[00:00:03]
[CALL TO ORDER]
PRESENT WITHIN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.I NOW CALL THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:12 PM SO FIRST OFF, WE WILL TAKE, UH, ROLL CALL AND, UM, I'LL GO IN ALPHABETICAL OR ORDER AS YOU SEE IN THE AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER HOWARD IS ABSENT.
AND I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE OUR EXOFFICIO MEMBERS, UM, WITH, UH, BOARD MEMBER WITH CANDACE HUNTER.
UM, JESSICA, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS CHAIR, JESSICA COHEN WILL BE JOINING US LATER.
SO, UM, BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THE CONTENTS OF TONIGHT'S MEETING, I WANNA RECOGNIZE THE PASSING OF, UM, A REALLY AMAZING AUSTIN KNIGHT, UH, CHRIS RILEY, WHO IS A FORMER CITY COUNCIL MEMBER PLANNING COMMISSIONER, AND A PROPONENT OF URBAN LIVING WALKABILITY AND BIKEABILITY.
CHRIS PASSED AWAY AT HOME ON JULY 28TH AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF DEALING WITH CANCER, AND I'M GONNA HAND IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO SAY A FEW WORDS.
AND I HOPE EVERYONE UP HERE GETS A CHANCE TO SAY SOMETHING BRIEFLY ABOUT HIM, BUT YOU JUST DON'T GET BIGGER HEROES OF, OF JUST A VISION FOR A CITY AND A WAY A CITY COULD BE.
AND UNDERSTANDING THE SHORTCOMINGS OF A CITY AND PUTTING EVERYTHING OUT THERE AND FIGHTING FOR A CITY.
AND, AND I, I JUST GOTTA SHARE, AT THE VERY, VERY END, HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS FACING AND HE OPENED UP HIS HOME TO EVERYBODY TO COME IN AND EVERYBODY JUST TO TALK ABOUT AUSTIN AND LIVING AND ALL THE THINGS THAT MATTER TO THEM.
AND THE DAY OF HIS BIG BIRTHDAY PARTY, THEY WERE LIKE, HOW ARE YOU GONNA GO TO YOUR BIRTHDAY PARTY? HE'S LIKE, THEY CAN'T KEEP ME IN THE HOSPITAL.
AND HE WAS JUST SO, THAT WAS JUST HIM, JUST FOREVER FULL OF PASSION AND SPIRIT AND WE'RE ALL GONNA MISS HIM.
AND HE'S JUST DID SO MUCH FOR THIS CITY AND, AND WE'RE, WE'RE LUCKY TO HAVE HIM.
AND, AND CHRIS RILEY BEND IS RIGHT OVER HERE.
HOPEFULLY YOU GET TO ALL GO WALK OR BIKE BY IT SOMETIME SOON.
BUT, UH, WE HAD A REAL HERO THERE AND WE'RE ALL LUCKY FOR IT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTED TO, UM, SAY A FEW WORDS OTHERWISE I CAN MOVE ON.
I KNOW WE ALL REMEMBER HIM FONDLY.
UM, YEAH, I ALSO JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT, UM, WE ARE ALREADY MISSING CHRIS, BUT WE FEEL SO BLESSED TO BE IN HIS LEGACY AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND, HE HAD A WONDERFUL, UM, SERVICE LAST WEEK AND MANY OF OUR, I'D SAY CURRENT AND PAST AUSTIN LEADERS WERE THERE TO REMEMBER CHRIS AND, AND WHAT HE DID FOR THE CITY.
AND I, I THINK SOMETHING FOR US TO REMEMBER AS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS IS THAT HE SERVED IN THIS ROLE AND REALLY UNDERSTOOD THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AS A CITY.
AND I THINK THAT, UM, ESPECIALLY TONIGHT, BUT ALWAYS TO REMEMBER THAT GROWING A CITY IS NOT AN EASY TASK.
AND SOMETIMES WE'RE ASKED TO DO HARD THINGS AND I THINK CHRIS SHOWED US A LOT OF LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE IN THAT.
AND I'M SO LUCKY THAT I GOT TO KNOW HIM, BUT ALSO THAT WE GET TO LIVE IN HIS LEGACY AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN CARRY ON MANY OF THOSE TRADITIONS.
UM, SO AS USUAL, WE HAVE A HYBRID MEETING, UH, ALLOWING FOR A VIRTUAL QUORUM AS LONG AS THE COMMISSIONER, SERVING AS CHAIR, MYSELF AS PRESIDENT IN CHAMBERS.
SO WE HAVE, UM, ALSO COMMISSIONERS ATTENDING VIRTUALLY.
WE CAN HAVE SPEAKERS ATTEND VIRTUALLY, UM, OR IN PRESENT IN CHAMBERS.
AND, UM, JUST REMEMBER TO, UH, FOR OUR VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE HAVE YOUR, YOUR SIGN IN SHEET READY AND YOUR RED, YELLOW AND GREEN VOTING ITEMS. UM, ALRIGHT, FOR THOSE MADAM CHAIR YES.
WOULD YOU RECOGNIZE ME TO ADD AN AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT TO THE, UH, TO THE AGENDA? UM, SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF SUMMER AND BARCELONA SLIDESHOW TO FOLLOW
UM, ALRIGHT, SO, UH, FOR OUR COMMISSIONERS WHO, UH, OR SORRY, OUR, OUR VIRTUAL SPEAKERS, UM, YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION TAKING UP YOUR ITEM.
UM, REMINDER THAT YOU CAN ALSO DONATE TIME.
SPEAKERS CAN DONATE, DONATE TIME, BUT THE SPEAKER DONATING TIME AND THE SPEAKER RECIPIENT MUST BE PRESENT IN PERSON WHEN THE ITEM IS CONSIDERED.
UM, ALL RIGHT, SO, UH, OUR FIRST ACTIVITY TODAY IS TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ITEMS THAT ARE CONSENT APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, POSTPONEMENTS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS OR
[00:05:01]
NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS, VICE CHAIR ZAR WILL READ THE PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND IDENTIFY THOSE THAT ARE CONSENT, POSTPONEMENT AND NON-DISCUSSION AND COMMISSIONERS.YOU'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST CONSENT ITEMS BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
SO, VICE CHAIR, UM, I'M SORRY, I DID SKIP OVER THAT.
UM, MS. CORONA, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? ELLA GARCIA PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
WE CHAIR, THERE IS NO ONE SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
WE DO NEED TO, UH, I'LL OPEN UP THE JULY 9TH MINUTES, UM, FOR ANY EDITS, ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON THOSE MINUTES? OKAY.SEEING NONE, UH, THOSE WILL BE ADDED TO THE CONSENT AGENDA AS IS.
SO VICE CHAIR, THANK YOU CHAIR.
UM, STARTING WITH OUR PUBLIC HEARING
[Consent Agenda]
ITEMS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS A REZONING C EIGHT 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 5 7 200 EAST RIVERSIDE BUDD, DISTRICT NINE.THIS ITEM IS UP FOR A PC POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST 10TH, UM, SEPTEMBER 10TH, OH, SORRY, SEPTEMBER 10TH.
UH, I, NUMBER THREE IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH ONE 7.01 ANDERSON SQUARE, DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR JOINT POSTPONEMENT BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT TO AUGUST 27TH.
UM, ALSO OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER FOUR IS THE REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH EIGHT ZERO, ANDERSON SQUARE DISTRICT FOUR.
UM, THIS IS ASSOCIATED ZONING CASE.
THIS IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT FOR JOINT POSTPONEMENT BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND APPLICANT TO AUGUST 27TH.
I NUMBER FIVE IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH 0 2 0 1 CHRISTCHURCH PLANNING DISTRICT THREE.
THE ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION TODAY.
I NUMBER SIX IS, UH, THE ASSOCIATED ZONING CASE.
C 14 DASH 2 24 DASH ZERO ZERO CHRISTCHURCH PLANNING SOUTH DISTRICT THREE.
THE ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION, OTHER ASSOCIATED REZONING CASES C 14 DASH 2024 DASH ZERO SEVEN CHRISTCHURCH PLANNING NORTH DISTRICT TI NUMBER SEVEN.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION I NUMBER EIGHT IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH 0 0 5 0.01 TOPLESS FAIRWAY MIXED EXCUSE DISTRICT THREE.
THE ITEM IS OFFERED UP FOR CONSENT.
THAT ONE'S BEEN PULLED FOR DISCUSSION AS AS NUMBER NINE.
THAT ONE WAS PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
SO THAT I AM IS OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION TODAY.
I NUMBER NINE, THE ASSOCIATED REZONING TO THE PLAN AMENDMENT C 14 DASH 2 24 DASH 15 OPS FAVOR, MIXED USE DISTRICT C ASSIGNMENT IS ALSO OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION I NUMBER 10 IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NP DASH 2 24 DASH 0 2 4 0 1 2700 GRACIE FARMS LANE, DISTRICT SEVEN.
THE ASSOCIATED REZONING ITEM NUMBER 11 C 14 DASH 2 24 DASH 5 2700 GRACIE FARMS DISTRICT SEVEN.
I NUMBER 12 IS A PLAN AMENDMENT AND PA DASH 2 24 DASH TWO SIX SH 2 0 4 EAST BERG LANE, DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 13 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 6 7 SH 2 0 4 EAST BURG LANE, DISTRICT FOUR.
UM, THIS ITEM IS ALSO OFFERED, OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 14.
UM, IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 3 9 OAK CREEK VILLAGE, PHASE TWO DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 15, REZONING C 14 DASH 2 24 DASH 0 2 3 4 5 0 7 MIN CHAKA DISTRICT FIVE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 16, REZONING C 14 DASH 20 20 24 DASH 0 8 0.
UH, 5 5 9 3 1 DIT CIRCLE REZONING DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT POSTPONEMENT TO, UH, SEPTEMBER 10TH.
ITEM NUMBER 17 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 7 5 9 0 1 12 RESEARCH DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 18 C 14 DASH 2024 DASH FIVE FM 9 6 9 DISTRICT ONE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 19, UM, REONE C 1423 DASH 0 1 35 1500 AND 1600 ROYAL CREST DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 20 C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 7 2 GARZA TWO DISTRICT EIGHT.
THIS REZONING IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 21.
IT'S ALSO REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 88 OTX DESIGN, DISTRICT FIVE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 22 IS A REZONING C EIGHT 14 DASH 82 DASH 0 0 6 0 2 83 LAKE AUSTIN COMMONS, BUDD AMENDMENT DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS, UH, OFFERED FOR CONSENT NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO UM, SEPTEMBER 10TH.
I NUMBER 23 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 6 6 1500 CROSSING PLACE DISTRICT THREE.
I NUMBER 24 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 3 0 8 1-830-AIRPORT DB 90 REZONING DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
UH, I NUMBER 25 IS A CONSENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT, UH, C 12 M TO DASH 2024 DASH ZERO FIVEFIELD MUD CONSENT AGREEMENT.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT
[00:10:01]
I NUMBER 26 IS A PUT AMENDMENT C EIGHT 14 DASH 2014 DASH 0 8 3 0 1 SUN DISTRICT FIVE.THIS ITEM IS ALSO OFFERED UP FOR CONSENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION INCLUDED I NUMBER 27 IS AN LDC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2023 DASH 26 LIVE MUSIC AND CREATIVE SPACE BONUS PHASE TWO.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT POSTPONEMENT BY THE COMMISSION TO SEPTEMBER 10TH.
I NUMBER 28 IS THE LOCAL AMENDMENT, UH, TO THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AND INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED UP FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
VICE CHAIR, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN FROM ITEMS ON THE AGENDA? MADAM CHAIR? I DID.
I, I'M SORRY I WASN'T LISTENING INTENTLY, MR. VICE CHAIR, BUT ITEM NUMBER 15, IS THAT STILL ON CONSENT? SO, UM, WE ARE KEEPING ON CONSENT.
WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP IN OPPOSITION AND WE'LL LET THEM SPEAK DURING THE CONSENT AGENDA, UM, ONCE WE GET TO THAT POINT.
AND THEN IF A COMMISSIONER WISHES TO PULL AFTER HEARING THE SPEAKERS, THEY CAN DO SO.
I'M GONNA BE RECUSING ON ITEMS 25 AND 26.
UH, I WORK AT AUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY AND THEY WILL BE BUILDING ON A PART OF THIS LAND.
YES, I'M GONNA BE RECUSING ON ITEMS 25 AND 26.
UM, SEVERAL OF MY CLIENTS, UM, OPPOSE, UM, IN GENERAL, UH, MUDS AND IN PARTICULAR, UH, THE, THE MUD THAT IS IN QUESTION HERE HAS A TAX RATE OF 90 CENTS PER HUNDRED.
THAT'S NINE 0 CENTS PER HUNDRED.
THAT IS THE ADDITION OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, THE TRAVIS COUNTY, UH, TAX RATE AND E ES, UH, ESD NUMBER 11, WHICH SERVES THIS AREA.
IT IS 4 CENTS LESS THAN THE COMBINED DISTRICT OF ALL OF THOSE TAXING ENTITIES COMBINED.
AND WE'RE GONNA PUT FOLKS THAT ARE, UM, SEEKING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OUT THERE AND SADDLE THEM WITH DEBT AND TAXES THAT, UM, THAT ARE HIGH.
AND I'M GONNA, I'M NOT A PART OF THAT AND I'M GONNA RECUSE I OKAY.
UM, OTHER RECUSALS? ABSTENTIONS.
UM, CHAIR, IF WE WANNA PULL AN ITEM, WHEN WOULD YOU LIKE? UH, YES, YOU CAN LET ME KNOW.
I'M WORKING MY WAY DOWN THE LIST, BUT, UM, DID YOU WANNA PULL AN ITEM? IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT ONE MIGHT NEED TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
SO WE'RE PULLING ITEM NUMBER 25 FOR DISCUSSION.
MS. GARCIA, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON SOME OF THE CONSENT ITEMS? I'M THINKING NUMBER 15, THE MINKA ROAD CASE.
WE ALSO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP IN OPPOSITION ON ITEM NUMBER 14.
OKAY, LET'S HEAR, UH, 14 FIRST AND THEN WE'LL HEAR THE SPEAKERS FOR ITEM 15.
AND AFTER WE HEAR THOSE SPEAKERS, UM, IF COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL FOR DISCUSSION, WE CAN DO SO.
WE WILL FIRST BE HEARING FROM JOHN CERVANTES.
HE IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.
JOHN, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
HELLO? UH, SO I'M, GO AHEAD AND JUST START IT.
I'M A TENANT ORGANIZER FOR BASA.
AND I AM SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF ITEM 14, UH, WHICH IS OAK CREEK VILLAGE IN WHICH EUREKA HOLDINGS IS APPLYING TO REZONE REDEVELOP THE APARTMENT STRUCTURES LOCATED ON 2302, UH, DERWOOD STREET HERE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS.
UH, I'VE BEEN HELPING OAK CREEK VILLAGE AND LUCERO TENANTS, UH, GET THEMSELVES ORGANIZED, UM, TO GET THEIR ISSUES ADDRESSED AND HEARD BY MANAGEMENT AND PROPERTY OWNERS.
RENEE AND WILL CAMPOS RECENTLY.
SOME OF THE PROPERTY, SOME OF THE PROBLEMS ON THE PROPERTY ARE PEST CONTROL, UH, REPAIR ISSUES AND UNPROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT, UH, AS WELL AS HEALTH AND SAFETY THREATS FROM UNSAFE CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES.
UH, EUREKA AND ITS REPRESENTATIVES HAVE MET WITH US AND THE TENANTS ASSOCIATIONS, AND WE ARE WORKING TO COME TO AN ON AN AGREEMENT.
AND WE ALSO HAVE, HAVE MET WITH OAK CREEK VILLAGE TENANTS TO DISCUSS THEIR CONCERNS REGARDING POTENTIAL DISPLACEMENT AND WHAT PROTECTIONS THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
AT THIS TIME, WE ARE NOT ASKING TO POSTPONE THE ZONING CASE, AS WE KNOW.
IT HAS BEEN POSTPONED A NUMBER OF TIMES ALREADY, AND EUREKA HAS TAKEN SOME POSITIVE STEPS.
AND WHILE THERE ARE, WHILE THERE HAVE BEEN DISTASTEFUL OCCURRENCES IN THE PAST,
[00:15:01]
WE WE DO NOT WANT TO FOCUS ON THEM, BUT RATHER WORK TO RESOLVE THE PROBLEMS TENANTS ARE CURRENTLY FACING AND MAKE SURE TENANTS HAVE SOME PROTECTIONS WHEN THEY'RE DISPLACED.WE, HOWEVER, DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT WE MUST SEE SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS IN THE CURRENT TENANT'S ISSUES BEFORE WE WOULD NOT OPPOSE THE FINAL APPROVAL OF THIS CASE.
TENANTS AT LUCERO HARM DAILY AS THEY NAVIGATE LIVING IN AN UNSAFE CONSTRUCTION SITE AND OAK CREEK VILLAGE, TENANTS HAVE REPORTED ISSUES.
REP HAVE REPORTED ISSUES, SERIOUS REPAIR ISSUES SUCH AS NO AC AND ONE TENANT WHO DID NOT HAVE A REFRIGERATOR FOR OVER A YEAR.
THIS, IN ADDITION TO WHAT HAS APPEARED TO BE SIGNIFICANT LEDGER ISSUES CAUSED BY A DEPARTING MANAGER, UH, WE ARE HOPEFUL THAT EUREKA WILL TAKE STEPS TO IMMEDIATELY CORRECT SUCH PROBLEMS. OF COURSE, DEPEND DEPENDABLE COMMUNICATION IS ESSENTIAL FROM NOW UNTIL REDEVELOPMENT IS COMPLETED.
AND EVEN AFTER THIS IS TO ENSURE THAT EUREKA MANAGEMENT AND EUREKA HOLDINGS ARE BEING RESPONSIVE, ARE BEING RESPONSIVE TO TENANTS WITH THEIR AUTHORITY AND NOT ALLOWING COMMITMENTS TO FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS OF TIME.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
YOU THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM THOMAS MORALES.
TOMAS, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
MY NAME IS TOMA MORALES AND I'M A RESIDENT AT OAK CREEK VILLAGE APARTMENTS.
UH, THE MANAGER, UH, TIFFANY MOORE WAS A NICE PERSON AT THE BEGINNING.
LATER SHE CHANGED HER, HER ATTITUDE WITH ME.
ONE TIME I GOT MY VEHICLE TOWED AWAY AND I DID QUESTION A TOW DRIVER ABOUT THE OTHER VEHICLES WITH FLAT TIRES, UH, EXPIRED TAG.
NEXT DAY I HAVE A PAPER POSTED ON MY DOOR TO BACK THE PROPERTY.
UH, THEN, UH, I HAD ONE WEEK WITHOUT NO POWER DURING THE ICE STORM, BUT NO CREDIT OR ASSISTANCE WAS, UH, GIVEN TO ME.
IN JANUARY 9TH, 2023, MY REFRIGERATOR WENT OUT.
I MADE A PHONE CALL TO REPORT IT ON MONDAY, THE MAINTENANCE, CHECK IT, CHECK IT OUT AND SAY THAT I NEEDED A NEW ONE.
HE SAY THEY HAVE TO ORDER ONE DAYS LATER.
I ASKED TIFFANY ABOUT, ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED WITH THAT, AND SHE SAID, I WILL NEVER GET ONE, UH, UNTIL THIS MONTH.
AND, AND THE REASON I GOT IT IS BECAUSE TIFFANY IS GONE THIS MONTH.
I PAID THE RENT AND THEY SAY I HAD A, I HAVE A BALANCE OF $2,000.
AND I QUESTION, WHERE DID THAT CAME FROM? GOT NO ANSWER.
NEXT DAYS I GOT ANOTHER PAPER SAYING THAT, UH, I OWE THEM ANOTHER 285.
WHERE'S THAT CAME FROM? NO ANSWER.
AND UH, ALSO AT OAK CREEK VILLAGE, NOW WE HAVE AN ELECTRIC CHARGE, BUT WE, WE DON'T HAVE A METERS TO RECORD HOW MUCH POWER WE ARE USING.
AND THEN ALSO ONE TIME, UH, TIFFANY CAUGHT THE POWER TO ONE OF THE RESIDENTS FOR ONE WEEK.
AND THIS RES RESIDENT NEEDED THE POWER TO HAVE OXYGEN.
SO WHAT SHE DID, SHE PUT HIS LIFE ON A RISK AND DER
AND DID I GET A, A DISCOUNT OR A FREE RENT FOR NOT HAVING A REFRIGERATOR? NEVER.
AND, BUT, BUT THEY ALL THE, THEY ALWAYS WANTED THE WHOLE PAYMENT ON THE RENT, BUT THEY NEVER FIXED THE PROBLEMS THAT WE WERE FACING.
WE'LL FIRST BE HEARING FROM RAY COLLINS.
RAY IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.
RAY, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
MY NAME IS RAY COLLINS, I CHAIR THE SOUTH MINCHA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.
UH, IN YOUR BACKUP, YOU WILL FIND A LETTER OF UNANIMOUS OPPOSITION TO A DRIVE THROUGH.
THERE IS NO OPPOSITION TO THE COFFEE SHOP.
THE CONTACT TEAM IS LEAVING THE LETTER OF OPPOSITION IN TO THE DRIVE THROUGH IN PLACE AS A SIGNED POST OF OUR OPPOSITION TO HOW THE PROPERTY MIGHT BE DEVELOPED BY A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER,
[00:20:01]
GIVEN THAT THE OWNER IS NOT THE DEVELOPER.IN FACT, WE COULDN'T WITHDRAW IT WITHOUT A MEETING AND A VOTE AND THE APPLICATION.
AND THE APPLICANT BROUGHT THE ERROR IN THE ZONING CASE TO MY ATTENTION BY TEXT AND EMAIL.
MONDAY AT 12:30 PM DAVID FOSTER, A CONTACT TEAM MEMBER WILL SPEAK OF THE LONG-TERM NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION TO THE A DRIVE-THROUGH IN THE SCHOOL ZONE, THE COOPERATION OF ELTO ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S WISHES AND WHATEVER ELSE AS HE SEES FIT.
OUR SECRETARY, SUSAN SCH WILL DETAIL WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN AND IF A DRIVE THROUGH IS PERMITTED.
FIRST IN MY OWN PRESENTATION, I'LL POINT OUT THAT THE STAFF REPORT MAKES NO MENTION OF JOSLYN ELEMENTARY OR THE SCHOOL ZONE.
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL HAS SPENT CONSIDERABLE BOND MONEY ON SIDEWALKS IN PARTICULAR.
AND WE DON'T WANT TO SEE SUCH PEDESTRIAN SAFETY MEASURES SQUANDERED BY VEHICLES ENTERING AND EXITING ANY DRIVE THROUGH BUSINESS ACROSS THOSE SIDEWALKS IN THE SCHOOL ZONE.
WHAT NO ONE TO MY KNOWLEDGE HAS CONSIDERED IS THE STAFF REPORT IN THE STAFF REPORTER ELSEWHERE, IS THAT ALL THREE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO REPRESENT DIFFERENT PARTS OF SOUTHWOOD, THAT IS COUNCIL MEMBERS RYAN AL ALTER, FUENTES AND VELASQUE, AND TWO OTHERS, COUNCIL MEMBERS ELLIS AND ALLISON ALTER SIGNALED THEIR SUPPORT FOR CITY LEAP IN A MAY 24TH MEMO TO CITY MANAGER BROAD NEXT CITY LEAP ARISES FROM THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTMENT PLAN FROM A JULY 16TH JOINT MEETING OF THE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEES.
AND FROM AN APRIL MEETING OF THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE, CITY LEAP ENVISIONS TWO VEHICLES LANES DEDICATED BUS LANES FOR THE UPCOMING EXPANSION OF THE 8 0 3 ROUTE AND BICYCLE LANES ON MENSCH A CAR-CENTRIC DRIVE THROUGH, THUS HAS NO PLACE ON MENSCH OR IN THE SAFE STREET AUSTIN PROGRAM.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM DAVID FOSTER.
DAVID, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
I'M A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF THE SOUTHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD.
IN FACT, I LIVE ABOUT A THREE MINUTE WALK AWAY FROM THIS, UH, LOCATION WHERE THE COFFEE SHOP IS BEING PROPOSED.
AND I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT FIVE.
UH, I'M ALSO A FOUNDING MEMBER OF THE SOUTH MINKA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM AND WAS DEEPLY INVOLVED IN, UH, PUTTING TOGETHER THE SOUTH AUSTIN COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH, UH, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED IN NOVEMBER OF 2014.
I ORIGINALLY DID SIGN UP TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS, BUT NOW I WANT CHANGE THAT AND JUST SPEAK ON, UH, THE PROJECT.
WHEN OUR CONTACT TEAM FIRST HEARD ABOUT THIS PROJECT, THIS COFFEE SHOP, WE WERE GIVEN THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WOULD INCLUDE A DRIVE THROUGH.
AND AS, UH, CHAIR COLLINS POINTED OUT, WE HAVE NOTHING AGAINST A A COFFEE SHOP AT THIS LOCATION.
IN FACT, OUR APPROVED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CALLS FOR BRINGING EXACTLY THESE KINDS OF BUSINESSES TO THE PERIMETER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH BY THE WAY, WE'RE BOUNDED BY VIN WHITE ON THE NORTH, UH, MIN CHAKA ON THE ON THE WEST, UH, STANE ON THE SOUTH AND SOUTH FIRST ON THE EAST, UH, BUSINESSES THAT WE CAN WALK OR BIKE TO AND NOT HAVE TO DRIVE TO.
UH, BUT OUR PLAN ALSO CALLS FOR PROMOTING BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
AND WE SEE A DRIVE THROUGH, ESPECIALLY AT THIS LOCATION AS UNDERMINING THE SKULL.
WHY IS THAT? WELL, AS, UH, AS CHAIR COLLINS AL ALREADY POINTED OUT, JOSLIN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET AND I'LL ADD THAT PROJECT CONNECT INVIS INVIS IS AT SOME POINT EXTENDING RAPID BUST, THE 8 0 3 DOWN MIN CHAKA ROAD.
SO THIS IS A ROBUST TRANSIT CORRIDOR THAT'S GOING TO BECOME MORE ROBUST AND WE DON'T NEED THOSE KINDS OF BUSINESSES WITH DRIVE-THROUGHS ON TRANSIT CORRIDORS.
SO WHY AM I ONLY SPEAKING ON RATHER THAN AGAINST? WELL, TWO THINGS HAVE CHANGED.
UH, ONE IS WE NOW UNDERSTAND, UH, THANKS TO CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF AND WITH, UH, SOME OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS THAT TONIGHT'S VOTE WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE A DRIVE THROUGH, WHICH IS WHAT WE WERE LED TO BELIEVE EARLY ON.
WHETHER IT WOULD SIMPLY AUTHORIZE A, A COFFEE SHOP AND BEFORE THEY COULD HAVE A DRIVE THROUGH, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, FOLLOW THAT PROCESS, WHICH WOULD TRIGGER YET ANOTHER HEARING HERE.
AND WE WOULD OF COURSE COME OUT AND OPPOSE IT AT THAT POINT.
SO THAT'S ONE THING THAT CHANGED.
AND THE OTHER THING THAT HAS CHANGED IS, UH, WE NOW HAVE INSURANCE FROM THE OWNER THAT SHE DOES NOT INTEND TO, UH, CONSIDER HAVING A COFFEE SHOP THERE WITH A DRIVE THROUGH.
SHE'S ONLY TALKING TO COFFEE SHOP DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS WHO WOULD NOT DO A DRIVE THROUGH.
UH, STILL I THINK IT'S USEFUL FOR US TO SPEAK TONIGHT, UH, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT, UH, WELL FOR ONE THING, OWNERSHIP SOMETIMES CHANGES HIS HANDS AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT A FUTURE OWNER MIGHT WANT TO DO ONCE THEY HAVE THE ZONING IN PLACE.
AND MORE BROADLY, I THINK THAT OUR SPEAKING HERE TONIGHT SENDS THE MESSAGE TO THIS COMMISSION AND
[00:25:01]
TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPERS THAT WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT HAVING, UH, A PEDESTRIAN BIKE TRANSIT FRIENDLY NEIGHBORHOOD AND ARE VERY LIKELY TO OPPOSE ANY AND ALL DRIVE-THROUGHS THAT ARE PROPOSED ALONG OUR PERIMETERS.SO THAT CONCLUDES MY REMARKS, EXCEPT I WILL SAY THAT I DON'T SEE ANY REASON NOT TO PASS THIS ON CONSENT GIVEN ALL OF THIS.
AND I WANNA THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND HARD WORK.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM SUSAN SCORN.
SUSAN, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, THIS IS THE LOCATION THAT'S UNDER QUESTION, BUT AS DAVID HAS ALREADY SAID, UM, WE UNDERSTAND FROM THE DEVELOPER THAT PLANS FOR A DRIVE THROUGH ARE, WOULD REQUIRE CUP AND ARE NOT ON THE DOCKET.
UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF WRAP UP, UH, AFTER RAY AND DAVID, UM, AND SAY THAT THIS IS NOT JUST A HYPOTHETICAL WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DRIVE-THROUGHS ON THIS STREET AND AROUND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, I'VE LIVED NEXT TO DAVID FOR 30 PLUS YEARS AND I MAKE A RIGHT TURN ONTO MAN SHK ALMOST EVERY MORNING.
'CAUSE I WORK AT UT SO DURING RUSH HOUR AND SCHOOL, UH, ENTRY HOURS, I'M MAKING THAT RIGHT TURN.
AND WHAT ANYONE WHO LIVES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN TELL YOU IS THAT IT IS, UM, VERY CHALLENGING TO AS YOU ARE WAITING AND WAITING AND WAITING FOR TRAFFIC TO CLEAR AND DEALING WITH ALL OF THE CHAOS COMING IN BOTH DIRECTIONS AND YOU SEE YOUR CLEARING AND YOU HIT THE GAS AND GO OUT TO REMEMBER TO CHECK TO THE RIGHT.
AND THOSE SIDEWALKS ON THE RIGHT ARE WHERE THE MOMS ARE COMING BACK WITH THEIR STROLLERS AFTER THEY DROP THE OLDER KIDS OFF AT SCHOOL.
AND I CANNOT TELL YOU HOW MANY CLOSE CALLS I'VE HAD, AND I REALLY HAVE WORKED VERY HARD OVER THREE DECADES TO SCHOOL MYSELF TO CHECK.
BUT ANYBODY WHO'S COMING INTO A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS ON A DRIVE-THROUGH IS NOT GONNA HAVE THAT KEYED INTO THEIR MEMORY.
AND IF WE PUT DRIVE-THROUGHS IN THIS AREA OR ON ANY OF THE STREETS THAT BOUND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, WE'RE, THERE'S A LOT OF PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC AND SCHOOL CHILDREN.
UM, WE'RE GONNA HAVE MULTIPLE CLOSE CALLS EVERY DAY.
SO AGAIN, NOT SPEAKING, UM, IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ZONING CHANGE, BUT WE WANTED TO SET THE FLAG THAT, UH, DRIVE-THROUGHS ON THOSE MAJOR STREETS ARE, UH, REALLY HAZARDOUS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AGAINST THE PLANS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY PUT FORWARD AND EXPRESSED.
AND THEY ALSO KEEP US UP AT NIGHT WITH THOSE, UM, THOSE MOM FEELINGS OF LIKE, AH, I CAN'T BELIEVE I ALMOST DID THAT.
THANK YOU, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS RYAN NIL.
RYAN, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
MY NAME IS RYAN NI AM THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE WOOTEN NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.
AND WE ARE OPPOSING ITEM NUMBER 17 90 12 RESEARCH BOULEVARD.
UM, DUE TO THE REQUEST THAT THERE BE A WAIVER REMOVING COMMERCIAL USES FROM A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE THINK THAT IT'S VALUABLE TO HAVE COMMERCIAL USES A NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU KNOW, WE LIKE TO GO PLACES AND VISIT THE DIFFERENT DESTINATIONS AND, YOU KNOW, ARE SAD TO LOSE SOME OF THEM, BUT WOULD LIKE FOR THERE TO BE NEW, UH, COMMERCIAL USES IN PLACE OF THE ONES THAT ARE BEING REMOVED WHEN IT DOES FINALLY ARRIVE.
UM, THE REASON STATED THAT THEY WANT TO DO IT IS BECAUSE OF LACK OF ACCESS.
THERE'S A NARROW DRIVEWAY ON BURN IT AND A NOT VERY GOOD DRIVEWAY ON RESEARCH BOULEVARD.
UH, BUT I DO THINK THERE'S OTHER SOLUTIONS WE CAN LOOK TO RATHER THAN JUST ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS IS BAD PLANNING AND NOT FIX IT AND JUST PUT A BUNCH OF HOUSES OR BEDROOMS IN THERE.
UM, I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT ITS PROXIMITY TO THE RED LINE AND HOW IT INTERACTS WITH THE FUTURE REDLINE PARKWAY INITIATIVE AND, UM, WE'RE ALSO THINKING ABOUT TRYING TO DO CHANGES TO THE SMP TO CONNECT IT TO, SO IT'S ACCESSIBLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, RATHER THAN REQUIRE YOU TO DRIVE THERE.
UH, BECAUSE I'VE TRIED BIKING THERE, IT, IT'S BAD, UH, I DON'T WANNA BIKE THERE.
SO THERE ARE I THINK, BETTER SOLUTIONS FOR THE STATED PROBLEM.
UM, SO I JUST WANNA REGISTER OPPOSITION FOR THE WAIVER AND JUST POINT OUT THAT I AM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM IS WORKING WITH MICHAEL WAYLAND, THE APPLICANT FOR MEETING WITH HIM ON MONDAY.
WE'RE NOT REQUESTING AN OPPOSITION OR A POSTPONEMENT OR FOR Y'ALL TO VOTE AGAINST IT AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
UM, BUT WE DO REALLY THINK THAT THOSE, YOU KNOW, MIXED USE PROVISIONS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR HAVING SUCCESSFUL NEIGHBORHOODS RATHER THAN JUST BEDROOM COMMUNITIES.
WE WILL FIRST HEAR FROM TAHIN OSBORNE.
UH, HE'S THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION AND TAHIN WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
[00:30:15]
HELLO EVERYONE.I WILL BE READING TWO TESTIMONIES, ONE FOR MYSELF AND FOR A TENANT WHO CANNOT BE HERE TODAY.
UM, SO MY NAME IS TAHIN, I'M AN ORGANIZER WITH BASTA.
AND EARLIER TODAY YOU ALL RECEIVED MY LETTER REGARDING THE REZONING APPLICATION FOR C 14 20 23 0 1 3 5 FOR 1500 AND 1600 ROYAL CREST DRIVE, ALSO KNOWN AS THE ELEMENT AUSTIN APARTMENTS.
I'M HERE TODAY TO FOLLOW UP AND STRESS THAT THIS REZONING IS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
SINCE FEBRUARY, I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH TENANTS, THE TENANTS ASSOCIATION AT THE ELEMENT AUSTIN APARTMENTS, TO ADDRESS VARIOUS CONCERNS, INCLUDING ESSENTIAL REPAIRS, SECURITY ISSUES, AND A LACK OF CONSISTENT COMMUNICATION FROM ONSITE MANAGEMENT FOR MONTHS.
TENANTS HAVE REQUESTED SEVERAL POSTPONEMENTS OF THIS HEARING TO ALLOW TIME FOR THEIR ISSUES TO BE PROPERLY HEARD AND NEGOTIATE AND ADDRESS AND ADDRESS BY OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT.
IN MOST RECENT NEGOTIATIONS, THE OWNERS NARROW ROAD GROUP HAVE WORKED TO RESOLVE SEVERAL LONGSTANDING TENANT CONCERNS.
AND WHILE THERE HAS BEEN PROGRESS WITH SOME OF THESE ISSUES, THERE IS STILL SIGNIFICANT WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
THE TENANTS ASSOCIATION DOES NOT OPPOSE THE REZONING APPLICATION HERE TODAY.
HOWEVER, FUTURE SUPPORT HINGES ON THE CONTINUED COOPERATION BETWEEN TENANTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS.
TENANTS ARE CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC THAT PROCEEDING WITH THE REZONING APPLICATION BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN BE A SIGN OF GOOD FAITH.
THAT MANAGEMENT AND OWNERSHIP WILL CONTINUE TO TAKE STEPS TO REBUILD TRUST AND RECTIFY THE ISSUES AT THE ELEMENT APARTMENTS.
AND CHELSEA SAYS, MY NAME IS CHELSEA REHA AND I HAVE BEEN A TENANT AT THE ELEMENT AUSTIN APARTMENTS SINCE 2018.
TODAY I AM REPRESENTING THE TENANTS ASSOCIATION TO INFORM THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THE REZONING CASE FOR 1500 AND 1600 ROYAL CREST DRIVE.
I WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE ZONING OF THIS PROPERTY IS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
WHILE WE DO NOT OPPOSE THE REZONING AT THIS TIME, OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS, WE HAVE BEEN COMMITTED TO WORKING CLOSELY WITH TENANTS AND OWNERS IN ORDER TO ADVOCATE FOR REPAIR AND SECURITY IMPROVEMENT IN OUR COMMUNITY.
IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WE AIM TO ESTABLISH A RETREAT OF COVENANT TO ENSURE THAT THESE INTERESTS ARE WELL REPRESENTED AND ADDRESSED FROM GENERAL MEETINGS TO DOOR KNOCK DOOR KNOCKING WITH FELLOW TENANTS.
WE'VE CONFIRMED THE EXISTENCE OF SEVERAL WIDESPREAD ISSUES ACROSS THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING EXCESSIVE LEAKS, OTHER REPAIRS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PRO PROPERLY ADDRESSED FOR MANY MONTHS.
PEST INFESTATIONS IN 90% OF THE UNITS THAT WE'VE SURVEYED, NEARLY NON-EXISTENT OR AT TIMES CONTRADICTORY CON COMMUNICATION FROM MANAGEMENT SAFETY AND SECURITY CONCERNS AND INCONSISTENT MAINTENANCE AND ACCESS TO VARIOUS COMMUNITY AMENDMENTS, WHICH WE PAY FOR MONTHLY.
WHILE IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS, SOME PROGRESS HAS FINALLY BEING SEEN, WE'D LIKE TO MAKE IT KNOWN OUR SUPPORT FOR REZONING REMAINS CONTINGENT UPON THE CONTINUED MOMENTUM AND RESULTS FROM OWNERS NARROW ROAD GROUP AND MANAGEMENT REPRO.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM DAVID SIMONE.
DAVID, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M A CURRENT TENANT AT THE ELEMENT AUSTIN AND HAVE BEEN OFFICIALLY LIVING HERE SINCE 2022.
TODAY I'M REPRESENTING THE TENANTS ASSOCIATION TO INFORM THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABOUT ZONING CASE FOR C 14 20 23 0 1 35 FOR 15 AND 1600 ROYAL CREST DRIVE.
THE REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY IS A MAJOR CONCERN FOR THE TENANTS IN OUR COMMUNITY.
WE DO NOT OPPOSE REZONING AT THIS TIME DUE TO SOME PROGRESS BEING MADE BY THE OWNERS NARROW ROAD GROUP AND MANAGEMENT REPRO TO RESOLVE OUTSTANDING ISSUES FOR THE TENANTS ON THE PROPERTY.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH OUR FELLOW TENANTS FOR SEVERAL MONTHS TO ADDRESS CONCERNS SUCH AS MAINTENANCE ISSUES, PESTS, AND SECURITY IMPROVEMENT.
WE HAVE FOUND THESE ISSUES BE WIDESPREAD THROUGHOUT OUR, THROUGH OUR OUTREACH VIA DOOR KNOCKING AND COMMUNITY MEETINGS.
ALONG WITH THAT, THERE HAVE BEEN ISSUES OF INCORRECT, LIMITED, CONTRADICTORY OR NO COMMUNICATIONS FROM MANAGEMENT IN REGARDS TO THESE ISSUES.
THIS HAS IMPACTED ME PERSONALLY WHEN IN APRIL, UH, ROCK WAS SLURRING THROUGH MY WINDOW AND TOOK THREE WEEKS AND A CALL TO CODE ENFORCEMENT TO BE REPAIRED DESPITE MY CONSISTENT OUTREACH TO MANAGEMENT.
WHILE THERE HAVE BEEN IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PAST TWO WEEKS SINCE WE HAVE MET WITH THE OWNERS, OUR SUPPORT FOR REZONING IS TIED TO THEIR COMMITMENT TO CARRY OUT THESE IMPROVEMENTS THEY AGREE TO AND MAKE GOOD FAITH EFFORTS TO REBUILD OUR TRUST.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS CHAIR.
[00:35:01]
SPEAKERS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.THANK YOU TO ALL THE SPEAKERS WHO SPOKE ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS TONIGHT ARE, UH, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL OTHER CASES? OKAY, SEEING NONE.
I JUST WANNA GO THROUGH AND REITERATE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING TONIGHT.
SO WE HAVE CASES FIVE, SIX, AND SEVEN, THE CHRISTCHURCH PLANNING NUMBER EIGHT AND NINE ON TOPLESS FAIRWAY.
WE ARE GOING TO HEAR THE DILLARD CIRCLE NUMBER 16 AS A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO HEAR NUMBER 25, THE SUN FIELD MUD AND NUMBER 28.
SO DO I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES.
UH, ANY, UH, LET ME TAKE VICE-CHAIR THERE AND THEN COMMISSIONER MOALA AND THEN COMMISSIONER.
AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? YES.
WE CAN GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FIRST.
WE'LL TAKE QUESTIONS NOW OR, OR COMMENTS.
UH, IT'S GONNA BE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WHEN WE GET TO IT.
I WAS JUST GONNA BRIEFLY SHARE FOR ITEM 17, JUST ITEMS SIMILAR TO IT, YOU KNOW, IT JUST FIGURING OUT WHERE THAT BAR IS.
WHEN WE'RE, WHEN WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALLOWED FOR MORE HEIGHTS, WE'VE ALLOWED FOR MORE HOUSING UNITS, AND I KNOW BACK IN THE DAY WHEN WE HAD BMU 60 LIMITING IT TO 60, WE HEARD ABOUT ISSUES WITH HAVING ENOUGH KIND OF FOOT TRAFFIC, IF YOU WILL, FOR THE, THE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL.
BUT NOW THAT WE ALLOW MORE HOMES ABOVE, NOW WE HAVE A PROCESS TO WAIVE RETAIL.
AND SO WE'RE HEARING FROM FOLKS NOW SAYING, WAIT A MINUTE, WE'RE GETTING MORE HOMES, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WHETHER WE WANT OR NOT, WE'RE GETTING THAT AUSTIN NEEDS THAT, BUT WE WANT RETAIL.
AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'RE GONNA LAND ON THAT AND WHEN WE'RE GONNA DO IT, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE A BIG CONVERSATION ABOUT WHEN AND HOW THAT HAPPENS, WHERE THAT BAR IS SET.
UH, YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO THANK MY FELLOW DISTRICT FIVE RESIDENTS COMING OUT, UM, REGARDING THE MIN SHAKA ROAD CASE.
AND I'M VERY PLEASED TO HEAR THAT, THAT THE DRIVE THROUGH IS NOT CONSIDERED OR LIKELY WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED AS THIS CASE MOVES FORWARD.
AND I JUST WANTED TO FLAG THAT I FEEL IT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE THAT THIS WASN'T SORT OF RAISED MORE CLEARLY AS AN ISSUE EVEN AT THE BEGINNING.
UM, WE UNDERSTAND THAT DRIVE-THROUGHS ARE NECESSARY IN SOME COMMERCIAL SITUATIONS, BUT THIS BEING ACROSS THE STREET FROM AN A ISD ELEMENTARY AND ALSO ON A ROAD THAT REALLY IS LOOKING TO SORT OF BE TRANSFORMED IN A REALLY IMPORTANT WAY AS PART OF OUR A SMP IS REALLY PROBLEMATIC TO ME.
SO I'M VERY, I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE NEIGHBORS REALLY RAISING THESE CONCERNS AND ALSO FOR THE APPLICANT BEING WILLING TO SORT OF RECONSIDER.
AND I DO HOPE THAT THIS MOVE DOES NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH A, A, UM, DRIVE-THROUGH BECAUSE IT, I JUST FEELS LIKE IT'S REALLY INAPPROPRIATE SPOT.
AND WE'RE GENERALLY SPEAKING THAT WE CONSIDER, UH, BROADLY ACROSS THE CITY WHAT WE DO WITH DRIVE-THROUGHS AND WHERE THEY ARE APPROPRIATE AS WE TRY TO BECOME A MORE TRANSIT ORIENTED MIXED USE, WALKABLE CITY DRIVE-THROUGHS ARE A REAL ISSUE.
THEY DO CAUSE EXTREME PROBLEMS IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC BACKUPS, THE CONGESTION, THE UM, SORT OF A POLLUTION AND NOISE CONCERNS.
AND WE AGAIN, UNDERSTAND THAT IN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL SITUATIONS, OF COURSE THEY'RE APPROPRIATE, BUT CERTAINLY NOT IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS.
