[00:00:07]
[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
AND, UH, WE'RE GONNA BRING THIS MEETING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER.UM, LET'S GO AND DO A, UH, LET'S SEE, THE TIME IS SIX 15.
UH, LET'S GO AND DO A ROLL CALL HERE.
I THINK WE HAVE, YES, WE HAVE QUORUM.
UH, SO I'M GONNA START ON THE DAIS AND START ON MY LEFT.
AND LET'S SEE, WE HAVE, UH, FAR LEFT HERE.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER CONLEY, AND THEN COMMISSIONER WOODS HERE.
UH, THEN I'M THE CHAIR, CHAIR SHAW VICE CHAIR, UH, NEXT TO ME, UM, UH, HERE.
AND THEN, UH, LET'S SEE WHO'S NEXT.
AND THEN COMMISSIONER HAYNES HERE.
SO I'M GONNA MOVE TO VIRTUAL WORLD HERE, AND WE'LL START WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER, UM, HOWARD HERE.
UH, COMMISSIONER BETA RAMIREZ HERE.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONER COPPS HERE.
AND, UH, WE HAVE EX OFFICIOS HERE THIS EVENING.
UH, THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, COMM, UH, CHAIR COHEN.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE, UH, CANDACE HUNTER, THE A I C BOARD OF TRUSTEES REPRESENTATIVE.
UH, I WAS HERE JUST BRIEFLY, MAYBE COME BACK.
UH, ALL RIGHT, SO WITH THAT COMMISSIONERS IN THE VIRTUAL SPACE, UH, PLEASE HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, YELLOW CARDS TO HELP ME TAKE VOTES.
AND, UM, REAL QUICKLY, WE'RE GOING TO, WELL, WE'LL MOVE INTO OUR, UM, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I DID NOT HEAR, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? NO, WE DO NOT.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING.UH, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? UH, QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONERS ON THE AUGUST 22ND, 2023, UH, MINUTES.
AND ESPECIALLY CALLED AUGUST 29TH, 2023.
THOSE WILL BE POSTPONED TO YOUR NEXT MEETING.
UH, BOTH OF THOSE, OR JUST THE 29TH? BOTH, UH, BOTH OF 'EM.
NO, I ACTUALLY NEEDED ON THOSE.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO, I HAVE HELP HERE, UH, BY,
[Consent Agenda]
UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPHILL.SHE'S GONNA DO THE FIRST READING, WELL, THE ONLY READING, TRYING TO, UH, SAVE TIME, UH, THE READING OF THE, UH, CONSENT AGENDA.
WE HAVE NUMBER TWO, PLAN AMENDMENT N P A 2023 DASH ZERO ZERO 1-803-ROOSEVELT AVENUE MULTIFAMILY.
THAT'S POSTED FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
NUMBER THREE, REZONING C 14 20 23 DASH 0 6 5 ROOSEVELT AVENUE MULTIFAMILY.
THAT IS THAT FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
NUMBER FOUR, PLAN AMENDMENT N P A DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 2 3 0 1 SHERIDAN.
THAT IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
NUMBER FIVE, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 3 5 SHERIDAN.
THAT IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
NUMBER SIX, PLAN AMENDMENT N P A DASH 22 DASH 0 0 1 7 0 1 CRESTVIEW VILLAGE.
THAT IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
NUMBER SEVEN, REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 3 5 CRESTVIEW VILLAGE.
THAT IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
NUMBER EIGHT, PLAN AMENDMENT N P A DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 1 16 0 1 SH LIFE WORKS THREE ARTILLERY THAT IS UP FOR CONSENT.
NUMBER NINE, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 1 8 SH LIFEWORK THREE AT TILLERY.
THAT IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH, NUMBER 10, PLAN AMENDMENT N P A.
IS THAT CORRECT? I'M SORRY, MS. RIVERA, IT'S, IT'S A CONSENT.
CORRECTION NUMBER NINE IS UP FOR CONSENT.
NUMBER 10, PLAN AMENDMENT N P A DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 3 0 0 2 7 14.
TURTLE CREEK MULTIFAMILY UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH.
NUMBER 11, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 5 1 7 9 3 8.
GREAT NORTHERN REZONING IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT NUMBER 12, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH
[00:05:01]
0 3 4 5 5 4 0 2 SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE IS OFFERED FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH, NUMBER 13, REZONING C EIGHT 14 DASH ZERO SIX DASH 1 0 6 3 HYATT WEST HUD AMENDMENT IS OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION NUMBER 14, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 MORELOS WEBER CSS ONE IS OFFERED FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 26, NUMBER 15, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 4 5 24 4.RUTLAND DRIVE IS OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION 16 REZONING C 14, 20 23, 3 8, 4, 1 0 6 AND A HALF 4 1 2 0 4 1 2, 2, 4, 1 2, 2, AND HALF.
EAST 12TH STREET IS OFFERED FOR, OH, THAT'S, I'M SORRY.
POSTPONEMENT, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WISHES FOR OCTOBER 10TH AND THE APPLICANT IS AMENABLE TO SEPTEMBER 26TH.
NUMBER 17, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 3 5 0 1 PETAL.
NUMBER 18, HISTORIC ZONING, C ONE FOUR H 20 23 0 7 9.
GRIFF GRIFFIN HOUSE 25 0 2 JARRET AVENUE IS PULLED FOR DISCUSSION NUMBER 19, CONDITIONAL USE SITE PLAN S PC DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 5 1 C.
SCENIC BROOK POCKET PARK IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT NUMBER 20, CODE AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2022 DASH 0 1 2 AMENDMENTS TO THE REGULATING PLAN FOR THE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY ZONING DISTRICT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT AS AMENDED BY THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE AND COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WILL BE READING IN AN AMENDMENT NUMBER 21.
IMAGINE AUSTIN, THE IMAGINE AUSTIN YEAR 10 REPORT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR CLARIFICATION.
UM, JUST TO UNDERSTAND THAT, IMAGINE AUSTIN, YOUR 10 REPORT, IS IT UP FOR CONSENT OR IS IT UP FOR POSTPONEMENT? CHAIR COMMISSIONER, LAY LIAISON, ANDREW RIVERA.
UH, CURRENTLY IT'S OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
UM, CHAIR WOULD LIKE TO POSTPONE THAT TO THE NEXT MEETING.
FOR DISCUSSION, UM, SANCHI, IF WE CAN JUST POSTPONE IT AND THEN FIGURE OUT, I THINK THERE'S SOME LOOSE ENDS THAT NEED TO BE TIED TOGETHER.
IF WE CAN JUST POSTPONE IT FOR THE ALRIGHT.
UH, ANY, ANY OPPOSITION TO POSTPONING THAT TO THE NEXT MEETING.
UH, SO A FEW THINGS, UH, BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS.
I THINK, UH, MR. CONLEY, DID YOU WANNA MAKE A COMMENT ON AN ITEM? YES.
YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE ONE COMMENT ON THE ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO, UM, I KNOW THAT IT, THAT THE, UH, LIFEWORKS ITEM IS PASSING ON CONSENT AND I'M VERY HAPPY ABOUT THAT.
AND I JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE HOW IMPORTANT THIS PROJECT IS FOR OUR SYSTEM AND, AND TO IT CLEARING THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS A VERY, UM, IMPORTANT STEP IN THIS VITAL PROJECT MOVING FORWARD TO, UM, AND HOMELESSNESS PARTICULARLY AND YOUTH HOMELESSNESS IN AUSTIN.
DO WE HAVE, I THINK WE, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, DID YOU WANNA GO AND READ IN YOUR AMENDMENT ON ITEM 20 FOR THE RECORD? YES, I'LL START WITH THAT.
AND THEN I'D LOVE TO CALL THE APPLICANT OR ITEM 17 DOWN.
UM, SO FOR 20, I'D LIKE TO LEAVE THIS ON CONSENT, BUT ADD OUTDOOR SPORTS AND RECREATION AS A PERMANENT USE IN ALL SUB DISTRICTS EXISTING AND SOON TO BE CREATED.
AND I, I'VE CHECKED IN WITH STAFF AND STAFF'S OKAY.
AND WE'RE GETTING THE NODS, SO.
UH, ANY OPPOSITION TO THAT AMENDMENT? MR. CHAIRMAN? I DON'T HAVE AN OPPOSITION.
