[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:05]
THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:10 PM FIRST, WE WILL TAKE ROLL CALL.
SO PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR PRESENCE WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME.
AND I'LL GO IN ORDER OF THE AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER BARRE RAMIREZ? HERE.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS IS NOT PRESENT.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY EXOFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT YET.
UM, SO I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME OUR BRAND NEW COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER CASEY HANEY, REPRESENTING DISTRICT SIX, IF YOU WANNA SAY A FEW WORDS.
I'M, I'M VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE.
I'LL PROBABLY BE FAIRLY QUIET THE FIRST COUPLE OF MEETINGS JUST AS I START DRINKING OUT OF THIS FIRE HOSE, BUT, UM, I APPRECIATE, UH, Y'ALL HAVING ME AND I LOOK FORWARD TO LEARNING FROM ALL OF MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND, UH, FROM, UH, FROM ALL OF THE PUBLIC WHO'S GONNA BE HERE TO, UH, TO HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.
ALRIGHT, PER USUAL, TONIGHT'S MEETING WILL BE HYBRID, ALLOWING FOR A VIRTUAL QUORUM AS LONG AS THE COMMISSIONER SERVING AS CHAIRS PRESENT IN CHAMBERS.
AS SUCH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS HERE IN CHAMBERS IN AN ATTENDANCE VIRTUALLY, SIMILARLY, SPEAKERS CAN PRESENT FROM THE CHAMBERS OR PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO SEND YOUR SIGN IN SHEETS TO OUR STAFF LIAISON PER THE CLERK'S GUIDELINES.
AND PLEASE HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW ITEMS FOR VOTING.
UM, AS USUAL, REMAIN MUTED WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING.
AND IF I MISS YOU, UM, UH, JUST COME OFF MUTE AND LET ME KNOW.
ALL RIGHT, SO IF YOU ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION TAKING UP YOUR ITEM.
REMINDER THAT SPEAKERS CAN DONATE TIME, BOTH THE SPEAKER DONATING TIME AND THE SPEAKER RECIPIENT MUST BE PRESENT IN PERSON WHEN THIS ITEM IS CONSIDERED.
[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]
MS. GARCIA, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? YES, THERE ARE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.THE FIRST SPEAKER IS PAUL STABLES.
PAUL, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES STABLES.
I OWN A PROPERTY AT 1201 EAST 11TH STREET.
UH, PARCEL ID 0 2 0 5 0 7 1 0 0 4.
UH, THE PROPERTY WAS PREVIOUSLY ZONED FOR CONDITIONAL USE FOR COCKTAIL LOUNGE UP UNTIL SEPTEMBER OF 2022, I'M SORRY, JULY OF 2022 WHEN TWO ORDINANCES THAT WERE, UH, ENACTED BY RECOMMENDATION OF THE URBAN RENEWAL BOARD REMOVED THOSE OR THAT, UH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, UM, ON, UH, AND THOSE, I'M SORRY, THOSE IN ORDINANCES WERE, UH, 2 0 2 2 0 7 2 8 63 DATED JULY 28TH, 2022.
AND ORDINANCE 2002 0 2 2 0 9 15 0 6 5 ENACTED ON SEPTEMBER 15TH, 2022.
UM, THESE ORDINANCES WERE IN LINE WITH THE URBAN RENEWALS PLAN ON EAST 11TH STREET.
THEY HAD, UH, BASICALLY, UM, DID IT NOT ON PURPOSE, THE CHAIR ESCOBAR MANU ESCOBAR, UH, STATED THAT IT WAS NOT THE INTENTION OF THE URB TO REMOVE THE LANDOWNER'S RIGHTS.
SO I'M ASKING FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO AMEND THE ZONING FOR THAT PROPERTY TO ALLOW FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COCKTAIL LOUNGE.
I'VE, UH, SUBMITTED A NUMBER OF DOCUMENTS, UH, SUPPORTING, UH, THE ACTIONS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE.
UH, THE ORDINANCE, UH, 9 1 0 6 20 DASH C THAT WAS ENACTED IN JUNE 20TH, 1991 WAS THE ORIGINAL ZONING THAT THE PROPERTY WAS SUBJECT, SUBJECT TO.
UM, BUT THEN THE TWO ORDINANCES THAT CAME IN IN 2022 IN JULY AND SEPTEMBER, UH, REMOVED THOSE USES.
UM, SO I'M ASKING THE CITY TO INITIATE A ZONING CHANGE ON THAT PROPERTY FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE OF A, FOR A COCKTAIL BAR, COCKTAIL LOUNGE.
ALRIGHT, YOU HAVE A MINUTE LEFT.
DID YOU, I HAVE A MINUTE LEFT.
IS THERE ANY, ANY ELABORATION YOU NEED TO MAKE ON THE REGARDS TO THE ORDINANCES OR SO THIS EVENING WE CAN'T TAKE UP DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM SINCE IT WASN'T POSTED.
BUT WE, UH, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS MAY
[00:05:01]
CHOOSE TO ADD IT AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.SO I GUESS THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
THANK YOU MELISSA MEDINA, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS CAROL PHILLIPSON.
CAROL, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
HELLO, MY NAME IS CAROL PHILLIPSON AND I LIVE IN JESTER STATES.
AND YOU'LL SEE SOME PICTURES HERE OF THE BALCONES CANYON LANDS PRESERVES WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PUT A CELL TOWER WITHIN 35 FEET ON SOME SIDES.
UH, SO IF YOU JUST CHECK OUT THE PICTURES, BUT I JUST WANNA, WANNA CHANGE POLICY.
SO THE CASE NUMBER IS SP 2 0 2 4 0 1 4 0 CS.
THE JESTER CLUB HAS CONTRACTED WITH TOWER VENTURES TO BUILD A HUNDRED FOOT CELL TOWER FOR AT AND T WITH 12 BATTERIES AND 50 GALLONS OF DIESEL FUEL, ONLY A FEW FEET FROM THE B BALCONES CANYON AND PRESERVE AN ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT.
THIS THEN PLANS TO ADD TWO MORE CARRIERS, INCREASING THE NUMBER OF BATTERIES AND DIESEL FUEL ACCORDINGLY, 36 AND 150 GALLONS CREATING A SERIOUS FIRE RISK TO THE PRESERVE.
THE SITE PLAN, AS YOU CAN SEE, DOES NOT SHOW THE EXTREME FIRE RISK AS DO THE PICTURES OF THE ACTUAL SITE.
I INVITE YOU, AND I'LL PERSONALLY TAKE YOU TO VISIT THE SITE TO SEE FOR YOURSELVES.
PRESENTLY, THERE IS NO CODE WRITTEN IN AUSTIN MOONEY CODE REGULATING THE DISTANCE OF A TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER FROM AN ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT.
WHY? WELL, I FOUND OUT FROM SCOTT STOOKEY AUSTIN FIRE MARSHAL ENGINEER THAT THIS IS THE FIRST CURRENT CODE ONLY STATES THAT A TOWER CANNOT BE 50 FEET OF A DWELLING UNIT, 500 FEET OF A DAYCARE CENTER OR 300 FEET OF A PROPERTY ZONE HISTORIC.
WOULD YOU NOT AGREE THAT ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN HISTORIC BUILDING? SINCE MONOPOLES CAN BE AS HIGH AS 200 FEET UPDATED CODE MUST ESTABLISH AND MANDATE A SAFE DISTANCE FROM ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT.
SO SHOULD A BATTERY OR FUEL FIRE IGNITE AND OR THE A HUNDRED FOOT MONOPOLE FALL INTO THE PRESERVE, A WILDFIRE WOULD QUICKLY SPREAD THREATENING THE ENDANGERED SPECIES.
PLUS, IN THIS CASE, A NEIGHBORHOOD OF 950 HOMES WITH ONLY ONE EXIT EVERY DAY.
WAR CELL TOWERS DOT THE HORIZON.
BUT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION IS HIGHLY SENSITIVE AND VULNERABLE, SO SHOULD BE TREATED AS AN EXCEPTION.
MR. STOOKY ALSO INFORMED ME THAT DISH IS THE ONLY COMPANY PRESENTLY USING HIGHLY COMBUSTIBLE LITHIUM ION BATTERIES, BUT THAT MAY CHANGE.
