[00:00:04]
[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.
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.
YEAH, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING CHAIR.
I HAD A CHECK MARK NEXT TO SOMEBODY.
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.
UH, COMMISSIONER COXS PRESENT.
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,
JUST QUICKLY, UH, WE HAVE, UH, I THINK I'M COUNTING FOUR CASES, UH, FOR DISCUSSION IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, RIGHT NOW.
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.
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.
[Reading of the Agenda]
COMMISSIONER FLORES, ARE YOU ABLE TO HELP ME WITH THE FIRST READING THIS EVENING? YES.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.
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.
11 REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 3 49 27 EAST FIFTH STREET.
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.
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.
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.
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.
THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE REDLINE PARKWAY, BUT THEY THINK IT'S, EVERYTHING'S GONNA BE OKAY.
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.
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.
UH, MR. RISINE, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? YES, CHAIR.
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.
UM, SO ANY, ANY QUESTIONS, UM, COMMISSIONERS HAVE IN DETERMINING WHETHER WE WANTED TO LEAD THE SUN CONSENT? ALL RIGHT.
[Consent Agenda]
I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, READ OUT THE CONSENT AGENDA.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.
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.
WE HAVE ITEM 10 IS, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT IS CONSENT.
PLAN AMENDMENT, NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONE TO FEBRUARY 14TH.
ITEM 13, PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, IS DISCUSSION.
ITEM 14, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH.
ITEM 15, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, 16, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 14TH, 17.
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.
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.
[4. Rezoning: C14-2022-0076 - 3100 Guadalupe; District 9]
MOVE TO OUR FIRST DISCUSSION CASE.IT'S THE REZONING, UH, AT 3 3100 GUADALUPE.
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.
I'LL HEAR FROM THE OCCUPANT APPLICANT.
MS. SUSS WARREN, MS. HO, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
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 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.
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.
[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.
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.
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.
THOSE ARE HOWEVER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ITEMS, NOT ZONING ITEMS. SO THEY ARE NOT ITEMS THAT WE CAN PUT IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
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.
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
UM, WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A TECHNICAL GLITCH IF I CAN HAVE YOU, UM, PLEASE RE, UH, START WITH YOUR, UH, REMARKS.
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.
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.UM, WELL NOW HEAR FROM MS. PAULA BROWN.
MS. BROWN, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
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'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. GEL PARISH.
UH, JAY FERRELL, FOLLOWED BY JOEL PARRISH.
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.
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.
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.
ONE NOW HEAR FROM MS. GEL PARISH, FOLLOWED BY MR. MAXWELL'S DICO.
MR. PARISH SHALL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION.
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.
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.
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.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. MAXWELL STITCH.
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.
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.
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.
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.
WE ALLOWED ONE OF THE THREE MINUTE SPEAKERS TO GO OVER, SO I THINK THERE WAS SOME PARODY THERE, SO, BUT 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.
THANK YOU, MS. UH, KATHERINE KEY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HEARING ME.
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.
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.
OKAY, BACK TO THE TELECONFERENCE.
WE'LL TRY, UH, 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.
UM, MR. OR I'LL HAVE, UH, THREE MINUTES FOR THE APPLICANT REBUTTAL.
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.
[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.
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.
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.
QUICK VOTE ON CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING NOTES IN FAVOR.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
THE COVENANT IS BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND IT RUNS WITH THE LAND.
SO THAT'S THE, THAT'S REALLY IS PROPERTY OWNERS.
UM, I THINK THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.
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.
[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.THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATIONS.
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.
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.
AND WE WOULD HAVE TO SEEK PERMISSION FOR OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND.
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.
BUT IT STILL HAS GO THROUGH APPROVAL.
THE CONDITION PERMIT STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION? YES SIR.
AND THEN ALL THOSE ITEMS THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, LATE HOURS, ALL THAT STUFF NOW IS PUT ONTO THE CONDITION USED PERMIT.
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.
SO AT THAT TIME THEN, IF ANYBODY HAS A SUIT, ALL THEY NEED TO DO IS CALL THE CITY.
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.
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.
SO WE WILL HAVE TO SHOW THE LOCATION OF THE DUMPSTERS, THE PARKING AND ALL OF THAT.
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.
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.
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.
[00:50:01]
OKAY.UM, AND IT WILL BE RE-REVIEWED AT THAT TIME? YES, SIR.
UM, LEMME SEE IF I HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
UM, I THINK THAT'S IT FOR NOW.
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.
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.
SO NO MATTER WHAT, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A BUSINESS THERE SELLING SOMETHING THAT'S GOING INTO MOUTHS
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.
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.
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.
YOU DID MENTION, I THINK IN YOUR EMAIL SOMETHING ABOUT PUTTING IT IN THE LEASE AGREEMENT.
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.
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.
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.
AND I GUESS OBVIOUSLY THEY DID
I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WHO ELSE HAS QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MOOW? MY QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY CURIOUS.
TYLER, CAN YOU SPEAK UP JUST A LITTLE MORE? WE'RE, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING
[00:55:01]
YOU.ARE WE, CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY NOW? YES.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
SO THEY COULD SERVE LIQUOR AND THEY COULD DO THAT UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING? YES, MA'AM.
I THINK THAT ANSWERS ALL MY QUESTIONS.
UH, WHO ELSE HAS QUESTIONS? I HAVE A FEW.
UH, AND THIS WOULD BE FOR STAFF.
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.
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.
UM, DO YOU, I'M HAPPY TO HELP A LITTLE BIT.
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.
UM, AND SO STEPH, JUST REAL QUICK, UH, I'M NOT DONE.
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.
AND WHAT CURRENTLY WE HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN INFORMATION ON THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IT COULD BE.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD A LITTLE BIT OF CLARIFICATION.
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.
UH, STAFF, I'M SORRY, I KEEP
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.
[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.
LET'S, UH, I'M GOING TO, I, I'M TRYING TO STICK WITH OUR RULES HERE.
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.
UH, UH, COMMISSIONER MOOCH, I WILL GIVE YOU A JUST ONE QUESTION IF YOU HAVE IT.
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.
CUZ YOU MENTIONED THE WE COULD, WE COULD CHANGE THINGS.
THE CO WE COULD LEAVE OUT THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
THAT'S WHAT, THAT WAS MY QUESTION.
UM, SO YOU WANT A LEGAL CLARIFICATION AND IT'S DOWN BELOW THERE.
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.
SO YOU BRING UP A GOOD QUESTION.
CAN WE, SO THIS WOULD BE EFFECTIVELY ELE REMOVING THE CO WOULD GIVE GREATER ENTITLEMENT.
SO DO YOU WANNA, ARE WE, DO YOU WANNA CLARIFY THAT? UM, I'D SEE WHAT POINT YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE COMMISSIONER MTU, BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE GONNA GET INTO MOTIONS.
SO CS ALLOWS FOR 60 VHE, LIKE YOU STATED CHAIR.
UM, AND THE CO WAS NOT PUT ON BY STAFF.
THOSE WERE COS THAT WERE ALREADY ON THERE, THAT WE CONTINUED THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
IF WE NOTIFIED FOR THE COS, YOU CANNOT GO, I GUESS LESS RESTRICTED.
IF YOU COULD ONLY GO MORE RESTRICTED.
SO WE'RE CHECKING THE NOTICE TO SEE WHAT THE NOTICE STATED.
BECAUSE YOU CANNOT GO OUTSIDE THE NOTICE.
I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.
WE ASKED FOR, WE CARRIED THE 42 30 UHHUH
THAT WAS NOT PUT ON BY STAFF, SO WE'RE JUST CHECKING THE NOTICE.
I AM NOT QUITE SURE YOU CAN CHANGE IT BECAUSE OF OUR NOTIFICATION, BUT WE'RE CHECKING THAT RIGHT NOW.
UM, COMMISSIONER THE, THE, SORRY CHAIR.
IT, IT'S IN THE AGENDA AS CS ONE C O N P, AND I WOULD THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE NOTICE, AND THAT'S WHAT THE AGENDA SAYS.
WE'LL LET STAFF, UH, CONFIRM THAT I, I'M IN AGREEMENT, BUT WE'LL LET STAFF CONFIRM.
IF, UH, ANY COMMISSIONER, I'M LOOKING, YOU HAVE A QUICK LINE COMMISSIONER SHAY? YEAH.
AND IT'S MOSTLY JUST TO HELP EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THE CONDITIONING USE PERMIT.
I MEAN, CAN STAFF EXPLAIN HOW LONG THE CONDITIONING USE PERMIT LASTS AND HOW IT EXPIRES? BECAUSE IT IS NOT PERPETUAL HAS TO DO WITH, UM, THE U HOW LONG IT'S USED, IF IT'S NOT USED.
AND THAT, UM, THAT BRINGS US TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE QUESTIONS.
UH, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? WAIT, STAFF
OH, IF, IF THE USE, OH WAIT, I'M SORRY.
THEN, UH, THE CONDITIONERS PERMIT EXPIRES AND THEY GOTTA START OVER.
COMMISSIONER SHAY, I THOUGHT THAT WAS A COMMENT.
NO, IT, I, I WAS TRYING TO MAKE IT IN, IN A QUESTION CUZ WE'RE SUPPOSED TO ASK A QUESTION, BUT FINE.
I CAN CONFIRM THAT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS RUNS WITH THE USE, AND IF THE USE CEASES FOR MORE THAN 90 DAYS, THEN THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT EXPIRES AND YOU HAVE TO START
[01:05:01]
OVER IT.LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER COX? UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE, THAT WE APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'M SORRY.
UM, WASN'T COMMISSIONER SHAY? OKAY.
YEAH, I, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT, UM, WE'RE HEARING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND THIS PROPERTY.
I WOULD BE MAKING THE SAME ARGUMENTS, UH, IF I LIVED IN THAT VICINITY.
BUT THE, THE WAY THE CITY REGULATIONS ARE WRITTEN, THE VEHICLE FOR THOSE RESTRICTIONS IS THE C U P PROCESS.
AND THE APPLICANT ESSENTIALLY HAS AGREED
SO, I, I AM, I AM GENERALLY IN AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, ON THEIR CONCERNS.
I'M ALSO IN AGREEMENT WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, BECAUSE THEY'RE GENERALLY IN AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS.
IT'S JUST A MATTER OF FINDING THE RIGHT TOOL AND VEHICLE TO MAKE THOSE, UH, MAKE THOSE LIMITATIONS ENFORCEABLE.
AND THAT THAT IS THE, UM, THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M SUPPORTING THE, UH, CS ONE ZONING.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, WANNA SPEAK AGAINST THIS MOTION.
I'D LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT.
UM, THAT SIMPLY THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT THERE BE CONDITIONS ON AMPLIFIED SOUND AND HOURS OF OPERATION, UM, NOT EXPLICITLY WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND NOT MANDATING HOW THAT IS, UM, ENFORCED.
BUT WITH THOSE CONDITIONS, I DO NOT THINK WE CAN DO THAT.
STAFF, UH, ANYBODY WANTS TO SPEAK TO THAT CHAIR COMMISSION LEE ON ANDREW RIVERA.
THAT'S, UH, NOT AN APPROPRIATE AMENDMENT.
CAN'T, WE CAN'T GO THAT DIRECTION.
IS IT POSSIBLE, AND I DON'T, I CAN'T REMEMBER IF WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE OR NOT.
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR STAFF TO PUT THAT IN THE NOTES? WELL, LET'S, LET'S KEEP WITH OUR TRAIN OF THOUGHT HERE.
SO WE WE'RE ENTERTAINING SPEAKERS THAT WANNA SPEAK AGAINST THIS MOTION.
THOSE, DOES THAT WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR? COMMISSIONER SHAY? SO, COMMISSIONER COX HAS, UH, SUMMED UP QUITE A BIT OF IT, WHICH ON COMPLETE AGREEMENT ON, UM, AS FAR AS FOR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT, WHAT I FOUND IS ENFORCEMENT, RIGHT? IF IT BECOMES A CIVIL SUIT, IT BECOMES SOMEBODY WHO HAS A LAWYER, WHO DOESN'T HAVE A LAWYER.
AND SO, TO ME, THE CONDITIONING USE PROCESS MAKES IT COMPLETELY FEASIBLE FOR ANYBODY TO PICK, BE ABLE TO PICK UP A PHONE IF THEY SEE THERE IS AN, IF THERE IS AN ISSUE, IF IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS HIDDEN IN SOME, YOU KNOW, RESTRICTION THING AND SOMEBODY DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO, YOU KNOW, GET A HIGH PRICE LAWYER, WHATEVER, THEN IT BECOMES SOMETHING THAT IT BECOMES VERY ADVERSARIAL.
SO THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS IS PUT IN THERE, IT GIVES A PLANNING COMMISSION THE ABILITY, EVEN AS TIME CHANGES TO ADJUST IT, YOU KNOW, IF THE TIME COMES AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WE, WE CAN REVISIT IT.
NOW, IF IT DOES EXPIRE, THEN IT STARTS ALL OVER.
WHICH, WHICH I, I THINK IS A GOOD WAY TO DO IT.
UM, SO I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE, TH THIS DOES OFFER THE PATH THAT, UH, BOTH PEOPLE WANT.
NOW I DO THINK AS FAR AS, UH, WHAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, WHETHER THERE COULD BE A NOTE OR SOMETHING, THE REASON I'M ALSO SUPPORTING IS BECAUSE, UM, THERE IS A LETTER THAT HAS BEEN WRITTEN THAT IT'S GONNA BE AN AGREEMENT THAT IS GONNA GO WITH IT, UM, ONTO COUNCIL.
AND AT THAT POINT, WE CAN ALSO LET COUNCIL CONTINUE TO, UM, HASH THIS OUT.
SO, UM, THAT'S GONNA, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S GOES WITH THE BACKUP MATERIALS.
ANY, UH, SPEAKERS FAR OR AGAINST, UM, COMMISSIONER POLITO? SURE.
I'LL JUST BRIEFLY SPEAK AGAINST I'M, WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE I WOULD'VE LOVED TO SEE AN AGREEMENT COME OUT OF THIS THAT WAS FEASIBLE FOR BOTH SIDES AND REALLY APPRECIATE, UM, ALL THE WORK FROM THE APPLICANT TO TRY TO FIND AN AGREEMENT.
UM, BUT I THINK WITHOUT THE RESTRICTIONS,
[01:10:01]
I DON'T FEEL RIGHT ABOUT SUPPORTING THIS PARTICULAR CHANGE.UM, IT WAS NOTED THAT THIS AREA IS BETWEEN TWO PROJECT CONNECT STATIONS.
I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA.
I GO HERE, I USE THIS RETAIL AREA QUITE A LOT ACTUALLY.
AND I'VE BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO WORK CLOSE ENOUGH TO NOT HAVE TO DRIVE, BUT I HAVE SEEN THE WAY PARKING HAS CHANGED RAPIDLY, UH, ESPECIALLY WITH MORE FOOD AND ALCOHOL SALES OVER THE YEARS.
SO I THINK THAT IF WE'RE CONSIDERING WHERE, UM, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS GOING TO WANNA ADD DENSITY OVER THE YEARS AND KEEP A NEIGHBORHOOD VERY LIVABLE, ATTRACTIVE TO MULTIPLE PEOPLE, LIKE DIFFERENT KINDS OF PEOPLE AND DIVERSE, I THINK, UM, THIS IS A, A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT TO GIVE, UM, IN PERPETUITY TO WHOEVER ENDS UP ON THE SITE.
UM, BECAUSE I REALLY RECOGNIZE THE GOOD FAITH EFFORTS HERE IN THE LETTER OF AGREEMENT IS EXCELLENT, BUT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T RUN WITH THE LAND, UM, I'M, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND POSE IT.
UM, SPEAKERS IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION CHAIR.
UM, YEAH, SO JUST LOOK AT THE SITE AND I THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT SEEMS LIKE A, A LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT TODAY ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT DURING THE C U P PROCESS AND, YOU KNOW, WE GET TO ADDRESS THOSE AT THAT TIME.
WE'LL LOOK AT DUMPSTERS, WE'LL TALK ABOUT PARKING.
AND I, I, I DO LOOK AT THIS EMAIL FROM, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVE AND THEY SPEAK TO WHAT OUR FELLOW COMMISSIONERS MENTIONED ABOUT THIS BEING A LONG PROJECT CONNECT, UM, ROUTE AND THE TWO ADJACENT STATIONS NEARBY.
AND ALSO IN THIS CONVERSATION THAT WE JUST HAD, WE LEARNED THAT DURING THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS, WE DROPPED THE ZONING, WE CUT THE ZONING BY A THIRD, SO THE HEIGHT THAT WAS ALLOWED AT 60 FEET WAS CUT TO 40 FEET.
AND SO THERE'S REALLY NO BETTER WAY TO PRESERVE OLD USES THAT DON'T NECESSARILY ALLOW FOR TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DENSITY THAN TO NOT ALLOW TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DENSITY.
SO THAT IS A CONVERSATION THAT I HOPE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKS INTO OVER THE NEXT COUPLE YEARS, IS, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN STRANGLE AND, AND LIMIT TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DENSITY? AND, YOU KNOW, DROPPING THE HEIGHT FROM 60 TO 40, IT'S A GREAT WAY TO MAKE POSITIVELY SURE WE DON'T REACH OUR CHANCE SUPPORTIVE GOALS.
SO HOPEFULLY THAT'S ONE OF MANY THINGS WE CAN ADDRESS AS WE LOOK AT AMAZING CORRIDORS LIKE THIS THAT REALLY COULD BE GREAT, BUT ARE LIMITED BY OUT OF DATE PLANNING PROCESSES.
ALL RIGHT, UH, WE HAVE ONE MORE SPOT FOR ANYONE THAT'S WANTS TO SPEAK AGAINST COMMISSIONER MEOW.
UM, I THINK, UNFORTUNATELY, I, I, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GIANNIS POLITO THAT I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE TALK ABOUT THE CORRIDOR AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE CHANGE FROM CS TO CS ONE IS NOT ABOUT ANYTHING DEALING WITH THE STRUCTURE, UM, YOU KNOW, BUILDING WHERE THEY'RE ABLE TO BUILD, OR THE HEIGHTS OR ANY OF THAT.
WE'RE REALLY DOWN TO A PARTICULAR USE.
AND AS WE TRY TO EXPAND THE WALKABILITY OF MULTI-USE HOUSING, THEN WE NEED TO PRESERVE AREAS WHERE PEOPLE CAN LIVE COMFORTABLY.
THERE ARE A LOT OF MIXED, YOU KNOW, HOUSING IN THEIR, FROM STUDENT HOUSING TO YOUNG PROFESSIONAL TO THE RETIRE.
AND THAT, AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY, THIS DOESN'T FIT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.
UM, THE APPLICANT CAN GET MUCH OF THEIR USE OUT OF A RESTAURANT.
A RESTAURANT IS ALLOWED TO SELL LIQUOR.
IT JUST HAS DIFFERENT HOURS, WHICH IS MORE IN KEEPING WITH LIVING FROM WHERE PEOPLE LIVE.
AND I, I THINK IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CORRIDORS AND THE HOUSING, THEN WE NEED TO PROMOTE LIVABILITY, NOT DRINKABILITY.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD, TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS THE MOTION TO APPROVE A STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THIS IS, UH, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX AND BY SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SHAY.
THOSE IN FAVOR? UH, PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR GREEN AND LEAVE IT UP JUST FOR A MOMENT.
UH, AND THOSE VOTING AGAINST VIRTUALLY.
SO, UH, I'M THE ONLY ONE HERE ON THE DIOCESE, AND I'M VOTING IN FAVOR.
SO THAT BRINGS US EIGHT TWO WITH COMMISSIONER GIANNIS POLITO AND COMMISSIONER MU TYLER VOTING, UH, AGAINST.
SO WE WILL LIKELY SEE THIS ONE COME BACK AND PLEASE COME BACK, CUZ I THINK A LOT OF YOUR POINTS WILL BE DA DEBATED AT THAT TIME.
[Items 6 & 7]
RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM.UH, THIS IS, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG HERE.
[01:15:01]
UH, ITEM SIX.AND THIS IS, UH, JUST ITEM SIX, RIGHT? JUST THE REZONING? SURE.
HEATHER CHAFFIN HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ACTUALLY, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT SIX AND SEVEN TOGETHER.
THESE WERE SUBMITTED AS ONE APPLICATION, AND THEN WE REALIZED THERE WAS AN EASEMENT SEPARATING THE TWO TRACKS.
SO IT HAD TO RE BE REFILED AS TWO SEPARATE ONES BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT CONTIGUOUS.
SO WE'RE, THIS, THIS IS ITEM SIX AND SEVEN, SO HOPEFULLY WE HAVE EVERYONE, ALL THE SPEAKERS HERE, AND THEN YEAH.
IT'S NOT YOUR TYPICAL REZONING MPA.
WE HAVE TWO REZONING THAT'LL BE TAKEN UP TOGETHER.
AND IT LOOKS ODD ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE REPORT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
UM, THE FIRST ONE IS CASE C 14 20 22 0 0 15.
IT'S, UH, LOCATED AT 1005 SPRINGDALE ROAD.
IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED G R M U C O N P AND R R N P.
AND THE REQUEST IS TO GO TO C S M U N P, THE RELATED CASE.
ITS ADDRESS IS 1,113 AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
IT'S ABOUT THREE AND A HALF ACRES.
AND THAT IS CURRENTLY ZONED G YEAH, G R M U C O N P.
AND REQUESTING THE SAME ZONING.
CS M U N P STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO CSM U UH, NP ON THESE PROPERTIES.
WE DO SUPPORT CS N P FOR THESE PROPERTIES.
IS, IS THAT, UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, IS THAT ON BOTH? I'M LOOKING AT MY NOTES.