IS IT, UH, OUTDOOR SPORTS IN THE NORTH BRUNET GATEWAY OR OUTDOOR SPORTS ACROSS THE ENTIRETY OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN IN ALL THE SUB-DISTRICTS OF THIS ITEM? ITEM 20.
AS LONG AS IT'S THE SUB-DISTRICTS OF THIS ITEM, ITEM 20, I'M OKAY WITH THAT, BUT OKAY.
YES, THAT IS THE LIMIT OF THAT AMENDMENT.
ANY, UH, AND YOU HAD ONE MORE ITEM YOU WANNA SPEAK TO MR. ANDERSON? YEAH, I SEE THE APPLICANT FOR, UM, ITEM 17.
DO YOU MIND COMING UP, MS. HOUSEMAN STAFF'S PUTTING AN IMAGE
[00:10:01]
UP ON THE TV RIGHT NOW.UM, SO THIS IS AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THIS VERY LARGE PROPERTY, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK YOU IF, UH, KIND OF WHAT THE PLANS ARE ON, ON HOPING TO PRESERVE THIS AS BEST WE CAN NOT, AND NOT RESTRICTING YOU ALL FROM MAKING IT KIND OF USABLE IN THE FUTURE.
MAYBE YOU HAVE TO DO THINGS TO THE CEILING, UNDERSTANDING ALL THOSE THINGS, BUT JUST HOPING TO, TO HEAR YOUR COMMENTS ON WHAT THE FUTURE OF THIS BUILDING IS.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS CHAIR.
I'M MICHELLE HOUSEMAN REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT AND COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR, UM, QUITE SOME TIME AND THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS A PREPARED STATEMENT TO READ AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS THE APPLICANT.
I WILL MAKE MY BEST EFFORT TO PRESERVE THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING.
AND THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN ON THE SITE FOR QUITE SOME TIME FROM BASICALLY BACK IN THE FIFTIES AND SIXTIES.
AND, UM, THE, THE MURAL THAT YOU SEE, THE HOLLOWAY BUILDING, THE WORDS THEY HAD BEEN, UM, THAT IT WAS RECONSTRUCTED AND PAINTED BACK IN THE FIFTIES AND SIXTIES.
IT WAS NOT THERE FOR A LONG TIME AND HE REDID IT AND THE FAINT OUTLINES AND HE FILLED IN THE GAPS.
SO BASICALLY WHAT YOU SEE, THE HOLLOWAY AND ALL THE INTERESTING, UM, WORDING THAT'S ON THERE, HE RECREATED IT RECENTLY TO MATCH KIND OF WHAT IT WAS IN THE PAST.
SO, SO IT IS, IT IS HIS INTENT TO MAKE BEST EFFORTS TO PRESERVE THIS BUILDING EXACTLY WHERE IT'S LOCATED, BUT MAKE MODIFICATIONS TO IT TO WHERE HE CAN RAISE THE CEILING SO IT'S USABLE AND THAT SORT OF THING IN THE FUTURE.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, UH, ANYONE WANNA SPEAK TO ANY OTHER ITEMS BEFORE YOU VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? MR. CHAIRMAN, I JUST WANT TO THANK CITY STAFF FOR WALKING ME THROUGH ITEM NUMBER 20.
UH, MR. ROSALYN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UM, I, I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT IT, BUT, UH, EXPLAINED THE DIFFERENCES FROM WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON TONIGHT, SO I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT HE EXPLAINED IT LIKE A FIFTH GRADER TO ME, AND THEN I ASKED HIM TO EXPLAIN IT LIKE A THIRD GRADER AND I FINALLY GOT IT.
SO I APPRECIATE CITY STAFF FOR DOING THAT.
DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, RECUSALS ON ANY ITEMS THIS EVENING? UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I'M RECUSING MYSELF ON ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE.
UM, AUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY HAS BEEN APPROACHED TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS VERY NICE PROPERTY, AND I RECEIVED THE MAJORITY OF MY INCOME FROM AUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
UH, LAST CHANCE FOR QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I HAVE A MOTION TO, UM, PASS THAT DON'T HAVE OUR AMEN'S TIME.
JUST PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, POST A PUBLIC HEARING, AND, UH, PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA, VICE CHAIR SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAZAR.
UH, ANY OPPOSITION TO CONSENT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE, THAT ONE PASSES.
NOW LET'S GO TO OUR FIRST, OH, WE HAVE A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
UH, BEFORE WE GET STARTED, UM, UH, WOULD THE COMMISSIONERS BE TO START WITH FIVE AT THREE? WE HAVE A PRETTY, UH, BIG EVENING TONIGHT, A LOT OF DISCUSSION CASES.
SO THE Q AND A, IF WE COULD START AT FIVE, AT THREE, UH, IF WE JUST NEED MORE QUESTIONS ON ANY ITEM, JUST LET ME KNOW.
UH, THAT'LL MOVE THINGS ALONG.
ALSO, UH, TO TRY TO AVOID SOME OF THE DEBATE TIME, I WILL ATTEMPT TO DO AN UP AND DOWN VOTE, UH, AFTER WE HAVE A MOTION.
BUT IF COMMISSIONERS FEEL LIKE THEY NEED TO SPEAK TO AN ITEM, UH, PLEASE LET ME KNOW AND WE'LL GO AND OPEN IT UP FOR, UH, COMMENTS, UH, FOR AND AGAINST.
BUT WE'LL TRY TO KEEP THINGS MOVING THAT WAY IF WE CAN.
AND, UH, HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET A LOT DONE TO TONIGHT.
ANY OPPOSITION TO THOSE? OKAY.
[16. Rezoning: C14-2023-0038.SH - 4106 1/2, 4120, 4122, 4122 1/2 E. 12th St; District 1]
UM, AND WE'LL START, THIS IS START WITH THE, WHO'S GONNA START US OUT HERE? YES, CHAIR.SO WE WILL HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 26TH, AND THIS WILL JUST BE THE MATTER OF THE POSTMAN, NOT THE MERITS OF THE CASE AT THIS TIME.
I WILL BEGIN WITH MS. SIMKINS.
AND I JUST, UM, REMIND FOLKS, YOU HEARD MR. RIVERA, THAT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CASE ITSELF, JUST THE POSTPONEMENT AND THE NEED TO HEAR IT NOW OR LATER OR SOONER OR LATER.
DID YOU ALREADY SAY 13 AND 15? WHAT ARE WE TAKING 16 OUTTA ORDER OR NO? 16 IS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT, UH, UH, THERE'S THAT FIRST TWO DIFFERENT DATES.
UH, THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, ARE JUST GRIEVANCE.
SO WE'RE GONNA DECIDE WHEN WE'RE GONNA HEAR THIS.
UM, MY NAME IS BELINDA SIMPKINS.
UM, IT WAS JUST RECENTLY BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, UM, REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, JUST FROM DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS FROM PEOPLE AND ME BEING TAGGED ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
[00:15:02]
UM, I HAVE THREE GREAT GRANDPARENTS WHO ARE BURIED AT BETHANY'S CEMETERY, AS WELL AS 10 OTHER RELATIVES THAT ARE SIMPKINS AS WELL.UM, I JUST WANTED MORE TIME TO GET MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING ON.
IT'S A LOT OF HEARSAY AS FAR AS, UM, IF THEY'RE GOING TO EXHUME THE GRAVES, MOVE THE GRAVES, NOT DO ANYTHING WITH THE GRAVES, AND THEN IT'S KEEP, YOU KNOW, BEING TOLD TO ME THAT IT'S CONSIDERED AN ABANDONED CEMETERY.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THE PEOPLE THERE ARE NOT ABANDONED.
MY GRANDPARENTS, WE DID NOT ABANDON THEM.
MY RELATIVES ARE NOT ABANDONED.
UM, IT'S VERY HEARTBREAKING JUST TO EVEN SEE THIS BEING DONE OR EVEN SOMEONE TELLING ME THAT IT COULD BE DONE WHEN THOSE ARE OUR LOVED ONES.
THEY ARE NOT FOSSILS, THEY'RE NOT, UM, PEOPLE TO, YOU KNOW, PUT ON DISPLAY FOR FIELD TRIPS.
I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THE OTHER ASSOCIATIONS HAVE DONE TO KEEP UP WITH THE PROPERTY AND TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE SURE THAT IT IS IN THE STANDING THAT IT'S IN RIGHT NOW.
