[00:00:01]
[CALL TO ORDER]
TUESDAY, JULY 16TH.WE ARE IN CITY HALL, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ONCE AGAIN IN ROOM 1001.
I'M GONNA CALL TO ORDER THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION.
I WILL START BY CALLING ROLL CALL CHAIR HANK SMITH.
I'M PRESENT VICE CHAIR BETSY GREENBERG.
LINE COMMISSIONER, STERN COMMISSIONER RYAN PKI.
PRESENT AND COMMISSIONER WILLIAM FLOYD.
IT TAKES SIX PEOPLE TO APPROVE.
SO EVERY ITEM HAS TO BE UNANIMOUS OR IT WON'T BE APPROVED OR DENIED.
IF ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WANTS TO SPEAK SEEING NONE, I WILL DO A CALL
[Consent Agenda]
OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.WE HAVE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING? WE HAD SOME COMMENTS.
WENT OUT EARLY AND THEY'VE MADE THOSE CHANGES.
ANY OTHER ITEMS ON THE, ON THE MINUTES? OKAY.
SO THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL INCLUDE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION, REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 2ND PUBLIC HEARINGS.
WE HAVE ITEM TWO, REZONING CASE C 14 20 24 DASH 0 8 9 AT 7,900 PERON TRAIL.
IT IS A REZONING FROM MH TO SF THREE.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM THREE IS A REZONING CASE, C 14 20 24 DASH 0 0 4 7 AT 85 0 1 SOUTH FIRST STREET.
IT IS A REZONING CASE FROM DR TO G-R-M-U-V DB NINE.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND ON A CONSENT AGENDA.
ITEM FOUR IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE.
S SP 2023 DASH 0 4 0 1 C AT TWO 90 PALMER INDUSTRIAL.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, UM, BUT IT IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
SO WE WILL HAVE A DISCUSSION ON ITEM TWO.
UM, AND THEN ITEM FIVE, DISCUSSION, APPROVAL OF THE ANNUAL INTERNAL REVIEW AND REPORT.
WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING READY YET.
WE'LL GET SOME, UH, STUFF PUT TOGETHER AND WE'LL APPROVE THIS AT OUR FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
SO WE WILL HAVE SOMETHING PUT TOGETHER ON THAT.
SO THAT IS A POSTPONEMENT TO THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST, WHICH IS AUGUST 6TH.
SIXTH FIRST TUESDAY IN AUGUST, WHATEVER THAT IS.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? SO WE'RE APPROVING THE MINUTES.
CONSENT FOR ITEMS TWO AND THREE.
DISCUSSION OF ITEM FOUR AND POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM FIVE.
DO I HEAR A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I'D LIKE TO BE SHOWN VOTING NO ON CASE TWO BECAUSE WELL, MH IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ONLY.
YOU PREFER WITH ONLY SIX OF US HERE.
IT MAY ACTUALLY MAKE A MOTION IF YOU PREFER TO POSTPONE.
UM, I'D RATHER IT BE CLEANER TO MAKE A MOTION TO PO POSTPONE ADAM TWO AUSTIN STAND.
IT REALLY IS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT BOTHERS ME TO GET RID OF.
UM, BUT I AM WILLING TO SUPPORT A POSTPONEMENT.
I CAN, AND THIS IS FOR ITEM TWO? YES.
I CAN BE CLEANER TO POSTPONE ITEM TWO TO THE FIRST MEETING IN, IN AUGUST.
SO AGAIN, THE CONSENT IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO, I MEAN POSTPONE POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM TWO TO THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
APPROVAL OF ITEM THREE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND DISCUSSION OF ITEM FOUR AND POSTPONEMENT OF ITEM FIVE TO THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
AND WE HAVE A MOTION BY, UM, COMMISSIONER FLORES AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PKI.
DOES EVERYBODY AGREE WITH THE MOTION? YES.
EVERYBODY GOOD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
IF WE HAD ONE MORE PERSON HERE, WE COULD TAKE A VOTE.
YOU COULD DO, WE'VE TO POSTPONE, BUT WE CAN'T DO THAT.
SO DO WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION ON ITEM FOUR? UH, SOMEBODY
I'M AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SPECIALIST WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
AND, UH, I'M HERE BECAUSE, UH, UH, WE SUPPORT THE APPLICATION FOR THE, UH, THE VARIANCES 'CAUSE THEY MEET THE FINDINGS OF FACT.