I DID HAVE A TYPO ON THE, UH, AGENDA.
SO FOR BOTH OF THOSE, WE ARE SUPPORTING CS N P.
AGAIN, THESE WERE FILED AS ONE, UH, APPLICATION, BUT HAD TO BE, UH, FILED SEPARATELY.
THE PROPERTIES ARE IN THE AREA, GENERALLY KNOWN AS THE FORMER EAST AUSTIN TANK FARM.
UH, IT WAS AN AREA USED FOR STORAGE OF PETROCHEMICALS FOR DECADES.
THE USES WERE REMOVED AND ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION OCCURRED LATER.
UM, AT THAT TIME IN THE 1990S, IT WAS REMEDIATED TO A LEVEL THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW RESIDENTIAL LAND USES.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE OFFICE OR COMMERCIAL.
AND I'M GONNA GET INTO MORE INFORMATION ON THAT LATER.
THE PROPERTIES ARE EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF AIRPORT AND SPRINGDALE ROAD.
UH, TRACT ONE HAS FRONTED ON BOTH ROADS AND IS DEVELOPED WITH PERSONAL IMPROVEMENT SERVICES.
THE MAJORITY OF THE TRACT IS ZONED G R M U C O N P.
THERE IS AN, A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ZONED R R C O N P.
IT, UH, CONTAINS FLOODPLAIN TO THE NORTH AND NORTHEAST IS, UH, OH, I HAVE A, A ERROR ON THERE.
PROPERTY ZONED P UH, IT'S P U D AND P, NOT P PUBLIC.
THAT IS, UH, UNDER CONSTRUCTION FOR PROFESSIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES FURTHER NORTH AND NORTHEAST.
OUR PROPERTY ZONED CS C O NP AND SF THREE NP THAT ARE DEVELOPED WITH A MIX OF COMMERCIAL LAND USES, AND THEN ALSO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL A LITTLE FURTHER TO THE NORTH.
UM, ACROSS SPRINGDALE ROAD TO THE WEST ARE PROPERTIES ZONED CS M U N P AND C S C O N P.
THESE HAVE LIMITED WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION, LIMITED RETAIL AND LIMITED RESTAURANT USES.
ACROSS THE INTERSECTION OF SPRINGDALE ROAD AND AIRPORT BOULEVARD ARE PROPERTIES ZONED P U D N P AND SF THREE N P DEVELOPED WITH ART STUDIO LIMITED RESTAURANT AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES ACROSS THE RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY TO THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST.
OUR PROPERTIES ZONED P N P N G R M U C O N P, UH, THE PUBLIC SITE IS UNDEVELOPED AND THE G R M U C N P SITE IS DEVELOPED WITH MULTI-FAMILY.
UH, THE PROPERTIES ARE AS STATED.
UM, THEY ARE IN THE AREA THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY THE EAST AUSTIN TANK FARM.
IT WAS REMEDIATED TO A LEVEL THAT WILL ALLOW OFFICE COMMERCIAL AND LIMITED INDUSTRIAL LAND USES.
AT PREVIOUSLY, THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN ZONED ALLY WHEN THE TANK FARM WAS DEVELOPED.
[01:20:01]
IN 1998 WHEN A LOT OF THESE ISSUES CAME TO LIGHT TO GR M U C O N P AND R R C O N P.THIS WAS NOT JUST FOR THESE TRACKS, IT WAS FOR APPROXIMATELY 49 ACRES OF FORMER TANK FARM PROPERTY.
AND IT WAS INITIATED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
THE R R C O N P, UH, WAS A TECHNIQUE USED AT THAT TIME TO, UM, APPLY TO FLOOD PLAINS.
UH, WE DON'T REALLY DO THAT ANYMORE BECAUSE WE HAVE ALL OUR MORE CURRENT WATERSHED REGULATIONS THAT ADDRESS THAT.
SO USED TO ZONE FLOODPLAIN RR AND JUST DON'T REALLY DO THAT ANYMORE.
HISTORY RESOLUTION, UH, 98 0 4 3 5 2 CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMED TO THE CITY'S COMMITMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A COORDINATED EFFORT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS AND TNRCC TO ENSURE PROPER CLEANUP OF THIS FORMER TANK FARM SITE AND INSTRUCTED STAFF TO INITIATE REZONING THAT WOULD ALLOW MIXED USE AND RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE 49 ACRE SITE.
WHILE REMEDIATION HAS OCCURRED ON THE SITE AT THIS POINT, AT THIS TIME, IT IS NOT TO A LEVEL THAT WOULD ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES.
UH, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, BASICALLY TWOFOLD.
ONE, IT WOULD REMOVE TWO COS THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY ATTACHED IN THESE CONDITIONS WERE ATTACHED WITH A 1998 REZONING.
UH, AT THAT TIME, THE ENTIRE 49 ACRE TRACT WAS LIMITED TO 2000 VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY.
I NEED TO GET A DRINK OF WATER.
UM, AND AGAIN, AS YOU KNOW, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE DO AT THIS TIME BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE, UH, TRANSPORTATION REVIEW.
DO YOU WANNA TAKE A BREAK AND GET A DRINK? THAT WOULD BE, BECAUSE I AM, I'M
MS. GLASGOW IS, UH, GETTING ME SOME WATER.
UM, YEAH, MY VOICE HAS BEEN GOING ALL DAY.
WHAT'S IN THAT WATER SINCE YOU'RE OPPOSING HER CASE.
UM, THERE WAS A 2000 VEHICLE TRIP LIMIT.
WE DON'T REALLY DO THAT ANYMORE.
VEHICLE ACCESS WAS PROHIBITED TO AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
WE SUPPORT REMOVING THOSE CONDITIONS BECAUSE IT WILL HAVE REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY A T D.
WE ALSO SUPPORT THE INCREASE FROM GR AND RR TO CS FOR THE BAY ZONING CATEGORY.
IT'LL ALLOW A WIDE RANGE OF OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USES AND HAVE ONE CONSISTENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION OVER THE PROPERTIES.
STAFF IS NOT SUPPORTING THE MIXED USE DE DESIGNATION OR ANY OTHER RESIDENTIAL ZONING CLASS ON THE PROPERTY UNLESS THE PROPERTIES ARE FURTHER.
TCE E Q HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPERTIES ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
CITY OF AUSTIN ZONING SHOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW ON THIS MATTER OF HEALTH AND SAFETY.
THE LETTER THAT'S IN THE REPORT WAS WHAT THE REVIEW, WHEN WE STARTED THE REVIEW, THAT WAS WHAT WAS AVAILABLE.
AND, UM, AFTER SOME OF OUR CONCERNS, MS. GLASGOW REACHED OUT TO T C E Q AND, UH, GOT THIS LETTER.
UM, I CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THE LAST PARAGRAPH, UH, WITH THIS UPDATED INFORMATION.
BASED ON REVIEW OF THE DATA, T C E Q NOTED THAT THE SITE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED TO A REMEDY STANDARD B, WHICH IS COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BASED ON THE BENZENE LEVELS IN SOIL AND GROUNDWATER.
T C E Q RECOMMENDED THAT AN UPDATED AFFECTED PROPERTY ASSESSMENT REPORT A A R BE PREPARED AND SUBMITTED TO EVALUATE CURRENT CONDITIONS.
THE APAR WILL PROVIDE INFORMATION TO DETERMINE THE PATH FORWARD AND A RESPONSE ACTION THAT MAY ALLOW
[01:25:02]
FOR CLOSURE OF THE SITE TO ALLOW TO RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS.ONCE THE RESPONSE ACTION IS COMPLETE AND APPROVED BY TCE E Q A, NO FURTHER ACTION LETTER WILL BE ISSUED.
A SUPERSEDING DEED NOTICE CAN BE FILED IN THE COUNTY RIO PROPERTY RECORDS TO REMOVE THE CONDU COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL RESTRICTION.
AND, BUT THE RESTRICTION ON GROUNDWATER USE WOULD REMAIN ON THE SITE STAFF'S POSITION.
IS THIS RE THIS LEVEL OF ANALYSIS? THE A A R HAS NOT BEEN FILED, SO IT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED.
AND THAT IS OUR REASON FOR NOT SUPPORTING THE MIXED USE.
WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
MS. GLASKO, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I'M ALICE GLASGOW, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
AND, UM, HEATHER, JUST GIVE UP A COVERED A LOT OF MY PRESENTATION.
I'M GOING TO, ARE YOU HANDLING IT OR AM I CHANGING
WELL, I'M GONNA COMMISSION MEMBERS, UH, THE, UM, SITE THAT, UH, MS. HEATHER CHAFFIN JUST EXPLAINED.
AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, IT IS, UM, UH, THERE ARE TWO TRACKS AND, UH, THE SEPARATION IS, UH, A FLAG LOT THAT GOES TO WHAT YOU GUYS KNOW AS THE, UH, SPRINGDALE P U D THAT YOU APPROVED RECENTLY.
THE SPRINGDALE P U D WAS PART OF THE TANK FARM.
SO THE R TWO TRACKS WERE PART OF THE 49 ACRES THAT WERE, UH, REZONED THROUGH A CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION IN 1998.
SO, IN ON, ON APRIL 30TH, 1998, THE CITY COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INITIATE, UH, REZONING TO MIXED USE AND RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, FOR THE VAN TANK FARM LOCATED AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
I MUST SAY THAT I WAS THE DIRECTOR, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AT THAT TIME, AND I AM THE ONE WHO WAS DIRECTED TO INITIATE THE REZONING.
SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE, UH, THIS SITE AND WHAT THE COUNCIL DIRECTOR WAS AT THAT TIME.
AND THE INTENT FOR THE COUNCIL THAT WANTED TO, UH, UH, GET RID OF INDUSTRIAL ZONING.
UH, THE SPONSORS OF THE, OF THE RESOLUTION WERE THE THEN KIRK WATSON MAYOR, AND THE NOW, UH, MAYOR KIRK WATSON AND GUS GARCIA, THE LATE GU GARCIA, WERE THE TWO CO-SPONSORS OF THIS INITIATION OF THE, UH, RESOLUTION, THE, UH, ZONING CASE.
WE WERE DIRECTED AT THE TIME TO BRING THE CASE BACK TO COUNCIL IN SIX MONTHS, WE DID.
AND THE, UH, CASE WAS REZONED TO, FROM ALLY DOWN ZONE TO G R M U CO.
AND THE INTENT RELIEF WAS TO ENCOURAGE REMEDIATION OF THE SITE.
SO CHEVRON WAS THE OWNER OF THE 49 ACRES, AND THEY DID, UH, GET INITIATE, UH, REMEDIATION.
AND AS YOU WELL HEARD FROM, UH, THE CASE MANAGER, HEATHER, SHE READ THE MOST RECENT LETTER OF NOVEMBER 2ND, THAT STATES THAT, UH, BASED ON THE, UH, REVIEW IN 2007 AND THE DATA THAT OUR GEOSCIENTIST JUST SUBMITTED RECENTLY, UH, UNDER THE PHASE TWO ASSESSMENT.
AND, UM, UH, MR. A A IS HERE AND HE'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE REGARDING HIS COORDINATION WITH T C E Q.
UH, THAT, UM, THE, THE NEXT STEP SINCE THE REVIEW INDICATES THE PROPERTY SHOULD HAVE BEEN, WAS CLEANED, REMEDIATED TO A RESIDENTIAL LEVEL, HOWEVER, UM, BECAUSE OF WHATEVER WAS GOING ON AT THE TIME.
AND MR. ER IS MORE FAMILIAR WITH THAT STUFF.
HE CAN EXPLAIN WHY THEY, THEY, UM, THE, UM, ASSESSMENT OR THE, UH, DESIGNATION WAS NOT, UH, RESIDENTIAL.
HOWEVER, THE, UH, THE NEXT STEP THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR THIS COULD TAKE 12 TO SIX MONTHS.
BUT ALL I'M ASKING FOR IS THAT WHEN I FILED THE ZONING CHANGE IN, UH, 11, 12 MONTHS AGO, I, MY, MY REQUEST WAS TWO THINGS TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO REMOVE TWO CONDITIONS, 2000 TRIP LIMIT, AND TO, UM, ALLOW ACCESS TO AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE TWO TRACKS ARE SEPARATED BY, UM, AN ACCESS EASEMENT, WHICH MEANS THAT, UH, THE SOUTHERN TRACT DOES NOT HAVE ANY ACCESS TO AIRPORT BOULEVARD AS PROHIBITED BY THE CONDITION OVERLAY.
SO MY REQUEST OF YOU TONIGHT IS THAT NOT TO TREAT US ANY DIFFERENTLY FROM ANY PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN THAT HAS M U ZONING.
WE WOULD BE THE ONLY PROPERTY THAT I KNOW OF FOR AS LONG AS I'VE WORKED AT THE CITY AS A CITY PLANNER AND AS A CONSULTANT WHERE YOU ARE ROLLING BACK ZONING, REMOVING A MIXED USE OVERLAY FROM ANY PROPERTY THAT HAS T C Q LETTER.
YOU HAVE PROPERTIES THAT ARE FORMER GAS STATIONS THAT HAVE THAT WORK, MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE CONTAMINATION.
THEY HAVE MU ZONING IN PROXIMITY TO THIS SITE, AS YOU SAW ON THE ZONING MAP.
AND, UM, MY QUESTION OF YOU, WHY SHOULD WE BE TREATED FAIL
[01:30:01]
UNFAIRLY IN COMPARISON TO THE REST OF THE CITY WHERE, UM, OTHER, UH, UH, REMI UH, ISSUES THAT RELATES TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS, UH, OCCUR ADMINISTRATIVELY AND THEY'RE TAKEN CARE OF IN, IN THAT MANNER? SO I, MY ASK OF YOU IS TO, UH, TO, UH, GRANT THE ZONING AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, BUT KEEP THE M MU THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR BECAUSE, UH, THE M MU ZONING IS NOT A PERMIT.BY THE TIME WE GET IN WITH A SITE PLAN, IF WE ARE INDEED, UH, PURSUING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THEN, UH, T C Q WILL BE INVOLVED AND WILL GET THROUGH THAT PROCESS AS REQUIRED.
SO I APPRECIATE YOUR, UM, HE, UH, HEARING FROM ME TONIGHT, AND I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
AND AS I STATED THAT WE DO HAVE A GEOSCIENTIST HERE WHO CAN ALSO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
WE'LL NOW HEAR THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M HERE WITH RANGER ENVIRONMENTAL.
BASICALLY, IF YOU ALL DO HAVE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS REGARDING THE EAST AUSTIN TANK FARM, IT'S A VOLUMINOUS FILE AND, UH, IT HAS A LOT OF DATA, BUT ALSO THE SITES ALL AROUND IT HAVE A LOT OF DATA AS WELL.
BUT, OR IF YOU HAD ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THE NOVEMBER LETTER THAT BOTH STAFF AND MS. GLASGOW MENTIONED, UH, I COULD ELABORATE ON THAT.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM, UH, THE APPLICANT FOR THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
WELL, COMMISSION MEMBERS, WHY DON'T I SUSPEND MY RE UH, MY REBUTTAL AND JUST LET YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK US QUESTIONS.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? UH, COMMISSIONER COX, SENATOR BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE TO, UH, QUESTIONS.
UM, I'VE GOT A FEW, BUT I'LL LET OTHER FOLKS KICK IT OFF.
WHO WANTS TO START? US? UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPEL, FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER COX.
UM, I THINK MY QUESTION IS FOR MR. E, THE GENTLEMAN WHO WAS JUST UP ABOUT THE TCE Q LETTER FROM NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR, 2022, WHY THEY DIDN'T GIVE ANY REASONING BEHIND WHY IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN, UH, THE LAND USAGE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RESTRICTING MULT OR, UH, ANY KIND OF RESIDENTIAL.
DO YOU HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT OR, I I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.
AND FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, THAT'S, THAT'S A REALLY SERIOUS WALK BACK OF, OF LAND USE.
ONE THING HERE IS THAT EVERYBODY HAS TO, UH, CHAIR SORRY.
CAN YOU COME TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE? OH, SORRY.
UH, ONE THING IS THAT THAT LETTER REFERENCES THE TEXAS RISK REDUCTION PROGRAM.
THE TEXAS RISK REDUCTION PROGRAM CAME ABOUT IN THE 2000, 2001 TIME PERIOD WHEN, SO EVEN THOUGH THE EAST AUSTIN TANK FARM DATES BACK TO THE 1990 TIME PERIOD, THE TURP PROGRAM DIDN'T COME ABOUT UNTIL, UH, EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.
WELL, WHAT HAPPENS IS, AN APAR WAS FILED IN 2004, SO IT WAS STILL FAIRLY NEW IN, ITS IN ITS LIFESPAN, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WAY.
THE, THERE WAS A LOT OF MISINTERPRETATION OF THINGS BACK THEN WITH, BY THE TCEQ AND HOW TO ENFORCE THEIR OWN RULES.
BUT, AND THIS PART HAS TO GO TO SPECULATION ON MY PART, IS THAT IT'S EASIER TO GET A CLOSURE FROM THE TCE Q IF YOU GO WITH A COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL STANDARD VERSUS A RESIDENTIAL STANDARD.
AND, YOU KNOW, AFTER AS MUCH MONEY AS ALL OF THE PARTIES IN THE EAST, EAST AUSTIN TANK FARM HAD SPENT ON THERE, I KNOW THEY WANTED OUT.
SO THEY THOUGHT COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL, I'M DONE.
AND SO THAT'S THE ONLY REASON.
IT WAS RECENTLY REVIEWED BY T C Q BY WAY OF THE, IN THE FALL.
AND THAT WAS THEIR TAKE ON IT, THAT THIS WAS INAPPROPRIATELY CLOSED AS A RESIDENTIAL OR AS A, AS A COMMERCIAL, UH, STANDARD.
SO, UH, THAT CAME FROM T C Q, THAT THAT WASN'T EVEN US.
SO, UH, THIS IS NOT MY WORLD, BUT THEY CLEANED UP THE SITE TO THE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL
[01:35:02]
STANDARD.I'M LOOKING AT THE WATERSHED PROTECTION TANK FARM STORY MAP, WHERE THEY DOCUMENTED ALL OF THESE ILLNESSES AND, AND OTHER THINGS IN THE AREA IN 1992 THAT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS IF THEY WERE ONLY GOING TO COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL LAND USES.
COULD YOU EXPAND UPON THAT? I, I'M SORRY, MA'AM.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.
UM, I'M ASSUMING WITH A CLEANUP OF A BROWNFIELD SITE, THERE'S DIFFERENT LEVELS OF CLEANUP.
SO I, I'M JUST NOT UNDERSTANDING HOW IT CAN GO FROM BEING O OKAY.
TO COMMERCIAL, UH, USE, BUT THEN 30 YEARS LATER WE'RE OKAY NOW WITH RESIDENTIAL USE, IF IT WAS ONLY CLEANED UP TO THE COMMERCIAL USE, TWO, TWO THINGS TO ADDRESS THAT.
NUMBER ONE, THE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS, THE CLEANUP STANDARDS ARE THE EASIEST TO REACH.
THEY'RE, THAT'S WHERE YOU DON'T CLEAN 'EM UP AS MUCH.
CONVERSELY, YOU KNOW, THE RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS, AGAIN, YOU, WITH THAT EAST AUSTINSON TANK FARM, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HYDROCARBONS, HYDROCARBONS DO NOT LAST IN THE SUBSURFACE.
THEY BIODEGRADE, THEY VOLATILIZE, THEY ATTENUATE.
SO A SITUATION THAT WAS CLOSED IN THE TWO MID TWO THOUSANDS PERIOD, UH, IT'S GONNA BE NOTHING BUT BETTER NOW BECAUSE THE USE OF THE PROPERTY DOES NOT SUPPORT HYDROCARBONS AT ALL.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A, UH, USED CAR LOT AND A, UH, AND A WORKOUT FACILITY.
UH, SO THE, THE LEVELS WILL GET BETTER OVER TIME.
BUT AGAIN, I REFERENCED ON MY SPECULATION IT IS EASIER, IT WAS EASIER FOR THE OIL COMPANIES, CUZ THEY DID, THEY DID, THEY SPENT A LOT OF MONEY OUT THERE REMEDIATING.
THEY EXCAVATED THOUSANDS OF CUBIC YARDS OF DIRT.
THEY DID WHAT WAS CALLED, UH, PUMP AND TREAT, WHERE THEY JUST PUMPED THE HYDROCARBONS AND WATER AND, AND, AND OIL GASOLINE OUTTA THE GROUND.
THEY DID WHAT'S CALLED SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION, WHERE YOU BASICALLY SUCK FUMES TO CHANGE THE STATE OF THE LIQUID FROM A LIQUID TO A GAS AND, AND REMOVE IT.
SO THEY SPENT A LOT OF MONEY OUT THERE.
BUT AGAIN, IT IS EASIER TO REACH THAT COMMERCIAL STANDARD THAN A RESIDENTIAL STANDARD.
AND IF I COULD JUST ASK ONE MORE QUESTION.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH TIME I HAVE LEFT, BUT IN THE TCEQ LETTER, IT STATES GROUNDWATER USE IS STILL RESTRICTED.
AND, UM, WHY WOULD THAT BE THE CASE? I BELIEVE IT WAS PART OF THE PRO, THE PROPOSED RESTRICTIVE COVENANT BY, UH, OF WHAT THE, THE OIL COMPANIES PUT ON IT.
THEY RESTRICT THE USE OF THE GROUNDWATER UNDERNEATH THE SITE.
UM, NEXT, UH, WHAT'S IT, COMMISSIONER SHAY? OH, COMMISSIONER COX.