SO I JUST WANNA SHARE MY APPRECIATION AGAIN TO THE, UM, MEMBERS OF DISTRICT FIVE AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT TO SORT OF RESOLVING THIS ISSUE.
I, I, I JUST WANTED TO QUICKLY SPEAK ON, UM, I NUMBER 14 AND NINETEENS ABOUT THE OAK CREEK VILLAGE AND THE 1500 1600 ROYAL CREST.
I WANT TO THANK THE TENANTS AND FOLKS FROM BOSTON WHO CAME OUT TO SPEAK TODAY.
UM, AND I WANNA THANK THE APPLICANTS FOR WORKING WITH THEM AND WE'RE APPROVING THOSE TODAY.
AND I, AND I SEE THAT THE TENANTS HAVE SORT OF, UM, GONE AHEAD AND SORT OF BEEN NEUTRAL ALLOWING THESE TO MOVE FORWARD.
AND I REALLY HOPE THAT THE APPLICANTS WORK WITH ALL OF THESE TENANTS TO RESOLVE ALL OF THE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ZONING CASES AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE HEARING ABOUT ON THESE PROPERTIES.
SO I JUST REALLY ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANTS TO CONTINUE WORKING WITH THEM AS THIS GOES TO COUNCIL AND RESOLVING ANY OUTSTANDING ISSUES.
RAISE YOUR HANDS, UH, MADAM CHAIR ON, UH, ITEM 15.
UH, COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE WISE WORDS FROM COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, EXCEPT I WOULD LOOK AT IT FROM THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT AND SAY, IF WE GOT A, THE TWO WEEK DELAY, WOULD THEY BRING IT BACK WITH THE DRIVE THROUGH NEXT? AND WE WOULD HAVE DEFINITIVE AGREEMENT ON THAT.
SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHAT, UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE LRNP, THE DRIVE THROUGH IS A CONDITIONAL USE.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH THIS BODY TO HAVE THAT APPROVED.
SO ESSENTIALLY IT'S NOT A PART OF THE ZONING, BUT WHAT DO WE DO WHEN COMMISSIONER MAXWELL HAS GONE ON TO BIGGER AND BETTER AND
[00:40:01]
MORE PROMINENT THINGS? HER A SOLUTION, HER WI COMMISSIONER VOICE IS HERE.YEAH, THIS WAS THE ITEM I WANTED TO ADDRESS AS WELL.
I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE MODIFY THE ITEM AND PLACE THE, THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY ON IT TO PROHIBIT THE DRIVE THROUGH USE.
SET THAT, AND IT CAN STAY ON CONSENT, BUT WE ADD THAT ONTO IT FOR THE CONSENT.
SO UNLESS THERE'S A, AN OBJECTION TO THAT MY D FIVE.
WE CAN I, NO, I APPRECIATE OUR FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I THINK THAT THAT'S PROBABLY A WISE, UM, RECOMMENDATION GIVEN THE, UH, DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD TONIGHT.
SO WE'LL, UM, LET'S MAKE THIS FORMAL.
SO THAT'S A, A RECOMMENDATION BY COMMISSIONER MUELLER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, UM, TO, UH, ADD A CEO THAT, UM, PROHIBITS DRIVE-THROUGHS ON THIS SITE.
IF, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
WELL, THE MOTION IS SINCE CHAIR WILL JUST MAKE THE MOTION AND THE CONSENT, IF THAT'S OKAY.
SO, BUT I THINK IT SEEMS LIKE WE DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION ON THAT, CORRECT AT THE MOMENT.
CHAIR, CAN I MAKE A MOTION? YES.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE OUR CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE ITEMS AS LISTED.
AND FOR ITEM NUMBER 15 TO BE NOTED WITH THE CHANGE THAT THE CHAIR JUST MENTIONED WITH THE PROHIBITION, UH, A CONDITIONAL, UH, OVERLAY THAT PROHIBITS, UM, ESSENTIALLY DRIVE THROUGH BUSINESSES.
AND THEN ON ITEM NUMBER 26 WITH THE SUN FIELD POD, UM, APPROVING IT WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND THE MINUTES.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? OKAY, THANK YOU.
[16. Rezoning: C14-2024-0080 - 5931 Dillard Circle Rezoning; District 4 (Part 1 of 2)]
HEAR OUR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT CASE FIRST TONIGHT.UM, THE REASON BEING, IF THIS IS ITEM 16, IF THAT REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT IS DENIED, WE WILL HEAR IT TONIGHT AND IT'LL GO BACK INTO THE REGULAR ORDER OF THE QUEUE.
UM, IF IT'S APPROVED, IT'LL BE POSTPONED TO A DATE CERTAIN, SO THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST IS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THEY ARE REQUESTING SEPTEMBER 10TH.
UM, AS A REMINDER FOR OUR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT CASES, IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING YET.
WE ARE NOT TO DELVE INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE.
UM, THE POSTPONEMENT MUST BE WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM TODAY'S MEETING, WHICH SEPTEMBER 10TH WOULD MEET THAT.
UM, AND WE'LL JUST DIVE RIGHT INTO THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT GOING FIRST.
SO, MS. GARCIA, DO YOU HAVE ANYBODY SIGN UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT? YES, WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP IN FAVOR, ZACH FADI.
UH, ZACH, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
SO, UM, MS. GARCIA, OUR RULES FOR THE DISCUSSION, POSTPONEMENT FOR PRIMARY SPEAKER WOULD JUST BE THREE MINUTES AND THEN EVERYBODY ELSE GETS ONE MINUTE FOLLOWING.
JUST A A POINT OF PRIVILEGE, CAN WE CLARIFY WHO THE SPEAKER FOR OR AGAINST IS? I THINK THE NAME YOU CALLED WAS A, A SPEAKER SIGNED UP IN FAVOR OF THE ITEM ITSELF, NOT THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO ESSENTIALLY THIS WOULD BE THE FIR THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER AND FOR THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO OUR FIRST SPEAKER WOULD BE CAROL OWIN.
IS IT CYNTHIA OR IT'S CYNTHIA RIGHT HERE.
SHE'S A PRIMARY IN OPPOSITION.
I'M SO SORRY ABOUT THAT CHAIR.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS CYNTHIA WARRING.
CYNTHIA, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
YOU HAVE, WE'RE GETTING SOMETHING CONFUSED HERE.
I'M, CAN I JUST ASK A QUICK QUESTION, MA'AM, ARE YOU THE, UM, ARE YOU THE PRIMARY, UH, PERSON SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF A POSTPONEMENT REQUESTING POSTPONEMENT? YES.
AND MA'AM, CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME PLEASE? CAROL OWIN.
SO STAFF, YOU CAN HELP US ANNOUNCE AND THANK YOU, MA'AM.
I THINK YOU CAN START, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU CAN START, YOU'LL, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I LIVE AT 3 0 2 WEST SKYVIEW ROAD AND I'M PART OF THE SKYVIEW GROUPS AND WE ARE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TO 59, 31 AND 6,003 AND A HALF DILLARD CIRCLE TO
[00:45:01]
SEPTEMBER 10TH.UH, THE REASON FOR THAT IS, UH, HD BROWN CONSULTING, WHICH IS THE CONSULTING COMPANY FOR URBAN GENESIS, UH, HAS PROVIDED US WITH SOME RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS.
THOSE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WERE PROVIDED TO US YESTERDAY AT 4:34 PM WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THEM.
WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO GET, UH, LEGAL ADVICE ON THOSE.
SO WE ARE REQUESTING THIS EXTENSION SO WE CAN HAVE A, A BILATERAL COMMUNICATION, UH, TO WORK THROUGH THESE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS.
THAT'S OUR WHY WE'RE REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM KATHY BARTLEY.
KATHY, YOU WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE.
SO WE DON'T, WHEN SPEAKERS SIGN UP, WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO IDENTIFY IF THEY'RE SPEAKING ON DISCUSSION FOR A POSTPONEMENT.
UM, WE HAVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THE ITEM.
I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING ON THE POSTPONEMENT.
UM, FROM THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO ARE PRESENT TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON THE POSTPONEMENT, COULD YOU INDICATE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE POSTPONEMENT? MA'AM, PLEASE COME AHEAD.
UH, STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU CAN GO AHEAD.
I'M THE APPLICANT, SO I'M SPEAKING AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT, SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT ME TO WAIT.
WELL, UH, YOU WILL BE AFTER WE GO THROUGH THE, THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONEMENT.
IS ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF POSTPONEMENT? HELLO, I'M KATHY BARTLEY.
I ALSO LIVE IN SKYVIEW 2 0 8 EAST SKYVIEW ROAD.
UM, I, UH, WANT TO POSTPONEMENT AS WELL, SPEAKING FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE WANNA POSTPONEMENT FOR THE REASONS THAT CAROL MENTIONED BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET LEGAL COUNSEL.
ALRIGHT, CHAIR, IF I CAN HELP CLARIFY, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE IN THE, IN THE, FROM THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AGAINST A POSTPONEMENT BECAUSE WE JUST DID THE FORMS, SO AND SO THEN WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICANT.
MY NAME IS AMANDA BROWN WITH HT BROWN CONSULTING.
UM, WITH REGARDS TO THE POSTPONEMENT, UM, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR, UM, OVER TWO YEARS NOW.
WE HAD ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN UNDER VMU ONE.
UM, THE PROJECT DIDN'T WORK UNDER THAT, AND THEN VMU TWO CAME FORWARD, UM, AND WAS APPROVED.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT WAS BACK ALIVE AGAIN AND THEN IT WAS REVOKED.
AND NOW WITH DB 90, UM, WE'RE MOVING FORWARD AGAIN.
UM, AND SO THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN VERY LONG FOR US AND WE JUST WOULD REALLY LIKE TO MOVE, MOVE FORWARD.
I THINK ANOTHER POINT I WANNA MAKE IS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY ZONED CS VMU, UM, AND WITH THE RECENT COMPATIBILITY, UM, ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD THIS BUILDING.
IT, IT WOULD WORK UNDER THE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS OF CS, UM, VMU.
AND, UH, WE FEEL LIKE THE PROJECT WILL BE BETTER UNDER THE DB 90, BOTH FOR US AND FOR THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS AND FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
UM, BECAUSE DB 90 HAS MUCH DEEPER AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS THAN VMU DOES.
UM, AND WE JUST NEED A DIRECTION ON WHICH WAY TO GO.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT? OKAY.
UM, WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO REBUTTAL RYAN.
WELL, THERE WAS, UH, SHE SHOULD HAVE HAD REBUTT.
DO WE HAVE A QUESTION? MS. MS. CARONA? DO WE HAVE A QUESTION? SORRY, CAROL WAS HOPING TO SPEAK TO THE OR TO MAKE A REBUTTAL TO THE LAST STATE STATEMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT? NO, WE, WE CAN'T GET INTO THAT NOW.
WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS AND IF THERE'S COMMISSIONER THAT HAS A, A QUESTION THAT MIGHT BE, UH, PERTAIN.
UM, OKAY, SO IF WE'VE HEARD ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS, UM, WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS, VICE CHAIR AND THEN COMMISSIONER COX.
CAN YOU, UM, HELP US UNDERSTAND, I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT OF LIKE HAVING
[00:50:01]
GONE THROUGH A LONGER PROCESS AND THIS HAS BEEN DELAYED.IS THERE ANY CRITICAL REASON WHY A TWO WEEK POSTPONEMENT WOULD CAUSE AN ISSUE TO YOUR CLIENT? IS THERE A WAY FOR US TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF SPACE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT WORK? UM, WE HAVE ALREADY POSTPONED BY TWO WEEKS AND THEY'RE READY TO GET STARTED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
WITH REGARDS TO THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, WE DID JUST GET THAT TO THEM YESTERDAY THAT HAD TO GO UP THE CHAIN AND, AND WE GOT IT FRESH, FRESH OFF THE PRESS FROM OUR ATTORNEY.
UM, BUT THE SUBSTANCE OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE PUT IN THERE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN WELL AWARE OF FOR WEEKS AND THOSE, UM, AREN'T CHANGING AND WE'RE, WE, WE'RE NOT IN A POSITION TO NEGOTIATE ANY FURTHER WITH THEM.
UM, WE'VE ALSO, WE'VE HELD TWO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS.
WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVES AS WELL.
UM, AND I'M GONNA FORGET YOUR LAST NAME MA'AM, BUT CAROL, CAN I, CAROL
CAN I HEAR FROM YOU AS WELL? UM, JUST ON THE REQUEST.
UH, I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A TIMING ISSUE HERE.
AND AS FAR AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD BEING AWARE OF, UH, THE URBAN GENESIS PLAN.
TWO YEARS AGO THEY CAME FORWARD WITH A PLAN AND THEN IT JUST KIND OF WENT STAGNANT.
WE HAD A MEETING TWO WEEKS AGO WITH, UH, URBAN GENESIS REPRESENTATIVES AND THEN WE HAD A MEETING ABOUT, I'M GONNA SAY 30 DAYS, 45 DAYS PRIOR TO THAT.
AND THAT WE DIDN'T FIND OUT THAT THIS, UH, URBAN GENESIS WAS, UH, COMING BACK FORTH UNTIL THE DB 90 ISSUE CAME UP AND THEN THEY CAME BACK AND RESURRECTED IT.
SO TIMING WISE, WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT MUCH TIME SINCE THIS HAS BEEN RESURRECTED.
AND IF I HAVE A LITTLE BIT, THOMAS BROWN, CAN I ASK YOU TO COME UP AGAIN? IF, IF WE DO INDEED DECIDE TO NOT POSTPONE TODAY, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO COMMIT TO SAY THAT YOU WILL CONTINUE WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS THIS GOES TO COUNCIL AND MAKE SURE THAT THOSE LAST FINALIZATION OF THE COVENANT AND WHATEVER WORK NEEDS TO HAPPEN, THAT YOU WILL COMMIT TO DOING THAT WITH THE YES, ABSOLUTELY.
WE INTEND TO HAVE THE RESTRICTED COVENANT EXECUTED AROUND THE SAME TIME WE GO TO COUNCIL, SO THAT'S OUR INTENT AS WELL.
COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I GUESS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
YOU'RE TELLING US THAT THIS HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
UM, IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHAT, WHY WAS THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ONLY GIVEN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD YESTERDAY AT FOUR 30? SO THE PROJECT WAS IN ITS ORIGINAL ITERATION WAS PROPOSED UNDER THE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS.
AND SO THERE WAS NO ZONING CASE THAT WAS BEING HEARD OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
THE PROJECT JUST ENDED UP NOT WORKING OUT FINANCIALLY.
UM, THE NEGO, THE, OH, OH, SO, OKAY.
SO WHEN YOU SAY THAT THIS HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR A LONG TIME, YOU DON'T MEAN IT'S BEEN IN THE CITY PROCESS A LONG TIME, YOUR CLIENT HAS JUST BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT FOR A LONG TIME? WE DID.
WE DID HAVE A SITE PLAN ON FILE.
SO WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH CERTAIN CITY PROCESSES, BUT THERE HAS BEEN NO ZONING UNTIL THIS DB 90 APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED.
AND WERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS THAT YOU HAD, WERE THOSE AT THE REQUEST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DID Y'ALL REACH OUT? I I'M, I'M KIND OF CURIOUS HOW THAT ALL CAME ABOUT.
UM, I SENT OUT LETTERS, UM, TO EVERYBODY WITHIN 500 FEET, UM, TO GET IN CONTACT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND WE ALSO HAD SEVERAL CONTACTS FROM THE PROJECTS PREVIOUS ITERATION AS WELL.
UM, AND SO WE REACHED OUT PROACTIVELY AND THEY ALSO REQUESTED MEETINGS WITH US AS WELL.
AND WOULD YOU SAY THAT THAT COOPERATION'S BEEN RELATIVELY PRODUCTIVE AND, AND YOU KNOW, TIMELY? YES.
AND THEN JUST A QUICK QUESTION FOR THE, THE, THE PRIMARY SPEAKER, I'M SORRY I DIDN'T CATCH YOUR NAME, UH, FOR THE POSTPONEMENT.
I'M JUST CURIOUS, UM, IF YOU COULD HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU THINK NEEDS TO HAPPEN WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, WHAT WOULD YOU SPEND THESE NEXT TWO WEEKS DOING? UM, IF WE WERE TO POSTPONE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING, WE WOULD SPEND IT, UH, WITH LEGAL COUNSEL TO REVIEW THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS TO LOOK AT THE PROS AND CONS.
UM, AND OF COURSE WE WOULD NEED TIME.
WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH IT.
WE'D HAVE TO GIVE IT BACK TO HD BROWN.
THEY'D HAVE TO RUN IT UP TO FLAGPOLE, HAVE TO COME BACK TO US
AND, AND I'LL ASK YOU THE SAME QUESTION I ASKED THE APPLICANT.
DO YOU FEEL LIKE THE, THE THE WORKING WITH THIS DEVELOPER HAS BEEN PRODUCTIVE AND, AND, AND TIMELY AND, AND CONDUCIVE TO SOME SORT OF, OF MEDIATED AGREEMENT? THEY HAVE BEEN VERY RECEPTIVE TO THE, UH, SKYVIEW GROUPS, YES.
[00:55:01]
JOHNSON.UM, MS. BROWN, YOU MENTIONED A SITE PLAN HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN FILED, UH, AND YOU REFERENCED IT AT ONE POINT AS WELL, AND THE APPLICATION DID DEMONSTRATE SOME OF THE ISSUES WITH ACCESS ALONG THE DILLARD CIRCLE FRONTAGE.
UM, IS THAT SITE PLAN CURRENTLY ACTIVE UNDER REVIEW? IS THAT EXPIRED? WITHDRAWN.
SO THERE'S NO CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION UNDER PROCESS THE SITE, CORRECT.
YEAH, WE WE'RE STARTING FROM SCRATCH.
AND SO WILL THE, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, DOES THE CLIENT INTEND TO SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFER FROM THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY FILED? WE DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT.
THE ORIGINAL BUILDING IS A FIVE STORY, UH, RESIDENTIAL BUILDING.
AND THE PLAN NOW IS ALSO A FIVE STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING.
WE WENT THROUGH SEVERAL ROUNDS OF COMMENTS WITH THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN AND A LOT OF THE SITE DESIGN IS DICTATED BY STAFF REQUIREMENTS, AUSTIN WATER REQUIREMENTS, AUSTIN ENERGY REQUIREMENTS.
AND SO IN AS MUCH AS THEIR REQUIREMENTS AND PREFERENCES CHANGE WITH REGARD TO THE SITE, WE DON'T, WE DON'T REALLY KNOW.
BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE DEVELOPMENT IS VERY SIMILAR.
AND I KNOW THERE WAS ONE POSTPONEMENT ALREADY AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST FROM OUR PREVIOUS, UH, I THINK THE JULY 23RD MEETING TO TODAY.
IS THAT THE ONLY POSTPONEMENT THAT'S HAPPENED ON THIS CASE? CORRECT.
OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE A MOTION COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? OH, JUST A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
DO WE, IS THE, IS THIS A PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS POINT OR NO, THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, I WOULD MOVE TO DENY THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
YOU SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER WOOD SECONDS.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? SURE.
UM, I THINK THAT CLEARLY THE APPLICANT IS MAKING GOOD PROGRESS IN WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND UNDERSTANDING THAT ANY APPROVAL OR OR RECOMMENDATION WE MAKE TONIGHT IS NOT THE FINAL ACTION ON REZONING.
THAT THIS WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL TO BE HEARD, UH, FOR PROTESTS TO BE CONSIDERED NOTIFICATION, ALL THAT.
UM, I JUST DON'T SEE ANY REASON TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL DELAY AFTER THE, THE THREE WEEK DELAY THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PLACED, UH, WHEN THE PROCESS OF, UH, APPLICANT OR DEVELOPER AND, AND, UH, NEIGHBORS WORKING TOGETHER SEEMS TO BE GOING WELL ENOUGH.
UM, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO ME, FRANKLY, LIKE A DELAY IS NECESSARY AT THIS STAGE.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION COMMISSIONER MUELLER? UM, I WILL, AND I, I APOLOGIZE.
I SHOULD HAVE ASKED WHEN THIS IS, WHEN THIS IS SUPPOSED TO GO TO COUNCIL.
DID WE HAVE A DATE ON THAT? STAFF IS COMING UP TO HELP US OR IF SOMEBODY'S QUICK ON THE DRAW WITH BACKUP.
YES, THIS IS SET TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE 29TH OF AUGUST.
IT'S A, UH, I'LL SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.
I'M STILL, I'M STILL CONSIDERING THE MOTION.
UM, MY CONCERN IS THAT WE TRY AND ENCOURAGE OUR DEVELOPERS AND NEIGHBORHOODS TO GET THINGS WORKED OUT BEFORE IT GETS TO WHICHEVER ZONING BODY PC OR ZAP.
AND THAT WAY THE PROCESS GOES SMOOTHER.
UM, IT, IT CAN COME BACK ON ON, YOU KNOW, IDEALLY IT WOULD COME ON CONSENT IF BOTH PARTIES WERE IN AGREEMENT, BUT I FEEL LIKE IF WE TAKE THAT PROCESS AWAY AND WE BYPASS OUR STUFF AND THE PUBLIC PROCESS, I DON'T THINK WE'RE DOING THE PUBLIC A GOOD SERVICE.
THIS PROJECT IS NOT, THIS ISN'T ONE OF OUR ONES THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, WAS APPROVED UNDER DESIGNATION AND WAS COMING BACK AND FUNDING ON THE LINE, THIS, THAT, AND THE OTHER THING.
SO I, I THINK WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE THESE DIALOGUES AND CONVERSATIONS TO HAPPEN BEFORE THEY GET TO US AND THAT, SO THAT THE ONLY ONES WE'RE REALLY HAVING TO LOOK AT ARE THE ONES WHERE THEY'VE REACHED A A POINT WHERE THEY, THEY CAN NO LONGER AGREE.
AND WE HAVE TO KIND OF SETTLE BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES WHAT WE THINK IS GONNA BE, UM, THE BEST SOLUTION.
I, I'M, I TEND TO BE IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT BECAUSE THE PROCESS HASN'T HAPPENED.
ARE THERE SPEAKING FOR THE DENIAL OF THE POSTPONEMENT VICE? SURE.
UH, CHAIR, I'LL BE HONEST, I, WHEN WE STARTED THIS CONVERSATION, I WAS ACTUALLY LEANING TOWARDS, UM, POSTPONING FOR TWO WEEKS.
BUT HEARING AS THIS ITEM, WE'LL BE GOING TO COUNSEL ON THE 29TH.
IF WE POSTPONE IT TO THE 27TH, IT MAKES IT VERY HARD FOR OUR STAFF AND APPLICANT TO WORK BETWEEN THOSE.
SO I WOULD SAY AS, WHILE I'M SAYING THAT I'M SUPPORTING THIS MOTION, I HAVE A VERY STRICT TASK OF THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE'RE APPROVING IT HERE AT PLANNING COMMISSION, THAT
[01:00:01]
WE HAVE A COMMITMENT FROM YOU VERBALLY HERE THAT YOU WILL WORK WITH THEM EVEN AS THIS GOES FORWARD TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THOSE REMAINING ISSUES THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ARE RESOLVED BEFORE THIS GETS TO COUNCIL.IF WE DO INDEED HEAR THIS TODAY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I, I I WANTED TO OPPOSE THE DENIAL OF THE POSTPONEMENT, UM, FOR, FOR TWO PRIMARY REASONS.
ONE IS WHAT COMMISSIONER MUTAL WAS GETTING AT WHICH ANY OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE TO LET TO, TO, TO FACILITATE AN APPLICANT AND THEIR NEIGHBORS TO FIND A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT BEFORE WE HAVE TO VOTE ON IT.
I THINK WE SHOULD ALWAYS TAKE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT.
UM, IT'S, IT'S A WAY BETTER OUTCOME ON THESE ZONING CASES THAN US TRYING TO MEDIATE, UH, A DISPUTE BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THEIR NEIGHBORS.
THE SECOND THING IS, WHEN I HEARD THAT THE COUNCIL DATE IS AUGUST 29TH, I ACTUALLY FEEL LIKE WE WE SHOULD SUPPORT POSTPONEMENT EVEN MORE BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE SETTING THIS UP TO NOT, UH, UH, PROVIDE ENOUGH TIME FOR THIS, UH, CO TO GET NEGOTIATED AND REVIEWED BY LEGAL OF BOTH PARTIES BEFORE IT EVEN HITS COUNSEL.
AND ONCE IT HITS COUNSEL, IT'S DONE.
UH, AND SO I THINK WE SHOULD BE GIVING TIME TO, TO, TO DO THAT AND, AND ALLOW THEM TO FIND AN AGREEMENT BEFORE WE EVEN HAVE TO VOTE ON IT.
LAST TWO SPOTS FOR OR AGAINST.
THIS IS TO DENY POSTPONEMENT AND HEAR THE CASE TONIGHT.
UM, THAT WAS MOTION BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
ALL IN FAVOR, THOSE AGAINST 3, 4, 5, AND, UH, ONE ABSTAINING I BELIEVE.
UM, WE'LL BE HEARING THIS CHAIR.
OH, I WAS GONNA MAKE A SEP A MOTION TO POSTPONE, BUT IF IT FAILS, YOU CAN, YOU CAN.
UM, SO IT'S JUST TO DENY THE POSTPONEMENT FAILED.
I WAS JUST GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS TO OUR NEXT MEETING ON AUGUST 27TH.
JUST POINT OF, UH, INQUIRY, I SUPPOSE.
WHAT WAS THE, WHAT WAS THE FINAL VOTE ON THAT? COULD YOU READ THAT PLEASE? SIX TO FIVE TO ONE.
COMMISSIONER COX, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THE DATE OF OUR NEXT MEETING.
YEAH, THAT'S MY MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO AUGUST 27TH.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR POST OR YOUR MOTION? I'VE, I'VE ALREADY SPOKEN.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FOR OR AGAINST? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECOND BY CHAIR HEMPEL.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? 3, 4, 5, 6.
SIX, SIX VICE CHAIR, NO CHAIR.
I WAS JUST, UH, MAKING MOTION THAT WE HAD, UH, FOLKS WHO WERE THERE.
I WAS JUST TRYING TO POINT YOUR ATTENTION TO IT.
SO, UM, UNLESS THERE'S ANOTHER MOTION, WE'LL BE HEARING THIS CASE TONIGHT.
SORRY, I WAS JUST DOUBLE CHECKING SOME OF THE BACK FOR THIS ITEM TO SEE IF I COULD OFFER ANOTHER THAT MIGHT SATISFY EVERYBODY.
UM, AND THIS WAS OUR DISCUSSION.
POSTPONEMENT OUR ONLY RULE, IT HAS TO BE WITHIN SIX.
JUST DOUBLE CHECKING ONE THING REAL QUICK.
DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER MOTION? WELL, I'M JUST WONDERING IF, IF WE,
[01:05:01]
IF WE POSTPONE, CAN IT, CAN IT GO ON CONSENT ON THE AUGUST 27TH IF THE CO HAS BEEN FINALIZED BETWEEN THE PARTIES SO THAT IT CAN STAY ON FOR COUNSEL THE 29TH POSSIBLY.UM, WE HAVE STAFF COMING UP TO HI, CYNTHIA HADGER PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UM, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, THERE'S, THIS IS NOT A CO BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO COMMISSIONER LER, WHAT IS YOUR PROPOSAL HERE? WELL, I, I, AND I'M NOT, I, SORRY, I NEED TO UNDERSTAND, CAN I EVEN MAKE A MOTION THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD PUT IT ON CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE 27TH? OR DOES THAT DEPEND ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE ITEM? I BELIEVE THAT DEPENDS ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE ITEM.
I'M HEARING THAT WE'RE GOING TO LISTEN TO THIS CASE TONIGHT.
UM, SO THIS WILL BE ADDED BACK INTO OUR QUEUE.
UM, ALRIGHT, SO WE'RE GOING TO
[Items 5 - 7]
BEGIN OUR EVENING HERE AT PUBLIC HEARINGS WITH NUMBER FIVE, CHRISTCHURCH PLANNING.UM, DO WE HAVE, UH, MS. MEREDITH CH CHAIR, MARINE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT? ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 23 0 0 0 2 0.01 CHRIST CHURCH PLANNING.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 1 1 2 AND TWO SIX MEDINA STREET, 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 5 AND 10 10 EAST SECOND STREET AND 1 0 5 SAN MARCO STREET.
IT'S LOCATED WITHIN THE EAST CAESAR CHAVEZ NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS A CHANGE OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE, SINGLE FAMILY AND CIVIC TO MIXED USE LAND USE.
AND IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF JOHN JONATHAN TOMKO, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER SIX IS CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 2 0 2 4 DASH 0 0 1 7 IS A REZONING REQUEST OF 2 0 6 MEDINA STREET AND 1 0 1 0 EAST SECOND STREET FROM SF THREE NP TO C-S-M-U-V-C-O-N-P.
AS AMENDED BY THE APPLICANT STAFF IS OFFERING AN ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION OF L-R-M-U-V-C-O-N-P WITH CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO PROHIBIT A SERVICE STATION USE.
THE SUBJECT TRACK IS APPROXIMATELY, UH, 0.45 ACRES.
UH, THERE'S A SLIGHT TYPO IN THE, UH, STAFF REPORT.
UM, THE CASE WAS SPLIT INTO TWO BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HAVE TO HAVE TWO SEPARATE REZONING CASES IF THERE'S A STREET SEPARATING THE TWO PARCELS.
IT'S LOCATED A BLOCK NORTH OF CAESAR CHAVEZ STREET.
TO THE SOUTH IS A MEDIUM SIZED CHURCH, WHICH IS ALSO ON THE AGENDA FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.
TODAY TO THE NORTHEAST AND WEST ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.
THE TRACT IS APPROXIMATELY 950 FEET EAST OF DOWNTOWN'S IMAGINE AUSTIN CENTER AND APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET SOUTH OF THE PLAZA.
AND THERE ARE AT LEAST FIVE HISTORICAL ZONING CASES THAT HAVE BEEN INITIATED WITHIN A THIRD MILE OF THE SUBJECT TRACT, INCLUDING A STRUCTURE CONDU, UH, CONSTRUCTED IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THE, UH, SUBJECT TRACT.
WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR FIVE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASSI WITH THROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF CHRISTCHURCH OF AUSTIN.
UM, THE SUBJECT TRACKS ARE OUTLINED IN YELLOW, AS JONATHAN WAS SAYING, THEY ARE, WERE SEPARATED INTO TWO, UH, DIFFERENT ZONING CASES.
SO THE LOWER SOUTHERN TRACT IS A HALF BLOCK 0.88 ACRES.
AND THE, UM, NORTH TRACT IS, UH, PROBABLY ABOUT, IT'S NOT QUITE A WHOLE OR HALF BLOCK, BUT UM, ALMOST OVER A QUARTER OF A BLOCK AND AT 0.45 ACRES.
UM, AS JONATHAN SAID, IT'S PRETTY CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN JUST EAST OF I 35.
UM, IT'S A HALF BLOCK TO A BLOCK, UH, NORTH OF CAESAR, UH, EAST CAESAR CHAVEZ.
THIS MAP SHOWS THE PROPERTIES, UH, RELATIONSHIP TO IMAGINE AUSTIN ELEMENTS AS WELL AS EXISTING TRANSIT, UH, BOTH STOPS AND SERVICE.
UH, CAESAR CHAVEZ IS, UM, AN IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR.
UM, THE AMENDMENT WE ARE ASKING FOR IS TO CHANGE THE NORTHERN TRACT FROM OPEN SPACE TO
[01:10:01]
MIXED USE.IT WOULD CHANGE THE COLOR FROM GREEN TO BROWN, AND FOR THE SOUTHERN PIECE IT WOULD CHANGE FROM BLUE, WHICH IS CIVIC TO MIXED USE, WHICH IS BROWN.
AND THIS IS JUST, UH, A MAP SHOWING THE ADJACENT OR THE SURROUNDING ZONING IN THE AREA.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE MOST SOUTHERN, UH, ZONING TRACT IS, UH, SHARES AND ALLEYWAY WITH PROPERTIES THAT HAVE COMMERCIAL ZONING ALONG E CESAR CHAVEZ.
SO WE'RE HERE ASKING FOR A REZONING TONIGHT BECAUSE THE CHURCH HAS NEEDS FOR ADDING ADDITIONAL SPACE.
THEY ARE, UH, HAVE ALREADY RUN OUT OF SPACE.
THEY NEED SPACE FOR THEIR PARISH HOUSE FOR CLASSROOMS, UM, AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAMMING FOR BOTH THEIR ADULT AND YOUTH SERVICES.
THEY ALSO HAVE A NEED FOR ADMINISTRATION, UH, SPACE FOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICES.
ADDITIONALLY, THE UM, TRACT ON THE THE ZONING TRACT ON THE NORTH SIDE IS A DIRT PARKING LOT AND THAT IS THEIR PARKING LOT.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO FORMALIZE AND IMPROVE AND ADD SOME PARKING FOR THEIR CONGREGATION, BUT ALSO POINT OUT THAT THAT PARKING LOT CURRENTLY SERVES, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, WHEN THE CHURCH IS NOT USING IT.
SO IT'S, UM, SOMETHING THAT, UH, WOULD IMPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL AS NOT HAVING PARKING ON THE STREET.
UM, BUT IN ADDITION, THEY, UM, HAVE FUTURE PLANS FURTHER DOWN THE LINE TO INCLUDE SOME HOUSING UNITS AND HAVING SOME COMMERCIAL SPACE ON THE GROUND FLOOR, WHICH COULD INCLUDE SOMETHING ALONG COFFEE SHOP, PRESCHOOL, SOME TYPE OF COMMERCIAL USE THAT WOULD BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE CHURCH'S, UH, MISSION AND GOALS.
SO WITH THE CEOS THAT WE HAVE PRESENTED OR REQUESTED FOR BOTH TRACKS, THEY ARE THE SAME.
THEY'RE PROHIBITING, UM, THE GROUP OF USES THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU, BUT I WILL SAY THAT IS NOT EXHAUSTIVE.
THERE COULD BE SOME MORE USES THAT ARE PROHIBITED.
THOSE WERE JUST THE, THE STANDARD USES THAT, UH, WE TEND TO PROHIBIT IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS.
SO SPEAKING MORE SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE NORTHERN TRACT, THAT IS THE TRACT THAT WHERE WE WERE ORIGINALLY ASKING FOR THE DB 90 OVERLAY AND AFTER CONVERSATIONS WITH THE AC OR VEZ, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, IT CAME TO OUR AWARENESS THAT THEY HAD THE MOST CONCERN ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF THAT PARTICULAR ASPECT OF THIS PROJECT, UM, BECAUSE THERE IS SINGLE FAMILY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ALLEYWAY.
UM, SO WE, UH, THE CHURCH TOOK ALL THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AND FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE AND RIGHT TO MODIFY THE REZONING REQUEST FOR THAT PARTICULAR TRACT.
WE MODIFIED TO C-S-M-U-V, UM, THAT WOULD STILL ALLOW FOR HOUSING.
UM, IT WOULD STILL ALLOW FOR SOME RELAXATIONS, UM, FOR DEVELOPMENT, BUT WOULD COMPLY WITH COMPATIBILITY.
UM, AND IT WOULD CAUSE FOR A STEP DOWN IN BUILDING HEIGHT TOWARDS THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES THAT ARE TO THE NORTH OF THE ALLEYWAY.
UM, THIS TABLE HERE IS JUST PROVIDING SOME, UM, COMPARISONS BETWEEN STAFF'S, UH, BASE ZONING RECOMMENDATION OF LR.
OUR ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS FOR CSMU.
UM, I LEFT THE MU OFF OF THERE.
AND THEN THE REQUEST THAT WE HAVE FOR C-S-M-U-V AND UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, C-S-M-U-V IS GOING TO KEEP THE HEIGHT AT 60 FEET, UH, ALLOW FOR WHAT WE SEE AS A POTENTIAL OF A HUNDRED UNITS.
IT WOULD SUPPORT STRUCTURED PARKING.
UM, AND WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WHILE WE ARE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THEIR, UM, SUPPORT FOR THE V IT DOESN'T GET US THE AMOUNT OF, UM, V WITH LR STILL RESTRICTS THE HEIGHT TO 40 FEET, WHICH WOULD END UP RESULTING IN A SUBURBAN STYLE DEVELOPMENT.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET STRUCTURED PARKING WITH A THREE STORY, UM, BUILDING.
UM, BUT IN ADDITION THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE CHURCH IS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DELIVER ON THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS RIGHT AWAY.
AND SO THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ANY OF THE RELAXATIONS IS WITH THE UM, WELL, I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT.
I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS LAUREN MALANI.
SHE'S SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION AND JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
LAUREN, PLEASE PRESS SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
FOR THIS ITEM, DO YOU WANNA SEE IF, UM, OUR VIRTUAL SPEAKER MAY ASK HER TO JOIN AGAIN OR IS SHE NOT ON THE QUEUE? IT LOOKS LIKE SHE HASN'T BEEN IN THE QUEUE FOR A WHILE.
UM, MS. HASI, IF YOU WANTED IN REBUTTAL TIME,
[01:15:03]
I HAVE A QUESTION.CAN I SHOW Y'ALL ONE SLIDE DURING MY REBUTTAL THAT I DIDN'T GET TO COVER? OKAY.
IF YOU CAN FAST FORWARD TO THIS SLIDE.
SO THIS, THIS IS A RENDERING THAT WE WERE ABLE TO PRODUCE THAT UM, BASICALLY SHOWS THE STEP DOWN AND HEIGHT TOWARDS THE SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, THE AREAS THAT YOU SEE THAT ARE IN GREEN ARE EITHER CURRENTLY ENTITLED TO ACHIEVE 60 FEET OR, UM, AS WE'RE ASKING FOR 60 FEET ON THE CHURCH PROPERTY.
UM, FAST FORWARD ANOTHER SLIDE AND THEN THIS IS JUST, UH, BLOWING UP THAT PROFILE VIEW OF THE STREET.
SO, UM, WITH DB 90 ALLOWING, WHILE IT ALLOWS UP TO 90 FEET REALISTICALLY, YOU'RE GOING TO GET A BUILDING THAT'S AT ABOUT 75 FEET.
UM, AND THEN THIS, UM, GOING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF EAST SECOND STREET, YOU GET 60 FEET THAT THEN BUMPS DOWN TO 40 FEET AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE SINGLE FAMILY, UM, TO THE NORTH.
AND THEN THE IMAGE BELOW IS JUST A REAL LIFE IMAGE ACTUALLY TAKEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT SHOWS AN ALLEYWAY SEPARATING A THREE STORY, UM, 40 FOOT BUILDING FROM SINGLE TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY ON THE OTHER SIDE.
I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS.
SO IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING A MOTION AND SECOND BY, UH, COMM MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER UH JOHNSON AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, WE'LL CONSIDER THAT MOTION PASSED PAST.
ALRIGHT, WE'LL GO TO OUR SPEAKERS.
UH, SORRY, OUR, UH, COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON AND THEN COMMISSIONER COX.
YEAH, JUST A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UH, MS. SASI, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WHAT IT IS YOU ARE REQUESTING TODAY.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR C-S-M-U-V ON BOTH TRACKS, IS THAT CORRECT? SO TODAY, UM, WE WERE ASKING FOR CS DB 90, NP, CO NP FOR BOTH TRACKS.
UM, BUT WE MODIFIED THE NORTHERN TRACT, UM, TO REMOVE THE DB 90 OVERLAY AND INCLUDE THE V BECAUSE V DOES COMPLY WITH COMPATIBILITY.
AND THAT WAS A WAY THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERNS FOR, UM, HEIGHT TOO MUCH HEIGHT.
SO THE SOUTHERN TRACT IS THE REQUEST IS STILL DB 90? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
AND THE NORTHERN TRACT IS JUST V OKAY.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I WAS, I WAS HOPING TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AGAIN 'CAUSE I WAS, I WAS ALSO CONFUSED.
UH, YOU PRESENTED A SLIDE SAYING 75 FEET ON THE SOUTHERN TRACT, BUT, BUT THEN YOU JUST SAID THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING DB 90.
SO, UM, WHILE WE KNOW, AND AS THE NAME STATES DB 90 ALLOWS UP TO 90 FEET, UM, REALISTICALLY WHAT WE ARE HEARING, UM, FROM CLIENTS IS THAT, UM, DB 90 IS ACTUALLY GONNA END UP RESULTING MOSTLY IN 75 80 FOOT TALL BUILDINGS JUST BECAUSE THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION DOESN'T PENCIL OUT FOR ONE ADDITIONAL FLOOR.
THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION TO GO OVER 75 FEET IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE.
UM, SO WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM OUR CLIENTS THROWER DESIGN IS NOT DEVELOPERS, BUT WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM OUR CLIENTS IS THAT, UM, DB 90 IS ACTUALLY GONNA PRODUCE 75 FOOT BUILDINGS, BUT IN ADDITION, THE CHURCH REALLY DOESN'T HAVE A DESIRE TO GO A FULL 90 FEET.
UM, THEY, THEY'RE FINE WITH 75 FEET, BUT WE CAN'T, UM, CO A DB 90 CASE FOR HEIGHT.
IT'S, THAT'S INTERESTING YOU, YOU'RE HEARING FROM CLIENTS ABOUT THAT.
I'M HEARING FROM A BUNCH OF RESIDENTS THAT ARE REALIZING WHAT DB 90 IS AND ARE HATING IT.
UM, SO WE SEEM TO BE RUNNING INTO DB 90 ISSUES FROM ALL ANGLES.
UH, UH, I GUESS QUESTION FOR STAFF AND I DON'T KNOW, UH, IF A TXN IS SEEING THE, THE CAMERA, UH, IS LIKE CONSTANTLY TRYING TO AUTO FOCUS.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN FIX THAT FOCUS, BUT FOR STAFF, I WAS HOPING YOU COULD HELP US UNDERSTAND TWO THINGS.
UH, CAN YOU CONFIRM AGAIN TO ME THAT WE CANNOT PUT ANY HEIGHT LIMITATION ON DB 90 IF WE WERE TO TRY TO PURSUE DB 90? AND THEN ALSO CAN YOU JUST HELP US UNDERSTAND KIND OF THE COMPROMISE THAT YOU WERE TRYING TO FIND WITH, WITH YOUR RECOMMENDED ZONING CATEGORY? YES, UH, I, UH, AS FAR AS THE CON UM, RESTRICTION ON THE HEIGHT ON DV 90, YOU CANNOT, UH, RESTRICT THAT HEIGHT.
SO THAT'S THE ANSWER TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION.
UH, THE SECOND IS, UM, THE COMPROMISE THAT STAFF WAS REALLY TRYING TO PURSUE IS THAT THEY FELT THAT, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS KIND OF A POCKET NEIGHBORHOOD OF A LOT OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
A LOT OF THEM HISTORIC, A LOT OF THEM STILL BEING USED AS RESIDENTIAL.
[01:20:01]
THE, THE, THAT LITTLE POCKET NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S ABOUT A BLOCK AND A HALF OR TWO BLOCKS, UM, FROM NORTH TO SOUTH AND ABOUT SEVEN OR EIGHT BLOCKS FROM EAST TO WEST DOESN'T REALLY FIT IN THE SURROUNDING AREAS.IT'S NOT REALLY PART OF DOWNTOWN, IT'S NOT REALLY PART OF PLAZA SALTILLO, IT'S NOT REALLY PART OF THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR THAT'S THERE ON CAESAR CHAVEZ.
AND SO OPENING THE DOOR TO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AND THAT INTENSE OF A LEVEL OF ZONING COULD SET A PRECEDENT FOR NON CHURCHES OR OTHER PROPERTIES WITHIN THAT AREA TO, UH, SEEK HIGHER ZONING AND COULD HAVE SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS ON THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IN TERMS OF ITS SINGLE FAMILY USE AND A LOT OF THOSE HISTORIC STRUCTURES THAT ARE THERE THAT IDENTIFIED, UH, IN THE STAFF REPORTS.
AND, AND JUST TO CONFIRM THAT THE ZONING CATEGORIES THAT, THAT, THAT STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED COMPATIBILITY WOULD APPLY THE DB 90, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO COMPATIBILITY TO THE SF ZONE PROPERTIES THAT ARE NEXT DOOR? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THE LR, UH, M-U-V-C-O-N-P IS THE RECOMMENDATION.
SO WITH THE V IT WOULD STILL INCENTIVIZE, UH, AFFORDABILITY, WHICH WAS SOMETHING THAT STAFF WANTED TO, UM, BE CLEAR ABOUT IN TERMS OF, UM, KIND OF MEETING THE APPLICANT, UH, SOMEWHAT BETWEEN THE DB 90 REQUEST AND SOMETHING A LITTLE LESS INTENSE.
THAT WAS, UH, TYPICALLY, UH, A, A ZONING RECOMMENDATION THAT STAFF HAS FOR CHURCHES IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS IN OTHER CASES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR APPLICANT.
