Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[00:00:04]

OKAY.

[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]

UM, THE TIME IS 6 0 6.

AND I'M TODD SHAW, THE CHAIR OF THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION.

AND I'M GONNA BRING THIS MEETING TO ORDER.

WE HAVE A QUORUM.

UH, RIGHT NOW, I THINK WE'RE UP TO 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, UH, NINE FROM COUNTING, RIGHT.

NINE MEMBERS HERE THIS EVENING.

LEMME CHECK THAT.

YEAH.

YEAH, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING CHAIR.

THANK YOU.

I HAD A CHECK MARK NEXT TO SOMEBODY.

IT WASN'T HERE.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

UM, LET'S DO A QUICK ROLL CALL.

UM, I'M JUST GONNA FOLLOW ALONG WITH THE WAY I SEE YOU GUYS.

UH, WE'LL START WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER GIANNIS POLITO.

UM, PRESENT.

OKAY.

UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPLE HERE.

UH, COMMISSIONER COXS PRESENT.

COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HERE.

UH, COMMISSIONER SHAY HERE.

COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HERE.

UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD HERE.

AND COMMISSIONER FLORES HERE.

AND I'M YOUR CHAIR.

CHAIR SHAW.

AND LET'S GO AHEAD.

UH, JUST A REMINDER FOR COMMISSIONERS, UM, LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS, UM, OH, LET ME JUST CORRECTLY RECOGNIZE EX OFFICIO.

UM, WE HAVE OUR BOA CHAIR, JESSICA COHEN ACCOMPANYING ME HERE, THIS, UH, THIS EVENING.

THANK YOU.

UH, BUT MOVING ON, LET'S SEE.

OH, HYBRID MEETING.

JUST QUICKLY, UH, WE HAVE, UH, I THINK I'M COUNTING FOUR CASES, UH, FOR DISCUSSION IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, RIGHT NOW.

UM, SO YOU ALL ARE WELCOME.

THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING.

WE'LL HAVE, UH, SPEAKERS AND STAFF PARTICIPATING AND COMMISSIONERS AS WELL, UH, PARTICIPATING REMOTELY.

UH, BUT THE CASES, I GUESS YOU CAN WAIT IN THE ATRIUM, UH, AND, UH, WAIT TO, UH, YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL WHEN YOUR CASE IS ABOUT 15 MINUTES OUT.

UH, AND YOU CAN RETURN TO THE CHAMBERS AT THAT TIME.

SO YOU DON'T NEED TO STAY HERE THE ENTIRE TIME, BUT YOU CAN IF YOU WANT.

UM, OKAY.

SO COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE, UH, HAVE YOUR RED, YOUR GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW CARDS JUST TO HELP ME KEEP COUNT.

AND I WILL TRY TO NOTE THE ABSTENTIONS AND THOSE VOTING AGAINST JUST, UH, FOR THE RECORD FOR THE PUBLIC.

AND, UH, REMAIN MUTED WHEN YOU AREN'T SPEAKING.

AND RAISE YOUR HAND IF I MISS YOU.

UM, YEAH, GO AHEAD AND CHIME IN, UH, TO GET MY ATTENTION SO QUICKLY HERE, UM, A MINUTE FROM THE LAST, OH, LET ME ROLL BACK.

UH,

[Reading of the Agenda]

COMMISSIONER FLORES, ARE YOU ABLE TO HELP ME WITH THE FIRST READING THIS EVENING? YES.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

UH, SO I'LL ALSO HAVE HELP FROM, UM, MR. RIVERA IN ANNOUNCING THE SPEAKERS.

AND SO THE FIRST ITEM, UH, ON OUR AGENDA, THE PUBLIC COMMUNICATION, WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS.

WE'RE MOVED TO APPROVAL OF MINUTES.

UH, COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE JANUARY 10TH, UH, 20, 23 MINUTES? UH, SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THOSE TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AND WITH THAT, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER FLORES TO DO, UH, THE FIRST READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE, UH, APPROVAL MINUTES FROM JANUARY 10TH, 2023.

UM, PUBLIC HEARINGS TWO PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 0 5 0.01 VARGAS MIXED USE THAT IS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT, UH, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH AND THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT.

UM, REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 7 VARGAS MIXED USE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT TO, UH, FEBRUARY 28TH, THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT FOR REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 7 6 3100 GUADALUPE, THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION FIVE.

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

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, SIX, REZONING C 14 20 22 0 70, SPRINGDALE SPRINGDALE COMMERCIAL TRACK TWO AMENDED.

AN ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION SEVEN.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 15 SPRINGDALE COMMERCIAL ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION EIGHT.

[00:05:01]

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2 9 0.0 1 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION NINE.

REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 9 4 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 10.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 16 0.0 3 49 27 EAST FIFTH STREET.

ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

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

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

12.

PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1 4 0.03 CHAPMAN 71.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONE TO FEBRUARY 14TH 13.

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

HOLLY MIXED USE THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION AND THAT IS THE N P A ONLY 14 REZONING C 14 20 22 0 2 0 5 DENNY'S CONDOS.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT FEBRUARY 14TH, 15, REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 6 HUDSON NUMBER THREE, THAT ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, 16, REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 5 DARBY YARD 700.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, 17.

SITE PLAN S P C 20 22 0 1 4 1 A REPUBLIC SQUARE CONDITIONAL USE.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

UH, 18 RE SUBDIVISION C 8 20 22 0 0 0 7 0.0 A REPLAT OF LOT TWO DREW LANE EDITION.

UM, THE ITEM IS HOSTED IN ERROR SO THERE IS NO ACTION.

19 RE SUBDIVISION C 8 20 22 0 2 5 4 0.0 A 1191 RIDGE DRIVE SUBDIVISION.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS PER EXHIBIT C 20 FINAL PLAT FROM APPROVED PRELIM.

PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 19 0 1 4 6 1 A FOXTON SUBDIVISION SMALL LOT SUBDIVISION PHASE ONE.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS PER EXHIBIT C 21 CODE AMENDMENT C 20 20 22 0 1 15 NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY REGULATING PLAN, T O D SUB-DISTRICT.

THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT AS RECOMMENDED BY CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE, UM, 22 REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1, 12 26 15 TO 26 17 EAST SIXTH STREET.

UM, THAT ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH.

THAT IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

UH, SO JUST A FEW THINGS HERE.

UM, I BELIEVE ON ITEMS TWO AND THREE, UH, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE, WE DON'T HAVE A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT, I THINK WE HAVE APPLICANT, APPLICANT IS AGREED TO A 2 28 POSTPONEMENT OF THE ITEMS TWO AND THREE.

CORRECT.

OKAY.

UH, AND I'LL READ THAT OVER.

AND THEN QUICKLY BEFORE WE, UM, FINALIZED NUM ITEM 21, THE CODE AMENDMENT IS EVERYBODY, UH, OKAY WITH MOVING THAT TO CONSENT? UM, OR DO WE ANYBODY WISH TO DISCUSS THAT ITEM? THE CODE AMENDMENT THAT, UH, IT WAS UP FOR DISCUSSION, BUT WITH THE, I THINK SOME THINGS GOT WORKED OUT AND I, IF WE DO MOVE IT ON CONSENT, UH, WE'RE GONNA LET, UH, MR. UH, JORGE RUSSIN SPEAK BEFORE, UH, WE VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA CHAIR.

I WAS GONNA SUGGEST THAT WE DO LEAVE THAT ON CONSENT IF POSSIBLE.

I THINK THERE WAS ONE GROUP THAT WAS HOPING TO HAVE IT PULLED FOR DISCUSSION AND THEY ARE A HUNDRED PERCENT OKAY WITH IT.

YEP.

THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE REDLINE PARKWAY, BUT THEY THINK IT'S, EVERYTHING'S GONNA BE OKAY.

I AGREE.

UH, I JUST WANTED TO, YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE, I WANNA LEAVE IT ON CONSENT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON IT.

OKAY.

UM, GO AHEAD, VICE CHAIR.

OH, SO THIS IS REGARDING THE, UM, NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY REGULATING PLAN T TD SUB-DISTRICT.

AND I, I JUST WANTED TO, UM, MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE RED LINE PARKWAY, UM, THE PLANNING EFFORT THAT'LL BE GOING ON, UM, LATER THIS YEAR WITH CAT METRO AND THIS AREA BEING REALLY CRITICAL IN UNDERSTANDING THE EASEMENTS RIGHT NEXT TO THE RED LINE.

I THINK THERE'S ONLY ONE PROPERTY IN THIS AREA WHERE IT GETS TRICKY.

UM, BUT AS WE ALL KNOW, THAT GAP IN CONNECTION, IF NOT MADE, COULD BE, UM, A DEAL KILLER FOR,

[00:10:01]

UH, A CONNECTING TRAIL 32 MILES LONG.

SO, UM, JUST A, A NOTE TO COUNSEL AND STAFF TO, UM, AS THIS MOVES FORWARD INTO ACTUALLY UPDATING THE REGULATING PLAN, UM, BEING COGNIZANT OF THOSE, UM, THOSE MICRO MOBILITY CONNECTIONS.