YEAH, I JUST WANNA START OUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT IS ASKING US NOT TO TREAT THIS PROPERTY ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER PROPERTY, BUT THIS PROPERTY IS VERY DIFFERENT
AND SO, UM, IN A RESPONSE TO THAT, WE HAVE PRETTY CLEAR HISTORIC RECORDS SHOWING THAT RESIDENTIAL WAS NOT ADVISED FOR THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THAT EXACT REASON.
I GUESS MY QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT, AND THEY CAN DECIDE WHO WANTS TO ANSWER THIS, UM, IS PRETTY SIMPLE.
DO, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING FROM THE STATE SAYING THAT THIS PROPERTY IS REMEDIATED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES? YEAH, YOU HAVE THE NOVEMBER 3RD LETTER, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE THIRD RESIDE.
YOU PULL OUT THE LETTER, PLEASE.
THAT, THAT DOES SAY THAT IT APPEARS THAT IT WAS, UH, UH, IT WAS GOING TO BE IN A, UH, RESIDENTIAL STANDARD WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
UH, I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THAT THE TC RECOMMENDED THAT AN UPDATED EFFECTIVE PROPERTY ASSESSMENT REPORT BE PROVIDED TO DETERMINE THE PATH FORWARD AND THE, UH, THE, THE RESPONSE ACTION THAT MAY ALLOW FOR THE CLOSURE OF THE SITE TO RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS.
AND THAT PROBABLY WOULD SIMPLY BE, UH, JUST MONITORING IT, SHOWING WHAT THE GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANT LEVELS ARE LIKE, UH, THE SOIL, THE CONCENTRATIONS THAT ARE PRESENT IN THE SOIL.
UH, SO IT, IT'S THIS, THIS WAS, THIS CAME FROM THEM.
THIS IS, UH, UH, NO, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IT, BUT IT'S SAYING THAT IF YOU PROVIDE US THE INFORMATION SAYING THAT IT MEETS THE STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL USE, THEN WE WILL GIVE YOU
[01:40:01]
APPROVAL FOR THAT.WE WILL REMOVE THIS RESTRICTION THAT, THAT'S HOW I'M READING THIS.
IT, IT SAYS THE APAR WILL PROVIDE INFORMATION TO DETERMINE THE PATH FORWARD.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE PATH FORWARD HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED, AND A RESPONSE ACTION THAT MAY ALLOW, MAY BEING THE KEYWORD ALLOW FOR CLOSURE OF THIS SITE TO RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS.
I HAVE A REALLY BIG PROBLEM WITH AN APPLICANT COMING BEFORE US SAYING, GIVE US RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE WE THINK THE T C Q IS EITHER WRONG MISINTERPRETING THEIR OWN REGULATIONS OR TRYING TO CONVINCE US THAT THEY'RE SAYING SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY NOT.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FROM T C Q THAT SAYS RESIDENTIAL CAN BE BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY? I, SIR.
I, I, I, I, THE ONLY THING I CAN POINT YOU TO IS THAT FIRST SENTENCE IN THAT THIRD PARAGRAPH, BASED ON ITS REVIEW OF THE DATA, THE T C Q NOTED THAT THE SITE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED TO A REMEDY STANDARD B COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL STANDARD.
THERE'S ONLY STANDARDS DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.
I'M SORRY, TT Q ACTUALLY REMOVING THAT RESTRICTION.
WELL, I THINK THEY GO IN THE, IN THE VERY BOTTOM OF IT, THEY SAID THAT THEY COULD, UH, A SUPERSEDING DEED NOTICE CAN BE FILED IN THE COUNTY REAL PROPERTY RECORDS TO REMOVE THE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL RESTRICTION.
IF, HAVE YOU, HAVE YOU SUBMITTED THE A PART AT T C Q? NO, SIR.
WHY NOT? TIMING? ACTUALLY, UH, THIS WAS A, UH, FACTOR THAT THE, THERE WAS SOMEONE ELSE INVOLVED IN THE PROPERTY AT ONE TIME THAT THEY WERE GONNA DO IT, AND THEN THEY BACKED OUT.
SO THIS WAS, THIS IS VERY NEW FOR ME AS FAR AS, UH, I MEAN, I DO IT, I DO AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY ASSESSMENT REPORTS.
THEY'RE LONG, THEY TAKE A LOT.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE, I I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT ON, ON YOUR PART, BUT THAT DOESN'T AFFECT OUR DECISION MAKING HERE IN THIS COMMISSION.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, IT, WE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THIS ZONING CASE WAS FILED, WHAT, A YEAR AGO.
SO, SO THAT MEANS THE APPLICANT HAS HAD OVER A YEAR TO SUBMIT AN APAR R TO ACTUALLY GET THIS RESTRICTION REMOVED.
OTHER THAN THIS LETTER FROM TCQ SAYING THAT THE APAR WILL PROVIDE INFORMATION, DETERMINE THE PATH FORWARD IN A RESPONSE ACTION THAT MAY ALLOW FOR CLOSURE OF THE SITE TO RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS.
I, I, I JUST, I JUST HAVE A PROBLEM WITH, WITH WHAT, WITH WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US HERE.
UM, I GUESS THAT MY LAST QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.
I RECALL THE PUD ZONING CASE FOR THE REST OF THIS EAST AUSTIN TANK FARM PROPERTY, AND DOESN'T, DIDN'T WE APPROVE A BUNCH OF RESTRICTIONS? USE RESTRICTIONS IN THAT PUD ZONING CASE THAT DID NOT ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL, UH, THAT PUD ZONING CASE, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH OF THIS, UH, THE MAIN LIMIT WAS ON THE HEIGHT, BUT THEY DID NOT REQUEST RESIDENTIAL LAND USES.
THEY DID NOT REQUEST THEM AND DID, THEY WERE NOT PERMITTED IN THE POD.
AND THEN MY, MY, SORRY, I, I LIED.
ONE MORE QUESTION IF I'VE GOT TIME.
UM, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ALREADY A ACCESS TO ONE OF THESE PARCELS, UM, AND MAYBE I'M WRONG ON THAT, BUT FROM THE AERIAL IMAGE, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THAT ALREADY EXISTS ON AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT DRIVEWAY REMAIN FOR THE USE OF THESE PROPERTY OWNERS, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S SOME SORT OF CO RESTRICTING ACCESS TO AIRPORT BOULEVARD?
YEAH, IF YOU GOT, SORRY, AN ANSWER.
UH, THE, WE ARE NOT PROPOSING AT, AT THIS TIME, DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS ARE NOT DETERMINED.
UM, I'M, I'M SORRY IF THAT WASN'T PART OF YOUR QUESTION.
UH, ONE TRACK DOES HAVE ACCESS OR FRONTAGE, UH, AND ACCESS TO AIRPORT AND THE OTHER DOESN'T.
I, I'M NOT SURE IF I WAS FOLLOWING THE QUESTION.
I'LL, I'LL, UH, I, I'M ASSUME I RAN OUT OF TIME, SO I'LL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO THE NEXT COMMISSIONER.
I, I'VE DONE A FEW CLEANUPS IN MY TIME.
UH, SO, UM, JUST ON THE APAR, COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT, UH, NA A IS AND WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO? UM, WHAT'S INVOLVED WITH THE NA A R? I THINK A LOT OF P FOLKS HERE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS, WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO.
AN EFFECTIVE PROPERTY ASSESSMENT
[01:45:01]
REPORT IS BASICALLY THE COMPLETE EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY IT LOOKS AT.SO, UH, PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY, LOOKS AT THE BUILDING, AT THE PROPERTY USAGE, LOOKS AT THE, WHAT'S AROUND IT, IT LOOKS AT SOIL CONTAMINANTS.
WHAT'S THE, AND THEY BREAK IT UP INTO, DEPENDING IF IT'S A COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL OR A RESIDENTIAL, YOU HAVE DEPTH LEVELS THAT YOU HAVE TO DO INVESTIGATIONS.
YOU LOOK AT GROUNDWATER, YOU LOOK, IS IT GROUNDWATER AFFECTED? IS IT IMPACTED, UH, WHAT'S THE GROUNDWATER USAGE IN THE AREA? UH, THERE'S EVEN, UH, VAPOR, YOU LOOK AT VAPORS ON THE PROPERTY THAT, THAT MAY OR MAY NOT EXIST, BUT IT IS A VERY COMPLETE EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY AND EVERYTHING AROUND IT.
AND THE STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL, I THINK THEY COME ABOUT CUZ THEY ASSUME YOU'RE GONNA HAVE, UH, MAYBE YOUNG, UH, PEOPLE, UH, EXPOSED TO THE SOIL AND CUZ THEY DO PLAY OUTSIDE.
SO I THINK THAT COME SOME OF THEIR LEVELS OF THAT THEY ESTABLISH ARE BASED ON THAT KIND OF EXPOSURE.
SO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS LIMITS THAT ARE PROTECTIVE OF A RESIDENTIAL KIND OF ENVIRONMENT WHERE YOU HAVE KIDS PLAYING IN THE YARD AND, AND EXPOSED TO, UH, CERTAIN LEVELS OF SOIL CONTAMINATION THAT THEY HAVE DEEMED SAFE.
IS THAT CORRECT? HOW THEY PERFECTLY SAID HOW THOSE LEVELS OKAY.
AND WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE SOIL LEVELS, THE GROUNDWATER RESTRICTIONS.
YOU'RE NOT, THAT'S NOT, NOBODY'S CONTEMPLATING CHANGING THE GROUNDWATER RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS OR THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
I MEAN, THE, THE, THE GROUNDWATER, WELL, FIRST OFF, THE GROUNDWATER'S NOT USED IN THE AREA.
UH, AND, UH, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO DO IN THE APAR.
YOU HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS DRILLED WATER WELLS IN THE AREA, OR IS THERE, I MEAN, THAT WHOLE AREA IS SERVED BY PUBLIC WATER.
SO, UH, THE, THE, THE RESTRICTING OF THE GROUNDWATER USAGE IS AN EASY ONE OUT THERE.
AND SO THIS, UM, I GUESS IF WE WERE TO GRANT THIS, WHAT I'M, I'M TRYING TO PLAY OUT, OKAY.
IF WE GIVE YOU THE ZONING THAT IN ALLOWS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND YOU PROCEED ON, AT WHAT POINT DO YOU HAVE TO, I MEAN, UH, WHAT KIND OF RISKS DOES THE CITY HAVE, UM, IF WE'RE GRANTING THIS ZONING AND IT'S KIND OF RUNS AGAINST WHAT THE STATE HAS ALLOWED IN THIS? UH, I'M, I'M TRYING TO, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A QUESTION FOR YOU OR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT REP.
I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF THE RISK TO THE CITY OF US GRANTING A RESIDENTIAL WHEN THE STATE HAS PROHIBITED IT.
IS THERE ANY RISK TO ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS AT I JUST, I, I, I DON'T BELIEVE SOIL WAS THE PROBLEM BACK IN THE, UH, IN THE DAY THEY EXCAVATED ALL THE, THE, UH, DIRT THAT WAS HEAVILY IMPACTED, THAT WAS UNDERNEATH THE TANKS OR THE LOADING.
I THINK IT'S MORE OF A ZONING QUESTION IF YOU COULD, UH, IT'S JUST A RISK TO THE CITY OF US ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL USE WHEN THERE'S A PROHIBITION AGAINST THAT.
IS THERE ANY RISK WITH, UH, REN A FILE AT THE STATE? UH, THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO, UH, COMPLY WITH STATE OR THE CITY OF AUSTIN COMPLIES WITH STATE LAW.
IF BY ANY CHANCE, UH, THIS ISSUE WITH THE REMEDIATION WASN'T IDENTIFIED AND A PROPOSAL WENT FORWARD WITH RESIDENTIAL, THERE, THERE COULD BE PROBLEMS. BUT THAT'S ALL JUST POSSIBLE.
AND THEN THE CITY IS, CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR, UH, INCORPORATING THAT.
AND SO WITHOUT, UH, HAVEN'T CONTACTED THE LAW DEPARTMENT ON THIS SPECIFIC QUESTION.
BUT, UH, IT APPEARS THAT IT COULD BE AN ISSUE.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND THEN COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
I, I, I THINK WE'RE KIND OF LUCKY IN AUSTIN THAT WE DON'T DEAL WITH A LOT OF REMEDIATION CASES AND WE DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, THAT INDUSTRIAL BACKGROUND THAT A LOT OF OTHER CITIES DO HAVE.
BUT THE PLACES WHERE I VISITED THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, HEAVY BROWNFIELD SITES 50, A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, THEY, A LOT OF THOSE SITES NOW DO HAVE RESIDENTS AND HOTELS ON THEM.
AND SO I'M CURIOUS, I MEAN, THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS A BROWNFIELD OFFICE, AND EVERYONE WHO'S BUILDING THESE LARGER RESIDENTIAL SITES HAS TO DO AN ESA.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS FOR STAFF OR APPLICANT, BUT I MEAN, IF, IF THERE WAS AN ESA, AN ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT DONE, THERE'S ALSO AN ESA TOO.
IF THERE'S THINGS THAT ARE FOUND, I MEAN, IF, IF THERE, IF THERE'S AN ESA THAT COMES BACK BAD, ARE WE STILL ALLOWED TO BUILD RESIDENTIAL THERE? OR IF THE E ESA COMES BACK AND IT SAYS IT'S CONTAMINATED, IT'S BAD, WHAT HAPPENS? UM, HEATHER CHAFFIN HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SINCE WE ARE AT THE ZONING STAGE,
[01:50:01]
UH, ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT HASN'T BEEN DONE.SO WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH, UH, SUPPORTING RESIDENTIAL ON THIS SITE.
THE HISTORY OF THE AREA IS, IS ONE OF THE MAJOR THINGS THAT'S HAPPENED IN THE LAST FEW DECADES HERE IN AUSTIN.
AND I THINK IT'S WITH AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION TO WAIT UNTIL THE PROPER STUDIES AND ANALYSES HAVE BEEN DONE FOR ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL VIA ZONING TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL.
I GUESS I WOULD JUST HATE TO SEE THE LEGACY OF SOMETHING THAT WAS BAD, MEAN THAT PEOPLE CAN'T LIVE HERE.
I, I, I HOPE EVERYONE ON, ON THE STATUS KNOWS THIS INTERSECTION, EVERYTHING THAT'S HAPPENING AROUND THERE, A LOT OF ENERGY.
IS THE APPLICANT THERE, CAN THE APPLICANT SPEAK TO KIND OF WHAT ARE NEXT STEPS IN, ARE YOU ALL THINKING ABOUT AN ESA OR IS THAT JUST THE COST YOU DON'T WANNA MESS WITH WHILE STILL DEALING WITH ZONING? UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UH, ESAS ARE USUALLY DONE AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
SO, UM, THE, UM, AT LEAST IN CASES THAT I'VE BEEN HELP INVOLVED IN AT THE TIME OF CY PLAN, UM, THAT, UH, THAT IS DONE AT THE, AT, AT THE TIME THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF GET TO REVIEW THAT.
AND, UM, IN THIS CASE, UH, WHEN THE CY PLAN GOES IN, WHETHER IT'S FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OR, OR RESIDENTIAL, IF, YOU KNOW, ONCE THAT IS RESOLVED, WE KNOW THAT, UH, WE STILL HAVE TO GET, YOU KNOW, T C Q CLEARANCE LETTER.
AND THERE'S ALSO A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON THE PROPERTY THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE BY CHEVRON THAT, UH, THEY ALSO PROHIBIT ALL THE RESIDENTIAL USES AND ANYTHING THAT IS HABITABLE FOR, FOR RESIDENTIAL.
SO THEY ALSO HAVE TO AGREE TO AMEND THAT COVENANT.
SO IT'S NOT A MATTER OF JUST, UM, UH, JUST GOING OUT THERE AND, AND SUBMITTING AND BUILDING RESIDENTIAL.
THE, UM, THE FIRST LETTER THAT WAS ISSUED IN 2007, THE WATERSHED PROTECTION STAFF, CHUCK SAXTON, WHO'S NOW, WHO LEFT THE CITY OF RETIRED, WAS COPIED IN THAT LETTER.
SO THE WATERSHED PROTECTION STAFF WERE COPIED ON THAT LETTER, UM, SINCE WE STILL HAVE TO SATISFY THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, ANOTHER, UH, OPTION WOULD BE TO TREAT IT LIKE, UM, WHAT, UM, CODE ENFORCEMENT DOES THAT WHEN THERE'S A CODE VIOLATION ON A SITE TO ENSURE THAT, UH, A CY IS NOT APPROVED FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THE, THE PROPERTY ADDRESSES CAN HAVE, UM, AT LEAST THE STAFF CAN, UH, ADD A NOTE TO THE, TO THE FILE FLAG IT THAT A CY PLAN SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT UNTIL, UM, AN A LETTER FROM T C Q A FINAL LETTER STATING THAT RESIDENTIALS PERMITTED IS ISSUED, UH, THAT INFORMATION IS THE CODE ENFORCEMENT TAGS PROPERTIES THAT WAY.
SO, YOU KNOW, THEY CANNOT GET A PERMIT WHEN YOU SUBMIT A SITE PLAN NOW THAT YOU HAVE TO DO THE, UH, STREET IMPACT FEE, THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
THEY ALSO TAG THAT ON, ON YOUR PROPERTY THAT YOU CANNOT GET BUILDING PERMITS UNTIL YOU PUT YOUR PARKLAND CERTIFICATION FEES, UNTIL YOU PAY YOUR, UM, UH, ASM P FEES.
SO THERE'S A WAY TO FLAG IT SO THAT NOTHING GETS APPROVED IN ANY FURTHER UNTIL YOU GET THOSE, UM, APPROVALS IN PLACE.
SO EVERYBODY CAN SEE THAT AT ANY TIME, AND THERE ISN'T, YOU'RE NOT NOT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ANY COVENANTS OR DOCUMENTS TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
SO THAT'S JUST A SUGGESTION TO CONSIDER.
AND BY THE WAY, UH, COUNCIL, UH, COMMISSIONER COX ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT ACCESS.
SO THE TRACT HAS A SEPARATED, THERE ARE TWO CASES BECAUSE, UH, THEY ARE SEPARATED BY A FLAG LOT.
SO THEY DON'T, THEY DON'T TOUCH EACH OTHER.
AND FOR THAT REASON, THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH HAS A DRIVEWAY THAT IS USED CURRENTLY FOR THE EXISTING FACILITIES, THE TRIANGLE PIECE OF THE SOUTH, BECAUSE OF THAT FLAG LOT THAT GOES TO SPRINGDALE PU, THAT'S THEIR DRIVEWAY.
SO THAT TRIANGLE BY ITSELF NEEDS TO HAVE ACCESS.
OTHERWISE IT'S, IT HAS NO ACCESS.
THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE, UH, THE AMENDMENT.
BECAUSE ORIGINALLY WHEN THE COUNCIL, SORRY, I NEED TO GO, WE NEED TO GO AND WRAP IT UP.
AND COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AND THEY CAN FOLLOW UP IF THEY WANT MORE INFORMATION ON THE DRIVEWAY.
MS. GLASGOW, I JUST NEED TO MOVE ON.
I, I HAVE A QUESTION AS FOR STAFF.
UM, AND, AND IT'S JUST SO A, AROUND THE CORNER FROM MY HOUSE, THERE'S SORT OF A, WHAT USED TO BE A GAS STATION AND, AND IT'S LIKE A LOT OF THE CORNERS AROUND TOWN THAT HAS SORT OF THE OLD FORM OF A GAS STATION, BUT THERE AREN'T ANY PUMPS OUT THERE ANYMORE.
AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE TURNED INTO TACO STANDS OR, OR CONVENIENCE STORES WITHOUT GAS, ET CETERA.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT A LOT OF THOSE PUMPS WERE REMOVED IN THE NINETIES BECAUSE THE UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS DID NOT, YOU KNOW, MEET CODE
[01:55:01]
WHEN THAT WAS CHANGED.AND SO A LOT OF THAT LAND HAS, YOU KNOW, THAT THE SAME SORT OF CONTAMINANTS AS, AS THE TANK FARM LAND DOES TOO.
SO IF SOMEONE, YET THAT LAND IS ZONED MU THAT THAT OLD GAS STATION, YOU KNOW, AROUND MY HOUSE IS ZONED MU, IF SOMEONE WERE TO START DEVELOPING THAT LAND AND THEY WERE DIGGING UP AND THEY HID AN OLD GAS TANK, WHAT, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS? UM, FIRST TO SPEAK TO, UH, COMPARING DIFFERENT SITES AROUND THE CITY.
UM, EACH SITE IS, UH, THE QUESTION, I'M SORRY.
THE, THE QUESTION WAS, WHAT HAPPENS IF SOMEONE FINDS A GAS TANK? THEN I, I DON'T KNOW.
I'M, I'M NOT AT THE SITE PLAN, UH, END OF THINGS AS FAR AS, I USED TO WORK WITH A GUY WHO'S IN CHARGE OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS, BUT, UH, I HAVEN'T WORKED ON IT IN A LONG TIME.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU WOULD GET A, A RED TAG OR, OR SOMETHING HAVING TO CEASE.
UM, HOPEFULLY THE SITE HAS ALREADY BEEN REMEDIATED.
UM, I, I, I DOUBT IT HAS, I MEAN, CUZ IT'S BEEN THERE FOR YEARS AND, AND NOTHING'S REALLY SORT OF DEVELOPED ON IT.
SO, UM, IF, IF, AND IF IT GETS RED TAGGED LIKE THAT, I GUESS THAT'S THE PROCESS MS. GLASGOW WAS TALKING ABOUT.
I MEAN, LIKE, I CAN'T STOP DEVELOPMENT ON IT AND THEN 10 YEARS LATER TRY TO DEVELOP AGAIN AND, AND PEOPLE HAVE SORT OF FORGOTTEN ABOUT THAT GAS TANK AND MAYBE I CAN BUILD SOMETHING ELSE THERE.