SO MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN NOW TO UPDATE POLICY TO ADDRESS THIS SITE AND FUTURE SITES THAT MEET THIS SPECIFIC CRITERIA.
PAUL FISHELL OF TRAVIS COUNTY BCB ALSO AGREES THAT CODE MUST BE UPDATED TO INCLUDE THIS NEW WILDFIRE THREAT.
THERE ARE MANY OTHER LOCATIONS THAT WOULD BE SUITABLE WITHOUT RISKING ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITATS AND 950 HOMES.
THEREFORE, I ASK THAT YOU REJECT THIS PERMIT REQUEST WITH YOUR DECISION TO UPDATE PRESENT CELL TOWER POLICY TO ESTABLISH A SAFE DISTANCE FROM AN ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT, WHICH MAY BE ALSO THE CATALYST TO CHANGE POLICY ACROSS THE US AND WHILE ALSO I CONTACTED THE ICC, THEY'RE ALSO INTERESTED IN CHANGING POLICY.
SO WE NEED TO BE THE FIRST, THIS HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE BEFORE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THIS.
SO WE NEED TO BE, WE NEED TO DO THIS, THAT'S ALL.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THIS EXACTLY, BUT YOU'RE PEOPLE THAT PLAN.
THANK YOU,
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
ON TO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SEPTEMBER 24TH MEETING MINUTES.
DOES ANYONE HAVE EDITS, COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS TO THOSE MINUTES? OKAY, HEARING NONE THE MINUTES WILL BE ADDED TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA AND I DO WANNA RECOGNIZE OUR, UM, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, CHAIR COHEN AND UM, UH, UH, A ISD BOARD TRUSTEE, UH, CANDACE HUNTER.
[Consent Agenda]
LET'S MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. THESE ARE CONSENT APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, POSTPONEMENTS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS OR NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS. VICE CHAIR CZAR WILL READ THE PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND IDENTIFY THOSE THAT ARE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AND NON-DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS.YOU WILL ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST ITEMS TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
THESE ARE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS FOR TONIGHT.
THIS IS, UH, NUMBER ITEM NUMBER TWO, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA A DASH 2023 DASH 0 1 8 0.06 CC 7 25 SHIRLEY AVENUE, DISTRICT FOUR.
ITEM NUMBER THREE, THE ASSOCIATED REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 3 2 67 25 SHIRLEY AVENUE, DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT.
I NUMBER FOUR IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2024 DASH 0 2 0 2 2 2 0 0 2
[00:10:03]
MAIN ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT DISTRICT NINE.THE ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 12TH.
THE ASSOCIATED REZONING IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 7 7 0 0 2 MAINOR ROAD REZONING DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 12TH.
I NUMBER SIX IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NP DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 0 0 2 2000 E SIX STREET AND 2000 EAST SEVENTH STREET DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT I NUMBER SEVEN IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2022 DASH 0 0 5 0 1 TRACER LANE, NPA DISTRICT ONE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT I NUMBER EIGHT IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2023 DASH 0 3 4 22 0 1 WILLOW CREEK DRIVE, DISTRICT THREE.
THE ASSIGNMENT IS OF FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 22ND I NUMBER NINE IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 4 8 11 0 6 AND 1110 EAST 30TH STREET, DISTRICT NINE.
THE ITEM IS OF FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 12TH.
I NUMBER 10 IS A REZONING C EIGHT 14 DASH 0 6 0 DASH 0 1 0 9 0.03 LAKESHORE BY AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE, DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT I NUMBER 11 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 9 7 RAMIREZ, UM, 39 DISTRICT FIVE.
I NUMBER 12 IS A HISTORIC ZONING, C 14 H DASH 2024 DASH 0 1 15 FREDDA AND WALTER BOWHOUSE, DISTRICT NINE.
I NUMBER 13 IS A HISTORIC ZONING AS WELL.
C 14 H TWO 20 DASH 2024 DASH 0 3 6 DASH EAST END SALOON 1500 CLUB AND 1500 BEAUTY AND BARBERSHOP.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
I NUMBER 14 IS AN LTC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2 23 DASH 0 4 5 SITE PLAN LIKE PHASE TWO AND INFILL LOTS.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 22ND.
I NUMBER 15 IS ALSO AN LDC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2024 DASH ZERO SEVEN PLAN DEVELOPMENT AREA TWO, PDA TWO.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
AND THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM NUMBER 16, WHICH IS ALSO AN LDC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH TWO FOUR DASH 0 2 2 DENSITY BONUS FOR COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES.
THIS ITEM'S UP FOR DISCUSSION.
THAT'S ALL OF OUR PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. THANK YOU MS. MEDINA.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS? YES, CHAIR.
WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
JIM WALKER IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION ON ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE.
JIM, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, THANK YOU TO JONATHAN AND MAUREEN FOR SUPPORTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND APPLICANT DISCUSSIONS ON THIS.
I SIGNED UP AN OPPOSITION BEFORE WE WERE STILL NEGOTIATING THE POSTPONEMENT DATE, SO I WANTED TO CLARIFY.
WE ARE NOT OPPOSED, UH, TO THIS.
WE ARE JUST WORKING THROUGH WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, SOME OF THE FINAL AGREEMENTS.
UH, THEY'VE BEEN GREAT THROWER'S BEEN GREAT.
MIKE CALL ON THAT HAS BEEN GOOD.
SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WE'LL SEE YOU IN NOVEMBER.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BRAD MASSENGILL.
HE IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION ON ITEM 14, AND HE WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
BRAD, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
PLEASE START, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
THAT, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THE CON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I, I BELIEVE I UNDERSTAND MR. MASSENGALE WILL BE SPEAKING ON IT WHEN IT COMES BACK.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WANNA PULL ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR OTHERWISE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? OKAY.
UM, IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING? I SEE MOTION BY VICE CHAIR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UNLESS THERE IS OPPOSITION TO THAT, THAT MOTION PASSES.
ALRIGHT, THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[13. Historic zoning: C14H-2024-0136 - East End Saloon/1500 Club and 1500 Beauty and Barber Shop]
TO OUR FIRST DISCUSSION CASE THIS EVENING.THIS IS THE HISTORIC ZONING ITEM NUMBER 13 OF THE EAST END SALOON AND 1500 CLUB AND 1500 BEAUTY AND BARBER SHOP.
SO WE'LL HEAR FROM MS. CONTRERAS.
THANK YOU CHAIR KELLY CONTRERAS, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM 13, CASE NUMBER C 14 H 20 24 0 1 3 6 AT 1500 EAST 12TH STREET IS AN OWNER OPPOSED HISTORIC ZONING CASE INITIATED BY THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
AFTER THEIR REVIEW OF A DEMOLITION APPLICATION.
STAFF IN THE HLC FOUND THAT THE BUILDING MEETS THE HISTORIC ZONING CRITERIA FOR ARCHITECTURE, COMMUNITY VALUE, AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS AS RECOMMENDED
[00:15:01]
BY THE 2016 EAST AUSTIN HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY.THE SURVEY ALSO IDENTIFIES THE PROPERTY AS ELIGIBLE FOR INDIVIDUAL DESIGNATION ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.
A 2019 ASSESSMENT BY THE ORGANIZATION OF EAST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS ALSO NAMES IT AS A NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION PRIORITY.
1500 EAST 12TH STREET IS A TWO STORY VERNACULAR COMMERCIAL BUILT BUILDING, A TYPOLOGY RAPIDLY DISAPPEARING IN AUSTIN.
IT IS A HIP ROOF WITH ESSENTIAL DORMER, ORIGINAL WOOD, AND REPLACEMENT FINAL WINDOWS AND WOOD SIDING REVEALED BY THE UNPERMITTED REMOVAL OF VINYL SIDING.
THE ADDITIONS AND PORCH ENCLOSURES APPEAR TO HAVE MOSTLY TAKEN PLACE DURING THE HISTORIC PERIOD.
THOUGH THE BUILDING HAS BEEN NEGLECTED, SIGNIFICANT INTEGRITY MAY BE RESTORED AND EXISTING INTEGRITY RETAINED BY BASIC REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE.