THANK YOU.

AND, UH, NOW GO AHEAD.

UH, MR. RISINE, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? YES, CHAIR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS JOR WITH HOUSING AND PLANNING.

AND JUST TO CLARIFY THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION DOES DIFFER FROM THE CODES AND ORDINANCES.

JOINT COMMITTEE STAFF HAS RECOMMENDING THAT THE T OD GATEWAY ZONE BE MODIFIED FOR F A R TO FROM EIGHT TO ONE TO 12 TO ONE, AND THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FROM 360 TO 4 91 AND THE T O D MIDWAY ZONE, THE F A R FROM FIVE TO ONE TO 7.5 TO ONE, AND THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FROM 240 FEET TO 327 FEET.

AND THIS FOLLOWS THE SAME PROPORTIONAL CHANGE THAT THE COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY DID ON THE C M U GATEWAY CASE THAT THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED ON CONSENT LAST FALL.

BUT, BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THAT THE CODES AND ORDINANCE SAYS COMMITTEE DID REVIEW THIS AND IS RECOMMENDING THAT BOTH ZONES BE AT THE SAME F A R OF 12 TO ONE AND 491 FEET WHEN USING A DEVELOPMENT BONUS.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

UM, SO ANY, ANY QUESTIONS, UM, COMMISSIONERS HAVE IN DETERMINING WHETHER WE WANTED TO LEAD THE SUN CONSENT? ALL RIGHT.

IT'S GONNA STAY THERE.

ALL RIGHT.

[Consent Agenda]

I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, READ OUT THE CONSENT AGENDA.

ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE HAVE, UH, ITEM ONE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JANUARY 10TH MEETING.

UH, ITEM TWO AND THREE, THE PLAN, AMENDMENT AND REZONING.

UH, IT IS A, UH, LET ME GET THIS RIGHT.

THIS IS A STAFF POST MOMENT, CORRECT, UH, UNTIL FEBRUARY 28TH.

APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT.

WE HAVE ITEM FOUR REZONING IS A DISCUSSION CASE.

ITEM FIVE, REZONING NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH.

ITEM SIX, REZONING DISCUSSION ITEM SEVEN, REZONING.

IT'S DISCUSSION CASE ITEM EIGHT, PLAN AMENDMENT, AND THE ASSOCIATED, UH, ITEM NINE, REZONING.

BOTH THOSE ARE ON DISCUSSION.

WE HAVE ITEM 10 IS, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT IS CONSENT.

ITEM 11, REZONING CONSENT 12.

PLAN AMENDMENT, NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONE TO FEBRUARY 14TH.

ITEM 13, PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, IS DISCUSSION.

AND THIS IS THE NPA ONLY.

ITEM 14, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH.

ITEM 15, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, 16, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, 17.

SITE PLAN.

IT'S ON CONSENT 18 RE SUBDIVISION ITEM POSTED IN ERROR, NO ACTION ON THIS ONE.

ITEM 19, RE SUBDIVISION APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, UH, FOUND IN EXHIBIT C.

ITEM 20, FINAL PLAT APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS FOUND IN EXHIBIT C.

ITEM 21, CODE AMENDMENT IS ON CONSENT ITEM 22, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 28TH.

ALL RIGHT, UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC, APPROVE THE, UM, UH, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE, UH, CONSENT AGENDA? UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPLE.

LET'S SEE A SECOND.

YOU HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER SHA, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.

UH, THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT, I'M SEEING ALL GREEN.

OKAY, WE'RE, UH, AND JUST I'M RECOGNIZING, UH, COMMISSIONER MOHOW IS HERE, SO THAT BRINGS US UP TO 10 MEMBERS THIS EVENING.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND

[4. Rezoning: C14-2022-0076 - 3100 Guadalupe; District 9]

MOVE TO OUR FIRST DISCUSSION CASE.

AND THAT IS ITEM FOUR.

IT'S THE REZONING, UH, AT 3 3100 GUADALUPE.

WE'LL START WITH STEPH .

GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS NANCY ESTRADA WITH THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THIS IS ITEM NUMBER FOUR ON YOUR AGENDA CASE NUMBER C

[00:15:01]

14 20 20 2076.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3,100 GUADALUPE STREET.

IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED CS C O N P, AND THE APPLICANT IS, IS REQUESTING CS ONE C O N P.

THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REZONE THE EXISTING BUILDING AND A 2,277 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF THE PARKING LOT THAT EXTENDS TOWARDS EAST 31ST HALF STREET TO CS ONE COS NP.

THE INTENT IS TO REPURPOSE THE BUILDING IN AN ADJACENT AREA FOR PATIO SEATING TO THE SERVICE OF ONSITE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, WHICH IS A COCKTAIL LOUNGE USE.

THE LAND USE CHARACTER OF THE SEGMENT OF GUADALUPE STREET IS PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL.

SO STAFF IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CS ONE CO N P WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE LISTED IN YOUR REPORT.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY FOR THE COCKTAIL LOUNGE USE THAT WOULD PROHIBIT AMPLIFIED SOUND AND LIMIT THE HOURS OF OPERATION AFTER SPEAKING WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT.

PROHIBITING OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND OR ESTABLISHING HOURS OF OPERATION IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE OF THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.

SO NEITHER OUTDOOR OR AMPLIFIED SOUND NOR HOURS OF OPERATIONS ARE ZONING SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS APPLICABLE UNDER THE BASE ZONING DISTRICT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN.

I'LL HEAR FROM THE OCCUPANT APPLICANT.

MS. SUSS WARREN, MS. HO, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.

THANK.

THANK YOU.

UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AND CHAIR.

MY NAME'S AMANDA SWORE WITH JENNER GROUP HERE THIS EVENING, REPRESENTING THE 3,100 GUADALUPE STREET SITE.

I HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO HAVE THE MOUSE IN MY HAND IN A REALLY LONG TIME.

THIS IS REALLY EXCITING TO BE ABLE TO CONTROL YOUR OWN PRESENTATION.

.

UM, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE.

I WILL TRY TO BE BRIEF.

I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE A, A BIG AGENDA, BUT JUST WANNA GET THROUGH SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PROJECT.

SO THIS IS THE LARGER 3,100 GUADALUPE SITE LOCATED, UM, ON THE WEST SIDE OF GUADALUPE.

UH, SITUATED BETWEEN 31ST AND 31ST AND A HALF STREET.

THE LARGER BLUE SITE IS THE ENTIRETY OF THE 3,100 GUADALUPE STREET PROPERTY.

THE AREA THAT IS DASHED IS THE AREA THAT IS UP FOR THE ZONING CASE THAT, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS A CS ONE REQUEST, IT TENDS TO BE MORE OF A FOOTPRINT REQUEST THAN A REQUEST FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY.

THE LARGER BLUE AREA THAT YOU SAW IS JUST UNDER HALF AN ACRE AT 0.43.

THE FOOTPRINT OF THE CS ONE ZONING REQUEST IS, UH, 0.075 ACRES, OR, UH, 3,200 SQUARE FEET.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY USED, THE AREA IN THE BUILDING IS A DRY CLEANER.

THE DRY CLEANER IS CURRENTLY ON A 30 DAY, MONTH TO MONTH LEASE.

AND DUE TO FAMILY CIRCUMSTANCES, THE OPERATOR IS NO LONGER GOING TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE THE BUSINESS, WHICH IS WHY THE, UH, GROUND LESS SOAR, WHICH IS A PIECE I'LL GO THROUGH IN A LITTLE WHILE, IS LOOKING AT AN ADAPTIVE REUSE TO REDEVELOP THE PROPERTY AS IT SITS TODAY.

THE, I ALWAYS LIKE TO SHOW THIS, THE SLIDE ON THE RIGHT IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, WHICH SHOWS MIXED USE.

THEREFORE, THERE IS NOT A, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION THAT IS ACCOMPANYING THIS REZONING.

THE REZONING REQUEST IS FOR THE CS ONE C O N P, WHICH IS JUST FOR THE DASHED AREA WITHIN THE LARGER TRACT.

THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT EXISTS TODAY ON THE PROPERTY WE'RE PUT IN PLACE AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT.

WE ARE PROPOSING THAT ALL OF THOSE CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS CARRY OVER.

SO WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO MAKE ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE INITIAL PROHIBITED USES NOR THE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMITATIONS.

WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, AS I MENTIONED, IS AN AS AN ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, PLUS THE ADDITION OF A PATIO AREA FOR AN UPSCALE COFFEE AND COCKTAIL LOUNGE.

SO TACOS AND COFFEE IN THE MORNING, COCKTAILS AND BITES IN THE EVENING.

SO IT WOULD BE A, A FULL DAY USE, NOT JUST A, AN AN EVENING USE.

ONE OF THE, UH, I GET ASKED ABOUT THE BOUTIQUE BOTTLE SHOP THAT WE TALK ABOUT.

