[00:00:03]
[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
BRINGING, UH, THIS MEETING OF THE MARCH 28TH PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER.AND WE'LL START OUT WITH A, UM, AND I'M EXCITED CAUSE WE HAVE EVERYBODY HERE, INCLUDING, WE'LL INTRODUCE THE NEW MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO Y'ALL IN JUST A SECOND.
UM, BUT, UH, FOR THOSE VIRTUALLY, UH, PLEASE HAVE YOUR, UH, CARDS READY TO VOTE.
WE'LL DO IT A LITTLE DIFFERENT CAUSE I WANNA RECOGNIZE THOSE, UH, NEW APPOINTEES.
AND WHEN I, UH, RECOGNIZE YOU, UH, SAY, PRESENT OR HERE, JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU'RE HERE.
OKAY? UH, FIRST JUST WANNA RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER AZAR, WHO WAS HERE ALREADY, BUT NOW IS, IS STILL THE MAYOR'S APPOINTEE
UH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER HAYNES, WHICH IS ALSO, UH, MAYOR WATSON'S APPOINTEE HERE.
UH, WE HAVE ALICE WOODS FROM DISTRICT TWO COMMISSIONER, UH, FUENTES APPOINTEE HERE.
AND WE HAVE COMMISSIONER CONLEY, UH, CONLEY FROM DISTRICT NINE.
UH, COMMISSIONER QUADRI HERE, UM, APPOINTEE.
AND FOR THOSE, UH, YOU MAY RECOGNIZE, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
HE WORKED UP HERE PREVIOUSLY OR VOLUNTEERED PREVIOUSLY.
UH, AND THEN WE HAVE, UM, ALSO NEW, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL FROM DISTRICT FIVE HERE.
UH, COMMISSIONER RYAN, UH, AL ALTER IS APPOINTED HERE.
AND THEN, UH, GOING DOWN, UH, THE ROW HERE, WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HERE.
UM, WE HAVE ON THE CHAIR, CHAIR SHAW.
WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HERE.
AND, UM, LET'S SEE WHO ELSE I'M MISSING ON THE, THAT'S EVERYBODY HERE.
LET'S LOOK VIRTUALLY HAVE VICE CHAIR HEMPLE.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX HERE, UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD HERE.
AND, UH, WANT TO ALSO RECOGNIZE, UM, OUR, UM, EX OFFICIO MEMBER CHAIR, UH, CHAIR OF, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, JESSICA COHEN.
SO AS I SAID, THAT BRINGS US UP TO, I THINK, 13, IF I'M COUNTING CORRECTLY.
SO WE'LL HAVE SOME GOOD VOTES THIS EVENING.
UH, MOVING ON TO, UH, REAL QUICK, UH, THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING.
SO WE HAVE PARTICIPANTS, UH, BOTH COMMISSIONERS AND SPEAKERS, UH, IN THE CHAMBERS AS WELL AS PARTICIPATING VIRTUALLY.
AND FOR THOSE, UH, WE HAVE A FEW, UH, MAYBE FOUR, I THINK FOUR OR FIVE CASES.
UH, WE'LL TAKE THEM IN ORDER AS THEY ARE ON THE AGENDA, BUT IF YOU WANNA WAIT OUT IN THE ATRIUM, ANDREW, WE'RE STILL, UH, SPEAKERS.
WE'RE GIVING, UH, A TEXT ABOUT 15 MINUTES OUT FROM THE ITEM.
IS THAT STILL WHAT WE'RE DOING? CHAIR COMMISSION LADIES ON ANDREW RIVERA.
UM, SO, UM, YES, SO WE CAN, UH, CERTAINLY SEND AN EMAIL TO EMAIL OUT TO FOX MINUTES AWAY FROM TAKING UP AT NINE.
SO IF YOU DON'T WANNA WAIT HERE THE WHOLE TIME, YOU ARE WELCOME TO WAIT OUT THERE AND WAIT FOR AN EMAIL SPEAKERS.
WE DO HAVE, I THINK WE'RE UP TO, I THINK WE'RE, IS IT FOUR OR FIVE CASES? AND SO IT WILL BE A PRETTY LONG EVENING EVEN WITH THAT NUMBER.
UH, SO JUST WANT THOSE THAT ARE, UH, TOWARD THE END, JUST, UH, HANG IN THERE.
BUT, UH, WE WILL BE HERE TILL AT LEAST 10 O'CLOCK, EVEN WITH SOME ACCELERATED RULES WE'RE GONNA TRY OUT.
UM, WE MAY GET OUT A LITTLE EARLIER, BUT IT, IT'S STILL GONNA BE A PRETTY LONG EVENING.
UH, SO I HAVE ASSISTANCE FROM MR. RIVERA THIS EVENING.
HE'S GONNA ANNOUNCE THE SPEAKERS.
AND COMMISSIONER FLORES, UM, YOU'RE GOING TO REDO THE FIRST READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP THERE.
YEAH, COMMISSIONERS TO STAY MUTED AND IF I FAIL TO GET YOUR ATTENTION, UH, YEAH, PLEASE SPEAK UP.
UM, BUT I'LL TRY TO RECOGNIZE YOU BY THROUGH RAISING YOUR HAND INITIALLY.
UH, WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMU COMMUNICATION.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
IS APPROVAL OF MINUTES, UH, FROM MARCH 14TH, COMMISSIONERS.DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE MINUTES FROM MARCH 14TH? OKAY, WE WILL MOVE THOSE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA AND I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER
[Reading of the Agenda]
TO COMMISSIONER FLORES.OKAY, WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
[00:05:01]
UH, TWO PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 18 0 0 2 1 0.02.SKYLINE OLTORF MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE, APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT THREE.
PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 21 0 0 2 5 0.0 1 2 90 WEST IN SCENIC BROOK, THAT ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT FOUR.
PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 0 8 0.0 1 31 17 TO 31 21 EAST 12TH STREET.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1 7 0.01 CRESTVIEW VILLAGE STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO MAY 23RD.
PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 21 0 0 1 4 0.03 CHAPMAN 71, THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 40 BRENTWOOD MULTIFAMILY STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 0 5 0.01 VARGAS MIXED USE THAT ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 11TH AND THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT NINE.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 7 VARGAS MIXED USE THAT ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 11TH AND THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT 10.
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 APRIL 11TH.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 7 0 SPRINGDALE COMMERCIAL TRACK TWO AMENDMENT AMENDED.
UM, WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND THE SPEAKER IS GOING TO PROVIDE REMARKS DURING THE CONSENT AGENDA.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 15 SPRINGDALE COMMERCIAL, UH, CONSENT STAFF TO STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION, UM, 13 PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1 5 0.03 DARBY YARD 700 THE ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 14.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 5 DARBY YARD 700.
PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1 5 0.04 HUDSON NUMBER THREE, THAT ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR DISCUSSION 16.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 0 6 HUDSON NUMBER THREE ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 1.
16.02 BOARD AND TRUCK DISCUSSION, 18 REZONING C 14 20 22, 0 1 21 BOARD AND TRACKED THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 19.
PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 0 0 5 0.02.
SECOND ALPHA 0.95 THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 20.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 1 14 SECOND ALPHA 0.96 AT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
PLAN AMENDMENT N P 20 22 0 0 1.
15.06 GLOUCESTER DWELLINGS THAT IS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 22.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 15 GLOUCESTER DWELLINGS THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
7 0 7 WEST 10TH STREET THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT AS AMENDED PER EXHIBIT A.
UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT HAVE AGREED ON UH, COS 24, HISTORIC REZONING C 14 H 20 22 0 1 76 BROKEN SPOKE OWNER HAS REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH, 25, REZONING C 8 14 97 0 0 1 15 LEANDER REHABILITATION, PUT AMENDMENT NUMBER 16, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO UH, REQUEST TO APRIL 25TH, UH, 26 REZONING C 14 20 22 1 19 52 25 NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD.
REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 27 REDLEAF HIGHLAND TRACK 12, THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.
RED LEAF HIGHLAND TRACK THREE, THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.
[00:10:01]
C 14 20 22 0 29 REDLEAF HIGHLAND TRACK FIVE CONSENT 30 REZONING C 14 20 22 0 0 30 RED LEAF HIGHLAND TRACK FOUR CONSENT.UM, 31 IS REZONING C 14 20 23 0 0 0 9 21 30 GOODRICH AVENUE.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO UH, APRIL 11TH 32.
CODE AMENDMENT C 20 22 20 22 0 2 1 WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE CODE AMENDMENTS.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT WITH THE MUSH TALLER AMENDMENT.
UM, C O J C ORDINANCE PROVIDED A, I BELIEVE EVERYONE HAS ACCESS TO THAT.
UM, 33 CODE AMENDMENT C 20 20 22 0 0 8 AMENDMENT TO DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, CAPITAL DOMINANCE OVERLAY CONSENT FROM THE CODE AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED WITH AMENDMENT BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, AND THERE'S A NOTE HERE THAT SAYS ANDERSON AMENDMENT INSERTS IS ADDITIONALLY, ANY PROPERTY WITHIN THE CAPITAL DOMINANCE OVERLAY MAY PARTICIPATE IN THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
34 CODE AMENDMENT C 20 20 22 0 13 AMENDMENT TO DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE FOR GREAT STREETS.
35 SITE PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE ONLY S SP 20 22 0 0 5 6 D.
EVERGREEN DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION SITE.
UH, 36 SITE PLAN REVISION S SPC 2000 THOUSAND 858 C R ONE MEXICAN-AMERICAN CULTURAL CENTER.
PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 20 0 1 93 WILDHORSE TRACKED.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS PER EXHIBIT C 38.
FINAL PLAT FROM APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 21 0 1, 52 0.2 A PINNACLE AT WILDHORSE RANCH SECTION TWO.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C 39.
FINAL PLAT FROM APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C 8 20 22 0 2 8 7 0.1 A THREE HILLS APARTMENTS AND THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS PER EXHIBIT C.
AND THAT IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.
OKAY, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FLORES.
SO WE'RE GONNA ALLOW FOR A FEW PEOPLE TO SPEAK HERE.
UM, UH, THE FIRST ITEM, AND MR. RIVERA, IF I GET THIS WRONG, LET ME KNOW.
SO WE HAVE SOMEBODY HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 11 AND 12, IS THAT CORRECT? CHAIR COMMISSION? LELAND ANDREW? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
AND I'LL CALL OUT THE DAMS. OKAY.
UH, WE'LL BEGIN WITH, UH, MR. UH, BEN RAMIREZ.
YOU'LL BE PROVIDED TWO MINUTES.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST UM, 11 AND 12 SPRINGDALE COMMERCIAL.
I AM CO-CHAIR OF THE SPRINGDALE AIRPORT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I'LL ALSO SERVE ON, UH, GO VALLEY, JOHNSON TERRACE, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, CONTACT TEAM, AND THE EAST MLK MLK CONTACT TEAM.
I'M HERE TO OPPOSE THIS, UH, PROJECT BECAUSE WE HAVE NO DEVELOPER IN HAND AND, UH, THERE'S NO PLAN FOR THE SITE.
YOU'RE TAKING AWAY ALL THE RESTRICTIONS FOR THE SITE WITHOUT HAVING A TAA OR, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THIS THING HAS AN ENVIRONMENT, HAS BEEN TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION BECAUSE IT IS ON THE OLD TANK TANK FARM SITE.
UM, UH, I'M HERE TO SAY THAT THERE'S NO COMMUNITY BE BENEFIT BEING OFFERED TO THE COMMUNITY FOR THE UPZONING ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.
UH, THAT'S PROPORTIONATE TO THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT THEY'RE GONNA GET ON THE PROPERTY AND AS WELL AS NOT HAVING ANY INPUT FROM, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, CONCERNED ABOUT FLOODING, CONCERNED ABOUT A COUPLE OTHER THINGS.
DIRTY WATER COMING OFF OF THE SITE.
WE'RE REALLY WORRIED ABOUT FLOODING CUZ THEN THE NEIGHBORING PROJECT ON SPRINGDALE GENERAL ENDED UP FLOODING THE WHOLE STREET OF SALCEDO, PROBABLY 15, 20 HOUSES.
ALSO, WE HAVE ANOTHER PROJECT IN BETWEEN THIS PROJECT AND SPRINGDALE GENERAL THAT HAS, THAT HAS TAKEN, IT IS NOW BEING NEGOTIATED AND TAKING CARE OF THE PROJECT THAT'S FLOODING SALCEDO STREET.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED AS A PART OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT IS TO SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE WITH THE
[00:15:01]
UPSIZING OF THE RETENTION POND OR SOMETHING UP TO THAT EFFECT TO MAKE SURE MY NEIGHBORS DOWNSTREAM DON'T GET FLOODED OUT BECAUSE WE JUST HAVE 40 ACRES OF IMPERVIOUS COVER.PUT IT IN ON THE SPRINGDALE GENERAL SPRINGDALE GREEN AND THIS SITE.
UM, I JUST THINK THIS IS BEING WAY RUSHED.
I MEAN, WE SHOULD DO A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS.
WE SHOULD TALK TO THE ENVIRONMENTALIST ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR, FOR, FOR LISTENING.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. ANGELA BEN GARZA SPEAKING ON 11 12 13, 14, 15, AND 16 CHAIR.
SHE'S CURRENTLY NOT CURRENTLY IN THE CHAMBERS.
UM, WILL NOW HEAR FROM MS UH, NADIA BARBO SPEAKING ON 11 12 13 14.
ACTUALLY, UH, SPEAKING ON 11 AND 12 ONLY ANDREW, COULD YOU REPEAT WHAT ITEM NUMBERS THAT, UM, MS. NADIA BARBO IS SPEAKING ON.
MS. ANGELA BEN GARZA WILL BE SPEAKING ON 13 14 15, 16 17.
SORRY, Y'ALL WE'RE COMING FROM WORK
UM, HOW MANY MINUTES YOU'LL BE PROVIDED? TWO MINUTES, FIVE MINUTES.
FIRST OF ALL, I KNOW Y'ALL DO THIS AND YOU DON'T GET PAID TO DO WHAT YOU DO AND WE APPRECIATE Y'ALL FOR THAT.
UM, I'M COMING UP HERE TO TALK WITH YOU ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE MORE KIND OF POSITIVE FOLKS IN THE AREA THAT REALLY TRIES TO COLLABORATE, COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS AND WORK TOGETHER IN COLLABORATIONS.
UM, WE HAVE BEEN DOING SO MUCH WORK FOR THE LAST TWO WEEKS TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN COLLABORATE IN SUCH A, IN SUCH A MINDFUL WAY AND SUCH A WAY WHERE WE CAN MAKE THIS KIND OF A CASE STUDY FOR PEOPLE TO STUDY IN AUSTIN, TEXAS.
AND I HAVE TO SAY COMMEND THE DEVELOPER DEVELOPER'S, UM, UH, REPRESENTATION, OUR CO UM, CO-CHAIR TEAM, WHICH IS EASTERN K COMBINED CONTACT TEAM FOR BEING OUT THERE FOR TWO WEEKS, EVEN ON SPRING BREAK BEFORE AND AFTER WORK DOING RESEARCH, THE COMMUNITY FOR WANTING TO KNOW MORE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.
BUT WHAT'S SENSITIVE ABOUT THIS AREA, MOST SENSITIVE, ACTUALLY TWO THINGS IS THAT WE HAVE A BLACK GENTLEMAN WITH HIS HORSES THERE.
SO THE DEVELOPERS DOING WHAT HE CAN DO TO WORK WITH HIM TO COLLABORATE, TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION TO MAKE HIM INCLUDED IN THIS PROJECT BEING IMPROVED.
WE ARE CLOSER TO HAVING, UH, NEGOTIATED, UM, COMMUNITY BENEFITS AS WELL.
AND WE ARE WORKING TOWARD, WE'RE PROGRESSING THERE.
WE'RE ALMOST THERE WITH THE DEVELOPER.
UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK, WE JUST GOT AN UPDATE TODAY AND WE'RE STILL SPEAKING ON THAT RIGHT NOW.
UM, BUT I CAN SAY FOR SURE THAT, UM, WE, WE ARE, WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING LEADWAY WE'RE GETTING SOLUTIONS THAT THE COMMUNITY IS HAPPY WITH AND WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING CLOSER AND THE DEVELOPER HAS, UM, ACTUALLY AGREED TO GO AHEAD AND HELP INFORM THE COMMUNITY AGAIN SINCE IT'S BEEN LIKE A YEAR SINCE THEY'VE BEEN UPDATED AS WELL.
I HEAR FROM MS. UH, NADIA BARBO ON, UH, 11 AND 12, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16.
[00:20:04]
OKAY.MS. NADIA BABAS BE SPEAKING ON ITEMS 13, 14, 15 AND 16.
UM, AS YOU MAY KNOW, THERE ARE LOTS AND LOTS OF ZONING CASES AND CHANGES IN EAST AUSTIN.
SO IT DOES GET REALLY COMPLICATED.
AND THIS IS NOT THE ONLY CASE I'M SPEAKING ON TONIGHT.
IT'S KEEPING THE COMMUNITY VERY BUSY, TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH AND AND DIGEST ALL OF THESE CHANGES.
UM, I THINK THE MAIN THING I WANTED TO ADD TO WHAT ANGELA SAID ON, UM, THESE FOUR, UH, CASES IS THAT THERE'S A, A TOTAL OF A THOUSAND NEW UNITS OF HOUSING, UM, WHICH IS A LOT, LOT.
UM, AND WHEN WE'RE TALKING, THAT'S A BIG IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT, UM, ALMOST NO NEIGHBORS KNEW ABOUT IT.
UM, I'M NOT SURE BECAUSE, UM, SINCE WE'RE NOT, UH, DOING A, THIS IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, I GUESS WE DIDN'T SHOW A MAP, UM, BUT THERE'S NO NEIGHBORS IMMEDIATELY IN THE 200 FOOT NOTICE LOCATION.
SO WHAT, BASED ON WHAT WE FOUND, UM, GOING DOOR TO DOOR IN THE HOGPEN NEIGHBORHOOD, NEIGHBORS HAVE ALMOST NO IDEA THAT THIS IS HAPPENING.
AND THE HOGPEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, HAD CLOSED DOWN LAST YEAR.
UM, UH, AND SO WE ARE, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO RE REINVIGORATE THAT, UM, AS A CONTACT TEAM.
UM, BUT THAT WAS THE REASON THE, IT'S A THOUSAND UNITS OF NEW HOUSING AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE WERE KIND OF DISCUSSING IN DETAIL ALL OF THE, UH, ALL OF THE IMPACTS AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR BENEFIT, UM, TO THE NEIGHBORS.
UM, AND THE, THIS NE THIS DEVELOPER, I WOULD SAY HAS BEEN REALLY, REALLY, UM, ACCOMMODATING, UM, AND RESPECTFUL, UM, THEIR WHOLE, UH, DEVELOPMENT, UM, TEAM.
UH, SO WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT ON THE CONTACT TEAM CUZ THAT IS NOT ALWAYS THE CASE.
UM, AND UM, WE APPRECIATE, UH, THAT, UH, AND WE DO WISH THAT THERE WAS SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT WE CAN WORK WITH THEM ON.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS DURING THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, JUST WANT TO GIVE A QUICK CHANCE.
WE HAD TWO ITEMS AND, UM, AM TELL, I WANNA RECOGNIZE YOU.
YOU HAD, UH, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO ITEM 32 AT ALL BECAUSE, UM, I THINK YOU HAD INITIALLY PULLED IT, NOW IT'S ON CONSENT.
IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO, UM, SPEAK TO ON THAT ITEM? THANK YOU CHAIR.
I WAS LOOKING FOR, WE, I THINK WE HAD THE AMENDMENT LANGUAGE WORKED OUT.
UM, I'M SORRY, I ACTUALLY HAVE NOT SEEN IT IN THE, THE RECENT BACKUP, SO I DON'T KNOW IF OTHERS HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO SEE THAT.
SO I WAS GONNA ASK LIAISON IF WE COULD LOOK AT THAT BRIEFLY.
AND, UM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU WANT ME TO ADDRESS.
SO WE SHARE REGARDING THAT, UH, THERE, THERE WAS SOME LANGUAGE, MOSTLY IT WAS READY TO GO ON CONSENT.
THERE WERE A FEW CHANGES TO SOME OF THE LANGUAGE IN THE, IN THE ORDINANCE TO KIND OF, UH, CLARIFY SOME QUESTIONS THAT HAD COME UP BEFORE TONIGHT'S MEETING.
SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH IT STILL BEING ON CONSENT? I WAS HOPING TO JUST GET A QUICK LOOK AT THE AMENDMENT LANGUAGE CHAIR, COMMISSION, LAY LIAISON, ENVERA.
UM, SO, UM, THE LANGUAGE WOULD BE TO THREE A C AND IT WOULD NOTE CROSSES AND AD OR ADJACENT TO AN AREA IDENTIFIED AS OKAY.
OKAY, SO WE'LL KEEP THAT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX? I THINK THERE WAS, YEAH, I THINK THERE WAS ONE OTHER CONCERN ABOUT, YEAH, I'LL DEFER TO COMMISSIONER COX.
WELL, NO, I WAS JUST, I I WAS SORRY, I WAS JUST DRAGGED THERE FOR A SECOND.
ARE, ARE WE TAKING IT OFF CONSENT? IT'S CURRENTLY ON CONSENT THAT I WANTED TO RECOGNIZE ANY CONCERNS AND MAYBE MAKE SURE WE ADDRESS COMMISSIONER MOTOS.
UH, I THINK THERE'S BEEN SOME WORK DONE, UH, TO GET IT TO WHERE SHE'S SATISFIED WITH THE LANGUAGE, BUT, UM, SO I, WE'RE LEAVING ON CONSENT UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS TO PULL IT IS, WELL IS THAT AMENDMENT ANYWHERE IN THE BACK? I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING IT.
UM, I RECEIVED IT AND WAS READING IT MR. RIVERA, IS IT IN THE CHAIR COMMISSION? LAY ON ARA.
SO IT WAS, UH, DISS A MINUTE TO THE, UM, UH, FIRST READER OF THE, UH, CONSENT AGENDA
[00:25:01]
AND THE CHAIR, UH, UH, TO READ INTO THE RECORD.I CAN DISSEMINATE IT TO THE, UH, COMMISSION.
CAN WE, CAN WE GO AHEAD AND PULL IT AND THEN, UM, I'LL TRY TO READ THE AMENDMENT AND SEE IF THAT ADDRESSES EVERYTHING.
AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN WE, WE DON'T NEED TO CHAT ABOUT IT.
UH, MR. RIVERA, CAN WE HAVE THAT READY TO DISPLAY WHEN THE TIME COMES? CERTAINLY PULL IT.
ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA PULL ITEM 32.
HOPEFULLY WE ADDRESS THAT VERY QUICKLY.
ITEM 30, OH, COMMISSION COMMISSIONER DESIGN.
CAN I JUST ASK, I KNOW THAT IT'S AHEAD OF THE EVERGREEN DAN IMPROVEMENTS.
IS THERE A WAY FOR US TO PUT THAT AT THE END? JUST BECAUSE I KNOW FOR SOME OF THE OTHER ONES WE MIGHT HAVE COMMUNITY MEMBERS OR APPLICANTS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE GO THROUGH THOSE FOR US BEFORE WE GET TO, UM, AN ORDINANCE THAT ESSENTIALLY REQUIRES ONLY STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION.
ANY OBJECTIONS TO MOVING THAT TO THE END SINCE? OKAY.
ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA MOVE 32 TO THE END.
UH, JUST REAL QUICK, UH, ITEM 33, ANYTHING YOU WANNA SPEAK TO ON THAT ITEM? MS. UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
SO THE AMENDMENT IS JUST NOW TO ALLOW FOR ANY CON ANY PROPERTY WITHIN THE CAPITAL DOMINANCE OVERLAY TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS.
THIS IS SIMILAR TO WHAT THIS BODY PASSED WHEN WE LOOKED AT WHAT WAS GONNA BE A NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SADLY WE'RE HEARING FROM A LOT OF FOLKS THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF ZONING CASES BECAUSE WE HAVE A VERY OUTDATED LANE DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND SO WE ALREADY PASSED TO DO THIS AND COUNCIL ALSO PASSED THIS ON FIRST AND SECOND READING.
THIS JUST MATCHES WHAT WE DID A COUPLE YEARS AGO.
AND I THINK THAT'S, OH, I KNOW, UM, MR. RIVERA IS ON THE ASSIGNMENTS FOR, UM, OUR CHAIR, VICE CHAIR PARLIAMENTARIAN.
DO THOSE HAVE TO GET APPROVED BY COUNSEL? I FORGET CHAIR.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO THEN MOVE UP JUST BEFORE WE GET INTO DISCUSSION CASES.
ITEM 42 ON THE NOMINATION OF PARLIAMENTARIAN, I, I MIGHT NEED A PARLIAMENTARIAN
UH, AND, UM, ANY, ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO MOVING THAT UP AFTER WE PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA? OKAY.
WE'RE GONNA TAKE CARE OF THAT RIGHT AFTER WE, UH, I GO THROUGH THE READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, AND THERE, LET'S GO AND GET TO IT.
SO WE HAVE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA
[ Consent Agenda]
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MARCH 14TH.ITEM TWO, PLAN, AMENDMENT, UH, APPLICANT, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM THREE, PLAN AMENDMENT, APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM FOUR, PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
ITEM FIVE, PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF, POSTPONE TO MAY 23RD.
THAT IS A DISCUSSION CASE ITEM SEVEN, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
ITEM EIGHT, PLAN AMENDMENT, NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TILL APRIL 11TH, APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT.
ITEM NINE, REZONING NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 11TH, APPLICANT IN AGREEMENT.
WE HAVE ITEM 10, REZONING NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 11TH AND WE HAVE ITEM 11 REZONING AND IT'S, UH, COMPANION ITEM 12.
THESE ARE BOTH REZONING CASES.
THOSE ARE BOTH ON CONSENT NOW.
UH, THAT ITEM IS ON CONSENT NOW.
ITEM 14, REZONING IS ON CONSENT.
ITEM 15, PLAN AMENDMENT IS ON CONSENT.
ITEM 16, REZONING IS ON CONSENT ITEM 17, PLAN AMENDMENT.
THIS ITEM IS UH, UP FOR DISCUSSION AS WELL AS ITEM 18.
REZONING CASE IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 19.
PLAN, AMENDMENT AND UM, YES AND IT'S COMPANION REZONING CASE ITEM 20.
THOSE ARE BOTH FOR DISCUSSION.
THEN WE MOVE TO, UH, YES ITEMS 21 AND 22, THE PLAN, AMENDMENT AND REZONING.
THOSE ARE BOTH FOR DISCUSSION AND THE 20 THREES.
REZONING CONSENT AS AMENDED PER EXHIBIT A NEIGHBORHOOD AND APPLICANT AGREED COS ITEM 24, HISTORIC REZONING OWNER POSTPONEMENT, UM, REQUEST APRIL 25TH.
WHAT DID WE SETTLE ON THERE? IS IT ON APRIL 25TH,
[00:30:01]
MR. RIVERA CHAIR? THAT IS CORRECT.UH, ITEM 25, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TILL APRIL 25TH.
31, UH, REZONING NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 11TH.
ALL RIGHT, UH, THE CODE AMENDMENT ITEM 32, WE'RE MOVING TO THE END.
UH, THAT'S PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE THAT TO THE END.
YES, THE C OJC RECOMMENDATION WITH AMENDMENT BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON IS ON CONSENT.
ITEM THREE TO 4 34 CODE AMENDMENT IS ON CONSENT ITEM 35.
ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE ONLY IS FOR DISCUSSION 36 ON CONSENT.
37 DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C.
UH, 38 DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C.
AND WRAPPING THE UP ITEM 39, FINAL PLATFORM APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C.
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA? DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, INCLUDING THE MINUTES FROM MARCH? UH, MARCH 14TH? UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR HEMPEL.
I'D LIKE TO BE SHOWN IN VOTING NO ON ITEM 34.
I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE THIS DENSITY, BONUS FEE IN LIEU FOR TEXT STREETS THAT DON'T ALLOW FOR GREAT STREETS, BUT TO CHARGE FOLKS THE EXACT AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT IT COSTS TO BUILD THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WHEN THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO BUILD THEM AND MAKE THEM BUILD THE SIDEWALKS THAT THEY HAVE TO BUILD ANYWAY.
THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO PAY MORE FOR GETTING LESS AND THEY WOULD RATHER BUILD THE GREAT STREETS.
AND SO I JUST THINK THIS FEE IS FAR TOO HIGH.
I DON'T WANNA PULL IT JUST CUZ IT WOULD HOLD UP HOUSING.
WE HAVE A BIG NIGHT, BUT HOPEFULLY THIS GETS RESOLVED BEFORE IT GETS TO CITY COUNCIL.
OKAY, WELL SHOW ON THE RECORD.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, VOTING AGAINST THAT ITEM.
ALL RIGHT, UH, I HAD A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO APPROVE, UM, CONSENT AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR HEMPEL.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
UH, AND THOSE ON THE DIAS IN FAVOR.
SO THAT, UH, WE HAVE CLEARED THE CONSENT AGENDA.
AND, UH, REAL QUICKLY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO ITEM 42.
[42. Election of interim parliamentarian.]
I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, NOMINATE, UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR TO BE MY PARLIAMENTARIAN.I HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, AND THE REASON IS HE HAS BEEN HERE PRETTY REGULARLY ON THE DIAS HELPING ME, UH, AND ALSO HAS ROLES IN OTHER COMMISSIONS AND IS VERY EFFECTIVE.
SO, UH, I'M JUST GONNA SAY THIS.
ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO, UM, COMMISSIONERS ARE SERVING AS PARLIAMENTARIAN? ALL RIGHT.
HEARING NONE, UH, WE GO AHEAD AND, UH, PASS THAT.
COMMISSIONER ZA, I SAY THANK YOU, CHAIR.
NOW OUR FIRST DISCUSSION CASE, LET, UH, ROOM CLEAR OUT QUICK.
ALL RIGHT, WELL LET'S GO AHEAD HERE, UH, FROM STAFF ON ITEM SIX,
UH, BECAUSE OF THE LARGE NUMBER OF CASES I NEED TO GET YOUR SUPPORT ON, ON MY NOTES HERE.
SO, UM, WE TYPICALLY, UH, ALLOW FOR EIGHT SPOTS FOR AT FIVE MINUTES EACH FOR Q AND A.
UM, AND WE CAN ALWAYS REVERT BACK IF WE REALLY NEED TO HEAR MORE AT MORE QUE Q AND A.
RAISE YOUR HAND AND WE CAN TAKE A VOTE.
BUT CUZ WE HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF CASES, I WOULD LIKE TO GO TO, UM, FIVE SPOTS AT THREE MINUTES EACH.
[00:35:01]
IT MAY SEEM RUDE, BUT IF YOU HAVE A SPEAKER THAT'S NOT ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION, PLEASE REDIRECT THEM QUICKLY, CUZ IT HAPPENS.YOU GO ON, THEN YOUR TIME'S GONE AND, AND THEN YOU DIDN'T GET ALL YOUR QUESTIONS.
SO I KNOW IT CAN BE A BREATH, BUT IT'S OKAY IF YOU NEED TO CUT 'EM OFF AND GET TO THE POINT.
UM, THAT WAY WE CAN GET THROUGH OUTTA HERE MAYBE BY 10 O'CLOCK.
SO WE'RE GONNA, ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT? WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION HERE.
SECONDLY, TYPICALLY WHEN IN DEBATE WE HAVE UPFRONT FOR AND AGAINST, WE HAVE ALLOWED THREE MINUTES EACH FOR THE PRIMARY SPEAKER, FOUR AND PRIMARY SPEAKER AGAINST.
AND THEN THE SECOND, THIRD SPEAKING, UH, GET TWO MINUTES.
I WOULD LIKE TO LOWER THAT NUMBER TO TWO MINUTES AND ONE MINUTE RESPECTIVELY.
AND IF WE'RE JUST CONSISTENTLY RUNNING OUT OF TIME, WE CAN RECONSIDER IT.
BUT LET'S TRY TO GO WITH THAT AND MAKE YOUR POINTS CONCISELY AND SEE IF WE CAN LIVE WITH THAT, UM, UH, MORE ABBREVIATED DEBATE.
SO IF WE HAVE, I MAY SUGGEST MOTIONS JUST TO KEEP THINGS MOVING, LIKE SOMETIMES JUST SAY STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, CAN WE GET A MOTION ON THAT AND IF THAT WORKS AND IF, UH, WE, I, IF WE DON'T GET ANY OBJECTIONS, IF I ASK AND THERE ARE NONE, WE MAY JUST MOVE THAT FORWARD.
COUNSEL IS DOING THAT AND THAT SEEMS TO MOVE THINGS THROUGH VERY QUICKLY, BUT IF THERE IS AN OBJECTION, WE'LL GO INTO DEBATE.
SO DO I HAVE A, UH, MOTION, UM, IN SUPPORT OF THESE CHANGED INTO OUR RULES? AND A SECOND WE JUST NEED A MOTION.
UH, WE HAVE, UH, OKAY, WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL AND SECOND TO COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
AND, AND WE'LL TAKE A QUICK VOTE.
ANY OBJECTIONS TO CHANGE OUR RULES? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE,
ALL RIGHT, NOW WE CAN MOVE INTO
[6. Plan Amendment: NPA-2022-0014.03 - Chapman 71; District 2]
THE FIRST CASE.UH, STAFF IF YOU WANT TO GIVE US, UH, OVERVIEW OF ITEM SIX.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UM, JESSE GUTIERREZ, UH, WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, ITEM SIX IS A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT CASE.
UH, THE CASE NUMBER'S NPA 20 22 0 1 4 0 3.
