[00:00:04]
[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, CONVENE THIS, UH, MEETING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.UH, THE DATE IS AUGUST 22ND, 2023.
AND WE'LL START WITH A ROLL CALL AND I'LL START WITH THOSE FOLKS, UH, ON THE DAIS HERE.
WE'LL START WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS HERE.
AND TO MY RIGHT, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER CZAR HERE.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HERE, COMMISSIONER HAYNES HERE, AND THEN, UH, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY.
UM, I'M JUST GONNA GO IN THE ORDER AS I SEE YOU GUYS.
UH, COMMISSIONER RA RAMIREZ HERE.
WE HAVE OUR A I S D BOARD OF TRUSTEES, OUR NEW EX-OFFICIO MEMBER, CANDACE HUNTER.
OF COURSE, WE HAVE AN ITEM THAT, UH, YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HERE THIS EVENING.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE, UH, JUST AS I'M ABOUT TO
AND ALSO WANNA RECOGNIZE, UH, THE A I SS D INTERIM SUPERINTENDENT MATTOS RA, UM, IS HERE THIS EVENING.
AND WITH THAT, I THINK THAT GIVES IT GET US PAST THE ROLL CALL.
UH, WE HAVE A FEW DISCUSSION ITEMS. UH, WE'LL GO THROUGH THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THOSE ITEMS. THEN, UH, WE DON'T HAVE THAT MANY FOLKS HERE, BUT YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY OUT IN THE LOBBY.
UH, YOU'LL GET A, AN EMAIL ABOUT 15 MINUTES OUT, UH, IF YOU'RE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
UH, BUT YES, WE HAVE, UH, FOLKS SPEAKING BOTH VIRTUALLY AND IN PERSON AS WELL AS COMMISSIONERS AS YOU CAN SEE ATTENDING VIRTUALLY AND, AND HERE ON THE DICE AS WELL.
UH, SO, UM, COMMISSIONERS, HAVE YOUR COLORED CARDS READY TO HELP ME COUNT VOTES.
THAT'S ALWAYS A STRUGGLE, BUT WE'RE GETTING BETTER AT IT.
UM, MR. RIVERA, DO WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION TODAY? CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LADIES ON ANDREW VERA.
WE DO NOT HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION THIS EVENING.
UH, THE NEXT ITEM, APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
UH, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND ROLL THOSE INTO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
IF THERE'S NO COMMENTS, UH, COMMISSIONERS
[Consent Agenda]
ANY, UH, CHANGES OR COMMENTS TO THE AUGUST 8TH, 20, 23 MINUTES.SO WE'LL GO PUT THOSE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, FIRST ITEM TODAY IS WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND READ THROUGH THE AGENDA AND IDENTIFY THOSE THAT'LL BE, UH, VOTED ON CONSENT.
AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THE HONORS THERE.
SO, AS I SAID, UH, MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 8TH, 2023 MEETING.
UM, AND ITEM TWO, WE HAVE PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 22 0 0 2, 9 0.02 ANDERSON LANE, MIXED USE.
UH, THAT'S STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
ITEM THREE, A PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 23 0 0 1, 3 0 2 700.
DAWSON, UH, THAT IS APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 26.
AND THE COMPANION, UH, REZONING THREE B, UH, C 14 20 23 0 0 6 4 700.
DAWSON, UH, AS WELL, UH, POSTPONED TO, THAT'S AN APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO, UH, SEPTEMBER 26, ITEM FOUR, A PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 20 23 0 0 1, 6 0.01 SH LIFEWORKS THREE AT TILLERY.
UH, THAT'S POST STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 12TH, FOUR B, THE REZONING COMPANION REZONING CASE C 14 20 23 8 SH LIFEWORK THREE AT TILLERY, UH, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 12TH.
UH, MOVING ON ITEM FIVE, REZONING C 14 20 22 0 1 63, UH, 1001 NORTH CAPITAL TEXAS HIGHWAY.
THAT IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
ITEM SIX, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 4 5 DASH, UH, ADDRESS, 24 0 4 RUTLAND DRIVE, APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 12TH.
ITEM SEVEN, SITE PLAN EXTENSION SP 2017 DASH 3 8 7 C
[00:05:01]
UMT TWO POWELL LANE, PLAZAS SITE PLAN EXTENSION AND ITEM IS ON CONSENT.ITEM EIGHT, MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN ORDINANCE UPDATE A V I A UPDATE TO THE 2012 M D O.
THAT HAS BEEN, UH, THAT IS A DISCUSSION ITEM THIS EVENING.
ITEM NINE I L A AMENDMENT, UH, AMENDMENT TO A I S D I L A, UH, THAT IS ALSO DISCUSSION ITEM THIS EVENING.
ITEM 10 L D C AMENDMENT, ZONING, THE APPLICATION PROCESSES AND DEADLINES.
UH, THIS ONE IS, UH, BEEN, THAT'S THE STAFF POSTPONEMENT TILL SEPTEMBER 26TH.
ITEM 11, L D C AMENDMENT UNO SIGNED.
CORRECTION, UH, THIS ITEM IS ON CONSENT.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING? I JUST HOLD FOR DISCUSSION.
UM, WITH THAT, DO I HAVE A MOTION, UH, TO APPROVE, UH, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA OF COMMISSIONER CZAR SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE THOSE ON THE DES IN FAVOR AND THOSE, UH, VIRTUALLY.
UH, AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND POINT COMMISSIONER SCHULER, YOU'RE, UH, IN OBJECTION TO, UM, ITEM.
WHICH ITEM, JUST FOR THE RECORD? THE UNO, PLEASE.
SO, UH, JUST, UH, HAVE IT BE NOTED THAT ON ITEM 11, THE L C L D C AMENDMENT, NUNO SIGNED CORRECTION THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER MOOCH TOLER IS, UH, VOTING AGAINST THAT ITEM.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND KEEP IT ON CONSENT.
UH, SO THAT WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST DISCUSSION CASE THIS EVENING.
UH, WE'LL GO AND KEEP THEM IN ORDER.
[8. Master Development Plan Ordinance update: ABIA Update to the 2012 MDO]
EIGHT, UH, THE A B I A UPDATE TO THE 2012 M D O.SO WE'LL START WITH THE PRESENTATION FROM STAFF.
UH, KEITH MARS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
I'M JOINED BY MY COLLEAGUES IN THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT.
AND THEN, UH, SUMMER SCHINDLER IS THE CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER FOR, UH, A B I A, UH, NOW CALLED A U SS.
YOU NEED TO GET FAMILIAR TO CALLING IT A U S UH, I'LL GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF, OF WHAT IS PROPOSED AND WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
UH, ALSO, ANY QUESTIONS THAT ARE WATERSHED PROTECTION RELATED, OR, AGAIN, AIRPORT OF COLLEAGUES HERE FOR THAT.
SO, WHAT'S BEFORE YOU IS AN UPDATE TO THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE FOR THE AUSTIN AIRPORT.
UH, THE CURRENT AGREEMENT, UH, REQUIRED AN UPDATE EVERY 10 YEARS.
WE, IN 2022, WE PROVIDED A ONE YEAR EXTENSION, AND THEN WE'RE BEFORE YOU TODAY TO ACTUALLY FORMALIZE THAT FOR ANOTHER 10 YEARS MOVING FORWARD.
THE BIG TAKEAWAYS FOR THE COMMISSION IS THAT UNLIKE, UH, MUCH DEVELOPMENT, THE, THE AIRPORT IS, IS A CAMPUS.
UH, AS YOU ALL KNOW, OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CAN STRUGGLE WITH THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS.
'CAUSE THERE WAS NOT CONTEMPLATION OF THAT NECESSARILY FOR SOMETHING OF THIS NATURE.
WHAT THIS ORDINANCE ALLOWS IS FOR THE CITY TO TREAT THE AIRPORT AS A CAMPUS, AS A SITE AT LARGE.
SO WHAT THIS ENABLES IS FOR THE CITY TO TREAT THE AIRPORT AS ONE SITE PLAN SO THAT IT CAN BE LOOKED AT COMPREHENSIVELY, LOOKED AT AS A CAMPUS, SO THAT WHEN BUILDINGS ARE CONSTRUCTED OR DEMOLISHED, WHEN UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ARE DONE, IT CAN BE HOLISTICALLY AND TO MEET THE AIRPORT'S NEEDS.
THERE IS ALSO SOME UNIQUE FEATURES TO THIS THAT MY COLLEAGUES IN WATERSHED PROTECTION CAN ELABORATE ON IN BOTH PROXIMITY TO ONION CREEK, BUT THEN ALSO HOW WE THE CITY TREAT STORM WATER, UH, AS IT RELATES TO, UH, TO THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT IS AT THE AIRPORT.
ANOTHER ELEMENT THAT MAKES THE AIRPORT VERY UNIQUE IS THAT THIS WAS ALSO, UH, A US AIR FORCE BASE PRIOR TO THE CITY TAKING, RECEIVING OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND.
SO THERE'S A NUMBER OF CONSIDERATIONS WITH IMPROVEMENTS THAT EXIST TODAY.
AGAIN, THE TAKEAWAYS FOR THIS COMMISSION IS CO OR THAT THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES US TO TAKE THIS BACK EVERY 10 YEARS.
THAT ALLOWS US TO LOOK AT THE SITE COMPREHENSIVELY.
UH, AND THEN ALSO IT ALLOWS US AN OPPORTUNITY TO, AGAIN, TREAT THIS AS A SYSTEM SO THAT ON THE REGULATORY AND ENTITLEMENT FRONT, WE CAN GO SLOW WITH AN ORDINANCE, SO THAT WHEN IT COMES TIME TO CONSTRUCT, WE THE CITY CAN GO QUICKLY WITH, WITH ENVISIONING WHAT THE AIRPORT IS INTENDED TO BE FOR THE CITY AND, AND STREAMLINING THAT PROCESS AS BEST WE CAN.
[00:10:01]
I'LL PAUSE THERE AND IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER.AND AS MENTIONED, MY COLLEAGUES WITH THE AIRPORT AND WATERSHED PROTECTION ARE HERE AS WELL.
I DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
IT'S, UH, READY FOR CLOSURE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONER ZA SECOND ABOUT COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO CLOSING THE HEARING? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND MOVE ON.
COMMISSIONERS, I THINK, UH, WE HAVE SOME Q AND A ON THIS ONE.
HE WANTS TO START US OFF HERE.
UH, COMMISSIONER COX, UM, AS MUCH AS I WISH I COULD VOTE ON THIS ITEM, I AM PART OF THE CONSULTANT TEAM WORKING ON THE AIRPORT EXPANSION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
SO I BELIEVE I HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS CONVERSATION AND THE VOTE.
ARE WE GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, TURN OFF YOUR, UH, SO WE CAN'T SEE YOU? IS THAT HOW WE DO THIS? OKAY.
SO YOU'LL BE GONE FOR THIS ITEM.
UH, WHO HAS FIRST ROUND OF QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER TO COMMISSIONER MOOCH TO NOT HEARING
YEAH, GO AHEAD AND KICK US OFF.
UM, I WANTED TO THANK, UM, MR. KEITH MARS FOR THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, UM, AND JUST BE FOR THE PURPOSES OF PUBLIC, I'M GONNA ASK SOME SILLY QUESTIONS, BUT AT LEAST LEAST WANT THEM TO BE ON THE RECORD SO THEY'RE IN THE PUBLIC RECORD SO PEOPLE CAN HAVE ACCESS TO THAT INFORMATION.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
UM, AND SO I WANTED TO, THERE WAS, UM, A WEB RESOURCE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION THAT IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC THAT HAS INFORMATION.
SO I THOUGHT WE MIGHT SHARE THAT ON THE PUBLIC RECORD.
UM, IS SOMEBODY ABLE TO, UH, UH, THIS IS, UH, I'M SUMMER SCHINDLER.
I'M CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AT THE, UM, AUSTIN AIRPORT.
UM, IF YOU GO TO FLY AUSTIN.COM, THERE IS A, UH, DROPDOWN REGARDING THE EXPANSION PROGRAM JOURNEY WITH AUSTIN, JOURNEY WITH A U S.
AND WHEN YOU GO THERE, YOU'LL SEE ALL THE CURRENT ACTIVE PROJECTS AS WELL AS THE FUTURE PROJECTS AS, UM, COMING UP.
AND YOU CAN SEE ALL OF OUR PRESENTATIONS THAT WE HAVE DONE, NOT ONLY AT THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION, BUT ALSO INDUSTRY DAY AND OUTREACH THAT SHOW THE EXTENT OF THE PROGRAM AND UPCOMING CONTRACTS AS WELL.
THANK YOU FOR THAT, UH, INFORMATION.
AND THEN, UM, CAN WE JUST MENTION BRIEFLY, UM, THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION, BECAUSE THOSE ARE ALSO OPEN, THE PUBLIC CAN ATTEND THOSE OR, AND HEAR THOSE AND MAKE COMMENTARY AS WELL, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY? YES.
THEY'RE, UM, EVERY SECOND WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH AT 3:00 PM AT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUIL BUILDING.
UM, AND, UH, THIS ORDINANCE WAS BROUGHT TO THEM THIS MONTH AS WELL, ON AUGUST 9TH, AND WE BROUGHT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION IN JULY.
THANK YOU FOR THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD FOR EVERYONE ELSE.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, SO I'LL, I'LL RELINQUISH THE REST OF MY TIME.
UM, ANYBODY EL I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
UM, UH, ONE THING THAT'S BEEN ON MY MIND LATELY, JUST, YOU KNOW, WITH THE, UH, THE HEAT AND THE WATER DROUGHT ISSUES THAT, UH, SEEM TO BE, UM, KIND OF IN FRONT OF US CURRENTLY AND IN FRONT OF US IS WHAT, UH, DOES THIS CAMPUS PLAN HAVE ANY INCORPORATE INNOVATION AS FAR AS WATER USE AND REUSE? IS, UH, DOES IT HAVE ANY ELEMENTS OF, UH, WATER MANAGEMENT? WELL, PART OF THE, THE PROGRAM WE ARE, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANNA DO, WHETHER IT'S WITH WATERSHED OR WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR FACILITIES, IS INCLUDE INNOVATIVE MEASURES IN, UM, WATER CONSERVATION, WATER FORWARD, UM, PLANS TO REUSE, YOU KNOW, WATER COLLECTION INTO TOILETS, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS, UM, ARE PLANNED.
UM, BUT WE ARE IN VERY, VERY EARLY STAGES OF PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT.
WE JUST NOW HAVE KICKED OFF OUR PROGRAM DEFINITION DOCUMENT PHASE FOR BOTH THE CONCOURSE AND OUR CENTRAL UTILITY PLANT.
SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS WILL START TO GET INCORPORATED INTO OUR PLAN.
AND THEN ONE OF THE ITEMS IN THE COVER LETTER, IT SAYS, ADDRESSES,
[00:15:01]
UH, THIS, THE, THERE'S FIVE ITEMS, UH, CALLS THAT HIGHLIGHTS TO THE M D O, UM, IS, UM, CAUSE THAT ADDRESSES VEGETATION CONFLICT WITH FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION PROTECTED AEROSPACE REQUIREMENTS.COULD YOU GO INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THAT ONE? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? I COULD BEAR YOUR, I APOLOGIZE.
UH, I, ON YOUR LETTER, UH, UH, IS A HIGHLIGHT ADDRESSES VEGETATION CONFLICT WITH F A A PROTECTED AIRSPACE REQUIREMENTS.
UM, COULD YOU ELABORATE ON THAT ONE A LITTLE MORE? UM, YEAH.
MOST OF WHEN THOSE VEGETATIVE REQUIREMENTS, AND I BELIEVE THIS IS WHAT, UM, YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT, IS REGARDING WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT.
UM, SO, UM, AREAS WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING WHERE WE USE VEGETATED FILTER STRIPS VERSUS WATER QUALITY PONDS SO THAT WE CAN MITIGATE THOSE WILDLIFE, UM, WATER ATTRACTS BIRDS, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
AND, UM, WE ARE TRYING TO MITIGATE THAT ALSO WHEN IT COMES TO TREES, UM, THAT WE WILL HAVE TO TAKE CERTAIN MEASURES TO ABIDE BY THOSE F A A REGULATIONS TO PRESERVE LIFE AND PROPERTY.
AND, UH, ALSO JUST QUICKLY, THE ITEM, UH, IT SAYS IMPLEMENT CAMPUS-WIDE APPROACH TO EXCEED WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS.
UH, I WAS INTERESTED A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THAT ONE TOO.
THAT'S, I'M JUST READING THE COVER LETTER.
UM, I THINK THERE ARE PARTS OF AN AIRPORT, OR I KNOW THERE ARE PART OF THE AIRPORTS THAT, UM, SOMETIMES GO AGAINST MAYBE SOME OF THE MISSIONS OF, OF WATER PROTECTION.
SO WE WANNA LOOK AT A CAMPUS AS A WHOLE, SO WHERE, WHERE WE CAN'T MEET, WE WANT TO EXCEED IN OTHER AREAS.
UM, AND SO, AND THEN ALSO, UM, KEEPING TRACK OF, I'M GONNA SAY LIKE IMPERVIOUS COVER, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS IN THE PROGRAM.
UM, AND SO MANAGING THOSE SORTS OF, UM, THE TRACKING, I CAN, I THINK THAT'S IT.
OR YOU WANNA JUMP ON JUST TO, UH, LIZ JOHNSTON WITH THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT.
UM, JUST TO ADD ON TO WHAT SUMMER MENTIONED, UM, WE ARE ALSO COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH, UM, THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT TO IDENTIFY AREAS WITHIN THE CAMPUS FOR ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY TREATMENT THAT DOESN'T EXIST NOW.
SO THESE WOULD BE BETTERMENTS FROM WHAT IS, UM, THERE, UM, UH, NOW, SO EACH SITE PLAN THAT COMES IN DOES NEED TO MEET CODE AS FAR AS, UM, WATER QUALITY TREATMENT, EXCEPT IN THE CONFINED DEVELOPMENT AREA.
BUT WE, THERE ARE OTHER AREAS, UM, THAT COULD BENEFIT.
AND SO WE'LL BE WORKING TOGETHER AS, UH, DEPARTMENTS ON THOSE ITEMS. AND LASTLY, SOME OF THE, HIS, UH, MENTIONED THE PREVIOUS USE OF THE AIR FORCE BASE.
ARE, ARE WE STILL DEALING WITH HISTORICAL CONTAMINATION AT THE AS WE EXPAND, OR HAS THAT BEEN, HAS THAT ALL BEEN REMEDIED OR IS THAT STILL THOSE ARE STILL THINGS THAT, UM, WE MONITOR.
BUT AS, AS FAR AS, UM, IN BUILDINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THOSE HAVE BEEN ABATED AND WE ARE DEMOLISHING THOSE BUILDINGS.
ANY SORT OF GROUNDWATER ARE THINGS THAT WE ARE TESTING NOW AND, AND TO MAKE SURE WHETHER IT'S PRESENT OR NOT PRESENT, WE CAN PROTECT THE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS IN THE FUTURE.
SO THOSE ARE STILL THINGS THAT WE, UM, ENCOUNTER AND, AND MITIGATE AND, AND PLAN AROUND.
IT PRETTY MUCH GOT ANSWERED, BUT I DO WANNA SORT OF ASK IT IN THE PUBLIC FORUM.
AND IT WAS JUST UNDERSTANDING, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, ESSENTIALLY WHATEVER WORK HAPPENS AT THE AIRPORT DOES HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS PART OF THE F D A PROCESS OR, OR AT LEAST SORT OF MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURAL PIECES.