IS THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, THE RED TAG GOES WITH THE, UH, PERMITS.
I GUESS SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO BE FILING A NEW CASE AND POSSIBLY ENCOUNTER THE SAME ISSUE AGAIN.
SO THE RED TAG GOES WITH THE SITE PLAN.
WITH THE SITE PLAN STAGE AND THEY COULD, UH, WORK TO REMEDY THAT, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS THROUGH A SITE PLAN, UH, CORRECTION.
BUT IF YOU DON'T REMEDY, IT JUST STAYS THERE AND YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T DO ANY WORK.
TO MY KNOWLEDGE, YES, BUT I'M, I'M NOT SPEAKING OF MY AREA OF EXPERTISE.
UM, THAT, THAT, THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
WE HAD, UH, I THINK I SAW COMMISSIONER MOOCH TYLER'S HAND.
DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO GO? UM, GO AHEAD.
UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. TERRY.
DO YOU HAVE A MEASUREMENT OF THE CURRENT BENZENE CONCENTRATION LEVELS IN THE SOIL? YES, MA'AM.
WHAT IS IT? UH, DON'T HAVE THE PART PER MILLION LAB REPORTS WITH ME, BUT I DID IN THE LAST, UH, PROBABLY WITHIN SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR BACK, I'D PUT THREE HOLES OUT THERE.
WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN CHEVRON, UH, WHEN THEY PUT THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON THE PROPERTY, THEY HAD A BASICALLY A SAUSAGE SHAPED THING THAT THEY CALLED THE, UM, IT'S A, BASICALLY WHERE THE LEVELS EXCEEDED THE STATE LEVEL.
SO WHAT I DID, I WENT BACK AND PUT THREE HOLES IN THERE AND THE NUMBERS WERE GREATLY REDUCED THAN WHAT THEY WERE BACK IN THE A PART TIME.
AND THAT'S WHERE I SAID THAT HYDROCARBONS DO GET BETTER OVER TIME.
UM, IS THERE ANY COMMISSIONER WHO WOULD CONSIDER A POSTPONEMENT ON THIS? MAYBE FOR SOME MORE PUBLIC INPUT AND FROM SOMEONE MORE INVOLVED WITH THE ENVIRONMENT WHO MIGHT BE ABLE TO ELABORATE ON THIS A LITTLE BIT? BECAUSE I FIND IT VERY DISCONCERTING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REZONING A PLACE FOR RESIDENTIAL THAT TRADITIONALLY, UH, CREATED A LOT OF, OF SOCIAL DISTRESS, UH, FOR, UH, CERTAIN FOLKS AND MAYBE A LOWER SOCIOECONOMIC CLASS.
AND I, ONE, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T GET A VOTE, DON'T WANNA BE PART OF MAKING ANY CHANGE TO THAT UNLESS EVERYONE IN THE AREA IS OKAY WITH IT.
I, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
YOU CAN, BUT, UM, IT WAS AIMED AT THE COMMISSION.
IF, WHEN YOU'RE DISCUSSING THIS, UM, IF WE COULD GET A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION IF YOU'RE REQUESTING WATERSHED PROTECTION STAFF OR ANY GUIDANCE YOU CAN GIVE ON THAT.
CHAIR, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, HAVING ANY BIG ISSUES WITH US POSTPONING THIS TO FEBRUARY 28TH? IT'S TWO MEETINGS FROM NOW.
NO, WE DON'T, THAT WOULD BE PERFECTLY OKAY.
[02:00:02]
POSTPONED WHEN IT'S SIGNED FOR A MOTION, I'D LOVE TO MAKE THAT MOTION UNLESS SOMEONE ELSE WANTS TO MAKE IT FOR FURTHER OUT.UH, YES, LET'S GO AHEAD AND WE HAVE ANY, WE HAVE ONE MORE SPOT.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS, UH, RELATED TO THIS? UM, NOW THAT WE'RE KIND OF TAKING A CERTAIN TACT, THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS CHAIR, UH, GO AHEAD.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK, UH, IF WE, DO YOU END UP POSTPONING WHEN YOU COME BACK, IF YOU COULD BRING THAT PARTS PER MILLION.
LET ME KNOW HOW MUCH THAT TAKES.
AND THEN COMMISSIONER MUSH TELLER, YOU PASSED.
SO COMMISSIONER MUSH TELLER, AND THEN COMMISSIONER SHAY, AND THEN WE'RE DONE.
SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, OUR WISHLIST THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO GET FROM THE APPLICANT FOR US TO REALLY REVIEW THIS.
I MEAN, LIKE, EVEN IF THEY CAME BACK WITH SCIENTIFIC DATA, I DID THIS BORING, I FIGURED THIS, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT THE ONE TO FINALLY SAY, OH, OKAY, WE'LL TAKE THAT DATA.
I MEAN, WE'RE NOT THE ONE TO, TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT FINAL SAY, WHETHER IT'S APPROVED OR NOT.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF A CERTAIN LETTER IS REQUIRED AND IF TCEQ IS THE ONE THAT NEEDS TO GET IT, HOW LONG IS IT GONNA TAKE FOR YOU TO GET THAT? YOU KNOW, AND WILL YOU BE ABLE TO GET THAT OR CAN YOU GET SOMETHING TO BACK UP WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US? SO I JUST DON'T WANT TO END UP IN THE SAME PLACE AS WE ARE TODAY, UH, WITHOUT WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, LETTERS OF APPROVAL OR INSIGHT, YOU KNOW, UM, THAT WE NEEDED.
SO JUST THINK ABOUT THAT CUZ I JUST DON'T WANNA HAVE TO DO THIS HERE.
UH, SOMEBODY HAVE A MOTION? OH, COMMISSIONER MOOCH.
TYLER, DO YOU WANNA FINISH THIS? DO YOU HAVE A MOTION OR DO YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION? OKAY, GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION.
I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, SORRY,
UM, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO SUPPORT, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND STAFF RECOMMENDATION? I AM GONNA SECOND THAT MOTION CHAIR.
AND RIVERA, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THAT'S ON ITEM SIX AND SEVEN, CORRECT? YES.
AND, UH, THIS IS FOR CS N P ON CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER MOOCH TYLER'S MOTION.
AND DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? COMMISSIONER MO TYLER? UM, I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT MS. CHAFFIN AND OUR, OUR TEAM, OUR CITY FOLKS HAVE PUT INTO THIS.
UM, NUMBER ONE, WE HAVE TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH.
AND SO EVEN THOUGH WE'RE LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND HOUSING, WE REALLY, WE REALLY NEED TO DO THAT SAFELY.
I THINK IF, IF THEY WANNA COME BACK AND, AND GET THE MU THEN WE NEED THE DATA.
I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GONNA HAVE IT IN A MONTH.
YOU NEED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS OUT THERE.
YOU NEED PUBLIC HEALTH PEOPLE, YOU NEED TCEQ.
SO THAT'S GONNA TAKE 'EM A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME.
THEY REALLY GOT THE CART IN FRONT OF THE HORSE HERE.
I'D LIKE TO SEE IT HAPPEN, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE IT HAPPEN SAFELY.
SO I THINK STAFF'S DONE THE RIGHT THING.
COMMISSIONER COX'S HAND WAS UP FIRST AND, UH, PREVIOUSLY COMMISSIONER COX, I, I GOING THE DIRECTION THAT PROBABLY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON'S GOING, BUT A LITTLE FURTHER, I WAS GONNA MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE POSTPONED THIS TO THE MARCH 28TH MEETING, MARCH 28TH.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND FOR MARCH 28TH? SO, SURE, SURE.
UM, HAVE WE GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSION, SHAY? ALL RIGHT, GO AHEAD AND SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION.
I THINK THIS IS, THIS IS CART BEFORE THE HORSE.
UM, THE, THE, THE BACKUP, THE LATE BACKUP THAT WE GOT IS USEFUL AND IT PROVIDES A VERY CLEAR DIRECTION OF HOW TO GET T C Q TO REMOVE THE RESTRICTION OF JUST COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USE ON THIS SITE.
SO I AGREE WITH, I THINK COMMISSIONER MOOCH TALLER, UM, I DON'T SEE T C TCQ DOING ANYTHING WITHIN 30 DAYS.
UH, SO THE MARCH 28TH DATE JUST GIVES THE APPLICANT ENOUGH TIME TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT THE T C Q IS LAID OUT, GET THEIR APPROVAL TO, UM, HAVE RESIDENTIAL ON THIS SITE, AND THEN COME BACK TO US AND WE CAN CONSIDER RESIDENTIAL ON THIS SITE.
UM, IT'S, IT'S AS SIMPLE AS YOU.
I THINK STEPH HAS SOME, UH, GO AHEAD, STEPH.
UH, WE CANNOT POSTPONE IT THAT FAR OUT.
WE COULD POSTPONE IT TO THE LATEST, UH, MARCH 14TH.
I'LL, I'LL, I'LL AMEND MY AMENDMENT TO MARCH 14TH.
[02:05:02]
WELL, IT'S A, IT'S NOW THE, UH, YOU THEN SECOND IT, SO IT BELONGS TO THESO I GUESS, UM, CHAIR COMMISSION LADIES ON ANDREW RIVERA, IF THERE'S AN OBJECTION, THE, UM, MOVEMENT CAN, UH, WITHDRAW.
SO, AS MR. RIVERA SAID, UH, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND WITHDRAW THAT MO UH, SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
WITHDRAW THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION AND MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND LET'S, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, I'M GONNA RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UH, NEXT, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, YOU HAD A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
I MEAN, I, I'M FINE TO PUT OUT THERE AS WELL MARCH 14TH, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY ARE OKAY WITH THAT OR IF THERE'S ANY ISSUE IN THERE.
FOR YOU TO POSTPONE AS LONG AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN.
WHEN WE'RE NOT IN A HURRY, WE DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT.
THEY'RE NOT DEVELOPERS, SO IT'S OKAY TO POSTPONE FOR AS LONG AS NEEDED.
JUST TO KEEP THIS IN OR DO I HAVE A SECOND, FIRST OF ALL FOR THIS? OKAY.
IF COMMISSIONER COX AND MR. RIVERA JUST CLARIFICATION, WE WILL NEED TO, DO WE NEED TO RECONSIDER, UM, THE CLOSING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW, OR CAN WE DO THAT AFTER THIS PASSES? CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LAY ONAL.
YOU MAY WANT TO SEE IF THIS, UH, FIRST PASSES OTHER THAN IF THAT, UH, PASSES, THEN, UH, RECONSIDER.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COX TO, UH, POSTPONE THIS TO THREE 14.
UH, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? IT WOULD BE AMAZING IF THIS SITE WERE CLEAN ENOUGH AND, AND SAFE ENOUGH TO BUILD HOUSING THERE, BUT WE DEFINITELY DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION WE NEED IN FRONT OF US QUITE YET.
AND SO THE, WE ARE GIVING, GIVING THE APPLICANT TREMENDOUS MOTIVATION TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY NEED TO FIGURE OUT.
AND IT WOULD ALSO BE GREAT IF WE COULD HAVE WATERSHED AT THAT MEETING TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WE MAY HAVE FOR THEM.
UH, I'M GONNA SPEAK AGAINST THIS MOTION.
I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S GONNA JUST PUT THIS ON ANOTHER AGENDA AND JUST WHERE WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT OF CASES.
IT IS CLEAR TO ME,
WE'RE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE.
UM, THAT IS THE FIRST THING IS YOU HEARD THAT'S A VERY, THAT'S A YEAR PROCESS.
UH, I, IT IT'D PROBABLY TAKE A YEAR.
SO, UH, I THINK, UM, WITH THE HISTORY HERE, UH, YOU KNOW, PUTTING, ALLOWING KIDS TO PLAY AROUND ON THIS, UM, IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO EVEN BE SEEN IS EVEN GOING THAT DIRECTION AND PUTTING THE CITY AT THAT KIND OF RISK.
YOU HEARD FROM STAFF, UH, THIS CREATES COMPLEX, UH, COMPLICATIONS FOR THEM.
I JUST THINK THIS IS THE WRONG TIME FOR US TO GO DOWN THIS PATH AND WE NEED TO REALLY WAIT ON THE T C Q TO PROVIDE THAT LETTER AND THEN WE CAN GO FROM THERE.
SO I'M GONNA OPPOSE ANY, ANY MORE FURTHER WORK ON THIS.
ANY OF THOSE? SPEAKING IN FAVOR, UH, COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO, TO FOLLOW UP.
UM, I, I THINK I'VE MADE MY POSITION CLEAR ON WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
UM, AND SO MY HOPE IS THAT IF THE APPLICANT CANNOT MAKE THAT HAPPEN WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME THAT WE'RE PROVIDING THEM, THAT THEY WILL TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY THEMSELVES TO POSTPONE RATHER THAN TRYING TO GET THIS, GET US TO RECONSIDER THIS, UM, WITHOUT, WITHOUT PROPER T C Q APPROVALS IN WRITING.
SO I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE.
UM, AND MAYBE WE WON'T SEE IT FOR ANOTHER YEAR IF THAT'S THE CASE.
SO, BUT I'LL SUPPORT, UH, THE POSTPONEMENT TO GIVE THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.
COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER MOTO, I JUST DON'T LIKE THE, THE PRECEDENT OF GIVING THEM A SHORT WINDOW TO COME BACK.
UM, I THINK THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN CLEARED UP BEFORE IT EVER CAME IN.
IT'S, AND, AND THAT NEEDED TO BE HANDLED BEFORE ASKING FOR THIS REQUEST.
I DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE AND I DON'T WANNA SEE HIM BACK UNTIL IT'S TAKEN CARE OF.
SPEAKING IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER SHAY.
SO I THINK WE ALL AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID.
I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, I DEFINITELY DON'T WANT THEM BACK UNLESS THEY GOT SOMETHING TO SHOW US.
SO MAYBE THEY'LL CONSIDER, UM, GOING INDEFINITE POST MOMENT.
BUT, UM, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS WITH TCU Q WITH AS WELL AS OTHER, UM, ENTITIES.
AND THIS WOULD AT LEAST GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO GET SOMETHING BACK TO US.
[02:10:01]
AND IF THEY CAN'T, THEN YEAH, I HOPE THEY TAKE THE CHANCE TO TAKE AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT AND REALLY WORK ON IT.BUT, UM, IF THEY COME BACK AND IT'S, WE'RE JUST SPINNING AROUND IN CIRCLES, I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, ALL OF US ARE GONNA BE VERY HAPPY IF WE HAVE A LONG AGENDA.
SO ANYWAY, I'M GONNA SUPPORT IT.
ALL RIGHT, LAST, UH, SPOT HERE.
SPEAKING AGAINST, ALL RIGHT, NOT SEEING ANY HANDS.
UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS MOTION.
AND THIS IS THE POSTPONE UNTIL THREE 14 BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COX.
UH, THOSE IN FAVOR, SHOW ME YOUR, OKAY, THAT'S LOOKS LIKE GREEN THERE.
UH, OKAY, THAT'S AND THOSE AGAINST THIS MOTION.
ALL RIGHT, SO THAT'S TWO, THAT'S EIGHT TO TWO IS I GOT THAT RIGHT.
WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER TOLER AND HAW VOTING AGAINST THAT MOTION DOES PASS.
AND NOW WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND I'M GONNA PUT A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO, UH, RECONSIDER THE CLOSING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, AND DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT? UH, COMMISSIONER COX.
AND THE MOTION IS TO, UH, FOR RECONSIDERATION.
SO LET'S GO AND VOTE ON THE RECONSIDERATION OF THE CLOSING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THEN, UH, GOING, HEARING NO OBJECTIONS, WE'RE GONNA POSTPONE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE DATE OF MARCH 14TH.
UH, DO I HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER COX, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
OH WAIT, COMMISSIONER MUSH TOLER AGAINST.
SO THAT'S, UM, POSTPONING THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THREE 14.
THAT'S, UH, PASSES WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER MUSH TELLER VOTING AGAINST.
TOOK CARE OF ITEM SIX AND SEVEN.
[Items 8 & 9]
UH, ITEM EIGHT LEFT STAFF GIVE THEIR PRESENTATION.MARIE MEREDITH, HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2 9 0.0 1 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 76 0 1 AND 76 AND A HALF.
CAMERON ROAD IS WITHIN THE CORONA HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE LAND USE, AND IT IS SUPPORTED BY STAFF, UH, THE CORONA CORONADO HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM DID NOT SUBMIT A LETTER RECOMMENDATION, WE DO HAVE A LETTER FROM THE CORONADO HILLS CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS IN THE STAFF CASE REPORT.
GOOD EVENING, HEATHER CHAFFIN HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON CASE C 14 20 22 0 94.
THIS IS THE RELATED REZONING TO THE MPA THAT MAUREEN JUST DESCRIBED.
THE REQUEST IS TO GO FROM G R C O N P TO G R M U V C O N P.
THE PROPERTY IS AT 76 0 1 AND 76 0 1 AND A HALF CAMERON ROAD.
STAFF IS SUPPORTING THE REQUEST.
UH, THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT IS SHOWN ON PAGE ONE IS AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, AND THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO CONTINUE THAT FORWARD.
IT, UM, LAYS OUT SOME DETAILS FOR A 25 FOOT, UH, WIDE VEGETATIVE BUFFER ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE.
AGAIN, THIS IS ON THE, I GUESS I DIDN'T SAY THIS BEFORE.
THIS IS ON THE EAST SIDE OF CAMERON ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF THE EASTBOUND FRONTAGE ROAD OF ANDERSON ROAD, US 180 3 SOUTH OF THAT INTERSECTION.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.
IT PREVIOUSLY HAD A HOUSE, BUT THAT HAS BEEN, UH, DEMOLISHED.
THERE ARE SEVERAL TREES ON THE SOUTHERN AND EASTERN PORTION OF THE TRACK.
UH, AS I SAID, THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER BEING THE CO NORTH OF THE PROPERTY.
OUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, UH, ZONED SF FIVE, NP SF THREE NP AND R R N P.
THE R R N P ZONED AREA IS ADJACENT TO BETTER MILK BRANCH CREEK AND ENCOMPASSES THE CREEK BUFFERS AND HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAIN.
FURTHER NORTH AT THE INTERSECTION WITH
[02:15:01]
THE FRONTAGE ROAD IS CSN P ZONED LAND WITH A MIX OF COMMERCIAL USES, LIMITED RESTAURANT, LIMITED RETAIL AND GAS STATION.EAST OF THE PROPERTY IS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, CORONADO HILLS, WHICH IS ZONED SF THREE NP SOUTHWEST OF THE PROPERTY.
ALSO ALONG CAMERON ROAD ON THE EAST SIDE ARE G R N P PROPERTIES WITH A MIX OF OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USES TO THE WEST.
ACROSS CAMERON ROAD ARE PROPERTIES ZONED G R N P G R C O N P AND SF THREE NP THAT HAVE A DAYCARE AND SINGLE FAMILY USES.
ALSO TO THE WEST IS A PROPERTY ZONED MF THREE NP DEVELOPED WITH MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCES.
UM, THERE IS CORRESPONDENCE IN THE BACK, UH, RELATED TO THIS REZONING REQUEST AND I BELIEVE THERE ARE SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE.
STAFF SUPPORTS THE REZONING REQUEST WITH THE ADDITION OF THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY OR THE CONTINUATION OF THAT CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
CAMERON ROAD IS AN AS P TRANSIT PRIORITY NETWORK AND HAS SEVERAL CAPITAL METRO METRO BUS ROUTES.
IT'S ALSO AN IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR.
UH, THE ROAD IN THIS AREA HAS A MIX OF USES.
OFFICE COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL C S M U V C O ALLOWS A RANGE OF USES IN THE ADDITION OF THE V V M U ALLOWS FOR THE POSSIBILITY OF ADDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS TO THE AREA.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
AND COMMISSIONERS, UH, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WE ARE TAKING UP BOTH ITEMS. EIGHT, UH, WHICH IS PLANNED AMENDMENT AND THE ASSOCIATED ZONING, WHICH IS ITEM NINE.
THANK YOU CHAIR ARE HERE FROM THE APPLICANT.
UH, MS. LEAH BOZO, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I'M LEAH BOJO WITH JENNER GROUP HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
UM, TO ORIENT YOU TO THE SITE, UM, WE'RE LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF 180 3 ON THE EAST SIDE OF CAMERON ROAD AS HEATHER, AS HEATHER DESCRIBED IN THE ST.
JOHN'S CORONADO HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LOT IS CURRENTLY VACANT.
UM, IT DOES HAVE A, A LITTLE WALKING TRAIL ACROSS IT, UM, AND IT'S ABOUT 1.6 ACRES IN SIZE.
UM, CAMERON ROAD IS A FUTURE CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR, AND THOSE RED STARS ARE THE BUS STOPS THAT EXIST THERE TODAY.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS IS AN EXCELLENT, UH, LOCATION, UH, FOR TRANSIT.
WE'RE, WE'RE REQUESTING, AS HEATHER DESCRIBED, TO ADD RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE SITE VIA THE VMU OVERLAY.
UM, CURRENTLY ITS ZONE CR G C O N P WE'RE ASKING TO ADD VMU TO THE, TO THE ZONING, UM, MAINTAINING THE CO AND THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER AND CHANGING THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN FROM COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE.
UM, IN ADDITION TO, UM, MAINTAINING THE CO, UH, WE HAVE MET AND DISCUSSED THIS CASE SEVERAL TIMES WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.
I THINK THE FIRST MEETING WAS IN MAY, AND WE'VE AGREED, UM, PRETTY, PRETTY MUCH RIGHT OUTTA THE GATE WE AGREED TO PROVIDE AN EIGHT FOOT MASONRY WALL OR WHATEVER THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY CODE.
