[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order ]
[00:00:08]
I AM BRINGING THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER, UH, SEPTEMBER 27TH, 2022, AND IT IS 6:18 PM UH, WE WILL START WITH A ROLL CALL, UH, STARTING WITH THOSE ON THE DIAS.
UH, START FROM RIGHT TO LEFT IF COMMISSIONER SHE PRESENT.
AND GOING TO MY LEFT HERE, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER, UM, ANDERSON HERE, AND WE HAVE, UM, THE BOARD, UM, CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
AND THEN ON THE SCREEN I'VE GOT, UH, COMMISSIONER POLITO.
I CAN'T, UH, JUST REAL QUICK FOLKS.
I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING YOU.
ARE YOU GUYS ON MUTE? UH, I'M BRING THE TEST.
POLITO, CAN YOU SPEAK JUST SO WE CAN SEE IF YOU CAN HEAR IT? YEAH.
COMMISSIONER HOWARD, START WITH A ROLL CALL HERE AND COMMISSIONER FLORES HERE.
UM, LOOKING, I THINK THAT'S ALL WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.
SO THAT BRINGS US TO TOTAL OF NINE CURRENTLY.
SO, UM, REAL QUICK, UH, WE HAVE A HYBRID MEETING.
SO WE HAVE, AS YOU CAN TELL, COMMISSIONERS HERE ON THE DIAS AND THOSE, UH, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY.
AND SIMILARLY, WE HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS HERE IN THE CROWD TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR COMING TO CITY HALL.
AND WE ALSO HAVE FOLKS THAT'LL BE PARTICIPATING VIRTUALLY AND MAKING THEIR COMMENTS, UM, UH, THAT WAY.
SO, UM, STARTING OUT, UH, DID NOT ASK, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION TODAY? NO, NO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
AND NEXT WE HAVE, UM, YES, APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
WE'LL GO AHEAD, UH, COMMISSIONERS, IN REVIEWING THE MINUTES, DID YOU HAVE ANY CHANGES OR COMMENTS? WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[Reading of the Agenda ]
NEXT, UM, COMMISSIONER FLORES, I DIDN'T ASK YOU AHEAD OF TIME, BUT YOU ALWAYS HELPED ME OUT.ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO THE FIRST READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA? I AM.
UM, WE HAVE APPROVAL A MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2022.
PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 19 0 1 3 0.01 COPELAND SOUTH.
THAT IS, UH, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 11TH, UH, THREE REZONING C 14 20 21 0 1 8 5 COPELAND SOUTH STAFF STAFF POST MOMENT TO OCTOBER 11TH.
UH, NUMBER FOUR, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 0 2, 6 0.01.
EIGHT B 2 26 TO 82 40 GEORGIAN DRIVE.
THAT IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT FOR TO OCTOBER 25TH.
PLAN, AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 0 0 7 0.0 1 1 0 8 1 0 NEWMONT ROAD.
THAT IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 8TH.
NUMBER SIX, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 1, 7 0.01.
THAT IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 15TH.
UH, NUMBER SEVEN, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 0 2, 0 0.01 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD AND TERRY OH LANE, THAT IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 8TH.
NUMBER EIGHT, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 21 0 0 1, 0 0.0 1 2400 EAST CHAVEZ PARKING EXPANSION.
THAT IS AN APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 15TH.
NUMBER NINE, REZONING C 14 20 21 0 1 2 1 2400 EAST SAAR CHAVEZ PARKING APPLICANT AND POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 15TH, 10 REZONING C 8 1 4 9 7 0 0 0 1 0.15.
LEANDER REHABILITATION, PUT AMENDMENT NUMBER 16.
THAT IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 15TH, 11 REZONING C 8 1 4 92 0 0 0 6 0.02.
SEATON MEDICAL CENTER, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
THAT IS A ON CONSENT WITH EXHIBIT A AND THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT NUMBER 12, HISTORIC ZONING C 14 H 20 22 0 73
[00:05:02]
WESTGATE TOWER.THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT NUMBER 13, HISTORIC ZONING C 14 H 20 22 0 0 9 9 DELLY HOUSE.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION NUMBER 14, REZONING C 8 1 4 20 21 0 1 7 5 6 14 SOUTH FIRST STREET.
PUT THAT ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT NUMBER 15, REZONING C 8 1 4 0 6 0 1 7 5 0.03 EAST AVENUE.
PUT PARCEL A AMENDMENT, THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.
NUMBER 16, REZONING C 14 20 21 0 1 9 0 30 20 EAST SAAR CHAVEZ.
17 REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 1, 24 0 9 TOWN LAKE CIRCLE.
C 18 REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 1 5 SPRINGDALE COMMERCIAL.
THAT ITEM IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 11TH.
NUMBER 19, REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 7 0 SPRINGDALE COMMERCIAL TRACK TWO AMENDMENT AMENDED.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 11TH.
NUMBER 20, SITE PLAN COMPATIBILITY WAIVER REQUESTS P 20 21 0 3 2 1 C, GILLES AND CASEY RESIDENCES.
21 SITE PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE, SP 20 21 0 3 5 0 C SCH CYCLE.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 11TH 22.
SITE PLAN EXTENSION S P 20 14 0 3 2 0 C XT THREE COMMERCE CENTER SOUTH SECTION TWO SITE PLAN.
PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 22 0 2 21 RIVER PARK SOUTH.
THAT ITEM IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 24 PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 21, 0 1 52 PINNACLE AT WILD HORSE RANCH.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C 25.
FINAL PLA FROM AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C EIGHT J 20 19 0 0 9 0 0.1 A STONY RIDGE HIGHLANDS PHASE ONE.
THAT ITEM IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 26 SUBDIVISION VACATION C H J 2007 0 0 7 8 1 1 A VACATION MCCORMICK MOUNTAIN, PHASE ONE SUBDIVISION.
27 CODE AMENDMENT C 20 20 22 0 0 6 REGULATING PLAN FOR THE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY ZONING DISTRICT.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT 28 CODE AMENDMENT INITIATION ONLY HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT, UM, IN 29.
CODE AMENDMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT AND IT IS SCHEDULED FOR COUNSEL ON OCTOBER 13TH.
AND THAT IS THE END OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, WE HAVE A FEW ITEMS WE NEED TO DISCUSS, UH, BEFORE, BEFORE WE DO THE FINAL READING.
SO FIRST OF ALL, UH, JUST FOR THOSE MEETINGS THAT ARE, UH, SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 15TH, UH, NOTE THAT THAT WILL BE A FIVE O'CLOCK CONSENT ONLY MEETING.
OUR NOVEMBER, UH, 16TH MEETING IS COUNSELED.
UH, SO PLEASE, UH, WE'LL HAVE AN HOUR THERE.
UH, BUT IT WILL BE A CONSENT ONLY MEETING, UH, TO COVER THOSE ITEMS. AND THEN SECONDLY, UM, I NEED SOME CLARIFICATION, UM, ON ITEM AND QUITE A FEW HERE.
ITEM NUMBER 11, UM, THAT IS ON CONSENT.
COULD STAFF, I THOUGHT WE HAD THAT WENT ON DISCUSSION.
IT'S ON CONSENT NOW, BUT WE HAVE, I SEE LANGUAGE THAT COMMISSIONER COX'S PROPOSED.
IS THAT THE EXHIBIT A THAT'S BEING COMMISSION HAY ON YES.
AND I DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS IN, UH, IN OPPOSITION.
[00:10:01]
THAT ONE MORE TIME.AND I DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT EXHIBIT A IF, UH, ALL THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT EXHIBIT.
DO YOU WANT ME TO JUST GIVE A REAL QUICK BACKGROUND OF HOW THAT CAME ABOUT? SURE.
IF YOU WOULD, BECAUSE, UH, I THINK WE NEED TO ALL KNOW WHAT'S IN THAT EXHIBIT.
UH, BUT YOU'RE THE ONE THAT PROPOSED THAT, RIGHT? COMMISSIONER COX CRAIG? YEAH.
SO, UM, THE, THE APPLICANT AND I, UH, MET AND, AND WE WERE TALKING, IT WAS MS. LYNCH BACK AND FORTH.
UH, THEY, THE APPLICANT IS ACTUALLY MEETING WITH AT, AT A MINIMUM THE DISTRICT 10 OFFICE NEXT WEEK TO DISCUSS TRAFFIC SAFETY, TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES.
IT WAS PART OF AN AGREEMENT THAT THE APPLICANT MADE WITH THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, SO THAT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD NOT BE HERE OPPOSING THE ITEM TONIGHT IN THE HOPES THAT IT WOULD STAY ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, THE SPECIFIC CONCERNS ARE RELATED TO, TO TRAFFIC SAFETY SINCE THERE ARE TWO SCHOOLS NEAR THE HOSPITAL.
UM, AND SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION, UH, ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS KNOWING THAT, THAT THOSE ARE CURRENTLY BEING WORKED OUT AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME TRYING TO KEEP THIS ON CONSENT, UH, TO RESPECT EVERYONE'S TIME AND, AND THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S TIME.
SO THAT'S HOW IT, THAT'S HOW IT CAME ABOUT, AND FROM MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE LANGUAGE OF EXHIBIT A, UM, HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND, AND THE APPLICANT IS IN A AGREEMENT WITH THAT LANGUAGE.
COMMISSIONERS, DO ANY OF YOU HAVE QUESTION? UM, WE CAN'T GO IF WE HAVE TOO MANY QUESTIONS, BUT ANY CONCERNS ABOUT EXHIBIT A THAT WE WOULD WANT TO PULL THIS FOR DISCUSSION OR ARE WE ALL GOOD WITH IT? I, I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, IS THIS, SO THIS IS RELATED TO THE ITEM THAT IS ON FOR DISCUSSION, IS THAT CORRECT? NO, IT'S NOT.
UH, WE HAVE, UM, COMMISSIONER COX, THAT IS INCLUDED EXHIBIT A.
UH, AND I, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND READ IT, UH, REAL QUICK.
UM, AND I A HERE EXHIBIT A SAYS, APPROVED STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH CONDITION THAT PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE AND SCHOOL TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS BE EVALUATED BY THE APPLICANT AND IF DEEMED APPROPRIATE AND APPROVED BY ATD, INSTALLED BY THE APPLICANT ON 34TH STREET AND IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT AREAS WITHIN THE T STUDY AREA.
THAT IS THE LANGUAGE OF EXHIBIT A THAT, UH, RIGHT NOW IS WHAT IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO WE'RE GONNA LEAVE IT ON, UH, CONSENT WITH THAT LANGUAGE AND EXHIBIT EIGHT.
THE NEXT, UM, LET'S MOVE DOWN HERE.
THE ITEM THAT'S A LITTLE PECULIAR IS, AND I WANNA APOLOGIZE AHEAD OF TIME.
I HAD MADE A LOT OF COMMITMENTS ABOUT GETTING ITEM 29 AND HEARING THAT, BUT IT IS A LOT, THERE IS A LOT IN THOSE CODE CHANGES AND WE HAVE A WORKING GROUP WORKING ON SOME AMENDMENTS.
UH, AND I THINK WE HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB WITH OUR WORKING GROUPS AND COMING UP WITH REALLY GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT WE JUST ARE READY.
UM, I THINK, UH, OCTOBER 11TH, UH, WOULD BE THE TARGET GIVEN COUNCIL IS, UH, SLIP THIS ONE TO THE 13TH.
SO WE, UH, GIVE OURSELVES A LITTLE TIME THERE, BUT I KNOW STAFF TONIGHT, I THINK YOU GUYS WANT TO HAVE THAT KEPT ON FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, WE ARE NOT READY, AND THIS IS AN ODD ONE.
I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER HAD TO DO THIS, BUT WE JUST AREN'T READY.
BUT I DO HAVE A, A PROPOSAL COMMISSIONER AZA, UH, DO YOU WANNA KIND OF FRAME WHAT YOU ARE CONSIDERING, UM, THAT WE MIGHT TRY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS EVENING AND FINDING A MIDDLE GROUND? THANK YOU CHAIR.
UM, SO BASED ON SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S PARTICULAR PIECES OF THE ORDINANCE AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED WHERE THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF CONCERN AND ISSUES.
SO WE WOULD BE, UM, ESSENTIALLY WE WOULD BE SAYING THAT WE'RE APPROVING THE ITEM WITH THE REMOVAL OF CERTAIN PIECES.
SO ONE WOULD BE THE REMOVAL OF, UM, FUNCTIONAL GREEN 25 8 SUB CHAPTER C, UM, AS PROPOSED, WHICH WOULD BE PASSED ON TO PHASE TWO WITH STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT.
WE WOULD REMOVE THE MISSING MIDDLE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH ARE IN THESE PARTS OF THE, UM, OVERALL ITEM WITH STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT.
AND AGAIN, UM, WE WOULD RECOMMEND REMOVAL OF CHANGES RELATED TO NEW UTILITIES, MAJOR PLACEMENT OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND UTILITIES EASEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH PLANT INFRASTRUCTURE IN 25, UH, DASH EIGHT DASH 2 61.
WE WOULD AGAIN, UH, RECOMMEND THAT THIS GO TO PHASE TWO OR EARLIER BASED ON, UM, THE ABILITY OF STAFF TO DO
[00:15:01]
THAT.SO WE'LL BE TAKING OUT THESE TWO ITEMS IN PASSING THE REST, THAT WOULD BE, UM, ONE WAY TO MOVE FORWARD.
BUT I'M ALSO HEARING A, UH, NEED FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO ASK FOR A POSTPONEMENT AND I DEFER TO THE
UH, STAFF, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? AND THEN WE'LL QUICKLY GET SOME INPUT FROM COMMISSIONERS BEFORE MAKING A DECISION.
AND JUST ON THIS OFFER, WE'LL, WE'LL, IF IT WE DO MOVE IT TO DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT, WE'LL HAVE A, JUST TO THE PROPOSAL.
UH, KATIE COIN ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.
SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THE POSTPONEMENT YET.
DISCUSSING THE IDEA OF IT, THIS, THIS IDEA OF WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONERS ARE TALKING.
AND, AND I DID JUST WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT LUKE METZKER FROM ENVIRONMENT TEXAS IS HERE TO ALSO SPEAK AGAINST, UH, POSTPONEMENT.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE ARE, WE WOULD BE DISAPPOINTED TO SEE THOSE ITEMS PULLED OUT.
WE'RE PARTICULARLY EXCITED ABOUT FUNCTIONAL GREEN.
UM, BUT UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S CONCERN AND THAT THERE'S A DESIRE TO HAVE MORE MEANINGFUL CONVERSATION.
A POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 11TH ON THOSE ITEMS FEELS LIKE TWO WEEKS IS NOT GOING TO DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO GET Y'ALL TO THE PLACE THAT YOU WANNA GET ON MISSING MIDDLE AND FUNCTIONAL GREEN AS FAR AS I CAN SEE IT.
UH, BUT IF WE PUSH THAT TO PHASE TWO AND, AND THAT IS, IS YOUR PREROGATIVE, UH, THEN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I CERTAINLY CAN UNDERSTAND, EVEN THOUGH I'D BE DISAPPOINTED TO SEE THOSE THINGS MOVE FORWARD.
BUT IT WOULD BE MY STRONG PREFERENCE THAT YOU ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE THINGS THAT AREN'T CONTROVERSIAL, THAT ARE IMPACTFUL, THAT HAVE BEEN WELL VETTED, THAT, UH, THAT WILL BE IMPORTANT TO GET ON THE BOOKS AS SOON AS WE CAN, ESPECIALLY RELATED TO GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, AND SOME OF THE OTHER PROTECTIONS THAT ARE OFFERED IN THIS, IN THIS ORDINANCE.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY THOUGHTS ON THE PROPOSAL? MY COMMISSIONERS ARE OKAY.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, IN OUR WORKING GROUP, WE'VE, WE, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO COORDINATE A TIME WHERE WE CAN CONTINUE TO DISCUSS THIS, AND THAT IS ACTIVELY BEING, TRYING TO BE SCHEDULED.
AND, UH, THE CHAIR OF OUR WORKING GROUP, UM, IS NOT HERE.
AND I, I GUESS HE'S BEEN TRYING TO ALSO BE PART OF THESE DISCUSSIONS.
SO I, I'M A LITTLE WEARY ABOUT, UM, PUSHING ANYTHING FORWARD WHEN WE'RE SO CLOSE TO AT LEAST GETTING OUR DISCUSSION THROUGH THESE PIECES.
AND WE CAN EVEN DISCUSS COMMISSIONER OURS, UM, PROPOSAL AT THAT POINT.
SO, I MEAN, I, I'D RATHER PUSH IT OUT.
I MEAN, I FEEL IT'S, I DON'T KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF SHOOTING FROM THE HIP AT THIS POINT IF WE PUSH ANYTHING FORWARD.
UM, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT ON THIS ONE.
AND I'LL NEED TO REPRESENT DIFFERENT, THE WORKING GROUP TO, UH, IF YOU, WE WANT TO SPEAK TO OUR CONCERNS ON THAT POSTPONEMENT, UH, WHO WOULD THAT BE? I GUESS WE HAVE A COUPLE FROM THE WORKING GROUP, SCO.
I THINK COMMISSIONER AZA, I THINK YOU NAILED IT.
IF YOU JUST REPEAT WHAT YOU HAVE, PUSHING CERTAIN ITEMS TO PHASE TWO AND THEN POSTPONING THE REST TILL THE 11TH.
SO IF I'M HEARING CORRECTLY, MS. ANDERSON, YOU'RE SAYING A COMBINATION OF THE TWO THINGS, WE'VE REMOVING SOME OF THOSE ITEMS TO THE 11TH AND SOME OF THESE TWO, PHASE TWO, IS THAT THE THOUGHT? WELL, BUT OKAY.
WELL, WHAT I THOUGHT I HEARD IS WE CAN STILL MAKE THAT DECISION, BUT WE STILL HAVE TO PASS PALM.
WE WE'RE GONNA POST, WE CAN POSTPONE THE WHOLE THING OR WE CAN HEAR DISCUSSION, POSTPONE IT, AND THEN WE CAN STILL MAKE THAT DECISION RIGHT AFTER THAT AS A MOTION MAYBE.
AND THEN, AND OR WE CAN, WE, IF WE MOVE THIS OUT AND WE ALLOW THE WORKING GROUP TO CONSIDER THIS, THEY CAN STILL COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE THOSE SECTIONS TO PART TO THE NEXT PHASE.
BUT EITHER WAY, WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE A POSTPONEMENT DISCUSSION ANYWAY.
SO, SO, SO CHAIR, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE THEN TO MOVE TOWARDS A DISCUSSION, POSTPONE.
THEN WE CAN HAVE THIS DISCUSSION.
IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE NOT ALL IN PERFECT AGREEMENTS.
SO WHO ARE THE, I GUESS
SORRY, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT.
UM, WE'RE STILL IN THE CONSENT PHASE, RIGHT? SO, SO CAN WE, CAN WE JUST HAVE THIS ITEM AS A DISCUSSION ITEM SO WE CAN MOVE ONTO THE CASES AND THEN, AND THEN BASICALLY JUST DISCUSS WHAT WE WANNA DISCUSS AND DECIDE AT THAT TIME IF WE WANT POSTPONE ANYTHING, IT'LL BE THE SECOND ITEM THAT COME UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
NO, I'M NOT, I'M NOT SAYING DISCUSSION.
I'M JUST SAYING PULL IT FOR DISCUSSION.
LET'S DISCUSS IT AND THEN WE'LL DECIDE AT THAT TIME WHAT IF WE WANNA POSTPONE, WHAT WE WANNA POSTPONE,
[00:20:01]
THAT SORT OF THING.UM, WE CAN HEAR FROM STAFF AND THEN POSTPONE AT THAT POINT.
WE CAN, IT'S JUST, WE DON'T HAVE, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE WORKING GROUP HERE, BUT WE CAN DO THAT.
WE JUST WON'T HAVE THE WORKING GROUP.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, THE REASON I'M SAYING IS CUZ I WAS JUST HOPING TO HAVE A, A, A MORE, I GUESS A MORE DETAILED DISCUSSION ABOUT COMMISSIONERS OURS PROPOSAL AND, AND KIND OF GET INTO THAT AND DECIDE WHAT WE FEEL COMFORTABLE POSTPONING, WHAT WE DON'T, AS IT RELATES TO THE COMMISSION'S WORK AS IT RELATES TO THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN FROM THE PUBLIC.
JERRY FEELING MR. RIVERA WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING, BUT IF I CAN QUICKLY COME IN AND SAY, SO SINCE WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS ALSO A POSTPONEMENT JUST OF A DIFFERENT SORT, I THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE WHETHER MY PROPOSAL OR OVERALL POSTPONEMENT OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH WITHIN A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT, WOULD THAT NOT BE CORRECT? CHAIR COMMISSIONER LIES ON ANN.
SO YOUR, UM, MAIN THING TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.
UM, SO AT THIS TIME YOU CAN EITHER POSTPONE OR HEAR THE CASE.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD MOVE THIS OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND MOVE INTO DISCUSSION.
POSTPONEMENT, POSTPONE IT IS A LITTLE, I'D HAVE TO CONFER WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT IN REGARDS TO NOTICE, UM, BECAUSE YOU WOULD BE TAKING ACTION ON PART OF THE ITEM AND POSTPONING PART OF THE ITEM.
UM, BUT I THINK IF YOU, UM, THE PRIMARILY IS TO, UH, MOVE IT OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, DISPOSE OF YOUR CONSENT AGENDA, YOU COULD PROBABLY TAKE UP YOUR, UM, UH, DISCUSSION POSTPONE ON THE, UH, ITEM NUMBER 12.
AND THEN, UH, THAT WOULD ALLOW ME, UH, TIME TO CONFER WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
UM, DOES ANYBODY NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM ANY OF THE ITEMS THIS EVENING? SURE.
CAN I JUST GET CLARITY ON WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH ITEM 29? I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE.
WE ARE GOING TO, UM, GO AHEAD AND DISPOSE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT CASES.
THE FIRST ONE WILL BE OUR HISTORICAL LANDMARK CASE, AND THAT WILL GIVE COMMISS, UH, MR. RIVERA TIME TO LOOK AT THE OPTIONS WITH LEGAL WHILE WE ARE HAVING THE FIRST DISCUSSION.
DID I HAVE ANY, UM, ANYBODY NEED TO ABSTAIN OR RECUSE FOR ITEMS THIS EVENING? SHARON WILL BE ABSTAINING ON ITEM NUMBER 17.
AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION ON 16 IF I MIGHT BE ALLOWED TO ASK THAT.
UM, THIS IS FOR MR. DANIEL JANIS.
CAN YOU PLEASE SHARE, UM, YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONVERSATIONS ON ITEM NUMBER 16, WHICH IS 30 20 EAST CAESAR CHAVEZ, MISS UH, LE BOJO, I WILL BE ASKING YOU TO, UM, RESPOND AFTER THIS.
UH, I, I APPRECIATE YOUR MAKING THE EXCEPTION.
UH, I'M DON JANS, I CHAIR THE GO VALLEY JOHNSON TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM.
YOU SHOULD HAVE A LETTER IN YOUR PACKET FROM US.
OPPOSING, UH, THIS, UH, UH, CHANGE TO ADD THE C CHAVEZ IS A, IS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
THE, THE CORRIDORS ARE E SEVENTH AND AIRPORT, AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S LIVELY AND HAPPENING.
UH, CEZAR CHA IS IS NOT A V CORRIDOR.
UH, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN DOES NOT CALL FOR IT.
ACTUALLY, WE TRIED, WE TRIED FOR SEVERAL WEEKS TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER WHO, WHO I APPRECIATE THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO SEE IF WE COULD FIND A DIFFERENT WAY TO DO IT, LIKE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AFR, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR, UH, BUT WE CAME, UH, THERE WAS NO, NO ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION.
SO UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE TO, UH, OPPOSE BECAUSE WE DO NOT WANNA SET PRECEDENT OF, UH, PUTTING V ON SEZ CHAVEZ CUZ IT'S NOT DESIGNATED AS SUCH.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR, FOR, UM, UM, FOR GIVING YOU THE TIME, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL HAVE.
APPRECIATE, I APPRECIATE THAT.
CAN MS. LEAH BO CAN THE APPLICANT PLEASE RESPOND TO THAT AS WELL? YES.
WE MET WITH THE NEIGHBOR SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE WE SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION AND SHORTLY AFTER SUBMITTING IT, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD LET US KNOW THAT THEY DID NOT WANNA BE IN THIS LOCATION, SUGGESTED THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
WE PUT PAUSE, HIT PAUSE ON THE APPLICATION.
WAS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED TO COME BEFORE YOU, I THINK IN MARCH TO SORT OF CONSIDER THAT AND SEE IF THERE WAS ANOTHER OPTION AVAILABLE.
UM, WE DETERMINED THAT THERE ISN'T REALLY ANOTHER OPTION
[00:25:01]
AVAILABLE.THERE'S NOT A HARDSHIP ON THE SITE.
UM, THERE IS A ZONING REMEDY, WHICH IS WHY WE DECIDED TO PROCEED WITH THIS APPLICATION.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT, WASN'T DESIGNATED AS A V CORRIDOR IN 2008 WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WENT THROUGH THEIR OPT-IN, UM, PROCESS, BUT WE FEEL THAT AUSTIN'S A VERY DIFFERENT PLACE NOW THAN IT WAS IN 2008.
AND, UM, THE VMU TOOL MAKES A LOT OF SENSE FOR THIS SITE.
UM, AND SO WE'D LIKE TO PROCEED WITH OUR REQUEST FOR V.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TOO.
OKAY, UH, LET'S GO AND MOVE ON.
SO, UH, JUST THOSE ON THE SCREEN, HAVE YOUR, UH, GREEN, RED, YELLOW CARDS AVAILABLE SO I CAN COUNT THE VOTES.
AND, UM, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD, LET ME DO THE READING HERE.
WE'RE GONNA START WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WE HAVE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2022.
UH, ITEM TWO, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 11TH.
ITEM THREE, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 11TH.
ITEM FOUR, PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 25TH.
ITEM FIVE, PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 8TH.
ITEM SIX, PLAN AMENDMENT TO STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 15TH, AS I POINTED OUT THAT IT'S GONNA BE A CONSENT ONLY AGENDA.
UM, MOVING ON TO ITEM SEVEN, PLAN AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 8TH.
ITEM EIGHT, APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 15TH.
ITEM NINE, REZONING APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 15TH.
ITEM 10, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 15TH.
UH, REZONING, UH, THIS IS A CONSENT AND AS WE, UH, DISCUSSED, UM, INCLUDING EXHIBIT A AND ITEM 12, UH, HISTORIC UH, ZONING.
THIS ONE WILL TAKE UP AS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM 13, HISTORIC ZONING IS, UH, OUR DISCUSSION CASE.
ITEM 14, REZONING APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM 15, REZONING IS ON CONSENT.
ITEM 16, REZONING IS ON CONSENT.
ITEM 18, REZONING STAFF POSTPONE TO OCTOBER 11TH, 19.
REZONING STAFF POSTPONE TO OCTOBER 11TH.
ITEM 20, SITE PLAN, COMPATIBILITY WAIVER REQUEST IS ON CONSENT.
ITEM 21, SITE PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD BUS FLOW TO OCTOBER 11TH, ITEM 22, SITE PLAN EXTENSION IS ON CONSENT.
23, PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C.
UH, 25 FINAL PLA FROM AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
26 SUBDIVISION VACATION IS ON CONSENT.
THAT'S THE, UH, BURNETT NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY ZONING DISTRICT, UH, IS ON CONSENT AND 28 CODE AMENDMENT INITIATION ONLY.
UH, THESE ARE ON THE HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS.
AND ITEM 29 IS, UM, GONNA GO AHEAD AND PUT IT ON, UH, FOR DISCUSSION AND WE'LL HEAR BACK ON FROM LEGAL, UH, WITH OUR OPTIONS ON WHETHER OR NOT HOW WE, UH, PROCEED WITH THE DISCUSSION.
ALL RIGHT, AND THAT'S, UH, YES, I'M SORRY.
I, I WANTED TO SAY EARLIER, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL ITEM 16.
I HOPE THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO READ THIS ALL OVER AGAIN.
UH, SO WE WILL, YOU WANT TO PULL ITEM 16 FOR DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION, PLEASE.
UH, ITEM 16 IS NOW PULLED FOR DISCUSSION AND WE'LL TAKE THAT UP.
UM, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND JUST SEE IF YOU ARE OKAY.
IF WE END UP TAKING UP THE ITEM 29 AS A DISCUSSION CASE, I WANNA PUT THAT IN, UM, BEFORE ITEM 16.
UH, DOES ANYBODY HAVE A CONCERN WITH THAT ORDER? OKAY.
[ Consent Agenda ]
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, INCLUDING APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES? UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPLE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER[00:30:01]
COX.LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE FROM THOSE ON THE DIAS.
ALL RIGHT, THAT'S FIVE AND FOUR, SO THAT, UH, UNANIMOUS NINE ZERO.
[29. Code Amendment: Environmental Protection, Landscape Requirements, and Site Plan Requirements (Part 1 of 2) ]
RIGHT, LET'S GO AND MOVE INTO OUR FIRST, UH, DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT CASE.SO WE'LL HAVE, LET'S SEE, DO YOU WANNA GO? AS YOU WERE READ THE RECORD, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UH, I'M ABSTAINING ON ITEM NUMBER 17, BUT VOTING IN FAVOR OF ALL ELSE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
AND I KNOW THAT WAS ALREADY DISCUSSED, BUT JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
ALL RIGHT, FOR THE RECORD, THANK YOU.
SO ALL WE HAVE, UH, THE FIRST WE'LL HAVE, UH, THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONE WILL GO FIRST CHAIR, COMMISSION, LAY ON ENVER.
SO IN REGARDS TO THIS ITEM, STAFF RECEIVED LIGHT INFORMATION.
AND, UH, IN LIGHT OF THAT INFORMATION, WE WILL NEED TO REQUEST YOUR POSTPONEMENT FOR TWO WEEKS.
THE APPLICANT IS OPPOSED TO THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO WE'LL, UH, NOW MOVE TO THE OPPOSITION TO THE POSTPONEMENT.
MR. EVANS WILL HAVE, UH, THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND LETTING ME SPEAK TO YOU AGAIN.
OUR APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED TO CITY STAFF IN MAY.
PUBLIC NOTICE WAS SENT OUT IN JUNE, TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE JULY 6TH MEETING, MAKING OUR APPLICATION PUBLIC RECORD AND AVAILABLE TO BE VIEWED.
AT THE JULY 6TH MEETING, MR. HARDEN SHOWED UP AND ASKED FOR AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.
CLEARLY, AT THAT POINT, HE HAD SEEN OUR APPLICATION.
WE WERE RESCHEDULED A MONTH LATER FOR AUGUST 9TH.
SURELY AT THAT TIME, HE'D SEEN OUR APPLICATION.
MR. HARDEN REQUESTED AN ADDITIONAL POSTPONEMENT, WHICH NOW HAS US HERE ON SEPTEMBER 29TH.
WHILE HE SEEKS ANOTHER POSTPONEMENT.
I ASKED THE COMMISSION TO SEE THIS FOR WHAT IT IS OF SUBVERSION OF OUR GOVERNING SYSTEM.
I'M TAKING TIME AWAY FROM MY FAMILY TO BE HERE.
WESTGATE REPRESENTATIVES ARE HERE.
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, YOU WERE ALL HERE.
WE NOW COME BEFORE YOU FOR A THIRD TIME.
PLEASE DO NOT LET THIS ONE PERSON TRY AND MANIPULATE YOU INTO CALLING FOR A POSTPONEMENT, BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT HE IS DOING.
I MUST CONDEMN HIS ACTIONS IN THE STRONGEST POSSIBLE WAY, SENDING TROVES OF DOCUMENTS TO CITY LEGAL TWO HOURS BEFORE THE START OF A MEETING, SO THAT THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY TO REVIEW IS VERY CLEARLY AN ATTEMPT TO MANIPULATE THIS GOVERNING BODY.
I HAVE FAR TOO MUCH RESPECT FOR YOU TO EVER DO SUCH A THING.
I ASK THAT THE COMMISSION, HEAR OUR CASE, HEAR FROM THOSE THAT HAVE COME TO SUPPORT IT, AND NOT ALLOW SOMEONE TO TRY AND MANIPULATE AND SUBVERT THIS SYSTEM.
I ASK THAT YOU HEAR OUR CASE AND DECIDE BASED ON THE MERITS OF OUR CASE, AND NOT ALLOW A FLAGRANT ATTEMPT TO SUBVERT THE AUTHORITY THAT YOU, THAT YOU HAVE FOR ONE SECOND LONGER.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THAT YOU'VE DONE AND CONTINUE TO DO AND SUPPORT OF THIS AMAZING CITY.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS, UM, POSTPONE REQUEST.
IT'S NOW, UH, TO THE COMMISSION FOR DELIBERATIONS.
I WISH, UH, DO YOU WISH TO ENTERTAIN A REDUCED, UM, Q AND A ON THE POSTPONE CHAIR? THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS IN THE OPPOSITION.
UH, DO YOU, UM, WISH TO ENTERTAIN A REDUCED Q AND A ON THE, UH, POSTPONEMENT ON THE, UH, DELIBERATION ON THE DIAS FOLKS? GIVEN THE, UH, WE HAVE TYPICALLY WE HAVE EIGHT AT FIVE MINUTES, UH, JUST ENTERTAINING THE IDEA OF SHORTEN THE DISCUSSION HERE, FIVE AT THREE TO START WITH.
IF, FOR ANY, UH, IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO REDUCING OUR Q AND A ON THIS ITEM? IT WOULD BE FIVE FOLKS WITH, UH, THREE MINUTES EACH.
WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO THE Q AND A THEN.
UH, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, I GUESS, UH, QUESTION TO STAFF.
UM, WHAT, WHEN WAS IT CHANGED FROM THIS BEING AN ITEM TO THIS BEING A STAFF POSTPONEMENT REQUEST?
UM, THIS, UM, WAS A REQUEST FROM THE LAW DEPARTMENT, UM, FOR MORE TIME FOR VIEW MATERIALS SENT SHORTLY BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING TODAY, UM, REGARDING THIS, UH, OWNER INITIATED HISTORIC ZONING APPLICATION.
AND, UM, HPD STAFF REFERS TO OUR, UH, OUR CITY LEGAL STAFF'S
[00:35:01]
REQUEST, UH, FOR TIME TO REVIEW THESE NEW MATERIALS.AND, UH, I'M OBVIOUSLY VIRTUAL, SO I CAN'T SEE THE AUDIENCE, BUT THERE WAS A REFERENCE MADE TO FOLKS BEING IN THE AUDIENCE PHYSICALLY BEING THERE, READY TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM.
UM, I'M HOPING THAT THAT ASSUMPTION IS CORRECT.
UM, AND I'M JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE TO THE COMMISSION OR JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE THAT I'M HAPPY TO MAKE THE MOTION TO DECLINE THIS POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
WE CAN ALWAYS CHOOSE TO POSTPONE IT LATER DURING DISCUSSION, BUT IF PEOPLE CAME HERE THINKING THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK, WHETHER FOR OR AGAINST, I CERTAINLY WANT TO GIVE THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY.
UM, STAFF, I'M SORRY, DID I JUST UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY, THAT THE REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT IS REALLY COMING FROM A LAW DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY NEED TO REVIEW DOCUMENTS AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER, UH, THE LAW DEPARTMENT DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT TIME TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SENT, UM, SINCE WE GOT THEM RIGHT BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, SO THEY'RE JUST REQUESTING TIME TO, TO GO THROUGH EVERYTHING, UM, AND MAKE SURE THAT, THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS SENT.
AND JUST TO UNDERSTAND THAT, IT SEEMS LIKE TO DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, THEY WOULD NEED TO REVIEW THESE DOCUMENTS BEFORE ACTION, IT SEEMS LIKE.
AND I ALSO HAD ANOTHER FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
JUST, I KNOW THIS, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT POSTPONE, BUT JUST IN TERMS OF THE POSTPONEMENT, UM, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD MADE SOME VERY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND LOOKING AT HOW WE COULD PERHAPS DO SOME ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
WAS THAT SOMETHING? I DO NOT SEE IT IN THE BACKUP, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF STAFF HAD CONSIDERED IT, UM, AND BROUGHT FORTH AT THIS MEETING OR NOT.
UH, YES, COMMISSIONER, WE DID DISCUSS WITH LAW, UM, ABOUT THOSE REQUESTS.
UM, I'M NOT SURE HOW Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THAT UP OR, UM, IF I'M ABLE TO DISCUSS THAT RIGHT NOW.
UM, BUT WE DO HAVE, UM, A LITTLE SOMETHING FROM LA FOR Y'ALL FOR THAT TO, I, I APPRECI THAT WE'LL HAVE TO WAIT FOR THAT IF WE DO A DISCUSSION ON THIS CASE.
I JUST WANT TO, UM, UNDERSTAND THAT FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF A POSTPONEMENT, BUT I APPRECIATE THAT.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS INVOLVING THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST? BLESS YOUR HIPPLE.
