, IS THAT THE CASE, UM, OR MOVE THE GAS LINES, UM, UNDER WHAT IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED UNDER CS? I, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

AND UNDER CS IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THEY COULD, YOU KNOW, HAVE A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ORIENTED AROUND THE GAS BUILDINGS, BUT I WOULD WITH THE DENSITY THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, UH, I, I DO THINK THAT THE GAS LINES WOULD HAVE TO BE MOVED BECAUSE IT, BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT GOES THROUGH THE, SO IT'S LIKELY THAT THE GAS LINES WOULD HAVE TO MOVE WITH ANY KIND OF NEW DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE AREA.

WELL, ESPECIALLY A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT.

BUT IF IT WASN'T A MULTIFAMILY WITH UNDER WHAT IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED FOR, IS THERE ANY, WAS ANY SORT OF, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT YOU CAN DO A PARKING LOT AND OVER IT, OR SOME LIMITED TYPE OF WORK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? I DON'T THINK SO.

I MEAN, I THINK THOSE, THOSE AREAS ARE TYPICALLY NOT DEVELOPED.

UM, YES.

I'M SORRY, PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE.

COMMERCIAL THERE'S PROPERTIES OF JASON ALL AROUND THERE THAT HAVE THAT SAME GAS LINE RUNNING THROUGH THEM.

IF YOU SHOW ON MY SLIDESHOW, I TOOK PICTURES OF IT AND THEY HAVE BUILDINGS BECAUSE IT'S NOT HAVE THEIR SPOTS THAT WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT LIVING.

SO THEY'RE HAVE THEIR BUILDINGS AND THEY HAVE TOYOTA RIGHT BEHIND THEM WERE ABLE TO BUILD, THEY BUILT THIS HUGE, UH, SERVICE CENTER AND IT RUNS THROUGH.

I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UM, WOULD INFORMATION ABOUT THE GAS LINES SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGE.

SORRY, MR. CONTOUR, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT? YES.

I THINK TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION, IF YOU LOOKED AT MY SLIDES, YES.

HOW MANY BUILDINGS DID YOU SEE OUT THERE? THERE WERE

[02:55:01]

60 FEET HIGH.

YOU DIDN'T SEE ANY, ALL YOU SAW WERE THE IMAGES THAT I HAD AND THAT DACEY HAD THAT SHOWED INDUSTRIAL ONE STORY BUILDINGS.

AND MATTER OF FACT, MOST OF THEM BUILT AROUND THE GAS LINE.

SO I APPRECIATE THE POINT.

YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE MY ONLY QUESTION IS, WOULD A POSTPONEMENT CAUSE YOU'RE MAKING AN ARGUMENT AGAINST IT.

SO MY ONLY QUESTION IS, WOULD A POSTPONEMENT CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE KIND OF ARGUMENT THAT YOU'RE MAKING OR YOUR GENERAL FEELING ABOUT THE PROJECT? DO YOU UNDERSTAND? I UNDERSTAND.

I, I, I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF UNKNOWNS THAT WE WERE TRYING TO CONVEY TO Y'ALL INITIALLY THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT.

SHE SAID, WE SAID, AND BY HAVING THAT LAST MEETING, WE CAN SORT ALL THAT OUT, VERBALLY RECORDED AND KNOW THE ANSWERS TO ALL THAT INFORMATION.

SO I JUST WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT BECAUSE I THINK COMMISSIONER CONLEY ASKED A QUESTION AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SO STAFF, YOU DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW, OR IT'S NOT IN OUR CODE WITH REGARD TO DISTANCES FROM GUESTS PIPELINES TO THESE, THESE, UH, ZONING.

I MEAN, WE JUST, CAUSE, UH, I'M ASKING STAFF, UM, JUST CAUSE HE ASKED A QUESTION, I HEARD THAT YOU GUYS DON'T KNOW IS THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN OUR CODE, I'M JUST TRYING TO, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU GOT A CLEAR ANSWER TO HIS QUESTION.

AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK INTO.

I WAS JUST ADVISED TO THE GAS LINES LIKE LATE LAST WEEK.

AND SO I, I DON'T, I DO NOT, I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO ALL RIGHT.

THAT I WOULD THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO THIS CASE ON WHAT DISTANCES ARE REQUIRED BY OUR CODE BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT CS.

I MEAN, THAT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT THIS CASE IT'S MEN IT'S ANYONE.

I'M JUST SURPRISED WE CAN'T, WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY HERE, ANYBODY, I GUESS NOT.

I JUST WANTED TO TRY TO GET AN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OR SHOULD ASK COMMISSIONER COOKS.

GO AHEAD TO STAFF.

SORRY FOR MAKING YOU GET UP AGAIN.

DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY THAT YOU JUST LEARNED ABOUT THIS GASOLINE LAST WEEK? I, I SAW I WAS FORWARDED CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE APPLICANT.

IT WAS ALSO SHARED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT WAS, I, IT WAS MID LAST WEEK, I THINK, PERHAPS WEDNESDAY ABOUT, ABOUT THE GAS LINE AND ABOUT THE RELOCATION OF IT, BUT I DIDN'T.

AND FOR THE APPLICANT, I ASSUME THE APPLICANT KNOWS A LOT ABOUT THIS GAS LINE.

I'VE GOT A FEW QUESTIONS.

SO WHO OWNS THIS GASOLINE? SO THE GAS LINE IS OWNED BY, UM, ONE GAS IT'S MICHAEL R TEXAS GAS, SORRY.

OR A CONTACT IS MICHAEL VILLAREAL.

IS IT A TRANSMISSION LINE OR LIKE A PART OF THE DISTRIBUTION NETWORK? IT'S A, UH, PRIVATE DISTRIBUTION NETWORK THAT RUNS THROUGH, DO WE KNOW THAT SIZE? UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT'S 12 INCH LINE.

DO WE KNOW WHAT LEGAL SETBACK THERE IS? UH, THEIR EASEMENT IS A RIGHT NOW IT'S A A HUNDRED FOOT EASEMENT CAUSE THERE'S TWO LINES THERE.

UM, SO THAT WOULD GET REDUCED DOWN TO A 50 FOOT EASEMENT AND THEY'RE WILLING TO DO WHAT THAT WOULD RUN UP AGAINST THE RIGHT OF WAY.

IT WOULD RUN UP.

PART OF IT WOULD BE ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY.

SO THEY'RE PROPOSING TO MOVE IT, UH, JUST DOWN INTO THE PROPERTY.

SO THAT WAY ALONG THE PROPERTY, THERE'LL BE A 30 FOOT EASEMENT ON THE NORTH SIDE.

AND THE REST OF THE, THE QUOTE UNQUOTE REQUIRED AREA FOR THE GAS LINE WOULD BE PART OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.

SO FROM A DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASSUMING ABOUT A 30 FOOT SETBACK FROM THIS GAS LINE TO THE BUILDING.

AND THAT BUILDING WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL.

THE BUILDING WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL.

UM, AND YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY RULES THAT WOULD HAVE A MORE SIGNIFICANT SETBACK, 30 FEET FROM A 12 INCH TRANSMISSION LINE TO RESIDENCES.

THE, UH, THE ONLY ONE THAT'S IN YOUR CODE IS A HAZARDOUS PIPELINE OVERLAY, WHICH THIS DOES NOT HAVE.

UM, BUT THE, THE RULES ARE WITHIN 25 FEET OF A GAS LINE IS GENERALLY, UM, WHAT THE LIMIT IS BY THE, BY THE STATE.

SO THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE 50 FOOT EASEMENT THAT RUNS THROUGH THERE.

SO YOU'RE 25 FEET ON EITHER SIDE AND WE'RE GOING TO BE, THE EASEMENT WILL BE 30, AND THEN WE'LL BE SET BACK A LITTLE BIT FROM THE EASEMENT AS WELL.

UM, MOVING ON TRAFFIC, UH, I, THIS WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR ATD, BUT, BUT SINCE THEY'RE NOT ON THE LINE, I'LL ASK YOU, DO YOU KNOW WHY WE SEEM TO HAVE FOCUSED OUR STUDY AREA TO LIKE THE NORTH? AND I DIDN'T REALLY SEE MUCH AT ALL ABOUT THE SOUTH WHERE THE STREET LOOPS IN AND GOES DID, WAS THAT INCLUDED IN THE STUDY AREA? THE IDENTIFIED INTERSECTIONS WERE TO THE SOUTH WHERE THE TOYOTA WAS.

UM, THEN IT WAS THE INTERSECTION OF SHELBY

[03:00:01]

AND THE FRONTAGE ROAD.

THEN YOU HAVE THE T INTERSECTION OF SHELBY AND WEDA MAR THEN THE INTERSECTION TO THE NORTHWEST.

YOU HAD THE TWO, UM, ALONG TERRIO SEVEN, UM, INTERSECTIONS.

AND THEN THE TWO DRIVEWAYS, ACTUALLY I DON'T, WE HAVE THE TIA MEMO, BUT WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A COPY OF YOUR TIA.

SO I DIDN'T, IT WASN'T CLEAR TO ME THE INTERSECTIONS WHERE WE TOMORROW AND SHELBY LANE, COLONIAL PARK BOULEVARD IN SHELBY LANE, I 35 AND SHELBY TERRIO AND ST.

ELMO ROAD, WE TOMORROW IN COLONIAL PARK BOULEVARD.

AND THEN THE TWO DRIVEWAYS, THE ONE ALONG WE TOMORROW AND ONE ALONG SHELBY.

I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T HAVE, YEAH, I DON'T HAVE A MAP, BUT IT'S, THEY WERE AROUND.

AND THAT WAS WHAT WAS DETERMINED WITH ATD ON THE AREAS THAT WE NEEDED, THAT WE NEEDED TO ANALYZE.

HE HAD A 10% REDUCTION ON THE TRIPS FOR TDM.

WHAT TDM ARE YOU PLANNING TO DO TO CORRECT.

SO WE WERE LOOKING AT, ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE TRIPS, THE TDM THAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO DO TO GET THE 10% REDUCTION? UH, THE TDM THAT WAS DESCRIBED TO US WAS THAT AREA THAT'S ALONG.

UM, WELL LET ME FIND IT HERE.

THAT'S A LONG, UH, TERRIO IS PROPOSED TO HAVE A, UM, IT'S A FUTURE, UH, IMPROVEMENT THAT IS PROPOSED TO HAVE A, UH, WALKABILITY WITH MORE SIDEWALKS.

UM, AND IT IS ACTUALLY THE ALL AGES, ABILITIES, ALL AGES AND ABILITIES, BICYCLE FACILITY, UM, THAT'S ALONG THERE THAT, THAT'S WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED.

WE ACTUALLY ORIGINALLY PROPOSED NOT TO HAVE THE 10% REDUCTION AND THEY CAME BACK THAT WITH THAT, UM, FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE NEEDED TO DO THE 10% REDUCTION AND THEN RUN THE, RUN THE ITEMS ALONG THAT, WHICH DID NOT CHANGE ANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAD.

AND I DON'T HAVE TIME CAUSE I'M AT 20 SECONDS, I'M UP.

BUT, BUT FOR THE, UM, FOR MS, UH, SORRY, I FORGOT YOUR NAME.

UM, UH, YES.

UH GLASSO UM, I'M REALLY CURIOUS ABOUT THE MF SIX AND IF YOU'RE CAPPING THE HEIGHT AT 60 AND YOU'RE DOING THE SETBACK, WHY, WHY ARE YOU GOING AFTER MSX RATHER THAN AN MFR? I'M A FIVE, YEAH, GO AHEAD AND FINISH THAT.

IT HAS TO DO WITH THE, UM, THE, THE, THE, UM, UNITS PER ACRE AND MFM AND, UM, AND FAR, SO YOUR MF FIVE WOULD BE A NICE CATEGORY.

WE EXCEED THE FIR UNDER THE, AND THE UNITS PER ACRE.

THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY WHY FLORIDA AIR RATIO UNDER YOUR, HOLD ON, LET ME GET MY, OKAY.

I SAID, THAT'D BE A QUICK RESPONSE.

SO CORRECT.

IT IS UNDER MF FOR THE M F FAR IS, UM, 0.75 TO ONE MFI.

THE FFR IS ONE-TO-ONE FLORIO RATIO AND WE'RE AT 1.54, AND THE UNITS PER ACRE UNDER MF FOUR IS A MAXIMUM OF 54 FROM 36 TO 34 UNITS PER ACRE.

AND I'M AT FOUR AND MFF IS 54 UNITS PER ACRE.

AND WE'RE AT 60 SOME INSPIRATION BECAUSE OF THAT.

WE HAVE 520 UNITS.

UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

MINISTERS ARE, OH, I'M SORRY.

UH, LET'S START COMMISSIONER.

JAAN PALITO.

I, UH, LET'S GO AND GET SOMEBODY FROM THE, UH, SCREENS.