UM, WE RECENTLY, JUST LAST FALL, WE GOT OUR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT APPROVED FOR THE EXPANSION PROGRAM, UM, INCLUSIVE OF UP TO 20 GATES IN THE, UH, MIDFIELD, TAXIWAY, RELOCATION, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
SO ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF WHAT THAT'S APPROVED ON ITS OWN A WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT SORT OF, UM, UM, ASSESSMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
SO, UM, CURRENTLY WHAT'S IN THERE RIGHT NOW, UM, 20 GATES TUNNEL, THE EXPANSION OR, UM, OF ARRIVALS, DEPARTURE HALL, RELOCATION OF THOSE, THE ROADS, UM, ARE ALREADY INCLUDED IN AN EA THAT WAS APPROVED LAST FALL.
AND AS PART OF THAT FEDERAL PROCESS, THERE IS A SORT OF A, I DON'T WANNA SAY COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, BUT THERE'S LIKE A PUBLIC PROCESS YES.
THAT FOLLOWS THROUGH WITH THAT.
AND THOSE ARE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS THAT WE CANNOT WAIVE AND WILL ALWAYS BE APPLIED.
UM, THOSE ARE, UM, UH, UH, A PRE-PROCESS AND THEN WHEN THE DRAFT EA IS ALSO POSTED AS WELL AND THOSE ARE REQUIRED.
UM, AND, UM, WE'VE ALSO, UH, THE AIRPORTS, UM, UH, MADE PROMISES OR, UH, SENT, UM, MEMO TO
[00:20:01]
COUNCIL MAYOR REGARDING ANY FUTURE FUEL FACILITY STORAGE THAT THOSE WILL GO THROUGH ANY EA PROCESS AS WELL FOR THOSE.I, I REALLY APPRECIATE, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY NEXT QUESTION, WHICH WAS I THINK JUST FOR FOLKS TO KNOW THAT AS WE GO THROUGH SOMETHING LIKE JET FUEL OR OTHER MM-HMM.
THAT COMMITMENT WAS MADE, UM, BY THE AIRPORT TO THE CITY.
UM, AND I DO WANNA APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT Y'ALL HAVE DONE ON THIS AND THE, UM, AND THE ADDENDUMS AS WELL.
YEAH, I JUST HAD A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS RELATING TO, UM, SORT OF TRANSIT AND ACCESS TO THE AIRPORT.
AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH PROJECT CONNECT AND THEORETICALLY, AND OUR NEXT PHASE, UH, WOULD INCLUDE AN AIRPORT EXPANSION AND OBVIOUSLY I, THAT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THIS ROUND OF PROJECTS AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS ABOUT HOW THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED IN A TERMS OF A LONG-TERM PLAN AND ALSO WOULD THERE BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADD ADDITIONAL PROJECTS OR IS THIS SORT OF THE SET FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS? HOW ARE YOU ALL THINKING ABOUT THAT? UM, SO YES, THAT STATION IS PLANNED FOR IN OUR MASTER PLAN.
UM, IT COMES OUT TO THE OUTER NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND TO WHERE RIGHT THROUGH THE PARKING AREA AND THE STATION'S PLANNED IN BETWEEN THE TWO, THE, UM, PARKING GARAGE AND, UM, CONSOLIDATED RENTAL FACILITY.
THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE PLANNED AND WE HAVE THE PLANNED RIGHT OF WAYS SO THAT WE CAN KEEP THAT THERE.
NOW, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WILL CONTINUOUSLY PLAN AND ARE PART OF THE PROJECT CONNECT PLANNING ACTIVITIES AND COORDINATION TO ENSURE THAT THAT ALIGNMENT STAYS THERE AND THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THEM.
SO ESSENTIALLY WE, SO ESSENTIALLY IF WE MANAGE TO GET THE FUNDING AT SOME POINT WE SORT OF FUTURE PROOF THE PLAN SO THAT THAT WILL BE ACCESSIBLE.
AND RELATED TO THAT, JUST TO UNDERSTAND, YOU ALL USUALLY DO THESE IN A SORT OF 10 YEAR CYCLE, IT SOUNDS LIKE.
SO WE WOULD EXPECT THE NEXT REVISION TO HAVE SOME DIFFERENT PROJECTS PERHAPS RELATED TO THOSE TRANSIT UPGRADES.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, WE WOULD EVALUATE, UM, THIS ORDINANCE WITH THAT.
WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO THIS TIME IS KNOWING THE EXPANSION PROGRAM SO WELL, UM, KNOWING WHAT WE HAD TO DO, WE COULD, UH, WORK WITH WATERSHED AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO ACTUALLY, UM, UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO, UM, WHICH WAS A REAL BENEFIT THIS TIME.
UM, SO WE KNOW THE PLAN FOR THE NEXT, UH, EIGHT YEARS PR PRETTY WELL ON WHAT WE NEED TO DO, UM, TO CATCH UP.
SO THAT WAS, IT WAS A REAL BENEFIT THIS TIME.
UM, OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW THAT AVIATION SORT OF STANDARDS CHANGE BIGGER PLANES, MORE PEOPLE.
WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF GROWTH AT THE AIRPORT.
AND DO YOU ALL FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT SORT OF THE PLAN THAT'S IN PLACE NOW AND THESE ADJUSTMENTS WILL REALLY HELP US MANAGE THE GROWTH OF THE AUSTIN AIRPORT OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS? YEAH, SO THIS, UM, WITH OUR INTERIM PROJECTS THAT ARE ALREADY UNDERWAY AND STARTING CONSTRUCTION, THAT WILL HELP PROVIDE RELIEF.
WE DO THINK THAT, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION OVER THE NEXT EIGHT TO 10 YEARS WILL GET US, UM, EVEN WITH THE GROWTH OF 5.5% YEAR OVER YEAR CAN GET US THROUGH LIKE 2035 TO 2040.
AND SO IT'S A BALANCING OF WORKING WITH OUR AREA AIRLINE PARTNERS AND RECONCILING, RECONCILING A PLAN THAT WORKS FOR THEM AS WELL.
AND I APPRECIATE STAFF WORK ON THIS.
UM, AND THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS, CHAIR.
WE STILL HAVE A FEW MORE SPOTS LEFT.
ANYONE WANTS TO TAKE THEM? OKAY.
IF NOT, DO I HAVE A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER ZA CHAIR MOVE, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION? WE HAVE A SECOND.
UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UH, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, MR. AZAR? UM, I'LL, I'LL JUST QUICKLY SAY, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK ANYBODY WHO'S TRAVELED AND USED OUR AIRPORTS IN THE PAST YEAR OR SO REALIZES WE REALLY NEED TO GET SOME OF THIS WORK DONE.
I THINK IT'S CRITICAL FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
SO I WANNA APPRECIATE STAFF'S WORK ON THAT.
AND IT'S EXCITING TO SEE THE WORK WE'RE DOING.
AND I ALSO WANNA APPRECIATE STAFF'S SORT OF, UM, WORKING THROUGH THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND THE WAY THOSE TABLES ARE DRAWN UP AND THE DETAILS.
I JUST WANNA SAY I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE AIRPORT IS DOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MEETING OUR COMMUNITY'S COMMITMENTS AND LIVING UP, UP TO THE COMMITMENTS AND BEYOND THEM.
UM, SO IT'S EXCITING TO SEE THAT WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THE WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
SO I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU.
UH, ANY SPEAKING AGAINST THIS ITEM? NOT SEEING ANY, UH, ANY OTHERS WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR BEFORE WE GO AND TAKE A VOTE? ALL RIGHT.
ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS ITEM? ANY, UH, PUTTING NEGATIVE? I SEE.
SO WE'RE GONNA GO, AND THIS PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
AND, UH, CONGRATULATIONS TO MR. MARS FOR HIS PROMOTION.
YOU SHOULD LOOK, YOU LOOK REALLY GOOD.
AND ALSO I WANNA SAY THANK YOU
[00:25:01]
TO OUR DEPARTMENTS.UM, OUR STAFF, THE STAFF AT WATERSHED AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WAS A VERY COLLABORATIVE PROCESS AND IT WAS NICE TO BE ABLE TO COME TO THIS SORT OF COLLABORATIVE EFFORT WITH EVERYONE.
[9. ILA Amendment: Amendment To AISD ILA]
UH, MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT DISCUSSION ITEM.WE HAVE, UM, THE I L A ITEM NINE AMENDMENT TO A I S D I L A.
AND WE'LL GO AND START WITH, UM, STAFF PRESENTATION ON THIS
I, I, I'M HERE AGAIN BEFORE YOU, UH, KEITH MARS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ASSISTANT DIRECTOR.
SO BEFORE YOU ON THIS ONE IS THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.
I, I'M GOING TO HIT SOME, SOME BROAD TOPICS TO HELP ORIENT YOU TO WHAT THIS IS.
AND I'M GOING TO PASS IT TO OUR COLLEAGUES WITH THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT TO GO THROUGH A PRESENTATION FOR YOU.
I THINK SOME IMPORTANT GROUNDING THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU NORMALLY SEE.
SO, STATE LAW AUTHORIZES MUNICIPALITIES TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS WITH LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS FOR DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND OTHER, OTHER TOPICS.
BUT THIS ONE IS SPECIFIC TO DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY ARE CONSIDERED PEER FORMS OF GOVERNMENT.
SO THEREFORE, IN ORDER FOR US TO COME TOGETHER AND BROKER AN AGREEMENT THAT IS THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THAT'S BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, WE HAVE TRIED TO KEEP THIS VERY TIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 'CAUSE THERE ARE OTHER MATTERS THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO BOTH THE CITY AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AND THOSE HAVE BEEN MEMORIALIZED AND OTHER INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENTS.
SO, TAKING YOU BACK TO 1994 WAS THE FIRST AGREEMENT BETWEEN AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY ON THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT HAS BEEN, UH, AMENDED, UH, I WON'T SAY REPLACED, BUT HAS BEEN AMENDED A NUMBER OF TIMES SINCE THEN.
ONE OF THE MAJOR REASONS OF GETTING THIS IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY TO OUR CITY COUNCIL AND ALSO A I S D, UH, BOARD IS THE, THE, THE RECENTLY PASSED BOND INITIATIVE.
AND THERE ARE MANY ELEMENTS TO THAT, SIMILAR TO, THERE'S SOME SIMILAR ELEMENTS TO THE AIRPORT OF THE, THOUGH THESE ARE DISPARATE LOCATIONS.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY'RE ALL PART OF THE SAME SCHOOL SYSTEM.
AND THIS IS OUR ABILITY TO COME TOGETHER AS TWO FORMS OF GOVERNMENT TO TRY AND RECOGNIZE THE UNIQUE NEEDS OF BOTH EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, BUT ALSO THAT THERE'S A HUNDRED PLUS LOCATIONS IN THE CITY.
SO THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, UH, IT, IT DOES REFLECT THE NEEDS.
IT DOES REFLECT ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS COMING TOGETHER, WORKING WITH OUR PEERS AND OUR PARTNERS WITH THE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AND WHAT YOU HAVE TODAY IS, HAS STAFF SUPPORT IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPPORT ON THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR A SCHOOL SYSTEM.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ELEMENTS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER, YOU'RE GONNA SEE ELEMENTS OF SETBACKS.
UH, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ELEMENTS OF THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS AND INSPECTION ITSELF.
YOU'RE GOING TO SEE US ALSO TRY AND RIGHT SIZE APPLICATION OR RIGHT SIZE, UH, DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, UH, BOTH BUILDING AND THEN ALSO LAND USE ELEMENTS TO BOTH THE UNIQUE NEEDS OF A SCHOOL, BUT THEN ALSO RECOGNIZING THAT THEIR NEEDS CAN CHANGE DRAMATICALLY FROM SOME OF OUR MOST URBAN SCHOOLS THAT ARE ON POSTAGE POSTER SIZE LOTS, ALL THE WAY TO SOME OF THE LARGER CAMPUSES.
UH, WE'VE ALSO TRIED TO BE VERY RESPECTFUL TO THE HARD WORK THAT HAVE BEEN DONE FROM OUR COLLEAGUES, BOTH FROM THE, THE POLICY LEVEL AND STAFF LEVEL DECADES OF WORK ON, SAY, BARTON SPRING ZONE, WHERE ELEMENTS ARE NOT BEING CONTEMPLATED, UH, OR, OR TOUCHED WITH THE, WITH THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.
UH, I THINK WHAT WE HAVE TO YOU TONIGHT IS SOMETHING THAT THE STAFF, UH, I KNOW WE'RE VERY PROUD OF, UH, AND, AND VERY HAPPY TO PRESENT THIS TO YOU, UH, AND, AND REALLY EXCITED ABOUT SEE WHERE, WHERE, WHERE WE AS A COMMUNITY TAKE THIS.
UH, I'M GONNA PAUSE THERE AND, UH, PASS IT ON TO MY COLLEAGUES WITH THE, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT I BELIEVE HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR YOU.
I BELIEVE WE'LL FIRST HEAR FROM, UH, SUPERINTENDENT RA.
MR. KORA, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
GOOD EVENING, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS.
I AM THE INTERIM SUPERINTENDENT FOR THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND I'M AMAZED AT HOW EFFICIENT Y'ALL ARE TODAY.
UH, OUR BOARD MEETINGS SOMETIMES WILL GO LATE INTO THE EVENING, IF NOT THE EARLY MORNING.
SO, UH, COMMEND YOU FOR THE EFFICIENCY.
UM, SO I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.
UH, I DO WANT TO EXPRESS APPRECIATION TO CITY STAFF.
THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING, UM, WORK PIECE OF WORK FOR THE LAST MANY, MANY MONTHS, WELL OVER A YEAR.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANT TO REINFORCE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, A I S D ONLY EXISTS TO SUPPORT EDUCATION.
LIKE THAT IS THE ONLY REASON THAT
[00:30:01]
WE EXIST.AND AS PART OF THAT REQUIRES MULTITUDE OF MULTITUDE OF THINGS, INCLUDING SAFETY, SECURITY, THE WAY THAT WE EDUCATE OUR STUDENTS, IT HAS CHANGED OVER THE COURSE OF, OF DECADES.
AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT, YOU KNOW, AS STEWARDS OF THESE INVESTMENTS AND SUPPORTING EDUCATION WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, UH, IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT THAT WE WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN AS WELL AS ALL OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS TO ENSURE THAT OUR STUDENTS GET WHAT THEY, WHAT THEY NEED.
UH, AND SO AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I, I WANT TO POINT OUT AS I FLIP THROUGH THIS IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE DEMONSTRATED OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS THAT WE AS A COMMUNITY CAN DO THIS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND WE CAN BE SUCCESSFUL.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LEARNED IN THE 2017 BOND PROGRAM IS THAT IF WE INVEST AND WE DO IT IN A THOUGHTFUL WAY, WE CAN HONOR THE LEGACY OF OUR HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, YOU KNOW, BRING ALL OF OUR FACILITIES UP TO SAFETY AND SECURITY STANDARDS, CREATE WELCOMING SPACES FOR OUR EDUCATORS AND STAFF, AND AT THE SAME TIME, REDUCE THE BURDEN ON A GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET.
RIGHT? THESE INEFFICIENCIES COST US TREMENDOUSLY THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
AND WITHOUT THESE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, WE DON'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN PROGRAMMING AND COMPENSATION, WHICH IS REALLY WHERE THE DOLLARS NEED TO GO.
AND SO, AS WE TALK ABOUT THIS WORK THAT'S, THAT'S OCCURRED, UM, I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE IS A SENSE OF URGENCY.
YOU KNOW, AS, UM, KEITH MENTIONED, UH, WE DID RECENTLY PASS A $2.44 BILLION BOND PROGRAM AT A 74% APPROVAL RATING.
AND IT WAS A, AN APPROACH THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS NEVER TAKEN ON BEFORE.
IT WAS TRULY AN EQUITABLE APPROACH.
AND THOSE INVESTMENTS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY ARE REFLECTIVE OF IT.
IF YOU THINK ABOUT $2.44 BILLION, ABOUT 72% OF IT ARE GOING TO TITLE ONE SCHOOLS.
SCHOOLS THAT SERVE HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED STUDENT GROUPS, ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENT GROUPS, BLACK AND BROWN STUDENTS.
WE CAN TALK ABOUT SPECIAL EDUCATION NEEDS AND INCLUSIVE MODELS.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE WITHIN THIS BOND PROGRAM.
BUT HERE'S THE OTHER CHALLENGE, IS THAT WE'RE OPERATING IN AN INCREDIBLY ESCALATED MARKET, AND TIME DOES MATTER, AND WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO OPEN SCHOOL A WEEK LATE TWO WEEKS LATE.
YOU KNOW, WHAT WE THINK ABOUT ALL THE TIME IS, YOU KNOW, A WEEK LATE IS REALLY A SEMESTER LATE, AND THAT'S A SEMESTER THAT OUR STUDENTS ARE NOT GONNA BE IN THESE IMPROVED BUILDINGS.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE THE IMPROVED, UH, FACILITIES OR SUPPORTS.
AND THAT INCLUDES OUR STAFF AS WELL.
AND WE OFTEN ALWAYS THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT, OH, THAT MY TIME.
I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I HAD THAT.
UH, BUT ANY CASE, OKAY, I'LL JUST KNOCK IT OUT REAL QUICK AS I MOVE THROUGH IT.
UM, YOU HEARD ME TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT THE INVESTMENTS.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, EVERY CAMPUS DOES GET, UH, AN INVESTMENT BY WAY OF THE 2022 BOND PROGRAM, BUT THESE ARE LARGE, COMPREHENSIVE PROJECTS, ONES THAT WILL TRULY CHANGE, UH, THE ENVIRONMENT THAT OUR STUDENTS WITHIN.
AND THE ONE THING THAT I WANNA REINFORCE, AND I I TRUSTEES TALK TO TRUSTEES ALL THE TIME ABOUT I TALK TO, YOU KNOW, OUR STAFF, IS THAT WE ARE A PROCESS ORIENTED, UH, TRANSPARENT ORIENTED ENTITY.
AND SO AS WE MOVED THROUGH THIS PROCESS, UH, IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME AS A LEADER OF THE ORGANIZATION, UH, THAT WE FOLLOWED A PROCESS THAT WAS FAMILIAR TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
ONE THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN COULD SUPPORT.
UH, SO, YOU KNOW, THE NOTIFICATIONS, UM, RECEIVING FEEDBACK, HAVING CONVERSATIONS AROUND WHAT THIS MEANS, UH, IN MY MIND HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL.
AND WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO SUPPORT IT AND, AND SEE WHERE THIS GOES.
UM, I WILL TELL YOU THAT, UM, WE ARE WELL UNDERWAY.
THE BOND JUST PASSED SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, BUT AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, GIVEN THE SCALE AT SOME OF THESE PROJECTS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE MOVING NOW.
SO, UM, WITH THAT, I'LL HAND IT OFF, UH, TO DAVE ANDERSON, UH, AND CHARLIE TO CARRY US TO THE REST OF THE PRESENTATION BY, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE, UH, HERE SHORTLY.
AND AFTER, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
I WILL, I MEAN, EXCUSE ME, AFTER, UH, MR. ANDERSON, UM, THERE'S NOT ANOTHER SPEAKER OR IS THERE? CORRECT.
SO WE'LL HAVE A CONTINUOUS THROUGH THE REBUTTAL OF A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES.
UH, INTERIM SUPERINTENDENT GERRICK COMMISSIONERS DAVE ANDERSON WITH THE GENERAL GROUP.
WE'VE HAD THE ABSOLUTE PLEASURE OF WORKING WITH THE DISTRICT.
WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM THROUGHOUT THE 2017 BOND, AND, UH, WE'RE WORKING WITH THEM IN THE 22 20 22 BOND.