UH, THE ADDRESSES ARE 50 10 BURLESON ROAD, 35 0 3, 35 0 3 AND A HALF, 35 0 5, 35 0 7 35 33 CHAPMAN LANE, AND 49 0 5 5,001 5,005, 5,005 AND A HALF, AND 51 0 9 EAST BEND WHITE SERVICE ROAD.
EASTBOUND, UH, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST COMBINED, UH, MCKINNEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AREA.
UH, THIS IS A FUTURE LAND USE MAP CHANGE REQUEST FROM INDUSTRY TO COMMERCIAL.
UH, THE INCLUSIVE PLANNING STAFF TEAM DOES NOT RECOMMEND THE CHANGE.
UH, THE SOUTHEAST COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM HAS SUBMITTED A LETTER SUPPORTING THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND THAT LETTER, THAT LETTER CAN BE FOUND IN YOUR LATE BACKUP.
NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
MR. WHELAN, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES AFTER THE GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UH, MICHAEL WHALEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO DISCUSS OUR REQUEST TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OR THE FLUME FROM INDUSTRY TO COMMERCIAL FOR THE SITE AT 50 10 BURSON, WHICH WE CALL CHAPMAN 71.
RIGHT NOW WE ONLY HAVE THE MPA FILED.
WE HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE CONTACT TEAM, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER FUENTES OFFICE, AND WITH CITY STAFF WITH RESPECT TO THIS SITE FOR SEVERAL MONTHS NOW, AS A RESULT OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS, WE'VE ADJUSTED OUR REQUEST FROM MIXED USE TO COMMERCIAL AND WE ARE WAITING TO BRING THE REZONING CASE SO WE CAN FIRST ENSURE THAT COMMERCIAL USES WILL BE GRANTED VIA THE FLUME.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE'RE DOING THIS.
FIRST, OUR REQUEST IS SUPPORTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM AND I BELIEVE MS. ANNA AGUIRE IS HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF OUR REQUEST.
OOPS, AS WE'LL DISCUSS, UH, MOMENTARILY THE REQUEST.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS ISN'T, IT'S NOT TURNING.
UH, AS WE'LL DISCUSS MOMENTARILY, THE REQUESTED FLUME CHANGE ALIGNS WITH CITY PLANNING POLICIES AND WITH THE COMMUNITY'S VISION FOR THIS AREA, WITH THE GOAL OF ADDRESSING SOME HISTORICAL ISSUES AS IT RELATES TO LAND USE.
HERE'S THE LOCATION MAP OF THE SITE SO YOU CAN ORIENT YOURSELVES.
THE SITE IS ON BURSON ROAD AND CHAPMAN LANE WITH FRONTAGE ALONG THE EASTBOUND SERVICE ROAD OF EAST BEND WHITE.
AND HERE'S AN IMAGE OF THE SITE TODAY FROM THE FRONTAGE ROAD, IS LARGELY DEVELOPED WITH SURFACE PARKING LOTS WITH
[00:40:01]
SOME INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.AS YOU'VE HEARD, THE SITE IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED FOR INDUSTRIAL AND WE ARE SEEKING COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP, COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION IS CONSISTENT WITH MUCH OF THE NEARBY FRONTAGE TRACKS, INCLUDING MULTIPLE TRACKS LOCATED LESS THAN A QUARTER MILE AC AWAY ACROSS HIGHWAY 71.
OUR REQUEST IS SUPPORTED BY THE SOUTHEAST COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
IF YOU LOOK ON THE SCREEN, YOU'LL SEE SNIPPETS FROM THE ADOPTED PLAN, HIGHLIGHT ADDED FOR EMPHASIS.
THE PLAN SPECIFICALLY POINTS OUT THAT AREAS ALONG BEN WHITE AND OTHER MAJOR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS ARE QUOTE, DEFICIENT IN NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING BUSINESSES.
DASH BOTH COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE USES END QUOTE AND CALLS FOR LAND IN THE AREA TO BE ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE TYPE ACTIVITIES.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ALSO CALLS FOR INDUSTRIAL USES TO BE SET BACK FROM THE STREET FRONTAGES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AND IMPORTANTLY SUPPORTS A MIX OF COMMERCIAL OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL USES ALONG MAJOR THOROUGHFARES, NOT JUST INDUSTRIAL CHAPMAN.
71 IS LOCATED LESS THAN HALF A MILE FROM THE IMAGINE AUSTIN DOVE SPRINGS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.
AS WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS SITE, WE REALIZED THAT DOVE SPRINGS IS THE ONLY NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER THAT IS SURROUNDED BY ENLARGING MADE UP OF INDUSTRIAL USES.
THIS IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE STATED CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS, WHICH ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE SMALLEST AND LEAST INTENSE OF THE THREE MIXED USE CENTERS.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM HAS EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO SAFELY TRANSITION PARTS OF THIS AREA TO COMMERCIAL AND EVEN RESIDENTIAL USES, AND HAS BEEN WORKING TOWARDS THIS GOAL FOR MANY YEARS.
YOU'LL HEAR THAT DIRECTLY FROM MS. AGUIAR WITH THE BERKS FROM SPUR BEING DEVELOPED HERE IN THE AREA IS EVEN BETTER SUITED FOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STAFF.
OPPOSITION IS BASED ON CLAIMS THAT INDUSTRIAL LAND MUST BE PROTECTED BECAUSE IT IS AT, IT IS AT RISK OF DISAPPEARING.
HOWEVER, A 2020 REPORT GIVEN TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION BY STAFF FOUND THAT ONLY 38% OF INDUSTRIALLY ZONED LAND WAS USED FOR INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES.
IN FACT, OVER A QUARTER OF INDUSTRIALLY ZONED LAND IS UNDEVELOPED.
WHEN THE SOUTHEAST COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN WAS ADOPTED, THE LAND USE BREAKDOWN FOUND THAT 22% OF THE MCKINNEY AREA WAS DESIGNATED FOR INDUSTRIAL USES WHILE THE CITYWIDE AVERAGE WAS ONLY 5%.
GRANTING THIS FLUME AMENDMENT HELPS ADDRESS SOME OF THE HISTORIC ISSUES, AND IMPORTANTLY ADVANCES NEIGHBORHOODS GOAL OF INCREASING COMMUNITY SERVING ACTIVITIES.
THIS GOAL IS CAPTURED IN MULTIPLE CITY PLANNING DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING IMAGINE AUSTIN, WHICH REFERENCES A 2011 DOVE SPRINGS COMMUNITY MEETING.
OUT OF THE SIX PRIORITIES FOR THE COMMUNITY IN THIS, UH, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ONE WAS THE ADDITION OF RETAIL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES.
SO TO RECAP, GRANTING COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION BRINGS THE SITE INTO ALIGNMENT WITH SURROUNDING FRONTAGE PROPERTIES AND THE REQUEST IS SUPPORTED BY THE CONTACT TEAM AND NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING DOCUMENTS.
THE SOUTHEAST COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CALLS FOR INCREASED COMMUNITY SERVING BUSINESSES AND ACTIVITIES AND SEEKS TO SET INDUSTRIAL USES BACK FROM THE STREET FRONTAGE.
THE SOUTHEAST COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD AREA CARRIES A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF INDUSTRIALLY DESIGNATED LAND, AND IT IS THE ONLY AREA IN AUSTIN THAT OVERLAPS INDUSTRIAL USES WITH AN IMAGINED AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.
AND FINALLY, INDUSTRIALLY ZONED LAND, FAR OUTPACES DEMAND AS WE'VE SEEN CITYWIDE WITH ONLY 38% OF INDUSTRIAL LAND BEING UTILIZED FOR INDUSTRIAL USES AND OVER A QUARTER OF INDUSTRIALLY ZONED LAND LEFT COMPLETELY UNDEVELOPED.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND OBVIOUSLY I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
WILL I HEAR FROM MS. GUI? YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
AS A DISCLAIMER, FULL DISCLOSURE, CURRENTLY SERVE ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL.
BUT I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR OR ON THE BEHALF OF THE COMMISSION OR THE COUNCIL.
I AM THE IMMEDIATE PASTOR CHAIR OF THE SOUTHEAST COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.
AND I'M SPEAKING ON THE BEHALF OF THE CONTACT TEAM FOR THIS PURPOSE.
WE HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE OWNER, WHICH IT'S RARE WHEN WE HAVE THE OWNER WRITE THERE HAND IN HAND WITH THE APPLICANT FOR SEVERAL MONTHS.
UM, THE CONTACT TEAM VOTED IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM INDUSTRY TO COMMERCIAL.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE FUTURE PLANNED BERGSTROM SPUR PROJECT, WHICH WILL BE A BICYCLE AND WALKING TRAIL FROM SOUTH FIRST TO AUSTIN BERGSTROM INTERNATIONAL
[00:45:01]
AIRPORT.WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON MAKING OUR AREA A GO-TO AREA DESIGNATION AS OPPOSED TO JUST A PASSTHROUGH AREA, WHICH COMMONLY HAPPENS IN INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIALIZED ZONE OR AND LAND USE AREAS.
WE ARE RESPECTFULLY ASKING THAT YOU SUPPORT THE FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE REQUEST FROM INDUSTRY TO COMMERCIAL.
I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM PHILLIPE CASTILLO.
UH, MY NAME'S FELIPE CASTILLO.
UH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND WHILE I'M UP HERE, THANK, UH, ANNA A YET AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD TEAM FOR ALL THEIR SUPPORT.
IT'S BEEN A A VERY GOOD COLLABORATION.
WE'VE ALSO HAD BEEN FORTUNATE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OF FUENTES HAS BEEN PART OF THE TEAM AND IN WORKING THROUGH THIS, IT'S A VERY VISIBLE PARCEL FROM 71 THAT WE HOPE TO DO SOMETHING VERY SPECIAL FOR IT.
SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THAT CONCLUDES THE, UH, SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CONCLUDE THE PUBLIC HEARING? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SAY BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, WELL, ANY OBJECTIONS
JUST REMINDER, WE HAVE FIVE THREE.
WHO WANTS TO KICK US OFF? UH, SEE COMMISSIONER COX WITH HISS HAND UP.
I DON'T WANNA GO DOWN TOO MUCH OF A RABBIT HOLE, BUT, UM, THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION VERY MUCH EMPHASIZE THE WHOLE INDUSTRIAL ZONING ISSUE.
UM, I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION TO STAFF IS WHEN WE DO AN ANALYSIS LIKE THIS AND THROW OUT ALL THESE PERCENTS OF UTILIZED, UN-UTILIZED, THAT SORT OF THING, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT WE'RE SEEING A MISREPRESENTATION OF UTILIZATION OF INDUSTRIAL TRACKS BECAUSE WE MIGHT BE ADDING PDA TO ALL OF THEM IN ORDER TO GET CONDOS AND APARTMENTS, OR MAYBE THEY'RE IN FLOOD PLAINS THAT CAN'T BE DEVELOPED.
UM, COULD YOU POTENTIALLY ELABORATE ON THAT A LITTLE BIT FOR US? SURE, COMMISSIONER, UM, THE PLAN IS ALSO PRETTY OLD, SO THE PERCENTAGES HAVE PROBABLY CHANGED SINCE THEN.
UM, BUT OVERALL, I THINK, UM, YOU COULD FIND INSTANCES WHERE, UM, UNDEVELOPED LAND WAS JUST, UM, FLUMED AS INDUSTRY.
SO THAT'S WHY YOU WOULD PROBABLY GET A PERCENTAGE OF INDUSTRIALLY, UH, FLUMED LAND JUST UNDEVELOPED.
SO THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY WAREHOUSE OR INDUSTRY ON THAT LAND PER SE.
UM, THAT MIGHT BE ONE REASON WHY.
UM, YEAH, THERE I DON'T, IS IS, IS THAT STUDY THAT Y'ALL DO OR ANY FUTURE ANALYSIS THAT YOU DO JUST LARGELY DEPENDENT ON THE BASE ZONING OR, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT EVEN MORE L I PDA CASES, WE'VE SEEMED TO BE GOING THROUGH A BUNCH OF THEM, AND I EXPECT THERE TO BE MORE.
DOES THAT MISREPRESENT THE AMOUNT OF INDUSTRIAL ZONING WE ACTUALLY HAVE IF WE'RE ADDING PDA IN ORDER TO GET RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL? I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
I'D HAVE TO ASK, UM, SOME OTHER COLLEAGUES OF MINE.
UM, YEAH, I'M NOT SURE TO BE HONEST, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE YOU WOULD GO THROUGH AND FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH INDUSTRIAL WE HAVE IF WE'RE RAPIDLY CONVERTING ALLY TO L I P D A AND THEN NOT HAVING INDUSTRIAL ANYMORE
YEAH, AND YOU'D YOU'D HAVE TO LOOK AT LIKE THE ACTUAL, LIKE YEAH, THE ZONING, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE ACTUAL LAND USE THAT'S THERE.
THERE'S A LOT OF LAND USES THAT WERE THERE BEFORE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN WAS ADOPTED, UH, 20 YEARS AGO, WHENEVER IT WAS.
THERE'S, THERE'S SOME LAND USE THAT AREN'T EVEN PART OF THE PLAN, THAT JUST HAVE BEEN REMNANTS OF WHAT THE AREA WAS, YOU KNOW, 20 YEARS AGO OR, OR BEYOND.
AND MY, MY LAST QUESTION, UM, SO DID, WHEN, WHEN Y'ALL MADE THIS RECOMMENDATION NOT TO SUPPORT THIS CHANGE, I KIND OF PICTURE, YOU KNOW, MAJOR TRAFFIC TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS LIKE HIGHWAY 71 AS BEING REALLY SUPPORTIVE TO COMMERCIAL.
UM, BUT THIS IS RIGHT ON HIGHWAY 71, SO COULD YOU ENLIGHTEN US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY Y'ALL WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTIVE OF COMMERCIAL ON A MAJOR HIGHWAY LIKE THAT? SURE.
I THINK REAL QUICK, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE NEXT QUESTION.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, YOU DON'T HEAR THE, PROBABLY CAN'T HEAR THE BUZZER, BUT WE'LL GO AND ROLL INTO MY, MY TIME.
SO GO AHEAD AND ANSWER THE QUESTION PLEASE.
UM, THERE WAS DEFINITELY A CONVERSATION
[00:50:01]
BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN DOES STATE THAT COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES ARE ALLOWED OR OKAY, ON AND WHITE FOR INSTANCE.UM, BUT WHAT WASN'T SHOWN IN THE PRESENTATION PREVIOUSLY IS THAT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY IN THE, UH, IMAGINE AUSTIN, UH, JOB CENTER, MCKINNEY JOB CENTER, UM, WHICH IS, UM, PRETTY SIGNIFICANT IN TERMS OF ITS LOCATION.
UM, SO I'LL JUST READ FROM, FROM, UM, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
IT SAYS THESE CENTERS TAKE ADVANTAGE OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, AS YOU MENTIONED, SUCH AS ARTERIAL ROADWAYS, FREEWAYS, OR AUSTRIAN BERKSHIRE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.
UM, SO THE FACT THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, UM, IS LOCATED IN AT A JOB CENTER IS PRETTY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT HAS ACCESS TO THESE MAJOR ROUTES THAT ARE GOOD FOR INDUSTRY WAREHOUSING.
AS, AS I'M SURE YOU'LL KNOW, UM, WITH MORE AND MORE WAREHOUSING, AMAZON, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
THESE AREAS ARE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GROWING ELSEWHERE.
BUT THIS IS WHAT A CONCENTRATION WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN THAT'S KEY TO THAT.
THERE'S OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN INDUSTRIAL IN THE PAST WHERE YOU SEE THE KIND OF PD LAP PDAS CHANGING, RIGHT.
UH, YOU'RE LOOKING EAST AUSTIN.
THIS IS AN AREA THAT'S STILL KIND OF INTACT IN SOME WAYS, AND I THINK THAT'S WHY OUR TEAM CHOSE TO NOT RECOMMEND BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, MOVING TOWARDS MIXED USE OR TOWARDS COMMERCIAL WOULD KIND OF JUST TIP THAT DOMINO TOWARDS MORE COMMERCIAL AND MORE MIXED USE, WHICH IS GREAT IN ST.
IS IT NECESSARY HERE AT THIS TIME OR EVEN MOVING FORWARD? UM, ALSO IN TERMS OF JOB BASE, UM, THE BLUE COLLAR JOBS THAT EXIST IN THIS AREA WILL BE LOST.
SO WHATEVER COMMERCIAL COMES IN, WHICH WE DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF COMMERCIALS COMING IN, UH, MIGHT NOT BE THE SAME TYPE OF JOBS FOR RESIDENTS OF AUSTIN THAT NEED BLUE COLLAR JOBS WITHIN THE CITY.
THIS IS SOMETHING ELSE TO THINK ABOUT IN TERMS OF WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DISPLACEMENT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT ONLY HOUSING, BUT ALSO JOBS AND WORK TYPES.
SO THAT'S ANOTHER REASON THE CONVERSATION WAS GEARED TOWARDS, UH, NOT SUPPORTING THIS, UM, CHANGE AT THIS TIME.
I'M GONNA GO AND YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME.
DO I HAVE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY? YEAH, I'M, I AM INTERESTED IN, UM, SORRY.
I'M INTERESTED IN THIS POINT THAT YOU MAKE ABOUT THE JOBS AND ABOUT THE NEED FOR BLUE COLLAR JOBS AND THAT DISPLACEMENT.
AND MY QUESTION IS, DO, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY WORK BEING DONE OR STUDIES BEING DONE AROUND UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE LONG-TERM PROJECTED DEMAND ACTUALLY IS FOR, UH, INDUSTRIAL LAND WITHIN THE CITY? AND DO YOU HAVE SOME SENSE OF THAT? CUZ WE'VE LOOKED AT HOW MUCH IT'S BEING USED RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M WONDERING, YOU KNOW, WHERE THIS ALIGNS WITH OUR PLANS.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I'VE HEARD OF, LIKE THAT'S IN PROGRESS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I THINK IT'S SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT.
UM, THERE IS A LOT OF TALK ABOUT WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY AND OBVIOUSLY TRYING TO, UM, GET THE WORKFORCE TO, YOU KNOW, MOVE TOWARDS HIGHER PAYING JOBS, BUT THERE'S HIGHER PAYING JOBS IN BLUE COLLAR.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, UH, DEPARTMENT OR TEAM.
I THINK THE INDUSTRIAL STUDY DOES MENTION THAT THE INDUSTRIAL STUDY THAT OUR DEPARTMENT PUT OUT PROBABLY ABOUT THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO.
SO THINGS HAVE DRAMATICALLY CHANGED SINCE THEN.
UM, BUT I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT TOPIC TO TALK ABOUT TO, TO, TO STUDY.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE UP TO COUNCIL PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAYBE INITIATE THOSE TYPES OF, UH, UH, KIND OF STUDIES, UM, AND TO MAKE THEM OFFICIAL, I FEEL LIKE.
UH, COMMISSIONERS ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? ANYBODY? SO ON THIS ONE, UM, WE HAVE, WELL, WE HAVE A MOTION.
OH, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO GRANT APPLICANT REQUEST FOR CHANGE IN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM INDUSTRIAL TO COMMERCIAL.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON'S SECOND SET.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SURE.
UM, I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE INDUSTRIAL SITES AND MAINTAINING INDUSTRIAL JOBS, BUT IT SEEMS THAT HAVING THE CONTACT TEAM AND SUPPORT THE LOCATION ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD WITH COMMERCIAL ACROSS THE STREET AND THE PROXIMITY OF BERGSTROM SPUR, THERE'S MORE POTENTIAL COMMUNITY BENEFIT IN THIS SITE AS COMMERCIAL THAN AS INDUSTRIAL.
UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING OB POSITION? SAYING NONE.
DO WE HAVE COMMISSIONER SPEAKING IN FAVOR? MR. FOX? COMMISSIONER FOX? OH, COMMISSION, UH, YOU SPEAKING AGAINST OR IN FAVOR? YEAH, I THINK I'M GONNA SPEAK AGAINST, OKAY, GO AHEAD.
[00:55:01]
I DON'T REALLY LIKE THESE FLU CHANGES WITHOUT A ZONING CASE ATTACHED.I KNOW WHY APPLICANTS DO IT, BUT THERE'S JUST SO MANY UNKNOWNS AND I THINK A LOT OF THE INFORMATION WE PROVIDED IS EITHER AMBIGUOUS OR, UH, PROBABLY OUT OF DATE.
AND I JUST THINK THAT THAT TH THIS, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THIS MAKES SENSE TO ME.
I KNOW THIS AREA PRETTY WELL AND IT, AND IT DOES MAKE SENSE.
I UNDERSTAND WHY THE CONTACT TEAM WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THE CHANGES, BUT I JUST THINK WE WOULD NEED MORE INFORMATION, UH, BEFORE I FEEL COMFORTABLE MAKING A CHANGE LIKE THIS.
I'LL, I'LL JUST MAKE DUE COMMENTS.
I, I REALLY WANNA SAY I, I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS STAFF IS MAKING AND I REMEMBER THAT 2020 REPORT.
WELL, I, I THINK THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT ARE WORTHY OF CONSIDERING.
ONE IN RECENT YEARS, PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ACTUALLY ZONED PARTS OF THE PARCELS ON, UM, BEN WHITE TO OTHER USES.
I KNOW PARTICULARLY ALONG BEN WHITE AND MONOPOLI, WE SWITCHED A BUNCH OF LOTS TO COMMERCIAL, PARTICULARLY WITH SUPPORT, HONESTLY, FROM THE CONTACT TEAM.
AND I REALLY DO WANT TO APPRECIATE MS. AGUIRE AND HER LEADERSHIP ON THEIR CONTACT TEAM AND THE WORK THEY'VE DONE.
PART OF THE ISSUE THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE IS THAT THE PLUM WAS ADOPTED 20 YEARS AGO.
AND SINCE THEN, NOT ONLY HAS THE AREA CHANGED, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S VISION OF WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS CHANGED.
AND I THINK THAT'S WORTHY OF HONORING HERE.
AND I ALSO WANNA SAY, HONESTLY, THAT EQUITY ISSUE IS HARD TO PUT ASIDE OUT OF THE, I REMEMBER IN THE REPORT, OUT OF THE AREAS THAT WERE CONSIDERED TO BE INDUSTRIAL AND HAVE HAD LOSS, YOU KNOW, TWO OF THEM SAYING ELMO AND, UM, UH, NORTH BERNARD GATEWAY ARE WEST OF 35, RIGHT? APART FROM NORTH RESEARCH BOULEVARD.
MOST OF THE AREAS WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO STILL MAINTAIN THAT INDUSTRIAL ZONING IS EAST OF 35.
IT'S WORTHY FOR US TO CONSIDER THAT.
AND AGAIN, I REALLY APPRECIATE STAFF'S COMMENT OF SAYING HOW DO WE DO MORE, UH, PLANNING AROUND THIS.
UH, COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, TAKE A VOTE.
UM, AND FOR THOSE ON VIRTUAL, KEEP YOUR CARDS UP.
UH, CUZ I GOTTA KIND OF TAKE NOTE HERE.
SO THOSE ON THE DIAS IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO, FOR APPLICANT, UM, UH, PLAN AMENDMENT CHANGE FROM INDUSTRY TO, UH, INDUSTRY TO COMMERCIAL LAND USE.
UH, THOSE IN FAVOR? UH, SIX, SEVEN.
UH, THOSE IN FAVOR, VIRTUALLY, UH, THIS AMENDMENT, UM, SORRY.
AND, UH, ON THE DIOCESE VOTING AGAINST, UH, THAT'S CHAIR SHAW AND THOSE VOTING AGAINST ON VIRTUALLY.
ALL RIGHT, SO THAT MOTION PASSES 11 TO TWO.
I KNOW I'M TRYING TO KEEP THIS QUICK.
STAFF, CAN YOU PLEASE SHARE THAT INDUSTRIAL REPORT WITH OUR NEW COMMISSIONERS? I KNOW THAT WAS A VERY HELPFUL REPORT.
UH, MR. RIVERA CAN, LET'S SEE.
[Items 17 & 18]
17 AND 18 TAKING THOSE UP TOGETHER? YES, SIR.THESE ARE THE BOARD AND TRACKED ITEMS. UH, AND JUST FOR NEW COMMISSIONERS, IF WE HAVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AND REZONING, WE TRY TO TAKE THOSE UP AT THE SAME TIME.
SO STAFF, UM, MARIE MEREDITH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT ITEM NUMBER 17 IS NPA 20 22 0 0 1, 6 0.02.
THE BOARD TRACK IS WITHIN DISTRICT THREE.
THE PROPERTY ADDRESSES ARE 21, 21 AND A HALF, 41 AND 71 STRATMAN COVE AND 11 21 41 41 AND A HALF.
JULIANA CO IS WITHIN THE GAAL JOHNSON TERRACE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE CAVALLI SUB AREA, THE REQUEST IS A CHANGE OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM INDUSTRY TO MIXED USE, AND IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF JOY HARDEN WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM 18, ON YOUR AGENDAS CASE NUMBER C 1 14 20 22 0 1 21 BORDEN TRACK.
IT'S LOCATED AT MARIE JUST STATED, BUT 21, 21 AND A HALF, 41 AND 71 STRATMAN COVE AND 11 21 41 AND 41 A HALF COVE.
THE SITE IS OVER 21 ACRES AND DEVELOPED WITH THE BOURN DAIRY FACILITY.
THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED L I C O N P AND THE APPLICANTS REQUEST, THIS I P D A IN P STAFF RECOMMENDS L I P D A NP COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING.
ONE OF THE CONDITIONS WILL ESTABLISH THAT A KITTO LOUNGE USE CANNOT EXCEED 15,000 SQUARE FEET.
[01:00:01]
THE PDA WILL ALSO PROHIBIT SEVERAL USES WHICH ARE OUTLINED ON PAGE THREE OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.AND THE APPLICANT DOES AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
THE REASON FOR SUPPORT IS THAT THE REZONING WILL PROVIDE A MIX OF USES.
THE AREA STANDARDS, UM, IN THIS PDA WILL ADD TWO RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UNITS USES, UH, CONDOMINIUM, RESIDENTIAL AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
AND, UH, AS WELL AS THE TEL NOUN USE THAT I JUST SPOKE ABOUT.
UM, AGAIN, THAT WOULD LIMIT, UM, HAVE A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION UNLESS THE APPLICANT, UM, WAS WILLING TO DO A C P.
THE PROPOSED PED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MODIFY SETBACKS, BUILDING HEIGHTS, BUILDING COVERAGE, AND F A R TO CREATE A DENSE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE GROWTH TRENDS.
THE BIGGEST ASK BY THE APPLICANT WOULD BE THE PROPOSED HEIGHT OF 120 FEET AS THE EXISTING ZONING HEIGHT ALLOWS FOR 60 FEET.
HOWEVER, THIS SITE IS FURTHER AWAY FROM THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY.
IT'S PROXIMITY TO THE HIGHWAY AND ITS LOWER ELEVATION MAKES THE HEIGHT AND THE REQUEST FOR THE MIXER USES APPROPRIATE LOCATION.
I MAY HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, MR. RICHARD SULE.
MR. SULE, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
HOPEFULLY I CAN GIVE YOU SOME BACK CHAIRMAN MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
MY NAME'S RICHARD SUT AND IN LIGHT OF YOUR HEAVY AGENDA TONIGHT, I'M JUST GONNA DO AN ABBREVIATED PRESENTATION CAUSE I THINK YOU HAVE SOME NEIGHBORS HERE TO TALK.
WE JUST FEEL LIKE THIS IS A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD CASE.
UH, IT'S, IT'S A CASE THAT'S AWAY FROM NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS.
IT'S BOUNDED BY TECH DOT JURISDICTION, UH, ROADWAYS.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY HOUSES NEARBY.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO PROVIDE 1400, UH, MULTI-FAMILY OR CONDOMINIUM UNITS.
AND BECAUSE WE SIT DOWN LOW AT THE, AT THE, UH, HIGHWAY INTERSECTION THERE, WE JUST FELT LIKE ASKING FOR THE 120 FOOT IN HEIGHT AND NOT TOWER ON OVER IN ANYBODY WOULD NOT BE AN IMPOSITION.
AND OUR ATTITUDE WAS KIND OF, IF, IF NOT HERE, THEN WHERE WITH THAT, I'LL CLOSE AND RESERVE FOR REBUTTAL.
ONE, I HEAR FROM MR. CHRISTOPHER BROWN IN OPPOSITION.
MR. BROWN, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I BETTER DEFER TO MR. THE CONTACT FOR THE POLAR PRESENTATION.
CHAIR, BEAR, BEAR WITH ME WITH JUST, JUST FOR ONE MINUTE.
WE GOTTA, UH, JUST GOTTA PUT UP THE PICTURE.
HOW MUCH TIME DO I HAVE BEFORE YOU START MY TIME? HOW MUCH TIME DO I HAVE? YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I I CAN GO AHEAD AND START AS, AS HE BRINGS IT UP.
UM, SO THE APPLICANT CAME, UH, TO THE CONTACT TEAM WITH A PROPOSAL YOU HAVE, UH, BEFORE YOU 125 FEET, 95% IN PREVIOUS COVER AND BUILDING ALL THE WAY TO THE COLORADO RIVER PRESERVE.
THE CONTACT TEAM, CATEGORICALLY, UH, OPPOSED THIS.
AND, UH, WE BEGAN TO, UH, HAVE NEGOTIATIONS.
WE, WE'VE HAD MANY, MANY, UH, MEETINGS WITH THEM.
AND, UM, UH, THE REASON THAT WE REJECT THIS, THIS PROPOSAL E EVEN THOUGH, UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S NOT NEAR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IT IS ABSOLUTELY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF YOU CAN SEE THERE, UM, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE SITE IS AND THAT CIRCLE RIGHT THERE IS THE ONLY, THE ONLY, UH, ENTRANCE TO THIS SITE FROM EAST, WEST, NORTH, AND SOUTH.
AND THERE, AND THERE IS A, IT'S LIKE A BOTTLENECK THERE.
SO THE, THE SCOPE OF THIS, UH, UH, PROJECT WOULD ALREADY OVERWHELM THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE HAVE HERE TODAY.
THERE'S LESS THAN 500, UH, TRIPS PER DAY.
THIS, THIS PROJECT WOULD PROJECT 21,000 TRIPS PER DAY ON THAT LITTLE BOTTLENECK RIGHT THERE.
SO, UM, WE BEGAN NEGOTIATIONS AND WE ACTUALLY REACHED AGREEMENT ON, ON, UH, UH, BUILDING AWAY FROM THE PRESERVE, WHICH IS GREAT, BUT WE COULD NOT FIND AGREEMENT ON THE HEIGHT IN THE, IN PERVIOUS COVER.
AFTER SOME CONVERSATIONS, THE APPLICANT OFFERED A 90, UH, UH, 90 FOOT, UM, UH, MAXIMUM HEIGHT, BUT THERE WAS NO SUPPORT.
AND ON THE CONTACT TEAM, WE CAME BACK WITH A COUNTER OFFER OF A, OF A 75 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT WITH 65% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND LET ME TALK ABOUT THE IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR A MINUTE.
UM, THAT GOES TO HEAT ISLAND AND, UH,
[01:05:01]
WE HAVE GOT TO TAKE CLIMATE, CLIMATE, UH, UH, UH, THE, THE CLIMATE SITUATION LITERALLY HERE, UH, IT, IT SPEAKS TO HEAT ISLAND EFFECT AND IT ALSO SPEAKS TO RUNOFF TO THE MORE CEMENT WE HAVE, THE MORE ROOFS WE HAVE, THE MORE RUNOFF WE HAVE.SO THIS IS WHY WE ARE ASKING FOR SIX, NO MORE THAN 65% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO THE CONTACT TEAM, UM, SO WHEN WE COULDN'T FIND AGREEMENT ON THE 90 FEET, THEY CAME TO YOU.
SO, UH, WE ARE STILL IN, IN A POSITION WHERE WE WOULD CONSIDER A 75 FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT WITH 65% IMPERVIOUS COVER AND A HUNDRED FOOT BUFFER FROM THE PRESERVE.
UH, SO THIS IS WHERE WE ARE TODAY, BUT IF, IF THEY ARE APPLYING FOR THE 120 FEET, UH, AT, UH, 95% PERVIOUS COVER, WE ARE OPPOSED TO THAT.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
WELL NOW HERE FOR MS. SUSAN AMANZA.
YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES BEFORE WE START.
DID WE SKIP CHRIS BROWN? OH, WE CAN BRING HIM BACK IF YOU WANNA GO.
YOU COME FIRST, CHRIS, I THINK, UH, BECAUSE HE'S A RESIDENT RIGHT NEXT TO THE AREA AND YOU COULD HOLD HIM FIRST.
AND THESE ARE THREE MINUTES, CORRECT, MR. SURE.
WELL, I'LL TRY TO BE MORE BRIEF THAN THAT.
UH, UH, COMMISSIONERS, MY NAME'S CHRIS BROWN.
UH, I'M, UH, I'M HERE AS A CO-FOUNDER OF THE COLORADO RIVER CONSERVANCY, A NONPROFIT COALITION WE STARTED A FEW YEARS AGO OF NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS AND ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS TO FOCUS ON ADVOCACY OF THE URBAN RIVER BELOW LONGHORN DAM TO THE CITY LIMITS.
UH, I'M ALSO THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNER TO THIS SITE.
I LIVE, I DON'T KNOW, MUST BE A FEW HUNDRED FEET, UH, FROM THE WESTERN END OF THE SITE, UH, DOWN AT THE END OF RED BLUFF ROAD.
UM, WHAT THE STAFF'S MATERIALS, I THINK FAIL TO MAKE CLEAR TO THE COMMISSION IS THAT THIS SITE IS ADJACENT TO A 43 ACRE WILDLIFE PRESERVE.
