Sep 06, 2022 Zoning and Platting Commission

THEN I'M GOING TO REVIEW THE CONSENT AGENDA.

FIRST ITEM IS NUMBER TWO.

IT'S A REASONING C 14 20 22 0 0 4 0 KIND OF PIONEER HILL PLAZA.

AND IT'S UP FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

UM, ITEM THREE IS A REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 4 9 500 VW ROAD.

STAFF IS SEEKING A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 4TH.

ITEM FOUR IS ON THE AS FOR UP FOR CONSENT.

IT'S A REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 5 0 ALLENDALE VILLAGE ITEM FIVE, REZONING C 14 20 21 0 0 0 3 SOUTH LAKE RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SEEKING POSTPONEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 4TH, ITEM SIX, WE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION ITEM SEVEN, UH, PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 22 0 2 2 1 RIVER PARK SOUTH THAT WE'RE DISAPPROVING FOR REASONS THAT'S SHOWN IN EXHIBIT C, ITEM EIGHT, PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 22 0 1 1 2 VELOCITY PRELIMINARY PLAN, DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT C ITEM NINE, FINAL PLAT OUT OF APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 20 0 1 1 TWO.ONE, A BREAKER HILL SUBDIVISION PHASE ONE APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT C AND ITEM 10 FINAL PLATFORM IMPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 18 0 1 6 5 DOT FOUR EIGHT CASCADES AT ONION CREEK EAST APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT C.

SO TO REVIEW WE HAVE, UM, ITEM TWO, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT THREE AND FOUR ARE POSTPONED AND I'M SORRY, THREE AND FIVE POSTPONE UNTIL OCTOBER 4TH FOR AS CONSENT SEVEN AND A ARE DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS AS SHOWN AND NINE AND 10 ARE APPROVAL FOR REASONS AS SHOWN.

COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

I SAW FIRST.

SO FOR HIS CONSENT FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, YES, I WAS GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING.

YOU BEAT ME TO IT.

JUST MAKE SURE THAT IT'S PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT CS DASH V ONE DASH C O VCO REVERSE.

GOOD, GOOD LONG LETTERS.

THEY ALL MEAN SOMETHING.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ AND JUST NOTE ON ITEM FOUR, THAT IT IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION, CS ONE VERTICAL CEO.

IS THERE A SECOND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GREENBERG? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THAT'S PRETTY UNANIMOUS.

COMMISSIONER KIELBASA IS ARRIVING AND RAISING HER HAND.

SO THEN WE WILL THE SHERIFF, WE CAN JUST, UM, WHITES, WE'RE GOING TO WAIT FIVE SECONDS.

SHE'S GOING TO GET UP HERE.

HER BEST WAS LATE.

WE'RE APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA AS RED.

I HEARD IT.

EVEN LOBBIED MY SUFFICIENTLY ON THE DICE.

YES, I THINK SO.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

PERFECT.

SO WE WILL MOVE ON

[6. Zoning: C14-2022-0204 - Gemini School of Visual Arts; District 6]

TO ITEM NUMBER SIX.

SEEMS LIKE WE WILL HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM MR. .

HELLO, JUST TO CLARIFY, I'M SORRY.

THE, IT WAS UNANIMOUS THAT BASKETBALL, IS THAT CORRECT? THANK YOU.

SUITE WITHIN AN EXISTING OFFICE COMPLEX.

SO I AM SHERRY SIR, WITNESS WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

AND THIS IS ITEM NUMBER SIX.

THIS IS CASEY 14 20 22 0 2 0 4, WHICH IS THE GEMINI SCHOOL OF VISUAL ARTS.

THE REQUEST IS FOR THE PROPERTY AT 1, 2, 3 TO FIVE HIGH MEADOW DRIVE.

AND THE REQUESTED ZONING IS FROM INTERIM SF TWO TO GEO THE STAFF RECOMMENDS GEO GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY.

THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS A 2,995 SQUARE FOOT

[00:05:01]

THE LOTS TO THE EAST ARE DEVELOPED WITH OFFICE BUILDINGS.

THE TRACK TO THE WEST CONTAINS A DERRICK DAYCARE USE TO THE NORTH ACROSS HIGH MEADOW DRIVE.

THERE'S A PUBLIC SCHOOL, WHICH IS A HIGH SCHOOL AND A MULTIFAMILY USE TO THE SOUTH.

THERE IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING GEOS ZONING FOR THE SITE TO UTILIZE THE SUITE WITHIN THE OFFICE COMPLEX FOR A COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY FACILITY OR BUSINESS OR TRADE SCHOOL USE AND LIST BOTH BECAUSE THE STAFF BELIEVES THIS IS A COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY USE BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT IS PROVIDED ON THE APPLICANTS WEBSITE.

UM, BUT THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT THEY QUALIFY AS A BUSINESS OR TRADE SCHOOL USE.

AND I POINT THIS OUT BECAUSE BOTH OF THOSE USES ARE FIRST PERMITTED IN THE GEO GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT.

IN OUR CODE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS GEO GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT STANDING FOR THIS FOOTPRINT AREA BECAUSE THE, BECAUSE THE PROPERTY MEETS THE INTENT OF THE GEO DISTRICT AS IT FRONTS ONTO AND TAKES ACCESS TO A LEVEL TWO COLLECTOR ROADWAY, HIGH MEADOW DRIVE, AND WILL PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.

THERE ARE EXISTING PROFESSIONAL AND MEDICAL OFFICE USES LOCATED TO THE EAST AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOL AND DAYCARE SERVICE TO THE NORTH AND WEST OF THE SITE UNDER CONSIDERATION.

AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU, CHAIR WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.

UM, AS BARCELONA BARCELONA, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

HELLO.

MY NAME IS PAULA BARCELONA.

UM, I'M HERE FOR JIM AND I SCHOOL OF VISUAL ARTS.

SO AS MR. WADE HAS JUST EXPLAINED, WE OUT OF CAREER TRAINING SCHOOL, OF COURSE IS A FOUR YEAR, UH, CAREER TRAINING COURSE.

UM, WE ARE THERE FOR NOT TO CONSIDERED A DEGREE GRANTING COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY, BUT WE ARE APPROVED BY THE TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION, CAREERS AND COLLEGES.

UM, WE ALSO FIVE IS VERY SMALL SPACE AND, UM, WE NEED, UH, OVER TO REZONE THE SPACE FROM, UH, THE COMMERCIAL THAT IT IS NOW TO A ZONING THAT ALLOWED THE TRADE SCHOOL.

WE NEED THE FIRE CERTIFICATES.

THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT STOPS US FROM BEING APPROVED BY THE TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION.

AND WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO OBTAIN THAT BECAUSE WE ARE NOT ZONED CORRECTLY ACCORDING TO THE FARM OR SHOW.

SO, UM, THE SUGGESTION TO USE THE GEO SEEMS TO BE, UH, VERY APPROPRIATE BECAUSE IT'S COVERED, UH, THE, THE USE, UH, FOR THE TRADE SCHOOL AS WELL AS COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY.

I KNOW THAT THAT HAS BEEN AN OBJECTION AND THE SUGGESTION WAS MADE TO USE AN O INSTEAD, BUT UNFORTUNATELY DOES NOT COVER, UM, A TRADE SCHOOL.

I'M THERE FOR NOT, I DO NOT SAY HOW BAD IT COULD BE, UM, USE IN OUR CASE.

I, UM, ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THIS ZONED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

THE SCHOOL HAS BEEN CLOSED DOWN BY THE TEXAS WORKFORCE BECAUSE WE COULD NOT PROVIDE A FAR CERTIFICATES, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE THE ZONING IN PLACE BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF OCTOBER OR EARLY OCTOBER, SO THAT WE CAN REOPEN THE SCHOOL.

WE HAVE STUDENTS WHO ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR PROGRAM AND IT BREAKS OUR HEART THAT THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO PROCEED THEM, CONTINUE WITH THEIR EDUCATION.

UM, OUR SCHOOL HAS BEEN IN AN OPERATION IN AUSTIN FOR 21 YEARS.

IT'S A SUCCESSFUL SCHOOL AND IT'S 85 TO 90% OF OUR STUDENTS ARE WORKING IN VERY LUCRATIVE, UM, UH, POSITIONS IN THE VIDEO GAME INDUSTRY.

AND, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE AWARE, BUT THERE ARE 85 VIDEO GAME COMPANIES IN AUSTIN.

SO, UM, WE ARE RUNNING IMPORTANT PARTS OF THIS INDUSTRY.

I HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONSIDER OUT APPLICATION POSITIVELY.

AND, UM, IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO US.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE THAT I CAN ADD TO.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. JOSEPH CRAWFORD.

MR. CRAWFORD, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

[00:10:03]

HELLO.

MY NAME IS JOE CRAWFORD.

UM, MY WIFE AND I OWN ONE OF THE THREE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT IS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH.

UM, WE I'VE SUBMITTED SOME COMMENTS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADDED AS LATE BACKGROUND, UH, ATTACHMENTS FOR YOU ALL.

AND MR. WHITE, THIS WAS VERY HELPFUL IN HELPING ME GET THOSE TO YOU.

UH, YEAH.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS PROPERTY SHOULD BE DESIGNATED AS LIMITED OFFICE.

AND IF THIS USE FALLS UNDER LIMITED OFFICE, THEN I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO USE.

AND I'M, I HAVE NO OBJECTION IN ANY WAY TO GETTING TO ALLOW THIS USE, UNLESS IT REQUIRES THE PROPERTY B ZONE GENERAL OFFICE.

SO THE ZONING GUIDANCE THAT I COULD FIND ONLINE SAYS THAT LIMITED OFFICE IS THE DESIGNATION FOR AN OFFICE THAT SERVES COMMUNITY NEEDS AND IT'S ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND THAT SEEMS TO EXACTLY DESCRIBE WHAT WE HAVE HERE.

THE PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE LIMITED OFFICE.

IT DOESN'T EXCEED THE THREE STORY MAXIMUM FOR LIMITED OFFICE DEVELOPMENT.

ALL OF THE OFFICE USES THAT WERE MENTIONED TO THE EAST OF THIS SITE ARE ZONED A LIMITED OFFICE IF THEY ARE ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE.

SO I THINK IT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THE REASON WE HAVE THESE ZONING GUIDELINES IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T LOOK AT A SPECIFIC USER AND THROW AWAY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WE'VE ESTABLISHED.

SO, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, I WELCOME THIS USE.

I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT USE TO HAVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF IT IS, UH, IF IT CAN BE DONE UNDER A LIMITED OFFICE ZONING.

THAT'S GREAT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE STAFF AGREES THAT IT CAN, UM, IF IT CAN'T THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT BEARING IS PROCEDURES THERE ARE THAT EXIST BACK TO THE LOUDEST USE AND NOT REZONE THE PROPERTY AS GENERAL OFFICE.

MY CONCERN ISN'T BITCH USED.

MY CONCERN IS OTHER USES THAT CAN COME IN IN GENERAL OFFICE THAT CAN'T COME IN IN LIMITED OFFICE DESIGNATION.

SO, UM, THINGS LIKE, UH, RESTAURANTS COULD BE A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT, UH, GROUP HOMES, REHABILITATION, FACILITIES, THESE THINGS.

THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT CAN BE CONDITIONALLY APPROVED IN LIMITED OFFICE ZONING, BUT, UH, ARE JUST MORE BROADLY ALLOWED UNDER GENERAL OFFICE ZONING.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTEGRITY OF THE, THE PLAN OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS MAINTAINED AND IF WE CAN GET THIS USE DONE WITHOUT COMPROMISING THAT, THEN, THEN THAT'S GREAT.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND I'LL STAY ON ONLINE.

DID IT, SCOTT? UH, IF YOU NEED ANYTHING ELSE FROM ME, IF NOT, I, UH, I'LL JUST HANG UP AND LISTEN.

THANK YOU, SIR.

IF YOU COULD PLEASE HOLD IT IN CASE THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND WHILE HERE FOR MS. COLLETTE BOSS ALONE FOR THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL YES.

HELLO.

UM, I JUST WANTED TO, UM, SPECIFY, BUT OUR LOCATION IS VERY, VERY SMALL.

THERE IS NO WAY THAT ANYBODY WOULD ENTERTAIN THE IDEA OF HAVING A RESTAURANT, A HOSPITAL OR ANYTHING SIMILAR IN THAT TINY SPACE.

IT'S REALLY VERY SMALL.

SO I REALLY DON'T THINK THERE IS A CONCERN THERE.

I CANNOT IMAGINE THAT I DON'T EVEN THINK THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WOULD ENTERTAIN RENTING THE SPACE TO A HOSPITAL OR A RESTAURANT.

UM, IT JUST DOESN'T LEND ITSELF.

UH, THE, THE ENTRANCE TO THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE COURTYARD.

THERE'S NO WAY A RESTAURANT OR A FAST TO ADDRESS JOE WOODS WOULD EVEN CONSIDER IT.

IT'S QUITE A DISTANCE AWAY FROM THE, THE MAIN STREETS.

UM, SO I, I, I REALLY DON'T SEE THAT THAT IS A CONCERN.

I, I CANNOT SEE IT.

I UNDERSTAND MR. CRAWFORD POSTS, BUT I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT, UM, SUCH, UH, UH, USE WOULD BE ENTERTAINED.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.

SO LET'S SEE, WE NEED CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

UM, MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ALL SECOND SECONDED BY KIELBASA, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

[00:15:01]

THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

FIRST QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

UM, MR. CRAWFORD, COULD YOU COME BACK? UM, WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW IS WHICH GEO USES ARE YOU PARTICULARLY CONCERNED WITH? ONE OPTION IS FOR US TO, UM, PROHIBIT THOSE USES.

THEY NEED THE GEO IN ORDER TO HAVE THE CURRENT USE, BUT IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL USES, I MEAN, THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY SAID THEY WOULD BE OKAY WITH PROHIBITING RESTAURANT AND HOSPITAL USES.

UM, UH, I'M S I'M SORRY, SOME OF YOUR QUESTION.

THIS IS JOE CRAWFORD.

SOME OF YOUR QUESTION GOT CUT OFF BY A VOICEOVER ON THE, UH, ON THE TELECOM, ON THE TELECONFERENCE.

I THINK WHAT I HEARD IS YOU'RE ASKING WHICH, WHICH GEO ARE NOT OKAY.

UM, I DON'T HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE LIST IN FRONT OF ME.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT I'VE PARTICIPATED IN ANY ONE OF THESE, UH, THESE, THESE PROCEEDINGS.

SO I'M, I'M IN MY CAR RIGHT NOW.

SO I CAN'T TELL YOU I'VE PROVIDED IN THE BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS.

SOME PARTICULAR USES THAT ARE CONCERNING TO ME THAT IT SHOULD AT LEAST BE CONDITIONAL FOR THIS PROPERTY.

UH, THAT'S THINGS LIKE GROUP HOME, TWO DESIGNATIONS AT THE RESTAURANT DESIGNATION AND THE GENERAL HOSPITAL THAT USES, OR SORRY, NOT DESIGNATION.

THOSE ARE ALL USES.

UM, I DON'T KNOW.

I CAN'T LIST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

EVERY USE THAT'S INCORPORATED IN GENERAL OFFICE USE AS OPPOSED TO LIMITED OFFICE USE.

UM, BUT I WANT TO SAY ALSO TO THE, TO THE IDEA THAT THIS SPACE IS SMALL.

I THINK THAT SOME OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS THAT YOU ARE ALL ATTACHED WITH IS LOOKING AT WHAT THE ZONING IS IN THE AREA.

AND THIS WOULD BE AN OUTLIER AS A GEO ZONING ON THIS SIDE OF THE BLOCK.

SO IT WOULD MOVE THE GOALPOSTS FOR FUTURE ZONING DESIGNATIONS.

UM, YEAH.

SORRY TO GO OFF TRACK THAT'S OKAY.

NO, I W I WOULD LIKE TO, SORRY, JUST, I WANT TO VERIFY JUST TO MAKE SURE CAUSE JUST SO MR. WADE IS THEY CANNOT BE LOW.

THE CURRENT USE WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR ELLO ZONING.

IT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED.

THERE'S ONLY A HANDFUL OF USES THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED IN GEO THAT ARE ALLOWED IN ELO.

EXACTLY.

IT'S PRINTING AND PUBLISHING.

UM, RUSS RESTAURANT IS CONDITIONAL ON BOTH.

UM, DEPENDING ON WHICH WAY YOU GO CONVALESCENT SERVICES, GROUP HOME TO GUIDE AND SERVICES AND HOSPITAL SERVICES.

AND I WANT TO SAY WE CAN'T PROHIBIT GRIP HOMES OR GUIDANCE SERVICES, RIGHT? SO THE ONLY THINGS WE COULD PROHIBIT WOULD BE CONVALESCENT SERVICE, CONVALESCENT SERVICES IN PRINTING AND PUBLISHING.

I THINK, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A CON HAVE THAT CONDITIONAL DIFFERENCE.

I THINK THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THAT.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING MR. CRAWFORD.

GUIDANCE SERVICES, TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES.

SO WE, CAN'T THE WAY THE ZONING WORKS.

WE HAVE TO GO WITH THE MORE AGGRESSIVE ZONING AND THEN WE CONDITION BACK.

YOU CAN'T GO WITH THE MORE CONSERVATIVE ZONING AND THEN CONDITION UP, YOU COULD PROHIBIT RESTAURANT USES, AND THEN THEY WOULD NOT BE CONDITIONAL ON THE SITE, OR YOU COULD LEAVE THEM AS CONDITIONAL USES THAT WOULD COME BEFORE YOU THE COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL FOR THE SITE PLAN.

SO IT'S UP TO YOU.

I WOULD, IF ANYBODY, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT, I WOULD, UM, PROHIBIT HOSPITAL USES IN CONVALESCENT SERVICES? CAN WE, I DON'T THINK WE CAN LIMIT HOSPITAL USES.

SO THERE'S LIKE A LIST OF FIVE THAT WE HAVE THAT YOU CAN YEAH, SURE.

I THINK THERE ARE.

I JUST WANT TO SAY AFTER HEARING THAT LIST, THE, UM, THE OTHERS THAT CONCERN ME ARE GUIDANCE SERVICES CAN INCLUDE REHABILITATION CENTERS, WHICH ARE GREAT, AND I SUPPORT HAVING THEM IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT IT IS.

I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT IT MORE CLOSELY IF IT'S SHARING A PROPERTY LINE WITH THREE RESIDENTIAL USES MR. CRAWFORD, ACCORDING TO OUR LAW DEPARTMENT, WE CANNOT PROHIBIT GUIDANCE SERVICES BY FEDERAL AND STATE LAW.

SO, SO IT WOULD BE HOSPITAL SERVICES.

IS THAT, IS THAT IN EITHER DESIGNATION YES.

HOSPITAL, THIS COULD STOP A NUMERATE.

THE USES THAT ARE PROHIBITED FROM PROHIBITION.

CAN WE CANNOT PROVE IT.

GROUP HOME, FAMILY, HOME

[00:20:02]

LET ME LOOK.

THERE MAY BE ONE OTHER SURE.

BUT IT'S NOT ON THIS LIST.

SO THANK YOU.

CAN I RAISE A QUESTION THOUGH? AND THAT IS ON THE YOU SUMMARY CHART, GUIDANCE SERVICES IS NOT ALLOWED UNDER ELO, BUT IT IS ALLOWED UNDER IT IS CONDITIONAL UNDER, UM, NOW I HAVE TO FIND THE TINY PRINT PERMIT PERMITTED.

BUT I CAN SEE WHERE TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS ARE, ALLOW OUR PC EVERYWHERE, EVERYWHERE.

SO I, I CAN ASSUME THAT THAT, BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

THE REASON TELECOMMUNICATIONS SAY PC ON YOUR CHART ON EVERYTHING ON EVERYTHING IS BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR OWN TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER ORDINANCE THAT COVERS THOSE AS TO WHERE IN THE CODE THAT THOSE CAN BE LOCATED.

SO THAT'S WHY IT STATES THAT, BUT THEN GUIDANCE SERVICES, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED UNDER ELLO.

WE DON'T HAVE A GUIDANCE SERVICES ORDINANCE.

AND SO WHY WOULD THEY, WHY COULDN'T WE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY? WHY COULDN'T WE PROHIBIT THEM IN GEO IF THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED UNDER ELA, WE HAVE BEEN TOLD BY OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT THAT THAT CANNOT BE A PROHIBITED USE IN AN ORDINANCE AND IS UNIMPORTANT, BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE OTHER REGULATIONS IN STATE AND FEDERAL LAW THAT GUIDE THOSE USES SPECIFIC USES THAT ARE ASSISTING.

WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE BETTY AND BAKER AND I USED TO GO BACK AND FORTH AND PACKET.

SO I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER SMITH WAS ABOUT TO MAKE A MOTION AND I MAY GET THIS WRONG.