I THINK YOU, UM, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR MS. LONG AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, I WANTED TO SEE IF THERE WAS ADDITIONAL DETAIL THAT, UH, I THINK IT WAS EITHER, IT WAS TRYING TO ELABORATE ON THE GAS LINE AND ALSO JUST IN REFERENCE TO THE PHOTOS THAT YOU SHARED, DID YOU WANT TO FINISH THAT POINT? UH, WHAT IS YOUR PARTICULAR QUESTION? SORRY, JUST IN RESPONSE TO, UM, SOME OF THE BACK AND FORTH IN TERMS OF THAT, UH, THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE GAS LINES AND THAT WOULD HAVE CHANGED YOUR DECISION.

UM, YES.

WELL, WHEN I TALKED TO THEM, I ASKED THEM, IS IT THE HIGH PRESSURE DIS A LINE THAT WAS GOING TO BE REROUTED BECAUSE IT'S 800 TO 1200 PSI, WHICH IS VERY DANGEROUS IF YOU'RE REROUTING AND THEY DID NOT EVER GIVE US AN ANSWER BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T KNOW.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT, YES, IT PROBABLY IS A HIGH PRESSURE LINE IF IT'S THE TRANSMISSION LINE, WHICH I JUST HEARD HIM SAY, BECAUSE HE WOULDN'T SAY WHICH ONE, IT WAS THE TRANS, UH, TRANS, UH, MISSION OR THE DISTRIBUTION LINE.

THAT DISTRIBUTION LINE IS A LOT LESS, UM, PSI.

SO THAT'S VERY CONCERNING.

I'M GLAD THAT THAT WAS ANSWERED.

UM, THE PROBLEM WE HAD WAS THAT I CALLED THE GAS COMPANY AND THEY ASSURED VEST IN MARCH.

THEY'D ALREADY GOTTEN APPROVAL FROM THE GAS COMPANY.

I CALLED THEM IN APRIL.

THEY HAD NOT TO GET TEXAS GAS SERVICE HADN'T EVEN HEARD FROM THEM THEN, BECAUSE I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT THE EASEMENTS.

THEY PUT ONLY 15 PUT FOOT EASEMENTS ON THEIR

[03:05:01]

CONCEPTUAL PLANS THAT WERE GOING TO GO RIGHT UP OUR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS VERY, VERY DANGEROUS.

UM, IF YOU LOOK UP ON THE SURVEY, IT SAYS IT HAS TO HAVE A 50 TO A HUNDRED FOOT EASEMENT BECAUSE THERE'S TWO GAS LINES.

AND THEY SAID ONE IS ABANDONED, WHICH I HAVEN'T CONFIRMED THAT BECAUSE I'VE TRIED TO CALL TEXAS GAS SERVICE AND THEY'RE NOT RETURNING MY CALLS NOW.

I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT, UM, LIKE I SAID, IT'S JUST VERY CONCERNING BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A LOT OF INFORMATION GIVEN TO US.

AND, UM, IT'S NOT SAFE, SORRY TO HAVE A HUNDRED FOOT EASEMENT GO DOWN TO 15 FOOT.

SO, AND IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, THE EASEMENTS ARE CONTROLLED BY THE TEXAS RAILROAD COMPANY AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

IT'S NOT REALLY SET FORTH BY.

SO YOU NEGOTIATE, BUT I MEAN, I KNOW IF YOU'VE READ ANY GUIDELINES, THEY RECOMMEND THAT YOU, ESPECIALLY WITH, UH, HOMES, HABITABLE AREAS THAT YOU KEEP IT SET BACK MUCH FURTHER THAN 15 FEET.

I MEAN, I'M SURE YOU'RE ALL AWARE OF THAT.

SO, UM, SO THAT WAS OUR CONCERN.

THANK YOU FOR THE ADDITIONAL DETAIL.

AND THEN I'LL JUST, UH, OFFER, UM, MS. GLASGOW OR IF I DON'T THE RISK OF BEING REDUNDANT, IF YOU WANTED TO ADDRESS ANYTHING THAT WAS JUST SAID, SHE ASKED FOR A MISS PLASMA.

AND I THINK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER SPOLETO, YOU WERE ASKING FOR KIND OF A CONFIRMATION OF THE SETBACKS THAT THEY'RE AGREEING TO, IS THAT WHAT THE YES.

ABOUT THE 15 FEET AND ANY ADDITIONAL DETAIL THAT YOU WANT TO PROVIDE ON THAT? OH, I WOULD SAY THAT I THINK THE 15TH, MAYBE THIS CONFUSION ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS, YOU KNOW, FROM, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, I, OUR CIVIL ENGINEER WHO'S, WELL, THE ONES WHO ARE GOING TO BE DESIGNING, HE, HE JUST ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SANDBOX.

HE'S THE EXPERT, BUT WHAT SETBACKS NEED TO OCCUR? IT'S HIS LICENSE THAT HE IS AT.

AND SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE AN UNSAFE PROJECT.

JUST LIKE THE PREVIOUS CASE.

YOU TALKED ABOUT THE FIRE SETBACK, AFD GETS INVOLVED WITH ALL THESE REVIEWS.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE A SITE PLAN.

IT IS NOT SAFE.

IF WE BUILD A HOTEL HERE, IT'S HAVING RESIDENTS TO, SO BACK TO A COMMISSIONER UPON THIS QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER YOU BUILD UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING AND YOU USE A BIT OF HOTEL, YOU STILL HAVE TO RELOCATE THE GAS LINE COMPANY.

AND WE SEND THEM EMAILS LAST WEEK.

THEY ASKED US FOR COMMUNICATIONS.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD DID, UH, ABOUT OUR COMMUNICATION WITH THE GAS COMPANY.

AND WE, LIKE I SAID, WE'VE BEEN IN THIS PROCESS FOR ALMOST TWO YEARS NOW.

SO WE'VE HAD COMMUNICATION STARTED EARLY ON AND STOPPED AND THEN PICKED UP AGAIN.

SO THE, UH, THE MOST RECENT INFORMATION IS WHAT WE SEND TO THEM, ALL DIALOGUE TO THE GAS COMPANY WITH THEM, INDICATING THAT, UM, THEY, THEY CAN RELOCATE IN THE PREFERRED RELOCATING THAT, UH, GAS LINE.

AND YES, ONE IS DECOMMISSIONED.

AND THE OTHER ONE THAT IS IN THAT IS ACTIVE.

IT'S THE ONES GOING TO BE RELOCATED AS EXPLAINED BY A CIVIL ENGINEER.

AND SO JUST TO MAKE SURE A COMMISSIONING ON HIS PALITO GUT GOT AN ANSWER TO A QUESTION.

SO IT IS 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE GAS LINE.

THAT'S WHAT IS THAT? WHAT WE HEARD? I THINK I WOULD PREFER A CIVIL ENGINEER TO ANSWER THE GAS LINE CENTER.

THAT'S WHAT SHE WAS ASKING.

AND I DIDN'T HEAR A CLEAR ANSWER TO THAT.

SO I'M TRYING TO THINK WHAT ELSE CIVIL ENGINEER SAID, THAT'S THE CORRECT SETBACK THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE STATE? WELL, I HEARD 25 AND YOU GUYS ARE DOING 30.

I NEED YOU SAY YES.

SO 25.

JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU GOT AN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION.

YOU MENTIONED.

THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING.

UH, COMMISSIONERS ARE, I THINK YOU'RE NEXT.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

I THINK I HEARD THIS FROM THE APPLICANT AND I THINK IT WAS THE ENGINEER.

I'M SORRY, OUR STAFF CAN SOMEONE PLEASE CONFIRM THIS IS NOT A HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE.

THIS IS NOT CATEGORIZED AS IT HAS HAZARDOUS LIQUID BIPLANE.

IT'S A NEW, NATURAL GAS.

IN DEPTH AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.

AND I GUESS THEN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

HOW DO WE USUALLY HANDLE SOMETHING LIKE THIS FOR ZONING CASES OR EVEN AT THE SITE PLAN PROCESS? LIKE WHAT USUALLY HAPPENS IF A SITE HAS A PIPELINE, NATURAL GAS PIPE THING, IF IT'S A HAZARDOUS PIPELINE, THERE ARE SETBACKS ESTABLISHED BY CODE.

IF IT'S A NATURAL GAS PIPELINE, I'M SURE THERE ARE SETBACKS.

I DON'T KNOW.

YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T, I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.

AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S USUALLY HANDLED AT THE SITE PLAN PROCESS? YEAH, IT IS.

I MEAN, I IT'S A CONCERN FOR THIS SITE.

UM, AND THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE DE UH, STUDIED MORE

[03:10:01]

AND I'M SORRY, CAN YOU PLEASE REMIND ME WHAT DEPARTMENTS ARE LOOKING AT SORT OF SAFETY AND HEALTH AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN? SO IT THINK FIRE WE'LL BE LOOKING AT ABSOLUTELY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, UH, DOES A REVIEW AS, AS, AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE REVIEWERS FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND WATERSHED, UH, FIRE DEPARTMENT AND, AND OTHERS, AND EVEN THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT HAVE A ROLE AT AND PLAN.

AND YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW THIS, BUT I GUESS WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT AT PSYCH LAND, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WOULD LOOK IT OVER, SEE IF THERE'S A REAL SAFETY HAZARD AND THEN PROVIDE SOME SIGN OF KIND OF GUIDANCE ON HOW TO HANDLE SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

IF LET'S SAY THE PIPELINE WAS NOT TO BE MOVED.

UH, YOU KNOW, AFD DOES REVIEW OUR ZONING CASES AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT, BUT THEY'RE REALLY LOOKING FOR, UM, W W WITH REGARDS TO USE, YOU KNOW, IS, DO THEY HAVE, DO THEY OBJECT TO MULTIFAMILY USE? AND THEY, THEY DID A REVIEW AND DID NOT OBJECT TO MULTI-FAMILY USE AT THIS LOCATION.

SO IN CASE FOR, EVEN FOR THE ZONING CASE, OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWS.

THEY HAVE, AND ESSENTIALLY SAID THAT THERE IS NO SAFETY HAZARD HERE AT THIS TIME.

THEY DID PROVIDE A LIST OF CHEMICALS, YOU KNOW, OR, UH, MOSTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE AUTO DEALERSHIPS AND AUTO-RELATED USES, I DIDN'T CHOOSE TO POST THOSE.

UH, BUT, UH, BUT THAT, THAT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.

BUT THAT IS NOT RELATED TO THE PIPELINE, JUST TO CORRECT.

FULLY UNDERSTAND.

AND THEN I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE IF, IF WE HAD SOMETHING LIKE, WOULD THE CITY HAVE A REQUIRED A PIPELINE TO BE MOVED, AND YOU MIGHT JUST NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS.

UH, I DON'T KNOW.

USUALLY WE, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANTS AND THE, WE WORK AROUND THE PIPELINE.

AND SO THERE WOULD, THEY MIGHT NOT BE A WAY TO MEMORIALIZE FOR A HAZARDOUS PIPELINE.

SO IN THIS CASE, IT'S A LITTLE MORE, I GUESS IT WOULD BE INSIGHTFUL CYCLING THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER THIS.

AND I KNEW MS. GLASGOW OR DID SOMEONE FROM THE APPLICANTS.

I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING THAT LINE OF QUESTIONING.

I'M NOT SURE.

I GUESS MY BIGGER QUESTION HERE WOULD BE MS. CLASSICAL FOR YOU.

THERE IS A CLEAR COMMITMENT THAT THE PIPELINE WILL BE MOVED.

CAN YOU PLEASE REPEAT YOUR QUESTION? I'M SO I THINK THERE'S A CLEAR COMMITMENT THAT THE PIPELINE WILL BE MOVED ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY, CORRECT? YES.

AND WOULD, THAT'S WHY WE REACHED OUT TO THE GAS COMPANY AND WE HAVE PROVIDED THE EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS AND SHED THAT WITH THE, THE NEIGHBORS.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE THAT IN ORDER TO AVOID THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.

SO WHATEVER OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT COMES UP WITH, YOU WOULD HAVE, DO REMOVE, HAVE IT MOVED BEFORE GOING TO SITE PLAN REVIEW IS THAT BEFORE DEVELOPMENT STARTS, THE GAS COMPANY, TEXAS GAS WILL REBOOT.

THEY ARE THE ONES WHO REMOVE THE GAS, NOT US.

THEY DO NOT ALLOW CITIZENS TO DO.

THEY HAVE A PROCESS.

YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN APPLICATION AND THERE ARE FEES INVOLVED.

THEY HAVE TO PAY, BUT THEY ARE THE ONES WHO PHYSICALLY RELOCATED, JUST LIKE THE GAS THAT COMES TO YOUR HOMES.

IT'S THE SAME PROCESS, I GUESS, AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING THE FULL PROCESS, AND THIS IS A UNIQUE CASE.

