* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [00:00:03]
          JUNE 14TH, 2022 
          [Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
MEETING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          WE HAVE A QUORUM AND GOING TO GO AND BRING THIS MEETING TO ORDER. 
          UM, WE'LL DO A QUICK ROLL CALL AND THEN WE'LL START OUT WITH THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM. 
          UM, I'LL JUST START WITH THOSE ON THE DIOCESE, UH, TO MY LEFT. 
          UH, I'LL JUST SAY YOUR NAME, JUST SAY PRESENT, UH, STARTING WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON PRESIDENT AND, UH, VICE CHAIR. 
          HEMPEL HERE AND WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER SHEA PRESENT AND I FORGOT THIS IS YOUR CHAIR, TODD SHAW, AND ALSO ON THE DIET. 
          SO WE HAVE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, CHAIR, JESSICA COHEN, AND THEN I'M GOING TO GO OVER TO THE SCREEN HERE AND, UM, JUST THE WAY I SEE YOU GUYS, I'LL GO IN THAT ORDER. 
          UH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS OUR COMMISSIONER YONIS, PALITO, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, EAR, UH, COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER HERE. 
          UH, WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER PRACTICES, UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES, AND CURRENTLY THOSE ARE ALL THE MEMBERS THAT I SEE ON THE SCREEN. 
          SO, UH, WE DO HAVE QUORUM, SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND, UH, WE WILL START WITH, I BELIEVE WE HAVE, UM, UH, ON PUBLIC, UH, COMMUNICATION. 
          [PUBLIC COMMUNICATION]
WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER SURE. 
          COMMISSION LIAISON, AND VERY, THAT IS CORRECT. 
          WE HAVE MR. SOTO, UH, PRESENT TO PROVIDE, UH, REMARKS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND OH, HOW MANY MINUTES? THREE MINUTES. 
          THREE MINUTES. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. 
          MY NAME'S CARLOS SOTO, I'M RESEARCH ANALYST AT COMMUNITY ADVANCEMENT NETWORK. 
          AND I'M GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR ORGANIZATION TODAY CAN, IS A PARTNERSHIP OF GOVERNMENTAL NONPROFIT, PRIVATE AND FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS, WHICH LEVERAGE MUTUAL RESOURCES TO COLLECTIVELY IMPROVE SOCIAL HEALTH, EDUCATIONAL AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          WE HAVE PARTNERS FROM A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT AREAS, INCLUDING GOVERNMENT. 
          THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND PFLUGERVILLE ARE PARTNERS. 
          AND TRAVIS COUNTY IS, UH, ANOTHER PARTNER WE HAVE, UH, CAP METRO IS A PARTNER AND SEVERAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND TOGETHER OVER THE PAST 25 YEARS, UM, WE'VE PROMOTED AND SUPPORTED THE POWER OF COLLABORATION BY IDENTIFYING OPPORTUNITIES TO COORDINATE AND ALIGN SERVICES AMONG OUR PARTNERS TO SUPPORT EFFORTS, TO ADDRESS COMMUNITY CHALLENGES THROUGH COLLECTIVE ACTION, CREATING CIVIC INFRASTRUCTURE FOR CIVIC DIALOGUE AND CIVIC ACTION, AND A VARIETY OF OTHER WAYS, UM, TO SUPPORT COLLABORATIVE ACTION AND EXPAND EQUITY AND OPPORTUNITY. 
          WE'VE DEVELOPED TOOLS THAT INFORM INCLUDING THE CANNED COMMUNITY DASHBOARD, WHICH INCLUDES 18 DIFFERENT INDICATORS, INCLUDING HOUSING COST BURDEN. 
          AND I BELIEVE, UH, VEZ ACTUALLY SERVED ON OUR DASHBOARD STEERING COMMITTEE FOR AWHILE. 
          UM, WE'VE ALSO DEVELOPED THE RACE EQUITY ACTION FRAMEWORK TO ASSESS LOCAL NEEDS AND IDENTIFY WHERE MORE ATTENTION IS NEEDED. 
          AND WE ARE CURRENTLY, UM, ORGANIZING RACE EQUITY PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE. 
          UM, IT'S A SERIES OF FOUR WORKSHOPS WHERE PEOPLE WHO HAVE PARTICIPATED IN, UH, TRAININGS LIKE BEYOND DIVERSITY OR UNDOING RACISM CAN LEARN WAYS TO APPLY THOSE PRINCIPLES IN THEIR DAILY LIFE AND IN THEIR WORK. 
          WE'VE ALSO CREATED OPPORTUNITIES TO ENGAGE. 
          UM, AND WE LAND, WE LAUNCHED THE WEEKEND ATX AS PART OF A COVID-19 RESPONSE TO GET CRITICAL INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC DURING TIMES OF CRISIS AND MULTIPLE LANGUAGES, AS WELL AS TO HELP ENSURE, ENGAGE AND CRISIS RESPONSE. 
          UM, WE ALSO HAVE OUR PODCAST, WHICH IS WEEKLY AND IT'S SHORT, AND IT FILLS YOU IN ON THE DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES THAT ARE TAKING PLACE AT HIGHLIGHTS OPPORTUNITIES TO GET ENGAGED ON EFFORTS AIMED AT ADVANCING EQUITY OPPORTUNITY AND COMMUNITY WELLBEING. 
          AND, UH, WE ALSO MAKE STRATEGIC CONNECTIONS. 
          UM, WE LAUNCHED THE LANGUAGE ACT ACCESS ACTION TEAM, AND, UH, WE LAUNCHED THE CENTRAL TEXAS LANGUAGE ACCESS FUND, WHICH IS NOW, UH, FOCUSING ON AN EFFORT TO INCREASE, UM, MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS IN LANGUAGES OTHER THAN ENGLISH. 
          AND WE ALSO HOSTED OUR REGIONAL SUMMIT LAST FALL. 
          UH, I'VE GOT A FEW SECONDS FOR QUESTIONS, BUT IT'S BETTER IF YOU EMAIL ME CSOTO@KENNYTX.ORG. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          [00:05:01]
SO, UM, MR. FLORES, ARE YOU ABLE TO ASSIST ME WITH THE FIRST READING AFTER I GO AHEAD AND, UH, TALK ADDRESS, UH, ITEM A ON THE, UH, THE PRIVILEGED MINUTES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU JUST REAL QUICK THEN. 
          UH, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE MAY 24TH, 2022 MEETING MINUTES? UM, IF NOT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THOSE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES, 
          [Reading of the Agenda]
I GUESS. 
          YEAH, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND START WITH THE FIRST READING. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          UM, WE HAVE BE PUBLIC HEARINGS, BE ONE SITE PLAN COMPATIBILITY WAIVER REQUEST AS P 20 21 0 1 0 2 C 1400 CEDAR AVENUE. 
          OPTUM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION B TWO REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 4 6 RUTLEDGE CENTER, MS. UPPER CONSENT B3 PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 0 2 7 1 0 1 Q WEST 35TH. 
          THIS ITEM IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE 28 BEFORE REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 21 S H Q W UH, WEST 35TH. 
          SORRY. 
          UM, THIS ITEM IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POST. 
          I WENT TO 28, B FIVE REZONING C 14 20 21 0 0 8 3 3001 EAST CESAR CHAVEZ. 
          THIS ITEM IS A APORT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT BY THE APPLICANT B6 REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 4 7 7 0 1 AND I'M 703 HIGHLAND AVENUE RESULTING. 
          THIS ITEM IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 12TH. 
           REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 4 2 BOLSON NORWOOD CORNER C O AMENDMENT. 
          THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT. 
          THE ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT S P 20 19 0 4 6 5 C 20 21 1 6 2 2 43 L M. 
          THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT BEING PARTIAL PLAT VACATION C 8 81 0 2 7 0.0 2 180 2 VAC SOUTH AUSTIN ACRES. 
          SECTION A. 
          THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT BEING TENDON FINAL CLAPPED, C H J 20 21 0 1 0 4 0.08. 
          TAUGHT SUBDIVISION. 
          THIS ITEM IS OF POOR CONSENT AND RECOMMENDED PER CONDITIONS AND EXHIBIT C AND RECOMMEND WAIVER FOR APPROVAL. 
          B 11 FINAL PLAT FROM APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLANS, C H J 2008 0 1 6 8 0.0158 AND CHARTER PHASE SIX. 
          A SMALL LOT. 
          SUBDIVISION IS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT AND B12 PRELIMINARY PLANS, C H J 2 20 19 0 0 9 0 STONY RIDGE ISLAND. 
          UM, THIS ITEM IS NOW FOR DISCUSSION AND THAT IS THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          SO, UH, COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY, UM, MINISTERS THAT NEED TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM ANY, ANY OF THE ITEMS? DECEIVING. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, AND LET'S SEE, WE'VE GOT, UM, DO WE HAVE, UM, UH, JUST WANT TO REMIND COMMISSIONERS TO HAVE YOUR, UH, COLORS. 
          IT MAKES IT EASY FOR ME TO COUNT BOATS, GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW. 
          AND THEN, UM, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND LET'S SEE. 
          DO ANY COMMISSIONERS, UH, AFTER, UM, READING THE AGENDA, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR WANT TO PULL INTO THE ITEMS? YES, I BELIEVE ON B SEVEN WE HAD, UM, MR. GARRETT WANTING TO SPEAK. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE CARE OF THAT FIRST. 
          AND THEN WE'LL, UH, IF ANY COMMISSIONERS AFTER THAT HAVE ANY, UH, ITEMS THEY WANT TO PULL ALL THAT TAKE CARE OF THAT NEXT. 
          THANK YOU, MRS. AGAIN, I FEEL SO LIKE STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS. 
          [00:10:11]
IF YOU WILL SELECT STAR SIX, THAT SHOULD I MEET YOU? GOOD AFTERNOON HERE IN COUNTDOWN COMMISSIONERS. 
          MY NAME IS . 
          I CURRENTLY SERVE AS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASA NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL PAID. 
          I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR OR ON THE BEHALF OF THE COMMISSION OR THE COUNCIL. 
          I'M THE IMMEDIATE PAST YOUR EPISODE, THIS COMPANY WHO HAS BEEN CONTACTING AND SPEAKING ON THE BEHALF OF THE CONTACT TEAM ON ITEM B SEVEN, THE CONTACT TEAM VOTED IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE OF USE FOR 80 16 BRODERSON ROAD PROVIDED THAT THE OWNER BRING LOUISVILLE BAPTIST CHURCH AT RECEIPT, PRIVATE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, ALLOWING NO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON SITE AND OBTAIN FEEDBACK FROM NEARBY RESIDENTS. 
          WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE COMMISSION CAN NOT CONSIDER OR CONDITION THE PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, BUT WE WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT EVEN THE PROXIMITY GET THIS PROPERTY TO EXIST IN RESIDENTIAL HOMES, WE WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH THE OWNER ON A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT REGARDING THE PROHIBITION OF STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. 
          ON THIS SITE, WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT MUSICAL EQUIPMENT WILL BE STORED HERE, BUT THE FACT THAT THIS CAN LAND TO FUTURE POTENTIAL STORIES OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THIS PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE IS ADDRESSED. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE ON PAGE EIGHT OF THE STAFF'S REPORT ON OUR DEPARTMENT SEARCH AT THE ADDRESS RANGES FROM 4,300 TO 46 18 NORWOOD LANE AND 7,800 TO 81 99 BURLESON ROAD IDENTIFIED FIVE LOCATIONS WITH PERMITS FOR A BOOK. 
          GROUND HAS ITS MATERIALS AND HIGH PILOTLESS COMBUSTIBLE STORAGE. 
          WE WANT TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY BY REQUIRING PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. 
          THAT WILL AGAIN PROHIBIT THE STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON SITE. 
          THESE RESIDENTS HAVE LIVED IN THESE HOMES FOR MANY YEARS, AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, AS EARLY AS THE 1940S, THE CONTACT TEAM ASSAULTS ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE CUMULATIVE NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ON THE QUALITY OF OUR EAR, OUR WATER IN OUR SLOW TO ALL THE RESIDENTS SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND SOUTHEAST SCOTLAND, INCLUDING THE WORKERS IN THIS AREA, BUT ALSO AS TO OUR CONCERN. 
          AND IF YOU WILL NOTE ON PAGE SEVEN OF THE STAFF'S REPORT, THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS MAKE UP A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THIS AT THESE COMPANY PLANT AREA, BUT IN OUR REPEAT, BUT THE CLOSEST FIRE PATIENTS EQUIPPED TO ADDRESS HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPIRES ARE LOCATED AS FOLLOWS STATION 14 AT 43 0 5 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, TIME HILDER STATION 20 X, 66, A ONE MAIN CHOCO ROAD IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN STATION 28, 20 14 WITH PALMER LANE IN NORTHWEST AUSTIN AND STATION 32 AT 28 TO FOUR MONTHS TO BUILD A ROAD IN WEST LAKE HILLS. 
          WE HAVE NO FIRE STATIONS IN SOUTHEAST AUSTIN THAT ARE EQUIPPED TO HANDLE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, WHICH IS ALARMING TO US. 
          AND ANOTHER REASON FOR THE URGENCY OF OUR REQUEST FOR THE PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, WE HOPE BRAINLY WILL BAPTIST CHURCH WILL WORK WITH US ON THIS PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, MOVING ON, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS TO WISH TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE ITEMS OR PULL THEM FOR DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW? WE HAVE ITEMS TO BE ONE IN B12. 
          OKAY. 
          OH, UM, COMMISSIONER PRACTICES. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          SO, UM, B SEVEN E CASE MENTIONED BY, UM, MISS  IS NOT UP FOR DISCUSSION TODAY. 
          OKAY. 
          NO, UM, IT IS NOT OKAY. 
          UM, YES, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL THAT OUT FOR DISCUSSION IF POSSIBLE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, NOTED. 
          WE WILL PULL ITEM B SEVEN FOR DISCUSSION. 
          DO WE, UM, MR. RIVERA? SHH. 
          UM, I DON'T KNOW IF, UH, MR. GARRITY IS STILL ON THE PHONE WITH WHICH WOULD SHE BE ABLE TO SPEAK OR SHE DID NOT SIGN UP TO SPEAK FOR THAT ITEM. 
          SURE. 
          COMMISSIONER LAYS ON ENVER. 
          UH, SO, UM, AS SHE PROVIDED HER REMARKS, UM, THAT HAS BEEN EXHAUSTED, BUT SHE COULD BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, UH, ONCE THE ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          OKAY. 
          THE CHAIR, SORRY TO INTERRUPT. 
          UH, JUST A REMINDER, UH, THAT, UH, THAT ITEM IS PULLED. 
          UM, THE INTERVAL WOULD NOT HAVE TO REMAIN ON THE LINE. 
          WE'LL SEND AN EMAIL TO WHEN WE'RE ABOUT 15 MINUTES AWAY FROM TAKING UP THAT ITEM. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK ALL RIGHT. 
          YES. 
          WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE ITEMS. UH, 
          [00:15:01]
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE THEM IN ORDER B ONE, B SEVEN AND B12. 
          AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE WAITING ON ONE OF THE ITEMS AND YOU WANT TO WAIT, UM, OUT IN THE ATRIUM, YOU CAN, UM, MR. RIVERA, WE'LL GIVE YOU A NOTICE WHEN WE'RE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, BUT YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY HERE. 
          IT'S NOT MANY FOLKS HERE IN CHAMBERS THIS EVENING. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND READ THE CONSENT 
          [Consent Agenda ]
AGENDA HERE. 
          SO THE FIRST SIDE, AND WE HAVE ITEM, UH, A APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE MAY 24TH MEETING, UH, ITEM B ONE, WE HAVE, UM, DISCUSSION ON THAT B TO REZONE IT'S ON CONSENT B3 PLAN AMENDMENT NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE 28TH ITEM BEFORE, UM, IS NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TILL TWO, JUNE 28TH, THE FIVE REZONING INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT. 
          UM, AND IS THAT, OH, BY THE APPLICANT, UH, ITEM B SIX FOR ZONING NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TWO JULY 12TH, B SEVEN, UH, PULLED FOR DISCUSSION. 
          THAT'S A REZONING CASE ITEM B EIGHT ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT IS ON CONSENT. 
          BENIGN. 
          PARTIAL PLAT VACATION IS ON CONSENT. 
          B 10 FINAL PLAT CONSENT CONDITIONS, UM, EXHIBIT C AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL LABOR. 
          UM, LET ME SEE. 
          YEAH, JUST FOR REFERENCE, UH, THE CONDITIONS AND EXHIBITS C UH, ITEM B 11, UH, FINAL PLAT FROM APPROVED FILAMENTARY PLAN. 
          IT'S ON CONSENT AND THEN ITEM B 12, THE PRELIMINARY PLAN ITEM. 
          WE HAVE PULLED THAT FOR DISCUSSION. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO, UM, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, INCLUDING THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING? UM, GET A MOTION BY THE VICE CHAIR OF A SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER SHEA. 
          UH, LET'S GO AND VOTE. 
          UH, LET'S START WITH THOSE ON THE DIOCESE, UH, IN FAVOR MOTION. 
          THAT'S EVERYONE. 
          AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN, PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR GREEN CARDS. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THAT'S UNANIMOUS. 
          I'M TRYING TO GET A SIX TO 10. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, WE'LL GO AHEAD 
          [B1. Site Plan - Compatibility Waiver Request: SP-2021-0102C - 1400 Cedar Ave; District 1]
AND MOVE TO OUR FIRST ITEM THIS EVENING DISCUSSION CASE ON ITEM B ONE, AND STAFF WANT TO GO AHEAD AND START US OFF. 
          UM, AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THIS HAS COME BEFORE US, BUT WE NEED, WE ARE, UM, WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF AND THEN WE'LL, WE NEED TO THROUGH GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          SURE. 
          COMMISSION LIAISON, ANDRA. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. 
          SO PREVIOUSLY YOU HAD CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SO ON BECAUSE IT WAS MORE THAN 14 DAYS. 
          UH, YOU RECONSIDERED TO POSTPONE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION TO THIS DATE. 
          SO BEGIN WITH THE STAFF FOLLOWED BY THE APPLICANT, UH, FOLLOWED BY SPEAKERS, UM, FOLLOWED BY ACTION. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. 
          MY NAME IS ZACH LOFTON AND I AM THE CASE MANAGER FOR SP 20 21 0 1 0 2 C OR 1400 CEDAR AVENUE. 
          THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED IN COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER ONE, AND ALSO LOCATED IN THE CHESTNUT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          SO AS MR. RIVERA JUST MENTIONED, THIS ITEM WAS A DISCUSSION ITEM AT THE APRIL 12TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND THE APPLICANT MADE ADJUSTMENTS TO THEIR PROPOSED SITE PLAN BASED ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COMMUNITY FEEDBACK. 
          SO IT WAS AGAIN, A DISCUSSION ITEM AT THE MAY 24TH MEETING, WHERE IT WAS SUPPOSED TO COME UNTIL THIS MEETING TONIGHT. 
          THE APPLICANT IS STILL PROPOSING TO REDEVELOP AS TWO LOTS WITH COMMERCIAL LAND USES ON CS U THE CEO IMPEDE INTO A SEVEN UNIT CONDOMINIUM RESIDENTIAL LAND USE WITH PARKING, BIKE, PARKING AND PUBLIC SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS. 
          THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER FROM 25 TO 10 63 OR SETBACKS. 
          SO THE SITE IS SUBJECT TO A 25 FOOT COMPATIBILITY SETBACK. 
          AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS ENCROACHING INTO THAT 25 FOOT SETBACK ON THE NORTH END ON THE WEST PROPERTY LINES. 
          SO THE WEST PROPERTY LINE ABUTS AN ALLEY WITH AN SF THREE PROPERTY WITH A FIVE FOOT REAR SETBACK ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ALLEY AND THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE ABOUT SOME SF THREE PROPERTY WITH A FIVE FOOT INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK. 
          SO AS MENTIONED AFTER THE APRIL 12TH MEETING DISCUSSION APPLICANT IS NOW PROPOSING THE TWO UNITS ON THE NORTH SIDE TO BE SET BACK SEVEN FEET FROM THE CHURN NORTH PROPERTY LINE AND 
          [00:20:01]
THE UNITS ON THE WESTERN SIDE TO BE SETBACK 18 FEET FROM THE TRIGGERING PROPERTY ON THE WEST SIDE. 
          BUT IF APPROVED THIS WAIVER WILL NOT IMPACT SIGHTLINES LINES AT THE INTERSECTION OF 14TH STREET AND CEDAR AVENUE. 
          AND SO FROM THE, FROM THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION STANDPOINT, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE COMPATIBILITY SETBACK WAIVER REQUEST, AND THE SITE COMPLIES WITH ALL OTHER COMPATIBILITY STANDARD REQUIREMENTS, SUCH AS LIGHTING SCREENING, AND BUILDING RIGHTS. 
          THAT'S IT FOR MY PRESENTATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          WELL NOW HEAR FROM THE FIRST SPEAKER, UM, FOR THIS ITEM AND THAT'S A MR. ZACK SEVEN, UM,  GREETINGS COMMISSIONERS. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. 
          UH, MOST OF YOU HAVE SOME DEGREE OF FAMILIARITY WITH THIS PROJECT AT THIS POINT. 
          UH, I'LL SPEND MY TIME SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING SOME OF THE QUESTIONS AND ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED IN OUR PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS. 
          UH, THE IMAGE ON THE SCREEN PROVIDES SOME CONTEXT. 
          THIS IS A SMALL QUARTER-ACRE SITE OCCUPIED BY VACANT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, AND WE'RE PROPOSING SEVEN ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. 
          NEXT SLIDE HERE ARE ADDITIONAL IMAGES FOR CONTEXT ON THE TOP ROW. 
          YOU SEE THE SITE IN ITS CURRENT STATE AS SEEN FROM CEDAR AVENUE ON THE BOTTOM ROW. 