IT'S OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

MR. CRAWFORD, WE'RE DONE WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AT GEO WITH A LIMITATION ON CONVALESCENT SERVICES, UM, HOSPITAL.

IT REALLY ONLY APPLIES TO ASSETS, A SOLID CONDITIONAL.

UM, I DO BOTH GENERAL AND LIMITED, UM, RESTAURANT HAS ALREADY CONDITIONED PRINTING AND PUBLISHING.

I THINK THAT'S IT.

I THINK EVERYTHING ELSE IS ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF.

SO WHAT I HAVE IS TO APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF G O ZONING WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, ADDING A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO PROHIBIT CONVALESCENT SERVICES, HOSPITAL SERVICES, PRINTING, AND PUBLISHING USES.

CORRECT.

THAT IS MY MOTION.

IS THERE A SEC? IS THAT A SECOND COMMISSIONER GREENBERG? OKAY.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM BEFORE WE VOTE COMMISSIONER KING, WAS HE BUILDING OR QUESTION YOU'VE BEEN DOING YOUR MUTE? YES, I AM.

THE REASON MAJORITY OF THIS AREA IS INTERIM ZONE IS IT WAS ANNEX, BUT NEVER GIVEN PERMANENT ZONING.

YOU KNOW, I WAS LOOKING ON THE BACKUP, THE STAFF REPORT HERE, AND I, I JUST, I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER GEOS ZONING AROUND HERE AND, UH, YOU KNOW, AND I'M, I'M CERTAINLY, UH, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION HERE.

I, YOU KNOW, I DO WANT TO MAKE, SEE IF WE CAN HELP, YOU KNOW, MAKE THIS WORK BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THE SERVICE HERE.

IT'S ALREADY HERE AND I THINK WE NEED TRADE SCHOOL.

SO CERTAINLY A HUNDRED PERCENT BEHIND WHAT'S WHAT'S BEING ATTEMPTED HERE, BUT I JUST WORRY ABOUT SETTING A PRECEDENT FOR GEO NOW BEING MORE WIDELY USED AROUND HERE IN THE ABSENCE OF SOME KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.

SO I, I KNOW THAT WORRIES ME A LITTLE BIT, BUT, BUT I UNDERSTAND WE'RE TRYING TO THREAD A NEEDLE HERE.

UH, THE OTHER THING IS THE HEIGHT IT'S, IT'S 20 FEET HIGHER.

SO, AND BY, BY RIGHT NOW, THIS, THIS LOT WITH THIS PROPERTY WOULD HAVE 20 FEET HEIGHT.

THE ENTITLEMENT.

NOW I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULD CHANGE THAT.

I'M JUST POINTING OUT THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE NOW SETTING IS THAT WE'RE ESTABLISHING A NEW, A NEW HEIGHT HERE EFFECTIVELY.

THAT'S ALLOWED, ALLOWED HEIGHT AT THIS AT THIS SIDE.

AND I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER GEO ZONING OR ANY OTHER ZONING, MAYBE I'M MISSING IN THE BACKUP.

UH, THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THAT.

I'M NOT SAYING I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT WHAT'S BEING OFFERED HERE.

I JUST WANT TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT THE CONCERN, SOME OF THE CONCERN THAT WAS EXPRESSED BY THE SPEAKER TONIGHT.

SO ANYWAY, THANK YOU.

I, I APPRECIATE THE CEO TO HELP KIND OF BACK DOWN ON SOME OF THOSE USES THAT MAY NOT BE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS AREA RIGHT HERE.

SO THANK YOU.

IF I CAN CLARIFY ONE THING, THE ZONING RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE MAKING ONLY APPLIES TO A 2,995 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE WITHIN THIS BUILDING.

SO YOUR HEIGHT COULD ONLY GO UP ON THAT 200, 2,990 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE WITHIN AN EXISTING BUILDING.

AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO STATE ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD LIKELY NOT BE WITHIN THE OFFICE BUILDING WILL BE SUBJECT TO COMPATIBILITY RIGHT ALONG THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE.

AND ALSO THERE IS ESTABLISHED GEO OR ON THE OTHER SIDE OF HIGH MEADOW DRIVE.

IT WAS DONE IN 2014.

IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR ZONING CASE MAP, THERE IS INTERIM ZONING.

[00:25:01]

AND SO WE DID HAVE A CASE ADJACENT TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS THE STREET TO THE EAST.

IT WAS C 14 20 14, 0 0 4 8, WHICH ESTABLISHED GEO ZONING ALONG HIGH MEADOW.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE KARA, JUST TO CLARIFY, I DO UNDERSTAND NOW THAT THIS IS JUST A VERY SMALL FOOTPRINT WITHIN THIS, THIS SIDE HERE, SO THAT THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.

AND I ALSO DO SEE SOME ELO NEARBY AND ALSO SOME GEO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AWAY.

SO I, I, I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT IT AND I COULD SEE NOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

SO I I'M, I'M, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AND I WAS GOING TO SUPPORT IT.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT WE'RE NOT KIND OF BEING A ONE-OFF HERE IN THESE, IN THESE ZONING CASES.

UH, BUT I THINK THIS WAS A GOOD DECISION HERE, SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER, I THINK.

CAN WE DO 13 FIRST AND THEN WE CAN DO 11 OR 12? YEAH.

SO LET'S DO 13 FIRST.

[13. Environmental, Drainage, and Landscape Amendments. Discuss and consider a recommendation for adoption of an ordinance amending Title 25 of the City Code relating to environmental, drainage, and landscape requirements. City Staff: Liz Johnston, Watershed Protection Department, (512) 974-2619, Liz.Johnston@austintexas.gov (Co-Sponsors Chair Barrera-Ramirez ,Vice-Chair Kiolbassa, and Commissioner Denkler)]

SORRY.

ARE YOU GUYS READY? OKAY.

GOING, GONNA SEND THIS UP IN FIVE MINUTES, FIVE MINUTES.

JUST KIDDING.

REALLY? NO, TAKE US AWHILE.

TALK LIKE AN AUCTIONEER, BUT NOW I KNOW THERE'S LOTS OF SLIDES.

THANKS SO MUCH FOR HAVING US.

MY NAME IS KATIE COIN ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN, ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF WATERSHED PROTECTION.

I'M EXCITED TO BRING FORWARD THESE, UH, THIS ORDINANCE FOR Y'ALL.

WE'RE HAPPY THAT YOU'VE ASKED US TO COME PRESENT TO YOU.

UM, THESE ARE CHANGES THAT FOR THE MOST PART WERE ALREADY PROPOSED AS DRAFT LANGUAGE IN OUR PREVIOUS LDC DRAFT, UH, WHICH IS WHY COUNCIL ASKS US TO BRING THESE BACK ON A VERY TIGHT TIMELINE.

THESE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT OUR DEPARTMENT AND MUCH OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCACY COMMUNITY WAS VERY EXCITED TO SEE PASSED, UH, AND, AND ARE SEEN AS REALLY A LONG TIME COMING.

SO THINGS LIKE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, THINGS LIKE MORE PROTECTIONS FOR THE COLORADO RIVER, UH, FRONTAGE, UH, AND MANY OTHER THINGS THAT LIZ WILL WE'LL TALK THROUGH IN THIS PRESENTATION ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO BRING FORWARD THAT WE THINK ARE GOING TO BE REALLY IMPACTFUL FOR OUR CITY TO BE MORE RESILIENT AND EQUITABLE FOR YEARS TO COME.

SO I'LL PASS IT TO LIZ.

TALK THROUGH THE DETAILS.

WE'LL HAND IT TO ANDREA TO TALK ABOUT, UM, SOME OF OUR ANALYSIS WORK FOR OUR STAFF REPORTS, AND WE'LL TRY TO DO THAT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HAVING US.

UM, SO THE ORDINANCE THAT I'M BRINGING FORTH TODAY IS RELATED TO A RESOLUTION THAT COUNCIL ADOPTED IN JUNE.

UM, THAT RESOLUTION DOES HAVE OTHER DELIVERABLES.

UM, UH, IN ADDITION TO THIS ORDINANCE THAT WE WON'T BE ADDRESSING HERE THIS EVENING RELATED TO, UM, UH, ADDITIONAL MONITORING OF INDUSTRIAL SITES, UM, AND ADDRESSING INEQUITIES BETWEEN OUR, UM, REGULATIONS.

THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE THIS EVENING.

THIS IS A SUBSET OF THAT RESOLUTION.

UM, UM, ADDRESSING SOME KEY SUBJECT AREAS, UM, THAT I WILL SPEAK ABOUT, UM, IN DEPTH, UM, THE DUE DATE THAT WE WERE GIVEN.

UM, SO THIS WAS BACK JUNE 9TH IS WHEN THE RESOLUTION WAS APPROVED IN THIS, UH, UH, OUR DUE DATE WAS DUE SEPTEMBER 15TH.

UM, LOOKING AT, UM, BOARDS AND COMMISSION DATES.

WE JUST DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THAT WAS POSSIBLE, BUT WE ARE, UM, TRYING TO, UH, HAVE THIS ORDINANCE TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE DATE AFTER THIS ABBOTT SEPTEMBER 15TH, WHICH IS THE 29TH.

SO NEXT SLIDE.

SO, UM, WE, WHEN THE RESOLUTION WAS PASSED, WE BROUGHT TOGETHER, UH, AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE SOME INTERNAL STAFF FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS.

UM, WE BROUGHT THIS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, UH, UH, AS A QUICK BRIEFING, UM, BACK IN JUNE AND THEN FORMED A WORK GROUP WITH THEM WITH THAT I WAS MET ONCE WE'VE GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION UPDATE, WE'VE PRESENTED TO CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE, AND WE GAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION A BRIEFING AS WELL.

REQUIREMENTS AND URBAN SLOPE PROTECTION.

UM, TOMORROW EVENING WE'LL BE PRESENTING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AGAIN, HOPING FOR A RECOMMENDATION FROM THAT BODY.

UM, WE WILL BE BRINGING THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE 13TH.

UM, THEY HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY MAY TAKE ANOTHER COUPLE OF WEEKS BEFORE GIVING A, UM, UH, BEFORE VOTING ON IT.

UM, AND SO, UM, THERE MAY NOT BE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE 13TH, BUT HOPEFULLY BEFORE CITY COUNCIL MEETS, UM, THERE IS ANOTHER RESOLUTION W W ANOTHER ORDINANCE COMING ON THE HEELS OF THIS ONE, UM, THAT WAS PULLED OUT AND GIVEN A SLIGHTLY LONGER TIMELINE RELATED TO A COUPLE OF THOSE ITEMS, WHICH, UM, SO RELATED TO GREENFIELD DETENTION

[00:30:01]

SO WE WILL BE BRINGING THAT FOR, UH, FORWARD AS WELL, UM, AT A LATER DATE.

SO DIVING IN ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ORDINANCE, UM, I'VE GROUPED THE ELEMENTS IN THE ORDINANCE BY SUBJECT MATTER.

SO THEY MAY, THE NUMBERS MAY BE OUT OF, OUT OF TURN.

UM, SO JUST KNOW THAT THAT JUST GOING BY THE, UM, SUBJECT MATTER, NOT WHAT'S IN THE RESOLUTION ITSELF, UM, BUT I'M TAKING LANGUAGE DIRECTLY FROM THE RESOLUTION.

SO FIRST ONE IS ESTABLISHED CRITERIA THAT PRIORITIZE WHEN GREEN STORMWATER METHODS SHOULD BE REQUIRED OR INCENTIVIZED OVER CONVENTIONAL STORMWATER CONTROLS.

UM, WHAT THIS MEANS IS, IS, UM, UH, SO GREEN STORMWATER METHODS INCLUDE RAIN GARDENS, BIOFILTRATION PONDS, RAINWATER CAPTURE, OTHER ELEMENTS, UH, OTHER TYPES OF WATER QUALITY TREATMENT OPTIONS THAT PROVIDE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS THAN WHAT CONVENTIONAL STORM WATER CONTROLS DO.

UM, ON THE, I HAVE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF STORMWATER CONTROLS SHOWN HERE.

ONE IS A RAIN GARDEN.

THE OTHER IS A SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION POND.

THAT'S BEEN SAID, PHIL POND HAS BEEN THE WORKHORSE OF OUR WATER QUALITY, UM, UH, REQUIREMENTS FOR MANY YEARS DECADES.

AND IT DOES VERY WELL.

UM, AND IT FOR REMOVING TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE OTHER ANCILLARY BENEFITS, UM, BECAUSE IT'S USUALLY A SAND FILTER IT'S YOU CAN'T PLANT THE THINGS IN IT NECESSARILY, NO TREES, NO OTHER POLLINATOR PLANS.

IT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR INFILTRATION.

IT'S USUALLY KIND OF TO THE SIDE AND IS NOT ACCESSIBLE BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS A FENCE AROUND IT.

UM, AND SO WHAT THIS ORDINANCE IS SAYING IS WHEN SHOULD WE REQUIRE THE GSI VERSUS CONVENTIONAL STORMWATER CONTROLS? UH, NEXT SLIDE.

UM, I'M NOT GONNA LIST OFF EVERY BULLET POINT HERE, BUT THESE ARE SOME OF THE BENEFITS OF GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, NEXT SLIDE.

UM, AND I ALSO HAVE A COUPLE OF SLIDES JUST TALKING ABOUT THE TIMELINE, THIS JUST LET YOU KNOW, THIS CONVERSATION HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

IT WAS DISCUSSED IN IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO THERE, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN ADVOCATED FOR, BY COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND BY WATERSHED PROTECTION STAFF FOR A DECADE OR MORE AT THIS POINT, NEXT SLIDE.

AND ACTUALLY NEXT SLIDE.

THAT, UM, WAS ATTEMPTED TO, UH, BRING IN SOME OF REQUIRE STORM WATER TO ENTER SOME OF THE AREAS, BUT NOT ALL OF THE AREAS.

SO OUR DRAFT RECOMMENDATION IS TO ADOPT WHAT THE, UM, WHAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS GOING INTO.

THE SECOND READING OF THE LDC REWRITE.

AND THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS TO REQUIRE GSI FOR SITES WITH LESS THAN 90% IN PERVIOUS COVER.

UM, THERE WOULD BE CARVE-OUTS FOR SITES THAT HAVE HIGHLY CONTAMINATED RUNOFF OR FOR SITES THAT, UM, ARE TREATING OFFSITE AND PERVIOUS COVER, UM, OF GREATER THAN 10 ACRES.

UM, AND WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE OPTION FOR SITES WHERE IT'S, UM, FOR WHATEVER REASON, THEY JUST CAN'T GET ALL OF THE WATER QUALITY TREATMENT INTO A RAIN GARDEN OR BIOFILTRATION POND OR RAINWATER CATCHMENT, AND NEED TO BE ABLE TO TREAT SOME OF IT WITH A SAID, FILL POND.

SO WE HAVE, WE HAVE SOME CARVE-OUTS, UM, TO, UH, TO ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY, BUT IN GENERAL SITES THAT ARE LESS THAN 90% IMPERVIOUS COVER WOULD NEED TO PROVIDE AS MUCH GSI ONSITE AS POSSIBLE.

UM, UM, OF COURSE WE WILL NEED WITH THIS ENTIRE EFFORT TO UPDATE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL.

UM, WE HAD SOME STAFF DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, ARE, IS THERE A WAY TO IMPROVE THE SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION POND DESIGN TO BRING IN SOME ANCILLARY BENEFITS? AND SO THOSE CONVERSATIONS WILL BE ONGOING.

UM, BUT FOR NOW WE WOULD GO WITH THE ECM, UM, UH, DEFINED GREEN STORM WATER, INFANT INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, UH, FACILITIES, UH, NEXT SLIDE, UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO REQUIRES SURFACE PARKING, LOT STORMWATER TO ENTER PERVIOUS PARKING, LOT ISLANDS, MEDIANS, AND PERIMETER LANDSCAPES AS A METHOD OF WATER QUALITY AND REQUIRE THE PAVEMENT BE GRADED TO ALLOW RUNOFF TO ENTER PLANTING AREAS.

UM, SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS NOT, UM, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE TO REQUIRE ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO SERVE AS WATER QUALITY CONTROLS.

UM, WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING IS INSTEAD REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THESE PERVIOUS AREAS IN PARKING LOTS BE PROTECTED WITH A SIX INCH CURB, WHICH PREVENTS WATER FROM GOING INTO THESE AREAS, UM, AND REMOVE A PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED, UM, IRRIGATION REQUIREMENT

[00:35:01]

AND INSTEAD REQUIRE APPLICANTS TO DRAIN STORMWATER TO THESE AREAS WHERE POSSIBLE.

UM, SO WE'D BE CHANGING SOME ITEMS IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UH, THE ZONING SECTION OF, UH, THAT TALKS ABOUT LANDSCAPING.

AND, AND TWENTY-FIVE EIGHT TO JUST SAY WHERE YOU CAN PUT YOUR WATER INTO THESE, THESE AREAS.

UM, THIS SHOULD STREAMLINE THE, FOR THIS SOMEWHAT BECAUSE THE STORM WATER IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS IS AN ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON THE DESIGN TEAM TO SHOW THAT CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE STORMWATER IS GOING TO A CERTAIN AREA.

THIS IS JUST SAYING WHERE YOU CAN DO IT.

AND SO THERE'S NOT A PERCENTAGE.

NEXT SLIDE NUMBER FIVE ALLOWS CISTERNS TO BE SIZED BEYOND THE REQUIRED STORM CAPTURE AMOUNT AND REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR STORMWATER RELEASE SO THAT THEY CAN SUPPLY IRRIGATION NEEDS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.

UM, SO WE'VE MET WITH OUR FOLKS IN AUSTIN WATER WHO ARE WORKING ON A WATER FORWARD PLAN AND BRINGING THEY'RE WORKING ON AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD BRING FORTH, UM, REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO RAINWATER CAPTURE.

AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION IN LOCKSTEP WITH WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DO.

SO WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS WE DON'T HAVE AN ACTUAL CODE CHANGE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS BECAUSE THE, THE STORMWATER RELEASE REQUIREMENT IS IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL.

UM, AND WE ALREADY HAVE THE ABILITY BASED ON THAT CRITERIA TO ALLOW, UM, APPLICANTS TO SIZE THEIR SISTER AND LARGER IN ORDER TO CAPTURE MORE RAIN WATER, AND THAT LARGER AMOUNT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, UM, DISCHARGED AT A CERTAIN AMOUNT FOR WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS.

AND SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IS HAVE REGULAR MEETINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY STARTED WITH OUR COLLEAGUES IN AUSTIN WATER TO DEVELOP CRITERIA AND THE ECM, UM, THAT WOULD MEET BOTH OF OUR NEEDS AND UPDATE OUR CRITERIA TO PROVIDE MORE GUIDANCE TO APPLICANTS WHO WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS, UM, AND BE ABLE TO MEET BOTH AUSTIN WATER AND WATERSHED PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS, UM, POSSIBLY INCLUDING SMART CONTROLS, UM, OR OTHER ABILITIES POSSIBLY, UM, REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF WATER QUALITY TREATMENT IF IT'S BEING KEPT BEING USED INTERNALLY TO THE BUILDING.

UM, AND SO THOSE, THOSE CONVERSATIONS WILL BE GOING, UM, IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, NEXT SLIDE.

AND SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION FROM THE LDC REWRITE, SECOND READING WITH SOME EDITS, UM, AND CONSULTATION WITH LAW.

ITEM THREE, THIS IS RELATED TO LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS.

SO TECHNICALLY THIS IS A NOT WATERSHED PROTECTION CODE, BUT IT'S CODE OWNED BY THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT RELATED TO FUNCTIONAL GREEN.

UM, AND SO THIS IS SAYING IMPLEMENT FUNCTIONAL GREEN REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTIES WITH MORE THAN 80% ALLOWABLE IMPERVIOUS COVER.

SO WHAT FUNCTIONAL GREEN IS, UM, IS LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE MORE, UM, APPROPRIATE FOR, OR MORE URBAN HIGH IMPERVIOUS COVER SITES.

THE PREVIOUS LANDSCAPE CODE ANTICIPATES A BUILDING WITH A LARGE PARKING LOT AND A STREET YARD KIND OF MORE SUBURBAN TYPE DEVELOPMENT.

UM, AND THESE INFILL PROJECTS THAT ARE REAL DENSE THAT HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT, UM, UH, DON'T HAVE A STREET YARD OR MAY HAVE COVERED PARKING OR, UM, STRUCTURED PARKING.

UM, THIS IS, THIS WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A POINT SYSTEM THAT THESE SITES WOULD HAVE TO MEET, UM, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS IN THAT BUILDING.

UM, SO IT'S BASED ON ECOSYSTEM SERVICE VALUE CREATED BY THE LANDSCAPE, UH, NEXT SLIDE.