SO WE'RE HERE FOR TWO 90 PALMER INDUSTRIAL, TWO AT 1090
[00:05:01]
1 0 0 9 5 EAST US TWO 90 HIGHWAY EAST, TWO 90.THIS IS IN THE GLAND CREEK WATERSHED.
IT'S IN THE SUBURBAN WATERSHED CLASSIFICATION IN THE DESIRE DEVELOPMENT ZONE.
IT'S NOT LOCATED OVER THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE AND IT'S IN COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE.
IT'S RIGHT THERE BY THE EDGE OF THE AUSTIN ETJ.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH RIGHT THERE, IT'S A HIGHLY DESERVED SITE.
UM, IT HAS THE HIGHWAY TO THE NORTH, UH, PAR TO THE RIGHT, THE RAILROAD TO THE SOUTH, AND NEW DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST.
THERE'S THE VIEW LOOKING WEST, UM, WAREHOUSES GOING UP, VIEW LOOKING A VIEW FROM THE SOUTH, LOOKING NORTH AT THE ADJACENT HIGHWAY.
THERE YOU SEE THE EXISTING, UH, TOPOGRAPHY ON THE LEFT AND THEN NEARBY CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES, NONE OF WHICH THIS SIDE IS IMPACTING.
SO THERE'S TWO VARIANCE REQUESTS.
UH, THE REQUEST TO VARY LDC 25 8 3 41 TO ALLOW CUT UP TO 15 FEET AND REQUEST TO VARY LDC 25 8 3 42 TO ALLOW FILL UP TO 16 FEET.
UH, THERE'S ELEVATIONS TABLE THERE SO YOU CAN SEE SOME SPECIFIC NUMBERS.
AND THERE'S THE GRAPHIC THERE ON THE RIGHT, YOU SEE WHERE IT'S DISTRIBUTED ACROSS THE SITE.
SO THE GRADING VARIANCE FINDINGS IN SUMMARY, UH, VARIANCES FOR GRADING HAVE BEEN GRANTED FOR SIMILAR PROJECTS.
THE GRADING IS A DESIGN DECISION, BUT THE PROJECT PROVIDES A GREATER ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WITH INCREASED LANDSCAPING.
AND THE PROJECT DOES NOT CREATE SIGNIFICANT PROBABILITY OF HARMFUL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.
AND THE VARIANCE WILL RESULT IN WATER QUALITY THAT IS AT LEAST EQUAL TO THE WATER QUALITY ACHIEVABLE WITHOUT THE VARIANCE FINDINGS OF FACT.
PER LDC 25 8 41 CITY STAFF DETERMINED THE FINDINGS OF FACT HAVE BEEN MET PER LDC 25 8 41 FOR THE REQUESTED VARIANCES.
CONSEQUENTLY, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WITH VARIANCE CONDITIONS.
THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE PLAN WILL BE SUPPLEMENTED WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF MANAGED NATIVE WILDFLOWER MEADOWS ON THE GRATED SLOPES AND INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TREE CANOPY AND OTHER VEGETATIVE COVER AND LARGER TREE SIZES PLANTED.
THIS MEANS 14,000 SQUARE FEET WILDFLOWER SEEDING AND MANAGEMENT AREA 50 ADDITIONAL SHADE TREES OVER 250 ADDITIONAL SHADE TREE INCHES, WHICH MEANS LARGER SIZE TREES AND OVER 150 ADDITIONAL SMALL TREE INCHES, WHICH MEANS LARGER SIZE SMALL TREES.
UM, THIS SLIDE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION VOTE, UH, TO THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST VARIANCES FAILED TO RECEIVE THE MINIMUM NECESSARY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION VOTES.
CONSEQUENTLY, NO MOTION WAS APPROVED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION FOR THE TWO 90 PALMER INDUSTRIAL VARIANCE REQUESTS.
AND THE VARIANCES ARE PRESENTED WITH NO RECOMMENDATION.
THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE REQUESTED VARIANCES WITH THE CONDITIONS FAILED ON COMMISSIONER BRISTOL'S MOTION.
COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN'S SECOND ON THE FOUR THREE VOTE.
THOSE VOTING I, COMMISSIONER NICHOLS, RISI EINHORN AND SULLIVAN, THOSE NAY.