SO, UM, ABOUT THE, THE HOUSING THAT YOU MENTIONED THE CHURCH WAS INTERESTED IN, IN BUILDING OR PARTICIPATING IN, DO YOU HAVE ANY SENSE FOR THE TIMING OF WHEN THAT WOULD HAPPEN AND THEN WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE LIKE FOR THE HOUSING TO HAPPEN? WOULD THE CHURCH SEEK A A, A PARTNER TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN? OR DO THEY HAVE THE EXPERTISE WITH THEIR PARISHIONERS? YEAH, SO, UM, THEY, THE HOUSING ASPECT OF THEIR, THEIR LONG IS A LONG TERM GOAL FOR THEM.
THEIR IMMEDIATE GOALS ARE TO CREATE MORE SPACE FOR THEIR CONGREGATION.
UM, AND HOUSING IS, IS MUCH FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD.
THEY REALLY WANT TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE LAND THAT THEY HAVE AND THEY WANNA BE ABLE TO INCLUDE SOME HOUSING THAT WOULD HAVE INCOME RESTRICTIONS.
UM, THEY UNDERSTAND THE SITUATIONS THAT, UH, A LOT OF EAST AUSTIN AND, AND OTHER PARTS OF AUSTIN ARE FACING TOO.
UM, AND SO THAT IS VERY LONG TERM.
I WOULD, I WOULD SAY IT'S PROBABLY SOMEWHERE AT LEAST FIVE TO 10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, UM, THEIR MORE IMMEDIATE PLANS ARE PROBABLY CLOSER TO THREE YEARS, UH, THREE TO FIVE YEARS BEFORE THEY CAN, UM, MOVE ON THOSE.
AND WHAT, UM, OF THE PROPERTIES, WHAT WOULD MOVE FORWARD INITIALLY IS THAT THE COFFEE SHOP AND THE, THE PARKING OR, UM, THEY HAVEN'T LOOKED AT HOW THIS PROPERTY AND THIS PROJECT WILL BE PHASED OUT.
I MEAN, CURRENTLY, UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF, OF DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CURRENT, THE, THE TRACK TO THE SOUTH HAS THEIR SANCTUARY BUILDING ON IT AND THEY JUST DID A RENOVATION ON IT A FEW YEARS AGO.
UM, AND SO THEY'RE LOOKING AT HOW CAN, HOW CAN THEY BEST PLAN BOTH TRACKS WITH THE NEEDS THAT THEY HAVE AND THEN BEING FORWARD THINKING.
SO THERE'S A LOT TO CONSIDER AT THIS TIME.
UM, THEIR CURRENT NEEDS DON'T NECESSARILY INCLUDE COMMERCIAL SPACE RIGHT NOW.
IT INCLUDES SPACE FOR THE CHURCH IN TERMS OF LIKE CLASSROOMS AND ADMINISTRATION OFFICES, WHICH IS WHY, UM, IT'S PROBLEMATIC, UM, IN TERMS OF WHILE STAFF WAS ALLOWING FOR THE V UM, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY HAVE TO START SOME OF THIS WITHOUT DOING ANY HOUSING COMPONENT AND THAT'S GOING TO BE PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR STRUCTURED PARKING.
UM, AND ONE OF MY LAST QUESTIONS FOR YOU IS, UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CHURCH PLANS TO BE THERE, THEY'VE RECENTLY DONE RENOVATIONS AND THEY'RE NOT LOOKING TO SELL AND, AND MOVE ELSEWHERE TO EXPAND THEIR ABSOLUTELY.
I DO HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CHURCH HERE TONIGHT IF, IF YOU WOULD WANT TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS, BUT THEY DO PLAN TO STAY IN THE COMMUNITY.
UM, AND THEN I THINK IF I HAVE TIME, I'VE GOT, OH, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH TIME, UH, MR. TOMKO WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND WHAT APPLICANT BRINGS UP AS A POTENTIAL ISSUE.
UM, DID, DID YOU TALK ABOUT THAT DURING THE PROCESS? HOW DO WE RESOLVE THAT WITH WHAT, WHAT STAFF WANTS, BUT THE PHASING OF IT? WELL, UH,
[01:25:01]
THERE'S A NUMBER OF STAFF THAT WEIGH IN ON THE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.IT'S NOT A SINGLE PERSON THAT, UH, MAKES THAT DECISION.
AND I THINK THE, UH, CONCERN ABOUT THE PRECEDENT THAT THIS COULD SET FOR THAT LARGER AREA WAS REALLY WHAT WAS RESONATING THE MOST.
UM, AND A PLANNING COMMISSION IS OPEN TO MAKING WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION THEY DEEM, UH, ACCEPTABLE.
BUT, UH, STAFF DID NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH MAKING A RECOMMENDATION FOR ANYTHING OF GREATER INTENSITY AT THIS SITE AT THIS TIME.
GIVEN ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED.
THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS, MR. HAYES.
UH, MR. CH OH, GOTTA GET SOME MORE STEPS IN JONATHAN.
UM, AND I'M JUST, UH, I, I, I TRIED TO HEAR MS. MS. HASSI AS, AS SHE WAS LAYING THINGS OUT THERE.
UM, GOTTA TELL YOU, I'M, I'M, I'M TORN ON THIS ONE.
I'M A, I'M A MEMBER OF A CHURCH IN, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M, I'M ON THE TRUSTEES, UH, WE'RE THE TRIANGLE CHURCH AND, UM, WE'RE ALWAYS FIGHTING FOR, FOR SPACE AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAD TO BUY THE HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET.
AND, UM, SO WE'RE ALWAYS STRUGGLING FOR SPACE, ALWAYS STRUGGLING FOR, UM, SPACE FOR OUR STAFF AND OUR CONGREGANTS.
UH, BUT A, A, A QUESTION THAT, THAT ARISES AND, YOU KNOW, I'M STILL TRYING, I'M NOT THE NEW GUY, BUT I'M STILL TRYING, I'M THE, I'M THE, I'M THE GUY WHO'S STILL TRYING TO LEARN ALL THESE MUV COS.
SO IF WE GRANT WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTS AND THEY'RE LOOKING FOR SPACE FOR THEIR CONGREGANTS, SO MORE SANCTUARY, MORE ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDINGS, CLASSROOMS FOR SUNDAY SCHOOLS, ALL THOSE ARE GREAT THINGS BY THE WAY.
UM, H HOW DO THEY FIT THAT IN, INTO THE MUVO? AREN'T, AREN'T THOSE DESIGNED FOR RESIDENTIAL? UH, NO.
SO I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE DIFFERENT THINGS.
THEY'RE TRYING TO, UH, ALSO CONFIGURE PARKING.
'CAUSE THEY CURRENTLY HAVE ALMOST A FULL BLOCK THERE AS WAS INDICATED IN THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S AN INTEREST FROM WHAT I HEARD, UH, FOR STRUCTURED PARKING.
SO THERE WOULD BE SOME LIMITATIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY COULD DO WITH THAT, WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
UM, BUT ALL THE USES IN TERMS OF CLASSROOMS AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE ZONING RECOMMENDATION.
IT'S JUST THE HEIGHT THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT.
NO, THE ZONING RECOMMENDATION.
YOUR, YOU'RE, YOU'RE RECOMMENDATION.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE ZONING RECOMMENDATION THEY'RE SEEKING? SO THEY'RE SEEKING CS, BUT THEY'RE RESTRICTING MANY OF THE USES THAT YOU SAW THERE.
UM, SO THERE MAY BE A FEW USES THAT THERE'S NOT OVERLAP IN TERMS OF WHAT THEIR REQUEST IS VERSUS WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.
UM, YOU COULD CERTAINLY REVISE THOSE BY, UH, I THINK THE APPLICANT HAD MENTIONED, UH, OFFERING A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT RESTRICTS MORE OF THOSE USES THAT MIGHT BE ALLOWED IN CS THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED IN LR.
SO THAT'S REALLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? MAYOR.
STELLAR GONNA GET YOUR STEPS, SIR.
THESE DON'T LOOK LIKE CORRIDOR STREETS TO ME, BUT I'D, I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT STAFF LOOKED AT AND WHAT THEY THOUGHT.
WELL, SO THE PROXIMITY TO THE IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH IS A, IS A CONSIDERATION.
BUT THERE, THOSE ARE NARROWER STREETS AND IT'S A TRADITIONALLY HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S IMMEDIATELY THERE TO THE NORTH.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT FLAG STAFF'S ATTENTION IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHILE THERE IS MUCH MORE DENSITY TO THE WEST IN DOWNTOWN AND MUCH MORE DENSITY AROUND THE TOD STATION AREA TO THE NORTH AND A LOT MORE COMMERCIAL, UH, DENSITY ALONG, UM, CAESAR CHAVEZ, AND I THINK THAT'S WHY YOU SEE A LOT OF THE ALLEYS AND ACCESSWAY THERE WITH THOSE BUILDINGS.
UM, I THINK THERE WAS, BUT TO BE CLEAR, THE STREETS AROUND THIS, THESE PARTICULAR PROPERTIES, THESE ARE NOT CORRIDOR STREETS.
THEY ARE, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
UM, I, I, I THINK THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS? BYE, CHAIR.
NO, WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO GO ANYWHERE.
UM, I I THINK YOU'VE PRETTY MUCH ANSWERED THIS QUESTION ALREADY FOR COMMISSIONER HAYNES, BUT JUST TO CONFIRM, UM, BY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, EVERYTHING THAT THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO DO WITHIN THIS, THE, THE LOTS THE THER USES WOULD COVER THAT, RIGHT? SOR WOULD, YES.
TYPICALLY WHEN A CHURCH IS KIND
[01:30:01]
OF RUNNING OUT OF SPACE AND SEEKING FOR A REZONING, ANR USE IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS, NOT A CS USE.AND EVEN WITH ALL THE ACCESSORY USES THEY'RE ENVISIONING, THEY WOULD BE COVERED UNDER THER.
UH, I BELIEVE IT, IT WOULD RECOMMEND, IT WOULD ALLOW THEM ADEQUATE ROOM TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SPACE FOR THEIR CONGREGATION IN THE SHORT TERM, LIKE THEY MENTIONED, MAYBE NOT BILL AS HIGH AS THEY WOULD WANT IN HOUSING, UM, BUT, UH, CERTAINLY ACCOMMODATE THE COM, THE CONGREGATION.
MS. HASI, CAN I HAVE, UM, HEAR FROM YOU FOR A SECOND? UM, I KNOW YOU ALREADY SAID THIS, BUT IF WE WERE TO LIMIT THE USES, IF WE WERE TO GO WITH THE APPLICANT RECOMMENDATION, YOUR CLIENT'S RECOMMENDATION, UM, AND THEN WE LIMITED THE USES TO WHAT ARE WITHIN LR, IS THERE ANY CONCERN THAT Y'ALL HAVE? ARE THERE CERTAIN USES THAT Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO KEEP FROM THE CS USE LIST? WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERN.
AND THEN I, I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A REPRESENTATIVE HERE, UM, ON BEHALF OF YOUR CLIENT, AND I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM THEM AS WELL.
IF YOU CAN JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND SHARE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SORT OF THE WAY THAT THE CHURCH IS ENVISIONING GOING INTO THIS SPACE AND WHAT ARE YOUR THINKING ABOUT? YES.
I'M REPRESENTING THE BOARD AND THE STAFF OF CHRISTCHURCH OF AUSTIN.
UH, THE REASON OUR IMMEDIATE NEED IS FOR ADULT EDUCATION, CHILDHOOD EDUCATION.
WE WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS WITH OUR PARKING SITUATION.
WE KNOW ON SUNDAYS THAT THAT CAN BE A PROBLEM FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND THEN OFFICE SPACE IN THE SHORT TERM.
WE DO KNOW THAT IF WE'RE BUILDING OUT SUNDAY SCHOOL CLASSROOMS, THEY'D BE OPEN DURING THE WEEK.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY PRESCHOOL SPACE OR A MONTESSORI DURING THE WEEK.
UM, AS WE'VE, UH, FOUND THIS SPACE, IT'S BEEN REALLY IMPORTANT TO US, THE HISTORY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND MOVING IN AND REALLY STEADILY INTO THIS SPACE.
AND SO THAT HAS BEEN, UM, UH, JUST A HUGE FIND AND SOMETHING THAT WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT AND PLAN TO STAY IN THAT SPACE AND NOT GET VERY BIG.
OUR MODEL IS THAT WE PLANT CHURCHES INSTEAD OF GROW.
WE DON'T PLAN TO BE A MEGA CHURCH.
UM, SO INITIALLY WE DON'T HAVE THE CASH TO DO ANYTHING AT THE MOMENT.
SO IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS, WE WOULD HOPEFULLY BE ABLE TO START TO BUILD SOMETHING IN THAT PARKING LOT ACROSS THE STREET.
WE PLAN TO STAY AND YEAH, AND WE PLAN TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS.
WE TRIED TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS.
WE'VE, UM, RESURRECTED A HISTORIC, UM, MOSAIC FROM PREMIER GLACIA BAUTISTA THAT USED TO MEET AT THAT SITE.
AND WE ARE REDESIGNING OUR BACKYARD AND PLANNING TO OFFER THE PICKLEBALL COURT AND THE PLAYGROUND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS PART OF THAT.
SO WE REALLY WANT TO BE PART OF THAT COMMUNITY.
WE HAVE TWO MORE SPOTS FOR QUESTIONS, IF ANY OTHERS, OTHERWISE I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
MR. JOHNSON, I'LL MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE ALREADY DO THAT? WE WE DID THAT.
I WILL MOVE, UH, THE APPLICANT REQUEST.
SO THAT'S CS DB 90 ON THE SOUTH TRACK AND CSV ON THE NORTH TRACK.
LET ME, WHAT THE OTHER, CAN I READ IT OFF? I'LL CLARIFY PLEASE.
YOU JUST TO MAKE SURE
THAT IS FOR THE SOUTH TRACK C-S-M-U-V-C-O-N-P AS AMENDED FOR THE NORTH TRACT.
AND TO CLARIFY, YOU ARE ALSO CONCLUDING THE MPA IN YOUR MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? UM, I THINK IT'S IN MY MIND PRETTY CLEAR WHY ONE WOULD SUPPORT THIS.
UM, WHILE I RESPECT STAFFS, UH, OPINIONS ON WHETHER, UH, A 90 FOOT ENTITLEMENT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THAT SPECIFIC SPOT, I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN VERY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT, UH, STAGGERING ENTITLEMENTS FROM THE AREA THAT IS CLOSER TO THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR TOWARDS THE SORT OF CENTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANYTHING FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH A 60 FOOT TALL OR FIVE STORY BUILDING IN A DYNAMIC THRIVING MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS, YOU KNOW, LITERALLY STEPS FROM DOWNTOWN.
UM, IT'S INCREDIBLY WELL CONNECTED, HAS GREAT ACCESS TO TRANSIT, UH, IF YOU EVEN NEED TO USE IT WHEN YOU'RE IN SUCH A RICHLY WALKABLE AND BIKEABLE AREA WITH AMENITIES SURROUNDING YOU.
UM, IF THERE IS ANYWHERE IN THE CITY THAT WE SHOULD BE ALLOWING MORE DENSITY AS OPPOSED TO LESS AT EVERY CHANCE IT'S HERE.
AND WHAT IS FUNCTIONALLY A A PART OF THE CENTRAL CORE OF OUR CITY.
ALL RIGHT, THOUGH, SPEAKING AGAINST, UH, COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I, I'M, I'M, UH, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I, I WANT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION OF STAFF.
[01:35:01]
THINK THE LAST ONE OR TWO MEETINGS, I, UH, I, I HAD POINTEDLY ASKED THEM IF THERE WAS A DB 90 CASE THAT THEY WOULDN'T SUPPORT.UM, AND, UH, THEY CAME WITH US TODAY WITH ONE THAT THEY WOULD NOT SUPPORT.
UM, AND I THINK, I THINK THE REASONS THAT THEY GAVE US AND THE REASONS THAT THE APPLICANT GAVE US, UH, AS FAR AS BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS AND, AND NOT DOING DB 90 ON THE NORTH TRACK AND, AND KIND OF IMPLYING THAT THEY'RE NOT REALLY GONNA DO DB 90 ON THE SOUTH TRACK, UM, IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD REALLY BE THINKING ABOUT.
WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT DB 90, UH, BECAUSE I THINK EVERY SINGLE CASE OF DB 90 THAT THIS COMMISSION APPROVES IS ACTUALLY GROWING THE OPPOSITION TO DB 90.
UM, AND THIS IS, THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THAT AS WELL.
UH, AND SO I, I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY BE CHALLENGES IF THEY DON'T HAVE DB 90 ON THE, ON THE SOUTH TRACK.
UM, BUT I THINK, I THINK IT'S JUST COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY INAPPROPRIATE IN THIS PARTICULAR PART OF AUSTIN, IN THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD TO GO FROM ESSENTIALLY, UH, THE, THE, THE ENTITLEMENT THAT'S THERE NOW THAT IS, THAT IS EXISTING USE THAT HAS BEEN THERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME, THAT IS CONTINUING TO SUPPORT A VIBRANT AND THRIVING COMMUNITY TO BASICALLY JUST BLOWING THAT UP WITH MAX ENTITLEMENT UNDER A DB 90 ZONING CASE.
AND EVEN THOUGH THIS APPLICANT'S TELLING US THAT THEY MAY NOT ACTUALLY UTILIZE ALL OF THOSE ENTITLEMENTS FOR THEIR PLANS, WE SHOULD NOT BE APPROVING ZONING BASED ON WHAT AN APPLICANT IS JUST THINKING ABOUT DOING IN THE FUTURE.
WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT THIS FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE.
UM, IT, I HOPE THE CHURCH THRIVES THERE.
I WANT IT TO THRIVE THERE, BUT ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU GRANT MAX ENTITLEMENTS ON A PROPERTY THAT REALLY SHOULDN'T HAVE IT.
SO I, I VERY MUCH OPPOSE THIS.
UH, AND I WISH WE WOULD, WE WOULD RECONSIDER OR PROVIDE A BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY TO, UH, TO THESE DB 90 CASES.
VICE CHAIR, CHAIR WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A, UM, AN AMENDMENT TO THIS MOTION.
UM, MY AMENDMENT WOULD, UM, STICK WITH THE, UM, ZONING AS REQUESTED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, BUT IT WOULD LIMIT A NUMBER OF USES WITHIN THE CS CATEGORY.
AND IF FOLKS WANT ME TO READ IT OUT, I CAN READ THEM OUT.
BUT LET ME EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN.
THAT WOULD MEAN WE WOULD BE LIMITING OR MAKING CONDITIONAL ALL THOSE USES, UH, TO MATCH WHAT IS UNDER LR.
UM, SHORT OF CERTAIN USES, WHICH I KNOW OUR STAFF HAS INDICATED THAT WE, UH, BY FEDERAL GUIDELINES AND LAWS WE SHOULD NOT BE, UM, TOUCHING.
SO THAT INCLUDES THINGS LIKE GROUP HOMES, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, FAMILY HOME AND TELECOM TOWER.
UM, APART FROM THOSE, WE WOULD BE LIMITING THE OTHER USES TO WHAT WOULD BE WITHIN THE LR.
SO THIS WOULD EXPAND THE LIST THAT ALREADY THE CLIENT HAS, UM, LISTED.
WHY DON'T YOU GO AHEAD AND READ WE CHEAT SHEET? SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY QUESTION.
WHICH OF THE CASES WOULD THIS APPLY TO? THIS WOULD APPLY TO BOTH OF THEM.
UM, AND SO THIS WOULD BE, I'LL READ IT OUT.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A WOOZY HERE SO PEOPLE FOLLOW ALONG.
UM, HOSPITAL SERVICE LIMITED WOULD BECOME, UH, CONDITIONAL HOSPITAL SERVICES GENERAL WOULD BECOME PROHIBITED.
MAINTENANCE AND SERVICE FACILITIES, PRIVATE TRANSPORTATION, TERMINAL ADULT ORIENTED BUSINESSES, AGRICULTURAL SALES AND SERVICES, AUTOMOTIVE RENTALS, AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR SERVICES, AUTOMOTIVE SALES, AUTOMOTIVE WASHING, IF ANY TYPE BILL BOND SERVICES, BUILDING MAINTENANCE SERVICES, BUSINESS OR TRADE SCHOOL BUSINESS SUPPORT SERVICES, CAMP CROWD, COMMERCIAL BLOOD PLASMA CENTER, COMMERCIAL, OFF STREET PARKING, COMMUNICATION SERVICES, CONSTRUCTION, SALES AND SERVICES, CONVENIENCE STORAGE, DROP OFF RECYCLING, COLLECTION FACILITIES, ELECTRONIC PROTOTYPE ASSEMBLY, ELECTRONIC TESTING, EMPLOYEE RECREATION, EQUIPMENT REPAIR SERVICES, EQUIPMENT SALES, EXTERMINATING SERVICES, FOOD PREPARATION, UM, FINANCIAL SERVICES.
UM, THESE WOULD ALL BE PROHIBITED.
GENERAL RETAIL, SALES GENERAL, UM, WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR NOT EXCEEDING 5,000 SQUARE FOOT OF GROSS FLOOR SPACE.
SO MATCHING LR, UM, HOTEL MOTEL, UM, WOULD ALSO NOT BE, UM, ESSENTIALLY WOULD BE PROHIBITED AS WELL.
INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT, UM, INDOOR SPORTS AND RECREATION KENNEL'S, LAUNDRY SERVICES, MEDICAL OFFICES EXCEEDING 5,000 SQUARE FOOT WOULD BECOME CONDITIONAL AND MON MONUMENT RETAIL SALES WOULD ALSO BECOME PROHIBITED.
OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT, OUTDOOR SPORTS AND RECREATION.
PAWN SHOP SERVICES, UM, THEATER VEHICLE STORAGE, VETERAN AIR SERVICES, THESE WOULD ALL BE PROHIBITED.
AND THEN PERSONAL IMPROVEMENT SERVICES NOT EXCEEDING 5,000 SQUARE FOOT WOULD BE ALLOWED.
UM, BEYOND THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.
PLANT NURSERY WOULD BECOME CONDITIONAL AND RESTAURANT GENERAL NOT EXCEEDING 5,000 SQUARE FOOT WOULD BE ALLOWED.
[01:40:01]
THE ONLY THING, IN ADDITION, THE THINGS THAT I HAVEN'T TOUCHED ARE, AS I MENTIONED, WAS THE GROUP HOME, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, TELECOM, AND FUNERAL SERVICES ON THE CS LIST.I LEFT IN PARTIALLY BECAUSE I WAS JUST CONFUSED.
I WOULD ASSUME THEY MIGHT NEED FUNERAL SERVICES.
I, SORRY, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
UM, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR AMENDMENT? UM, SURE.
I, I THINK, UM, I, UM, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO SORT OF BALANCE THE DIFFERENT SORT OF REQUIREMENTS THAT WE'VE HAD.
ESSENTIALLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO HERE IS I THINK HEARING FROM, UM, THE CLIENT AND THE CHURCH HERE, THE KIND OF VISION THAT THEY HAVE FROM THE WORK THEY WANT TO DO, WE WANT TO GIVE THEM THE MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY TO DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO FOR THEIR CONGREGATION AND FOR THEIR SERVICE.
AND I THINK THEY'RE REALLY PROVING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEIR MODEL AS A FAITH-BASED COMMUNITY IS VERY MUCH BASED ON SERVICE AND ENGAGING WITH THE COMMUNITY AND ENGAGING WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS.
AND I THINK I WANNA ENCOURAGE THAT AND KEEP THAT.
BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN THAT WITH CS USES, WHILE IT ALLOWS THOSE DIFFERENT PIECES THAT WE WANT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL, THE CERTAIN USES PERHAPS DO NOT MAKE SENSE WITHIN A NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO MATCHING IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CHURCH CAN DO THE WORK THAT IT WANTS TO DO AND ITS, UH, ENVISIONS TO DO IN THE FUTURE, BUT ALSO WE LIMIT THOSE USES THAT MIGHT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND IT.
WE WANNA LIMIT THOSE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT MY MOTION IS TRYING TO DO HERE, IF IT PASSES ATTACHED TO, UM, THE BASE MOTION.
ANYBODY ELSE? NO, SORRY, I WAS JUST ASKING A QUESTION.
UH, CLARIFYING THOUGHT WE LOST SOUND.
SO, UH, ANY, UH, COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT, MR. ELL? YEAH, AND I, I, I, I DO APPRECIATE WHAT IS BEING OFFERED HERE.
UM, UH, AND I DO APPRECIATE THE ROLE OF, OF FAITH IN OUR COMMUNITIES.
HOWEVER, I ALSO APPRECIATE THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.
AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SOMETHING WORK BECAUSE WE LIKE THE INTENDED USE.
AND I, I THINK THAT'S PROBLEMATIC.
UM, SO I THINK WE OUGHT TO KEEP THE SEPARATION HERE BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE.
AND THE OTHER THING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, IDEALLY WE HAD D BMU AND DB 90 AND THESE THINGS TO HELP CREATE, UM, HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND THE DESIRABLE OUTCOMES WE WANTED, BUT THESE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE CONCENTRATED ON THE CORRIDORS, AND WE HEARD FROM STAFF THAT THESE ARE VERY LOW LEVEL FUNCTIONING STREETS.
SO I, I REALLY THINK THAT, THAT WHILE THERE MAY BE AN EMOTIONAL REASON FOR WANT TO APPROVE, FUNDAMENTALLY, WE NEED TO NOT DO THAT.
STAFF GOT IT RIGHT FROM A DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVE, AND I APPRECIATE THEIR ANSWERS TONIGHT.
I I DO APPRECIATE WHAT THE CHURCH WOULD LIKE TO DO, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THESE PLANS ARE A WAY OUT.
WE DON'T HAVE DEFINITIVES IN FRONT OF US.
THEY COULD END UP HAVING TO SELL THAT PARCEL OF LAND WITH THE ZONING WE'VE GIVEN IT.
AND I, I UNDERSTAND BY PUTTING THESE, THESE CONDITIONS ON IT, YOU'RE TRYING TO PROTECT IT IN THERE.
BUT I STILL THINK THIS IS A WRONG PRECEDENT, AND I, I JUST DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT ANSWER TO THIS SOLUTION.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE APPROVING THIS.
I THINK WE SHOULD BE GOING WITH WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED FOR THIS EVENING.
UM, ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR THE AMENDMENT? COMMISSIONER CHAIR? I'M SORRY, IF I MAY JUST MAKE ONE QUICK CORRECTION BECAUSE I I DID NOT MENTION THIS.
I FORGOT TO MENTION LIMITED WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION WOULD ALSO BE, UH, PROHIBITED.
SORRY, JUST WANTED YOU TO CLARIFY THAT ON THE RECORD.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? YEAH, I'LL SPEAK IN FAVOR.
UM, WHILE I, AS A PLANNER, I FIND IT FRUSTRATING THAT, UH, WE GET SO GRANULAR SOMETIMES AS TO SORT OF SAY THIS ONE PARCEL CAN OR CAN'T HAVE INDIVIDUAL USES.
I THINK IN THIS CONTEXT IT DOES MAKE SENSE.
WE HAVE USED CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS BEFORE, WHETHER I LIKE THEM OR NOT.
UM, AND TO THAT POINT, I DON'T THINK THAT IT MATTERS, UH, WHO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS IN THIS CASE OR, OR WHAT THEIR INTENDED USE OR CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY IS.
UM, THE AMENDED LIST OF USES PUT FORTH DOES MAKE SENSE IN THIS CONTEXT.
DB 90 MAKES SENSE IN THIS CONTEXT.
UM, I DON'T THINK ANYWHERE IN AUSTIN'S PLANNING APPARATUS IS OUR CONVERSATION OF PLANNING ON CORRIDORS EVER LIMITED TO, MEANING LITERALLY ON INDIVIDUAL STREETS.
A CORRIDOR IS A SORT OF REGION ENCOMPASSING, UH, A PASSAGEWAY, A STREET, A TRANSIT LINE, SOME LINEAR LINKAGE.
UH, IT'S NOT LITERALLY THAT PHYSICAL PIECE OF INFRASTRUCTURE ITSELF.
AND SO TO SAY THAT A SITE 150, 175 FEET FROM A MAJOR CORRIDOR, FOUR BLOCKS FROM DOWNTOWN, DOESN'T COUNT AS BEING ON A CORRIDOR.
JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME PROFESSIONALLY AS
[01:45:01]
A PLANNER OR AS A SORT OF COMMON SENSE THINKER ABOUT HOW OUR CITY IS GROWING AND CHANGING.WHEN I THINK OF EAST USER CHAVEZ, I DON'T JUST THINK OF THAT PAVEMENT.
I THINK OF ALL THE BUSINESSES AND, AND HOMES AND USES THAT ARE AROUND THAT WHOLE AREA.
UM, OTHER SPEAKERS AGAINST OR FOR THIS AMENDMENT? OKAY, LET'S TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS FOR THE AMENDMENT AS, UH, READ BY VICE CHAIR CZAR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WOODS, UM, TO ESSENTIALLY, UH, UH, PROHIBIT A NUMBER OF USES AND MAKE CERTAIN OTHER USES CONDITIONAL.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT.
SO THAT PASSES, THAT AMENDMENT PASSES EIGHT TO ONE TO TWO.
UM, SO WE'LL GO BACK TO THE BASE MOTION AS AMENDED.
WE DID HAVE OTHER SPOTS FOR AND AGAINST, IF ANYBODY WISHES TO SPEAK BACK TO THE MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
MR. MAXWELL, UH, YEAH, I, I WANNA SAY THAT I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD THIS EVENING IS OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A, UM, INTERESTING DB 90 CASES, AS MANY OF OUR DB 90 CASES ARE.
UM, I WOULD JUST HIGHLIGHT TWO THINGS.
ONE OF THESE, UM, CURRENT PARELS IS A PARKING LOT.
I MEAN, IT BASICALLY A DIRT PARKING LOT, WHICH TO AGAIN, DOES NOT SEEM LIKE THE BEST HIGHEST USE OF THE LAND SO CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN.
AND ESPECIALLY AS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A THRIVING COMMUNITY THAT IS LOOKING TO GROW IN THOUGHTFUL AND INTERESTING WAYS.
UM, I WILL SAY THAT I, I DON'T FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS REGARDING DB 90 AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOCATION.
I DO THINK THAT THAT HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED TO ADDRESS IN THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE GIVEN OUR CURRENT, UM, SITUATION.
BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS ONCE AGAIN, A PLEA OR CRY TO OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THINK ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE IMPROVING OUR V STANDARDS, UM, CREATING SOMETHING LIKE DB 30, DB 60, DB 75, BECAUSE I THINK THAT NUMBER 90 IS CAUSING A LOT OF ANXIETY UNNECESSARILY BECAUSE THIS IS A GOOD TOOL AND WE'VE SEEN IT USED EFFECTIVELY.
AND IF WE HAD IT AT DIFFERENT HEIGHT LEVELS AND IN DIFFERENT FORMATS, WE WOULDN'T BE TRYING TO FIT SQUARE PEGS IN ROUND TOOLS.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER MUELLER? I'LL JUST REITERATE, I DON'T KNOW HOW A LARGE FIRE TRUCK TURNS AROUND IN THERE ON THOSE SMALL STREETS LIKE THAT.
WE ADD THIS BIG HEIGHT WITHOUT THE RIGHT INFRASTRUCTURE.
I, I, I THINK WE'RE CREATING DANGEROUS SITUATIONS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
I REALIZE IT'S CLOSE TO BIGGER STREETS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT IF THIS WERE TO BUILD OUT, IF IT WERE TO BUILD OUT WITH THE FULL ENTITLEMENTS OF THE DB 90, I, I THINK THAT'S, I I THINK THAT'S DANGEROUS.
I'M SURPRISED SOME OF THE OTHER ENGINEERS AREN'T SPEAKING UP.
ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR THANK YOU CHAIR.
UM, I WILL SAY I BELIEVE THAT THE, THE SAFEST PLACE FOR A FIRETRUCK TO GET AROUND IS AN URBAN GRID, WHICH IS WHAT THIS AREA IS.
AND I, I'M REALLY SURPRISED ACTUALLY THAT STAFF WASN'T IN FULL SUPPORT OF THIS.
UM, IT SEEMS TO ME, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT IS OUR GOAL IS WHAT WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT HERE, RIGHT? SO IS OUR GOAL, WALKABILITY, AFFORDABILITY, TAX-BASED TRANSIT USAGE, COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY, OR PROTECTING MULTIMILLION SINGLE MULTIMILLION DOLLAR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES FROM CHANGE? UM, 77 0 2 USED TO BE ONE OF THE MOST INCREDIBLE WORKING CLASS AREAS OF AUSTIN, AND I'M LOOKING AT ONE OF THE ORIGINAL WRITERS OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
HE HAPPENS TO BE IN THE ROOM WITH US TONIGHT.
UM, BUT IT'S CHANGED AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT SINCE THE SECOND OLDEST NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OF AUSTIN WAS ADOPTED.
AND NOW I'M LOOKING AT ZILLOW, AND YOU CAN BUY HERE FOR A MILLION, A MILLION, FIVE, 4 MILLION.
AND TO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T ALLOW LESS EFFICIENT, OR EXCUSE ME, LESS EXPENSIVE, MORE EFFICIENT HOMES NEAR MULTIMILLION DOLLAR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THAT JUST JUST STRIKES ME AS ODD.
SO WE'LL DEFINITELY BE SUPPORTING THIS.
AND, UM, IF YOU GO 90 FEET NORTH, THERE'S A SALVAGE YARD.
MAYBE WE CAN REZONE THAT NEXT FINAL SPOT AGAINST COMMISSIONER HAYNES.
UH, AND I WILL ADMIT TO, UH, I, I DID VOTE FOR THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE I CAN COUNT AND SO I WANTED TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BETTER BEFORE IT PASSED, UH, WHICH, YOU KNOW, PUT ON MY SWAMI HAT, I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN HERE.
BUT, UM, I I WILL ADMIT, UM, TO BEING CONFUSED ON THIS ONE, I MEAN, WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT WHO SAYS THEY WANT TO DO CHURCH AND CHURCH THINGS HERE, AND THAT'S A GREAT THING.
UM, I COMMEND THEM FOR DOING CHURCH AND CHURCH THINGS.
UH, WE STRUGGLE AT MY CHURCH TO FIND STAFF AND TO FIND YOUTH HOUSES AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND, AND FOLKS THAT COME OVER FROM
[01:50:01]
LAMAR FOR AFTERSCHOOL CARE.SO I, I GET, I GET SPACES IS, IS TIGHT, BUT WHAT I DON'T GET HERE IS DB 90, DB 90 IS DESIGNED TO BRING, UM, UH, NOT ONLY LITTLE A AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT BIG A AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT'S NOT FOR CHURCH THINGS, IT'S NOT FOR STAFF OFFICES.
IT'S NOT TO EXPAND YOUR SANCTUARY.
IT IS TO BRING MULTIFAMILY HOUSING INTO AN AREA THAT DOESN'T HAVE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND STAFF GOT IT.
IF WE WENT WITH STAFF'S, UM, RECOMMENDATION, THEY COULD BUILD UP, THEY CAN BUILD HIGH ENOUGH AND THEY CAN DO CHURCH THINGS AND, AND, AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD GO WITH.
I, I, I COMMEND STAFF, UH, ON THIS ONE.
AND, UH, UM, I I, I'M VOTING AGAINST IT, BUT I, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT, I DID VOTE FOR THE AMENDMENT, SO, OKAY, THAT'S ALL OF OUR SPOTS.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
THIS IS OUR BASE MOTION AS AMENDED.
UM, ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR THOSE AGAINST, IT'S UM, WE HAVE 11 COMMISSIONERS, CORRECT? YEAH.
SO THAT IT PASSES EIGHT TO THREE.
OH, I'M SORRY, SORRY, THAT'S EIGHT TO FOUR.
THANK YOU, UH, EVERYBODY FOR WORK ON FIVE, SIX AND SEVEN.
[Items 8 & 9]
ITEMS NUMBER EIGHT AND NINE.SO FIRST WE'LL HEAR FROM, UH, MS. MEREDITH AND MS. REN MEREDITH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 23 0 0 0 5 1.
ONTOP FAIRWAY MIXED YOUTH IN THE MONTOPOLIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 62 0 2, 62 0 4 CADDY STREET, ONE SIX ZERO ZERO ONE SIX ZERO FOUR ONE SIX ZERO SIX ONE SIX ZERO EIGHT ONE SIX TEN ONE SIX TWELVE, AND 1 6 14 ON TOPLESS DRIVE AND 62 0 5 62 11 62 15 FAIRWAY STREET.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM SINGLE FAMILY AND CIVIC TO MIXED USE LAND USE, AND IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
CYNTHIA HODGE WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM NINE ON YOUR AGENDA, KC 14 20 24 0 0 1 5.
I'M NOT GONNA REREAD THE ADDRESSES THAT MAUREEN JUST READ.
UM, BUT IT'S AT THE SAME LOCATION.
THE SITE HAS TWO ZONINGS ASSOCIATED WITH IT, COMMUNITY, COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, PLAN GRNP AND FAMILY RESIDENCES, NEIGHBORHOOD SF THREE NP.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS 1.92 ACRES UNDEVELOPED HAS FRONTAGE ON MONTOPOLIS DRIVE, WHICH IS A LEVEL THREE STREET CADDY STREET, WHICH IS A LEVEL ONE AND FAIRWAY STREET, WHICH IS ALSO A LEVEL ONE.
THE OVERALL PROJECT WOULD CONSIST OF APPROXIMATELY 76 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND WE WILL BE SEEKING A MODIFICATION FOR THE COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT ON THE CADDY STREET FRONT AS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT GR DB 90 D NP COMBINED DISTRICT ZONING.
WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR FIVE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASI ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNERS.
UM, SO THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS VERY NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF RIVERSIDE AND MONTOPOLIS.
UM, ALL OF THE LOTS COMBINED, TOTAL 1.92 ACRES.
UM, IT'S GOT, UM, FRONTAGE ON THREE SEPARATE STREETS, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY ON MONTOPOLIS DRIVE.
THIS IS JUST ANOTHER IMAGE, AN AERIAL IMAGE FROM ABOVE.
UM, THE CURRENT, ALL OF THE LOTS, ALL OF THE LAND ARE CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED TODAY.
UM, AND HAVEN'T SEEN ANY DEVELOPMENT, UM, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL IN A VERY LONG TIME, WITH EXCEPTION OF THE CORNER THERE AT THE CORNER.
UH, THE CORNER AT FAIRWAY AND MONTOPOLIS THAT DID ONCE UPON A TIME WAS A SMALL COMMERCIAL STRIP CENTER, UM, THAT WAS DEMOLISHED AT SOME POINT, AND NOW THAT REMAINS AS A, UM, UH, SLAB ON GRADE.
SO AGAIN, THIS, UH, THIS IS THIS PROPERTY AND RELATIONSHIP IN CONTEXT WITH IMAGINE
[01:55:01]
AUSTIN, UM, WITH TRANSIT SERVICE, BOTH CAPITAL METRO BUS, AS WELL AS THE CAPITAL METRO, UH, OR PROJECT CONNECT LINE THAT'S COMING DOWN RIVERSIDE DRIVE.UM, THIS PROPERTY, THESE PROPERTIES ARE LESS THAN A HALF MILE FROM WHERE THE STATION IS PROPOSED AT THE INTERSECTION OF RIVERSIDE AND MONTOPOLIS.
THIS IS A ZONING MAP OVERLAID ON TOP OF AN AERIAL.
UH, TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF CONTEXT FOR ZONING, THERE IS GR NP ZONING ACROSS THE WAY, AND THEN WHERE I WAS TALKING ABOUT THERE BEING ONCE UPON A TIME, A SMALL COMMERCIAL STRIP CENTER THAT CURRENTLY HAS COMMERCIAL ZONING AT THAT CORNER AS WELL.
UM, THE DESIRE, UH, AND THEN THERE'S THE GR UH, AT THE OTHER CORNER WITH CADDY AND MON MONTOPOLIS.
THERE'S A DESIRE TO DO A MIXED USE PROJECT HERE TO BRING MORE COMMERCIAL ACTIVATION TO THE FRONTAGE OF MONTOPOLIS, UM, AS WELL AS SOME UNITS THAT ARE, UM, VERY CLOSE TO, UH, MUCH NEEDED AND, AND FORTHCOMING IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRANSIT.
AND THIS IS A CHART SHOWING COMPARISON OF WHAT THE PROPERTY HAS TODAY UNDER SF THREE.
UM, WE JUST LOOKING GENERALLY UNDER SF THREE, IF YOU APPLIED HOME, THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF GAINING 20 TO 30 UNITS, UH, SINGLE FAMILY UNITS FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOT.
UM, FOLLOWING THE, UM, USUAL, UM, SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS FOR SF THREE UNDER CSMU.
UM, BECAUSE OF SITE DEVELOPMENT, UH, SITE AREA REQUIREMENTS, THERE IS PRETTY MUCH ONE-TO-ONE FAR LEFT ON THE TABLE.
BY THE TIME YOU WOULD DEVELOP UNDER A REGULAR CSMU ZONING, WE DID COME BACK AND ASK FOR CS DB 90, UM, STAFF SAID THEY WOULD OFFER GR DB 90, AND WE SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT'S FINE BECAUSE UNDER THE DB 90 PROGRAM, WE COULD STILL ACHIEVE THE SAME THINGS THAT WE WERE WANTING TO DO UNDER CS DB 90, WITH EXCEPTION OF SOME OF THE USES GOING AWAY.
AND THE LANDOWNERS WERE FINE WITH THAT.
SO WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
UM, WE, UM, EXPECT THAT A PROJECT HERE COULD BRING SOMEWHERE IN THE BALLPARK OF 189 UNITS AND SIX TO SEVEN FLOORS WITH STRUCTURED PARKING, UM, AND COMMERCIAL ACTIVATION OF THE STREET.
AND WITH THAT, I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS NOUE ELIAS.
UH, NOUE, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
WE WILL HEAR FROM VALERIE MENARD.
VALERIE, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
ARE THEY ON THE PHONE BY ANY CHANCE? NO.
AND MOVING ON, WE WILL HEAR FROM CARLOS PINON.
CARLOS, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
UH, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE ONE MORE TIME THAT THOSE THREE SPEAKERS, MR. NOE, ALIAS, VALERIE MENARD, AND CARLOS PINON ARE NOT IN CHAMBERS OR IN THE LOBBY.
UM, HEARING NOTHING ABOUT THAT, UH, MS. HASI, DID YOU WANT TO USE YOUR REBUTTAL TIME? NO.
IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? IS HE A MOTION OF VICE CHAIR SECOND BY HERE? COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? UH, OH, COMMISSIONER COX? UM, I DON'T, MAYBE IT'S JUST ME.
IT SEEMS KIND OF WEIRD THAT LIKE ALL OF OUR VIRTUAL SPEAKERS JUST HAPPENED NOT TO BE HERE.
ARE, ARE WE A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT, THEY WEREN'T VIRTUAL SOMEWHERE.
OKAY, SO, UM, CLOSING PUBLIC HEARING WAS VICE CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER, UH, SKIDMORE, UNLESS THERE'S OPPOSITION.
SO WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
WHO HAS QUESTIONS GOING FIRST? COMMISSIONER BARR RAMIREZ.
UM, SO I'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, COMMUNICATING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING CONTACT TEAM AND WITH MY COUNCIL MEMBER AS WELL ABOUT THIS CASE IN PARTICULAR.
AND I KNOW, YOU KNOW, JUST BY LOOKING AT OUR ETOD PRIORITY TOOL AND YOU KNOW, ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS IS, YOU KNOW, OUT OF THE 20 STATIONS, UM, THAT ARE PART OF THE ETOD PLAN, THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT'S EXPERIENCING ACTIVE DISPLACEMENT.
[02:00:01]
IS REALLY INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE PROJECT CONNECT ANTI DISPLACEMENT FUNDS.IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'VE DISCUSSED WITH THEM OR A WAY TO PARTNER ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT? WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED THOSE PARTICULAR MATTERS, AND I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO DISCUSSING THAT, UM, WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
UM, I KNOW FOR THESE PARTICULAR, UM, PROPERTIES, THERE ISN'T ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT, OR ANY HOMES TO BE DISPLACED, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE COMMUNITY.
UM, AND SO I DEFINITELY THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE'S WORTHY OF CONVERSATION TO HAVE ABOUT IT.
AND IS YOUR CLIENT INTENDING TO MAKE THESE RENTAL UNITS OR OWNERSHIP UNITS? UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S BEEN DETERMINED AT THIS TIME.
I THINK ONE OF MY, WELL, OKAY, I'M ASKING QUESTIONS.
SO YOU, YOU HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, AND I KNOW THAT THEY WERE ADAMANT KIND OF ABOUT SEEKING SINGLE FAMILY ONLY.