UM, SO THIS IS, UH, SOME BULLET POINTS OF SOME OF THE, UH, TYPES OF ELEMENTS THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED AND FUNCTIONAL GREEN, NEW TREES, SHRUBS, RAIN GARDENS, UM, VEGETATED ROOF, POROUS PAVEMENT.

UM, AND SO ONE KEY THING TO POINT OUT WITH FUNCTIONAL GRAIN IS THAT WITH, LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IF A PROJECT WERE TO PROPOSE A RAIN GARDEN THAT HAD SOME GROUND COVER AND SOME TREES ASSOCIATED WITH IT, THAT ONE ELEMENT WOULD BE ABLE TO GET MULTIPLE POINTS BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A RAIN GARDEN, IT WOULD HAVE GROUND COVER, IT WOULD HAVE TREES.

AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, AND OTHER CODE REQUIREMENTS COULD ALSO COUNT TOWARDS THIS.

SO YOU CAN DOUBLE DIP TO SOME EXTENT NEXT SLIDE.

[00:40:01]

UM, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH NOT AMENDING 25 TO ZONING, BUT RATHER BRINGING FUNCTIONAL GREEN INTO A SEPARATE SUB-SECTION OF 25 8.

AND WE WILL BE ASKING CITY COUNCIL FOR PERMISSION TO MOVE ALL OF LANDSCAPING AS WELL, JUST TO GET IT OUT OF, OF ZONING BECAUSE IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY BELONG THERE.

BUT FOR NOW WE'RE, WE'RE JUST PROPOSING THE FUNCTIONAL GREEN BEAD, UM, LIVE IN A DIFFERENT SPOT IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, DIFFERENT FROM ZONING.

SO THIS WOULD APPLY IN THE CBD WHERE, AND DOWNTOWN MIXED USE PROPERTIES THAT DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND SITES GREATER THAN 80% ALLOWABLE, IMPERVIOUS COVER, NEXT SLIDE.

UM, WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ITEMS LISTED.

UM, THIS IS ONE, UM, THAT WOULD PRE PROHIBIT AND CHANNEL DETENTION PONDS, UM, EXCEPT FOR CERTAIN CASES WHERE, UM, WATERSHED PROTECTION NEEDS TO PART NEEDS TO EITHER CONSTRUCT SOMETHING, REHABILITATE SOMETHING, OR PARTNER WITH A PUBLIC ENTITY WHERE NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE IS FEASIBLE TO PROVIDE REGIONAL FLOOD CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.

UM, THE CURRENT CODE DOES NOT ALLOW DETENTION PONDS IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AT ALL.

YOU CAN'T GET A FOOT INTO THAT BUFFER ZONE, EXCEPT THAT IT DOES HAVE THIS CARVE OUT FOR IN-CHANNEL DETENTION PONDS.

THEY CAN BE PRETTY DIFFICULT TO, UM, DO THE MODELING NECESSARY TO GET THEM, UM, APPROVED, BUT THEY ARE ALLOWED.

AND I THINK THAT THIS IS JUST SAYING, YOU KNOW, UNLESS WE REALLY, REALLY NEED TO FOR COMMUNITY BENEFIT IT'S BEST PRACTICE NOT TO HAVE THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CHANNEL.

UM, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ELEMENTS THAT, UH, UM, KIND OF SPECIFICALLY CALL OUT UTILITY LINES AND HOW THOSE INTERSECT WITH CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES.

UM, SO ONE IS REQUIRE PROJECTS TO RELOCATE REPLACED, OR WHY WASTEWATER PIPES IN THE INNER HALF, UM, TO MAKE IT MORE CODE COMPLIANT IN THE OUTER HALF.

SO, YOU KNOW, EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, REAL CLOSE TO THE CREEK WHERE POSSIBLE MOVE THEM, UM, INTO THE OUTER HALF OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.

SO THEY'RE NOT WHEN THEY BREAK, THEY DON'T DIRECTLY DISCHARGE INTO THE WATER.

UM, ADDITIONALLY NEW EAS UTILITY EASEMENTS NEED TO BE LOCATED IN THE SAME LOCATION AS WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES NEW UTILITY LINES NEED TO BE.

AND SO WE'RE ACTUALLY SAYING, YOU KNOW, IN, IN GENERAL UPSIZED OR REPLACED WASTEWATER PIPES, UNLESS IT'S LIKE AN EMERGENCY REPAIR WHERE THEY'RE REALLY JUST GOING IN AND FIXING A, A SMALL SECTION PUTTING LIGHT FOR LIKE THAT AND CALLING IT MAINTENANCE, IF IT'S BRINGING MORE WASTEWATER OR RE BEING A, YOU KNOW, A LARGE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT THAT REPLACES A LARGE SEGMENT, WE WOULD, UH, ALREADY SAY THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE OUTER HALF OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE ANYWAY.

SO THERE'S NOT A BIG DIFFERENCE IN HOW WE CURRENTLY INTERPRET, UM, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN THAT PERSPECTIVE.

UM, UTILITY EASEMENTS WOULD BE A KIND OF A NEW ADDITION TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, HOWEVER, IT'S, UM, KIND OF COMMON SENSE THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE ACQUIRING UTILITY EASEMENTS, THAT SHOULD BE IN A PLACE THAT THE CODE ALLOWS THE UTILITY TO BE ADDED.

NUMBER NINE, PROVIDE WETLAND PROTECTIONS AND BUFFERS EQUALLY ALONG LADY, BIRD LAKE TO HELP STABILIZE AND PREVENT EROSION ALONG THE SHORELINE.

UM, SO WETLANDS ARE PROTECTED EVERYWHERE IN TOWN, EXCEPT FOR THE AREA SHOWN IN YELLOW ON THIS MAP HERE.

SO THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND THE AREA ALONG LADYBIRD LAKE, BUT JUST IN THAT YELLOW SECTION.

AND SO THIS WOOD CODE AMENDMENT WOULD SAY, ALL OF LADY BIRD LAKE HAS WETLAND PROTECTIONS.

UM, WE WOULD NOT BE ADDING WETLAND PROTECTION TO DOWNTOWN, BUT JUST APPLYING IT TO LADYBIRD LAKE.

UM, SO NEXT SLIDE.

COLORADO RIVER PROTECTIONS.

UM, THIS IS, UM, A CODE AMENDMENT THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED BY SOME OF THE COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING PODESTA AND THE COLORADO RIVER ALLIANCE.

UM, AND SO THIS IS SAYING, EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE EXISTING CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND EROSION HAZARD ZONE BUFFERS ON THE COLORADO RIVER DOWNSTREAM OF THE LONGHORN DAM AND PROPOSED PROTECTIONS THAT WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE PROTECTIONS TO THE RIVER THAT WILL ENSURE A HEALTHY REPAIRING CORRIDOR TO STABILIZE THE RIVERBANK AND PROTECT PROPERTY FROM EROSION.

AND SO THIS IS SAYING THE FREE FLOWING PART OF THE COLORADO RIVER DOWNSTREAM OF LADY BIRD LAKE.

SO DOWNSTREAM OF THE LONGHORN DAM, IT'S HIGHLY ERODIBLE THERE.

UM, YOU KNOW, FLOODS COME THROUGH THE,

[00:45:01]

THE, THE BANK OF THE RIVER MOVES SIGNIFICANTLY IN SOME AREAS, THERE'S SOME REAL STEEP BANK, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, BLUFFS WHERE THE BANK HAS BEEN ERODING OVER TIME.

AND SO WE KNOW THAT OUR CURRENT CODE IS NOT REALLY, UM, ADEQUATE TO ADDRESS THE HIGHLY EROSIVE NATURE OF THE, UM, ALLUVIAL, UM, FLOODPLAIN OF THE COLORADO RIVER.

SO OUR CURRENT AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES AN EROSION HAZARD ZONE ANALYSIS TO BE, UM, ONLY WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF THE ORDINARY HIGH-WATER MARK ORDINARY HIGH-WATER MARK IS BASICALLY THE BANK.

SO WHERE IS AN ORDINARY RAIN EVENT? WHERE WOULD THE BANK BE? AND SO THAT, THAT IS, WOULD BE A HUNDRED FOOT OFFSET.

WE KNOW THAT THE RIVER COULD ERODE WELL BEYOND THE A HUNDRED FOOT MARK.

AND SO, UM, WE ARE, UM, AND, AND ADDITIONAL THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE IS ESTABLISHED AT 200 OR 400 FEET, DEPENDING ON THE LOCATION OF THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN, WHICH WE ALSO KNOW 200 FEET IS NOT ADEQUATE TO PROTECT, UM, ANY INFRASTRUCTURE OR BUILDING FROM THE EROSIVE NATURE OF THE COLORADO RIVER.

UM, ADDITIONALLY WE, UM, STORMWATER DISCHARGES, WE DO ALLOW STORMWATER DRAINS TO GO THROUGH CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES SO THAT THERE COULD BE OUTFALLS INTO OUR WATERWAYS, BUT WHEN YOU NEED TO PUT ONE OF THOSE IN THE COLORADO RIVER, THAT'S A LOT OF DISTURBANCE OF A HIGHLY ERODIBLE BANK.

AND SO THERE'S NO SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FOR THE COLORADO RIVER FOR THESE STORM WATER DISCHARGE LOCATIONS, NEXT SLIDE.

AND SO OUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO EXPAND THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN EROSION HAZARD ZONE ANALYSIS TO 400 FEET FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATERMARK, UM, TO ESTABLISH THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AT 400 FEET FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATERMARK, WHICH IS, UM, THE SAME CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AS BARTON SPRINGS, JUST FOR, UH, OR SORRY, BARTON CREEK, UM, AS A, AS A, UM, JUST AS A POINT OF REFERENCE, UM, IF A SITE HAS THE ABILITY TO, UM, HAVE A STORMWATER OUTFALL SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN DIRECTLY TO THE COLORADO RIVER, WE WOULD ALSO ASK THAT THEY LOOK, UM, THEY DO THAT INSTEAD.

SO A DIFFERENT WATERWAY INSTEAD OF DIRECTLY TO THE COLORADO RIVER.

UM, WE'RE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF UPDATING OUR PUBLICLY VIEWER, UH, PUBLICLY AVAILABLE VIEWER PROPERTY PROFILE TO SHOW THE ESTIMATED LOCATION OF THE ORDINARY WATERMARK HAS THERE.

YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE THAT RIGHT NOW.

SO NUMBER 11, ADDRESS, CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL CODE AND CONSISTENCIES AND OTHER MINOR CODE REVISIONS IN TWENTY-FIVE SEVEN AND 25 8 THAT STAFF HAVE PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED AND REVIEWED AS PART OF THE CODE NEXT AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONING PROCESS, UM, OR OTHER CODE AMENDMENTS AS NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH THE GOALS OF THIS RESOLUTION.

AND WE'RE DIRECTED TO WORK AS CLOSELY WITH THE PREVIOUS CODE, UM, THE LDC REWRITE AS, AS POSSIBLE AS WE BRING FORTH THESE AMENDMENTS.

SO I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH KIND OF SOME BULLET POINTS AND NOT SPEND A WHOLE LOT OF TIME ON EACH ONE, BUT WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT KIND OF CAPTURES YOUR EYE, AND YOU WANT TO ASK MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT NEXT SLIDE.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF CLEANUP.

UM, THERE'S SOME REORGANIZATION THAT WE'RE PROPOSING.

UM, THERE, UH, WE'RE MOVING FLOOD, PLAIN MODIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND TWO CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE REQUIREMENTS.

WE'RE TAKING SOME OF THE BULKHEAD WAVE ABATEMENT REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S IN ZONING, MOVING THAT INTO TWENTY-FIVE EIGHT WATER QUALITY, UM, CONSOLIDATING OUR LAKE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS INTO, UM, THE SAME INTO THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE REQUIREMENTS AS WELL, EDITING SOME OF THESE, UM, UH, THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION AND THE ROADSIDE DITCH EXEMPTION, WHICH IS EXEMPTS DITCHES FROM CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE PROTECTIONS TO MAKE THEM MORE CLEAR, BECAUSE THOSE ARE A COUPLE OF AREAS WHERE THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION, UM, AND EXEMPTING RAINWATER, HARVESTING CISTERNS FROM IMPERVIOUS COVER CALCULATIONS.

SO, UH, YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE ART, UH, BIOFILTRATION OR RAIN GARDEN.

UM, WE ARE MAKING SOME CHANGES TO REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTIONS TO STREAMLINE AND CLARIFY THAT PROCESS, UM, EXCEPT FOR THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION, WHICH WE'RE JUST, UM, WE'RE MORE OR LESS LEAVING THE SAME, EXCEPT THAT WHERE IT SAYS A SAID, FILL POND IS REQUIRED, WE'D SAY, UH, A POND THAT GIVES MORE OPTIONS.

[00:50:01]

IF, IF, UH, IF NECESSARY, NOT JUST A SAID FILL POND, UM, REQUIRING OUR, SO UPDATING OUR ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY REQUIREMENTS, UPDATING STREET CROSSING AND CREEK CROSSING REQUIREMENTS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE, UH, ASAP NEXT SLIDE.

UM, WE ARE CHANGING THE REQUIREMENT THAT THERE CAN BE NO, UM, ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES WITHIN 500 FEET OF LAKE AUSTIN.

THIS WOULD GIVE STAFF SOME ADMINISTRATIVE ABILITY AS THEY HAVE ELSEWHERE IN TOWN TO APPROVE CERTAIN CONSTRUCTION, BUT WE WOULD EXEMPT, UH, TRAMS FROM THAT REQUIREMENT.

SO TRAMS WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE FULL AND USE COMMISSION VARIANCE PROCESS AS THEY DO TODAY.

UM, ALLOW STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURES AND FLOODPLAINS, AND WITHIN 50 FEET OF A CF.

SO IF THERE'S EXISTING DRAINAGE ISSUES FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, THAT DOESN'T HAVE A STORMWATER CONTROL, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT IN A RAIN GARDEN IN THAT AREA, UM, CLARIFY EXISTING SUBDIVISIONS, REMOVE CODE LANGUAGE THAT ACTS IMPLICITLY ALLOWS WETLANDS TO SERVE AS WATER QUALITY CONTROLS, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE CRITERIA TO ALLOW THAT NEXT SLIDE, UM, UPDATE CUP, FILL RESTRICTIONS TO ALLOW CUT AND FILL IN EXCESS OF FOUR FEET FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STREET OR DRIVEWAYS, UM, WITH THE SAME CONDITIONS THAT THE STREET AND DRIVEWAYS HAVE TO CROSS SLOPES.

UM, THERE'S A SECTION IN 25, 8, 360 7.

THAT'S VERY OLD, REALLY RELATED TO THE RELOCATION OF THE SHORELINE ON LADY BIRD LAKE.

THAT REQUIRES COUNCIL ACTION.

UM, THIS IS, UH, WE FEEL NOT RELATED TO WATER QUALITY PROTECTIONS AND MORE RELATED TO DAM OPERATIONS AND WATER SUPPLY.

SO WE'RE PROPOSING TO REMOVE THAT, AND WE'RE SIMPLIFYING OUR ENDANGERED SPECIES NOTIFICATION TO REMOVE SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT TALKS ABOUT ALL THE SPECIFIC ENDANGERED SPECIES, BECAUSE THAT LIST DOES CHANGE FROM TIME TO TIME.

AND JUST, WE'LL JUST BE SAYING IF THERE IS A, AN ENDANGERED SPECIES IN THIS AREA THAT WOULD REQUIRE A CERTAIN NOTIFICATION OF THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES, NEXT SLIDE.

AND SO MOVING ON TO THIS, UH, REQUIREMENT, IT WAS, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO THE RESOLUTION THAT SAID, UH, BASICALLY DON'T DISINCENTIVIZE MISSING MIDDLE.

AND SO THE CONCERN HERE IS THAT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME GOES THROUGH A DIFFERENT REVIEW PROCESS.

THAT IS, THAT IS MUCH FASTER, UM, AND HAS FEWER REQUIREMENTS THAN A MISSING MIDDLE PROJECT.

AND SO THIS IS SAYING FOR PROJECT, FOR A SITE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, DON'T DISINCENTIVIZE MISSING METAL.

THAT MANY OF THE INFILL PROJECTS WERE PLANTED LONG BEFORE ANY OF OUR WATERWAY REGULATIONS.

LET'S SEE IF I CAN EXPLAIN THIS IN A WAY THAT'S CLEAR.

SO FIRST WE HAVE TO EXP CLEARLY CLEARLY DEFINE WHAT ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS APPLY TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

RIGHT NOW, THE CODE IS VERY UNCLEAR.

IT DOESN'T SAY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

WE DO APPLY ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS TO SUBDIVISIONS.

SO NEW SUBDIVISIONS THAT COME IN HAVE TO MEET CURRENT CODE REGULAR REQUIREMENTS, BUT FOR A LOT THAT WAS PLANTED PRIOR TO ANY WATERSHED ORDINANCES OR THAT, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY, THAT MAY BE AN EXTRA CREEK.

AND, UM, HAS BEEN BUILT ALREADY FOR PLANTED, OR IS EXEMPT FROM PLANTING.

WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO APPLY ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS TO THOSE LOTS BECAUSE THEY GO THROUGH A DIFFERENT PERMITTING PROCESS.

THEY GO THROUGH A BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS.

UM, THIS WAS AN, AN ITEM THAT WAS DISCUSSED FAIRLY IN DEPTH YEARS AGO WITH PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICERS, CHUCK LESNIAK, UM, AND CHRIS HARRINGTON AFTER HIM AND THE, THE, THE, WHAT WE CAME UP WITH, WHAT STAFF CAME UP WITH WAS A LIST OF ELEMENTS THAT WE FEEL SHOULD APPLY.

AND THEN WE WOULD EXEMPT EVERYTHING THAT DOESN'T APPLY FROM THOSE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, PROJECTS.

SO EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL HAS TO APPLY, YOU KNOW, THE PROHIBITION THAT VEGETATION IS CLEAR BEFORE A PERMIT WOULD APPLY.

UM, THE CURRENT RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS HAVE A APPLICATION.

THE APPLICATION IS ALWAYS ASKED IF THERE'S CUT OR FILL GREATER THAN FOUR FEET, WE WOULD CONTINUE TO APPLY FOR THAT WATERWAY PROTECTIONS IS A LITTLE BIT TRICKIER BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO EXEMPT EVERYTHING, BUT WE DO HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE

[00:55:01]

AND SO THIS IS SAYING THAT IF YOUR LOT WAS PLANTED BEFORE THE COMPREHENSIVE WATERSHED ORDINANCE, WHICH WAS MAY 18TH, 1986, THEN YOU WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM WATERWAY PROTECTIONS.

YOU'D STILL HAVE FLOODPLAIN, YOU'D STILL HAVE EROSION HAZARD ZONE.

UM, YOU, YOU STILL WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO OBSTRUCT WATER, BUT THE, THE CREEK BUFFER SETBACKS WOULD NOT APPLY.

UM, AND SO WE'RE BRINGING FORTH THOSE SAME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE PART OF THE LDC REWRITE AS PART OF THIS AS, UM, AS PART OF THIS EFFORT, NEXT SLIDE.

SO NOW WE HAVE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF WHAT SINGLE-FAMILY WOULD APPLIES TO SINGLE FAMILY, AND WHAT DOESN'T, WE WILL OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS REQUIREMENT TO, OR THE, THE, UH, THIS, UH, ELEMENT THAT SAYS DON'T DISINCENTIVIZE MISSING MIDDLE IS THAT WE WOULD SAY IF YOU HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY PLANTED LOT THAT WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, YOU COULD, UH, AND, AND WE'RE LIMITING IMPERVIOUS COVER TO 55% LIMITING THE SITE TO HAVE AN ACRE, HAVE A MORE STREAMLINED REVIEW PROCESS AND APPLY THE SAME ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS TO THOSE PROJECTS THAT WE WOULD FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

SO WE'RE NOT, I JUST ALSO WANT TO SAY, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE ZONING ENTITLEMENTS.

AND SO IF YOU'RE A SINGLE FAMILY, A LOT IS NOT KNOWN FOR UP MORE THAN 11 UNITS, YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

SO IT WOULD BE UP TO CITY COUNCIL TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THESE LOTS COULD BE ZONED DIFFERENTLY THAN THEY AREN'T TODAY.

SO, BUT WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT OUR ENVIRONMENTAL RULES WOULD NOT STAND IN THE WAY, I GUESS, OF THESE MISSING METAL PROJECTS, UH, NEXT SLIDE.

AND SO WORKING WITH OUR COLLEAGUES AND THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT THESE PROJECTS WOULD QUALIFY FOR WHAT IS CALLED A SMALL PROJECT SITE PLAN APPLICATION.

IT'S A PROCESS THAT ALREADY EXISTS.

UM, AND SO IT WOULD STILL HAVE, YOU KNOW, UH, DRAINAGE WOULD BE PART OF THE REVIEW FLOODPLAIN WOULD BE PART OF THE REVIEW FIRE AND ALL OF THE OTHER PARTNERING DEPARTMENTS THAT STILL REVIEW SITE PLANS WOULD STILL GET A PART OF THAT.