WE DID GET A REQUEST FROM ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT, UM, IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A COCKTAIL LOUNGE, IS THERE ANY CHANCE THAT YOU COULD HAVE A LIQUOR STORE IN THE BUILDING TOO, BECAUSE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD LIQUOR STORE CLOSED.

SO WE DID INCORPORATE THAT.

A, A SMALL BOUTIQUE BOTTLE SHOP THAT WILL BE ADJACENT TO THE COFFEE AND COCKTAIL LOUNGE.

UH, THE ASSOCIATED APPLICATIONS ON THE BOTTOM OF THIS IS, IS PRETTY IMPORTANT.

SO THE TEA SITE PLAN, THERE IS A, UM, S P T IS IN TRANSPORTATION.

THIS PROPERTY IS PART OF A LARGER SHARED TRANSPORTATION SITE PLAN WITH SOME OF THE PROPERTIES TO THE, TO THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH.

THERE IT IS A CORRECTION ASSOCIATED WITH THAT S ST P OR A NEW S S P T THAT WILL, UH, ACCOUNT FOR ANY CHANGES IN PARKING NUMBERS THAT ARE REQUIRED WITH THIS CHANGE OF USE, A SITE PLAN EXEMPTION WOULD BE REQUIRED, UH, SHOULD THIS MOVE FORWARD TO ALLOW FOR THE PATIO TO BE CONSTRUCTED.

AND THEN THIS IS JUST REZONING.

SO THIS,

[00:20:01]

UH, THIS CS ONE DOES NOT GIVE US A COCKTAIL LOUNGE.

IT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO COME BACK IN THE FUTURE AND ASK FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE COCKTAIL LOUNGE USE ON THE PROPERTY ONLY WITHIN THE AREA THAT WE'RE ZONING.

WE DID MEET WITH THE, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, UM, BOTH STARTING, I THINK WE STARTED CONVERSATIONS REALLY EARLY, BUT THEN, UH, DIGGING INTO NEGOTIATIONS IN AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, JANUARY.

AND I, I AM PLEASED TO SAY THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH A LOT AND I THINK GET TO A PLACE WHERE A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS WERE, WERE HAPPY.

UH, I'LL KIND OF TALK THROUGH WHY I THINK THIS IS STILL A DISCUSSION CASE IN A MINUTE, AND THEN YOU'LL OBVIOUSLY HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORS.

BUT REALLY THE THREE BIGGER, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS OUTSIDE OF THE ITEMS THAT YOU HEARD FROM STAFF REGARDING THE LATE HOURS AND THE AMPLIFIED SOUNDS DEALT WITH DUMPSTERS, LANDSCAPING AND PATIO FENCING, WE WERE ABLE TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON LOCATION OF DUMPSTER.

CURRENTLY IT'S AN EXPOSED DUMPSTER THAT IS TOO SMALL, UPSIZING IT AND CLOSING IT WITH A MASONRY, UH, ENCLOSURE, UH, PUTTING IN ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, AMBIENT LANDSCAPING, AND THEN MAKING SURE THAT THE PATIO AREA IS, UM, DECORATED IN A NATIVE FENCING, UH, THAT IS COMPLIANT WITH T A B C REGULATIONS AND AGREEING TO PROHIBIT A WOODEN PANEL FENCE.

I DON'T HAVE MUCH TIME, SO I'M PROBABLY GONNA SKIP THROUGH THIS AND I CAN COME BACK TO IT.

BUT THIS JUST SHOWS HOW THE PROPOSED USE WOULD LAY OUT THE AREA WITH THE BLUE RECTANGLE IS THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT WOULD BE THE ADAPTIVE REUSE.

YOU SEE THE, UH, MAROON ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SCREEN IS WHERE THE, UH, PATIO WOULD BE.

THE FOOD TRUCK WOULD BE ON THE EAST CLOSEST TO GUADALUPE.

MAY I HAVE 30 MORE SECONDS.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

UH, THE BIGGEST PIECE TO THIS IS REALLY DEALING WITH HOURS OF OPERATION AND SOUND.

SO WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND THEY HAVE REQUESTED THAT WE NOT SEEK, UH, OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND OR A LATE HOURS PERMIT.

WE HAVE AGREED TO THAT.

THOSE ARE HOWEVER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ITEMS, NOT ZONING ITEMS. SO THEY ARE NOT ITEMS THAT WE CAN PUT IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.

WE AGREED TO IT.

WE SAID LET'S ASK THE LAW DEPARTMENT.

UM, WE WERE UNFORTUNATELY TOLD THAT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN.

SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STATE ON THE RECORD THAT ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT SOMETHING WE CAN ASK FOR AT THIS STAGE, IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS APPROVED AT THIS STAGE.

WE ARE NOT AND WILL NOT ASK FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PER OR FOR WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, A LATE HOURS PERMIT OR, UM, THE ABILITY TO HAVE OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND.

AND WITH THAT, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU.

WHEN I HEAR, UM, FROM THE OPPOSITION BEGINNING WITH MR. BOBBY LEVINSKY, MR. LAVINSKY SELECTS STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.

YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, TO TRY TO KIND OF GET OVER THE HURDLE THAT THEY'RE FACING WITH, UM, MR. LEVISON, IT'S KNOCKING A YES.

MY APOLOGIES TO INTERRUPT.

UM, WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A TECHNICAL GLITCH IF I CAN HAVE YOU, UM, PLEASE RE, UH, START WITH YOUR, UH, REMARKS.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU AGAIN.

THIS IS BOBBY LEVINSKY.

I AM REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THIS CASE.

UM, THEY GOT, UH, THEY ASKED ME TO GET INVOLVED IN THIS A LITTLE BIT LATE IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE THEY JUST WERE REALLY CLOSE TO AN AGREEMENT.

UM, THE APPLICANT HAD, AND, AND AMANDA HAVE BEEN REALLY GREAT IN, UH, ADDRESSING A LOT OF THE NEW GROUP CONCERNS IN THOSE AGREEMENTS.

THEY JUST HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO FIND SOMETHING THAT CAN RUN WITH THE LAND.

SO THAT SHOULD, THIS IS A ZONING CASE THAT, UH, IF IT RUNS WITH THE LAND, THE OWNER IS THE ONE THAT BENEFITS FROM IT.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THE OWNER DOESN'T WANT TO SIGN A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, UM, FOR SOME OF THESE PROVISIONS.

WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT OTHER WAYS TO DO IT.

THAT'S WHY THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY CONVERSATION CAME UP, UH, TODAY.

UM, AND I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT THAT ONE.

BUT I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO JUST ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS GIVE US SOME TIME TO, UM, FIGURE THIS OUT AND DON'T ASSUME THAT THERE'S AN AGREEMENT BECAUSE THOSE, UH, CONDITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN OUTLINED ARE NOT ENFORCEABLE AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. MARK HIGGINS.

MR. HIGGINS, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

SELECT SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.

MR. HIGGINS, IF YOU'LL SELECT STAR SIX, UH, YOU'RE CURRENTLY MUTED.

IF YOU'LL SELECT STAR SIX, THEN

[00:25:01]

PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.

OKAY.

UM, WELL NOW HEAR FROM MS. PAULA BROWN.

MS. BROWN, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

THREE MINUTES CORRECT.

FOLLOWED BY MR. J FARRELL.

GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS PAULA BROWN.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, UH, IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT.

UH, AS BOBBY STATED, WE ARE STILL, UH, WORKING ON TOWARDS AN AGREEMENT.

UH, WE HAVE NO WRITTEN AGREEMENT CONCERNING THIS PROJECT AT THIS POINT, SO WE ASK THAT YOU OPPOSE THIS AND NOT VOTE ON IT YET.

WE ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE, UH, HOURS.

WE HAVE A DRY CLEANERS THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

SO WE HAVE HOURS OF OPERATION RIGHT NOW FROM NINE TO SEVEN, 9:00 AM TO 7:00 PM AND WE'RE GOING TO A BUSINESS THAT WOULD HAVE PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION, BEGINNING TO SELL TACOS AT 6:00 AM IN THE MORNING TILL MIDNIGHT, PERHAPS 2:00 AM IN THE MORNING.

UH, THIS IS NEXT DOOR TO HOMEOWNERS.

WE HAVE SEVERAL OF THEM HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION AGAINST THE PROJECT.

UM, I ALSO WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT IN THE, UH, ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET, UH, IN THE APPLICABLE SMALL ERA AREA PLAN POLICIES THAT UNDER GOAL FOUR, THAT IS FOR WEST CAMPUS, THAT IS NOT FOR THE WEST UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH WE FALL UNDER.

UM, WEST CAMPUS RUNS TO ABOUT 28TH STREET.

UM, THIS IS AT THE END OF 31ST STREET.

UM, ALSO, UH, UNDER OBJECTIVE 4.1, THAT IS WEST CAMPUS ALSO.

THAT IS NOT THE WEST UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH RUNS FROM, UH, 28TH TO 38TH STREETS.

UH, WE'RE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT PARKING.

UH, SEVERAL OF THE NEIGHBORS WILL ADDRESS PARKING.