UM, BUT DID YOU TALK ABOUT AT ALL LIKE OFFERING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR OF THE AFFORDABILITY WITH THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO? SO, UM, WITH THE DB 90 OVERLAY, I DID EXPLAIN THAT, UM, PARTICIPATION WITH THAT.
AND IF YOU'LL NOTICE LIKE THERE'S IT, THE REQUEST IS FOR, UM, CS OR WE'RE AGREEING TO GR DB 90, MEANING THAT THE ONLY, THE ONLY WAY THAT THIS PROPERTY CAN ACHIEVE ANY SORT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS IF IT IS THROUGH THE DB 90 PROGRAM, WHICH WOULD THEN REQUIRE AFFORDABILITY.
UM, SO I DID EXPLAIN THAT, UH, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, THROUGH EMAIL.
I EXPLAINED WHAT THE SITUATION WAS WITH THE DB 90, THE PARTICULARS AND HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT MEANING THAT THERE WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE SOME AFFORDABLE INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS.
YEAH, AND I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING, UH, JUST TO KEEP IT ALONG THE QUESTIONS, BUT, UM, THAT BECAUSE OF THE SPECIFIC NATURE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT THEY'RE ALREADY EXPERIENCING ACTIVE DISPLACEMENT AND THEY ON AVERAGE HAVE LESS THAN, YOU KNOW, 50% MFI THEY'RE EXPERIENCING, THEY HAVE MUCH LOWER INCOMES.
MM-HMM
AND SO I THINK THEY'RE SEEKING OPPORTUNITIES FOR GREATER AFFORDABILITY.
UM, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY ALL OF MY QUESTIONS.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER COX? UM, FOR, FOR THE APPLICANT, MS. HASSEY, UH, I REALLY HATE TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOTLIGHT.
THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING TO
AND I'M ENVISIONING LIKE A 90 FOOT MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING AROUND THIS TINY LITTLE HOUSE, WHICH I LOOKED UP THE PICTURE OF THE UP HOUSE.
AND THAT'S TWO STORY VICTORIA, AND THIS ONE'S ONE STORY, BUT THEY'RE BOTH REALLY ADORABLE AND, AND I FEEL LIKE THE ONLY THING MISSING IS YOU WEARING DARK SUNGLASSES AND BEING LIKE AN EVIL DEVELOPER OR SOMETHING.
BUT IS THAT, IS THAT EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE? SO YES, THERE IS THAT PROPERTY THAT HAS FRONTAGE ON FAIRWAY STREET AND, UM, THE SUBJECT AREA OF REZONING DOES SHARE THREE PROPERTY LINES WITH THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
UM, AND THE LANDOWNER DID HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THAT PARTICULAR, UM, LANDOWNER WANTING, THEY ASKED THAT PERSON IF THEY WANTED TO COME ON BOARD IN BEING A PART OF A REDEVELOPMENT HERE, AND THE RESPONSE WAS THAT THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED, THEY WANTED TO KEEP THEIR PROPERTY AT THIS TIME, BUT UM, THEY WERE NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS COMING FORWARD.
BUT I WILL SAY WHILE WE ARE ASKING FOR DB 90, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE 90 FEET AROUND THAT PROPERTY, ALL THE DENSITY IN THE, THE UNITS AND THE HEIGHT IS GONNA BE PUSHED UP TO MONTOPOLIS, UM, AND THE CORNERS WITH FAIR FAIRVIEW, UM, AND CADDY.
BUT THAT, BUT THAT'S, I I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE SAYING THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT PART OF ANY SORT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS.
YOU COULD BUILD THE 90 FEET ACROSS THIS WHOLE PROPERTY IF YOU WANTED TO.
THAT'S, THAT'S NOT WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN MY QUESTION TO YOU.
AND I YEAH, AND I, I HATE ASKING YOU THIS, BUT, BUT YOU ARE, YOU DID REPRESENT TWO DB 90 CASES THAT WE'RE HEARING TODAY.
ONE OF WHICH WE JUST HEARD A CHURCH WAS, WAS TRYING TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS TO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AROUND THEM.
AND SO Y'ALL HAD AGREED TO A DIFFERENT ZONING THAT WOULD REDUCE THAT HEIGHT.
IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE A DOLLAR TREE, YOU KNOW, OPPOSITE ONE CORNER OF THIS PROPERTY.
BUT THEN ESSENTIALLY ALL OF THE OTHER FRONTAGES ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES EXCEPT FROM ON TOPLESS.
IS THAT, WHY DID Y'ALL NOT CONSIDER SOME LOWER STEP DOWN ZONING TO TRY TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS FOR THOSE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES?
[02:05:01]
UM, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.THIS, THIS, THE IDEA DIDN'T COME UP ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, AND MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
I'LL HAVE TO TAKE THAT BACK TO THE LANDOWNERS, BUT, UM, I, THAT'S PROBABLY A BYPRODUCT OF ME COMPARTMENTALIZING ALL OF MY CASES SEPARATELY.
SO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, BUT, AND THEN IF I THANK YOU IF I HAVE TIME, UH, ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, IF STAFF CAN COME UP.
YOU'VE GOT ABOUT TWO MORE MINUTES.
UM, I'M SO FRUSTRATED,
I UNDERSTAND MON TOPLESS HAS A LOT OF MULTIFAMILY, BUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS BOUND ON 1, 2, 2 OF ITS LARGE FRONTAGES AND THEN THREE INTERNAL FRONTAGES WITH SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT YET Y'ALL ARE RECOMMENDING DB 90.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE HERE? YES.
SO RIGHT THERE ON THE QUARTER, LET ME DOUBLE CHECK TO MAKE SURE, UH, CADDY AND MONTOPOLIS, THERE IS A BUS STOP.
UM, THERE'S GR PRECEDENT IN THIS ENTIRE STREET.
UM, AND WE FELT THAT THIS WAS A GREAT COMPROMISE WITH THE APPLICANT.
SO IT'S THE EXISTENCE OF GR IT'S, IT ALREADY HAS A PRECEDENT ON THE STREET FOR GR AND ON THE SITE.
UM, AND, AND WE, WE HAVE QUITE A FEW OBJECTIONS, UH, IN OUR BACKUP.
IT DID, DID Y'ALL RECEIVE A VALID PETITION ON THIS? WE DID NOT, NO.
DO YOU KNOW IF, IF THE, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE OBJECTING ARE AWARE THAT THAT'S EVEN A POSSIBILITY? I BELIEVE SO, BEING THAT, UH, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
LET ME LOOK AT THE BACKUP TO MAKE SURE I STATE THE CORRECT NAME.
YEAH, I WAS HOPING TO ASK THE, UH, THE, THE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION MM-HMM.
UM, AS FAR AS I KNOW, YES, THEY ARE AWARE OF THAT.
IT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION THAT IS AWARE OF OTHER CASES IN THE AREA.
SO I WOULD ASSUME THAT THEY DO KNOW ABOUT THE VALID PETITION PROCESS.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. HASI AND I, IT'S JUST GONNA BE BRIEF, BUT I WANTED TO KIND OF, UM, PICK UP ON COMMISSIONER COX LINE OF QUESTIONING WITH THAT BLUE HOUSE ON FAIRWAY STREET.
IT SOUNDS LIKE Y'ALL HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THAT LANDOWNER.
UM, AND TO BE CLEAR, I HAVE NOT BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THAT LANDOWNER DIRECTLY, BUT, UM, THE OWNERS OF, UM, THE LAND THAT IS UP FOR REZONING, THEY HAVE BEEN HAVING CONVERSATIONS.
IT WAS ACTUALLY THEIR, UM, DESIRE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THIS REDEVELOPMENT OR THIS DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS ENTIRE, UM, BLOCK.
BUT SOME PEOPLE HAVE CHOSE TO NOT BE PART OF THAT AT THIS TIME.
UM, AND IT'S BEEN EXPLAINED TO ME THAT THAT PROPERTY OWNER, UM, WITH THE BLUE HOUSE, THEY DON'T WANT, THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN SELLING AT THIS TIME, BUT THEY'RE ALSO NOT OPPOSED TO, UM, WHAT'S GOING, YOU KNOW, TO DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING AROUND THEM.
SO, SO THEY'RE NOT OPPOSING THIS REZONING THAT SIDES? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
THAT WAS, THAT WAS MY QUESTION, WAS WHETHER THEY WERE YEP.
OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, SEEING COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS AND THEN COMMISSIONER HAYNES? YES.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF, AND IT'S KIND OF FOLLOWING UP ON WHAT COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ FERRERO WAS TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN, WHEN THE CITY JUST MADE ITS RECOMMENDATION OR MADE THE ASSESSMENT TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION, DID THEY WEIGH IN DISPLACEMENT FACTORS THAT WERE GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOW THIS WOULD IMPACT OR NOT IN PATH DISPLACEMENT? SO WE LOOK AT DISPLACEMENT ON THE SITE SPECIFICALLY, AND THERE'S NOTHING ON THE SITE WHERE TENANTS WOULD BE DISPLACED, AS MOST OF IT IS UNDEVELOPED IN AN OLDER COMMERCIAL SITE.
SO THERE'S NOT TENANT DISPLACEMENT ON THIS LOCATION FOR THIS PROPERTY.
BUT, UH, WE, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHAT HAPPENS IN TERMS OF DISPLACEMENT AS, AS A RESULT OF WHAT, WHAT KIND OF BUILDING OR ZONING MIGHT GO THERE, IS
[02:10:01]
WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING, IT'S ONLY ON THE SITE ITSELF.BECAUSE WE CAN'T ANTICIPATE THE DISPLACEMENT OF OTHER PROPERTIES WITH THIS ONE BEING THE ONE THAT'S BEING REZONED.
SO, BUT THE CITY DOES HAVE DATA AROUND OTHER, UH, NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE BEEN WHERE DISPLACEMENT HAS HAPPENED WITH, UM, PERHAPS SIMILAR, UH, FACTORS IN PLACE.
WE, WE UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENED AROUND THESE
AND SO YOU, YOU DO HAVE, YOU DO HAVE SOME DATA TO, TO LOOK AT THOSE THINGS.
I JUST HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU JUST DON'T LOOK AT THOSE THINGS.
THAT'S SOMETHING FOR ANOTHER DEPARTMENT FOR ZONING.
WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE DISPLACEMENT.
IS THAT ALL YOUR QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? OH, OKAY.
UM, COMMISSIONER HAYS, MS. HO, YOU CAN, OR OH, I DIDN'T KNOW IF Y'ALL WERE CONFERRING OR ON THAT.
OH, WE WERE JUST, SHE WAS JUST CONFIRMING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEING ZOD, NOT THE EXISTING ONES.
UM, SO ON THE BACKUP WE'VE GOT THAT YOU'RE ASKING US TO, TO CONSIDER CS DB 90 NP, BUT THEN IN, IN HER PRESENTATION, MS. HASI WAS TALKING ABOUT GR UH, DB 90 MP.
UM, WHAT IS, WHAT IS YOUR, OR THEY SAID THEY AGREED TO IT.
WHAT IS YOUR, YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS CS? NO, NO, NO.
OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS GR DB 90.
IT'S UNDER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THEY REQUESTED CS DB 90 NP INITIALLY.
UM, BUT THEY ARE AMENABLE TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF GR DB 90.
AND THEN, SO WILL YOU TELL ME THE DIFFERENCE THEN? NOT A LOT.
WHAT, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GR AND CS? WHAT, WHAT CAN I PUT ON A, A GR DB 90 THAT I CAN, OR, OR WHAT, OR VICE VERSA.
WHAT COULD I PUT ON A CS DB 90 THAT I CAN ON A GR DB 90? SO THEY WEREN'T LOOKING FOR SPECIFIC USES.
THEY WERE LOOKING FOR FAR, WHICH IS WHY THEY INITIALLY REQUESTED CS.
UM, NOW THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING GR THEY DIDN'T HAVE A SPECIFIC USE THAT THEY WANTED IN CS, THEY JUST WANTED THE FAR REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE ALONG WITH IT.
BUT WITH GR DB 90, THEY ARE ALLOWED UNLIMITED FAR, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE SEEKING, THAT'S WHY.
WE HAVE THREE MORE SPOTS LEFT IF ANYBODY HAS OTHER QUESTIONS.
SO ALSO
ALL RIGHT, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. JOHNSON, I'LL MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR GR DB 90 MP.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE MPA AND THE ASSOCIATED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT? OKAY, SECOND.
COMMISSIONER MOALA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? UH, SURE.
JUST BRIEFLY, I THINK THIS IS A, A, AGAIN, A GREAT SITE IN TERMS OF ACCESS TO TRANSIT, UH, OTHER MEANS OF GETTING AROUND TOWN EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES, UM, RETAIL NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES, UM, DOING DB 90 HERE MEANS MORE HOUSING AND MORE OF IT AFFORDABLE THAN IF WE DID SOME OTHER ZONING DISTRICT.
OR IF WE KEPT SF THREE, WE WOULD PROBABLY GET, YOU KNOW, 10 OR 12 OR MAYBE 20 MULTIMILLION DOLLAR, UH, MCMANSIONS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM.
SO I THINK THAT IT'S IN EVERYONE'S BEST INTEREST THAT WE GET AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AN URBAN, SORT OF MIXED USE FORMAT ON THIS URBAN SITE NEAR TRANSIT AS OPPOSED TO MORE INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE MANSIONS.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION, MR. RIVER RAMIREZ? SO, I, WELL, I AGREE WITH MANY OF THE STATEMENTS THAT YOU SAID.
THIS IS A PERFECT SITE FOR TRANSIT.
IT'S A PERFECT SITE FOR, UM, THE HEIGHT.
WHAT MY MAIN CONCERN IS, IS AFFORDABILITY.
AND I'M, WHAT MAKES ME NERVOUS OR GIVES ME PAUSE IS THAT THERE WILL ONLY BE, YOU KNOW, 10% AT 50%.
MFI IS ONLY 18 UNITS, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK I WOULD, I, WHAT MAKES ME NERVOUS IS THAT THIS, I KNOW THAT THIS COMMUNITY CAN, CAN DO BETTER.
I KNOW, I FEEL THAT THE DEVELOPER CAN DO BETTER, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT, UH, CONTINUING CONVERSATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DEVELOPER TO PUSH FOR SOMETHING MORE.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS MOTION.
THAT WAS, UM, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON
[02:15:01]
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER.I THOUGHT WE WERE WAITING ON PEOPLE SPEAKING FOR, UM, I, NO, I DO WANNA SPEAK AGAINST, UH, I, I'M GONNA TRY NOT TO REPEAT MYSELF TOO MUCH.
OH, COMMISSIONER COX, CAN YOU START OVER? YOU FROZE RIGHT WHEN YOU WERE ABOUT TO GET STARTED.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU, AM I UN FROZEN? WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW.
UH, BUILDING A MASSIVE BUILDING, UH, AROUND A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS SO RIDICULOUS THAT THEY MADE A CUTE LITTLE MOVIE ABOUT IT.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE.
UH, WE'RE DEALING WITH A MAX DEVELOPMENT DB 90 THAT WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH.
AND, AND I THINK IF WE COULD DO ANYTHING WITH IT, WE COULD TRY TO, YOU KNOW, RESPECT SOME OF THE, UH, SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT AROUND IT, SOME OF THE, THE RESIDENTS AROUND IT, AND, AND FIND A WAY TO CRAFT THIS SO THAT WE ARE GETTING THAT DENSITY THAT WE WANT AND THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE WANT ALONG ON TOP OF THIS, AND NOT TURNING THIS INTO A MASSIVE, CARTOONISH, RIDICULOUS SCENARIO LIKE PIXAR.
SO, UH, AGAIN, THIS IS, THIS IS ANOTHER CASE OF DB 90 BEING OVERLY, OVERLY RESTRICTIVE IN WHAT WE CAN'T DO TO IT.
UH, AND OVERLY UNRESTRICTIVE IN THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL, UH, AND DEVELOPMENT TITLES ON THESE SITES.
AND, AND I REALLY HOPE THAT MAYBE THERE'S SUPPORT ON THIS COMMISSION TO PUSH FORWARD, UH, LIKE WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER SAID, A DB 60, A DB 75.
IF, IF THIS PLANNING COMMISSION IS WILLING TO, TO START THAT PROCESS, I AM ALL FOR IT.
AND I WILL BE AN ACTIVE PARTICIPANT IN THAT BECAUSE THIS DB 90 IS NOT WORKING, AND IT'S GONNA CONTINUE TO BECOME HARDER AND HARDER TO GET PUBLIC SUPPORT THE MORE WE PUSH THESE CASES THROUGH.
ANY OTHERS? SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? AND THEN COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
UM, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT.
AND I JUST PICTURE THIS WORLD WHERE WE'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE AFRAID OF LACK OF HOUSING IN OUR CITY THAN WE ARE OF MORE HOUSING.
SO WHEN I HEAR OF COMMENTS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ONLY 18 AFFORDABLE UNITS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT.
I MEAN, IT WASN'T THAT LONG AGO THAT WE, I'M LOOKING AT ANOTHER GENTLEMAN IN THE ROOM, ALMOST PUT 14 AFFORDABLE HOMES IN THE SAME COMMUNITY.
AND THERE WAS A BALLOT PETITION THERE TO KILL IT.
AND SO NOW THAT LAND TODAY IS STILL VACANT, AND THAT COULD HAVE BEEN HOME TO 14 FAMILIES WHO NEED HOUSING IN THE CITY THAT WE CAN'T PUT HOUSING ON THE GROUND FOR, BECAUSE WE LOST HIS ZONING CASE.
AND THE IDEA OF, YOU KNOW, SAYING NO TO WHETHER IT'S ONE HOME, WHETHER IT'S A HUNDRED HOMES, WHATEVER IT IS, WE NEED HOUSING.
AND HERE'S A CHANCE TO GET 18 AFFORDABLE AND A LOT OF MARKET RATE IN AN AMAZING TRANSIT CORRIDOR.
SO, TO ME, THIS IS A BIG OLD NO-BRAINER CASE.
YEAH, I'LL KEEP THESE, THESE COMMENTS BRIEF, BUT, UH, I GUESS I, I WANNA SPEAK FOR THIS, UH, PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE, UH, AND PUSH BACK A LITTLE, GET A LITTLE BIT AGAINST THE, THE NARRATIVE OF UP OF SORT OF THIS RIDICULOUS TALL BUILDING NEXT TO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING OF, AND I LOVE THAT MOVIE UP AS WELL.
BUT, YOU KNOW, GREAT WALKABLE, AFFORDABLE, TRANSIT FRIENDLY CITIES HAVE MORE DENSITY AND MORE DENSITY MEANS BEING TALLER.
AND IF WE WANT TO HAVE THOSE THINGS, WE HAVE TO BE WILLING TO LET THE CITY GROW AND EVOLVE TO SUPPORT THAT.
AND I DON'T THINK, WHEN I THINK ABOUT VIENNA OR COPENHAGEN OR PARIS OR OSAKA OR TOKYO, LIKE THESE CITIES ARE NOT HELL SCAPES, RIGHT? JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE TALLER BUILDINGS.
AND I KNOW IT'S UNSETTLING FOR CHANGE TO OCCUR IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT THIS CHANGE IS HAPPENING INCREMENTALLY IN ORGANICALLY, AND IT IS THE WAY THAT WE CAN BUILD MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR MORE PEOPLE TO LIVE IN AUSTIN.
WE'LL GO BACK TO, UM, TAKING A VOTE ON THE MOTION.
THIS IS FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON BOTH THE NPA AND THE ZONING, THE REZONING CASE.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, THOSE AGAINST TWO AND THOSE ABSTAINING.
SO THAT PASSES NINE TO TWO TO ONE.
[16. Rezoning: C14-2024-0080 - 5931 Dillard Circle Rezoning; District 4 (Part 2 of 2)]
TO THE DILLARD CIRCLE REZONING CASE.EARLIER WE HAD A DISCUSSION, POSTPONEMENT,
[02:20:01]
UM, COULDN'T REACH A DECISION.SO WE'RE GOING TO HEAR IT TONIGHT.
GOOD EVENING, CYNTHIA HORY AGAIN, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM 16 ON YOUR AGENDA CASE C 14 20 24 8.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON 5 9 3 1 AND 6 0, 0 3, AND HALF DILLARD CIRCLE.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS APPROXIMATELY 3.08 ACRES, PARTIALLY DEVELOPED WITH SOME OVERFLOW SURFACE PARKING FROM THE ATOR JUST NORTH OF THE SITE.
THE SITE HAS FRONTAGE ON DILL CIRCLE, WHICH IS A LEVEL ONE STREET AND IS CURRENTLY ZONED CS MUV.
THE SITE IS 0.2 MILES FROM AIRPORT, FROM THE AIRPORT BOULEVARD ACTIVITY CORRIDOR, AND OVERLAPS WITH THE HIGHLAND MALL REGIONAL CENTER.
THE SITE IS 0.3 MILES FROM THE HIGHLAND STATION, METRO RAIL RED LINE, AND THERE'S A BUS STOP ALONG AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
THIS IS AN IDEAL LOCATION TO ADD HOUSING AND FALLS UNDER THE E TODD TYPOLOGY THAT ENCOURAGES RAPID CHANGE AFFORDABILITY AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS.
THE OVERALL PROJECT WOULD CONSIST OF APPROXIMATELY 250 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND WILL BE SEEKING A COMPLETE, WHICH MEANS 0%, UM, MODIFICATION TO THE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE REQUIREMENT DUE TO THE VARIOUS CONSTRAINTS ON THE FRONT OF THE SITE.
I'LL BE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
OKAY, CHAIR, WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR FIVE MINUTES.
AMANDA BROWN WITH HD BROWN CONSULTING IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING FOR A PROPOSED REZONING AT 59 31 DILLARD CIRCLE.
IT'S, UM, UM, ALONG AIRPORT BOULEVARD IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO GUADALUPE, JUST EAST EAST OF THE A CC HIGHLAND REDEVELOPMENT.
THE CURRENT ZONING IS C-S-M-U-V-C-O-N-P, AS I HAD MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY WITH A RECENTLY ADOPTED COMPATIBILITY ORDINANCE.
THIS, THIS PROJECT WILL BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD UNDER THE VMU CURRENTLY EXISTING ON THE SITE.
AGAIN, WE FEEL LIKE DB 90 MAKES FOR A BETTER PROJECT.
UM, AND I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT IN A LITTLE BIT, UH, IN THE PRESENTATION.
UM, THE PROPOSED ZONING, AGAIN, A-C-S-M-U-V-C-O-N-P DB 90, THE PROHIBITED USES THAT YOU SEE IN THAT CHART ARE CURRENTLY PROHIBITED WITH AN EXISTING CO.
WE ARE KEEPING THOSE, UM, IN PLACE.
THE PROJECT IS A FIVE STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING, UH, UNDER DB 90 THAT'LL, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFORDABILITY ARE 12 UNITS AT 60% MFI OR 10 UNDER 50% MFI, UM, DIVERGING FROM THE, UM, VMU BUILDING, WHICH IS 10% AT 80% MFI.
UM, AS CYNTHIA HAD MENTIONED, WE ARE REQUESTING A DEVIATION FROM THE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, UH, REQUIREMENT IN THE DB 90.
I DO WANNA TOUCH ON THE TRANSPORTATION IN THE AREA.
THIS IS A REALLY UNIQUE SITE IN THAT YOU CAN GET REALLY ANYWHERE IN THE CITY AT THIS LOCATION FROM MASS TRANSIT.
IT'S ABOUT A THREE MINUTE WALK TO THE HIGHLAND COMMUTER RAIL STATION.
UM, THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED, UH, HIKE AND BIKE TRAIL ALONG THE RAIL, UM, IS RIGHT ALONG THE PROPERTY AS WELL.
UH, WE ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE 8 0 8 0 3 RED LINE RAPID ALONG LAMAR, UM, AND THEN BUS, ADDITIONAL BUS ROUTES ALONG AIRPORT, AND THEN ALONG KIG AS WELL.
THE PROPOSED REZONING, UH, IS ONE OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE PROPOSED REZONING IS TO A RELAXATION ON THE REQUIRED GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL DILLARD CIRCLE.
AND THE REASONS FOR THIS ARE AS FOLLOWS.
DILLARD CIRCLE REALLY FUNCTIONS MORE OF A CUL-DE-SAC.
IT DOESN'T HAVE THROUGH TRAFFIC OR PUT THROUGH PEDESTRIANS, KIND OF MEANDERING BY.
UM, SO WE DO HAVE MINIMAL PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ALONG DILLARD.
THERE IS A LOT OF ACTIVITY TO THE COMMERCIAL TO THE NORTH.
UM, BUT THOSE PEOPLE ARE USUALLY THERE TO BE CUSTOMERS OF THOSE BUSINESSES.
UM, AND THAT'S KIND OF THE SECOND POINT.
ANY SORT OF COMMERCIAL WOULD BE DIFFICULT AT THIS BUILDING, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THERE'S SO MUCH, UM, COMMERCIAL AMENITY NEARBY.
THERE'S, UM, A RESTAURANT ORATORIUM, UM, A COFFEE SHOP, AND THEN OF COURSE, ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL AMENITIES, UM, AT THE A CC HIGHLAND REDEVELOPMENT.
BUT THE PRIMARY REASON FOR REQUESTING A, UM, DEVIATION FROM THE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL IS TRULY THE UNIQUE CONFIGURATION OF THE SITE AND THE ENCUMBRANCES THAT ARE ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF DILLARD CIRCLE.
THESE ISSUES MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO CREATE A, UM, COMMERCIAL TENANT SPACE THAT HAS, UM, COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE TO BE APPEALING TO A TENANT.
SO THIS IS A SORT OF S SNIP FROM OUR PREVIOUS SITE PLAN.
AGAIN, THAT SITE PLAN IS OUT OF
[02:25:01]
DATE, BUT GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA OF WHAT THE ENCUMBRANCE IS ALONG DI DILLARD CIRCLE CIRCLE ARE GONNA LOOK LIKE.SO THE FRONTAGE ITSELF IS, WE HAVE 60 FEET ALONG DILLARD CIRCLE.
SO UNDER DB 90, 75% OF THE BUILDING FRONTAGE IS REQUIRED TO BE, UM, GROUND FLOOR, GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE HAVE SEVERAL ENCUMBRANCES THAT FURTHER RESTRICT THAT FRONTAGE.
SO THERE'S A 20 FOOT WIDE, UM, PARKING LANE, A WATER VAULT EASEMENT, A WASTEWATER STUB EASEMENT.
UM, WE'LL HAVE A, WE'RE MORE THAN LIKELY HAVE A 15 FOOT, UH, PEDESTRIAN TRAIL FOR OUR PARKLAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS, UM, BIKE RACKS.
AND THEN THE BIG ONE IS REALLY THE OVERHEAD POWER RELOCATION THAT'LL BE RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING AS WELL.
SO THAT LEAVES 26 FEET OF BUILDING FRONTAGE, FRONTING ONTO DILLARD CIRCLE.
UM, 75% OF, AND 75% OF THAT, UM, IS REQUIRED TO BE GROUND FLOOR.
SO AGAIN, UM, FOR US, WE FEEL LIKE IT'S GONNA BE VERY DIFFICULT TO, TO LEASE A COMMERCIAL SPACE OF THIS SIZE AND THIS CONFIGURATION WITH THE ENC CONFERENCES ON THE RIGHT OF WAY.
I WANNA TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT URBAN GENESIS.
THEY HAVE SEVEN OR EIGHT VERTICAL MIXED USE BUILDINGS IN AUSTIN.
THEY LOCATE THEIR DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN, UM, WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE TO MASS TRANSIT.
SO THEY HAVE ONE IN THE E-R-C-M-L-K, TODD LAMAR, JUSTIN TODD, AND ALL OF THOSE BUILDINGS.
WE HAPPILY BUILT GROUND FLOOR RETAIL.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ASK LIGHTLY, AND WE DON'T WANNA JUST NOT DO IT.
IT REALLY IS A SPECIFIC CONSTRAINT TO THIS SPECIFIC SITE.
SO WE FEEL LIKE IT WON'T SET PRECEDENT IN THE FUTURE, UM, FOR ASKING FOR THIS VARIANCE.
UM, A LITTLE, I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN FAVOR, ZACH FADI.
ZACH, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, NAME ZACH FADI, UH, RESIDENT OF DISTRICT NINE.
UH, I DEFINITELY DID NOT MEAN TO BE THE PRIMARY SPEAKER FOR THIS, SO I CERTAINLY WON'T TAKE FIVE MINUTES.
UM, I FREQUENT A LOT OF THE RESTAURANTS IN THE AREA, UH, AND THE BUS, THE BUSINESSES.
UM, I USED TO, TO CLIMB AT CRUX.
I STILL DO IT ONCE IN A WHILE.
UM, I JUST THINK THAT IT'S A IDEAL SPOT FOR MORE PEOPLE.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THAT LIGHT RAIL STATION AND WE SPEND, ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PER USER SUBSIDY FOR THE, FOR THE RED LINE IS, IS QUITE BAD, UH, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE NEARLY ENOUGH DENSITY SUPPORT THIS, THIS RED LINE THAT WE'VE BUILT.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK HIGHLAND STATION IS ONE OF OUR WORST PERFORMING.
IT'S CERTAINLY ONE OF THE DEADEST STATIONS AROUND, AND I THINK IT IS IDEAL TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE, HAVE MORE PEOPLE AROUND.
WE BUILT OUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE BUILT THE, THE A CC RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
WE'VE BUILT A, A RED LINE STATION.
IT'S NOT TOO FAR FROM THE CRESTVIEW DEVELOPMENT AND THE WRE 99 AND ALL THE GROCERIES AND STORES THERE.
LIKE, IT, IT'S, WE, WE NEED PEOPLE TO LIVE AROUND THAT AREA TO ACTUALLY USE THE SPACES.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE BUILT THE, WE BUILT THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
NOW IT'S TIME FOR US TO SAY YES TO MORE RESIDENTS.
UM, I WAS LOOKING AT THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S LETTER, AND IT, IT MADE ME SAD THAT THEY REQUESTED THAT THERE NOT BE WINDOWS OR BALCONIES, UM, AT THE SIDE FACING THEM.
UH, I, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THEM WOULD.
I'M NOT SURE IF THEY, THEY REALIZE WHEN THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY, IN THEIR MIND, THEY'RE, THEY'RE FIGHTING AGAINST THE DEVELOPER, BUT I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE IF THEY'VE CONSIDERED LIKE THAT.
THEY'RE DICTATING THE TERMS BY WHICH FUTURE PEOPLE WILL LIVE THEIR LIVES.
YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ASKING THAT FUTURE RESIDENTS HAVE LESS LIVE WITH LESS LIGHT AND LESS ACCESS TO OUTDOOR SPACE.
AND I, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY WOULD ASK THAT OF THEIR CURRENT NEIGHBORS, AND I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD ASK IT OF THEIR FUTURE NEIGHBORS.
UM, AND THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM THOSE SPEAKING IN FAVOR.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS CYNTHIA WARRING.
UM, OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS CYNTHIA WARRING.
UH, CYNTHIA, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
CAN I SET THIS HERE? UM, ARE Y'ALL GONNA BE PUTTING UP THE, OKAY, SO I'M NOT SKILLED IN THIS AT ALL, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT IF THAT'S GONNA WORK, BUT, UM, I'LL TRY TO MAKE, DO, UM, HELLO, MY NAME'S CYNTHIA WARING, AND I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON THE DI DILLARD CIRCLE REZONING.
OUR FAMILY'S HOME WILL BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED DILLARD CIRCLE REZONING AND THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THIS REZONING.
IT WAS UNFORTUNATE WHEN FILLING THE FORM OUT TO SPEAK, IT HAD ONLY TWO CHOICES
[02:30:02]
FOR OR AGAINST, UM, THIS KIND OF PERSPECTIVE.AND IN TURN, CHOICES IS AT THE CRUX OF WHAT I HOPE I CAN COMMUNICATE TO THE COMMISSION TODAY.
MY HUSBAND AND I UNDERSTAND, AND WE SUPPORT THE NEED FOR INNOVATIVE IDEAS LIKE DB 90 TO ADDRESS URBAN DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY IN REGARD TO MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WITH THAT SAID, WHAT WE HAVE WANTED AND WHAT WE'VE ASKED FOR ALL ALONG IN THE FOLKS THAT WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH, IS FAIR AND EQUITABLE CONSIDERATION IN THESE MATTERS.
UM, EVERYONE HAS A SEAT AT THE TABLE OF DB 90, EXCEPT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH THEIR OWNERS AND RENTERS.
MAYBE THE THINKING WAS THAT THIS PORTION OF AUSTIN HOUSING AND ITS CITIZENS WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED BECAUSE IT COMPLICATES OR HINDERS THE GIST OF THIS ORDINANCE TOO MUCH.
I BELIEVE THIS IS NOT TRUE AND CERTAINLY UNJUST.
I HOPE THIS COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT LIKE Y'ALL HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING TONIGHT TO DB 90 IN REGARD TO RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES, THAT, THAT ARE GONNA BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED, REVISED, NEGOTIABLE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS COULD WORK FOR ALL.
AS I'M GOING TO DEMONSTRATE WITH THESE PROPERTIES AND MAPS, NOT ALL DEVELOPMENTS SEEKING DB 90 ZONING ARE CREATED THE SAME AND DEFINITELY NOT EQUAL.
THE FIRST SET OF PROPERTIES TO BE ADDRESSED WAS, UM, IN THE JULY 9TH COMMISSION MEETING.
AND THESE WERE PROPERTIES THAT WERE ASKING FOR DB 90.
THE SECOND SET OF PROPERTIES I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT ARE THE ONES THAT WERE ASKING FOR DB 90 TONIGHT.
WHAT EVERY ONE OF THESE PROPERTIES HAVE IN COMMON.
THEY ALL HAVE THEIR DIRECT ACCESS TO MAJOR THOROUGHFARES, EVERY ONE OF THEM.
SO, AND ALSO MOST ARE ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN LARGE COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL AREAS.
SO LIKE, ON THE FIRST, I DON'T KNOW HOW I'M GONNA DO THIS WITH Y'ALL, BUT I'M GONNA JUST DO IT LIKE THIS 'CAUSE IT'S NOT GONNA MATCH THAT.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO MATCH THAT.
OH, LET'S TAKE DOWN, DO YOU NEED THE PHOTO AS WELL? OH, THERE IT IS.
ONE QUICK, UH, UH, NO, NOT I'M GONNA DO IT THIS WAY 'CAUSE THAT'S GONNA CONFUSE ME AND TAKE UP MY TIME.
OKAY, SO I'M GONNA READ OUT SOME STREETS HERE WHERE DB 90 WAS, IS, WAS ASKED FOR, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS APPROVED OR NOT, BUT HERE'S CONGRESS.
AND THIS WAS ON FRONTAGE OF I 35.
THIS IS ANOTHER PICTURE OF IT, ANOTHER PICTURE OF THAT WHOLE DEVELOPMENT.
I 35 AND, UM, EAST FIFTH BY THE RAILROAD YARD, EAST 12TH, SOUTH LAMAR, AND, UM, SHADY LANE.
AND IT WAS RIGHT ALONG AIRPORT.
OKAY, NOW THIS ONE TONIGHT, HERE'S MEDINA STREET, SECOND STREET, ANOTHER SECOND STREET.
THIS ONE IS, UH, MONTOPOLIS AND CADDY.
THIS ONE'S RESEARCH, RESEARCH.
IT'S A, IT'S A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, ESSENTIALLY.
MA'AM, I JUST WANNA GIVE YOU ONE, ONE MINUTE WARNING.
THIS AN ENTRANCE TO DENSON AVENUE.
IT'S A TWO LANE WITH A BIKE, LANE STREET, AND YES, IT'S CLOSE TO AIRPORT.
IT'S JUST VERY CLOSE TO AIRPORT, BUT IT'S NOT ON AIRPORT.
AND THEN YOU GO DOWN THIS CUL-DE-SAC.
WELL, YOU GO DOWN THIS CUL-DE-SAC AND YOU END UP HERE A LITTLE BITTY PIE OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY.
AND THEY'RE GONNA PUT IN 200 UNITS RIGHT NEXT BACKING UP TO OUR HOUSES.
[02:35:01]
I, I, I UNDERSTAND THIS GENTLEMAN'S POINT.THIS IS ANOTHER WAY OF LOOKING AT IT.
YES, I UNDERSTAND THIS GENTLEMAN'S POINT ABOUT THE BALCONIES AND THE WINDOWS, BUT WHAT IS NOT SEEN, AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DEMONSTRATE TO YOU, IS THAT THOSE BALCONIES AND THOSE WINDOWS WILL BE 25 FEET FROM OUR HOMES, STRAIGHT UP FIVE STORIES LOOKING INTO OUR BACKYARDS, OUR LIVES.
SO I'M JUST ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER THAT DB 90.
I DON'T WANNA THROW THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATH WATER, BUT WE NEED A SEAT AT THE TABLE.
WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO ADDRESS THESE SITUATIONS THAT INVOLVE OUR RESIDENCES.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM CAROL OWIN.
CAROL, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
AGAIN, I'M CAROL OLAND WITH SKYVIEW GROUPS.
AND, UM, WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS, UH, MONT WALK HOLDINGS IS THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY.
UH, THEY OWN 59 31 DILLARD CIRCLE 6,003, BUT THEY ALSO OWN 60 15, 60 16, 60 20, AND 59 97.
DILLARD AND T WALK HAS ALSO EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN PURCHASING OTHER PROPERTIES ALONG DILLARD CIRCLE.
SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE IS TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM MONT WALK, FOR WHAT THEY PLAN TO DO WITH THE WHOLE DILLARD CIRCLE AREA, AND NOT JUST A PIECEMEAL APPROACH ON THIS.
DILLARD CIRCLE'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR PLANNED REDEVELOPMENT.
IT'S RIGHT THERE ALONG THE, UH, HIGHLAND MALL AREA, ALL THE ATTRIBUTES, THE CORRIDOR, EVERYTHING HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP, MULTIFAMILY PARKING, GREEN SPACE, RETAIL, ALL ALONG THE PROPOSED RED LINE.
THESE WILL BEN BENEFIT EVERYBODY IF WE DO A THOUGHTFUL PLAN.
SO LET'S HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF DILLARD CIRCLE AND NOT JUST A PIECEMEAL HERE, PIECEMEAL THERE.
ASK YOUR CONSIDERATION ON THAT.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM KATHY BARTLEY.
KATHY, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I AM A LIVE IN SKYVIEW, RIGHT BEHIND THE BUILDING.
AND, UM, I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO TO OUR PROPERTIES IN, UH, THE LOSS OF VALUE AND TO OUR QUALITY OF LIFE.
UM, INITIALLY WHEN, UH, AMANDA WAS TALKING ABOUT THE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY WERE PRESENTED TO US, THEY HAD MENTIONED A TIERED DEVELOPMENT IS GONNA BE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE BUILDING FROM OUR HOMES.
AND IT IS NOW WAS GONNA BE 35, I THINK, BUT BIGGER THAN 25.
AND IT WAS GONNA BE TWO STORIES THAT WAS NEXT TO OUR OTHER, OUR HOMES AT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THEN IT WAS GONNA TEAR UP TO FOUR STORIES.
I'VE SUGGESTED THAT WE KEEP THE TWO STORIES NEXT TO OUR BUILDING AND THEN GO AS HIGH AS THEY WANT.
THEY'RE GOING TO ASK FOR 90 STORY, 90 FEET, SO, YOU KNOW, GO FURTHER.
UM, ALSO, THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S BEING GIVEN TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE'RE NOT GETTING AMENITIES AT ALL TO ANY COMMERCIAL AMENITIES.
UM, WE'RE NOT, UM, AND THEY'RE NOT GIVING PARKING.
THERE'S NO PARKING AVAILABLE AT ALL HERE.
THEY HAVE A PLAN TO MAYBE BUILD A PARKING AREA IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CIRCLE.
USED TO HAVE A GREAT BIG BUILDING THERE AND PUT LOTS OF APARTMENTS IN THERE WITH BALCONIES AND, AND ANYTHING THEY WANT TO, TO, TO DO THAT.
THIS ONE IS NOT, THIS IS A GREEN SPACE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL NOT HAVE ANY MORE GREEN SPACE.
IT WILL HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT FLOODING.
YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'LL BE CON YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A LOT OF IDEAS, BUT THEY'RE NOT, AND SHE GAVE US A RESTRICTED COVENANT THAT DID NOT ADDRESS THE FACT THAT WE WANTED LESS HEIGHT CLOSER TO OUR HOMES AND FURTHER DISTANCE THEY SUGGEST THEY HAVE GIVEN US, WHICH IS VERY NICE.
SO WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS WHAT SHE SAID.
THEY'VE SAID NO BALCONIES AND THAT'S GREAT.
I THINK THEY'RE, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A PRIVATE WALL, PRIVATE SOMETHING FENCE OR SOMETHING, AND HOODED LIGHTS.
AND, UM, THEY WERE ONLY GONNA GO UP TO 65 FEET.
UM, I JUST DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK IT WAS REPRESENTED PROPERLY.
AND SO WE DIDN'T GET THE POSTPONEMENT BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, HAVE THIS, UH, WE HAVE THIS REVI, THIS, UM, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT AND SIGN.
[02:40:01]
ANYWAY, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO SAY.AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WANT DENSITY.
WE JUST DON'T WANT, WE JUST DON'T WANT IT IMPEDING OUR LIFE AS MUCH AS THEY'RE SING.
WHAT IS IT? NIMBY THEY SAY, I KNOW THAT ISN'T A GOOD TERM TO USE WITH YOUNG PEOPLE AND BUT IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED TOO.
WE SHOULD HAVE A VO A VOICE IN ALL OF THIS, AND NOT JUST THIS KIND OF VOICE.
'CAUSE WE'RE FIGHTING AGAINST ALL THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT WHAT WE WANT.
SO ANYWAY, I'M NOT A VERY GOOD SPEAKER, BUT I DID THE BEST I COULD.
THANK YOU FOR MY CONSIDERATION.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM KIMBERLY, KIMBERLY IKI.
KIMBERLY WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU FOR HEARING US TODAY.
MY LAST NAME IS EISS, AND I, UM, OWN THE PROPERTY AT 3 0 6 EAST SKYVIEW.
AND THIS PROPOSED STRUCTURE WILL DIRECTLY, UM, ABUT OUR PROPERTY.
I'VE LIVED THERE FOR, WELL, WE MOVED IN IN 1997 IS WHEN WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.
THIS WAS A COMMUNITY BUILT IN THE 1950S.
AND, UM, SO I DO OBJECT TO, UM, THE WAY DB 90 HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE IMPLICATIONS FOR SINGLE RESIDENT OR SINGLE FAMILY COMMUNITIES.
SO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO PROVIDING MORE, UM, ACCESSIBLE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE.
I'VE BEEN A SOCIAL WORKER IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR OVER 30 YEARS AND ADVOCATE FOR IT ON A DAILY BASIS.
I THINK IT'S REALLY NEGLIGENT THE WAY THIS BUILDING HAS, UM, NOT CONSIDERED THE IMPLICATIONS IT HAS ON THESE SMALLER COMMUNITIES THAT ARE IMPLICATED.
UM, SO I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THE PREVIOUS OBJECTIONS AND CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN STATED.
AND, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE ONLY THING THAT WILL TEMPER THIS IS AN AGREED, AGREED UPON COVENANT WITH THE BUILDER.
AND THUS FAR WHAT WE HAVE SEEN DOES NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, UM, THE MOST, UH, SIGNIFICANT OF CONCERNS, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY STATED, WHICH IS 25 FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE, A FIVE STORY BUILDING.
SO NOT ONLY AM I CONCERNED ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE, BUT I'M ALSO, UM, CONCERNED ABOUT PROPERTY VALUES.
WE HAVE SPENT THE PAST 30 YEARS PUTTING ALL OF OUR TIME AND OUR MONEY AND OUR EFFORT INTO THIS PROPERTY.
AND NOW FOR, YOU KNOW, VALUES OF MY HOME, BEING FACED WITH THAT IS A PRETTY, PRETTY BIG DEAL.
AND I THINK IF ANYONE PUT THEMSELVES INTO THAT, INTO OUR SITUATION, YOU'D PROBABLY FEEL THE SAME.
UM, I GET THAT THERE IS, UM, THE VALUE FOR THE MASSES COMPARED TO INDIVIDUALS.
I JUST THINK THAT DB 90, THE WAY IT'S BEEN PRESENTED, REALLY DISREGARDS, UM, THE INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED IN THAT.
SO I'M, I'M, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOMETHING THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY, A WIN-WIN THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY AT THIS POINT.
IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE A WIN-WIN.
IT FEELS KIND OF LIKE THIS IS THE WAY WE'RE CHARGING AHEAD AND WE'RE NOT WORKING FOR SOMETHING THAT REALLY WORKS FOR ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.
SO AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
I JUST WANNA FINISH UP WITH MY APPLICATION.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING, UM, DILIGENTLY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND, UM, WHILE WE WEREN'T ABLE TO ADDRESS ALL OF THEIR CONCERNS, UM, WE DID, UM, GET TO A AGREEMENT ON SOME, WHICH IS TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT.