WE WOULD JUST BE CLARIFYING WHICH WATER QUALITY, UM, REQUIREMENTS APPLY.

UM, PART OF THE SMALL PROJECT SITE PLAN IS THAT NO NOTICE GOES OUT AND AS A FASTER REVIEW TIME, UM, ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

ABOUT HOW THE CODE AMENDMENT IS TO BE APPLIED, BUT THE LARGER INITIATIVE ON THE CRITERIA UPDATES WILL BE EVENTUALLY A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE OF THE GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE CRITERIA, THE DESIGN CRITERIA, AND THE LIST OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY CONSIDERED GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE IS LOCATED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL.

SO WE'RE INTO THE STAFF REPORT AND ANALYSIS, AND I'M GOING TO TURN OVER TO OUR INTERIM PLANNING DIVISION MANAGER, ANDREA BATES, GOOD EVENING COMMISSION.

I AM ANDREA BATES ALSO WITH WATERSHED PROTECTION, INTERIM PLANNING, DIVISION MANAGER, AS LIZ SAID.

SO I'M GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH SOME OF THE ELEMENTS IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS THAT WE HAVE PREPARED FOR THESE CODE AMENDMENTS.

AND THAT INCLUDES THE STEPH PORT ITSELF, WHICH FOLLOWS THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REVIEW SHEET TEMPLATE.

YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH AND FIVE ATTACHMENTS, A DRAFT OF THE PROPOSED CODE LANGUAGE.

IT WENT TO YOU IN REDLINE FORMAT, BUT WE SHOULD HAVE A DRAFT ORDINANCE, UH, IN TIME FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION BACKUP FOR PLANNING COMMISSION'S REVIEW ATTACHMENT B AS A TABLE WITH A PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS, WHICH HOPEFULLY PROVIDES AN EASY OVERVIEW OF EACH THING THAT IS PROPOSED.

AND GENERALLY, WHAT IS IT ACCOMPLISHING? ATTACHMENT C IS NOT READY YET, BUT IT WILL BE THE AFFORDABILITY IMPACT STATEMENT PREPARED BY HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF.

WE ARE EXPECTING THAT TO BE FINISHED SOON, AND IT WILL BE INCLUDED AS DIRECTED BY THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION IN THE COUNCIL.

BACKUP ATTACHMENT D IS A FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF PREPARED AND I WILL GO INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON TONIGHT.

AND THEN ATTACHMENT E IS A WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT EQUITY REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO THESE ARE A FEW HIGHLIGHTS IN THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REVIEW SHEET.

IT INCLUDES A SUMMARY OF THE INITIATED CODE AMENDMENTS THAT CAME FROM THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND THE STAFF PROPOSAL THAT RESPONDS TO COUNCIL'S INITIATION.

I WILL NOT READ, SUMMARIZE THOSE BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT LIZ HAS JUST COVERED FOR YOU.

AFTER THAT SUMMARY, THERE'S A SECTION ON NEXT STEPS, AND THOSE WILL INCLUDE UPDATES TO THE CRITERIA THAT WILL IMPLEMENT THESE CODE AMENDMENTS.

MOST OF THOSE ARE LOCATED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL.

THOSE UPDATES WILL INCLUDE A LOT OF BASIC THINGS TO IMPLEMENT THE AMENDMENTS, UPDATING THE LANGUAGE, DESCRIBING WHAT THE AMENDMENTS WERE SOMETIMES PROVIDING A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

[01:00:01]

AND SO WE WILL BEGIN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THOSE CRITERIA TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE BOTH EASY TO IMPLEMENT AND ARE RESULTING IN CONTROLS THAT ARE PROVIDING THE BENEFITS THAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR FROM THAT GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE CODE AMENDMENT.

SO THAT WILL BE A LONGER UNDERTAKING, UH, THAT WON'T HAPPEN ALL AT ONCE, BUT WILL BE ROLLED OUT OVER TIME TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE EFFECTIVENESS AND THE EFFICIENCY OF SOME OF THE CRITERIA FOR GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE.

IN ADDITION TO THE ECM UPDATES, THERE'S ALSO A SECTION IN THE STAFF REPORT ON HOW WE WILL BE DEVELOPING POLICY GUIDANCE.

SO THESE AREN'T THINGS THAT RAISED AT A LEVEL OF AN ACTUAL CRITERIA AMENDMENT, BUT IT WILL BE COMING TO AN UNDERWRITTEN UNDERSTANDING, UH, ON KEY ELEMENTS LIKE THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT WILL WORK WITH AUSTIN WATER TO ENSURE WE HAVE A DEFINITION OF WHAT A MAJOR REPLACEMENT OF A UTILITY LINE IS.

THAT'S LANGUAGE THAT'S USED IN THE, UH, PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT, UH, WHERE WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A SHARED UNDERSTANDING OF THE TYPE OF WORK THAT, UH, FALLS UNDER THAT TERM MAJOR REPLACEMENT, AS WELL AS THE TYPE OF CONDITIONS THAT WOULD SUPPORT A VARIANCE FROM THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT.

AND SO THIS IS KIND OF A DEPARTMENT TO DEPARTMENT UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS MEANT BY SOME OF THE CODE LANGUAGE DEVELOPED AND POLICY GUIDANCE MEMOS.

IN ADDITION TO THOSE, THE STAFF AMENDMENT OR THE STAFF REPORT ALSO INCLUDES THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS AS THEY'RE BEING PRESENTED AND AN ADDITIONAL REQUEST THAT EITHER COUNCIL OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO RELOCATE THE LANDSCAPING STANDARDS FROM THEIR CURRENT LOCATION IN CHAPTER 25 TO ZONING TO 25 8 IN A NEW SUB CHAPTER C AS I BELIEVE LIZ MENTIONED WHEN SHE WAS DESCRIBING THE FUNCTIONAL GREEN AMENDMENTS, WE DID NOT FEEL WE COULD DO THAT WITH THIS SET OF CODE AMENDMENTS, BUT IT IS A LOGICAL THING WITH WHICH TO PROCEED IF IT'S INITIATED BY EITHER THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR COUNSELING.

AND THEN, UH, ONE OF THE FINAL SECTIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT IS A SUMMARY WILL BE A SUMMARY OF THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL ACTIONS.

OF STAFF REQUIRED TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND IMPACTS TO CITY PROJECTS WHERE THE CITY IS COMPLYING WITH THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS.

SO ATTACHMENT A, AS I MENTIONED IS A DRAFT OF THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS TONIGHT IN REDLINE FORMAT.

AND THAT DRAFT ORDINANCE IN THE LEGAL FORMAT IS COMING, AND THIS REFLECTS STAFF'S CURRENT RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT WE WILL CONTINUE TO INCORPORATE RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, THAT MAY BE RECEIVED FROM, UH, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, UH, UH, ZAP OF COURSE, AND PLANNING COMMISSION.

SO THOSE WILL OF COURSE BE REVIEWED BY STAFF AND THINGS WHERE WE HAVE AGREEMENT CAN BE INCORPORATED AND POTENTIALLY OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE GOING TO COUNCIL AS A DIRECT RECOMMENDATION.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS ATTACHMENT B THE SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS IN TABLE FORMAT.

AND IT WAS JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

SO YOU CAN SEE IT HAS THE ACTUAL CODE SECTION OR THE CODE CITUS, UH, FOR TRACKING THE, UH, WHERE SPECIFIC CHANGES ARE GOING IN RELATION TO CURRENT CODE, THE TYPE OF CHANGE WHICH WE HAVE CATEGORIZED AS A POLICY LEVEL CHANGE A FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IN WHAT THE CODE DOES FROM WHERE IT STANDS CURRENTLY A CLARIFICATION, WHICH IS JUST THAT A CHANGE THAT CLARIFIES A CURRENT CODE, BUT DOESN'T CHANGE WHAT IT'S FUNDAMENTALLY DOING AND THEN THE MIDDLE GROUND OF A MINOR CHANGE.

UH, SO IT'S, IT IS A SMALL CHANGE FROM WHAT THE CODE CURRENTLY REQUIRES, BUT NOT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE POLICY CHANGES WOULD BE A CHANGE IN DIRECTION.

UH, THEN THERE'S THE CURRENT STATUS OR CONCERN THAT'S BEING ADDRESSED BY THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT OR CHANGE THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING AND IN THE BENEFITS OF IMPLEMENTING THAT CHANGE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

AS I MENTIONED, THE AFFORDABILITY IMPACT STATEMENT WILL BE ATTACHMENT C BEING DRAFTED BY HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF STILL IN THE WORKS, BUT IT SHOULD BE READY TO GO SOON AND WILL BE INCLUDED IN BACKUP.

THEN NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND HERE'S WHERE I CAN START GIVING YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE SUMMARY OF WHAT IS IN THE STAFF REPORT.

THE ATTACHMENT D IS THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT WAS REQUESTED BY THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION.

AND WE'VE INTERPRETED THAT AS POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CITY STAFFING OR THE NUMBER

[01:05:01]

I'M GOING TO TAKE IT TOPIC BY TOPIC, STARTING WITH THE PROPOSAL FOR A TRANSITION TO GREEN STORMWATER IMPACTS STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO KNOW ABOUT HOW STAFF HAS ANALYZED THIS FOR THE GSI PROPOSAL IS THAT WE GENERALLY USE THE ASSUMPTION THAT PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT WILL USE A BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM OR A BIOFILTRATION POND TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENT TO USE GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE INSTEAD OF A SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION SYSTEM, WHICH WOULD ONLY BE ALLOWED FOR A SMALL NUMBER OF PROJECTS THAT MEET SPECIFIC PRECONDITIONS UNDER THE PROPOSED CODE.

A BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM IS THE MOST SIMILAR TO A SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION SYSTEM IN TERMS OF FOOTPRINT.

IT IS A CENTRALIZED CONTROL.

THEY CAN BE EQUIVALENT IN SIZE.

GENERALLY BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER IF YOU USE A SIDE SLOPES INSTEAD OF VERTICAL WALLS, BUT YOU HAVE A LOT OF DESIGN FLEXIBILITY THAT REALLY MAKES THAT AN, YOU KNOW, AN APPLES TO APPLES IN TERMS OF THE SIZE OF THE POND TO TREAT AN EQUIVALENT AREA.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BY THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BIOFILTRATION AND SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION ARE THE PLANTS, A BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM IS PLANTED.

AND THOSE PLANTS THAT ARE PROVIDING MANY OF THE BENEFITS THAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR WITH THIS TRANSITION TO GSI.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE, THERE IS A SCENARIO THAT WE INCLUDED IN THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS WE'RE INSTEAD OF DOING THE MOST SIMILAR CENTRALIZED CONTROL, A DEVELOPMENT MIGHT CHOOSE TO, UH, PROVIDE STORMWATER TREATMENT WITH MULTIPLE RAIN GARDENS.

AND THAT WOULD BE A MOVE TO MORE DISTRIBUTED CONTROLS.

THERE COULD BE MANY BENEFITS TO THE DEVELOPMENT TO DOING THAT BECAUSE YOU CAN INTEGRATE A RAIN GARDEN INTO LANDSCAPE AREAS.

IT PROVIDES A SITE AMENITY, BUT IF YOU DO THAT ON A LARGER SITE, YOU MIGHT NEED MULTIPLE RAIN GARDENS, MULTIPLE DISTRIBUTED CONTROLS INSTEAD OF ONE CENTRALIZED CONTROL.

AND SO THAT CHOICE, WHICH A DEVELOPMENT CAN ALREADY CHOOSE UNDER TODAY'S CODE A WOULD REMAIN A CHOICE UNDER THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT, BUT THAT CHOICE WOULD RESULT IN ADDITIONAL PONDS FOR LARGER SITES.

SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE WERE THINKING OF WHEN WE'RE EVALUATING THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CITY STAFFING AND SETTLED CITY PROJECTS.

SO LET'S START WITH THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT STAFF.

WE FOUND THAT, UH, IN REVIEWING THIS CODE AMENDMENT WATERSHED PROTECTION IS RECOMMENDING ONE NEW FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE FOR TRAINING ON GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND THIS WOULD BE TO TRAIN INTERNAL IN A WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT, FIELD OPERATION STAFF, STAFF FROM OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS, AS WELL AS EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS ON THE BEST MAINTENANCE PRACTICES FOR THESE CONTROLS, BECAUSE MAINTAINING A VEGETATED CONTROL IS DIFFERENT THAN MAINTAINING TRADITIONAL GRAY INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND WE CAN FIND THAT MANY OF THE POTENTIAL DOWNSIDES OF GSI, YOU KNOW, IF YOUR PLANTS ARE DYING OR IF YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO, UH, SUCCESSFULLY INCORPORATE IT INTO THE SITES, MAINTENANCE REGIME CAN BE ADDRESSED THROUGH TRAINING AND HELPING FOLKS UNDERSTAND HOW THESE CONTROLS CAN BE BEST MAINTAINED OVER TIME.

AND SO THE DEPARTMENT IS MAKING A PROACTIVE RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE ONE NEW FULL-TIME STAFF MEMBER TASKED WITH THAT BECAUSE IT WILL HELP WITH CODE IMPLEMENTATION AND A FUNDAMENTALLY HELP WITH THE SUCCESS OF THE TRANSITION TO GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE BENEFITS THAT WE WILL BE GETTING FROM THOSE CONTROLS.

WE TOOK A VERY HARD LOOK AT OTHER STAFFING IMPACTS TO THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT, FIELD OPERATIONS DIVISION.

AND THE THING TO KNOW HERE IS THAT DIFFERENT TYPES OF PONDS ALL HAVE DIFFERENT MAINTENANCE REGIMES, PONDS THAT ARE FOR SINGLE FAMILY.

RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS ARE INSPECTED BY WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT STAFF AND MAINTAINED BY WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT STAFF PAWNS FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS OR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS OR INSPECTED BY WATERSHED PROTECTION STAFF, BUT MAINTAINED BY THE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT.

SO WATERSHED DOES NOT MAINTAIN ALL PONDS, ONLY THE PONDS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.

SO, SO THAT'S KEY TO UNDERSTAND, SO YOU KNOW, HOW THE STAFF WILL BE IMPACTED SIMILARLY, UH, IN TERMS OF KNOWING THE IMPACTS, THERE ARE DIFFERENT DESIGN CRITERIA FOR BIOFILTRATION POEMS THAT WILL BE USED IN RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS.

THEY ARE IN FACT REQUIRED TO HAVE TURF OR ANOTHER SIMPLER PLANTING REGIME TO ENSURE THAT WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT STAFF CAN SUCCESSFULLY MAINTAIN THOSE PLOTS.

AND SO THERE'S ACTUALLY VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE FROM WATERSHED STAFF PERSPECTIVE, MAINLY INSPECTING AND MAINTAINING A SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION POND ON A,

[01:10:01]

FOR A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AND INSPECTING AND MAINTAINING A BIOFILTRATION POND FOR A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.

AND SO THAT MEANS THAT WE WERE NOT ACTUALLY SEEING ADDITIONAL CREW MEMBERS DRIVEN, UH, DRIVEN BY THIS CODE AMENDMENT THAT WE WOULDN'T SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE OF THIS CHANGE, WE ARE GOING TO NEED ADDITIONAL FOLKS OR AN ADDITIONAL CREW IN OUR POND INSPECTION, UH, CREW.

BUT WE RECOGNIZE THAT THOSE CREWS ARE CURRENTLY UNDERSTAFFED.

THEY HAVE EXISTING CAPACITY NEEDS FOR THE CONTROLS THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY MAINTAINING.

AND SO LOOKING AHEAD TO THE SUCCESS OF GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE OVERALL IN WATERSHED'S ABILITY TO MAINTAIN, TO CONTINUE TO BE A LEADER IN THIS FIELD TO PROVIDE INSIGHT INTO HOW TO CHANGE THE CRITERIA TO BASICALLY SERVE AS AN EXAMPLE FOR THE PRIVATE SIDE, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THE ADDITION OF ANOTHER POND MAINTENANCE AND VEGETATION GROUP.

AND THEN THE SECOND BULLET THAT I SKIPPED OVER IS ON THE INSPECTION SITE.

AND SO THERE'S ACTUALLY VERY MINIMAL DIFFERENCE IN INSPECTION FROM A SEGMENTATION POND TO A BIOFILTRATION POND.

SO YOU'D HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INSPECTION TIME IF YOU'RE DOING A ONE-TO-ONE CENTRALIZED CONTROL, BUT NOT TO THE EXTENT THAT CHANGES THE STAFFING LEVELS, BUT THIS IS WHERE YOU'D START TO SEE A LARGER IMPACT IF OVER TIME THERE'S A MOVE TO DISTRIBUTED CONTROLS.

SO THE MORE CONTROLS THAT THERE ARE, IF WE'RE SEEING MULTIPLE RAIN GARDENS, INSTEAD OF ONE CENTRALIZED CONTROL, WE COULD START TO SEE A MODERATE IMPACT FROM THOSE ADDITIONAL INSPECTIONS.

SO THAT'S THE OVERVIEW OF THE WPDS STAFF IMPACTS, UH, DEFINITELY ONE NEW FTE FOR TRAINER RECOMMENDING ONE NEW UPON MAINTENANCE AND VEGETATION CREW FOR THE OVERALL SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM.

EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT PURELY DRIVEN BY THIS CODE AMENDMENT AND THEN A WAIT AND SEE ON THE POND INSPECTION SIDE, UH, TO SEE IF WE SEE MORE DISTRIBUTED CONTROLS OVER TIME.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE DSD IS ALSO IMPACTED BY THESE CHANGES, THE WATER QUALITY REVIEW STAFF REVIEW WATER QUALITY PONDS.

THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL TIME REQUIRED, UH, TO REVIEW A BIOFILTRATION POND RATHER THAN A SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION POND, BUT IT'S NOT SIGNIFICANT.

AND ON ITS OWN WOULD NOT TRIGGER THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL STAFFING IN THAT GROUP.

AGAIN, YOU'D START TO SEE AN IMPACT WHEN YOU START TO SEE MORE CONTROLS.

IF A DEVELOPMENT OVER TIME STARTED TO USE MULTIPLE RAIN GARDENS, INSTEAD OF ONE CENTRALIZED CONTROL, UH, INSPECTIONS, NO ADDITIONAL IMPACT, UH, NO ADDITIONAL TIME REALLY NEEDED TO INSPECT A BIOFILTRATION POND.

BUT AGAIN, IMPACT IF YOU START TO SEE MORE CONTROLS IN THE RAIN GARDEN SCENARIO.

SO THOSE WERE THE STAFFING SITES.

OF COURSE, THE CITY ALSO BUILDS WATER QUALITY CONTROLS AS CITY PROJECTS, BUT HERE WE'LL SEE VERY WE'RE EXPECTING VERY MINIMAL IMPACTS TO CITY PROJECT COSTS BECAUSE MOST CITY PROJECTS ALREADY USE GSI.

THERE WAS A 2007 COUNCIL RESOLUTION ARE REQUIRING BUILDINGS AND OTHER SITE DEVELOPMENT TO USE GSI WHERE FEASIBLE THERE'S THE COMPLETE STREETS POLICY THAT THE REQUIRES OR STRONGLY ENCOURAGES GSI TO TREAT ROADWAYS, UH, WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENTS, OWN CIP PROJECTS ARE PRIMARILY GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND SO WE ARE ALREADY USING GSI FOR THE MOST PART AND WOULD NOT BE SEEING AN IMPACT TO CITY PROJECTS DRIVEN BY THIS CODE CHANGE.

I, THE NEXT TOPIC TO HIT ON IS NOT QUITE DONE BACK TO THAT SLIDE AT THE BOTTOM FUNCTIONAL GREEN.

SO FUNCTIONAL GREEN IS EXPECTED TO HAVE AN INCREASE IN REVIEW AND INSPECTION TIME ALSO FOR DSD STAFF.

AND THE ESTIMATE IS ONE FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SECTION AND ABOUT A THIRD OF A FULL EMPLOYEE'S TIME IN ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTION.

AND THAT CAN BE EXPLAINED IN TWO FOLD ADDITIONAL FOR REVIEW OF A FUNCTIONAL GREEN LANDSCAPE, ESPECIALLY AT THE BEGINNING, UH, LEARNING THE NEW SYSTEM IT'S SLIGHTLY MORE COMPLICATED AND THEREFORE REVIEWING FUNCTIONAL GREEN LANDSCAPE WOULD BE EXPECTED TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME THAN STANDARD LANDSCAPING, BUT FUNCTIONAL GREEN WILL ALSO APPLY TO ADDITIONAL SITES SITES WITH HIGH IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT MAY NOT HAVE A LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT UNDER CURRENT CODE, WHICH IS WHAT FUNCTIONAL GREEN IS DESIGNED TO DO IS TO BRING THESE BENEFITS TO SITES THAT DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE THEM.

