Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:04]

CALLED THE MEETING OF THE, UH, TUESDAY

[Call to Order]

JAN, JUNE 7TH, ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER AT 6:03 PM.

I'M GOING TO CALL ATTENDANCE, UH, COMMISSIONER OR KOSTA.

OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONER NADA.

NADIA RAMIREZ.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER BOON.

UH, I'M PRESENT COMMISSIONER DINKLER COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

YEAH.

COMMISSIONER KING HERE.

UH, COMMISSIONER CABASA HERE.

COMMISSIONER SMITH HERE.

COMMISSIONER STERN, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

I SEE HER ON THE SCREEN.

COMMISSIONER W UH, UH, WOODY? YEAH.

OKAY.

[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION]

UH, ANYONE HERE FOR CITIZENS COMMUNICATION OR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? NOT HEARING ANYTHING.

CHARTER COMMISSION LIAISON ON ANDREW RIVERA.

WE DO HAVE A CALL OR BEEN PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.

ALL RIGHT, MR. URBAN, IF YOU CAN COME UP TO THE, UH, DEGAS HERE A LITTLE, I FLIPPED THE HANDOUT.

UM, UNFORTUNATELY THEY WON'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT UP THERE, BUT IF YOU CAN LEAVE IT WITH MS. COMMISSIONER BOONE AT THE END, WE'LL DISTRIBUTE IT HERE.

YOU CAN LEAVE IT WITH COMMISSIONER BOON.

WE'LL PASS DOWN AND THERE WE GO.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS KARL URBAN.

I LIVE IN BUDA 1572 MAIN STREET.

UH, I WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION, UH, SOME ISSUES THAT CROP UP WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE CITY PLANNING AND COUNTY PLANNING ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THE ETJ.

IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE ONE, UH, GAVE YOU, YOU'LL SEE THE AREAS IN YELLOW ARE DESCRIBED AS RESIDENTIAL.

UH, UNFORTUNATELY THE ONE ON THE TOP, RIGHT, IS A HOSPITAL USE.

IF YOU LOOK DOWN BELOW THE TWO YELLOWS ON THE LEFT, YOU'LL SEE AN OUTLINE AND READ OF A PROJECT CALLED ONION CREEK INDUSTRIAL.

IF YOU LOOK AROUND ON YOUR END CREEK INDUSTRIAL, YOU'LL SEE ALL BLUE, AS WELL AS THEIRS IN THE LAND USES OFTEN THE MARGIN THEY SHOW THEIR NEIGHBORS AS INDUSTRIAL USE.

I CAN'T IMAGINE WHY THEY WOULD DO THAT.

WE'RE AN AG USE.

WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO, BUT IN ORDER TO GET INFORMATION, WE HAD TO DO A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT AN INTERESTED PARTY.

WE HAD JOIN THEM.

IF YOU LOOK ON THE SECOND PAGE IS A LIST OF PEOPLE THEY SENT AS INTERESTED PARTIES.

SOME ARE CERTAINLY REQUIRED.

YOU'LL SEE, THERE'S A FIRE DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS.

YOU'LL SEE RED CHECK MARKS.

FIRST RED CHECK.

MARK IS FOR SIERRA CLUB.

THEY'RE NOT NEXT DOOR.

THE NEXT CHECK MARK IS A BIKE AUSTIN.

THEY'RE NOT EVEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WELL, THE NEXT PAGE YOU'VE GOT AUSTIN LOST AND FOUND PETS.

HOW DO THEY QUALIFY AS INTERESTED PARTIES IN THEIR ADJOINING NEIGHBORS? DON'T IF YOU GO TO THE THIRD PAGE, THE FOURTH PAGE, I'M SORRY.

YOU'LL SEE THE INTERSECTION OF PREMIER ROAD, WHICH IS RIGHT OFF THE INTERSECTION.

NO SOUTH AUSTIN.

YOU SEE AN H THERE FOR THE 20, SOME ODD ACRES, THE HOSPITAL, WHICH WILL BE ADDRESSED LATER TONIGHT, AN ITEM FIVE, UH, THAT'S NOT ADDRESSED AS A HOSPITAL IN THERE ON PAGE ONE AND ACROSS THE STREET.

UH, THERE IS A BIT OF PROJECT IN LINE SINCE BEFORE COVID FOR 500 HOMES THAT ADJOINS INDUSTRIAL.

THOSE ARE NOT, THAT DOESN'T WORK.

THAT SHOULDN'T BE THERE.

PLUS YOU'VE GOT A HOSPITAL.

ADDITIONALLY, ONE OTHER THING THAT'S NOT REPRESENTED HERE BY THEIR MAPS.

IF YOU GO DOWN PREMIER ROAD THROUGH A PASTURE, THERE IS A FOOTPRINT FOR ALL 45 THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAD REQUIRED FROM

[00:05:01]

THE ESTANCIA DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO PURSUE THEIR DEVELOPMENT.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS THINKING, HOW DO WE FIGURE OUT WHAT A TIA IS? YOU'VE GOT A HOSPITAL, YOU'VE GOT THIS INDUSTRIAL WITH OVER 600,000 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL BUILDING.

WHEN WE FIRST GOT WIND OF THIS A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, WE THOUGHT, WELL, SURELY IT'S ONE STORY, AND IT'S GOING TO VARY SUPPORTING THE HOSPITAL WITH X-RAYS, ET CETERA.

THAT'S MY TIME.

I THINK THERE'S JUST A TREMENDOUS DISCONNECT BETWEEN COUNTY AND CITY AND THE PEOPLE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE SERVING.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND NOW GOING FORTH.

I'LL HAVE, UM, MS. RHODES READ THE, UH, ITEMS INTO THE AGENDA.

UH, READ THE AGENDA ITEMS. EXCUSE ME.

GOOD EVENING.

OKAY.

UH, GOOD EVENING.

MEMBERS OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION.

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

TURN IT DOWN.

OKAY.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UH, SO I'LL BEGIN WITH ITEM B PUBLIC HEARINGS.

NUMBER ONE, ZONING, UH, C 14 DASH 20 22 0 0 41.

ALYSSA ZONING.

THIS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL.

ITEM TWO, REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 44.

IS THESE ZIMMERMAN.

THERE IS A POSTPONEMENT REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT TO JUNE THE 21ST NUMBER THREE, REZONING C 14 20 21 0 1 93, 7400 SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE.

THIS IS OFFERED AS CONSENT.

HOWEVER, I DO NEED TO READ THE FOLLOWING INTO THE RECORD.

SO THESE, WHEN I'M READING INTO THE RECORD IS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR G R M U C O WITH AN ADDITIONAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO RESTRICT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING CLOSEST TO THE WEST PROPERTY LINE TO FOUR STORIES AND UNDER, AND NUMBER TWO, AN AMENDED CITY, AN AMENDED CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, WHICH CAN, WHICH WOULD DELETE CONDITION.

NUMBER TWO, RELATING TO A SETBACK FROM THE WEST PROPERTY LINE AND REPLACE IT WITH 125 FOOT BUILDING.

STEP BACK FROM THE WEST PROPERTY LINE AND A 65 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER LOCATED ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE FROM THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE TO THE SOUTHERN EDGE OF THE BLACKBERRY DRIVE RIGHT AWAY.

SO WITH THOSE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS, I'M OFFERING THIS ITEM FOR CONSENT ITEM BEFORE ZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 0 7 1 0 2 5 8 OLD LOCKHART ROAD.

THIS IS AN APPLICANT REQUEST FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT ITEM B FIVE, REZONING C 8 1 4 20 12 0 0 8 5 0.02 TEXAS CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, AUSTIN SOUTH CAMPUS.

THIS IS A PUD AMENDMENT AND IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL.

NUMBER SIX, ZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 1 6 23 0 1 OAK VALLEY ROAD.

THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION CASE ITEM B SEVEN, REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 48, 18 0 6 KEEL BAR LANE.

THIS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL.

ITEM B EIGHT, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE SP 20 21 0 1 78, STATE 78 C STILL WATER DOUBLE CREEK PHASE TWO.

THIS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL ITEM BA ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE S P 20 21 0 1 69 FEE CROSSROADS LOGISTICS CENTER EDITION ADDITIONS.

THIS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL.

NUMBER 10 PRELIMINARY PLAN CAJ 20 20 0 0 57 SLAUGHTER LANE, 90 ACRE TRACT A, WHICH IS A SMALL LOT SUBDIVISION.

THIS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL.

NUMBER 11, PRELIMINARY PLAN C EIGHT J 20 18 0 180 7.

PORTER TRACK PRELIMINARY PLAN.

WE HAVE A REGISTERED SPEAKER IN THIS.

THEREFORE THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

NUMBER 12 FINAL PLOT OUT OF OUR PRELIMINARY PLAN, C H J 20 18 0 180 7 0.18 PORTER TRACT FINAL PLAT.

THIS IS THE RELATED CASE AND WILL ALSO BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

[Consent Agenda]

ALL RIGHT.

UM, I THINK WE CAN ADD THE MINUTES TO THE CONSENT, UH, AGENDA, UH, UNLESS I HEAR OTHERWISE.