UM, HOW LONG WILL, UM, LAW NEED TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS? LIKE, WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO DO THAT IF WE SHIFTED THIS ITEM TO LATER IN THE MEETING? OR DO THEY NEED A WEEK OR TWO WEEKS? OUR CURRENT REQUEST FROM LAW IS FOR TWO WEEKS.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONED THIS ITEM BY TWO WEEKS.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER SHA WITH THE SECOND.
YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION COMMISSAR? I I JUST WANNA BE VERY CLEAR THAT I THINK ALTHOUGH WE HAVE THE, WE HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL OPPOSED DO THE, UH, DO LISTENING THIS, UH, CASE TODAY.
BUT REALLY THAT'S NOT THE REASON.
IF OUR LAW DEPARTMENT HAS TO DO WITH DUE DILIGENCE, OUR LAW DEPARTMENT HAS TO DO ITS DILIGENCE.
I CAN UNDERSTAND IN THE WAY OF OPENING IT US UP TO ANY KIND OF SORT OF LEGAL SHAKY GROUND.
I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT A LAW DEPARTMENT HAS THE ABILITY TO REVIEW WHAT IT NEEDS TO REVIEW BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION SO THAT WE KNOW WHERE WE'RE HEADING AS WELL.
AND LOOKING AT THE SORT OF AGENDA, IT IS RATHER LARGE, AND WE HAVE NOW HAVE ADDED ANOTHER DISCUSSION ITEM.
I THINK WE CAN GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, CONSIDERING WE LIKELY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION WITHOUT PROPER FEEDBACK FROM OUR LAW DEPARTMENT.
ANYONE SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER COXS? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE DENY THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST AND HEAR THE CASE TONIGHT.
UH, DO YOU WANNA GO AND SPEAK TO YOUR SUBSTITUTE MOTION? YEAH, I UNDERSTAND WHAT COMMISSIONERS ARE WITH SAYING, I UNDERSTAND THAT STAFF OR THAT LEGAL NEEDS TIME TO REVIEW THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SENT.
I THINK LITERALLY AT 4:08 PM UM, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE'S PEOPLE HERE, THEY'RE READY TO SPEAK, THEY'RE READY TO SUPPORT, THEY'RE READY TO OPPOSE, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO THEM TO DRAG THEM DOWNTOWN DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC TO JUST BASICALLY SAY, NOPE, NEVERMIND, COME BACK LATER.
WE CAN ALWAYS POSTPONE IF WE FEEL LIKE, UM, WE NEED TO GIVE TIME FOR LEGAL TO LOOK AT THESE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE PUBLIC AT 4:00 PM
[00:40:01]
UM, BUT I DO THINK WE SHOULD BE FAIR TO THE PUBLIC AND LET THEM SPEAK TONIGHT.ANYONE SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION IN FAVOR, COMMISSAR? OH, YES.
SO I'LL JUST SAY HERE WHAT COMMISSIONER COX IS SAYING.
AGAIN, LOOKING AT OUR AGENDA, I JUST WANNA BE COGNIZANT OF OUR TIME.
YOU KNOW, WE CAN MAKE THE SAME ARGUMENTS, YOU KNOW, A REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION ON A CASE.
WE PULLED IT FROM CONSENT LITERALLY AFTER THE MEETING STARTED.
SO I'M NOT SURE WHETHER THAT ARGUMENT GOES WHEN SOMETHING WAS SENT OR WHEN A REQUEST WAS MADE.
AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THAT COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE HERE AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THEM, BUT I'M ALSO LOOKING AT OUR FULL AGENDA AND THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE GONNA MAKE TO WAIT UNTIL MIDNIGHT, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING THROUGH MULTIPLE DISCUSSIONS.
SO THERE'S MULTIPLE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HERE TALKING ABOUT MULTIPLE ITEMS, AS IS ALWAYS THE CASE WITH THIS COMMISSION.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IF WE'RE GONNA POSTPONE AN ITEM REGARDLESS, LET'S BE RESPECTFUL OF EVERYONE'S DYING.
ALL RIGHT, SPEAK IN FAVOR AGAINST COMMISSIONER.
SHE, UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY A CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONERS.
R I MEAN, THERE'S, THERE SEEMS TO BE ANYTIME LIKE LEGAL EXPRESSES, UM, CONCERN.
I MEAN, THAT BECOMES SOMETHING THAT I FEEL LIKE WE, WE DO HAVE TO CONSIDER.
AND I DON'T WANT TO END UP WASTING EVERYBODY'S TIME.
IF IN THE END, OTHER INFORMATION COMES UP THAT, YOU KNOW, ENDS UP NEGATING ALL OF OUR WORK.
SO I, I WOULD RATHER GO FORWARD WITH ALL THE CORRECT DATA.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHERS WANNA SPEAK FORWARD OR AGAINST? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTIONS AND GO AHEAD.
CHECK ON, UH, JUST ONE TO ADVISE THAT, UH, MAYBE ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BASED ON THE VICE CHAIR'S QUESTION AND SAY THAT IF IT DOES GET HEARD TONIGHT, UH, HAVE CITY STAFF GET IN TOUCH WITH LEGAL AND HAVE THEM REVIEW THINGS AND THEN PUSH IT TOWARDS THE END OF THE AGENDA SO AT LEAST WE COULD GET SOME KIND OF INFORMED ANSWERS, THEN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.
ANY, I CAN'T BREAK THE NUMBER FIRST? YEP.
ANYBODY TAKING UP ON THAT? NO, I DON'T SEE ANY.
LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
UM, LIKE COMMISSIONER COX, EVERYTHING THAT, WHO'S SECOND THAT.
SORRY, UH, TO DENY POSTPONEMENT.
UM, OKAY, LET'S GO AND VOTE ON THIS ITEM.
THOSE ON THE DIAS IN, IN FAVOR.
THESE, SUBSTITUTE ALL THOSE ON VIRTUALLY.
WE GET LEAVE 'EM UP AND TAKING TO ACCOUNT HERE.
OKAY, THAT MOTION FAILS WITH COMMISSIONERS.
UM, GOING GO TO REVERSE ORDER HERE.
HOWARD FLORES, UH, ANDERSON SHAW, UH, VICE SARAH HIPPO, SR.
SO THAT FAILS TWO TO SEVEN, OR YOU KNOW, TWO TO SEVEN.
GOING AHEAD WITH OUR MOTION, UH, BY COMMISSIONER AZAR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SHAY TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL OCTOBER 11TH.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND I THINK WE GOT THROUGH AT OUR DISCUSSION ON THAT.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN IN FAVOR.
FIRST, LET ME SEE YOUR GREEN IF YOU GOT 'EM.
THOSE AGAINST, ALL RIGHT, THAT'S ONE.
AND THEN IS THAT A YELLOW OR RED? I'M SORRY, COMMISSION.
IS THAT LOOKS PINK?
I'M ABOUT TO MOVE INTO BETTER LIGHTING.
SO WE'VE GOT, IF I GOT MY COUNT RIGHT, SEVEN TO TWO, SO THAT PASSES.
SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE THIS UP OCTOBER 11TH.
I APOLOGIZE THOSE THAT CAME, BUT IT'LL DEFINITELY HELP US IF YOU'RE HERE WHEN WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION, YOU WOULD PROBABLY BE COMING BACK AGAIN ANYWAY, WHICH YOU COULD HAVE.
UH, BUT THANK YOU FOR COMING THIS EVENING.
SO, UH, MR. RIVERA, DO WE HAVE ANY INFORMATION FROM LEGAL ON, UM, IF WE CAN SPLIT, UH, PER, UH, COMMISSIONER ZAS PLAN IF WE, IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN EVEN DO? SURE.
SO THE FIRST THING IS TO ADDRESS THE POSTPONEMENT.
AND WITH ANY POSTPONEMENT, YOU DO NOT DELVE INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE.
YOU ONLY DELVE INTO THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO, UH, THAT, UM, KIND OF, UM, UH, MAKES IT, UM, A LITTLE
[00:45:01]
INTERESTING IN REGARDS TO HOW YOU, UH, GO FORWARD.UM, IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO ADDRESS THE POSTPONEMENT, UM, THEN, UM, THIS WILL JUST BE A DISCUSSION CASE THIS EVENING.
IF YOU HAVE THE DISCUSSION THIS EVENING, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, GO THROUGH YOUR USUAL PROCESS WITH ENTERTAINING MOTIONS TO ONLY TAKE A PROPORTION OF THE MATTER.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE SPECIFIC IN WHAT YOU'RE VOTING ON TODAY AND DEFINING WHEN YOU ARE BRINGING FORWARD THE NEXT ITEM.
UM, WHICH, BECAUSE THE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WOULD HAVE TO BE WITHIN TWO WEEKS.
EVERYBODY CLEAR ON THAT? OKAY.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND I, I GUESS WHAT I NEED TO KNOW, DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS WANT TO TAPE THE ROLE OF SUPPORTING THE POSTPONEMENT AND SPEAK TO THE, THE MERITS OF THE POSTPONEMENT? IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO HAVE SOMEBODY ON THE WORKING GROUP, UM, LIKE YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION.
I'M SORRY, MR, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE ORIGINAL MOTION IS SOMETHING LIKE A WORK? CAUSE IN THAT CASE WE, WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE IT OUT OF DISCUSSION, POST PERFORM AND GO TO DISCUSSION OF THE CASE, AND THEN MM-HMM.
THAT HAS TO RESIDE IN THE ACTUAL DISCUSSION, HIS RECOMMENDATION.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BEING TOLD RIGHT NOW.
SO I'M LOOKING FOR THE, SO LET'S GO, AND I GUESS WE NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE TAKE THIS UP, UH, FOR DISCUSSION OR WE THIS EVENING, OR WE POSTPONE.
AND SO, UH, THE WORKING GROUP, I GUESS THE RECOMMENDATION CAME FROM THE WORKING GROUP, UH, TO POSTPONE.
SO I'M LOOKING FOR SOME HELP HERE.
CHAIR, COMMISSION LIAISON, AN VER JUST KEEP IN MIND, WE DO HAVE, UH, SPEAKERS WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION IN OPPOSITION TO, IF YOU ARE GOING TO ENTERTAIN A POSTPONEMENT, WE HAVE SPEAKERS AND OPPOSITION TO THE POSTAL.
SO YOU'LL, UM, GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
WE'RE NOT, WE MAY NOT BE POSTPONING AT THIS POINT.
I JUST NEED TO GET A READ FROM MY COMMISSIONERS HERE ON WHAT THEY'RE, WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
SO, UH, I'M ON THE WORKING GROUP.
I MEAN, TO ME, I WOULD RATHER POSTPONE IT, BUT IF THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE TO SPEAK, WE COULD GO AHEAD AND LISTEN.
CUZ WE COULD STILL POSTPONE IT, RIGHT? WE COULD POSTPONE PART OF IT.
WELL, WE CAN, WE COULD POSTPONE THE WHOLE THING OR LET CERTAIN THINGS GO FORWARD AND CERTAIN THINGS NOT.
SO I THINK WE JUST HEAR THE CASE AND THEN OKAY.
THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF MY TAKE.
UM, I GUESS LOOKING AT THE BALANCE OF THE D AND SOMEONE DISAGREE WITH ME, UH, LET ME KNOW.
IT SEEMS LIKE WHERE OUR, UM, MO MAKING A MOTION AGAINST POSTPONEMENT AND HEARING, MAKING A MOTION TO HEAR THE CASE TODAY.
WE'RE GONNA PUT IT TO, I THINK, A VOTE.
RIGHT? AND THAT WOULD GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET TO YOUR MOTION, WHAT I WAS RECOMMENDING.
THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE CAN DO TO GET TO YOUR MOTION.
SO THE MOTION I'M HEARING, I JUST WANTED, I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE ON THIS, IS WHETHER TO POSTPONE, TAKE THIS UP, THIS DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT RIGHT NOW, OR DISCUSS THE CASE THIS EVENING.
AND SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THAT.
SO I GUESS THE MOTION IS TO HEAR THE CASE CASE TONIGHT? YES, THAT'S MY MOTION.
HEAR THE CASE TONIGHT, AND I DON'T HAVE A SECOND YET, SO SEC, I MEAN, OKAY.
SO COMMISSIONER SHAY, SECONDS THAT, UH, THAT, ARE WE CLEAR COMMISSIONERS? UM, THIS IS A MOTION TO HEAR THE CASE THIS EVENING.
AND ANYBODY WANNA SPEAK TO THAT MOTION TO HEAR SHARE COMMISS LAY LIAISON EVER.
SO I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU, YOU'RE WANTING TO MOVE TO DISCUSSION AND YOU'RE MOVING TO A MOTION BEFORE HEARING SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION TO THE POSTPONEMENT.
WE, BUT IF IT FAILS, WE WILL TAKE UP, IF THIS MOTION FAILS, THERE'S A TWO-STEP PROCESS, THEN YES, WE HAVE TO, THEN YOU'LL HEAR THE ITEM THIS EVENING.
THE MOTION IS TO HEAR THE ITEM THIS EVENING.
BUT THIS IS A POSTPONEMENT DISCUSSION THING, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE POSTPONEMENT AND WE CAN LET IT DIE.
RIGHT? AND THEN WE HEAR THE CASE.
IF WE COULD JUST HEAR FROM THE SPEAKERS, PLEASE.
UM, CAN WE JUST KEEP ON THE REGULAR AGENDA? I, I THINK WE'RE, IF I'M HEARING FROM MR. VERA PAST THAT POINT, RIGHT.
SO NOW WE HAVE TO ALLOW SPEAKERS TO SPEAK ON THE DISCUSSION POST ONE.
THIS ONE'S ON US, WE MAKE A MISTAKE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED THEN.
[00:50:01]
AND WE WILL, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT WANNA SPEAK ON THE DISCUSSION POST MOMENT.WELL, DOWN HERE FROM, UH, LUKE, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS.
I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT TEXAS.
WE'RE A NONPROFIT ADVOCATE FOR CLEAN AIR, CLEAN WATER, AND OPEN SPACES IN A LIVABLE CLIMATE.
AND, UH, SPEAKING RESPECTFULLY AGAINST THE POSTPONE, UM, THIS, UH, YOU KNOW, FUNCTIONAL GREEN AND SOME OF THE OTHER PROVISIONS IN THESE CODE CHANGES WERE PROPOSED MORE THAN FIVE YEARS AGO AS PART OF THE REWRITE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UM, THE, THESE PROVISIONS WERE APPROVED, INCLUDING FUNCTIONAL GREEN BY THE COUNCIL ON SECOND READING.
UM, AND WE'VE WAITED TOO LONG FOR THESE TO, UH, BECOME CODE.
UH, AUSTIN HAS SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS. 36% OF OUR CREEKS HAVE OF UNSAFE LEVELS OF FECAL BACTERIA IN THEM.
UM, WE HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS JULY WAS THE HOTTEST JULY ON RECORD.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, UM, HAD NINE DOGS DIE, UH, FROM EXPOSURE TO ALGAE BLOOMS, UH, IN LADYBIRD LAKE AND LAKE TRAVIS, UH, AND ON AND ON.
AND MANY OF THESE PROBLEMS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, PAVING OVER MORE OF OUR CITY, YOU KNOW, FOR ROADS AND DEVELOPMENT AND FUNCTIONAL GREEN AND, AND SIMILAR KINDS OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLAY A REALLY IMPORTANT ROLE IN HELPING MITIGATE THE IMPACTS, UH, OF THAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER, AS YOU KNOW, MORE WHEN IT RAINS, UH, RUSHES ALONG THE, UH, THE PAVEMENT, PICKS UP THE DOG POOP, PICKS UP THE FERTILIZERS AND RUSHES THEM INTO OUR CREEKS WHERE THEY CAUSE, UH, SERIOUS POLLUTION PROBLEMS. AND, UH, BY MIMICKING NATURE THROUGH THINGS LIKE RAIN GARDENS AND GREEN ROOFS, UH, WE INSTEAD ARE ABLE TO ABSORB THE RAIN AND, AND HELP PREVENT THAT POLLUTION IN THE FIRST PLACE.
WE'RE ALSO, THERE'S MANY OTHER BENEFITS IN TERMS OF REDUCING URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECT.
UM, YOU KNOW, REDUCING AIR POLLUTION.
ONE STUDY FOUND SPECIFICALLY OF THE FUNCTIONAL GREEN PROPOSAL THAT IT WOULD REDUCE, UH, AIR POLLUTION BY 2000 TONS A YEAR, REDUCE STORM WATER VOLUMES BY 10 TO 15%, UM, AND MANY OTHER, UH, SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS.
UH, SO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE WAITED TOO LONG.
YOU KNOW, WE, I WORRY THAT, UH, CERTAINLY IF YOU PULL OUT, UH, FUNCTIONAL GREEN TO PHASE TWO, UM, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, JUST, YOU KNOW, DELAYING ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY A YEAR BEFORE THESE THINGS ARE IMPLEMENTED, YOU KNOW, MISSING MIDDLE.
IF YOU WANNA PUSH THAT IN PHASE TWO, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'D BE COMFORTABLE WITH.
THE COUNCIL WAS CLEAR THAT THEY WANTED TO FIND, YOU KNOW, SOME, UH, MIDDLE GROUND ON THAT.
UM, BUT THEY DIDN'T SAY THAT FOR FUNCTIONAL GRADE.
AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN APPROVED, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL TIMES BY COUNCIL.
AND, UM, WE URGE YOU NOT TO, UH, PUSH THAT TO, TO PHASE TWO.
IF, IF ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD RECOMMEND COUNCIL ADOPT IT, BUT DELAY THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE, BUT LET'S JUST GET IT INTO LAW, THEN WE CAN WORK THROUGH THE SPECIFICS, YOU KNOW, DO THE TRAINING, UM, UH, DO THE EDUCATION FOR THE, THE BUILDERS TO UNDERSTAND THIS.
WE'LL HAVE MORE TIME AS FOR PHASE TWO TO, TO GO FORWARD AROUND SOME OF THE OTHER ENTITLEMENT CHANGES, BUT LET'S NOT DELAY ACTUALLY MAKING THIS LAW.
I THINK I WANNA HEAR FROM MS. QUINN FOR TWO MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS KATIE COIN, ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.
UM, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA TAKE UP TOO MUCH MORE OF YOUR TIME.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'LL HAVE A CHANCE TO DISCUSS FURTHER, UH, LATER IN THE EVENING.
I, I DID JUST WANNA TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY THAT, UH, I, AS A FORMER COMMISSIONER FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, UH, I KNOW HOW MUCH TIME GOES INTO THESE THINGS AND YOU ARE NOT COMPENSATED FOR THAT TIME AND THE SERVICE YOU'RE PROVIDING TO THE CITY.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE IS PASSION.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT TO GET THROUGH AND THAT Y'ALL WANT A MEANINGFUL CONTRIBUTION, AND I CERTAINLY WANT THAT AS WELL.
SO I WANTED TO EXPRESS GRATITUDE FOR THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN PUTTING INTO THIS.
UH, I'M ANXIOUS TO MOVE FORWARD CERTAIN COMPONENTS THAT WE DO HAVE CONSENSUS ON THAT HAVE BEEN ON, ON THE BOOKS IN DRAFT FORM FOR A LONG TIME.
UH, AND SO I HOPE THAT, UH, LATER ON IN DISCUSSION, WE CAN, WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT MAKES SENSE, UH, FOR Y'ALL TO ENGAGE WITH POTENTIALLY ON A LONGER TIMELINE, BUT, BUT ALSO NOT THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER ON SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT I'D LOVE TO GET ON THE BOOKS SOONER.
UH, SO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TONIGHT.
UH, APPRECIATE ALL THE TIME THAT YOU DEDICATE TO THIS CITY AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR HEARING FROM US.
IS THAT ALL THIS WE HAVE? YEAH.
WELL, LET'S GO AND GO INTO Q AND A, UM, AND SURE.
STILL HAVE FIVE AT THREE? YES, FIVE AT THREE, UNLESS, UM, WE HAVE OTHERS.
WE CAN CHANGE HIM IF WE NEED TO, BUT LET'S GO.
AND, UH, ANY COMMISSIONER'S FIRST QUESTION, MERIT TO THE POSTPONEMENT.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND, UH, TAKE A VOTE.
[00:55:03]
CHAIR.SO THE MOTION IS TO HEAR THE CASE TODAY.
UM, ANY OPPOSITION GOING VOTING ON THIS? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND PROCEED WITH THE VOTE.
UH, THIS ON THE DIAS AND HEARING, THIS IS DISCUSSION CASE.
UH, THAT'S EVERYONE VIRTUALLY.
SO WE'LL HEAR THAT ONE WE'LL, AND AS I SAID, WE'LL TAKE THAT ONE UP BEFORE ITEM 16.
UH, WELL, LET'S GOING BACK TO OUR ORDER.
I THINK THE NEXT ONE IS OUR FIRST DISCUSSION CASE.
UH, DOES THAT B HELP ME OUT HERE? IS THIS B 11?
[13. Historic zoning: C14H-2022-0099 - Delisle House; District 10 ]
OKAY.UH, MR. RIVERA, IS THAT ITEM B 13 CHECK COMMISSION WISE ON, I HEARD? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
WE'LL BEGIN WITH THAT PRESENTATION.
LET'S GO AND START WITH STAFF.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
THIS IS KIMBERLY COLLINS WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE IN THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
I'M MAKING THE STAFF REPORT ON ITEM 13, CASE NUMBER C ONE 40 H DASH 2022 DASH 0 99, THEILE HOUSE AT 2002 OR TWO.
TWO SCENIC DRIVE POST STAFF AND THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMEND THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FROM SF THREE, NP OR FAMILY RESIDENTS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING TO SF THREE H N P OR FAMILY RESIDENTS HISTORIC LANDMARK NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN COMBIN COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING.
THIS WAS A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE 10 MEMBERS PRESENT OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
THE CASES BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TODAY, BECAUSE THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A DEMOLITION APPLICATION FOR THE PROPERTY ARE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
ALL STRUCTURES OVER 45 YEARS OF AGE ARE ROUTED TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE FOR REVIEW.
STAFF RESEARCHED THE PROPERTY AND CONCLUDED IT MET THREE HISTORIC LANDMARK CRITERIA AND RECOMMENDED IT FOR HISTORIC ZONING.
ONLY TWO CRITERIA ARE REQUIRED FOR STAFF TO RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING.
THE THREE CRITERIA IT MEETS ARE ARCHITECTURE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS IN LANDSCAPE FUTURE.
THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AGREED RECOMMENDING THE HISTORIC ZONING BASED ON ARCHITECTURE, HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, AND LANDSCAPE FEATURES BY AGAIN, A UNANIMOUS VOTE OF 10 TO ZERO.
THERE IS A VALID PETITION AGAINST HISTORIC ZONING FILED BY THE OWNER'S AGENT.
THE BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION IS, AS FOLLOWED, IS AS FOLLOWS.
THE BUILDING IS A UNIQUE EXAMPLE OF VERNACULAR STRUCTURE REPRESENTING AN ARCHITECTURAL CURIOSITY OR ONE OF THE KIND.
BUILDING THE PRIMARY BUILDING IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF SPANISH ECLECTIC ARCHITECTURE WITH MODERN STYLE FAIR AND GRAINGER INFLUENCES.
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS A UNIQUE EXAMPLE OF ECLECTIC MID-CENTURY AND GOTHIC REVIVAL ARCHITECTURE.
IT FEATURES UNIQUE MANS BENDLE KEYSTONE THROUGHOUT.
IT APPEARS TO CONVEY ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE AS A ONE OF A KIND STRUCTURE.
IN AUSTIN, THE PRIMARY BUILDING AT 2002 SCENIC DRIVE KNOWN HISTORICALLY AS RIVER STREET OR RIVER AVENUE, IS A TWO STORY SPANISH ECLECTIC RESIDENCE WITH MODERN AND ECLECTIC ADDITIONS CONSTRUCTED DURING THE HISTORIC PERIOD.
IT IS CLAD AND STUCCO AND MASONRY AND KEPT WITH A COMPOUND HIP ROOF WITH DEEP EVES.
ADMINISTRATION INCLUDES MULTI LIGHT WOOD CASEMENT WINDOWS IRREGULARLY PLACED THROUGHOUT A CYLINDRICAL TURRET WITH A CRENELATED PARAPET AND ARCHED WINDOWS FLANK AND OPEN MASON PORCH.
THAT LEADS TO AN EXPANSIVE DESIGN LANDSCAPE.
THE SECONDARY BUILDING IS AN ECLECTIC GOTHIC REVIVAL COTTAGE.
IT IS TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT WITH AN ARCHED PALISADE, CEDAR SHAKE, ROOF, AND MASONRY CLADDING.
A TWO STORY TURRET WITH A FAUX CHECKERBOARD TRIM DOMINATES THE PRINCIPAL ELEVATION.
EACH ROUND ARCH INCLUDES A LIMESTONE KEYSTONE CAR BY FAME, LOCAL STONE WORKER PETER MANS BENDLE.
A RENOVATION WAS DESIGNED CIRCA 1946 TO 47 DURING THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE BY PROMINENT AUSTIN ARCHITECTS FAIR AND GRANGER, OFFICIALLY ESTABLISHED IN 1946.
FAIR AND GRANGER WAS ONE OF THE FIRST AND POSSIBLY MOST INFLUENTIAL MID-CENTURY MODERN ARCH ARCHITECTURAL FIRMS IN AUSTIN.
THE FIRM FLOURISHED WITH AN EXTENSIVE BODY OF WORK, INSISTING OF BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROJECTS.
THEY RECEIVED MULTIPLE AWARDS FOR THEIR WORK IN THE, IN THE MAGAZINE.
THE PROPERTY HAS SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS WITH BUILDER, ARCH, ENTREPRENEUR, AND OPTICIAN.
[01:00:02]
THE HOUSE AT 2002.SCENIC DRIVE CALLED RIVER STREET OR RIVER AVENUE BEFORE 1940 WAS CONSTRUCTED AROUND 1923 BY RAYMOND MAURICE DELLY IS HIS HOMESTEAD.
DELLY, THE SON OF HOUSTON ARCHITECT, THE SON OF A HOUSTON ARCHITECT, BUILT 16 OTHER HOUSES IN THE RIVER STREET AREA, WHILE ALSO WORKING AS AN OPTICIAN IN AUSTIN.
HE OWNED AND OPERATED THE AUSTIN OPTICAL COMPANY FROM THE EARLY 1920S UNTIL HIS RETIREMENT AROUND 1940.
HE WAS AN ACTIVE COMMUNITY MEMBER AS A MEMBER OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND LION'S CLUB.
HE WAS ONE OF THE 1927 INCORPORATORS WITH THE EARN NIGHT MANUFACTURING COMPANY.
EARN KNIGHT, A SYNTHETIC STONE MATERIAL CREATED BY AUSTINITE CF.
PAUL APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN USED IN SEVERAL LANDSCAPE FEATURES AND TERRACES AROUND THE PROPERTY.
DEL'S OTHER DESIGNS APPEAR TO REFLECT HIS UNIQUE FAIRYTALE COTTAGE AESTHETIC AND HIS OWN HOME IS A TESTAMENT TO HIS APPRECIATION FOR GOTHIC REVIVAL.
DETAILING DEL'S RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SIGNIFICANTLY CONTRIBUTED TO THE PATTERNS OF THE CITY BY BEING AN INNOVATIVE DESIGNER UTILIZING LOCAL ARTISANS I MATERIALS AND EARLY AND EARLY DEVELOPER OF THE WEST LAKE AUSTIN AREA.
LATER OCCUPANTS INCLUDED WILLIAM FOSTER AND THEN MR. AND MRS. KATIE SHOUTY AFTER THE SHOUTY FAMILY LOST A YOUNG SON WHILE LIVING AT THE PROPERTY IN 1945.
THEY SOLD THE HOUSE TO C H IN BOULDER, LATER HAS STATED THIS LATER FAMILY UNTIL 2 20 21.
ACCORDING TO TCAT RECORDS, CH SLATE WAS A LOCAL ATTORNEY AND LISA OF THE TAVERN UNTIL CIRCA 1953.
THE PROPERTY APPEARS TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT AND UNIQUE DESIGN LANDSCAPE WITH AESTHETIC AND HISTORICAL VALUE.
SOME LANDSCAPE FEATURES INCLUDE A TERRACE AND THE ARCHED BRIDGE AND BENCH, WHICH APPEARED TO BE INCORPORATE DELLYS OUR NIGHT MATERIAL.
THIS LOCAL AUSTIN BASED BUILDING MATERIAL IS RARE TODAY.
ADDITIONALLY, THE LANDSCAPE DESIGNED BY DELLYS, BY DELLYS SPECIFICALLY RELATES TO HIS ARCHITECTURAL VISION FOR THE HOUSE.
WITH MEANDERING WALKS AND EXPANSIVE LAWN AND AN EARLY SWIMMING POOL BUILD INTO THE HILLSIDE TOPOGRAPHY TO PROVIDE A RIVER VIEW.
ACCORDING TO RESEARCH, THIS PROPERTY IS LIKELY HOME TO THE EARLIEST KNOWN EXAMPLE OF FWA TECHNIQUE IN AUSTIN.
DUE TO THE USE OF THE EARN NIGHT ON THE PROPERTY IT'S PREDATING, IT PREDATES THE PREVIOUSLY EARLIEST KNOWN EXAMPLE BY 20 YEARS KNOWN AS THE B'S HOUSE IN EAST AUSTIN, WHICH WAS LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES IN 1998.
BOB LAW OR FALSE WOOD IS A TECHNIQUE WHERE CONCRETE STRUCTURES RESEMBLE RUSTIC OR ORGANIC FORMS OF WOOD.
THIS METHOD IS NOT COMMON IN TEXAS AND IS VERY RARE IN AUSTIN.
AND THE DELAL HOUSE REMAINS AN EXAMPLE OF BEAUTIFUL AND IMPRESSIVE.
THE DELAL HOUSE REMAINS A BEAUTIFUL AND IMPRESSIVE EXAMPLE OF MEXICAN INFLUENCED ARCHITECTURE AND CRAFTSMANSHIP IN WEST AUSTIN.
THERE IS A LEGACY OF HISTORIC SITES THAT HAVE BECOME DRAWS AND WORK WELL WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
EXAMPLES SUCH AS MAYFIELD PARK, LAGUNA GLORIA, MOUNT BONNELL, LION'S MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE, AND WALSH BOAT LANDING.
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION DOCUMENTS THAT HERITAGE TOURISM TRAVELERS STAY LONGER AND SPEND MORE THAN OTHER TRAVELERS.
THE CITY'S VISION AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS SPEAK TO THE IMPORTANCE OF CELEBRATING CREATIVITY AND RECOGNIZING PLACEMAKING.
AND THAT AUSTIN IS A PLACE THAT OF COMMUNITY VALUES ARE RECOGNIZED AND LEADERSHIP COMES FROM ITS CITIZENS.
I KNOW YOU'LL HEAR FROM SPEAKERS FROM BEFORE AND AGAINST, AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
SO WE'LL BEGIN WITH, UH, MS. MARY KA, UM, MS. KALE.
UM, UH, YOU'LL HAVE, UH, THREE MINUTES.
I'VE JUST, UH, BEEN PROVIDED A, UM, A REVISED, UH, SCHEDULE, UH, UH, SPEAKING ORDER.
[01:05:03]
THANK YOU ALL HEAR FROM MS. K, MS. KELLY, I HAVE THREE MINUTES.AND ALSO, OKAY, TELL ME, UH, WHEN YOU'RE PRESSING AND WE HAVE AN EXHIBIT FOR MS. KALE, TELL ME, UM, ANDREW, WHEN SHOULD I START? PARDON, PLEASE PROCEED.
I'M A GRAD STUDENT IN PUBLIC HISTORY AT TEXAS STATE, AND I'M CO-CHAIR OF THE AVO, EXCUSE ME, ADVOCACY COMMITTEE AT PRESERVATION AUSTIN, AND ALSO A VOLUNTEER AT MANY OTHER PLACES AROUND THE TOWN.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO SUPPORT HISTORIC ZONING FOR SCENIC DRIVE, THE DELLY HOUSE.
FIRST, THOUGH, I'D LIKE TO THANK THIS COMMISSION FOR YOUR SERVICE TO AUSTIN.
I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF TIME AND A LOT OF WORK.
AND ALSO HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
AUSTIN, UM, EXCUSE ME, HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE STAFF FOR THEIR HARD WORK AMIDST RECENT STAFFING CHALLENGES.
LITERALLY, THEY WERE AT 50% STAFFING AT ONE POINT THIS SUMMER.
SO, AND WITH EVERYTHING GOING ON IN AUSTIN, IT'S A LOT TO KEEP UP WITH.
UM, I'D ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT IF THE DELLY HOUSE DOES NOT RECEIVE HISTORIC ZONING, LIKE THE OTHER DEMOLITIONS IN THIS HIGH DEMO COUNCIL DISTRICT.
UM, IT ACCOUNTS FOR 17% OF THE DEMOS IN THE CITY.
I KNOW A LOT ABOUT DEMOLITION.
UM, IT WILL BE DUMPED, HOLD OFF AND DUMPED EAST OF I 35, WHERE ALL OF THE COUNTY LANDFILLS ARE LOCATED.
JUST MINUTES FROM THE B'S HOUSE, WHICH MS. COLLINS DISCUSSED AND MINUTES FROM SOME KIDS I TUTOR IN AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEX, WHICH JUST MAKES ME CRAZY.
UM, I APPLAUD THE HLC RECOMMENDATION FOR HISTORIC ZONING.
THIS WAS BASED ON CITY CODE REGARDING HISTORIC DESIGNATION CRITERIA, WHICH SHOULD BE IN THE EXHIBIT.
UM, THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOLLOWS STANDARDS IN THEIR CODE ESTABLISHED BY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE FOR NATIONAL REGISTER PROPERTIES ACCORDING TO CODE.
UM, AND MS. COLLINS WENT OVER SOME OF SOME OF THESE THINGS.
I'M NOT GONNA JUST READ IT VERBATIM FOR Y'ALL, BUT IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST 50 YEARS OLD AND HAVE A HIGH DEGREE OF INTEGRITY.
AND IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION, INTEGRITY MEANS IT'S ABILITY TO CONVEY ITS HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.
SO IT THINGS, IT'S THINGS LIKE LOCATION SETTING, DESIGN, MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP FEELING, AND ASSOCIATION.
THIS PROPERTY HAS ALL SEVEN OF THOSE.
UM, IT ALSO, AS MISS, UH, COLLINS SAID, IT HAS TO MAKE, UH, MEET TWO CRITERIA.
THIS HOUSE MEETS, THIS HOUSE MEETS THREE ARCHITECTURE, HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS AND LANDSCAPE FEATURES.
I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THE CITY CLOUD CODE INCLUDES ETHNIC FOLK ART OR VERNACULAR DESIGN ELEMENTS.
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT WE HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, KNOW THE NAME OF A FAMOUS ARCHITECT ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
ALTHOUGH LYLE'S FATHER WAS A WELL KNOWN ARCHITECT, UM, A BUILDER OR A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT EVEN, UM, OR THAT THE DESIGN ELEMENTS HAVE TO BE FAMOUS.
IT'S SIMPLY HONORING THAT LOCAL QUALITY.
UM, IT'S GOT THE LOCAL STONE WITH THESE VERNACULAR TECHNIQUES THAT MS. COLLINS DISCUSSED.
MOST IMPORTANT SCENIC DRIVE TELLS A DISTINCT AUSTIN STORY, A STORY OF MULTICULTURAL ARTISTRY THAT CONNECTS EAST AUSTIN AND THE B'S HOUSE TO WEST AUSTIN WHERE THIS ARCHITECTURE BECAME PREVALENT.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. BROWN.
MR. BROWN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M A, I, UH, AM AN ARCHEOLOGIST AND A HISTORIAN AND HAVE, UH, UH, NEARLY HALF CENTURY WORKING IN TEXAS.
IN THOSE AREAS, I'D WRITTEN A LETTER SUPPORTING THE HEAD HISTORIC DESIGNATION FOR 2002 SCENIC.
THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE CASE MATERIALS AND YOU CAN READ.
UM, I WILL ONLY REPEAT DIRECTLY HERE THAT IN NEARLY 50 YEARS OF WORKING WITH HISTORIC CULTURAL RESOURCES IN TEXAS, I HAVE SEEN FEW 20TH CENTURY HOME SITES AS DESERVING OF PROTECTION AS THE DELAL HOUSE.
A UNIQUE RESOURCE THAT IS CLEARLY ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.
AND WHERE IT'S SO LISTED, IT SHOULD EQUALLY BE ELIGIBLE FOR STATE LANDMARK STATUS AS WELL, POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE FOR NATIONAL AND STATE LISTENING.
IT IS INCONCEIVABLE THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR HISTORIC ZONING WOULD BE DENIED BY THOSE CHARGED WITH LAYING OUT A SUSTAINABLE ROADMAP FOR OUR AUSTIN'S FUTURE.
A FUTURE STRIPPED OF ITS HISTORY IS DYSTOPIAN AT BEST.