IT, OUR SIDELINE WOULD THEN BE CONTINGENT ON MOVING THE LINE AND THE LINE WOULD BE MOVING FOR DEVELOPMENT STORE.

WE'LL HAVE TO SHOW ALL THE OTHER, ALL THAT INFORMATION AT THAT TIME AT THE SYPRINE DISCIPLE AND WE'LL HAVE ALL THAT INFORMATION.

AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT WILL BE PART OF THE REVIEW AND THERE, AND THE GAS COMPANY WILL BE INVOLVED BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO, UH, TO HAVE TO HAVE THE PLAN TO SHOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE RELOCATED.

SO THEY'LL ALL BE INVOLVED WHEN THE STOP LINE GOES IN REVIEW.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

COMMISSIONER MITCHELL.

I THINK TEXAS GAS SERVICE IS PART OF THEY REVIEW.

HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

UM, FOLLOWING UP ON THE GAS LINE, IT LOOKS LIKE ALL OF THIS IS REGULATED AND MONITORED BY THE RAILROAD COMMISSION AND NOT THE CITY.

AND THERE'S SOME SAFETY EVIDENCE THAT INDICATES THAT THE SAFETY AREA IN THE HAZARD RADIUS REGARDING CHANCES OF SURVIVAL, IF THERE WERE A COMBUSTIBLE ACCIDENT OR A HIGH PRESSURE LINE VARY ANYWHERE FROM A HUNDRED FEET TO 700 FEET, DEPENDING ON THE DIAMETER OF THE PIPELINE.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S ANOTHER REGULATORY BODY THAT MIGHT BE INVOLVED IN MOVING THE PIPELINE THAT'S OUTSIDE THE CITY.

AND I'M JUST WONDERING IF MAYBE WE JUMPED THE GUN ON APPROVING THIS WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION AND KNOWING WHAT IS POSSIBLE WITH THE RAILROAD COMMISSION AND THE TEXAS PIPELINE.

AND MAYBE WE NEED THAT INFORMATION TO BE ABLE TO APPROVE THIS CASE, OR YOU JUST LEARNED ABOUT IT.

SO IF YOU HAD KNOWN ABOUT IT PRIOR, DOES THAT CHANGE YOUR PROCESS IF YOU HAD KNOWN ABOUT IT PRIOR? UH, NO, I DON'T THINK IT, IT CHANGES ARE THE ZONING STAFF DECISION IN THIS, IN THIS MATTER.

AND I SHOULD ALSO SAY, AS IN, IN THE SITE PLAN REVIEW,

[03:15:02]

IT'S NOT JUST CITY DEPARTMENTS, BUT IT'S OTHER UTILITIES COMPANIES, THE CABLE COMPANY, AUSTIN ENERGY CA TELEPHONE COMPANIES.

JUST A LOT OF THOSE EASEMENTS ARE SMALLER AND THE SAFETY CONCERNS ARE SMALLER ON, ON, ON SOME OF THAT WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH SOME OF THAT.

THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS ON SOME OF THE, AND I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE, THE, THE GOOGLE AREA MAP ON THIS, AND IT'S JUST SUCH AN INTERESTING SPOT TO PLOP AN MF SIX.

UM, BECAUSE JUST LOOKING AROUND, I, I, I DO THINK THEY BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT.

SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE INNER CONNECTABILITY.

I'M JUST LOOKING AT HOW I WOULD GET TO CONGRESS AND WALK OVER THERE FROM HERE OR WHAT I'VE GOT.

AND I, I'M JUST NOT SEEING THE, I'M WONDERING ABOUT THE, THE TRAFFIC STUFF.

I MEAN, I KNOW YOU GUYS TYPICALLY LOOK AT CAR TRIPS, BUT IF WE'RE, IF THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS ON THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN AND ALL OF THAT, I AM HAVING TROUBLE SEEING IT FROM HERE.

I WONDER IF WE MIGHT SPEAK A BIT ABOUT THAT.

IT JUST KIND OF LOOKS LIKE AN ISLAND.

I, I WOULD CONSIDER THIS SITE DIFFERENT FROM, UH, THE OTHERS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, TO THE NORTH, WHICH I THINK IS TO THE NORTH AND EAST ARE MORE ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS.

THIS IS UNDEVELOPED.

UM, AND IT IS, BUT IT IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.

UM, AND AT, AT ONE TIME, I WILL SAY WHEN I WAS DOING RESEARCH ON THIS AT ONE TIME, THIS PROPERTY DID ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY, BUT IT DOESN'T KNOW.

BUT WHEN ZONING WAS CUMULATIVE, IT DID ALLOW FOR MF THREE ZONING, BUT THAT WOULD BE A LOT LESS DENSE.

AND I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE ARTERIALS HERE AND THE CONNECTIONS, AND IT'S, IT'S JUST HARD TO SEE HOW THAT FITS IN.

I'M JUST STRUGGLING TO SEE THAT.

UM, THANK YOU.

SO I'M JUST DOING A QUICK COUNT.

HOW MANY DO YOU HAVE? THREE MORE.

ANY COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS? I, UM, I HAVE A FEW, UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE NEXT SPOT.

UM, LET'S SEE.

THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT AND STAFF.

I'LL HAVE, I'LL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE TO STAY CLOSE BY.

UM, SO, UH, THE STAFF HAS PROPOSED CERTAIN CONDITIONS ON THEIR RECOMMENDED DURATION.

UH, ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THE CONDITIONS? OKAY.

AND, UM, OH, UH, AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

AND IF YOU COULD STAY CLOSE BY MS. GLASGOW, I MIGHT HAVE ANOTHER ONE FOR YOU.

SO WE HEARD THAT THERE ALREADY A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF CONDOS.

I MEAN, IF YOU, IN THE AREA THAT ALSO WITH, YOU KNOW, IT'S MORE MIXED USE CONDOS WITH, UM, RETAIL, IS, ARE THOSE IN THE SAME AREA? THERE'S CONDO UNITS? UH, THE ONE THAT WAS, THAT WAS REFERENCED CALLED ACE, I THINK IT'S CALLED THE STATION ST.

ELMO.

THAT IS, UH, TO THE NORTHWEST OF THIS IS AT THE CORNER OF TERRIO AND COLONIAL PARK.

UM, AND THEN THERE ARE OTHERS THAT HAVE LIKE LIP PDA OR CSM UV.

THOSE ARE MORE ORIENTED TOWARDS CONGRESS.

BUT THEY ALL, THEY DO INCLUDE CONDO OR KIND OF TH THERE ARE TYPICALLY, UM, APARTMENTS, I THINK IS WHAT I MEAN, I DID THE ZONING AND IT WAS FOR MULTIFAMILY.

I THINK WHAT, WHAT HAS BEEN BUILT IS APARTMENTS.

AND THEN, UM, JUST GENERAL COMMENT, YOU KNOW, WE STAFF, THERE WAS A STUDY DONE ON KIND OF THE ENCROACHMENT OF, YOU KNOW, REZONING, THESE INDUSTRIAL AREAS INTO MULTIFAMILY OR OTHER MORE RETAIL IT'S.

DOES STAFF HAVE ANY CONCERNS BASED ON THAT YOU STUDIED THAT THIS IS KIND OF, YOU KNOW, REMOVING SOME OF THOSE AREAS THAT WERE, THAT ARE NEEDED FOR INDUSTRIAL, YOU KNOW, INDUSTRIAL ZONING IN THE CITY, OR IS THIS ALREADY HEADING THE DIRECTION OF THE VERSION? I DON'T WANT TO ASK SCOTT, MAUREEN, IF SHE HAS COMMENTS ABOUT THAT, ANY OKAY.

CAUSE I KNOW YOU ALL AND I WOULD, WE HAD COMMISSIONER SNYDER HERE CAUSE HE WAS REALLY OUR PERSON THAT WAS VERY INTERESTED AND WORKED WITH YOU GUYS.

UH, HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS.

THAT'S IT? THAT WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT WE CONSIDERED WHEN THIS CASE FIRST CAME IN WAS, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES IT ALIGN WITH THIS STUDY? UM, AND YOU KNOW, IN, IN, IN OUR DECISION-MAKING WE DID CONSIDER THAT.

I'M LOOKING AT MY LIST HERE.

YOU ONE SECOND.

[03:20:06]

SAY THAT AGAIN.

DO YOU WANT THE EXHIBIT NOTING THE DEVELOPMENTAL REALM? UH, I'M GOOD.

I THINK I JUST WANTED TO HEAR, VERIFY THAT THERE WERE OTHER INDIFFERENT ZONING, BUT THERE WERE, UM, YOU KNOW, WE ALREADY HAD RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE AREA JUST UNDER DIFFERENT ZONING CATEGORIES.

AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THE CLOSEST ONE BEING CATTY CORNER AND THEN, BUT A LOT OF THEM ARE MORE ORIENTED TOWARDS CONGRESS, BUT ALSO I THINK INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD HAS ONE OR MORE AND ALSO EAST DANA.

THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

UH, OKAY.

TWO MORE SPOTS.

UH, DO YOU HAVE COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS OR DO WE WANT TO MOVE ON TO EMOTION? I HEAR COMMISSIONER COX.

YOU HAVE MOTION.

OKAY, GO AHEAD.

IF THERE'S NO QUESTION, IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTION NOW I THINK I DON'T SEE ANYBODY RAISING THEIR HAND, SO LET'S GO TO MOVE FORWARD.

UM, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS TO THE DECEMBER 14TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND, AND, WELL, I CAN'T SPEAK TO IT YET, BUT IF I GET A SECOND, I'LL SPEAK TO WHY.

I THINK WE UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A SECOND I'M LUCKING.

UH, OKAY.

COMMISSIONER YANNIS PLAYED OFF, UH, FOR JUST A SECOND.

SO GO AND SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION.

SO, UH, GOOGLE IS YOUR FRIEND, UH, CHAPTER 25, 2 5 16 IS DEVELOPMENT IN YOUR HAZARDOUS PIPELINE NOTE THAT THAT'S CHAPTER 25 DASH TWO.

THAT IS OUR PURVIEW ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THERE'S A WHOLE LIST OF RESTRICTIONS RELATED TO WHAT CAN BE DEVELOPED NEAR A TRANSMISSION OF A HAZARDOUS LIQUID, WHICH IS DEFINED BY THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS.

BASICALLY A NATURAL GAS IS A HAZARDOUS LIQUID, AND THIS IS, UH, THE ENGINEER STATED IT WAS A 12 INCH LINE AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN CONSIDERS A HAZARDOUS PIPELINE TO BE A HAZARDOUS LIQUID WITH A, UH, INSIDE DIAMETER OF EIGHT INCHES OR MORE SO FROM WHAT I HEARD FROM STAFF WAS THAT THEY LEARNED ABOUT THIS PIPELINE A WEEK AGO.

UM, I, WHO KNOWS IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT KNEW ABOUT IT, UM, WHEN THEY DID THEIR REVIEW, I ASSUME THAT THIS WAS PROBABLY A COMMON OCCURRENCE TO HAVE THESE SORTS OF PIPELINES, BUT THERE IS A MAP YOU CAN PULL UP OF ALL THE HAZARDOUS PIPELINES IN THE CITY AND IT IS NOT A COMMON OCCURRENCE.

THERE'S ACTUALLY VERY FEW OF THEM.

AND THIS ORANGE ONE IS ONE OF THE FEW, UH, THAT ACTUALLY GO THROUGH AUSTIN.

SO I JUST THINK THIS NEEDS MORE CONSIDERATION.

I'D LIKE MORE INFORMATION.

I'D LIKE MORE INFORMATION FROM STAFF ABOUT THE REVIEW OF MULTIFAMILY NEXT THIS LINE.

AND AGAIN, I THINK WE SHOULD HONOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST FOR THEIR FIRST POST-MOMENT.

SO WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS VOTING AGAINST THIS.

WANT TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS MOTION? SPEAK IN FAVOR.

ANY, NOBODY WANTS TO SPEAK AT ALL IN FAVOR OR AGAINST OR, OKAY, WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, VOTE ON THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER YON, SPOLETO TO POSTPONE THIS CASE DECEMBER 14TH.

UM, LET ME GO AHEAD AND LET'S TAKE A VOTE.

THAT'S ON THE, DAYAS SORRY.

I DON'T MEAN TO DISRUPT OR ANYTHING.

I JUST WANTED TO ASK ONE QUESTION FROM STAFF.

KIND OF MY ONLY QUESTION IS WILL WE HAVE THAT? NO, I CAN'T ASK A QUESTION.

KNOW IT MAY BE, THERE MAY BE LEGAL DEFINITIONS, BUT I DO THINK THE NEIGHBOR, I, YOU KNOW, THEIR CONCERNS SEEM A LITTLE DIFFERENT FROM MINE.