WE'RE ONLY BUILDING A FIVE STORY BUILDING THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE PLAN.
UM, SO LIMITING THE HEIGHT TO 65 FEET WITHIN 150 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE, WE'VE AGREED TO CONSTRUCT AN EIGHT FOOT MASONRY WALL ON THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE.
AND THIS IS IN ADDITION TO, UM, THE REQUIRED SCREENING, UM, BET THAT'S REQUIRED IN THE DB 90 ORDINANCE.
AND THEN ALSO OF COURSE PROHIBIT BALCONIES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION FOR JULIET BALCONIES, UM, WE ARE COMMITTING TO THESE THINGS VIA PRIVATE RESTRICT, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
UM, I ALSO WANNA SAY WE ARE PROVIDING PARKING.
I THINK IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN IS TYPICAL, UM, BUT WE ARE ARE WORKING WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE ENTIRE AREA TO FIGURE OUT A COMPREHENSIVE PARKING SOLUTION FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE AREA.
UM, WE WON'T GET TENANTS IF WE DON'T HAVE THE REQUIRED PARKING.
UM, AND, AND SO THAT'S A, AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT TO US AS WELL.
[02:45:01]
THANK YOU.IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING THE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WOODS SECOND BY VICE CHAIR, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
WHO HAS THE FIRST QUESTION? COMMISSIONER WOODS.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. BROWN.
UM, I, YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT PROHIBITING BALCONIES ON THE SOUTH FACADE OF THE BUILDING IS PART OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT WAS SENT YESTERDAY.
IS AND THERE, ARE THERE BALCONIES ON THE OTHER FACADES OR IS IT JUST JULIET BALCONIES EVERYWHERE? UM, THAT IS UNCLEAR AT THIS TIME.
WE HAVEN'T FULLY DESIGNED THE BUILDING AT THIS POINT, SO WE DON'T REALLY KNOW, BUT WE WOULD PLAN TO DO JULIET BALCONIES ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
DO YOU THINK THAT IS A CONDITION THAT YOU, THAT THE THE DEVELOPER, THE LANDOWNER WOULD BE OPEN TO RETHINKING? I THINK IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE VERY HARD FOR ME TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT IF WE WERE RESTRICTING OUTDOOR ACCESS JUST FOR THE RESIDENTS WHO HAPPEN TO BE ON THAT SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, I KNOW WE CAN'T MAKE THAT A PART OF OUR ZONING RECOMMENDATION.
BUT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, THAT THEY MIGHT CONSIDER? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
IS THAT, UM, I, I GUESS I DON'T WANNA ASK FOR TOO MUCH, UM, FROM YOU REGARDING THAT NOW, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S HELPFUL TO KNOW.
UM, I THINK THAT, THAT'S REALLY MY MAIN QUESTION.
NEXT QUESTION, MR. JOHNSON? UH, YEAH, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND, AND THANK YOU, UH, FOR THE FOLKS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD SPEAKING AS WELL.
UM, MY IN-LAWS OWN A HOUSE ON CHESTERFIELD, SO I KNOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD WELL.
UM, I ALSO WOULD CUT THROUGH ON THE SKYVIEW BRIDGE WHEN I'D BIKE TO WORK.
IT'S A, A, I ALWAYS SAY A WEIRD LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IN A VERY GOOD WAY.
UM, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A, A BIG ROW OF TREES ALONG THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE IN QUESTION AND THAT THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN DID PRESERVE ANY OF THOSE TREES THAT WERE NOT DEAD.
SO THE DB 90 REQUIRES TREE PLANTINGS ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE, SO WE WILL CERTAINLY BE COMPLYING WITH THAT.
UM, KATHY AND I HAVE BEEN TALKING A LOT ABOUT, I, I BELIEVE A CERTAIN SHRUBBERY THAT WAS PLANTED BY HER THAT SHE WANTS US TO MAINTAIN.
AND WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
ULTIMATELY, IT'S UP TO WHAT THE CITY WANTS IF THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SCREENING.
UM, BUT YES, YOU KNOW, THAT IS ALWAYS, YES, IF WE CAN PRESERVE EXISTING MORE MATURE TREES, WE'D PREFER TO DO THAT THAN TO RIP THEM OUT AND, YOU KNOW,
AND HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONVERSATION WITH, UH, I THINK IT'S CAP METRO WHO ACTUALLY OWNS THE RAIL LINE ABOUT PROVIDING PEDESTRIAN OR BICYCLE ACCESS ACROSS THE RAIL LINE TO AIRPORT BOULEVARD, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE SORT OF CAR LIGHT APPROACH TO PLANNING THIS PROJECT? DO YOU MEAN ALONG OUR PROPERTY LINE? I DO, YES.
UM, YES, WE, WE HAVE BEEN, UM, IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CAPITOL METRO.
UM, AS OF NOW, WE DON'T HAVE AN EXACT ANSWER AS TO WHETHER OR NOT, UM, A A PEDESTRIAN CROSSING WOULD BE POSSIBLE THERE.
UM, BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THERE IS ALREADY PRETTY GOOD ACCESS FROM OUR DEVELOPMENT TO GET TO THE RAIL VIA DILLARD, UM, THE RAIL STOP VIA DILLARD.
SO IT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S STILL A LITTLE BIT UP IN THE AIR, BUT WE'RE DEFINITELY IN CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM.
UM, AND THEN JUST THINKING ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL, THE ASK TO WAVE THE COMMERCIAL YES.
UH, REQUIREMENT, I UNDERSTAND YOU ONLY HAVE ABOUT 60 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON MM-HMM.
UM, HAS, WAS THERE ANY CONVERSATION ABOUT THE VIABILITY OF, OF DOING SOME LEVEL OF GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL NONETHELESS, EVEN IF IT'S FACING THE BREWERY ACROSS, UH, THAT PARKING LOT OR IN SOME SORT OF INNOVATIVE WAY THAT IT'S NOT JUST YOUR TYPICAL STRIP OF GLASS STOREFRONTS ON A ROAD, MAYBE IT'S ON A COURTYARD OR SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE SITE? YEAH, I THINK, I MEAN IN THE ORIGINAL ITERATION WE, 'CAUSE UNDER VM U2 WE DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME REQUEST A VARIANCE TO THAT.
SO WE WERE JUST INCLUDING THE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL.
SO YEAH, WE DEFINITELY HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THAT.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, AT THE TIME, AND WE EXPECT IT TO BE THE CASE WHEN WE RESUBMIT OUR SITE PLAN A PARKLAND REQUIREMENT TO BUILD A PUBLIC ACCESS TRAIL.
SO REALLY TRYING TO CREATE, DO SOME PLACEMAKING BETWEEN THE AND THE BIKE RACKS AND SORT OF THAT AREA.
UM, BUT WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH REGARDS TO THAT, UM, AND, AND WANT TO CONTINUE THOSE JUST WITHOUT THE COMMERCIAL PART ONLY BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE IT WILL SIT VACANT FOR A PART OF THE BUILDING THAT COULD OTHERWISE GO TO HOUSING.
UM, WE DID NOT DISCUSS POTENTIALLY DOING, UM, GROUND FLOOR RETAIL ALONG
[02:50:01]
THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE NORTH TO AUDITORIUM.UM, AND THEN I KNOW FIRE'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE A HOT BUTTON ISSUE FOR US ON A ANOTHER CASE WE'RE HEARING TONIGHT.
UM, THINKING ABOUT FIRE ACCESS TO THE SITE, OBVIOUSLY YOUR ONLY VEHICULAR ACCESS IS THROUGH DILLARD'S CIRCLE.
UM, I KNOW THAT IT'S PRETTY COMMON FOR LARGER DEVELOPMENTS TO USE A SORT OF GRASS FIRE LANE WHERE IT'S THE, THE CONCRETE BLOCKS THAT GROW GRASS BETWEEN THEM.
UM, CAN YOU JUST SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THIS SITE, WHAT REQUIREMENTS WILL BE IN PLACE FOR THE SITE? ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE TO PUT A FIRE LANE AROUND YOUR PROPERTY OR PART OF IT AND HOW IS THAT SORT OF A FORM INFORMING THE APPROACH TO THIS SITE GOING FORWARD? YES.
THE FIRE LANE WILL BE REQUIRED THROUGH DILLARD TO GO DOWN TO THE SOUTH END OF THE BUILDING.
UM, SO THAT'LL PROBABLY BE 25 FEET IF I'M, EXCUSE ME, PROBABLY 25, 5 FEET FIRE LANE, IF NOT 25 FEET.
UM, ADDITIONALLY FOR THIS BUILDING WE'LL BE REQUIRED TO HAVE AERIAL ACCESS SO THE BOOMS OF THE TRUCKS CAN KIND OF MOVE AROUND AS THEY GO UP.
UM, AND THAT WILL PROBABLY DICTATE A LOT ABOUT THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING AS WELL.
AS FAR AS A GRASS CREEK, WE DO HAVE A FIRE LANE THAT GOES BACK THERE AND ALSO A PUBLIC TRAIL.
UM, THAT GOES BACK THERE AS WELL.
AND SO IF, IF WE NEED TO PUT THEM ON TOP OF EACH OTHER, WE WILL BE PURSUING A GRASS CREEK TYPE, UM, TYPE FIRE LANE IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVES IT.
WHICH, BUT IT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT YOU WOULD HAVE AT LEAST THAT 20 TO 25 FOOT DISTANCE WHERE THERE IS NO BUILDING OR STRUCTURE BECAUSE OF FIRE REQUIREMENTS ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE.
THERE WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 25 FEET AND, AND MORE THAN LIKELY MORE.
ALL RIGHT, OTHER QUESTIONS? VICE CHAIR.
UM, AND UM, THANK YOU MR. BROWN FOR BEING THERE.
I, I GUESS I DO WANNA FOLLOW UP ON SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT COMMISSIONER WOODS HAD SORT OF RAISED.
I THINK CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CONVERSATION THAT Y'ALL HAVE HAD AROUND THE ISSUE OF SORT OF BALCONIES OR WINDOWS IN THAT SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY? UH, SURE.
SO THERE ARE, UM, SEVERAL HOMES THAT WE SHARE A PROPERTY LINE WITH THAT, UM, THE BUILDING WILL BE 25 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, A MINIMUM OF 25 FEET.
MY GUESS IS AS WE GET THROUGH DESIGN, IT'LL PROBABLY BE FURTHER BUT A MINIMUM OF 25 FEET AWAY.
AND SO THE CONCERN WITH A FIVE FOOT, A FIVE STORY BUILDING IS THEIR PRIVACY.
AND SO PEOPLE LOOKING INTO THEIR YARDS.
UM, AND SO IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE A COMPROMISE ON THAT, 'CAUSE WE, YOU KNOW, WE DO WANT LIGHT AND AIR AND, AND FRESH AIR AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS FOR OUR RESIDENTS AS WELL.
SO OUR COMPROMISE WAS THE JULIET BALCONY.
I APPRECI THAT IN JUST SO I UNDERSTAND.
SO WE WOULD OF COURSE HAVE THE 25 FOOT BUFFER THAT IS BUILT WITHIN THE T 90 AS A COMPATIBILITY.
WE WOULD HAVE THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER OF 15 FEET WITH EXISTING VEGETATION AND NEW PLANTATION AS REQUIRED.
AND CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE MASONRY WALL IS SUPPOSED TO BE EIGHT FEET HIGH.
WHAT IS THE, WHAT, WHAT IS SORT OF THE COMMITMENT THAT Y'ALL HAVE MADE AROUND THAT MASONRY WALL? THAT'S BASICALLY IT.
AN EIGHT FOOT, AN EIGHT FOOT WALL, UH, THAT'S MASONRY.
WE ARE GONNA BE WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORS TO DECIDE EXACTLY WHAT THE MATERIAL IS AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT A REQUEST FOR NO CINDER BLOCKS AND WE'RE FINE WITH THAT.
UM, AND, AND SO IT, IT'LL BE JUST AN EIGHT FOOT MASONRY WALL.
SO I, I'LL BE HONEST, I THINK I WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE, WHAT WE'RE HEARING VERY CLEARLY FROM NEIGHBORS, AND WE'VE HEARD THIS BEFORE IN THIS COMMISSION AS WELL, THERE'S SORT OF A CONCERN ABOUT PRIVACY AND I THINK THAT'S A GENUINE REAL CONCERN.
I'VE LIVED IN HOME WITH THAT SORT OF, YOU KNOW, ABILITY BEFORE.
BUT I ALSO WANNA SAY, YOU KNOW, AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER FOR US, LIKE HAVING THOSE BALCONIES NOT JUST LIKE WINDOWS OR, OR JULIET BALCONIES, BUT BALCONIES WHICH ARE AN EXTERNAL SPACE WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE KNOW THERE'S MENTAL HEALTH SPECIFICS ASSOCIATED WITH HAVING PRIVATE EXTERNAL SPACE AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
SO I'LL BE HONEST, LIKE JUST BUILDING ON THAT QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER WOODS, AM I AGAIN WHERE WE CAN EITHER REQUIRE NOR NEGATE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, THAT IS A CONVERSATION THAT IS ONGOING.
BUT AM I HEARING FROM YOU POTENTIALLY A COMMITMENT TO RECONSIDER THAT ASK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? CORRECT.
BECAUSE I DO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER WOOD, IT MAKES IT VERY HARD.
AGAIN, AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE WERE TRYING TO THINK BROADLY OF ALL OF OUR NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY, HOW DO WE SORT OF MOVE FORWARD.
IT WOULD BE VERY HARD FOR ME TO ALSO SUPPORT A CASE WHERE BALCONIES OR OTHER OPENINGS ARE LIMITED.
AGAIN, HEARING THE PRIVACY CONCERN VERY REALISTICALLY.
I ALSO JUST WANNA SAY, YOU KNOW, THINKING TO MY OWN SELF, YOU KNOW, THINKING OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, I'VE LIVED AS A RENTER IN THIS CITY FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME.
DURING THE PANDEMIC WE HAD A 40 TO 50 FOOT OUTDOOR EXTERNAL BALCONY SLASH PATIO.
AND AT A TIME WHEN ME AND MY PARTNER BOTH HAD TO WEAR MASKS, EVEN IF WE WENT TO THE PARK OR WALKED OUT ON THE STREET, THAT 40 TO 50 SQUARE FOOT WAS A LIFESAVER.
THAT WAS THE ONLY SPACE WHERE WE COULD SIT WITHOUT HAVING
[02:55:01]
A MASK ON OUR, AND HAVE THAT ABILITY TO ACCESS OUTDOOR SPACE.AND FOR ME THAT'S A REALLY A COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.
SO I CANNOT SUPPORT SOMETHING WHERE THAT SORT OF THING WOULD BE LIMITED.
AND I ALSO WANNA SAY I APPRECIATE YOU, YOUR COMMITMENT EARLIER AND I HOPE YOU WILL KEEP IT GOING, WHICH IS NO MATTER WHAT THIS COMMISSION DECIDES TODAY, YOU'LL CONTINUE WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS THIS MOVES FORWARD.
OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. MAXWELL? UH, YES.
SO A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT HERE.
UH, I THINK YOU NOTED IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT YOU'RE, THE COMPANY YOU'RE WORKING WITH HAS ACTUALLY DONE DEVELOPMENTS IN SEVERAL PARTS OF THE CITY.
UM, CAN YOU GIVE US A SENSE OF WHAT TYPES OF, UH, PROPERTIES THOSE ARE? LIKE RENTAL AND COST? I'M SPECIFICALLY THINKING ABOUT A CC HIGHLAND BEING SO CLOSE BY, WOULD THIS BE SOMETHING WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO STUDENTS? IS THAT A POPULATION THEY GENERALLY WORK WITH? UM, YES.
STUDENTS, THEY HAVE ANOTHER PROJECT THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW JUST SOUTH OF ST.
UM, AND PRI PRIMARILY STUDENT KIND OF STUDENT AREAS AND THEN ALSO, UM, BEING NEAR TRANSIT, SO EAST RIVERSIDE CORRIDOR, M-L-K-T-O-D.
UM, AND, AND THEY BUILD ALL OF THEIR BUILDINGS IN THESE AREAS TO AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NEAR MASS TRANSIT.
UM, AND, AND THAT'S A WAY TO KEEP PARKING DOWN.
UM, AND, AND THEY HAVE A LOT OF TENANTS THAT DON'T EVEN HAVE CARS AND SO THAT'S KIND OF THEIR DEMOGRAPHIC.
AND THEN I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THIS TRAIL EASEMENT THAT YOU MENTIONED EARLIER.
WHAT WOULD THAT BE USED FOR, SORT OF CONNECT? WOULD IT BE ADDING TO THE CONNECTIVITY OF THIS PARTICULAR SITE? GREAT QUESTION.
UM, IN ITS MOST RECENT ITERATION, WHICH WAS AGAIN WAS WITH THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN, IT KIND OF GOES DOWN TO THIS SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE OF THE, OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY AND STUBBS OUT AT THE CAPITAL METRO LINE.
AND THEN, UM, JUST KIND OF THINKING ABOUT, I GUESS OTHER PROPERTIES SORT OF ALONG THE LINES OF, YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, HAVE YOU HAD A SITUATION IN SOME OF THE OTHER ELEMENTS YOU'VE DONE WHERE YOU HAVE LIMITED TO JULIET BALCONIES FOR AND HAS THAT AFFECTED YOUR RENTAL ABILITIES AND SORT OF THE UPTAKE OF THE BUILDING? YES, WE HAVE DONE THAT BEFORE AND I, I'M NOT SURE, UM, IF THERE'S BEEN AN ISSUE WITH BEING ABLE TO GET TENANTS, IS THAT YOUR QUESTION? WELL, JUST IN GENERAL, IF IT'S MADE THE, UM, ACTUAL RENTAL UNITS LESS DESIRABLE, UM, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD POINT OUT IS THAT WE DO HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS BECAUSE IT IS A DB 90 CASE.
SO I AM CONCERNED THAT SOME OF THOSE UNITS MIGHT BE CONCE SEEN AS LESS DESIRABLE AND THEREFORE END UP AS BEING THE AFFORDABLE UNITS BECAUSE THEY'RE ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE AND HAVE ONLY SMALLER ACCESS IES.
I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
I'LL, I'LL GET BACK TO YOU THOUGH.
AND THEN, UM, ONE FINAL QUESTION JUST APPRO APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY, UM, OF THE UNITS WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THE JULIET BALCONY? SINCE YOU'RE SAYING IT'S JUST ONE SIDE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
SO IT'S LIKE A THIRD OF THE BUILDING OR, UM, SO I GUESS IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE FOUR TIME 32 UNITS.
AND I GUESS THE QUESTION I'M JUST GONNA PUT IT OUT THERE IS THAT I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO ALSO HEAR THAT COMMITMENT THAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT RETHINKING THE JULIET BALCONIES.
UM, JUST AGAIN, REALLY EMPHASIZING AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, I THINK WE'VE COME TO A PLACE WHERE, WHERE WE FEEL THAT RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT TAKE AWAY PUB PUBLIC SPACE OR I SHOULD SAY OUTDOOR SPACE FOR THESE TYPES.
ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE THINKING ABOUT A DEMOGRAPHIC LIKE STUDENTS WHO MIGHT BE NEW TO AUSTIN OR YOU KNOW, HAVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AS MENTIONED BY ANOTHER COMMISSIONER.
WE REALLY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE LIVING IN REALLY APPROPRIATE TYPE SETTINGS, UM, THAT FEEL WELCOMING.
AND I'M NOT SURE THAT JULIET BALCONIES ARE APPROPRIATE GIVEN THAT, AND ESPECIALLY AGAIN CONSIDERING THAT THAT MIGHT BE USED FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THOSE WOULD BE LESS SORT OF AMENITY FOCUSED POTENTIALLY.
'CAUSE THEY HAVE THE SMALLER BALCONIES.
SO THAT IS AGAIN, A CONCERN THAT I WOULD RAISE.
UM, SO JUST WANTED TO FLAG THAT.
BUT I DO ALSO WANNA SAY THAT I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL CONNECTIONS WITH THE PARKLAND TRAIL AND I REALLY DO HOPE THAT WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT WITH CAT METRO BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY TRANSIT RICH AND OBVIOUSLY AMENITY FOCUSED AREA.
THAT WOULD BE REALLY GREAT TO SEE A NEW DEVELOPMENT IN.
I THINK I SAW COMMISSIONER AL KIM, I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND YOU KNOW, WHILE THEY'RE MAKING THEIR WAY UP, I WOULD LIKE TO ECHO AGAIN WHAT WE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE COMMENTARY, WHICH IS A LOT OF THESE CONCERNS, UM, ABOUT HOW TO INTEGRATE WOULD BE RESOLVED IF WE HAD THE SMALL AREA PLANNING.
I JUST, I FEEL LIKE I SAY IT EVERY MEETING NOW, I'VE MADE MOTION FOR IT, WE'VE SENT IT TO COUNCIL, WE HAVE CANDIDATES CAMPAIGNING ON THIS, WE HAVE AN ELECTION COMING UP.
SO I WOULD SAY FOR THOSE FOLKS WHO THINK THAT THAT'S A GOOD IDEA AND HOW WE CAN HANDLE THE CHALLENGES OF VARIATION AROUND OUR CITY TO SOLVE OUR PROBLEMS, LET'S START PUSHING OUR CANDIDATES AND OUR COUNCIL TO ANSWER TO THAT.
MY STAFF QUESTION, UM, ON THIS PROPERTY, I, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU GUYS ARE EVALUATING, DO YOU HAVE AT YOUR LEVEL OF THE EVALUATION ON THE ZONING PART, ARE YOU GETTING INFORM ANY INFORMATION ON, UM, THE FIRE REQUIREMENTS OR THE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS? I KNOW COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SAID WE HAVE ANOTHER CASE THAT WE'RE WE THAT THIS
[03:00:01]
MAY HAVESO I'M WONDERING DOES THAT EVEN COME INTO YOUR PIECE OR IS THAT YES.
FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD IN THE SITE PLANNING? NO, THAT DOES COME IN.
EVERY, EVERY REZONING CASE HAS A FIRE, UM, REVIEW AND THEY EITHER APPROVE IT OR REJECT IT.
THEY DO GIVE REASONS AND THE APPLICANT DOES WORK TO RESOLVE THOSE, RESOLVE AND ANSWER THOSE.
AND THERE'S A SECTION IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT SAYS THAT THERE ARE NO COMMENTS FROM, UH, FIRE, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY'VE APPROVED IT.
AND THEN YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS THEN SINCE THEY'VE APPROVED, BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS.
WHEN I LOOK AT LIKE THE AERIAL ON THE SITE, I CAN SEE WHAT THE APPLICANT IS CONCERNED ABOUT, ABOUT THAT SMALL STREET FRONTAGE.
SO I'M SEEING KIND OF LIKE A PIE WEDGE-SHAPED PIECE.
I'VE GOT A VERY SMALL STREET FRONTAGE ON A VERY LOW LEVEL ROUNDABOUT CIRCLE.
I DON'T SEE ANY MAJOR STREET FRONTAGE ANYWHERE ELSE.
I SEE TRACKS AND THEN ANOTHER SPACE AND THEN STREET FRONTAGE.
I'M JUST CURIOUS HOW, WHY THAT'S NOT A SAFETY CONCERN.
IF THEY'VE APPROVED IT, IT MEANS THAT THEY HAVE AC THEY WILL BE ABLE TO ACCESS THE SITE AND THEY DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, RESTRICTIONS ON IT.
AND, AND THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT FOR KNOWING THAT THIS HAS GONE THROUGH THEM, UH, BEFORE MM-HMM.
UM, AND EVERY ZONING CASE DOES GO THROUGH FIRE.
I'M TRYING TO, BECAUSE I KNOW SOME OF THE STUFF, UH, I THINK THAT THE, UH, THE TRANSPORTATION STUDIES COME AFTER, UM, OUR PROCESS.
THAT'S END ALL MY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
ALRIGHT, THREE MORE SPOTS FOR QUESTIONS.
I'M NOT, I PROMISE I'M NOT GONNA RAMPAGE ABOUT DB 90 LIKE I USUALLY DO AS MUCH AS I'D LOVE TO.
UM, BUT MY QUESTION IS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE COMMERCIAL, THE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL VARIANCE OR WAIVER, WHATEVER THAT'S BEING REQUESTED HERE.
UM, I'M ASSUMING THAT THERE'S NOT SOME SORT OF MINIMUM THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT WHERE THAT'S TRIGGERING BECAUSE IF, IF THE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL IS, IS IF THE LEVEL OF IT'S DICTA DICTATED BY FRONTAGE AND THEY'VE ONLY GOT 60 FEET OF STREET FRONTAGE, DOES THAT MEAN THEY'RE REQUIRED TO GIVE US A GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL CLOSET AND THEN THEY SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT? OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? SO THEY CAN REQUEST A WAIVER THAT'S ZERO TO A HUNDRED PERCENT DEPENDING OF THE 75% REQUIREMENT.
IN THIS CASE, THEY REQUESTED ZERO.
SO IT JUST, IT DEPENDS ON EACH CASE AND WHAT EACH APPLICANT, UH, IS WANTING FOR THEIR CASE.
WHEN, REFRESH MY MEMORY, THE 75% REQUIREMENT IS BASED ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL OF THEIR GROUND FLOOR OR IS IT BASED ON THE, THE, THE FRONTAGE OF THE ROAD? THE CURRENT CODE DOES STATE OF THE GROUND FLOOR, BUT THERE IS THE AMENDMENT IN PLACE FOR DB 90 FOR JUST 75% OF THE FRONTAGE, UH, TO MATCH THE OLD VMU TWO STANDARDS.
SO THAT'S THE SCENARIO THAT'S UP RIGHT NOW OF THE FRONTAGE ROAD.
SO IF WE WERE NOT TO PASS THE WAIVER, THEN THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO GIVE US AT LEAST 45 FEET OF GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE.
IF YOU DIDN'T, YOU COULD DO A PERCENTAGE OF ZERO TO A HUNDRED OF THE 75% OR YOU COULD DENY IT COMPLETELY? YES.
I KNOW IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF LIKE MINIMUM THRESHOLD THERE THAT TRIGGERS THE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT FOR, FOR CASES LIKE THESE.
'CAUSE THERE'S A NUMBER OF, SO THEY JUST HAVE TO MAKE THEIR CASE IN TERMS OF WHY THEY'RE SEEKING THE VARIANCE.
AND SHE, SHE STATED ALL THE DIFFERENT IMPLICATIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY THE CITY.
SO I THINK IS THERE A MECHANISM OH, OH, THANK YOU.
IS THERE A MECHANISM FOR THEM TO REQUEST WAIVERS AFTER THEY HAVE DB 90 ZONING? THEY NEED TO REQUEST IT AT THE TIME OF RESO.
OKAY, OTHER QUESTIONS? ARE WE READY FOR A MOTION MR. JOHNSON? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
UM, I'LL MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF CS MUV DB 90 NP SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SURE.
UM, LIKE I SAID, I'M, I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, AND ITS UNIQUE CHARMS. I THINK THEY ARE UNIQUE IN MANY WAYS.
UM, BUT THAT SAID, I, WHILE I SYMPATHIZE WITH THE REALITY OF HAVING A LARGE BUILDING GO UP BEHIND YOUR, YOUR HOUSE WHERE YOU DIDN'T HAVE ONE EVER BEFORE, UM, WE LIVE IN A GROWING CITY IN A LARGE CITY.
[03:05:01]
AND INEVITABLY BECAUSE OF THE WAY THIS CITY WAS BUILT OVER TIME, BECAUSE WE DO DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING IN A PIECEMEAL FASHION, THAT FRICTION'S GOING TO COME UP SOMEWHERE.AND HISTORICALLY WE HAD SO-CALLED COMPATIBILITY RULES THAT SAID, EVERYTHING GOES IN FAVOR OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMEOWNER.
YOU GET MORE DISTANCE THAN ANY OTHER CITY IN THE COUNTRY, GIVES YOU FROM TALL BUILDINGS, RELATIVELY TALL BUILDINGS.
UM, WITH DB 90 AND WITH OTHER CHANGES WE'VE MADE TO COMPATIBILITY, WE SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT ISN'T WORKING.
WE'VE TRIED THAT FOR DECADES AND IT'S NOT WORKING.
IT'S, IT'S HARMING OUR ABILITY TO GROW IN A HEALTHY WAY.
UM, IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S GONNA BE EASY.
THIS IS A CASE WHERE IF I OWNED ONE OF THESE HOUSES, I DON'T THINK GENUINELY, I DON'T THINK I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY ABOUT HAVING A FIVE STORY BUILDING GO UP BEHIND ME.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S A SACRIFICE WE SOMETIMES HAVE TO MAKE AS A CITY AS A WHOLE.
AND SO WHAT THE APPLICANT IS DOING, WHAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE DOING, WORKING TOGETHER TO TRY TO FIND COMPROMISE, I THINK IS FINE.
I THINK IF, IF JULIETTE BALCONIES HELP SOLVE THE PROBLEM IN THIS CASE, THAT'S FINE.
YOU KNOW, NOT EVERY APARTMENT IN THE CITY NEEDS TO HAVE A 50 SQUARE FOOT BALCONY.
IF THEY COULD, THAT'S GREAT, BUT THEY CAN'T ALL HAVE THAT.
UM, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD USE OUR LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY, OUR ZONING AS A CITY TO FORCE THOSE COMPROMISES ONTO PEOPLE.
UH, I THINK THOSE ARE THINGS THAT CAN BE NEGOTIATED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS WHERE AND WHEN APPROPRIATE.
UM, THAT SAID, IT'S A SITE IN IMMEDIATE WALKING DISTANCE TO EXISTING MASS TRANSIT, GREAT ACCESS BY CAR, BY BIKE, BY FOOT, UH, TO AMENITIES, PARKS, UH, OTHER RESOURCES THAT YOU NEED FOR URBAN LIVING.
UM, I THINK IT'S GENERALLY A NO BRAINER TO PUT A BIG DENSE BUILDING RIGHT HERE IN THE MIDDLE OF AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.
I SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER COX.
WELL, LET ME GET MY, MY DB 90 SOAPBOX HERE FOR A SECOND.
UM, UH,
UM, BUT WHAT I JUST HEARD WAS TALKING ABOUT HOW IN SOME CASES WE, WE NEED TO FIND THE APPROPRIATE COMPROMISE TO TRY TO MAKE THE LARGEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE HAPPY WHILE STILL GROWING THIS CITY IN THE WAY THAT WE NEED TO, TO ACCOMMODATE, UH, ALL, ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO LIVE HERE.
IT DOESN'T AFFORD US THAT FLEXIBILITY.
AND I THINK WE'RE RUNNING UP TO THAT, UH, MORE AND MORE AND MORE AND MORE.
AND, YOU KNOW, I I, I OWN A HOUSE THAT HAS THE GROVE POD BEHIND IT, SO I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH HAVING ALL THE CONVERSATIONS WITH ALL OF MY NEIGHBORS ABOUT, UM, ABOUT HAVING LARGE BUILDINGS LOOMING OVER YOUR BACKYARD.
AND, AND WHAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SAID IS TRUE.
YOU KNOW, I, I BEING ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE, I SYMPATHIZE WITH THAT CONCERN, BUT I ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT WE'RE LIVING IN A CITY, WE'RE LIVING IN AN URBAN AREA, AND, AND THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
AND ONE OF THE COMPROMISES THAT WE HAD AVAILABLE TO US WAS SETBACKS AND, AND SOME LEVEL OF WHAT WE USED TO CALL COMPATIBILITY, WHICH WAS COMPLETELY DECIMATED BY DB 90.
I UNDERSTAND THAT OUR COMPATIBILITY NEEDED TO CHANGE, AND WE MADE THOSE CHANGES, BUT, BUT I FEEL LIKE IN THE DB 90 SITUATION, WE MADE IT TO THE POINT WHERE IT'S COMPLETELY INFLEXIBLE.
SO THAT'S WHY I HAVE A BIG ISSUE WITH THIS, AND I'LL CONTINUE TO HAVE A BIG ISSUE WITH IT, AND HOPEFULLY THIS COMMISSION WILL HELP, HELP FIX IT.
ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR MR. SKI MOORE? YEAH, JUST BRIEFLY WANNA KIND OF WALK THROUGH WHAT I UNDERSTOOD THE PRACTICAL SETBACKS WILL BE AT THIS LOCATION.
SO WE'LL HAVE A 15 FOOT SCREENING BUFFER, WHICH WILL BE BEHIND AN EIGHT FOOT TALL, MY ARY WALL.
AND THEN I BELIEVE WE'LL HAVE WHAT SEEMS LIKE A 25 FOOT FIRE ACCESS OF SOME SORT.
SO 15 TO 25, 40 FEET OF BEFORE THE BUILDING FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE BUILDING.
WHEN I LOOK AT THE EXISTING HOUSES THAT ARE ALONG SKYVIEW ROAD, THEY'RE ALL PLUS OR MINUS 50 FEET FROM THEIR BACK PROPERTY LINE.
SO I'M DRAWING THIS PICTURE IN MY HEAD WHERE I HAVE 50 FEET FROM THE HOUSES TO THEIR OWN PROPERTY LINE, PLUS ANOTHER WHERE IT'S LATE 40 FEET.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A BUILDING THAT MIGHT BE, UH, THEORETICALLY COULD BE 90 FEET TALL, THAT IS ALMOST, SORRY, 90 FEET AWAY RIGHT FROM IT.
SO THIS IDEA, THIS IMAGE, AND IT'S THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US, RIGHT? AGAIN, WE'RE MAKING THESE IMAGES, WHETHER IT'S THE MOVIE UP OR, YOU KNOW, AND THESE CONVERSATIONS HERE WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE BUILDINGS LOOMING OVER, BUT WHEN WE GET DOWN TO IT, THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
ANYBODY SEE ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER
[03:10:01]
MUTAL? I ALREADY TALKED ABOUT AREA PLANNING ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE.I'M ACTUALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE WAIVER ON THE COMMERCIAL, THE REQUEST FOR THAT ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
I, I REALLY FEEL LIKE TO SOME OF WHAT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SAID TO SOME OF WHAT COMMISSIONER COX SAID, DB 90 IS PRETTY NARROW.
AND SO WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES TO US WITH DB 90 ASKING FOR DB 90, AND THEN THEY NEED CHANGES TO MAKE IT FINANCIALLY WORK FOR THEM, AND THAT'S NOT THE RIGHT SOLUTION TO THEIR PROBLEM, YOU KNOW, THAT WE, WE REALLY WANTED TO ACTIVATE, WE REALLY WANTED TO CREATE THESE BIKE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY WAYS THAT WOULD INTEGRATE WELL INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND I JUST DON'T SEE THAT WE'RE SUCCEEDING.
AND I FEEL LIKE SOMETIMES OUR DECISIONS ARE KIND OF HAPHAZARD, ALLOW, ALLOWING THE FLEXIBILITY THAT WE NEED FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE'LL GIVE IT TO THE DEVELOPER, BUT WE WON'T GIVE IT TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND I, I JUST, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY THERE WHO ARE PAYING THE TAX BILLS, I DON'T, I DON'T GET IT.
AND I, I, I DON'T, I DON'T SUPPORT THAT.
LAST TWO SPOTS FOR AND AGAINST.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE ITEM.
UM, AND ESSENTIALLY I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT WHAT STAFF IS SAYING AND WHAT FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID, THIS SEEMS LIKE AN APPROPRIATE SPACE.
WE KNOW THAT THIS IS RIGHT NEXT TO ESSENTIALLY WHAT IS A DOD WITH OUR REDLINE STATION.
THIS IS PART OF THE HIGHLINE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
IT WILL HAVE ACCESS, AND WE KNOW THAT FIRE AND, YOU KNOW, OTHER DEPARTMENTS HAVE TAKEN A LOOK AT IT.
AND WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT IT FURTHER AS SITE PLANS ARE SUBMITTED TO ENSURE THAT ALL SAFE AND SAFETY FEATURES ARE SORT OF, UH, PART OF IT.
AND IN ADDITION TO SORT OF WHAT COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE WAS SAYING, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE REMINDER THAT I BELIEVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ALSO, UM, NEGOTIATED A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT ALLOWS ONLY 60 TO 65 FEET OF HEIGHT AFTER 25 FEET.
SO ACTUALLY, IF THAT AGREEMENT GOES THROUGH, UM, AND I THINK WE'RE ALL GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE AGREEMENT BEING WORKED OUT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AS THIS GOES TO COUNCIL, YOU WOULD ONLY HAVE 65 ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FOR 150 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, SO SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED UNDER DB 90.
SO THERE IS A BUILT IN MECHANISM HERE THAT I THINK THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS EXPLORING, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
AND I THINK THE ONLY CONCERN THAT WE HAVE RAISED FROM THAT GOVERNMENT, AGAIN, WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SAYING AND SYMPATHY FOR WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SAYING, UM, UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DON'T WANNA HAVE EVEN BALCONIES RESTRICTED.
I, I WOULD DISAGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER SAYING I WOULD NOT WANT BALCONIES RESTRICTED EITHER, BECAUSE AS FAR AS I APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, IF I WAS ONE OF THE HOMEOWNERS WHO LIVED THERE AND THE CONCERN I WOULD HAVE, I CAN ALSO IMAGINE IF I WAS ONE OF THE RENTERS WHO WILL IN THE FUTURE LIVE THERE AND THE CONCERN THEY WOULD HAVE.
SO HOPEFULLY WE AS A COMMISSION CAN BALANCE THE NEEDS OF OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY WHILE STILL BEING RESPECTFUL TO THIS SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS FOR COMMISSIONER JOHNSON'S MOTION FOR STAFF, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
EIGHT, NINE, THOSE AGAINST 1, 2, 3.
MR. PHILLIPS, HOW DID YOU VOTE? OH, OKAY.
THAT ONE PASSES NINE TO THREE.
I'M GONNA TAKE A TEMPERATURE CHECK BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO MORE DISCUSSION CASES, ONE OF THOSE BEING THE SUN FIELD MUD.
UM, AND THEN WE HAVE THE IRC, THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL AND BUILDING CODES WHERE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
UM, DO WE WANNA TAKE A BREAK NOW OR, OH, NO, BEFORE FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
LET'S TAKE A, LET'S TAKE A LITTLE BREAK NOW.
LET'S TAKE A SEVEN MINUTE BREAK.
WE'LL COME BACK AT 9 33 QUORUM.
[25. Consent Agreement Amendment: C12M-2024-0015 - Sunfield MUD Consent Agreement]
ON TO ITEM NUMBER 25, SUN FIELD MUD.UH, MS. GROFF? YES, SARAH GROFF, UH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
SO CASE C 12 M 20 24 0 0 15 IS THE SUN FIELD MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT AMENDMENT TO THE CONSENT AGREEMENT.
THIS MUD IS LOCATED IN AUSTIN'S LIMITED PURPOSE JURISDICTION.
IT INCLUDES APPROXIMATELY 575 ACRES LOCATED EAST OF I 35, ALONG THE TRAVIS AND HAYES COUNTY LINE SOUTH OF, UH, TURNERSVILLE ROAD.
[03:15:01]
IN 2005 BY TCEQ AND A PUD WAS CREATED, UM, IN 2015 DUE TO CHANGES IN THE LAND PLAN.UM, PUD USES THE MUD NEEDS TO UPDATE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE PERCENTAGE OF REIMBURSEMENT THE DEVELOPER CAN OBTAIN FOR WATER WASTEWATER PROJECTS, ALLOWING THE DEVELOPER TO OBTAIN RE UH, BOND REIMBURSEMENT FOR ROAD PROJECTS, ALLOWING THE DEVELOPER TO SEEK FUTURE COST PARTICIPATION FROM CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FAR SOUTH PRESSURE ZONE WATER, WATER RESERVOIR, AND UPDATING, UH, THE WATER SERVICE PLANT.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND EITHER OF US ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS CHAIR WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT FOR FIVE MINUTES? OH, YES.
UM, I'M BEN WILLIAMS WITH KIMLEY HORN HERE REPRESENTING THE, UM, OWNER AND APPLICANT SUN FIELD DEVELOPMENT.
UM, SO MY, UH, MY PRESENTATION WAS KIND OF A COMBINED PRESENTATION WITH THE PUT AMENDMENT AND THE CONSENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT.
IF YOU COULD GO TO SLIDE FOUR, THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE JUST NEED TO FOCUS, UM, AS FAR AS THE MUD CONSENT AGREEMENT.
SO, UM, THIS AMENDMENT IS, UM, YOU KNOW, AS STAFF STATED, THE REMOVAL OF SOME OF THE REIMBURSEMENT RESTRICTIONS, AND THEN ALSO WE'RE UPDATING THE WATER SERVICE PLAN.
UM, SO UNDER THE CURRENT CONSENT AGREEMENT, THIS, UH, THE PLAN THAT'S ON THE LEFT HERE, UM, IS THE WATER SERVICE PLAN THAT THE APPLICANT IS HELD TO, UM, IS BASED ON AN SER THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2014, UM, WHICH WAS JUST BASED ON THE PROPOSED, UH, DEVELOPMENTS AND EVERYTHING IN THE SURROUNDING AREA AT THAT TIME.
UM, PART OF THAT INCLUDES ABOUT NINE, A LITTLE OVER 19,000 LINEAR FEET OF 24 INCH WATER MAIN.
UM, THE FAR SOUTH ZONE RESERVOIR SITE THAT IS, UH, SHOWN THERE IS JUST THE SITE DEDICATION.
IT'S NOT THE ACTUAL ELEVATED STORAGE TANK THAT'S PART OF THAT.
SO, UM, WITH THIS, UH, WATER SERVICE PLAN UPDATE THAT IS PART OF THIS AMENDMENT, UM, THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN INFRASTRUCTURE BEING BUILT.
SO THERE'S STILL KIND OF THAT SAME 19,000 LINEAR FEET OF 24 INCH WATER MAIN PLUS AN ADDITIONAL, UM, ALMOST THREE AND A HALF MILES OF 12 INCH AND 16 INCH WATER MAIN, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED, UM, AS WELL AS A 2 MILLION GALLON ELEVATED STORAGE TANK.
SO, JUST WANTED TO KIND OF TOUCH ON THAT, THAT THE, YOU, THE OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CURRENT AGREEMENT, UM, ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THE OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS AMENDED AGREEMENT.
UM, SO THAT WAS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? UM, IS SCOTT WHITMER PART OF THE APPLICANT'S TEAM? THEN? UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER WE'LL BE HEARING FROM IS CHRIS BRADFORD.
CHRIS, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES, JUDGE ALRIGHTYY.
WE WILL NOW BE LISTENING, OR WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM ANDY.
ANDY, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M WITH AUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY.
UH, WE'RE HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE SUN FIELD DEVELOPMENT.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO OUR CONTINUED COLLABORATION WITH A DEVELOPER AND, UM, EXCITED FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THIS COMMUNITY.
UM, I YIELD THE REST OF MY TIME TO ANY OF THE TEAM MEMBERS.
CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
DID YOU WISH TO MAKE ANY REMARKS IN YOUR REBUTTAL TIME? I JUST WANTED TO SAY ONE THING.
OH, UH, COME UP TO THE, THE MICROPHONE PLEASE.
[03:20:01]
A COMPLAINT FROM A, A RECUSED COMMISSIONER ABOUT THE TAX RATE IN A MUD.HE'S ACTUALLY THINKING OF A DIFFERENT MUD.
THIS, UH, THIS MUD HADN'T ADOPTED A TAX RATE YET.
UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE AREA'S COMPLETELY UNDEVELOPED.
UH, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
I SEE VICE CHAIR SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, UNLESS THERE'S OPPOSITION.
THAT MOTION PASSES ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? OR WE CAN ALSO ENTERTAIN A MOTION? YES.
AHEAD AND MAKE, MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION, INCLUDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION CONDITIONS THAT WERE NOTED IN OUR BACK BACKUP.
I'LL READ THEM HERE FOR THE RECORD.
RESEARCH THE FEASIBILITY OF ADDING SOLAR POWER TO THE PROPERTY WHERE PRACTICAL SLASH POSSIBLE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH CAPITAL METRO ABOUT ADDING ACCESS TO PUBLIC TRANS, UH, AT THE PROPERTY.
AS THE PROJECT PROGRESSES, UH, 10% OF ALL PARKING SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE CAPABILITY.
AND I BELIEVE THESE WERE ACCEPTABLE TO THE APPLICANT.
OH, THERE, I THINK THAT YOU'RE, THERE'S SOME CONFUSION BETWEEN THE MUD AND THE P THE P HAS ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL, THE MUD DOESN'T.
SO THEN MOVING FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
UH, IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, SIR? YES.
SO DOES THE, THIS IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON JUST THE MUD, NOT THE PUT.
SO, UH, THIS WAS ORIGINALLY ON CONSENT THIS EVENING, AND, UH, COMMISSIONER MOTALA PUSHED, UH, PULLED IT FOR DISCUSSION, BUT SHE'S NOT HERE.
