[00:00:05]
[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
HAVE A THANK YOU.CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME? WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND BRING THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT, UH, 6 0 6.
UH, COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE ATTENDING VIRTUALLY, PLEASE SHOW, UH, SHOW US YOUR FACES, UH, SO I CAN GET A HEAD COUNT HERE.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER, WE'LL DO A OFFICIAL ROLL CALL HERE.
UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND START WITH A, UH, THE ROLL CALL.
UM, I'LL JUST START HERE ON THE DIAS AND GO LEFT TO RIGHT, AND I'LL JUST CALL YOUR NAME AND ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR PRESENCE.
UH, SO WE'LL START WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HERE.
UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL HERE.
YOU GOT COMMISSIONER WOODS HERE.
AND GOING ON TO MY RIGHT, WE HAVE THE VICE CHAIR HEMPLE HERE, AND COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HERE.
AND THAT, UH, GIVES US A TOTAL OF SEVEN HERE ON THE DIAS TODAY.
AND THEN VIRTUALLY, UM, IN THE ORDER I SEE YOU GUYS.
UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY HERE AND COMMISSIONER HOWARD HERE.
UH, WE MAY, MAY HAVE SOME OTHERS JOINING US LATER.
I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES IS OUT.
UH, BUT WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET THROUGH, MOVE THROUGH THE BEGINNING OF OUR AGENDA HERE.
UM, UH, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION CHAIR, COHEN.
UM, SO WE HAVE OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS CHAIR, UH, CHAIR COHEN HERE JOINING US.
AS ALWAYS, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE IN PERSON, WHICH YOU ARE MOST OF THE TIME.
UH, NOW MOVING ON TO, UH, YES, WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
UH, THE FIRST, UH, NEXT ITEM HERE IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MARCH 28TH, 2023.
COMMISSIONERS, DID YOU HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE MINUTES? OKAY, SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THAT TO THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL.
[Reading of the Agenda]
AND VICE CHAIR HEMP IS GONNA HELP ME OUT AND DO THE, UH, FIRST RUN THROUGH OF OUR CONSENT AGENDA.AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THAT ON TODAY.
ALL RIGHT, FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM TWO IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 20 22 5 0 2, SECOND ALPHA 95.
ITEM ITEM NUMBER THREE, REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 114, SECOND ALPHA 96.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 0 5 0 1 VARGAS MIXED USE THAT IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
ITEM FIVE, REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 1 0 7 VARGAS.
MIXED USE IS UP FOR DISCUSSION NUMBER SIX.
PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2022 DASH 0 0 1 4 0 5 BERGSTROM SPUR TRAIL MIXED USE THAT IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT PER APRIL 25TH.
ITEM SEVEN, REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 1 46.
TRAIL AREA INFILL WESTERN TRACT, THAT IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
ITEM EIGHT, REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 1 48 BERGS FROM TRAIL AREA INFILL EASTERN TRACT IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
NUMBER NINE, REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 1 0 2 5 0 6, AND 5 0 8 WEST REZONING.
THAT IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
ITEM 10, REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 93 S D C M L K UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO MAY 23RD.
ITEM 11, REZONING C 814 DASH SIX DASH ONE 70 FIVE.ZERO FOUR EAST AVENUE PUD AMENDMENT.
[00:05:01]
12, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 0 9 23 10 GOODRICH.THAT IS UP FOR CONSENT, BUT WE DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER.
ITEM 13 REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 1 57.
DOMAIN ONE AND TWO PDA AMENDMENT IS UP FOR CONSENT.
ITEM C 14, SITE PLAN S P DASH 2022 DASH 8 52 C 62 EAST AVENUE IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
ITEM 15, CODE AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 2 COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AMENDMENT IS UP FOR CONSENT.
NUMBER 16 E V VARIANCE P 20 21 9 1 CF SITE PLAN IS UP FOR APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT NUMBER 17, PRELIMINARY PLAN C EIGHT DASH 2022 DASH 0 3 30 HARRIS BRANCH, COMMERCE PARK PRELIMINARY PLAN IS UP FOR DISAPPROVAL PER FOR REASONS PER EXHIBIT C.
AND NUMBER 18, THE FINAL PLAT OUT OF APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C EIGHT DASH 2022 DASH 0 2 5 TWO.ONE A.
DOTS SH GOODNIGHT TOWN CENTER PHASE ONE, SECTION ONE IS UP FOR DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS PER EXHIBIT C.
THAT CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA.
OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VICE CHAIR.
UM, I'M GONNA DO A FEW HOUSEKEEPING THINGS HERE AND THEN I'LL GO THROUGH THE CONSENT AGENDA AGAIN.
AND WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER ON, UH, THE GOODRICH ITEM, UH, THAT WILL, UH, GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM.
SO JUST, UH, THIS FOR, UH, THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING FOR THOSE OF YOU OUT THERE.
WE'VE GOT, UM, SPEAKERS PARTICIPATING IN PERSON AND VIRTUALLY AS WELL AS COMMISSIONERS HERE ON THE DIAS AND PARTICIPATING VIRTUALLY.
AND I BELIEVE, UH, WE HAVE A FEW CASES THIS EVENING.
UM, SO WE'LL TAKE THOSE AN ORDER AND THEN, UH, IF YOU WANT TO WAIT IN THE ATRIUM, I THINK, ARE WE STILL DOING THE EMAIL 15 MINUTES OUT FOR THOSE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? OKAY.
SO YOU CAN JOIN US, UH, WHEN YOUR, UM, WHEN YOUR CASE COMES UP, UM, COMMISSIONERS, UH, JUST REMEMBER THOSE OF YOU PARTICIPATING VIRTUALLY.
I HAVE YOUR GREEN, YELLOW, RED CARDS.
IT HELPS ME KIND OF KEEP TRACK OF THE VOTES AND, UH, KEEP YOUR, UM, UH, KEEP ON MUTE AND, AND RAISE YOUR HAND IF I MISS YOU.
I HAVE HELP HERE FROM THOSE AROUND ME IF I, IF I DON'T SEE YOU.
UM, YES, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES FROM ANY OF THE CASES THIS EVENING? ALL RIGHT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE OUR SPEAKER ON.
OH, AND JUST RE REMEMBER, I DON'T, UH, MEMBERS, UH, ESPECIALLY FOR THOSE THAT ARE NEW.
IF THERE'S ANY CASES THAT YOU WISH TO PULL AS WE'RE AT THIS TIME PERIOD, YOU CAN REQUEST THAT.
SO, UM, AND THE SAME GOES, UH, WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THE SPEAKER FOR GOODRICH AND, UM, WE CAN MAKE, DISCUSS, UH, MAKE A DECISION WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO HEAR MORE OR NOT AT THAT TIME.
[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION]
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE OUR SPEAKER.WE'LL HEAR FROM MS. LORRAINE ATHERTON SPEAKING ON ITEM 12 AND OPPOSITION.
UH, HELLO, I'M LORRAINE ATHERTON, UH, MEMBER OF THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ZONING COMMITTEE.
AND, UH, ALSO, UM, UH, MICHAEL GERBER, UH, C E O OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS ASKED ME TO, TO HELP THEM MAKE THEIR CASE IN OPPOSITION.
UH, UH, THE, UM, UH, UH, JOY HARDEN HAS, UH, UH, HAS REFUSED TO INCLUDE IN THE STAFF REPORT ON THIS CASE.
ANY INFORMATION REGARDING THE CURRENT, UH, EXISTING 120 UNIT HOUSING AUTHORITY APARTMENT BUILDING, UH, ADJACENT TO 2130 GOODRICH, UH, THE 2018 REZONING AND SITE PLAN FILES FOR
[00:10:01]
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY PROPERTY AT 2126 GOODRICH CONTAINED TRAFFIC INFORMATION THAT IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE TRIP LIMIT AT 2130 GOODRICH INFORMATION THAT WOULD CONTRADICT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO REMOVE THE TRIP LIMIT AT 2130.GOODRICH, UH, ATTACHED TO, I'VE SENT YOU, UH, A LETTER AND ATTACHED TO THAT LETTER IS THE LETTER OF OPPOSITION FROM MICHAEL GERBER, CEO OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, UH, WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN YOUR BACKUP.
UH, UH, MR. GERBER FELT COMPELLED TO CORRECT THE STAFF REPORT AND ASSERT THAT PATHWAYS AT GOODRICH PLACE.
A NEW THREE-STORY 120 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING OWNED BY HAKKA AND BUILT IN 2019 DOES INDEED EXIST ENTIRELY OCCUPYING THE PRIVATE DRIVE AT RA GLEN.
YET THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION CONTINUES TO SUGGEST THAT RAHAB GLEN WILL BE REBUILT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE PATHWAYS BUILDING AND ON TOP OF THEIR DETENTION POND, ALLOWING ACCESS TO THIS LITTLE PROPERTY AT 2130.
GOODRICH, UH, FOLLOWING MY LETTER IS A SAMPLING OF STAFF COMMENTS AND Z N A CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING TRAFFIC ISSUES SURROUNDING THE PATHWAYS PROJECT 2130 GOODRICH AND OTHER PROPERTIES AFFECTED BY SOUTH LAMAR CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS AFTER SOME PANDEMIC DELAYS, PROGRESS ON CORRIDOR PROJECTS IS ACCELERATING.
YET THIS STAFF REPORT ON 2130, GOODRICH CONTINUES TO IGNORE THEM.
WE REALLY WANT YOU TO DENY THIS REQUEST, UH, UH, AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, AND PLEASE TAKE SOME ACTION TO CORRECT THE ZONING REPORT BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNSEL.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS VERY MUCH.
[Consent Agenda]
ANY, UM, ITEMS? ARE WE, I'M GONNA READ THROUGH THESE AGAIN, UH, AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.ALL RIGHT, UH, WE HAVE ITEM ONE, APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
WE HAVE ITEMS TWO IS DISCUSSION.
AND, UH, WE'LL TAPE THOSE UP TOGETHER.
AND NEXT WE HAVE ITEM FOUR, UH, IS THE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ITEM FIVE, THE REZONING CASE.
UH, WE'LL TAPE THOSE UP TOGETHER.
UH, THOSE ARE BOTH DISCUSSION ITEMS. ITEM SIX, PLAN AMENDMENT, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
ITEM SEVEN, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
EIGHT, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
ITEM NINE, REZONING NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 25TH.
ITEM 10, REZONING, APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO MAY 23RD.
ITEM 11, REZONING STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO MAY 9TH.
ITEM 12, UH, REZONING IS ON CONSENT.
ITEM 13, REZONING IS ON CONSENT.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION 15.
ITEM 16, IT'S APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM 17, DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C.
AND ITEM 18, FINAL PLAT OUT OF APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN.
THIS ONE IS ALSO DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS IN EXHIBIT C.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT.
UM, DO, UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL? UH, COMMISSIONERS AZAR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO WHAT WE DID LAST TIME.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO APPROVAL THIS MOTION? OKAY, IT PASSES.
WE ARE MOVING ON TO OUR CHAIR COMMISSION, LISA AND ANDREW VER MY APOLOGIES.
DID WE NOTE THE CLOSING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING? UH, WE DID NOT.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND GOT A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING BY COMMISSIONER AZAR.
IT'S TAKEN BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
AND AGAIN, UH, HEARING NO OPPOSITION, UH, WE'LL GO AND PASS THAT MOTION.
THANK YOU FOR THAT, MR. RIVERA.
[Items 2 & 3]
OUR FIRST DISCUSSION[00:15:01]
CASE.UH, STAFF WILL GIVE US AN UPDATE.
THIS IS, UH, ITEMS TWO PLAN AMENDMENT ALONG WITH THE ITEM THREE, REZONING CASE AS SECOND ALPHA.
OH, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, MR. RIVERA, THIS IS THE ONE THAT WE ALREADY HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS CHAIR, COMMISSION, LAY? YES.
UH, SO WE DO HAVE, UH, THE APPLICANT AND TWO SPEAKERS REGISTERED.
UM, SO EACH, UM, MEMBER, I UNDERSTAND WE'LL RECEIVE ONE MINUTE.
AND, UM, WHAT WE'LL DO HERE, IF YOU RECALL, WE ALREADY FINISHED.
WE WENT THROUGH OUR Q AND A AND WE DECIDED TO POSTPONE THIS ONE.
UM, LET'S LISTEN TO WHAT'S SAID AND, UH, WE CAN OPEN IT UP FOR ADDITIONAL Q AND A IF NEEDED, BASED ON ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
BUT, UM, UH, WE DID ALREADY HEAR THIS CASE.
SO, UH, LET'S SEE IF THERE'S ANY NEW INFORMATION, ANY MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS PLAN AMENDMENT M P A 20 22 0 0 0 5 0.02.
PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 24 0 4 THRASHER LANE.
THE REQUEST IS WITHIN THEOLO NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS A CHANGE OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM COMMERCIAL TO SINGLE FAMILY, AND IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
GOOD EVENING, NANCY ESTRADA WITH PLAINTIFF DEPARTMENT.
SORRY, THIS IS ITEM THREE ON YOUR AGENDA CASE C 14 20 22 114, SECOND ALPHA POINT 96.
AS YOU RECALL, THIS CASE WAS HER TWO WEEKS AGO.
THE REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT IS TO GO FROM CS N P TO SF THREE NP STAFF REC STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT SF THREE NP.
THERE IS A VALID PETITION FROM THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR DUE TO SOME ISSUES WITH THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
I'LL BE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
WILL NOW HEAR FOR ANY APPLICANT FOR ONE MINUTE.
GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I'M RODNEY BENNETT AND I'M HERE TONIGHT.
RESPECTFULLY, TO REQUEST THE DOWNSIZE DOWN ZONING OF 24 0 4 THRASHER LANE FROM C SNMP TO SF THREE NMP.
IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE OWNER TO SUBDIVIDE THIS PARCEL INTO FOUR LOTS, SO THAT HE CAN CONSTRUCT FOUR DUPLEXES WITH A TOTAL OF EIGHT UNITS BY SUBDIVIDING INTO LOTS LESS THAN 20,000 SQUARE FEET.
THIS REDUCES THE COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS ON THE ADJOINING LOT ON THE SOUTH FROM 25 FEET TO 15 FEET.
THIS PLAN IS THE ONLY PLAN THAT WILL NOT HAVE OPPOSITION FROM THE MONS NEIGHBORHOOD, THE MON TOPLESS C, D, AND THE OWNER TO THE NORTH, DR.
THIS FACT IS PROVEN BY OUR PREVIOUS REQUEST TO RE REZONE THIS TRACT TO SF SIX MP LATER AMENDED TO CSM M U N P.
BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF SUPPORT FROM THESE GROUPS, THAT CASE WAS WITHDRAWN.
I FEEL THAT THE SF THREE REQUEST IS KEEPING WITH THE INTEGRITY OF THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
FURTHERMORE, FROM A PLANNING ASPECT, COMMERCIAL OR MULTI-FAMILY IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ON A DEAD END STREET.
WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION, MS. SARAH SERRY.
UM, THANK YOU GUYS FOR TAKING TIME TO MEET ME WITH ME ONE MORE TIME, OR LISTENING TO ME.
I DID REACH OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AFTER THE LAST MEETING TO DISCUSS FURTHER, UM, POSSIBILITY SOLUTIONS AND GOT NO RESPONSE.
UM, AFTER THE LAST MEETING, I REALIZED THAT NO ONE ASKED, INCLUDING ME WHY THE ADJACENT LANDOWNER WASN'T ABLE TO DO OR WASN'T DOING RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, UM, PROGRAM WITHOUT A REZONING.
I MEAN, CONFUSES ME AS TO WHY HE NEEDS A REZONING GIVEN THE NEW ORDINANCE.
AND THAT SHOULD REDUCE SETBACKS CONSIDERABLY ON MY PROPERTY AND COULD SOLVE THE SITUATION WITHOUT THE NEED FOR REZONING FROM SIESTA SF THREE.
UM, IT SEEMS LIKE HE COULD AS WELL, ALTHOUGH I TRIED TO CONNECT HIM ON THIS.
UM, HE DID NOT RESPOND, NOR DID THE OWNER.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE STAFF WAS LATER ASKED ABOUT THIS, AND IT WAS SHARED THAT HE WOULD'VE, UM, WOULD'VE HAD TO CONSIDER A REZONING CATEGORY FOR RESIDENTIAL AND CONCERNING, UM, COMMERCIAL ZONING.
HOWEVER, THAT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME SINCE HE'S ALREADY ZONED CS.
UM, THAT PROGRAM, IT SEEMS TO ME, WOULD ALLOW HIM TO BUILD SF SIX F SF HOMES THAT HE WANTS TO OR BUILD POTENTIALLY MORE.
AND WITHIN A PHOTO, AFFORDABLE SET ASIDE, NO REZONING WOULD BE NEEDED AFTER ALL.
I'M A LOT OF LOSS TO WHY ARE WE CAN'T DO THIS, AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO DENY HIS REQUEST.
WE ALSO HAVE REGISTERED SUSANNA ALMANZA, HOWEVER, I DON'T HAVE HER PRESIDENT CHAMBERS.
[00:20:01]
AND WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM CHAIR.UM, CAN ASK A CLARIFY, UH, WHO, YES, UH, CHAIR.
MAY I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION? MR. RIVER, MR. MR. RIVER, DID MR. AMANZA INDICATE, UM, WHETHER SHE WAS OPPOSED SUPPORTING OR NEUTRAL? REGISTERED IN OPPOSITION.
OKAY, SO COMMISSIONERS, UM, TO MAKE A DECISION WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR WE MOVE TO A MOTION, ANY PREFERENCES HAVE GOOD QUESTION.
YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND ASK QUESTIONS? YEAH.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO THIS.
UM, CUZ IF WE WANNA OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS AGAIN, WE, THIS IS GONNA BE A CHANGE.
JUST NEED TO ACCEPT, CHANGE OUR RULES.
DO WE WANT TO ALLOW A CERTAIN NUMBER? LET'S GO FIVE OR THREE MINUTES.
I'M HEARING MR. AAR MAKING A MOTION FOR FIVE AT THREE.
ANY OPPOSITION TO FIVE AT THREE? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND PROCEED.
HEY, I, I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.
WOULD THIS PROPERTY, UH, SO WOULD THIS PROPERTY QUALIFY FOR THE NOW RESIDENTIAL ALLOWED IN COMMERCIAL? IT DOES QUALIFY FOR THE ORDINANCE.
HOWEVER, UM, PER THIS PAST WEEK, I'VE BEEN IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPLICANT WHO'S BEEN IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THE OWNER, AND THEY ARE NOT LOOKING TO, UH, USE THIS ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW.
DUE TO THE EL ALL THE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS ALL THE AFFORDABILITY ELIGIBILITY THAT IT WOULD TAKE TO, UH, AND THAT WAS 10%, CORRECT? 10% AFFORDABLE HOUSING? I BELIEVE SO, YES.
CAN I SPEAK TO THE NEIGHBOR REAL QUICK? HI.
UM, SO SOMETIMES WE WE'RE HERE AND WE, WE HEAR THINGS AND WE READ MORE AND WE LEARN AND RE REMIND OURSELVES OUR RED, I BELIEVE YESTERDAY AND AUSTIN POLITICS.NET, THAT, UM, YOU HAD SHARED LAST TIME YOU WERE HERE THAT THE NUMBER OF UNITS YOU COULD BUILD WAS GOING DOWN.
COULD YOU WALK US THROUGH THAT AGAIN? I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION? I'M SO SORRY.
HOW MANY UNITS DO YOU HOPE TO BUILD AND WHAT DO YOU FEEL THE IMPACT OF, OF THIS DOWN ZONING NEXT DOOR WOULD DO TO THE NUMBER OF BU UH, UNITS YOU LOOK TO BUILD YOUR OVERALL YIELD? SO IT WAS, COULD YOU SPEAKING TO THE MICROPHONE? YEAH.
UM, IT WAS, AS I SAID, BACK OF THE NAPKIN MATH, IT WAS ABOUT 330 UNITS REDUCED TO 150.
GIVEN EVERYONE A CHANCE TO TALK, IF YOU WANNA COME UP REAL QUICK, UH, I'D LOVE TO KNOW MAYBE WHAT'S HOLDING YOU BACK FROM CITY COUNCIL? JUST DID A REALLY BIG THING ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.
AND YOU HAVE COMMERCIAL? YES, SIR.
THIS PROJECT WAS STARTED ROUGHLY TWO YEARS AGO.
HE'S NOT AN OUT-OF-TOWN BUILDER.
THIS IS ALL HE BUILT IS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
HIS, WE LOOKED AT THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US BY NANCY.
AND THE ISSUE IS WITH THE AFFORDABILITY OF THE 10%, 10% WOULD BE ONE UNIT OUT OF EIGHT.
UM, THESE AREN'T LOW END HOMES.
I WOULD CONSIDER THEM MODERATELY PRICED HOMES IN AUSTIN.
BECAUSE OF THAT, HE FEELS THAT HE WOULD HAVE AN ISSUE, UM, BUILDING SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.
UM, AS FAR AS MS. AMANZA, UH, SIGNING UP IN OPPOSITION, I'M NOT ASKING ABOUT THAT.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, DO WE, WE HAVE, UH, QUESTIONS.
ANYONE ELSE? UH, COMMISSIONER MUTO.
UM, AND SO THIS QUESTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, WHEN DID THE, WHEN DID YOU START WITH THIS PROCESS WITH THE CITY FOR THE REZONING APPLICATION? APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS AGO.
AND SO THIS HAS BEEN TWO YEARS IN THE WORKS, UM, AND YOUR, YOUR SUBMISSION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION STATED THAT ONCE, IF THIS IS APPROVED AT THIS CLEAREST COUNCIL, EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, THAT YOU ANTICIPATE ANOTHER TWO YEARS IN, IN PERMITTING TO GET TO MOVING DIRT OR SOMETHING, SOMETHING LIKE THAT? YES, MA'AM.
WE ANTICIPATE APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS FROM THE TIME WE GET APPROVED WITH THE ZONING, WE HAVE TO DO THE SUBDIVISION.
THEN ONCE THAT'S APPROVED, FILED FOR THE BUILDING PERMITS.
AND ALSO HAVE EVERYTHING DESIGNED.
AND MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR, UM, THE NEIGHBOR OPPOSING NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
[00:25:02]
YES.SORRY, I THINK I LOST MY SCREEN.
AND SO, UM, SO WE'RE ABOUT TWO YEARS OUT WITH THAT.
SO YOU TALKED ABOUT BUILDING MULTI-FAMILY, IS THAT CORRECT FOR YOUR PROPERTY? YES.
MULTI-FAMILY OR, AND WITH MIXED USE.
AND WHERE ARE YOU IN YOUR APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THAT AT THIS TIME? I'M, I HAVE NOT STARTED IT YET.
BUT I WILL SAY YOU HAD ASKED HIM WHEN HE STARTED HIS PROCESS, UM, I REALLY WISH THAT HE HAD IN THE BEGINNING BROUGHT ME INVOLVED IN THIS CUZ WE COULD HAVE HAD A CONVERSATION, ESPECIALLY DISAPPOINTING SINCE APPARENTLY HE'S BEEN HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE OTHER NEIGHBORS FOR A LOT LONGER.
I DID NOT OPPOSE TO THE CSM U WHEN HE WAS DOING IT.
AND SO HE'S SAYING THAT HE'S A, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME BUILDER, BUT HE WAS GOING FOR CSM U THEN HE WENT FOR SF SIX.
NOW HE'S GOING TO SF THREE AND I'M FORCED TO DO THIS BECAUSE OF HOW GREATLY IT AFFECTS MY PROPERTY.
I TALKED TO HIM BEFOREHAND AND SAID, LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN DO THIS, YOU KNOW, THE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL IS SUCH A PERFECT OPPORTUNITY.
UM, I GUESS I'M, I'M ASSUMING THAT HE DOESN'T WANNA DO AFFORDABILITY, BUT I WOULD BELIEVE IF HE COULD DO THAT, HE COULD PROBABLY BUILD A FEW MORE AND IT'D BE GREAT FOR EVERYONE CONCERNED AND NOT AFFECT, UM, MY PROJECT.
DO YOU KNOW, DO WE KNOW WHAT YOUR PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR? PARDON ME? DO WE KNOW WHAT YOUR PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR? MY PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED COMMERCIAL.
AS IS IS, SO, SO YOU WOULD EITHER HAVE TO APPLY FOR C S M U OR YOU WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR MULTI-FAMILY OR SOMETHING AS WELL TO BE ABLE TO PUT RESIDENTIAL THERE.
WELL, I WAS GOING TO DO THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.
I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
AND THAT'S ALL MY COMMISSION MY QUESTIONS, CHAIR.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, UH, FISHER ZAR.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
WE KNOW NO PATHWAY FOR THIS EXISTS TODAY, BUT LET'S SAY THERE WAS A PATHWAY FOR Y'ALL TO, UM, INDICATE THAT YOU WOULD NOT LIKE TO TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY ON THE NEIGHBORING LOT.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL WOULD BE OPEN TO? YES, SIR.
WE ARE NOT IN THE BUSINESS TO OPPOSE DEVELOPMENT.
IF THE OWNER WISHES TO FILE FOR A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS VARIANCE TO ZERO SETBACKS, WE WOULD NOT OPPOSE THAT.
UM, IF THERE WAS IN TIME SOMETHING THAT CAME, ANOTHER ORDINANCE THAT CAME UP, THEN SO BE IT.
WE WOULD, WE, I AND THE DEVELOPER ARE IN THE BUSINESS TO PROMOTE GROWTH AND TO GET PERMITS OUT.
UM, WITH THAT SAID, THERE'S NOT AN AVENUE AT THIS POINT IN TIME FOR US TO ALLEVIATE HER CONCERNS.
WE'LL HAVE AN ITEM TODAY WHERE WE MIGHT DISCUSS SOMETHING SIMILAR, DO SEE IF THERE'S AN PATHWAY FORWARD, BUT WE APPRECIATE THAT.
I'M NOT SEEING COMMISSIONERS ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.
SO DO WE HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER AZAR? UH, COMMISSIONER COX ACTUALLY HAS IT.
I WAS JUST, UH, THIS IS A TOUGH ONE, BUT I WAS, I WAS JUST GONNA MOTION, UH, FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR BOTH THE, WE HAVE TO DO BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE ZONING CASE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER AZAR, YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? COMMISSIONER COX? I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LOT.
I, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBOR, UH, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY OWNER JUST WANTS TO BUILD A COUPLE HOMES.
AND SO I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD NECESSARILY STAND IN THE WAY OF THAT FOR A POTENTIAL FUTURE PROJECT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY EXIST YET.
PLUS FUTURE SOLUTIONS THAT COULD COME ABOUT TO RESOLVE THIS, THAT, THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT YET.
SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF UNKNOWNS TO NOT ALLOW THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY OWNER TO JUST MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT THEY WANNA DO NOW.
UH, SO THAT'S WHY I'M COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
UM, THIS IS SUCH A TRICKY SITE, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONUNDRUM.
I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS.
THE REASON BEING, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE DOWN ZONING.
UM, SOMETHING THAT IS CURRENTLY ZONED OR FEATURE LAND USE MAP IS COMMERCIAL AND ZONE COMMERCIAL.
UM, AND NOW THAT WE HAVE AN AVENUE TOWARDS HAVING RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, UM, IT DOES HAVE AN AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENT, BUT I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING, SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS ONE.
I WONDER, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY, WERE YOU SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION?
[00:30:01]
I HAD A COMMENT AGAINST.UH, OTHER COMMISSIONER DES VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER MOTO.
I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT, UM, A PROJECT THAT COULD COME ONLINE HERE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS AND, AND PROVIDE SOME, UH, SOME MISSING ENTRY LEVEL OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES THAT I THINK ARE IMPORTANT.
COULD WE POSSIBLY GET MORE OUT OF IT? YES, BUT I, I ALSO AGREE THAT I THINK THERE ARE GOING TO BE CHANGES COMING EITHER AT THE LOCAL LEVEL OR AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT ARE GOING TO RELEASE SOME OF THE PRESSURE ON COMPATIBILITY.
UM, SO I THINK WHEN THE NEIGHBORING, UM, OWNER IS, IS CLOSER TO DEVELOPING, THERE'S GOING THERE.
I, I'M, I'M KEEPING MY FINGERS CROSSED THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE BETTER PATHWAYS FOR THAT AT THE TIME THAT THEY'RE READY TO DEVELOP.
WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
AND I DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH TO SAY.
I JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, AS HAS ALREADY BEEN NOTED, YOU KNOW, DOWN ZONING, UH, DOWN ZONING A LOT, UM, FROM COMMERCIAL TO SINGLE FAMILY, JUST SO THAT THE APPLICANT CAN SKIRT HAVING TO USE, UM, THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, UH, PROGRAM AND, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, ALLOWING 'EM TO AVOID CREATING AN AFFORDABLE UNIT OF HOUSING, WHICH THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO UNDER THAT PROGRAM, I THINK IS, I, I DON'T SEE THE PURPOSE OF IT.
AND I ALSO DON'T THINK THIS IS JUST THE STORY OF AN APPLICANT OR A DEVELOPER TRYING TO BUILD SOME, SOME SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
I THINK THIS IS THE STORY OF AN APPLICANT WHO IS CORNERED INTO CHOOSING THIS BECAUSE OF OPPOSITION FROM OTHER NEIGHBORS.
AND SO THEN THERE'S THIS QUESTION OF WH WHICH, WHOSE VOICE IS WORTH MORE, WHICH NEIGHBORS CARRY MORE WEIGHT, UM, AND, AND, AND, AND WHO GETS TO SWAY OR KILL A CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT TYPE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK IT'S A VERY TRICKY SITUATION BECAUSE IN MANY WAYS THE APPLICANT WAS CORNERED INTO DOING THIS BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING ELSE AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT SOME FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD SUPPORT.
AND SO I JUST, YOU KNOW, I, THIS IS A TRICKY ONE, BUT I DON'T SEE WHY I WOULD SUPPORT IT.
UH, I DID HAVE, UM, MR. ANDERSON ONE TO SPEAK AGAINST, BUT DO WE HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION? SEEING NONE.
UH, GO AHEAD AND COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, ALSO NOT AN EASY CASE, BUT THEN AGAIN, IT KIND OF BECOMES EASY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, RIGHT? SO BACK OF THE NAPKIN, IF WE'RE LOPPING OFF, LET'S SAY IT'S NOT 150, LET'S SAY IT'S A HUNDRED HOMES, 10% OF THOSE ARE AFFORDABLE, 10% AFFORDABLE.
I MEAN, IT'S JUST LIKE ALL THE, I GET IT.
THE AMAZING SHORTCOMINGS OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
ITEM NUMBER 20 CAN HELP ADDRESS THIS.
UNFORTUNATELY, WE DON'T HAVE ITEM 20 PASSED QUITE YET.
UM, I WOULD REALLY HOPE THAT THE APPLICANT, IF THIS DOESN'T SUCCEED TODAY AND DOESN'T SUCCEED AT COUNCIL, CAN HAVE A CHANCE TO GO AND LOOK AT WHAT CAN BE DONE BUILDING SINGLE FAMILY UNDER, YOU KNOW, UNDER, UNDER COMMERCIAL STANDARDS.
BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN PROBABLY PUT A LOT MORE IF YOU'RE NOT TRYING TO BUILD SF THREE STANDARDS.
SO MAYBE THERE COULD BE A LOT, QUITE A FEW MORE HOMES, BUT BUILT HERE THAN JUST THE EIGHT THAT ARE PLANNED FROM A TWO YEAR OLD PLAN.
ALSO, SORRY THAT A LOT OF THINGS HAVE TRIED TO HAPPEN ON YOUR SITE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSE THOSE WHEN THEY JUST HAD A LOT OF AFFORDABILITY WITH THEM.