I BELIEVE THAT'S EIGHT FEET ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE.
AND WE'VE ALSO AGREED TO PROHIBIT VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE ROAD, UM, BEHIND, I THINK IT'S CALLED GLEN HILL ROAD.
UM, THAT IS NOT A ROAD THAT WE ACTUALLY TOUCH, UM, BUT IT WOULD PROHIBIT US FROM WORKING WITH A NEIGHBOR OR ANYBODY ELSE TO P TO PROVIDE A DRIVEWAY BACK THERE INTO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UH, TO THE EAST.
AND WE'RE HAPPY TO MAKE BOTH OF THOSE COMMITMENTS.
UM, I'LL JUST QUICKLY RUN THROUGH.
THERE ARE A SERIES OF GOALS LAID OUT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN THAT I WOULD SAY SUPPORT THIS CASE.
THINGS LIKE USING VEGETATIVE BUFFERS, PROVIDING TRANSITIONS BETWEEN SINGLE FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS, UM, AND FOCUSING ON, UM, WALKING CONDIT CONDITIONS AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
AND WE ALSO FOUND SOME, OF COURSE, SOME GOALS Y'ALL HAVE HEARD BEFORE IN THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN ABOUT, UM, ENSURING A MIX OF USES ENSURING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND INFILL REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES.
UM, SO WITH THAT, I'LL CLOSE AND REQUEST YOUR RECOMMENDATION IN FAVOR OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO ADD THE VMU OVERLAY OVERLAY TO THIS SITE.
PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'LL BEGIN BY HEARING, UM, FROM, UM, MR. ROB HALVERSON.
MR. HALVERSON, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
UM, I'VE RESIDED AT, UH, 7,600 CAMERON ROAD, UH, FOR, UH, 20 YEARS AND RAISED MY FAMILY IN THAT HOME.
IT'S ZONED, UH, SF THREE NP, AND IT'S LOCATED DIRECTLY ACROSS CAMERON ROAD FROM 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD, WHICH IS BEING CONSIDERED FOR
[02:20:01]
THIS REZONING.UM, WE FEEL THE STRETCH OF CAMERON ROAD IS NOT SUITABLE FOR REZONING TO MULTI-USE.
UM, WITHOUT AN IN-DEPTH TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND A PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY STUDY, IT'S A CRUCIAL MISTAKE TO WAIVE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS DURING THE CONSIDERATION TO PROCESS THIS REZONING.
UH, SINCE 2011, WE'VE DOCUMENTED 11 TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS, AND THESE ARE THE ONES THAT WE'VE PERSONALLY WITNESSED INVOLVING SPEEDING CARS OVERTAKING A SIDEWALK AT 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD.
UM, AT LEAST THREE OF THESE INCIDENTS HAVE RESULTED IN THE DEATH OF A PASSENGER OR A PEDESTRIAN KILLED ON THAT SIDEWALK BY A VEHICLE IN SEPTEMBER OF 2015.
ALSO, PEDESTRIAN WAS HIT AND CRITICALLY INJURED ON THAT SIDEWALK BY A SPEEDING VEHICLE IN OCTOBER OF 2014.
IN 2016, WE CONTACTED THE AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AND THEY CHANGED A SPEED LIMIT SIGN NEARBY.
UM, EVEN CONSIDERING THOSE CHANGES, UNCONTROLLED SPEEDING IS STILL VERY MUCH PRESENT AT 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD, AS DEMONSTRATED MOST RECENTLY BY AN AUTOMOBILE THAT LEFT THE ROAD AT HIGH SPEED JUST THREE MONTHS AGO AND CLIPPED THE TELEPHONE POLE OF SEVENTY SIX OH ONE CAMERON ROAD, BREAKING IN, IN HALF AND PULLING DOWN COMMUNICATION WIRES IN OUR AREA FOR NUMEROUS DAYS.
UH, REZONING 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD TO MALTA USE PRETTY MUCH BY DEFINITION WOULD INTRODUCE EXPONENTIALLY MORE PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY AND TRAFFIC ACCESS POINTS IN THIS IMMEDIATE AREA.
PRESENTLY, THE NEAREST CROSSWALKS IN USE ARE 1100 FEET AWAY AT CAMERON AND MCKEE DRIVE AND, UH, AS, UH, WAS PREVIOUSLY STATED ABOUT 500 AND FEET, 580 FEET AWAY AT CAMERON AND 180 3 FRONTAGE, WHICH ACCORDING TO VISION ZERO WEBSITE, HAS HAD EIGHT ACCIDENTS INVOLVING PEDESTRIANS WITH TWO DEATHS IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS.
REGARDING THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, CURRENTLY, IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO CROSS THE SIX LANES OF CAMERON ROAD AT 76 0 1 ON FOOT WITHOUT BREAKING INTO A VERY STRATEGIC JOG.
THIS SITUATION WOULD PROHIBIT THE ABILITY OF ANY PEDESTRIAN TENANT OF 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD TO SAFELY GET ACCESS TO THE AUSTIN METRO LINE DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET WITHOUT PUTTING THEIR LIFE IN PERIL.
UH, ADDING 23 APARTMENT UNITS IN ADDITION TO A BOTTOM FLOOR BUSINESS.
AND THAT SPECIFIC STRIP OF SUPER DANGEROUS TRAFFIC WILL REQUIRE A SERIOUS LOOK AT HOW REALISTIC IT IS TO BE, TO CONTROL A TRAFFIC SPEED AND THAT STRETCH OF ROAD, WHICH SO FAR HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO BE CONTROLLED.
SO I FEEL WE SHOULD NOT ACCEPT EVEN ONE MORE FATALITY OR CRITICAL INJURY IN THIS AREA DUE TO AN INCOMPLETE OR RUSHED REVIEW PROCESS TO REZONE 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. ANN GRIMES AND MS. GRIMES SELECT STAR SIX.
UM, MY NAME IS ANNA GRIMES AND I LIVE AT 76 12 BARCELONA COVE, WHICH BORDERS THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE LOT AT 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD.
UM, THE RECOMMENDATION BY CITY STAFF TO CHANGE THE ZONING OF 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD APPEARS TO BE BASED ON THE LOCATION OF IT BEING ON A CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR AND ITS PROXIMITY TO OTHER SIMILAR, SIMILARLY ZONED PROPERTIES.
WE SHARE MR. HALVERSONS CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ON CAL ON CAMERON ROAD.
HOWEVER, WE ALSO AGREE THAT THE WESTERN HALF OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD FIT WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
OUR CONCERN IS IN ADDITION TO THE TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS, THE EASTERN HALF OF THE PROPERTY AT 76 0 1 CAMERON ROAD, THAT'S CURRENTLY COVERED BY TWO HERITAGE LIVE OAK TREES AND OTHER MATURE TREES.
AND IT IS A NATURAL HABITAT THAT IS PART OF THE BUTTERMILK CREEK WATERSHED.
THE TREE CANOPY OF THIS LOT IS VERY VISIBLE ON GOOGLE MAPS IF YOU LOOK AT THE SATELLITE VIEW.
AND ADDITIONALLY, WE SPOKE TO A TREE SURVEYOR WHO WAS AT THE PROPERTY EARLY LAST YEAR, TAGGING TREES OVER EIGHT INCHES IN DIAMETER.
AND MANY OF THE TREES ON THE PROPERTY ARE
[02:25:01]
CURRENTLY TAGGED.WE HAVE TWO HERITAGE LIVE OAKS ON OUR PROPERTY THAT LIKELY SHARE A ROOT SYSTEM WITH THE TREES ON THE NEIGHBORING LOT.
UM, IN ADDITION, THIS PAST DECEMBER, I ATTENDED A MEETING HELD BY THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BUTTERMILK CREEK RESTORATION THAT THEY'RE PLANNING IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS AND WILL COST THE CITY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
MANY OF THE RESIDENTS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHO LIVE ALONG BUTTERMILK CREEK HAVE EXPERIENCED EROSION FLOODING IN THE BUILDUP OF DISCARDED YOUTH SINGLE-USE PLASTICS ON THEIR PROPERTIES.
UM, ACCORDING TO THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT, THEY CAN ONLY FIX THESE PROBLEMS AS THEY ARISE AND ARE NOT REALLY ABLE TO PLAN FOR FUTURE ISSUES ALONG THAT CREEK.
SO MANY OF THESE ISSUES THAT ARE HAPPENING NOW ARE HAPPENING BECAUSE OF THE OVERUSE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND UPSTREAM BUTTERMILK CREEK SIMPLY CANNOT HANDLE THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT IS CURRENTLY FLOWING THROUGH IT.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS LAND SUPPORT MUCH NEEDED HOUSING FOR AUSTIN RESIDENTS AND REMAIN ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE.
THE CORONADO NEIGHBORHOOD HILLS PLAN HAS, UH, OBJECTIVE P EIGHT AND P NINE STATING THE INTENT TO PROTECT AND MAINTAIN THE CURRENT TREE CAN P IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND THOSE, UH, STANDARDS ARE NOT LISTED FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATION FOR REZONING.
I'VE PREVIOUSLY EXPRESSED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND TO THE LANDOWNER'S REPRESENTATIVES IN WRITING THAT I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS ZONING CHANGE IF ADDITIONAL VEGETATIVE BORDER WERE TO BE ADDED ALONG THE EASTERN HALF OF THIS LOT WHERE THE HERITAGE TREES ARE, UM, IN THE RANGE OF A HUNDRED FEET APPROXIMATELY FROM THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINES, OR A LARGER CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT PROTECTS THE FORESTED AREA.
KEEPING THE SOME OF THIS LAND IN A NATURAL STATE WITH LIMITS ON IMPERVIOUS COVER HAS THE POTENTIAL BENEFIT TO THE CITY BY REDUCING RUNOFFS AND THE FUTURE NEED TO SPEND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO REHABILITATE CREEKS AND STREAMS. IT ALSO SERVES A MUCH NEEDED GREEN SPACE ALONG THIS CORRIDOR TO REDUCE AIR POLLUTION FROM THE HIGHWAYS, THE URBAN HEAT CORE, AND PROVIDE MUCH NEEDED SHADE.
I APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION TO THE, UH, CONSIDERATION, UM, AND THANK YOU FOR THE TIME TO SPEAK TO YOU.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. CHERYL THOMPSON.
MS. THOMPSON, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UH, I'M CHERYL THOMPSON AND I AM THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND, UM, BASICALLY I WANNA SAY THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT HAS, UH, PRETTY MUCH CHERRY PICKED, UM, KIND OF THE, OUR MPA, UM, UH, TO MAKE IT BE THEIR, MEET THEIR GOALS, UH, KIND OF LIKE GOING THROUGH A BUFFET AT GOLDEN CORRAL.
AND I WANNA ALSO POINT OUT THAT ON PAGES FOUR AND FIVE, THE IMAGINE AUSTIN, THAT SOME OF THOSE YESES ARE REALLY NOT SAFE.
IT REALLY IS NOT AN EXCELLENT LOCATION, UH, BECAUSE THESE ARE NOT SAFE.
THERE ARE NONE OF THE BONUSES.
THEY TALK ABOUT THE PARKS BEING 0.8.
THAT'S NOT LINEAR, THAT'S NOT A, A TRUE, THAT'S A LINEAR DISTANCE.
THE WATER, UH, WA WATER AND WASTEWATER IN BUTTERMILK CREEK, JUST AS MY NEIGHBOR HAS MENTIONED, IS ALREADY IN JEOPARDY.
AND THIS INCREASED, UM, UH, DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WOULD, UH, INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND INCREASE, UH, EROSION.
IF YOU NOTICE ON PAGE 17 OF THE PACKET, THE TABLE THERE ADDRESSES THE FACT THAT WE ARE CONCERNED WITH HUMAN PROTECTION.
WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT FLOODING AND STORM WATER, THE EROSION OF BUTTERMILK CREEK, THE HERITAGE OF THE VEGETATION.
IT'S THE ONLY PARK THAT OUR HOMES HAVE IN THAT AREA.
WE'RE THE ONLY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DOES NOT HAVE ANY PARKS WHATSOEVER.
AND THEN WE NOTICE THAT IF YOU GO INTO THEIR ZONING PACKAGE ON PAGE FOUR, UM, WE TOTALLY OPPOSE THESE FEE IN LIEU.
THE DEVELOPER HAS VERY DEEP POCKETS TO PAY THEIR WAY, AND WE TOTALLY OBJECT TO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S JUST NOT RIGHT FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO PAY THEIR WAY TO DESTROY OUR AREA.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL PORTION, NUMBER FIVE AND NUMBER SIX, TALKS ABOUT THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL.
WE INSIST THAT THAT NOT BE, UH, UH, PAY IN LIEU.
UH, THEY DO NEED TO HAVE WATER CONTROLS THERE.
THE PARKS AND RECS, LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT, THE, YOU KNOW, THEY TALK ABOUT PARK INVESTMENT AND USING THEIR MONEY TO PERHAPS, UH, LOCATE, UH, OTHER AREAS.
THAT IS THE ONLY AREA THAT WE HAVE, UH, THAT OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE THAT, UM, PROVIDES THE SHADE AS MY NEIGHBOR TALKED ABOUT.
NOTICE IT ON PAGE, UM, 52, THE KEEP AUSTIN COOL USES THE NASA SATELLITE THAT TALKS ABOUT THE HEAT CORE IN THAT AREA THAT WE ONLY HAVE THOSE TREES THAT ARE PROVIDING, UH, THE SHADE.
AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, THEY TALK ABOUT THE
[02:30:01]
TRANSPORTATION THAT IS A HIGH CRASH ZONE PER THE CITY.THE HIGH CRASH ZONE, I'LL SAY IT AGAIN, HIGH CRASH ZONE.
THEY, UH, IT SHARES THE BIKE LANE ALONG VERY, VERY FAST SPEEDING VEHICLES.
UM, UM, THE FIRST BODILY INJURY AND DEATH FOLLOWING THIS WILL BE BASED ON OUR CHOICES AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE SET FOR TODAY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, I'LL TRY TO HIT, HIT MY POINTS EFFICIENTLY.
UM, UH, AS PART OF OUR ZONING APPLICATION, WE DID HAVE TO SUBMIT A T I A DETERMINATION, UM, AS PART OF EVERY ZONING APPLICATION THAT HAPPENS.
UM, WE WERE NOT REQUIRED BY CITY STAFF TO DO THAT AT THIS TO DO A T I OR A OR A ZONING TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AT THIS POINT BECAUSE THE TRIPS, UM, THE CORRESPOND WITH THIS PROJECT ARE SO LOW.
UM, AND IN FACT THEY'RE QUITE A BIT LOWER THAN MANY OF THE CURRENTLY PERMITTED USES ON THE SITE.
I CAN GO INTO MORE DETAIL ABOUT THAT IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
UM, I, I DID ALSO LOOK INTO THE VISION ZERO PROGRAM AND SOME OF THE, UM, CONCERNS THAT THE NEIGHBORS RAISED ABOUT SAFETY IN THE AREA.
AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME RECENT IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH THE VISION ZERO PROGRAM THAT THERE ARE MORE SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS PLANNED, UM, AND THAT SOME OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS MAY BE ABLE TO USE THE STREET IMPACT FEES THAT WOULD BE PAID ALONG WITH THIS PROJECT, UM, TO, TO BE PUT IN PLACE.
UM, AS FAR AS, UM, I THINK YOU, YOU ALL MOSTLY KNOW THIS, BUT YOU KNOW, WE WOULD OF COURSE COMPLY WITH ALL THE WATERSHED REGULATIONS AND THE TREE ORDINANCE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE'VE NOT YET DONE A TREE SURVEY, BUT WE WOULD BE COMPLIANT OF COURSE, WITH THOSE CODES.
AND, UM, I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT THE CENTER LINE OF THE BUTTERMILK CREEK IS, UM, ABOUT 275 FEET FROM OUR PROPERTY.
SO IT IS NOT, UM, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT, BUT OF COURSE WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO COMPLY IN THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PROCESS.
UM, AND THEN LOOKING AT THE BUFFER THAT WAS SUGGESTED BY BY ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS, UM, IT WOULD ENCOMPASS IF WE DID A HUNDRED FOOT BUFFER LIKE SHE, UM, REQUESTED IN, IN, IN EXCHANGE FOR, UH, THE 25 FOOT BUFFER THAT WE'VE COMMITTED TO IN THE CO.
UM, IT WOULD BE ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF THE SITE WOULD BE BUFFER.
SO I'M SURE YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THAT WOULD BE A LOSS OF HOMES ON THE SITE AND WE WOULD NOT BE AMENABLE TO THAT.
UM, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER INFORMATION I CAN PROVIDE CHAIR THAT CONCLUDE THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, FISHER COX, SECONDED BY COMMISSION VICE CHAIR HEMPLE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
UH, WHO HAS FIRST QUESTION? UH, FISHER COX, UM, I GUESS FIRST FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, I'M, I'M STARING ON MY OTHER SCREEN AT A SIGN THAT THE CITY PUT UP TO SOUTH OF, OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT SAYS HIGH CRASH ROADWAY, EYES UP, BUCKLE UP.
AND I ALSO NOTICED THAT THIS PARTICULAR TRACK, FOR SOME STRANGE REASON, IS THE ONLY ONE IN THE AREA THAT DOESN'T HAVE CURB.
IT'S JUST LIKE A LITTLE VALLEY GUTTER, UH, WITH NO GRADE SEPARATION APPARENT BETWEEN THE ROAD AND THE SIDEWALK.
UM, I GUESS I'M CURIOUS FROM THE APPLICANT'S, UH, PERSPECTIVE, W W WOULD YOU BE SUPPORTIVE OF FUNDING SOME IMPROVEMENTS LIKE GRADE SEPARATION, INSTALLING A CURB ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF YOUR PROPERTY, UM, AND MAYBE EVEN IF A T D APPROVES OF IT FUNDING, WHAT WOULD BE A RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE IMPROVEMENT? UH, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THOSE, A ACTIVE SPEED SIGNS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT JUST TO HELP GET PEOPLE'S ATTENTION AND APPARENTLY WHAT IS A VERY DANGEROUS ROADWAY IN, IN AUSTIN? I THINK, UM, I, I CAN'T SAY EXACTLY WHAT THE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE.
I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP THE CURB BECAUSE IT WAS IN MY NOTES AND I SKIPPED OVER IT QUICKLY.
UM, WE WOULD HAVE TO DO, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE WOULD BE REQUIREMENTS FOR OUR STREET SCAPE AND OUR, AND OUR, UM, WHERE OUR PROPERTY MEETS THE STREET AS PART OF THE REDEVELOPMENT.
I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE THAT A CURB WOULD BE PART OF IT SINCE THERE'S CURB LINE ALL ALONG THE REST OF THAT, UM, SITE.
UM, I DON'T, AND, AND THROUGH THE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE, WITH THE VISION ZERO FOLKS, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WOULD PRESCRIBE, BUT UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK WITH THEM ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY HAVE.
I KNOW THEY HAVE, UM, PROJECTS IN MIND AND IMPROVEMENTS IN MIND ALREADY.
AND SO I THINK WE'D BE HAPPY TO WORK WITH THEM ON, ON WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN THERE.
WELL, WOULD, WOULD, WOULD THE APPLICANT BE OPEN TO HELP SHARING SOME OF THOSE COSTS ABOVE AND BEYOND THE STREET IMPROVEMENT OR STREET IMPACT FEE? I THINK WE'D BE OPEN TO THE CONVERSATION.
I MEAN, NOT KNOWING WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OR WHAT KIND OF FEES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, I CAN'T NECESSARILY COMMIT TO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT CONVERSATION AND A LOT OF THAT STUFF WILL BE REQUIRED.
I MEAN, MAYBE NOT VISION ZERO STUFF, BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA HAVE STREET IMPACT FEES AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UM, TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
[02:35:01]
OKAY.SO IT LOOKS LIKE, IT LOOKS LIKE THE SITE PROBABLY DRAINS MOSTLY TO THE NORTHEAST TOWARDS THAT EXISTING CREEK.
DO YOU ANTICIPATE THE DRAINAGE PATTERNS REMAINING THE SAME OR ARE Y'ALL GONNA TRY TO REVERSE THAT DRAINAGE TO GO TOWARDS CAMERON ROAD? UM, WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN TO THAT STATE OF DEVELOPMENT WHERE WE'VE MADE A DECISION LIKE THAT.
WE'RE NOT IN A SITE, WE'RE NOT IN SITE PLAN APPLICATION YET.
WE'RE JUST DOING THIS ONE PIECE AT A TIME, SO WE'RE JUST AT ZONING.
YEAH, I MEAN THAT, THAT'S KIND OF AN IMPORTANT DEAL CUZ IT DOES LOOK LIKE THE DRAINAGE ON THIS SITE GOES THROUGH OTHER PROPERTIES TO GET TO THE CREEK.
UH, LAST QUESTION IS ABOUT THE HERITAGE TREES.
IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE WITH ENTIRELY WITHIN THAT BUFFER OR NOT, BUT DID IT SOUNDS LIKE Y'ALL DID DO A TREE SURVEY.
UM, ARE ARE Y'ALL ANTICIPATING REMOVING ANY HERITAGE TREES? WE ARE NOT ON SITE, NO.
WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING REMOVING ANY HERITAGE TREES.
UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
DO A MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MOVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ANYONE SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? COMMISSIONER HENDERSON? YEAH, YEAH, OF COURSE.
I MEAN, I, I, I AGREE THAT THIS IS A, A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT DEFINITELY NEEDS SOME LOVE.
AND TO WATCH IT GO FROM A VACANT PIECE OF PROPERTY TO 23 HOMES, IT'S GONNA HELP GET THAT LOVE THAT IT REALLY NEEDS.