UH, THAT, UH, AS RECENTLY AS THE 1970S WAS USED FOR MINERAL EXTRACTION AND HAS TO COMMUNITY EFFORTS AND PUBLIC EFFORTS BEEN RESTORED TO KIND OF REALLY REMARKABLE CONDITION, UH, AND IS IN TURN PART OF A NETWORK OF OTHER PARKLANDS AND, UH, RIPARIAN WATERWAYS THAT FORM THAT ENTIRE COLORADO RIVER CORRIDOR BETWEEN LONGHORN DAM AND, AND REALLY ALL THE WAY TO THE TESLA PLANT.
AND THIS IS THE SORT OF FIRST BIG REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT BEFORE THE CITY TO THINK ABOUT WHAT ARE THE STANDARDS WE WANT TO APPLY WITH RESPECT TO HOW THAT CORRIDOR IS GOING TO LOOK IN 20 OR 30 YEARS.
WOULD YOU WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE DOWNTOWN, OR DO WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE ESSENTIALLY WILD AND NATURAL CHARACTER THAT THE RIVER THAT WE HAVE, WHICH IS A REALLY EXCEPTIONALLY RARE, UH, ASSET, NATURAL ASSET TO HAVE OF ANY CITY OF THIS SIZE? UM, IN ADDITION TO BEING A HOME TO ALL MANNER OF WILDLIFE, THIS STRETCH OF RIVER BETWEEN LONGHORN DAM AND THE MOUTH OF WALNUT CREEK IS THE ONLY STRETCH OF URBAN WATERWAY IN THE STATE THAT MEETS THE STANDARD OF A, OF SO-CALLED PRISTINE WATERS UNDER THE PRISTINE WATERS.
BILL THAT GOT OUTTA THE TEXAS HOUSE LAST SESSION ISN'T UNDER CONSIDERATION AGAIN.
UM, THE, UH, CURRENT USES ON THIS SITE ARE ACTUALLY SURPRISINGLY COMPATIBLE WITH, UH, THESE PARKLAND USES IN THAT, UH, THE CURRENT, UH, DAIRY PLANT ONLY OCCUPIES ABOUT 50% IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE AND LEAVES SUBSTANTIALLY, UH, ADDITIONAL PORTIONS AS VACANT LAND THAT SORT OF FUNCTION AS UNOFFICIAL ANNEXES TO THE PRESERVE.
THE PROPOSAL TO REZONE TO, UH, MIXED USE TO AN L I P D A, UH, WOULD ALLOW ON THE FACE OF THE CODE A DENSITY THAT WOULD BE UP TO 95% WAS ESSENTIALLY ZERO SETBACKS ALONG THIS PRESERVE, UH, TO THE BACK AND TO THE SIDE.
AND, UH, THE ISSUE OF HEIGHT, I MEAN, THE HEIGHT WOULD BE DOUBLE THE HEIGHT OF THE ADJACENT, UH, THE NEARBY, UH, BRIDGES AT 180 3 OVER THE RIVER AND WOULD, UM, AND WHAT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT MIGRATORY BIRD CORRIDORS HERE IN THE AREA.
UM, AND SO WE WOULD, UH, UH, AGREE WITH THE IDEA THAT SOME KIND OF MIXED USE, UH, MAKE SENSE FOR THIS SITE, BUT WE WOULD URGE THAT IT BE DONE WITH, UH, UH, A DENSITY THAT'S, UH, IN BETTER BALANCE WITH THE EXISTING, UH, UH, PARKLANDS AND ADJACENT WILDLIFE QUARTER.
WE'LL, NOT HERE FOR MS. SUSANA.
GOOD AFTERNOON PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
I'M SUSANA, UH, WITH POD, UH, PART OF THE GO VALLEY JOHNSON TERRACE CONTACT TEAM.
AND I WANNA JUST REMIND YOU THAT THIS PARTICULAR, UH, PROPOSAL HAS NO ZERO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT IS ALL MARKET RATE AND WANTING TO GO AT 120 FEET.
WE DO NOT HAVE A BUILDING THAT TALL IN EAST AUSTIN.
[01:10:01]
FOOT THAT CAME UP AT THE OLD TANK FARM SITE.AND SO HERE YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE THEM ENTITLEMENTS, GO BEYOND THE ZONING BASE ZONING OF 60 FEET TO NOT 75 OR 65, BUT 120 FEET IS WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
AND ANYONE WHO'S DRIVEN DOWN CSO CHAVEZ ON THEIR WAY TO MYTA THIS WILL KNOW YOU CANNOT HANDLE 21,000.
AND WHEN YOU'RE COMING FROM THAT SITE GOING TO C CHAVEZ OR FIFTH STREET, IT ONLY LETS ONE CAR AT A TIME BETWEEN THOSE ISLANDS TO TAKE A LEFT ON CSO CHAVEZ OR FIFTH STREET, IT WOULD BE A MAJOR TRAFFIC JAM, UH, ON THAT PARTICULAR SITE.
I WOULD ASK YOU ALL TO DRIVE IT SO THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE WHAT IS, WHAT IS HAPPENING.
AND WHAT I SEE NOW IS, UM, DEVELOPERS NOW USING L I P D A TO TRY AND SKIRT WHAT IS REALLY, UH, THEIR HEIGHT DENSITY.
UH, WE HAD AGREED ON THE EAST FIFTH STREET TO GO LET THEM ON ONE PORTION, 75 FEET.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SAYING, OKAY, WE'RE, WE'RE WILLING TO GO THE 75 FEET, BUT WE'RE NOT WILLING TO GO TO 90 AND 120 FEET.
AND ALSO BECAUSE IT DOES IMPACT, UH, THE ENVIRONMENT, THE ROY GREDO, COLORADO RIVER PARK, THE COLORADO RIVER, THE PRESERVE, ALL OF THOSE THINGS WE TALK ABOUT.
BUT I THINK THE FACT THAT THERE'S NOT AFFORD, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWING ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHATSOEVER.
THIS IS DEFINITELY IDENTIFICATION PROJECT IN EAST AUSTIN AND ONE THAT WILL SET THE PRESIDENT GOING ALONG COLORADO RIVER, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE NOT AWARE, THEY HAVE BEEN BUYING UP THE LAND ALONG COLORADO RIVER ALL THE WAY UP TO TESLA.
AND IF YOU LET 120 FEET, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GONNA SEE ALONG THAT WHOLE CORRIDOR ALONG THE COLORADO RIVER.
SO I ASK YOU, PLEASE DO NOT GIVE ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS, UH, TO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND THIS DEVELOPER.
I'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
AND I WANT TO THANK THE CONTACT TEAM CUZ WE'VE HAD SOME GOOD MEETINGS AND, AND WE'LL CONTINUE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AS THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD.
THE, THE TRAFFIC THAT WAS MENTIONED, THAT'LL BE HANDLED AT THE SITE PLAN.
THIS, THESE, UH, ROADS ARE TEXT DOT JURISDICTION ROADS.
WE WILL HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL, UH, TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE THAT COMES WITH THIS, UM, IN EXCESS OF SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS.
BUT THAT AGAIN, THAT THAT GETS HANDLED AT THE SITE PLAN PHASE.
IF WE CAN'T MAKE THE TRAFFIC WORK, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE ZONING IS, WE'LL, WE'LL SITE PLAN FOR IT.
ON THE SETBACKS FROM THE PRESERVE, WE'D ORIGINALLY OFFERED A SETBACK THAT WAS BASICALLY THE FOUR 40 CONTOUR THAT, THAT WENT FROM ANYWHERE FROM 35 FEET TO 135 FEET AND AVERAGED 86.
IF THE COMMISSION THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS IMPORTANT, WE COULD STILL DO THAT.
UM, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, WE DID ASK FOR 95% BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CS ZONING.
AGAIN, WE COULD DO 80 UNDER THE ALLY.
IT, IT'S A MATTER OF THE DENSITY, BUT IF THAT IS AN ISSUE, WE'LL, WE CAN STICK WITH THE ALLY IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, UM, WE DON'T HAVE INCLUSIONARY ZONING IN, IN, IN TEXAS.
AND SO, UH, WE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IF YOU ASKED US TO DO AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR PARTICIPATION IN THE EAST AUSTIN CONSERVANCY, WE COULD VOLUNTEER TO DO THAT.
AND THAT IN THAT INVOLVES, UH, IF WE DID 10% AT 60% MFI, WE WOULD CONTRIBUTE, I BELIEVE IT'S $500 A, UH, MARKET RATE UNIT INTO THE EAST AUSTINSON CONSERVANCY FUND.
IF IT'S 10% AT 80, I THINK IT WOULD BE A THOUSAND DOLLARS PER PER UNIT, AND WE COULD DO ONE OR THE OTHER UNDER THAT, THAT UNDER THE EAST AUSTIN, UH, CONSERVANCY PLAN.
AGAIN, IF YOU WERE TO ASK US, THEN WE COULD VOLUNTEER IT.
I MEAN, WE'RE JUST, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO DO, UM, AT THE INTERSECTION OF TWO HIGHWAYS, 1400 UP TO 1400 RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
AND, UM, WE HOPE, WE HOPE THAT, THAT YOU LOOK KINDLY ON THIS AND WE'LL RECOMMEND IT.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
DO WE HAVE MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL IN, UH, NO OBJECTIONS.
UH, WELL, UM, I I JUST WANNA CLARIFY SOMETHING.
WE HAVE SOME NEW COMMISSIONERS, MR. RIVERA, BUT WE AREN'T ABLE TO INCLUDE, UM, COS OR ANYTHING REGARDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING PERCENTAGES OR CONTRIBUTIONS.
IS THAT CORRECT? CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LIAISON, AND RIVERA? THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, IT DOESN'T, UM, ENTITLE ANY, ANY, UH, CONDITIONS OF FORD LAW.
WE DO STRONGLY ENCOURAGE IT, BUT WE CAN'T INCLUDE THAT IN ANY KIND OF CONDITION OF THE, UH,
[01:15:01]
REZONING.UH, JUST WANNA MAKE THAT CLEAR.
SO, UM, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS TWICE? YOU HAVE OH, VICE YOUR, YOU'RE TRYING TO UNMUTE? UM, YES.
UH, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT HAVING TO DEAL WITH THE WILDLIFE SANCTUARY.
UM, I'M CURIOUS IF THERE'S AN ECOLOGIST ON YOUR TEAM AND, UM, THE AVERAGE SETBACK IS, IS A, IS A GREAT THING TO HAVE UP AGAINST THAT SANCTUARY, BUT I'M WONDERING IF THERE ARE, UM, OTHER INITIATIVES IN THE WORKS.
AGAIN, I KNOW THIS WOULD BE AT SITE PLAN, BUT THE DISCUSSIONS THAT START OUT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT TOO ABOUT LIGHTING.
UM, JUST HOW, HOW YOU CAN PROTECT THAT, THAT SANCTUARY THAT YOU'RE ADJACENT TO.
A AS WE GET CLOSER TO SITE PLANNING AND PLANNING THE SITE, WE WILL INVOLVE OUR ENVIRONMENTAL FOLKS ON BEST PRACTICES FOR BEING AGAINST, UH, THE PRESERVE.
AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE A C E F SETBACK ON ONE SIDE OF IT THAT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCES.
WE'RE GONNA SET BACK FROM THE, THE WETLAND C E F.
AND THEN AS WE GET MORE INTO THE PLANNING, UM, WE WILL TALK ABOUT BUILDING ARTICULATION, PROBABLY PUTTING MORE OF OUR WATER QUALITY PONDS.
THERE ARE NO WATER QUALITY PONDS ON THIS SITE NOW, SO THE WATER JUST DRAINS OFF UN UNTREATED.
WE'LL PROBABLY PUT OUR WATER QUALITY FEATURES CLOSER TO THE BO THE BOUNDARY WITH THE PRESERVE, WHICH WILL ENHANCE THE PRESERVE MORE THAN IT IS NOW AND SET THE BUILDINGS BACK.
BUT AS WE GET INTO IT, OUR, OUR ECOLOGIST AND OUR ENVIRONMENTAL FOLKS WILL BE WORKING ON THAT.
DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? VICE CHAIR? OKAY.
IS THERE SOME QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, MAYBE I'LL START OUT WITH THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF SOMEONE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS TO COME UP.
UM, CURIOUS, UH, DO YOU HAPPEN TO NOTE, I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT REPRESENTATION ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP.
ARE THERE ANY RENTERS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP, ON THE CONTACT TEAM? AND IF SO, ROUGHLY HOW MANY OF THE TEAM ARE RENTERS? WE, WE HAVE HAD, UH, UH, CONTACT TEAM MEMBERS BEING RENTERS, UH, IN THE PAST, WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE RIGHT NOW.
OUR CONTACT TEAM IS COMPOSED OF SIX NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENTS, THREE NONPROFITS, AND TO, UH, BUSINESS PEOPLE ALL FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND YOU'RE THE PRESIDENT, CORRECT? GREG? DON'T START PERSONALIZING THIS.
I DIDN'T KNOW I WAS, YOU, YOU ARE.
AND THE LAST TIME I CAME UP HERE, YOU, YOU ATTACKED ME PERSONALLY AND SHIELDED YOURSELF FROM BEHIND THERE.
AND THE CHAIR DID NOT PROTECT ME.
I'M PRETTY SURE THESE ARE RECORDED AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT HAPPENED.
AND IF IT DIDN'T, I'D LOVE FOR YOU TO SHARE THAT WITH US.
BUT PLEASE LET ME BRING THIS STORY.
MR. YOUNG IS, UM, JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION AND THEN I WANNA GIVE YOU PLENTY OF TIME.
WELL, LIKE I SAY, WE HAVE HAD RENTERS BEFORE.
WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE RIGHT NOW.
IT IS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND, UH, HOMEOWNERS, BUSINESS PEOPLE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO TIMES CONSERVE JUMP IN REAL QUICK.
I DO HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION IF YOU'RE WILLING TO ASK, BUT I, I HOPE YOU DON'T TAKE THIS PERSONALLY.
UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU'RE MAYBE AGAINST THE PRESUMED OR THE, THE HEIGHT THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AND THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND YOU MENTIONED THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE TWO.
IS THERE ONE OF THOSE THAT'S A BIGGER CONCERN THAN THE OTHER? WOULD IT BE HEIGHT OR IMPERVIOUS COVER? IS ONE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE OTHER TWO? JUST CURIOUS.
THEY'RE BOTH EQUALLY IMPORTANT.
AND, AND LIKE I SAID, THE THANK YOU, I'VE NOT MUCH TIME, SO THANK YOU.
A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF REAL QUICK.
IT CAN COVER ONE HOME, IT CAN COVER 10 HOMES, IT COULD COVER 20 HOMES.
IMPERVIOUS COVER IS IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO DOES, DOES IMPERVIOUS COVER CARE WHETHER OR NOT IT COVERS ONE HOME OR IF IT COVERS 20 HOMES IN A TALLER BUILDING? IS IMPERVIOUS COVER IMPERVIOUS COVER? FOR THE MOST PART, YES.
I MEAN, IF YOU DIG DEEP, THERE COULD BE IMPACTS TO RECHARGE FEATURES OR AQUIFERS, ET CETERA.
BUT IN GENERAL, THE WAY THE CODE IS SET UP, WHETHER IT'S 40 FEET OR 10 FEET, IT'S IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND THEN THE APPLICANT, I DID HEAR SOMEONE SAY YOU'RE NOT ALLOWING ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THEN I HEARD YOU SAY YOU'RE UP FOR IT.
COULD YOU BE CLEAR ON WHAT YOU GUYS LOOK TO DO? CUZ IT, WE CAN'T ASK YOU FOR IT, BUT IT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU WERE LOOKING TO VOLUNTEER IF YOU'D GO AHEAD AND DO SO.
[01:20:01]
SO AS WE UNDERSTAND IT, WE'VE BEEN PROPOSED OR, OR BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE, I THINK IT'S, IT'S CALLED THE EAST AUSTIN CONSERVANCY PROGRAM AND IT'S A, IT'S A PROGRAM THAT'S DUAL PURPOSE.IT, IT PROVIDES OR ENCOURAGES AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THEN IT ALSO FUNDS FOLKS TO STAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HELPS THEM WITH WHATEVER GENTRIFICATION OR COST PROBLEMS THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE.
AND THAT IS A PROBLEM THAT, OR THAT IS A, A PROGRAM THAT WE'RE WILLING TO DO.
NOW, WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS, IS THAT WE WOULD, DEPENDING ON, ON WHAT YOU THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT, WE COULD DO 10% AT 60% OR WE COULD DO 10% AT 80%.
AND THEN, AND THEN THERE ARE FUNDS THAT FLOW ALSO FROM THAT, THAT GO INTO THE CONSERVANCY.
TO BE CLEAR, I AM HEARING YOU COMMIT TO 10%, BUT YOU'RE JUST, YOU'RE OKAY.
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE DETAILS.
JUST REAL QUICK BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I JUST WANT FOLKS OUT THERE TO UNDERSTAND WE ARE, ARE TRYING TO REALLY RUSH THROUGH THESE QUESTIONS.
SO AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE ABRUPTNESS AND CUTTING FOLKS OFF.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET ALL OUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED.
SO I'M, I'M SORRY IF WE'RE APPEARING TO BE RUDE, BUT WE'RE, AGAIN, WE'RE PUTTING OURSELVES ON A VERY TIGHT TIMELINE, SO APPRECIATE YOUR, UH, UH, TOLERANCE.
UH, ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY AND THEN WE'LL, UH, COMMISSIONER MUTA.
MY, MY QUESTIONS ARE FIRST FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, JUST TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY AROUND, UM, THE AFFORDABLE, THE AFFORDABILITY THAT IS BEING VOLUNTEERED.
SO ARE YOU SAYING 10% ONSITE UNITS OR 10% FEE IN LIEU PAID TO THE EAST AUSTIN CONSERVANCY? IT'S BOTH.
IT'S 10% ONSITE AT 60% OR 80%.
AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, THE CONSERVANCY PROGRAM SAYS THAT YOU PAY THEM ON TOP OF THOSE AND THEY USE IT FOR OTHER, OTHER THINGS.
BUT THERE WOULD BE 10% OF THE UNITS ONSITE, ONSITE, ONSITE.
AND, AND BETWEEN 60, 60 AND 80, 60 WOULD BE AN OPTION FOR THOSE UNITS.
AND THEN I, UM, FROM THE CONCERNS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD RAISED, THEY ASKED ABOUT THE BUFFER AND Y'ALL AGREED TO THAT ENVIRONMENTAL BUFFER.
COULD YOU JUST SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE? WHAT WE'D AGREED TO WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT AN AGREEMENT ON THE TOTAL PACKAGE WAS WE'D AGREED TO THE FOUR 40 CONTOUR, WHICH FOR THE BULK OF THE PROJECT, IT'S A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL BUFFER.
IT RANGES FROM 135 FEET DOWN TO 35 FEET AVERAGES, 86 FEET OF BUILDING SETBACK.
NOW, WE WOULD WANT TO BE ABLE TO PUT OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, OUR STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND STUFF IN THERE, BUT IT WOULD KEEP THE BUILDINGS OUT OF THAT.
UM, AND THEN ONE MORE QUESTION, SORT OF THE REVERSE OF, OF COMMISSIONER ANDERSON'S QUESTION, WHICH IS BETWEEN HEIGHT AND IMPERVIOUS COVER.
ARE, IS THERE ONE OF THE TWO THAT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO YOU FOR THIS PROJECT? I'M GONNA RESPOND JUST LIKE DANIEL DID.
NOW WHAT WE DID WAS WE, LIKE I SAID, WE ASKED FOR THE 95% BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE HAVE GOTTEN USED TO ON CS MU ZONING.
UM, BUT IN DEFERENCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND BY THE WAY, THEY'VE BEEN GREAT.
THEY'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH US.
UM, UM, JUST WE BACK, WE BACKED IT DOWN TO 80%.
SO 80% WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO YOU.
AND YOU HAD SUGGESTED YOU HAD PROPOSED A COMPROMISE OF 90 FEET HEIGHT.
IS THAT WELL, WE HAD A, WE HAD A MIX OF, OF HEIGHTS AND, AND WE JUST COULDN'T REACH AN AGREEMENT YET ON THAT BECAUSE THEY, UM, AND I'LL LET, THEY SHOULD PROBABLY SPEAK TO THIS, BUT THEY WERE REALLY PRETTY WELL LOCKED IN ON 75 FEET AND THAT ABSOLUTELY DOESN'T WORK FOR US.
BUT FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, 90 FEET WOULD'VE BEEN A COMPROMISE THAT YOU COULD LIVE WITH? NO, NO.
IT, IT WAS A COMBINATION OF SOME HUNDRED 10, SOME 90.
IT, IT WAS AN ELABORATE CONVERSATION AND WE NEVER GOT ANYWHERE ON IT.
SO YOU WOULDN'T BE INTERESTED IN, IN A COMPROMISE REACHING AN AGREEMENT FOR 90 FEET HEIGHT? NOT AT 90, NO.
UM, AND THEN I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW.
UH, WE HAD COMMISSIONER MOTO AND OH SURE.
UM, CHAIR, I REALLY DO JUST WANNA REMIND ALL FOLKS AS A POINT OF ORDER THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS NOT A PART OF ZONING.
AND I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY CONVERSATION THE APPLICANT MIGHT BE HAVING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WE CANNOT REQUIRE ANY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THEM AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD EITHER.
UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, NOTHING WAS BEING REQUIRED.
I WAS ASKING WHAT WAS BEING VOLUNTEERED.
NO REQUIREMENT TAKEN
THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER MR. TO THANK GOOD JOB AVE
UM, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE HELPFUL FOR SOME OF THE NEWER FOLKS TOO.
I, I THINK, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS HASN'T HAD ENVIRONMENTAL
[01:25:01]
REVIEW BEFORE COMING TO US.CAN WE ASK FOR THAT? AND I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY WE ASKED FOR THAT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CAME FROM NEIGHBORHOOD OR APPLICANT, BUT THANK YOU.
I DON'T KNOW FROM WHOM, UH, IT WAS ASKED, BUT A STANDARD ZONING CASES DON'T GET GO TO WATERSHED.
UM, D S D UM, PROVIDES AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DURING THE SITE PLAN PHASE, IF, UM, DURING THE CONSTRUCTION WHERE YOU'RE BUILDING, IF, UH, THINGS OCCUR, THEN WE GET A REVIEW FROM ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF.
UM, PUDS OF COURSE HAVE TO GO TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, UM, CERTAIN OTHER CASES ON OCCASION.
BUT THIS IS STANDARD, NOT, THIS WOULD BE, THEN THIS WOULD BE THE CASE FOR ANY PROPERTY UP AND DOWN THE COLORADO AND L C R A AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
IS THAT CORRECT? I MEAN, NO MATTER, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK BLANKETLY, BUT JUST STANDARD RE ZONINGS TYPICALLY DO NOT GET, GO TO LIKE AN ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
IT MAKES IT HARD TO CONSIDER THE IMPACTS OF THIS REZONING ON THE ENVIRONMENT GIVEN ITS LOCATION AND THE MAGNITUDE OF THE PROJECT WITHOUT HAVING THAT.
UM, AND THEN I AM, WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO WORD THIS QUESTION, SO I'LL, I'LL YIELD MY TIME AND MAYBE IT'S THAT.
WELL, MR. MOOCH TELLER, THE APPLICANT WAS WANTING TO SPEAK TO YOUR LAST QUESTION.
DO YOU WANT TO PERMIT THEM TO DO, TO EXPAND? YEAH, OF COURSE.
DANIEL HAD ASKED US, UH, OR ASKED STAFF TO SEND US TO ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, AND WE RESPECT RESPECTFULLY AND POLITELY DECLINED BECAUSE IT'S, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCES, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY ENVIRONMENTAL WAIVERS.
THIS SITE IS ZONED INDUSTRIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SITE COULD BE BUILT OUT AND THERE WOULDN'T BE AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW EITHER.
UM, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY ENVIRONMENTAL REGS.
WE'RE GONNA COMPLY WITH ALL CITY ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS INCLUDING WATER QUALITY THAT'S NOT OUT THERE TODAY.
AND THAT'S WHY WE DECLINED THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER BOARD AND COMMISSION.
UM, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, DO YOU AND I, I'LL HONOR YOU, MARK, I WANT TO HEAR FROM MS. UH, MR. YEZ.
DO YOU, I'LL GIVE YOU MORE TIME.
DO YOU WANT GO AND MOVE INTO YOUR QUESTIONS? BUT COULD WE START WITH, UM, MR. YEZ EXPANDING ON THAT LAST QUESTION? OKAY, THANK YOU.
AND AS MUCH, CAN THIS BE BRIEF? YES, SIR.
UH, UH, MS. MARSHAL, YOU, YOU ACTUALLY BRING IN A BIG POINT AND LIKE STAFF SAYS TYPICALLY, BUT THIS IS NOT TYPICAL.
THIS IS ON THE COLORADO RIVER AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT GOING EAST THESE DAYS.
AND SO, UH, WE ASKED FOR A POSTPONEMENT, UH, A TWO WEEK POSTPONEMENT LAST TIME SO THAT WE COULD, UH, ASK THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TO DO AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
I TALKED WITH, UH, HOR, UH, WITH JORGE, I FORGET HIS LAST NAME FROM WATERSHED PROTECTION.
BUT IN, IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS, AND AS, AS GOING FORWARD ALONG THE COLORADO, AS DEVELOPMENT IS MOVING FURTHER EAST, WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THIS, WE HAVE TO CONSIDER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
AND THIS PROPERTY IS RIGHT ON THE COLORADO.
WELL, IT'S STILL, THE WATER STILL GOES DOWN THERE, RICHARD.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX, I, YEAH, I JUST WANNA START OUT THAT THIS IS THE BIGGEST CASE WE HAVE TONIGHT.
UM, IT'S BIGGER THAN THE STATESMAN PUT IN TERMS OF AREA, SO I REALLY HOPE THAT THIS COMMISSION AND THE CHAIR IF NEEDED, ALLOW FOR MORE TIME FOR QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS.
I KNOW WE'RE TRYING TO TRIM EVERYTHING, BUT THIS, THIS CASE IS IMPORTANT.
I, I GUESS I, I WANTED TO START, START OUT WITH, UM, UH, STAFF.
I THINK WE HAVE MS UH, JOHNSON.
I, I, I WAS CURIOUS TO HEAR FROM STAFF ABOUT WHAT THEIR CONCERNS OR, OR IF THEY HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE A THIRD TO A HALF OF THE SITE IS UNDEVELOPED RIGHT NOW, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE MOVING TO SOMEPLACE BETWEEN 80 AND 95% IMPERVIOUS COVER RIGHT NEXT TO WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE THE MOST PRISTINE WILDLIFE SANCTUARY WE HAVE IN THE CITY.
SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS TO HEAR FROM STAFF IF THEY HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.
UM, LIZ JOHNSTON, DEPUTY ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER WITH WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT, AND AS, UM, JOY MENTIONED, WATERSHED DO NOT GET DISTRIBUTED ON STANDARD ZONING CASES.
UM, MY STAFF HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED A CONCEPT SITE PLAN, WHICH, UM, THEY DID REVIEW FOR, UM, A COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT CODE RELATED
[01:30:01]
TO WETLAND PROTECTION.UM, AND SO WHILE I, I, UM, UNDERSTAND THEIR CONCERNS, AND I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE, UH, ANY CONCERNS RELATED TO THE COLORADO RIVER, UM, PRES PRESERVE, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL LOCATION.
UM, THERE ISN'T REALLY A PROCESS, STANDARD PROCESS FOR US TO INSERT OURSELVES IN CASES LIKE THIS.
IF IT, IF IT GOES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL, WOULD THAT KIND OF AUTOMATICALLY CREATE A MORE DETAILED REVIEW FOR THE, FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION? NO, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE FAIRLY PRECEDENT SETTING.
AND I'M NOT SURE BY WHICH STANDARD THEY WOULD REVIEW IT.
UM, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A PUD, WHICH HAS CODE PROVISIONS THAT DISCUSS SUPERIORITY ELEMENTS, AND THERE'S BEEN MANY OF THEM TO LOOK AT.
UM, UM, AND SO, AND THERE'S STAFF FEE
SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WOULD LOOK AT NECESSARILY.
WE WOULD LOOK AT, UM, EXISTING CONDITIONS, UM, AND EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WOULD NECESSARILY HAVE ANY SOLID RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO IMPERVIOUS COVER, FOR EXAMPLE.
UM, ANOTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANYONE FROM ATT D, BUT THE, BUT THE ATT D UH, MEMO, THE SITE BOUNDARIES THAT Y'ALL ARE USING IN THE MEMO APPEAR TO BE ONLY ABOUT HALF OF THE ACTUAL SITE THAT'S PART OF THE ZONING CASE.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THAT WAS JUST A, A MISTAKE OR IF THAT POTENTIALLY IMPACTS THE RESULTS OF YOUR MEMO.
GO, GO AHEAD AND ANSWER COMMISSIONER COST'S QUESTION IF, IF YOU CAN PLEASE.
AMBER HUTCHINS, AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.
I'M ASK FOR A ARE YOU, I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE, THE SITE THAT WAS STUDIED WAS ONLY HALF OF WHAT'S UNDER THE ZONING CASE? THAT'S CORRECT.
WELL, IT, THE, THE EXHIBIT, THE FIGURE THAT'S DE DEPICTED IN YOUR MEMO.
IT'S ONLY ABOUT HALF OF THE SITE THAT'S ACTUALLY PART OF THE ZONING CASE.
I WAS JUST WANTING TO CONFIRM THAT THAT DID OR DID NOT IMPACT YOUR ANALYSIS.
IF ANYTHING, IT'S MAYBE AN EXHIBIT ERROR.
I'M GONNA NEED TO CHECK ON THAT.
THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WAS ASSESSED WITH HIS ETA.
SO COMMISSIONERS, I DO HAVE MORE QUESTIONS.
UH, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, I'D LIKE TO GO TO EIGHT AT THREE, EXTEND IT, GIVE THREE MORE, UH, GO TO OUR USUAL NUMBER.
UM, AND UH, SO I WANT ONE OF THOSE SPOTS IF I CAN.
BUT I'M GONNA, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER HAYNES HAD SOME QUESTIONS IF YOU WANNA PROCEED.
UM, AND UH, IT'S A, IT'S A STAFF WATERSHED.
UH, I'M SORRY, I, I MISSED MS. JOHNSON.
YOU GOTTA PUT IT REAL SIMPLE FOR ME CUZ I'M THE ROOKIE AND I'M STILL TRYING TO CATCH UP.
THIS GENTLEMAN GOES, IF, IF WE DO THIS RESOUNDING THIS GENTLEMAN GOES FORWARD AND PUTS UP 1400 UNITS OR WHATEVER IT IS, UM, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO, TO GET THE SITE APPROVED, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH WATERSHED, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH BUFFERS, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO DO STORM WATER, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO DO TO MAKE SURE, AND THIS IS THE PRISTINE AREA ON THE COLORADO AND WE'RE REALLY GONNA MAKE SURE HE FOCUSES ALL THAT.
CUZ I LIVE ON A CREEK TOO AND I KNOW WHAT THE, I KNOW WHAT I HAVE TO DO TO EVEN PUT IN A DECK OR A PRIVACY FENCE.
AM I RIGHT, WRONG OR INDIFFERENT? UM, CORRECT.
THE SITE PLAN WOULD BE, UM, REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH EXISTING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
REAL QUICK, MY QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I'M CURIOUS, UM, YOU'LL, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HAS THE LAST SPOT I THINK SO, UH, MY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS ALLIED ZONING, THIS LOOKS LIKE, UH, IT WAS INDUSTRIAL, UH, AS AN INDUSTRIAL USE.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S RIGHT THERE AIRPORT AND A LOT OF ACCESS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE FOR AN INDUSTRIAL FACILITY.
UH, WHY WOULD WE NOT WANT TO MAINTAIN THAT TYPE OF USE ON THIS
AND THERE'S MIXED USE TO THE NORTH AND MIXED USE TO THE WEST.
AND WE THOUGHT TRANSITIONING THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY TO MIXED USE WAS APPROPRIATE.
AND THEN, UM, OH YES, UH, WE HEARD THE, THIS IS FOR STAFF TOO.
I NEED HELP IF WE DO A, SOME KIND OF CO ON THE BUFFER.
I, I'M NOT SURE HOW WE WOULD EXPRESS THAT CUZ TYPICALLY
[01:35:01]
WE JUST SAY NUMBER OF FEET, BUT THEY EXPRESSED IT DIFFERENTLY AND IT KIND OF HAD A, I GUESS IT VARIED.SO I'M NOT SURE HOW WE WOULD EXPRESS A BUFFER CONDITION, UH, BASED ON WHAT THE APPLICANT STATED.
UM, IT, IT SOUNDED LIKE IT'S JUST NOT X NUMBER OF FEET.
WHAT WAS, UM, MR. SETTLE, WHAT WAS THE TERM YOU, UH, USED TO EXPRESS THE LOCATION OF THAT BUFFER? WHAT WAS THE WE ORIGINALLY TIED IT TO THE FOUR 40 CONTOUR, WHICH FOUR 40.
SO STAFF, IS THAT SOMETHING WE COULD, IS THAT A WAY TO EXPRESS A BUFFER? THAT WOULD, AND IN OUR MIND THAT WAS A BUFFER FOR BUILDINGS.
WE WANNA BE ABLE TO PUT OUR WATER QUALITY FEATURES IN THAT BUFFER FOR BUILDINGS.
IT WAS A BUILDING, BUILDING SETBACK.
IF WE CAN GET THE ONE 20, CAN WE, CAN WE EXPRESS A SETBACK IN TERMS OF A COUNTRY? I, I, I BELIEVE WE CAN, UM, WORK WITH THAT.
UM, THE PDA, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO A SPECIFIC SPECIFIC CO BECAUSE THE PDA CAN MODIFY.
SO WE CAN JUST SAY THE CONDITION WOULD BE WHATEVER HE JUST SAID,
UM, AND WE COULD WORK WITH THAT LANGUAGE AND FIND SOME LANGUAGE THAT'S AMENABLE TO THE SETBACK.