WERE COMMISSIONER BRISTOL BREMMER AND KRUGER COMMISSIONER BEDFORD ABSTAINED.
COMMISSIONERS FER AND N SHERA WERE ABSENT.
UH, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SHARE WITH YOU.
AND, UH, NEXT UP IS THE APPLICANT.
OKAY, UM, CHAIR WE WILL NOW HEAR.
SO I MIGHT NEED SOME CLARIFICATION.
UM, I BELIEVE THE PROCESS IS TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR SIX MINUTES.
AND I BELIEVE YOU'RE IDENTIFIED AS THE PROPERTY OWNER OR THE APPLICANT? I'M THE APPLICANT.
UM, RYAN TAYLOR, UM, IS SPEAKING, HE'S A PRI HE'S THE APPLICANT.
UM, HE RECEIVED DONATED TIME FROM HUNTER GRAHAM, WHO'S PRESENT, AND RYAN WILL HAVE 12 MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I THINK YOU HAVE NINE MINUTES.
YOU DON'T NEED TO, BUT GO AHEAD.
YEAH, NO, I THINK WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT.
UM, I THINK WE HAVE A, A DIFFERENT SLIDE.
[00:10:08]
HI, MY NAME'S RYAN TAYLOR.I'M THE APPLICANT AND THE CIVIL ENGINEERING RECORD FOR THIS, UH, PROJECT OVER ON, UH, TWO 90 OUT BY THE CITY LIMITS NEAR MAINOR.
OUR APPLICATION IS REQUESTING UP TO 15 FEET OF CUT AND 16 FEET OF FILL.
UH, THE EXACT NUMBERS THAT LOOKING FOR PER OUR ENGINEERING DRAWINGS ARE 14.2 AND 15.2, 15.2 FEET.
SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT, BUT AS, AS A DIFFERENCE FROM THE APPLICATION.
SO THIS IS A AERIAL VIEW FROM, UH, GOOGLE MAPS OF THE SITE.
UM, IT'S CURRENTLY PRETTY DISTURBED.
ON THE WEST SIDE IS THE CAPITAL RES DISTRIBUTING SITES, A A BEER DISTRIBUTOR, A BEER DISTRIBUTOR.
UH, ON THE EAST SIDE IS EAST PALMER LANE, AND WE HAVE THE TOLL LANE TO THE NORTH.
UM, THIS IS A, I JUST, I WANTED TO BRING IN SOME PAST PHOTOS.
SO SHOW KIND OF SOME HISTORICAL IMAGERY OF WHAT OUR SITE, UH, LOOKED LIKE IN THE PAST WITH OLD MANOR ROAD.
UH, WAS THE HIGHWAY, THIS IS BEFORE THE TOLL TOLL ROAD CAME IN.
UH, SO THE, THERE WAS A PUBLIC ROAD GOING THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN AS A RESULT OF THAT, THERE WAS SOME FILL THAT WAS PLACED ON THE PROPERTY FROM THE, FROM THE HIGHWAY BUILDERS THAT KIND OF IMPACTED OUR, UH, VARIANCE HERE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO REQUEST.
UM, THERE ARE NO LARGE TREES ON THE SITE.
I BELIEVE THERE'S ONE 20 INCH, 21 INCH CEDAR ELM ON THE PROPERTY.
I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND DOUBLE CHECK THAT.
BUT THERE'S NO HERITAGE TREES CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, SO THIS IS A CUT AND FILL EXHIBIT OF, UH, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE PROPERTY.
THE RED REPRESENTS THE CUT THAT IS GREATER THAN EIGHT FEET THAT WE'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR.
THE BLUE REPRESENTS THE VOL, THE AREA OF FILL THAT WE ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THAT'S GREATER THAN EIGHT FEET.
SO AS YOU KIND OF JUST TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE PROPERTY, THE HIGH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS ON THE WEST AND EVERYTHING IS SLOPING TOWARDS THE EAST.
SO ON THE TOP OF THE PROPERTY WE'RE NEEDING A CUT.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT WHERE OLD MANNAR HIGHWAY RUNS THROUGH IS KIND OF DIRECTLY THROUGH THE TWO RED, UH, BLOTCHES.
IT, IT RUNS RIGHT THROUGH THE TWO RED BLOTCHES.
THERE'S ABOUT THREE FEET OF EXISTING SPOILS THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THAT OLD MANNAR HIGHWAY, UM, THAT'S IN THERE.