UH, BUT THIS, THIS PIECE OF WORK HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT.
AND SEEING IT HERE BEFORE YOU COMMISSIONERS IS, IS, IS REALLY EXCITING.
SO THE REQUEST TONIGHT, UM, INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS ARE A FUNCTION OR A PART, UH, OF CODIFIED STATE LAW, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TWO 12.902.
THE EXISTING I L A BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS EXPIRING IN 2024.
BY THE WAY, WE ALREADY EXTENDED IT DURING THE 2017 BOND, AND WE EXTENDED IT SO THAT THE RULES
[00:35:01]
OF DESIGN WOULDN'T CHANGE AS WE GOT TWO THIRDS OF THE WAY THROUGH THAT.AND SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO NOW IS MAKE SURE THAT WE SET THOSE RULES FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION NOW, SO WE HAVE A CONSISTENT, EFFICIENT USE OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS THAT GETS KIDS IN, IN DESKS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE IN THESE NEW FACILITIES.
UH, L E C 25 1 9 0 2 REQUIRES US TO BRING THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IT IS A CODIFIED PROCESS, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE THIS EVENING.
OUR HUMBLE REQUEST IS THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION TONIGHT, UH, BECAUSE OF THE TIME CONSTRAINTS THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT, UH, DISCUSSED.
I SENT YOU ALL A VERY, VERY LONG SLIDE DECK THIS MORNING BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO BREAK THIS DOWN TO SOMETHING THAT'S MANAGEABLE.
WE COULDN'T PRODUCE A RED LINE BECAUSE WE'VE MOVED SECTIONS AROUND AND IT JUST IS NOT READABLE.
SO THE INTENT WITH THIS MORNING'S, UH, PRESENTATION WAS TO WALK YOU THROUGH SECTION BY SECTION WHAT, UH, THE CHANGES ARE.
THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO FURTHER, UH, DRILL DOWN ON WHAT I THINK, AND IT'S MY OPINION ON WHAT I THINK THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS MOST INTERESTED IN.
WE ARE OPEN TO TAKE QUESTIONS ON EVERYTHING.
YOU HAVE THE FULL DRAFT DOCUMENT IN FRONT OF YOU.
YOU HAVE MY LENGTHY PRESENTATION, BUT THE INTENT IS FOR ME TO JUST, UH, FOCUS ON THE CHECK MARKED, UH, AREAS.
ARTICLE THREE IS A NEW ARTICLE IN THIS, UH, IN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.
UH, IT IS INTENDED TO PROMOTE INTERACTION AND COOPERATION BETWEEN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN, ESPECIALLY THE PLANNING, UH, ROLES THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS.
WHEN I WAS CHAIR OF PLANNING COMMISSION, WE HAD THE GREAT FORTUNE OF A I S D RE-ENGAGING AND COMING BACK AS EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS AND ATTENDING MEETINGS.
AND I'M SO THRILLED TO SEE, UH, TRUSTEE HUNTER DOING THAT NOW.
AND SO THIS IS AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO THAT, AND CODIFIED WOULD BE CODIFIED IN THE INTERLOCAL THAT WOULD PROMOTE THAT COOPER CONTINUED COOPERATION.
ARTICLE FOUR IS, IS, UH, ADDRESSES ZONING.
ZONING WASN'T REALLY ADDRESSED IN THE FIRST, UH, IN THE EXISTING INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT.
UH, SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 4.1 STATES THAT, UH, THESE ARE THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT WOULD APPLY TO SCHOOL DISTRICT, UH, DESIGN FLORIDA AREA RATIO MINIMUM, LOT SIZE, MINIMUM LOT WIDTH.
THESE ARE, UH, THE, THE INTERLOCAL NOW SPECIFIES THAT THE, THERE ARE NOT LIMITATIONS WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE, UH, CONCEPTS.
MINIMUM SETBACKS, UH, I'LL, I'LL SHOW YOU A TABLE IN A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE HAVE REDUCED THE MINIMUM SETBACK THE WAY THE CURRENT SETBACKS ARE.
UH, IT DEPENDS ON THE ZONING, ON THE ZONING, BUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS FOR, FOR EDUCATIONAL FACILITY CONSTRUCTION, THE MINIMUM SETBACK IS 10, AND THERE ARE THINGS YOU CAN'T DO WITHIN THE 10.
UH, BUT I'LL GET TO A TABLE THAT'LL CLARIFY THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
AGAIN, FURTHER, UH, CLARIFICATIONS BUILDING COVERAGE, UM, WILL BE SPECIFIED THAT NO BUILDING COVERAGE LIMITATIONS SHALL BE APPLIED IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, IMPERVIOUS COVER WILL BE, UH, GOVERNED STRICTLY BY WATERSHED, UH, REGULATION AREAS, AND I'LL GET INTO THAT IN A LITTLE BIT.
TRAFFIC IMPACT THAT NATALIE SEES.
UH, THE EXISTING INTERLOCAL STATES THAT NO TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ARE REQUIRED.
UH, THIS SECTION IS REVISED TO STATE THAT, BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO NOTE THAT, UH, IN OUR DISCUSSIONS AND NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, A CIRCULATION ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING.
WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT OUR STUDENTS CAN GET BY BICYCLE OR PEDESTRIAN OR IN CARS.
WE CAN LOOK AT HOW THE FACILITY FUNCTIONS.
IT'S JUST NOT A TRADITIONAL, UH, UH, T I A FROM A COMPATIBILITY PERSPECTIVE.
THIS IS LOT, THESE ARE LOTS OF WORDS AND HEIGHT, BUT I'M GONNA GO HERE.
SO EXISTING I L A IS THE SECOND COLUMN PROPOSED.
I L A, UH, IS THE THIRD COLUMN.
THE EXISTING I L A STATES THAT THERE'S NO STRUCTURES, UH, WITHIN 15 FEET OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR ZONING.
IT ALSO STATES THAT FROM 15 TO 25 FEET FROM THE SAME, THERE ARE SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS FROM, UH, FROM THE PROPOSED INTERLOCAL, WE'RE REDUCING THE MINIMUM SETBACK TO 10.
WE'RE PROPOSING TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM SETBACK TO 10, BUT WE'RE ALSO SPECIFYING THAT LESS THAN 25 FEET FROM RESIDENTIAL USE OR ZONING CANNOT HAVE ANY INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USES.
SO NO BUILDINGS WITHIN 10 FEET, NO SCHOOL BUILDINGS WITHIN 10 FEET AND NO INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USES, UH, WITHIN 25 FEET.
WHAT'S INTERESTING IS THAT 25 FEET, THERE'S NO
[00:40:01]
REAR FRONT SIDE, SO IT DOES PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A BUFFER, UH, BUT ALLOWS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ALSO FOR SCHOOL BUILDINGS TO USE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THE FACILITY FROM A, FROM A HEIGHT PER, FROM A HEIGHT.PLEASE, PLEASE, YEAH, PLEASE CONTINUE.
FROM A HEIGHT PERSPECTIVE, THE FORMER MAXIMUM HEIGHT, UH, FOR FACILITIES IN THE EXISTING INTERLOCAL WAS 60 FEET.
WE'RE PROPOSING A HUNDRED FEET.
AND THE REASON WE PROPOSE A HUNDRED FEET IS THERE'S, THERE'S SEVERAL REASONS.
ONE, TRANSOMS AND, UH, FACILITIES, STRUCTURAL FACILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH GYMNASIUMS REQUIRE, UH, ADDITIONAL HEIGHT.
IN FACT, MCCALLUM GOT A SPECIAL PROVISION IN A PREVIOUS AMENDMENT TO GET UP TO 85 FEET.
IN ADDITION FOR CONSTRAINED SITES, WE WANT THE ABILITY TO GO HIGHER IF WE NEED TO.
UH, I THINK YOU ALL ARE VERY FAMILIAR WITH EXISTING COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.
THAT'S SHOWN, UH, ON THE, UNDER THE EXISTING I L A, THE PROPOSED I L A IS A IS DIFFERENT.
IT IS A 45 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT, UH, WITHIN 60 FEET OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING, AND THEN A HUNDRED AFTER THAT.
AGAIN, WHEN WE TALK TO SCHOOL DESIGNERS AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT STAFF, THEY SAID WHEN WE DO, UH, GYMNASIUMS, WHEN WE DO THEATER AREAS, THOSE ARE GENERALLY GONNA BE LOCATED AWAY FROM, UH, NEIGHBORING, UM, NEIGHBORHOODS OR NEIGHBORING USES.
SO WE WANT THAT ABILITY TO HAPPEN.
WE WANT THAT HEIGHT TO HAPPEN IN THE CENTER.
UH, AND TALKING WITH CITY STAFF, UH, PLANNING STAFF, WE CAME UP WITH, UM, THE 60 FOOT SETBACK AND 45 FEET OF HEIGHT, UH, WITHIN THAT, WITHIN THAT SETBACK.
PLATTING, THIS IS A CLARIFICATION FROM THE EXISTING INTERLOCAL BECAUSE, UH, IT'S A JURISDICTION OF THE STATE THAT HAS CONDEMNATION AUTHORITY.
THE CITY'S POS POSITION IS THAT THE, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DOES NOT NEED TO PLAT.
WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS CLEAR IN THE DOCUMENTS, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, UH, THERE ARE A MYRIAD OF CHANGES HERE.
LOTS OF THEM HAVE TO DO WITH REVIEW TIMES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GET SCHOOLS ON THE GROUND AS FAST AS POSSIBLE WITH THE REQUISITE REVIEW.
UM, SECTION 6.1 IS BASICALLY, UH, COMBINES WHAT WAS A SMALL SITE PLAN AND IS CURRENTLY A SITE PLAN EXEMPTION INTO ONE SITE PLAN EXEMPTION FOR EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.
SO THERE IS A THRESHOLD ON SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT WE EXPANDED SECTION 6.2 AND 6.3, IDENTIFY PROJECTS AS MINOR AND MAJOR REVISIONS TO APPROVED SITE PLANS.
WE JUST ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL DETAIL TO THAT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR.
UH, SECTION 6.5 EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ON PUBLICLY ZONED TRACKS.
UH, THIS IS SOMETHING WE RAN INTO IN, UH, 2017.
IF YOU DO A SITE PLAN ON A P ZONE PROPERTY, YOU HAVE, IT'S, IT'S CALLED, IT'S, IT'S A CONDITIONING USE SITE PLAN.
IT HAS TO COME TO COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL.
AND THEY SHOULD BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY LANDSCAPE STANDARDS.
UH, THE NEW LANDSCAPE STANDARDS ARE VERY REFLECTIVE OF CURRENT CODE EXCEPT FOR ALLOWING FLEXIBILITY WITH VISIBILITY AND LIGHTING TO MAKE SURE WE ADDRESS SAFETY AND SECURITY.
I'VE GOT FIVE SECONDS THAT'S GONNA BEEP AT ME.
UH, UM, CHAIR, MIGHT I, UH, INTERVENE? UM, CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT WE GIVE THE SPEAKERS FOUR MORE MINUTES.
I THINK THIS IS A COMPLEX AND ITEM, AND I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE.
UH, I WILL POINT OUT, UH, THE LAST BULLET.
THIS DOES ALLOW FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY FOR THE CITY ARBORIST TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE, UH, HERITAGE FEE REMOVAL VARIANCE, OR OTHER REQUESTS BASED ON THE CRITERIA IN THE CODE SECTION 6.9.
AGAIN, A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT ZONING.
SAME CONCEPT APPLIES PARKING REQUIREMENTS IS REFLECTIVE OF HOW WE THINK THE CITY COUNCIL IS GONNA VOTE BASED ON A RESOLUTION.
WE WORKED WITH A T D STAFF TO COME UP WITH THE LANGUAGE.
THE PARKING HAS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE TRANSPORTATION CIRCULATION STUDY AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN.
UM, SIDEWALKS, I KNOW THIS IS A CONCERN WHEN IN 2017, UH, WE RAN ACROSS A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT AREAS WHERE SIDEWALKS WERE REQUIRED BY SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS.
IN SOME CASES, THE CITY WAS REQUIRING WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT OF THOSE SIDEWALKS.
IN SOME CASES, WE WERE ABLE TO REPLACE SECTIONS THAT WERE DAMAGED IN SOME CASES,
[00:45:02]
UH, BUILDING PERMITS, OR EVEN WE COULDN'T START CONSTRUCTION OR GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY UNTIL THOSE WERE DONE.SO THIS SECTION IS FAIRLY ROBUST AND CLARIFIES THAT, UH, IT DOES INCLUDE, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, UH, SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL REQUIREMENTS.
SO WE'RE NOT, AND IN FACT, WE, WE INVESTIGATED A COST SHARING AGREEMENT, UH, RE REGARDING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY IN THE EAR EARLIER VERSION OF THIS DOCUMENT.
BUT BECAUSE THAT ADDRESSES, UM, FINANCIAL, UH, COST SHARING ISSUES, WE DIDN'T FEEL IT WAS A CITY LEGAL.
AND CHAD CAN CORRECT ME, BUT DIDN'T FEEL IT WAS APPROPRIATE HERE.
AND SO THAT WILL BE A SEPARATE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT THAT ADDRESSES HOW THAT MONEY IS SHARED.
WE WORKED VERY, UH, HARD WITH WATERSHED.
OH, THERE SHE IS, UH, ON FIGURING OUT WAYS TO, SO, MR. ANDERSON, I WILL HAVE A QUESTION ON IC IF YOU WANNA SPECIFICALLY, IF WE COULD SAVE THIS ONE FOR LATER.
I'M GONNA HAVE QUESTIONS ON IC, SO IF YOU GOT OTHER ITEMS YOU WANNA COVER, IT WOULD BE, THIS IS THE LAST SLIDE.
WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE AND CLARIFY, THIS IS A NEW SECTION.
IT WASN'T ADDRESSED IN THE PREVIOUS INTERLOCAL.
UM, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, THE DISTRICT COULD UTILIZE THE SIGNS THAT IT WANTED TO, TO UTILIZE, UM, TO A REASONABLE EXTENT.
SO WE'RE NOT GONNA DO ROOFTOP SIGNS IF WE'RE ON A SCENIC ROADWAY.
WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THOSE SCENIC ROADWAY SIGN ORDINANCES.
BUT THIS JUST GIVES US DIMENSIONS SO THAT THERE'S NO MORE, UM, ARGUING ABOUT WHAT'S APPROPRIATE AND WHAT'S NOT.
AND RICHARD'S SCHOOL IS A GOOD, UM, A GOOD EXAMPLE OF, OH, GOD,
THAT'S RIGHT OF, OF, OF, OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID BY PUTTING IT IN HERE AND DEFINING IT.
UH, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND REALLY THANK YOU FOR YOUR, FOR YOUR, UH, TAKING ON THIS, THIS, THIS, THIS BIG ITEM THIS EVENING.
WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, IF I CAN GET A VOTE, UH, COMMISSIONER ZA AND, UH, ANY OBJECTIONS TO, UH, CLOSING PUBLIC HEARING A SECOND ON THAT? OH, WE HAVE A SECOND.
SORRY, I DIDN'T SEE YOUR HAND.
UM, JUST, UH, I DO HAVE A WANNA SEE THAT TABLE AGAIN ON IC, BUT DOES ANYBODY ELSE WANNA GO FIRST? I THINK YOU HAD SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND
UM, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANNA THANK, UM, EVERYBODY WHO'S INVOLVED IN THIS WORK, BOTH AT THE PLANNING AND CITY OF AUSTIN, AS WELL AS IN A I S D AND THE PARTNERS YOU ALL HAVE WORKED WITH.
OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A TREMENDOUS CHANGE AND I THINK ABSOLUTELY THE RIGHT TIMING, AND WE'RE EXCITED TO SEE WHAT GETS BUILT AS A RESULT OF THESE.
I THINK REALLY FORWARD THINKING CHANGES.
I THINK THERE WERE A COUPLE OF SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT WE HAD, ONE OF WHICH YOU'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED REGARDING THE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, JUST TO CLARIFY THEN, UH, WITH THE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS, I DID NOTICE THAT THERE'S A FEE IN LIEU FOR THE SIDEWALKS.
WOULD THAT BE CONTRIBUTING TO SIDEWALKS, TO THE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL OR HOW THAT WOULD WORK EXACTLY, IN TERMS OF, AS ONE OF THE CHANGES IN THE SIDEWALK PARTS.
SO THERE'S AN OPTION FOR FEE AND L OPTION FOR FEE AND L AND THAT WOULD BE, UH, THE INTENT IS FOR IT TO BE APPLICABLE TO THOSE SIDEWALKS IN SAFE FROSTS TO SCHOOL ASSOCIATED WITH THAT SCHOOL.
SO IT, RATHER THAN IT JUST GOING INTO THE GENERAL FUND, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'VE NOT SEEN WHERE THAT, THAT TYPE OF MONEY GOES INTO A POD, AND THEN WE DON'T SEE THE ACTUAL SIDEWALKS GO BACK INTO OUR SCHOOLS, WHICH IF, AS WE WERE DISCUSSING, IF THERE'S ANY PLACE YOU WANNA SEE SCHOOL SIDEWALKS, SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS, IT'S AROUND SCHOOLS.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY THAT, THAT FEE AND LIE WOULD ACTUALLY BE TIED TO THAT PROGRAM WOULD BE, I THINK, HELPFUL OR EVEN AS YOU SAID IN THE ADDITIONAL AGREEMENT.
YOU ALL ARE CONSIDERING APPRECIATE THAT.
AND I'M GETTING NODS THAT THAT'S THE INTENT, UH, FROM STAFF.
UM, THAT WAS THE FIRST QUESTION.
UH, AND THE SECOND QUESTION WAS SORT OF MORE OF A TECHNICAL ONE.
I SAW THAT WE ARE EXEMPTING THE DISTRICT FROM MOST FEES EXCEPT FOR RELATED TO, UM, INSPECTION FEES.
AND I WAS CURIOUS IF THERE WAS A REASON THAT STAFF OR YOU ALL FELT THAT THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO KEEP THE FEES RELATED TO INSPECTIONS IN THIS AGREEMENT? GREAT QUESTION.
UH, THE, UM, LEGISLATING ORDINANCE IN THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SPECIFICALLY STATES REVIEW FEES.
IT DOES NOT ALLOW US ALLOW THE CITY TO EXEMPT INSPECTION FEES.
AND SO OUR DISCUSSION WAS, UH, THAT IT WAS A FAIR TRADE OFF, UM, FOR THE DISTRICT TO, UH, PAY THOSE FEES BUT NOT HAVE TO DO THE REVIEW FEES.
SO IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A, UM, A BALANCE THERE.
AND I, I APPRECIATE THAT NUANCE.
I ASSUME THAT THERE WAS A REASON WE WERE CONTINUING TO CHARGE, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT, AGAIN, TAX DOLLAR MONEY BEING USED EFFICIENTLY, WHY CHARGE THEM FOR THESE PARTICULAR SET OF FEES? IT SEEMS
[00:50:01]
LIKE IT'S LEGALLY REQUIRED.AND WHAT WE DID FIND CLARIFICATION ON IS IMPACT FEES.
SO IMPACT FEES ARE DEFINITIVELY NOT INCLUDED, WHICH IS, CAN BE A VERY BIG LINE ITEM.
SO, UH, THAT'S VERY BENEFICIAL TO THE SCHOOLS.
AND THEN JUST KIND OF A LAST QUESTION.
OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF THESE CHANGES WERE DONE WITH THE PROJECTS WE HAVE IN MIND, BUT, UM, JUST SORT OF THINKING BIG PICTURE, DO WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE REALLY PUT THE DISTRICT IN A GOOD PLACE NOW FOR, YOU KNOW, THESE SORTS OF BOND PROJECTS GOING FORWARD? YEAH.
