[00:00:03]
COMMISSIONER HOWARD AND, AND PHILLIPS.
[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]
PRESENT WITHIN OUR, UM, SUBSTITUTE ROOM THIS EVENING.I NOW CALL THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:06 PM FIRST WE'LL TAKE ROLL CALL AND ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR PRESENCE WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME AND I WILL GO AND ORDER PER THE AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON NOT HERE YET.
COMMISSIONER BARR RAMIREZ IS ABSENT THIS EVENING.
UM, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY, UH, A LITTLE BIT LATER.
COMMISSIONER COX IS NOT ONLINE YET.
COMMISSIONER HAYNES IS NOT HERE YET.
COMMISSIONER MOSLER IS NOT ON YET.
AND COMMISSIONER JOHNSTON HERE.
UM, PER USUAL, TONIGHT'S MEETING WILL BE HYBRID AND WE'RE ALLOWING FOR A VIRTUAL QUORUM AS LONG AS THE COMMISSIONER SERVING AS CHAIR IS PRESENT IN CHAMBERS.
AS SUCH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS HERE IN CHAMBERS AND IN ATTENDANCE, VIRTUALLY, SIMILARLY, SPEAKERS CAN PRESENT FROM THE CHAMBERS OR PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO SEND YOUR SIGN IN SHEET TO OUR STAFF LIAISON FOR THE CLERK'S GUIDELINES.
AND PLEASE HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW ITEMS FOR VOTING.
ALSO, PLEASE REMAIN MUTED AND IF I DON'T HEAR YOU AND YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK, JUST COME OFF MUTE AND LET ME KNOW.
IF YOU ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION TAKING UP YOUR ITEM AND SPEAKERS CAN DONATE TIME.
MS. CORONA IS GOING TO HELP TONIGHT ANNOUNCING THE SPEAKERS DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS.
AND WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK DURING
[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION]
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION CHAIR? WE HAVE STUART HIRSH PRESENT.STUART, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS STUART HARRY HIRSH.
UH, BUT I TELL PEOPLE I'M STEW FROM DISTRICT TWO AND I'M HERE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE SAME SUBJECT.
I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE JANUARY, WHICH IS WHY SMART HOUSING RENTAL ONLY HAS FIVE YEARS OF AFFORDABILITY.
WHEN WE'VE PROVED IN THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY IN WEST CAMPUS THAT 40 YEARS OF AFFORDABILITY CAN BE VIABLE.
I'VE SHOWN UP HERE EVERY MONTH FOR SIX MONTHS AND ONLY YOU IN THE CITY COUNCIL CAN INITIATE CODE CHANGES AND I WILL KEEP SHOWING UP UNTIL THAT HAPPENS.
BUT I WANTED TO GIVE YOU TONIGHT A HISTORY LESSON ON A HISTORY, HISTORY OF HOUSING CRISES IN AUSTIN.
UH, THERE'S A FELLOW BY THE NAME OF RANDALL CAM, UH, CAM CAMPBELL, WHO WROTE A BOOK CALLED AN EMPIRE FOR SLAVERY, THE PECULIAR INSTITUTION IN TEXAS.
AND HE TAUGHT US THAT IN, UH, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CENSUS, THAT WAS DONE BETWEEN 1840 AND 1864.
FIRST IN THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS, LATER IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, UH, THAT THERE WERE 208 SLAVES IN TRAVIS COUNTY IN 1840.
AND BY 18 UH, 60 THERE WERE 3009.
SO THE WEALTH OF TRAVIS COUNTY WAS INITIALLY OUT OF A SLAVE ECONOMY, WHICH ISN'T ANYTHING ANY OF US LEARNED IN SCHOOL, I DON'T THINK.
CERTAINLY MY CHILDREN DIDN'T, MY PARENTS DIDN'T.
AND WE ALSO LEARNED IN THE NEW YORK TIMES 1619 PROJECT THAT THE PLACE THAT THEY CAME FROM WAS NEW ORLEANS.
AND TO READ YOU A, A VERY, UH, POWERFUL QUOTE, THE UH, THE AUTHORS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES 60 19 PROJECT SAID THAT NEW ORLEANS HAD BECOME THE WALMART OF PEOPLE SELLING.
THE SLAVES WERE IN BATTLE AREAS AND THEY WERE BEING SOLD ON THE CHEAP, BOTH IN LOUISIANA AND HERE IN TEXAS.
SO FOR US, WE'VE GOT A HOUSING CRISIS THAT IS NOT THE SAME.
OBVIOUSLY HAVING TO PRODUCE HOUSING FOR 200 AND SOME ODD SLAVES IS, UH, MUCH LESS DEMANDING THAN HAVING TO PROVIDE HOUSING IN A FEW YEARS FOR OVER 3000.
BUT WE ARE FACING THE SAME SORT OF CRISIS.
AND IF WE DON'T MAKE SURE THAT SMART HOUSING AND OTHER TOOLS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO US MAXIMIZE NOT ONLY HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN QUALIFY AT THE BEGINNING, BUT HOW LONG THAT UNIT REMAINS, UH, AFFORDABLE OVER TIME, WE'RE GONNA END UP WITH SOME REGULATIONS THAT WE HAVE TALKING ABOUT REASONABLY PRICED HOUSING AND OTHER REGULATIONS TALKING ABOUT INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING.
[00:05:01]
INCLUDE THE RENT OR MORTGAGE ELEMENT.SO IF YOU DON'T DO REASONABLY PRICED, WHICH IS THE R SMART HOUSING, YOU END UP WITH HOUSING THAT'S INITIALLY AFFORDABLE.
BUT IN THE LONG TERM IT JUST GOES INTO THE MARKETPLACE.
AND THAT'S MY THREE MINUTES AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
OUR CONSENT AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETINGS FROM MAY 28TH.DOES ANYONE HAVE EDITS TO THOSE MINUTES? OKAY, HEARING NONE, UH, THE MINUTES WILL BE ADDED TO THE CONSENT AGENDA AS IS.
[Conset Agenda]
TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.ITEMS THAT ARE CONSENT APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, POSTPONEMENTS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS OR NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS, VICE CHAIR CZAR WILL READ THE PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND IDENTIFY THOSE THAT ARE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AND NON-DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS.
YOU'LL ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST CONSENT ITEMS BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
AND I WANNA RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER TOLER, UM, ONLINE.
WE'LL START IN OUR CONSENT AGENDA.
SO IN ADDITION TO OUR MINUTES, UM, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO NPA DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 0 5 0.01 VARGAS MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT TONIGHT.
ITEM NUMBER THREE IS C 14 DASH 2022 DASH ZERO SEVEN VARGAS MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE.
THIS IS, UH, UM, ZONING CASE IS ALSO UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT TONIGHT I, NUMBER FOUR IS A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 2, 0.0 2, 30 0 7, AND 30 0 9 EAST FOURTH STREET, DISTRICT THREE.
THE ASSIGNMENT IS UP FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
I NUMBER FIVE IS THE ASSOCIATED ZONING CASE, UH, C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 5 3 13 0 7, AND 39 EAST FOURTH STREET DISTRICT STREET.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION AS WELL.
PLAN AMENDMENT NPA A DASH 2024 DASH THREE 1500 WEST NEY LANE, DISTRICT TWO.
I NUMBER SEVEN, UM, IS ASSOCIATED ZONING CASE C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 3 3 1500 WEST NEY LANE DISTRICT DUE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT.
I NUMBER EIGHT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 20 23 13 0 1 200 WEST MARY DISTRICT NINE.
UM, AND WE HAVE A SPEAKER WHO WILL BE SPEAKING ON THE CONSENT ITEM.
UH, I NUMBER NINE IS A ZONING CASE, ASSOCIATED ZONING CASE C 14 DASH 20 23 2 1 200 WEST MARY DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT.
I NUMBER 10 IS IN HER PLAN AMENDMENT.
SO THAT'S NPA DASH 2024 DASH 0 2 4 0 1 2700 GRACIE FARMS LANE, DISTRICT SEVEN.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT, UH, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE 25TH.
I NUMBER 11 IS ASSOCIATED ZONING KC 14 DASH 2 24 DASH 0 0 5 2700 GRACIE FARMS DISTRICT SEVEN.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO FOR CONSENT.
STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO, UH, JUNE 26, 20 FIFTH, I NUMBER 12, UH, IS IN NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT NP DASH 2023 DASH 5 3 6 6 0 5 ROAD DISTRICT ONE.
I NUMBER 13 IS ASSOCIATED ZONING IN KC 14 DASH 2024 DASH 6 6 0 5 ROAD DISTRICT ONE.
I NUMBER 14 IS IN HER PLAN AMENDMENT AND PA DASH 23 2 0.01 CHRISTCHURCH PLANNING DISTRICT THREE.
STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE 25TH.
I NUMBER 15 IS THE NEIGHBOR PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH ZERO TWO EAST SECOND STREET, 2300 BLOCK DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 9TH.
I NUMBER 16 IS THE NEIGHBOR PLAN AMENDMENT NPA THREE DASH 0 2 9 0 2 HUMANE SOCIETY OF AUSTRIAN, TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONE JULY 23RD.
I NUMBER 17 IS ALSO PLAN MEMBER NPA DASH 2023 DASH 5 0 1 OPIS FAIRWAY MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR, UM, CONSENTS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 9TH.
THE ASSOCIATED ZONING CASE C 14 DASH 2024 DASH ZERO 15 OUIS FAIRWAY MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT.
STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 9TH.
ITEM NUMBER 19, UH, IS IN APRIL.
PLAN AMENDMENT NP DASH 2023 DASH ZERO 1-806-672-FIVE SHIRLEY AVENUE, DISTRICT FOUR.
STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 23RD.
THE ASSOCIATED ZONING CASE IS ITEM NUMBER 20 C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 3 2 67 25 SHIRLEY AVENUE, DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR, UH, STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 23RD.
I NUMBER 21 IS ZONING KC 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 22 2700 DELTO REZONE, DISTRICT FIVE.
I NUMBER 22 IS THE ZONING KC 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 3 9, UM, 30 20 EAST CSAR CHAVEZ, DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT TONIGHT I NUMBER 23 IS IS ON KC 14 DASH 2023 DASH
[00:10:01]
0 3 9 OAK CREEK VILLAGE.THIS ITEM IS FOR CONSENT NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 9TH I NUMBER 24.
IS IS REZONING CASE C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 10 12 30 EAST 38TH, 12TH STREET, DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM NUMBER 25 IS ZONING CASE C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 7 4 22 0 9 DON LEE DRIVE, DISTRICT FOUR.
I NUMBER 26 IS ZONING CASE C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 5 6 85 57 RESEARCH BOULEVARD MOON DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 27 IS ZONING CASE C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 3 5 1500 1600 ROYAL GRASS DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR, UH, DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT I NUMBER 28 IS, UH, C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 1 8 23 23 TOWN LAKE CIRCLE, DISTRICT THREE.
I NUMBER 29 IS, IS GONNA IN CASE C 14 DASH 20 23 0 1 31, UM, EAST FIVE A DX REZONE DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
POSTPONEMENT I NUMBER 30 IS, UM, AN AN SVC.
SO THIS IS A SVC DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 7 2 C PALACE LAUNDRY DISTRICT NINE.
IN ADDITION, UM, ITEM NUMBER 31.
THIS IS UM, UM, LAND USE CHANGE, C 20 DASH 23 DASH 0 26 LIVE MUSIC AND CREATIVE SPACE BONUS PHASE TWO.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 9TH.
UM, SIMILARLY, FRAME NUMBER 32 C 20 DASH 2022 DASH 0 2 0 B SITE PLAN LIKE PHASE TWO AND INFILL LOTS.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 9TH.
WE ALSO HAVE A, UM, A, A, A RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS SHARED PREVIOUSLY.
SO THIS IS I NUMBER 33, SENIOR COOPERATIVE HOUSING.
UM, RECOMMENDATION THE SIGN WAS UP FOR CONSENT AS WELL WITH SPEAKERS ON CONSENT AND CHAIR.
THAT'S ALL OF OUR, UH, PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN FROM ITEMS ON THE AGENDA? OKAY, CHAIR.
I'D LIKE TO READ CUES FROM ITEMS 12 AND 13.
UM, THEY ARE, I BELIEVE WORKING WITH HOME BASE, WHICH IS OWNED BY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AND I WORK AT AUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
ANYONE ELSE? CHAIR, THIS IS, UM, COMMISSIONER
I'M SORRY, I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE, THE NEW
NOT QUITE SURE WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT.
I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM 33 PLEASE FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION.
ALRIGHT, OTHERS CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT? UM, STAFF, CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND, ARE THERE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR ITEM NUMBER 33? CAN YOU TELL US HOW MANY SPEAKERS ARE SIGNED UP FOR THAT ONE? YES.
LEMME PULL UP THE SPEAKER LIST FOR A MOMENT.
UM, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER STALLER, THE ONLY REASON I ASKED IS, UH, I HAD HEARD THAT WE HAD SOME SENIORS WHO HAD SIGNED UP FOR SPEAKING ON THAT.
SO I THINK IF WE PULL THAT ITEM, WE MIGHT WANT TO, IF, IF THE BODY IS AGREEABLE TO IT, WE WOULD MOVE IT TO BE THE FIRST DISCUSSION ITEM SO WE CAN RELIEVE THOSE PEOPLE.
'CAUSE THEY HAD ASKED NOT HAVE TO STAY TILL THE END OF THE NIGHT.
BUT WE'LL WAIT TO SEE IF PEOPLE DID SIGN UP.
WE HAVE FIVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
ANY OTHER, UH, RECUSALS PULLING OF ITEMS? I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ON SOME OF THE CONSENT ITEMS. NUMBER 28, IS THAT RIGHT, MS. CORONA FOR ITEM 28? SORRY.
WE HAVE GERARD ARD, GERALD WILLIAMS, UM, JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM THOSE SPEAKERS NOW? YES.
UM, GERALD, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
HI, THIS IS, UH, GERALD WILLIAMS. I AM A NEIGHBOR, UH, 1809 EVA STREET'S, MY ADDRESS.
UM, I DID PROVIDE A, UM, A LITTLE BIT OF A SLIDESHOW.
[00:15:02]
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT PLANNING TO PRESENT IT.I, I CAN'T REALLY WATCH, UH, REAL TIME WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE VIDEO BECAUSE I'M ONLY ON AUDIO
UM, UM, MR. WILLIAMS, IF YOU, IF YOU HOLD FOR JUST A A SECOND, WE HAVE IT UP NOW.
I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN UH, WE CAN SEE IT AND YOU'RE GOOD TO GO.
OKAY, GO AHEAD WITH YOUR REMARKS, I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND READ THE PAGE NUMBER CHANGES.
IT SHOULD BE ON PAGE ONE, JUST THE PLAN AMENDMENT.
UH, I'M, UH, OBVIOUSLY OBJECTING TO THIS CHANGE, UM, AND I'M HOPING TO, UH, CONVINCE YOU WHY IT IS, UH, YOUR DUTY TO ACTUALLY, UH, DENY BOTH OF THEM.
UM, FIRST OFF, THE REQUEST ITSELF IS INAPPROPRIATE.
I MEAN, THE PROPERTY IS IN AN INTENDED RESIDENTIAL AREA BETWEEN SOUTH CONGRESS AND FIRST STREET, WHICH ARE BOTH COMMERCIALLY ZONED AND NOT VERY FAR AWAY.
UM, EXPANDING THIS COMMERCIAL USE BETWEEN THEM STARTS TO BLUR THE LINE AND OPENS THE DOOR TO MORE EXPANSION BACK.
THE OWNER ALREADY HAS A BUNCH OF OTHER PROPERTIES AROUND INCLUDING A, UM, PROPERTY ON SOUTH CONGRESS, THE ONE THAT HAS THAT BOARDED UP GRAFFITI FRONT
AND THAT'S ACTUALLY, UH, HE HAS OPENED THE REAR TO FACE TOWARDS THE RESIDENCE, UH, RESIDENTIAL AREA.
UH, I DON'T KNOW WHY ITS FRONT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
SO I, IT DOES OPEN SOME QUESTIONS AS TO WHAT'S THE GOAL HERE,
UM, I THINK YOU ALL ARE AWARE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
THIS IS THE HERB BAR, WHICH IS ON MARY STREET BETWEEN SOUTH CONGRESS AND, UH, FIRST STREET.
UM, KIND OF BEHIND TORCHY'S TACOS THERE
UM, BUT THE PROBLEM IS ONCE YOU DO REZONE, YOU SEE CONTROL TO WHOEVER HAPPENS TO BE THE CURRENT OWNER, WHICH I WOULD SAY IS UNNECESSARY, UNWARRANTED, AND NOT CERTAINLY NOT EARNED.
UM, AND IN FACT, IT'S QUITE POSSIBLE ONCE YOU GIVE THEM ADDITIONAL CAPABILITIES TO, UH, YOU TAKE OTHER USES WITH THE ER BAR ITSELF, MIGHT NOT LAST LONG.
I MEAN, THEY COULD SIMPLY, UH, TRANSFER IT TO ANOTHER OWNER, WHICH I'LL GET TO IN A SECOND.
UM,
UH, IN FACT, THEY REQUESTED A A, A, UH, LAST TIME THAT THIS BE MOVED BACK TO NOW, WHICH CONFLICTS DIRECTLY WITH THE BOULDER CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETING, WHICH THEY PROBABLY KNEW ANYWAY.
NOT TO DWELL ON THAT TOO MUCH.
I'M GONNA GO TO SLIDE NUMBER THREE NOW.
UH, THEY'RE CLAIMING A HISTORICAL USE, WHICH IS CURRENTLY WHAT'S BEING USED TO JUSTIFY THE HERB BAR.
UH, IN FACT, THEY CREATED A, UH, THE, THE OWNER HAS CREATED MULTIPLE SHELL COMPANIES FOR HIS PROPERTIES.
I'M NOT GONNA GET INTO HOW HE GOT HIS MONEY SELLING SOMETHING TO ELON MUSK OR WHATNOT, BUT HE HAS A NUMBER OF SHELL COMPANIES AND OWNS PROPERTIES AROUND THE AREA.
UM, SO HE'S TRYING TO PRESENT HIMSELF AS SOME LOCAL FAMILY BUSINESSES TRYING TO IMPROVE ITSELF.
THE ACTUAL IRV BAR BUSINESS, MR. GERALD, IS LEASE OUT OF THE YES, THE TIME HAS EXPIRED.
UH, NO ONE SAID IT WAS GONNA HAVE ONLY THREE MINUTES AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.
I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T SAY SO BEFOREHAND.
WELL, YOU SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT BEFOREHAND.
UH, CHAIR, CAN UM, I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION? YES.
UM, I BELIEVE WE HAVE REPRESENTATION FROM THE OWNER HERE TONIGHT.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, AND I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, CAN YOU, UH, SHARE WITH US HOW THIS ENDED UP ON CONSENT, CONSIDERING THAT THERE WAS NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION? OBVIOUSLY WE'VE HEARD A SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITION, IT SHOULD SHOW AS GREEN.
UM, ELLE MEAD, HUTCH BACKWELL HERE REPRESENTING THE OWNER.
THIS CASE HAS BEEN ON YOUR AGENDA ABOUT FOUR OR 500 TIMES, I THINK.
UM, AND WE, UH, HEARD PRETTY LOUDLY AND CLEARLY THE CONCERNS ABOUT OUR ORIGINAL REQUEST, WHICH WAS CS MU.
UM, I EVEN THINK WE HAD V IN THERE.
[00:20:01]
AND THROUGH A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS WITH THE STAFF AND TAKING THOSE CONCERNS INTO, INTO CONSIDERATION, WE REALLY BOILED IT DOWN TO, UM, PROTECTING AND GETTING THE CORRECT ZONING FOR WHAT'S THERE AND WHAT'S REALLY BEEN THERE REALLY LONG TIME.UH, SMALL NEIGHBORHOODS SCALE RETAIL WITH THE ABILITY TO DO SOME RESIDENTIAL.
SO I THINK THAT'S REALLY COMMISSIONER HOW WE GOT TO A POINT OF EVEN BEING ABLE TO POSSIBLY BE ON CONSENT.
IT WAS A MATTER OF REALLY BOILING THE REQUEST DOWN TO SOMETHING THAT STAFF FELT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT MADE SENSE AND THAT ADDRESSED THE CONCERNS THAT WE HEARD.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY SO THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNDERSTANDS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WAS POTENTIALLY, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE PROJECT CHANGES NOW THAT YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT SET OF ZONING THAT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY A STAFF AND RECOMMENDED.
SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN THOSE TO US? THANKS.
SO WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WE ARE, UM, IN SUPPORT OF WHICH WE ARE HAPPY WITH THE HEIGHT MAXIMUM THAT WE CAN DO ON THE PROPERTY IS REDUCED VERY SIGNIFICANTLY TO 40 FEET.
THE ABILITY TO DO A LARGE SCALE OUTDOOR SEATING AREA GOES AWAY.
UM, WE CAN DO SOME OUTDOOR SEATING, BUT IT HAS TO BE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT DISTANCE FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL THAT WOULD BE NEAR US.
WE HAVE SOME SINGLE FAMILY NEAR US, BUT WE ALSO HAVE SOME MULTIFAMILY.
WE'D HAVE TO BE PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY AWAY FROM THAT SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, AND THEN OVERALL, THE BULK AND SCALE OF WHAT WE COULD DO ON THE SITE IS REDUCED VERY SIGNIFICANTLY.
AND THERE ALSO, I'LL SAY IN THAT ORIGINAL CS REQUEST, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT USES THAT YOU CAN DO AND VERY FEW, UH, MUCH FEWER IN THE STAFF RECOMMENDED ZONING.
AND THEN JUST ONE FINAL QUESTION.
WOULD WE EXPECT TO SEE SOME UPDATED INFORMATION BEFORE THIS GOES TO COUNCIL? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS NOT AWARE THAT THIS CHANGE MIGHT COME ABOUT AND HASN'T REALLY HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THIS.
SO THAT WAS MY CONCERN ABOUT KEEPING IT ON CONSENT WAS MAKING SURE THAT THAT CONVERSATION CONTINUES.
DO ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WANNA PULL ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR OTHERWISE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT.
UM, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING.
I SEE VICE CHAIRS FIRST AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL SECOND.
UM, IF THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS, THAT MOTION PASSES.
AND THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, CHAIRS WE MOVE INTO DISCUSSION.
MIGHT I MAKE A REQUEST OF THE BODY? IF, IF WE DON'T HAVE OPPOSITION, COULD WE DO THE ITEM NUMBER THREE FOR SENIOR COOPERATIVE HOUSING? IS THERE ANY DISAGREEMENT ABOUT THAT? I HAVE, SORRY SARAH, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA VOTE.
UM, DO WE KNOW WHY WE HAD A DELAY IN GETTING OUR, UM, MATERIALS FOR THIS WEEK'S MEETING? UM, THEY, THE EMAIL WAS SENT OUT AT, AT, UH, AROUND THREE 15 ON FRIDAY.
DID YOU GET THAT? I THOUGHT IT WENT OUT YESTERDAY.
JUST LIKE LUCKY CHARMS. IT'S MAGICALLY DELICIOUS.
[33. Discussion and action to provide a recommendation to City Council relating to prioritizing city-owned land for the development of income-restricted senior housing.]
UH, UH, OPPOSITION TO HEARING NUMBER 33 FIRST.SO THAT WILL BE, UM, OUR FIRST CASE THAT WE HEAR TONIGHT.
AND THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION SENIOR, THE RECOMMENDATION, UH, RELATING TO PRIORITIZING CITY OWNED LAND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INCOME RESTRICTED SENIOR HOUSING.
UM, AS WE HEAR FROM SPEAKER THIS QUESTION, OR WILL, LET'S, LET'S HEAR FROM THE, THE CO-SPONSORS ON THIS AND THEN WE'LL LET THE SPEAKERS GO.
UM, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT COMMISSIONER MAXWELL AND I ARE BRINGING FORWARD THAT ASKS THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO PRIORITIZE CITY OWNED LAND FOR WHICH THEY MIGHT BE PUTTING OUT RF QS FOR DEVELOPMENT, FOR INCOME RESTRICTED SHARED EQUITY, SENIOR HOUSING OPTIONS.
UM, I CAN GET INTO KIND OF SOME OF THE REASONS THAT I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT, BUT HELP MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN HEAR FROM THE SPEAKERS FIRST AND, UM, I THINK THEY WILL, THEY WILL COVER A LOT OF THAT AS WELL IN THAT DISCUSSION.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THIS? 'CAUSE IT, IT'S UNCLEAR IF IT'S MEANT TO BE COOPERATIVE OR INDIVIDUAL HOUSING, YOU'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IT BETTER.
YEAH, IT'S MEANT TO BE A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION FOR SHARED EQUITY HOUSING GENERALLY.
SO THAT COULD BE COOPERATIVE HOUSING OR COMMUNITY LAND TRUSTS.
BUT BASED ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT A LOT OF THESE SENIORS WHO NEED INCOME RESTRICTED
[00:25:01]
HOUSING ARE ALSO LIMITED IN THEIR MOBILITY AND MIGHT HAVE TO HAVE HAD TO GIVE UP THEIR CARS, UM, EODS WOULD BE A GREAT LOCATION FOR THIS KIND OF HOUSING.SO FOR THAT REASON, COOPERATIVE HOUSING, I THINK MAKES A LOT OF SENSE IN OUR RECOMMENDATION.
AND SO IF IT'S COMING UNDER COOPERATIVE HOUSING, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, SO IS, IS THIS INTENDED TO GO IN, UM, WE HAD CHANGES IN THE LAND CODE ON GROUP HOUSING OPTIONS, AND I'M WANTING TO MAKE SURE THIS IS SEPARATE FROM THAT AND WOULD BE SUBJECT IF, IF THERE'S COOPERATIVE HOUSING, IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO PROPER OVERSIGHT.
MY INTENT IS THAT IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO PROPER OVERSIGHT.
AS WE HEAR SPEAKERS, WE MIGHT CONSIDER, UM, ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE ON THE RECOMMENDATION TO, TO CLEARLY COMMUNICATE THAT TO COUNSEL.
AND WE'LL OPEN UP AFTER WE HAVE OUR SPEAKERS, WHICH I THINK THERE ARE FIVE, WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR, UH, Q AND A TO THE COMMISSION.
SO WHO IS OUR FIRST SPEAKER? I'M CHAIR.
UM, I, I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING LATE.
I LET THE, I I DID BEAT COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SO, UH, BUT JUST BARELY MAYBE.
UM, BUT, UH, I'VE GOT THE BACKUP MEMO IN THE, IN THE BACKUP AND, UM, LIKE COMMISSIONER MOSER, I GOT IT MONDAY.
WE'LL, WE'LL SOLVE THAT OUT LATER.