          YOU CAN SEE CLOSE UP IMAGES FROM THE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST CORNERS AT THE BOTTOM, RIGHT IMAGE SOUTHWEST CORNER NOTE, THE UNIMPROVED CONDITION OF THE ALLEY AND THE EXISTING THREE TO FOUR FOOT HIGH RETAINING WALL ON OUR LOT. 
          I'LL CIRCLE BACK TO THIS LATER. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          HERE'S THE CURRENT ZONING MAP ALONG WITH THE 1999 CHESTNUT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BOTH SHOWING FOURTEEN HUNDRED AND FOURTEEN OH TWO CEDAR ZONED AS C S M U C O N P. 
          THE V WAS ADDED IN 2009. 
          ONE OF THE QUESTIONS RAISED IN OUR PREVIOUS HEARING WAS WHAT KINDS OF USES ARE PERMISSIBLE WITH CSI ZONING ON THE RIGHT SIDE, YOU'LL SEE A PARTIAL LIST OF CS CHARACTERISTICS AND USES IT IS THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE INTENSIVE BASED ZONING DESIGNATION IN AUSTIN AT TWO TO ONE FAR FOR OUR SITE, THIS AMOUNTS TO APPROXIMATELY 24,200 SQUARE FEET. 
          WE'RE ONLY PROPOSING ABOUT 13,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          THIS IMAGE SHOWS THE EXISTING SITE DIAGRAM WITH ITS TWO VACANT STRUCTURES, VARIOUS COVERED OUTDOOR WORK AREAS AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. 
          NOTE THAT THE LOTS ARE ALMOST ENTIRELY PAVED AND IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IS ABOUT 97% OR MORE. 
          ALSO NOTE THAT BOTH STREET FRONTAGES ARE DOMINATED BY CURB CUTS, APPROXIMATELY 154 LINEAR FEET WITH HEAD IN PARKING. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          OUR PROPOSED PLAN INCLUDES SEVEN ATTACHED SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS TWO AND THREE STORIES RANGING IN SIZE WITH GARAGE PARKING AROUND A SINGLE MINIMUM WIDTH DRIVEWAY THAT EXITS TO CEDAR AVENUE. 
          EACH UNIT WILL HAVE PRIVATE OUTDOOR SPACE AND FIVE OF THE SEVEN WILL HAVE FRONT DOORS FRONTING ONTO THE STREET. 
          ON CEDAR. 
          WE REQUEST MODIFICATIONS TO COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS TO THE NORTH FROM 25 DOWN TO SEVEN AND TO THE WEST FROM 25 DOWN TO 20, IT IS CRITICAL TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS REQUEST IS FOR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED HOUSING. 
          IT'S NOT RESTAURANT OR RETAIL. 
          THIS IS LOW-IMPACT DEVELOPMENT COMPATIBLE WITH ITS SURROUNDINGS IN OUR MAY HEARING AND INCLUDED IN THE BACKUP DOCUMENTATION. 
          THERE WERE A FEW OTHER, WHAT IF COMMENTS POSED THAT I'LL TOUCH ON QUICKLY? WHAT IF YOU USE THE ALLEY FOR ACCESS? IT DOESN'T WORK DUE TO THE SITE GRADING BECAUSE OF THE RETAINING WALL STORMWATER DRAINAGE AND COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS. 
          AND THE ALLEY IS NARROW AND UNIMPROVED. 
          WHAT IF THE DRIVEWAY WERE NARROWER? THE DRIVEWAY IS ALWAYS IS ALREADY THE CODE REQUIRED MINIMUM FOR VEHICULAR MANEUVERING IN TWO-WAY TRAFFIC. 
          WHAT IF YOU JUST BUILD FIVE UNITS ON THE FRONTAGE AND PUT THE DRIVEWAY AT THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE, WE TRIED TO MAKE THIS WORK, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, OTHER LDC RESTRICTIONS MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE. 
          ALSO THIS WOULD RESULT IN FIVE SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER UNITS, ALL 2300 SQUARE FEET OR BIGGER. 
          OUR CURRENT UNITS, OUR CURRENT SEVEN UNIT PROPOSAL INCLUDES A GOOD RANGE OF SIZES, 1,250 SQUARE FEET TO 1900 SQUARE FEET. 
          THAT WILL START AT A LOWER PRICE POINT AND AT A MUCH BETTER MATCH FOR THE EXISTING ORIGINAL HOUSING STOCK IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          NEXT SLIDE WE'VE INCLUDED BUILDING ELEVATIONS TO AGAIN, EMPHASIZE THAT THESE ARE JUST ATTACHED HOUSES, SAME LOOK, SAME USE, SAME OCCUPANCY, JUST SLIGHTLY DENSER THAN TYPICAL. 
          SINGLE-FAMILY NEXT SLIDE HERE. 
          YOU SEE THE VIEW FROM CEDAR LOOKING AT THE EAST SIDE OF OUR SITE AND THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE TO THE NORTH. 
          THAT PROPERTY HAS A FIVE FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK, AND WE'VE PROPOSED TO MOVE OUR NORTH SIDE DUPLEX UNIT SEVEN FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE FOR AN EXTRA 
          [00:25:01]
BREATHING ROOM. 
          THE AREA BETWEEN THE DUPLEX AND THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE IS ENTIRELY COMPRISED OF PRIVATE BACKYARD SPACE FOR THOSE UNITS. 
          AND WE WILL PROVIDE FENCING. 
          IN SUMMARY. 
          WE BELIEVE THAT THIS REQUEST IS NECESSARY TO MAKE THIS DEVELOPMENT WORK AND THAT THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF WILL BE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          ONE OTHER ITEM I'D LIKE TO BRING UP TO THE COMMISSION'S ATTENTION IS THE ACTION THAT WAS TAKEN LAST WEEK BY CITY COUNCIL TO REDUCE COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS ON RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS. 
          THESE NEW RULES ARE SET TO TAKE EFFECT IN SEPTEMBER OF THIS YEAR, WHILE IT DID NOT COVER THE TYPE OF PRODUCT WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS TONIGHT. 
          I THINK WE CAN USE THIS AS A VIEW INTO THE FUTURE OF HOW THE CITY INTENDS TO UNLOCK MORE HOUSING OPTIONS AND COMBAT THE SHORTAGES WE ARE CURRENTLY FACING. 
          I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. WILLIAM LUCY, MR. LAZY. 
          YOU'RE ON THE TELECONFERENCE. 
          SO LIKE STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS. 
          MY NAME IS TRAVIS LUCY. 
          I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT. 
          UM, EVERYONE KNOWS THE ADAGE. 
          UH, IF THE ONLY TOOL YOU HAVE IS A HAMMER, EVERYTHING LOOKS LIKE A NAIL. 
          UH, COMPATIBILITY IS AUSTIN'S WAY TO PROTECT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES FROM LITERALLY ANY TYPE OF DISSIMILAR DEVELOPMENT, SHOPPING MALL AUTO REPAIR NIGHTCLUB, HEADING ZOO. 
          IT IS DESIGNED WITH THIS KIND OF WORST-CASE SCENARIO IN MIND. 
          UH, OUR PROJECT IS A VERY, VERY LONG WAY FROM ANY OF THAT. 
          WE'RE PROPOSING HOUSINGS, UH, COMPATIBLE HEIGHT, SIZE AND CHARACTER ON A LOT WITH APPROPRIATE ZONING, UH, LDS. 
          HE PROVIDES EXPLICIT AUTHORIZATION FOR COMMISSION TO GRANT WAIVERS FOR COMPATIBILITY. 
          WHEN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE CONTEXT. 
          AND I BELIEVE OUR PROJECT IS EXACTLY THAT. 
          UH, THAT'S ALL I HAVE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND I'LL HANG AROUND IN CASE THERE ARE QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM DENISE LIBYA, MISS MARIA, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. 
          COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF. 
          THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. 
          I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE UP ALL THREE MINUTES. 
          UM, JUST GOOD EVENING. 
          MY NAME'S DENISE FIA AND I AM THE CO-OWNER OF URBAN GRAVITY DEVELOPMENT. 
          I HAVE BEEN PART OF THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS NOW, AND I'VE SEEN THIS TOWN GO FROM ODD. 
          I USED TO CALL IT A TOWN BACK IN THE 1990S TO NOW A BUSTLING CITY. 
          AND I DO BELIEVE AS SUCH THAT APPROVING THIS WAIVER ALLOWS FOR THE DENSITY THAT THIS BUSTLING CITY REALLY DOES NEED. 
          UM, AND JUST FOR EVERYBODY TO NOTE AS WELL, URBAN GRAVITY HAS BUILT IN THIS AREA BEFORE THE CHESTNUT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UH, WE'VE HAD THREE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN THAT AREA, AND WE'VE ALSO PARTNERED WITH ZACK SAVAGE HOMES. 
          WHO'S ALSO DONE A FAIR AMOUNT OF BUILDING IN THIS AREA. 
          WE'VE TAKEN ALL OF THAT INTO, UM, GREAT EXTENT OF LOOKING INTO IT. 
          SO WE MAKE SURE THAT WE STAY WITH THE KIND OF THE FACADE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          THAT'S IT I'LL BE AROUND FOR QUESTIONS AS WELL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          HEY, WE'RE NOT HERE TO  THREE MINUTES. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          I'M MONAGHAN THAT I'M WITH CIVILLY TODAY. 
          UM, THE CIVIL ENGINEERING TEAM ON THIS PROJECT, I'M JUST HERE TO CLARIFY A FEW TECHNICAL ITEMS THAT HAVE COME UP IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO CONFIRM TODAY. 
          UH, FIRST ONE IS TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA, MANUAL DISCOURAGES ACCESS TO AND FROM UNIMPROVED ALLEYS. 
          UM, THE SITE IS ZONE CS, M U V C O N P. 
          THE CS PORTION ON THE CODE IS DESCRIBED AS INCOMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTS. 
          WE ARE USING THE MIXED USE COMPONENT ON D ON THE ZONING TO DEVELOP THE SEVEN RESIDENTIAL UNITS MAXIMUM ALLOWED PRE-SITE AREA IS 10 UNITS. 
          UM, AND THEN JUST THAT THE INTENT OF COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS IS TO PROTECT THE CHARACTER OF THE AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS AND THAT THE SAME CHAPTER OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS THE LAND USE COMMISSION TO GRANT WAIVERS TO REDUCE THIS THANK YOU. 
          NOW WE'RE HERE FOR MR. EONS OR ZILLOW AND THE OPPOSITION ON THE TELECONFERENCE  SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEEDED WITH YOUR REMARKS HELLO, THIS IS EONS OR ZILLOW, UH, RESIDENTS 
          [00:30:01]
IN THE CHESTNUT NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE SAME BLOCK AS THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 
          UM, I'VE HAD THE CHANCE TO SPEAK TO THIS COMMITTEE MULTIPLE TIMES NOW REGARDING THIS PROJECT. 
          AND, UH, WANTED TO FIRST SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR, UH, WILLINGNESS TO LISTEN TO THE CONCERNS OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THIS PROJECT. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING NEW TO ADD BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID IN THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS, EXCEPT TO LEAVE YOU IF THIS, THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPER AND, UM, THE PROJECT COORDINATORS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN FAIRLY DISINGENUOUS WITH THE NEIGHBORS, HAVE NOT, UM, TAKEN, YOU KNOW, OUR CONVERSATIONS IN GOOD FAITH. 
          THEY PRETENDED THAT THEY WOULD CONSIDER A FIVE-MINUTE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH MORE AMENABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PARTICULARLY THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, WHICH IS MOST IMPACTED, WHICH IS NOT MY OWN HOUSE, BUT ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS. 
          UM, AND THEN THEY DECIDED TO SCRAP THAT PROJECT WITHOUT COMMUNICATING THAT ALL WITH THE PLANNED CONTACTING OR THE CHESTNUT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND FRANKLY, I JUST HOPE IT'S ON YOUR CONSCIENCE TO, UM, GRANT A WAIVER TO A DEVELOPER THAT ACTUALLY CARES ABOUT THE COMMUNITY AND NOT WANT TO USE, UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. 
          AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LIKE, WE'VE ALWAYS SAID WE'RE PRO DENSITY, BUT WITHIN REASON AND WITH THE RIGHT TO BE SPIRIT, AND THIS IS JUST NOT IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          HAVE A GOOD DAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE FOR REBUTTAL THREE MINUTES, AS FAR AS BEING DISINGENUOUS, WE'VE ONLY BEEN OPEN AND HONEST WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. 
          UM, THE, THE FIVE UNIT CONCEPT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE CAME UP WITH AND PRESENTED TO CITY STAFF, AND THEY BASICALLY TOLD US THAT IT JUST WASN'T POSSIBLE WITH THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. 
          AND THERE'S NOT A, YOU GUYS ARE NOT ABLE TO GRANT A WAIVER, I GUESS, ON A HEIGHT RESTRICTION. 
          IT'S JUST, WASN'T POSSIBLE THE LAYOUT WE WERE DOING. 
          SO IT WASN'T OUR INTENT TO SHOW THEM SOMETHING AND THEN TAKE IT AWAY AT ALL. 
          IT JUST WASN'T POSSIBLE TO DO IT IN THAT CONFIGURATION. 
          UM, IF ANYTHING, WE WERE BEING MORE UPFRONT TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF IT. 
          UM, BUT WE'VE NEVER BEEN ANYTHING BUT UPFRONT WITH THEM. 
          AND THAT'S ALL, I'LL SAY, CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, PUBLIC KAREN. 
          OH, THANK YOU. 
          UH, AT A SECOND, UH, VICE VERY HUMBLE. 
          OKAY. 
          LET'S GO AND VOTE ON CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S IN THE DIOCESE AND THAT WAS ON THE SCREEN. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S EVERYONE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO QUESTIONS. 
          UM, COMMISSIONERS, WHO HAS THE FIRST QUESTION, UH, MR. UH, COMMISSIONER COSTS? YEAH. 
          UM, SO I, I, I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF TALKING WITH ZACH EARLIER TODAY, JUST TO GET SOME CLARITY ON, ON, ON ALL OF THIS. 
          UM, I GUESS ONE THING THAT I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM WITH STAFF IS THAT IF, IF THIS COMMISSION APPROVES THIS WAIVER, THE SETBACK, UM, THAT WAIVER ONLY APPLIES TO THIS PARTICULAR SITE PLAN. 
          IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE DEVELOPER, IF HE CHOSE TO CHANGE HIS PLANS OR CHOSE TO SELL THIS SITE, THE WAIVER THAT, THAT THIS COMMISSION IS BEING ASKED TO APPROVE IS TIED SPECIFICALLY TO THIS SITE PLAN AND ONLY THE SITE PLAN. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? BUT THAT IS CORRECT CONDITIONER. 
          AND WHAT WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE? SO THE ZONING ON THIS SITE, UM, IS A BIT INTERESTING AND WOULD ALLOW FOR, I'VE BEEN QUITE A FEW THINGS TO HAPPEN DEPENDING ON HOW COMPATIBILITY AFFECTS THAT. 
          UM, BUT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT, THAT WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED BY THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPER, IF IT WAS JUST A STRAIGHT UP RESIDENTIAL TYPE ZONING, WHAT WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THIS? AS I KNOW ZACH AND I WERE TALKING THAT MAYBE IT WOULD FIT WITHIN LIKE SF FIVE. 
          UM, IS THAT KIND OF YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS, IS ABOUT AN SFI RESIDENTIAL TYPE DEVELOPMENT? YEAH, THAT'S ABOUT RIGHT. 
          SFI, AS I'VE SAID, SOMETHING LIKE THAT ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS, UM, OBVIOUSLY LESS THAN 10 UNITS, SO THAT'S CONSEQUENTIAL FOR HOW IT WILL BE DESIGNATED, BUT YEAH, GENERALLY SFI AS OF SIX. 
          AND WHAT WOULD THE NORMAL KIND OF CODE REQUIRED SETBACK BE BETWEEN EIGHT? THIS SITE WAS ZONED SF FIVE. 
          WHAT WOULD THAT REQUIRED SETBACK 
          [00:35:01]
BE TO ITS ADJACENT SIDE PROPERTY? SO IF IT'S ZONED SF FIVE OR MORE RESTRICTIVE, GENERALLY IT'S ABOUT A FIVE FOOT SETBACK. 
          I THINK WE HAD DISCUSSED IT A LITTLE BIT AT THE LAST MEETING. 
          ORIGINALLY THEY'RE ASKING FOR A SETBACK OF FIVE FEET RATHER THAN 25 FEET. 
          AND THEN AFTER THE DISCUSSION HAD, YOU KNOW, MASSAGE THAT A LITTLE BIT TO MAKE IT 70 FEET. 
          SO FROM THAT STANDPOINT, THEY WOULD BE SET BACK FURTHER THAN WOULD BE REQUIRED BY CODE FOR A TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, BUT SETBACK. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THAT'S, AND THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO, TO, TO CLARIFY MY MIND, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THE DEVELOPER'S PROPOSING AN SFI TYPE DEVELOPMENT AND IF THE PROPERTY WAS ZONED SFI, BUT WOULD ONLY REQUIRE A FIVE FOOT SETBACK, THEN THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY THAN IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN ACTUAL KIND OF MULTI-USE OR COMMERCIAL TYPE DEVELOPMENT SETBACK FROM NSS ZONE PROPERTY. 
          UM, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE SITTING HERE JUST TALKING ABOUT THIS WAIVER SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF THIS SITE'S ZONING THAT ALLOWS FOR COMMERCIAL USE. 
          CORRECT. 
          UH, WELL, I GUESS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT BECAUSE OF THE COMPATIBILITY SET, RIGHT? SO FROM THE COMMERCIAL USE IT'S CS AND IT'S IN, AS I REFERENCED SOME OF THEM, SOME OF THE ZONING THAT IT HAS, THE BASE ZONING IS CS. 
          SO YEAH, I GUESS SUCCINCTLY TO SAY WE'RE DISCUSSING IT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT THE COMPATIBILITY SETBACK BECAUSE OTHERWISE THE, UH, THE SETBACK WOULDN'T BE SO MUCH OF A CONCERN AS YOU KNOW, AT 25 FEET, UH, COMPATIBILITY SETBACK FOR COMMERCIAL USES THAT THIS DEVELOPER IS NOW PROPOSING TO BUILD IN THIS SITE PLAN. 
          WELL, YEAH, BUT, BUT COMPATIBILITY APPLIES TO ANYTHING THAT'S LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN SFI. 
          SO THAT COULD BE MULTI-FAMILY THAT CAN BE S OF SEX. 
          IT COULD BE ANY VARIETY OF THINGS, LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN SFI, BUT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO BUILD IS CLOSER TO AN SFI TYPE DEVELOPMENT. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK WE'VE MADE IT FULL CIRCLE, SO I THINK I UNDERSTAND IT NOW, BUT, UH, BUT YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT THING. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          LOOKING AROUND THE ROOM. 
          DO WE HAVE, UH, ADMINISTRATORS WITH QUESTIONS? UM, I'M GOING TO GO OUT AND ASK A FEW. 
          WHO DID WE HAVE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD? UH, AGAIN, UM, CHAIR, WE HAVE MR. EONS OR ZILLOW ON THE TELECONFERENCE. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, IS THAT LIZ ZOLA? ZOLA, ZOLA. 
          UM, YES. 
          UM, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          SO THE PROPOSAL FOR THE FIVE UNITS SOUNDED LIKE IT WOULD, UM, WOULD HAVE REQUIRED A, UM, A HIGHER UNITS. 
          SO WAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD AMENABLE TO, UM, HIGHER UNITS? IF THE UNIT COUNT WAS LESS THAN THEY MAINTAIN THE REQUIRED SETBACKS. 
          MR. ZELLA, YOU MAY HAVE TO SELECT STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH A RESPONSE. 
          HI, UH, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. 
          UM, I THINK WITH THE FIVE MINUTE PLAN AS WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED, THE BIG ADVANTAGE REGARDLESS OF THE HEIGHT WAS THAT THE, UH, THERE WERE NO UNITS TOWARDS THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS WHERE THEY'RE REQUESTING THE SETBACK TO GO FROM 25 TO NOW SEVEN. 
          UM, THAT WAS THE BIGGEST ISSUE. 
          AND THEN ALSO FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT, IN TERMS OF REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF UNITS, PARTICULARLY AROUND HAVING, UM, INGRESS AND EGRESS THROUGH THE DRIVEWAY, SINCE THERE'S ONLY ONE DRIVEWAY HAVING SEVEN UNITS IS A, IS A REAL SAFETY CONCERN. 
          UM, UH, BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY, WE WOULD BE OKAY WITH HEIGHT LIMITATION, WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, A HIGHER PROPERTY, IF IT MEANT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE FIVES UNIT PLAN. 
          ALTHOUGH OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD PREFER TO HAVE TWO STORIES INSTEAD OF THREE. 
          UM, BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE WILLING TO COMPROMISE. 
          SO THAT'S, I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I HAVE A UP QUESTION FOR STAFF. 
          UM, SO I, I SEEM TO RECALL THAT THERE IS A WAY TO GET A WAIVER FROM THE HEIGHT, UH, BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE THAT YOU GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. 
          IS THAT, WOULD THAT BE THE CASE FOR, UM, IF THEY WANTED TO SEEK A VARIANCE TO THE HEIGHT OF THIS PROPERTY? 
          [00:40:02]
YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          SO THERE IS A PATHWAY FOR A SMALLER UNIT COUNT AND TALLER BUILDINGS, NOT THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT THROUGH OTHER CHANNELS. 
          AND I'LL, I SEEM TO RECALL WE HAD ANOTHER CASE THAT ON WHERE DUVALL DID ENDS INTO RESEARCH FOR THAT. 
          I THINK, UM, THE APPLICANT WAS ABLE TO, UM, REQUEST A VARIANCE AND I THINK GOT IT. 
          SO THERE IS A PATHWAY IT'S JUST, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING HERE TONIGHT. 
          I JUST WANT TO BRING THAT TO EVERYONE'S ATTENTION THAT, UM, THERE IS, THAT IS A FEASIBLE OPTION. 