THE BUILDING IS ASSOCIATED WITH GERMAN AMERICAN ENTREPRENEUR, EARNEST EISEN, AFRICAN-AMERICAN AMERICAN BUSINESSMAN, BEAUFORT JOHNSON, AND THE ALPHA PHI ALPHA FRATERNITY.
CHRISTIAN WILHELM OWNED THE PROPERTY AS FAR BACK AS 1889.
WILHELM WAS A GROCER WHO WAS ACTIVE IN POLITICS.
IN 1910, HE SOLD HIS STORE TO DESAL MERCHANTS, ERNEST AND LOUISA EISEN VISOR, WHO OPENED THE EAST END SALOON IN EISEN ADVISOR'S CAFE.
THOUGH THE SALOON WAS CLOSED DURING PROHIBITION, IT REOPENED IN THE THIRTIES AS A POPULAR SPOT FOR GERMAN FOOD, MUSIC, AND BEER WITH A RESIDENT ACCORDION BAND.
THE FAMILY LIVED ABOVE THE SALOON AND CLOSING THE PORCH DURING THE 1940S.
AFTER ERNEST EISEN ADVISOR'S DEATH, HIS WIFE SOLD THE PROPERTY TO BEAUFORD JOHNSON, NOTED BY LITERARY LUMINARY JAY MASON BREWER.
AS ONE OF AUSTIN'S MOST SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSMEN, JOHNSON CONVERTED THE BUILDING INTO THE 1500 BEAUTY AND BARBERSHOP AND THE 1500 CLUB A MUSIC VENUE.
ALPHA PHI ALPHA, THE OLDEST FRATERNITY TO A LAB.
BLACK MEMBERS ALSO TOOK UP RESIDENCE IN THE BUILDING FOR AT LEAST TWO YEARS.
IN THE FIFTIES, DESPITE ITS PROMINENCE AS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, EAST 12TH STREET FELL INTO DECLINE.
SH FELL INTO DECLINE SHORTLY BEFORE THE END OF THE HISTORIC PERIOD DUE TO SYSTEMIC DISINVESTMENT IN EAST AUSTIN BY BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INTERESTS.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DEFINES THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE AS 50 YEARS AND PRIOR.
THUS, EVENTS OCCURRING AFTER 1974 MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED PER LDC 25 2 3 52 WHEN EVALUATING A PROPERTY'S HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.
FINALLY, THE EAST AUSTIN SURVEY IDENTIFIES THE PROPERTY AS A UNIQUE LOCATION THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE CULTURAL IDENTITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO THE CITY.
IT FORMS PART OF THE HISTORICALLY IMPORTANT INTERSECTION OF 12TH AND KAMAL OPPOSITE THE GATE LEWIS HOUSE AND ADJACENT TO THE IQ HURDLE, HOUSE 12TH STREET WAS A BACKBONE OF AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMERCE DURING THE SEGREGATION ERA AND BEYOND.
THE BUILDING ALSO REPRESENTS EARLY GERMAN AMERICANS PRESENCE AND IMPACT IN EAST AUSTIN.
FORMER DISTRICT ONE COUNCIL MEMBER HOUSTON MADE THE BUILDING A GATHERING POINT FOR THE MANY GROUPS OUTSIDE AUSTIN'S ANGLO DOMINATED SOCIETY.
THAT CONCLUDES THE STAFF PRESENTATION.
ALRIGHT, MS. MEDINA, WHO DO WE HAVE? NEXT CHAIR.
WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN FAVOR, TRAVIS.
HOLLER TRAVIS, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
HI, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UM, AND I'M HERE IN BOTH A PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY.
UM, I'M A BOARD MEMBER OF PRESERVATION AUSTIN, INVOLVED IN OUR ADVOC ADVOCACY COMMITTEE.
I ALSO WORK PROFESSIONALLY IN A COM, UH, LOCAL COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE FIRM SPECIALIZING IN COMMERCIAL RETAIL DEVELOPMENT.
I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THE OWNER DEMOLITION AND IN SUPPORT OF ENACTING HISTORIC DESIGNATION FOR 1500 EAST 12TH STREET FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, AS THE, UM, STAFF MEMBER JUST POINTED OUT AND AS THE HLC UH, VOTED UNANIMOUSLY, THIS HOME HAS DEMONSTRATED ITS BOTH HISTORIC AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE TO EAST AUSTIN, SPECIFICALLY THE EAST 12TH, UH, COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.
IT IT IS, UH, IF YOU, IF YOU READ THE REPORT, IT SITS ADJACENT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE HURDLE HOUSE AS WELL AS THE SOUTH GATE LEWIS HOUSE.
AND IT FORMS THREE QUARTERS OF A PROMINENT INTERSECTION IN EAST AUSTIN THAT REALLY DOES KIND OF DEFINE THE HISTORY OF THE AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY IN EAST AUSTIN.
SPECIFICALLY, MY CONCERNS ARE THAT THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER, EUREKA HOLDINGS, WHICH USES THE NAME SODO SOPA LP TO DESCRIBE THE PROPERTY, WHICH A CULTURAL LESSON FOR ALL OF YOU, IS THAT SOTO SOPA IS ACTUALLY A PLAY ON A SOUTH PARK EPISODE THAT MOCKS GENTRIFICATION IN, UH, RUNDOWN AREAS.
THIS ENTIRE SITUATION IS, YOU KNOW, EMBLEMATIC OF THE CRISIS THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING WHEN IT COMES TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN EAST AUSTIN.
SPECIFICALLY FOR YEARS THAT PART OF TOWN HAS BEEN DEALING WITH DEMOLITIONS THAT HAVE DESTROYED CULTURAL AND HISTORIC CHARACTER AND BUILDINGS AND LEGACY BUSINESSES THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, MADE A ALREADY EXISTING MARGINALIZED COMMUNITY, EVEN MORE MARGINALIZED AS THEY'VE LOST THEIR IDENTITY AS THE CITY HAS SEEN DEVELOPMENT GROW.
I'M SAYING THIS AS SOMEONE THAT WORKS IN COMMERCIAL
[00:20:01]
DEVELOPMENT.THERE'S A WAY TO GO ABOUT, YOU KNOW, REZONING AND ALLOWING FOR DENSER DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, MORE HOUSING, ET CETERA.
BUT DEMOLISHING BUILDINGS THAT HAVE CULTURAL AND HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE, ESPECIALLY IN COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEALING WITH THIS AT THE FOREFRONT OF GENTRIFICATION IN THIS CITY, IS NOT THE WAY TO GO ABOUT DOING IT.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO, UH, TO FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE, UH, FROM THE CITY STAFF AS WELL AS THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, AND PROCEED WITH ALLOWING THIS TO ACHIEVE HISTORIC LANDMARK STATUS AS THIS, AS THIS BUILDING DOES REPRESENT A SIGNIFICANT INTERSECTION THAT WOULD BE THE CORNERSTONE OF BEING ABLE TO REVITALIZE THE EAST 12TH STREET CORRIDOR AND SPECIFICALLY DRAW ATTENTION TO THE HISTORY AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY IN EAST AUSTIN.
NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS MEGAN KING.
MEGAN, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M MEGAN KING, POLICY AND OUTREACH PLANNER FOR PRESERVATION.
I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF OUR ORGANIZATION IN SUPPORT OF HISTORIC DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY AT 1500 EAST 12TH STREET.
UM, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE HEARD FROM STAFF AND FROM TRAVIS JUST NOW THAT THIS BUILDING HAS DEMONSTRABLE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE FROM ITS EARLY GERMAN HISTORY TO ITS LATER ASSOCIATION WITH EAST AUSTIN'S BLACK COMMUNITY.
AND THIS IS UNDERSCORED BY THE FINDINGS OF THE 2016 EAST AUSTIN SURVEY, WHICH IDENTIFIES THIS BUILDING AS A POTENTIAL CITY OF AUSTIN LANDMARK AND RECOMMENDS IT FOR INDIVIDUAL LISTING ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.