UM, IT, DO WE HAVE LANGUAGE, DO WE HAVE THE, UM, THE LANGUAGE OF WHAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED? IT'S JUST A, JUST, JUST TO BE CLEAR, I THINK.
UM, SO, UM, THIS WOULD NOT, SO IT'S, IT'S NOT A CODE CHANGE AND IT'S ALSO ACTUALLY NOT A CODE INITIATION EITHER.
UM, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRIORITIZING CITY OWNED LAND CO-SPONSORS CAN CORRECT ME, BUT IT'S A RECOMMENDATION FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.
UM, SO WE'RE JUST SENDING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL AT THIS TIME, IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
AND, AND JUST TO CLARIFY WITH, UM, WITH OUR UPCOMING UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY, WE'RE DOING SOME REVISIONS TO THAT AND WE'RE SPECIFICALLY PRIORITIZING COOPERATIVE HOUSING.
AND THIS WOULD BE A SIMILAR TYPE OF EFFORT FOCUSED MORE ON ELDERLY AND COOPERATIVE HOUSING AND COOPERATIVE OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES.
SO IT'S AN, I THINK A COMPANION PIECE TO SOMETHING WE'RE DOING IN A DIFFERENT PART OF AUSTIN.
THERE IS MUSIC PLAYING IN YOUR BACKGROUND AND, UM, WE CAN HEAR IT.
UM, SO THE FIRST SPEAKER IS CHAD WALLACE AND HE'S JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
UM, CHAD, IF YOU'RE THERE, CAN YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS AND YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
THANK YOU CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I'M A BOARD MEMBER OF THE BOOMERS COLLABORATIVE FOUNDATION.
WE FOCUS ON SUSTAINABLE RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS THROUGH SHARED HOUSING, NON-MARKET HOUSING, AND EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED HOUSING FOR OUR AGING POPULATION.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO SUPPORT, OR AT LEAST I'M VIRTUALLY HERE TO SUPPORT, UH, GENERAL RECOMMENDATION BY CA COMMISSIONERS, ALICE WOODS AND FELICITY MAXWELL, WHICH INCLUDES ADDING SENIOR HOUSING REQUIREMENTS TO E AUSTIN'S E TODD REQUIREMENTS.
UH, AUSTIN'S SENIOR POPULATIONS GROWING RAPIDLY AND MANY FACE SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL CHALLENGES IN SECURING SAFE, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, INCLUDING SENIOR HOUSING AND E TODD RFPS IS CRUCIAL TO ENSURING OUR SENIORS CAN LIVE WITH DIGNITY AND SECURITY.
ADDRESSING THIS NOW SETS A PRECEDENT FOR OTHER CITIES.
AS THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SAYS, WHAT STARTS HERE CHANGES THE WORLD.
BY INTEGRATING SENIOR HOUSING INTO UTAH, DEVELOPMENTS OFTEN CAN LEAD THE WAY IN CREATING INCLUSIVE, SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES THAT OTHER CITIES WILL LOOK TO AS A MODEL.
THIS APPROACH REFLECTS OUR CITY'S INNOVATIVE SPIRIT AND COMMITMENT TO IMPROVING THE LIVES OF ALL ITS RESIDENTS, INCLUDING SENIOR HOUSING REQUIREMENTS, ENSURES THE FINANCIAL NEEDS OF SENIORS ARE MET WHILE FOSTERING COMMUNITY SUPPORT, SHARED EQUITY HOUSING AND CO-OPS OFFER OFFER COMMUNAL SUPPORT, AFFORDABLE LIVING AND ENTREPRENEURIAL OPPORTUNITIES BENEFITING BOTH SENIORS IN THE WIDER COMMUNITY.
E EQUITABLE TRANSIT, TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IS ESSENTIAL.
SENIORS NEED ACCESS TO SAFE, RELIABLE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, REDUCING THEIR RELIANCE ON PERSONAL VEHICLES.
THIS IMPROVES THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE, ENHANCES ROAD SAFETY AND SUPPORTS ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY, INCLUDING SENIOR HOUSING, ALSO CONTRIBUTES TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND JOB GROWTH, BENEFITING YOUNGER
[00:30:01]
WORKERS.IT'S A WIN-WIN FOR THE COMMUNITY.
WE URGE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE THIS RECOMMENDATION AS A VITAL STEP IN ADDRESSING THE SENIOR HOUSING CRISIS AND ENSURING A MORE EQUITABLE COMMUNITY FOR ALL AUSTIN RESIDENTS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS CAROL LILLY ALSO JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
UM, CAROL RECEIVED DONATED TIME FROM SCOTT TURNER.
SCOTT, ARE YOU PRESENT WITH US? IS MR. DURNER ONLINE? SCOTT, ARE YOU ONLINE? PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX.
UH, MY NAME IS MAGDALENA DE AND I'M HERE, UH,
WE ARE TRYING TO GET CAROL LILY.
UM, WE ARE SEEING IF SCOTT TURNER IS AVAILABLE VIRTUALLY.
UH, SCOTT TURNER IS NOT BUREAU.
UM, SO MS. LILY CAN EITHER PROCEED WITH THREE MINUTES OR WAIT TO SEE IF HER DONATED TIME PERSON SHOWS UP.
UM, CAROL IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM.
WOULD SHE RECEIVE FIVE MINUTES? YES.
UM, CAROL, WOULD YOU PLEASE PRESS SAR SIX AND SHE'S HERE.
I DON'T THINK I'LL NEED ALL FIVE MINUTES, BUT THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS CAROL LILY AND I'M HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AS A SENIOR AND BOOMERS COLLABORATIVE FOUNDATION ON BEHALF OF ALL ECONOMICALLY FRAGILE SENIORS.
AND ONCE AGAIN, I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT A CRISIS.
THERE IS A CRISIS ON OUR DOORSTEP, UH, ACCORDING TO THE HARVARD JOINT CENTER FOR HOUSING STUDIES.
AND THIS IS A QUOTE, UH, THE US POPULATION 65 AND OVER SOARED BY 34% IN THE LAST DECADE.
IN THE COMING DECADE, THE FASTEST GROWTH WILL OCCUR AMONG THOSE OVER 80 WHEN PEOPLE ARE MORE LIKELY TO NEED ACCESSIBLE HOUSING AS WELL AS SERVICES AND SUPPORTS AT HOME.
THE US, HOWEVER, IS NOT READY TO PROVIDE HOUSING AND CARE FOR THIS SURGING POPULATION.
UM, SO WE HAVE A NEW OUT OF THE BOX IDEA.
WE BELIEVE IT IS TIME FOR A PARADIGM SHIFT FOR A MORE AFFORDABLE AND SUSTAINABLE RETIREMENT.
WE ASK, UM, WHAT IF SENIORS CAN INSTEAD COME TOGETHER TO LIVE AND AGE IN PLACE IN VITAL INTERGENERATIONAL AND WALKABLE URBAN VILLAGE SETTINGS.
WHAT IF WE CAN OWN, OPERATE, AND MANAGE A SHARED FACILITY WITH A SUPPORT AND SUPERVISION OF A SYMPATHETIC FOUNDATION AND LIKE-MINDED SPONSORS? AND THEN WHAT IF WE CAN FIND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, SOCIALIZE AND SERVE EACH OTHER ONSITE OR NEARBY? UH, I'VE BEEN TRYING FOR OVER 10 YEARS TO BRING SHARED HOUSING FOR SENIORS TO AUSTIN IN THE FORM OF A LIMITED EQUITY HOUSING CO-OP WHEN I BEGAN OURS WITH BUT ONE OF SEVERAL CO-HOUSING INITIATIVES.
SO, AREA SENIORS HAVE KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME THAT SHARED HOUSING OFFERS MANY OF US THE BEST HOPE FOR AN AFFORDABLE AND SUSTAINABLE RETIREMENT.
SENIORS ESPECIALLY CAN BENEFIT FROM SHARED HOUSING PROJECTS WITHIN AUSTIN'S NEW EODS FOR ALL THE REASONS CITED IN THE GENERAL RECOMMENDATION.
AS WE LOSE THE ABILITY TO DRIVE, SENIORS NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THESE KINDS OF VITAL ECONOMIC SETTINGS WHERE EVERYDAY GOODS AND SERVICES ARE WITHIN EASY WALKING DISTANCE AND DEPENDABLE.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IS ONLY FOOTSTEPS AWAY.
OF COURSE, WE UNDERSTAND HOW IMPORTANT EODS ARE AS HUBS OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, ACCESS AND HOUSING FOR OUR WORKFORCE.
BUT THEY'RE EQUALLY IMPORTANT FOR ACCOMMODATING THE NEEDS OF TODAY'S SENIORS.
HOWEVER, IT MAY NOT BE SEEN, WE MAY NOT SEE IT HAPPEN WITHOUT ACTION FROM OUR CITY LEADERS.
PLEASE APPROVE THE GENERAL RECOMMENDATION AND PRIORITIZE SHARED HOUSING MODELS FOR SENIORS, ESPECIALLY LIMITED EQUITY COOPERATIVE HOUSING WITHIN AUSTIN AREA.
E TIDES AT TRANSIT STATIONS IN NEIGHBORHOODS IMPORTANT TO SENIORS.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MADE DEJA UH, MADELINA.
YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES THIS SPEAK.
UH, UH, AND THE OTHER SPEAKERS,
[00:35:01]
UH, I'M SOMEONE, UH, WHO SUPPORTS, UH, SENIORS IN, UM, AUSTIN.I ALSO BELIEVE AUSTIN IS, UM, SO INNOVATIVE AND LOOKS TO THE FUTURE.
AND THIS MODEL OF SHARED EQUITY SENIOR HOUSING, UH, IS ONE THAT I, UH, HAVE FOUND TO BE, UH, EXCITING.
UH, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE, UH, AS CAROL HAS NOTED, THE SENIORS, UH, ARE HAVING A HARDER TIME FINDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, AND MANY ARE, UH, ALSO, UH, POSSIBLY, UH, GOING INTO HOMELESSNESS.
AND AUSTIN DOESN'T WANNA SEE THAT INTO OUR FUTURE.
WE HAVE TO REALLY PLAN FOR THAT FUTURE.
AND THE E TODDS, UH, GIVE US THIS OPPORTUNITY.
AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN SUPPORT, UH, THE WORK OF THE BOOMERS COLLABORATIVE, UM, AND SENIORS LIKE MYSELF, UH, BY, UH, ACCEPTING THIS GENERAL RECOMMENDATION AND SENDING IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
UH, AND, UH, THAT IS WHAT I AM INTERESTED IN, IN HAVING YOU DO.
UH, I, UH, I DO BELIEVE THAT THE MODEL WOULD NOT ONLY MAKE, UH, SENIOR HOUSING MORE AFFORDABLE, BUT IT ALSO WOULD FORM A COMMUNITY, AS CAROL HAS SAID, A COMMUNITY OF SENIORS THAT CAN HELP EACH OTHER, THAT CAN ALSO, UH, SHARE RESOURCES AND MEALS AND, UH, AND ALSO SUPPORT EACH OTHER IN TERMS OF HEALTH.
'CAUSE HEALTH BECOMES A REAL ISSUE FOR SENIORS.
UH, THE TRANSPORTATION, UH, IS ANOTHER, UH, CHALLENGE FOR SENIORS.
UM, SO I, I REALLY DO, UH, SUPPORT, UM, UH, THIS PARTICULAR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
UH, AND WE LOOK FOR YOUR, UH, SUPPORT.
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE SERVICE YOU PROVIDE TO OUR COMMUNITY CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
SO THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE'LL GO STRAIGHT TO ROUND ROBIN Q AND A.
SO ARE THERE COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS FOR EITHER THE CO-SPONSORS OR SPEAKERS CHAIR COEN? I WANNA START BY SEEING SOMEONE WHO IS 53 YEARS OLD AND REALLY, REALLY CONCERNED IF I'M GONNA HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE WHEN I GET OLDER.
UM, DURING WINTER STORM YORI, I UNFORTUNATELY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE TO BRING FOOD, HOT FOOD MEALS TO OUR FOLKS AT THE RBGA CENTER.
IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE RBJ CENTER, THAT IS A SENIOR CENTER AND FOLKS, IT'S A CENTER FOR SENIORS AND FOLKS WITH DISABILITIES.
AND IT SHOWED ME HOW VULNERABLE OUR SENIOR POPULATION REALLY CAN BE, UH, WHERE SOMETHING AS AS LITTLE AS NO POWER FOR 24 HOURS CAN KEEP YOU FROM EATING.
SO I WAS WONDERING IF IF EITHER OF OF THE FOLKS BRINGING THIS FORWARD BE, WOULD BE OPEN TO MAKING THIS A LITTLE MORE FORMAL, LIKE A RESOLUTION.
BECAUSE I I ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THIS AND I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD TELL COUNSEL WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT.
IF, IF YOU DO, I CERTAINLY AGREE THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT I'D LIKE TO TELL COUNSEL WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT.
UM, I'LL LOOK TO MY CO-SPONSOR IF THERE'S ANY REASON THAT SENDING THIS IN THE FORM OF A RESOLUTION WOULD BE, UM, A PROBLEM.
NO, I THINK WE BOTH FEEL STRONGLY THAT THIS IS, AND AS I MENTIONED, FITS IN WITH SOME OTHER WORK THAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING SPECIFICALLY AROUND COOPERATIVE HOUSING.
I THINK THE ONLY CONCERN WAS EXACTLY THAT WE WOULD GIVE STAFF SOME FLEXIBILITY IN TERMS OF WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
BUT IF WE WANTED TO STRENGTHEN IT, I THINK THAT THAT SEEMS FINE TO US.
TO ME, CERTAINLY THAT WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY AMAZING.
THANK Y'ALL SO MUCH FOR BRINGING THIS OTHER QUESTIONS.
UM, I WANNA UNDERSTAND HOW THIS, UM, IS DIFFERENT FROM THE GROUP RESIDENTIAL THAT WENT THROUGH HOME.
SO AS PROPOSED, THIS IS JUST A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION.
SO IT DOESN'T SPECIFY WHICH ZONING DISTRICTS OR BUILDING TYPE, UM, THIS KIND OF HOUSING WOULD NEED TO FALL UNDER.
SO THEN I WONDER IF THE, UH, IF YOU GUYS WOULD BE OPEN TO ADDING LANGUAGE.
UM, I'M, I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE VULNERABILITY OF SENIOR POPULATION IN, IN COOPERATIVE HOUSING SITUATIONS.
WHILE THERE'S A LOT OF POSITIVE AND UPSIDE THAT I, I I SUPPORT AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN, I ALSO WANNA MAKE SURE THE PROTECTIONS ARE IN PLACE.
[00:40:01]
AND WE, WHEN WE PASS THE GROUP RESIDENTIAL IN HOME, WE REMOVE LICENSING AND INSPECTION AND WE REMOVED OVERSIGHT IF FOOD WASN'T BEING PROVIDED BY A THIRD PARTY.AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THOSE SAFEGUARDS AND SAFE FRAILS GET BACK IN ON ANY RECOMMENDATION OR RESOLUTION THAT WE MIGHT SEND TO COUNCIL.
AND I'M, I'M OPEN AS TO THE CRAFTING OF THE LANGUAGE, BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THOSE SAFEGUARDS IN THERE TO, TO PROTECT THE INTENT, YOU KNOW, WHICH IS TO OPEN UP REALLY IMPORTANT HOUSING OPTIONS THAT WOULD CREATE FOR COMMUNITY LIVING FOR SENIORS.
I, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE SENDING THIS AS A RESOLUTION, THEN GETTING INTO THAT WORDING WOULD BE IMPORTANT AS A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION.
I, I THINK I'D LIKE TO KEEP IT BROAD AND ALSO WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS ONE OF MANY TYPES OF HOUSING THAT ARE NEEDED FOR SENIORS AND ONE OF MANY TYPES OF INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING THAT ARE NEEDED.
UM, SO I'M, I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO HEARING THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE.
UM, LIKE I SAID, I, I WOULD WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE INCLUDE, UH, I WOULD HAVE TO PULL UP THE, LET ME GRAB THE DOCUMENT Y'ALL WERE SHARING IN THE BACK UP HERE.
SORRY, I'LL FLIP THAT AND LOOK AT THAT.
THE BEST WAY TO PUT IT IN GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
GIMME A MINUTE TO THINK ON IT,
AND I'LL COME BACK TO YOU, SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION.
AND COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE HAD QUESTIONS.
UH, AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS RESOLUTION FORWARD.
UH, I, I THINK IT'S GREAT AND I, UH, FULLY SUPPORT IT, BUT IT DID GET ME THINKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE LANGUAGE.
AND I'M WONDERING IF WE MAY WANT TO BROADEN IT TO INCLUDE NOT JUST SENIORS, BUT THE MEMBERS OF THE DISABILITY COMMUNITY.
AND I THINK, I THINK WE GET THERE ANYWAY WITH THE RECOMMENDATION.
'CAUSE Y'ALL HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN TO THE FACT THAT MOBILITY IMPAIRMENTS BECOME MORE COMMON FOR SENIORS.
BUT, UH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A SENIOR TO HAVE, UH, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE A DISABILITY AND HAVING A SHARED LIVING ENVIRONMENT IS, UH, IS REALLY IMPORTANT.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WOULD THE AUTHORS BE OPEN TO, UH, TWEAKING THE LANGUAGE TO INCLUDE THE DISABILITY COMMUNITY? YES.
IS IT CLEAR IN THE BACKUP WHERE THAT LANGUAGE WILL BE ADDED? SHERIFF, I MIGHT RECOMMEND IF, IF, IF I GUESS WE CAN JUST CONTINUE GOING THROUGH QUESTIONS AND REMIND FOLKS THAT I THINK AT THE END OF THE QUESTIONS, THE SPONSORS WILL MAKE THEIR MOTION.
AND ONCE THE BASE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE, WE CAN AMEND IT.
AND I CAN CERTAINLY, COMMISSIONER AL, I HAVE, I'M CRAFTING SOME LANGUAGE TO HELP WITH WHAT YOU'RE THINKING.
HAPPY TO DO IT IN OTHER PLACES AS WELL, BUT WE'RE JUST NOT THERE YET.
'CAUSE WE HAVEN'T MADE A MOTION.
UM, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, UH, MADAM CHAIR, I'M GLAD THAT THE VICE CHAIR IS CRAFTING LANGUAGE 'CAUSE I WAS CRAFTING AS WELL, BUT HE'S ALWAYS A BETTER CRAFTER THAN I AM.
UM, AND SO ON THAT NOTE, UH, WHOLEHEARTEDLY SECOND, THIRD AND FIFTH, UH, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE'S, UH, MY IDEA WAS ELIMINATE THE WORD.
THE FIRST AMENDMENT THAT I'M GONNA OFFER IS ELIMINATE THE WORD SENIOR.
UH, BUT MY QUESTION TO THE AUTHORS IS TO SAY, I, I GET IT.
WHY WE WANT TO STRESS E TODDS, BUT WHY DON'T WE JUST SAY CITY OWNED LAND, WHETHER IT'S IN E TODD, WHETHER IT ANYWHERE IN THE CITY, IN THE, IN THE, IN THE CITY LIMITS, CITY OWNED LAND SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED.
MY UNDERSTANDING, AND THIS MIGHT BE A A GOOD QUESTION FOR, UM, ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS FROM BOOMERS COLLABORATIVE, IS THAT THERE IS REALLY AN EMPHASIS ON BEING NEAR TRANSIT AND BEING IN WALKABLE COMMUNITIES FOR THESE SENIORS.
AND THAT NOT JUST ANY CITY OWNED LAND WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS KIND OF HOUSING.
BUT IF WE'RE GONNA, IF WE'RE GONNA FOCUS ON DISABLED, IF WE'RE GONNA FOCUS ON OTHER FOLKS, THEN MAYBE WE DON'T WANT TO LIMIT.
AND AS I THINK I'M FAIR TO SAY, AS THE ONLY BOOMER ON THE COMMISSION, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE
[00:45:03]
OTHER QUESTIONS.COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? SO THERE, I'M, I'M SURE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC.
UM, AND, AND FIRST OF ALL, I WANNA THANK COMMISSIONER WOODS AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL FOR BRINGING FORTH THIS RECOMMENDATION.
AND I DO WANNA KEEP IT FOCUSED ON SENIORS AND, UM, PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.
AND I DO WANNA KEEP IT FOCUSED IN THE EADS, ACTUALLY, THAT'S MY OWN PERSONAL PREFERENCE, UM, BECAUSE THERE IS A NEED FOR, TO BE VERY CLOSE TO TRANSPORTATION.
BUT FOR THOSE OF US, AND I'M GONNA ASK THE DUMB QUESTION, UM, WHO WOULD LIKE TO, I MEAN, I'M FAMILIAR WITH, I THINK PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR WITH GROUP HOUSING.
JUST WHAT, CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SO THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE TERM, UH, SHARED EQUITY, COOPERATIVE HOUSING, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? WOULD IT BE OKAY FOR ME TO DEFER TO ONE OF OUR SPEAKERS? WHO WAS THE PERSON WHO EXPLAINED THIS MODEL TO ME? IS MS. LILY STILL AVAILABLE? CAROL, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX.
CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION AGAIN? YES.
SO THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE TERM SHARED EQUITABLE COOPERATIVE HOUSING.
SO CAN YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THAT FOR THE MANY OF US WHO WANT TO KNOW WHAT THAT IS? DOES IT LOOK LIKE A DORM ROOM QUAD, OR, I MEAN, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE? UM, THE MODEL WE ENVISION, I MEAN, IT CAN, IT CAN TAKE ALMOST ANY FORM, BUT THE MODEL WE ENVISION IS ONE THAT LOOKS LIKE YOUR TYPICAL MIXED USE BUILDING WITH APARTMENTS.
UM, WE ORIGINALLY WE HAD BOUGHT FULL SIZE APARTMENTS, YOU KNOW, UM, BUT, UH, AS PRICES HAVE GONE UP, WE'RE, WE'RE NO LONGER CONSIDERING FULL SIZE.
WE'RE THINKING MORE, UH, EFFICIENCY FOR, UH, ONE ONES.
AND THEN WE WILL HAVE TWO, TWO UNITS THAT WILL BE TYPICAL APARTMENT, UH, KINDS OF UNITS THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE, UM, UH, EITHER A COUPLE OR, UH, SHARED HOUSING, UH, ROOMMATE STYLE.
THAT'S ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF THE COOPERATIVE MODEL.
WE CAN DO JOINT TENANCY IN THESE UNITS WITHOUT, UM, UM, WITHOUT HAVING, WELL, WE CAN EASILY DO THAT.
UM, IF YOU WERE DOING THIS AS A CONDOMINIUM, UH, YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO IT.
TWO PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO COME TOGETHER TO CLOSE ON A PROPERTY.
UH, BUT WE'RE, WE HAVE CHOSEN A LIMITED EQUITY MODEL BECAUSE SENIORS ARE THIS UNIQUE GROUP OF PEOPLE.
GENERALLY, MOST OF US HAVE SOME ASSETS, BUT WE HAVE VERY LIMITED MONTHLY INCOMES.
AND SO, UH, WE HAVE SOME MONEY TO BRING TO, TO, TO SINK A LITTLE BIT OF EQUITY INTO THIS PROJECT.
LI, BUT ONCE AGAIN, LIMITED THE LIMITED EQUITY COMPONENT, UH, ASSURES LONG-TERM AFFORDABILITY, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT SPEC, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T ALLOW PEOPLE TO COME IN AND BUY IN AS, UH, SPECULATORS.
BUT THIS IS AN OWNER, UH, OCCUPIED MODEL.
UH, IT, A SHARED EQUITY PROJECT THOUGH CAN ALSO BE LIKE THE STUDENT, UH, CO-OPS THAT WE ARE ALL FAMILIAR HERE WITH HERE IN AUSTIN.
THIS IS THE MODEL THAT YOU WILL FIND ON THE EAST COAST AND ON THE WEST COAST AND IN UPPER MIDWEST AND ALL OVER THE REST OF THE WORLD.
WE JUST DON'T HAVE IT HERE IN TEXAS.
AND, UH, WE THINK IT'S TIME THAT, UH, WE BRING THIS MODEL TO TEXAS.
I'M NOT SURE, OH, SHOULD I CONTINUE OR NOT?
YEAH, THE ONLY THING I'M GOING TO SAY, UH, I DON'T THINK WE'RE THINKING OF WHAT YOU ALL ARE THINKING OF WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT GROUP HOUSING.
UM, BUT I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT.
I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY AND I DON'T KNOW, UH, ALL OF THE, THE ZONING HERE AND HOW YOU, HOW THE CODE READS FOR ALL OF THAT.
UH, BUT WE ARE NOT THINKING OF IT IN TERMS OF GROUP HOUSING.
WE'RE THINKING OF IT IN TERMS OF SHARED HOUSING.
IN OTHER WORDS, WE, INSTEAD OF, UH, THE DEVELOPER OWNING THE PROJECT, OR, UM, SOME OTHER PROPERTY OWNER, WE ARE GOING TO COLLABORATE TOGETHER AND, AND DO THIS TOGETHER.
UM, AND OWN, BECOME THE COMMON OWNERS OF THE, OF THE, THE HOUSING CO-OP.
[00:50:01]
INTEND TO DO THIS.UM, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU KNOW, TYPICAL REAL ESTATE, YOU BUILD IT AND THEN YOU PUT IT UP FOR SALE, UNLESS IT'S A CONTRACT, WELL, WE'RE GONNA DO THIS MORE LIKE A CONTRACT.
WE'RE GOING TO GET ALL OF OUR PEOPLE IN PLACE SO THAT WE BRING, WE'RE BRINGING OUR MONEY TO THE TABLE IN ADVANCE.
SO WE'RE ALREADY GATHERING OUR INTERESTED PEOPLE.
WE'RE AT THE END OF TIME TO, YOU KNOW, TO BUY INTO IT.
IT, IT REALLY GIVES ME A MUCH BETTER IDEA ABOUT WHAT, WHAT'S, WHAT THAT TERM ACTUALLY MEANS.
NEXT QUESTION, UH, IF NO OTHER QUESTIONS, IS THERE A MOTION, I'LL HAVE A MOTION TO MAKE A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TO PRIORITIZE CITY OWNED LAND, ESPECIALLY WITHIN E TODD'S, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INCOME RESTRICTED SHARED EQUITY SENIOR HOUSING, INCLUDING COOPERATIVE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY LAND TRUSTS.
I SEE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK FURTHER TO YOUR MOTION? I DO.
UM, I THINK WE, IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYONE IS IN AGREEMENT THAT THIS IS A CRISIS THAT WE'RE FACING.
AND I CERTAINLY WANNA SEND THIS RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.
UM, WITH, WITH THE HIGHEST PRIORITY.
UM, SENIORS ARE THE FASTEST GROWING SEGMENT OF OUR POPULATION FALLING INTO HOMELESSNESS.