          UH, WELL, LET ME ADD FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, WAS THAT FIVE UNIT COUNT? WHAT WAS THE HEIGHT? UH, WHAT WAS, WERE THERE FINANCIAL ISSUES? IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS QUESTION, WAS THAT A FIVE UNIT ABLE TO TENSILE OUT OR WHAT WERE ISSUES WITH THAT? UH, SO THAT THOSE UNITS WERE, WERE TALLER AND THEN WE HAVE TO GO TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. 
          AND IN ORDER TO, AS MY UNDERSTANDING TO GET THROUGH BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HARDSHIP AND THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY QUALIFY AS A HARDSHIP. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I'M FINISHED. 
          UM, JUST FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PERSPECTIVE, THIS CASE HERE COULD HAVE COME TO US AS WELL, BUT THAT'S THE SAME PROBLEM. 
          THEY HAVE TO SHOW A HARDSHIP FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT FOR PC, IT'S JUST A REQUEST. 
          IT'S AN ASK. 
          YOU DON'T REALLY NEED TO HAVE ANYTHING DIRECTLY AFFECTING IT. 
          IT'D BE A STRETCH, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE ZONING ITSELF THAT VERY STRANGE TSA ZONING STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF ALL THIS RESIDENTIAL MIGHT BE VIEWED BY SOME, AS A HARDSHIP, BUT THERE'S A BOARD OF 11 AND THAT'S JUST ME, SO. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          I'M FINISHED. 
          UH, WHO ELSE HAS QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. 
          I'M NOT SEEING ANY HANDS. 
          UM, DO COMMISSIONERS WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? OKAY. 
          THAT'S YOUR HEMPHILL. 
          I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, UH, APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR THE COMPATIBILITY WAIVER, UM, PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          DO WE HAVE A SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER AZHAR SECONDS? I DO WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MESSAGING. 
          SURE. 
          UM, I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN COMPROMISE, UM, FROM BOTH SIDES WITH THE DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE GONE ON, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT UNIT COUNTS GOING FROM FIVE TO 12 OR 10, AND NOW DOWN TO SEVEN, UM, A REDUCTION OR AN INCREASE OF THE SETBACK FROM THE NEIGHBORING, UM, UH, HOUSE TO THE NORTH. 
          AND, UM, THE, THE APPLICANT ANSWERED ALL OF MY QUESTIONS ABOUT, UM, UH, GETTING OUT ONTO THE ALLEY SO THAT, THAT ALL MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. 
          AND ONE OF THE SPEAKERS SAID, UM, YOU KNOW, VOTE WITH OUR CONSCIENCE. 
          MY CONSCIENCE IS TO, UM, INCREASE THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE AVAILABLE, UM, FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE INTO. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS SPEAK AGAINST THIS MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER SNYDER. 
          UH, I'M NOT, I ACTUALLY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE MOTION MAKER. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, WE KIDS, WHICH IS, DOES, DOES YOUR MOTION, THE STAFF'S PROPOSAL INCLUDE THE SEVEN FOOT SETBACK OR IS THAT JUST, UH, SOMETHING THAT'S GOTTEN, IT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT? I THINK THAT'S, IT'S PART OF THE RIGHT STUFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION SEVEN FOOT. 
          YEAH. 
          THAT'S PART OF THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THE SEVEN FOOT. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I, THAT WAS JUST POINT OF CLARIFICATION. 
          DO YOU HAVE ANY, UH, MEMBERS SPEAKING UP AGAINST THIS MOTION? ANY COMMISSIONER JUST WANTED TO SPEAK FOR, UM, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER SHEA. 
          YEAH. 
          I'M GOING TO SPEAK FOR THIS. 
          I MEAN, A COUPLE THINGS, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT SAFETY. 
          I MEAN, WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT HERE IS TWO UNITS. 
          AND WHEN YOU SEE THAT THIS HAS GOT A COMMERCIAL ZONING ON THIS THING, IF YOU LOOK AT THE TRIPS THAT TWO UNITS GENERATE COMPARED TO WHAT POTENTIALLY THIS COULD BE WITH A FULL CS. 
          I MEAN, IT IT'S, IT'S NOT MANY, IT'S NOT MANY MORE TRIPS BECAUSE WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT TWO UNITS VERSUS A BUNCH OF COMMERCIAL USES. 
          THE OTHER THING IS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT AS A BUILDING FORM, THE WAY THAT THEY HAVE IT SET UP, IF IT IS SOME OF THE SFI BUILDING FORM WITH COMPATIBILITY, 
          [00:45:01]
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S COMPATIBLE. 
          I MEAN, IT'S MEANT TO BE THIS MISSING MIDDLE, UM, YOU KNOW, UP AGAINST A SINGLE FAMILY, HOW IT WORKS AND TAPERS THROUGH THAT. 
          SO, UM, THE CLARIFICATION OF THAT REALLY HELPED OUT. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, THE OTHER, UM, REASON I'M SUPPORTING IS THIS ALSO BECAUSE AS WE SAW IN THE PAST WEEK WITH THE NEWS, WITH, WITH THE COUNCIL EASING UP ON HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS, UH, TRYING TO INCREASE MORE HOUSING, ESPECIALLY IN, IN THINGS LIKE THIS, WHERE WE HAVE A HIGH USE NEXT TO SINGLE FAMILY. 
          SO, UM, THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING THIS. 
          THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS. 
          WE HAVE ANY, UH, FURTHER DISCUSSION FOR AGAINST, IF NOT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND JUST SPEAK, SORRY. 
          I'LL JUST SPEAK NEUTRALLY FROM MR.  PLEASE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I JUST APPRECIATE THAT. 
          SOME OF THE QUESTIONS FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS LOOKING FOR OPTIONS TO MAKE THIS A LITTLE BIT LESS OF WHAT APPEARS ON PAPERS, SPOT ZONING TO ME, I DO APPRECIATE THE MODERATE DESIGN AND I, UM, SUPPORT A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY THE SMALLER, THE, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY MORE MODERATE UNIT UNIT SIZES COMPARED TO SOME, UM, AND GETTING MORE UNITS ON THE SPACE. 
          UM, BUT JUST IN TERMS OF THE PRECEDENT, THAT'S WHERE I THINK IT WOULD BE NICE FOR US TO HAVE SOME OTHER OPTIONS, UM, THAT COULD HELP REFLECT THAT TRANSITION. 
          SO THAT'S, UH, BUT I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION AS FAR AS, OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE, OH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON REAL QUICK. 
          I'D LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR. 
          I JUST, I FEEL IT'S PAINFUL. 
          HOW DIFFICULT SOMETIMES WE MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING IN THE CITY. 
          I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW OR WHERE WE DECIDED THAT HOUSING IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH HOUSING, BUT WE'VE MADE THIS APPLICANT COME BACK NOW THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES. 
          AND THEN WE HEAR FROM THE ONE SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION SAYING, HEY, THEY'RE DISINGENUINE. 
          THEY SHOWED US THIS AND THAT'S NOT TRUE, BUT THEY WERE ON OUR AGENDA AT ONE POINT WITH FIVE. 
          SO THEY WENT TO A LESS EFFICIENT PROJECT WITH FEWER HOUSING UNITS IN A TIME WHERE WE DO NEED HOUSING. 
          AND THAT ONE TIME THEY WERE POSTED AS FIVE, THEY LOST STAFF RECOMMENDATION. 
          AND SO THEY TRIED, LIKE, THEY REALLY DID TRY MULTIPLE TIMES. 
          I VISITED THE SITE. 
          A LOT OF PEOPLE VISIT THE SITE AND I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IN THIS DAY AND AGE, WE MAKE HOUSING SO DIFFICULT TO BUILD IN THIS CITY, BUT I'M VERY THANKFUL THAT COUNCIL IS LOOKING AT COMPATIBILITY AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO EACH AND EVERY CHANCE WE GET TO WAVE COMPATIBILITY BECAUSE IN THIS CITY, WE HAVE DECIDED THAT COMPATIBILITY AND PRIVATE VIEW CORRIDORS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN HOUSING AND THAT. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE OATH. 
          COMMISSIONER COX. 
          YES. 
          YEAH. 
          I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK CAUSE I'M GOING TO BE CHANGING MY VOTE FROM LAST TIME WE VOTED ON THIS. 
          UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME AT LEAST TO KNOW THAT THIS IS, THIS IS ATTACHED TO THE SITE PLAN AND NOT THE, NOT, NOT THE ACTUAL PROPERTY ZONING. 
          UM, AND, AND SO UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY KIND OF AN SFI TYPE, UH, PROJECT THAT THEY'RE BUILDING. 
          UM, AND THIS IS IN LINE WITH THE TYPICAL SETBACKS FOR THAT TYPE OF PROJECT. 
          I JUST WANTED TO PUT OUT THERE SINCE IT'S BEEN MENTIONED MULTIPLE TIMES, I WOULD VERY MUCH CAUTION US, TRYING TO EXTRAPOLATE OUT A COUNCIL ACTION ABOUT US. 
          VERY SPECIFIC THING LIKE VMU AND JUST START BLANKETING THAT ACROSS ALL OF OUR DECISIONS RELATED TO COMPATIBILITY. 
          UH, THAT MAKES ME A LITTLE NERVOUS THAT WE'RE MAYBE STRETCHING WHAT SOME PEOPLE MIGHT HOPE VERSUS WHAT COUNCIL, UH, INTENDED. 
          BUT ANYWAYS, I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE, BUT I'LL BE, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THEM. 
          OKAY. 
          LOT OF THE FOLKS SPEAK IN FAVOR. 
          OKAY. 
          SO LET'S, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE. 
          LET ME START WITH THOSE ON THE DIOCESE, UH, IN FAVOR THAT'S EVERYONE. 
          AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN THAT IS IN FAVOR. 
          SHOW ME YOUR GREEN. 
          OH, THAT'S GREAT. 
          WE HAVE 10 ZERO. 
          THANK YOU. 
          TENDED TO FAVOR. 
          WE'LL HAVE TO MARK THAT. 
          VERY GOOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          WE FINALLY DID IT. 
          APPRECIATE YOU GUYS COMING BACK SO OFTEN APOLOGIZE. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO THE SECOND ITEM. 
          UH, DO WE NEED TO GIVE A FEW MINUTES FOR ANYONE TO JOIN US? OKAY. 
          THIS IS ITEM B SEVEN 
          [B7. Rezoning: C14-2022-0042 - Burleson - Norwood Corner CO Amendment; District 2]
AND, UH, WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM STAFF 
          [00:50:27]
WE WAITING ON SOMEBODY FROM MR. RIVERA CHAIR. 
          YES. 
          A WEDDING ON STAFF TO PRESENT. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          JUST CHECKING SILENCE, TARA, WHAT, WHAT ITEM ARE WE ON AGAIN? WE'RE ON B SEVEN. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S A GOOD POINT. 
          COMMISSIONER. 
          GOOD EVENING. 
          MY NAME IS WENDY RHODES. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          I HEARD THAT I WAS NOT ABLE TO UNMUTE UNTIL JUST NOW. 
          UH, I'M HOPE YOU'RE ABLE TO HEAR ME, MS. RHODES. 
          UH, WE'RE ABLE TO HEAR YOU. 
          WE CAN'T SEE YOU. 
          IS THERE A CAMERA ON, DOES IT STILL DON'T HAVE ISRAEL. 
          OKAY. 
          AND EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS. 
          UH, MY NAME IS WENDY ROSE WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT. 
          THIS REZONING AREA CONSISTS OF ONE FLAT A LOT AT THE NORTH CORNER OF BURLESON ROAD AND NORWOOD LANE. 
          IT IS, DON'T SEE US M U C O AND P, AND IS UNDEVELOPED AT THIS TIME, UH, TO THE NORTH, THERE ARE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON NORWOOD LANE. 
          UH, AUTOMOTIVE USES TO THE SOUTHEAST A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO THE NORTHWEST AND INDUSTRIAL USES TO THE SOUTHWEST, UH, IN APRIL, 2003. 
          THIS PROPERTY, AS WELL AS THE REMAINDER OF BLOCKS ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF NORWOOD LANE WERE REZONED TO SEE US M U C O N P FOLLOWING COUNCIL DIRECTION THAT WAS PROVIDED AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE SOUTHEAST NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. 
          THESE PROPERTIES ALONG NORWOOD LANE ARE WITHIN THE AIRPORT OVERLAY ZONE THREE. 
          AND, UH, SO NEW DEVELOPMENT, NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS NOT ALLOWED TO OCCUR OUTSIDE OF RECORDED FINAL PLATS, MUNICIPAL UTILITY UTILITY DISTRICTS, OR CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNED THE MOU AND THIS ON THESE LOT ALLOWS FOR THE CONTINUATION OF THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON NORWOOD LANE, BECAUSE THEY WERE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO ADOPTION OF THE AIRPORT OVERLAY ORDINANCE BY SEVERAL DECADES, THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT APPLIES TO THIS PROPERTY AND ALL PROPERTIES ALONG NORWOOD LANE ALLOWS FOR PERSONAL SERVICES, PERSONAL IMPROVEMENT SERVICES, AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES, BUT ALSO PROHIBITS A BROAD RANGE OF USES, INCLUDING MOST, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT, MOST RESIDENTIAL USES AND SOME HEAVY COMMERCIAL USES THAT TYPICALLY GENERATE A LOT OF TRUCK TRACK TRAFFIC. 
          THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, UH, FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF REMOVING LIMITED WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION FROM THE PROHIBITED USE LIST. 
          THE APPLICATION INDICATES THAT IF THE AMENDMENT WERE GRANTED THAN A 32,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ONSITE FOR THE STORAGE OF STAGE AND LIGHTING EQUIPMENT ACCESS WOULD BE TAKEN TO BURLESON ROAD BY WAY OF THE PLATINUM THAT APPLIES TO THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT ALLOW ACCESS TO NORWOOD LANE. 
          UH, THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS, UH, RAISE OUTING REQUESTS BY THE APPLICANT, AS IT WOULD ALLOW FOR A LIMITED WAREHOUSING DISTRIBUTION ON THE SITE. 
          UH, IT IS IN PROXIMITY TO A HIGHWAY AND THE AIRPORT, UH, RE ACCESS IS REQUIRED TO AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY. 
          AND THERE ARE ALSO, UH, USES OPERATING THAT ARE SIMILAR OPERATING WITHIN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY. 
          AND, UH, THAT CONDITIONAL OVERLAY CONTINUES TO PROHIBIT OTHER INTENSIVE TRUCK GENERATING USES. 
          WE ARE ALSO RECOMMENDING REMOVING THE CA THE MOU IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE SITE IS UNDEVELOPED AND LOCATED WITH AN  ZONE, WHICH DOES NOT HERMIT NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          [00:55:02]
OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, NEXT WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. 
          GOOD EVENING. 
          COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASI WITH THROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER. 
          UM, THE, AS WENDY WAS SAYING, THE SUBJECT TRACT IS SEEN HERE IN THIS IMAGE, UM, OUTLINED IN BLACK, IT IS WITHIN THE AIRPORT OVERLAY THREE, WHICH IS AN AREA THAT DOES NOT, UM, THAT THE CITY DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL USES. 
          UM, THE SUBJECT TRACT IS UNDEVELOPED IS UNDEVELOPED AND IS 2.3 ACRES COMBINED. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, SO THE SOUTHEAST COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN RECOGNIZED 20 YEARS AGO THAT THIS AREA WAS NO LONGER APPROPRIATE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND WAS APPROPRIATE FOR WAREHOUSE INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES. 
          BUT AS WENDY SAID, THERE ARE SOME EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR DECADES. 
          AND SO RECOGNIZING THOSE USES, THERE WERE SOME MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL TYPE USES THAT WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE, WHICH WAS THE REASON FOR THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT WAS PLACED ON THE PROPERTY. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          SO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THIS, THIS AREA IN THIS PARTICULAR TRACT IS MIXED USE. 
          AND AGAIN, AS WENDY STATED, RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES AT THAT TIME, THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE USES WERE, UH, LEGAL AND COMPLIANT. 
          UM, EVEN THOUGH IT IS IDENTIFIED THAT THIS AREA IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES ANY LONGER STAFF IS RECOMMENDING TO REMOVE THAT MIXED USE OVERLAY. 
          WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT NEXT SLIDE. 
          AND THEN THE ZONING ON THE SITE, UM, WAS CHANGED AS A RESULT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS, CSM U C O AND P IS THE ZONING TODAY. 
          WE ARE NOT ASKING TO AMEND THE BASE DISTRICT ZONING. 
          WE ARE ONLY ASKING TO AMEND THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO ALLOW FOR WAREHOUSE AND LIMITED DISTRIBUTION USE ON THIS SITE. 
          NEXT SLIDE SO THE CASE THAT WENDY WAS TALKING ABOUT AS A RESULT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THIS IS FROM THE ORDINANCE OF THAT CASE AND THE SUBJECT TRACKS ARE SHOWN IN GREEN, AND YOU CAN SEE LIMITED WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION WAS A USE THAT WAS PROHIBITED. 
          AGAIN, WE ARE ASKING TO GAIN THAT USE BACK NEXT TIME. 
          AND THIS IS THE 2015 REESE SUBDIVISION WHERE, UM, THE, THIS PARTICULAR TRACT OF LAND, UM, AS, UH, AN AGREEMENT TO THE SUBDIVISION, UH, ACCESS TO NORWOOD LANE IS PROHIBITED AND THEREFORE ALL ACCESS TO AND FROM THIS SITE MUST COME FROM BURLESON ROAD. 
          AND IT IS THAT REASON THAT WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE USE AND THE CHANGE IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS PARTICULAR TRACT SO I JUST WANTED TO MENTION, UM, I KNOW YOU HEARD FROM, UH, ANNA GARY EARLY, EARLIER, AND SHE AND I HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT THIS CASE SINCE MARCH, WHEN WE FILED THE CASE. 
          AND, UM, WE WERE INFORMED LAST NIGHT AT THEIR SECOND NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING THAT WE'VE BEEN TO, THAT THEY WOULD, THAT THEY ARE REQUESTING A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. 
          AND I JUST WANTED TO LET Y'ALL KNOW WE ARE LOOKING INTO THAT AND WE WILL REMAIN IN CONVERSATION THROUGH ANNA GARY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UH, WE, WE DO WANT TO LOOK INTO MATTERS RELATED TO THEIR CONCERNS BEFORE, UH, BEFORE WE DECIDE HOW TO, UH, WHAT THE SOLUTIONS COULD BE TO ADDRESSING THEIR CONCERNS. 
          SO I JUST WANT TO LET Y'ALL KNOW, UH, SHE AND I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION TODAY THAT WE'RE IN AGREEMENT THAT THIS CAN MOVE FORWARD. 
          UM, AND WE WILL HAVE TIME TO ADDRESS THOSE MATTERS BEFORE WE GET TO CITY COUNCIL AT THE END OF JULY AT THE EARLIEST, IT MAY BE LATER THAN JULY BY THE TIME WE GET TO COUNCIL. 
          SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. RON BREWER, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, RON THROWER, REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNER AND THE INTENDED BUYER FOR THE PROPERTY. 
          I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU ALL A LITTLE BIT OF INSIGHT AS TO WHAT THE INTENDED USE IS FOR THE PROPERTY. 
          WHILE IT'S CLASSIFIED AS LIMITED WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION, THIS IS GOING TO BE FOR AN AUDIO VIDEO EQUIPMENT STORAGE PLAYS, AND THEY MOBILIZE WHENEVER THERE IS A NEED FOR THIS EQUIPMENT TO GO TO A CERTAIN LOCATION. 
          AND WHEN IT'S NOT IN USE, IT IS STORED IN THE FACILITY. 
          UH, THERE'S NOT ANY, UH, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR OPERATIONS. 
          THEY DO HAVE NORMAL, UH, HOUSEHOLD AND BUSINESS CHEMICALS ONSITE. 
          THEY ALSO HAVE A DIESEL ADDITIVE THAT THEY PUT INTO THEIR TRUCKS THAT HELPS TO CLEAN THE EMISSIONS. 
          UH, THOSE ARE THEIR ONLY PLANNED, UH, MATERIALS, UH, THAT, THAT THEY PLAN TO HAVE ONSITE. 
          UM, THEY ALSO, UM, 
          [01:00:01]
WE'LL HAVE SOME SPRAY PAINT WHICH WILL BE PUT INTO APPROVED CONTAINERS AS WELL. 
          UM, SO THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT WITH THIS PARTICULAR USER, THEY DO PLAN ON SOME LEVEL OF HIGH PILE STORAGE INTERIOR TO THE STRUCTURE. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S MORE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT SIDE OF THINGS, BUT HIGH PILE STORAGE IS JUST WRACKING THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE IN THE FACILITY, AND THEY HAVE A HIGH REC, UH, PERMITS IN THEIR OTHER LOCATIONS. 
          THEY EXPECT TO HAVE THE SAME HERE. 
          THEY DO NOT FORESEE ANY ISSUES WHERE IT'S GOING TO CAUSE AN ISSUE ASSOCIATED WITH ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FROM THE AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT. 
          THEIR RACKS ARE, UM, OPEN AND WATER FLOWS THROUGH FREELY THROUGH THEM. 
          SO THERE'S NOT ANY ADDITIONAL, UH, FIREFIGHTING NEEDS FOR THEIR PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 
          UM, AND WITH THAT, I'LL JUST SAY WE ARE AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SURE. 
          THE ONLY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION THAT WAS MISSING. 
          SO IF THE APPLICANT WISHES TO, IF THE APPLICANT WISHES TO, UH, PROVIDE, UM, REMARKS BEFORE A REBEL WERE AVAILABLE AGAIN. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          UH, MR. ANDERSON BRUSHING ACROSS PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER. 
          LET'S GO AND VOTE, UM, THE DYESS. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S EVERYONE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UM, I GUESS I'LL GET THE FIRST QUESTION TO COMMISSIONER PRACTICES. 