UH, CURRENTLY THERE ARE SEVERAL SHARED AGREEMENTS WITH THE BUSINESSES ALONG GUADALUPE PARKING IS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND DOWN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS.

I LIVE ON 32ND, UH, HALFWAY BETWEEN KING AND GUADALUPE.

AND THERE'S LOTS OF TIMES THAT NONE OF US CAN PARK IN FRONT OF OUR HOMES DUE TO THE PARKING WITH THE BUSINESSES CURRENTLY THERE.

UM, WE ARE, UM, ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT NOISE FROM DUMPSTERS THAT WE ALREADY HEAR, UH, BETWEEN 5:00 AM AND 6:00 AM IN THE MORNINGS.

UH, WE ARE A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT SOME OF THOSE BUSINESSES ARE FALLING CODE CURRENTLY.

UH, WHEN, UH, PICKING UP DUMPSTERS ON GUADALUPE.

UM, UH, I WOULD ALSO, UH, LIKE TO, UM, SAY THAT WE, WE ARE WORKING AND HAVE BEEN WORKING, UH, WITH THE OWNER THROUGH HER AGENT, MS. AMANDA SWORE.

AND WE WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE TO IRON, UH, THESE ISSUES OUT AND HAVE SOME SORT OF WRITTEN AGREEMENT BEFORE THIS IS PASSED.

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

WE APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. GEL PARISH.

YOU CAN SAY JAY FERRELL.

OH, YES.

UH, JAY FERRELL, FOLLOWED BY JOEL PARRISH.

MY APOLOGIES.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

MY NAME IS JAY FERRELL AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED UPZONING OF 3,100 GULU.

EXCUSE ME.

I'VE LIVED IN MY HOUSE ON 31ST AND A HALF STREET, DOWN THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SINCE 1988.

I'M AN ARCHITECT AND I SERVE FOR MANY YEARS ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD STEERING COMMITTEE.

HERITAGE IS ONE OF CENTRAL AUSTIN'S VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS.

IT OFFERS MANY OF THE AMENITIES THAT PLANNERS TRY TO BUILD INTO PLACES LIKE MUELLER.

OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS ECONOMICALLY DIVERSE AND WITH A DIVERSE HOUSING STOCK, INCLUDING GARAGE APARTMENTS, APARTMENT BLOCKS, CONDOS, ADUS, AND SICKLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.

AND THOSE ARE OF ALL SIZES AND AGES.

WE HAVE STUDENTS WORKING PEOPLE, RETIRED PEOPLE, FAMILIES WITH SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN WHO I MIGHT A GO TO.

UH, SOME OF AUSTIN'S BEST PUBLIC SCHOOLS, THEY'RE ASSIGN THERE.

AND WE HAVE EASY WALKING ACCESS TO RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS IN OUR BORDERS TO GROCERY STORES IN THE FORM OF WHEATSVILLE AND CENTRAL MARKET TO UT AND TO THE SHO CREEK HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL.

WE ARE SERVED BY BUS ROUTES ON OUR BORDERS.

INDEED, OURS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD WORTH CELEBRATING AND PROTECTING BECAUSE WE LIVE NEAR THE CENTER OF A GROWING CITY.

WE ACCEPT AND ARE USED TO DEALING WITH CHALLENGES AND MAINTAINING THE QUALITY OF LIFE WE ENJOY.

AND YES, SOME PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES ARE AMONG THOSE CHALLENGES WHEN IT COMES TO PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES.

WE HAVE MADE IT A HABIT OF ENGAGING WITH APPLICANTS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED AND TO SEE IF WE CAN FIND COMMON GROUND.

IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT'S AGENT INFORMED US THAT THEIR INTENT IS TO HAVE A COCKTAIL LOUNGE WITH PRIMARILY OUTDOOR SEATING.

[00:30:01]

LATE NIGHT HOURS UNTIL 2:00 AM ON THURSDAY, FRIDAY, SATURDAY, AND SUNDAY NIGHTS.

A FOOD TRUCK ON SITE RELOCATED DUMPSTER CLOSER TO THE RESIDENCES THAT IS WITHIN 35 FEET OF THE ADJACENT, UH, RESIDENTIAL ZONE PROPERTIES AND REDUCTION OF PARKING SPACES ON SITE FROM 38 TO 32.

I MIGHT ADD THAT THE CURRENT TENANT AT 3,100 WATERLOO, THE CLEANERS IS CLOSED AFTER FIVE O'CLOCK ON WEEKDAYS AND AFTER TWO O'CLOCK ON WEEKEND AFTERNOONS.

AND NONE OF THE CURRENT PACKED PARKING LOTS IN THE EVENINGS ARE FOR PEOPLE USING THIS PROPERTY, BUT RATHER FOR THE NEARBY RESIDENCES, RESTAURANT PARKING HAS ALREADY EXTENDED BLOCKS INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH OUR NARROW STREETS.

31ST IS ONLY A 30 FOOT RIGHT OF AWAY, AND 31ST AND A HALF IS 50 FEET.

UH, THIS IS NOT ONLY A NUISANCE, BUT A SAFETY HAZARD.

WHILE WE PREFER TO HAVE PRIMARILY A DAYTIME USE, WE START IN GOOD FAITH TO NEGOTIATE A COMPROMISE WITH THE APPLICANT WHEREIN WE WOULD NOT OBJECT TO THE ZONING CHANGE IF THEY WOULD NOT HAVE AMPLIFIED OUTDOOR SOUND NOT BE OPENED PAST MIDNIGHT ANY NIGHT OF THE WEEK, WHICH WOULD MATCH, UH, SOME OF THE RESTAURANTS NEARBY.

UH, PROVIDE A MASONRY ENCLOSURE TO THE DUMPSTER TO MITIGATE SOUND AND PROVIDE LANDSCAPE SCREENING FOR DUMPSTER AND PATIO.

AFTER MONTHS OF BACK AND FORTH, WE DID GET TO THIS COMPROMISE.

WE HAVE 30 MORE SECONDS.

UM, WE DID GET TO THIS COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE PARTIES.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE OTHER SIDE THEN PROVED UNWILLING TO MEMORIALIZE THAT UNDERSTANDING IN A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT OR ANY OTHER INSTRUMENT THAT WOULD ENCUMBER THIS IN FUTURE OWNERS OF AN UPZONED PROPERTY WITHOUT AN ENFORCEABLE AGREEMENT ON SOUND AND HOURS, ET CETERA.

WE OPPOSE THE UPZONING, UH, ON THE PROPERTY AND HOPE YOU WILL TOO.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

ONE NOW HEAR FROM MS. GEL PARISH, FOLLOWED BY MR. MAXWELL'S DICO.

MR. PARISH SHALL HAVE THREE MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION.

UM, MY NAME IS JILL PARRISH.

MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE LIVED AT SIX 13 WEST 31ST STREET FOR 29 YEARS.

WE ARE 50 FEET FROM THE PROPOSED HOUR FROM THE LOCATION, UM, FOR THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE.

AND I, UM, AM HERE TO ASK YOU TO PLEASE VOTE NO ON THEIR REQUEST.

UM, I'M FOLLOWING JAY, WHO WAS EXTRAORDINARILY ELOQUENT AND I'M SPEAKING OFF THE CUFF, BUT, UM, I WANT TO TELL YOU WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DEALING WITH IN THE 29 YEARS THAT, THAT I'VE LIVED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

I LOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I KNOW THAT LIVING IN INNER CITY, AUSTIN COMES WITH SOME CONCESSIONS AND WE'RE WILLING TO MAKE THEM.

UM, FROM OUR FRONT DOOR.

YOU CAN NOW SEE FOUR ESTABLISHMENTS THAT SERVE ALCOHOL AND FOOD WITHIN 150 FEET FROM OUR FRONT DOOR THAT WE'RE NOT THERE WHEN WE PURCHASED THE HOME.

WITH THOSE CAME INCREASED DUMPSTERS.

WE NOW HEAR DUMPSTERS FOUR NIGHTS A WEEK UP FROM ONE NIGHT A WEEK WHEN WE PURCHASED THE HOME.

WE HAVE CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC ON OUR 30 FOOT EASEMENT STREET, WHICH IS NOT A FULL WIDTH.

WE HAVE PARKING ON EITHER SIDE OF THAT STREET AND WHICH REQUIRES TRAFFIC TO, UM, GO TO ONE LANE AND PEOPLE TO PULL OFF INTO OUR DRIVEWAY IN ORDER TO LET TRAFFIC PASS AND REVERSE AND BACK UP.

AND ALL THE WHILE WE HAVE A CONTINUOUS STREAM OF PEDESTRIANS WALKING DOWN THAT STREET IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE TO WHEATSVILLE TO THE BUS STOP, T U T.

UM, IT'S A SAFETY HAZARD CURRENTLY, AND IT HAS, IT IS ALMOST UNTENABLE IN ITS CURRENT FORM AND I CANNOT IMAGINE ANOTHER ESTABLISHMENT THAT STAR THAT IS OPERABLE IN THE EVENINGS AND THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO THE THE TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE THAT ALREADY EXISTS.

THEY SAY THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL PARKING, THAT THERE'S PLENTY OF PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE.

