Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[00:06:18]

ALL

[00:06:18]

RIGHT.

[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]

IT IS 6 0 6.

WE'RE GOING TO, WE HAVE QUORUM.

I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, BRING THIS MEETING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

UH, TODAY'S DATE IS JANUARY 10TH, 2023.

HAPPY NEW YEAR, EVERYONE.

WELCOME BACK.

EVERYBODY HAD A GOOD BREAK? UM, GO AHEAD AND DO A QUICK ROLL CALL HERE.

UH, I'M GOING TO START, UH, AND WE'LL MOVE, UH, THOSE ON THE DIAS.

UM, SORRY.

ON MY LEFT.

UM, WE, WE HAVE OUR, UH, START WITH EX OFFICIO.

WE HAVE, UH, BOA CHAIR, UH, JESSICA COHEN, AND THEN WE HAVE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HERE.

UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR HERE.

COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HERE.

I'M YOUR CHAIR.

CHAIR CHA SHAW .

AND WE HAVE THE, UH, VICE CHAIR HERE.

UM, AND LET'S SEE, GOING TO THE SCREEN, UH, WE'LL START, UH, WITH COMMISSIONER GIANNIS POLITO PRESENT.

ALL RIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER COX HERE.

UH, COMMISSIONER SHAY.

PRESENT, UH, COMMISSIONER MOOW PRESENT.

COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER HERE.

AND COMMISSIONER FLORES HERE.

I'M LOOKING TO SEE.

OKAY, SO THAT BRINGS US TO 6 7 8 9, 10, 11.

WE HAVE 11 THIS EVENING.

ALL RIGHT.

THAT'S A GOOD NUMBER.

UH, SO NEXT, UH, JUST A QUICK, OR, I'M GETTING HELP THIS EVENING.

UM, COMMISSIONER FLORES, ARE YOU GOING, CAN YOU HELP ME WITH THE FIRST READING OF THE AGENDA? YES.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

AND I'LL HAVE HELP FROM, UM, MR. RIVERA.

I'M JUST, UH, CALLING SPEAKERS AND ALSO THE VICE CHAIR HEMPEL IS GONNA HELP ME WITH, UM, JUST TRACKING VOTE COUNTS AND Q AND A THIS EVENING.

SO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR HELP.

UM, GOING AHEAD AND MOVING INTO, UH, JUST A QUICK ANNOUNCEMENT.

UH, THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING, SO WE'LL HAVE BOTH, UH, PARTICIPANTS ON THE COMMISSION THAT ARE VIRTUAL, AS WELL AS HERE ON THE DIAS AND AS WELL AS SPEAKERS, UH, THAT CAN SPEAK VIRTUALLY.

AND THOSE HERE IN, UH, COUNCIL CHAMBERS.

UH, ONE THING I DID WANT TO CONFIRM MR. RIVERA, IS, UH, ARE, ARE THEY GO SINCE WE HAVE A FEW CASES THIS EVENING.

UM, ARE YOU GOING TO SEND OUT AN EMAIL? WHEN DO THEY NEED TO WAIT HERE IN CHAMBERS? UM, WHAT'S OUR PROCESS THERE? I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A FEW CHANGES.

CHAIR COMMISSION LAY ON ANDREW.

SO, UH, APPROXIMATELY 50 MINUTES PRIOR TO, UH, THE COMMISSION CONSIDERING THE ITEM AND EMAIL WILL BE SENT TO, UM, PARTICIPANTS.

OKAY.

SO IF YOU SIGNED UP HERE TO SPEAK, THEY COULD WAIT IN THE ATRIUM AREA AND THEY SHOULD RECEIVE AN EMAIL CORRECT BEFORE THEIR ITEM COMES UP.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

BECAUSE IT, UH, IT WILL LIKELY BE, DEPENDING ON HOW MANY ITEMS, UH, WE HEAR TONIGHT, IT COULD BE A LONG EVENING.

UM, OKAY.

CHAIR, YES.

I NOTICE ALSO THAT WE HAVE A PACKED AGENDA.

SOMETIMES WE, UH, YOU KNOW, WE ALLOW THE EIGHT QUESTIONS.

SOMETIMES WHEN WE ONLY USE FIVE, WE THEN OFFER FOLKS ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

IS THERE ANY WAY MAYBE WE COULD FOREGO THAT AND JUST TRY AND BE REALLY EFFICIENT WITH THE TIME WE USE IF WE'RE ALREADY ONE OF THOSE FIVE SPEAKERS? UH, I AGREE.

AND WE'RE, WE'RE ALL, WE MAY WE'LL SEE HOW MANY ITEMS WE END UP WITH.

WE MAY ALSO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS ASKING QUESTIONS IN THE LENGTH OF TIME JUST TO GET THROUGH THE AGENDA TONIGHT.

BUT WE'LL, WE'LL SEE, UH,

[00:10:01]

HOW MANY PUBLIC HEARINGS WE HAVE LEFT.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, JUST QUICK, UH, HOUSEKEEPING, UM, FOR COMMISSIONERS, THOSE, UH, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY, PLEASE HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW CARDS AVAILABLE.

MAKES IT EASIER FOR ME TO COUNT VOTES, AND I'LL RECOGNIZE THE NUMBER OF VOTES, UH, VOTING AGAINST OR AN ABSTENTION.

UH, AND LET'S SEE, UH, PLEASE REMAIN MUTED.

UM, WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING, RAISE YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED, BUT PLEASE, IF I FAIL TO SEE YOU, I DO HAVE HELP HERE, UM, FROM FOLKS AND, UH, THEY'LL TRY TO RECOGNIZE YOU AS WELL AND BRING IT TO MY ATTENTION.

BUT, UH, YEAH, IF YOU'RE BEING FEEL LIKE YOU'RE BEING IGNORED, PLEASE SPEAK UP.

ALL RIGHT.

AND PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.

DO WE HAVE ANY, ANYTHING? UH, NOPE.

NO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, APPROVAL OF MINUTES.

COMMISSIONERS.

DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES FROM OUR, UH, MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 20TH? OKAY, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE APPROVAL OF THOSE MINUTES TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AND WITH THAT, UH, I'LL LET COMMISSIONER

[Reading of the Agenda]

FLORES KIND OF TAKE US THROUGH THE FIRST READING OF OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

THANK YOU, CHAIR SHAW.

ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE ONE APPROVAL OF MINUTES, APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 20TH, 2022.

UM, PUBLIC HEARINGS TWO.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2 9 ANDERSON LANE MIXED USE APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT THREE.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2 1 0.0 1 28 0 1 SOUTH I 35.

THAT ITEM IS APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT FOUR.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1, 0 22,000 EAST SIXTH STREET AND 2000 EAST SEVENTH STREET.

AN ITEM IS APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

FIVE.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 15 0.05 1811 AIRPORT BOULEVARD, APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

SIX.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 15 0.01 TCO LANE N P A APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT SEVEN.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P 20 22 0 0 1 15 0.03 DARBY YARD 700.

STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH EIGHT.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1 15 0.04 HUDSON NUMBER THREE, THAT ITEM IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, NINE.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P 20 22 0 0 1.

5.06 GLA GLOUCESTER DWELLINGS.

UM, THAT ITEM IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH 10.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1 4 0.05 BERGSTROM SPUR TRAIL MIXED USE.

UH, STAFF POSTPONE TO FEBRUARY 14TH 11.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1, 0 0.0 1 26 15 TO 26 17 EAST SIXTH STREET STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH, 12.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 0 9 0.01 1007 AND 1021 EAST SEVENTH STREET.

STAFF POSTPONE TO FEBRUARY 28TH 13.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 0 5 0.01.

VARGAS MC VARGAS MIXED USE THAT ITEM IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH.

14.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 0 8 0.0 1 31 17 TO 31 21 EAST 12TH STREET.

STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH, 15.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P 20 22 0 0 1.

16.02 BOARD AND TRACKED STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH, 16.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2, 3 0.02, EAST 51ST AND CAMERON, THAT ITEM IS STAFFED POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH, 17.

PLAN, AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 0 2 1 0.02.

BURLESON AND BEN WHITE STAFF POSTPONE TO FEBRUARY 28 18.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1 4 0.03.

CHAPMAN 71, APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, 19 REZONING C 14, 20 22 0 1 4, 1 12 AND WEST REZONING.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

APPLICANT REVISED REQUEST TO THE CO TO 90 FEET AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AGREES AND IT IS STAFF RECOMMENDED, UH, 20 PLAN

[00:15:01]

AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2, 2 0.0 1, 4 0 6 AND 4 28 EAST ALPINE ROAD.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.

21.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 1.

4 0 6 N 4 28 ALPINE ROAD REZONING.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 22.

PLAN AMENDMENT N PA 20 22 0 0 0 5 0.02.

SECOND ALPHA POINT 95, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH, 23.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 1 4.

SECOND ALPHA POINT 96.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH, 24.

PLAN AMENDMENTS N P A 20 22 0 0 0 7 0.0 ONE TEN EIGHT TEN NEWMONT ROAD, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

25 REZONING C FOURTEEN TWENTY TWENTY TWO ZERO ONE THIRTY SIX TEN EIGHT TEN NEWMONT ROAD.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

26.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P 20 22 0 0 1.