UM, I DO THINK WE NEED TO AMEND THE MINUTES TO SUGGEST THAT WE APPROVE THE, UM, THAT THE, UM, CODES AND ORDINANCES SUB COMMITTEE APPROVED THE SOUTH CENTRAL REGULATING PLAN WITH CONDITIONS.

SO IF THAT'S, UM, ADDED, WE CAN KEEP THAT ON CONSENT

[00:10:01]

AND READING CONSENT INTO THE, UM, AGENDA.

I HAVE, UM, THE MINUTES ITEM ONE, UH, TO THE APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO 6 21 OF ITEM THREE, ITEM FOUR, APPLICANTS, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT REQUESTS, ITEM SEVEN, ITEM EIGHT WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I WAS ASKED TO ACT, UH, AS WELL AS STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND I WAS ASKED TO READ THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION CONDITIONS INTO THE RECORD THEY ADDED.

THE PROJECT WILL USE BIOFILTRATION IN BOTH WATER QUALITY PONDS ON SITE AND TO THE POND WILL NOT OCCUR IN THE INNER HALF CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.

UM, AND THEN WE'RE MOVING TO ITEM, UH, LET'S SEE B NINE, UH, WHICH IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT B 10, WHICH IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

11 IS A DISCUSSION ITEM AND 12 IS A CONSENT ITEM.

UH, COMMISSIONER DINKLER.

I DO NEED TO GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 10, THE PRELIMINARY PLAN, A SLAUGHTER LANE, 90 ACRE TRACT, AND, UH, REVISE THE RECOMMENDATION TWO RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDED WITH CONDITIONS FOR EXHIBIT C OF THE STAFF REPORT.

CORRECT.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS BEFORE I CHAIR PEOPLE? WE TAKE A MOTION.

I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT B FIVE IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS WELL.

B FIVE IS ON THE DISCUSSION.

BE FIVE IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

B6 IS DISCUSSION BMW.

MY APOLOGIES.

UH, I HAVE IT, IT WAS READ INTO THE RECORD AS A CONSENT AGENDA FOR B FIVE.

MY APOLOGIES.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO K AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? OKAY.

ANYONE ELSE FOR A SECOND COMMISSIONER GREENBERG SECONDS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

WOO

[B6. Zoning: C14-2022-0016 - 2301 Oak Valley Rd; District 5]

LET'S PULL OUR FIRST DISCUSSION ITEM AND THAT WOULD BE, UH, ITEM SIX WOOD OAK VALLEY SUB, UH, ROAD.

COULD WE GET A BRIEF STAFF PRESENTATION ON THAT AND EVENING, UH, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? MY NAME IS WENDY ROSE WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THE ZONING AREA CONSISTS OF TWO UNPLANTED TRACKS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OLD MAN SHAQ ROAD AND, UH, OAK VALLEY ROAD.

AND IT CONTAINS ONE RESIDENT, ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON 6.09 ACRES.

IT IS OWNED INTERIM RURAL RESIDENTS SINCE ITS ANNEXATION TO THE CITY LIMITS.

THERE IS A SEGMENT OF SLAUGHTER CREEK THAT RUNS THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.

AND, UM, OLD MAN SHAKAR ROAD IS A TWO LANE COLLECTOR STREET WITH BAR DITCHES ON BOTH SIDES EXTENDS EXTENDING BETWEEN RIDDLE ROAD TO THE NORTH, WHICH IS IN THE CITY LIMITS AND EXTENDING SOUTH TO ROAD, WHICH IS TO THE SOUTH AND IS IN THE COUNTY.

UH, THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON LARGE PARCELS TO THE NORTH AND THE EAST.

THERE IS, UH, THIS IS AT THE EDGE OF THE CITY LIMITS.

SO THERE IS COUNTY LAND TO THE, TO THE SOUTH, WHICH CONTAINS A, UM, THEATER COMPANY.

AND THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON LARGE PARCELS AND A COUPLE OF TWO FAMILY RESIDENCES TO THE WEST.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING SF THREE, WHICH IS FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO BUILD A RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THIS TIME.

SFC ALLOWS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, UH, WHAT WE CALL TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE VERSUS WHICH IS A PRIMARY HOUSE PLUS AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AND, UH, DUPLEXES.

THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS CASE FOR SF THREE ZONING.

UM, AS SLAUGHTER LANE OR SLAUGHTER CREEK WILL LIMIT THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS THAT CAN BE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY.

AND ALTHOUGH THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON LARGE LOTS, THERE IS, UM, TO THE NORTH AND EAST.

THERE ARE, AS THERE IS SF THREE ZONING ACROSS OLD MANCHESTER ROAD AND ANDREW LANE TO THE WEST.

UM, SF THREE WOULD ALLOW FOR UP TO TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON EACH NEWLY CREATED LOT.

AND THIS PROPERTY MEETS THE INTENT OF THE SFC DISTRICT BECAUSE IT FRONTS ON US RESIDENTIAL STREET AND A COLLECTOR STREET, AND IS LOCATED WITHIN AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO WITH THAT, WE ARE RECOMMENDING US OF THREE.

THE APPLICANT IS HERE TONIGHT AND, UH, JASON RESIDENTS ARE AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MS. RHODES IS THE APPLICANT HERE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION?

[00:15:04]

GOOD EVENING.

I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, BUT I WANTED TO POINT OUT, UM, SOMETHING THAT MS ROAD SAID, IF I'M RICK, UH, KEEPERS, I'M SO SORRY.

UH, I'M KEEPERS, LAND PLANNING.

I'M THE APPLICANT REPRESENTING THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

UM, IT IS WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, AND I DO WANT TO POINT OUT SINCE IT IS SO CLOSE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY TO SAUDER CREEK, THERE ARE A LOT OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES.

AND SO THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE'RE REALLY ASKING FOR SINGLE FAMILY THREE INSTEAD OF TWO, UH, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE REALLY LIMITED ON WHAT THEY CAN, HOW MANY UNITS THEY CAN BUILD THERE IN GENERAL.

UM, THEY WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH PLATTING.

THEY WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH SITE PLANS.

SO ALL OF THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WILL BE ADDRESSED.

UM, BUT I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE SPEAKING FOREIGN AGAIN.

SO I WILL, UM, I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR YOU AND THEN I CAN RESPOND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

NO QUESTION AT, WE USUALLY HOLD THOSE TILL THE END, IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

UH, A PRINCIPAL SPEAKER AGAINST OR SHELL, IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PRINCIPAL SPEAKER, WE CAN TAKE YOU IN ORDER OF SIGNUP, KARA COMMISSION, LIAISON AND VERSE.

SO WE HAD MISS DUNHAM AND MR. BENEVIDEZ ABOUT SIGNUP AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER.

UM, MS. DUNHAM REGISTERED FIRST.

YES, SIR.

OKAY.

MR. BENNIS, UH, PROCEED.

UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS.

MY NAME IS CARLOS Y BENNETT IS THE FOURTH AND I AM A DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENTS WHOSE PRIMARY RESIDENCE IS TEN THREE ONE SEVEN OLD MAN CHECK ROAD, WHICH IS A PROPERTY OF BUDDING 2301 OAK VALLEY ROAD.

I'M SPEAKING TODAY BECAUSE I, AND SEVERAL OTHER NEIGHBORING HOMEOWNERS OPPOSE THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED REZONING APPLICATION.

THEY'VE SUBMITTED TO YOU ON BEHALF OF FARM WIRE, LLC, TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO SF THREE.

I BELIEVE THAT IT IS PREMATURE FOR THIS MATTER TO BE BEFORE THE COMMISSION AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.

ONE, THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT RECENTLY SENT A MAY 27TH, 2022 NOTICE TO ALL NEIGHBORS OF THIS AREA, INFORMING THEM THAT THEIR PROPERTIES MAY BE AFFECTED BY UPDATED MAPS OF AN ONGOING FIVE-YEAR EFFORT TO UPDATE THE FLOODPLAIN MAPS.

AND THEY HAVE SCHEDULED A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS THE STATUS OF THIS CONTINUING WORK AND TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR JUNE 21ST, 2022.

SECONDLY, NO TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS HAS BEEN REQUIRED IN THIS REZONING APPLICATION.

AND WHILE SUCH AN ANALYSIS IS NOT ALWAYS REQUIRED FOR A REZONING APPLICATION, I BELIEVE IT IS WARRANTED IN THIS CASE DUE TO THE SUBSTANDARD ROAD CONDITIONS OF OAK VALLEY ROAD AND THE CONGESTION OF OLD MINE CHAKA ROAD, COUPLED WITH ITS DRAINAGE EASEMENTS.

I HAVE, UH, PROVIDED MR. RIVERA WITH PHOTOS SHOWING THE OAK VALLEY ROAD, UH, OF PART OF THE OAK VALLEY ROAD WITH A NUMBER OF CARS ON IT BECAUSE THE LOCAL BAR OFTEN USES THAT ROAD FOR OVERFLOW PARKING ON THE SIDES.

AND SO, AND, AND, AND YOU'LL SEE ALL THE VEHICLES THAT ARE ON THE FIELD, PRESENTLY BEING PARKED WHEN THAT FIELD'S GONE, THE, THOSE VEHICLES WILL END UP ON THAT ROADWAY.