OVER HALF OF THE HOMELESS POPULATION IN THIS COUNTRY IS OVER 65, AND THAT NUMBER IS EXPECTED TO TRIPLE IN THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS.
AND SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE HIGHEST NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT.
AND I REALLY SEE COOPERATIVE HOUSING AND LIMITED EQUITY COOPERATIVE HOUSING SPECIFICALLY AS A CREATIVE SOLUTION THAT IS NOT THE ONLY SOLUTION THAT WE NEED TO TACKLE THIS PROBLEM.
BUT, UM, IS, IS SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES LESS CITY FUNDING AND TAXPAYER FUNDING THAN TRADITIONAL INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING, AND SOLVES A LOT OF THE PROBLEMS THAT ELDER ORPHANS SENIORS WHO ARE LIVING ALONE, SENIORS WITH LIMITED MOBILITY ARE FACING.
AND ALSO SOLVES A LOT OF THE PROBLEMS THAT OUR SERVICE PROVIDERS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN WILL INCREASINGLY BE FACING, TRYING TO MEET THE NEEDS OF A POPULATION THAT IS DISPERSED OVER A LARGE GEOGRAPHIC AREA, OTHERWISE AGING IN PLACE.
UM, AND SO I THINK THIS IS, UH, A RECOMMENDATION THAT I HOPE COUNSEL WILL TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST, OR I HEARD AMENDMENTS, GERALD, I'LL, UM, TRY TO DO AN ATTEMPT AT THIS AND FOLKS, TELL ME IF I'M CAPTURING WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.
AND I ALSO DEFER TO THE SPONSORS ON THIS.
I'M JUST SORT OF TRYING TO TRACK THE DIFFERENT COMMENTS.
AND I THINK THERE'S TWO BIG ONES.
I KNOW, UM, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, YOU HAD OTHER ONES AS WELL.
ONE WAS FROM, UM, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
I'M JUST GONNA EXPLAIN IT FIRST RATHER THAN STATING IT AS A MOTION IN CASE EVERY, ANYTHING NEEDS TO BE CHANGING.
SO IT'S A LOT OF THE LANGUAGE TWEAKS.
SO AT THE START WHERE IT SAYS GENERAL RECOMMENDATION, WE WOULD NOW BE SAYING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INCOME RESTRICTED SHARED EQUITY, SENIOR HOUSING AND HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.
UM, IF THE, IN THE CRISIS WE ARE FACING, WE WOULD ADD A THIRD BULLET POINT SAYING THERE ARE ABOUT 42.5 MILLION AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES MAKING UP 13% OF THE CIVILIAN NON-INSTITUTIONAL INSTITUTIONALIZED POPULATION, INCLUDING PEOPLE WITH HEARING VISION, COGNITIVE WALKING, SELF-CARE, OR INDEPENDENT LIVING DIFFICULTIES.
UM, THIS IS COMING FROM PEW RESEARCH.
THEN AS WE GO DOWN INTO THE, UH, THE, THE SORT OF RECOMMENDATION PART, IT WOULD ESSENTIALLY SAY SHARED EQUITY FORMS OF HOUSING, LIKE COOPERATIVES CAN PROVIDE AFFORDABILITY, COMMUNITY AND EASY SERVICE PROVIDER ACCESS FOR AUSTIN'S OLDER ADULTS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AT A MUCH LOWER COST.
AND THEN AS WE, UH, GET INTO THE BULLET POINTS, THIS WOULD BE THE THIRD BULLET POINT, AGAIN, IN THE MIDDLE, WE WOULD SAY THE HEALTH AND FINANCIAL SECURITY OF SENIOR RESIDENTS AND RESIDENTS WITH DISABILITIES IS AN INHERENT GOOD AND CONTINUE AS IS.
UM, IN THE NEXT BULLET POINT, WE WOULD SAY STIPULATING DEVELOPMENT OF SHARED COOPERATIVE HOUSING FOR SENIORS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WITHIN ROCKWELL.
AND THEN BASED ON COMMISSIONER MTOS COMMENT, WE WOULD HAVE A, AN ADDITIONAL BULLET POINT AND THE END, I WILL SAY, WITH PROPER MONITORING AND OVERSIGHT, SHARED EQUITY FORMS OF HOUSING, LIKE COOPERATIVES CAN PROVIDE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR AUSTIN'S OLDER ADULTS, UM, AND PEOPLE AND RESIDENTS WITH DISABILITIES, WHILE ENSURING THAT RESIDENTS HAVE GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE SUPPORT THEY NEED.
AND SO THESE ARE JUST RECOMMENDATIONS.
MAY I, MAY I TWEAK THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT ON THE OVERSIGHT LINE AND FINE IF THAT LINE IS DOWN BELOW AS YOU SUGGESTED.
BUT I, I'D LIKE IT TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC.
SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE SHARED LIMITED EQUITY COULD BE IN THE FORM OF LIKE, INDIVIDUALLY OWNED
[00:55:01]
UNITS THAT ARE SEPARATE VERSUS, OR THEY COULD BE IN THE FORM OF GROUP HOUSING WHERE PEOPLE ARE UNDER ONE ROOF.AND SO I'D LIKE IT SPECIFICALLY TO SAY THAT, UM, THAT IN THE, IN A GROUP HOUSING, THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE LICENSING AND, UM, REGULATION OVERSIGHT PER WHATEVER, APPLICABLE LOCAL AND STATE CODES ARE IN EFFECT.
JUST, SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY, WOULD THAT BE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION? I HAVEN'T MADE A MOTION, SO, NO, IT, IT, UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, AZAR WAS, HAD SOME POINTS DOWN BELOW THE MAIN RECOMMENDATION.
AND SO WHAT I'M GONNA SAY IS MAYBE CHAIR, WE DO IT THIS WAY.
UH, COMMISSIONER SKID MORE THE LANGUAGE THAT I SHARED.
DO YOU THINK THAT COVERS WHAT YOU WERE THINKING? SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT MOTION SHARE.
SO, UH, LET'S SPLIT THE MOTION SO THAT IT'S CLEAR.
SO BY SPLITTING THE MOTION, WE'RE ADDING AT THE TOP, UM, INCOME RESTRICTED, SHARED EQUITY, SENIOR HOUSING AND HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.
WE'RE ADDING THAT BULLET POINT WITH DATA ON HOW MANY AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES, UM, ARE WITHIN THE NATION BASED ON PEW AND CENSUS DATA.
IN THE SHARED EQUITY FORM, UM, HEADING, WE WILL BE SEEING AUSTIN'S OLDER ADULTS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.
AND THEN BELOW IN TWO OF THE BULLET POINTS, SHARED OR COOPERATIVE HOUSING FOSTERS CONNECTIONS, WE WILL BE SEEING THE HEALTH AND FINANCIAL SECURITY OF SENIOR RESIDENTS AND RESIDENTS WITH DISABILITIES.
AND THEN IN THE BULLET POINTS, STARTING WITH STIPULATING, WE WOULD BE SAYING STIPULATING DEVELOPMENT OF SHARED OR COOPERATIVE HOUSING FOR SENIORS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.
COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? I, I THINK OTHERS HAVE SPOKEN WELL TO IT.
UM, OTHER FOR OR AGAINST CHAIR? UH, I THOUGHT I SAW COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS FIRST WITH, IS IT A COMMENT OR A QUESTION? COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? WELL, IT WAS A QUESTION BECAUSE AS WE WERE DESCRIBED, UM, IN TERMS OF HOW THIS HOUSING WOULD, UH, WHAT THE VISION IS FOR THIS HOUSING, IT WOULD NOT BE THAT KIND OF GROUP RESIDENCY HOUSING.
AND I HOPE THAT WE STICK TO THAT BECAUSE IT, THAT DOES OPEN UP OTHER ISSUES.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT AS IT WAS DESCRIBED TO US AND WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON IS WHAT THE PRIMARY SPEAKER, UM, DESCRIBED TO US.
SO WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THAT OUT OF THE RECOMMENDATION WHERE IT SAYS, INCLUDING COOPERATIVE HOUSING, WHICH LEAVES IT TOO BROAD.
WELL, THAT COULD INCLUDE, THAT COULD INCLUDE WHAT THE SPEAKER SAID.
THAT COULD INCLUDE GROUP MULTIPLE PEOPLE IN A GROUP HOUSING SITUATION.
I MEAN, SHE TALKED ABOUT THE ROOMMATE SITUATION, RIGHT? AND THAT'S, THAT'S, UM, I, I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT, BUT I'M SAYING THAT, UH, GROUP RESIDENCY HOUSING IS, IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN, THAN THAT IN MY VIEW.
SO CAN I MAKE A, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A SUBSTITUTE OR AN AMENDMENT, IF, IF I MAY EXPLAIN THAT.
SO, UM, THIS IS JUST, THIS IS BASED ON, SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT YOUR ISSUE YET, RIGHT? 'CAUSE I THINK YOU HAD SOME LANGUAGE ON THAT.
SO WE'RE JUST ADDING, UM, THAT WE'RE NOT JUST RECOMMENDING SHARED EQUITY HOUSING FOR SENIORS, BUT ALSO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.
SO THIS WAS WHAT COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, UM, HAD LIKED TO SEE.
SO THAT'S REALLY MY MOTION AT THE MOMENT.
SO IF WE ADD THAT IN, WE'RE GONNA COME BACK TO THE MAIN DISCUSSION.
UM, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR WANTING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST, WE'RE SPLITTING THE, UM, THE AMENDMENT THAT COMMISSIONER OR VICE CHAIR AZAR IS WORKING ON.
AND THIS IS JUST DEALING WITH THE DISABILITY ASPECT THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
MADAM CHAIR, COMMISSIONER HAYES, I HAVE A SUBSTITUTE I'D LIKE TO OFFER UP.
UM, IN THE LINE OF WHAT I DISCUSSED EARLIER ON, UM, I COMMEND THE MOTION MAKERS FOR BRINGING THE SENIOR AND I ABSOLUTELY IN SUPPORT OF COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE'S, UH, WORKING IN THE, THE, UH, DISABILITY.
BUT WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IS, LET'S FOCUS ON THE, THE PRI IN MY OPINION, THE PRIZE HERE IS THE INCOME RESTRICTED, WHETHER IT'S SENIOR, WHETHER IT'S DISABILITY, WHETHER IT'S LOW INCOME, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
AND SO WHAT I WOULD OFFER IS A MOTION THAT SAYS PRIORITIZE CITY OWNED LAND FOCUS WITHIN, BUT NOT
[01:00:01]
LIMITED TO EADS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INCOME RESTRICTED SHARED EQUITY HOUSING, INCLUDING CO UH, COOPERATIVE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY LAND TRUST WITH THE APPROPRIATE LICENSING AND INSPECTION OF HOUSING OF, UH, INDIVIDUALS, UH, OVER SEVEN, UH, OF OVER SEVEN ADULTS OUTSIDE OF THE SECOND DEGREE OF, CONS IS THE RIGHT WORD.SO THAT IN ESSENCE, IF YOU ARE THE BROTHER, SISTER, MOTHER, FATHER, GRANDFATHER, GRANDMOTHER, THAT'S WHEN YOU GET IN SECOND DEGREE OF CONSANGUINITY OUTSIDE OF THAT, THEN APPROPRIATE LICENSING REGULATION COMES IN.
SO THAT WE ADDRESS THE CONCERNS I THINK THAT COMMISSIONER STOLLER HAS FOR GROUP HOMES, BUT WE DON'T AFFECT FAMILY UNITS.
THAT'S MY, UM, I GUESS THAT'S A SUBSTITUTE.
MIGHT WE? A REQUEST COMMISSIONER HAYNES? SURE.
REALLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT, YOU'VE ADDED A THIRD ISSUE INTO ALREADY WHAT WAS MERGING INTO TWO ISSUES.
I THINK IT WOULD BE CLEANER FOR AMENDMENTS IF WE JUST DISPOSED OFF AMENDMENTS.
IF WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT DISABILITIES.
LET'S DO THAT THEN LET'S TALK ABOUT THE SCOPE OF IT.
LET'S TALK ABOUT MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THE WORDS THAT I'M ADDING, I, I DO HAVE ISSUES WITH THE WORDS.
YOU'RE, I WANTED TO COVER SENIORS, I WANNA COVER DISABLED INDIVIDUALS, BUT I ALSO WANT TO COVER ANYBODY ELSE.
AND SO WHY PUT MY OPINION IS WHY PUT ON THE MODIFIERS, LET'S JUST SAY PRIORITIZE CITY OWNED LAND FOR INCOME, RESTRICTED SHARED EQUITY HOUSING, INCLUDING, AND THEN GO INTO THE MOTION MAKERS LANGUAGE.
IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER MUELLER, SO WE CAN DISCUSS.
UM, QUESTIONS FOR THE MOTION MAKER.
ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST SPEAK AGAINST? WE HAVE COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
AS SOMEONE WHO WORKS IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, TYPICALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS WE DO HAVE SENIOR HOUSING.
IT TYPICALLY INCLUDES PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, BUT UNDERSTAND THE POPULATION IN TERMS OF WHAT PEOPLE FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH SENIORS.
IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MIXING SENIORS IN A, IN A, IN A DEVELOPMENT WITH SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN, IT DOES, IT DOES CHANGE THE DYNAMICS.
AND SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE FOLLOW A MODEL THAT WOULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE SEE.
TYPICALLY, EVEN WITH FUNDING, FEDERAL FUNDING, IT'LL BE WITH SENIORS AND PER, OR 55 AND OVER, WHICH I'M 55 AS WELL, MYSELF AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES VERSUS TALKING ABOUT A FAMILY UNIT THAT MAY HAVE SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN OR WITHOUT DISABILITIES AND THAT SORT OF THING.
SO I, I THINK IT'S JUST, IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO SORT OF NARROW THE SCOPE AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO BE SO INCLUSIVE.
I THINK THAT'S WHEN YOU START TO AFFECT FOLKS' QUALITY OF LIVING.
UM, AND IT, IT REALLY IS NOT IDEAL IN MY OPINION.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M GONNA SAY IN TERMS OF NOT SUPPORTING THAT NOTION.
ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR AGAINST COMMISSIONER WOODS? UM, I, I JUST WANT, I'M SPEAKING AGAINST THIS ON THE BASIS OF MAKING A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION THAT WE, WE DO LEAVE IT UP TO STAFF TO DETERMINE THE SPECIFICS OF IT, BUT I FEEL STRONGLY THAT I WANT THIS RECOMMENDATION TO BE SPECIFIC TO INCOME RESTRICTED SENIOR HOUSING.
UM, I ABSOLUTELY THINK THAT LIMITED EQUITY CO-OPS ARE A GREAT SOLUTION AND A GREAT, UH, WAY TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR ALL AGES.
BUT I WANT TO REALLY RAISE AWARENESS AROUND THE CRISIS THAT SENIORS IN PARTICULAR ARE FACING AS IT RELATES TO HOUSING COSTS IN AUSTIN.
ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR AND LAST SPOT AGAINST WAS COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
I MEAN, I THINK THAT THERE'S A KEY POINT AND WHY, I BELIEVE WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT IN THE EADS IS THAT THESE ARE COMMUNITIES, WHETHER THEY'RE SENIORS OR THEY'RE FOLKS WITH DISABILITIES WHOSE, UH, WHO DON'T TYPICALLY HAVE ACCESS TO PRIVATE VEHICLES.
SO, AND I THINK PRIORITIZING, UH, HOUSING IN LOCATIONS WHERE THEIR MOBILITY CAN BE MET THROUGH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IS, UH, IS, IS REALLY IMPORTANT.
SO I'M IN FAVOR OF LEAVING, KIND OF LEAVING THE RECOMMENDATION FOCUSED, UH, ON SENIORS.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON COMMISSIONER HAYNES'S SUBSTITUTE
[01:05:01]
MOTION.ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? TWO AND THOSE AGAINST THREE, FOUR, EXCUSE ME.
I THOUGHT WE WERE ON THE MAIN MOTION.
SO FOUR IS ONE AND AGAINST IS THREE.
EIGHT, NINE AND ABSTAINING ONE.
SO WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
UM, VICE CHAIR, OUR SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS, MAXWELL.
ANY MORE, UH, SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST? MADAM CHAIR? IS THIS A CZAR SUBSTITUTE OR THE ORIGINAL? YOU SAID THE ORIGINAL, SORRY.
IS IT A SUBSTITUTE OR NO, NO, NO.
SO, SO WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THE MAIN MOTION YET? WE'RE JUST VOTING ON THE, THE AMENDMENT.
CAN WE GET A READING OF THAT AGAIN? SURE.
IS IT JUST ADDING DISABILITY? YEP.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, WE'RE VOTING 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
AND WE HAD SPLIT THE QUESTION, SO WE ARE GOING BACK TO PART TWO.
WHAT WAS THE VOTE? JUST ON, WAS ON THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS MADE BY VICE CHAIR AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
ON ADDING SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT THE DISABILITY COMMUNITY AND, AND MS. CORONA, I'LL SEND YOU ALL THE LANGUAGE CHANGES SO YOU HAVE THEM.
UM, SO THIS SECOND AMENDMENT, I'M JUST GONNA STATE SOMETHING.
AND COMMISSIONER STALLER, THIS WOULD BE FOR YOU TO SORT OF MAKE AND FIGURE OUT.
SO THIS IS SAYING WITH PROPER MONITORING AND OVERSIGHT, SUCH AS LICENSING WITHIN GROUP HOME SETTINGS, SHARED EQUITY FORMS OF HOUSING, LIKE COOPERATIVES CAN PROVIDE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR US SINCE OLDER ADULTS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, WHILE ENSURING THAT RESIDENTS HAVE GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE SUPPORT THEY NEED, AND YOU CAN TWEAK IT AND MAKE THE MOTION AS YOU SEE FIT.
UM, I THINK INSTEAD OF HAVING WITH PROPER, I, I WANT IT TO BE MORE CLEAR THAT IT'S A REQUIREMENT IS THAT'S MORE AN ACADEMIC SUGGESTION THAN ACTUALLY A, A REQUIREMENT.
I WANT IT TO BE A LITTLE BIT STRONGER.
SO I WOULD SAY, I, I WOULD SAY THAT ANY, UM, SURE.
I, SO IF I CHANGE IT TO REQUIRING MONITORING AND OVERSIGHT SUCH AS LICENSING WITHIN GROUP HOME SETTINGS, SHARED EQUITY FORMS OF HOUSING, LIKE COOPERATIVES CAN PROVIDE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR AUSTIN'S OLDER ADULTS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, WHILE ENSURING THAT RESIDENTS HAVE GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE SUPPORT THEY NEED.
SO THE START WOULD BE REQUIRING MONITORING AND OVERSIGHT, SUCH AS LICENSING WITHIN GROUP HOME SETTINGS.
HOW ABOUT, UM, HOW ABOUT JUST SEPARATING IT OUT? 'CAUSE YOU, I, THE, YOU KNOW, THE EXPLANATION ON WHY THIS IS GOOD IS, IS FINE, BUT I'D RATHER JUST SEPARATE IT OUT AND JUST SAY THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT LICENSING AND OVERSIGHT APPLY TO THESE PROJECTS, THESE HOUSING PROJECTS, AND NO WAYS GO, IT'S GOING IN AS A RECOMMENDATION AND THEY CAN JUST CONSIDER AND, AND LOOK AT IT AS, AS OUR STAFF AND OUR COUNCIL FEEL IS APPROPRIATE.
I, I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE MAKING A MOTION.
SO THIS IS, WE'D RECOMMEND LICENSING AND OVERSIGHT APPLY TO THESE HOUSING PROJECTS.
IS THERE A SECOND? UH, SEE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT COMMISSIONER MUELLER? JUST AS, AS WE HAD IN THE BEGINNING.
AGAIN, I THINK, UM, THE, I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.
UM, I DO ALSO AGREE WITH THE MOTION MAKERS THAT PRIORITIZING THIS ON THE EO IS IMPORTANT FOR, UH, BOTH OF THESE POPULATIONS.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT LOSING, UM, OVERSIGHT PROTECTIONS TO ALSO PROTECT THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ARE VULNERABLE.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER WOODS? I'LL SPEAK AGAINST, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE INTENT OF
[01:10:01]
THIS AMENDMENT.I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY THOUGH IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IN SHARED EQUITY COOPERATIVE SENIOR HOUSING IS ACTUALLY VERY DIFFERENT FROM GROUP HOMES AND SHOULD NOT REQUIRE LICENSING.
UM, IT'S, IT'S NOT A SUPERVISED RESIDENTIAL MODEL OF ANY KIND.
IT LOOKS MUCH MORE LIKE TRADITIONAL MULTI-FAMILY WITH A DIFFERENT FINANCING STRUCTURE.
SO I THINK THAT WE MAY UNINTENTIONALLY BE, UH, CONFUSING OUR RECOMMENDATION TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE AROUND GROUP HOMES.
WHEN I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THIS AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO GROUP HOMES THAT, UM, IS FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T REQUIRE ASSISTED LIVING, WHO LIVE INDEPENDENTLY IN SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES A LOT LESS FUNDING THAN GROUP HOMES.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT MODELS AND, AND WHAT YOU'RE WANTING TO PUSH FORWARD.
WHAT IF WE CHANGE THE LANGUAGE THEN IN THE, UM, THE GENERAL RECOMMENDATION WHERE IT SAYS INCLUDING COOPERATIVE HOUSING OR WHAT IF WE, WE ADD SOMETHING THAT SAYS THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO GROUP RESIDENT DELIVERY AND MAKE IT EXQUISITELY CLEAR WHICH HOUSING MODEL WE WANT THEM TO CONSIDER? COMMISSIONER? I THINK IF IT, IF IT'S, IF IT HAS BEEN CONFUSED AMONGST THIS COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND WE'VE HAD TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION AND UNDERSTANDING, THEN IT'S NOT GOING TO BE CLEAR GOING FORWARD.
WE'RE DISCUSSING A PRO AND CON, THERE SHOULD NOT BE A RESPONSE FROM A FELLOW COMMISSIONER.
SO WE ARE, WE'RE IN THE FOR AND AGAINST, UM, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THIS MOTION, UM, AFTER WE GET THROUGH FOR AND AGAINST, AND YOU CAN OFFER UP ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS.
COMMISSIONER MOALA, UM, IF DESIRED, WELL, IT'S NOT AN AMENDMENT THEN I NEED TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE.
IF WE CAN'T HAVE A COLLEGIAL DISCUSSION WE'RE IN FOR AND AGAINST LIKE WE DO WHEN WE'RE TALKING THROUGH AMENDMENTS.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, SO WE'RE BACK TO THE BASE MOTION, IS THAT CORRECT? NO, WE'RE ON THE AMENDMENT.
THE MOTION THAT YOU MADE THAT WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
THIS, UH, SPEAKING FOR COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, WELL, I HAD A A POINT OF CLARIFICATION BECAUSE, UH, AGAIN, I RAISED THE POINT EARLIER ABOUT GROUP HOUSING OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED,
SO I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED AS TO WHY THAT'S STILL IN ANY OF THE, THE WHY THAT'S IN THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE VOTING ON NOW.
SO I JUST WANT SOME CLARITY ON THAT PERHAPS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE, WE WANTED TO, AS COMMISSIONER WOODS SAID, AND I FULLY APPRECIATE AND SUPPORT WHAT SHE SAID.
UM, CAN SOMEONE HELP ME WITH THAT? BECAUSE THERE IS CONFUSION OVER THE, THIS TERM AND WHICH IS A POINT I RAISED MUCH EARLIER AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR A DESCRIPTION.
SO CAN WE, I I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE RIGHT PLACE OR SPACE TO GET THAT CLARITY, BUT CAN YOU YES.
SO AS THE GENERAL RECOMMENDATION IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT WE JUST APPROVED, THERE IS NO DISCUSSION OF GROUP HOMES AND COMMISSIONER MUSH IS PUTTING FORWARD AN AMENDMENT TO CLARIFY, UM, THAT IF THERE ARE GROUP HOMES, THEY WOULD BE PROPERLY LICENSED WITH PROPER OVERSIGHT.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE IN DISCUSSION AROUND.
COULD WE PERHAPS HAVE THE AMENDMENT OR THE SUGGESTED CHANGE BY COMMISSIONER AL REREAD? I THINK THAT MIGHT ALSO HAVE TO CLARIFY.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU REREAD THE LANGUAGE BY CHAIR? YES.
SO I CAN READ YOU THIS LANGUAGE.
SO THIS IS, UM, BY COMMISSIONER AL SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
THIS WOULD BE ADDING A BULLET POINT, UH, TO THE END.
WE RECOMMEND LICENSING AND OVERSIGHT APPLY TO THESE HOUSING PROJECTS.
GOING BACK INTO OUR FOR AND AGAINST, UM, NEXT SPOT IS FOUR.
UM, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, YOU'RE ON MUTE IF YOU'RE TALKING, I HAVE A NEUTRAL POINT QUESTION, I GUESS, CAN I STILL SPEAK? NO.
UM, YOU WANT ME TO WAIT? CAN YOU TAKE A POSITION FOR, OR AGAIN, EVEN LEANING THROUGH? SURE.
UM, OKAY, BECAUSE WE WERE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION.
[01:15:03]
IF A, IF THERE'S EVER A CASE WHERE THERE'S A CATEGORY THAT WARRANTS APPROPRIATE OVERSIGHT, WOULDN'T THAT HAPPEN REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE ARE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION FOR SUCH.SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF IN FACT IF EVER SOMETHING EVER APPLIED IN THERE ARE REGULATIONS THAT, UH, GOVERN SUCH, WOULDN'T THAT AL ALREADY, WOULDN'T THAT TAKE PLACE EITHER WAY? OR IS THAT NOT THE CASE? AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY.
SO, UM, I JUST WANNA, THAT'S WHY I SAID I WAS NEUTRAL BECAUSE I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND IF THAT WAS THE CASE.
THEY'RE SPEAKING AGAINST, CAN WE ANSWER AND CLARIFY? WE'RE IN THE Q AND A OR SORRY, THE FOR AND AGAINST IT WAS.
SO HOW DO WE EXPECT COMMISSIONERS TO MAKE EDUCATED ASSESSMENTS IF THEY CAN'T GET ANSWERS TO THEIR QUESTIONS? IT SOUNDED LIKE A RHETORICAL QUESTION TO ME, BUT WE ARE IN THE FOR AND AGAINST PART OF OUR DISCUSSION HERE.
SO, UH, CAN I SPEAK FOR THEM? UM, LET ME, AND WE'RE GOING IN ORDER.
SO I'M LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, I THINK I WOULD HOPEFULLY HELPFUL
I KNOW THAT WE HAVE CHANGED RECENTLY THE REGULATIONS ON HOW WE CONSIDER GROUP HOMES AND HOW THOSE ARE MONITORED AND EXAMINED.
AND I KNOW THAT THAT IS AN ONGOING CONCERN THAT IS BEING LOOKED AT BY CITY STAFF NOW SINCE WE'VE MADE THOSE CHANGES.
I THINK THE FRUSTRATION MIGHT BE HERE IS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION ABOUT A PRODUCT THAT IS BY AND LARGE DIFFERENT FROM GROUP HOMES AND WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO THOSE TYPE OF REVIEWS REGARDLESS.
AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT OUR SENIOR POPULATION AND OUR DIS DIS DISABLED POPULATION MIGHT ARE EXACTLY VERY VULNERABLE AND WE WOULDN'T IN NO WAY WANT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT MIGHT PUT THEM IN ANY SORT OF COMPROMISING SITUATION.
I THINK THE PROBLEM IS THAT THIS IS A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION ABOUT A SPECIFIC TYPE OF HOUSING THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO BUILD AND WE WOULD HATE, PARTICULARLY, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR THE OTHER MOTION MAKER, BUT I PARTICULARLY WOULD HATE TO ADD ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS THAT A MAY NOT BE NECESSARY AND B, MIGHT ACTUALLY LIMIT THE INTENT OR X THE ABILITY TO DO THIS TYPE OF WORK, WHICH HAS OBVIOUSLY BEEN MADE CLEAR BY OUR SPEAKERS IS VERY DIFFICULT TO ACCOMPLISH.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER SPEAKING FOR AND SPEAKING AGAINST, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
CAN YOU READ THE LANGUAGE AGAIN, VICE CHAIR? YES, SURE.
THE LANGUAGE HERE IS WE RECOMMEND LICENSING AND OVERSIGHT APPLY TO THESE HOUSING PROJECTS AS A BULLET POINT AT THE END OF THE DOCUMENT.
ONE, TWO, THOSE AGAINST THAT FAILS.
WERE THERE ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS? OKAY, WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE CHAIR.
'CAUSE I CAN'T ACTUALLY SPEAK ON MOTIONS.
AND BOOM, WE GOT A RESOLUTION.
THANK YOU FOR THAT RECOMMENDATION.
COMMISSIONERS ARE
I, I LOOKED AT THE GO SPONSORS ON HOW THEY WOULD LIKE TO HANDLE THAT.
I WILL MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION
MADAM CHAIR, WE, WE GOTTA DEAL WITH, I I'M NOT OPPOSED TO WHAT COMMISSIONER MAXWELL IS DOING.
WE GOTTA DEAL WITH WHAT'S ON THE TABLE FIRST DISPOSE OF THAT AND THEN NOT BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE A SUBSTITUTE.
IF IT, UH, A REMINDER YOU MADE A SUBSTITUTE, THEN WE HAD TO VOTE ON YOUR SUBSTITUTE BECAUSE YOU CHOSE TO DO THAT.
BUT I DID IT AS A FORM OF SUBSTITUTE.
SHE SAID THE WORD SUBSTITUTE, SIR.
IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
[01:20:01]
OKAY.I I I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION? SO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION IS TO SEND THIS FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL IN THE FORM OF A RESOLUTION WITH THE LANGUAGE BEING THE SAME.
UM, BUT THE STRUCTURE, UH, USING WHEREAS IS INSTEAD OF THE BULLET POINTS THAT WE HAVE IN THE BACKUP, AND UH, THEREFORE WE MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATION AS WRITTEN.
ANY FOR, SORRY, POINT OF ORDER.
DID WE, I DON'T THINK WE ACTUALLY VOTED FOR THE BASE MOTION, DID WE? NO, NO.
SO THIS CAN'T BE A SUBSTITUTE.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN AMENDMENT.
CAN IT REPLACE YOU? SORRY, WE HAD A SECOND ON THE BASE MOTION.
DID WE HAVE A SECOND ON THE BASE MOTION? YES.
UM, AND I WOULD ASK FOR ONE CLARIFICATION ON THIS.
WOULD THIS INCLUDE, WOULD YOUR SUBSTITUTE INCLUDE THE, UH, PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES LANGUAGE? YES.
AND I WOULD ASK FOR A CLARIFI.
WHAT ABOUT THE REGULATORY LANGUAGE? THAT COMM COMMISSIONER AL THAT IS NOT, THAT'S VOTED DOWN.
THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN MY SUBSTITUTE.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS SUBSTITUTE, TURNING THIS INTO A RESOLUTION.
COMMISSIONER MOALA VOTING NAY.
ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS OR SUBSTITUTES? OKAY, WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE BASE MOTION.
UM, CHAIR SAYS TO THE SUBSTITUTE, THE BASE MOTION IS ALREADY JUST POST OFF.
IF WE'RE NOT IN CODE AMENDMENTS, I'M VERY ON THIS
OKAY, SO WE ARE DONE WITH ITEM NUMBER 33.
UM, WE ARE GOING TO, AND THANK YOU TO OUR SPEAKERS FOR STAYING ON AND EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM FOR WAITING.
SO PATIENTLY, UM, WE'RE GOING TO GO TO OUR
[Items 2 & 3 (Part 1 of 2)]
FIRST DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT, WHICH IS ITEMS NUMBER TWO AND THREE, THE VARGAS MIXED USE CASE.SO, UM, WITH A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT, UM, WE'RE, THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING YET.
WE'RE NOT DIVING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE.
THE POSTPONEMENT, IF GRANTED WOULD BE WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM TODAY'S MEETING.
UM, NO STAFF INTRODUCTION WILL GO INTO THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONEMENT.
THE PRIMARY SPEAKER WILL GET THREE MINUTES AND ALL, EVERYBODY ELSE WILL GET ONE MINUTE AND THEN WE'LL DO, UH, THOSE AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO, MS. GRONIK, UM, VICTORIA HASI, SHE IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER AND SHE'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK THIS, THIS IS, UH, IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT FIRST.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE POSTPONEMENT.
THERE IS NO ONE SPEAKING IN FAVOR.
UM, WE DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGN UP IN OPPOSITION AND THAT IS NOE.
S NO, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK ABOUT JUST THE POSTPONEMENT.
WERE THEY IN PERSON OR ON THE PHONE? THEY WERE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN PERSON.
UM, SO IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF POSTPONEMENT, WE'LL HEAR FROM THOSE NOT IN FAVOR OF POSTPONEMENT CHAIR MEMBERS, THE COMMISSION, RON THROWER REPRESENTING VARGAS PROPERTIES LIMITED.
UM, THE CASE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, WE ARE VERY MUCH AGAINST A POSTPONEMENT REQUEST AT THIS TIME.
THE CASE HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR 23 MONTHS.
IT'S BEEN THROUGH SEVERAL ITERATIONS ALONG THE WAY WITH ALL THE CODE AMENDMENTS AND SUCH.
AND RIGHT NOW WE'VE BEEN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM, UH, TWICE.
WE'VE BEEN INVITED OTHER TIMES WITH 24 HOURS NOTICE TO SHOW UP.
UH, WE'VE BEEN INVITED TO A MEETING THAT WOUND UP GETTING CANCELED AND WE WEREN'T EVEN INFORMED OF THAT.
UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DIALOGUE ALONG THE WAY ABOUT, WE DON'T HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO PROVIDE TO THEM.
THEY KEEP ASKING FOR THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
THEIR CHARGE IS TO CONSIDER THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION, WHICH HAS BEEN ON THE TABLE WITH THEM FOR 23 MONTHS, AND THAT HAS NOT CHANGED, UM, EVEN REGARDLESS OF OUR ZONING REQUESTS HAVING CHANGED ALONG THE WAY WITH DB 90 ASK THAT, UH, IS BEFORE YOU, UH, TONIGHT AT
[01:25:01]
THIS POINT, WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS CASE AND WE WOULD, UH, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR CONSIDERATION TO DENY THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.THAT'S ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, WE'LL DO, UH, Q AND A, UH, ANY COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? YES, VICE CHAIR WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM MR. GENERAL JULIANNE, WHO IS HERE ON, UH, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM TO EXPLAIN THEIR REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT.
NOW, CAN YOU HEAR ME
UM, UH, UH, UH, THE SKY'S FALLING IS, IS, UH, MY, UH, POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
I, I OUTLINED ALL OF THE DB 90, UH, POST, UH, UH, REQUESTS, UH, APPLICATION REQUESTS.
AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU THAT OUR CONTACT TEAM, THE MENTALIS CONTACT TEAM, UH, MLK CONTACT TEAM, WERE ALL OPPOSED TO CATEGORICALLY OPPOSED TO DB 90 D.
DB 90 IS COMING UP BECAUSE, UM, UH, UH, UH, VM U2 WAS SHOT DOWN IN COURT.
SO, AND PRIOR TO THAT IT WAS CODE NEXT.
AND PRIOR TO THAT IT WAS OTHER THINGS.
SO WE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.
THOSE ARE THE VISION FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY HAVE YET TO BE FULFILLED.
THERE IS NO BUILDING OVER 60 FEET.
WE'VE HAD 37 WIN-WIN SITUATIONS.
WE'VE GOT 47 CASES, ALL OF THEM HAVE BEEN, UH, ON THE CEILING OF THE 60 FEET.
NOW, UM, I WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE DESIGNATION OF DB 90, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT AS VOLUNTEERS, WE CANNOT FOLLOW EVERYTHING THE WAY THAT PAID CONSULTANTS AND DEVELOPERS CAN.
SO ME AS THE CHAIR OF MY CONTACT TEAM, UH, IN MARCH, LEAH, UM, UH, SENT ME A, A LETTER SAYING THAT THEY WERE REAPPLYING AND I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT DB 90 WAS.
AND I ASKED HER, IS THERE ANY MAJOR CHANGE TO YOUR PROPOSAL? BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY REVIEWED IT.
THE, THE, THE PROPOSALS THAT ARE COMING, THE, THE APPLICATIONS THAT ARE COMING UP IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, WE'VE ALREADY REVIEWED ALL THESE THINGS AND THEY DID NOT HAVE DB 90.
SO THIS IS ANOTHER WAY TO CIRCUMVENT THE LAW, AND WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO SEAL, UH, UH, SEEK A LEGAL REMEDY IF THIS GOES THROUGH.
BUT I WILL, IN, IN ALL FAIRNESS, LIKE I SAY, YOU KNOW, UH, I, I KIND OF BLINDSIDED LEAH BECAUSE I TOLD HER THAT IF IF NOT NOTHING WAS CHANGING, THEN WE WOULDN'T BE OPPOSING IT.
AND IN MARCH I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT DB 90 WAS.
AND THEN IN THE LAST MONTH WE'VE HAD A FLOOD OF APPLICATIONS FOR DB 90.
AND SO ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES ON THE CONTACT TEAM SAID, WHAT'S GOING ON? AND THAT'S WHEN, YOU KNOW, SOME OF OUR EXPERTS SAID, WELL, THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING.
DE UNITED WAS, UH, APPROVED NOT TOO LONG AGO.
I, I WANNA SAY TO YOU AND THE COUNCIL AND, AND, UH, I MEAN ON ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL THAT, UH, WE IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE TRYING TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF AUSTIN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND WE ARE CONSTANTLY UNDER ATTACK BY THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.
AND MOST DEVELOPMENT PEOPLE ARE JUST INTERESTED IN MAKING THEIR MONEY.
THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN INTEGRATING OR PROVIDING, UH, UH, AMENITIES AND, AND THE TRANSITION OF THE VISION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I'M, SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY TO YOU IS THAT CATEGORICALLY WE'RE OPPOSED TO DV 90, AND I'M SORRY IF I INTERRUPT, YOU KNOW, GOT IN THE WAY OF SOME OF THE OTHER NEGOTIATED DB NINETIES, BUT WHEN, UH, UH, OUR, OUR, UH, RESEARCH PERSON ON OUR CONTACT TEAM LOOKED AT ALL THE, ALL THE, THE APPLICATIONS, I THOUGHT WE WERE JUST COMING TO ONE.
I APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR TIME AND THANK YOU, UH, AVE FOR, UH, I, I WILL JUST SAY THAT IF SOMEBODY SHOWS UP HERE, YOU SHOULD ALLOW US TO SPEAK, YOU KNOW, SO GETTING ONLINE IS, IS LIKE, IS IS NOT HUMAN ENOUGH AND COVID IS OVER.
I MADE THE EFFORT TO COME HERE.
THERE'S TWO OTHER PEOPLE WHO WOULD'VE COME AND TESTIFIED, BUT THEY, THEY DIDN'T SIGN UP ONLINE.
THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD COME FROM WORK AND SIGN UP.
I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD GO BACK TO THAT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS ON THE POST.
[01:30:01]
MY QUESTION.OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR THOSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM? OTHER COMMISSIONER STAFF? YES.
FIRST PLANNING STAFF OF, AND I'M GONNA EXPOSE MY OWN NAIVETE BEING RELATIVELY NEW ON COMMISSION.
UH, WHAT DOES THE 90 AND DB 90 MEAN? NANCY ESTRADA WITH, UH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT? SO THE DB 90 IS ESSENTIALLY, UM, COMPARABLE TO THE BM U2, WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE THE BASE DISTRICT, THE HEIGHT THAT IS ALLOWED IN A BASE DISTRICT AND A DB 90 WOULD ALLOW IT ADDITIONAL 30 FEET IN HEIGHT, NO MORE THAN THE MAXIMUM OF 90 FEET FOR DB 90.
AND JUST A QUICK REMINDER, WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO WHETHER WE'RE POSTPONING THIS TO JULY 9TH OR THE 23RD OR SOME OTHER DATE AND NOT THE CASE YET.
OTHER QUESTIONS? MADAM CHAIR? I, YES, THANK YOU.
ACTUAL MS. OH, MS. MR. UH, MR. TROTTA.
UM, WHEN THE, UM, I, I TRIED TO READ THE, I I GOT THE CASE ON MONDAY AND TRIED TO READ THE BACKGROUND.
UM, AND, UM, I NOTED IT WAS AT CITY COUNCIL IN APRIL OR MAY, AND THEN THERE WAS AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENTS, WHICH TO ME, INDEFINITE MEANS A LONG TIME, BUT NOW WE'VE GOT IT BACK TWO MONTHS.
CAN YOU TELL THE COMMISSION WHAT'S THE PROCESS WHEN THERE'S AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT? SO HOW DOES THAT GET, DO A, DO THE C DO THE PUBLIC, DOES THE PUBLIC GET A NOTICE OF IT'S COMING BACK? AND THEN HOW DOES IT GET BACK HERE? SO THE APPLICANT, UM, REQUESTED AFTER THIS CASE WAS RECOMMENDED BY PLANNING COMMISSION.
IT WENT TO THROUGH FIRST AND SECOND READING WITH CITY COUNCIL.
UM, ON APRIL 4TH OF 20 OF THIS YEAR, IT WAS REQUESTED TO HAVE AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT BY THE APPLICANT.
AND AT THAT TIME, UM, ONCE THAT DATE, OR I'M SORRY, ONCE THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THE POSTPONEMENT, AND IT IS GRANTED, THERE'S, UM, YOU HAVE 180 DAYS TO HAVE ACTION ON THE, YOU KNOW, COME BACK FOR ACTION ON THE CASE, UM, WHETHER IT'S COUNTS COMMISSION OR COUNSEL.
AND THE CASE WILL THEN HAVE TO HAVE A REIFICATION.
SO IT DOES GO OUT AGAIN, UM, TO THE INITIAL LIST THAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY SENT OUT TO REIFICATION FEE FEES WERE PAID, UM, AND EVERYONE IS RE NOTIFIED AGAIN.
SO IN, IN APRIL WHEN THIS CASE WAS IN FRONT OF THE C THE COUNCIL, NOT THE COMMISSION, THE COUNCIL, AND THEN, WE'LL, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE WORD INDEFINITE IN JUST A SECOND, BUT, UM, WE INDEFINITELY POSTPONED IT, BUT THEN IT COMES BACK.
SO THE APPLICANT THEN HAS PAID TO HAVE IT RENO TO THE, AND SO THE PUBLIC CORRECT.
MM-HMM,
UM, AND THEN MAYBE, AND, AND THIS MIGHT BE ONE OF OUR FUTURE WORK PROJECTS WAY DOWN ON LIKE 38 OR SOMETHING, MAYBE WE DON'T CALL IT INDEFINITE, BUT A POSTPONEMENT TO A DATE TO BE DETERMINED.
'CAUSE IT'S NOT INDEFINITE, IT'S TO BE DETERMINED WITHIN 180 DAYS.
THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT FOR YOU TO ANSWER RIGHT NOW, BUT I GOTCHA.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, YOU HAD A QUESTION? OKAY.
UM, OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
DO I HEAR A MOTION? OH, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
YEAH, I'LL MOVE TO DENY THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? UH, YEAH.
I THINK IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, ALWAYS IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC TO HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO SPEAK AND TO LEARN ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN TOWN.
UM, AFTER HEARING THE QUESTIONS THAT FOLKS HAVE ASKED AND, AND THE ANSWERS THAT STAFF AND OTHERS HAVE PROVIDED, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE PARTICULARS OF THIS CASE ASIDE, WE HAVE SENT NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY LAW.
DB 90 HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR SEVERAL MONTHS NOW.
IT'S NOT SUPER LONG IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY LONG ENOUGH FOR ENGAGED CITIZENRY TO HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT AND UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS.
UM, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT WAS KIND OF HIGHLY PUBLICIZED, HIGHLY PUBLICIZED AS A REPLACEMENT FOR AN INVALIDATED ORDINANCE,
[01:35:01]
UH, FORMERLY VMU TWO, UM, I JUST DON'T SEE A COMPELLING REASON TO POSTPONE THIS CASE THAT, UM, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES HAS BEEN IN SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM UNDER PUBLIC CONSIDERATION FOR ALMOST TWO YEARS.UH, I THINK WE, WE HAVE KNOWN ALL WE WILL EVER KNOW ABOUT THIS CASE, AND I THINK THE PUBLIC HAS HAD AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW THAT AS WELL.
AND I THINK IT'S TIME WE, WE HEAR IT ON ITS MERITS AND TAKE A VOTE.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? YES.
SO, SO I, I THINK THAT THE IDEA THAT EVERYBODY HAS ENGAGEMENT IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE DO OR EVEN, OR EVEN HAS THE TIME TO HAVE THAT KIND OF ENGAGEMENT, ESPECIALLY WORKING PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY UNDERSERVED AND MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES THAT OFTEN HAVE MORE RESPONSIBILITIES IN TERM, IT'S, IT'S, IT, IT'S INCREDIBLE THAT WE CAN SIT HERE AND MAKE STATEMENTS LIKE THAT AND NOT REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE TO MEET PEOPLE WHERE THEY LIVE.
AND JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING HAS BEEN OUT THERE FOR TWO MONTHS DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT HAS MARINATED DOWN TO NEIGHBORHOODS, ESPECIALLY WORKING AND LOWER INCOME PEOPLE.
AND I, THERE, THERE IS NO REASON WHY HAVING HAD IT POSTPONED BEFORE, NOT TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS COME HERE AND ASKED US FOR, TO POSTPONE IT FOR WHATEVER REASON, IF IT'S JUST TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING TO THEM AND HOW IT COMPORTS AND DOES NOT COMPORT WITH THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS AS, ESPECIALLY IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH AS MANY PEOPLE OF COLOR AS THE METROPOLIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS, IS IN MY VIEW, VERY INSUL IN INSENSITIVE, AND I THINK WE'RE BETTER THAN THAT.
I SPEAKING FOR THE POST FOR THE REJECTION AND POSTPONEMENT CHAIR.
ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
YEAH, DEFINITELY SPEAKING AGAINST THIS, WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REZONING A FIELD THAT HAS ZERO HOUSING UNITS ON IT AND ALLOWING FOR A LOT OF HOUSING WITH A REALLY STRONG DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
I KNOW WE HEARD FROM ONE GENTLEMAN WHO LIVES IN A DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RIVER WHO SHARED THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS ARE NOT OUTDATED.
I BELIEVE WHEN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN WAS WRITTEN, THE AVERAGE SALES PRICE OF A HOME IN AUSTIN WAS AROUND $150,000 AND TODAY IT'S AROUND FOUR TIMES THAT.
SO THIS IS DEFINITELY A GOOD ZONING CASE AND I'M EXCITED TO PASS IT.
AND I KNOW THERE'S ALWAYS A GOAL TO SLOW DOWN H HOUSING AND I HOPE THIS BODY DOES NOT EVER LOOK TO DO THAT, ESPECIALLY WITH DB 90.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION, WHICH IS TO DENY THE POSTPONEMENT.
UH, VICE CHAIR, CHERYL, JUST SAY I'LL SPEAK TO THE MOTION.
I KNOW THESE ITEMS ARE MOVING AND I, I HONESTLY RESPECT WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS BRINGING TO US AND RAISING IN TERMS OF ISSUES.
I ALSO APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS DONE ON THIS.
I, I GUESS MY ONE SORT OF REQUEST AND ASK WOULD BE OF THIS APPLICANT AND ALL FUTURE APPLICANTS AS WE GO THROUGH THESE DISCUSSIONS, THAT AS THESE ITEMS GO TO COUNCIL, PLEASE PROACTIVELY REACH OUT TO THE, UH, FOLKS WHO WE HEARD WHO WE HAVE HEARD FROM TODAY ASKING FOR THAT POSTPONEMENT.
AND HOPEFULLY WE KNOW THIS IS NOT THE END.
SO THIS IS JUST PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO THIS DOES GO TO COUNCIL AND WE GO THROUGH THREE MEETINGS AT COUNCIL.
I JUST ASK THAT Y'ALL CONTINUE THESE CONVERSATIONS AS THIS MOVES FORWARD.
ANYBODY ELSE, UH, SPEAKING AGAINST, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A, A VOTE ON THE MOTION TO DENY THE POSTPONEMENT.
ALL RIGHT, THAT IS EIGHT TO TWO.
WE WILL HEAR THIS CASE TONIGHT.
[22. Rezoning: C14-2024-0039 - 3020 E. Cesar Chavez; District 3 (Part 1 of 2)]
NEXT DISCUSSION.POSTPONEMENT ITEM, THIS IS NUMBER 22.
UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS REQUESTING A JULY 23RD, UH, POSTPONEMENT AND THE APPLICANT IS NOT IN AGREEMENT, SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR THOSE.
SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT.
THERE IS NO ONE SIGNED UP ON THIS ITEM.
SPEAKING AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT.
I'M LEAH BOJO HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, I, UM, WOULD, UH, APPRECIATE YOU MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS CASE TONIGHT.
[01:40:01]
RIANA WAS SPEAKING ABOUT THIS CASE WHEN HE SPOKE EARLIER A LITTLE BIT, WHICH IS THAT, UM, WHEN I REACHED OUT, HE SAID HE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND.I HAVE HERE ACTUAL EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE WHERE HE SAID THEY WERE GONNA CONTINUE TO OPPOSE IT, BUT THEY DIDN'T NEED TO SPEAK, WHICH IS WHY WE HAVEN'T CONTINUED TALKING WITH THEM.
WE ARE HAPPY TO REACH OUT AGAIN BETWEEN COMMISSION AND COUNSEL AND, AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S CHANGED SINCE THE FIRST VM U2 CASE WENT THROUGH, AND THEN AGAIN, SINCE THE, UM, SINCE THIS CASE IS MOVING FORWARD.
UH, BUT WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOU MOVING FORWARD.
UM, THAT CONCLUDES OUR SPEAKERS, UM, FOR AND AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT.
AND YOU MAY BE WONDERING WHY WE'RE DISCUSSING POSTPONEMENT IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK RIGHT NOW IN OPPOSITION.
AND IT'S BECAUSE AS, UH, MR. JANNIS INDICATED HE MISSED THE CUTOFF TIME FOR SIGNING UP TO SPEAK.
SO, UM, WE'LL GO INTO Q AND A STAFF, THE APPLICANT PUBLIC HEARING, NO, IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING YET.
UM, TRAVIS WAS GONNA CHECK, IS MR. DANIEL GIANNIS IN THE ROOM? I DO.
IS HE OUTSIDE? OKAY, IF SOMEBODY ELSE HAS A QUESTION, THEY CAN GO IN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS LEFT? UM, OKAY, I APPRECIATE THAT.
AT YOUR, MY QUESTION WAS ONLY FOR, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, WE'LL GO TO, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION MOVE TO DENY THE POSTPONEMENT.
IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, THOSE AGAINST.
ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE ONE AND COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS IS OFF THE DIVES.
OKAY, SO WE WILL HEAR ITEM 22 THIS EVENING.
[24. Rezoning: C14-2023-0110 - 1230 E. 38th 1/2 Street; District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]
IS THIS LIKE ITEM NUMBER 22? DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT? UM, CHAIR, WE ONLY HAVE TWO SPEAKERS.UM, AND THEY'RE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
THEY'RE OPPOSED TO THE POSTPONEMENT OR I'M NOT SURE THEY SIGNED UP, UH, TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION AGAINST THE ITEM.
UM, JIM WALKER, YOU PRESENT GERARD KENNY, UH, WE CAN ASK, UM, EITHER, UM, EITHER OR BOTH IF THEY'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO POSTPONING THE ITEM.
YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER AND WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE POSTPONEMENT RIGHT NOW.
UH, WE WERE PREPARED TONIGHT TO SPEAK TO THE CASE.
SO WE, THIS CASE HAS HAD SEVERAL POSTPONEMENTS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, UH, IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WE'RE OKAY IF YOU WANNA MOVE THIS FORWARD, WE WOULDN'T OPPOSE ANOTHER POSTPONEMENT TO KEEP DISCUSSIONS GOING.
I'LL BE HONEST AND I'VE TOLD, UH, RENER AND THE APPLICANT THAT AS WELL, BUT IF IT PROCEEDS, WE'RE PREPARED TO PROCEED WITH IT.
UM, WAS IT, UH, MR. GERARD KINNEY, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK AT ALL IN FAVOR OF A POSTPONEMENT? OKAY, UM, MS. BOJO, THE APPLICANT.
HELLO COMMISSIONERS, I'M LEAH BOJO HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF AMANDA SWORE, ACTUALLY WHO'S OUT WITH THE FAMILY SITUATION.
UM, UH, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD, UM, AS MR. WALKER SAID, WE HAVE, UM, OUR CLIENT HAS BEEN WORKING FOR SEVERAL MONTHS.
WE ARE GONNA CONTINUE CONVERSATIONS.
WE HAVE A LOT, UM, TO KEEP TALKING ABOUT, BUT WE'VE MADE, UM, I BELIEVE WE'VE MADE SOME PROGRESS AND WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD TONIGHT.
UM, WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION.
LOOKING FOR A MOTION MOVE TO DENY AMENDMENT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT'S EIGHT THOSE AGAINST.