6.0 3 49 27 EAST FIFTH STREET.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, 27.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 3 49 27 EAST FIFTH STREET.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, 28.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2, 9 0.01.

76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, 29.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 9 4 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD, APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH 30.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2, 3 0.03 BERKMAN RESIDENTIAL, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.

31.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 4 BERKMAN RESIDENTIAL.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 32.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 7 6 3100 GUADALUPE, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, 33.

REZONING C 14 20 22, 0 1, 0 2, 5 0 6, AND 5 0 8 WEST REZONING.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, 34.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 8 4 7 0 5 BROWNLEE CIRCLE REZONE.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 35.

REZONING C 14 14 20 22.

1 47.

LINDA VISTA, ELROY WEST INDUSTRIAL PARK AT MOORE'S CROSSING MUD.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

36 REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 93 S D C M L K ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JAN, UH, TO FEBRUARY 14TH, UH, 37 REZONING C 14 20 22 116 SOCO COFFEE AND ART GARDEN.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

38.

FINAL PLAT OUT OF APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 19 0 0 5.

7.2 PEARSON RANCH, PHASE TWO, A FINAL PLAT.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C.

FINAL PLAT OUT OF APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 19 0 0 5 7 0.3 A PEARSON RANCH, PHASE TWO B FINAL PLAT.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISAPPROVAL FOR RE REASONS PER EXHIBIT C 40 VARIANCES SP 20 21 0 0 9 1 C OLTORF SITE PLAN.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, 41.

IMAGINE AUSTIN AMENDMENT C P A 20 22 0 0 0 1 PALM DISTRICT PLAN.

THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CONDUCTED AND THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 42.

CODE AMENDMENT C 20 20 22 15 REGULATING PLAN FOR THE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY ZONING DISTRICT.

AND THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.

THAT IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THAT IS A LOT.

OKAY.

A FEW ITEMS. UH, I THINK COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, DO YOU HAVE, UM, A QUESTION ON NUMBER 19 OR WE'RE KEEPING THAT ONE ON CONSENT? THAT'S THE, UH, 12TH AND WEST REON.

YEAH, I'M FINE.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

AND THEN JUST QUICK, UH, 18 WAS ACTUALLY, UM, MR. RIVERA, IS THAT APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH? THAT IS CORRECT.

OKAY.

I'LL, I'LL READ THAT IN

[00:20:01]

A SECOND.

AND THEN I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE, UM, ITEM 41.

IT'S ALSO, WE HAVE ITEM 43, DISCUSSION OF A WORKING GROUP.

UM, RECEIVED A, A LETTER TODAY FROM THE RED RIVER, A CULTURAL DISTRICT, UH, JUST POINTING OUT SOME THINGS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND ASKING FOR A POSTPONEMENT.

UM, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND ON THIS ONE, AND WE CAN GET, HAVE STAFF COME UP IN A MOMENT, UH, IS TO, UH, AS I'M TOLD, THIS WILL BE TAKEN UP BY COUNCIL.

THE NEW COUNCIL, MARION COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 23RD IS CURRENTLY PLANNED.

WE HAVE A MEETING ON FEBRUARY 14TH.

SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE, UH, TO GIVE US SOME TIME AND MAYBE IF WE WANTED FORMAL WORKING GROUP, IS BRING THIS BACK, UH, ON THE 14TH OF FEBRUARY AND POSTPONE UNTIL THAT DATE, UM, DO ANY DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THAT RECOMMENDATION, UH, STAFF.

DO YOU WANT TO LIKE, TO KNOW HOW THIS MIGHT IMPACT YOU OR CONCERNS? AND WE CAN DEFINITELY MOVE THIS, I THINK, TO DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT IF WE NEED TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION.

YEAH, I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS.

STEVIE GREATHOUSE, UM, DIVISION MANAGER HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON BEHALF OF THE PALM DISTRICT PLAN, UM, POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH WITH A WORKING GROUP.

SOUNDS GREAT TO US.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

SO, UM, WHAT WE'LL DO IS, UH, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE THAT TILL, UH, FEBRUARY 14TH.

UM, AND WE'LL TAKE UP THE WORKING GROUP ITEM LATER THIS EVENING.

SOUND GOOD? OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

LET ME GO AHEAD AND READ THROUGH THIS CHAIR.

COMMISSIONER LEISEN? YES, SIR.

UM, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WE MAY HAVE SPEAKERS ON ITEM 37.

UM, I JUST WANT TO, UH, UH, CONFIRM WITH THE PARTICIPANTS PRESENT.

OKAY.

DO, DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS? DOESN'T APPEAR.

SO.

OKAY.

SO WE CAN LEAVE THAT ONE ON CONSENT, CORRECT.

MR. CANTU? MR. CANTU IS IN SUPPORT.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

SO LET ME TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND READ THROUGH THIS THING.

[Consent Agenda]

ALL RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE ITEM ONE, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 20TH, 2022.

ITEM TWO, PLAN, AMENDMENT, UH, APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

ITEM THREE, PLAN AMENDMENT.

APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

ITEM FOUR, PLAN AMENDMENT.

APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

ITEM FIVE, PLAN AMENDMENT.

APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

ITEM SIX.

PLAN, UM, PLAN AMENDMENT.

APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

ITEM SEVEN, PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH.

ITEM EIGHT, PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH.

ITEM NINE, WE HAVE STAFF POST AS PLAN AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH.

ITEM 10, PLAN AMENDMENT.

STAFF POSTPONEMENT, FEBRUARY 14TH.

ITEM 11, PLAN AMENDMENT.

STAFF POSTPONEMENT FEBRUARY 28TH, UH, 12.

PLAN AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT.

FEBRUARY 28TH, UH, 13.

PLAN AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH 14.

PLAN, AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT.

FEBRUARY 28TH 15.

PLAN AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY, FEBRUARY 28TH, 16.

PLAN, AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH, 17.

PLAN, AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT.

FEBRUARY 28TH 18.

PLAN, AMENDMENT, UH, APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, UH, 19 IS ON CONSENT.

UM, JUST A NOTE, APPLICANT REVISED REQUEST TO CO TO 90 FEET.

NEIGHBORHOOD AGREES AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS AS WELL.

20 PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, THIS IS, LET'S SEE, BOTH 20, UH, 20.

THE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ITEM 21 REZONING ARE JUST, WE'LL TAKE THOSE UP TOGETHER.

THAT'S, UH, UP FOR DISCUSSION.

AND THEN WE HAVE ITEM 22 PLAN AMENDMENT.

AND THE CORRESPONDING ITEM 23 REZONING CASE WILL BE, UH, THAT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH.

THEN WE MOVE TO, UH, ITEM 24, PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE ASSOCIATED, UH,

[00:25:01]

ITEM 25 REZONING CASE.

BOTH THOSE ARE ON CONSENT.

ITEM 26, PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, THAT'S NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH.

AND THEN THE CORRESPONDING REZONING CASE ITEM, UH, 27 NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, 28 IS A PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH, 29, REZONING APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH.

THEN WE HAVE THE, UH, ITEM 30 PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE ASSOCIATED ITEM 31 REZONING WILL BE TAKEN UP TOGETHER, UH, FOR DISCUSSION THIS EVENING.

ITEM 30 32 REZONING APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 24TH.

ITEM 33 REZONING, UH, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY, UM, 24TH AND APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT.

ITEM 34 REZONING, THAT'S A DISCUSSION CASE THIS EVENING.

ITEM 35 IS ON CONSENT.

36 REZONING APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, 37 REZONING, NO ITEM IS ON CONSENT.

38.

FINAL PLAT OUT OF APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS FOR EXHIBIT C AND 39 FINAL PLAT OUT OF APPROVAL APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN DISAPPROVED FOR REASONS FOR EXHIBIT C 40 VARIANCE APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT FEBRUARY 14TH.

UH, AS WE JUST DISCUSSED, ITEM 41, WE'RE GOING TO, UH, POSTPONE DISCUSSION TO FEBRUARY 14TH.

THAT'S AN AMA.

THE ALISON, UM, IMAGINE US AMENDMENT TO THE PALM DISTRICT PLAN.

AND, UH, LET'S SEE, 42 IS A CODE AMENDMENT AND THAT ONE ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.

UH, ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? YES, MR. THOMPSON? UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, I I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THE, THE SECOND ALPHA ONE, ITEM 22 AND 23, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT WAS OKAY WITH THAT POSTPONEMENT.

THAT'S OVER A MONTH.

CHAIR COMMISSION LAYS ON ANNE.

VERY, YES.

UH, SO WITH THAT ONE, IT'S ACTUALLY GONNA GET A LITTLE, UH, FURTHER OUT BECAUSE OF THE 60 DAY, UH, REQUIREMENT.

UM, THE FURTHER DATE AT THIS TIME THAT YOU CAN POSTPONE OUT TO IS FEBRUARY 28TH, AND THEN THE APPLICANT WILL REQUEST ADDITIONAL TIME AFTER THAT FEBRUARY 28TH DATE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

UM, AND, AND THEN I GUESS THE OTHER ONE, I, I HAVE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC THAT THERE'S SOME CONCERNS ON THE, UH, THE BURNETT GATEWAY, UM, IN TERMS OF THE, THE BICYCLE ACCESS TO THAT, THE, THE RED LINE PARKWAY ACCESS TO IT.