SO IF WE WERE TO BE LOOKING AT IT FROM A NATURAL GRADE PERSPECTIVE BEFORE THAT HIGHWAY, IT'D BE THREE FEET LOWER THAN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO REQUEST, UH, RIGHT NOW FROM THE APPLICATION.
UM, WE HAVE THESE BUILDINGS, THEY'RE PRETTY NARROW AND LONG WAYS GOING UP AND UP AND DOWN FOR OUR DESIGN CONSIDERATION OF THE EXISTING CONTOURS.
THE BUILDING'S ONLY ABOUT 250 FEET WIDE AND IT'S LONGER IN THIS DIRECTION BECAUSE IT'S FITTING THE CONTOURS OF THE, OF THE SITE.
IF WE WERE TO ROTATE THESE, WE'D BE LOOKING AT CLOSER TO 25, 30 FEET OF CUT AND FIELD VARIANCES THAT WE'D BE REQUESTING.
SO WE TRY TO FIT THESE BUILDINGS IN A AREA THAT WOULD LEAST IMPACT OUR CUT AND FILL REQUESTS.
WE TRIED ONE LARGER BUILDING, UH, FEW DIFFERENT BUILDINGS AND THIS IS REALLY THE, THE BEST OPPORTUNITY THAT WE HAD TO, UM, GIVE US WHAT WE NEEDED, ESPECIALLY TO SEE THE BUILDING ON THE EAST BEING A SMALLER ONE, NOT TO IMPACT SOME OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND THE EXISTING POND THAT WAS IN THERE.
SO, UM, SO THIS IS, UH, SOME OF OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE WORKED WITH WITH, UH, DAVID.
MICHAEL WAS TO GET AN ONSITE TRAIL AND ADDITIONAL TREES ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THIS IS A RENDERING WITH OUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT GROUP ARCHITECTURE GROUP OF ALL THE TREES THAT WE ACTUALLY ARE PROPOSING, UH, WITH OUR APPLICATION.
SO WE ARE ON THE VERY TOP OF THE SCREEN THAT THAT'S A PUBLIC CITY TRAIL.
IT'S THE AUSTIN TO MAINER, UH, CITY OF AUSTIN PUBLIC TRAIL THAT RUNS THROUGH ALONG TWO 90.
WE ARE PROPOSING AN ONSITE TRAIL THAT'S CONNECTING TO THAT TRAIL.
IT'S GONNA BE A DECOMPOSED GRANITE, UH, AND THE ENTIRE LENGTH IS GONNA BE SHADED.
THERE'S GONNA BE PARK BENCHES, UH, TO SIT.
AND THERE'S ALSO GONNA BE SOME SHADED AREAS FOR, UH, SOME OF THE EMPLOYEES TO USE DURING THE LUNCH BREAK AND EAT.
AND THE TRAIL EXTENDS, UH, AROUND THE PROPERTY AND THEN ALSO DOWN TO THE WATER QUALITY ATTENTION POND.
AND THERE'S SOME SEATING AREAS IN THERE THAT ARE ALL SHADED.
UH, THE FULL LENGTH, I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT HALF A MILE OF TRAIL NETWORK THAT'S GONNA BE CONNECTED TO THE PUBLIC TRAIL.
UM, THE TREES THAT WE HAVE HERE ARE, THEY'RE GONNA BE LARGER IN SIZE, UH, FROM DAVID'S RECOMMENDATION AND WE COULDN'T FIT AS MANY TREES 'CAUSE WE ONLY HAVE SO MUCH FRONTAGE.
SO WHAT WE WERE LOOKING TO DO IS THESE ARE GONNA BE LARGER AND MORE HEALTHY MATURE TREES THAN WHAT WE'RE TYPICALLY PLANNING IN AS A
[00:15:01]
CODE MINIMUM.AND IT'S JUST A FEW NOTES HERE THAT WE'RE KIND OF LOOKING OVER.
SO WITH, UH, DAVID MICHAEL'S GROUP, UM, HIS RECOMMENDATION HERE TO GET THEIR THEIR SUPPORT WAS PLANTING 50 ADDITIONAL TREES, WHICH INCLUDED THE 250 SHADE TREE INCHES AND THEN 150 SMALLER TREE INCHES.
THIS IS BASICALLY A TRIPLING OF THE CITY CODE REQUIREMENT, UH, FOR STREET YARD TREES.