[01:10:01]
THE DELIO HOUSE'S ROCK STYLE, A RELATIVELY RARE LOOK IN TODAY'S AUSTIN WAS NOT UNCOMMON IN THE AREA OF ITS CONSTRUCTION, AND SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN THE STYLE OF CHOICE IN THIS EARLY 20TH CENTURY LAKESIDE FISHING CAMP COMMUNITY.THE RARITY OF THE ST MASSIVE STONE CONSTRUCTION STYLE, BUT THE ADDITION OF THE ODDLY JUXTAPOSED WHIMSICAL AND DECOR ELEMENTS MAKE IT ONE OF THE MOST UNIQUE HOUSES STILL STANDING TODAY FROM THAT ERA IN AUSTIN.
THE SURROUNDING LANDSCAPE IS ALSO U UNIQUE IN BOTH ITS SCALE AND LAYOUT.
THERE ARE A FEW EXAMPLES OF SUCH EXTENSIVE EARLY 20TH CENTURY LANDSCAPING SURVIVING IN TODAY'S AUSTIN, SUGGESTING THAT THIS ALONE MIGHT JUSTIFY AS PRESERVATION AS WE LOOK AHEAD TO THE 21ST CENTURY WITH ITS DEMANDS FOR LOT SIZE REDUCTION, MORE HOUSES, IT WILL BECOME INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT TO SAVE PAST HISTORIC RESOURCES.
BUT IF HISTORIC PROPERTIES IS LIKE THE DOIL HOUSE MEET US STATE AND CITY OF AUSTIN CRITERIA FOR PROTECTION, AND AN ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BANDED TOGETHER TO SAVE IT, I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS PANEL WOULD VOTE FOR PRESERVATION INSTEAD, INSTEAD OF ALLOWING AN OUT-OF-STATE DEVELOPER WITH ZERO INTEREST IN AUSTIN'S HISTORY TO DEMOLISH A BEAR HISTORIC TREASURE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
WELL NOW HEAR FROM MICAH KING, MR. KING, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M THE POLICY AND OUTREACH PLANNER FOR PRESERVATION AUSTIN, OUR CITY'S LEADING NONPROFIT DEDICATED TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF PRESERVATION AUSTIN IN SUPPORT OF HISTORIC ZONING FOR 2002, SCENIC DRIVE, A PROPERTY WHOLE UNIQUE ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE.
A BODY EMBODY A DISTINCTLY AUSTIN STORY THAT MUST BE PRESERVED.
AS WE KNOW, BUILDING BUILDER RAYMOND DELLY WAS INVOLVED WITH THE EARN NIGHT COMPANY, WHICH PRODUCED WHIMSICAL LANDSCAPE OBJECTS LIKE THOSE SEEN AT THE PROPERTY.
EARN NIGHT STAFF WERE TRAINED BY MEXICAN ARTISANS IN THE ARTI FOA.
A TRADITIONAL STYLE OF TINTED CONCRETE THAT IS ESPECIALLY RARE IN TEXAS.
THE MOST PROMINENT EXAMPLE OF THIS STYLE, AS WE HEARD EARLIER, IS THE B'S HOUSE FROM 1947 IN EAST AUSTIN, BUILT IN 1923, 2002.
SCENIC DRIVE IS LIKELY HOME TO THE EARLIEST KNOWN EXAMPLE OF THIS STYLE IN AUSTIN, TELLING A STORY THAT SPANS THE CITY, EAST AND WEST.
WE HEARD THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE CITE THE EQUITY BASED HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN IN JUSTIFYING WHY 2002 SCENIC SHOULD NOT BE DESIGNATED DURING THE LC MEETING THAT THIS WAS HEARD AT.
WE AGREE THAT MORE UNDERREPRESENTED HERITAGE SITES IN AUSTIN SHOULD BE DESIGNATED, BUT DEMOLISHING THIS PROPERTY FOR WHAT WILL INEVITABLY BE A LARGER AND EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE HOME DOES NOT AMOUNT EQUITY, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE KNOW AS MAR HAD SAID, THAT THE DEBRIS FROM THIS DEMOLITION WILL BE HAULED OFF TO THE LANDFILLS POLLUTING EAST AUSTIN DESIGNATING THIS PROPERTY.
HISTORIC IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESERVE A TRULY UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL TREASURE IN THIS CITY.
IT IS FOR THOSE REASONS THAT WE URGE YOU TO SUPPORT HISTORIC ZONING FOR 2002 SCENIC DRIVE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MISS FIGHT RACHEL.
MISS RACHEL, IF YOU'LL SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
I HAVE ONE MINUTE, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
MY NAME IS RACHEL FE AND I'M A PROFESSIONAL ARCHEOLOGIST AND CULTURAL HISTORIAN, AND I'M ALSO A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF CITY WHO'S WATCHED WITH SOME DISMAY THE FLOW, NEGLECT AND DISMANTLING OF HISTORIC BUILT ENVIRONMENT.
AND SO I'M HERE TO URGE THE COMMISSION TO VOTE FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF 2002 SCENIC DRIVE, WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT AND UNIQUE HISTORICAL ASSET FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
AND HERE'S WHY THESE RESOURCES TELL IMPORTANT STORIES THAT CONNECT PEOPLE TO PLACES, CREATE COMMUNITY PRIDE AND IDENTITY.
IN THE CASE OF SCENIC DRIVE, THE HOUSE AND THE GROUNDS WERE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF A FIRST WAVE OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED LAKE AUSTIN SCENIC DRIVE IS CALLED SCENIC DRIVE FOR A REASON BECAUSE IT WAS, IT WAS BUILT IN THE EARLY 20TH CENTURY AS A SCENIC AUTOMOBILE DRIVE THAT YOU COULD TAKE ALONG WHAT A NEW ROAD WHICH WAS ALONG, UM, UP TO MOUNT BONNELL BOWL CREEK IN THE HILL COUNTRY AND BEYOND.
SCENIC DRIVE WITH ONE EXPRESSION IN AUSTIN'S OWN ANSWER TO THE MASSIVE WAVE OF INTEREST IN RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND NATURAL PLACES THAT FLIP THE NATION IN THE EARLY 20TH CENTURY.
AND THE LAND SUBDIVISION ALONG THE LAKE AND THE HOUSES THAT CAME AFTERWARDS IN THE 1920S WERE INTEGRAL TO THIS IDEA THAT YOU COULD BRING NATURE INTO EVERYDAY LIVES.
SO ARCHITECTURALLY, THE HOUSE IN THE GROUNDS ARE UNIQUE, UM, BUT ALSO FIRMLY WITH ROOTED WITHIN WHAT I LIKE TO CALL TEXAS' GILDED AGE VERNACULAR.
UM, IT'S A STYLE THAT WAS POPULARIZED BY HOMEGROWN ARCHITECTS
[01:15:01]
WHO WERE JUST GETTING THEIR START IN THE TWENTIES AND THIRTIES AND WHOSE EARLIEST HOUSES WERE IN ECLECTIC MASHUP OF MEDITERRANEAN ENGLISH INFLUENCES.SO I YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD ABOUT, UM, THESE HOMES WERE OFTEN MADE WITH LOCAL MATERIALS LIKE, UH, ROCK RUBBLE LIMESTONE, ROCK RUBBLE, AND SOMETIMES EVEN QUED ON SITE MISS MS FIGHT.
UH, GO AHEAD AND FINISH YOUR THOUGHTS.
I'M SORRY YOU COULDN'T HEAR THE BUZZER.
WERE DOWN TO OUR ONE MINUTE SPEAKERS, BUT I'M SO SORRY.
THIS IS ONE OF ITS TIME IS THE LAST OF ITS KIND AREA THAT HASN'T BEEN EXTENSIVELY ALTERED OR COMPLETELY RAISED, AND IT REPRESENTS A PERIOD OF JUT AND SOMEWHAT UNFETTERED ARCHITECTURAL CREATIVITY THAT PERSISTED AMONG ARKANSAS AND GRAD PEOPLE OF THE 1920S.
UM, IT'S REALLY A TRULY VERNACULAR STYLE, UM, FOR ALL THE REASONS THAT YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD.
SO PLEASE VOTE FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION ON THIS PROPERTY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM WALTER CARDWELL.
MR. CARDWELL, YOU HAVE A MINUTE NOTED.
MISS HOLLY REED, IF YOU'LL SELECT STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS, SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
GOOD EVENING PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
UM, HOLLY REED WITH THE WEST NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP, THE DEL DENIAL HOUSE OR THE ROCK HOUSE AT 2002.
SCENIC DRIVE IS ONE OF THE OLDEST REMAINING HOMES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.
IT IS A RARE SURVIVING REPRESENTATION OF BOSTON'S HISTORY DURING THE 1920S BUILT DURING THE EARLY GROWTH OF THE CITY, WESTWARD TOWARD THE RIVER.
THE HOMES CASTLE, LIKE CHARACTER, IMAGINATIVE ARCHITECTURE, ONE OF A KIND ARTISTIC STONE CARVINGS.
THE CRAFTSMANSHIP AND THE LANDSCAPING ARE TRULY UNIQUE TO THIS STRUCTURE, AND THEY ALIGNED THE CITY'S CRITERIA FOR A HISTORIC LA LANDMARK.
PLEASE STUDY CAREFULLY THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE DETAILS AND AMAZING CRAFTSMANSHIP THROUGHOUT THIS HOME.
YOU WILL SEE ANIMALS AND FACES CARVED INTO THE KEY STONES OVER THE ARCHES.
YOU'LL SEE A TURRET WITH A STONE STAIRCASE.
THE LANDSCAPING HAS STONE STEPS, BRIDGES AND WALKWAYS THAT INCORPORATE THE SURROUNDING NATURAL ELEMENTS OF TREES, HILLS, AND THE LAKE INTO THE DESIGN.
THIS IS AN IRREPLACEABLE TREASURE OF A HOME, AND IT GIVES US AN EYE INTO THE AUSTIN OF THE PAST.
LOSING THE HOME TO DEMOLITION WOULD BE A TRAGIC LOSS OF HISTORY TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO OUR CITY.
SO ON BEHALF OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, I ASKED, DID YOU PLEASE SUPPORT THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, THE CITY STAFF AND PRESERVATION AUSTIN FOR HISTORIC ZONING AT 2002 SCENIC DRIVE.
WELL NOW HEAR FOR MR. BLAKE TO CHAIR SHAW VICE CHAIR HEMPLE FELLOW LAND COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS BLAKE TALLETT AND I'M HERE BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING.
NOT ONLY AS A NEIGHBOR TO THIS PROPERTY, BUT ALSO IN MY CAPACITY AS MAYOR ADLERS APPOINTED TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
DURING MY SEVEN YEAR TENURE ON THE COMMISSION, I HAVE SEEN NUMEROUS, POTENTIALLY HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANT PROPERTIES ALL OVER THE CITY GIVEN DEMOLITION PERMITS, EAST SIDE, SOUTH SIDE, NORTH SIDE, WEST SIDE.
IT'S AN UNRAVELING NUMBER, COMMON AUSTIN HISTORIC FABRIC, AND IT'S CONTINUALLY ONGOING.
I'M ASKING YOU TONIGHT THAT YOU SUPPORT THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION OF THE HLC, THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION TO RESUME REZONE THIS PROPERTY HISTORIC AND PASS ALONG TO THE CITY COUNCIL, A UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION OF HISTORIC ZONING.
THE NEIGHBORS AND I ARE ASKING THAT A MESSAGE BE SENT THAT PROPERTIES THAT TELL THE HISTORIC NARRATIVE OF OUR CITY CAN AND SHOULD BE PRESERVED.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THIS COMMUNITY.
NOW WILL HEAR FROM, UH, THE OPPOSITION BEGINNING WITH MR. MICHAEL WHELAN.
MR. WHELAN, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER FOR, UH, BEAR WITH ME JUST ONE SECOND.
WE'LL HEAR FROM MS. HLA VK FOR ONE MINUTE.
[01:20:14]
GOOD EVENING.THANK YOU FOR BEING ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I'M A NEIGHBOR OF THE PROPERTY AT 2000 AND THEN TO SCENIC.
WHEN I RECEIVED THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC OF THE PUBLIC HEARING DEMOLITION, I SAID, HOW COULD ANYBODY BUY THIS PROPERTY WITH THE INTENT OF DESTROYING IT? I THINK IT'S AN ARCHITECTURAL TREASURE, AND I'VE BEEN TRYING, EVERY DAY I HAVE THIS, I SAY TO MYSELF, HOW CAN IT POSSIBLY BE DESTROYED? IT'S JUST AN INCREDIBLE PROPERTY.
I'M GOING TO READ EXCERPTS OF A LETTER FROM DEREK BAR SINSKI, WHO'S WITH THE ATLANTIS ARCHITECTS, AND HE SAYS, WHAT I WANT TO SAY MUCH BETTER THAN I DO.
HE AND I ARE IN FAVOR OF HISTORIC ZONING DESIGNATION FOR 2002.
HE SAID, THE BUILDINGS AND THE GROUNDS ARE WHAT? GO AHEAD AND FINISH YOUR THOUGHTS.
PARDON? IF YOU CAN GIVE US KIND OF YOUR CLOSING THOUGHTS.
HE SAID THE BUILDINGS AND THE GROUNDS ARE WELL WORN, BUT INTACT.
EXAMPLES OF AUSTIN'S PAST THAT CANNOT BE REPLICATED OR UNDERSTOOD IF THE ORIGINAL BUILDINGS ARE DEMOLISHED.
I JUST WANNA SAY I CONTACTED SOMEBODY FROM THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
I SENT HIM PHOTOS, UM, WARTS AND ALL.
AND HE, HE SAID IT WAS AN EXCEPTIONAL, HE'S NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
WHY DON'T WE DO THIS? I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE INTERESTING INFORMATION.
WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS OF YOU LATER.
NOW WE HERE FOR MR. MICHAEL WHALING FOR FIVE MINUTES.
UH, MICHAEL LAN ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER, THERE IS A OWNER OPPOSITION ON FILE, UM, WHICH OBVIOUSLY IMPACTS THE CASE.
THIS CASE SUMMARIZES, EXCUSE ME.
THIS CASE ARGUES THAT 2002 SCENIC IS HISTORIC, A STATUS THAT WOULD GRANT A PERPETUAL TAX BREAK TO THIS RELATIVELY ISOLATED LAKE FRONTIER TOWN PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, THE RATIONALE FOR HISTORIC STATUS IS BASED ON PROXIES FOR WEALTH, NOT ON HISTORIC IMPACT, AND IT AVOIDS TOUGH DISCUSSIONS ABOUT AUSTIN'S PAST.
OUR PRESENTATION WILL COVER THREE MAIN AREAS.
FIRST, I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH THE CHANGING RATIONALE FOR HISTORIC ZONING, AND THEN SUBSEQUENT SPEAKERS WILL COVER THE POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THIS CASE.
AND THIRD, THE PROPERTIES CONDITION.
THE RATIONALE FOR HISTORIC STATUS FOCUSES ON TWO PEOPLE.
COTTON HUGHES SLATER, IT'S LONGTIME OWNER AND RAYMOND DEL AISLE, THE DEVELOPER.
HOWEVER, THESE MEN ARE NOT NOTED FOR ANY CIVIC PHIL, PHILANTHROPIC OR HISTORIC IMPACT, OR REALLY FOR ANY SACRIFICES MADE FOR THE BROADER COMMUNITY.
INSTEAD, THEY ARE INCLUDED ONLY BASED ON THEIR JOBS AND SOURCE OF INCOME PROXIES FOR WEALTH AND AFFLUENCE.
IN 20TH CENTURY AUSTIN, THE CASE NOTES THAT SLATER WAS A LAWYER AND A PROMINENT LANO FAMILY FROM A PROMINENT LANO FAMILY WHERE HE OWNED A RANCH WITH HIS FATHER, JEFFERSON DAVIS SLATER SENIOR, AND HIS BROTHER ERIC SLATER AND JEFFERSON DAVIS SLATER JUNIOR.
IT ALSO NOTED THAT HE CO-OWNED THE TAVERN STARTING AROUND 1953 FOR CONTEXT.
ACCORDING TO PRESERVATION AUSTIN, DURING THIS PERIOD, SEGREGATION AND BARS AND RESTAURANTS WAS WIDESPREAD AND QUOTE, AN ACTIVIST BEGAN RESPONDING IN THE LATE 1950S THROUGH SIT-INS AND PROTEST THIS PRESSURE WORKED AND PRESERVATION AUSTIN REPORTS THAT IN 1958 RESTAURANT TOUR IN FUTURE MAYOR HARRY AIKEN BECAME THE FIRST WHITE ESTABLISHMENT TO VOLUNTARILY INTEGRATE SLATER'S FAMILY INDICATES THAT SLATER OWNED THE TAVERN AT THIS TIME, AND FOR ABOUT TWO MORE YEARS UNTIL ABOUT 1960.
WHILE WE DO NOT HAVE A LIST OF INTEGRATED DINING AS OF 1960, WE DO IN FACT HAVE ONE AS OF JULY, 1963, BY WHICH TIME 105 ESTABLISHMENTS HAD PUBLICLY COMMITTED TO INTEGRATE.
THE TAVERN WAS NOT ON THAT LIST.
THE FIRST REPORT FOR THIS CASE WAY BACK SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, SOLELY FOCUSED ON SLATER AS THE PRIMARY PERSON ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPERTY.
AFTER THIS TAVERN INFORMATION CAME TO LIGHT, HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENT CASE REPORTS PROCEEDED TO DEEMPHASIZE SLATER AND SIDESTEP THESE UNCOMFORTABLE HISTORIC TOPICS.
INSTEAD, THE CASE SUDDENLY INTRODUCED AN ENTIRELY NEW FIGURE WHO WAS NOT EVEN MENTIONED A SINGLE TIME IN THE FIRST CASE REPORT, RAYMOND DEL IS.
BUT THE RATIONALE FOR DELL IS ALSO FOCUSED ON HIS PAST WELL, INCLUDING A SIDE INVESTMENT
[01:25:01]
IN A FAILED MANUFACTURING VENTURE CALLED AITE, WHERE HE WAS ONE OF THE MEN WHO OWN STOCK IN THE COMPANY WHEN IT FIRST OPENED.THE OTHER RATIONALE FOR DELL IS, IS WHAT FIRSTHAND SOURCES REFERRED TO AS HIS PROFITABLE HOBBY END OF DEVELOPING ARCHITECTURALLY GRAND TERRY TOWNHOUSE ALONG LAKE OS AUSTIN.
AFTER ABANDONING THE ORIGINAL SLATER RATIONALE, THE CASE MANAGER SETTLED ON DELL AL'S SIDE INVESTMENTS AS A DEVELOPER.
BUT THAT RAISES OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT PRECEDENT.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF HOUSING WAS BUILT BY DEVELOPERS SETTING THE PRECEDENT THAT THIS IS AN ACCEPTABLE RATIONALE FOR HISTORIC STATUS STRETCHES, THE UNDERSTANDING OF HISTORIC SO MUCH THAT YOU COULD APPLY IT TO BASICALLY ANYTHING YOU WANTED.
IN OTHER WORDS, ALTHOUGH I, I DON'T THINK THIS WOULD HAPPEN WHILE I'M ALIVE, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE DAY WHEN THE CITY STARTS DESIGNATING PROPERTIES AS HISTORIC BECAUSE, QUOTE, PROMINENT LOCAL LAWYER AND MICHAEL WAYLAND HANDLED THE ZONING CASE.
IT WOULD BE ONE THING IF LY HAD A HISTORIC IMPACT, BUT THE CASE REPORT DOES NOT MAKE THAT ARGUMENT, AND THE HISTORIC SOURCES DO NOT PROVIDE THAT EVIDENCE.
INSTEAD, WE LOCATED TWO MAIN EFFORTS THAT DEL AL DID ACTUALLY ENGAGE IN AT CITY COUNCIL.
ONE IS THAT HE PETITIONED TO HAVE SCENIC DRIVE THE STREET THAT THIS PROPERTY IS ON, FORMALLY IS KNOWN AS RIVER AVENUE KEPT CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.
HE WANTED SCENIC DRIVE TO BE FULLY PRIVATE, ONLY AVAILABLE TO AFFLUENT LAKE AUSTIN HOMEOWNERS.
SECOND, HE GOT COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL TO PASS A RESOLUTION, GIVING HIM PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT A PRIVATE BOAT DOT.
THE, THESE WERE HIS MAIN, THESE WERE THE MAIN EFFORTS OF DEL AISLE AND THE ONLY WAY THAT HE APPEARED TO HAVE ENGAGED AT CITY COUNCIL.
MOST OF THE REMAINING REFERENCES TO ALLY ON THE HISTORIC RECORD EITHER RELATE TO HIS REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS OR TO HIS SOCIAL ENGAGEMENTS OR VACATIONS, SUCH AS THE ONE YOU SEE HERE ON THE SCREEN FROM A FLORIDA NEWSPAPER COVERING HIS 1943 VACATION ON A $40,000 HOUSEBOAT, WHICH FOR REFERENCE WOULD MAKE ALLY'S BOAT WORTH MORE THAN 10 TIMES THE MEDIAN AUSTIN HOME VALUE AT THE TIME.
IN 1943, THE ARTICLE NOTES THAT DEL A'S TRIP WAS QUOTE, RARE THINGS THESE DAYS DUE TO LIMITED FUEL SUPPLIES DURING WORLD WAR II, BUT THE DEL A WAS PERMITTED GAS FOR HIS TRIP FROM TEXAS TO FLORIDA AND BACK.
SO TO RECAP, THE RATIONALE HERE IS BASED ON PROXIES FOR PASS, WELL NOT ON HISTORIC IMPACT, AND APPROVING THIS RATIONALE, WHICH SET AN INCREDIBLY BROAD PRECEDENT THAT ONE COULD STRETCH TO JUSTIFY A HUGE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES ACROSS THE CITY.
WILL NOW HEAR FOR MR. MICHAEL GINI FOR THREE MINUTES, FOLLOWED BY APRIL BROWN FOR THREE MINUTES.
MICHAEL ALDINI ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER.
UH, THIS CASE BEFORE YOU TODAY CONTAINS SEVERAL IMPORTANT POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR EQUITY, FOR TAX CUTS, AND FOR WHAT THRESHOLD OF COMMUNITY BENEFIT A SITE SHOULD MEET IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY LANDMARK STATUS.
SO FIRST, EQUITY, AS YOU KNOW, THE CITY IS CURRENTLY REVIEWING ITS HISTORIC POLICIES AND PROCEDURES WITH AN EYE TOWARD EQUITY.
AND IN DOING SO, THEY'VE IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS THAT ARE BIASED IN FAVOR OF LANDMARKING AFFLUENT HOMES IN AFFLUENT AREAS, WHICH IN TURN HAS ENTITLED THOSE AFFLUENT AREAS TO A DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF HISTORIC TAX CUTS.
2002 SCENIC HAS YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THESE EQUITY ISSUES.
SO FOR INSTANCE, WE ONLY NOTED EARLIER THAT THE RATIONALE HERE IS BASED ON PROXIES FOR PAST WEALTH AND AFFLUENTS.
THE CITY HAS DIRECTLY RECOGNIZED THIS AS A PROBLEM STATING THAT ITS POLICY SET A THRESHOLD MORE LIKELY TO BE REACHED BY ARCHITECTURALLY GRAND BUILDINGS ASSOCIATED WITH WEALTHIER TYPICALLY WHITE PEOPLE.
THAT EXCERPT IS A PERFECT DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE BEFORE YOU TODAY.
AS A RESULT, A CITY REVIEW FOUND THAT AUSTIN'S LANDMARKING POLICIES AT CONCENTRATED LANDMARKS IN AREAS WITH A HIGHER SHARE OF WHITE RESIDENTS HIGHER INCOMES AND HIGHER PROPERTY VALUES.
THIS CASE WOULD FURTHER AGGRAVATE THOSE IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS. FOR CONTEXT, THE THE AFFLUENT TERRY TOWN NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THIS SITE IS LOCATED ALREADY AS A HIGH CONCENTRATION OF LANDMARKS AT ABOUT 4.4 LANDMARKS PER SQUARE MILE OR 13 IN TOTAL.
SO IN ADDITION, ADDITION TO LACKING A COMPELLING HISTORIC RATIONALE, 2002 SCENIC WOULD FURTHER REINFORCE SYSTEMIC INEQUITIES THAT THE CITY ITSELF HAS IDENTIFIED.
IT WOULD ALSO ENTITLE THIS TERRYTOWN PROPERTY TO A PERPETUAL TAX CUT ESTIMATED AT A ROUGHLY 20% TAX CUT ON CITY TAXES.
AND FOR REFERENCE, THE VALUE OF JUST THIS TAX CUT ALONE IS WORTH ONE AND A HALF TIMES WITH THE AVERAGE NONS SENIOR HOMEOWNER PAYS IN THEIR ENTIRE PROPERTY TAX BILL TO THE CITY.
BUT IT'S ACTUALLY WORSE THAN THAT WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THE STATE TAX CAP ON PROPERTY TAXES DOES NOT ACTUALLY INCLUDE REDEVELOPMENT.
SO AS YOU KNOW, NORMALLY FROM YEAR TO YEAR, THE STATE CAPS HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE A CITY CAN TAKE IN, BUT REDEVELOPMENT IS EXEMPTED FROM THAT CAP.
SO WHEN A SITE REDEVELOPS, THE CITY IS ABLE TO CAPTURE ALL OF THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE WITHOUT A CAP AT ALL.
AND BY LANDMARKING THIS PROPERTY, HOWEVER, THE CITY WOULD PASS UP ON ALL THAT ADDITIONAL REVENUE, A LOST VALUE, WE ESTIMATE AT OVER 40% OF THE TAX POTENTIAL AFTER REDEVELOPMENT.
SO LET'S STEP BACK AND FOLLOW THIS LOGIC TO ITS CONCLUSION.
THE HISTORIC RATIONALE IN THIS CASE IS
[01:30:01]
BASED ON PROXIES FOR PAST WEALTH.AND IF WE USE THAT RATIONALE TO LANDMARK THIS PROPERTY AND THEN CITY POLICIES USE THAT LANDMARK STATUS TO DELIVER MEANINGFUL TAX CUTS, THEN WE HAVE EFFECTIVELY, IF UNINTENTIONALLY MADE PAST WEALTH, A POLICY JUSTIFICATION FOR FUTURE TAX BREAKS.
WE KNOW FROM THE CITY'S OWN REVIEW THAT THAT HAS BEEN THE EFFECT OF OUR POLICIES IN THE PAST.
AND IN THIS CASE, WE ARE ASKING THIS BODY TO SET A PRECEDENT THAT WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN CORRECTING THOSE ISSUES RATHER THAN DOUBLING DOWN.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. BROWN FOR THREE MINUTES, FOLLOWED BY DENNIS MURPHY DUFFY FOR THREE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING, APRIL BROWN ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER.
AS MICHAEL MENTIONED, LANDMARKING WOULD BOTH ENTITLE THIS CHERRYTOWN PROPERTY TO A PERPETUAL TAX BREAK AND LIMIT ITS OVERALL TAX POTENTIAL FOR THE CITY.
SO ONE OF THE POLICY QUESTIONS BEFORE YOU TODAY IS, IS THIS TAX BREAK APPROPRIATE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE? AND WHAT BENEFIT WOULD THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY ACTUALLY GET AN EXCHANGE FOR GRANTING THIS TAX BREAK? ULTIMATELY, WE BELIEVE THAT THERE'S LITTLE TO NO BENEFIT FOR THE BROADER AUSTIN COMMUNITY AND ONLY LIMITED BENEFIT WITHIN TERRYTOWN BECAUSE THIS SITE IS NOT PHYSICALLY OR VISUALLY ACCESSIBLE.
SO FIRST, IN TERMS OF THE BROADER CITY, THE SITE IS LOCATED ON A RELATIVELY ISOLATED INACCESSIBLE TERRYTOWN STREET WITH NO TRANSIT SERVICE.
UH, TO QUANTIFY THIS, WE LOOKED AT THE DISTANCE OF PUBLIC TRANSIT FOR EVERY SINGLE HISTORIC LANDMARK CASE COUNCIL HAS APPROVED OVER THE PAST DECADE AND FOUND THAT 2002 SCENIC WOULD BE NEARLY FOUR TIMES FARTHER AWAY FROM TRANSIT THAN THE MEDIAN.
AS A RESULT, THIS SITE IS ONLY, IS REALLY ONLY GENERALLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TERRYTOWN AREA.
SO FOR INSTANCE, WE DID TRAFFIC COUNTS AND FOUND THAT SOMEONE WALKED OR BIKED PAST THIS SITE ABOUT 217 TIMES OVER THE COURSE OF AN ENTIRE WEEKEND.
SO EVEN IF WE ASSUME THAT ALL OF THESE TRIPS ARE UNIQUE TRIPS AND THAT THE UNIQUE, AND THAT THE NUMBERS WERE LOW, FOR SOME REASON OR ANOTHER, THAT IS STILL A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE BROADER TERRYTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND NEXT SLIDE, THE COUNCIL DISTRICT AS A WHOLE AND OF THE BROADER CITY, WHICH WOULD BE 10 TIMES THE SIZE OF THE COUNCIL DISTRICT.
SO ANY VALUE THIS SITE MIGHT HAVE IS HIGHLY LOCALIZED TO JUST THIS SPECIFIC TERRYTOWN AREA.
AND EVEN HERE, THE VALUE IS LIMITED AS THE PROPERTY IS FULLY PRIVATE AND IS ORIENTED TOWARDS THE LAKE MEANINGFULLY REMOVED FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND PUBLIC VIEW, AS SHOWN ON THE NEXT SLIDE HERE.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE, DURING MUCH OF THE YEAR WHEN THE PROPERTY'S LANDSCAPING IS IN FULL BLOOM, THIS BUILDING WILL BE MEANINGFULLY OBSTRUCTED.
BUT EVEN IN THE WINTER WHEN SOME OF THESE TREES ARE MORE BARE, EVEN THEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT IS ABOUT A HUNDRED FEET AWAY BECAUSE THE HOUSE ITSELF FRONTS THE LAKE RATHER THAN THE STREET.
AND OTHER WORDS, ONE WOULD NEED TO TRESPASS ONTO PRIVATE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO ACTUALLY GET A GOOD CLEAR LOOK AT THIS STRUCTURE.
SO BACK TO MY ORIGINAL POLICY QUESTION.
DOES THIS CASE OFFER SUFFICIENT BENEFIT TO JUSTIFY DESIGNATING IT AS THE 14TH LANDMARK IN AN ALREADY LANDMARK RICH NEIGHBORHOOD AND TIDING IT TO A PERPETUAL TAX BREAK GIVEN HOW INACCESSIBLE THE STRUCTURE IS, WE BELIEVE THE ANSWER IS NO.
AND WE ASK YOU TO VOTE AGAINST LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND AGAINST A PERPETUAL TAX CUT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM DENNIS DUFFY FOR THREE MINUTES, FOLLOWED BY AARON MONTOYA FOR ONE MINUTE.
MY NAME IS, UH, DENNIS DUFFY, AND I'M A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND I'VE, UH, ASSESSED THE, THE STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS AT THE SITE AND I VISITED FIVE TIMES AND MOST RECENTLY WITH COMMISSIONER.
SHE, UH, IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, UM, THE SITE HAS A NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS THAT WILL LIKELY NECESS STATE DEMOLITION, ORDER INSURER SAFE, AND HAVE HABITABLE DWELLING.
EVEN IN THE EVENT THAT SOMEONE IS INCLINED TO DO AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO PRESERVE THESE STRUCTURES, THEY WOULD STILL LIKELY FIRST NEED TO BE DECONSTRUCTED IN ORDER TO RESOLVE THESE IS ISSUES.
SO EVEN IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE STRUCTURAL PRESERVATION IS A VIABLE OPTION.
THE MESO REVOLVES AND BOTH THE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY STRUCTURES ARE NOT ADEQUATE FOR LOAD BEARING.
AND THEIR REUSE AS A NON LOAD BEARING VENEER IS NOT PRACTICAL.
THE FOUNDATION SHOWS SIGNS OF MOVEMENT THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED.
TYPICALLY, UH, HOMES OF THIS ERA HAVE RUBBLE FOUNDATIONS, WHICH, UH, IF THAT'S CONFIRMED TO BE THE CASE HERE, THE MASONRY WALLS WILL NEED TO COME DOWN IN ORDER TO CREATE A STABLE FOUNDATION.
THESE STRUCTURES HAVE NOT BEEN INHABITED FOR SOME TIME, AND THE WOOD ROOF FRAMING IS ROTTED, UH, FROM WATER INTRUSION FOR A PROLONGED PERIOD OF TIME THAT I BELIEVE PREDATES THE CURRENT OWNER, WHICH I THINK IS OWNED FOR ABOUT A YEAR.
UH, THE STRUCTURE SHOWS SIGNS OF REPEATED ROT IN THE FLOOR, JO, THEY WERE REPAIRED ONCE IT'S COME BACK.
UH, THERE'S OBVIOUS REASONS FOR WHY THAT WATER KEEPS COMING IN, UM, AND IT DEALS WITH THE NEXT ITEM.
THE SECONDARY UNIT, UM, UH, IS BUILT DIRECTLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE, ROUGHLY 10 FEET BELOW THE NEIGHBOR'S DRIVEWAY.
WITHOUT A RETAINING WALL, THE ROCK CUT IS VISIBLE INSIDE THE STRUCTURE.
UH, THE CONDITION IS AS STRANGE AS IT SOUNDS AND IT MUST BE REMEDIED.
[01:35:01]
UH, BUILDING A PROPER RETAINING WALL ON THE PROPERTY LINE WITH THE BUILDING IN THE WAY IS NOT PRACTICAL.THEREFORE, YOU WOULD NEED TO REMOVE THE BUILDING IN ORDER TO FIX THIS PROBLEM.
AGAIN, IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, AND BASED ON WHAT I'VE SEEN, UH, THE SITE HAS MANY OBVIOUS PROBLEMS THAT LIKELY HAVE NO RELIABLE SOLUTIONS WITHOUT COMPLETE DEMOLITION.
EVEN IF YOU'RE INCLINED TO SALVAGE THE STRUCTURES, YOU WOULD NEED TO DECONSTRUCT THEM AND THEN RECONSTRUCT THEM IN ORDER TO MAKE THEM SAFE.
BUT AT THAT POINT, YOU'VE EFFECTIVELY RECREATING A STRUCTURE RATHER THAN PRESERVING IT.
WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM MR. AMAN TOYO.
FOR ONE MINUTE, I FOLLOWED BY WILL CARDWELL FOR ONE MINUTE.
I'M AARON MONTOYA FROM RYAN STREET ARCHITECTS.
I'M AN ARCHITECT WORKING WITH THE OWNER ON THIS CASE.
AS AN ARCHITECT, I HAVE A DEEP APPRECIATION FOR OLD BUILDINGS AND I CAN SYMPATHIZE WITH THE INSTINCT TO PRESERVE DILAPIDATED STRUCTURES THAT EXHIBIT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CHARM.
BUT I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT CHARM ISN'T A QUALIFICATION FOR HISTORIC LANDMARKING.
THE CASE REPORT ARGUES THAT THIS STRUCTURE IS HISTORIC BECAUSE IT WAS DEVELOPED BY AN OPTICIAN NAMED RAYMOND DELLY.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE THAT DELAL WOULD'VE SEEN WHEN HIS WORKERS COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION IN THE 1920S BECAUSE A COUPLE OF DECADES LATER, NEW OWNER CH SLATER, HIRED A MODERNIST ARCHITECT TO REMODEL THE HOUSE, WHICH FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED THE WAY THE STRUCTURES EXPERIENCED AND NOT NECESSARILY IN A GOOD WAY.
THE 1940S REMODEL ADDITION TRIES, BUT ULTIMATELY FAILS TO BLEND IN WITH WORK.
THAT, IN MY OPINION, IS NOT THAT ARCHITECTURAL FIRM'S FINEST HOUR TO CONCLUDE.
UH, ACCORDING TO THE STAFF REPORT AND PRESERVATION AUSTIN, THE PRIMARY REASON FOR MEETING LANDSCAPE CRITERIA IS THE ALLEGED USE OF RITE AND FULL LOSS STRUCTURES.
THIS IS THE MOST REALLY FALSE.
THERE IS NO OCCURRENCE OF ANY OF THESE MATERIALS OR ELEMENTS ON THE SITE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WHEN I'LL HEAR FROM WALTER CODWELL FOR ONE MINUTE.
I'M AN ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY WITH ARMEN BROWN ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER.
AT ITS CORE, WE BELIEVE THIS CASE IS ABOUT THREE MAIN POLICY QUESTIONS.
FIRST IS A RATIONALE BASED ON PROXIES FOR PAST WEALTH RATHER THAN ON HISTORIC IMPACT SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY HISTORIC ZONING.
SECOND, WOULD THIS PRIVATE PROPERTY, WHICH IS NOT PHYSICALLY OR VISUALLY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC, OFFER SUFFICIENT VALUE AS A LANDMARK, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THIS FACT THAT THE STRUCTURE'S POOR CONDITION WOULD LIKELY NECESSITATE RECONSTRUCTION.
AND THIRD, DOES THIS CASE JUSTIFY TITLING THIS PROPERTY IN A MEANINGFUL PERPETUAL TAX BREAK IN AN AREA THAT IS ALREADY, THAT ALREADY ENJOYS A HIGH CONCENTRATION OF EXISTING LANDMARKS? WE BELIEVE THE ANSWERS TO EACH OF THESE CRITICAL POLICY QUESTIONS IS NO, AND WOULD ASK YOU TO OPPOSE HISTORIC PLAN MARKING, EXCUSE ME, HISTORIC ZONING.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MICHAEL, AND WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER THEM.