SO IT'S A SPECIAL BUILDING TO BE SURE AT PRESERVATION AUSTIN, WE BELIEVE THAT PRESERVING OLD BUILDINGS IS A VITAL TOOL FOR FORWARD THINKING CITY PLANNING DEMOLISHING THIS PROPERTY FOR AN EMPTY LAWN AS IS INTENDED BY THE OWNER, IS NOT GOING TO LEAD TO BETTER OUTCOMES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UNFORTUNATELY, UNDER THE BUILDING'S CURRENT OWNER, UM, IT IS THAT VACANT AND RAPIDLY, RAPIDLY DETERIORATING FOR NEARLY A DECADE, CONTRIBUTING TO THE BLIGHT THEY NOW WISH TO ERADICATE.
AN EMPTY LOT WILL FURTHER CONTRIBUTE TO THE NEGLECT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS SYSTEMICALLY EXPERIENCED FOR DECADES.
HOWEVER, DEMOLISHING IS NOT THE ONLY OPTION AND THERE'S NO SHORTAGE OF RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO MAKE PRESERVATION ECONOMICALLY VIABLE FOR THIS PROPERTY.
IF DESIGNATED AS A CITY OF AUSTIN LANDMARK, THE OWNER WOULD QUALIFY FOR LANDMARK PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
ONCE DESIGNATED, THEY COULD APPLY FOR A CITY OF AUSTIN HERITAGE TOURISM GRANT TO REHABILITATE THE BUILDING POTENTIALLY WORTH UP TO 250,000.
AND IF IT'S LISTED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, THEY COULD RECEIVE STATE AND FEDERAL TAX CREDITS FOR REHABILITATING THE BUILDING.
THAT'S A 45% TAX CREDIT ON QUALIFYING EXPENSES POTENTIALLY WORTH HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.
THERE ARE INCREDIBLY LUCRATIVE INCENTIVES TO PRESERVE AVAILABLE TO THE OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE IF IT IS DEMOLISHED.
WE ASK THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANT PIECE OF EAST AUSTIN HISTORY THAT WE HAVE HERE, AS WELL AS THE IMMENSE POTENTIAL THIS PROPERTY HOLDS FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
NEXT SPEAKER, NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS NALIA SANKOFA.
NALIA WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY NALIA.
PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
UH, THE SYSTEM WAS NOT ALLOWING ME TO MUTE
UM, MY NAME IS, UH, GREETINGS.
UH, I'M A PROFESSIONAL INTERDISCIPLINARY ARTIST DESIGNER, CULTURAL ACTIVIST AND RITUAL SPECIALIST HERE IN AUSTIN.
I'M A TRANSPLANT ORIGINALLY FROM CHICAGO.
I'VE BEEN COMING TO AUSTIN FROM, BUT ALSO I'VE BEEN COMING TO AUSTIN FROM FORT HOOD SLASH KILLEEN FOR, UM, ARTS AND CULTURAL ACTIVITIES SINCE 1987.
SO WHILE I'M NOT FROM AUSTIN, I AM OF AUSTIN AND I'VE BEEN INGRAINED IN AND PROTECTIVE OF BLACK EAST AUSTIN FOR THE LAST 35 PLUS YEARS.
SO I'M SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF DEMOLISHING THE, THE DEMOLISHING OF THE CULTURALLY HISTORIC, UH, EAST AUSTIN PROPERTIES AT 1500 EAST 12TH STREET.
UH, I IMPLORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL AS OTHER RELEVANT CITY OFFICIALS AND DEPARTMENTS TO LOOK VERY CLOSELY AT THE CULTURAL, RACIAL AND HISTORIC RAMIFICATIONS OF THE INTENTIONS AND GOALS AND MESSAGE OF JUST, OF DESTROYING THE, THIS PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE IQ HURDLE HOUSE AT 1416 EAST 12TH STREET RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM 1500, WHICH WILL FOLLOW MORE THAN LIKELY FOLLOW THE FATE OF 1500 EAST 12TH STREET.
[00:25:01]
SO SINCE MOVING HERE IN 1989, I HAVE WATCHED SWIFT AND MERCILESS GENTRIFICATION INITIATIVES AND EFFORTS OF EAST AUSTIN.AND I'VE WITNESSED TIME AND TIME AGAIN WITH AUSTIN'S HISTORIC AND LONGSTANDING BLACK COMMUNITIES IS NEW FOLKS ARRIVING, WHETHER INDIVIDUALS OR DEVELOPERS SUCH AS, FOR INSTANCE, EUREKA, UH, IGNORING OR, AND OR GOING OVER THE HEADS OF LONGTIME BLACK RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES WHO FEEL THAT THESE CULTURALLY AND HISTORICALLY IMPORTANT PROPERTIES SUCH AS 1500 EAST 12TH AND THE IQ HURDLE HOUSE, UH, SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED OR CHANGED, UM, TO OUTSIDE'S LIKINGS WITHOUT HAVING ANY UNDERSTANDING OR PUTTING ANY VALUE IN THE CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RELEVANCE OF THESE PROPERTIES.
UM, AND, AND SO WHEN, WHEN THESE GENTRIFYING EFFORTS, WHICH I ALSO CONSIDER TO BE CULTURAL URBAN COLONIZATION, UH, DON'T THINK THE PROPERTIES, WHEN THEY DON'T THINK THE PROPERTIES, UH, NEWCOMERS OR FOLKS WITH OTHER INTENTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN HERE, UM, LOOK AT THESE PROPERTIES AND FEEL LIKE, OH, WE SHOULD JUST DEMOLISH THEM AND TURN THEM INTO SOMETHING ELSE THAT BENEFITS FINANCIALLY BENEFIT THEM AND THEIR GOALS AND AGENDAS WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE BLACK FOLKS WHO ARE HERE, THE BLACK FOLKS WHO ARE COMING, AND THE BLACK FOLKS WHO ESPECIALLY WANT TO SEE SOMETHING, UH, FROM THIS COMMUNITY THAT LOOKS AND ACTS AND MOVES LIKE WE DO.
UM, IT IT, IT CREATES FURTHER DIVIDE AND BITTERNESS AND IT SENDS A MESSAGE THAT YOU BLACK PEOPLE, YOUR HISTORY, YOUR CULTURES AND SO ON, DON'T MATTER.
THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE, THOSE PROPERTIES TO PRESERVE THEM.
I'M SORRY, IT'S BEEN THREE MINUTES.
DO YOU HAVE A FINAL THOUGHT? OKAY.
THERE NEEDS TO BE A CONVERSATION WITH THE FOLKS FROM THE BLACK COMMUNITY, UM, AND ESPECIALLY THE RELATIVES OF THOSE PROPERTIES, ESPECIALLY THE IQ HURDLE HOUSE TO DISCUSS SOME, YOU KNOW, BETTER IDEAS AND PLANS FOR THOSE PROPERTIES.
NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS OPIA JOSEPH OPIA, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS, I'M ZIA JOSEPH.
I JUST WANNA MAKE A FEW COMMENTS AS IT RELATES SPECIFICALLY TO 1500 EAST 12TH STREET.
I JUST WANNA REMIND YOU THAT COUNSEL WILL TAKE UP THE EQUITY BASED PRESERVATION PLAN ON OR ABOUT NOVEMBER 21ST, 2024.
SO IF THAT PLAN IS TO BE MORE THAN SIMPLY JUST, UH, EXERCISE AND IF FUTILITY, I WOULD ASK YOU TO RECOGNIZE THE NEED TO PRESERVE THIS PARTICULAR PLOT OF LAND.
UH, SPECIFICALLY I WANT YOU TO REMEMBER THAT ON MARCH 4TH, 2021, COUNSEL APOLOGIZED TO BLACK INDIVIDUALS SPECIFICALLY FOR INTENTIONAL DISCRIMINATION.
THAT WAS ITEM 67, BUT THAT PLAN NEVER CAME TO FRUITION.
THEY PROMISED A BLACK EMBASSY, AS YOU MAY RECALL.
AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S PROBLEMATIC IS THAT THE CITY HAS WHAT I CALL EQUITY ITIS.
THEY USE EQUITY AD NAUSEUM, I CALL IT INFLAMMATION OF THE MOUTH FROM SAYING EQUITY TOO MUCH.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'VE DONE IS USED BLACK PEOPLE IN ORDER TO GET THE MONEY FOR THE CAPS AND STITCHES FOR I 35.
ANYTIME THEY NEED TO GET FUNDING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THEY USE EQUITY.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY, I'M SURE YOU CAN'T TELL EUREKA WHAT TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY, BUT YOU CAN AT LEAST RECOGNIZE THE PRESERVATION THAT'S GOING BEFORE COUNCIL TO SAY THAT THIS PROPERTY IS SIGNIFICANT.
IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND HOW YOU'RE PRESERVING SOMETHING EQUITABLY IF MOST OF THOSE PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN DEMOLISHED.
AND I WOULD JUST SAY FOR CONTEXT SPECIFICALLY TO USE, UH, ALL THAT USES WHEN YOU ACTUALLY DECIDE IF YOU PASS THIS ITEM FOR THE LANDMARK, UH, DESIGNATION TO ACTUALLY PUT ON THE PLACARD, THE MANY USES, IT WAS A BROTHEL AT ONE POINT, ACCORDING TO SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE HERE.
IT'S NO SECRET THAT THE H****R STOOD AT 12TH AND CHICON.
I MEAN, SO THERE'S NO NEED TO TRY TO BUILD ON ALPHA PHI ALPHA.
THEY WERE THERE FOR TWO YEARS, ACCORDING TO THE HISTORY.
TWO YEARS OUT OF A HUNDRED YEARS IS NOT THAT SIGNIFICANT.
[00:30:01]
ON WHAT WAS GOOD, SAY WHAT HAPPENED AT THAT PLACE.IT WAS GOOD, IT WAS BAD AND IT SERVED A PURPOSE, BUT IT'S BEEN STANDING FOR A HUNDRED YEARS.
AND SO I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO RECOGNIZE THAT DON'T SANITIZE THE HISTORY, THAT IT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM WITH THE HISTORY THAT'S BEEN TOLD ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE TODAY.
THAT'S THE MASONTOWN HISTORY, THAT'S SANITIZED AND HAS L-G-B-T-Q-I-A RAINBOW IN THE BACKGROUND WITH NO HISTORICAL RECORD TO SAY THAT THE MASON BROTHERS EVER IDENTIFIED THAT WAY.
AND SO I'M JUST ASKING THAT YOU NOT PUT A CONTEMPORARY CONTACTS ONTO THE HISTORY AND JUST TELL IT LIKE IT IS.
IT'S HISTORIC, IT'S STANDING THERE.
I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE, UH, PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU HAD, AND I RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE SOME BLACK PEOPLE IN OPPOSITION.
I UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE, THE POLLS AND YOU KNOW, THERE ENGINEERS THAT TALKED.
BUT I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO RECOGNIZE HISTORY AS HISTORY HAPPENED AND TO PRESERVE THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL GO AHEAD AND ANSWER THEM AT THIS TIME.
WE'LL TAKE QUESTIONS IN JUST A FEW MINUTES AND, UM, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS MAY CALL ON YOU.
NICK IS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION AND WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
NICK IS RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM MARY ALICE, CASPER.
MARY, ARE YOU PRESENT? NICK, YOU'LL HAVE EIGHT MINUTES.
PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
I'M NICK SANDLIN, AGENT FOR THE OWNER, AND WE'LL BE PRESENTING A SHORT SLIDE SHOW EXPLAINING OUR POSITION ON THE REQUEST FOR HISTORIC ZONING THAT WE ADAMANTLY OPPOSE.
WE OPPOSE THIS BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING ZONING ON THE SITE IS WELCOMED IN PRE CURRENT REGULATIONS AND CURRENT ZONING.
IT COULD ENABLE A BEAUTIFUL REVITALIZED 12TH STREET FIT FOR PEDESTRIANS AND SAFE MOBILITY IN THIS LOCATION, AS WELL AS A FUTURE PROJECT THAT CREATES HOUSING AND SERVICES TO THE CURRENT COMMUNITY THAT ARE IN DEMAND.
KEEPING THE EXISTING ZONING COULD ENABLE THIS ENTIRE BLOCK TO DEVELOP AS ONE COHESIVE COMMUNITY SERVING DEVELOPMENT.
THIS WOULD BE THE MOST EQUITABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THE LANDOWNER AS A PART OF THE GREAT STREETS PROGRAM AND FOR HOUSING IN GENERAL.
THE PURSUIT OF THIS HISTORIC ZONING WILL TAKE THAT POTENTIAL AWAY FROM ANY LANDOWNER HERE AND TAKE AWAY THE FUTURE VISION FOR AN IMPORTANT TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR.
IT WILL ALSO REDUCE THE CREDENTIAL FOR HOUSING IN THE AREA.
IT GOES AGAINST THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP'S STATED WISHES.
AND WITH ALL THAT SAID, I'D LIKE TO START THE SLIDESHOW AND I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR, UH, CONTROLLING.
UM, I ASSUME YOU'VE STARTED THE SLIDESHOW.
YES, WE HAVE THE PHOTO OF THE PROPERTY AS THE FIRST SLIDE.
SO, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, IN OUR VIEW, THIS IS NOT HISTORIC AND SHOULD ADD GREATER VALUE TO THE COMMUNITY THROUGH OTHER WAYS.
SKIPPING TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THE REASONS NOT TO ZONE 1500 EAST 12TH STREET.
THE OWNER STRONGLY OBJECTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSES IT.
ELDERS IN THE COMMUNITY, AS YOU'VE HEARD, OPPOSE IT.
IT DOES NOT MEET MODERN SAFETY STANDARDS OR THE PROPER CRITERIA.
AS THE DEVELOPMENT CODE SITS TODAY, A STRONG WILL EXISTS FOR A BETTER FUTURE AT THIS LOCATION.
THE NEXT SLIDE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSES IT AND WE ENCOURAGE TO READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT, BUT I'LL READ OFF SOME OF THE QUOTES.
THE BUILDING WAS IN A DILAPIDATED STATE BEFORE THE CURRENT OWNER ACQUIRED IT, AND IT HAS REMAINED VACANT FOR DECADES.
THE BUILDING IS ALSO SITUATED ON THE SITE IN A WAY THAT DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA OF AUSTIN'S GREAT STREETS INITIATIVE.
EAST 12TH STREET TRAFFIC HAS INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY OVER THE YEARS AND WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE AS EAST AUSTIN DEVELOPS.
THE EXISTING BUILDING DOES NOT ALLOW FOR SAFE SETBACKS FOR PEDESTRIAN USE.
THE BUILDING PREVENTS MULTIMODAL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD ENHANCE THE STREETSCAPE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLISTS, AND BUS RIDERS.
SUCH IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE FAR MORE MEANINGFUL CONTRIBUTIONS TO EQUITY ON THE EAST SIDE, THEN PRESERVATION OF A NON-CONTRIBUTING DILAPIDATED BUILDING.
THIS PROPERTY MAY CHANGE HANDS AGAIN, IN WHICH CASE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
[00:35:01]
WOULD BE PENALIZED BY THE DENIAL OF A PRODUCTIVE USE OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD BENEFIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND EAST AUSTIN AT LARGE.WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO APPROVE THE OWNER'S DEMOLITION REQUEST.
AND THESE ARE ALL QUOTES FROM THE DAVIS THOMPSON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
NUMBER THREE, ELDERS IN THE COMMUNITY OPPOSE IT.
THERE ARE SOME VIDEO FILES ASSOCIATED WITH THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
WE COULD EITHER, UH, VIEW THAT NOW OR I WOULD PREFER TO KEEP READING THE SLIDES AND COME BACK TO THE VIDEO TO CONCLUDE IF, IF POSSIBLE.
COULD WE GO TO NUMBER FOUR AND THEN COME BACK TO THE VIDEO? YES, WE'RE ON SLIDE FOUR.
ELECTRICAL INSTRUCTIONAL ISSUES AS SUPPORTED BY THE ENGINEERING REPORTS, ONE OF WHICH WAS MINE ALL INDICATE A SITUATION THAT IS BEYOND REPAIR AND HAS BEEN SINCE LONG BEFORE THE CURRENT OWNERSHIP TOOK CONTROL.
THE BUILDING IS NOT SAFE TO MOVE, NOR DOES IT HAVE AN ABILITY TO MEET ANYTHING CLOSE TO CURRENT LIFE SAFETY STANDARDS IN TERMS OF SETBACKS, ET CETERA.