AND SO FOR BOTH OF THOSE REASONS, MORE REVIEWS, ADDITIONAL TIME PER REVIEW, YOU SEE A SMALL INCREASE IN THE STAFFING NEEDS IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SECTION.

DETENTION PONDS OR IN CHANNEL WETLANDS.

THE, UH, NEXT CODE AMENDMENT TO COVER IS THE PROHIBITION ON IN-CHANNEL

[01:15:01]

AND WE EXPECT THIS TO HAVE EITHER A NEUTRAL OR A POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE REVIEW STAFF BECAUSE PROVIDING CLARITY THAT THESE PONDS ARE NOT ALLOWED FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, AND THEY'RE ONLY ALLOWED FOR PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT, IF THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVES MEANS THAT THERE'S LESS BACK AND FORTH, UH, KIND OF DESCRIBING WHEN, UH, THIS, YOU KNOW, WHEN A DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO HAVE AN IN CHANNEL POND VERSUS NOT BEING ABLE TO DO THE PONDS TODAY IS CONTINGENT ON FAIRLY COMPLICATED MODELING.

AND SO, UH, STAFF WOULD NOT BE NEEDING TO BE REVIEWING THOSE MODELS OR TAKING THINGS FORWARD AS VARIANCES FOR SOMEBODY WHO'S PROPOSING THIS TYPE OF BOND.

AND SO THAT'S A NET EITHER NEUTRAL OR POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE STAFF REVIEW TIME.

AND ON THE CITY PROJECTS, AS I MENTIONED IN GENERAL, PONDS WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED IF THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE, IF THEY'RE ALLOWED, THE DESIGN CRITERIA ARE NOT CHANGING.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE NO IMPACT ON THE CITY ITSELF FOR THE PROPOSAL THAT REQUIRES NEW UTILITY LINES, MAJOR REPLACEMENTS AND EASEMENTS TO BE LOCATED EITHER OUTSIDE OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE OR IN THE OUTER HALF WATERSHED STAFF SEE THIS AS A CLARIFICATION OF CURRENT CODE, AND THEREFORE IT WOULD HAVE A NEUTRAL TO POSITIVE IMPACT ON STAFFING ON THAT.

UH, THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THESE OUT PROPOSALS, YOU KNOW, NEUTRAL IS EITHER THERE'S NO CHANGE AT ALL BECAUSE SHE'D ALREADY BE COMPLIANT OR POSITIVE WHERE THERE NEEDS TO BE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER THE PROPOSAL MEETS CURRENT CODE OR NOT HOLDING EASEMENTS TO THE SAME STANDARD AS UTILITY LINES SHOULD ALSO REDUCE RISK TO A CITY PROJECT BY ELIMINATING THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE AFTER THE FACT.

SO IN THE CASES WHERE, AND NOT A NON-COMPLAINT EASEMENT IS ACQUIRED INSIDE THE CRITICAL OR INSIDE THE INNER HALF, THE CRITICAL THEN PUT THE LINES IN A PROJECT NEEDS TO GO THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS.

AND THAT ADDS A LOT OF RISKS BECAUSE VARIANCES ARE NOT GUARANTEED ACQUIRING A COMPLIANT EASEMENT MIGHT BE MORE COSTLY.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE AN INCREASE IN COST FOR CITY PROJECTS THAT WOULD HAVE ACQUIRED A NON-COMPLIANT EASEMENT WITHIN THE CRITICAL, BUT FOR A COMPLIANT PROJECT, IT WOULD BE THE SAME NEXT SLIDE, THE WETLAND PROTECTIONS ALONG LADY BIRD LAKE, ENSURE THAT THE WETLANDS ALONG THE LAKE BETWEEN LAMAR AND ARE PROTECTED JUST LIKE WETLANDS ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY.

AND THIS WOULD BE A MINIMAL IMPACT ON THE STAFF, THE WETLAND REVIEW STAFF, THERE WOULD BE INCREASED REVIEWS.

THERE ARE WETLANDS IN THAT AREA THAT WOULD GAIN PROTECTION AND THEREFORE NEED REVIEWS THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY PROTECTED, BUT IT WOULD NOT BE SO MANY THAT IT WOULD HAVE AN INCREASE THAT WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL STAFFING.

THERE ALSO WOULD THEREFORE BE THE POTENTIAL INCREASE IN THE PERMANENT TIME AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR CITY PROJECTS THAT ARE THEREFORE REQUIRED TO PROTECT THOSE WETLANDS.

SO PROJECTS ON PARKLAND, ESPECIALLY IN THAT AREA, ALONG THE LAKE, THAT WOULD REQUIRE WETLAND MITIGATION, BUT LIN MITIGATION IS GENERALLY FLEXIBLE AND THOSE THINGS WOULD IDEALLY BE BEST PRACTICES FOR CITY PROJECTS ALREADY, BUT IT'S NOT TECHNICALLY A REQUIREMENT.

NOW, ONES COULD THEREFORE ADD TIME AND SOME COSTS GOING FORWARD IN THE CATEGORY OF OTHER MINOR AMENDMENTS.

AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THERE ARE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF THE EXTENT OF THE CHANGES PROPOSED AND IN THE OTHER MINOR AMENDMENTS INITIATED BY OR SUGGESTED BY STAFF MANY ARE CLARIFICATIONS.

AND FOR THOSE, IT WOULD BE A NEUTRAL TO POSITIVE IMPACT ON THE STAFFING BECAUSE THE MORE CLARITY, THE LESS DISCUSSION BACK AND FORTH WITH AN APPLICANT ABOUT WHAT THE CODE MEANS, EASIER REVIEWS AND DECREASED REVIEW TIMES.

AND THERE WOULD BE NO IMPACT TO PROJECT COSTS BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE CURRENT STANDARDS THAT ARE IN PLACE.

THE STANDARD ITSELF IS NOT CHANGING.

THERE ARE A FEW OTHER MINOR AMENDMENTS THAT ARE TECHNICALLY CODE CHANGES, BUT THESE PARTICULAR AMENDMENTS WOULD ALSO HAVE A NEUTRAL TO POSITIVE IMPACT ON STAFFING OR PROJECT COSTS SIMPLY BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY ARE DOING.

THEY ARE THINGS LIKE MAKING THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTIONS EASIER TO ACCESS REQUIRING LESS COUNCIL REVIEW.

SO THAT WOULD CUT OUT SOME PROCESS THAT'S CURRENTLY REQUIRED, UH, FOR REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTIONS OUTSIDE OF THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE.

OF COURSE THERE ARE A CODE AMENDMENTS THAT ADD, UM, INCREASE THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES INSTEAD OF LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES.

AND SO THOSE WOULD HAVE A POSITIVE IMPACT ON STAFF.

SO THE DIRECTION OF THE CODE CHANGES THAT FALL UNDER THIS MINOR AMENDMENTS MEAN THAT THOSE ARE ALSO NEUTRAL TO POSITIVE IMPACT ON BOTH STAFFING AND CITY PROJECT COSTS ON THE PROPOSAL TO NOT DISINCENTIVIZE MISSING MIDDLE.

THIS GOES

[01:20:01]

AS A, UM, KIND OF GOES BOTH WAYS.

THERE COULD BE AN INCREASE IN REVIEW TIME FOR SOME ONE AND TWO UNIT PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY PROJECTS THAT WE'LL BE NEEDING TO COMPLY WITH THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE PROTECTION.

SO PROJECTS THAT WERE PLANTED AFTER THOSE PROTECTIVE BUFFERS WERE PUT INTO EFFECT.

IF THEY ARE PROPOSING DEVELOPMENT IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE THAT WILL REQUIRE STAFF REVIEW.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE REVIEW THAT'S OCCURRING ON ONE AND TWO UNIT PROJECTS THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN TODAY.

HOWEVER, THERE WOULD BE A DECREASE IN REVIEW TIME FOR ANY QUALIFYING THREE TO 11 UNIT PROJECTS.

SO THOSE ARE PROJECTS THAT TODAY GO THROUGH THE FULL SITE PLAN PROCESS AND WOULD HAVE MUCH MORE STREAMLINED REGULATIONS AND THEREFORE FASTER REVIEWS, UM, TO COMPLY WITH THE SAME REGULATIONS THAT THE ONE IN TWO UNIT PROJECTS ARE DOING.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

AND FINALLY, THE PROPOSAL TO EXPAND BOTH THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND THE EROSION HAZARD ZONE ANALYSIS BUFFER ON THE COLORADO RIVER DOWNSTREAM OF THE LONGHORN DAM.

SO EXPANDING THE EROSION HAZARD ZONE ANALYSIS BUFFER IS LIKELY TO INCREASE STAFF REVIEW TIME BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ALLOWED IN THE OUTER HALF OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE WILL TRIGGER ANALYSIS.

SO TODAY THE EROSION HAZARD ZONE ANALYSIS BUFFER IS 100 FEET FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK.

AND THAT GENERALLY COMPLIES WITH THE, UM, THE INNER HALF OF THE CRITICAL, WHICH HAS QUITE LIMITED DEVELOPMENT.

THERE'S NOT THAT MUCH DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN HAPPEN IN THAT AREA.

AND THEREFORE NOT A LOT OF PROJECTS ARE PROPOSING THINGS THAT ARE TRIGGERING THE EROSION HEALTH HAZARD ZONE ANALYSIS BUFFER.

AS YOU EXPAND THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ALLOWED IN THE OUTER HALF OF THE CRITICAL, YOU'LL SEE MORE PROJECTS WHERE THAT DEVELOPMENT IS TRIGGERING THE NEED TO DO THE ANALYSIS ON THE CITY PROJECT SIDE, EXPANDING THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE DOES LIMIT THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN BE LOCATED IN WHAT IS CURRENTLY OUTSIDE OF THE FLOOD PLAIN IN THAT 200 TO 400 FOOT VARIABLE WEIGHT.

SO IF THE, WHEN, OR IF THE CRITICAL EXPANDS TO A FLAT 400 FEET FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH-WATER MARK, IT WILL APPLY TO ADDITIONAL AREAS THAN IT APPLIES TODAY.

AND SO THEREFORE PROJECTS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LOCATE SOME DEVELOPMENT IN THOSE AREAS, UH, WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE CRITICAL REGULATIONS AND MIGHT HAVE TO BE RELOCATED OR REDESIGNED.

THAT TYPE OF WORK MAY ALSO REQUIRE THE EROSION HAZARD DON'T ANALYSIS, UH, AND BE RELOCATED OR PROVIDE PROTECTIVE WORKS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT LOCATED UP TO 400 FEET FROM THE ORDINARY HIGH WATERMARK.

HOWEVER, PROTECTING PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE FROM EROSION ON THE FRONT END SAVES A LOT OF MONEY IN THE LONG RUN.

SO IT MAY BE UPFRONT DESIGN COSTS TO RELOCATION COSTS OR PROVIDING PROTECTIVE WORKS.

BUT THAT MEANS THAT THAT DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE, OR SHOULD NOT BE AT RISK FROM EROSION, WHICH IF THAT WERE TO OCCUR, IT BECOMES A MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE CAPITAL PROJECT TO TRY TO SHORE UP OR PROTECT THE DEVELOPMENT ONCE THE EROSION IS OCCURRING.

OF A WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT PROGRAM TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO COST SHARE WITH INCOME RESTRICTED OR DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS TO HELP THEM MEET EXISTING WATER QUALITY AND DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS, AS WELL AS THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED TO GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO THAT'S GENERALLY THE SUMMARY OF THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS.

AND NOW WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE'RE CALLING A WATERSHEDS EQUITY RESPONSE, SUMMARY, AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO IT IS THE POLICY OF THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT TO PERFORM AN EQUITY ASSESSMENT ON A MAJOR PROPOSALS LIKE THIS, BUT GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE HAD TO RESPOND TO THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION, WE DID NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PERFORM AN EQUITY ASSESSMENT THE WAY THAT WE WOULD WANT TO DO ONE.

HOWEVER, WE WANTED TO DO SOME SORT OF ANALYSIS, AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT IT'S NOT SIMPLY GOING TO BE A RUBBER STAMP IN THE SPIRIT OF TIME.

SO WE DID THE BEST ANALYSIS THAT WE COULD AND MADE THE FINDINGS THAT WERE POSSIBLE IN THE TIMELINE, RECOGNIZING THAT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO USE AN EQUITY LENS TO THE EXTENT OF OUR ABILITIES, BUT THAT WE ARE NOT DOING AS MUCH AS WE WOULD OTHERWISE WANT TO IF GIVEN MORE TIME.

AND SO TO DO THIS, IT CONVENED A GROUP OF STAFF, INCLUDING, UH, THE EQUITY, UH, MEMBERS OF THE EQUITY COORDINATION TEAM WITHIN WATERSHED PROTECTION, AS WELL AS SOME EQUITY AND INCLUSION PROGRAM MANAGERS FROM A COUPLE OF THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS TO DO THIS OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS.

AND THE KEY FINDINGS OF THAT GROUP WERE THAT THE AMENDMENTS DO OFFER POTENTIALLY POSITIVE COMMUNITY IMPACTS, BUT WITH UNKNOWN AFFORDABILITY CONCERNS THAT COULD POSE POTENTIAL UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.

AND SO BASICALLY THE GROUP DOING THIS REVIEW DID NOT KNOW AT THE TIME IF THEY WOULD HAVE AFFORDABILITY IMPACTS, UH, HOWEVER, EVEN WITH THAT UNCERTAINTY, THE GROUP SUPPORTED MOVING FORWARD WITH THE AMENDMENTS WITH SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE, UH, STARTING WITH IMMEDIATE DEVELOPMENT

[01:25:01]

THIS IS OUR PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE STARTED THINKING ABOUT, UH, IN A RELATIVELY RECENTLY, AND WE'RE EXCITED TO START THE DEVELOPMENT OF IT'S VERY EARLY DAYS STILL, BUT THE RE THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GROUP REALLY RECOMMENDED FOCUSING ON THAT IS DOING IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO HELP COST SHARE ON, UH, BASIC WATER QUALITY AND DRAINAGE CODE COMPLIANCE.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THEY RECOMMEND THAT WE PAY IMMEDIATE ATTENTION TO ANY POTENTIAL INTERNAL EQUITY IMPACTS WITHIN WATERSHED PROTECTION, SPECIFICALLY TO THE FIELD OPERATIONS DIVISION IN COORDINATION WITH FINDINGS IN THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS.

AND SO, AS YOU REMEMBER, I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON WATERSHED STAFF, ESPECIALLY IN THE FIELD OPERATIONS.

AND SO I THINK THIS, UH, RECOMMENDS THAT WE PURSUE THE STAFFING NEEDS IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS.

AND SO THAT WAS EVALUATING POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO WORKLOAD AND ALLOCATING IMMEDIATE RESOURCES FOR STAFFING TRAINING FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS CAPACITY TO MEET THE ANTICIPATED INCREASES THAT MAY RESULT FROM THIS PROPOSAL.

AND TO ENSURE THAT THE FIELD OPERATIONS DIVISION IS A PRIMARY STAKEHOLDER IN DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING RELATED FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO AS WE WORK ON THE DESIGN CRITERIA FOR GREEN STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE, BE SURE TO INCLUDE FIELD OPERATIONS AS A PARTNER TO AVOID LONG-TERM UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES ON OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE.

IN ADDITION, THEY RECOMMENDED TRACKING FOR ALL STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES TO ENSURE THAT THERE REMAINS ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EQUITABLE DECISION MAKING THAT IS HAPPENING AT THE STAFF LEVEL, UM, WITH THE ABILITY TO EXPAND THE ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES UNDER THE CODE PROPOSAL.

UH, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THAT WORK COULD IN FACT INCLUDE DEVELOPMENT OF A FRAMEWORK AND A PROCESS FOR EVALUATING CODE AMENDMENTS FOR EQUITY IMPACTS GOING FORWARD.

AND THEN FINALLY THEY RECOMMENDED THAT WE DEVELOP SCOPE FOR A FULL EQUITY ASSESSMENT OF ALL ENVIRONMENTAL CODE TO BE CONDUCTED IN 2023, WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POTENTIAL CODE CHANGES THAT COME OUT OF THAT OUGHT TO BE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL NEXT FALL.

AND NEXT SLIDE IS THE LAST SLIDE.

THANK YOU, MS. BATES.

UM, SO THERE WOULD BE EROSION CONTROL STILL REQUIRED.

AND MS. JOHNSON FOR DOING OKAY.

I SEE MS. GREENBERG WITH HER HAND UP MR. GREENBERG, THANK YOU.

I'D LIKE TO CLEARLY UNDERSTAND WHAT EXACTLY IS NOT GOING TO BE REVIEWED FOR THREE TO 11 UNIT PROJECTS.

UM, WILL THOSE PROJECTS STILL REQUIRE AN ENGINEER TO CERTIFY THAT THE PROJECT WON'T CAUSE, UM, BAD EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORS AND ALSO ABOUT THE 55% IMPERVIOUS COVER? IS THAT FOR ALL PROJECTS WITH THREE TO 11 UNITS, OR DOES IT DEPEND ON THE ZONING THAT THE PARTICULAR PROPERTY HAS LIZ JOHNSTON WATERSHED PROTECTION, UM, TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST, YOUR LAST QUESTION FIRST, IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE ZONING.

SO THIS, UM, THIS DOES NOT CHANGE ANY ZONING, IMPERVIOUS COVER, UM, REQUIREMENTS.

UM, UH, ORIGINALLY WE HAD 45%, BUT WE HEARD SOME FEEDBACK THAT THERE ARE OTHER ZONING CATEGORIES THAT CAN DO ALLOW ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER UP TO 55, SOME 60.

UM, AND SO WE, UM, UM, SINCE MOST OF THEM CAPPED OUT AT 55%, WE PUT THE LIMIT FOR THOSE THAT WOULD QUALIFY FOR THE SITE PLAN, UM, SMALL PROJECT SITE PLAN AT 55%, HOWEVER, UM, WHATEVER IS THE MOST RESTRICTIVE WOULD APPLY.

UM, AND TO THE FIRST QUESTION, WOULD AN ENGINEER BE REQUIRED TO SEAL THE PLANS? YES, WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE ANY DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS WITH THIS.

UM, WE WOULD ONLY BE CHANGING WHAT THE APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS, UM, FROM THE WATER QUALITY PERSPECTIVE.

SO,

[01:30:01]

UM, NO ADVERSE IMPACT, UM, WOULD ALSO BE REQUIRED.

AND THOSE ARE ELEMENTS THAT AN ENGINEER WOULD DESIGN.

AND ARE THERE ANY, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT'S NOT GETTING REVIEWED FOR THREE TO 11 YEARS? RIGHT.

SO WHAT WOULD NOT BE GETTING REVIEWED WOULD BE MOST OF 25 8, UNLESS IT WAS SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT IN THE APPLICABLE SECTION.

SO THERE'S A LIST OF THINGS THAT WOULD APPLY.

SO WATERWAY SET BACKS IF PLANTED AFTER COMPREHENSIVE WATERSHED ORDINANCE, UM, CUT AND FILL LIMITS, UM, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHAT IMPERVIOUS COVER IS DEFINED AS, UM, SAVE OUR SPRINGS WOULD APPLY, BUT THINGS THAT WOULDN'T APPLY WOULD BE, UM, CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, FOR EXAMPLE, UH, CONSTRUCTION ON SLOPES, UM, WATERSHED, IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS.

THOSE ARE THE BIG ONES.

KATIE COHEN, ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.

NEXT QUESTION.

LET'S SEE, I WROTE A LOT OF QUESTIONS, BUT, UM, SO THIS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS RESOLUTION CAME ABOUT TO FOCUS ON INEQUITIES OR TO SORT OF SMOOTH OVER INEQUITIES IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN AUSTIN.

AND SO STEPPING BACK OR KIND OF REPACKAGING IT, HOW EXACTLY I KNOW YOU GAVE A LONG PRESENTATION, BUT WHAT'S SORT OF THE TOP NOTCH OR TOP LINES ON HOW YOU ACTUALLY DO THAT.

I CAN HAND IT TO LIZ IN JUST A MINUTE.

UM, I THINK THAT IT'S A BIT OF A MISNOMER ABOUT WHAT THE INTENT OF, OF, OF COUNCIL DIRECTION WAS.

THERE IS CERTAINLY A COMPONENT THAT SPEAKS TO, UH, HOW WE CREATE EQUITABLE POLICY EVALUATE EQUITABLE POLICY, AND CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK OF WATERSHED PROTECTION AND BEYOND WITH EQUITY IN MIND.

AND SO STAFF WILL BE PREPARING A REPORT FOR HOW WE'RE INTEGRATING EQUITY INTO RANGER RIVER, OUR STRATEGIC PLAN, THAT IT'S THE FIRST TIME IN 20 YEARS, WE'RE DOING A FULL OVERHAUL OF OUR STRATEGIC PLAN AS A DEPARTMENT.