CHAIR OF THE APPLICANT, OR IF FORGO FOR REBUTTAL.
THIS CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UH, HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, VICE CHAIR.
UH, SECOND OF MY COMMISSIONER OAR, THIS ONE TO GO VOTE.
UH, THIS ON THE DI AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN.
UM, JUST GONNA START WITH OUR QUESTIONS.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DO EIGHT, UH, AT FIVE.
WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE THEM ALL IF WE DON'T HAVE TO, BUT, UM, THIS MAY NEED A LITTLE, LITTLE MORE Q AND A.
UH, WHO WAS THE FIRST QUESTION? ANYONE? OH, THANK YOU.
YEAH, WE HAD A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, UH, TELLING US ABOUT HER CORRESPONDENCE WITH, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS SOMEONE AT THE NATIONAL PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES.
UM, I WAS JUST WONDERING IF SHE WAS STILL HERE, AND I'LL DONATE MY QUESTION TIME SO THAT SHE CAN TELL US MORE ABOUT THAT COMMUNICATION SHE HAD.
WAS THAT, UH, WAS THAT A MISS HOLLY? I'M TRYING.
WELL, I'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, I THINK FOR 40, 40 PLUS YEARS.
AND I DECIDED I WOULD CONTACT THEM, SEE WHETHER ANYBODY COULD PROVIDE ANY GUIDANCE IN HELPING PRESERVE THIS PROPERTY.
SO, UM, THEY GOT BACK TO ME AND IT WAS AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION.
UM, HE SAID, I SENT, HAD SENT HIM
[01:40:01]
PICTURES OF THE HOUSE, WARTS AND ALL, AND HE SAID TO ME, LOTS OF PEOPLE SEND US PICTURES, BUT WE'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS.THIS PROPERTY'S EXCEPTIONAL, REMARKABLE AND SHOULD BE PRESERVED.
AND THEN, UM, HE SAID HE WOULD WRITE A LETTER SUPPORTING IT, BUT THEN WHEN I RECONTACTED HIM, HE SAID THAT THEY REALLY DON'T SUPPORT INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES.
AND WHAT HE WAS EXPRESSING WAS HIS OPINION.
UM, AS SOMEBODY WHO'S WORKED FOR THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR A GOOD MANY YEARS, AND AS AN ORGANIZATION, THEY COULDN'T WRITE A LETTER.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE THAT LITTLE ATTEMPT ENDED UP.
SO ANYWAY, THAT'S THE WHOLE STORY.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? FOLLOW UP WITH THE REMAINING TIME? SURE.
UH, IF, IF I'VE GOT TIME, I, I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, WE SAW A VERY, VERY WELL PRODUCED AND LENGTHY PRESENTATION ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE OWNER AND, AND ALL THE REASONS WHY YOU DON'T THINK, OR WHY THE OWNER DOESN'T, WOULD RATHER TEAR THIS DOWN AND BUILD A NEW HOUSE.
UM, I, I'M JUST CURIOUS, I DIDN'T REALLY HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ABOUT THE HOUSE.
IT WAS MORE ABOUT DIGGING UP DIRT ON THE PREVIOUS OWNER AND, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO MAKE THE CASE THAT WEALTHY PEOPLE DON'T NEED MORE TAX BREAKS.
UM, BUT, BUT DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY RESPONSE TO THE FACT THAT WE'RE HEARING FROM ALL THESE GROUPS, WE'RE HEARING FROM STAFF, WE'RE HEARING FROM PROFESSIONALS, WE'RE HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THIS IS AN ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF PROPERTY AND STRUCTURE, UH, IN, IN AUSTIN AND, AND IN THEIR COMMUNITY.
I THINK THAT QUESTION WAS, UM, FOR MR. WAYLAND OR YOUR REP YEAH, FOR MR. WAYLAND WOULD BE GREAT.
MICHAEL WAYLAND ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT, THIS OPPORTUNITY.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX, UM, I THINK AS YOU HEARD FROM ARCHITECT, IT'S A BIT OF A MIS MISHMASH.
THERE'S A, A FUNDAMENTAL SPANISH ECLECTIC THING GOING ON.
UM, UNKNOWN ARCHITECT, WE KNOW WHO THE DEVELOPER WAS, HAVE OBVIOUSLY INDICATED THAT IS, UH, MR. DILE, UH, THE, UH, THERE WAS A REMODEL, AN IN, IT WAS MOSTLY INTERIOR, AND I THINK A COMMISSIONER, SHE SAW A, A BOX THAT WAS LAID ON TOP OF THAT MAIN BUILDING BY FAIR AND GRANGER.
UH, BUT OTHER THAN THAT BOX ON TOP AND THAT REMODEL, INTERIOR REMODEL, THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN SEE OF THE FAIR AND GRANGER PIECE.
UM, SO THAT BOX, I THINK, UH, MADE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE ECLECTIC IN TERMS OF, UH, THE HODGEPODGE.
I, I THINK THE ONE THING THAT WE'VE HEARD, UH, IS THERE ARE SOME STONE CARVINGS ON THE APARTMENT BUILDING THAT'S BUILT INTO THE, IN, UH, THE, THE CLIFF, THE, THE HILLSIDE, UH, THAT ALTHOUGH THEY CAN'T BE VIEWED DISTINCTLY FROM THE STREET, UH, THAT THEY'RE THERE.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE OFFERED THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION TO DO OUR BEST TO TAKE THOSE OUT AND MAKE THOSE AVAILABLE, UH, FOR DONATION TO PRESERVATION AUSTIN OR THE AUSTIN HISTORY CENTER.
BUT, UH, UNCLEAR, UH, I KNOW THERE'S SOME SPECULATION ABOUT WHO MAY HAVE BUILT, WHO MAY HAVE D UH, DONE THAT STONEWORK, BUT IT REALLY IS UNCLEAR WHO DID IT.
SO, DIRECT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, DON'T KNOW WHO THE ARCHITECT IS.
IT'S A MUCH DIFFERENT STRUCTURE THAN, UH, WAS BUILT, UH, BECAUSE OF KIND OF THIS BOXY EDITION ON TOP OF THE MAIN BUILDING, AN INTERIOR REMODEL.
THE, UH, AND IT IS AT BEST ECLECTIC.
DO DO I HAVE ANY MORE TIME CHAIR? I, THE LAST THING I WOULD ADD IS, UH, IN TERMS OF EXAMPLES OF STONE STRUCTURES, JUST LIKE, AND COMMISSIONER, SHE CAN SPEAK TO THIS LESS THAN 2, 3, 400 FEET AWAY, ARE SEVERAL OTHER EXAMPLES OF VERY SIMILAR STONE STRUCTURES THAT WE SAW WHEN WE WERE THERE.
ER, COX, SEE HOW THE BUZZER WENT OFF.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
LET'S START WITH COMMISSIONER POLITO AND THEN I'LL MOVE TO COMMISSIONER.
AND I ALSO HAD A QUESTION THAT, UH, MAYBE MR. WHELAN COULD ANSWER OR, UH, MS. BROWN, BUT I, I, AND I APPRECIATE THE, THE, UM, GETTING A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION ON THIS BEFORE OUR, UH, LAST POSTPONEMENT.
UM, I DO RECALL THE DISCUSSION OF THE COST BURDEN TO MAINTAIN THE STRUCTURE OR EVEN JUST TO RESTORE THE STRUCTURE.
AND, UM, AND WE HEARD FROM SEVERAL CONTENT EXPERTS ON HOW DIFFICULT THAT WOULD BE, THE FEASIBILITY.
UM, I GUESS, I SUPPOSE THIS IS STILL A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION WITH, UM,
[01:45:01]
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OR, UH, ANYONE ELSE ON HOW THAT MIGHT BE, UH, APPROACHED? OR IS THAT JUST IN NO INTEREST OF THE OWNER WHATSOEVER TO KEEP THE STRUCTURE? COULD YOU COMMENT A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THAT? SURE.M AWAY ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, AS YOU, UH, NOTED, UH, COMMISSIONER THE, UH, DUFFY ENGINEERING REPORT IS IN THE BACKUP.
UH, MR. UH, DUFFY SPOKE, OBVIOUSLY, HE'S HERE TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
SO JUST NO STRUCTURAL SUPPORT IN THE RUBBLE, UH, WALLS THAT ARE THERE.
UH, AND, UH, UH, IT, IT WOULD REQUIRE BASICALLY, UH, REBUILDING, RECREATING IT, UH, IN, IN TERMS OF, UH, SO THERE ISN'T REALLY PRESERVATION YOU WOULD DEMOLISH AND REBUILD IS WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO, UH, UM, AT LEAST ACCORDING TO OUR EXPERT.
SO I DON'T, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE.
UH, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK IF PRESERVATION AUSTIN HAS, UH, AN INTEREST IN PURCHASING THE BUILDING, IT WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, UH, ENTERTAIN THAT AND, UH, AND HAVE THEM, UH, DEAL WITH THE EXTRAORDINARY, AND I'M TALKING ABOUT EXTRAORDINARY EXPENSE.
IT WOULD TAKE TO, UM, I GUESS DEMOLISH AND RECREATE, UH, THE STRUCTURE, WHICH IS NOT HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
I'M NOT SURE THEY'D WANNA DO THAT.
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT BALLPARK COSTS THAT MIGHT BE? WHAT WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT TO RESTORE A BUILDING LIKE THAT? AT LEAST TO MAINTAIN HISTORIC STANDARDS? HOPEFULLY THAT'S NOT ALL MY TIME.
UH, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT.
UM, I, WE CANNOT GIVE, UH, AN ESTIMATE.
WE DIDN'T GET A CONTRACTOR OR AN ESTIMATOR TO PUT, UH, COSTS TOGETHER FOR THIS.
UH, AS YOU KNOW, THE WAY THAT THINGS, THE, THE MARKET IS CURRENTLY, UH, PRICES FOR EVERYTHING ARE SKYROCKETING.
UH, WE CAN NEVER RELY ON AND COST ARE JUST GOING UP AND UP.
I JUST HAVE ANOTHER QUICK QUESTION FOR APPLICANT FOLKS, WHICH IS HOW MUCH OF THAT THE, I, UH, Y'ALL MENTIONED UP TO A 40% OF A TAX POTENTIAL TAX REDUCTION AFTER REDEVELOPMENT.
COULD YOU GIVE A NUMBER TO THAT, A BALLPARK NUMBER OR WHAT KIND OF TAX REVENUE WE'RE LOSING IF WE GRANT HISTORIC PRESERVATION ON THIS PROPERTY? SO, I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC NUMBER ON THAT, BUT WHAT I CAN DESCRIBE TO YOU IS THE WAY THAT THAT WAS, UM, THE WAY THAT WE ARRIVED AT THAT FIGURE WAS I HAD TO KIND OF MAKE AN ESTIMATE OVER WHAT, UH, WHAT THE OVERALL KIND OF, UM, VALUATION WOULD BE AFTER REDEVELOPMENT.
SO I LOOKED AT COMPARABLE REDEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA THAT WERE WORTH, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS, AND THEN LOOKED AT WHAT THE, UM, LIKE AFTER LIKE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS AND WHATNOT, UM, WHAT THE ACTUAL TAX BENEFIT THAT THE CITY WOULD BE, AND THEN COMPARED THAT WITH, UM, IF IT WERE TO REMAIN AS IS, WHAT THE KIND OF TAXES WOULD GO TO THE CITY FROM THAT.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THAT FIGURE CAME FROM.
UM, BUT NO RECOLLECTION OF NUMBERS, LIKE IN DOLLARS.
UM, I, I DON'T HAVE LIKE A SPECIFIC, BUT IT WOULD BE SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS TO THE CITY PROBABLY.
YEAH, MY PROPERTY TAXES ARE DEFINITELY SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS.
IT'S JUST TRYING TO GET, JUST FOR, FOR, FOR REFERENCE THAT PIE CHARTS FOR REFERENCE THE OFF, I'M SORRY, CHEER IF I'M OVER TIME, BUT GO AHEAD.
IF I, IF YOU CAN WRAP UP, IF YOU GO AHEAD.
OH, NO, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY FOR REFERENCE, THE, LIKE THE, THE FIRST, THE KIND OF LIKE, TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF SCALE, THE 20% ONE, WHICH WAS JUST KIND OF LIKE THE REGULAR TAX CUT AS IS, UM, LIKE I SAID WAS ABOUT ONE AND A HALF TIMES WITH THE AVERAGE TAX.
CUZ WE WERE TALKING ABOUT CITY, CITY TAXES ONLY.
RIGHT? AND YOU'RE, WHEN YOU THINK OF LIKE YOUR TAX BILL, YOU'RE THINKING OF EVERYTHING PACKED IN.
SO JUST THAT CONTEXT, CONTEXT AS WELL.
UM, YEAH, THAT'S YES TO WHICH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLIES.
SO I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET AN, AN IDEA OF THE NUMBERS, BUT THANK YOU.
UM, AND THE, MY LAST QUESTION, IF I HAVE TIME FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, SORRY I KEEP CALLING MR. WHALEN BACK UP, UM, OR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO ANSWER.
BUT WITH RESPECT TO THE DEMOLITION, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF DEMOLITION, THE DUMPING AND ALSO JUST THE GENERAL WASTE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
AND YOU EXPRESS SOME OPENNESS TO IDEAS ABOUT PRESERVING CERTAIN CHUNKS.
BUT IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO ADDRESS WITH REGARD TO THE DEMOLITION OF THIS BUILDING OR ANY OF THOSE PRACTICES? YEAH, MICHAEL, WAY ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, I'LL BE VERY QUICK.
UH, AS YOU HEARD FROM EVERYBODY, UH, INVOLVED IT, IT IS BASICALLY STONE RUBBLE THAT IS UNSUPPORTED AND, UH, CAN'T HOLD ANYTHING UP.
SO I THINK GOOD NEWS IS, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, THERE'S NOTHING ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE.
UH, AND UH, THERE WOULD OBVIOUSLY WE WANT TO LOOK AT SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO EITHER REUSE IT,
[01:50:01]
UH, SOMEHOW, UH, ON SITE, UH, ON, UH, EITHER NEAR THE DOCK AREA OR, UH, ON THE GROUNDS.I'M NOT SURE HOW, BUT CERTAINLY WOULD, UH, BECAUSE IT IS ROCK, UH, THERE WOULD CERTAINLY BE THAT OPPORTUNITY.
UM, COMMISSIONER, SHE, SO LET'S SEE.
I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE, OUR HISTORIC DEPARTMENT.
UM, I GUESS IT'S THE ONE ON SCREEN.
WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I, I HAVE QUESTIONS, I MEAN, ABOUT THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS.
I MEAN IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT, WE SEE A LOT OF CASES COME IN FRONT OF US AND OFTENTIMES IT'S A LOT OF FRAMED HOUSES ON THE EAST SIDE AND IT'S RARELY THAT WE EVER GET SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
BUT I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS, I GUESS THE MIX OF IT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN THE STONE, LIKE THE ARTISANS OF THE STONE OR THE WOODWORK, UM, EVEN AS THE IRON WORK, I MEAN, HAVE WE, HOW OFTEN DO WE GET PROJECTS LIKE THIS IN FRONT OF US THAT HAVE THIS MIX AND ECLECTIC, UM, YOU KNOW, COMPOSITION? SURE.
KIM COLLINS HERE WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
UH, I WOULD SAY, UM, IF I HAD TO SPEAK THAT THIS IS PROBABLY MAYBE A ONCE A YEAR PROJECT AND, UM, AND YOU WILL HAVE TO FORGIVE ME BECAUSE I AM NEW TO THE DEPARTMENT.
SO, UM, I HAVE WORKED IN OTHER CITIES.
I WORKED WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, CITY OF BUTTA, BUT I HAVE NOT BEEN WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
SO I CANNOT SAY HOW FREQUENTLY THESE COME, UH, TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN, CUZ I HAVE NOT BEEN HERE, UH, THAT LONG.
BUT I WILL SAY THAT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE SEEN ANYTHING OF THIS MERIT, UM, COME HERE.
UM, IT'S, IT'S DEFINITELY, UH, A VERY UNIQUE, UH, PROPERTY.
UM, AND I HOPE THAT THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.
AND THOSE TALK ABOUT LIKE, IT'S BUILT OUT A RUBBLE.
I MEAN, IS IT, I MEAN, IS THIS TRULY JUST, I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S LIKE FALLING APART OR IS IT, ARE WE JUST SAYING IT'S JUST CHOP STONE OR I MEAN, IS IT TYPICAL THAT THIS IS WHAT IT'S BUILT OUT OF, OF THAT PSYCHOLOGY? SURE.
I THINK WHAT YOU WOULD TYPICALLY, HOW YOU WOULD REFER TO SOMETHING OF THIS, UH, TYPE IS A VERNACULAR, UH, ARCHITECTURE.
SO IT'S BUILT OUT OF, UM, LOCAL, UH, MATERIALS.
UH, SO, UM, ROCK AND, UM, MATERIAL THAT IS FOUND LOCALLY.
UH, THERE IS, UM, WORD OF MOUTH THAT SOME OF THE STONE HAS COME FROM LOCAL DAMS THAT WERE DISMANTLED AND THEN SOME OF THAT STONE CAME AND WAS UTILIZED IN, IN THE, UM, IN THE STONE WORK.
UM, IT JUST HAS A LOT OF LOCAL ARTISANS, UH, THE MEN'S SPINDLE KEY STONES, THE, UH, THE IRON WORK, THE, UH, THE FO WA UH, RITE, UH, TERRORISING AND BENCHES.
AND THERE'S JUST A LOT OF LOCAL ARTISTRY THAT GOES INTO THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY THAT REALLY MAKES IT ONE OF A KIND AND UNIQUE AND VERNACULAR.
UM, I WOULD DEFINITELY NOT SAY FROM MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT IT, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER OBVIOUSLY, THAT IT IS FALLING DOWN.
THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE THE, UH, OPINION OF A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
BUT FROM MY EVALUATION, UM, I THINK IT'S VERY COMMON THAT FOLKS THAT WANT TO DEMOLISH A BUILDING CAN VERY EASILY SAY, OH, IT'S FALLING DOWN.
SO
THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE, YOU KNOW, OH, WE WANT IT DEMOLISHED.
OH, IT'S, IT, IT'S FALLING APART.
YOU KNOW? SO, UH, I HATE TO BE SO CANDID, BUT THAT IS NOT, THAT IS THE MOST COMMON THING THAT WE SEE DAY IN, DAY OUT.
SO, UH, I WOULD NOT SAY THAT, UH, THAT SURPRISES ME.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS BEING BLAMED HERE.
AND YOU MENTIONED AS FAR AS OUR HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, CAUSE OFTENTIMES, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THERE, THERE'S THE OWNER AND OFTEN SINCE THAT'S JUST THE RICH PERSON WHO DOES, WHO PUT IT, YOU KNOW, PUT THE MONEY UP.
BUT THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION WHEN IT COMES TO THE ARTISTS WHO ARE INVOLVED, RIGHT? UH, THE, THE COLLECTIVE OF ALL THE HAND WORK, ALL THE SWEAT AND TEARS AND BLOOD THAT, THAT WENT INTO CREATING THIS, I MEAN, IS THAT AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION OR IS IT REALLY ALL ABOUT, OH, WHO WAS IT THAT COMMISSIONED DID, OR WHO THE DESIGNER WAS? BECAUSE OFTENTIMES, I MEAN, IT'S, BACK THEN IT WAS ABOUT THE ARTISTS, YOU KNOW, PUTTING IT TOGETHER.
BUT WHEN, WHEN, I MEAN, IS THAT, SHOULD THAT BE A CONSIDERATION INSTEAD OF JUST WHO OWNED IT, WHO LIVED THERE? ABSOLUTELY.
AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE MORE THAN ONE CRITERIA.
SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE BOTH THE ARCHITECTURE AND WE HAVE THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, AND IT'S NOT JUST ONE THAT HAS TO STAND ON ITS OWN.
SO, UM, FOR THIS, UM, RESOURCE WE HAVE THE ARCHITECTURE, UM, AND THAT INCLUDES, UM, THE ARTISTRY THAT GOES INTO IT, THAT INCLUDES,
[01:55:01]
UM, THE UNIQUENESS OF THE ARCHITECTURE.AND, UM, SORRY, I'M RUNNING OUTTA TIME.
YOU'RE, AND THEN LAST QUICK QUESTION, I THINK THAT WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED, AND THEN THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION IS SEPARATE.
AND THEN LAST QUESTION IS, IS THE, THE, I GUESS THE STORY AND THE COMMUNITY OF THAT? I MEAN, IT'S, I MEAN, IS IS THIS A UNIQUE TO THIS PART OF AUSTIN? YOU KNOW, CUZ A LOT OF IT IS HOW IT, HOW IT PUTS THE STORY OF AUSTIN TOGETHER.
AND THAT'S THE THING I HOPE WE DON'T LOSE, BUT SURE.
AND I WILL SAY THAT WHEN THIS WAS AT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, IT ORIGINALLY WAS GOING FORWARD AS MEETING ALL FOUR, UM, CRITERIA INCLUDING COMMUNITY VALUE.
UM, AND I THINK AT THE LAST MINUTE, THE HLC DECIDED NOT TO GO WITH THE, THE COMMUNITY VALUE.
UM, AND FOR, I DON'T, I CAN'T RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD WHY THEY ENDED UP GOING WITH THE, JUST THE THREE.
UM, BUT THEY DID ORIGINALLY HAVE, IT WAS A LAST MINUTE DECISION, BUT THE COMMUNITY VALUE, UH, WAS ABSOLUTELY, UM, A CONSIDERED CRITERIA THAT HLC WAS GOING WITH, UM, UP TO THE LAST SENATE BECAUSE IT ABSOLUTELY, UM, TELLS THE STORY OF WEST LAKE AUSTIN AND ITS DEVELOPMENT AND HOW IMPORTANT IT IS.
OKAY, NICK, COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
I HAVE, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE OFTEN SEE THESE CASES, WE SEE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS, THE ARCHITECTURE LANDSCAPE, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
I, IS THERE ANY THOUGHT OR REQUIREMENT THAT THERE HAS TO BE SORT OF A CONCRETE COMMUNITY BENEFIT FOR THE LARGER COMMUNITY FOR ANY HISTORIC ZONING WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN? WELL, I THINK THE LARGER COMMUNITY BENEFIT IS THAT YOU'RE TELLING THE STORY OF THE COMMUNITY AND, AND PRESERVING THE HISTORY OF THE COMMUNITY.
SO THAT IS THE OVERALL LARGER BENEFIT.
SO I GUESS TO MY QUESTION, RIGHT, LIKE I WENT UP TO THE SIDE JUST TO SEE, I CAN'T EVEN SEE IT FROM THE STREET.
SO IF I'M A TAXPAYER WHO IS IMPACTED BY A TAX BENEFIT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, WHAT BENEFIT AM I GETTING AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER? AN ARCHITECTURE, LET'S SAY IT'S, IT HAS ARCHITECTURE VALUE, BUT I CANNOT EVEN SEE IT FROM THE STREET.
WHAT VALUE AM I AS A RESIDENT OF AUSTIN GETTING? SURE.
WELL, THERE'S A LOT OF INTANGIBLE BENEFITS THAT COME FROM, UM, PRESERVING, UH, HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
SO JUST IN THE REHABILITATION ALONE OF THIS STRUCTURE, UM, FROM EVERY A DOLLAR OF TAX CREDIT, UM, THAT IS INVESTED, THERE'S A DOLLAR 25 OF TAX REVENUE THAT'S CREATED.
UM, THERE'S A LOT OF RESEARCH THAT THERE'S, UM, AN INCREASE IN PROPERTY VALUE.
THERE'S DRAWS TO NEW BUSINESSES, THEY ATTRACT NEW RESIDENTS AND THEN LARGEST TAX BASE.
UM, I GUESS JUST TO, JUST TO FULLY UNDERSTAND, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THAT APPLIES TO, IN HISTORIC PROPERTY THAT IS NEITHER VISIBLE FROM THE STREET NOR IN AN AREA OF THE CITY WHERE PEOPLE WOULD SEE IT? SO IT'S NOT LIKE DORRIS WILL DRIVE UP TO 2002 SCENIC DRIVE TO ACTUALLY GO AND LOOK AT, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE EXPECT THAT DORIS WILL DRIVE TO 2002 SCENIC DRIVE TO LOOK AT THE EXTERNAL WALLS OF THE PROPERTY? WELL, I THINK IT WOULD DEPEND ON HOW THE PROPERTY WAS ULTIMATELY WHAT THE FUTURE OF THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS.
BUT I THINK EVEN IF THE PROPERTY IS, UM, REHABILITATED IN A PRIVATE MANNER, UM, IT STILL RETAINS THE CHARACTER, UM, OF THE HISTORIC, UM, STORY OF WEST LAKE AUSTIN.
AND PEOPLE ARE DRAWN TO THAT AND THEY'RE, AND IT, UM, SO THAT'S HELPFUL.
CURIOSITY, DO WE PUT UP, AND IT ALSO, AND IT ALSO IS AN ECONOMIC DRIVER FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.
WOULD WE PUT A SIGNAGE OR A PLAQUE OR SOMETHING THAT SPEAKS TO THE HISTORY OF THE SITE ONCE IT HAS BEEN ZONE HISTORIC? YEAH, IT ABSOLUTELY CAN HAVE THAT.
BUT I THINK WHAT I WAS SAYING, WE CAN OR MUST, WILL IT BE REQUIRED TO HAVE, LIKE IF I'M WALKING BY THE HOUSE THAT I CANNOT SEE AND I'M LOOKING AT THE BOUNDARY WALL, IS THERE AT LEAST GONNA BE A PLAQUE THAT TELLS ME, SEE IT? CAN YOU SAY, I DROVE, OKAY, I'M NOT GONNA RESPOND TO THAT.
UM, BUT ALL THAT TO SAY THAT I THINK, IS THERE STILL ESSENTIALLY SOMETHING THAT GOES UP THAT SAYS, HERE'S WHO LIVED HERE, HE WAS A SEGREGATIONIST, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SORT OF RACIST PASTOR OF AUSTIN, OR HERE'S A DEVELOPER WHO LIVED HERE OR WORKED ON THIS.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S PART OF THESE HISTORIC LEARNING CASES? WELL, THERE'S, WE WOULD NEVER, UM, FIRST I I DO WANNA DRAW US THAT WE WOULD NEVER LANDMARK A PROPERTY, UH, WHERE A SEGREGATIONIST LIVED, UM, OR WHERE THERE WAS A RACIST PERSON.
UM, IF THERE WAS, I'M SORRY, JUST HISTORY OF, WAIT, I'M SORRY.
UM, MA'AM, I JUST WANNA, I GENUINELY THOUGHT THAT THAT IS INDEED WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
WE'RE SAYING OF COURSE, THAT THERE'S MORE VALUE TO THE PROPERTY, BUT ARE YOU SAYING THAT A SEGREGATIONIST NEVER LIVED AT THIS PROPERTY? I'M
[02:00:01]
SAYING THAT WE WOULD NOT OPENLY LANDMARK A PROPERTY WHERE WE ARE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THAT IS THE, THE PERSON.SO, I'M SORRY, I KNOW I'M RUNNING OUT OF JIM.
JUST TO CONFIRM, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE IS EITHER LYING OR MISTAKEN THAT INDEED SOMEONE WHO MIGHT HAVE ENGAGED IN SEGREGATIONIST POLICIES WAS NEVER LIVING HERE? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME? I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I GET THE FACTS RIGHT.
AND I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS THAT THE APPLICANT IS EITHER LYING MISTAKEN OR SEEMS TO HAVE A CONCERN HERE.
AM I CORRECT THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION DOES NOT HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVED HERE, UH, WERE RACIST? NO, WE DON'T HAVE THAT.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE LOOKED INTO? YES, WE LOOKED INTO WHETHER THERE WAS ANY OF THE EVIDENCE TO THAT CLAIM, YES.
AND WE DIDN'T FIND THAT EVIDENCE.
AND IS IT TRUE THAT THE, IF SOMEBODY OWNED A BUSINESS AT THE TIME, THAT INDEED IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SEGREGATIONIST AS WAS TRUE FOR MOST AUSTIN AND THE COUNTRY AT LARGE? SO WHAT WE DID FIND IS THAT, UM, CH LATER DID, OWNED THE TAVERN UP UNTIL 1960 AND THE FIRST RESTAURANTS WERE DESEGREGATED IN AUSTIN IN 1963.
SO, SO HE ACTUALLY DID NOT OWN THIS RESTAURANT.
UM, HE WAS NOT OUTSIDE OF, HE DIDN'T, I'M SORRY, JUST TO UNDERSTAND YOU'RE SAYING SEGREGATION DIDN'T START IN AUSTIN UNTIL HE HAD SOLD THE PROPERTY.
I'M SAYING DESEGREGATION DIDN'T START, UM, UNTIL 1963.
WELL, MA'AM, THAT WOULD MEAN WHEN HE OWNED THE PROPERTY, SEGREGATION WAS A PART OF IT.
UH, SIR, WE'LL SEE IF SOMEBODY RECOGNIZES IF YOU WANNA SIT CLOSE BY SOMEBODY MAY NEXT, UM, WHO HAS QUESTIONS? CHAIR? OH YES, CHAIR.
I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM BLAKE.
YOU, YOU DEFINITELY LOOK LIKE YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING PRETTY IMPORTANT.
UH, BLAKE ETTE, UM, AND I GO BY THIS PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, EVERY TWO, EVERY WEEK OR SO, I WALK MY DOGS BY.
IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK, YOU CAN SEE THE, THE SW POOL.
YOU CAN SEE A LOT OF, AT A LOT OF THINGS THERE.
TO ADDRESS THE, THE SEGREGATIONIST THING THAT'S A LITTLE DISINGENIOUS.
THE WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO Y'ALL, THIS, THIS, THIS DOCUMENT SAYING THAT WE, WE ARE NOT GONNA SEGREGATE, WE'RE NOT GOING DISCRIMINATE BASED ON RACE IN OUR RESTAURANTS AND OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THE SLATER FAMILY.
I KNOW THEY'VE WRITTEN A LETTER TO THE APPLICANTS OF REPRESENTATIVE SAYING, DON'T DEFAM US AND BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU SAY, THE SLATER FAMILY WHERE THEY WERE LESS EASE, NUMBER ONE, THEY WERE GONE IN 1960 WHEN THEY, WHEN THIS DOCUMENT CAME OUT, ASKING OTHER, ALL ACROSS THE CITY, ASKING SOME, SOME PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS.
WE SAYING ASK, SAY, WILL YOU NOT SAY, UH, DISCRIMINATE BASED ON RACE? I WASN'T THERE.
UH, THEY WERE, NOBODY WAS THERE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE, IF THE, THE TAVERN OWNERS OR THE TAVERN OPERATORS AT THAT TIME IN 1963, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WERE ASKED, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT TO SAY THAT THIS, THAT THE SLATER FAMILY ARE RACIST OR IMPLY THAT THEY'RE KU KLUX KLAN MEMBERS OR WHATEVER SEGREGATIONIST IS, THAT'S REALLY PUSHING IT, YOU KNOW, I, WHAT UPSETS ME IS THIS PROPERTY SHOULD BE LOOKED AT.
THE ASSOCIATION IS PROBABLY THE WEAKEST, ONE OF THE WEAKEST LEGS OF IT.
THE, THE GROUNDS ARE IMMACULATE.
THEY GO, THEY CAN BE MADE INTO IMMACULATE, THEY GO, GOES, THERE'S CASCADE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE LAKE.
THERE'S STEPS AND THERE'S ALL KINDS OF, UH, THE, THE HOUSE.
I MEAN, YEAH, THEY DID AN ADDITION IN THE 1950S OR FORTIES, BUT THAT'S WITHIN, YOU KNOW, WE ONLY LOOKED 50 YEARS BACK.
SO THAT'S IN THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE.
WHAT, WHAT WE'RE ASKING AT LEAST, UH, MEAN THE COMMUNITY VALUE.
I THOUGHT IT HAD COMMUNITY BAY.
WHAT THE COMMUNITY IS IS NOT REALLY DEFINED.
OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS, IN THE FIRST HEARING, THERE WAS 26 LETTERS.
I BELIEVE IN SUPPORT OF HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
I, IN MY SEVEN YEARS ON THE HISTORIC, UH, COMMISSION, I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT KIND OF OUTPOURING.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE IN THE CITY THAT WAS.
UH, UH, YOU KNOW, IT IT, THE, THE, THE SEGREGATIONIST, THE, THE THROWING THE RACE CARD ON THE TABLE WAS VERY GRATUITOUS IN MY MIND.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S LIKE THE WEALTH CARD ON THE TABLE.
I MEAN, THAT'S, WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION LOOKED AT IT FROM HISTORIC.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
BUT COULD I INTERRUPT REAL QUICK AND ASK ANOTHER QUESTION ON THAT THEN? I'M SORRY.
SO IN SEVEN YEARS, TO ANSWER, MAYBE COMMISSIONER, SHE'S QUESTION, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU SEEN A PROPERTY LIKE THIS COME UP BEFORE Y'ALL?
[02:05:02]
I MEAN, THERE WERE SOME, YOU KNOW, THERE THERE'S GREAT PROPERTIES THAT COME BEFORE US, BUT NOT SOMETHING LIKE THIS.I'VE NEVER SEEN, I'VE NEVER SEEN IT.
I MEAN, IT'S BECAUSE IT'S SO UNIQUE.
IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S ADE UH, SOUTHERN PLANTATION OR IT'S NOT A MID-CENTURY MODERN HOUSE.
I I WAS IN THE HOUSE ONE TIME.
I WAS ASKED TO A PARTY THERE WITH HANKS AND HIS WIFE, UH, ALLISON HANKS.
THEY, THEY HAD A, THEY HAVE USED TO HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTIES.
I MEAN, NOBODY'S TALKED ABOUT THE CARVINGS, ROCK CARVINGS INSIDE THE HOUSE.
NOBODY'S TALKING ABOUT THE, THE WAEL IRON WORK THAT'S ALL THROUGH THE HOUSE.
NOBODY'S TALKING ABOUT THE MURALS THAT ARE IN THE HOUSE.
UH, IT'S TO ME, I MEAN, I, I DON'T COME DOWN.
THIS IS KIND OF, I DON'T COME TO THESE THINGS CUZ I KNOW WHERE THIS IS GONNA GO.
IT GOES TO COUNCIL AND IT HAS TO BE A SUPER MAJORITY.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT NAIVE AND I'VE TOLD THE NEIGHBORS THAT, BUT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT TO ME, IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROPERTY.
IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROPERTY TO THIS CITY.
UH, JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN'T, I MEAN, TALK ABOUT PEOPLE DRIVE BY THERE.
UH, WHAT ARE THEY CALLED? UTILITIES OR WHATEVER IT BICYCLIST.
THE REASON WHY THEY, THEY'RE DONE.
YOU DON'T SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE GOING BY ALL THE ROADS AROUND THIS ARE BEING CONSTRUCTED.
THEY'RE PUTTING STORM DRAIN IN, IN THE ROAD.
SO THIS, THIS PROPERTY'S BEEN BLOCKED OFF.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE HLC MEETING.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY THESE NUMBERS ARE SO LOW.
I'M ALL, WHEN I WALK BY AND IT TAKES ME THREE OR FOUR MINUTES TO WALK FROM BOTTOM TO UP TO THE TOP OF PROPERTIES ON MY LEFT.
BICYCLES COME, COME BY ME ALL THE TIME.
I, I'M JUST SPENT OUT OF TIME.
SO SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND COMMISSION.
YOU'RE THE ONES UP HERE TONIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
I THINK THIS IS FOR THE OWNER'S AGENT, BUT, UM, MY QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE OWNER WAS LOOKING AT PROPERTIES TO BUY AND THEY DECIDED TO BUY THIS PROPERTY, IT WASN'T, IT WAS IN THE SHAPE IT IS IN NOW, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT BETTER DEPENDING ON HOW LONG AGO THEY BOUGHT IT, BUT THEY KNEW EITHER THEY WERE GOING TO RENOVATE IT OR DEMOLISH IT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAVE THE HISTORIC ZONING AND I GUESS BUILD A LARGE HOME OR SOMETHING HERE.
UM, BUT WOULDN'T, THIS IS JUST FOR MY KNOWLEDGE OF HOW THIS HAPPENS, BUT WOULDN'T THE REAL ESTATE AGENT SAY, YES, THIS WAS BUILT IN THE, THE TWENTIES OR FORTIES, THERE'S A CHANCE THAT IT MAY BE DEEMED HISTORIC, LIKE SOME DUE DILIGENCE DURING THE REAL ESTATE TRANSACTION.
WHAT, WHAT WAS THE STORY THERE? UM, GOOD QUESTION, MICHAEL.
WAY ON, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFIC ANSWER TO THE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE REAL ESTATE BROKER AND THE OWNER.
I WILL, I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT ONE OF THE SLATERS IS WHO SOLD IT TO, UH, MR. MURPHY IN 2021.
THIS IS THE CONDITION IT WAS IN.