AND I I I JUST WONDERED IF THE COMMISSION WOULD BE INTERESTED IN POSTPONING THAT TWO WEEKS TO SEE IF THEY COULD WORK SOMETHING OUT THERE, UM, E EITHER WITH THE LEGAL OR OR, OR WITH THE COMMUNITY.

I HAD SOME QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE THAT I DON'T THINK, UM, WERE ANSWERED IN THE Q AND A IN THE BACKUP.

SO MAYBE WE STILL TALK THROUGH THOSE, HAVE A Q AND A ON IT, AND THEN DECIDE WHAT TO DO.

UM, I I GUESS THAT'S OKAY.

I, IF IT'S, IF IT'S GONNA BE A LONG NIGHT, UM, AND IF WE'RE NOT REALLY GONNA ACTION ON IT, AND IF WE COULD DO THE Q AND A VIA EMAIL, IF, IF YOU THINK THAT THAT WOULD WORK OR I GUESS YOU WE TRIED THAT.

WE TRIED ENOUGH.

YEAH.

ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS ANY DISCUSSION POINTS ON POSTPONEMENT THAT WOULD BE ITEM? I'M, I'M FINE IF IT, I MEAN, I'M JUST NOT SURE WHAT MAYBE STAFF COULD TELL US IF THERE'S AN URGENCY FOR THAT ONE.

CHAIR.

COMMISSIONER ZA, I HAVE MS. HUNTER JORGE RUSSLYN WHO CAN SPEAK TO THAT ITEM.

THANK YOU, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER.

GOOD EVENING.

EVENING WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN HOUSING AND PLANNING THE PERMIT.

UH, MR A QUESTION ON THE TIMING.

I I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T GET THE QUESTION.

YEAH, YEAH, I GUESS THE, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION IS THAT THERE'S SOME CONCERNS THAT THE, THE PLAN DOESN'T, THAT THE NEW BONUSES DON'T PROPERLY ADDRESS THE RED LINE PARKWAY.

AND WE'D WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IF YOU'RE GONNA TAKE THE BONUS, JUST, JUST LIKE DOWNTOWN, YOU HAVE TO DO GREAT STREETS OR, YOU KNOW, OR, OR IN THE, THE UNO YOU HAVE TO DO GREAT STREETS THAT WE COULD MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAD TO DO THE RED LINE PARKWAY.

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT'S NOT IN THERE NOW.

AND, AND SO JUST GIVING AN EXTRA TWO WEEKS TO SORT OF FIGURE

[00:30:01]

OUT WHAT COULD HAPPEN, WHAT A, WHAT A PLAN WOULD LOOK LIKE, EITHER WHAT LEGALLY WE COULD DO OR WHAT WE'D HAVE TO RE-NOTICE, UM, AND SORT OF THINK THROUGH SOME OF THOSE THINGS.

I THINK THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS IN THE BACKUP, BUT I THINK WE STILL HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS.

SEAN, COMMISSIONER, IF I CAN ADDRESS THAT THE, THE WAY THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATED THIS CODE AMENDMENT ITEM 42 ON YOUR AGENDA DID NOT INCLUDE CONDITIONS TO, UH, THE INCREASE IN ENTITLEMENTS FOR FLORIDA AREA RATIO OR MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT WHEN USING A DEVELOPMENT BONUS.

CERTAINLY THAT'S A DISCUSSION THAT THE COMMISSION CAN HAVE AND WE CAN CERTAINLY RUN THROUGH, UH, POSSIBLE SCENARIOS IN YOUR DISCUSSION AS WELL AS HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH CITY LEGAL.

IF YOU PREFER A POSTPONEMENT IS ALSO ACCEPTABLE FOR US TO GAIN CLARIFICATION ON THOSE ITEMS IF YOU SEE FIT.

BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NEED DIRECTION ON BECAUSE THE WAY IT WAS NOTICED AND ALSO POSTED ON YOUR AGENDA WOULD NOT ALLOW US TO INCLUDE OTHER CONDITIONS TO THE CODE AMENDMENT AS CURRENTLY ON YOUR AGENDA OR NOTIFIED.

AND, AND I GUESS I JUST WOULD WONDER IF, IF THERE WERE MORE CONDITIONS, WHETHER THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH CODES AND ORDINANCES.

AND I, I GUESS I, IF, IF WE COULD TALK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES TONIGHT AND, AND THEN POSTPONE IF, IF WE THINK WE'D, WE'D LIKE TO DO THAT, OR MAYBE WE JUST POSTPONE TWO WEEKS WHEN WE ALREADY HAVE A PRETTY BUSY NIGHT AND, AND, AND HOPEFULLY SOME, YOU KNOW, THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND, AND LEGAL AND STAFF COULD WORK THAT OUT SO THAT NEXT TIME WE WOULD HAVE ANSWERS TO THOSE.

BUT I I BUT THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY URGENT TIMING OF WHY WE WOULD NEED TO DO THIS TONIGHT AS OPPOSED TO DELAYING TWO WEEKS.

WELL, IT'S, GO AHEAD.

IF, IF I MAY CHAIR MY APOLOGIES.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO INITIATE, UH, ANOTHER AMENDMENT IN THE FUTURE, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE EASEMENTS ALONG THE RAIL LINE IN ORDER TO PROVIDE DIRECTION OR ADVICE ON HOW THAT COULD BE INCORPORATED, UH, INTO THE REGULATING PLAN.

AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THIS EVENING AND THAT WE CAN LOOK INTO, UM, LOOKING AT, UH, HOW LEGALLY WE COULD INFUSE SOME OF THESE CONDITIONS, IF THAT'S EVEN POSSIBLE.

SO IT, IT, WHAT I'M HEARING IS WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE THIS AND MAYBE OFFLINE GET ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

UM, AND THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT CHAIR, IF I MAY, THAT THIS ITEM IS ALSO ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA FOR ACTION ON THE 26TH.

SO THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR POSTPONING THAT AT COUNCIL AS WELL, WHICH FROM A STAFF POINT OF VIEW, THAT WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.

OKAY.

WHAT, WHAT DATE WOULD YOU RECOMMEND MEN WE POSTPONE TOO? I, I WOULD THINK TWO WEEKS WOULD, WOULD HELP US SORT OF RESOLVE THOSE PROBLEMS. I'M NOT SURE WE'RE GONNA GET THEM RESOLVED.

IT MAY BE WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT IS AS IT IS NOW.

OKAY.

AND THEN DO SOMETHING ELSE FOR THE RED LINE.

BUT I GUESS I SORT OF WANT SOME PEOPLE TO HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT AND, AND, AND BE PREPARED TO SPEAK TO THAT BOTH THE COMMUNITY AND, AND STAFF ON, ON WHAT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT WE WOULD HAVE.

OKAY.

BUT WE MAY HAVE SOME FEEDBACK ON IF WHAT WE WANT, WE HAVE TO START OVER THROUGH THE PROCESS AND IF HAVE THAT AND IF THAT'S, IF WE HAVE TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO DO THAT.

OKAY.

BUT I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, WE HAD THOUGHT THROUGH ALL THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

OKAY.

SO BRING THIS BACK ON JANUARY 24TH.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? POSTPONE COMMISSIONER OF WHO'S GOT THERE? COMMISS COX? UM, MAYBE I MISHEARD, BUT, UH, STAFF MAY HAVE MENTIONED A POSTING LANGUAGE ISSUE.

SO DO WE HAVE TO GIVE DIRECTION RELATED TO THAT OR DO WE JUST STRAIGHT UP POST POSTPONE IN, IN MY MIND IT'S, WE'RE JUST POSTPONING RIGHT NOW, SO WE CAN SORT OF HAVE SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS WHEN THEY COME BACK OF, OH, WE WILL HAVE TO RE-NOTICE OR IT'LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH CODES AND ORDINANCES AGAIN OR WHATEVER THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS ARE.

AND AT THAT POINT WE MAY RE-NOTICE OR WE MAY MOVE ON WHAT, WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US AND, AND START A DIFFERENT OPTION.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE MR. ZA? UM, WHILE WE'RE POSTPONING, I JUST WANNA MAKE A COMMENT TO MR. ROSALYN, THANK YOU FOR WORKING ON THIS.

I JUST WANNA SAY, I THINK AS THIS CAME TO PLANNING COMMISSION, IT DOES NOT REFLECT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.

SO I HOPE THAT AS THIS COMES BACK, IT GETS MORE ALIGNED WITH THAT OR WE CAN GET AN EXPLANATION ON WHERE STAFF IS.

JUST, JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR ANSWER OF THE ACTION THAT HAPPENED HERE AND WHAT WE'RE,

[00:35:01]

WHAT WE'LL BE DISCUSSING HERE.

OKAY.

SO SOUNDS FOR A FEW REASONS WE MIGHT WANNA POSTPONE THIS TO, OKAY, SO WHAT I HAVE ON THEN ON ITEM, UM, 42, UH, INSTEAD OF DISCUSSION, WE WILL POSTPONE THAT UNTIL JANUARY 24TH.

CHAIR THE ONLY HAND.

COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, GO AHEAD.

THANK YOU.