[01:45:01]
OKAY.[27. Rezoning: C14-2023-0135 - 1500 & 1600 Royal Crest; District 3]
POSTPONEMENT REQUEST NUMBER 27, ROYAL CREST.DO WE HAVE ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT CHAIR? THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
YEAH, SO, UM, THE, SO I'LL JUST ASK A QUESTION ACTUALLY, IF THE APPLICANT, IF THE APPLICANT MAY COME UP.
UM, APPLICANT, I KNOW WE GOT TWO SEPARATE POSTPONEMENT REQUESTS.
ONE WAS FOR JULY 9TH AND ONE WAS FOR JULY 23RD.
I BELIEVE YOU, YOU WERE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE JULY 9TH YES.
AND YOU'RE NOT, JUST TO CLARIFY, SORRY, YOU'RE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE JULY 23RD? CORRECT.
OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, SO JUST TO REITERATE THAT THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD BOTH AGREED TO A POSTPONEMENT OF JULY 9TH.
UM, THERE WAS A, A SECOND REQUEST TO JULY 23RD MM-HMM.
WHICH THE APPLICANT DID NOT AGREE TO.
SO IN YOUR MOTION, YOU CAN CONSIDER HEARING THE CASE OR POSTPONING IT TO ONE OF THOSE DATES.
I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME MORE BACKGROUND INFORMATION.
IS, IS THERE A MOTION VICE CHAIR, CHAIR, I MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO JULY 9TH.
I SEE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT AT ALL? UM, JUST THAT I, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATION, UM, WITH THE TENANTS AND NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS AND I JUST APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT BEING AGREEABLE TO AT LEAST THAT MONTH.
ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THIS.
THIS IS TO POSTPONE ITEM NUMBER 27 UNTIL JULY 9TH.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT, THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY 10 TO ZERO.
[29. Rezoning: C14-2023-0131 - E5ATX Rezone; District 3]
DISCUSSION, POSTPONEMENT IS ITEM NUMBER 29 E FIVE A TX REZONE.IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT CHAIR? THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT, UH, MS. HASI VICTORIA HASSI WITH THOROUGH DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THIS ITEM BE DISCUSSED TONIGHT AND NOT POSTPONED IF POSSIBLE.
UM, UH, WELL ACTUALLY, UH, UH, BACK UP.
WE ACTUALLY ARE OKAY WITH A POSTPONEMENT, BUT WE WOULD PREFER THAT IF IT DOES GET POSTPONED THAT IT, UH, GOES TO JULY 9TH.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? YEAH, I'LL MOVE POSTPONEMENT TO THE JULY 9TH MEETING.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS FOR OR AGAINST BY CHAIR? I I JUST WANNA ITERATE WHAT WE HAD ALREADY SAID AT THE START, JUST 'CAUSE WE'RE WRAPPING UP THESE POSTPONEMENTS.
I, I'M JUST ASKING THE APPLICANTS AND ALL OF THESE CASES TO CONTINUE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY AS THIS MOVES FORWARD.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE TO POSTPONE TO JULY 9TH.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR? NINE 10.
OKAY, THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
ALL RIGHT, SO, UM, THAT ONE WILL BE POSTPONED TO JULY 9TH.
UM, THAT WAS ALL OF OUR DISCUSSION.
UM, CHAIR BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE DISCUSSION CASES, MAY MIGHT I SPEAK FOR A SECOND? YES.
SO WE HAVE FOUR DISCUSSION CASES TONIGHT.
THIS IS, UM, AND IF YOU INCLUDE ALL THE DIFFERENT ITEMS, THAT'S SIX.
SO WE HAVE TWO AND THREE, WHICH IS A, UH, NPA AND A ZONING CASE FOUR AND FIVE FOR WHICH WE HAVE SPEAKERS.
AND UM, THAT WILL BE TAKEN UP AS A DISCUSSION CASE 24.
AND I SHOULD, SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE SAID TWO AND THREE.
AND MS. CARONA, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP ON THEM.
THE ONLY SPEAKER WAS NOE S AND WE CALLED ON THEM EARLIER.
AND IS HE STILL ONLINE? DO WE KNOW? HE WAS, THEY SIGNED UP.
I'M LOSING ALL ABILITY TO KEEP UP.
UM, AND THEN 24, UM, FOR WHICH WE WILL BE DOING DISCUSSION
[01:50:01]
TODAY AS WELL AND WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.UM, SO THAT WILL BE THAT IN 27.
SO JUST TO REITERATE, WE HAVE TWO CASES, TWO, THREE, AND THEN 22 FOR WHICH THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS CURRENTLY AND THEY ARE UP FOR DISCUSSION IF THE BODY WISHES TO NOT GO THROUGH THE FULL DISCUSSION.
AND IF SOMEBODY DID NOT WISH TO PULL THOSE ITEMS, IF WE WANTED CHAIR, WE COULD POTENTIALLY SEE IF THERE IS A WILL TO PASS THEM OR DENY THEM OR TAKE A VOTE ON THEM, UH, WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE FULL PROCESS OF A ZONING CASE.
IS IT IN ANYONE IN THE OPPOSITION POSITION TO WHICH ITEMS? THIS WOULD BE TWO THREE, WHICH IS THE NPA AND ZONING CASE FOR VARGAS MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE AND ITEM 24, UM, WHICH IS, GIVE ME A SECOND HERE IS, OH NO, SORRY, 22ND.
22 IS UM, 30 20 EAST CESAR CHAVEZ DISTRICT THREE.
IS ANYONE IN OPPOSITION OF TAKING A VOTE ON THOSE OR DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM STAFF, THE APPLICANT? THE MERITS OF THE CASE? YES.
MR. JOHNSON, JUST A CLARIFYING QUESTION, IF THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP, DOES THAT CHANGE OUR OBLIGATION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THESE ITEMS? NO.
UM, AND SO GENERALLY, UM, SO I GUESS JUST PROCESS WISE, HOW WOULD THAT WORK? WE WOULD OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING, CLOSE IT AND THEN TAKE A VOTE.
SO WE WOULD BE DOING THAT AND WE WOULD MOVE TO THE ITEM, BUT WE WOULD NOT BE GOING THROUGH THE FULL DISCUSSION Q AND A AND THE APPLICANT, WE WOULD FOREGO APPLICANT, UM, PRESENTATIONS AS WELL.
AND JUST REPEAT, WHAT WERE THOSE ITEMS? TWO, THREE AND 22.
SO I THINK JUST FOR THE SAKE OF PROCESS, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS, UM, WE HAVE STAFF COME AND PRESENT ON THE ITEM.
WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE, UM, TAKE ACTION.
OKAY, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT PROCESS AND WE'LL START WITH ITEMS
[Items 2 & 3 (Part 2 of 2)]
TWO AND THREE.SO WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF MARIE MEREDITH.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT ITEM NUMBER TWO IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 22 0 0 0 5 0.01 VARGAS MIXED USE IT IS WITHIN THE MONTOPOLIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
PROPERTY ADDRESSES IS 400 VARGAS ROAD AND 65 20 LYNCH LANE.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE LAND USE AND IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF NANCY ESTRADA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE ON YOUR AGENDA.
CASE NUMBER C FOURTEEN TWO TWO TWO ZERO ONE TEN SEVEN VARGAS MIXED USE.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT FOUR HUNDRED'S VARGAS ROAD AND 65 20 LYNCH LANE AND CONSISTS OF TWO TRACKS.
UM, THIS CASE WAS LAST HEARD AT THE APRIL 11TH, 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WHERE C-S-M-U-C-O-N-P-U WAS RECOMMENDED FOR TRACK ONE WITH ADDED CONDITIONS TO THE CO AND L-R-M-U-N-P WAS RECOMMENDED FOR TRACK TWO.
SINCE THEN, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT AND IN ORDER TO, IN ORDER TO AMEND THEIR REQUEST, SO CURRENTLY TRACK ONE IS CURRENTLY ZONED GR NP AND THE APPLICANT IS NOW REQUESTING CS DB 90 NP.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THE MU WAS, UH, DROPPED FROM THE ZONING STRING AND REPLACED WITH DB 90.
TRACK TWO IS CURRENTLY ZONED LR NMP AND THE APPLICANT IS NOW REQUESTING LR DB 90 NP.
THE APPLICANT IS ALSO REQUESTING TO WAIVE THE DB 90 ORDINANCE GROUND FLOOR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED COMMERCIAL SPACES REQUIREMENT.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT CS CO DB 90 NP FOR TRACK ONE AND LR DB 90 NMP FOR TRACK TWO AND TO WAIVE THE GROUND FLOOR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED COMMERCIAL SPACES REQUIREMENT.
IF I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
ALL RIGHT, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER WOODS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
UH, MAKE A MOTION TO UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON ITEMS NUMBER TWO, THE MPA AND NUMBER THREE, THE REZONING, UM, RECOMMENDATION OF CS CO DB 90 MP FOR TRACK ONE AND LR DB 90 MP FOR TRACK TWO.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION,
[01:55:01]
THAT MOTION PASSES.[Items 4 & 5]
OUR DISCUSSION CASE ITEMS NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE.THIS IS 13 0 7 13 0 9 EAST FOURTH STREET.
WE'LL FIRST HEAR FROM STAFF RE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 23 0 0 0 2 0.02.
PROPERTY ADDRESSES ARE 1307 AND 1309 EAST FOURTH STREET.
THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND THE SPECIFIC PROPERTIES WITHIN THE E CESAR CHAVEZ NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND THE LAND USE AND DESIGN CONCEPT PLAN MAPS IN THE PLAZA SALTILLO TOD STATION AREA PLAN FROM LIVE WORK FLEX TO TOD MIXED USE.
THE EXISTING LAND USE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS SPECIFIC REGULATING DISTRICT AND THERE IS NO PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
THE REQUEST IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
DO, OH, IS MR. TOKO NOT HERE? SIT DOWN.
JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, THIS IS CASE NUMBER C 14 2023 DASH 0 1 53.
IT IS A REZONING FOR 3 13 0 7 AND 1309 EAST FOURTH STREET FROM TOD NP LIVE WORK SUBDISTRICT TO T-O-D-N-P-T-O-D MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING GRANTING THE TOD NP TOD MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT.
THE SUBJECT TRACT IS APPROXIMATELY 0.29 ACRES, UH, JUST SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF EAST FOURTH STREET IN NAVASOTA.
IT CONTAINS OFFICE RETAIL COMMERCIAL BUILT IN APPROXIMATELY 1920 AND 1947.
TO THE NORTH ACROSS THE STREET IS AN UNDEVELOPED LAND AND THE HISTORIC SCOOT IN TO THE EAST OF THE TRACT IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
AND TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT TRACT ARE TWO NEWER DUPLEXES TO THE WEST OF THE SUBJECT TRACT IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
THE SUBJECT TRACT IS LESS THAN 500 FEET FROM THE PLAZA.
UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS ZONING, UH, BASED ON, UH, BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE STATEMENT OF THE DISTRICT SOUGHT ITS PROXIMITY TO THE, UH, PLAZA SALTILLO RED LINE STATION AND INCREASING THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, UM, AND PROMOTING COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT AND NEARBY USES.
UM, IT ALSO PROMOTES CLEARLY IDENTIFIED COMMUNITY GOALS SUCH AS CREATING EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES OR PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
LEAH BOJO HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, SO HERE REPRESENTING 1307 AND 1309 EAST FOURTH AS DESCRIBED BY MR. TOMKO.
UM, SO HERE JUST TO ORIENT YOU, UM, TO THE PROXIMITY TO THE STATION AND IN PARTICULAR THE WALKABILITY AND BIKEABILITY OF THIS LOCATION REALLY IS UNMATCHED.
UM, YOU CAN SEE, UM, THE CAT, METRO RED LINE, BUT HONESTLY I WOULD SAY THE MORE EXCITING ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION HERE ARE THE LANCE ARMSTRONG BIKEWAY AND THEN JUST THE INCREDIBLE MIX OF USES TO MAKE THIS AREA SO WALKABLE AND, UM, AN EASY PLACE TO LIVE.
UM, HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SITE, IT'S VERY SMALL 0.29 ACRES.
UM, THE BUILDINGS ON IT HAVE HAD BEEN USED FOR COMMERCIAL USES AND IT'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SCOOT.
UM, IT IS
AND, UM, NOT ONLY IS IT 500 FEET LESS THAN 500 FEET FROM THE UM, PLAZA SALTILLO STATION, BUT IT IS ABOUT 200 FEET FROM THE
[02:00:01]
LANCE ARMSTRONG BIKEWAYS AND THEN LANCE ARMSTRONG BIKEWAY.AND THEN, UM, THERE ARE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT EXTENSIONS OF THE ALL AGES AND ALL ABILITIES, UM, BIKE NETWORK THAT ARE PROPOSED THERE, AS WELL AS, UM, NEARBY PARKS THAT ALREADY EXIST.
UM, HERE IS THE ZONINGS AND UM, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP SLIDES.
JUST SO YOU CAN SEE KIND OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WE ARE ON THE SOUTHERN END OF THE TOD THERE.
UM, JUST ONE SITE IN ONE, ONE LOT IN FROM THE CORNER.
UM, AND WE ARE CHANGING FROM LIVE WORK FLEX TO TOD MIXED USE.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE T-O-D-T-O-D MIXED USE IS THE LOWEST SOTIO SUBDISTRICT THAT ALLOWS YOU TO USE THE DENSITY PLUS HEIGHT BONUS TO GET TO 60 FEET AND DO THE AFFORDABILITY.
UM, SO HERE AGAIN, JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE GRANULAR, UM, WHAT WE'RE DOING, WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY CHANGING THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
IT'LL HAVE THE SAME DESIGNATION.
WE'RE CHANGING THE HEIGHT MAP.
UM, SO THAT, AND WE'RE, I'M SORRY, WE'RE CHANGING THE SUBDISTRICT FROM LIVE WORK FLEX TO TOD MIXED USE AND WE'RE CHANGING THE, AND ON THE ZONING WE'RE JUST CHANGING, UM, THE HEIGHT MAP.
UM, AND AT THE AFFORDABILITY, UM, THE SALTILLO PLAN, THIS WOULD BE A RENTAL PROJECT.
SO WITH THE SEAL SALTILLO PLAN WOULD REQUIRE 15% OF THE GROSS SITE AREA BE SET ASIDE IN UNITS, UH, OR I SHOULD SAY IN AFFORDABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, ONSITE UNITS FOR THOSE EARNING 50% MFI OR LESS.
UM, IN EXCHANGE FOR, UH, A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 60 FEET AND THEN WAVING THE, UM, DENSITY REQUIREMENT AND THE FLORIDA AREA RATIO SET FORTH.
AND THE TODD, IF FOR SOME REASON THIS WERE TO SWITCH TO OWNERSHIP, THAT WOULD BE 15% OF THE ENTIRE SQUARE FOOTAGE, UM, AT 60% MFI OR LOWER FOR OWNERSHIP, WHICH IS PRETTY LOW.
UM, AND UM, ON, ON VERY ROUND NUMBERS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ABOUT 11 OUT OF 45 UNITS BEING AFFORDABLE.
UH, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, NOT RELATED TO THE DENSITY BONUS, BUT JUST SOMETHING ELSE I THINK IS EXCITING IN THIS LOCATION IS THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKING AT ABOUT 25%.
UM, AND SO WITH THAT, I WOULD, UM, REQUEST YOUR RECOMMENDATION IN FAVOR.
AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALL RIGHT, OUR NEXT SPEAKER, UM, PATRICK NER.
PATRICK, UM, YOU'RE THE PRIMARY SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM.
AND THEN I HAVE HANNAH HERE, HANNAH DONATING TIME, CHRISTOPHER WALLET HERE, AND ERIC PACE.
UM, PATRICK, YOU'LL HAVE EIGHT MINUTES TOTAL TO SPEAK.
OKAY? AND I ASSURE YOU I WON'T NEED EIGHT, BUT I HOPE IT'S A DEMONSTRATION BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE PASSION THAT'S RELATED TO THIS PROJECT.
SO FIRST OF ALL, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR CONSIDERATION.
I ALSO MUST SAY YOUR STAMINA IS UNMATCHED.
I'M PARCHED AND HUNGRY AND I DON'T KNOW HOW Y'ALL DO IT, SO THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
UM, YES, WITH THE PRESENTATION, IF WE CAN GO TO THE SECOND SLIDE, UM, WE'RE GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF HOUSING IN THE AREA AND INCREASING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR RESIDENCES IN THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I MEAN, I'LL ALSO RECOGNIZE THE EXTREME GROWTH THAT WE'VE HAD AND THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND NOISE, BUT ULTIMATELY THAT'S WHAT MAKES THIS AREA SO DYNAMIC AND SO MUCH OF WHAT WE LOVE ABOUT IT.
I MEAN, ON ANY GIVEN NIGHT, WE'RE WELCOMING 800 NEW FRIENDS TO THE DOORSTEP OF THIS SITE AT THE SCOOT IN AS WELL AS THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
SO THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT IN THAT SPACE.
I'LL EVEN NOTE, YOU KNOW, THE T APARTMENTS, I'LL NOTE ON THE RIGHT, SOMEONE PARKED ACROSS MY DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS ABOUT A WEEKLY OCCURRENCE, BUT AGAIN, IT'S A DYNAMIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, LIFE, I'LL, I'LL CHARACTERIZE THIS AS LIFE ON THE EDGE.
SO WHAT CONTROLS THIS CHAOS AND ULTIMATELY MAKES IT SUCH A DYNAMIC AND LIVABLE SPACE? IT'S THE TOD.
SO THE TOD WAS INTENTIONALLY AND THOUGHTFULLY ZONED, UM, WITH THIS, I'LL SAY EDGE HERE.
IF YOU NOTE THE PINK SITE, THE PROPOSED SITE THAT'S RIGHT ON THE EDGE IN THAT BLUE AREA, ALL OF WHICH HAD A CEILING OF 40 FEET.
AND THAT WAS INTENTIONAL BECAUSE WITHIN 20 FEET ACROSS THAT ALLEYWAY IS THE LARGEST DENSITY WE HAVE OF, OR I SHOULDN'T SAY DENSITY, BUT THE LARGEST PROPORTION OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND RESIDENTIAL.
SO THE RESULT OF THIS HAS BEEN COMPATIBILITY THAT FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS HAS WORKED EFFECTIVELY ACROSS MULTIPLE EXAMPLES.
SO ON THE NEXT SLIDE, LET ME JUST GO DOWN THE BLOCK FOR YOU.
SO IF WE START MOST EASTWARD, THAT'S WHEN WE GET TO THE FOUNDRY ONE, WHICH IS A MIXTURE OF PREMIUM OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL.
WE'RE LOOKING AT 40 FEET WITH BELOW GROUND PARKING CLOSER.
NOW ON NAVASOTA, WE HAVE SEV ON FOURTH STREET, WHICH IS 40 FEET ABOVE GROUND PARKING.
AS WE MAKE OUR WAY FURTHER DOWN, THE MOST RECENT, UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT ACTUALLY I THINK OPENED ABOUT TWO WEEKS OR A MONTH AGO IS THE T THREE BUILDING, WHICH IS PREMIUM OFFICE WITH SOME CORPORATE HOUSING, AGAIN, 40 FEET BELOW GROUND PARKING.
IN RESEARCHING THIS, I WAS UNABLE TO FIND ANY PROJECT TO DATE THAT'S
[02:05:01]
BEEN CONSTRUCTED THAT COULDN'T ADHERE TO THESE STANDARDS.WHEN WE GO TO SLIDE FIVE, I'LL TAKE US A SHORT WALK OUTSIDE OF THE TOD.
SO THIS IS ON CESAR CHAVEZ AND KOMAL.
AND THERE ARE TWO PROJECTS ACTUALLY RIGHT ACROSS FROM ONE ANOTHER, ONE THAT IS PREMIUM OFFICE, ONE THAT'S RESIDENTIAL AGAIN AT 40 FEET WITH A MIXTURE OF BELOW AND ABOVE GROUND PARKING.
SO ON SLIDE SIX, IF THIS IS A THOUGHTFUL TOD THAT'S WORKED SO WELL AND IS HUNDREDS OF PAGES FOR A CITIZEN TO DIG THROUGH, THERE'S GOTTA BE SOME RECOURSE HERE.
AND IT TURNS OUT THAT THERE IS WITHIN A HUNDRED FEET OF THE TOD BOUNDARY HEIGHT LIMITATIONS WOULD BE WAIVED IF OWNERS OF AT LEAST 66% OF TRIGGERING PROPERTIES WITHIN 25 FEET OF THE SITE REQUEST THE WAIVER.
WELL THAT'S GREAT 'CAUSE THAT ENTIRE ALLEY IS 20 FEET, AS ARE ALL THE OTHER ALLEYWAYS AT THE BORDER OF THE TOD.
A RECENT REPRE PLATTING REQUEST CAME IN TO MOVE THE SITE TO A SETBACK OF 25 FEET.
THE REST OF THE ALLEY WOULD BE AT 20, THIS WOULD BE AT 25.
YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE MARKED A SMALL LINE IN RED FOR THE SITE.
AND THEN THE GREEN NEXT TO IT, I'D ALSO NOTE CONFIRMED OPPOSITION FROM EVERY SINGLE PARTY WITHIN THE CURRENT 20 FEET AND THE UP TO END INCLUDING 25 FEET.
SO IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHY WAS THIS 25 OR THIS 20 FOOT PROVISION OR THESE 20 FOOT ALLEYS PUT IN PLACE? WELL, THE 25 FOOT PROVISION IS BECAUSE ALL OF THE ALLEYWAYS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PINK LINES WHERE ALL OF THIS RESIDENTIAL EXISTS WAS AT THE BORDERS AT THE EDGE.
SO I I SAY AT THIS POINT, THE INTENT WAS CLEARLY ONE TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO LEGACY RESIDENTIAL.
THAT'S WHY IT WAS ZONED IN THAT BLUE AREA.
AND THEN SECONDARILY THAT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORING INPUT TO WEIGH THOSE COMPATIBILITY HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
IF THAT WASN'T THE INTENTION, WHY NOT JUST MAKE IT 20 FEET OR ONE FOOT? SO THAT READING INTO THE TOD, WE HAVE THAT ELEMENT OF IT.
LET'S TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT THE ALLEYWAY.
I THINK THE BENEFITS OF AN EXTRA FIVE FEET TO THE ALLEYWAY ARE DUBIOUS, GIVEN THE PRACTICAL NATURE OF SAID ALLEYWAY.
SO YOU CAN SEE AT BOTH THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT NO POINT EXCEEDS 20 FEET AND AT THAT POINT ANY BENEFIT WOULD VERY LIKELY GO TO THE LANDOWNER ANYWAYS BECAUSE OF THAT EXTRA FIVE FEET THAT REALLY ONLY THEY COULD USE.
SO WITH SLIDE NINE, UM, WE'RE OPEN TO PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HEIGHT AND I I DEFINITELY WANT TO CREDIT MS. BOJO FOR, UM, HER INTERACTION WITH THE UH, CONTACT TEAM AND THEN LATER A SESSION WITH RESIDENTS.
I WILL ALSO NOTE THAT NONE OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS TO DATE HAVE EXPLORED HEIGHT.
ALL OF THEM HAD TALKED ABOUT CRA TRASH OR TRAFFIC HEIGHT HAS NEVER COME UP.
AND THIS IS A BIT OF A CURIOUS SHIFT BECAUSE MICHAEL WINNINGHAM, THE PRINCIPAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT FIRM, REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL OF THE RESIDENTS ON JUNE OF 2022.
HE ATTACHED THIS THAT YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT AND SAID, I'VE ATTACHED THIS SIMPLE TEST FIT DRAWING BELOW.
OPTION TWO IS THE ONE AND I QUOTE, WE THINK IS BEST FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT REQUIRES YOUR CONSENT AT THE TIME HE CONFIRMED CONSENT FROM THOSE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.
MY QUESTION NOW WOULD BE, IF AFTER THAT TIME, CONSENT AND DISCUSSION OF HEIGHT WERE OF PRIORITY, WHY ARE THEY NOT ANYMORE? SO IN SUMMATION, I POINT OUT THAT HOUSING IS CRITICAL AS IS COMPATIBILITY AND WE AS SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS ARE VERY EAGER SUPPORTERS OF MORE HOUSING.
AND WE ALSO WELCOME A THOUGHTFUL DIALOGUE THAT CAN DISCUSS MORE OF THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS THEY MIGHT FIT TO COMPATIBILITY, ULTIMATELY WITH THE GOAL OF ENABLING AND CONTINUING TO WELCOME PEOPLE TO SUCH A PROSPEROUS AND VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT BACK UP FOR REBUTTAL.
I'M GONNA TRY TO QUICKLY TOUCH ON EACH OF THOSE AND THEN IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
UM, STARTING WITH THE PARKING, UM, AND THE PARKING MANAGEMENT, THAT'S BEEN A TOPIC WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A LOT WITH THE NEIGHBORS OVER MULTIPLE MEETINGS.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A REAL PARKING OVER OVERFLOW PARKING ISSUE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT DISTRICT COMING SOON AND SO THE STREET SHOULD SOON BE MANAGED.
AND SO OVERFLOW PARKING SHOULD BE HANDLED THE WAY THAT I THINK IS GOOD POLICY, WHICH IS INSTEAD OF NOT BUILDING HOUSING, YOU JUST FIX THE PROBLEM AT HAND.
UM, I ALSO WOULD SAY ON THE PARKING FRONT THAT UM, I THINK THAT THOSE, I THINK THAT THOSE PROJECTS THAT, THAT WERE POINTED TO AS, UM, HAVING UNDERGROUND PARKING OR ON QUITE A BIT LARGER SITES, THIS IS A VERY SMALL 12,000 SOMETHING SQUARE FOOT SITE.
UM, UNDERGROUND PARKING IS NOT FEASIBLE HERE AND IT'S ALSO MINIMAL.
UM, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE STORY OF PARKING.
UM, AND, AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SITTING UP HIGH ON A BIG PODIUM AND USING OUR HEIGHT
[02:10:01]
FOR THAT.UM, I WANNA POINT OUT THAT WHAT'S ONE THING THAT STAFF SAID IN THE REPORT, WHICH IS THAT THERE IS DOD MIXED USE THREE TIMES FURTHER FROM THE STATION AND OTHER PARTS OF THE TOD THAN THIS LOCATION.
THIS, AGAIN, THIS LOCATION IS, UM, LESS THAN 500 FEET FROM THE STATION USING THAT AS SORT OF THE MEASURE OF THE TODD.
UM, AND I DON'T CHALLENGE THE, THE INTENT OF THAT ORIGINAL DISTRICT THERE, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THIS PLAN IS, YOU KNOW, MANY YEARS OLD.
I THINK OUR HOUSING NEEDS HAVE CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE THAT TIME.
UM, AND I ALSO THINK THAT, UM, THAT COMPATIBILITY, AS YOU ALL KNOW VERY WELL, HAS CHANGED RECENTLY.
UM, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT LEGACY RESIDENTIAL, UM, TO USE THOSE WORDS, UM, ISN'T STILL, IT DOESN'T STILL EXIST.
IT ISN'T STILL IMPORTANT, BUT IT DOES MEAN THAT WE CAN HAVE OTHER PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY IN A LOCATION LIKE THIS, SUCH A TRANSIT AND, AND MOBILITY RICH ENVIRONMENT, UM, THAT WE CAN'T HAVE THOSE PROJECTS NEAR TO EACH OTHER, UM, AND STILL HAVE AND STILL HAVE GREAT NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, AS, AND THEN I'LL JUST CLOSE BY SAYING AS FAR AS THE, THE SUBDIVISION, UM, I WAS NOT WORKING ON THIS PROJECT AT THAT TIME.
I DO KNOW THAT THE SUBDIVISION WAS FILED AND THAT THAT REDUCTION IS, THAT IS TRUE THAT THAT REDUCTION IS HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE.
UM, I KNOW THAT THEY'RE PLANNING ON TAKING ACCESS FROM THE ALLEY.
I DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS OF THAT, BUT I'M HAPPY TO SEE WHAT I CAN FIND OUT IF THAT'S IMPORTANT.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? LEMME SEE.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, ALL THE, UH, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
I NEED TO NOTE THAT I NEED TO ABSTAIN FROM THIS ITEM.
I DID NOT KNOW UNTIL THE NEIGHBOR'S PRESENTATION THAT, UM, THIS IS AN INDUSTRY A TX PROJECT.
I HAVE CONSULTED WITH INDUSTRY A TX, BUT I DON'T MEET THE INCOME THRESHOLD FOR RECUSAL.
UM, LOOKING FOR QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.
COMMISSIONER HAYS, MADAM CHAIR.
I THINK WITH A RECUSAL WE'LL NEED ONE PERSON TO COME ONLINE.
THAT'S AN ABSTENTION, NOT AN CUSAL.
SO, UH, YEAH, AND AND TO YOUR POINT, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION WITHOUT ANOTHER COMMISSIONER, BUT WE HAVE THE QUORUM BECAUSE SHE'S STILL ON THE TASK.
PLEASE TRY TO BE ON CAMERA IF YOU CAN BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE LOW IN ATTENDANCE TONIGHT.
QUICK, QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO, UH, LOOKING AT THIS, IF THIS BODY WERE TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, UM, THIS, THE SALTIER REGULATING PLAN IS FUNNY IN THAT THAT REQUIREMENT IS THERE FOR 60% AND BELOW, EVEN FOR OWNERSHIP.
D DOES THIS BODY WITH CURRENT POSTING HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THAT AT ALL? BECAUSE IF WE WERE TO PUSH THIS FORWARD AT 60% AND BELOW MFI FOR OWNERSHIP, WHAT WE'RE ALMOST SAYING IS WE WANT THIS TO BE RENTAL, AND I DON'T THINK THIS BODY WANTS THAT.
AND SO DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY 80% BELOW TO MAKE HOME OWNERSHIP AFFORDABLE, MORE VIABLE? I MEAN, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL TO CHANGE THE, THE BASE SIZE, I THINK YOU COULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL TO CHANGE ANY OF THE PORTIONS OF THE PLAN THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO UPDATE.
I'LL, I'LL ASK A QUESTION TO STAFF ABOUT THE PARKING MANAGEMENT DISTRICT.
AND CAN YOU DESCRIBE A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT THAT WOULD DO, THE TIMING OF IT, THE BOUNDARIES? UM, I THINK THAT'S MORE OF A QUESTION FOR TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS.
UH, I THINK WE'RE AWARE THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO BRING IT ONLINE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF FACTORS IN THAT TIMELINE THAT MAY, UH, IMPACT WHEN IT'S ABLE TO BE BROUGHT ONLINE.
UM, BUT I THINK THAT THE FACT THAT THIS PROJECT IS TRYING TO PRODUCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AND REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAT IT'S BUILDING AS A PART OF THE SITE, UH, GOES TO REDUCING, UH, TYPICALLY WHAT A HOUSEHOLD'S THE SECOND HIGHEST TRANSP, UH, HOUSEHOLD COST IS, WHICH IS TRANSPORTATION COSTS.
SO IT PROVIDES A LOT OF ALTERNATIVES BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATIONAL ADVANTAGES, AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL PROVIDE A DEEPER LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY BECAUSE IT IS NOT, UH, BUILDING THAT PARKING.
AND WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY FROM TRANSPORTATION HERE TONIGHT? I, I DON'T.
UH, THAT WAS ACTUALLY NEW INFORMATION TO ME.
UM, BUT I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP ON IT IN TERMS OF, UH, WHAT THE TIMELINE IS FOR THAT PROJECT AND, AND HOW THAT, UH, WOULD IMPACT THIS POTENTIAL SITE.
I MIGHT BRING THAT UP AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, YOU'RE ON MUTE.
I THINK THIS QUESTION IS FOR STAFF BASED ON WHAT THE ISSUE THAT COMMISSIONER ANDERSON RAISED, AND THAT IS WHAT IS 80% OF
[02:15:01]
THE MFI VERSUS 60% OF THE MFI? WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF INCOME LEVELS? SO, 60, ACTUALLY, IF I COULD GO BACK ONE SECOND TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED, UM, WE'LL GET BACK TO THE MFIS, BUT, UH, I WAS TOLD BY MY COLLEAGUES THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO AMEND THE MFI IN THE PLAN BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A CODE AMENDMENT.SO I AM CORRECTING MY, MY PREVIOUS STATEMENT, UM, LOOKING AT, UH, THE LATEST MFI CHART THAT I'M ABLE TO FIND, UH, 60% MFI LOOKS LIKE IN AUSTIN, A FOUR PERSON HOUSEHOLD OF APPROXIMATELY $70,000, UH, AND AN 80% MFI WOULD BE A FOUR PERSON HOUSEHOLD OF APPROXIMATELY $93,000.
I, I, I, I DO FEEL LIKE FROM OWNERSHIP IS POSSIBLE THAT $70,000 FOR A FOR PERSON FAMILY, SO.
UM, THIS IS DEFINITELY A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY SOME OF OUR TO OD PLANS ARE, I DON'T, OUTDATED IS NOT PROBABLY A LITTLE UNFAIR, BUT MORE NEED IN NEED OF REVISION.
AND I'M JUST CURIOUS, WITH THE INTENT FOR THIS LIVE WORK FLEX SUBJECT, THAT'S NOT THE TYPE OF THING WE WOULD SEE IN A, WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE DONE OUR TODS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY, WHERE A MORE MODERN VERSION OF A TOD MIGHT NOT INCLUDE THIS.
IS THAT CORRECT? I GUESS WHAT I'M REALLY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS THE DIFFERENCES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT IS STILL A TOD DISTRICT AND WE WANT TO KIND OF HONOR THAT, BUT THIS TYPE OF BASE ZONING WOULD NOT BE WHAT WE WOULD HAVE IN A NEWER VERSION OF A TOD.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, I, I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A SERVING KIND OF AS A TRANSITION AREA, BUT IT'S NOT EQUALLY DISPERSED FROM THE TRANSIT STOP AS WE'RE IDENTIFYING.
THERE'S PARCELS THAT ARE AT THAT HIGHER LEVEL OF DENSITY THAT ARE MUCH FURTHER FROM THE STATION AREA THAN THIS SUBJECT TRACT IS.
UM, I THINK THE OTHER THING THAT IS IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER IS THAT, UH, THIS LIVE WORK PRODUCT IS AGAIN, UH, BASED ON MARKET DEMAND.
AND SO IF THERE'S NOT DEMAND FOR THAT PARTICULAR PRODUCT IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, IT REALLY KIND OF NARROWS THE OPTIONS FOR THE DEVELOPER TO DEVELOP THAT SITE.
AND SO IT'S A LITTLE SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF THOSE THINGS.
UM, AND IN THIS PARTICULAR PLAN, IT ALSO PRECLUDES THEM BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR A DENSITY BONUS.
SO THAT'S REALLY, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS TO GET TO THAT HIGHER LEVEL SUBDISTRICT TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE INCOME RESTRICTED, AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN A TOD, WHICH WE'RE DOING IN A LOT OF OTHER CASES, UH, WITH, UH, THE TOD UH, WORK THAT'S BEING DONE.
AND JUST RELATED TO THAT, BECAUSE I THINK THE ISSUE OF COMPATIBILITY HAS COME UP IS THAT WE DO EXPECT SET DOWN STEP DOWNS IN OUR TOD AND WE IN FACT PASSED JUST RECENTLY AN LDC CODE THAT SHOWS THAT TYPE OF STEP DOWN.
SO THE STEP DOWNS WOULD BE ENCOURAGED, BUT THIS WOULD THEORETICALLY BE THAT IN SOME WAYS BECAUSE IT IS AT THE EDGE OF A, IS THAT, HOW WOULD YOU ALL VIEW THAT FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE? WELL, SO THE ALLEY, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE RANGE IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 20 AND 25 FEET.
UM, THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, TRIGGERED FROM THAT POINT AND FROM SINGLE FAMILY ZONING OR, UH, I THINK IT'S SF FIVE ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE.
UH, THE PARCELS TO THE EAST AND THE WEST OF THE SUBJECT TRACK ARE ACTUALLY ZONED.
UH, THE PARCELS ACROSS THE ALLEY TO THE SOUTH ARE ZONED SINGLE FAMILY.
SO THERE'S REALLY ONLY TWO UH, TRACKS THERE THAT WOULD BE TRIGGERING PROPERTIES ACROSS THE ALLEY.
OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER HANDS, MAD CHAIR.
UM, I GUESS, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, MAYBE, UH, HI, UH, MS. BOJO, UH, THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
UM, YOU AND I HAVE TALKED JUST BRIEFLY ABOUT THIS.
I, I GOT IT YESTERDAY AND TRIED TO MAKE SOME CALLS.
UM, I AM, I'M NOT THE NEW GUY ANYMORE, BUT I'M STILL LEARNING.
SO, UM, YOU'RE PROPOSING, OR OR YOUR, YOUR CLIENTS ARE PROPOSING 15% AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON THIS PROJECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
IT WOULD BE, IF WE ARE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DENSITY BONUS, IT WOULD BE 15% OF THE GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE HAS TO BE TURNED INTO AFFORDABLE UNITS.
AND I KNOW YOU FOLLOW, UM, THE ACTIONS OF THIS COMMISSION PROBABLY MORE CLOSELY THAN I DO, UH, AND I COMMEND YOU FOR THAT.
BUT OVER THE LAST, I DON'T KNOW, SIX OR EIGHT OR 10 WEEKS OR SO, WE'VE HEARD LOTS HERE THAT, UM, AND, AND PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS THAT WE TAKE ON HERE AS COM, AS THE COMMISSION, WE GOTTA MAKE SURE WE'RE PUTTING OUT GOOD PROJECTS.
AND SO IN, IN LOTS OF THE CONVERSATIONS, WE HEARD THAT ANYTHING OVER 5% JUST IS BANKRUPT.
AND I'M, I'M WORRIED THAT WE'RE GONNA, THAT YOU'RE JUST PRESENTING A, A PROJECT THAT'S GONNA BE BANKRUPT.
[02:20:01]
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE DOING HERE? I DON'T BELIEVE THAT I AMUM, I THINK THAT WE HAVE HAD, IF I THINK IF I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, WE'VE HAD CON WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT DIFFERENT SITES BASED ON A LOT OF DIFFERENT FACTORS THAT CAN ABSORB DIFFERENT LEVELS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
SO I KNOW IT'S, OH, AND SO THIS IS A BIG PROJECT, SO IT CAN ABSORB LOTS OF HOUSING.
IT'S, WELL, IT'S ACTUALLY A REALLY SMALL PROJECT, BUT, WELL, IT'S A SMALL PROJECT.
BUT IT'S IN A VERY, VERY DESIRABLE LOCATION.
SO THE, THIS IS, I MEAN, CRIME REAL ESTATE, DO YOU WANT US TO DO LESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING? OH, NO.
I, I LOVE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE DOING, AND, AND LAST QUESTION.
UM, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT, UM, I SEE YOU HAVE A PEN THERE, OR IS IT A PEN OR A PENCIL? IT'S A PEN.
CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT BRAND OF PEN THAT IS? IT'S A SPACE PEN.
I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH A SPACE PEN, BUT I'LL, I'LL ASK THE CHAIR IN JUST A LITTLE BIT.
I WONDER IF SHE'LL RECOGNIZE ME FOR A, A MOTION.
'CAUSE WHAT I'VE HEARD OVER THE LAST SIX OR EIGHT WEEKS IS, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING ABOVE LIKE TWO OR 3% DOESN'T PENCIL OUT.
SO WHAT I, I WONDER IF MAYBE IF EVERYBODY USES A SPACE PEN, WE CAN GET SOME THINGS TO PIN OUT.
I I'LL ASK THAT MOTION LATER ON.
ANY OTHER PENCIL OR PEN QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? DID I SEE YOUR HAND GO UP? OKAY.
UM, LOOKING FOR A MOTION? YES.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
WE ALREADY CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING.
MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? I WOULD CHAIR, THANK YOU.
UM, THIS IS GREAT, AND I APPRECIATE MY COLLEAGUE POINTING OUT THE FACT THAT THIS ONE IS ONE OF THE HIGHEST AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUSES THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY, IF ONLY LAND EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY WAS AS GOOD AS THIS LAND, AS FAR AS BEING IN AN AMAZING GRID, BEING ONE BLOCK AWAY FROM A CAT METRO RAIL STATION, YOU JUST, IT'S JUST UNBEATABLE.
AND SO THIS IS PRETTY AMAZING.
I WOULD HOPE THAT IT IS A CITY AND STAFF THAT WE CAN UPDATE THESE REGULATING PLANS.
I KNOW I HEARD A FELLOW COMMISSIONER SAY THAT SHE THINKS THAT WE CAN, UM, HOUSE FOLKS EARNING 60% AND BELOW MFI.
UNFORTUNATELY THOUGH, WE DON'T SEE FAMILIES EARN THAT MAX NUMBER.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE, AT HABITAT, EVEN THOUGH WE SERVE 80% AND BELOW, WE ACTUALLY SERVE MUCH CLOSER TO 60%.
AND WHEN WE DO GO BELOW 60%, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WITH NO DEBT.
AND THE AVERAGE SCHOOL TEACHER HAS $500 A MONTH IN STUDENT DEBT.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, JUST TO ALLOW FOR MORE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO LIVE IN THESE HOMES AND TO MAKE THESE HOMES VIABLE FOR OWNERSHIP, I WOULD REALLY HOPE THAT WE CAN UPDATE THIS AS, AS A CODE AMENDMENT SOMETIMES SOON.
AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO BRING, BUT, UM, 60% AND BELOW JUST SIMPLY SAYS, YOU WANT THIS TO BE RENTAL AND YOU DON'T WANT THIS TO BE OWNERSHIP.
AND I THINK WE DO WANT MORE OWNERSHIP.
AND COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, QUICK CLARIFICATION THAT YOUR MOTION IS REGARDING THE MPA AND THE REZONING.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, DID I SEE YOUR HAND? WELL, YEAH.
SO SOMETHING THAT I, MY NAME WAS CALLED OUT IN TERMS OF WHAT, UM, I SAID, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT DATA WOULD BACK UP THE FACT THAT HOMES IN AUSTIN CAN STILL BE BOUGHT AT $600,000 AND BELOW WITH A 70%, UM, UH, INCOME BY SINGLE FAMILY, UH, HOMES, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AND TO SAY THAT THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE, UH, AND TO BRING UP ALL THESE OTHER KINDS OF ISSUES, TO STAND IN A WAY, AND THAT WE HAVE TO GO AS HIGH AS $93,000 WOULD ALSO ELIMINATE AND PUSH A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT WHO ARE MAKING LESS THAN 80%.
SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE FOUND THE RIGHT BALANCE AT 60%, AND I DON'T THINK THAT IT CLOSES THE DOOR TO OWNERSHIP AT ALL.
I THINK IT ACTUALLY OPENS THE DOOR.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, SOUND LIKE YOU WERE SPEAKING FOR THE AMENDMENT, OR SORRY, THE MOTION, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.
YES, I'M SPEAKING FOR THE AMENDMENT AND I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE LEVEL, THE MEDIUM FAMILY INCOME, WHICH THERE ARE STILL HOMES AFFORDABLE AT THAT INCOME LEVEL IN THIS CITY OF AUSTIN.
I KNOW THAT TO BE A FACT BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE WHO MOVE INTO TO MY NEIGHBORHOOD ARE EARNING THAT AMOUNT.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION IN ONE MORE SPOT? FOUR.
[02:25:02]
OKAY.LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS MOTION.
THIS IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON BOTH THE MPA AND THE REZONING MADE BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
THAT IS 10 ZERO, I'M UNDERSTANDING.
SO THAT'S ACTUALLY 9 0 1 9 0 1.
QUICK POINT, PERSONAL PRIVILEGE.
UM, I, I DO THINK MAYBE THIS BODY NEEDS TO HAVE A BIGGER DISCUSSION ABOUT AFFORDABILITY ONE DAY.
UM, THE FACT IS A $600,000 HOME IS JUST SIMPLY NOT AFFORDABLE TO ANYONE EARNING THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY UNLESS THEY'RE COMING TO THE TABLE WITH 400,000 IN CASH.
AND SO, IT, IT'S JUST, IT, IT'S, I I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION IN A WAY AND POSSIBLY EVEN INVITING FOLKS WHO ACTUALLY BUILD AND SELL THESE HOMES.
UM, AND I THINK THAT MIGHT HELP A LOT OF FOLKS UP HERE JUST KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT.
YOU MIGHT BRING THAT UP AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.
THAT, UH, BRINGS US TO A CLOSE ON FOUR AND FIVE.
[22. Rezoning: C14-2024-0039 - 3020 E. Cesar Chavez; District 3 (Part 2 of 2)]
TO ITEM NUMBER 22.THIS IS 30 20 EAST CAESAR CHAVEZ AND AND CHAIR.
IF I MIGHT REMIND FOLKS, THIS WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS WHERE WE HAD SAID, IF, IF IT WAS A WILL OF THE BODY, WE WOULD GO THROUGH OUR, UM, CONTRACTED PROCEDURE.
SO WE ARE HERE FROM STAFF AND WE'LL TAKE A VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, WE WILL MOVE TO APPROVE.
NO, WE'RE WAITING ON GOOD EVENING.
UM, MARCEL BOUDREAUX, PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF, THIS IS ITEM 22 ON YOUR AGENDA, CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 3 9.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 30 20 EAST CAESAR CHAVEZ.
THIS CASE WAS LAST HEARD AT THE SEPTEMBER 27TH, 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WHERE C-S-M-U-V-C-O-N-P WAS RECOMMENDED BY THIS COMMISSION AND SUBSEQUENTLY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 27TH, 2023.
SINCE THEN, THE COURT'S RULING IN VALIDATED, UM, THE BONUSES AUTHORIZED FOR A VM U2 BUILDING.
SO THIS IS BACK BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, UM, C-S-M-U-V-C-O DB 90 NP, THE TWO CONDITIONS FOR PROHIBITED AND CONDITIONAL USES WITHIN THE CS BASE DISTRICT IN THE CO.
UM, WERE FROM THE 20 23 20 23 CASE, AND ARE AGAIN, RECOMMENDED AS CONDITIONS IN THIS CASE AS THE APPLICANT REQUESTED.
UM, THE STAFF ANALYSIS AND BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PREVIOUS V COMBINING DISTRICT IS THE SAME FOR THIS REZONING REQUEST FOR DB 90.
THEREFORE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING CSMU VCO DB 90 NP.
I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
SEE, OKAY, THIS COMMISSIONERS ANDERSON AND MAXWELL, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, WE'LL CONSIDER THAT MOTION PASSED.
AND, UM, PER OUR, UH, WHAT WE HAD STATED EARLIER, UNLESS THERE IS OBJECTION, SORRY.
I MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AS JUST DESCRIBED TO C-S-M-U-V-C-O-D-B 90 MP.
I SEE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, AND UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, WE'LL CONSIDER THAT MOTION PASSED.
[24. Rezoning: C14-2023-0110 - 1230 E. 38th 1/2 Street; District 9 (Part 2 of 2)]
ON TO ITEM NUMBER 24 C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 10 20 12, 30 EAST 38TH AND A HALF STREET.SO WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF JERRY AS STAFF COMES UP.
I, I'M CURIOUS HOW SO MANY CASES WERE PULLED WHEN NOBODY WAS SIGNED UP AGAINST IF, IF SO, UM, I STATED EARLIER, BUT YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN OUTTA THE ROOM.
THERE WAS, UM, EMAILS THAT WERE SENT AND THERE WAS, UM, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD HERE.
HE JUST ARRIVED A LITTLE BIT LATE AND SO WASN'T ABLE TO SIGN UP AS AN OPPOSITION SPEAKER.
UM, HOWEVER, VICE-CHAIRS ARE ALLOWED THE SPEAKER TO COME UP AND, AND TALK DURING Q AND A SO HE COULD STILL GET THE, HIS OPINION OUT.
IS MR. TOMKO OUTTA THE ROOM AGAIN? OKAY, UH, JONATHAN MKO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
[02:30:01]
UH, CASE NUMBER 24 IS C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 1 0 12 30 EAST 38TH AND HALF STREET.UM, THIS IS A REZONING REQUEST OF 1230 EAST EIGHTH, UH, 38TH AND A HALF STREET FROM C-S-M-U-V-C-O-N-P TO C-S-M-U-V-C-O DB 90 NP.
AND TO CHANGE A CONDITION OF ZONING TO AMEND THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY BY REMOVING THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION OF 40 FEET, UH, IT'S A 40 FEET MAXIMUM HEIGHT RESTRICTION.
UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANTING C-S-M-U-V-C-O-N-P, UH, CO DB 90 AND NP AND AMENDING THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY BY REMOVING THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION OF 40 FEET ON THE SUBJECT TRACK.
THE SUBJECT TRACK IS APPROXIMATELY 4.4369 ACRES, OR APPROXIMATELY 193,000 SQUARE FEET.
THE SUBJECT TRACK IS JUST NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF EAST 38TH AND A HALF STREET, AND THE CAPITAL METRO RED LINE.
THE SUBJECT TRACK INCLUDES ALMA CHERRYWOOD APARTMENT COMPLEX, FORMERLY KNOWN AS DELLWOOD STATION APARTMENTS, THE WEST BANK DRY CLEANING WAREHOUSE, UH, CHERRYWOOD COFFEE HOUSE, MONARCH FOOD MART, AND GC CLEANERS.
AND LAUNDRY TO THE NORTH ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACK ARE SEVERAL DUPLEXES KNOWN AS DUPLEX NATION THAT WERE BUILT IN THE LATE 1940S TO THE EAST.
ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS IS MAPLEWOOD ELEMENTARY.
TO THE WEST IS DELWOOD MARKETPLACE.
A LARGE SHOPPING CENTER, INCLUDING A FIESTA STORE AND TO THE SOUTH, ARE SEVERAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES BUILT FROM IN THE 1940S AND FIFTIES.
THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT OPERATE SMALL OFFICE USES, SUCH AS AN ACUPUNCTURE OFFICE AND SOME OTHER HOME OFFICES ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF EAST 38TH AND A HALF STREET.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS REZONING BASED ON, UH, ZONING BEING CONSISTENT WITH POLICIES AND PRINCIPLES ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL.
IT'S APPROXIMATE TO, UH, MANOR ROAD, THE REDLINE TRAIL.
UH, THE MLK REDLINE STOP, UH, IMPOSING HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS REDUCES THE NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM LIVING NEAR THESE TRANSPORTATION ASSETS.
UH, THE PROPOSED ZONING BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE STATEMENT OF THE DISTRICT SOUGHT.
UM, THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES CS DISTRICT IS A DESIGNATION FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES, UH, AND A SERVICE NATURE.
UM, AND THE TR UM, THE CHARACTERISTICS AND THE TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS, UH, YOU KNOW, WARRANT, UH, DB 90 AS BEING, UH, A ZONING SUBDISTRICT THAT WOULD WORK WELL IN THIS AREA AND IN, IN EXCHANGE FOR PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AND A COMBINATION OF COMMERCIAL, UH, MIX OF OFFICE, RETAIL, COMMERCIAL, OR RESIDENTIAL USES.
UH, AND LASTLY, UM, THE PROPOSED ZONING WOULD SATISFY A REAL PUBLIC NEED AND NOT PROVIDE A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE TO THE OWNER.
UM, THERE'S A REAL PUBLIC NEED FOR MORE H HOUSING IN CENTRAL AUSTIN.
THE LIMITATION OF HEIGHT AT 40 FEET, SO CLOSE TO I 35, LESS THAN A THOUSAND FEET TO THE WEST MAY HAVE BEEN ACCEPTABLE AT ONE POINT IN TIME.
HOWEVER, TODAY IT IS LIMITING FOR THE SITE, UM, UH, LIMITING THE SITE FROM BEING POTENTIALLY REDEVELOPED WITH ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AND ADDITIONAL HOUSING DENSITY BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AND MUELLER DEVELOPMENT.
I WILL NOTE THAT THERE ARE SOME, UH, TRACKS AND CASES THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE CASE, UH, LOG OF THE STAFF REPORT PARCELS JUST TO THE WEST OF I 35 THAT HAVE, UH, DO NOT HAVE A 40 FOOT RESTRICTION.
SO REMOVING IT WOULD ENSURE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS EQUALLY TREATED.
LET ME, UM, I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
HELLO, COMMISSIONERS, I'M LEAH BOJO HERE ON BEHALF OF AMANDA SWAR.
I HOPE YOU'LL BE A LITTLE FORGIVING ON THIS PRESENTATION.
UM, SO HERE WE HAVE A MAP OF THE AREA.
YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENT TRACKS, UM, FOUNDED BY EAST 38TH AND A HALF.
THE RAILROAD TRACKS, THE FIESTA SHOPPING CENTER, UM, AND IT'S CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH WAREHOUSE, UM, RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS, A DRY CLEANER CONVENIENCE STORE IN THE CHERRYWOOD COFFEE HOUSE.
AS I THINK WE ALL ARE FAMILIAR, UM, HERE WE HAVE THE ZONING MAP.
I THINK MR. TOMKO KIND OF WENT THROUGH THIS, SO I WON'T BELABOR IT.
UM, BUT WE ARE, ALL WE ARE ASKING FOR IS TO REMOVE THE, UH, HEIGHT RESTRICTION OF 40 FEET IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND ALSO ADD THE DB 90, UH, OVERLAY TO THE SITE.