UM, AS THEY HAVE BEEN DOING FOR YEARS NOW, NUMBER THREE, THE SF RE UH, THREE REZONING WILL ALLOW, POTENTIALLY ALLOW FOR BETWEEN NINE TO 18.

LAUDS RESULTING IN 18 TO 28 DUPLEXES.

IN ADDITION TO THE PERMISSIVE 80 USE, WHICH BRINGS THE TOTAL CLOSER TO 36 TO 56 UNITS PUT PLAINLY SUCH DEVELOPMENT, COUPLED WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THESE ROADWAYS, WILL UNDOUBTEDLY CREATE AN ENORMOUS SAFETY HAZARD AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES MIGHT BE UNABLE TO RENDER EFFECTIVE AID IN A PROMPT MANNER DUE TO THE OVERDEVELOPMENT AND CONGESTION OF THIS AREA WITHOUT THE PROPER SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE TO DATE.

AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE APPLICANT HAS NEVER REACHED OUT TO ANY NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL HOMEOWNERS TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED REZONING, NOR HAVE THEY ATTEMPTED TO ALLEVIATE ANY NEIGHBORS CONCERNS NEITHER BEFORE, NOR AFTER I AND MY FELLOW NEIGHBORS SUBMITTED A MARCH 21ST, 2022 LETTER OF PROTEST TO MS. RHODES.

AND WE'RE FIVE, THE MAJORITY INTEREST HOLDERS OF FARM WIRE LLC, ARE OUT OF STATE INVESTORS.

AND TO DATE, NOTHING HAS INDICATED THAT EITHER OF THEM HAS A VESTED INTEREST IN THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY OR IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS SURROUNDING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

INSTEAD, IT APPEARS THAT THIS IS A CASE OF OPPORTUNITY STICK INVESTMENT, AND THAT THE SOLE CONCERN IS IN UP ZONING THE PROPERTY TO MAXIMIZE PERSONAL PROFIT, WITHOUT REGARD TO HOW IT IMPACTS THE COMMUNITY.

IN FACT, THE APPLICANT'S DRAENOR MEMORANDUM, WHICH IS THEIR ENGINEERING LAND USE

[00:20:01]

REPORT, WHICH WAS UPLOADED BY THEM AND SUBMITTED TO MS. RHODES, WHICH SHE HAS A COPY OF WAS SUBMITTED TO THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAKES IT QUITE CLEAR THAT THE INTENT OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS IS TO SELL THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

ONCE IT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY REZONED, AND TO MAXIMIZE THE NUMBER OF UNITS THEY CAN DEVELOP ON THE PROPERTY, IRONICALLY IN THEIR OWN DRAENOR MEMORANDUM, THEIR OWN ENGINEERS, STATE THAT IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, THEY WILL HAVE TO SUBMIT TO A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.

SO I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THAT THEIR ENGINEERS ASSUMED THAT THIS COMMISSION WOULD IN THEIR DISCRETION IN ITS DISCRETION REQUIRE AT MINIMUM AND IMPACT ANALYSIS.

IN ADDITION, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PHOTOS THAT I SUBMITTED TO MS. RIVERA, YOU'LL SEE GRASS GROWING THROUGH THE ROAD, YOU'LL SEE THE INCREDIBLY SHODDY CONDITION OF THE OAK VALLEY ROAD AND HOW IT REALLY ONLY SERVES AS A ONE-WAY ROAD.

I MEAN, THE TWO VEHICLES CAN NOT BE TRAVELING AGAINST EACH OTHER AT THE SAME TIME.

ONE HAS TO VEER OFF TO THE SIDE ONTO THE GRASS.

AND I DON'T SEE HOW, UNLESS YOU DO A TAKINGS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS PROPERTY, DO YOU EXPAND THAT ROADWAY? UM, WITHOUT IMPEDING, UH, THAT NEIGHBORING OWNERS ABILITY TO BUILD, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT, THE SETBACK OF 25 FEET WILL HAVE TO BE PUSHED BACK FOR THAT NEIGHBORING OWNER AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.

AND THE LAW IS QUITE CLEAR THAT THIS COMMISSION AND ALL REZONING APPLICATIONS SHOULD NOT UNDULY BURDEN NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, UNLESS THERE'S SOME GREAT NEED THAT CAN BE ARTICULATED FOR THE COMMUNITY.

I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY AND FOR LISTENING TO MY COMMENTS.

THANK YOU.

NEXT SPEAKER.

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MATTHEW FOX.

GOOD EVENING MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, AND THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR OUR THOUGHTS TODAY.

MY NAME IS MATT FOX.

I'M A DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENT AND A HOMEOWNER WHO LIVES AT 22 0 1 OAK VALLEY ROAD.

THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST OF 2, 3 0 1 VALLEY ROAD.

I'M HERE TO SPEAK TODAY BECAUSE I OPPOSE THE PROPOSED APPLICATION TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY FROM OUR .

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT THE LACK OF COMMUNICATION AND DUE DILIGENCE SHOWN BY BOTH KEEPERS, LAND PLANNING AND THE OUT-OF-STATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO US NEIGHBORS AT THE TIME OF THIS MEETING, NO ONE FROM EITHER KEEPERS OR THE OWNERS HAVE REACHED OUT TO ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS IN OUR COMMUNITY TO DISCUSS THE REZONING OR DEVELOPMENT PLANS.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A VERY STRANGE CALL I RECEIVED FROM CREEPERS TWO WEEKS AGO, IT KEEPERS EMPLOYEE CALLED ME ON MY CELL PHONE ON MAY 26TH AND ERRONEOUSLY THOUGHT.

I WAS A GENERAL CONTRACTOR WHO WAS HELPING DEVELOP THE FIELD.

AND THE EMPLOYEE ASKED IF I COULD SIGN A QUOTE-UNQUOTE REZONING PERMIT DOCUMENT THEY NEEDED SIGNED.

I HAVE ALSO SINCE LEARNED FROM NUMEROUS CITY OFFICIALS THAT A REZONING PERMIT IS NOT AN ACTUAL THING.

WHEN I ASKED THE KEEPERS REPRESENTATIVE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND CLARIFICATION SURROUNDING THE REZONING PERMIT, THEY SAID, AND I QUOTE, MAN, I HAVE NO IDEA.

KEEPER'S LACK OF COMMUNICATION TO OUR NEIGHBORS PAIRED WITH THEIR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE SURROUNDING THE REZONING PROCESS HAS GIVEN MYSELF AND MY NEIGHBORS EXTREME.

CAUSE FOR CONCERN ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS PROPERTY IN OUR CURRENTLY TIGHT-KNIT COMMUNITY, WE REQUESTED THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION.

PLEASE TAKE IN CONSIDERATION.

THE KEEPERS HAS NOT WORKED WITH OUR COMMUNITY IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM ON THIS REZONING REQUEST AND THAT WE OPPOSED THIS REQUEST IN ITS CURRENT FORM.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND HAVE A GREAT DAY.

THANK YOU, MR. FOX.

NEXT SPEAKER.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM ELENA GRABOWSKI FOLLOWED BY A LACY VAN COURT.

HI, MY NAME IS ALENA GRABOWSKI AND I'M A DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENT WHO LIVES ON A PROPERTY NEIGHBORING TO 3 0 1 OAK VALLEY ROAD.

I'M CALLING BECAUSE I OPPOSE KEEPERS, LAND PLANNING, PROPOSED APPLICATION, UM, SUBSTANTIAL, RECENT AND ONGOING DEVELOPMENT.

ALL ALONG OLD MANCHESTER ROAD HAS LED TO MORE VEHICLE BICYCLE AND FOOT TRAFFIC CHANGING.

THE ZONING CODE WOULD RESULT IN ADDED TRAFFIC TO OUR STREETS.

AND ONE ISSUE IS THAT OLD MAN CHECK IS ALREADY VERY NARROW.

THERE'S NO DIVIDING LINE BETWEEN THE LANES.

THERE ARE NO BICYCLE LANES AND NO SIDEWALKS.

FURTHERMORE DRAINAGE DITCHES RUN PARALLEL TO AND ON EITHER SIDE OF THE STREET FOR MOST OF ITS LENGTH, THERE'S NO WAY TO WIDEN IT WITHOUT TAKING LAND FROM THE OWNERS PROPERTIES.

IT'S ALREADY VERY CONGESTED BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THE CONSUMER BUSINESSES IN A NEW BAR.

THIS ROAD ALREADY GENERATES SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TRAFFIC THAN AN ORDINARY RESIDENTIAL STREET.

COUPLE THAT WITH THE FACT THAT VEHICLES OFTEN EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT OF THIS RESIDENTIAL ROAD, WHICH RECENTLY GOT SPEED BUMPS, AND IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT REZONING THE PROPERTY TO SF THREE WILL ADD TO THE CURRENT TRAFFIC CONCERNS AND FURTHER ENDANGER OUR CURRENT RESIDENTIAL HOMEOWNERS, UM, DUE TO ALL OF THESE ISSUES CURRENTLY OPPOSED THE SF THREE REZONING, UM,

[00:25:01]

AND HOPE THAT Y'ALL WILL RECONSIDER THAT PROPOSITION.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND HAVE A GREAT EVENING.