UH, I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION.
I'M, I'M PROBABLY HERE AS THE ONLY SUPERINTENDENT WITH A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING LICENSE,
AND I WILL TELL YOU, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THERE WERE FRUSTRATIONS THAT WE HAD, MAINLY BECAUSE THE SYSTEMS WERE NOT ABLE TO DO WHAT WE ALL BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD DO.
UM, AND A LOT OF IT CAME DOWN TO AN INTERPRETATION OF AN AGREEMENT, UH, THAT WAS DRAFTED DECADES AGO.
AND SO FROM THAT POINT, WE FELT VERY STRONGLY THAT IT NEEDED TO BE REVISED AND UPDATED TO REFLECT CURRENT CONDITIONS.
UM, BUT I THINK THIS DOES JUST THAT.
UM, AND SO WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT AND, UM, YEAH, NO, I THINK IT DOES.
I THINK IT SETS US UP VERY WELL.
APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK ON THIS.
UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, UH, UM, STAFF HAS JUST ALERTED ME THAT CURTIS BEATTY BEATTY IS ON, UH, ON THE CALL.
UH, CURTIS BADES WITH OUR TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, UH, IS INTIMATELY AWARE OF THE, UH, SAFE ROUTE SCHOOLS.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE BEING A HUNDRED PERCENT ACCURATE WITH THE RESPONSE ON HOW THOSE MONIES ARE USED.
UH, FOR ANYTHING WAS FEE AND LOO.
UH, AGAIN, MY NAME IS CURTIS BEATTY.
TRANSPORTATION OF PUBLIC WORKS.
UH, IT IS ENVISIONED THAT THIS FEE IN LIE FOR SIDEWALKS, THAT WOULD BE IN SITUATIONS WHERE THERE ARE SOME SITE CONDITIONS OR CONSTRAINTS THAT IS NOT FEASIBLE FOR THE IMMEDIATELY IN IMMEDIATE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS, OR THERE COULD BE SOME OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING UP.
WE WOULDN'T WANT TO TEAR OUT NEWLY INSTALLED SIDEWALKS.
SO THIS MONEY WOULD BE, UH, GO TOWARDS SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL FUNDING SO THAT IT, THE EXPENDITURES WILL COME BACK TO PROJECTS RELATED TO SCHOOLS.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.
UM, AND I JUST WANT TO, UH, TRUSTEE HUNTER, JUST YOU'RE WELCOME, UM, UH, TO ASK QUESTIONS AS WELL, UH, SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY.
SO, UH, FEEL FREE, WE CAN DEFINITELY USE OUR SPOTS AND THEY ACTUALLY EXTEND THE NUMBER OF, UH, FOLKS A ASKING QUESTIONS IF NEEDED.
SO, UH, JUST LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE TEAM HERE.
UM, AND THEN, UH, I HAD, UH, I'M GONNA GO AND ASK MY QUESTIONS SO WE COULD PULL UP THAT IC TABLE, UM, THAT I HAD A SKIP OVER.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT, UH, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND HOW THIS MIGHT CHANGE FROM THE CURRENT, UH, AGREEMENTS.
ARE THERE GONNA BE INCREASES, UH, YOU KNOW, TO, I, I GUESS YOU'RE INCREASING THE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR COMPARED TO THE CURRENT I L A OR IS THERE ANY PROVISION FOR IC? GREAT QUESTION.
SO WE HAVE GONE FROM WHAT CAN BE CONFUSING, TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
IT WILL BE SOLELY BASED ON WATERSHED.
AND WE HAVE BROKEN THAT, UH, INTO FOUR, FOUR PIECES, URBAN, SUBURBAN WATER SUPPLY AND BARTON SPRING ZONE.
IT IS OUR INTENT BASED ON 10, 15 YEARS OF NEGOTIATIONS, UH, FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE, THAT WE DO NOT TOUCH THE IMPERVIOUS COVER RULES THAT ARE IN THE EXISTING I L A BY ANYTHING THAT WE DO IN THIS I L A, SO THAT THERE'S NO CHANGE TO THAT.
THEN WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT WAS, AS SCHOOLS GROW, AS SCHOOL DESIGNS HAVE CHANGED, DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR US FOR, FOR SOME SITES TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER? SO WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE TABLE FOR, UH, FIRST OF ALL, FOR BARTON SPRING ZONE, NO CHANGE IN THE PROPOSED INTERLOCAL FROM EITHER THE BASE CHARACTERISTIC OR THE CHARACTERISTICS WHERE WE MAY CHANGE, WHERE WE MAY TRANSFER, UM, IMPERVIOUS COVER TO THE SITE, NO CHANGE FOR WATER SUPPLY.
WELL, ACTUALLY FOR ALL OF THE PROPOSED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BASE CASES, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE BASE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
WHAT WE DID IS WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT 130 SCHOOLS, UH, SITES BY WATERSHED CATEGORY AND LOOKED AT
[00:55:01]
LEARNING AREA CHANGES OR DESIGN CHANGES FOR LEARNING AREAS, AND WE ESTIMATED THAT MAYBE 20 TO 25,000 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL SPACE WOULD BE NEEDED BECAUSE SCHOOLS ARE DESIGNED DIFFERENTLY THAN THEY WERE IN 1994.AND I CAN GIVE YOU A LIST OF HOW THOSE KINDS OF DESIGN CHANGES.
UH, WE LOOKED AT ADDITIONAL AREA WE MAY NEED FOR NON LEARNING AREAS UP TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET, AND THEN WE LOOKED AT DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES.
AND YOU'LL SEE, I THINK WE ALL KNOW THIS OVER TIME, UM, SCHOOL DISTRICT OR SCHOOL ATTENDANCE RISES AND FALLS, RIGHT, WITH DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES.
SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COULD ACCOMMODATE FUTURE GROWTH IN THE, IN THE WONDERFUL SITUATION WHERE WE, WHERE, WHERE WE REALIZED IT.
SO WHAT WE DID IS WE DIDN'T CHANGE THE BASE CASE FROM EXISTING CONDITIONS, BUT WE DID CHANGE, UH, FOR WATER SUPPLY AND SUBURBAN AND URBAN, WE CHANGED, WE WE'RE ASKING FOR 5% MORE, 10% MORE ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER, UM, FOR SITES THAT ARE BETWEEN FIVE AND 10 ACRES AND UP TO 15% MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR SITES THAT ARE LESS THAN FIVE ACRES.
SO FOR THOSE SUPER CONSTRAINED SITES, WE'RE HOPING TO, THAT WE CAN HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND IT'S SUPER IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THAT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY BREAKS ON WATER QUALITY TREATMENT OR DETENTION.
WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE TO DETAIN THAT WATER, BUT WE JUST WANT THE ABILITY TO GIVE THE KIDS THE BEST ED CHANCE FOR EDUCATION THAT THEY CAN GET BY, UH, FOR CONSTRAINED SITES.
SO WE REALLY FOCUSED OUR CHANGES, UH, CHAIR SHAW ON CONSTRAINED SITES.
SO I, I WANNA, I THINK THIS IS GONNA BE A RELATED QUESTION, BUT, UH, I NOTED YOU TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO LOOK AT THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN LIGHT OF WHAT COUNCIL'S FUTURE DECISIONS.
I NOTICED THE COMPATIBILITY STILL KIND OF HAS SOME OF THE CURRENT COMPATIBILITY REGULATIONS.
AND I'M WONDERING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING AT MAYBE FUTURE THOSE COMING UP FOR A CHANGE.
UH, WHY NOT? UM, AT A HUNDRED FEET.
I MEAN, UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU MIGHT BE CONSTRAINING YOURSELF FOR FUTURE GROWTH.
UM, WHY NOT LOOK AT, UM, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED FEET AWAY FROM, YOU KNOW, GOING TO FULL HEIGHT, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE STILL USING THAT TIERED SYSTEM THAT'S EMBEDDED IN OUR CURRENT CODE.
WERE YOU, DID YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT, UH, ASKING FOR A LITTLE MORE, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVING COMPATIBILITY AT ALL AFTER SOME DISTANCE? I THINK I APPRECIATE THAT THOUGHT.
WE MET FOR HOURS AND HOURS AND HOURS WITH CITY STAFF AND
I THINK WE WOULD WELCOME, UH, UM, S SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF THE COMMISSION OKAY.
WANTED TO SEND THAT FORWARD TO COUNCIL.
I'M AT TIME, BUT THAT GIVES ME KIND, YOU DID LOOK AT IT AND I GUESS THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION, SIR, WITH SIX STAFF.
UM, UM, UM, LOOKING AROUND, I'VE COMMISSIONER MOOSH TOLER AND THEN COMMISSIONER HAYNES AND WE'LL SEE WHO'S, WHO ELSE HAS QUESTIONS AFTER THAT.
THAT, THAT WAS A PERFECT SEGUE FOR ME CHAIR 'CAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I KIND OF WANTED TO DIVE INTO A LITTLE BIT DEEPER, UM, AND, UH, POSSIBLY TAKE THAT TO DISCUSSION.
UM, SO THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR, UM, FOR OUR CITY STAFF.
THE CHANGES THAT WE'RE SEEING COME THROUGH ON COMPATIBILITY AT THE MOMENT IS ANY OF, OF THE, WHAT'S BEEN PASSED OR ZONING CHANGES OR THINGS LIKE THAT, DO ANY OF THEM APPLY TO THIS SCHOOL ZONING? DO WE HAVE ANY OF THAT IN OUR TOOLKIT YET? NO.
UH, KEITH MORRIS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO.
THE, THIS THE SCHOOLS CAN DEVELOP IN ANY ZONING CLASSIFICATION.
PART OF OUR APPROACH WAS REALLY TRYING TO RECOGNIZE SOME OF THE SCHOOLS THAT ARE WITHIN NEIGHBORHOODS, RECOGNIZE THAT TO THE CHAIR'S POINT, THAT CURRENT CODE IS PERHAPS NOT THE DIRECTION THAT, THAT WE'RE GOING.
UH, AND, BUT ALSO AT THE SAME TIME TRYING TO BE, UH, RE RESPECTFUL TO, UH, TO BOTH SETBACKS AND THEN, UH, THE, THE HEIGHT, ESPECIALLY WITHOUT THE F A R REQUIREMENTS.
UM, I MAY COME BACK TO YOU WHEN WE GET INTO OUR, UM, DISCUSSING MOTIONS ON, ON HOW TO CRAFT SOMETHING TO HELP THIS OUT.
UM, I HAVE A QUESTION ON THE TRANSPORTATION THAT I WANTED TO FOLLOW
[01:00:01]
UP ON.WE STARTED TO DISCUSS THE, UM, THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN.
I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOING AN N T A OR THE TIAS VERSUS THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN? HOW, HOW ARE THOSE DIFFERENT OR HOW IS THE PROCESS DIFFERENT? SURE.
UM, RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, MY NAME IS CURTIS BEATTY, TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS.
RIGHT NOW THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DESCRIBES ANY SITE THAT'S GOING TO GENERATE MORE THAN 2000 DAILY TRIPS, MUST DO A FULL T I A TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS.
THOSE TYPICALLY GOES INTO LOOKING AT, UH, THE SIGNAL TIMING OF INTERSECTIONS, WHAT KIND OF DELAY WOULD BE IN INTRODUCED, UH, BY ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, UH, AND VARIOUS OTHER ELEMENTS.
NTAS, NEIGHBORHOOD TRANS, UH, TRAFFIC ASSESSMENTS ARE GENERATED DEPENDING ON IF IT'S ON A RESIDENTIAL ROAD.
AND SO SOME OF IT IS, UH, SOME SITES MAY GENERATE A NTA REQUIRING TA, SOME SITES WOULD, OUR THOUGHT IS SCHOOLS OPERATE VERY UNIQUELY, THEY HAVE VERY DEFINED TRAFFIC IMPACTS TO THE NETWORK.
AND THAT'S TYPICALLY AT DROP OFF IN PICKUP, UH, TIMES.
BUT WE ASK THE, UH, SCHOOL DISTRICT TO WORK WITH US TO, WHEN THEY PROPOSE A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S AT, AT, AT A, A SIZE, EITHER THEIR NEW SCHOOL OR EXPANSION ABOVE, UH, A CERTAIN LEVEL THAT THEY LOOK AT HOW ARE THEY GOING TO HANDLE THESE PEAK PERIODS.
AND SO THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE QUEUING THAT, HOW MANY VEHICLES, WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO GO? STUDENT PARKING, UH, FACULTY AND STAFF PARKING, WHAT MIGHT NEED TO OCCUR AS FAR AS SHORT TERM TRAFFIC CONTROL, FACULTY BEING ABLE TO FACILITATE SOME TRAFFIC COMING ON THROUGH THE CAMPUS FASTER.
BUT WE DIDN'T WANNA PLACE THE BURDEN OF A FULL TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS ON A SCHOOL WHEN IT HAS SUCH A UNIQUE OPERATING, UH, CHARACTERISTICS.
SO THE THOUGHT WAS, WE STILL WANT TO HAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD FEEL ADDRESSED OF THEIR CONCERNS THAT A NEW SCHOOL MIGHT BRING TO THEM, BUT WITHOUT GOING INTO A LOT OF THE TECHNICALITIES, THAT WOULDN'T REALLY, UM, BE APPROPRIATE FOR ANALYSIS, ANALYSIS, UH, OF A SCHOOL VERSUS AN OFFICE BUILDING OR A HOSPITAL.
YEAH, I GUESS I'M, I, I FOLLOW THE LOGIC.
THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.
I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING A GOOD THOROUGH ASSESSMENT IN PART OF LOOKING AT ANY OF THESE TRAFFIC THINGS, PARTICULARLY WHERE THE, YOU KNOW, KID TRAFFIC IS INVOLVED, BICYCLE TRAFFIC, PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC, THAT ALWAYS KIND OF GETS MY, MY HAIR UP FOR SAFETY, UM, IS CONSIDERING THE, THE LARGER PICTURE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THAT, IN THAT TRAFFIC AREA, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE EXPANDING CERTAIN CAMPUSES OR MAKING CAMPUS FLOW CHANGES, IT'S GONNA CHANGE WITHIN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OR AROUND THAT DISTRICT.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER, IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE MAKING A DOCUMENT THAT SAYS WE DON'T NEED AN N T A THAT WE'RE STILL CAPTURING, UH, ADEQUATELY THE LARGER SAFETY STUDY.
UM, SO ACTUALLY, THOUGHTS ON THAT, CURTIS, THANKS.
I, IN, IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, THE, THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT AND QN STUDY THEY WERE DO, WILL BE DOING IS MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN N T A.
IT'LL LOOK AT DIFFERENT ELEMENTS INCLUDING MULTIPLE MODES, SUCH AS, UH, BIKING ROUTES, PEDESTRIAN ROUTES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
SO I HONESTLY BELIEVE HAVING THEM COMMIT TO AN ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN AND QUEUING STUDY FOR EACH, UH, PROJECT IS MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN AN N T A.
AND THEN IT'S ARE, ARE BUZZ ARE RANG, BUT DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER, DO DO YOU HAVE A TOPIC YOU MIGHT WANNA PASS ON TO OTHER COMMISSIONS? UH, I CAN ASK THE QUESTION AND MAYBE SOMEBODY CAN PICK IT UP.
I JUST, I WAS LISTENING TO COMMISSIONER MAXWELL'S QUESTIONS AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR DOCUMENT IS CAPTURING, I HEARD A LOT OF DISCUSSION THAT THE INTENT WAS THERE REGARDING THE SAFE SIDEWALKS.
JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S ACTUALLY CAPTURED IN THE WRITING DOCUMENT.
AS THE SUPERINTENDENT MENTIONED, WE DON'T WANT DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS COMING OUT LATER ON HOW THAT MONEY IS TO BE UTILIZED.
DOES ANYBODY WANNA PICK THAT UP BEFORE COMMISSIONER? UM, COMMISSIONER WE'LL GIVE, CAN HAVE MY TIME.
WE'LL HELP YOU OUT IF YOU NEED MORE TIME.
COMMISSIONER HAYNES, WILL YOU, UH, PLEASE ANSWER COMMISSIONER MISO ON MY TIME FOR SURE.
AND I'LL, I'LL, I'LL DEFAULT TO, TO CURTIS AND TO CITY STAFF THAT ARE HERE.
BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, UH, I WAS GONNA SAY IT WAS OUR INTENT, BUT IT'S OUR EXPECTATION THAT THIS DOES DO EXACTLY AS MR. BEATTY SAID.
UH, IF MR. BEATTY FEELS DIFFERENTLY OR THE STAFF FEELS DIFFERENTLY, I THINK WE ARE ALL IN THE OF THE SAME MIND THAT THAT'S WHAT WE WANT IT TO DO.
SO I'LL LET THEM SPEAK TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY FEEL THAT IT DOES.
UH, FROM OUR STANDPOINT, UM, ANY FEE IN LIEU FOR SIDEWALKS WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE OVERALL, UH, CITYWIDE SIDEWALK PROGRAM
[01:05:01]
BECAUSE THIS IS DESIGNATED PER THE SCHOOL, UH, WITH SCHOOL PROJECTS.I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT, AND I'M GOING TO ALSO DEFER A LITTLE BIT TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WITH BOND FUNDING.
THEY HAVE VERY STRICT RULES OF WHERE THEY CAN SPEND MONEY.
SO WE COULD NOT TAKE THIS MONEY AND GO SPEND IT ACROSS TOWN BECAUSE WE THINK THERE'S A HIGHER PRIORITY SIDEWALK.
THE EXPENDITURES OR FUNDS HAVE TO BE TIED SPECIFICALLY TO THEIR PROJECTS AND ALSO ONTO THEIR LAND.
SO EVEN IF THE CITY WANTED TO GET A LITTLE LIBERAL WITH THE USE OF THE FEE, AND WE WOULD PROHIBITED BECAUSE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SCHOOL BONDS EXPENDITURE.
AND, UM, SO I CAN, I CAN DEFINITELY REINFORCE THAT POINT.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A COMMUNITY BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, UH, THAT OVERSEES ALL OF OUR EXPENDITURES TIED TO ANY BOND INVESTMENT.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COMES UP IS, YOU KNOW, TRACKING OF THE FUNDS LINE THEM, LINE THEM BY LINE ITEM THEM, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, ANY FEES.
UH, SO IF WE, THERE WAS A, YOU KNOW, AN INSTANCE WHERE THOSE FUNDS WERE REALLOCATED, UH, WE'D HAVE TO GO TO OUR BOARD.
BUT BEFORE THAT, THE C B O C, UH, SO WE'RE PRETTY TIGHT, UM, IN HOW WE MANAGE THE FUNDS, AND, AND THAT'D BE OUR EXPECTATION THAT THEY REMAIN ON THE SITE AS WELL.
WE MIGHT CONSIDER ADDING LANGUAGE THAT, THAT PUTS THAT IN THERE FOR YOU THAT WOULD MAYBE PREVENT SOME FUTURE HEADACHE.
AND KEEP IT CLEAR, WE, YOU GUYS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB IN CLARIFYING SOME OTHER AREAS WITH, WITH DETAIL.
I THINK THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL FOR THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE HELPFUL.
SO, SO WE, I CAN ONLY COMMISSIONER MS. SHELTER AT THE END OF THIS.
OF COURSE, WE CAN MAKE, UH, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN RECOMMENDATIONS AND OFFER AMENDMENTS.
UH, AND, UH, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD IF ANY OBJECTIONS TO NO, I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
WELL, I, I, I KNOW I'M, I'M HELPING YOU OUT HERE,
ANY OBJECTIONS TO GIVING COMMISSIONER HAYNES MINE FULL TIME? MINE? I CAN GET MINE DONE.
WE'RE GIVING YOU YOUR FULL TIME.