SO WE'VE ALREADY, WE'VE ALREADY PASSED THE PUD ON CONSENT.
YEAH, WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE MUD.
IS EVERYBODY CLEAR ON, UH, THE MOTION? OKAY.
THAT PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO AND WELCOME BOARD MEMBER CO COHEN CHAIR.
WOULD YOU MIND RESTATING THE SECOND FOR THIS MOTION? YES.
THE SECOND WAS COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
[28. Local Amendments: International Residential Code and International Building Code]
ON TO, UH, NUMBER 28.HOWEVER, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND OUR MEETING TIME TO 11, AND HOPEFULLY WE WON'T NEED ALL OF THAT TIME, BUT JUST SO WE DON'T HAVE TO KEEP DOING THAT SECOND VICE CHAIR, UH, UNLESS THERE'S, UH, WELL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT, GREAT.
UM, SO FOR THIS, UH, DIRECTOR ROY IS GOING TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS.
AND THEN WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. WILCOX.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
I AM THE DIRECTOR FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF AUSTIN.
UH, SINCE IT'S THE FIRST TIME WE ACTUALLY COME WITH THE TECHNICAL CODES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, LET ME GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THAT.
THE CITY OF AUSTIN UPDATES, UH, THE TECHNICAL CODES, THE TECHNICAL BUILDING CODES.
EVERY FEW YEARS, WE TRY TO STAY UP TO DATE WITH THOSE, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLICATIONS OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL, WHICH IS THE ICC.
WE DO THAT TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING THE BEST POSSIBLE REQUIREMENTS FOR SAFE BUILDINGS IN AUSTIN, UH, IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE ICC, UH, VISION OF CREATING SAFE, AFFORDABLE, AND SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS AND COMMUNITIES.
AND WITH THE MISSION OF PROVIDING THE INFORMATION, TOOLS AND RESOURCES THAT MEMBERS CAN RELY ON BUILDING SAFETY PROFESSIONALS TURN TO AND THE PUBLIC TRUST TRUST.
UH, ONE THING ABOUT ICC IS THAT IT USES A CONSENSUS PROCESS TO CREATE THE MODEL CODES.
THAT'S WHY WE USE THE, THE, THE I CODES.
AND THIS PROCESS INCORPORATES THE EXPERTISE OF BUILDING PROFESSIONALS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
IT IS TRANSPARENT, IT'S NON-BIASED, UH, AND IT LEAVES THE FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE MODEL CODES IN THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC SERVANTS.
AND WE, AS THE CITY OF AUSTIN, ARE ACTUALLY PART OF THAT PROCESS.
AND THIS IS WHY WE USE THE ICC CODES AS A MOST TRUSTED SOURCE FOR THE TECHNICAL CODES.
AUSTIN, LIKE CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, UM, UTILIZES THE ICC MODEL CODES, UH, IN ABOUT, IN SEVEN OF THE NINE CODES THAT WE ACTUALLY ADOPT IN THE, IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
UH, IT IS CRITICAL THAT WE, UH, UPDATE THIS CODE IN A REGULAR BASIS, UM, SO WE CAN STAY UP TO DATE WITH INNOVATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE NEW TRENDS IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY.
UH, OF THE NINE TECHNICAL BUILDING CODES THAT WE REVISIT EVERY FEW YEARS.
UH, BEFORE YOU TODAY WE HAVE THE AMENDMENTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE,
[03:25:01]
OR THE IBC AND THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE OF THE IRC, UH, WHICH IS THE, THE MOST SPECIFICALLY CODES THAT WE USE FOR STRUCTURES THAT WE LEAVE, WORK AND PLAY.ONE THING THAT I WANNA MENTION IS THAT IT STATED IN BOTH CODES, AND I, AND I QUOTE FROM THEM, IT SAYS THAT IT IS TO ESTABLISH THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS TO PROVIDE A REASONABLE LEVEL OF SAFETY, HEALTH, AND GENERAL WELFARE THROUGH THE STRUCTURAL STRENGTH MEANS OF EGRESS STABILITY, SANITATION, LIGHT, AND VENTILATION, ENERGY CONSERVATION, AND FOR PROVIDING A REASONABLE LEVEL OF LIFE SAFETY AND PROPERTY PROTECTION FROM HAZARDS OF FIRE EXPLOSION, DANGEROUS CONDITIONS, AND TO PROVIDE A REASONABLE LEVEL OF SAFETY TO FIREFIGHTERS AND EMERGENCY RESPONDERS DURING EMERGENCY OPERATIONS.
SO TOGETHER THESE TWO CODES, UM, WORK TO SET THE SAFETY STANDARDS FOR ALL THE BUILDINGS AND INSTRUCTORS THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
AND AS WE ADOPT EACH NEW CYCLE, WE DO LEARN FROM THE PREVIOUS CYCLES.
AND OVER THE, OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS, WE HAVE ENGAGED WITH OUR COMMUNITY ON OUR PROPOSED TECHNICAL CODE CHANGES.
SO I'M GONNA, UH, ALLOW THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO WELCOMES TO PRESENT THAT TO YOU, UH, TONIGHT, AND WE'LL BE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
UH, THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO CODES THAT I'M GONNA PRESENT TO THE, TO THE COMMISSION TONIGHT.
THE FIRST ONE IS JUST THE RED LINE VERSION.
IT'S THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE.
AND SO I HAVE SOME BULLETS TO SUMMARIZE THAT.
THE SECOND ONE WILL BE THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, WHICH I ACTUALLY HAVE A PRESENTATION THAT WE GAVE, GAVE TO STAKEHOLDERS EARLIER THIS YEAR.
I'LL GO THROUGH THE IRC FIRST.
THEN THE IIBC WILL PROBABLY TAKE IT A LITTLE BIT LONGER.
SO CAN YOU PULL UP THE RED LINE FOR THE IRC? YOU, YOU HAVE TO FORGIVE THE RED LINES.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE MESSY BEFORE THEY GO TO THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
WE'RE JUST WAITING ON A PRESENTATION TO COME UP.
WOULD THE RED LINE BE WITHIN THIS PRESENTATION DOCUMENT? IT WAS, IT WAS PUT IN THE BACKUP.
WELL, I, WE WERE ABOUT TO PULL THAT ITEM.
OH, I CAN, I CAN GO THROUGH THE, THE KEY POINTS.
SO THE, IF WE DON'T WANT TO READ THROUGH THE WHOLE RED LINE, I CAN GO THROUGH THE KEY POINTS WITHOUT THE PRESENTATION.
SO UNLESS Y'ALL WANNA SEE THE RED LINE, WE SHOULD WELL, LET'S, LET'S START WITH THE KEY POINTS AND THEN IF WE GET THEM WHILE YOU'RE TALKING, WE CAN REASSESS.
SO, SO THE MAJOR, MAJOR CHANGES IN THE IRC, UH, THIS YEAR, THE, THE APPENDICES WILL BE RE-LET, IT'S, IT USED TO BE AB A, A AE A, YOU KNOW, AND IT WOULD GO THROUGH ALL THE A'S.
THE FIRST CHANGE WOULD BE THAT WE WE'RE ADOPTING THE NEW LETTERING SYSTEM IN THE IRC AND WE'RE ADOPTING THE TINY HOUSE APPENDIX TO MAKE IT MORE, UH, TO MAKE PEOPLE CAPABLE OF BUILDING A TINY HOUSE WITH, YOU KNOW, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HOME AMENDMENTS.
UH, OUR OVERALL OBJECTIVE IS TO REDUCE LOCAL AMENDMENTS AND MORE AND MORE CLOSELY MATCH THE MODEL CODES AS PUBLISHED.
THE ONE MAJOR CHANGE IN THE PLUMBING CODE PART OF THE IRC, WE'LL ADD LANGUAGE TO, UH, TO FACILITATE BUILDING TINY HOUSES, THE TIME LIMITS SECTION OF THE IRC WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT PERMITS THAT EX, YOU KNOW, CAN BE EXTENDED AND HOW LONG THEY CAN BE EXTENDED FOR 181 DAYS, WE'VE, WE'VE MOVED THAT INTO THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL AND TOOK OUT THE LOCAL AMENDMENT.
IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE IN THE MODEL TECHNICAL CODE.
SINCE WE HAVE A CRITERIA MANUAL THAT THE CITY HAS ALSO ADOPTED, UH, WE ADDED A DEFINITION FOR SURCHARGE AND A BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENT IN THE IRC AND THE IBC FOR RETAINING WALLS OVER FOUR FEET, OR IF THEY HAVE A SURCHARGE, THEY REQUIRE BUILDING PERMIT SURCHARGE WASN'T ADEQUATELY DEFINED.
SO WE WORKED WITH STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS TO, AND CIVIL ENGINEERS TO ADD A DEFINITION FOR SURCHARGE.
UM, WE CHANGED THE EGRESS DOOR REQUIREMENT AND, AND WANTED TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TOWNHOUSES TO MORE CLOSELY MATCH THE IBC.
IS THAT RRC? UH, THAT'S THE IBC ONE.
[03:30:03]
THERE SHOULD BE ONE THAT SAYS PROPOSED IRC 2024.AND SO ON THE EGRESS DOORS, UM, THE IRC DID NOT ALLOW PIVOTED OR BALANCED DOORS, BUT THE IBC DID UNDER THE IBC, YOU CAN BUILD ANY STRUCTURE.
IRC IS LIMITED TO ONE IN TWO FAMILY DINGS IN TOWNHOUSES, SO YOU COULDN'T USE BALANCED OR PIVOTED DOORS.
SO WE CHANGED THE LANGUAGE IN THE IRC TO MATCH THE IBC.
IF YOU CAN BUILD IT IN ONE CODE, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD IT IN THE OTHER, UM, INVISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE.
UH, WE ADDED LANGUAGE TO MAKE TINY HOUSES, UH, MORE ACCESSIBLE AND NOT HAVE A LOT OF THE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS TO REDUCE CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR TINY HOUSES.
AND THEN IN THE REQUIRED AIR CONDITIONING SECTION, COUNSEL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION THAT WANTED US TO ADD AN AIR CONDITIONING REQUIREMENT INTO THE MODEL CODES.
ANYWAY, THAT'S, WE'RE GETTING CLOSER
UM, AND SO THE AIR CONDITIONING REQUIREMENTS THAT, UH, CLOSELY MATCH DALLAS AND HOUSTON, WE PUT LANGUAGE IN THE IRC AND IBC EVEN THOUGH PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING THAT'S NEW HAS AIR CONDITIONING ALREADY.
THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE HAS LANGUAGE FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES.
SO WE WANTED TO MATCH THE I CODES HOW THEY, HOW EACH SECTION WOULD, EACH, UH, CODE WOULD SAY THE SAME THING.
SO WE JUST ADDED AIR CONDITIONING REQUIREMENTS INTO THE IRC AND IBC TO MATCH THE IPMC.
AND THOSE ARE THE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FOR LOCAL AMENDMENTS IN THE IRC.
THERE'S NOT VERY MANY, UM, SO I GUESS WE DON'T NEED THE RED LINE.
ALL RIGHT, SO NOW THE, THE NEXT ONE WILL BE THE IBC PRESENTATION THAT WE GAVE TO STAKEHOLDERS.
AND REMEMBER, THIS WAS FOR STAKEHOLDERS, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH ANY OF THAT.
SO WE'LL GO THROUGH THE FIRST SECTION.
THE SECOND SECTION WAS A SWIMMING POOL CODE FOR STAKEHOLDERS.
WE WON'T GET INTO THAT TONIGHT.
UM, WE UPDATE THE TECHNICAL CODES, UM, THROUGH ICC AND I ATMO, WHICH IS THE PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL CODES, UM, REASONS FOR THE AMENDMENTS OF THEIR COUNCIL MANDATED OR BUSINESS NEEDS OR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, OR ISO RATING.
STRIKE THROUGH IN THE PRESENTATION MEANS IT WAS REMOVED FROM AMENDMENTS AND RETURNED TO MODEL CODES.
SO IN THE ELECTRICAL SECTION, WE WENT BACK TO MODEL CODE, TOOK OUT ALL THESE LOCAL AMENDMENTS, UM, AND WE'RE POINTING TO THE ELECTRIC CODE, WHICH IS NFPA ARTICLE 70 NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE.
SO THIS WHOLE SECTION GOT REMOVED AND MOVED BACK TO MODEL CODE IN THE NEC.
UH, THE REASON FOR WE'RE DELETING THE DEFINITION FOR FOSTER CARE FACILITIES, IT WAS DELETED IN THE PAST, WAS THAT PREVIOUS YEARS IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT THE TERM FOSTER CARE CREATED A CONFLICT WITH THE TERM DAYCARE, WHEN IN FACT FOSTER CARE IS DEFINED AS A PERMANENT RESIDENCE FOR CHILDREN AND NOT CAPABLE OF SELF PRESERVATION.
AND RECORDING IN I TWO OCCUPANCY CONDITION, ONE WITH 24 HOUR NURSING AND MEDICAL CARE, BUT NOT EMERGENCY CARE FOR FIVE OR MORE CHILDREN, FIVE CHILDREN OR LESS WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN R THREE THAT WOULD REC AND WOULD RECEIVE MEDICAL CARE.
THE CONCLUSION IS THE DEF DEFINITION OF FOSTER CARE SHOULD NOT BE DELETED.
UH, IN SECTION 3 0 8 3 OF THE INSTITUTIONAL GROUP I TWO SHOULD GO BACK TO THE MODEL CODE AND INCLUDE FOSTER CARE FACILITIES AND REINSTATE CONDITION ONE AND TWO PER THE MODEL CODE.
UM, WE DELETED ALL THESE, ALL THESE OTHER ONES.
THE NUMBER OF PERSONS IN EACH OF THE ABOVE SECTION WAS CHANGED TO ALIGN WITH THE FAIR HOUSING LICENSING LAWS WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 1994 UBC.
SO FOR CITY OF AUSTIN TO MATCH STATE LAW HAS NO PURPOSE WHEN THE OTHER FACTORS AREN'T INCLUDED, SUCH AS NOT COUNTY FAMILY MEMBERS AND THE FAIR HOUSING ACT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR FAMILIES TO BE DETERMINED BY BLOOD OR MARRIAGE.
THE MODEL CODE USED THE AVERAGE OF SIX PEOPLE, WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF MOST OF THEIR STATES FOR LICENSING.
NO OTHER CITY IN THE SURROUNDING AREA AMEND THIS SECTION.
UH, THE SIX IS ONLY LIMITING POINT.
UH, THE ONLY LIMITING POINT OF WHEN TO ALLOW THE BUILDING TO BE AN R OR AN I.
UH, WE DELETED 3 0 8 5 4, UH, AND CHANGED THE NUMBER FROM FIVE TO SIX AND ADDED THE FIRE SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS THAT ALREADY EXIST IN THE IRC.
WE DECIDED TO GO BACK TO MODEL CODE, BUT 'CAUSE THE REQUIREMENTS ALREADY EXIST IN THE MODEL CODE CARE FACILITIES WITHIN A DWELLING, THIS WHOLE SECTION HAD BEEN DELETED.
[03:35:01]
ALLOWS FOR A STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT UNDER THE IIRC WHEN INSTALLING A 13 D FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM.THE EXCEPTION IS MAKING THE CODE LESS STRINGENT, WHICH WOULD NOT BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH STATE REQUIREMENTS AND CASUALTY IN THE INTEREST OF ATTEMPTING TO MINIMIZE CODE CHANGES.
LET'S SEE, AGAIN, WE'RE DELETING RAMPS.
WE JUST WENT BACK TO THE MODEL CODE.
THIS WAS A LOCAL AMENDMENT THAT'S BEEN IN FOR A WHILE, SO WE CHANGED IT BACK TO COMPLETELY MODEL CODE, UH, TOOK THE AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA MANUAL TABLES OUT, UH, INTERSTITIAL SPACE BENEATH ROOFTOP OCCUPANCIES, UH, WHEN DECKS AND ALL THE WALK SURFACES ARE CONSTRUCTED ABOVE A ROOF.
WE, WE REPLACED IT WITH A NEW SECTION 15 11 9 1.
THE REPLACEMENT LANGUAGE WILL BE ON THE NEXT SLIDE.
AND SO HERE'S THE NEW 15 11 91.
TALKING ABOUT RAISED DECK SYSTEMS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING, SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN A MANNER THAT PRECLUDES THE INTER INTRODUCTION AND ACCUMULATION OF DEBRIS AND IGNITION SOURCES BETWEEN THE SPACE OF THE ROOF AND THE DECK OR WALKING SURFACE.
THE PERIMETER OF THE RAISED DECK SHALL BE SURROUNDED ON ALL SIDES BY WALLS OR BY NON-COMBUSTIBLE ENCLOSURES APPROVED TO PREVENT FIRE INTRUSION FROM BELOW THE RAISED DECK.
THE WALL ENCLOSURE SHALL EXTEND AT LEAST FROM THE, FROM THE ROOF ASSEMBLY TO THE TOP SURFACE OF THE RAISED DECK.
THE ENCLOSURE SHALL NOT IMPEDE ROOF DRAINAGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 15 9 5 15 11 95 TO A RAISED DECK SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED ABOVE A LISTED ROOF ASSEMBLY.
THE EXCEPTION IS WHERE THE ROOF ASSEMBLY IS NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE A FIRE CLASSIFICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH 15 0 5 2 3, THE RAISED DECK SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS.
AND FOUR, THE RAISED DECK SYSTEM SHALL NOT IMPEDE THE OPERATION OF PLUMBING OR MECHANICAL VENTS, EXHAUST AIR INLETS, OR ROOF DRAINS WHERE REQUIRED ACCESS FOR INSPECTION, CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE SHALL BE PROVIDED.
UH, AND THIS, THIS NODE IS, IT REPLACED WHAT'S BEING STRUCK FROM SECTION 5 0 3 1 2 4 2.
WE DELETED ILLUMINATION UNDER LEVEL, UNDER NORMAL POWER AND IT WAS, UH, WE JUST TOOK IT BACK TO MODEL CODE.
SO THERE'S THIS SECTION STILL EXISTS, BUT WE TOOK OUT ALL OF OUR LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO IT.
MODEL CODE IS MORE RESTRICTIVE AND MAINTAINS CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS.
WE DELETED STAIRWAYS 10 0 9 0.3.
THIS SECTION WITH EXCEPTIONS WAS DELETED.
THIS AMENDMENT HAS EXISTED SINCE 1994 WITH THE IMPROVEMENT OF FIRE ALARM SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, AND FIREARM FIGHTING METHODS.
THE AMENDMENT NO LONGER SERVES THE PURPOSE.
STAIRWAY DOORS, INTERIOR STAIRWAY MEANS OF EGRESS DOORS SHALL BE OPEN 'EM FOR BOTH SIDES.
THE THIS SECTION WITH EXCEPTIONS WAS DELETED FROM THE AMENDMENT DUE TO CURRENT CHANGES IN THE MODEL CODE.
AND WE DELETED 11 0 8 6 2 6 2 3 6 3 6 4 2.
UH, WITH THE INTENT OF THESE AMENDMENT WAS TO ATTEMPT TO CREATE MORE B TYPE UNITS, ALTHOUGH STILL LEAVING THE EXCEPTION WITH 11 0 8 7 AND OTHER DESIGN OPTIONS AVAILABLE FOR A WAY OUT CREATING MORE B UNITS, UM, FOR CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.
IT WAS DETERMINED TO LEAVE AS PER MODEL CODE AND POSSIBLE DOING A STUDY IN THE NEXT CODE CYCLE TO CREATE STRONGER LANGUAGE FOR, FOR CREATING MORE B ACCESSIBLE UNITS.
LIGHTING WE ARE DIS PORTION IS AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS GENERATED BY RESOLUTION.
UH, WE ACTUALLY PUT THIS IN THE 2021 IBC THIS PAST MAY.
AND NOW WE'RE JUST CARRYING THE SAME AMENDMENT AS REQUIRED BY COUNSEL INTO THE 2024 CODE.
BASICALLY IT'S THE WINDOWLESS BEDROOM AMENDMENT.
UH, EVERY SPACE INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH NATURAL LIGHT BY A MEANS OF AN EXTERIOR GLAZED OPENING IN ACCORDANCE WITH 12 0 4 2 AND SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHT IN ACCORDANCE WITH 12 0 4 3.
EXTERIOR OPENING SHALL OPEN DIRECTLY ONTO A PUBLIC WAY OR UNTO A YARD OR CORD IN ACCORDANCE WITH 1205.
THE EXCEPTIONS ARE ANY ROOM OR SPACE THAT IS NOT WITHIN A DWELLING UNIT OR SLEEPING UNIT SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE NATURAL LIGHT.
ANY ROOM OR SPACE WITHIN AN AREA OF 70 SQUARE FEET OR LESS AND IS NOT A SLEEPING ROOM, SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE NATURAL LIGHT.
SLEEPING ROOMS WITHIN AN EXISTING DWELLING UNIT SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE NATURAL LIGHT IN ACCORDANCE WITH 12 0 4 2 WHEN ALTERATIONS DO NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SLEEPING ROOMS IN THE DWELLING UNIT.
AND AGAIN, THERE'S THE, THE, UM, THE, UH, RESOLUTION NUMBER ON THE BOTTOM 23 0 9 1 4 82.
THIS WAS ADOPTED AND PUT INTO THE 21 CODE JUST TO BE CARRIED FORWARD INTO THE 24 CODE.
UH, SO WE CHANGED THE FIRE TRUCK AND EMERGENCY VEHICLE SECTION WHEN STRUCTURE OR PORTIONS OF A STRUCTURE ARE ACCESSED BY FIRE DEPARTMENT, VEHICLES OR OTHER SIMILAR EMERGENCY VEHICLES.
THOSE PORTIONS OF THE STRUCTURE SUBJECT TO SUCH LOADS SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR THE GREATER OF THE FOLLOWING LOADS AS SPECIFIED
[03:40:01]
BY THE IFC 5 0 3 2 6 BRIDGES AND ELEVATED STRUCTURES OR SURFACES.AND THE LIVE LOADS SPECIFIED IN 16 0 7 8 1 EMERGENCY VEHICLE LOADS NEED NOT BE ASSUMED TO ACT CONCURRENTLY WITH OTHER UNIFORM LIVE LOADS.
UH, AND SO THE LIVE LOAD REQUIREMENT WAS ADDED PER THE MODEL CODE, LET'S SEE, 21 0 8 4 A CI FIVE 30 A SCE FIVE SECTION 3.722 IN EFFECT SINCE DECEMBER 31ST, 2005 AND IS NOW OBSOLETE.
THE MASONRY PUBLICATION WAS RENAMED IN 2016 AND IS NOW REFERRED TO AS TMS 4 0 2 6 0 2 DASH 16.
SPECIFICALLY THE PUBLICATION INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS, TMS 4 0 2 16 BUILDING REQUIREMENTS FOR MASONRY TMS 6 0 2 16 SPECIFICATIONS FOR MASONRY STRUCTURES PUBLICATION TMS 4 0 2 6 0 2 16 WOULD APPLY AS STATED IN SECTION 1 0 2 0.4 OF THE MODEL CODE AND ADOPTED IN CHAPTER 35 REFERENCE STANDARDS.
SECTION 3.722 WAS DELETED FROM THE AMENDMENTS.
WE ALSO DELETED TABLES 29 0 2 1, UH, COLUMN SEVEN OR COLUMN HEADER SEVEN AND FOUR SEPARATE FACILITIES IN 29 0 2 2 29 0 2 6 SMALL OCCUPANCIES.
THIS IS ALL ABOUT PLUMBING IN THE INTERNATIONAL, UH, BUILDING CODE.
BUT WE DO HAVE A SEPARATE PLUMBING CODE THAT IS IN EFFECT FOR COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE, COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY.
SO ALL THOSE SECTIONS WERE DELETED PORTABLE CLASSROOMS AND 31 0 3 5 WAS DELETED.
THESE BUILDINGS WILL HAVE A NATIONAL OR STATE APPROVAL, UH, IN, IN TEXAS TDLR STAMPS 'EM.
SO WE, WE DIDN'T NEED ANYTHING IN OUR LOCAL AMENDMENTS AND THAT WAS IT FOR THE CHANGES TO THE IBC OTHER THAN THE STING THERAPY PROVISIONS.
UM, SO DUE TO ANOTHER RESOLUTION, UM, STAFF HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO BRING IN AN AMENDMENT TO SEE THE, THE LIKELIHOOD OF ALLOWING A SINGLE STARE AND UP TO FIVE STORIES.
UM, A MEMO WAS SENT TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL IN OPPOSITION AND STAFF CONTINUES TO BE OPPOSED TO A LOCAL AMENDMENT TO THE CODE THAT WOULD ALLOW A SINGLE STARE EGRESS UP TO FIVE STORIES.
AND WE'LL RECOMMEND ADOPTING THE MODEL CODE FOR REQUIRED STAIR NUMBERS, WIDTH AND FIRE RATED CONSTRUCTION.
SO THERE WILL BE NO, AT THIS TIME THERE IS NO AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR A SINGLE STAIR PROVISION UP TO FIVE STORIES.
THAT'S THE END OF THE PRESENTATION.
WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS, I'M SURE.
WE'LL START WITH OUR SPEAKERS, RIGHT.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM OUR SPEAKERS IN FAVOR.
WE HAVE A LOT OF SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM, SO WE'LL BE CALLING SPEAKERS UP THREE AT A TIME WHEN YOU ARE CALLED.
CHRIS GANNON IS OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER.
HE'LL BE RECEIVING ONE MINUTE OF DONATED TIME FROM ADAM NIK.
SO, AND THEN WE'LL ALSO BE HEARING FROM JASON HASKINS.
JASON, ARE YOU PRESENT? HE IS NOT.
UM, OUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE STUART HARRY HIRSH.
UH, YOU'LL BE RECEIVING THREE MINUTES.
AND THEN PARKER WELCH, WHO WILL BE RECEIVING ONE MINUTE OF DONATED TIME FROM MICHAEL RHODES.
MICHAEL, ARE YOU PRESENT? UH, CHRIS WILL HAVE, UH, I JUST WANNA STATE FOR THE RECORD, SIX YOU ALL.
CHRIS, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
SO IT'LL BE CHRIS STEWART, AND THEN PARKER.
THANK YOU FOR HEARING THIS AND FOR SUGGESTING A SINGLE SHARE, UM, UH, AMENDMENT TO THE IABC.
I'M AN ARCHITECT WITH THE, WITH A I A AUSTIN'S HOUSING COMMITTEE.
AND I'M HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR A, UH, WELL FOR JUST A SINGLE SARAH AMENDMENT TO THE IBC.
UM, UH, SO THIS AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A POINT A FOR, UH, POINT ACCESS BUILDING POINT ACCESS, SINGLE SARAH BUILDINGS OR SMALL APARTMENTS BUILT AROUND A SINGLE CORE VERTICAL CIRCULATION.
SO I'M GONNA KIND OF FLIP THROUGH THESE QUICKLY.
UM, UH, THE CURRENT CODE REQUIRES TWO EXITS, WHICH RESULTS IN A LONG DOUBLE-LOADED CORRIDOR, AND, UH, TYPICALLY VERY SMALL, UM, ONE AND STUDIO BEDROOM APARTMENTS.
UH, BY GETTING RID OF THE SECOND STAIR, WE CAN DEVOTE MORE FLOOR AREA TO LIVING SPACE, LIKE WAS SHOWN HERE ON THE SCREEN.
UM, THEY'RE SMALL, THEY'RE NICE, THEY'RE WHAT MOST OF THE WORLD BUILDS.
IT'S ONLY IN THE US AND CANADA THAT THEY ARE AS REGULATED, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SEATTLE AND NEW YORK AND NOW HONOLULU AS WELL.
UM, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE TYPICALLY BUILDING IN, UH, IN AUSTIN.
[03:45:01]
IT'S THE TEXAS DONUT, UH, VERSUS, UM, SOME OF THESE POINT ACCESS SINGLE STAIR BUILDINGS, UH, WITH A MUCH SMALLER FOOTPRINT.UH, THIS IS AN IMPORTANT AMENDMENT THAT WE NEED ON THE BOOKS BEFORE WE START IN, ON OUR NEXT PHASE OF GROWTH.
THESE ARE KEY, UH, AND THESE ARE THE KEY PROVISIONS THAT, UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN A SUCCESSFUL AMENDMENT FOR AUSTIN.
UH, IN THE FOLLOWING SLIDES, I'LL GO INTO EACH ONE OF THESE AMENDMENTS FURTHER.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY FIVE STORIES ON A SINGLE STAIRCASE.
SO THERE'D BE FIVE STORIES SERVED BY ONE STAIRCASE.
THERE WOULD BE A SIX FLOOR, UH, BELOW, UH, WHAT WE'RE ASKING.
AND THIS WOULD KIND OF ALIGN WITH A FIVE OVER ONE TYPOLOGY, WHICH WOULD BE A TYPE THREE A, UM, WOOD FRAMED BUILDING ON TOP OF A CONCRETE PODIUM.
UM, AND WE'RE ASKING UP TO 85 FEET IN HEIGHT.
THIS ALIGNS WITH PROVISIONS IN THE IBC FOR TYPE THREE A, UH, WHICH IS AN INFLECTION POINT IN FINANCING, IN CONSTRUCTION FINANCING.
UH, WE AGREE WITH THE, UH, THE DSD VERSION THAT WAS, UH, POSTED THAT THESE SHOULD NOT BE HIGH RISES.
UM, AND THIS HEIGHT CAP REFLECTS THAT.
UH, IN COMPARISON, THE SEATTLE CODE ALLOWS FOR SIX FLOORS OF TYPE THREE A CONSTRUCTION MORE THAN WHAT'S ALLOWED IN THE BASE IVC OR IN AUSTIN.
UM, OUR SINGLE STA BUILDINGS, WHICH WOULD BE BUILT OVER A CONCRETE TYPE ONE PODIUM, WILL BE FAR MORE RESISTANT TO FIRE.
UH, LIMIT THE DWELLING NUMBERS TO FOUR PER STORY.
UM, WE COULD ALSO LOOK AT A FLOOR AREA CAP, BUT, UH, WE WOULD WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT CAP WOULD ALLOW FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY SIZE UNITS PER STORY.
UH, LIMIT THE EXIT DISTANCE FROM THE DOOR OF ANY UNIT TO THE DOOR OF THE STAIRWAY TO 20 FEET AND LIMIT THE TOTAL EXIT PATH TO 125 FEET.
THIS WOULD ENSURE A QUICK AND SAFE EVACUATION WITH THE MAJORITY OF TRAVEL LIKELY OCCURRING WITHIN THE UNIT, WHICH IS SAFER.
UM, INCLUDE ACTIVE SYSTEMS LIKE PRESSURIZED STAIRS AND SPRINKLER SYSTEMS. THE PRESSURIZED STAIRWAY PUSHES THE SMOKE AWAY FROM THE MEANS OF EGRESS AND PREVENTS HAVING A DANGEROUS SMOKE-FILLED CORRIDOR TWICE AS MANY PEOPLE DIE FROM SMOKE INHALATION THAN FROM BURN.
SO MINIMIZING THE LENGTH OF A CORRIDOR AND CONTROLLING THE SMOKE IS KEY.
UH, WE WOULD LOVE TO DISCUSS, UM, ALLOWING NFPA 13 R SPRINKLERS AS THESE ARE DESIGNED FOR APARTMENTS.
TYPICALLY THESE ARE, ARE ALLOWED ONLY UP TO FOUR STORIES, BUT BECAUSE OF THE SMALL FOOTPRINT OF A POINT ACCESS BUILDING, WE FEEL THERE MAY BE GROUNDS FOR AN EXCEPTION.
SPRINKLERS HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO PREVENT 90% OF FIRE RELATED DEATHS WHEN INSTALLED.
UM, AND UH, LET'S FOLLOW HONOLULU'S LEAD IN INCREASING THE STAIR WIDTH TO 48 INCHES.
THIS IS A FULL FOOT WIDER THAN WHAT WOULD TYPICALLY BE REQUIRED IN AN APARTMENT WITH AN OCCUPANCY OF, UH, UNDER 50 PER STORY.
AND THEN PROTECT THE CORRIDOR.
UH, TYPICALLY A BUILDING THE SIZE WOULD REQUIRE MAXIMUM OF A HALF HOUR RATED CORRIDOR, BUT LET'S RAISE THAT TO A FULL HOUR, WHICH REQUIRES HEAVIER DOORS AND BETTER COM COMPARTMENTALIZATION.
UH, THIS WILL RESORT, UH, RESULT IN A BETTER PROTECTED PATH OF EGRESS.
UM, NEXT I WANNA TALK ABOUT WHAT, UM, WE, UH, AT THE A I A DO NOT WANNA SEE IN THE AMENDMENT.
UH, WHAT WE WOULD SEE, UM, UH, INHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THESE.
UH, THE FIRST IS RESTRICTION ON THE CONSTRUCTION TYPE.
THE I-B-C-R-A PROVIDES A GRADIENT OF ALLOWANCES BASED ON THE COMBUSTIBILITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION TYPE.
UM, AND THESE ARE GONNA BE SPRINKLER BUILDINGS, SO THEY WILL BE AMONG THE SAFEST IN TERMS OF LIFE SAFETY, UH, UH, EVEN OUTTA TYPE FIVE.
AND LIMITING THE CONSTRUCTION TYPE IS GOING TO VASTLY LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOLKS WHO ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO USE THESE.
UM, SO THEN THIS IS THE, UH, THE GRADIENT OF CONSTRUCTION TYPES.
TYPE ONE IS, UH, THE MOST ROBUST AND THE LEAST COM, UH, COMBUSTIBLE.
TYPE FIVE IS YOUR TYPICAL, UM, LIKE SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
UM, AND THE MORE FIRE RESISTANT IS THE MORE ALLOWANCES, UH, THAT ARE PROVIDED IN TERMS OF AREA AND HEIGHT, THE LESS FIRE RESISTANT AND UH, THE LESS ALLOWANCES.
SO THERE'S A, A VERY CLEVER MATRIX THAT THE IBC PROVIDES THAT, UM, INCORPORATES IF THE BUILDING IS SPRINKLED OR NOT.
AND THAT IS WHAT DETERMINES THE HEIGHT AND SIZE OF BUILDINGS.
UH, GENERALLY, UM, LIMITING OR UH, ALLOWING A SINGLE STAIRS TO UH, SURFACE UP TO FIVE FLOORS SHOULDN'T, UH, IMPACT THE COMBUSTIBILITY OF A BUILDING.
THIS IS A POINT ACCESS BLOCK, UM, IN PARIS.
I BELIEVE THAT, UH, IS FIVE DIFFERENT INSTANCES PER LOT.
[03:50:01]
SO WE WOULDN'T WANNA LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF OCCURRENCES PER LOT.THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS STUART HARRY HIRSCH.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COMMISSION WILL RECOMMEND ON PROPOSED ADOPTION OF THE 2024 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AND THE PROPOSED 2024 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE OR THE SINGLE STAIRS THAT YOU JUST HEARD ABOUT.
BUT I AM GLAD THAT AN AFFORDABILITY IMPACT STATEMENT WAS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO TODAY'S SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING SINCE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2 0 0 7 1 1 2 9 100 PART FOUR HAS REQUIRED AFFORDABILITY IMPACT STATEMENTS BEFORE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS OR BOARD AND COMMISSION HEARINGS AND COUNCIL HEARINGS.
AND WE HAVEN'T ALWAYS GOT THEM ON ALL THE CODES APPEARING BEFORE YOU.
SO PART OF MY NOTE OF CAUTION IS IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ITS IMPACT ON AFFORDABILITY IS BEFORE THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS STARTS, WE ARE IGNORANT UNTIL IT REACHES YOU AND WE DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN.
AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN IN THIS CASE.
THEY GOT THEIR AFFORDABILITY IMPACT STATEMENT OUT BEFORE TONIGHT'S HEARING.
IT APPEARS TO ME THAT HOUSE BILL 24 39 APPROVED IN 2019 BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE AND SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR LEMONS AUSTIN'S LOCAL AMENDMENTS IN ORDER TO CONTINUE TO IMPLEMENT THE VISITABILITY ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE AND THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, LOCAL AMENDMENT ON TRIPLEXES TO BE, TO BE, UH, MORE ACCESSIBLE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.
PEOPLE WHO ARE SENIORS LIKE ME AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.
UH, I THINK WE HAVE TO AMEND CHAPTER FIVE DASH ONE OF THE AUSTIN CITY CODE, WHICH I KNOW IS NOT IN YOUR PURVIEW.
THE CHAPTER'S CALLED HOUSING DISCRIMINATION.
YOU PROBABLY DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT IT, BUT IT CONTAINS STANDARDS CURRENTLY FOR, UH, VISITABLE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEXES AND TOWNHOUSES RECEIVING CITY ASSISTANCE LIKE THROUGH SMART HOUSING AND OTHER PROGRAMS. WE'D HATE TO SEE THAT GO AWAY BECAUSE OF WHAT STATE LAW IS.
AND THE SOLUTION IS NOT TO RETAIN THE AMENDMENT AND BE SUBJECT TO, TO CHALLENGE, BUT RATHER TO PUT IT IN A DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE CITY CODE WHERE WE'RE NOT AS VULNERABLE.
I HAVE TO SAY GREAT PRAISE FOR CITY STAFF FOR RECOMMENDING THAT WE FOLLOW STATE LAW INSTEAD OF DOING WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING SINCE 2019, WHICH IS NOT FOLLOWING STATE LAW.
AND THAT'S NOT SHAME ON THE LEDGE, THAT'S SHAME ON US.
WE HAVE TO HAVE SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEXES AND TRIPLEXES ACCESSIBLE TO PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE TRYING TO AGE IN PLACE.
AND WE ARE FINALLY GETTING TO A POINT WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU CAN BUILD A HOUSE WITH THIS BOOK INSTEAD OF FOUR OF THEM, WHICH IS THE WAY IT WORKS CURRENTLY.
I WILL ALSO TELL YOU THAT WE'VE DONE STUPID THINGS IN THE PAST AND, BUT I WOULD LIKE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE TO REVISIT THE SINGLE STARE BECAUSE I HAVE VERY STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT THAT AND IT WON'T GET ME ANY APPLAUSE TONIGHT.
I I JUST WANNA MAKE A QUICK UPDATE.
UH, PARKER WILL NOW BE RECEIVING FIVE MINUTES.
HE IS RECEIVING ONE MINUTE OF DONATED TIME FROM MICHAEL RHODES AND ZACHARY FADI.
ARE Y'ALL BOTH IN ATTENDANCE? PARKER PARKER, DANIEL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, BUT I'LL BE IMPERSONATING STEVEN SMITH TONIGHT.
UH, HE COULDN'T BE WITH US 'CAUSE HE'S ACTUALLY LIVING IN A SINGLE STAIR APARTMENT IN NEW YORK, SO HE IS AN HOUR AHEAD OF US.
UM, SO WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH HIS PRESENTATION, UH, AS BEST I CAN.
UM, SO I BELIEVE, UM, SO HE IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR BUILDING IN NORTH AMERICA, WHICH IS A NONPROFIT THAT DOES RESEARCH ON BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS IN THE US AND CANADA.
UH, THIS IS A LOCAL ISSUE, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF GLOBAL AND NATIONAL CONTEXT THAT WE WANTED TO SHARE.
AND IF WE COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
UM, SO YOU PROBABLY HEARD ABOUT THIS A LOT OVER THE COURSE OF THIS DEBATE, BUT IT'S WORTH VISUALIZING, UH, BY ADOPTING THE IBC.
AUSTIN CURRENTLY HAS ONE OF THE LOWEST SINGLE STAIR HEIGHT LIMITS ON EARTH.
HIGHER INCOME COUNTRIES TEND TO HAVE HIGHER SINGLE STAIR HEIGHT LIMITS BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE RESOURCES TO DEVOTE TO FIRE PROTECTION FEATURES IN BUILDINGS AND TO THEIR FIRE DEPARTMENTS.
BUT NORTH AMERICA AND ESPECIALLY THE IBC IS THE OUTLIER.
IT'S GOT A LOWER HEIGHT LIMIT THAN EVEN THE OTHER US MODEL CODE WRITTEN BY THE NATIONAL FIRE
[03:55:01]
PROTECTION ASSOCIATION, WHICH ALLOWS FOR FOUR STORY SINGLE STAIR BUILDINGS.UM, AND WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT, UM, AND HERE'S JUST THE TOP HALF OF THE CHART AND FROM IT YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A TON OF COUNTRIES WITH MUCH LOWER FIRE DEATH RATES THAN THE US, SINGAPORE, SWITZERLAND, GERMANY, FRANCE, ITALY'S UP THERE THAT ALLOW BASICALLY FULL ON SKYSCRAPERS WITH SINGLE STAIR, WHICH IS NOT WHAT WE'RE ASKING.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO GO, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT CONTEXT.
UM, UH, THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE ABOUT THESE BUILDINGS IS THE SIZE DIFFERENCE.
THESE SINGLE STAIR BUILDINGS ON THE RIGHT THERE ARE VERY SMALL.
UM, THEY TEND TO BE WAY LESS THAN HALF THE SIZE OF TWO STAIR BUILDINGS.
SO THEY DRAMATICALLY INCREASE THE RATIO OF STAIRS TO RESIDENTS.
IF YOU IMAGINE A GIVEN CITY BLOCK THAT RIGHT NOW MIGHT BE OCCUPIED BY JUST ONE FIVE OVER ONE, THAT MIGHT HAVE TWO STAIRCASES, THAT COULD BE AS MANY 4, 5, 6 POINT ACCESS BLOCKS OR SINGLE STAIR BUILDINGS THAT WILL EACH HAVE A STAIR.
SO WE GO FROM TWO STAIRS ON THAT BLOCK TO SIX.
WE'RE REALLY NOT REDUCING STAIRS HERE.
IT'S MORE REDUCING HALLWAYS AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THAT DIAGRAM.
UH, SO REDUNDANCY HAS SOME VALUE IN A FIRE.
IT'S NOT NOTHING BUT MOST CODES AROUND THE WORLD VALUE THE SAFETY OF JUST LIMITING RISK BY LIMITING FLOOR PLATE SIZES OVER THE REDUNDANCY OF THE SECOND STAIR.
UH, SO BY THE WAY, THAT BUILDING ON THE LEFT IS NOWHERE NEAR AS LARGE AS A BUILDING WITH ONLY TWO STAIRS CAN BE UNDER AUSTIN'S CURRENT CODE.
UH, A LOT OF THE BUILDINGS THAT WE'RE PUTTING UP ARE MUCH BIGGER THAN THAT.
THE ONE I LIVE IN IS BIGGER THAN THAT.
UM, AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, UM, WE'RE GONNA MOSTLY SKIP THIS ONE.
IT'S SUMMARIZING AN ANALYSIS THAT'S GONNA BE COMING OUT, UM, FROM THE CENTER THAT STEVEN WORKS FOR.
UM, BUT IT BASICALLY SHOWING THAT NEW YORK HAS NO EGRESS ISSUES IN ITS CURRENT 4,000 PLUS MODERN SINGLE STAIR BUILDINGS, 4,000 SQUARE FEET PLUS.
UM, SO THIS SLIDE IS IMPORTANT.
UH, EACH CODE SECTION OFFERS A MENU OF OPTIONS.
DIFFERENT PLACES APPROACH THIS IN DIFFERENT WAYS SO YOU CAN FIND A MILLION DIFFERENT WAYS TO MITIGATE AGAINST A FIRE AND NO PLACE USES EVERYTHING.
UH, BUT THERE IS A TENDENCY IN THE US FOR OFFICIALS TO TAKE SORT OF A BELT AND SUSPENDERS APPROACH OR AN ALL OF THE ABOVE APPROACH.
UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO BE CONSERVATIVE, BUT EXISTING US CODE SECTIONS ARE ALREADY CONSERVATIVE, UH, FAR MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN WHAT YOU FIND ABROAD.
UM, THERE'S SOME INTEREST IN AUSTIN IN GOING HE WROTE THERE'S SOME INTEREST.
I AM THE INTEREST, UH, I'M INTERESTED IN AUSTIN GOING TALLER THAN SIX STORIES IN SOME CASES MOVING TO THE 85 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT THAT WE HAVE FOR FIVE OVER ONES AND BASICALLY TREATING THOSE EQUALLY, UM, GIVEN THE ADVANTAGES THAT WE HAVE IN FIRE SAFETY WITH A SINGLE STAIR BUILDING VERSUS YOUR DUAL EGRESS FIVE OVER ONE THAT WE TYPICALLY SEE.
UM, AND STEVEN SAYS HE WOULD ENCOURAGE CONSIDERING THAT.
UM, BUT AT THE VERY LEAST WE SHOULD NOT GO MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT SEATTLE HAS, WHICH IS ANOTHER AMERICAN CITY THAT'S ROUGHLY IN OUR SIZE RANGE THAT UM, IS, YOU KNOW, THEY ALSO HAVE A TECH INDUSTRY AND THEY ALSO HAVE A LOT OF SIMILARITIES TO US AND THEY'RE NOT EXPERIENCING A FIRE SAFETY CRISIS FROM THEIR SINGLE STAIR BUILDINGS.