BUT THERE'S GOTTA BE A BETTER, A BETTER SOLUTION HERE.
AND I JUST SEE THIS AS BEING A BIG STEP BACKWARDS.
UH, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS ITEM.
I'M GONNA START WITH THOSE ON THE DIAS.
UH, WE'LL DO, UH, THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, UH, FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION BY COMMISSIONER COX SECOND AND VICE COMMISSIONER AZAR GONNA SHOW ME HANDS FOR THOSE IN FAVOR.
UM, AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN IN FAVOR AND JUST THANK YOU.
UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, THAT WAS GREEN, CORRECT? YOU'RE HOLD? YES.
NOW LET'S MOVE TO, THAT'S 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
UH, LET'S SEE THOSE ON THE DIAS VOTING AGAINST THIS MOTION.
UH, THOMPSON, JUST HOLD CAUSE I'M, I NEED TO ANNOUNCE THOSE VOTING AGAINST AND, UH, SUSTAINING SH ALL RIGHT.
THAT IS ON THE SCREEN VOTING AGAINST THIS ITEM.
THAT ITEM FAILS WITH COMMISSIONERS, UH, THOMPSON COMMISSIONER, MAXWELL COMMISSIONER WOODS, UH, SHERIFF HAW, VICE HEMPEL, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, MR. CONNOLLY VOTING AGAINST, UH, AND THAT WAS ONE SEVEN TO FIVE, FIVE TO SEVEN.
UH, SO I DON'T THINK WE CAN DO ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT ONE.
[00:35:01]
NO.[Items 4 & 5]
TO OUR NEXT CASE.UH, YES, IT'S PLAN, AMENDMENT, AND THE REZONING.
SO WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF REMAR MEREDITH, HOUSING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS PLAN AMENDMENT MPA 20 22 0 0 5 0.01 VARGAS MIXED USE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 400 VARGAS ROAD AND 65 20 LYNCH LANE.
IT IS WITHIN THE MON MON TOPLESS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS A CHANGE OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE LAND USE, AND IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF NANCY ESTRADA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON YOUR AGENDA.
CASE NUMBER C 14 20 22 0 1 0 7 VARGAS MIXED USE.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 400 VARGAS ROAD IN 65 20 LYNCH LANE AND CONSISTS OF TWO TRACKS.
TRACK ONE IS CURRENTLY ZONED G R N P, AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING C S M U N P.
TRACK TWO IS CURRENTLY ZONED L R N P, AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING L R M U N P.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT G R M U C O N P ZONING FOR TRACK ONE AND L R M U N P ZONING FOR TRACK TWO.
THE UNDEVELOPED AND UN POTTED TRACKS ARE 4.31 ACRES LOCATED WEST OF US HIGHWAY 180 3 BETWEEN VARGAS ROAD AND SAXON LANE.
THE LARGER TRACK ONE IS 3.76 ACRES WITH FRONTAGE ALONG US HIGHWAY 180 3.
THE SMALLER TRACK TWO IS 0.55 ACRES AND IS LOCATED NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION AT VARGAS ROAD IN LYNCH LANE.
THE SITE DOES NOT MEET THE INTENT OF THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL CS DISTRICT.
THAT IS NOT AS, IT IS NOT LOCATED AT A MAJOR INTERSECTION.
THIS DESIGNATION HAS OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS OR TRAFFIC SERVICE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTS.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING GR M U C O N P AND L R M U N P ZONING, GIVEN ITS ACCESS 10 ARTERIAL STREET, US HIGHWAY 180 3, AND COLLECTOR STREETS, VARGAS ROAD AND SAXON LANE, AS WELL AS ITS ADJA ADJACENCY TO RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY AND CIVIC PROPERTIES.
THE MIXED USE COMBINING DSIG WILL ALSO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA, AS WELL AS PERMIT OFFICE CIVIC AND LOW INTENSITY COMMERCIAL USES THAT WILL PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
AND FOR THIS ITEM, I ONLY HAVE THE APPLICANT REGISTERED, SO WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR FIVE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASI WITH THROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
UH, THE SITE, AS YOU HEARD, IS 4.31 ACRES COMBINED.
IT HAS FRONTAGE ON FOUR DIFFERENT ROADWAYS, ONE OF THOSE BEING A MAJOR HIGHWAY, WHICH IS HIGHWAY 180 3.
THIS IS THE SITE IN COMPARISON TO ELEMENTS OF THE IMAGINE AUSTIN CONFERENCE OF PLAN.
IT'S ABOUT A QUARTER MILE FROM EXISTING BUS SERVICE STOPS AND ABOUT A MILE OUTSIDE OF THE RIVERSIDE STATION.
UM, IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CENTER NEXT SLIDE.
SO WE ARE ASKING TO TAKE THIS, UH, BIG RED POLYGON THAT YOU SEE AND CHANGE IT TO BROWN, WHICH WOULD BE MIXED USE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
AND THEN FOR THE ZONING CHANGE, UH, FOR THE FRONT PIECE THAT FRONTS ON, UH, THE HIGHWAY, IT'S THE LARGER PIECE THAT'S, UH, A LITTLE OVER THREE ACRES.
WE'RE ASKING TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO GR OR SORRY, FROM GR TO C S M U N P.
AND FOR THE SMALLER PIECE ON THE BACK HALF, THAT FRONTS ON LYNCH LANE, WE'RE ASKING FOR JUST ADDING THE MU OVERLAY TO THE EXISTING LR ZONING.
SO THIS IS A TABLE THAT SHOWS THE DIFFERENCE IN THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BETWEEN THE, THE THREE DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS THAT EXIST AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
BUT MORE SPECIFICALLY, WE'RE ASKING FOR MIXED USE ON ALL OF THE LANDS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THE ABILITY TO ADD SOME RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
UM, ON THE L RMU PIECE, IT ALLOWS, ON AVERAGE AVERAGING ONE AND TWO BEDROOM UNITS, IT WOULD BE ABOUT 20 UNITS, UH, ON THAT ONE ACRE.
AND THEN, UH, FOR CS M U, THE AVERAGE ONE AND TWO BEDROOM YIELD WOULD BE 40 UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH EQUATES TO ABOUT 149 ON THE THREE ACRES, UH, SITE.
THAT'S JUST A LITTLE OVER THREE ACRES.
THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE IN, UH, BETWEEN THE GR AND THE CS, WHICH IS WHERE, UM, STAFF AND OUR REQUESTS ARE NOT IN EXACTLY IN ALIGNMENT IS THE F A R, UH, F A R IS GOING TO BENEFIT THIS PROJECT, UH, ANY PROJECT THAT COMES FORWARD BECAUSE IT DOES ALLOW FOR GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN THE UNIT SIZES.
WHILE THE DENSITY YIELD IS THE SAME, THE F A R DOES ALLOW FOR SOME OF THOSE UNITS
[00:40:01]
TO POTENTIALLY BE LARGER IN SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE FAMILIES.IN ADDITION, UM, C S M U HAS A TWO TO ONE F A R THAT WILL ALSO MAKE IT MORE LIKELY THAT ANY PARKING THAT GOES ALONG WITH THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT COULD BE STRUCTURED VERSUS UNDER A ONE ONE-TO-ONE F A R.
IT'S LESS LIKELY THAT YOU'LL GET A DEVELOPER TO DO STRUCTURED PARKING ON THAT SITE.
SO, UM, AS YOU HEARD STAFF SAY, THEY'RE NOT RECOMMENDING CSM U ON THE FRONT ACREAGE, UM, MOSTLY BECAUSE THE SITE IS NOT LOCATED AT A MAJOR INTERSECTION.
UM, BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL SITES ACROSS THE CITY THAT WHILE MAY NOT BE AT MAJOR INTERSECTIONS, UM, HAVE CS ZONING AND HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR CS ZONING.
UM, THESE ARE SOME SITES IN FRONT OF YOU THAT ARE NEAR OUR SUBJECT TRACT THAT HAVE CS AND HAVE FRONTAGE ON, UH, 180 3 AND ALSO SOME OTHER INTERIOR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS.
THESE ARE SOME OTHER SITES THAT, UM, I TRIED TO FIND SITES THAT HAVE FRONTAGE ON A HIGHWAY, BUT ALSO HAVE ACCESS TO INTERIOR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS.
AND AGAIN, THERE'S SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE CS, UM, ZONING HAS BEEN APPROVED.
UM, I THINK WE KNOW THAT CS ALLOWS A GREAT DEAL OF OPPORTUNITY FOR USES THAT CAN SERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WITH THE SITE HAVING FRONTAGE ON FOUR DIFFERENT ROADWAYS, UM, IT ALSO PROVIDES A GREAT DEAL OF CONNECTIVITY, UH, FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT GOES IN.
WE, UH, REMAIN AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
AND, UM, I THINK WE'RE DOING PRETTY GOOD.
LET'S STICK WITH OUR, DON'T HAVE TO USE ALL OF 'EM.
UH, WE'LL STICK WITH EIGHT AND FIVE, BUT, UH, AGAIN, UM, DON'T HAVE TO USE ALL EIGHT SLOTS.
UH, WE NEED TO GO IN CLOSE PUBLIC CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING.
YES, IT'S CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING FIRST.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER AZAR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
DO I HEAR ANY, SEE ANY OPPOSITION CLOSING PUBLIC HEARING, SAYING NONE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, START WITH Q AND A.
OH, COMMISSIONER COX, YOU WANNA START US OFF? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF'S THERE, BUT I'LL JUST ASK MY QUESTION.
UM, OTHER THAN WHAT THE APPLICANT PRESENTED IN TERMS OF THE GREATER F A R AND THE GREATER IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT THEY WOULD GET UNDER, UNDER, UH, CS VERSUS GR, ARE, ARE THERE ANY OTHER THINGS THAT, THAT THEY COULD DO DEVELOPMENT OR USE WISE, UM, IF THEY WERE TO GET CS VERSUS GR ADDITIONAL USES? UM, WELL, WE PRETTY MUCH PUT THAT ON A CO YEAH.
UBER WOULD JUST BE A FEW ADDITIONAL USES FROM THE GR TO THE CS.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKED WAS? YEAH, I, I BASICALLY, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, OTHER THAN THE F A R AND IMPERVIOUS COVER, WHAT, WHAT ARE THE OTHER SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE GR AND THE CS AS YEAH, JUST A FEW USES.
UH, I DON'T RECALL WHAT THEY ARE, BUT IF THERE WOULD BE A FEW USES.
YOU, YOU INDICATED THAT THERE, UM, WAS LIKE SOME TRANSPORTATION TYPE REQUIREMENTS, UM, THAT WERE NOT SUITABLE FOR THIS, FOR THIS SITE.
OH, IS THAT, DID I MIS HEAR THAT REGARDING THE CS? YEAH, REGARDING, UH, CS DESIGNATION, DESIGNATION VERSUS G R? YEAH.
OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS JUST BASED ON HAVING CS, UH, AT A MAJOR INTERSECTION.
AND SINCE THIS IS LOCATED AT ONE ARTERIAL AND TWO COLLECTOR ROADS, SAXON AND VARGAS, WE FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO GO WITH THE GR.
AND THE STAFF FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE.
THE COMPATIBILITY STILL APPLIES, RIGHT? BECAUSE THIS SITE SEEMS TO BE SURROUNDED BY CORRECT.
PRETTY MUCH SMALL SF THREE EXCEPT FOR ONE LOT, WHICH HAS SF SIX.
YES, SF THREE IS ALL TO THE WEST AND SOUTH, SO THAT WOULD TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY.
REAL QUICK, IF I'VE GOT TIME, UM, WOULD, IT'S, IT'S A MINOR DIFFERENCE, BUT IF WE WERE, IF THIS COMMISSION WERE TO APPROVE CS VERSUS GR, WOULD YOU ACCEPT THE LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER INCLUDED IN A CO FOR DR? YES.
[00:45:01]
WE WOULD.IS THE IDEA, I ALSO WANNA NOTE THAT WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF'S CO THAT'S PROPOSED TO PROHIBIT THOSE USES, AND WE'RE ALSO WILLING TO PROHIBIT OTHER CS USES THAT ARE JUST NOT APPROPRIATE NEAR RESIDENTIAL, SUCH AS CONSTRUCTION SALES AND SERVICE AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CAN I SPEAK ON THE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGES? OH, RIGHT QUICK.
UM, COMMISSIONER COX, UM, I UNDERSTAND YOUR DESIRE TO LOWER THE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON THE PROPERTY.
I MEAN, FRANKLY, IT'S VERY HARD TO EVEN GET TO 80% IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON EVEN URBAN SITES BECAUSE OF THE DETENTION, WATER QUALITY, LANDSCAPING, AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
SO WE'D BE AMENABLE TO AN 80% CAP ON THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
COMMISSIONERS, UH, FURTHER QUESTIONS.
UH, NOT SEEING ANY, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER COX? COMMISSIONER COX? I THINK I'LL LAY OUT THE MOTION THAT RON AND I WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, WHICH, WHICH WAS TO, UH, UH, GRANT APPLICANT REQUEST, UH, WITH THE CO, UM, TO PROHIBIT AUTOMOTIVE RENTALS, AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SERVICES, AUTOMOTIVE SALES, AUTOMOTIVE WASHING BAIL BOND SERVICES, COMMERCIAL OFF-STREET PARKING, DROP OFF RECYCLING COLLECTION FACILITY, EXTERMINATING SERV SERVICES, OFFSITE ACCESSORY PARKING AND PAWN SHOP SERVICES.
AND THEN ADD A LIMIT TO IMPERVIOUS COVER OF 80%.
AND THEN I, I'LL LEAVE THE OTHER SERVICES.
MAYBE YOU CAN WORK THAT OUT WITH STAFF FOR COUNSEL, BUT, BUT FOR NOW, THAT'S WHAT I'LL PROPOSE AS A MOTION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER MU TOLLER AND COMMISSIONER COX, YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? CAN I ASK FOR POINT OF CLARIFICATION? NO, I, I THINK I JUST DID.
COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER AZAR, JUST IT'S YOUR POINT OF CLARIFICATION FOR STAFF.
STAFF, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR US TO MAKE A MOTION AT THIS POINT, THIS MIGHT BE FOR MR. RIVERA TO ESSENTIALLY SAY THAT SOME OF THOSE CO USES FROM CS WOULD CAN BE RESOLVED, OR DO WE NEED TO SPECIFY THEM AT THIS MOMENT? CHAIR COMMISSION LAY ON ANDREW.
SO YOU SHOULD PROBABLY, UH, SPECIFY THE USES AND THEN, UM, ALSO IN CONFIRM WITH LAW, WE CAN, UM, REVIEW PRIOR TO COUNSEL.
I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT.
YEAH, WELL, AND I ACTUALLY WANTED TO MODIFY MY MOTION TO INCLUDE THE, I THINK I NEED TO INCLUDE THE NPA, WHICH WOULD BE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
UM, AND, AND I GUESS, UH, IS IT POSSIBLE, RON, IF YOU COULD COME UP AND HELP US WITH SOME ADDITIONAL USES THAT YOU KNOW OF? OKAY.
LET'S, UH, JUST, UH, KEEP THINGS OURS.
SO WE HAD, UM, I THINK HE WAS ACCEPTED THAT THE N P A WAS INCLUDED, BUT COMMISSIONER MOOCH TOLD YOU WERE SECONDING THAT.
DO YOU AGREE WITH YOUR SECOND THAT THIS INCLUDES THE N P A? OKAY, THANK YOU.
SO WE ARE LOOKING JUST KEEP, I'M TRYING TO KEEP UP HERE.
SO WE HAVE THE CO USES THAT ARE IN THE BACKUP THAT WERE, THAT YOU LISTED, COMMISSIONER COX, RIGHT? THOSE ARE IN THE BACKUP? YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF ACTUALLY STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
AND NOW WE ARE, UH, IDENTIFYING ADDITIONAL USES TO INCLUDE A NET CO.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW? THAT, THAT WOULD BE MY DESIRE.
AND WHAT I HEARD WAS CONSTRUCTION SALES.
UM, AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN GET INTO THIS EXTENSIVELY ON THE FLY, BUT IF THERE'S ANY, SO WE ARE, WE AMENDING YOUR, YOUR INITIAL, BECAUSE IT BELONGS TO THE BODY.
SO ARE WE MAKING A AMENDMENT NOW TO THE CO? IS, IS THIS A MOTION TO AMEND THE CO THE CHAIR PROPOSING? OKAY.
DO WE HAVE THIS? SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND HEAR WHAT THOSE ARE AND WE'LL SEE IF YOU HAVE A SECOND.
AND, AND I'M HOPING THAT I CAN BREAK THE RULES A LITTLE BIT AND GET RON'S HELP WITH ANY ADDITIONAL PROHIBITED USES THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE.
WE'VE GOT THE APPLICANT HERE AND, UH, HOPEFULLY STAFF CAN, UM, GIVE US SOME FEEDBACK OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY AGREE WITH THESE ADDITIONAL PROHIBITED USES.
WELL, I MEAN, AGRICULTURAL, WE WOULD BE, WE'D, OH, YOU GOT ONE? GOOD.
WE'D BE GOOD WITH AGRICULTURAL SALES, UHHUH,
THOSE ARE PERMITTED IN CS GIVEN THAT TO YOUR HONOR, BUT THEY ARE IN C CS, WHICH, OKAY.
I'M JUST, I CAN'T SEE KIDDING.
[00:50:01]
THANK YOU.WHAT'S HAPPEN RIGHT, RIGHT NOW, UM, THE ONES WE'RE COMING UP WITH ON THE FLY ARE AGRICULTURAL SALES AND SERVICES, KENNEL SERVICES, CONSTRUCTION SALES AND SERVICES.
AND WHAT WAS THE OTHER SERVICE YOU SAID KEN'S, KEN'S ON THE OTHER SIDE.
UH, BUT AGAIN, WE'LL BE GLAD TO SPEND TIME BETWEEN NOW AND COUNCIL TO GET, OKAY.
LET'S, LET'S READ THIS ONE MORE TIME.
JUST, UH, SO WAS AGRICULTURAL SALES AND SERVICES? YES.
CONSTRUCTION SALES AND SERVICES? YES.
AND WAS THERE ONE MORE? KENNELS.
UH, COMMISSIONER AZA, I'LL, I'LL JUST ASK A QUESTION.
WOULD YOU ALL ALSO BE OPEN TO ADDING AN ADULT ORIENTED SERVICES, EXTERMINATING SERVICES, UNQUESTIONABLY, YES.
AND DROP OFF RECYCLING COLLECTION? YES.
WE'LL ADD THOSE IN AS WELL, HOPEFULLY DROP OFF.
AND WHAT WAS THE OTHER ONE? UM, I'M, I HAVE A LIZ HERE.
J IT HELPS THE ADULT ORIENTED BUSINESSES, COMMERCIAL BLOOD, PLASMA CENTER CONSTRUCTION, SEAL AND SERVICES, DROPOFF RECYCLING COLLECTION FACILITIES, AGRICULTURE, SALES, KENNEL SERVICES, AND EXTERMINATING SERVICES.
SO THIS WAS COMMISSIONER COX'S AMENDMENT TO HIS MOTION.
SO DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THOSE ADDITIONAL PROHIBITED USES? SO I, WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER AZAR.
UH, DO WE NEED ANY DISCUSSION HERE ABOUT THIS AMENDMENT COMMISSIONER? OKAY, JUST, SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY, I, I LOST TRACK HERE.
SO THESE ARE JUST ADDING AND REMOVING ONE PROHIBITED USES FROM THE ORIGINAL LIST THAT I PUT TOGETHER.
THESE ARE ADDING UP MORE ADDITIONAL PROHIBITED USES TO THE ONES THAT YOU READ INTO YOUR MOTION.
IT'S AN AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE LIST, SO, OKAY.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THOSE? ALL RIGHT.
ANY OPPOSITION TO ADDING THOSE ON? UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, I, I JUST HAVE A, A GENERAL DISLIKE FOR CREATING COMPLICATED COS WITH A LONG LIST OF, OF USES THAT AREN'T NEVER GONNA HAPPEN.
NO ONE IS GOING TO SPEND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON, ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND TURN IT INTO A RECYCLING DROP OFF CENTER OR, OR A BLOOD PLASMA CENTER.
AND, AND I JUST SOMETIMES WONDER IF WE SPEND TOO MUCH TIME COMPLICATING OUR CODE FOR THINGS THAT AREN'T GOING TO HAPPEN.
SO, COMMISSION THOMPSON, DO YOU WANNA BE SEEN AS VOTING IN OPPOSITION OF THIS? OKAY.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON IS, UM, IN A POSITION, ANY OTHERS IN OPPOSITION OF THE, UH, ADDITIONAL PROHIBITED USES? OKAY, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND MOVE THAT AS PASSING, UH, THE AMENDMENT, UH, TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
SO LET'S GO AND VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL.
I DON'T THINK, DID WE GET THROUGH ALL THE FOREIGN AGAINST? WE DID NOT.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION? I'VE SPOKEN ENOUGH ON THIS.
DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER DOES IT WANNA SPEAK AGAINST THE MOTION? ANY ADDITIONAL WANNA SPEAK FOR? ALL RIGHT.
DO WE HAVE, UM, LET'S GO AND TAKE A, A WELL, LET'S MAKE IT EASY.
DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, COMMISSIONERS THAT WANNA VOTE IN OPPOSITION OF CHAIR? YES.
UM, CAN WE COUNT THE VOTE? I, I, MAYBE I'M BEING WEIRD HERE, BUT I DON'T LIKE THE WHOLE, WE'RE JUST GONNA PASS IT UNLESS SOMEONE ELSE SPEAKS UP.
UH, THOSE ON THE DIOCESE, UH, VOTING IN FAVOR, THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX IN BY COMMISSIONER MOTO.
AND THIS WAS, THIS IS APPLICANT REQUEST, UH, WITH THE COS THAT WE JUST IDENTIFIED AND THE IC LIMIT OF 80%.
UH, SO EVERYBODY'S CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.
OKAY, LET'S, UH, THOSE VOTING IN FAVOR, THIS MOTION AND THE NPA, THE, YES, THE NPA AND THE ZONING CASE.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, PLEASE SHOW ME YOUR HANDS.
UM, SEEING THIS, EVERYONE ON THE DIAS AND, OH, THAT'S ALL GREEN, SO THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
THIS ONE WILL TAKE A LITTLE WHILE.
[14. Site Plan: SP-2022-0852C - 62 East Avenue; District 9]
YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE US, UH, BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM?[00:55:13]
GOOD EVENING PLANNING COMMISSION.MY NAME IS ZACH LOFTON AND I'M WITH THE URBAN DESIGN TEAM IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
AND THE ITEM THAT I HAVE FOR YOU TONIGHT IS FOR A DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS REQUEST, WHICH EXCEEDS THE PROGRAM'S ADMINISTRATIVE ALLOWANCE OF 15 TO ONE F A R IN THE RAINY STREET SUBDISTRICT IN DOWNTOWN.
SO THIS PROJECT IS 62 EAST AVENUE WITH A CASE NUMBER OF S P 20 22 0 8 5 2 C, AND THE APPLICANT IS THE GENERAL GROUP.
AND SO FOR THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 53 STORY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING, WHICH WILL INCLUDE 10 UNITS OF ONSITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, GARAGE PARKING, AND STREET SCAPE IMPROVEMENTS.
AND THROUGH LDC SECTION 25 2 5 86 B SIX, THE APPLICANTS REQUESTING FROM CITY COUNCIL ADDITIONAL BONUS AREA FROM 15 TO ONE TO 29 TO ONE F A R FOR THIS PROJECT.
AND SO, AS YOU, YOU ALL ARE FAMILIAR TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, APPLICANTS ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE GATE, UH, GATEKEEPER REQUIREMENTS.
AND SO FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, THEY'RE GOING TO MEET THE THREE GATEKEEPER REQUIREMENTS THROUGH GREAT STREETS FEE AND LIEU.
SO THIS PROJECT IS ON TECH DOT RIGHT OF WAY, AND SO IT'S PRECLUDED FROM, YOU KNOW, DOING THE GREAT STREETS IMPROVEMENT.
SO IN LIEU OF THAT, THEY'RE GONNA PAY A FEE, THEY'RE GONNA MEET THE AUSTIN ENERGY GREEN BUILDING, TWO STAR RATING, AND IT'S SHOWN THAT IT WILL ALSO COMPLY WITH THE URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES.
AND SO, SPECIFICALLY FROM A BONUS AREA STANDPOINT, THE APPLICANTS PROPOSING TO ACHIEVE THE BONUS AREA THROUGH THE FOLLOWING MEANS FROM 40 FEET TO EIGHT TO ONE F A R.
THEY'RE GONNA PROVIDE ONSITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR 5% OF THE BONUS AREA, TOTALING 3,487 SQUARE FEET AND FOUR UNITS AS REQUIRED BY THE RAINY STREET SUBDISTRICT REGULATIONS.
AND THEN FROM EIGHT TO ONE TO 15 TO ONE, THEY'RE GONNA PAY $298,550 IN FEES IN LIEU.
AND THEY'RE GONNA TARGET A THREE STAR, UM, AUSTIN ENERGY GREEN BUILDING RATING.
AND THEN FROM 15 TO ONE TO 29 TO ONE F A R, WHICH IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FROM COUNCIL.
UH, THEY'RE GONNA PROVIDE ONSITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR 5% OF THE BONUS AREA, TOTALING 5,985 SQUARE FEET AND SIX UNITS.
AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO GONNA PAY $510,000 IN FEES IN LOOP.
AND SO THAT'LL TOTAL 9,472 SQUARE FEET AND 10 UNITS OF ONSITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ALL FEES TOTALING $808,550 WE PAID INTO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND.
AND SO WITH THIS, THE APPLICANT HAS MET THE CODE REQUIREMENT TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT'S REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE ADMINISTRATIVE F A R ALLOWANCE FOR COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
AND SO FROM A STAFF RECOMMENDATION STANDPOINT, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR BONUS AREA ABOVE WHAT IS ALLOWED ADMINISTRATIVELY BY 25,000 200 586
I'LL BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS TO APPLICANTS HERE AS WELL AS SOME, SOME FOLKS TO SPEAK.
WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR FIVE MINUTES.
HELLO, COMMISSIONERS, I'M LEAH BOJO WITH JENNER GROUP HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, ZACH DID A GREAT JOB, SO I'M JUST GONNA GO THROUGH IT QUICKLY AND THEN I'M MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE, AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
UM, THE CYTO ZONE, C D AS YOU KNOW, IT'S CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND IT'S ONLY ACCESS IS OFF OF EAST AVENUE.
UM, JUST TO SITUATE YOU IN THE, IN THE DENSITY BONUS AREA, YOU CAN SEE HERE WHERE WE'RE LOCATED IN DOWNTOWN, AGAIN, RIGHT UP ON EAST AVENUE ON THE EASTERN EDGE.
UM, HERE'S A RENDERING OF THE BUILDING AND A, AND A SORT OF A SUMMARY OF WHAT ZACK DESCRIBED, THAT WE CAN GET UP TO 15 TO ONE F A R, AN UNLIMITED HEIGHT.
ADMINISTRATIVELY, WE'RE HERE TO REQUEST 29 TO ONE F A R.
UM, THE MAIN REASON FOR THAT BEING THIS IS AN EXTRAORDINARILY SMALL SITE.
IT'S UNDER 12,000 SQUARE FEET.
UM, HERE YOU HAVE SORT OF AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT.
UM, AGAIN, JUST UNDER 12,000 SQUARE FEET, WE'RE LOOKING AT 57 STORIES, UM, AND IT WOULD WE'LL END UP BEING 215 MULTI-FAMILY, MULTI-FAMILY UNITS.
[01:00:01]
FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, UM, WITH THE URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES, THE GREAT STREET STANDARDS, THE AUSTIN ENERGY GREENS BUILDING TWO STAR, WHICH WE'LL ACTUALLY AIMING FOR THREE STARS.UM, AND THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS, WHICH IS A, A MIX OF ONSITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND A FI IN LIEU.
HERE WE HAVE SOME RENDERINGS OF THE PROJECT.
I'LL JUST WALK YOU THROUGH IT QUICKLY.
YOU CAN SEE WHAT OUR STREET SCAPE LOOK LIKE BECAUSE WE ARE ON I 35.
WE'LL BE, WE'LL BE USING THE FEE IN LIEU OPTION FOR GREAT STREETS.
UM, BUT WE DID, UM, SET THE BUILDING BACK AT THE FRONT LEVEL AT THE FIRST LEVEL TO TRY TO CREATE, UM, SORT OF A SEATING AREA AND PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AREA, UH, IN SPITE OF TECH DOTS REGULATIONS.
HERE YOU CAN SEE FRONT ON WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE THERE ON THE FRONT DOOR.
HERE'S WHAT THE GROUND FLOOR LOOKS LIKE.
WE, WE WERE ABLE TO FIT EVERYTHING BACK OF HOUSE ON THE ALLEY SIDE, UM, WHICH WAS FORTUNATE.
AND THEN YOU CAN ALSO SEE THERE THAT SEATING AREA INSIDE THE PROPERTY LINE ON EAST AVENUE.
THIS IS A 70 OTHER THAN THE DRIVEWAY, THAT'S A 72 FEET OF FRONTAGE.
UH, HERE'S WHAT THAT SEATING AREA LOOKS LIKE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.
WE'RE USING, UM, A YON HOLLY FOR OUR TREE PER THE DESIGN COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION.
WE WILL BE, UH, WE WILL BE INSTALLING EV CHARGING STATIONS AS WELL AS, UM, UM, COLLECTING CONDENSATE AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO HERE'S PROBABLY THE SLIDE YOU'RE MOST INTERESTED IN.
I TRIED TO BREAK IT UP TO JUST SHOW THE DIFFERENT LAYERS OF THE, OF THE HOUSING AND THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS SINCE WE'RE DOING IT ALL THROUGH, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND GREEN BUILDING.
SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT ZAC DESCRIBED UP TO EIGHT TO ONE F A R IS THE RAINY DISTRICT PROGRAM, EIGHT TO ONE TO 15 TO ONE IS THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAM.
UM, SO THE FIRST, THE EIGHT TO ONE LAYER PROVIDES FOUR UNITS OF ONSITE, WHICH IS 5%.
UM, THE MIDDLE LAYER THERE FROM EIGHT TO 15, UM, RESULTS IN A BONUS FEE OF $298,500.
AND THEN THE TOP LAYER THAT WE'RE ASKING, WE'RE HERE ASKING YOU FOR, AND WE'LL BE ASKING COUNSEL FOR, AND WE DO OUR BEST TO MIMIC THE RAINY PROGRAM.
IT DOESN'T QUITE FIT IN EXACTLY, BUT WE BASICALLY DO 5% OF THE UNIT SPACE AS ON SITE AND THEN PAY A FEE FOR THE REMAINDER, UM, OF THE, OF THE BUILDING.
SO THIS WILL RESULT TOTAL IN 10 UNITS, SIX OF WHICH ARE THAT ADDITIONAL BONUS AREA, AND 510,000 OF WHICH IS THAT ADDITIONAL BONUS AREA.
UM, AND WITH THAT, I WILL MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE REGISTERED SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, BEGINNING WITH MS. MARGARET DELANEY.
MS. DELANEY ON THE TELECONFERENCE, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
SELECT STARS SIX, AND BEGIN YOUR REMARKS.
HELLO, MY NAME IS MARGARET DELANEY.
UM, A FEW WEEKS AGO, DELANEY, MS. DELANEY, MY APOLOGIES TO FOR THE INTERRUPTION, BUT IF YOU COULD GET CLOSER TO THE, UH, MICROPHONE ON, ON YOUR TELEPHONE.
UH, WE'RE HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF HARD TIME HEARING YOUR, OKAY.
HOW'S THAT? IS THAT GOOD? I'M AFRAID IT'S STILL THE SAME.