I CAN GET MINE DONE IN TWO MINUTES.
UM, BUT IT TALKS ABOUT THE SPORTS AND RECREATION FACILITIES LOCATED AT THE CAMPUSES, AND VERY SPECIFIC, VERY DIRECT QUESTION AS THE GUY WITH, IN ADDITION TO THE CHAIRMAN, AS THE GUY THAT SPENT WAY TOO MANY THURSDAYS, FRIDAYS, SATURDAYS, SOME SUNDAYS AT BURGER AND HOUSE PARK AND, AND NOAC AND OTHER FAC.
DOES THIS COVER THOSE FACILITIES? NOT, OKAY, I SEE YOU SHAKING YOUR HEAD.
WHY NOT? AND HOW CAN WE GET THOSE FACILITIES COVERED?
WELL, IT SAYS THIS IS APPLICABLE TO EDUCATION FACILITIES, AND IT SAYS, FOR AND, AND NOT THESE THINGS.
AND ONE OF THEM IS SPORTS, SPORTS FACILITIES.
SO IF YOU WANT TO DO IMPROVEMENTS AT HOUSE PARK, NOT BURGER, UH,
UH, BUT IF YOU, HOW IS THAT COVERED? HOW, HOW, HOW DO YOU DO UPGRADES AT, AT BURGER OR HOUSE PARK OR NELSON? NELSON? LET'S, LET'S TAKE NELSON, UH, NELSON'S PART.
UM, I WOULD SAY VERY, UH, UH, THAT'S ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETHING THAT, UM, AS AN ORGANIZATION, UH, WE MADE THE COMMITMENT AS PART OF THE 2022 BOND PROGRAM TO, TO NOT FOCUS ON THE CENTRALIZED FACILITIES IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE WOULD'VE PREVIOUSLY AND MOVE THOSE DOLLARS TO THE CAMPUSES, RIGHT? REALLY IN AN EFFORT TO MITIGATE THIS RISK THAT THE STATE HAS BROUGHT FORWARD TO US.
AND SO YOU'LL SEE A LOT OF INVESTMENTS AT OUR HIGH SCHOOLS, MIDDLE SCHOOLS, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS, UM, WITHIN ATHLETICS TO KIND OF DRAW THE STRAIN AWAY FROM OUR, UM, CENTRALIZED ATHLETIC FACILITIES.
BUT TO YOUR POINT, YOU KNOW, HOUSE, PARK, BURGER, AND EVEN NELSON FIELD, WHICH NELSON FIELD DOES HAVE A $22 MILLION INVESTMENT IN THIS BOND PROGRAM, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH A, A MORE TRADITIONAL APPROACH.
OUR HOPE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE KIND OF LEGWORK AND THE SYSTEMS THAT WILL BE BUILT, BY THE TIME THOSE PROJECTS COME ALONG, THEY WON'T HAVE AS MANY, UM, CHALLENGES.
I MEAN, I THINK WHAT WE FOUND ADMINISTRATIVELY IS THE HICCUPS COME AND REVIEW TIMES AND TIMELINES, AND AT LEAST AT THAT POINT, WE'LL BE ABLE TO MITIGATE THOSE.
I HOPE A I S D PUTS IT ON YOUR LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES FOR THE 89TH SESSION TO WORK WITH YOUR FAST GROWTH SCHOOLS AND YOUR OTHER SCHOOLS TO, UH, MAYBE TWEAK OR CORRECT THAT THAT'S, THAT'S AN OVERSIGHT.
UH, I MEAN, AND IT IS NOT ONLY ATHLETICS, BAND AND DRAMA, AND THERE ARE A LOT OF PLACES I AGREE, A LOT OF FOLKS THAT USE DELCO.
AND WOULD THIS ALSO APPLY AT THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER ON YES.
UH, THE ONE THING I WOULD SAY IS EVEN SAW THAT THE COUNTIES WILL, THE COUNTIES WILL HELP YOU IF YOU PUT THAT ON YOUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA.
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID, UM, AND I DON DUNNO IF YOU RECALL, BUT IN THE 2022 BOND PROGRAM, WE ACTUALLY HAD MULTIPLE PROPOSITIONS.
THAT'S BECAUSE THE STATE MADE US BREAK IT APART AND, AND ACTUALLY INCLUDE ATHLETICS SEPARATELY.
UH, IT DID PASS BY 58% FROM WHAT I RECALL.
BUT IT WAS, IT WAS THE CONCERN THAT STATEWIDE, UM, YOU COULD SEE THESE LARGE
[01:10:01]
INVESTMENTS GO TOWARDS THESE CENTRALIZED FACILITIES.AND THEN YOU HAVE A THOUSAND STUDENT HIGH SCHOOL BUILD A $22 MILLION, YOU KNOW, FOOTBALL STADIUM.
SO THAT IS THE, THE KIND OF ENVIRONMENT THAT WE'RE WORKING WITHIN.
UH, BUT I DO THINK THAT THESE TYPES OF CONVERSATIONS HELP US GET TO THE POINT AND GET THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ADDRESSED.
BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, I, I, I WANT TO, UM, EXPRESS TO YOU THAT WE DO HAVE INVESTMENTS AND IMPROVEMENTS AT THOSE, UH, FACILITIES.
IT'S NOT THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING TOUCHED, IT'S JUST THAT THEY WON'T BE INCLUDED IN THIS WAY.
THAT AND, AND I, NOTHING IN MY QUESTIONS ONE, I HOPE YOU DIDN'T TAKE THAT.
NO, AND WE WE'RE WORKING ON DEAL WITH THE RACCOONS AND MAC HOUSE PARK IS TOUGH AS SHO CREEK, AND THAT'S, I WILL, I WILL TELL YOU TO DEAL WITH THE RACCOONS AT MAC
UM, SO COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER ZA, DO YOU WANNA GO NEXT? OKAY, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I MIGHT GIVE Y'ALL SOME TIME TO FOLLOW UP WITH ME.
I'M, I'M GONNA FOLLOW UP THROUGH SOME, SO ONE IS THE COMPATIBILITY SECTION I'M LOOKING AT 4.8 0.1.
I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.
I, AND WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, I'LL JUST SAY THANK YOU HONESTLY TO Y'ALL FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS.
I THINK THIS IS A GREAT ITEM, AND THANK YOU SUPERINTENDENT FOR LEADING US THROUGH THIS CHARGE.
SO, I, I JUST HAD A QUESTION ON THE COMPATIBILITY, AND MAYBE EVEN STAFF CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND.
CURRENTLY THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UM, THE TRIGGER BEING URBAN FAMILY RESIDENTS OR RESTRICTIVE ZONING, AND THEN ALSO PERMITTED USE.
SO ESSENTIALLY WE'RE SAYING IF YOU'RE ZONED FOR CSS, BUT YOU HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, YOU STILL TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY.
COUNCIL IS WORKING PRETTY MUCH TO REMOVE THAT FROM OUR COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE.
AND I HAD A QUESTION, IS THERE A REASON FOR KEEPING IT HERE OR DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MATCHING OUR CODE AS PROPOSED? I DON'T KNOW.
I THINK FROM THE DISTRICT'S PERSPECTIVE, UM, LOOK, WE WORKED VERY, VERY HARD WITH STAFF ON IN COMING UP AND, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE WERE ON THE SAME PAGE.
WHAT, WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU WORKS FROM THE DISTRICT PERSPECTIVE.
IF IT'S THE COMMISSION'S DESIRE TO COMMUNICATE TO COUNCIL, OR EVEN MORE BROADLY, THAT POTENTIALLY THERE COULD BE OTHER SOLUTIONS THAT ARE, THAT ARE, THAT PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY TO THE DISTRICT, I THINK WE'D BE OPEN TO THAT.
BUT IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO BE LOCKSTEP WITH, WITH STAFF IN, IN, IN PUTTING TOGETHER THE DRAFT THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU.
I DON'T KNOW IF SOMEBODY ELSE SAID SOMETHING TO ADD TO THAT.
UH, COMMISSIONER, I, I THINK WE ARE TRYING TO BE RESPECTFUL TO WHAT THE, WHAT THE LAW IS TODAY, AND THEN ALSO THE, THE DIRECTION THAT'S BEING CONTEMPLATED.
I, I THINK THE CHARGE BEFORE US WAS LOOKING AT THIS IN TWO WAYS.
IN PART WHY I BROUGHT UP F A R EARLIER OF LIKE, WE'RE BOTH, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE MASSING, BUT THEN WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE USE AND RECOGNIZING THAT THE USES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SCHOOL CAN BE, YOU KNOW, THE INTENSE RECREATIONAL FACILITY.
UH, ABSENT THE, SO THERE'S BUILDING SETBACKS, RIGHT? WE WILL HAVE, I THINK WE CONTEMPLATED 10 FEET MM-HMM.
AGAIN, WE WE'RE TRYING TO RECOGNIZE CURRENT AND, AND THE FUTURE.
UH, AND I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE CERTAINLY OPEN TO, UH, TO FURTHER GUIDANCE ON THIS.
AND I UNDERSTAND I, A LOT OF OUR ORDINANCES ARE IN FLUXX.
IT'S HARD TO CATCH UP, CATCH OUR BREATH AT THE MOMENT.
UM, THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, I'M LOOKING AT THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER SECTION.
THIS WOULD BE ON PAGE TEN SIX POINT SIX 0.3 6 1 6 3, 6 0.6 0.3.
ESSENTIALLY IT'S ON PAGE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS.
SO ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER, WE, WE ESSENTIALLY SAY THAT WE CANNOT HAVE A TELECOM TOWER IN 120 FEET OF A NEIGHBORHOOD.
SORT OF AN SSF FIVE OR MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONING, BUT IT'S 300 FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK.
CAN CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME SORT OF THE REASONING BEHIND THAT DISTINCTION? THIS LANGUAGE WAS TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS MADE TO THE EXISTING I L A THAT PASSED COUNSEL LESS THAN SIX MONTHS AGO.
AND SO, AGAIN, IF THERE ARE IDEAS THAT THE, THE COMMISSION HAS ABOUT CHANGING THAT UP TO PROVIDE THE DISTRICT WITH MORE FLEXIBILITY, I THINK WE'D, WE'D BE OPEN TO THAT.
BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK THAT WENT IN TO GET OBTAINING THE AMENDMENT FROM COUNCIL, AND THAT AMENDMENT WAS VOTED ON BY COUNSEL.
AND SO WE FELT LIKE WE NEEDED TO REFLECT THAT REALITY SINCE IT WAS, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT WAS SO RECENT.
AND KEITH MARS, AGAIN, JUST FOR ANOTHER POINT
[01:15:01]
OF CLARIFICATION.I CHECKED WITH, WITH STEVE LEGAL AND, AND OUR, UH, AND CHRIS JOHNSON WITH OUR, WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF.
THE, EVEN THOUGH THAT TELECOM AMENDMENT WAS ADOPTED RECENTLY, WE, WE ARE ROLLING IT INTO THIS I L A.
SO SHOULD IT BE CONTEMPLATED, UH, AND, AND DIRECTION ON THIS, UH, IF, IF WE WERE TO AMEND THAT MATTER, IT WOULD AMEND.
UH, IT CAN HAPPEN WITH THIS, WITH THIS I O A I, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
AND SORT OF MY LAST HALF MINUTE, I'LL JUST SAY WE'RE A VERY PROUD NEIGHBORHOOD.
OUR NEAREST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IS MATTHEWS ELEMENTARY.
IT'S EARLY 20TH CENTURY, BUILT RIGHT UP TO THE LOT EDGE.
OUR PLAYGROUND IS LESS THAN 25 FEET FROM SINGLE FAMILY, YOU KNOW, BUILDINGS AND OUR, AND THERE'S NO OFF STREET PARKING.
AND I'LL TELL YOU, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD LOVES IT.
WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THAT SCHOOL, THE PARKING, THE NOISE, WE'VE NEVER HAD AN ISSUE.
AND SO I LIVE FROM THAT EXPERIENCE AND SEE THAT WE CAN PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY TO OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT.
WE HAVE A FEW MORE SPOTS OPEN.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, SO, UM, THIS IS THE TIME.
I, I, I AM CONTEMPLATING, UM, SOME, UH, MINOR AMENDMENTS, BUT, SO WE MAY WANNA PROCEED THIS AS KIND OF A, A BASE MOTION SCENARIO.
DOES ANYONE HAVE, THEY'D LIKE TO PROPOSE CHAIR? I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UH, DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THE, UH, THAT BASE MOTION AND THEN WE CAN BUILD ON IT? UM, IF WE HAVE ANY AMENDMENTS? I, I WON'T SAY MUCH EXCEPT TO SAY THANK YOU TO OUR STAFF, THANK YOU TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS, AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, I THINK OUR COMMUNITY'S LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING A LOT OF THESE CHANGES MOVING FORWARD.
AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SUPPORTING THIS WORK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
SOMETHING, UM, AND I JUST WANNA ADD IS, UM, THAT I WAS PART OF LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE PART OF THE BOND PROCESS FOR A I S D THIS LAST.
AND IT'S A TREMENDOUS PLEASURE TO BE UP HERE TONIGHT AND SEE THIS WORK MOVING FORWARD.
AND ALSO THE HISTORIC INVESTMENT WE'RE MAKING IN CERTAIN PARTS OF OUR COMMUNITIES.
SO I'M GONNA GO AND, UH, MAKE A, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO THE BASE MOTION, UH, JUST FOR CONSIDERATION HERE.
UM, I, TO MAKE IT EASY, IS THAT ON THE HEIGHT THAT WE ALLOW THEM, UM, AT A HUNDRED FEET TO GO TO FULL HEIGHT, WHICH THEY HAVE IS A HUNDRED FEET.
UH, DO WE HAVE A SEX COMMISSIONER AZAR? UM, I'LL JUST SPEAK TO THAT.
I THINK MR. CHAIRMAN, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? SO AT A HUNDRED FEET, UM, FROM, AS YOU READ HERE, THEY LAY OUT THEIR HEIGHT TABLE RIGHT NOW.
UH, THEY'VE GOT DIFFERENT TIERS, KIND OF LIKE THE COM CURRENT COMPATIBILITY IS LAID OUT.
UM, AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS, A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE SINGLE, SINGLE FAMILY TRIGGERING PROPERTY LINE AT A HUNDRED FEET, THEY CAN GO TO THEIR FULL HEIGHT OF A HUNDRED FEET.
THEY'RE CAPPING THEIR HEIGHT AT A HUNDRED FEET.
AT A HUNDRED FEET, THEY CAN GO TO A HUNDRED FEET.
SO, THE WAY, UH, CHAIR SHAW THE WAY, AND IT'S TOUGH TO, TOUGH TO COMMUNICATE IT, BUT THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN IS IF YOU'RE WITHIN 60 FEET OF THE PROPERTY PROPERTY LINE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE LIMITED TO 45 FEET OF HEIGHT AFTER 60 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, YOU HAVE A MAX SIDE OF YOU COULD ACHIEVE A MAX SIDE OF A HUNDRED.
I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING, YOU CAN REACH FULL HEIGHT AT A HUNDRED FEET.
IS THAT YEAH, YOU CAN REACH FULL HEIGHT AT A HUNDRED FEET, EVEN AS DRAFTED.
AND IT DOES STILL HAVE THE, THE, THE STAIR STEP THAT YEAH.
WITHIN, BEFORE A HUNDRED FEET.
SO YOU'RE ACTUALLY, YOU CAN ACCOMPLISH WHAT I'M SAYING WITH THIS CURRENT, YEAH.
CHAIR, I MIGHT, SO WE DON'T REALLY NEED THE AMENDMENT.
COMMISSIONER MITCH TAYLOR, GO AHEAD.
UM, SO DO WE NEED TO DISPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT? THINK DO I SPEAK, MR. ANDERSON IS SAYING THAT THEY CAN REACH THAT HEIGHT AT A HUNDRED FEET, THEN WE CAN, WE CAN, UH, RE CHAIR.
I THINK IT, WE CAN COUNT AS A DISPOSED AND MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT AMENDMENT.
DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE AMENDMENTS? YEAH, I THINK WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE, IF I CAN GET THE LANGUAGE TO WORK IS, UH, THAT WE HAVE THE COMPATIBILITY, UM, TO EITHER BE THE LESS RESTRICTIVE OF WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE I L A OR THE THEN APPLICABLE CITY STANDARDS.
AND I'M, I'M TRYING TO CRAFT AS MUCH FLEXIBILITY THERE AS POSSIBLE FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS,
[01:20:01]
BUT I MIGHT NOT QUITE HAVE THE LANGUAGE RIGHT THERE.CAN I, UH, PROPOSE SOMETHING? I ACTUALLY MADE A NOTE AND I THINK I'M TRYING TO CAPTURE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
UH, AT SUCH TIME, COUNSEL, UM, AMENDS COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, UH, THE I L A WILL REVERT TO THE UPDATED CODE REQUIREMENTS, UH, WHERE LESS RESTRICTIVE DOES THAT YEAH, YEAH.
I CAN EXPLAIN WELL, THAT, LET'S TALK ABOUT IT.
THE COMPATIBILITY THAT IS MORE RESTRICTIVE IN MY MIND, THAT SAYING IT LIMITS HEIGHT, IT HAS MORE OWNER SETBACKS.
SO JUST, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO PEOPLE OR DO WE NEED TO CHANGE? DO WE HAVE OTHER WORDING? I'M SORRY.
CAN WE REPEAT THE MOTION? SURE.
OH, A MOTION, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE A SECOND FOR.
WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE THE MOTION.
DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THIS AGAIN OR DO YOU WANT TO, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING? COMMISSIONER MOCHA? I WAS SUGGESTING THAT LANGUAGE, BUT, UH, THIS IS YOUR MOTION, SO, YES, SIR.
SO I WOULD, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, UM, COMPATIBILITY WILL BE THE LESS RESTRICTIVE OF EITHER THE I L A THAT'S GOES FURTHER THROUGH COUNCIL AND IS DATED OR THE THEN IN EFFECT COMPATIBILITY OF STANDARDS BEING UTILIZED BY THE CITY.
'CAUSE THAT'S GONNA ADDRESS SETBACKS AND HEIGHT.
IT'S GONNA GIVE 'EM A LITTLE BIT MORE WIGGLE ROOM, POSSIBLY.
DO WE HAVE, DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS, YEAH.
POINT OF CLARIFICATION OR, I HAD A QUESTION
I KNOW IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED A FEW TIMES UP HERE ON THE DIOCESE.
I KNOW THAT MAY STEER UP A LITTLE BIT OF A HORNET'S NEST INITIALLY WITH THESE ARE SCHOOLS, THEY INCREASE YOUR PROPERTY VALUES, THEY INCREASE SAFETY.
THEY, THEY DO SO MANY GOOD THINGS FOR THE AREAS AROUND THEM.
WHY ARE WE HOLDING THEM TO THE SAME COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS?
SO THANK YOU, UH, CHAIR COHEN, UH, FOR, UH, WE HEAR YOU.
AND SOMEBODY COULD TAKE THAT UP AND INTERIOR JUST PROCESS WISE, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A SECOND AT THIS POINT.
PARDON? SO THE MOTION, UH, KIND OF ON THE TABLE THAT'S LOOKING FOR A SECOND, UH, AND I WAS LOOKING TO SEE, WAS IT CLEAR TO EVERYONE WHAT COMMISSIONER MOHA WAS LAYING OUT? OKAY.
I'LL SECOND COMMISSIONER MOLLER'S.
SO, UM, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER MUTAL? I, I THINK WE'VE, WE'VE GOT IT.