THERE ARE NOT.

I'M HERE TO TESTIFY THAT THEY DO NOT EXIST.

UM, I THINK THAT'S IT, THAT'S ALL THAT I HAD TO SAY, BUT I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING OPPOSING THIS ZONING CHANGE.

THANKS.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. MAXWELL STITCH.

COME AND MR. STITCH COME.

YOU ONLY HAVE ONE MINUTE.

THERESA CLARK WILL BE NEXT.

OKAY.

HI, UM, MAX ST.

COME.

UH, THANK Y'ALL FOR WORK THAT YOU DO FOR THIS KIND OF THING.

IT'S GOTTA BE HARDENED, PAINFUL AND DULL, PERHAPS ON OCCASION, ANY CASE.

AND I'M HIS WIFE.

RIGHT.

UH, SO WE LIVE ABOUT SIX HOUSES AWAY FROM THE PROPOSED AREA.

WE LOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT IS SO WALKABLE AND SO MULTI, MULTI-GENERATIONAL.

PUTTING A BAR THERE HAS THE POTENTIAL

[00:35:01]

TO BE A TIPPING POINT THAT THAT MEANS THAT PEOPLE WITH KIDS DON'T WANNA MOVE THERE.

YOU KNOW, IF, IF, IF YOU HAVE DRUNK FOLKS, HAPPY OR SAD, WHATEVER, DRUNK FOLKS ARE A LOT NOISIER.

IF YOU HAVE THEM GOING BY AFTER THEY'VE BEEN OUT UNTIL TWO OR THREE IN THE MORNING, EVEN OUT TO MIDNIGHT, YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE KIDS THERE.

UM, AND YOU KNOW, SO WE, WE HAVE A BUCKET OF COLORED CHALK ON OUR FRONT PORCH FOR A FOUR YEAR OLD NEIGHBOR.

THREE HOUSES, FOUR HOUSES DOWN LEO.

AND HE WILL COME AND HE WILL DRAW AND HE'LL EXPLAIN WHAT'S GOING ON.

AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT WASN'T THREE MINUTES.

ARE WE DOWN? ONE MINUTE? ARE WE DOWN TO OUR MINUTE? CORRECT.

YEAH, IT, OH, WE'RE DOWN TO OUR MINUTE.

THREE SPEAKERS.

SO ANY CASE, YES, WE HAVE TRIED TO COMPROMISE.

IT'S A BAD COMPROMISE FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, BUT WE WOULD LIKE AT LEAST THE BAD PART, NOT THE HORRIBLE PART TO BE ENFORCEABLE.

SO THANK YOU.

BUT BEFORE YOU WERE CHAIR, WE DID GIVE 30 EXTRA SECONDS TO THE APPLICANT.

COULD WE PERHAPS PASS THAT ON? SURE.

DO YOU HAVE ANY TO THE OPPOSITION CHAIR? MS. UH, I BELIEVE ANOTHER SPEAKER, UH, SPOKE OVER THEIR TIME ON THE OPPOSITION.

YEAH.

WE ALLOWED ONE OF THE THREE MINUTE SPEAKERS TO GO OVER, SO I THINK THERE WAS SOME PARODY THERE, SO, BUT OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR NOTICING IT.

OKAY.

WILL NOW HEAR, UH, UH, WAIT.

SO MS. CLARK, OKAY.

WILL NOW HEAR FROM MS. TERESA CLARK FOR, UH, ONE MINUTE, FOLLOWED BY MS. CATHERINE KING.

HELLO, MY NAME IS TERESA CLARK.

I'VE LIVED IN AUSTIN FOR 28 YEARS.

I MOVED HERE WHEN I WAS 23 AND I MOVED TO THE VILLAS ON TOWN LAKE.

I HAVE BEEN THROUGH ZONING CHANGES AND THEY HAVE BEEN NOTHING BUT THE BIGGEST NIGHTMARE OF MY ENTIRE LIFE.

MY PROPERTY WAS TORN DOWN BY IT.

I WAS PUT THROUGH AMPLIFIED MUSIC.

OUR POLICE OFFICERS CANNOT SHOW UP IN THE EVENING TO ENFORCE ANY OF THIS.

I'VE HAD TO CALL THE POLICE BECAUSE OF THE PARKING ISSUES THAT WE'VE HAD ON OUR STREET AND NEXT TO WHERE I LIVE FOR BARBECUE.

AND I AM ASKING YOU, PLEASE DO NOT CHANGE THE ZONING OF WHERE I LIVE.

WE HAVE CHILDREN, WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT WORK, WE HAVE RETIRED PEOPLE.

WE WANNA KEEP OUR CLEANERS, WE WANNA KEEP OUR BUSINESSES, AND WE WANT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO SHUT DOWN, YOU KNOW, NO LATER THAN NINE O'CLOCK WITH BLACK'S BARBECUE.

SO PLEASE VOTE AGAINST THIS.

THANK YOU, MS. UH, KATHERINE KEY.

YOU'LL HAVE ONE MINUTE.

HELLO, I'M KATHERINE KEY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HEARING ME.

AND HELLO COMMISSIONERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO JUST, YOU KNOW, I'M ON THE SAME PAGE AS ALL MY NEIGHBORS.

WE HAVE A HORRIBLE PARKING ISSUE ON THIS STREET.

WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT.

UNFORTUNATELY, IT REALLY IS NOT MONITORED.

THE AFTER HOURS PARKING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY, PEOPLE CONSTANTLY DISREGARD THE SIGNS.

IT'S, THEY'RE NOT VERY VISIBLE.

WE HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM.

I KNOW THIS WILL ONLY ENCOURAGE MORE.

AND LIKE TERESA SAID, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH POLICE TO ENFORCE ANY OF THIS AND OR THE PARKING, YOU KNOW, TICKET PEOPLE AND THEY NEVER SHOW UP.

THIS WILL NOT BE A POSITIVE SITUATION TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE DON'T NEED THE, THE ALCOHOL.

WE DON'T NEED THE LATE MUSIC, AND WE REALLY DON'T NEED THE ISSUE WITH OUR PARKING.

AND THIS IS A GREAT, FUN NEIGHBORHOOD FULL OF HAPPY THINGS.

WE'D LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.

PLEASE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION NOT PASSING THIS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

OKAY, BACK TO THE TELECONFERENCE.

WE'LL TRY, UH, MR. MARK HIGGINS.

MR. MR. MARK HIGGINS.

IF YOU'RE PRESENT, SELECT STAR SIX CHAIR, MR. HIGGINS.

UH, ACTUALLY, UH, JUST, UM, ACCIDENTALLY HUNG UP.

UM, SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET HIM BACK ON THE LINE AND IF, UM, IT'S THE, WILL THE COMMISSION, IF HE CAN, UH, HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IF WE, UH, CAN GET HIM BACK ONLINE AFTER, UM, THE APPLICANT REBUTTAL.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

UM, MR. OR I'LL HAVE, UH, THREE MINUTES FOR THE APPLICANT REBUTTAL.

THANK YOU.

UM, COMMISSIONERS, WHAT I HOPE THAT YOU HEARD OUT OF THAT DISCUSSION IS THAT WE HAVE WORKED, UM, FOR A LONG TIME WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND REALLY THAT WE HAD COME TO A COMPROMISE THAT REALLY BRINGS THE PROPERTY BACK TO THE HOURS THAT IT COULD HAVE TODAY, WHICH IS A RESTAURANT THAT OPERATES TILL MIDNIGHT AND SELLS ALCOHOL.

AND, UM, TO, WE HAVE AGREED THAT WE WOULD NOT SEEK LATE HOURS PERMITS AND THAT WE WOULD NOT SEEK OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND AND ALL OF THE DUMPSTER AND LANDSCAPING ISSUES.

WE'VE ENDED UP IN A REALLY

[00:40:01]

INTERESTING POSITION THAT THE, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THIS SITE, THIS SITE IS IN A 99 YEAR GROUND LEASE, WHICH MEANS THAT MY CLIENT HAS A LEASE ON THIS PROPERTY UNTIL 2094.

UM, BUT THE UNDERLYING PROPERTY OWNER IS NOT IN A POSITION TO SIGN A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

SO WE DID PRESENT THE NEIGHBORS WITH A LETTER AGREEMENT, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY A CONTRACT THAT IS ENFORCEABLE.

UM, WE HAVE ALSO AGREED TO SUPPORT THEM IN ANY WAY THAT WE CAN, UM, AND JOINTLY ASK FOR THIS TO BE A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.

AGAIN, WE WERE INITIALLY TOLD THAT THAT IS NOT AN OPTION.

UM, WE HAVE READ EVERYTHING INTO THE RECORD THAT WE ARE, AND I WILL REITERATE AGAIN, THAT WE ARE NOT SEEKING, WILL NOT SEEK.

UM, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT WITH ZONING, IT, IT IS AT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THAT WILL COME BACK TO THIS BODY.

UM, OUR ZONING REQUEST IS TO ALLOW US TO EVEN SEEK A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN THE FUTURE.