UM, SO WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 669 NEW PROPOSED TREE INCHES COMPARED TO THE ONLY 21 INCHES THAT ARE ON THE CURRENT SITE, UH, IN TODAY'S CONDITIONS.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S 14,000 SQUARE FOOT OF WILDFLOWER SEEDING AND MANAGEMENT AREAS THAT ARE GONNA BE ON THE WATER QUALITY AND DETENTION POND AREAS TO HELP STABILIZE SOME OF THE SLOPES AND PROVIDE SOME BETTER ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS THERE.
AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, WE, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT SOME OTHER ENHANCEMENTS THAT I THINK ARE IMPORTANT FOR THIS SITE.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY FLOOD FLOODPLAIN OR THE WETLAND AREAS.
THERE ARE SOME AREAS THAT WE COULD IMPACT ALONG THE SOUTHERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY, BUT OUR DEVELOPMENT IS COMPLETELY STAYING OUT OF ANY OF THAT AREAS OF CONCERN.
THE WHOLE IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY IS, IS AT 55% AND THAT'S AT A FULL BUILD OUT CONDITION WITH ALL OF THE, ALL OF THE LOTS BEING DEVELOPED WILL BE AT 55%, WHICH IS BELOW THE ALLOWABLE 80%.
AND REALLY WHERE, WHERE THIS COMES INTO IS THE AREA WHERE WE HAVE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE FLOODPLAIN AND OUR DETENTION WATER QUALITY PONDS ARE, UH, SUBSTANTIAL IN SIZE.
SO THAT, TO PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, OVER SUCH A BIG PROPERTY THAT 16 ACRES OF IMP PREVIOUS COVER THAT COULD BE, THAT ARE BEING SAVED BY BEING ONLY AT 55% VERSUS 80, UM, THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY.
WE ALL OF THE PLANTINGS THAT WE SHOWED IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDER ON THE GROW GREEN PLANNING SELECTIONS, UH, WE'RE CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH THE AUSTIN GREEN ENERGY BUILDING STANDARDS TO, WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT.
UM, ALONG BOTH OF THE BUILDINGS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, WE'RE GONNA HAVE THE ANTI BIRD STRIKE PROTECTIVE COATINGS ALONG THE WINDOW FACADE.
UM, THE NEXT POINT IS OUR HALF MILE LONG DEACON PROS GRANITE, UH, SHADED TRAIL SYSTEM THAT'S GONNA BE CONNECTING TO THE AUSTIN TO MAINOR TRAIL.
AND THE POND THAT WE HAD LOOKED AT ON THE PREVIOUS SITE IS OVERSIZED CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW.
AND WE ARE, UM, GOING TO BE REDESIGNING THE OUTLET STRUCTURE WITH OUR, WITH OUR PLANS TO MAKE IT MORE EFFICIENT AND TRYING TO HELP FILL UP THE POND MORE.
SO WE ARE GONNA BE DISCHARGING 22% LESS STORM WATER INTO THAT NEIGHBORING FLOODPLAIN THAN WHAT'S GOING ON GOING ON THERE IN THE CURRENT CONDITIONS TO HELP THE CREEK, UH, FLOODING CONDITIONS.
UH, OUR WATER QUALITY PONDS ARE 10% OVERSIZED THAN CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS BASED ON OUR IMPERVIOUS COVER.
UM, SO I THINK THAT'S, THOSE ARE PRETTY MUCH ALL THE POINTS I WANTED TO, I GUESS TALK ABOUT RIGHT NOW.
AND THEN WANTED TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
ANY QUESTIONS? CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN? PICTURE THIS ONE? YEAH.
SO ARE ALL THOSE AREAS WITH THE LINES PARKING, THE AREAS IN THE GR IN THE, LIKE THE LIGHT GRAY? YES.
THERE'S, THOSE ARE THE PARKING SPACES, IS THAT NEEDED FOR THIS SO MUCH? I MEAN, THAT'S A LOT OF PARKING.
SO RIGHT NOW I THINK, I BELIEVE OUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS WE'RE NOT, UM, WE ARE NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO BEING GREATER THAN CODE, BUT THIS IS A, A BUSINESS PARK, UH, WHERE EMPLOYEES ARE GONNA NEED TO BE.
