[00:00:01]
I AM LESLIE POOL MAYOR PRO TEM, AND I WILL CALL TO ORDER THE WORK SESSION FOR APRIL 30TH, 2024 AT 9:01 AM AND WE HAVE A QUORUM OF COUNCIL PRESENT.
HOW ABOUT, UH, REMOTE? DO WE HAVE ANYBODY JOINING US VIRTUALLY? NOT YET.
WELL, WILL YOU ALL LET ME KNOW IF THAT HAPPENS? OKAY.
UM, COLLEAGUES, THE MAYOR LET US KNOW THAT HE IS IN DC FOR A MEETING WITH WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS RELATING TO A TASK FORCE ON HOMELESSNESS.
I UNDERSTAND HE WILL BE BACK IN TIME FOR OUR MEETING THURSDAY.
[A. Pre-Selected Agenda Items (Part 1 of 2) ]
PLAN FOR TODAY AND THEN WE'LL GET STARTED.OUR PLAN IS FIRST WE WILL RECESS THE WORK SESSION AND CONVENE THE AUSTIN ENERGY UTILITY OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AFTER A-E-U-O-C, WE WILL RECONVENE WORK SESSION, AND THEN GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ON ITEM E TWO.
ITEM E ONE WILL OCCUR ON THURSDAY WHEN MAYOR WATSON IS IN ATTENDANCE.
AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION, WE WILL RETURN TO THE DAIS FOR THE STAFF BRIEFING ON THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT DISTRICT AND DEC DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
UH, THEN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ITEM WITH THE SHORT BRIEFING FROM STAFF AND DISCUSSION.
WE'LL THEN MOVE TO PULLED ITEMS. THERE WILL BE A PRESS CONFERENCE TODAY AT 1:00 PM REGARDING THE RECENT RASH OF OVERDOSES, UH, WITH OUR TRAVIS COUNTY PARTNERS.
MY HOPE IS THAT WE WILL HAVE OUR WORK COMPLETED IN TIME SO THAT I CAN ATTEND THE EVENT AND YOU ALL MAY ALSO BE PLANNING TO ATTEND.
UH, DOES THAT SOUND GOOD TO EVERYONE? GREAT.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, I WILL NOW RECESS THE WORK SESSION AND WE WILL RECONVENE.
UH, WE WILL RECONVENE THE, UH, REGULAR WORK SESSION AT 10 26 APRIL 30TH,
[E. Executive Session ]
AND WE WILL BE GOING NOW INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.THE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION TO TAKE UP ONE ITEM PURSUANT TO SECTION 5 51 0.07, ONE OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE.
THE CITY COUNCIL WILL DISCUSS LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO E TWO MICHAEL MACDOUGALL ETAL VERSUS CITY OF AUSTIN ETAL CAUSE NUMBER D ONE GN 20 DASH EIGHT TWO IN THE 345TH DISTRICT COURT, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS.
IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THE ITEM ANNOUNCED? HEARING NONE, THE COUNCIL WILL NOW GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT OUR QUORUM BACK ON THE DI WE ARE OUT OF CLOSED SESSION.
WE DISCUSSED LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO ITEM E TWO AND I WILL, UH, RECONVENE THE WORK SESSION AND
[B1. South Central Waterfront Combining District and Density Bonus Program. ]
TAKE UP ITEM NUMBER.I THINK IT'S, IS IT NUMBER THREE, THE, UM, BRIEFING ON SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT COMBINING DISTRICT AND DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM COLLEAGUES.
I'LL TURN THE MEETING OVER TO A CM SENIO TO INTRODUCE STAFF.
AND AFTER THE PRESENTATION, I'LL CALL ON COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
GOOD MORNING, UH, COUNCIL, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR A BRIEFING ON THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT, UH, DISTRICT ON APRIL 23RD.
THE PLANNING STAFF BRIEFED THE HOUSING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL ON THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT COMBINING DISTRICT AND DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
TODAY'S STAFF WILL BRIEF THE ENTIRE BODY AS WELL AS INCLUDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THIS ITEM WILL BE ON THE MAY 30TH AGENDA FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.
AND WITH THAT, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO APRIL.
I'M APRIL JSO FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, MY TEAM AND MANY COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE CITY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT COMBINING DISTRICT AND DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM CODE.
WE'RE GLAD TO BE SPEAKING WITH THIS BODY ABOUT IT TODAY.
THE CODE AMENDMENT FOR THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT IS BASED ON TWO KEY ITEMS. THE FIRST IS THE ADOPTED 2016 SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT VISION FRAMEWORK, AND THE SECOND IS THE 2022 COUNCIL RESOLUTION, SPECIFICALLY PERTAINING TO THIS AREA OF THE CITY
[00:05:01]
TO NAVIGATE COUNCIL'S REQUEST, OUR APPROACH, UH, TO THE CODE HAS BEEN TO DEVELOP AN INCENTIVIZED SET OF REGULATIONS AND BONUS PROGRAM THROUGH THE CREATION OF A COMBINING DISTRICT AND DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.THIS IS CONSIDERED A PAPER DISTRICT SIMILAR TO WHAT, UH, NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY IS CONSIDERED THEN A CITY INITIATED REZONING OF PROPERTIES AND THE DISTRICT WOULD OCCUR.
UM, THAT WOULD BE WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS.
UH, OUR INTENT IS STAFF IS TO RECOMMEND COUNCIL REZONE ALL PARCELS IN THE DISTRICT, WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU HERE ON THE SCREEN.
STAFF ARE NOT, UH, SEEKING TO INITIATE REZONING OF EXISTING PUDS PDAS OR THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN THE AREA.
LANDOWNERS OF THESE SITES CAN INITIATE THEIR OWN REZONING PER TYPICAL PROCESSES.
HOWEVER, SO BEFORE YOU IS THE STRUCTURE OF HOW THE CODE IS WRITTEN.
THE ELEMENTS OF THE COMBINING DISTRICT ARE SHOWN ON THE LEFT AND THE ELEMENTS OF THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM ARE SHOWN ON THE RIGHT.
THE COMBINING DISTRICT IS BROKEN DOWN INTO FOUR DIFFERENT SUBDISTRICTS.
THE SUBDISTRICTS ARE DISTINGUISHED FROM ONE ANOTHER IN TERMS OF BOTH FLOOR AREA RATIO OR FAR, WHICH ESTABLISHES THE AMOUNT OF BUILDING SPACE YOU'RE ALLOWED BASED ON YOUR LOT SIZE AND HEIGHT LIMITS, WHICH DEFINE HOW TALL A BUILDING CAN BE, NO MATTER THE FAR OF THE, OF THE PLACE.
ADDITIONALLY, SINCE THE DISTRICT'S PARCEL SIZES AND SHAPES HERE IN SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT VARY SO WIDELY, STAFF HAS INTRODUCED THE CONCEPT OF DENSITY DISTRIBUTION AREAS TO CREATE AN OPENNESS, UH, WITHIN ANY GIVEN SITE, AND TO ENSURE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY AND NOT JUST RESIDENTS OF THAT DEVELOPMENT.
DDA FOOTPRINTS MUST NOT HAVE MORE THAN 90,000 SQUARE FEET, ROUGHLY THE SAME AS A DOWNTOWN BLOCK.
UH, THE OPENNESS IS THEN CREATED BY PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE INTERNAL CIRCULATION ROUTES REQUIRED BETWEEN EACH DENSITY DISTRIBUTION AREA.
WE HAD TWO DIFFERENT ECONOMIC CONSULTING FIRMS SUPPORT US IN ANALYZING THIS PROGRAM.
E-P-E-P-S SUPPORTED US IN CALIBRATING, UH, THE BONUS AREA OF THE VARIOUS ONSITE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
AND THEN HYATT BROWN ANALYZED HOW WE MIGHT SUCCESSFULLY STRUCTURE THE PROGRAM THAT STILL IN THEIR ASSESSMENT, AT LEAST MARGINALLY PENCILS, UH, FOR DEVELOPERS IN TODAY'S ECONOMIC CONDITIONS, THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM IS ORGANIZED IN THE FOLLOWING WAY THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU.
TO ENTER INTO THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD BEYOND THE BASE DENSITY TO A DENSITY SHOWN IN THE SUBDISTRICT MAP, A SITE MUST ADHERE TO GATEKEEPER REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU SEE THERE ON THE LEFT WITHIN THE FIRST THREE TO ONE FAR THEY'RE SEEKING.
THE GATEKEEPERS INCLUDE ONSITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AFFORDABLE RENTAL UNITS MUST BE PROVIDED AT 60% MFI OR BELOW.
AND IF BUILDING CONDOS, THOSE MUST TRANSLATE INTO AFFORDABLE OWNERSHIP UNITS AT 80% MFI OR BELOW, OR A FEE IN LIEU CAN BE PAID FOR AFFORDABLE, UH, OWNERSHIP, UH, UNITS, EXCUSE ME, FOR OWNERSHIP UNITS INSTEAD.
THEN, UH, THE ENHANCED ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND STREETSCAPE AND BUILD ENVIRONMENT STANDARDS ARE ALSO GATEKEEPER REQUIREMENTS.
THEN TO ACHIEVE THE MAXIMUM DENSITY AS DESCRIBED IN THE SUBDISTRICT MAP, A SITE MUST CONTRIBUTE FEES IN LIEU AND OTHER ONSITE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
SO THIS IS BROKEN DOWN IN THE FOLLOWING WAY.
70% OF THE DENSITY CAN BE EARNED THROUGH IN LIEU FEES AND DEDICATIONS.
UM, AND THOSE IN LIEU FEES WOULD BE DIVIDED AMONG AFFORDABLE HOUSING PARKS.
AND THEN, UM, INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY BENEFIT IMPACT FEES, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PARKS FEES WOULD BE SPENT NEARBY, AND THEN THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY IMPACT BENEFIT FEE WOULD BE SPENT TO SUPPORT THE DISTRICT DIRECTLY.
THEN THE OTHER PERCENT AT 30% OF THE DENSITY BONUS, UM, AVAILABLE MAY BE ACHIEVED THROUGH ONSITE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
AND YOU SEE THE LIST IN FRONT OF YOU HERE OF THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR ONSITE COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT CAN ACHIEVE, UM, ADDITIONAL DENSITY BONUS TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT THIS MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF A PROJECT THAT'S IN THE DISTRICT AND HAS RECENTLY SUBMITTED THEIR DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT APPLICATION TO OUR DEPARTMENT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT FOR A SITE OF THIS SIZE THROUGH THE PROGRAM, UH, THIS, THE DEVELOPMENT IS ABLE TO ACHIEVE ROUGHLY SIX TO ONE FAR, AND THEN COMMUNITY IN RETURN WOULD RECEIVE 21 ONSITE AFFORDABLE UNITS, $7.1 MILLION IN FEES IN LIE, THAT WOULD BE THEN DISTRIBUTED, UH, WITHIN HOUSING PARKS AND INFRASTRUCTURE BASED ON THE SITE SIZE, IT'S BROKEN DOWN INTO THREE DENSITY DISTRIBUTION AREAS, AND ADDITIONAL DENSITY IS GAINED THROUGH VARIOUS
[00:10:01]
PROVIDED ONSITE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.THIS INCLUDES CERTAIN TYPES OF COMMERCIAL MUSIC SPACE, PUBLIC ART, AND THEN OF COURSE, IMPORTANTLY OPEN SPACE.
ON APRIL 9TH, PLANNING COMMISSION HEARD FROM US ON THE DRAFT CODE WITH AN EIGHT TO ONE VOTE.
PC WAS IN SUPPORT OF WITH RECOMMENDATIONS MOVING THE DRAFT CODE FORWARD TO YOU ALL AT COUNCIL IN FRONT OF YOU, I'VE OUTLINED ALL 13 OF PC'S RECOMMENDATIONS HERE OF THEM.
STAFF IS NOT RECOMMENDING FOUR, NOT INCLUDING THREE SINCE THEY'RE OUT OF THE SCOPE OF THIS ZONING CODE AMENDMENT AND IN SUPPORTIVE AND WHERE RELEVANT TO THE CODE INCORPORATING SIX, THE MOST DRAMATIC RECOMMENDATION OF THE EVENING WAS NUMBER SEVEN, WHERE PC ASKED FOR STAFF TO USE THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM IN PLACE OF THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT DENSITY CODE.
STAFF DO NOT SUPPORT THIS RECOMMENDATION.
THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM SIMPLY DOES NOT MEET THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT'S NEEDS.
IN PART, WE AS STAFF ARE ASKED TO ACCOMPLISH ONSITE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, MAXIMIZING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR PEDESTRIAN TRANSIT AND TRANSPORTATION, INCENTIVIZING OPEN SPACE AND PARKS, AND THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM JUST FALLS WOEFULLY SHORT IN THESE AREAS FOR THIS DISTRICT.
IN TERMS OF THE BIG PICTURE, HERE ARE SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS ON HOW THE DRAFT CODE HAS EVOLVED FROM, UH, THE PUBLIC AND PLANNING COMMISSION FEEDBACK.
WE'VE EXPANDED THE BOUNDARIES IN THE DISTRICT AND MODIFIED THE SUBDISTRICTS IN A COUPLE OF AREAS, PARTICULARLY IN SUPPORT OF TRANSIT ORIENTED ENVIRONMENTS AND REDUCING DENSITY IN THE WEST.
WE ADJUSTED THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEES TO ENSURE PROXIMITY TO TRANSIT AND PRIORITIZE SPENDING TOWARDS PRESERVATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE ADDED MULTIMODAL CIRCULATION OPTIONS AND ENHANCED ALL CIRCULATION ROUTES.
WE'VE ALSO IDENTIFIED SOME NEXT STEPS, SOME OF WHICH YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU HERE.
WHILE THESE ARE VERY IMPORTANT FOR CONSIDERATION AND STAFF INTENDS ON, UH, WORKING ON THESE TO SUPPORT THE FDA GRANT APPLICATION PROCESS AND ITS TIMELINE, WE FEEL LIKE THESE ITEMS CAN BE COMPLETE SOON RATHER THAN NOW WITH LIMITED IMPACT TO THE AREA.
AS FOR THE TIMELINE, WE CONDUCTED THREE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND RECEIVED HUNDREDS OF SURVEY RESPONSES AND A ONE MONTH PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS.
EARLIER THIS YEAR, WE HELD TWO JOINT STAFF AND DEVELOPER MEETINGS.
WE'VE BRIEFED BOARD, UH, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 14 TIMES OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.
AND WE ARE ADDITIONALLY ATTENDING THE OPEN HOUSES FOR THE JOINT CODE AMENDMENTS TO SPEAK WITH COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS AREA OF THE CITY AS WELL.
AND WE HOPE TO BE GOING IN FRONT OF YOU, UH, LATER ON THIS, UM, IN MAY ON MAY 30TH, AS A CM YOU MENTIONED.
SO AS WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD, OUR HOPE IS THAT COUNCIL APPROVES THIS DRAFT CODE IN MAY, INITIATING THE REZONING OVER THE SUMMER.
THANKS FOR YOUR CONTINUED INTEREST IN THIS AREA, AND WE'D BE GLAD TO FIELD QUESTIONS.
TIM, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, MY OFFICE, UH, SENT A LIST OF DETAILED QUESTIONS TO STAFF, UH, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO RECEIVING THOSE RESPONSES.
UH, WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY AND REFINEMENT, UH, TO GET TO SOME OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS WHO MIGHT, WHO MIGHT HAVE SOME CONCERNS.
UH, BUT I JUST WANT TO REAFFIRM MY APPRECIATION FOR STAFF'S WORK, UH, ON THIS.
UM, REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK.
UM,
UH, AGAIN, THAT'S A PENDING ISSUE STILL TO BE DETERMINED, CHANGE ANYTHING FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE OF HOW WE GET THE INFRASTRUCTURE INTO THE AREA TO ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT.
SO THIS DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM IS JUST ONE AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED ONE ELEMENT OF, OF MANY THAT ARE, ARE NEEDED TO SORT OF THINK ABOUT FULL BUILD OUT IN THIS AREA.
UM, AND, UM, AND, AND SO I BELIEVE WE HAVE, UM, YES, KIM OLIVES IS HERE TO SORT OF TALK THROUGH THE OTHER COMPONENTS.
UM, BUT AGAIN, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY DIRECTLY IMPACT THIS DRAFT CODE SPECIFICALLY.
BUT IN TERMS OF THE FULL PICTURE FOR BUILD OUT, I'LL HAND IT OVER TO KIM.
MS. LAVAR, WELCOME KIM LAVAR, DEPUTY CFO.
UH, SO WHEN WE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY, GOING BACK A COUPLE YEARS, UM, WE TALKED ABOUT A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT TOOLS TO HELP US ACHIEVE THE, A VISION OF SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT, WHETHER IT WAS THEN AND, UM, THOSE TOOLS STILL APPLY NOW WITH THIS CURRENT VISION.