UM, AGAIN, WE HAVE OFFERED A LETTER AGREEMENT AND CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT OFFER OUT THERE.

IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE ASSOCIATION WANTS TO SIGN AS A, AS A BELT AND SUSPENDERS, IT'S HERE.

AND WE'VE ALSO OFFERED TO PUT THESE REQUIREMENTS IN THE LEASE, UM, WITH THE TENANT.

UNFORTUNATELY, I AM JUST NOT IN A POSITION WHERE I CAN ENTER INTO A TRADITIONAL RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

BUT I DO ALSO WANNA STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT I APPRECIATE, AND I KNOW THAT, UM, THE NEIGHBORS ARE A, A LARGE GROUP OF VOLUNTEERS AND THEY HAVE SPENT COUNTLESS HOURS WORKING WITH US.

AND SO I REALLY DO APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S TIME AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

AT THIS, UH, TIME.

I DO NOT HAVE MR. HIGGINSON BACK ON THE LINE.

UH, SO IF YOU WISH TO, UH, PROCEED WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING, THANK, GO AHEAD.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

YOU MOTION, MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

UH, WHO'S THAT? UH, COMMISSIONER SHAY, DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? ALL RIGHT.

UH, COMMISSIONER EZ POLITO.

ALL RIGHT.

QUICK VOTE ON CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING NOTES IN FAVOR.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, OKAY.

LET'S PROCEED WITH QUESTIONS.

UM, WHO WANTS TO GO FIRST? WE HAVE, WE'LL KEEP OUR EIGHT AT FIVE MINUTES.

UH, COMMISSIONER YOS POLITO, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. SW.

UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT, UH, THE LETTER OF AGREEMENT THAT YOU SENT TO THE NEIGHBORS IS ENFORCEABLE.

COULD YOU DESCRIBE HOW, UM, HOW THAT'S ENFORCED? I WILL DO MY VERY BEST.

I DO HAVE ONE OF OUR ATTORNEYS HERE THAT WILL COME AND TAP ME ON THE SHOULDER IF I ABSOLUTELY MESS THIS UP.

SO, IN GENERAL, A LETTER AGREEMENT SERVES AS A CONTRACT.

SO IT IS ENFORCEABLE BY THE PARTIES THAT ARE, UM, THAT ARE PARTY TO IT.

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A LETTER AGREEMENT AND A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT IS THAT A LETTER AGREEMENT RUNS BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT RUNS WITH THE LAND.

AND SO, LIKE I SAID, THE LETTER AGREEMENT WOULD BE BETWEEN MY CLIENT WHO HAS THE, UM, THE 99 YEAR GROUND LEASE ON THE PROPERTY.

IT IS JUST NOT WITH THE UNDERLYING OWNER.

AND AGAIN, IT IS NOT RECORDABLE, BUT IT IS, IT DOES SERVE AS A CONTRACT IS ENFORCEABLE BY BOTH PARTIES.

OKAY.

SO WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE IF THERE WAS, IF, UH, IF THERE WAS SOME VIOLATION, LET'S SAY, AND IN ORDER TO ENFORCE THAT, WHAT WOULD, WHAT ACTION WOULD THE NEIGHBORS BE TAKING? I AM GOING TO LET ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS IN OUR OFFICE SPEAK TO THIS SO THAT I DON'T MESS IT UP.

THANK YOU.

HELLO.

CHARLIE DORS, SANO LAND USE ATTORNEY WITH THE JENNER GROUP.

IT, IT WOULD BE THE SAME AS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

THEY COULD FILE A LAWSUIT, UH, AGAINST THE LEASE HOLDER.

DON'T NORMALLY LIKE TO TALK ABOUT PEOPLE SUING MY CLIENTS, BUT THAT WOULD BE THEIR RIGHT UNDER THIS CONTRACT.

YES.

HYPOTHETICALLY FOR ANY PARTY WITH THESE, UM, THESE ZONING ENTITLEMENTS AS WELL.

SO, UM, IN THAT CASE, THE, IS THE PRIMARY DISTINCTION THEN THAT IT'S NOT PUBLICLY RECOGNIZED TO THAT AGREEMENT? UH, A PRIMARY DISTINCTION, IT'S NOT RECORDED IN THE COUNTY RECORDS.

UM, OKAY.

SO, AND IT DOESN'T RUN WITH THE LAND.

SO IT DOESN'T RUN WITH THE LAND.

NORMALLY WHEN WE DO A COVENANT, IT'LL RUN WITH THE LAND.

UM, AND THIS IS BETWEEN THE PARTIES.

RIGHT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THE COVENANT IS BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND IT RUNS WITH THE LAND.

SO THAT'S THE, THAT'S REALLY IS PROPERTY OWNERS.

OKAY.

UM, I THINK THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

CAN I, UH, SPEAK FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THAT REAL FAST? YEAH, I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM MR. LAVINSKY IS HE HAS, YEAH, SO THE ONLY REAL MAJOR PROBLEM WITH IT, IT'S NOT JUST THAT IT'S BETWEEN THOSE ENTITIES.

IT'S ZONING RUNS WITH LAND, SO IT'S IN PERPETUITY AND IT INVOLVES ALL THE FUTURE TENANTS, ALL THE FUTURE OWNERS.

THE OWNER INITIATED THIS RE ZONING CASE.

THE OWNER'S RESPONSIBLE FOR SIGN FOR SIGNING THIS RESTRIC FOR COVENANT, IF YOU COULD, UM, I THINK THAT THAT'S KIND OF ON THEIR END OF THINGS.

WE CAN'T RELY ON A LETTER AGREEMENT BECAUSE WHAT COULD HAPPEN IS THEY COULD JUST ASSIGN THE CONTRACT OVER TOMORROW OR CANCEL IT AND JUST SIGN A NEW ONE.

AND THAT LETTER AGREEMENT WOULD HAVE NO LONGER AT FOUR.

IT, IT, UH, NO LONGER BE ENFORCEABLE FOR US BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEING ASSIGNED TO PARTIES.

IF THERE'S A BONAFIDE SALE, THE PROPERTY AND THIS LETTER AGREEMENT'S NOT DISCLOSED, IT COULD GO AWAY.

THERE'S ALL SORTS OF LEGAL COMPLICATIONS OF WHY WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A BETTER OPTION AND WE'RE WORKING OUR DARN THIS TO DO THAT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

SO JUST TO CLARIFY,

[00:45:01]

UM, IF, IF THE PROPERTY CHANGED HANDS, THAT AGREEMENT, THAT LETTER AGREEMENT IS ONLY BETWEEN THOSE, UH, PREVIOUS, THE LESSER OR THE, THE PREVIOUS PARTIES, BUT NOT ANY FUTURE OWNER TENANT? YES, MA'AM.

THAT'S CORRECT.

IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATIONS.

OKAY.

IS THAT ALL YOUR QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? OKAY, THANK YOU.

UH, LET'S MOVE TO COMMISSIONER SHAY.

SO I'M GONNA KIND OF CONTINUE ON, UM, SIMILAR QUESTIONS.

SO, UM, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE IF IT IS A LETTER OR IF IT'S A PRIVATE SHIFTED COVENANT, IT STILL ENDS UP BEING A CIVIL SUIT.

IS THAT CORRECT? IT BECOMES SOMETHING THAT'S ONLY ENFORCEABLE THROUGH SUING THROUGH A PRIVATE PROCESS.

AM I CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.

UM, OKAY.

SO THE OTHER PROCESS, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE WAY THAT THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS STAFF IS, IS REFERRING TO IS THROUGH THE CON, IT BECOMES A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

UNDER A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

CAN THOSE ITEMS BE PUT IN IT, FOR INSTANCE, LATE HOURS, UH, HOURS OF OPERATION, AMPLIFIED SOUND OR LIGHTING, ANYTHING LIKE THAT? CAN THAT BE PUT IN A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT? YES, SIR.

SO IF THIS ZONING WERE TO BE APPROVED AND WE WERE TO COME BACK WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COCKTAIL LOUNGE, THE COMMISSION HAS THE RIGHT TO, SO WE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO SEEK HOURS, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD BE THE HOURS OF MIDNIGHT.

YOU HAVE TO SEEK SOMETHING ADDITIONAL TO THAT.

RIGHT.

AND WE WOULD HAVE TO SEEK PERMISSION FOR OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND.

RIGHT.

SO IF YOU GET A, IF IT, IF THE COCKTAIL LOUNGE BECOMES A CONDITIONAL USE, IS IT GUARANTEED THAT, THAT THERE ARE ALLOW THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO EVEN PUT ONE THERE? SO IF THE COCKTAIL LOUNGE WAS APPROVED WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS LIKE A SITE PLAN, THEREFORE IT RUNS WITH THE LAND.

CORRECT.

BUT IT STILL HAS GO THROUGH APPROVAL.

THE CONDITION PERMIT STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION? YES SIR.

THAT'S ACCURATE.

OKAY.

AND THEN ALL THOSE ITEMS THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, LATE HOURS, ALL THAT STUFF NOW IS PUT ONTO THE CONDITION USED PERMIT.

AM I CORRECT? YES SIR.