THANKS.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL HEAR FROM LACEY VAN COURT FOLLOWED BY NON-MATH DENON.

MY NAME IS LACEY VAN COURT AND I'M A DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENT WHO LIVES IN A PROPERTY NEIGHBORING 2301 OAK VALLEY ROAD.

I'M HERE BECAUSE I OPPOSE KEEPERS LAND PLANNING'S PROPOSED APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF FARMAR LLC TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO SF THREE, AS PREVIOUSLY STATED BY MY NEIGHBORS OLD MAN CHAKA AND OAK VALLEY ARE BOTH VERY NARROW ROADS.

EMERGENCY VEHICLES THAT HAVE COME INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS HAVE BLOCKED OUR STREETS AS THERE IS NO APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THEM TO PARK OR DEPLOY THEIR EQUIPMENT WHILE THEY RENDER HELP TO RESIDENTS.

THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN SERIOUS ACCIDENTS ON THESE ROADS IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, EVERY MINUTE OF AN EMERGENCY CALL FIRE OR OTHER EMERGENCY IS CRITICAL TO PRESERVE LIVES AND PROPERTY AND SF THREE REZONING WOULD ONLY SERVE TO INCREASE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES AND EXASPERATE ALL THE PRESENT SAFETY CONCERNS THAT ALREADY EXIST AND SF THREE REZONING ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TRANSLATES STEP TO POTENTIALLY 36 TO 56, NEW HOME RESIDENCES APPROVING ZONING CHANGES TO A PROPERTY WITH NO THOUGHT TO THE SAFETY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND ITS RESIDENTS IS BOTH POOR PLANNING AND DANGEROUS.

WE CALL UPON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL TO REJECT THIS APPLICANT'S REZONING REQUEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO SF THREE IN THE NAME OF SAFETY, PUBLIC HEALTH, AND COMMUNITY INTERESTS.

AND WE INSTEAD REQUEST THAT NO REZONING CLASSIFICATION BE ISSUED TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OTHER THAN TO AN SF ONE DESIGNATION AS PER THIS, THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S MUNICIPAL CODE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM NON-MATH DUNHAM FOLLOWED BY CHARLES HETTY.

HI, MY NAME IS AND I'M A RESIDENT DISTRICT FIVE ON OLD MAN CHUCK WROTE.

UM, AND I LIVED THERE SINCE 1994 AND I'M SPEAKING OUT IN PROTEST OF THE APPLICATION TO RESEWN 2301 OAK VALLEY ROAD IN AUSTIN, TEXAS.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, AT ONE DIMENSION THAT, UM, THE, THE OWNER RIGHT NOW KEEP US, HAS NOT CONTACTED ME OR ANY, UH, ANY OF THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, WHICH TO ME SPEAKS VOLUMES TO THEY INVESTED INTEREST IN THE COMMUNITY.

UM, IT LOOKS LIKE JUST ANOTHER OUT-OF-STATE INVESTOR OR LAND SPECULATOR, AND IN ALL LIKELIHOOD THEY WILL SELL THE PROPERTY ONCE RE STONED AND DUPLEXES WILL BE DEVELOPED.

UH, IT'S A FAIRLY LARGE LOT.

SO, UM, AS I HEARD THERE, YOU KNOW, UPWARDS TO 50 UNITS, WHICH THEN WOULD, YOU KNOW, BRING A HUNDRED, 250, MAYBE EVEN 200 MORE CARS DOWN OLD, MAN, CHUCK A ROAD, UM, WHICH IS A, UM, SMALL NARROW ROAD WITH NO DEMARKATION LINES, NO BIKE LANES, NO SIDEWALKS AND TRAIN IT TO TRAIN IT DITCHES ON EACH SIDE OF THE ROAD IN THE PAST, I'VE SEEN, UM, 18 WHEELERS GO DOWN THAT ROAD AND WHICH MEANS TO ONCOMING TRAFFIC HAS TO EITHER STOP OR VEER HALFWAY INTO THE DITCH IN ORDER TO GET, YOU KNOW, PAST EACH OTHER.

UM, IF DOES THIS ANY KIND OF INDICATION OF, UM, LIKE WHAT MESSING UP VILLAGE LOOKS LIKE ON BELLBROOK, WHICH IS ALSO IN THE 7, 8, 7, 4 8 CODE, UH, SIP CODE, UM, THEN DOES THIS GOING TO LOOK PRETTY, PRETTY BAD? UM, UH, OLD MANCHESTER ROAD WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR THIS AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC.

IT CARRIES AND, UH, UM, I THINK THE CITY SHOULD DO A TRAFFIC STUDY BEFORE THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, UM, TO BRING THAT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC TO THE AREA SINCE IT REALLY, UM, IS A HUGE SAFETY HAZARD.

UM, AND WHAT HAPPENS DURING THE, DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE, WHEN ALL THESE, UM, UH, DELIVERY TRUCKS, 18 WHEELERS, AND SO ON, HAVE TO GO TO THE SIDE, HOW THEY GET THERE, ARE THEY GOING TO DRIVE THROUGH OLD METRIC ROAD AND CAUSE A TRAFFIC HAZARD FOR ANYBODY ELSE WOULD DRIVE US THERE? SO, AND HOW'S THE CITY, YOU KNOW, GONNA, UM, UH, MONITOR THAT, UH, WENT AND FORCE IT, YOU KNOW, THAT THESE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, DON'T DRIVE DOWN BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, SUPPOSEDLY THERE IS NO THROUGH TRUCKS OR TRUCKS GOING, SUPPOSED TO GO THROUGH THAT STREET AT ALL.

UM, SO, UM, THE CITY HAS BEEN PUSHING HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ALL OVER TOWN.

UNFORTUNATELY IT COMES AT THE COST OF THE SURROUNDING HOMEOWNERS.

IN THIS CASE, THE SAFETY ISSUES SHOULD RAISE SOME RED FLAGS AND BE A CAUSE OF GREAT CONCERN.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO MY COMMENTS.

[00:30:01]

THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM CHARLES EDDY, THE TELECONFERENCE, MR. READY? SHE'LL SELECT STAR SIX.

PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.

HI.

HI, I'M CHARLES EDDY.

I'M A DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENT.

I LIVE ON KALE ROAD, WHICH I'M ABOUT SOLD MAN SHACK ADJACENT TO OAK VALLEY.

UM, I'M SPEAKING, UH, IN OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING OF, UM, A DOUBLE VALLEY PROPERTY.

UH, MY MAIN CONCERNS ARE SAFETY AND EXTREME CONGESTION ON OLD BAND SHACKLE ROAD.

UM, AS, AS HAS BEEN STATED, USER BASICALLY COUNTRY ROADS USE OR NAIL ROADS, THEY HAVE NO, NO POTENTIAL OF BEING WIDENED.

UM, EARLIER THIS YEAR, UH, AT CASADA, UM, UH, MANY HOMES OPENED, UH, J JUST, JUST SOUTH OF OAK VALLEY PROPERTY ON OLD MAN SHACK, UH, 66 UNIT, UM, UH, PROPERTY WITH A 378, 600 SQUARE FOOT HOMES.

UM, THERE'S CONSTANT TRAFFIC UP AND DOWN.

I ALSO WANT TO MENTION, UM, AS, AS SOMEBODY SAID THAT THE OVERFLOW PARKING FROM SAM'S TOWN POINT ON ALL ON ALREADY ENDS UP ON OAK VALLEY.

THERE ARE ALSO ALSO SIX ADDITIONAL BARS IN BETWEEN, UH, ALL WRITTEN AND OLD MAN SHAQ ON MANSHACK ITSELF.

MUSSAR INDIAN ROLLER, UH, THE HIVE, UM, AUSTIN BEER GARDEN, AND, UM, MOONTOWER OVERFILLED FROM THOSE BARS ENDS UP ON OLD MAN SHAQ AT THE PROPERTY ON OLD MAN SHACK OF LYNBROOK.

UM, IT ALL, IT, ALL OF THIS ENDS UP BEING A SAFETY ISSUE.

UM, AND FOR PEDESTRIAN, SINCE THERE WAS NO SIDEWALK, IT ENDS UP, UM, UH, YEAH, I'VE SEEN, I'VE SEEN, UH, THAT DEALER, THAT ALONG THOSE ROADS.

ANYWAY, I THANK YOU FOR TALKING FOR LETTING ME TALK.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM KAREN CARSON FOLLOWED BY AMANDA ROSE NOTED MS. AMANDA ROSE.

GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU FOR LETTING US SPEAK HERE TONIGHT.

UM, MY NAME IS AMANDA ROSE AND I AM A DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENT WHO LIVES DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM 2301 OAK VALLEY ROAD.

I'M AT 2210 OAK VALLEY ROAD.

I AM HERE BECAUSE I OPPOSE, UH, THIS REZONING REZONING.

THIS PROPERTY TO SF THREE WILL ONLY CAUSE PROBLEMS AS EVERYBODY ELSE HAS REITERATED ITS TRAFFIC ISSUES AND CONGESTION.