THEY'VE HAD THEM FOR 50 YEARS, THEY ADOPTED THEM IN THE SEVENTIES, UM, AND THERE HASN'T REALLY BEEN ANY TROUBLE WITH IT.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S A BETTER MODEL THAN NEW YORK, UH, BECAUSE SEATTLE ALSO ALLOWS TIMBER CONSTRUCTION.
SO THE SAME WOOD THAT WE BUILD A LOT OF OUR APARTMENTS OUT OF.
UM, AND WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
UM, SO THIS IS A VISUALIZATION OF THAT MENU OF OPTIONS, UH, THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
UM, SO SEATTLE AND HONOLULU WOULD BE KIND OF THE BASIS.
IS THAT A WARNING OR IS THAT THE WHOLE THING? UM, I THINK THAT WAS TIME.
WELL THERE'S A MENU OF OPTIONS.
UH, LET'S PASS THE AMENDMENTS THAT AURA IS ASKING FOR AND LET'S MAKE THIS POSSIBLE.
THANK Y'ALL FOR Y'ALL'S COMMENTS.
OUR NEXT THREE SPEAKERS WILL BE PETER BRETON.
CAR NALU, YOU'LL HAVE ONE MINUTE.
AND FELIX DE PORTO, YOU WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE.
HELLO EVERYBODY, MY NAME IS PETER BRETON.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
I'M A DISTRICT EIGHT RESIDENT.
I AM HERE IN SUPPORT OF ITEM 28, BOO.
YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT ALLOWING SINGLE STAIR STRUCTURES WILL OPEN UP VASTLY MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR INFILL HOUSING.
I'M ALSO HOPING THAT Y'ALL WILL RECOMMEND STAFF ADOPT, UH, CHANGES TO THE DRAFTED AMENDMENT OR AMENDMENTS IN LINE WITH AURA'S RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH ARE AVAILABLE ACROSS OUR SOCIAL MEDIA AND OTHER CHANNELS.
THIS IS A ONE MINUTE SPEECH, SO I'LL GO QUICKLY.
[04:00:01]
I WANNA THANK CITY STAFF FOR THEIR WORK AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE NEED TO BALANCE COMPETING CONCERNS WHEN CRAFTING CODE AMENDMENTS.HOWEVER, I URGE YOU TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE STATUS QUO.
AGING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WHICH ARE MORE PRONE TO FIRE AND DO NOT HAVE MODERN FIRE SAFETY MECHANISMS OR NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WHICH DON'T NEED TO INCLUDE INCREASED FIRE SAFETY MECHANISMS SUCH AS SPRINKLERS.
WE NEED SAFE INFILL INFILL HOUSING.
IF WE REQUIRE COSTLY, ARBITRARY COMPLIANCE FOR OSTENSIBLY FIRE SAFETY REASONS, WE WON'T END UP WITH SAFER HIGHER QUALITY STRUCTURES.
IT'S RECAR IN ATTENDANCE, RIGHT? OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS GONNA BE FELIX DE PORTU.
IS HE IN ATTENDANCE? RIGHT? I'M JUST GONNA READ THESE OUT, UM, INDIVIDUALLY MOVING FORWARD.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS LUIS LUGO.
LUIS IS SPEAKING IN FAVOR RIGHT? DAN KEHE VIRTUAL HOW WE HAVE THAT HERE VIRTUAL, UH, FEBRUARY, RIGHT IS AMY UNA PRESENT, RIGHT.
UM, IS CUTTER GONZALEZ PRESENT? ALL RIGHTY.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE RIGHT ON TO EDGAR HANDEL.
EDGAR WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
HE'S SPEAKING IN FAVOR AND WE'LL HAVE ONE MINUTE.
EDGAR, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
PLUS PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
DID YOU SAY DAN CASH? HELLO? OH, HELLO.
I, UM, WANTED TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE SINGLE STAIR AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED BY AURA AND A I A, UM, SEVERAL YEARS AGO I WENT TO GO VISIT IN LAWS IN, UH, ABROAD.
AND I FELT THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING DIFFERENT ABOUT THE APARTMENT THAT WE STAYED IN THE WHOLE TIME WITH SOME FAMILY.
IT WASN'T UNTIL I GOT BACK TO THE UNITED STATES AND MANY YEARS LATER THAT I LEARNED ABOUT THE SINGLE STA THE OTHER THINGS THAT I REALIZED, SOME OF THE DIFFERENCES THAT I HAD REALIZED HAVING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THE BUILDING THAT WE HAD STAYED IN WAS SINGLE STAIR.
AND WHAT I FELT WAS THAT THERE WAS A MORE OPEN LAYOUT.
IT WAS MORE ROOMS, UM, THERE WAS MORE WINDOWS.
IT WAS ALL KNOW A BETTER PLACE TO BE.
AND IT JUST FELT REALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE APARTMENTS THAT I'D ALWAYS LIVED IN, WHICH ONLY HAD ONE WALL TO THE EXTERIOR.
YOU KNOW, JUST ONE PLACE THAT YOU REALLY HAD WINDOWS AND ALL THE OTHER WAS HALLWAYS AND BUILDINGS.
SO, UM, I REALLY THINK THIS COULD BE A REALLY GREAT THING.
I THINK IT COULD BE AN IMPROVEMENT FOR SAFETY AND ALLOW MORE PEOPLE TO LIVE IN A BLOCKABLE MORE SAFE ENVIRONMENT.
SO, UM, LET'S JUST GET IT PASSED.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER SPEAKING IN FAVOR WILL BE TY HAKI.
HI, I AM TY HOKI, UH, DISTRICT FIVE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE SINGLE STAIR AMENDMENT.
UM, BASICALLY IT COMES DOWN TO OPTIONALITY.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF FAMILY, FAMILIES THAT WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD, UM, SOMETHING BEYOND JUST LIKE A TINY TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT, RIGHT? THERE'S MANY PEOPLE THAT NEED TO LIVE IN MULTIFAMILY.
THIS GIVES THEM PLENTY OF OPTIONS THAT ALSO GIVES, AS EDGAR WAS DESCRIBING, UM, A MORE VARIED LIVING SPACE, UH, BETTER WINDOW ACCESS.
UM, HIS STORY ACTUALLY REMINDED ME THAT DURING ONE OF MY TRIPS OVERSEAS, I WAS STAYING IN PORTAL PORTUGAL, UH, IN A SIMILAR KIND OF CONFIGURATION IN A SINGLE STAIR BUILDING.
AND YEAH, THE LAYOUT WAS GORGEOUS.
SO MANY WINDOWS, SO MUCH NATURAL LIGHTING COMING IN.
UM, AND I THINK I DO BELIEVE THAT THE SAFETY CONCERNS CAN BE ADDRESSED.
UM, THIS ISN'T A NOVEL PROBLEM AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED.
IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR 50 YEARS IN SEATTLE.
IT'S USED ALL AROUND THE WORLD.
WE'RE NOT SENDING A MAN TO MARS, RIGHT? OR, OR A WOMAN TO MARS, RIGHT? LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN TRIED AND TRUE.
[04:05:01]
IT CAN BE DONE.SO YEAH, PLEASE, PLEASE DO IT ONCE THERE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MIRIAM SCHOFIELD.
MIRIAM, YOU WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE AND SHE'S SPEAKING IN FAVOR CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
WE'RE GOING TO, UM, VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION IN A SECOND.
UH, VICE CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER WOODS.
UM, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
SO, UM, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE, UM, UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION THAT EACH ONE OF OUR COMMISSIONERS AND EX OFFICIOS GETS THE SPOT FOR A QUESTION.
UM, SO IT KIND OF EXPANDS OUR TYPICAL EIGHT, UM, BUT ALLOWS EVERYONE TO ASK A QUESTION.
SO, UM, SEEING NO OBJECTION TO THAT, UM, I'LL JUST GO, LET'S LET OUR VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS GO FIRST.
UM, AND WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A QUE A QUESTION FORMED AT THIS TIME.
BUT I'LL JUST GO AS I SEE YOU ON THE SCREEN.
COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I GUESS MOST OF MY QUESTIONS ARE GONNA BE FOR OUR FIRE OFFICIAL THAT'S IN ATTENDANCE.
WE HAVE FIRE AND EMS, UM, SO THE NFPA, THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION, UH, WHICH IS A NEUTRAL CODE WRITING BODY, UH, ACTUALLY JUST PUBLISHED A WEEK AGO, A VERY, VERY, VERY LENGTHY DETAILED, UM, ARTICLE ABOUT THE SINGLE STAIR, UM, TOPIC.
AND, AND I READ THROUGH IT AND IT WAS, IT WAS QUITE EYE-OPENING.
IT SAYS THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE FIRE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS, THE METRO CHIEFS, THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE FIRE MARSHALS, THE NATIONAL FIRE CHIEFS COUNCIL, THE NATIONAL FALLEN FIREFIGHTERS FOUNDATION, AND THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE ALL HAVE COME OUT STRONGLY AGAINST INCREASING THE HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS WITH SINGLE, UH, EXIT STAIRS AND HAVE LAUNCHED THE FULL THROATED DEFENSE OF THE EXISTING CODES.
I'M ASSUMING BASED ON THE MEMO THAT WAS SENT TO COUNCIL, UH, THE, THE AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT IS JOINING ALL OF THOSE, UH, NATIONAL FIRE ASSOCIATIONS AND OPPOSING THE SINGLE STAIRCASE, UH, PROPOSAL.
YEAH, STEVEN TRUSDALE FIRE MARSHAL AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND THAT IS CORRECT.
AND, AND IN THIS ARTICLE IT ALSO SAYS, JUST AS ALARMING AS THE PROPOSED RULE CHANGES OFFICIALS SAY, IF THE PROCESS BY WHICH IS HAPPENING, RATHER THAN WORKING WITHIN THE METHODICAL CODE MAKING SYSTEM, WHERE EXPERT VOLUNTEERS FROM A VARIETY OF BACKGROUNDS REVIEW SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS AND REACH A CONSENSUS ON REVISIONS, STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE ISSUING THAT PROCESS TO STRIP AWAY REQUIREMENTS ON THEIR OWN WITH LITTLE OR NO INPUT FROM SAFETY OFFICIALS.
THE PROCESS IN WHICH WE'VE GONE ABOUT THIS SINGLE STAIRCASE DISCUSSION, WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT A METHODICAL CODE MAKING SYSTEM? SO I WOULD SAY THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THE NORMAL PROCESS OF CODE REVISION.
UM, AS, AS THE BUILDING OFFICIAL DESCRIBED, THIS IS NOT TYPICAL OF THE WAY THE PROCESS, UH, UH, IS, IT IS, UH, ENACTED.
AND SO, UH, THIS PROPOSAL WAS BROUGHT UP AFTER WE WERE PRETTY FAR DOWN THE ROAD OF, UH, REVISING THE CODES FOR 2024.
THAT SEEMED TO KIND OF COME OUT OF NOWHERE.
UM, FROM THE, FROM THE, I THINK HIS NAME IS STEVEN, HIS LITTLE NONPROFIT KINDA CAUGHT THIS ISSUE ON FIRE AROUND THE COUNTRY.
UM, ONE OF THE, THE ISSUES THAT WERE KIND OF OBVIOUS TO ME AS TO WHY SINGLE STAIRCASE MIGHT BE AN ISSUE HERE IN AUSTIN IS, IS YOU MENTIONED THAT WE ONLY HAVE 13 LADDER TRUCKS.
UM, I KNOW SEATTLE AND, AND NEW YORK CITY, UM, HAVE QUITE A FEW MORE THAN THAT BECAUSE OF THEIR, THEIR DENSITY OF, OF, OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT.
UM, IS 13 SUFFICIENT IF WE WERE TO APPROVE A SINGLE STAIRCASE FOR THESE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES, DO YOU THINK THE 13 LADDER TRUCKS THAT WE HAVE IN A CITY OF THIS SIZE, IN THIS GEOGRAPHIC AREA, UH, YOU KNOW, THESE LADDER TRUCKS ACTUALLY HAVE TO GET TO THE FIRE.
UH, DO YOU THINK THAT'S SUFFICIENT FOR, FOR PROVIDING, UH, LIFE SAFETY SERVICES? I DON'T.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE, UH, ARE CURRENTLY TWO LADDERS BEHIND, UH, WE EXPECT IT A LADDER TRUCK TO BE, UH, ADDED TO THE FLEET.
WHEN WE OPENED STATION 50 IN THE DUB VALLEY AREA AND THEN ANOTHER LADDER WHEN WE OPENED STATION 52 ON THE 360 CORRIDOR, UH, THOSE WERE, WERE NOT ADDED TO THE FLEET.
[04:10:01]
WE'RE FALLING FURTHER AND FURTHER BEHIND.AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THE SEATTLE EXAMPLE, THEY HAVE ONE LADDER FOR EVERY 2.7 ENGINES, AND WE ONLY HAVE ONE LADDER FOR EVERY 3.8 ENGINES.
DID, IF, IF WE DO MOVE TO A SINGLE STAIRCASE, HOW LONG DO YOU THINK IT WOULD TAKE TO KIND OF GET UP TO AN ADEQUATE NUMBER OF LADDER TRUCKS AND HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY SORT OF COMMITMENT OF FUNDING TO ACTUALLY DO THAT? WELL, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE PRETTY FAR BEHIND NOW, SO I, I COULDN'T ESTIMATE A TIMELINE.
BUT, UM, IT WOULD BE IN, YOU KNOW, A MINIMUM OF A DECADE.
I WAS GONNA SAY IF WE DELAY IMPLEMENTATION BY A YEAR, COULD WE MAYBE KIND OF, BUT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MANY, MANY YEARS.
UH, WELL, I APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONSES.
UM, UH, THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
MOVE ON TO BOARD MEMBER HUNTER, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I DO NOT.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, IT'S TIME.
WAS THAT A NO? YEAH, NO QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW.
AND TO BE CLEAR, ARE WE ASKING ONE QUESTION OR ARE WE ASKING A TIMED AMOUNT OF QUESTIONS? FIVE MINUTES WORTH.
UM, SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, CITY STAFF.
I'M, I'M, I'M CURIOUS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WE AS A CITY ADOPTED, UM, THE REQUIRING OF SPRINKLERS IN MULTIFAMILY IN ABOUT 2006.
CAN YOU LET US KNOW ROUGHLY HOW MANY FIRES WE HAVE IN MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS THAT REQUIRE THE USE OF A LADDER TRUCK, SAY IN 2022, HOW MANY REQUIRE THE USE OF A LADDER TRUCK? CORRECT.
I MEAN, WE DISPATCH LADDERS ON ALL STRUCTURE FIRES, UH, AND THEY ARE UTILIZED.
WHETHER OR NOT THE AERIAL DEVICE IS UTILIZED IS NOT, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES THAT IS.
SO FOR ALL WE KNOW WE'RE SENDING TRUCKS OUT, WE'RE NOT USING THEM AND WE'RE NOT KEEPING UP WITH THAT DATA.
OR ARE WE KEEPING UP WITH THAT DATA AND WE JUST DON'T KNOW IT OFFHAND? I DON'T KNOW IT OFFHAND.
IS THERE A WAY WE COULD TRACK THAT DATA? THERE IS, YES.
AND, UM, SO FOR THE CITIES THAT HAVE ADOPTED THIS IN THE UNITED STATES AND AND CITIES AROUND THE WORLD THAT HAVE ADOPTED THIS, IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THINGS ARE GOING AWAY.
I'M JUST CURIOUS, LIKE, UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE REQUIRE HOMES TO BE BY THEMSELVES AND SURROUNDED BY WATER, THAT WOULD BE SAFER, BUT IT WOULD JUST COST A LOT, RIGHT? AND SO I THINK AS A CITY WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT WAYS TO MAYBE NOT BE SO EXPENSIVE TO WHERE WE'RE, WE'RE DISPLACING A LOT OF PEOPLE.
AND SO IS THERE A THREAT IN, IN YOUR ANALYSIS, ARE WE LOOKING AT THE THREATS OF THE WAY WE ARE DISPLACING PEOPLE IN AUSTIN AND THEY HAVE TO GO LIVE FURTHER AND FURTHER OUT IN COMMUNITIES THAT AREN'T PROTECTED BY A FD AND THAT MIGHT BE IN RURAL AREAS OR IN WOODED AREAS.
DO WE TAKE ANY OF THAT INTO ACCOUNT AS FAR AS WHERE PEOPLE ARE MOVING? OR DO WE JUST LOOK AT AUSTIN AND JUST WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE AS FAR AS THE FIRE CODE? AS FAR AS ANY DECISIONS WE'RE MAKING, AS FAR AS TWEAKING THE FIRE CODE TO SEE WHAT COULD BE BETTER FOR AUSTIN KNIGHTS LIVING IN AUSTIN.
WE DON'T CONSIDER THE FIRE CODES IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS AS FAR AS I KNOW WHEN WE'RE, UH, CONSIDERING CHANGES TO THE FIRE CODE.
AND A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO THERE WAS A MEETING IN, IN EAST AUSTIN, CHRIS RILEY WAS THERE.
WE TALKED ABOUT HIM EARLIER IN 2015, I BELIEVE IT WAS.
AND WE WERE TOLD BY A FD AT THAT TIME THAT THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT, THAT THE KIND OF THE BIGGEST THING THAT A FD TRIES TO FIGHT OUR FOLKS PASSING FROM FIRE RELATED INJURIES WITHIN A BUILDING.
AND WE ASKED AT THAT TIME IF THERE WAS A, A NUMBER LIKE WE SAID.
UM, 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW, AS I UNDERSTAND, AUSTIN HAS A VARIANCE TO A, TO REQUIRE LARGER LANE WIDTHS, WHICH ARE, WHICH IS DEVASTATING FOR PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS.
UM, BUT IT'S TO MOVE BIGGER TRUCKS AROUND.
AND SO WE ASKED AT THAT TIME, UM, HOW MANY FOLKS PERISHED IN FIRES THE YEAR BEFORE, THE YEAR BEFORE THAT, AND A FD DIDN'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THOSE QUESTIONS BACK THEN.
DO WE HAPPEN TO KNOW THE ANSWER TO THOSE QUESTIONS TODAY? DID THE NUMBER OF FIRE FATALITIES CORRECT? WE DO HAVE THAT DATA.
I DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME, BUT IT'S, IT'S A PRETTY LOW NUMBER.
[04:15:01]
OF ALL, LEMME SAY THANKS TO UH, ALL Y'ALL IN THE BACK HERE WHO ARE, ARE HERE LATE, LATE, LATE, ABOUT TO SHOW US SOME COOL STUFF.LET'S GET STARTED WITH THE QUESTIONS.
SO, UM, DOES FIRE PREVENTION, OUR DEPARTMENT, A-T-C-M-S STILL OPPOSE SINGLE STARE? IS THAT WHERE, WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THINGS? I'M SORRY, SAY THAT AGAIN.
DID, DO Y'ALL STILL OPPOSE A SINGLE STARE AMENDMENT? YES.
UM, WHAT'S A QUINT, WHAT'S THE, WHAT A QUINT, COULD YOU DEFINE A QUINT FOR THE PLANTING? A QUINT IS A QUINTUPLE COMBINATION APPARATUS.
IT'S A COMBINATION OF AN ENGINE AND A LADDER.
IT HAS, UH, THE HOSE, THE PUMP, IT HAS REGULAR GROUND LADDERS AND AN AERIAL LADDER.
WHAT'S THE HEIGHT OF THE AVERAGE AERIAL LADDER ON OUR POINTS HERE IN AUSTIN? 105 FEET.
SO WELL OVER A SIX STORY BUILDING.
UM, HOW TALL IS THE, UH, TOWER FOR THE FIRE ACADEMY OVER OFF OF, UH, PLEASANT VALLEY BALL AND LONGHORN DAM? UH, THAT ONE IS FIVE STORIES.
I BELIEVE THE ONE AT OUR TRAINING ACADEMY IS EIGHT.
SO I'M JUST GOING UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THIS IS GOING TO PASS, MOST LIKELY, IF IT DOES, AND Y'ALL HAD TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AS TO THE STAIR WIDTH, BECAUSE THE ONE THING I REMEMBER FROM WHEN I WAS AT EMT WAS HAVING TO LUG SOMEBODY DOWN FROM THE FOURTH FLOOR OF AN APARTMENT COMPLEX AND A STAIR CHAIR AND HOW MUCH IT SUCKED.
WHAT WOULD Y'ALL LIKE TO HAVE THAT STAIR WIDTH BE? WHAT NUMBER DO WE SETTLE ON? YEAH, THE, THE STAIR WIDTH IS DEFINED IN A TABLE IN THE IBC, DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS OF 44 TO 48 INCHES IS ROUGHLY THE SIZE FOR A MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING.
DEPENDING ON THE OCCUPANCY, 36 INCHES IS THE MINIMUM.
SO WE WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE STAIR WIDTH BASED ON NOT ONLY THE OCCUPANTS NOW, BUT THE FIREFIGHTERS ARE RESCUE PERSONNEL TRYING TO GET THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.
UM, CHAIR, I THINK I HAD ASKED AT, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS THE LAST MEETING OR MEETING BEFORE, IF WE COULD HAVE A DEMONSTRATION.
I JUST WANTED Y'ALL TO SEE, I, I WANT SINGLE STA BUT I WANT Y'ALL TO SEE HOW, HOW COMPLICATED AND DIFFICULT IT IS TO, TO PACK SOMEONE DOWN A FLIGHT OF STAIRS.
SO IT, DO WE HAVE TIME FOR THAT TONIGHT? UM, SO JUST PROCEDURALLY, JUST TO BE CLEAR, SO I THINK WE CAN DO THAT FOR SURE.
UM, WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO GO INTO RECESS AND A SUB QUORUM OF COMMISSIONERS CAN GO AND VIEW IT.
THE REST OF THE FOLKS WILL HAVE TO STAY IN THE ROOM, BUT WE CAN FIGURE THAT OUT.
'CAUSE WE HAVE AT LEAST THREE PEOPLE WHO ARE VIRTUAL ANYWAYS.
WHICH WOULD MEAN, UM, SIX PEOPLE OFF OF THIS TASK CAN WALK AWAY IN ADDITION TO COMMISSIONER COHEN.
SO WE'LL TAKE A, HOW LONG DO YOU NEED TO DO THE, THE DEMONSTRATION? HI, KEVIN PARKER.
I'M AN ASSISTANT CHIEF FOR AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY EMS AND THE CHIEF OF OPERATIONS.
I THINK IT'LL TAKE US ABOUT FIVE TO 10 MINUTES MAXIMUM.
SORRY, CAN I JUST ASK A POINT OF CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I JUST WANNA MAKE SOMETHING CLEAR 'CAUSE I DON'T THINK THIS HAS BEEN TOUCHED UPON.
COULD I ACTUALLY HAVE THE BUILDING SERVICES PERSON, JUST TO BE CLEAR, THERE ARE ELEVATORS IN THESE BUILDINGS, SO WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT ONLY HAVING STAIRS.
IS THAT CORRECT? OR COULD YOU CLARIFY THAT JUST BEFORE WE SEE THIS DEMONSTRATION? THANK YOU.
DE DEPENDING ON THE HEIGHT, THERE MAY BE AN ELEVATOR REQUIREMENT.
SOME, SOME BUILDINGS THERE MAY NOT BE AN ELEVATOR REQUIREMENT, TWO, TWO STAIRWELLS OR THE NORM.
UH, SO ONCE YOU GET OVER 75 FEET, THE ELEVATOR REQUIREMENT, YOU HAS TO HAVE BACKUP POWER AND ALL KINDS OF ADDITIONAL THINGS ON A HIGH RISE.
UM, SO IT, IT REALLY JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT THE ARCHITECT SUBMITS AND WHAT WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED OTHER THAN THE ONE STAIRWELL.
AND JUST ALSO TO CLARIFY FOR THE FOLKS WHO HAVE NOT LOOKED AT THE MODEL CODE, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT TO FIT TO MAKE THOSE ACCESSIBLE FOR LIFE SAFETY.
THE SIZE OF THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE BASIS, THIS IS MY TIME CLARIFYING BEFORE THEY SEE THE PRE PRESENTATION, BECAUSE IT'S ALL SPECIFICALLY WE CAN FIRE, BUT THEY'RE NOT ELEVATORS ARE, WE'LL ALSO NOT HAVE ALL COMMISSIONERS COMING.
I KNOW YOU WANNA TALK, BUT YOU REALLY NEED TO RESPECT ME WHEN IT'S MY TURN.
I DON'T INTERRUPT YOU WHEN IT'S YOUR TURN.
A LITTLE DECORUM IS APPROPRIATE.
WE'RE GOING TO RECESS FOR 10 MINUTES, DO THE DEMONSTRATION AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND FINISH QUESTIONS.
I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION, UM, TO EXTEND TO 1130 BECAUSE WE'RE RUNNING UP CLOSE.
ANY OPPOSED CHAIR? I'M OPPOSED TO THAT.
UM, WE'RE, WE STILL PASSED THAT,
[04:20:01]
UM, CHAIR, CAN YOU PLEASE RESTATE WHO THE SECOND WAS? THE SECOND WAS MYSELF, MR. ZAHAR.OKAY, SO WE ARE GOING TO COME BACK AT 10 53.
WE'RE GOING TO GO OUT IN THE LOBBY AND ANY, THAT'S SIX COMMISSIONERS, CHAIR CO AND, AND ANY OF THE, THOSE FOLKS SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE.
YOU WANNA PULL SOME S**T LIKE, NOT YOURS STARTED AGAIN.
UM, SO WE'RE GOING THROUGH HERE? YES.
UM, JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE VIRTUAL MEMBERS, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE IF WE ALLOWED JARED CO JUST TO PROVIDE LIKE A ONE MINUTE RECAP OF WHAT Y'ALL SAW
UM, WHAT SURPRISED EVEN WE, WE WENT, IS YOUR, IS YOUR MIC ON? IT'S ON, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU, I DON'T THINK.
CAN YOU HEAR CHAIR COHEN? I CAN HEAR YOU.
MAYBE TRY THE MUTE ME, HER COUSIN.
MAYBE, MAYBE TRY THE MIC ONE NEXT TO YOU.
SO IT KIND OF CAUGHT US OFF GUARD.
I THOUGHT WE WERE GONNA DO THIS LIKE IN THE FOYER, BUT WE WENT OUTSIDE THE BUILDING INTO AN ACTUAL STAIRWELL, LIKE THE REAL FIRE STAIRWELL FOR CITY HALL.
AND THEY SHOWED US TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF CARRIES.
ONE IS IN A DEVICE CALLED A STAIR CHAIR.
THINK OF IT LIKE YOUR STANDARD FOLDING LAWN CHAIR, UH, EXCEPT WITH LIKE FOUR HANDLES ON IT.
AND THEN THE PATIENT GETS STRAPS INTO IT AND THEY HAVE TO MANUALLY KIND OF CARRY THEM DOWN STEP BY STEP USING THIS LIKE TANKLIKE TREAD TO SORT OF ROLL OVER THE CORNER OF THE STAIRS.
THE OTHER ONE WAS IN A DEVICE, THEY CALL IT MEGA MOVER, WHICH ESSENTIALLY LOOKS LIKE A KIND OF LARGE NYLON CLOTH SHEET WITH CARRY HANDLES.
AND THE PATIENT GETS WRAPPED UP IN THIS THING AND IT TAKES SIX OF THEM TO KIND OF SIX TO EIGHT OF THEM.
LIKE SOME HAVE TO BE ON THE HEAD DEPENDING ON HOW HAPPY THE PATIENT IS.
AND THEY CARRIED THEM DOWN A FLIGHT AND A HALF OF STAIRS.
AND HOW, HOW TIGHT IT IS AND HOW LIKE COMPLICATED.
AND, AND WE'RE EXPLAINING THAT, UH, DURING THIS PERIOD THERE ISN'T ANY CPR THERE ISN'T ANY MONITORING, THERE ISN'T ANY, UH, RESCUE BREATHING GOING ON.
THEY'RE NOT BEING BAGGED, THEY'RE NOT GETTING ANY OXYGEN.
SO IT WAS A, IT WAS A VERY POTENT DEMONSTRATION IN MY OPINION.
WE'LL GO ON TO COMMISSIONER HAYNES, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? YES, MA'AM.
UM, PROBABLY FOR CHIEF ELL, NOT PROBABLY FOR THE CHIEF, UH, LIKE CHAIR COHEN.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, CHIEF, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, YOU AND YOUR FOLKS.
UM, Y'ALL ARE THE TRUE HEROES HERE TONIGHT.
AND, UH, I JOKED WITH A COUPLE OF YOUR GUYS IN THE, IN THE STAIRWELL.
THEY SHOULD, THEY SHOULD PROBABLY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GET, UM, HAZARD DUTY, BUT YOU SHOULD PROBABLY GIVE THEM HAZARD PAY FOR TONIGHT.
BUT THANK YOU FOR, UH, THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO FOR THE CITY.
UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK TONIGHT ABOUT COMPARING US TO OTHER FOLKS AND, AND, UM, ONE CITY THAT KEEPS, KEEPS COMING UP A LOT IS, UM, SEATTLE.
UH, DO YOU KNOW THE POPULATION OF, OF SEATTLE? I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HAND.
UH, WHAT IF, WHAT IF I TOLD YOU IT WAS ABOUT 700,000 PEOPLE? THAT SOUNDS RIGHT.
AUSTIN JUST CROSSED A MILLION.
SO, UH, NOT QUITE COMPARABLE, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT.
DO YOU KNOW HOW BIG SEATTLE IS? SQUARE MILES? UH, IT'S, WOULD IT SURPRISE YOU IF I TOLD YOU IT WAS 83 SQUARE MILES? THAT'S, YOU KNOW, HOW BIG CITY OF AUSTIN IS, HOW ABOUT 305 SQUARE MILES? NOT QUITE COMPARABLE.
LET'S TALK ABOUT RESPONSE TIME.
DO YOU KNOW THE RESPONSE TIME OF THE CI OF THE SFDC SEATTLE FIRE DEPARTMENT? WHAT'S, WHAT'S THEIR RESPONSE TIME? SO THEY USE TWO METRICS THAT THEY, UM, MEASURE.
AND WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT THE SEATTLE SPECIAL OR THE, THE SINGLE STAIR ORDINANCE IS WHAT THEY CALL IT.
SO THE PRIMARY ONE IS THE ARRIVAL OF THE FIRST ENGINE UNDER FOUR MINUTES.
THEY ACHIEVE THAT 76% OF THE TIME
[04:25:01]
COMPARED TO 55, 50 7% OF THE TIME IN AUSTIN.AND THEY HAVE, UH, THE FIRST EIGHT UNITS, WHICH IS THEIR FULL COMPLIMENT FOR A STRUCTURE FIRE ARRIVES IN UNDER EIGHT MINUTES 95% OF THE TIME.
UH, AUSTIN ONLY ACHIEVES THAT 12% OF THE TIME.
SO IS IT FAIR FOR ME TO, TO, UH, GATHER THEN, BASED ON SOME OF THAT EVIDENCE, THAT ON A KIND OF A PER CAPITA BASIS, SEATTLE PROBABLY HAS MORE FIRE PROFESSIONALS ON A PER CAPITA BASIS THAN AUSTIN DOES? THEY DEFINITELY HAVE DENSER COVERAGE.
UM, IF WE ADOPT THIS TONIGHT, UM, WELL, WELL, UH, I'LL ASK THAT QUESTION IN A MINUTE, BUT IF, IF WE ADOPT THIS, UM, UH, AMENDMENT TO THE CODE, UH, WILL IT ENDANGER THE LIVES OF YOUR PERSONNEL? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I'D HAVE TO SAY WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE AMENDMENTS WOULD LOOK LIKE SPECIFICALLY, BUT WE DO FEEL LIKE IT WOULD MAKE OUR JOB MORE DIFFICULT AND POTENTIALLY MORE DIFFICULT IF WE ADOPTED ONE STAIRCASE, TWO STORIES, THREE STORIES, FIVE STORIES, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, AND REMOVE THE SECOND.
WOULD THAT ENDANGER A FD PERSONNEL? I THINK IT POTENTIALLY WOULD, BUT MY CONCERN WOULD BE MORE FOR THE CITIZENS BECAUSE WE WOULD BE COMPETING FOR THAT STAIRWELL FOR FIREFIGHTING AND EGRESS.
IT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME THAT YOUR CONCERN WOULD BE FOR THE CITIZENS AND I, I APPRECIATE THAT ANSWER.
UH, AND, AND IT WOULD ENDANGER THE CITIZEN'S LIFE, BUT IT, I I THINK IT WOULD, AND I'M SORRY, SIR, THE, FOR THE D-S-D-I-I, I HEARD YOUR NAME, BUT I'M OLD AND SO I'VE FORGOTTEN.
UH, TODD WILCOX BUILDING OFFICIAL.
UM, HOW LONG YOU BEEN DOING THE, THE FLIP SIDE, THE, THE BUILDING INSPECTION SIDE OF FOR FIRE AND, AND ALL, UH, 20, 22 YEARS WITH THE CITY, 37 IN CONSTRUCTION.
AND IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION, 37 YEARS ON THE JOB, WOULD THIS ENDANGER THE LIVES OF, NOT, NOT YOUR, WELL, IT COULD BE ENDANGER THE LIVES OF YOUR BUT OF, OF A FD FOLKS? I, I THINK IT WOULD NOT ONLY FOR FIRE AND OR MEDICAL EMERGENCIES, BUT ALSO A PD DISTRESS CALLS CHECK FOR WELFARE.
TELL ME ABOUT HOW WOULD IT ENDANGER A PD? UH, I MEAN WE, WE'VE HAD EXAMPLES AROUND THE WORLD OF PEOPLE USING FIRE OR ANY OTHER THING TO CLOG STAIRWELLS.
AND IF THERE'S ONLY ONE AND THEY USE METHODS TO CLOG THAT STAIRWELL AND THE POLICE CAN'T GET UP OR THE PEOPLE CAN'T GET DOWN, THEY CAN TURN IT INTO A POTENTIAL DEATH TRAP.
FOR IN TERMS OF THE FIRE OR, OR FOR WHAT REASON? UH, LIKE POTENTIALLY IF THERE WAS A SHOOTER AT THE BOTTOM OF THE STAIRS AND THAT WAS THE ONLY WAY OUT.
OH, SO IT'S A SHOOTING GALLERY? WELL, THAT WOULD BE JUST SOMETHING I WOULD, I THINK OF, I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T KNOW THE PROBABILITY OF THAT HAPPENING, BUT IT, AROUND THE WORLD IT DOES HAPPEN.
UH, WE GOT PROBLEMS WITH GUNS IN THIS NIGHT.
UH, BUT YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY MORE GUNS GET USED THAN SHOULD BE ALLOWED.
UM, BUT THAT'S A, THAT'S AN INCREASE.
I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THE MOMENT.
UM, MY QUESTION I THINK IS FOR MR. WILCOX.
COULD YOU CLARIFY, I THINK YOU WANTED TO ADD SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT WHAT THE PROCESS LOOKS LIKE AFTER THIS.
UM, SO THE PROCESS FOR TECHNICAL CODE ADOPTION IS TO GATHER STAKEHOLDER INPUT AND THEN GO TO THE BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF, OF APPEALS FOR FINAL APPROVAL TO MOVE TO COUNCIL PER THE RESOLUTION.
I WAS DIRECTED TO BRING THE TECHNICAL CODES HERE TO GATHER CITIZEN INPUT AND FOR THE BO THE COMMISSION TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDED CHANGES.
SO THE, THE, THE VOTE ON WHETHER TO TAKE THIS TO COUNCIL OR NOT WILL BE ON THE BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS, NOT, NOT ON THIS COMMISSION PLATE, JUST JUST ANY CHANGES THAT Y'ALL WANT TO RECOMMEND TO ME AS FAR AS LOCAL AMENDMENTS GO.
THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL, THANK YOU.
UM, I, ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS ABOUT THE STAIRWELL.
WOULD THE, THE CORRIDOR, THE STAIRWELL IS STILL MADE OUT OF WOOD WITH WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED? OR IS IT MASONRY OR SOMETHING TO, TO STOP THE FIRE? THE, THE RATED ASSEMBLY WOULD HAVE TO BE A TWO HOUR ENCLOSURE AROUND THE STAIRWELL FROM, FROM A PUBLIC WAY ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP TO GET EVERYBODY OUT.
SO THE FIRE PROTECTION WOULD STAY INTACT, JUST LIKE THE IBC REQUIRES.
NOW IT'D HAVE TO BE A TWO HOUR ASSEMBLY PRESSURIZED, UH, IN ORDER TO ALLOW BASICALLY A SINGLE STAIR TO WORK.
[04:30:02]
QUESTION YOU HAD, YOU HAD TALKED ABOUT THE POOL CODE, AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS NOW, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S COMING? IT, IT, IT'S NOT ONLY THE IRC AND IBC WOULD COME TO THIS COMMISSION.THE POOL CODE WENT ALREADY WENT TO THE BUILDING IF FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS AND THEY APPROVED IT TO GO TO COUNCIL.
I'M A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND SO THAT'S MORE IN MY PURVIEW.
ALRIGHT, THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
UM, UM, START WITH YOUR PRESENTATION IN SECTION 1204, THE LIGHTING ONE WHERE WE WERE ESSENTIALLY SAYING YOU NEED TO HAVE A WINDOW, UM, FOR EVERY SORT OF, I FORGET HOW WE DESCRIBE IT.
ESSENTIALLY EVERY BEDROOM AND LIVING SPACE.
DO DOES THAT INCLUDE PONY WALLS AS WELL? SO, YOU KNOW HOW IN SOME STUDIO APARTMENTS THEY HAVE A PONY WALL THAT DOESN'T HAVE A FULL WINDOW AND THE WINDOW IS IN THE OTHER ROOM.
HOW IS THAT? Y YOU CAN HAVE BORROWED LIGHT FROM AN OUTSIDE SOURCE.
UH, IF, IF YOU DON'T HAVE A ROOM THAT FACES DIRECTLY ON AN OUTSIDE WALL, YOU CAN USE BORROWED LIGHT FROM AN OPEN SPACE OR AN OUTSIDE WINDOW IN THE, IN THE AMENDMENT THAT GOT APPROVED FOR 2021, THAT WILL BE CARRIED FORWARD TO 2024.
SO THERE IS KIND OF A PROVISION TO ALLOW SOME MORE FLEXIBILITY FOR INTERIOR BEDROOMS TO USE BORROWED LIGHT INSTEAD OF DIRECT OUTSIDE WINDOWS.
AND ARE THERE ANY REQUIREMENTS FROM THE BOARD RIGHT, OF LIGHT? I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS, LIKE IN TERMS OF DEPTH FROM THE WINDOW OR ARE THERE ANY REQUIREMENTS OR IS THAT SORT OF JUST AS IT GOES TO SITE PLAN THAT'S CONSIDERED THERE? THERE'S SOME SIZE REQUIREMENTS IF YOU WANT TO USE BORROWED LIGHT.
SO YOU, YOU CAN, YOU CAN MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT, BUT YOU, WE ALSO ALSO HAD TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION PRIVACY.
SO WE DON'T WANT AN ENTIRE WALL TO BE A WINDOW.
'CAUSE THEN THE BEDROOM WOULDN'T HAVE ANY PRIVACY.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S HEIGHT AND SIZE CAPS OR, AND MINIMUMS IN THE ORDINANCE.
UM, I HOPE THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT AMENDMENT IN THEIR EXISTING AND THEN CARRYING IT FORWARD.
I KNOW THAT IS A CONCERN WE'VE HEARD FROM COMMUNITY AND I APPRECIATE THE FLEXIBILITY AS WELL BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S JUST SO MANY DIFFERENT VARIATIONS THAT CAN EXIST.
UM, I ALSO, UM, HAD A QUESTION.
UM, THIS WOULD BE POTENTIALLY, I GUESS ANYONE CAN ANSWER TWO THINGS.
I THINK THE DEMONSTRATION, THANK YOU.
I THINK ONE THANK YOU TO YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR ALL BEING HERE AND THE DEMONSTRATION AS WELL.
IT, I THINK ONE THING THAT WAS REALLY TWO THINGS THAT CAME TO MY MIND FROM THAT WAS ONE, AS OPPOSED TO SORT OF SORT OF THE NUMBER OF FLOORS, IT ALMOST FEELS LIKE THE MORE OR CRITICAL THING SEEMS TO BE THE NUMBER OF UNITS ACCESSING A STAIR.
SO I'M JUST THINKING, CAN YOU DO, LIKE, HOW IS THAT MANAGED? LIKE IS IT TWO STAIRS PER NUMBER OF UNITS? HOW IS THAT MANAGED CURRENTLY? WELL, LIKE IN SEATTLE AND NEW YORK, BOTH OF THOSE ORDINANCES THAT ALLOW THIS, THERE ARE RESTRICTIONS ON THE NUMBER OF, OF UNITS PER FLOOR.
UM, SO THAT'S HOW THEY CAP THE OCCUPANCY LOAD IS BY LIMITING THE NUMBER OF UNITS.
SO YOU DON'T HAVE AS MANY PEOPLE TRYING TO USE THE SAME STAIRWELL.
AND DO WE HAVE ANY REQUIREMENT IN THE CITY OF FOSTER FOR A NUMBER OF UNITS ACCESSING A STAIRWELL? THE, THE STAIRWELLS ARE SIZED AND THEN, OR THE STAIRWELL SIZING IS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS BEING SERVED BY A STAIRWELL.
SO THERE'S A TABLE IN THE IBC THAT'S EXISTING THAT SAYS HOW WIDE THE STAIRWELL HAS TO BE BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE USING IT.
RIGHT NOW, OF COURSE IT'S BASED ON TWO STAIRWELLS OF THAT SAME SIZE.
SO USING ONE STAIRWELL, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GAIN THE ENTIRE WIDTH OF REQUIRED STAIRS BASED ON OCCUPANCY UNLESS IT GOT PRETTY BIG.
AND THEN HONESTLY, YOU'RE GETTING TO SOMETHING THAT WAS GONNA BE MY SECOND, I GUESS I HAVE DECENT OBSERVATIONS ONCE IN A WHILE.
UM, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE ONE THING IS THE NUMBER OF UNITS ACCESSING IT AND IT, THAT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LIMITATION IN SEATTLE AND NEW YORK ON THAT.
IS THAT WHAT I HEARD? THERE ARE LIKE FOUR UNITS PER FLOOR, I BELIEVE.
AND THEN WE SAW THAT HONESTLY IN THE DEMONSTRATION AS WELL.
THE WIDTH MATTERS IN SOME WAYS QUITE SIGNIFICANTLY.
AND AS WE WERE BEING DEMONSTRATED, AS YOU'RE TURNING AND TURNING RADI, I GUESS FOUR FEET IS THE REGULAR WIDTH OF A CHAIR.
LIKE HOW IS THAT WIDTH SORT OF CALCULATED AND IS THERE, SHOULD THERE BE MORE ALLOWANCE FOR THAT WIDTH IF THERE IS TO BE FIRE ACCESS? IT'S CALCULATED BY THE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS TRYING TO GET OUT, USE IT FOR EGRESS, GET OUT OF THE BUILDING.
THE, THE NUMBER OF STAIRWELLS, GENERALLY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR EMS WOULD USE ONE STAIRS AND THE PEOPLE GETTING OUT WOULD USE ANOTHER.
NOW YOU'LL HAVE BOTH SETS TRYING TO USE THE SAME STAIR, ONE GOING UP, ONE COMING DOWN.
SO OTHER THAN THE CHAIR LIFT AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND THEIR EQUIPMENT AND HOSES AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF, PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE TRIPPING OR THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHT.
THEY COULD POTENTIALLY BE CAUGHT UP IN A FIRE HOSE AND FIREFIGHTERS TRYING TO GET UP AND THEY'RE TRYING TO GO DOWN.
SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A BIG AMOUNT OF CONGESTION USING THAT SAME STAIRWELL.
AND I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, IS THERE A TURNING RADIUS FOR THE CHAIR? LIKE IS THERE SOMETHING ON THE LANDING THAT WOULD EASE THAT IF PEOPLE WERE STANDING? LIKE IF I, IF WE KNEW WHAT THE TURNING RADIUS OF THE STAIRS IS, THEN WE KNOW WHAT KIND OF ALLOWANCE IS NEEDED.
I'M JUST WONDERING THERE, AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE MIGHT HAVE ANOTHER ANSWER AS WELL.
THERE IS, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR CONTINUITY OF EGRESS.
[04:35:01]
IS DETERMINED, IT CAN'T BE REDUCED AT ANY POINT UNTIL YOU GET TO A PUBLIC WAY.SO SAY IT'S 44 INCHES, THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN 44 INCHES FROM THE HIGHEST POINT ALL THE WAY OUTSIDE.