OKAY, I'M GONNA TAKE YOU OFF WITH MY MICROPHONE AND PUT YOU ON, UH, I DUNNO WHY.
IS THAT BETTER? MUCH BETTER, THANK YOU.
A FEW WEEKS AGO, THE RAINY STREET ASSOCIATION, UH, THE RAINY STREET NEIGHBORHOOD MET WITH Z QUADRI AND, UM, SELECT MEMBERS OF THE AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AT A TOWN MEETING.
AND AT THAT MEETING, THEY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT, UM, MOBILITY IS, I QUOTE, A CHALLENGE OR SAFE MOBILITY IS A CHALLENGE AND ASSURED US THAT THEY WOULD WORK WITH US TO MEET THIS CHALLENGE.
A FEW WEEKS LATER, WE GET A NOTIFICATION THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AN INCREASE IN THE A R ON 62 EAST AND IT, IT LOOKS LIKE A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING, BUT WE ARE ASKING YOU TO TAKE SOME THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION THAT I DON'T THINK YOU ARE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION.
THIS IS, UM, A RATIO OF, UH, 29 TO ONE ON AN 11,892 SQUARE FOOT LOT SET BETWEEN RIVER STREET REV RESIDENCES, UM, WITH 377 UNITS AND THE CAMBRI HOTEL WITH GUESTS CHECKING IN AND OUT.
THIS WILL BRING THE BUILDING TO 53 FLOORS AND 229 UNITS.
EACH ONE OF THOSE UNITS WILL HAVE ONE CAR, PERHAPS MOST, UM, PERHAPS TWO.
THIS RATIO IS HIGHER THAN ANYTHING IN NEW YORK CITY.
AND NEW YORK CITY HAS AN INTEGRATED BUS AND SUBWAY SYSTEM WHEN MAKING DECISION, I'M WONDERING IF THE BOARD IS TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF ALL THE, THE, UM, HIGH RISES AND THE CONSTRUCTION AND THE WIDENING OF I 35 ON
[01:05:01]
THE NARROW SHORT STREETS OF RAINY STREET WITH A HANDFUL OF EGRESS AND E AND INGRESS.THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING IS ALSO ON A, WHAT IS NOW A ONE-WAY STREET.
WITHIN THIS SCENARIO, WE HAVE UBER AND LYFTS STOPPING AT RANDOM IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET TO DROP OFF PASSENGERS.
UM, I'M HAVING DIFFICULTY FINDING, UH, JUSTIFICATION FOR ADDING MORE DENSITY.
UM, I'D LIKE TO, UM, GIVE YOU SOME OF THE JUSTIFICATIONS THAT WE HAVE HAD, UM, OVER THE YEARS ON RAINY STREET FOR DOING THIS.
NUMBER ONE, RAINEY STREET IS A WALKABLE COMMUNITY.
YES, WE ARE A WALKABLE COMMUNITY IF YOU WANT BEVERAGES OR PIZZA OR TACOS.
HOWEVER, WE NEED TO LEAVE THE COMMUNITY TO GO FOOD SHOPPING, TO GET MEDICAL CARE, TO GO TO A DRUG STORE OR TO SHOP FOR PERSONAL OR HOME IDS.
WE LOVE OUR ROYAL BLUES, BUT THEY'RE NOT MEANT FOR, FOR, UM, WEEKLY SHOPPING.
MOST PEOPLE WILL NOT BE COATING A WEEK'S WORTH OF GROCERIES UNDER THE 35 BRIDGE AND A LONG FRONTAGE ROAD TO GET TO TARGET OR WHOLE FOODS, WHICH ARE OUR NEAREST STORES.
NUMBER TWO, RAINY STREET IS NEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.
YES, WE ARE NEAR, UM, BUSES AND LIGHT RAIL.
HOWEVER, THE LIGHT RAIL DOES NOT GO SOUTH.
IT DOES NOT GO TO THE AIRPORT.
IT DOES NOT CONNECT TO NEEDED SHOPPING AREAS, NOR MEDICAL BUILDINGS.
BUS TRANSPORTATION IS NOT ESPECIALLY EFFICIENT AND IT CAN TAKE HOURS TO GET TO AND SEVERAL CHANGES TO GET TO YOUR DESTINATION.
NUMBER NUMBER THREE IS OFTEN NEEDS HOUSING.
HOWEVER, BEFORE BUILDING, THERE SHOULD BE A COMPREHENSIVE TRAFFIC STUDY, AN INDEPENDENT COMPREHENSIVE TRAFFIC STUDY OF, OF THE PROPOSED BILL OF THE PROPOSED AREA, THE PROPOSED BUILDING, AND THE ENTIRE AREA.
UNTIL NOW, WE HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCT, UH, CONSTRUCTION IN THIS AREA HAS BEEN APPROVED AND IT'S BEEN BUILT, AND NOW WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO FOR SAFE TRANSPORTATION.
ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS WAS TOLD BY A CITY PLANNER, NOT, UM, I THINK A FEW WEEKS AGO THAT TRAFFIC WAS NOT A CONSIDERATION.
PEOPLE IN THESE HOMES THAT WE ARE BUILDING THE BEAUTIFUL HOMES THAT WE'RE BUILDING NEED TO BE ABLE TO TRAVEL IN AND OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
I KNOW I SPEAK FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND ASKING YOU TO PLANT INFRASTRUCTURE AND FAITH MOBILITY BEFORE PLANNING ANY OTHER DENSITY IN OUR, UH, BUILDING OR DENSITY.
A TRAFFIC STUDY WOULD BE A GOOD FIRST STEP BEFORE ADDING FURTHER DENSITY TO AN ALREADY PROBLEMATIC SITUATION.
UM, I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU'RE PLANNING TO DO THIS, AND IF NOT, WHY.
WILL NOT HEAR FROM STEVEN EMRICK, FOLLOWED BY FRANCIS CAHILL.
MR. EMRICK, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M, UH, A RESIDENT OF, UH, TOWERS OF TOWN LAKES.
UM, YOU'RE GONNA HEAR FROM OTHERS IN OPPOSITION, UH, MANY MESSAGES AND, UH, SIMILAR TO MR. DELANEY'S THAT, UH, IDENTIFY, UH, THE EXCESSIVE FAR DENSITIES OF THIS BUILDING, UH, RELATIVE TO REASONABLE NORMS IN AUSTIN, THROUGHOUT THE US AND INTERNATIONALLY, GIVEN OTHER PROXIMATE DEVELOPMENTS EXHIBITING SIMILAR EXCESSES AS THIS BUILDING THAT'S UNDER CONSIDERATION.
UM, I, UH, AND THE RESULTING CONSEQUENCES TO SAFETY AND QUALITY OF LIFE EXISTING AND, UH, BA DUE TO EXISTING AND PLANNED TRAFFIC BANDWIDTH LIMITATIONS WITHIN THE RAINY DISTRICT.
UM, I'M USING MY TIME TO SPEAK MORE BROADLY TO ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO HALT ALL NEW F A R OVERRIDES, UH, IN THE, IN THE SAME CONTEXT, UH, AS THE PRESENT ONE FOR 62 TO 64 EAST STREET.
I'M ASKING YOU TO STAND UP PROF.
OH, I'M ASKING YOU TO STAND UP PROFESSIONALLY TO TAKE SERIOUSLY THE NEED TO HONESTLY APPRAISE THE RAINY DISTRICT'S REASONABLE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS.
IF THIS REQUIRES DEVISING WITHIN THE CITY COUNCIL AND AND MAYOR'S OFFICE, A BROADER, MORE DIVERSE ARRAY OF BUDGETING AND FUNDING MECHANISMS FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING TO AUS IN AUSTIN, THEN THOSE CURRENTLY JUSTIFYING RE JUSTIFYING RENNE OVERDEVELOPMENT, THEN I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO TAKE UP THAT PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AS INTEGRAL TO THE, UH, RESPONSIBLE PLANNING FUNCTION TO MEET THE NEED OF ALL NEEDS OF ALL AUSTIN RESIDENTS AND OF SAFE TRANS TRANSPORTATION WITHIN THE RAINY DISTRICT.
UH, IF THERE'S ANY CONCERN THAT WE, THAT I DON'T SUPPORT, UH, AFFORDABLE
[01:10:01]
HOUSING, UH, I DO SUPPORT IT.UH, I SUPPORT PUBLIC FUNDING AND PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS SUCH AS WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED FOR THIS BUILDING.
UM, AND I COME BY THAT SUPPORT, HONESTLY.
MY GRANDFATHER WAS HERBERT EMRICK, WHO WORKED TO DEVELOP PUBLIC HOUSING IN CHICAGO DURING THE DEPRESSION, WAS THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE FEDERAL PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY UNDER OUR FDR DURING WORLD WAR II, WHICH WAS THE PREDECESSOR OF HUD AND WHO FOR 13 YEARS AFTER THE WAR, WAS DIRECTOR OF THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SERVICE IN CHICAGO FOR HOUSING, WHICH ACTED AS A CLEARING HOUSE FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS FOR NEW BLACK IMMIGRANTS FROM THE SOUTH AND ETHNICALLY DIVERSE ARRIVALS FROM ALL OVER, HAVING JUST REREAD SOME OF MY GRANDFATHER'S WRITINGS ON ACHIEVING SY SYSTEMATIC SCIENTIFIC AFFORDABLE HOUSING JUST BEFORE THIS MEETING, I IMAGINE HE'S TURNING HIS GRAVE AT THE REALITY OF MASSIVE OVERDEVELOPMENT IN LESS THAN A TINY FRACTION OF A SQUARE MILE IN THE RAINY DISTRICT TO ACHIEVE FUNDING OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACROSS THE CITY.
AGAIN, I I, I DO SUPPORT, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRONGLY, BUT, UH, UH, BUT I I ASK YOU FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THESE CONCERNS.
THANK, YOU'LL NOW HEAR FROM FRANCIS CA HILL, FOLLOWED BY BONNIE CA HELD EACH WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES EVENING.
I'VE LIVED IN THE RAINY STREET NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 30 YEARS.
UH, I THINK THE PLANS PRESENTED ARE VERY GOOD, BUT THEY'RE LACKING IN ONE THING AS ALL PREVIOUS PLANS HAVE.
THEY DON'T SHOW WHERE THE MATERIAL IS GONNA BE STAGED OR WHERE ALL THE WORKERS ON THE CONSTRUCTION ARE GONNA PARK.
AND THE CHAMBER THAT RATHER THE COUNCIL, THE TOWN COUNCIL HAS BEEN ENDEAVORING TO GET THIS SETTLED EIGHT YEARS AGO.
THEY REQUESTED PLANNERS TO PUT DOWN WHERE THE WORKERS WOULD PARK THEIR CARS.
OF COURSE, PARKING CARS FLIES IN THE FACE OF OUR POLICY OF TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO WALK TO USE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND TO, UH, USE A BICYCLE.
WHERE AM I GOING WITH THIS? THE RAINY STREET NEIGHBORHOOD IS PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE NOW, AND THAT INCLUDES EAST AVENUE WHERE WE'RE, WE'RE PROPOSED TO PUT UP A NEW BUILDING.
UH, AGAIN, MY COLLEAGUE SPOKE ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'RE GONNA BE FIVE OR SIX HOUSES AS A RESULT OF THIS, AND THIS SEEMS TO BE A BIG PUSH, NOT TO ME.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS NOT A MAJOR ISSUE WITH ME.
IT'S AFFORDABLE FOOD, IT'S AFFORDABLE TRANSPORTATION, IT'S AFFORDABLE CLOTHING, IT'S AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE FOR YOUNG PEOPLE.
I WOULD NOT SAY BEN OUT PUBLIC HOUSING, AND I THINK SOME OF THE PEOPLE IN THE CI IN THE CITY ADMINISTRATION HAVE DONE THAT.
I THINK WE OUGHT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE TOTAL ECONOMY THAT'S NECESSARY FOR ALL OF OUR CITIZENS.
WILL NOW HEAR FROM BONNIE CAHILL, FOLLOWED BY EVE HOZ.
MS. CAHILL, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
YOU'RE GONNA HEAR ANOTHER PLEA FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY.
UM, THE NEW YORK TIMES SEVERAL MONTHS AGO HAD AN ARTICLE ABOUT AUSTIN IN THE PAPER AND A SPECIFICALLY AT THE RAINY STREET IN EAST AVENUE, AND THEY SAID THAT GEOGRAPHIC FOOTPRINT WILL BE THE MOST HIGHLY DENSE POPULATION AREA IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY WHEN IT'S BUILT OUT.
NOW, WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY PROGRESS AS FAR AS TRYING TO GET PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S HARD TO GET CAR CARS IN AND OUT.
BUILDINGS ARE GOING UP THAT ARE 50 STORIES.
WE HAVE ONE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM OUR HOUSE, THE FIRST NINE FLOORS.
WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY ARE? THEY'RE PARKING.
SO THE NEXT BUILDING NEXT TO IT, THE FIRST EIGHT FLOORS WE'RE PARKING.
SO PEOPLE ARE NOT LEAVING THEIR CARS AT HOME AND THEY ARE DRIVING THEM.
SO I WOULD REALLY JUST, UH, SAY THAT YOU DON'T GIVE THESE VARIANCES UNTIL YOU HAVE SOMETHING IN MIND
[01:15:01]
FOR HOW PEOPLE ARE GOING TO PARK, GET AROUND AND LIVE IN THIS AREA.IT'S MADE IT REALLY VERY UNTENABLE.
AND WITH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION COMING UP AGAIN, I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT HOW IT'S AFFECTED THE RESIDENTS.
RIGHT NOW, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THE CITY IS BEING GOVERNED BY DEVELOPERS WITH VERY LITTLE OF ATTENTION BEING GIVEN TO THE RESIDENTS AND THE TAXPAYERS AND THE VOTERS.
SO THAT'S MY THREE MINUTE PLEA.
PLEASE GIVE US SOME HELP WITH THIS.
YOU WILL NOW HEAR FROM MR. E, OR NOW I'LL HEAR FROM EVE HARZ, FOLLOWED BY DR.
UM, I THINK THAT WE SHARE THE GOAL OF ACHIEVING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THROUGHOUT, UH, THROUGHOUT AUSTIN.
THE ISSUE IS THAT THE CONTINUED VARIANCES FOR F A R AND THE RAINY STREET DISTRICT ARE HAVING A DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT, AND I TOO WOULD ASK, UM, FOR A PAUSE ON FURTHER DEVELOPMENT UNTIL THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE, UH, RECENTLY ADOPTED CAPITAL DOMINANCE OVERLAY OVERRIDE MAY MORE EQUITABLY DISTRIBUTE THE DEVELOPMENT, YOU KNOW, HIGH RISE DEVELOPMENTS TO SUPPORT, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING THROUGHOUT THE CITY, AND CERTAINLY IN AREAS WHERE THERE IS GREATER ACCESS TO TRANSPORTATION, TO LIGHT RAIL, UH, TO OTHER SERVICES, UH, IN ORDER THAT WE AS A WHOLE COMMUNITY CAN SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS OPPOSED TO THE, UM, UNUSUAL AND DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT THAT IT'S HAVING ON THE RAINY STREET DISTRICT IN TERMS OF THE EXCESSIVE, UM, DENSITY AND, UH, TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
ANN MARIE ALICE FOR ONE MINUTE, FOLLOWED BY MR. ROGERS.
I LIVE IN THE TOWERS OF TOWN LIKE CONDOMINIUM AND FOUNDED BY EAST AVENUE ON THE WEST SIDE.
WHEN I MOVED THERE SIX YEARS AGO, THERE WERE SMALL WOODEN STRUCTURES LINING THAT ROAD.
SUBSEQUENTLY, THIS COMMISSION APPROVED THAT 12 FEET OF THE ROADWAY BE TAKEN AWAY FOR DEVELOPMENT.
NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A VERY NARROW ROAD THAT IS SOMETIMES COMPLETELY IMPASSABLE AS A TWO-WAY STREET.
WILL AN AMBULANCE OR A FIRETRUCK BE ABLE TO REACH US IN AN EMERGENCY? IT HAVE TO PLOT THROUGH DISJOINTED ROADS THAT CHARACTERIZE THE AREA WHO WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE WHEN LIFE GIVING, SAVING HELP CAN'T REACH US IN A TIMELY WAY.
IT WILL BE YOU WHO MAKE THIS DECISION.
I AM ASKING THAT A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY BE CONDUCTED IN THE RAINY STREET NEIGHBORHOOD.
BE BEFORE ANY ACTION ON THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. ROGERS, FOLLOWED BY MR. OMEGA OR, OR HAGAN FOR ONE MINUTE EACH.
I'M AN OWNER OF RESIDENT IN THE RAINEY STREET DISTRICT.
I'M TOO AM ASKING THAT THERE BE A TRAFFIC STUDY DONE BEFORE THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED THERE.
THERE'RE CURRENTLY FIVE BUILDINGS UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITH APPROVED VARIANCES IN THE RAINEY STREET DISTRICT.
THAT'S GONNA DRAMATICALLY CHANGE THE POPULATION OF THIS VERY SMALL AREA.
UH, I THINK ASKING FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY BE CONDUCTED, ONE HAS NOT BEEN CONDUCTED PREVIOUSLY BEFORE THE OTHER VARIANCES WERE GRANTED IS A RATIONAL AND REASONABLE REQUEST.
UH, THERE'S CONCERNS FOR SAFETY, HEALTH VEHICLES, AMBULANCES, POLICE CARS CURRENTLY HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING IN AND OUT.
CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT IT'LL BE LIKE WHEN THE CURRENT BUILDINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED ARE COMPLETED MUCH LESS? THIS ONE MORE ADDITION.
I'M REQUESTING WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER A VERY REASONABLE REQUEST THAT A TRAFFIC STUDY BE CONDUCTED.
ONE HAS NOT BEEN DONE TO MY KNOWLEDGE IN THE LAST 25 YEARS.
SO BEFORE ANY MORE VARIANCES ARE GRANTED, CAN WE PLEASE DISCOVER WHAT KIND OF IMPACT THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO SUFFER FROM? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. GAN, UM, FOLLOWED BY THE NEXT TELE SPEAKER.
MR. BRIAN, FOR LONG EACH WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE.
I'M ALSO A RESIDENT OF THE TOWERS OF TOWN LAKE.
UM, AND I'M HERE BECAUSE I'M CONCERNED LIKE EVERYONE ELSE'S, ABOUT HOW THE QUALITY OF OUR LIFE IS ERODING AND HOW WE ARE ANTICIPATING MORE TRAFFIC SAFETY, UM, ISSUES.
UM, UM, AS PEOPLE HAVE TALKED TO ABOUT BEFORE, WE'VE GOT MAJOR CITIES LIKE SINGAPORE, TOKYO, NEW YORK CITY, THEIR DENSITIES, UH, THEIR, I'M SORRY, THEIR FAR RATIOS
[01:20:01]
ARE NOTHING LIKE WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.THEY'RE LOWER THAN WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE.
I'M FULLY IN SUPPORT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
MAYBE SOME OTHER AREA OF AUSTIN COULD, UM, COULD HELP IN THIS WAY.
UM, LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT UNDERWAY.
UM, I CAN ONLY IMAGINE HOW MUCH MORE CONGESTED IT'S GOING TO BE WHEN WHAT'S PLANNED AND WHAT'S CURRENTLY UNDERWAY IS REALITY BECAUSE WE DON'T, AS SOMEONE SAID EARLIER, WE DON'T HAVE AN AREA TO GO AND DO OUR SHOPPING.
UM, SO LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, I'M JUST ASKING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR TRAFFIC STUDY BEFORE ANY APPROVAL IS GRANTED.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. BRIAN FUR LONG, FOLLOWED BY SUSANNA CARRANZA, BOTH ON THE TELECONFERENCE.
SELECT STAR SIX PROCEEDING AT YOUR MARKS.
UH, THE FLORIDA RATIO IN NEW YORK, WHICH IS THE PLACE IN THE UNITED STATES, IS LIMITED BY LAW TO 12.
THE HIGHEST RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IS 10 FOR FOUR INCENTIVES FROM TOKYO.
IT'S 13 SAN FRANCISCO, NINE LA 13 HONG KONG 10.
WE'RE PROPOSING THE HIGHEST DENSITY IN THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES AND PROBABLY THE HIGHEST DENSITY IN THE WORLD.
AND REGARDING THIS, WITH NO TRAFFIC STUDY, THE DENSITY OF 908 UNITS, WHICH WAS, WHICH, WHICH, WHICH WAS PROVED THAT AN 80 RAINY IS NOW BEING SEATED BY IT.
IT IS ALMOST BEING MATCHED BY 839 UNITS PER ACRE AT THIS PROPERTY.
1,214 UNITS AT 90 92, RAINY, THE TALLEST BUILDING IN THE WORLD AT RIVER, RIVER ROAD, AND C CHAVEZ.
AND SO WE'RE DOING THIS WITH NO TRAFFIC STUDY.
PEOPLE GOING TO DIE BECAUSE AMBULANCES AND FIRETRUCK CAN'T MOVE.
WE'RE, WE'RE RUNNING AN EXPERIMENT HERE.
NEVER TRIED UNITED STATES IN TERMS OF DENSITY BEFORE, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS IGNORING THE TRAFFIC.
WE'LL, NOW HEAR AFFIRM MS. SUSANNA CARRANZA.
MS. KWANZA, YOU'LL HAVE ONE MINUTE FOLLOWED BY ROBIN.
AND THEN GLENN SCHAFFER QUESTION, I DON'T MIND, I DIDN'T INFORMATION LAST MINUTE.
I WAS WAITING FOR MS. CARRANZA.
IF, UH, YOU CAN, UH, GET CLOSER TO YOUR MICROPHONE, PLEASE.
WE'RE HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING MS. OKAY, MS. KZA, WE'RE GONNA COME BACK TO YOU AS YOU, UM, YOU JUST, UM, UM, GET CLOSER TO YOUR MICROPHONE AND WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM, UH, MS. UH, ROBIN SCHAFFER.
MS. SCHAFFER, YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.
UM, HELLO, MY NAME IS ROBIN SCHAFFER AND I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND MY HUSBAND GLENN.
WE LIVE AT THE MILAGO CONDOMINIUMS ON RAINEY STREET.
FIRST OF ALL, WE AGREE TOTALLY WITH THE OPPOSITION OF 62 RAINEY, A 62 EAST AVENUE PROPOSAL, AND WITH MARGARET'S DELANEY'S VOICE, THE ONGOING TRAFFIC MOBILITY ISSUES IN THE RAINEY STREET DISTRICT POSED A SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND QUALITY OF LIFE OF THE DISTRICT'S RESIDENCE.
THE PROPOSAL BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A DENSITY EXCEPTION WITHOUT A COMPLETE CUMULATIVE AND UNBIASED TRAFFIC STUDY IS IRRESPONSIBLE AND SHOULD BE REJECTED.
NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM FLY SHAVER FOR ONE MINUTE.
I SPOKE IN BEHALF ON BEHALF OF GLENN AND ROBIN FAVOR.
NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM, UH, RITA CHER.
PRESIDENT CHAMBERS, YOU'LL HAVE ONE MINUTE.
I AM RITA SHEER, AND I UNDERSTOOD THAT WHEN I MOVED TO THE TOWERS OF TOWN LAKE 12 YEARS AGO, THAT I WAS CHOOSING TO LIVE IN A HIGH DENSITY ZONE.
SINCE THEN, MANY BUILDINGS HAVE GONE UP, MOST, IF NOT ALL, OF THEM, WITH ZONING VARIANCES AND NO TRAFFIC STUDIES BEFORE THE VARIANCES WERE GRANTED.
OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE SEEN TRAFFIC CONGESTION
[01:25:01]
INCREASE DRAMATICALLY, AND I AM CONCERNED THAT EMERGENCY VEHICLES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO REACH MY BUILDING QUICKLY.I HOPE THAT A TRAFFIC STUDY CAN BE DONE BEFORE THIS BUILDING IS GRANTED A VARIANCE.
NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM, UH, YOU WANNA STARK ON THE TELECONFERENCE, MS. STARK, UH, SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
WELL, UM, NOW HERE FROM MS. SUSANNA CARRANZA, WE CAN TRY YOU AGAIN.
OKAY, WE'LL TRY, UM, MS. UH, JIMO STARK FIELD, SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR MARKS.
UM, MY NAME IS JAM STARK AND I'M A 15 YEAR RESIDENT OF RAINY STREET.
I'VE LIVED AT THE MALAGO THAT ENTIRE TIME, AND AS YOU CAN WELL IMAGINE, THE, UM, CHANGES ON RAINY STREET HAVE BEEN PRETTY DRAMATIC AND NOT FOR THE GOOD.
IF I CAN SEE IT AS FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN FOR RAINY STREET, UM, MY CONCERN IS OF COURSE, TRAFFIC DENSITY, UM, AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES AS THE PREVIOUS, UH, SPEAKER, UH, SPOKE ABOUT.
SO I WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO STOPPED THINKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPERS AND START THINKING ABOUT THE RESIDENTS OF, UH, THAT COMMUNITY.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT THERE'S NOTHING HISTORIC LEFT IN THE AREA.
SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY AND, UM, SPEED.
MS. CARRANZA, SELECT STAR SIX.
UH, I'M GENERALLY IN FAVOR OF HIGH DENSITY AS AN EFFICIENT WAY TO ACCOMMODATE A GROWING POPULATION.
HOWEVER, I BELIEVE HIGH DENSITY MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE TO ENSURE WE'RE NOT SOLVING A PROBLEM WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE OTHER PROBLEMS IS FREE.
WHILE WE'RE SEEING THE RAINY STREET NEIGHBORHOOD, IT ONLY FOCUSED IN THE DENSITY PART OF THE EQUATION.
WHILE THE POPULATION OF THE RAINY STREET NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SEEN EXPLOSIVE GROWTH IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE DID NOT HAVE MEANINGFUL ACCESS TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.
LIKE OUR NEAREST BUS STOP ON C IS REALLY LIMITED, AND THE TRAIN ROUTES ARE ALSO LIMITED AND DON'T GO EVERYWHERE.
THAT MEANS MOST OF OUR RESIDENTS REALLY RELY ON CARS TO GET IN AND OUT TO ALLOW SUCH DRASTIC INCREASE WITHOUT EVEN A STUDY AND WITHOUT PLANNING FOR FUTURE INFRASTRUCTURE IS REALLY RECKLESS.
WE NEED TO PUT DENSITY ALONG WITH TRANSPORTATION ACCESS.
WE WANT TO MAKE RAINEY STREET TRULY WALKABLE AND NOT JUST SOMETHING THAT CAN WALK THROUGH THE PARK, BUT WE HAVE NEED A CAR FOR EVERYTHING ELSE.
UM, I OPPOSE, UH, THE FAR VARIOUS.
AND I HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
I WOULD JUST, I WOULD JUST CLOSE BY SAYING THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENCE IN RAINY.
UM, I WOULD POINT OUT THAT OUR DEVELOPMENT WILL BE FACING EAST AVENUE, SO ALL CAR TRAFFIC WILL COME IN AND OUT THROUGH THE DRIVEWAY ON EAST AVENUE.
UM, BUT THAT, I THINK THAT ONE IMPORTANT STEP TOWARD MAKING AN AREA MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AND, AND SUSTAINABLE MODE FRIENDLY IS PROVIDING RESIDENTS IN A LOCATION LIKE THIS WHERE THEY CAN WALK AND BIKE TO USES THAT ARE NEARBY.
IF, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
AND MOTION TO, UH, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, COMMISSION MAXWELL
[01:30:01]
STATE ADVISED BY SIR HEMPLE.ANY OBJECTIONS CLOSING IN THE HEARING? ALL RIGHT.
UH, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, MOVE TO OUR NORMAL Q AND A.
WE'LL KEEP IT AT, UH, EIGHT AT FIVE FOR NOW.
UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? ANYONE? UH, LET'S START COMMISSION.
MU AND COX BOTH RAISED THEIR HAND THAN I DID, SO, OKAY.
I, I THINK I SAW MO COX, COMMISSIONER AZAR, AND THEN COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
SO WE'LL START WITH, UH, LET'S GO START WITH COMMISSIONER MOUCHEL TELLER.
UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE REMARKS OF THE, UM, PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATED TONIGHT IN THE HEARING.
I, UH, I KNOW WE HAVE, UM, MEMBERS OF OUR COMMISSION WHO ARE VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT OUR LAND CODE AND ISSUES WITH OUR LAND CODE.
I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WILL CONNECT WHATEVER WE CODE.
UM, AND SO I APPRECIATE THAT THEY BROUGHT THIS POINT OUT, AND I THINK IT'S, IT'S TELLING THAT WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF IT FROM NEIGHBORHOODS THAT OFTEN TAKE A LOT OF FLACK, AND YET, HERE'S A HIGH DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD ECHOING THE SAME SENTIMENTS.
WE NEED INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING.
UM, TO THAT EFFECT, THOUGH I KNOW THEY'RE LOOKING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO KIND OF MOVE THIS IN PARTICULAR ON THIS PROJECT.
SO I WAS HOPING THAT CITY STAFF MIGHT BE ABLE TO TAKE SOME OF MY TIME TO EXPLAIN THE PROCESS OF WHEN NTAS ARE REQUESTED, WHERE THEY COME INTO PLAY IN, UM, IN THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, AND, AND ALSO ANSWER WHY THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN'T ADJUDICATE THAT.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER.
THE FIRST THING I'LL SAY IS WE HAVE SOME TRANSPORTATION FOLKS HERE WHO CAN ANSWER, ANSWER SPECIFIC, SPECIFIC QUESTIONS RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION.
BUT I DID JUST WANNA MENTION AS A REMINDER THAT THE ITEM THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS EXCLUSIVELY TO LOOK AT INCREASING THE, YOU KNOW, OR ALLOWING GRANTING A REQUEST FOR INCREASE IN BONUS AREA FOR F A R AND THAT, AND THERE ARE SPECIFICS.
I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE FOLKS THAT SPOKE AND THE LISTENERS UNDERSTAND WHERE WE HAVE JURISDICTION ON THAT, RIGHT.
AND SO THAT ACTUAL ANALYSIS, THE TRANSPORTATION SPECIFIC ANALYSIS WILL COME DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
IT'S THE, THE, THE PROJECT IS CURRENTLY IN THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, BUT, UM, WHAT WE HAVE TONIGHT IS JUST ENTITLEMENTS THROUGH DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS.
AND THEN, IN TERMS OF THE PROJECT ITSELF, UM, MY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS HOW DO WE COME UP WITH THE DOLLAR FIGURE ON THE FEE LIEU? I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, IF I, IF I HEARD CORRECTLY AND, AND THE APPLICANT CORRECT CAN CORRECT ME, IS WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT 215 TOTAL UNITS OF WHICH A TOTAL OF 10 ON SITE WOULD BE AFFORDABLE, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE FEES IN LIEU.
AND I'M, I'M NOT SURE THOSE FEES GOT TO MORE THAN SEVEN OR $800,000.
UM, THE, THE WAY THE FEES ARE CALCULATED IS, UM, THERE WAS, AS YOU KNOW, THERE WAS RECENTLY A RECALIBRATION DONE, AND THE RAINY, UM, FEE STAYED AT $5 PER SQUARE FOOT FOR RESIDENTIAL.
SO THAT'S THE FEE THAT WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
UM, IN RAINY DISTRICT, IT'S CALCULATED BASED ON U SQUARE FOOTAGE OF UNIT, SO BASICALLY LIKE NET RENTABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO, UM, BOTH THE AREA FROM, UH, 40 FEET UP TO EIGHT TO ONE.
AND THEN THE BONUS AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, WERE CALCULATED USING THAT SAME FORMULA.
UM, WE, WE JUST BASE THE BONUS AREA ON THE RAINY SPECIFIC FORMULA.