I MEAN, THE IDEA IS THAT AS WE LOOK AT OPPORTUNITIES TO RELAX, COMPATIBILITY, WHETHER IT BE IN HEIGHTS OR SETBACKS, THAT WE'RE GONNA, AND, AND REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THAT'S ON HOUSING OR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, THAT WE'RE GONNA ALLOW THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY TO DO THE SAME THING AS WE FEEL IT'S NECESSARY FOR OUR CITY TO GROW.
SO THEY'RE, I'M TRYING TO WORD IT.
SO THAT SCENARIO IS WHAT THEY HAVE IN THE DOCUMENT THAT THEY'VE ED AND SPENT THE TIME ON, BUT IT GIVES THEM THE FLEXIBILITY AND ACCOUNT FOR THE FLEXIBILITY TO RELAX IT FURTHER AS WE GROW OUR CITY AND EVOLVE OUR CITY.
THAT WAY THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND WRITE THIS AGAIN.
DO WE HAVE CHAIR? IM SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY, CAN WE PLEASE REPEAT THE MOTION
LET, LET ME SIMPLIFY THAT QUESTION.
I DON'T WANT YOU TO REPEAT IT VERBATIM, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ARE WE REMOVING COMPATIBLE REQUIREMENTS COMPLETELY, OR, OR ARE WE GOING WITH WHAT WE HAD INITIALLY RECOMMENDED? NO, SHE READ.
UH, TRIED TO WORD WHAT SHE, SHE INITIALLY.
I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.
AND, OKAY, SO DO WE HAVE ANY, THIS DID NOT REMOVE COMPATIBILITY ENTIRELY, SO IF WE WANT TO SUBSTITUTE THAT, IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THE COMMISSION, THEN WE WOULD NEED TO MOVE.
THIS DIDN'T REMOVE, THERE'S NO SUBSTITUTE AT THIS POINT.
DO WE HAVE, UH, ANY IN OFFICE? GO AHEAD.
I'M GONNA MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE REMOVE COMPATIBILITY RE UH, REQUIREMENTS ALTOGETHER.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? UH, SORRY.
UH, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? UM, SURE.
I'LL, I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK, BUT I THINK I JUST WANNA REFLECT WHAT COMMISSIONER SAL HAS ALREADY SAID.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROVIDE THE MOST FLEXIBILITY TO OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AND I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING MORE COMPLICATED.
IT DOES MAKE MORE SENSE TO JUST HAVE A SEAMLESS AMENDMENT SAYING THAT WE WOULD LIKE FOR COMPATIBILITY NOT TO IMPACT OUR SCHOOLS.
[01:25:01]
I LIVE NEXT TO MATTHEWS ELEMENTARY.WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ACROSS THE STREET TO A PROPERTY THAT RUNS RIGHT UP TO THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S NOT THAT KIND OF IMPACT.
MY NEIGHBORS ARE VERY HAPPY WITH WHERE WE ARE.
SO I HOPE THAT THAT'S THE KIND OF, UM, SITUATION WE CAN HAVE IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL.
UM, ANY, SPEAKING AGAINST THIS MOTION, JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION OF, WAS THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION OFFERED TO WA OF COMPATIBILITY ENTIRELY OR ARE WE STILL ON THE OKAY.
UH, SUBSTITUTE MOTION HAD A SECOND BY COMM COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE DEBATING THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION AT THIS POINT.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST WELL, I'LL COMMISSIONER MR. TYLER.
I'LL LET COMMISSIONER CONLEY CONLEY FINISHED.
CONLEY SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM.
YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY JUST A FEW BRIEF WORDS IN FAVOR.
AND IT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE'RE MAKING A, AN INVESTMENT AS A COMMUNITY THROUGH THE BOND IN OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AND WE SHOULD GIVE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO MAXIMIZE WHAT THEY CAN ACCOMPLISH WITH THOSE PUBLIC DOLLARS.
UM, AND, AND MAXIMIZE THE FLEXIBILITY WHEN IT COMES TO THE DESIGN PROCESS, UM, TO PRODUCE THE BEST PRODUCT, THE BEST OUTCOME, UM, FOR FAMILIES, FOR STUDENTS AND, AND, AND FOR THE COMMUNITY.
SO I JUST, I, I LIKE THE FLEXIBILITY THAT WE'RE GIVING THEM, AND I STRONGLY SUPPORT MAXIMIZING THAT FLEXIBILITY.
UH, THEY'RE SPEAKING AGAINST THIS ITEM.
NOT SURE IT'S THE GETS, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE LANGUAGE WE HAVE NOW ALSO ADDRESSES ANY OF THE SETBACK THAT IT, THAT IT ENCOMPASSES THAT.
SO THE POINT OF CLARIFICATION, ARE WE STILL, UH, DOES THIS MEASURE? I THINK THERE'S A CHARLIE DORS ON BEHALF OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
I, I DO WANNA CLAR CLARIFY SOMETHING 'CAUSE I THINK WE'RE USING SOME TERMS JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, NOT SPECIFIC.
AND I, I THINK THAT'S WHAT COMMISSIONER STELLER IS DOING TOO.
SO WE PUT THIS HAS THE COMPATIBILITY RES RESTRICTIONS FOR CERTAIN INTENSE RECREATIONAL USES IN SECTION 4.8.
AND THEN THE CONCEPT OF COMPATIBILITY IN TERMS OF SETBACK FROM SINGLE FAMILY IS ALSO IN OUR HEIGHT, UH, SECTION.
SO THE WAY I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS IS, UH, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT, UH, WOULD BE A HUNDRED FEET NOTWITHSTANDING ANY, UH, NEIGHBORING USES.
UM, AND THEN JUST DELETING, UH, OR, AND FOR, IT'S CHANGING SECTION 4.8 TO JUST SAY, UH, DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT IS EXEMPT FROM L D C CHAPTER 25 2 SUB CHAPTER C, ARTICLE 10.
AND SO THERE'S STILL BE A, A 10 FOOT SETBACK THAT TOO
BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE ALSO HAPPY TO, YOU KNOW, ELIMINATE THE 10 FOOT SETBACK.
BUT I JUST AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
OKAY, SO LI LAYING THAT OUT, IS THAT THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION MAKER AND THE REST OF THE COMMISSION? YES.
CHAIR, I THINK JUST FOR CLARITY SECTION IS, I DO WANNA SAY I'M MAKING AN AMENDMENT ONLY RELATED TO 4.8 COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
I THINK WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT SETBACKS, BUT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TRACKING OUR AMENDMENTS PROPERLY.
RIGHT NOW, I'M ONLY YOUR REFERRING TO SECTION 4.8 ON PAGE, STARTING ON PAGE FOUR.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF THE, UH, YES.
I THINK THIS IS GETTING, WE ARE TRYING TO GET TO A PLACE THAT WE CAN ALL HOPEFULLY AGREE, BUT GO AHEAD.
IF THAT'LL HELP YOU MAKE A DECISION FOR THE LAST, CAN YOU COME BACK UP PLEASE? I'M SORRY, I MISSED YOUR NAME.
UM, UH, CAN YOU GIVE ME THE DEFINITION OF THE INTENSE RECREATIONAL USE FACILITY? ARE WE TALKING BURGER AND, AND HOUSE? PARK AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED AN INTENSE RECREATIONAL FACILITY.
SO, UH, IT ACTUALLY, IT, IT EXCLUDES A TRAIL SWIMMING POOL, TENNIS COURT.
SO I GUESS IT DOES, BUT IT WOULD INCLUDE ATHLETIC OTHERWISE, UM, OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A PLAYGROUND? IT DOESN'T PLAYGROUND.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY, IT SAYS HERE, IF I CAN HELP, IT SAYS, AND INCLUDING A SWIMMING POOL, TENNIS COURT, BALL COURT, OR PLAYGROUND MAY NOT BE CONSTRUCTED 25 FEET OR LESS FROM ADJOINING PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO EARLIER.
SO THIS IS IN, UH, THE LAST SORT OF THE END OF THE SENTENCE OF 4.8, INCLUDING POINT.
[01:30:01]
IT SAYS, JUST TO READ IT, IT'S WRITTEN IN THAT WAY.IT SAYS EXCLUDING MULTI-USE TRAIL YEAH.
AND INCLUDING, AND THEN THE LIST IS INCLUDING OF THAT.
THAT'S, SO I'LL BE HONEST, IF I THINK OF A, UH, PLAYGROUND BEING INCLUDED IN HERE, I'M GONNA ASSUME THAT ANY OTHER RECREATIONAL OR SPORTS FACILITY WOULD CERTAINLY BE INCLUDED.
SO I NEED TO GO SEE WHAT INTENSE RECREATIONAL USE IS INCLUDED AND THEN THAT'S EXCLUDED FROM THAT.
I, I'M TRYING TO DO THAT QUICKLY NOW, BUT I MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO, BUT I DO ALSO THINK, DON'T GET 'EM CHARLIE.
THIS STILL WOULD NOT, UM, INCLUDE, UH, YOU KNOW, RECREATIONAL FACILITIES THAT AREN'T ALSO ASSOCIATED WITH SCHOOL CAMPUSES.
WHICH AS I NOTE, AND THAT THAT ALSO, IF YOU WANNA HAVE IT, THAT'S IN 2 12 9 0 2 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SEC SUBSECTION F.
IT SAYS, UH, IT CAN'T MODIFY AN ORDINANCE, UH, FOR ATHLETIC FACILITIES A BREAK.
NO, NO, WE DON'T TAKE A BREAK, BUT I CAN SUSPEND, BUT THANK YOU.
WE DUNNO WHEN WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS, HOW MUCH TIME WE CAN GIVE SOMEONE.
LET'S JUST SUSPEND EVERYTHING.
DO THINK THAT MAKES SENSE? YES.
UM, CHAIR, I, I WOULD, IF, IF I HAVE SUPPORT FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SUSPEND OUR RULES SO THAT OUR, OUR, YOU KNOW, FOLKS HAVE THE TIME TO LOOK AT SECTIONS AND RESPOND IN A REASONABLE WAY.
WE CAN ASK OUR QUESTIONS AND CLARIFY SO WE'RE NOT SORT OF HEMMED IN BY OUR RULES AT THIS POINT.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER LEE'S ON ANDREW, JUST, UH, TO, UH, KEEP THINGS ON TRACK IF WE COULD, UM, MODIFY IF YOU HAVE A, UM, SPECIFIC MODIFICATION.
SO I'M GONNA SAY THAT WE ALLOW, UM, FOR EACH AMENDMENT WE ALLOW THREE MORE QUESTIONS AND GIVING THREE MINUTES EACH TO EACH OF THE QUESTION ANSWER, LIKE BETWEEN THE QUESTION ANSWER.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO THREE MINUTES EACH FOR THREE MORE QUESTIONS ON EACH AMENDMENT.
WE HAVE A SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS.
UH, AND THEN, UH, ANY OBJECTIONS TO ALLOWING SOME Q AND A HEARING? NONE, UH, THAT CHANGE TO THE RULES, UH, PASSES.
OR WHERE WE, SO WE'RE, WE HAD A QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER HAYNES.
COMMISSIONER HAYNES, WAS YOUR QUESTION FULLY ANSWERED? MY, I'M, I'M SORRY.
I'M HAPPY TO TAKE UP THAT QUESTION AND CONTINUE WITH A LINE OF QUESTIONING AND MY TIME CAN START IF YOU WANT TO, BUT I SEE THAT STAFF IS LOOKING INTO THE QUESTION TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY GIVE US A REASONABLE ANSWER.
UM, AS LONG AS IT, I GO AHEAD AND ASK YOUR QUESTION.
MY QUESTION IS RE ESSENTIALLY WHAT COMMISSIONER HAYNES ASKED.
ALL, WE'LL WAIT TO HEAR WHAT IS INCLUDED IN INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USE BE.
EXCEPT JUST TO CLARIFY, WE, WE CAN STILL DO A SECOND HUNDRED PERCENT JUST, AND, UM, JENNIFER IS AN AGREEMENT ON THAT.
CHAIR, I MAY HAVE A QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER AZAR.
THE, I'M, I'M, I'M TRACKING YOUR AMENDMENT AND THE, THE ORDERING, I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M FOLLOWING ACCURATELY.
SO FOR RIGHT NOW, WE'RE CONTEMPLATING 4.81 AND 4.81 DOES NOT SPEAK TO BUILDINGS.
THIS IS ONLY ABOUT ADJACENT USE AND THE USE.
WE'RE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT INTENSE INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USE.
THIS ISN'T ABOUT BUILDINGS OR MASSING.
AND I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER HAYNES QUESTION WAS ESSENTIALLY, AND I'M FOLLOWING THROUGH ON THAT, IS TO SAY, CAN, CAN WE UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT ALL IS INCLUDED IN INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USE? GOT IT.
UM, I JUST CHECKED IN CODE AND IT'S ACTUALLY NOT DEFINED.
SO I THINK IT MIGHT BE ONE OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU SEE IT TYPE OF SITUATIONS.
UH, SO, UM, I I I THINK THE, IT DOES EXCLUDE AND IT HAS THOSE EXCLUSIONS.
SO I, IT INCLUDES, LET ME USE THE TERM THAT'S USED SEXUAL IT IS THERE YES.
WILL TAKE TALKS ABOUT SPORTS COURTS AS DEFINED.
THIS IS AS THIS GIVES EXAMPLES.
INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USE IS NOT DEFINED EXPLICITLY.
I THINK WE'VE LEARNED PAINFULLY OVER THE PAST 10 MINUTES THAT IT NEEDS TO BE DEFINED
BUT IT DOES, WHAT WE DO KNOW IS IT INCLUDES AN INTENSIVE RECREATIONAL USE, INCLUDES A SWIMMING POOL, TENNIS COURT, BALL COURT, OR PLAYGROUND.
AND IT DOES NOT INCLUDE A MULTI-USE TRAIL.
IF THE COMMISSION'S DESIRE IS TO CHANGE THAT DEFINITION.
UM, MR. ANDERSON, ACTUALLY, THAT DEFINITION WILL NOT
[01:35:01]
BE REQUIRED.I THINK IT WAS A CLARIFYING QUESTION 'CAUSE MY AMENDMENT, IF IT PASSES AT THE MOMENT, IS THAT WE WOULD KEEP SECTION 4.8 COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS HEADING AND THE LINE WOULD SIMPLY READ DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT IS EXEMPT FROM THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS OF L D C CHAPTER 25 DASH TWO, SUB CHAPTER C, ARTICLE 10.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
SO WE STILL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS IF NEEDED.
YEAH, THE MOTION ON THE TABLE.
ANY OTHER CLARIFYING QUESTIONS NEEDED? OKAY.
UM, SO WE'RE AT THE POINT, THIS IS SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
WE ARE, UH, WE'LL AT SPEAKERS, UH, THOSE FOR AND AGAINST.
UM, SO DO WE HAVE ANY, I DON'T THINK WE'VE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY OF THOSE THAT ARE, WE'D WANNA SPEAK AGAINST THIS MOTION.
LOOKS LIKE WE'RE READY TO TAKE A VOTE.
DO WE NEED TO REPEAT THE MOTION SUBSTITUTE MOTION ONE MORE TIME? HAPPY TO DO THAT CHAIR.
SO WE'RE SAYING THAT, UM, FOR SECTION 4.8, STARTING ON PAGE FOUR, COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS HEADING, UM, STARTING ON PAGE FIVE, IT WOULD SIMPLY READ DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT IS EXEMPT FROM THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS OF L D C CHAPTER 25 DASH TWO SUBCHAPTER C ARTICLE 10 PERIOD.
AND WE WOULD STRIKE THROUGH THE REST OF THE SECTION.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, THOSE IN FAVOR ON THE DAAS.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A, TAKE A VOTE.
UM, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON IS NOT PRESENT.
UH, SO DO WE HAVE, UH OH, YES.
UH, RECOGNIZING COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, COMING BACK TO THE DAAS, UH, THOSE, UH, VIRTUALLY IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, UH, PLEASE SHOW ME AND THOSE ABSTAINING OR VOTING AGAINST, NO.
COMMISSIONER CONLEY, I SEE YOUR GREEN.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER, UH, THAT WAS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO THE BASE'S MOTION? UH, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS? 'CAUSE THAT SUBSTITUTE REPLACES COMMISSIONER ALS, UH, 'CAUSE THEY WERE ON THE SAME TOPIC.
UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER AMENDMENT?
I'LL BE HONEST, I'M CONSIDERING THIS ONCE.
I MIGHT NEED HELP FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.
IT, IT WILL BE A LITTLE REDUNDANT BECAUSE I'M MAKING AN AMENDMENT WITHIN THE COMPATIBILITY SECTION AND I'M MAKING A REDUNDANT.
UM, I, I'M JUST THINKING WHETHER I SHOULD MAKE A REDUNDANT ONE IN CASE THAT ORIGINAL MOTION IS NOT CARRIED FORWARD.
I DO THINK THE ELEMENT THAT I'M TRYING TO SUGGEST IS VERY IMPORTANT.
SO I WOULD AT LEAST WANT THAT CONSIDERED IN THE FINAL I L A.
UM, AND IT WOULD REALLY BE, OKAY, I'LL LAY IT OUT.
AND THEN
SO I WOULD BE ASKING FOR STRIKING SECTION 4.8, AND I CAN EXPLAIN THAT IN A SECOND, WHAT THAT WOULD DO.
AND SO ESSENTIALLY I WOULD BE SAYING IN THE COMPATIBILITY SECTION, IF INDEED THAT SECTION MOVES FORWARD, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, SORT OF THE MOTION THAT WE'VE HAD, WE SHOULD NOT HAVE USES TRIGGERING COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
AND THAT'S SIMPLY JUST, WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION ON THIS TASK AND COUNCIL'S HAD THAT DISCUSSION AS WELL.
UM, PERFECT EXAMPLE THAT ALWAYS COMES UP IS CAN MABRY TRIGGERED COMPATIBILITY ONTO SENIOR HOUSING, ASSISTED LIVING ACROSS THE HIGHWAY, MOPAC.
AND IT NEVER SORT OF MADE SENSE AND IT WAS SIMPLY THE CAMP MAYBE ZONED SSF.
SO IT WAS TRIGGERING A COMPATIBILITY.
WE'VE HAD CHURCHES, CEMETERIES, UH, SCHOOL ACTUALLY THEMSELVES TRIGGER COMPATIBILITY BECAUSE OF THAT PURPOSE.
AND, UM, COUNCIL HAS DECIDED TO MOVE AWAY FROM THAT USED TRIGGERING COMPATIBILITY, BUT RATHER ZONING.
'CAUSE IF WE HAVE NONCONFORMING USE, THOSE CAN BE BOUGHT IN COMPLIANCE.
ANY QUESTIONS OR MAYBE YOU, YOU, YOU SAID YOU WERE TRYING TO TAKE OUT 4.8 0.2.
UH, UH, I WOULD TAKE OUT SECTION 4.8, 0.1 0.2 ON WHICH A USE PERMITTED IN AN SSF FIVE AND THEN 4.82 ON WHICH A USE PERMITTED IN AN SSF FIVE.
AGAIN, IT'S REDUNDANT BECAUSE WE JUST STRUCK THE SECTION AS PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT WE KNOW THIS ITEM HAS TO MOVE FORWARD, SO I'M JUST MAKING A LITTLE BIT OF A REDUNDANT MOTION HERE.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER CLARIFYING QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU WANT TO, UH, SECOND VICE CHAIR? OKAY.
UH, WHAT'S THE SECOND ON THAT ITEM? DO WE HAVE, DO WE NEED TO GO THROUGH ANY FOR, AGAINST THIS ITEM? ANY OPPOSITION THAT WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT? ALL RIGHT.
ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS, UH, AMENDMENT TO THE BASE HEARING? NO OBJECTIONS.