UM, I JUST WANTED MORE TIME TO BE BROUGHT UP TO SPEED, UM, AS TO WHAT CAN HAPPEN.
I MEAN, I COULD LISTEN TO PEOPLE THAT SAY THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE, UM, EXHUMING THE GRAVES, BUT SOMETIMES PEOPLE ARE NOT TELLING THE TRUTH.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF OUR LEGAL RIGHTS AS FAMILY MEMBERS ARE BEING TAKEN CARE OF, BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS UNDER THE PRESUMPTION OF PEOPLE THAT THESE WERE JUST ABANDONED PEOPLE AND THEY DID NOT HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS.
AND I'M THEIR GRANDDAUGHTER, THEIR NIECE, AND THEIR COUSIN.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
I'M LEAH BOJO ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT WE HAVE A TWO WEEK, UH, POSTPONEMENT AT THIS POINT.
UM, WE HAVE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS.
I HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH MS. SIMKINS AND WITH A, WITH A LOT OF OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, UM, PARTICULARLY MS. SUE SPEARS, THE, UH, CARETAKER OF THE CEMETERY RIGHT NOW THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE, TO THE, UM, TO THE CEMETERY THAT WE'RE HERE TALKING ABOUT.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, UM, AS I'VE ASSURED OTHERS, I WANNA ASSURE YOU THAT, UM, NO GRAVES ARE, ARE GOING TO BE, UM, DAMAGED, MOVED, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO GREAT EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE FEELS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE POSSIBILITY OF AN OF MORE POSTPONEMENTS WHEN WE GET TO THE COUNCIL LEVEL, WE WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO MOVE FORWARD IN TWO WEEKS.
UM, CERTAINLY IF WE'RE NOT READY ON THE 26TH OF SEPTEMBER, WE COULD, WE COULD CERTAINLY WORK ON ANOTHER POSTPONEMENT, BUT, UM, WE ARE MAKING A LOT OF PROGRESS.
I'M HAPPY TO SHARE SOME OF THOSE DETAILS IF YOU'D LIKE.
IT SEEMS LIKE THIS ISN'T QUITE THE TIME FOR THAT.
UM, WE'RE WORKING DILIGENTLY, UM, AND I THINK THAT WE ARE, UM, MAKING SOME VERY PROMISING PROGRESS.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS, CHAIR, COMMISSION, LADIES, AND IF IT'D BE THE, UH, PRIVILEGE OF THE COMMISSION TO HEAR FROM ONE MORE SPEAKER FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD? SURE.
UM, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AND CHAIR.
MY NAME IS ALEXANDRIA ANDERSON.
I'M HERE REPRESENTING, UM, THE M L K NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN ONE THAT'S BEEN IN THE WORKS SINCE 2000.
UM, WE'RE ASKING FOR A POSTPONEMENT.
UM, WE MET WITH TAMIRA LAST NIGHT AT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING AND WAS ABLE TO SHARE MORE INFORMATION WITH THEM.
HOWEVER, WE ARE CURRENTLY DRAFTING, UM, A PROPOSAL TO THE DEVELOPER, UM, BEING THAT IN THE PAST, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN BURNED.
WHEN IT'S COME TO THIS DEVELOPMENT, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TAKING THE LEGAL STEPS AS WELL AS MAKING SURE WE'RE COVERING ALL OUR TRACKS TO THE ITEMS THAT WOULD BE COMMUNITY BENEFITS SEWN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BE WRITTEN OUT, SIGNED AND DOCUMENTED FOR UM, PURPOSES.
AND SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I'M DOING MY DUE DILIGENCE AS THE CHAIR TO MAKE SURE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS COVERED AS WELL AS THE CEMETERY AND ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS, UM, AS WELL.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UM, UH, START OUR Q AND A ON THIS ONE.
UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COX? UH, COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH.
UM, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO GET INTO THE MERITS, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HAS AND HASN'T HAPPENED.
THE LETTER IN THE BACKUP FROM THE, UH, TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION SAYS ATLAS BOUNDARIES FOR THIS CEMETERY HAVE BEEN ALTERED BOUNDARIES OF THE H C C AND THE CAD PARTS OF BOUNDARIES APPEAR CONSISTENT.
[00:20:01]
NEVER PRECLUDES THE POSSIBILITY THAT GRAVES MAY EXIST OUTSIDE OF THE CURRENT FENCED AREA.WE LOOK FORWARD TO FURTHER CONSULTATION WITH YOUR OFFICE.
HAS FURTHER CONSULTATION WITH T H C HAPPENED? IT HAS, UM, AND, UH, YOU CAN STOP ME IF I'M GETTING INTO THE MERITS TOO MUCH, BUT, UM, WELL, AND SO, BUT YES, IT HAS
THEY ALSO SAID THAT IF WE REALLY WANTED TO ENSURE THAT WE WERE DOING ALL POSSIBLE, UM, METHODS, WE WOULD COMBINE A SPATIAL METHOD, WHICH IS WHAT THE GROUND PENETRATING RADAR IS WITH A PHYSICAL METHOD, WHICH IS CALLED, WHICH IS ONE VERSION IS SCRAPING, IS THE, THE CADILLAC VERSION OF THAT.
AND SO WE HAVE, HAVE AGREED TO THAT, AND IT IS CURRENTLY IN THE DRAFT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT WE ARE, THAT WE ARE WORKING THROUGH THE DETAILS OF RIGHT NOW.
SO THAT SECOND PART IS NOT PLANNED TO HAPPEN AT ALL PRIOR TO THE ZONING CASE BEING APPROVED.
IT, THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WOULD HAVE TO BE RECORDED BEFORE THE ZONING CASE IS APPROVED, AND THEN THAT SURVEY WORK WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN BEFORE ANY EXCAVATION.
SO YOUR QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER COX? OKAY.
UH, ANY OTHERS, OTHER HAND UP COMMISSIONER CONLEY? I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVE.
UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND, UM, MS. ALEXANDRIA, UM, MY QUESTION IS JUST I, THE SPECI THE SPECIFIC DATE YOU'RE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL IS OCTOBER 10TH? YES.
AND IS THERE A SPECIFIC REASON FOR THAT? I MEAN, FOR THAT SPECIFIC DATE, WE JUST MET WITH THE YESTERDAY AS FAR AS BRINGING, UM, CERTAIN ITEMS TO THEM, HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY, WHICH THAT IS, THE 26TH IS 12 DAYS FROM NOW.
I MEAN, NOT TWO WEEKS, 14 DAYS FROM NOW, TWO WEEKS IS NOT GONNA ALLOW US AMPLE TIME TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE, UM, INFORMATION LOOKED OVER, DRAFT UP, SENT IT TO THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD.
I WAS JUST TALKING WITH MS. SIMKINS AND KNOWING THAT SHE LIVES ACROSS SPRINGDALE AND DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO MAKE SURE WE'RE HAVING ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS.
IT WAS SUGGESTED BY ONE OF OUR CO-CHAIRS OF THE CONTACT TEAM LAST NIGHT AND AGREED UPON THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A SIT DOWN WITH NOT, AND, UH, SIT DOWN WITH ALL THE STAKEHOLDER HOLDERS.
THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS, BUT THERE'S NOT BEEN ONE COLLECTIVE MEETING OF EVERYONE.
AND SO, LIKE SHE WAS SAYING, IT'S A BUNCH OF HEARSAY OR TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT TRULY IS GOING ON AND WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THAT AREA.
AND SO FOR ME, I, I, LIKE I SAID, THIS HAS NOT BEEN SOMETHING THAT'S JUST COME UP.
THIS PROJECT WE THOUGHT WERE DONE WAS GONNA BE DONE TWO YEARS AGO, AND HERE WE ARE IN 2023.
COMMISSIONERS,
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. BOJO.
SO I, I GUESS IF WE'RE POSTPONING, UH, FOR A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME BASED ON YOUR REQUEST, WOULD YOU, ARE YOU AGREEING TO SORT OF MAKING A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN THAT TIME AND RESOLVING SOME OF THEIR SORT OF OUTSTANDING CONCERNS? ABSOLUTELY.
AND THEN, UH, SORT OF MY SECOND QUESTION TO THAT WOULD BE, WELL, I SUPPOSE IT'S, I GUESS IT'S MORE OF A COMMON AND WE CAN GET TO IT, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THAT IF WE GET TO THE TWO WEEKS AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S OUTSTANDING ISSUES, OF COURSE WE WILL HAVE THE ABILITY AS A COMMISSION TO EXTEND FURTHER FOR A POSTPONEMENT IF WE FEEL LIKE SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS HAVE NOT BEEN RESOLVED THAT I THINK ARE BEING RAISED TODAY.