AND IT'S ON TRANSIT AND IT CHECKS SO MANY OF OUR BOXES AND IT'S BEEN UNDERDEVELOPED FOR A LONG TIME AND IT'S GONNA BE GOOD TO SEE THIS TURNAROUND IN THIS REALLY AMAZING CORNER OF AUSTIN.
UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION? COMMISSIONER POLITO, I JUST ECHO THE CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
I THINK, UM, THIS IS A, THERE'S, THERE IS A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN BE DONE RESPONSIBLY TO CREATE MORE HOUSING IN THIS AREA, BUT IT'S AN, IT IS AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE SPOT ON BUTTERMILK CREEK.
SO, UM, I ECHO THOSE CONCERNS.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER, SPEAK IN FAVOR.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER SHANE.
SO DURING DEVELOPMENT, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS I GOTTA BE SUBMITTED IS LIKE AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY AND A LOT OF CONCERNS THAT THE RESIDENTS BROUGHT OUT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT THE AREA'S LIKE ALL THE, YOU KNOW, THE, FROM THE FLOODPLAIN TO THE ALL THE PLANTS, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT.
ALL THAT STUFF IS GOING TO BE PART OF A STUDY THAT HAS TO GET SUBMITTED TO THE CITY TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES OR COR YOU KNOW, THE CRITICAL QUALITY, QUALITY ZONES OR, UM, SENSITIVE AREAS.
SO, UM, A LOT OF THAT WILL BE FIGURED OUT ALONG THE WAY.
AND I KNOW IT'S TOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, BUT IT'S, IT'S IN THERE AND I THINK, UM, THAT CAN HELP ALLEVIATE SOME CONCERNS THAT THINGS MIGHT GET OVERLAND.
UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS WANNA SPEAK? GO AHEAD.
COMMISSIONER COX, CAN I MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION? UH, YES YOU CAN.
UM, I MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE SUPPORT, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THE CHANGE THAT THIS, THAT IN ADDITION TO THE 25 FOOT WIDE VEGETATIVE BUFFER, THE CO ALSO INCLUDES A REQUIREMENT THAT GRADE SEPARATION SHALL BE PROVIDED ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY WITH CAMERON ROAD.
WE HAVE STAFF HERE TO GIVE US, UM, DISCUSS.
YES, WE CANNOT RE REQUIRE, UH, THOSE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE ZONING CASE THAT WOULD BE DONE WHEN THE SITE IS FULLY ENGINEERED, UH, AND REVIEWED.
SO, I, I EXPECTED Y'ALL TO SAY THAT
I'M A TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER.
IT IS A DESIGN FEATURE THAT AMELIORATES POTENTIALLY ADVERSE TRAFFIC IMPACTS.
UM, I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT SECTION OF CODE.
I AM GOING BASED ON, UH, WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED BY LAW DEPARTMENT IN THE PAST, NOT NECESSARILY THE SPECIFIC CASE.
UH, BUT I MEAN, IT'S, TO ME, BEING A TRAFFIC
[02:40:01]
ENGINEER, IT SAYS RIGHT, AND THAT'S ACTUALLY WHY I MADE THAT AMENDMENT WAS BECAUSE I WAS LIKE, OH, CRAP, I CAN DO THATSO, YEAH, I'M, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE SAME, AND WE WERE GIVEN THIS MEMO FROM LEGAL AND I, I INTERPRET IT SIMILARLY.
UM, SO, UH, I I MEAN WE'VE GOT THE LETTER FROM LEGAL RIGHT HERE.
SO, AND, AND IF THIS IS PART OF THE MOTION, WE WILL, YOU KNOW OKAY.
REVIEW IT WITH LOG AND SEE IF I'M BE YOUR NOT REMEMBERING THINGS CORRECTLY.
AND SO, UM, I KNOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SOMEBODY FROM LAW AVAILABLE.
UM, UH, I MEAN, THEY SAID THEY WOULD BE, ARE THEY AVAILABLE TO HELP US WITH THIS CHAIR COMMISSION LAY LIAISON, ANDREW RIVERA? SO IF IT IS THE, UM, RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMISSION, UM, WE, IT WILL BE VETTED PRIOR TO, UH, GOING TO COUNCIL.
UM, SO THE COMMISSION, UM, AT THIS TIME IS WELCOME TO OKAY.
MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION.
SO, UH, COMMISSION, SO IS THIS, UM, OKAY, SUBSTITUTE MOTION, GO AHEAD AND RESTATE IT.
I, WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MOOCH TELLER, BUT GO AHEAD AND STATE IT ONE MORE TIME.
THE, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH, IN ADDITION TO THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT, UH, GRADE SEP GRADE SEPARATION SHALL BE PROVIDED ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY WITH CAMERON ROAD.
AND, AND FOR, FOR LAYMAN'S TERMS, THAT MEANS INSTALL A CURB, BUT IN TRAFFIC DESIGN MEANS IT'S CALLED GRADE SEPARATION.
SO WE HAD A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MOALA.
WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION HERE.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER, UH, DISCUSSION ON THIS, THE MOTION MAKER? COMMISSIONER COX? NO, I, I, I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS, UM, BASED ON MY KNOWLEDGE OF THIS AREA WITH, WITH THE HAZARDS RELATED TO TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE'S NOT AN EASY CROSSING WITH THIS PROPERTY CUZ THE BUS STOPS ARE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF IMPROVEMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE TO MAKE IT SAFER.
THE GREAT SEPARATION IS JUST ONE OF THOSE BASIC FEATURES THAT MAKES IT SAFER AND MORE COMFORTABLE TO WALK ON THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY ALONG ALONG A BUSY STREET.
ANY, UH, COMMISSIONERS WANNA SPEAK AGAINST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? NOT SURE THAT I'M SPEAKING AGAINST, BUT I'D LOVE TO ASK THE APPLICANT THEIR THOUGHTS ON THIS.
WE OF COURSE WANNA MAKE THE AREA SAFER, UM, AND WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK OF COURSE WITH ATD ON THAT.
I, I'M ASSUMING CURVES WOULD ALREADY BE REQUIRED OF, OF COURSE WE WOULDN'T BE TRYING TO NOT DO THAT.
I JUST, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE AND WHAT THE COST WOULD BE, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT FOR SURE BETWEEN NOW AND WE GO TO FIRST READING ON THURSDAY, SO PROBABLY NOT BY THURSDAY, BUT SECOND AND THIRD READING IS A COUPLE WEEKS OUT, SO WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET SOME MORE INFORMATION BY THEN.
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, COMMISSIONER COX, YOUR SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UH, INCLUDES BOTH THE, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE REZONING? THAT'S CORRECT.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SPEAKING IN FAVOR? UH, IN FAVOR OR AGAINST CHAIR? I'LL CONTINUE TO SPEAK, I GUESS IN FAVOR.
OF COURSE, UH, YOU KNOW, IT, IT MAKES SENSE THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD WANT TO DO THIS, BUT IF FOR SOME REASON THERE, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY FIGURE OUT THAT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE OR IT'S JUST GONNA COST WAY TOO MUCH FOR A 23 UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO AFFORD, I WOULD HOPE THAT BETWEEN NOW AND THIRD READING AND COUNCIL, THEY CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET THROUGH THAT.
BUT MY GUESS IS THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT, SO HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS.
UH, SPEAKING AGAINST IN FAVOR, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
I, I GUESS I'M JUST, I'M A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE O ON THE DAIS TAKING THE RECOMMENDATION OF, UH, UM, I'M SURE A GREAT TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER, UM, UH, ON, YOU KNOW, OVER CITY STAFF ON WHAT IS THE BEST WAY, WHAT'S THE BEST USE OF, UH, SOME NUMBER OF DOLLARS THAT WE THINK WE CAN GET FROM THE, THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THIS AREA SAFER.
AND, AND, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT CITY STAFF HAVE, YOU KNOW, STRATEGIES AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WAYS OF, OF DETERMINING HOW THE SORT OF TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES, YOU KNOW, ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY GETS SPENT AND, AND JUST PUTTING LOTS OF OVERLAYS, YOU KNOW, FROM, FROM OUR OPINIONS ON THE DIAS WITHOUT SEEING SITE PLANS, WITHOUT REALLY UNDERSTANDING OTHER, OTHER ACTIONS THAT THAT STAFF MAY HAVE IN IN MIND.
[02:45:01]
I, I THINK THAT'S A, A BAD DIRECTION AND, AND NOT SOMETHING THAT I'M WANTING TO GO DOWN.UH, SPEAKING IN FAVOR, SPEAKING AGAINST, ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO.
I'M GONNA REPEAT THE, UH, SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MUTO STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND ADDING TO THE CO LAN, UH, TO, UH, REQUIRE GRADE SEPARATION ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF CAMERON ROAD.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, UM, COMMISSIONER COX? THAT IS CORRECT.
THOSE ON THE DIOCESE IN FAVOR.
I'M, I'M SORRY, THOSE ON THE VIRTUAL IN FAVOR? UH, LET ME GET, OKAY, I SEE EIGHT AND THEN THAT'S, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON IS AGAINST, OKAY, HOLD ON.
UH, COMMISSIONER YAS PLEATER, IS THAT ABSTAIN? YELLOW? OKAY.
SO THAT BRINGS THE TOTAL, I THINK, TO 9 1 1.
AM I COUNTING RIGHT? SOMEBODY HELP ME HERE? HERE.
EIGHT, NINE, NO, THAT'S EIGHT ONE TO 1 8 11? YES.
WITH THE COMMISSIONERS, UM, UH, THOMPSON VOTING AGAINST AND GIANNIS VALINO VOTING IN ABSTENTION.
AND THAT WAS AGAIN FOR THE NPA AND THEON.
MOVING ON TO, UH, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD IF, LET'S, UH, HEARING NO OBJECTIONS, UH, JUST A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A, WE'LL COME BACK HERE AT, UM, LET'S JUST MAKE IT 9 0 5.
ALL RIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS, LET'S GET ON BACK AND WE GET QUORUM.
WE'LL GO AND BRING THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
OKAY, UH, WE'VE GOT THE NUMBERS HERE.
WE'RE GONNA BRING THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER 9 0 6.
GONNA FINISH UP OUR DISCUSSION CASES.
[13. Plan Amendment: NPA-2022-0010.03 - Holly Mixed Use; District 3]
ITEM, THIS IS JUST ITEM 13.UH, THIS IS A HOLLY MIXED USE AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM STAFF TO KICK THIS OFF.
RE, MEREDITH HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER 13 IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 0 1 0 0.03.
HOLLY MIXED USE, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2309 EAST SECOND STREET, 2320 EAST CAESAR CHAVEZ, AND 2315 24 0 3, 24 0 5, 24 0 9, AND 24 11 EAST SECOND STREET.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS A CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM SINGLE FAMILY AND CIVIC TO MIXED USE LAND USE.
CONTACT TEAM IN THE HOLLY PLANNING AREA.
AND THERE IS CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE STAFF CASE REPORT.
STAFF SUPPORTS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR MIXED USE LAND USE.
UH, STAFF SUPPORTS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR MIXED USE LAND USE BECAUSE THE PROPERTIES ABUT MIXED USE LAND USE TO THE SOUTH, EXTENDING THE MIXED USE LAND USE NORTH TO EAST SECOND STREET IS APPROPRIATE.
EAST CAESAR CHAVEZ TO THE SOUTH IS AN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR.
AND AS MENTIONED, THIS UH, CASE HAS NO ASSOCIATED ZONING CASE FILED WITH IT.
ALSO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SUPPORTS, SUPPORTS PRESERVING SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING THROUGHOUT THE PLANNING AREA.
AND IT ALSO SUPPORTS A VARIETY OF HOUSING OPTIONS FOR A MIXTURE OF DIFFERENT INCOMES AND SUPPORTS INCREASING HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW INCOME WORKERS IN BOTH HOME OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, MR. WHALEN AND MR. WELLEN, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, MICHAEL WHALEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANTS.
UH, I'M HERE TODAY TO REQUEST A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS FUTURE LAND USE MAP, WHICH THEY, THE CITY ADOPTED OVER TWO DECADES AGO IN 2001.
SPECIFICALLY, WE ARE REQUESTING REVISING SEVERAL PROPERTIES BETWEEN EAST CESAR CHAVEZ AND SECOND STREET FROM CIVIC AND SINGLE FAMILY TO MIXED USE, WHICH IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S POLICIES AND GOALS.
THIS CASE IS A BIT UNIQUE IN THAT IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT BY FIVE DIFFERENT OWNERS ON THE BLOCK, INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS, SOME OF WHOM YOU ARE, SOME OF WHOM YOU WILL HEAR FROM TONIGHT AND ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IT INITIALLY STARTED AS A REQUEST FROM ONE OF THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNERS ON THE BLOCK, BUT
[02:50:01]
AFTER WE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORS TO LET THEM KNOW THAT WE WOULD BE APPLYING FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT, WE LEARNED THAT SEVERAL OF THEM WERE AWARE THAT CITY POLICIES ENVISIONED A MIXED USE FUTURE FOR THEIR, FOR THIS CORRIDOR AND THAT THERE WAS INTEREST IN JOINING IN THIS APPLICATION.SO FIRST, BEFORE I JUMP INTO THE DETAILS OF OUR APPLICATION, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A STEP BACK TO CENTER THE DISCUSSION AROUND THE CITY'S PLANNING PROCESSES.
AS YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT SMALL AREA PLANS THAT IT ADOPTED BETWEEN 1998 AND 2018, INCLUDING THE, INCLUDING THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IN 2001.
THESE PLANS ARE NOT MEANT TO BE STATIC.
THEY'RE MEANT TO BE UPDATED AND REVISED AS THE CITY ADOPTS NEWER POLICIES AND GOALS.
THAT IS WHY THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS EXISTS TO ALLOW THE CITY TO UPDATE THESE PLANS ITERATIVELY OVER TIME IN, IN ORDER TO KEEP THEM ALIGNED WITH CITY POLICY.
AS NOTED, THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN WAS ADOPTED OVER TWO DECADES AGO IN 2001.
SINCE THAT TIME, THE CITY HAS ADOPTED NUMEROUS NEW POLICIES AND DIRECTION, INCLUDING IMAGINE AUSTIN, THE HOUSING BLUEPRINT, THE MOBILITY PLAN, AND THE NEW CORRIDOR OVERLAY AMONG OTHERS.
THESE POLICIES CONSISTENTLY CALL FOR FOSTERING A MIX OF USES ALONG OUR CORRIDORS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE COMPLETE COMMUNITIES WHERE PEOPLE CAN LIVE, WORK AND ENJOY DIFFERENT SERVICES AND COMMERCIAL AMENITIES.
THIS IS THE AREA IN QUESTION BETWEEN EAST SAAR CHAVEZ AND SECOND STREET.
I'LL SHOW YOU THE SPECIFIC PROPERTIES IN IN QUESTION IN A MOMENT, BUT I FIRST WANT TO OUTLINE THE CITY'S POLICIES TOWARDS THIS AREA.
SO THIS IS THE AREA, UH, IT'S ALONG AND IMAGINE AUSTIN AND CORRIDOR OVERLAY CORRIDOR.
THIS IS EAST SESAR CHAVEZ AND IT'S WITHIN THE EAST SESAR CHAVEZ BUSINESS DISTRICT, BOTH OF WHICH MARK THIS AREA IS APPROPRIATE FOR A MIX OF USES TODAY.
THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOODS PLANS FLUME MARKS MUCH OF THIS BLOCK FOR MIXED USE, WHICH IS SEEN HERE IN GRAY.
THE REMAINDER OF THE BLOCK IS EITHER CIVIC OR SINGLE FAMILY.
ADDITIONALLY, JUST SEVERAL WEEKS AGO, IF WE GO TO THE NEXT, THERE IT IS.
UH, SEVERAL WEEKS AGO IN DECEMBER, PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO RECOMMEND A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT ON THIS SAME BLOCK FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO MIXED USE.
AGAIN, CONSISTENT WITH CITY POLICY IN THIS AREA.
THIS IMAGE SHOWS THE TOTAL AREA THAT WILL BE DESIGNATED FOR MIXED USE ONCE THAT PRIOR PRESIDENTIAL CASE RECEIVES FINAL APPROVAL AT CITY COUNCIL.
THIS, THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU TODAY WOULD THEN FURTHER HELP IMPLEMENT CITY POLICIES FOR COMPLETE COMMUNITIES BY REAFFIRMING AUSTIN'S COMMITMENT TO CALLING FOR A MIX OF USES ALONG OUR CORRIDORS.
IT WOULD DO SO BY DESIGNATING THE PROPERTIES OUTLINED HERE.
THESE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT BY THE ORANGE DOTS FOR MIXED USE, A DESIGNATION THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA.
THE OTHER THING THIS IMAGE ILLUSTRATES IS THE WAY IN WHICH MULTIPLE PROPERTY OWNERS, INCLUDING BOTH A COMMERCIAL OWNER AS WELL AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMESTEADS, HAVE WORKED TOGETHER TO BRING FORWARD A MORE COHESIVE CASE THAT RECOGNIZES THE CITY'S POLICY VISION FOR THIS AREA.
SO TO RECAP, THE CITY ADOPTED THE HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OVER TWO DECADES AGO IN 2001.
SINCE THAT TIME, THE CITY HAS ADOPTED NEW POLICIES AND GOALS FOR COMPLETE COMMUNITIES AND A MIX OF USES, PARTICULARLY ALONG CORRIDORS.
AND THIS REQUEST WOULD UPDATE THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S PLANS, FUTURE LAND USE, MAP THE FLUME TO BETTER IMPLEMENT THE CITY'S POLICIES.
IT WOULD NOT, AGAIN, IT WOULD NOT CHANGE ANY ZONING ENTITLEMENTS AND FUTURE CHANGE IN ZONING WOULD NEED TO COME BACK BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
THIS WOULD SIMPLY ALIGN OUR FLUME WITH CITY POLICIES AND EXPECTATIONS.
AND I BELIEVE THERE ARE, UH, OTHER SPEAKERS HERE TO, UH, ADDRESS YOU.
AND, UH, WITH THAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM DANIELLE MURRAY MURRAY.
IF YOU'LL, UH, SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
I LIVE AT 24 0 5 EAST SECOND STREET.
ONE OF THE PROPERTIES REQUESTING TO BE CHANGED TO MIXED USE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
UM, AS YOU JUST HEARD, HOUR BLOCK IS NOT LIKE MOST OTHER RESIDENTIAL STREETS HERE IN HOLLY OR EVEN MANY OF THE OTHER BLOCKS ON SECOND STREET.
THE SIX HOUSES ON OUR BLOCK BACK ONTO TWO STORY COMMERCIAL, UM, AT OUR LOT LINE.
AND WE'RE ACROSS THE STREET FROM MULTIFAMILY HOUSING.
THE STRETCHES THE ENTIRE BLOCK.
WEST AND NORTH, WE ARE SURROUNDED BY CEMENT, PARKING AND COMMERCIAL DUMPSTERS EVEN.
UM, WITHIN THE HALF BLOCK WE HAVE FOUR AS WE HEARD EARLIER, FOLKS COMPLAINING.
UM, IF I LIVE EVEN A BLOCK EAST OR WEST ON SECOND STREET, UH, I WOULDN'T BE HERE TONIGHT.
BUT THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AT THE OF MY YARD IS ENTITLED FOR 90 FEET OF DEVELOPMENT.
UH, WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THE HOLLY COMMONS EXTENSION PROJECT IS APPROVED, WILL LIKELY START IN TWO TO THREE YEARS, WHICH WILL MEAN, UH, THE ENSUING YEARS WILL BE A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION, NOISE, DUST AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT AND STREET CLOSURES ACROSS THE STREET FROM US.
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, UM, OWNS THE SANTA RITA COURTS.
[02:55:01]
CHALMERS COURTS, UM, JUST WEST OF OF US WAS DEVELOPED INTO FOUR-STORY APARTMENTS, UM, OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, SOME OF WHICH IS STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT.UM, AND THEY HAVE JUST STARTED SIMILAR MODERNIZATION UP AT ROSEWOOD.
AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, UH, SANTA RITA COURTS, AGAIN, OUR NEIGHBORS JUST ACROSS THE STREET ARE GOING TO BE UP FOR REDEVELOPMENT.
NEXT, WITH AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED, THAT COULD MEAN 90 FOOT PROJECT AS WELL.
UM, AND SEVERAL YEARS AND PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION.
SO I JUST WANNA BE REALLY CLEAR THAT I FULLY SUPPORT NEW AND IMPROVED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND EXCUSE, UM, PARTICULARLY IN THIS PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS WALKABLE, IT'S TRANSIT ACCESSIBLE.
UM, AND WE'VE TOLD MR. WAYLAND THAT WE WILL SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THEIR PROJECT.
UM, BUT I ALSO WANNA BE REALISTIC THAT
WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF MOVING AT THIS TIME.
WE LOVE WALKING OUR KIDS TO THE, TO THE VA ELEMENTARY PLAYING AT PAN AM AND BETH BIKING DOWNTOWN AND AROUND THE LAKE AND UP BOGGY CREEK TRAIL.
BUT IF WE FIND OURSELVES SURROUNDED BY CONSTRUCTION, UM, AND MIXED USE PROPERTIES POWERING OVER US FROM LITERALLY THREE SIDES, WE JUST WANNA BE ABLE TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO RELOCATE AND POTENTIALLY DO SOMETHING MORE APPROPRIATE WITH THE PROPERTY.
UM, I THINK YOU'LL HEAR PROB THAT THERE CAN GONNA AFFECT AFFORDABILITY ON OUR BLOCK.