          UH, SINCE YOU PULLED THIS, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO FIRST ASK A QUESTION OF MS. , IF SHE'S STILL ON THE LINE, I'M NOT ABLE TO DO THAT. 
          NICE TO GET IT. 
          IF YOU'LL SELECT STAR SIX AND PROCEED, UH, OR JUST, UH, AWAIT THE INQUIRY FROM THE COMMISSION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, YES. 
          SO, UM, WE JUST HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO HAVE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON THE SITE. 
          SO CAN YOU DESCRIBE, UM, YOUR CONCERNS? ARE YOU MORE CONCERNED ABOUT CURRENT USE OR FUTURE POTENTIAL USES ON THE SITE UNDER, UH, UNDER A DIFFERENT OWNER? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          WE KNOW WHAT THE CURRENT, WHAT THERE, THE CURRENT BUYER OR THE CURRENT OWNER OWNER IS PROPOSING TWO STORES. 
          SO THAT IS NOT OUR CONCERN. 
          OUR CONCERN IS LIKE IF THIS PROPERTY IS SOLD LATER ON, OR IF THE OWNER LEADER CHANGES HIS MIND OR WHAT CAN BE STORED THERE, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN, IN THE, ON THIS PROPERTY, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE YOU'RE ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL HOMES. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND I HEAR YOUR CONCERN ON THAT. 
          UM, SO MY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT IS, UM, IF YOU ARE NOT PLANNING TO STORE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, UM, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WOULD HOLD YOU BACK FROM A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT, UM, SPECIFICALLY LAYS OUT THAT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WILL NOT BE STORED ON THE SITE JUST TO PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE, IN THE FUTURE? UM, RON THROWER, AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO FIRST POINT OUT THAT WE HEARD ABOUT THIS 24 HOURS AGO. 
          SO WE HAVEN'T DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ON THIS RIGHT NOW. 
          UM, I CAN TELL YOU THAT, UM, THE FIRST CONCERN THAT CAME TO MY MIND IS HOW HAS THE RESTRICTED COVENANT GOING TO BE ENFORCED BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE A PRIVATE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. 
          IT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE IF THIS COULD SOMEHOW BE A PUBLIC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, SO THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT CAN BE CALLED INTO 3 1 1, IF THERE'S, IF THERE'S AN ISSUE, WHICH WE WILL NOT ANTICIPATE, BUT IF THERE'S AN ISSUE, SO THAT CODE ENFORCEMENT COULD DEAL WITH THIS. 
          AND BY THAT, YOU'D HAVE FIRE MARSHALS THAT WOULD COME OUT AND VISIT THE SITE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY SORT OF, UH, WRONGDOINGS GOING ON WITH HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON THE PROPERTY, IN THE INSTANCE OF A PRIVATE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. 
          IT DOES CAUSE A LITTLE BIT OF PAUSE FROM US. 
          HOW ARE HOW'S THAT GOING TO BE ENFORCED? ARE THEY GOING TO BE HIRING A FIRE MARSHALL TO COME KNOCK ON THE DOOR, THE FACILITY TO ASK, TO ENTER THE FACILITY? AND THERE'S JUST SOME COMPLICATIONS THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ARE HIGHLY REGULATED BY THE AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT. 
          AND IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN FIND THIS TO BE INTO A PUBLIC RESTRICTED, RESTRICTED COVENANT, THAT WOULD BE A FAR MORE PREFERABLE SITUATION. 
          UH, AND WE UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITIES OF IT BEING A PUBLIC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT BECAUSE OF THE LAW DEPARTMENT AND THE SITUATION THAT, THAT THEY PUT ON, UH, THESE TYPES OF ISSUES. 
          BUT, UH, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER BEEN ASKED TO LOOK AT A PRIVATE RESTRICTION COVENANT FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. 
          AND IT'S, UH, IT'S GOING TO BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW WE CAN WORK THIS OUT. 
          UM, I'M NOT SAYING WE'RE AGAINST IT. 
          I'M NOT GONNA SAY WE'RE FOR IT, BUT WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS DIALOGUE ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH CITY COUNCIL. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, AND MY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS, UM, IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO A CEO, UM, REGARDING, UM, HAZARDOUS 
          [01:05:01]
MATERIALS AS, AS A USE THAT CANNOT BE DONE ON THE SITE, UH, WHEN HE RODE STAFF? UNFORTUNATELY, NO, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO LIST THAT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ARE NOT ALLOWED, BUT IT IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT A LAND USE. 
          UM, ALSO I BELIEVE THERE HAVE BEEN PELVIC RESTRICTIVE CABINETS FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN THE PAST, BUT THEY'VE BEEN, THEY'VE BEEN ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND THE, YOU KNOW, THE QUANTITIES HAVE BEEN KNOWN, AND THIS IS, THIS IS AN UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY AND THERE ARE, UM, HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS IN THE IMMEDIATELY IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY THAT WOULD, THAT TRIGGER THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH, UM, QUESTIONS, UH, COMMISSIONER SNYDER. 
          UH, I, UH, I THINK THIS IS FOR MRS. MS. IDRA. 
          UM, I UNDERSTOOD FROM THE APPLICANT THAT I THINK THEY APPLICANT SAID THAT YOU HAD AGREED WITH THEM, THAT YOU WILL CONTINUE THESE DISCUSSIONS, BUT YOU DIDN'T HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT MOVING THIS FORWARD TONIGHT. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? OR, UM, COULD YOU, UH, MAYBE YOU SET UP IN YOUR REMARKS THAT I MISSED THAT. 
          YEAH, NO, ABSOLUTELY. 
          UM, NO, THAT IS CORRECT. 
          UM, WE DID ALERT, UM, MS. UM, HASI ABOUT OUR CONCERNS REGARDING HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS, UM, FROM THE ONSET, BUT OUR CONTACT TEAM DID NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON THIS ITEM UNTIL YESTERDAY WHEN WE FOUND OUT THAT THIS WAS COMING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          SO THAT'S HOW THIS HAS TRANSPIRED, BUT YEAH, SO WE WERE WHATEVER SOLUTIONS WE CAN, UM, YOU KNOW, WORK ON AND RESOLVE. 
          UM, WE WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, UH, WE'RE JUST VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE HIGH AMOUNT OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN OUR AREA. 
          UM, SO, AND BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A FIRE STATION THAT IS EQUIPPED TO ADDRESS HAZARDOUS MATERIALS FIRES, UM, AND WHEN WE TO STATIONS HAVE EMERGENCY EMS PERSONNEL ON SITE. 
          SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS, ALL OF THESE MULTIPLY, AND WE'RE JUST CONCERNED IN, IN THIS SITUATION, THERE'S RESIDENTIAL HOMES IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY, AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO PROTECT THEM FOR AS LONG AS THEY CHOOSE TO REMAIN THERE. 
          IT SOUNDED LIKE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS. 
          UM, BUT, UH, I I'M, I'M STILL NOT CLEAR, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THIS MOVING FORWARD AND DISCUSSING THIS? AND I TRY AND DO ADDRESS IT BEFORE IT GETS TO COUNCIL OR YOU OR THE CLIMATE COMMISSION TO VOTE AGAINST THIS? NO, NO, NO, NO. 
          I APOLOGIZE. 
          WE ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE OWNER ARE CONTACTING, IS NOT IN OPPOSITION TO THE USE OF THE CHANGE OF THE YOUTH. 
          WHAT WE'RE CONCERNED IS ABOUT THE PROTECTION OF THE COMMUNITY AND IN THIS CASE, PUBLIC SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY REGARDING HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. 
          SO WE WANT THE ASSURANCE THAT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WILL NOT BE STORED ON THIS, ON THIS SIDE, UM, FOR THAT REASON. 
          SO, NO, WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GET, TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE STAFF TO SEE THE SECOND ALSO OFFER, UM, OUT OF THE, YOU KNOW, THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX SOLUTIONS THAT MAYBE WE CAN COME UP WITH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, MS. ROGERS, DO WE HAPPEN TO HAVE ANYBODY FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT? UH, NO, NOT, NOT, NOT FOR THIS MEETING. 
          I, I DID NOT ASK THEM TO BE HERE TONIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          I ASSUME IF I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT STANDARDS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS THAT YOU WOULD, THAT'S NOT WHAT VENDOR. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER SHANE. 
          SO IS THERE ANY PROCESS, I MEAN, CAUSE WHEN I'VE DONE, LIKE, UM, JUST LIKE, UM, LET'S SAY, UH, COMMERCIAL, UM, YOU KNOW, CHANGE OF USE IN, IN, IN A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND THEN WE HAD TO STORE SOMETHING, IT ENDED UP GOING THROUGH REVIEWING FIVE FIRE MARSHALL WHERE THE STORAGE, WHAT CHEMICALS WE HAD TO OUTLINE, EVERY SINGLE THING THAT WAS GOING TO GO INTO THERE DURING THAT PROCESS. 
          SO I LOOK AT THIS, I KNOW WE'RE HERE IN THE CONDITION OF ZONING RIGHT NOW, BUT IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CATCH THIS EVEN DURING, YOU KNOW, CAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO BUILDING THERE. 
          IS THERE A PROCESS THAT CAN BE THAT DURING WHETHER IT BE BUILDING PLAN, REVIEW THAT IT GOES TO THAT, AND MAYBE THERE COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S WRITTEN THERE. 
          JUST THAT ANY, ANY TYPE OF HAZARD STORAGE NEEDS TO GET REVIEWED? I MEAN, OR IS THAT ALREADY A PROCESS BY THE CITY? BECAUSE I KNOW THAT DURING A TYPE OF USE CHANGE, LIKE FOR INSTANCE, IF I WAS GOING TO DO PERSONAL SERVICES, LIKE IT WAS A HAIR SALON. 
          SO IF WE HAD TO DOCUMENT EVERYTHING, BUT THIS IS COMPLETELY OPEN-ENDED AT THIS POINT. 
          SO 
          [01:10:01]
HOW WOULD THAT WORK? OR COULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT HA THAT IS TAKEN CARE OF LATER DURING BUILDING REVIEW? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, IF IT'S GOING TO BE, UM, OUTDOOR STORAGE OF, OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, THEN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE DONE AT THE SITE PLAN PROCESS. 
          AND THERE'S A HAZMAT FORM THAT HAS TO GET FILLED OUT. 
          IT'S A MULTIPLE PAGE FORM THAT GETS SUBMITTED TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. 
          IT'S THEIR DISCRETION OF WHETHER THEY APPROVE IT OR NOT. 
          UM, WE'VE DEALT WITH THAT WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH, UH, LARGE QUANTITIES OF GASOLINE ASSOCIATED WITH GENERATORS TO, UH, PERPETUATE, UH, DATA CENTERS, THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          AND I KNOW THAT THERE IS LIKE A 500 FOOT RESTRICTION TO HAVE THE LARGER QUANTITIES OF THESE FUELS. 
          UM, I'VE NOT BEEN INVOLVED IN A PROJECT WHERE OUTDOOR STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAS BEEN A SMALLER QUANTITY AND GONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS. 
          BUT AGAIN, IF IT'S AN EXTERIOR STORAGE ITEM, IT'S NOT AT THE SITE PLAN PROCESS. 
          AND IT IS ALSO PART OF THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS AS WELL. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT MY CONCERN IS THE USE AT THIS POINT, RIGHT? THEY'RE SAYING THEY'RE GOING TO JUST STORE, YOU KNOW, AVI EQUIPMENT AND MINOR THINGS. 
          SO IT'LL GO THROUGH AND THE FIRE MARSHALL, OR, BUT IT LOOKS AT IT, IT'S FINE BECAUSE THE STORAGE WASN'T GOING TO BE ANYTHING OF CONCERN, BUT BECAUSE IT COULD HAVE IT, WHAT'S THE CITY PROCESS THAT FOR INSTANCE, THERE'S A FORM YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE GOING TO STORE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. 
          IS THAT, I MEAN, IS THIS PART OF THE CITY PROCESS, IF NOW I'M GOING TO STORE SOME OF THIS THAT I HAVE TO GET THIS THING APPROVED BY THE, THE FIRE, YOU KNOW, BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ANYWAY, OR IS IT GOING TO BE SO OPEN-ENDED WE GOT OUR PERMIT, WE GOT OUR BUILDING. 
          NO ONE KNOWS NO ONE, YOU KNOW, OR, I MEAN, CAN IT BE WRITTEN IN THERE THAT THIS IS PART OF THE PROCESS? I'M NOT SURE. 
          UM, I WILL SAY THAT IF SOMEBODY IS JUST GOING TO STORE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS THERE, THEY WOULD DO IT. 
          IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT ILLEGALLY, THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT IN VIOLATION TO CITY CODE AND THE RESTRICT COVENANT, THEN THAT CHANCE. 
          BUT THEN IN MY OPINION, IT'S GOING TO BE A SITUATION WHERE CAN THEY GET ACTUAL INSURANCE TO THE BUILDING? BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THE INSURERS IN SOME CASES WILL AUDIT AND THEY'LL COME OUT AND LOOK. 
          AND IF THEY SEE SOMETHING THAT'S A LIABILITY, THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THE ISSUES RIGHT AWAY. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, CAN WE IMPLEMENT SOMETHING DURING THE PROCESS? UM, I'M NOT AWARE OF SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE, BUT, UM, I'M OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS. 
          HM. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I HAVE SOME IDEAS, BUT MAYBE I'LL THROW THAT TO YOU LATER. 
          IT'S STILL REVIEWING IN MY HEAD, BUT THANK YOU. 
          THANKS. 
          ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER, WITH ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, I'LL JUST MAKE A COMMENT. 
          HAVING PERMITTED CITY FACILITIES BEFORE THERE IS A HAZMAT PERMIT PROCESS THAT YOU HAVE TO DETAIL THE QUANTITIES AND THE TYPES OF CHEMICALS YOU STORE AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEWS THAT, UM, IF YOU'RE BELOW CERTAIN THRESHOLDS, YOU MAY NOT NEED A PERMIT. 
          THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE, UH, OWNER BUILDING OWNER WOULD HAVE TO EVALUATE TO SEE IF A PERMIT WOULD BE REQUIRED. 
          I WOULD HOPE THAT THERE'S SOME REASONABLENESS IN THE CO, UH, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE AT MY HOUSE, I HAVE ACETONE, I HAVE OTHER CHEMICALS AND PESTICIDES IN MY SHED. 
          I MEAN, HOPEFULLY IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOSE LEVELS, I THINK THAT A HOMEOWNER WOULD MAINTAIN, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY WE CAN BE REASONABLE AND NOT, YOU KNOW, INCLUDE THOSE KINDS OF, UH, QUANTITIES. 
          UH, BUT DEFINITELY IF WE HAVE BIGGER BARRELS, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL DRUMS THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT. 
          SO, BUT THERE IS A FIRE DEPARTMENT PROCESS FOR PERMITTING, THOSE KINDS OF USES, UM, OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. 
          UH, OKAY. 
          DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? UH, DO WE HAVE MOTION, UM, COMMISSIONER SHAPE, A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          DO WE HAVE A SECOND, UH, STARTED HEMPEL ALL RIGHT. 
          YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          MY CHAIR, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? OKAY. 
          ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WANT TO SPEAK FOR, OR AGAINST A COMMISSIONER COX FOUR AGAINST, UH, OR I GUESS, OKAY. 
          AND THEN WE HAVE CONDITIONS THAT GO AHEAD. 
          I W I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, I SPOKE WITH MR. GARY ABOUT HER CONCERNS MORE BROADLY AS IT RELATES TO A WORK THAT'S HAPPENING AT THE AIRPORT. 
          AND JUST FOR THE COMMISSION'S, UH, UNDERSTANDING OF THIS, UH, I BELIEVE THE NEAREST FIRE STATION THAT'S HAZMAT CAPABLE IS STATION NUMBER 14, WHICH IS UP BY MUELLER, WHICH MADE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE WHEN MUELLER WAS AN AIRPORT. 
          UH, BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE NOW. 
          SO I HOPE, I HOPE VERY MUCH SO THAT MITZI GARY, UM, IS ABLE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AND GET THAT THING GONE WITH COUNCIL AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. 
          CAUSE IT WOULD MAKE A LOT OF SENSE TO HAVE A HAZMAT CAPABLE OF STATION, MUCH CLOSER TO THIS PARTICULAR AREA IN RELATION 
          [01:15:01]
TO THE AIRPORT. 
          BUT I DON'T, MY PERSONAL BELIEF IS, IS A SITE THIS SMALL AND, AND THE QUANTITIES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE TYPE OF USE, I WOULDN'T WANT TO PUNISH THIS PARTICULAR LANDOWNER FOR, FOR SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE FURTHER PLANNED OUT BY, BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. 
          SO I'LL, I'LL SUPPORT THIS IN HOPES THAT MISSING AREA AND OTHER GROUPS ARE ABLE TO MAKE PROGRESS ON THAT. 
          HASN'T HAD, I, UH, SAW COMMISSIONER PRACTICES HANDS UP. 
          YES. 
          UM, SO I JUST WANT TO COMMENT, UM, I'LL SAY I'M IN S OR, UM, BUT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW THERE ARE PROCESSES, UM, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A PERMIT MAY OR MAY NOT BE REQUIRED IN THE FUTURE IF USE CHANGED. 
          AND THERE WERE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORED. 
          UM, BUT JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE PROCESSES, DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE EQUITABLE PROCESSES THAT RESULT IN, UM, PROTECTING, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THOSE RESIDENTS ARE, UM, WORKING CLASS AND RESIDENTS OF COLOR. 
          SO, UM, I'M ALSO JUST ECHOING WHAT OTHER FOLKS HAVE SAID THAT I'M HOPEFUL THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CONTACT TEAM AND THE APPLICANT WILL WORK TOGETHER, UM, TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE THAT THESE CONCERNS, UH, ARE REFLECTED IN, UH, IN WHATEVER THAT OUTCOME IS. 
          AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I WOULD JUST ASK THE DEVELOPER TO LOOK AT HOW, UM, IF YOU ALL TAKE PREVENTATIVE ACTION, UM, AND PREVENT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS FROM BEING STORED THERE IN THE FUTURE, THAT COULD BE PREVENTING A FUTURE CRISIS FOR THE COMMUNITY, UM, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH, UM, IF THERE WAS A NEW OWNER AND THAT WOULD TAKE, YOU KNOW, BE A WHOLE BATTLE AND WE SHOULDN'T, YOU KNOW, PUT COMMUNITY MEMBERS THROUGH THAT. 
          SO I HOPE WE LEARNED FROM HISTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM AND EAST AUSTIN AND, AND DO THE ART, DO OUR PART BASICALLY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ANY MORE COMMISSIONERS FOR AGAINST I HAVE MOTION. 
          UH, WELL, WE HAD A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SHAY SECONDARY BY VESTURE HEMPEL LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE. 
          UH THERE'S ON THE DIETS AND FAVOR THAT'S EVERYONE, THOSE, UH, VIRTUALLY ALL RIGHT. 
          THAT ITEM PASSES. 
          UH, WE HAVE 4, 6, 10, 0. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT, 
          [B12. Preliminary Plan: C8J-2019-0090 - Stoney Ridge Highlands; District 2]
LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO THE LAST DISCUSSION ITEM B12, UM, IS WE HAVE STAFF, WE NEED A FEW MINUTES FOR FOLKS TO TRANSITION CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LIAISON, AND VERSE. 
          SO STAFF SHOULD BE ON THE VIDEO CONFERENCE. 
          UM, AN EMAIL WAS SENT TO THE, UM, TO THE APPLICANT. 
          I DO NOT HAVE THEM ON THE TELECONFERENCE. 
          SO JUST FYI, JUST CLARIFY, BUT WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. 
          YES. 
          MR. ISABELLA IS HERE TO PRESENT ON THE TELEPHONE ON THE VIDEO CONFERENCE. 
          GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. 
          THIS IS A SETUP FOR RHONDA WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, UH, FOR KC H UH, 20 19 0 9 0. 
          UH, THE DYSTONIA THAILAND, UH, PRELIMINARY PLAN. 
          UH, IT IS LOCATED AT 28, UH, PARDON ME AT 75 TO SEVEN ALLOY ROAD. 
          UH, THIS PROPERTY IS OWNED SF FOUR A AND A, THE, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO A SUBDIVISION WITH, UH, 588 LOTS ON A 224.27 ACRES. 
          UH, THE, UH, PLAN HADN'T BEEN REVIEWED BY STAFF AND, UM, CONSIDERED, UH, APPROVAL BOTH. 
          AND, UH, IT'D BE PRESENTED TO YOU AS A CONSENT AGENDA, UH, ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          UM, THIS, UH, PROPERTY IS ALSO, UH, REVIEWED BY, UH, TRAVIS COUNTY AND TRAVIS COUNTY HAS ALSO, UH, CLEARED THE COMMENTS AND, UH, AFTER, UM, AND, UH, THE PLAN CAN MEET A DEPARTMENT TO BE APPROVED. 
          UM, I AM HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND, UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY, UH, UH, OR REQUIRE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          UH, SO AS A STATE, I DO NOT HAVE THE APPLICANTS ON THE TELECONFERENCE OR PRESENT. 
          UM, WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, UM, MR. KEITH DOZER, MR. DELOSURE, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO PRESENT. 
          GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONER. 
          YOU'RE SAYING STAFF. 
          UM, I'M HERE TONIGHT. 
          UM, IN OPPOSITION SPECIFICALLY FOR ROAD ACCESS, THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION HAS, UM, THREE PROPERTIES NORTH OF IT THAT I OWN. 
          UM, ALL THREE ARE LANDLOCKED. 
          [01:20:02]
UM, ACCESS IS BY EASEMENT OVER OTHER PROPERTY. 
          UM, ALL THREE PROPERTIES WERE LEGALLY SUBDIVIDED OR EXISTED IN THEIR CONFIGURATION BEFORE RESTRICTIONS WOULD HAVE REQUIRED ROAD FRONTAGE. 
          UM, SO THERE ARE THREE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH WITHOUT PUBLIC ROAD ACCESS, UM, OR WITHOUT PUBLIC ROAD FRONTAGE. 