WE HAVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND OUR EQUITY REVIEW ABOUT KIND OF THOSE FULL-SCALE POLICY ASSESSMENTS IN TERMS OF, OF EQUITY.

UM, BUT THE INTENT OF, OF MOST OF WHAT IS REALLY PACKAGED HERE IS REALLY LOOKING AT, UH, ITEMS THAT WERE GENERALLY HAD WIDESPREAD BUY-IN DURING THE LDC UPDATE THAT WE'LL HAVE, UM, WE'LL HAVE POSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS THAT ARE BEST PRACTICE AND HAVE BEEN FOR A LONG TIME.

SO GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND A LOT OF THESE OTHER THINGS.

AND SO WHILE THERE IS CERTAINLY AN EQUITY FOCUS, AND WE ALWAYS WANT TO KEEP EQUITY IN MIND, UH, THAT WASN'T REALLY THE CORE FOCUS OF AT LEAST PHASE ONE PHASE TWO, WHICH WE'RE NOT POSTED TO TALK ABOUT.

WE ARE TASKED WITH THINKING ABOUT MITIGATING, UH, UH, MITIGATING ENTITLEMENTS FOR GREENFIELD DETENTION, WHICH IS ONE OF THE BIG PIECE OF PHASE TWO.

THAT IS A LITTLE BIT, WE HAVE TO FOCUS ON ON THE CORE OF THAT, BECAUSE WE KNOW THERE ARE AFFORDABILITY IMPACTS LIKELY ASSOCIATED WITH PHASE TWO.

THIS WE FEEL LIKE ARE MARGINAL, NOT MARGINAL, BUT, UM, SMALL CHANGES TO BEST PRACTICES THAT ARE ALREADY OFTEN BEING UTILIZED ACROSS THE BOARD.

ONE OTHER ITEM I'LL SPEAK TO YOU FROM AN EQUITY PERSPECTIVE, THE SETBACKS FOR THE COLORADO RIVER.

UH, SO MAKING SURE THAT DOWNSTREAM OF LONGHORN DAM, WE'RE REALLY MAKING SURE THAT THAT WATERFRONT IS BEING PROTECTED.

WE KNOW THAT THAT, THAT WATERFRONT IS VERY EROSIVE.

UH, COMMISSIONER SMITH USED TO BE ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.

I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW MANY TIMES WE HAD, UM, THE, THE CREEK THAT RUNS THROUGH PARK PR PRESENTATIONS ON, ON HOW EROSIVE THAT CREEK WAS AND THAT OUTFLOW INTO THE, INTO THE RIVER.

AND SO, UH, THAT SPECIFICALLY WAS ADDED INTO COUNSEL'S DIRECTIVE FOR US TO LOOK AT SETBACKS FOR THE COLORADO RIVER BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, EAST SIDE ORGANIZATIONS, UH, WHO ADVOCATED FOR THOSE PROTECTIONS.

SO IS THAT HOPE AND YEAH.

AND, UH, YEAH, UH, KATIE GAVE A REAL GOOD EXPLANATION, BUT I ALSO WANT TO JUST ADD THAT, UM, TAKING A LOOK AT THE EXISTING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ADDRESSING INEQUITIES BETWEEN THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE AND THE DESIRE DEVELOPMENT ZONE.

UM, SO YEAH, WE'RE LOOPING IN THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE RAIN TO RIVER STRATEGIC PLAN, IT WILL BE A MUCH LONGER PROCESS.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DELIVER WITHIN THREE MONTHS OF THE INITIATING RECOMMENDATION.

SO PART OF WHAT WILL BE OUR PLANNING GROUP WE'LL BE SENDING,

[01:35:01]

UM, TO COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER IS HOW ARE WE GOING OUR, OUR PLAN FOR LATER ADDRESSING IT EVENTUALLY WITH A CODE AMENDMENT, BUT IT, IT, IT WILL TAKE A LOT LONGER, UH, TIME AND B, UM, IN ORDER TO REACH OUT TO THE COMMUNITY AND HAVE THE EQUITY ANALYSIS THAT WE WANT TO DO.

YOU'VE TACKLED GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND I THINK YOU DID A REALLY AMAZING JOB, UM, ESPECIALLY SPEAKING FROM WHAT WE SAW AT THE CODES AND ORDINANCES TOO, AND YOU'VE ADDED ONTO IT.

YOU'RE TACKLING, CLEANING UP THE CODE.

I THINK IT'S A REALLY AMBITIOUS PROJECT.

SO I'M, I CONGRATULATE YOU FOR DOING THIS.

THANK YOU, MS. SHINDER KING.

I HAVE MY COMMISSIONER CAN GO AHEAD.

OF OUR PROACTIVE PLANNING WORK.

UM, YES, AND I DO APPRECIATE THE WORK HERE AND CAN SEE THE BENEFITS HERE AND, YOU KNOW, BEING PROPOSED HERE IN, YOU KNOW, KIND OF STEPPING BACK AS WELL AND LOOKING AT THE EQUITY COMPONENT OF THIS, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT THE, THESE CHANGES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WOULD COME ABOUT THROUGH BASICALLY REDEVELOPMENT.

SO IT WOULD TAKE, IT WOULD BE A NEW DEVELOPMENT OR A MAJOR REMODELING PROJECT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT THESE COMPONENTS WOULD BE BROUGHT TO BEAR AND BENEFIT THE COMMUNITIES AND THE PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

COMMISSIONER KING.

AND, AND ALSO JUST TO SPEAK TO THE EQUITY IMPLICATIONS OF THAT.

WE KNOW THAT DEVELOPMENT RATES ARE HAPPENING OFTEN IN HIGHER INTENSITY IN CERTAIN PARTS OF TOWN IN OUR, UH, EASTERN CRESCENT.

AND SO WHEN WE ALSO KNOW THAT YOU SIDE OF AUSTIN HAS SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER TREE CANOPY AND REDUCED ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, THESE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, FOR THIS ORDINANCE.

THAT WOULD MEAN THAT OUR CONTROLS THAT ARE MANDATED FOR WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS, UH, WOULD ALSO PROVIDE THESE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS OF IMPROVING OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE DISPARATE LOWER, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY NOW.

WELL, THAT'S, THAT'S GOOD.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE POINT I WANTED TO MAKE ABOUT THAT ABOUT THE REDEVELOPMENT IS THAT EFFECTIVELY THROUGH THE REDEVELOPMENT, WE, THE REDEVELOPMENT WE'VE SEEN IN AUSTIN, ALL ALONG OUR QUARTERS AND PARTICULARLY IN EAST AUSTIN, THE LOW-INCOME FAMILIES THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM THESE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE COMPONENTS ARE NO LONGER THERE.

THEY'RE GETTING PUSHED OUT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF.

AND SO WHAT ARE MY, WHERE I'M COMING AT THIS FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE, I'M COMING AT IT FROM HOW DO, HOW DO WE APPLY THESE, THESE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND, UH, UH, FUNCTIONAL GREEN, UH, IMPROVEMENTS AND BENEFITS TO EXISTING, UH, MARKET AFFORDABLE, EXISTING LOW-INCOME FAMILIES, COMMUNITIES, BUSINESSES, AND, AND, AND APARTMENTS MULTIFAMILY, WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO GET PUSHED OUT TO GET THESE BENEFITS.

THEY CAN GET THEM WHILE WHERE THEY LIVE.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TO, HOW CAN WE DO THAT? CERTAINLY IT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS THAT EXIST WITHIN WATERSHED ALREADY, UH, THAT WOULD ALLOW EITHER MULTI-FAMILY OR COMMERCIAL OR, OR, UM, SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL HOMEOWNERS, UH, TO, UM, INSTALL RAIN GARDENS, INSTALL CISTERNS, HAVE GREENER TECHNOLOGIES AS PART OF THEIR SITE THAT COULD BE, UH, ELIGIBLE FOR REBATES THROUGH AUSTIN WATER.

A SUSTAINABLE BUILDING IS NOT MY, MY, UH, I DON'T KNOW ALL THE DETAILS ABOUT THE WEEDS OF THAT, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE ARE REBATES EXISTING FOR RETROFITS THAT WOULD MAKE BUILDINGS MORE SUSTAINABLE.

AND SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IN ADDITION TO JUST WHEN NEW SITES ARE DEVELOPING OR WHEN WE'RE GETTING REDEVELOPMENT, UH, OCCURRING, WE ARE LOOKING AT WAYS THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE WE'RE RETROFITTING, UH, THE WAY OUR CITY FUNCTIONS ALREADY.

YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE HAVE BONDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, YOU KNOW, WHY DON'T WE HAVE A BOND FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR OUR COMMUNITIES.

AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING NEW WE COULD START WORKING ON, BUT, YOU KNOW, UH, I GUESS MY, MY LAST POINT HERE IS THAT, UH, THESE, I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE WE, WE, IT, AND I DON'T WANT TO BE CRITICAL BECAUSE I CAN SEE SOME GOOD EQUITY COMPONENTS HERE, BUT, BUT IT'S NOT DONE YET.

AND I'M WORRIED THAT WE'RE PUSHING THIS THROUGH, EVEN THOUGH STAFF SAYS WE HAVEN'T HAD ENOUGH TIME TO ACTUALLY COMPLETE IT.

SO I JUST WANT TO SUPPORT STAFF AND TRYING TO TAKE THE TIME TO DO THE EQUITY ANALYSIS.

NOW, BEFORE WE PUT THAT CODE INTO EFFECT, THE WHY D WHY DELAY THIS? WHY, YOU KNOW, WHY DELAY EQUITY ANALYSIS.

SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE TIME TO DO BOTH, THAT WE HAVE TIME TO DO THE INEQUITY AND THE EQUITY ANALYSIS ON THIS AND IMPLEMENT THESE GOOD BEST PRACTICES IN A TIMELY MANNER.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DO YOU MIND IF I RESPOND, UH, COVENTRY KING? I, I THINK IT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT AND I WANT TO JUST BE CLEAR.

STAFF IS NOT ASKING, ESPECIALLY ON PHASE ONE FOR ANY EXTENSION IN TIMELINE.

WE THINK THAT THESE CODE CHANGES ARE A LONG TIME COMING, AND WE FEEL COMFORTABLE INCLUDING WITH OUR INTERNAL EQUITY ACTION TEAM, UH, WITH THE IDEA THAT WE WILL DO WHOLESALE ASSESSMENT OF, OF CODE AND POLICY, AS WELL AS KIND

[01:40:01]

UH, BUT WE KNOW THAT MANY ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, UH, INCLUDING FOLKS WHO FOCUS ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN THIS CITY ARE IN SUPPORT AND HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN IN SUPPORTIVE OF THESE CHANGES, UH, AND ARE TRYING TO PUSH FORWARD.

SOME OF THOSE MITIGATING PROGRAMS, INCLUDING COST SHARING POTENTIALLY FOR, FOR REGULATORY COMPLIANCE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'RE ASKING FOR.

WE JUST WANT TO BE REALLY CLEAR THAT EQUITY IS NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING WE RUBBER STAMP.

AND SO WE WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO IN THE TIME GIVEN.

AND I, I DO APPRECIATE THAT MS. GORDON, AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR WORK.

I'VE SEEN YOUR WORK ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND YOU IMPRESSED ME THERE, AND I APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU'RE DOING HERE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

COMMISSIONER SMITH IS NEXT.

AND THEN I'M GOING TO GO AFTER COMMISSIONER SMITH.

UM, COUPLE OF THINGS, TIMING WISE, Y'ALL, AREN'T EXPECTING EMOTION FROM US TONIGHT.

I MEAN, I KNOW YOU'D LOVE ONE, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE ONE TONIGHT, BUT WE CAN'T HAVE ONE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL.

I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH GETTING SOMETHING YET.

UM, OVERALL I THINK A LOT OF THESE THINGS ARE THINGS US IN THE INDUSTRY I'VE BEEN DOING FOR YEARS.

ANYWAY.

I MEAN, I HAVEN'T DESIGNED A SAND FILTRATION BOND IN PROBABLY 10 YEARS.

NO ONE HAS THERE FOR THE MOST PART EVERYONE'S GONE AND DOING BIOFILTRATION PONDS AND WHATEVER WE CAN DO.

SO A LOT OF THESE THINGS ARE JUST CODIFYING.

WHAT HAS BEEN STANDARD PRACTICE FOR MANY YEARS.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THOUGH, THAT KIND OF THE DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE UTILITY LINES.

UM, PART OF MY CONCERN IS WE COULD ALMOST BE PRIORITIZING REPLACEMENT OF PERFECTLY FINE LINES THAT HAPPEN TO BE IN A CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, BUT THEY CAN BE PRIORITIZED TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE THEY'RE IN A CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND BE PRIORITIZED AHEAD OF A FAILING LINE THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE, UM, THAT DESPERATELY NEED, BECAUSE THERE'S A LIMITED AMOUNT OF MONEY.

WE KNOW WE HAVE A LOT MORE FAILED INFRASTRUCTURE THAN WE HAVE MONEY TO REPLACE IT.

I DON'T WANT TO PRIORITIZE A PERFECTLY WORKING LINE IN A CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE OVER A FAIL LINE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET, JUST CAUSING PROBLEMS. YEAH.

UM, YEAH, I, I AGREE WITH YOU THERE.

AND I BELIEVE THE INTENT IS REALLY TO FOCUS ON PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED PROJECTS FROM THE UTILITY, NOT NECESSARILY.

SO LIKE IF, UH, IF THERE'S A PROJECT THAT'S COMING IN FOR REDEVELOPMENT AND THEY HAPPEN TO BE, THERE IS AN EXISTING WATER LINE OR WASTEWATER LINE IN A NON-COMPLIANT LOCATION, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO CONNECT TO THAT.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THEM CHANGE THAT JUST FOR A SMALL SECTION.

IT DOESN'T, THAT WOULDN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.

WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT ONE THING TO CONCERN FAN.

I KNOW MOVING THINGS OUT OF 25 TO 25 8 MAKES A LOT OF SENSE AND A LOT OF CASES, BUT IT ALSO MEANS YOU'RE APPLYING IT TO A BIGGER GROUP OF PEOPLE.

25 TO ONLY APPLIES IN THE CITY LIMITS 25 8 APPLIES IN THE ETJ AND OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS.

AND NOW YOU'RE BRINGING IN STAKEHOLDERS WHO HAVE NO SAY SO IN THE PROCESS, THEY DON'T VOTE, THEY DON'T PAY TAXES, BUT WE'LL BE IMPLEMENTING NEW REGULATIONS AND NEW COSTS ON THEM WHEN THEY HAVE NO SAY.

SO WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL HOW WE DO THAT.

WE ACTUALLY HAD SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW TO DO THAT TODAY, JUST TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT WOULD ONLY APPLY TO ZONED PARCELS AS IT DOES TODAY.

WELL, I APPLAUD YOU AS WELL.

THIS IS JUST A HUGE AMOUNT OF WORK.

UM, I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, LAST TIME WHEN WE WERE AT CODES AND ORDINANCES, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUE.

UM, MY QUESTION IS WHY LIMIT THE SITE SIZE TO HALF AN ACRE? LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, I LIVE ON A QUARTER ACRE.

I FEEL LIKE I COULD PUT FOUR UNITS ON MY PROPERTY.

WHY, UM, LIMIT EAST TO THIS HAPPY GROUP, RIGHT? THE, THE, THE TASK WAS TO, FOR THE SAME ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, DON'T DISINCENTIVIZE MISSING MIDDLE.

AND SO IF YOU HAVE A LARGER LOT, CHANCES ARE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IS GOING TO SUBDIVIDE.

UM, AND THEN COME UNDER CURRENT REGULATIONS VERSUS, UM, MAXIMIZE THE DEVELOPMENT WITH A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

SO IF YOU SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU HAVE A FIVE ACRE LOT, ONE RESIDENCE IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO MEET IT'S IMPERVIOUS COVER ELEMENT OF 45% IN OUR URBAN ENVIRONMENT, THEY WOULD INSTEAD SUBDIVIDE.

AND SO WE WERE TRYING TO SAY, YOU KNOW, IS, WOULD THAT BE THE SAME ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT? PROBABLY NOT.

THEY WOULD CHOOSE A DIFFERENT PRODUCT.

AND, AND JUST TO SPEAK TO THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT A PLANNING COMMISSIONER HAS HER HAD SOME CONCERNS ALSO ABOUT THE CAP THAT WE HAD PROPOSED.

AND I WANTED TO BRING UP, UM, ENTRY OF BATES BECAUSE WE DID RUN SOME ANALYSIS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT 0.5 ACRE CAP DOESN'T BASICALLY MEAN THAT THIS WORKS ON A HANDFUL OF, OF LOTS AROUND THE CITY.

WE WANT THAT TO BE AN IMPACTFUL, UH, NEW POLICY.

AND SO SHE CAN SPEAK TO THAT ANALYSIS.

CODES AND ORDINANCES, WE LOOKED AT THE SITE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PROPERTIES ZONED , AND WHERE WE, IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THOSE EXISTING ZONINGS COULD ACCOMMODATE A SMALL-SCALE MISSING MIDDLE UNDER THEIR ZONING UNIT ENTITLEMENT.

SO AFTER THAT FEEDBACK FROM

[01:45:01]

AND SO THINKING THAT THOSE MIGHT BE LIKELY CANDIDATES FOR PROJECTS THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THESE, WE WANTED TO SEE HOW LARGE THE PARCELS ACTUALLY WERE.

UNFORTUNATELY, THERE IS NOT A PERFECT DATA SET THAT HAS ACCURATE PARCEL BOUNDARIES WITH THE ZONING OF THE PARCEL.

AND SO WE USE, I KNOW IT'S A SURPRISE TO ME AS WELL, BUT IT WASN'T A SURPRISE BECAUSE WE ENCOUNTERED THE SAME CHALLENGE IN OUR WORK, ON THE LDC REVISION.

SO WE BASICALLY COMBINED THE TWO DATASETS, UH, THAT TO GET PARCELS AND THE ZONING DATASET, BUT DOING THAT RESULTED IN SOME FRAGMENTS, BASICALLY PARCEL FRAGMENTS THAT SKEWS THE COUNT SMALLER.

SO WE EXCLUDED MANY OF THE FRAGMENTS TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT.

SO IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR SITE SIZES, WE'RE NOT COUNTING ARTIFICIAL PARCEL SIZES THAT WERE JUST CREATED AS AN ARTIFACT OF THE GIS ANALYSIS, BUT EVEN KNOWING THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF PARCELS IN THOSE ZONES ARE HALF AN ACRE OR SMALLER.

AND SO I WOULD SAY VERY COMFORTABLY THAT 50% TO 75% OF THE PARCELS WITH THOSE ZONES, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY THE SFI SF SIX ZONES THAT ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE LOCATED ON, UH, LOTS THAT WERE PLANTED AS PART OF A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION.

THEY ARE BELOW THAT HALF ACRE THRESHOLD AND COULD UTILIZE.

SO I WISH I COULD GIVE YOU AN EXACT NUMBER AND DON'T WANT TO OVER PROMISE ON THE ACCURACY OF THE GIS, BUT IT'S THE MOST I WAS READING IT THE, THE OTHER WAY I WAS SAYING, CAUSE IT SAYS SITE LIMIT OF HALF ACRE.

I WAS READING IT THAT IT WOULD ONLY APPLY TO THOSE SITES BIGGER THAN HALF AN ACRE.

SO THAT WAS A LONG DESCRIPTION OF THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU .

I WAS LIKE, I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

I LIVE IN A QUARTER ACRE AND I THINK I COULD SUB YOU KNOW.

OKAY, GREAT.

WELL, THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S OTHERS.

UM, I WAS JUST GOING TO FOLLOW UP ON THE MISSING MIDDLE THING BECAUSE AS I, AS YOU KNOW, AT CODES AND ORDINANCES, I POINTED OUT THAT THE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, SAYS THE INITIATED ORDINANCES WILL ENSURE THAT FOR THE SAME ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, THE CITY DOES NOT DISINCENTIVIZE SMALL SCALE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING PROJECTS.

AND SO I SEE THIS RESOLUTION WITH ITS DOUBLE NEGATIVES, UM, AS SAYING DO NO HARM.

I DON'T SEE IT AS INCENTIVIZING MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING.

AND I, SO, AND ESPECIALLY I SEE THIS AS THE REST OF THIS IS JUST CLEANING UP THE ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS AND REORGANIZING IT, BUT THEN THIS IS THROWN.

THIS IS IN THERE TO SAY, JUST DO NO HARM, BUT IT'S TAKEN ON A LIFE OF ITS OWN.

AND I THINK THAT IS PROBLEMATIC.

UH, WE KNOW THAT THERE'S LOTS A LOT FLOODING IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE WORSE, UH, AND, AND FOR GOOD REASONS.