UM, AND, UH, I KNOW THAT, AND I'VE HEARD THE CASES, OTHERS TALKING ABOUT THE CONDITION OF BUILDINGS, THAT HASN'T BEEN THE FOCUS.
WE FOCUSED, I THINK, ON HISTORIC ASSOCIATION, OBVIOUSLY, AND, UH, UH, SOME MAJOR EQUITY ISSUES THAT THIS CITY AND HAS, UH, HAS WRESTLED WITH.
UM, SO I CAN'T ANSWER THE SPECIFIC QUESTION OTHER THAN TELL YOU THAT WE BOUGHT IT FROM A SLATER.
UH, AND THIS IS THE CONDITION THAT, UH, WE INHERITED FROM THE SLATERS.
WE'VE ONLY HAD IT FOR, UH, ABOUT A YEAR.
UM, SO I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE AN, AN ANSWER TO THE SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER, UH, MR. MURPHY KNEW AT THE TIME THAT IN FILING A DEMOLITION PERMIT, I GUESS WHEN HE FILED A DEMOLITION PERMIT AT THAT TIME, HE KNEW THAT THERE WOULD BE, UH, UH, A QUESTION SINCE IT'S MORE THAN 50 YEARS OLD, WHETHER IT WOULD BE EVALUATED AND GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
SO I THINK THERE WAS SOME RISK THERE WITH THE PURCHASE.
IT'S NOT LIKE THIS WAS, YOU KNOW, A HUGE SURPRISE THAT A STRUCTURE THAT, THAT HAS THIS KIND OF HISTORY WOULD MAYBE GO DOWN THIS ROUTE.
UM, SO I GUESS THE, THE QUESTION THAT MAYBE DOESN'T HAVE AN ANSWER IS LET'S SAY, LET'S SAY THE REMODEL IS 20 MILLION TO GET IT TO WHERE IT WOULD BE HABITABLE, UM, WITH THE HISTORIC STRUCTURES WHERE THEY SCRAPE IT, AND IT'S LIKELY A 20 MILLION HOUSE THAT'S PUT THERE.
SO, AND YEAH, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT GONNA RENOVATE IT.
I MEAN, WE WILL, UH, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S, WE'LL SEE IF
[02:10:01]
THERE'S SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO BUY IT.I MEAN, MR. MURPHY'S NOT THE COST TO RENOVATE THIS THING IS ASTRONOMICAL IS WHAT, UH, MY INSTINCTS TELL ME.
WE DON'T HAVE A GENERAL CONTRACTOR, BUT GIVEN THE CONDITION OF IT, AND MR. SHEY CAN SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE CONDITION OF IT, HE KNOWS THAT IT'S, UM, A SEVEN FIGURE REMODEL.
UH, HE STATED THAT TO ME, AND THIS IS NOT SOMETHING MR. MURPHY'S GONNA UNDERTAKE.
WE'LL, LET PRESERVATION AUSTIN, UH, AND, UH, THE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE ALL HERE EAGER TO RENOVATE IT, UH, COME UP WITH THE, THE MONEY THAT THAT WOULD TAKE.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX, LET'S, UH, JUST GIVE REAL QUICK, I'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS.
I'M JUST WAITING TO SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO GO.
UH, COMMISSIONER ZA, I'M ALREADY GOING SECOND.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, UM, IS THE CRITERIA I THINK THE APPLICANT WAS POINTING OUT WAS, UH, ACCESSIBILITY, UM, YOU KNOW, THROUGH TRANSIT OR BEING ABLE TO, UM, WALK ON THE PROPERTY.
IS THAT A CONDITION FOR HISTORIC, UH, DESIGNATION IN THIS CASE? NO, THAT'S NOT A CRITERIA THAT IS LOOKED AT FOR HISTORIC.
SECONDLY, THE, UH, IN HIS HISTORIC ASSOCIATION, THAT WAS, I MEAN, THE PEOPLE THAT THIS, UH, PROPERTY IS ASSOCIATED WITH, THAT WAS NOT ONE OF THE CRITERIA THAT WE'RE, IT'S NOT ONE OF THE THREE, CORRECT.
HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION IS ONE OF THE CRITERIA.
HOWEVER, THE PERSON IN QUESTION, UM, IS NOT ONE OF, IS NOT WHO THE ASSOCIATION IS BASED ON, IT'S BASED ON RAYMOND DEL DENIAL.
I THINK THE PERSON THAT WAS BEING BROUGHT UP WAS CH LATER.
UH, AND THEY DISCUSSED THE, THE TWO INDIVIDUALS IN THEIR CASE.
UM, SO WHAT, IS THERE A, COULD YOU JUST GO THROUGH THE, I THINK YOU TOUCHED ON IT, THE, UM, I'M READING SOME NOTES HERE.
ARE THERE EXAMPLES OF OTHER PROPERTIES THAT HAVE HISTORICAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION WHERE THE OWNERS, UM, AND I AS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE CIVIC LEADERSHIP PHILANTHROPISTS, UH, OR MAKING A HISTORIC IMPACT, COULD YOU SPEAK TO THAT? THEY KIND OF HAD THAT TABLE WITH THE X'S.
UM, WHAT IS THE, I THINK THIS, WHAT CAN YOU BRING TO BEAR THAT THIS, THERE IS SOME THAT THE RAYMOND DELLY, COULD YOU JUST REPEAT THAT AGAIN, KIND OF THEIR, THEIR, UM, THEIR CONTRIBUTION WAS? SURE.
SO DEL DENIAL'S RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SIGNIFICANTLY CONTRIBUTED TO THE PATTERNS OF THE CITY BY BEING AN INNOVATIVE DESIGNER UTILIZING LOCAL ARTISANS AND MATERIALS.
AND HE WAS AN EARLY DEVELOPER OF THE WEST LAKE AUSTIN AREA.
AND DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING, THE COMMENT ABOUT, UH, THIS IS JUST A PROXY FOR PAST WEALTH.
UM, ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? I'M JUST TRYING TO READ, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN AND, UH, FOR THIS HISTORIC DESIGNATION, I MEAN, I'VE BEEN TO A LOT OF, QUITE FRANKLY, WHEN YOU TRAVEL THE COUNTRY AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT, A LOT OF IT IS TRUE, A LOT OF THESE PROPERTIES THAT, UM, THAT HAVE HISTORIC DESIGNATION, UH, WHETHER IT'S, UH, FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT, YOU KNOW, AS THE ARCHITECT OR SOME OTHER FAMOUS ARCHITECT, THEY WERE THE ONES WE TYPICALLY SEE OR VISIT.
A LOT OF THEM ARE RICH WHITE PEOPLE.
I MEAN, THAT'S NOT UNCOMMON, IS IT? SURE, DEFINITELY.
UM, I THINK IN THAT, IN THIS CASE, THIS IS, UM, HOW AUSTIN'S CODE IS, UM, SET.
UM, AND SO WHILE THERE IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT TO EXPAND THE CRITERIA TO ALLOW OTHER, UM, RESOURCES TO MEET, UM, CRITERIA FOR HISTORIC LANDMARKING, UM, DENYING A RESOURCE THAT MEETS THE CRITERIA DOES NOT, UM, UH, I DON'T THINK, UM, MAKE FOR, UM, A MORE INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY.
I THINK IT JUST DENIES A RESOURCE THAT MEETS THE CRITERIA.
I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
[02:15:01]
THANK YOU.AND WE'LL DO, UH, REAL QUICK, IF YOU MAKE, I SEE COMMISSIONER COX AND I THINK COMMISSIONER ZA WANTED ANOTHER CHANCE AND THAT PEOPLE BRING US LIST IN.
I WAS, I WAS GONNA MAKE A MOTION IF WE WERE OUTTA SPOTS.
IF, IF WE'RE GONNA GO TO A SECOND, LET'S GO AND WRAP UP THE Q AND A.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHERS? UH, COMMISSIONER ZAR, DID YOU HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION? OH, OKAY.
WELL, LET'S FINISH WITH THE QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER COX, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I, I WOULD LOVE THE OPPORTUNITY, UH, WITHIN THE NEXT FEW MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT THE EQUITY PORTION OF THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION.
UM, I THINK THAT IT'S AN ENORMOUSLY IMPORTANT SUBJECT, BUT I'M QUITE CURIOUS HOW IT WAS FRAMED AS, AS A REASON TO OPPOSE HISTORIC ZONING ON THIS PROPERTY.
UM, AND SO I'D JUST LIKE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND FROM THE APPLICANT WHY THEY THINK THAT A VERY LIKELY INEQUITABLE HISTORIC ZONING PROCESS, UM, THE, THAT SHOULD BE USED TO DISCOUNT THE POTENTIALLY HISTORIC NATURE OF THIS PROPERTY.
WHY, WHY IT WAS BROUGHT UP AS A REASON TO DENY HISTORIC ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY, MIKE
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE DOING WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS PRO, UH, PROPERTY IN PARTICULAR, IS OBVIOUSLY THE CITY IS CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH ITS EQUITABLE PRESERVATION PLAN PROCESS.
AND AS PART OF THAT, THE CITY ITSELF HAS LOOKED BACK AT CODE CRITERIA, DIFFERENT THINGS, THE SYSTEMS, AND WHETHER THOSE SYSTEMS FOSTER EQUITABLE OR INEQUITABLE OUTCOMES.
AND SPECIFICALLY IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, WE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURE, UM, AND THAT WAS CALLED OUT IN ONE OF THE CITY'S BRIEFINGS ON EQUITY AND PRESERVATION AS A SYSTEMIC BIAS IN TERMS OF WHEN WE FOCUS KIND OF EXCLUSIVELY ON SOME OF THESE TYPES OF THINGS, WHICH HISTORICALLY, I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S WHAT THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMUNITY HAS INITIALLY HAD FOCUSED ON.
IT DOES IN THE CITY'S OWN WORDS, UM, SET THRESHOLDS THAT PRIVILEGE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE TYPICALLY WEALTHY AND WHITE.
UM, AND IN TERMS OF APPLYING THAT, BECAUSE THIS IS THE LAND USE COMMISSION, AND, AND THIS IS LIKE THE BODY WHERE THOSE POLICIES GET TURNED INTO ACTION, WHERE THOSE POLICIES ARE IMPLEMENTED, AND YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF FURTHER EQUITY OR LET'S, AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY THAT, I MEAN, ISN'T THE SOLUTION TO THAT, TO TRY TO EXPAND HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND BRING SOME OF THOSE OTHER PROPERTIES INTO THE FOLD RATHER THAN DENY? BECAUSE LIKE, I I, I'M THINKING BACK TO WHAT COMMISSIONER SHAY SAID, AND, AND SOME OF THE HISTORIC VALUE OF THIS PROPERTY IS WHAT THE ARTISANS PUT INTO IT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT THE PEOPLE THAT, THAT DID HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND, AND ARTISTRY AT THAT PERIOD OF TIME, AND OBVIOUSLY IT'S RICH PEOPLE THAT HAD THE ABILITY TO HIRE THOSE PEOPLE TO DO THAT WORK AT THAT TIME.
UM, SO I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE SHOULD DENY HISTORIC ZONING FOR PROPERTIES LIKE THIS THAT MAY BENEFIT WEALTHY PEOPLE RATHER THAN THE SOLUTION TO EQUITY BEING IN BRING, BRINGING MORE PROPERTIES OF A DIVERSE BACKGROUND INTO THE FOLD, RATHER THAN NEGLECTING THE PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE SEEING NOW.
I, I GUESS IT KIND OF COMES BACK TO THE IDEA THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH THESE TYPES OF THINGS, YOU ALSO HAVE, AS WE COVERED KIND OF THE BROADER ISSUE OF SHIFTING TAX BURDENS BASED OFF OF HOW YOU'RE IMPLEMENTING THESE POLICIES, RIGHT? AND SO YES, ABSOLUTELY THE CITY SHOULD LOOK AT ADDRESSING THESE SYSTEMIC ISSUES THAT ARE BAKED INTO YOUR CODES AND YOUR POLICIES.
UM, BUT WHILE YOU DO THAT, YOU ARE AND HAVE HISTORICALLY OFFERED LANDMARKING DESIGNATION TO MANY, MANY PROPERTIES THAT ONCE YOU ADD ALL OF THEM UP AND INDIVIDUALLY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO SHIFTING OF TAX BURDENS FROM AFFLUENT COMMUNITIES TO LESS AFFLUENT COMMUNITIES.
AND WITH EACH CASE WHERE YOU'RE CONTINUING TO DO THAT, IT HAS A, IT CONTINUES TO ADD TO THAT I UNDERSTAND HISTORY OF EQUITY, WHICH IS WHY I'M, I'M INTERRUPTING YOU, BUT I, I'M, THAT'S SUCH A FRUSTRATING POINT TO ME BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT COME UP AND WANT HISTORIC ZONING, AND THEN WE ACCUSE THEM OF JUST WANTING THE TAX BREAKS.
AND THEN WE HAVE APPLICANTS LIKE, LIKE, LIKE YOUR CLIENT THAT'S COMING TO US AND ACTUALLY USING THAT TO TRY TO
[02:20:01]
CONVINCE US TO NOT DO HISTORIC ZONING BECAUSE THEY WANNA BUILD A MASSIVE HOUSE IN THE LOCATION OF THIS ONE.AND, AND I, TO ME, NOTHING IN THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION CRITERIA LISTS IS THIS PERSON DESERVING OF A TAX BREAK OR NOT.
AND SO IT REALLY FRUSTRATES ME WHEN WE GET CAUGHT UP IN THIS CONVERSATION WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO, WE'RE TRYING TO DETERMINE THE VALIDITY OF THE HISTORIC VALUE OF PRESERVING THIS PROPERTY.
AND WE HAVE APPLICANTS COME UP SAYING, WELL, YOU SHOULDN'T HISTORICALLY PRESERVE THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE MY CLIENT DOESN'T DESERVE A TAX BREAK.
I MEAN, HOW, HOW DO WE, AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, SHOULDN'T WE BE EVALUATING THIS ON THE HISTORIC VALUE OF THIS PROPERTY AND NOT WHAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE DECIDES IS THE BENEFIT OF HAVING A HISTORIC PROPERTY? IT'S A GOOD POINT.
AND I WOULD SAY, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT OTHER APPLICANTS HAVE SAID, BUT WHAT I CAN SAY IS WHAT I'VE DONE IS RECOUNT TO YOU THE OUTCOMES THAT YOUR CITY HAS REPORTED THEIR SEEING BASED OFF OF THESE POLICIES.
THAT'S NOT JUST MY CITY, IT'S YOUR CITY COMMISSIONER COOKS THAT.
THOSE ARE THE BENJAMIN, I I MEANT THE THE CITY HAS A GOVERNMENTAL BODY THAT'S, YEAH.
SO, UH, DO YOU HAVE A QUICK ONE ZA, GO? NO, GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
I GAVE, I ACTUALLY GIVE YOU A COUPLE CHANCE.
I, I WAS JUST GONNA, UM, ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY CAN SPEAK TO THIS CONVERSATION AROUND WHETHER ONE OF THE KEY RESIDENTS MENTION IN THE BACKUP HERE, UH, INDEED PARTICIPATED IN SEGREGATION OR NOT.
I'M NOT SURE IF THERE IS, UM, BECAUSE WHAT I'M HEARING FROM STAFF IS THAT IT SEEMS LIKE THEY DID THE RESEARCH AND DID NOT FIND THAT, SO IN THE PRESENTATION WE PUT FORWARD A TIMELINE.
I WILL JUST READ YOU THE FACTS AS I KNOW THEM, AND THEN YOU CAN DECIDE FOR YOURSELF WHAT YOU THINK THE LIKELIEST HISTORICAL REALITY IS.
WE KNOW FROM THE STAFF REPORT THAT CH SLATER OPERATED THE TAVERN CIRCA 1953 ACCORDING TO PRESERVATION AUSTIN.
I THINK ACCORDING TO THE HISTORY WE MOST, MOST OF US KNOW DURING THIS PERIOD, SEGREGATION OF BARS AND RESTAURANTS IN AUSTIN WAS QUOTE, WIDESPREAD.
AND ACTIVISTS BEGAN RESPONDING IN AUSTIN THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY IN THE LATE 1950S THROUGH THE EARLY 1960S THROUGH SIT-INS AND PROTESTS, PRESERVATION.
AUSTIN HAS REPORTED THAT IN 1958 RESTAURANT TURN FUTURE MAYOR HARRY AKIN, BECAME THE FIRST WHITE ESTABLISHMENT TO VOLUNTARILY INTEGRATE.
WE KNOW THAT SAGE SLATER OPERATED THE TAVERN AT THAT TIME, AND FOR TWO MORE YEARS UNTIL ABOUT 1960 WAS THE TIME AT WHICH, UH, SLATER'S FAMILY REPORTED THAT HIS OPERATION OF THE TAVERN CONCLUDED.
UM, SO AT THAT TIME, WE, WE DON'T HAVE A LIST, UM, BUT THERE'S A LIST IN HARRY AKINS, UH, PAPERS AT THE AUSTIN HISTORY CENTER OF, UH, THE ESTABLISHMENTS THAT HAD COMMITTED TO INTEGRATION AS OF JULY, 1963.
SO OB INTEGRATION EFFORTS HAD CONTINUED OVER THAT TIME.
HARRY AIKEN WAS A KEY PART OF THAT, UM, IN TERMS OF LIKE THE RESTAURANT IN TERMS OF THE WHITE RESTAURANTERS WHO WERE TRYING TO, TO PUSH THAT FORWARD OVER THAT LATE 1950S AND THROUGH THE EARLY 1960S.
UH, AND SO THE REASON WHY WE HAVE THAT LIST IS BECAUSE HARRY AIKEN HAD A PUBLIC CAMPAIGN TO GET OTHER RESTAURANTS, UM, TO INTEGRATE.
AND BY 1963, THEY HAD KIND OF DONE A BLANKETING OF DIFFERENT RESTAURANTS TO TRY TO GET PUBLIC, UM, COMMITMENTS TO THAT.
UH, AND THE TAVERN OF 1963 WAS NOT ON THAT LIST.
UM, SO AGAIN, SLATE EARNED AT 1953, I BELIEVE, TO 1960.
WE KNOW THAT HARRY AIKEN DESEGREGATED HIS RESTAURANTS IN 1958.
UH, WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS PUBLIC ACTIVISM TOWARDS DESEGREGATION IN THE LATE 1950S AND EARLY 1960S.
UM, AND IN TERMS OF THE LIST THAT WE HAVE, THAT WAS LISTED AS OF 1963, SO THOSE ARE THE, THAT'S THE TIMELINE.
AND I WANNA SAY THE IDEA OF FOCUSING ON THAT FACTOR AND IS NOT HERE TO DISPARAGE, UM, AN INDIVIDUAL OR A FAMILY, IT IS NOT ABOUT PLAYING THE RACE CARD.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ASSERTION FOR US TO CONSIDER AS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
AND WHEN I HAVE STAFF SAY THAT WE WOULD NEVER OPENLY ZONE HISTORIC A PROPERTY THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH SEGREGATION, I JUST WANNA SAY COLONEL, SHE'S HOUSE IN HYDE PARK IS ZONE
[02:25:01]
HISTORIC.WE HAVE ACTUAL ADVERTISEMENTS FROM HIS DEVELOPMENT SAYING WHITES ONLY.
WE HAVE CLEAR UNDERSTANDING THAT HE CREATED A SEGREGATION SEGREGATING COMMUNITY, WHICH TODAY IS HYDE PARK, OF COURSE, INTEGRATED.
BUT THAT HIS HOUSE IS THERE, IT IS THE SHY HOUSE.
WE STILL HAVE SHY PARK, SHY POOL.
WE KNOW SOMEONE WHO IS A SEGREGATIONIST.
WE CONTINUE TO LANDMARK AND HIGHLIGHT THAT PERSON THAT THAT IS PART OF THE HISTORY OF THIS CITY AND THIS COUNTRY IS AN IMPORTANT ASPECT, AND WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT AND CONTEXTUALIZE THAT.
INDEED, THEY WERE FOUNDING FATHERS OF THIS NATION WHO WERE, WHO HAD ENSLAVED PEOPLE THAT THEY HAD PURCHASED AND OWNED THROUGH THEIR LIFETIMES.
THAT IS NOT MEANT TO BE DISPARAGING TO THEM OR ERASING THAT HISTORY.
IT IS HIGHLIGHTING A RACIST HISTORY WITHIN THIS CITY AND THAT COUNTRY THAT IS IMPORTANT.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S SUPPORT FOR WHAT I'M SAYING HERE OR FOR WHAT IS BEING FORWARD, BUT IF THAT ASSERTION IS MADE, I WOULD HOPE THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO REALLY DISPEL THAT AS A RUMOR.
OTHERWISE WE'RE NOT DOING JUSTICE TO OWN HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROCESS OR TO OUR CITY OR THE PEOPLE OF COLOR WHO LIVE HERE, WHO ARE NOT SIMPLY PLAYING THE RACE CARD.
AND, AND JUST TO, AND TO FOLLOW UP ON THE POINT OF, IN TERMS OF ADDRESSING THESE HEAD ON AND CONTEXTUALIZING THEM, I, I ALSO WANTED TO NOTE A POINT THAT WAYLON MENTIONED EARLIER, WHICH IS THAT IF YOU LOOK BACK TO THE FIRST STAFF REPORT ON THIS, CH SLATER WAS THE ONLY INDIVIDUAL MENTIONED RM DEL I WAS NOT MENTIONED IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE FIRST ONE, AND WAS INTRODUCED IN A, THE FOLLOW UP STAFF REPORT.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY, UM, I WAS NOT, I WAS NOT MEANING TO SAY THAT WE HAVE NOT LANDMARKED, UM, RESOURCES AND THINGS ASSOCIATED, UM, WITH YES, I'M SORRY.
WE'RE, UH, STEPH, WE, HE'S, HE, WE DON'T HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
UH, WE'RE, AND WE'RE AT A PEOPLE WITH QUESTIONS, SO WE'RE, UH, WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON.
SO, UH, THAT'S ALL OUR QUESTIONS, I THINK.
VERY GOOD DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS.
UM, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER COX, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
OKAY, SO THIS IS APPROVAL OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
COMMISSIONER COX, THERE ARE SO MANY THINGS TO COVER HERE, BUT I, I'M ACTUALLY REALLY GLAD WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE DO NEED TO TALK ABOUT.
UH, ALL THESE ELEMENTS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.
I, I REALLY WANT US TO REFOCUS OUR ATTENTION ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE.
AND I WAS A BIT FRUSTRATED WITH THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION BECAUSE I FELT LIKE THEY WEREN'T ADDRESSING NECESSARILY THE MERITS OF THE CASE, AND THEY WERE TRYING TO BRING IN ALL OF THESE OTHER EXTERNAL ELEMENTS TO CREATE CONTROVERSY OR DIVISION ABOUT THE DECISION WE'RE ABOUT TO MAKE THAT, THAT REALLY, I DON'T THINK SHOULD BE PART OF THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION BECAUSE OF THE MERITS OF THIS PROPERTY.
WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT EQUITY, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE RACIAL PAST, WE NEED TO HIGHLIGHT ALL THAT STUFF THROUGH OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE DENYING HISTORICALLY VALUABLE PROPERTIES, UM, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH OF THE OTHER HISTORICALLY VALUE PROPERTIES THAT WILL HIGHLIGHT THAT PARTICULAR PART OF, OF AUSTIN'S HISTORY.
YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDING FROM THE STREET.
I'M LOOKING AT THE STREET VIEW RIGHT NOW.
I CAN UNDERSTAND WITH THE, WITH THE CONSTRUCTION FENCE, WITH THE PRIVACY SCREEN, WHY A PEDESTRIAN MAY NOT BE, BE ABLE TO SEE IT, BUT, UM, THE STREET, THE GOOGLE STREET CAR CAN CLEARLY SEE IT.
AND IF THEY JUST WOULD TRIM THE TREES PROPERLY, THIS WOULD BE A GORGEOUS HISTORIC PROPERTY THAT YOU CAN VIEW FROM, UM, FROM SCENIC DRIVE, AND IT'S CALLED SCENIC DRIVE.
SO ANY RANDOM TOURISTS THAT WANTS SOMETHING SCENIC MIGHT JUST DRIVE DOWN SCENIC DRIVE BECAUSE IT'S CALLED SCENIC DRIVE.
BUT, BUT IN ALL SERIOUSNESS, THAT THIS TO ME TICKS A LOT OF THE BOXES.
IT MAY NOT TICK, TICK ALL OF 'EM, BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO DENY THIS BECAUSE SOMEONE RICH GETS A TAX BREAK OR BECAUSE WE DON'T HISTORICALLY ZONE ENOUGH PROPERTIES THAT REPRESENT CONTROVERSIAL PARTS OF OUR PAST, I THINK THAT WE'RE, WE'RE DENYING OVERALL AUSTIN'S HISTORY.
UM, AND I JUST DON'T THINK WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD GO DOWN THAT PATH.
BUT I DO SUPPORT US TRYING TO INITIATE A PROCESS TO OPEN THAT UP, HAVE THAT CONVERSATION, AND
[02:30:01]
MODIFY THIS WHOLE PROCESS WE'RE GOING THROUGH TO TRY TO ENCAPSULATE THOSE CONCERNS THAT, THAT WE'RE ALL EXPRESSING.SO APOLOGIES IF I TOOK A LITTLE LONG.
UH, COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST, UH, COMMISSIONERS ARE, I'LL TRY TO KEEP THIS QUICK TO COMMISSIONER COX'S POINT.
THE IDEA HERE IS TO ONLY LOOK AT THE MATERIAL FACTS OF THE CASE, UM, BY STAFF'S OWN BACKUP.
ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE ARE ZONING THIS HISTORIC IS THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS.
AND I READ AFTER THE SHOUTY FAMILY LOST A YOUNG SON WHILE LIVING AT THE PROPERTY 90 45, THEY SOLD THE HOW TO CH IN MILDRED'S SLATER.
IT STAYED IN THIS SLATER FAMILY UNTIL 2021.
ACCORDING TO TCAD RECORDS, CH SLATER WAS A LOCAL ATTORNEY AND CO-OWNER OF THE TAVERN, CIRCA 1953.
THOSE ARE THE MATERIAL FACTS IN FRONT OF US.
LOOKING AT THE ONE REASON FOR ZONING THIS HISTORIC ARE THE HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS, WHICH INCLUDES MR. SLATER.
AND I HATE TO SAY, I'M NOT SURE THAT EITHER SIDE AT THIS POINT HAS CLEARLY SHOWED ME THAT THERE IS A CONCERN AROUND THE PAST OF THAT FIRST NATURE, NOT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT REMAINS.
SO I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST IT, BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT'S A CRITICAL THING FOR US TO CONSIDER AS PART OF THIS, BECAUSE INDEED IT IS IN THE BACKUP, AND THAT IS INDEED WHAT WE ARE CONSIDERING.
ONE THING I LIED TO THAT IS I THINK A MISSIONER COX MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, THE TROUBLE WITH THE, THE TAX ABATEMENT ASSOCIATE WITH IT AND HOW IT MAKES THESE DIFFICULT, THESE CASES DIFFICULT.
IT'S A LOCAL LAW BY MY UNDERSTANDING.
SO I HOPE HE AND OTHERS WILL JOIN ME IN SENDING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL TO REMOVE THAT TAX ABATEMENT.
SO INDEED, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE ACTUAL BENEFIT AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION OF A PROPERTY.
SO I HOPE YOU ALL WILL JOIN ME WHEN I BRING THAT RECOMMENDATION FOR COUNCIL.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER, SPEAK IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER.
SHE, SO THIS, THIS PROPERTY GOES WAY BACK FOR ME, BACK IN THE LATE EIGHTIES WHEN I WAS, UM, AT THE UT SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE.
I MEAN, I'M A, I WAS A AVID CYCLIST THEN, AND, AND I CONTINUED ON THROUGH THE YEARS.
BUT, UM, I WOULD CONTINUE EXPLORING AND WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR, YOU KNOW, LIKE COMMISSIONER COX WAS SAYING, IT'S LIKE SCENIC BOULEVARD, RIGHT? SO I'M FINDING PLACES TO GO BIKE, AND I DISCOVERED THIS NEAT LITTLE SECTION OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAD THESE STONE HOMES.
AND YES, YOU COULD SEE THE HOME BECAUSE IT WAS, YOU KNOW, BACK THEN, I MEAN, IT WAS WELL KEPT AND THROUGH ALL THE YEARS, I MEAN, EVEN WHEN I WAS WORKING, UM, IT STAYED AS MY PREMIER BIKE ROUTE.
AND NOW EVEN THE CITY IS DESIGNATING AS ONE OF THE MAIN BIKE ROUTES.
AND SO THERE'S REASON FOR THIS TO BE HERE.
AND IT'S, YOU, YOU SEE THE HOME.
UM, AND THERE WAS SOMETHING MAGICAL, MAGICAL ABOUT THAT SECTION BECAUSE YOU GO UP THIS HILL AND IT'S GOT THIS VIEW OVER IT, AND THEN YOU KIND OF DIVE DOWN SCENIC BOULEVARD.
BUT UP AT THIS TOP SECTION, THERE WAS A STORY, AND I WAS WONDERING WHAT WAS THE STORY? I DIDN'T EVEN LIVE IN TERRYTOWN BACK THEN.
BUT, UM, SO THROUGH THE YEARS, YOU KNOW, AS I GOT MORE INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEN YOU START LEARNING MORE ABOUT IT.
WELL, WHAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TRYING TO PIECE TOGETHER THE ARCHEOLOGY OF WHAT AUSTIN WAS BACK THEN.
AND THEN I REALIZED THIS TOLD A STORY.
THIS, THERE WAS SOMETHING HAPPENING AT THIS PART OF TOWN, AND I KNEW CLARKSVILLE HAD A SPECIAL THING THAT WAS GOING ON EAST SIDE, HAD SOMETHING SPECIAL GOING ON.
SO THIS, THIS WENT TOGETHER TO ME AS SOMETHING THAT WAS UNIQUE AS PART OF THE HISTORY OF AUSTIN, WHEN I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY SET FOOT ON THE PROPERTY, IT WAS TO ME, YOU KNOW, LIKE, UM, WELL, IT WAS SAID, IT'S LIKE, IT, IT DEFIES EXPECTATIONS, YOU KNOW? AND I KNOW WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT THIS HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION AND WE KEEP PINNING THIS ON WHO THE PERSON WAS, WHO OWNED IT, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND HONESTLY, I MEAN, LIKE, WHEN WE GO SEE A SHOW, LIKE AT ZACH THEATER, ARE WE REALLY LOOKING AT THE DONORS ON THE WALL? ARE WE, I MEAN, NO, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE ARTISANS WHO PUT TOGETHER THE SHOW, RIGHT? AND THOSE ARE WHO WE ARE IN AWE OF.
AND WHEN I WALKED THROUGH THAT PROPERTY, THAT'S WHAT I WAS IN AWE OF, TO SEE THE CARVINGS ON THE STONE TO EVEN HOW EACH OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE KEY STONES WERE PUT TOGETHER AND ALL THE DIFFERENT ARTISTIC PIECES THAT WAS PUT IN THERE, YOU KNOW, THE IRON WORK.
IT TOLD THE HISTORY EVEN FURTHER BEYOND JUST THE PEOPLE WHO OWNED IT.
AND THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT I FEEL IF WE GOT HISTORIC DESIGNATION, WE WOULD ACTUALLY COMMEMORATE.
AND THAT GOES BEYOND JUST WHO WAS THE WEALTHY PERSON WHO HAD IT.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING THIS.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER, SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION.
DID YOU HAVE YOUR, YOU WANNA SPEAK? I LIKE SPEAK NEUTRALLY.
I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE POINT OF MERITS, TO THE POINT OF EQUITY AND THE POINT OF BENEFITS.
UM, I AGREE, UH, WITH SOME OF THE STATEMENTS ABOUT LOOKING AT THE MERIT MERITS OF THIS CASE IN
[02:35:01]
TERMS OF A HISTORIC PICTURE OF ARCHITECTURE.AND I WAS REALLY PONDERING ON THE WORD VERNACULAR, WHICH WAS USED EARLIER, UM, GOING, WHAT DOES THAT REALLY MEAN? UM, YOU KNOW, KIND OF BREAKING THE MOLD AND LOOKING AT THE, THE ARTISTRY OF THIS BUILDING.
AND, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, APPRECIATING THAT PIECE OF IT BEYOND, I, I DISAGREE THAT IT WITH THE LIMITED VIEW ON JUST THE SLATERS AND THIS PARTICULAR, UM, ESPECIALLY THIS LIKE LOOKING AROUND AT THE DATES OF THE TAVERN AND STUFF, WHICH WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A LOT OF EXPLICIT INFORMATION.
WE HAVE SOME, UM, IT'S A, IT'S A LOT OF SPECULATION AND FILLING IN.
AND THAT, THAT BRINGS ME TO THE RACIAL EQUITY POINT BECAUSE IT IS A BIG FREAKING DEAL.
THE RACIAL EQUITY ASPECT OF ALL OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND CULTURE IS A HUGE DEAL.
AND I DO THINK WE NEED TO BE REALISTIC ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHITE MALE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE 1950S IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, ON THE WEST SIDE, AND OF COURSE THEY WERE RACIST.
OF COURSE, WE HAVE STUFF ATTRIBUTED TO RACISTS ALL OVER THE PLACE.
YOU KNOW, HOW ME, MEXICANS AND NATIVE PEOPLE BURLESON HAD LYNCHED, AND HOW MANY OF THE THINGS STILL ALL OVER THE PLACE ARE NAMED AFTER PROBLEMATIC SEGREGATIONIST? I ALSO THINK WE DO A DISSERVICE TO THIS MOVEMENT WHEN WE JUST THROW OUT THE WORD SEGREGATIONIST WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A REGULAR PROPERTY OWNER WHO SOLD THEIR PROPERTY BEFORE, UH, AN ACTUAL LIST OF, YOU KNOW, DESEGREGATING CHAMPIONS CAME OUT.
I THINK THAT DOES A DISSERVICE TO THE ARGUMENT AS WELL, BECAUSE RACIAL EQUITY IS ABOUT OUTCOMES.
AND I APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONER COX ABOUT WHAT DOES THIS REALLY DO FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTED BY THE NEGATIVE SYSTEMIC INEQUITIES OF RACISM AND CLASSISM IN THIS CITY.
AND THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO CENTERING OF THOSE PEOPLE IN THIS CONVERSATION.
UM, SO I'VE, I'VE LONG SAID THAT RACIAL EQUITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN THIS CITY MEANS MORE PROTECTION, MORE PRESERVATION, UH, MORE EQUITABLE MOVEMENTS THAT BENEFIT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE DISPROPORTIONATELY NEGATIVELY IMPACTED, NOT JUST DEGRADING AND DEMOLISHING BUILDINGS ON THE WEST SIDE, CUZ WE GOTTA STICK IT TO SOMEBODY OVER THERE.
UM, AND THAT IT JUST DOESN'T REALLY HELP US.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE BENEFITS, I MEAN, I'VE BEEN REALLY AMBIVALENT ABOUT THIS COMMISSION.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT CONVINCED COMPLETELY THAT WE GET MORE PUBLIC BENEFIT EITHER WAY, BUT BY LISTENING TO THIS CONVERSATION, I KNOW THIS BUILDING IS MORE ACCESSIBLE BY LAKE, BY BIKE, BY VIEW THAN IT THE BENEFIT OF A HUGE MCMANSION IN ITS PLACE.
AND THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SEE.
UH, THOSE SPEAKER IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION.
UH, I'M GONNA SAY A FEW WORDS, UH, JUST ON THE MERITS, UM, OF THE CASE.
I THINK IT, IT SUPPORTS, UH, HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
WE DID HEAR FROM ANOTHER FEW NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WEREN'T FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD EXACTLY AND STILL HAD A LOT TO SAY ABOUT IT AND ITS IMPORTANCE, UH, INCLUDING, UH, FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HERE.
UM, IT IS ALSO, I DROVE DOWN THERE THE OTHER DAY.
I RAN BY THIS PROPERTY ON MY BIKE WITH MY SON.
I THINK IT'S TOTALLY ACCESSIBLE AND, UH, ALONG SCENIC DRIVE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN ISSUE AT ALL.
AND YES, THERE IS A CONSTRUCTION FENCE, HOPEFULLY THAT'LL BE GONE AND, UH, IT'LL BE IN VIEW OF, UH, MANY MORE PEOPLE.
UH, BUT I THINK JUST ON THE MERITS, WE HAVE A 10 ZERO VOTE BY THE HISTORIC COMMISSION.
I MEAN, I WANT TO HONOR THAT AS WELL.
UM, A LOT OF GOOD ISSUES BROUGHT UP ABOUT OUR POLICIES AND WE DO NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.
UM, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DO HERE AT THIS COMMISSION, I THINK TAKE UP, UH, CODE ISSUES IF WE, IF WE WANT TO, TO TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE SHORTCOMINGS OF, UM, OUR PROCESS.
SO AGREE WITH OUR COMMISSIONERS THAT, UH, SPOKE KIND OF THE NEED TO IMPROVE OUR POLICIES.
UM, BUT I WILL, I THINK THIS, UH, PROPERTY DESERVES HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
I'LL BE VOTING FOR IT NOW, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING AGAINST, WE HAVE ONE MORE SPOT? YES.