          AND THE PROPOSAL, UM, SHOWS TWO STUBBED OUT ROADS HEADED EAST, UM, TO OTHER PROPERTIES. 
          AND THOSE TWO PROPERTIES DO IN FACT HAVE PUBLIC ROAD FRONTAGE. 
          MY OPPOSITION IS, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BRING PUBLIC ROAD FRONTAGE TO THREE PARCELS IN THE COUNTY. 
          AND THE SHARED FRONTAGE IS, IS QUITE LONG. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO BE REVIEWED, UH, PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF ANY PLAT I REMAIN AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THE SIDE. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER. 
          LET'S GO AND VOTE. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, THAT'S ANONYMOUS. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? UH, JUST A REAL QUICK POINT OF CLARIFICATION. 
          WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR APPROVAL HERE? UM, ARE WE UNDER A TIME FRAME FOR GETTING THIS ACTED ON MR. CHAIR?  NOT HOW TO BUILD 31 6, 7. 
          THIS WAS POWER BILL, BUT IT WOULD BE REVIEWED UNDER, UH, PREVIOUS, UH, REQUIREMENT. 
          SO, UH, IT NEEDED, IT, IT BE POSSIBLE THAT IT CAN BE, IT CAN BE POSTPONED. 
          THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE OPTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, BUT, UH, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FROM ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, I GUESS I'M JUST CURIOUS IF STAFF HAS A RESPONSE TO, TO THE PUBLIC'S COMMENT ABOUT ACCESS TO THOSE LANDMARK PARCELS. 
          WAS THAT LOOKED AT, AND WHAT IS STAFF'S RESPONSE? UM, FIRST, UM, WITH A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION, UH, THE ONLY REQUIREMENT IS THAT ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IS THAT ANY PROPOSED LOT THAT IS, UH, UH, ON A PLAN, IT DOESN'T HAVE PUBLIC, UH, ACID. 
          UH, THE OWNER IS ONLY OBLIGATED TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO HIS PROPERTY OR THE LAWS THAT ARE IN HIS PROPERTY, ANYTHING THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THOSE MONITORS OF THE PROPERTY. 
          WE, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY JURISDICTION OR COULD REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO ACTUALLY PROPOSE TO ME RIGHT AWAY. 
          SO, BUT, BUT ISN'T THERE SOME SORT OF STATE LAW ABOUT HOW LANDLOCKED PROPERTIES HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO PUBLIC AWAY, LIKE, LIKE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE TO PROVIDE SOME SORT OF EASEMENT ACCESS. 
          CORRECT. 
          AND THEN LOOKING AT THIS APPLICATION, IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS COMMENTS MADE BY, UH, BY OUR, OUR STAFF. 
          AND I'LL GO TRY TO CONNIE REGARDING THE BALANCE OF TRACK. 
          AND IT LOOKS LIKE THOSE WERE APPROVED. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, I CAN'T, I DON'T HAVE A QUICK ACCESS TO LOOKING AT HOW THE, UM, REQUIREMENTS WERE MET. 
          UM, I'M ACTUALLY COVERING THIS CASE FOR SOMEONE WHO HAS RETIRED, BUT, UH, IT DOES LOOK LIKE THAT, UM, REQUIREMENT WAS MET, BUT, UM, THAT IT, YES, IT COULD BE TO BACK UP A LITTLE, UH, WHENEVER A BOUNCE ATTRACT IS TRIGGERED, RIGHT IN APPLICATION THAT'S ATTRACT, UH, IS, UH, FOR ANY PROPERTIES THAT WERE QUITE AN ILLUSIONAL TRACK, ANYTHING THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THAT ORIGINAL TRACK, THAT WE CANNOT, UM, UH, REQUEST ANY, ANY, UM, ANY FURTHER REQUIREMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STATE LAW, WHICH SUPERSEDES CITY REGULATIONS, AND IF YOU'RE APPROVING A PLAN OR A PRELIMINARY PLAN THAT LAYS OUT TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, AND IT MAKES NO PROVISION OR ACCESS TO RIGHT AWAY TO ADJACENT LOCKS THAT HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS THROUGH THIS PLAN, THROUGH THE BOUNDARIES OF THIS TRENT, I MEAN, ISN'T THIS THE TIME TO ADDRESS THAT BEFORE WE, BEFORE WE PUT OUR SEAL OF APPROVAL ON THIS TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE THAT DOESN'T APPEAR TO ADDRESS ACCESS REQUIREMENTS WHERE STATE LAW REQUIRES IT. 
          YEAH. 
          BUT THE, THE ACCIDENT WOULD HAVE TO BE FOR THE, FOR THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. 
          IF THE, IF THE APPLICANT IS ABLE TO CLEAR THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BOUNCER TRACK, THEN THERE IS THE BOUNCER TRACK. 
          AND WE, WE, WE COULD GO AHEAD AND PROCEED FURTHER THAT WAY, IF THERE WAS A BALANCE TO TRACK THEM THAT, UM, WE STILL WOULDN'T, WOULDN'T ACTUALLY BE REQUIRED TO, TO, OR THE APPLICANT WOULDN'T BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ANY TYPE OF ACCESS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTY. 
          [01:25:07]
IT'S STILL A LITTLE CONFUSED, BUT HOPEFULLY, MAYBE SOMEONE HAS MORE QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT CLARIFY COMMISSIONERS ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          DO I HAVE MOTION? UH, CHRIS SCHNEIDER, I, I GUESS I HAVE A FOLLOWUP QUESTION. 
          SORRY, NOT EMOTION. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UM, UH, ALSO FOR STAFF. 
          SO, UM, AT WHAT POINT IN THE PROCESS OF, OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, DOES THE NEIGHBOR, IS THERE A PUBLIC PART OF THIS PROCESS THAT THE NEIGHBOR GETS TO RAISE THE CONCERN ABOUT HIS PROPERTIES, EACH NET AND ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, OR IS THAT A MATTER THAT IS TYPICALLY OR REQUIRED BY LAW TO JUST BE HANDLED PRIVATELY, LIKE WITH AN INDIVIDUAL LAWSUIT OR SOMETHING, UM, OR AGAIN, PHILOSOPHY FOR THE SUBDIVISION WHERE WE CAN ONLY REQUIRE APPLICANTS TO PROVIDE RIGHT AWAY IN THEIR PROPERTY OR AN APPLICANT CANNOT MEET, WE CAN'T, UM, REQUEST OR MAKE THE REQUIREMENT TO THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE IN A WAY TO CHOOSE FROM, WITH THE PROPERTY WE'LL RIGHT AWAY TO 2015 VERB, AS FAR AS, UM, ANY TYPE OF OLD GUY. 
          SO IT'S THERE ANOTHER STEP IN THE PROCESS OF GOING FROM PLANTING TO ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING AND PAVING AND STREETS WHERE THE NEIGHBOR HAS SOME OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE THIS, OR IS THAT NOT EVEN CONTEMPLATED UNDER THE LENDED ELEMENT CODE? YEAH. 
          IT SORT OF THIS, THERE WOULDN'T BE, AS FAR AS I'M FAMILIAR WITH, THERE WILL BE ANOTHER, ANOTHER POSSIBILITY FOR NOW. 
          OKAY. 
          THANKS. 
          THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DO I HAVE MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER POTS. 
          I MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING BECAUSE I'D REALLY LIKE MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE RESEARCH. 
          UH, STAFF TOLD US THAT THIS WAS CONTEMPLATED BY THE STAFF THAT'S RETIRED AND THE COMMENT WAS CLEARED, BUT I LIKE TO KNOW HOW THE COMMENT WAS CLEARED. 
          UM, SO MY PROPOSAL IS TO GET THAT ANSWER AT THE NEXT MEETING COMMUNITY. 
          OKAY. 
          WE GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON. 
          DO WE NEED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? UM, COMMISSIONER IT'S R DO YOU WANT, THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          I JUST, I KNOW IF STAFF CAN HELP CLARIFY THIS FOR ME. 
          AND I THINK I REMEMBER THIS CORRECTLY, BUT JUST, I'M NOT IN A LOT OF WHAT EMOTION, BUT JUST FOR THE MOTION OF THIS, IF WE DENIED A, BECAUSE SUBDIVISION, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DENIED WITH CERTAIN GORD REQUIREMENTS THAT CORRECT. 
          SO WE WOULD HAVE TO GIVE THE REASONS FOR WHY THIS DOES NOT MEET OUR CODE REQUIREMENTS. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WAS A QUESTION FOR STAFF. 
          UM, NOW I BELIEVE THE, UH, THE COMMISSIONER COX, THAT YOUR QUESTION, OF COURSE, BOWMAN. 
          SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT AN ACTUAL DENIAL. 
          YES. 
          AND I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF WE DECIDED TO PROCEED OR DENY WE HAVE TO DO IT WITH THESE REASONS UNDER STATE LAW. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT CORRECT? YES. 
          ONCE YOU, ONCE YOU MAKE THE ACCIDENT, UH, OR DENIAL, THEN THERE HAS TO BE A CODE SECTION AND THERE HAS TO BE A DICTATION WHY IT WAS DENIED. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. 
          SO I THOUGHT THIS IS NOT, I THOUGHT WE BEGAN THE DISCUSSION THAT THIS WASN'T COVERED UNDER ANY KIND OF SHOCK CLOCK. 
          ANYWAY, THAT IS CORRECT ON CIRCULATION. 
          THIS IS, THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE FOR HOSPITAL 36 7, OR IT CAN, IT CAN BE POSTPONED. 
          SURE. 
          CONDITIONALLY LEAVES ON AMPER. 
          I THINK CLARIFYING, UH, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT A SHOT CLOCK, IT'S STILL UNDER THE, IF IT MEETS ALL APPLIQUE, BUT, UH, ALL APPLICABLE, UM, REGULATIONS. 
          SO I GUESS THAT'S A QUESTION I DON'T SEE WHERE WE HAVE GROUNDS AT THIS POINT FOR A POSTPONEMENT. 
          SURE. 
          I THINK SO TWO THINGS, ONE, THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE. 
          IT'D BE NICE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND TO, UM, THIS, WE HEARD THAT STAFF RETIRED AND I KNOW STAFF'S DEALING WITH A LOT OF UNDER STAFFING. 
          A LOT OF FOLKS WERE LEAVING AND IT WOULD JUST, IT WOULD BE TOO BAD TO ACCIDENTALLY HAVE MISSED SOMETHING. 
          SO IT'D BE GREAT TO GET A CONFIRMATION FROM STAFF THAT THEY LIKE THIS PLAN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NEW EYES ON IT, AND LET'S JUST HEAR BACK IN TWO WEEKS AND HOPEFULLY HEAR THAT EVERYTHING'S GOOD. 
          AND THAT WE'RE NOT ACCIDENTALLY LOPPING OFF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY TO THE NORTH OF THIS WITH NO ACCESS. 
          [01:30:02]
OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO, UM, YEAH, THE, UH, ANY MORE SPEAKERS FOR, AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT TILL DO WE NEED TO, WOULD THIS BE AT OUR NEXT MEETING? SO THE MOTION COMMISSIONER COX. 
          YEAH. 
          WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS THE DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING? 1628. 
          UH, I MAKE A MOTION TO POST BONDED JUNE 20 20TH. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          AND MR. ANDERSON, WE STILL HAVE YOUR SECOND ON THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S UH, THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A VOTE UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, LET'S START ON THE DYESS, THOSE IN FAVOR AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S UNANIMOUS. 
          SO WE'RE GOING TO POSTPONE TO JUNE 20TH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          WE ARE DONE WITH OUR DISCUSSION CASES. 
          UM, A CHAIR. 
          YES. 
          SORRY. 
          DO WE NEED TO RECONSIDER THE QUESTION BY WHICH WE DECIDED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, CHECKING MACHINE LIES, THEN ANDREW RIVERA. 
          THIS IS WITHIN YOUR 14 DAYS. 
          SO YOU DO NOT HAVE TO REVISIT THAT MATTER, BUT THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER FOR ASKING. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM, WHICH, UH, AND JUST WANT TO SAY WE DO HAVE, UH, MR. GREG DUTTON HERE FROM STAFF TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. 
          UM, BUT THE PROCESS FOR THIS, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND, UH, GIVE SIX MINUTES TO THE CO-SPONSORS COMMISSIONER, SHEA, MR. ANDERSON, UH, TO SPEAK TO THIS WORKING GROUP OR THE JUSTIFICATION FOR IT. 
          AND THEN WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR, UH, EIGHT Q AND A, THE USUAL EIGHT FOLKS, FIVE MINUTES, AND THEN WE CAN, UH, ENTERTAIN MOTIONS FOR FORMATION OF A WORKING GROUP OR NOT. 
          I MEAN, WE MAY COME OUT OF THIS WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, WE MAY WANT TO PAUSE OR WE THINK IT'S NOT NEEDED, BUT ALL THOSE OPTIONS AROUND THE TABLE. 
          [C. ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION]
SO LET'S GO AND START. 
          UM, I'LL GO ON TO READ. 
          THIS IS ITEM C C1 DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION ESTABLISHING A WORKING GROUP TASKS WITH FORWARDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          UH, THERE WAS A, UH, SYNOPSIS OF THE, THIS WORKING GROUP AND ITS PURPOSE. 
          IT WAS IN THE BACKUP FROM COMMISSIONERS, SHEA, AND ALSO COMMISSIONERS. 
          YOU ALSO HAVE THE, UH, KIND OF THE RULES AROUND FORMATION OF WORKING GROUPS. 
          IT WAS ALREADY ALSO PROVIDED. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT, UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM OUR TWO CO-SPONSORS, UM, WHICH OF YOU WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN? UH, OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER SHACK. 
          YEAH. 
          I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND START. 
          I MEAN, I'M ASSUMING YOU GUYS HAVE ALL READ JUST MY QUICK LITTLE SYNOPSIS OF WHY. 
          UM, I'D LIKE TO START THIS WORKING GROUP, UM, YOU KNOW, AS WE SEEN BEFORE, IT JUST, WHY IS HOUSING SO HARD TO CREATE IN THE CITY WHEN, DURING A TIME WHEN WE ARE IN SUCH DIRE NEED OF IT. 
          AND SO MANY TIMES THAT, UM, I'VE COME TO SEE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE WE ARE OUR OWN WORST ENEMY AND THERE ARE GREAT IDEAS, BUT WE ENDED UP HITTING AGAINST AN ARCHAIC CODE. 
          AND WHEN WE HAD GREAT IDEAS COME THROUGH DURING CODE NEXT, AND WHEN CODE NEXT DIDN'T GET ADOPTED, A LOT OF THOSE GREAT IDEAS JUST KIND OF FELL AWAY. 
          AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW IS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, CITY COUNCIL HAS ALSO STARTED TAKING THE STEPS TO KIND OF PIECEMEAL, YOU KNOW, LIKE W WHAT WE JUST SAW THEM DOING ABOUT WITH COMPATIBILITY OF TAKING THE CONCEPTS AND TOOLS THAT WE DID START WITH AND KIND OF LIKE INCREMENTALLY, UM, PUSHING HIM FORWARD. 
          BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M PROPOSING IS KIND OF BEING ABLE TO TAKE THAT AND CREATE A WORKING GROUP TO START LOOKING AT ALL THE DIFFERENT PIECES OF DIFFERENT KNOBS THAT WE CAN TURN TO MAKE IT SO WE CAN CREATE MORE HOUSING IN A MORE AFFORDABLE WAY. 
          UM, AND THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, SOME EXAMPLES WOULD BE, UM, LOOKING AT, FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY IF WE WERE GOING TO LOOK AT, UH, I DUNNO, MCMANSION ASPECTS, RIGHT. 
          RATHER THAN WE DON'T DO AWAY WITH IT, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT SOME, YOU KNOW, WHAT EVERYBODY WANTED, UH, POLITICALLY HOW TO DO THAT, BUT THERE ARE TWEAKS THAT WE CAN DO, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE GET MORE HOUSING, FOR INSTANCE, EVEN WHEN WE DO DUPLEX, I MEAN, WE'RE AT A POINT NOW WHERE, UM, A LOT OF DEVELOPERS ARE CHOOSING EVEN NOT TO DO A DUPLEX BECAUSE THEY CAN MAKE MORE MONEY JUST BY DOING A SINGLE FAMILY. 
          CAUSE WE CAN'T BUILD ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE IN A DUPLEX TO MAKE IT WORTHWHILE, TO EVEN CREATE MORE DENSITY. 
          AND THEN WE HAVE SITUATIONS WHERE THERE'S HIGHER ZONING CATEGORIES THAT BECAUSE OF COMPATIBILITY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WONDER WHY ARE THEY DOING SO LITTLE WHEN THEY HAVE HIGH ZONING? WELL, BECAUSE THERE'S A COST TO, TO HAVE TO BUILD, UM, YOU KNOW, MORE OF THAT AND IT JUST WASN'T WORTH IT. 
          SO WHAT THIS WORKING GROUP IS GOING TO DO IS TO START LOOKING AT DIFFERENT KNOBS THAT WE CAN TURN IN THE EXISTING CODE, UH, TO START MAKING 
          [01:35:01]
IT EASIER, TO GET MORE HOUSING, UH, AND MORE, UH, MORE AFFORDABLE TO DEVELOP AS WELL NOW WHERE THIS LEADS TO IS GOING TO BE, OF COURSE, IT COMES BACK TO THE CONTRACT, TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSIONS THROUGH CODES AND ORDINANCES BEFORE IT GETS SUBMITTED. 
          AND THEN OF COURSE IT COMES BACK UP, BUT THIS IS KIND OF A SIGNING BUCK WHERE THE PUBLIC, AS WELL AS COMMISSION, UM, CAN GO THROUGH. 
          AND I MEAN, I'M HOPING TO AT LEAST PICK UP SOME OF THE PIECES, WHAT WE HAD LEFT OFF WITH CODE CODE NEXT ON SOME OF THESE GREAT IDEAS. 
          SO, UM, AND WITH THAT, I MEAN, IF, UM, GREG WANTS TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE IN THIS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANKS. 
          UH, I THINK THE ONLY CHANGES I WOULD LOOK TO MAKE TO THIS, THIS POSTING IS, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          I THINK IT'S JUST REGARDING HOUSING, CORRECT? YEAH. 
          AND YOU KNOW, SO RIGHT NOW, AUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY. 
          MY DAY JOB, WE ARE WORKING ON SEVEN HOMES FOR AISD TEACHERS AND STAFF, UH, WHO EARNED BETWEEN 80 AND 120%. 
          AND WE'VE HAD HUNDREDS UPON HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF EMAILS FROM AISD TEACHERS AND STAFF WHO EARNED BETWEEN 80 AND A HUNDRED PERCENT, 20% MFI WHO HAVE WHAT CHANCE OF BUYING ANYTHING IN THIS CITY, RIGHT. 
          OR EVEN RENTING ANYTHING IN THIS CITY, BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME PROGRAMS THAT ARE WORKING, YOU KNOW, FOR FOLKS THAT ARE IN THE 80% BELOW FOR OWNERSHIP OR 60% BELOW FOR RENTAL. 
          BUT THE SECOND YOU GET TO WHAT THE MARKET'S ABLE TO BUILD AND WITH ALL OF OUR LIMITATIONS ON WHAT THE MARKET CAN BUILD, YOU KNOW, THERE'S JUST A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR CONVERSATION TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO MOVE THE NEEDLE ON HOUSING. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I WANTED COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU. 
          THE POSTING SAID FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. 
          WE'RE CREEP. 
          WE'RE WANT TO MAKE IT MORE AFFORDABLE IN THE SENSE, CREATING MORE DENSE, MORE HOUSING, AND TO BE ABLE TO MAKE IT LESS EXPENSIVE TO DEVELOP BECAUSE WE, I MEAN, WE SIT HERE EVERY TIME, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE PEOPLE COME IN AND PRESENT TO US. 
          I MEAN, IT'S, IT COSTS SO MUCH TIME MONEY, YOU KNOW, JUST TO, JUST TO DO THAT. 
          AND THEN EVEN IF THE REVIEW, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THINGS THAT ARE CURSORY REVIEW NOW. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S STAFF TIME, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE, BUT IF THERE'S A WAY TO STREAMLINE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE KNOW IS GOING TO GET APPROVED ANYWAY, THEN WHY EVEN MIGHT GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. 
          SO THIS WILL BE EVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO EVEN ENGAGE STAFF AND SEE WHAT IS THE INEFFICIENCIES HERE. 
          UM, AND LET'S, YOU KNOW, IF WE KNOW IF THIS IS A FLAT LOT AND THEY BUILD IT, THIS PLATE HEIGHT AND THIS, YOU KNOW, AND AT THIS SLOPE, IT'S OBVIOUSLY GOING TO, YOU KNOW, MEET, UM, YOU KNOW, ALL, ALL THE REGULATIONS. 
          SO THEN WHY EVEN GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS OF HAVING A DOCUMENT OF HOW THAT'S DONE. 
          UM, ANYWAY, SO ANY QUESTIONS YOU'VE HEARD, WE'VE HEARD FROM OUR CO-SPONSORS, UM, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION REGARDING THIS ITEM? UH, COMMISSIONER IS OUR, THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          ANNE, DO YOU WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE, CO-SPONSORS BRINGING THIS ITEM AND I'M DEFINITELY INTERESTED IN WORKING WITH THIS WORKING GROUP. 
          UM, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. DUTTON, IF HE'S HERE, YOU KNOW, SERVING GONE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE, I THINK WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF THINGS ARE IN THE PIPELINE AND IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF MOVEMENT THIS YEAR, AND I'M ASSUMING SOME OF THAT WORK WE'RE GO INTO NEXT YEAR. 
          I'M JUST TRYING TO ASSIGN FROM MR. JEFF, NOR ANYONE FROM STAFF, IF THEY CAN SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THE CAPACITY OF STAFF TO WORK ON SOME OF THESE ITEMS AS WELL. 
          JUST SO WE HAVE CLARITY ON HOW TO PROCEED FORWARD. 
          UH, SURE. 