UM, MR. ROSALIN, I KNOW THAT THERE'S ALSO A LARGER CODE AMENDMENT MOVING THROUGH.

IT'D BE AWESOME TO KNOW IF MAYBE THE ISSUES THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO ADDRESS WITH THE POTENTIAL RIGHT OF WAY NEEDED FOR THE REDLINE PARKWAY, IF THAT COULD MAYBE BE ADDRESSED IN THAT WORK AND NOT NECESSARILY THIS WORK.

IT'D BE GREAT TO UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER IN TWO WEEKS.

THANKS.

YES, SIR.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO, UM, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? I SEE COMMISSIONER AZAR SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.

UH, THOSE ON THE SCREEN, UH, THOSE ON THE DIAS, START WITH THAT, RIGHT? THAT'S EVERYONE AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN, SHOW ME YOUR COLORS.

ALL RIGHT.

THAT'S QUITE A PALLET YOU GOT THERE, MR. COMMISSIONER COX? ALL RIGHT, THAT'S EVERYONE.

UNANIMOUS REP 2 6 11.

ALL RIGHT.

11 0 0.

OKAY.

UH, LET'S, LET'S SEE.

MR. RIVERA HELP KEEP ME ON TRACK.

OUR FIRST ITEM HERE, DO YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? POSTPONES, CHAIR, COMMISSION? LADIES, AVERA? NO, WE DO NOT.

UH, SO WE'LL BEGIN WITH OUR FIRST DISCUSSION CASE OF THE EVENING.

[Items 20 & 21]

UM, SO WE WILL, UH, BEGIN HEARING FROM STAFF IN REGARDS TO ITEMS 20 AND 21.

THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING.

I'M KATHLEEN FOX WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

I WILL BE DISCUSSING ITEM 20.

IT'S A PLAN AMENDMENT M P A DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 2, 2 0.0 1, 4 0 6, AND 4 28 EAST ALPINE ROAD IN DISTRICT THREE.

THE REQUEST IS FROM OFFICE TO MIXED USE.

UH, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDS THE REQUEST FOR MIXED JUICE, UH, UM, LAND USE.

THE BASIS FOR THIS IS THAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ST.

EDWARDS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, WHICH SUPPORTS NEW HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT.

UM, THERE IS MULTI-FAMILY LOCATED TO THE NORTH.

THE REQUEST IS MOSTLY FOR MIXED JUICE MULTI-FAMILY.

BY THE WAY, I DIDN'T ADD THAT.

UM, THE STREET EAST ALPINE IS NOT RESIDENTIAL.

IT'S FILLED WITH MOSTLY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES.

SO IT WOULD FIT WITH THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT BY ADDING ADDITIONAL HOUSING.

THIS IS NOT, AGAIN, IN A JOB CENTER.

THIS IS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD ACTIVITY CENTER, WHICH DOES ALLOW MULTI-FAMILY AND VARIETY OF HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT.

UM, THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL PROJECT IS ALSO LOCATED NEAR ST.

EDWARDS AND WITH AN HALF MILE OF A PLANNED METRO STOP MAKING THE SITE ACCEPTABLE LOCATION FOR HOUSING, DESPITE BEING A DAY ADJACENT TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES TO THE WEST AND SOUTH.

UH, DID NOTE THE LACK OF SIDEWALKS.

THE CONTACT TEAM DID REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT, WHICH WE DID DO.

AND THEN THERE WERE TWO LETTERS FROM TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE, UM, WHO HAD ISSUES WITH WATER QUALITY BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NEXT TO BLONDE CREEK AND THERE WAS GOING TO, UH, THAT THERE WAS AN EXISTING 50 FOOT CO, WHICH WENDY RHODES WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THAT.

AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF GREATER SOUTH RIVER CITY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT DO REQUEST AND SUPPORT A MULTITUDE OF DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPES.

AND WITH THAT, THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH OUR DURING OUR Q AND A? THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, .

GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR AND

[00:40:01]

COMMISSION MEMBERS.

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

THIS, UH, REZONING AREA CONSISTS OF A PLATTED LOT.

IT CAN AND AN AND AS WELL AS AN UNPLATTED TRACT.

IT CONTAINS A VACANT VFW POST AS WELL AS, UM, AN UNPLATTED AND UNPLATTED AREA.

UH, BLUNT CREEK FLOWS THROUGH THE EASTERN PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY AND CONTAINS A DOCUMENTED CREEK BUFFER.

UH, IT IS ZONE G O C O N P THAT OCCURRED AT THE TIME OF THE SOUTH, THE GREATER SOUTH RIVER CITY, UM, CITIZENS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN REZONINGS, WHICH WERE APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN SEPTEMBER OF 2005.

AND THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, THE ONLY ONE FOR THIS PRO FOR THIS PROPERTY, IS A 50 FOOT WIDE VEGETATIVE BUFFER, BEGINNING AT THE CENTER LINE OF, OF BLOOD CREEK.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED, HAS FILED A REQUEST TO THE GO M U C O N P DISTRICT IN ORDER TO BUILD UP TO 40 TOWNHOUSE UNITS OR UP TO 90 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS.

THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING G O M U N P BECAUSE THE LOCATION IS, UM, APPROPRIATE FOR MIXED USE AND GIVEN ITS PROXIMITY TO MAJOR ARTERIALS RESIDENTIAL USES AND ST.

EDWARDS.

AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT THERE IS A TRAFFIC, UH, SIGNAL BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND ADDITIONAL, UH, SIGNAGE AT THE EAST ALPINE SOUTH CONGRESS INTERSECTION THAT IS, UH, UNDERWAY ALREADY.

AND SO, UH, THE STAFF BELIEVES THAT THIS PROPOSAL WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE LAND USES IN THE VICINITY.

UM, I DID WANNA NOTE UNDER THE ISSUE SECTION THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION DID CHANGE FROM THAT, THAT WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED IN, UM, LAST YEAR AND LATE LAST YEAR.

UM, WE DID, UH, HEAR FROM WATERSHED PROTECTION STAFF AND THEY, UH, REQUESTED THAT WE REMOVED THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY REGARDING THE VEGETATIVE SETBACK.

UM, THEY DID A CURSORY REVIEW OF THIS SITE AND IT APPEARS THAT THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS, UH, CURRENTLY MAY BE GREATER THAN THE SETBACK AS DESCRIBED IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.

UH, SO THEY ARE RECOMMENDING REMOVING THE SETBACK SO THAT IT DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH ANY CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS.

UM, SO I DID WANNA NOTE THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS J NOW JUST G O M U N P.

UH, THE APPLICANT DOESN'T OBJECT TO THAT.

AND, UM, THERE IS, THERE HAS BEEN CORRESPONDENCE, UM, BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, UH, THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT.

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

JUST QUICK QUE DO WE HAVE SOMEONE FROM WATERSHED HERE THIS EVENING? YES.

UH, LIZ JOHNSON, SHE IS, UM, PARTICIPATING REMOTELY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

WE'LL NOW BEGIN WITH SPEAKERS.

UM, WE'LL BEGIN WITH, UH, THE APPLICANT, MR. DAVID HARTMAN.

MR. HARTMAN, YOU'LL HAVE, UH, FIVE MINUTES.

UH, GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.

DAVID HARTMAN.

I'M BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.

I HAVE OUR CIVIL ENGINEER ON THE LINE AS WELL AS, UH, DEVELOPER'S REPRESENTATIVE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

UH, THIS, UH, CASE IS FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

WE'RE JUST SIMPLY ADDING MIXED USE TO, UH, A COUPLE OF LOTS, TWO ACRES AT THIS ADDRESS.

UM, CURRENTLY ZONE, ZONE GEO OFFICE PLUM IS OFFICE ADJACENT ZONING IS MF.

UM, AGAIN, THE APPLICATIONS ARE HIGHLIGHTED.

WE'RE ADDING M MU AND MIXED USE.

OUR CURRENT PROPOSALS DEVELOPMENT IS, UH, COMPRISED OF PROB PROBABLY, UM, 40 TOWN HOMES OR 90 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS.

UH, GIVEN THE CURRENT ENVIRONMENT, IT'S PROBABLY GONNA BE THE 90 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS, UH, APPROXIMATELY TWO TENTHS OF THE MILE.

THE ST.

ED'S CENTRALLY LOCATED AND IMAGINE AUSTIN CENTER, UH, ALONG, UH, NEAR AND IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR, ONE-THIRD TO A METRO RAPID ROUTE, UH, NEW TRAFFIC LIGHT AS MS. RHODES SAID AND IS RECOMMENDED BY HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF.

THIS TIMELINE CAN BE SUMMARIZED BY STATING THAT WE'VE HAD FIVE MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPS, INCLUDING, AS YOU KNOW, THE, THE CITY HOSTED VIRTUAL COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

THAT IS NOTICED AT THE PUBLIC PLANNING COMMISSION.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND NOVEMBER 8TH REQUESTED A POST AMENDMENT THAT WE DIDN'T OPPOSE TO THE DECEMBER 13TH HEARING THAT WAS CANCELED.

SO WE'RE HERE TONIGHT BEFORE YOU AND THIS LOCATION, JUST THE NORTH OF BEN WHITE.

UM, AGAIN, YOU SEE THE STREETS, UH, WILLOW SPRINGS, EAST ALPINE ROAD, CONGRESSMAN WOODWARD AND WAREHOUSE ROAD IS ANOTHER STREET TO THE SOUTH BEN WHITE.

THIS IS JUST KIND OF ZOOMED IN SHOWING THAT THE ADJACENT, UM, LAND USES OR TOWN HOMES, APARTMENTS, APARTMENTS, APARTMENTS.

UM, SENIOR LIVING IS SOCO VILLAGE ST.

EDGE'S JUST TO THE NORTH.

AGAIN, MF ZONING IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE TRACT OFFICE OF PLUM.

UH, THIS SHOWS AT A THIRD MALL FROM THE THE CAT METRO RAPID BUS ROUTE AND

[00:45:01]

STOP AND DEAD CENTER IN THIS, UM, IMAGINE AUSTIN CENTER.

AND THEN, UH, THE CORRIDOR, IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR IS CONGRESS AVENUE.

UM, ALPINE ROAD IS ON THE AS P, UM, AS WELL AS ADJACENT STREETS.

AND I WAS SUPER EXCITED WHEN THE CLIENT CALLED, UH, ABOUT THIS TRACT AND LOOKED IT UP.

AND CERTAINLY IT, UH, FOUND OUT, UH, UNDER RESEARCH THAT IT FALLS WITHIN THE 10 MINUTE, UH, WALK SHED AND THREE MINUTE BIKE SHED OF ESSENTIALLY TWO NEW PROJECT CONNECT STATIONS.

UM, AS MS. ROAD SAID, UM, THIS IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL, THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE SATURDAY ON THE GROUND UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITH BACKHOES AND FENCING.

AND IT'S HAPPENING.

UM, AGAIN, SIMPLEST CASE, UH, ADDING A MIXED USE.

THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE ON THE LEFT, ON THE RIGHT IS ARE PROPOSED.

EVERYTHING IS THE SAME.

THE ONLY THING THAT'S DIFFERENT IS THAT WE'RE AUTHORIZING HOUSING THE BACKUP.

THERE WERE STATEMENTS ABOUT, UM, BASICALLY RAINWATER HARVESTING RAIN GARDENS AND STORMWATER RUNOFF.

AND FAST FORWARD TO BASICALLY OVER THE HOLIDAYS OR, YOU KNOW, LATE LAST YEAR.

IN, IN ESSENCE, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE COUNCIL APPROVED, UM, THIS PROVISION IS REQUIRING GREEN STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND STORM WATER WITHIN PARKING LOTS REQUIRED TO DRAIN.

AND THAT WAS THANKS TO, UM, UH, IT WAS PROPOSED, OBVIOUSLY A, A WHILE BACK AND DURING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISION, UH, THIS CURRENT ITERATION UNDER INVOLVED IN MULTI-DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW, MULTIPLE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS INCLUDING THIS, UH, BODY HAD THE GREAT WORK GROUP AND THEN OBVIOUSLY OVERWHELMINGLY APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL SUPPORTED BY ENVIRONMENT TEXAS AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS AND STAKEHOLDERS.

THIS IS JUST A BLOW UP OF, UM, THE DEPUTY ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER'S STATEMENT THAT THERE ARE CONCERNS ABOUT HAVING CREEK SETBACKS BEING NEGOTIATED VIA ZONING OVER OVERLAYS.

AND, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY IF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS ARE ADEQUATELY PROTECTIVE, AND I JUST THINK OF IT IN MY CONTEXT OF A ZONING CONTEXT AS YOU DON'T, THERE'S REASONS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE BUILD ZONING BUILDING SETBACKS ON A PLAT, FOR EXAMPLE.

SO, UM, THAT COULD CHANGE OVER TIME AND I THINK SIMILARLY.

SO IT MAKES SENSE TO ME THAT THE CITY'S DEPUTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICERS RECOMMENDING AND HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF IS RECOMMENDING REMOVING THAT, THAT, UM, CO UM, OF THIS IS JUST THE FINAL SLIDE.

REASONS TO SUPPORT MUCH OF NEEDED RESIDENTIAL INFILL HOUSING IN CENTRAL AUSTIN IN SUPPORT OF COUNCIL DIRECTIVE FOR MORE HOUSING IN ALL AREAS.

UM, ALL THE REASONS TO SUPPORT THE BULLETS THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH.

AND AGAIN, WE'RE ONLY ADDING MIXED USE COMBINING DISTRICT.

ALL THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REMAIN IDENTICAL TO EXISTING ZONE ZONING, AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY, WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. SARAH CAMPBELL IN OPPOSITION.

UM, I SIGNED MYSELF UP AS A PRIMARY SPEAKER.

I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOME REMOTE SPEAKERS ON THIS.

WILL THAT FOLLOW ME OR BE LATER? OH, FOLLOW.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UM, OKAY.

UM, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

I AM SARAH CAMPBELL, THE PLANNING AND ZONING CHAIR OF THE SOUTH RIVER CITY CITIZENS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS S R C C.

IN YOUR BACKUP MATERIALS IS AN INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE PLAN AMENDMENT CASE MANAGER THAT STATES, I QUOTE THE S R CCC NA IS DEMANDING THAT THE CO, WHICH PROHIBITS ANY DEVELOPMENT FROM 50 FEET FROM BLUNT CREEK NOW GO TO 200 FEET IN QUOTE, WE DID NOT DEMAND ANYTHING.

THE CASE MANAGER WAS NOT AT THE MEETING WHEN WE PRESENTED TO THE APPLICANTS WHAT WE DESIRED FOR CREEK PROTECTION.

SO I CAN ONLY ASSUME THAT THE APPLICANTS TOLD HER THAT WE DEMANDED CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS IN ORDER TO MAKE S R C C SEEM TOTALLY UNREASONABLE.

WE ARE NOT UNREASONABLE.

WE MADE OUR DESIRE, OUR DESIRES, KNOWN FULLY EXPECTING NEGOTIATIONS AND COMPROMISE TO FOLLOW.

WE WERE TOLD BY THE APPLICANT'S AGENT THAT THEY WOULD GET BACK TO US.

THEY NEVER HAVE.

CONSEQUENTLY, SCC HAS NOT VOTED ON THIS REZONING, NOR HAS THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM VOTED ON THE FLU CHANGE.

STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF BOTH CASES WITH I THINK NO MENTION OF OUR LACK OF SUPPORT, I MEAN OR INPUT.

S RCC IS ONE OF THE OLDEST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS IN THE CITY FORMED IN THE EARLY 1970S,

[00:50:01]

AND WE'VE BEEN NEGOTIATING SINCE THEN FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT HAS BEEN JUST ABOUT AS LONG THAT S R CCC HAS WORKED TO IMPROVE THE WATER QUALITY AND DOWNSTREAM FLOODING OF ONE CREEK WITH WHAT WE ALL KNOW NOW ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE.

IT SHOULDN'T BE SO HARD.

THE EAST ALPINE PROPERTY IS LOCATED JUST NORTH OF THE HEADWATERS OF BLONDE CREEK.

OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS OR SO, S RCC HAS, HAS NEGOTIATED SUCCESSFULLY WITH A I S D, HOME DEPOT AND WALMART, ALL LANDOWNERS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA FOR ENHANCED CREEK PROTECTIONS.

WE FIRST MET THE APPLICANTS ON SITE ON SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2022, DURING WHICH WE SAID THAT PROTECTIONS FOR BLONDE CREEK WOULD BE OUR MOST PRESSING CONCERN.

THEN WE LAID OUT OUR SPECIFIC DESIRES FOR CREEK PROTECTION TO THE APPLICANTS IN A TEAMS MEETING ON THE AFTERNOON OF OCTOBER 17TH, 2022.

WE FULLY EXPECTED THE APPLICANTS TO GET BACK TO US FOR NEGOTIATIONS.

THEY SAID THEY WOULD, BUT THEY NEVER HAVE.

AS LATE AS DECEMBER 5TH, I CORRESPONDED WITH MR. HARTMAN ABOUT GETTING BACK TO US.

HE SAID HE WOULD PROBABLY AFTER THE HOLIDAYS, AFTER LAST TUESDAY WHEN MOST PEOPLE WENT BACK TO WORK, I THOUGHT WE WOULD HEAR FROM THE APPLICANTS TO WORK OUT SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE BEFORE TODAY, LAST FRIDAY, MR. HARTMAN SENT US ATTACHMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR TONIGHT AND BACKUP MATERIALS FOR ITEMS 20 AND 21, MAKING CLEAR THAT HE WAS NOT GETTING BACK TO US FOR NEGOTIATIONS.

STAFF HAD ALREADY SENT US THIS INFORMATION.

I WONDER IF THIS IS REALLY MR. HARTMAN'S IDEA OF GETTING BACK TO US.

WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY.

HOUSING IS MENTIONED AS A POTENTIAL USE.

WE ARE IN FAVOR OF MORE HOUSING, ESPECIALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

WE ARE AWARE OF THE CITY'S NEW FLOOD MAPS AND THE RECENTLY PASSED, UH, ENHANCEMENTS, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS, I'M SORRY, THAT WILL APPLY TO DEVELOPMENTS GOING FORWARD.

WE DO HOPE THESE CHANGES WILL PROTECT THE CREEK IN THE WAYS THAT WE DESIRE AND IN THE WAYS OUR OTHER PARTNERS HAVE.

AT THIS POINT, WE REQUEST THE FOLLOWING TO KEEP THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WITH THE REZONING.

FOR NOW, THE APPLICANTS HAVE NOT REQUESTED IT BE REMOVED.

THE CO WAS PLACED ON THE SITE AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS.

TO REMOVE IT WOULD BE TO ACT UNILATERALLY WITHOUT INFORMING OR THE CONSENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.

SO JUST GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.

NUMBER TWO, STATE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT THE CITY WILL INFORM AND INCLUDE S R CCC AT THE TIME THAT A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THIS SITE IS SUBMITTED.

SCC IS NOT NOTIFIED ROUTINELY OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTALS NUMBER THREE, PROHIBIT THE FOLLOWING ALLOWED USES UNDER GEO ZONING ON THIS SITE.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER SEVEN COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, MEDICAL OFFICES EXCEEDING 5,000 SQUARE FEET, GROSS FLOOR AREA, COMMUNITY EVENTS, HOSPITAL SERVICES GENERAL.

I WILL TRY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE FOR ME.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU.

HAVE MR. TODD REGISTERED AND ON THE, UH, PARTICIPATING VIA TELECONFERENCE.

UM, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE HE IS ON MR. UH, TODD, ARE YOU PRESENT ON THE TELECONFERENCE? OKAY, WE'LL MOVE TO MR. JEFF KESSEL.

MR. KESSEL SELECT STAR SIX.

UM, PROCEEDED WITH YOUR REMARKS.

MY NAME IS JEFF KELE.

I AM A, UH, RETIRED CIVIL ENGINEER.

I'VE LIVED IN THE SCC NEIGHBORHOOD IN THIS WATERSHED FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS AND HAVE BEEN ACTIVELY INVOLVED WITH ALL THE PROJECTS THAT SARAH MENTIONED.

OUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD COORDINATION WITH LARGE PROJECTS THAT WERE, UH, DEVELOPING LARGE TRACKS UP IN THE HEADWATERS OF THE WATERSHED, WHICH IS A REAL CRITICAL AREA IN TERMS OF PROTECTING THE WATERSHED, WATER QUALITY, EROSION AND FLOOD FLOODING POTENTIAL.

THESE ARE ALL MISSIONS OF THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT.

AND I, MY CAREER HAS BEEN SPENT, UH, WORKING FOR WATERSHED AS, UH, A SUBCONTRACTOR.

SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THEIR PROCEDURES AND ANALYSES.

AND, UM, I WAS, I WENT OUT TO THE SITE WHEN THIS PROJECT CAME UP JUST TO SEE HOW FAR BACK FROM THE CREEK WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS PROJECT STAND.

AND, UM, I, I THINK THAT'S, UH, I PROPOSED THAT WE STEPPED

[00:55:01]

BACK, KEEP AT LEAST 200 FEET BACK FROM THE CREEK BASED ON JUST WHAT YOU CAN SEE ON THE GROUND.

IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S PRETTY MUCH MUDDY FLOODPLAIN ALL THE WAY UP THAT TRACK OF THE ROAD, ALPINE ROAD UNTIL WE GET TO THE BEND IN THE ROAD, WHICH IS ABOUT 200 FEET.

UM, THIS IS AN AREA WHERE THE CITY HAS BEEN, HAS INSTALLED A LARGE REGIONAL STORM WATER TREATMENT FACILITY.

AND, UH, SO WHAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT MOVES IN JUST ACROSS THE ROAD FROM THIS FACILITY.

WHAT IS THE FLOODING POTENTIAL AND WHAT IMPACT WILL IT HAVE ON THE CREEK? AND, UM, I AT THIS POINT, UM, I I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHERE WATERSHED PROTECTION IS GOING TO DRAW THE LINE.

UH, THEY, THEY, THEY'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH JUST A SIMPLE 50 FOOT OFFSET FROM THE CREEK AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THE PROJECT AND THE CREEK.

THEY WANT SOMETHING MORE BASED ON THE ACTUAL FLOOD PLAIN DIMENSIONS AND WHAT THEY'RE CONSIDERING AS THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.

SO MAYBE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT IT IN THE SAME WAY.

AND SO I'M HAPPY TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, UM, AND, AND SEE THIS PROJECT GO FORWARD.

I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S AN ENGINEERING SOLUTION TO PROVIDING THIS, THIS HOUSING.

I THINK THIS COULD BE A GOOD DEVELOPMENT.

UH, AT THIS POINT.

I THINK THEIR PLANS SHOWING, UH, STARTING THEIR PROJECT AND PARKING LOT 50 FEET OFF THE CREEK IS TOO MUCH OF AN ENCROACHMENT ON THE, THE WATER ON THE FLOODPLAIN.

IT'S GOING TO COMPLETELY, UM, CHANGE THE REPAIRING CORRIDOR THERE.

RIGHT NOW THERE IS A REPAIRING CORRIDOR WITH A LOT OF TREES AND VEGETATION.

THIS PROJECT'S FOOTPRINT WILL TOTALLY ELIMINATE THAT.

SO THERE WILL ESSENTIALLY BE NO BUFFER BETWEEN THEIR SITE AND THE CREEK.

AND THE CREEK HAS VERY LITTLE CAPACITY TO CONVEY FLOW.

AND THE BIG PROBLEM IS, IS THAT AS SOON AS WATER LEAVES THIS SITE, IT'S GOTTA TAKE A HARD, HARD 90 DEGREE TURN TO FOLLOW A MANMADE CHANNEL PATH TO, IN ORDER TO DEFLECT AROUND AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION.

AND YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT THEY, THE, THE ZONING CHANGE IS GOING TO ALLOW MUCH GREATER IMPERVIOUS SIR COVER THAN WE SEE TODAY.

BUT YOU, MR. THE ARIEL, YOU'LL SEE THAT.

EXCUSE ME.

UH, MR. TODD, WE'RE WE'RE OUTTA TIME.

YOU COULDN'T HEAR THE BUS? I, SORRY.

I'M SORRY.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, THANK YOU.

I'LL, I'LL JUST WRAP UP.

UM, I WOULD LIKE TO STAY INVOLVED AND HEAR FROM THEIR ENGINEERS.

WE HAVE NOT HEARD BACK FROM OUR ORIGINAL PROPOSAL TO STEP BACK FROM THE CREEK AND UH, I'D LIKE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

CHAIR COMMISSION LEADS ON ANDREW RIVERA.

SO, UM, I'M BRINGING MR. TODD ONLINE.

UM, HE HASN'T CALLED BACK IN JUST YET.

UH, DO YOU WISH TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANTS? UH, WHO WAS JUST, WHO WAS SPEAKING? JUST MR. KESSEL.

JEFF KESSEL.

I APOLOGIZE MR. KESSEL.

UM, I REFERRED TO YOU AS MR. TODD.

SORRY ABOUT THAT.

OKAY.

SO, UH, WHILE WE'RE BRINGING MR. TODD BACK ON, DO YOU WANNA HEAR FROM THE, UH, APPLICANT FOR HIS REBUTTAL OR JUST, UH, PAUSE FOR A MINUTE? YEAH, LET'S PAUSE A MINUTE.

MAYBE.

WANNA, THIS IS JEFF KEK CALLING BACK.

I'M HAPPY THAT HE RECOGNIZED AS DAVID TODD .

WELL, AND I'LL TAKE HIS TIME IF HE DOESN'T USE IT.

OH, LET'S, WE'LL GIVE A SHORT PAUSE, SEE IF WE CAN GET MR. TODD ON THE LINE.

MR. TODD, ARE YOU ON THE TELECONFERENCE? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, GO TO THE APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL AND THEN MAYBE WE WILL, WE'LL GIVE MR. TODD A CHANCE IF WE'RE ABLE TO PATCH HIM IN.

MR. HARTMAN, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.

EXCUSE ME, CHAIRING COMMISSIONERS.

UM, I GUESS I'LL HIT ON ABOUT FOUR ITEMS, ONE OF WHICH WAS JUST KIND OF MY RESPONSE OR, UH, LIKE THEREOF.

I WOULD SAY THAT THE, THE CODE LANGUAGE THAT ABOUT THAT WAS ON ONE OF THE SLIDES ABOUT RAIN GREEN REQUIRING GREEN STORM STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE, AGAIN, IS, IS WHAT WE'RE

[01:00:01]

SUPPORTIVE OF.

IT WAS PAST ONLY LATE LAST YEAR.

THEY HAD A WHOLE LOT OF PUBLIC HEARING, UM, GOING BACK TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CO CODE REVISIONS ABOUT WHAT THE, THE PROVISIONS WOULD BE.

ALTHOUGH, HOWEVER, WE DIDN'T REALLY SEE THE LANGUAGE UNTIL THE VERY END OF LAST YEAR.

IT TOOK OVER THE HOLIDAYS TO KIND OF DIGEST THINGS AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS THE, THE BEST, THE BEST ROUTE FOR THIS PROJECT.

AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS TRYING TO ONE OFF KIND OF NEGOTIATE RAIN, RAIN GARDEN STANDARDS LIKE WE WERE KIND OF ATTEMPTING TO MAYBE THINK ABOUT DOING BEFORE THAT GOT ADOPTED.

UM, UH, IS IS SOMETHING THAT IS NOT BEST PRACTICE.

SO SOME SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD MOVE AWAY AND, AND EMBRACE ACTUALLY SOME OF THE GOOD WORK THAT THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER AND CITY COUNCIL AND THIS BODY DID.

SO WE'RE IN FAVOR OF STICKING TO THAT PLAN AND NOT TRYING TO NEGOTIATE SEPARATELY.

AND THEN IN TERMS OF THE QUESTION ABOUT KEEPING THE CO I MEAN, I, I WOULD MAYBE LEAVE THAT TO THE DEPUTY CITY ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER TO MAYBE, MAYBE, UH, LOOK AT THAT.

BUT I WOULD JUST SAY THAT AND MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON SCIENCE, UH, CODE PROVISIONS RATHER THAN, UH, UH, JUST KIND OF OBSERVING A TRACK AND SAYING THAT BASED ON WHAT YOU LOOKED AT, THE THE SETBACK NEEDS TO BE 200 FEET.

AND THEN I WOULD JUST SAY MOST OF EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IS SITE PLAN ISSUES AND, AND WILL CERTAINLY BE FULLY ADDRESSED AT TIME OF SITE PLAN.

AND BY THE WAY, WILL BE, THE SITE PLAN WILL BE REQUIRED TO, UH, COMPLY WITH ATLAS 14 REGULATIONS.

SO THIS SITE'S GONNA BE DEVELOPED UNDER THE, THE PREEMINENT REGULATIONS THANKS TO YOUR GOOD WORK AT THIS BODY AS WELL AS THE CITY COUNCIL REG LAST CHAIR.

AND, UH, UH, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY MORE FOR QUESTIONS.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING CHAIR COMMISSIONER HAS ANY WAY? I BELIEVE WE DO HAVE MR. TODD PRESENT NOW.

NO, SORRY, MR. TODD, IF YOU'LL PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.

YEAH, UH, I HOPE THAT, UM, THAT I CAN PARTICIPATE.

UH, WELL, GOOD, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

UM, I AM DAVID TODD.

I AM THE PARKS ENVIRONMENT CO-CHAIR, UH, FOR THE SOUTH RIVER CITY CITIZENS NEIGHBORS ASSOCIATION, AND I'M THE COORDINATOR FOR A NON-PROFIT GROUP CALLED THE BLUNT CREEK PARTNERSHIP.

UM, I'VE WORKED ON CREEK AND PARK ISSUES IN THIS AREA FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS.

UM, I APPRECIATE MR. HARTMAN'S, MR. FENWICKS, MR. FENWAY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE PROCESS AND AS WELL THE WORK BY KATHLEEN FOX AND WENDY RHODES ON THIS PROPOSAL.

UM, HOWEVER, I REMAIN CONCERNED ABOUT THE ZONING AND NEIGHBORHOOD AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR THE PROPERTY.

UH, WHILE WE CERTAINLY APPLAUD THE PROSPECT NEW HOUSING IN THE AREA, I BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT COULD HAVE SERIOUS IMPACTS ON UPON CREEK AND ASK THAT THE COMMISSION WORK ON THE SOLUTION TO PROTECT THE CREEK AND THE DOWNSTREAM PARKS AND COMMUNITIES AND STREAM EFFECTS IN THE SAME WAY THAT OTHER NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS HAVE COOPERATED IN THIS EFFORT OVER MANY YEARS, INCLUDING WALMART, HOME DEPOT AND AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.

I THINK IT'S GOOD TO POINT OUT THAT THIS PROPERTY IS ONE OF THE VERY LAST IN THE BLOOD WATERSHED THAT HAS A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE.

AND SO IT IS CRITICAL THAT IT BE SENSITIVELY DEVELOPED.

UM, I THINK IT IS ESSENTIAL PRO PROPOSED PROJECT, MAINTAIN A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 200 FEET FROM THE CENTER LINE, THE CREEK, TO PROTECT AGAINST DOWNSTREAM FLOODING, NON-POINT SOURCE POLLUTION, AND TO, UM, MAINTAIN THE MATURE TREES DURING THE REPAIRING CORRIDOR THERE.

AND TO, UH, ALLOW FOR RIGHT OF WAY FOR ANY FUTURE HIKING BIKE TRAILS THAT MAY BE, UM, POSSIBLE.

UH, WE URGE THAT OTHER GREEN STORMWATER MANAGES STRATEGIES ALSO BE ADOPTED AT THE EAST ALPINE PROPERTY, INCLUDING RAINWATER COLLECTION AND RAIN GARDENS.

UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CONSIDERING MY COMMENTS AND THOSE OF OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD ADVOCATES.

APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

OKAY.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? UH, CLOSE, CLOSE PUBLIC COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER, SECONDED BY, I SEE A SECOND.

SORRY.

SECOND, UH, BY LAST YEAR, HEMPEL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.

UH, THAT'S ON THE DIAS.

ALL RIGHT, THAT'S EVERYONE THAT IS ON THE SCREEN.

OKAY.

11, 0 0.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UH, SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND KEEP THAT WE'VE WHITTLED DOWN OUR NUMBER OF CASES.

I THINK FOR NOW, LET'S GO AHEAD AND KEEP IT AT EIGHT AND AT FIVE.

WE DON'T NEED TO USE ALL THAT TIME, BUT, UH, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND KEEP IT THE SAME FOR NOW.

SO, UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS, HE WANTS US TO START US OFF.

ANYONE.

OKAY.

UH, WE'LL START WITH, UH, VICE CHAIR.

HE THE FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER GIANNIS POLITO.

HI.

THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

UM, I MADE NOTE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, SUGGESTED PROHIBITIONS AND WHICH IS THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER.

UH,

[01:05:02]

UH, AND I CAN'T EVEN READ MY OWN HANDWRITING.

SORRY ABOUT THAT.

BUT THERE WERE FIVE ITEMS ENDING WITH HOSPITAL SERVICES.

WHAT IS EITHER YOUR, UM, YOUR POSITION ON THOSE ITEMS? YEAH, I DIDN'T QUITE CATCH THEM ALL MYSELF.

IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE'RE HEARING THOSE, THESE, MY, OUR OUR GUT RESPONSE IS THAT WE'RE NOT INCLINED TO FURTHER RESTRICT THE PROPERTY.

IT'S, UM, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT TOPIC, UM, I THINK IS BASICALLY UP TO THE WILL OF THE COMMISSION.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONER POLITO.

THANK YOU.

MY QUESTIONS ALSO FOR THE APPLICANT.

UM, I'M TAKING A LOOK AT THE, AT THE LAW PARTICULARLY, UM, 4 28 ALPINE ON FLOOD PRO.

AND IT DOES LOOK LIKE IT IS RIGHT IN THE WATERSHED.

DO YOU KNOW, UM, THE, SO THE, THE BUFFER THAT WAS MENTIONED, UM, IS 50 FEET, AND CAN YOU JUST DESCRIBE WHERE THE FLOOD PLAIN IS AT THAT LINE? I WOULD DEFER TO OUR CIVIL ENGINEER WHO'S ON THE LINE OR PERHAPS MS. UM, MS. JOHNSON.

MATT.

MATT, MATT.

SORRY, SORRY, ENGINEER.

WE CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

UM, SO THE, THE CREEK STAND LINE IS RUN AT THE EDGE OF THE, IN THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY.

UM, THERE'S NO FE OF FLOOD PLANE ESTABLISHED, UM, BUT AT THE TIME OF SITE PLANE, WE MAY HAVE TO DO A, A DRAINAGE STUDY AROUND THE CREEK IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH ANY CITY OF AUSTIN CONVEY IN BROOKLAND.

UH, AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THE CURRENT CODE, WE WOULD ESTABLISHED THAT THE CREEK SETBACK BACK COULD BE THE MINIMUM 50 FEET OR MASS FLOOD LANE.

SO WE WOULD DO THAT AT THE TIME OF SUB LANE.

OKAY.

SO IN THE PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL PLAN, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE UNITS AND THEN THE FIRE LANE DIRECTLY UP TO THE CREEK BUFFER.

SO IS THAT FAR LINE, UH, THE 50 FOOT MARK FROM THE CENTER OF THE CREEK, UM, DAVID HARTMAN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT? I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THE CONCEPTUAL MAP IS SIMPLY THAT IT'S, IT'S A POTENTIAL MASSING OF THE SITE.

UM, WHAT'S BEFORE THIS BODY AND BEFORE CITY COUNCIL, WHAT WE APPLIED FOR WAS TO SIMPLY ADD MIXED USE, AUTHORIZED RESIDENTIAL, UH, THE, THE IDEAS ABOUT EXACTLY WHERE THE BUILDING LOCATION IS, WHERE FIRE LANES WILL BE DECIDED AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.

UM, BUT THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE FIND THAT NEIGHBORHOODS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS THEY REQUEST AND REQUIRE IS JUST A VISUAL OF WHAT IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE.

SO WE PREPARE THAT, BUT IT'S CONCEPTUAL IN, IN, IN NAME ONLY, SO, YEAH.

AND, UH, THAT MAKES SENSE THAT YOU WOULD ADDRESS A LOT OF THESE AT THE SITE PLAN, UM, PHASE, BUT DO YOU ALL HAVE, UH, SOME ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTS OR HAVE YOU DISCUSSED ADJUSTING THE, THE LAYOUT OR THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN BASED ON, UM, SOME OF THAT STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE OR POTENTIALLY CHANGING THE, THE SETBACK FROM THE CREEK? UH, BEST ANSWER IS NO.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I THINK MOST OF MY QUESTIONS ARE FOR, UH, MS. JOHNSTON.

UM, SO I, I WAS READING THE BACKUP INFORMATION, UM, AND I APOLOGIZE IF, IF ANY OF THIS IS WRONG, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CO THAT'S ON THE EXISTING ZONING WAS 50 FEET OF BUFFER SPACE CENTERED OVER THE CREEK.

AND IN YOUR EMAIL YOU INDICATED THAT THERE WAS, UH, A 50 FOOT MINIMUM BUFFER FOR THIS CREEK FROM THE CENTER LINE.

SO AM I UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY THAT JUST UNDER CURRENT CITY CODE, THE BUFFER DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE EXISTING CO IS VERSUS CURRENT CITY CODE, THAT BUFFER IS ALREADY DOUBLING IN DISTANCE FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THE CREEK? UM, I MIGHT HAVE TO CONFIRM WITH OUR ZONING STAFF WHAT THE LANGUAGE OF THE ORIGINAL CEO WAS.

I BELIEVE THAT BOTH WERE FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THE CREEK.

UM, AND SO IT'S VERY SIMILAR.

UM, RIGHT NOW THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE IS THE MINIMUM 50 EXCEPT WHERE THE FLOODPLAIN IS SHOWN TO EXTEND BEYOND THAT.

SO IN SOME CASES IT GOES, YOU KNOW, UP TO 70, 75 FEET.

UM, AS THE APPLICANT MENTIONED, OR THE ENGINEER MENTIONED, IT'S POSSIBLE DURING A SITE PLAN REVIEW THAT THEY MAY HAVE TO DO ADDITIONAL MODELING TO DETERMINE IF THE FLOODPLAIN IS GROWN WITH ATLAS 14.

AND IF THAT WERE THE CASE, THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE IS AT LEAST MINIMUM 50 FEET.

IT WILL NEVER SHRINK BEYOND BELOW THAT, BUT IT COULD GO UP TO 400 FEET.

SO WHERE THAT, THAT LINE IS DEPENDS ON, UM, SOME ENGINEERING WORK.

SO AT A MINIMUM UNDER CURRENT CITY CODE, THE, THE, THE

[01:10:01]

EXISTING CO BUFFER, IF IT'S 50 FEET FROM THE CENTER OR 50 FEET CENTERED, THEY'RE GONNA GET THAT UNDER EXISTING CITY CODE NO MATTER WHAT.

UM, AND, AND WHAT I NOTICED, WHICH WAS KIND OF SURPRISING AND MAYBE SOMEWHAT UNIQUE, UM, SINCE THIS IS AT THE VERY TOP OF THIS, UH, WATERSHED, THE, THE PROPERTY APPEARS TO BE BASICALLY DISCHARGING INTO THE VERY TOP OF THIS CREEK AMONGST THREE OR FOUR OR MAYBE EVEN MORE OTHER DETENTION FACILITIES THAT ARE ALL SURROUNDING THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

AND SO I'M CURIOUS, BASED ON YOUR EXPERIENCE, UM, DOES THAT, DOES THAT IMPACT YOUR REVIEW AND, AND HOW YOU DETERMINE SETBACKS WHEN YOU'VE GOT A WHOLE LOT OF, OF MULTIPLE DETENTION FACILITIES DISCHARGING INTO GENERALLY THE SAME AREA? IT, IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE SETBACKS.

UM, SO A SITE PLAN WILL HAVE A DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY REVIEWER AND A SEPARATE FLOODPLAIN REVIEWER.

SO THERE'LL BE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ENGINEERING REVIEWS THAT THAT HAPPEN.

AND, UM, SO THEY WILL LOOK AND MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO ADVERSE FLOODING IMPACT DOWNSTREAM.

UM, THE TWO YEAR STORM CONTROL ALSO HAS A EROSION CREEK EROSION PROTECTION ELEMENT TO IT.

AND SO THAT SHOULD ALSO HELP WITH THE CREEK EROSION, WHICH IS, UM, CORRECTLY, UH, A CONCERN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF THAT HARD TURN.

UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I SAY THIS A LOT, BUT A LOT OF THESE ISSUES DO GET REVIEWED DURING SITE PLAN AND ARE VERY DIFFICULT TO NEGOTIATE AT THE ZONING STAGE.

MY MY MY LAST QUESTION IS, UH, FOR YOU IS IT, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THE APPLICANT IS PLANNING FOR DETENTION.

I THINK WHAT THEY'RE INTENDING TO BUILD MAYBE DOESN'T REQUIRE DETENTION, UM, SINCE THEY'RE AT THE VERY TOP OF THIS WATERSHED, THAT DOES CONCERN ME A LITTLE BIT SINCE THE DE DETENTION BECOMES MORE VALUABLE AND IMPORTANT AS YOU GO UP THE WATERSHED.

UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT DETENTION FOR, FOR THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT? UM, YEAH, I MEAN I, THE DE DRAINAGE REVIEWER WILL REVIEW IT AND YOU'RE CORRECT, MOST OF THE TIME IF IT'S, IF THERE ISN'T ALREADY A DETENTION FACILITY LIKE REGIONAL POND, WHICH I SEE AS ACROSS THE CREEK AND UPSTREAM, BUT I DON'T SEE WHERE THIS WOULD BE FLOW INTO, SO IT'S LIKELY THEY WOULD NEED TO HAVE SOME SORT OF DETENTION POND.

OKAY.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

WOULD BE REVIEWED AT SITELINE.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

AND IF, AND IF I GOT ANY MORE TIME LEFT FOR THE APPLICANT, I, I'LL JUST FOLLOW ONTO THAT QUESTION.

UH, I DON'T SEE ANY, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING RELATED TO DETENTION IN THE PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

I KNOW THAT'S INTENDED TO JUST BE MASKING ONLY, BUT Y'ALL, ARE Y'ALL ANTICIPATING DETENTION FOR THIS PROPERTY? I'LL DEFER THAT TO THE CIVIL ENGINEER.

THE SHORT ANSWER IS, AND WE WILL MEET ATLAS 14, I THINK THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN JUST WOULDN'T LABEL, UH, ACCURATELY.

AND THERE WAS ONE PARTICULAR POINT THAT I JUST THOUGHT I'LL MENTION AS WELL IS OKAY, WE, WE, WE APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION.

SORRY.

ARE YOU, UH, ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR ME? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU.

SORRY.

SORRY.

YOU SAID THE SHORT ANSWER IS, AND THEN YOU BLANKED OUT.

SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT YOUR SHORT ANSWER WAS.

YOU'LL ALLOW, LET ME REPEAT, GO AHEAD.

YEAH, THE, THE SHORT ANSWER IS WE WILL COMPLY WITH DETENTION AT THE TIME OF THE SITE PLAN AND CURRENTLY IS ADLIS 14.

AND WE WOULD ALSO COMPLY WITH ANY CO AMENDMENT RELATED TO GREEN FUEL CONDITION DEVELOPMENT AS NEEDED AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.

SO THAT'S A SHORT ANSWER.

I CAN ELABORATE YOU BEING MY TIME'S UP, SO THANK YOU.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

UH, ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS LOOKING AROUND.

UM, LET'S SEE.

OH, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS I'LL GO AHEAD AND ASK.

UM, WAS THERE A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT YET ON THIS? UH, YES.

THERE WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT ON THE 8TH OF NOVEMBER OF 2022.

THAT WAS TO THE 13TH OF DECEMBER.

AND THEN THAT MEETING WAS CANCELED BECAUSE OF AN ELECTION DAY.

OKAY.

AND THEN WHILE YOU'RE, UM, HERE, DO YOU WANNA GO, DO YOU HAVE THE LANGUAGE ON THE CO? YES.

JUST, UH, ILL GO AHEAD AND YOU WERE INQUIRING ABOUT, IT'S, IT'S IN, IT'S IN THE BACKUP, BUT IT'S SEVERAL PAGES IN AND IT SAYS, AND THIS WAS, UM, AGAIN, THIS WAS DONE IN 2005, A 50 FOOT WIDE VEGETATIVE BUFFER, BEGINNING AT THE CENTER LINE OF BLOWN CREEK ON TRACT 1 21.

THAT'S WHAT THIS WAS.

SHALL BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED ON THE TRACT IMPROVEMENTS PERMITTED WITHIN THE BUFFER ZONE OR UNLIMITED TO DRAINAGE UTILITY UNDER, SORRY, UNDERGROUND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS OR THOSE IMPROVEMENTS THAT MAY OTHERWISE BE REQUIRED BY THE

[01:15:01]

CITY OF AUSTIN OR SPEC SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT IS STANDARD BUFFER.

THAT IS STANDARD VEGETATIVE BUFFER LANGUAGE, UM, IN, IN A ZONING ORDINANCE.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK