Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[00:00:02]

OUR VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS COME ONLINE.

ALRIGHT.

UH,

[ Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]

HAVING A QUORUM PRESENT.

WE CALL THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:04 PM SO FIRST WE'RE GONNA TAKE ROLL AND PLEASE SAY HERE, UH, WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, I'M GONNA GO IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER FOR BY THE AGENDA.

SO, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON HERE.

COMMISSIONER VICE CHAIR ZA.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER COX'S.

NOT SITTING THAT.

OKAY.

WE'LL COME BACK.

UM, COMMISSIONER HAYNES HERE.

CHAIR PELS.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER HOWARD.

HMM.

UH, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? HERE.

COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER MOALA.

I DON'T THINK SHE'S ON YET.

COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS HERE.

AND COMMISSIONER WOODS HERE.

OKAY, SO, UM, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF OUR EX OFFICIOS HERE TONIGHT.

OKAY.

SO, UH, AS USUAL, TONIGHT'S MEETING WILL BE HYBRID, ALLOWING FOR A VIRTUAL QUORUM AS LONG AS THE COMMISSIONER SERVING AS CHAIRS PRESENT IN CHAMBERS.

AS SUCH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS HERE IN CHAMBERS AND IN ATTENDANCE, VIRTUALLY, SIMILARLY, SPEAKERS CAN PRESENT FROM THE CHAMBERS OR PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE REMEMBER TO SEND YOUR SIGN IN SHEET TO OUR STAFF LIAISON PER THE CLARK THE CLERK'S GUIDELINES.

AND IF YOU ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION TAKING UP YOUR ITEM.

SPEAKERS CAN DONATE TIME, BOTH THE SPEAKER DONATING TIME AND THE SPEAKER RECIPIENT MUST BE PRESENT IN PERSON WHEN THE ITEM IS CONSIDERED.

AND THEN I WILL HAVE, UH, ASSISTANCE FROM MR. RIVERA, OUR STAFF LIAISON IN ANNOUNCING THE SPEAKERS DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR OUR VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS.

PLEASE HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW ITEMS FOR VOTING FOR THOSE ONLINE.

STAY ON MUTE WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING AND RAISE YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED.

AND IF I MISS YOU, PLEASE TRY AGAIN AND LET ME KNOW.

UM, IF I DIDN'T GET TO YOU.

SO FRIENDLY REMINDER, UM, ABOUT SOME OF OUR ITEMS THAT THIS MAY COME UP TONIGHT.

WITH RESPECT TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ZONING, I REMIND THE COMMISSIONERS THAT ASIDE FROM OUR CONSIDERATION OF PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENTS VIA APPLICANT ELECTING TO INCLUDE OR NOT INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS IS NOT PART OF A ZONING OR REZONING REQUIREMENTS.

SO I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION THIS EVENING.

UM, AND OUR MEETING MINUTES FROM THE JANUARY 23RD MEETING WILL BE POSTPONED UNTIL, UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING THIS MONTH.

SO, UM, OUR FIRST

[Consent Agenda]

ACTIVITY TODAY IS TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UM, ITEMS THAT ARE CONSENT, APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, POSTPONEMENTS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS, OR NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS, COMMISSIONER CZAR WILL READ THE PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND IDENTIFY THOSE THAT ARE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AND NON-DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS.

YOU'LL ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST THAT ITEMS BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.

SO COMMISSIONER SAR.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

UM, WE'LL BE GOING TO THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS FIRST.

SO THIS IS, UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 2023 DASH 0 0 0 2 0.01.

CHRISTCHURCH PLANNING DISTRICT THREE.

THIS IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO MARCH 26TH.

UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE IS, UM, ALSO A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2022 DASH 0 2 0 1 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD, ONTARIO LANE, DISTRICT THREE.

THIS IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO MARCH 12TH I.

NUMBER FOUR IS REZONING C 14 DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 6 2.

UH, INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD, ONTARIO LANE, DISTRICT THREE.

THIS IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO MARCH 12TH.

I'M NUMBER FIVE.

PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH 0 15 0 4.

HE LANE, DISTRICT ONE.

THIS IS UP FOR DISCUSSION TODAY.

ITEM NUMBER SIX, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH ZERO HUNDRED SEVEN HE HOUSING DISTRICT ONE.

THIS ITEM IS ALSO FOR DISCUSSION I NUMBER SEVEN, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH 0 2 5 0 2 5 5 2 4 WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90 DISTRICT EIGHT.

THIS UP ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT I NUMBER EIGHT IS A REZONING.

UM, THIS IS C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 9 6.

BEN WHITE BOULEVARD MEDICAL OFFICE DISTRICT THREE.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION TODAY.

I NUMBER NINE, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 4 2 ME ROAD DISTRICT NINE.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 27TH.

ITEM NUMBER 10 OF REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 4 7 19 11, VOW CREEK DRIVE, DISTRICT THREE.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 27TH.

ITEM NUMBER 11, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 4 9 DONLEY, NVG REZONING DISTRICT FOUR NORTH BRENT GATEWAY, REZONING DISTRICT FOUR.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 12.

THIS IS ALSO REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 50 KRAMER NORTH BURN GATEWAY REZONING DISTRICT FOUR.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

[00:05:01]

I NUMBER 13 IS A REZONING AS WELL.

C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 3 9.

OAK CREEK VILLAGE, PHASE TWO DISTRICT THREE.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 9TH.

ITEM NUMBER 14, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 3 1.

UM, E FIVE 80 X REZONE DISTRICT THREE.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

ITEM NUMBER 15, REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 5 6 WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90 DISTRICT EIGHT.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 27TH.

I NUMBER 16 IS A HISTORIC ZONING C 14 H 2023 DASH ZERO, UM, 1 4 3 DEEP EDDIE GROCERY DEEP EDDIE CABARET, DISTRICT 10 SIGN IS UP FOR CONSENT.

I NUMBER 17 IS A COMPATIBILITY WAIVER FOR SITE PLAN SP DASH 2022 DASH 0 4 9 1 C AT 1170 WEBER.

WILL, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

NUMBER 18 IS AN LDC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2023 BONUS ZONING DISTRICT.

THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.

ITEM NUMBER 19 IS AN LDC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2023 DASH 0 4 1 AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE TITLE 25 RELATING TO THE NORTH BURN GATEWAY REGULATING PLAN DISTRICT SEVEN.

THE ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO CHECK IN WITH OUR, UH, COMMISSIONERS IF THEY'RE FINE WITH PUTTING NUMBER 20, WHICH IS A DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION TO RECOMMEND UPDATING THE AUSTIN CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN REGARDING TELEWORK POLICIES.

UM, AND I CAN SPEAK TO WHAT, WHAT THAT IS.

AND THEN ITEM NUMBER CHECK, GIMME A SECOND HERE.

BUT WE WOULD ALSO BE LOOKING AT, UM, APPOINTING PEOPLE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, WHICH COMMISSIONER JOHNSON WISHES TO SERVE ON IT.

SO WE'LL BE ASKING IF FOLKS ARE AMENABLE TO PUTTING THAT IN THE CONSENT TO HAVE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE TO SLIDE NUMBER 24.

AND WE WOULD BE POSTPONING ITEM 25, WHICH IS NOMINATED MEMBER TO SERVE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

THANK YOU.

AND I WANNA RECOGNIZE THAT COMMISSIONER COX AND COMMISSIONER MU ARE, UM, AND COMMISSIONER HOWARD ARE ON ONLINE NOW.

UM, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, UH, FOR ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS? NO.

AND DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO PULL ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR OTHERWISE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? COMMISSIONER HAYNES? UH, THANKS.

THANKS MADAM CHAIR.

UM, I, I THINK I JUST MISSED, UH, MISHEARD OR DIDN'T UNDERSTAND, UH, VICE CHAIR'S.

WHAT, ON 20 OR YOU SAID YOU WERE LOOKING TO CONSIDER IT.

WHAT, WHAT WAS THE ITEM ON 20? YES, COMMISSIONER ZA IF YOU WANNA ANSWER QUESTIONS.

SURE.

UM, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, ITEM NUMBER 20 WAS A REQUEST FROM A PLANNING COMMISSION BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD THAT STAFF WAS CONSIDERING LOOKING AT THE AMENDMENTS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD RECOMMENDED REGARDING THE AUSTIN CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN.

IF YOU REMEMBER, THIS WAS PART OF THE WORK DONE BY THE TELEWORK WORKING GROUP AND WE JUST WANTED TO SEE WHAT STAFF WAS PROPOSING.

UM, YOU'LL SEE THE BACKUP IS AVAILABLE AND WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT ESSENTIALLY STAFF IS MOVING AHEAD WITH EXACTLY WHAT THE WORKING GROUP PRESENTED.

SO, AS SUCH, UNLESS ONE OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WISHES TO HEAR MORE ON THAT, WE COULD DISPOSE OFF THAT ITEM AT THIS TIME.

UM, CONSIDERING IT'S WHAT OUR WORKING GROUP HAD ALREADY SUGGESTED AND WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD ALREADY VOTED ON.

DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? COMMISSIONER HAYNES? UM, DID I MISS THE FACT THAT IT WAS ON THERE OR DID THIS JUST GET ADDED ON TODAY? NO, THIS HAS BEEN POSTED.

COMMISSIONER HAYNES HAS SAID, I THINK, I CAN'T REMEMBER.

I'M SURE I REQUESTED IT.

I CANNOT REMEMBER WHO SECONDED IT AS A REQUEST TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ON THIS BECAUSE WE JUST WANTED TO HEAR WHAT STAFF WAS MOVING AHEAD WITH.

UM, AND WE'VE BEEN INFORMED, ESSENTIALLY STAFF IS MOVING AHEAD WITH WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED.

I'M LOOKING FOR THE, I'M LOOKING FOR THE MAGIC WORD INCREASE, IF YOU'LL GIVE ME A MINUTE.

I WILL.

AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU'RE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBER 20, THE DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO RECOMMEND UPDATING THE AUSTIN CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN REGARDING TELEWORK POLICIES? CORRECT.

OKAY.

AND, AND THEN CHAIR, I'VE MADE AN ERROR WHILE COMMISSIONER HAYNES IS CONSIDERING THAT, IF I MIGHT, UM, SAY THAT.

SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 19 LDC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2023 DASH 0 4 1 AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE TITLE 25 RELATING TO THE NORTH BURN GATEWAY REGULATING PLAN DISTRICT SEVEN.

THIS ITEM IS POSTPONED TO 2 27.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

UM, SO I'LL GO THROUGH THE ITEMS FROM COMMISSION AND NOMINATIONS ONE BY ONE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY OBJECTION TO HAVING THEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SO NUMBER 20, ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS FOR THAT BEING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE, WE CAN MOVE THAT TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UM, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, I WANNA MAKE SURE YOU'RE GOOD WITH THAT.

I'M GOOD.

OKAY.

[00:10:01]

I JUST, I JUST LOOKED AT IT AND THE WORD INCREASE IS NOT ON THERE.

I'M GOOD.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

UM,

[24. Nominate a member to serve on the Comprehensive Plan Joint Committee.]

ITEM NUMBER 24.

UM, UM, NOMINATING A MEMBER TO SERVE ON COMP PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.

ANY OBJECTION TO HAVING THAT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR COMMISSIONER JOHNSON TO BE NOMINATED TO THAT COMMITTEE? OKAY.

SEEING NONE THAT WILL MOVE TO CONSENT.

AND LIKEWISE, NOMINATING A MEMBER TO SERVE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.

UM, POSTPONING THAT TO OUR NEXT MEETING, UH, FEBRUARY 27TH.

SURE.

COMMISSIONER COX? I WAS JUST, UH, UH, SORRY, WHICH, UH, WHICH COMMITTEE IS, UM, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON JOINING, UH, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE? UM, I JUST WANTED TO, IF THAT PASSES, I WANTED TO LET HIM KNOW THAT I BELIEVE OUR NEXT MEETING'S TOMORROW, SO , THIS WOULD HAPPEN.

NO, THIS HAS TO GO TO COUNCIL.

NO.

COMMISSIONER COX.

THEY, THEY POSTPONED IT UNTIL NEXT WEEK.

OH, OKAY.

THANKS.

NEVER.

SORRY, YOU GOT A WEEK ALSO.

GOOD TO GOT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.

IT'S THE 21ST.

OKAY.

OKAY.

APPRECIATE THAT.

'CAUSE THOSE OF US THAT HAVE VALENTINE'S PLAN GAVE HIM KIND OF GRIEF, TRYING TO SCHEDULE SOMETHING ON VALENTINE'S DAY.

I CAN IMAGINE.

UM, I WAS JUST ALSO GONNA SAY A REMINDER AND MR. VE YOU CAN CORRECT ME.

SO, UH, SERVICE ON THE JOINT COMMITTEES HAS TO BE APPROVED BY COUNSEL AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO FILL IN THE OATH BEFORE YOU WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO SERVE.

UM, THE NUMBER 25 NOMINATING A MEMBER TO SERVE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE IS POSTPONED TO OUR NEXT MEETING, UM, FEBRUARY 27TH.

ANY OBJECTION TO THAT BEING ON CONSENT? OKAY.

UM, I'LL GO BACK THROUGH AND, UH, BRIEFLY GO OVER OUR CONSENT AGENDA TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ALL OF THAT STRAIGHT.

SO, UM, ITEM TWO, PLAN AMENDMENT, APPLICANT POSTPONE IN MARCH 26TH.

ITEM THREE, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO MARCH 12TH.

ITEM FOUR, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO MARCH 12TH.

ITEM FIVE AND SIX ARE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.

NUMBER SEVEN, APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.

NUMBER EIGHT, DISCUSSION NUMBER NINE, NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 27TH.

NUMBER 10, APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 27TH.

NUMBER 11 AND 12 ARE ON CONSENT.

NUMBER 13, NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO APRIL 9TH.

NUMBER 14, CONSENT NUMBER 15, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 27TH, NUMBER 16 AND 17, CONSENT NUMBER 18, DISCUSSION AND NUMBER 19 POSTPONEMENT TO FEBRUARY 27TH.

OKAY.

UM, WE ALSO HAVE ITEMS NUMBER 20 AND 24 AND 25 ARE MOVED TO CONSENT.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? OKAY.

UM, AND AGAIN, A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

FIRST BY, UH, VICE CHAIR AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.

UM, ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR.

OKAY.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

YOU'RE GREEN.

I SEE A THUMBS UP.

COMMISSIONER TAL, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

OKAY, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE

[Items 5 & 6]

ON TO OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING OF THE NIGHT.

AND THAT IS NUMBER FIVE AND SIX.

RIGHT NUMBER FIVE AND SIX.

SO MS. MEREDITH, IT'S NOT WORKING.

OKAY.

ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS PLAN AMENDMENT MPA 20 23 0 0 1 5 0.04.

HEFLIN HOUSE PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 51 0 6 AND 51 0 8 HEFLIN LANE WITHIN THE EAST MLK NEIGHBORHOOD.

PLAN CON, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN COMBINED, UH, PLANNING AREA, THE REQUEST IS A CHANGE OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR HIGHER DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE.

WE DID NOT RECEIVE A LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION FROM THE EAST MLK NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.

GOOD EVENING, JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

ITEM NUMBER SIX IS CASE NUMBER C 14 2023 DASH 0 1 1 7 HELEN HOUSING.

IT IS A REZONING REQUEST FOR 51 0 6 AND 51 0 8 HELEN LANE FROM SF THREE NMP TO MF THREE NMP STAFF IS MAKING AN ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION OF SF SIX NP FOR THIS CASE.

THE SUBJECT TRACK IS APPROXIMATELY, APPROXIMATELY A HALF AN ACRE OF UNDEVELOPED LAND ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HEFLIN

[00:15:01]

LANE, APPROXIMATELY 170 FEET WEST OF WHERE FORT BRANCH CREEK INTERSECTS WITH HEFLIN LANE.

IT'S APPROXIMATELY A THIRD OF A MILE FROM THE INTERSECTION OF EAST MLK BOULEVARD AND SPRINGDALE BOULEVARD.

BOTH IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CORRIDORS.

IT'S APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET FROM THE, THE INTERSECTION OF HEFLIN LANE AND WEBER VILLAGE ROAD WHERE THERE IS A CAPITAL METRO BUS STOP FOR THE LOCAL 18 ROUTE.

HEFLIN LANE IS A LEVEL TWO A SMP CORRIDOR.

THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH IS ALSO VACANT LAND, WHICH WAS REZONED SF SIX NP IN 2020 TO THE WEST, SOUTH, AND EAST ARE A MIX OF SMALLER, OLDER, AND NEWER LARGER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

AND A DUPLEX STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS ZONING BASED ON COMPATIBILITY WITH THE RECENTLY REZONED SF SIX NP PARCEL TO THE NORTH.

AND THE PRACTICE OF LOCATING MULTIFAMILY ZONING NEAR MAJOR INTERSECTIONS.

GRANTING MF THREE NP MID-BLOCK WOULD MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE A TRANSITION TO LESS INTENSELY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY PARCELS SURROUNDING THE SUBJECT TRACK.

I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.

MS. VICTORIA HASI.

MS. HASI, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

VICTORIA HASI WITH THROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.

UM, CAN SOMEONE LET ME KNOW IF THE PRESENTATION IS UP? IT'S UP.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

UM, YES, COMMISSIONERS.

UM, THIS, UH, SUBJECT, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS TWO TRACKS OF LAND, UM, THAT TOTAL JUST UNDER A HALF ACRE.