I THINK, UM, LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

WELL, I'M JUST GONNA MAKE A COMMENT.

IT SEEMS TO ME IN ORDER FOR ME TO FEEL COMFORTABLE VOTING ON THIS, I WANT TO KNOW THAT WE CAN HAVE THESE ANSWERS BY, BY DECEMBER 14TH OR ELSE WE'RE GOING TO JUST COME BACK HERE AND HAVE THE EXACT SAME CONVERSATION ALL OVER.

AND MY INTENT WITH THIS MOTION IS, IS A SIGNAL TO THE APPLICANT AND STAFF THAT WE WANT MORE INFORMATION ON THIS BECAUSE THE ANSWERS THAT WE'RE GETTING JUST SEEM A BIT TOO SQUISHY TO ME.

AND, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S BEEN ASKING THESE QUESTIONS AND THEY'RE TELLING US THAT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN GETTING ANSWERS EITHER FROM THE APPLICANT OR THE GAS COMPANY.

AND SO I IMAGINE THEY'LL PUSH FORWARD AS WELL.

SO WE'LL HAVE THREE ENTITIES GIVING, GETTING MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS, SO THAT OBVIOUSLY THEY'LL THEY'LL WANT US TO VOTE ON THIS.

OKAY, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SPEAK IN FAVOR OF IT JUST BECAUSE WE NEED A FIRE DEPARTMENT REPS.

WE NEED MORE REPRESENTATION FROM STAFF TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.

UH, YOU KNOW, NOT SAYING NATURAL GAS IS NOT A HAZARDOUS LIQUID, OR YOU JUST THINK WE'RE, IT IS HAZARDOUS.

YOU HAVE AN EXPLOSION YOU'RE GOING TO KILL PEOPLE.

SO I

[03:25:01]

UH, YOU KNOW, I'M MORE, I THINK THEY'RE MORE INTERESTED IN WHAT I HEARD IS MOVING IT, UH, CREATES A HAZARD.

I'M WORRIED ABOUT PUTTING, YOU KNOW, MULTIFAMILY HOUSING RIGHT THERE NEXT TO IT.

UH, THAT'S MORE I CONCERN IS, AND I THINK WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND MORE ABOUT THE RISK BEFORE WE SIT THERE AND PUT AN MF SIX P UH, ZONING RIGHT THERE NEXT TO SOMETHING DANGEROUS.

SO I'D LIKE TO HAVE JUST MORE OF THE EXPERTS HERE AT THE NEXT MEETING SO WE CAN GET ANSWERS TO OUR QUESTIONS.

THANK, UH, THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD.

AND, UH, I THINK WE'RE READY TO VOTE ON THIS, THAT ON THE DAYAS, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE BEST IN FAVOR.

UH, 1, 2, 3, THAT'S A SEVEN AND THEN THOSE ON, ON THE SCREEN.

9 0 2 NANOMETERS.

THAT'LL BE POSTPONED TILL DECEMBER 14TH.

COMMISSIONER WEIGHS ON EDITOR, ANDREW RIVERA AS THAT A DATE IS MORE THAN TWO WEEKS OUT.

IF WE CAN HAVE SOMEONE MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE WERE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, TO, UH, DECEMBER 17TH, I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

A MOTION TO RECONSIDER.

LET'S MAKE A MOTION ON THE ACTION.

SO WE'RE GOING TO RECONSIDER WHAT WE JUST VOTED ON.

SO, SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND THEN YOU WANT TO MAKE A NEW MOTION TO POSTPONE OF DEM IS DECEMBER 14TH, BUT REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING W W POINT OF ORDER, I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO FORCE VOTE ON THE ESSENTIALLY RECONSIDER I WAS SENT TO YOU FIRST.

YOU NEED TO VOTE ON ESSENTIALLY RECONSIDERING OUR, UH, CLOSING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THAT CORRECT? YOU NEED TO TAKE THAT VOTE AND ONLY THEN CAN YOU MAKE YOUR SECOND MOTION FOR MR. COX? AND I SECONDED COMMISSIONER GAWKS HIS MOTION TO, UM, ESSENTIALLY RECONSIDER A VOTE AND CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

EVERYBODY CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE DOING.

SO LET'S GO ON THAT DIES.

AND, UM, THAT WAS ON THE SCREEN AND SHE HAD TO SPLIT UP.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS AND JEREMY MAKING A MOTION TO, UH, KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN, UH, FOR OUR NEXT MEETING OR FOR, FOR WHEN WE CONSIDER THIS ITEM.

DOES THAT SOUND GOOD, ANDREW? OKAY.

WE HAVE A SECOND COMMISSIONER COX SECTION SET.

SECOND SET.

MOST OF US GO AND TAKE A VOTE.

THAT'S ON THE GUYS, NOT ON US AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN.

THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

SO ARE WE LET'S SEE, HAVE WE EXHAUSTED, UH, OUR DISCUSSION CASES, HONESTLY.

SO, UM, I NEED TO TAKE JUST A SECOND TO GET, UH, JUST TO MEET THIS.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE EXTEND OUR MEETING TO 10 15.

I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COX.

LET'S GO AND VOTE ON EXTENDING TILL 10, 15.

IT'S UNANIMOUS.

UM, SO, UH, LET ME SPEAK QUICKLY ON, WE HAVE FOUR ITEMS AND I WANT TO PROPOSE THAT WE TAKE THESE TOGETHER.

UM, AND THEN I DON'T KNOW THOSE OF YOU THAT HAVE READ THE VARIOUS ITEMS, BUT IF WE TAKE THEM TOGETHER, IT LIMITS OUR QUESTIONS.

I WOULD BE WILLING, YOU KNOW, WE CAN TAKE A VOTE TO SUSPEND OUR RULES AND GET ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

UH, IF WE NEED THEM, SINCE THERE'S FOUR ITEMS, THEY ARE VERY RELATED AND, UH, WE CAN DISCUSS THOSE IN A MOMENT, BUT I JUST WANT TO, MY MOTION HERE, MY INTENTION IS TO TALK ABOUT THOSE ALL AT ONCE AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO EACH OTHER, AND THEN MAKE A MOTION.

IF WE WANT TO SPLIT THE QUESTION AT THAT POINT, WE CAN AND VOTE ON THEM INDIVIDUALLY OR THREE OF THEM AT ONCE ONE SEPARATELY.

SO THAT'S HOW I'D LIKE TO PROCEED INITIALLY IS LOOK AT IT ALL TOGETHER.

SO A LITTLE HELP FROM MANDER HERE, THIS, UM, WE DON'T, DO WE HAVE ANY STAFF HERE, UH, THAT WERE INVOLVED IN KIND OF THE, THE RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE, UH, TO THE HIGHLAND MALL FACILITY? DO WE HAVE ANYBODY AVAILABLE CHAIRED CONVENTION LIAISON, ANDREW VERA.

SO A EMAIL WAS SENT OUT TO, UM, THE INDIVIDUAL, THE STAFF INVOLVED IN THE DECISIONS MAKING AND WHO PROVIDED THE MEMORANDUM AND YOUR BACKUP.

I DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE.

BUT BEFORE PROCEEDING, ANY FURTHER, WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER, UM, MR. RON THROWER TO SPEAK ON THE CODE AMENDMENT

[03:30:01]

ITEM.

SO IF YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM MR. THORA AT THIS TIME, THANK YOU.

CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, RON THROWER.

UM, OBVIOUSLY CODE AMENDMENTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ME AND I ACTUALLY WROTE A VERY LONG DIATRIBE OF WHAT I WAS GOING TO SPEAK ABOUT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO JUST COMMENT FIRST OF ALL, ABOUT, AND I MEAN, THIS WITH RESPECT ABOUT HOW KIND OF HUMOROUS IT WAS TO HEAR THE DIALOGUE ON THAT CASE ABOUT EAST AUSTIN, THE CARDING ON THE, BECAUSE I DID THINK THAT IT BECAME OVERLY COMPLEX, BUT I THINK THAT SPEAKS TO JUST EXACTLY WHAT WE DEAL WITH EVERY DAY FOR EVERY PROJECT.

AND THAT'S THE COMPLEXITY OF THE CODE THAT WE HAVE TODAY.

IT'S BEEN AROUND 37 YEARS.

IT'S BEEN THROUGH HUNDREDS OF AMENDMENTS AND THE DISCUSSION THAT YOU ALL HAD TODAY ON THAT PARTICULAR ITEM IS WHAT I HAVE EVERY DAY IN MY OFFICE ABOUT EVERY LITTLE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IN DEALING WITH GETTING A PERMIT, THREE OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN.

AND WE DO IT IN MULTIPLE FORMS, UM, IN PERSON ON WHITEBOARDS, UH, LOOKING AT, UH, PAST PROJECTS FOR EXAMPLES, UH, TALKING TO CITY STAFF, TALKING TO MULTIPLE CITY STAFFS, GETTING MULTIPLE ANSWERS ON THE SAME QUESTION.

AND ALL I ASK RIGHT NOW IS THAT Y'ALL CONSIDER WHEN YOU'RE PUTTING A CODE AMENDMENT TOGETHER TO PUT AN INTENT STATEMENT WITH IT SO THAT THE INTENT NEVER GETS DILUTED ALONG THE WAY.

THERE ARE TOO MANY TIMES THAT WE DEAL WITH INTERPRETATIONS, REINTERPRETATIONS OF CODE ITEMS AND REINTERPRETATIONS OF REINTERPRETATIONS OF CODE ITEMS. YOU CANNOT LOOK AT A PROJECT NEXT DOOR THAT GOT APPROVED TWO WEEKS AGO AND EXPECT TO HAVE THE SAME RULES APPLY TO THE PROJECT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO EXACTLY THE SAME PROJECT, RIGHT NEXT DOOR.

IT COSTS TIME, IT COSTS MONEY AND IT JUST DELAYS PROJECTS EXCESSIVELY.

AND I ASK PLEASE, TO PUT HOUSING AS A PRIORITY IN EVERY ONE OF YOUR CODE AMENDMENTS, IT IS SO HARD TO GET HOUSING APPROVED IN AUSTIN AND THE DECISIONS THAT YOU ALL MAKE TODAY ON ANY ZONING CASE, IT'S STILL THREE YEARS OUT FOR THE, FOR THESE UNITS TO GET BUILT AND TO GET ACTUALLY OCCUPIED.

AND WE ARE LOSING PRECIOUS LAND INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, DEALING WITH THIS CODE THAT WE HAVE TODAY THAT CAN BE FIXED IF WE CAN ALL GET ON THE SAME PAGE TO FIX IT.

AND I ASK THAT Y'ALL PLEASE USE RESOURCES IN YOUR QUEST TO LOOK AT THESE CODE AMENDMENTS, BECAUSE UNLESS YOU DEAL WITH THE CODE EVERYDAY, LIKE MYSELF AND MANY OTHERS IN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CODE AND JUST KNOW THAT AS Y'ALL PUT CODE AMENDMENTS FOR IT, I'M GOING TO BE LOOKING AT IT.

I'M CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC ON THE CODE AMENDMENT THAT WAS PUT FORWARD BY A VASE.

AND I APOLOGIZE, I CANNOT REMEMBER YOUR SECOND ON THAT, BUT THAT SHOULD BE COMING TO Y'ALL.

UH, SOMETIME IN THE NEXT TWO TO FOUR WEEKS, I WOULD THINK.

AND, UH, AT THE CODES AND ORDINANCES SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, IT WAS, UH, INSIGHTFUL TO UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITIES THAT BRENT LLOYD IS GOING THROUGH, TRYING TO GET ALL THESE DEPARTMENTS TOGETHER, TRYING TO GET ONE ITEM FIXED IN THE CODE TO MAKE HOUSING SIMPLER FOR AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED PROJECTS THAT HAVE THREE TO 16 UNITS.

AND IF WE CAN, IF WE CAN DO THAT, AND IF BRENT LLOYD CAN ACTUALLY NAVIGATE THAT AND IT CAN BECOME COME LESS COMPLEX AND CAN BECOME EASIER, I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN MAKE STRIDES FOR BIGGER CHANGES TO THE CODE TO HELP THE MORE BIGGER PROBLEMS THAT WE FACE EVERY DAY.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT C1 THROUGH C4.

UM, SO REALLY QUICK, THIS ITEM WAS, UM, ONE THAT, UH, I RECOMMENDED AND I GUESS SYNCHRONOUS BY THE VICE CHAIR AND JUST QUICK SUMMARY.

[Items C1, C2, C3 & C4]

I'M JUST GONNA RE UH, REVIEW THESE QUICKLY AND THANK YOU TO MR. RIVERA FOR PUTTING TOGETHER THESE NOTES.

HE SHARED SOME OF THE CODE BACKGROUND AND KIND OF GIVES HIS TESTIFICATION DOING TO DO WHAT WE'RE DOING.