I'D LIKE TO PAINT A PICTURE FOR YOU BECAUSE I KNOW YOU CAN'T SEE IT IN FRONT OF YOU.

UH, I HAVE OWNED MY HOME SINCE 2012, AROUND 2011, APPROXIMATELY A YEAR BEFORE I BOUGHT MY PROPERTY.

OAK VALLEY ROAD HAD ITS FIRST STREETLIGHTS INSTALLED TWO YEARS AFTER I MOVED IN IN 2014, WE GOT OUR FIRST FIRE HYDRANTS IN.

I LIVE IN WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY A COUNTRY ROAD.

IT IS A NO OUTLET STREET WITH ONE LANE, NO SIDEWALKS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE STREETS ARE TRENCHES SO THAT IN HEAVY RAINS, THE WATER HAS SOMEWHERE TO FLOAT THROUGH.

IF I HAPPEN TO BE DRIVING ON THE ROAD AND ANOTHER CAR COMES IS COMING FROM THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.

I HAVE TO VEER OVER ONTO THE GRASS TO LET THEM GO BY.

NOW.

IMAGINE IF THIS REZONING GOES THROUGH THE LAND SELLS AND DEVELOPMENT BEGINS ON THIS PROPERTY ON A DAILY BASIS, MY NEIGHBORS AND I WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH TRYING TO MANEUVER AROUND HEAVY MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT AND OTHER VEHICLES FOR WHAT WOULD BE AT LEAST TWO YEARS, IF NOT MORE THEN ON TOP OF THAT WITH THE AMOUNT OF STRUCTURES ALLOWED WITH THE SF THREE ZONING, MY NEIGHBORS AND I WOULD BE DEALING WITH ALL OF THE MANEUVERING AROUND OTHER VEHICLES INDEFINITELY.

I CAN'T STRESS TO YOU ENOUGH, HOW OUR TINY LITTLE STREET CANNOT HANDLE THE POTENTIAL AMOUNT OF STRUCTURES AND PEOPLE THAT IT WOULD BRING.

I AM A BORN AND RAISED AUSTINITE.

I LOVE MY CITY AND I LOVE MY COMMUNITY, BUT I HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT INVESTORS, ESPECIALLY ONES THAT DON'T EVEN LIVE HERE WHO TRY AND CHANGE THINGS TO FIT THEIR OWN FINANCIAL AGENDA WHEN THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW THE LOGISTICS OF THE PROPERTY AND THE COMMUNITY ITSELF.

IN QUESTION, I CALL UPON THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REJECT THIS APPLICANT REZONING REQUEST, PLEASE.

AND I ALSO WANT TO RE UH, READ SOMETHING, UH, OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER, CARLOS DID NOT GET TO SAY, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION REJECT THIS APPLICANT'S REZONING REQUEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO SF THREE, AND THEN NAME OF SAFETY, PUBLIC HEALTH, AND COMMUNITY INTERESTS.

AND WE INSTEAD REQUEST THAT NO REZONING CLASSIFICATION BE RECOMMENDED AS TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OTHER THAN TO AN SF ONE DESIGNATION OR ALTERNATIVELY THAT THE COMMISSION AT THIS TIME RETURN THIS APPLICATION TO REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PROPERLY DISCUSS THIS PROPOSED REZONING WITH NEIGHBORING

[00:35:01]

HOMEOWNERS TO OFFER POSSIBLE CONCESSIONS THAT MAY SERVE TO ALLEVIATE CONCERNS AND THAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO ADMINISTER A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE COMMISSION'S REVIEW BEFORE ANY FURTHER CONSIDERATION AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

HAVE A GOOD NIGHT, NO.

HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL I DO APPRECIATE, UM, THE COMMUNITY COMING OUT AND SPEAKING.

UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, UM, I LIVE IN THE AREA.

I LOVE THE COMMUNITY AS WELL, AND WE ARE, WE HAVE HUGE HEARTS FOR COMMUNITIES AND MOST PEOPLE I WORK WITH DO ACTUALLY AFFORDABILITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING BECAUSE THERE'S A HUGE NEED.

THERE'S A LOT OF PROBLEMS THAT NEED TO BE MET, BUT I WILL SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC IS DEFINITELY A PROBLEM.

UM, HOUSING SHORTAGES ARE DEFINITELY A PROBLEM.

A LOT OF THE CONCERNS THEY HAVE ARE PROBLEMS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S DUE TO THIS ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY.

I THINK IT'S DUE TO QUITE A BIT OF, UM, THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.

SO I WOULD JUST SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE APPLICANT WOULD BE, OR THE OWNER WOULD BE OPEN TO DOING IT.

TIA.

I THINK THAT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A GOOD IDEA.

UM, I WOULD LOVE TO GET ALL OF THE, UM, COMMUNITIES, CONTACTS.

I DON'T HAVE THEM.

I TRY, I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH DISTRICT FIVE.

I DID ASK FOR CONTACT INFORMATION SO THAT I COULD REACH OUT, UM, AND HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH ALL OF THEM, UM, SO THAT WE COULD LISTEN.

I I'M USED TO DOING THIS.

I'M HAPPY TO, TO MEET WITH THEM AND, AND TALK THINGS THROUGH WITH THEM.

I'M VERY OPEN TO THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THOUGH, THERE'S NO WAY, UM, RESPECTFULLY TO EVEN PUT, I THINK THAT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE A HARD TIME PUTTING 15 HOUSING HOUSES ON THIS LOT BECAUSE OF ALL, UH, BECAUSE OF THE, UH, SLAUGHTER CREEK AND EVERYTHING.

SO I THINK THAT, UM, DOING ANYTHING MORE THAN THAT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT AUSTIN WOULD EVEN ALLOW CITY STAFF WOULD ALLOW.

UM, AND I DO KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF BARS AROUND THERE AS WELL.

UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT THEY USE OAK VALLEY AS A PARKING LOT, ALONG WITH THIS PROPERTY AND MAYBE OTHER PROPERTIES WITH IT, BUT IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY.

SO, UM, BUT I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL.

AND THAT'S MY REBUTTAL.

SORRY.

UM, I THINK, IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO SIGNED UP, BUT DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK? WE CAN READ YOUR POSITION IN THE RECORD, WHETHER YOU'RE PRO OR CON WELL, LET'S AT LEAST GET YOUR NAME INTO THE RECORD.

YES, I DO HAVE RAMSEY MIDWOOD.

UM, MY NAME IS RAMSEY MIDWOOD AND I SAM'S TOWN POINT AND, UH, I'M BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE IN THIS SORT OF SITUATION.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE PIECE OF LAND, UM, AND IT SITS RIGHT IN THE HEART OF, WHAT'S KIND OF BECOMING WHAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO SAY AS AN ENTERTAINMENT ZONE, BUT AS A KIND OF AN AREA OF GREAT TRAFFIC.

AND, UH, AND, UH, I SIGNED UP FOR IT BECAUSE I BROUGHT THE INVESTORS IN.

I BROUGHT THOSE TO THE TWO PEOPLE IN TO BUY IT WITH, UH, THE THOUGHT OF DOING SOMETHING WITH IT.

UH, ALTHOUGH I ALSO WAS NOT, UH, DID NOT HAVE A LOT OF, UH, COMMUNICATION WITH THE KEEPERS.

I NEVER WAS APPROACHED BY THEM AND I'M ALSO A NEIGHBOR THERE.

AND SO I DON'T THINK THAT THEY'VE HANDLED THIS SITUATION VERY WELL AT TALL.

AND, UH, I KNOW THAT THE TWO INVESTORS ARE LIVE IN DIFFERENT CITIES AND ARE HAVING A HARD TIME FIGURING OUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO AS WELL.

UM, BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S A BIZARRE SITUATION.

UH, AND I THINK THAT WHAT THIS DOES IS IT GIVES THE COMMUNITY AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS WHAT SHOULD BE DONE WITH THIS LAND THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, RESPECT TO THE INVESTMENT THAT THE INVESTORS MADE IN IT, BUT ALSO RESPECTS THE PARTICULAR PROBLEMS THAT, UH, THIS COMMUNITY IS HAVING AS FAR AS TRAFFIC AND MOBILITY AND, UH, YOU KNOW, AND ALSO HOUSING AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

UM, AND I, I WILL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR A LOT OF THOSE CARS OVER THERE.

THEY COME TO SAM'S TOWN POINT TO, TO HEAR MUSIC AND DANCE AND PARTICIPATE IN WHAT YOU KNOW IS THE THING THAT MAKES AUSTIN SPECIAL.

UM,

[00:40:02]

AND THERE SEEMS TO BE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A DEVELOPING AREA AND, AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE APPROACHED WITH SOME CAUTION, BUT ALSO, UH, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING HAS TO HAPPEN.

I MEAN, I KIND OF THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A SERIES OF TRAILS THAT WOULD KIND OF CONNECT A LOT OF THE BARS AND BUSINESSES THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, CREATE MORE OF A PEDESTRIAN TYPE OF, UH, SITUATION OVER THERE WITH BIKES AND KIND OF DIMINISH THE, THE, WHATEVER THE, THE TRAFFIC CAUSE IT IS, IT IS KIND OF WHATEVER.