SO THAT WOULD BE A, A BUILDING SETBACK AT THE 440, UH, CONTOUR OF 440 FEET, IS THAT CORRECT? 60 FEET? WELL, IF YOU WANT TO DO IT AN EASIER WAY, WE COULD SAY JUST 60 FEET OF BUILDING SETBACK ACROSS THE BACK.
THAT'S AN EASIER WAY TO DO IT.
AND ACROSS THE BACK IS GOING TO THE WILDLIFE.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
SO COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, YOU HAVE THE LAST ADDED QUESTION FOR THE WATER STAFF OR THE, THE WATERSHED STAFF.
UM, WE, WE JUST LIKE TWO MONTHS AGO OR MAYBE THREE MONTHS AGO, PASSED THE NEW WATERSHED PROTECTION AND THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD FALL UNDER THAT NEW PROTECTION.
IS THAT TRUE? UM, PARTIALLY WE, UM, APPROVED PART OF THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PROPOSED.
THE COLORADO RIVER PROTECTIONS WERE PUT IN PHASE TWO AND THOSE HAVE NOT COME FORWARD YET.
THEY HAVE NOT COME FORWARD YET.
BUT, BUT THERE IS A PLAN FOR ALL OF THE COLORADO RIVER DOWNSTREAM FROM HERE TO THE TESLA PLANT, OR AT LEAST AS CLOSE AS IT'S INTO THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO BE 450 FEET, AS I RECALL FROM THE EDGE.
IS THAT RIGHT? THE PROPOSAL WAS 400 FEET FROM THE SHORELINE, 400 FEET.
BUT SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN THE, THAN THE BACKYARD CREEK
AND THAT WAS THE WATERSHED'S RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AND, AND THEN ALSO FOR STAFF, FOR THE COMMERCIAL PARKLAND DEDICATION THAT WE JUST PASSED THIS, THIS WOULD FALL UNDER THE COMMERCIAL PARKLAND DEDICATION THAT WE JUST PASSED AS WELL.
SO, SO THE THE BIGGER AND THE MORE THAT THEY BUILD AND THE RESIDENTIAL DEDICATION AND ANY COMMERCIAL PARKLAND DEDICATION, ALL OF THE BIGGER THEY BUILD THE MORE PARKLAND OR, YOU KNOW, FEES IN LIEU THAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO, UM, DEDICATE AS WELL.
WELL, I DON'T KNOW THE REAL SPECIFICS OF THE ORDINANCES, BUT, UH, YES, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY.
THEIR DEVELOPMENT WOULD TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE.
SO, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS FOR THE MOTION FOR THIS ONE? I SEE, UH, COMMISSIONER MOOW, GO AHEAD.
I KNOW YOU GUYS AREN'T GONNA GO FOR THIS, BUT I'M GONNA PUT IT OUT THERE.
ANYWAY, I'M, I'M GONNA MOTION THAT WE DENY THE APPLICANT REQUEST.
DO WE SEE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER COX? UH, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER MISH TELLER? YEAH, I DO.
UM, SO WE'VE LOOKED AT A COUPLE OF REALLY BIG PROJECTS ALONG THE COLORADO.
WE SPENT A LONG, LONG TIME ON STATESMAN PUD AND THEN WE HAD BRODY RECENTLY.
UM, AND THESE ARE, THESE ARE PUDS, SO THEY'VE GOT A MEET SUPERIORITY AND WE'VE BROUGHT ANO A A NUMBER OF THINGS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP, UM, FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, THE SANCTUARY, THE COLORADO RIVER, WE HAVE,
[01:40:01]
UM, I MEAN, THIS IS A BIG HUGE PROJECT TO PUT ON THE EAST SIDE CORRIDOR.UM, THERE'S A LOT TO CONSIDER, UH, AS IT AFFECTS THE EAST SIDE THERE AND THOSE FOLKS GETTING SQUEEZED ON BOTH ENDS OF CAESAR CHAVEZ, UH, AND EVERYTHING IN THE MIDDLE THERE.
I, I THINK THAT'S VERY, VERY CONCERNING TO ME.
UM, WE HAVE NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMING IN HERE.
I, I REALIZE THE APPLICANT HAS VOLUNTEERED IT.
BUT A PROJECT OF THIS MAGNITUDE IN ITS LOCATION WITH ALL IT STANDS TO GAIN THAT THIS REALLY REQUIRES MORE THAN WHAT'S GOING ON HERE TONIGHT.
AND, YOU KNOW, COME BACK AS A PUT AND WE'LL START TO TALK ABOUT SOME SUPERIORITY AND, AND MEETING THAT.
BUT I, I CAN'T, I CAN'T LOOK AT THIS AND SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE EAST SIDE THERE.
THE, THE HOUSING ISSUES, THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, THERE'S JUST TOO MUCH, MUCH HERE TO RUSH IT THROUGH TONIGHT.
UH, THOSE SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UH, TO MOVE APPROVAL, UH, LIMITING TO ONE 20 HEIGHT AND 75% IN PERVIOUS COVER.
DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
SO GO AHEAD AND SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, YOUR SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE ALMOST PASSED THE NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT WAS GONNA OPEN UP A LOT OF HOUSING UNITS IN A LOT OF PLACES IN THE CITY, AND WE DIDN'T.
AND SO WE ARE GONNA CONTINUE JUST TO SEE A LOT OF ZONING CASES.
GETTING 1400 HOMES TO REPLACE A MILK FACTORY SEEMS LIKE A REALLY GREAT THING.
UM, I DEFINITELY LIKE THE IDEA OF TALLER BUILDINGS ALLOWED HERE.
120 FEET ALLOWS FOR CONCRETE TYPE BUILDINGS, STEEL BUILDINGS, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE ALL THESE LIMITATIONS OF 60 AND 75 FEET FOR RESIDENTIAL ESPECIALLY, WE'RE JUST GONNA GET A LOT OF STICK FRAME BUILDINGS IN 30 TO 50 YEARS FROM NOW.
WE ARE GONNA BE KICKING OURSELVES OVER, WE'RE HAVING SO MANY BUILDINGS IN THE LAST MOMENTS OF THEIR LIVES.
SO TO GET BUILDINGS THAT ARE GONNA LAST A LOT LONGER IS A VERY GOOD THING.
UM, THIS IS A LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED ON THIS SITE.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE SAID HERE TONIGHT, SUCH AS L I P D I L I P D A, SKIRTING HIGH DENSITY.
IT WOULD BE AMAZING IF WE HAD BETTER ZONING CATEGORIES TO BE ABLE TO ZONE THIS AND MOST OTHER PROPERTIES IN AUSTIN, BUT WE DON'T.
AND THIS IS SUCH AN AMAZING LOCATION THAT I'M GLAD TO WATCH IT NO LONGER BE LI AND I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE A LOT OF HOUSING GET BUILT IN A PART OF AUSTIN THAT IS JUST AS DESPERATE FOR HOUSING AS MOST OTHER PARTS OF AUSTIN.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UH, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I, I THINK I HAVE AN AMENDMENT.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'D BE WILLING TO EX, WE CAN SEE IF I CAN GET A SECOND FOR A SIX.
UH, WE TALKED ABOUT A 60 FOOT BUFFER.
UM, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT AS AN AMENDMENT? YES.
SO DO I HAVE A SECOND? YOU CAN JUST ASK IF THERE'S ANY OBJECTIONS.
OKAY, WE HAVE A SECOND, UH, FROM COMMISSIONER THOMPSON CHAIR, JUST SO YOU CAN CLARIFY BUFFER FROM WHAT POINT, SO, UH, I THINK WE SPOKE EARLIER IN CLARIFICATION IS THIS WAS ON THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE, UH, THE CONS CONCERN, THE, THE RIVER PROPERTY, THE GREEN SPACE.
IS THAT WHAT THE APPLICANT WAS WILLING TO AGREE TO? IT'D BE THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE IN, IN, IT'S FOR BUILDING SETBACK.
BUILDING 60 FOOT BUILDING SETBACK ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE.
SO I HAVE A, DID I HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER THOMPSON? UH, ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE AMENDMENT TO THAT SUBSTITUTE MOTION, YOUR HONOR.
OKAY, SO NOW WE CAN MOVE THROUGH TO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY, AND OH, YOU WANT, YOU ALREADY SPOKE.
ANYONE SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER COX WANTS TO SPEAK AGAINST THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
AM I ALLOWED TO, TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE TO THE SUBSTITUTE? NOT WE NEED TO GO AND NOT ON THIS.
NO, WE CAN'T MAKE A SUBSTITUTE TO A SUBSTITUTE
UM, WELL, I'M GONNA SPEAK AGAINST, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER MOOSE TALLER.
THIS SHOULD BE A PUD, UH, IT'S BIGGER THAN THE STATESMAN SITE.
IT'S A HUGE CHANGE IN USE AND INTENSITY.
UM, AND, UH, I, I HONESTLY WOULD PREFER THIS TO BE POSTPONED, UH, EVEN THOUGH I DO THINK L I P D A IS AN ABUSE AND A LOOPHOLE IN OUR ZONING CODE, UM, I THINK THERE'S WAYS TO MAKE THIS ACCEPTABLE IF, IF THE APPLICANT ABSOLUTELY REFUSES TO DO A PUT, AND I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WOULD REFUSE TO DO A PUT.
UM, BUT I, I JUST THINK THIS FIRST SHOULD GO TO ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
I THINK WE NEED MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE TRAFFIC BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN NO, LOOK AT LAVENDER LOOP AND EAST SEA CESAR CHAVEZ, WHICH IS A TERRIBLE INTERSECTION TO BEGIN WITH, AND
[01:45:01]
ALL THE TRAFFIC FROM THIS IS GONNA GO THROUGH THAT ONE SINGLE INTERSECTION.AND THEN THE, THE WILDLIFE SANCTUARY, WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON ANY OF THIS AND MOST APPLICANTS THAT COME TO US COME WITH SOME SORT OF PRELIMINARY AGREEMENT WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WITH SOME SORT OF NONPROFIT OR ORGANIZATION.
I'VE SEEN THE APPLICANT STATE THAT THEY'RE WILLING OR POSSIBLY COULD DO IT, BUT THAT SORT OF AMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE AND THE FACT THAT I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING ACTUALLY TAKE PLACE IN THAT DIRECTION OTHER THAN JUST STATEMENTS HERE AT THE COMMISSION MAKES ME THINK THAT THIS ISN'T READY.
AND I DON'T THINK THIS COMMISSION HAS SET A PRECEDENT JUST APPROVING THINGS ON PROMISES THAT DON'T SEEM TO HAVE ANYTHING BACKING IT UP.
UM, SO THAT I, I I CAN'T SUPPORT THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
UH, THE, SPEAKING OF FAVOR OF THE SUBSTITUTE CHAIR, I DO WANNA BE CLEAR THAT MY MOTION WAS TO INCLUDE THE NPA.
UH, ANY THOSE SPEAKING IN FAVOR? ANYONE? OKAY.
THIS WANNA SPEAK AGAINST? ALL RIGHT.
SO, UM, LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
THIS IS FOR MOVE APPROVAL OF, UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, CORRECT? YES.
WITH A, UM, 120 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT, 75% IMPERVIOUS COVER, AND A 60 PER, UH, 60 FOOT BUILDING SETBACK ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE.
IS EVERYBODY CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON? OKAY, LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
THOSE ON THE DIOCESE FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND.
VIRTUAL IN FAVOR OF THIS SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
THOSE ON THE DIOCESE THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THIS SUBSTITUTE MOTION AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN OPPOSED TO THIS SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
I SEE COMMISSIONER COX, COMMISSIONER MU SHALL HAVE YOU VOTED YET? SHE VOTED AGAINST.
SO THAT IF I COUNT RIGHT, THAT PASSES 10 TO THREE.
UH, WE ARE NOW, WE'RE MAKING PRETTY GOOD PROGRESS HERE.
[Items 19 & 20]
IF I'M CORRECT, ITEMS 19 AND 20, CORRECT.ITEM NUMBER 19 IS NPA 20 22 0 0 0 5 0.02.
PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 24 0 4 THRASHER LANE.
IT'S WITHIN THE MONK NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE.
MET FROM COMMERCIAL TO SINGLE FAMILY AND IT IS SUPPORTED BY STAFF.
AND JUST POINT OF ORDER, WE'RE TAKING, UM, BOTH 19 AND 20, THE PLAN, AMENDMENT AND REZONING.
SO NOW WE'LL HEAR ABOUT THE REZONING.
MY NAME IS NANCY ESTRADA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM 20 ON THE AGENDA.
CASE NUMBER C 14 20 22 114, SECOND ALPHA 0.96.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 24 0 4 THRASHER LANE.
IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED CS N P AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING SF THREE NP.
THE SUBJECT REZONING AREA IS A NINE SIX ACRE, UH, TRACTED ON THE NORTHWESTERN SIDE OF THRASHER LANE AND CONSISTS OF AN UNDEVELOPED UNPLATTED TRACT WITH WHICH IS ZONED CS N P.
THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES TO THE NORTH SF THREE N P MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE ACROSS THRASHER LANE TO THE EAST CS M U N P.
AND SOUTH OF THIS TRACK IS CSM, P AND G R M U C O N P IS TO THE WEST.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO THE FAMILY RESIDENCE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, SF THREE N P DISTRICT IN ORDER TO BUILD UP TO 10 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE PROPERTY.
THE FAMILY RESIDENTS SF THREE DISTRICTS ALLOWS FOR A MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE, AS WELL AS A DUPLEX USE.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT FAMILY RESIDENTS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SF THREE MP COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPLICANTS REQUEST BECAUSE THE LOT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE SF THREE NP DISTRICT AS IT FRONTS ON A RESIDENTIAL SECTION OF THRASHER LANE.
AND A REZONING WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT ESTABLISHED TO THE NORTH AND NORTHEAST OF THE PROPERTY.
[01:50:02]
THANK YOU CHAIR.WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
UH, WELL NEED JUST A BRIEF MOMENT TO PULL UP THE, UH, UH, PRESENTATION.
GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I'M HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING ALPHA BUILDERS REQUEST TO REZONE 24 0 4 THRASHER LANE FROM CS TO SF THREE.
THIS REQUEST WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED OVER A YEAR AGO.
WE HAD ORIGINALLY ASKED FOR SF SIX AND AMENDED IT TO CSM U.
BOTH OF THESE REQUESTS WERE MET WITH STRONG OPPOSITION BY THE NEIGHBOR TO THE, TO THE NORTH, DR.
FRED MCGEE, THE MON TOPLESS NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP, AND THEN MON TOPLESS CDC.
THEY MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THEY WOULD NOT SUPPORT ZONING ANY ZONING OTHER THAN SF THREE.
THAT CASE WAS WITHDRAWN IN ORDER TO MEET THE DEMANDS OF DR.
MCGEE AND THE MON TOPLESS NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP.
MY CLIENT HAS SINCE COME UP WITH A NEW PLAN THERE.
ZONE 24 0 4 THRASHER TO SF THREE, RE DIVIDE IT INTO FOUR 10,300 SQUARE FOOT LOTS AND TO CONSTRUCT EIGHT UNITS.
HOWEVER, WE ARE AT A STANDOFF.
MCGEE AND THE ON TOPLESS NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP WHO WILL ONLY SUPPORT SF THREE.
AND ON THE OTHER SIDE IS OUR OPPOSITION, WHO HAS REQUESTED WE SEEK AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT SO THAT THEY CAN DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE IN THEIR OWN REDEVELOPMENT PLANS.
AS YOU'RE AWARE, THIS CASE HAS BEEN POSTPONED NUMEROUS TIMES.
MY CLIENT UNDERSTANDS THE PAIN OF REDEVELOPMENT AND WILL NOT OPPOSE THE ADJACENT LANDOWNER'S PLAN.
HOWEVER, THIS OPPOSITION, WHO DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING FILED WITH THE CITY AS OF YET, IS PUTTING A CHOKE HOLD ON US.
WE FEEL THAT ZONING THIS PROPERTY TO SF THREE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, PROVIDED MORE HOUSING, WHICH IS MUCH NEEDED.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE BY THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE CLIENT'S, PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENTS A BEAUTIFUL PRODUCT.
AND I'LL BE AVAILABLE SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM SARAH S IN OPPOSITION.
MS. SUB, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG FIVE MINUTES GOES, SO I'LL TRY NOT TO SPEAK TOO FAST, BUT I WANNA SAY WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN HERE.
MY NAME IS SARAH SERRY AND I OWN THE TWO LOTS NEXT TO THIS LOT THAT IS BEING REQUESTED TO BE ZONED.
UM, FROM CS TO SF THREE, I'M OPPOSED TO THIS REZONING AND I HAVE RE UM, SUBMITTED A VALID PETITION, UM, THAT HAD HAD HOPED NOT TO DO THAT.
BUT AS RECENTLY AS THIS AFTERNOON IN TRYING TO COMMUNICATE WITH THIS OWNER, THEIR RESPONSE WAS TO ASK ME IF I'D LIKE TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY.
I WOULD LIKE TO WORK TOGETHER ON A PLAN THAT MAKES SENSE FOR BOTH OF US.
AND THAT'S BEEN MY REQUEST OF HIM ALL ALONG.
UM, I EMAILED ALL OF YOU EARLIER TODAY, UM, BUT I ALSO WANTED TO COME DOWN AND SPEAK BECAUSE THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME.
UM, AS I HAD STATED IN THIS, IN THIS EMAIL, UM, THIS REZONING FROM CS SF THREE MEANS THAT COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS WILL NOW BE APPLIED TO MY PROPERTY.
UM, REDUCING MY DEVELOPMENT ABILITY.
MY ENTIRE PROPERTIES WILL BE ENGULFED BY THESE SETBACKS.
I HAVE BEEN WORKING TOWARD THIS PROJECT FOR A REALLY LONG TIME, ACQUIRING THE FIRST PAR PARCEL IN 2018, AND THE SECOND PARCEL IN LATE 2021.
I'M A SMALL WOMAN OWNED BUSINESS AND I'M AN INDEPENDENT DEVELOPER.
SO I MOVED SLOWLY, BUT THIS CHANGE WILL SIGNIFICANTLY HURT MY PROJECT.
I AM WORKING TOWARDS A MIXED USE OR RESIDENTIAL PROJECT HERE THAT WILL SERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PROVIDE HOUSING.
UM, I HAD THOUGHT AT SOME POINT I WOULD NEED TO COME TO YOU MYSELF TO REQUEST FOR REZONING ON MY LOTS, BUT NOW I CAN USE THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROGRAM TO BUILD AS MANY AS APPROXIMATELY 300 UNITS WITH 30 OF THEM BEING AFFORDABLE AT 60 MFI.
UM, THIS REZONING REDUCES THE NUMBER WHICH IS REDUCED TO 130 UNITS.
THIS IS ALL BACK OF THE NAPKIN MATH.
I'M JUST TRYING TO, UM, AND IT DOESN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE REDUCTION IN UNITS ON THEIR, UM, THEIR PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
UMM, ALSO OPPOSED BECAUSE THIS REZONING DOESN'T KEEP, UM, IT, UH, REALLY ALL IT DOES IS KEEPS MOVING THE, THE CS LINE AND SF LINE AROUND.
UM, I'VE BEEN WATCHING THE REZONINGS IN THIS AREA SINCE I ACQUIRED THE FIRST PARCEL.
AND, UM, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
IT SEEMS LIKE A TRANSITION, UM, BETWEEN THE TWO IS WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN.
AND THAT TRANSITION WOULD ALSO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE EFFECT OF MY PROPERTY, UM, WHICH IS WHAT TRANSITIONS ARE FOR.
UM, SO TO CLOSE AS, AS A SMALL DEVELOPER, I WOULD NOT THINK THAT I WOULD BE HERE OPPOSING SOMEONE ELSE'S DEVELOPMENT.
UM, HOWEVER, THIS CASE SEEMS TO ME TO GO AGAINST THE BIGGER PICTURE THAT, UM, AUSTIN IS STRIVING FOR.
[01:55:01]
AND IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD REDUCE HOUSING UNITS.UM, IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION, AND I HOPE I DIDN'T SPEAK TOO QUICKLY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
I'M, I'M THE PRESIDENT OF MY TOP CONTACT TEAM AND I SIGNED UP YES, MS. AMANZA CHAIR.
SO YOUR RULES DO ALLOW YOU TO ASK QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS WHO ARE PRESENT IN CHAMBERS.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND WE, UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, GET THE REBUTTAL AND, AND WE WILL ALLOW YOU THREE MINUTES IN Q AND A.
UH, ONCE AGAIN, RODNEY BENNETT, IF YOU WILL, PLEASE LOOK AT THE, THE PDF THAT I HAVE, UH, OVER AT ANDREW'S DESK.
YOU'LL SEE THE COMPATIBILITY HEIGHT CHART.
AND IF YOU'LL NOTICE THAT IT SAYS SITES LESS THAN 20,000 SQUARE FEET, YOU HAVE A 15 FOOT COMPATIBILITY SETBACK.
UM, WHEN WE RESET DIVIDE THIS TRACT, THE SITES WILL BE LESS THAN 20,000 SQUARE FEET.
SO THE COMPATIBILITY SETBACK IS NOT AS BAD AS IT APPEARS.
UM, IF IT WERE BUILT UP AS, UH, ONE LOT, IT WOULD OF COURSE HAVE A 25 FOOT SETBACK.
UM, WE DON'T FEEL THAT THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT ANY DEVELOPMENT ON OUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
UM, ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE AT A, WE'RE AT A STANDOFF.
I HAVE ONE SIDE SAYING TO DO THIS, I HAVE ANOTHER SIDE SAYING TO DO THAT.
MY CLIENT'S SITTING IN THE MIDDLE WONDERING WHAT HE CAN DO TO GET, TO GET A PRODUCT THAT'S NEEDED IN THIS CITY.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, LET'S GO AND TAKE A MOTION.
UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR SECOND BY, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO THE FIRST QUESTION.
MS. AMANZA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU CA CAN YOU PLEASE, UM, SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE CASE? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
I'M SUSAN AMANZA, PRESIDENT OF MONAS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.
UH, THE MANAS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING CONTACT TEAM, NEITHER SUPPORTS NOR NOR OPPOSES THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST AT 24 0 4 THRASHER.
SO WHEN I SIGNED UP, EITHER FOR OR AGAINST, WE WERE NEUTRAL ON THIS ONE.
HOWEVER, WE DO RECALL SOME OF THE THINGS THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS HAVE PREVIOUSLY, UH, SAID ABOUT THE ZONING CASE, PARTICULARLY IN REGARDS TO AFFORDABILITY.
WE WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE ACTUAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING HAS EXISTED IN THIS PROPERTY FOR YEARS, WHEN THAT MEETS THE COMMUNITY'S DEFINITION FOR SUSTAINABILITY, RESILIENCE, COMPATIBILITY WITH OUR HISTORIC CHARACTER AND GOALS CONTAINED IN IMAGINE AUSTIN AND THE MONOPOLI NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
UH, HIGHER AND BETTER STANDARDS, SUCH AS THIS IS WHAT THE MONOPOLI COMMUNITY HAS CHAMPIONED FOR YEARS.
THE AUSTIN PLANNING COMMISSIONING CONSTITUTE COULD CHOOSE TO SUPPORT OR FACILITATE OUR EFFORTS INSTEAD OF REPEATEDLY SUPPORTING DISPLACEMENT AND DESTRUCTION AS WELL AS INFERIOR QUALITY CONSTRUCTION.
OUR CITY'S MOST VULNERABLE, UH, NEIGHBORHOODS.
AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, WE KNOW WE DON'T OPPOSE IT AND WE DIDN'T SUPPORT IT.
WE WERE NEUTRAL ON THIS PROJECT, AND IT WAS ONLY BECAUSE OF THE AFFORDABILITY QUESTION.
WE'RE NOT AGAINST SINGLE FAMILY, UH, ZONING.
UH, CONTINUED QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER ZA.
UH, WHO ELSE HAS QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
UM, YES, I HAVE A, I I I I THINK A QUESTION FOR THE, UM, NEIGHBOR.
UM, SO YOUR MAIN CONCERN IS THE IMPACT THAT THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WILL HAVE.
WELL, I MEAN, I I SUPPOSE THAT IS MAKING A SIMPLER, SORRY, SO SORRY,
THAT'S A PROBABLY A SIMPLISTIC WAY OF SAY PUTTING IT, BUT YES, THE, THE, THE COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FROM HAVING THE SINGLE TIME, WELL, THE TRIGGERS THAT START HAPPENING.
AND, AND SO, UM, THAT'S WHY I HAD MENTIONED, I SAID TO HIM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU VIEW SF SIX, UM, THAT WILL HELP ME HURT ME LESS, YOU KNOW, OR I KNOW THAT HE WENT FOR CSM U I KNOW THAT HE WENT AFTER SF SIX AND THEN NOW SF THREE AND HE'S GETTING PUSHED BACK BY, I GUESS
[02:00:01]
HE MENTIONED FRED, I GUESS HE LIVES TWO DOORS DOWN.SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY WHY, WHERE THAT WAS COMING FROM.
UM, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A CERTAINLY A WAY WHERE THE CHANGE OF THE ZONING WITH THE NEW RULES, HE COULD STILL DO EXACTLY WHAT HE WANTED TO DO WITHOUT AFFECTING MY PROPERTIES THAT I AM WORKING TOWARD DOING THIS.
UM, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS I WANT HIM TO BE ABLE TO DO WHAT HE WANTS TO DO, BUT I REALLY, OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN UNDERSTAND, I DON'T WANT IT TO AFFECT WHAT I'M DOING.
I HOPE THAT ANSWERED QUESTION.
AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF IF I STILL HAVE ENOUGH TIME.
IS THERE ANY CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT WE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO PUT THAT WOULD WAIVE THE IMPACT THAT THOSE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WOULD HAVE ON COMPATIBILITY OR OTHER, UM, UH, RESTRICTIONS FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES? IS THERE ANYTHING WE COULD DO TO ALLOW THE ZONING CHANGE BUT NOT TRIGGER? UM, I'D HAVE TO LOOK TO SEE IF WE COULD DO ANY KIND OF CONDITION OVER THAT.
I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT SPECIFICALLY.
SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT WE CAN DO TO NOT TRIGGER THAT WOULD NOT TRIGGER, UM, THE ADJACENT COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS THAT WOULD NOT IMPACT THE NEIGHBORING LOT.
LET ME SEE IF I CAN, OKAY, WELL, I'LL, I'LL, I GUESS I'LL JUST WAIT FOR AN ANSWER ON THAT.
DO, UH, MR. RIVERA, DO WE HAVE, IS THAT SOMETHING LEGAL TO NEED TO ANSWER? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN DO THAT.
WAIVE THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS IN THIS REZONING CASE.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER LEE ON ANDREW ROY CON CONFRONTED WITH STAFF.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? NO, THAT'S MY PRIMARY MATTER QUESTION.
UH, JUST REAL QUICK, DID ANYBODY ON THE SCREEN, I THOUGHT I SAW A HAND WAS I DIDN'T, DON'T WANNA IGNORE YOU GUYS.
I THINK I HAVE REALLY QUICK QUESTIONS.
CAN I SPEAK TO THE NEIGHBOR REAL QUICK? HEY.
UM, SO I DON'T MEAN TO LEAD YOU AND I DON'T MEAN TO REPEAT THE QUESTION WAS JUST ASKED, I JUST WANNA BE PERFECTLY CLEAR.
SO IS IT TRUE, IS IT, IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT YOU WOULD NOT BE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE IF COMPATIBILITY WERE NOT CHANGED WHATSOEVER? IF THE NEIGHBOR WAS WILLING AND ABLE TO SIGN SOMETHING SAYING, I DO NOT WANT MY ZONING TO TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY ON YOUR PROPERTY? YES.
SO, UM, IF YOU CAN DO THAT, IF THAT'S ALLOWED.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN, I'M ASKING THE QUESTION AND NOW I'D LOVE TO TALK TO THE APPLICANT REAL QUICK.
IF YOU HAD THE ABILITY TO SIGN SOMETHING SAYING THAT YOU WANT THE ZONING, BUT THAT YOU DO NOT LOOK TO TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY WHATSOEVER, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING YOU'D BE AMENABLE TO? YES, SIR.
WE ARE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF OPPOSING PROJECTS.
BUT I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THE NEIGHBORS POSITION, THIS ONE.
AND THEN STAFF, UM, ALMOST THE SAME QUESTION AS WHAT YOU JUST HEARD.
IS THERE A MECHANISM WE HAVE IN CODE THAT ALLOWS FOR SOMEBODY WHO IS A TRIGGERING PROPERTY TO WAIVE THAT? I KNOW WE ALLOW THAT IN TODS.
IS THERE SOMETHING ALLOWED OUTSIDE OF TODS WHERE WE ALLOW THIS, I AM CHECKING, BUT I AM ALMOST POSITIVE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN WAIVE NOT THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS, BUT THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROCESS COMPATIBILITY.
IS THAT ON? WHO IS THAT ON AND HOW'S THAT HAPPEN? THEY, THEY WOULD HA, I, I DON'T KNOW.
IT'S THROUGH THE D IT'S THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
UM, BUT UM, SO I'M TRYING TO GET SOME, YES, I'M TRYING TO GET, UM, SOME SPECIFICS ON HOW THAT'S HANDLED.
MIND IF I MAY, I, I DON'T WANT TO GO DOWN THE WRONG RABBIT HOLE.
UM, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A COMMERCIAL PROJECT, IT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A SITE PLAN, ONLY A SUBDIVISION, BUT YOU THROUGH THE, YOUR SUB BODY AND THE FOUR LO AND THEN THE RESIDENTIAL REVIEW PROCESS.
SO DO YOU WANT MS. HARDEN? I, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE YOU SPEAK IN FRONT.
I HEARD HE'S SUBDIVIDING AND HE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL REVIEW PROCESS.
NOT THE CLAN PROCESS IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT BECAUSE I THINK EITHER DU 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS OR SOMETHING OF THE LIGHT THAT HE SAID HE WOULD DO.
SO HE COULD ONLY DO A DUPLEX OR A SINGLE FAMILY WITH A ADU.
THAT IS DONE THROUGH OUR RESIDENTIAL REVIEW, NOT OUR SITE PLAN.
SO I WILL NEED TO CHECK ON THAT.
I DEFINITELY NEED TO CHECK ON THAT.
AND WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING INTO THAT, IS THERE ANY WAY WE COULD DO THAT TODAY, ESPECIALLY WITH HIM BEING HERE? ROLLING.
WE MIGHT HAVE, OH, WE MIGHT HAVE TO TABLE THIS.
ITEM AND, UM, GO TO THE NEXT, OH, THE NEXT IS MY ITEM, SO, OKAY.
UM, WE PROBABLY HAVE TO TABLE THIS ITEM WHILE I LOOK INTO THE MATTER.
IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE COMMISSION.
SO WHERE ARE WE ON OUR, WE ARE AT THREE QUESTIONS.
UM, WE MIGHT HAVE MORE, SHOULD WE, SHOULD WE GO AHEAD AND TABLE THIS? I THINK LET'S GO TO FULL Q AND A.
YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS WHEN WE COME BACK TO IT THEN? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M WONDERING.
THERE MAY, LET'S JUST TABLE, YEAH.
UH, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I DO.
[02:05:01]
I THINK THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.WELL, HOLD, HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
WE'RE CONSIDERING A MOTION TO TABLE THIS AND THEN CUZ WE, IT MAY PROMPT ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AFTER WE GET AN ANSWER.
IS YOUR, DO YOU WANT TO, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION THAT MIGHT HELP THEM IN THEIR WHILE THEY'RE DELIBERATING OR CAN THIS ONE? UM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT WOULD HELP.
IT'S JUST A, A DIFFERENT ASPECT TO THE, UH, GO AHEAD AND ASK YOUR QUESTION VICE CHAIR AND THEN WE'LL HOLD, WE'LL SEE IF WE, WE HAVE UH, A VOTE TO, UH, TABLE AT THAT POINT.
UM, IT, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS FOR STAFF OR FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE HISTORY OF WHY THESE SITES THAT WERE SET SO FAR BACK OFF OF RIVERSIDE WERE, WERE INDICATED FOR COMMERCIAL USE ANYWAY IN THE FIRST PLACE.
THESE TO BE, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR CUT QUESTION? YES.
REGARDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THE, THIS PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, UM, THAT I BELIEVE ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS CAME TO TALK ABOUT ARE INDICATED AS COMMERCIAL LAND USE NOW EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE SET SO FAR BACK OFF OF RIVERSIDE AND SOUTH OF SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE HISTORY BEHIND THAT.
WE'VE THIS MARINE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UM, THIS HAS COME UP BEFORE AND I WORKED WITH MY SUPERVISOR MARK WALTERS ON TRYING TO FIGURE THIS OUT.
WE COULDN'T FIND AN ANSWER CUZ WE DIDN'T REALLY WORK ON THIS PLAN AND THE PLAN DOESN'T REALLY ADDRESS IT.
WE WEREN'T SURE IF THE, UM, UH, COMMERCIAL WAS LAND USE WAS PUT ON THE PROPERTY BECAUSE IT HAD COMMERCIAL ZONING AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO CHANGE IT.
THEY WANTED TO KEEP IT COMMERCIAL AND I'M NOT SURE IF, UH, SUSANNA HAVING WORKED ON THE PLAN, MIGHT HAVE MORE INSIGHT.
YES, I'M SUSANNA MANZA, WE ACTUALLY WORKED ON THEM ON TOP OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
AND IT WAS, WHAT HAPPENED WAS, UM, YOU HAD PEOPLE WHO OWNED THE LAND THAT WANTED TO KEEP IT COMMERCIAL.
SO WHEN WE HAD LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, HUNDREDS OF PROPERTY CAME UP, UH, THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY DURING THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNED ADOPTION, UH, TO CONTEST IT.