[01:40:01]
UH, THEN IT, UH, PASSES UNANIMOUSLY, UH, MOVING ON TO ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS COMMISSION HAVE COMMISSIONER ZA SORRY, BEAR WITH ME.UM, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO STRIKE SECTION 6.62.
UM, AND ESSENTIALLY IT SAYS THAT THE TELECOM TOWER MAY NOT BE LOCATED, UM, WITHIN 300 FEET OF A HISTORIC, UM, LEASE ZONED OR HISTORIC LANDMARK.
AND, UH, ESSENTIALLY I'M SENDING A, WELL, I'LL SPEAK TO YOU IN A SECOND, BUT THAT'S MY MOTION AT THIS POINT.
UH, DO YOU, CAN I ASK JUST A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON WHY YOU'RE PROPOSING THAT AMENDMENT? SURE.
I, I THINK WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD DECENT HERE.
WE HAVE 120 FEET FOR ANY BUDDING, UM, SINGLE FAMILY USE OR 50 FEET FOR DAYCARE SERVICES OR, OR A DWELLING UNIT.
AND I THINK THERE'S GOOD REASONING FOR WHY WE WOULD WANT THAT DISTANCE FOR TELECOM TOWER BECAUSE OF ANY POTENTIAL IMPACT ON THOSE FOLKS LIVING NEARBY OR, UM, CHILDREN WHO MIGHT BE NEARBY.
HOWEVER, HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK I, I SEE SOME REASONING BEHIND THE HISTORIC LANDMARK, BUT WE WOULD STILL HAVE OTHER PIECES THAT WOULD BE DEFINING THAT.
SO I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULD NEED TO HAVE A SPECIFIC, UM, GUIDANCE FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK.
IF IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT'S OWN HISTORIC, IT WOULD STILL BE WITHIN THAT 120 FEET.
SIMILARLY, IF IT'S ANOTHER STRUCTURE, UM, THAT HAS USES.
SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO HERE.
UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? CAN I JUST SPEAK TO IT? GO AHEAD.
UM, I JUST WANNA SAY, YOU KNOW, WE WERE JUST TOLD THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL HAD CONSIDERED.
SO REALLY THIS IS, LET'S, LET'S GET A SECOND FIRST.
WE HAVE SEC COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, NOW GO CONTINUE.
SO ESSENTIALLY THIS WOULD AGAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD STILL HAVE THE OTHER DISTANCE, UH, REASONING THAT IS IN THERE, SO WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON THAT.
SO I DO NOT SEE ANY MAJOR CONCERN.
AND REALLY IT IS TO MAKE THE REQUIREMENT SIMPLER AND TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE LIKE DIFFERENT KINDS OF STANDARDS RUNNING THROUGH DIFFERENT USES.
IT BECOMES HARD TO TRACK OVER TIME.
WE'VE SEEN THIS AT THE CITY AND ALTHOUGH WE HEARD FROM STAFF THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING, UM, THE COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE CONSIDERED SEMI-RECENTLY, UH, THIS WOULD BE MY WAY OF SIGNALING SOMETHING TO COUNCIL AND SAYING MAYBE WE NEED TO RECONSIDER THAT EVEN IF IT WAS A RECENT DECISION.
UH, SO WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT, UH, THEN LET'S GO AHEAD, UH, HEARING NO OBJECTIONS, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, THAT ONE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AS WELL.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH AMENDMENTS? I'M GONNA TRY
AND I MAY BE OPENING UP A HORNET'S NEST, SO I'M GONNA ASK, UH, YOU TO COME UP.
AND I'M DOING THIS ON THE FLY, ADMITTEDLY, BUT, UH, UH, THE TERM ALSO INCLUDES A, UH, FACILITY USED FOR EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES INCLUDING SPORTS, ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT.
YOU FILL IN THE TERMS IF, UM, IF NOT PROHIBITED BY, UH, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, STATE LAW, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
ALTHOUGH I WORK FOR A LAW FIRM, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, SO I'M GONNA INVITE THE ATTORNEYS UP TO ADDRESS THAT
SO THAT, SO THAT IF, IF IT A, GETS CHANGED, OR B IF, IF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IS SPECIFIC TO SPORTS FACILITIES BUT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE, THE THE MAX OR THE WHATEVER ON 51ST.
THE ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT CENTER.
THANKS CHAD SHAW WITH THE CITY LAW DEPARTMENT.
I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IN THAT.
BASICALLY, UH, I'M TRYING TO BACK DOOR.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY IT, I'LL SAY IT BECAUSE I'M NOT A LAWYER.
I DON'T HAVE A TECHNICAL TERM, BUT YOU'RE BACKING BACK INTO WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
UM, AND I WILL SAY THAT AS, UH, MR. ANDERSON MENTIONED EARLIER, AND AS YOU'RE FULLY AWARE, OBVIOUSLY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION HE TALKED ABOUT DOES EAT UP A LOT OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND I THINK HE EVEN QUOTED FROM THE SECTION, BUT AS A RECOMMENDATION, I GIVEN THAT, THAT'S WHY I WOULD SAY, IF NOT, I CAN SEE THAT PROHIBITED.
IF, IF, IF YOU'RE SAYING LET'S NOT RUN A FOUL OF STATE LAW, I, I DON'T THINK THAT, I DON'T THINK I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION AS LONG AS WE UNDERSTAND THAT 2 12 9 0 2
[01:45:01]
IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE DOES EAT UP A LOT OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD SAY, IF NOT PROHIBITED I UNDERSTAND BY STATE LAW.
AND THEN THAT WAY IF, IF YOU DETERMINE IT'S NOT PROHIBITED BY STATE LAW, THEREFORE IT'S AN EDUCATIONAL FACILITY AND THESE, UH, THIS I L A COMPLIES OR APPLIES, RIGHT.
GIVE Y'ALL MORE FLEXIBILITY,
SO LET'S HEAR THE, UM, THE MOTION ONE MORE TIME, UH, GIVEN WHAT WE JUST LEARNED.
WELL, ARE THERE ANY OTHER CLARIFYING QUESTIONS FROM ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND IF YOU CAN, GIVEN WHAT WE KNOW, UH, I CAN'T REPEAT IT, WHOEVER WROTE IT DOWN.
THE TERM ALSO INCLUDES A FACILITY THAT MAY BE USED FOR EX FOR EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES SUCH AS SPORTS ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT, IF NOT PROHIBITED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODER STATE LAW.
I WOULD SAY, UH, UH, ATH HOW ABOUT ATHLETIC COMPLEXES? UM, UH, PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS AND OTHER ASSOCIATED FACILITIES, IF NOT PROHIBITED BY STATE LAW?
SO THE FULL LIST WOULD, THE TERM ALSO INCLUDES A FACILITY USED FOR EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES, SPORTS ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT, ATHLETIC COMPLEXES, PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS, AND OTHER ASSOCIATED FACILITIES, IF NOT PROHIBITED BY STATE LAW.
CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION? A CLARIFYING QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER AZAR.
UM, I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, IF YOU CAN ALL HELP ME UNDERSTAND.
SO WE, WE, OH, MR. ANDERSON, YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOOD.
UM, UH, SINCE THE, THIS DEFINITION ESSENTIALLY SAID EVERYTHING HERE EXCEPT FOR THINGS THAT ARE ACCESSORY USES.
SO IF WE'RE CREATING MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR SPORTS FACILITIES ENTERING, WHICH I'M TOTALLY FINE WITH, ARE WE THEN LEAVING BEHIND MEDICAL FACILITIES AND CAFETERIAS? I MEAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THEN WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE OTHER ACCESSORY USES.
I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND SEE WHERE THE MENTION IS OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES SPECIFICALLY.
WE ADDRESSED AS MUCH WELL, AN ACCESSORY USE AS AN ACCESSORY USE IS CURRENTLY DEFINED BY CODE.
SO IT IS NOT THE PRIMARY USE AND WOULD BE ELIGIBLE UNDER THIS INTERLOCAL.
SO WELL MEDICAL FACILITY FOR, FOR, FOR AN EXAMPLE, IF IT MEETS THE ACCESSORY USE STANDARD, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS PRIMARY USES.
THAT'S THE DIFFERENTIATION WE'RE MAKING.
DID STAFF HAD, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
I THINK I HAVE A FIXED FOR, I I ABSOLUTELY SEE WHERE YOU'RE GOING.
HOW ABOUT, HOW ABOUT IN THAT LI BEFORE WE GET TO THAT LIST, WE SAY A FACILITY, UH, NOT LOCATED AT A PRESCHOOL, PRIMARY OR SECONDARY CAMPUS SO THAT YOU GET THE DETACHED, UM, THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTERS AND IF STATE LAW CHANGES, BERGER, NELSON HOUSE PARK, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE DISTRICT OWNS A TENNIS CENTER OR, UH, THE DELCO CENTER.
UH, CHAD SHAW LAW DEPARTMENT, AGAIN, MIGHT I JUST SAY TOO, THIS MAY BE ONE OF THOSE INSTANCES WHERE AS A RECOMMENDATION WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE COMMISSION IS POTENTIALLY, UM, TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
AND OF COURSE, BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF THE ISSUE, IT MIGHT REQUIRE SOME REFINEMENT, UH, IF IT WERE, IF, IF COUNSEL WANTED TO ACTUALLY ACT ON THAT.
SO I JUST WANNA THROW THAT OUT THERE THAT, UM, IT, AS LONG AS THE INTENT IS UNDERSTOOD, I I WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN SOME ABILITY TO REFINE THAT IF, IF IT DID GO FORWARD AND IF COUNSEL HAD AN INTEREST IN INCORPORATING MY FIRST WORDS WERE, I REALIZED I'M OPENING UP A HORNET'S NOSE
OH, NO, AND I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, AND UNDERSTANDING THAT SOMETIMES OUR, A LITTLE CONTEMPLATION GETS US TO SOME, SOME BETTER LANGUAGE.
COACH YOUR HANDS MIGHT RECOMMEND THAT.
THEN WE MAYBE MAKE A MOTION THAT SAYS, UM, LOOK AT THE LIST OF ACCESSORY USES AND, AND TRY TO REASSESS WHAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES OR WHATEVER.
[01:50:01]
I'M SORRY, I HAVE TO LOOK AT THE EXACT THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, BUT ESSENTIALLY WE WOULD BE SAYING, YEAH.UH, WHICH ACCESSORY USERS NEED TO BE RECONSIDERED, UM, AS PART OF, UM, EDUCATIONAL, THE DEFINITION OF, UH, EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES WITH THE INTENT OF PROVIDING MORE FLEXIBILITY.
SO OUR STAFF CAN HOPEFULLY FIGURE THAT OUT.
I DON'T KNOW, I'M JUST SUGGESTING THIS, I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS A MOTION THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE SINCE YOU'RE THE MOTION MAKER.
UH, THE, THE DIFFERENCE THAT, THAT I HAVE HEARD AND THAT I'M, THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING IS THESE ARE GOING TOWARD THE FACILITIES THAT ARE LOCATED AT A CAMPUS THAT, THAT WHOSE PRIMARY, UM, PURPOSE IS TO DELIVER EDUCATIONAL AT PRIMARY SECONDARY PRESCHOOL.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET IS THE DISTRICT ALSO OWNS A BUNCH OF OTHER STUFF AND WE SHOULD GIVE THEM FLEXIBILITY IN THOSE INSTANCES WHEN IT DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW.
SO I THINK IT'S, UH, YOU CAN GO AHEAD WITH YOUR MOTION.
MAYBE WE CAN HAVE ANOTHER, I HATE TO SAY IT, BUT MAYBE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION THAT ESSENTIALLY SAYS GO AND LOOK AT OTHER THINGS AS WELL.
SO I THINK I'M FINE WITH, UH, MOVING AHEAD.
WITH THAT, I I, WE NEED TO GET CLEAR ON THE MOTION SO WE CAN GET A SECOND AND MOVE ON.
SO, UH, I THINK YOU, YOU HAD SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE I THINK YOU WANTED TO CRAFT, I'M, I'VE GOT NOTES THAT I'M NOT QUITE SURE.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THE MOTION.
LET'S MOVE ON IT AND THEN WE'LL SEE IF WE HAVE ANY, WE CAN HANDLE ANY CHANGES TO AMENDMENT SUBSTITUTIONS OR MAKE OTHERS GO AHEAD.
UM, I, I WOULD JUST SUGGEST SO THAT IT'S BROAD SO THAT CHAD AND I CAN WORK ON LANGUAGE.
IT WOULD SAY RECONSIDER ADDING, UH, PERMISSIBLE USES, UH, INCLUDING, UH, SPORTS OR OTHER RECREATION RECREATIONAL FACILITIES TO THE FULLEST EXTENT CURRENTLY PERMITTED BY LAW OR, UH, AVAILABLE AFTER SUBSEQUENT CHANGES TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.
YEAH, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SAY NOT IN CONFLICT WITH THE LOCAL, UNLESS YOU TELL ME LEGAL.
WELL, I THINK, I THOUGHT I WAS SAYING THE SAME THING.
WHAT, WHAT DO YOU WANNA GO WITH? UM, I'M, I'M GONNA TAKE, I'M GONNA TAKE THE ADVICE OF MY COUNSEL AS WELL.
ALRIGHT, SO RE LET'S BE SPEC ONE MORE TIME IF YOU DON'T MIND AND THEN WE'LL TRY TO DO A SECOND.
RECONSIDER EXPANDING EDUCATIONAL FACILITY USES INCLUDING, UH, SPORTS COMPLEXES, PERFORMING ART AND PER AND PERFORMING ART CENTERS, UH, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW AND, UH, AVAILABLE, UH, UPON SUBSEQUENT STATE LAW CHANGES.
IS THAT ALL RIGHT? I WANT IT TO BE, THE REASON I'M SAYING THAT IS BECAUSE IF THE, IF THEY COME BACK IN THE 89TH LEGISLATURE AND CHANGE IT, I WANT THERE TO BE SOMETHING THERE THAT SAYS, WELL, WE WE'RE COVERED.
NOW WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO THIS AGREEMENT.
THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT YOU WANTED.
IF THAT IS, THAT IS WHAT I WANTED, BUT I WOULD, I'M SURPRISED THAT AN ATTORNEY WANTS TO PUT A, A CHANGE IN STATE LAW INTO CITY CODE.
THAT WOULD, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
BUT IF YOU, LET ME JUST CLARIFY TOO.
HE IS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S ATTORNEY.
I JUST, I JUST WANNA GET THAT OUT THERE BEFORE THERE WAS ANY, LEMME TALK ION, LEMME TALK.
'CAUSE I WOULD BE SHOCKED IF THE CITY WANTS TO DO THAT.
I WILL SAY I DO AGREE WITH CHARLIE THAT, UM, I WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US FOR BOTH PARTIES.
AND THIS HAS BEEN VERY MUCH OF A, A PARTNERSHIP.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING REALLY CLOSELY TOGETHER.
I THINK WE'VE BEEN WORKING REALLY WELL TOGETHER, AND I DO APPRECIATE WHAT HE HAS ADDED.
AND, AND IT, I THINK IT BUILDS ON WHAT I SAID EARLIER AND THAT WE CAN LOOK AT THIS AND UNDERSTANDING IF AGAIN, THIS MOVES FORWARD.
UM, AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THE STATE STATUTE SAYS THIS IS ABOUT SCHOOL BUILDINGS AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THE STATE STATUTE SAYS THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS WE, THAT THESE AGREEMENTS DO NOT DO.
I THINK IF, IF THE COMMISSION DECIDES THAT THE, THE ATTORNEYS SHOULD HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITH OUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE STATUTE SAYS, WE CAN, WE CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION IN A VERY CONSTRUCTIVE WAY.
AND I DO APPRECIATE WHAT CHARLIE ADDED IN, IN THE, IN HIS OPENING LANGUAGE FOR WHAT HE WAS SUGGESTING.
I DO NOT, I'M NOT CLEAR ON OUR MOTION, BUT MY MOTION, MY MOTION READS THIS TERM, UH, IN, UH, AT THE END OF THE DEFINITION OF AN EDUCATIONAL FACILITY.
[01:55:01]
UM, UH, FACILITIES NOT LOCATED AT PRESCHOOL, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS, BUT USED FOR EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES INCLUDING ATHLETIC COMPLEXES, PERFORMING ART CENTERS AND ASSOCIATED STRUCTURES, IF NOT PROHIBITED, IF NOT PROHIBITED BY STATE LAW.UM, SO DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY, UM, UH, POINTS OF CLARIFICATION, ANYTHING ELSE TO DISCUSS? WE HAVEN'T REALLY OPENED IT EXCEPT TO THE FULL COMMISSION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS MOTION? ALL RIGHT.
DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER HAYNES? SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? WE MAY.
I SEE NO OBJECTIONS AND THAT, UH, AMENDMENT PASSES.
SO DO WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH ANY FURTHER AMENDMENTS? COMMISSIONER WOODS? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL SAW HANDS, I THINK.
YEAH, I THINK WE HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL AMENDMENT.
AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO COMMISSIONER AL.
ACTUALLY MAYBE COMMISSIONER AL IS RELATED.
UM, WE WANTED TO ALSO PUT IN AN AMENDMENT TO ADDRESS THE, UH, MINIMUM SETBACKS.
SO THE DISCUSSION IS TO STRIKE, UH, SECTION 4.5 MINIMUM SETBACKS AND JUST REMOVE IT ENTIRELY.
CAN YOU, UH, JUST QUESTION, CAN YOU READ THAT SECTION? YES.
SO THE SECTION WOULD, UH, CURRENTLY READS AS MINIMUM SETBACKS OR SECTION 4.5 MINIMUM SETBACKS.
SCHOOL BUILDINGS ON EDUCATIONAL FACILITY SITES SHALL BE SETBACK MINIMUM OF 10 FEET FROM THE LOT LINE FROM A LOT LINE.
THERE SHALL BE NO MINIMUM SETBACK FOR OTHER STRUCTURES EXCEPT FOR TELE COMMUNICATION TOWERS AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 6.6.
AND WHAT WE ARE SUGGESTING IS TO STRIKE THAT 4.5.
I MIGHT OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION JUST FOR CLARITY, WHICH WOULD BE TO AMEND SECTION 4.5 TO READ.
THERE SHALL BE NO MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT ON EDUCATIONAL FACILITY SITES EXCEPT FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 6.6.
SO WHAT, I'M HERE, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A SECOND YET, SO WE'RE KIND OF WORKING THROUGH THE LANGUAGE.
SO WE'LL TAKE COMMISSIONER WOODS.
SO COMMISSIONER WOODS AMENDMENT.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY, LET'S ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
SO, UH, STAFF, UM, DO WE HAVE OTHER, OTHER INSTANCES WHERE WE DON'T PRESCRIBE SETBACKS? UM, KIND OF NO MINIMUM SETBACKS OR WOULD THIS BE A UNIQUE SITUATION? I MEAN, THE, THE I L A IS UNIQUE IN OF ITSELF.
UH, THE TYPE OF USE WITH THE SCHOOL AND, AND ACCESSORY USES ARE UNIQUE IN OF THEMSELVES.
UM, THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE, SAY FOR EXAMPLE, THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL WOULD NECESSITATE SETBACKS, UH, UNLESS IT'S FIRE RATED CONSTRUCTION DETAILS THAT I'M NOT ENTIRELY FAMILIAR WITH.
BUT THERE ARE INSTANCES THAT WOULD WALK AND TALK LIKE SETBACKS.
BUT THIS COULD ESSENTIALLY PUT A BUILDING AT THE LOT LINE FROM, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S PROPOSED.
THIS WOULD ALLOW CONSTRUCTION, THIS WOULD ALLOW YOU TO VERTICAL AT THE PROPERTY LINE.