YES, ANDERSON, A LOT OF, LOT OF IMPORTANT THINGS HAPPENING HERE TONIGHT.
UM, I DON'T KNOW, I JUST FIND IT DIFFICULT TO GIVE A FIVE TO 10 MILLION HOME A TAX BREAK AGAINST THEIR WISHES.
IT'S JUST, I, I REALLY HOPE THAT PRESERVATION AUSTIN AND EVERYONE WHO'S INTO EVERYTHING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ZONING HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND, AND GIVING BETTER ZONING AND ALL THESE TYPES OF THINGS CAN HELP WORK ON THE PRESERVATION BONUS THAT IT FEELS LIKE WE'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT FOR A LONG TIME.
IF THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO ALLOW A NEW PRIMARY HOME IN AN ABU MAYBE THIS WOULD BE A LOT EASIER CONVERSATION AND WE CAN HELP INCENTIVIZE SUCH THINGS TO HAPPEN.
BUT INSTEAD WE HAVE SF ZONING IN AN AREA WITH NOTHING BUT FIVE TO 10 MILLION HOMES, AND I THINK THIS IS GONNA BE KIND OF A FORESEEABLE RESULT.
[02:40:01]
GO AHEAD.SO THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SHAY, UH, TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE HERE ON THE DI FIRST.
THOSE IN FAVOR? UH, THOSE, UM, AGAINST THE MOTION.
AND NOW VIRTUALLY THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR GREEN CARDS.
SO THAT MOTION, I'M COUNTING SIX THREE, SO THAT MOTION DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH VOTES.
UH, CAN WE SEND IT TO COUNCIL LIKE THAT? SURE.
COMMISSION LAY ONOR, THE IT REPORTED COUNCIL WITHOUT A STAFF OR WITHOUT THE, UM, RECOMMENDATION? UH, DUE TO LACK OF AFFIRMATIVE.
UH, WANTED, I HAD SWITCHED THE ORDER, AND I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED.
WE HAVE TWO MORE CASES, UM, BEFORE US.
UM, AND I'VE BEEN, UM, MR. AVE, YOU WERE SAYING THAT, UH, DO WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON 16, DO WE? EXCEPT FOR THE APPLICANT CHAIR COMMISSION ALWAYS ON AVERSE.
SO WE DON'T HAVE A REGISTERED SPEAKER.
HOWEVER, UH, THE COMMISSION MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC.
UM, SO JUST IN COMMISSIONERS LOOKING TOWARD, DO YOU WANNA TAKE UP 16 FIRST AND THEN PROCEED WITH THE CODE? OKAY.
YES, YOU HAVE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS.
SO, UM, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE UP ITEM 16 FIRST, AND I APOLOGIZE TO STAFF.
UH, HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE SHORT.
LET'S, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND TAKE UP ITEM 16, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM 29.
UH, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND START WITH, UH, THE STAFF REPORT ON 16, UH, QUICK, DOES ANYBODY NEED TO, WE HAVE SO LOW NUMBERS.
DO WE NEED TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK BECAUSE WE CAN'T HAVE TOO MANY PEOPLE LEAVE.
LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS.
UH, LET'S COME BACK HERE AT, UH, 9 0 5.
OKAY, WE HAVE, UM, WE HAVE A QUORUM.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND BRING THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
[16. Rezoning: C14-2021-0190 - 3020 E Cesar Chavez, District 3 ]
SO THE NEXT CASE WE'VE READ TO ARE GONNA TAKE UP ITEM 16.AND, UH, DO WE HAVE STAFF TO GIVE US OVERVIEW? GOOD EVENING.
HEATHER CHAFFIN WITH HOUSEMAN DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS A REZONING REQUEST FOR C 14 20 21 0 1 9 0 3 0 2 OH E CAESAR CHAVEZ, CHANGING FROM CS M U C O N P TO CS M U V N P.
THE STAFF REQUEST IS TO SUPPORT THIS WITH THE REMAINING CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS TO APPLY, WHICH ARE PROHIBITED LAND USES, UM, AND CONDITIONAL LAND USES, INCLUDING THINGS LIKE ADULT ORIENTED BUSINESSES, AUTOMOTIVE RENTAL SALES, WASHING, AND THEN CONDITIONAL COMMERCIAL, OFF STREET PARKING, LIMITED WAREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTION AND RELATED USES.
THOSE ARE ALL ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE REPORT.
THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO THESE CONDITIONAL USES.
SO THE REQUEST IS BASICALLY CSM U TO CSM U V WITH THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WITH PROHIBIT PROHIBITED AND CONDITIONAL USES.
IT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CAESAR, SHADOW STREET BETWEEN LINDON AND TILLERY STREETS.
IT'S CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH OFFICE USES EAST OF THE PROPERTY.
IT'S A CONVENIENT STORE SERVICE STATION.
THESE ARE DEVELOP OR ZONED CSM, U C O N P.
UH, OTHER SURROUNDING LAND USES ARE ZONED CSM,
[02:45:01]
U C O N P AND GM MEETING, AND P DEVELOPED WITH OFFICE AND LAND USE, USE OFFICE AND RESTAURANT USES.AGAIN, SORRY ABOUT MY VOICE ACROSS CESAR CHAVAS TO THE SOUTH, OUR TIES OWNED C S M U C O N P G R M U C O N V N P, AND, UH, S M U S M THREE AND P THAT ARE DEVELOPED WITH A LUMBER YARD, LI LIMITED RETAIL, AND THEN DEVELOPED LAND STAFF IS SUPPORTING THE REQUEST BECAUSE THIS IS A CAPITAL METRO HIGH, UH, FREQUENCY ROUTE ROUTE 17 AND FOUR.
AND, UH, THE CITY HAS BEEN APPROVING VMU ON CORRIDORS THAT WERE NOT DESIGNATED AS VMU CORRIDORS WHEN VBU WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED.
UH, THE ADDITION, AGAIN, MIXED USE IS ALREADY ALLOWED AT THIS SITE.
VMU WILL ALLOW, UH, REDUCED SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BUT IN, UH, IN EXCHANGE FOR THOSE REDUCED, UH, DEVELOPMENT EXCHANGES, THEY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
SO, UM, I'M AVAILABLE FOR OTHER QUESTIONS.
CHAIR WILL NOT HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
HELLO COMMISSIONERS, I'M LEAH BOJO HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
I KNOW YOU HAVE A LOT AHEAD OF YOU.
UM, SO TO ORIENT YOU TO THE SITE, THIS, IT'S LOCATED ON EAST CAESAR CHAVEZ AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LINDON STREET.
YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP WHERE SOME OF THE CLOSE BY TRANSIT STOPS ARE THAT HEATHER MENTIONED, UH, THE BLUE STARS.
UM, LOOKING IN A LITTLE CLOSER, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE SITE IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A C 1980S OFFICE BUILDING AND A SURFACE PARKING LOT.
UM, IT'S JUST UNDER 2.35 ACRES, AND IT'S A VERY WELL SITUATED CENTRAL EAST AUSTIN SITE.
UM, IT DOES ACCESS TO SEVERAL EXCELLENT BUS ROUTES, IS WALKABLE TO THE BUTLER HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL, UM, AS WELL AS A VARIETY OF RESTAURANTS AND SERVICES.
AND THIS SECTION OF CESAR CHAVEZ IS AN IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR.
SO, LIKE HEATHER SAID, TODAY, THE ZONING IS CS M U C O N P, AND THE FLU IS ALREADY DESIGNATED AS MIXED USE.
UM, WE'RE PROPOSING ONLY TO ADD THE VMU OVERLAY.
RESIDENTIAL IS ALREADY PERMITTED ON THE SITE, AND THE SITE AND INTERSECTION HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED AS A GOOD LOCATION FOR DENSE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH I'LL GET TO MORE IN JUST A MINUTE.
UM, WE ARE PROPOSING TO KEEP THE LIST OF PROHIBITED AND CONDITIONAL USES THAT WE'RE PUT IN PLACE VIA THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IN 2003, AND THE SITE WILL COMPLY WITH COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS.
UM, SO THESE ARE SEVERAL, UM, IMPORTANT COMPONENTS OF THE GO VALLEY JOHNSTON TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OR THE GOALS OF A, OF MIX OF USES ARE OUTLINED.
THEY SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBE ENCOURAGING RESIDENTIAL USE ON SITES THAT ARE CURRENTLY COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND PROVIDING MIXED USE AND CONVENIENT AND WALKABLE LOCATIONS LIKE THIS ONE IS.
UM, THIS SPECIFIC INTERSECTION IS CALLED OUT, UM, AND THE PLAN IS A PLACE TO ENCOURAGE RES UH, REDEVELOPMENT WITH MIXED USE, A COMMERCIAL GROUND FLOOR, AND RESIDENTIAL USES ABOVE, UM, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE VMU OVERLAY DOES.
UM, IT EVEN GOES SO FAR AS TO REQUIRE A PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED FIRST USE, UM, WHICH GOES FURTHER THAN THE MIX USE OVERLAY DOES, WHICH, UM, ONLY ALLOWS A MIX OF USES.
UM, AND THIS INCLUDES THE, THE MU INCLUDES A DENSITY CAP, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE REQUESTING THE VMU OVERLAY IN THIS LOCATION.
UM, AS YOU HEARD FROM, FROM HEATHER, UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS REQUEST DUE TO THE TRANSIT ACCESS AND THE ONSITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION, UM, THAT WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE.
THIS IS IN, IN, THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THIS, UH, 2017 STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT.
UM, THEY'RE CALL FOR BOTH MORE MARKET RATE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
UM, BMU IS A CITY ENFORCED AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENT, UM, AND DISTRICT THREE, AS YOU PROBABLY JUST READ, IS BEHIND.
IT'S ONLY AT 16% PROGRESS TOWARD ITS OVERALL AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS, UM, AND IS ALSO NOT ON TRACK CURRENTLY TO MEET AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS FOR THIS LEVEL OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, SO I WANNA CLOSE BY SAYING THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT IN 2008 WHEN THE VMU OPT-IN PROCESS TOOK PLACE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGNATED AIRPORT ON SEVENTH STREET AS THEIR VMU CORRIDORS.
UM, HOWEVER, AUSTIN WAS A VERY DIFFERENT PLACE IN 2008.
UM, WHILE THE MEDIAN HOME PRICES AND THE AVERAGE RENT HAS MORE THAN DOUBLED,
[02:50:01]
THE MEDIAN INCOME FOR A SINGLE PERSON HAS INCREASED BY LESS THAN 12%.THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN INCOME RESTRICTED HOME AND A MARKET UNIT RENT AT, I'M SORRY, AN INCOME RESTRICTED UNIT AND A MARKET UNIT AT THAT TIME WAS ONLY A HUNDRED DOLLARS.
AND NOW THE AVERAGE RENTAL IS, UM, $900 DIFFERENCE THAN A SUBSIDIZED UNIT.
UM, SO THIS MEANS THAT WE NEED EVERY ONE OF THOSE UNITS, AND WE ESPECIALLY NEED THE INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS MORE THAN EVER.
OUR DEVELOPMENT IS IN, UM, THE VERY EARLY STAGES.
SO, UM, BUT YOU CAN SEE HERE, UM, THAT THE VMU OVERLAY WILL RESULT IN ABOUT 19 UNITS OF 60% MFI.
AND AS IT ZONED TODAY, UM, IT WOULD BE ABOUT A HUNDRED UNITS LESS AND ZERO WOULD BE INCOME RESTRICTED.
SO, UM, WITH THAT, I WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
MS. BUD, YOU COULD PROCEED TO A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL, PLEASE.
MY, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK I NEED THE REBUTTAL.
CLOSE THE SPEAKERS ON THIS SIDE.
OKAY, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE.
UH, YOU HAVE MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, COMMISSIONER ZA SIGN BY BY YOUR PLE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE ABOUT TO CLOSE THIS HEARING.
UH, THOSE ON THE DIAS AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN.
UH, 90, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
IT'S GONNA BE FIRST COMMISSIONER, UH, POLITO.
I HAVE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, I NOTICED THE, THE MFI IS LISTED.
UM, YOU ALL LISTED FOR ONE PERSON.
WAS THAT CONSISTENT DOWN THE LIST? UH, FOR THE AVERAGE RENTS THAT YOU MENTIONED AS WELL? THE AVERAGE RENTS WERE JUST AVERAGE OF ALL UNIT TYPES.
BUT THE, UM, THE COMPARISON OF IS, IS CONSISTENT BETWEEN 2008 AND 2022.
AND THEN THE, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, UH, WHAT IS THE MIX OF UNITS WITH RESPECT TO EFFICIENCY, STUDIO ONE, BEDROOM, TWO BEDROOM, ET CETERA? WE DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION YET.
UM, SO THEN, UH, AND YOU ALL HAVE SAID 10% AT 60% MFI, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WOULD BE VMU ONE.
THE SITE IS CONSTRUCTED BY, UM, COMPATIBILITY FROM THE NORTH, UH, ACTUALLY AND THE SOUTH FROM ACROSS THE STREET.
SO, UM, SO THAT WOULD BE A VMU ONE BUILDING 10% AT 60% MFI.
AND THE COMPATIBILITY RESTRICTIONS LIMIT YOU TO WHAT HEIGHT AND WHAT YEAH, IN GENERAL, GO AHEAD.
THE BASE DISTRICT GETS YOU TO 60 FEET OF HEIGHT, UM, BUT WE CAN'T, THE, IT ACTUALLY DOESN'T QUITE GET TO 60 FEET.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT GETS TO ABOUT 55 IN THE MIDDLE, SO IT'S PROBABLY GONNA BE, UH, A FOUR STORY BUILDING.
COMMISSIONERS, ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? UH, UH, YES, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, UM, FIRST MR. JANIS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP IN QUICK QUESTION.
UM, I THINK I HEARD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF AS THE CHAIR OF THE CONTACT TEAM.
UM, I'M CHAIR THE GO VALLEY JOHNSON NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM.
ALSO THE CHAIR OF RIVER BLUFF NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND, AND DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW HOW OLD THE CONTACT TEAM IS, OR HOW OLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IS? WE ARE THE ORIGINAL GROUP THAT CREATED THE CONTACT TEAM PROCESS.
IN 2003 WHEN OUR PLAN WAS ADOPTED, WE REFUSED TO DISBAND WHEN THE, WHEN CITY STAFF, UH, ATTEMPTED TO DO THAT, I CAME TO THIS BODY AND ALSO TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND TOLD 'EM THAT WE WERE GONNA STAY IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MONITORED OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH IS THE BLUEPRINT FOR OUR, THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE ACCEPTANCE OF, UH, OF, UH, UH, OF DEVELOPMENT IN AUSTIN.
IT IS, UH, YES, THERE ARE, AUSTIN IS NOT THE SAME AS IT WAS BEFORE IN PLACES LIKE SOUTH LAMAR.
FIRST, UH, I MEAN SECOND STREET, FIFTH STREET, SIXTH STREET, NEAR, UH, I 35 FIFTH STREET, UH, SOUTH CONGRESS.
ALL THOSE LOOK LIKE ANYWHERE USA THAT'S WHAT WE DO NOT WANT.
WHO WAS THE CHAIR BEFORE YOU? I, I HAVE BEEN THE CHAIR SINCE 2003.
I'M ONE OF THE ORIGINAL AUTHORS.
HALF OF OUR, UH, FIVE OF OUR, UH, 11 MEMBER GROUP, UH, ARE THE ORIGINAL AUTHORS.
SOME OF THEM ARE, UH, UM, PEOPLE WHO BELONG TO THREE AND FOUR GENERATIONS OF EAST AUSTIN FAMILIES WHO HAVE RESISTED THE DISPLACEMENT AND, AND THE SYSTEMIC, UH, UH, GENTRIFICATION THAT'S BEEN HAPPENING THERE.
I HAVE A QUESTION, MISS BOJO NOW.
WELL, I, I DO WANT TO SAY TO YOU THAT WHEN THE VMU TWO, UH, UH, THING WAS COMING UP, THERE WAS A, A PROPOSAL TO ADD VMU AND ALL OF US, UH, IN,
[02:55:01]
IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS, AND THE GRASSROOTS OPPOSED THAT.SO VMU, UH, IS IT, IT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGNATES SEVENTH AND AIRPORT.
THAT'S WHERE WE'RE ACCEPTING THAT KIND OF DENSITY.
WE DO NOT WANT TO SET PRECEDENT.
IF THIS SITE DID NOT HAVE COMPATIBILITY, DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF THE DIFFERENCE OF HOMES? IT COULD BE THAT COULD BE BUILT HERE? I DO.
UM, IF THERE WERE NOT COMPATIBILITY ON THE SITE, THE HOME, THE NUMBER OF HOMES COULD BE AS MANY AS 270 ROUGHLY.
AND WHAT IS THE PROPOSED NUMBER OF HOMES TODAY? WITH COMPATIBILITY? WITH COMPATIBILITY? WE'RE LOOKING AT CLOSER TO 200, I BELIEVE.
OH, MR. ZA, I'LL TRY TO KEEP THIS REALLY, REALLY QUICK.
MS. ER, I FEEL LIKE WE HEARD FROM THE NEIGHBOR CONTACT TEAM THAT THEY HAD ASKED TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES TO SORT OF FIGURE OUT, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO THE WORK THAT YOU DID AROUND THAT AND WHAT WAS CONSIDERED? CERTAINLY.
UM, SO WHEN WE, WHEN WE TALKED EARLY ON AND SORT OF TALKED ABOUT THE SITE AND THE COMPATIBILITY, UM, THAT AFFECTED IT, AND HOW THIS CHANGE TO VMU DOESN'T ACTUALLY CHANGE THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING, IT JUST CHANGES THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT CAN FIT INSIDE IT.
UM, UM, MR. JAN'S PROPOSED THAT WE GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND ASK FOR A VARIANCE INSTEAD, BECAUSE IF I MAY, UH, HE SAID HE DIDN'T, THEY DIDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH MORE UNITS INSIDE THE ENVELOPE, BUT THEY JUST DIDN'T WANT THE V ON THE MAP.
AND SO IF THERE WAS ANOTHER WAY TO GET THERE, THEY WOULD SUPPORT THAT.
UM, AND SO WE, WE DID EXPLORE THAT IDEA.
UH, WE TOOK A FEW MONTHS AND SORT OF EXPLORE THAT AND WAITED FOR VMU TO SHAKE OUT AND JUST KIND OF SEE WHERE EVERYTHING LANDED.
AND, UM, REALLY, UM, HAVING BEEN TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEVERAL TIMES, I FEEL, I FEEL, UM, CONFIDENT THAT THERE IS NOT A HARDSHIP ON THE SITE AND THAT THERE IS A ZONING REMEDY, WHICH ARE USUALLY SORT OF THE TWO QUESTIONS THAT COME UP, UM, IN THAT REQUEST.
AND SO, UM, SO WE ARE BACK BEFORE YOU WITH THE ZONING REQUEST BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS THE PATH, UM, TO GET THIS CHANGE.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING CLEARLY IS REALLY THE CHALLENGE HERE OF WANTING TO GO FOR THE VMU INSTEAD OF JUST THE MU THAT IS JUST THE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT WOULD LIMIT IT.
AND THERE IS NOTHING ELSE THAT WE CAN SORT OF FIGURE OUT, ALTERNATIVELY, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANOTHER PATH TO THIS PROJECT CHAIR, OWEN.
I, I, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT SORT OF THAT QUESTION OF HARDSHIPS, I DON'T WANNA PUT YOU ON THE SPOT.
YOU CAN SAY THAT THIS IS NOT APPROPRIATE, BUT I WONDER IF YOU CAN SPEAK US A LITTLE BIT THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PROCESS ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
IS THIS LIKE, IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE CONSTRAINED BY OUR CODE AND I WONDER IF YOU HAVE THOUGHTS OR SOMETHING? SO THERE ARE TWO PATHS YOU CAN TAKE FOR, FOR THIS KIND OF REQUEST.
YOU CAN CAN EITHER USE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT WITH BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, YOU HAVE TO PROVE THAT THERE IS AN ACTUAL HARDSHIP THAT IS ALREADY PREDEFINED SOMEWHAT UNDER STATE LAW.
WE WE'RE VERY CONFINED OR ARE RESTRICTED BY WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DETERMINE AS A HARDSHIP.
WE AS OPPOSED IF, IF THEY BRING IT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVE A HARDSHIP, YOU JUST HAVE TO SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE WANNA DO, AND WE THINK IT WILL BENEFIT THE CITY BY DOING IT.
UH, AND THEN LEAVE IT TO THE COMMISSION TO MAKE UP THEIR MINDS.
UM, IF I, I THINK IT DEPENDS MUCH LIKE THIS COMMISSION A LITTLE BIT ON THE MAKEUP OF THE BOARD MEMBERS.
SOME BOARD MEMBERS, UH, MIGHT BE A LITTLE MORE LENIENT OR IN SOME AREAS ON WHAT THEY MIGHT THINK IS A HARDSHIP OR WHAT MIGHT BE DETERMINED AS A HARDSHIP.
UH, I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF GRAY AREA THERE.
SO, UM, WITHOUT, WITHOUT KNOWING THE CASE ITSELF OR WHAT WAS BEING PRESENTED AS A HARDSHIP, IT WOULD BE REALLY HARD TO, TO MAKE ANY REAL KIND OF DECISION.
I THINK THIS IS GREAT CONTEXT FOR WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? UM, I HAD ONE FOR MR. YOUNG, JUST TO UNDERSTAND.
I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UH, KIND OF THE CONTEXT OF AIRPORT.
I MEAN, I KNOW THESE STREETS, BUT I WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU.
SEVENTH STREET VERSUS AIRPORT VERSUS C CHAZ.
KIND OF WHY THE DECISION ON THOSE WERE DESIGNATED FOR, YOU KNOW, THIS, THE VMU VERSUS, UH, NOT WHY YOU FEEL C CHAVEZ IS NOT APPROPRIATE.
BECAUSE, UH, C CHAVEZ IS, UM, A, A VERY BIG MIX, UH, AT THAT TIME, UM, DURING THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND RIGHT BEFORE, RIGHT AFTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN C CHAVEZ WAS MOSTLY, UH, WAS REALLY MIXED, UH, UH, BUSINESSES AND HOMES TODAY, A LOT OF, UH, NOT MUCH HAS CHANGED, UH, ON THAT STREET,
[03:00:01]
BUT A LOT OF THE HOMES ARE NOW BUSINESSES AS WELL.ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT, WE, UM, SEVENTH STREET AND AIRPORT ARE MUCH MORE, UM, SUITABLE FOR UP ZONING BECAUSE THERE'S BIGGER LOTS.
THAT'S THE OTHER THING THAT C CHAVEZ IS A TWO LANE STREET AIRPORT.
AND, UH, AND SEVENTH ARE FOUR LANE STREETS WITH BIG LOTS.
THIS IS WHY, UH, WHEN ALL THIS CAME UP, WE WANTED TO KEEP SEZ CHAVEZ OUT OF THE, UH, DESIGNATION.
BUT LIKE I SAY, WE'RE WILLING TO ACCEPT, UH, YOU KNOW, IF IF THEY WANT TO GO AND, AND DEVELOP ON V THAT'S GREAT.
I ALSO WANNA SAY THAT WE HAVE HAD OTHER CASES LIKE THIS AND THEY HAVE BUILT WITHIN THE ZONING CATEGORY.
UH, TILLERY AT CESAR CHAVEZ IS ONE EXAMPLE WHERE THEY CAME TO THE CONTACT TEAM, WE DID NOT LIKE WHAT THEY WERE DOING, AND THEY WENT AHEAD AND BUILT THESE BIG BUILDINGS WITHIN THE ZONING CATEGORY.
SO THESE GUYS COULD DO TOO, AS FAR AS THE, THE, THE, UM, THE AFFORDABILITY, IT, IT IS AN ILLUSION TO THINK THAT AFFORDABILITY TODAY APPLIES TO ANYBODY IN EAST AUSTIN WHO'S BEEN THERE FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME.
HOUSING IN MY AREA HAS BEEN EXCLUSIVELY FOR PEOPLE FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE.
THERE ARE VERY FEW PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD TO, TO LIVE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHO ARE FROM MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE AND, AND TO HAVE 10 UNITS AT 60%, YOU KNOW, HOW ABOUT FOUR 40% OF THE UNITS AT 35 TO 50%.
AND, AND THE, UH, UH, GUADALUPE DEVELOPMENT, UH, GUADALUPE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IS THE ONLY ONE IN THE CITY WHO IS DOING REAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN AUSTIN.
NOT PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE.
THANK YOU FOR, UH, THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, ARTICULATE THESE POINTS.
I I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.
ANYMORE, OH, COMMISSION, UH, CHAIR COHEN.
QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT PLEASE.
SO WE ALL TALK IN THESE LAND USE CIRCLES, AND I'M SURE YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROBLEMS, ENDEAVORS GOING THROUGH WITH THE STATE'S BEEN PUT AND THERE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IS THERE ANY ROOM TO WIGGLE ON THIS MORE THAN, UM, I'M HAPPY TO TALK TO MY CLIENT ABOUT THAT.
UM, BE BETWEEN COMMISSION AND COUNCIL.
WE HAVE NOT HAD THOSE KINDS OF CONVERSATIONS.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A VERY IMPASSIONED PLAN.
I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING I MYSELF SUPPORT AS WELL.
I MAY NOT HAVE A VOTE, BUT LIVING IN DISTRICT THREE ARE SURE.
SO SEEING SOME MORE OF THAT DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO, I WOULD CORRECT ONE THING WHICH IS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING IF THE, IF THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IT WOULD BE 19 UNITS, NOT 19 UNITS.
HEATHER CHA, HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH A REZONING CASE.
THAT IS NOT A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
WE CAN ONLY REQUIRE FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT TO COMPLY WITH WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
BUT THEY CAN ALWAYS AGREE TO IT.
WHICH, UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, CANNOT BE ENFORCED BY THE CITY THAT IT CAN BE ENFORCE BY A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
UH, ANY MOTIONS ON THIS ONE? LOOKS LIKE WE'VE RAN OUT OF QUESTIONS.
I'LL MOVE TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I DON'T SEE A SECOND.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, MOVE TO APPROVE.
AND WE HAVE A SECOND TO BE MAJORITY.
WHY WOULD IT NEED A SUPER MAJORITY? OH, UH, VICE SHARE.
SECOND SET YOU WANT, UH, MR. ANDERSON, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR EMOTION? SURE.
UM, THIS IS A AREA IN TOWN, UH, AREA OF TOWN THAT I'VE ALSO LIVED IN AND WORKED IN FOR A LONG TIME FOR NINE YEARS.
[03:05:01]
LONG AS SOME PEOPLE I UNDERSTAND, BUT I'VE WATCHED A LOT OF THINGS HAPPEN IN THIS AREA THAT IN A LOT OF WAYS ARE HAPPENING DUE TO LACK OF HOUSING.WE'VE WATCHED A LOT OF THE SINGLE FAMILY INVENTORY GO FROM $200,000 HOMES JUST IN 2014 TO NOW APPROACHING $2 MILLION HOMES TODAY.
AND THAT'S 100% UNSUSTAINABLE.
AND THAT'S ALSO NOT COOL TO HAVE ZONING TYPES OF HOUSING THAT'S ONLY AFFORDABLE TO THE TOP 5% OF INCOME EARNERS.
CAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS 200 BRAND NEW HOMES IN AN AREA THAT DESPERATELY NEEDS HOUSING.
IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE 40 UNITS THERE.
WE COULD HAVE ACHIEVED THAT IF WE HAVE VMU TWO, WE COULD'VE ACHIEVED THAT IF WE DIDN'T ALLOW HOUSING TO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH HOUSING ONLY IN A CITY THAT'S DESPERATE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ONLY IN A CITY THAT'S DESPERATE TO HAVE A HOUSING CRISIS.
DO WE SAY HOUSING IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH HOUSING? HOW WE ARE TOLERATING THAT RULE ANOTHER DAY IN THIS CITY? I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND.
DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR US TO HAVE A CHAIR OF A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR 19 YEARS? THAT MIGHT BE ANOTHER QUESTION WE ALL NEED TO HAVE HERE.
MAYBE THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT LEADS TO THE CITY AUDITOR CALLING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESSES OR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS OUT FOR BEING HORRIBLE.
AND I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF EXAMPLES OF, OF WHAT THAT LEADS TO.
SO I'M EXCITED TO SEE MORE HOUSING BUILT HERE, AND IT'S A GREAT SPOT FOR HOUSING.
IT'S ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT, AND WE NEED HOMES.
SO I'M SORRY, IT CAN'T BE MORE THAN 200 HOMES.
ANY COMMISSION TO SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION COMMISSION POLITO? WELL, AS USUAL, I CAN'T, UM, RESIST, BUT, UM, UNSPIN SOME OF THE SPIN THAT I HEAR BECAUSE THE TOP 5% OF INCOME EARNERS CAN BUY HOMES, YOU KNOW, IN NEO-COLONIAL FASHION THAT BELONG TO CURRENTLY LOW INCOME PEOPLE AND SOME OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO RENT TO SOME OF THE HARDEST WORKING, WORKING CLASS PEOPLE IN AUSTIN WHO ARE STILL IN EAST AUSTIN.
UH, BUT IT HAS ABSORBED A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT.
AND PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE THIS CONTACT TEAM THAT HAS YES, HAD A, A CHAIR FOR 19 YEARS, BUT AS YOU HEARD, FIVE OF 11 REPRESENT NEIGHBORHOODS AND NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS WHO HAVE BEEN THERE FOR GENERATIONS.
WHILE MANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME IN REPRESENT YOUNGER FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS AND BUSINESS OWNERS AND ENTREPRENEURS WHO HAVE COME IN OVER TIME AND ACTUALLY MADE A FUNCTIONAL, MULTIRACIAL, UH, DIVERSE GROUP THAT'S NEGOTIATED 37 OR 38 WIN-WIN CASES AND ABSORB THOUSANDS OF NEW UNITS, INCLUDING HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF AFFORDABLE, TRULY AFFORDABLE UNITS, WHICH IS THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT THAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS COMMISSION SUPPORT.
IF YOU'RE GONNA TAKE THE LAST STAB ASSESSOR CHAVEZ, WHICH YOU KNOW, CMU THIS, THIS MU ZONING ACROSS CAESAR CHAVEZ TWO PLEASANT VALLEY, WE'VE SEEN WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE LAST DECADE.
UH, THERE HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DISPLACEMENT, BUT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP IN WAYS THAT ARE GONNA CONTINUE TO BRING IN REVENUE, CONTINUE TO BRING IN NEW PEOPLE AS NEW PEOPLE HAVE COME IN, BUT CAN DO A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR US IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY BENEFIT.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE GIVING THE V PRECEDENT ON THIS CORRIDOR, UH, WITHOUT SEEING PROJECTS THAT REALLY MOVE US TOWARD THE SOLUTION.
UM, NOT JUST BRINGING IN MORE LUXURY STUFF THAT TRULY REPLACES THE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE CREATED A NICE PLACE TO LIVE HERE.
SO I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST, AND I'M SO DISAPPOINTED THAT WE COULDN'T, UM, GET A WIN-WIN THROUGH THE LIMITATIONS OF THE CODE.
I AGREE THAT OUR CODE NEEDS UPDATES, AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE SITE PLAN PROCESS ADJUSTED SO THAT WE COULD GET MORE DENSITY ON THIS, UH, CORRIDOR AND FIND A WIN-WIN.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER SPEAKING IN FAVOR, SPEAKING AGAINST, ALL RIGHT.
I THINK, UH, READY TO TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
UH, SO THIS IS, UH, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECONDED BY VICE SIR HEMPLE FOR, UH, SUPPORTIVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
LET'S GO IN THOSE IN FAVOR ON THE DIAS.
AND THOSE, UM, ON THE SCREEN, UH, IN FAVOR.
WE HAVE ONE, TWO, AND THOSE AGAINST.
IS THAT A YELLOW CARD? COMMISSIONER COX.
UM, SO THAT MOTION PASSES IS, UH, 6 7 2, AND YES, THAT'S SEVEN.
AND THEN ONE HONEST PLEA OF VOTING AGAINST AND COMMISSIONER COX VOTING, UM, NEUTRAL.
UM, WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON TO THE LAST DISCUSSION CASE THIS EVENING.
[03:10:01]
I AM SORRY.UM, THAT COUNT WAS EIGHT, RIGHT? 8 11, 7, 1 WE NINE.
[29. Code Amendment: Environmental Protection, Landscape Requirements, and Site Plan Requirements (Part 2 of 2) ]
WE ARE TO OUR ITEM 29 DISCUSSION CASE.THIS IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS.
AND WE WILL START WITH, UH, STAFF OVERVIEW.
LIZ JOHNSTON, DEPUTY ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER WITH WATERSHED PROTECTION.
UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR, UM, HAVING THIS, UH, DISCUSSION THIS EVENING.
UM, I'VE ALREADY GIVEN THE, THE PRESENTATION PREVIOUSLY AND IT'S A PRETTY LONG ONE, SO I HAVE IT HERE IN CASE WE NEED REFERENCE, BUT I DEFINITELY CAN'T BREEZE THROUGH THAT IN SIX MINUTES.
UM, SO I DID WANNA GIVE AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE HAVE GONE SINCE THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE.
UM, WE HAVE BEEN TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, RECEIVED RECOMMENDATIONS WITH, UH, IN SUPPORT WITH SOME OTHER, UM, ITEMS, UH, LISTED FOR US TO CONSIDER.
UH, SIMILAR, WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, THEY HAD UM, SOME SUGGESTIONS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON, UM, UH, LOOKING AT WHICH CAN BE INCORPORATED, WHICH AREN'T.
UM, AND I THINK WE'LL PROBABLY ACCEPT ALL OF THEM.
UM, AND THEN THEY HAD A LIST OF SOME OTHER SUGGESTIONS.
AND ONE OF THOSE IS, UM, THAT THEY RECOMMEND THAT ANY AFFORDABILITY IMPACTS, UM, THAT OUR, UM, LISTED IN THE AFFORDABILITY IMPACT STATEMENT BE, UM, BROUGHT INTO PHASE TWO.
SO REMEMBER, THIS IS THE FIRST PHASE OF TWO PART, UM, PROCESS, BRINGING FORTH A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, REGULATIONS RELATED TO STORMWATER, GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, FUNCTIONAL GREEN, WHOLE HOST OF OTHER, UM, CHANGES, UH, THAT WERE PART OF THE LDC REWRITE, UM, COLORADO RIVER PROTECTIONS, UM, AND, UH, NOT DISINCENTIVIZING MISSING MIDDLE FOR THE SAME ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
UM, AND SO THERE ARE, THERE, ZAPS RECOMMENDATION IS THAT AFFORDABILITY IMPACTS BE, UM, ADDRESSED IN THE PHASE TWO, WHICH WOULD, UM, INCLUDE, UH, GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, OH, SORRY, GREENFIELD, UH, REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION FOR DETENTION PROJECTS AND URBAN SLOPE PROTECTIONS.
UM, AND SO WE ARE, UM, WE WERE ORIGINALLY PLANNING ON GOING TO CITY COUNCIL THIS WEEK.
WE HAVE ASKED FOR A PROPOSED APPOINTMENT TO OCTOBER 13TH FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
UM, THE AFFORDABILITY IMPACT STATEMENT WASN'T COMPLETE UNTIL, UH, LAST FRIDAY.
UM, WE GIVE IT, UM, I THINK UPLOADED ON MONDAY, SO IT SHOULD BE IN PART OF YOUR BACKUP.
IT WAS AN UNDETERMINED IMPACT, UH, IS WHAT WAS FOUND.
THE TWO ITEMS THAT, UM, WERE, UH, BROUGHT KIND OF ROSE TO THE TOP AS POTENTIAL IMPACTS WERE, UH, THE FUNCTIONAL GREEN LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND GSI REQUIREMENTS.
UM, BUT BECAUSE OF THE, UH, UM, DATA THAT THEY LOOKED AT AND THE POTENTIAL OFFSETS OF NEGATIVE EFFECTS FROM AFFORDABILITY ON, UM, IMPROVED OUTCOMES FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE, THEY SAID IT WAS AN INDETERMINED, UM, AFFORDABILITY IMPACT.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE, UM, A RECOMMENDATION FROM YOU ALL, UM, UH, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ON ITEMS THAT YOU DO LIKE AND DON'T HAVE CONCERNS WITH.
I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, AGAIN, UM, UH, FUNCTIONAL GREEN AND, UH, THE, UH, MISSING MIDDLE SITE PLAN PROCESS AND HOW THAT RELATES TO, UM, CLARIFYING, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS THAT ARE RELATED TO SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, WE'VE HEARD THAT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AS WELL.
SO IF, IF SOME OF THE ITEMS NEED TO BE PUT ON THE LONGER TIMELINE, THE PHASE TWO ITEMS, WE CERTAINLY WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO THAT THIS EVENING.
WE WOULD JUST ASK THAT THE ITEMS THAT ARE LESS CONTROVERSIAL, THAT ARE KIND OF, UM, NO ONE HAS CONCERNS WITH THAT.