AND SO THAT WAS A PROCESS IS THAT WE HAD HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO KEEP THE LAND AT THAT TIME, COMMERCIAL.
AND, UH, AND COUNCIL AGREED WITH IT.
UH, LET ME GO AHEAD AND SEE IF THE, GO AHEAD.
WE'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM AND ACTUALLY GO OUT OF ORDER TO EVERGREEN FIRST, AND I'LL HAVE TO LOOK UP WHICH NUMBER THAT WAS, BUT WE WOULD SKIP CLUSTER, CUZ THAT IS ALSO MS. HARDEN'S CASE.
SO WE ARE, CAN WE GO TO ITEM 35 INSTEAD? SO YOUR MOTION IS TO DO EVERGREEN NEXT.
MS. HARDEN WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING.
YEAH, I DO HAVE AN ANSWER THAT, UM, RON THROWER CAN ANSWER BETTER THAN I, UM,
UM, BUT THE LAND USE COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION CAN REDUCE SETBACKS CANNOT ADDRESS HEIGHT TO FIVE FEET.
SO NOW IT'S WHAT, 25 FEET? YOU CAN REDUCE IT TO FIVE FEET, BUT THAT DOES NOT ADDRESS HEIGHT ONLY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN WAVE COMPATIBILITY THROUGH A VARIOUS PROCESS.
AND THAT, OF COURSE, THAT WOULD NEED A HARDSHIP IN THE, I MEAN, WE HAVE A, THE CHAIR HERE, UM, UM, ONLY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, SO THERE IS NOT A WAY TO WAIVE COMPATIBILITY.
JUST TO CLARIFY QUESTION MS. HARDEN, I'M SORRY, I'M, I'M GONNA HAVE TO ASK YOU TO COME BACK.
UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU SAY THAT PLANNING COMMISSION CAN REDUCE THE SETBACK TO FIVE FEET, YOU MEAN ON THE LOT UNDER CONSIDERATION, NOT ON AN ADJOINING LOT, CORRECT.
THE LOT ON UNDER CONSIDERATION? YES.
SO ESSENTIALLY THAT WOULD MEAN THAT WE CANNOT IMPACT THE ADJOINING LAW? CORRECT.
SO I GUESS WE'RE GONNA FINISH THIS UP.
WE WERE AT, UM, WE WERE AT FOUR.
WE HAVE A SPOT FOR ONE MORE IF YOU WANT TO GO ON 33.
DO WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
UH, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? TAKE A QUESTION.
I'M SORRY, CHAIR, I'M JUST GONNA ASK A QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT.
COULD YOU, UM, WOULD YOU BE AMENABLE TO A TWO WEEK POSTPONEMENT? I KNOW, I'M SORRY, YOU JUST WALKED US THROUGH THE TIME THAT THIS CASE IS TAKEN.
WOULD YOU BE AMENABLE TO TWO WEEK POSTPONE TWO WEEKS? YES.
[02:10:01]
I, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.CAN I MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE? I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS TWO WEEKS WITH THE CLARIFICATION THAT HOPEFULLY STAFF CAN FIGURE OUT IF THERE IS ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE AT RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PROCESS OR ANYTHING AT A LATER STAGE TO ADDRESS THE OTHER CONCERN, AND THEN WE CAN TAKE THIS UP FOR CONSIDERATION.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? UH, I HAVE THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS? POSTPONEMENT? SAY NONE.
UM, OH, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER MITCH TYLER, UH, YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR OBJECTION? YEAH, I JUST THOUGHT WE'D BEEN THROUGH THIS WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, UM, A COUPLE OF OTHER CASES.
AND AT THE MOMENT, DUE TO THE STATUS OF OUR LAND CODE, WE DON'T HAVE A MECHANISM FOR THIS.
IS, IS BEEN MY CLEAR UNDERSTANDING TO RESOLVE THESE KINDS OF ISSUES.
UM, AND EVEN UNDER RC PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, WHICH THE CITY DOESN'T ACKNOWLEDGE ANYWAY, UM, THE TWO LANDOWNERS COULDN'T WORK IT OUT EITHER.
THIS IS A PROBLEM WITH LAND CODE.
WE DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS, SO I DON'T KNOW.
SO I I I DON'T SEE THAT POSTPONING IT TWO WEEKS IS GONNA GET US THERE, BUT OKAY.
ANY, ANY OTHER OBJECTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
SO DO YOU WANNA BE SHOWN, UH, VOTING AGAINST THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER HAW? COMMISSIONER HAINES.
SO, UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, DO YOU WANNA BE, UH, ON THE RECORD VOTING AGAINST THIS MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT? COMMISSIONER MOOCH TYLER, UH, I'M GONNA JUST ABSTAIN, I THINK.
AND GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE VOTE.
I'M, I'M GONNA VOTE AGAINST IT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, WELL, WITH THAT, DO WE NEED ANY DEBATE ON THE ITEM? WE, I WAS TRYING TO REST THIS JURY.
YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THIS WHILE? ARE WE VOTING? I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, WHICH MOTION ARE WE VOTING? WE'RE, WE'RE VOTING TO POSTPONE FOR TWO WEEKS.
SO I'LL JUST, I'LL, I'LL JUST SAY A FEW WORDS IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONE MEN VERY BRIEFLY.
I JUST THINK THAT I, I, I THINK IF, IF THERE'S ANY POSSIBLE WAY TO, TO ADDRESS THIS, I RECOGNIZE HOW DIFFICULT AND CHALLENGING THIS IS, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD TRY TO FIND SOME ALTERNATIVE.
I THINK IT'S JUST U UNFAIR THAT COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS AND OTHER STANDARDS ON ONE LOT WOULD, WOULD, WOULD HARM, UM, ANOTHER, UH, NEIGHBOR'S PLANS FOR THEIR, FOR THEIR OWN SITE.
AND I ALSO THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO SUPPORT OUR SMALL, LOCAL, UH, DEVELOPERS AND NEIGHBORHOOD BASED DEVELOPERS.
SO I THINK THAT IF WE CAN FIND A WORKABLE SOLUTION FOR THIS, THEN THAT'S, I'M ALL FOR IT.
AND I JUST HOPE WE CAN GIVE OURSELVES THE TIME TO DO THAT.
ANY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON? I GUESS I'M
SO WE DON'T THINK THERE'S A WAY TO DO THIS.
I THINK IF HE COULDN'T FIND A WAY IN TWO WEEKS BEFORE, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE GONNA FIND A WAY TWO WEEKS NOW.
AND SO I THINK WE SHOULD JUST GO FORWARD.
ANY OTHER DEBATE? COMMISSIONER HAYS, DO YOU WANNA SAY ANYTHING? YES, SIR, I DO.
UM, I AM NOT PROJECTING ANY VOTE OR ANYTHING, UH, BUT I'M OKAY TO POSTPONE THIS.
BUT THE WAY I LOOK AT THIS AND, AND IN A, IN MY PROFESSIONAL SETTING, I LOBBY AT THE CAPITOL AND I GET RUN OVER ALL THE TIME BECAUSE WHAT THE LAW SAYS, UM, I WILL JUST PROJECT OUT TO SAY, UH, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS PRETTY CLEAR TO ME, AND I'M THE ROOKIE.
I'M, I'M HOPEFUL STAFF COMES UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WE, THAT WILL FIX THIS BOX, BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THERE IS A FIX TO THIS BOX, AND THAT'S WHY WE NEED A LAND USE CODE.
UH, NOW WITH THAT SAID, UM, WORK THIS OUT BECAUSE I TELL YOU, I, I WANT TO FIX YOUR PROBLEMS. I WANT TO SOLVE YOUR SOLUTIONS, BUT IF THE LAW DOESN'T ALLOW IT, I KNOW WHAT I'M GONNA DO IN TWO WEEKS AND I'M NOT GONNA HOLD UP ANYBODY ELSE, UH, FOR ANOTHER TWO WEEKS.
UH, ARE WE READY TO TAKE A VOTE? ALL RIGHT, SO THIS IS A POSTPONEMENT FOR TWO WEEKS.
UM, UH, THOSE ON THE DIOCESE IN FAVOR? WHAT A POSTPONEMENT.
AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT.
UH, AND THOSE, UH, AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT ON THE DIAS.
[02:15:01]
WE HAVE VOTING AGAINST THIS MOTION PASSES, UH, WITH VICE HEMPEL, COMMISSIONER MOSH TOLER, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON VOTING NAY.LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, COME BACK AT 8 35.
UM, BUT WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
[Items 21 & 22]
I THINK WE'RE STILL GOING, UM, 21, 22.IS THAT RIGHT? IN PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ITEM NUMBER 21 IS N P A 20 22 0 0 1 5 0.06.
THE GLOUCESTER DWELLINGS IS LOCATED AT 58 0 3 GLOUCESTER LANE WITHIN THE, UM, EAST MLK NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO HIGHER DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY, AND IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF JOY HARDEN WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM 22 ON YOUR AGENDAS CASE NUMBER C 14 20 22 1 15, LOCATED AT 58 0 3 GLOUCESTER LANE.
THE SITE IS 1.65 ACRES, AND THE SITE IS ON SF THREE NP.
AND THE REQUEST IS SF SIX N P STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, THE REQUEST REMAINS THE PLUMS OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING CATEGORY WHILE ALLOWING FOR DENSER HOUSING OPTIONS, INCLUDING CONDOMINIUM, RESIDENTIAL AND TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL, THE SIZE OF THE LOT, AND THE NEED FOR MORE DIVERSITY OF HOUSING OPTIONS THROUGHOUT AUSTIN.
MAKES OF SIX A COMPATIBLE AND REASONABLE CHANGE.
I NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASI WITH THROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNERS.
UH, THE SUBJECT SITE, UH, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS IN BLUE.
UH, IT IS 1.65 ACRES AND IS SURROUNDED BY MOSTLY SINGLE FAMILY THAT INCLUDES TRADITIONAL STANDALONE HOUSES, AND THERE ARE SOME DUPLEXES IN, UM, THE AREA AS WELL.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE A FEW PROPERTIES OUTLINED.
THERE'S A CHURCH, UM, CHURCH PARKING THAT'S IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST.
UH, THERE'S DAYCARE AND SCHOOL THAT'S TO THE SOUTH, UH, AS WELL AS SOME OFFICE TO THE SOUTH.
AND THEN YOU'VE GOT AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, UM, FURTHER TO THE FURTHEST TO THE EAST.
SO THE SUBJECT TRACK IS OUTLINED IN BLUE.
AGAIN, THIS IS GIVING YOU SOME CONTEXT TO ELEMENTS OF THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS WELL AS, UH, CAPITAL METRO BUS SERVICE AND BUS STOPS.
UM, THE SITE IS ABOUT AN EIGHTH, UM, AN EIGHTH OF A MILE FROM A EIGHTH OF A MILE FROM AN IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR.
AND IT'S ALSO ABOUT A MILE FROM A TOWN CENTER, IMAGINE AUSTIN TOWN CENTER ON THE SOUTHERN, UH, LOWER CORNER.
SO, AS YOU HEARD, WE ARE ASKING FOR A FLU AMENDMENT FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO HIGHER DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY.
THAT WOULD CHANGE THE COLOR OF THIS PARCEL FROM THE YELLOW THAT YOU SEE TO THAT KIND OF OLIVE GREEN COLOR.
AND THEN THE ASSOCIATED REZONING REQUEST IS ASKING TO CHANGE ZONING FROM SF THREE TO SF SIX.
THIS IS A SLIDE SHOWING, UM, THIS SF SIX ZONED PROPERTIES IN THE CITY.
SF SIX IS A REALLY GOOD, UM, INFILL DENSITY TOOL THAT WE COULD USE A LOT, UM, TO GAIN SOME OF THESE, UH, A LITTLE MORE DENSITY, ESPECIALLY IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WANNA MAINTAIN SOME OF THE TRADITIONAL, UH, CHARACTER AND FEEL.
BUT UNFORTUNATELY, AS YOU CAN SEE, A LOT OF THE SF SIX PROPERTIES THAT EXIST IN THE CITY ARE IN THE OUTER RINGS.
UM, AND THIS AREA, IN ADDITION TO OTHER AREAS INSIDE THE CITY, COULD USE SOME DIVERSITY AND HOUSING TYPE.
THIS IS COMPARING THE SF THREE ZONING DISTRICT WITH SF SIX.
A LOT OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE VERY SIMILAR.
UM, BUT WHAT YOU ACHIEVE IN THE END, IF, UH, THIS PROPERTY IS TO STAY ZONED SF THREE, IT CAN BE CARVED UP, SUBDIVIDED INTO, UH, MATHEMATICALLY INTO 11 LOTS, WHICH COULD EQUAL AS MUCH AS 22 DWELLING UNITS.
IF EACH HOUSE OR EACH LOT HAS A HOUSE AND AN ADU CONFIGURATION, UM, THAT WOULD GIVE A, HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT ON THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THIS AREA BECAUSE IT WOULD BE COMPARABLE.
UM, WHEN LOOKING AT PROPERTY TAX APPRAISALS, UM, ANY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED, UM, BY THE CITY WOULD BE CITY MAINTAINED ON THE TAXPAYER DOLLAR VERSUS UNDER SF SIX.
THIS AREA, THIS LOT WOULD STAY AS A SINGLE LOT ALLOWING FOR UP TO MATHEMATICALLY 19 DWELLING UNITS.
[02:20:01]
WOULD NOT BE COMPARABLE TO THE OTHER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THIS AREA IN TERMS OF TAXES AND ANY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE, UM, WOULD BE PROVIDED AND REQUIRED THROUGH THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.UM, SF SIX HAS A LOT OF GREAT BENEFITS.
AGAIN, IT ALLOWS FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT.
IT KEEPS US FROM SPRAWLING OUTWARD, GIVING US SOME MORE UNITS ON THE INSIDE OF THE CITY.
IT MAINTAINED HAS THE ABILITY TO MAINTAIN SINGLE FAMILY CHARACTER.
YOU CAN HAVE STANDALONE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES, YOU CAN HAVE DUPLEXES, YOU CAN HAVE TWO FAMILY, OR YOU CAN HAVE TOWNHOUSES.
UM, IT DOES NOT REQUIRE A SUBDIVISION PROCESS, WHICH IN THE END HELPS FOR THE UNITS TO COST LESS.
UM, AND IT DOES HA WILL REQUIRE A SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS, WHICH PROVIDES GREATER TREE PROTECTIONS AND ALSO PROVIDES A LEVEL OF FLEXIBILITY FOR LAYING OUT THE BUILDING PLACEMENT, WHICH CAN WORK AROUND THINGS SUCH AS HERITAGE TREES AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES.
THIS IS A, A EXHIBIT SHOWING HOW COMPATIBILITY IS IMPACTING THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AREAS.
SO THE LARGER PICTURE WINDOW, YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT TRACK OUTLINED IN BLUE, AND THE SITE HAS FRONTAGE ON GLOUCESTER.
THAT'S THE ONLY FRONTAGE THAT IT HAS, AND THAT WOULD SERVE AS THE DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE INTO THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN BECAUSE IT IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY USE AND ZONING, UM, ALL THE, UM, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A GREEN BORDER THAT IS A 25 FOOT NOBU SETBACK, AND NOTHING CAN OCCUR IN THAT AREA, UM, EXCEPT FOR REQUIRING, UH, SCREENING, WHICH IS USUALLY A PRIVACY FENCE.
UM, THEN MOVING FURTHER IN, THERE'S A 30, UH, A YELLOW BAND THAT IS A 30 FOOT, UH, HEIGHT REQUIRE OR 30 FOOT HEIGHT ALLOWANCE WITH TWO STORIES.
AND THEN BEYOND THAT, TOWARDS THE CENTER IS WHERE A BUILDING COULD ACTUALLY ACHIEVE UP TO 35 FEET AND THREE STORIES, WHICH IS WHAT EVERYONE ELSE THAT HAS SF THREE ZONING AROUND THEM HAS THE ABILITY TO DO TODAY.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE.
YOU WILL NOW HEAR FROM MR. RON THROWER.
MR. TH YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES COMMISSIONERS.
RON THROWER REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNER.
I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT I CANNOT THINK OF A BETTER CANDIDATE SITE FOR A DEVELOPMENT UNDER AN SF SIX STYLE, UH, SITE PLAN.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S A SITE THAT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE A DESIGN OPPORTUNITY.
YOU GOT A LOT OF TREES ON THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S A LOT OF HERITAGE TREES ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, THERE'S A LOT OF, OF, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST FEATURES THAT CAN BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY JUST TUCKING IN A HOUSE HERE AND THERE AROUND A TREE VERSUS SUBDIVIDING.
THIS PROPERTY, I THINK, WOULD BE THE ABSOLUTE WORST THING BECAUSE THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE, I BELIEVE IS 65 FEET.
AND, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE, THE STREET RIGHT AWAY WIDTH THESE DAYS IS ANYWHERE FROM 58 TO 64 FEET.
SO THAT NECK WOULD BE AN ENTIRE RIGHT OF WAY COMING IN WITH A CUL-DE-SAC.
UNDER SF THREE, UH, DEVELOPMENT UNDER SF SIX, WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT A 25 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY HONORING THE COMPATIBILITY, UH, AT THE ENTRANCE AND THEN ALL THE WAY AROUND.
AND I THINK IT'D MAKE A GREAT SITE FOR THAT.
UM, IF WE CAN CONTINUE THE SLIDES THAT, UM, WERE UP EARLIER.
UH, THIS IS A, THIS IS A, A, UH, EXHIBIT THAT SHOWS THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE REZONING REQUEST.
THE ONES THAT ARE IN GREEN HAVE EITHER SIGNED OR RESTRICTED RESTRICTIVE COVENANT PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT ALLOW, OR THAT REQUIRES 10% EXTRA PARKING ON SITE TO ACCOMMODATE CUSTOMER PARKING.
OR THEY'VE ISSUED A LETTER OF SUPPORT.
UM, THE PROPERTY THAT'S IN BLUE IS HERE THIS EVENING, AND SHE IS ALSO IN SUPPORT.
AND, UH, JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
WE'RE AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MS. KENDRA RAHO.
MS. RAHO, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M KENDRA RAHO, AND I LIVE AT 58 0 1 GLASSER LANE.
UM, WHEN I FIRST FOUND MY HOUSE EIGHT YEARS AGO, I FELL IN LOVE WITH THE AREA.
IT REMINDED ME OF THE COUNTRY, AND IT WAS THIS LITTLE PIECE OF TRANQUILITY I HAD IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY.
SO WHEN I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE REZONING, I FREAKED OUT, OF COURSE,
SO I'VE DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH.
I'VE SPOKEN WITH ROAD DESIGN, UM, I'VE MET WITH MY NEIGHBORS, I'VE MET WITH MY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND THROUGH DISCOVERY, I REALLY FEEL THAT REZONING TO THE SF SIX IS BETTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I THINK THAT THE DESIGN ELEMENTS TOOK AWAY A LOT OF INHERENT FEARS I ALREADY HAD OF WHAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN.
UM, UH, THE THROWER DESIGN COMPANY'S BEEN FANTASTIC TO, TO WORK WITH AND TO SPEAK WITH ME, SO THAT'S REALLY TAKEN A LOT OF MY FEARS AWAY.
I STILL HAVE RESERVATIONS ABOUT WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE ON THAT STREET.
UM, GLOUCESTER LANE IS NOT A WIDE STREET.
[02:25:01]
IT'S A SMALL RESIDENTIAL STREET.MOST OF THE PLACES WHERE I'VE SEEN THE SF SIX, THEY HAVE A LOT MORE ACCESS.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S, WE'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING ANOTHER 40 CARS, MAYBE 45 CARS ON A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN BARELY GET BY RIGHT NOW WHEN PEOPLE ARE PARKED ON EACH SIDE OF THE STREET.
SO THAT WAS MY ONLY CONCERN, WHICH I REALIZE DOESN'T REALLY HAVE A LOT TO DO WITH SF SIX VERSUS SF THREE BECAUSE THE SAME THING COULD HAPPEN WITH SF THREE.
I JUST SEE IT BEING VERY CONGESTED, BUT MY OVERALL SUPPORT, UM, IS TO GO AHEAD AND END REZONE.
UH, THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK IS FOR AN EXTRA FIVE FOOT SET BOOK BACK FROM A 25 TO TO 30, JUST TO TRY TO MAINTAIN SOME OF THE PRIVACY.
BUT, UM, OTHER THAN THAT, I'M JUST HERE IN SUPPORT TONIGHT IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS.
WELL, NOW I HEAR FROM MS. NADIA BABA FOR THE OPPOSITION.
MS. BARBO, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UM, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AGAIN, NADIA BARBO.
UM, I'M ON, UH, I'M A OFFICER OF THE PECAN SPRINGS, SPRINGDALE HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH THIS, UM, PROPERTY IS, UM, WITHIN OUR BOUNDARIES.
UM, THERE WERE, WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS PROJECT OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS, UM, THERE WERE A FEW ISSUES THAT THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT.
UM, ONE IS, UM, THAT THERE IS NO OWNER OR BUYER FOR THIS PROPERTY.
UM, AND THAT IS SOMEWHAT UNUSUAL.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO REZONE THIS IN ORDER TO DO SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT TO DO AT THIS PROPERTY.
IT'S BEING REZONED PURELY SO THAT THEY CAN SELL IT TO SOMEONE ELSE.
UM, AND WHAT THAT HAS RESULTED IN IS NO, NO ONE TO DISCUSS THE FINE DETAILS OF HOW THE, HOW THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE, WILL OCCUR.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, I I, I THINK THERE'S ONLY BEEN ONE OTHER CASE THAT I KNOW OF THAT WAS COME TONIGHT AND BASED ON MY OTHER TRIPS HERE, IT IS UNUSUAL.
AND SO I'M, I'M VERY CURIOUS YOUR, UH, YOUR INPUT ON THAT, UM, BECAUSE IT'S, EVEN CALLING IT GLOUCESTER DWELLINGS IS FUNNY ON THE AGENDA.
LIKE, IT'S NOT A DWELLINGS, IT'S A HOUSE, JUST ONE HOUSE RIGHT NOW.
SO, UM, THE OTHER THING THAT THE NEIGHBORS WERE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT CHANGING THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SHOULD BE DONE INTENTIONALLY.
THE FLUM IS THERE ON PURPOSE, EVERYONE VOTED ON IT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS IT THE WAY THAT IT IS.
AND SO, CHANGING THAT, I MEAN, I GOT A CALL ON THE WAY HERE THAT THE LETTER THAT I WROTE TO YOU WAS INCORRECT.
WE, THAT I MISSED SOME OF THE NOTES OF THE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE HAD HAD VOTED AGAINST THIS PROJECT BECAUSE CHANGING THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SHOULD BE DONE INTENTIONALLY.
WE SHOULD KNOW WHAT'S COMING, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S COMING BECAUSE, UM, THERE'S NO DEVELOPER HERE.
SO, UM, TH THOSE WERE THE CONCERNS THAT WE WANTED TO SHARE.
UM, AND, UH, I THINK, I THINK WE COULD BECOME OKAY WITH, UM, A PRO A PROJECT HERE, UM, UH, THAT IT WAS OF THIS, UH, TYPE.
UM, BUT AT THIS POINT, THERE'S, THERE'S NOTHING HAPPENING.
THERE'S JUST THE LONGTIME RESIDENTS, UM, UH, AND, AND THEY'RE, BUT THEY'RE GONNA BE GONE.
SO, UM, THAT WAS KIND OF, UH, THAT WAS A BIG CONCERN.
CHAIRMAN, I HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO PLEDGE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONER CONLEY SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ZA.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO, UH, FIVE QUESTIONS AT THREE MINUTES EACH.
UH, WHO HAS FIRST QUESTION? ANY QUESTIONS? CHAIR, UH, COMMISSIONER DESAR.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. THROWER.
SO THE LETTER THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE PECAN SPRINGS, SPRINGDALE HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SAID, UM, THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT IT IF MS. KENDRA RAHO AND NEARBY NEIGHBORS' CONCERNS WERE UPHELD.
WE HEARD FROM MS. KENDRA RAHO THAT HER CONCERNS.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHERE SOME OF THE OTHER ADJOINING NEIGHBORS ARE IN RELATION TO THIS PROJECT? SURE.
UH, IF WE COULD BRING UP THAT LAST EXHIBIT, UM, FROM THE PRESENTATION, THAT ONE YOU CAN SEE, UM, KENDRA'S PROPERTY IS THE ONE THAT'S IN BLUE.
THE TWO PROPERTIES THAT ARE ON THE SAME SIDE OF GLOUCESTER IS, UH, THE ONES THAT ARE TIED INTO THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
THEY ASKED FOR THE ADDITIONAL PARKING, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT PARKING ON THE STREET, AND THE OTHER TWO ACROSS THE STREET ARE JUST IN IN FAVOR.
THEY'RE, THAT'S IN THE BACKUP.
UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. BARBO.
I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, I HOPE I'M LOOKING AT THE L RIGHT LETTER.
THIS IS DATED MARCH 26TH FROM THE BCAN SPRING SPRINGFIELD HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, AND IT SEEMS LIKE YOU SAY AFTER MUCH DISCUSSION, UM, SNA AWARDED AGAINST THE PHON FLU CHANGE, NOTING THAT WE WOULD SUPPORT IF
[02:30:01]
MS. KENDRA ARAJO AND NEIGHBOR NEARBY NEIGHBORS' CONCERN WERE UPHELD.UM, AND IT WAS UNUSUAL TO BE UNABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE DEVELOPER BUILDING THE NEW PROJECT.
SO CONSIDERING I THINK WE HAVE MS. ARAJO TODAY NOT HAVING, UM, AN OPPOSITION, SOME OF THE OTHER PEOPLE IN SUPPORT, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHY YOU'RE OPPOSED TO THE PROJECT AT THIS TIME? UM, WHEN WE WERE TALKING PREVIOUSLY, THERE WERE, UH, A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS ABOUT THE SETBACK, ABOUT LIGHTING, ABOUT FENCING, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT IN THE CONVERSATION WE SHOULD HAVE KENRICK COME UP HERSELF.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT LIKE SHE BELIEVES THAT THAT WILL, THOSE CONCERNS WILL GET ADDRESSED IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF, UH, OF SITE PLAN.
UM, BUT, UM, A LOT OF OUR NEIGHBORS ARE AWARE OF ZONING CHANGES AND NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THEIR BACKYARD.
AND, UM, AND KNOW THAT THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES.
IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN IN A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT RIGHT NOW, THEN IT, THERE'S, THERE'S A HIGH CHANCE THAT IT WON'T HAPPEN.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THE, I YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, MR. THOR, CAN I HAVE YOU BACK, AND I'M GONNA RUN OUT OF TIME VERY SOON, BUT, UM, CAN YOU RESPOND TO SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT WERE DISCUSSED WITH THE NEIGHBORS THAT YOU BELIEVE WILL BE, YOU KNOW, ADDRESSED AS THIS GOES TO SITE PLAN? WELL, THE LIST WAS EXTENSIVE THERE.
I DON'T KNOW, 50 OR SO ITEMS ON THE LIST.
UH, THERE WERE SOME ITEMS RELATING TO LIGHTING.
LIGHTING IS CO COVERED UNDER THE COMPATIBILITY CODE FOR HOODED AND SHIELDED.
UM, WE DON'T SEE THE NEED TO PUT THAT IN A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WHEN THAT SHOULD BE A CODE ENFORCEMENT ITEM FOR THE CITY.
AND OF COURSE, IT SHOULD BE PART OF THE DESIGN OF THE SITE PLAN.
UM, AND ITEMS, SOME ITEMS RELATING TO FENCE HEIGHTS, UM, VEGETATION, UM, YOU KNOW, THE LIST, LIKE I SAY, IS EXTENSIVE.
BUT AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE ADDRESSED 99.9% OF THE ITEMS. THANK YOU.
I WAS GONNA, I HAD A QUESTION AND I WAS, I WAS GONNA ASK JUST TO PROVIDE A LITTLE EXTRA TIME FOR THAT ANSWER, BUT IF THAT ANSWER HAS BEEN COMPLETE.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UM, THE NEIGHBORS, UM, UH, NADIA, UM, WHO SPOKE, UH, IN OPPOSITION, THANK YOU, BY THE WAY, FOR STAYING OUT SO LATE
UM, MY QUESTION IS THE FOLLOWING, UM, IF ULTIMATELY YOU MENTIONED THAT THE CONCERN THAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO SELL THIS LOT, THEY DON'T YET HAVE A BUYER.
UM, IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SELLING ONE LOT VERSUS SELLING EIGHT TO NINE INDIVIDUAL LOTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S PERSPECTIVE? I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT DO YOU GAIN FROM HAVING THEM SUBDIVIDED INTO EIGHT OR NINE SEPARATE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS VERSUS JUST SELLING ONE? OOH, I'M NOT A, AN EXPERT ON WHAT OTHER OPTIONS THERE COULD BE.
I MEAN, I, IDEALLY, IT WOULD BE GREAT IF THERE WAS JUST A DEVELOPER THAT WAS, THAT WANTED TO DO SF SIX, AND THEN WE COULD TALK ABOUT MAYBE ONE OF THESE COULD BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, INSTEAD OF, UM, NO, NONE, NO DISCUSSION OF THAT.
SO I, I DON'T KNOW, UM, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THAT CASE.
AND THEN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYONE HERE THAT CAN SPEAK TOO MUCH ABOUT THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION AND, AND MAYBE YOU CAN JUST HELP US UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS, UM, THESE VERY SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AROUND LIGHTING, AROUND PARKING, AROUND ACCESS, AROUND SETBACKS, SOME OF THESE VERY SPECIFIC DETAILS AND PIECES OF THE PROJECT THAT WE REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THROUGH ZONING.
UM, WHAT PRO, HOW CAN THE, THE NEIGHBORS PARTICIPATE IN OR HAVE THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED WHEN A PROPERTY IS GOING THROUGH THAT KIND OF PROCESS? YEAH, CUZ THE SITE, WELL, BESIDES SETBACKS, CUZ SETBACKS IS A, I'M JUST NAMING THE THINGS THAT YOU LISTED.
ALL THE OTHER THINGS EXCEPT FOR SETBACKS, UM, IS HANDLED IN ITS ZONING ORDINANCE.
BUT ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE OUTSIDE 25 TOO, THAT, LIKE THE LIGHTING MY QUESTION NOW LIGHTING AND THE OTHER DETAILS.
UM, SITE PLAN IS ADMINISTRATIVE.
UM, SO IT IS MORE DIFFICULT BECAUSE THAT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS, BUT THEY, THE APPLICATION MUST COMPLY WITH THE CODE.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE LIGHTING REGULATIONS.
NOW IF THEY WANTED SOMETHING MORE RESTRICTIVE, IF THEY WANTED SOMETHING MORE RESTRICTIVE THAT GETS MORE THAN CODE, YEAH.
THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE HANDLED THROUGH A, A PRIVATE AGREEMENT BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE TO JUST COMPLY WITH OUR CODE REGULATIONS.
AND OF COURSE, OUR EXISTING CODE IS QUITE OUTDATED
UM, IF, IF THERE ARE SORT OF SPECIFIC DETAILS AND CONCERNS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS.
UM, I'M, I'M, I'M JUST TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, AROUND, UM, SOME DIFFERENT, THESE PIECES OF THE CONVERSATION THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.
IS THERE ANY WAY FOR THEM TO, UH, WELL,
UH, WELL, MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANY WAY FOR THEM TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU OR WITH THE FUTURE APPLICANT ABOUT HOW TO MAKE THESE, UM, ADDRESS
[02:35:01]
SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS OR? I DON'T, UH, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S TOO MANY, AND I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC EXAMPLES RIGHT NOW TO UNDERSTAND, BUT YEAH.WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WE'RE NOT HIRED TO DO THE SITE PLAN.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE DO HUNDREDS OF SITE PLANS, UH, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ALSO TRY AND REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS TO LET THEM KNOW, UM, NOT ALL APPLICANTS AND AGENTS DO THAT.
UM, IS THERE ANY SORT OF REQUIREMENT IN THE CODE? NO, THERE'S NOT.
UH, BUT YOU KNOW, THEY WILL GET NOTICE OF THE FILING OF THE SITE PLAN AND THEY CAN CERTAINLY ENGAGE WITH THE, UH, APPLICANT THAT'S IN, THE ENGINEER THAT'S INVOLVED WITH THE SITE PLAN AT THAT TIME.
THEY CAN ENGAGE WITH THE CITY STAFF, THEY CAN QUESTION EVERYTHING THAT MAY BE ON THE LIST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS IN COMPLIANCE.
YOU KNOW, THERE IS OPPORTUNITY FOR THEIR INPUT AT THAT STAGE.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
DO WE HAVE MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER COX AND THEN, OH, GO AHEAD.
COMMISSIONER COX, I SAW YOUR HAND FIRST, UH, GIVEN A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER MAX, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UH, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER COX? UH, NOT, NOT REALLY.
I JUST, UM, I, I, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I DO THINK THAT, UM, ONCE THEY SEE WHAT'S BUILT UNDER SF SIX IN THIS PARTICULAR LOT, UH, WHAT THEY'RE, WHAT WE'RE LIKELY GONNA ACHIEVE IS BETTER THAN, THAN SUBDIVIDING THE LOT.
UM, SO I AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT IN THAT ITSELF.
THAT'S WHY I'LL MAKE THE MOTION HERE.
DO WE HAVE ANY, DO ANYONE ELSE WANNA SPEAK TO THIS? OKAY.
I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THERE'S A TON OF AMENITIES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO BRING NEW FAMILIES.
AND I THINK THAT SF SIX GIVES US A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES TO REALLY BUILD SOMETHING GREAT.
THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WE HAVE SF SIX IN OUR CODE.
SO I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS ONCE THIS MOVES TO DEVELOPER COMMISSIONERS.
ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS, UH, MOTION COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER ZARK? I'LL JUST MAKE IT VERY QUICK.
I JUST WANNA THANK MS. KENDRA RAHO AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS.
WE'RE WORKING WITH MR. THROWER AND MR. THOR, OF COURSE, WE'RE WORKING WITH THEM AS WELL.
IT'S ALWAYS A GOOD DAY WHEN WE HAVE NEIGHBORS WHO CAN REALLY ENGAGE IN THESE DEEP QUESTIONS, UM, IN A, IN A VERY OPEN-MINDED WAY.
I JUST REALLY WANNA APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE.
AND I THINK COMMISSIONER CONLEY, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK AT ALL? OKAY.
UH, FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECTIONED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UH, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND PASS THAT.
SECOND, WE NEED A FORMAL VOTE.
DO WE NEED A FORMAL VOTE CHAIR COMMISSION ON ANDREW? IF IT'S A UNANIMOUS VOTE, IT'S UNANIM UNANIMOUS.
CAN I JUST SAY ONE THING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD? YES.
UM, YOU TALKED ABOUT NOT HAVING A, A DEVELOPER, YOU KNOW, TO WORK WITH.
I I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS, IT'S NICE TO HAVE THE DEVELOPER TO WORK WITH AND TO SHOW US PICTURES, BUT IT'S ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER, YOU KNOW, BEST, BEST LAID PLANS OF THAT DEVELOPER MAY NOT COME TO FRUITION.
AND THEY CAN ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, SEE INTEREST RATES RISE AND LOSE CONTROL OF THE PROPERTY.
AND, AND WE NEED TO BE PLANNING ON WHAT THE ZONING IS AND WHAT THE ZONING SAYS RATHER THAN A POWERPOINT FROM WHAT THE DEVELOPER HAS, BECAUSE THAT'S ALL WE, THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO.
THAT'S ALL WE GET GUARANTEED, IS WHAT THE ZONING WAS SET AT.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? UH, TO YOUR POINT OF CLARIFICATION, WE DID JUST VOTE ON BOTH THE MBA AND THE ZONING CASE, CORRECT? YES.
I HAD, UH, INITIATED THIS AND WE, YES, I, I DON'T THINK I INCLUDED THAT MY ORIGINAL MOTION CAN.
SO I'M GONNA SAY THAT WE, WE, SINCE YOU ALREADY VOTED ON THE ZONING CASE, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ALSO APPROVE THE NPA CHANGE.
UH, ANY OBJECTIONS TO APPROVING THE NPA CASE AS WELL? ALL RIGHT.
UM, SCOTT, I THINK WE'RE UP TO, WE HAD AGREED TO MOVE 32 TO THE END AND TAKE UP ITEM 35.
[35. Site Plan (Environmental Variance Only): SP-2022-0056D - Evergreen Drainage Improvements; District 9]
ALL RIGHT.SO STAFF, LEMME GIVE US AN UPDATE ON SITE PLAN.
UH, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE ONLY.
MY NAME IS MARIA DE RE OH, I'LL WAIT UNTIL YOU PULL THAT BACK UP.
MY NAME IS MARIA DE REINHARD AND I AM AN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST SENIOR IN THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT, AND I'M THE WETLAND BIOLOGIST AND
[02:40:01]
E R M REVIEWER FOR THIS CASE.I'LL BE PRESENTING THE TWO VARIANCES FOR THIS CASE.
AND IT, IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE FIRST SLIDE JUST FOR A SECOND.
IT'S, IT'S CALLED EVERGREEN DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, LOCATED AT 1800 AND A HALF EVERGREEN AVENUE.
IT'S IN WEST BOLDON CREEK WATERSHED, CLASSIFIED URBAN IN THE DESIRE DEVELOPMENT ZONE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT NINE.
AND THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WEST MARY STREET IN EVERGREEN AVENUE WITH THE SOUTH, WITH SOUTH LAMAR BOULEVARD ON THE WESTERN BOUNDARY.
THE SITE, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS AERIAL, IS LARGELY UNDEVELOPED WITH A CREEK RUNNING ALONG THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S A CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, A WETLAND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE, OR C E F ALONG THE CREEK.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A RIM ROCK, C E F ACROSS EVERGREEN AVENUE TO THE EAST WITHIN 150 FEET.
THE WATER ON SITE IS ROOTED OR DISCHARGED THROUGH AN OUTLET THROUGH AN OUTFALL, UM, IN A DRAINAGE PIPE HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE ON THIS IMAGE UNDERNEATH EVERGREEN AVENUE RUNNING NORTHWARD.
AND THEN THE WATER IS NOT ACTUALLY DISCHARGING ACROSS THE CREEK ACROSS EVERGREEN AVENUE.
SO THE RIM ROCK C E F IS NOT AFFECTED BY STORMWATER, OUTFALL OR RUNOFF.
THE TWO VARIANCES THAT THIS CASE IS DEALING WITH IS FIRST THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO LAND A DEVELOPMENT CODE 25 8 261 G TO ALLOW FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
THE SECOND VARIANCE IS 2 25 8 281 C ONE A TO REDUCE THE C E F SETBACK TO 50 FEET AND 25 8 2 81 C TWO B TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE REDUCED 50 FOOT C E F SETBACK.
UM, THE APPLICANT HAS ELECTED NOT TO PROVIDE PLANS SHOWING HOW THE PROJECT SITE WOULD BE DEVELOPED BEYOND THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION WITHIN THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND THE ASSOCIATED IMPACTS TO THE WETLAND C E F.
WITHOUT THIS IMPERATIVE INFORMATION, THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR BOTH VARIANCES CANNOT BE DETERMINED.
THE FIRST VARIANCE REQUEST IS REGARDING THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATIONS IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
THIS IS PROHIBITED IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE UNLESS ONE OF THE EXEMPTIONS IS MET.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REGRADE THE CHANNEL WITH AND TO REDUCE THE FLOODPLAIN FROM THE EXISTING 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN HIGHLIGHTED IN LIGHT BLUE TO THE PROPOSED 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW ON THIS SLIDE.
DUE TO THE LIMITED INFORMATION PROVIDED, IT CANNOT BE DETERMINED IF THE PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION FOR THIS CASE MEETS ANY OF THE THREE EXEMPTIONS, AND THUS THE FORMAL VARIANCE IS REQUIRED.
THE FUNCTIONAL HEALTH OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN 100 YEAR FULLY DEVELOPED FLOODPLAIN IS, HAS BEEN ASSESSED AND RATED IN FAIR CONDITION.
HOWEVER, SINCE THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION APPEARS TO INCLUDE THE CHANNEL ITSELF, THERE WOULD BE A ADDITIONAL FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FLOODPLAIN HEALTH THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE ACTIVE CHANNEL TO DETERMINE THE RESTORATION AND MITIGATION RATIOS REQUIRED.
AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED.
A PROPOSED RESTORATION OR MITIGATION PLAN FOR FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION IMPACTS WAS NOT PROVIDED.
AND WITHOUT THESE PLANS, IT CANNOT BE DETERMINED IF THE PROJECT WOULD MEET THE RESTORATION AND OR MITIGATION RATIOS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ECM 1.7 0.5 AND SIX.
THE SECOND VARIANCE REQUEST IS REGARDING C E F SETBACK REDUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE C F SETBACK.
THE PROJECT PROPOSED WETLAND C F SETBACK REDUCTION TO 50 FEET, WHICH IS SHOWN IN GREEN HERE.
AND THEN THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE REDUCED 50 FOOT C E F SETBACK, WHICH IS SHOWN IN ORANGE.
BOTH OF THOSE WOULD REQUIRE A FORMAL VARIANCE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT PROVIDING ONSITE ONE ONE-TO-ONE IN-KIND MITIGATION THAT IS SUFFICIENT IN ACCORDANCE AND PURSUANT TO ECM ONE POINT 10.4.
SO, IN SUMMARY, THERE ARE A FEW MAJOR APPLICATION DEFICIENCIES THAT, UM, IMPACT STAFF'S DETERMINATION OF FINDINGS OF FACT.
THE APPLICANT DID NOT PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION ON HOW THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT SITE WOULD BE DEVELOPED.
THIS IMPACTS THE ABILITY TO FULLY EVALUATE ANY OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT WITHOUT A FULLY DEVELOPED SITE PLAN.
IT IS UNCLEAR WHY THE DRAINAGE CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS ARE NECESSARY AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED.
THE APPLICANT DID NOT FOLLOW THE STANDARD PROCESS AND THE APPLICATION DOES NOT HAVE AN APPROVED FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION, RESTORATION AND MITIGATION PLAN
[02:45:01]
OR AN APPROVED WETLAND C E F MITIGATION PLAN.THE LACK OF THESE APPROVED PLANS PREVENTS THE ABILITY OF STAFF FROM DETERMINING THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVALUATING THE HARMFUL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.
WATER QUALITY AND MINIMUM DEVIATION FROM CODE STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE FINDINGS OF FACT HAVE NOT BEEN MET AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION VOTED IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF TO NOT RECOMMEND THESE TWO VARIANCES AT THE JANUARY 18TH COMMISSION MEETING.
THAT'S CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AFTER THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR, UH, FIVE MINUTES.
MY NAME'S ROBERT KLEEMAN ON, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO KNOW ABOUT THIS, IT'S THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE AND WE'RE LOOKING AT A SITUATION, UH, THE COMPLETE TAKING OF THE PROPERTY AND THE VARIANCES ARE NOT GRANTED.
AND WE'LL GO GO THROUGH THAT, UM, QUITE QUICKLY.
UM, FIRST SLIDE PLEASE, OR NEXT SLIDE.
SO THE FIRST QUESTION IS, ARE WE, IS THE APPLICANT BEING DENIED PRIVILEGE, UH, THAT SIMILARLY SITUATED PROPERTIES, UH, HAVE ENJOYED? GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
HERE YOU SEE, UH, NO ONE BACK.
SO END, END RED IS THE PROPERTY AND YOU SEE THE, UM, THE ENCLOSED STORM SEWER CROSSING LAMAR, AND THEN CONTINUING ON IN EVERGREEN.
IN FACT, THIS STRETCH IS THE ONLY OPEN CHANNEL OF THIS ENTIRE SUB BASIN, AND THERE'S 77 ACRES UPSTREAM.
UH, AND YOU CAN SEE HOW THE PROPERTY WAS CUT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER BY THE CONSTRUCTION OF MARY.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT EVERY OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY ON THAT BLOCK AND IN THIS AREA HAS BEEN DEVELOPED.
AND THIS AREA HAS BEEN UNDER ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT FOR OVER 120 YEARS.
AND TO SAY ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS GET DEVELOPED LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
SO I THINK TO SAY THAT IT CAN'T BE ESTABLISHED, WE'RE BEING DENIED SIMILAR RIGHTS IS, UH, IS, UH, UNMERITED.
SO LET'S START ON THE, ON THE LAMAR SIDE.
NEXT TO US IS A SINGLE LOT SUBDIVISION THAT WAS RECORDED IN 2013.
THE CITY LET THEM DEDICATE A 10 FOOT WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND A 50 FOOT WIDE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE RIGHT NEXT DOOR 10 YEARS AGO.
OKAY, WE ARE MATCHING UP, ATTEMPTING TO MATCH UP, AND I JUST LEARNED FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER THAT THEY ACTUALLY DID NOT LOCATE THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE CORRECTLY ON THAT PROPERTY, WHICH IS WHY THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE PROPOSED ON OURS IS ACTUALLY 10 FEET, MAYBE WIDER AS IT HITS THE PROPERTY LINE.
BUT WE ARE TRYING TO MATCH UP, WHICH WAS GRANTED ON, ON THE WEST SIDE.
ON THE EAST SIDE, YOU SEE THE INLET INTO, UH, EVERGREEN, WHICH THE CITY OF AUSTIN BUILT, UH, IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.
AND WITH A FIT, IF YOU REDUCE THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE TO 50 FEET, THAT LEAVES 33 FEET FROM THAT EDGE TO THE CORNER TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND IN THAT 33 FEET IS A PROTECTED TREE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE DRIVEWAY HAS BEEN SHIFTED OVER BECAUSE PUBLIC WORKS ALLOWED A WAIVER TO MOVE, UM, A DRIVEWAY TO BE THAT CLOSE, UH, TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
THESE ARE THE CONSTRAINTS THAT WERE NOT CREATED BY MY CLIENT.
UH, AND SO HERE YOU SEE A VIEW FROM EVERGREEN AND THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THE PROPERTY IS IT IS FLAT UNTIL YOU GET VERY CLOSE TO THE WATERWAY.
AND THEN THERE YOU, THEN YOU HAVE THE UPLIFT CREATED BY THE FILL ON THE AUSTIN PIZZA GARDEN PROPERTY.
SO THE FINDING IS, IS THAT ALL THESE CONDITIONS ARE NOT, NOT THE RESULT OF ANYTHING THAT MY CLIENT HAS DONE, BUT THE RESULTS OF ALL THE OTHER SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT THAT'S, THAT HAS OCCURRED.
AND SO TO SAY THAT THEY CAN'T FIND THAT'S THE CASE, I, UH, RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE.
THE MINIMUM DEVIATION FROM THE CODE THAT'S GONNA BE SUBSUMED CUZ THIS IS A SITUATION OF A TOTAL AND COMPLETE TAKING OF THE PROPERTY.
THE VARIANCES ARE NOT GRANTED.
WE WILL, UH, COVER THAT IN THE NEXT, UM, UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
SO, UH, THE SITE AS WILL BE FULLY COMPLIANT, IT'LL, UH, WHEN, WHEN IT COMES IN.
SO, UH, NO ONE'S ASKING FOR ANY VARIANCE HAS TO FULLY COMPLY WITH WATER QUALITY DETENTION PONDS.
ALL THE OTHER, UM, UH, TREE ORDINANCES, ALL THOSE OTHER THINGS ARE STILL GONNA BE IN PLACE.
[02:50:01]
UM, THERE ARE PERIAN MITIGATION, ACTUALLY, UH, AT THE SUGGESTION OF STAFF ABOUT THREE ITERATIONS AGO ON THE MITIGATION PLAN, SUGGESTED SHELFING DOING, UH, UM, BENCHING, UH, THE, THE RIPARIAN MITIGATION AREA TO REALLY CREATE A MUCH BROADER EVEN.AND, AND THE STAFF IS MISTAKEN.
WE HAVE NEVER PROPOSED MODIFYING THE BOTTOM OF THE CREEK.
UM, AND THE, THE PLAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO STAY OUT OF THE BOTTOM OF THE CREEK AND NOT TOUCH THE, THE, THE WETLANDS ITSELF, BUT ONLY TO MODIFY ON THE OUTSIDE OF THAT.
UM, AND I NEED TO POINT OUT THAT THIS WILL BE MAYBE ONE OF A, OF LESS THAN A HANDFUL OF PROJECTS IN THIS BASIN THAT WOULD EVEN HAVE WATER QUALITY PONDS.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL SLIDES? YES, I DO.
UH, JUST DUE TO THE COMPLEXITY OF THIS CASE, DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS, STEVEN? THANK YOU, PLEASE.
THIS IS A PICTURE, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, CHAIR.
UH, HOW MUCH TIME ARE WE PROVIDING? UH, THREE MINUTES.
SO THIS IS, UH, UH, DIAGRAM OF THE MITIGATION PLAN.
IF YOU SEE THE TOPO LINES ALONG THE BOTTOM, UH, THAT RUN, UH, PARALLEL TO THE PROPERTY LINE, THAT'S WHAT I CALL THE UPLIFT THAT'S ON.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT IS AUSTIN PIZZA, AUSTIN'S PIZZA AND MARY STREET.
UH, THE, THE BENCHES AND THE TRAIL WERE PUT IN AT THE SUGGESTION OF THE PRIOR STAFF PERSON ON ONE OF THE PRIOR ITERATIONS OF THE, OF THE, UH, MITIGATION PLAN.
THAT'S NOT ANYTHING THAT WE CARE ABOUT.
IF THAT, IF STAFF WANTS THAT TAKEN OUT FOR MORE PLANTING, THAT'S FINE.
SO LET ME GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING.
MY CLIENT BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY IN, IN 2002 AFTER THE COUNCIL HAD ZONED IT CS M U C O IN 2001.
THEY HAD A DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PREPARED, UH, DONE BY THE CITY, WHICH, UH, CONFIRMED THAT THE SITE WAS, COULD BE DEVELOPED, THAT THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT DRAINAGE FROM UPSTREAM, THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE MANAGED AND IT HAD TO BE PLATTED.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE'VE BEEN, UH, FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS, IS TRYING TO GET A PLAT AND TO GET THE DRAINAGE DONE.
UH, THIS SITE PLAN WOULD GENERALLY, AS YOU SEE, WOULD CREATE, UH, OUTSIDE OF THE RED LINE, WOULD BE ABOUT AN 18,000 SQUARE FOOT AREA.
BUT THAT INCLUDES THE YELLOW, WHICH IS A RELOCATED SEWER LINE.
AND, AND TO PROTECT SOME TREES, UH, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS SHIFTED OVER IN THE PARKING.
UM, AND SO GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, CUZ I NEED TO GET HEARD.
SO, BECAUSE WE'RE IN A, UH, UH, COMPLETE TAKINGS, UH, SITUATION, UH, I BELIEVE STAFF HAS, UH, MISREAD THE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE LAW.
AND THE FIRST QUESTION TO ASK IS ESTABLISHING WHAT IS A REASONABLE ECONOMIC USE OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
AND THEN YOU GO AND LOOK AT DEVIATIONS.
YOU DON'T LOOK AT DEVIATIONS, THEN TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT WHAT'S A REASONABLE ECONOMIC USE OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.
UM, AS I'VE TALKED ABOUT ON MITIGATION, IT'LL BE TEMPORARY DISTURBANCE OF THE 50 FOOT, UH, C E F BUFFER, NONE IN THE WATERWAY OR SOUTH OF THE WATERWAY.
UH, OF COURSE, IN ADDITION TO THE MITIGATION ON SITE, UM, THERE WILL BE PAYMENT OF THE SIX TO ONE, UH, FEE TO THE FUND.
IN 2013 IS WHEN EVERYTHING CHANGED THE, IN, IN 2003, THE CITY ATTEMPTED TO BUY THIS PROPERTY.
THEY HIRED THE CITY, HIRED HOLT TO DO A DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS.
AND THEY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THIS PROPERTY COULD BE DEVELOPED IF YOU CON, IF YOU LIMITED THE WATERWAY TO 50 FEET, AS WE ARE PROPOSING AS VIABLE AND APPROVABLE ADMINISTRATIVELY.
IN 2003, THAT WAS THE CASE UNTIL 2013 WHEN THE THIR 2013 ORDINANCE CAME INTO EFFECT.
BUT THE WORLD HAS CHANGED SINCE 2013.
THIS ISN'T THE FINDINGS OF FACT FROM THE UNLEASHED AFFORDABILITY ORDINANCE, THE CITY HAS DEDICATED TO FINDING CREATIVE, INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE ARE TRYING TO CREATE A BUILDING SITE AS SUGGESTED BY STAFF IN 2003 BY CONTROLLING THE FLOODING AND THE DRAINAGE.
AND THEN I WILL, I NEED, AND, AND I DO, I GET A, I THINK COUNTER.
SO THAT'S, UH, NO, WE HAVE MR. EASTER, THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER.
CHAIR SPEAK, UH, CHAIR COMMISSION.
MR. WHOEVER, WHO'S ON OUR LIST FOR SPEAKERS CHAIR COMMISSION, LAY ON ANDOVER.
SO I DIDN'T HAVE THEM REGISTERED, BUT AGAIN, YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS.
WE'RE GONNA, WE'LL GO INTO Q AND A AND, AND I'M SURE SOMEBODY WILL INVITE YOU UP HERE TO SPEAK.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, NO, NO MORE SPEAKERS ON THIS SIDE.
UH, MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONER, DESIRE STATE BY
[02:55:01]
COMMISSIONER WOODS.UH, THERE, THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS.
IF I SEE NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THAT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO Q AND A.
THIS MAY REQUIRE A LITTLE MORE THAN FIVE AT THREE.
SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE SOME CHALLENGING ONES, BUT LET'S SEE IF WE CAN START AT THAT.
SO, COMMISSIONER WOODS, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? AND THEN COMMISSIONER COX, AND THEN GIVE A SHIRT.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT WE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THIS CASE? WE'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME, UH, TRYING TO GET THIS, UH, GET THIS COMPLETED.
SO YES, WE HAVE DESIGNED INSIDE THE PROPOSED FOOTPRINT THAT WE COULD USE IF THE 50 FOOT IS GRANTED.
UH, WE HAVE, UH, TWO DIFFERENT DESIGNS.
ONE IS, I THINK, VERY CREATIVE.
IT GOES ALONG WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT WOULD GIVE US, UM, ACTUALLY 50, UH, EXCUSE ME, IT WOULD GIVE US 63 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
IF WE DO THE, UH, THE, THE NEWEST, UH, UH, UNLEASHED AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IF WE DO, UM, THE STANDARD, WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE ZONING AND, AND THE CONSTRAINTS, UH, WE'RE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY DO 10% THERE, WHICH WOULD BE A SIX, ABOUT A 60 UNIT, UH, PROJECT.
SO, UH, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE CITY NEEDS AND WANTS.
AND, UH, WE, WE FEEL LIKE WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS, UH, TO THE DRAINAGE AND THE, AND THE WATERWAY, WE CAN, WE CAN ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISH THAT.
UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF AS WELL, OR FOR MS. REINHARD.
UH, WERE YOU PRESENTED THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION THAT WE HAVE JUST SEEN? HI.
NO, THAT WAS NOT PROVIDED IN OUR SUBMITTED SITE PLAN AT ALL.
THAT WAS ONLY PROVIDED A DAY BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
THAT'S THE ONLY TIME IT'S BEEN PROVIDED.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I'VE GOT THREE QUESTIONS.
HOPEFULLY I'LL BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH THEM, UH, FOR STAFF FIRST.
UM, PROBABLY SHOULD JUST STAY UP AT THE PODIUM.
SO LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU'RE THERE.
SO, UH, IN IN YOUR PRESENTATION, THERE SEEMED TO BE A LAUNDRY LIST OF THINGS THAT WEREN'T, WASN'T SUBMITTED.
UH, YOU SEEM TO INDICATE THAT, THAT IT, THIS REALLY HASN'T FOLLOWED THE, THE PROCESS THAT'S BEEN SET IN STONE FOR QUITE A WHILE FOR REQUESTING ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCES.
COULD YOU RECAP THAT REAL QUICK? YES.
SO TYPICALLY WE HAVE A FULL SITE PLAN SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE ENTIRETY OF THE SITE THAT'S BEING DEVELOPED, NOT JUST THE SMALL PORTION THAT'S GOING TO BE IMPACTING WETLANDS OR FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION SO THAT WE CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND WHERE FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION AND, UM, IF, IF THERE'S AREA ON THE SITE FOR FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION ACTUALLY TO OCCUR, OR IF IT NEEDS TO BE ENTIRELY MITIGATION THAT'S PROPOSED OFFSITE OR IF IT'S A COMBINATION.
UM, IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR US TO DECIDE AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE EXTENT OF ONE-TO-ONE MITIGATION FOR WETLAND C E F PROTECTIONS IS AVAILABLE ON THE SITE AS WELL.
AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, THAT ALSO AFFECTS OTHER REVIEW DISCIPLINES, NOT JUST OURS, BUT THAT'S THE SPECIFICS FOR THE VARIANCES FOR THIS PIECE OF IT.
SO THEY DID NOT PROVIDE THE SITE PLAN FULLY DEVELOPED.
THEY DID NOT PROVIDE, YEAH, THE FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION PLAN, FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION PLAN, FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION PLAN, ANY OF THOSE THREE.
AND THEY DID NOT PROVIDE THE WETLAND C E F ONE TO ONE MITIGATION PLAN.
I'VE, I'VE BEEN THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL C UH, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE PROCESSES AND, AND IT'S TYPICALLY A TWO-WAY CONVERSATION.
SO I, I'M, I ASSUME, AND JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT Y'ALL GAVE THE APPLICANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT THESE THINGS TO REVIEW BEFORE GOING TO COMMISSION? YES, AND THEY, UM, THEY, THIS SITE ALSO HAD GONE THROUGH A PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL.
SO THIS WAS A WITHDRAW AND RESUBMIT.
SO THERE WAS A PREVIOUS SITE PLAN BACK IN 2020, AND THEN IT GOT RESUBMITTED IN 2022, WHICH IS WHEN I TOOK IT OVER.
UM, BUT WITH 2020, THEY WERE STARTING TO WORK OUT ADMINISTRATIVELY, SOME SORT OF WETLAND MITIGATION ONE TO ONE, BUT THEY STILL NEVER GOT THROUGH TO SOMETHING THAT WAS ACTUALLY SUFFICIENT TO MEET ONE-TO-ONE AND APPROVE IT.
AND THEY DECIDED TO ELECT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE VARIANCE PROCESS INSTEAD OF CONTINUING TO WORK WITH STAFF TO ESTABLISH A ONE-TO-ONE MITIGATION PLAN.
THEY ALSO DID NOT PROVIDE FLOODPLAIN, UM, INFORM INFORMATION.
SO, SO LAST QUESTION FOR YOU AND I, UH, THE BUZZER MAY HAVE BEEPED, I CAN'T HEAR IT.
[03:00:01]
UH, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES STAFF WILL, UH, UH, RECOMMEND APPROVAL BUT WITH CONDITIONS, UM, FOR, FOR THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL'S, UM, CONSIDERATION OR FOR THE COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION.IS THERE A REASON WHY STAFF COULDN'T DO THAT HERE? UM, FIND A WAY TO RECOMMEND IT, BUT, BUT THEN RECOMMEND CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
YES, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE A FULL SITE PLAN TO ACTUALLY SHOW WHAT THEY WERE GONNA BE DOING.
AND THE SAME WITH THEIR PROPOSAL FOR FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION OR WETLAND MITIGATION.
WE HAVE RECOMMENDED THINGS IN THE PAST WHEN WE'VE HAD A FULL EXTENSIVE PLAN SET TO KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO BE PROPOSED AND GUARANTEEING THAT INFORMATION.
UM, I, SO I GUESS I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND FROM THE APPLICANT WHEN, WHEN THIS PROCESS STARTED AND IF WE COULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE, SO WHAT YEAR IT BEGAN, HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN WORKING, CUZ IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE WAS A CHANGEOVER IN STAFF IN 22 AND YOU GUYS WERE ALMOST ABOUT TO REACH SOMETHING.
SO WHAT HAPPENED? AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED AT ENVIRONMENTAL WOULD BE HELPFUL.
SO IN THE, THE 2020 APPLICATION, UH, ALL COMMENTS WERE CLEARED EXCEPT FOR THOSE SPECIFICALLY RELATED THAT NEEDED THE VARIANCE DECISION TO BE MADE FOR WHATEVER REASON.
WHEN THE WITHDRAWAL AND RESUBMITTAL OCCURRED, IT'S LIKE THE FILE WAS EMPTIED AND NONE OF THAT MOVED FORWARD.
UH, IF YOU LOOK LOOKED AT THE TIMELINE I SENT YOU, THERE WERE FIVE ITERATIONS OF THE MITIGATION PLAN SENT TO STAFF.
AND DURING THE 2020 APPLICATION, UM, I ALSO NEED TO SAY THAT IT'S PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO ONE-TO-ONE ONSITE MITIGATION WHEN THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE CF SETBACK.
AND, AND SO, UH, WHATEVER, AND, AND LET ME ALSO SAY THIS ABOUT THE SITE PLAN.
IT WAS AFTER WE RESUBMITTED THAT IN JULY OF 2021, STAFF THEN MOVED THE GOALPOST ON US AND SAID, OH, WELL YOU CAN'T DO A D SITE PLAN.
LIKE THEY TOLD US A YEAR AND A HALF EARLIER, NOW YOU HAVE TO DO A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN, OR WE CAN'T POSSIBLY REVIEW YOUR VARIANCE.
UH, THIS ACTUALLY STARTED OFF AS A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION, WHICH IS WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED IN TW 2001 AND CONFIRMED BY HOLT IN 2003, GET THE LOT LEGAL, GET THE DRAINAGE CONTROLLED.
THOSE ARE, THAT'S THE ORDER OF THE PROCESS.
AND SOMEHOW STAFF IS NOW JUMPING WAY AHEAD AND WANTING A, A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN MERELY SO THEY CAN DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE WE'RE MITIGATING SUFFICIENTLY.
AND WE C CLEARLY CAN'T DO A ONE-TO-ONE.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE.
SO, UM, WHY WAS THE, UM, APPLICATION, WHY DID IT HAVE TO BE WITHDRAWN AND RESUBMITTED? UH, THE, THE, THE CLOCK RAN OUT ON THAT.
WE HAD, SO IN, IN FEBRUARY, MARCH, UH, I RESUBMITTED THE FORMAL APPLICATION FOR THE VARIANCES.
UH, THE, THE PROJECT ENGINEER, UH, GOT ALL THE COMMENTS CLEARED.
UH, OTHER THAN THOSE RELATING DIRECTLY TO THE VARIANCE BECAUSE OF THE CLOCK, WE HAD TO DO A WITHDRAWAL AND RESUBMIT IT, WHICH WAS APPROVED AND RESUBMITTED.
WE LOST OUR, THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWER, ANNA, WHO'D BEEN WORK THAT RICK HAD BEEN WORKING WITH FOR A NUMBER FOR FIVE ITERATIONS ON THE, ON THE MITIGATION PLAN.
AND IT'S LIKE ALL OF A SUDDEN, UH, IN JULY NOW WE NEED A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN.
BEFORE I RUN OUT OF TIME, DO YOU WANNA, UM, LET US KNOW WHAT HAPPENED WHEN YOU GUYS WERE AT ENVIRONMENTAL? BOTH YOU AND STAFF I THINK ALLUDED TO THAT? WELL, IT, IT'S ONCE THE STAFF GO AHEAD AND ANSWER, OKAY.
ONCE THE STAFF TOLD US THAT ONLY A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN COULD SATISFY THEIR CURIOSITY TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS, UH, AND WE, THE, THE CLIENT THOUGHT ABOUT THE COST AND DELAY OF DOING THAT WITHOUT KNOWING WHETHER THE VARIANCES BE GRANTED, UH, THAT'S WHERE THERE'S AN IMPASSE.
AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION ATTEMPTED TO TRY AND, AND MEDIATE BETWEEN US AND STAFF.
AND, AND WE KNEW STAFF WASN'T GONNA BU BUDGE OFF THEIR LATEST POSITION.
AND SO EFFECTIVELY WE ASKED THE, UH, COMMISSION TO VOTE TO GET US OUT OF THERE TO GET US HERE.
UH, MY JOB IS, IS TO EXHAUST ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES OTHER CUZ OTHERWISE THIS IS GOING TO THE COURTHOUSE.
IF, IF IT DON'T WORK SOMETHING OUT AND, AND THEN THERE YOU'LL HAVE A VACANT LOT AND NO HOUSING.
AND I HATE TO PUT IT THAT STARKLY, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT.
AND A LITTLE COOPERATION WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED
[03:05:01]
AND WOULD LOVE TO WORK WITH Y'ALL TO TRY AND FIND A SOLUTION.UH, CUZ THIS ISN'T THAT HARD, FRANKLY, BUT IT'S BEEN MADE INCREDIBLY COMPLICATED.
UH, COMMISSION MAXWELL? UH, YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY.
UM, IS IT POSSIBLE TO BRING BACK UP WHAT YOU ALL HAVE PROPOSED IN TERMS, I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE DETAILED SITE PLAN, BUT I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE IT ONE MORE TIME IF THAT'S POSSIBLE.
THE, THE, THE SITE PLAN OR THE BUILDINGS? UH, THE BUILDINGS ACTUALLY, WHICHEVER IS FINE.
JUST YOU HAD IT IN THE PRESENTATION.
CAN YOU BRING UP THE, ANY PARTICULAR SLIDE? UH, I THINK IF YOU WANT BACK ONE OR, YES, I KEEP GOING.
UM, WHAT DO YOU WANT? YEAH, THIS ONE.
SO JUST TO GET A SENSE OF WHAT IF IN THE PERFECT WORLD, WHAT YOU COULD BUY BUILD HERE, GIVEN THE VARIANCES YOU'RE SAYING APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY UNITS AND SORT OF WHAT WE'D BE LOOKING AT IF YOU GO FORWARD.
THIS, THIS, I KNOW THAT'S A LOT TO READ.
IF IT'S DONE UNDER THE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED, UH, WE'RE LOOKING AT UH, UH, 122 UNITS AND 63 WOULD BE, UH, AFFORDABLE AND 59 WOULD BE MARKET RATE.
UH, AND THAT WOULD BE UNDER THE TYPE TWO IF YOU GO NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
THAT'S WHAT THAT BUILDING LOOKS LIKE THAT ACTUALLY WILL FIT INTO THAT SPACE.
THIS IS WITH STANDARD ZONING AND AFFORDABLE BONUSES.
IT'S, UM, WITH SOME SUBTERRANEAN PARKING, UH, YOU WOULD GET, UH, 42 1 BEDROOM UNITS SIX, AND THEN THERE'S 10% AFFORDABLE.
UH, AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE WILL SHOW YOU THAT THAT SMALLER, SHORTER BUILDING THAT'S, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO SOUTH LAMAR, INCLUDING ALL OF THE TRANSIT CORRIDOR AND EVERYTHING ELSE? YES.
AND IS A PRIME LOCATION FOR THE TYPES OF HOUSING WE'RE LOOKING TO BUILD IN THE CITY.
IT IS EXACT, IT'S A ALONG, UH, THE SOUTH LEMAR LARGER CORRIDOR.