IT DOES NOT MEET THE PROPER CRITERIA.
OWNERSHIP AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS, INCLUDING A LOCAL ARCHITECT THAT LIVES NEARBY, MAINTAINED THAT THE BUILDING DOES NOT REPRESENT HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT ARCHITECTURE.
BELIEVE IT WAS CALLED VERNACULAR ARCHITECTURE, WHICH IS A VERY LARGE BUCKET.
COMMUNITY MEMBERS TESTIFIED THAT OLD NEWS CLIPS WERE TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT OVER GLORIFYING THE STRUCTURES OVERALL HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE.
COMMUNITY MEMBERS TESTIFIED THAT OLD NEWS CLIPS WERE ALSO TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT TO, EXCUSE ME, INFLATE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPERTY'S RESIDENCE.
AND TENANTS COMMUNITY MEMBERS TESTIFIED THAT NOT ONLY IS 1500 EAST 12TH STREET NOT A GOOD MEMORY PLACE, BUT A BAD ONE.
THEY WANT TO MOVE BEYOND COMMUNITY MEMBERS POINTED OUT THE HISTORY EFFECTIVELY SHOWS A LONG HISTORY OF THE STRUCTURE BEING USED FOR WHATEVER COMMERCIAL PURPOSES THAT THERE WAS A MARKET DEMAND FOR IT AT THE TIME, INCLUDING THESE ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES THAT WERE DETRIMENTAL TO NEIGHBORS ATTEMPTING TO LIVE CLEAN AND SOBER LIVES.
A STRONG WILL EXISTS FOR A BETTER FUTURE.
WHAT EXPERTS RECOMMEND AND WHAT THE DAVIS THOMPSON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND OTHER NEIGHBORS WANT THE SAME THING FOR THIS COMMISSION TO NOT OVERRIDE OUR JOINT CONCLUSION THAT WHAT REMAINS OF THE STRUCTURE OF 1500 EAST 12TH STREET SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE DEMOLISHED AND THAT THE MOST EQUITABLE PATH FORWARD FOR THIS SITE IS TO BE ALLOWED TO BECOME PART OF THE GREAT STREETS PROGRAM.
WITH THAT, IF YOU DON'T MIND GOING BACK TO THE VIDEO.
MY NAME IS DANNY THOMPSON AND I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN EAST AUSTIN.
I'M NOW 67 YEARS OLD, A LOCAL MUSICIAN AND MAINTENANCE WORKER IN THE AREA.
I HAVE WORKED IN THIS BUILDING BEFORE.
UH, I AGREE WITH THE GENTLEMAN TO, TO ACTUALLY MOVE IT, IT WAS DANGEROUS JUST WORKING IN IT.
BUT, UH, THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT I HEARD IN THE LAST MEETING THAT CONTRADICT MY FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE AND HISTORY.
I'LL START WITH THE BOTTOM LINE.
THIS HAS NEVER BEEN A GOOD MEMORY PLACE FOR EAST AUSTIN RESIDENCE.
I WALKED THOSE STREETS AS A CHILD AND AS A TEENAGER, AS I WAS PLAYING MUSIC IN THE AREA, WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS PUT ON PAPER WAS NOT NECESSARILY THE ACCOUNT.
FIRST AND FOREMOST, I AM OPPOSITION FOR, I WANT THIS HOUSE TO BE, UM, DI DEMOLISHED.
COMPLETELY THREE REASONS THAT I HAVE THAT THIS HOUSE SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED.
NUMBER ONE, IT DOES NOT MEET ANY GREAT ARCHITECTURAL CRITERIA.
NUMBER TWO, THERE ARE NO PERSON OR PERSONS WHO ARE HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT IN THIS COMMUNITY THAT GIVE THIS HOUSE CREDENCE TO BE CONTINUED.
FOURTH AND FOREMOST, THIS HOUSE DID NOT REPRESENT THE BEST OF THE EAST AUSTIN COMMUNITY.
IT REPRESENTED THE WORST OF THE EAST AUSTIN COMMUNITY.
AS I CONTEXTUALIZED THAT, I HAVE BEEN IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR OVER 50
[00:40:01]
YEARS.MR. SANDLIN, YOUR TIME HAS UP FINAL THOUGHTS? UH, YOU KNOW, NO, I I THINK THAT IF ANYBODY WANTS TO YIELD TIME TO THIS, WE COULD PROBABLY FINISH THE VIDEO, BUT WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK TO THAT.
I JUST, UM, THINK I'VE KINDA REITERATED OUR POSITION AND AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY OF ME.
NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS ELLIOT DO ELLIOT.
SORRY ELLIOT, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AND CITY STAFF.
MY NAME IS ELLIOT DEW AND MY INTEREST IN THIS CASE IS THAT I LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM 1500 EAST WALL STREET.
I'VE LIVED ALL OVER AUSTIN, AND SPECIFICALLY AT THIS ADDRESS FOR SEVEN YEARS.
UM, I RUN A LOCAL COMPUTER REPAIR SERVICE, AND EACH DAY I SEE THE VALUE IN MAKING DECISIONS BASED ON LOGIC, NOT EMOTION.
I, I URGE THAT YOU NOT FORCE A HISTORICAL DESIGNATION FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
TRULY HISTORIC STRUCTURES ARE BUILT WITH ADDITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL MERIT FROM THE ONSET.
THIS WAS NOT BUILT WITH ANY KIND OF STANDOUT ARCHITECTURE, NOR WAS IT BUILT TO ENDURE.
THIS SITUATION SPURRED ME TO DO MY OWN INDEPENDENT RESEARCH.
IN DOING SO, I NOTICED POLICIES OF CITIES LIKE NEW YORK AND PHILADELPHIA IN OTHER CITIES, YOU HAVE TO ARRIVE WITH IRREFUTABLE FACTS TO SHOW A STRUCTURE IS TRULY HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT.
A DESIGNATION IS SOMETHING TO ASPIRE TO QUALIFY FOR AND WORK HARD TO PROVE.
HERE THE PROCESS QUICKLY DEVOLVES INTO NON MERITORIOUS ARGUMENTS VERSUS TRUE DISCUSSION OF RELEVANT HISTORICAL MERIT.
WHILE THERE IS SOME INTERESTING HISTORY ON THIS SITE, SADLY MUCH OF IT IS QUITE NEGATIVE.
THE ONLY HISTORY IN THAT THE STRUCTURE HAS ANY POTENTIAL TO HONOR IS GERMAN.
THERE ARE FAR BETTER AND MORE ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT AND SAFER STRUCTURES TO ACCOMPLISH THAT OVER AGGRANDIZING HISTORY.
AS IS THE CASE HERE IS A WASTE OF CITY RESOURCES.
RESOURCES THAT COULD BE PUT TO FAR BETTER USE.
JUST LIKE THIS SITE, ENABLING SOMETHING ELSE TO BE BUILT HERE GREATLY INCREASES OUR COMMUNITY'S CHANCES OF TRANSFORMING THE SITE INTO A PLACE PEOPLE WANT TO BE.
WE WANT SOMETHING MUCH SAFER, MORE USEFUL, MORE WALKABLE AND VALUABLE THAN WHAT IT HAS BEEN.
IN CONCLUSION, THIS STRUCTURE DOESN'T MEET THE REQUIRED LEVELS TO FORCE HISTORIC DESIGNATION AGAINST AN OWNER OR COMMUNITY'S WILL.
AND THE BEST PATH FORWARD IS TO GIVE IT AN OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME PART OF THE GREAT STREETS PROGRAM IN AUSTIN'S FUTURE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL PIECE THAT MY DOG DIED ON THIS STREET IN FRONT OF THIS HOUSE BECAUSE OF THE POOR VISIBILITY ON THIS CORNER.
HAVE A NICE NIGHT AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, DID WE WANT TO, UH, OFFER A REBUTTAL TO OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN FAVOR? I CAN'T REMEMBER IF THEY WERE VIRTUAL OR IN PERSON.
I'M HERE REPRESENTING MYSELF, UH, IN A PERSONAL CAPACITY, IS ALSO A BOARD MEMBER FOR PRESERVATION AUSTIN.