SO THE MATTER OF PARKING WE'RE SEEING HERE IS BASED ON WHAT WAS CODE AND ALSO OUR MARKET DEMANDS FOR WHAT WE BELIEVE THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES ARE GONNA BE WORKING AT THIS FACILITY.
DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY SPACES THE OLD CODE WOULD'VE REQUIRED VERSUS HOW MANY YOU'RE PROVIDING BY CHANCE? UH, I DON'T RIGHT NOW, BUT WE CAN LOOK THAT UP AND PROVIDE IT.
AND THEN A LOT OF THE TREES, I MEAN, OF COURSE PARKING DOES, IT'S NICE TO HAVE SHADE WHERE YOU PARK, BUT THEN THERE'S UM, IT'S HARD FOR THE TREES TO GROW.
SO WE HAVE IN THE ISLANDS THAT WE'RE PROVIDING, I BELIEVE THEY'RE 10 FEET WIDE.
UH, SOME OF THE ONES ON THE VERY WESTERN EDGE, THOSE ISLANDS ARE 12 FEET WIDE.
UH, AND SOME BIGGER TREES ARE GONNA BE THERE.
THE PARKING SPACES ARE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE STANDARD NINE FOOT WIDTH WHERE YOU SEE LIKE SOME OF THE PEDESTRIAN PARKING, UH, AREAS.
BUT THE ISLANDS THAT ARE IN THAT PARKING AREA ARE, UH, GREATER IN WIDTH.
[00:20:01]
THAT WE'RE GONNA BE PLANTING, THESE ARE GONNA BE HEALTHIER, MORE MATURE TREES THAN REQUIRED BY CITY CODE THAT WE'RE GONNA BE PLANTING IN THE, IN THESE ISLANDS.SO IT DOES GO BEYOND CURRENT CODE WITH THE SHADING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, YEAH.
IF IT A ZONING CASE GOES FORWARD WITHOUT A RECOMMENDATION, THE COUNSEL DECIDES WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS CASE THAT MIGHT BE A STAFF QUESTION.
LIZ JOHNSTON, INTERIM ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.
UM, SO YOU ARE THE DECIDING BODY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCES.
UM, THERE IS NO APPEAL AND UM, SO IT ENDS, UH, WITH YOUR DECISION THIS EVENING.
AND WE WOULD REQUIRE A UNANIMOUS VOTE 'CAUSE THERE'S ONLY SIX OF US HERE.
SO IF THERE'S ANY ISSUES WE CAN ALWAYS POSTPONE SOMETHING DOWN THE ROAD.
BUT IF EVERYBODY'S IN AGREEMENT.
UM, ONE THING WE DID TALK ABOUT, I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
ONE WOULD BE, UM, I'D LIKE TO SEE A WORK WITH STAFF TO COME UP WITH A MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE LANDSCAPING.
SINCE THIS ISN'T AN INDUSTRIAL SIDE AND NOT A RESIDENTIAL, UM, WE WOULD WANT TO SEE SOMETHING MORE OF A MAINTENANCE PLAN SO THAT THESE PLANS DON'T GET TREES, DON'T GET PLANTED AND THEN NOT DONE TAKEN CARE OF.
SO WE WOULD WORK WITH ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF TO COME UP WITH A MAINTENANCE PLAN GOING DOWN THE ROAD.
UM, I DON'T THINK THAT'S ANY ISSUE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF.
WHAT ELSE? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, CHAIR, THIS IS, UH, THOMPSON.
I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT SOME OF THE CONVERSATION AT COMMISSION LED ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
'CAUSE I WASN'T ABLE TO FIND THAT.
UM, WHY THE DISSENT? IT WASN'T DISSENT, IT JUST DIDN'T MEET ENOUGH VOTES FOR APPROVAL.
SO IT WAS, IT WAS, IT IS BEING FORWARDED TO US WITH NO MOTION WHATSOEVER, NO RECOMMENDATION.
I JUST, I WAS CURIOUS IF SOMEONE COULD RECAP THE CONVERSATION, THE NATURE OF THE CONVERSATION THAT THEY HAD.
MIKE MCDOUGAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
UH, THE EV ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUT FORTH A MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCES.
UM, AND SO THEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WENT TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
UM, AND IN TIMES PAST, WHAT THEY MIGHT HAVE DONE WAS AFTER THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCES DID NOT PASS, DIDN'T GET ENOUGH VOTES.