IT'S WHERE THE CITY WANTS HOUSING.
AND I DO HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION, IF I HAVE TIME.
UM, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AROUND THERE? BECAUSE I KNOW THE AUSTIN PIZZA SITE IS SOMEWHAT OF A CONCERN AT THAT SITUATION IN TERMS OF THE INFILL THAT'S HAPPENED THERE THAT MIGHT BE CAUSING SOME OF THESE PROBLEMS. IT, IT, IT'S A, IT IS ACCUMULATION BECAUSE THE PROPERTY, THE, THE, THE PROPERTY WAS ORIGINALLY IN A PLAT THAT WAS DONE LIKE IN MAYBE 1905 MM-HMM.
AND SO LAMAR, I MEAN, THE TECH STOCK MOVED THE CREEK OVER AND PUT IT ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE, UH, UH, CLEARLY WITH MARY AND, AND PIZZA GARDEN BEING AT THE SAME ELEVATION.
THAT WAS PROBABLY A COMBINATION OF THE CITY AND THAT LOT OWNER RAISING THE LAND, CREATING THAT UPLIFT.
UH, WHEN THE, WHEN THE CITY BUILT THE RE REPLACED THE EVERGREEN INLET, THEY UNDERSIZED THE INLET.
YOU HAVE A SIX BY FIVE UNDER EVERGREEN, WHICH CAUSES PART OF THE BACKUP.
UM, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE GONE ON AROUND THAT HAVE THEIR EXTERNALITIES HAVE FALLEN ONTO THIS PROPERTY.
SO, SORRY IF I, SINCE I STILL HAVE ONE MORE MINUTE.
ESSENTIALLY, IF YOU DID MOVE FORWARD AND WE HAD GRANTED YOU WOULD ESSENTIALLY APPROVE THE WATERSHED SITUATION IN THIS LOT, CORRECT? WELL, JUST SAYING THAT THE END RESULT WOULD END UP BEING A BETTER SET OF DRAINAGE SITUATION FOR THE LOT.
THE, THE, THE DRAINAGE IS NOT PERFORMING.
NOW, IF, IF YOU GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE, YOU SEE THE PROPERTY'S FLAT AND IT SPILLS OVER IN EVERGREEN, AND YOU WOULD ACTUALLY WOULD CREATE A, A LARGER RIPARIAN AREA MM-HMM.
UH, WE'RE AT OUR LAST QUESTION.
DO WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER WITH A QUESTION? I DO HAVE A FEW.
UH, SO WE MIGHT NEED TO NO, GO AHEAD.
UM, WHO ELSE HAD, DID YOU HAVE NO, I WAS GONNA TAKE A QUESTION AND ASK, UM, AND JUST USE THAT EXTRA TIME FOR HIM TO FINISH WHAT HE WAS SAYING, BUT, UM, OKAY.
WELL, LET'S, WE CAN ALLOW MORE.
DID YOU HAVE MORE TO ADD TO THAT, TO THAT LAST QUESTION? DID YOU FINISH YOUR ANSWER OR DID YOU HAVE MORE TO ADD? I THINK I DID.
UM, I MEAN, WHAT I HEARD, IT WOULD SOUND VERY COMPLICATED, BUT THERE'S A LACK OF INFORMATION.
IF YOU HAD THE INFORMATION, WOULD YOU THEN BE ABLE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO GRANT THE VARIANT? WHAT I HEARD, YOU JUST DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION.
YOU AREN'T, AND THAT'S THE REASON FOR NOT, UH, RECOMMENDING THE VARIANTS.
IS THAT, TRYING TO PUT IT SIMPLE? IS THAT OKAY? YES.
THAT'S A VERY SIMPLE WAY TO PUT IT, BUT YES.
WHAT ARE THE RISKS? UM, WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE THE RISKS? I MEAN, IF WE DEVELOP, WE HAVE ALL THESE UNITS, BUT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL SIDE, WHAT COULD WE POTENTIALLY BE OVERLOOKING AND NOT SEEING IF WE DON'T HAVE THIS INFORMATION? I MEAN, I, I MEAN, WE'RE, WE LOOK AT THE RENDERING, LOOK AT THE UNITS, AND MAN, THAT LOOKS REALLY GOOD, BUT I DON'T, DON'T WANT TO DO THAT.
IF THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS WE'RE NOT TA WE'RE NOT ABLE TO COMPREHEND HERE.
LIZ JOHNSTON, WATERSHED PROTECTION.
[03:10:01]
UM, SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THAT TONIGHT WAS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE SEEN THOSE RENDERINGS.SO, UM, THAT'S IMPORTANT INFORMATION TO HAVE.
SO WE WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THE STORM WATER IS GOING TO BE HANDLED.
WE WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT, UH, TREES ARE GOING TO BE REMOVED OR PRESERVED.
WE WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THE CREEK CAN BE RESTORED WITH A DETAILED PLANTING PLAN.
UM, AND THE WETLAND MITIGATION.
NOW, I, IT, IT'S NOT TRUE THAT YOU CAN'T PHYSICALLY PUT ONE-TO-ONE ON THE SITE.
UM, I THINK THAT'S JUST A MISCOMMUNICATION OF UNDER OF WHAT THAT MEANS.
BUT MIRANDA'S, UM, VERY HAPPY TO WORK WITH, WITH THE APPLICANTS TO COME UP WITH IMPROVED WAYS OF HANDLING STORM WATER THAT WOULD MEET THE FUNCTION OF THE EXISTING WETLAND.
UM, SO THERE'S, THERE'S MANY OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD BE, LET ME, UM, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH THEM WITH THE INFORMATION, BUT IF WE WERE TO PASS THIS VARIANCE, I MEAN, ON THAT, WHAT ARE THE RISK? I MEAN, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT FLOODING OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT, UM, WHAT, WHAT'S, WHAT, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT HERE? UM, ARE WE TRYING TO PROTECT? RIGHT.
SO THE, THE FLOODING WOULD BE HANDLED SEPARATELY.
WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT RIPARIANS, THE FUNCTIONING OF THE, THE, THE CREEK.
UM, AGAIN, IT IS AN URBAN CREEK AND IT'S NOT, UM, IT, IT, WE UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE ON THIS PARTICULAR SITE.
UM, WE BELIEVE THAT THAT IS A REASONABLE REQUEST TO HAVE.
UM, THE OTHER RISK IS THAT SINCE THIS IS NOT SUBMITTED WITH THE SITE PLAN, THERE'S NOTHING TO TIE THE 63 UNIT BUILDING TO THIS REQUEST.
THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN THE BACKUP AS A POTENTIAL.
THAT'S NOT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED.
BEING WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED AS A GRADING PLAN.
UM, SO DO WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND EXPAND THIS, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY? WE CAN DO THAT IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
I, I, I, I THINK I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND I DON'T TAKE US LONG.
UH, ARE THERE ANY O OPPOSITION TO GO AND GO WITH EIGHT LIKE WE DID BEFORE? ALL RIGHT.
SO WE HAVE COMMISSIONER CONLEY, COMMISSIONER HAINES, AND THEN COMMISSIONER AAR, COMMISSIONER COHEN, AND WHO ELSE? COMMISSIONER MR. TOLER.
AND, UM, CHAIR COHEN ALSO HAD QUESTIONS.
ANY OPPOSITION? I THINK THIS IS, THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ONE.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY, I THINK YOU WERE FIRST.
UM, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL LET, I'LL, I'LL LET A FEW OTHERS GO FOR US.
YOU WAIVE YOUR, YOU CAN COME BACK.
SO, COMMISSIONER UH, COMMISSIONER HAINES.
UM, HELP ME, WHAT'S, WHAT IS THE NAME OF THIS CREEK? OR IS THIS, IS THIS A NAMED CREEK OR IS THIS A DRAINAGE DITCH GOING INTO BULLON? IT APPEARS TO ME IT'S A DRAINAGE DITCH THAT HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED.
WHAT, NODDING YOUR HEAD, UM, IS THIS A NAMED CREEK? SORRY, FOLKS.
THIS IS JOHN CLEMENT, UM, UH, PROGRAM MANAGER FOR THE WATERSHED REVIEWERS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL SIDE.
I REPORT TO LIZ JOHNSON, THE DEPUTY, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.
UH, IT HAS A CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
FLOODPLAINS AND CRITICALS ARE REGULATED TO UP TO, UH, 64 ACRES.
SO THERE'S MORE THAN 64 ACRES OF LAND THAT DRAIN AND DRAINS HERE DRAIN.
AND IT'S TYPICAL TO HAVE A PATCHWORK OF THESE THROUGHOUT TOWN WHERE YOU HAVE RELATIVELY NATURAL CREEK SECTIONS OR AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, VEGETATED AND EARTH AND MATERIALS, UH, GOING INTO STORM WATER, COMING OUTTA THE STORMWATER SYSTEM, BACK INTO NATURAL CHANNELS AND SO FORTH.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER AZAR, I, I APPRECIATE THAT CHAIR.
I'VE ACTUALLY FOLLOW UP TO THAT SINCE I THINK THAT WAS A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.
HONESTLY, I, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT DOES THIS FLOWING DO? THIS CREEK, I'M SORRY, COULD YOU RE REPEAT, REPEAT THAT.
UH, WHAT DOES THE CREEK FLOWING INTO? INTO, UH, WATER IN EAST GOLDEN CREEK? THIS IS JOHN CLEMENT WITH WATERSHED.
AGAIN, IT FLOWS IN EAST GOLDEN CREEK.
AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION WAS, AGAIN, FOR STAFF, CAN YOU HELP US, I JUST NEED TO PROCEDURALLY UNDERSTAND THE VARIOUS REQUEST COMES TO US.
DOES THIS GO TO COUNCIL AFTER US? IT DOES NOT, NO.
SO WE ARE THE FINAL DECISION MAKING BODY.
WHATEVER WE DECIDE TONIGHT IS THE DECISION YES.
NEXT, UH, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I'LL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND SO JUST KIND OF FOLLOW UP ON THAT.
I JUST, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS.
SO STAFF POINTED OUT THAT THE MAIN ISSUE WAS LACK OF CLARITY AND SPECIFIC INFORMATION ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS THAT,
[03:15:01]
ABOUT THE SITE PLAN, RIGHT? THAT, THAT YOU DON'T HAVE AT THIS MOMENT.MY QUESTION IS, DOES US GRANTING THIS VARIANCE NECESSARILY STOP THAT, THOSE AN THOSE QUESTIONS FROM BEING ANSWERED AND, AND, AND, AND FURTHER INFORMATION, I MEAN, IS THIS IS JUST, IS IT DONE? IS IT, UH, IS THERE STILL FURTHER REVIEW THAT WILL TAKE PLACE? SO TYPICALLY, UH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
TYPICALLY, UM, MIGHT NEED LIZ ON THIS ONE.
UH, TYPICALLY, UH, PLANS GO TO SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION.
MOST COMMENTS HAVE BEEN CLEARED.
UM, THAT HAD HAPPENED PREVIOUSLY WITH THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN.
UH, THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED WITH THE NEW SITE PLAN.
THEY CHOSE NOT TO CLEAR COMMENTS.
SO, AND THEY HAVE NOT WORKED OUT THE COMMENTS WITH WATERSHED STAFF, UH, IN TERMS OF, UH, UH, WETLAND CFS AND FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION.
UH, BECAUSE OF THAT, THEY, WE BASICALLY, THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS IS DONE AT THIS POINT, UNLESS YOU PUT CONDITIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT WOULD BE, HAVE TO BE DONE FROM THE DAY ES ESSENTIALLY.
COULD YOU BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT THOSE CONDITIONS WOULD BE? UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY SENSE? ACTUALLY, I THINK WE NEED LIZ FOR THIS.
HOW WOULD WE RESOLVE, HOW DO WE GET TO A PERMITTED SITE PLAN IN TERMS OF THE OPEN COMMENTS REGARDING FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION AND WETLAND MITIGATION? THOSE COMMENTS WOULD BE CLEARED AGAIN, UNLESS THERE WERE CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE JUST IN SPEAKING WITH THE APPLICANT, THAT, UM, IF WE CAN COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF AN EXHIBIT IN, IN LIEU OF A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN, THAT THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION AND COME BACK TO Y'ALL, UM, THAT MIGHT BE AN OPTION AS WELL.
ARE WE, ARE YOU, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A POSTPONEMENT? UM, OH, WELL, HERE'S A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU BE AGREEABLE TO POSTPONE AND WORK ON SOME KIND OF AN EXHIBIT OF THAT SORT AND RETURN? YES.
AS LONG AS THE CONSOLIDATED REQUIREMENT FOR A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN IS TAKEN OFF THE TABLE, WE'D BE, WE WOULD, UH, WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN FOR A MONTH AT THE MOST, UH, TO WORK WITH STAFF, UH, TO SEE IF WE CAN'T COME BACK.
AND I DO APPRECIATE, UH, THE RECOGNITION THAT THIS IS A REASONABLE REQUEST.
I THINK WE GOT WRAPPED AROUND THE AXLE A LITTLE BIT, UM, IN, IN THE, IN THE HANDOFF.
AND, UH, UH, MAYBE NOW WE CAN SIT DOWN AND, AND TALK AND, AND SHARE THE INFORMATION AND COME UP WITH A AND, UH, RESOLUTION.
AND SO FOR STAFF, WOULD YOU AGREE TO THIS? UH, YES.
I THINK WE CAN COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF EXHIBIT THAT WOULD WORK, SO.
DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS, COMMISSIONER HANKS? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS.
JUST WHAT, WHY CAN'T YOU COME UP WITH A, IS IT THE EXPENSE OF A CONSOLIDATED WETLAND PLAN? AND, AND I KNOW THIS IS COMPLICATED, SO MAKE IT SIMPLE.
SO FOR ME, PLEASE, A CON YES, A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN IS STARTING OVER.
CUZ WHERE WE STARTED WAS TO DO A PLAT AND TO DO THE DRAINAGE.
AND NOW IT'S GROWN, YOU KNOW, THEN THE CONSOLIDATED IS A FULL VERTICAL DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S DIFFERENT THAN A D SITE PLAN THAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
THAT'S SPENDING PROBABLY SIX MONTHS GETTING IT READY FOR SUBMITTAL.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S ABOUT 18 MONTHS TO GET THROUGH WITH A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN.
SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT TWO YEAR DELAY, UH, BEFORE WE EVEN KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE VARIANCES.
BUT, BUT STAFF, THEY CAN COME BACK WITH, WITH A SHORTER, THEY CAN COME BACK WITH SOMETHING AND HELP Y'ALL AND GET, GET TO A DECISION HERE.
IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? RIGHT.
THE GOAL WOULD BE TO GET TO SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
UM, THE GOAL IS USUALLY SUPPORT OF THE VARIANCE.
UM, SO THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BE STRIVING FOR.
SO, UH, A MOTION WE HAVE A PLAN? I THINK.
I CAN I ASK, IS THERE ANY WAY I CAN ASK A QUESTION OR ARE WE NOT TAB PAST QUESTIONS? YEAH, WE ARE, WE ARE OUTTA QUESTIONS, BUT, UM, I, I THINK I DON'T GENERAL EVERYONE'S HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THEIR QUESTIONS.
WE DID HAVE FOLKS THAT WERE AWAITING FOR THOSE EXTRA S***S.
WHO WAS ON THE DO, UM, COMMISSIONER? VIRTUALLY, I BELIEVE COX.
SO COMMISSIONER MUHA AND THEN COX.
WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND FINISH.
COMMISSIONER MU IS SAYING HERE, QUESTION COMMISSIONER, GO.
OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO COMMISSIONER COHEN.
UM, COULD I JUST GET A BRIEF EXPLANATION FROM THE APPLICANT ON, OR, OR MAYBE SOME ELABORATION ON WHY THEY FEEL STAFF
[03:20:01]
MADE THE INCORRECT DECISION HERE? BECAUSE THAT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING THAT COULD END UP BEFORE MY BOARD.CAN I ASK WHICH BOARD YOU'RE ON? I'M CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
THEN THAT WOULD BE AN INTERPRETATION APPEAL.
I DON'T SEE A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
BUT, UM, I, RATHER THAN SAYING, ARE YOU ASKING ME TO A EXPLAIN WHY I THINK I DISAGREE WITH THEIR FINDINGS ON EVERY FINDING? I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT ME TO DO.
SO, I'M SORRY, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
THERE'S NOT A, NOT A ZONING VARIANCE ISSUE.
BUT YOU SAID YOU THOUGHT STAFF WAS WRONG ON THIS ONE.
AND THAT'S WHAT, BUT WE'RE WILLING TO SIT DOWN AND SEE IF WE CAN'T TURN THOSE NOSE, THOSE FROWNS AND THE SMILES, SO TO SPEAK.
UH, UH, CHAIR COHEN, THIS IS LIST AND I BELIEVE THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HERE, STAFF INTERPRETATIONS RELATED TO ZONING CASES.
UM, I'D NEED LAW TO LOOK INTO THAT, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT, UM, IT, UH, STAFF INTERPRETATION REQUEST WOULD COME TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS.
UM, IF THERE'S A QUESTION FOR, UM, UM, D S D, UH, DO YOU HAVE THEM ON THE LINE? AND, UH, THEY CAN, UH, PROBABLY SPEAK TO THAT.
I'M NOT SEEING ANY AT THIS POINT.
UM, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER COX, AND THEN I HAVE ONE QUESTION.
COMMISSIONER COX? I WAS, I WAS GONNA MAKE A MOTION, BUT IF THERE'S MORE QUESTIONS.
WE'RE GONNA, COMMISSIONER CONLEY IS THE LAST, AND THEN THAT'S THE LAST ONE.
SO, UM, MY ONLY QUESTION IS, IS IT PO SEEING THAT THERE'S THIS AGREEMENT TO COME BACK AND WORK ON SOMETHING? IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO GO AHEAD AND GRANT THE VARIANCE NOW ON THE CONDITION THAT THEY'LL COME BACK AND PRESENT TO US THEIR FINDINGS? NO.
SO WE CANNOT GRANT THE VARIANCE UNTIL THEY TO COME BACK.
AND, AND, AND HOW LONG DOES STAFF NEED TO ACTUALLY DO THIS? TWO WEEKS, I THINK.
WELL, I HEARD, I THINK THERE WAS AGREEMENT ON A MONTH, UH, TO APRIL'S.
I THINK BETWEEN THE AFRICAN AND STAFF, BOTH.
SO DO WE HAVE THE, SO JUST REAL QUICK, UH, PARLIAMENTARIAN, I THINK WE NEED TO DO A RECONSIDERATION OF THE CLOSING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THE PUBLIC HEARING GONNA BE CLOSED, BUT ALSO COMMISSIONER OW HAS HER HAND UP ON NOT SURE WHICH.
ANY OPPOSITION THAT ARE, YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR A POINT OF ORDER? COMMISSIONER ELLA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UH, IS, IS IT REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THE DECISION ON THE POSTPONEMENT? WE'LL OPEN IT.
NO, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD CHANGE THAT.
SO WE DO NEED TO RECONSIDER PUBLIC HEARING.
LET'S GO AND TAKE REAL QUICKLY, CUZ WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE NEED TO DO A RECONSIDERATION, UH, TO, UM, SO THAT WE CHAIR, I THINK WE CAN DO THAT AS A CONSOLIDATED MOTION SO WE CAN ALL RIGHT.
CHAIR, COMMISSION, LAY ON I NATIONAL.
YOU PROBABLY WANNA DO THAT IN REVERSE TO SEE HOW IF THE POSTPONEMENT FIRST PASSES, UH, THEN IF IT, IF THE POSTPONES APPROVED, THEN MOVE TO RECONSIDER.
SO THE WHO MADE THE MOTION ON THE POSTPONEMENT, UH, WAS MAKING COMMISS COX'S.
I WAS GONNA MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONED APRIL 25TH AND REOPENED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WHERE, WHO HAS A SECOND? COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
UH, DO WE NEED TO SPEAK ANY DEBATE? CAN I SPEAK TO THIS? GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER COX.
SO I, I, UH, AS A CONSULTANT WHO HAS SUBMITTED ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE REQUEST, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PROCESS IS EXTREMELY BURDENSOME.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS PARTICULAR PROCESS GONE THROUGH BY THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT, APPLICANT WAS ESPECIALLY BURDENSOME.
SO I, I DO HAVE A LOT OF SYMPATHY, BUT, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT WE NEED TO RESPECT THE HIGH BAR THAT CITY STAFF PLACES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCES.
AND, AND I'VE ALWAYS SUBMITTED SITE PLANS.
IT MAY NOT BE A COMPLETED A HUNDRED PERCENT SITE PLAN, BUT PART OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT PROCESS IS ABOUT JUSTIFYING THE VARIANCES BASED ON THE USE OF THE PROPERTY.
AND SO I AGREE WITH STAFF THAT THEY'RE BLIND, BLIND HERE IF THEY DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE ANY OTHER INFORMATION OTHER THAN THE MITIGATION OR LACK THEREOF, THAT'S PROPOSED BY ITS APPLICANT.
SO I'M HOPING THAT A MONTH TIMEFRAME, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANTS MADE SOME PROGRESS ON DEVELOPING SITE PLAN DOCUMENTS.
[03:25:01]
HOPING THAT THEY ALREADY HAVE STUFF THAT SATISFIES WHAT THE EC, WHAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF HAVE BEEN REQUESTING, AND THEN HOPEFULLY THEY COME BACK.AND WHAT I'M HOPING FOR IS THAT THEY'VE REACHED SOMEWHAT OF AN AGREEMENT ON AN ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE, POTENTIALLY WITH STAFF RECOMMENDED MITIGATIONS THAT WE CAN, THAT WE CAN EVALUATE AT THAT TIME.
I, I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH STAFF THAT THERE, THERE'S LACKING INFORMATION HERE FOR BOTH US AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION OR THE ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF, AND HOPEFULLY THIS POSTPONEMENT ALLOWS US TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM.
UH, ANYBODY WANTS BEFORE AGAINST COMMISSIONER AZAR? I, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE MOTION MAKER.
UM, COMMISSIONER COX, ARE YOU OKAY WITH SAYING THAT IN, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A CONSOLIDATED SITE PLAN WITHIN A MONTH, WE'RE REALLY ASKING FOR AN EXHIBIT THAT PRESENTS SOME KIND OF FINDINGS OF FACT SINCE THAT IS WHAT I BELIEVE I HEARD FROM STAFF TODAY WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT? WELL, I, I, I WOULD, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
UM, I'VE ALWAYS SUBMITTED SITE PLAN DOCUMENTS TO SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF FACT A QUESTIONNAIRE.
SO I, I THINK, I THINK I'D RATHER LEAVE IT.
I THINK WE HEARD FROM STAFF THAT THEY DON'T NEED A COMPLETE SITE PLAN, BUT THEY DO NEED SOME SORT OF DOCUMENTATION, WHATEVER THE DEFINITION OF THAT IS.
I, I, I WOULD PREFER TO LEAVE THAT UP TO STAFF.
BUT IF THERE'S A MUTUALLY ACCEPTED VERBIAGE FROM STAFF AND THE APPLICANT TO ADD AS A CONDITION OF THIS POSTPONEMENT, I'M HAPPY TO CONSIDER THAT.
I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT ACTUALLY THAT WOULD BE.
I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.
ANY OTHER DEBATE? COMMISSIONER DESAR? I, I'LL JUST SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WITH THE CLARIFICATION THAT I HOPE THAT STAFF WILL NOT ASK FOR.
LIKE, I DON'T WANNA BE BACK HERE IN A MONTH SAYING WE DON'T HAVE A CONSULTED SITE PLAN AND GO THROUGH THIS ALL AGAIN.
REALLY, THERE'S SOME EXHIBIT THAT DEVELOPS THOSE FINDINGS OF FACT.
I HOPE THAT THAT'S SOMETHING STAFF CAN CONSIDER IN THE APPLICANT CAN WORK TOWARDS.
OKAY, WE'RE GONNA GO TAKE A SOLID VOTE ON THIS.
UH, THIS IS A POSTPONEMENT, UH, TILL, UH, 4 25.
UM, IT'S BY COMMISSIONER COX, BEEN BY COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
UH, THOSE ON THE DI IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT.
UH, THAT'S EVERYONE, THOSE ON THE SCREEN? I THINK THAT'S ALL GREEN.
NOW, UH, COMMISSIONER Z CHAIR, MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN THAT.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER COX? SECOND SET.
LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE FOR THE RECONSIDERATION ON THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THAT IS ON THE DIAS, THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
THAT IS, IS THAT GREEN? MM-HMM.
AND THEN I'LL POSTPONE THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARING TO APRIL 25TH.
UM, CHAIR MAKING A MOTION TO POSTPONE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COX.
UM, THIS IS GONNA TAKE A VOTE ON THE DIAS AND ON THE SCREEN.
DID WE CLEAR THAT ONE? THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK AND THANK YOU.
BRING IT BACK TO US AND WE'LL HOPEFULLY BE ABLE TO VOTE ON THIS ONE.
WHAT DO WE HAVE? WE POSTPONED THE, UM, I'M 32.
[32. Code Amendment: C20-2022-021 - Wildland Urban Interface Code Amendments]
IS THAT THE ONE WE PUSHED TO THE END? ALL RIGHT.UM, HOW MUCH, I GUESS, DO WE HAVE STAFF EVEN HERE TO PRESENT
UH, AND I TRIED TO NOTICE THE DIFFERENCES.
UM, JUST TO POINT ORDER, DO WE HAVE ANY STAFF OR COMMISSIONER MOOCH TYLER, WHO WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM ON THIS ITEM? OR, I THINK WE GOT THE AMENDED LANGUAGE WORKED OUT, SO IT MAY JUST BE A MATTER OF READING THAT AND MAKING SURE THE COMMISSION IS SATISFIED WITH THAT.
AT THIS POINT, CAN WE BRING UP THE AMENDED LANGUAGE AND HAVE YOU NOTE, BECAUSE I, I LOOKED AT IT, BUT IF YOU COULD JUST STATE WHERE YOU CHANGED IT.
I, I, YEAH, I THINK I SEE WHAT YOU DID.
IT TOOK ME A LITTLE WHILE TO FIGURE IT OUT THOUGH, BUT NOW I, IT WAS SMALL.
WE CHANGED, UH, PART A, UH, WHERE IT SAYS DOES NOT CROSS.
AND I CAN READ IT HERE IN A SECOND, BUT I'D LIKE IF WE CAN BRING IT UP ON THE SCREEN, I THINK THAT'LL HELP ALL OF US, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LAY ANDREW, EMPLOYING THAT OUT.
BUT THEN ALSO WE HAVE A CHIEF VOIA, UM, ON THE VIDEO CONFERENCE.
UM, UH, CHIEF, DO YOU WANT TO JUST SPEAK TO THIS, UH, MINOR AMENDMENT AND WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ACCEPTABLE TO YOUR DEPARTMENT? ABSOLUTELY.
TOM VOKEY, AUSTIN FIREFIGHTER MARSHALL.
UM, YES, THIS AMENDMENT IS, IS ACCEPTABLE AND IT DOES, UH, YOU KNOW, KIND OF CLARIFY,
[03:30:01]
UH, A LITTLE BIT BETTER.WE DO THINK OUR STAFF WOULD PICK UP EVEN WITH
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, COMMISSIONER MOALA, UM, MADE AT SLIGHT ADJUSTMENT THAT IT'S NOT ONLY, UM, ROADS THAT ARE PASSING, I GUESS, UH, I NEED THE LANGUAGE.
IT'S CROSS CROSSES OR IS ADJACENT TO YES.
SO I WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT THE SAME THING, THAT LANGUAGE.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU GOT THE LATEST.
AND SO, YEAH, COMMISSIONER MOOCH.
TYLER, IF YOU CAN JUST, I THINK, UH, SOMEBODY'S ADDED SOME, YOU ADDED THE LANGUAGE, UM, NOR IS ADJACENT THOSE WORDS, NOR IS ADJACENT.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS AMENDMENT? COMMISSIONER IZA, UM, UH, CHIEF VOKI, I FEEL LIKE YOU WERE JUST MENTIONING THAT.
CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK TO YOUR, UM, UH, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT? SURE.
WE, WE HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE AMENDMENT AT ALL.
UM, WE FEEL LIKE IT, IF IF IT CLARIFIES FOR EVERYONE, THEN WE'RE IN FAVOR OF IT, AND IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE INTENT OF WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO.
THAT WAS ALL MY ONLY QUESTION.
SO I THINK WE'VE PULLED THIS DOWN.
WE'LL, UM, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY, ANY MORE Q AND A.
ANY QUESTIONS? CAN I CHAIR COMMISSION? SURE.
COMMISSIONER COX? CAN I ASK ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION? UM, IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY THREE OF THAT SAME SECTION THAT SPEAKS TO NOT MORE THAN 2000 FEET IN LENGTH AND PROVIDES ACCESS TO NOT MORE THAN 30 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS.
SO CAN I JUST GET CONFIRMATION FROM STAFF THAT IF THE, IF THE ACCESS STREET IS MORE THAN 2000 FEET IN LENGTH AND OR PROVIDES ACCESS TO MORE THAN 30 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS, THEN A SUBDIVISION CANNOT HAVE ONE ACCESS STREET.
IS THAT UNDERSTANDING? CORRECT? YES.
AND SO THAT, THAT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, KIND OF A SE IT'S SEPARATED INTO A DIFFERENT SECTION AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW IS THE WAY IT WILL STAY.
AND, AND THAT SEPARATE SECTION.
SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE WATER INUNDATION, THE WILDFIRE OR SEPARATE ITEMS. AND THEN OXO, UH, AGAIN, THERE'S DIFFERENT REGULATIONS.
IF YOU READ DOWN FURTHER IN THAT SECTION AND YOU GO WAY DOWN THE D THERE'S EXCEPTIONS FOR DIFFERENT ACCESS THINGS.
AND THAT'S ALL, ALL THINGS THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF FIRE RELATED ITEMS. AND, AND THOSE ARE NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
OUR, OUR, OUR MAIN GOAL WAS JUST TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE OF WHAT, WHAT WE WERE GOING TO REFERENCE FOR, UH, FOR WHAT WE WOULD USE AS, AS THE, WHETHER SOMETHING'S IN THE WILDLAND AREA OR NOT.
COMMISSIONER COX, IF YOU GIVE US A BRIEF MOMENT, WE NEED TO EXTEND CHAIR.
I MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 10 30.
ANY OBJECTIONS? ALL RIGHT, CONTINUE.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX, DID YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR WERE YOU FINISHING? NO, I THINK I, I THINK, UH, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS, IS A FAIRLY LIMITED, UH, AMENDMENT.
AND I, AND, AND I GUESS THE SECTION I'M LOOKING TO DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S BEING AMENDED AS PART OF THIS, SO I MIGHT BE GOING BEYOND THE SCOPE, BUT, BUT I JUST WANT TO, THE LANGUAGE IN THIS WHOLE THING IS REALLY WEIRD.
IT'S VERY, LIKE, PERMISSIBLE, BUT THEN IT, BUT THEN THERE'S KIND OF PROHIBITIONS, BUT NOT REALLY.
SO I, I, I THINK THAT CLARIFIES, UM, THE INTENT OF THIS TO ME.
SO I, I, I THINK I'M GOOD AT THIS POINT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? CAN MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WITH THE AMENDMENT? DO WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER ZA SECONDS? UH, DO WE NEED ANY DEBATE ON THIS CHAIR? COMMISSIONER? UH, APOLOGIES.
INTERRUPT, BUT THAT'S JUST A CLARIFICATION.
THAT'S THE, UM, REVISED ORDINANCE AS APPROVED BY THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.
AND AS AMEND BY MUCH TALLER YES.
MOTION MAKER AND SECOND AGREE.
UH, THOSE IN FAVOR ON THE DAS, THOSE IN FAVOR? ON THE SCREEN.
[03:35:01]
VERY WELL.WHAT HAVE WE GOT LEFT? LET'S SEE.
WE ARE GONNA, I AM REALLY HAPPY.
WE, I THINK WE DID REALLY WELL THIS EVENING, GIVEN WHAT I THOUGHT WE WERE GONNA BE FACED WITH.
SO WE ARE, WE HAVE, OH, ITEM 40,
[40. Discuss and consider establishing a working group to review matters related to the Austin Strategic Mobility Program including ATX Walk Bike Roll. (Sponsors: Chair Shaw and Vice-Chair Hempel)]
DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ESTABLISHING A WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW MATTERS RELATED TO THE AS SM P ATX WALK, WALK BY ROLL.UM, I BROUGHT THIS ALONG WITH, UH, VICE CHAIR HEMP.
SO WE HAVE SOME AMENDMENTS TO OUR, UM, AUSTIN'S STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN.
DO WE HAVE, UH, FIRST OF ALL, FOR THOSE, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY? UH, WE CAN'T DO THAT RIGHT NOW.
UH, SO WHAT WE DO FOR THOSE NEW MEMBERS, WE FORM WORKING GROUPS, UH, WHEN WE HAVE, UM, CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, LIKE WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE.
AND IT REALLY DOES HELP, UH, EVEN TO SET THESE UP.
SO WHEN, UH, THESE AMENDMENTS COME FORTH, WE HAVE A CHANCE TO WORK THROUGH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TO STAFF AND THEN BRING THAT TO THE FULL COMMISSION.
UH, I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ONE.
AND, UH, WE ARE GOING TO MAKE OTHER ASSIGNMENTS ON JOINT COMMITTEES.
ONCE WE ASSIGN, ONCE THEY'RE DONE WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS, THEY'RE DISSOLVED.
SO THEY'RE NOT, THEY DON'T GO ON BEYOND, YOU KNOW, FOR THE WHOLE YEAR, LIKE SOME OF THE JOINT COMMITTEES.
SO, DO WE HAVE INTEREST ON THOSE? UM, I KNOW WE HAVE, WE HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS THAT ARE, UH, PROFESSIONALS IN, UH, TRANSIT.