SO BOTH OF THOSE, UM, WERE CALCULATED TO COME UP WITH A SQUARE FOOTAGE NUMBER, WHICH IS 9,400 AND SOMETHING, UM, WHICH EQUATES TO, UM, ABOUT 10 UNITS.
AND THE UNITS WOULD MATCH THE MIX OF THE OVERALL MARKET RATE UNITS, UM, PER THE RAINY REQUIREMENTS.
UH, I'M, MY NAME IS CURTIS BATTY WITH THE AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.
JUST WANTED TO ANSWER SOME OF YOUR COMMENTS, UM, ABOUT NTAS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
FIRST OF ALL, THE REASON THIS PROJECT DID NOT FALL UNDER N T A, THAT IS STRICTLY TO RESIDENTIAL ROADWAYS, AND THE EAST AVENUE DOES NOT QUALIFY AS A RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY.
AND THAT IS THE PRIMARY REASON WHY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DOES NOT REQUIRE N T A FOR THIS PROJECT.
ALSO, THE LDC REQUIRES A TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS.
WHEN A DEVELOPMENT GENERATES 2000 DAILY TRIPS OR MORE, BASED ON THE DENSITY THAT THIS PROJECT IS, UH, PROPOSING, IT DOES NOT GENERATE THAT AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC.
IT GENERATES A ROUGHLY 15 TO 1600 DAILY TRIPS.
[01:35:01]
NOT REQUIRED WITH THIS PROJECT AT THIS TIME.SO, UH, COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR NAME? WE MIGHT HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS.
I'M CURTIS SPADY WITH AUSTIN TRANSPORT TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AS OF THREE WEEKS AGO.
UH, NEXT WE HEAD COMMISSIONER COX, FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER ZA.
UM, I GUESS QUESTION FOR STAFF, UH, JUST TO CONFIRM, THEY WANT TO DOUBLE THE F A R ALLOWED AND THE BENEFIT WE'RE GETTING IN RETURN FOR THAT, WHICH I THINK STAFF DESCRIBED AS A SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY BENEFIT, IS THOSE SIX UNITS AT 80% MFI.
AND THEN I THINK I HEARD SOMETHING ABOUT A COUPLE OF YOON HOLLY FEES OR SOMETHING BEING PLANTED IS, IS THAT THE SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY BENEFIT TO DOUBLE THEIR F A R? SO COMMISSIONER, IT WOULD BE 10 UNITS TOTAL, UH, SPLIT UP FOUR FOR THE, UH, RAINY STREET REQUIREMENTS, AND THEN THE, THE SIX WOULD BE FOR THAT AREA FOR THE ADDITIONAL ASK ABOVE THE 15 TO ONE ADMINISTRATIVE ALLOWANCE.
AND THE REASON WE'RE HERE IS FOR THE ADDITIONAL ASK, RIGHT? YES.
AND, AND SO THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY BENEFITS TO DOUBLE THEIR F A R AND STAFF THINKS THAT THE SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY BENEFIT IS SIX AFFORDABLE UNITS AT 80% N M F I AND A COUPLE OF PLANTS.
$510,000 DOESN'T GET YOU A WHOLE LOT THESE DAYS.
BUT, UH, SO IN, IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY BENEFITS, DOES TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY NOT FACTOR INTO THAT? IS THAT NOT AN OPTION FOR Y'ALL TO LOOK AT? ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING WE'VE HAD A LOT OF ISSUES IN THIS AREA WITH PEDESTRIANS DYING
I MEAN, IS THAT, IS THAT NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU LOOK AT WHEN YOU THINK OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS? SO THAT'S NOT WHAT, THAT'S NOT WHAT SECTION, UH, 25,000 200 586 DEFINES THIS COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT COMMUNITY BENEFITS, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
IT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THERE AREN'T, YOU KNOW, CONCERNS WITH, WITH TRANSPORTATION AND THOSE, THOSE ISSUES ARE GONNA BE RAISED DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FOLKS, UH, BUT, BUT HOLD, BUT HOLD ON A SECOND.
YOU JUST TOLD US WE WERE IN THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
SO WE'RE IN THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
WHAT I HAVE FOR YOU TONIGHT IS NOT RELATED TO SITE PLAN.
SO SEPARATELY, IN ADDITION TO SITE PLAN, IT ALSO SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR A DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TONIGHT.
AND THAT'S, SO IF WE POKE, IF WE POSTPONE THIS FOR LET'S SAY A MONTH AND LET THE SITE PLAN PROCESS PLAY OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE, WILL WE HAVE MORE CLARITY RELATED TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, TRAFFIC SAFETY, THAT SORT OF THING, SINCE WE ARE IN THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, I WOULD SAY PROBABLY NOT WITHIN A MONTH.
THE SITE PLAN PROCESS TAKES, YOU KNOW, IT TAKES A GOOD CHUNK OF TIME UP TO A YEAR.
AND SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS IN A MONTH IS UNLIKELY.
UH, THE APPLICANT, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? WELL, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
THEY WANTED TO RESPOND, I THINK TO, IF I COULD JUST ADD A LITTLE, WELL, LET ME, LET ME IF GO AHEAD.
I CAN JUST, JUST ASK MY QUESTION AND THEN, CUZ I'M GONNA RUN OUTTA TIME IF I DON'T.
UM, UH, GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS, THE THREE STAR I'VE BEEN TOLD BY MANY DESIGN PROFESSIONALS THAT THREE STAR IS BASICALLY LIKE BASIC LEVEL WITH MODERN MATERIALS AND MODERN H VCS AND MODERN WATER SYSTEMS. UM, CAN, CAN YOU CONVINCE ME MAYBE THAT THAT GREEN BUILDING THREE STARS IS, IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT IS SPECIAL ANYMORE? UM, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE TECHNICALITIES OF TWO STAR VERSUS THREE STAR GREEN BUILDING, BUT WHAT I CAN SPEAK TO IS THAT THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT ARE REQUIRED THROUGH THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM ARE A FORMULA.
UM, AND SQUARE FOOTAGE IS ALLOTTED BASED ON A MENU OF ITEMS INCLUDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AT LEAST HALF OF YOUR COMMUNITY BENEFIT HAS TO BE VIA AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND THEN THE OTHER HALF CAN BE MADE UP OF OTHER THINGS, INCLUDING THE REST OF IT BEING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, EITHER ONSITE AND A FEE OR THREE STAR GREEN BUILDING AS OPPOSED TO TWO OR, OR A HANDFUL OF OTHER THINGS THAT GET USED LESS RE FREQUENTLY.
UM, SO WHEN TO TRY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION AND SORT OF THE QUESTION YOU ASKED EARLIER.
UM, THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT WE
[01:40:01]
ARE FOLLOWING ARE, ARE, ARE DETERMINED BY ORDINANCE.UM, THEY WERE RECALIBRATED LAST YEAR AND THAT FEE WAS TAKE, THEY TOOK A LOOK AT THAT FEE AND, AND THEY DID CHANGE IT IN OTHER PARTS OF DOWNTOWN, BUT IN RAINY IT STAYED THE SAME.
AND SO THAT'S HOW WE CAME TO THAT NUMBER.
UM, WE ALSO PAST STREET IMPACT FEES FOR TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER THINGS, BUT THAT'S HOW THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS NUMBER COMES HERE.
YEAH, I WAS ABOUT, I WAS ABOUT TO ASK, IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE CODE THAT'S PREVENTING YOU FROM INCLUDING LIKE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND TRAFFIC SAFETY WITH THOSE COMMUNITY BENEFITS? SO THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS IS THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS SPECIFIC THING.
ANY DEVELOPMENT AS, AS FAR AS I KNOW, UH, AND CERTAINLY ANYTHING, UM, DOWNTOWN WOULD ALSO HAVE TO PAY A STREET IMPACT FEE, WHICH WAS ALSO SORT OF RECENTLY APPROVED.
IT USED VIA T I A, I'M SURE CURTIS CAN SPEAK MORE ELOQUENTLY TO THIS, BUT NOW THERE'S A FEE PER UNIT FOR TRAFFIC MITIGATION, WHETHER OR NOT YOU DO A T I.
SO OUR BUILDING BUILDING WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THAT AS WELL, BUT I WOULDN'T CONSIDER THAT A COMMUNITY BENEFIT BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT EVERY DEVELOPMENT DOES.
THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT ARE SPECIFIC TO THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM THAT IN THE BUZZER RANG.
UM, LET'S GO ON TO COMMISSIONER ZA FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
UM, MR. BEATTY, I THINK THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
WE'RE ALSO GOING TO THE GREAT STREETS FI U AND SINCE THIS IS ON EAST AVENUE, THIS WOULD LIKELY BE PAYING, AND I THINK THIS WAS IN THE BACKUP AS WELL.
IT WOULD BE IF APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
THIS WOULD PROBABLY PAY FOR THE GREAT STREETS FIEN U THAT IS CORRECT.
DO WE HAVE ANY EXPECTATION OF HOW THE GREAT STREETS FI U IS GOING TO BE USED? IS IT GONNA BE GEOGRAPHICALLY LINKED? I DO NOT KNOW.
UM, I THINK IT WOULD BE GEOGRAPHICALLY LINKED TO EITHER THE RAINY AREA OR THE DOWN TAR AREA IN GENERAL.
UH, BUT THIS IS RELATION IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE EXPANSION OF THE I 35 AND TEXTILE IMPROVEMENTS.
AND SO THE IDEA IS TO USE IT, UH, IN SOME CAPACITY ALONG THAT AREA AND NOT DUE STRICTLY TO, TO OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE NO GEOGRAPHICAL MIXES.
SO THAT IT WOULD BE LIKELY THAT WE ACTUALLY MIGHT SEE SOME INVESTMENTS, NOT JUST WITH THIS PROJECT, BUT OTHER PROJECTS ALONG THERE.
UM, AND THEN THE, WE WOULD ALSO GET THE TRANSPORTATION FEES.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT AS WELL? YES.
UM, UM, AS THE APPLICANT INDICATED, UH, THIS PROJECT, AS OF ALL PROJECTS AS OF JUNE, 2022, YEAH, 22 AND TWO, UH, WILL BE APPLICABLE TO THE STREET IMPACT FEE, UM, BASED ON ITS LAND USES AND ITS INTENSITIES, IT WILL HAVE TO PAY A FEE.
UH, THERE ARE SOME DEDUCTIONS THAT CAN OCCUR DUE TO REDUCED PARKING, DUE TO SOME TRANSPORTATION, DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
ALSO, THE MORE, UH, AFFORDABLE UNITS THAT ARE BUILT ON SITE, THEY ALSO GIVE REDUCTION THERE.
UM, THERE'S VERY LITTLE IMPROVEMENTS THEY CAN BUILD ALONG THEIR FRONTAGE, AND SO PRETTY MUCH THEY WILL JUST WRITE A CHECK.
HAS THAT CALCULATION BEEN DONE ON THE POSSIBLE FEE? NO, IT HAS NOT BEEN DONE.
UM, THE STREET IMPACT FEE SHOWS THAT HAS DONE AT TIME AS SUBDIVISION OR, UH, PLATTING AND THAT HAS NOT OCCURRED YET.
SO THE ASSESSMENT HAS NOT BEEN MADE.
I APPRECIATE THAT AND I, I AM NOT SURE IF YOU'RE THE BEST PERSON TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION OR SOMEONE ELSE'S, BUT HOPEFULLY YOU CAN HELP ME UNDERSTAND.
WHEN WE'RE DOING THIS SITE PLAN, IS THERE ANY CONVERSATION WITH THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF WHAT STAGING MIGHT LOOK LIKE? CONSTRUCTION IMPACT? I KNOW FOR STREET CLOSURES WE DO THAT, BUT DO WE DO THAT OTHERWISE AS WELL? UH, WE DO NOT DO THAT EXPLICITLY.
WE ARE EXPLORING THE IDEA OF HAVING, WHEN A SITE PLAN COMES IN, THAT A APPLICANT WILL HAVE TO DO SOME TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION IMPACT STATEMENT TO INDICATE WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THEIR CONSTRUCTION ACCESS.
UH, ALL DEVELOPMENTS DO HAVE TO SUBMIT A TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY TIED TO THE SITE PLAN ITSELF.
JUST BECAUSE YOU GET A SITE PLAN PERMIT DOESN'T MEAN THE CONSTRUCTION HAPPENS WITHIN A COUPLE OF MONTHS.
IT COULD HAPPEN A COUPLE OF YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.
AND, UH, WE NEED TO REFLECT THE REAL TIME CONDITIONS AS THEY LOOK AT THEIR TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS.
SO, UM, YES, THEY WILL HAVE TO HAVE A TRAFFIC PUBLIC PLAN.
THEY WILL HAVE TO PULL THE NECESSARY PERMITS TO WORK IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, AND THAT INCLUDES ANY LANE CLOSURES, TEMPORARY OR LONG TERM.
UM, AND JUST TO RECONFIRM THAT WE WOULD STILL BE GOING THROUGH A TRAFFIC STUDY AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN WHEN IT IS MOVING THROUGH APPROVAL WITH ESSENTIALLY ASKING THE DEVELOPMENT TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN STANDARDS AROUND MAKING SURE THAT INGRESS, EGRESS AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE TAKEN CARE OF.
UH, NOT A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS BASED ON THE INTENSITY AND THAT BEING PROPOSED, BUT TO LOOK AT THEIR TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AS FAR AS MAINTAINING PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ALONG THEIR FRONTAGE, BICYCLE ACCESS ENTRANCE AND EXITS FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
ALL OF THAT WILL BE EXAMINED AND INCLUDED IN THE TRANSP, UH, THE TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN BEFORE THEY ARE ALLOWED ANY PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION.
AND ONE LAST QUESTION ON FROM YOU.
IS THERE ANY, ARE WE DOING ANY KIND OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING OR UNDERSTANDING OF THE NEEDS OF RAINY AT THIS TIME? YES, THERE WAS A COUPLE OF YEARS BACK AN EXAMINATION FOR
[01:45:01]
OPTIONS TO LOOK AT TRANSPORTATION AS A WHOLE IN THE RAINY STREET DISTRICT.I WOULD NOT CALL IT A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, IT WAS JUST LOOK AT WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE, WHAT DOES TRANSPORTATION NEED TO LOOK LIKE IN THIS RAINY DISTRICT IN THE FUTURE.
UM, SOME CONCEPTS HAVE BEEN DEBATE, UH, PRESENTED.
UM, SOME CONCEPTS HAVE RECEIVED NOT SO A POSITIVE REACTION.
OTHERS ARE STILL BEING EXAMINED.
UM, WE ARE IN CONVERSATIONS WITH CAP METRO TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR SERVICE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE IN THIS AREA.
UH, EVEN OUTSIDE OF PROJECT CONNECT.
UH, THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE STILL ONGOING.
UM, BUT AS USUALLY KNOW THIS IS A CHALLENGING AREA.
UM, BUT I'D ALSO LIKE TO CONVEY TO THE NEIGHBORS IN THIS AREA, UM, FIRE AND EMS DO REVIEW SITE PLANS ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS AND, UH, THE NECESSARY ABILITY TO PROVIDE THEIR SERVICES IN A TIMELY MANNER IN THIS AREA.
SO, UH, DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS ARE LOOKING AT IT FOR VARIOUS REASONS.
AND I'M GONNA RUN OUTTA TIME HERE, SO I'M NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO ASK A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT I'LL JUST SAY I HOPE THAT AS THIS CONVERSATION FURTHERS THAT Y'ALL CAN CONSIDER HAVING SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND CONSTRUCTION STAGING AND THINGS LIKE THAT, IF INDEED THE PROJECT PROCEEDS.
COMMISSIONER CONLEY, YOU'RE OUR FOURTH COMMISSIONER WITH QUESTIONS.
I HAVE NO QUESTIONS AT THIS MOMENT.
SO WE WON'T COUNT THAT AGAINST YOU.
YOU CAN GO LATER IF YOU NEED TO.
UH, ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
CAN CAN I ASK THE, UM, THE GENTLEMAN FROM THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT? SORRY, WE'LL, BOTH BACK HERE.
UM, SO I, I'M JUST LOOKING AT THIS, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE A 750 PAGE REPORT, THE AUSTIN OR THE RAINY MOBILITY STUDY, THAT'S THE ONE YOU WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER? YES.
THAT'S, THAT'S A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT STUDY, NOT A YES.
I MEAN, SO, AND, AND YOU TALKED ABOUT THERE WERE SOME IDEAS, CAUSE I I'M ON THE PAGE.
IT SORT OF DESCRIBES THAT CONSTRUCTION ON SOME OF THESE THINGS MIGHT HAPPEN IN 2023 AT THE TIME THAT WAS THOUGHT.
SO, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT'S BEEN POSTPONED AS, AS, AS PEOPLE WORK THROUGH ALL THOSE ISSUES AND YES.
AT THE TIME, AS CONVERSATIONS WERE HAD WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH THE MAC AND WITH, UH, VARIOUS CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AT THE TIME, UM, THEY WEREN'T IN SUPPORT OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THE IDEAS.
I I'M ALSO LOOKING AT THE VISION ZERO MAP MM-HMM.
AND IT APPEARS THAT THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ONE.
I I MEAN, JUST ON THE MAP IT SHOWS ON RAINY STREET, THERE WAS ONE ACCIDENT IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, I THINK THE DATE IS FOUR RESULTING IN A FATALITY.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE UH, IT SAYS SERIOUS INJURY.
SERIOUS INJURY, MEANING NOT A FATALITY.
BUT THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY FATALITIES ON RAINY STREET? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS AS, I MEAN, FOR THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE IN THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ON THAT STREET.
WOULD YOU SAY THAT WAS A, A HIGH A, A A CONCERNING NUMBER OR A A WELL, I, I, I WOULD ALWAYS EMPHASIZE THAT ANY FATALITY IS CONCERNING.
UM, THERE ARE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHY ANY SEVERE ACCIDENT HAS HAPPENED.
UM, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, THAT INCIDENT IN PARTICULAR HAD, UM, INTOXICATION INVOLVED IN IT.
AND SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT ARE BEYOND THE CONTROL OF ANYBODY TO TRY TO RECTIFY.
THAT WAS A POOR CHOICE OF AN INDIVIDUAL.
UM, AND, AND THEN I GUESS I HAD ONE MORE QUESTION FOR STAFF, BUT MAYBE JUST THE, THE OTHER YEAH.
UM, ON, ON THE, THE DOLLARS THAT WERE SPENT OR THAT THE HOUSING DOLLARS, CAUSE WE HEARD SOME ABOUT THIS FUNDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALL OVER AUSTIN.
THERE, THERE ARE SOME RULES ABOUT WHERE THOSE FEE AND LOU CAN BE SPENT.
CAN YOU TALK SOME ABOUT THOSE? UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T HAVE A, A REALLY CLEAR ANSWER TO THAT, UH, QUESTION.
IT GOES TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND, AND THAT'S INTENDED SPECIFICALLY THE DOLLARS THROUGH THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM ARE SUPPOSED TO BE TARGETING, UM, UNHOUSED POPULATIONS.
AND SO THAT LOOKS LIKE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT THAT IS THE GOAL OF THE, UH, VLU THERE.
UM, ARE ONE SUPER QUICK QUESTION.
SO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, WHO ELSE? JUST TRYING TO LINE HIM UP.
QUICK QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
IF THIS WERE TO PASS TODAY AND THIS, IF THIS WERE TO PASS CITY COUNCIL, I KNOW EMERGENCY SERVICES DOES A, I FEEL A PRETTY GOOD JOB IN AUSTIN OF UNDERSTANDING WHEN BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN AND BIG LARGE BUILDINGS COME ONLINE.
DO YOU HAVE A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF THE DATE WHERE THE FIRST MOVE-INS WOULD BE OCCURRING IN THIS TOWER? THE FIRST MOVE-INS? I CAN DO SOME BACKWARDS
[01:50:01]
MATH AND SAY THAT WE ARE HOPING TO HAVE A SITE PLAN BY FALL AND BUILDING PERMITS AFTER THAT.SO MAYBE, UM, IF WE START CONSTRUCTION
THAT'S JUST MY MATH, BUT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD GUESS.
SO EARLIEST, ROUGHLY 2026? YES.
I'M GOING TO ASK, UH, JUST A FEW QUESTIONS.
I'M A LITTLE, THE STREET FRONT, UH, I GUESS THIS IS FOR STAFF.
UM, DO YOU WANNA HELP ME OUT HERE? SO THEY'RE PAYING FEE IN LIEU, BUT WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING IT, UH, ARE WE GONNA GET, UM, ANY KIND OF GREAT STREET? I MEAN SIDEWALK, WHAT, WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS? I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT THEY'LL HAVE TO ADHERE TO, UM, WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING IT.
SO WE DON'T WANT TO USE THE TERM GREAT STREETS BECAUSE THAT'S A SPECIFIC PROGRAM WITH SPECIFIC DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU NEED IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROGRAM.
BUT YES, THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN AN INTEREST IN CREATING A MORE CORDIAL, SAFE, PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, UM, ENVIRONMENT AS REFERENCED BY THE APPLICANT WITH THE BUILDING SETBACK ON A SMALL SITE TOO.
THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT INSIGNIFICANT.
SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THAT SPACE THAT'S GONNA BE GIVEN TO PEDESTRIANS AND OTHERWISE WOULDN'T BE.
AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT AND LET'S MAKE IT QUICK CUZ I'D LIKE TO BRING, UM, IF I CAN, WAS IT, UH, THIS IS, UM, UP, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.
SO QUICKLY, WHAT WERE THE, UM, YOU LISTED THE BENEFITS, YOU FLASHED THEM UP ONTO THE AUSTIN ENERGY, UH, YOU LISTED A, WHAT WAS BEING DONE ON THIS? THE LAST, WHAT? THE, SO THE, THE GATEKEEPER REQUIREMENTS ARE GREAT STREETS COMPLIANCE, WHICH WE'LL BE DOING THROUGH A FEE IN ADDITION TO THE STREET SCAPE.
THAT'S NOT THE UNOFFICIAL, UM, AREA.
AND THEN WE HAVE TO DO AUSTIN GREEN BUILDING TWO STAR AS A GATEKEEPER.
WE'RE GONNA BE DOING THREE AND WE'RE GONNA BE INCLUDING EV CHARGERS, UM, AND SOME OTHER THINGS.
UH, CONDENSATE COLLECTION FOR ONSITE IRRIGATION, UM, AND INCREASED ENERGY OF PERFORMANCE FOR THE BUILDING.
SO THOSE ARE THE GATEKEEPER REQUIREMENTS.
AND THEN THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS WOULD BE MET THROUGH THE ADDITIONAL THIRD STAR OF AUSTIN ENERGY, GREEN BUILDING AND, UM, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UH, LET ME GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM, IS IT MISS CAHILL? IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
YOU, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO, TO SAY YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.
I HAVE A LOT TO SAY, BUT I'M JUST ONLY GONNA BE A PART OF IT.
THE, UM, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE COST OF, OF, UM, LOW COST HOUSING IS GOING TO BE, BECAUSE MOST OF THESE THINGS ARE VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE.
SO WHAT IS, WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO OFFER PEOPLE? AT WHAT POINT THE COST, ANY COMMENTS? BECAUSE THE NEW, THE NEW ONES HAVE JUST WENT IN ACROSS FROM US.
THE BASIC IS 1,030 $300 A SQUARE FOOT.
SO I'M GONNA RUN THAT AS TIME.
SO WHAT IS THE, WHAT WILL THAT BE IF WE HAVE AN ANSWER? SO WILL THEY.
THE DOWNTOWN REQUIRES 80% MFI FOR OWNERSHIP.
SO THAT NUMBER CHANGES A LITTLE BIT EVERY YEAR.
BUT AT THE TIME THEY GO TO MARKET, IT WOULD BE AT 80% MEDIUM FAMILY INCOME.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE 80% OF $1,300.
IT WOULD BE, THESE ARE FOR SALE, SO IT WOULD BE THE, OF THE PURCHASE PRICE.
DOESN'T SOUND TOO AFFORDABLE TO ME, BUT THAT'S NEITHER HERE NOR THERE.
WE HAVE CALLED THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ON MANY OCCASIONS BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH CONGESTION ON OUR STREETS, WE CAN'T GET THROUGH OURSELVES.
AND THEY'VE JUST SENT US ON TO ANOTHER PLACE, ANOTHER PLACE.
AND NOBODY EVER GIVES US ANY, ANY HELP AT ALL.
SO WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION ON THESE ISSUES.
DID, SIR, DO YOU WANNA COME? YOU HAVE YOUR HANDS UP? YEAH.
UH, PLEASE INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
I, UM, IT WAS REMARKED EARLIER THAT EAST STREET IS NOT A RESIDENTIAL CONSIDERED RESIDENTIAL STREET, AND THEY'RE NOT.
AND THEREFORE, UH, TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS ARE NOT PERTINENT.
BUT, UM, THERE ARE A HU A LARGE NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENTS NOW THAT HAVE ACC UH, EGRESS AND INGRESS OF CARS ON E STREET, INCLUDING, UH, MY OWN, BUT A LOT OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS.
AND, UH, I GUESS MY FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION IS, UH, WHEN DOES THAT RECEIVE CONSIDERATION? AND WHO IS ACCOUNTABLE AND RESPONSIBLE FOR EVALUATING THE AGGREGATE TRAFFIC IMPACT OF MULTIPLE DEVELOPMENTS? IF THE CONSIDERATION FOR AN INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT IS 2000, UH, EGRESSES AND INGRESS IS PER UNIT, IT'S, IT SEEMS LIKE THE AGGREGATE NUMBER IS MORE RELEVANT TO, UH, THE NEEDS FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY.
I'M ALL DONE WITH MY QUESTIONS.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS COMMISSION? MAXWELL, UH, COMMISSIONER
[01:55:01]
MAXWELL? YEAH, THIS IS ACTUALLY A QUESTION FOR OUR TRANSPORTATION EXPERT.UH, UH, I DID NOTE THAT IT SEEMS LIKE PART OF THE COMPLICATION HERE IS ALSO THE TEXT DOT RIGHT OF WAY.
SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? AND ALSO, IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON HOW THE I 35 RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT MIGHT ALSO WEIGH INTO THIS, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS WELL.
YES, EAST AVENUE IN THIS SECTION, UM, ALONG THE FURNITURE OF THIS PROPERTY IS CONTROLLED BY TEXT DOT.
UM, SO THEY HAVE COMPLETE, UH, SAY AS FAR AS DRIVEWAY ACCESS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE, UH, IN THIS AREA, AS FAR AS I 35 IN THE RECONSTRUCTION OF IT RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO INDICATION FOR ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY NEEDS.
THEY CAN DO THEIR IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY.
UH, SO THERE WOULD BE NO NEED TO TAKE ADDITIONAL, UH, PROPERTY FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR PLANS AS THIS HAS BEEN TRANSPIRED TO AT D T P W, WHATEVER I AM RIGHT NOW,
ANYBODY WANNA TAKE IT? OUR, OH, IS THAT EIGHT? OKAY.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UM, OH, SO JUST FOR THE AUDIENCE, I WAS, WE'RE OUT OF Q AND A, WE HAVE EIGHT SPOTS AT FIVE MINUTES EACH.
AND I DID PULL UP AS MANY OF YOU THAT I COULD THAT RAISED YOUR HANDS EARLIER TO GET YOU IN MY QUESTION PERIOD.
BUT WE ARE OUT, SO WE ARE MOVING TO THE DEBATE PERIOD, UH, WHILE WE'RE ENTERTAINED MOTIONS AND DISCUSS THOSE MOTIONS.
SO THAT IS, UM, THAT IS OUR NEXT STEP.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION COMMISSIONERS? START THE BALL ROLLING.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX? UM, NO WAY IT'S GONNA PASS, BUT I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS FOR A MONTH, BUT I'M TRYING TO PULL UP OUR SCHEDULE FOR A DATE, WHATEVER THE, UH, NOT THE NEXT MEETING, BUT THE MEETING AFTER THAT, IF SOMEONE CAN HELP ME IS MAY 9TH.
YEAH, I'M GONNA, I'M ON MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS TO MAY 9TH.
I WOULD, UH, DO YOU HAVE, LET'S SEE IF YOU HAVE A SECOND.
UH, I HAVE COMMISSIONER HOWARD HAS INTER MOTION.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THIS? I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT WHY, WHY WE TO DO THIS.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WAS A FORMULA THEY WERE TRYING TO MAKE WORK, UM, BUT A AS, I HATE TROTTING THIS OUT, BUT, BUT AS A TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER MYSELF THAT I DON'T KNOW ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY WHERE WE HAVE THIS MANY PEOPLE LIVING AND VISITING HOTELS AND VISITING BARS AND DOING WHAT THEY DO IN A BLOCK THAT IS FOUR FOOTBALL FIELDS IN LENGTH.
THE MAJORITY OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA HAS 300 FOOT BLOCKS.
YOU HAVE WAY BETTER ACCESS THAN THIS RAINY STREET IS, TO ME, KIND OF LIKE DEVELOPMENT GONE WILD WITHOUT, WITHOUT ACTUALLY PAYING ATTENTION TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THAT AREA RIGHT NOW, IT IS JUST JAM-PACKED.
AND THE ONLY REASON WE'RE HERE TALKING ABOUT THIS IS BECAUSE THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT WANTS TO DOUBLE THEIR F A R AND THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A FORMULA.
I UNDERSTAND WE'RE GONNA GET SIX ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE UNITS OUT OF THE 200 OR WHATEVER UNITS THAT IS GONNA BE IN THIS PROPOSED BUILDING.
I REALLY THINK THAT THIS APPLICANT CAN, CAN GO THROUGH THE MOTION, MAYBE NOT IN 30 DAYS, BUT PRETTY QUICKLY TO DEVELOP SOME SORT OF PLAN IN HOW THEY CAN POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTE TO PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC SAFETY AS A FUTURE MEMBER OF THIS COMMUNITY.
THAT'S GOING TO ADD, UH, QUITE A LOT OF UNITS AND QUITE A LOT OF TRAFFIC TO THIS VERY INTERESTING AND UNIQUE AREA, UH, IN OUR, IN OUR CENTRAL, UH, CITY.
SO THAT'S WHY I JUST, I, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM FLESH THAT OUT MORE, UH, ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMPLAINTS.
CUZ I DON'T THINK WE REALLY, ALL WE HEARD WAS THAT THERE IS NOT GONNA BE ANY TRAFFIC THERE.
WE'VE GOT A PLAN, BUT NO ONE WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
UM, AND I JUST THINK WE NEED TO FLESH THAT OUT BEFORE WE START DOUBLING FAERS, UH, IN THIS PARTICULAR PART OF TOWN.
I HAVE ONE QUICK, SO I KNOW THIS IS A BIT, UH, UNCONVENTIONAL, BUT UH, AND IF THERE'S ANY OBJECTIONS, LET ME KNOW, BUT COULD WE HAVE STAFF IN THE APPLICANT? I JUST WANNA KNOW 30 DAY OR WHAT DO WE
[02:00:01]
MAY 9TH? IS, IS THAT REALLY DOABLE? I MEAN, TO LOOK AT SUCH A, A PLAN, I'M, I JUST DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE REALLY GONNA BE ABLE TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER MEANINGFUL FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE.WE WOULD PREFER THAT YOU MOVE FORWARD TONIGHT IF POSSIBLE.
UM, WE'RE HAPPY TO CONTINUE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AS WE MOVE THROUGH OUR SITE PLAN.
UM, BUT I DON'T TO YOUR POINT THINK THAT WE'RE GONNA COME UP WITH ANYTHING DIFFERENT IN 30 DAYS AND, UM, WE DO HAVE INTERNAL DEADLINES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP.
NO, I, I DO LIKE WHAT HE'S SAYING.