UM, ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT, I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
UM, WHAT WAS THE, WE HEARD THIS, WHAT WAS, WHO WAS GRANTED THE LAST POSTPONEMENT? WAS THAT A NO, I REMEMBER THIS CASE.
NO, IT'S A, A DIFFERENT PROPERTY.
OH, IT'S THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S WHY WE, I RECOGNIZE THIS ONE.
SO THIS IS NOT BEEN GRANTED IN ANY POSTPONEMENTS THIS MR. CHAIRMAN? I DO, I'VE GOT ONE QUESTION.
MS. SIMKINS, CAN YOU, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? OKAY.
UM, I HAD, I HAD THE PLEASURE.
I PUT THAT IN HER COURTS OF SERVING ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, WE HAD A, WE HAD A REQUIREMENT IN OUR BYLAWS THAT THERE WAS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME BEFORE WE COULD HAVE EVEN A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING.
IS THERE A SIMILAR ONE FOR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? UM, I BELIEVE SO.
I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK OUR BYLAWS AND CHECK THAT OUT.
BUT DO YOU, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT TIMEFRAME IS? OR OBVIOUSLY YOU GOTTA CHECK I, OUR HOURS WERE SEVEN DAYS.
[00:25:01]
OKAY.NO, I CAN ACTUALLY CHECK AND SEE WHAT THAT SAYS AND THEN GET BACK TO YOU.
I THINK FOR ME IT'S JUST LIKE, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M DOING MY DUE DILIGENCE.
NO, I, I APPRECIATE THAT AND I, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU, BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT NOTIFY YOUR NEIGHBORS AND YEAH.
WELL, THE THING IS THAT WE'VE ALREADY CREATED, CREATED THOSE DOCUMENTS WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW TO HEAR ABOUT THE, THE FAMILY MEMBERS AND THE INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVE ACROSS SPRINGDALE AND BEING ABLE TO REACH OUT TO THEM.
OUR BOUNDARIES ARE AIRPORT 12, BLESS YOU.
AIRPORT 12TH AND, UM, 12TH AIRPORT, M L K IN SPRINGDALE.
AND SO YOU STILL HAVE SO MANY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVE IN THAT AREA THAT HAVE NOT BEEN NOTIFIED.
I THINK, UH, MS. BOJO, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO ADD? YES.
UM, SO I THINK WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS I, I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO, AND WE, WE HAD A QUICK CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS, SO, BUT NOW WE'RE ALL GONNA HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT,
UM, I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO POSTPONING TO OCTOBER 10TH IF WE KNEW THAT WE WOULD HAVE SORT OF TIMELY PROGRESS FROM THAT POINT ON.
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN NEVER BAR ANYTHING FROM COMING UP.
IT'S ALWAYS POSSIBLE THAT SOMETHING COMES UP AND YOU HAVE TO POSTPONE.
BUT THE, THE PROBLEM IS THAT IF WE HAVE A MONTH POSTPONEMENT HERE, AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER MONTH POSTPONEMENT AT COUNCIL, NOW WE'RE PUSHING UP TO THE END OF THE YEAR, AS Y'ALL KNOW, THE COUNCIL SCHEDULE IS EARLY DECEMBER, AND NOW WE'RE IN FEBRUARY.
AND THAT'S WHERE IT REALLY BECOMES A PROBLEM.
SO, SO I, I, WHAT I LET THE NEIGHBORHOOD KNOW, AND I'LL LET Y'ALL KNOW, IS I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO OCTOBER 10TH IF, IF WE COULD ALL KIND OF AGREE IN GOOD FAITH THAT IF WE CAN GET EVERYTHING REALLY TIED UP BY OCTOBER 10TH, THAT THEN COUNCIL WOULD PROCEED, UM, ON, ON THE SCHEDULE THAT WE GET FROM THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT THIS ONE TWO WEEK INCREMENT.
IT'S THE, IT'S THE WHOLE THING.
I THINK WE'RE OUTTA QUESTIONS UNLESS SOMEBODY'S REALLY HAS TO ASK ANOTHER ONE.
UH, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER ZA COX HAS A MOTION.
I WAS GONNA MOTION, UH, TO POSTPONE TO OCTOBER 10TH.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? UH, SECOND.
I SEE COMMISSIONER HAYNES HAND GO UP FIRST.
WELL, UM, ALL RIGHT, LET'S STICK WITH THAT FOR NOW.
UH, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK, UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, ON THIS ONE.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION JUST SO WE CAN SEE WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM ON THIS ONE? COMMISSIONER CO.
SO I, I DON'T THINK OCTOBER 10TH, I DON'T THINK A MONTH IS UNREASONABLE, UH, CONSIDERING WHAT WE HEARD THAT MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS WITH THE CEMETERY ARE JUST HEARING ABOUT THIS CASE AND, AND MAY HAVE QUITE INTERESTING AND USEFUL INFORMATION FOR THE DEVELOPER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T GET IN ANY TROUBLE WHEN THEY'RE, WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING THIS, UH, OBVIOUSLY WE CAN'T CONTROL WHAT COUNCIL DOES, BUT I THINK THE MORE WE UNDERSTAND THAT DUE DILIGENCE WAS DONE, THE MORE WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMUNITY FEELS LIKE DUE DILIGENCE WAS DONE, THE MORE COMFORTABLE WE WILL FEEL AND THE MORE COMFORTABLE COUNSEL WILL FEEL.
SO I THINK OCTOBER 10TH IS A REASONABLE REQUEST.
ALL, UH, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THIS TO A VOTE UNLESS ANYBODY ELSE HAS SAY ANYTHING.
CHAIR WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
I'M GONNA RECOMMEND THAT WE POSTPONE TO SEPTEMBER 26TH.
SEE A SECOND FOR SEPTEMBER 26TH.
BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION AGAIN.
UM, ANY OTHERS WANNA SPEAK TO THIS? I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE REAL QUICK.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I'D LOVE TO, UM, IF IN THE NEXT MONTH, UM, IF, IF ALL SIDES KIND OF FEEL LIKE THERE'S A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF NOW WHERE THE BOUNDARIES ARE AND EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, THEN, THEN GREAT.
AND IF THERE'S NOT THAT AGREEMENT, I'D LOVE TO VISIT THE SITE WITH THE FOLKS WHO ARE AFFECTED BY THIS AND, AND MOST INTERESTED.
WE MAKE THIS, ANYBODY ELSE FOR, OKAY.
COMMISSIONER CONY, YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING? UM, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL SAY SOMETHING VERY BRIEFLY.
I JUST, I, I, YOU KNOW, I, I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARDS TO THE CEMETERY, A GOOD FAITH EFFORT ON THE DEVELOPER'S PART TO AT LEAST TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THE SITE.
AND THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE ONGOING.
THEY'RE CURRENTLY TAKING PLACE.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHERE THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE AT, BUT I JUST WANT TO NOTE TO THE COMMISSION THAT THAT WORK IS TAKING PLACE.
LET'S GO AND, UH, VOTE ON THIS ONE.
ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS OCTOBER 10TH.
I DON'T SEE ANY, SO THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
UM, SO NOW WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO OUR DISCUSSION CASES
[00:30:02]
AND NUMBER 13.[13. Rezoning: C814-06-0106.03 - Hyatt West PUD Amendment]
YOU WANNA START US OFF PLEASE? AND THIS IS THE HYATT WEST POD AMENDMENT? YES.NANCY ESTRADA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 13 ON YOUR AGENDA, CASE NUMBER C 8 14 0 6 0 106 0 3.
THE HYATT WEST PUD AMENDMENT, WHICH IS LOCATED AT 1 51 SOUTH FIRST STREET.
THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE FAIRFIELD HYATT P TO REMOVE THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR THE WEST PARCEL.
THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS AMENDMENT WITH CONDITIONS THAT ARE LISTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, AND I'M GONNA LET AUSTIN WATER SPEAK TO THESE CONDITIONS.
SO, GOOD AFTERNOON, MISSION, AND GOOD AFTERNOON.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I'M KEVIN CRIT, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR WITH AUSTIN WATER.
I, WE, THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO YOU THIS AFTERNOON AND CERTAINLY, UH, APPRECIATE OUR WORK WITH STAFF.
UH, WE, WE CERTAINLY SUPPORT THIS, UH, PROPOSED STAFF AMENDMENT THAT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE APPLICANT CONNECT TO A NEARBY RECLAIMED WATER USE AND THAT WOULD ALLOW, UH, THE OFFSET OF, UM, WATER THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE POTABLE WATER, SO THEY CAN BE USED FOR NON-POTABLE PURPOSES.
UM, THIS INITIATIVE IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH OUR WATER 4 20 18 PLAN, WHICH IS OUR INTEGRATED LONG-TERM WATER RESOURCE PLAN.
UM, IN ADDITION, THIS IS ALSO IN CONFORMANCE WITH, UH, 2021 CODE AMENDMENTS TO REQUIRE SUCH CONNECTIONS.
UM, AND, UH, OBVIOUSLY AS YOU CAN, UH, CERTAINLY EXPERIENCE, WE'RE IN A SERIOUS, SERIOUS DROUGHT.
UM, THIS IS JUST ONE OF THE EFFORTS THAT WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR NOW IN LONG TERM TO TRY TO PROVIDE A SUSTAINABLE WATER FUTURE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
SO WITH THAT, I HAVE OTHER STAFF MEMBERS WITH US TO SPEAK TO ANY DETAIL OR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
UH, DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT PRESENT? HI COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I'M LEAH BOJO HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, I HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT I WILL RUN THROUGH.
UM, SO JUST SO EVERYONE IS ON THE SAME PAGE, THIS IS THE SITE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST ACROSS FROM, UH, ACROSS THE RIVER FROM DOWNTOWN.
OBVIOUSLY ONE OF IT WAS ONE LARGER PARCEL AS THE, OF A PUD THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2007.
WE ARE NOW JUST ASKING TO AMEND THIS ONE PARCEL, WHICH MY CLIENT NOW OWNS.
UM, HERE YOU, WE A LITTLE BIT ZOOMED IN.
YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S A, UM, IT'S A SERVICE PARKING LOT TODAY.
THE ENTIRE PUD IS JUST UNDER 10.
UM, AND WE'RE PROPOSING A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT IS IN SITE PLAN RIGHT NOW.
THAT SITE PLAN APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED LAST FALL.
UM, AS I THINK YOU ALL KNOW, THIS IS AN EXCELLENT TRANSIT AND MULTIMODAL LOCATION.
IT'S BETWEEN TWO CORE TRANSIT CORRIDORS.
UM, IT'S A 0.2 MILE WALK TO THE CAP METRO VIC MATTHIAS AUDITORIUM SHORE STATION, WHERE METRO RAPID COMES THROUGH, AS WELL AS LOCAL ROUTES ONE AND 30 AND HIGH FREQUENCY ROUTES SEVEN, 10, AND 20.
UM, IT'S ALSO ADJACENT TO THE ANNEN ROY BUTLER HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL OR PROTECTED BIKE LANES ON CONGRESS, UM, AND A VARIETY OF OTHER WAYS TO BIKE, PET AND, AND MOVE AROUND THE SITE.
UM, THE AMENDMENT THAT WE ARE REQUESTING IS ONLY TO REMOVE PARKING MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.
UM, THERE IS A, IT IS A LONG PUT, I THINK IT'S IN YOUR BACKUP IN THE STAFF REPORT.
UM, IT CURRENTLY ALLOWS AN 80% PARKING REDUCTION, WHICH I THINK WAS PROBABLY CONSIDERED SUPERIOR IN 2007
UM, BUT FORTUNATELY FOR ALL OF US, OUR CITY HAS CHANGED QUITE A BIT.
AND AN 80% PARKING REDUCTION IS ACTUALLY LESS OF A PARKING REDUCTION THAN IS AVAILABLE IN MOST OF THE CITY.
UM, THIS IS ALSO, OBVIOUSLY THIS REQUEST IS IN LINE WITH THE COUNCIL'S.
WE ALL, I THINK, KNOW THAT THEY INITIATED AN AMENDMENT CITYWIDE ON MAY 4TH TO ELIMINATE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
UM, IT'S EXPECTED TO COME BACK IN NOVEMBER.
I WOULD POINT OUT THOUGH THAT EVEN IF THAT HAD ALREADY PASSED, UM, THERE MAY BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY IN IT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT, UM, WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO AMEND THIS POD ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
UM, SO JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT DETAILS.
UM, IT'S A MIX OF FOUR RENT AND, AND FOUR OWNERSHIP, UM, RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES.
AND THEN HERE'S THE PARKING BREAKDOWN.
UM, APPENDIX A WOULD REQUIRE 670 SPACES, SO THE 80% WOULD BE 536.
UM, AND THEN WE ARE LOOKING TO PROVIDE ONLY 327 OF THOSE SPACES, UM, WITH THIS PROJECT IN, IN STRUCTURE PARKING UNDERGROUND.
UM, SO LIKE I SAID, THIS PUD WAS APPROVED ORIGINALLY IN 2007.
UM, AND I THINK, UM, AGAIN, AT THE TIME I THINK
[00:35:01]
THAT WAS SORT OF CONSIDERED PROGRESSIVE.UM, WE'VE COME A LONG WAY ON THAT.
IT WAS APPROVED WITH A, A LIST OF SUPERIORITY ITEMS P WIDE AND SPECIFIC TO THIS TRACK THAT ARE STILL INTACT AND I WOULD SAY EVEN ARE SUPPORTED, UM, BY THIS DEVELOPMENT AS OPPOSED TO THE SURFACE PARKING LOT THAT'S THERE TODAY.
UM, AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, WITH THE SITE PLAN THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED, WE HAVE ALSO AGREED TO DO RECLAIMED WATER, UM, ON SITE RECLAIMED WATER, UM, FOR THE FIRST AND SECOND STORY COMMERCIAL USES, AS WELL AS FOR THE IRRIGATION OF THE GREEN SPACE, WHICH IS AN EXCEPTIONAL AMOUNT GIVEN WHERE THE SITE IS LOCATED.
THIS IS NOT A REGULAR DOWNTOWN HIGH RISE WITH ZERO LOT LINES.
UM, IT HAS QUITE A BIT OF GREEN SPACE ON THE TRAIL SIDE.
UM, SO HERE ARE A COUPLE RENDERINGS, UM, JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT THE RETAIL LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT THE PROJECT IS INTENDED TO LOOK LIKE.
YOU CAN SEE THIS, THE GREEN SPACE, UM, THAT WOULD BE WATERED WITH RECLAIM USE, RECLAIMED WATER.
UM, AND WITH THAT, I WOULD, I WOULD CLOSE AND JUST, UM, JUST SORT OF TO SUMMARIZE HERE, I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING TO PROVIDE RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE, THE MOST WALKABLE AND TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE LOCATION IN THE CITY.
IF IT WERE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE RIVER, THERE WOULD BE NO PARKING REQUIREMENTS SOON.
THERE WILL HOPEFULLY NOT BE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN MOST OF THE CITY.
UM, IT MEETS THE CITY'S, UH, WATERFRONT OVERLAY GOALS.
UM, IT MEETS COUNCIL PRIORITIES AND IT PROVIDES ONSITE WATER REUSE IN EXCESS OF WHAT IS REQUIRED BY CODE TODAY.
AND WHAT THE SITE PLAN THAT'S BEEN IN REVIEW SINCE LAST FALL IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE.
UM, YOU KNOW, I I WOULD ARGUE THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE PITTING ENVIRONMENTAL, UH, BENEFITS AGAINST EACH OTHER.
I THINK
UM, AND THEN IN ADDITION, IT COMES WITH SOME WATER, UM, ADDITIONAL WATER BENEFITS AS WELL.
AND SO WITH THAT, I HOPE TO HAVE YOUR SUPPORT, UM, IN REMOVING THIS REQUIREMENT.
I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, JUST, UM, QUESTION FROM ME.
DID WE, DID WE PULL THIS OR HOW DID THIS END UP FOR DISCUSSION? APPLICANT'S NOT REQUEST DIFFERENT FROM STAFF.
IT'S DISCUSSION BECAUSE WE CAN'T AGREE WITH THE WATER UTILITIES CONDITION.
I WAS, THAT WAS GONNA BE ONE OF MY QUESTIONS.
SO LET'S, UH, DO A MOTION TO MR. ANDERSON, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, ANY OBJECTIONS? CLOSING THE HEARING, SAYING NONE.
GO MOVE UNDER OUR Q AND A SECOND.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SORRY, I'M TRYING TO KEEP THIS THING.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? UH, OKAY.
UH, ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE CLOSING? THE HEARING? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND START THE Q AND A.
THANK YOU, CHAIR COMMISSIONER.
UM, CAN I ASK THE APPLICANT, CAN WE PUT UP THAT SLIDE THAT SHOWED THE PARKING, UM, PARKING REQUIRED BY THE PUTT AGREEMENT AND WHAT THE APPLICANT IS HOPING TO BUILD OTHER WAY? YOU CAN LOOK AT PRETTY PICTURES THOUGH, IF YOU'D LIKE ON THOSE PICTURES.
HEARING IT'S FORWARD, IT'S HEARING NONE.
AND CAN YOU REMIND US THE NUMBERS THAT YOU JUST SHARED? SO THE PUD REQUIRES, IT SHOULD BE SLIDE NUMBER FIVE, I THINK.
UM, THE APPENDIX A, UM, THE CITY'S PARKING TABLE REQUIRES 670 SPACES.
UM, AND, AND THEN THE 80 WITH THE 80% REDUCTION, WHICH IS WHAT THE PILOT WOULD ALLOW, THERE'S THIS THAT COMES TO THE 536, YOU SEE RIGHT THERE.
413 FOR RESIDENTIAL, 1 23 FOR COMMERCIAL.
UM, WE ARE CURRENTLY HOPING TO PROVIDE ONLY 327.
AND IS THAT THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR POSITION AND, AND WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING? STAFF IS NOT DISAGREEING WITH THE PARKING COMPONENT.
IT'S ONLY THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE ADDITIONAL WATER.
I'M SORRY, I ASKED THAT INCORRECTLY.
IS THAT THE MAIN THING YOU'RE TRYING TO CHANGE WITH YOUR PUT THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE'RE CHANGING.
UM, IS, IS SOMEBODY FROM WATERSHED ON OR, OR WATER WAS ABLE TO, HEY, UM, JUST, JUST CURIOUS, UM, DO YOU ALL PAY ATTENTION TO CODE CHANGES HAPPENING AT CITY COUNCIL LEVEL? COULD YOU REPHRASE THAT? I'M SORRY.
COUNCIL RECENTLY INITIATED SOMETHING TO ELIMINATE ALL PARKING MANDATES FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT? YEAH, CERTAINLY.
AND SO THIS APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO BUILD OVER 200 FEWER SPACES ON THIS DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NEXT TO THE LAKE WITH AMAZING TRANSIT.
AND YOUR DEPARTMENT WANTED TO BLOCK THAT TO GET MORE OUT OF THE DEAL? I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THIS.
NO, I, AND, AND, AND FIRST LEMME SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, I WOULD CERTAINLY AGREE WITH MS. BOJO THAT IT'S, WE'RE WE'RE NOT ARGUING OVER, UM, YOU KNOW, ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS.
[00:40:01]
IS THAT EVEN WITH THE ONSITE REUSE THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING OR PROPOSING, IT'S STILL LEAVES A LOT OF WATER FOR TOILET URINAL FLUSHING.THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE POTABLE WATER.
SO WE'RE CERTAINLY, UH, NOT TRYING TO BE ADVERSE TO ANY PARKING, UM, CHANGES.
UH, THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT WHAT WE'RE ABOUT.
WE'RE TRYING TO, WE'RE WORKING HARMONY TO FIND THE SUSTAINABLE WATER SOLUTIONS ACROSS OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, AND THESE ARE CODE, UM, PROVISIONS THAT, UM, WILL BE, UM, HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED BY COUNCIL AND WILL BE REAFFIRMED IN, UM, UPCOMING COUNCIL BETWEEN NOW AND THE YEAR.
SO YOU UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT COULD GO AND BUILD THEIR, THEIR ENTIRE PROJECT THAT COULD JUST BUILD 200 MORE PARKING SPOTS AND THEY DON'T NEED ANYTHING FROM THE CITY.
THEY CAN JUST GO AND BUILD THAT.
I AM NOT AN EXPERT ON PARKING, BUT I'LL LEAVE THAT TO YOU.
WELL, I KNOW WE HAD A PARKING PRESENTATION HERE RECENTLY AND IT WAS, IT WAS GOOD TO HEAR FROM STAFF THAT THEY ARE WORKING ON MECHANISMS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GO AHEAD AND REVISE ALL OF OUR CCDS, PUDS, PDAS, ALL THOSE THINGS TO NOT REQUIRE PARKING.
SO KIND OF, SORRY, THIS HAS TO BE A DISCUSSION ITEM TONIGHT, POWELL.
COMMISSIONER M TYLER, I HOPE I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO'S A LITTLE CONFUSED.
I I AM CONFUSED AT WHAT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO DECIDE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THESE PARKING SPACES ARE A COMPLETELY SEPARATE ISSUE FROM THE RECLAIMED WATER ISSUE.
CAN I HAVE AN UNDER CLEARER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DECIDE TONIGHT, PLEASE? YEAH.
DO YOU WANNA HEAR FROM THE STAFF TO YOUR QUESTION? OKAY.
SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR REMOVING MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
UM, I GUESS INITIALLY, UH, WHEN THE CASE CAME TO US, WE, YOU KNOW, EXAMINED THE, THE CASE AND BASICALLY AUSTIN WATER IS ASKING FOR CERTAIN CONDITIONS IN ORDER TO APPROVE, UM, REMOVING THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING IT, BUT AUSTIN WATER IS PRESENTING SOME CONDITIONS AND WE RECOMMENDED IT WITH CONDI, WITH AUSTIN WATERS CONDITIONS.
IS THERE A PARTICULAR, I MEAN THESE REALLY SEEM LIKE BOTH VERY IMPORTANT BUT DISTINCTLY SEPARATE ISSUES.
UM, WHY ISN'T THE IDEA OF THE RECLAIMED WATER COMING IN AT A DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITY IN THIS PROCESS? IS THERE NOT ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT? WELL, WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE CASE, UM, WE WERE USING THIS ALSO AS A MECHANISM OR USED AS A COMMUNITY BENEFIT.
AND SO WHEN THE APPLICANT CAME BACK AND SAID, THESE ARE THE ITEMS THAT WE ARE, WHICH IS IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED, UM, THAT THEY WOULD BASICALLY OFFER AS WITH THIS CASE AND WITH THIS PROJECT, THEN THAT IS WHEN STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND.
AND WE JUST KNEW THAT WE HAD TO, UM, WORK WITH AUSTIN WATER UTILITY.
SO I'M STILL NOT SURE I'M HEARING AN ANSWER.
IS THERE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER SEPARATELY ON THE RECLAIMED WATER ISSUE? IT, IT'S JUST NOT RELATED TO THE, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO ELIMINATE THE MINIMUM, TO CHANGE THE MINIMUM PARKING.
SO THE, THE, THE IDEA THAT THESE ARE TIED TOGETHER IS, IS REALLY, I THINK, PROBLEMATIC FOR US AS A COMMISSION.
WELL, UM, I DON'T KNOW, QUESTION.
IS THERE ANOTHER, IS THERE ANOTHER PIECE OF THE SITE PLAN, THE REVIEW PROCESS? I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE, WHERE IN THE SEQUENCING WE ARE WITH THE PROJECT OR IS IT THE ONLY WAY TO BRING THIS BACK IN BECAUSE THIS WAS ALREADY APPROVED? THAT'S RIGHT.
SO COMMISSIONER SHERRY SOWAS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THE IDEA IS THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR SOMETHING AND ALSO WATER IS ALSO ASKING FOR SOMETHING THROUGH THIS P U D AMENDMENT.
AND IN ORDER TO GET THAT RECLAIMED WATER, THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO IT NOW WITH THE AUSTIN FORD PLAN.
AND SO THIS IS THEIR OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THIS IS A P U D AMENDMENT THAT'S IN BEFORE YOU WHERE THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR SOMETHING AND THEN THE STAFF IS SAYING, OKAY, WELL THEN WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE RECLAIMED WATER AND THIS IS THE PROCESS TO GET THAT.
SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE CONDITIONS ON THIS CASE.
I SEE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH HANDS UP.
I I THINK I HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING.
OKAY, LET ME JUST, UH, WE'LL DO IT IN THIS ORDER.
UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPEL AND THEN COMMISSIONER HER RAMIREZ AND THEN COMMISSIONER COX.
I THINK I MIGHT, THIS QUESTION MIGHT BE FOR
[00:45:01]
YOU.UM, WHEN A, A PUD, UM, IS BEING AMENDED AND IT'S A A, A MINIMAL AMENDMENT IS JUST DEALING WITH, IN THIS CASE IT'S DEALING ONLY WITH PARKING.
IS IT THE REGULAR PRACTICE THAT ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS AGAIN, REVIEW THIS PUD EVEN THOUGH IT'S JUST THE ONE ISSUE THAT IS IN A QUESTION? YES.
WHEN P U D AMENDMENTS COME IN, THEY'RE DISTRIBUTED TO ALL OF THE STAFF FOR REVIEW.
SOMETIMES STAFF HAS NO COMMENT.
SOMETIMES STAFF IS SAY, OKAY, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS PROGRAM GOING ON THAT'S GOING INTO EFFECT IN 2024 FOR AUSTIN FORD.
THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO, UM, GET THOSE REQUIREMENTS MET WITH THIS P U D THROUGH THIS P U D AMENDMENT.
AND THEN THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
CAN YOU REMIND ME THE POTENTIAL COST OF BRINGING IN THE RECLAIMED LINE THAT I BELIEVE THAT AUSTIN WATERS ASKING FOR? YES, I BELIEVE IT IS A, A COUPLE OF MILLION DOLLARS.
TWO, I THINK IT'S AROUND TWO, $2 MILLION.
AND WHAT WOULD THAT DO FOR THE, THE PLAN IF THAT WERE TO BE PART OF IT? WELL, I THINK PART OF THE ISSUE IS BRINGING THE LINE FROM THE CORNER OF, I BELIEVE RIVERSIDE AND BARTON SPRINGS.
UM, I THINK PART OF THE ISSUE IS, UM, THAT THAT IS AN OFFSITE IMPROVEMENT.
SO IT IS A, A MORE COMPLICATED IMPROVEMENT THAN THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO ONSITE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
UM, AND THEN THE OTHER, UM, COMPONENT IS THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE A REDESIGN OF THE BUILDING AND THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE PLUM, UM, THE ENTIRE BUILDING TO HAVE THE NON-POTABLE WATER THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING.
SO THE 2 MILLION IS JUST FOR THE LINE, BUT THEN THERE'S THE REDESIGN, THE DELAY AND THE COST, AND THEN THE, AND THEN THE SORT OF THE RISK OF AN OFFSITE, A COMPONENT TO THE PROJECT.
AND DO YOU HAVE A NUMBER FOR THAT? I DON'T, I DON'T, BUT I CAN TRY TO GET ONE.
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE
THE BUILDING ITSELF WOULD BE $1 MILLION.
UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, RAMIREZ.
YEAH, MY QUESTION IS ABOUT THE WATER FORWARD, UM, PLAN.
SO I, THIS IS KIND OF THE FIRST I'M LEARNING ABOUT IT.
IT SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT IDEA TO CONSERVE WATER.
UM, BUT IT SOUND I'M GETTING AN UNCLEAR, UH, TIMEFRAME FOR WHEN IT'S ACTUALLY REQUIRED.
SO CAN SOMEBODY TELL ME WHEN DEVELOPERS ARE REQUIRED TO MEET THE WATER FORWARD, UH, PLAN? SO I'LL, I'LL ASK CATHERINE JASINSKI, SHE'S ON THE LINE TO KINDA GIVE YOU A BETTER FRAMEWORK OF THE DETAILS.
UH, YOU KNOW, THE OVERVIEW IS THAT COUNCIL HAS PASSED ORDINANCE THAT REQUIRES CONNECTION TO THE RECLAIMED SYSTEM.
THIS SITE IS, I THINK AROUND 400 FEET.
UM, I THINK THERE IS ADMITTEDLY A COMPLICATION.
I THINK THE SITE PLAN ORIGINALLY CAME IN AS AN OFFICE BUILDING, WHICH WOULD HAVE IN FACT REQUIRED IT BY CODE.
UM, BUT I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LATER CHANGE TO THE MULTIFAMILY APPROACH, WHICH ADDS A WRINKLE TO IT.
AND I'LL LET, I'LL LET CATHERINE EXPLAIN THE WRINKLE.
UM, SINCE DECEMBER 1ST, 2021, LARGE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT HAVE MORE THAN 250,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE HAVE BEEN REQUIRED TO CONNECT TO THE RECLAIMED WATER SYSTEM AND USE RECLAIMED WATER, UH, FOR ALL OF THE NON-POTABLE NEEDS IN THE BUILDING.
THE ONE THAT THAT REFERENCES THAT IF MULTI-FAMILY COMPONENT, YOU CAN GET A
SO, UM, AS KEVIN MENTIONED, THE INITIAL SITE PLAN WAS FOR AN OFFICE BUILDING.
WE MADE THE COMMENT TO THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU HAD TO CONNECT AND USE TO RECLAIM AND THE APPLICANT HAS SUBSEQUENTLY CHANGED, REDESIGNED THEIR BUILDING TO BE A MULTI-FAMILY OR MIXED USE, EXCUSE ME.
SO THEY'RE SEEKING THE VARIANCE TO BE ABLE TO, TO NOT HAVE TO BE REQUIRED.
IS THAT, IS THAT KIND OF WHAT, OR HAVE THEY SOUGHT THE VARIANCE TO BE ABLE TO, BECAUSE IT, THEY DON'T HAVE TO COMPLY UNTIL THE END OF THIS YEAR.
THAT'S OUR, THAT THEY WANT THE VARIANCE.
SO HAS THAT PROCESS BEEN INITIATED OR, 'CAUSE THIS ISN'T, THIS DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THEY'RE, THAT THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS.
WELL, IT'S, IT'S COMPLICATED BUT THERE'S, UP UNTIL VERY RECENTLY JUST SHOWN AN OFFICE BUILDING AND SO, UM, WHILE FOR THE PLAN SET TO COME IN AND SHOW THE MULTI-FAMILY COMPONENT AND THEN THAT AT THAT POINT, THAT'S WHEN THEY CAN APPLY FOR THE VARIANCE.
[00:50:01]
THANK YOU.ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER COX, AND THEN, UM, I HAD A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
I HAVE SOME TWO, SO WE'RE GONNA GO AND KEEP TO OUR, WE MAY ACTUALLY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS, SO WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GO TO EIGHT AND IF WE NEED MORE, WE'LL USE THEM.
UH, THIS IS A PRETTY IMPORTANT TOPIC.
UM, SO THAT WAS NEW INFORMATION, UM, THAT WE JUST HEARD.
SO WHEN, WHEN WAS STAFF SOMEONE FROM STAFF, UH, WHEN WERE THEY MADE AWARE THAT THE BUILDING CHANGED TO A RESIDENTIAL USE? AND THEN FOLLOW ON QUESTION TO THAT, SINCE IT'S MIXED USE, DO THE RULES, WOULD THE RULES STILL REQUIRE THAT THE COMMERCIAL PART OF IT BE CONNECTED TO REUSE? SURE, I CAN ANSWER THAT.
UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS
I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THE DATE.
UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS MARCH, SOMETIME IN THE SPRING OF THIS YEAR IS WHEN WE MET WITH THE APPLICANT AND JULIE.
UM, AND THEY NOTIFIED US THAT THEY WERE 20.
THEIR
WE'RE HAVING A REAL HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING YOU.
SO LET'S GO AND SHIFT TO THE OTHER US AND WATER FOLKS, UH, AND STAFF IF YOU, IF YOU HAD THE DATES.
WELL, I THINK YOU CAN JUMP IN.
I THINK WE HEARD MARCH OF THIS YEAR AND, AND OBVIOUSLY IT'S COMPLICATED PROCESS.
UM, BUT THE SECOND PART OF THE QUESTION WAS FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, WOULD THE COMMERCIAL FLOORS STILL BE REQUIRED TO BE CONNECTED TO REUSE? SO ANY RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT WOULD, IT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO APPLY FOR THE VARIANCE.
AND THEN I GUESS, I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION RELATED TO THIS FOR AUSTIN WATER WOULD BE, UM, THEY ARE COMMITTING TO REUSE FOR IRRIGATION.
UM, I, I MEAN IT UNDER CURRENT CODE.
WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT STILL BE CONSIDERED KIND OF A STEP UP FROM BASELINE, WOULD YOU THINK? GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS, I CAN JUMP IN AS CATHERINE IS, UM, GLITCHING AND CATHERINE, IF YOU ARE ABLE TO CONNECT BACK, UM, JOIN AND CORRECT ME.
I'M SHWETA PANDER AND THE BUSINESS STRATEGY MANAGER AND AUSTIN WATER.
UM, SO THE, THE IRRIGATION CONNECTION IS SOMETHING THAT WE DEFINITELY APPRECIATE, BUT IT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING.
THERE IS STILL ROUGHLY ABOUT 1.9 MILLION GALLONS OF WATER PER YEAR THAT WILL BE PORTABLE WATER THAT, THAT WILL BE USED IN TOILET FLUSHING.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE, SO THE APPLICANT IS AT THIS TIME PROPOSING TO USE AN ONSITE WATER REUSE SYSTEM, UH, TO CAPTURE, TO USE FOR IRRIGATION AND CAPTURE THE FIRST AND THE SECOND FLOORS ONLY, BUT IT'S A 14 STORY BUILDING.
SO THE REMAINING FLOORS ARE STILL GOING TO BE USING DRINKING WATER.
SO THE ONE POINT, UH, ONE POINT PLUS MILLION GALLONS OF WATER THAT WILL BE USED IS PART OF THE WATER.
SO USING THE RECLAIM SYSTEM FOR THIS IS WHERE WE THINK THERE IS A GREATER WATER SUSTAINABILITY OPTION.
SO, SO IF, IF I STILL HAVE SOME TIME, UM, UH, YOU DON'T, HEY, UH, YEAH, SORRY, THE BUZZER DID RING.
UH, LET'S GO AND, UM, WE'RE GONNA, SAME QUESTIONS.
HOPEFULLY IT'LL BE CAPTURED BY ONE OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONER ZARI, YOU WERE NEXT AND DID WE HAVE SOMEBODY UP? COMMISSIONER GOMLEY? COMMISSIONER.
MS. BOER, CAN YOU COME UP HERE FOR A SECOND JUST SO WE CAN SORT OF FULLY UNDERSTAND.
WHAT I'M HEARING IS, I THINK STAFF CLARIFIED THAT ESSENTIALLY THIS IS A MIXED USE, MULTI-STORY BUILDING AND Y'ALL WOULD BE PROVIDING THE PORTABLE RE OR THE REUSE FOR THOSE FIRST TWO FLOORS AND FOR LANDSCAPING AND OTHER THINGS ON THE PROPERTY.
AND WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 2 MILLION, ARE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 2 MILLION AT INCLUSIVE OF THIS, OR WOULD THAT BE THE 2 MILLION IN ADDITION TO THE WHATEVER YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO FOR THESE TWO FLOORS AND THE PROPERTY ITSELF, THAT WOULD BE IN ADDITION.
SO DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA ON HOW MUCH OF THE INVESTMENT WILL BE FOR THE, WHAT YOU ARE PROVIDING? I DON'T, AND I DON'T THINK I CAN GET THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT I, IF I COULD CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT.
UM, THERE'S JUST A COUPLE THINGS.
UM, ONE OF THEM IS THAT THE, THE ORDINANCE WAS PASSED IN 2021 WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECEMBER 1ST.
SO IT'S THE, THE TERM SEEKING A VARIANCE IS A LITTLE MISLEADING, I THINK.
NOT MISLEADING, BUT JUST UNCLEAR BECAUSE, UM, THE DIRECTOR SHALL NOT, UH, SHALL GRANT THE VARIANCE.
SO THERE WAS A QUESTION SOMEWHERE ABOUT ARE WE SEEKING A
[00:55:01]
VARIANCE? AND IT, IT'S LIKE WE'RE, WE'RE SEEKING IT BY JUST SUBMITTING A SITE PLAN UNDER THOSE OLD RULES.AND I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
UM, UNDER THE RULES THAT ARE IN EFFECT RIGHT NOW, WE DID CHANGE THE USE ON THE SITE PLAN.
THAT IS TRUE, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT CHANGES.
I MEAN, WE CHANGED THE USE EARLIER THIS YEAR AND THAT REQUIREMENT STILL DOESN'T GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL DECEMBER 1ST.
SO EVEN IF IT WAS A NEW SITE PLAN THAT HAD GONE IN ON THE DATE THAT THE CHANGE OF USE HAPPENED, WE STILL WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE WATER USE RULES.
UM, AND I SAY THIS BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, THERE'S A DOLLARS COMPONENT TO IT OF COURSE 'CAUSE THERE ALWAYS IS, BUT THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER COMPONENT TO IT, WHICH IS WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS, WHAT THE RULES ARE TODAY, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
AND I JUST WANNA KIND OF RAISE THAT AS WELL, THAT IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT DOLLARS, IT'S ABOUT, IT'S ABOUT INTRODUCING A NEW COMPONENT TO THE PROJECT AT THIS POINT, OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS, ALL OF THAT.
AND THE FACT THAT WE ARE EXCEEDING WHAT THE WATER ORDINANCE, UH, REQUIRES.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, IF THIS WERE, IF THIS CASE IS DENIED, THEN WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THE CITY WOULD RATHER SEE A BUNCH OF EXTRA PARKING AND NO WATER REUSE INSTEAD OF, UM, LESS PARKING AND SOME WATER REUSE.
AND, AND I'M SORRY, JUST TO FOLLOW UP IN MY TIME JUST TO UNDERSTAND CLEARLY, BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IS THIS NOT A VARIANCE? YES, CORRECT.
I MEAN I THINK THE WORD TO THE VARIANCE IS IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT'S LIKE AUTOMATIC
AND ESSENTIALLY THE WAY IT WOULD BE, WE, THERE'S A RULE THAT HAS NOT GOTTEN INTO EFFECT.
SO IN SOME WAYS YOU'RE NOT ASKING FOR VARIANCE BECAUSE THERE IS NO RULE THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FROM.
AND SO THEN AS WE'RE UNDERSTANDING IT, WHAT I'M ALSO HEARING IS THAT BASED ON THE RULES THAT ARE IN EFFECT TODAY, YOU ARE ACTUALLY PROVIDING MORE ADVANCED WATER YES.
STANDARDS IN ADDITION TO THE PARKING REQUIREMENT.
SO IN THE AMENDMENT THAT YOU HAVE FILED, INCLUDING THE CHANGE OF USE, YOU ARE NOW GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS REQUIRED BY CODE TODAY, BOTH FOR WATER REUSE ON SITE AND FOR PARKING.
ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS, I THINK MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED MR. CONNOLLY.
UM, YEAH, I JUST, I I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT'S CLARIFICATION AND COMMENTS ON THIS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GET CLARITY FROM STAFF, FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SPECIFICALLY.
IS, I JUST WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR IN ANY CASE, WE ARE TODAY MAKING NO DECISIONS RELATED TO ANY VARIANCE OF ANY KIND.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THAT OUTTA THE WAY.
AND IS THERE GOING TO BE SOME FUTURE DATE IN WHICH THERE WILL BE ANY KIND OF DISCUSSION ABOUT A POSSIBLE VARIANCE OR IS THAT GRANTED AUTOMATICALLY? UM, NOT, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY FUTURE DATE THAT THERE WOULD BE ANY KIND OF VARIANCE THAT DISCUSSED.
SO COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY, THAT WOULD BE TO SUE THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, NOT THROUGH THE P U D REZONING PROCESS.
SO BASICALLY AUSTIN WATER IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY GET THAT REQUIREMENT AT THIS TIME INSTEAD OF DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, BUT THEY STILL COULD DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS ATTEMPT TO GET THAT REQUIREMENT? YES.
AND THAT WAS REALLY THE, THE MAIN QUESTION I HAD.
I JUST HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
IF YOU WERE TO MOVE FORWARD BUILDING THE REQUIRED PARKING, THAT WOULD BE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THAT WOULD HAVE, UH, AN IMPACT AS WELL ON THE WATERSHED, DON'T YOU AGREE? YES.
AND DO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF HOW MUCH SPACE WOULD BE TAKEN UP BY THOSE PARKING UNITS REQUIRED? UM, WELL WE WOULD HAVE TO GO DOWN, UM, AND I DON'T