UH, SO HERE'S A TIMELINE OF THE WORK WE'VE DONE SO FAR WORKING WITH, UM, WITH, UH, THE FOLKS IN THE CHERRYWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, WE'VE HAD, UH, OR AMANDA AND, AND HER TEAM HAVE HAD QUITE A FEW MEETINGS WITH THESE, WITH THIS GROUP OF NEIGHBORS.
AND WE ALSO PLAN TO CONTINUE HAVING, UM, MEETINGS AND CON CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM AS WE HEAD TO COUNCIL.
UM, WE'VE EVEN SPOKEN A BIT TODAY ABOUT WHAT KIND OF, WHAT WE'RE EXPECTING THAT TIMELINE TO LOOK LIKE,
[02:35:01]
AND I THINK WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT THAT.UM, WE HAVE AGREED TO THIS LIST.
I BELIEVE THIS IS SORT OF THAT STANDARD LIST OF TENANT PROTECTIONS FOR THE TENANTS THAT LIVE THERE TODAY.
UM, I DON'T THINK IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THOSE, I'LL LEAVE IT UP THERE FOR JUST A MINUTE.
UM, BUT I BELIEVE THIS IS ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU USUALLY SEE, UM, AS FAR AS MAKING SURE THAT CURRENT TENANTS, UM, ARE PROTECTED AT THE TIME OF REDEVELOPMENT, WHICH I'LL GET TO HERE SHORTLY.
UM, AND THEN HERE IS THE LIST OF TENANT PROTECTIONS FOR FUTURE TENANTS, UM, THAT WOULD GO INTO EFFECT UPON REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE.
UM, WE HAVE AGREED TO, UH, THAT NO DEMOLITION OF THE APARTMENTS WOULD OCCUR BEFORE NOVEMBER 1ST, 2026.
UM, I BELIEVE THESE NUMBERS REFLECT, UM, SO 70, THE RESERVATION OF 74 AFFORDABLE UNITS.
UM, I BELIEVE THIS IS, THIS IS WITH THE GOAL OF ESTABLISHING A PFC FOR THE SITE.
UM, IF THE, AS WE, WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS, IS STILL IN DISCUSSION, WE ARE STILL IN DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, BUT THAT OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD COMPLY, AT LEAST COMPLY WITH DB 90 OR VMU DEPENDING ON WHICH OVERLAY WE PARTICIPATED IN AT THE TIME OF REDEVELOPMENT.
UM, AND THEN FOR THE COMMERCIAL TENANTS THERE, UM, WE HAVE COMMITTED TO NOT TERMINATING ANY OF THIS EXISTING LEASES, INCLUDING ANY AVAILABLE EXTENSIONS.
UM, WE'VE COMMITTED TO NO DEMOLITION PRIOR TO MARCH 1ST, 2025 ON THAT SECTION OF THE SITE, WHICH I CAN GO BACK TO IF YOU'RE INTERESTED.
UM, AND WE'VE DELAYED THE DEMOLITION IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE OWNERS OF AND THE CHERRYWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION TIME TO COLLABORATE ON A BROADER COMPREHENSIVE VISION FOR THE, FOR THE PLAN.
WE HAVE NOT YET GOTTEN TO THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, QUESTIONS AND WORK TO HAPPEN ON THAT FRONT.
UM, AND WE'VE ALSO INC ARE INCLUDING A RIGHT TO RETURN PROVISION FOR THE COMMERCIAL TENANTS, UM, ON THE REDEVELOPED COMMERCIAL PORTION OF THE SITE.
UM, SO AS YOU ALL KNOW, DB 90 WOULD, WOULD REQUIRE 10% OF THE UNITS AT 50% MFI OR 12% AT 60 AT A MINIMUM.
UM, AND THIS IS, UH, THIS IS THE REQUEST OVERVIEW AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT.
AGAIN, I WANNA REITERATE THAT WE, UM, WE HAVE MORE CONVERSATION TO HAVE AND WE WILL CONTINUE THAT WORK BEFORE WE HEAD TO CITY COUNCIL.
WE'LL HEAR FROM OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.
I BELIEVE IT'S MR. JIM WALKER.
JIM WALKER, CHAIR, THE CHAIR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, I SENT A LETTER JUST TODAY, I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL GOT THAT.
I HAVE HARD COPIES HERE IF ANYBODY WANTS THAT.
UM, GREAT CONVERSATION ON ITEM 33 EARLIER, BY THE WAY, THAT'S A VERY I IMPORTANT AND COOL INITIATIVE.
SO SAY THAT LIKE THAT OUT YET.
UM, SO WE HAVE MET SEVERAL TIMES.
I'LL GIVE, UH, FULL RESPECT TO THE APPLICANT AND RENER FOR BEING RESPONSIVE AND, AND MEETING AND BEING, UH, SOMEWHAT OPEN TO CONVERSATIONS AS, AS LEAH MENTIONED, WE'RE NOT THERE YET.
UH, BUT WE DO EXPECT, UH, ONGOING CONVERSATIONS.
UH, WE HAVE THREE PRIMARY CONCERNS, UH, WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE OUR POSITION THAT WE CANNOT SUPPORT THIS TONIGHT, BUT WILL NOT OPPOSE THIS MOVING FORWARD AT THIS TIME.
UH, BUT IT'S THE EXPECTATION OF CONTINUING THE CONVERSATION TO GET TO FIRM COMMITMENTS.
UH, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE SHOWN IN THAT SLIDE ARE A LITTLE OLD, ACTUALLY.
UH, SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN REVISED.
BUT, BUT WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH IT.
BUT ONE OF THE KEY THINGS IS TRYING TO GET TO FIRM COMMITMENTS AND NOT JUST, WE'LL CONSIDER IT LATER, YOU KNOW, OR AT OUR SOLE DISCRETION.
UH, OUR THREE PRIMARY CONCERN AREAS ARE A LOT OF WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IN SOME OF THESE EARLIER CASES.
UH, THIS WILL, THE DB 90, UH, WE HAVEN'T HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE HEIGHT.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IDENTIFIED.
THIS IS A DENSITY LOCATION 20 YEARS AGO, SO WE'RE, WE'RE GOOD THERE.
BUT THE DB 90 WILL ADD A WHOLE LOT OF ENTITLEMENT VALUE ON PAPER.
UH, AND WITHOUT A SITE PLAN OR A PROFORMA, THERE'S, THERE'S NOWHERE TO REALLY HANG THE, THE TYPICAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS OF AFFORDABILITY, HOW MANY UNITS, WHAT SIZE UNITS ARE IN THERE, UH, HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH SOME OF THE OTHER COMPATIBILITY, UH, ISSUES AND THE OVERLAYING CHANGES WITH DB 90 AND ONSITE PARKING AND SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF.
THAT'S WHERE I THINK SOME OF THE DANIEL'S CONCERNS COME FROM.
AND WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE SOME FOLKS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT TOO.
WHAT WILL THE MARKET DO WITH THESE, WITH THIS NEW KIND OF ENTITLEMENT? UH, SO THAT'S WHERE THAT COMES FROM.
PARTLY IN RESPONSE TO THAT, WE'VE INITIATED, UH, WHAT WE'RE CALLING THE HANCOCK CHERRYWOOD AREA PLAN.
THIS WAS SUPPORTED BY CITY COUNCIL A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.
IT'S TRYING TO LOOK AT A LONG TERM.
[02:40:01]
PLAN FOR NOT ONLY THIS FOUR AND A HALF ACRES, BUT THE FIESTA SITE THAT WAS MENTIONED.UH, TRYING TO TRIGGER A RED LINE STATION THERE AT HANCOCK, WHICH WE'VE ALL TALKED ABOUT FOR A LONG TIME, THINKING ABOUT HANCOCK CENTER, THINKING ABOUT THE SEVEN ACRE I 35 CAP.
BUT WE WOULD HOPE THAT THIS APPLICANT, DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THIS WHOLE CASE, WOULD BE PATIENT WITH THEIR PLANNING IN ORDER TO INTEGRATE INTO THAT LARGER PLAN.
WE NEED BETTER PLANNING AND NOT PIECEMEAL REDEVELOPMENT, UH, TENANT PROTECTIONS AND AFFORDABILITY.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH BASTA, THIS IS OUR SECOND BIG AREA.
UH, LOVE WORKING WITH BASTA ON THE TENANT PROTECTIONS.
THE APPLICANT HAS LEANED IN ON THAT FOR THE CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENCE OF THE ALMA.
UH, AS WELL AS FOR THE COMMERCIAL OWNERS.
CHERRYWOOD COFFEE HOUSE IS A BELOVED LOCATION, SO HONORING THEIR LEASE, UH, AND BEING, HAVING INTEGRITY WITH HONORING THE LEASE AND THE EXTENSIONS IS SOMETHING WE'LL WATCH VERY CLOSELY.
AND A RIGHT TO RETURN IS VERY EXCITING.
UM, AND THE FUTURE AFFORDABILITY IS KIND OF AS, AS YOU ALL DEMONSTRATE, EVERY WEEK IS THE BIG ONE.
74 UNITS ARE WHAT'S IN ALMA APARTMENTS.
WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE 74 UNITS, NO MATTER HOW MANY TOTAL UNITS ARE IN WHATEVER GETS BUILT THERE, WE'D LIKE TO SEE AT LEAST 74 OF THOSE BE AFFORDABLE AT SOME LEVEL.
AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT 50 OR 60, WHAT'S SPREAD ACROSS 50 AND 60, WHAT UNIT SIZES GO INTO WHERE.
UH, BUT THAT'S OUR, WHAT WE'RE PUSHING FOR IS SOME CREATIVITY OTHER THAN A PFC, INCLUDING LOOKING AT P LOOKING AT OTHER OPTIONS FOR HOW WE GET TO AT LEAST ONE FOR ONE REPLACEMENT THERE.
AND IT WILL REQUIRE INGENUITY.
SO WE, WE GET THAT AND WE'RE COMMITTED TO CONTINUING TO WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH THE APPLICANT.
THE LAST AREA, UH, DESIGN AND CONNECTIVITY, UH, SO THIS GETS INTO THE RED LINE PARKWAY, AND I NOTICED IN THE ADDITIONAL STAFF COMMENTS, UH, THAT THERE IS A, AT LEAST A 20 FOOT URBAN TRAIL EASEMENT THAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDING IN A FUTURE SITE PLAN.
AGAIN, IF WE HAD A SITE PLAN, IF THERE WAS SOME THAT WE COULD RESPOND TO A LOT OF THIS, UM, BUT MAYBE LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE RED LINE DEDICATION.
UH, THERE'S A CREEK KIND OF BUFFER DRAINAGE AREA THAT NEEDS SOME THOUGHT.
UM, BUT WE'RE HOPING TO INFLUENCE THAT THROUGH RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, UH, OR COMMITMENTS BY THE APPLICANT OVER THE NEXT COUPLE MONTHS.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT.
UH, WE LOOK FORWARD TO ONGOING DISCUSSIONS.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO, AS YOU'VE SAID A COUPLE TIMES NOW, YOUR ALL'S PUBLIC ENCOURAGEMENT OF THE APPLICANT AND, AND, UH, TO CONTINUE TO TALK WITH US AND TO MAKE FIRM COMMITMENTS, NOT JUST KIND OF ASPIRATIONAL LANGUAGE.
AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND SORRY FOR GETTING YOU THE LETTER SO LATE.
WE MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
AND WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. GERARD KINNEY.
UH, GERARD KENNY HERE, LIFELONG AUSTINITE, UH, FOUNDER OF THE CHERRY FOUNDING PRESIDENT OF THE CHERRYWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, I, I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MYSELF HERE.
I'M NOT OFFICIALLY REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ALTHOUGH I HAPPEN TO AGREE WITH EVERYTHING JIM WALKER JUST SAID.
UM, I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THAT TRACK FOUR OF THE FOUR TRACKS, WHICH CONSISTS OF THE CHERRYWOOD COFFEE HOUSE, THE MONARCH, AND THE CLEANERS, THAT, THAT LITTLE TRIANGLE AT THE END, I DON'T THINK THAT THE, THAT THE, UH, 40 FOOT HEIGHT SHOULD BE EXTENDED THERE.
THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT TRACT ALONE SHOULD BE LEFT AT THE HEIGHT THAT IT IS THE RESTRICTION THAT IT IS.
AND THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS FOR THAT.
ONE IS, IT'S RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SCHOOL.
UH, AND THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE POINTED THAT OUT AND BEEN OCCURRED, BEEN WORRIED ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF THAT PARTICULAR TRACT.
BUT ALSO IN THE FUTURE WHEN THERE IS A SITE PLAN, I THINK WE WOULD ENTERTAIN ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AT THAT TIME, BUT WE WOULD HAVE MORE, MORE NEGOTIATING POWER IF WE, IF, IF IT WERE LEFT AT FOUR FEET FOR NOW, 40 FEET FOR NOW.
UH, I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE HANCOCK CHERRYWOOD AREA PLAN.
I THINK THAT THIS, THIS PROJECT IS WHAT STIMULATED THE IDEA THAT WE PUT FORWARD.
AND I, AND I THINK THAT, AND I DO HOPE THAT THE, THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL HOLD OFF AND BE A, BECOME A PART OF THAT.
[02:45:01]
THANK YOU.WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR REBUTTAL.
UM, I THINK I, I WOULD JUST, UM, REITERATE WHAT I SAID EARLIER, THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS, UM, NOT ONLY THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS, BUT THROUGH THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS.
WE HAVE MADE THOSE COMMITMENTS.
UM, AND, UH, THERE'S, THERE ARE THINGS TO TALK ABOUT BEFORE WE GET TO COUNCIL AND THEN THERE ARE THINGS TO TALK ABOUT EVEN AFTER THAT.
IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY, I SEE MOTION AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON AND MAXWELL.
UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
UM, I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, MR. JOHNSON FOR LEAH, UH, WHAT'S A-P-F-C-I? I'LL PULL MY ROOKIE CARD.
I CAN SEND YOU A PUBLIC FINANCE CORPORATION.
UM, I, I, I'M CURIOUS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES.
YOU MENTIONED THAT, UM, THE HANCOCK SORT OF JOINT AREA PLAN WAS RECENTLY GIVEN SOME SORT OF APPROVAL OR, OR DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL.
CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT? I KNOW IT'S NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT GERMANE TO THIS CASE, BUT I'M JUST, UH, IT'S ABSOLUTELY, I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT IDEA.
IT'S ABSOLUTELY GERMANE IN OUR MINDS JUST BECAUSE OF THIS IS A LOT OF SINGLE FAMILY FABRIC AND THERE'S JUST SOME, SEVERAL HUGE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND THEN THERE'S PLACES LIKE THESE FOUR AND A HALF ACRES AND PLANNING THEM TOGETHER, UH, WE'LL GET MORE OUT OF ALL OF THEM FOR THE LANDOWNERS AND THE RESIDENTS IN THE, IN THE CITY.
UM, SO THE RESOLUTION WAS ONLY KIND OF A SUPPORT RESOLUTION FROM CITY COUNCIL.
THERE WAS NO FUNDING THAT WENT WITH IT INSIDE THAT PARTICULAR RESOLUTION.
SO I THINK IT WAS D NINE AND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND SEVERAL OTHER OFFICES INDICATING THEY SUPPORT, UH, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NOT BANDWIDTH NECESSARILY IN CITY STAFF TO DO SMALL AREA PLANS LIKE THERE, THERE WAS 20 YEARS AGO, I THINK THAT IDEA STILL RESONATES WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE.
UM, SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE HOPING IN.
WE, YOU KNOW, WE RECOGNIZE CHANGE IS CONSTANT, BUT WE, UH, WE DO WHAT WE CAN TO HELP SHAPE IT AND NOT JUST LET IT HAPPEN TO US.
I DO WONDER IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD BRING UP AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM FOR SMALL AREA PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WOODS, I'LL KIND OF FOLLOW ON COMMISSIONER JOHNSON'S QUESTIONS.
UM, FOR YOU, MR. WALKER, CAN YOU SPEAK TO HOW THIS ZONING CHANGE DOES OR DOES NOT FIT INTO THAT AREA PLAN AND THE, THE PROCESS OF WORKING WITH LANDOWNERS ON WHAT THAT PLAN LOOKS LIKE AND MOVING FORWARD? YEAH, SO WHAT WE'VE, UH, AS GERARD MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, HAVING THIS CASE COME FORWARD, KIND OF SET IN MOTION, OUR THINKING, OKAY, WELL WE GOTTA, WE GOTTA REALLY THINK ABOUT THIS LARGER AREA.
UM, IT'S NOT POLITICALLY SOUND FOR ONE NEIGHBORHOOD TO COME FORWARD AND SAY, HEY, WE HAVE THE BEST IDEA YOU ALL SHOULD GET ON BOARD.
THE, UH, AIAS DESIGN ASSISTANCE TEAM PROCESS HAS BEEN USED IN AUSTIN A COUPLE TIMES.
WHATEVER YOU THINK OF WHERE THOSE THINGS END UP THAT DAT PROCESS KICKING IT OFF IS A WAY TO GET MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDERS TOGETHER AND HAVING THEIR MULTIPLE VIEWS EXPRESSED, INCLUDING, AND ESPECIALLY PRIVATE LANDOWNERS, SO THAT IT'S NOT JUST A COMMUNITY VOICE, RIGHT.
SO WE'RE, THAT'S THE, THE PROCESS WE ARE TRYING TO INITIATE.
ARCHITECT'S FOUNDATION HAS INDICATED SOME BANDWIDTH.
IF WE CAN GET THEM AN APPLICATION AND IT LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING THEY WANT TO DO, UM, WE'RE TRYING TO TIE THE TIMELINE OF THAT TO THE TDOT CITY DECISIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE IN OCTOBER, NOVEMBER.
SO THAT, THAT CAP BEING PROPOSED BY TDOT AND BEING SUPPORTED BY THE CITY HAS A MUCH STRONGER RATIONALE TO ACTUALLY GET DONE BECAUSE WE KNOW WE HAVE SOME SENSE ABOUT WHAT COULD HAPPEN ON THOSE LARGE PARCELS.
I'LL NOTE THAT, UH, CENTRAL HEALTH OWNING 14 ACRES OF THAT HANCOCK CENTER NOW PUTS A BIG PUBLIC ANCHOR INTEREST IN THAT, THAT WHOLE IDEA.
SO, SO WE'RE TRYING TO KIND OF CATALYZE A PROCESS THAT WOULDN'T JUST BE OUR VOICE, BUT WOULD BRING MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDER VOICES TO A, A VISIONING PROCESS.
AND JUST THINKING ABOUT THIS CASE SPECIFICALLY, YOU KNOW, HEARING AND APPRECIATING THE CONCERNS AROUND TENANT PROTECTIONS AND AFFORDABILITY, WERE THOSE CONCERNS ADDRESSED? DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS ZONING FITS INTO THE VISION FOR THAT SMALL AREA PLAN? I, I THINK THE IDEA OF INCREASED HEIGHT CLOSE TO A RENOVATED I 35 IS SOMETHING THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE SEE.
[02:50:01]
THERE WANTS TO BE AN OPTIMIZATION OF IT.UM, I, I THINK THIS PROJECT DOES FIT INTO THAT.
IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE, AND THEIR TIMELINE, IF WE CAN GET A VISION GOING, THEY, THEIR STATED TIMELINE OF, YOU KNOW, MARCH OF 2025 OR NOVEMBER OF 26, I THINK WE CAN HAVE SOMETHING COMPELLING TO LOOK AT BY THEN.
AND SO THEN I WILL FOLLOW UP WITH MS. BOJO, UH, AND UNDERSTAND THAT YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO SPEAK ON ALL OF THIS, BUT SEEMS LIKE THE TENANT PROTECTIONS ARE A LITTLE BIT OF THE STICKING POINT HERE.
ARE Y'ALL WILLING TO CONTINUE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH BOSTON AND WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED? ABSOLUTELY.
I THINK WE'VE HAD A VERY CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATION SO FAR WITH BOTH BOSTON AND THE NEIGHBORS ON THAT FRONT.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HAYNES AND THEN COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO, UM, ACTUALLY THANK YOU COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
YOU ALWAYS GIVE ME THINGS TO THINK OF, UM, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, MS. BEJA.
UM, AND, AND I MUST HAVE BEEN NAPPING WHEN, UM, WHAT'S THE, THERE'S A P I'M GLAD YOU HAVE YOUR PEN.
I'M SURE THIS ONE PENCILS OUT TOO.
UH, I LOVE THE AFFORDABILITY AND LOVE THE TENANT PROTECTIONS AND EVERYTHING, BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER HOWARD HAS ME 'CAUSE HE KNOWS A WHOLE LOT MORE ABOUT PFCS, BUT WHAT IS THE, WHAT'S WHO, WHAT'S THE PUBLIC ENTITY, UH, THAT'S DOING THE FINANCING HERE? I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ONE YET.
UH, DO YOU WANT ME TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT? I HAVE, MY CLIENT IS OUTSIDE.
I CAN FIND OUT MORE DETAILS IF YOU'D LIKE.
WOULD MR. YOU LIKE TO, IT'S NOT AN OPINION, IT'S A SORRY ABOUT THAT.
UM, SO PART OF THE REASON THAT WE ARE, UM, ABLE TO ALLOW THAT TIME FOR THE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL TENANTS AND ALLOW THAT FURTHER OUT DEMOLITION IS SO THAT WE CAN PUT THAT TOGETHER.
SO NO, WE DON'T HAVE AN ENTITY, UH, NAILED DOWN YET, BUT THAT WOULD BE THE GOAL AND IT WOULD ALLOW THE PROJECT TO PROVIDE MORE AFFORDABILITY.
COMMISSIONER MAXWELL AND THEN VICE CHAIR.
UM, A QUICK QUESTION FOR, WELL, I'LL, I'LL START WITH THE APPLICANT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVE.
SO, UM, THIS WAS TOUCHED UPON EARLIER AND I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.
THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION OF THE RED LINE TRAIL AND HOW THE PARKWAY MIGHT ACTUALLY INTERACT WITH THIS.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT JUST SO WE CAN CLARIFY? SO, REDLINE, UH, PARKWAY, OBVIOUSLY THE RED LINE'S RIGHT HERE.
WE'VE, WE'VE REDLINE PARKWAY'S BEEN INCLUDED FROM THE, FROM THE GET GO.
UH, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, WE'VE ASKED IF THE APPLICANT CAN VOLUNTARILY SET ASIDE 32 FEET OR SO OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR FUTURE REDLINE PARKWAY.
I THINK STAFF COMMENT WAS AT LEAST 20 FEET FOR AN URBAN TRAIL, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE RED LINEE PARKWAY.
UM, BUT THAT FIRM COMMITMENT HASN'T BEEN MADE TO THAT.
IT'S A, IT'S A, WELL, WE'LL LOOK AT IT, IT'S A GOAL IN THE FUTURE.
AND SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS A LITTLE BIT MORE, YOU KNOW, COMMITMENT TO SOME OF THOSE THINGS.
AND IT'S THE SAME THING ON THE AFFORDABILITY.
I THINK THE 10 TO 12% AFFORDABILITY THAT WAS SHOWN, IF YOU ACCESS THE DB 90, WELL YOU'RE REQUIRED TO DO THAT, RIGHT? WE'RE NOT BRINGING PUBLIC ASSISTANCE TO THAT.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR AT 74 UNITS WOULD BE MORE VERY LIKELY THAN WHAT DB 90 REQUIRES THEM TO DO.
SO THAT'S WHERE THE CREATIVITY'S GONNA BE.
UH, A PFC IS ONE OF SEVERAL MECHANISMS TO GET THERE.
RIGHT? AND SO ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR RIGHT NOW IS BEING OPEN TO, LET'S LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS, RIGHT? WE'VE DONE A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS AT MILLER.
I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THE MILLER AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT.
WE'VE TRIED A LOT OF THINGS THERE.
UM, ALL THE MARKET RATE PARTNERS AT MILLER HAVE 15% OF AFFORDABILITY JUST AS A STARTING POINT.
SO IT CAN BE DONE, IT PENCILS, IT PENS, IT CRAYONS.
YOU JUST GOTTA KIND OF BE WILLING TO COMMIT TO IT AND FIGURE OUT THE NUMBERS.
UM, AND KEEPING ON THE MOBILITY, UM, SORT OF DISCUSSION HERE.
SORRY, YOU OBVIOUSLY ON A NO, I APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMENTS.
UM, THIS IS A LARGER SITE AND WITH SOME OF OUR LARGER SITES, WE DO WANNA INCLUDE THINGS LIKE SORT OF ADDITIONAL MOBILITY, MAYBE THAT SIDEWALKS OR CAN CONNECTIVITY.
AND I'M JUST, WE, IF YOU HAVE, YOU ALL HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? UH, OUR UNDERSTANDING, AND THIS MAY BE FOR STAFF, IS THAT THEY'LL HAVE TO DO SOME GOOD STREET FRONTAGE ON 30TH AND
[02:55:01]
A HALF STREET.UM, WE DO, THERE'S BIKE LANES ON THERE ALREADY THAT I THINK ARE SLATED FOR IMPROVEMENT THROUGH A CITY PROJECT CURRENTLY.
UH, THE RED LINE PARKWAY WOULD BE THE MAIN ONE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
UH, GETTING A RED LINE STATION WITHIN A QUARTER MILE WOULD CHANGE EVERYTHING ABOUT THAT, THAT QUESTION.
SO, AND THEN JUST ONE THING I NOTED WHEN THERE WAS A BRIEF COMMENT THAT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE SAW IN THE PRESENTATION MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT OUTDATED.
WAS THERE ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR YOU WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT JUST SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S, IT WAS JUST A PFC THING.
SO, SO WE HIGHLIGHTED IN AN, IN AN EARLY DRAFT THAT WE'RE NOT ONLY GONNA LOOK AT PFCS AND THE APPLICANT TO THEIR CREDIT SAID OKAY AND KIND OF OPENED UP THE, THE PLAYBOOK ABOUT WHAT WE WOULD LOOK AT IF THERE NEEDED TO BE AN ADDITIONAL PARTNER TO GET THE DEEPER AFFORDABILITY.
AND I WILL JUST ASK ONE FINAL QUESTION, AND OBVIOUSLY THIS IS PROBABLY MORE, SOME MORE AND MORE FOR THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD JUST BE GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE DISCUSSED A POTENTIAL POSTPONEMENT OF THIS CASE, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CONVERSATION'S ONGOING AND THE, THE, UM, APPLICANT IS COMMITTED TO THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE SORT OF CONTINUING THAT CONVERSATIONS HAVING MOVED ON FROM PLANNING COMMISSION? I, I THINK IF THINGS CONTINUE IN THE GOOD FAITH WAY THAT THEY HAVE BEEN, I, I FEEL GOOD ABOUT THAT AND OUR STEERING COMMITTEE HAS SOME RETICENCE ABOUT THAT.