I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THE TIMEFRAME, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FORMULA, YOU KNOW, WHETHER WE THE GUIDE, YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF PLAN WOULD YOU USE TO DO THIS? YEAH.
UH, THE WAY OUR LDC IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE THE POSSIBILITY TO SUBMIT A ZONING APPLICATION AND A SITE PLAN SIMULTANEOUSLY.
NOW THEY ARE MOVING FORWARD, THIS APPLICANT IS MOVING FORWARD WITH THE SITE PLAN, ASSUMING THEY GET THE RIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FAR INCREASE.
IF THE ZONING APPLICATION IS DENIED, THAT THE SITE PLAN WILL HAVE TO BE REVAMPED AND CANNOT MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE IT IS MAKING THE ASSUMPTION THAT THEY GET THE F A R INCREASE.
SO THEY ARE DOING SO AT THEIR OWN RISK.
COULD WE DO SOME TYPE OF TRANSPORTATION STUDY? UM, I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT BECAUSE THE LDC DOES NOT REQUIRE THIS APPLICANT TO DO SUCH A STUDY TO GET THEIR ZONING APPLICATION AS BEING SUBMITTED.
SO AS 30 DAYS, 60 DAYS, 90 DAYS, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE THE LDC DOES NOT REQUIRE THEM TO DO SO.
SO WE WOULD, UNFORTUNATELY, WE WOULD PROBABLY COME BACK AND NOT HAVE ANYTHING MORE EXACTLY.
IS WHAT I'M, SO CAN I CHAIR, CAN I YES, GO AHEAD.
UM, I, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THIS WAS NOT A ZONING CASE.
THIS THIS IS, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY, UH, UH, A DENSITY BONUS REQUEST UNDER THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
IS THAT NOT CORRECT? YES, COMMISSIONER.
SO THIS ISN'T A ZONING REQUEST, JUST POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL BONUS AREA THROUGH THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
AND, AND, AND JUST JUST SO WE ALL UNDERSTAND, THE CODE MAY NOT REQUIRE IT IN THE PARTICULAR FORMULA FOR WHAT THEY'RE ASKING, BUT, BUT THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE THE OPTION TO PROVIDE INFORMATION RELATED TO TRAFFIC, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, THAT SORT OF STUFF, OR OFFER UP SOME OTHER CONTRIBUTION.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT LIMITED IN THAT WAY, ARE THEY? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLOSE WITH THAT LAST PLEA APPLICANT.
PLEASE RESPOND, BUT WE, UH, WE'RE GETTING INTO TOO MUCH Q AND A HERE, AND I THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAYBE TAKE A VOTE, BUT GO AHEAD.
WE, WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO THAT THROUGH THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS, BUT WE CAN, I DON'T THINK THE DENSITY BONUS ALLOWS FOR TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT, SO IT'S ONE OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU I WAS JUST GONNA SPEAK AGAINST.
OKAY, WELL LET'S JUST, UH, YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE THAT.
UH, YES, GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT SPOT.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
MY SUBSTITUTE MOTION IS TO, UM, ESSENTIALLY MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? UH, CONLEY.
OKAY, MR. CONLEY SECOND THAT YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR, UH, MOTION, UH, SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
I APPRECIATE THAT CHAIR AND I APPRECIATE WHAT COMMISSIONER C**K WAS TRYING TO DO, BUT I THINK IT'S VERY CLEAR FROM STAFF THAT AT LEAST ON OUR END, WE'RE NOT GOING TO RECEIVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN THE TIME PERIOD.
AND AS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HEARD FROM STAFF, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MUCH WE POSTPONE CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED.
SO OF COURSE THIS IS 25 DASH TWO, SO THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS IN 25 DASH TWO AND OTHER PLACES THAT WORK IN TANDEM WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
SO I DO NOT WANT TO JUST POSTPONE AN ITEM JUST FOR THE SAKE OF HONESTLY POSTPONING IT.
IF WE HAVE CLARITY ON IT, WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD.
THINGS THAT I WOULD SAY IN ADDITION IS, AS I MENTIONED, I HOPE THAT MS. UH, BOJO YOU AND THE APPLICANT CAN WORK ON LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS.
I HOPE THAT SOME OF THESE DETAILS WILL BE FIGURED OUT, UM, AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
SO WE REALLY ARE MAKING SOME SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS.
AND LASTLY, AS THE GRID STREETS FEE, YOU KNOCK ON WOOD, GETS APPROVED BY COUNCIL, THEY'RE HOPEFULLY YOUR MORE DOLLARS BEYOND SIMPLY THOSE COMING IN, UM, FROM ESSENTIALLY TRAFFIC PURPOSES SO THAT WE HAVE ABILITY TO ACTUALLY DO SOME OTHER IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA AS WELL.
IN ADDITION TO HONESTY, SEEING THAT THE ISSUES THAT ARE BEING RAISED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD TODAY ARE VERY IMPORTANT AND REALLY FOCUS ON SOME OF THE ISSUES AROUND TRAFFIC PLANNING IN THE AREA IN GENERAL AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING.
SO I THINK HOPEFULLY THAT'S SOMETHING THE FOLKS CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH AND I KNOW THAT'S A CONVERSATION I INTEND TO HAVE WITH SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS AS WELL.
ANYONE SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER COX.
AND THEN, UH, WE'LL GIVE YOU A COMMISSIONER MUSH CHILD, YOU CAN GO NEXT WHEN WE GET THERE.
YEAH, I'M JUST GONNA TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO SAY A FEW THINGS.
[02:05:01]
THINK WE SHOULD HAVE HIGHER STANDARDS.I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A FORMULA.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT FORMULA POPPED OUT SIX UNITS.
UM, BUT THIS COMMISSION CAN MAKE IT CLEAR TO APPLICANTS THAT WE EXPECT HIGHER STANDARDS, PARTICULARLY WHEN THE, THE DEVELOPMENT BENEFITS OF THAT ARE SIGNIFICANT AND PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY ARE INTENDING TO GO INTO AN AREA WITH PREEXISTING ISSUES.
UM, AND, AND I WANNA HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A PLAN.
UH, YOU KNOW, THE CITY PROBABLY SPENT A CRAP TON OF MONEY PUTTING TOGETHER A PLAN TOGETHER, PUTTING A PLAN TOGETHER TO TRY TO IMPROVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THIS AREA.
AND THERE WERE ROADBLOCKS TO THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE ROADBLOCKS ARE, BUT THERE WERE ROADBLOCKS THAT HIGHLIGHTS AN ISSUE WITH TRYING TO JUST SAY, OKAY, WELL, WE'LL JUST, WE'LL JUST TAKE CARE OF THIS THROUGH AN EXISTING PLAN.
WE'LL TAKE CARE OF IT THROUGH A FUTURE PLAN.
THERE'S ALWAYS GONNA BE ROADBLOCKS.
SO WE SHOULD BE EXPECTING DEVELOPERS WHEN THEY COME IN AND ASK FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION, WHICH IS WHAT THIS IS, TO DOUBLE THEIR F A R AND GET SIGNIFICANTLY MORE UNITS THAT THEY NEED TO BE BRINGING THE SOLUTIONS TO THEIR COMMUNITY'S PROBLEMS. THEY NEED TO BE HELPING OUT WITH THESE PROBLEMS AND NOT EXPECTING THE CITY TO TAKE CARE OF THEM BECAUSE WE SEE HOW SLOW THAT PROCESS CAN BE.
SO THE POINT OF MY MOTION TO POSTPONE WAS NOT EXPECTING TO SOLVE THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS IN 30 DAYS.
THE POINT IS TO GET THIS APPLICANT TO COME BACK, PROPOSE SOMETHING BETTER, MAYBE, UH, BEYOND WHAT THAT FORMULA REQUIRES, BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT THERE'S EXISTING ISSUES HERE THAT NEED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I, WHAT I WANT TO SAY, AND I'M GONNA VOTE TO, UH, ABSTAIN ON THE CURRENT MOTION.
UH, SO MEMBERS SPEAKING IN FAVOR, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, I, I THINK SOMETIMES WE NEED TO REALLY THINK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SUCCESSFUL TRANSPORTATION.
THAT RAINY STREET MOVES MORE PEOPLE THROUGH IT UP AND DOWN RAINY STREET ON A FRIDAY NIGHT THAN ANY OTHER STREET IN AUSTIN.
AND IF THAT'S NOT SUCCESSFUL TRANSPORTATION OF PEOPLE GETTING UP AND DOWN THAT STREET, THEN I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT SUCCESSFUL TRANSPORTATION LOOKS LIKE.
IS IT MORE CARS GOING THROUGH THERE FASTER? I DON'T SEE THAT AS A SUCCESSFUL TRANSPORTATION STORY.
I LIVE IN THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD, RAINY STREET, LIVED THERE FOR, YOU KNOW, 25 YEARS.
AND 25 YEARS AGO THERE WERE LOTS OF CARS GOING UP AND DOWN RAINY STREET BECAUSE THEY WERE CUTTING THROUGH RAINY STREET TO GET ONTO I 35 AND INTO DOWNTOWN.
AND SO WE'RE MOVING A LOT MORE PEOPLE NOW AND A LOT FEWER CARS.
AND I CONSIDER THAT A TRANSPORTATION SUCCESS.
AND, AND I DON'T CONSIDER THAT A PROBLEM.
ARE THERE CHALLENGES IN DENSITY? THERE'S CERTAINLY CHALLENGES AND WE NEED TO ADDRESS THOSE, BUT I SEE THE PROBLEMS 25 YEARS AGO IS MUCH WORSE THAN TODAY.
WE HAD COMMISSIONER MOOCH TO WANTING TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS MOTION, I BELIEVE, UH, FROM YOUR HAND UP PREVIOUSLY.
YEAH, I'LL, I'LL JUST, I I JUST WANNA ECHO THE STATEMENTS THAT COMMISSIONER COX MADE THAT WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT HAS WORKED WITH STAFF ON A BONUS PROGRAM THAT IS AVAILABLE, IT IS NOT A GIVEN BECAUSE IT IS A CASE BY CASE CONSIDERATION THAT HAS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE OTHER FACTORS AROUND IT.
AND I, I DO THINK THAT WE FAIL WHEN WE DON'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE OTHER FACTORS.
THERE'S SOME VERY SEVERE FACTORS HERE, AND WE SEE THIS ON A LOT OF OUR CASES THAT COME THROUGH WHERE WE DON'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THROUGH THE TREE THIS ENOUGH TO HAVE EARNED WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
WE HAVE A SPOT IN FAVOR, SPOT AGAINST ANYONE ELSE? I, I, UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND SPEAK IN FAVOR.
I THINK I DO HEAR COMMISSIONER COX'S CONCERN.
I THINK THEY'RE RELEVANT, BUT WHAT I ALSO HEARD IS THAT WE HAVE A, A STUDY THAT WAS DONE THAT COUNSEL AND, AND WE HAVE NOT ACTED ON.
AND I THINK WE DO NEED TO DEAL WITH THIS IN A COMPREHENSIVE MATTER, JUST NOT ONE DEVELOPMENT AT A TIME.
AND I WOULD ASK FOR THOSE, THE PASSION THAT THE SPEAKERS BROUGHT THIS EVENING.
WE NEED TO EXERT SOME OF THAT PRESSURE AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL AS IT REGARDS TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS RAINY PLAN.
UH, THERE ARE PROBABLY A LOT OF GOOD IDEAS IN IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE IN FAVOR OR AGAINST IT OR IF YOU EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT, BUT THAT WOULD
[02:10:01]
BE I THINK, THE POINT OF ENGAGEMENT, UH, FOR, TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS IS MORE HOLISTICALLY FOR THIS ENTIRE DISTRICT.SO I THINK WE HAVE SOME COMMISSIONERS HERE ARE GONNA LOOK INTO THAT AND MAYBE ASK OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO REVISIT THAT PLAN AND, UM, AND TRY TO DO SOMETHING ON A COMPREHENSIVE BASIS.
BUT I THINK FOR WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, THEY'VE MET THE, UM, THOSE REQUIREMENTS IN THE ORDINANCE.
AND, UH, SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS, UM, SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY ELSE? WE HAD ONE MORE SPEAKING AGAINST.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER AZAR.
SECOND, MY COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY, FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION, IF I GOT THAT RIGHT.
UH, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO, UH, HANDS, UH, IN FAVOR ON THE, UH, DIAS IN FAVOR OF THIS.
THAT IS EVERYBODY, IF I'M LOOKING CORRECTLY.
AND SO THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, UH, ON VIRTUALLY.
SO I'M SEEING COMMISSIONER HOLD, UM, CONLEY AND COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
THOSE VIRTUALLY VOTING AGAINST THAT WOULD BE COMMISSIONER MUTO.
AND I SEE, IS THAT YELLOW? I BELIEVE IT IS.
COMMISSIONER COX, YOU'RE VOTING TO ABSTAIN.
ALL RIGHT, SO THAT MOTION PASSES WITH COMMISSIONER MUTO VOTING AGAINST, AND COMMISSIONER COX ABSTAINING.
AND IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IS THAT ALL OUR DISCUSSION CASES? OH MY GOSH.
UH, COMMISSIONER, CAN I HAVE A MOMENT OF PRIVILEGE? UM, I, I JUST WANNA REALLY THANK MR. LOFTON, MR. BATES, MR. RIVER, ALL OF OUR STAFF WHO HONESTLY LEFT.
I JUST WANNA SAY, I KNOW WE'RE RUNNING SOMEWHAT SHORT ON STAFF.
I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES.
I JUST WANNA SEE HOW MUCH I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT Y'ALL ARE DOING, AND I KNOW HOW HARD Y'ALL WORK, SO THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH.
UM, WE'RE MOVING AWAY FROM OUR DISCUSSION CASES, IS THE REMAINING WILL TAKE A LITTLE TIME, I THINK.
CAN WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK? UH, WELL, YEAH, LET'S TRY TO GET BACK IN FIVE MINUTES.
THERE'S A SEVEN MINUTE, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS.
SO, UM, WE'RE GOING AND BRING THIS MEETING BACK TO, WE HAVE QUORUM.
WE'LL EASE INTO THIS ACTUALLY, THE
UM, SO WE HAVE, OKAY, THE FIRST ONE IS,
[19. Discussion and possible action initiating code amendments to City Code Chapter 25-2 relating to the creation of a new zoning district. (Sponsors: Commissioners Anderson and Maxwell)]
ALL RIGHT, WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION.AND THE FIRST ONE IS IN, UH, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION INITIATING CODE AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 25 2, RELATING TO THE CREATION OF A NEW ZONING DISTRICT.
AND FOR THESE ITEMS, I JUST WANNA SAY WE, I LET YOU GUYS LET US GO A LITTLE FREEFORM ON THESE, BUT I'D LIKE TO DO THIS IN A LITTLE MORE STRUCTURED MANNER.
WE'LL GIVE FIVE MINUTES TO THE MOTION, UH, THE SPONSORS, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE INTO OUR EIGHT AND FIVE Q AND A, IF THAT'S ENOUGH.
IF WE NEED A FEW MORE, WE CAN, CAN ALLOW THAT.
AND THEN WE WILL, UH, WE, THIS IS ACTUALLY POSTED AS PO UH, YES.
SO THEN WE CAN DECIDE, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE A MOTION TO MAKE, WE CAN DO THAT.
SO LET'S KIND OF STICK WITH THE SAME STRUCTURE TO MOVE THINGS ALONG.
SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM COMMISSIONERS ANDERSON AND MAXWELL, GIVING US KIND OF SOME BACKGROUND ON THIS, UH, PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT.
SO NOT, NOT THAT LONG AGO, WE WERE ALL VOTING ON A COUPLE OF CASES WHERE WE WERE KEEPING ALLY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL IN PARTS OF AUSTIN THAT WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET RID OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL FOR A LONG TIME.
UM, IN SOME OF THESE CASES, WE WERE ACTUALLY GOING FROM A ZONING CATEGORY THAT WAS NOT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ONLY TO THEN CONDITION OUT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES AND THEN ALLOW RESIDENTIAL.
NOW, SO MUCH OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE BACKWARDS GYMNASTICS OF A 1984 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT IS VERY, VERY OUT OF DATE.
THIS BODY CITY STAFF HAVE DONE AMAZING, AMAZING THINGS TRYING TO CHANGE THAT, BUT HERE WE ARE.
SO, UH, THIS ITEM IS A TOOL TO PROVIDE SOME
[02:15:01]
CONTEXT, CONTEXT SENSITIVE RELIEF TO THE FAILURES OF OUR 1984 CODE.UM, CURRENT ZONING TOOLS ARE OUTDATED.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO UPDATE THEM.
THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO GET FINER TOOLS HERE IN AUSTIN.
SO THIS ITEM IS REVERSE ENGINEERING ALLY PDA, UH, WHERE HERE IN THIS ROOM, WE'VE USED A COUPLE OF TIMES WHERE WE DIDN'T WANT TO, BUT WE DID BECAUSE IT WAS KIND OF THE ONLY TOOL WE HAD TO DO WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO, WHICH WAS ADD HOUSING AND AREAS THAT NEEDED HOUSING.
THIS WILL ADDRESS ZONING ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS IN A CONTEXT SENSITIVE MANNER.
UH, THIS WILL ONLY COME UP AS INDIVIDUAL ZONING CA.
UH, INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASES, NOTIFICATION AND PETITION RIGHTS ARE UNCHANGED.
THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE PARKLAND DEDICATION, ENVIRONMENTAL, ENVIRONMENTAL REGS, WATER WASTEWATER, DRAINAGE, TRANSPORTATION, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PARKING, SIGNAGE, UM, ONLY ZONING AND PARKING.
UM, I HOPE THAT YOU ALL ARE LOOKING AT THE BACKUP.
IF YOU HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT YET, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND PULL IT UP.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT HERE IN A SECOND.
BUT IT DOES INCLUDE COMPATIBILITY, ZONING, REGU, UH, OVERLAYS, HEIGHT, PARKING, ET CETERA.
SO WE'RE GONNA TIGHTEN UP USES.
UH, SO RIGHT NOW WE HAVE CS, WHICH IS SO SUBURBAN.
I THINK WE SPENT 20 MINUTES TODAY THROWING US, UH, CONDITIONAL OVERLAY ON TAKING A LOT OF THE NONSENSE THAT CS HAS IN IT OUT.
THE BASE ZONING HERE, THE BASE ZONING WOULD BE A VERY ACTIVATED, UM, ZONING CATEGORY IS VERY 100% WHAT YOU WOULD WANT TO SEE IN THE MIDDLE OF A CITY TYPE USES.
UM, SO IF IN A ZONING OVERLAY THERE'S A RESTRICTION, IT'S TO BE INCLUDED.
AND NOW LET'S GO AHEAD AND LOOK AT THE BACKUP.
SO I HAVE THE BACKUP RIGHT HERE.
CAN WE BRING THE BACKUP THE FACE? THERE IT IS.
SO WE JUST TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT KIND OF THE TROUBLES WE'VE HAD HERE IN THIS BODY AND OUR LIMITED TOOLS TO CHOOSE FROM.
NOW, THIS IS JUST FOR STAFF TO CONSIDER AS A STARTING POINT, OBVIOUSLY, UM, IF THEY HAVE WAYS TO MAKE THIS BETTER THAN THOSE ARE ENCOURAGED.
UM, BUT THIS HAS A BASE ZONING STANDARD.
AND THE REASON THAT IS, IS BECAUSE WHEN WE, IF SOMEBODY GETS THIS ZONING AND THEN LATER ON THEY SELL THAT PROPERTY AND THEY DECIDE NOT TO USE A BONUS, THEN YOU KIND OF HAVE TO HAVE THAT BASE ZONING STANDARD THERE.
IF THEY DO HAVE A BONUS, THEN THE HEIGHT WILL BE DICTATED WITHIN THAT ZONING ORDINANCE THAT WAS FIRST CREATED, WHERE THAT, WHERE THAT PROPERTY RECEIVED TOWN ZONING DESIGNATION.
AND IT HAS A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS JUST HERE FOR BASE ZONING ALLOWS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD MODIFICATIONS, BUT ONLY IN CHAPTER 25 DASH TWO, SUB CHAPTER C AND CHAPTER 25 DASH SIX, APPENDIX A.
AND THE, WE STARTED OFF WITH THAT.
THIS INCLUDES THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENT OF 10%.
SO ONE OF THE ISSUES WE'VE HAD HERE, SO, SO EXPAND A LITTLE BIT MORE.
SO THIS IS, UM, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE OF A PUD ON ONE END, THE MOST EXTREME KIND OF MOST EXPENSIVE THING THAT TAKES THE LONGEST HUGE IMPACT ON STAFF AND THE PDA, THAT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PDA THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING HERE FOR A COUPLE OF TIMES, THAT PRETTY MUCH ONLY ATTACHES TO L I C H AND MAY BE M I, I'M NOT SURE, BUT NOT TO CS OR MF.
IT'S BEEN USED A LITTLE BIT MORE LIBERALLY HERE AS, UH, AS OF LATE.
UM, WE'VE USED IT IN AREAS OF TOWN WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO.
UM, BUT PDA DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THE MODIFICATION OF COMPATIBILITY OR REQUIRE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I THINK WE WERE HERE, UH, LOOKING AT THE BOARDING CASE NOT THAT LONG AGO WHERE WE WERE JUST TRYING TO SEIZE, IS THERE GONNA BE AN OFFERING OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING? AND ANDREW WAS THERE, DON'T ASK, DON'T ASK.
AND THEN FINALLY, FINALLY, THE APPLICANT WAS LIKE, YEAH, AND THERE'S GONNA BE SOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
SO THIS WILL BE VERY DIFFERENT IN THAT IT WILL ALREADY BE A PART OF THAT CASE WHEN IT FIRST COMES TO US.
AND THEN I'LL LET MY CO-SPONSOR JUMP IN IF SHE WANTS TO JUMP IN AT ALL.
UM, I WAS EXCITED TO CO-SPONSOR THIS.
I THINK SOMETIMES WATCHING THESE PLANNING COMMISSIONS AND THEN NOW ACTUALLY SITTING UP HERE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE CASES THAT COME BEFORE US CAN BE QUITE COMPLEX.
AND HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO FEEL LIKE THERE'S ANSWERS FOR OUR APPLICANTS BEFORE THEY EVEN COME TO US, THAT GIVE THEM OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK AROUND WHAT IS THE COMPLEXITY OF OUR VERY OUTDATED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO KNOWING THAT THEY CAN WORK WITH STAFF THAT THESE OPPORTUNITIES THERE SO THAT WHEN THE CASE COMES TO US, WE CAN FEEL GOOD ABOUT WHAT WE'RE APPROVING.
UM, REALLY AS COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MENTIONED, THIS IS A TOOL IN A TOOLBOX TO HELP US WORK WITH WHAT WE HAVE, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THOSE BIG BROAD STROKES OF REFORM ARE PROBABLY NOT HAPPENING.
SO LET'S TRY TO GIVE OURSELVES SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO REALLY FEEL LIKE THIS IS A GOOD WAY TO WORK AROUND THE COMPLEXITIES THAT WE SEE AS COMMISSIONERS WHEN THE CASES COME BEFORE US.
AND I THINK THE OTHER THING I LIKE TO EMPHASIZE IS THAT WE'D LIKE STAFF TO REALLY CAREFULLY CONSIDER HOW THIS COMES BACK TO US.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT THIS REALLY IS, IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE WHAT DOES THAT TOOL LOOK LIKE IF WE'RE PUTTING IT IN OUR TOOLBOX.
IS IT A WRENCH, IS IT A SCREWDRIVER? YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME FINE, UH, SOME FINESSING WE CAN DO WITH THIS ONCE WE HAVE STAFF A CHANCE TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT IT.
AND THEN I THINK WE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY CONSIDER, IS THIS SOMETHING WE WANNA ADD
[02:20:01]
TO OUR ZONING? MM-HMM.AND I, AND, UH, COMMISSIONERS CAN CORRECT ME, UH, IF I'M WRONG, BUT JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, THE PROCESS IS THIS WOULD GO, IF WE VOTE ON IT TONIGHT FOR ACTION, IT WOULD THEN GO TO STAFF AND THEN, UM, STAFF WOULD KIND OF COBBLE TOGETHER THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IN A DRAFT FORM AND IT WOULD COME TO THE, UH, CODES AND ORDINANCE, JOINT COMMITTEE, THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THEN ON THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
IS THAT THE CORRECT PROCESS? CORRECT.
SO THIS IS JUST A STARTING POINT.
UH, IT IS AVAILABLE TO ANYONE HERE.
IF YOU HAVE A BRIGHT IDEA, YOU GET A, YOU KNOW, GET A CO-SPONSOR AND YOU CAN, WE CAN MOVE IT, UH, CHANGES ALONG.
AND SO I REALLY APPRECIATE, UH, YOU GUYS TAKING ACTION TO ADDRESS A PROBLEM THAT WAS IDENTIFIED.
UM, SO WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I KNOW I HAVE A FEW.
I GUESS WE CAN, UH, LET'S JUST, UH, GO AROUND.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE MOTION OF THE SPONSORS? UH, COMMISSIONER COX, IS THAT, SEE YOUR HAND UP? YEAH.
UM, SO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, WE CAN'T MAKE THAT A REQUIREMENT OF THE BASE ZONING, CORRECT? THAT'S ILLEGAL.
AND SO THIS, THIS IS RELATED TO SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD MODIFICATIONS, BUT WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS THE L I P D A AREN'T DEVELOPERS ALREADY VOLUNTEERING AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO BASICALLY CONVINCE US TO ZONE SOMETHING LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, UH, WITH THE PDA ATTACHMENT.
SO ISN'T THIS KIND OF A REGRESSION OF WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW COME BEFORE US IN TERMS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON LA PDA PROJECTS? I THINK MISS HARDEN HAS HER RESPONSE, AND SINCE I'VE KEPT HER HERE, WE SEE STAFF COMING UP.
WE'LL LET STAFF ANSWER THAT BEFORE WE DO.
IT'S A GOOD QUESTION, I THINK.
I THINK A FEW THINGS WITH THAT.
UM, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF L I P D A CASES THAT DO NOT HAVE AN AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT.
UM, IF THEY DO DO AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT, IT IS WITH A PRIVATE DEVEL DEVELOPER OR, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE ENTITY, WHICH IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT, BUT I THINK THIS IS FOR THE CITY CAN ENFORCE AND NOT LIKE A VM U.
SO THE CITY ENFORCES VM U AND IF IT'S A L I P D A, IT HAS TO BE DONE WITH A PRIVATE DEVELOPER IN A PRI IN A PRIVATE AGREEMENT.
AND AGAIN, I WANNA SAY MANY L I P D A CASES DO NOT EVEN HAVE AN AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT.
AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, STAFF CANNOT REQUIRE THAT TO OCCUR.
AND SO WHAT I'M HEARING FROM COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UM, IS THAT THIS WOULD BE LIKE A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM WOULD REQUIRE THE CITY, LIKE A V M U PROGRAM, UM, SO TO SPEAK.
AND SO IT WOULD REQUIRE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND IT WOULD NOT BE WITH THROUGH A PRIVATE AGREEMENT, WHICH YOU MAY OR MAY NOT GET BECAUSE WE CAN'T ENFORCE THAT OR CAN'T REQUIRE THAT.
UM, AND I'M CURIOUS, THESE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD MODIFICATIONS, UH, I MEAN THAT'S THE WHOLE, THAT'S A WHOLE LOT OF STUFF IN THERE THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE A LOT OF CONSTERNATION TO A LOT OF PEOPLE.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THE, UH, IF, IF COMMISSIONER ANDERSON OR SOMEONE ELSE CAN, CAN I, UH, ELABORATE ON WHAT THEY MEAN BY ALLOWING TOWN ZONING TO MODIFY SITE DEVELOPMENT, COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, OVERLAYS AND COMBINING DISTRICTS AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING EVERYTHING IN THOSE TWO SECTIONS? SURE.
SO I WANNA BE PERFECTLY CLEAR, THIS IS NOT IDEAL, NOT IDEAL IN ANY WAY.
IDEAL WOULD BE US WORKING AS A CITY, SPENDING 10,000 HOURS ON A NEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT CALLS FOR A NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND US SPENDING 10 YEARS AND PASSING A NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THIS GETS US A LOT OF THE WAY, UH, IN A LOT OF THOSE, UH, MOMENTS OF PROGRESS THAT WE WERE HAVING IN A NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
OF COURSE THAT WAS GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAP IT IN ALL OF AUSTIN.
SO THIS COMES UP SHORT, VERY SHORT FROM A NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BUT THIS'LL HELP US GET A LOT OF HOUSING UNITS IN, IN WHATEVER ELSE MAKES SENSE FOR CERTAIN SITES IN PLACES WHERE WE CAN'T DO THOSE THINGS TODAY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS TO DO 'EM WELL.
AND AND SPEAKING OF TOOLS TO DO THEM, WHAT, WHY WOULDN'T WE JUST APPLY LIKE THE V M U BONUS REQUIREMENT TO SOMETHING LIKE THIS RATHER THAN HAVING A WHOLE SEPARATE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD MODIFICATIONS FOR JUST THIS PARTICULAR ZONING? THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PLACES WHERE VMU JUST DOESN'T WORK, WHICH IS ONE OF THOSE MAIN REASONS WE'VE
[02:25:01]
SEEN A LOT OF LAP PDAS.AND IT'S ANOTHER REASON, UH, I'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF FOLKS WHO OWN CERTAIN PARCELS OF LAND WHO JUST AREN'T DOING ANYTHING WITH THEM, BUT THEY'RE PERFECT SITES FOR A LOT OF HOUSING, A LOT OF TRANSIT SUPPORTED DENSITY, A LOT OF TAX BASE FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
AND I'VE APPROACHED A LOT OF PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE AND OTHER THINGS.
AND WHAT THEY'VE PRETTY MUCH TOLD ME QUITE A FEW OF THEM IS WE'RE WAITING FOR THE CITY TO HAVE A BETTER CODE THAT ACTUALLY WANTS US TO DEVELOP OUR LAND.
AND SO UNTIL THEN, THESE ARE PARKING LOTS.
THESE ARE GAS STATIONS ARE PLACES THAT CAN'T BE DEVELOPED UNDER CURRENT CODE.
AND JUST TO REPO RESPOND TO YOUR QUESTION, UM, COMMISSION COX.
SO VMU, EVEN WITH THE USE OF VMU TO ONLY ALLOWS A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 90 FEET.
SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE CONCERN THAT WE WERE HAVING WITH PDA, WITH THE LAP PDA, THAT WE COULD NOT GO TO THE HEIGHT WHICH WAS BEING ASKED BY THE APPLICANT AT 120 FEET.
SO THE HEIGHT IS ONE LIMITATION.
THE OTHER, UM, LIMITATION THAT ALSO OCCURS WITH THE TWO IS EXACTLY AS COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WAS SAYING.
SO VME WAS ALWAYS MEANT TO BE USED ON CERTAIN CORRIDORS, WHICH ALWAYS HAS LED TO THIS SORT OF ISSUE WHERE WE DO SEE STAFF OFTEN DOES NOT RECOMMEND IT BECAUSE OF QUARTER ACCESS, BECAUSE THAT IS INDEED WHAT IS IN THE CODE AND THE PLANNING MISSION OFTEN, UM, GOES AHEAD AND APPROVES IT BECAUSE WE SEE THAT THERE'S OTHER BENEFITS TO IT.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND CHAIR QUICK WRAP UP ON, ON THAT LAST QUESTION, WHICH WAS A GOOD ONE.
VM U ALSO IS ONLY FOR RESIDENTIAL, DOESN'T MODIFY COMPATIBILITY, AND IT ONLY GOES TO 90 FEET IN THE BEST CASE SCENARIO.
AND, AND JUST REMINDER, THIS JUST KICKS IT OFF.
STAFF IS GONNA LOOK AT THIS AND, AND CONSIDER IT AND, AND BRING US SOMETHING, UH, HOPEFULLY BETTER TO REVIEW.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MOOW? I'M REALLY EXCITED YOU GUYS ARE TAKING THE INITIATIVE TO AT LEAST GET THIS DISCUSSION GOING.
YEAH, I, I KIND OF FEEL SILLY THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE SOMETHING WHILE WE'VE BEEN SITTING COMPLAINING.
WE DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS, WE DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS WE DO, AND THAT'S, THAT'S INITIATING, WHICH IS GREAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE TIME LIMITED, SO I WANNA TRY AND GO QUICKLY, UH, IN JUST LOOKING AT WHERE YOU GUYS STARTED FROM, LOOKING AT THE F THE F A R AND THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, IF WE ARE CRAFTING A BEGINNING TOOL IS WHAT ABOUT GIVING A, AN OPPOSITE KIND OF OPPORTUNITY AS WELL WHERE THE F A R GOES HIGHER BUT THE IMPERVIOUS COVER GOES LOWER.
CUZ WE ALSO HEAR ABOUT THE CONCERNS DEPENDING ON WHERE WE MIGHT APPLY THIS, RIGHT?
AND SO I'M, I'M WORRIED ABOUT SUCH A HEAVY IMPERVIOUS COVER WITH LOW F A R AND THEN GETTING INTO WATER RUNOFF CONCERNS, THINGS LIKE THAT DEPENDING ON WHERE, WHERE WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO APPLY THIS.
UM, AND, AND Y'ALL CAN COMMENT OR WE CAN TALK ABOUT MAYBE IF THERE'S OPPORTUNITY TO TWEAK IT AND GIVE US SOME MORE TOOL THERE TO LEVERAGE.
AND THEN MY OTHER CONCERN GOES BACK TO WHAT, UM, COMMISSIONER COX BROUGHT UP IS, UM, IS THERE THOUGHT ON A MECHANISM? CUZ MY, MY UNDERSTANDING ALSO WAS THAT THE AFFORDABILITY COULD NOT BE TIED TO A ZONING REQUEST PER SE, THAT THERE, THAT WAS AT THE STATE LEVEL.
BUT I MAY NOT UNDERSTAND THAT.
SO I HONESTLY JUST ASKING QUESTIONS.
THANKS AND THANKS FOR WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE DONE.
NO, GOOD QUESTION AND LOVE FOR OTHERS TO JUMP IN ON THIS ALSO, BUT THAT IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THIS, THIS COOL, THIS TOOL COULD ALLOW AND IT'S GONNA ALLOW FOR THAT TYPE OF FLEXIBILITY.
UM, WHERE THIS PERVIOUS COME COVER COMES FROM HIS, YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M ENVISIONING AND YOU KNOW, THERE WILL BE CASES THAT ARE DIFFERENT IN THIS OF COURSE, BUT YOU KNOW, THIS IS ALREADY THE, YOU KNOW, I SEE THAT YOU SEE IN CS IN A LOT OF THE URBAN AREAS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW.
BUT ALL OF THESE WOULD DEFINITELY REQUIRE WATER DETENTION, WATER STORAGE, WATER QUALITY.
SO YOU, WE'D BE TALKING ABOUT THE REDEVELOPMENT OF SITES THAT FOR THE MOST PART PROBABLY DON'T HAVE THOSE WATER FEATURES AND THOSE, THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES THAT ALL THE REDEVELOPMENT WOULD, WOULD REQUIRE.
I SEE COMMISSIONER AZAR WAS ABOUT TO JUMP IN AS WELL.
I I WAS JUST GONNA ADD, UM, COMMISSIONER SHOULDER TO YOUR QUESTION.
SO YES INDEED WE CANNOT REQUIRE, UM, ANY AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE SET ASIDE AS PART OF ANY ZONING CATEGORY, BUT AS A VOLUNTARY INCENTIVE OFFERED.
SO ANYBODY CAN VOLUNTEER TO EITHER TAKE THIS AS IT IS OR USE WHATEVER THEIR BASED ON ALLOWS THEM TO DO THAT IS WITHIN THEIR SORT OF, RIGHT.
AND SO BASED ON THOSE INCENTIVE PROGRAMS, WE CAN REQUIRE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE BELIEVE, UM, SOMEBODY WOULD BE WILLINGLY BE WILLING TO OFFER.
AND SO THE WAY IT WOULD BE SEEN IS ESSENTIALLY THE WAY WHEN FIRST VMU PROGRAM WAS GREETED WAS A NEW ZONE, BUT EITHER THE NEIGHBORHOOD MAPPED IT ONTO CERTAIN PLACES WHERE THEY AGAIN, HAD THE CHOICE TO EITHER GO AHEAD AND DEVELOP TO BASE STANDARDS OR DO SEPARATELY TO THE, WHATEVER THOSE HIGHER STANDARDS WERE VOLUNTARILY IN THIS SCENARIO WILL BE THE SAME.
AND THEN WE ARE ABLE TO REZONE TO IT IF THAT INDEED IS THE WILL OF THE APPLICANT.
[02:30:04]
OH, UH, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT THAT, YOU KNOW, IF EVEN THOUGH THE, THE ZONING CATEGORY IS 95% IN IMPERVIOUS COVER, JUST AS WE DID TONIGHT O ON THE PIECE OF LAND WHERE WE SAID THERE'S A, THERE'S A CEO THAT WE'RE ONLY GONNA GO TO 80% IMPERVIOUS COVER, WE WOULD ALWAYS HAVE THAT OPTION IF, IF IT WERE IN A SENSITIVE AREA OR THERE WERE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS IN THIS, IN NO WAY TRUMP'S PIECES OF CODE THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THESE CHAPTERS.SO FOR INSTANCE, SOS ITEMS LIKE THAT, THOSE WOULD STILL REQUIRE A PUT.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS? MR. COX? I'LL LET YOU GO ONE MORE TIME.
I, I'VE ACTUALLY GOT A QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS, THIS IS KIND OF BLOWING MY MIND A LITTLE BIT.
UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT OF US LIKE TWEAKING THINGS HERE OR THERE, BUT THIS IS ACTUALLY JUST A COMPLETE INTRODUCTION OF A BRAND NEW ALMOST CLEAN SLATE ZONING CATEGORY.
WELL, THE, THE PRACTICAL LOGISTICS OF THAT IS, IS THAT THAT NOT A CONCERN TO STAFF, UM, VERSUS SOMETHING LIKE SOME SORT OF COMBINING DISTRICT OR, OR DOES THAT REALLY NOT, PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, BUREAUCRATICALLY SPEAKING, PROCESS SPEAKING, DOES THAT NOT REALLY MATTER TO Y'ALL? OH, UM, COMMISSIONER, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE THIS AND LOOK AT IT.
I CAN'T, I'VE ONLY VAGUELY LOOKED AT IT AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS COLLECTIVELY IN EACH DIVISION, IN EACH DEPARTMENT.
UM, I THINK THE CHAIR LAID OUT IT'S GONNA HAVE A THOROUGH REVIEW BY MANY DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND DIVISIONS WITHIN DEPARTMENTS.
UM, SO, UM, AND WE HAVE A LOT OF TWEAKS.
SOME Y'ALL MAY SUPPORT, SOME YOU MAY NOT.
SO I, I JUST CAN'T REALLY ANSWER THAT AS I HAVEN'T DELVED INTO IT.
AND THEN ME MYSELF CAN ANSWER IT ANYWAY.
THIS HAS TO BE A, A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS YOU KNOW.
SO, UM, WE CAN LOOK AT THAT AND, YOU KNOW, I'LL BE HAPPY TO GIVE YOU SOME STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE AND FEEDBACK, BUT I THINK THAT THIS JUST BEING INITIATED IS THE STARTING POINT AND WE'RE WILLING TO LOOK AT IT AND VET IT AND GIVE OUR FEEDBACK AND THE LIKE AND, AND, AND ON THAT POINT OF JUST INITIATING IT MM-HMM.
UM, THE PROCESS, IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTES TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, COULD SOMEONE HIGHLIGHT THE PROCESS, STAFF REVIEWS IT, WHAT THE TIMEFRAME IS FOR THAT? IT COMES BACK TO US, THEN WHAT HAPPENS? THEN WHAT HAPPENS? THEN WHAT HAPPENS? SURE.
I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, SO YES, IF WE INITIATE IT TODAY, IT GOES TO STAFF FOR ESSENTIALLY DRAFTING THE ORDINANCE.
THERE IS NO TIMELINE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
STAFF WILL DO IT BASED ON ESSENTIALLY THEIR WORKLOAD.
THEY, WE LEAVE IT TO THEM TO DECIDE AT WHICH POINT, ONCE THEY HAVE A DRAFT READY, IT GOES TO THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE ONCE APPROVED FROM THERE IT COMES TO PLANNING COMMISSION.
ONCE APPROVED FROM HERE, IT GOES TO COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
UM, AND THAT'S SORT OF THE PROCESS THAT GETS ENACTED.
AND, AND I WOULD JUST ADD, YOU GUYS ARE RESPONDING TO THE COUNCIL PRIORITIES, SO, YOU KNOW, WHEREVER THIS KIND OF FALLS, UM, IT, IT COULD TAKE SOME TIME.
DEPENDING ON WHAT PRIORITIES OF COUNCIL.
SO I, I WAS JUST GONNA ADD, WHEN IT COMES BACK TO S A P C, WE WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADD AMENDMENTS AND MAKE TWEAKS AT THAT POINT AS WELL.
YES, AS LONG AS IT IS WITHIN THE SCOPE, BEFORE WAS INITIATED.
AND REAL QUICK, SO I, I HAVE TALKED TO A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, I WAS CURIOUS IF ANY OF THEM WANTED TO RUN WITH THIS JUST BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW DO WE IMPROVE OUR BROKEN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND WHAT I HEARD BACK RESOUNDING IN CONVERSATIONS WAS, THIS IS AWESOME, LET'S MOVE IT FORWARD.
AND I WAS LIKE, WELL, IS IT BETTER IF IT COMES FROM COUNCIL TO WHICH I WAS TOLD WE CAN CALL STAFF JUST AS WELL AS Y'ALL CAN INITIATE SOMETHING AND Y'ALL CAN CALL STAFF.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE'S EXCITEMENT IN THIS BUILDING FOR THIS IS UN CATEGORY.
AND COMMISSIONER COX, YOU HAVE A GOOD POINT, POINT, WHICH IS, WE, WE HAVEN'T DONE MANY THINGS LIKE THIS OVER THE PAST 10 YEARS.
THE LAST ONE I DID WAS A CHANGE OF UNO TO GO TO 300 FEET AND TO ELIMINATE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
AND THE ONLY REASON I DID THAT AS WE WERE REWRITING THE LANE DEVELOPMENT CODE IS BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF THOSE LITTLE SECTIONS OF THE CODE THAT WE WEREN'T TOUCHING.
CUZ THAT WASN'T AN ALREADY EXISTING VERY GOOD OVERLAY.
AND SO THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS OUTSIDE OF THE CODE REWRITE PROCESS.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE INITIATED THAT THERE IS 15 TO 20 YEARS OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE ON THIS BROKEN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO IF WE ARE STUCK FOR WHATEVER REASON AND UNABLE TO DO COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE REFORM, THEN THIS BODY AND CITY COUNCIL ARE GONNA HAVE TO START MAKING A LOT MORE CHANGES TO THE BROKEN CODE THAT WE HAVE TO GET IT LESS BROKEN, GIVE SERVE MORE FOLKS.
SO, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY, COMMISSIONER HAINES
[02:35:01]
AT ALL? OKAY.UH, ALRIGHT, WELL LET'S GO AHEAD AND, AND, UH, ANYBODY HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
MR. ANDERSON, DID YOU SPEAK? OKAY, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I HAVE MOTION TO INITIATE THE CREATION OF TOWN ZONING CA UH, CATEGORY CONSISTENT WITH BACKUP, ENCOURAGING ALTERNATIVES THAT YIELD A GREATER AMOUNT OF HOUSING.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? DO YOU WANT A SECOND SPONSOR? OKAY.
UH, ANY YOU WANNA ADD ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? I, I'VE SPOKEN ENOUGH OF THE, THE VERY QUICK THING I'LL ADD IS, UH, AN A BJ ARTICLE THIS WEEK TALKING ABOUT THE, THE FASTEST GROWING NEIGHBORHOODS IN AUSTIN.
BUT 12 OF THE 25 FASTEST GROWING NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE AUSTIN METRO ARE ROUGHLY 10 MILES NORTH OF ROUND ROCK.
WE'RE NOT BUILDING ENOUGH HOUSING AND WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO CHANGE THAT AND GET TRANSIT SUPPORTED DENSITY ON THE GROUND, WE'VE GOTTA DO.
AND THIS IS A GREAT TOOL TO HELP US GET THERE.
UM, ANY SPEAKERS AGAINST THIS MOTION? YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THE MOTION? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? I JUST WANNA ADD THAT I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A REALLY FORWARD LOOKING OPPORTUNITY FOR US AND CONSIDERING WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN TERMS OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE CITY AND HOW WE'RE GROWING AND CHANGING.
THIS IS THE BRIGHT MOVE FOR COUNCIL COMMISSION.
ANY EVIDENCE IN FAVOR? WELL, CHAIR, COMMISS, VICE SELLER, AUTHOR, GO AHEAD.
UM, MAY I, AUTHOR AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AN AMENDMENT OR A CHANGE, UM, SO I MIGHT NEED SOME HELP, BUT WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS SEE IF WE CAN LEAVE THIS, UM, BEFORE WE SEND IT, HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE WORK.
UM, BUT I, I THINK IT'S PRETTY BROAD TO SEND A STAFF AND I, I'D LIKE IT TO BE A TOOL THAT WE CAN APPLY OUTSIDE OF SOME OF THE, THE DENSER AREA AS WELL.
UM, AND SO I THINK MAYBE WE JUST NEED TO LEAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO LOOK AT IT, MAYBE ADD SOME LANGUAGE OR, OR MOVE IT AROUND A LITTLE BIT AND THEN SEND IT TO STAFF.
CUZ THEY'RE, THEY'RE A VERY LIMITED RESOURCE TOO, SO I'D LIKE TO FINE TUNE IT A LITTLE.
AT LEAST GIVE HIM SOME DIRECTION BEFORE WE SEND IT ON.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE COULD ADD STUFF, AMENDMENTS OR WHATEVER OVER THE NEXT TILL OUR NEXT MEETING OR WHATEVER.
I'M LOOKING FOR A WAY TO DO THAT.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING THAT WOULD BE A POSTPONEMENT TO A CERTAIN DATE.
IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? POSTPONE ACTION ON THIS.
I MEAN, I WANNA SEND IT FORWARD, BUT I'D LIKE TO, I THAT'S WHAT, IF THAT'S MY ONLY MECHANISM, THEN DON'T WOULD SAY POSTPONED FOR OUR NEXT MEETING AND GET YOUR AMENDMENTS IN BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ANDREW ENOUGH TIME OR NOT.
UH, I GUESS I NEED A CLEAR AMENDMENT.
I MEAN A, AN AMENDMENT AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IT MIGHT BE A SOMEWHAT OF A SUBSTITUTE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE MOTION MAKER WANTS TO DELAY.
NO, THE, THE STAFF THAT I'VE TALKED TO, I MEAN, IT'S, I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT IT'S KIND OF PRESUMPTUOUS TO SAY WHAT THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE.
AND AT THIS POINT, THIS IS JUST MOVING FORWARD WITH DIRECTION OF WHAT IS A VERY URBAN ZONING.
AND SO MAYBE I'M HEARING FROM THE COMMISSIONER THAT THERE'S A NEED FOR IT, A MISSING MIDDLE TYPE ZONING, WHICH I TOTALLY AGREE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS WOULD BE THAT TOOL.
UM, BUT I'D BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT TOOL IF, IF THAT COULD BE, UM, PROPOSED HERE AT THE DA.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND SO COULD YOU STATE YOUR MOTION SO THAT WE CAN SEE IF WE GET A SECOND? I JUST NEED, SO I GUESS THEN I'M, I'M REQUESTING A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO POSTPONE TO OUR NEXT MEETING, UM, AND HAVE AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED.
OR SUGGESTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSION AT THE NEXT MEETING.
OKAY, SO THAT WOULD BE WHAT'S, WHAT'S OUR NEXT MEETING? MAY? NO, DO WE HAVE APRIL? APRIL 25TH OR APRIL 25TH.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? HEY, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? UH, IF IT'S RELATED TO THE MOTION BEING MADE,
SO IF IT'S TO THE MOTION MAKER, UH, OKAY.
UH,
AND, AND LET ME, LET ME JUST TWO SECONDS TO CLARIFY.
SO WHEN COUNCIL SENDS SOMETHING LIKE THIS, THEY USUALLY BASICALLY TELL STAFF THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO COME OUT OF IT.
AND THEN STAFF WILL SAY, WELL, YEAH, SURE, BUT HERE'S A BUNCH OF FEEDBACK ON THAT.
ARE, ARE WE BY APPROVING EITHER, UH, COMMISSIONER MUSH, SO'S SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UM, OR THE
[02:40:01]
ORIGINAL MOTION? ARE WE TELLING STAFF THAT THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO COME BACK LIKE COUNSEL DOES? NO.SO ON HERE, WE DID WRITE PROPOSAL FOR STAFF CONSIDERATION.
SO THIS IS JUST AN IDEA FOR THE, A PLACE, PLACE FOR THEM TO CONSIDER, TO START JUST SO THEY CAN UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT ALL THESE THINGS AND THEN THEM TRY TO TRANSLATE THIS CONVERSATION INTO A BACKUP DOCUMENT.
AND THIS WAS ALSO SOMETHING THAT WE COULD SUBMIT TO THE BODY, UH, FOUR DAYS AGO FOR EVERYONE JUST TO GO AHEAD AND TO LOOK AT AND START TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT WE WERE THINKING.
AND I'LL, I'LL, YOU'RE NOT VOTING ON THIS LANGUAGE IN ANY WAY.
WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS VOTING ON THE INITIATION OF THE PROCESS.
THIS IS A SUGGESTED FRAMEWORK, BUT IT IS NO WAY.
ARE YOU SAYING, YOU KNOW, BY SAYING, I SUPPORT THIS.
ARE YOU SAYING YOU AGREE WITH THE TERMS IN THIS DOCUMENT? IT'S MORE ON INITIATION OF THE PROCESS.
MR. CHAIRMAN, SINCE I HAVE TO ASK COMMISSIONER MUTO, UM, SINCE SHE'S THE, GOT THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
UM, AS THE NEW KID ON THE BLOCK, CAN YOU TELL ME APPROXIMATELY, UH, ARE, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT SIX WEEKS OF STAFF REVIEW, SIX MONTHS OF STAFF REVIEW? WHAT, WHAT KIND OF TIMEFRAME ARE WE CONSIDERING HERE? ARE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WANTS TO JUMP IN? WELL, CLARIFICATION.
SHE WAS, YEAH, THAT QUESTION WAS TO ME.
I WAS GONNA SAY NO ON MY MOTION.
I WANT COMMISSIONERS TO HELP CLEAN IT A LITTLE BIT SO THERE'S MORE CLEAR DIRECTION FOR STAFF, CUZ IT'S GONNA GO THROUGH EVERY ONE OF THEIR DEPARTMENTS.
SO THAT'S A LONG PROCESS, BUT I'LL LET SOMEBODY ELSE SPEAK TO THAT PART.
AND THAT'S ABOUT AS MUCH AS I KNOW.
SO I, YEAH, SO THE INITIATION OF THIS ITEM AND THEN THIS GOING TO CITY STAFF, THEY'LL TAKE THE TIME THAT THEY NEED TO GET IT RIGHT AND THEN THEY'LL, THEY'LL PUT IT FORWARD WHEN THEY FEEL IT'S RIGHT.
AND THEN THAT'LL BE OUR CHANCE TO OFFER WHATEVER AMENDMENTS WE FEEL WE NEED TO OFFER TO MAKE IT, TO MAKE IT WORK.
SO IT COULD COME BACK LOOKING SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT TO CODES IN ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE, AND THEN IT COMES BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND WE CAN ADD, WE CAN AMEND IT, UH, AND WE HAVE VERY ROBUST DISCUSSIONS, AMENDMENTS AT THAT TIME.
PEOPLE CAN ADD AND WE'LL VOTE ON ALL OF THOSE.
UH, SO WE HAVE A LOT OF THOSE VERY HEAVY ENGAGED SESSIONS ON CODE AMENDMENTS.
AND THAT WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNITY WHERE TO REALLY ADD YOUR, YOUR THOUGHTS.
SO I, I'LL, I'LL SECOND COMMISSIONER MU MUSH TYLER'S MOTION FOR A SPECIFIC REASON THAT I'M HAPPY TO GET INTO, IF I CAN TALK CHAIR POINT OF INFORMATION PLEASE.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE 25TH IS GOING TO BE A VERY, VERY HEAVY LEAK SCHEDULED AGENDA.
COULD WE HEAR FROM THE LIAISON? NOT THAT I WANNA POSTPONE THIS, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M, I THINK THIS IS GONNA BE AN IMPORTANT TOOL AND THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD REALLY CONSIDER IT TONIGHT, BUT YEAH, YOU ARE CORRECT.
WE HAVE A HEAVY IN THAT FACT WE ARE, ONE OF THE ITEMS HERE IS LOOKING AT ANOTHER MEETING IN MAY TO MAKE UP FOR, UH, OUR HEAVY AGENDA.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE.
SO CHAIR COMMISSION LEE ON ANDREW? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY FIVE TO SIX DISCUSSION CASES.
UH, TWO OF 'EM THAT ARE GONNA BE FAIRLY COMPLEX.
SO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE, THAT WAS, DID YOU SECOND THIS COMMISSIONER COX, OR WERE YOU ASKING CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? YOU DID.
SO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS TO THE 25TH.
UNDERSTAND, WE DO HAVE A VI UH, VI THE AGENDA, BUT, UM, WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND, UH, VOTE ON THIS MOTION TO POSTPONE.
ANY, ANY DISCUSSIONS FOR AGAINST COMMISSIONER COX SPEAKING IN FAVOR? YEAH, I DID SECOND IT, I, I WAS ACTUALLY, UM, I WAS TRYING TO WORK THROUGH MY HEAD.
IF THERE WAS A WAY TO HAVE SOME SORT OF LIKE WORKSHOP DISCUSSION WITH STAFF ON THIS RATHER THAN JUST SAYING, HERE'S A REALLY, REALLY BROAD FRAMEWORK, UM, THEN IN LIKE SIX MONTHS WE GET IT BACK WITH SOME SUGGESTED CHANGES AND THEN WE JUST HAVE TO VOTE ON IT AT THAT TIME AND, AND OFFER AMENDMENTS AND NOT REALLY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO KIND OF WORK BACK AND FORTH WITH STAFF.
UM, IS THERE A MECHANISM FOR THAT? I THINK YOU'RE PROPOSING SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE NOT DONE.
UM, OKAY,
WE'RE NOT EX I, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN WRITING CODE.
SO WE KIND OF, AND THIS HAS A LOT MORE DETAIL AND GUIDANCE, WHICH YOU DON'T ALWAYS GET.
SOMETIMES IT'S JUST A COUPLE OF SENTENCES KIND OF GIVING THEM DIRECTION.
THIS GIVES A GENERAL FRAMEWORK OR A LITTLE MORE DETAIL, BUT IN NO WAY IS STAFF BOUND BY THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS RECOMMEND THESE, UH, PARAMETERS, BUT I THINK THEY GET THE INTENT.
SO THAT'S USUALLY WHAT WE PROVIDE THEM IS INTENTION AND KIND OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
AND THEY COME BACK WITH THE CODE, DETAILED CODE LANGUAGE.
SO WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS KIND OF SOMEWHAT OF A
[02:45:01]
MORE, IT'S KIND OF PUTTING THE BACK END ON THE FRONT END TO GIVE, UH, MORE OF THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE WANT SOMETHING TO LOOK AT IN CODE FORMAT AND THEN IT GOES TO THE CODES AND ORANGES, WHICH IT DOES GET QUITE A BIT OF DISCUSSION THERE WITH ZAP AND AMENDMENTS ARE ADDED THAT WE THEN SEE FROM THAT, UH, JOINT COMMITTEE.AND THEN WE, THAT'S WHEN WE GET OUR TURN.
SO I THINK, UH, BY DOING A LOT OF GOOD HOMEWORK HERE AND GIVING A GREAT IDEA, I THINK MAYBE YOU MIGHT HAVE FRIGHTENED A FEW PEOPLE, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON ON OH, YOU KNOW, GIVING THEM A LITTLE TOO MUCH INFORMATION.
BUT LET'S GO, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE, UH, TO VOTE ON THE POSTPONEMENT FOR COMMISSIONERS TO OFFER SOME TWEAKS TO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE.
UH, ANY MORE SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST? UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR? UM, GO AHEAD.
I'LL, I'LL, I'LL MAKE THIS VERY, VERY QUICK.
I JUST WANNA SAY, REGARDLESS OF SORT OF THE MOTION AT HAND AND THE CONVERSATION, I THINK PLANNING COMMISSIONERS SHOULD DEFINITELY FEEL THAT THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON ANY ITEM.
I JUST, I'M PERSONALLY NOT IN FAVOR OF SEEING IF WE CAN GET STAFF REVIEW ON ITEMS WITH THE CLARIFICATION THAT STAFF ACTUALLY DOES NOT WORK FOR US.
UM, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT AND THE COUNCIL MEMBERS STAFF MEMBERS ARE DIFFERENT.
WE HAVE A STAFF LIAISON WHOSE JOB IS TO GUIDE US THROUGH THE ACTIONS THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE AS A COMMISSION AND JUST LOOKING AT THE WORK FLOW OF STAFF, HONESTLY, Y'ALL, EVEN AS I INITIATE AN ITEM IN A FEW MINUTES, THEY HAVE SOMEWHERE AROUND 35, 40 CODE AMENDMENTS IN THE PIPELINE RIGHT NOW.
SO I JUST WANNA BE VERY REALISTIC.
I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR TO ASK STAFF TO THEN NOT JUST PROVIDE US THEIR WORK IN RELATION TO CODE AMENDMENTS, BUT ALSO PROVIDE US FEEDBACK ON OUR IDEAS.
I DON'T THINK I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT BECAUSE JUST UNDERSTANDING THAT THE WORKFLOW THEY HAVE AND THE WORKLOAD THEY HAVE, I JUST WANNA SUPPORT THEM TO GET THEM TO DO THE WORK THAT THEY NEED TO DO, PARTICULARLY KNOWING THAT THEY HAVE TO RESPOND FROM, UM, COUNCIL REQUESTS AND THE WORK ASSIGNED TO THEM BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
UH, THE SPEAKING IN FAVOR, UH, COMMISSIONER M TELLER, THAT IS EXACTLY WHY WE NEED A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO TIGHTEN IT UP.
UH, THOSE SPEAKING AGAINST, I WAS SPEAKING AGAINST BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT, THIS IS INITIATING THE PROCESS.
UH, REALLY WHAT I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS FORMING A WORKING GROUP
THAT'S KIND OF THE, THE PROCESS.
UH, THE COMMISSIONER COX, IF YOU WANTED THAT KIND OF WORK SHOPPING, WE WOULD FORM A WORKING GROUP TO GO AWAY AND MAYBE FLUSH OUT MORE DETAILS FOR THIS, UH, RECOMMENDATION, UH, FOR A CODE AMENDMENT, THAT WOULD BE KIND OF OUR NORMAL PROCESS.
I THINK WE NEED TO GET IT IN THE QUEUE WITH STAFF.
THAT'S MY, THAT'S ALL PUT AGAINST THIS DELAY.
UH, I SPEAK IN FAVOR ANYMORE AGAINST MR. CHAIRMAN.
I'LL SPEAK, I'LL SPEAK AGAINST, BUT IT'S ALSO, YOU KNOW, I'LL ALWAYS TRY TO SLIP IN THAT QUESTION.
I TRUST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, BUT, UH, HE JUST TOLD ME THAT WE'LL HAVE A CHANCE IF WE WANT A, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COMMISSIONER COX SAID IS I, I GUESS A WORKSHOP OR KIND OF A, MY VERNACULAR WOULD BE A HALFTIME CHECK IN.
UH, AND, AND EVEN THOUGH I TRUST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I'M, I'M VERIFYING THAT, UH, IF, IF WE DO WANT A CHECK-IN WITH STAFF, WE CAN ASK FOR AN UPDATE IN JULY, AUGUST AND SEE HOW THINGS ARE GOING.
IS THAT THE CASE IN MR. CHAIRMAN, OUR COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, ANYONE'S WELCOME TO ANSWER, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS TALKING ABOUT THERE IS IN CODES AND ORDINANCES, UM, STAFF DOES A GOOD JOB OF SHARING WITH US WHERE THINGS ARE IN THE PROCESS AND GIVING US UPDATES ON THE DIFFERENT ITEMS THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON, ALL THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
WE ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO GIVE AN UPDATE.
EVERYTHING COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SAID.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON, UH, THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS APRIL 25TH.
UH, COMMISSIONER MUSH, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER COX.
UH, THOSE ON THE DIAS IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION TO POSTPONE, UH, SEEING NONE.
THOSE ON THE SCREEN IN FAVOR TO POSTPONE.
THAT'S, UH, COXON MU TALLER, THOSE AGAINST THE MOTION TO POSTPONE.
SO, UM, I'M GONNA MAKE THIS EASIER ON, I'M SORRY, YOU'RE AGAINST YEAH.
IN FAVOR OR AGAINST, AGAINST PRESS MOMENT.
SO THAT MEANS I'M GONNA MAKE THIS EASY ON MYSELF.
WE HAD TWO THAT WERE IN FAVOR OF THIS, UH, SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT COMMISSIONER COX AND COMMISSIONER MUSH TYLER.
[02:50:01]
THE MAIN MOTION, UM, AND, UH, THIS IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH HELP ME OUT.COMMISSIONER MAN ANDERSON WITH, UH, ITEM 19.
UM, WITH WHAT YOU'VE PROVIDED IS JUST A, A SUGGESTION FOR STAFF, RIGHT? MOTION TO INITIATE THE CREATION OF TOWN ZONING CATEGORY CONSISTENT WITH BACKUP, ENCOURAGING ALTERNATIVES THAT YIELD A GREATER AMOUNT OF HOUSING.
AND THAT WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, DO WE NEED TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION AT THIS POINT? WE TRIED TO PASS THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DIED IN MARCH OF 2020.
WE'VE GOTTA DO WHAT WE CAN TO GET BETTER DENSITY BONUSES ON THE, ON THE GROUND.
WE DON'T ALLOW INCLUSIONARY ZONING, BUT WE DO ALLOW DENSITY BONUSES.
AND WHEN THEY DON'T YIELD WHAT WE NEED, THAT'S ON US.
SORRY, I THINK I ALREADY ALLOWED YOU AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL TO SPEAK
SO, ANY, UH, LET ME JUST, ANYBODY OPPOSED TO THIS MOTION BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE? COMMISSIONER MOSH CHILD, ARE YOU ON? ARE YOU MUTED? I CAN'T TELL IF YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY SOMETHING.
WELL, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THIS A LITTLE MORE.
IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE'RE SEEING AND DISCUSSING IT, OR, OR, OR HAVE YOU GUYS ALL ALREADY MADE UP YOUR MIND AND YOU'RE JUST GONNA CAST YOUR VOTES? WE HAVEN'T, WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THE, WE'RE NOT VOTING ON A CODE CHANGE.
WE'RE JUST VOTING ON THE INITIATION OF THE PROCESS.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING.
SO WE'RE, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT IT SO YOU CAN SPEAK TO YOUR OPPOSITION? THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO AN OPPOSITION? I, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE MORE DEEPLY WHAT'S GOING ON.
I ASKED THOSE HARDER QUESTIONS.