I, I, I HEAR YOUR CONCERNS.

UM, THIS WAS, UM, A SIMILAR PROPOSAL AS WHAT WAS PART OF THE LDC REWRITE, UM, KIND OF SIMILAR TO WHAT IS CALLED SITE PLAN LIGHT.

UM, IT ALSO WOULD ADDRESS, UM, AN INITIATED CODE AMENDMENT THAT PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATED SEVERAL MONTHS AGO THAT WOULD, UM, BASICALLY DO THE SAME THING FOR AFFORDABILITY ON LOCKED PROJECTS.

AND SO IT'S KIND OF MEETING TWO REQUIREMENTS WITH, WITH ONE, BUT NO, I, I HEAR YOUR, YOUR CONCERNS.

AND AS YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THE RED LINES, I WAS CONCERNED THAT IT SAYS IS LOCATED ON A LOT.

THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PART OF A SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.

SO IT DOES SEEM TO ME THAT IT IS, UH, POSSIBLY ALLOWING MULTIFAMILY AND 12 IS PRETTY BIG.

I SEE, UM, ON A SINGLE FAMILY LOT, IT'S JUST, AND IT'S, IT SEEMS TO MUDDY THE WATERS TOO.

SO IN THAT WAY, JUST, JUST TO BE CLEAR, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CERTAINLY HEARD YOUR CONCERN AT AT, UH, CODES AND ORDINANCES.

WE ARE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHANGE TO ZONING.

UH, SO THIS IS ONLY WHAT ZONING ALLOWS, UH, UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT WHERE WE'RE JUST REALLY NOT TRYING TO DIS-INCENTIVIZE THESE MISSING MIDDLE, UH, DEVELOPMENTS AND, AND EVEN SO THERE'S STILL MORE BURDEN ON THESE MISSING MIDDLE UNITS.

THEN THERE WOULD BE ON A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

UM, AND SO IT'S, IT'S NOT EVEN EQUALIZING IN THE SAME WAY THAT HONESTLY, I THINK COUNSEL INTENDED, UM, BECAUSE PARTIALLY BECAUSE THERE'S STILL THOSE DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS THAT,

[01:50:01]

SO, UH, IT'S, IT'S STILL MORE, UH, THAN WHAT SINGLE FAMILY IS, IS GOING TO BE, UH, ASKED TO DO ONE MORE.

I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T, I FEEL LIKE, I FEEL LIKE I DIDN'T SEE THIS IN THE, IN THE COUNCIL'S RESOLUTION, BUT I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT YOU PUT IN THE PART ABOUT ENDANGERED SPECIES.

UM, BECAUSE WE STRUGGLED SO MUCH ON THAT CAVE THING OFF OF MOPAC AND THE NOTIFICATION WAS SO HARD AND PEOPLE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT.

I KNOW LIZ WAS THERE.

AND SO I'M VERY HAPPY THAT I SAW THAT IN THERE.

OH, ONE MORE MR. KING COMMISSIONER KING, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON.

YEAH, THANK YOU.

THIS IS ONE LAST QUICK THING I DO APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU DO IN WATERSHED.

AND, AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO FOLLOW UP WITH AN EQUITY ANALYSIS, UH, YOU KNOW, AND, AND, AND ADDRESS THAT IMPACT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE DONE WITH THIS, AND I HOPE THAT'S A PRIORITY AND REMAINS A TOP PRIORITY, BUT I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, AS WE, AS WE RAMP THIS UP, THAT YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO TAKE RESOURCES AWAY FROM OTHER WORK THAT YOU DO SUCH AS FOR EROSION CONTROL.

AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE AND THE LOCALIZED FLOODING ISSUE, AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, IT'S, YOU KNOW, I KNOW IN ZILKER WE HAVE RECURRING ISSUES WITH EROSION CONTROLS, SO THEY'RE NOT ENFORCED CONSISTENTLY.

THAT MEANS SCORES OF REPORTS TO CITY STAFF.

AND, AND I JUST WORRY THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH STAFF TO KEEP UP WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING, BUT ANYWAY, I APPRECIATE THE WORK TONIGHT AND I HOPE WE CAN GET THIS, THIS PAST IN, IN, ON THE BOOKS AND THE EQUITY EQUITY ANALYSIS COMPLETE AS WELL.

DIFFERENT DIFFERENT GROUP.

YEAH, I APPRECIATE IT.

IF I CAN ADDRESS, UM, THIS WOULD NOT IMPACT ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTION STAFF.

THEY ARE ACTUALLY HOUSED IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, SO YEAH.

GOOD LUCK AS YOU MOVE FORWARD.

I APPRECIATE IT.

AND WE'LL MAYBE DRAFT SOMETHING UP.

YOU NEED AGAIN ON THE, WHAT IS TODAY? TODAY'S THE SIXTH ON THE 20TH.

DID WE WANT TO PUT TOGETHER A WORKING GROUP? HOW DO WE DO THIS? NO.

MR. RIVERA SAYS NO.

AND I SAY THAT WE DO, LIKE, WE ALWAYS DO JUST SUBMIT OUR, SUGGEST OUR RESOLUTION SUGGESTIONS, OR EVEN PARAGRAPHS OR TWO LINES AND GIVE THEM TO ANDREW ANDREW POSTED.

AND WE'LL JUST SHARE THAT SOUNDS GOOD.

AND ANY GUIDANCE ABOUT IF YOU WANT ANY FURTHER PRESENTATION AT THE NEXT MEETING OR STAFF SUPPORT, UM, WE MIGHT LIKE YOU TO BE HERE.

IT WAS HELPFUL LAST TIME WHEN MR. SHUNK WAS HERE AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT FLOOD PLAINS.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

WE CAN BE HERE.

I WOULDN'T EXPECT A PRESENTATION.

WE LIKELY MAY HAVE QUESTIONS.

SURE.

AND CHERRY, BUT I MIGHT JUST INTERJECT, I THINK ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION IS GOING TO LOOK AT THIS MAYBE TOMORROW OR TOMORROW.

AND SO I, THAT I WOULD LOVE TO GET THE BENEFIT OF THEIR REVIEW AS WELL BEFORE WE MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ANY, ANY RECOMMENDATION WILL BE IN MY PLANNING COMMISSION.

I HAVE TO SEE WHAT PLANNING COMMISSION SAYS.

SO WE'LL MAYBE USE THAT AS PUT THAT IN BACKUP FOR NEXT NEXT TIME.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 12 BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING ON 11.

AND MAY I SAY THAT I REALLY LIKED COMMISSIONER THOMPSON'S, UH, RESOLUTION, AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION OR IN SUPPORT OF IT OR HOW WE WANT TO RUN THIS NEXT SECTION, BUT I REALLY WILL READ THE ITEM OUT.

SO NUMBER 12 IS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION RECOMMENDING TO COUNCIL REVISIONS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING RESUB, DIVISION AND CONNECTIVITY.

UM, SO THERE ARE TWO RESOLUTIONS IN THE BACKUP.

UM, SO DOES ANYBODY WANT TO START THE DISCUSSION OR HOW DO WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD? VICE CHAIR? CABASA DO YOU WANT TO JUST GO OVER EACH, UM, LIKE PARAGRAPH BY PARAGRAPH? YEAH, SURE.

SO LET'S SEE.

I WILL START.

HOW ABOUT I HAVE THEM SEPARATE? I HAVE A LOT OF THINGS OPEN OVER HERE.

WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE FIVE MINUTE BREAK.

I REALLY HAVE TO GO TO THE BATHROOM.

SO WE'LL BE BACK AT IT IS EIGHT O'CLOCK.

WE'LL BE BACK AT 8 0 5.

SO I'M FINE TAKING THAT OUT AND HAVING THE PROTECT LIVABILITY BE IN THERE, IF OTHERS FEEL THE SAME WAY I'M SEEING NODDING.

THE ORDER.

THERE

[12. Discussion and possible action recommending to Council revisions to the Land Development Code regarding resubdivisions and connectivity. (Co-Sponsors Chair Barrera-Ramirez and Vice-Chair Kiolbassa)]

ARE, UH, WE'RE ALL HERE.

OKAY, GREAT.

I DON'T SEE.

OH YEAH.

CAN WE SHAKE HANDS HERE? SO I JUST SEE THE FIRST, WHEREAS IS THE SAME, THE SECOND, WHEREAS SAYS, UM, IMAGINE AUSTIN ALSO STRIVES TO PROTECT A LOT OF ABILITY.

THAT'S FROM COMMISSIONER THOMPSON AND THE OTHER ONE SAYS, IT TALKS ABOUT COMPACT AND CONNECTED INDICATORS, UM, AND TOTAL VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND, UM, ET CETERA.

[01:55:02]

UM, AND NO, NO, NO.

THAT IS THE, THAT THOSE TWO, WHEREAS IS THAT I GUESS THE LIVABILITY AND THE COHESION, THOSE ARE OPPOSED.

THOSE ARE THE OPPOSITE OF THE INTENTION OF THIS RESOLUTION.

I FEEL LIKE THE CHANGES DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF THE RESOLUTION.

I MEAN, THEY'RE JUST WAREHOUSES, WHEREAS THIS WENT DOWN ONE MORE THAN IT GETS SUBSTANTIVE.

WELL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST THE PROTECT STRIVES TO PROTECT LIVABILITY.

MAYBE WE KEEP THAT I'M NOT ON THE THIRD, WHEREAS YET, SO I'M JUST ON THE SECOND ONE, WHICH I THINK IS FINE.

WELL, LET'S JUST GO THROUGH THEM AND NOT SAY WHAT WE ONE, OKAY.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

SO DO YOU WANT ME HA, SO WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THEIR, HOW THEY'RE DIFFERENT.

DO YOU WANT ME TO GO DOWN ONE AND THEN DOWN THE OTHER? YES.

COULD I JUST MAYBE SAY SOMETHING ABOUT HOW I APPROACHED IT? IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL, UH, IN THE BEGINNING, I GUESS MY FIRST COMMENT, UM, IS THAT AS I READ IT, I FELT THAT IT WAS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH TWO DIFFERENT THINGS AND ONE BEING KIND OF A CONNECTIVITY ACCESS TO TRANSIT AND ANOTHER BEING, UM, ADDRESSING ISSUES OF SAFETY AND ACCESS RIGHT.

OR EMERGENCY, UM, EX ESCAPE.

SO I REALLY READ IT AND FELT LIKE, OKAY, NUMBER ONE, THIS IS TRYING TO DO TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

SO SOME OF THE CHANGES AT THE BOTTOM ARE REALLY TRYING TO MAKE THIS MORE ABOUT THE CONNECTIVITY.

SO MY VERSION REALLY TRIES TO JUST ADDRESS THE CONNECTIVITY QUESTION, UH, FOR TRANSIT AND, UM, I NOT TO INVALIDATE THE NEED TO ADDRESS THE OTHER TOPIC.

I JUST FELT THAT THIS, UM, MODEL THE, TO, TO HAVE THEM.

AND, AND I THINK MY PERSPECTIVE IS FROM A TRANSPORTATION PLANNER.

AND SO FOR ME, AND I'M NOW I'M RE RE RE REMEMBERING WHAT THIS SAYS.

SO THE, A DEAD END STREET D IS THE OPPOSITE OF CONNECTIVITY AND IT'S THE OPPOSITE.

AND A COL-DE-SAC IS THE OPPOSITE OF CONNECTIVITY.

I THINK THE POINT THAT IT WAS LIKE, THEY MAY DISAGREE WITH THAT DENTISTRY IS NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE OTHER TYPES OF TRENDS.

IT MIGHT BE DEAD INTO IT.

CAR.

YES, YES, ABSOLUTELY.

THAT'S RIGHT.

SO, UM, YES.

SO WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT.

ABSOLUTELY.

WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT A BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION, ISN'T JUST AS IMPORTANT.

UM, SO I AGREE WITH YOU.

I THINK THAT'S, I THINK THAT IS THE POINT IS THAT A DEAD END STREET IS LACKING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN THROUGHPUT, UNLESS WE INSIST THAT IS A DESIGN STANDARD THAT'S REQUIRED.

IT CAN BE DONE WITHOUT, WITHOUT, UH, SAYING THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE A DENTISTRY, THE TWO CAN EXIST TOGETHER.

I AGREE.

YES, I DO.

AND THROUGHOUT THE WORLD DO IT IS A DESIGN OPPORTUNITY.

UH, AND NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE SO FRUSTRATED.

SO MAYBE WE CLARIFY DEAD END, DEAD END STREETS ARE COOL TO SACKS THAT REQUIRE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY.

BUT I, I LIVE ON A DEAD END STREET, OR I OWN MY HOUSE ON A DEAD INDUSTRY.

SO, UM, JUST TO CLARIFY MY COMMENT EARLIER, I WAS WRITING THE RESOLUTION THAT THE RESOLUTIONS THAT EDIT THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON IS PROPOSING.

IT WAS REALLY THE PREAMBLE TO IT.

UM, I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS MAKING AS STRONG OF AN ARGUMENT ABOUT WHY WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THESE CHANGES, THAT THAT'S ALL.

SO ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT MAYBE SOME OF THE, WHEREAS THIS FROM THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, THE ONE THAT TALKS ABOUT CRASHES THAT TALKS ABOUT DESIGNING FOR BICYCLE AND WALKING CONNECTIVITY, ESPECIALLY FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, THE COST OF, OF CAR OWNERSHIP, DO YOU THINK ALL OF THOSE NEED TO REMAIN IN? RIGHT.

ALTHOUGH I RECOGNIZE WHAT COMMISSIONER THOMPSON IS SAYING IS THAT BEING OVERLY PRESCRIPTIVE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, COMPLETELY REMOVING AND PROHIBITING DOESN'T ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE PROBLEM, WHICH IS, UM, THAT WE NEED TO DEFINE WHAT A DEAD END AND A CUL-DE-SAC STREET ARE, AND THEN, UM, IMPROVE THAT DEFINITION.

UM, SO YOU KNOW, HER, HER SECOND RESOLUTION, THE REQUIRE THAT DEAD END STREETS BE NO LONGER THAN, YOU KNOW, AND PROVIDE A MULTI-USE TRAIL CONNECTION.

THAT'S REALLY COMPELLING LANGUAGE THAT REALLY CLARIFIES WHAT THE ISSUE IS FOR US.

AND I, AND I, I, TO SAY PERSONALLY, I NEVER THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE AN ISSUE THAT I WOULD THINK ABOUT,

[02:00:01]

IT'S ONE OF THE BEST THINGS THAT EVER HAPPENED TO ME, TO BE HONEST.

AND IT SAID IT'S APP ONE OF THE TLDS AND AUSTIN AND SPRAYED UP AGAINST LAMAR.

AND THE FACT THAT IT'S A DEAD INDUSTRY MAKES IT LIVABLE AND OTHERWISE IT HONESTLY, IT WOULDN'T BE.

AND, UM, SO I DO DO THINK THERE ARE PLACES FOR IT'S AN APPROPRIATE TOOL JUST FROM MY PERSONAL LIVED EXPERIENCE.

SO ARE THERE MAY ASK DIFFERENT WAY? ARE THERE ANY WORK, WHEREAS IS BECAUSE I LACK ALL OF YOUR, WHEREAS THIS ON YOUR VERSION, BUT I LIKE A LOT OF THE, WHEREAS IS ON THE OTHER ONE AS WELL.

ARE THERE ANYWHERE AS IS THAT SOMEONE JUST CAN'T LIVE? IF WE PUT ALL OF THE WAREHOUSES TOGETHER, THE ONLY THING I NOTICED WAS WHEREAS FATALITIES, SERIOUS INJURIES AND TOTAL CRASHES, AND I'LL, I'VE INCREASED YEAR OVER YEAR IN THE AUSTIN AREA SINCE 2019.

I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT A SIGNIFICANT, IF NOT MAJORITY OF THOSE FATALITIES HAVE BEEN PEDESTRIANS, UM, NOT PEOPLE IN THE CAR, UH, THEY'VE BEEN PEDESTRIANS AND IN MY MIND CUL-DE-SACS ARE SAFER BECAUSE YOU HAVE VEHICLES TRENDING DOWN CALLED THE SAC.

BUT I THINK THE POINT THERE IS THAT IF YOU ARE, IF WE WERE REQUIRING PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THE CUL-DE-SAC DOESN'T CONNECT AND WE'RE REQUIRING THEM TO GO THE SECURITAS ROUTE, THEN YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO MESH THOSE.

I THINK JUST STATING THAT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, A MAJORITY OF THOSE CRASHES INVOLVE PEDESTRIANS AND WE NEED TO PROTECT PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS AS A RESULT OF THAT, SOMEONE TAKING GOOD NOTES, I'M NOT TAKING GOOD NOTES, BUT I WAS THAT I TAKE ISSUE WITH IS THAT RESEARCH SHOWS THAT RESIDENTS EXPERIENCE THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF COHESION ON DEAD END AND CALL THE SAC STREETS, UM, FEELS LIKE AN OVERSTATEMENT OF, YOU KNOW, LIKE THAT'S JUST A PERSONAL CHOICE.

AND SO I WAS LIKE, I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT THE RESEARCH THAT I DID DO RESEARCH ON THAT AND THAT I'M SURE YOU CAN FIND COUNTER RESEARCH, BUT THAT IT'S ACCURATE.

IT'S NOT JUST SOMETHING I SAID, CAN WE SOFTEN THAT LANGUAGE? INSTEAD OF SAYING THE RESEARCH, THOSE ARE RESIDENTS EXPERIENCE, THE HIGHEST LEVELS, SOMETHING ALONG THE FACT THAT RESEARCH SHOWS THAT RESIDENTS EX UM, EXPERIENCE COHESION ON YOU DON'T EVEN NEED THAT IT COULD JUST BE ENHANCED LIVABILITY, YOU KNOW, AND YEAH.

JUST SOFTEN THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT.

SO WE'RE, WE'RE STILL SAYING THE SAME THING THAT WE'RE ENCOURAGING, NOT ENCOURAGING CUL-DE-SAC, WE'RE NOT DISCOURAGING CUL-DE-SACS FOR CARS, BUT WE'RE NOT CARRYING IT TO THE EXTREME EITHER AND CALLING THEM OUT FOR, UH, THE BENEFITS THAT THEY PROVIDE.

INNER GREENBERG, IT'S THE REDUCTION OF THROUGH CAR TRAFFIC, BUT WE DON'T WANT THAT TO BE AT THE EXPENSE OF PEOPLE WHO WALK AND PEOPLE WHO RIDE BIKES.

MAKE A POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT HOW TO IMPROVE IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE? WELL, THIS IS ONLY A RESOLUTION.

UM, WE HAD, I HAD SENT OUT THE, UM, ARTICLE WANTS TO FIX URBAN SPRAWL DITCH, THE CUL-DE-SAC.

AND I THOUGHT WHEN WE FIRST, UM, LOOKED AT THIS, WE WANTED SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE MORE HELPFUL TO TRANSIT.

AND, UM, THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS WITH ALL THE CUL-DE-SACS THERE, WHAT, UM, YOU KNOW, LONNIE POINTED OUT WOULD NEVER BE SORT OF ACCESSIBLE TO TRANSIT, EVEN IF THERE'S PATHS, YOU KNOW, CONNECTING, I, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT FIXES THE PROBLEM.

UM, YES.

CALLED THE SACKS ARE VERY LIVABLE.

IT'S GREAT.

YOU CAN TEACH YOUR KIDS TO RIDE A BIKE RIGHT.

IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

UM, BUT THE BENEFIT OF THE, OF THE CUL-DE-SAC IS ONLY TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE RESOURCES TO LIVE ON THAT.

COL-DE-SAC AND I, I WORRY ABOUT THE DEAD ENDS.

I MEAN, SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, WE SAW CASES, UM, EVEN RECENTLY THE, THE CASE WHERE THE, UM, THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT BACKING INTO, TO TRAFFIC FROM CERTAIN PROPERTIES.

IF WE ZONED A CERTAIN WAY, UM, WHERE THERE WAS BASICALLY ONE WAY OUT OF A CERTAIN SUBDIVISION, UM, AND THIS, THOSE SUBDIVISIONS ARE THE ONES WITH ALL THE CUL-DE-SACS INSTEAD OF THE CONNECTIVITY.

SO, UM, I THOUGHT THE POINT OF THIS WAS TO ENCOURAGE THE CONNECTIVITY AND TO DISCOURAGE THE DEAD ENDS IN CUL-DE-SACS.

UM, AND NOT TO JUST SAY, WELL, IT'S FINE TO HAVE A CUL-DE-SAC IF THERE'S A PATH AT THE END, BUT, AND THEN THE FINAL STATEMENTS STAYED IN WHERE AS, AS REQUIRE MORE CONNECTIONS TO EXTERNAL STREETS FOR LARGER SUBDIVISIONS.

AND I DON'T THINK THIS CULDESAC PROVISION WOULD REALLY ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE ARTERY ISSUES THAT YOU'RE POINTING OUT.