          GREG DUTTON, HOUSING AND PLANNING. 
          UM, YOU'RE RIGHT. 
          WE DO HAVE AN INCREASING NUMBER OF CODE AMENDMENTS COMING FROM COUNCIL CERTAINLY LATELY. 
          UH, AND AS I THINK AS COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MENTIONED, WE'RE ALSO A LITTLE DOWN, UH, ON STAFF. 
          SO CAPACITY'S A LITTLE BIT REDUCED, I COULDN'T SAY WITH ANY CERTAINTY TONIGHT, UM, WHAT WE CAN OR CAN'T DO. 
          I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO PROBABLY COME BACK TO YOU ONCE WE KNOW THE UNIVERSE OF MAYBE WHAT THE WORKING GROUP IS GOING TO PROPOSE, UH, IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE'VE CURRENTLY GOT ON OUR TABLE, AND THEN WE COULD HAVE A MORE, UM, CONCRETE PLAN ABOUT HOW TO APPROACH IT. 
          THANK YOU, MR. DUTTON. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          THAT WAS ALL MY QUESTION. 
          CAN I I'D LIKE TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT ABOUT WHAT, UM, WHAT WAS JUST TALKED ABOUT WITH COUNSEL, BRINGING UP A LOT OF NEW ORDINANCES COMING THROUGH BACK WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH CODE NEXT, A LOT OF THESE CONCEPTS, THESE ORDINANCES, WHETHER IT BE ENVIRONMENTAL OR SUCH WAS ALWAYS BALANCED WITH SAYING, IF WE DO THIS ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT, WE WOULD GET MORE DENSITY, MORE HOUSING, OR NOW WHAT WE'RE HAVING IS THESE PIECEMEAL COMING THROUGH AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT MORE. 
          SO LET'S SAY THERE'S MORE ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS, BUT WE NEVER CAME BACK AND SAID, HEY, WELL, THIS WAS TIED BACK INTO INCREASING THIS DENSITY. 
          WELL, THIS GETS APPROVED. 
          WE HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT THIS 
          [01:40:01]
DENSITY NOW, HOW IT'S CONNECTED WITH IT. 
          IT'S JUST GOING TO MAKE IT MORE EXPENSIVE AND MORE DIFFICULT TO MAKE MORE HOUSING BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING THROUGH AND FINDING THE BALANCE BETWEEN THE TWO. 
          AND THAT'S WHY THIS IS KIND OF, WE'RE KIND OF IN A DANGEROUS SITUATION HERE, AND WE NEED TO KEEP THAT BALANCE AND KEEP THAT MOMENTUM BETWEEN THE TWO. 
          OKAY. 
          DO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF THE CO-SPONSORS COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER? UH, I'M I'M INTERESTED, UM, AND, UH, AND UNDERSTANDING THIS A LITTLE BETTER. 
          AND I THINK EVERYONE ACROSS THE CITY IS FRUSTRATED WITH, UH, UM, THE ATTEMPTS TO REFORM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY SIT. 
          UM, AND AT, UH, WHEN THE FIRST TIME I WAS ON THE COUNCIL, I CAME IN ON THE TAIL END OF THE INITIAL CODE NEXT ADOPTION. 
          AND THEN I WAS HERE. 
          I'VE BEEN HEARING A LOT OF US HAVE BEEN HERE THROUGH THE SECOND AND, YOU KNOW, WE SORT OF END UP IN THE SAME PLACE AGAIN AND AGAIN. 
          AND I THINK THAT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THAT IS THE RIGHT THING TO HAPPEN, IT IS IT'S THE FACT THAT, UM, EITHER THROUGH LEGAL MEANS OR THROUGH A LACK OF POLITICAL WILL, THE COUNCIL HAS NOT SEEN FIT TO MOVE FORWARD BROAD REFORMS. SO I GUESS AN INITIAL QUESTION FOR THE SPONSORS OF THIS PROPOSAL, I I'D LIKE A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ON, I I'VE HEARD, UH, COMMISSIONER SHAKES TALK ABOUT AND SORT OF TALK ABOUT, OR LIKE THE SITE PLAN PROCESS OR THE APPROVAL PROCESS, BUT, BUT I'M TRYING TO GET A SENSE THAT, IS THIS A DISCUSSION ABOUT BROAD REFORMS OR MINOR REFORMS AND HOW DO WE, I JUST DON'T WANT TO END UP WHERE WE'RE MAKING SOME WHERE WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT LAY OUT SOMETHING THAT IS BROAD AND OR VERY CONTROVERSIAL. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND THEN THIS JUST COLLAPSING AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THAT IS PARTICULARLY PRODUCTIVE. 
          I THINK IF WE, IF I CAN GET A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ON THE LEVEL OF THE SCOPE, SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING, I THINK I'LL HAVE A LITTLE MORE COMFORT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I'LL, I'LL COMMENT ON THAT. 
          I MEAN, AND, AND WHAT YOU SAID IS EXACTLY WHAT MY CONCERN WAS AND WHAT I WANTED THIS WORKING GROUP TO START, UH, FOCUSING ON. 
          IF YOU READ MY SYNOPSIS, I MEAN, THIS IS EXACTLY YET TO FIND THOSE, THE LOW-HANGING FRUIT PIECES, FIRST OF ALL, OF THE DOLLARS THAT WE COULD TWEAK, THAT'S NOT CONTROVERSIAL. 
          ONCE WE START HITTING THE BROAD THING, THEN IT'LL, IT'LL GO FIZZLES OUT TO, YOU KNOW, AS WE SEEN AS IT'S NOTHING, I MEAN, WE'LL LOOK AT CODE NEXT AND HOW MUCH EFFORT THAT WAS PUT INTO THAT. 
          BUT IF YOU LOOK AT IT IN PIECES, RIGHT, THEN WE COULD TWEAK CERTAIN DIALS. 
          YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE DEALT WITH, UH, WELL, FOR INSTANCE, EVEN COMPATIBILITY, LIKE, LOOK WHAT WE JUST APPROVED TONIGHT. 
          YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE A SIMILAR SITUATION LIKE THIS, THESE ARE DIALS THAT WE CAN TWEAK. 
          FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU HAVE A CERTAIN HEIGHT ZONING NEXT TO SINGLE-FAMILY, BUT THE TYPOLOGY BUILDING TYPE WAS MORE LIKE AN SFI. 
          I MEAN, THESE ARE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHY DO WE HAVE TO REHASH THIS EVERY SINGLE TIME? YOU KNOW? SO LET'S FIND THOSE DIALS THAT WORKS WITHIN EXISTING CODE. 
          SO THE BROAD ASPECTS, YOU ALWAYS LIKE CREATING NEW ORDINANCE NEW CONCEPTS AND IT GETS TIED UP, BUT THIS IS WE'RE GOING TO FIND WAYS TO WORK WITHIN OUR ARCHAIC CODE AND TWEAK THE KNOBS, UM, IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS WORK, BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF LIKE THE, THE, THE WAY THAT IT'S MOVING FORWARD WITH COUNSEL. 
          BUT AGAIN, THE DANGER IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS BALANCED AT ONE POINT THAT WE WOULD GET THIS AND YOU GET THAT, OR YOU WANT THIS AND YOU GET THAT. 
          BUT NOW IF WE DO, IF ONE SIDE FOR MEN, FOR INSTANCE, LET'S SAY, UM, THE ENGINEERING PART GOES ON, ENVIRONMENTAL GOES A CERTAIN WAY, AND IT WASN'T BALANCED WITH THAT. 
          UM, THAT INCREASE IN, IN ENTITLEMENT OR DENSITY, THEN IT'S JUST GOING TO MAKE IT EVEN WORSE AND MAKE IT HARDER FOR US TO GET MORE HOUSING. 
          SO WE HAVE TO BE LOOKING AT ALL THESE DIFFERENT PIECES. 
          AND AGAIN, THE LOW-HANGING FRUIT, I THINK IS ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS. 
          FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE COULD DO, WE TALKED ABOUT EXTENSIVELY FOR INSTANCE, ON DUPLEX, RIGHT? IF WE WERE TO ADJUST THE FAR, UH, TO ALLOW TO ENCOURAGE MORE DUPLEX CREATION, AND RIGHT NOW, NO, ONE'S GOING TO CREATE IT BECAUSE PROPERTY VALUES HAVE GONE SO HIGH IT'S YOU, YOU MAKE MORE MONEY IF YOU JUST BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME VERSUS A DUPLEX. 
          SO NO ONE'S GOING TO BUILD DENSITY IN THE CENTRAL AUSTIN, BUT IF YOU TWEAK THE FAR, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD PROBABLY GET MORE PEOPLE TO TAKE TO BUILD THE DUPLEX TOPOLOGY. 
          WE HAVE A NEW SITUATION WHERE, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM BORDER ADJUSTMENTS, IT'S LIKE THE, THE ATTIC EXEMPTION IS 
          [01:45:01]
ALL MESSED UP ALL OVER AGAIN. 
          I MEAN, WE, WE GOT TO RE-EXAMINE THIS AND, AND, AND KIND OF TWEAK THESE KNOBS AGAIN, BUT THESE ARE SIMPLE THINGS THAT WE CAN BRING ABOUT, AND IT DOESN'T CREATE NEW ORDINANCE. 
          IT TWEAKS THE CURRENT KNOBS THAT WE HAVE. 
          AND I THINK ON THE BROAD SCALE, YEAH, ON THE BROAD SCALE, IT'LL BRING UP BIGGER IDEAS THAT COULD ALSO BECOME A BROADER PIECE, BUT WE WILL PUT THAT. 
          UM, BUT THAT'S NOT THE INTENT OF THIS GROUP. 
          I FINISHED TONIGHT. 
          GO AHEAD AND FOLLOW UP. 
          SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT I UNDERSTAND. 
          YOU'RE SAYING DISCREET PROPOSALS. 
          AND THEN I GUESS THE FOLLOWUP QUESTION IS A LOT OF THESE THINGS ARE MAYBE QUITE TECHNICAL AND IT'S, IT MAY BE DIFFICULT FOR, UH, FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE SERVING ON THE WORKING GRIP TO BE ABLE TO ACCURATELY ADJUST THEM. 
          WILL WE BE ABLE, AND I GUESS I WASN'T CLEAR FROM MR. DUTTON, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE FAST SUPPORT OR IF WE NEED TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF TIMES THAT WE GO TO STAFF TO ASK FOR THEM TO SPEC SOMETHING OUT. 
          YEAH, THAT'S IT. 
          MR. DUTTON CAN COME UP HERE A BIT. 
          I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT. 
          AND THE DOCUMENT WAS SHARED TO US BY MR. RIVERA, THAT THERE WITH THE WORKING GROUP, YOU, YOU DON'T GET STAFF REPORT, BUT I DO KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW WORKING GROUPS THAT UNIMPORTANT ISSUES THAT THEY DID OFFER THEIR SUPPORT. 
          SO I'M NOT SURE WITHOUT KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IN MORE DETAIL, UH, WHETHER THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN, YOU KNOW, GET STAFF SUPPORT OR NOT. 
          RIGHT. 
          I, I, I, IT'S HARD SAY, I MEAN, WE STAFF, WE WANT TO BE HELPFUL ON THE FRONT END, SO THAT THERE'S A BETTER PRODUCT AND IT BE A RESOURCE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, BUT I, YOU KNOW, I COULDN'T COMMIT STAFF TODAY. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO BASED ON THAT, I THINK THE ASSUMPTION IS WITH THE WORKING GROUP IS YOU'RE KIND OF GOING IT ALONE. 
          YOU CAN ATTEMPT TO PUSH THINGS FORWARD, BUT THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET SUPPORT ON ANY ACTIONS, ANY ITEMS. UM, OKAY. 
          UH, LET'S SEE. 
          UM, YEAH, COMMISSIONER COX. 
          MY INITIAL REACTION TO THIS PROPOSAL IS THAT IT'S EXTREMELY BROAD AND THAT'S KIND OF EVIDENT IN SOME OF THE QUESTIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES WE HAVE, BUT WHAT I'M HEARING COMMISSIONER SHAY SAY A LOT IS TALKING ABOUT MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING. 
          AND SO WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO SAY THAT THIS IS, THIS IS A WORKING GROUP THAT'S FOCUSED ON HOW TO MAKE, HOW TO ELIMINATE POTENTIAL BARRIERS TO MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING IN THE EXISTING CODE? I WOULD HAVE TO A MOTION MAKERS, UH, WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT, MR. ANDERSON, GOOD QUESTION. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S MUCH OF A DESIRE TO REALLY LIMIT IT. 
          I, THAT'S WHY I THINK IT'S JUST THE HOUSING WORKING GROUP. 
          AND, UM, I AGREE WITH YOU AND COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER, LIKE, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS TO SEE SOME THINGS WHERE WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME AND IN THE END, NOTHING HAPPENS. 
          RIGHT? SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF CHANCES FOR US TO TALK TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS FOR US TO TALK TO THE FOLKS WHO WERE BUILDING HOUSING FOR US TO TALK TO THE FOLKS WHO NEED HOUSING AND JUST FIGURE OUT THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE COULD BE WORKING ON. 
          AND WHENEVER STAFF, IF EVER STAFF WANTS TO JOIN THE MORE THAN WELCOME TO, BUT I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S REQUIRING STAFF HELP EITHER SO WELL. 
          AND THAT'S, AND THAT'S A GOOD SEGUE TO MY NEXT QUESTION, BECAUSE ONE OF THE ISSUES I HAVE WITH OUR WORKING GROUPS IS THAT THEY'RE NOT VERY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC. 
          AND, AND WHAT I'VE SEEN IN MY LIMITED TIME HERE IS THAT SOMETIMES A WORKING GROUP WILL SPEND AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF TIME. 
          THEY'LL DEDICATE AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF ENERGY. 
          THEY'LL COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO AN ACTUAL PUBLIC FORUM WHERE THERE'S POTENTIALLY A GREATER DIVERSITY OF VOICES THAT ARE SPEAKING TO THAT ITEM. 
          AND, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THINGS MAY NOT GO THE WAY THAT PEOPLE THINK OR THE WORKING GROUP MEMBERS THOUGHT THEY WOULD. 
          AND, AND THEN IT, EVERYONE JUST FEELS FROM ME BECAUSE, BECAUSE IT MAY NOT, IT MAY NOT WORK OUT THAT WAY. 
          AND SO I JUST, I UNDERSTAND THE LOW HANGING FRUITS, I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF THIS. 
          I FEEL LIKE IF THERE TRULY WAS SOME LOW-HANGING FRUIT THAT WOULD BE EASY TO ACCOMPLISH, WE MAYBE WOULD HAVE ACCOMPLISHED THAT BY NOW. 
          SO I, MY IMPRESSION IS THAT THIS THING IS THIS WORKING GROUP IS IMMEDIATELY PROBABLY GOING TO GO TOWARDS COMPATIBILITY. 
          THEY'RE ARE GOING TO GO TOWARDS PARKING REQUIREMENTS. 
          THEY'RE GOING TO GO TOWARDS UNIT COUNTS. 
          AND IN CERTAIN ZONING CODES, ZONING KIND OF, YOU KNOW, AND THOSE ARE ALL REALLY HOT BUTTON TOPICS. 
          AND, AND SO I'M JUST, I'M JUST KINDA WONDERING HOW THAT'S GONNA PLAY OUT, UM, WITH, YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO SPEND AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF TIME 
          [01:50:02]
WITHIN THE WORKING GROUP AND THEN IN THIS COMMISSION, RESPONDING TO THE WORKING GROUP PROPOSALS THAT KIND OF HASH OUT THESE ISSUES THAT SEEM TO HAVE BEEN BATTLED OVER RELENTLESSLY THROUGH CODE NEXT. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A QUESTION IN THERE JUST TO CONCERN, UH, THAT WANTS TO BE EITHER OF YOU WANT TO REPLY TO THAT. 
          I MEAN, WE LOVE SURE. 
          I MEAN, IT GETS THE QUICK RESPONSES. 
          WE STILL HAVE A HORRIBLY OUTDATED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND IT'S STILL INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TO BUILD HOUSING IN THE CITY. 
          AND THAT'S EVIDENT EVERY SINGLE TIME WE TRY AND LOOK AT THE MEDIAN FAMILY HOUSE VALUE, ANYTIME ANYONE TRIES TO BUILD IN THIS CITY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND ALSO FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS, WE HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN UPDATING OR CRUMMY CODE. 
          SO NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE AN OLD, OUTDATED CODE THAT DOESN'T ALLOW US TO BUILD THE TYPES OF HOUSING THAT MOST PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO BUILD NOWADAYS, BUT WE ALSO HAVE 10 YEARS OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ON IT. 
          SO THIS IS JUST AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DO, YOU KNOW, THE CODE CHANGES AND INITIATE THOSE CODE CHANGES. 
          IF WE GO TO THAT AND, AND THERE IS A WAY TO, UM, DEFINITELY HAVE THE PUBLIC THERE. 
          CAUSE I KNOW WE HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS DURING CODE NEXT. 
          I WAS WITH A COUPLE OF YOU. 
          AND THERE WERE A LOT OF TIMES WHEN A LOT OF PUBLIC MEMBERS WOULD SHOW UP. 
          CAUSE WE HAD POSTED MEETINGS AT THE LIBRARY EVERY SO OFTEN THERE WERE A LOT OF FOLKS IN THE ROOM JUST TAKING NOTES AND ASKING QUESTIONS, AND THERE'S A WAY TO DO THAT. 
          AND YOU KNOW, YOUR INPUT COULD BE USED THERE AND YEAH, I'D FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE IF, IF WE COULD FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MAKE THOSE WORK IN GROUP SESSIONS REALLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC. 
          CAUSE I THINK THAT'D BE MORE VALUABLE TO THE WORKING GROUP, BUT THEN ALSO I'M CURIOUS IF I'VE GOT ANY OTHER TIME, UM, TAKE A COMMISSIONER SHEA AND COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HAVE OBVIOUSLY PUT MORE THOUGHT TO THIS THAN, THAN, THAN THE REST OF US HAVE. 
          AND I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THERE'S ANY SPECIFIC TOPICS THAT YOU KIND OF HAVE A LIST OF ALREADY THAT YOU'RE KIND OF THINKING ABOUT THAT THAT WOULD BE IN THE INITIAL, UH, HIT LIST FOR FOUR TOPICS FOR THIS WORKING GROUP TO LOOK AT. 
          SO, UM, UM, HUH. 
          OH, GO AHEAD AND ASK. 
          RIGHT. 
          SORRY FOR TO TROUBLE TODAY. 
          UM, I JUST HAD A COMMITTED QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER COX BECAUSE I KNOW HE CHAIRED THE SOUTH CONGRESS BUD WORKING GROUP. 
          AND I WAS WONDERING IF THAT WORKING GROUP DID SOMETHING THAT YOU FELT WAS A GOOD WAY TO ENGAGE THE PUBLIC OR MAKE THE MEETINGS MORE TRANSPARENT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL HELD PUBLIC MEETINGS OR DID SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK WE CAN EMULATE. 
          I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR, UM, YEAH, SURE. 
          THE MEETINGS WERE NOT POSTED IT. 
          IT WAS A BIT, I FEEL LIKE IT'S A BIT OF A DIFFERENT SITUATION THAN THIS WORKING GROUP BECAUSE WE HAD ENORMOUS STAFF SUPPORT. 
          AND THE REASON WE ADDED ENORMOUS STAFF SUPPORT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS A PUD CASE AND ANYONE INVOLVED IN PIKE CASES KNOWS THAT THERE'S LIKE 500 CITY EMPLOYEES THAT ARE LOOKING AT EVERY ASPECT OF A PUD. 
          UM, THE, THE, THE DEVELOPER WAS VERY COMMITTED TO BEING EXTREMELY INVOLVED. 
          HE BROUGHT A TEAM OF LIKE 20 PROFESSIONALS TO EVERY WORKING GROUP. 
          AND THEN WE DID HAVE CERTAIN ELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC. 
          UM, BUT IT WAS ALSO PART OF A ZONING CASE THAT, THAT HAD THOSE PUBLIC MEETINGS ATTACHED TO IT. 
          UM, AS, SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ALL CODE AMENDMENTS, GO THROUGH A SIMILAR PROCESS IN THAT THERE'S A PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AT TIME OF INVESTIGATION, PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AT TIME OF ADOPTION, BOTH AT BC AND COUNCIL NCO JC. 
          AND I'M WONDERING, I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU DID SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY GREAT AND WE COULD EMULATE THAT FROM THE SOUTH CONGRESS, BUT, BUT THANK YOU. 
          WELL, NO, THE GREAT, THE GREAT THING ABOUT THAT POSE THAT WE HAD ENORMOUS STAFF SUPPORT. 
          AND I, I DOUBT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE LEVEL OF STAFF SUPPORT WITH THIS WORKING GROUP AS WE DID WITH, WITH THE PUD. 
          UM, BUT, BUT I TAKE YOUR POINT AND I, I GUESS MY QUESTION THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE MORE EXPERIENCED LIKE YOU IS WHEN WE INITIATE INITIATION OF, OF CODE CHANGES, DOES THAT TYPICALLY HAPPEN WITHIN A WORKING GROUP OR DOES THAT TYPICALLY HAPPEN WITHIN THE PC? IT'S GO AHEAD. 
          COMMIT YOUR SHAPE. 
          YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. 
          IT IS ON THE BACKUP BY THE WAY. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, WHATEVER WE PROPOSE COMES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THAT POINT, WE VOTE DECIDE IF WE'RE GOING TO SEND IT TO CODES ROARING AND SOME MIGHT EVEN GET HASHED OUT AGAIN, BUT KEEP IN MIND LIKE WHAT WE, WHAT WE PROPOSE HERE IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL. 
          COUNCIL HAS, IS THE ONE WHO'S TO SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GET THE STAFF TO SPEND THE ENERGY, TO CREATE IT INTO SOMETHING BEFORE IT EVEN COMES BACK TO US. 
          SO THIS IS WAY EARLY ON. 