SO, UH, TO JUST GO OVER WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, FIRST OF ALL, IS WE DO EVERY YEAR, WE'RE GOING TO ESTABLISH OUR CALENDAR FOR THE NEXT YEAR AND VOTE ON IT.

UH, WE RUN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE KIND OF THE SAME ISSUES DURING THE, UH, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER THAT I THINK WE CAN ADDRESS THEM THE SAME WAY.

UH, BUT WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND PUT IN THE CALENDAR, THE LOCATION OF CITY, UH, WHERE WE'RE HERE TODAY.

I WAS IN CITY, UH, COUNCIL CHAMBERS,

[03:35:02]

OR A CITY HALL.

UM, UH, BUT THE, HE DID SHARE THE, UH, CALENDAR IN THE BACKUP, UH, FOR REFERENCE IF YOU NEED IT.

SO THAT'S C1, C2 IS, UM, WE'LL VOTE ON CHANGING OUR RULES, UM, AND HIS, UH, MR. RIVERA POINTED OUT, IT'S NOT A LEGAL DIRECTIVE, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL VOTE ON HERE AMONG, UH, THOSE PRECEDENTS TODAY.

AND, UM, WE CAN DO THAT.

UH, C3 IS A CHAIN TO THE BYLAWS, WHICH ACTUALLY WE CAN VOTE ON THAT AND THAT WOULD MOVE TO THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEES.

AND JUST SO WE ZAP AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS HAVE BOTH DONE THAT.

SO WE WOULD BE FOLLOWING SUIT.

AND THE GOAL THERE WAS TO BRING ALL THREE OF THESE, UM, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ANF, UH, COMMITTEE AT THE SAME TIME.

SO THEY COULD LOOK AT THIS HOLISTICALLY WITH ALL OF THE SOVEREIGN BOARDS.

UM, AND THEN WE HAVE C4, WHICH IS THIS ONE ACTUALLY IS, UH, IT WOULD FOLLOW THE CODE, UH, AMENDMENT PROCESS WHEREBY WE WOULD GET OUR, UH, CODE ORDINANCES GROUP INVOLVED TO KIND OF, ONCE WE HAVE SUPPORT HERE, IT WOULD MOVE TO THEM TO HASH OUT THE DETAILS OF THE LANGUAGE.

UM, BUT IT WOULD ALSO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF HAVING PUBLIC INPUT.

AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO US.

I KNOW.

UH, SO THROUGH THAT CHANGE, WE ACTUALLY, THE NEIGHBORHOODS INVOLVED AND OTHERS THAT HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHERE WE ACTUALLY MEET.

AND, UH, SO WE OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC FOR DISCUSSION.

SO IT IT'S IN OUR, UH, YOU KNOW, PLANNING COMMISSION.

WE CAN, THAT IS OUR RESPONSE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF OUR DUTIES TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE CODE.

AND SO THAT'S WITHIN OUR PURVIEW.

UM, AND IT WOULD EVENTUALLY, IF IT, UH, IT WOULD MOVE BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AFTER GOING TO THE CODE, UH, OR THIS IS JOINT COMMITTEE.

WE WOULD LOOK AT WHAT THEY PROPOSED AND THEN IT WOULD MOVE ON TO COUNCIL AFTER THAT.

AND IT WOULD ALSO AFFECT, I'M TRYING TO THINK, UH, THE, THE COMMISSIONS THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED ARE, UH, THE LAND USE COMMISSION.

SO THAT'S BOA AND CHELSEA AND ZAP.

IS THAT ANY OTHERS, ANDREW? UH, YOU HAVE, ET CETERA HERE.

I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF OTHER, IT WOULDN'T JUST BE PLANNING, COMMISSION, CHAIR COMMISSION.

IT WOULD BE ANYONE WHO, UH, UTILIZES THAT SECTION OF CODE HAS NOTIFICATION.

SO, UH, THAT'S KIND OF THE, THE, UM, THE BASKET OF, AND SO JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND, UM, THERE IS A MEMO THAT WAS INCLUDED, UH, WHERE STAFF HAVE RECOMMENDED, YOU KNOW, RELOCATING OUR MEETINGS TO THE BEAT PDC LOCATION AT HIGHLAND MALL.

AND THIS WOULD HAPPEN AROUND FEBRUARY, MARCH TIMEFRAME IS THERE, THEIR SUGGESTION IS TO HAVE US MEET THERE.

UM, THERE WERE THOSE FOR VARIOUS REASONS IN THE PUBLIC AND AMONG THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT WERE, UH, NOT HAPPY WITH THAT.

AND I'M NOT GOING TO READ THE ZAP RESOLUTION, BUT IT'S ONE, YOU HAVE SEVERAL POINTS HERE THAT, UH, IT KIND OF BRINGS JUSTIFICATION FOR THEIR CONCERNS.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF MATERIAL HERE.

UH, SO I'VE KIND OF GONE THROUGH, UH, THESE, UH, VICE-CHAIR.

DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING JUST TO, UM, THE ITEMS BEFORE WE KIND OF MOVE ON TO Q AND A? UM, THE ONLY THING TO ADD IS JUST, UH, REITERATING, UM, WHAT WE HEARD THROUGH VARIOUS COMMITTEES AND THROUGH DISCUSSIONS WITH COMMISSIONERS OF THE, THE PROBLEM WITH MOVING TO THE HIGHLAND MALL LOCATION, UM, FOR BOTH COMMISSIONERS AND THOSE WHO SERVE ON BOARDS, UM, AND, AND OTHER COMMISSIONS BESIDES PLANNING, UM, THERE'S THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HAVING TO COME TO THE, UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY AND THAT, UM, IT'S A LOT MORE DIFFICULT TO ACCESS WITH BUS AND TRANSIT.

UM, AND JUST REITERATING THAT THIS IS THE CENTRAL LOCATION, IT'S MORE EQUITABLE.

UM, AND WE JUST WANT TO CONTINUE MEETING HERE AND I, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS, WE'LL HAVE Q AND A, BUT, YOU KNOW, COMMENTARY IS DEFINITELY WELCOME.

AND IF WE WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS OF EACH OTHER, YOU KNOW, THAT'S FINE TOO.

I JUST WANT TO, UH, WE'LL START THE Q AND A NOW.

AND SO, UM, AND AGAIN, IF, BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY ITEMS, IF WE NEED TO ASK MORE QUESTIONS, WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY HERE FROM STAFF THAT MADE THIS CHANGE.

SO IT'S MOSTLY A DIALOGUE BETWEEN US HERE.

SO DOES ANYBODY WANT TO JUST START, UH, WITH THEIR CONCERNS OR KIND OF ON ANY OF THE ITEMS TO BEGIN WITH?

[03:40:03]

COMMISSIONER COX? UM, SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS TO KEEP OUR MEETINGS HERE AT CITY HALL.

AND SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO CHANGE, TO ADD IN OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE, IN OUR BYLAWS TO SPECIFY THE LOCATION OF WHERE WE HAVE MEETINGS TO CITY HALL, BUT THEN THE, THE CODE AMENDMENT, WHAT'S THE POINT OF THE CODE AMENDMENT.

IT, IT, UM, THE CODE AMENDMENT IS TO REALLY KIND OF CORNERS MORE INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC.

IT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE WOULD DO THAT WOULD KIND OF BE FULLY, UH, WHERE THERE'D BE, UM, THROUGH OTHER CHANGES TO OUR ORDINANCES AND CODES, THEY HAVE THAT PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS.

SO, UM, THAT WOULD BE THE BENEFIT.

SO, SO THE, THE, SO THE IDEA BEHIND THE CODE AMENDMENT IS JUST TO SOLICIT PUBLIC FEEDBACK ON THE CHANGE OF LOCATION.

YEAH, WELL, IT ACTUALLY WOULD EMBED IT IN THE CODE ACTUALLY MAKE IT CODE THAT WE, THESE, THESE ENTITIES MEET AT AUSTIN CITY HALL.

SO I THINK IT HAS ACTUALLY, UM, I WOULD SAY MORE JEN, JESSICA GETTING APPROVAL OF THE BYLAWS, IT'D BE PROBABLY MORE DIFFICULT TO CHANGE IN THE FUTURE.

WELL, THAT, AND THAT ACTUALLY IS EXACTLY WHY I'M ASKING THIS BECAUSE I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT ADDING THAT LEVEL OF SPECIFICITY IN SOMETHING THAT IS DIFFICULT TO CHANGE, YOU KNOW, CHANGING OUR BYLAWS AND WHATEVER ELSE IT'S CALLED.

SEEMS LIKE THAT'S A RELATIVELY SIMPLE THING TO DO.

UM, BUT I MEAN, WHAT IF THERE IS A POINT IN TIME IN THE FUTURE WHERE, BECAUSE OF SOME, I DON'T KNOW, EMERGENCY MAINTENANCE ISSUE OR A NATURAL DISASTER, OR SOME, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE MEETING CAN'T BE HELD AT AUSTIN CITY HALL IS THE CITY ABLE TO JUST CALL A DIFFERENT BUILDING, THE AUSTIN CITY HALL, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THAT BECOMES AUSTIN CITY HALL OR YOUR, SO I THINK TO YOUR POINT, YES, THE CITY HALL, IF THERE'S AN EMERGENCY AND WHEREVER THAT THE MEETING PLACES, AND I THINK THOSE DETAILS WOULD BE HAMMERED OUT BY THE JOINT COMMITTEE IF NEEDED, UH, TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES THAT YOU'RE BRINGING UP, THAT WOULD BE THEIR ROLE.

UM, SO REAL QUICK, JUST TO ANSWER YOUR, I WANT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT PROCESS, BECAUSE I THINK I HEARD A QUESTIONNAIRE AND I NEED HELP FROM MR. RIVERA BYLAWS VERSUS A CODE CHANGE.

THERE THEY'RE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT IN THE LEVEL OF, UM, PUBLIC INPUT.

SO THE BYLAWS IS ALL WE DO.

THAT'S A MUCH SIMPLER THING TO CHANGE IN THE FUTURE THAN A TIP.

IF WE DID PASS A CODE TO REQUIRE US TO MEET HERE IN THE FUTURE, THAT WANTED TO BE CHANGED, IT'S MORE DIFFICULT THAN JUST CHANGING THE BYLAWS.

IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT? CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LICENSE, NINE ADVERSE.

SO WHEN YOU CHANGE YOUR BYLAWS THAT GOES TO AUDIT AND FINANCE AND COUNCIL, WHEN YOU CHANGE, WHEN YOU CREATE A CODE AMENDMENT, IT GOES TO THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THEN TO COUNCIL.

SO THERE ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS INVOLVED IN BOTH AS FAR AS AMENDING BOTH IT'S, UM, KIND OF THE SAME PROCESS.

SO, UM, YEAH, TO UNDO SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DONE, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE CAN GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS, WHETHER IT BE A CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS OR, OR THE CLUB, NO, THAT ZAP APPROVED SOME SORT OF RESOLUTION SAYING THAT THEY WANTED TO STAY AT CITY HALL.

DID THEY DO ALL OF THIS AS WELL? THEY HAVE, UM, YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT COMMISSIONER DESIRE? UM, SO I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY HAVE APPROVED A CHANGE TO THEIR BYLAWS.

SO IT WILL BE GOING TO AUDIT AND FINANCE GESTURE REMINDER.

THEY CAN NOT INITIATE CHANGES, DO THE GOLD ONLY THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN DO THAT.

OR THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THROUGH THAT.

SO TO ADD ON THAT, AS I'M AWARE, IT LEADS FOR ZAP, NOT SURE ABOUT THE VOA, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY PURSUED A CHANGE TO THEIR RULES BECAUSE THEY FELT LIKE THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTED BY THE CITY STAFF OR THE CITY MANAGER.

UH, SO THEY DIDN'T PURSUE THAT STEP.

LIKE WE ARE PROPOSING TODAY AND I THINK IT STILL IS WORTH DOING SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, THEN ZAP DOESN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT FOR NO, THEY DO.

THEY CAN, INSTEAD OF ONLY PLANNING COMMISSION THAT'S FOR THE CODE CHANGE, THAT'S FOR C4 AND, UM, MR. RIVERA THAT, UH, THEY CAN, UH, VOTE, THEY COULD HAVE VOTED TO

[03:45:01]

ADDRESS THEIR BYLAWS.

I'M SORRY TO ADDRESS OUR RULES, CORRECT? YEAH.

THEY JUST CHOSE NOT TO, I THINK THEY DIDN'T THINK HE WAS GOING TO BENEFIT BECAUSE THEY ALREADY, THEY FELT LIKE STAFF WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE IT A REAL CHANGE.

SO I'M CONFUSED.

I WANTED, I WANTED CLARIFICATION ON THE THING YOU SAID BEFORE COMMISSIONER, MOST HOLLER ASKED HER QUESTION WAS SOME ENTITY THOUGHT THAT IT WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTED BY STAFF, SO THEY DIDN'T DO WHAT WE'RE DOING.

WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THAT WAS JUST ON THE I'M SORRY.

THAT WAS JUST ON THE, THE RULES.

IT'S JUST RULE CHANGES THEIR RULE CHANGE.

THANKS.

OKAY, SHERIFF, I CAN ADD ONE MORE THING TO THIS CONVERSATION.

I THINK I'M GOING TO SHARE A BOX.

YOU HAVE WRITTEN A REALLY GOOD POINT OF SAYING, YOU KNOW, THAT OUR GORD IS SORT OF, IT'S MORE, IT'S NOT AS NIMBLE WHERE IT'S, WE KNOW IT'S NOT EASY TO CHANGE, BUT I DO WANT TO ADD ONE MORE THING TO IT THAT, SO IF WE INITIATED THIS AS A CODE CHANGE, IT WOULD FIRST GO TO STAFF WHO WOULD DRAFT ACTUAL SORT OF RED LINE LANGUAGE, WHICH WOULD BE RUN BY THE LAW DEPARTMENT AND EVERYONE INVOLVED.

IT WOULD THEN GO TO THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW.

SO THEN WE WOULD ALL TAKE A VOTE ON IT.

AND IF WE MOVE IT, THEN IT COMES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT TAKES A VOTE ON IT.

IT THEN GOES TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL THEN REVIEWS IT AND TAKES A VOTE ON IT.

SO, UM, OKAY.

PROCEED.

THANK YOU, MR. BREATH.

OH, OKAY.

SO ALL THAT TO SAY THAT ESSENTIALLY ONE, THERE'S A LOT OF, SORT OF CHECK AS WE GO TO THAT.

THERE'S SORT OF LIKE A PROCESS TO THIS ONE.

THE OTHER PIECE OF IT IS I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS A GOOD CONCERN.

AND I THINK I'D CODES AND ORDINANCES.

WE CAN DEFINITELY CONSIDER LANGUAGE A STAFF IS BRINGING YOU TO SEE ME AT CITY HALL, GAMA, EXCEPT IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF EMERGENCY OR A CERTAIN OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT NECESSITATE US MEETING AT ANOTHER LOCATION.

BUT I HEAR YOUR CONCERN, I GUESS, ALL THAT TO SAY, HOPEFULLY WE STILL HAVE ENOUGH TIME AHEAD OF US TO RESOLVE THAT WITH STAFF AND COUNSEL'S HEALTH.

UM, THE QUESTION, CAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT WE EVER GOT, YEAH, I'M SORRY.

I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE CHAIR COHEN.

I JUST SAW THE HAND, UH, ON MY SPRAIN JERICHO AND YOU WERE NEXT.

SO I WANT TO RECOGNIZE YOU.

OH, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.

OR YOU ADMITTED, UM, IT'S VERY SOFT.

IF YOU CAN ELEVATE YOUR VOLUME OR IF STAFF CAN HELP IN ANY WAY.

WE'D HATE TO MISS.

TRY IT, TRY AGAIN.

I THINK IT'S JUST THE ANGLE ON THE MIC.

IT IS.

SO YEAH, WE CAN BARELY HEAR YOU.

I AM SO SORRY.

UM, LET'S UM, HOLD YOUR QUESTION.

I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN DO.

I THINK IF SHE CAN, SHE JUST KEEP TALKING.

CAUSE I THINK IF SHE KEEPS TALKING, IT MIGHT FEED HIM BETTER.

SAY MORE THAN A WORD.

UM, YEAH, NOT THAT I'M SMOKING FOR ONE OR IS ANYBODY ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WE CANNOT ON THE DIOCESE, AT LEAST WE CAN NOT UNDERSTAND YOU.

AND I'M, I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.

I'M NOT.

UH, CAN WE SEE EMAIL, THE COMMENT INTO, YEAH.

IF YOU COULD, UM, EMAIL YOUR COMMENTS AND IF, UH, YOU'RE, IF YOUR COULD LOG IN, SEND AN EMAIL, SOMEBODY CAN, WE CAN READ IT OFF FOR DISCUSSION.

SO LET'S GIVE YOU A FEW MINUTES MAYBE TO DO IT THAT WAY.

UH, SO, UH, QUESTIONS.

YEAH, I DID.

RIVERA, DID YOU, I THINK WE GOT AN UPDATE THAT'S COUNSEL WAS LOOKING AT THAT, UH, OR, UH, PROVED IT TO HAVE VIRTUAL CHAIR COMMISSION-WISE ON EVER HEARD THE, UM, IT'S CURRENTLY BEING REVIEWED FOR, UM, UH, FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE EVER HAD GOTTEN CLARIFICATION.

WE WERE ASKING ABOUT CLARIFICATION ON THE ABILITY FOR CITIZENS TO BE ABLE TO VIRTUALLY TESTIFY.

I THINK WE'D POSE THAT OUT TO LEGAL.

CAUSE I JUST WONDERING THE ONLY WAY I WOULD SAY, SHOULD WE CONSIDER THE OTHER WAY IN MAYBE HAVING SOME OF THE MEETINGS AT THAT IS BECAUSE THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, SUGGESTED THAT THEY HAD BETTER AVI.

AND SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ACCESSIBILITY FOR CITIZEN TESTIMONY AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THEN IF THAT'S A MECHANISM, IF PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO VIRTUALLY TESTIFY AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO FIND, THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO THE TRANSPORTATION.

I THINK WE HAD PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED THAT EXPAND CITIZEN ACCESSIBILITY VERSUS CONTRACTS IT, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE EVER GOT CLARIFICATION.

CAUSE THERE WAS LOTS OF MOVING PARTS WITH COVID ORDINANCES AND STATE CHANGES.

AND SO I BELIEVE I DID WE, UH, MR.

[03:50:01]

RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BYLAWS.

SO I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MIGHT INFLUENCE OUR DECISION A BIT IF, LIKE I SAID, IF IT'S EXPANDING VERSUS CONTRACTING THE ABILITY FOR CITIZENS TO HAVE ACCESS AND, AND JUST THE POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THE, ARE WE VOTING ON THIS? YES.

WELL WE ARE GONNA VOTE ON OR WE CAN POSTPONE, BUT YES, THE ATTENDANCE TO VOTE ON ALL OF THESE.

WELL WHAT, UH, MAYBE I, I MISUNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF THIS, BUT MY PERCEPTION IS THAT THE VOTE TONIGHT IS STARTING A PROCESS TO BASICALLY EVALUATE AND HEAR THE PUBLIC FEEDBACK.

I MEAN, WE'RE INITIATING THAT PROCESS OR ARE WE BASICALLY SAYING THIS IS IT, OH, LET ME, LET ME GO AHEAD AND REPHRASE WHAT I SAID EARLIER, IF IT, SO WHAT'S CLEAR.

SO WE HAVE TO DO C ONE IS WHAT WE DO EVERY YEAR, WHICH IS ESTABLISHING OUR CALENDAR FOR THE NEXT YEAR FISCAL YEAR.

AND WE WANT TO INCLUDE IN THERE, THE LOCATION AND, UH, MR. RIVERA THROUGH HIS RESEARCH HAS PROVIDED PRETTY PLENTY OF JUSTIFICATION ON WHY WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PUT IN THE LOCATION WHEN SCHEDULING OUR MEETINGS, SEE TWO IS A CHANGE TO OUR RULES THAT IS UP TO US, WE'LL VOTE ON IT.

IT STOPS HERE.

CITY STAFF CAN CHOOSE TO, UH, TO, UM, TO APPROVE WHAT WE VOTED ON OR THEY CAN, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN IMPLEMENT THIS CHANGE FOR THEIR MEMORANDUM.

SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW WHAT WE VOTE ON, ON CHANGING OUR RULES, THE BYLAWS, WHICH HAS BEEN, UH, ALREADY, UH, VOA AND ZAP HAVE CHANGED.

IT VOTED TO SEND A RECOMMENDATION TO THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE THAT THEIR LOOK, THEIR LOCATION FOR MEETING IS AUSTIN CITY HALL.

AND THAT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE ANF COMMITTEE AS WELL AS COUNCIL.

THAT'S ACTUALLY A CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS TO INCLUDE THE LOCATION WHERE WE, A PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD MEET.

THEY'VE BOTH DONE THAT ALREADY AND APPROVED IT AND IT'S MOVING FORWARD.

WE WOULD LIKE MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE ALSO DO THAT.

SO THEY HAVE ALL THREE OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ME TO THE COMMITTEES AT THE SAME TIME.

AND THEY LOOK AT THIS ALL AT ONCE.

SO THOSE ARE, AND THE FINAL ONE IS THE MORE ELABORATE PROCESS OF CHANGING THE CODE, WHICH WOULD AS COMMISSIONER.

AZHAR KIND OF EXPLAIN THAT PROCESS.

THAT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER WE HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGING CODES ORDINANCES, IT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT SAME PROCESS.

SO TWO QUESTIONS, UM, IT WOULD, IT NOT BE APPROPRIATE THEN TO WAIT ON THE PROCESS FOR THE BYLAWS AND THE CODE TO CHANGE OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES SO THAT THEY ALL MATCH INSTEAD OF DOING ONE NOW AND THEN HAVING A PROCESS THAT WILL LIKELY LAST MONTHS FOR THE OTHER ONES.

AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION, I GUESS IS, UM, YOU SAID RECOMMENDATION, BUT, BUT WHAT I HEARD FROM HIM, WHICH ONE, A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BYLAWS AND THE CODE.

YEAH, THE COAT.

WELL, YES.

THE CODE IS LIKE ANY OTHER CODE CHANGE? WE HAVE ONE, I BELIEVE.

UH, JUST, AND THEN FOR THE BYLAWS, THE VOTE TODAY, TONIGHT IS A RECOMMENDATION POTENTIALLY.

BUT WHAT I HEARD FROM MS. RIVERA IS THAT IT, IT GOES THROUGH SOME PROCESS AND THEN IT COMES BACK TO US WITHIN A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND THEN NO, THAT'S THE CODES AND ORDINANCES C4 ITEM WOULD GO TO.

CAN I, I'M SORRY.

LET ME SEE IF I CAN TRY TO DO JUSTICE TO THIS POINT.

SO THE FIRST ONE IS ESSENTIALLY JUST RELATED TO OUR CALENDAR.

WE CAN PUT IT IN THERE.

WE'RE NOT EVEN SURE IF IT GETS RECOGNIZED.

LIKE I'M, WE'RE NOT SURE IF STAFF HAS TO FOLLOW THAT.

SO IT'S, NON-BINDING AS FAR AS WE KNOW IN THIS MOMENT, BUT WE'RE THE LAST PEOPLE TO TAKE ACTION ON IT.

IT DOES NOT GO ANYWHERE ELSE.

WE TAKE A NONBINDING ACTION.

THAT'S C1.

C2 IS A CHANGE FOR OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE.

AGAIN, ONLY US MAKING A DECISION, BUT IT'S COMPLETELY, NON-BINDING STAFF DOES NOT HAVE TO ABIDE BY IT IF WE PUT THE LOCATION IN THERE, BUT IT'S SORT OF US GESTURING OUR INTENTION OF WHERE WE WOULD LIKE TO BE TREATED AS A CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS, GOES TO THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL AND COUNCIL TO ESSENTIALLY GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO THAT DOES HAVE, UH, MOMENTS OF, UH, YOU KNOW, COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMUNITY AND ALSO WITH OUR LEGAL STAFF AND SO ON.

AND THE LAST ONE IS A GOLD CHAIN

[03:55:01]

THAT GOES TO AN EVEN MORE ELABORATE PROCESS OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND WITH THE LEGAL CHECKS ALONG THE WAY.

BUT THE LAST TWO ARE BINDING.

THE FIRST TWO ARE ESSENTIALLY NON-BINDING.

SO THEY JUST SIGNAL INTENT, BUT PASSING THEM ALONE WHITENING, WE DO NOT GET, AND I, I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION AND THE WHOLE REASON I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS AND THEN I'LL PROMISE I'LL SHUT UP AFTER I MAKE THIS POINT IS I'M NOT COMFORTABLE VOTING TONIGHT, DECIDING WHERE ALL FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS SHOULD BE.

UM, I WOULD, I WANT MORE INFORMATION ON THAT.

I WANT IT TO GO THROUGH THESE PROCESSES AND THEN VOTE.

SO I'M OKAY.

VOTING FOR SOMETHING THAT'S NON-BINDING OR THAT STARTS THE PROCESS.

BUT IF WE'RE VOTING ON SOMETHING THAT, THAT, THAT BINDS US SOMEHOW INTO HAVING PLANNING ALL FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AT CITY HALL, NO MATTER WHAT, THEN, THEN I'LL PROBABLY ABSTAIN FOR THAT VOTE.

AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO, I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS.