BUT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH MOVING FORWARD.
THE TRICK IS GONNA BE IN RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS.
YOU KNOW, IS IT A FIRM COMMITMENT
YOU KNOW, THAT'S HARDER TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT.
SO I THINK IF WE'RE LEANING THIS WAY AS WE GO FORWARD AND I, I THINK WE ARE, THEN I'M OKAY WITH IT.
AND IF I DO HAVE ONE MORE SECOND, I AM JUST CURIOUS, SINCE SOMEONE MENTIONED THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL HAS, HAS THE APPLICANT OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD BEEN SPEAKING TO THE PTA AND OR SORT OF A ISD ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND WHAT MIGHT BE FEASIBLE? WE, THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE APPLICANT.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S BEEN TO THE, THE PAT AND THE CA, THE PTA AND THE CAC AND WE MET THE PRINCIPAL.
UM, SO THEY'RE, THE RAILROAD PROVIDES A PRETTY INTERESTING LINE THERE, RIGHT? SO, UH, THEY'RE FINE WITH THIS.
THERE AREN'T THAT MANY FAMILIES ACTUALLY IN THE ALMA WHO ARE CURRENTLY HAVE KIDS ATTENDING MAPLEWOOD, WHICH I FOUND SURPRISING, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE, UH, IT'S A FUTURE BENEFIT FOR THIS SITE TO HAVE AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OF THAT QUALITY RIGHT THERE.
UM, UH, MR. ROCKER, IF YOU CAN SAY IS, I ACTUALLY WAIT, I THINKING I'M GONNA GO TO THE APPLICANT.
CAN YOU, AND YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW THIS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THIS, UM, SORT OF CONVERSATION ON THE AFFORDABILITY PIECE THAT THERE'S A REQUEST FOR FIRM COMMITMENT AND IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S NOT CURRENTLY WHAT'S INCLUDED.
I'LL, I KNOW EARLIER I HAD, I HAD HEARD AS WELL FROM OTHER STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS THERE WAS SORT OF, YOU KNOW, AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE OWNER AND TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE MM-HMM
DO YOU WANT, CAN YOU, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT PIECE TO ME? UM, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE EXACT LANGUAGE OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
I DO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GENERALLY.
AND I WOULD SAY THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE WOULD NEED TO NAIL THOSE THINGS DOWN BEFORE WE GO TO CITY COUNCIL.
AND, AND THEN CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, UH, WHAT IS THE DEMOLITION TIMELINE? I SURE CAN.
SO YEAH, BOTH FOR THE COMMERCIAL AND THE RESIDENTIAL COMPETENCE? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
THE COMMERCIAL, UM, THE COMMERCIAL WOULD, UH, THE APARTMENTS WOULD, THE RESIDENTIAL WOULD NOT BE DEMOLISHED PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 1ST, 2026.
AND THE RESIDENTIAL, I'M SORRY, THE COMMERCIAL
AND THE COMMERCIAL WOULD NOT BE DEMOLISHED PRIOR TO MARCH 1ST, 2025.
SO, I MEAN, I, I DO WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE IT.
IT IS NOT AS, NOT SOON AS ONE WOULD THINK, LIKE MARCH, 2025 IS, IT'S, BEFORE WE KNOW IT, IT'S GONNA BE MARCH, 2025.
DON'T ASK ME 'CAUSE I, THINGS I NEED TO DO BY THEN.
UM, IT'S, AND I'M NOT GONNA GET THEM DONE.
UM, AND THE OTHER PIECE OF THIS IS, SO CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE COMMITMENTS FOR THE COMMERCIAL, UM, PART AS WELL? 'CAUSE I KNOW THERE'S SOME AFFORDABILITY AND ABILITY TO COME BACK INTO THE COMMERCIAL AS WELL.
TO RETURN, SO THE RIGHT TO RETURN IS, OR IS IT TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE? LIKE IS IT, DO YOU KNOW? UM, I MEAN I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT GETTING INTO THE, THE REAL DETAILS OF, OF LEASES, 'CAUSE I DON'T KNOW THEM, UM, YOU KNOW, IF IF IT'S SOMEONE IN GOOD STANDING THAT CAN MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LEASE, THEY WOULD, IT WOULD BE OPEN TO THEM FIRST IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
UM, WE CAN FIND, I CAN FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THAT BEFORE WE GO TO COUNSEL.
'CAUSE I KNOW THAT'S A QUESTION PEOPLE ASK ABOUT THESE BUSINESSES, BUT, BUT IT IS, IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED TO ME AS RATES FOR THOSE FOLKS TO RETURN TO THAT SPACE.
[03:00:01]
GO TO MR. WALKER IF I MAY.UM, MR. WALKER, I GUESS, I GUESS I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S PERSPECTIVE OF OFF, I, I KNOW THERE'S LIKE, THERE'S TWO PATHS HERE, RIGHT? ONE IS, WE'RE SAYING CONVERSATION WILL CONTINUE, BUT I, I HATE TO SAY IT ALSO, THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME DISCOMFORT WITH SORT OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE CALL THE FIRM COMMITMENT.
I GUESS IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD FINE WITH MOVING FORWARD OR WOULD THE NEIGHBORHOOD REALLY LIKE TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO SOLIDIFY SOME OF THOSE THINGS AND FIGURE THOSE OUT? I KNOW THOSE CAN BE FIGURED OUT LATER, BUT THIS IS ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.
AND I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND YOUR PERSPECTIVE.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CONTAINS MULTITUDES,
I THINK THERE'S UH, THERE'S OTHER FOLKS ON THE STEERING COMMITTEE WHO SEE THAT WE ARE ACHIEVING PROGRESS, BUT WE NEED TO GET TO THE FIRM KIND OF COMMITMENTS THAT WHOEVER THE OWNER IS, RIGHT, WHATEVER THE, THE PERFORMA AND THE SIDE PLAN, HOW THEY START TO SHAPE UP.
AND CLEARLY SOME PROJECTS DEVELOP THAT KIND OF STUFF EARLY SO THEY CAN ANSWER THESE KIND OF QUESTIONS.
UM, ARE, WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH KIND OF, I GUESS IT'S A RISK TO KIND OF PROCEED FORWARD.
IS THAT, DO I AN DID I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YES, I BELIEVE YOU DID.
I, AND I GUESS I, UH, MY FOLLOW UP TO THAT WOULD BE, I GUESS IT SEEMS LIKE Y'ALL ARE WORKING IN GOOD FAITH, THE APPLICANT IN Y'ALL, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL.
AND I GUESS TO YOUR POINT, RIGHT, THERE'S A RISK ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
AND I GUESS BECAUSE WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO WORK ON IT, IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT, I, I GUESS WE CAN THINK ABOUT LIKE HOW DO WE SORT OF TAKE THAT RISK FACTOR OUT OF IT? WE WANNA MAKE SURE, OF COURSE THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE AS A BODY ARE REQUIRING, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS, WE DO RESPECT THE WISHES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I JUST WANNA BE RESPONSIVE TO THAT.
UM, MS. BOGGIO, IF I CAN HAVE YOU BACK FOR ONE FIVE SECONDS.
CAN YOU TELL US IF, IF THERE UNDER THE 10% OR 12% REQUIRE FOR DB 90, HOW MANY UNITS ARE EXPECTED TO BE AFFORDABLE? I WILL GET YOU THAT NUMBER HERE IN JUST ONE SECOND.
UM, BUT I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT, UM, IF I COULD, WHILE HE'S PULLING THAT UP, UM, TO YOUR, TO YOUR QUESTION EARLIER, I KNOW THAT, UM, SUMMER IS A TIME WHEN THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, VACANCIES, YOU KNOW, AND WE HAVE A PRETTY FULL, UH, COMMISSION HERE.
AND SO THAT'S PART OF OUR INTEREST IN MOVING FORWARD.
WE KNOW VERY WELL THAT WE CANNOT BRING THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL UNTIL IT IS READY, UH, TO GO.
UM, BUT BY GETTING THROUGH THIS AND HAVING THIS CONVERSATION, WHICH IS ALSO I THINK IS GONNA, IS A HELPFUL PART OF THE DISCUSSION.
IF THERE'S THE, THE ANSWER TO THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS TOTAL.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE TOTAL IS AROUND 330 AFFORDABLE UNITS? NO, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU TOTAL UNITS.
CAN YOU REPEAT HOW MANY UNITS? RIGHT.
I KNOW I'M OVER TIME, SO WE'LL BE OKAY.
CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT? UM, SO JUST TO CLARIFY THAT LAST PIECE, 'CAUSE THE DB 90 REQUIREMENTS ARE AT 12%.
SO, UM, THERE'S THAT GAP OF 24 UNITS.
OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION.
I THINK THIS IS FOR STAFF, UM, ABOUT THE REDLINE PARKWAY.
UM, I USED TO SERVE ON THE BOARD THERE AND THIS AREA WAS REALLY, REALLY CRITICAL TO, WELL, IT'S HARD TO SAY ONE SEGMENT OF A TRAIL IS MORE CRITICAL THAN OTHERS, BUT BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH A DESTINATION AND A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE WOULD BE GETTING ONTO THE TRAIL, UM, THE MINIMUM 20 FOOT EASEMENT THAT WOULD BE ASKED FOR AT SITE PLAN ONLY GETS YOU THE TRAIL.
UM, THERE'S THE, THE NEXT LEVEL WHICH IS 32 FEET, WHICH I THINK WAS ASKED, UH, FOR MAYBE DISCUSSED, WHICH WOULD GET YOU A TRAIL AND MAYBE SOME TREES AND A FEW OTHER THINGS.
THE IDEAL, SO THE CADILLAC WOULD BE 60 FOOT EASEMENT AND THAT GETS YOU, UM, EVEN MORE THAN THAT.
AND I'M JUST WONDERING ABOUT, IS THIS ALL DONE AT SITE PLAN? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PUT IN AS A, A, A RECOMMENDATION THAT COUNSEL ASK FOR THIS OR, I THINK I'M MORE ASKING ABOUT PROCEDURE AND ASKING FOR THESE COMMUNITY BENEFITS TO BE SOLIDIFIED
[03:05:01]
IN OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.UH, JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UH, ACCORDING TO TPW, THE MINIMUM FOR TRAIL IS 12 FEET.
AND SO THE MINIMUM EASEMENT REQUIRED IS 20 FEET.
UM, WITH YOUR QUESTION, UH, REGARDING THE PROCESS, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING AT SITE PLAN THAT WOULD BE DEVELOPED.
SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING AT THIS TIME WE COULD DO, BUT I THINK WE'VE HAD CASES BEFORE WHERE WE, MAYBE IT'S JUST ON RECORD THAT WE'RE STATING THAT THERE'S A DESIRE TO HAVE MORE.
UM, YOU COULD CERTAINLY DO THAT
I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
ANYBODY ELSE WITH QUESTIONS? OKAY, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? UH, YEAH.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SORRY, I FORGOT I HAD MY MICROPHONE OFF.
UM, I THINK THIS IS, UH, SHAPING UP TO BE A VERY EXCITING PROJECT.
SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT IS WORKING WELL WITH INTERESTED PARTIES AND STAKEHOLDERS IN THE AREA, NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS.
THIS IS WHAT THE CITY NEEDS MORE OF IS THOUGHTFUL, DENSE, MIXED USE INFILL DEVELOPMENT, UH, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT PEOPLE CAN WALK AND BIKE AND OTHERWISE GET TO ON TRANSIT OR ON TRAILS, UH, THAT PROVIDE COMMUNITY BENEFITS IN ADDITION TO THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT OF NEW HOUSING.
AND SO, UM, I'M VERY EXCITED TO SUPPORT THIS.
SPEAKING AGAINST, UM, CHAIR, IF I MIGHT MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
I'M GONNA MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO JULY 9TH.
WILL YOU FOR A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SURE.
I, I DO WANNA REALLY ECHO, UH, WHAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON WAS JUST SAYING.
AND I REALLY WANNA THANK THE APPLICANT FOR WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON ALL THESE THINGS.
I, I DO ALSO HEAR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF RESIDENT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I WANNA RESPECT THAT.
LIKE I DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS IS NOT A PART OF OUR ZONING, BUT I DO HEAR THE SORT OF, YOU KNOW, THE CONCERN THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS.
LIKE I KNOW I WOULD NOT BE COMFORTABLE GOING INTO ANY SORT OF AGREEMENTS BASED ON AN IOU AND I, AND I HATE TO SAY IT SOUNDS ALMOST LIKE THERE'S AN IOU HAPPENING, UM, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT WOULD COME THROUGH OR NOT.
AND IF THAT'S SOMETHING WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD FEELS UNCOMFORTABLE AND IT SEEMS LIKE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS REALLY COMMITTED TO HAVING REALLY FRUITFUL, THOUGHTFUL, IN DEPTH CONVERSATIONS, I WOULD RATHER GIVE THEM THAT EXTRA MONTH SO THAT WE DO GET BACK SOMETHING THAT REALLY HAS THAT SORT OF SUPPORT THAT I KNOW THEY WANT TO GIVE TO THIS PROJECT.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR A POSTPONEMENT.
ALRIGHT, ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? HI.
I'VE HEARD THE APPLICANT SAY THEY'RE READY TO GO.
I'VE HEARD FOLKS AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD SAY THEY'RE OKAY TO LET IT GO TONIGHT AND THEY'RE ALL GONNA KEEP WORKING TOGETHER.
AND THIS IS DB 90 AND I DO NOT WANT TO POSTPONE THIS.
ANYWAY, SPEAKING, SPEAKING FOR COMMISSIONER HANS MADAM CHAIR, UM, I, IT IT HAS COME TO MY ATTENTION VERY LATE AND I APOLOGIZE FOR DOING THIS.
I, AND I'M JUST ABOUT TO, UH, CHANGE THE FORM.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UM, I'M GONNA HAVE TO RECUSE ON THIS ITEM AND SO DO WHAT YOU ALL WILL.
OKAY? AND YOUR REASON, IF THIS DATE OF REASON, UM, I'M GONNA RECUSE ON THIS ITEM.
UM, I'VE GOT CLIENTS THAT HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS IN OKAY.
THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS ITEM.
IT'S NOT JUST MY PERSONAL CURIOSITY IS MY
UM, SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THIS IS COMMISSIONER HANS NEED TO LEAVE THE, OH YES, COMMISSIONER HANS, IF YOU ARE RECUSING, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO LEAVE THE DIOCESE.
UM, AS SOON AS I CHANGE THIS POEM ON THANK YOU
UM, MR. MAXWELL, UM, I I AM TOTALLY IN AGREEMENT WITH BOTH OF THE FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WHO SEE THIS AS AN EXCELLENT PROJECT AND REALLY DO WANNA MOVE THIS FORWARD.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT THIS POSTPONEMENT IS ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE WE DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS ON THE RIGHT TRACK.
I THINK I'M JUST VERY CONCERNED.
FOR EXAMPLE, WE JUST DISCUSSED THE RED LINE PARKWAY, UM, AND WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
AND I THINK I JUST WOULD PREFER IF WE GAVE OURSELVES A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO ACTUALLY FIRM UP SOME OF THESE COMMITMENTS, PARTICULARLY, AND I'M GONNA SAY THINGS WERE NOT RELATED TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT JUST FEELS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF OPEN QUESTIONS AND I WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO REALLY SEE THAT FOLLOWING.
YOU KNOW, WE'D LOVE TO HAVE THIS ON CONSENT AND READY TO
[03:10:01]
GO IN THE NEXT MEETING AND JULY 9TH.AND I THINK THAT COULD REALLY HAPPEN IF WE WORK VERY DILIGENTLY AND SEE THAT AS A TRUE DEADLINE OF LET'S GET THIS FINALIZED AND FIXED.
SO THEN IT CAN GO TO COUNCIL ON A REALLY TIED UP, READY TO GO FORM.
ALL RIGHT, ANYBODY ELSE SPEAKING AGAINST FOR? ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS FOR THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO POSTPONE TO JULY 9TH.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, 2, 3, 4, UH, AGAINST 1, 2, 3, 4.
UH, WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION, WHICH IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
UM, I DON'T THINK WE'D HAD ANY FOR AGAINST SPEAKERS ON THAT YET.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SPOKE IN FAVOR, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, WE HAVE TWO, FOUR, AND THREE AGAINST SLOTS LEFT.
ANYBODY ELSE SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST? UH, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? COMMISSIONER SEYMORE? YEAH, I'LL SPEAK FOR BRIEFLY.
AND I, AND I'LL BE HONEST, I STRUGGLED AS TO WHETHER TO GO WITH THE POSTPONEMENT OR NOT, BUT I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M HEARING IS LIKE THE KIND OF DIALOGUE THAT WE ALWAYS WISH WE WOULD HAVE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE PROJECTS AND ZONING CHANGES.
AND I THINK THAT MOVING IT FORWARD AND US TAKING ACTION TODAY WILL ACTUALLY HELP US TO, TO MAKE, MAKE PROGRESS.
RIGHT? WHEN WE LOOK AT DELWOOD AND WE LOOK AT THE HANCOCK CENTER, I THINK IF THIS PROJECT IS NOW, UM, MOVED FORWARD TO COUNCIL, COUNCIL IS GONNA BE FORCED TO REALLY LOOK AT THE SMALL AREA OF PLANNING.
AND, UH, SO I THINK FORWARD PROGRESS, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR, FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS A GOOD THING.
AND LAST COMMENT, JUST A BIT OF HISTORY AND, AND, AND, UH, JIM WALKER KNOWS THIS TOO, THAT LIKE THE DELLWOOD SHOPPING CENTER WAS LITERALLY ONE OF THE FIRST AUTOMOBILE CENTERED SHOPPING CENTER DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
AND I THINK IT IS A BEAUTIFUL THING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BRINGING IT BACK TO SOMETHING THAT'S MORE HUMAN SCALED.
ANYBODY ELSE SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST? LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
THIS IS, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
AND THOSE AGAINST AND ABSTAINING.
OKAY, SO THAT IS, THAT PASSES SEVEN TO ZERO TO ONE CHAIR.
POINT OF PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY, JUST BECAUSE WE'VE NEVER, I'M CURIOUS, WE'VE NEVER HAD SO FEW MEMBERS ON THE DIOCESE AND STILL HAD A VOTE WHERE WE HAD A RECUSAL WITH COMMISSIONER HAYNES RECUSING.
DOES THAT LOWER THE VOTE NUMBER FOR THE MAJORITY DOWN TO, I KNOW ABSTENTION DOES IT, BUT DOES RECUSAL IT DOES FOR US.
HUH? I DON'T, I'VE NEVER HAD THE, THE, BECAUSE CONSIDERED ALWAYS CHANGES.
THANKS COMMISSIONER HAYNES, CAN YOU BRING THAT FORM BACK? OKAY.
SO WE'RE THROUGH ALL OF OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON
[BOARDS, COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS UPDATES]
TO, UH, OUR UPDATES FROM BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUPS.SO STARTING WITH CODES AND ORDINANCES, JOINT COMMITTEE, WE ARE MEETING A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING NEXT TUESDAY.
OUR REGULAR MEETINGS ARE TYPICALLY ON WEDNESDAYS FOLLOWING THE PC MEETING.
AND BECAUSE THAT'S A, UH, UH, CITY HOLIDAY, IT'S JUNETEENTH.
WE'RE MOVING OUR MEETING TO NOON.
SO IT'LL BE TUESDAY, JUNE 18TH.
AND WE'RE HEARING, UM, UH, SOME, UH, CODE UPDATES AROUND DB 90 IN ADDITION TO, UH, VOTING, UH, NEW CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR FOR THAT COMMITTEE.
MOVING ON TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING ON JULY THE 10TH.
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
OUR NEXT MEETING IS ON JUNE 26TH.
AND I HAVE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM RELATED TO NEEDING TO STEP DOWN FROM THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
SMALL AREA PLANNING, JOINT COMMITTEE.
[03:15:01]
UM, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY.YEAH, SO, UM, WE'RE GONNA BE RESCHEDULING OUR MEETING THEN WE'LL SCHEDULE FOR JUNE.
SA, CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
UM, WE HAVE, UH, I THINK OUR NEXT MEETING WILL LIKELY BE, UM, CANCELED AS WE ARE STILL WITHOUT AGENDA ITEMS SINCE THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT HAS BEEN POSTPONED.
THE REGULATING PLAN CONSIDERATION BY COUNCIL.
SO WE WILL BE MEETING LIKELY AFTER THAT IS APPROVED.
THE CITY OF AUSTIN BUILDING IS WORKING GROUP.
WE ARE SCHEDULING THE MEETING AND I KNOW I HAD SENT, UM, AN EMAIL OUT TO FOLKS AND I KNOW THERE WERE SOME COMMITMENTS BECAUSE OF TRAVEL.
SO WE'RE GONNA BE SCHEDULING SOMETHING SOON AND START THAT CONVERSATION.
OUTREACH AND PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP.
I THINK YOU'RE THE ONLY MEMBER.
UM, UPDATE FROM THE BUDGET WORKING GROUP.
WE SHARED OUR BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS.
THEY WERE IN THE BACKUP FOR THIS MEETING.
UM, WE WILL ALSO ASK FOR A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO TAKE ACTION ON THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT FOR NOW, EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE THEM WITH A LOT OF TIME TO CONSIDER THEM FOR DISCUSSION AT OUR JUNE 25TH MEETING, BUT TO BE DISCUSSED IN FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. OKAY.
AND THE 2024 TECHNICAL BUILDING CODE UPDATES WORKING GROUP.
UH, UH, SIMILAR TO, WE ARE NOW BACK FROM VACATIONS AND WE'LL BE SCHEDULING OUR FIRST MEETING HOPEFULLY FOR THIS WEEK.
ALRIGHT, SO COMING UP TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
UM, HEARD A NUMBER OF THEM, UH, THIS EVENING.ANYONE WISH TO GO FIRST? UM, WE'D LIKE TO ADD AN AGENDA ITEM TO CONSIDER THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BUDGET WORKING GROUP.
UM, AND FORMALLY TAKE ACTION AND VOTE ON THAT ON OUR NEXT AGENDA.
SO IF WE CAN MAKE SURE IT'S ADDED AS AN AGENDA ITEM, THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.
AND THE, UH, COMMISSIONER'S MAXWELL WOODS ARE CO-SPONSORS ON THAT.
UM, VICE CHAIR, CHAIR, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HEARD VERY CLEARLY FROM FOLKS TODAY REGARDING THE DB 90 PROGRAM AND I UNDERSTAND THE COMMUNITY CONCERN ABOUT WHAT THE PROGRAM IS.
HOW DOES IT FUNCTION? I REALLY THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO GET A BRIEFING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE ON THE PROGRAM.
I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THE COMMUNITY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS AND WHAT ARE ALL THE DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS.
UM, SO I HOPE THAT STAFF CAN PROVIDE US A BRIEFING ON THAT, UM, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE WITH THE CAVEAT THAT I FEEL LIKE, 'CAUSE I'M NOT GONNA BE HERE FOR THE NEXT MEETING, BUT I THINK THE EARLIER THE BETTER.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? I, UM, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, YOU HAD MENTIONED A BRIEFING
YEAH, I THINK THAT WAS ABOUT THE, THE, UH, HANCOCK HAN CHERRY WOOD SMALL AREA PLAN.
AREA PLAN AND MAYBE BROADEN IT TO ANY AREA, SMALL AREA PLANS OF THE CITY.
THINK WOULD, THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.
WOULD REALLY LOVE TO KNOW AN UPDATE ON SMALL AREA PLANNING.
AND, AND THAT'S, I WAS WONDERING IF THAT MIGHT TIE INTO NOT TO DISCUSS IT, BUT I WONDER IF THAT WOULDN'T ALSO TIE INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS.
AND THEN I HAVE ONE, UM, I NEED A SECOND.
I WOULD BE THE SECOND, JUST TO BE CLEAR.
UM,
WHAT DO THEY DO? WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO BE LOCATED? YOU KNOW, THE MORE OF THE PARTICULARS OF THAT BECAUSE IT, IT WILL AFFECT OUR, UM, OUR WORK HERE THAT WE DO WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO SEE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
I WOULD JUST ADD THAT WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL IN OPERATION.
I'D LOVE TO HEAR RESULTS AND SORT OF OUTCOMES FROM THOSE AND UPDATES BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME EXISTING, WHICH I THINK WOULD HELP FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION.
ANY OTHERS? I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO APPOINT A NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONER TO THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE BECAUSE I AM HAVING, UH, A VERY HARD TIME MAKING IT REGULARLY TO THOSE MEETINGS.
AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE DO HAVE PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATION THAT CAN BE A LITTLE MORE PRESENT FOR THOSE.
WE'LL ADD THAT TO THE NEXT AGENDA.
ANY OTHERS? I MENTIONED ONE ABOUT UPDATING THE REGULATING PLANS, BUT BEFORE I WANT TO BRING THAT FORWARD, I WANT TO TALK WITH STAFF.
LIKE A BRIEFING FROM STAFF OR JUST CHECKING IN WITH THEM TO SEE IF MAYBE THEY WERE ALREADY DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR JUST WHERE THAT IS AND WHETHER OR NOT IT'D BE HELPFUL.
CHAIR FOR THE FUTURE AGENDA ITEM FOR COMMISSIONER WOODS, UM, FOR THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
[03:20:01]
POSITION WITH THAT COMMITTEE? I AM RESIGNING MY POSITION WITH THAT COMMITTEE, BUT EFFECTIVE AFTER THE JUNE 26TH JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING, WHICH I CAN MAKE CHAIR IN THAT, IN THAT SCENARIO, WE WOULD NEED TO IN A JOINT SUSTAINABILITY.IS COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS THE ALTERNATE? YES.
SO I THINK I WOULD ASK, UM, THAT WE PLACE AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA TO APPOINT BOTH A PRIMARY AND AN ALTERNATE TO THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
UM, BECAUSE WE MIGHT NEED TO MOVE PEOPLE OR DO SOMETHING, BUT IF WE CAN, UH, PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA AS AN ACTION ITEM, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
DO YOU WANNA SECOND IT? I'LL SECOND IT.
IF THERE'S, AND I'M SORRY, WHO WAS THE CO-SPONSOR FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON'S? UH, FUTURE AGENDA ITEM WAS NOT.
YEAH, THAT ONE, THE LAST ONE THAT WAS MENTIONED, THE, UH, REGULATING PLANS.
HE'S GONNA TALK WITH STAFF AND OH, OKAY.
SO IT'S NOT AN ITEM REQUEST FOR NOW, HE'S JUST MENTIONING IF YOU'LL BRING IT FORTH.
AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WAS MYSELF AND THEN CHAIR.
UM, FOR THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE? YES.
I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH
IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE, I WILL ADJOURN THIS MEETING AT 9:27 PM THANK YOU SO MUCH.