SO, AND, AND I WILL JUST ALSO CHIME IN THAT AS YOU SAW, UM, WITH NO OBSTRUCTIONS, UH, FROM FIRE ATTACK LINES, ET CETERA, UM, ONCE WE BEGIN TO IN THAT STAIR CHAIR OPTION, ONCE WE BEGIN TO ROLL THAT PATIENT DOWN, THE UH, START PATH, UH, DOESN'T VARY, UH, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT CHAIR MOVES.
AND SO IF THERE IS A HOSE OBSTRUCTION, UH, AS IT TURNS A CORNER ON THE LANDING, UM, THAT IS IN THE WAY OF OUR STAIR CHAIR, THAT'S EVEN MORE TIME IT WILL TAKE US TO MANEUVER AROUND THAT AND MOVE THE PATIENT AROUND.
UH, SAME THING FOR THE SIZE OF THE PATIENT.
A A GENTLEMAN MY SIZE, UH, IS SIGNIFICANTLY HARDER TO MOVE THAN THE, UH, DEMONSTRATIONS, UH, THE PATIENTS YOU SAW DEMONSTRATED THERE.
SO I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, I'M GONNA ASSUME THE IMPACT IS NOT THE SAME WHETHER IT'S AN EIGHT FOOT WIDE STEER OR A FOUR FOOT, THERE'S GOTTA BE A DISTINCTION.
IS THERE A DISTINCTION DEPENDING ON HOW WIDE A STA IS, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE EXAMPLES OF, FOR EXAMPLE, AN EIGHT FOOT WIDE STAIRWELL TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT KNOWLEDGE, IS THE WAY I WOULD ARTICULATE IT.
AND I THINK WE HAVE ANOTHER GO AS WELL.
HELLO? UH, ASSISTANT CHIEF ANDRE DE OF AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT.
ONE THING IS WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A CLEAN ENVIRONMENT THAT WE'RE DOING A MEDICAL EVACUATION ON, IT CHANGES THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT WE'RE DOING.
IF WE'RE DEALING WITH THE BUILDING BEING ON FIRE IN A SINGLE STAIRCASE WHERE WE WON'T BE ABLE TO HAVE AN EVACUATION STAIRWELL AND ATTACK THAT STAIRCASE WILL BE OPEN TO THE PRODUCTS OF COMBUSTION.
AS SOON AS WE OPEN THE DOOR ONTO THE FIRE FLOOR THAT COMPLICATES IT.
NOW WE HAVE A PATIENT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO RECOVER A PATIENT OUTTA THERE THAT NO MATTER WHAT THE WIDTH IS, WE WILL BE EXPOSING THEM TO SOME LEVEL OF PRODUCTS COMBUSTION.
AND WOULD HAVING A SECOND STA MEAN THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE EXPOSED TO THOSE? CORRECT.
WHEN WE HA OUR CURRENT OPERATING PROCEDURES ARE, IF WE HAVE TWO STAIRWELLS, ONE WILL BE THEIR EVACUATION THAT IS FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE STRUCTURE.
WE DESIGNATE THE OTHER ONE AS A FIRE ATTACK STAIRWELL.
SO ALL OF OUR FIREFIGHTING OPERATIONS ARE HAPPENING THERE.
WE ARE OPENING THE DOORWAYS INTO THAT, UH, FLOOR THAT HAS THE FIRE AND WE WILL BE ALLOWING THOSE PRODUCTS TO COMBUSTIONS INTO THAT, INTO THE ATTACK STAIRWELL SO WE CAN HAVE A SAFE, UH, PRESENTA, UH, SAFE EVACUATION STER.
MR. MAXWELL, WAIT QUICKLY, CHAIR, I THINK WE NEED TO EXTEND THE MEETING.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 1130.
OH, I THOUGHT WE ONLY DID THEM SINCE WE'RE THERE.
CHAIR, CAN I EXTEND THE MEETING TO MIDNIGHT? IT IS 1118.
I'M NOT SURE WE'RE GONNA GET THROUGH EVERYTHING IN 12 MINUTES.
I DON'T SEE ANY SECOND BY, UM, GO, WAIT, I'LL START TAKING VOTES ON THIS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
UH, SEVEN THOSE AGAINST TO TWO.
YEAH, I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO HEAR FROM, UM, MR. GANNON WITH THE A I A I THINK Y'ALL CAN
UH, SO OBVIOUSLY IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST IN BUILDING THESE TYPES OF BUILDINGS, WHICH WE'VE SEEN IN OTHER CITIES.
AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD REALLY GET INTO THE BENEFITS OF SINGLE STA SINCE OBVIOUSLY WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF THE CONCERNS AND SPECIFICALLY IN THE DEMONSTRATION, WHICH I THINK WAS VERY INFORMATIVE AND I APPRECIATE CHAIR COHEN BRINGING THAT TO US.
UM, I I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF YOU COULD TALK POTENTIALLY ABOUT THE CROSS VENTILATION LIGHT, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT YOU SEE AS AN ARCHITECT.
UM, UH, WHERE TO START
UM, IF ANYONE'S BEEN TO BARCELONA OR ANY OF THE, YOU KNOW, WONDERFUL WALKABLE, UM, YOU KNOW, CITIES IN EUROPE, WE'VE ALL STAYED IN BEAUTIFUL LITTLE APARTMENTS THERE, SINGLE SARAH APARTMENTS.
THEY, THEY HAVE, UM, UH, WE WERE JOKING.
IT'S A, IT'S IT'S CORNER WINDOWS FOR EVERY UNIT.
'CAUSE IT'S AT LEAST HERE IN THE, IN THE AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING A MINIMUM OR A MAXIMUM OF FOUR UNITS PER FLOOR.
UM, AND THAT ALLOWS THE UNITS TO STRETCH AROUND TO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, WHICH ON A DOUBLE-EDGED CORRIDOR YOU DON'T GET THAT.
UM, SO THEN STRETCHING AROUND TO THE BACK OF THE UNIT, YOU'VE GOT CROSS VENTILATION, YOU'VE GOT WINDOWS ON BOTH SIDES.
YOU'RE ABLE TO GET MORE BEDROOMS INTO THESE UNITS.
SO, UH, RIGHT NOW OUR APARTMENTS ARE PRETTY MUCH SINGLE, SINGLE BEDROOM OR STUDIO OR MAYBE
[04:40:01]
THERE'S A TWO BEDROOM HERE OR THERE.UH, AND THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL ON A DOUBLE LOAD CORRIDOR WHERE IF YOU WANNA MAKE YOUR APARTMENT BIGGER AND INCLUDE MORE BEDROOMS, YOU HAVE TO EAT UP MORE WINDOW SPACE.
THERE'S ONLY ONE DIRECTION TO EXPAND THESE, UM, UH, UNITS.
AND THEN THERE'S A BIG SHADOW AREA WHERE YOU'VE GOT THESE HUGE WALK-IN CLOSETS AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY FIND, UH, STUFF TO FIT BACK THERE, HERE HAVING MULTIPLE EXPOSURES, UH, TO THE EXTERIOR, YOU'RE ABLE TO GET MORE BEDROOMS, MORE WINDOWS, LARGER, MORE FLEXIBLE UNITS.
UM, THEY'RE ALSO, THEY'RE, THEY'RE BIGGER UNITS, BUT THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING IS MUCH SMALLER.
SO THEY'RE ABLE TO BE USED AS INFILL DEVELOPMENT.
UM, WHEREAS OUR DOUBLE OED CORRIDORS AND OUR TEXAS DONUTS PRETTY MUCH TAKE THE WHOLE BLOCK TO BUILD.
UM, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO BUILD A SMALL, UH, APARTMENT BUILDING WITH TWO STAIRCASES THAT IT JUST DOESN'T FIT OR PENCIL.
UM, WITH A SINGLE STAIRCASE IT DOES AND YOU CAN BUILD IT ON A STANDARD LOT.
UM, SO WE'RE SEEING, UM, A LOT OF EXAMPLES OUT OF SEATTLE AND GLOBALLY WHERE THERE'S THESE REALLY BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE APARTMENT BUILDINGS THAT FIT ON ONE LOT.
UM, SO IN TERMS OF INFILL AND FINE GRAIN URBANISM, THAT'S A HUGE BENEFIT.
AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAD HEARD IN THESE CONVERSATIONS WAS RELATED TO AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED AND HOW THESE MIGHT BE A REALLY GOOD FIT FOR THAT TYPE OF PROJECT.
COULD YOU SPEAK TO THAT PLEASE? YES, DEFINITELY.
UM, THERE'S A WHOLE, I MEAN, THIS MIGHT UNLOCK AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED WHERE, UM, WE'RE ABLE TO BUILD MORE OF THE DENSITY THAT WE'RE NOT SEEING YET WITH THE 4 BILLION UNLOCKED ON, UH, ON MORE OF THE STANDARD, UM, UH, SF LOTS.
SO THAT'S A A AND THEN, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER BENEFITS TOO, JUST IN TERMS OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, DEVELOPERS.
UM, I, I'M GONNA HAVE TO REFER TO MY NOTES TO GET YOU THE MORE SPECIFICS.
WELL, AND I THINK IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT THESE ARE TEND TO BE SEEN AS FAMILY STYLE UNITS.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO, IS THAT BASICALLY BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL SPACE OR YEAH.
WHY, WHY WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT AS AN ARCHITECT GOOD FIT FOR A FAMILY POTENTIALLY? SO, SO THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE FLOOR PLAN ALLOWS MORE BEDROOMS. UM, SO HAVING ONE, ONE WALL OF WINDOWS MEANS THAT YOU'VE GOT YOUR LIVING ROOM WITH A WINDOW.
UM, MAYBE YOU'VE GOT TWO MORE BEDROOMS WITH WINDOWS, BUT THAT'S, YOU'RE NOT GONNA FIND A THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT WITH WINDOWS IN ALL THE BEDROOMS, UM, UNLESS IT'S ON A POINT ACCESS BLOCK WHERE THE BEDROOM IS ABLE TO WRAP AROUND OUR VERTICAL CORE CIRCULATION.
AND THEN JUST TO CLARIFY, CURRENTLY IN AUSTIN, WE'RE REALLY JUST NOT ABLE TO BUILD THESE TYPES OF BUILDINGS AND THAT WAS PART OF THE REASON THAT A I A AND OTHERS HAD HAD HOPED TO SEE AN EXPANSION OF THESE TYPES OF BUILDINGS.
I GUESS AS AN ARCHITECT, DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE ASKING FOR THESE TYPES OF AMENDMENTS AND FEEL THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR OUR CITY AS WE MOVE FORWARD AND GROW? Y YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
UM, OUR, OUR, UH, OUR BUILDING CODES ARE BUILT WITH, WITH MULTIPLE REDUNDANCIES IN THERE IN TERMS OF, UM, UH, LIFE SAFETY.
UH, AND SPRINKLERS HAVE COME A LONG WAY.
A LOT OF THE, THE, THE TWO STAIR REQUIREMENTS WERE, WERE PUT IN THERE BEFORE SPRINKLERS WERE THERE.
SPRINKLERS PREVENT 90% OF FIRE DEATHS.
SO I THINK THAT I FEEL COMFORTABLE.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, THANK YOU.
QUESTIONS FOR, UH, THE FIRE AND BUILDING OFFICIALS.
UM, ONE ON IRC AND THIS WILL BE FOR MR. WILCOX.
UM, WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION AMONG STAFF OF AMENDING THE IRC TO APPLY TO THREE UNIT STRUCTURES? YOU MENTIONED THAT SOME CHANGES WERE CONSIDERED IN LIGHT OF THE HOME INITIATIVE, ALLOWING FOR THREE UNIT DWELLINGS AND TINY HOMES AND OTHER DWELLINGS.
AND I KNOW THAT NORTH CAROLINA EXPLORED, UH, ADOPTING A THREE UNIT IRC AND THE CITY OF MEMPHIS DID SO SEVERAL YEARS AGO.
UH, HAS THAT COME UP AT ALL IN STAFF DISCUSSIONS? IT, IT, IT, IT HASN'T CAME UP IN AUSTIN YET AS A LOCAL AMENDMENT.
THE, THE SCOPE OF THE IRC IS ONE IN TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TOWNHOUSES UP TO THREE STORIES.
SO INSTEAD OF CHANGING THE SCOPE OF THE ENTIRE IRC, THE THERE ARE LOCAL AMENDMENTS IN THE IBC THAT WOULD ALLOW THREE FAMILIES, UH, AND TO BE ABLE TO BUILD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HOME AMENDMENTS.
AND WOULD THOSE PROVISIONS IN THE IBC ALLOW THREE FAMILY OR THREE UNIT STRUCTURES TO BE BUILT EXACTLY IN LINE WITH IRC REQUIREMENTS FOR TWO, TWO DWELLING STRUCTURES, OR ARE THERE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS? WELL, YEAH, IT IS.
IF YOU HAD A A, A TWO FAMILY DWELLING AND THEN A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING SEPARATE, YOU COULD BUILD ALL OF THOSE.
I MEAN A, A A ONE STRUCTURE WITH THREE DWELLINGS, WOULD THAT HAVE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS COMPARED TO A TWO DWELLING STRUCTURE? Y YES.
WITH SUPPRESSION AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WILL BE REQUIRED BY THE IRC RIGHT NOW, ONE IN TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS, UNLESS THEY'RE OVER 3000 SQUARE FEET AND HAVE INSUFFICIENT FIRE FLOW OR STUFF LIKE THAT.
[04:45:01]
IT'S, THAT'S ACTUALLY A STATE HOUR SEPARATION.
UM, SO I CAN'T REQUIRE SUPPRESSION UNLESS IT MEETS CERTAIN CRITERIA IN THE IRC WHERE IN THE IBCI, I CAN.
I WOULD HOPE THAT THAT IS CONSIDERED ALLOWING THE, I UH, UH, AMENDING THE IRC SCOPE TO APPLY TO THREE UNIT STRUCTURES AS WELL.
UH, AGAIN, WE'VE SEEN THAT DONE IN MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE AS A LOCAL AMENDMENT AND NORTH CAROLINA AS A STATEWIDE AMENDMENT THAT WAS VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR, BUT WAS PASSED THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE, UM, FOR THE IBC.
UM, THINKING ABOUT THE SINGLE STAIR, AND, AND THIS MIGHT BE MORE FOR, UM, WELL ACTUALLY FOR, FOR YOU MR. WILCOX, UNDER CURRENT BUILDING CODE, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT A MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURE, TYPICAL, YOU KNOW, 3, 4, 5 STORY STRUCTURE, UM, WHAT CONSTRUCTION TYPES ARE ALLOWED? UM, LET'S ASSUME A HUNDRED UNITS STRUCTURED PARKING? UH, WELL, YEAH, DEPENDING, DEPENDING ON THE HEIGHT.
OR, OR FOUR, WHICH IS HEAVY TIMBER.
WHICH WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS NON-COMBUSTIBLE ONE OR TWO.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, MORE CONSTRUCTION TYPE SPECIFICALLY AT FIVE A OVER A PODIUM OF CONCRETE OR NON-COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS.
UM, AND SO THIS IS SORT OF GETTING INTO THE FIRE QUESTION NOW, UM, REFERENCING THE SAME NFPA ARTICLE THAT COMMISSIONER COX BROUGHT UP.
UM, ACCORDING TO THE NFPA ABOUT TWICE, THERE'S ABOUT TWICE THE RATE OF FIRES, UH, IN SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES AS THERE ARE IN MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURES.
IN TERMS OF PER PER DWELLING UNIT, I THINK IT WAS ABOUT FIVE PER THOUSAND FOR MULTIFAMILY AND ABOUT 9.5 PER THOUSAND PER SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, IF MORE NON-COMBUSTIBLE BUILDING TYPES, GREATER SEPARATION DISTANCES, 10 FOOT FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCES AND SPRINKLERS MAKE A STRUCTURE MORE SAFE IN THE FACE, FACE OF FIRE, UM, WHY ARE THOSE NOT REQUIRED? WHY ARE WE NOT CONSIDERING REQUIRING THOSE FOR SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES? SOLID CONCRETE MASONRY CONSTRUCTION, HEAVY TIMBER.
UH, AND, AND AGAIN, IT GOES, GOES BACK TO THE, THE SCOPE OF THE IRC AND THEN STATE LAW, IF IT'S A ONE OR TWO FAMILY DWELLING OR A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AND IT DOESN'T MEET CERTAIN CRITERIA LIKE OVER 3000 OR 3,500 SQUARE FEET WITHIN 200 FEET OF A HAZARD OR INSUFFICIENT FIRE HYDRANT FLOW, WE CAN'T BY STATE LAW REQUIRE A SUPPRESSION SYSTEM.
BUT THEORETICALLY, WOULD A, A MASONRY TYPE ONE CONSTRUCTION SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE BE SAFER THAN A TYPE FIVE B SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE IN A FIRE? IT, IT'S, IT'S LESS LIKELY TO CATCH ON FIRE SINCE IT'S NON-COMBUSTIBLE.
WOULD THE PRIMARY REASON TO NOT CHOOSE TO BUILD THAT HOME BE A COST CONCERN? IT WOULD BE TOO EXPENSIVE TO BUILD IT.
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN STICK FRAME LIGHT FRAME CONSTRUCTION? YES.
SO IF WE SEE TYPE FIVE A CONSTRUCTION SAFELY USED IN MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS THAT ARE SEVERAL HUNDRED UNITS, I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHY THAT COULDN'T BE SAFELY USED IN MUCH SMALLER PROJECTS WITH SPRINKLER REQUIREMENTS, PRESSURIZED STAIRWELLS, UH, THAT SORT OF THING.
WELL, AND IF THAT WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMISSION, WE WOULD LOOK AT THAT.
UH, THE STAIR PRESSURIZATION AND THE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS IN COMBINATION DO PROVIDE CERTAIN LEVELS TO GET PEOPLE OUT.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE INTENDED FOR, TO GET THE PEOPLE OUT WITH THE CONGESTION FROM PEOPLE TRYING TO GET UP AND THE PEOPLE TRYING TO GET OUT.
EVEN IF YOU DUMPED MORE STAIR IZATION AND SPRINKLER SYSTEM INTO THE BUILDING AND YOU HAVE A TRAFFIC JAM, IT MAY HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR CREATING A SITUATION FOR MORE FATALITIES.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.
UM, SO WE'VE COME TO THE END OF OUR Q AND A, I BELIEVE EVERYBODY IS GONE.
UM, SO WE THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR ANSWERING QUESTIONS.
UM, IS THERE ANY, UM, WORDS FROM THE WORKING GROUP THAT WAS FOCUSED ON THIS? I'LL LET COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? YEAH, SO, UM, JUST TO GIVE YOU ALL CONTEXT, I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS THAT WE CREATED A WORKING GROUP.
AND ACTUALLY THE FIRST REQUEST RELATED TO TECHNICAL CODES, JUST SO EVERYBODY WAS CLEAR ABOUT THIS, WAS ACTUALLY IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR.
I ASKED FOR A BRIEFING BECAUSE WE DID KNOW THAT THIS WAS COMING AND WE WERE INTERESTED IN UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THIS YEAR IN THE TECHNICAL CODES.
SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS HAD A DIRECT INTEREST IN THIS SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR AND THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROCESS.
SO I'M REALLY GLAD TO HAVE EVERYONE HERE TONIGHT AND ACTUALLY HAVE THIS BRIEFING NOW THAT WE'VE COME TO A CLOSE OF THE ACTUAL INPUT FROM EVERYBODY, UH, FOR THE VARIOUS PARTIES.
UM, IN TERMS OF THE WORKING GROUP, IT'S, UH, AS WAS NOTED DURING THE CONVERSATION, WE ARE EXPECT OR HAVE BEEN REQUESTED TO COME FORWARD WITH A MEMO TO COUNCIL.
UM, NOW THAT WE'VE GOTTEN THE BRIEFING AND HAVE SEEN
[04:50:01]
THE FINAL VERSIONS OF THE DRAFT CODES, WE DID FEEL THAT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THE WORKING GROUP TO GO AHEAD AND CREATE THAT MEMO AND THEN BRING IT BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION.UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT INTO THE, A FUTURE AGENDA, AND I'M HAPPY TO PROPOSE THAT NOW, OR WE COULD DO IT AS A FUTURE ATTEND ITEM.
VICE CHAIR, CAN YOU HELP ME ON THIS? SURE.
I THINK AT THE END OF IT WE CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, BUT WE CAN, WE CAN SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE WORKING GROUP OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED TO DO BEFORE WE START MAKING MOTIONS, BUT CERTAINLY WE CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER COX AND THEN COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ.
UH, I, I GUESS TWO QUESTIONS TO I GUESS YOU CHAIR OR, OR THE COMMISSION GENERAL IS WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING ASKED OF US AT, AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME.
AND, AND I WOULD BE VERY INTERESTED IN LIKE, IF, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE POSTPONING OR TABLING THIS SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY WORK THROUGH THE WORKING GROUP AND, AND DEVELOP SOME REALLY MEANINGFUL RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY, COMMISSIONER, UH, COX, WE CAN MAKE YEAH, WE CAN MAKE ALL OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS SO WE CAN POSTPONE AND COME BACK FOR ACTION IF THAT IS THE WILL OF THE WORKING GROUP.
AND I THINK WE'VE HEARD FROM THE WORKING GROUP THAT THAT IS ACTUALLY WHAT THEY WISH.
IF THAT IS THE WILL OF THE BODY, WE'LL DO THAT.
OTHERWISE, WE WOULD BE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS RIGHT NOW TO COUNSEL, SINCE THIS IS NOT AN ITEM THAT WE OFFICIALLY APPROVE OR JUST APPROVE, WE, WE WILL BE SETTING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER COUNSEL AND THE, THE BOARD THAT MR. WILCOX MENTIONED, AND IT WOULD BE GOING NEXT TO THOSE BODIES.
THERE'S MORE THAN ONE BODY THAT WILL BE GETTING THEM.
UH, COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ.
I KNOW I MISSED MY CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
UM, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, THE SINGLE STAIRWELL, IT'S FIVE STORIES WITH MAXIMUM FOUR UNITS ON EACH FLOOR.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 20 UNITS.
UM, I THINK THAT HAS BEEN THE SUGGESTION FROM A I A AND OTHERS.
THERE WAS A DRAFT ORIGINALLY PER, UH, UM, PROVIDED, SO THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE THINGS WE COULD SORT OF CLARIFY IN A MEMO THAT WE WOULD SEND ON TO COUNCIL AND TO THE OTHER BODIES AS NOTED.
UM, SO THE IDEA WAS BASICALLY THAT WE WOULD HEAR THIS BRIEFING, CREATE THE MEMO, AND WE COULD HAVE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, INCLUDING ADDITIONAL FIRE AND SAFETY OR WHATEVER WE THOUGHT WAS APPROPRIATE AND THAT, THAT WE WOULD THEN DISCUSS THAT AND APPROVE IT AS A BODY AND THEN, THEN IT WOULD GO OFFICIAL.
THAT WOULD BE OUR OFFICIAL MEMO REGARDING THE TECHNICAL CODE UPDATES.
COMMISSIONER COX? I, IS IT APPROPRIATE NOW TO MAKE THE, UM, MOTION TO POSTPONE YES.
TO A, UH, TO A DATE CERTAIN? UH, YEAH.
I, I, I WOULD SUGGEST, AND I DON'T KNOW IF COMMISSIONER, UM, MAXWELL IF YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION, BUT I WAS THINKING ONE OF OUR OCTOBER DATES WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND GIVE US MAYBE ENOUGH TIME TO, TO MEET A FEW TIMES AND DEVELOP RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, I THINK THAT THAT WAS EXACTLY THE IDEA WAS THAT WE WOULD GIVE OURSELVES AT LEAST A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
UM, SO YES, IF YOU HAD A SPECIFIC DATE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
UM, JUST COMMISSIONER COX, IF, IF YOU DON'T MIND, COULD I ASK AN INFORMATIONAL QUESTION OF STAFF YES.
ABOUT THEIR TIMELINE FOR THE REST OF THIS PROCESS? YEAH, THAT'LL HELP US.
I SEE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL RAISE HIS HAND IN THE ROOM HERE.
UM, SO IS IS, HOW DOES THAT OCTOBER AND OCTOBER DATE WORK INTO YOUR TIMELINE FOR ADOPTION OF THE TECHNICAL CODES? SO THE LOCAL AMENDMENTS WILL GO TO THE BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD ON THE 28TH OF THIS MONTH, GO TO THE LAW DEPARTMENT AFTER THAT AND GO TO COUNSEL ON OCTOBER 24TH.
SO, I'M SORRY, THAT WAS COUNSEL ON OCTOBER 24TH? CORRECT.
CAN I ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, SIR? SORRY, I'M SO, I'M SORRY.
I, I GUESS IF WE WERE TO STAY ON THE CURRENT TRAJECTORY, IS THERE A DATE BY WHICH WE WOULD NEED TO TAKE, WOULD NEED TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS? UH, IF, IF IF COUNCIL'S REQUEST OF THIS COMMISSION IS TO SEND A MEMO STRAIGHT TO COUNCIL, THEN IT, I DON'T THINK Y'ALL'S REQUEST WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH ANY OTHER BOARDS SINCE COUNCIL REQUESTED IT DIRECTLY OF YOU.
SO I'LL, I'LL CONTINUE TO PUSH FORWARD WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE 28TH AND THEN THE, THEN THE LAW, AND THEN THE COUNCIL ON THE 24TH A AS IS WITH Y'ALL'S MEMO BEING A SEPARATE ITEM.
AND I, I KNOW I WANNA BE, SO THAT'S HELPFUL.
AND, AND I GUESS I'LL SPEAK TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.
I WOULD WANTED TO GO TO THE BOARD.
I KNOW THE BOARD ACTUALLY WANTED TO PAUSE AND HEAR WHAT WE HAD TO SAY, SO I DON'T WANNA PRECLUDE THEM FROM RECEIVING ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THIS BODY.
SO, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT SOME DEGREE OF POSTPONEMENT AND I DEFER TO Y'ALL AS A WORKING GROUP COMMISSIONER MAXWELL
NO, I WAS GONNA SAY COMMISSIONER COX, IF, DID YOU STILL, YOU HAD STARTED TO SAY A DATE.
[04:55:01]
WELL, SO I WAS, I WAS ACTUALLY THINKING, I WAS TRYING TO BE QUICK ABOUT IT AND I WAS GONNA SAY OCTOBER 8TH, UM,UM, CAN I MAKE, AND, AND, AND WHAT, WHAT I'LL JUST, WHAT I'LL JUST SAY, AND THEN I'LL SHUT UP IS, IS THAT THESE ARE TECHNICAL CODES.
I DON'T, I DON'T EXPECT OUR WORKING GROUP TO ACTUALLY PROPOSE ANY TECHNICAL CHANGES TO TECHNICAL CODES.
WE'RE NOT THE BODY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
UH, WHAT, WHAT I'M ENVISIONING AND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL CORRECT ME IF, IF, IF YOU'RE THINKING OF SOMETHING ELSE, BUT JUST KIND OF GENERAL GOAL ORIENTED QUOTES THAT THAT KIND OF MATCH WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND, AND THEN HOPE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE TECHNICAL CAPACITY TAKES THAT INTO ACCOUNT BEFORE THEY GO TO COUNCIL.
UM, SO MAYBE THAT CHANGES THE, THE KIND OF THE, THE, THE THINKING ABOUT THE WORKING GROUP'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE TIMEFRAME ON THAT.
I WAS GONNA SAY, SO IF I MIGHT MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, MY RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT WOULD BE THAT THIS BODY POSTPONE FOR TWO WEEKS, AND IF WE NEED TO POSTPONE, WE CAN, ESSENTIALLY, WHAT I'M SAYING IS I THINK WE NEED TO CONFER WITH OUR STAFF TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MAKES SENSE.
SO WE'LL BE POSTPONING FOR TWO WEEKS, WHICH MEANS WE WILL BE COMING BACK IN TWO WEEKS.
BUT WE, WE WOULD LOVE FOR THE WORKING GROUP TO CONVENE BEFORE THAT AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE REALISTIC TIME WITH STAFF IS.
AND SO THEN IF WE NEED TO POSTPONE IT AT THE MEETING IN TWO WEEKS, WE CAN DO THAT WITHOUT OUR STAFF BEING PRESENT.
SO WE WOULD LET THEM KNOW THAT WE INTEND TO DO IT SO WE'RE NOT WASTING STAFF TIME, BUT ALSO NOT PUTTING OURSELF IN A BIND WHERE WE HAVE POSTPONED IT TO A DATE THAT'S SO FAR IN THE FUTURE THAT WE'RE THEN NOT ABLE TO COME BACK FROM IT.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TWO WEEKS, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT I'M TYING Y'ALL'S HANDS.
I'M JUST SAYING WE DO TWO WEEKS AND GIVE YOU ALL THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH STAFF AND THE CHAIR AND I CAN DO THAT AS WELL.
SO MAYBE THERE'S AN UPDATE IN TWO WEEKS.
YEAH, I, I, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT AS A, SINCE WE HAVE SOME UNCERTAINTY ABOUT ONE, WE WANT TO, WHAT WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE TIMEFRAME, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL, UH, THE OCTOBER 27TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND WE WILL PROVIDE AN UPDATE IN DETAIL FURTHER DETAILS ABOUT THE FINAL MEMO AT THAT TIME.
DID YOU SAY OCTOBER OR AUGUST? AUGUST.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? WERE YOU READY TO TAKE A VOTE? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING THIS ITEM TO AUGUST 27TH.
WE ARE THROUGH OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.
[29. Select a primary and alternate representative to serve on the Joint Sustainability Committee. Sponsors: Chair Hempel, Vice Chair Azhar, and Commissioner Woods.]
NUMBER 29.THIS IS, UH, SELECTING A PRIMARY AND ALTERNATE REPRESENTATIVE TO SERVE ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
YOU THANKS TO A FD THANK YOU TO A FD AND EMS FOR COMING IN.
AND ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS THAT STAYED THIS LATE.
SORRY, CHAIR, JUST CLARIFICATION YOU A POST MOMENT ON THE LAST ITEM WAS TO AUGUST 27TH.
UM, I BELIEVE THIS ONE HAS BEEN ON OUR AGENDA FOR A WHILE.
UH, THIS IS AN ITEM 29, UM, UNDER DISCUSSION ACTION ITEMS TO SELECT A PRIMARY AND ALTERNATE REPRESENTATIVE TO SERVE ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
UM, I BELIEVE ARE COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE BEEN SERVING, UM, DUTIFULLY ON THIS BODY, UM, JUST CANNOT MAKE THE TIMES.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED IN SERVING YOU ARE MISSING THREE TONIGHT? YES.
MR. JOHNSON, WHEN DOES THE, UH, JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEET? GREAT QUESTION.
THEY MEET ON THE FOURTH WEDNESDAY OF EVERY MONTH HERE AT CITY HALL, GENERALLY.
IF NO VOLUNTEERS TONIGHT
UM, UM, CAN I MAKE A REQUEST OF YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS SINCE I KNOW YOU WERE WORKING WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? CAN YOU CHECK IN WITH HER IF SHE'LL BE WILLING TO MOVE FOR THE ALTERNATE TO THE PRIMARY POSITION? ABSOLUTELY.
AND THEN WE CAN FIGURE OUT ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE.
UM, AND COULD I MAKE A FURTHER REQUEST OF COMMISSIONER
[05:00:01]
PRIMARY? SURE.COULD WE, UH, PROPOSE AN INQUIRY TO LEGAL ON WHETHER OR NOT AN EX FIO CAN SERVE ON THAT COMMITTEE? YES, WE CAN DO THAT.
I JUST DON'T LIKE TO SEE THINGS LEFT OPEN LIKE THAT.
YEAH, THIS ONE'S BEEN OPEN FOR A WHILE.
UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? OKAY.
[WORKING GROUP/COMMITTEE UPDATES]
ON TO OUR WORKING GROUP AND COMMITTEE UPDATES.UH, WE CAN GO THROUGH THESE PRETTY QUICKLY.
30 CODES AND ORDINANCES, JOINT COMMITTEE.
JULY AND AUGUST MEETINGS HAVE BEEN CANCELED DUE TO LACK OF AGENDA ITEMS. HOWEVER, WE HEAR THAT THERE ARE ALREADY ITEMS FOR OUR SEPTEMBER MEETING.
31 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE HAD OUR QUARTERLY MEETING AND OUR NEXT ONE IS IN TWO AND A HALF MONTHS.
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE THERE.
UH, 33, SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, WE ARE ACTUALLY MEETING NEXT WEEK, AND I DID WANNA NOTE THAT ONE OF OUR AGENDA ITEMS ON PLANNING COMMISSION THIS EVENING IS ACTUALLY GONNA BE TAKEN UP BY THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT.
UM, IT'S THE PUD ITEM, UM, WHICH WE POSTPONE.
SO I WILL HAVE UPDATES REGARDING THAT AT THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
CITY OF AUSTIN BUILDINGS WORKING GROUP, WE HAVE NOT MET ON THAT, SO NO, WE HAVE NOT CHAIR.
AND I KNOW THAT WAS NOT SORT OF ON ONE OF THOSE THINGS AS WE WENT THROUGH THE VACATION MODE.
HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE THE ABILITY TO PULL PEOPLE TOGETHER NOW.
JUST, I KNOW SUMMER WAS A HARD TIME FOR SCHEDULING SCHOOL'S BACK.
36 OUTREACH AND PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP.
COMMISSIONER COX, WE HAVE NOT MET BECAUSE OF LIFE.
AND TO CLARIFY, YOU SAID LIFE AND NOT LICE LIFE.
37, THE 2024 TECHNICAL BUILDING CODE UPDATES WORKING GROUP, WHICH SOUNDS LIKE WE'LL BE WE NEXT WEEK.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. UM, I HAVE A COUPLE, UH, AND I HOPE TO JUST SET THESE UP AND GET A SECOND, UM, ON THEM SO THAT THEY'LL BE ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT TIME.UM, THE FIRST ONE IS ONE THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR A WHILE NOW.
UM, I'LL LOOSELY TITLE THIS, THE GOVERNANCE WORKING GROUP.
UM, BUT OUR, UH, NOT OUR BYLAWS, BUT OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES THAT WE AS A COMMISSION OPERATE BY.
UM, THOSE ARE HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BY A CHAIR LIKE THREE CHAIRS AGO, UM, BEFORE I EVEN WAS SERVING.
AND IT'S BEEN UPDATED ALONG THE WAY.
UM, AND WE'RE, IT'S GREAT TO HAVE THESE RULES.
A LOT OF THE BODIES DON'T HAVE THEM.
UM, BUT IT'S ALSO TIME FOR US TO UPDATE THEM, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THE COMMISSION NOW.
SO I'M PROPOSING TO FORM A WORKING GROUP, UM, THAT WOULD UPDATE OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES.
AND, UM, PERHAPS WHEN WE DISCUSS IT AT OUR NEXT MEETING, UH, AND, AND ELECT MEMBERS TO BE ON THIS WORKING GROUP, WE CAN HAVE A MORE, UH, ITEMIZED, UH, AGENDA OF WHAT WOULD BE COVERED.
UM, BUT I'M THINKING IT IS, UH, CLARIFYING OUR COMMISSIONER DEBATE RULES.
DO WE STILL WANT TO HAVE EIGHT COMMISSIONERS AT FIVE MINUTES EACH? IS THAT STILL APPROPRIATE? SHOULD WE HAVE MORE, LESS, UM, THE TIMELINESS OF BACKUP, WHICH I KNOW WAS A DISCUSSION AT A, A MEETING OR TWO AGO.
UM, THESE ARE ALL INTENDED TO BE RULES THAT ARE, UM, FLEXIBLE.
UM, SO WHERE OUR BYLAWS ARE MORE, UH, HARD AND FAST, THINK OF THEM AS A LAW.
THESE ARE A RULE WHICH WE CAN, UM, HAVE UPDATED TO FIT OUR MEETING NEEDS, UH, OF THE DAY.
SO, UM, I GUESS I'M LOOKING FOR A SECOND ON SECOND.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
UM, SO WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN OUR NEXT MEETING.
THE SECOND THING THAT I WANTED TO DISCUSS IS, UM, THE VERY PRESSING NEED OF A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, UM, TO HAPPEN.
WE'D HAVE A FIFTH TUESDAY, UH, SORRY, YEAH.
FIFTH TUESDAY COMING UP OCTOBER 29TH.
UM, BUT WE MIGHT NEED TO FIND ANOTHER DATE IN SEPTEMBER TO SQUEEZE IN.
UM, BUT WE ARE, UH, LOOKING AT MANY CODE ITEMS COMING THROUGH.
UM, THERE'S BEEN BRIEFING REQUESTS, WHICH WE WANT TO TRY TO START MAKING GOOD ON THOSE REQUESTS.
WE HAVE OFTEN ASKED FOR THEM, AND THERE'S JUST NOT TIME IN OUR MEETINGS TO, TO HAVE THOSE.
[05:05:01]
UM, YES, VICE CHAIR, UM, IF I MIGHT ADD DETAILS, SO STAFF DID GET BACK TO US ON SOME AVAILABILITY.THEY'LL LIKELY, UH, WILL BE SHARING.
SO CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THE FIFTH TUESDAY IN OCTOBER OPEN, WHICH WOULD BE OCTOBER 29TH.
UM, OTHER POTENTIAL DATES THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE ARE THESE WILL BE SENT OUT TO YOU, SO OCTOBER 17TH, OCTOBER 21ST, OR NOVEMBER 14TH.
I WILL SAY IN TERMS OF THE TIMING OF OCTOBER WOULD BE THE PREFERABLE ONE BECAUSE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE DUE BY THE END OF THAT MONTH.
SO THAT WOULD GIVE US SOME GOOD TIMING TO DO THAT.
UM, LIKELY AN EMAIL WILL GO OUT TO Y'ALL FROM STAFF ASKING FOR YOUR AVAILABILITY ON THESE.
WE ARE, I THINK, CURRENTLY CONSIDERING OF LET'S SAY FIVE OR FIVE 30 START TIME.
SO IF YOU'RE LIKE, I CAN DO FIVE TO SOMETHING, BUT I CAN DO FIVE 30, PLEASE INDICATE THAT AS WELL SO WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT EVERYONE'S AVAILABILITY IS TO SCHEDULE IT.
UM, AND ESSENTIALLY IT WOULD BE IN CITY HALL, UM, EITHER HERE OR IN THE BOARDS IN UH, COMMISSIONS ROOM.
SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THAT A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM OR DO WE JUST, WE CAN, WE JUST DO IT? LET'S DO IT FOR, OKAY.
SO SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL ON THAT ONE.
UM, THAT'S ALL I HAD OTHER, UH, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. COMMISSIONER COX AND COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
SO COMMISSIONER COX, I WAS WONDERING IF THERE'D BE A SECOND OR GENERAL INTEREST IN, UM, AT, AT, AT THE VERY LEAST GETTING A BRIEFING ON, UM, KIND OF THE RESULTS OF ALL THE DB 90 CASES THAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING.
UM, I'M PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN, IN LIKE THE GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION AND KIND OF THE PERCENTAGE OF CASES THAT ARE COMING IN AND HOW THEY'RE RECOMMENDED AND JUST WE CAN KIND OF DEVELOP A LIST OF DIFFERENT STATS AND STUFF THAT THAT, THAT WE WANT FROM STAFF.
BUT I JUST THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO KIND OF, WE'VE SEEMED TO GET QUITE A FEW DB 90 CASES, HALF OF THEM END UP ON, UM, ON CONSENT.
HALF OF THEM, WE BATTLE IT OUT AND, AND I THINK IT'S JUST BECOMING A, A BIGGER AND BIGGER THING THAT DOMINATES OUR TIME.
AND SO, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SOME SPACE FOR A DISCUSSION WITH STAFF ABOUT, UM, ABOUT DB 90 AND, AND UNDERSTANDING IT MORE, UM, IN, IN ALL SORTS OF CONTEXTS.
AND IF THAT LEADS TO POTENTIALLY THIS BODY TRYING TO ACT TO MAKE CHANGES TO IT OR INCORPORATE ADDITIONAL DBS LIKE, LIKE WE'VE SOMETIME MENTIONED, UM, THEN I THINK THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
CAN I JUST MAKE A REQUEST OF FOLKS THIS JUST A GENERAL REQUEST AS WE'RE MAKING FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS, UM, WHETHER NOW OR LATER IF Y'ALL CAN INDICATE TO STAFF IF, IF YOU WANT IT DONE WITHIN THIS YEAR OR IT CAN BE CARRIED FORWARD.
I'LL JUST BE HONEST, WE, I CHECKED IN WITH STAFF AND WE HAVE AROUND SIX-ISH BRIEFING REQUESTS THAT ARE OUTSTANDING.
AND THEN WE HAVE AT THIS POINT, LOOKING AT IT, WE HAVE SOMEWHERE AROUND FIVE-ISH CODE SLASH TECHNICAL CODE ITEMS FOR THE END OF THE YEAR IN ADDITION TO OUR CASELOAD FOR ZONING CASES.
SO I, I THINK I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, UH, BUT I GUESS A A ANYONE AS YOU'RE MAKING THE REQUEST, IF YOU ARE FINE WITH IT GOING INTO THE NEXT CALENDAR YEAR, PLEASE LET US KNOW SO THAT WE CAN PRIORITIZE ACCORDINGLY.
SO WAS, DO I NEED TO YES, WE'RE LOOKING FOR A SECOND ON THAT ONE.
ANY, ANY, UM, THOUGHTS AROUND THAT BRIEFING, UH, INCLUDING LIKE MAYBE A, A LIST OF WHAT YOU COULD BE LOOKING FOR AND IF YOU HAVE, UH, A DATE IN MIND OR IF THAT COULD ROLL OVER TO 2025? SURE.
YEAH, I'LL, I'LL SHOOT IT ALL IN EMAIL.
UM, AND THEN, UH, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? YEAH, I, UH, MADE A REQUEST FOR A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO GET CLARIFICATION ON WHAT COMMISSIONER COX IS POTENTIALLY ASKING FOR.
SO HE SAID DB 90, SO A BRIEFING ON CASES DB 90 CASES AND THEY WOULD, UH, JUST A, A SUMMARY OF WHAT HAVE WE SEEN TODAY, THE GEOGRAPHIES, JUST SOME COMMON DATA, UH, ABOUT THEM.
AND COMMISSIONER HAYNES AND COMMISSIONER COX WILL COME UP WITH A, A DISTINCT SUBSCRIPTION FOR WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR.
UM, LAST MEETING I HAD REQUESTED A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AND I THINK IT WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PARLIAMENTARIAN WOODS, UH, ABOUT, UH, NOTICE REQUIREMENTS, MAILED NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR ZONING AND REZONING CASES.
UM, I THINK I FORGOT TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
[05:10:01]
THINK IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO CLARIFY THAT AS AT FIRST A BRIEFING ON LIKE WHAT IT GOES INTO OUR NOTICE NOW AND THAT COULD BE IN THE FUTURE.UM, BUT I THINK STARTING WITH A BRIEFING ON THAT AND THEN LATER LOOKING AT HOW WE COULD IMPROVE NOTICE.
CAN I, CAN I MAKE AN AN I CAN ASK AN UNFAIR QUESTION AND YOU CAN REFUSE TO ANSWER IT AND LET THIS KNOW LATER.
I'LL, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ROLLED INTO NEXT YEAR OR DO YOU OH YEAH, I SAID THAT.
ALRIGHT, OTHER AGENDA ITEMS? SEEING NONE, I SEE THE ANTICIPATION.
UH, REAL QUICK, JUST AN ANNOUNCEMENT.
UH, LAST NIGHT AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WE POSTPONED AN APPEAL CASE, AN INTERPRETATION APPEAL, WHICH IS A STAFF APPEAL.
UH, THIS IS ONE OF THE RARE FORMS OF CASES THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GETS.
IT'S WHERE WE HAVE TO EITHER UPHOLD OR REVERSE OR MODIFY A STAFF DECISION ON A, ANY ZONING ORDINANCE WHERE AN APPLICANT OR APPELLANT DOESN'T AGREE WITH THE STAFF DECISION.
UH, WE POSTPONED IT PARTIALLY BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH OF A QUORUM TO WORK ON.
IT REQUIRES SUPER MAJORITY, BUT WE ALSO HAVE A SECOND APPEAL CASE COMING UP, UH, FOR OUR SEPTEMBER MEETING.
THESE CASES AREN'T OVERLY COMPLICATED, SO I KNOW WATCHING BOA ISN'T THE MOST EXCITING THING IN THE WORLD, BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE BOA'S MOST POWERFUL TOOL, IT IT SHOULD BE INTERESTING, UH, ESPECIALLY IF WE DO END UP DECIDING TO, LIKE, I'M JUST NOT GONNA SAY ANYTHING ON THAT 'CAUSE THAT'S LIKE BORDERLINE TALKING ON THE CASE, BUT IT, IT WOULD BE A GOOD, EASY ONE TO WATCH.
NOW WHAT'S THE MEETING DATE AND TIME? UH, SEPTEMBER 9TH.
A TXN? YEAH, WE MEET AT FIVE 30.
WITH THAT, I ADJOURN THIS MEETING AT 11:52 PM THANK YOU EVERYBODY.