I, I KNOW MY COLLEAGUE SAYS HE'S THE NEWBIE, BUT I FEEL LIKE I AM, BECAUSE THERE ARE THINGS I DON'T UNDERSTAND, AND I DON'T FEEL READY TO TURN SOMETHING AROUND AND INITIATE IT WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING.
SO I WOULD LIKE THE MOTION MAKER TO TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO EXPLAIN IT AT A VERY STUPID LEVEL FOR ME, SO THAT I MAY UNDERSTAND.
AND THEN WE CAN, SO WE, I'M SORRY.
WE, WE ARE, WE DID OUR Q AND A, WE HAD THE INITIAL PRESENTATION.
UH, DO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC QUESTION THAT YOU WANT ANSWERED? BECAUSE WE, WE GOT THROUGH THE Q AND A, WE WERE OUT OF QUESTIONS, SO I MOVED THIS ALONG TO MOTION MAKING.
WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXTEND MORE QUESTIONS.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, ARE YOU, YOU WANNA SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OR, I'M, I'M GONNA SPEAK NEUTRALLY.
WHATEVER YOU WANNA CLASSIFY IT AS.
I I'M GONNA VOTE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD BECAUSE LIKE, LIKE THE CHAIR SAID, IT'S, IT'S AN, IT'S INITIATING A PROCESS.
I DO THINK, I DO HOPE THAT IF WE SEE MORE OF THESE COME UP, AND I THINK THIS IS GREAT, WE NEED TO BE HAVING THESE DISCUSSIONS, BUT AS WE SEE HERE, THE DISCUSSION IS VERY LIMITED BY OUR RULES AND THE PROCESS IN A COMMISSION FORMAT.
SO MY HOPE IS THAT WHEN WE BRING THINGS UP LIKE THIS IN THE FUTURE, THAT MAYBE WE DON'T HAVE ACTION TAKEN THE VERY FIRST TIME.
WE'RE SEEING THIS, THE VERY FIRST TIME THE SPONSORS ARE INTRODUCING THIS SO THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF MORE CONVERSATION BEFORE THROWING THIS OVER TO STAFF AND THEN NOT SEEING IT FOR SIX MONTHS.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT POSSIBLY HAVE VERY SIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENCES AT THAT TIME.
SO I, I'M, I AM ALL FOR COLLABORATION.
COLLABORATION IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S EASY TO DO IN THIS FORMAT.
SO MY SUGGESTION IS THAT IN THE FUTURE, MAYBE BRING THIS UP WITHOUT AN ACTION THE FIRST TIME WE SEE IT, AND THEN WE CAN PUSH IT ALONG, UH, THE NEXT MEETING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AND THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, WITHIN QUORUM, I, I'LL USE THE WORD SOCIALIZATION.
IF THERE'S A LITTLE MORE SOCIALIZATION THAT CAN BE DONE IN LIVING WITHIN OUR QUORUM RESTRICTIONS, PLEASE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT.
SO YOU GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM A BROADER GROUP OF COMMISSIONERS.
I'M NOT SURE YOU KNOW, WHO YOU GUYS TALK TO AND PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, UH, BUT YES, THAT, THAT WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAYBE SHOP IT WITH A FEW OTHER FOLKS.
LET'S GO AHEAD, UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER DEBATE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE THIS TO A VOTE.
THIS IS, UM, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE MOTION, JUST, UH, PRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
AND, UH, THOSE ON THE DI IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION.
AND THOSE ON THE SCREEN VOTING IN FAVOR.
I SEE, UM, ALL GREEN EXCEPT, UH, COMMISSIONER MOSH SHALLER EXTENSION YELLOW.
UM, WHERE ARE WE AT ON NU ONE, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LAY ON YES.
COMMISSION ANDERSON, I, I KIND OF GO WHO WERE THE MOTION MAKERS? UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
[02:55:01]
AND WHAT WAS OUR NUMBERS THERE? DID YOU GET THE YEAH, IT WAS 11 11 11 TO 1, 1 0 1 11 0 1.UH, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE.
[20. Discussion and possible action initiating code amendments to City Code Chapter 25-2 relating to waivers for compatibility standards. (Sponsors: Commissioners Anderson and Azhar)]
IS ITEM 20, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION INITIALING CODE AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 25 DASH TWO RELATING TO WAIVERS FOR COMP COMPAT COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.WE'RE GOING TO GIVE, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER AAR TIME THE, UH, DETAIL OF THIS THANK YOU CHAIR.
I'M SEEING FOR COMMISSION ANDERSON, THAT I CAN GO AHEAD.
SO REALLY, YOU KNOW, GOING AGAIN TO WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY, IT IS, WE ARE INITIATING AN ITEM WHICH IS RELATING TO THE WAIVERS FOR COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE DOING.
IN ADDITION, THERE'S AN EXHIBIT AVAILABLE IN THE BACKUP.
UM, AND SO IT IS ESSENTIALLY FOR STAFF TO CONSIDER.
IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT BY ANY MEANS.
I TRUST STAFF WILL BE ABLE TO GO LOOK AT WHAT MAKES SENSE IN TERMS OF WAIVERS FOR COMPATIBILITY, HOW DO WE DO IT? WHERE DOES IT MAKE SENSE? HOW DO WE SORT OF ENACT IT AND COME BACK WITH SOME GUIDANCE? THE EXHIBIT REALLY SPEAKS TO TWO THINGS, PARTIALLY BECAUSE THEY'RE WHAT IS IN OUR CODE IN DIFFERENT PLACES TODAY.
ONE IS, UM, THAT IN 25 DASH TWO DASH 10 81, UM, THERE'S ACTUALLY THINGS THAT ALLOW A LAND USE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL TO WAIVE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS WHERE THERE'S REALLY STRICT GUIDANCE AROUND WHERE YOU CAN DO THAT AND WHERE YOU CANNOT.
SO WE WOULD BE CREATING MORE FLEXIBILITY IN THOSE TO ALLOW US TO DO IT.
THE SECOND ONE IS, SO A, CURRENTLY IN OUR T O D REGULATING PLANS, ALL THREE OF THEM, THERE'S A ALLOWANCE IN, UM, SECTION 4.3 0.2 DASH B THREE A, UM, WHICH ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS A WAIVER OF SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
IF 60% OF THE OWNERS OF THE TRIGGERING PROPERTIES OR OWNERS OF 60% OF THE TRIGGERING PROPERTIES DECIDE NOT TO ESSENTIALLY TRIGGER THAT COMPATIBILITY.
SO THAT ALLOWS EXIST IN OUR T O D CODE OR ESSENTIALLY SAYING MAYBE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WE CAN CONSIDER.
IS IT A WAIVER THAT'S ALLOWED BY NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS? IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY GO AHEAD AND ENACT, UM, THROUGH A SORT OF A PROPER PROCESS AT PLANNING COMMISSION COUNCIL? SO IT'S REALLY JUST LEAVING THE OPTIONS OPEN, AND I HONESTLY DEFER TO STAFF TO SEE WHAT THEY BRING FORWARD AND WHAT MAKES SENSE.
OF COURSE, THE IMPETUS FOR THIS IS REALLY COMING FROM THE ITEMS THAT WE HAD LAST TIME AND THEN WE PASSED TODAY, WHERE I THINK WE HAVE A CLEAR CASE WHERE A PROPERTY OWNER IS DOING A ZONING CHANGE THAT WOULD TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS ON ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER LEADING TO SOME ISSUE.
AND THE TRIGGERING PROPERTY OWNER IS CLEAR IN SAYING THAT THEY'RE FINE WITH NOT TRIGGERING COMPATIBILITY, BUT OUR CODE DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT.
I'M NOT GONNA SPEAK MUCH TO IT BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAD A PRETTY HEFTY DISCUSSION ON THE ISSUE LAST TIME.
SO HOPEFULLY THIS IS JUST CREATING A PATHWAY FORWARD FOR US TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE.
I KNOW IT'S COME UP IN THE PAST AS WELL, BUT WE REALLY SAW IT HIGHLIGHTED WITH THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
AND YEAH, SO WE, WE DID SAY WE WERE GONNA INITIATE THIS LAST MEETING, SO I'M GLAD TO SEE IT COME BACK LIKE WE SAID IT WOULD.
AND UM, SO THERE, THERE'VE BEEN A NUMBER OF TIMES WHEN WE HAVE TRIED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO, I MEAN, WE'VE HEARD FROM NEIGHBORS WHO SAID, WE DON'T WANT TO TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY ON THIS DEVELOPMENT.
WE, WE, WE, WE LIVE NEXT TO A MAJOR CORRIDOR AND WE LIKE THE IDEA OF LIVING IN A CITY AND OUR HOME IS PREVENTING LIKE THIS DEVELOPMENT NEXT TO US FROM, YOU KNOW, BEING WHAT THEY WANT IT TO BE.
IS THERE A WAY WE CAN WAVE THAT? RIGHT? AND WE'VE BEEN ASKED THAT, I'VE BEEN ASKED THAT A NUMBER OF TIME OVER THE YEARS, UM, IN CERTAIN PARTS OF TOWN, IN CERTAIN TODS, IT IS ALLOWED.
AND I'VE WATCHED THAT HAPPEN WHERE THE DEVELOPERS HAVE WORKED HAND IN HAND WITH IMMEDIATE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS TO GET A LETTER OF SUPPORT SAYING, YES, WE ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN.
AND IT'S BEEN A BETTER DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF THAT.
THEY, THEY WORKED TOGETHER IN A WAY THAT THEY DON'T GET TO WORK TOGETHER AT ALL.
AND TYPICALLY IT'S VERY, WE SEE KIND OF ADVERSARIAL, YOU KNOW, CONVERSATIONS COME IN HERE WHERE IT'S JUST LIKE, WE DIDN'T WANT THIS, OR WE DID WANT THIS.
AND THIS IS A GREAT WAY FOR FOLKS TO BE ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER EARLIER ON.
THAT ACTUALLY, I THINK GIVES MORE POWER TO THAT TRIGGERING PROPERTY.
UM, SO IT'LL BE GREAT TO SEE, NUMBER ONE, AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS FOR THIS TO OCCUR THAT MAKES SENSE.
THAT'S WITH THE PERMISSION OF A MAJORITY OF NEIGHBORING OWNERS, WHATEVER THAT HAPPENS TO LOOK LIKE.
AND THEN A PC VERSION FOR THAT TO OCCUR WHERE MAYBE THE TRIGGERING PROPERTY IS A GRAVEYARD OR A SCHOOL OR A GROUP THAT YOU'RE JUST NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO GET TO SIGN OFF FOR WHATEVER REASON.
SO I'M EXCITED TO SEE THIS HAPPEN, AND I THINK THIS WILL ALSO YIELD IN A LOT MORE HOUSING.
SO WITH THAT INTRODUCTION, WE, UH, WE CAN MOVE INTO OUR Q AND A.
UH, SO WE'LL START AT EIGHT IN FIVE, BUT IF WE NEED MORE, LET ME KNOW.
WE CAN CONTINUE ON, UH, WITH ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TO MAKE SURE FOLKS ARE CLEAR.
UH, I'M GONNA GO AND KICK IT OFF BECAUSE I'M INTERESTED TO CATCH YOU OFF CARD COMMISSION, UH, CHAIR COHEN
SORRY, UH, UH, BECAUSE I'M IN, HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THE BOARD AND ADJUSTMENTS, AS I UNDERSTAND ON
[03:00:01]
COMPATIBILITY WAIVERS THAT CURRENTLY IS IN THE BOA'S DOMAIN, IS THAT CORRECT? SO, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS OR ANY COMMENTS, SUGGESTIONS? N ACTUALLY, NO.I WAS A LITTLE SURPRISED CAUSE I, WHEN I FIRST SAW THE AGENDA, I, I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO
I WAS LITERALLY JUST TEXTING MY VICE-CHAIR ABOUT THAT.
UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR, I, I WAS JUST GONNA ASK, SO YES, SO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CAN PROVIDE THAT WAIVER.
I THINK THE ISSUE THAT WE'VE HAD WITH CASES IN THE PAST IS THERE'S A HIGHER STANDARD, WHICH IS REALLY ABOUT SHOWING A CERTAIN DEGREE OF UNIQUE HARDSHIP.
DO A PROPERTY OWNER, YOU CAN, WE CANNOT ALLOW WAIVERS, UM, OTHERWISE, AND SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I FEEL LIKE IT'S COME BEFORE WHERE SOMETHING COMES, THE ENTIRE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ESSENTIALLY SAYS, YES, THIS IS GOOD PLANNING AND WE AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING, BUT NO, THE CODE DOES NOT ALLOW US TO DO THAT.
SO HOPEFULLY THIS ADDRESSES THAT ISSUE.
UM, THE DIFFERENCE AND WHAT, WHAT YOU GUYS CONSIDER A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
WELL, AND, AND YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER ALSO THAT IT'S, IT'S, WE'RE, WE'RE LIMITED BY WHAT WE CAN DO BY THE STATE.
LIKE, SO A, A LOT OF WHAT'S DEFINED AS A HARDSHIP IS ALREADY PREDEFINED BY, BY STATE LAW AND PREVIOUS CASE LAW.
SO I THINK THIS WILL ACTUALLY OPEN UP A NEW PATH FOR US TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SOME REALLY INTERESTING DECISIONS OR NOT HAVE TO.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAD.
SO HOW WOULD THIS DIFFER FROM, UH, LIKE A VARIANCE PROCESS? SO I'LL START BY SAYING, HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT STAFF WOULD BRING BACK.
SO THAT'S SORT OF MY FIRST ANSWER.
UH, DEPENDING ON HOW THAT'S BROUGHT BACK THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT IN THE TWO, UH, THINGS THAT I'VE BROUGHT FORTH, SORT OF THE TWO IDEAS I SHOULD SAY THAT WE'RE SAYING, HEY, STAFF, MAYBE YOU CAN CONSIDER SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
THE TWO DIFFERENCES ARE, ONE IS THAT RATHER THAN IT BEING A, UM, ESSENTIALLY A VARIANCE THAT AGAIN, YOU KNOW, HAS A THRESHOLD OF ITS OWN AND WHAT MEETS THE VARIANCE REQUIREMENT, IT IS MORPH OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE WAIVER FOR A REQUIREMENT THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL CAN GO THROUGH.
OF COURSE, THAT MEANS YOU GO THROUGH A PUBLIC MEETING AT BOTH STATIONS.
SO IT'S SORT OF LIKE UNIQUE TO THAT.
IT IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THE CODE TODAY.
UM, BUT REALLY IN VERY SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE OTHER IDEA IS REALLY, AND I'LL BE HONEST, I DON'T KNOW HOW, HOW STAFF WORKS ON IT ADMINISTRATIVELY ON THEIR END, BUT IF PROPERTY OWNERS OF 60% OF THE TRIGGERING PROPERTY ESSENTIALLY GO AHEAD AND SAY, WE DO NOT WISH TO TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY ON A CERTAIN PROJECT, THEN THAT COMPATIBILITY DOES NOT GET TRIGGERED.
SO THAT'S MORE OF A NEIGHBORS COMING TOGETHER.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A PETITION OR FORM.
I DON'T KNOW MS. HARDEN IF YOU HAVE.
AND SO I DON'T QUITE KNOW HOW THEY, THEY DO THAT, BUT THERE IS ALREADY A PROCESS.
AGAIN, SITE PLANNERS, MANY PEOPLE WILL LOOK AT THIS AND PUT THEIR IDEAS TOGETHER AND COME FORWARD WITH SOME IDEAS.
AND, AND, AND SO MY NEXT QUESTION IS THAT, THAT VERY LAST BIT, UH, AND WITHOUT REQUIRING PARTICIPATION IN A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, W WOULDN'T, WOULDN'T THIS ESSENTIALLY CANNIBALIZE A LOT OF THE MECHANISMS WE USE TO REQUIRE AFFORDABILITY? UH, SO AGAIN, I'LL, I'LL ADD TWO THINGS.
I THINK ONE TO THE REASON THAT'S WRITTEN THAT WAY IS BECAUSE IN THE CURRENT TD ORDINANCE, YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO GET THAT WAIVER IF YOU'RE PARTICIPATING IN A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
SO OTHERWISE YOU CANNOT USE IT.
NOW, OF COURSE, IN A TD IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE IN A TD YOU HAVE A DENSITY BONUS THAT APPLIES THROUGHOUT YOUR ENTIRE AREA.
IF WE WERE TO TIE TO DENSITY BONUS CURRENTLY, THEN A VERY SMALL PART OF THE CITY CURRENTLY FALLS WITHIN A DENSITY BONUS AREA.
SO YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO USE IT.
IF IT WAS TIED TO THAT, WOULD THE OTHER REQUIREMENT THAT, AGAIN, THIS WOULD NOT BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE WAIVER, IT WOULD BE COMING TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL.
SO PLANNING COMMISSION COUNCIL, IF LET'S SAY SOMEBODY WAS NOT USING OUR COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE AND WAS TRYING TO DO THIS ROUTE, WE COULD EASILY SAY, WELL, NO, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH THAT OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE BONUS RATHER THAN GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS OF PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL.
AND I MAKE MYSELF CLEAR, I HOPE I DID.
SO, SO, SO THE KIND OF THE REVERSE VALID POSITION THING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS BASICALLY JUST TO GET A TICKET TO SHOW UP TO COMMISSION AND ASK FOR A COMPATIBILITY WAIVER.
I WAS REALLY TALKING ABOUT THE SECOND ONE WHERE WE WOULD HAVE A SAY FOR THE FIRST ONE, UH, WAIT, I'M SORRY.
NOW I'M CONFUSING MY OWN SELF, UM,
SO YES, IF WE DID IT IN THAT WAY,
[03:05:01]
SOMEBODY COULD TECHNICALLY DO IT.SO THEY COULD ALLOW IT, UH, FOR A COMPATIBILITY WAIVER WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT WITHOUT USING A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
BUT AGAIN, WITH THE REQUIREMENT THAT NOT ALL PARTS OF OUR CITY UNDER A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, SO I'LL GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF WHILE BACK.
I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL REMEMBER, THERE WAS A CASE IN GO VALLEY, JOHNSTON TERRACE WHERE SOMEBODY WANTED TO BUILD DUPLEXES, BUT THEY HAD TO MEET THE 25 FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT FROM COMPATIBILITY.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD SAID, WE DON'T WANT THIS SETBACK WE'RE FINE WITH A REGULAR SETBACK.
THE APPLICANT WANTED TO DO IT AND THEY WERE TRYING TO ZONE IT TO AN MF CATEGORY JUST SO THEY WOULD ACTUALLY NOT HAVE TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR.
SO, AGAIN, RIGHT IN THERE WAS LIKE THE THING WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS LIKE, WELL, WE'RE NOT GONNA SUPPORT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, BUT WE WOULD SUPPORT JUST REMOVING THE COMPATIBILITY WAIVER.
SO THAT'S REALLY THE IDEA BEHIND THIS.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY TIED SPECIFICALLY TO A DENSITY BONUS THAT'S ONLY IN THERE BECAUSE THE T OD ORDINANCE FUNCTIONS THAT WAY.
BUT, BUT, AND I, AND I'M SURE MY TIME'S OUT, BUT, BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS KIND OF LIKE A VALID PETITION TYPE EFFORT.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY MECHANISM THAT THIS CODE AMENDMENT IS CONSIDERING, IS ESSENTIALLY LIKE A VALID PETITION FOR RELEASING COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
ONE IS A PLANNING COMMISSION COUNCIL WAIVER, SIMILAR TO WHAT EXISTS IN THE CODE TODAY.
ONE IS KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE CALLING THE VAL PETITION IDEA THAT IS IN THET OD ORDINANCE TODAY.
AGAIN, I'M ONLY BRINGING OUT TWO ITEMS THAT EXIST IN OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS AND CODE.
BY NO MEANS WOULD I SAY WE SHOULD GO WITH ONE OR THE OTHER, HOW WE SHOULD BUILD IT.
I REALLY RELY ON STAFF TO GUIDE US THROUGH THAT.
I, I HEARD THE BUZZER, BUT I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
WHAT ARE THE TWO? SO THERE'S THE VA, THE REVERSE VALID PETITION.
WHAT'S THE SECOND ONE THAT THIS IS TALKING ABOUT? SO THE SECOND AS J I KNOW, WE'RE GO AHEAD AND ANSWER.
UM, THE FIRST ONE IS THAT FIRST BULLET POINT, WHICH SAYS, AMEND SUBSECTION C AND REMOVE SUBSECTION D OF 25 DASH TWO DASH 10 81.
IT'S CALLED LAND USE COMMISSIONER COUNCIL WAIVER.
SO EXCEPT FOR CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS, THE LAND USE COMMISSIONER COUNCIL ON APPEAL FROM A LAND USE COMMISSION DECISION MAY WAIVER REQUIREMENT OF THIS ARTICLE IF THE LAND USE COMMISSIONER COUNCIL DETERMINED THAT A WAIVER IS APPROPRIATE.
SO BULLET 0.1 IS THAT APPEAL PROCESS THAT EXISTS TODAY IN THE CODE IN VERY LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES.
AGAIN, I JUST PUT IT THERE BECAUSE IT'S IN THE CODE TODAY.
AND THEN THE OTHER ONE, THE VALIDATION ONE IS WHAT IS ALLOWED IN THE T OD AREAS TODAY, AGAIN, JUST REFERRING BACK TO HOW WE DO IT CURRENTLY.
SO IT'S MORE LIKE, HERE'S TWO OPTIONS EXIST IN THE CODE TODAY.
MAYBE WE CAN DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS.
OUR STAFF CAN COME UP WITH A THIRD, FOURTH, FIFTH PATH THAT IS UNKNOWN TO ME AT THIS MOMENT.
AND TERRY, THE ONLY THING I'D ADD TO THAT ARE MANY PEER CITIES ACTUALLY ALLOW THEIR LAND USE COMMISSION OR COUNCIL TO MODIFY OR WAIVE COMPATIBILITY.
UM, AND THOSE ARE ALL CITIES THAT DO NOT HAVE ANYWHERE NEAR THE HOUSING CRISIS THAT WE HAVE.
WE ARE IN THIS CRISIS FOR A REASON.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THIS LOOKS TO ADDRESS.
I I WOULDN'T CALL IT A REVERSE FILE PETITION.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S A A GOOD WAY TO FRAME THIS, BUT, UH, IT'S JUST ALLOWING NEIGHBORS IF THEY, SO, SO IF THEY DECIDE TO WHATEVER THRESHOLD OF NEIGHBORS THAT IS, THAT STAFF COMES UP WITH, MAYBE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR TODS, IF THEY DECIDE TO WAIVE THAT RESPONSIBILITY OR THAT THAT RIGHT, THAT THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW IN A CURRENT CODE, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO SO, WHICH RIGHT NOW CURRENT CODE DOES NOT ALLOW THEM THAT.
UH, LET'S MOVE ON TO ANOTHER COMMISSIONER OF QUESTIONS.
UH, NOT SEEING ANY, DO WE WANNA A MOTION ON THIS CHAIR BEFORE WE DO? I JUST, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THEN THE PROCESS GETS REALLY HAIRY.
I GUESS JUST A REMINDER TO PEOPLE, IF YOU HAVE NOT ASKED YOUR FIRST TIME, EVEN IF YOU ASK ONE, IF YOU HAVE MORE QUESTIONS, YOU CAN GO FOR A SECOND SLOT.
AS LONG AS OTHER PEOPLE DO NOT WISH TO ASK A QUESTION, WE WILL ALLOW THAT AT THIS TIME.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS? THIS ONE, AGAIN, IT'S JUST INITIATING THE PROCESS AND IT, WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF AVENUES THAT WERE PUT FORTH TO STAFF, BUT IT COULD BE TOTALLY DIFFERENT SET TO STAFF.
GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, UH, ESSENTIALLY INITIATE CODE AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 25 DASH TWO RELATING TO WAIVERS FOR COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
WE NEED, YOU WANNA SPEAK TO IT ANY MORE DISCUSSION? I'LL JUST SAY, I'M NOT GONNA SPEAK TO IT CUZ I THINK FOLKS HEARD ON IT, JUST THE EXHIBIT AND STAFF IS LOOKING AT ME.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THAT'S ONLY FOR JUST IDEAS FOR CONSIDERATION.
I THINK Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE GOOD IDEAS ON HOW TO CHOOSE SOMETHING SIMILAR.
ANY ANYONE WANNA SPEAK AGAINST THE MOTION COMMISSION? I'LL, CAN I SPEAK NEUTRALLY? I I AM TRYING TO NOT ALLOW NEUTRAL SPEAKERS,
[03:10:01]
FOR OUR, BY OUR RULES.I I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS GREEN OR RED, BUT, UM, I JUST WANNA EXPLAIN, I'M GONNA STAIN FROM THIS ONE BECAUSE I JUST DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE FIRST BULLET POINT.
I I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE SECOND BULLET POINT AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
THE FIRST ONE, I JUST NEED TO LEARN MORE AND I JUST DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE.
I, AND I WANNA BE CLEAR, I JUST, I REALLY WANNA BE CLEAR.
THESE ARE JUST THINGS THAT WITH THE EXPERIENCE THAT THESE FOLKS HAVE THAT THEY'RE SUGGESTING, THEY'RE IN NO WAY SAYING THIS IS WHAT WILL BE, UH, THIS IS WHAT STAFF'S GONNA COME BACK WITH.
THESE ARE JUST, AGAIN, SUGGESTIONS BASED ON THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE CURRENT CODE.
STAFF CAN COME BACK WITH SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAT MEETS THE INTENT OF WHAT WE PUT FORTH TODAY.
SO I ALMOST FEEL LIKE WE'RE SCARING PEOPLE WITH THE, UH, ADDITIONAL HOMEWORK WE'VE DONE TO MAKE IT A LITTLE CLEAR.
IT'S ACTUALLY A LITTLE, IT'S, IT'S SCARING PEOPLE.
AND I, I THINK, UH, BE CLEAR WHAT STAFF COMES BACK WITH ME LOOK TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
ANYONE ELSE WANNA SPEAK FOR AGAINST, UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD? YEAH, I ACTUALLY WANNA SPEAK IN THE, UH, THE PREVIOUS ITEM ON THE LEADING INSTITUTE AND I WAITED TOO LATE.
OKAY, NOW I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING YOU, COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
UH, WHICH, WHICH YOU SAID YOU WANTED TO SPEAK ON ITEM 19 ON THIS ITEM.
WELL, WE'RE GOING, WE'RE IN DEBATE.
AND SO IF, UH, IF YOU WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR OR AGAINST EITHER ONE OF THIS ITEM? YEAH.
UH, SPEAKING IN FAVOR, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES.
YEAH, I, I JUST, I WAS JUST ADDING THAT I HAD WANTED TO SPEAK PREVIOUSLY, BUT CAN YOU STILL FAVOR WITH ME? OKAY.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? OKAY, GREAT.
OPPORTUNITY TO SORT OF CLARIFY.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE MOTION ITEM 20.
UM, COMMISSIONER AZAR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, LET'S GO AND SEE THOSE IN FAVOR ON THE DIAS.
AND THOSE IN FAVOR, VIRTUALLY SHOW ME YOUR GREEN, I THINK THINK WE'VE GOT COMMISSIONER CONLEY, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, VOTING IN FAVOR AND COMMISSIONERS, COX AND MOALA, UM, UH, VOTING ABSTAINING.
[21. Discussion and possible action to schedule a special called meeting of the Planning Commission. (Sponsors: Chair Shaw and Vice-Chair Hempel)]
SO WE HAVE ITEM 21.IT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO DO THIS, BUT, UM, UM, THIS WOULD BE CALLING A SPECIAL MEETING ON MAY 30TH.
AND THERE'S A FEW ITEMS THAT WE'VE CONSIDERED.
THERE'S SOME A S P AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN AMENDMENTS, UM, THAT, UH, WE WANT A PRESENT, I'M SORRY, A PRESENTATION.
IS THAT CORRECT, MR. RIVERA? OR ARE WE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT AMENDMENTS? CHAIR, COMMISSION, LEE ON VERA? UH, SO REAL QUICKLY, IF I COULD BACK UP AND SURE.
UH, ANDREW, IF YOU COULD PULL IT UP REAL QUICK.
UM, THE, THE REASON FOR THE, UH, SPECIAL CALL OR THE REQUEST FOR THE SPECIAL CALL, UM, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR MEETING OF APRIL 25TH, UM, THERE YOU HAVE, UH, SEVERAL ZONING, UH, DISCUSSION CASES, UM, AND ALSO A, UM, UH, STAFF, UH, INTERPRETATION APPEAL, WHICH WILL, UH, LIKELY TAKE TIME AS WELL.
UM, ALONG WITH THAT, UM, CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 25TH ARE THE AS M P AMENDMENTS AND THE PALM DISTRICT PLAN, INCLUDING, UM, ON THAT AD OR INCLUDING ON THE AGENDA, IS FINALLY A BRIEFING ON THE ADUS.
SO YOU HAVE A FAIRLY, UH, SIGNIFICANT, UM, A AGENDA ON APRIL 25TH.
UM, SO I THINK, UH, THAT'S BROUGHT UP THE DISCUSSION OF HAVING A, UM, SPECIAL CALL ON THAT FIFTH TUESDAY THAT, UM, UH, THE COMMISSION, UM, USUALLY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HAVING THAT FIFTH TUESDAY FOR EITHER BRIEFINGS OR, UH, IN THIS CASE, MAYBE, UM, POSTPONING SOME CASES FOR ACTION.
SO WE HAVE A WORKING GROUP, UH,
[03:15:01]
THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN WORKING GROUP THAT WE FORMED, WHICH HAS COMMISSIONER ZAR, CONNOLLY, COX, AND MAXWELL.SO YOU ALL WOULD BE EXPECTED TO PROVIDE AMENDMENTS AT, IF WE DO AGREE ON THIS, IT WOULD GIVE THEM A LITTLE MORE TIME.
UM, CUZ THAT'S NOT JUST A PRESENTATION, THAT'S WHERE WE ACTUALLY WORK THROUGH AMENDMENTS AND, UH, THAT TAKES A LITTLE TIME.
UH, SO THAT, THAT HELPS, UH, ON THE PALM DISTRICT.
YOU WANT TO, I KNOW WE'RE JUMPED, WE MAY BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT NOW IN CONSIDERATION, UH, UPDATE ON THAT.
UM, CAN, CAN WE DO UPDATES NOW? UM, I THINK, UM, IF, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, AN UPDATE NOW WOULD HELP US MAKE A DECISION ON THIS ITEM.
SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD, UNLESS SOMEBODY OPPOSES IT.
WE GO AHEAD AND DO AN UPDATE ON THE PONG DISTRICT AT THIS POINT.
SO THE REASON THERE, THERE'S TWO REASONS WE'RE WANTING TO POSTPONE THIS EVENT.
THE FIRST ONE IS BECAUSE THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT, UH, INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HAS SAID IT'S GOING TO TAKE ABOUT THREE WEEKS TO COORDINATE ALL THE DIFFERENT VENUE OWNERS AND STAKEHOLDERS INTO A SINGLE MEETING.
SO THAT, THAT'S ISSUE NUMBER ONE.
I MEAN, AGAIN, REMEMBER WE'RE JUST POST SOUTH BY HALF OF THEM ARE STILL RECOVERING FROM HANGOVERS OR, YOU KNOW, A THOUSAND OTHER THINGS.
SO TURNS OUT COVID BURNED THROUGH.
THE MAJORITY OF RED RIVER AS WELL.
SO, JUST TO MOVE, WHEN I'M HEARING IS THAT ONE MAY NOT EVEN BE ON THIS AGENDA.
UH, LIKELY NOT IT, CUZ IT'S TAKING, GONNA TAKE US MORE TIME.
IT MAY NOT GET ON THIS MAY 30TH AGENDA.
WE'LL HAVE THAT ONE ON THE MAY 30TH.