I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER I'M VOTING FOR OR ABSTAINING DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS.

I'M GOING TO MAKE JUST ONE OTHER THING, TINY COMMENT.

AND THAT WOULD BE JUST THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LOCATION IS LIKELY TO MOVE WITH THE NEXT CALENDAR YEAR IN ADX.

AND IT SOUNDED LIKE I'M GOING TO FORGET THAT, BUT I THINK OUR FED MEETINGS WOULD START THERE.

THE GOAL CHANGES IN BYLAWS CHANGES.

THERE IS ACTUALLY A POSSIBILITY WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THAT TIME.

UH, PARTICULARLY THE GOLD CHAINS I WOULD CAN ALMOST SAY WITH CERTAINTY WILL NOT BE APPROVED BY THAT TIME.

IT TAKES A VERY LONG PROCESS.

UM, AND THE BYLAWS CHANGE COULD BE MOVED, BUT THAT DEPENDS IF WE'RE PUT ON THE AGENDA AS A DIAMOND OR BEST THROUGH OR NOT.

THE TIMING, AS I UNDERSTAND IS ABOUT THE TIMING THAT THEY WANT TO MOVE US TO THIS NEW FACILITY IS ABOUT THE EARLIEST THAT THE ANF COMMITTEE WOULD EVEN HEAR IT AND IT STILL WOULD HAVE TO GO TO COUNCIL.

SO, UH, BUT, UM, SH I WOULD HOPE STAFF WOULD BE TRACKING THAT KNOWING THAT ALL THREE COMMITTEES ARE ASKING ANF, UH, FOR WHAT THEY THINK AND WHEN MOVE US AND WAIT ON THAT DECISION, I WOULD THINK THEY WOULD.

SO I, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I THINK WE, UM, WELL WE CAN GET INTO THE DEBATE SO MORE, I APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CAUSE, UM, BUT THE GOAL HERE IS TO DECIDE WHAT WE WANT TO VOTE ON AND VOTE ON IT.

IF WE NEED TO POSTPONE SOME OF THESE, UH, FOR THE MAJORITY THINKS THAT'S IMPORTANT TO DELAY, WE CAN DO THAT TOO.

BUT, UH, UH, FOR ITEMS C1, WE SHOULD PROBABLY GO AHEAD AND SET OUR CALENDAR.

I THINK WE CAN DO THAT.

MY, MY ONLY QUESTION ON THE CALENDAR WHEN I LOOKED AT IT WAS THE DECEMBER 27TH DATE, JUST BECAUSE FOR A NUMBER OF PEOPLE, THERE WILL BE A HOLIDAY ON THE SUNDAY.

AND THAT MAY I JUST WONDERING IF WE'LL HAVE QUORUM, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE THAT DECEMBER 27TH MEETING? YEAH.

SO I, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

WE SHOULD PROBABLY, WE HAVE TO EXTEND TIME HERE, A MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO 10 30.

THANK OF SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COX.

UM, NOPE.

SEE ANY SCREEN FOLKS COMMISSIONERS ON THE SCREEN.

UH, OKAY.

THOSE VOTING AGAINST.

WHAT DO YOU MISS? UH, SO I THINK, UH, WE NEED TO FULFILL OUR DUTIES FOR GETTING OUR CALENDAR DONE.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE C1 FIRST.

UH, THAT SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T ANYWAY, SO LOOK, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.

BE THE 13TH AND THE 21ST.

THE MOTION CHAIR THAT WE BREW C1 WITH OUR CALENDAR, WITH THE LOCATION OF, OKAY.

SO THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS WE HAVE A FEW DATES PER COMMISSIONER, MOST TODDLERS CONCERN.

ANDREW, CAN YOU HELP ME OUT HERE? UM, ON THE CALENDAR, WHAT ARE THE DATES IN NOVEMBER? FIRST OF ALL, THERE WERE NO CONFLICTS BETWEEN HOLIDAYS BEYOND, YOU KNOW, WHAT MIGHT BE IN THE VICINITY OF THANKSGIVING, UH, AND THE WINTER HOLIDAYS.

SO I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT, UM, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER, UH, VICE, YOU WANT TO HELP US, RIGHT.

SO OUR SECOND MEETING IN NOVEMBER WOULD BE THE 22ND, WHICH IS THE TUESDAY BEFORE THANKSGIVING.

AND WHAT WE DID FOR THIS YEAR IS WE MOVED THAT TO THE WEDNESDAY BEFORE THANKSGIVING, UM, SO THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE A QUORUM, UH, ISSUE THAT WEEK.

AND WE'RE, WE'RE DOING THE SAME THING.

SO THE MEETING THAT'S CURRENTLY POSTED FOR THE 27TH OF 2022, UM, POTENTIALLY WE WOULD MOVE THAT TO, WHICH IS THE TUESDAY AFTER CHRISTMAS, THE WEDNESDAY BEFORE.

SO THE 21ST.

SO WHAT WAS THE NOVEMBER DATE? IF WE MATCH WHAT WE DID THIS YEAR, NOVEMBER DATE WOULD BE THE 16TH.

SO WE WOULD HAVE A MEETING ON THE EIGHTH AND THE 16TH AND NOVEMBER IN NOVEMBER, AND THEN DECEMBER WOULD

[04:00:01]

SO THAT KIND OF GETS US OUT OF THE, YOU KNOW, AT THE TIME AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE TAKING OFF AND TO ENSURE A QUORUM.

SO, UM, THAT WOULD BE MY PROPOSED KINDA, UH, ALTERNATIVES THAT WE COULD THROW INTO, UM, MOTION FROM A COMMISSIONER.

BIZARRE.

SO DO YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND RESTATE THAT WITH THOSE CHANGES AND SEE IF WE CAN GET A BIT EMOTIONAL? I'LL SECOND IT, OKAY.

SO THE MOTION IS TO, UM, IS A VOTE TO APPROVE OUR CALENDAR FOR, UM, CALENDAR YEAR 2022, WITH OUR REGULAR MEETING TIMES WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT NOVEMBER WE WILL MEET HAVE THE SECOND MEETING ON NOVEMBER 16TH AND IN DECEMBER, OUR SECOND MEETING THAT MONTH WILL BE ON DECEMBER 21ST.

AND DO WE NEED TO SPECIFY TIMES AT THIS POINT, MR. RIVERA? SO WE DON'T KNOW.

SO WE HAD A FOUR O'CLOCK START ON BOTH THE MEETINGS THIS YEAR ON THOSE WEDNESDAYS, UH, CHAIRED COMMISSIONING WISE ON RIVERA ONLY ON THE NOVEMBER, WEDNESDAY, YOUR DECEMBER DATE AND TIME IS CURRENTLY AT SIX O'CLOCK.

SO COMMISSIONER, UH, I MISS HER A VERY, DO WE NEED TO MAKE ANY ACCOMMODATIONS FOR TIME? LIKE WE DID? UH, THAT'S MY QUESTION.

CAN WE LEAVE IT OPEN AT OUR REGULAR TIME AT THIS POINT? OR DO WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND SET THE TIME, UH, SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF, OR AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY THE BOARD? OKAY.

SO THE TIME WILL BE FOR THESE MEETINGS WILL START AT SIX OR AS OTHERWISE NOTED BY THE BOARD.

AND THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS WE'RE GOING TO SPECIFY US, UH, CITY HALL, UH, COUNCIL CHAMBERS THAT ARE MEETING LOCATION.

QUICK, QUICK QUESTION.

UM, THE FEDERAL HOLIDAYS ARE LISTED.

DOES THE CITY RECOGNIZE ANY HOLIDAYS IN ADDITION TO THE FEDERAL HOLIDAYS AND, AND DO ANY, DO WE KNOW THAT THOSE DON'T CONFLICT WITH ANY OF THE CITY HOLIDAYS THAT MAY NOT BE FEDERAL? SO I THINK MR. RIVERA HAD LOOKED AT THAT AND I WAS INFORMED THAT OUR MEETING REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING TIMES, YOU'RE NOT CONFLICT WITH ANY OF THE CITY HOLIDAYS CHAIR COMMISSIONED LIGHTS ON THAT ROAD.

THAT IS CORRECT.

SO ARE WE CLEAR ON THE MOTION FOR A CALENDAR? YEP.

LET'S GO AHEAD.

AND, UH, THIS MOTION, UM, BY CHAIR SHAW, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER AZHAR AND THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A VOTE.

UH, THOSE ON THE SCREEN.

SO WE'VE CLEARED OUR, OUR MAIN RESPONSIBILITIES.

WE'VE DONE THAT.

UH, SO MOVING ON TO THE AHEAD COMMISSIONERS ARE, MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE FOLKS AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, I'M GOING TO MAKE EMOTION THAT WE, UM, UH, APPROVE ITEM C TWO.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE THESE INDIVIDUALLY.

I LIKE THAT APPROACH, UM, GIVEN THE CONVERSATION.

SO DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT MOTION C2 TO, UH, OKAY.

WE SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

UH, DO WE WANT TO HAVE ANY CONVERSATION OR DO, CAN WE TAKE A VOTE COMMISSIONER THAT'S ALREADY WANTS TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SURE.

OR JUST QUICKLY, I THINK JUST A REMINDER, AGAIN, THIS IS OUR RULES OF PROCEDURES, INTERNAL, THE VOTE THAT WE TAKE, TODAY'S THE FINAL VOTE, BUT IT'S A NON-BINDING VOTE, BUT SIGNALS OUR INTENT TO WANT TO MEET, CONTINUE MEETING AT PLANNING AT CITY HALL.

ANYONE SPEAKING AGAINST IN FAVOR? UM, I'M SECONDING THIS BECAUSE IT IS BROUGHT UP TO US.

I AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT PUTTING SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, IT, THAT WE'RE MEETING AT AUSTIN CITY HALL IN PERPETUITY.

I JUST KNOW THAT DURING THE CODE NEXT, WE SEVERAL TIMES MET AT OTHER BUILDINGS, UH, YOU KNOW, DOWNTOWN BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TRYING TO HAVE MORE MEETINGS AND COULD FIT AND OUR NORMAL SCHEDULED TIME AND WE HAD TO FIND ROOM SOMEWHERE.

AND SO I, I WOULD BE WANTING TO FIND BETTER LANGUAGE, UM, FOR A MORE PERMANENT SOLUTION THAT OFFERED SOME OUT FOR THAT TIME.

UM, BUT SINCE THIS IS JUST OUR RULES THAT WE COULD REVOLT ON AT ANY GIVEN TIME, THAT'S FINE.

SO ANY, UH, COMMISSIONERS WANT TO SPEAK FOR, OKAY, MR. FOX, GO AHEAD.

ARE RULES OF DEBATE THAT WE CAN SAY HOW YOU'D LIKE TO ASK YOU FOUR MORE QUESTIONS TONIGHT.

SO, UM, THIS IS THE FINAL VOTE ON THIS ITEM, BUT LIKE YOU SAID, IF CODE NEXT COMES BACK OR IF SOMETHING ELSE COMES UP AND WE NEED TO HAVE ADDITIONAL MEETINGS IN DIFFERENT SPACE, WE CAN SET THOSE MEETINGS AND THEN CHANGE.

THESE RULES

[04:05:01]

OKAY, PERFECT.

IT IS ALL WITHIN OUR CONTROL.

UH, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON C2.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

WE'VE GOT EVERYBODY HERE.

THOSE ON THE SCREEN.

THIS IS ITEM C TWO.

WE'VE CLEARED THAT ONE.

UH, IT'S UNANIMOUS.

SO I HAVE THREE C3.

I THINK IT IS EXPLAINED, UM, AND EMOTIONS ON C3 GO TO THE COMMISSIONERS ARE, UH, WOULD IT BE OKAY? CAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE FOLKS MIGHT BE OF SAME MIND ON BOTH THREE AND FOUR FOR ME TO COMBINE THREE AND FOUR, UNLESS I HEAR OTHERWISE FROM ANYONE, UH, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SAY, LET'S KEEP THEM SEPARATE, UH, JUST TO KEEP MOVING FORWARD AND TO LIMIT DEBATE ON EACH ONE ON THE MERITS OF THE ITEM.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO C3 FIRST, IF YOU DON'T MIND THAT THE MOTION FOR C3 IS A CHANGE TO OUR BYLAWS TO BE SENT FORWARD WITH ALSO A STATEMENT OF INTENT, UM, THAT THIS WOULD NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR UNMITIGATED CIRCUMSTANCES.

SECOND BITE OF THE VICE CHAIR OR FOR SPECIAL CALL MEETINGS.

GREAT.

SO LET'S STATE THAT SO I CAN WRITE THAT DOWN.

UM, SO I'M MOVING FORWARD WITH ITEMS C3 WITH, UH, ACTION REGARDING OUR BYLAWS AS PROPOSED WITH THE EXPRESSION OF INTENT THAT THIS DOES NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF A SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS, SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND UNMITIGATED CIRCUMSTANCES.

