[00:00:01]
[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
EVENING EVERYONE.WE'RE GOING TO CALL OUR MEETING TONIGHT TO ORDER AT 6:08 PM ALL RIGHT.
FIRST, UH, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ROLL.
UM, SO CAN I GET MY COMMISSIONERS VIRTUALLY TO TURN THEIR CAMERAS ON? OKAY.
I'LL JUST GO BY, UM, THE ORDER AS POSTED IN THE AGENDA.
SO, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HERE.
UH, COMMISSIONER SHAW IS ABSENT.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS HERE.
AND I DON'T SEE ANY OF OUR EX OFFICIOS IN THE CHAMBERS OR VIRTUALLY.
UM, WE'LL RECOGNIZE THEM IF THEY ARE ABLE TO COME ON.
UM, SO TONIGHT WE ARE HYBRID AS WE HAVE BEEN FOR A FEW YEARS NOW.
UM, IF YOU ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL ABOUT 15 MINUTES PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION TAKING UP YOUR ITEM.
AND MR. RIVERA IS GOING TO HELP US TONIGHT IN ANNOUNCING THE SPEAKERS DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO AS A REMINDER FOR THOSE VIRTUALLY HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW ITEMS FOR VOTING.
UM, AND THEN WE WILL MAKE SURE WE CALL OUT THE VOTES FOR CLARITY FOR THE MINUTES.
UM, AFTER THAT HAPPENS, UM, ONLINE, REMAIN MUTED WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING.
AND, UM, IF I MISS CALLING ON YOU, JUST COME OFF MUTE AND, AND, UM, CALL MY NAME.
SO, UM, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION TONIGHT, MR. RIVERA? OKAY.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
WE HAVE THE MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 26TH, 2023 ON OUR AGENDA.DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY EDITS OR CHANGES TO THOSE MINUTES? SEEING NONE, WE CAN ADD THOSE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[ Consent Agenda]
COMMISSIONER ZA IS GOING TO HELP ME BY DOING THE FIRST READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS EVENING.SO GOING THROUGH OUR, UH, PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 23 0 0 2 0.2, 0.0 3, 300 440 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD, NPA, DISTRICT THREE.
UM, THIS IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 14TH.
UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE IS THE REZONING, C 14 20 23 0 0 4 4, UM, 300 TO, UH, 440 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD DISTRICT THREE.
THIS AGAIN IS A STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER, UH, 14TH.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 23 0 0 2, 0 0.014, UH, 2 0 1 SOUTH CONGRESS DISTRICT THREE.
THIS IS A, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 28TH.
ASSOCIATED ZONING CASES NUMBER FIVE, UH, C 14 2 23 0 0 4 3 4 2 1 SOUTH CONGRESS DISTRICT THREE.
UM, THIS IS ALSO POSTPONED TO NOVEMBER 28TH ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST.
AND I DO WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR THIS, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS A SECOND POSTPONEMENT REQUEST AND, UH, WE APPRECIATE THEM GOING ALONG WITH IT, I HAVE NUMBER SIX IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 23 0 0 1 8 0.0 3 5 5 1 4 GROVER AND 5 5 1 5 ROOSEVELT AVENUE, DISTRICT SEVEN.
I NUMBER SEVEN IS A REZONING ASSOCIATED REZONING C 14 20 23 0 6 5 5 5 0 6 AND 5 5 1 4 GROVER AVENUE AND 5 5 1 5 ROOSEVELT AVENUE, DISTRICT SEVEN.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2 2 2 0 0 1 7 0.01 CRESTVIEW VILLAGE DISTRICT SEVEN.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION ASSOCIATED, UM, ZONING CASE, UH, NUMBER NINE C 14 20 22 DASH 0 0 3 5, CRESTVIEW VILLAGE DISTRICT SEVEN.
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NBA 20 23 0 0 1, 3 0.02 700 DAWSON, DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION ASSOCIATED, UM, REZONING C 14 2 2 3 0 0 6 4 700 DAWSON, DISTRICT NINE.
THIS IS UP FOR DISCUSSION AS WELL.
I NUMBER 12 IS A REZONING REQUEST, C 14 2 23 0 0 72 HYDE PARK, HIGH STREET, DISTRICT NINE.
UM, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 28TH AND THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT NUMBER 13 IS, UM, A REZONING C 14 2 23 0 8 4 AT BLUESTEIN MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ONE.
UM, I'M NUMBER 14, C 14, 2 22 0 0 62 1 0 6 0 1 NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD,
[00:05:01]
DISTRICT FOUR.THIS IS A STAFF AND APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT NUMBER 15 ZERO RESTRICTIVE COVENANT TERMINATION C 1477 DASH 1 3 8 RCT ON 1 0 6 0 1 NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD, RCT DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT NUMBER 16 C 14 20 23 0 0 4 7 1 9 1 1 WILLOW CREEK DRIVE, DISTRICT THREE.
THIS IS A POSTPONEMENT TO, UM, I'M SORRY, LET ME JUST MAKE SURE ON TO NOVEMBER 28TH.
UM, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
THIS IS C 14 20 23 0 0 9 9 7800 NORTH INTEREST RATE 35 REZONING DISTRICT FOUR.
THE SIGN IS UP FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 18 C EIGHT 14 2014 ZERO TWO SH COLONY PARK SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INITIATIVE, BUD DISTRICT ONE.
NUMBER 19 IS A REZONING C 14 20 23 DASH 0 0 8 8 9 0 3 WEST AVENUE AND 704 WEST NINTH STREET, DISTRICT NINE.
NUMBER 20 IS HISTORIC ZONING, C 14 H DASH 2023 DASH 0 9 2.
THE DEPU JERICHO FRAZIER HOUSE DISTRICT ONE.
NUMBER 21 IS A CONDITIONAL USE SITE PLAN S PC DASH 2022 DASH 0 1 62 C.
THE ART CENTER REPLACEMENT DISTRICT NINE.
THIS IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 28TH.
NUMBER 2022 IS ACOP AND COMPATIBILITY WAIVER, SBC DASH 2022 DASH 0 4 4 4 A EAST CHAVEZ HOTEL.
I NUMBER 23 IS A SITE PLAN EXTENSION S SP 27 DASH 2017 DASH 0 4 84 C XT TWO SUNRIDGE CONDOMINIUM SITE PLAN EXTENSION DISTRICT THREE.
NUMBER 24 IS A FINAL PLAT OUT OF AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN.
CJ DASH 2008 DASH FOUR EIGHT DASH ZERO FOUR 1A EASTWOOD, SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION.
THIS IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS PER STAFF REPORT I NUMBER 25 IS A FINAL PLATT OUT OF AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAN C EIGHT J DASH 2008 DASH 0 0 4 8 DASH ZERO 4.28 EASTWOOD, SECTION TWO SUBDIVISION.
THIS IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS PER STAFF REPORT NUMBER 26.
THIS IS SHORT FORM FINAL PLATT CHA DASH 2023 DASH 0 7 4 0.0 A CLEAR ELROY SUBDIVISION.
THIS IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS PER STAFF REPORT.
ITEM NUMBER 27 IS A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION CH A DASH 2022 DASH 3 3 5 1 1A WHISPER VALLEY MULTIFAMILY SUBDIVISION PARCEL THREE AND FOUR DISTRICT ONE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO FOR CONSENT WITH CONDITIONS AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT C.
NUMBER 28 IS AN LDC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2023 DASH 0 2 7 PARKLAND, DEDICATION, REPEAL, AND REPLACE.
THIS IS POSTPONED TO NOVEMBER 14TH BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION NUMBER, UH, ON CONSENT NUMBER 29 IS A RIGHT OF WAIVE VACATION 20 22 20 23 DASH 0 3 3 8 7 7 LMM CLAY AVENUE RIGHT OF WAY VACATION.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT AND CHAIR.
THAT IS THE END OF ALL OF OUR, UH, PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THANK YOU, COMMISSION CZAR.
UM, QUICK REMINDER FOR OUR, UM, LISTENERS AND FOR OUR PLANNING COMMISSIONER MEETINGS OR MEMBERS THAT OUR NOVEMBER 14TH MEETING.
SO OUR NEXT, UM, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WILL ALSO BE THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE HOME ZONING AMENDMENTS.
UM, AND THEREFORE, IF WE ARE PUSHING ANY ITEMS TO THE NOVEMBER 14TH MEETING THAT ARE NOT OFFERED FOR CONSENT, THEY WILL HAVE TO GO ONTO THE NOVEMBER 28TH MEETING.
UM, SO JUST A REMINDER ABOUT THAT.
UM, SO GOING BACK TO THE CONSENT AGENDA, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN THEMSELVES FROM ANY ITEMS ON THE AGENDA? UM, I'M MAKING A NOTE THAT ON ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE, I WILL BE ABSTAINING FROM VOTING BECAUSE I AM, UH, ON THE BOARD FOR THE REDLINE PARKWAY INITIATIVE, WHICH IS, UH, ADJACENT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.
UM, BUT I'LL BE PARTICIPATING IN THE DISCUSSION.
UM, ANY OTHER ABSTENTIONS, RECUSALS OR COMMENTS ON THE AGENDA? UM, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON ITEM 16, WILLOW CREEK AND, UH, JUST THANK THE APPLICANT, UM, FOR THEIR GOOD FAITH EFFORTS TO WORK WITH THE TENANTS AND PROVIDE, UM, CLEAR COMMUNICATION TO THE TENANTS AND, UM, A STRONG PACKAGE OF BENEFITS THAT WILL HELP PREVENT DISPLACEMENT IN THAT AREA.
I ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT'S A VERY SENSITIVE, DELICATE CASE WITH A LONG, UM, COMPLICATED HISTORY WHERE PREVIOUS OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY HAVE NOT, UM, BEEN VERY ATTENTIVE TO THE TENANTS AND HAVE NOT COMMUNICATED WELL.
SO THERE'S A, A LITTLE BIT OF A HISTORY THERE AND, UM, THERE'S A, AN EFFORT, UM,
[00:10:01]
RIGHT NOW TO REALLY KIND OF BRING THE TENANTS TOGETHER AND HAVE A CONVERSATION AND HELP THEM ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS PROPERTY.SO FOR THAT, I JUST WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR THEIR GOOD FAITH EFFORTS AND THANK THEM ESPECIALLY FOR AGREEING ONCE AGAIN, UH, TO, UH, POSTPONEMENT TO HELP US GET THIS DONE.
THANK YOU FOR COMMUNICATING THAT.
UM, UM, MR. VERA, I UNDERSTAND WE MIGHT HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WANTING TO SPEAK TO, UM, THE COLONY PARK ITEM CHAIR COMMISSIONER LAYS ON ANDREW RIVERA.
YES, WE DO HAVE, UM, A SPEAKER REGISTERED ON THAT ITEM.
AND I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER ZA WANTED TO, UM, MAKE A FEW COMMENTS WITH THE SPEAKERS.
WE'LL TAKE THE SPEAKERS FIRST.
MS. SCOTT, DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? GOOD EVENING.
UM, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, UH, THANK YOU FOR, UH, PUTTING OUR COLONY PARK ITEM ON THE CONSENT OF AGENDA.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PLAN.
I PERSONALLY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS SINCE 2007, AND SO IT, THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING.
UH, I ALWAYS LIKE TO SAY THAT, UH, I'M A PERSON OF FAITH AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT A, THAT A PEOPLE WITHOUT A VISION PERISH.
THIS IS OUR VISION AND IT HAS BEEN OUR VISION AND IT HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING, UH, FOR A PROJECT TO BE PUT ON HOLD FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
APPROXIMATELY 15 YEARS IS A LONG TIME, BUT WE HAVE WAITED AND WE ARE NOW READY FOR THIS PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD.
SO WE THANK YOU FOR MOVING IT FORWARD TONIGHT.
COMMISSIONER ZA THANK YOU CHAIR, UH, FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY.
I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM AND JUST THANK MS. SCOTT FOR HER LEADERSHIP AND FOR ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THE WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE ON THIS ITEM.
NEARLY A DECADE AGO, UM, WHEN I WAS 10 YEARS YOUNGER AND 50 POUNDS LIGHTER
I WANNA SAY I'VE SEEN THE HARD WORK THE COMMUNITY HAS PUT INTO THIS ITEM AND THE WORK THAT THEY HAVE DONE, AND I WANNA THANK OF COURSE THE ELLAS TEAM AND OUR CITY STAFF FOR WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH THEM, TO COMING TO A PROJECT THAT WILL TRULY BE SOMETHING THAT WILL ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE FOLKS THERE TODAY.
EXPAND OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEW FOLKS AND REALLY CREATE NEW OPPORTUNITIES WITH DISTRICT ONE.
SO JUST A BIG THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY INVOLVED IN.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE FOR THOSE 15 AND HONEST 15 AND HONESTLY 20 YEARS.
IT'S A LONG TIME COMING, BUT WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO SEE THIS MOVE FORWARD.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THE CONSENT TO JENNA AS READ COMM? I KNOW THAT WE'RE POSTPONING THE PARK LANE DEDICATION ITEM TO A CONSENT AGENDA, BUT THAT IS ONE ITEM THAT WE MIGHT WANNA DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT WHEN THAT ITEM COMES BACK.
AND THEN, UH, JUST GOTTA CHIME IN FOR COLONY PARK.
I RECALL STAFF AND MS. SCOTT AND OTHERS TOURING MAYOR PER TIM, CHERYL COLE AND, AND HER STAFF AROUND THE SITE OVER 10 YEARS AGO.
AND IT'S JUST SO EPIC TO SEE IT FINALLY HAPPENING.
SO EXCITED TO GET THOSE HOMES ON THE GROUND AND THEN EXCITED TO SEE MORE FORM OF HOUSING THAT'S MORE SUSTAINABLE AND MORE AFFORDABLE AND EXCITED TO BUILD HOMES LIKE THAT ACROSS THE CITY.
SO THIS NEXT MEETING'S GONNA BE GREAT TOO.
WE, SO IS THERE A MOTION TO, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I SEE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR ON THE DSS.
UM, THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[Items 8 & 9]
INTO OUR, UH, FIRST HEARING WOWAND THAT IS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT AND NINE CRESTVIEW VILLAGE.
LET'S SEE, MS. MEREDITH AND MR. TOMKO, MARINE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2 2 2 0 0 1 7 0.01.
CRESTVIEW VILLAGE PROPERTY IS LOCATED 69 16 69 26 69 28 NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD AND EIGHT OH EIGHT EIGHT TEN EIGHT TWELVE, AND 9 0 6 JUSTIN LANE.
[00:15:01]
IS WITHIN THE, UH, CRESTVIEW WOOTEN COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA AND THE NORTH AND THE LAMAR JUSTIN LANE STATION AREA PLAN.THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND THE NORTH LAMAR JUSTIN STATION AREA PLAN TOD TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF 160 FEET WITH DENSITY BONUS.
THE EXISTING LAND USE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS SPECIFIC REGULATING DISTRICT, AND THERE IS NO PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE A LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
CONTACT TEAM, UH, JONATHAN TOMKO, UH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UH, PRESENTING CASE C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 3 5 CRESTVIEW VILLAGE.
THIS PARCEL IS APPROXIMATELY 2.9 ACRES, AND THE REQUEST IS TO GO TO FROM T-O-D-N-N-P TO T-O-D-N-P WITH AN INCREASED HEIGHT OF 160 FEET WITH DENSITY BONUS STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS REQUEST.
UM, THE ADDRESS AS READ EARLIER, UH, IS THE SAME.
THE PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO THE CAPITAL METRO CRESTVIEW STATION.
UH, THESE, UH, CURRENTLY THIS PROPERTY IS, IS VACANT AND HAS NO RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS OR ANY USE TO SUPPORT THE SUBSTANTIAL PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN HIGH DENSITY PUBLIC TRANSIT ADJACENT TO THE PARCEL.
UM, THIS INCREASED HEIGHT WOULD BRING THE, UH, PROPERTY IN RANGE IN TERMS OF THE DENSITY OF DWELLING UNITS TO SUPPORT HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSIT.
AND KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS SITE, UH, AS PART OF PROJECT CONNECT, UH, WOULD BE HOME TO TWO, UH, TRANSIT LINES.
I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, MR. MICHAEL WHALEN.
MR. WHALEN, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I NEED MY GLASSES FOR THIS ONE.
UH, MICHAEL WHALEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, I AM HERE THIS EVENING TO PRESENT ON TWO CASES FOR A SITE AT THE INTERSECTION OF NORTH LAMAR AND AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
IT IS ONE OF THE MOST TRANSIT RICH LOCATIONS IN THE ENTIRE CITY OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN.
IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR THE LAMARR, JUSTIN, TOD, NOW CALLED THE CRESTVIEW STATION, TOD.
BUT THIS TOD, AS WE WILL SEE IS OUTDATED AND OUT OF STEP WITH CURRENT CITY POLICIES.
WE ARE REQUESTING THE CITY TAKE THE FIRST STEP TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE BY INCREASING HEIGHT TO 160 FEET AT THE HEART OF THE TOD IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE CRESTVIEW RAIL STATION.
NOW, LET'S TAKE A STEP BACK FOR A MOMENT.
THE PROPERTY IS ROUGHLY 2.9 ACRES, LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF TWO MAJOR CORRIDORS AND ADJACENT TO THE CRESTVIEW RAIL STATION.
IT SITS AT THE MOST TRANSIT RICH LOCATION OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN, AS I MENTIONED, WITH ACCESS TO TE TWO DESIGNATED RAIL STATIONS.
AS CASE MANAGER JUST NOTED, THE CURRENT RED LINE AND THE FORTHCOMING AUSTIN LIGHT RAIL, WHICH IS FORMALLY KNOWN AS THE ORANGE AND BLUE LINES.
IT ALSO HAS ACCESS TO SIX BUS ROUTES, INCLUDING FOUR OF THE TOP MOST USED BUS ROUTES IN THE CITY.
IN OTHER WORDS, THIS SITE IS CRITICAL TO SUPPORTING ROBUST TRANSIT USAGE GOING FORWARD AND TO MAKING AUSTIN COMPETITIVE FOR TRANSIT GRANTS SINCE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PRIORITIZES TRANSIT PROJECTS THAT FEATURE DENSITY NEAR STATIONS SUCH AS THIS.
HOWEVER, TODAY THE SITE CURRENTLY FEATURES OUTDATED SUBURBAN STYLE, AUTO ORIENTED SINGLE STORY COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES WITH FRONT SETBACKS FOR FRONT FACING PARKING.
ON THE ONE HAND, THE SITE, AS IT EXISTS TODAY, WILL NOT SUPPORT WALKABILITY AND TRANSIT USE OVER THE LONG TERM.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IT PRESENTS A REAL OPPORTUNITY TO ACHIEVE A TRULY TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE PROJECT AT THIS CRITICAL SITE.
AS SOON AS THE MARKET BEGINS TO STABILIZE, WE WILL ONLY BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY REALIZE THAT OPPORTUNITY, OPPORTUNITY IF OUR POLICIES ALLOW US.
SO LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE CRESTVIEW STATION TWO OD POLICIES CURRENTLY ALLOWED, AND WHAT'S ALLOWED MAYOR WILL WIN.
AND THE AT LARGE COUNCIL ADOPTED CRESTVIEW STATION TOD REGULATIONS AT THE END OF 2008, WHICH JUST AS A POINT OF REFERENCE WOULD'VE BEEN THE FIRST SEASON OF BREAKING BAD AND THE LAST YEAR OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.
SINCE THEN, THE POLICY HAS OVERHAULED MANY OF ITS, THIS CITY HAS OVERHAULED MANY OF ITS LAND USE AND TRANSIT POLICIES CALLING FOR GREATER HOUSING GROWTH, AND A MIX OF USES ALONG OUR CORRIDORS, AND PARTICULARLY ALONG OUR CURRENT AND FUTURE RAIL STATIONS.
HOWEVER, THE CITY HAS NEVER GONE BACK TO UPDATE THE CRESTVIEW EIGHT STATION TOD, EVEN AS IT HAS AMENDED OTHER REGULATING PLANS LIKE PLAZA SALTILLO, EAST RIVERSIDE, AND NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY.
CRESTVIEW STATION REMAINS LOCKED IN 2008.
AS A RESULT, THE CRESTVIEW STATION, TOD IS NOW ATOD IN NAME ONLY.
ITS POLICIES ARE OUTDATED AND OUT OF STEP WITH AUSTIN'S CURRENT POLICIES AND ITS CURRENT NEEDS.
TO PUT THIS INTO PERSPECTIVE, THE CRESTVIEW STATION TOD PROVIDES LOWER DENSITY AND HEIGHT THAN OTHER REGULATING
[00:20:01]
PLAN AREAS, WHICH PROVIDE FOR A RANGE OF HEIGHTS, INCLUDING, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, 85 TO 90 FEET IN PLAZA, 120 TO 160 FEET IN EAST RIVERSIDE, AND 120 TO 491 FEET IN NORTH BERNA GATEWAY.YOU'LL ALSO NOTICE THAT EVEN TRADITIONAL ZONING CATEGORIES HAVE OUTPACED CRESTVIEW STATION AT THIS POINT.
THE CRESTVIEW STATION, TOD WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED TO BE BETTER THAN TRADITIONAL ZONING CATEGORIES IN ORDER TO DO BETTER OR TO BETTER SUPPORT OUR TRANSIT AND HOUSING GOALS.
BUT TODAY, YOU'RE ACTUALLY BETTER OFF WITH SOMETHING LIKE GRV OR CSV THAN YOU ARE WITH THE CRESTVIEW TOD, BECAUSE VERTICAL MIS MIXED USE WILL GIVE YOU HIGHER BY RIGHT DENSITY AND HIGHER BONUS HEIGHT THAN THE TOD HERE.
THE CASES BEFORE YOU TODAY WOULD MAKE ONE SINGLE MEANINGFUL CHANGE, ALLOWING UP TO 160 FEET FOR THIS CRITICAL SITE IN THE CRESTVIEW TOD, WHICH, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, HAS A STRONG PRECEDENT IN OTHER REGULATING PLANS, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT THE CRESTVIEW T STATION TOD WILL HAVE BETTER TRANSIT ACCESS THAN ANY OF THESE OTHER PLANS.
THIS WILL HAVE BETTER ACCESS TRANSIT ACCESS THAN ANY OF THE OTHER PLANS BECAUSE OF TWO RAILS, UH, TWO, UH, RAIL LINES.
AS A RESULT, THE CITY'S OWN EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, THE E TODD POLICY PLAN DIRECTLY STATES THAT QUOTE, CRESTVIEW STATION TOD HAS THE LOWEST DENSITY OF ALL TO D ZONES.
SO TO RECAP, CRESTVIEW STATION IS ONE OF THE MOST TRANSIT RICH AREAS IN THE CITY OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN, BUT IT IS TRAPPED BY OUTDATED REGULATIONS.
THIS CASE WOULD TAKE THE FIRST STEP IN UPDATING OUR REGULATIONS AND MAKE CRESTVIEW STATION A WORKING TOD RATHER THAN ATOD IN NAME ONLY.
AND, UH, I'LL RESERVE THE REST FOR ANY REBUTTAL.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. BENJAMIN BARLIN ON THE TELECONFERENCE.
MR. BARLIN SSAR SIX, PROCEED WITH THE REMARKS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
UH, AS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND DEVELOPER, WE HAVE A REAL PLAN TO PUT A MIXED USE BUILDING IN HERE THAT BRINGS THAT DENSITY THAT WAS JUST TALKED ABOUT AND BRINGS TO YOU A LOT OF OTHER FEATURES AND THINGS TO THE COMMUNITY, SUCH AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, NONPROFIT SPACE, AND LOTS OF OTHER FEATURES THAT WE REALLY, UH, LOOK FORWARD TO DELIVERING TO THE CITY.
UH, THIS IS GOING TO BE A, UH, A RE A REPLAN AND, AND A RE UH, REVITALIZATION OF THIS AREA.
AS YOU SAW FROM THE PICTURES, IT'S, IT DOESN'T LOOK VERY GOOD TODAY, AND WE REALLY WANT TO GET ON WITH THIS AND, AND PUT THIS WONDERFUL PROJECT UP.
WE NOW HEAR FROM MR. TOM WALD.
MR. WALD, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M REPRESENTING THE REDLINE PARKWAY INITIATIVE.
WE SUPPORT, AND I, HOW, HOW MANY MINUTES? TWO OR THREE? I DIDN'T CATCH THAT.
UM, YEAH, REPRESENT REDLINE PARKWAY INITIATIVE SUPPORTING THE 32 MILE TRAIL ALONG THE CAPITAL METRO REDLINE.
AND I DID NOT COORDINATE THIS POINT WITH MIKE WHALEN, BUT IT'S REALLY FASCINATING BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY GOING TO BE QUITE A CENTER FOR TRANSIT HAS TWO, IT HAS THE CROSSING OF TWO HIGH CAPACITY DEDICATED TRANSIT WAYS.
UM, AND IT'S GONNA BE VERY EASY TO GET TO AND GET FROM, UH, WHEN YOU TAKE TRANSIT.
YOU UNDERSTAND THAT TAKING ONE BUS OR ONE TRAIN MAKES YOUR TRIP A LOT EASIER THAN HAVING TO TRANSFER AGAIN.
UM, AND PART OF THE REASON WHY I WANTED TO SPEAK ON IT IS BECAUSE YES, IT'S RIGHT ALONG THE RED LINE.
UM, THE WALKING AND BIKING AND PUBLIC SPACE COMPONENTS ARE CRITICAL TO OUR MISSION.
UH, THIS INTERSECTION, JUSTIN LAMAR AND AIRPORT BOULEVARD ARE VERY UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO MAXIMIZE OUR PUBLIC SPACE AS PEOPLE ARE COMING TO TRANSIT AND WAITING FOR TRANSIT.
AND I WANT TO, YOU KNOW, I, I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR.
I THINK THIS IS A TERRIFIC PLACE FOR DENSITY.
UM, SO I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THE, THE HEIGHT INCREASE HERE.
AS, AS MIKE WILLAN HAD MENTIONED.
UM, THIS WAS LAST REEVALUATED OVER A DECADE AGO.
AND, UM, I THINK THERE'S A LOT MORE UNDERSTANDING OF THE NEED FOR, UH, MAXIMIZING YOUR TRANSIT, UM, INVESTMENTS.
UM, BUT WHAT I'VE NOTICED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC SPACE SURROUNDING THIS AREA IS THAT THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN LED NOT BY PUBLIC SPACE OR PUBLIC DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, BUT BY PROFESSIONALS WHERE THEIR EXPERTISE LIES IN SOMETHING ELSE.
AND THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE DEVELOPER, UH, AT, AT ALL.
UM, BUT THIS IS, UM, YOU KNOW, TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS BEING DESIGNED BY, UH, OTHER ENGINEERS WHO DON'T PUB, WHO DON'T SPECIALIZE IN PUBLIC SPACE.
AND THE, THE MULTIPLE, THERE'S FOUR
[00:25:01]
JURISDICTIONS THAT HAVE, UM, SORT OF PREVIEW OVER THIS AREA, AND THEY'RE NOT COMMUNICATING ON THAT PUBLIC SPACE, UM, UH, AND BIKE WALK, UM, ACCESS NEEDS, UH, LEVEL.AND I THINK THAT'S A BIG PART OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT THAT'S MISSING.
UM, I'M GONNA CONTINUE TO, TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THEN ALSO OTHER COMMUNITY LEADERS IN THE AREA AND TRY TO ENSURE THAT THOSE ARE MAXIMIZED ALONG WITH THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE BEING, UM, THAT ARE BEING CREATED IN THE AREA.
I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT FOR NOW.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION.
UH, MR. MIKE LEVINE, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES CHAIR.
I DON'T HAVE A OPPOSITION PRESENT.
UM, WE WILL, UH, I'M NOT SURE IF THE APPLICANT WANTS A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
MICHAEL WHALE, AGAIN, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, I'M JUST GONNA EMPHASIZE I'VE WORKED WITH TOM WALL ON OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE NEXT TO THE REDLINE PARKWAY.
AND CERTAINLY, UH, DESPITE THIS HAVING, UH, AN EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT'S REQUIRED, IT'S 10% OF THE ENTIRE GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHEREAS A LOT OF, LIKE EAST RIVERSIDE IS ONLY THE BONUS AREA, SO IT'S A LOT MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UM, WE CERTAINLY ARE OPEN TO FIGURING OUT WHAT WE CAN DO IN TERMS OF OUR PART IN THE, IN, UH, WITH THE PARKWAY AS WELL.
AND WE, AND WE'LL HAVE TIME BETWEEN NOW.
I MEAN, WHO KNOWS WHEN WE'RE GONNA GET TO, TO COUNCIL AT THE, YOU KNOW, SO ANYWAY, CHAIR, I APOLOGIZE TO GO OUT ORDER.
I DO HAVE MR. LEVINE ON THE TELECONFERENCE NOW.
UM, MR. LEVINE, IF YOU'LL SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
UM, I DID REGISTER IN OPPOSITION AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD SOME CONTEXT TO THIS, AND THAT THE TOWER THAT'S BEING PROPOSED WAS PART OF A LARGER PROPOSAL THAT WAS GONNA PROVIDE A, A, A VAST AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THAT AREA IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS.
I'VE WORKED A VERY LONG TIME WITH THE, UH, BARLINS, WHO WE'VE VERY MUCH ENJOYED WORKING WITH, AND, UH, WERE REALLY DISAPPOINTED WHEN THE, UH, THE FINAL PROJECT WASN'T GIVEN A GO AHEAD.
AND SO THIS IS THE REMNANTS OF THAT, AND WE FEEL LIKE WE CAN, WE CAN PROBABLY DO A LITTLE BIT BETTER IN THAT AREA IN TERMS OF PROVIDING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, AND SERVING THE, UH, UH, AS MR. WAYLAND SAID, THE, THE, UH, TRANSIT AVAILABILITY IN THAT INTERSECTION.
UM, WE ARE, AS A NEIGHBORHOOD, VERY SUPPORTIVE OF, OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THAT AREA.
AND WE'D LIKE TO SEE, UM, SOMETHING MORE, UM, SPECIFIC PROPOSED IN THE FUTURE.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, CAN I GET A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, SECOND COMMISSIONER CZAR, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY.
UM, LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GONNA GET UNANIMOUS ON THAT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND START OUR, UH, ROUND ROBIN OUR DEBATE.
UM, SO ORIGINALLY WE WERE GOING TO DO FIVE MEMBERS AT THREE MINUTES EACH, BUT, UM, SOME LAST MINUTE CHANGES TO OUR AGENDA.
UM, I THINK WE'LL GO WITH OUR REGULAR RULES OF, UM, EIGHT COMMISSIONERS AT FIVE MINUTES EACH.
WE MIGHT NOT NEED ALL THAT TIME, BUT WHO HAS THE FIRST QUESTION? COMMISSIONER Z.
MR. LAN, CAN YOU PLEASE WALK US THROUGH THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE JUSTIN BEAN, DOD MICHAEL WHALEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT? SO SIMILAR TO SOME OF THE OTHER, UH, TODS AND REGULATING PLANS, IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO EXCEED FAR OR HEIGHT.
UM, THERE'S ALS OR IN THIS CASE, IF YOU EXCEED 45 UNITS PER ACRE.
SO THERE, THAT'S A DIFFERENT TRIGGER THAT EXISTS IN A COUPLE OF OTHER, UH, PLANS.
AND IN THIS CASE, UH, THE FAR CLEARLY IS GONNA GET BUSTED PRETTY QUICKLY.
UM, IF YOU GO EVEN A SMIDGE ONE SQUARE FOOT OVER THE FAR LIMITATION, THAT'S AT 10% OF YOUR GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE.
AND I WANNA ALSO EMPHASIZE HERE, AND IT MIGHT'VE BEEN A, UH, IT MIGHT'VE BEEN INTENTIONAL, BUT IT'S 10% OF THE GROSS SQUARE FOOT AREA.
BUT THE AREA THAT YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE IS NET RENTABLE.
SO IF YOUR GROSS SQUARE AREA, UM, OF YOUR BUILDING, LET'S SAY IT'S 135,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND 10% IS 13,500 SQUARE FEET,
[00:30:01]
IT ISN'T THAT YOU GET TO PROVIDE 13,500 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH WOULD BE YOUR HALLWAYS AMENITY CENTER.YOU KNOW, EACH UNIT PICKS UP ABOUT 10% ADDITIONAL FOR THE COMMON AREAS.
NO, IN THIS CASE, IN THIS REGULATING PLAN AND A COUPLE OF OTHERS, YOU WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE 13,500 SQUARE FEET OF ACTUAL, UH, UNITS.