WE WILL THIS, THIS, THAT WILL BE THE LAST WEEK IN APRIL IS WHEN WE PLAN TO HAVE THAT MEETING OR WHEN THEY PLAN TO HAVE THAT MEETING.
SO DO YOU THINK WE'LL FINISH OUR MEETINGS WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND BE ABLE TO PULL OUR AMENDMENTS TOGETHER, UH, BY THAT DATE? THAT'S THE QUESTION.
I THINK IT WOULD BE TIGHT AND IT DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH TIME PLANNING.
THE, THE PEOPLE, THE WORKING GROUP.
SO RIGHT NOW, WE'LL, IT'S, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND INCLUDE THAT FOR NOW ON THE AGENDA, BUT THEN THERE'S, IF, IF WE APPROVE IT, THERE'S ALSO THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION'S GOING TO BE HEARING OR DISCUSSING THE DEFINITION OF A LIVE MUSIC VENUE.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST MEETING IN MAY, MR. RIVERA.
RIGHT? IS THAT MAY 9TH OR, UH, CHAIR? I'D HAD TO LOOK AT THE DATES.
I THAT'S EITHER YOUR FIRST MEETING IN MAY OR YOUR SECOND MEETING.
I THINK IT'S YOUR SECOND MEETING IN MAY, ACTUALLY.
BUT I, I, I THINK COMING UP WITH AN ANSWER TO THAT FIRST, BEFORE WE START DIGGING INTO THIS, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING HOW MUCH RED RIVER HAS CHANGED SINCE THE PANDEMIC, THE VENUES THAT HAVE SURVIVED, IT'D BE GOOD TO BE ABLE TO DEFINE WHO THOSE ARE, WHAT THEY ARE, AND WRITE THAT INTO THE, UH, PALM DISTRICT PLAN.
UH, SO THAT'S AN UPDATE ON THE PALM DISTRICT PLAN.
WE TOOK CARE OF THAT AGENDA ITEM.
SO NOW, UM, ANYMORE QUESTIONS ON GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UH, JUST ONE QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 30TH, RIGHT? MAY 30TH WOULD BE, YES.
IT'S THE FIFTH, FIFTH TUESDAY.
SO IT'S, SO THOSE OF YOU THAT I SHOULD HAVE EXPLAINED, UH, WE HAVE TYPICALLY TWO MEETINGS, BUT WHEN THERE'S A FIFTH TUESDAY, WE CAN USE THAT TO DO OTHER BUSINESS.
SOMETIMES WE HAVE JOINT MEETINGS WITH ZAP, UH, WHEN THERE'S PRESENTATIONS, UH, THAT WE BOTH WANT TO HEAR.
UH, SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE CARE OF OUR BUSINESS, NOT A SHARED MEETING WITH ZAP.
MR. MAXWELL, JUST A QUICK QUESTION FOR OUR STAFF LIAISON.
UM, THE ASS P IT, IT WOULDN'T DELAY THE PROCESS FOR US TO MOVE THIS BACK CUZ I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A TIGHT TIMELINE WITH COUNCIL CONSIDERATION AS WELL.
CHAIR COMMISSION LIAISON, ANDREW.
SO, UH, THE, UH, A AX OR A TX BIKE ROLL AND THE AS M P ARE SCHEDULED FOR COUNCIL IN MAY, HOWEVER, IT IS AN IMAGINE AUSTIN ITEM.
SO PLANNING COMMISSION MUST ACT ON THAT PRIOR TO IT BEING HEARD FROM COUNCIL AT COUNCIL.
SO THE ITEM WOULD BE POSTPONED AT COUNCIL.
AND I THINK, UH, WITH THOSE, WITH THOSE CASES STAY ON, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY WOULD BE OUR PRIORITY AND WE MAY NOT EVEN GET TO IT.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS? UH, THIS ITEM, MR. AAR? I'M SO SORRY, SHERRY, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.
MR. RARE, YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE THIS ANSWER.
THE A D U ITEM, IS IT EXPECTED TO GO ON CODES AND ORDINANCES ON THE 19TH OF APRIL CHAIR? I DON'T HAVE THE SCHEDULE OF THE ADU AMENDMENTS.
UM, I KNOW THAT IT WAS ONLY A BRIEFING, UH, PROPOSED FOR THE 25TH TO PC.
OH, SO IT WOULD BE A BRIEFING ONLY, CORRECT.
I'M, I'M HONESTLY IN FAVOR OF CREATING A NEW MEETING.
I, I'LL BE HONEST, I THINK IT SOMETIMES IT HELPS IN HAVING SOME DISTANCE BETWEEN WHEN IT GOES TO OUR COMMITTEES, INCLUDING THE COMP PLAN COMMITTEE, WHERE TWO OF THOSE ITEMS MIGHT BE GOING JUST BECAUSE I FULLY BELIEVE IT GIVES PEOPLE, HONESTLY, TIME TO LOOK AT THE BACKUP AND BEFORE THE MEETING.
[03:20:01]
ALL RIGHT.SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO THIS, UH, THIS FOR CONSIDERATION, IF WE SOMEBODY MAKES A MOTION, IS TO, UH, ADD ANOTHER MEETING TO OUR AGENDA.
YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION? YES, CHAIR.
I'M MAKING A MOTION THAT WE ADD A MEETING TO MAY 30.
MAY 30TH, UH, FOR ANOTHER, AND PARTICULARLY LOOKING AT SOME OF OUR CONS, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS AND CODE AMENDMENTS.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND, UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPLE SECOND SET MOTION? DO WE NEED ANY, UH, DEBATE DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.
DO SEE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS ADDITIONAL MEETING? OH, MR. RIVERA, DO YOU HAVE CHAIR COMMISSIONER LEE ON ANDREW? I JUST ALSO WANT, AT THIS TIME IF WE COULD, UH, CHECK ON QUORUM FOR, UH, MAY 30TH.
JUST TO SHOW OF HANDS AT THIS POINT, UH, WHO THINKS THEY CAN ACTUALLY MAKE THE MEETING? UH, SORRY.
I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT MAY 2ND.
SO ON THE DIAS, WE HAVE EVERYONE THAT, UH, UH, REASONS LATER, UH, WELL, I'LL SAY IT NOW.
COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, YOU PROBABLY WON'T BE WITH US AT THAT POINT, SO THAT'S WHY YOU'RE NOT RAISING YOUR HAND.
BUT WE HAVE EVERYBODY ELSE AS THEY CAN ATTEND THOSE, UH, VIRTUALLY.
UM, ANY IDEA ABOUT YOUR ATTENDANCE STATUS? OKAY, SO I THINK WE SOUNDS LIKE, UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, YOU THINK YOU'RE IN OR OUT? OKAY, I SEE A HAND UP.
I'LL TAKE THAT AS CONSIDER HIM POSSIBLY IN.
SO I THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH FOR QUORUM AND TO CONSIDER THOSE AMENDMENTS WITH ENOUGH FOLKS.
SO WE WERE IN THE, THE MIDDLE OF, I THINK, VOTING ON THIS.
WE HAD EVERY, WE ALREADY VOTED
I WANNA CHECK ON STAFF AND IS THE DAY AFTER MEMORIAL DAY, MOST IMPORTANTLY IS THE DAY AFTER SIMON DIED.
I JUST, I WANNA CHECK WITH Y'ALL.
IT'S THE DAY AFTER MEMORIAL DAY, SO, UH, STEPH WILL BE HERE.
SO I THINK WE SECRETARY, WE VOTED ON THE DI, RIGHT? I THINK WE HAD EVERYBODY.
DID WE TAKE A VOTE? I'M SORRY.
LET'S GO AND SHOW OF HANDS, THOSE THAT NOT TAKE A VOTE.
THIS MOTION FOR A MAY 30TH MEETING.
UM, ARE THOSE ON THE SCREEN? WE HAVE COMMISSIONER COX IN FAVOR, AND, UH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER HOWARD IN FAVOR AND COMMISSIONER MISHAL, ABSTAINING AND ABSTAINING.
SO THAT, THAT MOTION CARRIES 10 0 2, IS THAT CORRECT? WE'RE STILL AT 12.
[22. Election of Officers]
GOING ON NOW WE, UH, HAVE ELECTION OF OFFICERS, UH, WE HAVE OPENINGS.WELL, I'LL SAY THIS, WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON ALL OF THEM.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY, UH, APPRECIATED.
UM, COMMISSIONER FLORES, WHO'S NOT HERE TONIGHT, SHE IS OUR SECRETARY, UH, DID A GREAT JOB FOR A LONG TIME DURING COVID, WE HAD TO SHOW UP AND SIGN DOCUMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE, UM, WHAT DO THEY CALL THAT? BUILDING ONE TEXAS BUILDING.
UH, SO THAT WAS ALWAYS FUN HANGING OUT WITH MASS SIGNING DOCUMENTS DURING THE PANDEMIC.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE.
UM, WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, UM, LAST TIME WE VOTED IN A TEMPORARY STATUS, UM, TO HAVE A CHAIR, UM, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER AZAR IS OUR PARLIAMENTARIAN AND A TEMPORARY STATUS.
SO THAT'S IN THE WORKS RIGHT NOW, UH, FOR THIS MEETING.
UM, BUT DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THE OFFICER ROLES OR BEFORE WE MOVE INTO MOTIONS? THIS IS AT THIS TIME EVERY YEAR JUST TO EXPLAIN THIS IS WHEN WE VOTE ON OUR OFFICERS FOR THE NEXT YEAR.
UM, COMMISSIONER AZAR IS OUR PARLIAMENTARIAN, BUT WAS THAT A TEMPORARY, THAT WAS A TEMP ASSIGNMENT.
SO THIS IS ALL FOR, THIS WOULD BE, I JUST WANTED FOLKS TO KNOW HE IS IN THAT ROLE TEMPORARILY.
WE DID NOT, WE DID, COULD NOT VOTE ON THAT PERMANENT BASIS.
SO THAT IS ALSO SOMETHING, AND I HAVE A QUESTION, VOTE ON, ARE THE THREE OFFICERS THAT WE HAVE UP HERE WILLING TO CONTINUE IN THEIR CURRENT ROLES? YES.
CAN I SAY SOMETHING FOR YES, JUST ON THE SECRETARY.
I, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MENTION ONE THING.
IT DOES HELP TO HAVE SOMEONE WHO PLANS TO ATTEND THE MEETINGS IN PERSON AND VERY REGULARLY, CUZ IT HAS TO BE PHYSICAL, SIGNED COPIES
[03:25:01]
OF THE LA AND SO, SO JUST TO BE CAREFUL THAT FOLKS WHO ARE LIKE, YES, I WILL ALWAYS BE THERE IN PERSON, EXCEPT FOR, YOU KNOW, RARE CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD DEFINITELY CONSIDER GOING FOR A SECRETARY.SO THE ROLES, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A MOTION BEING MADE THAT THE SECRETARY MAY BE UP IN THE AIR IS PREDOMINANTLY ASSIGNING PLATS AND DOCUMENTS, UH, WHICH, UM, MR. RIVERA HA LAYS OUT FOR US AFTER THE MEETING.
AND SECONDLY, UH, IT IS NOT IN THE BYLAWS, BUT TRADITIONALLY WE HAVE THEM DO THE FIRST READING OF THE, UH, AGENDA.
SO THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT YOU WOULD PREDOMINANTLY, UH, DUTIES THAT YOU WOULD PERFORM.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
LET'S, LET'S SEE IF YOU, WE HAD A MOTION, WELL, LET ME THROW IT OUT THERE.
OF THE FOLKS WHO LIKE TO SHOW UP HERE, IS THERE ANYONE INTERESTED IN BEING SECRETARY OR IS THERE SOMEONE ON THE SCREEN THAT IS GONNA BE TEMPTED TO THIS BUILDING EVERY MEETING TO BE SECRETARY? IF, IF I COULD REAL QUICK, NOT THAT I'M INTERESTED IN TAKING THIS FROM COMMISSIONER AZAR, BUT WE DO HAVE GUIDANCE FROM LEGAL AS OF YESTERDAY THAT EX OFFICIOS CAN NOW SERVE AS PARLIAMENTARIANS.
I THINK THEY'RE MAD ABOUT ME BECAUSE OF ALL THE EXTRA WORK IT CREATED, BUT STILL, IT'S, IT'S INTERESTING.
JUST, UM, I I AM ACTUALLY GONNA, I'M GONNA, WELL, LET ME JUST SUGGEST THIS.
I, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, YOU HAVE BEEN HERE PRETTY CONSISTENTLY AND I WAS ACTUALLY CONSIDERING YOU FOR THE SECRETARY ROLE.
UM, IS THAT SOMETHING YOU, I MEAN, I WAS REALLY HOPING TO PAWN THAT OFF, BUT, UH, IF ONLY I COULD SECOND THAT I'M SEEING IF ONLY, SO I, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, IS THAT, ARE YOU PLANNING ON BEING HERE ATTENDING REGULARLY? I I THOUGHT YOU JUST SAID YOU WANTED IT.
NO, I WAS ACTUALLY SUGGESTING THAT I SECOND THAT FOR COMMISSION.
WE HAVE A TURD FROM BISHOP IN THAT CASE.
UH, SOMEBODY ELSE WANNA MAKE A MOTION ON THE NOMINATIONS? I MOVE CEASE.
WELL WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE ON OUR, ON OUR OFFICERS CHAIR COMMISSION.
SO IF YOU COULD JUST CALL THE NAMES AND THEN, UH, VOTE ON THE ADAM.
SO THEN, WELL, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HERE.
UM, WHO IS, WHO IS NOT HERE TONIGHT, COMMISSIONER, TO FILL OUT THE FULL PC? WE HAVE TWO MORE.
COMMISSIONER FLORES WHO IS GOING TO BE, UH, AT THE NEXT MEETING.
WE PROBABLY WON'T, WE WON'T HAVE HER.
WE WON'T HAVE COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE THE, MAYBE THE NEW COMMISSIONERS.
SO WE'RE EXPECTING OH, AND, AND COMMISSIONER CONLEY ISN'T HERE RIGHT NOW.
SO, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO, I'M JUST TRYING TO, SO WE'RE EXPECTING COMMISSIONER FLORES'S SEAT AND COMMISSIONER THOMPSON'S SEAT TO BE REPLACED AT SOME POINT IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
I, I'M BEING TOLD THAT SHOULD BE MAYBE THE NEXT MEETING, UH, BECAUSE THAT IS COUNCIL DISCRETION.
SO I WON'T BE THE NEW GUY ANYMORE.
BECAUSE WE COULD, WE COULD ALWAYS, UH, REAPPOINT THE THREE OFFICERS NOW.
CAUSE I THINK THERE'S GENERAL AGREEMENT ON THAT AS FAR AS I CAN TELL.
AND THEN IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO POSTPONE THE SECRETARY VOTE UNTIL WE HAVE ALL THE PERMANENT MEMBERS SEATED, THEN THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE WANT TO CONSIDER.
UH, NO, WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO TAKE ACTION TONIGHT.
I DON'T WANNA BE PUT IN A TEMPORARY MODE.
IF, IF WE CAN COME TO A DECISION CHAIR, COMMISSION LAY LIAISON.
IT'S ALSO PART YOUR, UH, BYLAWS THAT YOU MUST, UH, APPOINT, UH, OFFICERS, UM, YOUR FIRST MEETING IN APRIL.
YEAH, WE CAN'T, YEAH, THAT'S TRUE.
SO CAN I, UM, CAN SOMEBODY READ THE NAMES, UH, FOR CONSIDERATION? I'M GOING TO, I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ IT.
SO THAT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY, WE WOULD HAVE, UM, CHAIR TODD SHAW, UM, CONSIDERED FOR CHAIR.
WE WOULD HAVE CLAIRE HEMPEL FOR VICE CHAIR AVES, HAR FOR, FOR, UH, PARLIAMENTARIAN AND GREG ANDERSON FOR SECRETARY.
UM, I, I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANY DISCUSSION, DEWEY, ANYBODY WANT? OKAY.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND RAISE HANDS.
ARE WE IN ON THE DIAS FAVOR OF THE OFFICERS? THOSE ON THE SCREEN.
[03:30:03]
OKAY.THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR VOTE OF CONFIDENCE AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE OTHER OFFICERS.
UH, OKAY, NOW LET'S, UH, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS FOUR.
[23. Nomination of members to be considered by Council to serve on Joint Committees.]
I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS ONE.THESE ARE THE JOINT COMMITTEES.
WE DO HAVE A FEW THINGS WE COULD PROBABLY FILL AND COMMISSIONER COX TO ADDRESS YOUR, YOUR CONCERN.
GENERALLY WE LIKE, UH, FOLKS TO AT LEAST BE ON ONE BOARD OR, UM, JOINT COMMISSION OR, UM, JUST TO, SO OTHERS DON'T HAVE TO DOUBLE UP, KIND OF SPREADS OUT THE WORKLOAD.
SO AT THIS POINT, UM, LAST MEETING, UH, JUST TO REMIND FOLKS, PREVIOUS ACTIONS, WE HAD ADAM HAYNES ON THE COMPREHEN PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
UH, WE HAD COMMISSIONER MAXWELL ON THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD AND COMMISSIONER WOODS ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
WHAT I THINK WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON TONIGHT, AND MR. RIVERA REMIND ME OF, CUZ WE, WE HAVE SOME FOLKS IN HOLDOVER AND THEY'RE, THEY MAY BE NEEDED FOR THEIR NEXT MEETINGS.
SO WE DON'T WANNA REPLACE 'EM JUST NEXT, JUST NOW.
BUT I THINK WE CAN, UM, TAKE ACTION ON, UM, SMALL AREA PLANNING IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO PARTICIPATE THERE.
OF COURSE, NOW WE'RE MISSING COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
I WAS, HE WAS THE ONE THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN ASSIGNMENT YET.
UH, AND I WOULD, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN TAKE ACTION THERE.
UH, AND I WAS ALSO, UM, IF SOMEBODY WAS, LET ME KNOW IF THIS WILL CAUSE ANY PROBLEMS ON CODES AND ORANGES, BUT IF SOMEBODY WAS REALLY INTERESTED IN SERVING ON CODES AND ORDINANCES, UH, I COULD MOVE OVER TO SMALL AREA PLANNING.
SO THAT IS, I DON'T DOES ANYBODY HAVE A BIG INTEREST IN SERVING ON CODES AND ORDINANCES? OH, NO.
OH, I, I THOUGHT DID, WAS THERE A STAFF QUESTION? SORRY, I'M CONFUSED.
UM, SO FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT WE WERE DOING WITH FLORES, BUT, UH, THE APRIL MEETING WAS CANCELED BECAUSE WE DID NOT HAVE QUORUM.
SO WE'RE GONNA TRY TO MEET IN MAY FOR AN EMERGENCY MEETING.
OTHERWISE, I THINK AUSTIN'S GONNA IMPLODE INTO A BIG BLACK HOLE
SO I THINK THERE ARE SEATS THERE THAT WE NEED TO FILL IF ANYONE IS WILLING.
YEAH, I THINK YOU'VE GOT FLORES IN HOLDOVER, RIGHT? HELP ME OUT HERE, ANDREW.
WHAT CAN WE DO TONIGHT? CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LADIES ON? SO YEAH, WE WANT, WE WANTED FLORES IN HOLDOVER, UM, AND POSSIBILITY OF MAKING THE, THE QUORUM FOR THAT MEETING.
BUT BECAUSE THAT IS NOW CANCELED, UM, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND POINT, UH, I THINK, UH, TWO, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, UH, CORRECT ME IF I'M MISTAKEN, I BELIEVE THERE'S TWO VACANCIES.
UH, WHO DID WE APPOINT TO THIS MO THE COMPREHENSIVE JOINT COMMITTEE LAST TIME? UH, COMMISSIONER HAYES.
THEN WE ACTUALLY HAVE TWO OPENINGS WITH ONE REPLACEMENT FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER FLORES.
SO THE CHALLENGE IS WE DON'T, WE'RE STILL MISSING TWO COMMISSIONERS TO MAKE THOSE ASSIGNMENTS.
UH, UH, AND COMMISSIONER CONLEY IS NOT HERE.
WE CAN, UH, MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION AND IF HE, I GUESS IF HE'S SERIOUSLY AGAINST THAT, HE COULD TELL US.
BUT, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT FORTH HIS NAME EITHER FOR SMALLER AREA PLANNING OR, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THERE'S MORE NEED ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WE JUST, WE'RE GONNA BE DOUBLING PEOPLE UP.
SO IF PEOPLE ARE WANTING TO SERVE ON A JOINT COMMITTEE, UM, THAT ARE ALREADY, I MEAN, WE'VE GOT, UM, COMMISSIONER WOODS ON SUSTAINABILITY AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL ON THE, UH, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT.
UM, I'M NOT SURE I'LL OFTEN THOSE MEAT, UM, ANYWAY, UH, AND I'M ALSO OFFERING UP THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.
BUT IF WE DO THAT, ANDREW, THEN WE'RE GONNA PUT THAT, UM, OFF RIGHT.
UNTIL SOME, IT'LL TAKE A WHILE FOR COUNSEL TO APPROVE THAT NEW MM-HMM.
[03:35:01]
WOULD SUGGEST, UM, ANY, WELL, LET'S JUST BE FAIR, ANY OTHERS THAT HAVE BEEN INTERESTED IN CODES AND ORDINANCES? OKAY.I'M HEARING THAT, UH, IT'S, SO YOU'RE GOT YOUR HAND UP, SO WE'LL INCLUDE THAT IN OUR MOTION.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND COMMISSIONER CONLEY, HAS ANYBODY HEARD HIM EXPRESS INTEREST OR WAS HE PREVIOUSLY ON SMALLER AREA PLANNING OR? OKAY, SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND WHAT, WHAT DO YOU WANNA GO ON? I'M GONNA GO ON SMALLER AREA PLANNING, SO LET'S
SO CHAIR, I'M MAKING A MOTION TO APPOINT COMMISSIONER MAXWELL TO THE CLOSE AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, CHAIR TODD SHAW TO THE SMALLER AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
AND COMMISSIONER CONLEY TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY CLEAR COMMISSION THOMPSON AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL TO THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT BOARD.
DIDN'T WE MOVE ON THAT LAST TIME? MM-HMM.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LAY VERA.
I DO BELIEVE THAT COMMISSIONER HOWARD WAS INTERESTED ON A JOINT COMMITTEE.
UH, WE HAD THAT CONVERSATION AND HE IS FINE WHERE HE IS.
ANY OTHER, ARE WE GOOD WITH THIS? LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
UH, DID WE GET A SECOND? NO, NO, NOT YET.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THESE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FILL AND POSITIONS.
COULD YOU RESTATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS ONE MORE TIME, PLEASE? OKAY, SURE.
SO WE'RE, UM, SHAW ON SMALLER YEAR PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE, UH, CONK ON COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE, AND THEN FELICITY MAXWELL ON THE, UH, CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.
ARE YOU, ARE YOU GOOD COMMISSIONER MITCH SCHOLAR? OKAY.
UH, VOTE ON THIS VIRTUAL, UH, THOSE IN FAVOR OF THESE NOMINATIONS.
ASK I, I'M GONNA TRY TO MAKE THIS, UH, MR. ER, CAN YOU REMIND US NOW WHAT WE CAN SEE HERE LEFT? SO WE HAVE THE ALTERNATE SEAT FOR JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
WE, I THINK STILL HAVE ONE WE CAN SEE ON COMP PLAN.
I THINK THERE'S ONE ON EACH AND THEN, AND THERE'S ONE ON SMALLER AREA.
SO WE STILL HAVE THREE VACANCIES.
SO WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE AND TWO VACANCIES.
YEAH, WELL, THREE VACANCIES CUZ OF THE ALTERNATE FOR SUSTAINABILITY.
[24. Appointment of members to Working Groups]
NEXT ITEM.I DON'T, WHEN I LOOKED AT IT, I DIDN'T, I DON'T SEE ANY FOLKS MOVING OFF BECAUSE OF THEIR, I THINK WE'RE GOOD.
UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS TO BE ADDED TO A WORKING GROUP.
THEY'RE LISTED IN THE UPDATES SECTION.
AND, LET'S SEE, I'M JUST COUNTING HERE TO SEE WHERE WE'RE AT.
UH, WE'RE AT QUORUM ON THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND THOSE, NO, WE'RE NOT.
UH, ACTUALLY, YEAH, SO WE, WE CAN PUT ONE MORE THERE.
UM, CHAIR COMMISSION LADIES AND I WHILE YOU DO, YOU CAN GO UP TO SIX MEMBERS.
UM, WE DO LIKE TO STAY WITHIN FIVE IF POSSIBLE.
BECAUSE OF THE COMMUNICATIONS NEEDED TO AT TIMES WITHIN THE CHAIR, VICE CHAIR.
CAN WE CLARIFY WHAT HAPPENED WITH ADU? BECAUSE I THOUGHT ALL OF THAT.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS WRAPPED UNDER THE SMALL, UM, THE HOUSING WORKING GROUP AND THEN THAT CLOSED AND WE DIDN'T REDO THINGS AFTER COMMISSIONER SHAY FINISHED HIS SERVICE.
I THINK WE VOTED ON THIS TO START THIS IN A YOU WANNA GO AHEAD AND COMMISSIONER ZA? UM, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS, SO WE CREATED THIS ESSENTIALLY TO LOOK AT THE AD ITEMS THAT ARE COMING FORTH.
WE JUST WENT AHEAD AND CREATED THE WORKING GROUP CUZ WE KNOW AGAIN, WE'LL HAVE A FEW WEEKS TO GET ALL OF THE WORK DONE.
SO YEAH, IT DID KIND OF COME OUT OF THAT GROUP REALIZING WE WERE GONNA GET SOME, UH, SOME CODE CHANGES.
SO IT WAS KIND OF, WE WERE WORKING ON IT, BUT THEN COUNCIL ALSO HAD SOME CODES THEY HAD INITIATED.
I HADN'T HEARD ANYTHING BACK ON THAT YET.
UM, IT'S MOVING THROUGH THE PROCESS.
I THINK WE HAVE AN UPDATE, UH, THAT STAFF THAT'S GONNA PROVIDE AND THEN AT SOME POINT WILL, HOPEFULLY THEY'LL GIVE US A SCHEDULE FOR WHEN THAT'S GONNA COME BACK.
WHO'S LEADING OUR WORKING GROUP? CUZ I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING.
UH, SO I THINK I WOULD ASK THAT THE WORKING GROUP ESTABLISHED THAT OUR LEADER
WE HAVE WHO DO WE HAVE ON THE WORKING GROUP RIGHT
[03:40:01]
NOW? I'VE GOT A LIST OF ABOUT SIX PEOPLE THAT ARE WAITING.WE HERE THAT WANTED TO BE PARTICIPATING IS PUBLIC CHAIR.
CAN I INTERRUPT REAL QUICK PLEASE? YES, PLEASE.
I'M GOING TO ADVISE THAT SOMEONE MAKES A MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING.
WE STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH WORKING GROUP UPDATES.
WE'RE GOOD? NO, LET'S GIVE OURSELVES A FEW MORE MINUTES.
I'LL, I'M GONNA TRY TO, SO COMMISSIONER, UM, MOSH TALLER.
THE, UH, I WAS REFERRING HAVING PEOPLE TO REFER TO THE BACK, UM, WHERE IT LISTS THE UPDATES AND IT SHOWS THE MEMBERS.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, IT'S OUR COX, HOWARD MOSH AND COHEN, UH, THAT'S ON THE BACK.
UM, WHEN WE'RE ASKING FOR UPDATES, IT LISTS ALL THE MEMBERS.
AND SO ANYBODY INTERESTED IN, I'M JUST TRYING TO MOVE IT.
SO THAT ONE'S PRETTY MUCH FULL.
UH, AUSTIN'S STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN WORKING GROUP HAS COMMISSIONER ZAR, CONLEY, COX, AND MAXWELL.
UH, THAT ONE'S PRETTY GOOD, NUMBER FOUR, BUT WE DO HAVE ROOM.
ANYBODY INTERESTED IN ADDING ON? AND WE'LL SAVE A PLACE FOR SOMEONE ELSE.
UM, DESIGN GUIDELINES, UPDATE WORKING GROUP.
I THINK, UH, THIS ONE, UH, VICE CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER COHEN.
BUT I THINK COMMISSIONER COHEN, YOU WERE HAVING CHALLENGES WITH THEIR MEETING TIME AND I DON'T KNOW, IS IT STILL IMPORTANT THAT WE ENGAGE IN THIS? THIS IS A MULTI MULTICOM COMMISSION EFFORT, ISN'T IT? YEAH.
THIS IS A PRETTY BIG PROJECT, BUT THEY, THEY DID CHANGE THE MEETING DATES WEDNESDAYS NOW, SO, OKAY.
UH, BUT THEY'RE, UH, I THINK WE'RE GOOD THERE UNLESS YOU GUYS NEED ANY MORE MEMBERS.
YOU GOT, THAT ONE'S PRETTY FILLED OUT TOO, SO I DON'T COMMISSION.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON THIS ONE.
ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? COMMISSIONER HAINES? YES.
I THOUGHT YOU WERE GONNA, WE WANTED TO GET ON A WORKING GROUP.
[BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]
RIGHT.LET'S SEE IF WE CAN CLOSE THIS OUT WITH UPDATES.
UH, ANYTHING FROM CODES AND ORDINANCES? VICE CHAIR? NO, WE'RE MEETING NEXT WEDNESDAY.
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO, ABLE TO MAKE THE FIRST JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS OR HOW THAT WORKS.
UH, LET'S, LET'S TALK MAYBE WE CAN HAVE SOMEBODY FEELING TALK IN UNOFFICIAL CAPACITY.
JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING TOMORROW.
UH, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S NOTHING THERE.
COMMISSIONER MR. TYLER, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? I'M, I'M GONNA SEND OUT A NOTE TO THE GROUP AND GET IT COOKING.
I'VE GOT A FEW PEOPLE THAT WERE HEADING KNOWN JAMES AND NEED TO TRANSITION OVER WHO WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC PROCESS.
AND I THINK HE CAN STILL, UH, HELP OUT AS, UH, PUBLIC.
AUSTIN'S STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN, WORKING GROUP.
UM, ANY, IT'S, IT'S ACTIVITY IN PROCESS.
WE'RE GONNA START BRIEFING SIMPLY NEXT WEEK.
STILL WORKING THROUGH UPDATES WITH OUR SUBGROUPS.
AND WE ALREADY HEARD ON PALM DISTRICT UPDATES, SO WE'RE GOOD THERE.
UH, JUST FY I DID SEND AN EMAIL OUT TO ALL THE, UH, WORKING GROUP MEMBERS.
PLEASE CHECK THAT SO WE CAN GET TOGETHER AND GET THAT SCHEDULE FOR STAFF.
UH, ANY OPPOSITION? UH, GO AHEAD, MR. ANDERSON.
UM, THIS MIGHT BE EVENT FLORES'S LAST MEETING AND COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
I'D LOVE TO THANK THEM BOTH FOR THEIR SERVICE.
I'M CURIOUS IF IT IS 9 58 IF COMMISSIONER THOMPSON HAS 30 SECONDS OF ANYTHING HE WANTS TO SAY, EVEN IF IT'S LIKE ONE SENTENCE.
THIS IS MY THIRD LAST MEETING.
UM, I THINK I PROBABLY SAID IT ALL BEFORE.
UM, I, I KNOW ALL OF YOU GUYS LOVE THE CITY, UH, JUST LIKE I DO AND LET'S KEEP MAKING IT GREAT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
SO ANY OBJECTIONS TO ME? CLOSE ADJOURNING THIS MEETING? OKAY.
IT'S 9 59 AND UH, THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS ADJOURNED.
MAY GOT FOUR WHEELS OF ROAD EATING GOOD.
[03:45:03]
I DON'T NEED IS AS DONNA SIT UP IN DUNES.