IT'S JUST GETTING CRAZY.

IT'S GROWING FASTER THAN ANY OF US PROBABLY EVER SAW, SAW IT HAPPENING.

AND, UH, ANYWAY, UH, I LOVE ALL THESE NEIGHBORS OVER HERE AND, UH, AND WANT WHAT'S BEST FOR THEM, BUT I'M ALSO LIKE WHEN I GOT THESE GUYS THAT HAVE PUT THE MONEY INTO THIS PROPERTY AND THEY WANT TO, THEY WANT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET A RETURN ON THEIR INVESTMENT.

AND, UH, SO, BUT I THINK THE KEEPERS COULD HAVE, COULD HAVE DONE A LOT, A BETTER JOB IN REACHING OUT AND THANK GOD THAT THAT THING WENT OFF.

CAUSE I'M NOT ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING TO SPEAK.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE WE GO TO, UH, QUESTIONS.

I'M ASSUMING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A FEW, UM, MS. GREENBERG, UH, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG MOVES TO CLOSE THE HEARING.

DO I HAVE A SECOND, MR. SMITH SECONDS? UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

I'LL START IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON THE DAY S ALTERNATE WITH, UH, WHO, THE FOLKS THAT ARE ON THE SCREEN COMMISSIONER.

OKAY.

IT LOOKS LIKE I'M GOING TO START FROM THE RIGHT MR. GREENBERG, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? AND PLEASE NOTE, UH, TRANSPORTATION STAFF IS HERE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. BEADY.

UM, NO, I HAVE QUESTIONS AND MS. RHODES, UM, FIRST OF ALL, THE BACKUP SAYS THIS IS SF TWO TO SF THREE, AND THE SIDE AREA IS 6.09 ACRES.

IS THAT CORRECT? I'M SORRY.

THE ZONING IS ACTUALLY INTERMURAL RESIDENTS ACRES OR THREE ACRES.

IT'S A TOTAL OF TWO TRACKS THAT EIGHT TOTAL.

IT'S TWO TRACKS, A TOTAL SIX ACRES.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

AND CAN I ASK, UM, I MAYBE DON'T WANT TO SAY WHY, BUT I'M A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED TO HEAR THAT THERE WERE PHOTOGRAPHS AND A LETTER FROM DRAENOR THAT WE THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THE, OUR BACKUP.

YES, CORRECT.

IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE BACKUP.

I DID.

UM, IT WAS UPLOADED AS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT.

HOWEVER, AT THE TOP IT SAID ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE.

AND SO ALTHOUGH A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE SEEN THAT DOCUMENT.

I DID, UH, TAKE THAT.

I DID NOT ATTACH IT TO THE REPORT BECAUSE IT DOES SAY ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE IT, IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN UPLOADED FOR PUBLIC VIEWING.

OKAY.

UM, BUT THE PICTURES COULD BE UPLOADED FOR PUBLIC VIEWING.

I JUST TOOK IT AS THE, AS THE WHOLE DOCUMENT THERE AREN'T, THERE ARE PICTURES THAT ARE, LET'S SEE, I BELIEVE THE THOUGHT THERE WERE PICTURES THAT MR. BENEVIDEZ HAD ATTACHED, BUT I DON'T KNOW.

I DO NOT NECESSARILY SEE THEM HERE.

SURE.

COMMISSIONER LAYS ON HENDRA VERA.

SO IN YOUR INBOX, YOU SHOULD HAVE A LATE EMAIL FOR ME.

THAT INCLUDES THE PHOTOGRAPHS FROM MR. .

OKAY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

UM, AND I GUESS WHILE MY MICROPHONE IS ON, I WOULD SAY THAT I CAN SEE THAT THIS CASE WOULD BENEFIT FROM A POSTPONEMENT, UM, TO GIVE THE APPLICANT AND NEIGHBORS TIME TO COMMUNICATE, PERHAPS COME UP WITH CONDITIONS THAT MIGHT MAKE IT, UM, MORE PALATABLE.

I WOULD OBJECT TO A CHARACTERIZATION THAT SF THREE IS HIGH DENSITY.

UM, ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST MY POINT OF VIEW AND I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION AT THIS POINT CAUSE I'M SURE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

GOING TO THE, UM, SCREEN, IT LOOKS LIKE COMMISSIONER KING HAS THE NEXT QUESTION.

UH, CHAIR, I SAW COMMISSIONER WOODY HAD HIS HAND UP, SO HE SHOULD GO FIRST.

HE WAS, HE HAD IT UP BEFORE I DID.

SO COMMISSIONER WORDS.

THANK YOU.

[00:45:01]

NO PROBLEM.

YEAH.

UM, I DO AGREE WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER REBAR, UH, ABOUT A POSTPONEMENT.

AND I LIKE WHAT ONE OF THE DEVELOPERS DID ON A CASE THAT WAS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

I MEAN, THEY WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD EXTENSIVELY.

UH, NOT ONLY DID THEY, UH, SCALE THEIR PROJECT, THEY ALSO, UH, D YOU KNOW, PUT THINGS INTO, UH, FIX THE AREA AROUND IT.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THERE, THERE, THERE RENT, THEY REALLY TOOK TO HEART, YOU KNOW, COMING IN AND BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR.

AND THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING I LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SO I WOULD VOTE FOR A POST, YOU KNOW, A POSTPONEMENT AS WELL.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DEVELOPER WORKED WITH THESE FOLKS.

UH, YEAH, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

ALL RIGHT.

ANY QUESTIONS? I DON'T SEE ANY MORE FROM THE DAY I SAW I'LL GO TO COMMISSION.

OH, I'M SORRY.

UH, COMMISSIONER SMITH.

YEAH.

I MEAN, I KIND OF MIRRORED, WHATEVER WAS ALREADY BEEN SAID.

UH, THIS IS ONE THAT I THINK IS DESPERATE TO HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

UM, I THINK IT COULD COME OUT WITH SOME CONCEPTUAL LAND PLANS OF WHAT COULD ACTUALLY FIT ON THESE PROPERTIES AND SHOW THE NEIGHBORS WHAT YOU CAN DO AND VISIT WITH THEM.

UM, THE PROPERTY OWNERS OWN HALF THE ROADWAY.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO IMPROVE THAT HALF THE ROADWAY.

SO I THINK THEY CAN MAKE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS.

I THINK A LOT OF THINGS CAN BE DONE THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, BUT NOT HAVING MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS KIND OF A HINDRANCE.

AND I THINK THIS IS A CASE CRYING TO HAVE A CONTINUOUS FOR 30 TO 30 DAY PERIOD TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND COME BACK TO THIS.

ALL RIGHT.

I THINK I'VE GOT THIS NEXT ORDER, RIGHT? COMMISSIONER KING.

YEAH.

THANK YOU.

UM, AND I, I ALSO CONCUR WITH THE, THE CINEMA ABOUT POSTPONING, THE CASE AND ENCOURAGING THE DEVELOPMENT APP DEVELOPERS AND APPLICANTS WHO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK A 30 DAY POSTPARTUM WOULD BE GOOD BECAUSE IT'LL GIVE TIME FOR THAT MEETING WITH WATERSHED DEPARTMENT ON THE FLOOD FLOOD, PLAIN INFORMATION THAT WOULD HELP INFORM THEIR PROCESS.

SO I THINK THAT THAT'S BENEFICIAL AND, UH, THE, UH, I LOOKED IT UP AS I UNDERSTAND, AND MAYBE STAFF COULD, HENRY HELPED ME WITH THIS, UH, THE OAK VALLEY ROAD.

I LOOKED ON THE ASM P UH, AMENDMENT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.

I DIDN'T SEE OAK PROBABLY WROTE IS SHOWN TO BE NO CHANGE.

IS THAT CORRECT STAFF? YES.

UH, THIS IS CURTIS BAY WITH AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT THAT IS CORRECTLY CURRENT, I GUESS, AND P AND THE S AND P DIDN'T DUMB DO NOT INCLUDE OAK VALLEY ROAD BECAUSE IT'S A DEAD END.

IT'S NOT CONSIDERED A ROAD FOR MOBILITY PURPOSES IN THE AREA.

IT IS MORE, I DON'T WANT TO REFER TO IT AS A PRIVATE DRIVE.

IT IS MORE OF THOSE RESIDENTS ON THAT ROAD AND ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

I, I, I'M GLAD THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION.

I THINK THAT HELPS INFORM THIS PROCESS AS WELL, THAT THEY'RE GOING TO, THAT'S THE ROAD THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING FOR WHO KNOWS 10, 20 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.

MAYBE NOT 20 YEARS.

I HOPE NOT, BUT YOU KNOW THAT FOR SOME FORESEEABLE, UH, FOR THE, THE KIND OF THE LONG-TERM HERE AND, UH, THE, IN TERMS OF THE NTA, AND I KNOW STAFF IS TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER ZONING, UH, A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR THE ZONING, OR FOR TIME ZONING, LIKE IT UP, IF IT WORKED FOR THIS CASE, FOR EXAMPLE, WE WOULD BE DISCUSSING THAT.