          SO THE CONCERN FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IS IT GOING TO GO ONE WAY OR THIS WAY OR THAT WAY, WE'RE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO THAT THEY CAN INPUT, BUT THE REAL PUBLIC INPUT, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO CRAFT IT, ISN'T GOING TO, ISN'T GOING TO BE ANYTHING UNTIL IT COMES BACK AS, AS A REAL CASE IN FRONT OF US. 
          SO MR. DUTTON, YES. 
          UH, JUST TO CLARIFY ON THE PROCESS. 
          SO YOU, YOU, AS A BODY PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU CAN INITIATE CODE AMENDMENTS TO YOURSELF. 
          YOU DON'T HAVE TO SEND THEM TO COUNCIL, SO YOU CAN DO THAT YOURSELVES IF YOU WANT TO, BUT, BUT IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO GET STAFFED TO PUT IT TOGETHER BEFORE IT COMES BACK TO US THAT THAT'S RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          IT'S LIKE A TWO-STEP PROCESS. 
          AND THEN THAT WOULD BE THE 
          [01:55:01]
FORMAL PUBLIC PROCESS. 
          THAT'S WHERE, YEAH. 
          THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD HAVE MEETINGS, JUST LIKE THIS. 
          IT WOULD BE OUT IN THE OPEN, LIKE THIS WORKING GROUP STUFF IS JUST CASUAL CONVERSATION, YOU KNOW? UM, AND IT GETS CRAFTED, BUT IN THE END, THE, WE AS A BODY, AS THE ONE WHO INITIATED NOT THE WORKING GROUP, RIGHT. 
          YEAH. 
          UH, JUST I'M LOSING TRACK HERE. 
          UM, SO LET'S, UH, MOVING FORWARD, UH, COX HAD A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT, WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT WE WOULD START FOR? I JUST THINK WE'RE RUNNING A LITTLE BIT SHORT ON TIME, BUT IF, IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANY OTHER IDEAS TO RESPOND TO THAT QUESTION, NO SET AGENDA, HOUSING'S DIFFICULT TO BUILD. 
          LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE IT EASIER. 
          SO, SO I WILL ANSWER, I THINK THE, I WOULD THINK KEEPING IT BROAD IS A GOOD IDEA AT THIS POINT AND LETTING THE WORK GROUP KIND OF NOT LIMIT THEIR SCOPE, LET THEM EXPLORE ALL OPTIONS. 
          AND THEN AGAIN, IT'S GOING TO COME BACK TO THE FULL PC, GO THROUGH, UM, JOINT COMMISSIONS CODES AND ORDINANCES. 
          SO THERE'S A LONG PROCESS. 
          IT'S JUST A GOOD THINK TANK TO GET SOME GOOD IDEAS OUT. 
          AND I LIKED THE IDEA OF DESSERT, DIVERSE THOUGHT, UM, WITHIN THE WORKING GROUP. 
          I THINK THAT'S A THING WE SHOULD LOOK AT AND THINK ABOUT HOW WE GET THERE, UH, IN THE FORMATION OF THIS WORKING GROUP, IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          SO WITH THAT, UM, WE'VE GOT FOUR SPOTS LEFT. 
          UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM VICE-CHAIR AND HEMPHILL? I JUST HAD A, A PROCESS QUESTION THAT MAY HELP THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN BEING PART OF THE WORKING GROUP IS HOW IS THERE A SCHEDULE OR AN ANTICIPATED LENGTH OF TIME THAT YOU ANTICIPATE DOING THIS? UM, IS IT REGULAR MEETINGS, UM, TO GET YOUR, UM, W WHAT YOU'LL BE WORKING ON TOGETHER, IF YOU COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT PROCESS? UM, I THINK MY, WHAT I WAS THINKING FIRST WAS TO GET THE WORKING GROUP TOGETHER TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT WHAT WE WANT TO HIT FIRST, RIGHT. 
          AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF GROUPS THAT I WOULD WANT TO HEAR FROM, BECAUSE TO ME, THERE'S, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT. 
          UH, I MEAN, THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY KIND OF A TECHNICAL GROUP, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, ALL THESE DIFFERENT, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, LIKE WHATEVER FAR HEIGHTS, ALL THAT STUFF. 
          AND IN RELATION TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL OF REQUIREMENTS OF THIS OR THIS OR THAT, BUT THERE'S, I SEE TWO DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT WE COULD APPROACH. 
          ONE OF THE FIRST GROUP IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF IT IS, IS THE BUILDING FORM. 
          CAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF REGULATION ON THAT. 
          AND THEN THE OTHER ASPECT IS ALSO THE SITE. 
          SO I ALREADY SEE TWO COMPONENTS THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT AND WE WOULD MAYBE START WITH, HEY, LET'S LOOK AT ANYTHING SITE RELATED FIRST AND THEN BRING IN WHETHER WE TALKED TO SOME CIVIL ENGINEERS OR SOME PLANNERS AND SUCH THAT MIGHT HELP, UM, HELP, HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT, UM, THOSE, THE LIMITATIONS WERE ON THAT ARE. 
          THEN AFTER THAT, THEN WE WOULD ALSO LOOK AT BUILDING FORM AT THAT POINT. 
          I WAS GOING TO, UH, WE, WE GOT AN EMAIL FROM THE AIA SAYING THAT THEY EVEN HAVE A GROUP THAT WANTS TO WORK WITH US ON DIFFERENT THINGS, AND THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN PERFECT FOR THAT. 
          SO I SEE THESE TWO COMPONENTS AND WE WOULD BRING IN, UM, YOU KNOW, PE GROUPS FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WORKED WITHIN THAT, UM, AND THEN DECIDED WHICH ONE TO WORK WITH FIRST. 
          SO THAT'S KIND OF, I'M SAYING IT, DO YOU HAVE A TARGET, A DATE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO AIM FOR? LIKE BY THE TIME COUNSEL GETS BACK FROM THEIR RECESS OR BY THE END OF THE YEAR? SO THAT'S A TOUGH THING AND I DON'T, THE OTHER THING IS ALSO, IT'S A SUMMERTIME, SO I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT OUR SCHEDULE IS GOING TO BE LIKE HERE, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING SPECIFIC. 
          I MEAN, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, BY, UH, WELL, I DON'T KNOW THIS YEAR, AT LEAST SOME COMPONENT, UM, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY BY THE END OF 20, 22, WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT MAYBE TALKS ABOUT, UH, BUILDING FORUMS OR, OR, OR SITES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          OR MAYBE THIS IS THE FIRST STAGE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE FIRST, UM, LOW-HANGING FRUIT, UH, SUGGESTIONS WE HAVE, AND THEN WE MIGHT EVEN WORK ON THE NEXT LEVEL, YOU KNOW, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING, SOME IDEAS PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION THIS YEAR. 
          THAT'S ALL I HAVE THINKING. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S GOOD. 
          OKAY. 
          SO, UH, JUST, JUST QUICK NOTE, I'M NOT S NOT ASKING A QUESTION. 
          WE WOULD GET ONGOING UPDATES FROM THE WORKING GROUP AS THEY PROGRESS. 
          SO, I MEAN, IT'S A WAY TO KEEP THE REST OF US KIND OF APPRAISE OF WHAT YOU GUYS ARE WORKING ON. 
          SO DO WE HAVE, UM, A FEW MORE SPOTS LEFT, UH, FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, UH, COMMISSIONING ON IS PLATO. 
          I HAVE A QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONERS SHEA JUST, OR IN REGARD TO SOME OF THOSE EARLIER COMMENTS ABOUT HOW THIS HAS POSTED ABOUT AFFORDABILITY, BUT THAT MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY BE THAT THE CONVERSATION MIGHT BE MORE ABOUT MAKING DEVELOPMENT LESS EXPENSIVE. 
          AND I GUESS 
          [02:00:01]
I JUST WANT TO ASK LESS EXPENSIVE FOR HOME. 
          I WOULD SAY IN THE END IT WOULD BE LESS EXPENSIVE FOR EVERYBODY. 
          RIGHT? PART OF IT IS, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE, IF WE CAN MAKE, UM, YOU KNOW, EVEN LIKE LESS STAFF HAVE TO REVIEW IT BECAUSE THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE ALWAYS END UP COMING TO THE COMMISSION, AND WE ALWAYS END UP APPROVING CERTAIN THINGS. 
          I MEAN, THEN WE SPEND LESS STAFF TIME ON THAT STAFF CAN WORK ON SOME OTHER THINGS, RIGHT. 
          AND THAT'S TAXPAYER MONEY. 
          UM, THEN AS FAR AS FOR WHOEVER'S BUILDING, YOU KNOW, IT MAKES IT LESS EXPENSIVE. 
          AND IN THE END IT KEEPS TRICKLING DOWN TO HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, IN THE END, THE IDEA IS TO HAVE, MAKE IT LESS EXPENSIVE TO BUILD. 
          AND ALSO WE END UP BUILDING MORE, UH, UNITS. 
          SO W WHICH WOULD END UP BRINGING COSTS DOWN. 
          SO IN THE END, EVERYTHING COMES DOWN JUST ON THE WHOLE SUPPLY DEMAND. 
          SO THE COST TO CREATE GOES DOWN AND SUPPLY GOES UP, THEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE PRICES GO DOWN. 
          SO THERE'S A, IT DOES SEEM LIKE THERE'S A FOUNDATIONAL ASSUMPTION THAT THE TACTICS YOU'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT ARE BASED ON A TRICKLE DOWN SAVINGS FROM TRICKLING DOWN, FROM SAVINGS TO THE BUILDER, HOPING THAT THAT GETS POSTED PASSED DOWN TO EVENTUALLY THE CONSUMER, UM, AND TACTICALLY THAT, AND, AND THE IDEA THAT INCREASING SUPPLY IS GOING TO BRING THE PRICE OF HOUSING DOWN. 
          SO THAT SAFE TO SAY, THAT'S ON ONE SIDE. 
          AND THE OTHER SIDE IS ALSO THE, ON THE CITY SIDE WITH IF, IF WE HAVE LESS, UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE, IF WE DON'T HAVE TO KEEP GOING THROUGH THE SAME REVIEW, THEN HOPEFULLY THAT WOULD DECREASE ALSO THE, THE, WHATEVER THE, THE, THE MANPOWER REQUIRED ON THE CITY SIDE, UM, DECREASED COSTS ON THAT END, WHICH IS ALSO SAVINGS TO THE CITY AND TO PACK TAXPAYERS. 
          YEAH. 
          I, AND I CAN CERTAINLY, I THINK WE CAN ALL ATTEST TO THE HUMAN COST AND THE, THE, THE, THE COST OF TIME AND ATTENTION THAT THE PUBLIC PROCESS DOES REQUIRE. 
          UM, I AM STRUGGLING WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT COST SAVINGS TO THE DEVELOPER ARE PASSED ON TO LOWER HOUSING PRICES. 
          AND, UM, I'M ALSO, I ALSO DON'T ACCEPT THE ASSUMPTION THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S INHERENTLY DIFFICULT TO BUILD HOUSING JUST BECAUSE AUSTIN BUSINESS JOURNAL KEEPS TALKING ABOUT HOW AUSTIN'S WE ARE PER, PER CAPITA PRODUCING MORE HOUSING THAN ANYONE. 
          SO DEVELOPMENT IS HAPPENING HERE AT INCREDIBLY REC RECORD-BREAKING PACE. 
          WE'VE BUILT MORE MULTIFAMILY IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS THAN WE'VE SEEN IN PROBABLY THE 15 BEFORE IT IT'S, IT'S, UH, WE'RE BUILDING LIKE CRAZY AND PRICES ARE NOT GOING DOWN. 
          SO, UM, I, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THE, SOME OF THE FOUNDATIONAL PREMISES HERE. 
          AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO ASK IN REGARDS TO SOME OF COMMISSIONER ANDERSON'S STATEMENTS, I REALLY APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE HOUSING THAT'S BEEN PRODUCED FOR AISD EMPLOYEES, BUT I'M HAVING A HARD TIME TYING THAT TO THE CONVERSATION ABOUT BUILDING IT 80 TO 120% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME WHEN AISD TEACHERS START IN THE 50 THOUSANDS ON A GOOD DAY. 
          AND, UM, THE MINIMUM WAGE AT AISD IS STILL 1350. 
          IT'S THEIR VOTING THIS, THIS BUDGET CYCLE, I THINK, TO RAISE IT TO $16 AN HOUR. 
          UM, AND SO I'M REALLY CONFUSED, BUT MAYBE THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CLARIFIED, BUT I'M, I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT, UM, WE'RE BUILDING, WORKING CLASS HOUSING. 
          IF WE'RE LOOKING AT A RANGE OF 80 TO ONE 20, WHICH WE'RE SEEING THE MARKET RIGHT NOW PRODUCE AS WELL AS WITH SOME OF OUR TOOLS LIKE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED. 
          SO WHICH FACULTY AND STAFF ARE WE, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT AISD ADMINISTRATORS? OKAY. 
          HAPPY TO JUMP IN. 
          SO, UM, RIGHT NOW THERE'S QUITE A FEW AISD STAFFERS WHO DO EARN, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT MORE THAN HALF, BUT IT'S A BIG PERCENTAGE THAT DO EARN MORE THAN 80% MFI, AND THEY DON'T QUALIFY FOR INCOME SUBSIDIZED HOUSING. 
          AND THERE'S ALSO NURSES THAT FALL INTO THAT RANGE OF INCOME EARNERS. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN HUGE THING TO LOOK AT AND THESE NUMBERS, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T LIE THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD A BALANCED HOUSING INVENTORY, MEANING ROUGHLY SIX MONTHS OF INVENTORY IN AUSTIN SINCE SUMMER OF 2011, I BELIEVE. 
          AND SO THAT'S WHERE SOMEBODY SELLING A HOME, THE SELLER HAVE THE POWER AND THE BUYER DOESN'T HAVE THE POWER. 
          WHEREAS RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE A TWO TO THREE WEEK INVENTORY, 100%, ALL THE VALUE IS FOR ALL THE, YOU KNOW, POWER GOES TO THE SELLER. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE JUST THE DYNAMICS THAT WE HAVE IN THIS MARKET. 
          IT IS DIFFICULT TO, I KNOW WE LIKE TO SOMETIMES SAY IT ISN'T, BUT IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO BUILD. 
          AND CAPITAL'S EFFICIENT IF WE MAKE IT, IF WE KEEP IT DIFFICULT TO BUILD HERE, THEY'RE GOING TO SAN ANTONIO AND BUILDING THEY'RE BUILDING IN DALLAS, THEY'RE BUILDING 20 MILES THAT WAY, 30 MILES THAT WAY. 
          AND IF WE WANT OUR FOLKS WHO LIVE AND WORK IN AUSTIN TODAY TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO WORK AND LIVE IN AUSTIN, THEN WE HAVE TO CHANGE THAT BECAUSE THE BEST WAY TO GUARANTEE DISPLACEMENT IN THE GROWING CITY IS TO NOT ALLOW NEW DEVELOPMENT OR TO HINDER IT AS MUCH 
          [02:05:01]
AS WE DO. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE VERY GOOD AT THAT. 
          AND SO WHAT THIS WORKING GROUP ENDS UP COMING UP WITH, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I'M REALLY EXCITED TO FIND OUT. 
          YEAH, I, I WOULD QUALIFY THAT IN, IN MY EXPERIENCE, THE BEST WAY TO GUARANTEE DISPLACEMENT IS NOT TO INCLUDE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE DIRECTLY IMPACTED. 
          AND I THINK IT'S, WE'VE SEEN OVER A NUMBER OF CASES THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR DIRECTLY IMPACTED PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS, EVEN THOUGH THESE MEETINGS ARE WELL POSTED, THEY ARE, UH, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE CAN TUNE IN RIGHT NOW, IF THEY HAVE A SMARTPHONE AND A WIFI CONNECTION, THEY CAN WATCH THIS MEETING. 
          PEOPLE CAN CALL IN, UM, THEY CAN EASILY ACCESS THE BACKUPS AND THEY CAN REQUEST THINGS FROM STAFF. 
          AND WHEN WE MOVE THESE CONVERSATIONS INTO WORKING GROUPS, ALL OF THAT GETS REALLY, REALLY SHAKY. 
          UM, IT GETS VERY DIFFICULT TO ACCESS AND STUFF GETS BROUGHT HERE EVEN MORE COMPLICATED AND DIFFICULT FOR THE PUBLIC TO ACCESS. 
          SO, UM, I THINK THERE ARE SOME DANGEROUSLY BROAD, UH, ASSUMPTIONS AND FOUNDATIONS AROUND THIS WORKING GROUP. 
          AND, AND I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS. 
          I THINK THESE THINGS NEED TO CONTINUE TO BE DISCUSSED HERE. 
          SO, UM, OKAY. 
          SO WE HAVE, UH, ONE MORE, MORE SPOTLIGHT, TWO MORE. 
          OKAY. 
          ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR, UH, COMMISSIONER AZHAR, YOU'VE ALREADY GONE ONCE, BUT DO YOU? I HAVE, AND I ALSO HAVE MORE OF A COMMON, SO I LEFT MY COLLEAGUES. 
          GO AHEAD AND THEN I CAN, CORRECT. 
          YOU HAVE ANY OTHER SCARE, EVERYBODY A CHANCE HERE LOOKS AROUND THE ROOM. 
          GO AHEAD, PLEASE. 
          MR. IS OUR THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          I'M WONDERING, AND I THINK I'M HEARING SOME QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS FROM FOLKS ABOUT SERVICE SCOPE OF THE WORK AND HOW IT COMES FORWARD. 
          AND I'M WONDERING IF IT MADE SENSE, THE IDEA BEHIND WORKING GROUPS OF COURSES THAT YOU CAN DIG INTO DETAILS HAVE MORE LOOSE CONVERSATIONS WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ROBERT'S RULES AND YOU KNOW, ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE PART OF THESE OFFICIAL MEETINGS. 
          SO YOU CAN SORT OF DIG DOWN AND HAVE A THROUGH CONVERSATION, WHICH IS HARD TO HAVE IN THIS FORMAT. 
          AND I'M WONDERING IF THE, IF ONE WAY, AND I THINK I'M HEARING FROM SOME OF MY COMMISSIONERS THAT I THINK THEIR CHALLENGES, WHAT COMES OUT OF WORK GROUP, HOW DOES THAT SHAPE AND SO ON? AND I WONDER IF IT MAKES SENSE THAT THE WORKING GROUP IS FORMED CONTINUES WITH HIS WORKS, CONTINUES WITH ITS WORK, UM, PROVIDES UPDATES UNDER OUR, UM, UPDATES SECTION OF OUR AGENDA, BUT MAYBE THEY CAN ACTUALLY BE A MIDPOINT CONVERSATION WITH THE FULL COMMISSION. 
          IF WE CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA, THE WORKING GROUP CAN SHARE SOME THOUGHTS, GET FEEDBACK FROM THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS. 
          THOSE COMMISSIONERS WHO WERE UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE CAN ALSO PROVIDE SOME GUIDANCE OR SO ESSENTIALLY IF WE CAN HAVE MORE OF A FEEDBACK LOOP, I WONDER IF THAT SOLVES SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT ARE BEING RAISED SO WE CAN DO SOME IN-DEPTH WORK, BUT ALSO REALLY MAKE SURE THAT THE PROCESS IS INCLUSIVE. 
          I THINK THAT'S A GREAT, THE IDEA LIKE A MID CHECK-IN, UM, CAUSE THAT'S THE OTHER THING IS ALSO, I DON'T WANT THE WORKING GROUP TO HEAD COMPLETELY IN A DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, SOME OTHER DIRECTION AND NOT GET THAT INPUT, YOU KNOW? SO I AGREE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE SHOULD HAVE A MID CHECK, BUT MAYBE A COUPLE CHECKPOINTS ALONG THE WAY, JUST TO, YOU KNOW, JUST TO KIND OF FULFILL IT, YOU KNOW, IN MORE THAN JUST A QUICK LITTLE THING AT THE END OF OUR MEETING, BUT JUST SOMETHING WE PUT IT IN JENNA AND WE GO THROUGH LIKE, I DUNNO, 30 MINUTES AND WE JUST KIND OF GO THROUGH, UM, DIFFERENT THINGS TO GET INPUT. 
          I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. 
          OKAY. 
          HOLD ON. 
          LET'S JUST MAKE SURE I'M LOOKING AT, JUST TO MAKE SURE NOBODY, ANYBODY WANTS TO ASK QUESTIONS, HEADS AND RES FOUR. 
          WE HAVE ONE MORE SPOT. 
          UM, MR. COX, YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND FINISH THIS OFF? WELL, I WAS, I WAS, I WAS KINDA GOING, UH, UH, THE SAME WAY THAT I, I DO FEEL LIKE THE SCOPE OF THIS IS SO IMPORTANT AND THERE IS A HUGE DIVERSITY OF VOICES THAT ONE, I DO THINK WE NEED TO FORMALIZE A WAY TO BE ABLE TO, TO BROADEN THE CONVERSATION PERIODICALLY TO THE FULL PC. 
          BUT THEN ALSO I WAS THINKING THAT MAYBE THIS SHOULD NOT BE A, YOU KNOW, A SIX MEMBER OR FIVE MEMBER, WHATEVER IT IS WORKING GROUP THAT JUST STAYS THAT WAY THE ENTIRE YEAR. 
          THAT, THAT IF THERE'S A, IF THERE'S A WAY, AND I KNOW THIS, THIS MAY SEEM INEFFICIENT OR MAY BE SEEN AS A PUNISHMENT FOR, OR SORT OF CERTAIN PEOPLE IN THE COMMISSION THAT WE ACTUALLY LIKE FREQUENTLY AND MAYBE NOT FREQUENTLY, BUT SOMEHOW ROTATE MEMBERS IN AND OUT, JUST SO THAT WE HAVE THAT DIVERSITY OF JUST, AND I THINK WE BREAK QUORUM WHEN YOU DO THAT. 
          SO THAT'S KIND OF, YEAH, I CAN'T DO THAT WELL, BUT WE CAN CHANGE. 