THEY MIGHT THEN PUT FORTH A MOTION TO REJECT THE VARIANCE AND VOTE ON THAT.
UH, IN THIS SITUATION, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION DID NOT.
AND SO THEY JUST MOVED TO THE NEXT DIG OF THE ITEM.
AND SO, UM, THAT IS IN A POSITION OF ZING BEING ABLE TO SAY THAT IT MEETS THE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR STAFF.
BUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION DOESN'T HAVE A, A RECOMMENDATION.
AND, AND, AND NO ONE SHARED THEIR REASON FOR NOT SUPPORTING IT.
UH, THE, I WAS, THEY, SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS SPOKE TO ME BEFORE THE MEETING.
I THINK THEY WERE JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE, UH, THE AMOUNT OF GRADING, UH, IN GENERAL THAT, THAT'S, UH, THE STANDARD, WELL, I WOULDN'T SAY THE STANDARD, BUT, BUT COMMON AND, UH, TYPICAL FOR WAREHOUSE TYPE PROJECTS.
AND THIS SITE BEING NEXT TO THE MAJOR TOW ROAD OR THE HIGHWAY IS A GOOD LOCATION FOR A WAREHOUSE.
AND WAREHOUSES BY NATURE ARE BIG, FLAT STRUCTURES AND YOU HAVE TO GET TRUCKS IN AND OUT AND LOADING DOCKS IN AND OUT.
SO IT DOES REQUIRE AN EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF GRADING MORE SO THAN A RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT TYPE BUILDING WOULD REQUIRE, FOR EXAMPLE.
D-S-D-I-I WOULD, UH, I WOULD AGREE.
UM, AND THE CODE SPECIFICALLY DOES NOT LIMIT GRADING WITHIN THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
SO IF SOMEBODY NEEDED TO DIG DOWN IN THE, WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING, SAY LIKE A, A 50 STORY BUILDING, DIG DOWN 30 FEET FOR THE, THE FOUNDATION CODE DOESN'T STOP THAT.
UM, CODE ALLOWS IT SPECIFICALLY CODE ALSO SPECIFICALLY ALLOWS FILL WITHIN THE BUILDING FOUNDATION WITHOUT A LIMIT.
SO IT'S BASED ON THE NEED TO, UH, OF, OF THE BUILDING ESSENTIALLY CODE DOES LIMIT GRADING TO FOUR FEET OUTSIDE THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
SO IF, IF, UH, IN A WAREHOUSE SITUATION SOMEBODY HAS TO FILL TO MAKE A FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION LEVEL FOR THE WAREHOUSE TO FUNCTION AND THERE'S A FALL ON THE LAND, WELL THE FILL UNDERNEATH THE FOUNDATION IS NOT LIMITED, BUT THE PARKING LOT HAS TO MATCH THE FOUNDATIONAL ELEVATION.
AND SO TO MAKE THE FOUNDATION OF THE PARKING LOT MATCH THE BUILDING, THERE HAS TO BE A FILL TO MAKE THAT EQUAL.
AND THE CODE DOES REGULATE THE FILL AND THE CUT FOR THE PARKING LOT ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING.
AND OF COURSE IT WOULDN'T DO TO HAVE A, UH, PARKING LOT 10 FEET BELOW OR 10 FEET ABOVE THE BUILDING ELEVATION.
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I NORMALLY TRUST THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, SO THIS ONE BOTHERS ME.
UM, BECAUSE HALF OF THEM, I MEAN THEY HAD EIGHT AND COULDN'T COME TO A RECOMMENDATION.
WE'VE ONLY GOT SIX HERE TONIGHT.
UM, SO I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO POSTPONE.
[00:25:01]
WITH THAT? YES, WE ARE.UM, DO WE HAVE A, WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THE POSTPONEMENT? YOU NEED A SECOND BEFORE WE CAN DISCUSS THAT? MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THIS MORNING, MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
OTHERWISE YES, WE CAN GO TO A DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'M HAPPY TO SECOND.
SO A MOTION TO POSTPONE TILL THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER GREENBERG.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.
WE WILL SEE Y'ALL AGAIN NEXT MONTH.
HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET BETTER ATTENDANCE.
THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
UM, CODES AND ORDINANCES, JOINT COMMITTEE, WORKING GROUP COMMITTEE UPDATES.
WE, ANY UPDATE? WE, WE HAVEN'T MET.