SO IT'S A, UH, IT'S A PRETTY BIG LIFT.
UH, IT'S HARD TO SAY WHAT IT TRANSLATES TO, BUT IT TRANSLATES TO MORE THAN 10% OF THE UNITS ULTIMATELY.
AND DO YOU HAVE A IDEA AT THE MOMENT IF THIS WOULD BE AN OWNERSHIP PROJECT OR RENTAL? OH, I DON'T KNOW YET.
I, I THINK AS, AS YOU WELL KNOW, TEXAS PROPERTY CODE, UH, HAS A 10 YEAR TAIL ON CONDOMINIUMS. SO THE LIABILITY IS A LOT GREATER, AND THEREFORE THE COST IS A LOT GREATER BECAUSE, UH, CONTRACTORS DON'T LIKE TO WORK, UH, ON CONDOS BECAUSE OF THE LIABILITY.
UH, THEY HAVE A LOT, UH, STIFFER REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF INSURANCE THAT GETS PASSED ON TO THE ASSOCIATION.
AND IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, IF IT'S RENTAL UNITS, THE REQUIREMENT IN THE TOD IS 60% MFI FOR 40 YEARS.
THAT'S, AND IF YOU WERE TO DO OWNERSHIP, IT WOULD BE 80% MFI FOR NINE, NINE YEARS.
SAYING THE STANDARD YES, THAT IS THE STANDARD.
THANK YOU, MR. WILL, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, APOLOGIES FOR SOUNDING WEIRD.
I'M VERY SICK RIGHT NOW, SO THANK GOD FOR TECHNOLOGY.
UM, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT'S.
UM, IS THERE ANY SCENARIO IN WHICH YOU CAN TAKE A, YOU, YOU CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT OVER 60 FEET AND NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, MICHAEL WAY ON BEHALF OF, UH, THE APPLICANT? I THINK IF YOU CREATED LIKE AN OBSERVATION TOWER, MAYBE, UH, THAT HAD, UM, MAYBE A UNIT AT THE TOP.
I MEAN, IT'D BE REALLY HARD TO, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD DO IT ACTUALLY, UH, AND ECONOMICALLY MAKE IT FEASIBLE.
UM, I, I JUST, I, I, I CAN'T, I CAN'T THINK OF A WAY.
THE OTHER PIECE THAT, UH, ALSO GETS TRIGGERED, COMMISSIONER, IS THAT 45 UNITS PER ACRE.
SO AS SOON AS THAT GETS, UH, HIT YOU, YOU GET, UH, TAGGED.
AND SO YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE AN ECONOMICALLY VIABLE, UH, PROJECT HERE.
I DON'T THINK AT, UH, YOU KNOW WHAT, 135 UNITS I DON'T THINK IS GONNA MAKE IT BECAUSE 60 TO 160 IS A PRETTY BIG JUMP.
AND IT'S A PRETTY BIG JUMP WITHOUT INCREASING THE BASE DENSITY.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHAT ULTIMATELY GETS BUILT ISN'T SOME 90 FOOT APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT SOMEHOW JUST SKIRTS RIGHT UNDER THE LIMITS AND ALLOWS YOU TO, ALLOWS YOUR CLIENT TO BUILD THIS PROJECT WITHOUT ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS PART OF THE BONUS PROGRAM.
I'M JUST TRYING TO, I THINK IT'S 2.9 ACRES, IS THAT RIGHT COMMISSIONER? I JUST, UH, I JUST, I THINK IT'S THE, THE BIGGER, THE BIGGER PIECE HERE IS THE, UH, 45 UNITS PER ACRE.
I JUST DON'T, UH, UH, THEY WOULD BE LIMITING THEMSELVES TO, I'M NOT GREAT WITH MATH.
UH, SOMEBODY UP THERE IS PROBABLY A LOT BETTER THAN I AM.
UM, BECAUSE, 'CAUSE ONE THING I WASN'T SURE ABOUT WAS THIS, IS, THIS INCLUDES RESIDENTIAL OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL, RIGHT? WELL, RIGHT NOW OFFICES, UH, AS YOU WELL KNOW, THERE'S OVER 5.7 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AVAILABLE IN AUSTIN.
SO I DON'T THINK, IN MY OPINION, THERE'S GONNA BE ANY OFFICE BUILT PROBABLY FOR QUITE SOME TIME, IF NOT, WELL, UH, THAT'S TRUE.
BUT HOW MUCH OFFICE FACES IN THIS EXACT LOCATION? NOT, NOT A WHOLE LOT.
UM, SO I, I'M JUST TRYING TO, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND THE POSSIBILITIES HERE.
AND, AND I'M ASSUMING ONE POSSIBILITY IS THAT YOU TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WITH COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE, BUT DON'T WITH RESIDENTIAL.
AND SO THE DEVELOPER OR THE APPLICANT GETS A DENSER PROJECT WITH MORE LEASEABLE FLOOR SPACE WITHOUT ACTUALLY ADDING ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THIS AREA.
AM I IMAGINING A SCENARIO THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE, OR, OR IS THAT POSSIBLE? IF YOU, YOU WOULD HAVE TO, YOU'D HAVE THE TWO LIMITATIONS.
WE DISCUSSED THE TWO TO ONE FAR AND THE 130 UNITS PLUS OR MINUS, RIGHT? SO, UH, IF YOU, EITHER ONE OF THOSE GETS TRIGGERED, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, PIECE COMES INTO PLAY.
SO I GUESS YOU'RE ASKING, IS THERE A WAY TO DO SOMETHING AT 1.9 TO ONE FAR, WILL THAT BE ECONOMICALLY, UH, FEASIBLE AND THEREFORE YOU GET TO BYPASS THE AFFORDABLE
[00:35:01]
HOUSING? UM, UH, SURE.IF YOU WANT ME TO SAY YES TO, BECAUSE YOU LIKE SOMEBODY TO SAY YES TO YOUR QUESTIONS.
YES, THAT IS, THAT IS PO NO, NO, THAT IS NOT, THAT IS NOT ECONOMICALLY POSSIBLE RIGHT NOW,
WELL, THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I'M ASKING IS, IS YOU, YOU WOULD KNOW BETTER THAN ME IF, IF THAT SCENARIO IS, IS SOMETHING THAT IS LIKELY TO HAPPEN.
AND SO I, I WANT, I WOULD SAY FROM YOU THAT THAT'S, THAT THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO HEAR.
WELL, TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION IS, IS IT LIKELY TO HAPPEN? ABSOLUTELY NOT, IN MY OPINION.
UH, BUT THERE'S LOTS OF OTHER PEOPLE ON THIS DAIS WHO, UH, ARE A LOT SMARTER THAN ME ABOUT THE MARKET, UM, AND HOUSING RIGHT NOW.
AND, AND THE NEED FOR HOUSING AND THE DEMAND FOR HOUSING, WHICH IS MOVING PEOPLE TO BUILD MULTIFAMILY, PEOPLE ARE CONVERTING OFFICE SITE PLANS THAT WITHOUT THE BUILDING PERMITS TO MULTIFAMILY, UH, IN THIS MARKETPLACE RIGHT NOW.
AND EVEN THOSE CAN'T, AND EVEN THOSE CAN'T GET BUILT AS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF INTEREST RATES RIGHT NOW.
OUR NEXT COMMISSIONER WITH A QUESTION, COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY? YEAH, I HAVE, UM, SORRY, ONE, JUST A FEW MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
SORRY TO MAKE YOU GET BACK UP.
YOU'LL GET SOME EXTRA STEPS IN TODAY.
UM, OH, NO, I JUST, I, I REALLY APPRECIATED THE, THE, THE COMMENTS THAT WE, WE HEARD FROM THE REDLINE PARKWAY FOLKS AND ALSO YOUR REPLY, UM, AROUND YOUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THEM.
UM, I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF, IF YOU COULD SAY A LITTLE BIT MORE TO SORT OF WHAT THAT RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN LIKE AND, AND, AND IF THERE'S SOME KIND OF COMMITMENT TO AND IMPROVING THAT RELATIONSHIP OR, UM, MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S A WORKABLE RELATIONSHIP THERE.
UH, MICHAEL WAY ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, SO ON ANOTHER CASE, UH, THAT WAS HEARD HERE ON KIG, I FORGOT THE ADDRESS, BUT I FORGOT THE ADDRESS.
IT WAS THE OLD TEXAS GAS SITE, PRETTY BIG SITE.
UM, WE WORKED, UH, WE SPENT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME WORKING AND, UH, ULTIMATELY MADE A COMMITMENT, A FINANCIAL COMMITMENT.
I THINK IT WAS FINANCIAL COMMITMENT TO HELP, UH, REDLINE PARKWAY REALLY KICK OFF, ESPECIALLY SINCE THAT PROPERTY WAS ADJACENT TO THE REDLINE AS WELL.
HUGE ADVANTAGES TO GET THE PLANNING GOING AND, UM, UH, UNDERWAY.
'CAUSE ULTIMATELY ALL THESE PROPERTIES THAT ARE ALONG THE REDLINE PARKWAY ARE GOING TO BE, ARE GONNA BENEFIT FROM HAVING THIS TYPE OF CONNECTIVITY, UM, INCLUDING THIS SITE.
SO, UH, IT'S BEEN A POSITIVE RELATIONSHIP.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE ANYBODY LISTENING OR ANYBODY, UH, WHO'S GOT PROPERTY CLOSE TO OR ADJACENT TO THE, UH, UH, RED LINE WORK WITH MR. WALD ON WAYS TO GET THIS PROJECT MOVING EVEN FASTER.
'CAUSE IT'S HUGE ADVANTAGE FOR THE CITY.
WE SEE IT EVERYWHERE WHEN WE GO TO OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE INVESTED, UH, IN THIS TYPE OF, UH, PLAN.
UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PERSON WHO SPOKE, UM, IN OPPOSITION SORT OF REFERENCED A LONGER HISTORY IN THE AREA AND SOME OF THE PREVIOUS PLANS FOR A, A BROADER DEVELOPMENT.
COULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TO THE RELATIONSHIP THAT THIS CURRENT PROJECT HAS TO THAT, TO THOSE PAST PLANS? YEAH, SO, UM, THERE WAS, UH, I'LL JUST HOLD IT UP.
THERE WAS, UH, THERE'S THREE TRACKS.
AND SO, UH, ONE OF THE, THIS, THE TRACK THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED TONIGHT IS THE ONE RIGHT AT THE CORNER.
I THINK IT'S ABOUT TO ISSUE ANOTHER RFP FOR THAT TRACK.
AND, UM, THE, THE SAME OWNERS OF THE ONE THAT'S BEING REZONED OWN THE ONE RIGHT UP HERE.
AND SO ONE TIME THERE WAS A COHESIVE PLAN.
UM, THE CITY DIDN'T WANT US TO PRESENT IT AS A COHESIVE PLAN, BUT, UH, MR. LEVINE, THE PERSON WHO SPOKE IS CORRECT.
WE, IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A COHESIVE PLAN WITH PARKLAND.
THAT FELL OUT, UH, IN PART DUE TO THE ECONOMY NOT MAKING THE, UM, UH, ABILITY, NOT MAKING THE ABILITY TO BUILD ON THE CITY'S SITE, UH, FEASIBLE ANYMORE.
UM, BUT WE NEED TO PICK UP, YOU KNOW, AND HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH MR. LEVINE.
UM, WE WILL HAVE TO DO PARKLAND DEDICATION ANYWAY, AS EVERYBODY HERE KNOWS AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
UM, THAT'S A SITE PLAN, UH, DISCUSSION, ALTHOUGH IT'S ONE THAT WE SHOULD AND CAN ENGAGE IN BETWEEN NOW AND COUNCIL AS WELL WITH MR. LEVINE.
AND WE WILL ENGAGE AGAIN WITH HIM ON THAT.
AND WHAT DID THE ONGOING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY LOOK LIKE AROUND THE OTHER PLANS? UM, IS THAT, WELL, THE PLANS THAT, UH, WE HAD ARE GONE.
I MEAN, THAT, UH, THE, THE EX THE EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT WAS TERMINATED.
UM, SO, UH, THEY'RE JUST GONNA REISSUE THE RFP.
UM, FOR THAT SITE, FOR THE AUSTIN ENERGY.
I CALL IT THE AUSTIN ENERGY SITE.
'CAUSE IT USED TO BE A LAY DOWN PLACE.
UM, I THINK IT MIGHT NOW BE OWNED BY
[00:40:01]
THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT AT SOME POINT.I DON'T KNOW WHO OWNS IT RIGHT NOW.
UM, COMMISSIONER MO DAHLER, DID I SEE YOUR HAND UP? OKAY.
OH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, IT WAS AN M NAME
UM, SORRY, I HAVE A FEW MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON THE COMMISSIONER CONLEY'S, UH, QUESTIONS.
I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE FRONTAGE AREA AND SPECIFICALLY RELATIONSHIP TO SORT OF THE NEW PROPOSED LIGHT RAIL THAT'S GONNA GO THERE AS WELL AS THE EXISTING, UM, TRANSIT.
AND OBVIOUSLY YOU, WE ALL ARE EXCITED ABOUT HAVING THE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT PUT IN THERE, AND I'M JUST CURIOUS HOW THE CONVERSATION HAS GONE REGARDING RIGHT OF WAY AND ALSO MORE GENERALLY SPEAKING WHAT THE, UM, IS PLANNED IN TERMS OF MAYBE ELIMINATING PARKING, INCREASING BIKE ACCESS, ALL OF THOSE THINGS SINCE THIS IS SUCH A TRANSIT RICH AREA.
YEAH, SO, UM, HAVE NOT GIVEN, HAVE NOT DONE A DEEP DIVE ON ANY OF THAT.
UH, I WILL SAY WHEN THE PLANS WERE BEING, WHEN, WHEN ALL THE, WHEN THE ENTIRE TRACK, WHEN ALL, WHEN, WHEN ALL OF IT WAS BEING REVIEWED AND EXAMINED, THE, A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT LITERALLY HAVE, AND IT LITERALLY WILL BE THERE.
THE ORANGE LINE WILL HAVE IT STOP RIGHT THERE, BASICALLY ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THE, UH, NEED FOR PARKING, FOR EXAMPLE, OBVIOUSLY IS GOING TO PLUMMET, HOPEFULLY BY THE TIME THIS GETS BUILT.
UM, IT'LL BE ALMOST, YOU KNOW, FOR NAUGH, BUT I THINK THERE'LL PROBABLY BE A NEED FOR SOME, THIS ISN'T, WE'RE NOT QUITE YET AT NEW YORK CITY, UM, PARKING LEVELS FOR DOWNTOWN.
UM, SO THAT, THAT'S ONE THING.
UH, I HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT ANY RIGHT OF WAY TAKING OR REQUESTS YET.
UM, I, I CAN INVESTIGATE, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD OF ANY YET FROM, UH, AUSTIN TRANSIT PARTNERS.
UH, SO I JUST, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT, TO THAT, TO THE TAKING QUESTION.
BUT I AGREE THAT PARKING WON'T BE NEARLY AS, UH, IMPORTANT HERE.
AND I GUESS RELATED TO COMMISSIONER CONLEY, THERE WOULD BE, UM, GOOD BIKE ACCESS LANES AND ALL THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE PLANNING, OBVIOUSLY FOR THE DESIGNS THAT I'VE SEEN POSTED, UM, UH, FOR THE, UH, WHAT IS IT CALLED NOW? THE AUSTIN LIGHT RAIL LINE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? I, I CALL IT THE ORANGE LINE 'CAUSE I'M, I FORGET, BUT THE AUSTIN LIGHT RAIL HAS, UH, ALL THAT CONNECTIVITY, THE, THE, UH, WALKING, BIKING AND CONNECTION TO, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE ISSUES WAS ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, HERE, THEY STILL WOULD HAVE TO GO TO JUSTIN LANE AND THEN RYAN DRIVE TO GET BACK INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE WAS, UM, AND WE WILL, I MEAN, IT'S JUST NATURAL BECAUSE YOU'RE SO CLOSE TO THE STATION TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS, UH, THE STATION THERE AS WELL.
AND ONE FINAL QUESTION, UM, REGARDING THE SORT OF JUSTIN LANE AND THEN NORTHWELL MARBLE BOULEVARD, IF WE END UP WITH SOME HIGHER BUILDINGS ON THAT FRONTAGE ROAD, WOULD WE HOPE TO SEE SOME ACTIVATED STOREFRONTS AND SORT OF, YOU KNOW, THE MORE INVITING ATMOSPHERE GIVEN AGAIN THAT IT'S ATOD DISTRICT? YEAH, I MEAN THAT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE GOAL.
UM, I FORGET AS I'M STANDING HERE RIGHT NOW, WHETHER IT'S REQUIRED ON THE GROUND FLOOR, LIKE VERTICAL EXCUSE, I JUST FORGOT.
AS I'M STANDING HERE RIGHT NOW, I SHOULD KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT AND I DON'T KNOW.
IT IS, IT IS, SO IT IS, SO IT IS REQUIRED.
JONATHAN TOMKO, OUR CASE MANAGER.
SO YES, I, SO APPARENTLY I HAVE TO HAVE, UH, ACTIVATED GROUND FLOOR, SPACE
THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS, CHAIR.
I'M NOW WALKING AWAY FOR REAL.
I'M NOT EVEN GONNA LOOK AT THE STEPS I'VE TAKEN
ALRIGHT, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT AS WELL.
UM, BUT, AND I'M A NEW COMMISSIONER AND SO PLEASE BEAR WITH ME AS I FRAME THIS QUESTION.
UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WOULD BE, COULD YOU TELL US AGAIN HOW MUCH TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE AND HOW MUCH OF THAT WOULD BE DEDICATED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING? UM, YES, MICHAEL WHALE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
UH, I DIDN'T MEAN TO CONFUSE AND APOLOGIES, I WAS JUST THROWING A NUMBER, LIKE ASSUME 130,000 SQUARE FEET, UH, IF THAT TRIGGERED THE TWO TO ONE, UH, RATIO, UM, WHICH IT WOULD IN THIS CASE, UH, THAT WOULD, UM, WELL, LET ME JUST CONFIRM, MAKE SURE BEFORE I GIVE THROWOUT NUMBERS THAT ARE INACCURATE, THAT ALWAYS GETS ME IN TROUBLE.
YEAH, SO I CAN DO IT A HUNDRED.
SO 130, IF IT WAS 130,000 SQUARE FEET, UH, THAT, THAT WOULD TRIGGER THE TWO TO ONE.
UH, THAT WOULD ONLY BE ABOUT, BASED ON THE MATH, THAT A BUNCH, WE HAVE A BUNCH OF HOUSING PEOPLE HERE, PROBABLY,
[00:45:01]
UH, 140 UNITS, MAYBE 150 UNITS.SO THAT TWO WOULD PROBABLY TRIGGER THE, UH, THE, THE 45 UNIT, UH, UH, LIMITATION.
IT'S ALSO NOT A MARKETABLE PRODUCT AT ONLY A HUNDRED AND, UH, UH, 40 UNITS.
SO LET'S, FOR YOU, FOR THIS PURPOSE, COMMISSIONER, LET'S ASSUME 130,000 SQUARE FEET, ANY THAT'S GONNA TRIGGER THE DENSITY BONUS.
SO 10%, IF THAT'S YOUR GROSS SITE, YOUR GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE, 10% OF THAT WOULD BE 13,000 SQUARE FEET AND THAT 13,000 SQUARE FEET WOULD HAVE TO BE IN APARTMENTS.
IT, IT ISN'T APARTMENTS IN HALLWAYS, IT HAS TO BE IN APARTMENTS IN A, IN A TYPICAL NUMBER.
UH, AND AGAIN, I'M LOOKING AT COMMISSIONERS FOR SOME GUIDANCE.
I DUNNO WHETHER YOU USE SIX 50 OR 700 ANY GUIDANCE ANYBODY, HUH? FOR, FOR, FOR, FOR, FOR AN APARTMENT.
SO YOU WOULD DIVIDE, YOU WOULD DIVIDE THE 13,000 SQUARE FEET BY WHATEVER YOUR APARTMENT SIZE WOULD BE, SO, SO, YEAH.
UM, AND I'M TRYING TO GET AN IDEA BECAUSE WE DON'T, WE REALLY, A LOT OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS GOING OVER MY HEAD JUST QUITE FRANKLY IN TERMS OF, I'D LIKE TO GET AN IDEA OF THE UNITS, HOW MANY UNITS, AND THEN TO JUST TO BREAK THAT DOWN A LITTLE BIT, WHAT WE'VE SEEN HAPPEN IN THE PAST IN THE CITY, AND I'M NOT SURE THIS IS THE PLACE TO ADDRESS THAT, AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE, I'M A NEW COMMISSIONER, IS WE'VE SEEN AFFORDABILITY TRANSLATE TO LIKE ONE BEDROOM OR, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST, UM, UNITS THAT CAN ONLY ACCOMMODATE, UM, YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUALS OR, UM, THAT SORT OF THING OR STUDIOS, UH, AND NOT UNITS THAT ACCOM ACCOMMODATE FAMILIES.
AND SO THAT'S BEEN KIND OF THE DIRTY LITTLE SECRET WITH AFFORDABILITY IN THE CITY THAT THEY'RE BUILT FOR, UH, JUST INDIVIDUALS IF THAT.
AND SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT AFFORDABILITY AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PEOPLE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO HELP AT 60% OF THE MFI OR THEREABOUTS, I MEAN, YOU COULD BE TALKING ABOUT JUST STUDENTS, UM, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT INDIVIDUAL UNITS OR, BUT YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT FAMILIES AND, AND, AND WORKING PEOPLE.
SO, SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT AT ALL? YEAH, SO, UH, MICHAEL WA ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, THE, UM, A LOT OF THE OTHER, UH, ORDINANCES LIKE VERTICAL MIXED USE DO REQUIRE THAT THE MARKET UNITS AND THE AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE IN THE SAME PRO RATA MIX.
SO IF 70% OF YOUR UNITS ARE ONE BEDROOM AND 30% ARE TWO BEDROOM, YOUR AFFORDABLE UNITS HAVE TO BE IN THE SAME MIX.
I HAD STEPPED AWAY FOR A MOMENT TO CHECK.
I DON'T THINK THIS REGULATING PLAN, UH, HAS YET BEEN UPDATED TO THAT STANDARD.
UM, BUT I WOULD EXPECT, GIVEN HOW OLD IT IS, UH, REMEMBER BREAKING BAD AND GEORGE BUSH, THAT THIS WILL, UH, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD BE UPDATED TO REFLECT THAT AS WELL BY THE TIME WE GET AROUND A BUILDING, WHICH IS AT LEAST FIVE YEARS AWAY FROM NOW.
SO YOU REALLY, WE DON'T KNOW, BUT WE YOU'RE SAYING THAT POTENTIALLY IT COULD BE ONE AND TWO BEDROOM PLACES? YEAH, MO MOST, UH, COMPLEXES HAVE A MIX OF ONE AND TWO BEDROOMS AND MAYBE, UH, A FEW THREE BEDROOMS. UM, SO I, BUT I DON'T, I, THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY DESIGN DONE FOR THIS ONE YET.
UH, WE HAVE THREE MORE SPOTS LEFT.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS OR IS THERE A MOTION, MR. CONNOLLY? UM, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, GO WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
SECOND, IS THAT FOR BOTH EIGHT AND NINE? YES.
COMMISSIONER MOTION, SCHELLER SECONDING, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? UM, I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO SAY THAT HASN'T ALREADY BEEN COVERED.
I THINK THAT, UH, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, UM, DENSITY, UM, VERY IN A TRANSIT RICH AREA, RIGHT ALONG A NEW, UM, ALONG A LOT OF OUR NEW TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, AND TRAIN LINES.
AND, UH, THIS AREA HAS LONG BEEN CALLING, UM, FOR MORE TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE, UM, HOUSING AND LAND USE.
AND I DO HOPE THAT THERE CAN BE, AS THE, UM, DEVELOPMENT PROGRESSES A A, A MORE ROBUST CONVERSATION ABOUT THE UNIT MIX, UM, AROUND THE AFFORDABLE UNITS.
AND ALSO I THINK I, I REALLY HOPE THERE IS A, A, A, A STRONG CONVERSATION WITH THE CITY AS THE CITY MOVES FORWARD, PUTTING OUT ITS RFP, UM, AND, AND DECIDING WHAT IT WILL DO WITH THE ADJACENT LOTS AROUND HOW THOSE, UM, WILL BE INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED AND FLOW TOGETHER.
BUT, UH, I THINK THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE SHOULDN'T BE SUPPORTING THIS NOW AS THE PLANNING COMMISSIONER.
[00:50:02]
THANK YOU.ANY COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST ANYONE ELSE WANNA SPEAK? I DO.
UH, COMMISSIONER MOOW, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, AND THEN COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, UM, APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER, UM, CONNOLLY'S COMMENTS ON, UH, THE PROJECT VIABILITY AND YES, I WANT TO AGAIN EMPHASIZE THAT WE WANNA SEE THE HOUSING REFLECT, UM, THE VARIATIONS THAT WE NEED.
IN ADDITION TO THIS BEING THE RIGHT LOCATION FOR THIS PROJECT.
IT'S ALSO IN A NEIGHBORHOOD AREA WHICH WOULD PROVIDE SOME TERRIFIC, UH, SCHOOLING OPPORTUNITIES FOR FAMILIES, UM, THAT COULD BE POTENTIAL FUTURE RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA.
I ALSO WANTED TO CIRCLE BACK 'CAUSE I'M, UM, I'M A BIG FAN OF THE REDLINE PROJECT.
I THINK THAT'S A VERY INTEGRAL PART OF MAKING OUR, UM, INTER MOBILITY PROJECT WORK, ESPECIALLY ALONG THE TRANSIT CORRIDORS.
UM, SO I'D LIKE TO TO CONTINUE TO ENDORSE SUPPORTING THAT AS THIS DEVELOPS OUT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
SO, UH, MY FIRST UH, APARTMENT COMPLEX WHEN I MOVED HERE IN 2015 WAS THE MIDTOWN AT CRESTVIEW.
AND, UH, TO BE HONEST, I HAVEN'T MOVED VERY FAR.
MY OFFICE IS ONLY A MILE AWAY NEAR THE HIGHLAND LIGHT RAIL STATION AND I'VE SEEN QUITE A BIT OF REVITALIZATION AND A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT GOING ON OVER THE PAST EIGHT YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE.
UNFORTUNATELY, THERE HASN'T BEEN A LOT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT'S BEEN DEVELOPED, PARTICULARLY AROUND THE HIGHLAND STATION.
SO TO SEE LIGHT RAIL, TO SEE THIS COME TO FRUITION IS, IS REALLY, UH, HEARTWARMING IN ME.
I HOPE THAT WE CAN LOOK AT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO MAXIMIZE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, IN THESE AREAS WHERE THERE WE, IT'S TRANSIT RICH, UM, AND THERE'S GOOD ACCESS AS WELL.
SO, UH, KUDOS TO THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, TEAM HERE AND I HOPE THAT, WE'LL, THE PRODUCT THAT WE SEE WILL, WILL SET A, SET THE STAGE FOR OTHERS.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, I'LL BE QUICK.
YEAH, THIS IS TRANSIT HEAVEN SURROUNDED BY ZONING THE LBJ ADMINISTRATION WOULD BE SAD ABOUT.
AND YOU KNOW, THE FACT IS WHEN YOU BARELY TRIGGER, WHEN YOU GO OVER ONE SQUARE FOOT, YOU HAVE TO GO WAY OVER AND THAT'S JUST A, A A FACT OF LIFE.
AND SO, UM, THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO DO, BUILD A LOT MORE HERE THAN WHAT CURRENT ENTITLEMENTS ALLOW FOR.
AND I, I APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT, WHAT KIND OF HOUSING WOULD BE BUILT UNDER THE NEW ENTITLEMENTS, BUT THE FACT IS, CURRENT ENTITLEMENTS, WE'D STILL GET, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY THE SAME TYPE OF UNITS.
WE WOULD JUST GET MANY, MANY FEWER.
AND SO I LOVE GETTING AS MANY HOMES AS POSSIBLE RIGHT HERE NEXT TO TRANSIT.
SO IT'S JOBS, IT'S UH, HOMES, ALL RIGHT NEXT TO THE TRANSIT CENTER OF AUSTIN, ESPECIALLY WITH THE ORANGE LINE AND THE RED LINE, UH, PARKWAY.
LIKE, IT'S JUST FANTASTIC AND I HOPE Y'ALL CAN BUILD FASTER AND I HOPE WE CAN GET MORE GOOD ZONING IN THIS AREA SOON.
AND IT WOULD'VE BEEN REALLY NICE TO HAVE TOWN ZONING IN THE TOOLBOX FOR THIS CASE, BUT HERE WE ARE.
UM, PIGGY BACK OFF OF, UM, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON'S COMMENTS.
I JUST WANNA SAY I'M SO GLAD TO SEE THIS HIGH ENTITLEMENT REQUESTED AND IT SEEMS LIKE ENTHUSIASTICALLY ENDORSED BY MANY OF THESE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
AND TO NOTE THAT WE HAVE SEVERAL OTHER TO Z ZONES THAT NEED THIS TYPE OF REFORM AND THAT WE NEED TO BE THINKING PROACTIVELY AS A PLANNING COMMISSION AND AS A COUNCIL ABOUT ALL OF THESE NEW PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING ONLINE AND HOW WE CAN BEST MANAGE THE GROWTH AROUND THESE AMAZING ASSETS AS WE MAKE SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY INVESTMENTS AND THINGS LIKE PROJECT CONNECT, WE NEED TO HAVE ZONING THAT MATCHES IT.
SO I'M SO GLAD TO SEE THIS CASE TONIGHT AND I HOPE IN THE FUTURE WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO HAVE THESE CASES BECAUSE THE ENTITLEMENT'S ALREADY THERE.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
SO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS BY COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MOALA, AND IT IS FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON BOTH ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE.
SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 6, UH, ONLINE.
THAT IS, AND I AM VOTING TO ABSTAIN.
WE'RE 12 UP HERE, SO 11 0 1 11 0 1.
[Items 10 & 11]
AND 11.UM, SO THAT IS, UH, MS. MEREDITH AND MS. MS. REES MARIE MEREDITH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS PLAN AMENDMENT
[00:55:01]
NPA 20 23 0 0 1 3 0.02 700 DAWSON IS WITHIN THE BOLDING CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.THE REQUEST IS A CHANGE TO FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED USE LAND USE.
IT IS NOT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
THERE IS A LETTER FROM THE BOLDING CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, CONTACT TEAM AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN THE STAFF CASE REPORT.
GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONER SHERRY CERTIS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 11, WHICH IS CASE C 14 20 23 0 0 0 5, WHICH IS LOCATED AT 700 DAWSON ROAD.
THE ACCOMPANYING REZONING CASE.
IN THIS REQUEST, THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR REZONING FROM SSF THREE MP TO CSMU MP ZONING.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS A 3.76 ACRE PLATTED LOT THAT IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A VACANT CLUB AND LODGE USE TO THE NORTH.
THERE'S A MULTI-FAMILY USE, ZONED MF THREE MP AND A SMALL PARK ZONED PNP.
THE LOTS TO THE SOUTH AND EAST ARE DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ZONED SSF THREE MP.
THE LAND TO THE WEST CONTAINS AN UNDEVELOPED GREEN BELT AREA ZONED PNP AND A RAIL LINE.
THE APPLICANT RECENTLY PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY WITH THE INTENT TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE A CLUB OR LODGE USE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD GATHERING PLACE AT THIS LOCATION.
THE PREVIOUS HIGH ROAD AT DAWSON ELKS LODGE USE WAS CONDUCTED UTILIZING A SECTION OF THE CODE THAT PERMITS NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS TO OPERATE A CLUB OR LODGE USE IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT.
THIS SECTION WOULD NO LONGER APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY AS THE NEW CLUB OR LODGE USE WOULD BE FOR A PROFIT BUSINESS OWNED BY THE BLACK FAMILY.
THEREFORE, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A COMMERCIAL MIXED USE ZONING THAT WILL PERMIT THIS USE BY RIGHT.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR CSMU MP ZONING FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
THE SITE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS LOCATED WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONING, MF THREE MPN SF, THREE MP ZONING ON THREE SIDES AND PMP ZONING TO THE WEST.
THEREFORE, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR CSMU MP ZONING AN INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL MIXED USE CATEGORY IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT ALONG DAWSON ROAD, WHICH IS A LEVEL ONE RESIDENTIAL STREET.
THE PROPOSED C-S-M-P-M-U MP ZONING WOULD BE CONSIDERED SPOT ZONING IN THIS AREA THAT IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL AND CIVIC ZONING PATTERNS.
THE REQUESTED CHANGE IS TO PERMIT A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS ON A SITE THAT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND USES WHERE ACCESS IS LIMITED AND PARKING MAY OVERFLOW ONTO THE RESIDENTIAL STREET IN CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 25 2 8 36.
A CLUB OR LODGE USE THAT IS LOCATED WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT MUST HAVE VEHICULAR ACCESS FROM A DEDICATED STREET WITH A RIGHT OF WAY OF AT LEAST 60 FEET WIDE.
DAWSON ROAD IS CURRENTLY HAS AN EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY OF 50 FEET ACCORDING TO THE ASMP.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION DOES NOT MEET THE INTENT OF THE CSS SPACE DISTRICT PER THE PURPOSE STATEMENT OF THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES DISTRICT.
CSS ZONING IS TYPICALLY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MAJOR ROADWAYS, IE TWO ARTERIAL ROADWAYS TO PROVIDE SERVICES THAT ARE AVAILABLE AND ACCESSIBLE TO THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY OR CITYWIDE.
AND SO I'M HERE TO AND AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I'M AT 9,600 STEPS JUST FYI JP, UH,
THESE TWO CASES INVOLVE A SITE THAT MANY OF YOU MAY KNOW OR MAY KNOW OF OR EVEN HAVE BEEN TO OVER THE YEARS, THE FORMER ELKS LODGE AND THE HIGH ROAD ON DAWSON AT 700 DAWSON ROAD.
IT'S A LONG STANDING AND BELOVED CLUB THAT HAS BEEN PART OF THE AUSTIN EMBOLDEN COMMUNITY SINCE IT OPENED 65 YEARS AGO IN 1958.
EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE TERRY BLACK FAMILY, A LOCAL FAMILY WHO RUNS LOCAL BUSINESSES, INCLUDING A BARBECUE RESTAURANT, A BLOCK AWAY FROM THE SITE, BOUGHT 700 DAWSON WITH THE INTENTION OF REVITALIZING THE SITE IN TWO STEPS.
FIRST, THEY PLAN TO REOPEN THE CLUB, WHICH THEY WILL OPERATE UNDER THE THEIR FAMILY BUSINESS.
SECOND, THEY PLAN TO PROVIDE A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD HOSPITALITY SPACE, A HOTEL USE WITH RESTAURANT SERVICE THAT CAN SERVE AS AN ECONOMIC ANCHOR FOR THE ENTIRE SITE AND SUPPORT THE CONTINUED CLUB USE IN URBAN PLANNING.
THESE TYPE OF NEIGHBORHOOD GATHERING SPACES ARE CALLED THIRD PLACES.
THOSE COMMUNITY SPOTS OTHER THAN YOUR WORK OR HOME, THAT IN THE WORDS OF URBAN SOCIOLOGISTS, RAY OLDENBERG QUOTE, HOST THE EASY AND INFORMAL YET SOCIALLY BINDING ASSOCIATION THAT IS THE BEDROCK OF COMMUNITY LIFE.
HOWEVER, WHILE THIRD PLACES ARE CRITICAL TO PROVIDING COMPLETE COMMUNITIES, THEY ARE ALSO OFTEN UNDER THREAT.
OLDENBERG NOTES THAT ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THIS IS BECAUSE AMERICAN CITIES HAVE OFTEN ADOPTED NEGATIVE ZONING CODES, WHICH PROHIBIT ALL SUCH ESTABLISHMENTS OF THE TYPE CAPABLE OF HOSTING THE INFORMAL GATHERING
[01:00:01]
OF LOCAL POPULATIONS.THAT IS THE CORE POLICY PROBLEM.
WE ARE HERE TODAY TO DISCUSS IN OUR CASE, WE HAVE A LONGSTANDING 65 YEAR OLD THIRD PLACE MARKED ON THE SCREEN BEFORE YOU WITH A STAR, YET, CURRENT PLOT POLICIES HAVE TAKEN A VERY NARROW LIMITED VIEW OF THIS SITE, ZONING IT FOR SINGLE FAMILY USES AND DESIGNATING IT FOR FUTURE MULTIFAMILY.
THE STAFF REPORT STANDS BY THIS LIMITED VIEW RECOMMENDING DENIAL BECAUSE THE SITE IS WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WITH THE RED REPRESENTING SINGLE FAMILY ZONING AND THE BLUE REPRESENTING COMMERCIAL OR MULTI-FAMILY ZONING.
BUT I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THIS POLICY RATIONALE, THE IDEA THAT WE CANNOT ALLOW FOR APPROPRIATELY REGULATED AND SIZED GATHERING SPACES LIKE THIS IN INTERNAL AREAS, IS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WHY MANY OF THESE THIRD PLACES ARE DYING OUT OR OTHERWISE PROHIBITED IN THE FIRST PLACE, THEREBY REQUIRING MORE AUTOMOBILE USAGE TO GET TO THE FAR AWAY THIRD PLACES.
THESE ARE NOT CORRIDOR PROJECTS.
THEY'RE INVITING HUMAN SCALED PLACES THAT CAN SERVE AS AN IMPORTANT ASSET FOR A COMMUNITY.
AND IF WE LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT FORMS OF THE, THAT THIS HAS TAKEN, WE SEE THAT APPLYING A PROHIBITIVE RESIDENTIAL ZONING ONLY POLICY RATIONALE WOULD RULE OUT THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF THIRD PLACES THAT DO EXIST IN AUSTIN TODAY, LIKE THE WESTOVER HILLS CLUB SEEN HERE, OR THE CRESTVIEW CENTER, WHICH IS COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY ON ALL SIDES, AND YET OFFERS A WINE CLUB, A PIZZA SHOP, AND GROCERIES AND HOSTS, COMMUNITY EVENTS, OR 43RD AND DUVALL, WHICH SIMILARLY OFFERS A BAKERY AND RESTAURANTS AND GROCERIES.
MY BELOVED MOTHERS GONE, UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO FIRE.
IN FACT, WHEN THE APPLICANT, WHEN AN APPLICANT BROUGHT A REZONING CASE TO THE CITY IN THE 1930S TO REQUEST COMMERCIAL ZONING FOR THIS SPOT, THE MAIN OBJECTION WAS THAT QUOTE, THE NATURE OF THIS PROPERTY IS ESSENTIALLY RESIDENTIAL.
THIS IS FROM THE HYDE PARK, UH, NEIGHBORS, UH, WHEN THEY WERE COMPLAINING BACK IN THE 1930S.
THIS IS THE SAME OBJECTION THAT IS OFFERED TO OUR CASE TODAY.
IF THIS POLICY RATIONALE HAD CARRIED THE DAY IN THE 1930S, THE THIRD PLACE AT 43RD AND DUVALL MAY NOT EXIST TODAY.
AND IF IT CARRIES A DAY HERE, THE THIRD PLACE AT 700 DAWSON MAY DECLINE OR DISAPPEAR ENTIRELY.
THAT IS BECAUSE, AS I HAVE NOTED, THE SITE CURRENTLY FEATURES SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, WHICH WOULD BROADLY PROHIBIT THE CLUB HOSPITALITY AND RESTAURANT VISION THAT THE FAMILY BELIEVES IS CRITICAL TO REVITALIZING AND ANCHORING THE SITE.
WE BELIEVE THERE IS A BETTER WAY FORWARD.
THE FAMILY HAS WORKED FOR MONTHS TO NEGOTIATE AN EXTENSIVE COMPROMISE PACKAGE, INCLUDING A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WITH CONTEXT SENSITIVE SETBACKS, LIMITED BUILDING, UH, AND IMPERVIOUS COVER RESTRICTED FAR, AND USE SPECIFIC PROHIBITIONS AND SIZE LIMITATIONS, WHICH YOU CAN SEE SUMMARIZED HERE AND PROVIDED IN MORE DETAIL IN YOUR BACKUP.
I BELIEVE IT'S ATTACHED TO THE, UH, SUPPORT LETTER FROM, UH, UH, THE ROADIES.
THE COMPROMISE ALSO INCLUDES MODIFYING THE REQUEST TO A GR BASE ZONING AS WELL.
WITH THESE CONDITIONS IN PLACE, WE HAVE EARNED THE SUPPORT OF OUR CLOSEST NEIGHBOR, BRETT RODDY, WHO YOU WILL HEAR FROM TODAY.
THE LIMITING CONDITIONS, AGAIN, ARE ATTACHED TO HIS, UH, LETTER IN THE BACKUP.
I WOULD JUST CONCLUDE BY NOTING THAT PLANNING FOR THIRD PLACES IS CHALLENGING FOR THE SAME REASON THAT THEY'RE SO SPECIAL, THEIR LOCATION WITHIN OUR COMMUNITIES.
WE BELIEVE IT IS POSSIBLE TO ADDRESS THESE CHALLENGES AND HAVE LAID OUT A PACKAGE FOR HOW WE BELIEVE WE CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT.
AND WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE OUTLINED IN MR. RODDY'S LETTER.
THEY'RE ATTACHED TO HIS LETTER, UH, IN DETAIL.
ONE NOW HEAR FROM MR. LANDRY MOORE, FOLLOWED BY MR. BARK.
MR. MOORE, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
HI, UH, I'M AM MS. LANDRY MOORE.
UM, UH, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
IT'S MY FIRST TIME AT CITY HALL.
UM, SO AS I SAID, I'M LANDRY MOORE.
I AM, UH, WITH SOUVENIR, HAVE A CONSULTING HOSPITALITY COMPANY THAT WORKS WITH THE BLACKS ON 700 DAWSON.
UM, I'M HERE TODAY TO ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT THE FAMILY'S ZONING APPLICATION WITH THE COMPROMISE PACKAGE THEY'VE PUT FORWARD.
I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE BLACK FAMILY ON THIS PROJECT SINCE APRIL TO HELP THEM BRING THEIR VISION FORWARD TO ENGAGE AND COMMUNICATE WITH THE BOLD AND COMMUNITY THE FAMILY'S BEEN COMMITTED TO WORKING TOGETHER WITH THE NEIGHBORS ON THESE CASES AND HAVE BACKED UP THAT COMMITMENT BY MEETING WITH NEIGHBORS, MAILING OUT INFORMATION ON THEIR PLANS TO PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE AREA AND HOLDING COMMUNITY MEETINGS AT THE PROPERTY ITSELF SO THAT THEY COULD DISCUSS THEIR PLANS DIRECTLY WITH ANYONE WHO'S INTERESTED.
THEY'VE PUT A LOT OF ENERGY INTO THAT ENGAGEMENT, AND THAT HAS HELPED THEM TO REFINE THEIR VISION INTO ONE THAT WE BELIEVE WILL HELP 700 DAWSON CONTINUE TO BE A COMMUNITY AMENITY GOING FORWARD.
THAT INCLUDES REOPENING THE CLUB AND EVENTUALLY ALLOWING FOR NEIGHBORHOOD HOSPITALITY SPACE,
[01:05:01]
WHICH INCLUDES A SMALL LOCAL HOTEL THAT CAN OFFER SOME INTEGRATED RESTAURANT SPACE.I KNOW THAT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS POSED DURING THIS REVIEW PROCESS HAVE BEEN ABOUT THE HOTEL SPECIFICALLY, AND I WANNA OFFER MY PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AS SOMEONE WHO'S WORKED WITH SMALLER, MORE INTIMATELY SIZED HOSPITALITY SPACES.
I BELIEVE THESE SPACES, UM, ARE COMPATIBLE WITH AND COMPLIMENTARY TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
UH, THEY'RE PROFESSIONALLY RUN HUMAN SCALE, NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY AMENITIES THAT CAN HELP BE AN ANCHOR FOR OTHER GATHERING SPACES AROUND THEM, SUCH AS THE REVITALIZED CLUB AND THE PROPOSED FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICE.
IN THIS CASE, ESPECIALLY, I BELIEVE THE BLACK FAMILY HAS PUT IN A LOT OF HARD WORK TO HONOR THE INPUT THEY'VE RECEIVED AND REFINED THEIR ZONING REQUESTS WITH A MEANINGFUL COMPROMISE PACKAGE.
I WOULD ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT THEIR VISION AND THEIR PROPOSED COMPROMISE PACKAGE.
I'M ONE OF THE APPLICANTS ALONG WITH MY FATHER, TERRY, UM, BROTHER, SISTER, AND MICHAEL AND CHRISTINA.
UH, WE ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT OUR REQUESTS FOR C-S-M-U-C-O-N-P ZONING WITH THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY COMPROMISE PACKAGE.
WE HAVE NEGOTIATED WITH OUR CLOSEST NEIGHBORS.
THIS PROPERTY IS PRETTY SPECIAL TO US.
UM, OBVIOUSLY I'VE SPENT 10 YEARS OF MY ADULT LIFE DOWN THE STREET BUILDING A BARBECUE RESTAURANT, UM, THAT I'M VERY PROUD OF.
DURING THAT TIME, WE'VE PARKED, UM, AT THE HIGH ROAD.
WE'VE HAD A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THEM, UM, TO PARK UP THERE.
AND THAT'S ALL I KNEW OF THE PROPERTY UNTIL RECENTLY LAST YEAR WHEN WE PURCHASED IT, UM, I HADN'T BEEN IN THE PROPERTY INSIDE THE BUILDING BECAUSE I WASN'T A MEMBER, UM, THE WHOLE TIME WE WERE PARKING UP THERE, BUT I DID.
ONCE I GOT INSIDE, I REALIZED THAT I HAD ATTENDED A WEDDING THERE 20 YEARS AGO, AND WE GOT THE PROPERTY BACK IN LAST JUNE.
AND ON JULY 4TH, WE INVITED ABOUT 50 PEOPLE UP THERE TO SWIM IN THE POOL AND WATCH THE FIREWORKS SHOW, UM, OVER THE RIVER DOWNTOWN.
AND BY THE END OF THE PROPERTY OR THE END OF THE PARTY, THERE'S ABOUT 250 PEOPLE THERE.
AND WE QUICKLY REALIZED, I DIDN'T KNOW THE OTHER 200 PEOPLE, BUT THEY WERE ALL NEIGHBORHOODS, KIDS MAINLY, AND SOME ADULTS THERE THAT CAME BECAUSE THEY'VE DONE THAT FOR YEARS AND YEARS.
SO THIS PROPERTY'S BEEN PRETTY SPECIAL TO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IT WAS AN OAKS LODGE SINCE 1953, SO 70 YEARS.
IT'S BEEN THE HIGH ROAD ON DAWSON SINCE I BELIEVE 2008.
AND WHEN WE FIRST TOOK IT OVER, UM, WE GOT PLENTY OF CALLS FROM DIFFERENT REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS AND DEVELOPED PARTNERS WANTING TO DO SOMETHING WITH US.
WE ALSO GOT PLENTY OF MEMBERS, OUR EX MEMBERS OF THE, UH, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CLUB CALLED THE HIGH ROAD ON DAWSON.
SO IT WAS, IT WAS INTERESTING HEARING BOTH PEOPLE AND WHAT THEY WANTED, AND WE KNEW WHAT WE WANTED TO DO.
UM, WE WANTED TO OPEN THE CLUB BACK UP.
WE QUICKLY REALIZED THAT THAT WASN'T GONNA BE THE CASE.
UM, SO MICHAEL WAYLAND WAS HIRED AND WE GOT A CRASH COURSE AND WHAT ZONING IS AND KIND OF WHAT GOES ON WITH THAT.
SO, UM, DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD ENTAIL, BUT WE KNEW WHAT WE WANTED TO DO, AND WE DON'T, WE'RE NOT A BIG REAL ESTATE FIRM OR BIG DEVELOPER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UH, WE KNOW HOW TO START A BUSINESS AND WE KNOW HOW TO RUN A BUSINESS AND BUILD A BUSINESS.
AND WE KNEW THAT PROPERTY WAS SPECIAL AND WE KNOW IT'S BEEN A COMMUNITY GATHERING SPACE FOR A LONG TIME.
SO WE WERE HOPING TO CONTINUE THAT.
UM, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO LONG TERM.
AND I THINK, LIKE THEY SAID, IT'S GONNA BE A VERY HUMAN SKILLED PROJECT.
UM, THE INITIAL PHASE IS GONNA BE GETTING THE, THE PROPERTY BACK OPEN IN THE CURRENT BUILDING THAT IT'S IN.
UH, IT TAKES A LOT OF UPDATING, OBVIOUSLY NOT BEING ADA COMPATIBLE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND THEN LATER WE WOULD LOVE TO DO A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD HOTEL WITH SOME OF THE OTHER USES THAT THEY TALK TO.
SO, UM, THAT'S REALLY WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT.
YOU KNOW, THIS PLACE HAS BEEN THERE FOR 70 YEARS AND WE HOPE TO CONTINUE IT ON.
UM, WE LIKE TO DESCRIBE IT AS THE LIVING ROOM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE HOPE THAT THAT LIVING ROOM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS STILL THERE.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
ON THE TELECONFERENCE, WE'LL HIRE FROM BRENT ROAD.
BRETT, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
WITH YOUR REMARKS, PROCEED MR. RHODES.
MR. RHODES, MAKE SURE YOU'RE, UH, YOU'RE UNMUTED ON YOUR DEVICE, AND SELECT STAR SIX,
[01:10:05]
MR. RIVERA.DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? YES, CHAIR.
UM, ONE I'LL, WE CAN, UM, I'LL COME BACK TO MR. RHODES.
UM, UM, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE OPPOSITION.
UH, AM I COMING THROUGH NOW? YES, SIR.
UH, I'M VERY FAR AWAY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD RIGHT NOW, BUT MY NAME IS BRETT ROADIE, UH, MY WIFE AND, UH, WENDY AND I ARE CLOSEST NEIGHBORS TO 700 DAWSON CASE.
AND WE LIVE DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY AND SHARE A PROPERTY LINE WITH IT.
UH, THE BLACK FAMILY, UH, UH, HAS WORKED WITH, WITH US FOR SEVERAL MONTHS TO FIGURE OUT A GOOD COMPROMISE THAT BOTH MEETS THEIR NEEDS AND ADDRESSES, UH, OUR CONCERNS.
AND, UH, WE BELIEVE THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY PROVISIONS BEFORE YOU TODAY ACCOMPLISHED THAT, UH, WITH AGREEMENT ON BUILDING SETBACKS, HEIGHT, STEP BACKS, IMPERVIOUS, AND BUILDING COVER LEVELS, FAR AND A TAILORED LIST OF, UH, ALLOWABLE USES, WHICH INCLUDES CLUB, LODGE, UM, HOTEL, MOTEL, AND RESTAURANT USES.
UH, ALONG WITH LIMITATIONS ON ACCESSORY USES, UH, THE ULTIMATE GOAL HERE IS TO CRAFT A ZONING COMPROMISE THAT ALLOWS THE BLACK FAMILY TO REVITALIZE THIS SITE WHERE THE CLUB, HOTEL, MOTEL AND RESTAURANT, WHILE ALSO PUTTING SOME GUARDRAILS IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT IT REMAINS A NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE PROJECT.
AND, UH, WE THINK THIS AGREEMENT HELPS, UH, GET US THERE.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU HONOR THIS WORK BY THE, UH, SUPPORTING THE BLACK FAMILIES REQUEST AND THE, UH, CONDITIONAL OVERLAY REVISIONS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WE ALSO HAVE MR. MICHAEL GINI REGISTERED AND WILL BE AVAILABLE, UH, FOR QUESTIONS
I'M JODY ZIMMEL, AND I REPRESENT THE BOULDER CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BCNA.
UM, I AM SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING AND NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT CASES LOCATED AT 700 DAWSON ROAD.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS MET WITH THE APPLICANT AND THEIR ATTORNEY ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS.
WE HAD MANY, MANY MEETINGS WITH THE ZONING COMMITTEE AND THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS AND WITH THE STEERING COMMITTEE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND THERE WAS ALSO SEVERAL CONTACT TEAM MEETINGS THAT WERE NOT PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT I ALSO WERE ATTENDED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE.
UM, WE DID AGREE ON SEVERAL ITEMS THAT'S IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY SIDE, ITEMS A THROUGH F THAT WERE PART OF THE APPLICANT'S PRODI PROPOSED CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORTS THE CLUB COMMUNITY USE, BUT NOT THE COMMERCIAL USE OF THIS SITE.
UM, THE BOULDER CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS RESIDENTIAL USE FOR THIS SITE, WHICH IS MULTIFAMILY AS SHOWN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
UM, I THINK THAT MULTIFAMILY NOT ALLOWING CLUB LODGE AS A CONDITIONAL USE IS REALLY THE SHORTCOMING HERE IN THE CODE.
NOT REALLY THIS PART ABOUT IT BEING COMMERCIAL, BUT MF COULD HAVE ALLOWED IT, IT DOESN'T RIGHT NOW.
UM, WE SUPPORT CLUB AND LODGE AS CONDITIONAL USE AND ITEMS A THROUGH F THAT ARE PART OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
OUR LETTER OF OPPOSITION IS DATED OCTOBER 10TH, 2023, AND IT CONTAINS THE DETAILS OF OUR PROPOSAL FOR RESIDENTIAL AND CLUB USE ONLY.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HERE WITH ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE ZONING COMMITTEE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
YOU ALL HAVE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
IT'S MY TURN TO, TO, TO, TO YOU REMEMBER, UH, MICHAEL WEIGH ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE SPENT MONTHS, WHICH IS WHY, UH, UH, WORKING ON THIS TO GET IT CRAFTED, AS YOU HEARD FROM, UH, MR. RODIE IN A WAY THAT WOULD MAINTAIN THE RIGHT SCALE, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE GONE TO GR.
WE'VE REDUCED IMPERVIOUS COVER, WE'VE REDUCED FAR, UH, WE'VE, UH, INCREASED SETBACKS FROM, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, UH, LOTS OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
UH, ALSO PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, UM, TO, UH, MANAGE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT, LIKE AMPLIFIED SOUND THAT CAN'T BE DONE IN A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
SO REALLY, UM, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE, UH, THAT WE HAVE HERE ARE TWO USES.
REALLY IT'S THE HOTEL MOTEL, WHICH, AND RESTAURANT USE, WHICH MAKE IT VIABLE ECONOMICALLY.
AND THE TWO THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO RESTRICT KIND OF THE SCALE ARE THE FAR, UH, THE HEIGHT AS WELL.
[01:15:01]
WE CAN'T, UM, FOR A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE, UH, SOUTHERN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORING, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, LINE.WE CAN'T, WE CAN ONLY BE AT 40 FEET.
UM, THERE CAN'T BE ANYTHING FOR 50 FEET.
AND THIS IS ALL WRITTEN IN THE, UH, UH, CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY PROPOSED.
UM, AND I'M HAPPY TO RE HAND IT OUT, BUT IT'S, IT'S IN THE BACK, UH, ATTACHED TO MR. RODDY'S LETTER.
UM, SO ALL THOSE THINGS HAVE BEEN AGREED TO.
IT'S JUST THE HOTEL MOTEL USE AND THE RESTAURANT USE, AND EVEN THE RESTAURANT USE.
YOU'LL SEE FROM THE CONDITIONS WE'VE LIMITED THE SIZE, UM, AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, ALL THE OTHER USES, UM, EXCEPT FOR THE COMMERCIAL OFF STREET PARKING, WHICH IS ALSO LIMITED.
UM, AND THAT'S TO PROVIDE FOR THE EMPLOYEE PARKING AND GUEST PARKING FROM, UH, A NEARBY SO THAT THEY DON'T PARK ON THE STREET.
ALL THE OTHER USES ARE LIMITED, UH, TO BEING ONLY ACCESSORY USES, AND THEY'RE LIMITED IN SIZE, SO THEY HAVE TWO LIMITATIONS TO THEM.
ALL THOSE OTHER USES THAT YOU SEE THERE.
AND THEN THERE'S A GREAT BIG LIST OF PROHIBITED USES SO THAT WE GET IT NARROWED DOWN TO JUST THE RESIDENTIAL USES AND THE CLUB LODGE, HOTEL MOTEL AND THE RESTAURANT USE.
SO, UM, AGAIN, UH, I THINK WE'VE GOT THE RIGHT COMBINATION TO GET THE RIGHT THIRD PLACE HERE AND TO MAKE IT SO THAT THIS CLUB LODGE CAN CONTINUE, CAN, CAN CONTINUE AS AN APPROPRIATE THIRD PLACE.
CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
CAN I GET A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER AZAR SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
ALL THOSE IN, OR LET'S DO IT THIS WAY.
IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? SEEING NONE.
WE HAVE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO I HAVE A COMMISSIONER WITH A QUESTION? NO QUESTIONS TONIGHT.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS AND THEN I'LL GO.
HOW DID YOU ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE CITY STAFF AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH REGARDS TO TRAFFIC ALONG THAT VERY SMALL ROAD, MICHAEL WHALEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT? UM, AT, AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN, UH, IS TYPICALLY WHEN A TRAFFIC ISSUE WILL COME UP OR IF THERE IS ONE, UH, A, UH, TIA WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE AT THAT TIME.
UM, ALSO IF THERE'S ANY RIGHT OF WAY THAT'S REQUESTED, WE WOULD HAVE TO, UH, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY.
WE'LL ALSO HAVE TO FOLLOW SUBCHAPTER E AND INCORPORATE SIDEWALKS, UH, UH, AND OTHER, UM, UH, REQUIREMENTS OF SUBCHAPTER E.
SO IN TERMS OF ADDRESSING IT TODAY DURING THE ZONING CASE, NO.
DURING SITE PLAN, YES, IT WILL CERTAINLY BE ADDRESSED.
ANY COMMENTS WILL, UH, THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, UH, HAS, WILL BE ADDRESSED RIGHT NOW, JUST, UH, FOCUSING ON THE LAND USE, UH, AND THAT'S WHERE THE NATURE OF OUR CONVERSATIONS HAVE BEEN WITH, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, DO YOU HAVE A LITTLE MORE TIME? DID YOU WANNA USE IT OR IS, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, NOT REALLY.
THE CITY STAFF, WHEN THEY, UM, PRESENTED THEIR RECOMMENDATION, DID TALK ABOUT THE TRAFFIC SPILLING OUT AND THE, THE ROAD THERE NOT BEING ABLE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, HANDLE WHAT IS GOING TO BE VIEWED AS THE HEAVIER TRAFFIC.
SO I GUESS THE ANSWER IS THAT THERE'S NO ANSWER TO THAT UNTIL IT GETS ANSWERED AT ANOTHER STAGE.
UM, COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ? YES.
THIS IS FOR MS. ZEAL FROM THE BOLDEN CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND MY QUESTION IS MORE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, I CONFIRMING IF THEIR MAJOR CONCERNS ARE TRAFFIC AND PARKING, SPILLOVER PARKING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IS THAT YOUR MAIN CONCERN ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL USES? UM, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER JODY ZUMAL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, THAT IS ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WAS A BIG CONCERN OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE ADJACENT OFF OF THAT SMALL LITTLE STREET DAWSON ROAD.
THERE'S ALSO CONCERN ABOUT LIGHTING.
THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT SOUND, THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT BARBECUE PIT SMOKING IN THE, ON THE PROPERTY BECAUSE PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE ALREADY EXPERIENCED THE BARBECUE PIT SMOKING OF BLACK'S BARBECUE, AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE TO HAVE IT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD FARTHER.
AND ALSO THERE WAS GENERALLY A FEELING THAT THEY REALLY LIKED, EVERYBODY REALLY LIKED THE CLUB AND EVERYBODY WANTED TO KEEP THE CLUB, BUT THE COMMERCIAL ASPECT WAS NOT SOMETHING THE
[01:20:01]
NEIGHBORHOOD WANTED TO SEE AS AN INCURSION ON AN INTERIOR SITE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES.
I, I, I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE FOR STAFF IS, AND I WAS TRYING TO LOOK IT UP QUICKLY, BUT I DIDN'T HAVE TIME.
DOES THE ASMP REQUIRE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY, UM, ON THIS SITE? SO WOULD THEY BE REQUIRED TO GIVE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, THE WIDTH FROM THE S AND P IS REQUIRED? I KNOW IT'S A VERY NARROW AT THAT POINT.
AND AS MENTIONED, THERE'S NO SIDEWALK ON THAT SIDE.
COMMISSIONER BEAR RAMIREZ, I BELIEVE GOT BRIAN GOLDEN WITH THE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS ON THE LINE WITH US TO ANSWER ANY TRANSPORTATION QUESTIONS FOR THIS CASE.
I, BRIAN GOLDEN TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
SO THE ASMP FOR CALLS FOR 58 FEET FOR DAWSON, IT'S A LEVEL ONE ROADWAY.
UH, WE WOULD EXPECT AN ADDITIONAL DEDICATION, UH, FROM THE CENTER LINE.
UM, SO IF IF IT'S 50 FEET CURRENTLY, UH, WE'D EXPECT ABOUT FOUR FEET.
OKAY, UH, COMMISSIONER COX, UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, MR. WHALEN, YOU WERE JUST UP HERE TELLING US ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF RESIDENTIAL
AND THEN NOW YOUR NEXT CASE IS BASICALLY ELIMINATING THE POSSIBILITY OF RESIDENTIAL, UM, ON THE SITE.
THAT WOULD BE PERFECT FOR RESIDENTIAL.
WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? A DIFFERENT CLIENT IS PAYING ME RIGHT NOW.
SO, SO MORE, A MORE SERIOUS, YOU WANT ROOT HONESTY,
UH, WELL, NO, IT, SERIOUSLY, I MEAN, ONE THING, UH, ON A MORE SERIOUS NOTE, THE CLUB LODGE, UH, THE CONCEPT OF THIRD PLACE, YOU CAN'T, IF EVERYTHING'S RESIDENTIAL, THEN ALL YOU END UP DOING IS DRIVING TO YOUR THIRD PLACES.
UH, AND WELL, AND THIS IS A, LET, LET ME, LET ME, LET ME, LET ME PIGGYBACK OFF OF THAT BECAUSE I WAS LISTENING TO YOUR PRESENTATION INTENTLY AND I WAS LIKE, WAIT A MINUTE.
SO THE ONLY REASON THEY CAN'T DO THE CLUB LODGE IS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MAKE IT FOR PROFIT RATHER THAN KEEP IT NON-PROFIT AND ADD A BOUTIQUE HOTEL TO THE SITE TO SUPPLEMENTS THEIR NOW FOR-PROFIT LODGE, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT I, I'M NOT PARTICULARLY OPPOSED TO ALL OF THAT, BUT I DO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION, PARTICULARLY, IT'S SO HIGH ABOVE THE ADJACENT HOMES, ANY SORT OF COMMERCIAL USE, PARTICULARLY ONE THAT HAS AN OUTDOOR COMPONENT, MAN, THAT, THAT SOUND, THE SMELL, THE HEADLIGHTS, ALL OF THAT IS GONNA TRAVEL OVER THIS ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THIS SITE IS LITERALLY LOOKING OVER THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO I, I GUESS A MORE SERIOUS QUESTION IS FOR YOU IS, IS IF WE'RE, IF WE WERE TO TRY TO, AND I DON'T REALLY KNOW LEGALLY IF WE CAN TRY TO ADOPT THIS CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT YOU'VE NEGOTIATED WITH, I BELIEVE ONE NEIGHBOR, UM, IF YOU WOULD ACCEPT OR VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE, UH, ACCEPTING RESTAURANT USE AND BASICALLY ALL NON-RESIDENTIAL USE AS, AS CONDITIONAL SO THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO, TO DIG INTO THE DETAILS ABOUT LIGHTING AND NOISE AND ALL THAT SORT OF STUFF BEFORE, UM, THE BLACKS REALIZED THEIR VISION FOR THIS PROPERTY.
SO A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BURIED IN THERE.
I THINK, UM, I, WELL, I GUESS FIRST I SHOULD ASK IF, IF YOU'RE PREPARED TO GIMME 160 FEET LIKE CRESTVIEW AT THIS LOCATION, I THINK WE COULD BE DONE.
IF THAT'S AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION YOU'RE GONNA MAKE
I DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA WORK OUT.
SO I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE CONCEPT OF COMPLETE COMMUNITIES, UH, IS IMPORTANT AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE.
IT HELPS REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TRIPS.
IF WE DID A MULTI-FAMILY HERE AND IT WAS, YOU KNOW, AFFORDABILITY, LOCK, VMU, WHATEVER, 90 FEET, WHATEVER, I, IN SOME RESPECTS, BECAUSE THAT TRAFFIC WILL BE COMING AND GOING AT THE SAME TIME AS PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE COMING AND GOING, I THINK THAT'S, UH, PROBABLY MORE ACUTE THAN, UM, IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC THAN A HOTEL MOTEL USE, WHICH IS A VERY LOW, UH, UH, TRAFFIC USER.
AND, UM, AND THE CLUB LODGE, WHICH WILL BE AT DIFFERENT TIMES THAN PEOPLE COMING AND GOING.
SO I THINK IT WORKS WELL IN TERMS OF THE TRAFFIC ISSUE.
UM, UH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE CORRECT.
THE CLUB LODGE, WE HAVE TO COME
[01:25:01]
BACK TO THIS BODY TO, ON THE CLUB LODGE USE, UH, BECAUSE IT, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A CLUB LODGE, IT WAS A CLUB LODGE AS YOU, UH, RIGHTLY POINT OUT IN, UH, IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.SO IT WAS NONPROFIT, NOW IT'S COMING BACK AS PART OF THE BLACKS, UH, UH, FAMILY, UM, BUSINESSES.
SO, UH, WITH A HOSPITALITY COMPONENT.
SO IT WOULD BE COMING BACK, THE, THE CLUB LODGE WOULD BE COMING BACK AS A, UH, A CONDITIONAL USE.
SO YOU'LL HAVE AT THAT TIME, UH, THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE THINGS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF LIGHTING.
UH, THE SETBACKS ARE BAKED INTO THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
AND I'D POINT OUT ALSO AS, UH, MS. ZEEL NOTED, EVERYTHING ON THAT LIST HAS BEEN AGREED TO.
COMMISSIONER WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE HOTEL MOTEL AND THE RESTAURANT.
ALL THE OTHER ITEMS ARE ITEMS THAT WHEN YOU READ THEIR, UH, LETTER, THEY'VE, THEY'VE ADOPTED, I THINK SHE SAID THE A THROUGH F ITEMS. NO, UH, THERE, NO, I, I UNDER, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THERE'S THE, ALL OF, A LOT OF THE REASONS TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING THESE COMMERCIAL USES, PARTICULARLY ONES THAT TEND TO BECOME KIND OF EVENT SPACES, YOU KNOW, BOUTIQUE HOTELS, A LODGE, THAT SORT OF STUFF.
UM, A LOT OF THE CONCERNS OF HAVING THAT RIGHT NEXT TO THIS, THIS SUBDIVISION, UM, AND PARTICULARLY LOOKING OVER AND LOOMING OVER THE SUBDIVISION, A LOT OF THAT CAN BE TAKEN CARE OF AND ADDRESSED DURING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS.
AND SO THAT'S WHY I THINK THAT, THAT THE, THAT THE OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY CAN ACHIEVE WHAT THEY PROBABLY WANT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE CAN ADDRESS THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS.
AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M KIND OF LEANING TOWARDS THAT AS A COMPROMISE HERE.
AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT YOUR, WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE OF IT ABOUT IT.
WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE PICK UP THE QUESTION.
COMMISSIONER MU OH, COMMISSIONER MUELLER.
I'LL GIVE LIKE 30 SECONDS TO THAT, BUT I WANNA ASK A QUESTION OF STAFF.
SO I'LL LET THEM FINISH THAT UP.
MR. WHALEN, I THINK THAT WAS FOR YOU.
I COULD COME BACK AND ASK YOU, COMMISSIONER TO REPEAT THE QUESTION,
IT WAS ASKING ABOUT GETTING THE CONDITIONAL OVER WAY.
I I KNOW WHAT HE'S ASKING ABOUT.
I WAS JOKING, I WAS TRYING TO BE FUNNY, BUT Y'ALL, Y'ALL, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
UM, SO, UH, I, I THINK THE ANSWER TO THAT IS, UH, THE FIRST PHASE IS THE CLUB LODGE USE.
THAT IS GONNA BE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
AND WE'RE GONNA BE BEFORE YOU WITH A FULL SITE PLAN FOR THE REVIEW THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED.
UH, I THINK AFTER THAT, BECAUSE YOU'LL BE ABLE TO LOB ALL THOSE THINGS ON AT THAT TIME, UM, TO, TO HAVE, MAKE THEM COME BACK AGAIN AT A GREAT EXPENSE FOR THE HOTEL, MOTEL AND RESTAURANT, WHICH ARE SUBSEQUENT PHASES.
I, I THINK FEELS A, A BIT ONEROUS.
UM, ESPECIALLY GIVEN ALL THE OTHER CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS A THROUGH F AS, UH, UH, UH, MY NEIGHBOR, UH, JODY ZEEL, UH, NOTED, UM, ARE ARE PROVIDING THE TYPE OF, UH, COMMUNITY GATHERING SPACE AND, AND, AND, AND I THINK PROPER SCALE AT THIS LOCATION.
LET ME GRAB, UM, STAFF, 'CAUSE I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM STAFF THAT RECOMMENDED AGAINST THE REQUEST.
I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE.
I KNOW WHERE THIS AREA IS KIND OF BACK BEHIND AUDITORIUM SHORES.
WE PREVIOUSLY HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT TRAFFIC ISSUES AND CONCERNS IN THAT AREA.
UM, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR STAFF'S REASONING FOR NOT SUPPORTING THIS REQUEST, AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT IT.
UM, VERSUS JUST, I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S ZONED AROUND IT, BUT WERE THERE ANY OTHER FACTORS BESIDES WHAT'S EXISTING IN THE ZONING AROUND IT? SO COMMISSIONER MISH TOLER, I THINK OUR CONSIDERATION WAS THAT THIS IS NOT NORMALLY WHERE WE WOULD PUT THIS LEVEL OF COMMERCIAL ZONING.
OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD NORMALLY GO AT MAJOR INTERSECTIONS.
THAT'S WHAT CSS IS INTENDED FOR AND THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT NEEDED FOR THEIR USE.
AND SO WE FELT THAT THE STREET CAPACITY, WHICH IS A LEVEL ONE ROADWAY, IT'S A RESIDENTIAL STREET, AND THE FACT THAT IT DID NOT MEET THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT THAT THEY'RE SEEKING AND WOULD ALLOW ALL OF THESE OTHER COMMERCIAL USES, UM, WERE GREAT FACTORS IN OUR DECISION AS TO WHY WE DID NOT THINK IT WAS APPROPRIATE AT THIS LOCATION.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS CSS OWNING, BUT IT FRONTS ONTO BARTON SPRINGS ROAD, WHICH IS IN ARTERIAL.
THIS IS A LEVEL ONE RESIDENTIAL STREET.
UM, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE CAPACITY FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE STOOD AS STAFF IN OUR RECOMMENDATION.
SO IT'S CURRENTLY SSF THREE? YES.
DO WE, DO WE THINK THAT IT COULD ACCOMMODATE ANY DENSER HOUSING? WELL, THE RECOMMENDATION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IS FOR MULTIFAMILY.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE PLUM RECOMMENDATION WAS.
THE CHANGE TOO WAS FOR MULTIFAMILY, WHICH THERE
[01:30:01]
IS MULTIFAMILY DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH OF THIS, UM, ALONG DAWSON.I YIELD ANY REMAINING TIME BACK.
WAIT, WHO HAD THEIR HAND UP FIRST? MR. WOODS? THANK YOU CHAIR.
UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT AND I'M ALSO GONNA HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. BLACK IF Y'ALL WANNA MAKE YOURSELVES AVAILABLE.
UM, MY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT IS, IF NOT GRANTED THE ZONING CHANGE, DOES THE OWNER HAVE ALTERNATIVE PLANS FOR THE PROPERTY OR MAYBE THAT'S A QUESTION FOR MR. BLACK AS WELL.
YOU GOTTA SAY YOUR NAME, MARK BLACK.
AND, UH, QUESTION FOR EITHER OF YOU, WHAT, WHAT KIND OF RESIDENTIAL COULD BE BUILT UNDER SSF THREE ON THIS PROPERTY CURRENTLY? HOW MANY UNITS? UH, OH MAN.
UH, IT, IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU COUNT IT.
UH, AND NOW I, I JUST CAN'T REMEMBER, UM, THE NUMBER OF UNITS, YOU KNOW, UNITS, I THINK THERE'S A REALISTIC ISSUE IN TERMS OF WHERE THE BUILDABLE SPACE IS.
UM, AND I'M AFRAID TO SPECULATE.
UH, I REMEMBER WE, UH, DID THIS AT ONE POINT IN TIME.
UH, IT, IT'S, IT'S, I JUST, I DON'T WANNA SPECULATE.
BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT VERY MANY, BUT I, BUT WE HAVE LOTS OF NEW RULES ON, ON BREAKING UP THE LOTS, AND I THINK AT ONE POINT IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE 20 OR 30 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, I THINK.
BUT I, I JUST, I DON'T WANNA SPECULATE, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, 20 OR 30 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AND IS THAT KI TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE TOPOGRAPHY ON THE SITE? UH, NO.
IT WOULD JUST BE TAKING A BROAD VIEW OF THE 3.7 ACRES, YOU KNOW, AND, AND, AND IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A HIGHER NUMBER.
I THINK WE DIDN'T, DIDN'T WE DO, WE DID THE CALCULATION AT ONE POINT.
NO, BUT I'M, I'M LOOKING BEHIND YOU AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE WE HAD DONE SOME OF THIS CALCULATION TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD YOU BUILD THERE? AND IT'S, IT'S PRETTY LIMITED.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, HAVING NO ALTERNATIVE PLANS, WOULD THE OWNER SELL THIS PROPERTY? I MEAN, I KNOW THIS IS NOT HOW WE THINK ABOUT LAND USE, BUT IS IT LIKELY THAT IT WOULD CONTINUE TO BE THIS VACANT CLUB LODGE SPACE? WELL, YOU COULDN'T USE IT AS CLUB LODGE SPACE UNLESS WE FOUND A NONPROFIT TO OPERATE.
IT WOULD JUST STAY AS IT IS UNTIL SOMETHING ELSE WAS DONE.
AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION FOR MR. BLACK IS, CAN YOU SPEAK TO SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS AROUND THE SMOKE FROM THE BARBECUE PITS, WHETHER THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S PLANNED ON THIS SITE OR WHETHER THAT'S SOMETHING RELATED TO THE RESTAURANT NEARBY? WELL, I, I, TWO THINGS ON THAT ONE THAT WAS ALSO A CONCERN OF, OF THE NEIGHBOR.
AND WE HAVE A SPECIFIC PROVISION RELATED TO, UM, THAT ACTIVITY BEING, UM, UH, QUITE A DISTANCE AWAY, I BELIEVE IT WAS, YEAH, 200 FEET FROM, UH, THE SOUTHERN, YOU KNOW, WHERE THE SSF IS ON OUR SOUTHERN PROPERTY.
SO, UH, TWO THIRDS OF A FOOTBALL FIELD.
UM, BUT IN TERMS OF PLAN, NO, THERE'S NO PLAN TO PUT ANY SORT OF TERRY BLACK BARBECUE PITS UP THERE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO IT WOULD BE, UM, IT'D BE LIKE A TRUE POOL BURGER THAT WE LOOK AT PUTTING ON THE WEST SIDE, UM, AROUND THE POOL.
SO THERE WOULD BE SOME SORT OF, UH, HAMBURGERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, BUT NOT A BARBECUE RESTAURANT.
I I DO HAVE THE SSF NUMBER, THE SSF THREE NUMBER, IF YOU TOOK IT WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION TO TOPO, WOULD YIELD YOU 20.02, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT'S USING THE 3.7 AND A 57 50, UH, UH, FIGURE FOR, FOR LOT SIZE.
AND UNDER THE CURRENT CODE, 57 50 IS YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE PER LOTT SIZE.
AND THIS IS AGAIN, PROBABLY A QUESTION THAT WE CAN'T ANSWER, BUT DO WE HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF THOSE 20 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WOULD BE AS COMPARED TO THIS CLUB LODGE USE? I DON'T, I THINK I, I'M NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER.
I MEAN ON AS, AS THE WORLD TURNS, I PLAY ONE, UM,
BUT THERE'S A LOT MORE ENGINEERS ON THIS DIOCESE THAN, THAN I AM, SO IT WOULD BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
I SAW COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY, UM, AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT BEFORE HE GETS TOO FAR AWAY,
UM, SO LET ME PROMISE THIS BY SAYING AS A SRA RESIDENT AND, UH, WHOSE KIDS WENT TO SCHOOL IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'VE HAD MANY ENJOYED MANY EVENTS AT THE HIGH ROAD.
AND I JUST WANNA SORT OF WALK THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THIS BECAUSE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS IT WAS AN ELKS LODGE, IT HOSTED WEDDINGS, IT HOSTED EVENTS.
[01:35:01]
THE CURRENT ROADWAY ACCOMMODATED THE TYPE OF USE THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY HELD AT THIS SPACE.IS THAT CORRECT? UH, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND, AND I, AND IN FAIRNESS, BECAUSE I, THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DISCUSSIONS THAT WAS AT A NON-PROFIT AND IT WAS AT A, UH, THE FEELING WAS, UH, THEY OPERATED IN A LITTLE BIT MORE LOW KEY WAY.
THERE'S CONCERN AND WE GET IT, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE HAD ALL THE DISCUSSIONS IN TERMS OF LIMITATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED, UM, THAT, UH, IF YOU CONVERT TO FOR-PROFIT FROM NON-PROFIT, THAT MAY, UH, HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE USE, UH, ON THE OFF HOURS, UH, PROBABLY NOT DURING THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY.
AND I DON'T THINK THE ELKS LODGE WAS A, A HUSTLING AND BUSTLING PLACE, UH, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY EITHER.
UM, BUT WE'RE AWARE OF THAT, WHICH IS WHY YOU HAVE THIS HUGE, THIS LIST OF, UH, LIMITATIONS ON THE ACCESSORY USES AS WELL.
AND I GUESS TO YOUR POINT ABOUT THIRD PLACES, SOME OF THIS CONSIDERATION CAN, SEEMS TO BE ABOUT TRAFFIC AND SORT OF CAR MOVEMENT, WHEREAS WHAT WE REALLY SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT IS WHAT WE ARE LOSING AS A COMMUNITY SPACE IF WE DON'T REOPEN THIS LODGE.
AND I, I THINK THE THING THAT I WANTED TO ALSO ASK ABOUT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS CONSISTENTLY OFFERED, WHICH WAS SPACE FOR SAY LIKE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB, UH, BOY SCOUTS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
THE PTA, WE CONSISTENTLY USED THE SPACE WHEN IT WAS BOTH THE HIGH ROAD, AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS THE CASE WITH THE ELKS LODGE BEFORE THAT.
SO AGAIN, IF WE GO BACK TO THIS HAVING THIS THIRD SPACE, THAT'S A REAL AMENITY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, THAT, THAT'S THE GOAL.
I MEAN, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE HAD.
UH, THAT'S WHY LANDRY HAS BEEN IN ALL THE MEETINGS AT, WITH ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH, WITH THE MULTIPLE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS.
AND WE HAD SMALLER MEETINGS WITH PEOPLE THAT ARE DIRECTLY, UH, ADJACENT OR NEAR OR NEARBY.
WE'VE HAD THE BROADER CONTACT TEAM MEETINGS, UM, WITH QUITE, I THINK THE BEST ATTENDED CONTACT TEAM MEETING, UH, THUS FAR THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
UH, SO IT'S BEEN, I MEAN, IT'S BEEN A ROBUST CONVERSATION, WHICH IS WHAT YIELDED, UH, THAT, UH, RATHER DETAILED AND I GET IT CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, BUT I THINK, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, THE POINT WAS MADE.
I MEAN, YES, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S DETAILED, BUT THAT'S IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN THIS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY, UM, LEVEL OR SCALE IF YOU WILL.
UM, AND THEN ONE RELATED QUESTION.
OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, BUT WE KNOW THAT AS YOU POINTED OUT, OFTENTIMES HAVING COMMERCIAL IN A MORE MIXED NEIGHBORHOOD WAY OFFERS A LOT OF BENEFITS.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A REAL EFFORT HERE TO SORT OF AS TO YOUR POINT, MAKING THIS VERY DETAILED LIST.
SO I GUESS IF YOU'RE THINKING BEYOND SORT OF THOSE FOLKS YOU'VE BEEN IN A, A CONVERSATION WITH, DO YOU FEEL THAT THE NEGATIVE THERE WOULD BE A NEGATIVE IMPACT IN TERMS OF THE ZONING? BECAUSE TO ME, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE WE CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A NET BENEFIT, AND I JUST WOULD BE CURIOUS IF YOU FEEL LIKE THAT THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY MIGHT ALSO SEE IT THAT WAY? UM, I WOULD HOPE SO.
AND ACTUALLY I HOPE THAT THIS LEVEL OF DETAIL, UH, DOES WHAT I REFERRED TO IT REALLY TAILORS IT FOR A THIRD PLACE.
I MEAN, WE HAVE THAT STEP BACK, UH, WHERE YOU CAN'T BE TALLER.
THERE'S NOTHING FOR 50 FEET FROM DAWSON, NOTHING FOR 50 FEET FROM OUR SOUTHERN NEIGHBOR, UH, UH, IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, UH, EXCEPT FOR LIKE BENCHES AND TRAILS, YOU KNOW, UH, AND THEN FROM 50 TO A HUNDRED FEET YOU CAN ONLY BE AT 40 FEET AGAIN, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME, UH, INPUT FROM, UH, LANDRY FROM HER INVOLVEMENT IN OTHER, UH, PROJECTS HERE IN AUSTIN, UM, WITH BUNKHOUSE, IT REALLY GIVING US A SENSE OF, UH, HOW TO SCALE THAT, UH, APPROPRIATELY.
AND, AND THE FAR WAS A BIG ONE, OBVIOUSLY MR. RODDY'S AN ARCHITECT, PROMINENT ARCHITECT, AND HE UNDERSTOOD SCALE AND WAS ABLE TO ADD THAT ADDITIONAL LIMITATION, UH, TO, TO MAKE IT TAILORED APPROPRIATELY.
UM, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF WHEN YOU SECOND.
SO, UM, JUST IN LOOKING AT THE LAND USE MAP AROUND THIS AREA, OBVIOUSLY THIS IS NOT DIRECTLY ON THE CORRIDOR AS NOTED AS BARTON SPRINGS, BUT JUST AS A CURIOSITY, IF THIS WAS SAY, ONE OR TWO PARCELS CLOSER TO BARTON SPRINGS, WOULD THE CONSIDERATION HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT REGARDING THE ROADWAY AND THE USAGE? BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS JUST SORT OF ONE STEP TOO FAR INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I'M JUST CURIOUS, GENERALLY SPEAKING, IF STAFF COULD SEE THAT MORE AS AN ADJACENT USE TO PORTLAND SPRINGS, WOULD THAT HAVE CHANGED THE RECOMMENDATION? I DON'T BELIEVE SO BECAUSE OF THE ROADWAY THAT IT FRONTS ONTO BECAUSE OF THE LEVEL OF THE LEVEL ONE RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY.
BUT I THINK WE JUST CLARIFIED THAT THAT TYPE OF USE THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD HAS BEEN USED THAT WAY IN THE PAST.
SO THAT WASN'T IMPACTED BY THE ROADWAY.
IT WASN'T A COMMERCIAL USE COMMISSIONER, IT WAS A NONPROFIT, SO, WELL, I THINK THAT THE UNDERSTANDING THOUGH WAS THAT THROUGHOUT THE TIME THAT WAS AN ELKS LODGE AND THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE WAS PROVIDED BY THE PARKING THAT ALREADY EXISTS.
HOWEVER, IT DID NOT INCLUDE A RESTAURANT AND A HOTEL.
SO WE WOULD EXPECT A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE JUST BECAUSE IT'S A RESTAURANT AND A HOTEL VERSUS WHAT WAS ALREADY THERE.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT UNTIL THEY LOOK AT ATIA AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN AND THEN JUST TO, BUT OH, THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
UM, YEAH, I'M SORRY, I HAVE A, I HAVE A QUESTION.
YOU'RE DOING THAT TO YOURSELF?
[01:40:01]
UM, UH, NO, MY, UM, I'M JUST, I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION AND THE CONVERSATION HERE AND I'M JUST TRYING TO BETTER UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, IF, LET'S SAY IF IT WAS A NONPROFIT OPERATING A CLUB SPACE AND THEY WERE ACTIVE, AN ENGAGED NONPROFIT IN THE LOCAL ART SCENE AND THEY WERE HAVING ART SHOWS AND COMMUNITY EVENTS AND THERE WERE FOLKS DRIVING THERE, NOTHING ABOUT THE WAY THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM USING THAT SPACE IN THAT WAY.IS THAT CORRECT? AS LONG AS THEY MET THE CODE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY, YES.
WHICH THIS USE WOULD NOT, SO, BUT THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO INVITE MANY FOLKS AND THERE WOULD BE ACTIVE USE OF THAT SPACE.
I MEAN, THAT'S APPARENTLY HOW HAD BEEN OPERATED PREVIOUSLY.
AND NOTHING WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM HAVING A BARBECUE IF THEY WANTED TO.
WELL, THEY COULD NOT IN RESTAURANT USE THOUGH.
NO, I'M JUST, I'M MORE THINKING ABOUT THE, THE, THE, THE, UM, FOLKS IN TEXAS THAT DON'T LIKE TO SMELL BARBECUE SMOKE.
UM, UH, NO, I APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, MY NEXT QUESTION IS FOR, IS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, I, UH, I I JUST WANTED TO SORT OF BETTER UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE IS THIS CONVERSATION AROUND HOUSING AND THOSE OF US WHO ARE PASSIONATE HOUSING ADVOCATES DO ALWAYS LAMENT A MISSED OPPORTUNITY FOR HOUSING AND ALSO, UM, RECOGNIZE HOW IMPORTANT THIRD SPACES ARE.
I THINK ONE REALLY IMPORTANT ASPECT OF A THIRD SPACE IS THAT IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN GO AND HANG OUT WITHOUT NECESSARILY HAVING TO SPEND MONEY.
UM, YOU'RE NOT FORCED TO CONSUME IN ORDER TO BE THERE.
WHAT KIND OF SPACE IS ENVISIONED HERE? AND MAYBE THIS IS ALSO A QUESTION FOR MR. BLACK, BUT UM, YOU KNOW, IS IS IT A, IS IT A SPACE THAT FOLKS FROM THE COMMUNITY CAN ACCESS FREELY OR WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCESS FREELY? OR WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? UM, UH, THE ANSWER IS YES, IT WILL BE ACCESSIBLE.
I MEAN, I, SO A LOT OF THE, I MEAN EVEN SHALOM AUSTIN AND THE YMCA CHARGE, UH, YOU KNOW, 80 TO A HUNDRED, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY CHARGE ANYMORE.
I MEAN IT JUST, SO THEY'RE CHARGING, YOU KNOW, 80 TO A HUNDRED DOLLARS PER, PER, UH, PER MONTH, OR WOULD IT BE A PAID TO BE A MEMBER SITUATION? YES.
UH, AND IT, IT, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT, THAT WOULD BE THE SCALE, BUT IT WOULD BE A PAID MEMBERSHIP.
JUST LIKE, UH, IT WAS, WHEN IT WAS THE HIGH ROAD AND ELKS, IT WAS OBVIOUSLY A LOT LESS.
I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S SOME PEOPLE WHO WERE MEMBERS AT SOME POINT, BUT IT WAS A LOT LESS.
UM, AND WOULD THERE, WOULD THERE BE ANY ASPECTS OF THE PROPERTY OR AMENITIES ON THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT PAYING? I, I THINK, UM, ONE THING THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT, AND THEY'VE ALREADY MADE IT AVAILABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IS TO USE THE SPACE CURRENTLY, OBVIOUSLY FOR, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS, FOR EXAMPLE.
I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT TYPE OF DISCUSSION, UM, AND THAT TYPE OF USE.
UM, AND ALSO I, AND I'D FORGOTTEN TO MENTION, 'CAUSE I THOUGHT YOU HAD ASKED A GOOD QUESTION ABOUT BARBECUE, UH, ACCESSORY TO A CLUB LODGE.
THEY HAD A RESTAURANT THERE BASICALLY AND A BAR.
I MEAN, THOSE ARE ACCESSORY USES TO A CLUB LODGE.
AND, UM, THEY HAD SOME OUTDOOR, UH, I THINK THEY HAVE SOME OUTDOOR BARBECUES OUT THERE ALREADY.
SO, UH, THESE ARE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAD A, A NONPROFIT OPERATING IT, THEY WOULD, YOU KNOW, HAVE A FULL BLOWN, STILL THEY'D HAVE A FULL BLOWN YEAH.
OPERATION GOING THERE, UM, UH, AS AN ACCESSORY USE.
AND, AND THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY YES, WE STARTED AT CSS, WE'VE REDUCED IT THE TONE A LITTLE BIT TO GO DOWN TO GR UH, AS OUR, AS OUR, AS OUR REQUEST, UH, ALONG WITH THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
AND I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT SORT OF MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THERE, THEY HAVE NO OTHER PLANS FOR THIS SITE OTHER THAN THIS, BUT MY, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY TO AT SOME POINT INCORPORATE HOUSING.
I MEAN, IS IS THAT, I MEAN, THAT'S NOT OFF THE TABLE WITH THE ZONING.
I MEAN, I, I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT.
THAT'S WHY WE, WE HAVE THE GRMU UH, CO, BIG CO NP, UM, SO THAT THE, THE OPPORTUNITY IF, IF, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, THE WORLD PIVOTS AGAIN AND AGAIN AS IT DOES, UM, THEN, AND THEN MULTIFAMILY WOULD BE A POSSIBILITY.
IT'S, WE DON'T HAVE, UM, THE OPPORTUNITY TO WAVE FAR OR WAVE 'CAUSE THESE ARE CONDITIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SET.
NOW THE 40 FOOT FOR THE FIRST A HUNDRED FEET, 60 FEET, THE LIMITATIONS ON IMPIOUS, THOSE WILL BE TIED IN LIMITATION ON IMPERVIOUS COVER, FAR BUILDING, ALL THAT IS NOW REALLY SHRINKING.
WHAT YOU CAN DO PLUS MU AS YOU WELL KNOW, HAS SITE AREA RESTRICTIONS THAT LIMIT YOU TO LIKE 40 PLUS OR MINUS UNITS PER ACRE.
SO YOU'D, YOU'D, YOU'D HAVE A LIMITATION ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS AS WELL.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IN TERMS OF ZONING, TO BE CLEAR FOR EVERYONE, WE'RE NOT IN ANY WAY ACTUALLY CLOSING THE DOOR ON THE POSSIBILITY THAT THERE COULD BE HOUSING ON THIS SITE AT SOME POINT.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? YOU CAN DO THAT.
IS THERE A MOTION ON THE TABLE? OBJECT
[01:45:01]
FOR NUMBER 10 AND 11? YES, I WILL MOTION TO APPROVE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR ITEMS 10 AND 11.IS THERE A SECOND? UM, COMMISSIONER ERSIN STAFF HAS SOMETHING.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO STATE IF THAT IS YOUR MOTION.
I HAVE A CAVEAT FROM THE LAW DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THE FIRST TIME THAT, UH, THE STAFF IN THE LAW DEPARTMENT SAW THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO G-R-M-U-C-O WAS YESTERDAY AFTERNOON.
SO WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO VET THAT INFORMATION.
SO I WAS SPEAKING TO OUR ATTORNEY AND SHE ASKED ME, SHE SAID, AS REQUESTED BY THE LAW DEPARTMENT, IF THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE THE CA LANGUAGE AS AGREED TO BY THE APPLICANT.
UM, PLEASE PREFACE THESE CONDITIONS BY STATING TO ACCOMPLISH THE FOLLOWING AND THEN INCLUDE THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT THE APPLICANT IS REFERENCING.
UM, SHE SAID THIS WILL CLARIFY THAT LAW WILL ADDRESS THE INTENT OF EACH CONDITIONAL OVERLAY RECOMMENDED BY THE PC IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT THE WORDING MAY BE DIFFERENT, ET CETERA, BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO GO OVER THAT INFORMATION.
SO I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT, THAT WAY THAT WOULD GIVE US THE ABILITY AS STAFF IN THE LAW DEPARTMENT TO VET THE BEST WAY THAT IT WOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE IN THE FUTURE.
SO I WILL MOVE APPLICANT REQUEST, INCLUDING THE CO AS WORDED TO, TO ACCOMPLISH FOLLOW TO ACCOMPLISH THE FOLLOWING.
ARE YOU STILL A SECOND? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? YOU BET.
YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION QUESTION? YES.
UM, I HAVE A LOT OF THOUGHTS ON THIS, BUT I, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT I LEARNED IN GRAD SCHOOL FOR URBAN PLANNING AT UT WAS THIS IMPORTANCE, THIS IMPORTANCE OF THIRD PLACES.
AND IT DOES SEEM LIKE THERE'S WIDE SUPPORT FOR REOPENING THIS CLUB AND COMMUNITY USE, INCLUDING FROM THE BOLDON CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THE LAND COSTS IN AUSTIN MEAN THAT THAT CLUB LODGE USE IS NOT SUSTAINABLE ON ITS OWN WITHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HOSPITALITY COMPONENT OF THIS PROJECT.
BUT IT'S ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT AUSTIN NEEDS ADDITIONAL HOTEL CAPACITY AND THAT THIS WOULD BE A GREAT PLACE FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE HOTEL.
THIS SITE IS ADJACENT TO TWO MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS TO THE NORTH AND THEN BARTON SPRINGS ROAD, WHICH HAS A LOT OF COMMERCIAL USES ALONG IT.
SO I REALLY DON'T FEEL THAT IT'S AN INAPPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING AND I CERTAINLY DON'T FEEL THAT COMMERCIAL USES ARE INHERENTLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL USES.
I THINK IT'S CLEAR THAT THE LEVEL OF DETAIL THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE CO MEANS THAT THIS SPACE IS REALLY TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE CONTEXT AND THE SCALE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE IF THIS CHANGE IS NOT GRANTED, THIS SITE WILL CONTINUE TO HOUSE A VACANT CLUBHOUSE, WHICH IS ALSO NOT IDEAL FOR ANYONE.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WILL BE A FEE TO USE THIS SPACE, BUT I THINK THAT THAT FEE IS PROBABLY MUCH MORE AFFORDABLE TO A LOT OF PEOPLE THAN BUILDING A POOL.
AND I CAN IMAGINE THERE ARE A LOT OF FAMILIES THAT WILL SEE THAT COST AS REASONABLE FOR THE USE OF A POOL DURING THE SUMMER THAT THEY CAN WALK ACROSS THE STREET TO WITH THEIR CHILDREN.
SO FOR THAT REASON, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT LOCATION FOR THE USES PROPOSED AND APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE APPLICANT AND THE BLACK FAMILY HAVE GONE THROUGH AND, AND THE WORK THAT THE BOLDON CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS GONE THROUGH IN CREATING THIS EXTENSIVE CO THAT CREATES A REALLY SPECIFIC USE WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, ANY AGAINST COMMISSIONER COX? I'D LIKE TO OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UM, TO SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON BOTH, UH, ITEMS 10 AND 11.
IS THERE SECOND? COMMISSIONER MOOSE TOLER? OKAY.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? UM, I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO SAY.
I, I, I THINK WE NEED A BETTER PLAN FOR THIS SITE.
UM, IF, IF THE LODGE USE IS THAT BELOVED, UM, THEN IT CAN CONTINUE AS A NONPROFIT.
BUT, BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS, IS CONVERTING THIS TO A BOUTIQUE LUXURY HOTEL WITH ESSENTIALLY A REALLY NICE POOL.
UM, AND I PRETTY SURE HALF THE HOUSES IN THE BOULDER CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE POOLS,
SO, UM, I I THINK THIS SITE WOULD BE GREAT FOR A LODGE AS A COMMUNITY USE, BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO THINK ABOUT IT MORE.
UM, MAYBE INCORPORATE SOME RESIDENTIAL OR SOMETHING THAT WE KNOW IS NEEDED, NOT JUST A REALLY MASSIVE POOL IN A VERY WEALTHY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THAT'S WHY I THINK WE SHOULD SEND THEM BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND HOPEFULLY COME BACK WITH, UH, WITH A BETTER PLAN.
[01:50:02]
COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? UH, I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS, AND I THINK WE HEARD IT EARLIER FROM THE BLACK FAMILY, THAT THIS IS NOT JUST A LODGE OR BOUTIQUE HOTEL, THIS IS A COMMUNITY SPACE.AND I FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THIS CASE BECAUSE I HAD THE BENEFIT OF GOING TO BIRTHDAY PARTIES THERE, HOSTING EVENTS, MANY OTHER THINGS.
AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT BECAUSE IT WAS A NONPROFIT AND IT WORKED UNDER THE EXACT SAME RULES THAT SUDDENLY BECAUSE WE NEED TO MAKE IT A COMMERCIAL BECAUSE OF OUR ZONING RULES, BECAUSE OF SO MANY OTHER THINGS, THAT IT IS NO LONGER COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS WIDELY BELOVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS WIDELY SUPPORTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE DESIRE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BRING BACK THE CLUB WAS THE NUMBER ONE REQUEST, AND THAT'S WHAT THE BLACK FAMILY HEARD AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.
SO I UNDERSTAND OUR RULES ARE NOT IDEAL AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE SITUATION IS NOT IDEAL, BUT IT SEEMS INAPPROPRIATE TO ME TO SAY TO JUDGE EVERYBODY HERE THAT A NEIGHBORHOOD CAN'T HAVE A THIRD PLACE THAT HAS BEEN LONG THERE AND LONG BELOVED, UM, COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ.
AND I AM ALSO, UM, PARENT OF SOMEONE FROM THE, MY KIDS GO TO BECKER ELEMENTARY, WHICH IS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I SEE IT AT PEAK TRAFFIC HOUR.
I GO UP AND DOWN DAWSON TWICE A DAY.
AND I KNOW THAT IT'S A VERY NARROW STREET, BUT I DO AGREE THAT IT IS, I MEAN, AND I'VE NEVER BEEN TO THE, TO THIS PLACE I'VE SEEN, AND I'VE ALWAYS WONDERED, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT WAS BEFORE AND EVEN BEFORE THE MULTI-FAMILY WENT IN AND IT WAS JUST A BIG HILL, YOU KNOW, I JUST HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS THERE.
AND I WILL ATTEST TO THE AREA HAS GREAT FIREWORK VIEWS, BUT I, I THINK I WANT TO DISPUTE WHAT COMMISSIONER COX HAS SAID.
NOT EVERYBODY HAS A POOL IN BOLDEN AND NOT EVERYBODY IS WEALTHY IN BOLD AND THERE ARE STILL A MIX OF, OF FAMILIES THAT LIVE THERE.
AND I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF FAMILIES THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM BEING ABLE TO WALK TO THE LODGE IN THE SUMMER, THE POOL, THAT THERE'S NOT A POOL NEARBY.
LIKE EVEN THOUGH BARTON SPRINGS IS IS DOWN THE STREET, THERE'S NOT A WALKABLE POOL.
SO I DO THINK THAT WOULD BE A BIG BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY.
UM, ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? WELL, I WANNA SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF COMMISSIONER COX'S, UM, UH, MOTION BECAUSE I FEEL, YOU KNOW, JUST AS PASSIONATE AS THE OTHER COMMISSIONER DOES, UM, PER, I TAKE KIND OF PERSONAL UMBRAGE AT SAYING JUDGE USING WORDS LIKE JUDGEMENTAL.
AND THIS IS NOT AN, EXCUSE ME, I'M, I'M SPEAKING PLEASE, PLEASE RESPECT ME AS I HAVE RESPECTED YOU.
UM, AND I ALSO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, COMING FROM GROWING UP IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAD THIRD SPACES, THEY WERE, THEY DIDN'T NECESSARILY, AND THEY WEREN'T THIRD SPACES WITH COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES IN THEM.
WELL, SOME OF THEM HAD RESTAURANTS AND COFFEE SHOPS, BUT NOT BOUTIQUE HOTELS.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE PART THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT AGREE WITH IS THE BOUTIQUE HOTEL ASPECT OF THIS.
AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, THIS IS A LEVEL ONE ROADWAY.
THERE WILL BE TRAFFIC ISSUES AND THE TRAFFIC WILL BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF THE, IT WILL NOT BE THE SAME AS SOME PEOPLE HAVE SAID HAVE SAID HERE TONIGHT WITH A NONPROFIT THAT WAS RUNNING A CLUB ON A VERY LOW LEVEL WITH LOWER MEMBERSHIP, THEN IT WILL BE WITH A HOTEL, A RESTAURANT, AND A FOR-PROFIT CLUB ALSO, THERE'S NO FREE THING FOR PEOPLE TO DO HERE.
SO WHAT KIND OF A THIRD SPACE DOES THAT MAKE THIS IN REALITY? SO I'M SAYING THAT I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER COX.
I DON'T SEE WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL BENEFIT.
$80 MIGHT BE AFFORDABLE TO SOME, BUT IT'S NOT AFFORDABLE TO OTHERS.
AND SO I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT, ESPECIALLY GIVEN WHAT THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT HAS SAID HERE TODAY, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS PUSHING BACK AGAINST THE COMMERCIAL ASPECT OF THIS, THAT I WOULD HAVE TO AGREE WITH HIS MOTION.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER, UH, SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST THIS MOTION CHAIR? COMMISSIONER? I'D LIKE TO RAISE A POINT OF ORDER BECAUSE I'M STARTING TO GET A LITTLE P****D OFF OVER HERE.
THIS IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION SNIDE REMARKS, SMILES, JOKES.
JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T AGREE WITH SOMEONE DOESN'T MEAN YOU DON'T MAINTAIN THE QUORUM.
UM, I, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE THIRD PARTY, ME, I APPRECIATE THE BRINGING UP THAT THIS IS PRIVATE AND FOR, FOR
[01:55:01]
PROFIT CHANGES THE NATURE OF A THIRD PARTY SPACE.AND I, I WISH WE HAD A LITTLE MORE Q AND A THEN BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL LIKE I SAW AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.
IT TO BE A THIRD PARTY SPACE OR FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND USE A POOL OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO AS FAR AS I UNDERSTOOD, UNLESS I MISUNDERSTOOD, I DON'T SEE THAT BENEFIT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT WHAT I DO SEE IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS RIGHT NEAR THE AUDITORIUM SHORES, THE NEW STATESMAN POD THAT'S COMING, AND ALL THIS REDEVELOPMENT THAT'S ALL WALKABLE.
AND I HEARD FROM STAFF THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO POSSIBLY PUT IN ANYTHING FROM SSF THREE TO MF SIX HOUSING THERE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SUPPORTING IN A WALKABLE PART OF A VERY ACCESSIBLE PART OF DOWNTOWN.
SO I FEEL LIKE FOR AS MUCH OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE HAD ABOUT GETTING HOUSING IN, IT'S JUST SMACKING ME IN THE FACE.
HOW ARE WE MISSING THIS OPPORTUNITY WITH WALKABILITY TO AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN ONE OF THE CITY'S GREATEST PARKS AND SOME OF THE TRANSIT THAT'S COMING THERE.
THAT'S MY, I GUESS I'M THROWING THAT OUT FOR PEOPLE TO KIND OF CONSIDER.
I FEEL LIKE THERE'S SO MUCH BETTER OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS, FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD REALLY SUIT THE CITY AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE, AND THE, AND THE LANDOWNERS.
WE HAVE ONE SPOT LEFT FOR, UH, SPEAKER AGAINST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
I'LL BE SPEAKING, UH, AGAINST THIS ITEM.
I HOPE THAT WE CAN PASS THIS AND SO WE HAVE TO VOTE NO ON THIS SO WE CAN GET BACK TO THAT MAIN MOTION.
UH, I'VE BEEN TO THIS SPACE MANY, MANY TIMES OVER THE YEARS AND IT'S A VERY FUN AND COOL SPOT.
I'M SORRY TO SEE THAT IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR SO LONG.
THIS IS ALSO ON MY PRIMARY BIKE PATH TO WORK AS IT HAS BEEN FOR THE LAST NINE YEARS.
SO I KNOW IT VERY WELL AND I, I I, IT HURTS ME TO THINK THAT WE WANT WIDER ROADS FOR PEOPLE TO ACCESS PLACES LIKE THIS BECAUSE THERE'S NO NEED FOR THAT.
AND WHEN YOU HAVE SLOWER MOVING VEHICLES, THAT'S ACTUALLY AMAZING FOR THE FOLKS WHO ARE ACCESSING THIS, YOU KNOW, BIKE FOOT.
AND MOST OF THE TIMES I THINK I'VE EVER BEEN THERE.
IT'S HOW I'VE ALWAYS GOTTEN THERE AS LONG AS, AS WELL AS A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE ACCESSING IT IN THE SAME WAY.
SO, UM, I I CAN ALMOST HEAR THE, THE FUTURE RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA AND OF AUSTIN SAYING, YES, PLEASE MAKE THIS HAPPEN.
THIS IS A VERY COOL SPACE AND WE CAN DO VERY COOL THINGS THERE, BUT WE NEED GOOD ZONING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.
AND JUST BLANKET EUCLIDEAN ZONING LIKE WE HAVE IN SO MUCH OF THE CITY ISN'T GONNA GET US THERE.
SO I'M EXCITED TO VOTE NO ON THIS AND THEN GET BACK TO THAT MAIN MOTION.
OKAY, THAT IS ALL OF OUR SPOTS FOR OR AGAINST, UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COX AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MOOSH TOLER TO GO WITH STAFF.
THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, THOSE ON VIRTUAL, LET'S SEE.
ON THE DIOCESE AGAINST 1, 1, 5, 6, 7.
AND THOSE VIRTUALLY AGAINST PATRICK AND NADIA C TWO.
SO WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION, WHICH WAS COMMISSIONER WOODS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO HONOR THE, OR TO GO WITH APPLICANT REQUEST, INCLUDING, UM, THE, THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WITH THE VERBIAGE TO ACCOMPLISH THE FOLLOWING, UM, ON THE DAIS OR WE DIDN'T FINISH OUR FOR AND AGAINST.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER YES, COMMISSIONER COX.
CAN I OFFER AN AMENDMENT, UH, TO THE MOTION THAT, UM, AND IT MAY HAVE TO BE A SUBSTITUTE.
I DON'T KNOW, UM, THAT ALL NON-RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, SHALL BE CONSIDERED CONDITIONAL USES.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
COMMISSIONER COX, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? I THINK I SAID EVERYTHING WHEN I WAS HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH MR. WHALEN.
UM, I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S OBVIOUS CONCERNS HAVING A, A BOUTIQUE HOTEL, WHICH ESSENTIALLY IS ATTACHED TO A LODGE, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY AN EVENT SPACE, UM, RIGHT NEXT TO THIS, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP AND THE STREET VIEW, YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT MIGHT BE A CONCERN.
'CAUSE THIS IS AT A MUCH HIGHER ELEVATION THAN ALL THE ADJACENT HOMES.
AND SO BY HAVING IT AS A CONDITIONAL USE, WE'RE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS, MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, AN OUTDOOR MUSIC VENUE, RIGHT.
FACING, YOU KNOW, THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
MAKE SURE THAT THE LIGHTING IS RESPECTED, UH, IS RESPECTING THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, THAT SORT OF THING.
THAT'S ALL DONE UNDER A CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS.
SO I THINK IT'S A SMART THING IF WE ARE GONNA HAVE COMMERCIAL IN THIS SPACE, UM, TO BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS TO RESPECT THE, THE ADJACENT, UH, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
[02:00:01]
OKAY.ANY COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER HAYS FOR YEAH, THANKS, UH, MADAM CHAIR.
UH, I SECONDED IT 'CAUSE I WANTED TO HEAR WHAT COMMISSIONER COX HAD TO SAY.
UM, AND, AND I'M, I'M, I'M STRUGGLING.
I, UH, UH, Y'ALL HAVE HEARD ME BEFORE.
I'M A HUGE ADVOCATE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.
THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY WANTS TO DO SOMETHING, BUT IT HAS TO ASK OUR PERMISSION TO DO SO.
AND, UM, UM, IT IS, BUT I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE SAYING AND, AND I THINK, I THINK COMMISSIONER MAXWELL BRINGS A, A GREAT POINT UP TO SAY THIS SITE HAS SUPPORTED SIMILAR, ALBEIT AT A, AT A LOWER LEVEL BECAUSE IT WAS A NOT-FOR-PROFIT.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT I QUITE BUY THAT.
'CAUSE YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN TO AN ELK'S LODGE AND
AND SO I, I DO THINK IT CAN SUPPORT THAT.
UM, SO I, I'VE BEEN TORN ON THIS CASE, AND I THINK COMMISSIONER COX WITH THIS AMENDMENT ACTUALLY HITS A, A PRETTY GOOD MIDDLE GROUND THAT, UM, IF YOU, IF YOU MAKE EVERYTHING THAT'S NOT RESIDENTIAL AND CONDITIONAL USE, THAT MEANS AS THE OWNER COMES BACK AND WANTS TO DO THE BOUTIQUE AND WANTS TO DO, OR THE HOTEL OR OR OTHER SPACES, THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET APPROVAL AND, UM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO SEEK NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT.
AND, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S A BAD THING.
AND, UM, THAT'S WHY I SECONDED IT.
AND I, I THINK IT'S A, I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT ABOUT THIS ITEM OR ABOUT THE, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT, UM, IF THEY CAN BALLPARK WHAT THIS MIGHT ADD IN THE WAY OF TIME AND MONEY TO THIS CASE.
MICHAEL WHALEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, UM, UH, I DON'T HAVE A GOOD FIELD.
THE, THE CHALLENGE WITH THE, UH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS IS YOU HAVE TO DO A FULL SITE PLAN, WHICH IS, CAN BE, AS EVERYBODY HERE KNOWS, QUITE EXPENSIVE, WELL OVER A A HUNDRED THOUSAND, $200,000.
SO YOU HAVE TO DO A FULL SITE PLAN, BRING IT THROUGH FOR VALUATION, AND THEN WHATEVER CONDITIONS ARE THEN LOBBED ON, HAVE TO, THEN YOU HAVE TO GO BACK AND REVISE IT TO TAKE ON AND, AND MODIFY THOSE CONDITIONS.
WHICH IS WHY I MENTIONED, UH, TO COMMISSIONER COX THAT THE CLUB LODGE IS THE FIRST THING THAT WE'RE COMING FORWARD TO.
IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
SO ALL THESE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, UH, BEING SURE THAT SCREENING IS DONE RIGHT, COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS ARE MET, WILL ALL BE HANDLED IN THAT FIRST SITE PLAN.
IT WILL BE A FULL SITE PLAN PACKAGE, UM, AND IT, AND ALL THOSE CONDITIONS CAN BE ADDED TO IT.
AND ONCE YOU HAVE A SITE PLAN, UM, THE, THE IDEA IS, AS YOU'VE HEARD FROM, UH, UH, MS. MOORE AND MR. BLACK WOULD BE TO THEN ADD THE HOTEL MOTEL FEATURE THAT, THAT LAND USE AND IT WOULD BE PART OF THE SAME SITE PLAN.
SO IT ALL, ALL THOSE CONDITIONS WOULD CARRY FORWARD.
THANK YOU MS. TO THE NEXT ONE.
UM, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS.
I THINK THE APPLICANT IS VERY CLEAR IN WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO DO AND TO SIMPLY ADD MORE HOOPS AND TO INCREASE COST AND TIME FOR SOMETHING, WE ALREADY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO.
I, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS.
ARE THERE COMMISSIONER SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS FOR THE AMENDMENT, UM, MADE BY COMMISSIONER COX, SETTED BY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAYNES, UM, FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ON ALL NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.
THOSE ON THE DAES VOTING FOR THIS AMENDMENT.
ONE, TWO, THOSE ON THIS, ON VIRTUAL, SORRY.
AND AGAINST VIRTUALLY TO, SO THAT AMENDMENT DOESN'T PASS, DO WE? OKAY.
UM, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST THE ORIGINAL MOTION? ARE WE READY TO TAKE A VOTE? OKAY.
UM, THIS IS FOR, UM, APPLICANT'S REQUEST WITH THE CONDITIONAL OVERLY, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED THOSE VOTING IN FAVOR ON THE DAES SIX.
[02:05:03]
HAVE TWO THOSE AGAINST ON THE DAAS, THOSE AGAINST VIRTUALLY THREE.UH, ANYBODY ABSTAINING? COMMISSIONER HAYNES? UM, I'M GONNA ABSTAIN.
SO THAT MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO THREE TO ONE, IS THAT RIGHT? YEAH.
WE'RE FINISHED WITH THAT ITEM.
[31. Discussion and possible action recommending amendments to the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan or element or portion thereof, including the Austin Equity Climate Plan and Austin Strategic Mobility Plan related to matters concerning telework; approve and forward a memorandum to Council concerning matters related to City of Austin telework policies.]
WE ARE GOING TO DO, AS STATED, WHEN WE READ THE CONSENT AGENDA, WE'RE NO LONGER HAVING A BRIEFING ON NUMBER 30.WE ARE GOING TO HEAR OUR SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR ITEM NUMBER 31.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A, WE'LL TAKE A BREAK, A BRIEF BREAK SUGGEST TO CLARIFY, WE'RE STARTING 31, BUT HOPING THAT WE CAN HAVE TESTIMONY BEFORE WE TAKE A BREAK BECAUSE FOLKS HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR QUITE A WHILE, RIGHT? SO NUMBER 31, UM, I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO COMMISSIONERS CONNOLLY AND AZAR, BUT THIS ONE IS ABOUT THE TELEWORK POLICY.
UM, AND THIS IS AN ITEM THAT IS TIME SENSITIVE.
UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, UH, WILL GO INTO EFFECT BY THE BEGINNING OF NEXT YEAR.
AND SO IF THERE ARE ANY AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PASSED FROM THIS BODY THIS EVENING, UM, IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN TONIGHT IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE REFLECTED IN WHAT IS, UH, MOVES FORWARD IN IN 2024.
COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY? SORRY, DO YOU WANT ME TO WALK THROUGH THE AMENDMENTS AT THIS TIME? IS THAT NECESSARY? NO, NO.
SO I'LL JUST INTRODUCE THE ITEM.
SO THIS IS THE RESULT OF, UH, THE HARD WORK OF A WORKING GROUP THAT WAS, UH, BROUGHT TOGETHER, UM, IN RESPONSE TO, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME INFORMATION WE RECEIVED ABOUT POTENTIAL CHANGES TO CITY COMMUTING AND TELEWORK POLICIES THAT SPECIFICALLY MIGHT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS.
AND AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE ARE TASKED TO BE THE STEWARDS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND TO UNDERSTAND, UM, WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO MAINTAIN THAT.
SO A WORKING GROUP GOT TOGETHER.
UM, I REALLY WANNA THANK EVERY MEMBER OF THE WORKING GROUP FOR SHOWING UP TO ALL THE MEETINGS AND FOR BEING VERY CONSISTENT AND BRINGING YOUR INPUT TO THE DISCUSSION.
WE TOOK A CLOSE LOOK AT THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PARTICULARLY AT THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY AND CLIMATE EQUITY PORTIONS OF THE PLAN.
AND WE IDENTIFIED THAT WHILE THE GOALS AND THE INTENT OF THE GOALS ARE VERY CLEAR, THERE STILL NEEDS TO BE SOME CLARIFYING LANGUAGE AROUND WHAT THE CITY'S COMMITMENT TO ITS ROLE IS IN IMPLEMENTING THOSE GOALS.
SO ALL WE'RE DOING IS RECOMMENDING SOME AMENDMENTS TO COUNCIL.
UM, AND IF YOU KNOW, IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO TAKE THESE UP, COUNSEL WILL INITIATE, UM, THE CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ALONG WITH THESE, UH, FOUR AMENDMENTS THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING.
WE ARE ALSO RECOMMENDING, UH, SENDING A LETTER, UM, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE BACKUPS ALONG WITH THE AMENDMENTS.
UM, AND THIS LETTER WILL FURTHER, UM, EXPLAIN, CLARIFY TO COUNSEL OF THE INTENT OF THE AMENDMENTS.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON TODAY.
AND THESE AMENDMENTS ARE IN NO WAY A CHANGE TO THE GOALS, UM, AND VISION OUTLINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE INTENT IS ONLY THAT THESE AMENDMENTS WILL STRENGTHEN, UM, THE LANGUAGE IN THOSE GOALS THAT THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN PUT THERE BY THE COMMUNITY.
AND, AND, UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CONLEY.
THAT PRETTY MUCH COVERS EVERYTHING.
I THINK THE ONLY THING I WANT TO MENTION IS PROCEDURALLY, JUST SO FOLKS UNDERSTAND, INITIALLY THE WORKING GROUP HAD BEEN WORKING TO INITIATE AMENDMENTS, UM, TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THEN WE WERE INFORMED BY STAFF THAT WE, AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION, DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO INITIATE CHANGES.
UM, SO THAT IS WHY YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S A SPREADSHEET WITH AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAD BEEN WORKING ON.
BUT NOW THERE'S A LETTER THAT ESSENTIALLY WILL BE FORWARDED AS A, UM, MEMO OR AN RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO, UM, COUNCIL, AND THEN FOR COUNCIL TO TAKE UP AS THEY PLEASE.
SO, TO COMMISSIONER CONLEY'S POINT, WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY AMENDMENTS TONIGHT.
WE'RE SENDING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.
UM, JUST JUST TO ADD, UM, WHILE THAT IT HAS BEEN THE OPINION THAT THAT STAFF HAS EXPRESSED TO US, WE MAY HAVE A FEW, UM, FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS FOR CITY LEGAL IN THIS REGARD.
BUT, UM, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD FIRST WITH HEARING THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
ALL RIGHT, MR. RIVERA, DO YOU HAVE SPEAKERS FOR NUMBER 31 LINED UP? CHAIR? COMMISSIONER LEE.
[02:10:01]
ANDREW VERA.FIRST AGAIN WITH, UM, HEARING FROM MR. CHASE NORRIS.
UH, FIRST LET ME SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
THE WORK Y'ALL ARE DOING IS SO IMPORTANT.
I'VE BEEN A CITY EMPLOYEE FOR ABOUT NINE YEARS.
I, LIKE MANY OF MY COWORKERS, HAVE ENJOYED THE FLEXIBILITY TELEWORK HAS PROVIDED ME.
I WAS BEMUSED TO HEAR THAT IT WAS BEING TAKEN AWAY BASED ON ANECDOTAL EXPERIENCES.
I WON'T BELABOR THE POINT 'CAUSE YOU KNOW THEM ALREADY, BUT I DO WANNA TOUCH ON THEM BRIEFLY.
TELEWORK GIVES US MORE TIME THE MOST FINITE RESOURCE WE MORALS HAVE.
IT ALLOWS US TO GET ENOUGH SLEEP TO SAVE A CUP OF COFFEE, READ THE PAPER IN THE MORNING, ORGANIZE OUR PLANS FOR THE DAY, SPEND MORE TIME WITH OUR PARTNERS, AND TAKE CARE OF OUR OUR CHILDREN.
THE MONEY WE PUBLIC SERVANTS SAVE ON GASOLINE MAKES OUR INFLATION RIDDEN DOLLARS GO FURTHER IN A CITY THAT GETS MORE EXPENSIVE EVERY DAY.
IT REDUCES THE NUMBER OF CARS ON THE ROADS AND GREENHOUSE GASES ADDED TO OUR ATMOSPHERE.
IT ALLOWS US TO FOCUS BETTER ON OUR WORK AND INCREASE OUR PRODUCTIVITY.
I'M A SITE PLANNER AND I WORK WITH DEVELOPERS, ENGINEERS, LAWYERS EVERY DAY.
AND I DO OVER EMAIL, PHONE CALLS AND TEAMS. UH, SITE PLAN CAN BE DONE PRETTY MUCH ANYWHERE WITH A LAPTOP AND WIFI.
AND WHEN I HAVE A TEAM MEETING OR AN APPLICANT WANTS TO MEET IN PERSON, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO DRIVE TO THE BEAUTIFUL PDC AND WORK WITH THEM FACE-TO-FACE.
BUT THAT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY RARE.
I THINK WORKING IN AN OFFICE WITH MY COWORKERS HAS SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS.
IT ALLOWS FOR MORE PRODUCTIVE COLLABORATIVE MEETINGS AND ALLOWS US TO GET TO KNOW EACH OTHER ON A PERSONAL LEVEL, LEVEL, WHICH BUILDS RAPPORT AND TRUST.
WE ARE ALL PART OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN FAMILY, AND WE SHOULD GET TO KNOW OUR FAMILY.
THIS COULD BE DONE ONCE A WEEK WHERE WE ALL HAVE TEAM MEETINGS ON THE SAME DAY AND THROUGH THOUGHTFUL TEAM BUILDING ACTIVITIES.
BUT I BELIEVE TELEWORK AND IN-PERSON WORK SHOULD BE CONTEXTUAL TO THE WORK PEOPLE ARE DOING.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. JOSE PEREZ.
DO I SPEAK ON THE MIC? IT'S MY FIRST TIME.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR LOVE, TIME AND LEADERSHIP.
WHAT STARTS HERE CHANGES THE WORLD.
THAT'S THE CLAIM FROM MY ALMA MATER.
WHAT STARTS HERE CHANGES THE WORLD.
WHEN WHO, HOW? I AM A TRAVIS REBEL, A WAGNER, THUNDERBIRD, A TEXAS LONGHORN, AND A CITY ENGINEER.
PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF TELEWORK FOR THE REASONS LISTED BELOW.
IF NOT, PLEASE EDUCATE ME SOME MORE.
TELEWORK IS A WORK FLEXIBILITY THAT ENABLES ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES TO PERFORM THEIR DUTIES FROM AN APPROVED ALTERNATIVE WORK SITE.
TELEWORK BENEFITS THE AGENCY AND THE WORKFORCE BY ENHANCING THE RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF A DIVERSE WORKFORCE.
IT IMPROVES ACCOMMODATIONS TO INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES.
IT ENSURES THE CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS IN CASES OF EMERGENCY.
IT REDUCES TRANSPORTATION COSTS LIKE TIME, HEALTH, AND MONEY.
AND IT IMPROVES MORALE BY ALLOWING EMPLOYEES TO BALANCE WORK AND PERSONAL DEMANDS.
I SEE NO DOWNSIDES TO TELEWORK.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. DON JACKSON, FOLLOWED BY PAIGE BRADLEY.
MR. JACKSON, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M HERE, UH, SPEAKING AS A MEMBER OF ASME 1624.
AND I JUST WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS THE COMMISSION HAS PROPOSED FOR THE, UH, FOR THE, UH, IMAGINE AUSTIN FOR THE ASMP.
I THINK THESE ARE REALLY CONSISTENT WITH OUR UNION'S POLICIES AND POSITION ON TELEWORK AND THE IMPORTANCE IT HAS BEEN FOR OUR MEMBERSHIP, UH, ACROSS THE CITY AND ALSO IN THE COUNTY, WHICH HAS BEEN MUCH MORE ROBUST IN ITS IMPLEMENTATION AND CONSISTENCY ON THAT.
UM, AS I, AS WE SORT OF TALKED TO THE COMMISSION BEFORE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS A GOAL OF TRYING TO REACH 50% OF ITS, UH, EMPLOYEES, UH, TRIPS THROUGH NON SINGLE USE AUTOMOTIVE TRIPS.
AND WE'VE ACTUALLY GOTTEN VERY CLOSE TO THAT.
40% OF THAT IS FROM 40% OF THE 46 IS FROM TELEWORK AND WORK FROM HOME.
WITHOUT THAT, WE AREN'T GONNA, WE, WE CAN'T COME CLOSE TO ACHIEVING OUR CLIMATE GOALS, OUR ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION GOALS ANYTIME SOON.
SO IT, IT, IT'S BEEN THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT CHANGE THAT'S HAPPENED FOR ALTERNATIVE, UH, COMMUTE OPTIONS FOR CITY EMPLOYEES.
AND THAT'S REFLECTED IN CITY TRENDS IN GENERAL.
[02:15:01]
ALSO SEE IN DATA, UH, AROUND WHERE CITY STAFF LIVE.IT'S OFTEN KIND OF FAR NORTH OR FAR SOUTH.
UH, PEOPLE DRIVE TO WHERE THEY CAN AFFORD.
AND THOSE AREAS DON'T HAVE, UH, THE MOST RELIABLE TRANSIT OPTIONS, UH, BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND CORE CITY FACILITIES WHERE STAFF WORK.
AND SO THAT MEANS DRIVING, UH, FOR MOST OF THEM.
SO BEING ABLE TO TELEWORK MORE OFTEN WITH A MORE ROBUST POLICY, UH, TAKES THOUSANDS OF CARS OFF THE ROAD THAT WOULD BE OCCUPIED BY CITY STAFF.
UM, SO THIS IS, WHICH IS IMPORTANT BOTH FOR ECOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL REASONS, ALSO JUST FOR TRAFFIC AND COMMUTING REASONS.
AND AS, UH, ONE OF MY, UH, UNION BROTHERS JUST SAID, UH, IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR STAFF WHO HAVE LIMITED TIME, AND IT'S ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT BENEFITS WE CAN GET.
SO, UH, AND I GUESS MY FINAL POINT IS JUST, YOU KNOW, THE CURRENT PLAN REGIONALLY IS THAT THE STATE WILL BE, UH, UNDERTAKING A MAJOR RECONSTRUCTION OF THE PRIMARY, UH, HIGHWAY THAT THE CITY USES TO GET NORTH AND SOUTH.
AND THAT'S GONNA LAST FOR YEARS, IF THAT CONTINUES.
UM, WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY UNION POSITION ON THAT, OF COURSE.
UH, BUT, UH, IT'D BE A REALLY BAD TIME TO THROW ANOTHER 10,000 CARS ON THE ROAD.
THAT'S, UH, THAT'S WHAT I'VE GOT TO SAY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM PAIGE BRADLEY, FOLLOWED BY BEN SETE.
BOTH WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE EACH.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE AND BRINGING THIS ITEM FOR DISCUSSION.
MY NAME IS PAIGE BRADLEY, AND I'VE BEEN WITH THE CITY FOR A BIT OVER A YEAR AND A HALF.
MY CURRENT ROLE IS REMOTE OPTIONS WERE A HUGE DRAW FOR ME.
I LOVE MY JOB AND ITS FLEXIBILITY IS A BIG REASON WHY MYSELF AND OTHER FOLKS IN THEIR TWENTIES HAD THE OPPORTUNITIES OR HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK AS PUBLIC SERVANTS OR TO MAKE MORE MONEY IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
IF WE REMOVE THE REMOTE OR THE CITY'S TELEWORK BENEFIT, WE RISK LOSING A LARGE PART OF OUR WORKFORCE AND POTENTIAL TALENT POOL.
MY DEPARTMENT'S ACCOMMODATING TELEWORK POLICY ALLOWS MYSELF AND MY COWORKERS WHO HAVE KIDS AND CARETAKERS, OUR CARETAKERS ARE OLDER AND WHO HAVE DISABILITIES, THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE FULLER, HEALTHIER LIVES WITH THE TIME AND EXPENSE WE SAVE BY TELECOMMUTING, I'M ABLE TO BE MORE CREATIVE, MORE ACTIVE AND HEALTHIER PHYSICALLY AND MENTALLY BECAUSE OF OUR TELEWORKING BENEFITS.
CITIES TELEWORK BENEFIT REPEAL WILL ADD CAR TRIPS TO OUR ROADWAYS THAT PEAK COMMUTE HOURS, INCREASING TRAFFIC DEMAND WORSENING THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES.
SO WE CAN ALL SIT IN OUR OFFICE CHAIRS TO TAKE VIRTUAL MEETINGS ALL DAY.
THE CITY'S TELEWORK BENEFIT REPEAL IS NOT DATA DRIVEN OR GOOD FOR MY COWORKERS OR OUR COMMUNITY FRIENDLY.
I WANNA ADD THAT OUR COWORKERS WITHOUT ACCESS TO TELEWORKING IN THEIR ROLES, MAY PAY MORE MONEY AND TIME TO GET WORK AND BACK TO THEIR PEOPLE.
IMPROVED HEALTH WORK BENEFIT POLICY SHOULD INCLUDE OUR ESSENTIAL WORKERS.
THEY DESERVE EXTRA COMPENSATION OR SOME OTHER ADDED BENEFIT FOR THE COST THEY INCUR TRAVELING TO AND FROM THEIR WORK SITES EVERY DAY.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU ALL HERE FROM BEN SABBY, FOLLOWED BY WHITNEY HOLT, FOLLOWED BY IRIS SETY.
UH, FIRST I WANNA START BY JUST SAYING THANK YOU FOR THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.
I REALLY DO HOPE THAT COUNCIL TAKES THIS UP.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF AFSCME 1624.
AND AS PART OF THAT OFFICE, I GET TO TALK TO MANY, MANY DIFFERENT WORKERS.
SOME OF WHO ARE NOT COMFORTABLE COMING DOWN HERE AND, AND SPEAKING IN FRONT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THE LIVE STREAM THAT'S BEING WATCHED, UM,
BUT I HEAR FROM THEM HOW THIS, UH, THIS BENEFIT OF BEING ABLE TO WORK REMOTELY IF THEIR JOB ALLOWS IT, UH, HAS, HAS GREATLY IMPROVED THE WAY THEY DELIVER THEIR SERVICES, THE WAY THEY, THEY WORK DAY TO DAY FOR US.
UH, THEY HAVE ALSO MENTIONED HOW DIFFICULT IT WOULD MAKE THEM IF THEY'RE BEING FORCED ONTO THE ROADS.
UH, ANOTHER GREAT, UH, AND IT WAS ALREADY MENTIONED, UH, ASPECT IS HOW AS AN EMPLOYER, IT WOULD MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE CITY TO BE APPEALING TO FILL HARD TO FILL POSITIONS.
UM, AS A MAJOR EMPLOYER IN OUR AREA, THE CITY OF BOSTON WOULD DO WELL TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE.
AND, UM, SORRY, I THOUGHT I PREPARED FOR THREE MINUTES.
UM, AND THE, UH, THE ASPECT THAT IS THAT I WORK FOR AN EMPLOYER THAT'S AWARD-WINNING IN OFFERING TELEWORK.
UM, AND AS SOMEONE WHO HAS CHOSEN TO USE TRANSIT AS MY MAIN WAY OF GETTING AROUND THE CITY, I KIND OF GOT RAINED ON, ON MY TRANSIT DOWN HERE, UH,
THE, UH, THE BENEFITS THAT I SEE IN ALIGNING AND BEING A LEADER WITH THIS VISION THAT WE'VE ASKED OTHER LARGE EMPLOYERS TO, TO FOLLOW, UH, I THINK IS REALLY GOOD AS A CITY TO ALIGN ITSELF WITH WHAT IT'S ASKING OTHERS TO DO.
I HOPE TO SEE COUNSEL TAKE IT UP.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM WHITNEY HOLT, FOLLOWED BY RISBY, FOLLOWED BY MERU.
[02:20:02]
UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING UP THIS ISSUE.I WORK FOR TRAVIS COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND I'M A MEMBER OF AFME 1624.
AND UNTIL LAST MONTH, I WAS AN EMPLOYEE WITH AUSTIN PUBLIC HEALTH.
UM, I WORKED FOR THE CITY FOR THE LAST TWO AND A HALF YEARS.
AND THE REPEAL OF OUR TELEWORK BENEFIT, UM, NOT JUST AS IT WAS DONE
UM, I HAVE 15 YEARS OF COMMUNITY AND NONPROFIT LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE AND A MASTER'S IN PUBLIC POLICY.
AND I DON'T SAY THAT TO LIKE PAT MYSELF ON THE BACK.
I SAY THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE IMPACTS THAT THIS WILL HAVE ON RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION, THEY'RE LIKE REAL
UM, ONE THING I SPECIFICALLY JUST WANNA POINT OUT IS THAT, UH, LIKE THERE IS A MASSIVE CHILDCARE SHORTAGE IN THIS CITY.
UH, AND WE ARE ABOUT TO FLOOD NOT ONLY MORE CARS UNDER THE ROAD WITH A COMMUTE, BUT ALSO MORE KIDS GOING INTO DAYCARE, UH, AT MORE EXTENDED HOURS IN DAYCARE, KIDS NEEDING AFTERSCHOOL CARE.
WE JUST LITERALLY DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR A DECISION LIKE THIS.
AND THERE HAS BEEN NO INDICATION WHATSOEVER FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE THAT THEY'RE EVEN TAKING THAT INTO ACCOUNT.
UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS, AND YEAH, THANK YOU.
WHEN I HEAR FROM IRIS SET UP BE FOLLOWED BY MIRUS HI.
BEING ABLE TO COMMENT ON THIS, I JUST WANTED TO BRING OUT THE, THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE BIGGEST GROUPS THAT BENEFITS FROM TELEWORKING IS PRIMARY CAREGIVERS.
I PERSONALLY JUST BENEFITED FROM IT TODAY BECAUSE IF YOU'RE ABLE TO TELEWORK, YOU'RE ABLE TO BE CLOSER TO YOUR PLACE, THE PLACE YOU'VE CHOSEN FOR CHILDCARE, THE SCHOOLS THAT YOU'VE CHOSEN, AND YOU HAVE TO DRIVE YOUR KIDS THERE.
YOU HAVE TO PICK THEM UP AND THEN WORRY ABOUT GETTING TO WORK AND GETTING FROM WORK.
AND THEN AS PRIMARY CAREGIVERS, WE'RE ON CALL
SO BEING ABLE TO BE NEARBY ALLOWS US TO RESPOND QUICKLY IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY.
AND THAT IS ONE OF THE VALUES THAT, UM, I REALLY APPRECIATE ABOUT A TELEWORKING POLICY BECAUSE WE ARE ABLE TO SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR FAMILY AND STILL BEING ABLE TO PERFORM OUR JOB DUTIES VERY WELL.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE A BREAK NOW.
UM, WHEN WE COME BACK, UM, LET'S SAY 10 MINUTES.
UM, WE'LL TAKE UP THE, UM, A DISCUSSION ON WHAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE BACKUP.
DO WE NEED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW? NO.
OH, IT WASN'T A PUBLIC HEARING.
VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS? NO, NOT YET.
UM, I'LL HAND IT BACK OVER TO COMMISSIONER AZAR.
UM, AND CHAIR, JUST TO CLARIFY, WE HAD A QUESTION, UM, ON ITEM NUMBER 10 AND 11.
SO I KNOW WE CLEARLY VOTED ON ITEM 11.
WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS, SINCE YOU WERE THE MOTION MAKER, CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM THAT YOUR MOTION FOR THE 700 DAWSON ROAD CASE WAS FOR BOTH THE REZONING AND THE PLAN AMENDMENT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
WE JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THE PLAN AMENDMENT WAS INCLUDED.
UM, NOW BACK TO, UH, NUMBER 31.
SO WE'VE HAD OUR SPEAKERS, AND, UM, DO YOU WANNA DO AQ AND A? UM, I, I CAN REALLY, I LEAVE IT UP TO THE COMMISSION BECAUSE I'M HAPPY TO SORT OF WALK THROUGH THE FOUR AMENDMENTS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IF NEEDED.
BUT I, IF FOLKS HAVE ALREADY REVIEWED, UM, THE BACKUP AND ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE AMENDMENTS AND ARE PREPARED TO GO INTO DISCUSSION OR A VOTE, THEN I'M TOTALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
UM, WHY DON'T WE OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
UM, AND THIS WOULD BE ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND THE DRAFT MEMO THAT'S IN OUR BACKUP.
UM, FOR THE WORKING GROUP MEMBERS AND STAFF.
ANY QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONER AL.
[02:25:01]
I WANNA THANK, UM, OUR CITY STAFF, UM, AND REPRESENTATIVES WHO SPOKE.UM, WE HAVE A CITY OF AUSTIN ITSELF AS ONE OF THE LARGEST EMPLOYERS IN THE METROPLEX, AND, AND REPRESENTS A LOT OF DIFFERENT FOLKS ACROSS A LOT OF DIFFERENT SPECTRUMS THAT, THAT I THINK PEOPLE DON'T ALWAYS THINK ABOUT ON A DAILY BASIS.
UM, AND I THINK THE TELEWORK POLICY IS GONNA BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR OUR EXISTING STAFF, UM, AND, AND AS RECRUITMENT FOR FUTURE.
SO GREAT WORK TO OUR WORKING GROUP.
UM, BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF FOLKS WHOSE JOBS REQUIRE THEM TO TRAVEL.
UM, SOME OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL FOLKS, OUR INSPECTORS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
I, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE JOBS THAT ACTUALLY REQUIRE TRAVEL, THAT WE'RE NOT INADVERTENTLY PUTTING ANYBODY IN A BAD POSITION IN ANY WAYS ABOUT, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT REMOVING PARKING THAT THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO THEIR JOB OR BENEFITS THAT THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO THEIR JOB IS OBVIOUSLY THERE'S AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE THAT BEING ABLE, BEING IN A WORK CAPACITY WHERE YOU HAVE THE OPTION OF TELEWORK IS, CAN BE ADVANTAGEOUS.
AND NOT ALL OF OUR CITY EMPLOYEES HAVE THAT ADVANTAGE.
SO MY OTHER QUESTION THEN IS, ARE THERE ANY CREATIVE THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO EXTEND THAT TO SOME OF THE OTHER AREAS? OR DO WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT TO ASK OUR, OUR STAFF TO LOOK INTO THAT? HOW DO WE POSSIBLY, UM, EXPAND THIS ROLE FOR SOME OF OUR OTHER CITY EMPLOYEES THAT IT WOULDN'T NORMALLY TOUCH BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE WORK THAT THEY DO? THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, COMMISSIONER MUSH TYLER.
AND I THINK YOU RAISED A NUMBER OF EXCELLENT POINTS AND, AND SOME REAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT NEED TO GO INTO ANY, UM, CITY TELEWORK POLICY.
AND SO I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU FLAGGING I THINK THE COMPLEXITIES AND NUANCES AROUND THIS DISCUSSION.
BUT I ALSO WANNA MAKE IT JUST CLEAR HERE FOR EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WHAT OUR PURVIEW IS AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO WE ARE NOT AT THIS MOMENT, UM, UM, SORT OF WORKING ON THE CITY'S TELEWORK POLICY.
UH, NOR ARE WE MAKING, UH, SORT OF SPECIFIC, UM, DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THAT POLICY.
WE ARE, UM, THE STEWARDS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND WHAT WE ARE ASKING THE CITY TO DO IS, IN ANY TELEWORK POLICY THAT THE CITY ENGAGES IN, IT MUST BE ALIGNED WITH THE GOALS THAT THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY HAVE ALREADY SET FOR THEMSELVES THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO ALL WE'RE TELLING THE CITY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, ANY TELEWORK POLICY, THE CITY ENGAGES, IT NEEDS TO BE ALIGNED.
SO THERE ISN'T, UM, ANY FURTHER PRESCRIPTION BEYOND THAT ABOUT WHAT SHOULD GO INTO A TELEWORK POLICY.
BUT I COMPLETELY AGREE THAT THE CONCERNS, THE QUESTIONS YOU RAISED NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, IN THE CITY'S TELEWORK POLICY.
IT'S JUST, THAT'S, I THINK, A LITTLE BIT BEYOND OUR PURVIEW AS PLANNING COMMISSION.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING AND SETTING KIND OF THE PARAMETERS THERE.
COMMISSIONER HANDS AND, AND COMMISSIONER TO, TO, UH, BUILD OFF OUR, FIRST OF ALL, THANKS, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY FOR THE, UH, WORK THAT YOU DID ON THIS AND LEADERSHIP.
BUT TO BUILD OFF THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE HEARD FROM, UH, CITY EMPLOYEES AND, AND FOLKS INVOLVED IN THIS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO FOLLOW TRAVIS COUNTY'S MODEL IN, IN THESE POLICIES.
UH, TRAVIS COUNTY HAS A, A GREAT TELEWORKING POLICY, BUT THE ONE THING THAT'S KEY IN THAT IS THAT TRAVIS COUNTY HAD THEIR FRONTLINE SUPERVISORS, THEIR FRONTLINE MANAGERS AND THEIR FRONTLINE FOLKS BE THE ONES TO DEVELOP THAT.
AND, AND WHAT WE TRIED TO ADD INTO THIS IS, THAT'S KEY TO THE, TO THE SUCCESS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
IF, IF THE, IF THE THE CITY DOESN'T BUILD IN, UM, UH, METRICS AND BUILD IN ACCOUNTABILITY AND BUILD IN, UH, SUCCESSFUL POLICIES THAT ALLOW THEM TO, TO MEASURE THE, THE PROS AND CONS, THE THE POLICY'S NOT GONNA NOT GONNA BE SUCCESSFUL.
OUR JOB IS TO SAY THE PLAN HAS THESE CRITERIA AND THE CITY NEEDS TO FOLLOW THESE CRITERIA.
AND I THINK, I THINK COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY DID A GREAT JOB AT, AT FLESHING THAT OUT.
AND, UH, I APPRECIATE HIS WORK.
COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY, UM, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION MYSELF, AND THIS IS A QUESTION.
UM, I THINK FROM THE WORKING GROUP TO CITY LEGAL, WE WERE JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND MORE CLEARLY WHAT THE PARAMETERS OF OUR,
[02:30:01]
OUR DECISION MAKING PROCESS WERE.AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE INITIALLY SET OUT TO DISCUSS SOME OF THESE AMENDMENTS, WE FELT IT WAS, UH, REASONABLE TO INITIATE THESE CHANGES TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND SO, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING NOW FROM LEGAL IS THAT THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, DOES NOT INITIATE CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UM, AND SO WE ARE ONLY RECOMMENDING CHANGES, UM, TO COUNCIL.
HOWEVER, I WANTED TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BASIS FOR THAT OPINION IS AND GET A CLEARER SENSE OF WHY NOT, BECAUSE IF WE ARE OFFICIALLY THE STEWARDS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THEN, YOU KNOW, I WANNA BETTER UNDERSTAND, IS IT, YOU KNOW, IS IS IT A, IS IT A LACK OF PRECEDENT, UM, THAT IS DRIVING THIS? OR IS IT SIMPLY THAT, YOU KNOW, IS IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE CITY'S CHARTER THAT SPECIFICALLY FORBIDS US FROM, UM, INITIATING THESE CHANGES? AND THAT, THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR CITY LEGAL IF THERE IS SOMEONE FROM CITY LEGAL AVAILABLE TO HELP ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
UM, THIS IS CHRISTY MANN WITH, UM, THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
AND, UM, YEAH, I THINK I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION PRETTY, UM, SUCCINCTLY.
ARTICLE 10, THE CHARTER DESCRIBES, UM, THE PLANNING ASPECTS OF THE CITY'S CHARTER SPECIFICALLY.
AND IF YOU GO TO SECTION FOUR, THE PLANNING COMMISSION POWERS AND DUTIES, IT DESCRIBES, UM, THIS BODY'S POWERS AND DUTIES WITH RESPECT TO PLANNING.
UM, THE MOST, UM, GERMANE, UM, SUBSECTION IS SUBSECTION FIVE, AND IT JUST, UM, DESCRIBES, UM, THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S, POWERS AND DUTIES, UM, TO MONITOR AND OVERSEE THE EFFECTIVENESS AND STATUS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND RECOMMEND ANNUALLY TO THE COUNCIL.
ANY CHANGES IN, OR AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS MAYBE DESIRED OR REQUIRED? IT'S PRETTY ON POINT.
SO THE ACTION THAT, UM, THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPEARS TO BE WANTING TO TAKE HERE.
AND SO, UM, IF THE CHARTER HAD, UM, WANTED CHARTER'S NOT AS SENTIENT, BUT IF THE CHART, IF THE, IF, UM, THE LANGUAGE HAD SAID INITIATE, THAT WOULD BE THE ANSWER.
SO THAT IS WHERE, UM, THAT'S THE BASIS OF OUR RECOMMENDATION.
BUT THE CHARTER DOES NOT SAY THAT WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO, RIGHT.
IT DOESN'T, THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CHARTER THAT SAYS THE PLANNING COMMISSION CANNOT INITIATE CHANGES.
IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, THE, AS FAR THE PLANNING CORRECT, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING SPECIFIC THAT SAYS YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO INITIATE.
HOWEVER, THE, THE, UM, WHEN YOU READ TEXTS LIKE THIS, AND IT JUST, AND THE TITLE OF THE, UM, SUBSECTION IS YOUR, THIS BODY'S PLAN, UM, POWERS AND DUTIES, AND IT DESCRIBES THEM, UM, IT DESCRIBES A PRETTY, UM, COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF POWERS AND DUTIES AND THAT POWER AND DUTY IS NOT IN THE LIST.
AND SO OUR LAWS RECOMMENDATION AND ANALYSIS HERE IS THAT THE, UM, THAT YOU'RE, THAT YOU'RE LIMITED TO MAKING RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND JUST SO A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION.
SO I APPRECIATE THAT I NOW UNDERSTAND THE BASIS FOR THAT OPINION.
SO IT'S REALLY JUST BASED ON AFFIRMING THE WAY THE TEXT IS WRITTEN, BUT THERE ISN'T ANYTHING THAT SPECIFICALLY SAYS WE CANNOT.
UM, BUT THEN ALSO, I, I, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, IN REVIEWING THE CODE, UH, I'M SORRY, IN REVIEWING THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO LOOK AT, UH, UH, AT THE AREAS THAT ADDRESS THIS, THERE ARE CLEAR GOALS THAT SOMETIMES LACK, UM, SMALL BITS OF CLARIFYING LANGUAGE, UM, OR EVEN THERE ARE JUST DETAILS THAT ARE HAZY OR AN, OR AMBIGUOUS AND THAT DON'T ALLOW FOR A CLEAR INTERPRETATION OF THE GOALS AND VISIONS OF THE PLAN.
AND THERE ARE, ARE THINGS THAT ARE, ARE, ARE RELATIVELY SMALL OR CLEANUP, IT'S, IT'S ARTICULATED WELL IN THE GOAL, BUT IT'S NOT SO WELL ARTICULATED IN THE SORT OF SUB GOALS UNDER THAT MAIN GOAL.
SO I THINK JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY, IF WE ARE THE STEWARDS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WE CAN MAINTAIN IT, SHOULD WE NOT BE ALLOWED TO SORT OF JUST RECOMMEND DIRECTLY TO STAFF, UM, SOME CLEANUP WORK THAT MAY BE NEEDED OR SOME CHANGES, UM, THAT, THAT DON'T NECESSARILY ALTER THE OVERARCHING INTENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHY SHOULD THAT HAVE TO GO THROUGH COUNSEL? UM, AND, AND DOESN'T THAT JUST ADD A SORT OF AN ONEROUS EXTRA STEP TO, UM, OUR FULFILLING OF OUR DUTY AS PLANNING COMMISSION? SURE.
UM, I DON'T HAVE A POLICY ANSWER FOR THAT, BUT I WILL SAY THAT I, IT IS, IT'S MY, MY INTERPRETATION IN THE LAW DEPARTMENT'S INTERPRETATION, IT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY SPECIFIC AND ANSWERS THIS, UM, PRETTY DEFINITELY IN THE SECTION THAT I'VE, THAT I'VE, UM, PROVIDED HERE FOR YOU.
THOSE WILL BE ALL MY QUESTIONS.
UM, UH, SORRY, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, I JUST HAD
[02:35:01]
A QUICK FOLLOW UP QUESTION.DO WE THINK THAT, OR, UM, DO WE KNOW PREVIOUS COMPLAINING COMMISSIONS HAVE ACTUALLY, UM, UNDERTAKEN ACTUAL AMENDMENTS? OR HAS THIS BEEN THE CONSISTENT INTERPRETATION OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT REGARDING OUR ACTUAL POWERS IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION? UM, I DON'T HAVE A FULL HISTORY OF EVERY OF EVERY ACTION.
THE PLANNING, UH, A PLANNING COMMISSION IS TAKEN AND IF THERE WAS A DIFFERENT, UM, INTERPRETATION YEARS AGO AND SOMEHOW GOT PROCESSED, HOWEVER, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, I MEAN, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES? YOU WOULD ISSUE RECOMMENDATIONS, COUNSEL WOULD THEN TAKE THEM UP AND THEN INITIATE CHANGES AND THEY WOULD COME BACK AROUND TO THIS BODY FOR CONSIDERATION.
UM, LIKE OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS HAVE MOST RECENTLY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN, THERE'S BEEN PLAN AMENDMENTS RECENTLY, AND THAT'S A COUNCIL INITIATED RESOLUTION THAT THEN MOVES IT TO, UM, THE STAFF BEING DIRECTED TO DO X THAT STAFF TAKING THAT PRODUCT BACK TO THIS, THIS BODY MAYBE THROUGH SOME OTHER COMMISSIONS, FIRST TO THIS BODY FOR, UM, THE EXERCISE OF YOUR DUTIES AS IDENTIFIED IN THE CHARTER.
AND THEN HAVING THOSE FORMALLY GO BACK TO COUNSEL FOR FINAL ACTION ON Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION.
SO IT'S A PRETTY PRESCRIBED PROCESS THAT IS COMMONLY DONE FOR, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS.
SORRY, MAY I ASK ONE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION WITH YOUR TIME? SORRY, I JUST, THE QUESTION YOU ASKED REMINDED ME OF ANOTHER QUESTION.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
SO WHO ACTUALLY INITIATED THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM THE BEGINNING? DID WAS THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INITIATED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITSELF? IMAGINE OS I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFIC ANSWER TO THAT, BUT IMAGINE AUSTIN IS, IS A, IS AN ITERATION OF THIS, OF THE CITY'S, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND, UM, AND SO I WOULD THINK THE BETTER, LIKE A WAY TO JUST TO THINK ABOUT THAT IS HOW DID THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COME TO BE? AND THAT IS AN OLDER, YOU KNOW, WE IF IF YOU WOULD LIKE THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, UM, I CAN, I CAN PROVIDE IT FOR YOU AT A LATER TIME, BUT I DON'T HAVE, OKAY.
I DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, YOU KNOW, AT MY FINGERTIPS.
WELL, IT MIGHT BE INTERESTING FOR US TO KNOW THE HISTORY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BECAUSE IF IT DID TURN OUT TO BE THE CASE THAT IT WAS INITIATED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ITSELF, THEN THAT WOULD BE A PRECEDENT THAT I THINK WE WOULD, WE WOULD WANT TO, TO KNOW ABOUT.
I THINK THE, UM, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING TIME TO ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS.
SORRY, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? UH, YEAH, JUST ONE ADDITIONAL FOLLOW UP.
UM, THE CHART, THE CITY CHARTER IS A LITTLE BIT OF, I DON'T WANNA SAY A LIVING DOCUMENT, BUT THERE ARE CHANGES IN AMENDMENTS TO IT OVER TIME.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING THERE IS ACTUALLY A PROCESS CURRENTLY TO LOOK AT SOME ASPECTS OF THE CHARTER.
SO IF WE WANTED TO CLARIFY OR MAYBE MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, CLEAR WHAT IS AND IS NOT PERMITTED IN TERMS OF THIS SPECIFIC SITUATION WOULD BE, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE? I DON'T KNOW.
THE PRO THE ANSWER, THE, THE SHORT ANSWER IS THE, UM, THE CITY DOES CONSIDER AN, UM, AN UPLIFT RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO THE CHARTER THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO OUT FOR A VOTE, UM, TO, YOU KNOW, TO THE, TO THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN.
UM, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW, I DON'T KNOW THE PROCESS IN WHICH, UM, COMMISSIONS ENGAGE IN THAT, BUT I'M SURE THAT THERE IS A PROCESS TO, TO, UM, TO BRING THOSE UP AND THEN PASS THOSE ALONG SO THAT THEY'RE CONSIDERED.
UM, AND I CAN, AGAIN, THAT'S ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE THINGS IF Y'ALL WANT, UM, FOLLOW UP ON THAT.
YEAH, I'M SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY, THERE IS AN EXACT PROCESS THAT IF WE WANTED TO ACTUALLY CHANGE THE LEGAL LANGUAGE THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS IN THE CHARTER, THERE IS A PO A PATH FORWARD TO DO THAT.
AND THAT THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD TAKE UP SO THAT THIS IS A RESOLVED FOR FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSIONS GOING FORWARD.
THERE IS A PROCESS I KNOW THAT CITY, CITY STAFF IS ENGAGING IN AND ENGAGES IN, UM, THAT IS LED, IS LED BY FOLKS IN, IN LEGAL TO GATHER LIKE RECOMMENDED, UM, CHANGES TO THE CHARTER.
UM, AND I, WHAT I DON'T KNOW IS HOW, UM, HOW AND WHETHER COMMISSIONS PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROCESS.
AND I CAN GET YOU THAT ANSWER LATER.
COMMISSIONER AZAR, THANK YOU CHAIR.
AND I, UM, MS. MANN, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS.
UM, CAN YOU, SO I KNOW THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE FULLY UNDERSTAND.
SO THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THE, UM, THE ISSUE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND SINCE IT SEEMS LIKE SINCE WE'RE, SO, JUST, JUST TO UNDERSTAND, CAN YOU CLARIFY RIGHT, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT INITIATING THE CHANGE THERE.
IT DOES NOT REQUIRE US TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING, RIGHT? THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE YOU'RE,
[02:40:01]
THIS ISN'T, UM, AN INITIATION.AND TO BE CLEAR, THAT ISN'T ACTUALLY THE RIGHT ANSWER.
THERE'S NO PUBLIC HEARING FOR INITIATIONS.
AND SO FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN UM, CITY COUNCIL INITIATES, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, THEY WILL DO IT THROUGH A RESOLUTION.
AND THAT IS NOT, UH, NOT, IS NOT NOTICED AS A PUBLIC HEARING WHEN IT COMES BACK AROUND AFTER STAFF HAS, YOU KNOW, HAS A PROPOSED, UM, THEY, THEY, SO COUNSEL ISSUES, DIRECTION TO STAFF, STAFF TAKES, UM, THAT DIRECTION COMES UP WITH, UM, A PROPOSAL AND THEN COMES TO YOU.
THOSE WOULD BE, UM, THAT WOULD BE A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT THAT WE DON'T HAVE AN AMENDMENT SPECIFIC TO CONSIDER.
UM, AND THAT WOULD, DOESN'T REQUIRE NOTICE.
SO YOU DO NOT NEED TO NOTICE FOR, FOR INITIATIONS, LIKE VIA A RESOLUTION.
BUT YOU DO NEED TO NOTICE FOR CON CONSIDERATION OF, UM, AN ACTUAL AMENDMENT.
I APPRECIATE THAT AS A HEARING NOTICE.
SO, JUST TO UNDERSTAND, IF COUNSEL INDEED CHOSE TO TAKE UP OUR, UM, OUR RECOMMENDATION AND INITIATE A CHANGE, WHAT WOULD THE PROCESS AFTER THAT LOOK LIKE? THE PROCESS AFTER THAT WOULD? WELL, THE PROCESS WOULD BE, THEY WOULD INITIATE IT THROUGH A, THROUGH A RESOLUTION.
UM, THAT RESOLUTION WOULD PROVIDE DIRECTION TO COUNT, UH, TO STAFF.
STAFF WOULD THEN GO OUT AND DO WHATEVER THAT DIRECTION IS.
IF THAT MEAN, IF, UM, AND THEN STAFF WOULD TAKE THE PRODUCT OF THAT PROCESS AND, UM, TAKE IT THROUGH THE PROPER, UM, PARTICIPATION, UM, AVENUES.
AND I'LL JUST SKIP AHEAD TO Y'ALL AND THEN, UM, 'CAUSE THAT MIGHT, THAT'S DEPENDENT, IT'S DIFFERENT DEPENDENT ON WHAT THE SUBJECT MATTER IS, RIGHT.
UM, AND COME TO THIS, THIS BODY, UM, FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BASED ON, UM, TO CONSIDER THE AMENDMENTS THAT STAFF HAS PROPOSED.
AND LIKELY THERE WOULD BE A WORKING, YOU KNOW, A WORKING GROUP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT Y'ALL WOULD ASSIGN AL THAT JUST LIKE, AND LIKE THIS ONE WAS LONG, BUT LIKE THE PALM DISTRICT PLAN WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMP PLAN.
SO STAFF, UH, COUNSEL HAD A RESOLUTION AND EVENTUALLY GOT BACK HERE AND THERE WAS A LONG TIME OF CONSIDERATION AND EVALUATION AND, AND THERE WAS, THERE WAS A HEARING POSTED FOR THAT, AND Y'ALL CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THEN AFTER THAT, THE RECOMMENDATIONS WENT TO COUNSEL FROM THIS BODY AND THEY CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING ON, ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
JUST ONE LAST QUESTION SINCE I KNOW STAKEHOLDERS HAVE ASKED THIS.
SO JUST FROM, AGAIN, FROM A PROCESS PERSPECTIVE, IF COUNSEL DOES, DOES NOT, CHOOSES TO NOT FOLLOW THROUGH ON OUR RECOMMENDATION, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU OR OTHER STAFF, WHAT HAPPENS AT THAT POINT? COUNSEL CAN, UM, DO WHAT THEY WANT WITH DO AS THEY WISH WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
I THINK COMMISSIONER M, COMMISSIONER
SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS TAKE IT UP TO BRING IT LIVE TO, UH, UH, AS AN AGENDA ITEM FOR THEM.
IS, IS THAT CORRECT? HAS TO BE SUPPORTED.
YOU GET A, HAVE A RESOLUTION POSTED ON THE AGENDA.
UM, SOMETHING, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT I, I'M NOT SURE I, I'LL HAVE TO GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT.
NO, I GUESS A, A QUESTION FOR OUR WORKING GROUP ARE, WERE WE CONCERNED THAT WE WEREN'T GONNA GET TRACTION ON THIS? I I MAY HAVE BEEN.
I THOUGHT WE HAD A LOT OF BUY-IN TO, TO DO THIS WORK.
UM, THAT'S A, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
UH, COMMISSIONER MUTAL, I THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT OF TRACTION AND A LOT OF CONCERN, AND WE HEARD FROM A NUMBER OF CITY EMPLOYEES TONIGHT, UM, WHO RAISED, I THINK REALLY IMPORTANT POINTS.
UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE, THE, THE QUESTION FOR ME AROUND THIS IS BIGGER EVEN THAN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO SPECIFICALLY AROUND THIS PARTICULAR POLICY.
UM, THIS REALLY PERTAINS TO OUR ROLE AS STEWARDS AND OUR ABILITY TO ENSURE THAT THE CITY WILL IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND I THINK THERE REALLY IS A RISK OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BEING IGNORED.
UM, AND IT'S, IT'S, IT'S VERY CLEAR PROVISIONS AND GOALS BEING IGNORED BY COUNCIL.
UM, AND IF WE LOOK AT THE, UM, TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF COMMUNITY INPUT THAT WAS GATHERED THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESS, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK AS, AS PLANNING COMMISSION, WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN FIGHT FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND, AND THAT IS, I THINK, THE BIGGER QUESTION THAT'S UNDERLYING NOW I THINK THIS CONVERSATION.
SO I, YOU KNOW, I I I HOPE THAT WE, I REALLY APPRECIATE CITY LEGAL BEING HERE AND, AND, AND PROVIDING, UM, ANSWERS.
I I, I'M VERY GRATEFUL FOR THEIR TIME AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN GET SOME FURTHER CLARIFICATION.
[02:45:01]
'CAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE STILL ARE SOME QUESTIONS.UM, AND, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TO THIS RIGHT NOW, BUT IT SEEMS AT LEAST, UM, REASONABLE AND I NEED TO LOOK FURTHER INTO THIS, THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT HAD INITIATED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO BEGIN WITH.
AND IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEN I THINK THAT THAT'S VERY RELEVANT
SO, UM, I THINK WE HAVE SOME FURTHER, UM, QUESTIONS THAT DESERVE ANSWERS.
UM, BUT HAVING SAID THAT, I, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS OR, YES, CHAIR COHEN.
UH, COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
WANTED TO START WITH, UH, WHERE IS IT DEFINED OR WHERE ARE THE PROCEDURES FOR AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DEFINED? IS THAT IN CHARTER OR ORDINANCE? IT'S IN THE CHARTER.
IT'S JOY, HARD AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.
WE DO NOT HAVE LONG RANGE PLANNING STAFF HERE TODAY, SO I'M TAKING THOSE QUESTIONS BACK AND WE'LL, WE'LL PROVIDE YOU ANSWERS IN WRITING COACHING.
UM, SO I, I WILL, UM, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, I WILL TAKE THOSE DOWN AND I'LL MAKE SURE THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE STYLE WILL, UM, PROVIDE YOU ANSWERS BY THE NOVEMBER 14TH, NO LATER THAN THE NOVEMBER 14TH, UM, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
WELL, I'LL JUST, I'LL JUST WRITE, UM, REPEAT, UM, WHERE CHANGES TO THE PLAN, I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS NUMBER ONE? OH, UH, WHERE ARE THE PROCEDURES? YEAH.
TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THEN QUESTION TWO, UH, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 2 13 0 3 SAYS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAY BE ADOPTED OR AMENDED BY ORDINANCE FOLLOWING.
AND THERE ARE A COUPLE OPTIONS.
OPTION TWO IS REVIEW BY MUNICIPALITY'S PLANNING COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT, IF ONE EXISTS, DOES THAT MEAN RIGHT NOW WE COULD VOTE OR AFTER PROPERLY NOTICING VOTE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW US TO EDIT THE PLAN OR AMEND THE PLAN? UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, UM, LAW'S INTERPRETATION, AND SO THAT WOULD BE INCORRECT, BUT TO ME THAT'S MORE LAW.
BUT I'LL GET WITH LAW TO MAKE SURE, UM, NOT TO AMEND THE PLAN ITSELF, UHHUH TO WRITE IN ORDINANCE, BECAUSE PLANNING COMMISSION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ORDINANCES, RIGHT? SO WE MAKE AN ORDINANCE SAYING THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WOULD THAT WORK? I'M NOT SURE.
SO I WILL, I, THAT NEEDS SOME THOUGHT FROM OTHER PEOPLE.
WHY ISN'T LEGAL ANSWERING THIS? UM, WELL, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, YOU'RE NUMBER ONE, I THINK THAT THAT CAN GO TO STAFF NUMBER TWO.
'CAUSE YOU DIDN'T ASK ME STAFF, SO I I WAS DEFERRING TO FOLKS THAT WERE COOL.
UM, SO, UM, YOU, YOU ASKED ABOUT THE PROCESS.
THE PROCESS IS, IS GONNA BE A COMBINATION OF WHAT'S IN THE CHARTER.
AND AGAIN, IT'S, UM, IT'S, UM, ARTICLE 10, SECTION FOUR DESCRIBES THE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT, THAT BOTH THE COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION TOUCH THE CHART OR TOUCH THE, UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT POWERS AND DUTIES, RIGHT? RIGHT.
AND, AND IT DESCRIBES, UM, SOME PROCESS IN THERE AS WELL.
AND THERE'S A, A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THAT IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU DO, WHAT THIS, WHAT THIS BODY CAN DO.
AND SO WHEN THAT IS, WHEN THAT IS IMPLEMENTED, THERE'S GONNA BE A, A, A PROCESS THAT MOVES FORWARD.
AND YOU, UM, YOU, YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT AN ORDINANCE.
THIS BODY MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNSEL TO, TO, UM, APPROVE ORDINANCES DOES NOT ISSUE THEIR OWN ORDINANCES.
SO ALL WE GOTTA DO IS GET COUNSEL TO SIGN OFF ON ALLOWING US TO MAKE THE ORDINANCE.
IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? COUNSEL, TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION, UM, I THINK YOU TALKED ABOUT FOUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, A SPONSOR AND THREE OTHERS.
AND THEN THEY WOULD DO A RESOLUTION, IT WOULD DIRECT STAFF, AND THEN STAFF WOULD DO THE WORK, AS CHRISSY SAID, LIKE ANY OTHER, UM, AND STAFF WOULD DO THE WORK, COME BACK CODES AND ORDINANCES, THEN PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THEN BACK TO COUNCIL.
I GUESS I'M CONFUSED THEN, BECAUSE IT SAYS THAT WE'RE AN ADVISORY BODY TO THE COUNCIL PLUS ADDITIONAL DUTIES, BUT ISN'T MAKING THOSE CHANGES PART OF OUR ADDITIONAL
[02:50:01]
DUTIES, OR IS IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT CLEARLY DEFINED ENOUGH FOR LEGAL, IT'S DEFINED IN THE CHARTER THAT THIS BODY'S ALLOWED TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.ONE OF THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THIS BODY IS TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO THE COMP PLAN.
DOES RECOMMENDATIONS GO TO COUNSEL FOR, UM, CONSIDERATION WHO COULD THEN INITIATE CHANGES? SO YOU'RE JUST STICKING WITH FOUR TWO A AS THE ALT PENULTIMATE ANSWER WITH RE WITH RESPECT TO WHAT WE'RE, WHAT, LET ME, LET ME BACK UP WITH RESPECT TO WHAT THIS, UM, POSTING IS UNDER, WHICH IS NUMBER 31 RELATED TO, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, A REC, A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RECOMMENDATION, UM, RELATED TO THE TELEWORK POLICY.
AND I'M GONNA GUIDE US BACK TO WHAT WE'RE POSTED AS.
AND IT'S NOT AN, IT'S NOT A, A QUITE, WE'RE NOT THIS EXPANSIVE.
AND SO IF THIS BODY WISHES TO HAVE A MORE EXPANSIVE CONVERSATION, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO, UM, FIND A, FIND A DIFFERENT PROCESS FOR THAT.
'CAUSE HERE WE'RE POSTED FOR ONE SPECIFIC THING.
WELL, I PROVIDED THE RECOMMENDATION ON HOW TO MOVE THIS PARTICULAR ITEM FORWARD.
AND, UM, I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT RECOMMENDATION.
CHAIR ITEM COMMISSIONER ZA, I'M, I'M SORRY.
I, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, UM, THANK YOU MS. VAN FOR THAT.
I, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY SOMETHING SIMILAR AS WELL.
IT LOOKS LIKE, I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS.
IF, IF FOLKS ARE OPEN TO IT, I THINK WE, AS THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION AND SEE WHETHER WE NEED TO HAVE A SEPARATE CONVERSATION TO DELVE INTO SOME OF THOSE.
I MEAN, I DON'T WANNA STOP YOU FROM ASKING QUESTIONS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE I FOLKS MIGHT HAVE A LOT OF PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS AND WE CAN DEFINITELY HAVE A SEPARATE TYPE TO GO OVER THOSE AS WELL.
JUST AN OPTION FOR ALL OF US TO CONSIDER.
BUT MY ARGUMENT WOULD BE, THIS IS ABOUT ITEM 31 AND, UH, IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, EVEN IF IT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION, WHERE ARE THE PROCEDURES SPELLED OUT? I MEAN, YES, SO WE'VE GOT TWO A AND THEY'RE STICKING BY THAT.
BUT IF THERE'S MORE TO IT, LIKE THE ORIGINAL INTENT IS BEING IGNORED, OR IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT I HAVEN'T FOUND YET BECAUSE I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, SHOULDN'T THAT BE ADDRESSED NOW? BECAUSE IT COULD ULTIMATELY AFFECT WHAT TYPE OF RECOMMENDATION WE MAKE OR WHAT WE SEND TO COUNSEL IN ORDER TO GET THIS PASSED INSTEAD OF JUST A RESOLUTION, A RECOMMENDATION.
MAYBE IT COULD HAVE SOMETHING WITH A LITTLE MORE TEETH OR A LITTLE MORE WEIGHT TO IT.
SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE THAT IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, THAT, THAT INTERESTS US.
AND THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I RAISED TO SAY LEGAL.
HAVING SAID THAT, UM, IT WAS NOTED, THIS IS A VERY TIMELY ISSUE AND A TIMELY CONVERSATION.
AND THE ONLY REASON I THINK WE HAVEN'T INVESTED MORE TIME PURSUING THIS IS AS WE SAW THAT THAT OPENS A WHOLE NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ABOUT PROCEDURE THAT I THINK HAVE NEVER BEEN FLESHED OUT BEFORE.
BECAUSE TO MY UNDERSTANDING, THIS MAY BE THE FIRST TIME THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ATTEMPTED TO AMEND, UM, OR INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UM, THERE'S STILL SOME QUESTION ABOUT PRECEDENT THERE.
UM, SO BECAUSE THIS IS TIMELY AND BECAUSE THIS, UM, POLICY CHANGE IS TAKING PLACE RIGHT NOW AT THE CITY CAN JEOPARDIZE OUR ABILITY TO REACH VERY CLEAR GOALS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
I THINK THE BEST WE COULD DO TONIGHT IS MOVE THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL AND MOVE IT FORWARD WITH THE LETTER THAT CLEARLY OUTLINES OUR INTENT.
AND THEN HOPE THAT FROM THERE COUNCIL WILL TAKE IT UP.
AND THEN OF COURSE WE HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL LISTEN TO THE UNION THAT THEY'RE A PART OF
MAYBE WE CAN GET IT OUT AS AN AGENDA ITEM AND WE GET TO THAT PART.
OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE TELEWORK IN THE MEMO IS, YES, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, JUST BECAUSE I DO KNOW THAT SOME OF THESE CON, SO FOR EXAMPLE, SOME OF THE, UM, AMENDMENTS WE'RE SUGGESTING ARE RELATED TO THE CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN AND THE ASMP.
UM, AND CONSIDERING THAT THERE'S ALREADY BEEN TREMENDOUS WORK, UH, BY A WORKING GROUP ACTUALLY PUT INTO WORDING SPECIFIC CHANGES TO THESE PLANS, SHOULD THESE PLANS COME BACK, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO REUSE OR SORT OF BRING UP THESE AMENDMENTS AGAIN? UH, NOTWITHSTANDING THE TIMELINESS OF THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION? I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE WORK OUTPUT BEING ABLE TO BE USED IN A DIFFERENT CONTEXT.
THAT WAS, I, I GUESS THAT WAS JUST THE STAFF JUST TO SEE IF THAT WAS BE SOMETHING THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION CORRECTLY, YOU'RE SAYING LIKE IF TRANSPORTATION BROUGHT SOME CO COULD THIS, COULD THOSE AMENDMENTS BE, SINCE THIS IS IN FRONT OF YOU, COULD THOSE AMENDMENTS BE, I GUESS IF THEY WERE GERMANE ENOUGH TO THE POSTING LANGUAGE? I WOULD ASSUME SO, YES.
UM, I WOULD REFER TO LEGAL TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CORRECT, BUT I MEAN, THAT IS WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW.
IF THERE'S AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA, YOU CAN MAKE AMENDMENTS TO THAT ITEM.
[02:55:01]
NOT QUITE SURE OF ASMP AND TELEWORK ARE THAT IN LINE.SO WITHOUT SEEING WHAT WOULD BE THE PROPOSAL WITH THE POSTING LANGUAGE, I WOULD BE UNSURE.
BUT, UM, THAT DEFINITELY IS A POSSIBILITY.
JUST TO CONFIRM IF WE HAVE FUTURE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS COME TO US.
I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM.
SO, SO, SO WE CANNOT, OR I, AND I WOULD HAVE TO THINK OF AN EXAMPLE, BUT SOMEBODY COMES UP WITH A, OH, I DUNNO, THE WATER FORWARD PLAN AND WE'RE LIKE, OH, WE HAVE TO HAVE MORE, MORE SHARE AS PART OF WATER FORWARD.
SO WE WOULD HAVE, UH, AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THOSE THINGS.
ALRIGHT, I'LL, UM, ASK IF THERE'S ANY, UM, MOTIONS ON THE TABLE.
UM, YEAH, I'M, I'M HAPPY TO, UH, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, UH, FORWARD, UH, TO COUNSEL THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, FROM THE TELEWORK WORKING GROUP, UM, FOR THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CLIMATE EQUITY AND ASMP PLANS, AND THAT WE FORWARD ALONG WITH THOSE, UM, THE, UH, MEMORANDUM WITH THE REQUEST TO INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ELEMENTS OR PORTION THEREOF, INCLUDING THE CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN, AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN IN REGARD TO TELEWORK POLICIES, SO THAT WE ADVANCE BOTH THOSE DOCUMENTS TO COUNCIL.
I SEE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER WOODS.
ANY, UM, DISCUSSION ON THAT? COMMISSIONER AL, COMMISSIONER AL? THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS SAID IN THAT MOTION.
SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF WHAT THE TELEWORK GROUP HAS DONE, BUT THERE WAS A SECOND STATEMENT ABOUT INITIATING THINGS, AND I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE SEPARATE FROM FORWARDING THE TELEWORK RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO THIS CAN'T GO TOGETHER TO, TO CLARIFY, THE TELEWORK, UH, WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THAT COUNCIL INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND ALONG WITH THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, FOR THOSE, UH, INITIATED AMENDMENTS, UM, WHICH ARE IN THE SPREADSHEET, WE ADDED A DOCUMENT WHICH JUST OUTLINES THE INTENT OF THOSE AMENDMENTS.
AND THAT IS THE, THE TITLE OF THE DOCUMENT WAS WHAT I READ, UM, JUST TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THAT'S THE DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE SENDING FORWARD TO COUNSEL.
SO, UM, IF, IF THAT MAKES IT CLEAR THAT'S IT'S, IT'S ONLY ONE, UM, ONE SET OF POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS.
MAY I ASK TO RESTATE THE MOTION? SORRY.
UM,
UM, IS THIS THE CORRECT PROCEDURE? OKAY.
SO I MOVE THAT WE, UM, FORWARD TO COUNSEL, UH, THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE TELEWORK WORKING GROUP TO THE CLIMATE EQUITY AND AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN AND INCLUDE WITH THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, THE MEMORANDUM, WITH THE REQUEST THAT COUNCIL INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ELEMENTS OR PORTION THEREOF, INCLUDING CLIMATE EQUITY AND THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN IN REGARD TO TELEWORK POLICIES, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
AND, AND IF I MIGHT CLARIFY THAT MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER STALLER.
SO YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE BACKUP THERE'S THE SPREADSHEET THAT WE HAD WORKED ON, WHICH WAS THE ACTUAL AMENDMENTS.
AND THEN AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THAT, WE WERE TOLD THAT SINCE WE COULD NOT INITIATE AMENDMENTS, WE HAD TO DO A RECOMMENDATION.
SO THE TEXT LETTER IS THE RECOMMENDATION AND WE'RE ATTACHING THE AMENDMENTS TO IT SINCE WE HAD ALREADY WORKED ON THEM.
AND THAT WAS SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WINS? RIGHT.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION AROUND THAT I, I, I REALLY DON'T THINK ANY MORE DISCUSSION IS NECESSARY, BUT
SO ALL I WANT TO, UM, SAY IS, IS REALLY AN APPEAL TO OUR COUNCIL TO TAKE THIS, UM, THESE RECOMMENDATIONS SERIOUSLY, TO CONSIDER THEM CAREFULLY.
UM, I KNOW THAT WE HEARD, UM, FROM A NUMBER OF CITY EMPLOYEES SPEAKING TO THE BENEFITS AND IMPACTS THAT TELEWORK POLICY HAS ON THEIR LIVES.
HOWEVER, WHAT WE ARE SPEAKING TO HERE IS DISTINCT.
WHAT WE ARE SPEAKING TO HERE IS THE SUCCESS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND WE BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A GENUINE THREAT TO THE SUCCESS OF THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IF THE CITY ISN'T CAREFULLY REVIEWING THE LANGUAGE AND GOALS THAT IT HAS ALREADY SET FORWARD.
SO WE HOPE THAT, THAT THE COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER THIS CAREFULLY, CONSIDER THIS IN A TIMELY FASHION, AND WE HOPE THAT COUNCIL WILL NOT, UH, THAT, THAT THE CITY WILL NOT MOVE FORWARD, UM, WITH ANY, UH, CHANGES TO, UM, TELECOMMUTING OR TELEWORK POLICIES UNTIL IT CAN AT LEAST REVIEW THESE RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECIDE HOW IT WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD.
LET, OH, COMMISSIONER WOODS, I JUST WANNA REALLY BRIEFLY THANK MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ON THIS WORKING GROUP, AND IN PARTICULAR, COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY, WHO PUT A TON OF WORK INTO THIS AND HAS, I THINK WE'VE COME UP
[03:00:01]
WITH SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY IMPACTFUL AND JUST TO THANK THE CITY EMPLOYEES AND FORMER CITY EMPLOYEES WHO WERE HERE TONIGHT AND CALLED, IN YOUR WORDS ON THIS MATTER, ARE REALLY, REALLY IMPACTFUL AS WELL, AND REALLY GRATEFUL FOR THAT.I'LL, I'LL JUST, I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK QUESTION.
UM, ALL THIS TO SAY THAT I THINK I, I WOULD REALLY ECHO THAT.
THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY ON THE WORK GROUP, AND DEFINITELY THE SPEAKERS WHO SPOKE AND WHO PREVIOUSLY SPOKE AND BROUGHT THIS TO OUR ATTENTION AS WELL.
I, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT AS, AS OUR WORKING GROUP WAS ENGAGING WITH THESE AMENDMENTS, WE HAD A REALLY INTERESTING, AND I THINK A VERY FRUITFUL CONVERSATION, WHICH IS THAT THE CITY CAN TRULY LEAD ON SOME OF THESE THINGS IN A UNIQUE WAY.
YOU KNOW, WE CAN HAVE PLANS THAT FOCUS ON HOW THE, WHAT WE WANT PRIVATE MARKET ACTORS DO, OR WHAT WE WANT, YOU KNOW, CITIZENS IN THEIR PRIVATE LIVES TO DO.
AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, THE CITY SHOULD TALK ABOUT HOW DO WE INCENTIVIZE THOSE CHANGES AND BEHAVIORS SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AS A COMMUNITY AND A LOT OF OUR GOALS.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY AS AN A PUBLIC ENTITY TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS FOR THEIR OWN SELVES.
SO, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE WERE FOCUSED ON THESE CHANGES SPECIFICALLY, I THINK THAT APPLIES ACROSS THE BOARD AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ELECTRIFICATION OF FLEET SERVICES, OR WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT CO TWO EMISSIONS AND ELECTRIFICATION OF OUR BUILDINGS, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
THERE'S A LOT OF THESE GOALS THAT WE HAVE AS A COMMUNITY AND VALUES THAT WE HAVE AS A COMMUNITY, AND WE CAN FORWARD THOSE AS A CITY BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE CITY ENGAGES IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT FACETS OF OUR, OF OUR LIVES AND OUR CITY'S LIFE, AND DEFINITELY THE EMPLOYEES AS WELL.
UM, IF I, I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER HANDS.
OH, COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ.
I THOUGHT I SAW YOUR HAND GO UP.
OH, VOTING, THAT'S A YES VOTE.
UM, THE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION STATED BY COMMISSIONER COLLIN ELLI, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WOODS ON THE DAAS.
AND ON OUR SCREEN, THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
THANK YOU ALL, AND THANK YOU TO THE WORKING GROUP FOR THAT EFFORT AND THE REALLY GOOD DISCUSSION, WHICH SOUNDS LIKE IT MAY LEAD TO A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.
IT PASSES 11 0 1 WITH COMMISSIONER COX, CORRECT? YES.
WELL, DO YOU WANNA NOTE THAT 11? NO, HE HAD TO DROP OFF.
NO, I, I JUST MEANT TO SAY, JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS IS A 11 0 0 VOTE.
BECAUSE WE HAVE, UH, ONE PERSON OFF THE DICE SO CLOSE TO YOU.
WE HAD STARTED OFF WITH AT 12 FOLKS, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY FOR THAT FOR THE MINUTES.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR LAST TWO ITEMS. UM, WE HAVE 34 MINUTES BEFORE WE NEED TO CALL TIME, SO I'M HOPING WE CAN WRAP THIS UP BEFORE THEN.
[32. Discussion and possible action concerning special called meetings pertaining to code amendments.]
ITEM NUMBER 32 IS, UH, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION CONCERNING SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS PERTAINING TO CODE AMENDMENTS.UM, THIS ONE, UM, WAS SIMPLY TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE UPCOMING MEETING DATES THAT WE HAVE.
UM, SO EVERYBODY'S VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
UM, OF COURSE, THIS COMING THURSDAY WE HAVE THE JOINT, UH, COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE HOME AMENDMENTS.
UM, THAT WILL BE THE FIRST OF THREE, UH, PUBLIC HEARINGS.
THE SECOND HEARING WILL BE OUR NOVEMBER 14TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
UM, SO AS STATED EARLIER, THE ANY ZONING CASES, UM, BEING HEARD THAT NIGHT WILL EITHER BE ON CONSENT, AND IF IT CALLS FOR A DISCUSSION, THAT MEANS THOSE WILL BE MOVED ON TO THE NOVEMBER 28TH, UM, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION DATE.
SO, UM, IF WE HAVE A LOT OF SPEAKERS ON NOVEMBER 14TH FOR A PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, MEETING AT THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE HOME AMENDMENTS, IT COULD BE POSSIBLE THAT WE HAVE TO, UM, CALL A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON NOVEMBER 15TH IN ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING THOSE SPEAKERS.
UM, SO WANT TO ALERT EVERYBODY TO THAT.
UM, AND CAN I GET A SHOW OF HANDS IF I JUST WANNA SEE A QUICK QUORUM CHECK ON THAT NOVEMBER 15TH DATE, WHICH WOULD BE A WEDNESDAY THAT BE IN THE EVENING? I THINK THAT WOULD BE IN THE EVENING AT THE TYPICAL TIME.
IS THAT CORRECT, ANDREW? WE DO NOT CHAIR COMMISSIONER LAY ON ANDREW RIVERA.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, UH, THE, UH, THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED AMONGST THE COMMISSION.
UM, ABOUT, UH, CONTINUATION AND WHAT TIME THAT WOULD, UH, COMMENCE.
UM, SO THAT'S, UH, SOMETHING FOR CONSIDERATION.
UM, LET ME FINISH GOING THROUGH THESE OTHER DATES.
UM, AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK TO NAILING DOWN A TIME IF NEEDED.
UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE THIRD PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE HOME AMENDMENTS
[03:05:01]
IS DECEMBER 7TH, GOING TO COUNCIL.UM, AND WE HAD TALKED ABOUT A DECEMBER 5TH POSSIBLE MEETING DATE, UM, FOR PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, AND IS THAT TO, THAT'S JUST TO CATCH UP ON OUR ZONING CASES, CORRECT? YES.
SO WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY ON DECEMBER.
SO DECEMBER 5TH FALLS ON A TUESDAY, AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO ESSENTIALLY HAVE A MEETING THEN IF WE ARE RUNNING BEHIND ON CASES OR OTHER ITEMS AS THE YEAR COMES TO A CLOSE.
UM, SO LET'S GO BACK TO THE WEDNESDAY PLANNING COMMISSION POTENTIAL MEETING DATE ON NOVEMBER 15TH, CHAIR.
MIGHT I RECOMMEND SOMETHING ON THAT? IF FOLKS ARE OPEN TO IT SINCE WE'RE NOT NET WE, WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL NEED TO GO ON THAT DATE.
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR STAFF TO MAYBE VIA EMAIL, HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT TIME WORKS FOR THE MAJORITY OF FOLKS AND THEN WE CAN, UM, MAYBE GO AHEAD AND SORT OF HOLD THAT TIME, BUT THERE'S A BIG POSSIBILITY THAT MIGHT NOT BE NECESSARY ANYWAYS.
CAN I, YOU ADD ONE FLAG TO THE YEAH.
UM, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO NOTE THAT IS ALSO A CODE JOINT CODES AND ORDINANCE MEETING PLANNED FOR THAT EVENING.
AND OBVIOUSLY THAT'S FINE, BUT JUST TO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT THAT OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD AFFECT QUORUM FOR THE OTHER BODY.
WE WOULD'VE TO CANCEL THAT MEETING.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LADIES ON ANDREW VERA.
SO, YES, UM, WE CAN CERTAINLY, UM, KIND OF UPHOLD THE COMMISSION, UH, TO, IF IT COMES TO, UH, UH, THAT SCENARIO TO SEE WHAT BE, WHAT WORKS BEST FOR EVERYONE.
UM, BUT A, A RAISE OF A SHOW OF HANDS REALLY QUICKLY, WOULD, IF WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS MEETING ON THE WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 15TH, WHO IS AVAILABLE? 5, 6, 7.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE, WE HAVE QUORUM.
IF THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN, UM, IT WOULD BE A, A BARELY QUORUM, IT SOUNDS LIKE.
UM, WE CAN HOLD THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DECEMBER 5TH AS A POTENTIAL PC MEETING DATE, BUT YOU MAY WANT TO PENCIL THAT IN ON YOUR CALENDAR.
JUST DEPENDS ON HOW FAR WE'RE GETTING BEHIND ON OUR ZONING CASES.
THE ONLY THING I ADD IS, UH, I MEAN, WE HAD A MANY NIGHTS DURING A POTENTIAL NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHERE WE JUST WENT LATE, SO LET'S HOPE THAT WE CAN JUST ALL PERSEVERE AND STICK TO IT AND MAYBE GET THROUGH IT THAT NIGHT.
BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO THREE O'CLOCK, FOUR O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, WOW.
HERE, I'D ALSO POINT OUT THAT, UH, IF WE, UH, IF WE DO VENTURE LATE ON THE 14TH, UH, I KNOW, YOU KNOW, I'M PROBABLY NOT GONNA BE A STAFF'S BEST FRIEND WHEN I SAY THIS, BUT IF WE DID IT ON THE 28TH, STILL GIVE IT, IT'D BE SHORT, BUT IT STILL GIVES THEM TIME TO MAKE THE SEVENTH BACK UP.
JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE IS AN OPTION.
I'M ALREADY NOT GONNA SAY SOMETHING.
YES, CHAIR COMMISSIONER LAYS ON ANDREW.
SO, UM, A CONVERSATION THAT IF WE COULD, UM, HAVE, IS ON NOVEMBER 14TH, HOW LONG DOES THE COMMISSION WISH TO GO INTO THE EVENING OR THE MORNING OF THE 15TH? COMMISSIONERS ARE, SO IT'S, SO I I, I WOULD SAY DO THINGS TO THIS.
I THINK CERTAINLY FOLKS DON'T MURDER ME.
I WAS GONNA SAY CERTAINLY MIDNIGHT, BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY AS LONG AS WE HAVE SPEAKERS, SO IF WE HAVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP, I WOULD NOT WANNA TURN FOLKS AWAY.
WE SHOULD WRAP UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CLOSE IT AND THEN MOVE ON.
BECAUSE IF FOLKS HAVE ARRIVED AND THEY'RE STAYING LATE, I WOULD NOT WANT TO SEND ANYONE HOME AND SAY THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK LATER AGAIN, UNLESS WE SAY THAT THERE'S A CERTAIN DATE OR A TIME.
JUST OF A CLARIFICATION FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE NOT THROUGH, WENT THROUGH THIS EARLIER OR NEW TO THIS WHOLE PROCESS, UM, IS IT CONSIDERED, UM, I GUESS WHAT IS AN HOUR THAT WAS NORMALLY TWO OR 3:00 AM WAS THERE A CUTOFF THAT WAS USUALLY USED FOR PREVIOUS TYPES OF HEARINGS ALONG THESE LINES WHEN IT WAS QUITE A LONG HEARING? NO, I, IF I, IF MEMORY SERVES ME RIGHT, I FEEL LIKE ONE 30 MIGHT BE THE LATEST WE MIGHT HAVE GONE.
SO ONE 30 AROUND THAT TIME, WE ACTUALLY WOULD ACCOUNT FOR MORE TIME THINKING WE'D HAVE MORE SPEAKERS.
ONE TIME WE SAID WE'D TAKE SPEAKERS BETWEEN BLANK AND BLANK, BUT WHEN WE RAN OUT OF SPEAKERS, WE STOPPED ONE DAY WHEN TECHNICALLY THE TIME
[03:10:01]
WE ORIGINALLY SAID WENT A LITTLE BIT LATER, BUT THERE WERE NO MORE SPEAKERS.SO WE, WE OVERESTIMATED COMMISSIONER, WE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON THE YES.
COMMISSIONER MUELLER, I, I THINK COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS WAS AHEAD OF ME.
SO, SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I'M HEARING, AND I I DID SHARE SOME OF THIS WITH THE MAYOR THIS AFTERNOON, IS ABOUT THE PROCESS.
AND I'M GONNA HAVE TO REGISTER MY CONCERN ABOUT THE PROCESS, BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE PLANNING ON HAVING A MEETING THAT GOES THIS LONG, IT BECOMES VERY EXCLUSIVE AND NOT INCLUSIVE OF PEOPLE WHO ARE FAM, WHO ARE FAMILIES WHO LIVE IN MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES, AND WHO CANNOT REALLY ATTEND A MEETING THAT LONG INTO THE NIGHT IF THEY CAN ATTEND ON THAT DATE AT ALL.
AND SO, I, I'M JUST GONNA REGISTER MY CONCERN AS SOMEBODY WHO OPERATES IN A MARGINALIZED COMMUNITY, UH, IN TERMS OF THIS PROCESS, THAT IT, IT REALLY LENDS ITSELF TO PEOPLE WHO ARE WELL HEALED, WHO ARE INSIDERS, WHO HAVE THE INFORMATION, WHO ARE, WHO HAVE THE RESOURCES AND THE ABILITY TO STAY UP THE ENTIRE NIGHT WITHOUT THE, THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF PEOPLE WHO COME FROM WORKING, WORKING INCOME AND LOWER INCOME FAMILIES.
SO I, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, WELL, IT'S JUST, FROM MY VIEW, IT WOULD BE BETTER TO, IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE THAT KIND OF, OF TURNOUT THAT WE, THAT WE TRY TO AT LEAST MAKE IT MORE INCLUSIVE BY SETTING ASIDE TWO DAYS TO HAVE THIS HEARING INSTEAD OF, UH, KIND OF REALLY CUTTING OFF, UM, THE ACCESS TO MANY COMMUNITIES WHO ARE JUST NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS TYPE OF PROCESS.
I, I, I SAID THAT TO THE MAYOR EARLIER.
I'VE HAD ALREADY PEOPLE TELLING ME THAT THIS IS NOT A PROCESS THAT'S INCLUSIVE OF PEOPLE OF COLOR AND COMMUN IN MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES.
SO I'M JUST GOING TO BRING THAT TO THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS BODY.
YEAH, I GUESS TO TAG ON THAT, I WAS GONNA ASK, DO WE, THE SIGN UP FOR SPEAKER PROCESS, THAT'LL BE BEFORE, BUT IN TERMS OF ESTABLISHING HOW MUCH TIME PEOPLE ARE GONNA HAVE TO SPEAK, AND THAT, IS THAT ALREADY ESTABLISHED OR ARE WE GONNA BE DOING THAT AT THE START OF OUR NOVEMBER 14TH PUBLIC HEARING? UM, MR. RIVERA, WE CHAIR SHAW, AND YOU AND I HAVE NOT TALKED ABOUT THIS SPECIFICALLY YET, BUT I WOULD ASSUME WE'RE FOLLOWING WHAT COUNCIL IS DOING.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER LIAISON IS CORRECT.
UM, SO THE, UM, COUNCIL IS HAVING TWO MINUTE ALLOTMENT TIMES.
SO I GUESS, IS THAT, IS THAT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT OR IS THAT JUST PRECEDENT CHAIR? IT'S, UM, WHAT, UM, COUNCIL ROLES ARE, YOU KNOW, FOR THE OCTOBER 26TH MEETING.
AND SO WE WOULD JUST, UH, MIMIC THAT.
NOT A LEGAL REQUIREMENT, BUT JUST FOLLOWING PRECEDENT.
MM-HMM,
UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO EXPECT THAT SAME KIND OF TURNOUT THAT WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO PLAN FOR THAT AND, AND ALLOW PEOPLE WHO, WHO NEED TO SPEAK TO PLAN FOR THAT ACCORDINGLY.
LIKE WE, AND FOR OUR MEETING PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO PHONE IN, IS THAT CORRECT? THEY WILL HAVE THAT OPTION AS WELL.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LADIES ON ANDREW? THAT IS CORRECT.
WE WILL HAVE EACH HYBRID MEETING.
UM, THE, UM, TELECONFERENCE REGISTRATION WILL CLOSE AT NOON, UH, THE TUESDAY OF THE MEETING, AND, UM, IN PERSON WILL CLOSE AT, UM, 4:00 PM THE DAY OF THE MEETING.
UM, SO YOU'RE NOT GONNA KNOW UNTIL NOON REALLY HOW OUR NUMBERS ARE LOOKING FOR PEOPLE THAT WANT TO TESTIFY ON THE 14TH.
THE REGISTRATION WILL OPEN THE FRIDAY, UM, BEFORE THE MEETING SO WE CAN, UM, I CAN START PROVIDING THE COMMISSION WITH, UM, SPEAKER NUMBERS, UM, CLOSE THE BUSINESS EACH DAY.
AND I THINK AS WE START TO SEE HOW THE NUMBERS ARE SHAPING UP OVER THE WEEKEND, WE CAN, UM, GET A LITTLE MORE SOLID
[03:15:01]
ABOUT THAT NOVEMBER 15TH DATE.UM, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE'LL SEND OUT A, A SURVEY TO THE COMMISSION TO SEE ONE IF YOU'RE ABLE TO MAKE THAT DATE.
AND THEN TWO, THE, THE PREFERABLE START TIME.
COMMISSIONERS ARE ON, ON THE FLIP SIDE, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT FOR THE COMMISSIONERS AS WE'RE PREPARING FOR THURSDAY.
SO JUST A REMINDER TO FOLKS THAT EVEN THOUGH WE WILL GET A STAFF BRIEFING, UM, THIS THURSDAY, WE WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE MORE QUESTIONS FROM STAFF.
WE HAVE THE Q AND A REPORT, UM, SO ALREADY, UM, MR. VE HAD SHARED THAT WE CAN SEND IN WRITTEN QUESTIONS.
WE WILL ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO Q AND A WITH STAFF ON THE 14TH AND Q AND A WITH FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AS WELL.
SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT AS WE'RE GOING INTO THURSDAY, WHICH IS GONNA BE A LONG DAY THAT IF FOLKS FEEL LIKE THEY CAN WAIT WITH SOME OF THEIR QUESTIONS, WE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DIG INTO SOME OF THOSE SUBSTANTIVE DETAILS ON THE 14TH.
AND JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, IF YOU ALL HAVEN'T LOOKED, BUT THERE IS ACTUALLY ADDITIONAL BACKUP THAT'S BEEN POSTED FOR THE 10 26 MEETING.
SO FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE ON THE WORKING GROUP AND OR INTERESTED IN THE MORE DETAILED ASPECTS OF THESE CHANGES, MIGHT BE A GREAT TIME TO START LOOKING AT THAT.
NOW, UM, WE ARE NOT POSTED FOR ACTION ON THIS ITEM, IT WAS JUST A DISCUSSION.
SO ANY OTHER THOUGHTS, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? OKAY.
UM, WE'LL BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR THAT SURVEY COMING FROM MR. RIVERA.
AND MOVING ON TO NUMBER THREE, CHAIR.
I DO, I HAVE, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.
UH, KIND OF GETTING BACK TO COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS' POINT, UH, OUR, OUR THOUGHTS HERE, UM, WOULD IT, WOULD IT, WOULD IT BE IN LINE OR WOULD IT BE, UH, APPROPRIATE TO, TO JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA HOLD OUR HEARING ON THE 14TH AND WE'RE GONNA TAKE SPEAKERS, BUT WE ARE, WE ARE ALSO GONNA RESERVE SOME TIME ON THE 28TH, UH, TO PUT THAT OUT AS AN OPTION THAT IF WE GET OVERWHELMED, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S NOTHING WRITTEN IN STONE THAT SAYS THIS HAS TO GO ON THE 14TH, OR AT LEAST THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
UH, I THINK THERE IS THOUGH IT'S NOTIFICATION, RIGHT? ANDREW CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LAYS ON ANDREW VER.
SO, UM, YOU PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO SPECIFY, UH, AUTOMATICALLY SPECIFY A SECOND DATE UNTIL YOU RUN INTO THAT SCENARIO.
UM, OR ELSE YOU'LL HAVE TO, UM, MEET ON THAT SECOND DATE, YOU'LL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THAT SECOND DATE.
SO, UM, IF YOU HAVE THE, UH, IT'S BEST TO HAVE THE HEARING ON NUMBER 14TH, AND THEN IF NEED BE AT THE END OF THE MEETING OR CLOSE TO THE, UM, SAY, UM, YOUR, THE COMMISSION IS, UM, UM, COMING UP UNTIL A LATE HOUR, UM, SAY, YOU KNOW, UM, YOU'LL CONTINUE THE MEETING TO THE FOLLOWING DATE WITH A SPECIFIC TIME
SO, BUT ANDREW, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN ABOUT THE 28TH? UH, MY, MY THOUGHTS ARE THAT IT, IT COULD JEOPARDIZE THE AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION ZONING CASES THAT WE'RE HEARING THAT GETS PUSHED BACK EVEN FARTHER.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I KINDA LIKE THE IDEA ALSO, AND, AND I THINK ALL OF US HAVE TOUCHED ON THIS TO SOME DEGREE, THAT ALL THE FOLKS THAT ARE REALLY EXCITED TO COME AND TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ADDRESSING, YOU KNOW, OUR OUTDATED CODE AND THE, AND THE RULES AROUND BUILDING DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING HOMES IN MUCH OF OUR CITY, THEY'RE GONNA BE EXCITED TO TALK ABOUT IT.
AND SO I, I WOULD HATE FOR US TO BE LIKE, OKAY, WELL WE'VE MADE IT TO THIS POINT SO Y'ALL CAN GO HOME AND COME BACK LATER.
SO THE FOLKS WHO ARE COMING UP TO SHOW, IT'S GONNA BE REALLY GREAT TO HEAR FROM EVERYBODY.
AND ALSO, ONE THING I'VE HEARD IN THE PAST IS, I DON'T KNOW IF, IF THERE IS A SECOND DATE, IS THERE ANYTHING TO PREVENT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN FROM COMING DOWN TO SPEAK AGAIN? OH, WE SHOULD.
THE SIGNUPS WOULD CLOSE, WOULDN'T THEY? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
I THINK STATE LAW, IF YOU'RE POSTED, YOU HAVE TO BE OPEN CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LAZEN ADVERSE.
SO IF YOU'RE CONTINUING THE MEETING TO THE FOLLOWING DATE, YOUR SPEAKER REGISTRATION, UM, IS WHAT IT WAS WHEN THE PUB, WHEN THE REGISTRATION CLOSED.
IF YOU'RE POSTPONING TO ANOTHER DATE, THEN YOU START WITH A FRESH REGISTRATION.
MY GUESS IS WE'RE JUST GONNA FIGURE THIS OUT ON THE 14TH.
BUT I THINK TO COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS'S POINT, THAT DOESN'T ALLOW PEOPLE TO PLAN ACCORDING, AND I, AND I, AND I REALLY JUST WANNA REITERATE
[03:20:01]
THAT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S VERY, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO EXPRESS THIS REALLY, BECAUSE, UH, WE ARE IN A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THAT THE CITY WILL DO.AND WE'VE ALREADY SET UP A PROCESS BY WHICH A LOT OF PEOPLE CANNOT PARTICIPATE.
WE'VE SET UP THAT PROCESS IN THAT WAY SO THAT MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES WHO HAVE A LOT OF INTEREST, YOU SAY A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THIS AND THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT, BUT THEY, THEY DON'T LOOK, THEY'RE NOT GONNA LOOK LIKE ME AND COME FROM MY COMMUNITIES.
BY AND LARGE, WE'RE GONNA SEE THE SAME GROUPS OF PEOPLE THAT WE ALWAYS SEE BECAUSE OF THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE SET UP TO BEGIN WITH.
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE, HOW WE BRING THEM INTO THE MIX AND LET THEM HAVE, SAY, IN THEIR CITY GOVERNMENT.
UM, I'LL JUST QUICKLY JUMP IN HERE BECAUSE I REALLY APPRECIATE, UM, THE POINTS THAT COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS IS MAKING, AND I THINK THEY ARE SPOT ON.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS A, AS AN ORGANIZER WORKING IN THE COMMUNITY, I THINK, UH, WORKING CLASS PEOPLE, PEOPLE OF COLOR, PEOPLE IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE, UM, NOT BEEN RESOURCED IN THE SAME WAY, UM, REALLY DO STRUGGLE, UM, TO SHOW UP TO ALL OF THIS PROCESS.
THEY, THEY, THEY STRUGGLE TO SHOW UP TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON TUESDAY NIGHTS.
AND IT IS TRUE THAT BY AND LARGE, OVERWHELMINGLY WE DO HEAR FROM WIDER, MORE AFFLUENT FOLKS BECAUSE OF THAT.
BECAUSE IT IS TRUE THAT THE ENTIRE PROCESS AROUND OUR ZONING CONVERSATION WAS DESIGNED TO PRIVILEGE CERTAIN VOICES.
AND SO I COMPLETELY WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TRUTH.
HAVING SAID THAT, I ALSO WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IF WE TALK ABOUT WORKING CLASS FOLKS, YOU KNOW, COMING OUT TO CITY COUNCIL ON A WEEKDAY OR ON A WEEKNIGHT IS VERY DIFFICULT.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND SO I THINK SOME KIND OF MORE INCLUSIVE PROCESS WOULD MAYBE HAVE INCLUDED SOMETHING ON THE WEEKEND.
UM, BUT THAT ISN'T SOMETHING THAT, UM, THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DECIDE OR CONTROL COUNSEL SET UP A PROCESS THE WAY THEY DID.
I THINK THAT THERE WILL BE IMPORTANT VOICES THAT WILL BE LACKING IN THE CONVERSATION, BUT I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH WE CAN DO TO FIX THAT IN TERMS OF MOVING HOURS AROUND HERE AND THERE, FUNDAMENTALLY, MANY OF THE FOLKS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM WON'T BE ABLE TO COME OUT ON A WEEKDAY OR ON A WEEKNIGHT, AND THEY WON'T, WON'T BE ABLE TO COME TO THIS BUILDING DOWNTOWN AND HANG OUT FOR THE MANY HOURS THAT WILL BE NEEDED TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY.
AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A LESSON THAT WE NEED TO TAKE, UM, FROM THIS AND THINK ABOUT ONLINE PLATFORMS AND OTHER FORMS OF ENGAGING WITH AND LISTENING TO FOLKS.
BUT, UM, JUST KIND OF FACING THE REALITY OF, OF, OF WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.
I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH WE CAN FIX OR SOLVE THIS BIGGER, DEEPER STRUCTURAL ISSUE THAT WE HAVE, UM, BY SORT OF, YOU KNOW, TINKERING WITH IT.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE A STRONG POSITION ON THIS.
I JUST, I I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ANYTHING WE DO WILL BE FAR FROM IDEAL.
I, I THINK WE HAVE SOME FRAMEWORK TO WORK WITH.
WE KNOW WE'RE GONNA START OUR MEETING AT SIX O'CLOCK ON THE 14TH.
WE'LL HAVE OUR AGENDA AND THE TYPICAL STUFF.
SO IF WE WERE TO GET TO PUBLIC TESTIMONY STARTING BY 7:00 PM JUST TO RUN SOME ROUND MATH, JUST DO SOME ROUND MATH WHEN WE, AND WE ALL AGREE, OKAY, MIDNIGHT IS REASONABLE, THAT GIVES US FIVE HOURS OF TESTIMONY, THAT GIVES US 300 MINUTES OF TESTIMONY.
SO RIGHT THERE, THAT'S 150 PEOPLE AT TWO MINUTES A PERSON.
BUT WE'RE KNOW, WE'RE NOT GONNA GET THROUGH 150 AND CALLING PEOPLE UP OR GETTING PEOPLE ON THE LINE.
SO IF WE SAY WE CAN GET THROUGH A HUNDRED PEOPLE ON NOVEMBER 14TH, THEN I'M WONDERING, UM, UM, ANDREW, MR. LIAISON THEN CAN WE SET UP A SYSTEM WHEREBY AS PEOPLE KIND OF SIGN UP, WE CAN GIVE THEM A GENERALIZED TIME WINDOW IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY SIGN UP, WHICH WE'RE KIND OF ALREADY DOING FOR OUR REMOTE FOLKS ANYWAY.
AND THEN ALREADY KNOW WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO CUT OFF SOMEWHERE AROUND A HUNDRED FOLKS.
AND, AND THOSE FOLKS WOULD KNOW IN ADVANCE, DEPENDING ON WHEN THEY SIGN UP, YOU COULD TELL 'EM RIGHT THEN AND THERE.
WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA PICK YOUR TESTIMONY UP ON THE 28TH CHAIR COMMISSION BECAUSE WE DON'T NEED TIME TO GO OVER, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON AMENDMENTS WE WANNA OFFER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE'RE GONNA NEED THAT TIME TOO.
AND, AND SOME OF THE PEOPLE ON THE COMMISSION ACTUALLY WORK ALSO
SO, YOU KNOW, IT, WE, WE'VE GOTTA WE'VE GOTTA MAKE THIS WORK FOR EVERYBODY.
AND, AND IN THE FUTURE, I KNOW THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER CONLEY LAID OUT SOME THINGS, BUT I MEAN, GEOGRAPHY IS PART OF THE ISSUE.
SOME PEOPLE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE ABILITY TO, TO GET TO CITY COUNCIL.
WHY IS IT THAT WE'RE NOT HOLDING MORE OF THESE KINDS OF MEETINGS THAT IMPACT, YOU KNOW, A A WHOLE GROUP OF PEOPLE ACROSS ETHNICITIES AND RACES AND INCOME LINES? WHY AREN'T WE HOLDING THEM WHERE THEY ARE,
[03:25:01]
WHERE THEY LIVE, UH, AS OPPOSED TO HAVING THEM TO TRY TO COME TO THIS MEETING EITHER ONLINE OR IN PERSON AND HANG OUT FOR THIS AMOUNT OF HOURS.AND LIKE, THEY DON'T HAVE CHILDREN THAT HAVE TO GET TO SCHOOL IN THE MORNING.
LIKE THEY DON'T HAVE PARENTS THAT THEY'RE CARING FOR.
LIKE, THEY DON'T HAVE JOBS THAT BEGIN VERY EARLY AND THEY CANNOT TELECOMMUTE.
UM, BECAUSE MANY OF THEM ARE, ARE WHAT WE, WE CALL DURING THE, UH, UH, PANDEMIC ESSENTIAL WORKERS.
SO THEY HAVE TO BE AT THAT GROCERY STORE.
UM, AND IT, IT, IT IS A SAD STATEMENT IN MY VIEW THAT WE CONTINUE TO PUT UP A PROCESS IN WHICH IS DESIGNED SO THAT, SO THAT PEOPLE FROM MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES OF COLOR, BIPO COMMUNITIES CAN NOT PARTICIPATE UNLESS THEY ARE RESOURCED AND WELL HEALED.
AND THAT'S MY, UM, PUSHBACK ON THIS PROCESS.
AND I, MAYBE THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN FIX NOW, BUT MY GOODNESS, IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE OUGHT TO BE ALL ABOUT FIXING.
SOMEBODY SAID WE'RE THE PLANNING COMMISSION EARLIER, AND INDEED WE ARE.
BUT WHO ARE WE PLANNING FOR OR WE JUST PLANNING FOR A CERTAIN SEGMENT OF THIS COMMUNITY? THAT'S MY QUESTION CHAIR.
I, I KNOW WE'RE GONNA PROBABLY GONNA WRAP THIS UP SOON.
UM, THE, THE, THE GOOD NEWS ABOUT EVERYTHING WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT IS THESE ITEMS HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED IN SOME FORM OR FASHION FOR 10 YEARS, IF NOT MUCH LONGER THAN THAT.
AND, UM, I DON'T THINK ANYTHING THAT WE WILL BE DISCUSSING OR DEBATING UP HERE LOOKS TO MAKE HOUSING MORE DIFFICULT TO BUILD.
IT ACTUALLY ALLOWS FOR HOUSING TO BE EASIER TO BUILD SMALLER UNITS, AFFORDABLE TO.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE TIME TO OPEN UP THAT DEBATE.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO GET INTO THAT, AND I'M SURE EVERYBODY AGREEABLE TO MORE PEOPLE.
SO THE GOOD NEWS IS, YOU KNOW, THESE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED A LONG TIME.
I DON'T THINK WE WANNA GET INTO THAT DEBATE RIGHT NOW.
I THINK WE WANNA TALK ABOUT HOW WE'RE GONNA OPEN THIS UP TO THE PUBLIC.
WERE YOU, I, I'M GONNA GET TALKED OVER.
SO LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND WRAP THIS UP.
WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY NOTICED TO DISCUSS ANY OF THIS.
I KNOW, I THINK HE WAS GETTING TO HIS POINT ABOUT THE DATES, BUT ANDREW, YOU HAD YES.
CHAIR, UH, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LAY LIAISON, ANDREW, REAL QUICKLY, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I HOPE TO DO, UM, DURING THE EVENING ON NOVEMBER 14TH IS TO, UM, PERIODICALLY SEND OUT AN EMAIL TO THE SPEAKERS, UM, TO LET THEM KNOW WHERE WE ARE, UM, AT, AT THAT, UM, NUMBER OF SPEAKER.
UM, PROBABLY EVERY 50 TO A HUNDRED.
I'LL SEND OUT AN EMAIL, UM, JUST TO LET 'EM KNOW THE, UM, KIND OF THE TIME ESTIMATE WE'RE LOOKING AT AND, UM, UH, UM, JUST TO ASSIST WITH, UM, UM, LETTING KNOW SPEAKERS, UH, LETTING THE SPEAKERS KNOW WHERE WE ARE IN THE ORDER.
UM, ONE THING THEY WON'T HAVE TO DO ON THE TELECONFERENCE IS THEY WON'T HAVE TO STAY ON THE LINE THE ENTIRE TIME.
THEY WILL BE ABLE TO CALL IN, UM, PROBABLY 20 TO 30 MINUTES PRIOR TO THEIR SPEAKING TIME.
[33. Discussion regarding 2024 meeting calendar. ]
OKAY, UM, LET'S MOVE ON TO NUMBER 33.UM, THIS IS ABOUT, UH, DISCUSSION.
NO ACTION, UH, REGARDING THE 2024 MEETING CALENDAR THAT WAS IN YOUR BACKUP.
SO THESE ARE ALL THE POTENTIAL DATES, UM, FOR 2024.
UM, JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THOSE DATES AS IS.
AND, UM, DEPENDING ON, UH, IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES, UM, THIS COULD POTENTIALLY BE AN ITEM ON THE NOVEMBER 14TH AGENDA THAT WE CAN PUT ON CONSENT AND THUS ADOPT OUR 2024 MEETING DATES.
ANY THOUGHTS ON WHAT IS CURRENTLY POSTED? MAJOR CONFLICTS? WE TYPICALLY TRY TO LOOK AT SPRING BREAK AND MAJOR HOLIDAYS, UM, AND I THINK WE'VE CLEARED THOSE.
I THINK OUR, UH, BYLAWS HAVE US ADOPT OUR MEETING AND DATES AT THE FIRST MEETING IN NOVEMBER.
SO IDEALLY WE WOULD BE OKAY WITH THESE OR MAKE CHANGES, UM, THAT ARE REFLECTED ON OUR NOVEMBER 14TH AGENDA, UM, THAT WE THEN VOTE ON CONSENT.
SO COMMISSIONER ZARK, SATUR, IF I MIGHT JUST CLARIFY THE ASK FOR THE DAYS SINCE WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THIS ON THE 14TH.
HOPEFULLY FOLKS CAN LOOK AT IT RIGHT NOW AND LET US KNOW IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE INCORPORATED, BECAUSE THIS WILL LIKELY BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE 14TH.
[03:30:01]
UM, SINCE WE'RE GONNA BE DOING IT ALL, DID SOMEBODY, UH, DIRECT US TO WHERE THAT WAS? I THINK I MISSED THAT WHEN I WAS REVIEWING MATERIAL.IT WAS IN THE, UM, EMAIL WITH THE, UH, COLIN, UM, WITH THE LOGIN INFORMATION.
IT'S ON THE VERY LAST PAGE OF THE AGENDA.
I'M LOOKING, I'M LOOKING, I HAVE ALL THE BACKUP MATERIALS.
UH, MR. RIVERA, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO PULL IT UP ON THE SCREEN SO FOLKS CAN LOOK AT IT? SO TRUE.
COMMISSIONERS WILL JUST DO THAT IF YOU ALL GIVE OUR STAFF A SECOND.
GOOD CHAIR, COMMISSIONER ZANER, AS WE DO THAT, UH, YOU'LL NOTE THAT WE, UM, YOUR BYLAWS STIPULATE YOU MEET ON THE SECOND AND FOURTH TUESDAY.
AND SO THE ONLY, UH, DATES WE'RE LOOKING AT AMENDING ARE THE SECOND, UM, MEETING IN NOVEMBER AND THE SECOND MEETING IN DECEMBER.
UM, THOSE WOULD BE, UH, CONSENT AND AGENDA MEETINGS AT, UM, FOR BOTH THOSE DATES STARTING AT 5:00 PM THOSE BE WHAT MEETINGS? CONSENT ONLY, ONLY.
SO JUST SO FOLKS CAN FOLLOW ALONG, AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW IS OUR DRAFT AGENDA.
SO IF FOLKS HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON IT, YOU ALL CAN LET US KNOW.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT IT, REALLY, IT'S THE SECOND AND FOURTH TUESDAY FOR ALL MONTHS.
AND AS MR. VERA SAID, ONLY FOR THE SECOND, THE FOURTH, UH, TUESDAY MEETING ON NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER, WE WILL BE CHANGING THOSE.
SO IN NOVEMBER, WE WOULD BE MOVING FROM NOVEMBER 26TH TO NOVEMBER 19TH FOR A 5:00 PM MEETING, CONSENT ONLY.
AND THEN DECEMBER, IT WOULD ALSO BE THE FOURTH TUESDAY, WE WILL BE MOVING FROM DECEMBER 24TH TO DECEMBER, UH, DECEMBER 17TH, 5:00 PM CONSENT ONLY CHAIR.
IS THERE A REASON WHY WE HAVE TO KEEP THESE AS CONSENT ONLY? IS IT, IS IT THAT WE'RE SHARING THE ROOM AND WE NEED TO GET OUT? OR IS THERE ANY HOPE OF US GETTING OUR OWN ROOM? I JUST FEEL BAD HAVING TWO CONSENT ONLY MEETINGS BACK TO BACK TWO MONTHS, BACK TO BACK CHAIR COMMISSION LADIES AND ANDREW.
SO, UM, IN THE SCENARIOS THAT, THAT YOU DO NEED ON THAT, UM, ONE OF THOSE, UH, MEETINGS, I THINK WE CAN, UM, UH, SET IT TO WHERE IT COULD BE A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I JUST FEEL BAD US REQUIRING A BIG POSTPONEMENT FOR EVERY DISCUSSION CASE.
SO FOR NOW, IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, MR. RIVERA, WHAT WE'RE WE'RE SAYING IS THAT FOR NOVEMBER 26TH, SORRY, NOVEMBER 19TH AND DECEMBER 17TH, WE WOULD STILL HAVE START TIME AT 5:00 PM AND IT WOULD JUST BE A REGULAR MEETING.
AND OF COURSE, IF ON THE DAY OFF IT LOOKS LIKE WE CAN DO A CONSENT I AGENDA, WE CAN DO THAT.
DOES THAT REFLECT COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WHAT YOU WERE THINKING? CHAIR ONE, ONE THING I, I, UM, WOULD ASK THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER IS THAT BECAUSE THAT IS, UM, UM, THE AMENDED DATES ACTUALLY PIGGYBACK ON A ZAP NIGHT.
SO WHAT WE WOULD DO IS, UM, PROBABLY START THE PC MEETING, UM, LATER AT SAY, UH, SEVEN O'CLOCK.
SO THEN I, I GUESS AT THIS POINT WHAT WE'RE SUGGESTING IS THAT FOR NOVEMBER 19TH, UH, AND DECEMBER 17TH, WE WOULD BE STARTING AT 7:00 PM NOTED.
UM, OUR VIRTUAL FOLKS, CAN YOU TAKE A SCREENSHOT SO WE CAN PULL THIS DOWN AND SEE YOUR FACES? SO WE SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
AND CHAIR, I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND OUR MEETING BY 15 MINUTES.
SECOND, IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY, I'LL, ANYONE IMPOSED? NO.
UM, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS ON THE DATES THAT WERE SHOWN? COMMISSIONER HOWARD, THIS IS FOR PURELY SELFISH REASONS, BUT AISD GRADUATIONS ON THAT MEET THAT FOURTH WEEK OF MAY, AND MY SON IS GRADUATING ON THE 28TH, THANK GOD.
SO I WILL NOT BE PRESENT FOR THAT MEETING AT 4:00 PM I UNDERSTAND
AND, AND I WOULD ALSO ADD A COMMENT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO OUR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR, A REMINDER THAT APART FROM THE CHAIR, EVERYONE ELSE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN VIRTUALLY AS WELL.
SO IF YOU'RE TRAVELING AT ANY TIME AND YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO JOIN VIRTUALLY, YOU CAN ALWAYS DO THAT.
SO, UM, WITH THOSE CHANGES, WE WILL ADD THIS TO THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE 14TH.
HOWEVER, IF YOU DO HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS, WE CAN ALWAYS PULL IT AND IT WOULD MOVE TO THE 28TH
[03:35:01]
IF, FOR DISCUSSION.[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
OKAY.UM, I'LL MOVE ON TO, UH, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. YES, CHAIR GOEN.
I THINK NOW WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNE TIME TO ASK IF WE COULD HAVE A DISCUSSION AND IF YOU WANTED TO PHRASE IT AS WITH POSSIBLE ACTION, UH, AROUND THE ROLE THE PLANNING COMMISSION PLAYS IN AMENDING, UH, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SO THAT THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD AGENDA ITEM.
AND, UH, THE OTHER NEW AGENDA ITEM.
SO FIRST JUST APPRECIATE WHAT COMMISSIONERS CONNELLY AND PHILLIPS WERE SAYING.
UH, IT'S, IT'S NOT JUST, OR UNDERPRIVILEGED FOLKS WHO HAVE ACCESS OR TROUBLE ACCESSING CITY HALL.
I HAD TO LEAVE MYSELF, I COULDN'T EVEN TALK ON, ON THE PALM, THE PALM DISTRICT AMENDMENT BECAUSE I HAD TO GET BACK TO WORK.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ACCESSIBILITY AND THAT'S SOMETHING I'VE ALWAYS HAD A PROBLEM WITH WITH CITY HALL.
NOW THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EVERYTHING BEING BEHIND LOCKED DOORS, YOU CAN'T EVEN GET TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE ANYMORE.
LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE WORKING ON AS, AS, AS A COMMUNITY AND A WHOLE IS MAKING CITY HALL MORE ACCESSIBLE TO EVERYBODY FROM THE PERSON WHO WASHES DISHES AND MCDONALD'S ALL THE WAY TO, WELL, I THINK THE BILLIONAIRES PROBABLY HAVE ENOUGH ACCESS, BUT IF, IF YOU GET MY POINT THAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT ON THE AGENDA.
MAYBE A RESOLUTION TO COUNSEL DISCUSSION, MAYBE POSSIBLE ACTION OF A RESOLUTION TO COUNSEL.
WE COULD COME UP WITH SOME IDEAS, MAYBE POINT 'EM IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION OR HELP THEM, BECAUSE I KNOW THEY'RE CRAZY BUSY AND REALLY DON'T HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT IT.
YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT BECAUSE, UM, HAVING LIVED IN THIS CITY FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND HAVING, UM, DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH AND WRITTEN A LOT OF ARTICLES ABOUT ACCESS AND, UM, EQUITY ISSUES, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT WORKING PEOPLE IN GENERAL, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT WHOLE COMMUNITIES OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN LOCKED OUT, KEPT OUT, PREVENTED OUT FROM THE PROCESS.
UM, BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THE PROCESS IS STRUCTURED, IT'S STRUCTURED, IT IS A CONTINUATION OF SYSTEMIC RACISM IN, IN TERMS OF HOW THIS PROCESS WAS INITIALLY SET UP DECADES AGO, THAT NONE OF US HERE HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH, BUT THAT IS THE VESTIGES OF THE PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN SET UP.
AND WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 1928 OR BEYOND, AND, AND BY THE WAY, WE'RE APPROACHING THE HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY OF 1928 IN FOUR YEARS TIME, THIS IS A PROCESS THAT'S AN OFFSHOOT OF ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
AND IT REALLY DOES NEED TO TO BE DISCUSSED AND HOPEFULLY CHANGE SO THAT WE CAN FINALLY PROVIDE EQUITY AND ACCESS TO PEOPLE ACROSS THE BOARD.
AGAIN, IF WE'RE THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE NEED TO BE ABOUT PLANNING FOR EVERYONE AND NOT JUST PLANNING FOR THE WELL-HEELED, THE WELL-RESOURCED, THE PEOPLE WHO CAN, CAN SHOW UP AND WHO ARE IN THE KNOW.
AND AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I, I, I APPRECIATE, UH, YOUR COMMENT COMMISSIONER ABOUT PUTTING THIS ON THE AGENDA.
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR PHRASING IT SO MUCH MORE ELOQUENTLY THAN I DID.
ANDREW, CAN UM, CHAIR COHEN CO-SPONSOR AN ITEM CHAIR? IT'S BEST IF A, UM, YEAH.
MS. PHILLIPS CAN HAVE A, A CO-SPONSOR.
SO COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, UM, IS THERE A CO-SPONSOR ON THAT ITEM? UH, COMMISSIONER AL.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, WE'LL HAVE TO VERIFY THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN, THAT WE CAN WORK ON.
I THINK THAT COMES BACK TO SOME OF YOUR EARLIER QUESTIONS SINCE IT'S NOT TECHNICALLY A LAND USE ISSUE.
CHAIR COMMISSIONER LAZEN, I'LL WORK WITH HIS SPONSORS.
UM, AND THAT'S A, A DIFFERENT, UM, FUTURE AGENDA ITEM THAN THE UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO WERE THERE CO-SPONSORS FOR THAT ONE? UH, COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
[BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]
WE'LL MOVE ON TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUP UPDATES.UM, SO CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE WE MET LAST WEEK, UM,
[03:40:01]
I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT WE'VE DONE AND AND CHAIR, WE CONSIDERED THE PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE, UH, REDRAFT.UM, THE COJC FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, BUT WE ASKED THAT THE DRAFT ORDINANCE BE SHARED WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALONG WITH SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT THE FEE CALCULATION MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
UM, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO POSTPONE TODAY.
SO WE CAN HOPEFULLY GET THAT FROM STAFF AND LIKELY WE'LL BE ABLE TO VOTE ON THAT ITEM ON CONSENT ON NOVEMBER 14TH.
UH, COMP PLAN, JOINT COMMITTEE, ANY UPDATES?
AND THEN WE, UH, FORMALIZED OUR MEETING SCHEDULE FOR NEXT YEAR.
AND THEN, UM, UH, WHAT'S, UH, THE PLANNING STAFF, THE NEWLY ENHANCED AND EXPANDED PLANNING STAFF HAS, HAS IN STORE FOR IMAGINE AUSTIN AND OTHER PLANS GOING FORWARD.
UM, COMMISSIONER WOODS JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE, NO UPDATES SINCE OUR LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BUT WE HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW EVENING, SO I'LL HAVE UPDATES NEXT TIME.
SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ.
YEAH, WELL WE DIDN'T HAVE A QUORUM FOR OUR LAST MEETING AND WE JUST NEED TO RESCHEDULE THE MEETING AND WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET.
AND SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD? UH, YES.
WE MET LAST WEEK AND REVIEWED THE INITIAL DRAFT PLAN, WHICH WE'VE ACTUALLY SUBSEQUENTLY LEARNED IS NOW IN DEEP PROVISIONS AND WILL LIKELY COME BACK TO US, UM, HOPEFULLY IN THE SPRING, I THINK MARCH.
UH, MOVING ON TO OUR WORKING GROUPS.
ANY UPDATES FROM THE ADU AND DUPLEXES WORKING GROUP CHAIR? YES.
UM, COMMISSIONER STALLER, WE THINK WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AT THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE STAFF PRESENTED TO US AND ESSENTIALLY TOLD US THAT THE, AT THIS POINT THE WAY STAFF IS LOOKING AT IS THE AD AMENDMENTS WILL BE ROLLED INTO THE HOME PHASE TWO AMENDMENTS THAT WE'LL LIKELY BE CONSIDERING NEXT YEAR.
SO I THINK IT MIGHT BE WORTHWHILE FOR US TO, AT SOME POINT CONSIDER WHETHER WE SHOULD DISSOLVE THIS GROUP AND CREATE A NEW ONE.
SHOULD WE HAVE A HOME PHASE TWO LIKE SO WE MIGHT HAVE TO JUST RECONFIGURE THIS GROUP 'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THE WAY STAFF IS PROCEEDING WITH THAT ITEM IS CHANGING SLIGHTLY.
THE HOME AMENDMENTS WORKING GROUP, UM, CHERYL, SPEAK TO THAT.
SO AGAIN, AS COMMISSIONER MAXWELL MENTIONED JUST THIS AFTERNOON, THE DRAFTS FOR THE HOME AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN POSTED TO OUR DECEMBER, OR SORRY, OCTOBER 26TH MEETING.
SO IF YOU GO AND YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT AND I WILL BE SENDING A DUAL POLL TOMORROW TO START SCHEDULING MEETINGS NOW THAT WE HAVE THE DRAFT SO WE CAN HAVE OUR WORK DONE IN ADVANCE OF THAT NOVEMBER 14TH MEETING.
UM, AND THEN TELEWORK WORKING GROUP, WE HEARD THE RESULTS FROM THEIR WORK TONIGHT AND SO I THINK THAT WORK IS, OR THAT WORKING GROUP CAN BE DISSOLVED SINCE THEIR MISSION WAS COMPLETED.
AND WITH THAT, THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR A GREAT MEETING TONIGHT.