OKAY.

ENFORCEMENT OF THAT, NOW IT'S ON A CITY DOCUMENT.

DOES IT BECOME A, UH, ENFORCEMENT, DOES THAT GO THROUGH PRIVATE CIVIL SUIT? NO, SIR.

OR DOES IT COME THROUGH ONCE IT'S ON THE CITY PROCESS? ONCE IT'S ON THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, IT BECOMES PUBLICLY ENFORCEABLE.

OKAY.

SO AT THAT TIME THEN, IF ANYBODY HAS A SUIT, ALL THEY NEED TO DO IS CALL THE CITY.

AM I CORRECT? YES, SIR.

OKAY.

SO IT BECOMES MUCH EASIER TO ENFORCE AS A CONDITIONING USE PERMIT? YES, SIR.

FOR ANYBODY CUZ THEY COULD JUST PICK UP THE PHONE? YES, SIR.

OKAY.

UM, THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.

AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS CONDITIONING USE PERMIT IS NOT A GUARANTEE THAT THEY EVEN HAVE THE ABILITY TO USE A COCKTAIL LAUNCH.

IT COMES THROUGH THE COMMISSION, WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT AND, YOU KNOW, AND THERE'LL BE A LETTER LIKE THIS TO, TO BACK THAT UP WHETHER WE SUPPORT IT OR NOT.

THE NEXT QUESTION I HAVE IS YOU MENTIONED GETTING A SITE PLAN EXEMPTION.

SO IS THAT THE PROCESS YOU'RE GOING THROUGH? UH, IN ORDER TO GET THIS, UM, GET THIS LAID OUT? IT WILL BE FOR THE PATIO.

SO IN GENERAL, YOU CAN USE A SITE PLAN EXEMPTION FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE UNDER A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET.

AND SO A SITE PLAN EXEMPTION WILL BE USED TO ADD THE PATIO.

UH, THE REMAINDER OF IT WILL JUST BE INTERIOR REMODEL PERMITS BECAUSE OKAY.

WHAT ABOUT, YOU MENTIONED LIKE THE DUMPSTER LOCATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU'RE GONNA MOVE IT.

I GUESS MY QUESTION AT THAT POINT IS, UM, HOW YOU, HOW ARE YOU COMMITTING TO THE MOVEMENT OF THAT? BECAUSE UNDER SITE PLAN EXEMPTION, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SHOW THAT.

I MEAN, COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT DUMPSTERS SUPPOSED TO BE, YOU KNOW, BEHIND MASONRY SCREENING, THINGS LIKE THAT, YOU'RE COMMITTING TO IT, BUT THAT IS TODAY'S CODE ANYWAY.

BUT WITH A CLINE EXEMPTION, YOU KIND OF LIKE, EH, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT REALLY LOOKED AT.

SO HOW DO YOU, HOW ARE YOU COMMITTING TO BEING ABLE TO DO THIS? SO THERE'S REALLY TWO LAYERS TO IT.

THE SITE PLAN EXEMPTION IS HOW THE WORK IS DONE, BUT THE SITE PLAN, SO THE, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS AN A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, WHICH MEANS IT DOESN'T PERMIT CONSTRUCTION.

RIGHT.

SO WE WILL HAVE TO SHOW THE LOCATION OF THE DUMPSTERS, THE PARKING AND ALL OF THAT.

MM-HMM.

, IT'S STILL REVIEWED WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

UH, SO A LAND USE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT STILL HAS TO BE REVIEWED FOR ALL OF THOSE THINGS.

IT JUST DOESN'T PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION AND ACTUAL MOVEMENT OF IT.

THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION IS THEN PERMITTED WITH THE SITE PLAN EXEMPTION.

OKAY.

AND THEN THE PARKING, I MEAN, I I, I'M SURE I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME.

HOW IS, IS THE PARKING GONNA BE PART OF THE CONDITIONING USE PERMIT WHEN ALL THAT NUMBER COMES IN? IT'S REALLY TWOFOLD.

SO AS I MENTIONED IN MY PRESENTATION, THERE'S ACTUALLY A T A TRANSPORTATION SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT THAT MM-HMM.

INCORPORATES THIS PROJECT AND OTHERS.

AND WE WILL HAVE TO SHOW THAT IT HAS THE PARKING SPACES FOR THE OTHER, UM, THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT SHARED USE WITH THIS AND WITH, UH, AND IT THAT IT WILL SUFFICIENTLY PARK OUR USE.

WE HAVE TO SHOW THAT MM-HMM.

WITH THE T SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, AND THEN IT'LL ALSO HAVE TO BE ON THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

[00:50:01]

OKAY.

SO IT'S COVERED EITHER WAY.

IT'S ALL TALLIED.

UM, AND IT WILL BE RE-REVIEWED AT THAT TIME? YES, SIR.

SOUNDS LIKE.

OKAY.

UM, LEMME SEE IF I HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

UM, I THINK THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

UH, WHO'S NEXT? UH, COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH.

QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THIS ZONING CHANGE THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING DOESN'T PASS BASED ON YOU WORKING WITH THE, THE, THE LEASEE, UM, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, WHAT'S THE MOST LIKELY THING TO HAPPEN IF THIS ZONING CHANGE DOESN'T PASS? I, THE PROPERTY WOULD REDEVELOP WITH THE RESTAURANT USE.

OKAY.

AND IF WE DID PASS THIS ZONING CHANGE, BUT YOU DID NOT GET THE C U P THAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO PURSUE, WHAT'S THE MOST LIKELY THING TO HAPPEN? THE PROPERTY WOULD REDEVELOP WITH A RESTAURANT USE.

OKAY.

SO NO MATTER WHAT, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A BUSINESS THERE SELLING SOMETHING THAT'S GOING INTO MOUTHS , IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.

OKAY.

AND, AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT, UH, IN GENERAL, BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING AND READING IN THE EMAILS, THAT YOU ARE AGREEABLE TO WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ASKING FOR, UM, IN TERMS OF NOISE, OPERATION HOURS, THAT SORT OF THING.

UM, YOU JUST CAN'T FIND A MECHANISM TO DO IT OUTSIDE OF THE C U P PROCESS, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.

WE CAN'T FIND A MECHANISM THAT PUTS IT TO RUN WITH THE LAND OUTSIDE OF THE C P PROCESS.

OKAY.

SO VERY LIKELY YOU'RE GONNA BE BACK TO PC IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS IF THIS ZONING CHANGE IS APPROVED.

AND WE'RE GONNA BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN ABOUT WHAT SORT OF CONDITIONS TO PUT ON THIS PROPERTY IF, IF WE WANT TO ALLOW A C U P FOR ALCOHOL SALES? YES, SIR.

OKAY.

NOW, THE ONLY OTHER MECHANISM THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE OUTSIDE OF THE C P PROCESS IS THE PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, AND YOU TOLD US THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER IS UNABLE TO SIGN A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.

I'M CURIOUS WHY YOU SAID UNABLE INSTEAD OF UNWILLING.

IS IT, IS THERE SOMETHING PREVENTING HIM OR CHOICE OF WORDS? THEY, THEY ARE NOT INCLINED TO PUT RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY GIVEN THAT THERE'S THE GROUND LEASE IN PLACE.

OKAY.

YOU DID MENTION, I THINK IN YOUR EMAIL SOMETHING ABOUT PUTTING IT IN THE LEASE AGREEMENT.

YES, SIR.

WE HAVE.

IS THAT STILL, WE HAVE ALSO, UM, MENTIONED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE WOULD PUT IT IN, PUT THESE RESTRICTIONS REGARDING, UM, USE AND AMPLIFIED SOUND IN THE, IN THE TENANT'S LEASE SO THAT WHEN THEY COME IN THAT THEY HAVE THE RESTRICTIONS.

SO IT WOULD BE IN A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT PLACES.

OKAY.

BUT I GUESS SPEAKING OF ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS, IF IT'S IN A LEASE AGREEMENT, THE ONLY REALLY ENFORCER OF THAT WOULD BE THE PROPERTY OWNER.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE NOT VERY INCLINED IT'S TO DO THAT.

CORRECT? IT WAS CORRECT OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT THIS, THE LETTER AGREEMENT FRANKLY, HAS MORE ENFORCEABILITY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAN PUTTING IT IN THE LEASE DOES.

OKAY.

AND, AND I MEAN, AS FAR AS THE PROPERTY OWNER'S INVOLVEMENT, LIKE, LIKE EVERYONE'S SAYING, ALL OF THIS STUFF WE'RE DISCUSSING CARRIES WITH THE PROPERTY AND THEREFORE THE PROPERTY OWNER ULTIMATELY HAS CONTROL OVER THIS, NOT ANYONE WHO LEASES THE PROPERTY.

AND SO I'M JUST CURIOUS, IT IT, THE C U P, THE ZONING CHANGE, ALL THAT SORT OF STUFF, THAT THIS IS ALL WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS AGREEMENT, THEY'RE, THEY'RE OKAY WITH WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE? SO THERE IS, AS I MENTIONED, THERE'S A LONG-TERM LEASE HOLDER, UM, THAT HAS THE PERMISSIONS TO SEEK THE APPLICATIONS THAT THEY NEED TO PERMIT AND RUN THEIR ESTABLISHMENTS.