          WE CAN CHANGE WORKING GROUP MEMBERS. 
          YEAH. 
          ADD OUR MEETINGS. 
          CAN'T WE, UH, MR. RIVERA, YOU WANTED TO SPEAK TO THAT. 
          SURE. 
          COMMISSIONER LIAISON AND VERA, I'D BE CONCERNED OF A WALKING QUORUM. 
          SHERIFF. 
          I CAN CLARIFY, SUGGEST THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A WALKING GROUP, COMMISSIONED GODS. 
          AS LONG AS WE TALK ABOUT THE SAME TOPIC, WE CANNOT ROTATE PEOPLE. 
          IF WE ROTATE PEOPLE, IT HAS TO BE DIFFERENT 
          [02:10:01]
TOPICS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          ANOTHER WAY TO ADDRESS THAT THOUGH, TO YOUR POINT IS TO FORM, DO WORK IN GROUPS WITH SIMULTANEOUS OR SIMILAR, AND THEN TRY TO COMBINE THEM. 
          BUT WE CANNOT TALK TO EACH OTHER ABOUT THE SAME THING. 
          WELL, THEN I, AND I THINK, I THINK THAT GOES TO YOUR PREVIOUS POINT. 
          I THINK WE NEED TO FIND A REALLY FORMAL WAY TO, TO, TO HAVE A REGULAR DISCUSSION, NOT JUST AN UPDATE, BUT AN ACTUAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE, THAT ARE IN THE WORKS OR ARE BEING DISCUSSED WITHIN THE WORKING GROUP WITHIN OUR PC FORMAT SO THAT WE GET WHAT WE CAN OUT OF IT. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO IF I AM, WE NEED TO DECIDE ON KIND OF THE STRUCTURE MEMBERSHIP. 
          AND SO THAT WOULD, UM, I'M GOING TO GO AND TAKE AS A CHAIR HERE AND TRY TO, UM, SAVE FEW THINGS AND GET SOME INPUT ON THE MAKEUP OF THIS WORKING GROUP, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO VOTE ON IT, UM, TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          UM, I DID HEAR SOME CONCERNS, BUT I DON'T, I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE ENOUGH TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. 
          UM, BUT I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE CHAIR. 
          I THINK WE'RE GOING TO NEED, UH, LEADERSHIP ON THIS. 
          IT'S NOT REQUIRED. 
          UM, I WILL NOT BE CHAIRING THIS AND I THINK THE VICE CHAIR AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT, WE'VE GOT OUR HANDS FULL WITH JUST RUNNING THE COMMISSION. 
          SO I REALLY NEED SOMEBODY TO STEP IN AND CHAIR THIS GROUP, SO TRYING TO BUILD SOME STRUCTURE AROUND IT. 
          UM, AND, UM, COMMISSIONER SHEA, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'D BE WILLING TO DO? SURE. 
          UM, ANY OTHER INTERESTS BEFORE WE, UH, IN SHARING? UH, I THINK WE, YOU'VE GOT SOMEBODY THAT'S LIVED THROUGH ALL OF THE LAND CODE REVISIONS, UH, TO DATE AND WOULD BRING A LOT OF GOOD EXPERIENCE IN THE END WHO I FIND VERY FAIR. 
          UH, BUT I'M LOOKING FOR DIVERSITY HERE IN THOUGHT AND WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE FOLKS, UH, THAT AS MUCH, IF YOU HAVE CONCERNS MORE OF A REASON THAT YOU SERVE ON THIS WORKING GROUP. 
          SO, UM, WHO WOULD BE INTERESTED, UH, IN KNOW, I THINK BRINGING THEIR VOICE TO THIS GROUP, IT'S VERY BROAD, BUT I THINK WE NEED THOSE VOICES. 
          AND I DO WANT TO SAY, I NEED YOU, YOU KNOW, IF YOU VOLUNTEER, WE NEED FOLKS THAT ARE, UH, WILLING TO GO TO THE MEETINGS AND PARTICIPATE IN, OFFER THEIR VOICE. 
          SO, UM, I THINK THIS WILL END UP BEING VERY IMPORTANT TO OVER TIME THAT MAY LAST FOR AWHILE. 
          AND IT MAY BE THAT YOU ALSO ARE CALLED UPON AND I'M CHECKING WITH MR. RIVERA HERE. 
          COUNCIL IS WORKING ON A NUMBER OF ISSUES. 
          WE'VE MADE DIRECT SOME OF THESE HOUSING ISSUES TO THIS WORKING GROUP, IF THAT'S AN OPTION, UH, WHEN THEY COME AROUND, BEFORE THEY COME BACK TO CODES AND ORDINANCES AND PC. 
          SO THAT MAY BE ANOTHER, UH, FUNCTION OF THIS GROUP. 
          UH, ANYWAY, HANDS OF THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO JOIN THE TEAM GOT US. 
          COMMISSIONERS IS OUR, UH, WE'VE GOT OUR VOA CHAIR. 
          IT'S COHEN. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER IS PLATO. 
          I'M TRYING TO TAKE NAMES HERE, HOLD ON, UH, COMMISSIONER PRAXIS. 
          AND, UH, WE, AND I'M ASSUMING, UM, MR. SNYDER ONE, MAYBE HOW MANY IS THAT? RIGHT? 2, 3, 4 OR FIVE. 
          SO WE HAVE, WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO QUORUM. 
          IT'D BE SEVEN. 
          SO THAT'S THE LIMIT SEVEN. 
          AH, VERY GOOD. 
          SO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON ON THIS, ARE YOU YES, RIGHT? YES. 
          SO THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD FILL IT OUT. 
          YEAH, IT HAS TO BE LESS THAN QUORUM, SO SIX. 
          YEP. 
          SO I, UM, SO LET'S GO AND READ THAT. 
          CAN YOU READ ME WHAT YOU HAVE? VICE-CHAIR SURE. 
          SO WE HAVE, UM, COMMISSIONER SHAY HAS CHAIRED COMMISSIONER'S AZAR CHAIR COHEN, UM, WHO DOESN'T COUNT AS PART OF THE, THE QUORUM COMMISSIONER ANDERSON COMMISSIONER. 
          YANAS PALITO COMMISSIONER PRAXIS AND COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THAT IS THE MAKEUP OF THE TEAM. 
          AND I, I AM VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT GROUP. 
          I THINK WE WOULD GET A LOT OF GOOD WORK DONE. 
          SURE. 
          COMMISSIONER  YES. 
          WE HAD A MOTION OR DID WE HAVE A SECOND? WE ARE JUST MAKING UP THE TEAM TO DEVELOP THE MOTION, SO WE DON'T HAVE A MOTION YET. 
          WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FORMULATE THE MEMBERS AND THEN WE'LL WRAP IT IN TOGETHER. 
          [02:15:01]
SO THERE WILL BE A MOTION NAMING THE CHAIR AND THE MEMBERS. 
          UH, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE WE JUST KIND OF DEVELOPED A MOTION, BUT THERE ISN'T DONE YET. 
          UM, SO I THINK WE'VE GOT THAT NAILED. 
          UH, DO WE HAVE A CLEAR SCOPE ON IT? UM, I CAN READ SOMETHING, UM, JUST TO CREATE THE SCOPE, MAKE SURE. 
          AND THEN I'LL READ IT AGAIN AS PART OF THE MOTION IN THE MEMBERS, BUT, UH, SOMETHING THAT JUST TO TRY TO CAPTURE THIS IN A BROAD WAY, UH, SEE IF Y'ALL ARE OKAY WITH THIS. 
          CAUSE IT, UH, DEVELOP CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES TO THE CITY OF ASA LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 25, THAT WILL INCREASE HOUSING IN ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF AUSTIN, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND ANTI-DISPLACEMENT POLICIES. 
          SO GENERALLY IT'S VERY BROAD, BUT IT JUST KIND OF SAYS WE'RE GOING TO CRAFT THESE WITHIN THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TOOL, YOU KNOW, UM, UH, MEASURES THAT COUNCIL HAS ALREADY APPROVED. 
          CAN YOU READ THAT AGAIN? OKAY. 
          WHERE DID THIS COME FROM? THIS IS ME. 
          OKAY. 
          ONE MORE TIME. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THIS IS JUST TRYING TO CAPTURE THE SCOPE OF THIS WORKING GROUP. 
          SO DEVELOP CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 25, THAT WILL INCREASE HOUSING IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND HOUSING AND ANTI-DISPLACEMENT POLICIES. 
          IT'S VERY BROAD, VERY BROAD. 
          AND IT'S TO BECOME HOUSING PIECE. 
          UH, ONE SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON. 
          YOU WERE SPEAKING. 
          YEAH, SURE. 
          SO THIS IS GOING TO BE THE HOUSING WORKING GROUP. 
          YES. 
          THIS IS JUST A SCOPE ON JUST TRYING TO, WE HAD A LOT OF DIFFERENT DISCUSSION. 
          I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT ON KIND OF THE BROAD SCOPE OF THIS WORKING GROUP AND COMMISSIONER COX. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          I WAS JUST MAKING A BAD JOKE. 
          YEAH, YOU'RE FINE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'VE LISTENED TO WHAT EVERYBODY SAYS AND YOU BACKED UP ENOUGH TO KIND OF BE ABLE TO ENCOMPASS ALL THE LITTLE COMMENTS WITHIN THAT. 
          THAT'S WHAT VERY BROAD, IT'S VERY HIGH LEVEL. 
          IT'S JUST SAYING YOU'RE LOOKING AT A PROPOSED CODE CHANGES, BUT IT DOES SAY THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, UH, STRATEGIC COUNSELING BLUEPRINT. 
          WE'VE GOT ALL THESE ELEMENTS THAT REALLY KIND OF SHOULD BE THE FRAMEWORK FOR HOW WE MAKE OUR DECISIONS. 
          THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. 
          THOSE ARE THINGS THAT COUNCIL HAS ALREADY APPROVED. 
          UH, THOSE ARE KIND OF THE, THE GUARD RAILS OF WHAT WE SHOULD DO, UM, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE, WITHIN THIS WORKING GROUP. 
          UM, OKAY. 
          SO, UH, WITH THAT, UM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? SURE. 
          I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CREATE THE HOUSING WORKING GROUP WITH WHAT YOU HAD READ IT AND WITH THE, UM, I GUESS WE HAVE TO, AND THEN WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THE SLATE, RIGHT. 
          AND THEN THE TEAM. 
          YEAH, THE TEAM. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I GUESS IT'S, UH, COMMISSIONER SHAY, COMMISSIONER ZAR, COMMISSIONER COHEN. 
          UH, MR. POLITO, MR. ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER PRAXIS AND COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          WE GOT A SECOND. 
          OKAY, WELL, LET'S GO, UH, TAKE A VOTE ON THOSE FROM THE DIOCESE. 
          UM, THIS IS A GOOD, CAN I ASK A QUESTION REAL QUICK? SO SORRY. 
          UM, SO, UM, WE WERE POSTED TO DISCUSS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING WORKING GROUP, AND WE'RE CREATING THIS JUST AS A HOUSING WORKING GROUP. 
          IS THERE ANY ISSUE THERE, OR IS THAT SOMETHING WHERE, I MEAN, THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH, WELL, A QUICK COMMENT. 
          THE THAT'S WHAT WE DID HAVE SOME BACKUP THAT CLARIFIED, UH, I THINK WHAT THE, UH, CO-SPONSORS WERE INTENDING. 
          UM, MR. RIVERA, DO YOU SEE ANY ISSUE WITH THE WAY OF THE POSTING? SURE. 
          IF YOU COULD GIVE ME JUST ONE MINUTE, PLEASE. 
          OKAY. 
          SURE. 
          IT'S THAT ACTUALLY UPLOADED TO THE BCIC? CAUSE I DON'T THINK IT IS. 
          OH, THE EMAIL. 
          OKAY. 
          I UNDERSTAND THIS IS JUST IN OUR EMAIL TO THE COMMISSIONERS. 
          OH, THANK FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. 
          SO IS NOT IN THE BACKUP. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW NUANCED OR JARGONY IS, BUT IT'S LITERALLY AFFORDABILITY IN THE AGENDA, WHICH IS BROAD AFFORDABILITY MARKET AFFORDABILITY, NOT INCOME RESTRICTED AFFORDABILITY. 
          YUP. 
          IT'S CAPITAL A, AN OFFICIAL LEGAL TERM TO MEAN INCOME RESTRICTED. 
          I KNOW WE ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT IN THAT WAY, WE SAID CAPITAL A AFFORDABLE VERSUS AFFORDABLE. 
          UM, 
          [02:20:01]
I DON'T THINK THAT'S HOW IT'S UNDERSTOOD OFFICIALLY IS IT? I THINK THAT IT HAS ANY IMPLICATIONS FOR AGENDA FOR NOTICE GOING WITH THAT SECOND. 
          I GUESS WHEN, WHEN I HEARD THE CHAIR, UH, WE FRAME, UH, UM, THE MISSION STATEMENT, UH, IN TOUCHING ON LIKE THE S THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, WHICH INCORPORATE IDEAS ABOUT, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BIG AND LITTLE AG, UH, THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE GENERAL ENOUGH TO COVER THAT. 
          BUT WAIT FOR MR. RIVERA, LET ME JUST ALSO SAY THANK YOU TO, UM, COMMISSIONER SHAY AND ANDERSON AND, AND TO YOUR CHAIR, UH, AS YOU KNOW, NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED. 
          AND SO I THINK YOU'RE SENSING THAT TONIGHT. 
          SO COMMISSIONER IS, ARE, AND WELL, UH, GO AHEAD TO COMMISSIONER. 
          I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY CHAIRMAN WHILE WE'RE WAITING. 
          CAN YOU PLEASE REPEAT YOUR, UM, THE GUIDANCE FOR THE WORKING GROUP? SURE. 
          AND, UH, YES, HOLD ON. 
          SO I'LL REPEAT IT ONE MORE TIME. 
          HERE. 
          IT IS DEVELOP CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES TO THE CITY OF US AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 25, THAT WILL INCREASE HOUSING IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND TRANSPORTATION HOUSING AND ANTI-DISPLACEMENT POLICIES. 
          SO, YEAH, THE IDEA THERE WAS JUST THAT, UH, AGAIN, COUNCIL HAS ALREADY, UM, PASSED A NUMBER OF, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, UH, THAT AGAIN, KIND OF GUIDE, UH, WHAT WE DEVELOP IN CODE. 
          SO IT'S JUST SAYING THAT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO BE MINDFUL OF THOSE ALREADY ADOPTED POLICIES WHEN MOVING FORWARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE CODE CHANGES. 
          THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          AND I DO WANT TO RECOGNIZE, I THINK, YOU KNOW, CLEAR THE POSTING LANGUAGE, UH, AGAIN WAS MEANT TO BE BROAD, BUT I GUESS, UM, MR. A VERY YOU'RE CHECKING JUST TO SEE IF WE'RE ON SOUND SURE. 
          TRADITIONALLY IT'S ON ANDROID. 
          SO I'M LOOKING AT WHETHER A, UM, UH, WORKING GROUP CAN BE BROADENED BY SCOPE. 
          UM, SAY THAT AGAIN. 
          I'M SORRY, WHETHER WE CAN BROADEN IT. 
          WE CAN BROADEN IT CLARIFYING WITH LEGAL. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I WOULD SAY I'M A D FANS ON HOW YOU INTERPRET IT. 
          I THINK, UM, YES, MY COMMENT IS ON HOUSING, BUT, UH, I THINK THE, THIS POSTING WAS, UH, AFFORDABILITY VERY GENERALLY. 
          AND, UM, THE IDEA IS WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE THAT THROUGH INCREASED HOUSING. 
          YEAH. 
          DO, AND JUST, I WANT TO JUST, UH, ASK, I MEAN, DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE A CONCERN, UM, IN MOVING FORWARD? UH, I GUESS ANY, WHAT IS A CONCERN WITH, I'M JUST, IT'S JUST FROM A, THAT WE'RE FOLLOWING THE RULES OR DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE WAY WE COMMUNICATE OUR SCOPE OR WE CAN IMPROVE IT NEXT WEEK IN TWO WEEKS, RIGHT. 
          LEAVE IT AS IT IS. 
          I MEAN, MY CONCERN IS THE SUMMER, WHETHER WE CAN GET AS MANY PEOPLE TOGETHER ANYWAY. 
          SO IF IT'S A CONCERN, WE HAVE THE SLATE, WE HAVE OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT FORWARD TO VOTE, YOU KNOW, TWO WEEKS AND WE VOTE THEN COMMISSIONER PRACTICES. 
          UH, WOULD THAT MAKE YOU MORE COMFORTABLE THAT WE, UM, HAVE A CLEAR POSTING UNDER THIS LINE ITEM AND BRING IT BACK? UM, I THINK WE'VE HASHED IT OUT. 
          I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AGAIN. 
          WE WOULD JUST HAVE CLEAR LANGUAGE ON WHAT THE WORKING GROUP IS GOING TO DO AND, UM, AND THAT WAY WE AVOID ANY, UH, CONCERNS FROM THE PUBLIC. 
          WOULD THAT BE YOUR PREFERENCE? SURE. 
          YES, I CAN. 
          I CAN SUPPORT THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK, UH, YES, AND I WOULD, UM, ALSO OFFER IF IT IS CLEAR AND WE FEEL LIKE WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD. 
          UH, MAYBE WE HAVE THIS ITEM ON CONSENT, UM, IF WE CAN, BUT WE CAN HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION IF NEEDED. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO I'M HEARING NO MOTION. 
          WE'LL POSTPONE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING, POSTPONED WITH NEW LANGUAGE THAT WILL HELP PROVIDE. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SOUNDS GOOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER IS OUR JERRY, IF I CAN MAKE A REQUEST FROM THE CO-SPONSORS, IF THEY CAN ACTUALLY HELP DRAFT 
          [02:25:01]
THE SORT OF GUIDING LANGUAGE FOR THE WORKING GROUP. 
          I THINK WHAT YOU SHARED TODAY IS HELPFUL, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE REALLY HAD A PRETTY COMPLEX DISCUSSION. 
          I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAPTURE THAT. 
          SO I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IT IF OUR CO-SPONSORS COULD WORK ON THE LANGUAGE AND BRING IT FOR ADOPTION NEXT TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          I'LL EMAIL YOU WHAT I'VE PUT TOGETHER AND YOU GUYS CHANGE IT. 
          HOWEVER YOU WANT TO KIND TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS EVENING. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT SUGGESTION. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UM, I THINK WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM. 
          DO 
          [D. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
WE HAVE ANY, UM, FUTURE ITEM D FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, ANYTHING FROM COMMISSIONERS? UH, I WILL POINT OUT, UM, JUST AS FAR OFF INTO THE FUTURE, WE WILL HAVE, UH, THE DATE I'M TRYING TO, IS IT AUGUST 30TH, I GUESS 30TH, AUGUST 30TH. 
          WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT EXTRA TUESDAY. 
          AND WE'RE GOING TO BE MEETING WITH ZAP. 
          I'LL BE FORMULATING KIND OF THE RULES OF THAT MEETING, BUT WE'LL HAVE SEVERAL UPDATES. 
          I THINK, UH, THERE'S BEEN A FEW THAT COMMISSIONER HAS REQUESTED, UH, I'LL BE PUTTING FORWARD, UH, THE, UH, AGENDA AND WE'VE GOT A FEW THINGS THAT STAFF WANT TO UPDATE US ON AND A FEW ITEMS WE'VE REQUESTED. 
          UM, PROBABLY OVER THE NEXT 10 DAYS, I'LL GET SOMETHING ON A DRAFT AGENDA OUT TO EVERYONE HERE AND AS WELL AS, UM, KIND OF THE RULES OF THAT MEETING SINCE WE'VE GOT ZAP AND PC, SO IT MIGHT BE KIND OF A HYBRID SET OF RULES. 
          UH, BUT THAT WILL BE, UH, IN AUGUST, ANY OTHER ITEMS, COMMISSIONER TO SWITCH TO BRING FORWARD. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          HEARING 
          [E. BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]
NONE. 
          WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM E JUST RUN THROUGH OUR, UM, WORKING GROUP UPDATES, UH, CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE BY CHERRY. 
          WANT TO UPDATE US? SURE. 
          SO WE'RE MEETING TOMORROW EVENING AT SIX, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS AND A SUMMARY TABLE OF ALL IN PROCESS AMENDMENTS THAT BACKUPS AVAILABLE ONLINE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND DO WE KNOW IF WE HAVE QUORUM FOR THAT MEETING YET? I'M TAKING ADVANTAGE OF, OH, WE DON'T KNOW YET. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, LET'S SEE. 
          COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES. 
          DO YOU HAVE AN UPDATE? YES, WE MET LAST THURSDAY AND GOT US A STAFF PRESENTATION ON, UH, THE INDUSTRIAL, UH, ZONING STUDY THAT WAS DONE A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, AND THEN JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE, UH, COMMISSIONER PRACTICES. 
          UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY PERTINENT UPDATES AT THE MOMENT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          A SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE. 
          UH, WE DID NOT HAVE OUR MEETING. 
          WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING FOR OUR AGENDA, SO WE CANCELED. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, WE DON'T HAVE COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HERE ON THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD AND AS WELL, WE HAVE RE TIRED OUR MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION WORKING GROUP. 
          IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. 
          UH DIDN'T. 
          WE RETIRE THAT WORKING GROUP CHAIR COMMERCIALIZE ON ARROW. 
          THAT'S POSTED IN THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          SO THAT COMPLETES OUR AGENDA. 
          UM, DO I, IF I DON'T HEAR ANY UP ANY UP, THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, I'M GOING AHEAD AND ADJOURN THIS MEETING, UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UM, BUT MR. ANDERSON, I CHECKED COMMISSIONED LIGHTS ON MY MIND. 
          I APPRECIATE THE, UH, BEEN TO, UH, POINTING THAT, UH, BUT THIS TIME AROUND, WE DON'T NEED ONE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, I'M GOING TO GO INTO CHURN THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          AT 8 42 
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.