SO I THINK, UH, COULD, COULD THIS BE THE CASE THAT WE TRY THAT OUT ON THAT WE GIVE IT AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS SO THAT IT CAN INFORM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT AND THE COMMISSION, UH, RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE WE DO NOT KNOW THE INTENSITY THAT THERE'LL BE DEVELOPED HERE.

OUR ONLY CHOICE IS TO ASSUME THE MAXIMUM INTENSITY INTO FIGURE OUT WHAT COULD BE, UH, IF IT IS THE MAXIMUM INTENSITY, IT WOULD BE OVER 500 DAILY TRIPS, AND YES, THAT WOULD TRIGGER NTA.

BUT AS THE APP, UH, APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE SAID, HEY, ONLY BE 15 TO 20 AVAILABLE HOUSING UNITS.

AND THAT WOULD BE LESS THAN 300 DAILY TRIPS AND WOULD NOT TRIGGER IT IN TA, OKAY.

I WILL SAY BEGINNING, JUNE 20TH, THE TCM WILL BE IN EFFECT.

AND THERE IS THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR A ZONING TIA, IF IT GENERATES SOME NUTS TRUCK TRIPS TO DO SO.

THANK YOU.

AND I APPRECIATE THAT INFORMATION, MR. BEATTY, AND I WONDER TOO, IS THERE, WHAT IS THE THRESHOLD FOR THAT PARTICULAR ANALYSIS? I'M LOOKING AT SOMETHING RIGHT NOW.

IT DOES LOOK LIKE IT'S 2000 DAILY TRIPS, SO IT WOULD NOT TRIGGER THAT.

OKAY.

AND, UH, AND THE, THE, UH, LET'S SEE, UH, UH, LET ME SAY, GOSH, SO YES, IN TERMS OF THE INTENSITY, I THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT THAT YOU MAKE.

UH, UH, AND, UH, MAYBE, MAYBE THIS IS FOR ANOTHER STAFF MEMBER TO, UH, HOW MANY, WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS YOU COULD GET ON AN SF THREE LOT UNDER THE CODE.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE COULD BE CONSTRAINTS OTHER CONSTRAINTS, BUT JUST IF THERE ARE NO CONSTRAINTS, HOW MANY COULD YOU GET ON AN SF THREE LOT? CAN YOU GET LIKE

[00:50:01]

A DUPLEX AND AN ADU? WELL, WENDY RHODES, AGAIN, HOUSING AND PLANNING, THE DISTRICT JUST ALLOWS FOR TWO UP TO TWO UNITS.

SO IT COULD EITHER BE A DUPLEX OR A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE WITH THE, WITH AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, BUT IT COULDN'T BE A DUPLEX PLUS, UH, AN ADU THAT'S THREE UNITS.

AND THAT KICKS YOU INTO A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CENTER.

THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.

IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING WITH SOME OF THESE CODE CHANGES IN TERMS OF THE ADU AND ALSO, BUT IF THEY WERE TO USE LIKE AFFORDABILITY ON LOCKED THAT PROGRAM, COULD THEY DOUBLE UP ON THE DENT ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS UNDER THAT PLAN? I I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND RE REVIEW AFFORDABILITY ON LOCKTON.

YEAH, NO, NO WORRIES.

I APPRECIATE I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT OUT, BUT YEAH, I THINK THE GENERAL ANSWER IS, IS YES, THEY COULD.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

I'M JUST SAYING, POINTING THAT OUT TO SAY THAT THOSE KINDS OF FACTORS DO AFFECT INTENSITY AND DENSITIES, AND THAT, THAT KIND OF INFORMATION SHOULD BE DISCUSSED IN TERMS OF, UH, YOU KNOW, PROVIDING SOME AFFORDABILITY HERE ON THIS SIDE AND, UH, AND, AND ADDITIONAL HOUSING THERE AND, AND WHERE IT FITS IN WITH THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION IN TERMS OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE TRAFFIC INFRASTRUCTURE, THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE FLOODING INFRASTRUCTURE.

I UNDERSTAND HOW IT LOOKED ON THE CITY'S MAP, UH, OF A PROBLEM VIEWER, THE WATERSHED PROTECTION, AND JUST NEARBY WITHIN LESS THAN A BLOCK AWAY, THERE ARE SEVERAL POINTS OF PROBLEMS SHOWN ON THIS PROBLEM BUREAU FOR A LOCALIZED FLOODING.

SO, SO IT IS, IT IS NEARBY.

AND AS WE PUT MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER, I WOULD EXPECT THAT THAT WOULD CONTINUE TO BE A PROBLEM AND MAYBE EVEN INCREASE.

SO I, IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE THAT WOULD WANT TO HA HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS, BUT ALSO TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN, SO THAT, UH, WE COULD OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND POSTPONE THIS FOR, TILL OUR FIRST MEETING IN JULY, UH, THAT THAT MEETING WOULD BE IT'S SCHEDULED FOR THE 5TH OF JULY, RIGHT AFTER THE 4TH OF JULY.

OKAY.

WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME FOLKS, YOU KNOW, THERE'LL BE OUT OF TOWN OR WHATEVER FOR THE 4TH OF JULY, THAT THAT'S AN ISSUE COULD, WE WOULD BE GOING TO THE SECOND MEETING IN JULY WOULD BE A BETTER.

AND THAT SECOND MEETING, IF WE DID IT SECOND MEETING IN JULY, THAT WOULD PUT US AT, UH, THE 21ST, UH, WAIT, I'M SORRY, JULY 19.

YOU AND I, THE, UH, JULY THE, YEAH, THE 19TH.

RIGHT? SO, UH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO JULY THE 19TH UP INTO PUBLIC HEARING BACK UP AND POSTPONE TO THE JULY, THE 19TH 20, 22.

CAN I ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT THE MOST? LET ME SECOND IT, SORRY.

I'LL SECOND THE MOTION, BUT THEN I JUST LIKE A QUESTION FROM THE APPLICANT, IS THAT OKAY? I'M ACTUALLY AT THE TOWN THAT LIKE, THAT'S THE ONLY TIME ALL YEAR SHE COME UP TO THE MIC.

JUST SO NO PROBLEM.

I'M ACTUALLY OUT OF TOWN THAT WEEK.

UM, I DON'T EVEN TRAVEL, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY WEEK I'M OUT OF TOWN FOR THE WHOLE, FOR THE WEEK OF THE 19TH.

YEAH.

OKAY.

UM, I'M INCLINED TO KEEP IT ON THE 19TH AND YOU CAN REQUEST AN EXTENSION THAT WOULD GIVE YOU PLENTY OF TIME TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

SO ASSOCIATES COME UP WITH SOME SCHEMATIC LAND PLANS AND COME UP WITH SOME IDEAS OF HOW WE CAN PUT SOME CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS ON THIS THAT WOULD EVERYBODY SATISFIED.

I THINK YOU CAN GET THERE.

UM, SO COULD I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST JULY 5TH IN LIEU OF MAKING SURE THAT I MEET WITH EVERYBODY? CAUSE I, I HONESTLY DID WANT TO MEET WITH EVERYBODY, BUT DIDN'T GET THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION.

SO I'VE ALREADY TALKED TO CARLOS, I'M GETTING THEIR INFORMATION, WE'LL MEET BEFORE THAT.

BUT IF I DON'T, I'LL LET WENDY KNOW.

WE CAN, I CAN COMMUNICATE THAT WE DO JULY 5TH.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

IF WE, IF THE MEETING YOU'VE DEALT TAKE PLACE OR THEY'RE NOT READY, THEY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT.

SO I HAVE, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM JANUARY 5TH.

I'M NOT THE ONE THAT MADE THE MOTION THOUGH.

SO, SO I WILL MODIFY MY, IF IT'S OKAY, I'LL MODIFY MY MOTION TO BE JUNE, JULY THE FIFTH.

AND THE, WITH THE, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS NOT REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT, THEY CAN REQUEST ANOTHER POSTPONEMENT ON JULY THE FIFTH, IF THEY ARE, IF THEY FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE THERE, HASN'T BEEN ENOUGH TIME.

UH, IF IT'S RELATING TO THE POSTPONE TIME, OH, SORRY.

I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY WITH EVERYONE, I MEAN THEIR VACATIONS HAPPENING.

I MEAN, IF THE APPLICANT'S NOT AN, UM, DOESN'T, DOESN'T DISAGREE.

WHY DON'T WE JUST POSTPONE THIS TO AUGUST THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST? I MEAN, I'M AN ATTORNEY, I'VE GOT TONS OF TRIALS ALL OF THIS MONTH, NEXT MONTH.

I MEAN, 30 DAYS IS A LONG TIME.

AND AGAIN, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK FOR IT, A CONTINUOUS ON THE JULY 5TH HOUR, I WOULD STICK WITH JULY 5TH AND SAY, LET'S TRY TO GET EVERYTHING IN MY CONCERN IS IF YOU MOVE IT TO AUGUST, NOTHING'S GOING TO HAPPEN FOR THE NEXT 45 DAYS.

AND JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, IN THE BACKUP, IT INDICATES THAT THIS IS SCHEDULED FOR COUNCIL ON THE 28TH.