UM, THE IMAGE IN FRONT OF YOU SHOWS TWO CIRCLES, THE GREEN CIRCLE BEING A QUARTER MILE RADIUS AND THE BLUE CIRCLE BEING A HALF MILE RADIUS.

AND WE WANTED TO SHOW THIS SO THAT YOU CAN UNDERSTAND AND SEE THE RELATIONSHIP OF THIS PROPERTY TO THE VARIOUS, UM, BUS STOPS, MANY BUS STOPS, UM, THAT ARE WITHIN A REASONABLE WALKING DISTANCE.

UH, FOR THIS REASON, WE DO FEEL LIKE THIS SITE IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO GAIN SOME ADDITIONAL DENSITY.

UM, NEXT SLIDE.

SO THIS, UH, WE ARE ASKING FOR A PLUM AMENDMENT TO MULTI-FAMILY.

UH, NEXT SLIDE AND A REZONING TO MF THREE.

NEXT SLIDE.

SO WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS UNDER MF THREE, UH, WITH SITE AREA REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLY IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, YOU COULD GET 13 UNITS OF THOSE UNITS BEING ONE AND TWO BEDROOM MIX.

UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS SF SIX AND THAT WOULD, UM, HAVE THE POTENTIAL AMOUNT OF, UH, YIELD AND UNITS THAT COULD BE ACHIEVED ON THIS HALF ACRE, UH, PIECE OF LAND.

NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD SHOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SF THREE ZONING DISTRICT ALL THE WAY UP TO OUR REQUEST OF MS THREE.

AND, UH, MOST NOTABLY YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GAIN IS FOR MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE AND IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE AS WELL AS FAR THAT WOULD ALLOW, UH, FOR A GREATER YIELD.

UM, MF THREE DOES ALLOW A LITTLE BIT, UH, ADDITIONAL HEIGHT OVER WHAT ALLOWED TODAY AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET OF HEIGHT.

AND WHILE WE HAVE NOT FULLY EXAMINED THIS SITE TO SEE IF THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY WILL BE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET, UM, IF, IF THE OPPORTUNITY ARISES, IT WOULD OBVIOUSLY ALLOW FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE YIELD FOR THIS, UH, AND FLEXIBILITY IN DESIGNING A PROJECT AT THIS SITE.

UH, WE REMAIN AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

CHAIR, I HAVE NO OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.

I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT? I HAVE NO OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU.

UM, A AND I GET A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

OKAY.

UH, MADE BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.

SIGNED BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.

ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.

OKAY.

AND ONLINE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

OKAY.

I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.

WHO HAS OUR FIRST QUESTION? UH, COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I WAS, UM, SURPRISED TO SEE LITTLE TO NO DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN FOR THIS PROPERTY.

I'VE GOT THE CITY OF AUSTIN FLOOD PRO GIS MAP UP IN FRONT OF ME, AND IT LOOKS LIKE HALF THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FEMA FLOODPLAIN.

UM, PRETTY MUCH

[00:20:01]

THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE COA FULLY DEVELOPED A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN.

HALF THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE FULLY DEVELOPED 25 YEAR FLOODPLAIN.

SO I'M JUST CURIOUS, I GUESS, UM, THIS IS GONNA GO, I GUESS FIRST TO THE APPLICANT.

UM, I, IT SEEMS LIKE POSSIBLY A LOT OF THIS SITE MIGHT NOT BE DEVELOPABLE, SO I WAS SURPRISED THAT YOU WERE WANTING LIKE MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND MAX BUILDING COVERAGE WHEN HALF THE SITES WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN.

SO IT, COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT IN TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL AND WHAT Y'ALL ARE PLANNING? HASI? UM, YES, I'M HERE.

I I KNOW RON IS ON THE LINE TOO, BUT I THINK HE'S TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO UNMUTE HIMSELF.

UM, YES, I AM .

HEY RON.

UH, HEY Y'ALL.

SORRY WE THERE.

SORRY, WE COULD NOT BE THERE IN PERSON.

UM, COMMISSIONER COX, I MEAN, YES, IT IS A UNIQUE SITUATION WHERE THERE IS FLOODPLAIN ON THE PROPERTY, BUT THIS IS OBVIOUSLY, UH, IN OUR OPINION A CONDITION THAT NEEDS TO BE, UM, NEEDS TO BE FIXED BY WAY OF ADDING DENSITY TO THE PROPERTY.

BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY THAT YOU'RE GONNA ECONOMICALLY PROVIDE A DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN MOVE AROUND THE FLOODPLAIN BUILD UP OUTTA THE FLOODPLAIN, IT HAS TO BE A PROJECT THAT IS GOING TO BE OF A DENSITY WHERE THE ECONOMICS CAN ACT ACTUALLY WORK.

UM, SF SIX, AS THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, IS ONLY PROVIDE SIX UNITS ON THE PROPERTY.

AND YEAH, WE COULD DIVIDE THIS INTO TWO LOTS AND PUT SIX UNITS ON THE PROPERTY TODAY UNDER HOME.

BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS THE RIGHT APPROACH TO THIS.

AGAIN, A LITTLE BIT MORE DENSE DEVELOPMENT GETS THE PROPERTY ECONOMICALLY VIABLE TO BE DEVELOPED OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN CAN CREATE GREAT AREAS OF REFUGE THAT A HOUSE CANNOT.

AND I JUST WANNA EMPHASIZE THAT THE PROPERTY IS ON OR IN NEARBY BUS ROUTES WITH 160,000 PEOPLE A MONTH, UH, TRAVELING ON THESE VARIOUS BUS ROUTES.

SO IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY.

AND RON, I I APPRECIATE ALL THAT, BUT WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M GETTING AT HERE IS THAT, UH, YOU, YOU, YOU'RE COMPARING, ESSENTIALLY IT WOULD BE 11 TWO BEDROOM UNITS VERSUS SIX UNITS BETWEEN THE MF THREE AND THE SF SIX.

AND THAT'S BASED ON THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT'S NOT BASED ON BUILDABLE AREA.

AND IF HALF OF YOUR SITE IS ALREADY IN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN, YOU, YOU MAY NOT EVEN HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAX OUT TO 11 UNITS ON ONLY HALF OR POTENTIALLY A THIRD OF THIS SITE.

AND SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF MF THREE IS EVEN SOMETHING.

I DON'T THINK IT'S PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK IT'S, IT'S AN ISLAND OF MF THREE IF WE DID THIS, WHICH DOESN'T SEEM APPROPRIATE.

BUT ALSO I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GONNA SEE THE BENEFITS OF MF SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF, OF THE SITE ITSELF.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO PROCESS IN MY, IN MY HEAD IS, IS ARE WE, ARE YOU EVEN GONNA BE ABLE TO FIT 11 UNITS OR 13 UNITS OR WHATEVER ON THIS PROPERTY? AND I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU, YES, IT IS A HALF ACRE IN SIZE THAT THERE IS ROOM TO DO THAT ON THE PROPERTY.

UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU COULD AGAIN, PICTURE THE PROPERTY AT BURNETT ROAD NEAR NORTH LOOP WHERE THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FLOODPLAIN THERE, BUT THERE IS AN OFFICE BUILDING THAT IS THREE OR FOUR STORIES TALL THAT'S BUILT UP OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN.

THAT OFFICE BUILDING COULD NOT BE BUILT IF IT WAS ONE STORY OFFICE BUILDING.

THE ECONOMICS JUST DOESN'T WORK.

AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITY HERE TO ALLEVIATE THE FLOODPLAIN SITUATION TO THE BEST DEGREE POSSIBLE.

I DON'T THINK THAT SIX UNITS IS THE ANSWER HERE AT ALL.

UM, I THINK MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE UNITS CREATES A BETTER SITUATION TO PUT PEOPLE OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN.

AND IN FACT, AND YOU KNOW, ALTERNATELY, UH, YOU KNOW, THE CITY COULD BUY THESE PROPERTIES BECAUSE THEY ARE LARGELY FLOODPLAIN.

WE'RE LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, BRING DENSITY ALONG THE CORRIDOR, AND PUT PEOPLE IN A SAFE PLACE OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN.

I MEAN, IF THE OPTION IS FOR THE CITY TO BUY THE PROPERTY 'CAUSE IT'S IN THE FLOODPLAIN OR FOR US TO MAX OUT DENSITY COMMISSIONER FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE FLOODPLAIN.

COMMISSIONER COX, DOESN'T THAT SEEM A LITTLE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE COMMISSIONER, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE MAXING OUT THE DENSITY.

COMMISSIONER COX, THAT WAS THE END OF YOUR FIVE MINUTES.

THANKS.

THANK YOU.

UM, ANOTHER COMMISSIONER WITH A QUESTION.

COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS,

[00:25:02]

FOLLOWING UP ON COMMISSIONER COX'S QUESTION, COULD THE CITY STAFF ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT? I SPOKE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWER ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN 'CAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING THE STAFF WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WHEN THEY SAW IT.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY TALKED TO, AND I I APOLOGIZE, THEY COULDN'T BE HERE THIS EVENING, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY MENTIONED TO ME IS THAT IT WOULD BE LOOKED AT DURING SITE PLAN, WHAT WOULD BE FEASIBLE ON THE SITE WHEN AND NOT AT THE TIME OF ZONING RIGHT NOW.

WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE HEARING A LOT FROM SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS.

UM, SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS WE TOOK IN CONSIDERATION WHEN IT'S MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION OF SF SIX BECAUSE OF THE LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER.

UH, AS WAS INDICATED ON THAT CHART EARLIER, UM, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR, UH, MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR SF SIX WOULD BE 55% AND FOR MF THREE WOULD BE 65%.

AND THE MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE WOULD GO FROM 40% TO 55%.

SO THOSE WERE THINGS THAT WERE CONCERNING AS WELL.

UM, THANK YOU.

JUST WANNA FOLLOW UP ON THAT BECAUSE A COUPLE OF TIMES WE'VE BEEN TOLD ABOUT ISSUES LIKE FLOODING.

THE FLOOD ZONES ARE NOT VIEWED UNTIL THE SITE PLAN AND THEN WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION AS COMMISSIONERS ON WHETHER TO GO WITH ONE ZONING OR THE OTHER WITHOUT THAT INPUT AND BEING NEW.

I JUST DON'T GET THAT, THAT, HOW THAT MAKES LOGICAL SENSE.

UM, SOMEONE COULD SOMEONE EXPLAIN THAT? I I JUST, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF BECAUSE TO ME PERSONALLY, ONE WOULD IMPACT HOW I WOULD MAKE THAT DECISION.

I I DON'T KNOW THAT, UH, I CAN EXPLAIN IT FROM A FLOOD PLANE EXAMPLE, BUT I COULD PROBABLY EXPLAIN IT FROM A TRANSPORTATION PERSPECTIVE.

'CAUSE I'VE HAD SOME CASES LIKE THAT.

IF WE'RE GETTING ZONING, UH, IF WE'RE DOING ZONING RIGHT NOW ON A PROPERTY, THERE IS AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF UNITS THAT MIGHT CHANGE ONCE THE SITE PLAN IS DEVELOPED TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS GONNA GO AND WHERE DETENTION PONDS MIGHT GO OR WHATEVER ELSE.

UM, IF A TRANSPORTATION STUDY IS DONE DURING, DURING A TRANSPORTATION STUDY MIGHT NOT BE TRIGGERED DURING REZONING, BUT IT MAY BE TRIGGERED AT SITE PLAN BASED ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE GONNA BE DEVELOPED ON THE SITE.

SO IT'S LIKE THINGS CAN CHANGE EITHER AT ZONING OR AT SITE PLAN.

AND SOMETIMES THE MORE DETAILED ANALYSIS IS DONE AT SITE PLAN RATHER THAN EARLIER IN THE PROCESS AT ZONING, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

I THINK IT DOES WITH TRANSPORTATION TO SOME EXTENT, BUT WITH A FLOODPLAIN, YEAH, IT'S A DIFFERENT ANIMAL AND, YOU KNOW, BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR GIVING ME THAT BEST ATTEMPT AT THAT ONE.

ALL RIGHT.

COMMISSIONER OR VICE CHAIR? ZA.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

UM, I'M WONDERING MS HAS HERE, OR MR. THOR, IF YOU COULD TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROJECT.

WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE INTENT OF YOUR CLIENT? WHAT ARE, WHAT IS THE EXPECTATION OF WHAT THEY'RE HOPING TO BUILD IN THIS SPACE? UM, YES, COMMISSIONER, UM, SO THERE, THE INTENT IS, AS RON SAID, TO TRY, TRY TO GET A VIABLE PROJECT HERE, UM, ON THIS HALF ACRE.

UM, AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST WAYS TO DO THAT IS TO INCREASE THE, THE DENSITY SO THAT THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION, ESPECIALLY BUILDING UP OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN, UM, CAN BE SPREAD AMONGST THOSE UNITS.

THE FEWER NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WE GET ON THIS SITE, THE MORE COSTLY IT'S GOING TO BE TO, FOR EACH OF THOSE UNITS TO BE BUILT.

UM, SO RIGHT NOW THERE'S NOT LIKE A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN, UH, FOR THIS, FOR THIS PROJECT.

UH, WE'RE MOSTLY JUST, WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT ZONING RIGHT NOW.

IS IT APPROPRIATE HERE TO PUT, UM, MORE, UH, UNITS THEN WHAT'S ALLOWED UNDER SF THREE TODAY? AND FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, WHICH, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST LOOKING AT GENERAL LAND USES, IT DOES MAKE SENSE TO ADD SOME DENSITY IN THIS AREA NEAR EXISTING TRANSIT.

SO AS, UH, JONATHAN SAID, WHEN WE GET TO A SITE PLAN PHASE, WHETHER THAT'S US OR SOMEONE ELSE, THEY WILL BE LOOKING AT ALL OF THESE OTHER MATTERS IN GREATER DETAIL.

UM, AND THAT WILL AND THEN RESULT IN HOW MANY ACTUAL UNITS ARE GOING TO FIT AND HOW ALL OF THAT'S GONNA COME TOGETHER.

BUT THE PROJECT ISN'T AT THAT PHASE RIGHT NOW.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A LONG-WINDED, UH, ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION.

BUT ESSENTIALLY THE INCREASE IN DENSITY IS GOING TO ALLOW,

[00:30:01]

UM, FOR A, A DEVELOPMENT TO BE BUILT HERE, UM, THAT'S FEASIBLE.

SO I, I APPRECIATE THAT.

AND, AND, AND I GUESS SORT OF AS A FOLLOW UP, I GUESS THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING FOR, ARE WE THINKING MORE IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS ALLOWED PER ACRE OR IS IT SOME OTHER FEATURE OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS? LIKE, BUT I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF IF YOU WANTED TO LIMIT THE PER COVER OR SOMETHING ELSE, WOULD THAT LIMIT THE DEVELOPABILITY THAT Y'ALL ARE LOOKING AT? OR IS THAT JUST SORT OF AN UNKNOWN AT THE MOMENT? UH, I WOULD SAY IT'S AN UNKNOWN AT THE MOMENT.

UM, MORE SPECIFICALLY WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DENSITY THROUGH SITE AREA REQUIREMENTS, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, SF THREE, SF SIX, AND THEN MF THREE.

AND FOR SITE AREA REQUIREMENTS PER UNIT FOR MF THREE OR ANYWHERE BETWEEN 1200 TO 1800 SQUARE FEET PER UNIT, WHICH IS HOW WE ARRIVE AT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE CALCULATED NUMBER OF 13.

SO THAT'S MORE OR LESS, THAT'S MORE WHAT'S DRIVING THE REQUEST.

I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, UM, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THE BUILDING COVER, UM, ALLOWANCE DOES HELP A LITTLE BIT MORE.

UM, BUT WITHOUT PULLING, DOING A FULL SITE ANALYSIS AT THIS TIME, I JUST, I CAN'T REALLY SAY IF WE'RE GOING TO BE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE FULL, UH, 55% OF BUILDING COVER OR 65% OF IMPERVIOUS COVER WITH THIS PROJECT.

I APPRECIATE THAT MISS, MISS AND THANK YOU CHAIR.

THANK YOU.

OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? OH, COMMISSIONER AL.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

UM, I HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN STUFF FOR STAFF.

UM, DID WE HAVE, I, I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER COX PULLING THIS OUT.

IS, IS THE FLOODPLAIN INFORMATION INCLUDED IN OUR BACKUP? I, I DON'T THINK I SAW IT IN OUR MATERIALS.

THERE'S A SECTION WITH THE MAPS AND THERE'S A, UH, IMAGERY THAT HAS THE, THE BLUE OUTLINES.

UM, PART OF IT IS, OKAY, IT'S FLOODPLAIN, BUT PART OF IT IS ALSO A CREEK BUFFER.

SO YEAH, THERE'S A IMPORTANT DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTIC OF THAT.

UM, I DIDN'T ADD ADDITIONAL COMMENTS IN THE STAFF REPORT 'CAUSE I LEFT THAT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWER WHO'S THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT ON FLOOD PLANE TO TALK ABOUT THAT, UH, IF THEY CHOSE TO IN THEIR SECTION OF THE REPORT.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

UM, AND I, I'M GUESSING ENVIRONMENTAL IS NOT AVAILABLE TO HELP US TONIGHT.

NO, I APOLOGIZE ON THAT.

THAT'S OKAY.

THAT'S OKAY.

SO, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING THOUGH IS IF WE'RE PERMITTING THINGS IN THE FEMA FLOOD FLOODPLAINS THAT FEMA HAS THE DISCRETION NOT TO INSURE ON THAT.

IS THAT OR NOT TO COVER IN THE CASE OF LOSSES, I THINK YOU'RE ENTERING AN AREA WHERE I'M NOT COMFORTABLE AS A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT.

WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL FOLKS HERE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.

DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT IT? SO COMMISSIONER M TOLER, I WANNA CLARIFY THAT ZONING IS NOT A PERMIT.

SO ZONING WOULD JUST BE THE ABILITY TO DO LAND USES AND SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ON A PROPERTY.

BUT A PERMIT COMES INTO THE PHASE OF WHEN SITE PLAN REVIEW OR SUBDIVISION REVIEW.

THOSE ARE ACTUALLY CONSIDERED PERMITS FOR A PROPERTY AS TO WHAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY DO ON A PROPERTY.

SO WHEN WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT ZONING, WE'RE LOOKING AT A CATEGORY OF USES OR SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE DEVELOPED ON A PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE.

RIGHT.

BUT WE ARE SITTING IN A FLOODPLAIN.

YES.

AND THAT FLOOD AND CURRENT WILL BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN DURING THE SITE PLAN PHASE OF REVIEW WHEN THEY LOOK AT PERMITING AN ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT WE DON'T EVEN ALLOW PEOPLE TO DO THAT ALONG THE ETJ STUFF.

THEY CAN'T EVEN BUILD, LIKE WE HAD STUFF COME THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION, SO I'M CONFUSED BECAUSE WE HAD STUFF COME THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION WHERE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WHETHER IT WAS A TEAR DOWN REBUILD, ET CETERA.

BUT, BUT THINGS CAME UP WHEN THAT STUFF WAS IN THE FLOOD PLAIN, WE STARTED TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION AGAIN.

RIGHT.

SO THAT I UNDERSTAND IT SEEMS PRETTY RELEVANT WHAT THE SITE IS APPLICABLE FOR FOR THIS.

I MEAN, THAT, THAT OUGHT TO DISQUALIFY IT BASED ON WHAT WE'VE DONE BEFORE.

I I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN AND OBVIOUSLY YOU KNOW THAT WE CAN'T BUILD WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN AND THAT THERE ARE SETBACKS FROM THE FLOODPLAIN, BUT THAT AGAIN, WILL BE LOOKED AT IN DETAIL AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN REVIEW.

OKAY.

AND SO THEN THOSE SETBACKS NEED ARE GONNA HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS AND THEN THE INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVER IS GOING TO AFFECT ALL THE OTHER IMPERVIOUS COVER AND ALL THE OTHER PROPERTIES AROUND AS WELL.

AND SO IF WE'RE ALLOWING THIS TO HAPPEN IN AN AREA THAT WE KNOW IS HIGH RISK, ARE WE ENDANGERING THE OTHER PROPERTIES AND THEIR FEMA ABILITIES? COMMISSIONER MU I APOLOGIZE, WE'RE AT THE END OF YOUR TIME.

IF THERE'S ANOTHER COMMISSIONER

[00:35:01]

THAT HAS A QUESTION OR WANTS TO PICK UP, UH, COMMISSIONER MU'S, COMMISSIONER WOOD? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL CONTINUE WITH THAT QUESTION.

OKAY.

I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE ENDANGERMENT BECAUSE WE ARE JUST LOOKING AT THE, THE ZONING AT THIS POINT.

WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE ABILITY TO DO USES SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ON THE SITE.

WE'RE NOT PERMITTING USES ON THE SITE.

SO, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND OUR, THE COMMISSIONER'S CONCERNS ABOUT THE FLOOD PLAN ON THE PROPERTY AND IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE AS STAFF TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN WE MADE OUR RECOMMENDATION, UH, FOR THIS, WHICH IS WHY WE RECOMMENDED SF SIX BECAUSE SF SIX ZONING IS SOMETHING, IS A ZONING CATEGORY THAT'S MEANT TO DEAL WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND THE CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT.

SO THAT'S KIND OF PART OF HOW THE STAFF LOOKED AT THIS SITE.

AND I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT THE ENTIRE SITE IS NOT COMPLETELY UNCOVERED BY FLOODPLAIN.

SO IF YOU CLUSTERED THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE PORTION OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN, IT COULD BE DEVELOPABLE.

BUT THE QUESTION IS, HOW MANY ENTITLEMENTS WILL THE APPLICANT HAVE EITHER SF SIX OR SOME OTHER CATEGORY BASED ON Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, TO BE LOOKED AT, UH, AS THEY BUILD THEIR SITE PLAN TO BE LOOKED AT EVEN MORE CLOSELY BY ENVIRONMENTAL AND ALL THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT WILL BE REVIEWING THE SITE PLANNING APPLICATION.

AND CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT THE INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT MIGHT BE ALLOWED UNDER NM UNDER MF THREE WOULD NOT, WOULD STILL NOT IMPACT THE, THE ABILITY TO BUILD WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU RESTATE THAT ONE MORE TIME? SORRY.

UH, CAN, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT EVEN WITH INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVER, THERE IS, YOU ARE STILL NOT ALLOWED TO BUILD WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN ON THIS SITE.

YOU WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO BUILD WITHIN THE PORTION OF THE SITE OUTSIDE OF THE FLOOD? I BELIEVE SO.

I MEAN THAT, THAT WOULD BE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL TO SPEAK TO AT SITE PLAN.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY WOULD ISSUE A PERMIT FOR SOMEBODY TO DEVELOP RIGHT IN THE FLOODPLAIN.

UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD WANNA DO THAT EITHER, BUT, UM, YEAH.

CAN I SPEAK TO THIS? THAT, THAT'D BE GREAT.

SORRY, WHO WAS THAT? I THINK THAT'S MR. THROWER.

OH, OKAY.

YES, GO AHEAD.

SORRY.

YES, IT IS RON THROWER.

UM, WHEN A SITE PLAN IS DONE FOR A PROJECT THAT'S IN THE FLOODPLAIN, THERE'S AN EXTENSIVE FLOODPLAIN MODEL THAT'S DONE ABOUT THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND THEN THE PROJECT'S IMPACT ON THAT FLOODPLAIN.

WE CANNOT IMPACT ANY PROPERTIES UPSTREAM OR DOWNSTREAM WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

NOW THERE'S OPPORTUNITY UNDER THOSE, UH, THAT MODELING IS TO, TO DIG OUT AN AREA OF THE SITE TO FILL IN AN AREA OF THE SITE SO THAT THERE'S NOT AN OVERALL DISPLACEMENT OF THE FLOODPLAIN ONTO ANYBODY ELSE AS LONG AS THE HYDRO HYDROLOGIC HYDROLOGIC MODEL WORKS.

UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DONE BEFORE ON SEVERAL PROJECTS THAT HAVE A FLOODPLAIN ON IT.

WE CAN'T IMPACT ANYBODY, BUT WE, WE CREATE AREAS OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN TO ACTUALLY PLACE THE DEVELOPMENT.

OR IN SOME AREAS WE WILL BUILD THE PROJECT UP OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN.

AND UNDER THE NEW REGULATIONS, THE NEW DEVELOPMENT HAS TO BE TWO FEET ABOVE THE FLOOD.

THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION HAS TO BE TWO FEET OUT OF THE FLOOD PLANKS.

AND UNDER ALL OF THOSE CONDITIONS, IT'S A FULLY INSURABLE PROJECT.

THANK YOU, MR. THY, THAT'S HELPFUL.

BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.

WE HAVE THREE MORE SPOTS FOR COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.

YES.

COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.

UM, I THINK YOU'VE TOUCHED UPON THIS OR THIS IS A QUESTION FOR APPLICANT.

UH, YOU MENTIONED THE NUMBER OF BUS LINES, AND I'M JUST LOOKING IS THAT THIS LOOKS LIKE IT'S A DEVELOPING AREA WITH A LOT OF GOOD CONNECTIONS TO TRANSIT AND ALSO, UM, WHERE WE ARE SEEING SOME ADDITIONAL DENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT.

UH, COULD YOU SPEAK TO SORT OF HOW THIS AREA IS CHANGING AND WHY THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD PROJECT AT A HIGHER DENSITY? RON THROWER, AGAIN, I MEAN WE, WE HAD REZONED THE PROPERTY BACK BEHIND SF SIX, UH, ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO.

WENT THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WENT THROUGH A LONG PROCESS TO GET THERE.

THERE IS DENSITY BEING ADDED TO THE AREA.

SPRINGDALE AND TANA HILL ROADS BOTH HAVE A GREAT NORTH SOUTH ROUTES.

HEFLIN HAS AN EAST WEST ROUTE THROUGH RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

AGAIN ABOUT A HUNDRED AND SIXTY FIVE, A HUNDRED SEVENTY 5,000, UH, RIDERS A MONTH GO ON ALL OF THESE ROUTES IN THIS AREA.

THERE'S FIVE DIFFERENT BUS ROUTES.

UM, THE AREA IS DEFINITELY IN TRANSITION TRYING TO GET SOME DENSITY IN THE AREA.

AGAIN, PROMOTING TRANSIT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

Y'ALL KNOW WHERE I STAND ON THAT.

UM, AND THEN A RELATED QUESTION, PERHAPS APPSCAN AND, AND OR STAFF, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IF THIS, UH, WAS SLIGHTLY CLOSER TO ONE OF THE KEY CORRIDOR, WE MIGHT BE AUTOMATICALLY MIGHT BE IN CONSENT AND WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT MF SIX OR EVEN HIGHER.

SO IS THE ISSUE HERE REALLY THAT IT'S IN THAT INNER RESIDENTIAL STREET? IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING? I DUNNO WHO IN, I'LL LET RON, UH, ANSWER THAT FIRST.

I'M GONNA HAVE TO ASK YOU TO REPEAT

[00:40:01]

THE QUESTION.

JUST, I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE IT SEEMS HAVING, AGAIN, LOOKED AT THIS TO THE POINT THAT YOU JUST MADE, THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL MAJOR EAST, WEST AND NORTH SOUTH CORRIDORS IN THIS DIRECT AREA.

HOWEVER, THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS ON A RESIDENTIAL STREET, WHICH SEEMS TO BE PLAYING INTO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF THE LOWER DENSITY VERSUS GOING FOR A HIGHER ENTITLEMENT.

IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING? WELL, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, BUT AGAIN, THE PROXIMITY TO BOTH OF THE MAJOR ROUTES ON SPRINGDALE AND WEAVERVILLE ROAD, UM, LEND ITSELF TO HAVE GREATER TRANSIT OPTIONS AND GREATER DENSITY IN THE AREA ONLY HELPS THAT SITUATION.

NOT EVERY PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPING ALONG THOSE CORRIDORS THAT CAN ACTUALLY PROMOTE DENSITY.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE AREA JUST NORTH OF HEIN ON WEAVERVILLE, IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION.

IT'S GONNA FOREVER BE A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION.

SO AGAIN, JUST ADDING A LITTLE BIT OF DENSITY HERE AND THERE HELPS.

WE GOT SF SIX THAT'S DIRECTLY BEHIND MF IS A GOOD TRANSITION OUT TO THE ROADWAY IN FRONT OF THAT.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS.

OTHER QUESTIONS? OH, COMMISSIONER HAYNES.

THANKS.

THANKS MADAM CHAIR.

UH, QUESTION FOR, UH, MS. HASI OR, OR MR. THROWER? UM, FIRST OF ALL, THANKS FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.

UM, AND, AND IN THE BACKUP, I NOTED THAT, UH, ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THAT, THAT YOU SAY THE REASON THAT YOU WANT THE MORE DENSITY IS, IS YOU WANNA PROVIDE, UH, MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING.

AND SO MY QUESTION, I I THINK COMMISSIONER ZA WAS SPEAKING TO THIS, BUT UM, YOU KNOW, I LIKE TO GO STRAIGHT TO THE HEART OF THE MATTER AND STRAIGHT TO THE QUESTION.

UM, ARE Y'ALL WILLING TO COMMIT TO, UM, UM, MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING OR, UM, LOWERING, UH, YOU KNOW, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ON THIS PROPERTY? IF WE GIVE YOU THE HIGHER DENSITY? I THINK THAT I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT MF THREE IS A MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING TYPE.

UM, YOU KNOW, AND THERE'S CHANCE HERE THAT WE COULD NOT ACHIEVE THE MF THREE DENSITY.

UM, AND IT MAY BE CLOSER TO MF TWO, BUT, UM, WE'RE NOT GONNA KNOW UNTIL WE GET INTO THE SITE PLAN STAGE.

BUT WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU AGREE TO, TO DO, UM, 80% MFI ONE UNIT COMMISSIONER HAYNES, WE'RE, WE CAN TALK, WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DISCUSS, UH, THAT AS A CONDITION OF ZONING ZONING, UM, ZONING.

OKAY.

I'LL ASK IT.

I'LL, I'LL COME BACK AROUND.

WHAT, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO TO PROVIDE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING? MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING COMES IN FORM.

UM, AND THAT CAN STRETCH ANYWHERE FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME ALL THE WAY UP TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, MULTIFAMILY ALONG THE CORRIDORS, BUT EVERYTHING IN THE MIDDLE THERE IS MISSING MIDDLE.

THERE'S NOT AN, A INCOME BRACKET THAT WE MUST MEET TO PROVIDE MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING.

AND I'LL JUST POINT TO THE FACT THAT, AGAIN, THE ECONOMICS TO BUILD THIS PROJECT OUTTA THE FLOODPLAIN ARE GOING TO HAMPER THE ABILITY TO GO THE DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO, BUT WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT, UM, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT I GUESS WE CAN TALK TO THE CLIENT ABOUT.

BUT ALL, ALL OF THESE UNIT, AS OF RIGHT NOW, ALL OF THESE UNITS WILL BE MARKET-BASED UNITS AS OF RIGHT NOW, YES.

OKAY.

THANKS.

ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE ONE MORE SPOT OR WE CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

UH, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.

UM, YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

UM, HAVE YOU EXAMINED WHAT, UH, YOU'D BE ABLE TO BE ENTITLED TO BUILD UNDER EITHER MF THREE OR SF SIX ZONING? LOOKING AT SOME OF THE OPTIONAL BONUS PROGRAMS THE CITY HAS, PARTICULARLY THE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED PROGRAM? NO, WE, WE HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THAT AT THIS STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S A PRETTY SMALL SITE.

UM, IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE AFFORDABLE PROJECTS THAT YOU SEE COME FORWARD ARE LARGER PROJECTS.

UM, AND WITH EVERYTHING GOING FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOT, I'M, I'M, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'VE CONSIDERED.

WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK TO THE CLIENT ABOUT IT, BUT WE'VE NOT CONSIDERED, UM, THAT THAT HASN'T BEEN CONSIDERED AT THIS POINT.

THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS.

[00:45:01]

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

IS THERE A MOTION I'LL START.

OH, SORRY.

NO, YOU WERE GONNA DO IT .

I'LL GO AHEAD.

UM, CHAIR, I MOVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

I'LL SECOND THAT POINT OF ORDER.

I THINK WE NEED TO SPECIFY FOR BOTH THE ZONING AND THE NPA.

THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS FOR THAT, UH, REMINDER.

YES, THIS WOULD BE BOTH FOR THE NPA ITEM AND FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE AHEAD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THESE.

OKAY.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR RECOMMENDATION? SURE.

UM, I'LL, I'LL SPEAK TO IT A LITTLE BIT.

I, I THINK REALLY AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS, I THINK I, I THINK QUESTIONS AROUND THE, AND OTHER THINGS, I THINK THOSE ARE IMPORTANT.

AND WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF THAT WILL BE HANDLED AS THIS GOES TO, UM, THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.

BUT I JUST WANNA SAY, LOOKING AROUND AT THE ZONING AROUND IT, REALLY, THERE IS NOTHING HERE THAT IS WITHIN HIGHER THAN SORT OF THAT SF ZONES.

SO I'M NOT SURE THAT IT IS, MAKES APPROPRIATE SENSE TO PUT IT HERE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT HEFLIN DOES HAVE A TRANSIT ROUTE ON IT, BUT IT IS STILL NOT ONE OF OUR MAJOR CORRIDORS IN OUR CITY.

IT'S NOT LIKE SPRINGDALE, IT'S NOT LIKE AIRPORT.

IT'S NOT LIKE MLK, WHICH ARE SLIGHTLY DISTINCT.

AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER 18 COMES HERE, WHICH IS STILL ON A BUS ROUTE THAT COMES EVERY 30 MINUTES.

SO I GUESS WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES WHAT KIND OF APPROPRIATENESS MAKES SENSE HERE.

I WILL SAY THAT I THINK SF SIX ALLOWS THE APPLICANT TO STILL CONSIDER DIFFERENT KINDS OF PRODUCTS LOOKING AT DOWN HOMES OR MISSING MIDDLE VARIETY.

I'LL BE HONEST, I THINK IF I HAD MORE CLARITY ON WHAT THE APPLICANT WAS TRYING TO CREATE AND IF REALLY THE NEED FOR MF THREE WAS THAT THEY WANTED TO CREATE A MORE, UM, SINGLE FAMILY STYLE PRODUCT, BUT NEEDED SOME DENSITY CONTROLS AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION, BUT NOT HAVING THAT INFORMATION AT THIS TIME, I REALLY DO FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE GOING AHEAD WITH MF THREE AND I THINK STAFF MAKES A RIGHT RECOMMENDATION OF GOING TO SF SIX IN THIS CASE.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION FOR RA RAMIREZ? I JUST WANNA ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER AZAR SAID.

ALSO, THE BUS ROUTE IS ONLY IN ONE DIRECTION, SO IT'S NOT GOING IN TWO DIRECTIONS, SO IT REALLY DOESN'T GIVE THE FLEXIBILITY THAT YOU MIGHT THINK.

SO I, YES, I SUPPORT, UM, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THERE SPEAKING.

OH, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, OH, SORRY.

I THOUGHT I SAW YOUR HAND.

UH, COMMISSIONER MUTAL SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.

I, I DO, UM, THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO CONSIDER THE FLOODPLAIN ZONING AND THOSE THINGS.

UM, UH, PARTICULARLY AS WE LOOK FOR OPPORTUNITIES AND APPROPRIATE PLACES TO INCREASE DENSITY.

THE FACT THAT THIS IS NOT ON ONE OF OUR MAJOR CORRIDORS, PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE IT'S IN A FLOODPLAIN.

WE DON'T PUT MAJOR CORRIDORS ON OUR FLOODPLAINS KNOWINGLY.

AND SO, AND WHEN THE WATER MOVES, WE CAN DIVERT A BIT AND THAT KIND OF THING, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT PUTS THE OTHER PROPERTIES AT RISK.

UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE ENGINEERING AND ALL THAT HAPPENS AT SITE PLAN, BUT YOU CAN'T AVOID THAT UM, WATER TAKES THE PATH OF LEASE RESISTANCE AND WHEN THERE'S A LOT OF IT, IT'S GOING SOMEWHERE.

SO I, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT, ESPECIALLY AS WE LOOK FOR OPPORTUNITIES ON WHERE TO PUT OUR GOOD DENSITY AND, AND DO THAT.

WE KNOW WE HAVE THESE PROBLEMS. WE KNOW COUNCIL'S BRINGING FORWARD BONDS ON CLIMATE EQUITY AND SO I, I DO THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

UM, IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST, I'LL GO AHEAD AND, UH, TAKE A VOTE.

OKAY.

ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR.

THIS IS COMMISSIONER CZAR'S MOTION OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEMS FIVE AND SIX, SECONDED BY MYSELF.

UM, ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR.

OKAY.

AND ONLINE.

THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

OKAY, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO NUMBER

[8. Rezoning: C14-2023-0096 - Ben White Boulevard Medical Office; District 3 ]

EIGHT.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

NANCY ESTRADA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THIS IS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT ON YOUR AGENDA.

CASE NUMBER C 14 20 23 0 9 6.

BEN WHITE BOULEVARD MEDICAL OFFICE, WHICH IS LOCATED AT JAMES 4,007 JAMES CASEY STREET.

UM, AS YOU MAY RECALL, THIS CASE WAS PRESENTED A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, SO I'LL BE PROVIDING A BRIEF OVERVIEW THIS EVENING.

UM, THE SUBJECT AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 6.3 ACRES AND IS CURRENTLY ZONE GR THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING C-H-P-D-A NP.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A TWO STORY MEDICAL OFFICE

[00:50:01]

BUILDING AND SURFACE PARKING.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING C-H-P-D-A MP FOR A PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT AND EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING MEDICAL OFFICES.

THE PROPOSAL WOULD CREATE AN ADDITIONAL 136,000 SQUARE FEET OF NEW MEDICAL OFFICE SPACE FOR A TOTAL OF APPROXIMATELY 194,000 SQUARE FEET OF MEDICAL OFFICE SPACE ON THE SITE.

THE PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT WILL ALLOW MEDICAL OFFICE PROJECT THE FLEXIBILITY TO ACHIEVE UP TO A HUNDRED, 120 FEET IN HEIGHT.

THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT C-H-P-D-A-N-P-A COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING.

THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY SERVICES, CH ZONING DISTRICT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LOCATION SINCE WEST BEND WHITE BOULEVARD IS A SPECIFIED HIGHWAY CORRIDOR THAT ALLOWS FOR CH ZONING.

THEREFORE MEDICAL OFFICE USE ALONG THE HIGHWAY CAN BE PROVIDED TO HELP SUPPORT MEDICAL SERVICES AT A REGIONAL SCALE.

I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU CHAIR.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, UH, MR. WHALEN.

MR. WHALEN, UM, IS, UM, APRIL PRESENT? YES.

OKAY.

UM, MR. WAYLON WILL HAVE NINE MINUTES.

WOW.

OKAY.

I'LL TAP DANCE AT SOME POINT.

UM, MICHAEL WHALEN, I'M I'M GONNA GO FAST 'CAUSE I THINK WE'VE SEEN THIS ONCE BEFORE.

UH, FIRST I WANNA CONFIRM THAT YOU CAN HEAR.

OKAY, COOL.

OKAY, GREAT.

UM, UH, MICHAEL WHALE ON BEHALF OF ST.

DAVID'S HEALTHCARE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING AND FOR HEARING ME OUT ON ROUND TWO OF THIS PRESENTATION.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK OUR AV TEAM FOR MAKING SURE WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE ACCOMMODATIONS THAT ENSURE THIS HEARING IS ACCESSIBLE TO ALL.

I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.

AS YOU RECALL FROM THE LAST MEETING, OUR PROJECT IS THE BEN WHITE BOULEVARD MEDICAL OFFICE REDEVELOPMENT AT 4,007 JAMES CASEY STREET.

IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE ARE SEEKING TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM G-R-V-N-P TO C-H-P-D-A-M-P TO FACILITATE THE REDEVELOPMENT OF AN EXISTING TWO-STORY MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING IN SURFACE PARKING LOT.

THE EXISTING MOB WAS BUILT BACK IN 1983 AND THIS REDEVELOPMENT WOULD ADD APPROXIMATELY 136,000 SQUARE FEET OF MEDICAL OFFICE TO THE SITE FOR A NEW TOTAL OF 194,000 SQUARE FEET.

THE C-H-P-D-A ZONING ALLOWS US TO BUILD HIGHER THAN 60 FEET WHILE MODIFYING TWO SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO MAINTAIN THE SETBACK AND LOT WITH STANDARDS UNDER THE EXISTING GR ZONING.

WE ARE SEEKING CH ZONING FOR THIS SITE, WHICH IS APPROPRIATE GIVEN ITS LOCATION ALONG STATE HIGHWAY 71, WHICH IS ALSO KNOWN AS BEN WHITE BOULEVARD.

IF APPROVED, THIS PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN MODERNIZED AND EXPANDED HEALTHCARE OPTIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S DESIGNATED HOSPITAL DISTRICT AND IT WOULD ADVANCE COUNCIL DIRECTION AND PLANNING POLICIES THAT SEEK TO PLACE HEIGHT AND DENSITY ALONG MAJOR CORRIDORS.

NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS A LOCATION MAP WITH THE MOB SITE IN BLUE.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PROPERTY ABUTS BEN WHITE TO AND TO THE LEFT ACROSS JAMES CASEY IS THE ST.

DAVID'S HOSPITAL, KNOWN AS THE SOUTH AUSTIN MEDICAL CENTER.

NEXT SLIDE.

AND HERE IS THE SITE.

TODAY, UH, YOU CAN SEE THE 19 83 2 STORY OFFICE BUILDING SITTING BACK BEHIND THE EXISTING SURFACE PARKING LOT.

NEXT SLIDE.

THE PROPERTY IS IN THE SOUTH AUSTIN COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AREA, WHICH INCLUDES THE SOUTH MENCHACA NEIGHBORHOOD.

UH, AND I BELIEVE YOU'LL HEAR FROM MR. COLLINS, WHO'S FROM THE CONTACT TEAM IN A MOMENT.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH WAS ADOPTED IN 20 14, 10 YEARS AGO, DESIGNATED THE AREA IN BALLOU AS THE HOSPITAL SPECIAL DISTRICT TO THE IMMEDIATE WEST OF THE MOB SITE IS THE HOSPITAL WHICH REACHES A HEIGHT, UH, AS TALL AS 120 FEET.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN SPECIFICALLY CALLS OUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE HOSPITAL SPECIAL DISTRICT SAYING THAT IT RECOGNIZES THE UNIQUE LAND USE REQUIREMENTS OF A MAJOR MEDICAL CENTER AND RELATED MEDICAL OFFICES AND BUSINESSES.

NEXT SLIDE.

COUNCIL HAS SUPPORTED DENSITY AND HEIGHT ALONG OUR MAJOR CORRIDORS.

AS I STATED EARLIER, C-H-P-D-A ZONING WOULD ALLOW US TO BUILD ABOVE THE 60 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT SET BY THE EXISTING GR ZONING, WHILE ALSO ALLOWING US TO MAINTAIN THE LESS RESTRICTIVE GR SETBACK AND LOT WITH STANDARDS ON THE SCREEN.

YOU CAN SEE IN RED THE AMOUNT OF LAND WE WOULD LOSE UNDER CH SETBACKS, WHICH IS MEANINGFUL.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE SITE'S FLAG LOT CONFIGURATION GIVES IT A SOUTHERN LOT WIDTH OF ABOUT 50 FEET.

I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT FLAG, THERE ISN'T ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THE FLAG.

THE DEVELOPMENT IS ALL PUSHED UP AGAINST BEN WHITE AND JAMES CASEY AND THE OTHER BUILDING, UH, IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS A SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON OF SOME KEY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR BOTH CH AND GR WITH THE FLAG LOTT IN MIND, YOU'LL SEE THE CH ZONING REQUIRES A HUNDRED FOOT MINIMUM WIDTH, WHICH WE SIMPLY CANNOT ACHIEVE BECAUSE OF THAT FLAG LOT CONFIGURATION.

YOU'LL ALSO SEE THAT THE CH REQUIRES SOME OF THE LARGEST SETBACKS OF ANY ZONING.

DISTRICT.

GR SETBACKS ALLOW US TO BUILD CLOSER

[00:55:01]

TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND CLOSER TO THE HIGHWAY.

AND IF WE CAN GO BACK ONE SLIDE, I WANTED TO EMPHASIZE AGAIN THAT THERE'S NO BUILDING ON THAT FLAG.

SO THIS SIMPLY ALLOWS US TO BUILD CLOSER TO THE, THE LINES THAT ARE ON E EAST BEND WHITE ON JAMES CASEY, AND THEN ADJACENT TO THE OTHER TWO, UH, UH, BUILDINGS THAT ARE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE, UH, NEXT TO US.

GO.

NEXT SLIDE.

AND ONE MORE.

OH, I'M SORRY.

GO BACK.

ONE MORE MY BAD.

IF YOU AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH CH AS A ZONING DISTRICT, IT IS STRUCTURED TO GIVE YOU MORE HEIGHT IN EXCHANGE FOR LESS IMPERVIOUS COVER.

SO IF YOU ARE OVER 80%, BUT UNDER 85% IMPERVIOUS COVER, YOU CAN BUILD UP TO 60 FEET OF HEIGHT.

AND IF YOU LOWER YOUR IMPERVIOUS COVER BETWEEN 75 AND 80%, YOU CAN ACHIEVE 80 FEET OF HEIGHT.

AND THEN AGAIN, IF IT'S BETWEEN 70 AND 75%, YOU CAN BUILD UP TO A HUNDRED FEET AND SO ON AND SO ON.

ON THE OTHER HAND, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT UNDER GR IS 60 FEET AND YOU CAN HAVE UP TO 90% IMPERVIOUS COVER.

SO THAT BOTTOM LINE THERE, 85% TO GET TO 65 FEET, EXCUSE ME, 60 FEET UNDER CH 90%, UH, IN GR UM, THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER, AGAIN ALLOWED UNDER CH IS ONLY 85%.

SO THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS, UH, CH ENCOURAGES LESS IMPERVIOUS COVER.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

UH, JUST TO CONCLUDE, WE ARE SEEKING TO REDEVELOP THE 40-YEAR-OLD TWO STORY MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING AND SURFACE PARKING LOT.

THE REDEVELOPMENT WILL YIELD ALMOST 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF NEW MEDICAL OFFICES AND FACILITIES THAT CAN BETTER MEET OUR COMMUNITIES GROWING AND EVOLVING MEDICAL NEEDS.

THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS DESIGNATED HOSPITAL SPECIAL DISTRICT, AND IT COMPLIMENTS THE ADJACENT ST.

DAVID'S HOSPITAL.

AND THE FLEXIBILITY OFFERED WITH C-H-P-D-A-N-P ZONING IS NEEDED TO BUILD ABOVE 60 FEET WHILE MAINTAINING THE EXISTING GR SETBACKS AND LOT WITH REQUIREMENTS.

AGAIN, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION AND, UH, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS AFTER MR. COLLINS SPEAKS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.

THANKS.

THANK YOU, CHAIR.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM MR. COLLINS.

MR. COLLINS, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.

MY NAME IS RAY COLLINS.

I CHAIR THE SOUTH MINCHA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.

UH, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT OFFERED TO NEGOTIATE ANY OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS YOU SEE IN OUR EXHIBIT A SINCE YOU LAST HEARD FROM ME ON JANUARY 23RD.

SO I'LL CONTINUE MY EXPLICATION OF WHAT I REFERRED TO THEN AS A SMORGASBORD OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

TONIGHT I'LL START WITH A MORE GENEROUS COMMUNITY BENEFIT, REDUCED RENT FOR SPACE IN ST.

DAVID'S HCA HEALTHCARE MEDICAL OFFICE COMPLEX FOR ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS CENTRAL HEALTH AND INTEGRAL CARE TWO ORGANIZATIONS WHICH PROVIDE RESPITE CARE FOR DISCHARGED HOMELESS PATIENTS WHO ARE PRESENTLY BEING DISCHARGED INTO OUR SOUTHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD.

I WILL POINT OUT HOWEVER, THAT THERE IS A COMMUNITY CARE CLINIC, SIX 10TH MILE, UH, AWAY, AND INTEGRAL CARE IS THREE AND A HALF MILES AWAY.

AND ST.

DAVID'S HCA HEALTHCARE DOES NOT DISCHARGE PATIENTS TO THEM.

SO WE'RE HOPING THAT THE SHORTER DISTANCE FROM THE WEST SIDE OF JAMES CASEY STREET TO THE EAST SIDE MAY HAVE SOME BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON HOSPITAL POLICY REGARDING RESPITE CARE FOR PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, A RELATED PROBLEM IS THAT ST.

DAVID'S HCA HEALTHCARE IS A DATA SILO USING THE EPIC, EPIC EEHR RATHER THAN CENTRAL HEALTH MAP AND ECHOES COORDINATED HOUSING ASSESSMENT.

INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THIS PROBLEM COULD BE SOLVED IN PART IF EMS WOULD TAKE IDENTIFIABLE AND UNINSURED PATIENTS TO ASCENSION, PREVENTING LATER FINANCIAL PROBLEMS WHICH CREATE DIFFICULTIES HOUSING PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS AS MENTIONED IN OUR EXHIBIT B.

OTHER NEGOTIABLE COMPONENTS OF EXHIBIT A ARE THE MINUSCULE ADDITIONAL FUNDING OF LAB AND X-RAY COSTS FOR FREE PEDIATRIC CARE FOR UNINSURED CHILDREN BY LIRIO PEDIATRICS.

SHADE FOR THE UPCOMING HOT SUMMER STUDENTS.

UH, FOR STUDENTS AT ST.

ELMO ELEMENTARY.

A GENEROUS CONTRIBUTION TO THE SOUTH AUSTIN CREEK ALLIANCE TO MITIGATE OUR FLOODING PROBLEMS IN SOUTHWOOD AND THROUGHOUT SOUTH AUSTIN, UH, BIKE LANE AND FREE BUS PASSES FOR ST.

DAVID'S EMPLOYEES.

[01:00:03]

THANK YOU MR. COLLINS.

THANK YOU.

WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR OUR THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.

THANK YOU.

MICHAEL WHALE.

ON BEHALF OF UH, ST.

DAVID'S, UH, HEALTHCARE, UM, I HAVE A LETTER IN THE BACKUP THAT KIND OF OUTLINES SOME OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.

I THINK ALL OF Y'ALL ARE FAMILIAR, UM, WITH THE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT ST.

DAVID'S FOUNDATION GIVES AWAY, UH, UH, MUCH OF WHICH THE MONEY THAT ST.

DAVID'S FOUNDATION GETS COMES FROM, UH, ST.

DAVID'S HEALTHCARE OR THE HOSPITAL SIDE OF IT.

UH, IN ADDITION TO THOSE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR AND THE, UH, $4.8 BILLION IN, UM, UH, CHARITY CARE THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED BY ST.

DAVID'S SINCE IT, UH, BEGAN, UH, WHICH COMES OUT TO OVER A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS OF UNCOMPENSATED CARE YEAR.

ST.

DAVID'S AT IT, ITS AT ITS EXPENSE, NOT THE FOUNDATION'S EXPENSE, DOES HAVE HOSPITAL CASE MANAGERS AND SOCIAL WORKERS AT THE SOUTH AUSTIN LOCATION.

AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PATIENT AND THEIR SUPPORT SYSTEM, THEY FACILITATE SERVICES NEEDED TO ASSIST PATIENTS IN TRANSITIONING BACK TO THEIR COMMUNITIES.

UM, THESE CAN INCLUDE SERVICES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, INCLUDING THE CHURCH IF A PATIENT SPECIFICALLY REQUESTS IT, BUT AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THE HOSPITAL CANNOT, UM, DEMAND THAT SOMEBODY GOES SOMEWHERE OR, UH, IMPROPERLY, UH, HOLD SOMEBODY, UH, UH, IN THE HOSPITAL.

SO, UH, HAPPY TO RESPOND TO ANY OF THE OTHER ITEMS, WHETHER IT BE THE