UM, THERE'S NOTHING AFFORDABLE ABOUT A 900 SQUARE FOOT UNUP UPDATED 1950S HOUSE, WHICH IS WHAT WE LIVE IN WITH A $10,000 TAX BILL.
AND IF THE PROPERTY REMAINS LIMITED TO SINGLE FAMILY, IF WE'RE DENIED THE SLUM UPDATE, IT'S ONLY GONNA BECOME LESS AFFORDABLE AND ALSO LESS LIVABLE IF IT'S ISLANDED WITHIN THIS BLOCK OF COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE TOWERS.
AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE FUTURE FOR THIS BLOCK.
WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T REMAIN, UM, STUCK AS AN ONLY SINGLE FAMILY IN THE MIDST OF THAT.
SO I ASK YOU TO APPROVE THIS ITEM.
WE NOW HEAR FROM QUINCY ALLEN, SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH REMARKS.
I'M THE, UH, CO-FOUNDER AND MANAGING PARTNER OF ART CAPITAL PARTNERS.
UM, WE'RE A MINORITY OWNED COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE FIRM AND THE PRIMARY PROPERTY OWNER OF THESE HOLLY COMMONS PARCELS.
UM, IN ADDITION, UM, AS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, WE ARE MIX U SPECIALIST.
UM, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING.
AND AS, UH, MR. WHELAN, UH, ALLUDED TO EARLIER, WE HAVE WORKED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND AS DANIELLE SAID, AND THAT SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS ARE INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION.
WE ARE HERE SIMPLY TO ASK YOUR SUPPORT.
AND, UM, ALONG WITH MR. WHALEN, WE'RE HERE TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMISSIONERS MAY HAVE.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM STEVEN YK.
MR. JOK, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, STEVEN YARIK, 24 0 3 EAST SECOND STREET.
UM, I HAVE, UH, BEEN LISTED ON THE APPLICATION, SO I GUESS I'M AN APPLICANT
UM, CAUSE I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A, UH, RATHER UNIQUE SITUATION THAT WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, FIVE, UH, FOUR OF THE, UH, RESIDENTIALS RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS TO THIS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY COME IN TO, TO ASK TO TAG ALONG.
AND, UM, THIS WAS QUITE A LONG PROCESS IN THE MAKING AND HAS REALLY KIND OF BEEN, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD ANOTHER INDICTMENT OF THE, UH, THE PLANNING PROCESS AS IT EXISTS WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
UM, YOU GUYS, UH, MR. WAYLAND REFERENCED THAT THERE WAS A PREVIOUS, UM, PLAN AMENDMENT ALREADY APPROVED THAT WAS FOR 2317 EAST SECOND STREET HOUSE OWNED BY, UH, STEVEN NAVA.
UM, AT THAT TIME WE TRIED TO REACH OUT TO, TO THE STAFF AND UM, AND TALKED TO 'EM ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CAN WE, CAN WE TAG ALONG ON THIS? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD DO TOO? AND STAFF SAID, WELL, THIS IS, UH, UH, SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS ONCE A YEAR AND, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD'VE TO TO PAY THE FEES.
AND I SAID, WELL, LOOKS LIKE THE CODE SAYS YOU GUYS HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO INITIATE ON OUR BEHALF.
IF WE REQUEST YOU DO THAT, WILL YOU DO THAT? AND THEY SAID, WE'RE NOT TOUCHING THAT WITH A 10 FOOT POLE
SO, UH, ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, COUPLE YEARS GO BY.
UM, WE WERE ACTUALLY OUT OF STATE, UM, TAKING CARE OF IN-LAWS.
IT WAS A SUMMER WHEN, UH, WE GET A PHONE CALL FROM THE NEIGHBORS THAT MR. WAYLAND STARTED PUTTING THIS APPLICATION TOGETHER.
AND, UH, WE SAID, OKAY, WELL AT LEAST IT'S, WE KNOW BEFORE THE JULY DEADLINE, BUT IT HAPPENED TO BE ABOUT 48 HOURS
[03:00:01]
BEFORE THE JULY DEADLINEUM, SO EVERYBODY'S SCRAMBLED TO GET IT TOGETHER.
AND, UM, THERE ARE TWO, UM, TWO OF OUR NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE NOT JOINED THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN APPLICATION.
UM, WE ARE IN CLOSE CONTACT WITH ONE OF THEM WHO IS JUST A LITTLE BIT UNCERTAIN ABOUT THE WHOLE THING, DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THIS ARCANE PROCESS.
UM, THE OTHER ONE IS NOT PRESENT.
UM, THEY ARE, THEY MAY LIVE IN THE, THEY DO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I BELIEVE, BUT THEY ARE, UH, UM, LANDLORDS WHO I'VE REALLY NEVER SEEN AROUND.
UM, SO THAT, THAT IS STILL ON OUR LIST OF PEOPLE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH.
AND I WOULD HOPE IN THE INTEREST OF GOOD PLANNING, THAT IF WE CAN REACH OUT AND, UH, DEVELOP THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AND WE CAN GET EVERYBODY ON BOARD, UH, THAT PERHAPS THIS COMMISSION WOULD BE INTERESTED IN INITIATING AN OUT OF CYCLE PLAN AMENDMENT, UM, ON THEIR BEHALF SO THAT THEY COULD JOIN IT.
AND WE DON'T HAVE THIS WEIRD SITUATION WHERE, UH, THE MAP LOOKS LIKE SOMEONE GOT THEIR TEETH KNOCKED OUT.
UM, I THINK THAT'S, UH, THAT'S MOST OF IT.
BUT, UH, THE, UH, THE, THE BEST THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT THIS IS LIKE REALLY JUST A PLANNING EXERCISE.
AND SO IT'S NICE TO SEE THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOING THAT.
THERE'S NO ZONING CASE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
UH, THAT'S BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
UM, I'M SURE MR. WAYLAND'S CLIENT DOES, I'M SURE THEY'LL BRING A ZONING CASE.
BUT, UH, THIS IS REALLY JUST IMPORTANT TO GET IT DONE BECAUSE OF THE ONCE A YEAR OPPORTUNITY, UM, AND THE HURDLES OF GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS BEFORE ANYBODY COULD, COULD FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH IT.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION, UH, MR. VINNO FERNANDEZ.
UH, IF YOU'LL SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH THE EAR REMARKS.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? HELLO? YES SIR.
UH, MY NAME IS KAINO FERNANDEZ AND I'M THE, UH, ORIGINAL CHAIRMAN OF THE ADOPTED HOLLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BACK IN 2001.
AND WE SPENT MANY, MANY HOURS WORKING ON THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
AND, UH, IN ORDER TO GET IT ADOPTED, UH, THIS IS ONE CORRIDOR, ONE SECTION OF, UH, OF THE AREA THAT WE WERE VERY CAREFUL AND WANTED TO BE REAL CAREFUL TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS NOT COMMERCIALIZED BECAUSE IT IS SINGLE FAMILY AND HAS BEEN SINGLE FAMILY WITH MANY FOR MANY YEARS.
AND THE HA COMMONS IS BASICALLY A DEVELOPMENT IS GROWING LIKE CANCER.
UH, I REMEMBER, UH, THE FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION WORKING WITH US AND BLOCKING OUT THE OWL CAUSE THEY WANTED 2:00 AM DRINKING, UH, PERMIT.
UH, WE ALSO HAD THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELP US WITH, UH, UH, BUCKETS ALSO ONE IN 2:00 AM SO EVER SINCE THEN WE'VE BEEN ASKING FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PLANNING FOR EAST SARATA CHAVEZ LIKE THEY DID ON RIVERSIDE.
SO HERE WE GO DOING IT PIECE BY PIECE.
THIS IS AN INSULT OF TAKING OUR PEOPLE'S LAND.
THERE ARE TWO OWNERS, MR. SOTO AND MS. RAMIREZ THAT DO NOT WANT TO BE PART OF THIS BECAUSE THEIR FUTURE LAND, LAND USE IS TO REMAIN SINGLE FAMILY.
THAT'S THEIR HOME, THAT'S THEIR, THEIR INVESTMENT THAT THEY BOUGHT, AND THAT'S FOR THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.
ANOTHER THING, SANITA, YES, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THEIR, THEIR REDEVELOPMENT.
THEY'RE HAVING ONE THIS THURSDAY.
WHY DON'T THESE PEOPLE JOIN AND HAVE IT BE PART OF A FULL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPROACH AND VIEW AS OPPOSED TO, UH, JUST DOING IT, UH, ON THEIR OWN.
UH, THIS LAW FIRM, THE, THE MR. WAYLAND HAS A, A, A REPUTATION OF ONCE THEY GET SOMETHING GOING, THEN THEY WANT 90, THEY WANT 90 FEET, JUST LIKE WHAT THEY DID AT BLA.
WE WORK ON
BUT THEY HAVE RECENTLY GONE AND CONTINUE TO GO AND ASK FOR 90.
ARE WE GONNA BE ASKING FOR 90 IN THIS PARTICULAR, UH, UH, AREA? SPECULATION.
THIS IS, THIS IS ANOTHER INJECTION OF GENTRIFICATION.
AND YOU KNOW, WHILE I WAS ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL JULY, EVERYBODY WAS SO SYMPATHETIC ABOUT GENTRIFICATION AND US AND BEING MOVED AND NOT BEING ABLE TO LIVE IN EAST AUSTIN ANYMORE.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO ACTIONS LIKE THIS, WE DON'T GET SUPPORT.
WE KNOW WE DON'T MAINTAIN THE QUALITY OF LIFE.
IF YOU LOOK AT, AT, AT CHALMERS TO THE NORTH, THERE'S NO BUSINESSES.
IF YOU LOOK TO THE SOUTH, THERE'S NO BUSINESSES.
SO WHEN YOU GET SANTA RITA, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GONNA GET ON SECOND STREET.
THIS IS LIKE A BLANK CHECK SAYING, HEY, GIVE GIVE ME THE BLANK CHECK FOR A FUTURE LAND USE FOR THIS CORPORATION'S DELAWARE LIMITED.
AND PEOPLE THAT, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU MENTIONED ARE TAXES ARE OUR $10,000.
WELL IF THIS PASSAGE, IT'S GOING GET HIGHER BECAUSE THIS IS THE SAME THING THAT HAPPENED
[03:05:01]
AT RAINY WHEN COUNCIL MEMBER UL LAVA IS, AND PERRY LOREZ AT KNIGHT, THE DEVELOPERS WENT IN THERE AND CHANGED THE ZONING FOR 10 YEARS.SO A LOT OF THOSE PEOPLE IN 10 YEARS WERE PAYING, UH, UH, A HUNDRED DOLLARS TO THE 10TH YEAR THEY WERE PAYING $10,000.
AND THAT TOTALLY TOTAL DISPLACEMENT.
THIS IS A DISPLACEMENT, UH, UH, TOOL HERE.
AND I FEEL, I FEEL THAT THIS, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION HAS A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSENSUS OF THE HURT.
JUST LIKE SOS MENTIONED THAT WE DELIVERED TO YOU BY CREATING THIS, THE DESIRE DEVELOPMENT ZONE AGAIN, UH, THE RESIDENTIAL, UH, BUT THE, YOU KNOW, IT'S A BUFFER TO THE, TO THE CHALMERS COURSE THAT WE HAVE KIDS, WE HAVE CHILDREN, UH, THIS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S NO TELLING WHAT IT'S GONNA BRING.
IS IT ANOTHER BAR? IS IT ANOTHER ALCOHOL VENTURE? IS IT ANOTHER FOUR STORY? UH, A HOUSING UNIT? WE DON'T KNOW.
SO WHY ARE WE GOING THERE? WHY ARE WE APPROVING A BLANK CHECK? JUST BECAUSE A DEVELOPER AND A COUPLE OF LANDOWNERS THAT SAY, HEY, WE'RE PROBABLY GONNA BE MOVING OUTTA HERE ANYWAY.
WELL, YOU GOT TWO LANDOWNERS THAT ARE LONG TIME AUSTIN.
I KNOW THAT RAM RAMIREZ ARE GONNA DONATE THEIR PROPERTY TO THE CHURCH.
AND I KNOW MR. SOTO AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT ALL THIS.
I SAID, TELL 'EM THEY GAVE YOU $4 MILLION.
I SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, TELL 'EM YOU'LL LEASE YOUR LAND TO THEM FOR A HUNDRED YEARS.
BUT SEE, THEY DON'T WANT TO GO THERE.
AND, AND LIKE THE MAN MENTIONED MR. SOTO, HE'S NOT TOO SAVVY ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND THIS IS THE ABUSE AND MISUSER GOVERNMENT USES AND CORPORATIONS AND AND DEVELOPERS USE TO BE AND DISPLAYS THE VULNERABLE THAT HAVE NO VOICE.
AND AND HE TOLD ME, UH, CUZ I TALKED TO HIM AND I TALKED TO, TO HIM, MS. RAM RAMIREZ AT CHURCH, AND SHE SAID, I DON'T WANT THAT.
YOU KNOW, THEY BEEN GO KNOCKING AT MY DOOR.
I DON'T ANSWER BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.
THIS IS MY HOME, THIS IS MY MOM BOUGHT IT FOR US, AND WE, WE WANNA LIVE HERE AND WE WANNA DIE HERE.
SO UNTIL, LIKE ALL THE GENTLEMAN MENTIONED, YOU GET A HUNDRED PERCENT, MAYBE WE SHOULD GO THERE.
BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S TOO EARLY RIGHT NOW.
YES, IT WAS APPROVED IN 2021, I MEAN IN, IN 2001.
UH, THIS ALSO FALLS WITHIN THE BUENA EASTERN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AREA.
AND LIKE I SAID, FROM A PLANNING, UH, PERSPECTIVE, WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN ASKING THE CITY AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DO A COMPREHENSIVE CORRIDOR PLANNING FOR EASTER, CHAZ, MR. AND NOT TO BE DOING PIECE BY PIECE.
YOU COULDN'T HEAR IT, BUT THE, UH, THE BUZZER RANG, UM, WE'RE AT THE, OH, OKAY.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY CLOSING THOUGHTS AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A GENTRIFICATION TOOL, INJECTION INTO THE, THE, THE TAKING OF OUR LAND ONCE AGAIN.
I HERE FROM THE, UM, APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, MICHAEL WHALEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, I THINK, UM, DANIELLE MURRAY, UH, STATED AT BEST, I MEAN IN TERMS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING AROUND THEIR PROPERTY NOW.
UH, SHE'S ONE OF THE APPLICANTS UH, THAT WE HAD MET WITH AND HAD ENCOURAGED TO GET INVOLVED BECAUSE OF THE, UM, LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME THAT ANYBODY HAS TO FILE AN APPLICATION.
IF THE CITY HAD THE RESOURCES AS, UH, TO DO A COMPLETE RE-PLAN OR REEVALUATION ON A REGULAR BASIS OF EACH ONE OF THESE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
BUT THEY DON'T, WHICH IS WHY THERE'S A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS WHEN OTHER BROADER PLANS, HOUSING, MOBILITY, UH, THE EAST SAAR CHAVEZ BUSINESS DISTRICT ARE, UH, EVOLVING.
IT GIVES PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR TO BRING BEFORE YOU AN AMENDMENT TO A PLAN THAT REFLECTS SOME OF THOSE POLICIES.
UH, ALSO, I WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, FOCUS FOR A MOMENT THAT THIS ISN'T ABOUT A, WE'RE NOT HERE TO APPROVE A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR A SPECIFIC REQUEST.
IT IS SIMPLY ABOUT ALIGNING THE PLAN WITH OUR POLICIES AS A CITY.
AND ANY REZONING WILL, AGAIN, HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE YOU.
SO, UH, THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED A FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
SO, UH, THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE, AND OBVIOUSLY THERE'S LOTS OF PEOPLE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UH, COMMISSIONERS WANT, UH, MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, WE HAVE A SECOND.
[03:10:02]
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MU.TYLER, LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX, I GUESS QUESTION FOR STAFF, WHAT, UM, WHAT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT WAS DONE WITH THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST? WEST, UH, MARINE MEREDITH HOUSING AND PLANNING? SO WE HAD A VIRTUAL COMMUNITY MEETING.
UM, LET ME GET THIS STAFF REPORT.
UH, SO WE HAD A VIRTUAL COMMUNITY MEETING.
WE MAILED APPROXIMATELY 954 COMMUNITY MEETING NOTICES.
AND, UM, LET'S SEE, FOUR PEOPLE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TENDED, DO WE KNOW IF ANY OF THOSE PEOPLE LIVE IN THE APARTMENTS ACROSS THE STREET ON SECOND STREET? I DON'T REMEMBER.
ARE THE NOTICES PROVIDED TO THE RESIDENTS OF THOSE APARTMENTS, OR IS IT JUST PROVIDED TO THE LANDOWNER? IT'S PROVIDED TO BOTH THE PROPERTY OWNER, A RENTER, AND ANY NEIGHBORHOOD OR ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP WHO REQUESTED NOTIFICATION FOR THE AREA.
AND I GUESS MY QUESTION WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP, I'M WONDERING, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS MIXED USE DESIGNATION IS, IS IS THE MULTI-FAMILY THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM THESE TRACKS, IS THAT CONSIDERED AN APPROPRIATE ZONING TRANSITION OR USE TRANSITION FROM THE MIXED USE ON CAESAR CHAVEZ? OR WOULD WE NORMALLY LOOK TO HAVE A DIFFERENT TRANSITIONAL USE BETWEEN MIXED USE AND WHAT IS RELATIVELY LOW DENSITY, MULTI-FAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING? UM, WHEN MY PLANNING TEAM MET, AND WE DISCUSSED THIS CASE, WE LOOKED AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, AND IT WAS MENTIONED THAT BECAUSE OF THE MULTI-FAMILY TO THE NORTH AND THE MIXED USE TO THE SOUTH AND THE, THE ADJACENCY TO THE ACTIVITY CORRIDORS, THAT MIXED USE, UH, FOR THIS, FOR THESE PROPERTIES WERE APPROPRIATE.
A MIXED USE IS APPROPRIATE NEXT TO, UM, MULTI-FAMILY.
AND THEN I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION FOR A APPLICANT, IT'S PRETTY RARE THAT WE SEE CHANGES TO A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN WITHOUT AN ACCOMPANYING ZONING CASE.
CAN, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE ALSO NOT REVIEWING A ZONING CASE TO GO WITH THIS YEAH.
MICHAEL WAY ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT? UM, WELL, IT IS CALLED THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
SO IT IS TRYING TO SET OUT A PLANNING, UH, TOOL TO HELP, UH, INFORM WHAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE IN THE ZONING.
AND NUMBER TWO, WHEN WE SAT DOWN WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND ADVISE 'EM THAT WE WERE GONNA PROCEED, WE, WE AS A GROUP HADN'T REALLY, UH, REACHED A CONSENSUS ON WHAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE.
SO WE'VE HAD, WE'VE CONTINUED TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS TO SEE, UH, WHAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE ULTIMATELY, UM, EITHER WITH, UH, COMING BEFORE YOU AS A GROUP OR, UH, INDIVIDUALLY.
I THINK HAVING, SO THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF MY POINT OF CONFUSION IS IF THIS IS, IF THIS IS A PLANNING EXERCISE, I KIND OF GET THE IMPRESSION THAT WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY GO THROUGH A PLANNING EXERCISE, THAT THIS IS INTENDED FOR A PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT, BUT, BUT WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF US AS A, AS A ZONING CASE.
AND SO IF THIS WAS PURELY A PLANNING EXERCISE, I'M, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROCESS, BUT IF THIS IS ABOUT A SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT, I'D KIND OF LIKE TO SEE THOSE DETAILS AS WELL.
AND, AND FROM THE, THE NEIGHBORS THAT JOINED YOU, IT SOUNDS LIKE, IT KIND OF SOUNDS LIKE TO ME THAT THEY THREW UP THEIR HANDS AND SAID, WELL, THIS IS INEVITABLE, SO I MIGHT AS WELL JOIN THE BANDWAGON SO I CAN SELL MY PROPERTY FOR A HIGHER PRICE TO GET BETTER ZONING.
UM, OR THEY JUST DIDN'T WANT TO BE AROUND CONSTRUCTION, SO I JUST, I DON'T KNOW.
I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THE WHOLE THING, SO IF YOU WANT TO USE UP THE REST OF MY TIME TO MAYBE HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT I, I I WOULD JUST SAY TWO THINGS.
ONE, UH, REPEAT THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN PROCESS SPECIFICALLY ALLOWS FOR AMENDMENTS.
YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO BRING AN AMENDMENT ONCE A YEAR, UH, SO THAT THERE ISN'T A FLOOD OF 'EM ALL THE TIME UNLESS YOU GET SPECIAL DISPENSATION FROM THE
[03:15:01]
CONTACT TEAM.AND, UH, SO IT IS AN EVOLVING, ITERATIVE PROCESS TO MODIFY THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO GIVE PEOPLE GUIDANCE AS THEY GO FORWARD WITH ZONING OR ZONING THEY MIGHT CONSIDER.
AND AS TO THE NEIGHBORS, THEY TOO WOULD LIKE TO AT LEAST KNOW WHAT THIS PROPERTY MIGHT BE IN THE FUTURE, WHICH IS WHY THEY DECIDED THEY WANTED TO JOIN.
UH, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY HAVE TO GIVE UP THEIR SINGLE FAMILY, BUT IT GIVES THEM THAT FLEXIBILITY AS YOU NOTED.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU COULD HEAR THAT.
LET'S, UH, COMMISSIONERS ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
HEARING NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
UM, YOU HAVE A MOTION? ALL RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, MOVE APPROVAL OF THE CHANGE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION? CORRECT.
ALL YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? SURE.