THOSE GET, UH, RECOMMENDED THIS EVENING, UM, SO THAT WE CAN, UM, HAVE A, A FIRM CONFIDENT BASIS ON WHAT, UH, UH, WE CAN SAY THAT PLANNING COMMISSION WANTS, SO THAT WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION INTO OUR, UH, STAFF REPORT THIS WEEK, IF POSSIBLE, AND INCORPORATE IT, UM, INTO WHAT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE 13TH.
UM, AND WITH THAT, I THINK THAT IS ALL.
WE CAN OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS, UNLESS KATIE COHEN HAS ANYTHING? NOPE.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? CHECK, MICHELLE.
AND KNOW WE DO NOT HAVE SPEAKERS.
I, UH, YOU'RE WELCOME TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HERE.
[03:15:01]
OKAY.SO I THINK WE'RE, UM, WELL, LET'S, UH, WE HAVE, UH, WE CAN OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS.
LET'S CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, YOU HAVE A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER ZA.
UH, SECONDED BY CHAIR SHAW, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE TO CLOSE THE HEARING CHAIR.
UM, SHOULD WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? IF WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT POSTPONEMENT, IT WOULD REOPEN.
AND, UH, THOSE ON THE DIAS? YEP.
AND THOSE AGAINST YOU VOTING AGAINST, I'M POLITO.
DO YOU HAVE A COMMISSION? A THANK YOU.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE? ALL RIGHT.
COX, UM, IS, IS THERE A WAY FOR STAFF TO KIND OF BRIEFLY REVIEW, UH, THE ITEMS THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND ZAP GAVE Y'ALL TO WORK ON, AND WHAT YOU THINK MIGHT BE THE RESULTS OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS? THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION HAD 18 RECOMMENDATIONS AND, UM, HONESTLY, I THINK MANY OF THEM WERE, UM, CONCERNED WITH, UH, WHAT WAS NOT INCLUDED, UM, RELATED TO ELECTRIC VEHICLES, SOLAR, UM, IN ENSURING THAT WE CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION SURROUNDING EQUITY.
UM, I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD BE ANYTHING I COULD REALLY, UM, BRING INTO THIS NECESSARILY OTHER THAN THE RE UH, THE REQUEST THAT WE POSTPONE THE, UM, ACTION ON MISSING MIDDLE.
I THINK THEY HAD A LOT OF CONCERNS WITH, UM, THE SITE PLAN LIGHT CONCEPT AND THE LACK OF NOTICE ASSOCIATED WITH, UM, WITH THAT.
UM, THERE WERE SOME O UM, OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION AND, UM, REMOVING, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN REQUIREMENTS THAT, UM, REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION PROJECTS BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
UM, I THINK THAT ANY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN REQUIREMENTS WOULD STILL BE IN EFFECT.
IT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE LISTED IN THE, UH, REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION.
UM, AND SO THOSE WERE A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT.
UM, ZONING AND PLANNING DID HAVE SOME REAL, LIKE, SPECIFIC, UM, CONCERNS, UM, THAT, UM, ESPECIALLY COMMISSIONER SMITH AS AN ENGINEER BROUGHT FORTH THAT HE LOOKED THROUGH.
UM, ONE WAS, UH, A, AND I, I'M JUST GOING OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD CUZ I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT, UM, ONE WAS RELATED TO WATER QUALITY.
SO WHEN WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT GSI BE THE STANDARD TYPE OF WATER QUALITY FOR MOST PROJECTS IN TOWN, UM, THE LANGUAGE WE HAD TO, UM, DISCUSS THAT WAS, UH, THAT THE CONTROLS ACHIEVE THE SAME STANDARD AS, AS DEFINED IN THE ECM.
HE THOUGHT THAT THAT LANGUAGE WOULD MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR IN TO, TO, TO CARRY OUT IN PRACTICE.
UM, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY GOING TO GO IN AND, UH, VERIFY IF A WATER QUALITY POND IS ACTUALLY ACHIEVING THE POLLUTION REDUCTION STANDARDS.
WE JUST REVIEW THAT THEY ARE, UM, BUILT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL.
SO, UH, THAT IS ONE THAT, UM, I THINK WE ARE JUST GOING TO LEAVE THE CODE THE WAY IT IS AND NOT CHANGE THAT PARTICULAR COMPONENT.
UM, AND WE'VE DISCUSSED IT WITH, UH, WATER QUALITY ENGINEERS IN WATERSHED WHO, UM, ARE, UM, UH, IN SUPPORT OF THAT.
UM, THERE WAS, UH, ONE RELATED TO MAKING SURE THAT SHORELINE ACCESS FOR BOAT DOCKS IS NOT NEED, DOESN'T BE, ISN'T AFFECTED BY THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION.
WHAT WERE THE OTHER ONE? KATIE COHEN, ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER? I THINK A KEY ONE WAS SPECIFICALLY THAT THEY SHARED CONCERNS ABOUT, UH, WANTING TO MAKE SURE ANY COSTS WERE MITIGATED.
UH, AND SO THEY DID NOT DELAY ACTION ON ITEMS, BUT THEY DID, UH, MAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATION, UM, UH, TENTATIVE
[03:20:01]
BASED ON, ON THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD ROLL IN ANY AFFORDABILITY IMPACTS OF THIS PHASE ONE INTO WHAT WE PROPOSE TO MITIGATE AS PART OF PHASE TWO.UH, AND SO THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF AND WOULD LIKELY HAVE DONE WITHOUT THAT.
UH, AND SO, YES, WHILE THE THINGS THAT WE FEEL WE NEED TO MITIGATE FROM PHASE ONE ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN WHAT WE EXPECT FOR GREENFIELD DETENTION, FOR INSTANCE, UH, WE, WE WANT TO BE HOLISTIC IN TERMS OF HOW WE'RE THINKING ABOUT ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS TO MITIGATE FOR THE FULL PACKAGE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S BROKEN UP BETWEEN PHASE ONE AND TWO.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE TIME, BUT, UM, ON THE EQUITY ISSUE, I'M CURIOUS IF, IF Y'ALL, I'M SURE YOU'VE BEEN ASKED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES AND I'VE PROBABLY PUT SOME THOUGHT TO IT, BUT DO, DO Y'ALL SEE ANYTHING IN THESE POD AMENDMENTS THAT COULD DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT, UM, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN AREAS OF AUSTIN, UH, MORE DETRIMENTALLY THAN THAN OTHERS? AND ON THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT, DO, DO YOU SEE CERTAIN AREAS OF AUSTIN ACTUALLY BENEFITING MORE THAN THAN OTHER AREAS WITH, WITH THESE CHANGES, UH, IF ANYTHING, FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE, I SEE THESE AS MOVES IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND MAKING SURE THAT THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAVE IN PLACES WHERE DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY IS HIGHER, WHICH INCLUDES IN THE EASTERN CRESCENT, UH, IS DEVELOPING IN A GREENER WAY.
SO HAVING GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE BE THE, THE STANDARD FOR WATER QUALITY CONTROLS, UH, IS A PART OF THAT BECAUSE WE KNOW THERE'S ALL THOSE ANCILLARY BENEFITS TO THOSE KINDS OF CONTROLS.
OH GOSH, SORRY, I'M STILL NOT USED TO THAT SOUND AND IT'S BEEN YEARS.
UH, THAT'S, SO THAT'S ONE CAUSE I CAN'T HEAR IT.
UM, BUT I WILL SAY THAT ONE OF THE OTHER ITEMS THAT, THAT WE'RE FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THAT OUR, UH, EQUITY REVIEW CALLS FOR, UH, IS SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT NOT JUST THESE, UH, AMENDMENTS TO CODE, BUT LOOKING AT ENVIRONMENTAL CODE, UH, ON THE WHOLE TO DO A FULL EQUITY ASSESSMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT MISSING, UH, ANY OF THE EXTERNALITIES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH CODE THAT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS NEW CODE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, BUT DO THAT IN A, IN A REALLY SYSTEMATIC WAY ACROSS ENVIRONMENTAL CODE, UM, AS WELL AS INTEGRATE, UH, ALL OF THAT THINKING INTO THE WAY WE FRAME UP OUR STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WE'RE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW.
SO WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR FIGURING OUT WHAT SCOPE WOULD LOOK LIKE FOR A FULL DEEP DIVE EQUITY ASSESSMENT OF ALL ENVIRONMENTAL CODE.
I ASSUME MY TIME'S DONE CHAIR.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER SHANE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I WISH, I DO WISH OUR WORKING GROUP WAS ABLE TO, UH, GET TOGETHER BEFORE THIS MEETING.
UM, WE, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO, AND YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST, THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERNS GOING THROUGH AND I'M JUST KIND OF REALLY NERVOUS ABOUT TRYING TO PUSH THINGS FORWARD WHEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REST IS THE GROUP IS THINKING AND SUCH.
BUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN KIND OF OUR MIND WAS THE IMPACT, THE FINANCIAL, YOU KNOW, LIKE HOW MUCH IS THE COST? CAN IT, CAN IT, YOU KNOW, CAN THE PROJECT ABSORB TO DO ALL THIS? AND I SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE WAS A STUDY THAT LOOKED AT THE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF A RANKING AND YOU KNOW, LIKE THE, UM, WHATEVER THE, THE, THE POINT SYSTEM THING.
AND IT LOOKED LIKE THE BAR WAS SET PRETTY HIGH CUZ A LOT OF THEM DIDN'T QUITE MAKE IT.
AND THEN, AND THESE WERE EVEN ON LARGER PROJECTS AND LET'S SAY WE START MOVING THIS TO SMALLER AND SMALLER PROJECTS.
WHAT IF WE, WHAT IF WE GET DOWN TO AN ACRE HALF ACRE? I MEAN, THE COST TO DO THIS, YOU KNOW, SOME TYPE OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ON A SMALL PROJECT IS SUBSTANTIAL.
AND I'M LIKE, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THEY COULD ABSORB IT, YOU KNOW? AND SO YES, I SEE SOME THINGS THAT IF IT'S A RESIDENTIAL ZONE, BUT WHAT IF IT WAS LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, SOME OF THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE SMALL RESIDENTIAL SIZE, LIKE ON, I DON'T KNOW, LIKE A ON CAN EGG OR SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, ALONG THAT, I MEAN, HOW WOULD THEY ABSORB THAT COST? RIGHT.
FOR SITES UNDER AN ACRE IN URBAN, SO LIKE ON CAN EGG, THE EXISTING CODE ALREADY ALLOWS PAYMENT IN LIEU OF WATER QUALITY.
UM, AND SO THAT'S NOT GONNA CHANGE.
SO FOR PROJECTS THAT QUALIFY FOR PAYMENT IN LIEU OF WATER QUALITY, THEY WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO, UM, HAVE THAT MM-HMM.
SO, SO IF IT IS A SMALL LOT, THEY COULD STILL DO PAYMENT IN LIE, BUT WOULD THEY STILL BE REQUIRED TO DO LIKE A BIOFILTRATION POND? NO.
SO THE, THE THRESHOLD IS NO, IS HOW IS YOU SAID IN A, WHAT WAS IT? SO THE EXISTING CODE, WHICH IS NOT GONNA CHANGE, IS THAT IN, UM, URBAN WATERSHEDS? YEP.
IF IT'S UNDER AN ACRE, THEN THAT'S NOT GONNA CHANGE.
IT'S NOT GONNA REQUIRE THEM TO GO DO THIS BOWEL FILTRATION POND SUCH.
AND THEN OTHER THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING IS EVEN LIKE,
[03:25:01]
UM, WE LIKE THE IDEA OF CISTERN, YOU KNOW, LIKE, AS WE'VE ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT BRAIN WATER HARVESTING AND SUCH, BUT THE COST TO DO THAT AND STORE IT, IS THERE A BENEFIT TO OFFSET FROM SAY, WATER QUALITY OR DETENTION FOR THAT? UM, YOU KNOW, SO TO INCENTIVIZE SOMEONE INSTEAD OF JUST, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY TO DO THIS TYPE OF, UM, YOU KNOW, RAIN WATER COLLECTION.AND THAT IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE, UM, ITEMS THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE A CODE CHANGE.
SO IT'S NOT HERE FOR YOU TONIGHT, BUT IS A CON UM, A, A CONVERSATION THAT WE ARE CONTINUING TO HAVE WITH OUR COLLEAGUES IN AUSTIN WATER WHO ARE WORKING ON THEIR WATER FORWARD PLAN.
AND SO BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON, UH, CISTERNS ARE GOING TO BE MORE LIKELY TO BE REQUIRED IN THE FUTURE.
AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT OUR, UM, REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT AT ODDS WITH THAT.
AND SO WE ARE ACTUALLY, WE'VE GOTTA WORK PLAN TOGETHER TO ADDRESS THAT, TO, TO DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TO, TO, TO, UM, MODEL WHAT THE REDUCTION IN WATER QUALITY TREATMENT WOULD BE.
AND SO THAT IT'S A MUCH EASIER PROCESS FOR APPLICANTS TO, TO WORK THROUGH.
UM, THERE, IT'S A FAIRLY TECHNICAL, UM, UH, UH, PROCESS TO GO THROUGH THIS.
AND SO OUR ENGINEERS ARE SPEAKING IN FROM WATERSHED IN AUSTIN WATER, AND WE'LL PROBABLY BE CONTRACTING THAT MODELING WORK OUT, BUT IT SHOULD BE, UM, IT'S A, IT'LL BE TAGGING ON A CONTRACT WE ALREADY HAVE, SO IT SHOULDN'T BE, UM, TOO MUCH MORE ADDITIONAL TIME.
BUT, UM, IT DOES, WE WILL BE REQUIRING MORE TIME TO ADDRESS THAT THROUGH, UH, THE CRITERIA MANUAL UPDATE.
AND SO THAT WOULD BE NOT, THAT'S LIKE AFTER PHASE TWO? I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S FURTHER DOWN OR IS IT ACTIVELY BEING IT'S WE'RE IT'S KIND OF ITS OWN PROCESS.
UM, SO THIS STAFF OR COUNCIL SAID TO, TO DO THIS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A CODE CHANGE CUZ IT'S ALREADY, IT'S ALREADY ALLOWED, WE CAN DO IT ALREADY.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE, STREAMLINE IT AND MAKE IT MUCH MORE EASY, UM, AND EXPLICIT IN OUR CRITERIA MANUAL.
HOW DID YOU GUYS DETERMINE THAT BASELINE REQUIREMENT VERSUS LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, I KEPT THINKING THERE WOULD BE A WAY IF YOU LOWERED IT, BUT THEN YOU INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO GO FOR MORE BY GIVING SOMETHING BACK VERSUS SETTING THE BAR SO HIGH RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING.
I'M THAT WE DON'T EVEN, I GUESS WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT'S ATTAINABLE ON A, I DON'T KNOW, FEIL FEASIBLE BASIS.
SO I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE SPEAKING TO FUNCTIONAL GREEN AND THE 0.3 SCORE? YES.
YEAH, THAT SPECIFICALLY, UH, WAS SET BASED ON THE CASE STUDIES THAT WERE DEVELOPED.
UH, BUT THAT SCORE WAS BASED ON THOSE CASE STUDIES.
THERE WERE A NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT, OH, SHE IS HERE IF WE WANT TO HAVE THAT HER ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
UH, BUT, BUT THAT SCORES BASED ON SOME CASE STUDIES THAT DID MEET IT, SOME CASE STUDIES THAT WERE CLOSE TO MEETING IT, IT WAS NEGOTIATED AS A PART OF THE WORKING GROUP FUNCTIONAL GREEN AS SOMETHING THAT SEEMED ASPIRATIONAL BUT NOT UNATTAINABLE SINCE THERE WERE EXAMPLES WITHIN THE CURRENT MARKET OF PROPERTIES BEING ABLE TO MEET THAT SCORE.
SO MOVE TO THE NEXT COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONERS ARE, I'LL JUST CARRY THAT QUESTION FORWARD SINCE WE HAVE STAFF PRESIDENT OF STAFF CAN RESPOND TO THAT.
BEFORE WE PROCEED, PLEASE EXTEND TIME.
SHALL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE EXTEND TIME BY 20 MINUTES, HALF AN HOUR.
WE'RE EXTENDING TIME BY HALF AN HOUR.
EXTEND AND MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THAT BY 10 30.
UH, THOSE ON THE DIAS AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN.
SO I JUST WANNA GIVE STAFF THE ABILITY TO FINISH ANSWERING THE QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER SHA.
PAMELA, DO YOU WANNA TAKE THAT ON, UH, ABOUT THE SCORE? OH, AND YOU, WE CANNOT HEAR YOU.
UH, WELL POTENTIALLY, UH, WE CAN HAVE HER CHAT WITH, UH, STAFF ON TEAMS AND GET BACK TO YOU WITH AN ANSWER IF THERE'S MORE NUANCE THAT WE CAN OFFER.
AND IF YOU WANNA ASK OTHER QUESTIONS, WE CAN BACKGROUND TO THAT.
JUST AS A FOLLOW UP TO THAT, CAN YOU ALSO SPEAK AND WISH YOU BE THE BEST PERSON TO SPEAK TO THIS? WE CAN.
CAN YOU ALSO SPEAK TO, UM, HOW THE SORT OF MULTIPLIER SCORES WERE ALSO DEVELOPED? YEAH, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
UM, AND SO THERE WERE A NUMBER OF FOLKS INVOLVED IN DOING REALLY EXTENSIVE DEEP DIVE PEER-REVIEWED RESEARCH ON WHAT ALL OF THE SCIENCE SAYS ABOUT ECOSYSTEM SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED BY DIFFERENT TOOLS IN THE TOOLKIT THAT IS FUNCTIONAL GREEN.
SO THAT INCLUDED, UH, A LOCAL URBAN ECOLOGISTS
[03:30:01]
NAMED HEATHER VEK.IT ALSO INCLUDED STAFF IN THE NATURE CONSERVANCY.
SO REALLY GROUNDBREAKING WORK TO SET THE STANDARDS FOR WHY THOSE MULTIPLIERS EXIST THE WAY THEY DO IN TERMS OF IF SOMETHING HAS A HIGHER MULTIPLIER, IT MEANS IT DOES MORE FROM ECOSYSTEM SERVICE PERSPECTIVE THAN OTHER THINGS WITH LOWER MULTIPLIERS.
SO HIGHER MULTIPLIER MIGHT MEAN IT HAS HIGHER HABITAT VALUE BASED ON THE SCIENCE, IT MITIGATES MORE URBAN HEAT ISLAND EFFECT.
IT, IT HAS SOME OF THOSE OTHER BENEFITS, WHEREAS SOMETHING THAT, UH, MAYBE ONLY TICKS SOME OF THE BOXES, UH, MIGHT HAVE A LOWER MULTIPLIER.
SO REALLY SPECIFICALLY SPEAKING TO SOME OF THOSE URBAN ISSUES IN HIGH DENSITY PLACES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MITIGATE FOR WITH GREENER DEVELOPMENT.
AND THEN, UM, SORT OF A FOLLOW UP QUESTION WAS, I KNOW THERE'S CONVERSATION AROUND POSTPONE.
CAN YOU PLEASE SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON SORT OF LOOKING AT THAT OR SOME OF THESE OTHER PIECES THAT WE MIGHT BE DOC, BUT WILLING TO PHASE TWO, JUST SOME OF THE STAFF CONCERNS THAT WE CAN FULLY UNDERSTAND THEM? SURE.
AND I'LL PASS IT TO LIZ JUST A MINUTE TO OFFER HER OPINION AS WELL.
I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE AND WE'VE HEARD PUSHBACK FROM EVERY PERSON WE'VE TALKED TO ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT MISSING MIDDLE IS RIGHT SIZE TO BOTH BE IMPACTFUL AND NOT FLEX TOO MUCH ON OUR ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS IN A WAY THAT IT IS GONNA BE PROBLEMATIC WITH LARGER IMPACTS.
AND SO I'M, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THAT.
SHIFTING TO PHASE TWO, IT'S ALSO ONE OF THOSE ITEMS WHERE A LOT OF THIS STUFF IN PHASE ONE IS, IS VERY WATERSHED LED, OR AT LEAST DSD LED MISSING MIDDLE.
THAT'S A, A TRUE COLLABORATION WITH HOUSING AND PLANNING.
AND SO IS GREENFIELD GREENFIELD DETENTION REQUIREMENT, BRINGING THAT FORWARD WITH ADDITIONAL 25 DASH TWO ENTITLEMENTS.
I THINK THESE PLACES WHERE WE REALLY NEED TO GET ON BOARD AND, AND BE IN LOCKSTEP WITH HOUSING AND PLANNING, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT ARE GONNA TAKE MORE TIME.
SO MISSING MIDDLE MAKES TOTAL SENSE.
I THINK ON FUNCTIONAL GREEN, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN ABOUT AFFORDABILITY.
UH, AND SO, UM, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE VETTING, UH, THE, THE RULES THAT, UH, ARE ASSOCIATED WITH IT, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE RETESTING THAT MINIMUM SCORE SINCE IT'S BEEN A FEW YEARS SINCE WE DID SOME TESTING TO VET THAT MINIMUM SCORE.
UH, I THINK THAT THAT'S APPROPRIATE.
I WOULDN'T, I WOULD NOT PREFER TO HAVE IT ON THE SAME TIMELINE AS THOSE OTHER ITEMS. I THINK IT COULD BE SEPARATE.
WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO BRING THAT FORWARD SOONER.
UH, AND I, IDEALLY WE WOULD HAVE SUPPORT TO, UM, POTENTIALLY PASS FUNCTIONAL GREEN, BUT JUST DELAY IMPLEMENTATION OF IT, UH, SO THAT WE HAVE SOME TIME TO TEST RULES BEFORE IT ACTUALLY, UH, SO WE HAVE LIKE AN EFFECTIVE DATE IN CODE TO FINALIZE THOSE RULES.
I WANNA MAKE SURE PAMELA DID NOT HAVE A RESPONSE.
I THINK SHE'S, UM, SO WHAT SHE SAYS IS A BASELINE IS BASED ON EXISTING DEVELOPED SITES.
UM, WE LOOKED AT WHAT WE'RE DOING AND POINTS ALSO REFLECT FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY.
SO THEY LOOKED AT, UM, UM, EXISTING, UH, PROJECTS THAT HAD HIGH IMPERVIOUS COVER.
WHAT, WHAT WERE THEY REALLY DO DOING ANYWAY, UM, AND WORKED FROM THERE.
AND JUST TO CONFIRM THAT THESE CASE STUDIES WERE THE ONES THAT HAD BEEN CHEERED IN ONE OF OUR BACKUPS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION, CORRECT? I BELIEVE SO, YES.
JUST JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT.
I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK CAUSE WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF TIME.
I, I'M GONNA ASSUME THAT OUR WORKING GROUP WILL CONTINUE WORKING ON THIS, WHETHER THROUGH PHASE ONE, PHASE TWO, WHATEVER THOSE PIECES LAND.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT STAFF WOULD BE WILLING, WE KNOW THAT IS VOLUNTARY ONLY? UH, WOULD YOU ALL BE WILLING TO ENGAGE IN THAT PROCESS WITH US? WE, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THAT WORKING GROUP IS MEANINGFUL.
I KNOW WE'RE NOT, UH, AUTOMATICALLY COMMITTED TO BEING A PART OF THAT, BUT WE VERY MUCH THAT, BUT WE VERY MUCH WANT TO BE, UH, AND I THINK ESPECIALLY KEEPING IN MIND WHAT ACTION YOU DECIDE OR DECIDE NOT TO TAKE TONIGHT, I THINK IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT WE ARE INVOLVED IN ANY WORKING GROUP DISCUSSIONS MOVING TOWARD THAT OCTOBER 13TH COUNCIL DATE.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU WOULD DEFER ANY ACTION TO TWO DAYS BEFORE THAT DATE.
DO WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? CHAIR COMMISSARY ANDERSON, I THINK I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS.
IF Y'ALL CAN DO ME A FAVOR AND WE HAVE SOME BRIEF ANSWERS AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW, THAT'S OKAY.
UM, SO DO WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY FTE IT'S GONNA TAKE TO IMPLEMENT ALL THIS? WE DON'T HAVE THE CUMULATIVE NUMBER, BUT WE HAVE IT OUTLINED BASED ON EACH PIECE, UH, IN OUR FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS.
SO WILL ANY DEVELOPMENTS OR POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS LOSE ANY RIGHTS? UM, SO IF THERE WERE, WE ARE INCREASING, WE'RE PROPOSING TO INCREASE, UH, CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE SETBACKS ON THE LOWER PART OF THE COLORADO RIVER.
SO, UM, THERE WOULD BE SOME IMPACT TO, UM, PROPERTIES ALONG THE COLORADO RIVER.
HOWEVER, UM, GIVEN THE MOVEMENT OF THE COLORADO RIVER, IT REALLY DOES PROTECT THAT DEVELOPMENT FROM
[03:35:01]
FUTURE EROSION AND PROTECT, UH, CITY, UH, STAFF FROM HAVING TO, UM, GO IN AND BUY OUT THE PROPERTY OR DO A VERY EXPENSIVE EROSION PROJECT, WHICH WE, THIS WATERSHED PROTECTION DOES ALL OVER TOWN.UM, SO IT DOES, I THINK IT, IT IT, IT PROTECTS EVERYONE AND FOR THE FUTURE.
UM, CAN YOU ELABORATE SOME IMPACT? WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THOSE WERE YOUR WORDS? THERE ARE, THERE'S SOME IMPACT FOR SOME, RIGHT? SO CURRENT CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE ON THE COLORADO RIVER DOWNSTREAM OF THE LONGHORN DAM IS, UM, SET AT WHAT THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAIN IS.
UM, WITH A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 200 FEET AND A MAXIMUM OF 400 FEET.
UM, GIVEN THE WAY THE DANS OPERATE AND THE UM, HIGHLY EROSIVE NATURE OF THE SOILS ON THE COLORADO RIVER, IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE TO TIE THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, WHICH IS THE, UH, OFFSET FROM THE, UM, BANK OF THE RIVER, UM, TO THE FLOOD PLAIN.
UM, WE ARE PROPOSING TO INCREASE THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND MAKE IT A STANDARD SETBACK OF 400 FEET ALL ACROSS THE BOARD.
SO IN SOME SITUATIONS IT WOULD BE THE SAME AND OTHER SITUATIONS IT WOULD GROW.
I GUESS WE'RE ON A LOT OF TROUBLE IF THE COLORADO MOVES THAT MUCH, RIGHT? IT DOES.
IT DEFINITELY, UM, CAN, WHEN WILL YOU RELEASE THE COMPLETE CRITERIA MANUAL? THE, THE FUNCTIONAL GREEN CRITERIA CRITERIA MANUAL? UM, WE ARE, UH, PAMELA IS ALSO HELPING DRIVE THAT, UM, UH, WE HAVE DRAFT, UM, RULES THAT WE COULD, UM, IMPLEMENT ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS.
SO VERY QUICKLY AFTER THE CODE IS ADOPTED, WE COULD IMPLEMENT THOSE.
HOWEVER, IF THERE NEEDS TO BE A DELAYED IMPLEMENTATION, UM, WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT OPPOSED TO THAT AS WELL.
THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT SEEMS PROBLEMATIC FOR ME.
AND THE CASE STUDIES, ARE THERE NEWER CASE STUDIES OR ARE THERE JUST THE CASE STUDIES THAT CAME FROM THE ENTIRE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BEING REWRITTEN TOGETHER? CASE STUDIES HAVEN'T BEEN UPDATED SINCE THE PREVIOUS DRAFT, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING IF YOU WANT TO DEFER IMPLEMENTATION THAT WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO SCORING SOME MORE UPDATED, MORE TIMELY, UH, CASE STUDIES.
OH, AND I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION, DO WE KNOW KIND OF WHAT THIS WILL COST THE CITY AS FAR AS IMPLEMENTATION AND MANAGING AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT? OUR FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS DOESN'T LOOK AT TO THE DOLLAR COSTS.
IT LOOKS AT SPECIFIC BANDWIDTH NEEDS FOR TEAMS TO BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT SUCCESSFULLY.
UH, BUT WE DID NOT LOOK AT, UH, DOWN TO THE DOLLAR.
I GUESS THAT'S SURPRISING TO ME CUZ WE JUST HAD A BIG CONVERSATION ABOUT PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES AND THERE WAS A CONVERSATION ABOUT DO WE WANT TO COLLECT THE FEES AT SITE PLAN OR DO WE WANNA COLLECT THE FEES AT CO? AND IT WAS A THOUSAND TIMES MORE EFFICIENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AND FOR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND US, YOU KNOW, WANTING TO SEE DEVELOPMENT OCCUR IN REDEVELOPMENT.
AND THEN WE HEAR THE BIGGEST, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF PUSH BACK WAS, OH, IT'LL, IT'LL COST US FTES AND LIKE THEY ALMOST USED THE FTE AS AN ARGUMENT AGAINST THE CITY BEING MORE EFFICIENT AND ALLOWING THOSE DOLLARS TO BE COLLECTED AT THE END OF THE PROCESS INSTEAD OF AT THE BEGINNING.
I KNOW THAT'S NOT YOU ALL, IT'S JUST INTERESTING TO HEAR LIKE DIFFERENT WAYS OF LOOKING AT ALMOST THE SAME EXACT THING.
YEAH, I MEAN, THIS ORDINANCE IS QUITE BIG AND SO THERE ARE, THERE ARE NEW RULES AND THEN THERE'S A LOT OF PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS AND STREAMLINING AS WELL.
AND SO TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF IT ALL WOULD BE IS KIND OF CHALLENGING.
WE DID LOOK AT, UM, GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FOR EXAMPLE, IS MORE COMPLICATED TO REVIEW AND INSPECT AND, UM, UM, SOME TRAINING NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
SO THAT HAS ADDITIONAL STAFFING IMPACTS FROM REVIEWS, INSPECTIONS AND UM, AND HAVING SOMEBODY ON STAFF WHO WOULD BE, UM, ABLE TO TRAIN STAFF AND CONSULTANTS, UM, UM, SO THAT, THAT, BUT, BUT THAT IS AN INCREMENTAL, INCREMENTAL IMPACT THAT, UM, HAS ALREADY BEEN HAPPENING.
UM, BECAUSE RAIN GARDENS AND BIOFILTRATION POND, ESPECIALLY RAIN GARDENS ARE PRETTY POPULAR AND THERE ARE, SO WE'RE ALREADY SEEING IMPACTS TO STAFF JUST WITH CURRENT CODES.
THAT IS ALL MY TIME THOUGH, BUT THANK YOU.
COMMISSIONERS, UM, IN ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
UM, HOW DO WE WANNA PROCEED ON THIS ONE? DO WE HAVE A, FOR ALL THE Q AND A, DO WE HAVE A MOTION MR. ZAR TRY? NO, THERE'S SOME CONVERSATION TO BE HAD.
SO I'M GONNA SPLIT WHAT I HAD ORIGINALLY RECOMMENDED, AND I'LL START WITH THE SORT OF LONGER CONVERSATION ONE.
SO, UM, I'LL STATE IT FIRST AND
[03:40:01]
I CAN SPEAK TO IT.SO I WOULD ASK THAT WE REMOVE FROM WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IN FRONT OF US, WE REMOVE THE FUNCTIONAL GREEN SUB ITEM CONTAINED IN 25 8 SUB C FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED WITH PHASE TWO, ALONG WITH STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ON THE ITEM.
UH, REMOVE THE MISSING MIDDLE SUB ITEM CONTAINED IN VARIOUS SUBSECTIONS OF THE OVERALL ORDINANCE FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED WITH PHASE TWO, ALONG WITH STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ON THE ITEM.
AND THEN REMOVE CHANGES RELATED TO NEW UTILITIES.
MAJOR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH PLANT INFRASTRUCTURE CONTAINED IN 25 DASH EIGHT DASH 2 61 FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED WITH PHASE TWO.
SO THERE'S THREE SECTIONS THAT WE WOULD, UH, WRAP INTO PHASE TWO, ONE IS RELATED TO UTILITY.
AGAIN, I'LL STOP SPEAKING ON AND I'LL JUST STATE THE MOTION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THIS MOTION? UH, VSPHERE HEMPLE.
YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SURE.
I'LL MAKE THIS REALLY GOOD CUZ I KNOW THIS HAD BEEN DISCUSSED BEFORE AND IS KIND OF PLAYED.
UM, SO THESE ARE JUST, I THINK, THREE ITEMS THAT REQUIRE A LITTLE MORE WORK CUZ OUR WORKING GROUP IS WORKING THROUGH THESE.
I THINK THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF FEEDBACK FROM STAKEHOLDERS.
UM, AND THERE'S A LOT OF SORT OF, I THINK, SORT OF A PUSH TO CONSIDER THOSE IN THE RIGHT WAY AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WRAPPING THEM IN WITH THE CONVERSATIONS.
UM, PARTICULARLY, I'LL BE HONEST, I THINK THE FUNCTIONAL GREEN, I THINK THERE'S A CONVERSATION AMONG FOLKS TO REALLY TAKE INTO THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, WRAP IT IN PHASE TWO.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT SOME OF THAT CONVERSATION AROUND INCENTIVIZING OR ENTITLEMENTS.
UM, SAME GOES FROM MISSING MIDDLE AS WE MENTIONED.
I THINK THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT NEED TWEAKING AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU OVERALL WORKS WELL FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE, BUT ALSO DOES NOT DISINCENTIVIZING MISSING MIDDLE.
UM, AND THEN THE UTILITY PIECES, JUST TO MAKE SURE, I THINK WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE WORK WITH OTHER STAFF TEAMS AND FULLY CONSIDER THE SOME OF THE UTILITY IMPACT.
SO, UM, AGAIN, THOSE ARE THE THREE ITEMS THAT I'M TAKING OUT.
UH, ANY COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION? I, JUST TO CLARIFY MY MOTION.
IT IS THE, THE MOTION IS TO TAKE THESE THREE OUT ITEMS OUT, WRAP THEM UP WITH THE PHASE TWO AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT TO RESPOND TO THEM.
SO THAT'S THE MOTION ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW.
I'M SPLITTING MY EARLIER CONVERSATION BECAUSE I, I FEEL LIKE I WAS GETTING SOME RESISTANCE.
SO THIS MOTION IS JUST FOR THE SPLIT OF THOSE FOR PHASE TWO? YES.
SO TO TAKE THOSE THREE ITEMS AND MOVE THEM OVER TO THE PHASE TWO, UM, LOOKING AT THE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PROCESS, SOME OF THE ENTITLEMENT WORK THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
SO IT'S NOT SPEAKING TO THE OTHER? NO, I WILL WAIT TO MAKE THAT MOTION.
SO, UH, IS EVERYBODY CLEAR ON THIS MOTION? ANY CLARIFICATION NEEDED? OKAY.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS BEFORE WE VOTE.
YEAH, I APOLOGIZE IF I'M SLOW HERE.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF THESE AMENDMENTS THAT WE WANT TO PUSH TO PHASE TWO FOR FUTURE DISCUSSION.
IS THAT WHAT MISSIONERS ARE JUST LAID OUT? SO I THINK COULD YOU DESCRIBE PHASE TWO? SO, UM, STAFF CAN, I THINK BETTER DESCRIBE THE, BUT PHASE TWO WILL BE LOOKING AT THE GREENFIELD REQUIREMENTS AND THE, UH, STEEP SLOPE REQUIREMENTS.
UH, COUNCIL SPLIT THIS ENTIRE CONVERSATION INTO PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO.
SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW IS PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO WILL BE LOOKING AT THOSE ITEMS BECAUSE IT'S PART OF A LARGER STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PROCESS AND ALSO SOME OF THE CONVERSATION ON ENTITLEMENTS AND INCENTIVES.
SO THE HOPE IS TO TAKE SOME OF THESE ITEMS AND PUT THEM THERE.
THE MAIN IDEA HERE IS TO NOT HOLD UP EVERYTHING ELSE BECAUSE THERE'S SOME PIECES THAT ARE CONTENTIOUS, BUT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE OUT THE CONTENTIOUS PIECES AND PUT IT PART OF THAT ON UPCOMING PROCESS THAT WE KNOW IS COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE.
SO WE WOULD BE, I, I'LL BE HONEST, WE WILL BE DELAYING ADOPTION OF THESE ITEMS BECAUSE THESE WILL BE PUSHED TO PHASE TWO, BUT THE IDEA IS TO CAPTURE ALL THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'RE GETTING FROM THE COMMUNITY, MAKE, MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL COMFORTABLE WITH THOSE ITEMS, BUT MOVE AHEAD WITH SOME OF THOSE OTHER PIECES BECAUSE WE ARE IN A BIT OF A TIME CRUNCH.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT INFORMATION.
SO COUNCIL INSTRUCTED US TO COME BACK BY NOVEMBER FOR PHASE TWO.
WE HAVE NOT YET FORMALLY ASKED FOR AN EXTENSION.
WE'RE WORKING WITH HOUSING PLANNING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE CREATING A TIMELINE FOR THESE ITEMS. THAT ACTUALLY MEANS THAT WE CAN GET MEANINGFUL STAKEHOLDER INPUT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS INPUT, ET CETERA.
UH, AND ALSO DRAFT 25 DASH TWO LANGUAGE FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL MITIGATING ENTITLEMENTS.