BUT SEE, I THINK YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THOUGH.

I MEAN, THAT'S CONCERN, DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD PUT IN A, UH, MAYBE A RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE A T DEEM

[02:05:01]

IT'S NOT, WE'RE NOT SUGGESTING CODE.

I MEAN, YEAH, THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT.

IF COUNCIL ASKED THEM TO, WE CAN'T ASK THEM TO, AND I AM WONDERING IF THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE ASAP THAT WOULD HELP, YOU KNOW, THAT TALKS ABOUT THE IDEAL, UH, DISTANCES OF STREETS AND BLOCK LINKS, ET CETERA, OR THE TYPE OF, UM, CLASSIFICATION OF STREETS THAT, BECAUSE THERE IS AN IMPACT TO MAC, TO MINIMIZING BLOCK LENGTH, AS YOU MINIMIZE BLOCK LENGTH, YOU HAVE MORE STREETS AND LESS HOUSES.

SO YOU'RE DECREASING DENSITY SIGNIFICANTLY WHEN YOU ADD MORE STREETS AND FEWER HOUSES.

SO THE SHORTER, THE BLOCK LENGTH, THE LESS DENSE YOUR DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE IN THE FEWER HOUSE.

YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIT JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT IT'S ALSO THE MORE WALKABLE THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE'S A BLOCK, THE MORE, THE POTENTIAL FOR THAT BOTTLENECK SITUATION.

THERE'S A BALANCE IN THERE, A BLOCK LENGTH THAT IF YOU GET TOO SHORT OUTSIDE TOO, I MEAN, DENSITY, IT'S MORE THAN JUST SQUARE FOOT.

SO COMMISSIONER KING HAS HIS HAND UP.

AND SO GO AHEAD AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT WAYS FORWARD.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

YOU KNOW, AS I, AS I THINK ABOUT THE DISCUSSION HERE, I, YOU KNOW, AND THE, KIND OF THE, THE IMPETUS FOR THIS WORK WE'RE DOING HERE, IT WAS ALL ABOUT A SUBDIVISION OUT IN THE EDGE OF OUR CITY HERE.

IT WASN'T ABOUT IT.

WASN'T ABOUT CUL-DE-SACS IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR CITY HERE.

THAT'S THE WAY I PERCEIVED IT.

SO I, I D I DON'T WANT IT TO COME OUT AS SAYING, GO BACK AND RETROFIT ALL THE CUL-DE-SACS THAT YOU'VE ALREADY BUILT.

THIS IS A GOING FORWARD THING, YOU KNOW? AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M COMFORTABLE WITH JUST MY, MY FOCUS WOULD BE ON GOING FORWARD.

AND SO, UH, I, YOU KNOW, I CAN SEE BOTH BENEFITS, YOU KNOW, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, GOOD THINGS IN BOTH OF THOSE, BOTH OF THE RESOLUTIONS, BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE, WHERE WE'RE KIND OF PUTTING OUR THUMB ON THE SCALE OF, YOU KNOW, ONE TRANSPORTATION MODE OVER ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO, WELL, LET'S, LET'S JUST HAVE NO CUL-DE-SACS EVER THEY'RE PROHIBITED, BANNED, NEVER AGAIN, SHALL THEY EXIST, YOU KNOW, KIND OF SITUATION, BECAUSE WE WANT MASS TRANSIT EVERYWHERE, YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF THING.

AND I'M NOT SAYING, WE'RE SAYING EXACTLY, LIKE I JUST DESCRIBED IT, BUT, BUT YOU GET MY POINT HERE.

I JUST WANT TO BE CAREFUL.

THE MAIN THING, I THINK JUST IT'S GOOD ENOUGH TO SAY, LET'S TRY TO MINIMIZE ANY CUL-DE-SACS GOING FORWARD IN NEW SUBDIVISIONS AND HAVING ATD SAKE.

HERE ARE THE SITUATIONS WHERE WE THINK YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE ONE, BUT OTHERWISE NO, YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF THING.

SO IF WE CAN STAY FOCUSED ON THAT, I THINK WE CAN GET A GOOD RECOMMENDATION OUT.

UM, THERE'S NO DEADLINE ON THIS.

SO I, I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT THE AUTHORS ACTUALLY GET TOGETHER INSTEAD OF SUBMITTING TO, UM, THAT THE AUTHORS GET TOGETHER AND FIGURE OUT SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY, AT LEAST THE AUTHORS CAN AGREE TO.

I LIKE IT.

I MEAN, I MAKE THAT MOTION.

I REALLY, I, LIKE I SAID, I'M OKAY WITH COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IF WE SAID, WHEREAS I THINK COMBINING SOME OF THE WAREHOUSES TOGETHER WELL, YEAH, SO WE JUST GO THE SECOND ONE, WHEREAS RESEARCH SHOWS THAT RESIDENTS EXPERIENCE ENHANCE LIVABILITY ON DEAD END AND COL-DE-SAC STREETS.

AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE I THINK IS FINE.

LONNIE.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE IN COMMISSIONER THOMPSON'S THAT YOU, UM, THAT STOOD OUT TO YOU? NO, IT'S REALLY JUST THAT I REALLY LIKED WHAT, THE DIRECTION THAT SHE TOOK IT IN.

I DO THINK THAT SOME OF THE, WHEREAS IS THAT WE'RE IN YOURS ABOUT, UM, DESIGNING COMMUNITIES WITH OPTIONS, FOR BIKING AND WALKING IN PARTICULAR, AND THEN, UM, THE DEAD END STREETS AND DISCONNECTED NETWORKS, INCREASING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED.

AND TIME-SPAN THE CAR, ALL OF THOSE THINGS WHERE OUR IMPETUS FOR THAT, I THINK THOSE SHOULD GO OVER THERE AS WELL.

UM, I LIKE YOUR CONNECTED STREET NETWORKS, THE CONNECTED GRID, THE WAY THE STREETS ARE LAID OUT AND THE SUBDIVISIONS, LIKE ALL OF THOSE, WHEREAS IS PROBABLY FROM UNDER THE FATAL, IN UNDER THE FATALS SERIOUS INJURIES, WHICH IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT ONE'S CONTENTIOUS ALL THE ONES BELOW IT, AS WELL AS THE ONES ABOVE IT WITH CORRECT.

WELL, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE CAR OWNERSHIP IN TEXAS COSTS $10,000 A YEAR.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WELL, AND I THINK IT'S MOSTLY BECAUSE THERE WERE SAYING HAVING DEAD END STREETS AND CUL-DE-SACS REQUIRES YOU TO DRIVE.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN THIS.

IT'S LIKE A VERY TYPICAL PLANNING SLIDE WHERE YOU HAVE A SUBDIVISION.

THAT'S, THAT'S TYPICAL, A TRADITIONAL SUBDIVISION AND ONE, THAT'S GOT A GRID NETWORK AND TIMMY WANTS TO VISIT HIS FRIEND AND HE LIVES OVER HERE OR HE LIVES BEHIND HIS HOUSE.

BUT THE ONLY WAY TO GET THERE IS TO GO TWO MILES OUT OF THE WAY, VERSUS

[02:10:01]

I GUESS I WANT TO WEIGH IN AND SAY, THAT'S US SCENARIO.

AND THERE ARE JUST AS MANY SCENARIOS.

I DON'T MIND TAKING THAT ONE OUT.

I MEAN, WHEN I GREW UP IN AUSTIN, WE JUST BAN FENCES AND BACKYARDS, NOBODY HAD A FENCE.

WE ALL JUST WALKED THROUGH THE ARTS AND WHERE WE CAN WALK ANYWHERE.

WE WANT TO.

GREAT.

I WOULD JUST POINT OUT THAT THAT IS THE ONLY, WHEREAS THAT POINTS OUT AN EQUITY ISSUE, RIGHT.

THAT WEALTHY PEOPLE CAN AFFORD CARS.

AND IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD A CAR, YOU'RE ASLEEP TO THESE HUGE WALKS.

AND ON TOP OF IT, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE INCOME INSECURE ARE MOVING FURTHER OUT.

SO THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO BE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS DESIGNED IN THIS WAY THEN IN THAT GRIDDED NEIGHBORHOODS.

BUT I THINK THE DISTANCE, THE LENGTH OF THE BLOCK HAS A LOT TO DO WITH THE WALKABILITY AND ACCESS.

IF YOU'RE CALLED A SACK IS 500 FEET.

IT, IT DOESN'T PRESENT THE SAME CHALLENGE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT.

IT JUST DEPENDS.

I THINK THE REASON WHY I WOULD LIKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON THAT BLOCK WAY.

I CAN GO TO ATD AND SEE WHAT ATD SAYS ABOUT THE BLOCK LENGTH.

LET THE EXPERTS TELL US WHAT THE PROPER BLOCK LENGTH WOULD BE.

SO, OKAY.

SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THE FATALITIES ONE, IF WE SAY, WHEREAS FATALITIES AUSTIN AREA, ET CETERA, IS MOSTLY OF PEDESTRIANS AND THEN DESIGNING COMMUNITIES FOR OPTIONS, BICYCLING AND WALKING INCREASE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, ESPECIALLY FOR CHILDREN, WITH FAMILIES.

UM, AND THEN THE DEAD END STREETS DISCONNECTED NETWORK IS GOOD.

AND THE CONNECTED STREET NETWORKS HELP REDUCE TRAFFIC IS GOOD CONNECTED STREET GRID.

GOOD.

AND THE WAY THAT STREETS ARE DESIGNED GOOD AND SUBDIVISIONS TOO, FEW, FEW ACCESS.

SO ALL THOSE STAY IN AND THEN WE'RE TAKING THE CAR OWNERSHIP WENT OUT.

SO I'LL WRITE IT UP CHAIR, JUST ONE LAST POINT.

IF I COULD COMMISSIONER STERN, YOU KNOW, YOUR POINT WAS RIGHT ON ABOUT THE EQUITY ISSUE.

I AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY AND ALSO COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.

AND, AND I THINK THIS REALLY HELPS OUT IF WE SAY GOING FORWARD, NEW SUBDIVISIONS, WE'RE GOING TO NOT HAVE ANY, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN, YOU KNOW, AT ALL POSSIBLE NOT HAVE ANY MORE, UH, YOU KNOW, DEAD ENDS OR CUL-DE-SACS IN THERE IN THAT.

AND I THINK THAT HELPS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WHAT THE SUPPORT THAT THOUGH SAYING THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY MORE.

I WOULD NOT SUPPORT THEM.

NO.

AND AGAIN, I'M NOT SAYING BAN THEM, OR LIKE I SAID EARLIER, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S BANDON, I'M SAYING IS GOING FORWARD TO TRY TO MINIMIZE THEM.

AND IF I JUST SAID THAT I MISSPOKE, I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY THAT.

AND I THINK IN SOME CASES THEY'RE REQUIRED, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE UP AGAINST A RAILROAD TRACK OR YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

JUST TRY TO MINIMIZE THE USE OF THOSE WHEREVER WE CAN.

AND I THINK THAT THAT, THAT HELPS WITH THE EQUITY ISSUE THAT THE COMMISSIONER GREENBERG AND COMMISSIONER STARRING WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT ON A GOING FORWARD BASIS.

I THINK THE ISSUES WE HAVE TO CONSIDER AS WE'RE A CITY THAT HAS CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, WE HAVE TREE ORDINANCES.

WE HAVE PARK ORDINANCES, WE HAVE CRITICAL WATER, QUALITY ZONES, WATER QUALITY, TRANSITION ZONES.

WE HAVE FLOOD LINES ON ALL OF THOSE PREVENT YOU FROM CROSSING AND HAVING BLOCK LINKS THAT ARE LONGER THAN THEY NEED TO BE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HAVE CUT THROUGH STREETS WHEN YOU HAVE TREES IN PARKS AND FLOODPLAINS AND PRETTY WATER QUALITY ZONES AND CES.

SO ALL OF THAT DRIVES THE LONGER BLOCK LENGTH.

UH, SO WE, WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ALL THAT DRIVES CUL-DE-SACS AND A LOT OF CASES BECAUSE YOU SIMPLY CAN'T CROSS A CREEK.

UH, SO YOU DEAD END INTO IT.

WELL, THAT'S WHY IT SAYS PROHIBIT THE DEAD END STREETS AND ARE CALLED THE SACKS, UNLESS THE DIRECTOR DETERMINES THE TOPOGRAPHY NATURAL FEATURES OR OTHER UNUSUAL CONDITIONS MAKE CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED STREET AND FEASIBLE.

WE'RE NOT SAYING NEVER HAVE THEM EVER.

YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES IN AUSTIN, UM, THAT SORT OF MAKE IT, THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAPPEN.

THERE'S LIVABILITY BENEFITS CUL-DE-SACS WELL, BUT THIS WAS REALLY WELL, I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE LAST THING OR, AND THAT IS, I THINK WE SHOULD DO.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING ABOUT EQUITY IN IT.

AND I THINK COMMISSIONER STERN MAKES A GOOD POINT.

AND BECAUSE ESPECIALLY WE JUST HAD A WHOLE THING ON EQUITY AND WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL THING BEFORE, AND THAT ALSO IS A BIG PUSH IN THE CITY, IN THE CITY DSD AND EVERYTHING.

ANYWAY.

SO I THINK SOMETHING ABOUT EQUITY, MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT LANGUAGE, BUT IF SOMEBODY COULD DRAFT IT, UM, AND THEN I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA THAT WE JUST KIND OF COME TOGETHER, SOME PEOPLE AND, UM, REWORK THIS AGAIN.

SAY THINGS LIKE THERE IS CONSENSUS IN THE RESEARCH THAT LEADS TO THE OVERWHELMING CONCLUSION AND SOMEONE COMFORTABLE WITH, WHEREAS IT HAS THAT LANGUAGE.

GREAT.

COMMISSIONER BOONE HAD SOMETHING TO SAY.

YEAH, I'M SORRY.

I, I, I YOU'RE IN THE DARK.

I DIDN'T SEE YOU.

UM, UH, SORRY.

I SLIGHTLY LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT, BUT IN GENERAL, I, UM, I GUESS I CAN, I CAN SEE, YOU KNOW, THE APPEAL AND THE BENEFITS AND THE LIVABILITY BENEFITS OF A CUL-DE-SAC.

UM, AND I THINK THOSE LIE INTENTION AND IMBALANCE WITH OTHER THINGS THAT ARE APPEALING AND BENEFICIAL TO LIVABILITY.

I LIVE ON A STREET WITH TWO ENDS AND I USE BOTH ENDS MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY.

SO I, YOU KNOW, I, I KIND OF, I THINK IT'S EASY TO SAY THINGS LIKE RESEARCH SHOWS.

I THINK IT'S MUCH HARDER TO

[02:15:01]

I'M CERTAINLY HAPPY TO ACKNOWLEDGE AGAIN, THE BENEFITS AND THE TENSIONS THAT LIE WITHIN NATURAL FEATURES AND SAFETY AND TRANSPORTATION.

AND I REALLY DO LIKE THIS, THIS, YOU KNOW, TENSION ACKNOWLEDGING THING THAT SAYS, IF YOU HAVE A LONGER COL-DE-SAC ALLOWING FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS, WHAT I DON'T THINK THIS DOES OUTSIDE OF THE REQUIRE MORE CONNECTIONS TO EXTERNAL STREETS FOR LARGER SUBDIVISIONS IS ACKNOWLEDGED THE DIFFICULTY IN SERVING AREAS THAT LOOK LIKE THE SUBDIVISIONS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WITH TRANSIT.

AND I DON'T THINK YOU CAN DO THAT WITH BANNING CUL-DE-SACS.

YOU CAN CONSTRUCT A GORDIAN KNOT OF STREETS THAT ARE EXTENSIVELY THROUGH STREETS AND STILL MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO SERVE WITH ANYTHING APPROACHING, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC TRANSIT.

UM, AND SO I THINK SOME OF THESE, YOU KNOW, RESOLUTIONS ARE GREAT.

UM, I THINK A COUPLE MORE THAT, YOU KNOW, NOT PUT THEIR THUMB ON THE SCALE OF TRANSIT, BUT AT LEAST BRING THE POSSIBILITY OF SERVING TRANSIT THE WAY WE DO SINGLE OCCUPANT VEHICLES AND BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS WOULD BRING MS, UH, INTO BETTER BALANCE ACROSS THE MODES.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I ALSO THINK THAT IT'S REALLY HARD TO SERVE TRANSIT WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THE DENSITY TO SUPPORT IT.

SO THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT FOR DIFFERENT DAYS.

SO I WILL, UM, GET TOGETHER WITH THE I'LL DRAFT UP, SEND IT OUT TO THE, MY FELLOW AUTHORS AND WE'LL PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT TIME TO DISCUSS IT AGAIN.

AND IF SOMEBODY HAS AN EQUITY SENTENCE, THEY WANT TO SEND ME, I WILL TAKE IT.

ITEM NUMBER 14, NOMINATE A MEMBER OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION TO BE CONSIDERED BY COUNCIL TO SERVE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.

WE'RE MOVING ON TO

[14. Nominate a member of the Zoning and Platting Commission to be considered by Council to serve on the Small Area Planning Joint Committee.]

DOES ANYONE WANT TO SIT ON THE SMALL AREA PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE? DIDN'T WE DO THAT ON THE 17TH.

WE DID.

UM, BUT THERE WAS A PAPERWORK PROBLEM.

I SEE.

AND SO WE NEED TO DO IT AGAIN AND DIG DIGGING.

WE NOMINATED COMMISSIONER ACOSTA.

HE'S NOT HERE, HE'S NOT HERE.

SO AGAIN, EITHER YES, WE COULD EITHER POSTPONE OR WE COULD NOMINATE SOMEONE ELSE LET'S POSTPONE.

WELL, IF SOMEONE ELSE WANT TO DO IT, LET'S POSTPONE.

WE CAN POST THEM.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHEN IT MEETS.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT MEETS DURING THE DAY, WHICH IS HARD FOR THOSE OF US THAT HAVE JOBS.

W AND, AND WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHAIR.

I'M SORRY, THIS IS A COMMISSIONER KING.

WE HAVEN'T HAD A MEETING IN A LONG TIME.

THAT LAST ONE WAS CANCELED.

SO WE DON'T MEET THAT OFTEN.

THEY'RE NOT THAT MANY SMALLER PLANS THAT COME OUT THERE FOR US TO LOOK AT.

SO THAT, THAT, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A WHILE BEFORE WE MEET AGAIN.

AND WE MET, UM, IT ALLOWED A VIRTUAL ATTENDANCE.

SO DURING LUNCH TIME USUALLY, AND ALLOWS A VIRTUAL ATTENDANCE.

IT'S PERHAPS NOT A HARDSHIP TO, UM, EVERYONE AND CHAIR, JUST TO, UH, MORE INFORMATION THAT OUR NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER THE FIFTH.

OH, OKAY.

SO I HAD IT THE FOURTH, ALL THIS SMALL AREA.

OH YEAH.

IT'S WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER THE FIFTH.

AGENDA ITEMS, WE'LL BE BRINGING UP THIS, UH, SUBDIVISION AGAIN, AND WE WILL MAYBE HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL WATERSHED TO DISCUSS.

UM, ANY OTHER FUTURE

[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]

ANYTHING ELSE? YES.

COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

THE CHAIR.

WE, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT HAVING A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE VMU.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT.

JUST PUTTING IT BACK ON THE LIST I ALREADY PASSED.

COMMISSIONER LAYS ON HENNEBERRY.

I KNOW.

WE JUST TALKED ABOUT HAVING A BRIEFING.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WE LOOKING AT NECESSARY VEDA.

I'M NOT SURE IF HE SURE.

CONFRONTED WITH STAFF AND WALL.

IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT BRIEFING.

SO THANK YOU.

I DON'T THINK WE'VE MET SINCE.

CODES AND ORDINANCES.

[COMMITTEE REPORTS & WORKING GROUPS]

NO, YOU DID.

YOU DIDN'T COME UP WITH A RECOMMENDATION.

OH YEAH.

OH, WE DID.

THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE.

LET'S DO WE TALK ABOUT, WE TALKED ABOUT A BUNCH OF STUFF THOUGH.

I DON'T REMEMBER.

THAT WAS THE BIG ONE WAS CODES AND ORDINANCE.

WE TALKED ABOUT THE VMU AT THE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY, RIGHT? IS IT VMU OR IT'S LIKE A TODD THING.

IT IS.

IS THERE REGULATING PLANS? SO IT'S ACTUALLY LIKE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

IT'S REALLY INTERESTING THOUGH.

WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT AGAIN.

I MEAN, I THINK CODES AND ORDINANCES IS THE MOST FUN.

UM, I'M BEING

[02:20:01]

SERIOUS.

THAT'S WHAT WE TAUGHT.

WE TAUGHT.

IS THAT IT, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? I DON'T REMEMBER.

THOSE WERE THE TWO THINGS.

A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT.