[00:00:02]
11, WE'RE GONNA GO AND BRING THIS, UM, MEETING
[ Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER.AND WE'LL DO START OFF WITH A ROLL CALL AND I'LL START OVER HERE.
KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN MOVING AROUND ON ME, SO, UH, START HERE.
ON MY LEFT, WE HAVE, UM, STARTING WITH COMMISSIONER HAYNES HERE.
AND MOVING TO MY RIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER ZR HERE.
AND THEN WE HAVE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HERE.
UM, WELL, LET'S START WITH THE ONES I SEE.
AND THEN IT LOOKS LIKE, UM, I CAN SEE, UH, COMMISSIONER COX AND COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS MAY JOIN US SHORTLY.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? AND I, I'M, I'M NOT, YOU CAN'T SEE ME.
AND I THINK I'M CHECKING WITH COMM, UH, MR. RIVERA, I THINK, UM, TO COUNT YOUR VOTES, WE NEED, YOU NEED TO BE VISIBLE.
I AM VISIBLE FROM MY SIDE OF THE SCREEN, BUT YOU'RE SAYING I'M NOT VISIBLE FROM YOUR SIDE OF THE SCREEN.
UM, AND I, AND I HAVE MY VIDEO ON, SO MAYBE I'LL TRY TO LEAVE AND COME BACK.
WE WILL GET SOME, UH, GO AHEAD AND DO THE FIRST READING, AND HOPEFULLY YOU CAN GET BACK AND WE CAN SEE YOU.
COMMISSIONER COX MIGHT WANT, MIGHT WANT TO TRY.
UM, LET'S, I'M GONNA HAVE TO GO, GO AHEAD AND JUST, UH, MOVE THROUGH A FEW THINGS.
UH, THIS IS A VIRTUAL MEETING, SO WE'LL HAVE, UH, PARTICIPANTS BOTH VIRTUALLY AND IN THE AUDIENCE AS WELL AS COMMISSIONERS, UH, THAT'LL BE DOING THE SAME.
UH, FOR THOSE, UH, THAT ARE PARTICIPATING VIRTUALLY COMMISSIONERS HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, YELLOW CARDS AVAILABLE SO I CAN ACCURATELY COUNT YOUR VOTES.
UM, I NEED TO, UH, ALSO RECOGNIZE TO MY LEFT, WE HAVE THE CHAIR OF THE BOA, UM, CHAIR COHEN.
UH, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING.
[ Consent Agenda]
START OUT WITH IS A READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, AND I HAVE HELP FROM COMMISSIONER CZAR TO TAKE ME THROUGH THAT IF YOU WANNA GET US STARTED.UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND START ON THE CONSENT AGENDA HERE.
UM, SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO.
PLAN AMENDMENT N PA 2022 DASH 0 0 2 9 0.03.
ANDERSON LANE, MIXED USE DISTRICT ONE.
THIS ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT.
ITEM THREE, WHICH IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2023 DASH 0 5 0 1 FM 9 69, DISTRICT ONE.
UM, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
UM, ITEM NUMBER FOUR, THIS IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH EIGHT SEVEN, UM, FM 9 69, DISTRICT ONE.
AGAIN, THIS IS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT PULLED BY MYSELF.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH 0 2, 0 0 2, 1 0 6, AND 118 RED BIRD LANE, DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION ITEM NUMBER SIX, REZONING C 14 20 23 DASH 0 3 4 DASH 5 4 0 2 SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE, DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS, UH, IS FOR DISCUSSION AS WELL.
I NUMBER SEVEN IS A PLAN AMENDMENT, UM, NPA DASH 2023 DASH 2 0 2, 0 0.0 3, 300 400 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD, NPA, DISTRICT THREE.
UM, ITEM NUMBER, UM, EIGHT REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 4 4 300 DASH 4 4 0 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD, DISTRICT THREE.
REZONING, UH, NUMBER NINE C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 4 6.
SO C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 4 6 600 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD, DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT.
THERE WAS A SPEAKER WHO HAD PROVIDED US, UH, WITH COMMENTS THAT ARE IN YOUR BACKUP, SO YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO READ THEM THERE.
UH, FOR THESE ITEMS, ITEM NUMBER 10 IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA UH, DASH 2023 DASH 0 2 3 0.01 SHERIDAN DISTRICT, UM, FOUR.
THIS, UH, ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 23RD.
UM, WE, NUMBER 11 IS A REZONING, UH, C 14 20 23 DASH 35 SHARED IN DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS IS ALSO AN APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 23RD.
ITEM NUMBER 12, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH FOUR ZERO.
UM, 1 0 3 1 7 AND 1 0 4 2 3 MC PLACE, DISTRICT SEVEN.
THIS IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO DECEMBER 12TH.
UM, ITEM NUMBER 13, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 4 3 4 2 0 1
[00:05:01]
SOUTH CONGRESS, DISTRICT THREE, UH, THIS IS OUR FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO DECEMBER 12TH.NUMBER 14 IS A REZONING C 14 20 23 DASH 0 0 4 7.
UM, 1,911 WILLOW CREEK DRIVE, DISTRICT THREE.
THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 23RD.
I NUMBER 15 IS C 14 20 23, UH, DASH 0 0 7 2 HYDE PARK, HIGH STREET, DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
UM, WE ARE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 16, WHICH IS ALSO REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 0 8 DELANO STREET, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ONE.
THIS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO DECEMBER 12TH.
NUMBER 17 IS A REZONING CASE, C 14 DASH 2023 DASH ZERO 16.
UM, 1 3 1 7 MORGAN LANE, DISTRICT FIVE.
NUMBER 18 IS A HISTORIC ZONING.
UH, THIS IS THE C 14 H DASH 2023 DASH 15 MITCHELL HOUSE DISTRICT ONE.
NUMBER 19 IS ALSO HISTORIC ZONING, C 14 H DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 37, 1100 EAST SECOND AVENUE, UM, A DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION AS WELL, SINCE IT IS OPPOSED BY THE OWNER.
NUMBER 20 IS, UM, SPC IS A CONDITIONAL USE SITE PLAN.
SO THIS IS SPC DASH 2022 DASH 0 16 2 C, THE DOHERTY ARTS CENTER PLACEMENT DISTRICT NINE.
THIS IS A FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 9TH.
I NUMBER 21 IS A PUT AMENDMENT C EIGHT 14 DASH 2 0 4 DASH 0 8 3 0 1.
THIS IS A FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 23RD.
ITEM NUMBER 22 IS A REZONING C EIGHT 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 9 5 517 SOUTH LAMAR POD DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT BY APPLICANT I NUMBER 23 IS A CODE AMENDMENT.
UM, C 20 DASH 2023 DASH 0 2 9 ELIMINATES STATIONARY FILING, UH, PLAN FILING DEADLINES.
NUMBER 24 IS THE FINAL PLATT C EIGHT DASH 20 23 14 9 0 8 EASTSIDE COMMERCE SUBDIVISION DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS, UM, AS, UH, MARKED OUT IN EXHIBIT C.
UM, NUMBER 25 IS A RIGHT OF WAY.
VACATION 2023 DASH 0 9 8 2 LMM DASH 1,514, WEST 25TH, UH, DISTRICT 10.
AND THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.
[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION]
MR. RIVERA, YOU, UH, THE HYDE PARK ITEM, YOU SAID WE HAVE A SPEAKER CHAIR.COMMISSIONER LA LIAISON ANDREW? YES.
SO THIS ITEM WAS PREVIOUS LOAN CONSENT.
I DID HAVE A, UH, INDIVIDUAL REGISTER AFTER THE CLOSING OF THE PUBLIC, UH, AFTER THE CLOSING REGISTRATION.
IF YOU WANT TO CONSIDER THE REMARKS AT THIS TIME, MR. UH, JOE BEDELL IS AVAILABLE.
MR. BEDELL, IF YOU'LL PROVIDE YOUR REMARKS.
FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE AND GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THIS.
UH, I HAD TO CHOOSE WHETHER I WAS FOR OR AGAINST.
UM, I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH IT, BUT IT ONCE HAD HOUSES ON IT.
IT'S BEEN A PARKING LOT FOR MANY DECADES.
I I'VE ATTENDED MANY MEETINGS IN RECENT MONTHS ON THIS TOPIC, AND, UM, I'VE NOT HEARD ANYONE SAY NO, NO, NO.
WE NEED TO KEEP THAT A PARKING LOT.
I WAS HOPING TO SHOW YOU SOME IMAGES.
I, THERE'S A LOT OF WORK GOING ON AROUND THE WORLD, UH, TO ADDRESS CONGESTION IN CITIES, GLOBAL WARMING.
UM, ONE OF THE OLDEST, UH, PUBLIC PLACE, CAR FREE STREETS IN EUROPE IS KEN RASA AND VIENNA TIC SINCE FROM THE OPERA ON THE RING RASSA UP TO THE CATHEDRAL, THE DOME, AS IT'S CALLED IN DOME PLOTS.
UM, IT'S BEEN A CAR-FREE ZONE SINCE 1972.
AND THERE ARE EXAMPLES ALL OVER EUROPE, PROBABLY ALL OVER THE WORLD OF STREETS LIKE THIS.
THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN OPPOSITION, UM, THAT, UH, BUSINESSES ON THESE STREETS WOULD SUFFER, THAT DELIVERIES WOULD BE IMPAIRED, THAT EMERGENCY VEHICLES WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH.
MY ISSUE WITH THE HIGH STREET PROJECT AS PROPOSED IS THAT, UH, THERE, THERE'S A BIGGER ISSUE IN HYDE PARK,
[00:10:01]
UH, THAN THIS ONE PIECE OF GROUND MY NEIGHBOR.YOU JUST GONNA HAVE A FEW MORE MINUTES.
UM, MY NEIGHBORS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT PARKING, UM, IF THERE'S A BIG RESTAURANT ON THIS SITE.
UM, BUT I WAS HOPING THAT WE COULD SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT.
AND THIS THINKING IS, COMES OUT OF A BOOK BY DANIEL KAHNEMAN CALLED THINKING FAST AND THINKING SLOW.
HE'S A NOBEL PRIZE WINNING PSYCHOLOGIST AND ECONOMIST, AND THIS DEVELOPMENT IN THIS PLACE IS PROBABLY THE MOST IMPACTFUL, POTENTIALLY IMPACTFUL DEVELOPMENT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, HYDE PARK IN GENERATIONS.
THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY IN THIS AREA AT 43RD AND DUVAL TO THINK MUCH MORE EXPANSIVELY ABOUT WHAT 43RD STREET COULD BE AND WHAT SOME OF THE OTHER FORMER STREETCAR AVENUES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COULD BE.
MORE SPECIFICALLY, THERE'S A MAJOR TRANSIT HUB RIGHT AT DUVAL AND 43RD.
I BROUGHT MAPS, SOME, I'VE GOT IMAGES.
SO YOU, YOU ARE GONNA RUN OUTTA TIME IF YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND THINK ABOUT, I'M JUST, WE JUST HAVE A FEW MORE MINUTES.
I'M, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY.
UM, 43RD STREET FROM DUVAL TO GUADALUPE COULD BE A CAR FREE ZONE, SO COULD 40TH STREET.
THESE ARE VERY WIDE AVENUES, WHICH MEANS THERE'S A LOT OF VERY DARK PAVING THAT'S ALBEDO THAT'S AN ABSORBER OF SOLAR ENERGY BY FLATTENING THE, THE SIDEWALK AND THE, THE PUBLIC WAYS, THE, THE TRAFFIC.
UM, THIS COULD BECOME ESSENTIALLY A PUBLIC SQUARE OF THE SORT THAT WE SEEING IN COPENHAGEN, ALL OVER HOLLAND, ALL OVER THE BRITISH, UH, THE, UH, GERMAN SPEAKING WORLD.
UM, AND BARCELONA IS REALLY THE TRENDSETTER.
YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF ERDAS BACK IN THE 1880S.
UM, THIS CREATED A, A GRID OF SQUARES.
I'M SORRY, WE'RE WE, WE GAVE YOU DOUBLE THE TIME.
IT IS INTERESTING, AND I HAVE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THESE STREETS, ESPECIALLY BARCELONA.
SO I'LL JUST END BY SAYING THOSE ARE SUPER BLOCKS.
THERE ARE REALLY GOOD STUDIES FROM THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION AND ELSEWHERE, MEASUREMENTS OF, UM, PRODUCTS OF COMBUSTION, UM, OTHER GREENHOUSE GASES.
UM, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S MORE THAN A, THAN A CITY PLANNING ISSUE.
IT'S A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE, AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HERE.
UH, FIRST ITEM TODAY WE HAVE A DISCUSSION.
WE HAVE TO FINISH OUR CONSENT AGENDA.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONER VETA RAMIREZ HAD YOUR HAND UP A WHILE BACK.
I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM SEVEN, EIGHT, AND NINE FOR DISCUSSION.
WE JUST SAID THERE'S NO CONSENT FOR DISCUSSION.
SO WE'RE GONNA PULL SEVEN, EIGHT, AND NINE.
UH, THEY WENT BACK ON CONSENT, BUT THERE ARE, WE'LL PULL THOSE FOR DISCUSSION.
THAT IS CORRECT, CHAIR, I READ THEM IN AS CONSENT, AND THAT WAS, UH, WHEN WE STARTED THIS MEETING.
AND I BELIEVE WE WANT TO GO TO A DISCUSSION.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ, WHICH, I'M SORRY, I'M, I'M SORRY.
JUST, JUST TO CONFIRM THE WAY I'VE READ IT, I READ HYDE PARK'S DISCUSSION CASE, BUT SINCE WE'VE HEARD THE SPEAKER, WOULD THAT BE A CONSENT ITEM NOW? SO, JUST NOTING THAT THE HYDE PARK ITEM IS ALSO A CONSENT ITEM, NOW CHAIR.
SO WE PULLED SEVEN TO NINE FOR DISCUSSION, AND THE HYDE PARK ITEM, I'M FORGETTING THE NUMBER, GOES BACK ON CONSENT THAT ITEM NUMBER 15.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA? UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
[00:15:01]
SEE ITEM NUMBER FOUR? YES.UM, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, WE'VE GOT THREE AND FOUR ON DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
I, I'M SORRY I DIDN'T MISS THAT.
UM, ONCE WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, COMMISSIONER ZA? YEAH.
ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE, UH, TAKE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LAY AND ANDREW RIVERA, DID YOU INCLUDE YOUR
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
MINUTES? OH, THE MINUTES IS TIME.AND AS I RECALL OUR LAST MEETING, THERE WERE SOME OCTOBER MINUTES, DIDN'T WE? ARE WE READY TO APPROVE THOSE OR DO WE NEED TO POSTPONE CHAIR? THOSE WILL APPEAR ON YOUR FOLLOWING MEETING.
SO TONIGHT, UH, WERE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE NOVEMBER 14TH, UH, 20, 23 MINUTES? Y'ALL ALREADY FORGOT ABOUT THAT MEETING.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND ROLL THAT INTO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO, DO I HAVE A MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE MINUTES? DO HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? UH, ANY OBJECTIONS TO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES? I'M LOOKING AROUND SEEING NONE.
WE'RE GONNA GO AND MOVE ON TO OUR, UH,
[Items 3 & 4]
FIRST ONE THIS EVENING.THIS IS DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT ON ITEM THREE AND FOUR.
AND SO, UH, WE NEED TO HEAR FROM, UH, THE, THE APPLICANT.
IS IT THE APPLICANT FIRST? OKAY, SO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, WE HAVE MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LANE, LA ANDREW RIVERA.
SO WE'LL HEAR FROM THE REQUESTERS FIRST.
UM, SO THAT WOULD BE MYSELF, CHAIR, CORRECT.
I'LL GO, GO AHEAD AND START FIRST.
MR. MR. CHAIRMAN, UM, WE'RE, ARE WE MOVING TO POSTPONE THIS OR ARE WE DISCUSSING? YES, WE'LL, WE'LL GET SOME CONTEXT FROM, UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR.
IT'S BEEN A REQUEST OF SOME OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS TO PULL THIS ITEM.
UH, BUT THE APPLICANT IS NOT IN FAVOR.
AND, AND SO TO CLARIFY THE QUESTION, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, MY, MY REQUEST IS A POSTPONEMENT AND THE APPLICANT IS IN DISAGREEMENT.
SO WE'LL DISCUSS THE POSTPONEMENT ALONE AT THIS POINT, AND IF THAT MOTION FAILS, THEN WE WILL HAVE A DISCUSSION TONIGHT ABOUT THAT.
SO, ALL, ALL I WANTED TO SAY WAS THAT I THINK, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE, UH, TWO ITEMS. I THINK IT'S, UH, IT'S HONESTLY A CASE OH, WHERE STAFF HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF LAYING OUT SOME THINGS.
WE'VE HEARD SOME CONCERNS FROM OUR STAKEHOLDERS, UM, INCLUDING BASTA THAT WORKS WITH TENANTS.
THEY'RE LOOKING AT SOME SORT OF DIFFERENT PIECES ASSOCIATED WITH, UM, THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE HERE.
IT'S NOT THE EXACT SAME PROJECT, BUT THEY'RE LOOKING AT THINGS ACROSS THE BOARD AND THEY HAD SOME CONCERNS AND THEY WANTED TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF A PAUSE TO SEE THAT WE HAD THE TIME TO WORK THROUGH SOME OF THOSE THINGS.
SO AT THIS POINT, I'M, I'M REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT OF TWO WEEKS WITH THE HOPE THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO RESOLVE SOME OF THOSE, UM, QUESTIONS THAT REMAIN AND BRING IT BACK, UM, SO THAT IT CAN MOVE FORWARD AS NEEDED.
UM, DO YOU WANNA HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT NOW? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU ALL.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I'M ALICE GLASGOW REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, AND, UH, MY, MY DESIRE WOULD BE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO HEAR THE CASE.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE REASONS BEHIND THE POSTPONEMENT HAS TO DO WITH A FINANCING TOOL THAT MY CLIENT WOULD LIKE TO USE FOR THIS SITE THAT IS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE TRAVIS COUNTY, UH, HOUSING AUTHORITY.
AND THAT TOOL ALLOWS FOR DEEPER AFFORDABILITY LEVELS IF THAT TOOL IS USED.
MY, IN MY OPINION AS A PLANNER, I DON'T THINK THAT A FINANCING TOOL SHOULD BE AN, UH, SHOULD, UH, AFFECT A REZONING CASE.
SO THE PROPERTY IS 99%, UH, ZONED TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL WHERE THERE'S A, A LITTLE TINY 1% OF A TRUCK THAT IS, IS NOT ZONED TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL.
SO, UM, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER ENCOUNTERED A CASE WHERE, UH, A, A FINANCIAL TOOL THAT COULD BE USED FOR PROPERTY IS BEING USED TO DELAY A ZONING CASE, UH, WHERE THE TWO ITEMS ARE NOT RELATED.
SO I JUST THINK THAT IT, FOR THAT REASON, THAT, UH, THE ISSUES BEING RAISED CANNOT BE RESOLVED IF THE, MY UNDERSTANDING HAS TO DO WITH ENFORCEABILITY OF THE TOOL THAT IS CREATED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS.
SO THE, THE ISSUE HAS TO DO WITH THE LEGISLATION THEN THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THAT TOOL AND NOT THROUGH A ZONING CASE.
THE ZONING CANNOT RESOLVE THAT.
AND JUST LIKE YOU DON'T REQUIRE TO GET A, A BANK LOAN APPROVAL BEFORE YOU CAN CHANGE A ZONING, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REALLY DOING WITH THIS CASE.
AND THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE, UH, OPPOSITION TO THE POSTPONEMENT.
I, I'M GONNA HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF.
DO YOU HAVE AN ITEM YOU NEED TO RECUSE FROM THIS ITEM? THIS ITEM? OKAY.
SO WE'LL JUST NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER HOWARD IS RECUSING HIMSELF ON ITEMS THREE AND FOUR.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
[00:20:01]
UM, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.SO COMMISSIONERS, I GUESS WE NEED A MOTION OR DISCUSSION.
WE HAVE A MOTION THAT WE CAN, WHEN, UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS ITEM, UM, UNTIL DECEMBER 12TH.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? UH, OKAY.
COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, MR. CONLEY? UM, YES.
I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, I, IIII WANT TO, UH, APPRECIATE AND, AND THANK, UM, UH, MS. GLASGOW FOR, UM, SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, I THINK MAKING SOME VERY IMPORTANT POINTS, SOME OF WHICH, UH, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE.
I DON'T THINK THAT THE REASON FOR THE POSTPONEMENT HAS ANYTHING TO DO NECESSARILY WITH THE SPECIFIC ENFORCEABILITY OF THE FINANCIAL TOOL.
IT DOES HAVE TO DO WITH, UM, BROADER CONCERNS, UH, IN THE COMMUNITY THAT WE HAVE AROUND, YOU KNOW, AS PLANNING COMMISSION WHEN WE HEAR COMMITMENTS MADE.
UM, YOU KNOW, TONIGHT WE WILL HEAR APPLICANTS SAYING THAT THEY'RE VOLUNTEERING AFFORDABILITY OR THAT THEY WILL PRODUCE AFFORDABILITY.
AND I THINK THERE'S REAL CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, THE IMPORTANCE OF TRUSTWORTHINESS IN ALL OF THAT.
AND I THINK THAT, UM, IN THAT REGARD, THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT QUESTIONS THAT STILL NEED TO BE ANSWERED.
UM, ANYBODY THAT, UH, KNOWS ME, KNOWS I'M A
AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
SO I WOULD NOT, UM, REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT ON THIS UNLESS I FELT VERY STRONGLY, UM, THAT THERE ARE SOME REALLY MEANINGFUL, UM, REASONS FOR THAT AND FOR TAKING TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY'S ON THE SAME PAGE AND AS COMMISSIONERS, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE RESPONSIVE TO, TO REQUESTS AND ISSUES OF THIS SORT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST THIS ITEM.
I'LL, I'LL SPEAK AGAINST MR. CHAIRMAN.
I, UH, WHO IS OPPOSED? CAN I LET, LET ME ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, WELL, WE'RE KIND OF BEYOND QA I'LL, I'LL PERMIT A QUESTION.
I MEAN, WE DIDN'T GET ANY QUESTIONS.
WHAT'S, WHAT, WHAT IS THE FINANCING TOOL BEING USED HERE? WELL, IT IT HAS, IT'S CONTEMPLATED, HAS NOT BEEN FINALIZED.
IT IS, IT'S, UM, HAS TO DO WITH A, A RESOLUTION THE CITY COUNCIL PASSED IN, UH, JULY 20TH OF LAST YEAR THAT, UM, IT INDICATES, UH, AUTHORIZES TRAVIS COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY BECAUSE, UH, UH, UH, THE LAWS THAT REQUIRE THAT WHENEVER A DIFFERENT HOUSING AUTHORITY WANTS TO OPERATE WITHIN THE AUSTIN CITY LIMITS, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS TO PASS A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE, THIS, IN THIS CASE, TRAVIS COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY TO BE A PARTNER IN THIS PROJECT TO PROVIDE THE FINANCING TOOL USING THEIR TAX CREDITS, USING THEIR BONDS AND TAX CREDIT.
AND THAT'S WHY COUNCIL MEMBER COMMISSIONER, UM, PC HOW IT HAS TO, THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO KNOW, HAS TO, HAS TO RECUSE HIMSELF.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, APOLOGIZE FOR RESTING THIS THROUGH.
IF, IF I CAN JUST RESPOND QUICKLY.
UH, SO COMMISSIONER HAYNES, I THINK REALLY, I THINK THE PROJECT ITSELF IS A, IS A GOOD PROJECT, RIGHT? WE WANNA FOCUS ON PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, AND OF COURSE OUR CITY IS VERY MUCH ON BOARD AND THERE'S, UH, POTENTIALLY KNOCK ON BOARD FUNDING COMING IN FROM THE COUNTY AS WELL IN ADDITION TO BEING A PFC TAX DEAL.
I THINK THE HOPE REALLY IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE, UM, COMMITMENTS AROUND HAVING THE PSH AND AFFORDABILITY IS LOCKED IN PLACE AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CASE ITSELF.
SO THAT'S REALLY, AGAIN, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE CASE, SORT OF THE FINDINGS OF THE CASE.
WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THOSE COMMITMENTS TO AFFORDABILITY AND PSH ARE TRULY COMMITTED AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UH, WE HAD A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UM, ANY FURTHER, UH, DISCUSSION FOR OR AGAINST? OKAY, UH, LET'S GO AND TAKE, AND THE POSTPONEMENT DATE WAS DECEMBER 12TH.
OKAY, LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
THOSE ON THE DIOCESE IN FAVOR.
THOSE ON, UH, VIRTUALLY, UH, GO THOSE IN FAVOR AND THAT'S, LET'S SEE, COMMISSIONER COX, UH, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
UH, THOSE, LET'S SEE THOSE VOTING AGAINST
UH, YOU CAN JUST SPEAK IF YOU'RE NOT COMMISSIONER, BUT RAMIREZ, ARE YOU IN FAVOR? YES.
I'M ABSTAINING FROM THIS, THIS VOTE.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONER MOTO IS ABSTAINING.
CIVIL COMMISSIONER HOWARD JUST IS RECUSED HIMSELF.
[00:25:01]
THE FIRST ITEM.LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR SECOND, UH, OUR NEXT FIRST DISCUSSION CASE.
UH, THIS WILL BE ITEMS FIVE AND CHAIR, THIS IS COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
I WAS, OH, I DIDN'T STATE THE REASON WHY I WAS RECUSING MYSELF.
YEAH, I'M THE CEO OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF TRAVIS COUNTY
UH, APPRECIATE THAT MR. HOWARD.
ALL RIGHT, UH, LET'S GO AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.
UH, THESE ARE ITEMS, UH, FIVE AND
[Items 5 & 6]
SIX.WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF ON THE, WE'RE GONNA HEAR ABOUT THE PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE REZONING TOGETHER.
MARIE MEREDITH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 23 0 0 2, 0 0.0 2, 1 0 6, AND 1 1 8 REDBURN LANE DISTRICT THREE.
IT IS WITHIN THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO MIXED USE.
THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM DID SUBMIT A LETTER YESTERDAY.
UH, THEY TOOK A NEUTRAL POSITION AND THE LETTER WAS SUBMITTED AS LATE MATERIAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS NANCY ESTRADA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER SIX ON YOUR AGENDA.
THIS IS CASE C 14 20 23 0 3 4 54 0 2 SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1 0 6 1 16 AND ONE 18 REDBIRD LANE, 54 0 2, 54 0 8, AND 54 12 SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE AND ONE 11 WEST MOCKINGBIRD LANE.
IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED SF TWO N-P-C-S-M-U-N-P-C-S-M-U-C-O-N-P.
AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CSMU VCO.
THE SUBJECT REZONING AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 2.72 ACRES AND IS LOCATED ON SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE BETWEEN REDBIRD LANE AND WEST MOCKINGBIRD LANE.
THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE ALONG REDBIRD LANE IS DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY WITH ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN A PREVIOUS AUTOMOTIVE SALES USE, WHILE THE NORTHERN PER PORTION IS UNDEVELOPED THE NORTH LOT THAT IS ONE 11 WEST MOCKINGBIRD LANE HAS AN EXISTING CONDITION OVERLAY THAT ESTABLISHES A 30 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE AND PROHIBITS AUTOMOTIVE AND PAWN SHOP SERVICE USES.
THIS CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WILL REMAIN IN PLACE AND THE APPLICANT DOES NOT PROPOSE TO CHANGE IT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO C-S-M-U-V-C-N-P COMBINED DISTRICT ZONING FOR A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD CONSIST OF 250 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS AND 9,600 SQUARE FEET OF GROUND FLOOR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES.
THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CITY'S VERTICAL MIXED USE PROGRAM AND WILL INCLUDE THE REQUIRED AFFORDABILITY LEVELS.
IF THE PROJECT IS IS DEVELOPED AS A VM U2 BUILDING, 12% OF THE UNITS WILL BE AFFORDABLE FOR HOUSEHOLDS EARNING 50% OR LESS THAN THE MFI STAFF IS RECOMMENDING C-S-M-U-V-C-O-N-P WITH A CONDITION OF OVERLAY THAT INCLUDES THE PROHIBITED USES LISTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
ON THE FOLLOWING CONSIDERATIONS, THERE IS EXISTING CSS ZONING LOCATED DIRECTLY ACROSS SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE, AS WELL AS SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY.
LAND USES ALONG SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE ARE IN TRANSITION FROM UNDEVELOPED TRACKS TO THOSE THAT INCLUDE MIXED USE.
IN MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND COMMERCIAL USES WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO SERVE RESIDENCES OF THE ADJACENT AREAS.
AND FINALLY, SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE IS A CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR WITH THIS SITE LOCATED WITHIN ONE QUARTER OF A MILE OF THREE PUBLIC TRANSIT BUS STOPS.
IT IS CURRENTLY SERVED BY TWO CAPITAL METRO BUS ROUTES, INCLUDING A METRO RAPID BUS ROUTE.
I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
OKAY, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT NOW.
HI, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
I'M AMANDA SWORE WITH RENER GROUP.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR PULLING UP THE PRESENTATION.
A PICTURE'S WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS, SO I'M GONNA WAIT UNTIL THAT POPS UP TO START IF I CAN PLEASE.
SO AGAIN, I'M AMANDA SWORE WITH RENER GROUP.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TONIGHT, REPRESENTING ITEMS FIVE AND SIX.
UM, I CALL 'EM, UH, FIFTY FOUR OH TWO SOUTH CONGRESS.
SOME PEOPLE CALL 'EM THE REDBIRD LANE PROPERTIES, BUT WE'LL SHOW YOU WHAT, WHY THAT IS.
OH, CAN I DRIVE? OKAY, AWESOME, THANKS.
UH, SO THE PROPERTY IS JUST UNDER THREE ACRES.
IT IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF CONGRESS, UM, WITH MOCKINGBIRD LANE ON THE NORTH REDBIRD LANE ON THE SOUTH.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS, UM, ONE BLOCK NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF STANE AND SOUTH CONGRESS.
WHAT DID I DO? OKAY,
YOU CAN, UH, AGAIN, SEE, UH, WHERE
[00:30:01]
THIS IS BOUND BY THE PROPERTY IS, IT LOOKS REALLY FUNNY ON MAPS, WHICH IS WHY I SAY THIS.IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A BUNCH OF SINGLE FAMILY PARCELS.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE BACKUP, THIS IS ACTUALLY FIVE PARCELS THAT MAKE UP ONE, UM, UNIFIED PROPERTY.
UH, THE PROPERTIES ARE CURRENTLY VACANT.
THEY WERE ASSESSED, SAID, UH, PREVIOUSLY USED AS AUTOMOTIVE SALES AND A SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS ON A CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR, AN IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR, AND WITHIN, UM, PROXIMITY TO A EXCELLENT TRANSIT FOR, UM, FOR THIS PART OF TOWN.
I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING TWO CASES.
ONE IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT, AND THE OTHER IS THE ZONING CASE.
THE ZONING CASE IS FOR THE AREA OUTLINED IN THE DARK BLUE AREA.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT IS FOR THE AREA THAT HAS THE BLUE DASH LINE.
UM, THAT PROPERTY HAS BEEN ACQUIRED, WAS ACQUIRED IN 2019 BY THE LARGER PROPERTY OWNER.
THEY'RE TRYING TO, UM, REZONE IT SO THAT IT CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO THE LARGER REDEVELOPMENT.
THIS IS AN IMAGE THAT SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE TRANSIT THAT'S IN THE AREA, AS STAFF MENTIONED, UM, WE HAVE EXCELLENT TRANSIT.
WITHIN A QUARTER OF A MILE IS WHERE ALL OF THESE STATIONS RUN.
WE HAVE BOTH, UM, MIDDAY, UH, RAPID OR FREQUENT ROUTE.
UM, ON THE ONE AND ON THE THREE 11 EAST, WEST, NORTH SOUTH, WE HAVE THE 8 0 1, AND THEN WE HAVE THE NIGHT OWL AT 4 86.
THIS PROPERTY IS ALSO, UM, HAS A BUS STOP THAT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION ON ITS, UM, ON ITS PROPERTY.
UH, THIS SHOWS A LITTLE BIT BETTER, THE REZONING AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT.
ON THE LEFT, YOU CAN SEE THE, THE OUT PARCEL OF THE SINGLE FAMILY AGAIN, WHAT WAS, UM, PURCHASED AND IS TRYING TO BE INCORPORATED.
UH, THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE, THE REMAINDER OF THE PLANNING IN THE AREA THAT SHOWS, UM, WHERE THAT DEMARCATION LINE BETWEEN THE PROPOSED MIXED USE AND THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY IS.
AS STAFF MENTIONED, WE ARE PROPOSING 250 MULTI-FAMILY, UH, UNITS ON THE PROPERTY.
AND, UH, WE'LL BE DESIGNATING DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY WITH THE VERTICAL MIXED USE.
UM, IF THIS WERE A VMU ONE, IT WOULD BE REQUIRED THE TENANT 60.
IT IS, UH, IF IT IS A VMU TWO PROJECT, WE WOULD HAVE THE OPTIONS.
WE HAVE MADE THE COMMITMENT AT THE REQUEST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, CONTACT TEAM TWO, UH, UTILIZE THE 12% OF THE UNITS AT 50% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME.
UH, AGAIN, I WANNA JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TRANSIT.
UM, THERE'S, THIS IS IF YOU'RE, THIS IS LOOKING SOUTH ON CONGRESS.
UH, IT WAS A BEAUTIFUL DAY, NICE AND SUNNY.
UM, THE FENCING ON THE RIGHT IS WHERE THE, THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN FENCED UP, BUT YOU SEE THE BRAND NEW SIDEWALK, THE BRAND NEW BIKE LANE, AND, UM, RIGHT IN THE FRONT OF THAT PICTURE IS WHERE THE BUS STOP IS RELOCATED ONTO THE PROPERTY.
STAFF MENTIONED THEY HAVE A LIST, LIST OF PROPOSED PROHIBITED USES.
WE ARE FINE WITH ALL OF THOSE AND CURING OVER THE USES FROM THE OLD CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
I KNOW I TALKED FAST THROUGH THE PART.
THIS IS THE, UM, THE LITTLE BIT MEATIER PART OF IT.
SO WE, UH, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS PROCESS, WHICH WAS IN FEBRUARY, WE REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTING TO START A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT REDEVELOPMENT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
WE HAVE HAD, UH, MONTHS OF MEETING IN PERSON ON THE PHONE VIRTUALLY, AND HAD A, A LONG LIST OF ITEMS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
SOME OF THOSE WERE IMMEDIATE ITEMS. I DO THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
UM, IT ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT MY CLIENT IS THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THEY ARE THE DEVELOPER.
SO THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO, UM, RESPOND IMMEDIATELY TO NEEDS THAT THE CONTACT TEAM AND THE NEIGHBORS HAVE TALKED ABOUT.
SO THEY HAVE SECURED THE PROPERTY, INSTALLED NEW PARKING, UM, SECURED THE EXISTING, UH, DETERIORATING STRUCTURES AS THEY PREPARE THIS PROPERTY TO MOVE FORWARD, AS WELL AS CLEANING UP, UM, DEBRIS, ET CETERA.
AS I SAID, WE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS FOR A REALLY LONG TIME, UH, ABOUT ITEMS THAT WERE OF IMPORTANT, BOTH IMPORTANCE BOTH TO THE CONTACT TEAM AND TO THE, UM, NEIGHBORS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.
I'M GONNA RUN THROUGH SOME OF THESE WITH MORE TIME THAN OTHERS.
SO, UH, THE, THE, ONE OF THE VERY FIRST REQUESTS THAT WE GOT WAS TO, UM, ON A NEW PROJECT TO NOT PROVIDE ANY WINDOWS, UM, FOR A PROJECT THAT FACED, UM, WEST.
SO ANYTHING THAT FACED SINGLE FAMILY TO NOT PROVIDE ANY WINDOWS, UM, THAT'S NOT LEGAL.
UM, IT'S ALSO, IF WE WERE TO DO THAT, WE WOULD LOSE AN ENTIRE CORRIDOR OF THE PROJECT, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN A SUBSTANTIAL LOSS IN HOUSING ON A COURT TRANSIT CORRIDOR, UM, THAT CAN PROVIDE ACTUALLY, UH, TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.
UM, SO WE DID NOT, UM, AGREE TO THAT REQUEST.
WE WERE THEN ASKED IF WE WOULD ONLY PROVIDE WINDOWS THAT WERE ABOVE SIX FEET TALL.
IE WHEN YOU'RE IN THE SHOWER, THAT LITTLE WINDOW THAT'S ABOVE YOUR, UM, ABOVE YOUR HEAD.
AGAIN, NOT IN BEST PRACTICES AND NOT, UM, INFOR PROVIDING, UM, SUSTAINABLE HOUSING OPTIONS.
UM, WE WERE THEN ASKED IF WE WOULD NOT PROVIDE BALCONIES ALONG THE WESTERN, UH, SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS FACING THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, MY CLIENT DID NOT WANT TO AGREE TO THAT, BUT AFTER A LOT OF CONVERSATION, WE HAVE SAID THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE OPEN TO CONSIDERING.
UH, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF, UH, OPINIONS ON THIS IN, IN MANY DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS FROM THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS AREA.
UM, LIKE I SAID, MY CLIENT, UM, WAS DESIRING TO PUT BALCONIES.
IF IT ENDS UP BEING THE DESIRE TO NOT DO THAT, THEY CAN LIMIT THAT.
[00:35:01]
THERE IN FULL CONTEXT.UH, A COUPLE OF THE OTHER MAJOR ITEMS THAT WERE TALKED ABOUT WERE THE ONSITE CONSTRUCTION PARKING.
THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN GIVEN THE WIDTH OF THE ROADWAYS THAT CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WOULD PARK IN THE AREA.
WE DID MAKE SURE THAT WE, UH, SE WILL SECURE BOTH ONSITE AND OFFSITE CONSTRUCTION PARKING AS WE GO THROUGH THIS.
I'M GONNA FLY THROUGH SOME OF THE OTHER ONES BECAUSE THEY'RE MORE, UH, IMPORTANT TO THE FOLKS THAT LIVE THERE.
BUT WE'VE AGREED TO PLANT NATIVE VEGETATION.
MAKE SURE THAT WE, UM, SCOOT SOME OF THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING AWAY FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, MAKE SURE IT'S ALL HOODED SHIELDED CUT OFF.
WE HAVE, UM, MADE SURE THAT PEDESTRIANS, THAT THE, THE BUILDING FRONT FRONTS TOWARDS CONGRESS, THAT THAT'S OUR FRONT DOOR, THAT THE, UH, PEDESTRIAN USES HAVE ACCESS TO CONGRESS OR THE INTERNAL PARKING GARAGE.
ALL OF THE PARKING WILL BE STRUCTURED, UM, ANDRA BY THE PROJECT.
WE'LL PROVIDE ARTWORK, SECURITY, UM, AND THEN REALLY IMPORTANT TO THE CONTACT TEAM AND THE NEIGHBORS IS A PIECE A, A PERSON TO CALL, RIGHT? IF THERE'S AN ISSUE THAT THERE'S, UM, A PLACE.
YEAH, I CAN THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW HEAR, UM, WITH FROM THE OPPOSITION, BEGINNING WITH MR. PR INGAL, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
HEY Y'ALL, THANKS FOR, FOR HAVING US HERE.
UM, THIS, THIS, THIS THING HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO US IN A PRETTY AWKWARD FASHION.
UM, THE, THE FLUME AMENDMENT CASE, IT, IT'S, IT'S PERTINENT TO US AND AS MUCH AS THAT IT, IT HAS A, AN IMPACT ON A, A, A RESOURCE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THE BIRD STREETS IS A, IT'S A, IT'S OLD NEIGHBORHOOD.
EXCUSE ME, LEMME CHANGE MY GLASSES HERE.
CAN Y'ALL GIMME A SECOND WHILE I GET MY EYEBALLS?
WELL, I'M JUST GONNA WING IT, Y'ALL.
OH, OH, BRETT, I HAVE SOME READERS, SORRY.
I'VE TALKING GLAUCOMA AND, UH, AND, AND DYSLEXIA.
AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE'VE BEEN HAVING SO MANY MEETINGS RATHER THAN, UH, DOING ALL THIS STUFF VIRTUALLY.
AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY THAT'S BEEN, UH, BEING PATIENT WITH ME ON THAT FACT.
UM, THE BIRD STREETS IS, IT'S A A HUNDRED PLUS YEAR OLD NEIGHBORHOOD, LIKE FOUR BLOCKS.
UM, WE HAVE 1930S INFRASTRUCTURE.
BASICALLY WE HAVE, UH, DITCHES AND, UH, CREEKS.
OUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS, UH, NEIGHBOR.
IT, IT'S BORDER, IT'S OUR THREE CREEKS ON TWO SIDES.
IT'S, UH, LITTLE TURTLE CREEK.
AND ON THE EAST SIDE IT'S, UM, A SEASONAL CREEK.
WE TALKED START CALLING MYSTERY CREEK.
IT'S A, IT'S HA IT'S A ON, IF YOU LOOK AT THE FLUME MAP AND WHERE IT EXISTS RIGHT NOW, THE, UH, OH, DID WE EVER GET MY MATERIAL UP? I'M SORRY.
ANYWAY, THEY, THE, UH, THE, THERE'S A FIVE ACRE DRAIN FIELD SOUTH OF REDBIRD LANE, UH, THAT FEEDS TWO DITCHES, UH, ON PARALLEL ON REDBIRD LANE.
THEY HEAD TOWARD SOUTH CONGRESS AND THEY FEED INTO A CREEK THIS MYSTERY CREEK.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THIS FLUE MAP HERE, UM, ON THE, THE BORDER BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ON CONGRESS AND THIS SSF PROPERTY THAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO INCLUDE IN THE NEW, UH, EX EXCLUDED FROM OUR PART OF THE FLU MAP, UH, THAT'S A, THAT, THAT'S A CREEK THERE.
AND IT'S RUNNING RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THIS PROPOSED MU PROPERTY THAT, UH, THEY'RE TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER.
UM, WE'VE HAD, UH, WATERSHED PROTECTION OUT TO, TO LOOK AT, UH, TO LOOK, LOOK AT THE AREA, AND THEY'VE, UH, THEY'VE, CAN WE MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE? UH, THEY'VE DONE A, A PRELIMINARY SURVEY CONCERNING THE CREEK AND DRAINAGE ISSUES ON REDBIRD LANE.
AND, AND THE CREEK'S NEED TO BE RESTORED AND TO ALLOW RECHARGE WATER TO FLOW TO LITTLE TURTLE CREEK A HALF A BLOCK NORTH AS A PROPOSED PROJECT.
[00:40:01]
IMPORTANT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.THIS IS, THIS IS PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE BORDERS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT, IT, IT'S REALLY AWKWARD THAT IT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS PROJECT AND RUNS RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF IT.
THE WATERSHED PROTECTION IS ASSURED AS IT NEEDS TO BE RESTORED AND TURNED INTO A CREEK.
AND YET WHEN WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO THESE PEOPLE FROM, UH, THE DEVELOPER, THE APPLICANT, UH, IT'S CLEAR THAT THEY WANT TO EITHER PUT IT IN A CHANNEL UNDERGROUND AND SEND IT BACK UP TO THE WASTEWATER OR, AND, AND HAVE A VERY LARGE PROJECT THAT'S TOO BIG FOR THE FOOTPRINT.
IF THIS CREEK RUNNING THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF, IT'S GOTTA A 25, 25 FEET ON EITHER SIDE, UH, CLEARANCE, AND IT'S GONNA M DOWN THE FOOTPRINT OF THIS PROPOSED PROJECT.
SO, I MEAN, AT THIS POINT, WHAT, WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD LIKE IS, UH, AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT UNTIL WE CAN GET SOME KIND OF CLARIFICATION FROM, UH, WATERSHED PROTECTION AND PUBLIC WORKS ON RELEASING THAT EASEMENT THAT IS THAT BORDER BETWEEN THOSE, THAT SSF PROPERTY AND THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT EXISTS ALREADY.
UM, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE, UH, THE, THE, THE FIRST, THE FLUME PROJECT WE WERE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PRETTY MUCH OBJECTS TO IT OUT OF, OUT OF HAND.
UM, THE, UH, AS FAR AS ALL THE STUFF THE AWKWARDNESS COMES IN IS THE FACT THAT WE FELT LIKE WE'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH THE, UH, THE POTENTIALITIES OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS AND ALL THOSE THINGS THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH, UH, IF WE, IF WE LOSE, WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT IN PLACE, YET WE OBJECT TO IT AT THE SAME TIME.
SO WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT ANTI-DEVELOPMENT.
WE KNOW SOMETHING'S GONNA BE THERE.
WE JUST WANT IT TO BE THE APPROPRIATE THING THAT'S NOT GONNA DESTROY OUR CREEK.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. ANDY HENDRICKS.
MR. HENDRICKS, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, I'M A HOME HOMEOWNER ON THE REDBIRD LANE.
UM, I, ALONG WITH THE BIRD STREETS OF PLEASANT HILL STAND IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP ON ENVIRONMENTAL GROUNDS.
UH, MR. CREEK IS THE ONLY DRAIN THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS FOR THE LAST 300 FEET TO THE EAST TOWARDS CONGRESS, AND IT ALL FILLS UP, UM, WHEN IT'S CLOGGED.
UH, I FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT KEEPING THE RAINWATER MYSELF AND HAVING IT, UH, WE, WE'VE HAD WORK DONE ON THE, UH, TURTLE CREEK TO THE WEST WHERE THEY DEEPENED THE CHANNEL AND, UH, THEY CLEANED IT UP, UH, BEFORE IT GOES UNDER A BRIDGE.
AND, UH, I THINK WE NEED THE SAME, UH, SORT OF RESTORATION TO THE ONE ON THE EAST AT 1 0 6.
I THINK THE WATER IN THE CREEK BELONGS TO OUR SOIL AND NOT TO THE CONGRESS DRAIN.
UH, AND I'M GLAD I, I'M INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT THE, THE WATERSHED PROTECTION STUDY WILL DO TO PROTECT THAT CREEK.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. JOHN ESTRADA ON THE TELECONFERENCE.
MR. ESTRADA, SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS TO NOTE THAT THE LAST PRESENTATION YOU SENT TO CORRECT THE PREVIOUS ONE YOU SENT WAS, UH, WE WERE UNABLE TO DOWNLOAD.
HELLO? I, I SENT THE WRONG LINKS ACTUALLY, SO THAT'S OKAY.
THE SECOND ONE WAS THE ONLY, ONLY ONE THAT WAS CORRECT, BUT, UH, I'LL GET STARTED.
HELLO, UH, MY NAME IS JOHN ESTRADA AND I AM A 40 YEAR RESIDENT ON BLUEBIRD LANE.
UH, I'M NOT NECESSARILY FOR OREGON THIS PROJECT.
UM, I WORK FOR A DIFFERENT CITY.
[00:45:01]
THE PROCESS WORKS, YOU KNOW, I KNOW IT'S GOT THE RECOMMENDED DESIGNATION, SO YOU KNOW, IT'S IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM HAPPEN.UM, MY MAIN CONCERN, UH, FROM THIS PROJECT, THE IMPACT IT WILL HAVE ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS.
UH, THESE ARE LEVEL ONE STREETS, NOT INTENDED FOR MIXED USE.
UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ALREADY SEEN AN INCREDIBLE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND PARKING, UM, DURING EVENTS AT THE, UH, SAGE BRUSH BAR.
UH, EVEN MORE SO NOW THAT, UH, PARKING IN THE 54 0 2 LOT AND ALONG SOUTH CONGRESS ARE NOW GONE.
UH, BECAUSE REDBIRD HAS NO PARKING SIGNS ALONG THIS BLOCK.
MOST OF THE PARKING SPILLS ONTO BLUEBIRD AND THE 300 BLOCK OF REDBIRD, UH, THESE STREETS ARE VERY NARROW AND DON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS.
MY FAMILY USED TO GO FOR WALKS ON THE WEEKENDS, BUT NOW WE DON'T BECAUSE WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT GETTING HIT BY CARS, LOOKING FOR PARKING, UH, OR LEAVING THE BAR.
UH, WHAT WE NEED ON BLUEBIRD AND THE REST OF REDBIRD ARE RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMITS AT BEST AND NO PARKING SIGNS AT WORST.
I KNOW THERE'S A PROCESS FOR RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMITS AND THAT IT HAS MULTIPLE STEPS, INCLUDING SIGNATURES, A FEE AND A TIA.
BUT, UM, I KNOW THAT EVEN THEN IT'S STILL UP FOR SOMEONE TO DECIDE YES OR NO.
WHAT I'M HOPING IS THAT STAFF REALLY KEEP IN MIND HOW BAD THEY ALREADY GETS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WITH PARKING FROM THE BAR AND HOW MUCH WORSE IT COULD POSSIBLY GET VISITORS TO THIS NEW PROJECT.
I KNOW THAT A TIA IS PART OF A WHOLE PROCESS ANYWAY, SO I'M JUST HOPING THAT CITY STAFF CAN, UH, FIGURE THIS OUT.
UH, YOU KNOW, IF I'D HAD THE VIDEO UP THERE, YOU COULD HAVE SEEN JUST HOW BAD AND, UH, YOU KNOW, DANGEROUS IT IS TO WALK AROUND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE GOALS, UM, FOR A LOT OF THE FOLKS AT CITY HALL IS MAKING MORE WALKABLE, SAFER AREAS.
UH, AND YOU KNOW, IN THAT VIDEO YOU WOULD'VE SEEN THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE WALKING DOWN THE STREET, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T SEE PAST THE CARS THAT ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD.
UH, AND SO A COMING CAR, I COULDN'T SEE YOU 'CAUSE THERE'S NOT A STOP SIGN.
UH, THE OTHER THING IS, IS THAT WHEN YOU GET TO THE SECOND PART OF BLUEBIRD, IF CARS PARKED ON EACH SIDE OF THE STREET, THEN UM, IT'S BASICALLY A ONE LANE ROAD AND IT, UH, EMERGENCY VEHICLES LIKE A FIRE TRUCK, UH, WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH.
UH, SO I, I DIDN'T KNOW I HAD THREE MINUTES THOUGHT I HAD TWO.
BUT, UH,
WE'LL HEAR FROM MS. EZ WALLERSTEIN.
I LIVE AT 1 0 9 WEST MOCKINGBIRD LANE, WHICH IS DIRECTLY NEXT TO THIS PROJECT THAT THEY'RE PLANNING ON THE WEST MOCKINGBIRD SIDE.
AND THEN TO THE SOUTH IS THE REDBIRD SIDE.
THEY HAVE, UM, WHEN THEY DEMOLISHED AND CLEANED UP THE SITE, THEY BULLDOZED SILT INTO THIS MYSTERY CREEK DRAINAGE THAT RUNS NORTH SOUTH, RIGHT BEHIND MY PROPERTY AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPOSED AREA.
SO THE WATER NOW BACKS UP ALL ONTO REDBIRD LANE, OKAY.
IT SHOULD FLOW FROM REDBIRD LANE NORTH UNDER MOCKINGBIRD AND MEET UP WITH TURTLE CREEK NORTH OF THE NEW LITTLE FORD BUILDING THAT THEY JUST BUILT ON WEST MOCKINGBIRD AND CONGRESS.
SO THERE'S THIS MAJOR FLOODING THAT HAPPENS ON REDBIRD LANE EVERY TIME IT RAINS.
THE SECOND THING IS, IS THAT OURS, I'VE BEEN LIVING THERE FOR 25 YEARS, JUST SO YOU KNOW, OUR STREETS ARE BARELY TWO LANE.
SO IF ANYBODY PARKS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, THE ROAD BECOMES ONE LANE.
NOW WITH THE SAGE BRUSH CANTINA, WHICH IS A VERY ACTIVE BAR AND GETS VERY CROWDED, THEY WERE USING THIS PROPOSED LOT FOR PARKING, WHICH KEPT A LOT OF CARS OFF THE STREETS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT NOW IT'S FENCED OFF AND CLOSED, GETTING PREPARED FOR CONSTRUCTION.
SO NOW ALL THE PARKING FOR SAGE BRUSHES ALL THE WAY DOWN THESE VERY NARROW ROADS ALREADY, AND THEY'RE PARKING ON BOTH SIDES, WHICH CAUSES THE STREETS TO BE REALLY ONE LANE, ONE DIRECTION FOR 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 BLOCKS.
[00:50:01]
AND PEDESTRIAN WALKING IS DANGEROUS.STRAIGHT UP DANGEROUS PEOPLE TURN DOWN MOCKINGBIRD LANE TO GET OUT OF THE TRAFFIC ON CONGRESS BETWEEN TWO 30 AND FIVE O'CLOCK ALREADY.
THEY GO 50 MILES DOWN THIS TWO BLOCK STREET TO GET OUT OF THE TRAFFIC.
I'M CONCERNED WITH THE FACT OF IN AND WHERE THE IN AND OUTS OF THIS BIG COMPLEX IS GONNA BE.
THE EGRETS, IF IT'S GONNA BE ON MOCKINGBIRD AND REDBIRD, YOU KNOW, THE INS AND THE OUTS FOR THE BIG APARTMENT BUILDING THAT'S GONNA CREATE 300 MORE CARS ON THESE LITTLE TINY STREETS.
IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE ON CONGRESS AND WE REALLY NEED THAT MYSTERY CREEK TO BE FIXED FOR THE FLOODING SITUATION ON REDBIRD.
YOU AND I HEAR FROM YASMINE AVILA.
MS. AVILA, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M A HOME OWNER OF, OF 3 0 4 WEST MO BOARD LANE.
I HAVE BEEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 14 YEARS.
UM, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS A LOT OF CHARACTER.
IT IS A CHARMING NEIGHBORHOOD.
ANYONE THAT VISITS IT JUST PRICESS HOW BEAUTIFUL IT IS.
THESE ALL TREES, NARROW STREETS, NO SIDEWALKS, IT'S JUST, I HAVE BEEN SAY A TALL IS ONE OF THE LAST JEWELS, HOAS OF AUSTIN AND 14 YEARS LIVING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
IN THE LAST SEVEN, EIGHT YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN, WE HAVE SEEN AN INCREASE OF MASSIVE DEVELOPMENTS AND THE ONE THAT IS COMING UP IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE BIGGEST, OR IF NOT THE BIGGEST ONE IN OUR TINY FOUR BLOCKS.
NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED, UM, PREVIOUSLY, UH, WE DO NOT HAVE THOSE BEAUTIFUL SIDEWALKS THAT YOU SAW IN THE PRESENTATION.
UM, WE HAVE YOUNG CHILDREN, WE HAVE YOUNG, UH, CHILD, UH, THAT ARE WALKING.
WE ARE SPENDING OUR EVENINGS IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND ALREADY HAVING ISSUES WITH THESE VEHICLES TORN IN OUR STREETS, UM, ON PEAK HOURS.
AND NOT ONLY IS AND SEVERAL NUMBER OF CARS, IT'S JUST A SPEED THAT IS ALSO AN ISSUE FOR US.
UM, AS I MENTIONED, OR AS I WAS, WAS MENTIONED BEFORE, WE HAVE THREE CREEKS THAT RUN AROUND OUR FOUR BLOCKS NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO YOU CAN IN MIND WE HAVE THREE CREEKS CROSSING OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
ONE OF THEM, ONE OF THEM IS RIGHT BEHIND MY, MY HOUSE.
ONE BEHIND MY PROPERTY IS BEAUTIFUL TO HAVE A CREEK, BUT IT'S ALSO VERY SAD TO SEE HOW IT HAS BEEN DEGRADED OVER THE SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
IF I MIGHT MENTION, UM, WE CROSSED, WE USED TO CROSS THIS CREEK EASILY.
WE HAVE TO FREE CLIMB MORE THAN SEVEN FEET AND THEN CLIMB UP AGAIN.
IF WE WANNA GO TO THE OTHER SIDE BECAUSE CHILDREN WANT TO PLAY IN THE AREA.
WHY NOT? SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO, THAT MYSTERY CREEK IS BEING PROTECTED, NOT CHANNELIZED CITY'S MISSION IS PROTECT IS FLOOD.
UM, FLOOD PROTECTION IS ONE OF THE CITY MISSIONS WHERE PROTECTION MISSIONS IS PROTECT CITIZENS BY FROM FLOODING.
WE DON'T, WE DON'T, WE DON'T WANNA CREATE MORE FLOODING.
WE DON'T WANNA CREATE OR CREATE IN A CONCRETE CHANNEL.
WE WANNA ENHANCE OUR CHANNELS.
WE DON'T WANNA CHANNELIZE THEM WITH CONCRETE.
SO I'M HERE TO OPPOSE TO THE PROPOSED AT MINIMUM ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE AND ASK FOR RECOGNITION AND PROTECTION OF THIS MYSTERY CREEK.
IT'S, UM, SURPRISINGLY TO SEE THE CONSTRUCTION THAT IS NOT RECOGNIZING, UM, THIS NATURAL FEATURE THAT WE HAVE IN AUSTIN, UM, SPECIFICALLY, OR THANK YOU, NOT SO MUCH.
HOPEFULLY THE EXIT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS NOT THROUGH MOCKINGBIRD OR RED LANE.
WE'LL HEAR FROM JACKSON HENDRICKS, FOLLOWED BY ANDREA MCCARTNEY.
UM, I'M A RESIDENT AT 3 0 6 REDBIRD LANE.
I'VE LIVED AT 3 0 6 FOR 20 YEARS.
[00:55:02]
THIS IS THE BIGGEST DEVELOPMENT I'VE SEEN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD IN MY LIFE.UM, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD INFRASTRUCTURE IS NOT BUILT TO SUPPORT, UM, SUCH A BIG PROJECT.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, IT'S DISREGARDING A PART OF THE ECOSYSTEM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, WHICH HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN STRONG.
UM, WE'RE SURROUNDED, SORRY SIR.
WE GO DOWN TO ONE MINUTE AFTER.
UM, SPEAKERS, GO AHEAD AND FINISH YOUR THOUGHTS IF YOU WOULD.
I WOULD LIKE FOR A MYSTERY CREEK TO BE RESTORED.
WILL NOW HEAR FROM ANDREW MCCARTNEY, FOLLOWED BY THE APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL.
I'VE LIVED AT 3 0 9 REDBIRD LANE FOR 38 YEARS.
I'M SPEAKING ABOUT ITEMS FIVE AND SIX ON THE AGENDA.
I'M OPPOSED TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT ON ITEM FIVE TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
THE EASEMENT OF THE WET WEATHER CREEK THAT TRAVELS FROM SOUTH TO NORTH ON 1 0 6.
REDBIRD MUST FIRST BE PROTECTED.
UM, J EDUARDO PEREZ OF WATERSHED PROTECTION DREW A MAP OF THE WATER FLOW.
YOU'VE PROBABLY GOTTEN A COPY OF THAT.
UM, IF NOT I CAN HELP ALSO, I'M ASKING FOR AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM SIX UNTIL THE PROTECTION OF THE CREEK IS CLARIFIED.
IN ADDITION, I REQUEST THAT ALL ENTRANCES AND EXITS BE ON SOUTH CONGRESS AND NOT ON REDBIRD OR MOCKINGBIRD LANE, WHICH ARE VERY NARROW.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
COULD YOU PUT THAT PRESENTATION BACK UP? I THINK THERE'S A PICTURE THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL.
UM, I I'M VERY GRATEFUL THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAME OUT.
AS I SAID, WE HAVE BEEN TALKING, UM, WITH A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS FOR A REALLY LONG TIME, AND THE, UH, ITEMS THAT THEY BROUGHT UP WERE NOT, THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME WE'VE HEARD 'EM.
UM, YOU KNOW, FLOODING AND THOSE CONCERNS ARE ONE OF THE VERY FIRST THINGS THAT BROUGHT UP.
UNFORTUNATELY, UM, FLOODING AND STUDIES LIKE THAT ARE CONDUCTED AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, NOT AT THE TIME OF ZONING.
WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS, CAN I, CAN YOU FLIP ME FORWARD A LITTLE BIT PLEASE? UH, TO SLIDE, UH, 17 PLEASE.
UM, WHAT THIS IMAGE DOES SHOW IS THE EXISTING CREEKS THAT, THAT ARE THERE.
SO THERE IS A CREEK TO THE EAST.
THERE IS A CREEK TO THE NORTH, WHICH YOU'LL SEE IS THERE'S NOT A CREEK, UM, THAT RUNS ALONG OUR PROPERTY LINE.
THERE IS, UM, THERE'S NOT DRAINAGE SUFFICIENT TO GO THROUGH THERE THAT WOULD CREATE ANY TYPE OF DRAINAGE CHANNEL.
THERE IS NOT AN EASEMENT IN THAT AREA.
UM, WHAT WE HAVE FOUND IS A, A MANMADE DITCH THAT IS THERE.
UM, BUT WE, WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THAT WHEN WE GO THROUGH SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, ALL OF THESE ITEMS WILL BE REVIEWED.
THAT'S THE POINT OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE TO DO THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY.
THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE TO DO ALL THE FLOOD STUDIES.
UM, IF THERE ARE FLOODING ISSUES, ALL OF THOSE WOULD BE REMEDIED AND MADE BETTER.
UM, WE HAVE TO LEAVE IT BETTER THAN WE FOUND IT, UM, AS WE GO THROUGH SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
SO, UM, LIKE I SAID, THESE ARE NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE HEARD THESE.
WE HAVE KIND OF REITERATED THAT THEY ARE SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ISSUES.
AND AGAIN, THERE IS NO FLOOD PLAIN.
THERE IS NO CREEK, THERE IS NO EASEMENT ON THE PROPERTY TODAY.
UH, AND THEN THE LAST THING I WOULD JUST MENTION, AS I MENTIONED IN MY PRESENTATION, IS THAT ALL PARKING FOR THIS PROJECT WILL BE PROVIDED IN A STRUCTURED PARKING GARAGE.
UM, THAT WILL BE WRAPPED WITH UNITS.
SO THERE WILL NOT, UM, BE ANY ONSITE PARKING.
EVERYTHING WILL BE CAPTURED WITHIN THE PROJECT.
UH, I, UH, APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
ALRIGHT FOLKS, LET'S GO AND MOVE INTO Q AND A.
WHO WANTS TO START US OFF? OH, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, DO I HAVE A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL SECONDED BY THE SECOND.
AND, UM, ANY OBJECTIONS CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING? ALL RIGHT, NOW WE CAN MOVE INTO Q AND A.
WHO WANTS TO START US OFF? UH, COMMISSIONER BETA RAMIREZ.
I WAS WONDERING IF MR. PEREZ COMMISSIONER BE RAMIREZ, CAN YOU, UM, TURN YOUR VOLUME HIGHER? MY VOLUME? OH, DO I NEED TO TURN? CAN YOU HEAR ME? NO.
UM, I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THE CREEK THAT,
[01:00:01]
OR WHATEVER IT IS, AND I, AND I SAW THE STUDY FROM, UM, THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT.I'M NOT A DRAINAGE ENGINEER, SO ALL THE LINES AND THE TRIANGLES, I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND.
I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM MR. PEREZ IF HE IS IN THE AUDIENCE, HIS BACKGROUND ABOUT THE STUDY THAT WAS CONDUCTED.
DO WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM WATERSHED HERE THIS EVENING? WE REQUEST.
DID YOU, WHO DID YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM? THE, I THINK HIS NAME IS EDUARDO PEREZ.
WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY HERE THIS EVENING FROM WATERSHED, UNFORTUNATELY.
UH, ANY OTHER YOU WANNA DIRECT YOUR QUESTION TO STAFF PERHAPS OR THE APPLICANT? SURE.
I MEAN, YEAH, I MEAN, MY OTHER QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT, UM, THE A SMP.
UM, SO IT SOUNDED LIKE THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 29 FEET FROM CENTER LINE ON BOTH REDBIRD AND MOCKINGBIRD.
IS THAT CORRECT? DO YOU WANT THE APPLICANT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION OR STAFF? WHOEVER.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD MS. LET'S, YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY, MS. WARR, IF YOU HAVE AN ANSWER, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
I I I CAN, I CAN GIVE IT MY BEST SHOT.
SO, UH, THE NUMBERS THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT ARE THE INFORMATION THAT WE RECEIVED PRELIMINARILY WITH ZONING.
WE HAVE WITH REGARD TO THE RIGHT OF WAY, WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH ALL OF THE CITY DEPARTMENTS REGARDING TRANSPORTATION.
AND WHAT THEY HAVE TOLD US IS, UH, AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, THEY WILL DETERMINE WHAT, IF ANY, UH, I HAVE TWO CHILDREN THAT RUN AROUND YOURS ARE PRECIOUS, UM,
BUT, UM, WHAT THEY HAVE TOLD US IS THAT THEY WILL DETERMINE THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS REQUIRED AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND IT WILL DETERMINE, THAT'S WHEN THEY WILL ALSO LOOK AT INGRESS AND EGRESS PATTERNS, UM, ON MOCKINGBIRD AND REDBIRD.
AND THEN WHAT THOSE TURNING MOVEMENTS THAT THEY DO ALLOW OR DON'T ALLOW WOULD DETERMINE WHAT RIGHT OF WAY THAT THEY WOULD REQUIRE ALONG THOSE ROADWAYS.
AND THE MAIN REASON I'M ASKING IS 'CAUSE I HEARD A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CIRCULATION, PEOPLE FEELING SAFE WALKING.
AND SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU'D BE REQUIRED TO ADD CURB AND GUTTER AND SIDEWALK ON BOTH MOCKINGBIRD AND REDBIRD AND THAT YOU WOULD BE PUSHING THOSE, THE CENTER LINE BACK SO THAT IT WOULD ACCOMMODATE, UH, THOSE TYPES OF FACILITIES ON THE, ON YOUR SITE.
WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE GERD, CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALKS ON OUR PROPERTY AT THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT.
HOW FAR THOSE PUSH IN IS WHAT WOULD BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
'CAUSE YOU'D WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT TAPERS ACCORDINGLY TO THE EXISTING ROADWAY.
I MEAN, MY MAIN QUESTION WAS ABOUT LOCALIZED FLOODING AND THE
SO I'M, YOU KNOW, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE VOTING ONE WAY OR THEN ANOTHER WITHOUT HEARING FROM THE WATERSHED PERSON.
IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SOMEONE FROM WATERSHED IS GONNA BE HERE TONIGHT.
I DO HAVE OUR CIVIL ENGINEER HERE IF IT'S OF ANY BENEFIT, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S ANYBODY FROM THE, UM, CITY HERE TODAY.
I GUESS MY FINAL QUESTION, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I MISSED THIS, BUT, UM, YOU SAID TWO 50 UNITS.
DO YOU ANTICIPATE HOLD, WE HAVE SOMEBODY FROM STAFF HERE THAT, UH, MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? I WAS JUST GONNA, UM, KIND OF COMMENT THAT WATERSHED ISN'T TYPICALLY REVIEW DURING THIS PORTION OF ZONING.
UM, WE DO HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL THAT WE'RE WE'LL REVIEW DURING ZONING, UM, AND I CAN, WE CAN REACH OUT TO THEM TO GET SOME MORE SPECIFIC INFORMATION.
BUT, UM, WHAT THEY'VE PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT IS WHAT ENVIRONMENTAL HAS PROVIDED TO DATE.
UM, BUT IT'S NOT TYPICAL THAT, UH, WATERSHED WOULD REVIEW AT THIS POINT.
I GUESS WHAT I SAW FROM THE DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS, IT LOOKED TO ME AS IF THERE WERE NO IMPACT AND THE DRAINAGE ISSUES WERE MAINLY SOUTH OF THE SITE.
SO I WAS CONFUSED BECAUSE READING IT, IT LOOKS LIKE THE TECHNICAL REPORT WAS SAYING ONE THING, BUT WE'RE HEARING SOMETHING ELSE FROM NEIGHBORS.
SO I'M, I'M CONFUSED ABOUT THE IMPACT AND I WANTED TO HEAR SOMEONE THAT ACTUALLY KNOWS HOW TO READ THE REPORT.
UM, WE DO HAVE A MAP THAT, YEAH.
HOLD TECHNICAL REPORT SHOWS THE DRAINAGE, SO WE WILL, UM, I THINK WE'LL PROBABLY CONTINUE THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING TO ALLOW THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS TO SHOW WHAT THEY HAVE.
UH, DID YOU TAKE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT, MR. CHAIR? COMMISSIONER LAY ANDREW RIVER? YES.
I CURRENTLY GETTING THAT UPLOADED.
IT SHOULD, UH, BE AVAILABLE SOON.
SO WHO WANTS TO ASK THE NEXT QUESTION? AND, AND I'LL, I WILL IF THEY, IF THE NEXT QUESTION PERSON WITH QUESTIONS DOESN'T KEEP DELVING INTO THE FLOODING, I WILL, BUT GO AHEAD.
WHO IS NEXT? COMMISSIONER HAYNES.
I'LL LEAVE THE FLOODING TO YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, MS. SORE, YOU PUT UP, UH,
[01:05:01]
IN YOUR, UH, PRESENTATION, YOU HAD A LIST OF THINGS AND, AND WE'RE I'M A, YEAH, I'M STILL THE NEW KID SINCEUM, AND SO ALL THOSE ACRONYMS CONFUSE ME SOMETIMES.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A, UH, ADDING A, A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY HERE, A CO OR THERE'S BOTH.
SO THERE'S AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT IS ON THE NORTHWEST PARCEL THAT HAD A, A COUPLE OF PROHIBITED USES AS WELL AS A SETBACK THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO CARRY OVER.
THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY ON THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT CONTEMPLATES PROHIBITED USES THAT WE ARE OKAY WITH.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT TALKED ABOUT, UM, A 30 FOOT SETBACK, UH, ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY BUILDING SETBACK, AND THEN A FIVE FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER THAT WE WOULD BE WILLING TO OFFER IN AS PART OF THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
BUT THE REMAINDER OF THE ITEMS WOULD BE DONE AS A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT GIVEN THE RESTRICTIONS THAT EXIST WITH ZONING.
WHY WOULDN'T WE PUT THIS IF, IF YOU, I, I'M, I'M GUESSING HERE, AND I WOULDN'T SAY I'M ASSUMING, BUT I KNOW WHAT HAPPENS,
SOUNDS LIKE THE RESIDENTS ALSO WANT THAT, AND THEY WOULD BE HAPPIER.
I'M NOT SAYING THEY'D BE HAPPY, BUT THEY'D BE HAPPIER.
AND IF WE'VE GOT BOTH OF THOSE, WHY WOULDN'T WE PUT THOSE IN A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND MAKE IT A, MAKE IT A PART OF THIS GOING FORWARD TO SEE IF WE CAN ALL MEET IN THE MIDDLE? YEAH.
MY EXPERIENCE OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS IS THAT THE ITEMS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO PUT IN A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY ARE, ARE LIMITED TO PUBLICLY ENFORCEABLE ITEMS. AND BECAUSE THESE ARE PRIVATE ITEMS THAT THEY WOULD BE DONE IN A COVENANT.
BUT I'M HAPPY TO LET STAFF ANSWER THAT.
CAN STAFF ANSWER THAT? LET ME GUESS.
WELL, TYPICALLY, UM, SO WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY THE TWO ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT THEY WERE OFFERING? THERE WAS, THERE WAS A LIST OF SEVEN OR EIGHT.
ONE OF 'EM WAS THERE NO BALCONIES ON THE, I GUESS THAT'S THE WEST SIDE AND THERE WERE SEVERAL ITEMS. OH, SO THE ITEMS THAT WOULD BE IN THEIR PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT? MM-HMM.
IF, IF THOSE ITEMS ARE NOT A PART OF CHAPTER 25, 2 ZONING, THOSE ARE NOT ITEMS THAT CAN ACTUALLY BE RESTRICTED WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
SO IF IT'S SOMETHING TO DO WITH A, SAY A SETBACK, A NEW BUILDING SETBACK, A VEGETATIVE BUFFER, THINGS THAT, UM, ALREADY EXIST WITHIN THE ZONING THAT WE CAN RESTRICT, THEN WE CAN INCLUDE THOSE IN THE CONDITION.
IS BUILDING A BALCONY, NOT PART OF BUILDING THAT IS PART OF SITE PLAN? MM-HMM,
UM, HOW DID, I KNOW THAT WAS GONNA BE THE ANSWER.
UM, AND MR UM, ON THE SIDEWALKS, I, I REALIZE WE DON'T KNOW THE, THE DISTANCE AND THE, THE LIMITATIONS.
WE'LL DO SOME OF THAT ON SITE, UH, IN, IN SITE PLAN.
BUT YOUR, IF THIS GOES THROUGH YOUR REQUIREMENT FOR SIDE SIDEWALKS WOULD BE JUST FOR THE PROPERTY, WOULD YOU CONSIDER EXTENDING THOSE BACK? OBVIOUSLY THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO ANOTHER PRIVATE AGREEMENT HERE, YOU'RE ASKING SOME QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT OPEN A CAN OF, UH, A CAN OF WORMS. UM, SO WE, THAT'S MY JOB.
WE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SIDEWALKS ALONG OUR PROPERTY.
UH, AS PART OF OUR DISCUSSIONS, UH, INITIALLY WE WERE ACTUALLY ASKED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO POTENTIALLY NOT PROVIDE SIDEWALKS ALONG REDBIRD AND MOCKINGBIRD BECAUSE THEY LIKED THE CHARACTER OF THEIR STREET THAT DID NOT HAVE THE SIDEWALKS.
I CAN LET THEM CONFIRM, BUT THAT, THAT WAS ONE OF THE VERY FIRST THINGS THAT WE WERE ASKED WAS TO NOT PROVIDE SIDEWALKS.
UM, WE HAVE SAID THAT THAT IS VIA CODE.
WE ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SIDEWALKS FOR YOUR, THERE'S STILL BEEN SOME ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS, UM, WHERE THEY HAVE REQUESTED FOR US TO NOT PROVIDE SIDEWALKS FROM OUR DRIVEWAYS INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO ONLY PROVIDE, UM, PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO OUR DRIVEWAYS.
SO I, I THINK THAT I CAN'T SAY YES, THAT I WOULD DO THAT.
CAN I HAVE SOMEONE FOR THE, THERE WERE SEVERAL THAT WERE ASKING FOR SIDEWALKS.
CAN I HAVE YOU, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK MA'AM ASKING FOR SIDEWALKS IF PEOPLE WERE SAYING WE LIKE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, LIKE YES.
WELL COME TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE.
SO THIS BUILDING, THIS PROPOSAL IS ON THE VERY END.
THERE'S, AND, AND MA'AM, I'M GONNA, 'CAUSE I ONLY GOT LIKE, LIKE THEY CUT YOU OFF.
THEY CUT ME OFF TOO, SO, OKAY.
SO WOULD, DO YOU WANT, IF THE, IF THE APPLICANT AGREES TO EXTEND SIDEWALKS DOWN RED BIRD FOR TWO BLOCKS ALL THE WAY DOWN THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS, I, I DOUBT YOU WOULD GET THAT, BUT WHAT ABOUT ONE BLOCK? OKAY, SO THE STREETS ARE ONLY THIS BIG.
I'M JUST SAYING THERE'S NO ROOM FOR SIDEWALKS EITHER ON THE WHOLE STREET.
[01:10:01]
UM, SUPPORT THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT'S GONNA BE GOING UP AND DOWN THESE STREETS BECAUSE THE STREETS ARE ONLY TWO LANES ALREADY.THEY DON'T CARRY ENOUGH LENGTH FOR EVEN PARKING.
THANK YOU, UM, FOR ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, UH, WHO'S NEXT CHAIR? COMMISSIONER LAVER, BEFORE, UH, YOU PROCEED IF, UH, THE, WE HAVE THE, UM, EXHIBITS REQUESTED.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, WAS IT MS. MCCARTNEY? WHAT? COULD YOU COME UP? I THINK THAT WAS YOUR NAME IF I GOT IT RIGHT? ME? YES.
UH, YOU WERE, DID YOU HAVE THE EXHIBIT? UM, IS THIS THE ONE WE'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW? NO, THAT'S, UH, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
UH, YEAH, THERE, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MR. PEREZ DREW, UM, AND THAT'S RED BIRD LANE IS THE SOUTHERN STREET AND THEN YOU SEE, UM, 1 0 6 AND YOU SEE THE ARROWS GOING THERE THROUGH THIS COMING DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT IS THIS SEASONAL CREEK.
AND IT DID RUN BETTER, BUT WITH THE BULLDOZERS AND EVERYTHING CLEARING THE PROPERTY, ALL KINDS OF SILT GOT IN IT.
SO THERE'S EVEN MORE PROBLEMS NOW.
SO LET ME ASK, UH, THIS QUESTION.
DID YOU TALK TO THE WATERSHED? UH, GO AHEAD AND COME UP SIR, IF YOU WOULD.
SO I THINK YOU WERE TRYING TO EXPLAIN, UM, WHAT WAS, SINCE WE DON'T HAVE WATERSHED HERE TODAY, WHAT DID THEY SAY ABOUT THIS CREEK? UM, HE'S ACTUALLY, UH, ENCOURAGING US TO PUSH FOR RESTORATION OF IT ON THE, ON THE SLIDE ON THE RIGHT THERE, THIS IS A 84 19 84 AERIAL PICTURE.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT CURVE TRAVERSING YOU, YOU CAN KIND OF COMPARE THE, THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT, YOU CAN SEE THAT CURVE OF TREES THAT'S DESCRIBING THE ARC OF THAT CREEK.
IT'S BEEN DESCRIBED AS A DITCH OR WHATEVER, BUT IT'S AN ACTUAL CREEK.
UM, HE, HE CAME OUT ON THE, ON THE, ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF A RED BIRD.
THAT FIVE ACRES, THERE'S, IF YOU LOOK AT IT ON THE SATELLITE PICTURE, WHICH YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE IT ON THIS ONE AS WELL, THERE'S ACTUAL CONTINUATION OF THE CREEK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RED BIRD.
IT HITS THE TWO DITCHES THAT WE HAVE, OR EXCUSE ME, UH, WE HAVE DITCHES INSTEAD OF SIDEWALKS, WE HAVE DRAINAGE DITCHES, AND THOSE DITCHES FEED INTO THIS CREEK.
SO I'M GONNA RUN OUTTA TIME AS WELL.
I'D LIKE TO TALK TO THE APPLICANT'S CIVIL ENGINEER.
I'M TRYING TO GET A LOT OF INFORMATION ON THIS SHORT TIME PERIOD.
SO WE DON'T HAVE THE, UH, WATERSHED HERE WITH US, BUT CAN YOU SPEAK TO THIS, UH, FEATURE AND HOW THIS WOULD BE, UH, ADDRESSED DURING SITE PLAN? I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS HERE.
THOMAS LOMBARDI, KIMLEY HORN CIVIL ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT.
SO IT, IT'S NOT A CREEK, IT IS A MANMADE DITCH.
UM, IT IS BETWEEN THE, THE TWO LOTS.
UM, THERE IS OFFSITE DRAINAGE FROM THE SOUTH GOING THROUGH THE PROPERTY, GOING, GOING THROUGH THIS DITCH DRAINING NORTH THROUGH MOCKINGBIRD.
DURING THE SITE PLAN STAGE, WE ARE REQUIRED BY CODE TO CAPTURE THE OFFSITE DRAINAGE PUT INTO A PUBLIC DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
CURRENTLY A DRAIN EASEMENT DOES NOT EXIST ON THE SITE.
WE'RE GONNA CAPTURE THE OFFSITE DRAINAGE IN A PUBLIC DRAINAGE EASEMENT ROUTED AROUND OUR SITE, DISCHARGED IT TO THE NORTH OFM BURN INTO AN EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
UM, DETENTION AND WATER QUALITY WILL BE PROVIDED ON SITE.
UM, IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD IN TERMS OF OFFSITE DRAINAGE, REALLY NOT A LOT OF DRAINAGE.
UM, YOU KNOW, FLOODPLAIN HAS MINIMUM 64 ACRES.
WE'RE NOWHERE NEAR THAT HERE FOR THIS PROPERTY.
SO AGAIN, THIS WILL BE HANDLED AT THE SITE PLAN STAGE.
UM, SO WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE THAT JUST IS PUTTING A SERIES OF STORMWATER DRAINS TO CONVEY THIS AROUND YOUR PROPERTY OR INTO THE MAIN STREET STORMWATER.
WHAT WOULD THIS ULTIMATE WOULD LOOK LIKE? IT COULD BE A COMBINATION OF, OF, OF A DITCH AND THEN THAT WOULD DISCHARGE INTO UNDERGROUND STORM SEWER PIPE THAT WOULD SHOOT NORTH TO MOCKINGBIRD OR POND, PROPOSED POND.
WE'LL ALSO CONNECT TO THAT PUBLIC, UM, PIPE THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE BUILDING AND IT'LL DISCHARGE NORTH OF, UH, MOCKINGBIRD INTO THE EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS, UH, YOU'LL HAVE TO MANAGE THE WATER THAT'S COMING ONTO THAT SITE AND WE'RE REQUIRED BY CODE.
UH, WE STILL HAVE SOME MORE SPACES.
ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER CONLEY? COMMISSIONER CONY CONLEY? YEAH.
SO THIS IS ACTUALLY TOUGH BECAUSE I HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS THAT I
[01:15:01]
CAN'T GET TO WITHOUT FIRST SAYING THAT I THINK WE DO NEED TO HEAR FROM SOMEONE FROM THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT.UM, I, YOU KNOW, I, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WATERSHED DOESN'T REVIEW CASES AT THIS TIME, AND A LOT OF THIS REVIEW WILL HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, BEFORE AND DURING SITE PLAN.
UM, BUT FOLKS FROM WATERSHED HAVE DRAWN SOME KIND OF A MAP FOR PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I THINK THAT WE NEED AT LEAST TO HEAR FROM THEM TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS THAT THEY HAVE COMMUNICATED TO FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND THIS.
AND TO CLARIFY WHAT HAS BEEN PUT OUT THERE.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT INFORMATION IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL DESERVE TO KNOW.
I MEAN, SOME COMMUNICATION HAS OCCURRED AND IF IT HASN'T, THEN THAT ALSO NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED.
BUT, UM, SO THAT'S THE FIRST THING I WANT TO JUST STATE.
AND I I WOULD, YOU KNOW, I KNOW IT'S TOUGH, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN DO THIS IF THERE'S SOME WAY WE CAN REACH OUT TO THEM, YOU KNOW? BUT I WOULD REALLY FEEL LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING SOMEONE WE HAVE TO HEAR FROM.
UM, SO THAT'S JUST A STATEMENT, I GUESS, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE FROM STAFF CAN SPEAK TO THAT, BUT, UM, CAN I SPEAK TO THAT? WELL, NO, I MEAN, I, MY QUESTION REALLY IS FOR STAFF IN THAT IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DOES WATERSHED WEIGH IN AT THE ZONING STAGE? IT'S WHAT KIND OF COMMUNICATION HAS WATERSHED HAD WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT THIS MANMADE OR NOT MANMADE CREEK THAT WE'RE HEARING ABOUT.
AND I THINK WE JUST DESERVE TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION IF WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS.
WELL, UNFORTUNATELY I CAN'T GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION, BUT I KNOW WATERSHED IS NOT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE NOT BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH SPECIFICALLY WATERSHED ON THIS.
UM, SO SOMEONE, IT'S ENVIRONMENTAL, YOU KNOW, THAT DOES LIKE A BASIC REVIEW.
WE HAVE OUR REVIEWERS THAT GO THROUGH, UM, BUT WATERSHED HAS NOT, SO I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY BEEN IN CONTACT WITH SOMEONE.
I MEAN, SO IN WHAT CONTEXT DID SOMEONE FROM WATERSHED DRAW A MAP FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD? I CAN ANSWER THAT.
SO, UH, AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE CONVERSATION, THE VERY FIRST THING THAT THEY ASKED US WAS, HEY, THERE'S A LOT OF WILDLIFE, THERE'S A LOT OF WATER, THERE'S A LOT OF FLOODING, WHAT CAN WE DO? AND SO WE GOT OUR ENGINEERS INVOLVED AND HAD THEM START DOING STUDIES, UM, AND WE ALSO SAID, HEY, HERE'S A CONTACT, RIGHT? UM, SO IT'S NOT JUST THIS LITTLE PIECE.
THERE WAS ALSO THE NEIGHBORHOOD MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE CULVERTS UNDER SOME OF THEIR DRIVEWAYS THAT, THAT HAD BEEN FILLED IN AND HADN'T BEEN MAINTAINED.
THERE WERE CULVERTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROADS THAT, THAT HAD BEEN ILLEGALLY FILLED IN BASED ON, UM, SOME, UH, PROPERTIES THAT WERE UNDER CONSTRUCTION DOWNSTREAM.
AND SO TO HELP THEM, WE SAID, ALL RIGHT, HERE'S, HERE'S A CONTACT, RIGHT? UM, WE WILL BE HANDLING OUR WATER, BUT THERE'S OTHER WATER THAT WE AREN'T IN CONTROL OF AND THAT WE HAVE, WE CAN'T MAKE PEOPLE GO BACK AND DO UNDO THE BAD THAT THEY DID.
SO WE GOT THEM IN CONTACT WITH THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT SO THAT THEY COULD HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS KNOWING THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S TALKED ABOUT AT ZONING.
UM, WE WENT AHEAD AND DID SOME STUDIES FOR THEM AT THIS TIME AND PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT REQUIRED, KNOWING THAT THE REST OF IT WOULD BE HANDLED AT ZONING.
WELL, I, I THINK IT WOULD STILL BE HELPFUL FOR US TO CLARIFY WHAT KIND OF CONVERSATION HAS TAKEN PLACE.
IT SEEMS LIKE YOU, UM, SORRY, IT'S MY TIME IS RUNNING OUT AND I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE.
SO CLARIFY, WE GOT WATERSHED, SORRY, WE GOT WATERSHED PROTECTION INVOLVED 'CAUSE OF THE FLOODING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT.
CAUSED BY THAT THE BACKUP ON THAT SITE, IT, IT, THAT'S A MISCHARACTERIZATION THAT THEY SET THAT UP FOR SOMEHOW.
SO MY QUESTION IS JUST I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM WATERSHED AS TO WHAT EXACTLY THEY COMMUNICATED AND, AND WE, WE, WE, WE ASKED THEM TO COME COMMUNICATE AND IT'S, IT WAS MADE CLEAR TO US TO SPEAK HERE OKAY.
TO Y'ALL THAT WE'D HAVE TO HAVE A REQUEST FROM ONE OF Y'ALL OR FROM FREDDY, SOMEBODY CITY COUNCIL TO ASK THEM TO BE HERE TO SPEAK.
NOW I'M GONNA, I, I DON'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT JUST I, I'M SQUEEZED FOR TIME.
I WANT TO ASK A DIFFERENT QUESTION.
SO CAN I JUST SAY ONE SENTENCE? OKAY.
HE DID A SURVEY AND A MAP AND WE HAVE ALL THESE GRAPHS AND ALL THIS STUFF.
WE'VE SEEN THE MAP AND I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY.
BUT I MEAN HE, IF YEAH, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
YEAH, THAT'S, THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT OF INFORMATION.
SO MY OTHER QUESTION, I'M SORRY TO PIVOT.
I HOPE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WILL CONTINUE TO TAKE UP THAT LINE OF QUESTIONING.
BUT MY OTHER QUESTION IS UNDERSTANDING THIS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, AND I HEAR FROM YOU THAT YOU, THAT INITIALLY THERE WERE EVEN REQUESTS AROUND REMOVING WINDOWS FROM ONE OF THE SIDES OF THE BUILDING AND THEN, UH, REQUEST, UH, POTENTIALLY RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT REMOVES BALCONIES.
COULD YOU CLARIFY THAT IS WHAT IS EXACTLY THIS? UM, THERE HAS, THERE'S NOT A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT EXECUTED AT THIS TIME.
THERE HAS BEEN A REQUEST TO NOT HAVE BALCONIES ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT FACES THE RESIDENTIAL, UH, PROPERTIES.
UM, AFTER A LOT OF CONVERSATION, THEY SAID THAT IF IT BECAME THE DESIRE THAT THEY COULD, THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE THAT CONCESSION.
COULD I SPEAK TO THE, A NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVE? THIS IS, UM, WHOEVER CAN SPEAK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THIS.
UM, YEAH, I, OH, I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND, UM, THE POSITION ON WANTING TO REMOVE FIRST WINDOWS AND THEN BALCONIES.
WOULD THE PEOPLE RESIDING IN THIS BUILDING, I MEAN, I PRESUME THAT YOU HAVE WINDOWS IN YOUR HOUSE.
WOULD THE PEOPLE PRESIDING IN THIS BUILDING NOT BE
[01:20:01]
DESERVING OF HAVING WINDOWS? AND UM, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT SO MUCH.IT IS AS WE, OUR, OUR OUR LOTS ARE ARE RURAL, THEY'RE LIKE HALF ACRE LOTS.
WE LIVE A RURAL LIFESTYLE AND HAVING, UH, BALCONIES AND WINDOWS DIRECTLY LOOKING DOWN INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BALCONIES ARE IN OPPOSITION TO A RURAL LIFESTYLE.
SO I, I THINK, UM, I THINK I KNOW THE QUESTION.
UM, I'M SORRY MR. CONLEY WANTS MY TIME IS UP TO GO YOUR TIME'S UP.
UH, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO PICK THAT UP LATER, I JUST NEED TO, UH, COMMISSIONER MUTO WAS NEXT, SO WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE HER QUESTIONS NOW.
UM, I, THIS IS, UM, PRETTY FAR SOUTH DOWN SOUTH CONGRESS.
I'M WONDERING IF STAFF CAN SPEAK TO SOME OF THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN AND HOW OUR GROWTH EXTENDS INTO THIS AREA.
UM, 'CAUSE THIS HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN, YOU KNOW, IN, IN OLDER DAYS, THIS WAS OUTSIDE OF ALL THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR AND THERE THERE IS A, A CHANGE OVER AS THIS IS GROWING.
SO HOW DOES OUR PLAN LOOK FOR THIS PORTION OF SOUTH CONGRESS? I CAN'T HEAR ANYTHING.
DID I LOSE Y'ALL? OH YEAH, HOLD ON.
THEY'RE CONVENING TO SEE WHO'S GONNA COME ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
I GUESS THIS IS KIND OF LIKE QUESTIONS ABOUT IMAGINE AUSTIN AND HOW WE'RE LAYING OUT THAT GROWTH THAT WAY.
UM, I COULD REALLY ONLY SPEAK TO WHAT, UM, IN THE CASE REPORT, LEMME SEE IF I CAN PULL IT UP.
SO WHEN I DO THE PLAN AMENDMENT CASE REPORT, I JUST LOOK AT THE IMAGINE AUSTIN, UM, COMPLETE COMMUNITY MEASURES.
AND I HAVE THAT ON PAGE SEVEN AND EIGHT OF THE CASE REPORT.
AND I JUST NOTE THAT, UM, THAT IT'S NEW, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE, IF YOU REMEMBER THE PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, APPLICATION, IT'S JUST THAT ONE SINGLE FAMILY LOT.
SO I NOTE THAT IT'S NEAR THE SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE AND EAST SNE LANE ACTIVITY CORRIDORS.
IT'S NEAR, UH, TRANSIT, UM, AND IT'S NEAR SERVICES AND I LIST THEM.
UM, YEAH, BUT WHAT DOES OUR FUTURE PLANNING LOOK LIKE FOR THIS AREA? UM, UNFORTUNATELY FOR, FOR MY PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, JOB I, I'M DON'T KEEP UP TO DATE ON.
DO WE A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT, DO WE HAVE ANYBODY FROM STAFF? I'M SORRY.
CAN'T YOU, WE YEAH, DO WE ALREADY UNDERSTAND THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY FROM STAFF THAT CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND THE WATERSHED ISSUES AND NOW WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY FROM STAFF WHO CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND THE LARGER CITY PLANNING ISSUES EITHER TONIGHT? UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE PREPARED ON THE STAFF TO HELP US.
COMMISSIONER AL COULD, IF I COULD SAY SOMETHING.
MS. MEREDITH, COULD YOU CONFIRM, UH, SORRY, THIS IS ME HERE.
UM, THAT IN OUR BACKUP IT SAYS THAT THIS IS THE NEAR CON SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE AND EAST ASNE LANE ACTIVITY CORRIDORS.
THIS WAS PART OF OUR BACKUP FOR THE NPA ON PAGE SEVEN.
SO I WONDER IF THAT HELPS ANSWER SOME OF COMMISSIONER AL'S QUESTION, IF YOU CAN CONFIRM THAT.
I'M SORRY, I REALLY COULDN'T HEAR.
I DON'T FEEL LIKE THERE'S ENOUGH INFORMATION THERE.
I'M TRYING TO GET MORE INFORMATION BEYOND WHAT'S IN THAT REPORT.
I MEAN, I, I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT FUTURE THAT'S OKAY.
DEVELOPMENT WILL BE, UM, I'M SORRY.
UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAD TO ASK TONIGHT.
UM, COMMISSIONER THIS WITH QUESTIONS ANYMORE.
MAX MAXWELL, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, GO AHEAD.
YEAH, THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, SO I DO WANNA GO BACK TO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE'VE MAYBE LOST SIGHT OF HERE IS THAT THIS IS BASICALLY ON A PRETTY MAJOR CORRIDOR IN AUSTIN AND AT A, AT A FAIRLY MAJOR INTERSECTION AS YOU POINTED OUT THAT THERE'S A LOT OF NEW INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S GONE IN PEDESTRIAN.
SO CAN YOU JUST EMPHASIZE, TALK ABOUT MAYBE SOME OF THE TRANSIT OPTIONS THAT ARE THERE, WHY THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO DO, UH, VERTICAL MIXED USE, SORT OF TALKING THROUGH THAT ASPECT OF THE PROJECT? ABSOLUTELY.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
SO THIS IS ONE OF THE, UM, FEW AREAS THAT CAN ACTUALLY PROVIDE TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING NEXT TO TRANSIT THAT ACTUALLY EXISTS.
SO WE'RE ON THE 8 0 1, UM, BOTH NORTHBOUND AND SOUTHBOUND.
WE HAVE DAYTIME, UH, FREQUENT TRANSIT WEEKDAY, UM, BOTH NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND, EASTBOUND AND WESTBOUND.
SO YOU COULD ACTUALLY LIVE A CAR-FREE LIFESTYLE HERE.
YOU HAVE, UM, BICYCLE LANES AND PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE THAT HAS BEEN AND IS BEING INSTALLED, UM, TO RUN BOTH NORTHBOUND OUNCE AND SOUTHBOUND ON SOUTH CONGRESS.
SOUTH CONGRESS AND STANE ARE BOTH IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDORS THAT DO ENVISION
[01:25:01]
THE GROWTH THAT IS ANTICIPATED WITH AN IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR.SOUTH CONGRESS IN THIS LOCATION IS ALREADY A CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR.
THIS, I DO THIS A LOT, RIGHT? THIS, THIS ACTUALLY HAS REAL LIFE.
I ACTUALLY TRANSIT THAT EXISTS.
I'M GONNA KICK YOU OFF BECAUSE I HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, UM, HOW ARE WE THINKING ABOUT THINGS LIKE BIKE PARKING FOR THAT SO THAT WE CAN BE THINKING ABOUT TAKING CARS OUT OF THAT PARKING GARAGE AND SORT OF RECOGNIZING THAT THERE IS SOME LIMITATIONS IN TERMS OF VEHICLE ACCESS IN THAT AREA? YEP.
WE DO HAVE BIKE PARKING LOCATED WITHIN THE PARKING GARAGE OF THE STRUCTURE.
AND UM, AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, YOU WOULD BE HOPEFUL THAT A LOT, LIKE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF THE SOUTH CONGRESS DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE WOULD BE A CAR LIGHT SORT OF SITUATION, NOT NECESSARILY TWO OR THREE CARS PER RESIDENT, ANYTHING LIKE THAT? YES MA'AM.
AND THEN JUST TO UM, SORT OF GO BACK TO THE SORT OF WINDOWS AND BALCONY SITUATION, GENERALLY, SEE SPEAKING WHEN WE DO VERTICAL MIXED USE, WE WOULD EXPECT ALMOST ALL OF THE APARTMENTS TO HAVE SOME SORT OF, UH, BALCONY ACCESS, UH, AS PART OF THE UNIT.
AND WHEN YOU DO THAT, NORMALLY, DO YOU OFTEN FIND YOURSELF IN A SITUATION WHERE YOU DON'T PUT IN BALCONIES? SO THIS WOULD BE A KIND OF DIFFERENT TYPE OF REQUEST THAN PER NORMAL? IT WOULD BE A, IT'D BE A DIFFERENT REQUEST THAN NORMAL? YES, MA'AM.
AND, AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, THOSE, THOSE, UM, UNITS WITHOUT BALCONIES WOULD BE CONSIDERED SORT OF, I WANNA SAY SUBSTANDARD, BUT MAYBE NOT AS DESIRABLE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THAT ADDITIONAL OUTDOOR SPACE.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S USUALLY THE CASE, YES MA'AM.
AND ALSO JUST FINAL QUESTION, ALONG THOSE SAME LINES, IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE WE HAVE SEEN VERTICAL MIXED USE GO IN, WE DO HAVE BALCONIES THAT OVERLOOK THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IS THAT GENERALLY CONSIDERED A CONFLICT POINT OR ANYTHING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, SORT OF A CONCERN OVER TIME? THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN SUBCHAPTER E THAT DO PROTECT, UM, DO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE THERE.
SO I HAVE NOT SEEN IT BE A CONFLICT.
SO IN GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHEN WE DO VERTICAL USE, WE WANT BALCONIES, WE WANT OUR, UM, THOSE TO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THESE PRO AND THAT THEY DON'T NECESSARILY CAUSE ANY ISSUES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS, GENERALLY SPEAKING IN PROJECTS WHEN THEY'RE DEVELOPED.
ALRIGHT, UH, WE HAVE TWO MORE SPOTS, UM, IF ANYBODY NEEDS THEM.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS' HANDS UP, BUT I DO NOT SEE YOU ON THE CAMERA, I DON'T THINK.
OKAY, SO SORRY, I'M JUST HAVING ALL KINDS OF TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES TONIGHT WITH, WITH THE, UM, THE VIRTUAL.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, I DID.
I WANTED TO, TO TO ONCE AGAIN UNDERSTAND THE AFFORDABILITY ASPECT OF THIS FOR THE FOLKS WHO EARNED, WHAT WAS THE MFI? WAS IT 50 BELOW 50 OR 50 TO 80? WHAT WAS THAT? AND HOW MANY UNITS PROJECTING BASED ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE BUILDING THAT PERCENTAGE, HOW, HOW MANY WOULD THAT BE? LET'S SEE HOW FAST I CAN DO MATH TODAY.
UM,
THAT WOULD BE 30 UNITS AND IT WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THEY BE A MIX OF ONE, TWO, AND THREE BEDROOMS. SO THE AFFORDABLE UNIT MIX WOULD HAVE TO BE PROPORTIONATE TO THE OVERALL UNIT MIX.
SO YOU WOULD HAVE ONE, TWO, AND THREE BEDROOM UNITS, UH, 30 OF THEM COMBINED, UH, RESERVED FOR HOUSEHOLDS EARNING UP TO 80 OR 50% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME.
AND, AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTIONS, I GUESS I, I TOO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AROUND FLOODING AND THE CREEK AREAS, BUT, UM, I GUESS WE'RE NOT GONNA GET THOSE ANSWERED.
UM, IT'S GREAT THAT YOU ARE ON A MAJOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR AS, UM, THAT WOULD REALLY BE HELPFUL FOR EVERYBODY THERE.
SO THANK YOU FOR, FOR GOING OVER THE AFFORDABILITY PART OF IT ONCE AGAIN.
DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? OKAY, UH, WE DO HAVE ONE MORE SPOT IF ANYBODY WANTS TO CLOSE THIS OUT ON OUR Q AND A.
UM, SO I, I'LL STAFF, I HAVE A QUESTION THAT HOPEFULLY Y'ALL CAN HELP US ANSWER.
AND I THINK YOU ALREADY ACTUALLY PRETTY MUCH ANSWERED THIS, BUT I JUST WANNA CONFIRM FOR ANY PROJECT WHEN THERE'S A WATER BODY CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE OR A CREEK OR SOMETHING ELSE, UM, I KNOW THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S HANDLED AT THE SITE PLAN LEVEL.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THAT'S GENERALLY HANDLED IN THE LIFETIME OF A PROJECT? WELL, I DO WANNA CLARIFY THAT, UM, MY COMMENTS EARLIER ABOUT, UH, WATERSHED PROTECTION, THEY DO NOT REVIEW ZONING CASES, PERIOD.
SO THEY REVIEW PODS, UM, BUT THEY DO NOT REVIEW ZONING CASES.
UM, WE DO HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP AND DSD THAT DOES LOOK AT ZONING CASES, UM, BUT AS FAR AS WATERSHED, SO IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD REACHED OUT, WHICH IT SEEMED LIKE OBVIOUSLY THEY REACHED OUT AND HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS, IT'S NOT INFORMATION THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA INCLUDE IN OUR REPORT.
[01:30:01]
THAT INFORMATION, BUT UM, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF DOING.BUT THAT, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY MY COMMENTS FROM EARLIER.
I I APPRECIATE THAT AND I'M NOT SURE IF YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE CAN HELP ME ANSWER.
ONCE A CASE LIKE THIS PROCEEDS, HOW IS SOMETHING LIKE THIS HANDLED AT THE SITE PLAN, UM, TIME? WELL, I MEAN, THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROCESS AND AS THE ENGINEER SPOKE EARLIER, UM, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN STAFF AND HAVE TO MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, MEET, YOU KNOW, WATER QUALITY ISSUES, WATER, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING THAT IS REQUIRED UNDER CODE TO, UM, MAKE THIS DEVELOPMENT MOVE FORWARD.
AND, AND I'M GOING TO ASSUME, AND I BELIEVE I KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, WHICH IS THAT, UM, SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE TIED TO LOCALIZED FLOODING, OF COURSE AT THE TIME THE CITY WOULD ASK AN APPLICANT TO ADDRESS THAT AT THE TIME OF SITELINE TO ENSURE THAT IT DOES NOT EXACERBATE YES LOCALIZED FLOODING.
UM, THE, THE APPLICANT WOULD, OR THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL CODES IN THAT, IN THAT AREA.
I JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS HELPS, HELPS SORT OF CONTEXTUALIZE, I WE ALWAYS RUN INTO THIS ISSUE WHERE OFTEN THINKING OF QUESTIONS AND ISSUES, UM, THAT ARE OFTEN RESOLVED AT SITE PLAN.
SO I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT EVEN IF THE CASE MOVES FORWARD, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT SITE PLAN, UH, LOCALIZED FLOODING, WATER QUALITY DETENTION, ALL OF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT OUR CITY REQUIRES.
AND WOULD THOSE, THOSE REQUIREMENTS WOULD HAVE TO BE MET FOR A DEVELOPMENT TO RECEIVE.
ALL THOSE ITEMS WOULD HAVE TO BE REVIEWED.
UM, MS. HORA, I DID HAVE A, A QUESTION WITH YOU ABOUT THE BALCONIES.
I'LL SORT OF PICK UP ON THAT CONVERSATION A LITTLE BIT.
UM, AND THEN I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THAT AS WELL.
SO CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DISCUSSION AROUND, UM, THE REMOVAL OF BALCONIES, UM, IN YOUR SORT OF PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? ABSOLUTELY.
SO THERE, THERE WERE JUST, THERE WAS A REQUEST THAT WE NOT PROVIDE, LIKE I I SAID IT STARTED WITH WINDOWS AND LANDED TO BALCONIES THAT WE NOT PROVIDE BALCONIES ON THE PROPERTY THAT FACES ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING THAT FACES THE SINGLE FAMILY.
AND, UM, WE HAVE SAID OUR, OUR CLIENT DESIRES TO HAVE BALCONIES.
HOWEVER, UH, OUR CLIENT HAS AGREED THAT IF THAT ENDS UP BEING WHERE IT LANDS, THAT THEY COULD PROHIBIT BALCONIES ON THAT WESTERN SIDE.
COULD SOMEBODY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO TALK ABOUT THE REQUEST TO, UM, ELIMINATE WINDOWS OR, OR BALCONIES OR HOWEVER THAT CONVERSATION WENT? IT WASN'T SO MUCH ABOUT ELIMINATING WINDOWS, IT'S JUST MAYBE RACING 'EM UP ABOVE, PEERING DOWN INTO OUR BACKYARDS LEVEL.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A FIVE STORY, UH, UNIT AND, AND OUR BACKYARDS ARE PRETTY MUCH, UH, JUST WIDE OPEN.
YOU KNOW, THEY, IT'S, UM, I'VE TOLD THEM BEFORE IN THE SUMMERTIME, I DON'T HAVE AN AIR CONDITIONER, YOU KNOW, I'M OUT IN MY BATHTUB NAKED, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE A HIPPIE, NAKED HIPPIE VIEWING AREA.
YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, OUR LIFESTYLE AND OUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A DISTINCT CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S BEEN LIKE THIS FOR A LONG TIME.
I, SOMEONE OVER JUST, SORRY, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY THE LADY BEHIND YOU.
'CAUSE MY TIME IS LITTLE, MA'AM, I'M HERE BECAUSE MY PROPERTY IS THE ONE PROPERTY THAT'S RIGHT NEXT TO HER.
MA'AM, COULD YOU PLEASE COME AT THE, THE, MY PROPERTY IS THE PROPERTY THAT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THIS AT 1 0 9 WEST MOCKINGBIRD.
AND, UM, MY WINDOW, MY LIVING ROOM, MY BEDROOM WINDOWS, I HAVE THREE OF THE CONDOS OF THE FIVE THAT ARE THERE.
SO OUR WHOLE, WELL, WE WOULD TOTALLY BE FACING EACH OTHER WITH, SO I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, MA'AM, IF THERE WAS A SECOND FLOOR, IT WAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH A SECOND FLOOR? YES.
WOULD YOU BE OPPOSED TO THAT AS WELL? WELL, MINE IS A SINGLE FAMILY SECOND FLOOR.
SO IF THERE WAS A SECOND FLOOR ACROSS, THEY COULD LOOK IN AS WELL.
OR IS IT REALLY DIRECTLY, DIRECTLY, NOT ONLY, SO YOU WOULD NOT HAVE A CONCERN WITH THEM, NOT ONLY SECOND, NOT ONLY SECOND FLOOR, BUT THIRD FLOOR.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW HIGH IT'S GONNA GO, BUT THEY CAN DEFINITELY LOOK RIGHT IN.
BUT I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WOULD YOU HAVE THAT CONCERN FROM SOMEONE WHO LIVED, WHO WAS AN OWNER AND NOT A RENTER AS WELL? I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
WE'RE OUTTA QUE WE ARE OUTTA QUESTIONS COMMISSIONERS.
WE HAVE A, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONERS START US OFF.
COMMISSIONER COX RAISED HIS HAND.
COMMISSIONER COX? UH, I DIDN'T SEE YOU.
I'LL JUST, I'LL JUST MAKE A QUICK MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS.
UM, DID NOT HAVE THIS PLANNED AND HAVE MY SCHEDULE UP, UH, BUT TO OUR, UM,
[01:35:03]
TO OUR NEXT MEETING.I THINK THAT WAS DECEMBER 12TH.
SO, UH, ANYONE WANNA SECOND THIS MOTION? I'M LOOKING AROUND.
I SEE COMMISSIONER MR. TO, OKAY.
COMMISSIONER COX, YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? UM, I, I THINK IT'S SIMPLE.
UH, THERE'S SOME, THERE'S SOME EXTREMELY VALID CONCERNS, PARTICULARLY RELATED TO DRAINAGE.
AND, UM, WHILE WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO RELY ON, UH, CITY STAFF TO PROVIDE AN EXTREMELY INFORMED OPINION ABOUT THIS, SINCE THEY HAVE NOT REVIEWED IT IN DETAIL FOR A ZONING APPLICATION, I THINK IT'S VERY REASONABLE AND FAIR TO RELY ON THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE MORE DETAIL AND MORE SOLUTIONS FOR PREEXISTING AND KNOWN ISSUES, UM, THAT MAY SATISFY US AND, AND ALLOW US AS A BODY TO FEEL COMFORTABLE PUSHING THIS ALONG.
SO BY POSTPONING THIS, UM, WE'VE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION.
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS, AND HOPEFULLY THE APPLICANT AND POSSIBLY THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT, UM, AND OTHER PLANNING STAFF CAN COME BACK, UH, AT OUR NEXT MEETING AND, AND PROVIDE A BIT MORE DETAIL, WHICH WOULD MAKE ME MORE COMFORTABLE VOTING FOR THIS.
UM, COMMISSIONERS OPPOSED IN FAVOR? COMMISSIONER MOOCH, YOU WANNA SPEAK AGAINST CHAIR? COULD I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION OF THE, OF THE APPLICANT? SURE.
UM, MS. MOORE, IS THERE A TIMELINE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS CASE THAT WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF? UM, WE ARE SCHEDULED TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE 14TH.
WE DID, UM, AGREE TO A VERY LENGTHY POSTPONEMENT AT THE REQUEST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FAR LONGER THAN WE WOULD'VE ORIGINALLY AGREED TO, UM, TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR SCHEDULES.
AND THEN WE ALSO GOT PUSHED FROM THE LAST MEETING BECAUSE IT WAS A CONSENT ONLY.
SO WE'VE BEEN ON THE DAAS FOR QUITE A WHILE AND I'M NOT SURE THERE'S ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE COULD PROVIDE OVER WHAT WE'VE ALREADY PROVIDED.
MY APOLOGIES TO COMMISSIONER AL.
AYE, GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER MOTO SPEAKING IN FAVOR.
UM, AND, UH, I'M THANKFUL THAT THE APPLICANT GAVE MORE TIME TO, TO TRY AND GET SOME OF THIS RELIEF WITH THE, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S UNFORTUNATE WE DON'T QUITE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WOULD ALLOW EVERYBODY TO MOVE FORWARD, UM, WITH CONFIDENCE RIGHT NOW.
UM, BUT I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, AS WE CONTINUE TO PUSH OUR DOWNTOWN OUT AND GROW OUT, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT MORE OF THESE, A LOT MORE OF THESE CONCERNS COME UP.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE MORE WE CAN BE PREPARED TO UNDERSTAND AND, AND HAVE COMFORT IN, IN ALLOWING THE GROWTH TO OCCUR, I, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE OUR JOBS A LOT, A LOT BETTER AND A LOT MORE INFORMED AND, AND ALLOW FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO WELCOME THE GROWTH IN INSTEAD OF BEING SO LEERY.
IS THAT, UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY, OKAY, SO I I ANOTHER CLARIFICATION.
SO IF WE HEAR THIS ON DECEMBER 12TH, WHEN WOULD IT BE ON COUNCIL AGENDA? WOULD IT BE ABLE TO MAKE IT ON THE 14TH PER CHAIR, CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LEELAND? SO YES.
UM, IT WOULD BE ABLE TO APPEAR ON THE DECEMBER 14TH AGENDA, BUT FOR FIRST READING ONLY.
ANY COMMISSIONER SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST A MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER HAYNES AND THEN COMMISSIONER CONLEY? YES, I'LL, JB YOU WANT TO GO, GO FOR IT.
I'LL SPEAK, I'LL SPEAK FOR THE POSTPONEMENT, MR. CHAIRMAN.
UM, AND, AND I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA BREAK THE RULES.
Y'ALL KNOW THAT, UM, TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF, UH, COMMISSIONER'S, UH, CONCERNS.
I, I'M NOT, I, I'M FOUR WINDOWS AND I'M FOUR BALCONIES, BUT, BUT I WANT TO COMMEND, ABSOLUTELY COMMEND THE APPLICANT FOR OFFERING THAT UP.
UH, THAT'S A, IT, IT IS A BIG STEP AND, AND I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SOME OF THE UNITS LESS DESIRABLE AND, UH, BUT IN THE, I I GUESS IN THE MODE OF TRYING TO FURTHER THIS ALONG, I WA I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT FOR, UH, FOR OFFERING THAT UP AS A CONCESSION.
AND, AND THAT'S WHY I ASK ABOUT IT.
AND THEN, AND I, I, I WILL TELL THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY I'M ONE OF THE GUYS OR I'M, I'M ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY SIDES WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, OR AT LEAST MAKE SURE THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE, ARE CONCERNED.
BUT, BUT IT IS CONCERNING TO ME WHEN YOU COME UP HERE AND, AND, AND I AGREE THE FLOODING
[01:40:01]
AND, AND ALL THAT IS A, IS A CONCERN.WE NEED TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THAT.
AND, AND THEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND THE SAFETY AND ONE OF THE, THE OPTIONS OR THE SOLUTIONS TO DEAL WITH TRAFFIC AND SAFETY ARE SIDEWALKS, YET YOU SEEM A LITTLE HESITANT ABOUT.
UM, AND, AND, AND, UH, SOME OF YOU'RE SHAKING YOUR HEAD, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH VEHICLE TRAFFIC, BUT IT DOES PROVIDE SAFETY FOR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.
UH, YET SOME OF YOU SEEMED A LITTLE HESITANT TO AGREE.
AND THEN, AND THE APPLICANT AGAIN, COMMEND Y'ALL, THANK YOU MS. FOR UM, HAS SAID THEY WOULD WORK ON SIDEWALKS.
AND SO I, BUT I WILL VOTE TO POSTPONE THIS BECAUSE I, AND, AND I KNOW THAT PUTS Y'ALL IN A BOX.
UM, BUT I, I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT MOVE TONIGHT.
UH, YOU WANNA SPEAK FOR AGAINST COMMISSIONER CONLEY? UM, WELL, SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE TOUGH 'CAUSE WE'RE SPEAKING ON THE POSTPONEMENTS ALLY YES.
ON THE, THE POSTPONEMENT UNTIL DECEMBER 12TH.
SO ON THE MOTION TO POSTPONE, I, I REALLY AM ON THE FENCE.
I DON'T WANNA HOLD THIS CASE UP.
UM, HOWEVER, I THINK IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT WATERSHED REVIEW ZONING CASES, LEAVING THAT ASIDE, THERE ARE ITEMS FROM WATERSHED IN THE BACKUP FOR THIS ZONING CASE,
AND SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, I THINK WHENEVER THERE ARE ITEMS FROM A SPECIFIC PLAN CITY DEPARTMENT, WE SHOULD AT LEAST BE IN A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE ABLE TO ANSWER, ASK QUESTIONS AND GET THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY THAT DEPARTMENT WITH REGARD TO WHATEVER IT IS THAT'S IN OUR BACKUP.
SO I, I AM DISAPPOINTED TO BE IN A POSITION NOW WHERE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I, I AM STRONGLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE HORRENDOUS, UM, CONCESSION MADE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AROUND THE REMOVAL OF BALCONIES, WHICH DESTROY, YOU KNOW, IT JUST DESTROYS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE POTENTIAL FOR PROVIDING UNITS WITH A MUCH HIGHER QUALITY OF LIFE, UM, UNITS THAT, UH, PROVIDE A MUCH HIGHER HEALTH STANDARD.
I WOULD REMIND THE NEIGHBORS THAT EVERY SINGLE TENANT THAT WILL BE LIVING IN THESE PROPERTIES, UM, WILL BE A MEMBER OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND A MEMBER OF YOUR COMMUNITY AND WILL BE YOUR NEIGHBOR.
AND THEY DESERVE QUALITY OF LIFE, HEALTH, THE ABILITY TO STAND OUTSIDE AND CATCH A BREATH OF FRESH AIR.
UM, AND UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, THIS MIGHT NOT BE THE CITY WHERE EVERYONE GETS TO SPEND TIME NAKED IN THEIR BATHTUBS, IN THEIR BACKYARD, IF THAT'S THE ISSUE.
UM, BUT THERE ARE TRADE OFFS AND SOMETIMES THAT TRADE OFF MEANS OPENING MY WINDOW AND LOOKING OUT AND SEEING MY NEIGHBOR ACROSS AND SAYING HI, YOU KNOW, AND THAT IS JUST LIFE.
UM, YOU KNOW, BUT, BUT I THINK IT'S, IT'S, IT'S SHAMEFUL, UM, TO HAVE THESE CONCESSIONS MADE, UM, WHEN, WHEN THESE CONCESSIONS SPECIFICALLY REDUCE THE QUALITY OF THE UNITS, UM, REDUCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE FUTURE TENANTS LIVING IN THOSE SPACES, UM, MAKE THOSE UNITS LESS HEALTHY AND LESS, UM, UH, BENEFICIAL TO THE FOLKS THAT WILL BE LIVING THERE.
UM, SO I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THAT ASPECT OF THIS, AND I'M ON THE FENCE ABOUT A POSTPONEMENT.
UM, I THINK WE'RE OUT OF SLOT, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE POSTPONEMENT, UH, TO DECEMBER 12TH.
ANYBODY WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR AGAIN? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I, OKAY.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND HOLD YOUR CARDS THERE FOLKS.
MAXWELL, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, YOU WANNA SPEAK ON THIS ONE? YEAH, I, I DO ACTUALLY JUST WANNA SPEAK ON THE POSTPONEMENT BECAUSE I, I DO WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TAKEN UP QUITE A LOT OF TIME OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS AND MONTHS.
UM, ALL OF US WORKING ON LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS, AND THAT HAS FORCED US TO PUT ASIDE SOME OF OUR CRITICAL WORK AROUND ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION CASES.
AND I THINK THIS POSTPONEMENT, I I HAVE REAL CONCERNS THAT THAT'S AN OUTCOME OF THAT BECAUSE HAD WE NOT BEEN DOING SOME OF THIS, UH, LDC WORK, WE WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO SOME OF THESE PC CASES SOONER.
AND SO I, I PERSONALLY AM OPPOSED TO THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HOLD THOSE THINGS IN BALANCE AS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND TO GIVE A DELAY BECAUSE WE WERE UNABLE TO GET TO THIS CASE SOONER BECAUSE WE HAD OTHER WORK THAT WAS REQUIRED OF US.
FEELS A LITTLE UNFAIR TO THESE APPLICANTS, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING HOW CLOSELY THEY HAVE WORKED WITH THE NEIGHBORS IN TRYING TO RESOLVE THESE ISSUES.
SO I AM ACTUALLY NOT CLEAR WHAT A TWO WEEK POSTPONEMENT WOULD ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISH OTHER THAN ALLOWING US TO TALK TO WATERSHED WHO PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN HERE TONIGHT ANYWAY, SO I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO BE VOTING AGAINST, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD SUPPORT THAT.
UH, I THINK WE'RE OUTTA SLOT, SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
UH, THOSE, UM, IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT ON THE DIOCESE, UH, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
UM, LET'S GO AND TAKE THE VOTE AGAINST ON, ON THE DAAS.
AND THOSE ON THE, UH, VIRTUALLY,
[01:45:01]
UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? IS THAT, DID YOU ALREADY VOTE OR AM I, I'M SEEING SOME.YEAH, I'M SEEING SOMETHING IN FRONT OF YOU.
ALL RIGHT, SO THAT MOTION PASSES SEVEN TO FOUR, UM, AND WITH, UH, COMMISSIONERS MAXWELL, COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY, UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR AND COMMISSIONER ANDERSON VOTING AGAINST THAT MOTION.
COMMISSIONERS, WE GOT, LET'S GO MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT CASE.
MR. CHAIR, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, CAN WE JUST MAKE A SPECIFIC REQUEST, UH, WOULD STAFF THAT WATERSHED BE AVAILABLE, UH, FOR THE NEXT MEETING SO WE CAN RESOLVE ACCORDING TO THE, THAT, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY REQUEST.
I WON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SO IF WE'RE GONNA POSTPONE IT, IF WE CAN HAVE STAFF HERE, THAT'D BE GREAT.
JUST TYPICALLY WE DO HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER, WHICH IS REPORTING THROUGH WATERSHED AND MAY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HELP THIS HERE THIS EVENING.
I'M, YOU KNOW, I KNOW WAS IMPOSSIBLE, BUT YES, PLEASE, UH, ON THE 12TH, THAT WOULD BE, WE KNOW THAT'LL REALLY HELP THIS THING MOVE ALONG.
[Items 7 & 8 & 9]
AND NINE MARINE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT.ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 23 0 0 2, 0 0.03, 300 TO 400 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD WITHIN THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
I DO WANT TO NOTE A CORRECTION TO THE ACREAGE THAT'S IN THE STATE STAFF CASE REPORT.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM INDUSTRY TO MIXED USE LAND USE.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, THE SOUTH CONGRESS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
CONTACT TEAM SUBMITTED A RECOMMENDATION LETTER YESTERDAY, NOVEMBER 27TH.
THEY DO NOT SUPPORT THE CASE AND THEIR LETTER WAS SUBMITTED TO YOU AS LATE BACKUP.
SO I'M JUST GONNA GO AHEAD AND BRIEFLY INTRODUCE EACH, UM, CASE.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT ON YOUR AGENDA CASE, C 14 20 23 4 0 0 4 4 300 TO FOUR 40 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD.
UH, THIS IS LOCATED AT 300 400, 4 36 AND FOUR 40 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD AND 42 11 WILLOW SPRINGS ROAD.
UM, THE ZONING IS CURRENTLY L-L-I-N-P AND THE REQUEST IS TO L-I-P-D-A-N-P.
THE SUBJECT AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 4.71 ACRES AND IT IS SITUATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD AND WILLOW SPRINGS ROAD.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REZONE THE PROPERTY, UH, TO L-I-P-D-A-N-P DISTRICT FOR MIXED USE REDEVELOPMENT.
THAT WILL INCLUDE A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING WITH FIRST FLOOR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED COMMERCIAL USES.
THE PROJECT WILL INCLUDE 686 MID-RISE, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCES, AND 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF FIRST FLOOR RETAIL STAFF.
DOES RECOMMEND THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AS DESCRIBED, UM, FOR L-I-P-D-A-N-P DISTRICT ZONING FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CONSIDERATIONS.
UH, THE PROPOSAL IS IN ALIGNMENT TO THE L-I-P-D-A ZONING ENTITLEMENTS THAT ARE TO THE EAST AND SIMILAR, UH, AREAS TO THE NORTH ALONG EAST BEND WHITE BOULEVARD.
UM, WE ALSO RECOGNIZE THE PRO, THE PROPERTY'S PROXIMITY TO THE INTERCHANGE OF TWO FREEWAYS AND ITS PROXIMITY TO SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE, WHICH IS A CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR AND BEING NEAR, UH, THE SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTER.
UM, ITEM NUMBER NINE IS CASE C 14 20 23 0 0 4 6 600 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD.
THE ADDRESS IS 5 0 6 AND 600 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD, 41 38 AND A HALF ONTARIO LANE.
UM, THIS IS ACTUALLY A PDA AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE CONDITION OF ZONING.
IT'S CURRENTLY ZONE L-I-P-D-A-N-P AND THE AMENDMENT IS TO CHANGE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT AND MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS.
UH, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM HEIGHT INCREASE FROM 85 FEET TO 125 FEET AND INCREASE AND AN INCREASE TO THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 400 TO 600 UNITS.
UH, NO OTHER CHANGES TO THE PDA ARE BEING PROPOSED AND BASED ON THE L-I-P-D-A, UH, NP ZONING TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY AND SOUTH OF EAST WIND, SOUTH OF EAST BEND WHITE BOULEVARD, AS WELL AS OTHER SURROUNDING L-I-P-D-A, NP ZONINGS STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO ALLOW MAXIMUM HEIGHT INCREASE FROM 85 TO 1 25 FEET AND AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM
[01:50:01]
NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 400 TO 600 UNITS.WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I'M LEAH BOJO WITH HONOR GROUP HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, SO TO, TO ORIENT EVERYBODY TO THE SITE, UM, AS NANCY SAID, THE SOUTH, IT'S JUST TO SOUTH OF, UM, OF BEN WHITE HERE, JUST, UM, JUST INSIDE TO THE EAST OF SOUTH CONGRESS.
UM, AND IT IS TWO, ACTUALLY TWO SITES, 300 TO FOUR 40 IS ALLY TODAY, STRAIGHT UP ALLY.
UM, SO WE ARE BOTH DOING THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE ADDING THE PDA TO THAT SITE AMENDING THE, THE EXISTING PDA THAT IS ALREADY IN PLACE ON 600 INDUSTRIAL.
UM, THIS MAP, I THINK DOES A GREAT JOB OF SHOWING, UM, THE INCREDIBLE TRANSIT, UH, THAT IS AVAILABLE TO THIS SITE.
THIS IS SORT OF, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THAT ST.
THERE'S A LOT OF NEW, UH, COMMERCIAL, A LOT OF CREATIVE COMMERCIAL BREWERIES.
THERE'S ALL KINDS OF, UM, REALLY COOL WALKABLE THINGS COMING INTO THIS AREA.
THERE'S A LOT OF RESIDENTIAL COMING INTO THE AREA.
UM, AND OBVIOUSLY, UM, IT'S SITUATED REALLY WELL FOR TRANSIT.
AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE BERGSTROM SPUR TRAIL, UH, IS LOCATED ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE, UM, WHICH IS A PRETTY EXCEPTIONAL PROJECT.
THIS IS THE FULL, THE WHOLE THING.
YOU CAN SEE WHERE OUR PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON IT, WHICH IS GONNA BE A HUGE BOON TO, UM, TO SOUTH AUSTIN, REALLY CONNECTING A TON OF SITES.
IT'S PRETTY, UM, IT'S PRETTY INCREDIBLE.
UM, I ALSO SHOULD POINT OUT REAL QUICK HERE ON THIS SLIDE THAT WE'RE, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE CLOSEST SINGLE FAMILY IS ABOUT A HALF MILE AWAY AWAY TO THE SOUTH.
SO IT'S ANOTHER REASON THAT I THINK HEIGHT AND DENSE RESIDENTIAL IN THIS SPOT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
UM, AGAIN, YOU KNOWI AND L-I-P-D-A.
THE EXISTING USES ARE, ARE OUR WAREHOUSE.
UM, WE ONLY HAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT ON THE 300 TO FOUR 40 SITE.
UM, AND THEN, UM, SO THE, WE'RE ON THE 300 TO FOUR 40 SITE.
WE'RE ADDING 700 UNITS AND ADDING THE MULTIFAMILY USE, OF COURSE THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT UP TO 700 UNITS, I SHOULD SAY.
UM, WE'RE CULLING OUT ALL THE NOXIOUS AND NUISANCE USES THAT GO WITH LI OF COURSE, UM, AND ADDING MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES TO IT.
UM, AND THEN ON THE, UM, 600 SITE, WE'RE JUST, WE'RE ALREADY HAVE 400 MULTIFAMILY USES AVAILABLE AND 85 FEET, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL 200 AND 125 FEET OF HEIGHT.
I'M HAPPY TO GO INTO THE DETAILS OF THE USES THAT WE'RE PIVOTING IF YOU'D LIKE.
UM, SO HERE IS A MAP OF THE CURRENT AND COMING ENTITLEMENTS OVER 60 FEET IN THIS AREA THAT INCLUDES RESIDENTIAL.
SO YOU CAN SEE WE BACK UP ACROSS THE BERGSTROM SPUR TO 125 FEET CADDY CORNER FROM THE 600 SITE AS WELL.
UM, AND THEN THERE'S A QUITE A BIT OF, UM, OF 90 FEET, 85 FEET, THINGS LIKE THAT.
150 IS, UM, IN PROCESS THERE TO THE SOUTH OF US.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, BEING THAT THIS IS AN L-I-P-D-A, UM, THERE IS NOT AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENT AS YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE CITY CODE.
HOWEVER, WE ARE, UM, PROPOSING ONE.
UM, AND THIS IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING.
UM, I I WILL APOLOGIZE THAT THE, THE NUMBERS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM WHAT I SENT OUT TO YOU IN AN EMAIL BECAUSE I, I MISCALCULATED THE NUMBER.
UM, BUT THESE, THIS IS AN ACCURATE PERCENTAGE OF WHAT WOULD BE, UM, PROVIDED ACROSS THE SITE.
YOU CAN SEE IT'S KIND OF A, A, A MISHMASH OF DIFFERENT LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY.
WE DID THAT ON PURPOSE TO TRY TO SORT OF FEATHER IN, UM, SOME OF THE LOWER INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS WITH THE MARKET RATE UNITS.
THAT WILL BE THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE.
UM, WE'VE TALKED A LOT WITH THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT THIS, AND WHILE I AM, UM, UN UNFORTUNATELY WE DON'T HAVE THEIR SUPPORT, UM, BECAUSE WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GET TO THE AFFORDABILITY THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
UM, WE ARE STILL MAKING A LOT OF THE COMMITMENTS WE SAID, WHICH IS WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO UNITS THAT WOULD REACH, UM, FIRST RESPONDERS AND TEACHERS, WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS A, IS A REAL PROBLEM WITH KEEPING FOLKS STAFFED HERE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE HERE.
UM, SO WE'VE, WE ARE MAINTAINING THE COMMITMENT TO PROVIDE THOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS AIMED REALLY AT THE 50% MFI LEVEL.
YOU SEE, THAT'S THE BIGGEST CHUNK.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE THE NUMBERS WE LOOKED UP AS FAR AS AVERAGE SALARIES, PARTICULARLY STARTING SALARIES FOR THOSE WORKERS, UM, ARE TARGETED AT THAT MFI LEVEL.
UM, AND THEN WE WOULD OF COURSE PARTNER WITH A ISD AND, AND, UM, THE LOCAL GROUPS TO, TO ADVERTISE THOSE UNITS TO THEM FIRST, HOPING TO, TO HELP THEM, UM, FIND HOUSING HERE.
UH, AND WITH THAT I WILL CLOSE AND MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
I HAVE MR. MARIO KTU WITH, UM, FIRST SPEAKER.
MR. KTU, SELECT STAR SIX, PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
HOW MUCH TIME DO I HAVE? FIVE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING TIME COMMISSIONERS.
[01:55:01]
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.I ALSO WANNA MENTION TO, TO LEAH THAT, UH, WE DO APPRECIATE THE TIMES THAT WE'VE MET.
WE'VE MET, UH, UH, A FEW TIMES AND WE APPRECIATE THAT INTERACTION.
WE, WE HAVE ALSO SPOKE ABOUT A RESTRICTED COVENANT.
UM, BUT I WANT EVERYBODY TO KEEP IN MIND THAT, UH, THESE ARE GONNA BE TWO, TWO BUILDINGS AT 125 FEET.
THESE WILL BE THE TALLEST FIRST BUILDINGS EVER IN SOUTH CONGRESS WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA.
UH, INITIALLY WE UNDERSTOOD THEY WERE GONNA BE 125 FEET.
UH, WE LATER ON HAD A COUPLE MEETINGS IN, WE FOUND OUT THAT THERE WERE ONLY GONNA LEAVE ONE AT A HUNDRED TWENTY, A HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE FEET, AND THE OTHER ONE WOULD REMAIN AT 90 FEET.
UH, SO WHAT KIND OF, WHAT WAS THE TURNING POINT ON THIS IS THAT WITHIN OUR LAST MEETING, UH, WE WERE INFORMED THAT THEY WERE GONNA GO AHEAD AND CHANGE THE 90 FEET TO A HUNDRED TWENTY, TWENTY FIVE FEET.
SO IT WENT BACK TO, TO THE VERY FIRST MEETING OF 125 FEET, WHICH KIND OF REALLY THREW US OFF.
UH, THE NUMBERS THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT, UH, IS 800 UNITS.
UH, THAT'S WHAT WE UNDERSTAND, THAT THERE'S GONNA BE 800 UNITS COMING OUT OF THIS, AND THAT, UH, WE WOULD HAVE 72 UNITS FOR AFFORDABILITY.
UH, AND THAT'S A LITTLE PROBLEMATIC FOR US AS, AS A CONTACT TEAM AND AS FOR A CITY AND FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD, BECAUSE IT IMPACTS THE QUALITY OF LIFE IF WE DO NOT HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND I, I'LL GO BACK TO WHAT LEAH SAID TOO, AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, EMS WORKERS, ARTISTS, MUSICIANS, SCHOOL TEACHERS, WE'RE LOOKING FOR THAT LOW MFI, WE UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE PARAMEDICS AND INDIVIDUALS MAKE, YOU KNOW, 40, 50% MFI OR MAYBE HIGHER.
BUT THE POINT BEING IS RIGHT NOW, IF YOU REALLY LOOK AT THE, THE BIGGEST PICTURE AND THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THAT OUR EMS WORKERS CAN'T EVEN AFFORD TO LIVE WITHIN INNER CITY.
AND THAT'S A FACT THAT THAT'S, THAT'S STANDARD DATA RIGHT NOW, THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE LOSING EMS PERSONNEL.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE WITHIN OUR CITY.
AND EVEN IF WE WERE GONNA DO THE HOME THING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, A WEEK AGO TO, TO PROVIDE MORE HOMES, HOW DO WE NOT KNOW THAT WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO HAVE A AFFORDABILITY OUT OF THAT? AND, AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, OF COURSE, THE CASE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE AT A HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE FIVE FEET, THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED, BUT WE REQUIRE AFFORDABILITY.
AND THAT'S WHAT WAS THE TURNING POINT ON THIS, IS THAT, UM, IT'S THE HEIGHT.
UH, HISTORICALLY WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO, AT, AT 60 FEET, UH, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET, UH, 50 AND 60% MFI, UH, THE BUILDINGS THAT, THAT WE ARE OKAY WITH BUILDINGS BEING ON, ON THE PERIPHERY, BUT THIS IS GONNA BE IN, IN THE INNER CORE OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA.
SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MAP THERE, THERE ARE NO BUILDINGS AT 125 FEET.
THESE WILL BE THE VERY FIRST LARGEST, TALLEST BUILDINGS IN ALL OF SOUTH AUSTIN.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, TO KEEP THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT WE SPOKE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, JUST SHORTLY A, A WHILE AGO, UH, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO FEATHER IN THE AFFORDABILITY, UH, IN THIS CASE, IN MAKING SURE THAT, UH, WE, MAYBE WE CAN GO BACK TO THE TABLE AND HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS.
BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE NEED, WE NEED TO HAVE TRUE AFFORDABILITY IN AUSTIN.
AND IT'S NOT ABOUT JUST BUILD, BUILD, BUILD AND NOT KNOWING THAT WE'RE GONNA GET AFFORDABILITY OUT OF THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE DESIRE.
UM, SO I MEAN, WE'RE OKAY WITH KEEPING ANOTHER, ANOTHER PROPERTY AT 90 FEET AND HAVING THE AFFORDABILITY THAT COMES OUTTA THAT ONE.
UM, AND IF WE HAVE TO GO 90 FEET AND GET AFFORDABILITY, A LESSER AFFORDABILITY OUT OF THAT, WE'RE FINE WITH THAT AS WELL.
BUT IF WE'RE GONNA GO 125 FEET, WE DESERVE, UH, 120 UNITS OR MORE OUT OF THIS PROPERTY AT 120 FEET OR 125 FEET.
I'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK THINGS.
UM, I, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT I BELIEVE THE A ISD BUILDING, UM, WHICH I CAN SHOW YOU ON THE MAP IF YOU'D LIKE, AT THE CORNER.
I THINK THAT IS ABOUT 120 FEET OR SO.
JUST, JUST, IT'S A LITTLE WAYS OFF, BUT JUST TO CLEAR THE, CLEAR THAT FACT.
UM, AND, AND AS FAR AS THE, THE HEIGHT CHANGES, I WILL, IT IS TRUE THAT WE HAVE, WE'VE BEEN WORKING VERY HARD.
WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORS TALKING ABOUT HEIGHT, TALKING ABOUT THESE PERCENTAGES.
AT ONE POINT WE DID SAY WE WERE GONNA TRY TO MAKE 90 FEET WORK, THAT IT'S ABSOLUTELY ACCURATE.
UM, WE TRIED TO MAKE IT WORK, IT DID NOT WORK, WHICH IS WHEN WE CAME BACK WITH THE, THE BULLETED LIST THAT WE SHOWED YOU, UM, WE PRESENTED A FEW DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
I ONLY PRESENTED THE ONE TO YOU THAT I THOUGHT WAS THE MOST, UM, COMPELLING, BUT THERE WERE A FEW CHOICES OF SORT OF TRYING TO MAKE MORE AFFORDABILITY, MORE UNITS AT A HIGHER LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY OR TRYING TO GET TO SOME OF THOSE LOWER LEVELS.
UM, WHICH IS HOW WE ENDED UP WHERE WE ARE NOW WITH PARTICULARLY THE 50%, A COUPLE, YOU KNOW, SMALL NUMBER OF 40% MFI UNITS REALLY TRYING TO MIX IN, UM, THE UNITS AIMED AT THESE PARTICULAR, UM, FOLKS, UM, INTO THE BUILDING.
AND, AND I'M GONNA TELL YOU THAT THE PROFORMA THAT WE DID TO COME UP WITH THAT
[02:00:01]
AFFORDABILITY PROPOSAL IS, IS DETAILED.THIS IS NOT JUST A A A A WASHED OVER.
THIS IS REALLY PLUGGING IN NUMBERS AND COMING UP WITH THE BEST THAT WE CAN PRESENT TO YOU.
UM, THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE THROUGH A PRIVATE COVENANT.
SO WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT YET, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE PDA, IT CAN'T BE IN A PUBLIC AGREEMENT, BUT THAT IS, THAT IS THE PROPOSAL, UM, THAT WE ARE PUTTING FORWARD.
AND, AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD ONE.
UM, I ALSO JUST WOULD, I GUESS I WOULD JUST CLOSE BY SAYING, YOU KNOW, I, I KNOW THAT THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SUGGESTED THAT WE'RE GETTING TOO MUCH HEIGHT FOR THIS AFFORDABILITY, BUT IF WE LOWER THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, THEN WE'RE LOWERING ACTUALLY THE NUMBER OF BOTH MARKET AND AFFORDABLE UNITS.
SO THAT REALLY JUST DOES NOT FEEL LIKE THE ANSWER.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, MRS. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
ANY OBJECTIONS? ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR QUESTIONS.
I THINK COMMISSIONER, UH, VETA RAMIREZ, YOU, UH, YOU PROBABLY HAVE SOME, DO YOU WANNA GO FIRST? YEAH, MY FIRST QUESTION, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE BACK OR THE RESPONSE PROVIDED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM YESTERDAY, UM, JUST KIND OF PROMPTED A QUESTION FOR ME.
THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT THE STROM SPUR TRAIL, AND I BELIEVE IT'S THE 600, UM, 600 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD PARCEL.
THERE WAS AN EASEMENT PROVIDED AND THERE'S NOT GONNA BE, OR I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT'S GONNA BE PROVIDED AND ACCESS TO THE TRAIL.
CAN YOU TALK MORE ABOUT THAT? WHO, WHO DO YOU WANT TO, YOU WANT STAFF? UH, THE APPLICANT.
UM, SO, UM, HESITATE TO BRING THIS UP, BUT THAT IS A SITE PLANNING QUESTION
UM, AND, UM, WE HAVE NOT, WE HAVE MET MULTIPLE TIMES WITH THE FOLKS IN URBAN TRAILS WHO ARE WORKING ON THE TRAIL.
THEY ARE AWARE OF THIS PROJECT.
WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WAYS THAT WE CAN, UM, YOU KNOW, EMBRACE THE TRAIL, INCORPORATE OUR DEVELOPMENT INTO IT, BE, YOU KNOW, REALLY, REALLY MAKE OUR DEVELOPMENT DESIGNER DEVELOPMENT TO WORK WITH THE TRAIL.
THEY HAVE NOT MENTIONED AN EASEMENT OR NEEDING ONE.
I BELIEVE IT IS A PRETTY WIDE RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, CERTAINLY IF THEY DO, WHEN WE GET TO SITE PLAN, WE WOULD HAVE TO GIVE ONE.
UM, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE ONE THAT WAS GIVEN ON 600.
UM, AND AS FAR AS I KNOW, THEY DON'T HAVE A SITE PLAN IN, BUT, BUT THAT IS ABSOLUTELY A CONVERSATION WE WOULD HAVE AT THAT TIME.
YEAH, I MEAN, UM, SORRY, JUST LOOKING OVER QUICKLY, THE QUESTION, I MEAN, IT SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT THE BERKS FROMM SPUR ACCESS WOULD BE REMOVED IF THIS, IF THE HEIGHT WAS PERMITTED.
SO I GUESS YOU'RE NOT, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD BE.
IN FACT, THERE'S, IN ADDITION TO THE BERKS FROMM SPUR THAT GOES ALONG THE, THE, THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE, THERE'S A LITTLE PIECE OF RIGHT OF REGULAR, UH, AUSTIN, CITY OF AUSTIN RIGHT OF WAY THAT WAS INITIALLY GONNA BE A ROAD FOR, I THINK IT'S CALLED WILLOW SPRINGS, THAT THE URBAN TRAILS DEPARTMENT HAS ACTUALLY TAKEN OVER AND IS GONNA MAKE THAT A CONNECTION FROM THE TRAIL INTO THE SYS THE STREET SYSTEM IN THE SAINT AMO DISTRICT.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT ACCESS IS RIGHT AWAY.
SO IT COULDN'T BE, IT WOULD'VE TO BE VACATED TO BE CHANGED.
WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE IT, AND IN FACT IT WOULD PROVIDE MORE CIRCULATION BETWEEN THE TWO.
MY FINAL QUESTION IS JUST ABOUT THE NUMBER OF UNITS I SAW GOING THROUGH THE BACKUP, A LOT OF DIFFERENT NUMBERS.
THERE'S LIKE A, LOOKING AT THE ZTA, THERE'S 1,286 UNITS AND THEN, UM, YOUR ZONING WOULD PREVENT PERMIT, UM, UP TO 1300 UNITS.
BUT THEN I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT YOUR INTENTION IS, HOW MANY UNITS YOU INTEND TO DO AND YES, AND, AND I APOLOGIZE, I MADE THAT CONFUSING.
SO IT'S RIGHT NOW ON 300 TO FOUR 40, THERE ARE NO MULTIFAMILY UNITS ALLOWED BY RIGHT.
IT'S DON'T JUST LIMITED INDUSTRIAL.
SO THE PDA WOULD ALLOW, UM, SEVEN UP TO 700 AS PROPOSED.
AND THEN ON THE 600 SITE, IT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED ENTITLED TO HAVE 400 RESIDENTIAL UNITS WOULD BE ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL 200.
SO THE NEW UNITS WOULD BE 900 AND THE TOTAL WOULD BE 1300.
YEAH, THAT WASN'T ACROSS BOTH.
AND THEN MY FINAL QUESTION IS ABOUT AFFORDABILITY.
AND I THINK WHAT I HEARD FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS THAT THIS DESIRE FOR THE DEEP AFFORDABILITY, AND YOU AND I SPOKE EARLIER ABOUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE MOVING AROUND THE NUMBERS TO PROVIDE THAT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I JUST ASK THAT YOU CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM IF THIS MOVES FORWARD.
YOU KNOW, MAYBE TRYING TO MEET THEIR NEEDS AND, AND PROVIDING THAT DEEPER AFFORDABILITY THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR.
UH, WHO WANTS TO GO NEXT? WHO, WHO RAISED HER HAND? OKAY, I DIDN'T.
UM, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THE NUMBER OF UNITS.
CAN YOU CLARIFY THE AFFORDABLE UNITS AS WELL? 'CAUSE WE SAW THEN THE NUMERICAL BREAKDOWN JUST IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGES.
DID I COUNT THAT RIGHT? WAS IT 12% AFFORDABLE? CAN YOU PLEASE TALK ABOUT THAT? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
[02:05:01]
AND I KNOW THERE WAS A SLIDE TO THIS, IF WE CAN, YES, THERE IS A SLIDE.IT IS NUMBER, I BELIEVE IT'S NUMBER EIGHT.
I, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I'M FOLLOWING THE MATHS ALONG CORRECTLY.
I THINK THE SLIDE AFTER, OH SORRY, COULD YOU GO DOWN? YEAH, IT'S THE SLIDE AFTER THIS.
UM, SO THIS IS BASED ON THE NEW UNITS THAT ARE BEING ENTITLED.
SO ON THE 300 TO FOUR 40 SITE, AND ACTUALLY LEMME START AT THE TOP.
SO AT THE TOP I HAVE THE PERCENTAGES THAT WE WOULD BE APPLYING.
SO IT'S 0.5 AT 40.5% AT 40% MFI, 5% AT 50% MFI, 1% AT 60% MFI, 1% AT 80% MFI OF THAT TOTAL NEW 900 UNITS.
UM, AND SO, AND AGAIN, I KNOW THIS IS NOT AN, WE WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO FEATHER IN SOME OF THOSE LOWER RENT UNITS, SO THAT'S WHY THAT'S A KIND OF A, A, A MISHMASH.
UM, SO WE WOULD, THAT WOULD COME UP WITH FOUR UNITS ON THREE, 300 TO FOUR 40.
THERE'D BE FOUR UNITS ON 600, THERE'D BE ONE UNIT AT 40% M FFI, SO THE TOTAL WOULD BE FIVE ON 300 TO FOUR 40.
THERE'D BE 35 AT 50 AND ON 610.
SO 45 AT 50 ON 300 TO FOUR 40, THERE'D BE UP TO SEVEN UNITS AT 60 ON 602.
SO THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE NINE FOR 60, SAME FOR 80%.
SO THE TOTAL, I MIGHT HAVE ADDED THAT WRONG.
THE TOTAL WOULD BE 68 UNITS AFFORDABLE AT TOTAL OF THOSE RANGES, UM, OVER ALL OF THE NEW UNITS BEING PROVIDED.
AND, AND SO IF I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY, IF I'M READING THE TOP PROPERLY, THAT'S LOOKING AT ESSENTIALLY 7.5% YES.
MISREAD THAT 0.5% THAT THAT CLARIFIES THINGS.
SO IT'S LOOKING AT 7.5% AFFORDABLE OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS.
AND THEN THAT'S THE MFI BREAKDOWN.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, UM, WHY Y'ALL WERE NOT ABLE TO SORT OF CONSIDER 10%? AND I'M LOOKING AT OF COURSE, AFFORDABILITY LEVELS, BUT I DUNNO IF YOU WANNA TALK TO THAT FOR SURE.
UM, SORRY, I'M SORRY, POINT OF CAN I ASK POINT OF INFORMATION QUICKLY, YOU, THESE NUMBERS ARE FOR THE ADDITIONAL UNITS, IT DOESN'T ADD UP TO 1300, RIGHT? SO WHERE THERE ARE 1300 UNITS THAT'S RIGHT.
AND THIS IS JUST A PORTION OF THAT 1300.
THIS IS THE NEW UNITS THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED ON THE SITE TODAY THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED AS A RESULT OF THESE ZONING CASES.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY 5%, THE 68 UNITS TOTAL IS 5% OF 1300.
THERE, THERE IS ACTUALLY, UM, A A, A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON THE SITE ON 600 ALREADY.
THAT, UM, THAT DOES HAVE SOME AFFORDABILITY IN IT.
IT'S NOT, IT WAS APPROVED IN I THINK 2020.
AND IT, AND IT'S AMAZING HOW THAT SHORT TIME AGO, UM, WE WERE REQUIRING NOT VERY MUCH AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UM, SO THERE'S 6% AT 60 AND 4%.
SO 6% AT 60 AND 4% AT 80 IS THE REQUIREMENT OF THAT? I DIDN'T, I BRING, IT'S A PRIVATE AGREEMENT, SO I APOLOGIZE.
I DIDN'T KNOW I SHOULD TALK ABOUT IT, BUT
SO, UM, SO, BUT THERE, BUT IT IS RECORDED ON THE LAND.
SO THAT WOULD BE, SO WE COULD ADD IN THAT ADDITIONAL 10% OF THOSE, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THAT MATH WOULD WORK, BUT THE 10% OF THE 400 PLUS THE SEVEN AND A HALF PERCENT OF THE 900 WOULD BE, AND AND SORRY, GO AHEAD CHAIR.
WELL I WAS GONNA ASK COMMISSIONER BETA RAMIREZ, I'M GONNA, DID YOU HAVE ANY MORE TO ADD? OKAY, I'M GONNA GIVE, UH, COMMISSIONER AZAR SOME MORE TIME.
I, I APPRECIATE THIS QUESTION.
SO JUST SO I, UH, I I I APPRECIATE THE SORT OF THE BREAKDOWN IN NUMBERS, BUT MAYBE WE CAN JUST FOCUS ON THE TOP LINE.
SO INCLUDING THIS OTHER RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, OTHER ARE, ARE YOU TELLING ME THAT 7.5% OF WHATEVER, 'CAUSE IF THERE'S NO RESIDENTIAL TODAY, SO ALL RESIDENTIAL WILL BE NEW RESIDENTIAL? WELL, THERE'S 400 UNITS ALLOWED TODAY ON THE 600 SITE.
SO THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THESE OLDER RULES.
SO FOR THE 900 ADDITIONAL UNITS, WERE DOING, UM, 7.5% OF THE 900 ADDITIONAL UNITS? EXACTLY.
THAT, THAT HELPS ME UNDERSTAND THAT.
AND THEN YOU WERE GONNA SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, UM, THE QUESTION OF THE AFFORDABILITY LEVELS AND THE 10% VERSUS THE SEVEN 5%.
SO, UM, THERE'S A FEW THINGS REALLY.
UM, LIKE I SAID, THIS, THIS, THESE NUMBERS WERE PLUGGED THROUGH THROUGH A PROFORMA THAT WAS VERY DETAILED AND VERY, AND IS, IS NOT, THIS IS NOT JUST LIKE A GIVE ME A V AND AT SOME POINT I'LL DO THE 10%.
LIKE THIS IS LIKE, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT WE ARE WORKING TOWARD AND THE
AND YOU MIGHT NOTICE THAT NOT A LOT OF PROJECTS ARE MOVING FORWARD AND WE ARE HOPING TO MOVE THIS ONE FORWARD QUICKLY.
AND THIS IS WHAT THE PROJECT CAN WITHHOLD OR CAN UPHOLD, WHATEVER CAN TAKE, CAN HANDLE
UM, WE COULD DO 9% AT 60, WHICH WOULD BE MORE UNITS, BUT OBVIOUSLY A LITTLE BIT HIGHER MFI, BUT THROUGH OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE WERE
[02:10:01]
ENCOURAGED TO TRY TO GET TO THOSE LOWER LEVELS.UM, YOU KNOW, I DID, I KNOW IT'S ALWAYS HARD TO, TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT AVERAGE SALARIES ARE AND EVEN WITHIN A PARTICULAR PROFESSION, SALARIES RANGE QUITE A BIT.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE JUST DID SOME, SOME OVERVIEWS OF, OF SALARIES AND IT, AND IT LOOKS LIKE FROM WHAT WE FOUND, YOU KNOW, FIRST RESPONDERS AND TEACHERS IN THEIR FIRST YEAR MAKE SOMEWHERE AROUND 55 OR 60% MFI.
AND THEN OF COURSE THE LONGER THEY'RE IN THE PROFESSION, GENERALLY IT GOES UP FROM THERE A BIT TO LIKE MAYBE MAX OUT AT LIKE 80.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THE 30 AND 40 DO YOU KNOW, KNOW.
YEAH, NO, I WAS, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY I APPRECIATE THAT.
I JUST WANNA ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.
WE SHOULD BE WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND GETTING TO THE DEEPER AFFORDABILITY.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE BEDROOM MIX OR WE ARE NOT, WE ARE NOT AT THAT POINT.
SO THAT'S NOT, BUT IS THERE A CONSIDERATION THAT IT WOULD BE SORT OF THE BEDROOMS FOR THE AFFORDABLE UNITS WOULD BE SORT OF EQUIVALENT TO WHATEVER THE MARKET? YES.
EITHER EQUIVALENT THROUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE OR THROUGH MIX.
WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THAT FAR YET, BUT YES, THERE WOULD BE SOME KIND OF EQUIVALENCY.
I MEAN, UH, WHO WANTS TO GO NEXT? I CAN'T SEE THE SCREEN YET.
UM, I SEE COMMISSIONER, UH, COX HAS HIS HAND UP.
YEAH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M CONFUSED OR NOT, UH, BUT UM, OBVIOUSLY THROUGH, THROUGH WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW, WE'RE CHANGING THE RULES.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WERE SOMEHOW HELD TO SOME OTHER PREVIOUS RULE FOR THE UNITS THAT DON'T EXIST, BUT COULD EXIST NOW.
UM, SO WHAT, WHAT I'M GATHERING IS THAT WE'RE FROM WHAT PREVIOUS COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID, THERE'S NO RE RESIDENTIAL THERE NOW, BUT THE PROJECT YOU WANT TO BUILD IS ONLY GOING, IT'S GONNA BE THE TALLEST IN THIS AREA AND IT'S ONLY GONNA PROVIDE 5% OF ITS UNITS AS AFFORDABLE.
SO, UM, THERE IS A BUILDING, AN OFFICE BUILDING THAT IS 120 FEET NEARBY JUST TO THE EAST.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT MATTERS, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE IT'S AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF INFORMATION.
UM, AND THEN THERE IS A FAIR AMOUNT OF, OF PROPERTY ALREADY ENTITLED TO EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR.
IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND PULLING UP SLIDE SEVEN, THAT WOULD BE AWESOME.
UM, SO HERE YOU CAN SEE, OOPS, I'M SORRY, IT WAS THE ONE, MAYBE IT'S EIGHT.
UM, SO HERE YOU CAN SEE THIS IS, AS OF NOW THE, THE, THE SITES WITH THE ASTERISKS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE IN PROCESS RIGHT NOW.
SO THOSE ARE NOT APPROVED, BUT THEY'RE REQUESTED.
UM, AND I ONLY POINT THAT OUT TO SHOW THAT THERE IS A, A MARKET FOR THIS KIND OF HEIGHT AND THESE KIND OF PROJECTS HERE.
AND THEN THE REST OF THE ONES, UM, ARE, ARE ENTITLED.
SO YOU CAN SEE FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THERE'S 125 FEET, INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE NO OF US AND TO THE, AND SORT OF CAT CORNER TO THE NORTHEAST, UM, THAT DON'T HAVE A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.
I MEAN, I'M SORRY, DON'T HAVE AN AFFORDABLE COMPONENT.
THEY HAVE A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.
THEY WERE, THEY WERE ZONED WAY BACK AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROJECT WAS THAT THEY WERE ZONED FOR, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S, THIS AREA HAS SORT OF COME TOGETHER THROUGH PDAS BECAUSE OF LACK OF A BETTER TOOL, I THINK TOO.
SO WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL UNITS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET FROM THIS PROJECT THAT ARE AFFORDABLE? THE TOTAL NEW NO, TOTAL THE WELL, BECAUSE YOU'RE BUILDING, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT BUILDING, YOU'RE NOT WANTING TO BUILD.
WELL, I THINK IT'S CUSTOMARY HUNDRED UNITS.
YOU'RE WANTING TO BUILD 1300 UNITS.
WE, I THINK IT'S CUSTOMARY WHEN YOU HAVE A ZONING CASE.
YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF YOU DISAGREE, OF COURSE, BUT I THINK IT'S CUSTOMARY TO, TO ASK FOR, UM, AFFORDABILITY IN EXCHANGE FOR THE NEW ENTITLEMENT THAT YOU'RE GETTING.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THE 900 IS AND THAT'S WHAT THOSE CALCULATIONS ARE BASED ON.
SO IT'S 7.5% OF THE NEW ENTITLEMENT, WHICH IS 900.
BUT, BUT FOR NEW ENTITLEMENTS UNDER VMU, DON'T WE TYPICALLY ASK FOR 10, 12, OR 15% FOR THE NEW UNITS UNDER VMU? YOU DO.
SO WHY ARE YOU HELD TO A LOWER STANDARD IF WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW FOR AN INCREASE IN HEIGHT? WELL, FOR ONE THING, WE HAVE LOWER AFFORDABILITY THAN THE, UM, THAN THE VMU PROGRAM REQUIRES.
SO VMU THE LOWEST IS 50 AND WE HAVE SOME 40% UNITS IN THERE, UM, AS WELL AS A MIX ABOVE THAT.
UM, AND, BUT VMU TOO ASKS FOR 12% AT 50% MFI, WHICH SEEMS LIKE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE THAN WHAT YOU ARE OFFERING EVEN WITH THE 40% UNIT, WHICH, WHICH I THINK THERE'S ONLY, WHAT, FIVE OF THOSE 40% UNITS? THERE ARE FIVE THAT'S RIGHT.
I MEAN, WELL, IT JUST, IT JUST SEEMS, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME LIKE, LIKE WE'RE SETTING THE BAR PRETTY LOW HERE ON AFFORDABILITY.
I, I UNDERSTAND THE DEEPER AFFORDABILITY, I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT, BUT IT STILL FEELS LIKE THE BAR IS SET LOWER THAN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO HOLD OTHER DEVELOPMENTS.
[02:15:01]
THIS IS, THIS IS A REALLY, REALLY STUPID QUESTION, BUT ONE THAT I'VE NEVER ASKED OR NEVER HEARD ASKED WHEN IT COMES TO PERCENTAGE APPLICATIONS, LIKE THIS IS A FRACTION OF THE, UH, OF A UNIT ALWAYS ROUNDED UP.THE CITY ROUNDS A UNIT UP FOR SURE.
UM, THAT'S PROBABLY ALL MY TIME, BUT I, I JUST, I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU CAN CONVINCE ME THAT THIS ISN'T BEING HELD TO A LOWER STANDARD THAN WHAT WE HOLD OTHER DEVELOPMENTS WHEN IT COMES TO AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS.
I MEAN, I, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE.
I I'M NOT SURE IF THAT WAS A QUESTION FOR ME.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN ADD OTHER THAN THAT THERE'S LOWER AMOUNTS AND THAT THE, THE MARKET IS IN A SITUATION RIGHT NOW WHERE THIS IS, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS PROJECT CAN WITHSTAND, LIKE, YOU CAN SEE HOW PRECISE IT IS.
WHO'S THE NEXT COMMISSIONER OF QUESTIONS HERE? COMMISSIONER JUST GOT THEIR HANDS UP.
I COMMISSIONER HAYS, UH, CHAIR, DO YOU WANNA PUSH YOUR HANDS, PUSH YOUR HANDS BEFORE YOU GO UP? AND I HOPE YOU'RE NOT GONNA ASK ABOUT AFFORDABILITY.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT CHAIR? WELL, YEAH, JUST LIMIT YOUR, UH, QUESTIONS ON THE AFFORDABILITY QUESTION RIGHT NOW.
UM, JUST KIND OF OUT OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO INQUIRE ABOUT WHAT'S COMING FROM, I'M SORRY, WHAT? WE CAN'T ASK GENERAL QUESTIONS.
SO, UM, WE'RE GETTING LINE OF QUESTIONING, WE'RE JUST KIND OF GETTING OUTSIDE OF THE, THIS, WHAT WE'RE ALLOWED TO ASK ON THIS CASE.
'CAUSE THESE ARE NOT AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE EMBEDDED IN OUR CODE.
THESE ARE VOLUNTARY AFFORDABILITY.
SO WE'RE, THEY'RE NOT EMBEDDED IN OUR CODE IS REQUIREMENTS.
THAT'S WHY THIS WOULD BE A PRIVATE AGREEMENT IS BECAUSE THE CITY CAN'T ACTUALLY ASK IT.
PRIVATE AGREEMENT US FOR THIS AFFORDABILITY, BUT WE'RE VOLUNTEERING IT.
SO I'LL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND JUMP IN HERE 'CAUSE YOU HAD A GOOD, HOLD ON.
THERE'S THAT MAP YOU SHOWED AND THEN I'M LOOKING AT THE CASES IN THE BACKUP THAT SHOW RECENTLY, UM, APPROVED CASES.
ARE SOME OF THOSE ACTUALLY ON, UM, I'M JUST, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE, LOOKS LIKE WE'VE ALLOWED PRETTY, PRETTY GOOD HEIGHT ON SOME OF THESE ON YOUR MAP.
AND I'M JUST WONDERING ARE THESE SOME OF THE ONES THAT ARE ON THE TABLE THAT IT MIGHT BE A QUESTION STAFF HAS TO ANSWER? WERE THOSE IN SOME OF THE RECENT CASES? SO SOME OF THE HISTORY YEAH.
THE AREA HISTORIES OR THE HAR AREA? YES.
UM, ZONING, UH, THERE'S A FEW LI PDAS.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ONES.
WHAT IF YOU KNOW THE HEIGHT OR IF THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ONES THAT ARE LANDING ON THE, UH, MAP WE SAW EARLIER? WELL, THAT WAS AC THOSE ARE ACTUALLY RELATED TO THE EXHIBIT THAT WAS SHOWN.
SO THE AREA THAT IS NORTH OF THE YES.
PROPERTY AND SOUTH BEND WHITE YES.
AND THEN ALONG ALSO ON THE NORTHEAST, ALONG THE FRONTAGE I 35 AND OH THIS, DO YOU KNOW IF THEY VOLUNTEERED A CERTAIN AFFORDABILITY, UM, LEVELS IN PART OF THE, THOSE AGREEMENTS? I WOULD NOT KNOW.
I WOULD NEED TO RESEARCH THAT.
WHO ELSE DO WE HAVE? ALL RIGHT.
TELL ME IF I'M MISSING ANYBODY DOING MOTION.
MR. CONLEY, JUST TO GET US STARTED, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO GRANT THE APPLICANT REQUEST.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND CHAIR COMMISSION LAYS ON ANDREW? AND JUST TO, UH, CLARIFY, THAT'S 4 7 8 N NINE? YES.
I SAW COMMISSIONER MOHA GIVEN THE SECOND.
ALRIGHT, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER CONLEY? UM, I, I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO SAY.
I THINK THE QUESTIONS HAVE, HAVE, UH, ADDRESSED THE MAJOR CONCERNS.
I THINK THAT THERE IS A GENUINE AND SINCERE DESIRE, BOTH FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FROM THE COMMUNITY TO SEE A LARGER NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS IN PROJECTS LIKE THIS.
BUT I THINK THAT THAT ALSO SPEAKS TO THE LACK OF NECESSARY TOOLS, UM, AND BONUS PROGRAMS TO GET UNITS OUT OF A PROJECT LIKE THIS.
SO I DO, UM, COMMEND THE APPLICANT FOR FINDING UNITS THAT ARE IN THAT DEEPER TIER OF AFFORDABILITY, WHICH WE JUST ALMOST NEVER SEE, UM, IN, IN, IN, IN A PROJECT THAT ISN'T SUBSIDIZED.
SO TO SEE THAT DEEPER TIER OF AFFORDABILITY IN A PROJECT THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE SUBSIDY, I THINK IS MEANINGFUL.
I ALSO WANNA RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS AN AREA THAT IS, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY VERY WELL CONNECTED TO TRANSIT, CONNECTED TO BREWERIES, CONNECTED TO, UM, ART AND COMMUNITY SPACES, AND THERE'S A, UM,
[02:20:01]
JUST A KIND OF A GROWING, UH, ECOSYSTEM AND COMMUNITY IN THIS AREA.UM, SO IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS A VERY APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR, UM, THIS KIND OF, THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT AND, UM, YOU KNOW, BROADLY, UH, SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
ALTHOUGH I DO, UM, UNDERSTAND AND, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, ECHO THE DESIRE OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO SEE MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS IN A PROJECT LIKE THIS.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, UH, SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION, COMMISSIONER COX, I, I WANNA SEE THIS MOVE FORWARD.
UM, BUT, BUT I'M GONNA BE VOTING AGAINST VOTING BECAUSE VOTING AGAINST EVERY, EVERYTHING WE DO SETS A NEW BASELINE.
YOU KNOW, EVERY HEIGHT WE APPROVE IN AN AREA IS GONNA BE THE NEW BASELINE FOR WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS GONNA WANT.
UH, EVERY NEW PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE'RE WILLING TO SECRETLY ACCEPT, BUT NOT TALK ABOUT, UH, IT'S GONNA SET THE NEW BASELINE FOR WHAT EVERYONE THINKS THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH.
AND SO, UM, I I JUST, I DON'T THINK THE PLANNING, THIS PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD BE SETTING LOWER BASELINES WHEN IT COMES TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UH, I THINK WE SHOULD BE ASKING FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND MORE DEEPER AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND IF WE SHOWED APPLICANTS THAT THAT WAS THE ONLY THING WE WERE WILLING TO ACCEPT, I GUARANTEE YOU THEY WILL FINANCIALLY FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
SO, 'CAUSE THESE, THESE DEVELOPMENTS ARE EXTREMELY PROFITABLE EVEN IN THE CURRENT CLIMATE.
UH, SO I, I HAVE A STRONG SUSPICION THAT THIS WILL PASS.
I WANT THIS TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT I'M GONNA BE VOTING AGAINST, UH, 'CAUSE I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD ACCEPT THAT LOWER AFFORDABILITY.
UM, GOSH, YOU KNOW, UH, THERE WAS SOME MENTION OF THE TOOLS THAT WE'RE MISSING.
SO THOSE OF US THAT HAVE, THAT WERE PART OF THE LAND CODE, WE PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO DEVELOPING CODES AND DENSITY BONUSES THAT HAD ALL THESE BUILT IN.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT.
IT COULD BE YEARS OF PACE WE'RE GOING.
WE DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS AND I DON'T SEE A LOT OF MOMENTUM WITH THE, UH, THE WAY WE'RE APPROACHING THE CODE, THAT IT'S GONNA HAPPEN ANYTIME SOON.
SO THIS IS THE BEST WE HAVE IS WE HAVE TO RELY ON, YOU KNOW, THESE PRIVATE, UH, AGREEMENTS TO GET WHAT WE NEED INSTEAD OF HAVING IT BUILT IN.
SO, UM, I THINK WE'RE DOING OKAY HERE AND WE'RE ALLOWING MORE HEIGHT.
THAT'S KIND OF THE GAME WE HAVE TO PLAY EACH TIME WE COME HERE CASE BY CASE.
UM, THERE REALLY IS NO CODE TO DEPEND ON.
UH, THIS ONE, I THINK, UH, IT IS AN AREA OF GROWTH.
IT'S GOOD, GOOD, GOOD TRANSIT.
I THINK IT'S A GOOD PLACE FOR THIS KIND OF DENSITY AND WE'RE GETTING SOMETHING OUT OF IT AS FAR AS AFFORDABLE UNITS.
UM, ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION, UH, THERE'S COMMISSIONER VETA RAMIREZ.
UM, AND IT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT COMMISSIONER COX SAID.
I THINK WHAT I REALLY STRUGGLE WITH, EVERY TIME I HEAR PROFORMA, I HEAR DOLLAR SIGNS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT IT'S GONNA BE A PROFITABLE DEVELOPMENT.
I KNOW THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE 1300 UNITS WILL BE MARKET RATE.
AND, UM, I THINK THAT 80%, 60% MFI IS JUST, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE THAT CAN AFFORD TO LIVE IN AN APARTMENT.
AND I REALLY THINK THAT I'M CONCERNED AGAIN ABOUT NOT HAVING THE DEEPLY AFFORDABLE UNITS.
AND IT MAKES ME SAD THAT WE CAN'T, UM, YOU KNOW, I I ALSO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER COX THAT WE'RE SETTING THE BAR LOWER AND LOWER AND I WISH THAT WE COULD, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE MORE BENEFIT FOR THE COMMUNITY.
I THINK YOU HAVE ONE MORE SPOT IF SPEAK IN SPEAK IN FAVOR AND AGAINST.
THIS CASE JUST REALLY FEELS LIKE A, A NO-BRAINER TO ME.
I MEAN, WHEN WE SET THE VMU STANDARDS, WHICH IS NOW STRUCK DOWN ON THE COURTS, BY THE WAY, UM, WE SET IT AT 12% AT A TIME WHEN INTEREST RATES WERE LESS THAN HALF THAN WHAT THEY ARE RIGHT NOW.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, AS WE LOOK AT OUR CALIBRATION, WE FEEL WE NEED, WE KNOW WE NEED AS A CITY TO CALIBRATE MORE OFTEN AND 12% THERE.
THERE'S A LOT OF VMU CASES THAT WERE EVEN JUST PAUSED, JUST COMPLETELY WAITING FOR MARKET CONDITIONS TO BE BETTER.
'CAUSE THE FACT IS, COST OF CAPITAL IS A REAL THING AND WE CAN DISLIKE WORDS LIKE PROFORMA.
BUT WHEN YOU'RE THROWING A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS OR $200 MILLION AT A CASE THAT TO, TO BUILD AND INVEST IN A CITY, NOBODY'S GOING TO DO THAT WITHOUT A PROFORMA THAT WORKS.
AND SO WE CAN NOT LIKE CERTAIN WORDS LIKE THAT AND WE CAN VOTE DOWN TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DENSITY WHERE WE KNOW WE WANT TRANSIT AND WHERE IT MAKES A TON OF SENSE TO BUILD HOUSING.
BUT I DON'T SEE HOW THAT'S GOOD FOR ANYBODY.
SO, VERY EXCITED TO VOTE FOR THIS PROJECT AND, UM, REALLY HOPE THAT THEY ALL HAVE BALCONIES.
ALRIGHT, WE HAVE ONE MORE SPOT, UH, TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.
[02:25:02]
OKAY.AND NOT SEEING ANY HANDS, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS IS, UM, APPLICANT REQUEST.
UM, AND THIS INCLUDES SEVEN, EIGHT, AND NINE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I DO HAVE A, I GUESS I GOTTA DO A POINT OF INFORMATION, SIR.
UH, I THINK COMMISSIONER CONLEY'S MOTION WAS FOR THE APPLICANT AS LONG AS THAT, YEAH, APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS THAT AS LONG AS THAT'S THE STAFF STAFF RECOMMENDATION, I, I THINK THEY SQUARE UP, BUT I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT AND STAFF WILL ANSWER.
THEY'RE NODDING THEIR HEAD YES.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LAY LIAISON AREA.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND THE APPLICANT RECOMMENDATION AND 4 7, 8, 9 ARE UNISON.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
THOSE ON THE D IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
THOSE ON THE, UH, VIRTUALLY, UM, GO AND SHOW ME YOUR COLORS HERE.
AND SO I'VE GOT, UM, SO THAT MOTION PASSES WITH COMMISSIONER COX VOTING, UH, OPPOSING AND COMMISSIONER VETO RAMIREZ ABSTAINING.
CANDACE HUNTER? YES, THANK YOU.
AND I WANNA RECOGNIZE OUR EXOFFICIO CANDACE HUNTER.
I THINK WE'VE GOT, DO WE NEED, UH, A QUICK BREAK? YEAH, LET'S GO AND TAKE, UH, JUST, UH, FIVE MINUTES.
SO LET'S GET BACK HERE AT ABOUT 8 45.
GO AHEAD AND HEAR, UH, FROM STAFF PRESENTATION
[19. Historic Zoning: C14H-2023-0137 - 1100 E. 2nd St. A; District 3]
ON ITEM 19.THANK YOU, CHAIR ITEM 19 C 14 H 20 23 0 1 3 7 IS AN OWNER OPPOSED HISTORIC ZONING CASE AT 1100 EAST SECOND STREET, INITIATED BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
UH, THE 2016 EAST AUSTIN HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY LISTS THE PROPERTY AS ELIGIBLE FOR LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND INDIVIDUAL LISTING ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER.
UH, SO STAFF AND THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, BOTH RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING ON THE BASIS OF ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION WITH AUSTIN CARPENTER AND BUILDER, CHARLES SINSON.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL TO SPEAK, OR THE, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER, HLC IS THE APPLICANT.
WE'RE NOW READY TO HEAR FROM THE OWNER, UM, MR. JOSHUA BRUNSON.
UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, I AM THE APPLICANT.
I'M, UH, WORKING ON THE BEHALF OF THE OWNER ON THIS.
UM, IT IS A CHARMING LITTLE HOME AND UNFORTUNATELY WE FEEL THAT IT'S A LITTLE BIT PAST.
UM, THE HOME HAS BEEN SCABBED ON OVER THE YEARS.
UM, SOME, YOU KNOW, NORMAL T ONE 11 THAT'S KIND OF ENCOMPASSING HALF THE BUILDING.
UH, WE'RE HAVING SOME FLOOR ISSUES, UM, AND ALSO AS WELL AS THE HOME HAS BEEN, UH, CHOPPED UP INTO A DUPLEX.
I DON'T KNOW WHEN, BUT A LOT OF THESE ADDITIONS KIND OF STARTED IN THE SIXTIES OR SEVENTIES, UM, PRIOR.
AS YOU CAN SEE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE T ONE 11 SIDING, THIS IS JUST NOT THE ORIGINAL SIDING THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, YOU KNOW, I, I'VE DISCUSSED THIS WITH THE OWNER.
UM, OUR, OUR INTENT IS TO, YOU KNOW, OBTAIN THE DEMOLITION PERMIT AND ENCOURAGE, UH, ANYONE THAT IS LOOKING TO DEVELOP, UH, IN THIS ENVIRONMENT TO BE ABLE TO PRESERVE THE FRONT FACADE.
I DID HAVE HAVE THE PLEASURE OF MEETING, UM, WITH ONE OF THE, UM, HLC.
UM, THE COMMISSIONERS, UM, AT THE PROPERTY WENT THROUGH THIS AND THE ENCOURAGEMENT WAS TO KEEP THE, THE FRONT FACADE, WHICH, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, EVEN WITH THAT THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT GOES IN INTO THESE HOMES TO KEEPING AND REPAIRING IT.
UM, COULD YOU MIND IF WE KEEP SCROLLING THROUGH THE PDF? THANK YOU.
UM, THERE'S A COUPLE INTERIOR PHOTOS AS WELL, UM, OF THE, OF THE FLOORS OF JUST KIND OF THE, THE PROPERTIES JUST REALLY IN ROUGH SHAPE.
THE OWNER BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY, 1972, I BELIEVE, AND HE'S JUST KIND OF KEPT IT, KEPT THIS AS WELL, ALL HIS OTHER PROPERTIES IN THIS CONDITION, UM, TARGETING, YOU KNOW, UH, A CHEAPER, UH, PATH ON RENT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE.
I WOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGE Y'ALL TO CONSIDER THE OWNER'S WISHES ON TRYING TO OBTAIN THIS DEMOLITION PERMIT.
UM, REALLY DO APPRECIATE HISTORIC, UH, PUTTING THEIR TIME AND EFFORT, UM, INTO THIS TO DIVE INTO THE HISTORY OF IT.
BUT WE FEEL THAT JUST, UH, AND FROM WHAT WE CAN SEE AND WHAT I FEEL AS WELL AS A DEVELOPER HERE IN THIS TOWN, THAT THE, THE HOME IS JUST TOO FAR PAST TO BE ABLE TO PRESERVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
[02:30:02]
ANDREW.IS THAT ALL THE, UM, CHAIR, UH, THE, UM, APPLICANT FOREGOES THE APPLICANT? THE, UM, REBUTTAL THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, COMMISSIONER, SOMEBODY CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
WELL, I SAW COMMISSIONER COX SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CZAR.
ANY OBJECTIONS? SEEING NONE, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO Q AND A.
WHO HAS THE FIRST QUESTION? UH, COMMISSIONER.
UH, HOPEFULLY TWO QUICK QUESTIONS.
I NOTICED ON THE ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET, IT SAYS ZONING CHANGE FRONT BUILDING ONLY.
CAN STAFF CLARIFY, AND I APOLOGIZE IF YOU ALREADY EXPLAINED THIS, BUT CAN CLA UH, CAN STAFF CLARIFY WHAT THAT MEANS? FRONT BUILDING ONLY? SURE THING.
COMMISSIONER, UH, THIS LOT HAS TWO STRUCTURES ON IT.
UM, THERE IS A SECONDARY, UH, HOUSE, UH, BEHIND THIS HOUSE THAT WAS MOVED ONTO THE LOT.
UM, THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DID NOT RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING FOR THAT BACK HOUSE.
UM, SO OUR RECOMMENDATION, UH, THAT STAFF AND THE HLC IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH HISTORIC ZONING ON THE FRONT, FRONT HALF OF THE PROPERTY WITH THE FRONT BUILDING ONLY.
AND, AND ARE YOU FAMILIAR ENOUGH WITH THE PROPERTY A A I'M LOOKING AT STREET VIEW, AND IT SEEMS LIKE SOME OF THE PICTURES WE, WE WERE PRESENTED APPEAR TO BE IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, NOT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
IS THAT AN AREA, IS THAT THE AREA THAT'S NOT BEING REQUESTED FOR HISTORIC ZONING? UM, SO IN YOUR BACKUP, THERE IS A LITTLE BLUE HOUSE, UM, ALTERNATELY ADDRESSED AS 2 0 5 MEDINA.
THAT IS THE BUILDING THAT IS NOT BEING REQUESTED FOR HISTORIC ZONING.
UM, THE FRONT HOUSE, WHICH IS THE, UM, BROWN FOLK VICTORIAN HOUSE, UM, HAS A LOT OF ADDITIONS ONTO THE BACK OF IT, UM, THAT ARE NON HISTORIC, BUT THE, UH, THE FRONT OF THE HOME IS STILL, UM, IN ITS HISTORIC FORM.
SO THAT IS THE PART OF THE LOT THAT THE, UH, LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDED.
AND I KNOW I SAID TWO, BUT I CAME UP WITH THREE IN MY HEAD.
WE MAY HAVE COVERED THIS BEFORE, BUT IS THERE A WAY TO DO THIS SO THAT WE'RE JUST REQUIRING THAT THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE BE PRESERVED RATHER THAN THE BACK THAT'S BEEN MODIFIED HEAVILY? UM, I'LL HAVE TO CHECK ON THAT.
I BELIEVE THERE'S A WAY WE CAN DO THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT ONLY.
YEAH, IF YOU COULD LET ME, LET ME CHECK JUST IN CASE.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GIVE, UH, HAVE THAT YOU NEED SOME TIME TO BOOK THAT UP.
COMMISSIONERS, WHILE WE'RE OKAY.
WE HAVE CONFIRMED COMMISSIONER THAT THAT IS POSSIBLE.
YOU STILL HAVE SOME TIME, COMMISSIONER COX, IF YOU NEED IT.
I, I WOULD, I'D VERY MUCH SUPPORT DOING THAT OVER THE, THE, THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE.
UH, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? UM, COMMISSIONER CONLEY, I THINK I WOULD JUST FOLLOW UP WITH THAT QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT.
I'M SORRY, TO THE APPLICANT, NOT TO THE OWNER AND RICK, AND ASKED THE OWNER, WOULD YOU BE AGREEABLE TO THAT, UM, SORT OF A COMPROMISE? IS THAT, DOES THAT STILL PRESENT AN ISSUE? UM, YEAH.
UM, YOU KNOW, I I, I DID COME UP LAST TIME WHEN I DID MEET CHELSEA AT THE SITE.
YOU KNOW, I DID SPEAK WITH THE OWNER ON THAT.
UM, HE, HE DOES UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM, BUT HE DOES REQUEST THAT, UM, HE NOT BE HELD TO THAT.
IF THERE IS A DEVELOPER IN THE CITY THAT IS LOOKING TO PRESERVE, WHICH THERE ARE, AND WE ARE ENCOURAGING, UH, FINDING, UH, A POTENTIAL BUYER SOMETIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE THAT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN TAKING ON THIS TYPE OF PROJECT, UH, TO PRESERVE 1100 EAST SECOND STREET, UM, WITH THE CONFINES OF, YOU KNOW, THE FRONT DOOR REMODEL, WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT.
UM, BUT WE ARE REQUESTING THAT, THAT COME UP AS WE SEE FIT AS HIM AS A PROPERTY OWNER.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, TO THE COMMISSION HERE, THERE IS SOME DESIRE TO PRESERVE THAT FACADE.
AND SOME COMPROMISE COULD BE ARRIVED.
WOULD SOMETHING LIKE THAT BE, UM, PREFERABLE TO THE OWNER? SEE, SINCE THE OWNER IS NOT A DEVELOPER, UH, HE'S JUST A, THE LANDOWNER, THE PROPERTY OWNER, HE, HE WOULD NOT WANT TO HINDER ANYBODY ELSE'S UNDERSTOOD INTENT IN THE FUTURE OF WHAT THEY CAN OR CAN'T DO WITH THE PROPERTY.
YOU KNOW, AS I MENTIONED, WE WOULD ENCOURAGE, UH, SOMEONE BEING ABLE TO PRESERVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
WE, WE DO, WE TRULY DO WISH THAT THE HOME WAS IN BETTER SHAPE.
NO, THIS WAS A PROJECT THAT I ORIGINALLY WAS GONNA UNDERTAKE, UM,
[02:35:01]
TO PURCHASE AND PRESERVE THIS FRONT FACADE, UM, AND DEVELOP IT.THE MARKET HAS CHANGED, BUT ALSO, UM, TO SEE THE OVERALL CONDITION OF THE HOME, ONCE I FINALLY WAS ABLE TO GET INTO IT, IT JUST DID NOT MAKE, UH, I I IMAGINE SENSE.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT JUST, IT'S, IT'S IN REALLY, REALLY ROUGH SHAPE.
YOU DID MENTION, UM, WHEN YOU SPOKE SEEKING A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
UH, I MEAN, WE, I'M, I'M, I'M BIG ON PRE PRESERVATION.
I, I THINK I'M A, I'M A CARPENTER BY TRADE.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORY THAT GOES WITH THESE AND, UH, AND THE INTRICACIES OF THESE HOMES.
BUT WE WOULD DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE SOMEONE TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THIS AND TAKE IT TO THE COUNTRY AND HOPEFULLY ADD ONTO IT.
BUT AGAIN, THEN SOMEONE, UNFORTUNATELY THE HOME'S IN REALLY ROUGH SHAPES, I DON'T KNOW.
UH, I'M NOT A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, SO I CAN'T SPEAK ON THE, THE ABILITY TO EVEN DO THAT.
AND, BUT THEN IT WOULD BE OUT IN THE COUNTRY SOMEWHERE.
IN ANY CASE, IT WOULDN'T CORRECT.
I MEAN, I CAN SIT HERE AND TELL YOU WHAT, WHAT I WOULD LOVE YOU TO HEAR, BUT I DON'T WANNA BE SITTING HERE LYING TO YOUR FACE.
I THINK YOU GET ENOUGH OF THAT ALREADY ON THE DAY TO TODAY, SO, YEAH.
UH, I THINK MY LAST QUESTION IS REALLY FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
UH, IF, IF POSSIBLE, I KNOW THAT I'M, I MIGHT BE RUNNING OUTTA TIME.
SORRY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND MY TIME IS TICKING.
YEAH, I DON'T MEAN TO, I JUST, UM, UM, WHEN, WHEN I GET CUT OFF, I GET CUT OFF.
SO, UH, I JUST WANNA BETTER UNDERSTAND THE BASIS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION.
'CAUSE WE SAW DIFFERENT PHOTOS OF THE BACK, AND I, I HEAR THAT THERE MAY BE THIS KIND OF COMPROMISE WHERE IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE WILLING TO SORT OF, IF WE CAN PRESERVE THE FACADE AND THE FRONT, THEN THAT'S SUFFICIENT.
BUT I WANNA JUST KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE SOME OF THE KEY ELEMENTS OF THE FRONT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE.
UM, YEAH, AND I HAVE SEEN A LITTLE BIT IN THE BACKUP, BUT IT WOULD BE JUST HELPFUL IF WE COULD JUST YEAH, SURE THING.
UM, SO, UH, COMMISSIONER, THE, THE FRONT PART OF THE HOUSE, THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE IS WHAT WE WOULD WANNA PRESERVE AND NOT THE, UH, 1970S ADDITIONS TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE THAT WERE BUILT OUTSIDE THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE, WHICH ENDS IN 1938 FOR THIS PROPERTY.
BUT WHEN YOU SAY THE FRONT, I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE A SENSE OF HOW MUCH HAS BEEN CHANGED HERE, KIND OF SHIP OF THESIS, HOW MANY, WHAT, WHAT FROM HERE IS REALLY STILL EVEN THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
THIS IS EASIER DONE IN IMAGES,
HOPEFULLY SOMEONE ELSE WILL CARRY THE QUESTION CHAIR.
YEAH, I DON'T, WELL, WHILE HE'S LOOKING, UM, THE, UH, CLIFF'S NOTES VERSION IS THE ORIGINAL MASSING OF THE HOUSE THAT REMAINS IS WHAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR.
UM, SO WE WOULD LOOK AT PERMITS, WE WOULD LOOK AT PROBABLY A SURVEY OF THAT, YOU KNOW, EXISTING PART OF THE HOUSE TO SEE WHAT'S ORIGINAL.
UM, I KNOW WE'VE HAD A LANDMARK COMMISSIONER GO OUT AND DO A SITE VISIT, UM, TO, UH, TO KIND OF DETERMINE WHEN AND WHERE THINGS WERE TACKED ON OVER THE YEARS.
UM, BUT IN GENERAL, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE WERE, THERE WAS MORE THAN ONE ADDITION TO THE REAR OF THAT HOUSE, UM, AND KIND OF A LONG SNAKE.
UM, SO, SO JUST TO UNDERSTAND THIS PROCESS, IF, IF, 'CAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S STILL AN ANALYSIS THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE, RIGHT? A SURVEY OF THE HOUSE AND A STUDY OF IT AFTER THAT TAKES PLACE, DOES, YOU KNOW, THEN WHAT HAPPENS? YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WHAT IF WE IDENTIFY THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE 20% OF THE FACADE IS ORIGINAL, JUST HYPOTHETICALLY OR 50%? I DON'T KNOW.
UM, I THINK AT THIS POINT, UM, WE'RE REASONABLY CERTAIN THAT THERE IS, UH, MORE OF THAT TO THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
UM, GIVEN THAT I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT A LOT OF IT HAS BEEN LOPPED OFF TO ADD THOSE 1970S ADDITIONS.
UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THEY MOSTLY JUST ADDED ONTO WHAT WAS THERE OVER TIME.
UM, SO THAT, UH, CENTRAL YELLOW MATH THING, THAT SQUARE IN THE MIDDLE IS WHAT WE WOULD BE, UH, SEEKING TO, UH, ZONE THE FOOTPRINT ON.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AFTER THAT SORT OF SURVEY HAPPENS AND, AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S A CLEARER PICTURE OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE, DOES THAT, YOU KNOW, DOES THAT COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION? IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE OWNER THEN TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WITH A CLEAR SENSE OF WHAT IS GONNA GET PRESERVED TO STILL CONTEST THE CASE? I UNDERSTAND THE OWNER IS OPPOSED TO THIS.
UM, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UM, YOU KNOW,
[02:40:01]
WHAT HAPPENS IN THE PROCESS AFTER THAT ANALYSIS TAKES PLACE? UM, SO DEPENDING ON HOW Y'ALL VOTE, IT WILL MOVE FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL.UM, IF Y'ALL VOTE TO, I MEAN, IT'LL, IT'LL MOVE FORWARD REGARDLESS.
UM, AND THE, THE, UH, CITY COUNCIL WILL NEED TO VOTE, UH, IN A SUPER MAJORITY IN ORDER TO ZONE ANY PART OF THE PROPERTY OF THE OWNER'S WISHES.
SO AT THAT POINT, WE WOULD HOPEFULLY HAVE, UM, MORE
SO WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO REVIEW ANY OF THAT.
UNLESS Y'ALL WERE TO POSTPONE
OH, COMMISSIONER HATES, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.
UM, FOR HISTORIC, FOR HISTORIC STAFF, UM, CAN YOU HELP ME? 'CAUSE I'M THE, I'M THE NEW KID HERE.
CAN YOU HELP ME WITH THE PROCESS? SO Y'ALL GOT A DEMOLITION PERMIT AND YOU GO OUT AND SAID, WAIT A MINUTE, THIS IS HISTORIC AND SO LEMME GET THIS STRAIGHT.
AND WHEN WAS THE HOUSE BUILT? UH, SO THIS HOUSE I BELIEVE WAS BUILT AROUND 1888.
UM, AND, UH, HOW BIG IS THE LOT? UM, LET ME GET THAT.
APPROXIMATELY 7,800 SQUARE FEET.
OH, SO I COULD, SO I COULD PRESERVE THIS.
COULD I PRESERVE THE FACADE? AND THEN COULD I PUT, I COULD GET FOUR UNITS ON THIS QUARTER LOT THREE, ONLY THREE
WHY COULD I, IF I PRESERVE IT, IT'S, IT'S ONLY, OH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT Y'ALL VOTED FOR.
I'M JUST THE PRESERVATION BONUS, SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY.
AND YOU'RE WISE NOT TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE.
UM, THIS PROPERTY WAS RECOMMENDED, UH, FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK ZONING BY THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, UM, BECAUSE THEY FOUND THAT, UM, IT MET THE QUALIFY QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION IN ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS.
AND, BUT THE OWNER IS OPPOSED? THAT'S CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER ZA, DO YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP? UM, YES, I DID.
MISS, I'M, I'M SORRY, I'M GONNA HAVE TO ASK YOU NO, NO WORRIES.
SO I, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANT TO MENTION IS, SO, UM, 'CAUSE THE APPLICANT HAD SORT OF, SORT OF LAID THIS OUT RIGHT, THAT THEY APPLIED FOR DEMOLITION PERMIT AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT MOVED.
BUT IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, ONCE WE HAVE GIVEN A DEMOLITION PERMIT, THEN THAT MEANS THE OWNER WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO MOVE THE HOUSE OR DEMOLISH IT.
THERE IS NO WAY FOR US TO SAY THAT THE HOUSE WOULD BE PRESERVED ONCE WE HAVE GIVEN A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
UM, A DEMOLITION PERMIT WILL, UM, ALLOW THE APPLICANT THE ABILITY TO KIND OF CHANGE THEIR MIND, UM, WITHDRAW THE DEMOLITION AND, UM, APPLY FOR A RELOCATION WITHOUT ANOTHER HLC REVIEW AND WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS AGAIN.
UM, BUT IF THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS ISSUED, THEN IT IS ON THE APPLICANT TO DO, UM, EITHER, YOU KNOW, DEMOLITION AS THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED, OR, UM, WITHDRAW AND CHANGE THEIR PERMIT TO RELOCATION.
SO ONCE, ONCE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS ISSUED, IT'S REALLY UP TO THEM, THERE'S NO WAY FOR US TO SORT OF REQUIRE IT TO BE MOVED OR SOMETHING ELSE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT, COMMISSIONER, I APPRECIATE THAT.
THE, THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE NOTES ON THE INTEGRITY AND WE HAD SOME REALLY GOOD PICTURES IN OUR BACKUP AS WELL LOOKING AT SOME OF THE CONDITION.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT, THE CONDITION OF THE HOUSE? IS THAT AN ASSESSMENT THAT Y'ALL HAVE LOOKED AT OR THERE ARE HLC COMMISSIONERS HAVE LOOKED AT THAT THERE IS STILL ENOUGH THERE FOR IT TO NOT, FOR IT TO BE ESSENTIALLY PRESERVED IN A REASONABLE WAY? UH, YES.
COMMISSIONER, WE DID HAVE, UM, COMMISSIONER COOK, I BELIEVE, WENT OUT, UM, TO THE SITE, UM, TO CHECK IT OUT.
AND, UM, HE AGREED WITH THE APPLICANT THAT THE REAR PART OF THE HOUSE FROM THE SIXTIES AND SEVENTIES, UM, ONCE IT WAS DUPLEXED, IS NOT IN GOOD SHAPE.
UM, IT'S, IT'S NOT LONG FOR THIS WORLD, UM, BUT THE FRONT PART OF THE HOUSE, UM, GIVEN THAT IT'S BEEN, UM, A DUPLEX FOR A PRETTY LONG TIME, UM, IT'S UH, IT'S IN REMARKABLY GOOD SHAPE FOR A HOUSE OF ITS AGE.
SO MY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE IF Y'ALL CAN HELP ME, AND MY HOPE I'M LOOKING AROUND FOR EVERYBODY AND EVERYBODY HELP ME HERE, WHICH IS, IF WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT SORT OF KEEPING THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE, SHOULD WE DESCRIBE IT, I FORGET IT WAS THE 1938 SANBORN MAP, OR SHOULD WE TALK, HOW WOULD WE, HOW WOULD WE DO THAT IN A MOTION? CAN SOMEBODY HELP US? AND I'M SORRY IF THAT'S TOO TECHNICAL A QUESTION.
I DON'T KNOW IF SOMEONE ELSE HAS A QUESTION.
UH, MS. MS. HARTNER, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF WE WANTED TO DO A SPECIFIC PART OF THE HOUSE AND SORT OF THE ORIGINAL, SHOULD WE, SHOULD WE REFER TO THE 1938 SANBORN MAP? HOW WOULD WE CRAFT A MOTION THAT WILL ALLOW US TO FOCUS ON THE SORT OF ORIGINAL PART OF THE STRUCTURE? OKAY, SO MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE GREAT ILLUSTRATION THAT CALEN
[02:45:01]
DREW ME, THAT YOU WOULD WANT THE ENTIRE, THE ENTIRE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE, JUST NOT THE ADDITIONS, RIGHT? SO YOU WOULD BE ZONING H ON A FOOTPRINT ZONING, CORRECT? YES.AND I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UH, SO FOR THE FOOTPRINT, HOW DO WE REFER TO IT IN A MOTION? SHOULD WE SAY FOOTPRINT BUILT UP TO 1938? I GUESS I'M TRYING.
YEAH, I THINK, I MEAN, WE'D BE ABLE TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
WE'D ACTUALLY HAVE TO GET A SURVEY DONE.
SO WE WOULD KNOW THAT WE ARE JUST ZONING THAT FOOTPRINT, NOT THE LAND, NOT THE ADDITION.
SO THEY COULD DEVELOP AROUND THAT STRUCTURE? ABSOLUTELY.
THEN IF THOSE, IF THE HOME AMENDMENT PASSES THAT THE COMMISSION REFERRED TO, UM, THEY COULD STILL
UM, SO, BUT WE WOULD JUST BE ABLE TO, I MEAN, I WOULD JUST SAY THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND THEN WE WOULD GET TO LAW TO MAKE THAT RIGHT.
I, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT, BUT WE KNOW THE INTENT.
THAT, THAT'S ALL I NEEDED TO KNOW.
I JUST WANTED TO, UNDER PROCEDURALLY, HOW DO WE, UM, DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT? UM, AND THE, AND THE LAST QUESTION I'LL ASK IS, UM, MS. CONTRERAS, YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AT THE OLDER PICTURES, WHAT A SHAME.
WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GET THIS HOUSE ZONED HISTORIC BEFORE.
'CAUSE THERE'S BRACKETS AND SOME OF THE FRONT RAILINGS AND IT'S AN EXTREMELY EXQUISITE SORT OF THING.
SO IF WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENS IN OUR HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS, IS THAT SOMETHING WE WOULD ASK TO RECONSTRUCT? 'CAUSE WE HAVE VERY CLEAR DOCUMENTATION OF WHAT, WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE.
UM, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD APPRECIATE BUT NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRE, UM, SINCE WE HAVE THAT HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION OF THE, UM, THE INTRICATE KIND OF GINGERBREAD, UM, IT'S A GOOD START.
WE WOULD NEED TO VERIFY THOUGH THAT THAT WAS ACTUALLY ORIGINAL.
UM, BECAUSE SOME HOUSES HAVE APPLIED ORNAMENTATION AS FOLKS, UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HAD A LITTLE MORE MONEY AND, UH, WANTED TO JAZZ THINGS UP A BIT, UM, IN LATER YEARS.
SO WE WOULD NEED TO CONFIRM, UM, THAT THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL FIRST OF ALL.
AND THEN, UM, IF AN APPLICANT WANTED TO CHANGE THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE, UM, IF THEY WERE TO RECONSTRUCT, WE WOULD ASK THAT THEY RECONSTRUCT TO THAT PHOTO.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSION HAS QUESTIONS I'M NOT SEEING ANYMORE.
COMMISSIONER AZAR, UM, CHAIR, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION.
AND COMMISSIONER COX, I'LL LOOK AT YOU TO SEE IF THIS WORKS.
WE'RE, I WOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF ZONING, HISTORIC, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
ALL RIGHT, WE'VE GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COX, YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? COMMISSIONER AZAR? YES.
UM, YOU KNOW, ONE, I REALLY APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER COX AND OUR STAFF HELPING US SORT OF THINK THROUGH A CREATIVE WAY OF LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE ABILITIES TO PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE WITHOUT SORT OF ENCUMBERING THE OWNER, UH, WITH A LOT OF SORT OF DIFFERENT PIECES AND LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE ADDITIONS THAT WERE MADE LATER IN THE SIXTIES.
I ALSO WANNA SAY, I THINK, YOU KNOW, ON THIS COMMISSION WE OFTEN TALK A LOT ABOUT, UM, HOW DO WE LOOK AT PRESERVING SOME OF OUR HISTORIC HERITAGE IN EAST AUSTIN.
AND THIS IS PART OF THE EAST AUSTIN HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY, AND WE HAVE GOOD DOCUMENTATION OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, OF THE FULL VICTORIAN ASPECT OF THIS HOME.
WE ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO LOOK AT, UM, YOU KNOW, SORT OF THE AFFILIATIONS OF THE FOLKS WHO LIVED IN THE HOUSE AND THE WORK THAT THEY DID ON THIS HOUSE AND OTHER SPACES IN THE CITY.
SO ALL THAT SAID, I I FEEL LIKE THIS, THERE IS STILL, UM, SIGNIFICANT ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS AND SIGNIFICANCE OTHERWISE TO GO AHEAD AND HAVE THAT REQUISITE FOR PRESERVATION OF THAT ELEMENT OF THE HOUSE, WHILE ALSO ALLOWING SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR THE OWNER, UM, TO BE ABLE TO DO OTHER ELEMENTS.
I KNOW THAT'S STILL NOT COMPLETELY ALIGNED WITH WHAT THE OWNER WOULD WISH, UM, BUT IT STILL ALLOWS US TO PRESERVE IN A CRITICAL PART OF OUR HISTORIC INFRASTRUCTURE WHILE ALSO, UM, ALLOWING SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR FOLKS.
ANY SPEAKERS TO OPPOSED ANY MORE? AGAIN, UH, SPEAK IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER HEINS, DO YOU WANT SPEAK? I'LL DO A, I'LL TRY A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
UM, UH, I'LL MOVE TO GRANT THE APPLICANT OR THE, THE OWNER'S WISHES.
I MEAN, THIS IS, IT'S THEIR PROPERTY.
SO IT'S, UH, APPLICANT'S REQUEST, YEAH.
UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, NOT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, THE APPLICANT IS, UM, HLC, SO THIS WOULD BE A DENIAL OF THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT? THAT'S, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I SAID.
NO, YOU WERE CLEAR, VERY CLEAR.
COMMISSIONER HAYNES, UH, THE CHAIR WAS THINKING OF IT IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT WAY.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND, UM, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? FIRST OF ALL, UH, COMMISSIONER AL, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? COMMISSIONER HAYNES? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS SAYS HER COMMISSIONER.
UH, DO YOU WANNA JUST, YOU WANT A QUESTION OR A SECOND? I DID I MISS YOUR SECOND OR DO YOU WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR OR AGAINST I DID NOT SECOND IT.
I, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER AZAR AND HAVING
[02:50:01]
RESEARCHED THE, HIS HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THIS CITY.THERE IS A HUGE INEQUITY BETWEEN PROPERTIES THAT ARE PRESERVED ON THE WEST SIDE AND PROPERTIES THAT, THAT ARE PRESERVED ON THE EAST SIDE.
AND ONE OF THE, THE REASONS IS THAT IT TOOK SO LONG FOR FOLKS TO START GETTING INTO THE CULTURE OF PRESERVING HISTORY ON THE EAST SIDE.
THESE DEMOLITION, UH, PERMITS WERE COMING THROUGH LIKE YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE WITHOUT ANY RESEARCH BEING DONE ON THE PROPERTIES.
AND, UH, FORTUNATELY THAT HAS CHANGED, AND I DID A LOT OF REPORTING ON THIS AND HOW THIS WORKED.
IT WAS ONE BUREAUCRAT AT ONE POINT IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN THAT HAD THE POWER TO, TO, UH, APPROVE DEMOLITIONS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WENT ON IN EAST AUSTIN.
SO THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN PRESERVE SOME OF WHAT'S LEFT AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE HISTORY OF EAST AUSTIN, AS WELL AS TELLING THE STORY OF AUSTIN, THAT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
SO I CANNOT STATE ENOUGH HOW IMPORTANT, UM, IT IS, UH, TO PRESERVE THE FACADE OR THE FOOTPRINT, WHATEVER WE'RE GOING TO CALL IT, AND ALL OF THE RESEARCH THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS.
AND WE KNOW, WE KNOW THAT WHEN HOME DOES PASS, WE KNOW THAT THIS WILL BECOME VERY VALUABLE BEYOND THAT.
SO I JUST HAVE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE'S ALSO THIS KIND OF LINGERING LEGACY OF THE, THE, THE TRAUMA THAT HAS BEEN DONE TO THE HISTORY OF EAST AUSTIN.
SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UH, SPEAKING AGAINST, ALL RIGHT.
UH, SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND, UH, TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UH, BY COMMISSIONER HAYNES, WHO'S THE SECOND ON THAT? COMMISSIONER MTO, I BELIEVE? YES.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THOSE IN FAVOR ON THE S UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND COMMISSIONER HAYNES.
OKAY, THOSE IN FAVOR? UH, ON VIRTUALLY.
UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, I THINK IT'S A MISTAKE THAT, UM, THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS' HAND IS STILL RAISED, BUT OH, YES.
I'M NOT, LET'S SEE, LET'S JUST, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT YEAH.
IT, IT KINDA LOOKS
SO NOW LET'S, THAT'S, UH, MAKE SURE I GET COMMISSIONER HAYNES, COMMISSIONER MTO, COMMISSIONER HOWARD AND, UM, ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UH, SO LET'S GO AND TAKE VOTES ON THE DI UH, DI OPPOSED.
ALRIGHT, SO THAT'S, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, COMMISSIONER CONLEY, COMMISSIONER SHAW, COMMISSIONER ZA.
AND THOSE VIRTUALLY, UH, OPPOSED? I SEE COMMISSIONER COX, COMMISSIONER BETA RAMIREZ, AND COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS OPPOSED THAT MOTION FAILS.
SO BACK TO OUR INITIAL, ORIGINAL MOTION.
UM, AND, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD, EVERYBODY CLEAR ON WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AND TAKE A VOTE.
UH, THOSE IN FAVOR, GO AHEAD AND RAISE YOUR HAND ON THE DAIS.
THOSE VIRTUALLY IN FAVOR I'M LOOKING ACCOUNT.
THAT MOTION PASSES WITH COMMISSIONER MO TOLER IN OPPOSITION.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SO THAT CLEARS ALL OUR DISCUSSION CASES.
GO AND MOVE OVER TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
[26. Discussion and possible action to adopt a rule regarding registered speaker donation of time during public hearings. (Sponsors: Chair Shaw and Vice-Chair Hempel]
UM, ITEM 26, UH, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO ADOPT A RULE REGARDING REGISTERED SPEAKER DONATION OF TIME DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS.UM, SO JUST I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND COMMISSIONER RIVERA, YOU HAD KIND OF, UM, LAID OUT WHAT WHAT WE MIGHT WANNA CONSIDER IS AN OPTION.
DO YOU WANNA GO AHEAD AND EXPLAIN THAT TO THE COMMISSION AS A STARTING POINT? THANK YOU, CHAIR.
SO, UM, PREVIOUSLY WHEN YOU, UH, WHEN THE COMMISSION ALLOWED DONATION AND TIME, UM, YOU, UM, I KIND OF, UM, DOUBLED THE PRIMARY SPEAKER, THE THREE MINUTE SPEAKER, AND THE TWO MINUTE, UM, OR THE ONE MINUTE, UH, SPEAKER TO TWO MINUTES.
[02:55:01]
SO THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE THE, UH, THREE MINUTE, THE FIVE MINUTE WOULD RECEIVE A DONATION UP TO 10 MINUTES.THE THREE MINUTES WOULD RECEIVE A TOTAL TO SIX MINUTES AND THE ONE MINUTES A TOTAL TO TWO MINUTES.
ALONG WITH THAT, WE, UM, I WOULD LIKE IT OR I WOULD REQUEST IF WE, IT'D BE POSSIBLE TO, UM, HAVE THAT PERTAIN TO ONLY IN-PERSON SPEAKING REGISTRATIONS AND CLOSE THE REGISTRATION AT TIME AT 5:00 PM TO ALLOW THE SORTING OF DONATION TIME IN THE SPEAKER LIST.
SO WHAT I HEARD WAS WE'RE ALLOWING FOR JUST ONE PERSON TO DONATE TIME TO ALLOW IT TO GO TO DOUBLE CHAIR THE MECHANISM OF HOW THE INDIVIDUAL GETS TO THAT ALLOTTED TIME.
UM, UM, I, THERE THERE'S NOT A LIMIT.
UM, FOR EXAMPLE, A, A NUMBER OF WOMEN AS SPEAKERS CAN DONATE TO A FIVE MINUTE SPEAKER TO REACH THAT 10 MINUTE MARK.
SO, UM, THIS IS, ANY QUESTIONS OR ANY CHANGES FOLKS WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE? COMMISSIONER AZAR? I'M, I'M SO SORRY.
COMMISSIONER MR. VERA, CAN YOU PLEASE REPEAT WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AGAIN? YES.
SO, UM, AND THIS WAS, UM, BY THE PREVIOUS RULES, UM, UH, JUST, UM, FOR CONSIDERATION, UM, THE FIVE MINUTE SPEAKERS WOULD HAVE TIME UP TO 10 MINUTES.
THE THREE MINUTE SPEAKERS WOULD HAVE TIME UP TO SIX MINUTES, AND THE ONE MINUTE SPEAKERS WOULD HAVE TIME UP TO TWO MINUTES BA BASED ON THE SAME RULES OF, UM, HAVING THE ABILITY TO PASS ON TIME TO SOMEONE.
AND THAT PERSON HAS TO BE PRESENT AT THE TIME.
AND THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, I'M SORRY.
I FEEL LIKE YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT ESSENTIALLY I THINK YOU'RE ALSO RECOMMENDING, OR IS THAT SOMETHING WE WOULD BE DOING, WHICH IS CLOSING THE ABILITY TO SIGN UP AT 5:00 PM SO Y'ALL CAN WORK THROUGH THE CORRECT.
UM, THAT WOULD BE, UM, BENEFICIAL TO, UM, COMPILING THE LIST AND HAVING IT, UH, READY FOR THE, UH, BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.
UM, JUST ONE THING TO NOTE IS THAT EVEN WHEN THE REGISTRATION CLOSES AT 5:00 PM AND SAY SOMEONE COMES AT FIVE 30, UM, THE INDIVIDUAL COULD STILL CONVEY, UH, A MESSAGE TO THE COMMISSION AT THE, UH, COMMISSION'S REQUEST.
AND THEN MY OTHER LAST QUESTION IS, I, I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW 'CAUSE I'VE NEVER SIGNED UP TO SPEAKER PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, ARE, IS SOMEBODY ABLE, SO WE'RE, SO IF SOMEBODY SIGNS UP FOR A PLANNING COMMISSION, THEY CAN SIGN UP VIRTUALLY? CORRECT.
AND THEY CAN SIGN UP FOR BOTH IN-PERSON AND VIRTUAL? CORRECT.
WHAT TIME DOES THE, WHAT TIME DOES THE VIRTUAL SIGN UP FOR COMMISSION CLOSED? SO FOR THE COMMISSION, THE, UM, FOR THE REMOTE TELECONFERENCE, SPEAKER REGISTRATION CLOSES AT TWO O'CLOCK.
AND THAT WOULD NOT BE CHANGING WITH THE ATION TWO O'CLOCK OF THE DAY OFF OR DAY OF? YES.
SO, SO IF SOMEBODY, LET'S SAY, CANNOT BE HERE AT 5:00 PM THEY COULD STILL UP TILL 2:00 PM BE ABLE TO DO IT VIRTUALLY CORRECT.
I JUST WANTED, THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. RIVERA.
UM, YES, JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT FOR ANYBODY WHO'S A VISUAL LEARNER LIKE MYSELF, THE UM, OUTLINE FOR THIS IS ACTUALLY IN OUR BACKUP.
IT WAS SENT BY, UH, CHAIR, THE STAFF LIAISON THIS AFTERNOON.
SO IT'S IN THERE AS A WORD DOCUMENT SO YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THESE.
UM, MY QUESTION WAS ACTUALLY RELATED TO SORT OF SOME OF THE, UM, WOULD THIS SPECIFICALLY BE FOR ZONING CASES OR HOW WOULD IT APPLY TO SITUATIONS WHERE WE HAVE SAY, LDC AMENDMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING? I WOULD, UH, CHAIR COMMISSIONER LAVER.
I WOULD SAY THAT THIS PERTAINS TO YOUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS.
I THINK, UM, WHEN YOU ARE ENTERTAINING A AMENDMENT LIKE WE DID ON NOVEMBER 14TH, I THINK, UH, THAT'S WHEN I WOULD CONFER WITH THE CHAIR, THE VICE CHAIR AND THE EXECUTIVE TEAM TO LOOK AT, UM, UM, REVISING THOSE, UH, SPEAKING, UM, TIMES.
AND THEN RELATED IN THE SAME SITUATION, UM, IF THERE WAS A SITUATION, SAY FOR SOME REASON DONATION OF TIME DIDN'T NECESSARILY FEEL LIKE IT FIT WITHIN THE CASE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THERE WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO POTENTIALLY SUSPEND OR REVISE THOSE RULES, GIVEN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.
UH, IS TO YOUR POINT IN CONVERSATION WITH THE CHAIR PRIOR
[03:00:01]
TO THE START OF MEETING, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, OR IF WE FELT THAT THE RULES WERE, UM, INCOMPATIBLE WITH A CASE, WOULD THERE BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUSPEND THEM, I GUESS IS THE QUESTION.SO I WOULDN'T SAY YOU COULD DO IT PER CASE.
UM, AND THEN JUST ONE FINAL QUESTION WAS JUST TO CLARIFY.
THESE TYPES OF, UM, TIME SHARING AGREEMENTS WERE IN PLACE PREVIOUSLY FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AND THIS IS BASICALLY JUST A REINSTATEMENT OF RULES THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY HAD.
SO WITH, UM, WHEN WE WENT TO, UM, ALL VIRTUAL, WE SUSPENDED DONATION AND TIME ALTOGETHER.
UM, AND THEN MOST RECENTLY ON NOVEMBER 14TH, UM, GETTING COMFORTABLE WITH THE SYSTEM AND SEEING THAT WE WERE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THE DONATION OF TIME AND IT WENT RATHER WELL.
UM, I DO THINK IT WOULD BE, UM, SOMETHING THAT WE CAN IMPLEMENT NOW AND I THINK THE, UH, PUBLIC WOULD APPRECIATE IT.
I CAN JUST CLARIFY ONE THING, WHICH MR. RIVER, YOU CAN CORRECT ME, MS. UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UH, SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO CHANGE, OF COURSE, HOW MUCH TIME SOMEBODY CAN DONATE AND SPEAK AT, BUT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE SIGNUP TIME OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
'CAUSE THAT'S JUST, YOU CANNOT CHANGE TIME.
AND THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY A BETTER WAY TO ASK THE QUESTION IS IF THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY TO BE FLEXIBLE AROUND THE RULES, SHOULD THAT BE NEEDED? AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WOULD BE PER MEETING, NOT PER CASE.
YEAH, AND THAT WOULD BE AROUND THE DONATION OF TIME BECAUSE THE REST OF IT, OUR STAFF WOULD NEED, UM, STANDARDS TO BE ABLE TO FOLLOW WITHOUT CHANGING IT TOO MUCH.
COMMISSIONER COS AM SORRY IF I'M REALLY CONFUSED, BUT, UM, THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS DISCUSSION IS THAT WE'RE GOING BACK TO PREVIOUS RULES THAT ALLOW DONATION OF TIME UP TO 10, SIX AND TWO.
BUT THERE'S A THING IN HERE THAT SAYS REQUEST LIMIT TO IN-PERSON REGISTERED SPEAKERS.
AND I'M A LITTLE CURIOUS WHY WE WOULDN'T APPLY THE SAME RULES TO THOSE WHO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN US VIRTUALLY.
AS I'M DOING NOW, CHAIR COMMISSIONER LEES ON ANDREW VERA, I THINK THAT COULD, UM, ADD SOME COMPLEXITIES TO, UH, THE ABILITY TO, UM, VERIFY SPEAKERS AND THE WAY WE CONDUCT OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS WHERE, UM, WE HAVE PEOPLE'S, UM, UM, THE PUBLIC LOG ON AT CERTAIN TIMES.
UM, AND THEN, UM, IT, IT, IT, I THINK IT COULD JUST, UH, CREATE, UH, MORE ISSUES IF, IF WE, UM, I, I, WELL, I WOULD, AND I WOULDN'T TOTALLY PUT THAT OUTTA THE QUESTION I WOULD ASK THAT WE INITIALLY START WITH IN PERSON SPEAKERS.
UM, AND THEN MAYBE, UM, LOOK AT IT AGAIN AT A FUTURE TIME IF WE WANNA INCLUDE, UM, REMOTE SPEAKERS.
SO, SO TWO, TWO FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS FOR THOSE WHO JOIN US VIRTUALLY.
FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WANT TO SPEAK VIRTUALLY, WHAT IS THEIR, WHAT WOULD THEIR TIME LIMIT BE? AND IF THEY ARE THE PRIMARY SPEAKER OR ANY SPEAKER, COULD THOSE PHYSICALLY IN PERSON DONATE THEIR TIME TO SOMEONE WHO'S SPEAKING VIRTUALLY? AGAIN, I, I THINK THAT WOULD, UM, UM, BE TOO COMPLEX AT THIS TIME.
UM, I WOULD NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE, UH, BEING ABLE TO, UH, IMPLEMENT THAT AT THIS TIME.
AND THE REASON I'M ASKING IS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SITUATIONS BEFORE WHERE THE PRIMARY SPEAKER MAY, UH, HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO COVID OR, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST COULDN'T FOR SOME REASON MAKE IT EVEN THOUGH THEY INTENDED TO.
AND I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S, IT'S IMPORTANT TO AFFORD THEM THE SAME OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE THEIR INPUT AS, AS THOSE WHO WERE ABLE TO MAKE IT, ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE PRIMARY SPEAKERS.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THE, THE POINT OF MY QUESTIONS.
UH, IT'S JUST GETTING A, UH, MR. RIVERA, UM, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION, COUNSEL.
WHAT IS THEIR CURRENT PROCESS FOR DONATING TIME? CHAIR COMMISSIONER LEES ON INVERSE? SO, UH, THE THING, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, IT'S NOT, UM, UM, IT'S A, YOU REALLY CAN'T COMPARE THE, UM, PUBLIC HEARINGS TO COMMISSION TO COUNCIL IN THE MANNER THAT THE PUBLIC AT COUNCIL HAS DIFFERENT TIME LIMITS ALLOTMENTS.
UM, I WOULD BELIEVE IT, UH, THEY HAVE,
[03:05:01]
UH, THREE MINUTES AND TWO INDIVIDUALS CAN DONATE THEIR TIME TO A SPEAKER.SO THAT WOULD GIVE THEM UP TO NINE MINUTES.
UM, AND IT IS, UM, FOR IN-PERSON, SPEAKERS ONLY.
WELL, THAT GIVES US SOME CONTEXT, UM, OF HOW THEY DO IT.
UM, I CAN UNDERSTAND NOT TAKING ACTION ON THE VIRTUAL AT THIS EVENING, BUT I, I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR, FOR US TO CONSIDER THAT.
AND, UM, MR. RIVERA, IF WE MIGHT LOOK, UM, AT OPTIONS FOR THAT, BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT IMPROVING ACCESSIBILITY AND, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVING, UM, FAIR WAY FOR PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE, UM, THAT CAN'T ALWAYS MAKE IT IN PERSON.
SO I THINK IT'S, IT'S WORTH IT FOR US TO CONTINUE TO LOOK INTO THAT.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE HELPED THE CITY MOVE ALONG IN TELEWORKING POLICIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO I'D, I'D LOVE TO SEE US FIND A WAY TO MAKE THAT WORK, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR OUR COMMISSION MEETINGS AS WELL ALONG THOSE SAME LINES, EVEN IF WE CAN'T DO IT AT, AT THIS JUNCTURE, I HOPE WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT MAYBE IN THE NEW YEAR.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LAY LIAISON.
UM, SO, UH, I COULD COMMIT TO, UM, UH, REVISITING, UH, THE VIRTUAL PARTS.
I JUST WANNA REALLY BE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE, UH, DO DONATION OF TALENT, UH, TIME REALLY DOWN AND, UH, UM, MAKE IT TO WHERE THE PUBLIC, UH, IS NOT CONFUSED.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS BEFORE WE, AND WE'LL NEED TO TAKE UP A MOTION VOTE ON THIS AND, UH, GOES ON TO COUNCIL AFTER THIS CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER NERT? NO, UH, THIS IS WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW, SO IF HE JUST WANT TO, UM, UH, NOT IT AS, UM, ADOPTION OF THE DONATION TIME PER EXHIBIT A PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR DO YOU WANNA ENTERTAIN A MOTION CHAIR? GO AHEAD.
JARED WAS GONNA SAY THAT WE, UM, MOVE AHEAD WITH THE CHANGE IN RULES AS PROPOSED.
UH, DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? UH, DO GO AHEAD.
OH, I WAS JUST GONNA OFFER UP, AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO DO THIS, BUT IF, IF COMMISSIONER ALREADY BE WILLING TO ACCEPT AN ADDITION THAT JUST SAYS, AND INSTRUCT STAFF TO EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES TO EXTEND TIME DONATION TO, UH, VIRTUAL ATTENDEES.
DID THE MOTION MAKER ACCEPT THAT? I'M COMPLETELY FINE WITH THAT, AS, AS LONG AS I THINK IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC HEARING THIS, IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT WE'RE MOVING AHEAD WITH THIS RULE CHANGE AT THIS TIME AND LOOKING AT EXPLORING OPPORTUNITIES FOR, UM, VIRTUAL, UH, SPEAKERS AT A FUTURE DATE.
SO, JUST SO THAT ANYBODY'S LISTENING, THEY'RE CLEAR ON, UH, WHAT THEY CAN EXPECT AS THEY COME AND SPEAK TO US IN THE COMING WEEKS AND MONTHS.
BECAUSE, BECAUSE SO MUCH OF THE PUBLIC IS LISTENING RIGHT NOW, THIS
UH, SO THIS BELONGS TO THE BODY.
IS HER
ANY OPPOSITION TO THE, UH, THE CHANGE PROPOSED? OKAY.
UH, IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION? ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NONE, THAT ONE THAT PASSES.
[27. Election of interim chair. ]
RIGHT.UM, YOU ALL WE NEED TO, I AM ROLLING OFF, UH, IN THE CHAIR ROLE TO GIVE SOMEBODY A CHANCE AT TAKING ON THAT.
UM, UH, WHILE I, I'M GONNA CONTINUE TO SERVE TO THE END OF THE YEAR.
I TALKED TO, UH, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER POOLE.
UH, SO SHE'S, SHE'S BEEN BRIEFED, BUT, UH, WANNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, TAKE CARE OF THIS THIS EVENING.
AND THEN ALSO FOR THE, UM, THE, UH, MY ROLE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE, IF ANY OF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN EITHER SWITCHING OVER, UH, TO THAT FROM YOUR CURRENT POSITION OR WHAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF SOMEBODY, AND THEY DON'T, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN MEETING MUCH LATELY, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, MAY I SEE HEADS AGREEING WITH ME THAT THEY HAVEN'T.
UH, SO IT'D BE GOOD IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO BE AN INTERIM POSITION UNTIL YOU GET, UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER POOLE ASSIGNED SOMEBODY, UH, TO REPLACE ME.
SO WITH THAT, AND, UH, MR. RIVERA, HELP ME OUT HERE.
WHAT WE'VE BEEN ADVISED TO DO IS WE'RE GONNA TAKE NOMINATIONS, UH, FOR THE CHAIR, AND WE'RE GONNA DO THAT FIRST AND THE NEXT MEETING, YOU KNOW? NO.
UH, SO WE'RE GOING TO TAKE, UH, GO AHEAD AND TAKE NOMINATIONS, AND THEN WE WILL VOTE ON EACH
[03:10:01]
ONE OF THOSE.AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, YOU GET, YOU'LL VOTE, UH, ONE VOTE ON THE NOMINATIONS, AND THEN IT IS, UM, I GUESS PREFERABLE IF YOU DON'T, IF YOU ABSTAIN FROM VOTING FOR YOURSELF.
CAN I NOMINATE MYSELF? YOU CAN NOMINATE YOURSELF.
UH, SO I'M GONNA, I I JUST HEARD A NOMINATION.
YOU HEARD, YOU HEARD A LOT OF THINGS, BUT YOU DID NOT HEAR THAT.
SO I'M GONNA GO AND, UH, MAKE A NOMINATION FOR VICE CHAIR HEMPEL.
UM, I THINK SHE HAS, NUMBER ONE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB, AND I'M NOT HERE.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, SHE HAS A LOT OF THE PLANNING, UM, BACKGROUND, UH, THAT IS KIND OF IN ZONING BACKGROUND THAT IS REALLY ESSENTIAL TO A LOT OF WHAT WE DO HERE, BUT REALLY GOOD TO HAVE IN THAT CHAIR POSITION.
SO SHE WOULD BE MY NOMINATION, AND I SECOND THE NOMINATION.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER CONLEY SECONDING, ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS BEFORE WE TAKE UP A VOTE? AND THIS INTERIM CHAIR TILL NEXT APRIL.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER AZAR.
UM, DO I NEED TO, UH, I MEAN, MY, MY RECOMMENDATION, I'VE ALREADY, I'VE ALREADY TOLD HIM, UH, THAT I WAS GONNA DO SO, AND IT'S HIS RIGHT TO ACT AS, ACT ACCORDINGLY.
BUT I WILL TELL Y'ALL, UM, AS THE NEW KID ON THE BLOCK, UM, UH, YOU ALL HELPED ME AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT.
BUT COMMISSIONER CZAR GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL, AND, AND I WILL TELL YOU HIS LEADERSHIP, UH, THROUGH WHAT IS HAS TO BE THE, UH, MOST ONEROUS AND, AND COMPREHENSIVE THING THAT WE HAVE DONE IN MY SHORT TENURE.
UM, HE IS, HE IS A LEADER OF THIS GROUP AND, AND SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED AS SUCH A, IN THE, IN THE MIDDLE SEAT.
I, UM, MAN, YOU ARE GONNA JUST MAKE IT TOUGH,
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR THE CHAIR? ROLL.
UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THE NEW KID ON THE BLOCK SHTICK IS ONLY GONNA LAST FOR SO LONG,
SO I'M JUST GONNA ENTERTAIN AND TELL ME IF I'M, UH, DIVERT, UH, GOING OFF THE RAILS HERE A LITTLE BIT.
BUT DOES ANYBODY WANNA SPEAK, UH, FOR THE NOMINATIONS? AND IT, YOU KNOW, I SPOKE, UH, COMMISSIONER HAYNES SPOKE, BUT I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.
WE'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER MOTO AND THEN, UH, CHAIR, COMAN CHAIR.
AND THEN, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM,
UM, YEAH, I, I'M, I WOULD LIKE TO STRONGLY ENDORSE, UM, A AS FOR CHAIR, I, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A VERY STRONG ROLE FOR HIM.
AND, UM, I JUST, I ONLY HAVE POSITIVE THINGS TO SAY BECAUSE I LIKE THAT WE CAN HAVE DIALOGUE AND GIVE AND TAKE.
UM, UH, AND I, I THINK YOU DO A GREAT JOB RUNNING THE MEETINGS.
I, I, I RESPECT VERY MUCH, UM, COMMISSIONER HEMPEL SERVICE TO THE COMMISSION.
UM, I, I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, HER, HER PROFESSIONAL SITUATION, HAVING TO RECUSE QUITE A BIT IN, IN CERTAIN CASES.
AND WHILE HER KNOWLEDGE IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO US TO FUNCTION ON THE COMMISSION, I'M, I'M, I JUST HAVE SOME RESERVATION ABOUT THAT SITTING IN THE CHAIR ROLE.
WE HAD, UH, CHAIR COHEN AND THEN COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UH, I'M, I'M SAD THAT THE VICE-CHAIR DIDN'T HERE, BUT I WANTED TO ASK, UH, COMMISSIONER, YOU'RE INTERESTED THAT YOU'VE BEEN, NOW THAT YOU'VE BEEN NOMINATED, UH, I, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT GETS TALKED ABOUT A LOT HERE AT PC, BUT THE, THE CHAIR POSITION, UH, KIND OF TAKES AWAY A LITTLE BIT OF YOUR LEEWAY WHEN IT COMES TO DISCUSSING THINGS.
IT'S A LITTLE MORE, UH, APOLITICAL.
I GUESS MY CONCERN IS NOT, NOT THAT I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD MAKE A GREAT CHAIR, BUT YOU'RE, OH GOD.
I MEAN, I'M NOT PUTTING ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER DOWN, BUT YOU'RE KIND OF OUR POWERHOUSE BRO.
AND IF YOU'RE HAVING TO RUN THE MEETINGS AND KEEP TRACK OF TIMES AND, YOU KNOW, WILL
[03:15:01]
YOU STILL BE ABLE TO PUT ALL THAT TIME INTO THESE AWESOME AMENDMENTS THAT YOU BRING? LIKE, WAIT, IS, IS THAT A RHETORICAL QUESTION? NO, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S 100%, LIKE, LEGIT.IT'S, IT'S CHAIR'S KIND OF BORING.
I WOULDN'T DO IT IF I DIDN'T HAVE A SEAT ON PLANNING COMMISSION.
WELL, I GUESS IT'S TECHNICALLY I CAN'T MAKE MOTIONS, BUT IT'S DISCOURAGED FOR THE CHAIR TO MAKE MOTIONS.
AND SO I, I I, I WOULD SAY, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE RAISING IS A REALLY GOOD POINT.
I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT TO THINK ABOUT.
UM, OF COURSE, I FEEL LIKE NOMINATED AND SELECTED, I WOULD TRY TO LIVE AS MUCH UP TO THE ABILITY OF THE CHAIR AS POSSIBLE.
AND I, AND I GUESS I, I'M FORTUNATE THAT I'VE HAD, YOU KNOW, SOME GOOD EXAMPLES IN FRONT OF ME.
I'VE BEEN THROUGH, WHAT, THREE OR FOUR CHAIRS I FORGET.
SO WE'VE HAD SOME REALLY GOOD EXAMPLES, UH, OF CHAIRS AND HOW TO LEAD ON THAT.
BUT I, I ALSO HAVE TO SAY I AGREE, I THINK, UM, UM, VICE HEMPEL HAS SHOWN GREAT LEADERSHIP IN ALL THESE YEARS AS WELL.
AND I'M, I'M NOT TRYING TO DISCOURAGE YOU IN ANY WAY.
I THINK YOU'D BE BOTH BE VERY GOOD AT IT.
I DON'T WANNA LOSE ANYTHING FROM YOU.
ALRIGHT, WELL, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
I AM BEGGING MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO ONLY VOTE FOR CLAIRE HEMPEL.
AND I SAY THAT WITH ALL SERIOUSNESS, THIS GENTLEMAN TO MY LEFT WOULD JUMP ON A BARREL OF HAND GRENADES FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND THEN HE'D DO IT AGAIN IF HE COULD.
HE NEEDS TO FINISH HIS DISSERTATION, AND IF WE DON'T LET HIM, HE WILL NEVER DO IT.
AND WE WILL JUST KEEP GIVING HIM MORE WORK.
PLEASE VOTE FOR CLAIRE HEMPEL.
I WILL ONLY BE VOTING FOR CLAIRE HEMPEL TODAY, AND I HOPE ALL OF YOU WILL DO THE SAME.
IT HAS NOW BEEN STATED ON PUBLIC, CORRECT.
YOU'VE NOW BEEN
UM, I, I WANNA SAY, I MEAN, I THINK THIS, UH, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE NOMINATION, UM, UH, FROM COMMISSIONER HAYNES AND IT PUTS US ALL IN, I THINK, AN AN ODD POSITION BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT VEZ WOULD MAKE A EXCELLENT, WONDERFUL CHAIR.
I THINK, UM, UH, CLAIRE HEMPEL HAS BEEN, UH, VICE CHAIR OF THE COMMISSION FOR A WHILE AND HAS BEEN ON THE COMMISSION SINCE I FIRST JOINED.
UM, I THINK HAS BEEN A, AN IMPORTANT, UM, BALANCED, THOUGHTFUL VOICE WHO HAS PUT A LOT OF ENERGY AND ATTENTION TO CASES AND HAS BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION SERVING THE COMMUNITY AND THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN FOR, FOR A GOOD WHILE.
AND I THINK THAT, THAT, THAT IS IMPORTANT.
AND I THINK, UM, COMMISSIONER HEMEL WILL MAKE AN EXCELLENT CHAIR.
AND I THINK AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME, UM, IT IS, IT IS, UM, THE SEAT OF CHAIR, UM, BELONGS TO OUR VICE CHAIR.
ANYONE ELSE? ALRIGHT, I'M JUST GONNA CLOSE THAT.
I AM REALLY UPSET, I HAVE TO MAKE THIS CHOICE TONIGHT.
UM, THEY'RE BOTH WONDERFUL PEOPLE AND WOULD DO GREAT.
UH, QUICK POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
SO IF THE VICE CHAIR BECOMES THE CHAIR, THEN WE'LL HOLD ANOTHER VOTE TO ELECT A VICE CHAIR, AND THEN IF THAT VICE CHAIR HAPPENS TO BE LIKE THE SECRETARY OR THE PARLIAMENTARIAN, FOR EXAMPLE, THEN WE OH, JUST, OKAY.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY TO EVERYBODY, OH, SINCE WE'RE NOT POSTED FOR THAT, WE WOULD REQUEST AN ITEM ON OUR AGENDA FOR NEXT TIME AND WE WOULD GO THROUGH THOSE ACTIONS.
UM, SO YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT HAVING TO VOTE ON THIS.
ARE, ARE YOU VOTING AS AN OFFGOING MEMBER FOR THE NEXT CHAIR? YES, I CAN.
UM, AND WHAT WE, JUST TO REPEAT THE PROCEDURE, UH, IN THE ORDER OF NOMINATION, WE'LL SEE WHO VOTES IN FOR THE VICE, UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPEL, AND THEN WE'LL VOTE, UH, THEN WE'LL VOTE FOR THE SECOND NOMINEE, COMMISSIONER AZAR.
UH, SO WE'LL ADD UP THE VOTES EACH TIME AND YOU VOTE ONCE, AS I UNDERSTAND.
UH, SO WE'LL SEE WHICH ONE GARNERS THE MOST VOTES, AND THEN THEY WILL, UH, GET THE CHAIR, CHAIR COMMISSIONER LAVER.
SO, UM, ONE, UH, PART OF THAT IS THAT THE, UH, SO TAKE UP THE NOMINATIONS IN ORDER THAT THEY WERE MADE, AND THEN IF THE FIRST NOMINEE GARNERS THE SEVEN VOTES, UM, THEN YOU DON'T GO TO THE SECOND NOMINEE.
SO ANY MORE DISCUSSION BEFORE WE TAKE UP THE VOTE? DO CLARIFY WHO THE FIRST NOMINEE WAS.
SO WE'RE CHAIR QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER COX.
UM, SINCE WE HAVE, SINCE WE'RE TAKING IT UP, LIKE IN THAT ORDER, I JUST WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR THAT
[03:20:01]
I ALSO BELIEVE THAT BOTH INDIVIDUALS, CLAIRE AND AASE WILL BE WONDERFUL CHAIRS.UM, I HAVE WORKED A LOT MORE, UH, PERSONALLY WITH AASE, AND EVEN THOUGH WE OFTEN DON'T END UP IN THE SAME CATEGORY OF VOTES OR WE MAY HAVE CERTAIN POLICY DIFFERENCES, UH, HE'S ALWAYS TREATED ME WITH AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF RESPECT.
UM, EVEN THOUGH I DO TRY TO PRESS ALL OF THE BUTTONS I CAN
SO JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE.
UH, WE ALL HATE THE CHOICE, BUT LET'S ALL, YEAH.
UH, VICE CHAIR HEMPEL, GO AND RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU WANT HER IN THE CHAIR POSITION.
SO WE DO GARNER SEVEN, SO, UH, WE, THAT'LL BE IT.
THAT SAYS SEVEN VOTES NEEDED, SO WE, CAN I TAKE A MOMENT?
UM, I, I JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT DO THINGS.
ONE, I REALLY JUST WANNA THANK ALL MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FOR THEIR KIND WORDS.
IT'S ALMOST EMBARRASSING, REALLY
UM, AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE SUPPORT AND I'LL CONTINUE WORKING WITH ALL OF Y'ALL NO MATTER, YOU KNOW, WHAT ROLE I'D LAND UP IN, WHETHER I'M EVEN ON THE COMMISSIONER OR NOT.
UM, AND THE REALLY WHY I ASKED FOR A POINT OF RELIGIOUS TO THANK OUR CURRENT CHAIR, COMMISSIONER SHAW, WE HAVE BEEN BLESSED TO HAVE YOUR LEADERSHIP HERE, AND FOLKS MIGHT NOT KNOW THIS, NOT EVERYBODY HERE.
I ACTUALLY DID NOT VOTE FOR COMMISSIONER SHAW WHEN THE DECISION WAS MADE BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE,
SO IT SHOULD TELL YOU HIS GREATNESS AS A PERSON, AS A LEADER, HIS ABILITY TO WORK WITH PEOPLE THAT I WOULD NOW CONSIDER HIM ONE OF MY CLOSEST FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES ON THIS COMMISSION, REALLY SPEAKS TO HIS LEADERSHIP OF WORKING WITH EVERYONE REGARDLESS OF WHO THEY ARE, AND BRINGING US ALL TOGETHER TO REALLY FOCUS ON SOME IMPORTANT ISSUES AND FOR REALLY GOING THROUGH SOME VERY DIFFICULT AND TUMULTUOUS TIMES AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS AND A LOT OF DIFFERENT CHANGES THAT OUR CITY HAS HAD AND OUR STAFF HAS HAD.
BUT ALL THAT SAID, I I WOULD NOT LET THIS MOMENT GO WITHOUT THANKING YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS IN GUIDING US OR ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS IN WORKING THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT ALSO ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS ON BEHALF OF OUR CITY AND YOUR LEADERSHIP, AND REALLY ENSURING THAT THE VOICE OF DISTRICT SEVEN WAS REPRESENTED HERE AND THE VOICE OF SO MANY FOLKS IN, UM, IN OUR CITY WAS REPRESENTED HERE.
AND I JUST REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS.
AND I'LL, I'LL JUST CLOSE WITH SAYING, I, I HAVE THIS HAS, THIS WAS JUST A GOOD TIME FOR ME.
IF YOU GUYS HAD BEEN COUNTING, IT'S BEEN SIX YEARS, UH, THREE OF THEM IN THIS CHAIR POSITION, AND THEN WE WENT, RIGHT, WE WERE IN COVID DURING THAT TIME.
SO THOSE OF YOU, THAT WAS CHALLENGING.
SOME OF YOU WERE, YOU KNOW, AND YOU PROBABLY PARTICIPATE IN OTHER WAYS IF YOU AREN'T ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS A LOT OF WORK.
AND WE DO SO MUCH HERE, AND I REALLY FEEL SO GRATEFUL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE TAUGHT ME SO MUCH, YOU KNOW, JUST NOT LAND USE, BUT THE, THE POINT OF VIEW THAT, YOU KNOW, YOUR VALUES AND THE THINGS THAT MO THAT YOU GET EXCITED ABOUT AND, AND, UH, YOU'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT, REALLY, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE MOVED ME A LOT OF TIMES BEYOND JUST THE TECHNICAL STUFF THAT WE WORK ON.
SO I'VE LEARNED SO MUCH FROM ALL OF YOU.
AND THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS IN THE PAST, AND THIS IS ALL GREAT.
I THINK HOME WAS A GREAT PLACE TO KIND OF WRAP IT UP.
I MEAN, THAT'S A GREAT SCORE IN MY BOOK FOR A PLANNING FOR A CODE AMENDMENT LIKE THAT.
SO, UH, I THINK YOU ALL DID REALLY WELL.
AND I'LL SEE YOU DOWN THE ROAD.
IT'S JUST, UH, I'LL BE HANGING OUT A LITTLE WHILE.
SOMEBODY ELSE WILL BE LEADING OUR MEETINGS AND THEN, UM, WE'LL SEE WHAT COMES NEXT.
[28. Nomination of a member to serve on the Small Area Planning Joint Committee. ]
UH, NOMINATION FOR THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.SO JUST A REMINDER, THIS CAN BE LEFT AWAKENED, BUT REALLY IF SOMEONE WOULD BE WILLING TO STEP UP EVEN IN AN INTERIM PHASE AND SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE, IT REALLY HELPS BECAUSE, UM, OTHERWISE WE CAN REALLY RUN INTO SOME QUORUM ISSUES AND IT CAN BE A CHALLENGE.
SO IF, IF, IF ANY, OUR COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE WILLING TO DO DOUBLE DUTY.
IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S NOT A VERY HEAVY LIFT AT THE MOMENT.
AND WE CAN POTENTIALLY HAVE THE SAME ARRANGEMENT THAT WE HAD WITH ME, THAT ONCE WE HAVE A NEW COMMISSIONER IN PLACE, WE CAN HAVE THEM TAKE OVER THIS POSITION.
SO HOPEFULLY SOMEONE WOULD NOT HAVE TO SERVE IN THIS ROLE FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
BUT I, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT PLEA BECAUSE IT DOES REALLY HELP THE COMMITTEES, UH, MOVE MORE SMOOTHLY.
[03:25:01]
IF, UH, UH, UH, CHAIR SHAW IS PLANNING TO STEP OFF THE COMMISSION BY THE END OF THE YEAR, IT REALLY WOULD BE PREFERABLE IF WE CAN APPOINT SOMEONE TODAY SO THAT I CAN GO THROUGH THE FULL COUNT COUNCIL APPOINTMENT PROCESS, SIGN A PROCESS OATH PROCESS TO HAVE THAT PERSON SEATED BY THE TIME OF THE NEW, UM, OF THE MEETING IN THE NEXT YEAR.ANY NOMINATIONS? COMMISSIONER AL? I'D LIKE TO, YEAH, I'D LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONER, UM, PRICE IF SHE'D LIKE TO JOIN US ON SMALL AREA.
SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME, A LITTLE LOUDER, PLEASE.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONER PRICE IF SHE'D LIKE TO JOIN US ON SMALL AREA, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS PHILLIPS, UH, DID YOU SAY, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER ALBERTA PHILLIPS? YES, PLEASE.
UM, I AM WAITING FOR COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS TO RESPOND.
OH, WHEN YOU SAY JOIN YOU, YOU DON'T MEAN WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT.
RIGHT? I MEAN, I'D BE HAPPY TO JOIN YOU, BUT NOT BE IN ON SMALL ALL AREA.
UM, YEAH, YEAH, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO JOIN YOU.
UM, WHAT DID I JUST AGREE TO?
UM, SO, SO BEFORE WE GO INTO MOTION MAKING, JUST TO CLARIFY, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, WE, WE WOULD BE ASKING YOU TO SERVE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE IN ADDITION TO SERVING ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE THAT YOU SERVE ON ALREADY.
IT'S AN, IT'S AN INTERIM BASIS.
YOU WOULD BE SERVING ON ANOTHER COMMITTEE, WHICH IT SEEMS LIKE HAS NOT BEEN MEETING AS REGULARLY.
SO I, SO BECAUSE WE DO NEED TO MAKE A MOTION, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION.
AND I'M GONNA ASSUME COMMISSIONER AL, YOU'RE THE SECOND ON THIS.
AND, UM, I'LL, I'LL, I'LL JUST SPEAK THIS TO THIS JUST TO SAY, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
REALLY, I CANNOT, I CANNOT OVERSTATE HOW IMPORTANT THIS CAN BE FOR RUNNING THE PROCESS OF THOSE COMMITTEES.
SO I JUST REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR ABILITY TO STEP UP AND DO THIS.
LET'S, UH, WELL, LET'S MAKE IT EASY.
ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THE MOTION OF APPOINTING, UH, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS TO THE SMALLER AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE?
UH, SO NOW WE'RE MOVING INTO, UH, BOARD COMMITTEES WORKING UP, UM, ROOF UPDATES, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, SKIP FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. OH, WE DID, I DID.
SO WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. SO WE NEED TO PUT ONE ON THERE.
GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER ZA CHAIR, SINCE WE HAVE VACATED THE, UM, UH, VICE CHAIR SEAT, SO CAN I ASK THAT WE, UM, ESSENTIALLY DO AN ELECTION OF AN INTERIM VICE CHAIR AS WELL? AND I'LL BE HONEST, I'LL THROW MY, UH, HAT, MY NAME IN THE HAT FOR THAT ONE.
AND SO I WOULD SAY, CAN WE ALSO ASK FOR AN ELECTION OF AN INTERIM PARLIAMENTARIAN ON THE AGENDA AS WELL? I'M NOT SAYING I'M FULLY DONE WITH THIS.
IF THERE'S OTHER FOLKS WHO WOULD BE WILLING TO DO IT, THAT'D BE FINE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE ALL THE OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE AT OUR NEXT MEETING.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONER, LIAISON, ENVER.
UM, I BELIEVE WE CAN DO THAT AS LONG AS IT'S, UM, UNDERSTOOD THAT AT THIS TIME YOU'RE RESIGNING FROM THE PARLIAMENT SEAT AND WE PUT BOTH ON THE OH, INTERESTING POINT.
I WOULD SUGGEST MEETING ONE, ONE NEXT COURT ORDER.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S REQUIRED, MR. RIVERA, FOR HIM TO HAVE TO STEP DOWN AT THIS MEETING.
NOT UNTIL HE IS BEEN OFFICIALLY ELECTED INTO THE NEW OFFICER POSITION.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE VACATED FIRST, AT LEAST NOT ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONER LA COMMISSION, LAY LIAISON ANDREW VERA.
SO I THINK THE INQUIRY WAS THAT, UM, COULD WE PLACE A BOTH OF OFFICER POSITIONS ON THE NEXT AGENDA? AND SO THERE HAS TO BE AN, IT HAS TO BE OPEN TO DO THAT.
COMMISSIONER COX WAS, UH, SAYING SOMETHING CHAIR, I WAS JUST HAPPY TO ONLY DO ONE OF THESE PER MEETING SINCE I THINK TRYING TO DO TWO IN THE, IN THE SAME MEETING MIGHT GET COMPLICATED AND A BIT EMOTIONALLY DISTRESSING.
SO, SO I'LL, I'LL AGREE TO THAT.
AND I'LL JUST AT THIS POINT SUGGEST THAT WE GO AHEAD AND PUT, UM, UM, ESSENTIALLY ELECTION OF AN INTERIM VICE CHAIR ON OUR NEXT MEETING, AND THEN WE CAN CONSIDER HOW WE MIGHT PROCEED.
UM, CHAIR, I'M, I'M SORRY, BUT WE, WE POSTED FOR ELECTION OF A CHAIR.
I WAS THE, IS THIS SCENE DIFFERENT? I, WELL, I HAD HAD ANNOUNCED THAT AFTER THIS MEETING.
I, I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THOUGH, MR. RIVERA, YOU WANT TO COMMENT? I, I THINK THE CONFUSION IS THAT
[03:30:01]
THE QUESTION WAS PLACING TWO OFFICERS SEATS ON THE NEXT AGENDA.WE'RE ONLY PLACING THE VACANT VICE CHAIR POSITION ON YOUR NEXT AGENDA.
SO WE, ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? ALL RIGHT, NOW WE CAN MOVE
[BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]
ON TO THE, UH, BOARD'S, COMMITTEE'S, WORKING GROUPS, UPDATES.UM, DO WE HAVE A REPORT FROM CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE? UH, SURE.
WE HAVE NOT MET SINCE OUR LAST, UM, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND WE DO NOT HAVE AN UPDATE AT THIS TIME.
UH, CONFERENCE PLAN COMMITTEE, UH, COMMISSIONER CONLEY OR COX? ANYBODY WANTS TO NO.
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
COMMISSIONER WOODS ISN'T HERE, SO GO AHEAD AND SKIP THAT ONE.
PLA UH, SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
NO UPDATE, EXCEPT WE HAVE A NEW INTERIM MEMBER,
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
AND, UM, NEW, UH, THERE IS A WORKING GROUP FORM TO, UM, WORK ON THE REVISED SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT PLAN, WHICH IS STILL IN PROCESS.
UH, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND DUPLEXES WORKING GROUP.
UM, IS THIS ONE, I GUESS WE'RE GONNA CARRY THIS FORWARD.
COMMISSIONER, MS. NO, I WAS GONNA PROPOSE THAT WE, WE CLOSE THAT DOWN GIVEN, UM, THE MOVEMENT OF HOME AT THIS POINT.
SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND REMOVE THAT, UM, UH, WORKING GROUP AND, AND WHEN IT'S, UH, WHEN WE HAVE A MOMENT, IF I COULD REQUEST A, A MOMENT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE WHEN YOU FEEL THE TIME IS OKAY.
UM, I THINK WE'RE RIGHT UP TO THE EDGE OF ADJOURNMENT, SO GO AHEAD.
UM, I WANNA BE, UH, VERY CAREFUL ABOUT HOW I, HOW I SUGGEST THIS.
UM, UH, I WOULD LIKE FOR OUR COMMISSION TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE INTERACT WITH OUR SPEAKERS WHEN THEY COME.
UM, I KNOW WE GET, UM, VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THE THINGS WE BELIEVE IN, UM, BUT I THINK IT'S, IM, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE NOT CALL OUT OUR SPEAKERS AND A AND ATTACK THEM, UH, WHEN THEY COME TO SPEAK.
UH, WE NEED TO HEAR THEM OUT AND, AND GIVE THEM SOME RESPECT.
AND, AND MY CONCERN ON THAT IS THAT IF WE WANT TO ALLOW OUR CITY TO GROW AND DEVELOP AND EXPAND, WE NEED TO HEAR THE CONCERNS AND WE NEED TO FIND WAYS TO BRIDGE THOSE GAPS AND HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND, AND GET EVERYBODY KIND OF GOING IN THE SAME DIRECTION ON THAT.
UM, SO I JUST MIGHT, WE THINK ABOUT HOW WE ENGAGE THOSE FOLKS THAT COME TO SPEAK WITH US, UM, SO THAT WE CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IN THE PROCESS AND, AND GET TO WHERE WE ALL WANNA GO, WHICH IS A WELL-PLANNED, LIVABLE CITY FOR EVERYBODY.
UM, MAY I ALSO HAVE A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE? OKAY, GO AHEAD.
UM, I, I REALLY APPRECIATE, UM, UH, WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER JUST SAID.
AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT, UM, THAT IT HAS BEEN NOTED MANY TIMES BEFORE.
THERE ARE MANY FOLKS, UM, IN THIS CITY WHO DO NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OR THE PRIVILEGE TO COME TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AND SPEAK.
AND THAT AS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, WE ARE ALSO MANDATED, UM, TO SPEAK FOR AND UPLIFT THE VOICES OF FOLKS IN AUSTIN SUCH AS RENTERS WHO WE SELDOM, IF EVER HEAR FROM, UM, WHO DO NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE LUXURY TO COME HERE ON TUESDAY NIGHT, STAY UP TILL 9:10 PM AND TALK TO US.
UM, AND SO THAT WE HAVE A COMMITMENT YES, TO LISTEN TO THE SPEAKERS WHO COME HERE AND YES, ALSO TO LIFT UP AND UPHOLD THE VOICES OF ALL THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN AND MANY PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF COMING OUT TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS.
SO I'LL JUST CLOSE ON THAT AND SAY YOU, YOU BOTH ARE RIGHT.
UM, I JUST, AND I THINK SOMETIMES IT IS, IF THERE ARE ANY IN THE CHAIR, IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT TONE OR, UH, WITH ANY COMMISSIONER, TAKE IT UP WITH THE CHAIR.
WE'VE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS IN THE PAST, AND SOMETIMES IT'S JUST A GOOD CONVERSATION TO HAVE ABOUT HOW WE, HOW WE ARE PERCEIVED UP HERE ON THE DIOCESE.
SOMETIMES WE'RE NOT SURE ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW WE'RE PERCEIVED BY THE PUBLIC.
SO THOSE ARE THINGS WE SHOULD PAY ATTENTION TO.
SO, UH, YES, WE SHOULD BE RESPECTFUL AND WE DO NEED TO REPRESENT OUR CONSTITUENTS AND PEOPLE THAT AREN'T HERE.
SO BOTH THOSE THINGS ARE TRUE.
UM, ANYTHING ELSE THIS EVENING? ALL RIGHT,
[03:35:01]
WELL THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS.I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND ADJOURN THIS MEETING, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION AT 9 58.
LOVE ALL LONG HERE TO, THAT'S HOW YOU MAKE ME FEEL.