WE, PARDON ME, CANCELED THE JULY MEETING DUE TO LACK OF BUSINESS.
AND DID WE HAVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE DISCUSSION ITEM? DID WE OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING? UM, WE CLOSED, YES.
WE NEED TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO I HEAR A MOTION TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SECOND I'LL THOSE AND PAPERS SAY, AYE, PUBLIC HEARINGS CLOSED.
WE LEFT IT OPEN BECAUSE WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING.
PARDON ME? WAS THERE A SECOND ON THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY.
[WORKING GROUP/COMMITTEE UPDATES]
ANYWAYS.NO, NO UPDATE ON CODES AND ORDINANCES.
CONTRA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
MR. THOMPSON, YOU WANNA GIVE AN UPDATE? WE DID HAVE A MEETING.
NOT MUCH WAS TALKED ABOUT, BUT UM, YEAH, SURE.
WE GOT AN UPDATE ON IMAGINE AUSTIN'S OUTREACH EFFORTS AND THE, UM, EQUITY BASED PRESERVATION PLAN.
UH, THE DISCUSSION OF FOLDING THAT IN TO IMAGINE AUSTIN AND SORT OF MORE OF A, A SORT OF NOTIFYING US THAT THAT WOULD BE COMING.
WE APPROVED THE ANNUAL REPORT, UH, WHICH YOU'LL SEE I, I GUESS WENT OUT THIS WEEK.
SO ANYTHING ELSE? I MISSED CHAIR.
THE ANNUAL REPORT IS ACTUALLY STILL BEING LOOKED AT.
'CAUSE IF YOU, WE, WE APPROVED IT WITH CONDITIONS, PENDING CONDITIONS.
I'VE GIVEN SOME COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT AND WE'RE WAITING TO KIND OF SEE HOW THAT WILL BE FINALIZED.
ANYTHING ELSE ON THE CONFERENCE DAY PLAN, JOINT COMMITTEE, IF NOT THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE? WE HAVEN'T MET, HAVEN'T MET.
SO NEXT MEETING IS NEXT MONTH.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
AGENDA ITEMS? YES, MA'AM.UM, I WAS KIND OF DISTURBED TO READ IN THE MONITOR THAT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO POST BACKUP, UM, ONLY TO POST THE AGENDA FOR IT WAS SPECIFIC TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT THOSE RULES APPLY TO US AS WELL.
AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO CHANGE OUR RULES TO REQUIRE THE BACKUP BE POSTED IF IT'S NOT ALREADY IN THE, IN OUR BYLAWS, I DIDN'T, WELL, BYLAWS ARE HARDER TO CHANGE THAN JUST RULES.
UM, UM, THIS WOULD NEED TO BE, I BELIEVE, ADOPTED IN THE BYLAWS.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT STAFF DOES HAVE AN INTERNAL DEADLINE POSTING BACKUP.
WE POST BACKUP ON THURSDAYS, UM, BECAUSE WE GET FROM STAFF ALL OF THEIR BACKUP ON WEDNESDAY CLOSE OF BUSINESS.
AND SO IT IS OUR NORMAL PRACTICE TO POST BACKUP ON THURSDAYS.
I GUESS THE QUESTION IS IT, IS IT PRACTICE OR IS IT CODE OR BYLAW REQUIREMENT? I DON'T BELIEVE I SENT SAW IT IN THE COMMISSION'S BYLAWS.
AND THERE'S NO CODE REQUIREMENT FOR POSTING BACKUP.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO, LET'S JUST SAY RULES AND BYLAWS, UM, TO AMEND THOSE TO REFLECT POLICY.
TO REFLECT THAT WE WOULD, UM, WANT TO REQUIRE BACKUP.
THE LAST WEEK'S PLANNING COMMISSION BACKUP DIDN'T GO UP UNTIL LIKE MONDAY LATE AFTERNOON.
AND THEN THERE WAS A SPECTRUM OUTAGE
SO IT'S, YES, THAT WAS A MESS.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT KIND OF THING PREVENTED AND I WOULD SUPPORT, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT.
JUST BASICALLY PUTTING INTO CODE OR BYLAWS, WHATEVER IS THE CURRENT POLICY.
SO WE'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.
I THINK WE COULD WRITE SOMETHING UP FOR AUGUST 6TH.
ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? HEARING NONE ADJOURNMENT,