UH, SO IS THERE, OKAY, I'VE GOT OTHER, YEAH.
ARE THERE OTHER, THIS QUESTION FOR STAFF, ARE THERE OTHER, I'M JUST MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THINGS LIKE FIRE SAFETY.
ARE THERE OTHER BUILDING CODE RELATED, UH, THAT WE WOULD GET DISTANCES BETWEEN FACILITIES? UH, OKAY.
MR. ANDERSON, YOU WANNA, YEAH.
THE BEGINNING OF THIS DOCUMENT DOES SAY THE TECHNICAL CODE CRITERIA AREN'T CHANGED AND AREN'T AMENDABLE BY THIS DOCUMENT.
SO IF WE SET A ZERO LOT, A ZERO SETBACK LIMITATION AT THE LOT LINE, IT DOES NOT ALLOW US TO NOT COMPLY WITH TECHNICAL CRITERIA SUCH AS FIRE CODE.
AND, AND HOW WOULD WE DO SIDEWALKS
[02:00:02]
IF YOU BILL RIGHT TO THE LOT LINE? WELL, I THINK THOSE ARE PART OF THE, YEAH, THOSE EXISTING.YEAH, LET'S, OKAY, SO LET'S MAKE SURE WE'RE ADDRESSING THE QUESTIONS, UH, TO THE RIGHT PEOPLE.
DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION, COMMISSIONER HANS? I HAVE
YEAH, AND THERE'S NO, I MEAN, I, I HAVE SIMILAR, I'M STILL TRYING TO, WOULD THIS IMPACT YOUR ABILITY TO, TO DO SIDEWALKS? I MEAN, IF WE, IF YOU BUILD ZERO NOW NO, SIDEWALKS ARE TYPICALLY IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
BUT, UM, BUT CURRENTLY, LIKE C B D AND D M U ZONING DISTRICTS DOWNTOWN HAVE ZERO SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
UM, THERE'S OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS THAT HAVE ZERO SIDE AND REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
THE DIFFERENCE BEING LIKE THE BUILDING CODE, IF YOU ARE LESS THAN FIVE FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE OR LESS THAN 10 FEET FROM ANOTHER STRUCTURE, IT REQUIRES FIRE RATED CONSTRUCTION.
AND USUALLY THAT JUST MEANS NO OPENINGS, NO WINDOWS, THAT SORT OF THING.
AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'RE OBVIOUSLY IF THERE'S EASEMENTS AND YOU'D HAVE TO ABIDE BY ANY EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES.
IF I MIGHT ASK A QUESTION, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY QUESTION REGARDING EASEMENTS.
IF I UNDERSTAND THE LEGAL DOCUMENT SECTION, IT SOUNDS LIKE EASEMENTS WILL BE SORT OF NEGOTIATED.
SO THIS WOULDN'T IMPACT EASEMENTS EITHER, BECAUSE THOSE WILL BE NEGOTIATED REGARDLESS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? I THINK WE'VE HAD A FEW.
UM, SO WE HAD A, DID WE HAVE A SECOND YET? NO, WE HAD COMMISSIONER WOODS.
SO WE HAVE, DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THIS? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? UM, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY, I'M JUST OPENING UP, THIS IS KIND OF IS A REACH FOR ME THAT I'M, I'M, I THINK I GOT MY QUESTIONS ANSWERED.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO AHEAD AND OPEN THIS UP FOR A VOTE? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD.
UH, LET ME ASK, ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS ITEM, MR. AZAR? UM, I'M, I'M JUST SPEAKING FOR CHAIR IF I MIGHT, UM, I UNDERSTAND.
I THINK THAT THIS CONVERSATION HAPPENED EARLIER.
WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, IT MAKES SENSE FOR US TO CONSIDER THE SETBACKS AND I FEEL PRETTY COMFORTABLE AT THIS MOMENT UNDERSTANDING THAT EASEMENT, SIDEWALKS AND OTHER SORT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY THINGS WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF.
SO I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION AT THIS POINT.
UH, WHILE WE'RE GOING DOWN THE, ANY SPEAKERS AGAINST THIS ITEM AND YOU JUST DON'T WANNA SPEAK FORWARD, YOU GUYS WANNA SPEAK FORWARD? YOUR ITEM? COMMISSIONER WOODS? I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO HEAR THAT WE HAVE NO SETBACKS IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS, AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, BASED ON ALL THE CONVERSATION WE'VE HAD ABOUT THE NEED TO ALLOW SCHOOLS TO BE FLEXIBLE, THE ZONING THAT WE ALLOW FOR OUR SCHOOLS SHOULD BE AS PERMISSIVE AND FLEXIBLE AS ANY ZONING DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY.
SO I THINK THIS IS A GREAT STEP.
ANY ANYONE WANTS ANY MORE SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE ITEM.
UM, THIS IS, UH, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MAX, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
AND, UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND JUST READ IT ONE MORE TIME, JUST SO WE'RE FOR THE RECORD, AND THEN WE WILL GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
SO THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 4.5 MINIMUM SETBACKS, UH, AND PROPOSING THAT IT READS, THERE SHALL BE NO MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT ON EDUCATIONAL FACILITY SITES EXCEPT FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 6.6.
THERE'S, UH, LET ME JUST, ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS ITEM? OKAY.
SEEING NONE THAT, UH, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
AND I THINK COMMISSIONER MOALA, YOU HAD, DID YOU HAVE ONE? YES.
I WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ADDRESSING ALL OF THIS.
I BELIEVE SECTION FOUR POINT, SORRY, I'M TRYING TO FIND IT HERE.
I JUST HAD IT 4.10 HEIGHT REGULATIONS.
I WOULD LIKE, I, I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW SUIT ON WHAT WE DID ON COMPATIBILITY, SO MIGHT NEED SOME LANGUAGE HELP, BUT I'D LIKE TO REMOVE THE HEIGHT REGULATIONS REQUIREMENTS.
CAN YOU, UH, MAYBE PITCH US SOMETHING TO WORK WITH? OKAY.
I THINK IT'S GONNA BE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HEARD BEFORE, UH, WHICH IS TO ACTUALLY, WE WOULD JUST REWORD IT, UM, EXCEPT FOR HEIGHT REGULATIONS GOVERNING TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 6.6 OF THE AGREEMENT.
UM, THERE WILL BE NO RESTRICTION ON HEIGHT REGULATIONS OR OTHER STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED ON EDUCATIONAL FACILITY SITES.
[02:05:05]
I, I THINK THAT'S GONNA CAPTURE IT.UH, DO WE HAVE ANY LOOKING AROUND THE ROOM FOR ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER ZA, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER, I SEE THE SECTION THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
UM, YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY REMOVING HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, WHETHER SOMEONE WITH IS IN THE 65 FEET OF A DR.
SO WE WOULD JUST BE REMOVING HEIGHT ALTOGETHER.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
AND ANDERSON, TO CLARIFY, DAVE ANDERSON REPRESENTING, UH, A I S D, NO HEIGHT LIMITATION, NO HIGH LIMITATION AT THE 60 FOOT MARK, WHICH IS THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN.
THAT HEIGHT LIMITATION IS 45 FEET, AND THEN AFTER THE 60 FOOT, UH, MARK, NO HEIGHT LIMITATION.
MY, MY INTENT IS TO REMOVE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS ON EDUCATIONAL PROPERTIES, PERIOD.
SO, IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, MR. ANDERSON WE'RE SAYING BOTH THOSE SECTIONS, WE BE REMOVING HEIGHT LIMITATIONS MM-HMM.
EXCEPT FOR THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS.
UH, WRITE DOWN YOUR MOTION, UH, 'CAUSE I MAY ASK YOU TO READ IT ONE MORE TIME, BUT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS? YEAH, I DO.
UM, READING, NOT, NOT THAT I DON'T THINK COMMISSIONER SALLER HAS A BAD INTENTION, BUT READING BAD INTENTIONS IN THAT SOME LAWYER ARCHITECT'S GONNA DO, UH, DOWN THE ROAD.
UM, THESE WOULD BE, UH, FOR BUILDINGS USED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES.
UH, WE DO NOT, OR I DON'T THINK WE WANT A I S D TO GET IN THE BUSINESS OF BUILDING CONDOMINIUMS THAT EXCEED WHATEVER.
SO IF THEY'RE FOR TEACHERS UP HERE, GO AHEAD.
I GUESS WE'RE GONNA GET SOME CLARIFICATION.
JUST A, A REMINDER THAT THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT APPLIES TO EDUCATIONAL FACILITY AND ACCESSORY USE HOUSING IS NOT CONTEMPLATED AS AN ACCESSORY USE.
SO I, MY CLARIFYING, UM, STAFF, PLEASE HELP ME OR FOLKS JUST HELP ME OUT HERE.
I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER AL IS SUGGESTING IS REALLY THE ENTIRE SECTION WOULD SIMPLY READ, EXCEPT FOR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 6.6 OF THIS AGREEMENT.
THERE IS NO MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS OR OTHER STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED ON EDUCATIONAL FACILITY SITES IRRESPECTIVE OF THE ZONING OR USE OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
SO THE MOTION MAKER, UH, AGREES WITH THAT ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE.
DO WE HAVE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? A SECOND? NOT YET.
I'M JUST WAITING TO GET ALL THE QUESTIONS OUT OF THE WAY.
UH, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WITH THAT MOTION, UH, I'LL GO AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER WOODS? UH, LET'S GO AND DIS COMMISSIONER MUSH.
YOU WANNA GO AND DISCUSS THIS ITEM IN FAVOR? I THINK IT'S IN LINE WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE, WE COULD FALL PREY TO THE LAND OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
THE I L A IS BEHOLDEN TO BOTH THE, YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC VOTERS AND THE, AND THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
I I'M GONNA PUT MY FAITH IN THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE GIVING FLEXIBILITY ANY OTHER WAYS WE INTENDED.
UH, ANY MEMBERS SPEAKING AGAINST THIS ITEM? CAN WE GET A SECOND? YES.
UM, DO WE HAVE, UH, ANY OTHERS WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT.
DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS? UH, MOTION? JUST IT AND IT'S GONNA STRIKE FOUR POINT 10.2 COMPLETELY, RIGHT? NO, I THINK THE, SO MOTION IS READ BY COMMISSIONER ZA.
IF SO, I CAN ESSENTIALLY SAY, REALLY WE WOULD KEEP THE HEADING FOUR POINT 10 HEIGHT REGULATIONS.
STRIKE ALL THE LANGUAGE IN THAT SECTION AND REPLACE IT WITH LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, EXCEPT FOR TELE TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 6.6 OF THIS AGREEMENT, THERE IS NO MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS OR OTHER STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTED ON THE EDUCATIONAL FACILITY SITES, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE ZONING OR USE OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AND, UM, UH, STAFF, I'LL SHARE THIS LANGUAGE AFTER THE MEETING.
SO, UH, ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS MOTION? OKAY.
ANY OTHERS? COMMISSIONERS? WE'RE DOING A LOT OF WORK HERE.
I DIDN'T EXPECT JUST TO BE SO BUSY SINCE MR. RIVERA SAID I COULDN'T.
SO ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS? STAFF IS REGRETTING NOT HAVING ZONING CASES TONIGHT, RIGHT?
[02:10:01]
APPROVED SEVERAL AMENDMENTS.SO HOW DID MR. RIVERA JUST, UH, HOW DO WE NEED TO TIE, TIE CHAIR COMMISSION LAYS ON ANDOVER SO IT'S NOT AS R MAXWELL, UH, UH, BASE MOTION AS AMENDED.
DO WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THE BASE MOTION ASED? YES.
SO WE'RE JUST VOTING, UH, IF Y'ALL, EVERYBODY HEARD THAT WE'RE GONNA VOTE.
UH, IT'S THE BASE MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER CZAR SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL FOR THE BASE MOTION AS AMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO, UM, DO WE WANT, DO, DO WE NEED TO GO INTO ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS ON THIS? ALL RIGHT.
UM, DO WE HAVE A, THAT'S A MOTION.
DO WE NEED A SECOND? SHOULD YOU ALREADY HAVE THE SECOND? YOU HAVE A SECOND.
COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, GO AHEAD.
YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THE, THIS ITEM? YEAH, THIS IS JUST, IT'S REALLY AMAZING WORK THAT EVERYONE'S DONE HERE AND I WANTED TO THANK STAFF AND THE APPLICANT FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
AND I'D LOVE TO DO THE SAME WITH AUSTIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE NEXT.
ANY OTHER FOLKS WANNA SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? CAN I, CAN I JUST CLARIFY THE SECOND WAS COMMISSIONER WOODS, WAS IT NOT FOR THE BASE MOTION? IT, ME, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LAY ON I HAVE AZAR MAXWELL.
UH, I'M GONNA MAKE, TRY TO MAKE THIS EASY.
DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS MOTION? SEEING NONE THAT MOTION PASSES, UH, UNANIMOUSLY.
WE GOT HERE WE ARE DONE WITH OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.
[ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION]
ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION.AND THANK YOU STAFF FOR HANGING IN THERE.
THAT TOOK A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN I THOUGHT.
UM, BUT APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK AND, UH, I THINK HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET SOME AGREEMENT FROM COUNSEL AND THIS WILL GIVE YOU GUYS A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY, SO APPRECIATE IT.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER, WE HAVE ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION, WHICH, UH, MR. RIVERA, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN THIS ITEM.
SO I WILL SAY WE DO HAVE, UH, JUST TO REMINDER, I'LL USE THIS AS A PLACEHOLDER.
AUGUST 31ST, UM, UH, WE HAVE A SPECIALLY CALLED MEETING WHERE WE'RE GONNA COVER, HAVE STAFF PRESENTATIONS.
AND THIS WAS THE IDEA, IDEA PITCHED BY COMMISSIONER COX, UM, TO GET SOME MORE IN, UH, BACKGROUND ON SOME OF THESE CODE AMENDMENTS COMING TO US.
SO WE HAVE, UH, NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY, UH, PRESENTATION AND WE HAVE AN A D U PRESENTATION.
UH, WE HAVE, IS THERE A ANOTHER ONE ON THE AGENDA CHAIR COMMISSION LAY? YES.
AND I'LL DISSEMINATE THE AGENDA TO THE COMMISSION.
SO WE HAVE, UH, FOUR ITEMS THAT WE'LL GET PRESENTATIONS ON THAT EVENING.
IT'S, THEY'RE NOT FOR ACTION, THIS IS JUST PRESENTATION AND Q AND A WILL BE ALLOWED MR. RIVERA.
AND THEN AND CHAIR, JUST A CLARIFICATION, THAT IS ON THE 29TH, AUGUST 29TH AT 6:00 PM OH, THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I WOULD'VE PROBABLY SHOWED UP ON THE WRONG DATE.
AND THAT'S, UH, TIME IS SIX O'CLOCK MM-HMM.
AND I THINK I HAD, UH, SEVERAL HANDS GO UP WHEN I ASKED YOU TO BE HERE, SO HOPEFULLY WE STILL HAVE, UH, A QUORUM.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
LET'S GO AND MOVE.FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. HAVE ANYTHING THAT, UH, COMMISSIONERS WANT TO PUT ON FUTURE AGENDA? UM, OH YEAH, GO AHEAD.
I THINK WE'RE GONNA SAY THE SAME THING.
UH, JUST A, A QUESTION FOR OUR, UM, LIAISON, MR. RIVERA.
UM, IS THERE A PLAN TO DO A AN L D C AMENDMENT UPDATE FROM STAFF AT SOME POINT, OR WOULD THAT BE INCLUDED IN A FUTURE AGENDA? CHAIR COMMISSIONER LAYS ON VERSO.
UM, WE HAVE A MEMORANDUM THAT WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION FOLLOWED BY A BRIEFING AS WELL.
SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN WOULD THAT BE OCCURRING? I'LL PROVIDE THE COMMISSION WITH THAT INFORMATION I LATER SAW.
AND I THINK I DID, LET ME GO AROUND.
UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR, DO YOU HAVE ONE? YES, YES.
UH, THERE WERE THREE ITEMS THAT WERE INITIATED AT CODES IN, UM, UM, LAWRENCE'S JOINT COMMITTEE.
UH, CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT THEY GET ON THE NEXT AGENDA THERE? WERE INITIATING CERTAIN CODE CHANGES AND WE CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
I THINK, UM, AND MR. RIVERA CAN TELL ME IF IT'S STILL THE CASE THAT THE, UH, CHILDCARE SERVICES ONE, UH, WILL GET A BRIEFING ON SEPTEMBER 12TH
[02:15:01]
AND, UH, WE'LL ACTUALLY TAKE THAT UP FOR ACTION ON, UH, SEPTEMBER 26TH.UH, MS. RIVERA, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE WERE TRYING TO COVER IN THESE SECTIONS? OKAY.
[BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]
UH, BOARD COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUP UPDATES.UH, CODE OF ANCE TO THE JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, WE MET LAST WEEK AND WE, UM, HAD ACTION ON THE NORTH BRUNETTE GATEWAY REGULATING PLAN AMENDMENTS PART ONE.
UM, THERE WILL BE A PART TWO COMING THROUGH LATER AND CHILDCARE SERVICES PART ONE.
SO THOSE WILL BE COMING TO THE COMMISSION SOON.
UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, UH, ANYBODY WANNA TAKE THAT ITEM? WE DON'T HAVE COMMISSIONER COX BACK.
CONS PLAN, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, CHAIR, WE, UH, WE ARE SCHEDULED TO MEET THIS THURSDAY, UM, AND HAVE, UH, ESSENTIALLY DO NOT HAVE AN UPDATE SINCE THE LAST MEETING.
UH, JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMM COMMITTEE.
I DON'T HAVE ANY UPDATES, BUT I COULD SURE.
IT'S BEEN HARD FOR ME TO MAKE THOSE WEDNESDAY EVENING MEETINGS.
CAN WE PUT THAT ON
I SHOULD HAVE PUT THAT ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. YEAH.
WE'LL, UH, TAKE UP THE LOOK FOR A BACKUP.
THANK YOU FOR, UH, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER ZA, IF WE'RE GONNA DO THAT ONE.
WE HAVE THE NEW COMMISSIONER SEATED.
CAN WE ALSO PUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, WHICH I'M SERVING ON? UH, YES.
WE'LL PUT THOSE TWO ITEMS ON SO HOPEFULLY WE, UH, GET ALL OUR PEOPLE IN THE RIGHT SEATS.
UH, SMALL AREA PLANNING, JOINT COMMITTEE, UM, MEETING.
YES, WE WERE GONNA HAVE A MEETING IN AUGUST, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GONNA HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING IN SEPTEMBER, SO WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO IT.
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
UM, WE JUST MET THIS PAST MONDAY AND HAD A BRIEFING REGARDING, UH, PROJECT CONNECT AND A T P IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT, UM, BOARD AREA.
AND ALSO GOT AN UPDATE ON OUR REGULATING PLAN, WHICH LOOKS LIKE WILL NOW BE CLOSER TO THE BEGINNING OF NEXT YEAR.
NOW WORKING GROUPS THAT ARE STILL ACTIVE.
WE HAVE THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AND DUPLEX WORKING GROUP.
UH, ARE YOU GUYS STILL KIND OF WAITING TO SEE WHAT'S COMING OUT OF, UH, OKAY, SO NO ACTIVITY THERE.
THEY'RE STILL GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER, ALL THE AMENDMENTS THEY'VE BEEN GIVEN, SO.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS EVENING? ALL RIGHT.
UH, ANY OBJECTIONS, UM, TO ADJOURNING THIS MEETING? SEEING NONE, UH, THIS MEETING OF THE CLIENT'S PLANNING COMMISSION IS ADJOURNED.
THANK, SEE WHAT I'VE FOR YOU BECAUSE.