WHAT WAS THE LAST TIME SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND ELSE AND MITIGATED CIRCUMSTANCES I'M THINKING OF DISASTERS OR OTHER THINGS BEYOND OUR CONTROL.

ALL RIGHT, SARAH, VERY CLEAR ON, ON THE MOTION AND WE DID, DID WE GET A SECOND? I'M SORRY.

I'M LOSING TRACK HERE.

BY SIERRA, YOU HAD TWO SECOND.

LET'S GO.

YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? I THINK JUST AGAIN, THE IDEA HERE IS, DO SEND SOMETHING FORWARD TO COUNCIL FOR, TO CONSIDER AND UNDERSTAND WHETHER THEY THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR ZAP AND BOE AND US DO, UH, CONTINUE MEETING HERE AS WE'RE HEARING VERY LOUD AND CLEARLY FROM THE COMMUNITY.

AND WE'VE ALSO EXPRESSED AN INTENT THAT THERE MIGHT BE OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THIS MIGHT NOT APPLY AND WE HOPE THAT THAT WILL BE A PART ASSISTANCE.

GOTCHA.

ANY, UH, COMMISSIONERS WISHING TO SPEAK AGAINST? OKAY.

ANY MORE IN FAVOR, THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A VOTE.

UH, THAT'S ON THE DYES.

OH, OH, IN FAVOR.

I JUST WANTED AGAIN, TO ADD TO THAT, THAT WE'RE MISSING INFORMATION THAT WOULD HELP US MAKE A BETTER DECISION.

SO AS THAT GOES TO COUNCIL, I WANT THE INFORMATION ON VIRTUAL OPTIONS FOR PUBLIC INPUT AND TESTIMONY NOTED.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON MOTION.

WE GOT A, THOSE ON THE DAYAS.

ONLY MENTIONED THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE AT THE NEW LOCATION AND DID NOT SPEAK TO ANY ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION OR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT, WHICH FRANKLY JUST GOES AGAINST THEIR OWN CITIES, CLIMATE EQUITY GOALS, AND OTHER GOALS.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS ON C3 NOW FOR C4 DO ON TACKLE THAT ONE COMMISSIONER IS OUR, I'LL JUST MAKE A MOTION AGAIN.

SO I WORKED CONSIDERING AN INITIATE INITIATION OF AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE TITLE 25 TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE REGARDING LOCATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS, UH, WITH THE INTENT THAT THIS WOULD NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF SPECIAL MEETINGS, SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND UNMEDICATED CIRCUMSTANCES.

ALRIGHT, SO THIS IS A VOTING ON ITEM C4.

UM, DO WE HAVE A SECOND, UM, VICE-CHAIR HEMPEL OF SECONDS.

THIS YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR EMOTION? SURE.

I THINK I JUST WANT TO REALLY RECOGNIZE WHAT FOLKS ARE SAYING, MAKE SENSE.

THIS IS TRULY THE, UM, THE OPTION THAT IS MORE DIFFICULT TO GO BACK ON AND SORT OF INCLUDES A LONGER PROCESS WITH THE CLEAR IDEA THAT I THINK WE'VE HEARD SOME GOOD CONCERNS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS AS THIS COMES TO CODES AND ORDINANCES, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ALL OF THOSE OPTIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WITH OUR STAFF.

UM, AND SO THAT WHATEVER COMES BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION REFLECTS THAT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE CAN THEN FURTHER VET IT, SEND IT FORWARD TO COUNCIL, UM, THEN COUNCIL CAN VETTED.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT PROCESS ALLOWS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT CREATING ESSENTIALLY A MESS FOR OUR OWN SELVES.

NOBODY WANTS TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS MOTION REAL QUICK.

I'LL JUST SAY I'M SUPPORTING IT BECAUSE I THINK IT REALLY GIVES US TIME AND INTERACTION WITH THE RIGHT STAFF TO COME UP WITH THE RIGHT LANGUAGE AND REALLY, UM, WORK WITH THE PUBLIC IN, IN KIND OF GETTING A SOLUTION TO THIS ISSUE.

SO I, I, I WELCOME THE PHONES AND NORTONS IS A JOINT COMMITTEE WORKING ON THIS.

UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE VOTE.

UH, THERE'S ON THE DIAS, UH, THOSE, UM, THE SCREEN, UH, OKAY.

IT'S UNANIMOUS.

UH, THANK YOU.

UH, GO AHEAD.

CAN I JUST MAKE, SORRY, ONE QUICK COMMENT, WHICH I SHOULD HAVE MADE EARLIER.

I'M A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED THAT AS OUR STAFF PUT OUT THAT MEMO, IT

[04:10:01]

I'M SURPRISED THAT THAT WAS NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN THE MEMO.

JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT ON RECORD.

AND I TRULY APOLOGIZE FOR NOT GETTING TO HEAR FROM CHAIR COHEN ON THIS ISSUE.

I KNOW YOU GUYS SIT, DEBATED IT AT THE BOA AND SO, UH WE'LL HOPEFULLY, UM, AND AGAIN, IF YOU WANT TO SHARE ANYTHING WITH THE GROUP, WE'D LOVE TO HEAR ABOUT, UH, SOME OF THE COMMENTS AND CONCERNS THAT CAME OUT OF YOUR MEETING.

UH, IF YOU WANT TO SHARE THAT WITH THE COMMISSION IN AN EMAIL, IF YOU WANT TO TRY AGAIN, DO YOU HAVE, YEAH, I SWITCHED TO A DIFFERENT MICROPHONE.

DID IT HELP AT ALL? YEAH.

SO HERE'S THE ONLY ISSUE I CHOSE TONIGHT TO DIE, WHICH IS SO BEFORE I WAS JUST GOING TO OFFER SOME CLARIFICATION, ONE SECOND, ONE SECOND.

UH, IT'S 10 26.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE EXTENDED.

35.

10 35.

CAN WE GET A VOTE ON 10 35? UH, I WENT TO 3, 4, 5, 7.

THAT PASSES 10 35.

GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.

UH, CHECK ON.

SO BEFORE I WAS JUST GOING TO OFFER SOME CLARIFICATION, BUT COMMISSIONERS ARE, DID THAT VERY CLEARLY.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON.

AND THE MAIN REASON WHY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CHOSE NOT TO MAKE A CHANGE TO ITS RULES PROCEDURES IS BECAUSE IT WAS NON-BINDING AND OUR LEGAL COUNSEL SAID, NO, IF YOU WANT TO GET THIS OUT THERE, YOU NEED TO DO IT SO THAT IT GETS PUT IN FRONT OF THE FCR IN FRONT OF COUNCIL FROM, FOR ME, MY BIGGEST CONCERN, AND MOST OF MY BOARD MEMBERS WHO CAME TO ME ABOUT THIS IS THAT THE WEEK THIS WAS KIND OF SPRUNG ON THE LAND, USE COMMISSIONS WITHOUT ANY WARNING, WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC INPUT AT ALL.

IT'S JUST SO KEY.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE EVERYTHING AND WE'RE NOT JUST GOING TO MOVE IT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE IT TO A PLACE THAT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE ANY SETUP YET.

ISN'T GOING TO HAVE ANY SET UP UNTIL FEBRUARY 10 BUS LINES, YOU KNOW, WHICH MAY NOT AFFECT THE FOLKS LIKE THE APPLICANTS, BUT FOLKS WHO WANT TO COME OUT AND TALK AGAINST THESE KINDS OF ISSUES, LIKE THE KEYS.

WE JUST HEARD BEFORE THAT THE NEW BUSINESS, THAT, THAT, THAT IS THE PRIME PERFECT EXAMPLE FROM FOLKS IN MY DISTRICT WHO ARE GOING TO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO COME AND SPEAK BEFORE US.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT ABSOLUTELY SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED.

UH, I COULD THINK OF A DOZEN MORE REASONS WHERE WE'RE SOVEREIGN WARTS.

WE NOT, NOT TO TALK DOWN OR MAKE ANY ADVISORY BOARD OF PERMISSION.

FEEL LIKE THEY ARE LESS IMPORTANT THAN US, BUT WE HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC ROLE PLANNING COMMISSIONS THAT GOES STRAIGHT TO COUNCIL AND CAN AFFECT THE GROWTH OF THE CITY FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, DOESN'T EVEN GET APPEALED TO COUNCIL.

IT GOES STRAIGHT TO DISTRICT COURT.

SO WE HAVE SOME VERY UNIQUE ROLES IN OUR CITY, AND I FEEL THE WEIGHT OF THAT SHOULD BE CHECKED ALONG WITH CITY COUNCILS SO THAT THERE'S NO DIFFERENTIATE DIFFERENT VARIATION BETWEEN THE THREE OR FOUR BUCKS.

UM, AGAIN, THE LIST WAS LONG, HAD A GREAT CARRYING ON IT AND THEIR RESOLUTION, OUR RESOLUTION PUT TOGETHER.

UH, IF ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS ON IT, JUST EMAIL ME.

I CAN GIVE YOU A HUNDRED REASONS WHY THIS IS NOT THE BEST IDEA IN MY OPINION, BUT THAT, THAT, THAT'S ALL I REALLY WANTED TO SAY ABOUT IT.

AND I'M SO GLAD I HEARD FROM YOU.

SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, WITH THAT LET'S WE REALLY NEED TO GET DONE.

SO LET'S MOVE TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM.

COMMISSION-WISE ON A REAL QUICK, THE TWO MEMBERS OF THE CODE IN ORDINANCES WANT TO BE THE, UH, SPONSORS ON THE CODE AND ORDINANCES FOR THIS, UH, PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT.

EVEN THOUGH WE VOTED ON IT, CORRECT.

TO OUR AGENDA, UH, WE ARE ON THE, I THINK OUR COMMITTEE ISN'T WORKING GROUP UPDATES, NOT MISTAKEN.

SO COMMISSIONER DESIRE WITH THE SECOND BY VICE CHAIR.

[E. BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]

SO, UM, GERALD STAR WITH CODES AND ORDINANCES HERE, UM, I THINK THIS HAD ALREADY BEEN GOVERNED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMBURG, LAST NAME, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MENTION, DO MR. TORRES GARMENTS.

THEY WERE MENTIONED AT THE INITIAL SOMETHING THAT WE INITIATED IN.

I WANT TO SEE APRIL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT EARLIER THIS YEAR.

UM, ON THE SITE PLAN, REVIEW PROCESS FOR AFFORDABILITY LOCK.

THAT'S WHAT HE WAS REFERRING TO.

AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HEARD WILL BE COMING FORWARD TO US IN THE COMING MONTHS, ALONG WITH A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ITEMS. I AM SO GLAD THAT YOU GUYS FINALLY GOT TO TAKE THAT UP.

I APPRECIATE IT.

UH, SO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.

UH, DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY HERE TODAY? SAY THAT AGAIN? UH, THE CONFERENCE IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.

[04:15:01]

YES, YOU ARE.

DO YOU GOT TO, HAVE YOU MET OR ARE YOU GOING TO MEET? UH, YES, WE ARE MEETING SOMETIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

I THINK EARLY DECEMBER WE HAD TO, WE DIDN'T GET QUORUM FOR THE LAST MEETING, SO, SO WE RESCHEDULED.

WELL, HOPE TO HEAR FROM YOU GUYS.

UH, WHEN YOU DO MEET A JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE, WE'LL GO AHEAD.

AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYBODY HERE, UM, TODAY THAT CAN SPEAK TO THAT SMALLER REPLANTING JUNK COMMITTEE.

I THINK THAT WE HAD A, WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A MEETING AND THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO OVER SOME OF THE WATERFRONT OVERLAY AND THE STATESMAN PLED AND THAT DIDN'T AND DID NOT END UP TAKING PLACE.

SO I BELIEVE THAT'S BEING RESCHEDULED AND WANT TO GET THAT DONE BEFORE THAT COMES BEFORE, UM, PC.

AND, UM, MR. RIVERA THAT HAS TO GO TO THAT DRUNK COMMITTEE, CORRECT? CHECK MICHELLE WROTE YESTERDAY AS A REQUIREMENT.

ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY.

A SMALL CENTER, UH, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD, AND ANYTHING TO REPORT THERE? NO.

AND THEN, UH, MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP.

UM, YOU GUYS DID THE HEAVY LIFT OF REVIEWING THE, UM, TCM IS, DO WE NEED TO CONTINUE HAVING THIS, UM, WORKING GROUP? I THINK IT'S THAT WAS THE TASK AT HAND.

WASN'T IT? IT WAS, I THINK WE HAVE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT WE'D LIKE TO REVIEW AND MAYBE WE CAN MEET AND REPORT THAT BACK TO YOU.

BUT WE HOPE THAT AGAIN.

SO WE'LL KEEP THAT GROUP TOGETHER FOR NOW.