UM, WE HAVE OTHERS THAT ARE INTERESTED.
UH, SO WE ARE LIMITED TO, UH, QUORUM, RIGHT BELOW QUORUM.
SO IS THERE ANY INTEREST, UH, FROM COMMISSIONERS TO SERVE ON THIS WORKING GROUP CHAIR? YES.
COMMISSIONER COX, CAN I ASK EITHER TO YOU OR, OR VICE CHAIR, WHAT, WHAT YOU KIND OF ANTICIPATE THE SCOPE OF THIS WORKING GROUP TO BE? AND, AND WHAT, WHAT WOULD THEY BRING BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION CHAIR COMMISSION LADIES IN MAY? SO, I DO HAVE, UM, STAFF, UH, COLE KITTEN, UH, WHO CAN PROVIDE, UM, PROBABLY 2, 2, 3 MINUTES ABOUT, UM, THE ITEM THAT WILL BE COMING TO THE PUN COMMISSION ON APRIL 25TH.
UH, THAT WILL BE AN ACTION ITEM IN REGARDS TO ASS AND P.
UH, IF HE'S AVAILABLE, THEN WE SHOULD PROBABLY GET A BRIEFING.
THANK YOU, MR. KITTEN, IF YOU COULD, UH, PLEASE, UH, PROVIDE A BRIEF OVERVIEW.
HELLO? CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME? YES.
THANK YOU EVERYONE, UH, FOR, FOR GIVING ME SOME TIME TO PROVIDE A LITTLE OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE WORKING GROUP WOULD BE WORKING ON.
I'M DIVISION MANAGER, UM, OVERSEEING THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN.
AND I'M ALSO SPEAKING ON, ON BEHALF OF THE AT TX WALK BIKE ROLL TEAM.
UM, SO FIRST, UH, THE BICYCLE URBAN TRAILS AND SIDEWALK PLANS ARE BEING REPLACED, UH, BY NEW PLANS DEVELOPED THROUGH THE ATX WALK BIKE ROLL PROCESS.
UH, THE THREE DRAFT PLANS RELEASE WERE RELEASED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IN JANUARY, AND THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED ON MARCH 20TH.
UM, DURING THIS TIME, PRESENTATIONS WERE GIVEN TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, INCLUDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, THESE PREVIOUS MODAL PLANS WERE ATTACHED TO THE A AND P AND INCLUDED AS PART OF, UH, UH, PART OF THE A AND P WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED IN APRIL OF 2019.
UM, SO THESE UPDATED PLANS WILL BE ADOPTED AS ATTACHMENTS TO THE ASS AND P AND THE ASS AND P WILL BE AMENDED CONCURRENTLY TO REFLECT THE ASSOCIATED CHANGES.
UH, THESE AS P AMENDMENTS, UM, WERE WERE ANNOUNCED AND PUBLISHED ON THE AUSTIN TEXAS.GOV/AS P WEBSITE, UH, THIS WEEK, AND WILL STAY OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT UNTIL APRIL 25TH.
UM, THE AS S AND P AMENDMENTS INCLUDE CHANGES TO THE POLICY DOCUMENT MAPS AND THE STREET NETWORK, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION WORKING GROUP.
UM, CAN, CAN EXPECT TO SEE HOW THE THREE PLANS FALL WITHIN THE A S P AND HOW THEY'RE ALIGNED, UM, INCLUDING UPDATED SUPPORTING POLICIES, INDICATORS, AND TARGETS AND ACTION ITEMS, AND HOW THE UPDATED BICYCLE FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS ARE CAPTURED IN THE AS S P STREET NETWORK.
UM, THE THREE PLANS AND THE AS S P AMENDMENTS WILL
[03:40:01]
GO TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE ON APRIL 13TH FOR A RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE FORWARD TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE ASKED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE THREE PLANS AND THE AS M P AMENDMENTS AT ITS APRIL 25TH MEETING.
UH, THE FINAL DRAFTS OF THE THREE PLANS IN THE AS SM P AMENDMENTS, UH, WILL BE POSTED FOR COUNCIL BACKUP ON MAY 5TH FOR THE, UH, UH, WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION, UH, FOR THE COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR MAY 18TH.
SO, UM, WHAT WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR, UH, FROM THE, THE WORKING GROUP IS, UM, ENSURING THAT THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, UH, TO MOVE THE PLANS AND THE AMENDMENTS FORWARD TO COUNCIL.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, I DON'T KNOW IF, UH, WELL, LET'S OPEN IT UP.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MR. KITTEN AT THIS POINT? UM, SO THIS WORKING GROUP, UH, IT JUST MAKES IT A LOT EASIER IF WE HAVE FOLKS REALLY DIGGING IN TO, UH, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN THE DRAFT AND PRESENTING, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE ALSO HAVE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE THAT'S GONNA BE REVIEWING THIS, AND THEY MAY COME FORTH.
UH, I DON'T THINK THE WORKING GROUP IS PROBABLY GONNA HAVE TIME TO CONVEY THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS TO THAT JOINT COMMITTEE IN TIME.
UM, SO IT MIGHT BE, WE GET BOTH SETS.
UM, JUST ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION ON THIS.
WHAT IS THE UNMUTE YOURSELF? OH, CLARIFYING QUESTION ON THIS.
WHAT IS THE EXACT TIMELINE FOR THIS WORK GROUP? WHEN DOES IT, YES, WE WOULD NEED MR. RIVERA, IF IT'S COMING TO PLANNING COMMISSION BY THE 25TH, WE WOULD NEED REC, UH, RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS BY WHEN CHAIR COMMISSION LAY LIAISON, ANDREW RIVERA.
SO, UM, WITH THE, COMING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON APRIL 25TH, PREFERABLY THE, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR, UM, DISSEMINATION ON APRIL 24TH, THAT WOULD BE THE LATEST, OF COURSE, EARLIER THE BETTER.
UM, SO THE WORK GROUP WOULD HAVE TO MEET BEFORE THAT? YES, BEFORE THE 24TH OF APRIL.
AND IT'S ALWAYS PREFERRED TO HAVE SOMEBODY JUST TO LEAD AND KIND OF COORDINATE SCHEDULING OF THE GROUP TO, UM, SO IF WE DON'T HAVE THE INTEREST HERE AND CAN'T PULL TOGETHER A WORKING GROUP, WE DO HAVE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, BUT, UM, I, I REALLY DO THINK WE NEED TO PULL TOGETHER A WORK GROUP.
CAN I, CAN I SPEAK TO THAT? YEAH, SURE.
COMMISSION O CONNOLLY HAD SOMETHING TO SAY AND THEN YOU FOLLOW, YOU CAN GO OUT TRACY.
NO, I WAS GONNA SAY, I, I THINK WE DO NEED TO PULL TOGETHER A WORK GROUP.
IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, THIS, THERE'S SO MUCH GOING ON THIS MONTH.
IT'S GONNA BE KIND OF A CRAZY MONTH, BUT I I, IF, IF NO ONE ELSE IS AVAILABLE, THEN I'M DEFINITELY WILLING TO WORK ON THIS.
WE HAVE ONE MEMBER, COMMISSIONER COX HAD A COPY.
COMMISSIONER COX, WE CAN TAKE YOUR COMMENT QUESTION NOW.
WELL, I THINK I'M THE ONLY PC PERSON ON THE C PJC AT THE MOMENT.
UM, SO YEAH, AND THERE'S NO WAY, OH, AND I THINK I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING.
THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE GONNA GET COUNSEL TO APPROVE, UH, FILL IN THOSE SPOTS.
I THINK EVEN IF WE WERE NOT TO NOMINATE THEM THIS EVENING.
AND WE HAD TO CANCEL OUR LAST MEETING BECAUSE OF QUORUM ISSUES.
AND, AND THE MEETING FOR APRIL HASN'T EVEN BEEN SET YET.
HEY, COMMISSIONER COX, WOULD YOU, IN LIEU OF, UH, CUZ IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THAT, UH, JOINT COMMITTEE IS GONNA BE ABLE TO HELP OUT HERE.
WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO SERVE ON THIS WORKING GROUP? AS LONG AS I DON'T HAVE TO CHAIR IT.
ANY OTHERS INTERESTED? AND DOES THE WORKING GROUP NEED TO MEET IN PERSON? PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF CAUSE IT'S NOT ON RECORD.
THEN DOES THE WORKING GROUP NEED TO MEET IN PERSON OR CAN WE MEET REMOTELY? YOU CAN.
HOWEVER THEY CAN MEET REMOTELY, VIRTUALLY, AND, YES.
GO AHEAD AND THANK COMMISSIONER COX WAS FIRST.
MR. COX, YOU WERE ABOUT TO SAY.
I, WELL, I INTERRUPTED YOU, SO I APOLOGIZE.
BUT, BUT I DO HOPE THAT WE CAN, UH, NO, I DON'T WANNA
MR. KITTEN, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN COMMIT IN THIS CASE IS SOME REPRESENTATION FROM YOUR TEAM? UM, I'LL DEFINITELY BE AVAILABLE AND WE'LL INCLUDE THE ATX
[03:45:01]
WALK PIPE ROLL TEAM AS WELL.I WOULD LOVE TO GET, UH, TWO OTHER, AT LEAST TWO OTHER FOLKS.
I HAD A QUESTION RELATED TO THE OTHER WORKING GROUP, WHICH IS PROJECT CONNECT.
UM, DO WE KNOW IF THE TIMELINE IS AS TIGHT FOR THAT ONE? JUST BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE WANT DIFFERENT SETS OF LIKE, TO MANAGE THE WORKLOAD BASICALLY.
I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR IS OUR POINT GUARD ON, UH, PROJECT CONNECT.
AND I THINK, UH, STAFF CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I, I DO NOT KNOW THAT THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS COMING IN THE PIPELINE YET.
WE WILL SEE IT SOON IN THE FUTURE.
SO THERE IS NO TIMELINE ASSOCIATED WITH WHETHER IT, WE COULD DEVOTE OURSELVES TO THIS ITEM FIRST.
SO YES, THEN I'M HAPPY TO SERVE.
UM, CHAIR ALSO, I, I'M, I'M PUTTING MYSELF OUT THERE TO SAY THAT I WILL SERVE ON IT, EXCEPT I WILL NOT BE THERE AT THE APRIL 25TH MEETING.
SO I CANNOT CHAIR THIS BECAUSE I WILL NOT BE PRESENT FOR THE MEETING.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONERS WANNA SERVE? UM, CHAIR, I JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU THAT WE DO NEED TO BACKFILL AT SOME POINT TOO.
ALSO, UM, JAMES'S SPOT ON OUR ADU DUPLEX WORKING GROUP.
AND THAT DOESN'T NEED TO HAPPEN AS QUICKLY AS A COUPLE OF THESE THINGS ARE COMING UP, BUT JUST AS PEOPLE ARE FIGURING OUT HOW MUCH TIME THEY HAVE TO PUT WHERE, YES, I'VE GOT SOME, SOME REQUESTS OUT TO STAFF FOR INFORMATION TO TRY AND GET THAT PREPARED WHEN WE RESTAFFED FROM.
SO I'VE GOT, UM, THANK YOU FOR THAT, THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT.
AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT SOME OF THOSE OTHER, UM, WORK GROUPS AND, UH, JOINT COMMITTEES IN A SECOND.
SO I HAVE COMMISSIONER CONLEY, MR. COX, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, COMMISSIONER AZAR.
CAN I, UM, LEADERSHIP IS LOOSE, BUT COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, COULD YOU KIND OF COORDINATE THE MEETINGS? YES, I'M HAPPY TO LEAD ON THIS.
UH, LAST CHANCE, CUZ WE CAN'T, IF WE ADD, WE HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE NEXT MEETING TO ADD YOU ON.
SO IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, NOW'S YOUR CHANCE.
SO THE, WE NEED TO HAVE A MOTION THEN ON THE WORK HERE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A PROPOSED MOTION? VICE CHAIR? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPOINT COMMISSIONERS CONLEY.
COMMISSIONER MAXWELL COMMISSIONER ZAR, IF I HEARD THAT CORRECTLY, TO THE WORKING GROUP TO REVIEW THE, UH, ATX WALK BIKE ROLL CLAIM THAT'S COMING THROUGH.
YOU GOT A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BIKE.
COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE, UH, WELL, THIS IS SIMPLE.
DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS WORKING GROUP? ALL RIGHT, IT PASSES.
UH, SO THE NEXT ITEM IS, ALL RIGHT, THIS IS RELATED TO PROJECT CONNECT.
I DON'T, DO WE HAVE ANY STAFF THAT WE'RE HERE TO SPEAK TO THIS? OKAY.
UM, I HAD THOUGHTS ON THIS AND I'LL SHARE IT.
AND COMMISSIONER AZAR, YOU ARE SO INVOLVED WITH THIS, PLEASE WEIGH IN.
BUT I ASK, UH, THE VICE-CHAIRMAN, MR. RIVERA, WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE COMING TO US TO ACTUALLY REVIEW AND PROVIDE AMENDMENTS TO? AND I, WE COULDN'T THINK OF ANY FORMAL, YOU KNOW, CODE OR ANYTHING THAT WE WOULD ACT ON.
SO STAFF HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO DEVELOP SOME ORDINANCES RELATED TO DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF HOW THE RIGHT OF WAY CAN BE DONE.
NOISE AND NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS WITHIN OUR CODE, WHICH MIGHT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED AS THE PROJECT MOVES FORWARD.
THERE IS NOTHING AS SUCH THAT I KNOW OF IN THE PIPELINE AT THE MOMENT, BUT LIKELY IN THE COMING MONTHS AND UM, YEARS, WE WILL START RECEIVING A NUMBER OF ITEMS TO CONSIDER.
UH, IN THAT WE WE'RE NOT FULL FILLED OUT WITH ALL OUR NEW COMMISSIONERS.
COULD WE POSTPONE THIS TILL OUR NEXT MEETING? CAN I ASK, IS THIS WORTHWHILE BECAUSE OF IT'S A, SUCH A GENERATIONAL INVESTMENT IF WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND MAKE THIS A WORKING GROUP OF SOME SORT.
I MEAN, MORE THAN A WORKING GROUP, AN ACTUAL COMMITTEE.
CHAIR COMMISSION LIAISON ANDREW RIVERA.
THAT'S NOT AN OPTION FOR THE COMMISSION.
AND, AND SO WE WILL, UH, WOULD THIS GO THROUGH, PROBABLY GO THROUGH CODES AND ORANGE'S JOINT COMMITTEE IF THEY'RE ACTUALLY CODE CHANGES, CORRECT.
IF COUNCIL INITIATED A CHANGE, IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO GO TO CHANGES.
AND, UH, MOVING ON TO NOMINATIONS.
HEY, CHAIR, JUST REAL QUICK, UM, I, I DON'T THINK WE WILL, SO I JUST WANNA MANAGE EXPECTATIONS.
UM, I THINK WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE OUR FULL SLATE OF COMMISSIONERS
[03:50:01]
UNTIL PROBABLY EITHER THE LAST MEETING IN APRIL OR THE FIRST MEETING IN MAY.JUST WANTED TO MAKE, MAKE Y'ALL AWARE OF THAT.
I'M, I'M JUST GONNA HAVE ONE QUESTION.
THIS IS, WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO, AND WE DO NOT NECESSARILY NEED TO, BUT IF WE WISH TO WEIGH IN ON THE LIGHT TRAIL ALIGNMENT AND STATIONS CONVERSATION IN ADVANCE OF THE MAY ADP BOARD MEETING, THEN YES, WE WOULD NEED TO CONSIDER THIS REMINDER THAT IS NOT A CODE ITEM.
WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO MAKE A, A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT.
AND OUR RECOMMENDATION WILL BE TREATED AS ANY OTHER COMMUNITY BODY MAKING OF RECOMMENDATION.
IT WILL NOT BE A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION OF AC GONNA MAKE IT MORE CONFUSING, ANY INTEREST.
UM, AND I JUST GIVEN THE WORKLOAD IN A NUMBER OF CASES, I WOULD ADVISE AGAINST ANOTHER WORK GROUP IF WE'RE NOT REALLY PROVIDING AMENDMENTS AT THIS POINT.
[43. Nomination of members to be considered by Council to serve on Joint Committees.]
ASK THAT WE POSTPONED 43, UNLESS THERE ARE SOME COMMITTEES THAT ARE REALLY DESPERATE AND WE NEED TO MAKE SOME ASSIGNMENTS, UH, WITH COMMISSIONER COX.IF ANYONE WANTS TO SERVE ON THE C P G C P PJC, THEN I WOULD BEG YOU TO PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND SO WE CAN NOMINATE THAT.
IF THAT'S THE THING WE NEED, WE NEED MORE BODIES TO GET QUORUM.
COMMISSIONER COX, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK A LITTLE ABOUT WHAT YOU GUYS DO JUST TO FILL OTHERS IN? TO BE ENTIRELY HONEST, FOR THE TIME THAT I'VE BEEN ON THE JOINT COMMITTEE, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO A WHOLE LOT BECAUSE OF QUORUM ISSUES,
SO, UH, IT'D BE NICE IF WE COULD ACTUALLY DO SOME THINGS AND GET SOME BODIES.
UH, I HAVEN'T BEEN THE BEST WITH ATTENDANCE EITHER, BECAUSE THE MEETING TIME IS TERRIBLE AT NOON.
UM, BUT, UH, IF WE GET MORE PEOPLE THAT OBJECT TO THAT TIME, MAYBE I CAN GET IT CHANGED.
UM, BUT WE DID REVIEW AGENT AUSTIN AS LIKE A REFRESHER.
UH, WE REVIEW BUDGET STUFF, UM, AS PART OF THE FORMAL PROCESS.
AND THEN, LIKE YOU ALREADY SAID, UH, THINGS LIKE THE ATX WALK, BIKE ROLL, AND OTHER, UH, CITYWIDE PLANS ARE SUPPOSED TO COME TO US SO WE CAN REVIEW IT AND, AND MAKE AND GIVE FEEDBACK.
UM, WHAT I RECALL IS ANY CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE GO THROUGH THIS COMMITTEE.
UH, SO YOU GET INVOLVED IN THINGS LIKE THE AS P, OTHER IMAGINE AUSTIN REVISIONS AND ALSO THE METRICS.
UH, STA WHAT I REALLY ENJOYED, CAUSE I LIKE TO SEE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, IS THEY HAD A LOT OF THOSE THAT THEY'RE MEASURING HOW WELL THE CITY WAS DOING WITH ALL THE IMAGINE US AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, AND WE COULD MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO WE GOT TO SEE THOSE, SEE HOW THE CITY WAS DOING IN THEIR VARIOUS, UH, AREAS.
AND THEN ALSO YOU LOOK AT THE BUDGET, LIKE, UM, COMMISSIONER COX SAID, YOU LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF IT ALIGNS WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND, UM, WHAT I REALLY WAS INTERESTED IS HOW MUCH OF THE STORM WATER, UM, UH, LINES THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE IN NEED OF INSPECTION AND REPAIR.
SO YOU'D GET TO DIRECT AND RECOMMEND ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR CERTAIN PROGRAMS AND FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO YOU DO HAVE AN IMPACT THAT WAY.
SO IT IS A LITTLE MORE HIGH LEVEL, UH, THAN SOME OF THE OTHER JOINT COMMITTEES, BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
EVERYBODY, IF YOU LIKE, MORE OF THE PLANNING ELEMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND KIND OF BEING IN THAT SPACE.
THIS IS A GOOD JOINT, UH, COMMITTEE TO BE A PART OF.
AND WE NEED HOW MANY MORE? WE NEED THIR TWO MORE.
SO I THINK WE NEED TWO MORE, BUT I, I DO WANNA RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER FLORES, UH, SHE WAS INVOLVED IN, IN THAT COMMITTEE FOR LONGER THAN I AM.
UH, AND UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S TRUE.
FORTUNATELY SHE'S STILL HERE, SO SHE MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD TO IT AS WELL.
DO YOU WANNA ADD ANYTHING TO MY COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER FLORES? UH, YOU'RE ON MUTE, I BELIEVE.
COMMISSIONER FLORES, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ON MUTE.
ALL RIGHT, MR. CHAIRMAN? OH, YES, COMMISSIONER, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I WILL, UH, WITH I'M, I'M HAPPY TO STEP UP.
I AM, I'M ALL IN MONEY MARBLES AND CHALK, BUT I JUST WANT TO PUT OUT THERE, YOU KNOW, I, I HAVE TO WORK AT THE CAPITAL, UH, FOR MY DAY JOB AND FOR THE NEXT NINE MONDAYS AND TUESDAYS, I AM PUTTING IN 70 AN 80 HOUR WEEK.
SO COME JUNE AND, YOU KNOW, GONE FROM HERE, WE DON'T HAVE A SPECIAL, BUT, UH, COME
[03:55:01]
JUNE, I'M, I'M, BUT BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, IT'LL BE TOUGH.I, I, I WILL COMMIT TO IT AND I'LL DO IT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FIRST COUPLE MEETINGS I'M GONNA BE, UH, ELSEWHERE.
SO, YEAH, GOOD COMMISSIONER, ZONE CHAIR MIGHT MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
UM, NEW COMMISSIONERS, HONESTLY, I, I'LL BE HONEST, I THINK IT REALLY WOULD BE WORTHWHILE IF WE CAN APPOINT TWO PEOPLE EACH TO THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SMALL AREA PLANNING.
AND HONESTLY, WE DO NEED TO APPOINT SOMEONE TO SOUTH ON THE WATERFRONT AS WELL, CUZ THAT WILL START LAPSING SOON.
I HATE TO PUSH FOR THIS TONIGHT, BUT IF FOLKS REALLY, UNLESS YOU'RE JUST LIKE, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT Y'ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S FINE.
BUT IF FOLKS HAVE ANY INKLING ON THINGS THAT THEY'RE INTERESTED IN, I WOULD HIGHLY ENCOURAGE Y'ALL TO GO AHEAD AND ASK FOR THAT TONIGHT.
SO YOU'RE OPENING UP TO THE OTHER JOINT COMMITTEES AS WELL? THE ONLY REASON I SAY THAT IS AS I'M LOOKING HERE, YES, IF COMMISSIONER FLORES ROLLS OFF, THEN COMMISSIONER COX IS THE ONLY ONE LEFT ON, UH, COMPREHENSIVE IS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
SEEN, GOES FOR A SMALL AREA PLANNING.
UH, WE HAVE CURRENTLY HOWARD OW AND THOMPSON, WHEN THOMPSON ROLLS OFF GOES DOWN TO TWO PEOPLE, WE WOULD NEED TWO MORE PEOPLE.
IT'S FOUR APPOINTMENTS FROM US AND THEN SOUTH CENTER WATERFRONT IS JUST COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
SO IF HE ROLLS OFF, THEN HONESTLY IT BECOMES VACANT.
IF REALLY, IF WE CAN GET FOLKS ON NIGHT, WE CAN OF COURSE COME BACK AND PUT IT BACK ON THE AGENDA.
BUT IF FOLKS HAVE ANY INTEREST, LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND OKAY.
CHAIR COMMISSION, LADIES LIAISON.
UM, SO, UM, ONE THING WE MAY WANNA DO IS, UM, GIVEN THE TIMEFRAME OF WHEN COUNCIL COULD APPOINT NEW MEMBERS AND WHEN THEY COULD THEN, UM, CONSIDER NOMINATIONS, GIVEN THOSE PARAMETERS, IT'S THE BEST TO HOLD ON TO THE CURRENT MEMBERS AS HOLD HOLDOVER CAPACITY, UH, TO, UH, IN THE HOPES OF MAKING THOSE, UH, THOSE MEETINGS IF YOU MOVE THEM, UM, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO, UM, THIS COMMISSION WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO FILL THOSE VACANCIES.
UM, PRIOR TO THE NEXT MEETINGS CHAIR, UH, COMMISSIONER, WELL, COMMISSIONER COX, AND THEN COMMISSIONER AAR.
YEAH, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT TIMING.
SO THE NEXT TWO COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE CANCELED.
SO DOES THAT MEAN WE TECHNICALLY WE COULD MAKE NOMINATIONS AT OUR NEXT MEETING AND IT WOULDN'T, IT SHOULD ALIGN WITH THE COUNCIL SCHEDULE, IS THAT CORRECT? SO THE NEXT, UM, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IS APRIL 11TH.
THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IS APRIL 13TH.
SO THE COUNCIL COULD MAKE NEW APPOINTMENTS TO THE BODY.
UM, BUT THEN, UM, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SCHEDULE OF WHEN THOSE NEW MEMBERS WOULD BE, UM, HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE CERTIFIED.
SO ONCE THEY'RE CERTIFIED, THEN YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO NOMINATE THEM TO A JOINT COMMITTEE.
SO, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, SINCE WE WILL ALIGN WITH COUNSELING AWAY WHERE THIS COULD BE, IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE IF WE MAKE A DECISION TODAY OR AT THE NEXT MEETING.
I THINK WE CAN DEAL THIS CONVERSATION TO THE NEXT MEETING CHAIR.
THIS IS, UH, MR. HOWARD, MY VIDEO'S NOT WORKING, SO I'M SORRY.
WE CANNOT HAVE THE, UH, COMMISSIONER.
AND CHAIR, SHALL, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU NOW.
UH, SO YES, COMMISSIONER COX IS CORRECT.
THE, THE NEXT, SO WE ONLY HAVE THE TWO OF US AS, UH, ON THE C ON THE JOINT COMMITTEE RIGHT NOW.
I CAN DO, I CAN BE A HOLDOVER, UM, BUT WE DON'T HAVE OUR NEXT MEETING SET, SO, YOU KNOW, I CAN BE A HOLDOVER UNTIL THE NEXT, UH, PC MEETING, IF Y'ALL WANNA GO AHEAD AND MAKE APPOINTMENTS THEN.
UM, BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE AN, A MEETING IN APRIL, OR IF WE DO HAVE A MEETING IN APRIL, BEFORE APRIL 30TH, UH, OR APRIL 25TH, WHICHEVER
SO WE WON'T HAVE ANOTHER CANCELED, UM, COMPREHENSIVE CHAIR COMMISSIONER ON MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE STAFF IS, UH, TARGETING APRIL 12TH FOR, UH, THE NEXT C PAGE C PJC MEETING.
WELL, I THINK IT'S NOT GONNA DO ANY HARM TO GO AHEAD AND YEAH, COMMISSIONER.
[04:00:01]
UM, WE HAD DISCUSSED THE SOUTH CENTER OF WATERFRONT, WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD, I THINK.UM, SO IF THAT'S ONE OF THOSE ONES WE CAN JUST GO AHEAD AND FILL.
IF, IF THAT'S AN, UM, CHAIR, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO APPOINT COMMISSIONER HAYNES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE AND, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL TO THE SOUTH CENTER WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
CAN WE ADD PATRICK HOWARD TO THE COMP PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE, PLEASE? I, I'LL TAKE THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SO WHAT I'M NOW SAYING IS THAT WE ARE APPOINTING COMMISSIONER HOWARD AND COMMISSIONER HAYNES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, AND I'M MAKING A MOTION TO ADD, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL TO THE SOUTH OUTSIDE OF WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
ANY CONCERNS, MR. RIVERA? I THINK THOSE ARE OPEN.
SO WE SHOULD HAVE, UH, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LADIES ON ARA.
I'M, I'M, I'M AFRAID I DON'T RECALL THE, UM, CURRENT, UM, CAPACITY OF COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
UM, IF YOU COULD GIMME ONE SECOND TO, UH, LOOK AT HIS STATUS IF HE'S, UH, NEEDING A REFRESHER, UM, OR NOT, UH, MR. VERA, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.
I'LL JUST MAKE A COMMENT TO EVERYBODY ELSE.
SO AS WE COME BACK ON THE 11TH, I WOULD HIGHLY, UH, ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO LOOK AT THE OTHER COMMITTEES AS WELL AND SEE.
SO, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE AN OPENING ON THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE SINCE, UM, ALL FOUR OF US ARE REMAINING ON THE COMMISSION.
UM, WE DO HAVE AN WE, IF WE GO AHEAD AND APPOINT TWO PEOPLE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE TODAY, THEN THERE WILL BE NO MORE OPENINGS ON THAT UNTIL COMMISSIONER FLORES ROLLS OFF.
UM, WE DO, BY MY UNDERSTANDING, HAVE THE ABILITY TO AN ALTERNATE FOR THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
UM, CURRENTLY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SERVES AS THE PRIMARY, UM, COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER USED TO BE THE, UH, ALTERNATE.
WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO APPOINT SOMEONE TO THAT.
UM, WE WOULD ALSO, UM, BE ABLE TO APPOINT AT LEAST ONE PERSON, POTENTIALLY TO WHEN COMMISSIONER THOMPSON ROLLS OVER FROM THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
AND THEN IF, IF WE FILL IT TODAY, THEN SOUTH SANTA WATERFRONT GETS FILLED.
SO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE JOIN SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE ALTERNATES, SMALLER YIELD PLANNING COMMITTEE, JOINT COMMITTEE.
AND, UM, JUST TO QUICKLY GO OVER, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS BEEN DESCRIBED.
SO ESSENTIALLY EVERYTHING RELATED TO, UM, CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUCH AS ADX, BIKE, AYN, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, AND ANY AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT PLAN RELATED TO METRICS AND OTHER THINGS ALL GOES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
THE, UM, JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE IS A COMMITTEE THAT WE HAVE WITH, UM, ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION LOOKING AT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT COME THERE.
THE SMALLER AREA, UH, PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE LOOKS AT SMALLER YEAR PLANS, INCLUDING DOWNTOWN, OUR CORRIDORS, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS, AND OTHERS, UM, AS THEY COME FORWARD.
SO THAT ALL GOES TO SMALL AREA, A JOINT COMMITTEE, IF THAT HELPS FOLKS.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY, I THINK ON JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WAS LOOKING TO BE REPLACED.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS COMMISSIONER ANDERSON IS STAYING GONE.
HE'S ASKING TO BE REPLACED, SEEMS LIKE.
WELL THEN WE HAVE, UM, THE PRIMARY PERSON FOR JOINT SUSTAINABILITY AND THE ALTERNATE BOTH OPEN, BUT COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WILL SERVE AS LONG AS WE DO NOT MAKE ANOTHER APPOINTMENT.
SO IS THERE ANYBODY THAT IS REALLY IN, IN INTEREST IN SUSTAINABILITY MATTERS? YEAH, I'M INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THAT JOINT COMMITTEE.
WELL, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UM, AND WE RETURN BACK TO, UM, MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LAY.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD WILL BE TAKEN, UH, UH, REFRESHER ON APRIL 17TH.
SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO REPEAT THAT, UM, VOTE AGAIN.
UM, SO, UM, IT'S THE BEST AMOUNT.
SO THEN I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO, OH GOSH, I'M GONNA MAKE SURE YOU REMEMBER THIS.
UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER HAYNES APPOINTED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE WILL HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, UM, ADDED TO THE SOUTH CENTER WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
AND THEN COMMISSIONER WOODS WILL REPLACE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
AND, UH, ONCE THE REFRESHER HAS HAPPENED, WE WILL LIKELY AT SOME, UH, GO AHEAD AND APPOINT COMMISSIONER HOWARD TO, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE FUTURE.
BUT FOR NOW, WE'RE APPOINTING, WE ARE MAKING THREE APPOINTMENTS.
WE HAVE A SECOND, UH, SECOND BY, UM, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UH, ARE THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO THESE APPOINTMENTS? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION CHAIR.
I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 10 35
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UH, ANY OPPOSITION TO EXTENDING THE MEETING? HEARING NONE, WE'VE EXTENDED.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
WE HAVE ONE MORE.UH, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, JUST TO CLARIFY, IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE NOTICE FOR THE APPOINTMENTS, CAN WE SAY NOMINATION OF MEMBERS TO BE
[04:05:01]
CONSIDERED BY COUNCIL TO SERVE ON JOINT COMMITTEES AND THEN HAVE A SEPARATE ONE FOR NOMINATION TO THE WORKING GROUPS? BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE ON THE AGENDA, IF WE WANTED TO DO IT TODAY, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO IT.WHO IS, UH, COMMISS ANDERSON, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? YEAH.
I THINK WE FACED THIS NUMEROUS TIMES.
UM, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON REMINDED US OF PAST CASES WHERE WE'VE DEALT WITH SIMILAR THINGS WE DEALT WITH TONIGHT, WHERE WE REALLY NEED SOMETHING IN CODE TO ALLOW FOR THE RELAXATIONS OF COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS WHEN TRIGGERING PROPERTY OWNERS AGREE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE IN SOME OF OUR T OD REGULATING PLANS.
SO I, I'D HOPE TO BRING SOMETHING ON THE 11TH, UM, THAT STATES THAT, AND THEN HOPEFULLY WE COULD SEE A CODE AMENDMENT AND SOMETHING TO HELP SEE THIS PROCESS QUICKLY.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND, UH, TO PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA? COMMISSIONER AZAR.
UM, A ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? ALL RIGHT.
WELL, REAL QUICKLY BEFORE WE LEAVE, I WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER THOMPSON AND COMMISSIONER FLORES FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I KNOW YOU GUYS WILL BE ROLLING OUT SOON.
UM, WE'VE BEEN THROUGH SOME LAND CODES TOGETHER.
HOPEFULLY WE'LL SEE ANOTHER ONE HERE SOON.
UH, BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE.
YOU GUYS WANT ANYTHING TO SAY? UM, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA SEE YOU AGAIN,
THEY'RE BACK ON THE 11TH, SO LET'S, LET'S HEAR FROM THEM THEN.
I DON'T WANNA SAY GOODBYE YET.
WE'LL HANG ON TO AS LONG AS WE CAN.
WELL, UH, ANY OTHER, UM, ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT, IF I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, CALL FOR, UM, SIGNING OFF THIS EVENING.
IT IS, UH, 10 30 AND WE'RE GONNA BRING THIS MEETING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CLOSE.