THEY JUST DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO FURTHER RESTRICT WITH A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON THE PROPERTY.

SO THE PROPERTY OWNER DOESN'T ACTUALLY HAVE TO GIVE ANY SORT OF CONSENT TO EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING.

THEY DO HAVE TO SIGN OUR APPLICATIONS.

OKAY.

AND I GUESS OBVIOUSLY THEY DID ? YES, SIR.

.

OKAY.

I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONERS, WHO ELSE HAS QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MOOW? MY QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.

UM, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY CURIOUS.

UH, COMMISSIONER MUSH.

TYLER, CAN YOU SPEAK UP JUST A LITTLE MORE? WE'RE, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING

[00:55:01]

YOU.

SORRY.

QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.

ARE WE, CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY NOW? YES.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.

UM, PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED CS AND A FEW OTHER THINGS ON IT.

SO AM I UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY THAT THE, THIS IS JUST TO GO TO A CS ONE? CORRECT.

IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED CS C O N P, AND IT'S GONNA GO TO CS ONE CO N P.

OKAY.

AND SO WHAT DOES THAT CHANGE SPECIFICALLY ALLOW THE PROPERTY, UM, THAT IS GONNA ALLOW FOR THE, FOR THE COCKTAIL LOUNGE USE IN THE FUTURE OF CS ONE IS THAT THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CS AND CS ONE, SORRY.

I MEAN, WE'RE NOT CHANGING HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW LIQUOR SALES, UM, WHICH I BELIEVE THEY INTEND TO DO ON A LIMITED, CORRECT.

ON A LIMITED MM-HMM.

.

OKAY.

SO THAT CHANGES ALL TIED TO LIQUOR ONLY, IT'S NOT CHANGED, IT'S NOT TIED TO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OR FAR RATIOS OR SETBACKS OR ANYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT? NO, THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY.

AND TO CLARIFY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND TO CLARIFY FROM THE APPLICANT, IF THIS DOESN'T GO THROUGH AS PLANNED, AS PLANNED, THEN THE BACKUP PLAN WOULD BE TO GO WITH A RESTAURANT? YES, MA'AM.

THAT'S ACCURATE.

AND A RESTAURANT CAN SERVE LIQUOR OR CAN'T THEY APPLY FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE ALSO? YES, MA'AM.

A, A RESTAURANT CAN SERVE LIQUOR, UM, BETWEEN THE HOURS OF BETWEEN T ABC HOURS WITH THE CUTOFF OF MIDNIGHT.

HMM.

SO THEY COULD SERVE LIQUOR AND THEY COULD DO THAT UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING? YES, MA'AM.

OKAY.

I THINK THAT ANSWERS ALL MY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, WE'RE UP TO FOUR.

UH, WHO ELSE HAS QUESTIONS? I HAVE A FEW.

UH, AND THIS WOULD BE FOR STAFF.

THANK YOU.

SO, UH, GUADALUPE IS A, UH, A CORRIDOR, UM, MUCH LESS MUCH LIKE THE ONE CLOSE TO MY HOUSE, WHICH IS BURNETT.

UM, AND THERE ARE PLANS FOR, I MEAN, IT IS A IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR.

IT'S A PRIORITY NETWORK.

THERE'S A LOT OF PLAN, EXISTING TRANSIT, PLANNED TRANSIT.

UM, SO MY QUESTION, THE CS, UH, THERE'S A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO LIMIT IT TO 40 FEET.

UM, WHERE, WHERE DID THAT COME AROUND ABOUT, BECAUSE I GUESS 60 FEET IS THE CS THAT'S TYPICALLY, UH, THE HEIGHT THAT'S TYPICALLY ALLOWED FOR CS, IS THAT CORRECT? I WOULD NEED TO LOOK, LOOK UP THAT INFORMATION RIGHT NOW.

ALL RIGHT.

I THINK IT IS 60 FEET.

UM, DO YOU, I'M HAPPY TO HELP A LITTLE BIT.

OKAY, SURE.

UH, FROM, SO CORRECT, CS IS GENERALLY A 60 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT FROM EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN TELL.

THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT EXISTS TODAY WAS PUT INTO PLACE WITH THE OVERALL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED.

AND DOES ANYBODY, I READ 2004, IS THAT CORRECT? WHEN THAT WAS ESTABLISHED AROUND THAT TIME? YES.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, AND SO STEPH, JUST REAL QUICK, UH, I'M NOT DONE.

YES.

SORRY.

UH, SO THIS, UH, THIS FOOTPRINT, THIS BUILDING, THE REZONING LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY MODEST CHANGE IN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING, BUT THE, UM, THIS COULD BE DEVELOPED INTO A MUCH LARGER, I MEAN, FOOTPRINT, IT COULD INCREASE IN SIZE.

UM, I MEAN THE LIMIT ON BUILDING, UH, SQUARE FOOTAGE, UM, I MEAN, IT COULD BE A LARGER STRUCTURE IF, IF A DEVELOPER IS, WAS WILLING TO DEVELOP THIS SIDE.

CORRECT.

AND WHAT CURRENTLY WE HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN INFORMATION ON THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IT COULD BE.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

HI.

I JUST WANTED TO ADD A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION.

YES.

A LARGER BUILDING COULD BE PLACED ON THE SITE, BUT CS ONE AND THE LIQUOR SALES AND COCKTAIL LOUNGE WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE FOOTPRINT.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

SO IT WOULD HAVE LIMITATIONS.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, OKAY.

UH, STAFF, I'M SORRY, I KEEP .

ONE MORE.

UH, IS, ARE WE ABLE TO REMOVE THE CO AS PART OF THIS? UM, IF WE MAKE ANY MOTIONS THIS EVENING? WE ARE, WE ARE ABLE TO REMOVE IT.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS.

ANYBODY ELSE? CHAIR?

[01:00:01]

OH, YES, CHAIR COHEN.

I, I DID HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION, AND IT MIGHT BE MAYBE, UH, MS. SW CAN ANSWER OR IT MIGHT BE STAFF.

IS THERE A LIMIT, SINCE THIS GOT BROUGHT UP, AND IT'S SOMETHING I'M UNFORTUNATELY VERY FAMILIAR WITH, IS THERE A LIMIT TO HOW MUCH ALCOHOL A RESTAURANT CAN SELL? YES.

SO THE, A RESTAURANT TODAY COULD OPERATE THE, IT'S THE 49 51 THRESHOLD, RIGHT? SO YOU CAN SELL ALCOHOL UP TO 49% OF YOUR SALES CAN BE ALCOHOL, 51% HAS TO BE FOOD SALES TO BE CONSIDERED A, UM, COCKTAIL LOUNGE.

IT IS IF OVER 51% OF YOUR SALES ARE FROM LIQUOR, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE THRESHOLD.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UH, ALL RIGHT.

WE'RE UP TO SIX.

GOT A COUPLE MORE SPOTS.

LET'S, UH, I'M GOING TO, I, I'M TRYING TO STICK WITH OUR RULES HERE.

UH, REPEATS.

I'M TRYING TO LIMIT 'EM.

, BUT HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

LET'S GIVE THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS A CHANCE.

UH, COMMISSIONER MOOCH, TYLER AND SHAY HAVE ALREADY HAD A CHANCE, SO I'M LOOKING AROUND THE ROOM HERE TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T LEAVE OUT ANYONE ELSE THAT HAS QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, UH, COMMISSIONER MOOCH, I WILL GIVE YOU A JUST ONE QUESTION IF YOU HAVE IT.

I'M, YEAH, JUST ONE.

SO WE RECEIVED A LAND USE MEMO FOR THIS EVENING.

UM, SO I'M LOOKING FOR CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

THE LAND USE MEMO, UH, FROM LEGAL SAID THAT WE CAN APPROVE THE APPLICATION IS PROPOSED.

WE ARE ALLOWED TO APPROVE A MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONING CLASSIFICATION.

UM, WE CAN APPROVE THE PROPOSED WITH MORE.

I, I GUESS I'M NOT SEEING WHERE IT SAYS WE CAN APPROVE.

SORRY.

CUZ YOU MENTIONED THE WE COULD, WE COULD CHANGE THINGS.

YEAH.

THE CO WE COULD LEAVE OUT THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.

THAT'S WHAT, THAT WAS MY QUESTION.

THE ANSWER WAS YES.

UM, SO YOU WANT A LEGAL CLARIFICATION AND IT'S DOWN BELOW THERE.

YEAH, I DO SEE THAT.

THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY COMBINING DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND, OKAY.

AND THAT IS IN THERE THAT WE COULD, UM, IT SAYS INCREASED MINIMUM LOT SIZE OR REQUIREMENTS.

I SEE DECREASE ON HEIGHT.

I'M NOT SEEING INCREASE.

SO YOU BRING UP A GOOD QUESTION.

CAN WE, SO THIS