AND SO I EXPECT, AND I PLEASE DO NOT HOLD ME TO THIS AT LEAST SIX MONTHS, SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS, UH, TO, TO REALLY MEANINGFULLY WORK ON THESE
[03:45:01]
ITEMS. AND SO, UM, THAT IS MY, THAT IS MY CURRENT ESTIMATE YET WE HAVE NOT FORMALLY ASKED FOR THAT EXTENSION YET.SO FINISHER COX, WELL, I'M, I'M JUST GONNA PUT IT OUT TO THE GROUP AND, AND I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO HEAR STAFF'S RESPONSE IF IT'S POSSIBLE.
I KNOW THIS IS COMPLETELY OUT OF ORDER, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF, IF IT'S MORE ADVANTAGEOUS FOR US AND CLEANER, UH, FROM AN ORDINANCE PERSPECTIVE TO JUST TAKE THE TIME WE NEED TO WORK THROUGH THESE ITEMS IN PHASE ONE, GET SOMETHING PASSED OR NOT.
UM, AND THEN, AND THEN PHASE TWO, I, I'M HEARING PHASE TWO IS WAY OUT, AND SO I, I JUST DON'T, SO I GUESS MR. COX, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
YOU CAN PROPOSE A SUBSTITUTE OR A AMEND.
I MEAN, YOU HAVE OPTIONS, BUT I THINK WE'RE NOT REALLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN A MOTION, WE HAVE A MOTION THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER.
SO IS THERE, WAS THERE A SECOND ON THE MOTION? YES, WE HAD A SECOND.
UM, IT WAS ME AND HEMPLE A SECOND.
SO, SO WE NEED TO SPEAK TO THE MOTION.
WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER AAR SPOKE TO IT.
SO WE'RE SPEAKING EITHER FAVOR AGAINST OR, YOU KNOW, WE CAN MAKE SUBSTITUTES OR AMEND ODD TO THINK ABOUT THAT.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION, UH, SPEAKING, UH, COMMISSIONER POLITO? UH, I'LL KEEP IT BRIEF.
I JUST DON'T THINK WE SHOULD SPLIT THESE THINGS OUT.
I THINK THIS IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF REALLY IMPORTANT STUFF THAT'S BEEN PUT OFF AND NEEDS TO MOVE FORWARD.
AND I THINK A LOT OF THE OTHER, UM, PIECES CAN BE NEGOTIATED BETWEEN HEARING COUNCIL AND HERE MOVING FORWARD.
BUT I'M IN FAVOR OF KEEPING IT TOGETHER.
ALL RIGHT, SPEAKING IN FAVOR, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UH, I TALKED TO URBAN LAND INSTITUTE THIS WEEK, AND THEY ARE PULLING IN A BIG GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO GET INVOLVED AND REALLY LOOKING INTO THIS BECAUSE IT'S HUGE.
IT'S REALLY, REALLY, REALLY BIG.
IT'S VERY RUSHED, AND THERE'S JUST A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE WITH TREMENDOUS CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT THIS REALLY IS GONNA MEAN AND WHAT THE, THE ON GROUND IMPACTS OF THIS ARE GONNA LOOK LIKE.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT A LOT OF THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN A NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND I'VE HEARD THAT A COUPLE OF TIMES.
LIKE, WELL, THIS WAS A PART OF THE, THE NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND IT ALMOST FEELS LIKE, YOU KNOW, PLANNING AN AMENITY DECK ON THE 34TH FLOOR OF A BUILDING, AND THEN YOU CANCEL ALL THE CONDOS, THE CONDOS THAT WE'RE GONNA PAY FOR THE AMENITY DECK, AND NOW YOU WANT TO STILL BUILD THE AMENITY DECK UP IN THE AIR ALL BY ITSELF.
LIKE THE INCENTIVES THAT WENT ALONG WITH A LOT OF THESE THINGS AREN'T THERE.
AND THERE'S STILL A LOT OF MISUNDERSTANDING OUT THERE AND A LOT OF CONFUSION AND A LOT OF REAL, REAL CONSTERNATION ABOUT WHAT THE ON THE GROUND IMPACTS OF THESE BIG THINGS ARE GONNA LOOK LIKE.
SO, UM, CITY STAFF THAT I'VE TALKED TO ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT MORE TIME.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT A LOT MORE TIME, AND WE NEED MORE TIME BECAUSE IF WE RUSH THIS AND WE GET IT WRONG, THAT'S NOT GOOD FOR ANYBODY.
SO LET'S JUST WORK TO GET IT RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER COX, CAN I MAKE A SUBSTITUTE? CAN I MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION? UH, YES YOU CAN.
I WAS GONNA TEST THE WATERS TO, TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM, UM, TO OUR OCTOBER 11TH MEETING.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO POSTPONE TO OCTOBER 11TH.
OKAY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SHAY, GO AHEAD AND SPEAK TO OUR MOTION COMMISSIONER COPS.
I'M PROBABLY GONNA SAY WHAT COMMISSIONER SHAY WOULD SAY IT, IT'D BE REALLY, REALLY ADVANTAGEOUS AND VALUABLE IF THE WORKING GROUP WAS ABLE TO, TO MEET, TO DIGEST THESE THINGS A BIT MORE AND, AND ACTUALLY COME UP WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE, FOR THIS COMMISSION TO, TO, UH, TO CONSIDER RATHER THAN KIND OF JUST CHOP UP THIS FRANKENSTEIN EVEN MORE, UM, AND, AND POTENTIALLY LOSE A LOT OF THE VALUE AND, AND A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT MAKE SENSE BY HAVING THESE THINGS TOGETHER IN A SINGLE PACKAGE.
UM, I ASSUME THERE WAS SOME RATIONALE BETWEEN PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO, BUT NOW WE'RE KIND OF, UM, CHOPPING THAT UP WITHOUT KNOWING THE IMPACT.
SO I JUST THINK WE SHOULD TAKE MORE TIME TO LOOK AT IT AS A WHOLE, PARTICULARLY WITHIN THE WORKING GROUP.
UH, SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONERS Z I'M HONESTLY MORE OF A NEUTRAL.
I REALLY DO APPRECIATE AND DEFER TO MY COMMISSIONERS IF THEY WANT THOSE TWO WEEKS TO LOOK AT THESE ITEMS. UM, I'LL JUST SPEAK FOR MYSELF AND I THINK FOR AT LEAST PART OF THE WORKING GROUP, I'M NOT SURE WE'LL BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE ANY KIND OF HONESTLY AGREEMENT ON THESE ITEMS AROUND FUNCTIONALLY AND MISSING MIDDLE IN TWO WEEKS.
THEY REQUIRE A HEFTY AMOUNT OF WORK.
AGAIN, I, I RESPECT THE COMMISSIONERS NEED FOR
[03:50:01]
TWO MORE WEEKS, AND I'M HAPPY TO, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT THAT.BUT I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR, I THINK THERE'S VERY LIKELY THAT WE'LL BE MAKING THE EXACT SAME MOTION IN TWO WEEKS, BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WE'LL BE ABLE TO RESOLVE ALL OF THE THINGS WITH THESE PIECES BY THEN.
SO JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT EVEN AS I RESPECT THE NEED FOR POSTPONEMENT, UH, SPEAK IN FAVOR.
MR. SHA, DO YOU WANNA SAY ANY WORDS? I MEAN, COMMISSIONER COX PRETTY MUCH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, EXPRESS WHAT, WHAT I'M THINKING THROUGH MY HEAD, BUT I, I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT, UM, WHAT THE OTHER, THE INTENTION OF THE OTHER MOTION IS.
AND I FEEL LIKE IN TWO WEEKS IF WE ARE MAKING THE SAME MOTION, WE ARE SENDING THAT FORWARD.
AT LEAST THAT DECISION WAS MADE WITH THE WORKING GROUP TO, TO DO SO.
YOU KNOW, AND I, I THINK WE MIGHT EVEN BE ABLE TO GET THERE WITH, WITH SOME ADDITIONAL PIECES THAT WE MIGHT EVEN BE ABLE TO SEND FORWARD.
SO IT JUST GIVES THAT OPPORTUNITY AND IT ALSO RESPECTS, UM, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER BDOS, LIKE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT SPLITTING IT AT THIS POINT, AND, BUT AT LEAST WE CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION OF THE IMPACT OF THAT.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST A MOTION, SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I'VE TALKED TO A COUPLE DOZEN PEOPLE ABOUT THIS.
I'M ALSO ON THIS WORKING GROUP AND EVERYONE'S BEGGING FOR MORE TIME, LIKE A LOT MORE TIME, LIKE SO MUCH MORE TIME.
THEY'RE ASKING FOR A YEAR
AND I'D RATHER GO AHEAD AND JUST LAND ON THAT NOW AND LET'S JUST GET THAT CERTAINTY GOING AND START TO WORK ON IT.
UH, ANY OTHERS WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR? I'LL JUST QUICKLY SAY, I, I'D LIKE TO GET A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE WORKING GROUP IN TWO WEEKS, WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE AND, AND HAVE EVERYBODY HERE DISCUSSING IT.
UM, THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE.
SO I'M GONNA GO AND VOTE FOR THIS SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
ANY, UH, SPEAKING AGAINST LAST OPPORTUNITY? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THIS, UH, SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO POSTPONE ACTION UNTIL OCTOBER 11TH, UH, BY COMMISSIONER COX, SAYING BY COMMISSIONER SHAY.
UH, THOSE IN THE DIAS IN SPORT, YOU GOT TWO THOSE VOTING AGAINST ON THE DICE.
ALL RIGHT, THOSE ON THE SCREEN, VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
SUBSTITUTE ONE, THAT MOTION DOES NOT PEST.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO THE, UH, MOTION JUST RELATED TO THE, UM, MOVING CERTAIN ITEMS TO PLANT, UH, PHASE TWO.
UH, THAT WAS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ZA.
DO WE NEED TO, I HATE TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT IT IS VERY WELL DESCRIBED.
I I THINK WE NEED TO PROBABLY READ IT ONE MORE TIME.
UM, SO THE MOTION IS TO REMOVE THE FUNCTION GREEN SUB ITEM CONTAINED IN 25 8 SUB C FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED WITH PHASE TWO, ALONG WITH STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT.
ON THE ITEM, REMOVE THE MISSING MIDDLE SUB ITEM CONTAINED IN VARIOUS SUBSECTIONS OF THE OVERALL ORDINANCE FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED WITH PHASE TWO, ALONG WITH STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ON THE ITEM, REMOVE CHANGES RELATED TO NEW UTILITIES, MAJOR REPLACEMENTS OF EXISTING, UH, UTILITIES AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE CONTAINING 25 DASH EIGHT DASH 2 61 FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED WITH PHASE TWO.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, DOESN'T MEAN THE COMMISSION DOESN'T GET TO COMMENT ON IT AND STILL BE PART OF IT, IT JUST MOVES IT INTO A LARGER DISCUSSION PHASE.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE LET IT GO AND IT'S LIKE, OH MY GOSH, IT'S OUT OF OUR HAND.
SO JUST WANNA BE CLEAR, IS THAT EVERYBODY YOU KNOW? AND, UM, OKAY, WE WERE, WE DIDN'T WRAP UP ANY FOR DISCUSSION, YOU KNOW, FOR THE MOTION OR AGAINST, SO WE STILL HAD A COUPLE OF SPOTS.
SO DOES ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK FOR AGAINST COMMISSIONER COX? UH, I'LL JUST SPEAK AGAINST, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE DON'T UNDERSTAND NECESSARILY THE IMPACTS OF BREAKING THIS UP.
AND THE ITEMS THAT COMMISSIONERS ARE LISTED ARE PROBABLY NOT JUST THE MOST CONTROVERSIAL, BUT PROBABLY THE MOST IMPACTFUL, BOTH FROM A BENEFIT AND A COST PERSPECTIVE.
[03:55:01]
UH, PUSHING THIS OFF.I, YOU KNOW, WHEN STAFF TELLS ME SIX MONTHS TO SIX TO EIGHT MONTHS, I'M PRETTY SURE WE'RE PROBABLY TALKING ABOUT MORE THAN A YEAR.
SO I, I JUST, I JUST FEEL LIKE WE, WE COULD TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY NOW TO WORK THROUGH THIS RATHER THAN BASICALLY JUST PUNT THIS ANOTHER YEAR AND HAVE THESE SAME CONVERSATIONS A YEAR FROM NOW.
UH, SO WE HAD, WE HAVE TWO MORE SPOTS.
SPEAKING OF FAVOR OR AGAINST, UM, OTHERWISE WE CAN GO AHEAD AND VOTE.
I JUST POINT OF CLARIFICATION FOR, UM, MR. RIVERA, IF WE DO, UH, RECOMMEND DELAYING THESE, UH, COUNCIL, UM, THAT IS, I MEAN, COUNCIL COULD STILL TAKE THESE UP, RIGHT? CHAIR COMMISSION LIAISON.
SO I BELIEVE THAT COUNCIL WILL NEED A RECOMMENDATION FROM CURRENTLY COUNCIL WILL NEED A RECOMMENDATION FROM PLAN COMMISSION BEFORE PROCEEDING TO A PUBLIC HEARING.
NOW, COUNCIL CAN ALSO INCLUDE AN ITEM ON A FEATURE AGENDA TO WAIVE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REVIEW.
SO THEY WOULD'VE TO TAKE ACTION.
JUST AS CLEAR ON WHERE THIS MIGHT END UP.
IT ISN'T IT, IF I, AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECT MS. RIVERA, THAT IF WE DON'T MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON ALL OF IT, THEN IT COULD, IT EITHER, IT EITHER ONE OF TWO THINGS HAPPEN.
EITHER COUNCIL MAKES A MOTION TO, TO WAIVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION AND THEREFORE WE DON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THESE ITEMS, OR IT HOLDS UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AT COUNCIL BECAUSE IT'S AN INCOMPLETE RECOMMENDATION.
SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON RECOMMENDATION AND A RECOMMENDATION OF WHAT TO DO WITH THE ITEMS BEFORE YOU, BUT WE'RE NOT MAKING A REC WHAT? WE'RE NOT THERE YET.
LET'S, ON THE MOTION ON THE TABLE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE THEN.
UM, THOSE ON THE DIAS, UH, IN FAVOR, THIS MOTION, GO AHEAD AND RAISE YOUR HAND.
AND THOSE ON VIRTUALLY, UH, IN FAVOR.
SO WE'VE GOT, UM, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, AND GOT COMMISSIONER COX AND COMMISSIONER FLORES VOTING AGAINST COMMISSIONER, UH, POLITO, UH, NEUTRAL.
UM, YES, COMMISSIONER AAR, OUR CHERYL WILL GO AHEAD AND ASK THAT WE RECONSIDER THE VOTE FOR POSTPONEMENT TO TWO WEEKS, AND I CAN SPEAK TO WHY I'M ASKING FOR THAT.
SO, UH, FOR A RECONSIDERATION, WE NEED SOMEBODY THAT VOTED IN FAVOR OF THAT.
SOME, SOMEBODY AGAINST, RIGHT? OH, SOMEBODY TO FLIP.
YOU GOT, ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE A RECONSIDERATION.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SURE.
I'LL JUST SAY, IF WE DON'T VOTE EITHER WAY, THEN WE DON'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATION.
IT GOES TO COUNSEL AS NO RECOMMENDATION, RIGHT? I'M NOT SURE THAT WOULD BE A COMPLETE, HONESTLY, WE WOULD BE DELEGATING OUR DUTY TO SOMEONE ELSE.
I'M NOT SURE THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE FOR THE WORK THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.
SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND CONSIDER THAT.
ANY MORE? ANYBODY ELSE WANNA SPEAK TO THIS RECONSIDERATION? ALL RIGHT, THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE THAT'S ON THE DIAS IN FAVOR, RECONSIDERING.
AND THEN THOSE ON THE SCREEN IN FAVOR.
I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE EXTEND TIME TO 10 40.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND VOTE ON EXTENDING TO 10 40.
GOT, WE'VE GOT, DID YOU VOTE? COMMISSIONER SHAY? HEY, THANK YOU.
OKAY, THAT'S EIGHT EIGHT TO 1 8 0 1 WITH, UH, COMMISSION POLITO VOTING NEUTRAL.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND SO WE DID RECONSIDERATION.
DO WE HAVE ANY MOTIONS? UM, GERALD MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE ACTION ON THIS ITEM BY TWO WEEKS, SO FOR IT TO COME BACK ON OCTOBER 11TH.
[04:00:01]
RECOMMEND THAT WE MOVE TO A, YOU GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COX.UH, DO WE WANT ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? WE TALKED ABOUT IT QUITE A BIT.
CAN WE GO AND MOVE TO A VOTE? ANY OBJECTIONS IF I, IF I CAN JUST MAKE ONE QUICK COMMENT, WHICH IS TO SAY DO THINGS.
ONE, THANK YOU TO OUR STAFF FOR WORKING VERY CLOSELY, BUT THEY'VE BEEN ANSWERING QUESTIONS.
I FEEL LIKE WE ALL HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS.
I APPRECIATE THEIR HARD WORK ON THIS.
UM, AND STAFF WILL WILL WORK WITH, UM, COMMISSION THOMPSON, WHO'S CHAIRING THIS COMMITTEE TO SEE.
WE CAN INVOLVE YOU IN OUR WORKING GROUP PROCESS SO THAT YOU HAVE TIME TO RESPOND TO WHAT WE'RE BRINGING IN, IN TIME FOR YOU TO WORK WITH COUNCIL.
SO ANY OTHER, ANYBODY ELSE WANNA SPEAK TO THIS MOTION? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE THAT'S ON THE DIAS.
UH, THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT.
SO THAT'S 8 0 1 WITH, UH, COMMISSION MICHIGAN STAIN.
WE'VE GOT A LITTLE TIME HERE TO FINISH UP.
WE'VE GOT, BOY, YES, WE HAVE TWO ITEMS FROM THE COUNCIL.
[30. Discussion and possible action initiating code amendments to Title 25 of the City Code to modify the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) – Gateway Zone and Midway Subdistricts of the North Burnet / Gateway Regulating Plan, to increase the maximum floor-area ratio (FAR) and building height when using a development bonus. Co-Sponsors Commissioner Azhar and Commissioner Anderson ]
ITEM 30.HOPEFULLY WE CAN, UM, WITH THE LITTLE DISCUSSION, TAKE CARE OF THIS QUICKLY.
SO THIS IS A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE INITIATING, UH, ACTION INITIATING CODE AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 25, THE CITY CODE TO MODIFY THE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, UH, GATEWAY ZONE AND MIDWAY SUBDISTRICTS OF THE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY REGULATING PLAN TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO AND BUILDING HEIGHT WHEN USING A DEVELOPMENT BONUS.
AND THIS W HAS CO-SPONSORS, COMMISSIONERS, ZAR AND ANDERSON.
SO, UH, DO YOU GUYS WANNA TALK ABOUT THIS AND KIND OF SET IT UP? SURE, SURE.
SO THERE ARE CHANGES THAT ARE ALREADY HAPPENING TO THE CMU SUBDISTRICTS OF NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY THAT COUNCIL HAD INITIATED.
SO THIS SHOULD BE COMING TO US RELATIVELY SOON.
THOSE ITEMS WERE BROUGHT TO THE, UH, TO THE CODE AND ORDINANCES JOINED COMMITTEE.
AND OVER THERE WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION, UM, THAT ESSENTIALLY DOD, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE HIGHEST ENTITLEMENT SUBDISTRICT WITHIN NORTH BURN GATEWAY BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES TO CMU, WOULD ACTUALLY FLIP.
SO TD, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE HIGHEST INTENSITY, WOULD ACTUALLY BE LOWER INTENSITY TO THE CMU.
SO PART OF THAT CONVERSATION THERE, CODES AND ORDINANCES WAS THAT WE MADE A, UH, RECOMMENDATION AS PART OF OUR MOTION TO FORWARD THE CMU CHANGES TO PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE CLARITY FOR STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT THE POSTING AT THE TIME OF PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD ALLOW US THE ABILITY TO FIX THAT ISSUE WITH DOD SO THAT WE'RE MATCHING ENTITLEMENTS AND DOING GOOD PLANNING.
HOWEVER, WE WERE INFORMED LATER BY STAFF THAT IT REALLY NEEDED TO BE INITIATED AS A SEPARATE INDIVIDUAL ITEM.
SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS SOMETHING THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY CODES AND ORDINANCES.
THE IDEA IS, AGAIN, REALLY IT'S A CLEANUP MEASURE.
THE IDEA IS TO KICKSTART THE PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR ENTITLEMENTS FOR BOTH CMU GATEWAY AND ALSO FOR T OD ARE BOTH, UM, MATCHING OR AT LEAST SIMILAR IN THE, WHAT THE PLANNING EFFORT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AROUND NORTH POINT GATEWAY.
ONE THING I'LL ADD IS THAT WE ARE DOING SOME CLEANUP AS THE NORTH POINT GATEWAY REGULATING PLAN IS BEING SORT OF RECONSIDERED BY STAFF, BUT THAT'S JUST A LARGER AND LONGER PROJECT.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COMPLIANT WITH THE VISION OF WHAT THE PLAN WAS.
CHAIR, IF I CAN MENTION ONE MORE THING, SORRY.
STAFF WAS IN AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPOSAL HERE.
SO WE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH STAFF AND STAFF, UM, AGREED THAT THIS MADE SENSE AND NEEDED TO BE DONE.
SO COM UH, COMMISSIONER ZA, CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE ACTION WE WOULD BE TAKING, CONSIDERING THIS EVENING WHERE THIS GOES FROM THIS POINT? UM, SURE.
SO WE WOULD, AND IT PLEASE NOTE THAT IT IS NOT SAY HOW MUCH OR WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
UM, IT'S BASED OFF OF HONESTLY EXACT LANGUAGE TO WHAT WAS INITIATED BY COUNCIL.
EXCEPT COUNSEL SAID, HERE'S WHERE THE FAIR AND HEIGHT HAVE TO BE.
WE'RE GIVING STAFF THE ABILITY TO REVISE AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S COMPLIANT AND MAKES SENSE.
ALL WE'RE DOING TODAY IS INITIATING THE CHANGE GIVING STAFF THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT THE DOD SUBDISTRICTS, UH, FIGURE OUT WHAT WOULD MAKE SENSE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE NORTH BURNER GATEWAY PLAN.
ACTUALLY, NO, IT GOES TO CODES AND ORDINANCES, JOINT COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERATION, WHICH THEN HAS TO FORWARD IT TO THIS BODY, WHICH WOULD THEN SEND THAT RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL FOR FINAL ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE CHANGES.
SO WE'RE ONLY INITIATING THE ITEM TODAY.
WE'RE NOT ADOPTING OR MAKING ANY CHANGES TODAY.
UM, SO DO WE GO, WE SHOULD TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM ANYONE BEFORE WE, UH, ENTERTAIN MOTIONS AND TAKE A VOTE? OKAY, WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS ITEM.
[04:05:01]
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THAT.DO WE, WE DON'T COMMISS YOUR COX.
UH, THOSE ON THE DIAS IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN.
[31. Discussion and possible action regarding Housing Working Groups including but not limited to dissolving and reforming the working groups; and appointing members. Co-Sponsors Chair Shaw and Vice-Chair Hempel ]
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING HOUSING WORKING GROUPS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO DISSOLVING, REFORMING THE WORKING GROUPS AND APPOINTING MEMBERS.THIS WAS AN ITEM THAT CAME UP, UH, LAST TIME, AND I KNOW IT SOUNDS A LITTLE MORE SEVERE, BUT, UH, THE COUPLE OF THINGS CAME UP IS WE'VE GOT TWO WORKING GROUPS, UM, THAT HAVE WANT TO HOLD SIMILAR MEETINGS WITH SIMILAR INDIVIDUALS.
AND IT SEEMED LIKE WE'RE USING A LOT OF RESOURCES TO HAVE DUAL MEETINGS.
ALSO, ONE TO, WE HAVE SOME COUNCIL ACTIONS AND DON'T KNOW IF THIS, THESE BODIES WERE PREPARED TO TAKE, UH, TAKE UP THOSE COUNCIL DIRECTED CODE CHANGES.
AND SO JUST WANTED TO GET, UM, SOME INPUT ON THAT.
UH, I AM LOOKING AT THE TIME, WE WOULD PROBABLY, IF WE WANNA HAVE DISCUSSION ON THIS, WE MIGHT NEED TO EXTEND OR OTHERWISE WE COULD, COULD TAKE THIS UP AT THE NEXT MEETING.
BUT REAL QUICK, MR. RIVERA, WHEN ARE THOSE COUNCIL ACTIONS COMING TO THE, UH, TO US, I GUESS RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND THE COMPATIBILITY? DO WE KNOW CHAIR COMMISSION WHILE HE'S ON BURY? DON'T QUOTE ME ON THIS.
I BELIEVE IT'S YOUR SECOND MEETING IN OCTOBER.
SO IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE CLEAR DIRECTION TO THE WORKING GROUP ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE GOING TO BE CON TAKING UP THESE ITEMS. OKAY.
SO BEFORE WE THINK ABOUT, LET'S SAY RECONFIGURING THE OTHER TWO GROUPS, THE UM, I GUESS MY THOUGHT IS TO CREATE A, A WORKING GROUP THAT'S JUST THE LISTENING GROUP, RIGHT? BASICALLY IT'S LIKE THE DATA, THE, THE DATA ACQUISITION GROUP.
SO WHEN WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LISTEN FROM THE PUBLIC, WE ARE LITERALLY LISTENING FROM THE PUBLIC.
WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THE MERITS OF WHAT THEY'RE TELLING US, BUT WE NEED THOSE LISTENING SESSIONS.
AND WHEN WE HAD TO DIVIDE IT UP BETWEEN LIKE, WAIT, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT HORIZONTAL OR VERTICAL? OH WAIT, YOU CAN'T TALK ABOUT THIS.
OR YOU CAN'T, IT WAS JUST, IT'S JUST TOO DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH.
SO IF WE BASICALLY HAD A WORKING GROUP THAT WAS DEALT WITH THE DATA ACQUISITION AND THE, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN, WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS, THEY COULD BRING IN THAT INFORMATION AT THAT POINT THEN IT BECOMES THE BODIES AND THEN IT GOES TO THE DIFFERENT GROUPS TO HASH OUT THE, UH, THE MERITS.
YOU KNOW, FOR INSTANCE WHETHER, UM, IT'S AN EASIER, MORE DIFFICULT ONE TO, TO MOVE FORWARD.
I MEAN, AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE TO MESS WITH DISSOLVING THOSE TWO OTHER ONES, BUT WE JUST CREATE ONE SPECIFICALLY FOR DATA ACQUISITION.
I DON'T KNOW, THAT'S JUST A THOUGHT.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THERE WOULD BE A WORKING GROUP JUST TO ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC AND THEN THEY WOULD BE DISSOLVED AND THEN WE HAD JUST THEN GO TO THE NEXT EXISTING WORKING GROUPS.
IS THAT THE IDEA? SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE WHETHER IT GETS DISSOLVED, I MEAN IF WE NEED TO DISSOLVE IT JUST SO THERE'S NOT THE OVERLAP WORRY ABOUT THE QUORUM KIND OF RIGHT.
COMPLEXITIES IS THEY NEED TO HAVE DISCREET SCOPES, I THINK.
IT'S GONNA, IT WOULD GET, I MEAN UNLESS, UNLESS, UNLESS YOU DO WANT TO GO AHEAD AND SAY, WE'LL JUST DISSOLVE THE OTHER TWO WORKING GROUPS, CREATE THIS AND WE'LL RE RE AND THEN WE RECREATE.
CUZ I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND HOW WE DO THIS.
IF YOU WANT ONE MISSION, COHEN, WE COULD DO THE THIRD GROUP.
IF, IF IF THE TASK THAT IT'S ASSIGN IS NON ACTIONABLE OTHER THAN TO PRESENT TO THE BODY TO BE OFF TO THE OTHER WORKING GROUPS, YOU'D HAVE TO BE, THAT'S CAREFUL ABOUT THE WORDING.
BUT IT'S, THAT WAS KIND OF THE THOUGHT BEHIND THIS OTHER ONE.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT AN ACTIONABLE PIECE.
YEAH, I WAS JUST LIKE YOU WERE SAYING, I'M, I'M ALL FOR SIMPLER IS BETTER AND I'M, AND I I'M WONDERING IF, IF WE'RE COMPLICATING THINGS A BIT HERE WHEN WE DON'T ACTUALLY EVEN KNOW YET WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA OF THE LISTING SESSION IS AWESOME, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GONNA COME OUT OF THOSE LISTING SESSIONS.
I GENERALLY LEAN TOWARDS LET'S JUST HAVE A SINGLE HOUSING WORKING GROUP.
THOSE TASK IS TO BASICALLY SCOPE OUT THESE ITEMS AND THEN IF WE FEEL LIKE A SEPARATE WORKING GROUP SHOULD TACKLE THOSE ITEMS, OR IF THOSE ITEMS CAN BE TACKLED WITHIN THAT SAME HOUSING WORKING GROUP, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE FULL PC CAN, CAN DISCUSS ONCE WE GET REPORTS FROM THE LISTENING SESSIONS OR WHATEVER FROM JUST THE HOUSING WORKING GROUP.
AND, AND THAT WAS THE INTENTION, THAT WAS ORIGINAL INTENTION
[04:10:01]
UNTIL WE ENDED UP HAVING A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO JOIN THE WORKING GROUP, WHICH BLEW IT TO, TO TOO MANY PEOPLE.SO WE HAD TO BREAK IT INTO TWO.
BUT IF WE REFOCUS THE TASK OF THE THIS WORKING GROUP, THEN MAYBE WE CAN WE'LL BE ABLE TO LIMIT IT TO SUB CORE.
FOLKS, UH, IF WE'RE GONNA MAKE A DECISION, WE NEED A LITTLE MORE TIME.
I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION THAT WE EXTEND TIME TO 10 50.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COX GOING TAKE A VOTE.
SO THAT'S 8 0 1 WITH COMMISSION ON UPSTANDING.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND FINISH THIS UP.
I, I, AGAIN, I'M HAVING, BEING RUSHED, I'M HAVING A LITTLE DIFFICULTY SEEING IF WE HAVE ONE KEEP THOSE OTHER TWO INTACT.
I JUST THINK THAT WE MIGHT FOUND, CAN I MAKE A, CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION OR EMOTION THAT WE DISSOLVE THE TWO HOUSING WORKING GROUPS? CREATE, CREATE A SINGLE HOUSING WORKING GROUP WHOSE SCOPE IT IS TO ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC AND, AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS AND DEVELOP A SCOPE OF WORK OR THE WORKING GROUP TO PRESENT TO THE FULL PC.
AND THEN AT THAT PRESENTATION WE CAN DECIDE IF WE NEED ANOTHER WORKING GROUP BECAUSE OF INTEREST OR BECAUSE OF THE TOPIC OR WHATEVER.
AND THE ADVANTAGE WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS THAT THERE'S ONLY WHAT, NINE PEOPLE TUNED INTO THE MEETING RIGHT NOW.
SO WE MAY NOT HAVE THE ISSUE OF OKAY.
TOO MANY PEOPLE WANTING TO JOIN.
SO IF WE WANNA MAKE THIS GO QUICKLY, WE WOULD SAY, OKAY, NUMBER ONE, LET I, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DISSOLVE THE TWO HOUSING WORKING GROUPS.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? WE'RE GONNA TAKE, OKAY, WE HAVE A SECOND.
LET'S SHARE A SECOND AND THEN YOU WANNA GO ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? OKAY.
LET'S GO AND MOVE TO A VOTE OVER DISSOLVING THE TWO HOUSING WORKING GROUPS.
SO WE'VE TAKEN THOSE TWO DOWN.
NOW, UH, DO WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION? OKAY.
SO, UH, MAKE A MOTION TO CREATE A HOUSING WORKING GROUP TASKED WITH, UH, PUBLIC, UH, ENGAGEMENT, UH, TASKED WITH, UH, PUTTING TOGETHER THE DATA AND ASSESSING TO CREATE A, I GUESS COMMISSIONER CUS WAS A, UH, SCOPING OUT.
SCOPING OUT THE TASKS OF THE WORKING GROUP.
TO PRESENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ARE WE CLEAR ON THAT? PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT? YEAH.
UH, DO WE NEED TO EVERYBODY CLEAR ON WHAT, WHAT THAT WORKING GROUP IS? AND SO DO WE HAVE TO GET MEMBERS, PUT MEMBERS IN AT THIS POINT? WE SHOULD, YES.
SO, SO WHO IS ON THE OTHER TWO WORKING GROUPS? UH, YEAH.
YOU, YOU CAN BE ON, YOU DON'T COUNT AGAINST OUR QUORUM.
SO WE JUST NEED ENOUGH TO BE SUB QUORUM, YOU KNOW, AND YEAH.
AND THEN IF ANYBODY WANTS TO, I GUESS IF THEY'RE NOT ON IT, THEY, THEY COULD.
SO LET'S RAISE, WHO WANTS TO BE ON THIS LISTENING TEAM? LISTENING GROUP? HAVE COMMISSIONER SHA.
COMMISSIONER ARD? DO YOU RAISE YOUR HAND AND HOLDING IT? UH, COMMISSION POLITO? NO.
WHO, WHO ELSE WE'RE ON THOSE OTHER GROUPS? I REALLY WANT THEM TO RAISE THEIR HAND.
I WAS ON THE, YEAH, I WAS ON THE SITE DEVELOPMENT GROUP AND I'M HAPPY TO STEP BACK AND SEE WHAT SCOPE COMES OUT OF THIS WORKING GROUP.
WHO'S, WHO'S THE FIFTH? MR. SHE ANDERSON.
OH, COMMISSIONER COX, YOU RAISE YOUR HAND.
SO WE GOT ROOM FOR ONE MORE AND NO, I WOULD, I WAS SAYING THAT I'M HAPPY TO STEP BACK AND NOT BE ON THIS ONE.
I JUST THOUGHT YOU RAISE YOUR HAND.
WE GOT, BUT WE, WE, WE, WE WOULD WELCOME YOU TO BE ON.
HOW ABOUT THAT? THERE'S SO MUCH BENEFIT AND KEEP IN, IN MIND AT THIS POINT.
THE FIRST PART OF THIS IS, IS DATA ACQUISITION, RIGHT? IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, WE NEED COMMISSIONERS THERE TO HELP, UM, FIELD THE LISTENING SESSIONS AND TAKE AND BE ABLE TO TAKE NOTES.
SO MY POSITION IS I'M HAPPY TO JOIN, BUT, BUT IF WE HAVE A QUORUM ISSUE, I'M HAPPY TO NOT ALSO JOIN WHATEVER WORD.
WE HAVE ROOM FOR ONE MORE, RIGHT? AND I THINK THOMPSON GIVEN YES,
[04:15:01]
WE WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND PUT HIM ON THERE.IF HE'S NOT HERE, THEN YOU'RE GAME.
IT, SO WE'RE CLEAR ON THE MOTION AND THE MEMBERS.
AND THOSE ON, ON THE SCREEN, ON THE NEW WORKING GROUP.
AND, AND JUST TO LET EVERYBODY, SO, UM, AIA IS ASKING FOR SOME DATES FOR US FOR, UH, LISTENING SESSION WITH THEM.
SO THAT'S, UM, SO I'LL SHOOT OUT AN EMAIL TO YOU GUYS ABOUT, UM, PUTTING THAT TOGETHER.
SO I'M GONNA MAKE THIS QUICK OUT OF THE WE'LL GO, UH, CODES, ORANGES, ANY UPDATES.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ]
ITEMS. I SKIPPED THAT ONE.DO WE HAVE ANY? I I HAVE ONE CHAIR.
UM, CAN WE CREATE, CAN WE PUT CREATING A WORKING GROUP AT OUR NEXT, UM, AGENDA TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE CODE CHANGES RELATED TO COMPATIBILITY AND MIXED USE ON, UM, USE? YES.
WE NEED TO FORM WORKING GROUPS FOR THIS.
THAT WAS THE ENTIRE THIS, SO, UM, JUST MAKING A REQUEST TO PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT TIME.
[BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES ]
GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO, UH, UPDATES, CODES, NOR STRONG COMMITTEE, ANYTHING.WE MET AT THE NEW MEETING LOCATION FOR THE FIRST TIME.
I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
AND I WASN'T A PRESENT THERE, SO.
LET'S GO AND MOVE ON SO WE CAN GET OUTTA HERE.
UH, CONFERENCE AND PLAN, JOINT COMMITTEE, ANYTHING.
WE MEET, WE MEET ON OCTOBER 13TH.
A SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE'RE SCHEDULED TO MEET IN OCTOBER.
UH, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
UH, DESIGN GUIDELINES UPDATE WORKING GROUP.
WE'RE WAITING FOR THE DESIGN COMMISSION TO, UH, REACH OUT TO US.
AND THE OTHER TWO NO LONGER EXISTS, SO, UM, ANY OBJECTIONS? TOJO THIS MEETING? NO.
IT'S 10 45 AND I'M ADURING THIS MEETING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND IF I EVER LOSE MY LEGS, I WON'T KNOW.
AND IF I EVER LOSE MY, I WON'T HAVE TO WALK THE MOON.
I'M BEING FOLLOWED BY A MOON SHADOW, MOON SHADOW, MOON SHADOW.
I'M LEAPING AND HOP ON A MOON SHADOW, MOON SHADOW.