SO, UM, WE HAVE A, A SUITE OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT WE CAN PURSUE.
SO I'M, I'M, I'M CONFIDENT THAT WE CAN, UM, WE CAN ADDRESS THE NEEDS.
[00:15:01]
AS A, AS A A FOLLOW UP, MY UNDERSTANDING, UH, IS THAT THERE IS SIGNIFICANT INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT, UH, AGAIN, NOT JUST THE ABOVE GROUND STUFF WHERE IN TERMS OF ROADS, BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF THE DRAINAGE, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE, THE WATER AND WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO IN TO ALLOW THIS LEVEL OF, UH, DEVELOPMENT.THERE IS, IS THAT ACCURATE? THERE IS.
UM, THERE'S BEEN CONSIDERABLE WORK TO ASSESS, UH, THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS, THE AREA RELATIVE TO, UM, THIS, THE ANTICIPATED DENSITY BASED ON THIS PLAN.
UM, SO I'M ACTIVELY WORKING WITH THOSE AFFECTED DEPARTMENTS TO DETERMINE A PATH FORWARD.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? LOOKS GOOD.
[D1. Discuss proposed amendments to City Code Title 25 (Land Development). ]
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, SENIO, I THINK WE NOW HAVE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DISCUSSION.ALRIGHT, SO IF YOU WILL KICK OFF THAT DISCUSSION, AND I THINK WE HAVE ANDREA BATES.
NEXT ON OUR BRIEFINGS, WE HAVE A, UH, BRIEFING ON THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE YOUR BEFORE YOUR CONSIDERATION.
UH, AS A REMINDER, AT THE LAST MEETING THAT Y'ALL HAD, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE JOINT PUBLIC HEARING MEETING THAT WE HAD, THERE WAS A REQUEST TO HAVE MORE COUNSEL CONVERSATION, SO WE ADDED THIS TO YOUR TIMELINE TO DO SO.
UH, AND ANDREA WILL GO THROUGH THE OTHER DATES THAT WE ARE COMING TO YOU IN THE FUTURE.
THIS UPDATE WILL INCLUDE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE FROM PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH THEY CONSIDERED IT LAST WEEK.
UH, AND WITH THAT, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO ANDREA BATES.
I DID WANNA GIVE A THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR ALL THEIR HER WORK.
ANDREA'S GONNA BE OUR MC AND SHE'S GOING TO START THE PRESENTATION AND THEN HAND IT OFF TO EACH INDIVIDUAL CASE MANAGER FOR EACH SECTION.
AND THEN AT THE CONCLUSION, WE'LL, UM, TAKE QUESTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THE STAFF.
ANDREA BATES, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS BRIEFING IS AN OVERVIEW OF THE FOUR CODE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE CONSIDERED AT THE APRIL 11TH JOINT MEETING OF THE COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND THOSE AMENDMENTS INCLUDE THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING USE HOME PHASE TWO, WHICH PROPOSES A SMALLER LOT SIZE FOR ONE UNIT, CITYWIDE COMPATIBILITY CHANGES AND THE EQUITABLE TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT OR ETOD OVERLAY.
WE PRESENTED THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE JOINT MEETING ON APRIL 11TH.
AFTER THAT MEETING, WE HELD TWO OPEN HOUSES FOR THE COMMUNITY TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PROPOSALS.
THERE WAS AN IN-PERSON OPEN HOUSE AT THE CENTRAL LIBRARY ON APRIL 17TH AND A VIRTUAL OPEN HOUSE ON APRIL 20TH.
LAST WEEK, PLANNING COMMISSION TOOK UP THREE OF THE FOUR AMENDMENTS AT A HEARING ON TUESDAY, APRIL 23RD.
ALSO ON THE 23RD, THERE WAS A BRIEFING TO A JOINT MEETING OF THE HOUSING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE AND THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL.
TODAY, THE 30TH, WE ARE HERE PRESENTING AT WORK SESSION AND THE FOURTH AMENDMENT WILL BE GOING TO PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT.
THEN WE HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL OPEN HOUSES SCHEDULED ON MAY 6TH AND MAY 8TH, BOTH IN PERSON, AND I'LL HAVE ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON THOSE IN A COUPLE OF SLIDES.
THEN THERE WILL BE ANOTHER CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ON MAY 14TH.
AND FINALLY, THE COUNCIL MEETING WHERE THERE WILL BE ANOTHER HEARING ON MAY 16TH.
WE HAVE BEEN USING MULTIPLE CHANNELS TO GET THE WORD OUT ABOUT THESE CODE AMENDMENTS.
AS YOU KNOW, THERE WAS MAILED NOTICE, WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE PURPLE POSTCARD FOR THREE OF THE FOUR AMENDMENTS THAT APPLY CITYWIDE THAT WENT TO ALL, UH, RESIDENCES, RESIDENCES, AND BUSINESSES ADDRESSES IN AUSTIN.
THERE WAS ALSO A SEPARATE ETOD SPECIFIC NOTICE THAT WENT TO THE CORRECT GEOGRAPHY FOR THOSE CODE AMENDMENTS.
THERE HAVE BEEN NEWS STORIES, NEWS COVERAGE OF THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
THE CITY HAS BEEN POSTING ON SOCIAL MEDIA ABOUT THEM AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT.
AND WE HAVE ALSO TAKEN OUT ADVERTISEMENTS IN LOCAL PUBLICATIONS.
IN ADDITION TO ALL THAT, THERE IS A PROJECT WEBSITE WITH EXTENSIVE INFORMATION ABOUT ALL OF THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS, WHICH IS UPDATED AS THE ADDITIONAL MATERIALS ARE PRODUCED.
THERE IS ALSO AN EMAIL AND PHONE NUMBER FOR PEOPLE TO SUBMIT EITHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS TO STAFF IN ADDITION TO THE OPEN HOUSES, UH, THAT I MENTIONED.
SO THESE ARE OUR ENGAGEMENT NUMBERS FROM LAST WEEK.
SO OVER 670,000 CITYWIDE PURPLE POSTCARDS WENT OUT IN ADDITION TO OVER 39,000 ETOD SPECIFIC NOTICES.
[00:20:02]
AS OF EARLY LAST WEEK, THERE WERE ALMOST 5,000 VISITS TO THE PROJECT WEBSITE@SPEAKUPAUSTIN.ORG.OVER 200 PHONE CALLS OR EMAILS OVER 150 COMMENTS ON SPEAKUP AUSTIN.ORG.
THERE WERE 181 SPEAKERS AT THE APRIL 11TH JOINT MEETING.
UH, 88 PEOPLE ATTENDED THE FIRST IN PERSON OPEN HOUSE AND OVER 75 IN ATTENDANCE FOR THE VIRTUAL OPEN HOUSE.
THESE ARE THE TWO ADDITIONAL OPEN HOUSES THAT I MENTIONED ON MAY 6TH, FROM SIXTH TO 8:00 PM THERE WILL BE AN OPEN HOUSE AT ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL AND ON MAY 8TH FROM SIX TO 8:00 PM AT GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER MUSEUM AND CULTURAL CENTER.
SO THAT TAKES US TO THE CODE AMENDMENTS THEMSELVES.
TODAY'S BRIEFING WILL FOCUS ON SOME CLARIFYING ITEMS FOR THE PARTICULAR AMENDMENTS THAT ADDRESS QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME UP SINCE THE APRIL 11TH JOINT MEETING, AS WELL AS AN OVERVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE THREE ITEMS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS ALREADY REVIEWED.
AND SO WE WILL START WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING.
GOOD MORNING, I'M ERIC THOMAS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AND I'LL BE PROVIDING A COUPLE CLARIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSED NEW ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING PRINCIPLE LAND USE.
PART OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR EV CHARGING IS TO PROHIBIT THE USE UNDERGROUND.
THIS PROHIBITION WAS INCLUDED ON RECOMMENDATION BY THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE, AND THIS IS BECAUSE WHEN EV, WHEN EVS CATCH FIRE, THEY BURN INCREDIBLY HOT AND GENERATE A GREAT AMOUNT OF SMOKE.
FURTHERMORE, UNDERGROUND SMOKE REMEDIATION CAN TAKE SEVERAL DAYS DURING WHICH TIME ACCESS TO THE ENTIRE PARKING GARAGE WOULD BE PROHIBITED IN THE TIME SINCE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS FINALIZED.
WE'VE CONTINUED TO COORDINATE WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND HAVE COME TO AN UNDERSTANDING THAT EV CHARGING MIGHT BE ACCEPTABLE ONE LEVEL BELOW GRADE WITH CERTAIN DESIGN CRITERIA AND RESTRICTIONS ON PLACEMENT.
GIVEN THE TIMING, STAFF DEFERRED THE OPTION TO AMEND THE PROPOSAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL.
ADDITIONALLY, AFTER REVIEWING PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT CONVERSATIONS, STAFF FEELS THE NEED TO CLARIFY THAT THE PROPOSED PRINCIPLE LAND USE WILL NOT CHANGE OR RESTRICT HOW EV CHARGING IS ALREADY PERMITTED AS PART OF AN ACCESSORY PARKING USE.
THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS ONLY APPLY TO EV CHARGING AS THE PRINCIPAL OR ONLY USE OF A SITE.
ACCESSORY PARKING WILL STILL BE PERMITTED FOR OTHER PRINCIPAL USES, STAFF DOES NOT AND WILL NOT RESTRICT THE NUMBER OF SPACES THAT MAY BE ELECTRIFIED SO LONG AS ACCESSORY PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
ON APRIL 23RD, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THREE AMENDMENTS.
THE FIRST IS RELATED TO ROADWAY TYPES.
AN EV CHARGING USE IS PERMITTED OR CONDITIONAL DEPENDING ON WHICH ROADWAY TYPE THE SITE ABUTS.
THE STAFF PROPOSAL INCLUDES EACH OF THE, THE ROADWAY TYPES THAT ARE DEFINED IN ARTICLE FIVE OF 25 DASH TWO SUBCHAPTER E.
THE AMENDMENT ADDS LANGUAGE TO ACCOUNT FOR ANY ADDITIONAL ROADWAY TYPES THAT MIGHT BE DEFINED IN THE FUTURE SO THAT THE USE IS NOT PROHIBITED ALONG THOSE ROADS.
BY EXCLUSION FROM THIS ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS AMENDMENT.
THE THE NEXT AMENDMENT WOULD PERMIT EV CHARGING UP TO ONE LEVEL BELOW GRADE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
STAFF IS EVALUATING THIS AMENDMENT.
WE ARE WORKING WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANGUAGE AND THE EFFECT ON DEVELOPMENT BEFORE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION.
THE FINAL AMENDMENT WOULD MAKE EV CHARGING A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN 1000 FEET OF ANY HIGHWAY CAPS AND STITCHES.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS AMENDMENT GIVEN THE ADJACENCY OF FUTURE CAPS AND STITCHES TO DOWNTOWN AND WALKABLE MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOODS TO THE EAST.
WE AGREE THAT AN EV CHARGING USE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED BY STAFF AND THE LAND USE COMMISSION THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROCESS.
HELLO, I AM LAURA KEATING IN THE PROJECT CONNECT OFFICE AND THE CASE MANAGER OF HOME PHASE TWO.
WE WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY SOME ITEMS THAT WE HAVE GOTTEN QUESTIONS ON REGARDING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND CURRENT REQUIREMENTS.
FIRST RELATES TO THE 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT.
IMPERVIOUS COVER MAXIMUMS HELP ENSURE THERE IS SPACE FOR RAINWATER TO BE ABSORBED INTO THE GROUND OR DIRECTED TO THE STORM DRAIN DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS ARE GENERALLY DESIGNED WITH THE ASSUMPTION OF A 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SECOND RELATED TO EMERGENCY ACCESS, ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT IS REQUIRED TO MEET CURRENT FIRE CODE STRUCTURES THAT ARE OUT OF THE REACH OF THE FIRE HOSE FROM THE STREET MUST HAVE A SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSIDE THE STRUCTURE OR BE ACCESSIBLE BY A FIRE LANE.
IN GENERAL, THE MEDIAN LOT DEPTH DOES NOT EXCEED THE 150 FEET HOSE LENGTH.
NOW I'LL SUMMARIZE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENTS
[00:25:01]
THAT WERE MADE LAST WEEK.MANY OF THESE AMENDMENTS ARE STILL UNDER CONSIDERATION BY STAFF AND WE WILL PROVIDE OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATIONS AS PART OF AN UPDATED STAFF REPORT FOR THIS PRESENTATION.
THE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN GROUPED INTO SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS TO THE ORDINANCE AND GENERAL AMENDMENTS THAT PROVIDE ADDITIONAL POLICY AND PROGRAMMATIC DIRECTION.
THE FIRST GROUP OF SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS RELATE TO LOT SIZE AND UNIT SIZE.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS MAINTAINING THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF LOT AREA, WHICH FOR A FLAG LOT EXCLUDES THE NARROW PORTION OF THE LOT USED TO ACCESS THE STREET.
THE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE FLAGPOLE WOULD NOT BE COUNTED IN THIS INSTANCE.
ADDITIONALLY, AMENDMENTS INCLUDE A REDUCTION OF THE PROPOSED MINIMUM LOT SIZE FROM 2000 SQUARE FEET TO 1500 SQUARE FEET, A REDUCTION IN THE PROPOSED LOT WIDTH FROM 20 FEET TO 15 FEET, AND AN INCREASED GUARANTEED UNIT SIZE FROM 1450 SQUARE FEET TO 1650 SQUARE FEET.
THE NEXT GROUP OF AMENDMENTS RELATE TO SETBACKS AND WHAT IS ALLOWED BETWEEN THE SETBACK AND THE LOT.
LINE TWO AMENDMENTS RECOMMENDED A ZERO SETBACK FOR INTERNAL LOT LINES OR WHERE TWO SMALL LOTS ARE ADJACENT TO ONE ANOTHER.
THE COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDED REDUCING THE FRONT BACK SETBACK FROM 50 FEET, 15 FEET TO 10 FEET.
UM, THEY ALSO INCLUDED AN AMENDMENT THAT ALLOWS ENCROACHMENTS FOR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND PORCHES.
AND THIS AMENDMENT IS ACTUALLY ALIGNED WITH THE CURRENT CODE ALLOWANCES FOR ENCROACHMENTS.
ADDITIONALLY, THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT FRONT YARD IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS OF 50% WOULD ONLY APPLY TO DRIVEWAYS AND PARKING AREAS.
THIS WOULD EXEMPT PORCHES AND WALKWAYS FROM THIS CALCULATION.
THE FINAL GROUP OF SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS IS RELATED TO SUBDIVISION AND LAW ARRANGEMENT PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED LOWERING THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF THE FLAGPOLE ON A FLAG LOT TO 10 FEET IF ONE FLAG LOT IS PROPOSED AND FIVE FEET IF TWO FLAG LOTS ARE SIDE BY SIDE.
THE COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDED ALLOWING BAD BACK LOTS, WHICH IS A LANDLOCKED LOT WITHOUT STREET ACCESS AND UTILITIES WOULD NEED TO BE ACCESS ACCESSED THROUGH AN EASEMENT.
ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE CLARIFICATIONS WERE RECOMMENDED RELATING TO FLAG LOTS AND RE PLATING.
NOW MOVING ON TO POLICY AND PROGRAMMATIC AMENDMENTS.
THERE ARE FOUR POLICY AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD IMPACT THE DEVELOPMENT ALLOWED UNDER HOME PHASE TWO.
UM, THE FIRST IS TO DEVELOP A NEW REPLANNING PROCESS SPECIFIC TO HOME PROJECTS.
THIS IS CURRENTLY UNDERWAY WITH A PROPOSED INFILL RE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE THAT IS MAKING ITS WAY, UM, THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.
PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO DIRECTED THE CREATION OF A PRESERVATION PROGRAM SIMILAR TO HOME PHASE ONE AND TWO AMENDMENTS RELATED TO MODIFYING THE APPLICATION OF HOME PHASE TWO BY AREA OF TOWN.
THE SECOND GROUP OF POLICY AMENDMENTS RELATES TO THE TRACKING AND IMPACT OF HOME PHASE TWO AND MAKING SURE THAT THE PUB, THERE'S PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL RELATED TO THE NEW DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
UM, AND WE JUST WANTED TO KNOW THAT SOME OF THIS TRACKING IS ALREADY IN PROGRESS FOR HOME PHASE ONE.
THE LAST GROUP OF POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PROGRAMMATIC IN NATURE AND WOULD EXTEND BEYOND THE IMPACT OF JUST HOME PHASE TWO.
THESE INCLUDE FINANCIAL AND LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOMEOWNERS AND ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR PEOPLE AT RISK OF DISPLACEMENT.
THIS SUMMARIZES THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACCESS AND I'LL PASS IT ON TO MY COLLEAGUE JONATHAN LEE TO TALK ABOUT COMPATIBILITY CHAIR.
I'M SORRY, IS, IS THIS IN THE BACK? UH, UH, THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S JUST A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT'S SCROLLING AND I, I COULDN'T FIND IT IN MY EMAIL AND I COULDN'T FIND IT IN THE BACK.
UH, ABSOLUTELY COUNSEL AND I APOLOGIZE.
WE, UH, STAFF WAS WORKING VERY LATE YESTERDAY TO GET THIS FINALIZED.
SO, UH, WE'RE GETTING IT POSTED AS LATE BACK UP RIGHT NOW, OR IS BACK UP RIGHT NOW AND WE'LL GET IT EMAILED IT TO Y'ALL AS WELL.
I'M THE CASE MANAGER FOR THE COMPATIBILITY CODE AMENDMENT.
I FIRST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE COMPATIBILITY BUFFER IS MUCH MORE FLEXIBLE THAN THE CURRENT NO BUILD SETBACK, THOUGH THEY BOTH HAVE THE SAME 25 FOOT WIDTH.
THE COMPATIBILITY BUFFER ALLOWS A NUMBER OF LOW IMPACT USES AND THIS TRANSLATES TO MORE BUILDABLE AREA AND FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, MORE HOUSING UNITS ON SITES ACROSS THE CITY.
AND, UH, I ALSO WANNA NOTE THAT THE STANDARDS FOR THE COMPATIBILITY BUFFER ARE NOT LOCATED WITHIN THE, THE ZONING CODE CHAPTER 25 DASH TWO.
THOSE ARE INSTEAD LOCATED IN ANOTHER SECTION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 25 DASH EIGHT.
[00:30:03]
AND LASTLY, UM, THE PROPOSED COMPATIBILITY CHANGES WOULD REDUCE THE OVERALL AREA SUBJECT TO COMPATIBILITY BY NEARLY 94% COMPARED TO CURRENT REGULATIONS.UM, THIS IS IN LARGE PART DUE TO ENDING COMPATIBILITY AT 75 FEET, UM, VERSUS THE CURRENT 540 FEET.
UH, BUT IT'S ALSO, UH, DUE TO CHANGING THE APPLICABILITY, INCLUDING ADDING AN EXEMPTION FOR LOWER DENSITY MULTIFAMILY ZONES.
AND NOW I'LL MOVE ON TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENTS.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION MADE OVER A DOZEN AMENDMENTS TO STAFF'S PROPOSAL.
UM, SEVERAL WERE TO THE CODE LANGUAGE ITSELF AND SEVERAL WERE BROADER GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO THE FIRST ONE IS TO REMOVE THE 40 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT NEEDED TO GET AN EXEMPTION FROM THE COMPATIBILITY BUFFER FOR SITE ZONED NO LO OR LR.
THOSE ARE THE LOWER INTENSITY COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE ZONING DISTRICTS STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT.
SECOND ONE IS ALLOW A 15 FOOT COMPATIBILITY BUFFER INSTEAD OF THE 25 FOOT BUFFER THAT NORMALLY APPLIES ON LOTS LESS THAN 75 FEET IN WIDTH.
UM, STAFF GENERALLY SUPPORTS THIS WITH A FEW CHANGES.
THE NEXT ONE IS EXCLUDABLE TO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE UP TO 16 UNITS FROM COMPATIBILITY BUFFERS.
UH, WE SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT AND, UH, ALLOW SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPATIBILITY, NOT ONLY THE COMPATIBILITY HEIGHT LIMITS, BUT ALSO THE COMPATIBILITY BUFFER REQUIREMENTS.
UM, THIS AMENDMENT IS CURRENTLY STILL UNDER REVIEW.
THE NEXT ONE IS ALLOW A 15 FOOT COMPATIBILITY BUFFER FOR A STRUCTURE THAT IS 40 FOOT TALL OR LESS AND CONTAINS A RESIDENTIAL USE.
UH, THIS ONE IS STILL UNDER REVIEW AS WELL.
AND, UM, ENSURE BOTH PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL CAN INITIATE SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
UM, STAFF SUPPORTS THIS AMENDMENT.
AND LASTLY, RECOMMEND NOISE REQUIREMENTS FOR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT.
UM, THIS IS UNDER REVIEW AND HERE ARE SEVERAL GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STAFF AND COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.
UM, FIRST, JUST MAKE THE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS MORE FLEXIBLE.
UH, SECOND, PROVIDE A SUMMARY OF THE COMPATIBILITY REGULATIONS, UH, AT VARIOUS SITES AROUND THE CITY.
UM, ALSO PRIORITIZE MEETINGS WITH NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS TO DESCRIBE THE COMPATIBILITY CHANGES, UM, AND LIMIT THE APPLICABILITY OF COMPATIBILITY CHANGES TO CERTAIN AREAS, UH, TO STUDY EQUITY DISPLACEMENT AND GENTRIFICATION IMPACTS.
AND LASTLY, ENSURE THAT THE REQUIRE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS MATCH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEW DANCY BONUS PROGRAMS CONSIDERED IN 2024.
MY NAME IS WARNER COOK AND I'M THE CASE MANAGER FOR THE EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY CODE AMENDMENT AND REZONING.
SO SOME OF THE CLARIFICATIONS YOU'LL SEE ON THIS SLIDE, UM, ARE THINGS THAT WE'VE HEARD SO FAR OVER THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS AS WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO THE COMMUNITY.
ONE OF THOSE BEING THE, THERE'S A MISCONCEPTION THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO REDEVELOP UNDER THE ETOD BONUS PROGRAM AND THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR REDEVELOPMENT.
UM, THE PROPOSAL WOULD ALLOW FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF REDEVELOPMENT THAT A SITE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO TODAY.
UM, BUT THERE'S ACTUALLY REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD MAKE IT MORE, MORE DIFFICULT IN SOME CASES TO, UM, REDEVELOP EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS OR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL SPACES AND ADD ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS.
IN FACT, WE'VE ALSO GOTTEN CONCERNED THAT EXISTING BUSINESSES WOULD BE IMPACT.
AND, AND I WANNA EMPHASIZE THAT WHILE NEW USES MIGHT BE PROHIBITED ON THROUGH THE STAFF PROPOSAL, THIS DOESN'T IMPACT ESTABLISHED USES.
THEY WOULD BE CONSIDERED LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USES AND WOULD CONTINUE TO BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE AS THEY ARE TODAY.
UM, THERE'S BEEN SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THE ETOD COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS RELATE TO THE CITYWIDE CHANGES THAT, UH, JONATHAN WAS JUST GOING THROUGH.
UM, AND THERE IS A SLIGHTLY MODIFIED OR RELAXED VERSION OF COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS FOR PROJECTS THAT MEET THE ETOD DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS.
UM, GENERALLY ALLOWING BUILDINGS TO REACH 90 FEET AFTER THAT 25 FOOT COMPATIBILITY BUFFER, WHICH IS IN LINE WITH THE HEIGHT ALLOWED IN THE DB 90 DENSITY BONUS 90 PROGRAM ALREADY ADOPTED.
AND THEN AFTER 50 FEET, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO REACH THEIR FULL HEIGHT, WHICH IN SOME CASES COULD BE UP TO 120 FEET OR ROUGHLY 10 STORIES.
UM, THERE'S ALSO BEEN, UH, YOU KNOW, WHY ISN'T THIS IN THERE? WHY ISN'T THAT IN THERE? AND THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, THINGS THAT WE, THAT COUNCILS DIRECTED US TO LOOK AT THAT THE COMMUNITY IS EXCITED FOR US TO LOOK AT THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE PHASES OF THE WORK.
AND THAT INCLUDES, UM, LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL AREAS OF TOWN FOR THE METRO RAPID AND METRO RAIL PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT CONNECT PROGRAM.
UM, THAT ALSO INCLUDES LOOKING AT DIFFERENT OR INCREASED ENTITLEMENTS ABOVE 120 FEET.
AND IT ALSO INCLUDES LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
SO THINGS LIKE OPEN SPACE, UH, AFFORDABLE COMMERCIAL SPACE, TRANSIT, SUPPORTIVE FEATURES ARE ALL THINGS THAT WE'VE HEARD THAT FOLKS WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS ANOTHER TYPE OF BENEFIT IN THIS PROGRAM.
[00:35:01]
LOOKING TO THAT IN THE NEXT PHASE, WHICH WE WOULD WE'RE PLANNING TO BRING TO COUNCIL IN SPRING OF 2025.AND THEN FINALLY, IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT ONCE THESE A, UM, PROVISIONS THESE TWO COMBINING DISTRICTS EO AND DBE TAUGHT ARE ON THE BOOKS, UM, AND, AND ADOPTED, IF THAT'S COUNCIL'S WILL, THEN ADDITIONAL PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD BE ABLE TO COME THROUGH THE STANDARD REZONING PROCESS WITH NOTICE, UH, THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL TO REQUEST THE APPLICATION OF THOSE IF THEY'RE WITHIN A HALF MILE OF THIS GEOGRAPHY.
AND WITH THAT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENTS YET BECAUSE THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS HEARING THIS CASE TONIGHT.
SO WE RECOMMEND YOU ALL TUNE IN AND HERE IS A REMINDER OF OUR SCHEDULE GOING FORWARD TONIGHT.
AS WARNER JUST MENTIONED, THERE WILL BE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OF THE ETOD OVERLAY NEXT WEEK.
THERE WILL BE THE TWO ADDITIONAL OPEN HOUSES MAY 6TH AT ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL AND MAY 8TH AT THE CARVER MUSEUM ON MAY 4TH OR 14TH.
WE'LL BE BACK BEFORE YOU FOR A WORK SESSION BEFORE THE COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON MAY 16TH.
WE ENCOURAGE THE COMMUNITY TO VISIT THE WEBSITE, SPEAK UP AUSTIN.ORG/LDC UPDATES FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSAL AND UP-TO-DATE VERSIONS OF THE DOCUMENTS.
AS THE, UH, ITEMS PROGRESS THROUGH THE REVIEW PROCESS, THE COMMUNITY CAN ALSO EMAIL OR CALL STAFF AT THE EMAIL AND PHONE NUMBER YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN WITH EITHER COMMENTS THAT WILL BE COMPILED FOR, UH, COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.
THEY WILL HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND GOING FORWARD AFTER PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW WILL CONTINUE TO BE COMPILED FOR COUNCIL.
OR IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROPOSAL, UH, THEY CAN LEAVE THE QUESTION AND STAFF WILL RETURN THE EMAIL OR PHONE CALL WITHIN A FEW BUSINESS DAYS.
AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION FOR THIS MORNING.
THANK YOU SO MUCH MS. BATES, UM, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, ZENIO, LET'S, UM, MOVE INTO QUESTIONS IN A FEW WOULD DESIGNATE WHICH STAFFER YOU THINK IS APPROPRIATE DEPENDING ON THE CONTENT OF THE QUESTIONS.
LET'S START WITH, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS.
I HAVE ONE SPECIFIC QUESTION THEN A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
AND IT IS ABOUT THE SLIDE THAT SHOW THE RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION TO LOWER THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO 1500 SQUARE FEET.
BUT THEN IT SAID THE UNIT SIZE, THEY WANTED A MINIMUM OF 1650.
CAN YOU KIND OF EXPLAIN, ARE THOSE COMING FROM TWO DIFFERENT PROPOSERS OR HOW, HOW DID THEY COME TO THAT SUGGESTION TO, TO MAKE A 1650 SQUARE FOOT UNIT MIDDLE? YEAH, SO THOSE WERE TWO SEPARATE AMENDMENTS.
UM, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO, WHO MADE EACH, BUT UM, CURRENTLY YOU'RE GUARANTEED A A 1450 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE, WHICH IS THE AVERAGE UNIT SIZE UNDER HOME PHASE ONE FOR THREE UNITS.
UM, AND THEY'RE JUST RECOMMENDING, UM, A A LARGER HOUSE WOULD BE ALLOWED, UM, ON ANY LOT SIZE.
SO AS THE LOT SIZE GETS SMALLER, YOU WOULD BE ALLOWED, UM, A A HIGHER FAR.
SO THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY, SORRY, THERE, THEY GAVE ME THE, THE CHEETO VELA MICROPHONE, SO EVERYBODY WATCH OUT.
UM, SO THE IDEA WOULD BE MAYBE THEY HAD A, A THIRD STORY OR WERE ABLE TO UTILIZE ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR TO BE ABLE TO REACH THAT SORT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE.
ON A, ON A 1500 SQUARE FOOT LOT, YOU WOULD LIKELY NEED THREE STORIES TO GET TO THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE WITH YOUR IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS.
'CAUSE I, I KNOW SOME OF THIS CONVERSATION IS AROUND ALLOWING FOLKS TO BUILD SMALLER UNITS ON SMALLER LOTS AND, UM, I'VE TOLD THE STORY A A FEW TIMES WHEN I WAS FIRST GETTING OUT ON MY OWN.
I HAD A 423 SQUARE FOOT APARTMENT AND I LOVED IT.
AND I HOPE ONE DAY WHEN I'M A LITTLE OLD LADY, I CAN GO BACK TO MY 423 SQUARE FEET.
'CAUSE I DON'T LIKE TO, TO HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF STUFF AND I DON'T HAVE, I DON'T LIKE DUSTING A WHOLE LOT, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE THOSE UNITS AVAILABLE FOR FOLKS.
UM, OTHER THAN THAT, I'LL JUST SAY I REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT STAFF IS PUTTING INTO THIS.
UM, I ALSO APPRECIATE, I KNOW PLANNING COMMISSION, WHEN THEY LAST MET, THEY HAD TO BREAK THEIR MEETING INTO TWO DIFFERENT DAYS BECAUSE THEY HAD SO MUCH INFORMATION TO TAKE ON AND SO MANY TOPICS TO DISCUSS.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF ACTIVITY HAPPENING THAT MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE EVIDENT JUST THROUGH A WORK SESSION OR, UM, EVEN WHEN COUNCIL TAKES THESE UP, BUT I KNOW THAT, UM, A LOT OF WORK IS HAPPENING AND SO I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, IN OTHER TIMES WHERE WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE AMOUNTS OF AMENDMENTS TO REVIEW, STAFF SOMETIMES HAS PUT TOGETHER A SPREADSHEET OF, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WHAT YOU DELINEATED IN THESE SLIDES, BUT SOMETIMES ADDING THE RATIONALE INTO, YOU KNOW, EXACTLY WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN STAFF SAYS, HEY, WE CAN WORK WITH THIS, BUT WE MAY MAKE SOME CHANGES.
SO IS THERE A PLAN TO, TO DO THAT AGAIN FOR US
[00:40:01]
FOR THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS? COUNCIL MEMBER? WE ARE WORKING ON THAT SPREADSHEET AND WE WILL CERTAINLY SHARE IT WITH PARENT COUNCIL.WELL, I LOOK FORWARD TO BEING ABLE TO REVIEW THESE, UM, AND THANK EVERYONE'S HARD WORK TRYING TO MAKE THIS VERY, UM, PALATABLE FOR US AND EASY FOR US TO UNDERSTAND ALL THE DIFFERENT SUGGESTIONS THAT PEOPLE ARE MAKING ALONG THE WAY.
COUNCIL MEMBER CADRE AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER KELLY DOES THIS, DOES THIS WORK? UH, THIS WORKS.
UH, I JUST WANNA, UM, SHOW MY SUPPORT FOR THE, THE PC, UH, AMENDMENT TO FURTHER RESTRICT, UH, EV CHARGING AS A USE IMMEDIATELY AROUND THE PLAN CAPS IN CENTRAL AUSTIN.
YOU KNOW, THE CITY'S WORKING REALLY HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT IT'S TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE CENTERED CAPS ON I 35 IS A REALITY.
SO, UM, I'M GLAD STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
UH, AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO, UH, SEEING THE CHANGE COME MAY 16TH.
AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ALISON, FOR COMING UP HERE FOR THAT PRESENTATION.
I SUBMITTED A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS THROUGH Q AND A ABOUT THIS ITEM, BUT I DO HAVE ONE THAT I'D LIKE TO ASK.
I'M NOT SURE WHO'S GOING TO ANSWER IT, SO MAYBE YOU CAN ROCK PAPER, SCISSORS IT, BUT, UM, WHAT METRICS WILL HELP EVALUATE IF THE GOALS OF INCREASING DENSITY HOUSING OPTIONS AND TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY ARE ACHIEVED OVER TIME? DO WE KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT? UH, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, NIA, WHO WOULD YOU LIKE TO THANK YOU.
UH, MS. BATES, MAYBE I WAS LOOKING AT MS. BATES.
I FELT LIKE I, I FORGOT THE SHOW WHERE YOU PHONE A FRIEND.
I WAS LOOKING FOR A FRIEND
SO WE KNOW THAT WE WILL BE DOING SPECIFIC MONITORING FOR HOME PHASE ONE AND LIKELY HOME PHASE TWO, BUT THAT'S A GREAT SUGGESTION TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT OF ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS.
AND SO WE CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO TRACK THE PROGRESS AS APPLICATIONS ARE SUBMITTED AND THEY GO THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS, WE CAN BE LOOKING AT WHO IS USING THE DIFFERENT BONUS PROGRAMS, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE UPTAKE OR ANY CONCERNS, UH, ENCOUNTERED WITH THE POTENTIAL COMPATIBILITY CHANGES.
AND THAT WILL INFORM POTENTIAL MINOR MODIFICATIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, STAFF MAY PROPOSE TO THE AMENDMENTS GOING FORWARD.
THEY WILL OF COURSE INFORM FUTURE COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, UH, ADDITIONAL CODE AMENDMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS TO THESE.
AND SO WE WILL ALSO BE, OF COURSE WRITING UP ALL OF THIS WORK INTO THE POTENTIAL THE GRANT PROPOSAL AND THEN WE WILL HAVE THE INFORMATION ON HOW THAT IS RECEIVED AS THAT PROCESS MOVES FORWARD.
YEAH, I JUST THINK IT'S A BEST PRACTICE TO DO THAT FOR ANYTHING THAT WE BRING FORWARD TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE BEING SUCCESSFUL IN WHAT WE'RE DOING, BUT THEN ALSO TO MAKE THOSE MODIFICATIONS AND ADJUST AND ADAPT AND OVERCOME IF NECESSARY FOR THE SUCCESS OF PROGRAMS. IS THAT SOMETHING I NEED TO BRING FORWARD AS AN AMENDMENT? WELL, I THINK THE, THE MAYOR ACTUALLY MADE THAT SPECIFIC OKAY.
UH, AMENDMENT AND DIRECTION AND WHEN WE VOTED, UH, AT THE END OF LAST YEAR.
AND I WOULD IMAGINE, BECAUSE WE ALL NEED THAT DOCUMENTATION AND THAT DATA WE ALWAYS DO AND WE ALWAYS ASK FOR IT AND STAFF IS ALWAYS PREPARED TO PROVIDE IT.
SO I WOULD IMAGINE THIS WOULD BE AN EXPANSION OF THAT.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
THAT DIRECTION WAS GIVEN TO US WITH HOME PHASE ONE AND WE WOULD CONTINUE WITH THAT.
YEAH, FOR CLARIFYING THAT I, AGAIN, IT'S JUST A GOOD PRACTICE TO GET INTO AND I KNOW THAT OUR STAFF, OUR PROFESSIONAL CITY STAFF IS EXCELLENT AT PROVIDING THAT DATA FOR US SO THAT WE CAN MAKE BETTER INFORMED DECISIONS AS COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR CITY.
COUNCIL MEMBER ALLISON ALTER AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER RYAN AL ALTER.
UM, I'VE SUBMITTED A, A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS, BUT I HAVE A COUPLE THAT I WANNA ASK HERE AND IF YOU COULD ASK SOMEONE WHO CAN SPEAK TO HOME AND SDRS FIRST I SEE TRISH LINK MAKING HER WAY DOWN TO THE PODIUM.
UM, SO I WANTED TO ASK HOW DO HOME ONE AND HOME TWO TREAT SDRS NUTRITION LINK WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT IN HOME? ONE COUNSEL APPLIED A LIMITATION ON, UM, THE DUPLEX USE AND THE TWO UNIT USE.
UM, THERE WAS A PREEXISTING LIMITATION ON THE TWO UNIT USE, WHICH COUNSEL CARRIED FORWARD AND THEN ON DUPLEX THAT WAS, UM, ADDED SO THAT THEY WOULD BE TREATED CONSISTENTLY AS, UH, RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BY COUNSEL FOR HOME TWO THERE, IT WOULD STILL BE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
SO IT WOULD STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR A SHORT TERM RENTAL LICENSE.
SO IS IT ACCURATE THAT UNDER HOME ONE TWO OF THE THREE UNITS COULD BE USED EXCLUSIVELY AS STRS? SO THERE WAS NOT A LIMITATION PLACED ON THE THREE UNIT USE? SO YES, THEY COULD BE USED THAT WAY.
[00:45:01]
ALL THREE UNITS COULD BE USED? CORRECT.UM, SO IS IT ACCURATE THAT UNDER HOME TWO, IF AN EXISTING LOT AND HOME IS SUBDIVIDED INTO THREE SEPARATE LOTS THEN AND THEN THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO MORE LOTS DEPENDING ON THE SIZE THEN EACH OF THE UNITS ON EACH OF THE LOTS COULD BE USED EXCLUSIVELY AS ST CORRECT.
UM, COLLEAGUES, I REMAIN VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF STRS THAT MAY BE CREATED THROUGH WHAT WE'RE DOING.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE SOLUTION IS.
UM, MS LINK, YOU HAVE MENTIONED THAT YOU WANTED US TO BE DOING A, UM, MORE COMPREHENSIVE STR UM, REVISION.
WHAT IS THE TIMETABLE FOR THAT PROCESS? SO IN ORDER TO CHANGE OUR SHORT TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS, WE WILL NEED TO HAVE A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH MEANS THE EARLIEST WE COULD COME TO COUNSEL WOULD BE IN THE FALL.
UM, YOU KNOW, I I THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES WITH OUR SDR ORDINANCES IN THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND VERY, VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THIS ALL INTERSECTS.
UM, AND I DO THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.
UM, THIS IS PROBABLY NOT FOR TRISH.
UM, IT'S PROBABLY FROM THIS PAGE.
LET ME BE, HOLD ON ONE SECOND BEFORE TRISH GOES.
'CAUSE I JUST AS A FOLLOW UP THAT, UM, UH, TRISH, UH, WAS THE REMOVAL OF THE STR USE PART OF THE HOME INITIATIVE OR WAS IT A STAFF INITIATED CLEANUP OF THE CODE? IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO MODIFY AND TO FIX CHANGE, HOWEVER WE NEED TO DESCRIBE IT ALL OF THE STR REGULATIONS IN A HOLISTIC MANNER.
SO THAT WAS ACTUALLY NOT PART OF HOME ONE, BUT BECAUSE WE WERE MAKING THOSE, UH, CHANGES TO THOSE USES, THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
AND THE REASON THAT WE HAD TO DO THE CLEANUP WAS RELATED TO A RULING IN A COURT CASE.
SO WE ARE MAKING CHANGES THAT WERE REQUIRED BY THE JUDICIARY.
SO THERE ARE COURT CASES THAT HAVE IMPACTED THE REGULATIONS THAT THE COUNCIL PASSED IN 20 12, 13 AND 15 AND 16.
UM, AND SO WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF COURT RULINGS.
WE ALSO HAVE SOME OTHER CITIES GOING THROUGH COURT, THE COURT PROCEEDINGS RIGHT NOW.
AND SO THAT COULD POTENTIALLY, UM, IMPACT WHAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO.
UM, SO THE IDEA WAS TO TAKE ALL OF THE STR, UM, REGULATIONS AT ONE TIME AND TRY TO ADDRESS ALL OF THEM HOLISTICALLY AS SOMEONE WHO WAS ON THIS DAIS WHEN WE FIRST TRIED THE, AS THE TEN ONE COUNSEL ROBUSTLY TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS INHERENT IN S STRS AND THEIR PROLIFERATION AROUND OUR CITY.
AS IN MANY CITIES, I CAN, I CAN JUST SAY HOW MUCH WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO BATTLE TO GET SOME CONSISTENCY AND, UM, PEACE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND THE AREAS WHERE S STRS HAVE, UH, SHOWN UP, WHETHER THEY ARE REGISTERED WITH US OR NOT.
AND WE HAVE HAD, UH, CONSISTENT DIFFICULTIES IN TRYING TO ESTABLISH OUR COMMUNITY VALUES IN THIS TO, IN THIS ARENA IN RELATION TO WHAT BOTH THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS REQUIRED OF US AND ALSO AS A RESULT OF COURT CASES.
SO IT MAKES IT A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION.
SO I WANTED TO BE REALLY CLEAR THAT THE SDR PIECE AND THE CHANGES TO IT THAT, THAT MY COLLEAGUE COUNCIL MEMBER ALISON ALTER, IS RAISING TODAY AND HAS BEFORE WEREN'T PART OF THE HOME INITIATIVE EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED TO THAT BY SOME, THAT CHANGE WAS INITIATED BY STAFF IN ORDER TO TAKE IT TO MAKE EFFICIENT USE OF STAFF TIME.
AND THE FACT THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT THAT PORTION OF THE CODE, THAT WORK CONTINUES A PACE.
IT HAS NOT BEEN RESOLVED, BUT I THINK THIS DAIS IS UNITED IN ITS DESIRE TO GET TO A PLACE THAT WORKS WELL ACROSS THE BOARD FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, UM, IF I CAN CONTINUE WITH MY QUESTIONS.
COUNCIL MEMBER ALISON ALTER, YOU HAD ANOTHER QUESTION.
I'LL JUST POINT OUT I APPRECIATE THE, THE, UM, THE BACKGROUND THAT YOU PROVIDED MAYOR PRO TEM, BUT NONETHELESS MS. LINK DID JUST SAY THAT EVERY ONE OF THE UNITS CREATED BY HOME CAN BE AN SDR.
AND SO WE ARE MAKING THESE CHANGES WITHOUT, UM, MAKING THE REVISIONS TO SDR AND THIS POTENTIALLY ACCELERATES THE STR PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE OR THE PROLIFERATION OF STR, UM, IN OUR COMMUNITY.
AND THAT IS A CONSEQUENCE OF HOME ONE AND HOME TWO, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER, UM, IT WAS PART OF THE PROCESS, GIVEN THE WAY THAT WE HAVE TO HANDLE STS RIGHT NOW, IT DOES, UM, IMPACT THE PROLIFERATION.
[00:50:01]
I THINK I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. BATES.UM, WHAT OTHER CODE AMENDMENTS ARE ON THE HORIZON THAT WOULD IMPACT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS IN PARTICULAR, IF IT'S NOT YOU, IT CAN BE SOMEONE ELSE.
I'M JUST, THE ONE THAT COMES TO MIND IS A PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS TO MAKE IT EASIER TO SUBDIVISION, TO SUBDIVIDE, EXCUSE ME, UH, RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT, I CAN INVITE SOMEBODY FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT UP TO SPEAK TO ITS PARAMETERS.
LINDY GARWOOD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO AS MS. BATES, UM, INDICATED WE ARE WORKING ON A, UM, A RESOLUTION THAT YOU PASSED IN I BELIEVE LAST YEAR, UM, DIRECTING US TO CREATE AN EASIER SUBDIVISION PROCESS, UM, PARTICULARLY FOR PROJECTS LIKE HOME TWO.
AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE ALSO ARE WORKING ON THE SITE PLAN LIKE PROPOSAL PHASE TWO.
UM, THEY'LL BE BROUGHT TOGETHER, UM, AS MANY OF THE AMENDMENTS OVERLAP EACH OTHER, UM, IN IN WHERE THEY, WHERE THEY RESIDE IN THE CODE.
WE WERE BASICALLY PROPOSING AN EASIER PATH FOR, FOR THESE SMALL LOTS TO GET REDEVELOPED.
UM, PROVIDING A SIMPLER PATH THROUGH THE, UM, DRAINAGE PROVISIONS IN PARTICULAR.
UM, AND WE'RE WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH, UM, OUR WATERSHED DEPARTMENT AND, UM, WE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH HOME TWO TO MAKE SURE ALL OF THE PROJECTS ARE ALIGNING AND THAT ORDINANCES, OR EXCUSE ME, THE DRAFT ORDINANCES GOING TO COME TO PLANNING COMMISSION ON MAY 14TH AND TO COUNCIL ON MAY 30TH.
AND HOW DO WE, UM, AVOID LOCALIZED FLOODING FROM THE BUILDING WITHOUT THE DRAINAGE ASSESSMENTS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE THE PROPOSAL FOR.
UM, THE METHODOLOGY IS STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE SPECIFICS OF HOW UM, IT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AT THIS TIME, BUT THAT IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE'RE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION.
AND LIKE I SAID, WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH WATERSHED TO MAINTAIN ANY SAFETY PROVISIONS THAT ARE NECESSARY.
AND THAT'S COMING MAY 14TH, PLANNING COMMISSION? YES, MA'AM.
THEN I HAVE A QUESTION ON, UM, HOME MORE BROADLY.
UM, CAN YOU PLEASE CONFIRM WHETHER AND HOW THE HOME DRAFT ORDINANCE WOULD INCLUDE GARAGES WITHIN FAR LIMITS? YES.
SO THE HOME ORDINANCE, UM, WOULD COUNT A GARAGE TOWARDS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOUSE.
IT WOULD BE INCLUDED AN FAR CONSISTENT WITH PHASE ONE.
UM, AND THEN I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
IT LOOKS LIKE, UM, THE FIRE MARSHALS HERE.
SO, SO, UM, MR. TRELLE, CAN YOU, UM, FIRST OF ALL SAY YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? YEAH, STEVEN TRU DOLLON FIRE DEPARTMENT.
CAN YOU, UM, PROVIDE UM, SORT OF AN OVERVIEW OF THE FIRE CODE REV, UM, REGULATIONS THAT WOULD INTERSECT WITH HOME, PARTICULARLY WITH THE FLAG LOT PIECES, UM, BUT ALSO WITH THE NUMBER OF UNITS, UM, THAT WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF AS WE EVALUATE THESE PROCESSES? UM, I HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF HOMES THAT ARE IN THE WWE.
UM, I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE WWE AND THERE'S A LOT OF THESE THINGS THAT ON THEIR SURFACE SEEM COUNTER TO WHAT WE KNOW FROM THE WWE.
WE, I WAS PART OF A, OF A EXERCISE THE OTHER WEEK AND WE WERE LOOKING AT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE BOULDER AREA.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE HOUSES THAT FOLLOW THE
UM, WE ARE POTENTIALLY PUTTING HOUSES IN THE MIDDLE OF AREAS THAT DON'T HAVE THE, UM, EXITS THAT WE WOULD WANT.
AND, AND I'M JUST STRUGGLING WITH HOW TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS PLAYS OUT AND INTERSECTS AND THERE MAY BE OTHER CODES THAT PROTECT IT.
I'M JUST NOT UNDERSTANDING HOW IT ALL FITS TOGETHER.
SO IF YOU COULD PROVIDE SOME INSIGHTS, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.
SO FOR THE, UH, AS MENTIONED, IF THE, THE FIRST POINT IS IF
[00:55:01]
THE STANDARD ACCESS IS 150 FEET, SO, UH, MOST LOTS THAT'S GONNA BE ACHIEVABLE.UH, UNLESS THE, THE LOT HAPPENS TO BE VERY DEEP.
AND THEN THAT POTENTIALLY COULD TRIGGER EITHER A FIRE LANE REQUIREMENT, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, DIFFICULT FOR A LOT OF RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
AND SO THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO SPRINKLER THE, UH, THE DWELLING THAT'S BEYOND THE 150 FEET, BUT FOR THE, IT'S BEYOND 150 FEET FROM A HYDRANT OR FROM THE ROADWAY? FROM THE ROADWAY.
BUT FOR MORE SPECIFIC, UH, INFORMATION WITH REGARD TO THE OVERLAP OF THE WOOEY IN HOME AND ALSO THE BUILDING CODES, SINCE THERE IS OVERLAP THERE, I'M GONNA ASK BEN FLICK OUR MANAGING ENGINEER TO COME UP AND HE CAN SPEAK TO THOSE THANK YOU, UH, WITH MORE DETAIL.
AND OBVIOUSLY IF THEY'RE IN THE WOOEY, THEY HAVE TO HARDEN THE HOME, BUT THEN THERE'S ALL THE SPACING STUFF THAT GETS IMPACTED.
UH, BEN FLICK MANAGING FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE.
SO IN TERMS OF HOME ONE, WHEN WE'RE ALLOWED TO PUT THREE UNITS ON A LOT AS CHIEF MENTIONED, SO THAT INCITES THE REQUIREMENT IN THE FIRE CODE WHERE THEY HAVE TO MEET ACCESS OF THE 150 FEET OR SPRINKLER THE BUILDING TO GET A GAIN.
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DENSIFICATION WITH THE WOOEY, THE CONCERN IS GONNA BE WHEN A SUBDIVISION COMES IN THAT IS BELOW THE CURRENT THRESHOLD OF 30 UNITS AND THEY'RE ALLOWED TO ESSENTIALLY TRIPLE PREVIOUSLY WOULD'VE BEEN APPROVED WITH ONE ONLY ONE POINT OF ACCESS.
SO NOW IT REQUIRES TWO AND IT'S GONNA BE VERY DIFFICULT TO GO BACK AND RETROFIT IN A LOT OF CASES THESE SUBDIVISIONS.
SO THEY'RE GONNA BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE INGRESS EGRESS REQUIREMENTS.
UH, IN TERMS OF ROADWAY, HOW DOES THAT WORK IF WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, ONESIE, TWOSIES, LIKE RANDOMLY PEOPLE DECIDE THAT THEY WANT TO SPLIT THEIR LOT INTO THREE AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE IN, I DON'T KNOW, LONG CANYON THAT HAS ONLY ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT.
AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN ANYBODY CAN GO AHEAD AND SPLIT THEIR LOT AND NOW YOU'RE ADDING MORE PEOPLE.
AND IF ENOUGH PEOPLE DO IT AND IT'S A BIG ENOUGH AREA, YOU CAN NEED ANOTHER EGRESS, BUT INDIVIDUALLY THEY DON'T.
SO WHAT DOES, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT ALL ADDS UP.
SO THAT'S CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENT ON HOW WE WOULD HANDLE THAT UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT IS A MECHANISM THAT, THAT THE STEP-BY-STEP PROCESS COULD EVENTUALLY OVER TIME LEAD TO SOMEWHERE BEING NON-COMPLIANT.
UH, WE'RE REVIEWING THAT AND THAT IS A CONCERN OF OURS AS WELL.
AND SO WE DON'T HAVE A PLAN FOR IF ALL OF THESE HOUSES, IF ALL OF THESE PEOPLE DECIDE TO USE THEIR PROPERTIES IN THESE ADDITIONAL WAYS, WHICH WE'RE TOUTING AS THE WAY THEY CAN, AND THEY'RE IN THE WILD AND URBAN INTERFACE AND WE HAVE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS THAT REQUIRE CERTAIN EGRESSES AND INGRESS WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU REACH CERTAIN THRESHOLDS, WE DON'T HAVE A PLAN FOR THAT.
THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED THOUGH THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS.
FROM THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS, WE WOULD REVIEW IT ON ALL NEW CASES.
UM, 30 UNITS AND ABOVE WOULD REQUIRE IT.
WE'RE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT THE 24 WEI CODE.
SO WE WOULD WORK SOMETHING IN THERE THAT WE WOULD EXTRAPOLATE IF SOMETHING WERE 10 UNITS.
UH, IT'S A SMALL SUBDIVISION, BUT WE WOULD ASSUME AT SOME POINT IN TIME THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO SUBDIVIDE AND, AND TRIPLE TO BE OVER THAT.
SO WE WOULD LOOK AT KIND OF STEPPING DOWN THE REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE ONE AND TWO POINTS OF INGRESS.
THE CONCERN'S GONNA BE EXISTING SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE COMING THROUGH AS COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER STATED, THERE'S NO MECHANISM IF EACH INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER WERE TO COME THROUGH.
'CAUSE IT'S NOT, IT'S A SUBDIVISION ON A PROPERTY AS OPPOSED TO THE OVERALL SUBDIVISION RE PLATTING.
SO, AND I MEAN, AND THIS IS A, I I SURE IT'S AN ISSUE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY, BUT IN MY DISTRICT WE HAVE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE NOT BUILT WITH THESE, UM, WITH TWO EXITS.
AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T NEED A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE TO GET TO THE POINT THAT YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE ADDITIONAL WEIGHT ON IT.
AND IF IT'S INDIVIDUALS, WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE A MECHANISM.
AND EVEN WITH THE 30, I WOULD ARGUE, GIVEN WHAT WE SAW WITH MILESTONE OUT NEAR RIVER PLACE, WE DON'T HAVE A REAL MECHANISM TO FORCE THEM TO DO THE EGRESS AND EGRESSES EVEN WHEN THEY'RE DOING THE LARGE, UM, DIVISIONS.
UM, BUT WE HAVE ENORMOUS RISKS IN THE EE AND YOU DON'T, I MEAN, YOU DON'T WANNA BE BUILDING IN THE WWE AND IF YOU HAVE TO BE BUILDING IN THE WWE, YOU NEED TO BE BUILDING.
AND IT'S NOT JUST THE EGRESS AND EGRESSES THAT ARE AN ISSUE.
I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'M GONNA HAVE TO REALLY THINK ABOUT.
[01:00:01]
I DON'T, I DON'T, I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE OPENING A PANDORA'S BOX THAT'S GONNA BE VERY, VERY, UM, DETRIMENTAL TO THE SAFETY OF OUR COMMUNITY.THERE'S ANOTHER PART OF THE WEI THAT'S NOT THE EGRESS AND THE EGRESS, WHICH IS JUST HOW CLOSE THE BUILDINGS ARE TOGETHER.
AND THERE ARE LOTS OF PIECES OF THIS WHICH ALLOW YOU TO PUT BUILDINGS CLOSER TOGETHER.
AND WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT FROM ONE BUILDING TO THE OTHER, THE EMBERS CAN FLY AND YOU WANNA HAVE THE DISTANCES.
THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THE CODE.
AND THAT'S MUCH EASIER WHEN YOU HAVE LARGER LOTS AND YOU DON'T HAVE THESE NARROW SETBACKS.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IN THE WOOEY AREA WHEN, UM, YOU HAVE THESE NEW RULES AND EVEN IF IT'S JUST ONE SET OF BUILDINGS THAT UM, YOU KNOW, ONE LOT BECOMES THREE AND NOW THEY'RE REALLY CLOSE TOGETHER, UM, FOR THOSE PEOPLE, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THEIR HOUSES ARE STILL MAINTAINING THE DISTANCES THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THAT FIRE SAFETY? SO IN CASES OF THAT, WE WOULD LOOK AT THE SEPARATION DISTANCES WITHIN THE WWE CODE.
SO IT'S GONNA INCREASE THE NUMBER OF STRUCTURES THAT ARE GONNA HAVE HARDENING REQUIREMENTS AND POTENTIALLY SPRINKLER SYSTEMS, JUST DEPENDING CASE BY CASE.
SO IN ALL OF THESE CASES, WHEN WE DO THIS, THERE ARE GONNA BE COSTS THAT ARE ADDED FOR THE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS OR FOR THE HARDENING, BUT BUT I MEAN, ARE WE, LIKE, IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE WWE THAT IS GOING TO MAKE IT SO THAT THOSE STRUCTURES CAN'T BE AS CLOSE AS THIS IS PROPOSING? OR ARE WE NOW ALLOWING THEM TO BE CLOSER IN THE WWE? SO THERE'S NOTHING WITHIN THE WWE NOW, OR CURRENTLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE 24 AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THAT ONLY WHEN STRUCTURES BECOME CLOSER IN PROXIMITY, IT INCREASES THE HARDENING REQUIREMENTS AND PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THOSE, THOSE BUILDINGS.
SO WE HAVE THESE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE HARDENING THAT WOULD BE CHANGING, BUT ARE THEY, MOST OF THOSE AREAS DON'T HAVE BUILDINGS THAT ARE THIS CLOSE TOGETHER? MM-HMM.
SO OUR REGULATIONS, DO WE NEED TO ADDRESS THOSE REGULATIONS IN THE
AND SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT IF THERE'S A FLAG LOT AND IT'S LARGER THAN 150 FROM THE STREET, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A SPRINKLER SYSTEM OR A FIRE LANE.
AND THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, ANYWHERE IF THEY'RE IN THE
UM, BUT WE DO HAVE A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE WITH THE EGRESS AND THE INGRESS IF WE'RE RANDOMLY ALLOWING THESE TO HAPPEN IN AREAS THAT WERE NOT PLANNED, UM, FOR THAT LEVEL OF DENSITY, POTENTIALLY.
I, I DON'T, I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM STAFF IF WE HAVE SOME SOLUTIONS THAT THEY CAN PROPOSE, BECAUSE I DON'T, I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT HAPPEN AND HAVING, UM, SEEN HOW, HOW QUICKLY THINGS BURN IN IN OTHER PLACES THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, MUCH CLOSER, UM, HOME LOCATIONS.
I THINK IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, UM, A REALLY BIG ISSUE.
AND WE'LL DEFINITELY LOOK INTO IT.
AND THEN I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION FOR TODAY, AND THAT IS SORT OF PROCEDURALLY, UM, WHAT WOULD WE BE TAKING UP ON THE 16TH? UM, GIVEN THAT WE HAVE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE HAVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT DO NOT, UH, MATCH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, HOW WILL WE HAVE, HOW WILL WE THINK ABOUT THOSE GOING FORWARD IN TERMS OF LIKE MOTIONS AND AND MATERIALS? SO WE WOULD DO A STAFF VERSION AND A COMMISSION VERSION.
I WILL SAY THIS IS, WE HAVE BEEN, UM, IN BACKUP UP TO DATE UP TILL NOW, WE HAVE HAD SEPARATE ORDINANCES FOR EACH ITEM.
HOWEVER, ALL OF THOSE ORDINANCES AMEND THE CITY CODE.
SO WE ARE GOING TO DO A SINGLE ORDINANCE THAT INCORPORATES ALL OF THOSE PIECES EXCEPT FOR THE REZONING OF THE ACTUAL REZONING ACTION FOR THE ETOD.
UM, I CAN SEND MAYOR AND COUNCIL A A LITTLE EMAIL KIND OF BREAKING THAT DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT THE CONCERN WE HAVE IS WE NEED THE REZONING PIECE TO STANDALONE.
SO THERE WOULD ONLY BE ONE VERSION OF THAT.
AND THEN THE LARGER ORDINANCE, WHICH IS THE CHANGES TO THE CODE ITSELF, THERE WOULD BE A STAFF VERSION AND A PLANNING COMMISSION VERSION SINCE THERE IS NOT, UM, A CONCURRENCE ON, ON ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I HAVE SOME PIECES THAT I MIGHT SUPPORT AND SOME THAT I DON'T WITH THE SEPARATE ORDINANCES.
AND SO THAT IS GONNA MAKE THAT REALLY COMPLICATED IF WE SUPPORT PIECES AND NOT PIECES THAT ARE ACROSS THOSE, LIKE I
[01:05:01]
INITIATED THE EV AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR THAT.SO OUR RECOMMENDATION, THERE ARE OTHER ONES THAT I'M STILL, YOU KNOW, UNSURE THAT I'M SUPPORTING AND WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO, I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN PRESENTING IT AS IF WE WERE VOTING SEPARATELY ON THOSE AMENDMENTS.
AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, I WOULD LIKE THERE TO BE A PROCEDURAL WAY THAT, THAT I CAN DO THAT AND I MAY NOT BE THE ONLY ONE WHO FEELS THAT WAY.
IT WOULD LIKELY BE DIVIDING THE QUESTION AND IT WOULD BE PARTS.
AND THE ORDINANCE WHEN IT COMES OUT WILL LAY OUT WHICH PARTS APPLY TO WHICH THING.
SO THOSE PARTS COULD BE LIKE PARTS ONE THROUGH FIVE COULD BE ONE SET OF AMENDMENTS AND THE COUNCIL COULD VOTE ON THOSE, DIVIDE THE QUESTION AS WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.
IT JUST WILL BE IN ONE ORDINANCE DOCUMENT.
UM, IF IT'S CLEAR PARTS WHERE WE CAN DO THAT, IT IT WILL BE, IT WILL BE.
AND, AND, UM, OBVIOUSLY THE MAYOR'S NOT HERE, BUT IF YOU CAN, SOMEONE CAN WORK WITH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE TO MAKE SURE THAT YES, WE HAVE THAT ABILITY AND THAT IT IS CLEAR ON THE MOTIONS.
CAN YOU SAY ONE MORE TIME? I'M NOT, SO YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE PUTTING O IS SEPARATE FROM THE OTHER THREE OR THE, SO IF YOU'LL NOTICE IN THE ETOD ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A PART THAT ACTUALLY REZONES THE PROPERTIES TO ADD THE ETOD TO THE STRING.
SO, AND THERE WOULD ONLY BE ONE VERSION OF THAT BECAUSE IT'S ONLY THE ONE THING OF REZONING.
SO PERHAPS WE COULD JUST SEPARATE OUT THE EV ONE AS WELL AND THEN YOU CAN KEEP THE OTHER ONES STAFF WILL WORK ON THAT WITH THE
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, SENIO.
UM, I'VE ASKED, UM, MY STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF TO GET A MAP THAT SHOWS WHICH AREAS ARE AFFECTED, LIKE WHERE ARE THE HOAS AROUND TOWN.
AND WE KNOW THAT HOME DOES NOT AFFECT HOMES THAT ARE GOVERNED BY HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS AND PROPERTY OWNER ASSOCIATIONS.
AND IT WOULD PROBABLY SET A LOT OF MINDS TO REST IF THEY HAD A SENSE OF WHERE THEY ARE.
UM, WITH REGARD TO MAPPING THAT, IS THAT SOMETHING WE COULD GET FAIRLY SOON? I AM LOOKING TO MS. BATES FOR CONFIRMATION.
I'M NOT SURE THAT WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE I GIVE YOU AN ACCURATE ANSWER.
I PERSONALLY AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT REQUEST.
I DO KNOW THAT WHEN WE'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS IN THE PAST ABOUT IDENTIFYING PROPERTIES WHERE PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS WOULD LIMIT, PUT FURTHER LIMITATIONS ON WHAT IS ACCESSIBLE UNDER ZONING.
STAFF DOES NOT HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE DATABASE OR ANY WAY TO TRACK THAT INFORMATION.
SO I CAN FOLLOW UP ON WHO HAS RECEIVED THIS REQUEST TO SEE IF THERE IS ANYTHING THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
BUT IN GENERAL, WE DON'T HAVE DATA ON WHERE THERE ARE HOA OR A COMPREHENSIVE SET OF DATA ON WHERE THERE ARE HOAS OR PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS THAT WOULD LIMIT THE NUMBER OF UNITS, FOR EXAMPLE, OR PLACE OTHER PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS ON PROPERTY.
BUT AT SOME POINT WE WILL NEED THAT INFORMATION.
I IMAGINE WE ARE IN THE POSITION OF WEIGHING THE PRIVATE INFORMATION WITH WHAT THE CITY IS IN, UH, IS ABLE TO ENFORCE AND IDENTIFY.
SO THIS IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE THOUGHT OF BEFORE, AND WE CAN PREPARE A RESPONSE WITH THE CURRENT STATUS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHETHER THIS WOULD BE ACHIEVABLE IN THE FUTURE.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL.
AND, AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE BEEN THINKING ABOUT AND, AND WISHING FOR, UM, CERTAINLY THE LAST, I DON'T KNOW, 5, 6, 7 YEARS MAYBE
UM, AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, A, A PRETTY LONG TIME.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER RYAN ALTER.
I JUST WANNA PICK UP A LITTLE BIT ON THE WWE CONVERSATION AND, UH, COUNCILOR ALLISON ALTER, WE ACTUALLY PLAN TO, TO REACH OUT TO YOUR OFFICE ONCE WE HAD SOME LANGUAGE, BUT, UH, AN IDEA THAT OUR OFFICE IS EXPLORING IS SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU WOULD SEE IN THE LARGER SCALE DEVELOPMENT WHERE IF YOU RIGHT NOW GO AND SUBMIT FOR A, A LARGE, UH, PROJECT AND IT HAS OVER A CERTAIN NUMBER OF UNITS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A, A CERTAIN INGRESS AND EGRESS, UH, REQUIREMENT OR ABILITY.
AND SO IF WE AS, UM, THE CITY ARE ABLE TO ESSENTIALLY DRAW LINES AROUND NEIGHBORHOODS OR OTHER AREAS THAT MAKE SENSE THAT APPLY THAT SAME RULE, AND SO YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, I REPRESENT A VARIOUS NEIGHBORHOODS, I, THE BARTON VIEW ONE IS, IS A GREAT EXAMPLE WHERE THEY HAVE BASICALLY
[01:10:01]
ONE WAY IN AND OUT AND, AND IT'S A VERY DISCERNIBLE NEIGHBORHOOD.AND IF YOU SAID WITHIN THIS AREA YOU ARE ALLOWED X NUMBER OF UNITS BASED ON YOUR INGRESS AND EGRESS, THEN WHEN SOMEONE DOES GO TO SUBDIVIDE, IF THEY ARE GOING TO PUT A UNIT ABOVE THAT, THEN THAT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED.
AND SO IT WILL KIND OF HELP SOLVE THAT SMALLER SCALE PROBLEM.
AND, AND I KNOW THAT THERE ARE CHALLENGES IN THAT, BUT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO GET OUT WHEN THEY NEED TO.
AND SO I THINK THIS IS ONE POTENTIAL WAY TO DO THAT.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE DETAILS THERE, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE CERTAIN LIMITATIONS.
AND THEN IF, UH, LATER DOWN THE ROAD THEY BUILD ANOTHER ROAD,
UH, BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO PUT THAT PROTECTION IN PLACE.
SO JUST KINDA WANNA PUT THAT OUT THERE AND, AND, AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE THAT SOON, BUT LOOK FORWARD TO, TO TALKING WITH YOU ABOUT THAT.
UH, I WANTED TO TALK OR ASK ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT FOR THE, IT'S THE NUMBER ONE, THE AMEND THE LOT AREA AND IMPERVIOUS COVER MEASUREMENTS TO EXCLUDE FLAGPOLE.
UM, YOU SAID IT'S CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT CODE.
SO WE DO NOT CURRENTLY COUNT THE POLE AS PART OF THE LOT WHEN CALCULATING IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO CURRENTLY THE LOT AREA DOES NOT INCLUDE THE FLAGPOLE.
IT JUST INCLUDES, YOU KNOW, THE LARGER SQUARE FLAG PORTION OF THE LOT.
UM, AND SO THEREFORE A CONSEQUENCE OF THAT IS THAT THE IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THAT AREA IS NOT COUNTED.
UM, AND THIS HAPPENS TODAY, UM, UNDER FLAG LOT SUBDIVISIONS.
UH, AND THEN NUMBER THREE, WHEN WE USED TO HAVE AN INCREASE IN THE MINIMUM UNIT SIZE FROM, YOU SAID CURRENTLY IT'S 1450 TO 1650, THAT 1450 IS BASED OFF THE NU THE FAR ESSENTIALLY MAX OUT UNDER TWO UNITS? CORRECT.
'CAUSE UNDER THREE UNITS IT WOULD BE LIKE MORE LIKE 1250.
SO IN, IN HOME PHASE ONE, THREE UNITS, UM, FOR THE SMALLEST LOT GOT A, A SLIGHT BUMP TO 43 50.
OH, IT DID? SO 1450 IS ONE THIRD OF THAT? YES.
I, AND I HAD THE 37 50 AND THAT'S WHY I WAS CONFUSED.
OKAY, THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
AND I, UH, JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, I THOUGHT I HAD ONE MORE QUESTION, BUT I THINK THAT IS IT.
AND, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER VELA, THANK YOU.
UM, ON THE HOME ACT ACTUALLY ON, AND, AND PICKING UP ON THE FLAGPOLE A A QUESTION RIGHT QUICK.
UM, HOW MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? I'M JUST WONDERING IN TERMS OF SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, EXEMPTING, NOT EXEMPTING, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, 500 SQUARE FEET, YOU KNOW, 600 SQUARE FEET OUT, JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY AND WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE LOT ARE, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? YOU KNOW, AGAIN, AND JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, ASSUMING THAT THE, UNDER THE CURRENT POLICY THAT YOU DO A, A FLAGPOLE, UH, UH, SUBDIVISION, UH, AND PLEASE EXCUSE IF I'M NOT USING THE RIGHT TERMS, BUT A, A A FLAGPOLE STRUCTURE, UH, YOU, YOU WOULD HAVE 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR YOUR LOT AND THEN YOU EXEMPT THE FLAGPOLE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO THAT MAKES IT 47% FOR, YOU KNOW, 50%.
LIKE, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH OF A BUMP IS THAT IN TERMS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER UNDER CURRENT POLICY? YEAH, THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.
UM, SO STAFF ORIGINALLY RECOMMENDED, INCLUDING THE FLAGPOLE, JUST SO 45% WAS KEPT STEADY, BUT BECAUSE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO NOT INCLUDE IT, WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING SOME MODELING TO STUDY WHAT THAT, WHAT THAT INCREASE WOULD BE UNDER LIKELY SCENARIOS.
I, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT NUMBER TO KNOW.
YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A, YOU KNOW, A, A SIGNIFICANT, UH, PERCENTAGE INCREASE, UH, THAT'S IT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO KNOW THAT IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE INCREASE, SO AGAIN, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY GONNA HAVE A MATERIAL EFFECT, THEN I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, JUST IN TERMS OF OUR ANALYSIS, I'M JUST NOT QUITE SURE WHAT IT MEANS TO EXEMPT THE FLAGPOLE OR, OR, OR NOT, UH, EXEMPT THE FLAGPOLE.
UM, AND THEN WITH REGARD TO THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK, UH, THAT PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED AND THAT, UH, Y'ALL ARE NOT RECOMMENDING, WHAT ARE THE CONCERNS WITH THE 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK? YEAH, SO ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS THE 25 FOOT SETBACK IS GONNA REMAIN IN PLACE FOR LARGER LOTS OVER 57 50 THAT HAVE ONE UNIT.
UM, AND FOR ANY OTHER USES LIKE CIVIC USES THAT ARE
[01:15:01]
ALLOWED IN SF ONE, TWO, AND THREE, AND SO THE STAFF SEES THE 15 FOOT, UM, SETBACK IS MORE OF A BALANCE FROM THE, BETWEEN THE 25 AND AND A SMALLER SETBACK.IS IT JUST AESTHETICS? IT'S PARTIALLY AESTHETIC.
AND THEN STAFF IS ALSO LOOKING AT KIND OF WHAT THE IMPACT ON THE OPEN, ANY OPEN GREEN SPACE YOU MIGHT HAVE IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE IF YOU DID REDUCE TO THAT 10 FEET? YEAH.
IT'S FUNNY 'CAUSE I KNOW WE'RE GETTING A BUNCH OF GROUND MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT EMAILS RIGHT NOW, UH, BUT DO WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE LAWN IN THE FRONT? I MEAN, WE USE A LOT OF WATER, YOU KNOW, TO, TO KEEP OUR KIND OF FRONT LAWNS GREEN.
AND I MEAN, PERSONALLY, I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF, OF FRONT LAWNS.
I THINK OF THEM MORE AS KIND OF WASTED SPACE, UH, AND USE, WE USE A LOT OF WATER TO KEEP THAT GRASS GREEN.
SO I, I THINK THAT'S A POLICY QUESTION.
UH, AND, AND I WAS JUST WONDERING WHAT, WHAT STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE ON THAT WOULD BE.
WE HAVE, I THINK FROM STAFF AND LAURA, PLEASE, UH, INTERJECT IF I'M, I'M WRONG.
BUT WHEN SHE'S SPEAKING TO THE AESTHETICS, WE'RE LOOKING AT, AT OPEN SPACE, CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR, UM, CONSERVATION OF WATER, BUT LOOKING AT OPEN SPACE AS A PRIORITY OF OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL.
AND I SEE KEITH MAR STANDING, I THINK HE MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD TO THIS.
DO YOU WANNA THANK YOU, KEITH.
KEITH MAR, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
OUR TREE PLANTING REQUIREMENTS ARE ALSO KIND OF CRITICAL TO THAT, ESPECIALLY AS WE BECOME MORE COMPACT AND CONNECTED.
UH, THAT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE, THE HOUSE, THE HOME, THE, THE FRONT YARD SIDEWALK AND, AND SHADED, UH, SIDEWALK IS GONNA BE CRITICAL TO THAT.
UH, AND AFTER, UH, QUITE A BIT OF CONTEMPLATION, THAT'S WHERE WE LANDED IN, IN A MATTER OF THE, THE GREEN SPACE AT LARGE.
BUT TREES SPECIFICALLY FOR BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE SPACE FOR SHADE MM-HMM.
IS THERE A SENSE IN HOW MUCH SPACE DO WE NEED IN THE FRONT TO PROVIDE A SPACE FOR A TREE? WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH WHAT A NUMBER LOOKS LIKE.
PART OF THE CHALLENGE IS CLOSE ENOUGH, BUT WITHOUT, UH, PROVIDING CONFLICT.
UM, MANY, MANY INFILL LOTS ALSO HAVE OVERHEAD UTILITIES THAT ARE, THERE ARE, UH, REAL SAFETY CONCERNS ABOUT SEPARATION BETWEEN TREES AND THE
UH, SO THAT'S WHERE THE 15 FEET, UH, ARE THERE TYPICALLY, UH, ENERGY WIRES IN THE FRONT, THOUGH? I, I THINK OF THEM AS KIND OF RUNNING THROUGH THE BACKYARDS, BUT I KNOW AT, AT DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE DIFFERENT STRUCTURES.
FRONT YARD, UH, FRONT YARD WHERE THERE ARE NOT OVERHEAD UTILITIES, AND THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE A MATTER OF NOT HAVING UNDERGROUND UTILITY CONFLICTS.
UH, BUT CERTAINLY THOSE CONFLICTS EXIST, BE IT IN THE FRONT OR IN THE BACK.
AND AGAIN, I MEAN, HONESTLY, EVEN JUST LOOKING AT DOWNTOWN, I MEAN, WE'VE MANAGED TO DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB WITH OUR TREES AND OUR STREETSCAPE HERE WITH, AND I THINK WE HAVE ZERO SETBACKS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA.
I, I MEAN, I, I THINK OF 10 FEET AS KIND OF, UH, AGAIN, IRRESPECTIVE OF, OF THE OTHER CONCERNS.
UH, YOU CAN DEFINITELY HAVE A TREE WITHIN A 10 FOOT, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, A SETBACK.
BUT, UH, BUT, UH, ANYWAY, UH, UH, LOOK FORWARD TO, TO THE, UH, UH, FUTURE CONVERSATIONS ON IT.
I'D LIKE STAFF TO LOOK AT THE IMPACTS OF OUR NEW STREET TREE ORDINANCE AND WITH REGARD TO DISTANCES AND WHAT WE'RE HOPING TO ACHIEVE IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE AND HEALTHY CANOPIES.
COUNCILOR BRA WAS, UH, THINKING ALONG THE SAME LINES AS THERE WAS A RELATED, UH, INITIATIVE THROUGH THE RESOLUTION THAT STREET TREES WILL OBVIOUSLY BECOME A MUCH MORE IMPORTANT COMPONENT TO THE CITY.
UH, AND THAT'S DEFINITELY A, UH, SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES, UH, ONE CITY APPROACH TO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE NOT CREATING FALSE CHOICES ON, UH, IN THESE MATTERS.
UM, A ALL RIGHT, UH, LAST QUESTION, UH, UNLESS THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE.
I WANTED TO GO BACK TO, UH, MAYOR PROTIME POOL'S, UH, COMMENTS ABOUT THE HOAS.
AND JUST BE REALLY CLEAR, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION.
THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, THE CITY, UM, IF SOMEBODY COMES IN FOR A PERMIT, YOU KNOW, TO DO HOME ET CETERA, THEY'RE NOT GONNA LOOK AT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THEY'RE GONNA GO FORWARD WITH IT.
UM, SO THE ONLY WAY THAT YOU PROTECT YOURSELF IF YOU'RE IN ONE OF THOSE HOAS THAT DOES HAVE DEED RESTRICTIONS IS IF YOUR HOAS IS ORGANIZED AND HAS ACCESS TO A LAWYER AND IS ON THE BALL ENOUGH WHEN SOMEBODY'S PERMISSION GOES IN TO STOP IT.
AND ON TOP OF THAT, UM, BECAUSE OF WHAT HOME ONE AND HOME TWO DO FOR THE NUMBER OF UNITS AND FOR THE LOT SIZE, YOU HAVE SOME HOAS THAT HAVE A NUMBER OF UNIT CAP, AND SOME WHO HAVE
[01:20:01]
A, A LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT, AND SOME WHO HAVE BOTH, BUT NOT EVERYONE HAS ALL OF THE ELEMENTS.AND SO YOU REALLY HAVE TO GO AND YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT YOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND IT IS, YOU KNOW, WISHFUL THINKING TO THINK THAT, UM, DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE GOING TO MAKE IT SO THAT THESE THINGS DON'T APPLY, UM, IN THE AREA SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT.
IF THEY ARE CONCERNED, UM, THEY MAY NOT BE CONCERNED, THEY MAY WELCOME IT, BUT, BUT IT, WE CAN'T SAY THAT BECAUSE YOU D RESTRICTIONS IT'S NOT GOING TO IMPACT YOU.
I THINK THAT IS, IS NOT AN, A FAIR, UM, CONCLUSION GIVEN EVERYTHING WE'VE HEARD OVER THE YEARS ON ALL OF THE ASPECTS OF OUR, OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
ALRIGHT, IT IS ABOUT 1230 AND I NEED TO, UH, DEPART FOR THE PRESS CONFERENCE THAT IS HAPPENING, UM, UP AT TRAVIS COUNTY.
AND I KNOW THERE ARE A NUMBER OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO ARE ALSO GOING TO GO.
SO COLLEAGUES, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, SINCE WE HAVE ONE LAST ITEM, WHICH IS THE PULLED ITEMS, AND SINCE SOME OF THE PULLED ITEMS ARE BEING PULLED BY PEOPLE WHO NEED AND WANT TO GO TO THE PRESS CONFERENCE, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT TAKING A BREAK? UM, AND THEN WE WILL RECONVENE WHEN WE'RE BACK FROM THE PRESS CONFERENCE IN THAT WAY.
Y'ALL CAN ATTEND THAT AND ALSO BE BACK FOR THE PULLED ITEMS. THAT SOUND ALL RIGHT? AND I THINK THAT MEANS MAYBE TWO O'CLOCK OR TWO 30.
SO WE'LL TAKE A RECESS NOW AND COME BACK AT TWO O'CLOCK FOR PULLED ITEMS. SEEING NO OBJECTIONS.
WE ARE IN RECESS AND WE WILL RECONVENE AT TWO O'CLOCK.
AND STEPH, THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR THE DILIGENT WORK THAT YOU'RE PUTTING FORWARD ON THESE, UH, REALLY DIFFICULT ISSUES.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A QUORUM.
THAT WE HAVE ALL, SO WE CAN RECONVENE THE WORK SESSION.
UM, AND WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT.
[A. Pre-Selected Agenda Items (Part 2 of 2) ]
AND LET'S SEE, WE ARE UP TO PULLED ITEMS. WE HAVE FOUR PULLED ITEMS, 3 49, 69, AND 76.SO WE WILL START WITH ITEM THREE.
AND, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER RYAN ALTER, YOU PULLED THIS ONE.
I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS FOR THE DIRECTOR, UH, AUSTIN RESOURCE, JUST TO GET A A LITTLE CONTEXT ON THIS ITEM.
THIS IS THE ITEM ABOUT THE, THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE RULE CHANGE AND THEM COMING BEFORE COUNCIL OR NOT.
UM, MY FIRST QUESTION FOR YOU IS, WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT, UH, BEFORE THIS MEETING ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, EFFORTS THAT Y'ALL GO THROUGH IN ORDER TO BRING IT BEFORE, UH, THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND COUNCIL.
AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD JUST TALK ABOUT WHAT ADDITIONAL WORK YOU SEE UNDER THE CURRENT PROCESS THAT YOU WOULD AVOID IF WE MADE THIS CHANGE? SURE.
UM, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
COUNCIL MEMBER RICHARD MCHALE, DIRECTOR OF FROST RESOURCE RECOVERY.
UM, OUR ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, OUR, OUR PROCESS TO, UH, CHANGE OUR ADMINISTRATIVE RULES ARE DIFFERENT FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
SO, UM, OUR PROCESS IS MORE LIKE, UH, AMENDING CODE.
SO WE FOLLOW A PROCESS WHERE WE WILL DRAFT THE RULES, WE WILL THEN CONVENE AN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS TO GATHER INPUT, UM, MAKE ANY MODIFICATIONS BASED ON THAT.
AND THEN AS THAT, THAT IS THEN PRESENTED TO OUR ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO COUNCIL, UH, THEN WE WOULD SCHEDULE A COUNCIL MEETING FOR THAT APPROVAL, UH, AS OPPOSED TO THE OTHER PROCESS THAT OTHER DEPARTMENTS USE THAT HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES, WHEREAS THEY WOULD JUST HAVE A PUBLIC, UH, PROCESS OF POSTING FOR 31 DAYS, ACCEPT COMMENTS, ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
UH, AND, AND CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE RULES? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT TYPES OF CHANGES WOULD WE SEE HERE? SURE.
SO THE, UH, THE DIRECTOR'S RULES FOR AUSTIN RESOURCE RECOVERY BASICALLY ARE THE HOW WE IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENT THE, THE POLICY.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CODE SAYS THAT, UH, A RR WILL COLLECT SOLID WASTE FOR THE CITY.
AND SO THE RULES KIND OF TALK ABOUT, OKAY, WE WILL PICK UP RECYCLING, WE WILL PICK UP TRASH.
SO THAT KIND OF, KIND OF GOES DOWN IN THE DETAIL THERE.
SO, UM, ITEMS INCLUDED IN THE, IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES FOR CHAPTER 15 INCLUDE SERVICE SCHEDULES, UM, TALKS ABOUT OUR CORE SERVICES SUCH AS THE RECYCLING, BRUSH PICKUP, GARBAGE PICKUP, OTHER CORE SERVICES SUCH AS OUR HOUSEHOLD HAS THIS WASTE FACILITY AND OUR, UH, RECYCLING PROGRAMS. UM, THERE'S A SECTION ON FEES IN THERE, BUT WE CAN CHARGE FOR FEES, UM, CART SIZES, UM, MATERIALS ACCEPTED.
SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN, IN OUR, THE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES.
AND THEN LOOKING KIND OF AT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN, UH, WHILE, YOU KNOW, YOU DESCRIBED THE ADDITIONAL HASSLE, AND I CAN CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT,
[01:25:01]
UH, THE, SINCE THIS RULE HAS BEEN IN PLACE, HAVE THERE HAVE, HAVE YOU EVER HAD A PROPOSAL THAT HAS GOTTEN TO COUNCIL THAT WAS ULTIMATELY NOT APPROVED? SO WHILE MAYBE YOU HAD EXTRA WORK, ULTIMATELY, HAVE YOU EVER NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL WITH THE CURRENT PROCESS? UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE, THE HISTORY OF, SINCE THIS HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE THAT WAS 2012, AND I WASN'T NEARLY AS INVOLVED AS I AM NOW IN THIS SITUATION, BUT I DO KNOW IF WE'VE HAD FOUR, UM, OVER THE, PROBABLY THE PAST 10 YEARS CHANGES, I THINK ALL OF THOSE WERE SUCCESSFUL.UM, BUT I KNOW THAT THOSE WERE CAME AND THOSE WERE MAJOR ITEMS. THOSE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE UNIVERSAL RECYCLING ORDINANCE AND, UH, SOME OF THE LARGER POLICY TYPE THINGS.
UM, A LOT OF THE CHAINS THAT WE STILL NEED TO MAKE THOUGH, ARE MORE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DETAILS.
SO FOR INSTANCE, AS WE LOOK TO GO TO AN ON-CALL, UH, UH, BRUSH, UM, BULK AND BRUSH COLLECTION, UH, WE'RE GONNA CHANGE OUR NUMBER OF TIMES.
WE COLLECT FROM TWO TIMES TO MORE THAN THAT, PROBABLY THREE TIMES LOOKS LIKE.
UM, SO THAT WOULD BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE, UH, IN OUR RULES, AND THAT UNDER THE CURRENT PROCESS, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH SWAC AND THEN THE COUNCIL TO CHANGE THAT NUMBER FROM TWO TO THREE.
WELL, I JUST, I WAS HOPING FOR A LITTLE MORE CONTEXT AND YOU'VE PROVIDED IT TODAY, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UH, YES, COUNCIL MEMBER KELLY.
YEAH, I WAS JUST HOPING, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
SORRY TO GET YOU AS YOU'RE LEAVING.
UM, I WAS HOPING TO JUST GET A BETTER IDEA OF, OF WHY WE NEED TO ALIGN WITH THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS IN THIS REGARD BECAUSE, UM, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS IN THE BACKUP, AND I'D LIKE TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THAT.
UH, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER COMES DOWN TO, UM, HOW QUICK WE CAN IMPLEMENT SOME OF THE POLICIES THAT COME OUT OF THIS, UH, GROUP.
UM, THE BIG CHANGE REALLY IS THAT PROCESS OF, OF HOW WE, UM, INTRODUCE THIS TO THE PUBLIC.
SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A, THE CURRENT PROCESS OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS UTILIZE THAT HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES, THAT'S A 31 DAY POSTING PERIOD, WHEREAS OURS IS MORE OF AN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER, UH, MEETING SCHEDULE.
SO, UM, DEPENDING ON HOW COMPLEX THE ISSUE IS, LIKE THE UNIVERSAL RECYCLING ORDINANCE, INSTEAD OF A 31 DAY CO UH, UH, COMMENT PERIOD, UM, OUR INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS LASTED FOR APPROXIMATELY SEVEN MONTHS.
SO IN REGARDS TO YOUR INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER PROCESS, YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THAT WENT ON FOR SEVEN MONTHS.
COULD YOU TELL ME THE URO, THE FEEDBACK AND SETTING UP MEETINGS WITH THE PUBLIC AND THE HAULING COMMUNITY? JUST SO WE HAVE ALL THE, ALL THE PLAYS AND, UM, ALL THE VOICES AT THE TABLE, AND WHAT ARE SOME OF THOSE VOICES THAT WERE AT THE TABLE? BECAUSE I'M, UM, PRIMARILY THROUGH THE CURRENT PROCESS, IT'S, IT'S PRIMARILY THE HAULING COMMUNITY.
WE REALLY DON'T GET A LOT OF PUBLIC INPUT.
UM, WE DO GET SOME COMMENTS FROM SWAC, BUT PRIMARILY THE FOLKS THAT SHOW UP, AT LEAST AT THE ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETINGS ARE PRIMARILY THE HAULING COMMUNITY.
SO IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE COULD SEE SOME OF THAT FEEDBACK THAT THEY PROVIDED TO YOU BEFORE THURSDAY? I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IN MAKING A DECISION ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO, TO VOTE ON THIS ITEM.
THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT YOU SAID WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS.
UM, I CAN CERTAINLY GATHER THAT WAS MANY YEARS AGO.
WE CAN CERTAINLY DO SOME DIGGING ON THAT.
SO WAS THERE A RECENT STAKEHOLDER PROCESS? I'M SORRY, I'M, IF IT SOUNDS LIKE I'M CONFUSED.
YEAH, WE DID ACTUALLY, UH, I THINK OUR MOST RECENT ONE WAS, UH, BACK IN, ACTUALLY LAST, IN 2022 WHEN WE, UH, WE CAME TO THIS BODY TO, THERE WAS A CONFLICT BETWEEN, UM, SOME OF THE LANGUAGE AND THE RULES AND THE CODE WHERE, UH, IT DIDN'T, IT WASN'T CONSISTENT.
SO WE CAME, UH, TO ADDRESS THAT.
SO THAT WAS THE MOST RECENT ONE THAT WE HAD.
BUT ON THIS ITEM IN SPECIFIC, WAS THERE A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS? IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WERE PREVIOUSLY, UNLESS YOU MADE THE DECISION TO CREATE THIS CHANGE BASED ON THAT FEEDBACK FROM 2022? I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, I'M HEARING FROM STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE SAYING THAT THEY WERE NOT INFORMED OF THIS AND THEY WERE NOT TALKED TO ABOUT THIS CHANGE.
AND SO I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT WHERE THAT DISCONNECT IS ABOUT THIS CHANGE TO THE CODE.
SO I MEAN, THIS WAS BROUGHT UP AT OUR SWAC MEETING.
WAS THERE ANY OTHER EXTERNAL INPUT? UH, NO, THIS WAS, UH, THIS JUST CAME UP AT OUR SWAC MEETING WHERE WE INTRODUCED IT LAST WEEK.
SO THEN MY NEXT QUESTION IS THAT IF WE WERE TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM AND REQUEST THAT YOU DO SOME EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK IN RELATION TO IT, WOULD IT HAVE ANY EFFECT ON WHAT YOU ALL ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH? NO, WE COULD STILL EFFECT, EFFECTIVELY DO THE SAME THING, UM, AT A LATER POINT.
IS THERE A SITUATION YOU SEE WHERE SOME OF THAT EXTERNAL FEEDBACK MAY PUT YOU IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION IN REGARDS TO MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS ITEM? UM, IF YOU'RE ASKING ME IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WILL BE DELAYED BECAUSE OF A, OF PUSHING THIS ITEM, NO.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALLISON, OFFICER ALTER.
SO, UM, YOU MENTIONED THAT IT WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE ZERO WASTE COMMISSION.
WAS IT VOTED ON BY THEM? IT WAS, IT WAS A ONE TO 7 1 4 7 AGAINST CHANGING THE AMENDMENT.
[01:30:01]
ONE QUESTION FOR YOU, MR. MCHA, IF EVEN IF WE DON'T SPECIFY Z WAC AS A BODY FOR YOU TO TAKE YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE RULE CHANGES TO, OR YOUR PROCEDURAL CHANGES TO, YOU WOULD STILL GO TO THAT BODY, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, SO WHAT OUR PROCESS WOULD BE IS I WOULD SUBMIT ANY CHANGES, ANY POTENTIAL, UM, AMENDMENTS TO, TO THE RULES IN THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT THAT I WOULD SUBMIT TO OUR ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION.UM, AND IF WE WERE FOLLOWING THE CURRENT PROCESS, UM, THE WAY OTHER DEPARTMENTS WOULD AT THAT POINT, THEN UH, WE WOULD INITIATE THE 31 DAY COMMENT PERIOD.
SO SWAC WOULD NOT ONLY HAVE, UM, THE CHANGES BEFORE THEN, BEFORE THAT 31 DAY COMMENT PERIOD STARTS, UH, BUT THEY'D BE ABLE TO, UH, HAVE INPUT ON BOTH, AT BOTH, UH, THE SWAC MEETING AND DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
AND WE WOULD BE ABLE TO AFFECT THE CHANGES IN A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER, SAVING SOME TIME, WHICH ALSO TRANSLATES INTO SAVINGS ON OUR BUDGET AND OUR STAFF TIME.
BECAUSE ONE OF THE CHANGES THAT, UH, WE'RE LOOKING TO MAKE RIGHT NOW IS A TIME THAT WE ASK FOLKS TO SET THEIR CARTS OUT.
UM, I'M WANTING TO MOVE THAT UP A LITTLE BIT.
SO, UM, AS WE GET TOWARDS MAY IN THE HEAT OF THE SUMMER, WE WANT OUR CREWS TO BE ABLE TO WORK OUT THERE A LITTLE BIT EARLIER AND, AND BE OUT OF THE HEAT.
SO THAT IS ONE OF THE TYPE OF CHANGES THAT I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH COUNSEL FOR APPROVAL.
AND I KNOW THAT THAT IS A SPECIFIC THAT WE HAVE GRAPPLED WITH ON THIS DAIS, AND THAT IS THE PHYSICAL SAFETY AND HEALTH OF THE DRIVERS, FOR EXAMPLE, WHO, YOU KNOW, ARE DRIVING THE, THE, UH, TRUCKS AROUND AND LOADING UP THE CARTS.
UM, I WILL TELL MY COLLEAGUES THAT I DUG INTO THIS WHEN I WAS CONTACTED, UM, BY REPRESENTATIVE, UM, FOR, UH, THE HAULERS OR ONE HAULER.
AND, UM, I CHALLENGED HIM TO TELL ME WHY I SHOULDN'T, WE SHOULDN'T MAKE THIS CHANGE.
THEY'RE JUST BEING RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
AND, UH, WHAT I'VE COME AWAY FROM IN MY INVESTIGATION, I DON'T, THERE IS NOT A COMPELLING REASON TO DENY STAFF'S REQUEST HERE.
THAT'S, UM, BASICALLY WHERE I, WHERE I STAND ON ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? ALRIGHT, GREAT.
OUR NEXT ITEM IS, UM, 49, AND THAT'S COUNCIL MEMBER VAL.
UH, THANK YOU, UH, MAYOR PROTI, UH, I JUST WANTED TO PULL THE ITEM AND IT, IT'S, THIS IS, IT'S, UH, SNUCK UNDER THE RADAR JUST A BIT.
THIS IS A ITEM THAT HAS THE, UM, TENANT PROTECTIONS ESSENTIALLY WE'RE KIND OF CODIFYING, UH, VARIOUS TENANT PROTECTIONS BOTH FOR, UH, RESIDENTIAL TENANTS AND, AND NON-RESIDENTIAL TENANTS, COMMERCIAL LEASES, OFFICES, RESTAURANTS, THAT KIND OF STUFF LIKE THAT.
UM, AND WE WILL BE, UH, REFERRING TO THIS SECTION VIA OTHER PARTS OF, UH, OF THE ORDINANCE.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, LIKE AN ETO OR A, A DB 90 COULD POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, REFER BACK TO THIS TO SAY JUST KIND OF PUTTING ALL OF OUR TENANT PROTECTIONS IN IN ONE PLACE TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR EVERYBODY, WHICH I THINK IS A, A GREAT IDEA.
UM, I UNDERSTAND, UH, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS GONNA BE, UH, DISCUSSING THIS, UH, AT, AT THE MEETING TONIGHT.
THEY MAY HAVE SOME, UH, RECOMMENDED CHANGES.
SO I JUST REALLY WANTED TO GIVE EVERYBODY A HEADS UP THAT, THAT THIS IS GONNA BE DISCUSSED IN TERMS OF HOW IT FUNCTIONS WITH ETOD, WILL GET SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, I ANTICIPATE TONIGHT, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THOSE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS COME, UH, THURSDAY.
ANYTHING ELSE? I HAVE ONE QUESTION.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION OF MS. LINK, IF I MAY.
AND I JUST WANNA GET A CLARIFICATION ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO 4 18 32.
THAT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF REPLACEMENT, IT'S A REPLACEMENT OF THE UNITS BY COUNT, NOT NECESSARILY BY AFFORDABILITY.
TRITION LINK WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
SO THE REPLACEMENT LANGUAGE IS ABOUT REPLACING UNITS THAT WE'RE SERVING HOUSEHOLDS AT LESS THAN 60% MFI.
SO THE IDEA WHEN THIS WAS STARTED AND AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED WAS THE CONCERN ABOUT BASICALLY LOSING UNITS.
WHEN WE HAVE THIS DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT INCENTIVIZING, BASICALLY TEAR DOWN OF REASONABLY NOT NEW HOUSING, SUPER OLD HOUSING SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE.
AND SO, UM, COUNSEL TOOK THE POSITION THAT, OR IT'S APPLIED A REQUIREMENT THAT SAID, IF, IF THE REPAIRS ARE A CERTAIN STANDARD, YOU CAN DO THIS,
[01:35:01]
BUT YOU HAVE TO REPLACE BASICALLY THE UNITS THAT WERE AFFORDABLE TO CERTAIN INCOMES, THE UNITS NOT THE HOUSEHOLD.SO, AND THEN THE, THE WHAT HAS TO BE AT CERTAIN LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY IS A SEPARATE REQUIREMENT.
THIS PARTICULAR REQUIREMENT IS ABOUT JUST ENSURING, LET'S SAY THAT WE HAD 10 BED OR 10 UNITS WITH TWO BEDROOMS, SO THAT'S 20 BEDROOMS, THAT THERE ARE AT LEAST 20 BEDROOMS REPLACED IN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT.
BUT THEN WHAT, WHATEVER THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENT IS GONNA COME FROM A DIFFERENT REQUIREMENT IN CODE, RIGHT? IT WOULD BE THE NUMBER OF TWO BEDROOM UNITS THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED BY THIS.
UM, WHAT COUNSEL WAS SAYING AT THE TIME WAS EFFICIENCIES IN ONE BEDROOMS. OUR OLDER COMPLEXES, UM, TEND TO HAVE MORE BEDROOM, LARGER BEDROOM COUNTS.
AND SO COUNSEL WANTED TO MAINTAIN THAT.
ANYTHING MORE ON THIS ONE? WE ARE MOVING TO ITEM 69, WHICH IS COUNCIL MEMBER RYAN ALTER.
UH, I JUST WANT TO DISCUSS TWO ELEMENTS HERE, AND THIS IS THE CHARTER REVIEW ITEM.
UM, FIRST AS IT RELATES TO RECOMMENDATION NUMBER FOUR, THIS IS WHEN WE HOLD THE ELECTION.
SO, UH, YOU RECALL, WE, WE HAD THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION COME BACK AND SAY THAT, UH, FOR ORDINANCE PETITIONS OR CHARTER PETITIONS, WE WOULD MOVE THOSE TO, UM, MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS, WHICH ARE GUBERNATORIAL OR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS.
UM, WE HAD CONTEMPLATED, AND I AM STILL TRYING TO DECIDE, BUT I WANT TO KIND OF DAYLIGHT FOR EVERYBODY HERE, A POTENTIAL CHANGE TO MOVING CHARTER ELECTIONS TO ALWAYS BEING ON A PRESIDENTIAL CYCLE.
SO ONCE EVERY FOUR YEARS, AND HAVING THE PETITIONS BE, UH, EVERY TWO YEAR POSSIBILITIES.
JUST TRYING TO GET THE RIGHT BALANCE OF INCENTIVIZING PEOPLE TO GO TO THE PETITION AND NOT TO, UH, OR I'M SORRY, TO AN ORDINANCE AND NOT TO A CHARTER BECAUSE OF, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I FEEL LIKE A CHARTER SHOULD BE A HIGHER STANDARD.
AND, AND BY MAKING THEM BOTH GUBERNATORIAL AND PRESIDENTIAL, WE'RE POTENTIALLY, UH, KIND OF CREATING THEM AT THE SAME LEVEL.
AND SO I JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT THAT FOR EVERYBODY, SO IT'S NOT A SURPRISE IF LATER ON THAT COMES ALONG.
AND THEN THE OTHER, UM, IS, UM, JUST A NOTE ABOUT, I KNOW I HAVE RECEIVED SOME EMAILS, I IMAGINE Y'ALL HAVE AS WELL, ABOUT THE THREE AND A HALF PERCENT THRESHOLD FOR CITIZEN INITIATED PETITIONS.
AND PART OF THAT TALKS ABOUT, THANK YOU.
UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO DEGRADE THE PUBLIC'S ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE.
AND, AND ESPECIALLY LOOKING BACK HISTORICALLY, WHEN THE SOS ORDINANCE WAS PASSED AT THAT TIME, IT WAS A 10% REQUIREMENT TO GET ON THE BALLOT.
AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS RIGHT NOW, 20,000 OR THREE AND A 5%.
SO WE'RE, WE ARE STILL WAY BELOW EVEN WHAT THAT THRESHOLD WAS, WHICH WAS A THRESHOLD FOR 50 YEARS.
AND BEFORE THAT IT WAS EVEN HIGHER, IS AT 25%.
SO TO SAY THAT WE ARE NOT HONORING OUR HISTORY AND LOOKING TO WHEN, YOU KNOW, THESE BIG SUCCESSFUL INITIATIVES HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE, UH, I THINK IS JUST NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE HISTORY OF THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER ALLISON ALTER.
SO, UM, I THINK WE'RE POSTED TO LIKE, DISCUSS AND POSSIBLY ADOPT.
SO, UM, DO WE HAVE A SENSE OF HOW WE WANNA HANDLE THIS OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL WEEKS AND WHETHER WE'RE PLANNING TO VOTE ON THURSDAY OR, OR WHAT WE SHOULD BE PREPARED FOR? I HAVEN'T SEEN A PROPOSAL, YOU KNOW, FROM COUNCIL, AND I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS WHAT WE LIKE AND WHAT WE DON'T LIKE.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH THE EVENTS OF THE LAST WEEK, I THINK SOME OF US ARE A LITTLE DISTRACTED FROM THAT.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO GET A SENSE OF WHERE YEAH, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE PLANNING AND WHAT WE'RE THINKING AND WHAT THE DEADLINES NEED TO BE IN ORDER TO DO IT.
I THINK THAT'S A, A GOOD QUESTION.
AND I THINK, UM, SINCE THE MAYOR ISN'T HERE RIGHT NOW, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, INCLUDE HIM IN THAT QUESTION AND WE CAN ALL THINK ABOUT WHETHER WE ARE EVEN PREPARED TO TAKE ON THAT ITEM FOR VOTE ON THURSDAY.
BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY HAVE THE PRESENTATION FROM THE STAFF AND THEN, UH, SEE WHERE WE'RE AT.
UM, BUT IF IT'S OKAY WITH YOU, I WOULD ASK THAT WE PASS THAT QUESTION ALONG TO THE MAYOR.
WAS THERE A, I'M SORRY, I MEANT I WASN'T HERE BY THE MEETING.
SO IS THERE A PRESENTATION ON THIS FROM THE STAFF? I THOUGHT WE ALREADY HAD.
JUST MAKING OUR WAIT TO THE MICROPHONE.
[01:40:01]
WOULD YOU HAVE, OR GOOD AFTERNOON RATHER.WOULD YOU HEAR ME WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT? WE DID HAVE A PRESENTATION PREPARED FOR THURSDAY.
WE'RE HAPPY TO GO THROUGH THAT TODAY, IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO PREPARE FOR THE DISCUSSION OR LEAVE THAT TO YOU ALL.
I THINK THIS IS THE PRESENTATION THAT WE SAW AT THE AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MAYBE EXPANDED SOMEWHAT.
THIS IS, UH, A FOLLOW UP TO THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD AT THE APRIL 16TH, UH, WORK SESSION WHERE WE'RE SORT OF, UM, PROVIDING A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARIFICATION ON, UM, THE SCHEDULE AS WELL AS WHAT ARE SOME POTENTIAL POLICY ENDS THAT COULD BE EFFECTUATED WITHOUT CHANGING THE CHARTER.
'CAUSE OF COURSE, CHANGING, YOU KNOW, ANY TYPE OF LANGUAGE, BIG OR SMALL IN THE CHARTER WOULD REQUIRE A CHARTER ELECTION.
SO WE WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME POTENTIALS THAT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION HAD MENTIONED.
UM, DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE DONE THROUGH A CHARTER.
THEY COULD BE DONE THROUGH AN ORDINANCE OR A RESOLUTION.
UM, SO YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF LAY THAT OUT AND PUT A FINER POINT ON IT.
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR OFFERING TO DO IT TODAY, BUT HONESTLY, I, I WOULD AGAIN, DEFER TO WAIT FOR THE MAYOR AND FOR THE DIOCESE TO BE FULL AS COUNCIL MEMBER FUENTES ISN'T HERE EITHER.
AND SO OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE, FOR THEM, IF THAT SOUNDS ALL RIGHT.
SO THEN I, UM, I, I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
UM, I WOULD ASK THEN THAT WE ASSUME THAT WE ARE NOT VOTING ON THURSDAY.
SOMEBODY CAN BRING A PROPOSAL FOR US TO CONSIDER, BUT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD BE VOTING ON THIS SORT OF AT THE MAY SURE.
30TH MEETING IF IT NEEDS TO BE DONE BEFORE BREAK OR AT THE JULY MEETING, DEPENDING ON WHAT IS REQUIRED.
SO WE'LL PUT THIS ON THE LIST, UH, FOR, OH, WE HAVE THE PRESENTATION ON ON THURSDAY, BUT THAT TO WEIGH IN AND WE CAN HAVE SOME CONVERSATION, UM, ON THURSDAY IF WE WANNA HAVE MORE, BUT THAT WE'RE NOT PLANNING, THAT WE'RE VOTING ON THURSDAY ON SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN A DRAFT OF JUST, AND WE JUST, WE WILL GET A DEC YES, I'LL GET THE INPUT FROM THE MAYOR AND WE'LL DECIDE HOW WE WILL PROCEED ON THURSDAY.
BUT THOSE ARE GOOD SUGGESTIONS.
AND IT IS ALSO ON THE MAY 30TH, IT WILL BE ON THE MAY 30TH AGENDA'S DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.
SO, SO THE VOTE WOULD NOT NEED TO HAPPEN THIS WEEK ANYWAY, BECAUSE YOU WERE PLANNING TO HAVE IT POSTED AGAIN, CORRECT.
FOR THE MEETING AFTER THIS ONE, CORRECT.
WELL, THAT'S, THAT I THINK WILL, UH, UH, RELIEVE US GREATLY.
DOES THAT SOUND GOOD TO EVERYBODY? OF COURSE.
COUNCIL MEMBER ALTER, DOES THAT SOUND OKAY? GREAT.
COUNCIL MEMBER V? NO, I'M GOOD.
AND ANYTHING MORE ON THAT ONE? ITEM 76 IS COUNCIL MEMBER KELLY.
SO ITEM 76 IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE CODE CHAPTER 26, AND CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A TEMPORARY CHANGE OF USE OF DEDICATED PARKLAND KNOWN AS THE UPPER BULL CREEK GREEN BELT TO ALLOW WATERSHED PROTECTION TO UTILIZE THAT PARKLAND FOR TEMPORARY STORAGE AND STAGING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE OLD LAND PASSES DAM MODERNIZATION PROJECT.
THE DAM MODERNIZATION PRO PROJECT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY.
IT WILL MITIGATE POTENTIAL FLOODING.
UM, BUT THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS FROM THE COMMUNITY AND I'VE DONE EXTENSIVE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND FEEDBACK, INCLUDING WITH INDIVIDUALS FROM BULL CREEK RANCH AND THE MOUNTAIN.
AND AS SUCH, I PLAN ON BRINGING FORWARD AN AMENDMENT FOR THREE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT I BELIEVE WILL HELP MAKE OUR COMMUNITY MORE APPEASED WITH THAT TEMPORARY USE AND STORAGE OF THOSE ITEMS. UM, PART OF THE REASON THAT I BELIEVE THIS IS SUCH A BIG DEAL FOR THOSE COMMUNITIES GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO WHEN I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL AND WE DID THE, THE LIFT STATION OVER THERE.
UM, THERE WERE A LOT OF PROBLEMS RELATED TO NOISE AND TRAFFIC THAT I BELIEVE CAN REALLY BE MITIGATED TO NOT ONLY KEEP THAT PARKLAND GREAT, BUT ALSO ALLOW FOR THE MODERNIZATION OF THAT DAM.
SO I JUST WANTED TO READ OUT WHAT I PLAN TO BRING FORWARD.
AND I'VE CHECKED WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT, THEY'RE OKAY WITH THIS, BUT I WILL BE MOTIONING TO AMEND LINE 25 TO READ AS FOLLOWS, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTS THE CITY MANAGER TO CONDUCT AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ON THE PARKLAND PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
THIS WOULD INCLUDE PREVENTATIVE MEASURES TO PROTECT THE PARKLAND, COUPLED WITH A COMPREHENSIVE RESTORATION PLAN TO RETURN THE AREA TO ITS ORIGINAL STATE OR BETTER AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION CONCLUDES.
UM, THERE'S ANOTHER BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, WHICH IS THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTS THE CITY MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT A ROBUST TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN TO MINIMIZE DISRUPTIONS TO LOCAL TRAFFIC, AS WELL AS A SOUND MANAGEMENT STRATEGY TO CONTROL NOISE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
THIS WOULD AIM TO MINIMIZE TRAFFIC DURING SCHOOL TIMES.
THAT WAS A BIG ISSUE BACK WHEN THE LIFT STATION WAS BEING, UM, PUT IN OVER THERE.
AND I REMEMBER THERE WERE SEVERAL IMPACTS TO THE SCHOOL BUS TRAFFIC AND ALSO PARENTS OVER AT CANYON VISTA MIDDLE SCHOOL PICKING UP AND DROPPING OFF THEIR KIDS.
THERE'S ANOTHER BE IT RESOLVED, AND THIS IS THE FINAL ONE.
[01:45:01]
SAYS, THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTS THE CITY MANAGER AND COORDINATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY DEPARTMENTS TO CREATE A NEW CITY PARK AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION'S COMPLETED WITH ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED AT EXHIBIT A, FOLLOWING THE COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSED USE, THE CITY MANAGER SHALL CONSIDER PUTTING IN AMENITIES IN THIS PARK, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO A DOG PARK AND COMMUNITY GARDEN.THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WILL FURTHER BRING TO, UH, COUNCIL DURING THE BUDGET.
BUT IN TALKING WITH THAT COMMUNITY, WE REALLY DO LACK A DOG PARK THAT'S FENCED IN.
AND RIGHT NOW, THE, THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT REALLY USE THAT AREA ON THE CORNER OF SPICEWOOD SPRINGS AND OLD LAND PASSES ARE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE CYCLISTS WHO TEND TO DO THE, THE LOOP, WHICH IS SPICEWOOD SPRINGS, TO OLDLAND PASSES TO SPICEWOOD SPRINGS TO 180 3 AND DOWN 360.
AND SO WE JUST WANNA EXPAND THE USE IN THAT PARKLAND, MAKE SURE THAT IT'S PROTECTED, MAKE SURE THAT THE RESIDENTS OVER THERE ARE HAPPY AND, UH, MAKE IT MOVE FORWARD.
SO I JUST WANTED TO DAYLIGHT THAT AND HOPEFULLY IT IS AMENABLE BY STAFF MOVING FORWARD.
AND YOU'LL PUT THOSE AMENDMENTS UP ON THE MESSAGE BOARD FOR US? ABSOLUTELY, YES MA'AM.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ANYBODY NEEDED TO BRING UP? UH, UH, ITEM FIVE? YES.
I DIDN'T HAVE THAT ONE, BUT NOW I DO.
ITEM FIVE, COUNCIL MEMBER RYAN ALTER.
THIS IS THE DROUGHT, UH, OR WATER CONSERVATION PLAN.
I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR AUSTIN WATER.
IS AUSTIN WATER HERE AND PREPARED? I WOULD'VE PAID TO MADE ANNA WAIT ALL DAY AND NOT GET TO ASK HER A QUESTION.
ANNA BRIAN BORJA, AUSTIN WATER.
THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU IS JUST, UM, THIS IS NOT THE END OF THE STORY AS IT RELATES TO THIS PLAN.
WE ARE SUBMITTING TO THE STATE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO BY DEADLINES, BUT THIS WILL BE PART OF THE CONVERSATION AS IT RELATES TO WATER FORWARD AND OTHER ISSUES.
AND SO THIS IS, THIS ISN'T IT IS, THAT'S CORRECT.
UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION ABOUT OUR DROUGHT CONTINGENCY AND WATER CONTINGENCY PLANS.
AUSTIN WATER DOES, UM, UH, DESIRE TO SUBMIT THESE TO THE TCEQ THIS MONTH TO MEET THE STATE'S DEADLINE, UH, WHICH IS IN MAY OF, UH, 2024.
HOWEVER, WE RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO GATHER ADDITIONAL INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY.
UH, WE HAVE BEGUN A DIALOGUE WITH OUR WATER FORWARD TASK FORCE, AND THEY HAVE PROVIDED US WITH SOME, UH, EXCELLENT INPUT ON OUR PLANS.
SO WE WANT TO CONTINUE THAT DIALOGUE WITH THEM.
OVER THE COURSE OF THE SUMMER, WE ARE, UH, PREPARING AN UPDATE TO OUR WATER FORWARD PLAN.
SO UPDATES TO THE WATER CONSERVATION PLAN GO HAND IN HAND WITH UPDATES TO THE, UM, WATER FORWARD PLAN.
SO WE WANNA BRING BACK TO COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER, THE UPDATED WATER FORWARD PLAN, ALONG WITH ANY RESULTING CHANGES TO WATER CONSERVATION AND DROUGHT CONSERVATION PLANS.
COUNSEL WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO ADOPT THOSE UPDATED PLANS AND WE WILL RESUBMIT THEM TO THE STATE.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE LOOK BACK AT WHAT OUR GOALS WERE FIVE YEARS AGO AND WHERE WE LANDED, AND SOME OF THEM WE GOT CLOSE AND SOME OF THEM, YOU KNOW, LITTLE NOT QUITE AS CLOSE.
AND SO, UH, JUST SEEING WHAT WORKED, WHAT DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT WE NEEDED TO MAKE CERTAIN INVESTMENTS IN VARIOUS AREAS THAT WE DIDN'T OR, UH, OUR SUCCESSES, WE CAN KIND OF DOUBLE DOWN IN THOSE AREAS.
BUT APPRECIATE THAT RESPONSE AND LOOK FORWARD TO THAT WORK.
AND I WOULD ALSO ASK NOTICE THAT OUR, OUR DIRECTOR, UM, DIRECTOR ROLSON IS HERE AS WELL.
UM, IF YOU COULD, WHEN YOU PRESENT, UM, ON THIS ITEM, IF YOU PRESENT ON THIS ON THURSDAY, COULD YOU LET US KNOW, AND MAYBE THIS JUST EVEN IN A MEMO, HOW OUR RULES TEND TO BE MORE STRINGENT THAN WHAT THE STATE OR THE LCRA OR THE PLAN THAT WE'RE HAVING TO SUBMIT THIS FOR? 'CAUSE THIS IS A REQUIREMENT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS AND ALSO THE DEADLINE, UH, THERE'S SOME RAMIFICATIONS IF WE DON'T SUBMIT IT, SO WE HAVE TO SUBMIT IT.
BUT THAT OUR, OUR POLICY AND OUR VISION IS MUCH MORE CONSERVATIVE, IF YOU WILL.
UH, AND IT MIGHT BE USEFUL FOR US TO SEE IN THOSE INSTANCES HOW THAT IS THE CASE.
AND THEN WHEN WE HEAR FROM OUR CONSTITUENTS, WE CAN EXPLAIN AND OFFER SOME MORE SPECIFIC DATA, CERTAINLY.
ANYTHING ELSE? THANKS FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
I THINK COLLEAGUES, WE ARE DONE.
UH, AND SO FOR THE WORK SESSION TODAY AT TWO TWENTY NINE, I CALL US ADJOURNED.