SO

[00:55:01]

YEAH.

COUNCIL CAN POSTPONE IT TOO.

SO, UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER KIELBASA HAD HER HAND RAISED, UH, NEXT, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT ISN'T JULY 4TH, THE, UH, MONDAY.

YEAH, IT'S A MONDAY.

THAT'S A LONG WEEKEND.

I KNOW HISTORICALLY THAT SOMETIMES WE HAVE, WE HAVE BEEN IN THIS SITUATION BEFORE AND THAT WE HAVE HAD A PROBLEM WITH QUORUM AND IT'S BEEN JUST LIKE SIX OR SEVEN PEOPLE ON JULY 5TH, UM, INCLUDING ME SOMETIMES MOST OF THE TIME.

SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT THAT IT CAN BE, AND IT HAS BEEN A PROBLEM IS GOING TO HAVE TO APPOINT THIS IT'S IT COULD BE A CONSENT ONLY AGENDA ON THE FIFTH, WHICH CASE THIS WOULD BE PUT BACK.

I MEAN, IT'S, I THINK TRYING TO STICK WITH THE FIFTH, THAT WAY THEY'RE FORCED TO, THAT'S NOT FORCED, THEY'RE ENCOURAGED TO GET TOGETHER SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

OKAY.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HAS A QUESTION OR COMMENT.

WELL, I, I, I'M JUST QUESTIONING THE, I UNDERSTAND THE PERSPECTIVE AND I THINK WE'VE HEARD BOTH THE PROPONENTS AND OPPONENTS SAY THAT THESE DATES DON'T WORK FOR THEM.

SO I, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO OFFER THE AUGUST DATE.

IF FOLKS ARE SAYING THAT, THAT THEY CAN'T GET IT TOGETHER AND THAT KIND OF TIMEFRAME.

SO I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW, UNDERSTAND THE LOGIC OF SCHEDULING SOMETHING WE KNOW IS NOT WORKING FOR ANY OF THE PARTIES AT THIS POINT.

SO I, I GUESS I WOULD OFFER AN ALTERNATIVE AND SUGGEST WE POSTPONED TO THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.

YOU'RE GOING TO SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

SURE.

I'LL OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO POSTPONE TO THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.

IS THERE A SECOND? I WILL.

SECOND IT.

AND, AND, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON WAS, DID THAT INCLUDE, UH, REOPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING, REOPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

THANK YOU ALL.

SECOND.

THAT MOTION.

THANKS FOR THE COACHING.

EVERYONE'S YEAH, NO PROBLEM.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

EXCUSE ME.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.

YOU CAN TELL THE CAFFEINE, UM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

COULD DO TWO SEPARATE VOTES FIRST.

UM, DO THE POSTPONEMENT OF THE CASE TO AUGUST 2ND AND THEN SHOULD THAT PASS, UM, RECONSIDER, UH, CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND POSTPONED THE PUBLIC HEARING TO AUGUST 2ND.

YEAH.

I, SINCE WE WERE UNANIMOUS ON CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE HAD SOMEONE THAT COULD FROM THE OPPOSING SIDE MOVE TO, TO RECONSIDER THE HEARING, BUT I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO IT BOTH WAYS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING, THE HEARING TILL AUGUST 2ND, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, THAT PASSES ON 6, 2 7, 6 2 MUST BE FIVE, FIVE, OR IT PASSES.

YEAH, I'LL WRITE THE CHAIR.

COULD YOU HELP ME WITH THE VOTE FOR, FOR THIS? I CAN'T SEE EVERYBODY HERE.

OKAY.

I UNDERSTOOD VOTING FOR WERE KILLED BOSSA, UH, THOMPSON, CLER, GREENBURG.

AND, UH, WHO ELSE WAS THERE? KING KING.

WOODY.

WOODY.

OKAY.

SO VOTES FOR IT.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER BOONE.

SO IT PASSES, UH, 7 2, 1, 1.

OKAY.

AND WE, WELL, I THINK I KNOW WHO THE ONE IS.

OKAY.

THERE'S NINE OF US HERE.

THIS ONE'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING OTHER THAN THAT.

UH, WHO AM I MISSING YOU? I VOTED FOR, SO, YEAH.

OKAY.

MR. KOSTA JUST JOINED.

DO YOU WANT TO, OR NOT? I'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME AND I'M THE OPPOSITION.

OKAY.

AND YOUR SO IT'S SEVEN TWO.

OKAY.

I THINK WE'VE GOT IT.

OKAY.

UM, MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK IN AUGUST AND HAVE ANOTHER CONTINUOUS ANOTHER 30 DAYS.

SO I'D REALLY LIKE TO COME BACK IN AUGUST WITH EVERYBODY ON BOARD, ON BOARD SAYING, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT.

I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK IN AUGUST AND SAY, LET'S MOVE INTO SEPTEMBER.

I MEAN, WE GOT TO KEEP THINGS MOVING.

RIGHT.

AND I SHARE YOUR CONCERN.

THE REASON I'M SUPPORTING IT IS I WILL BE OUT BOTH MEETINGS IN JULY IN SCOTLAND.

AND THERE'S NO WAY IN HECK, YOU'RE GOING TO GET ME BACK HERE.

OKAY.

UM, I THINK THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE, THE, UH, TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING OR THIS CASE.

YES.

ON AUGUST 2ND.

WHAT IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION ON SECOND.

ALL RIGHT.

COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF OPENING

[01:00:01]

QUESTION, MS. THOMPSON, MS. GREENBERG QUESTION.

I THINK THAT IS UNNECESSARY BECAUSE BY STATE LAW, IF WE HAVE SOMETHING TO, UM, DISCUSS, WE HAVE TO ALLOW SPEAKERS, BUT WE CAN UNCLOSED THE PUBLIC YEAR OR REOPEN THE PUBLIC.

I MEAN, WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SEVEN AISLE.

I DON'T THINK IT'S .

I DON'T THINK IT HURTS ANY RIGHT.

NOTED, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING, THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

AND I THINK YOUR CHAIR, IT WAS REOPENING, REOPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I THINK I I'M GOING TO JUST LET ONE OF Y'ALL DO THIS.

OKAY.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

AND WHAT

[Items B11 & B12]

IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE MOVING FORWARD TO ITEM.

WAS IT 11? OKAY.

I'M SHOWING WE HAVE A SPEAKER ON.

YEAH, LET'S DO 11 AND 12 TOGETHER.

WELL, WE PASSED 12 ON CONSENT, SO, OKAY.

I'M REALLY MESSING UP HERE.

ALL RIGHT.

DISCUSSION ON 11 AND 12.

THANKS FOR THE HELP.

Y'ALL CAN WE GET A STAFF PRESENTATION? WELCOME.

GOOD EVENING.

I'M PAUL SCOGGINS, TRAVIS COUNTY TNR.

UM, THE PROPOSE A PLAN IS TO DO 73 LOTS ON 15.6 11 ACRES.

UM, THE PROPERTY FRONTS ON BOB JOHNSON ROAD AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TWO MILE ETJ, UM, OF THE 73 LOTS 69 WILL BE RESIDENTIAL FOUR WILL BE OPEN SPACE AND THEY ARE ALSO PROPOSING TWENTY ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY NINE LINEAR FEET OF, UH, STREETS.

UH, WATER AND WASTEWATER WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN.

STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS PLAN AND WE FEEL THAT IT MEETS TITLE 30 REGULATIONS.

UM, AND ALSO WE HAVE TWO REPRESENTATIVES OF THE APPLICANT HERE ALONG WITH THEIR ENGINEER, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR THEM.

OKAY.

DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO MAKE A PRESENTATION OR JUST LIMITED TO QUESTIONS AND PLEASE BE SURE TO STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

GOOD EVENING.

COMMISSIONERS STEVE WALKUP WITH THE APPLICANT AND ALSO IN COMMUNITY BUILDERS.

UM, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT, UH, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON, UH, WITH TRAVIS COUNTY AND A CITY OF AUSTIN FOR SOME TIME, UH, FEEL CONFIDENT THAT IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.

UM, LIKE MR. SCOGGIN SAID WITH TITLE 30, WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, UM, THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU.

I CAN SHARE WHEN I HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION, IT'S ON A SCAR SEGA FOLLOWED BY WILLIAM RODRIGUEZ.

HELLO, GOOD EVENING.

UM, MY NAME IS ANNA AND I LIVE AT 1709 WARD'S PLACE.

UH, THIS, MY HOME BACKS UP TO THE PROPERTY THAT IS BEING DEVELOPED.

MY BIGGEST CONCERN HERE IS THE ENTRANCE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE ONLY HAVE ONE MAIN ENTRANCE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNED FOR ABOUT 200 HOMES THAT, THAT GREW TO ANOTHER 170 HOMES, UH, INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND, UM, ADDING ANOTHER 69 RESIDENTS IS GONNA PUT US AT WELL OVER 500 HOMES THERE, AND A LOT OF TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, WE ALREADY HAVE ISSUES WITH PEOPLE SPEEDING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, RUNNING THE STOP STOP SIGNS, AND THERE'S JUST ONE