UM, YOU KNOW, SANTA RITA IS ONE OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING AUTHORITIES, THREE MAIN DEVELOPMENTS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO REDEVELOP, AND THEY'RE, THAT'S GONNA GO IN F FIVE.
I THINK THEY'RE DOING AT LEAST FOUR STORIES EVERYWHERE BACK THERE.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THIS AREA IS ALREADY A VERY COMMERCIALIZED AREA AND THIS STRANGE STRIP OF VERY COMMERCIAL LAND IN BETWEEN CESAR CHAVEZ AND SECOND STREET.
I MEAN, IT WASN'T THAT LONG AGO WHEN THESE WERE KIND OF ONE WAY ROADS AND CAT METRO WAS ON SECOND ON BOTH.
THEY'RE STILL ON SECOND PRETTY HEAVILY, AND CESAR CHAVEZ.
AND I DON'T KNOW, YOU JUST LOOK AT ALL THESE GIANT PARKING LOTS AND SINGLE STORY USES, AND WE HEAR FROM THE FOLKS THERE THAT ARE LIKE, YOU KNOW, THIS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
YOU KNOW, MAYBE 20 PLUS YEARS AGO, IT MADE SENSE TO, TO FLUB THIS A SINGLE FAMILY FOR THE FEW THAT ARE, BUT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE MOST PART, IT JUST REALLY DOESN'T.
AUSTIN HAS A VERY DIFFICULT TIME TRYING TO GET ZONING IN MASS.
SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NEW, IT'S CREATIVE, AND I'M GLAD THEY'RE DOING THIS.
I'M GLAD THEY'RE WORKING TOGETHER.
AND I, I LIKE THE COMMIT, THE, THE SPEAKER WHO SAID, YOU KNOW, WOULD WE BE WILLING TO TALK TO THE FOLKS WHO AREN'T HERE IF THEY WANTED TO JOIN THIS IN THE FUTURE? AND I'D LOVE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.
BUT YEAH, THIS SEEMS TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.
UH, SPEAKING AGAINST, UH, IN FAVOR.
SO, UM, I MEAN, I WISH, I WISH THERE WAS A BETTER PLANNING PROCESS, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF WHAT THE HAND THAT WE'VE BEEN DEALT WITH THESE DAYS.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL'S ALREADY SAID IT, AND SETH SAID, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE GOING THROUGH, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING LIKE WE HAVE BEEN.
AND, UM, AND SO FROM WHERE I LOOK AT IT IS WE HAVE THE MULTI-FAMILY, WHICH IS GONNA GET REDEVELOPED.
AND AS YOU KNOW, AS COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SAID, I'M NEXT GONNA BE FOUR STORIES.
THEN YOU HAVE CAESAR CHAVEZ, WHICH IS COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE.
SINGLE FAMILY IS NOT THE RIGHT PATTERN OF ZONING BETWEEN A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AND MULTI-FAMILY.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THAT, I MEAN, MIXED USE IS, IS AN APPROPRIATE ZONING CATEGORY.
SO COMING FROM A PLANNING STANDPOINT, TAKING A STEP BACK LOOKING AT IT, THAT IS, LIKE STAFF SAID, IS AN APPROPRIATE CATEGORY.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M SUPPORTING IT.
SPEAKING AGAINST ONE LAST SPOT FOR IN FAVOR.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS, UH, THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER, UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPEL FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
UM, PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR, UH, THOSE IN FAVOR VIRTUALLY.
UH, THOSE VOTING AGAINST AND THOSE SUSTAINING.
SO THAT'S GONNA BE, UM, EIGHT ONE IN ONE.
COMMISSIONER GIANNIS POLITO VOTING AGAINST, AND COMMISSIONER MOOW ABSTAINING.
SO THAT CLEARS ALL OUR DISCUSSION CASES FOR THE EVENING, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
[23. Nominate a member of the Planning Commission to be considered by Council for the purpose of serving on the Joint Sustainability Committee as the primary member.]
UM, ITEM 23 NOMINATIONS.[03:20:01]
WE ARE, WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE A JOINT SUSTAINABILITY, UM, MEMBER.UM, WELL, WE HAVE A, UH, SUBSTITUTE COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER, BUT HE'S NOT GONNA BE WITH US MUCH LONGER.
SO RIGHT NOW, UH, IS THERE ANY INTEREST IN, UH, ANYONE THAT'S GONNA CONTINUE SERVING ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, IN FILLING THE, THESE SHOES OF, UM, FOR THIS POSITION? YEAH.
SHALL WE WAIT TILL WE HAVE NEW COMMISSIONERS CHAIR? YES.
UM, SO LET ME, IS ANYBODY WILLING TO, I, I GUESS WHAT'S, LET'S SOLID THE COMMUNICATION.
WE CAN ATTEND THE MEETINGS, BUT WE CAN'T, UM, PARTICIPATE, I GUESS, AS A VOTING MEMBER.
IS THAT CORRECT? MR. RIVERA CHAIR COMMISSION LIAISON, ANDREW RIVER? THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, YOU WOULD JUST, UH, BE ATTENDING LIKE, UH, MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, UM, BUT NOT, UH, ACTUAL MEMBER.
AND THEY, WHAT ARE, DON'T HAVE COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER HERE, DO WE KNOW WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE THEY, ARE THEY UPDATING THE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN? IS THAT WHAT'S HAPPENING? JARED HAD TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH.
UM, UM, AND IF THERE IS SOMEONE WHO'S, UH, INTERESTED, I CAN, UH, PROVIDE THEM THAT INFORMATION OFFLINE.
CHAIR, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
IF WE JUST NEED SOMEONE TO TEMPORARILY DO IT UNTIL WE PUT SOMEBODY ELSE IN THERE, I'M HAPPY TO DO IT.
BUT LONG TERM, I LIKE THE IDEA OF WAITING FOR THE NEW FOLKS TO COME IN.
DOES THIS NOMINATION HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY COUNSEL CHAIR? THAT IS CORRECT, YES, IT WILL.
I, I THINK THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THE PROCESS OF GETTING OUR NEW COMMISSIONERS IN, GETTING THOSE APPROVED, GETTING EVERYBODY ORGANIZED INTO OUR JOINT COMMITTEES, UH, IT WOULD BE A GREAT HELP IF WE HAD SOMEBODY REPRESENTING OUR, OUR TEAM, UM, AT LEAST FOR THE SHORT TIME.
UH, SO DO I HAVE A, A, I GUESS, SECOND, UH, NOMINATION OF COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR THE REPRESENTING US ON THE, UH, JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE, UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COX.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A QUICK VOTE.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
ITEMS. UH, WE, JUST REAL QUICK, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT HAVING, UM, ANOTHER MEETING JANUARY 31ST, BUT AFTER CONSULTING WITH MR. RIVERA, I THINK WE CAN FIT THE PRESENTATION FROM THE HOUSING GROUP.IS THAT WELL, FROM THE AIA, UH, COMMISSIONER SHAY, YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? YES.
THINK THAT MIGHT BE, I DON'T THINK IT, WELL, SO WHAT I WANTED TO DO WAS, UM, SO WE, WE HAD DISCUSSED IT WITH AIA AND, BUT I DO WANT TO GET EVERYBODY'S, UM, RESPONSE TO EACH OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO I'LL BE SENDING THAT, UM, OUT TO EVERYBODY ON A SPREADSHEET AND EVERYBODY CAN COMMENT OR, UM, YOU KNOW, AND JUST VOTE ON IT.
UM, SO IF WE ARE GOING TO DO THE JANUARY 31ST, THEN WE COULD DO IT THEN.
OTHERWISE, IF NOT, THEN, UM, I DON'T THINK IT'LL TAKE TOO LONG TO GO OVER IT.
I THINK A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT THEY DISCUSSED, WE HAVE DISCUSSED BEFORE, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE HEARD, UM, THESE RECOMMENDATIONS WHETHER BY OURSELVES OR BY OTHER PEOPLE.
SO I DON'T THINK IT'LL TAKE THAT LONG, BUT I DON'T WANNA HAVE A FULL JANUARY 31ST MEETING JUST FOR THAT.
UM, I'M A LITTLE BIT CURIOUS ON, SO THE PLAN FORWARD, I HEARD YOU SAY THERE ARE, UH, I GUESS, RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU WANTED US TO CONSIDER? YEAH, I MEAN, SO THE, THE IDEA BEHIND THIS WAS TO SEE IF THERE'S, UM, IF, IF ANY, IF, IF PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD CONSIDER INITIATING SOME OF THE LOW HANGING FRUIT.
AND THERE ARE SOME IN THERE THAT I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S THE, THEY'RE LITTLE ROADBLOCK THINGS THAT HAVE HIT US MULTIPLE TIMES.
UM, I THINK ONE OF THEM HAS ALREADY BEEN A ADDRESSED, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT COUNCIL HAS DONE WITH IT.
UM, SO IT'S THINGS THAT, UM, I DON'T KNOW.
I, I, I, I THINK YOU GUYS SHOULD JUST LISTEN TO IT AND SEE, BUT IT, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT, UH, PIECES THAT ARE VERY DIVISIVE AND I THINK YOU GUYS WILL FIND IT.
YOU KNOW, EASY TO, UH, DIGEST AND WE'LL, WE'LL
[03:25:01]
GO THROUGH THAT.WE'RE GONNA PICK MAYBE LIKE THE THREE EASIEST ONES, UM, TO CONSIDER.
WOULD THIS BE, UM, A PRESENTATION WITH POTENTIAL ACTION JUST BY COMMISSIONERS TO RECOMMEND, UM, CERTAIN, TO ADVANCE CERTAIN CODE CHANGES AT THAT TIME AFTER THE PRESENTATION? IS THAT, YEAH.
AND SO THE INTENT ON IT, IT COULD BE THAT WE RECOMMEND SENDING IT TO CODES AND ORDINANCES, OR WE COULD RECOMMEND IT, UM, AS A CODE INITIATION, BUT, UM, IT'S GONNA BE UP TO THE BODY, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE DO WITH IT.
UM, YOU KNOW, CUZ TYPICALLY WE SEND IT TO CODES AND ORDINANCES, YOU KNOW, UNLESS, UM, UNLESS THERE'S ENOUGH SUPPORT, BUT, OKAY.
SO, SO WHAT, UM, I THINK THE COURSE THAT NORMALLY IS THAT THE WORKING GROUP KIND OF VOTES ON THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND BRINGS THAT FORWARD TO THE BODY, CORRECT? MM-HMM.
IN ORDER FOR US TO GO THROUGH THAT.
SO WE'LL HAVE THAT, WE'LL HAVE THAT AT THE TIME WHEN THIS COMES FORWARD TO THE PLAINTIFF COMMISSION.
SO WE'RE NOT GONNA MEET ON JANUARY 31ST.
THAT'S THE POINT OF THIS, THAT DISCUSSION.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER, UM, ANY OTHER ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? SO THERE WAS THE, UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER MOALA HAD BROUGHT UP ADUS, UM, AND THEN I HAD SECONDED IT, AND WE WERE, ONE CONSIDERATION WAS TO CONSIDER HAVING THE, UH, HOUSING WORKING GROUP KIND OF MULL IT OVER, YOU KNOW, KIND OF DISCUSS IT.
UM, SO MR. AL, CAN YOU KIND OF UPDATE US ON THAT, WHAT YOU WANTED ON THE ADU DISCUSSION? WELL, WHEN WE BROUGHT IT UP LAST TIME, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY IT CAME OUT OF CASE IN FRONT OF US THAT THERE IS A LOT OF CONFUSION, UM, AND SOME MISSED OPPORTUNITY, UM, TO HARNESS ADUS AS A HOUSING MECHANISM IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.
UH, SO WE WERE GOING TO DISCUSS BRINGING FORWARD SOME RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, IT DIDN'T MAKE IT ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT.
UM, SO ONE OF THE THOUGHTS WAS, WOULD IT, INSTEAD OF CREATING A SEPARATE GROUP FOR THIS, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO PULL THIS UNDER THE, UM, THE HOUSING, THE WORKING HOUSING GROUP TO LOOK AT THIS, THIS AS WELL? AND I COULD, UH, COME IN ON THAT IF THAT MEETS WITH THE COMMISSION'S APPROVAL.
SO, UH, REMIND ME THE, UM, KIND OF THE PURPOSE OF THIS WORKING GROUP.
UM, COMMISSIONER SHAT, I KNOW WE HAD KIND OF HAD TWO DIFFERENT ONES AND WE KIND OF PULLED BACK, SO, AND WE, UH, CHARGED YOU GUYS WITH WHAT? YEAH.
AND HERE'S THE, HERE IN, IN TALKING WITH, UM, WITH ANDREW, BASICALLY AFTER WE MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, TECHNICALLY BECAUSE IT'S A WORKING GROUP, IT IS, IT'S DONE RIGHT, AND THEN WE HAVE TO RECHARGE IT AGAIN, AND THEN IT'S DONE RECHARGE AGAIN.
SO WHAT WE COULD DO IS, WHILE WE'RE WORKING ON THIS, THE NEXT TASK THAT COULD BE GIVEN TO IT WOULD BE A DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT THE, UM, THE A A D U, UM, CONCERNS, UH, THAT COMMISSIONER MUTO HAD BROUGHT UP.
AND THEN THAT WOULD BASICALLY AT THAT POINT WOULD CONTINUE THE, UH, HOUSING WORKING GROUP FOR ANOTHER TASK.
BUT IT'S, IT, YOU KNOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS AFTER WE DELIVER SOMETHING, IT IS COMPLETED.
AND SO TECHNICALLY SPEAKING AND SPEAKING WITH ANDREW, AFTER WE DO OUR PRESENTATION FROM WHAT WE GOT FROM AIA, THEN UM, WE WOULD HAVE TO BE RECHARGED WITH A TASK.
OTHERWISE WE WOULD DIS DEVELOP, OTHERWISE WE'D DISSOLVE.
HERE IS WHAT I RECOMMEND, GIVEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LARGE TURNAROUND, AND WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, IN THIS GROUP, I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE OUT WHAT YOU GUYS WERE CHARGED WITH.
UM, I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER MOALA, YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR A NEW WORKING GROUP WHEN WE HAVE NEW MEMBERS.
AND, UM, WE HAVE OUR REESTABLISHED OUR JOINT COMMITTEES.
UH, THAT IS GONNA TAKE A LITTLE TIME, BUT I THINK WE JUST NEED TO GET THROUGH THAT PROCESS OF GETTING, UH, FOLKS AND NUMBERS HERE, UH, WITH THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS, THEIR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, AND THEN ALSO THE JOINT COMMITTEES FILLED OUT.
AND THEN THIS SHOULD BE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS.
UM, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S MY PREFERENCE CHAIR, BUT JUST FOR CONSIDERATION, IF I MAY, UM, I PARTICULARLY APPRECIATE SOME OF THE HISTORICAL
[03:30:01]
BE TAKING WITH THEM WHEN THEY LEAVE PC.AND, UM, I, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF THEIR INPUT ON THE TOPIC BEFORE THEY'RE GONE.
WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO TAKE ACTION ON THE ITEM UNTIL THE NEW, UH, COMMISSIONERS GET STARTED, BUT BOY, WE'D LOSE A LOT OF LEGACY KNOWLEDGE.
UH, WELL, LET'S, SO LET'S SEE.
SO I, I HEARD, I THINK I, IS THERE EVEN AN OPTION FOR YOU GUYS TO FOLD IN ANY OF THE ADU RECOMMENDATIONS INTO THIS AT THE SAME TIME? OR IS THAT, IS IT JUST TOO EARLY, UM, AT THE MEETING WITH AIA? IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET IT ALL? SO, SO SOME OF THE, I THINK SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS DOES BRIDGE UPON SOME OF THAT, BUT, UM, TO ME, WHAT WE PRESENT IS NOT NECESSARILY JUST THE AI.
I MEAN, IF THERE'S, IS THERE, IF THERE'S ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS TO PRESENT, THEN WE, WE SHOULD GET TO DO THAT.
SO, UM, MY THOUGHT IS WE COULD TRY TO FOLD IT IN.
IF IT DOESN'T WORK, THEN WE CONTINUE IT, THEN IT DOESN'T MATTER.
THEN FORM ANOTHER WORKING GROUP.
WHY DON'T WE DO THIS? LET'S, LET'S PUT ON THE AGENDA TO FORM THE WORKING GROUP AS AN OPTION FOR DISCUSSION, UH, COMMISSIONER MUTO, UH, AND THAT WAY WE HAVE THE OPTION TO GO AHEAD AND FORM IT AT THAT TIME AT OUR NEXT MEETING.
SO ON THE AGENDA, WE'LL, UH, A WORKING GROUP TO ADDRESS ADU, UH, WE'LL TAPE THAT UP IN OUR NEXT MEETING.
[BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]
COMMITTEES, AND WORKING GROUPS.OH, I'M NOTICING THE TIME HERE.
UH, CODES AND ORDINANCE, THE JOINT COMMITTEE, UM, VICE CHAIR, AN UPDATE.
OUR, UH, OUR MEETING THIS MONTH WAS CANCELED, SO WE'LL, WE'LL LOOK AHEAD TO FEBRUARY.
COMPREHENSIVE AND JOINT COMMITTEE, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
COX, FLORENCE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FOR US? UH, NO.
UM, THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR, MYSELF AND VICE CHAIR, UH, HANK SMITH MET, AND THEY PROBABLY WON'T MEET AGAIN UNTIL AFTER NEW COMMISSIONERS ARE ON BOARD.
UH, GONNA JUMP TO SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE DID NOT MEET, NOTHING TO REPORT.
UH, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
UM, WE JUST DISCUSSED THE ROLE OF THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD GOING FORWARD, UH, AND TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS MORE OFFICIAL THAN IT CURRENTLY IS.
UH, DESIGN GUIDELINES, UPDATE WORKING GROUP.
SO THE WORKING GROUP THAT I'VE BEEN ON HAS MET, UH, ABOUT FOUR TIMES.
SO WE'RE JUST MAKING OUR WAY THROUGH THE CHAPTERS SLOWLY BUT STEADILY.
DO YOU HAVE ANY KIND OF TIMEFRAME? DO YOU THINK YOU GUYS ARE GONNA BE READY TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS? WELL, THEY, I THINK THE TIMELINE FOR THE BROADER GROUP, AND REMEMBER, I'M JUST ONE SUBGROUP OUT OF FIVE OR SIX OR SO, AND I THINK THE ENTIRE THING WAS SIX MONTHS.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH THAT.
I FORGOT YOU'RE PART OF A, UH, QUITE A LARGE GROUP FROM DIFFERENT YEAH.
AND CHAIR COHEN'S ON ANOTHER, UH, ANOTHER GROUP.
UM, BUT I DON'T THINK SHE'S HAD A CHANCE TO MEET BUILDINGS.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO UPDATE ON THAT SEPARATE? NOPE.
IT'S JUST, BUT THERE, I'VE ONLY BEEN TWO, UH, UH, LIKE THE MEET AND GREET, THEIR MEETINGS ARE ON MONDAY, WHICH IS REALLY HARD FOR ME TO MAKE, SO.
WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT, UH, YOUR ACTIVITIES.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER SHAY? NO.
J JUST BE LOOKING OUT ON, UM, YOUR EMAIL FOR THE SPREADSHEET.
UM, BUT YOU CAN LOOK OVER THE DOCUMENT THAT'S BEEN PUT IN THE BACKUP, BUT THAT'S WHEN WE BROKE ON IN SPREADSHEET.
AND THEN, UM, AND THEN WE COULD PLAN FOR NEEDING TO DISCUSS THE POINTS, UM, AS NEEDED.
SO TO BE CLEAR, THAT, UH, I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR THAT TO GO BE AMONG THE WORKING GROUP, MR. RIVERA, IS THAT CORRECT? I MEAN, UM, I MEAN, IT COULD BE SENT AS JUST FOR INFORMATION, BUT WE SHOULDN'T BE VOTING AS A COMMISSION ON ANY, JUST THE WORKING GROUP AT THIS POINT.
MR. RIVERA, CHAIR COMMISSION LADIES LIAISON, ANDREW RIVER? THAT'S CORRECT.
I BELIEVE, UH, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I'M STATING THIS INCORRECTLY, COMMISSIONER SHAY, BUT I, I BELIEVE HE'S, UH, REFERENCING THAT THE WORKING GROUP OKAY.
WILL VOTE ON THE, UM, THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, AS IS THE, UH, USUAL PROCESS FOR WORKING GROUPS.
THOSE WILL, UM, THOSE THAT ARE VOTED OUT
[03:35:01]
OF THE WORKING GROUP WILL THEN, UH, COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION.THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
THE LAST ONE THAT'S NOT SHOWN ON HERE, BUT WE NEED TO SPEAK TO IS HOME DISTRICT PLAN, WORKING GROUP.
UM, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, CHAIR COHEN AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS AND, UH, I THINK WITH HER EXPERIENCE AND QUITE A BIT OF FAMILIARITY WITH THE, UH, FOLKS ALONG THE RED RIVER CULTURE DISTRICT, UM, WOULD LIKE TO LEAD THIS.
AND I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO GET A MEETING OF THE WORK GROUP MEMBERS TOGETHER.
I'VE ALREADY MET WITH THE LIAISON FOR THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT.
RED RIVER, UH, MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION, AND SEVERAL STAKEHOLDERS AND LIVE VENUE, OR SORRY, LIVE MUSIC VENUE OWNERS.
SO I WANNA GET THIS MEETING GOING AS QUICK AS WE CAN.
WE'RE LOOKING TO GET IT SCHEDULED FOR EARLY NEXT WEEK, BECAUSE WE WANNA GET THIS ROLLING BEFORE SOUTH BY.
AND, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT.
UM, I'M GONNA ADJOURN THIS MEETING AT 9 54.