UM, COUPLE QUICK REBUTTAL ITEMS. UM, THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION OFFICE AND CITY STAFF PUT TOGETHER A TREMENDOUS REPORT, UM, MANY PAGES LONG DETAILING THE ARCHITECTURE, THE CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE, THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.
I MEAN, THERE ARE MANY LEVELS OF CRITERIA THAT THIS HOME OR THIS RE THIS BUILDING REPRESENTS AND WHY IT SHOULD BE, UH, ALLOWED, UH, WHY WE SHOULD STOP DEMOLITION AND ALLOW FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, SOMETHING I DO TAKE, UH, UH, OBJECT TO IS THE PRESENTATION THAT THE PRIMARY SPEAKER FOR THE, UM, UH, I GUESS OBJECTION REFERRED TO THE PHOTO THAT WAS UP THERE IS THE BACKSIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S IN NO WAY AN, UH, ACCURATE DEPICTION OF WHAT THIS BUILDING LOOKS LIKE OR THE INTERSECTION IN QUESTION.
UM, ADMITTEDLY I KIND OF CAME HERE, UH, RIGHT AFTER WORK AND DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO PUT MY OWN SPECIAL PRESENTATION TOGETHER BECAUSE THERE WAS, I MEAN, THE REALITY IS IS THAT THERE WAS SO MUCH THAT WAS ALREADY DISCUSSED DURING THE
[00:45:01]
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING.UM, BUT THE REALITY IS, IS THAT THIS ENTIRE, WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CONVEY WITH THE HURDLE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET, AS WELL AS THE SOUTHGATE LEWIS HOUSE DIRECTLY DIAGONALLY ACROSS AS WELL, IS THAT THIS ENTIRE INTERSECTION REALLY IS THE CENTERPIECE OF THE EAST 12TH STREET HISTORIC CORRIDOR THAT REPRESENTS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF HISTORY AND CULTURE FOR THE AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY IN EAST AUSTIN.
UM, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE ISSUES I ALSO TAKE IS THAT WE'RE, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST AS ONE PROPERTY.
BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE, THIS IS JUST A STEPPING STONE FOR ESSENTIALLY THE DEMOLITION OF PRETTY MUCH EVERY HISTORIC BUILDING ALONG EAST 12TH STREET.
JUST TODAY ALONE, IT WAS ANNOUNCED THAT A POPULAR L-G-B-T-Q NIGHTCLUB CALLED OUTER HEAVEN WILL BE, UH, THEY WERE, THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REFUSING TO RENEW THE LEASE 'CAUSE THEY'VE TOLD ESSENTIALLY THEIR TENANTS THAT THEY PLAN ON DEMOLISHING THAT STRETCH OF BUILDINGS AS WELL, WHICH IS ONLY TWO BLOCKS FROM THIS SITE.
WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY NOW TO, YOU KNOW, REALLY ALLOW OURSELVES TO ENACT HISTORIC ZONING, NOT JUST ON THIS BUILDING, BUT ALSO BEGIN THE PROCESS OF REVITALIZATION FOR THAT EAST 12TH STREET HISTORIC CORRIDOR AND, YOU KNOW, PAY IT FORWARD TO THE COMMUNITY THAT REALLY BUILT THIS CITY.
UM, AND I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE, BOTH ARCHITECTURALLY THE PEOPLE THAT LIVED THERE AS WELL AS THE CENTERPIECE IT PROVIDED TO THAT COMMUNITY FOR SO MANY GENERATIONS AS PREVIOUS SPEAKERS MENTIONED.
YEAH, THERE'S SOME UNSIGHTLY ASPECTS OF ITS HISTORY AND I WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DENY THAT HISTORY.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SAY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, TO REMOVE THIS PIECE OF HISTORY AND PRETEND LIKE IT WAS NEVER, THERE IS REALLY A SHAME WHEN WE'VE LOST SO MUCH OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES THAT MEANS SO MUCH TO THAT COMMUNITY AND THAT PART OF TOWN AS WELL.
SO THANK YOU FOR THE CHANCE TO PROVIDE REBUTTAL.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? I SEE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UNLESS THERE'S OPPOSITION THAT MOTION PASSES.
I WANNA RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
UM, OKAY, WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
SO WHO IS OUR FIRST COMMISSIONER WITH A QUESTION? YES, VICE CHAIR COMMISSIONER ANDERSON
COULD STAFF SHARE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WE'VE LOOKED AT PROPERTIES THAT WE WERE LOOKING TO OWN HISTORIC AND IT WOULD RANDOMLY HAVE A GIANT PARKING LOT ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
COULD WE, IS THERE A MAP THAT WE CAN SEE THAT HAS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS WE'RE LOOKING TO ZONE HISTORIC HERE AND MAYBE WHILE STAFF LOOKS FOR THAT, UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND MAYBE SHARING, YOU KNOW, ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OR ARE WE TALKING RANDOMLY ABOUT A PARKING LOT AND KIND OF OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT NOT BE HISTORIC? UM, WELL, UM, WHILE OUR AV STAFF FINDS THE, UH, ZONING MAP, UM, WE CAN DISCUSS THAT, UM, TODAY, UM, Y'ALL HAVE THE DISCRETION TO, UH, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON JUST ZONING THE FOOTPRINT OR ZONING THE ENTIRE PARCEL.
UM, LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION WAS FOR THE ENTIRE PARCEL, UM, BUT AS WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST, UM, Y'ALL AREN'T LIMITED TO THAT AND CITY COUNCIL WON'T BE LIMITED TO THAT EITHER.
UM, JUST DEPENDING ON, UM, WHAT Y'ALL FEEL, UM, YOU WANT YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO BE TONIGHT.
UM, MS. CONTRERAS, THIS IS FOR YOU AS WELL.
UM, THE BACK ADDITION THAT WAS SHOWED TO US IN SOME OF THE PICTURES AND IT'S IN THE BACK AS WELL.
DO WE KNOW WHAT IS THE DATE OF THAT THING THAT JUTS OUT IN THE BACK? WE DON'T, UM, THAT ONE COULD BE FROM ANYWHERE FROM THE SIXTIES TO MORE MODERN.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS NOT A PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT ADDITION, UM, TO THE BUILDING'S ORIGINAL FORM.
UM, AND IF Y'ALL WANTED TO DO SAY A FOOTPRINT THAT EXCLUDED THAT ADDITION, UM, STAFF WOULD BE AMENABLE TO THAT.
AND, AND EVEN IF WE ZONE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY THAT IT MIGHT BE THAT DOESN'T MEET THE STANDARD AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD NOT HAVE TO PRESERVE THAT.
I THINK THERE'S SIMPLY WAY, UM, TO BE HAD, UM, WITH ANY FUTURE DESIGNS ON THE SITE, UM, IF THE HISTORIC AGE PART OF THE PROPERTY WERE PRESERVED.
UM, THE SECOND QUESTION I HAD WAS, WE, WE HAD A, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ENGINEER, UH, FROM THE OWNER HAD A NOTE FROM AUSTIN ENERGY, UM, ON BEING CLOSE TO SORT OF SOME OF OUR A INFRASTRUCTURE.
HOW IS THAT REGULARLY HANDLED WITH OTHER SORT OF ZONING CASES? NOW OF COURSE, I'M GONNA ASSUME SOMEBODY'S GRANDFATHERED IN ALREADY FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IF THEY DO IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE HISTORIC ZONING, HOW, HOW IS THAT USUALLY MANAGED? UH, SO COMMISSIONER, THIS ISN'T ONE THAT WE'VE COME ACROSS BEFORE.
UM, AND SEVERAL OF OUR LANDMARK COMMISSIONERS WERE MARKED, UH, AS SUCH AT OUR LAST MEETING.
UM, BUT UM, WE THINK THAT IT WOULD BE GRANDFATHER DID.
UM, IF AUSTIN ENERGY NEEDED TO MOVE THE POLE TO ACCOMMODATE
[00:50:01]
THE HISTORIC ZONING, UM, WE WOULD LOOK FOR WAYS TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, UM, IF THAT WERE TO COME TO FRUITION.SO REGARDLESS, WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU THOUGH IS THAT THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE ALL THE NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE STRUCTURE, OF COURSE MAINTAINING THE HISTORIC FABRIC AND STILL BE COMPLIANT WITH WHATEVER THE AUSTIN ENERGY GUIDELINES MIGHT BE.
THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING WILL RE THE CITY WILL RESOLVE IT REGARDLESS, IS WHAT I'M HEARING.
UM, AND THEN THE LAST SORT OF QUESTION THAT I HAD ON THIS WAS, UH, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT, WE DID NOT SEE ANYTHING FROM THE ENGINEER'S REPORT THAT TALKS SPECIFICALLY TO THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE.
I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT WE HAD WAS AN ASBESTOS REPORT, WHICH I'M GONNA ASSUME WHETHER YOU DO DEMOLITION OR WHETHER YOU DO, YOU KNOW, RENOVATION REGARDLESS, YOU WOULD HAVE TO MANAGE THAT ISSUE.
I, I GUESS, HAVE Y'ALL DONE SORT OF THAT SORT OF UNDERSTANDING? THE STRUCTURE LOOKS PRETTY INTACT AND THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE SEEMS PRETTY DECENT COMPARED TO SOME OF THE OTHER CASES WE'VE SEEN.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THOUGHTS ON THAT.
UM, SO OUR, UM, LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, FELT THE SAME WAY THAT YOU DID, BUT THE, UH, THE APPLICANT FOR DEMOLITION IS ON THE LINE.
HE'S ALSO THE, UM, THE PE FOR THE PROP FOR THE PROJECT.
UM, AND HE MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO SPEAK TO, UM, HIS ASSESSMENT OF THE, UH, THE BUILDING STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY AS WELL.
UM, OKAY, UM, MAYBE I LOST THE, A APPLICANT THAT WE HAVE ONLINE.
COULD YOU SHARE REGARDING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE JUST FROM SORT OF A STRUCTURAL SOUNDNESS PERSPECTIVE? MR. MR. SANDLIN? THAT'S FINE.
NICK SANDLIN, I JUST, YEAH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT DUE TO THE LOCATION OF THE STRUCTURE AS IT RELATES TO PLANNING STANDARDS.
SO I'M THE CIVIL ENGINEER, WE DID SOURCE TWO INDEPENDENT STRUCTURAL REPORTS THAT WERE PART OF THE FILE THAT SPEAK TO THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING, WHICH, UH, ACCURATELY DEPICTS ITS DILAPIDATED STATE AND WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE DONE.
AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S BEEN THE BASIS FOR WHAT WE'VE EXPRESSED TO YOU GUYS AND JUST TO, UM, YOU KNOW, KIND OF CLEAR, CLEAR THAT UP AS FAR AS MY ROLE, MY LETTER, AND THEN THE OTHER TWO ENGINEERS THAT WERE INVOLVED AND, AND THE DATA THAT THEY PROVIDED.
SO I KNOW, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE, I'LL JUST BE HONEST, I THINK I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED 'CAUSE IN SOME PLACES THERE WAS CONVERSATION ABOUT, AND I GUESS YOU CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT SINCE YOU'RE NOT THE ENGINEER THAT WORKED ON THAT, BUT IN SOME PLACES WE HEARD THAT THINGS NEED TO BE COMPLETELY REPLACED IN OTHER PLACES.
IT SEEMED LIKE REALLY THERE WERE OTHER ISSUES, BUT THINGS THAT COULD ESSENTIALLY GO THROUGH A RENOVATION, YOU KNOW, PROCESS.
I DUNNO IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE DETAILS ON THAT OR NOT.
I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY IS THERE ENOUGH STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY FOR THE STRUCTURE TO BE ABLE TO BE RENOVATED AND STILL PRESERVED? IT IS NOT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS BUILDING IS A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR MO MOVING BECAUSE OF THE STRUCTURAL REPORTS AND HOW THEY CITE, UM, THAT IT'S, IT'S NOT SAFE TO, UH, INHABIT IT CURRENTLY.
AND IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, I THINK ONE OF THEM REMARKED THAT IT WAS OF MNT COLLAPSE WAS THE CONCERN.
I AM RUNNING OUT OF TIME HERE, SO I'LL PAUSE THERE.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER COX AND THEN COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
I, I GUESS THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, I, I'M, I'M A LITTLE BIT BIASED BIAS IN MY PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY, UH, DOING TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND I'M, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THIS BUILDING IN THE STREET VIEW, UH, WHAT, I MEAN, WHAT IS THE CITY'S OPINION AND, AND, AND CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROXIMITY OF THIS BUILDING? UM, ESSENTIALLY RIGHT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY BOUNDARY AND POTENTIALLY, I MEAN, IS IT COMPLETELY WITHIN PRIVATE PROPERTY? DO WE KNOW THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER, UM, THIS IS STAFF CALLEN CONTRERAS PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UM, IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON'S, UH, REQUEST EARLIER AS WELL.
WE DO HAVE A MAP OF THE PROPERTY, UM, ON THE SCREEN.
SO, SO I TAKE IT FROM THAT THE, THE BUILDING ACTUALLY DOES ENCROACH IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
WELL, THAT IS AWFULLY INTERESTING.
[00:55:01]
STREET.UM, AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE MADE VALIANT EFFORTS TO, TO ATTEMPT TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE SIDEWALK ON 12TH STREET.
UM, I'M, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT ARE IN TERMS OF TRYING TO PRESERVE THIS BUILDING.
UM, IF, IF IT ENCROACHES WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND THE PROPERTY OWNER MAKES A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO TRY TO RESTORE THIS BUILDING AND PRESERVE IT, HOW DOES THAT EVEN WORK IF IT, IF IT'S A FEW FEET ON CITY OF AUSTIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY? I I JUST, MY QUESTION IS ROOTED IN THE FACT THAT IF I EVER WENT TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND SAID, I WANNA REHABILITATE THIS BUILDING THAT HAPPENS TO ENCROACH ON PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, I GUARANTEE YOU THE CITY WOULD COME BACK AND SAID, ABSOLUTELY NOT.
YOU NEED TO REMOVE THIS STRUCTURE FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
UH, COLIN CONTRERAS PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UH, COMMISSIONER, UM, AS I SAID EARLIER, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NEED TO WORK WITH, UM, PARTICULARLY IN BETWEEN MAYBE TONIGHT AND, UH, THE TIME THIS PROPERTY, UH, MOVES ON TO CITY COUNCIL IN THE COMING MONTHS.
UM, BUT I DEFINITELY, UH, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
UM, I'M NOT A TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER, SO, UM, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT SPECIFICALLY, BUT, UM, WE DO HAVE CITY STAFF WHO COULD, UM, HELP ME CLARIFY THAT IN THE FUTURE AND TO, UH, TO HOPEFULLY COME UP WITH A PLAN MOVING FORWARD, UM, IF HISTORIC ZONING WERE TO PROCEED.
AND YEAH, AND I'M, AND I'M JUST COMING FROM THIS, FROM THE FACT THAT I, I I AM, I'M USUALLY A PROPONENT OF, UH, HISTORIC ZONING, UM, AND I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT WOULD BE FOR THIS BUILDING.
IT IS, IT IS QUITE DIFFERENT THAN THE TWO OTHER STRUCTURES ON, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDES OF, OF THESE CORNERS THAT APPEAR TO BE HISTORIC AS WELL.
UM, AND SO I'M JUST, I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE CHALLENGES RELATED TO THAT.
BUT, BUT JUST TO CONFIRM MY LAST QUESTION, UH, WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY POTENTIALLY AS A WAY TO COMPROMISE, UM, THAT WE COULD ONLY, WE COULD RECOMMEND ONLY ZONING, HISTORIC THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE OR THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND NOT HAVE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON THE REMAINING PARCEL.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, COMMISSIONER.
AND YES, UH, YOU KNOW, HISTORIC BUILDINGS, UH, DON'T OFTEN FOLLOW MODERN LOT LINES.
UM, SO YEAH, I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN AND I AGREE THAT THIS IS GONNA BE A DIFFICULT SITE NO MATTER WHAT.
UM, SO, UH, WE'RE COMMITTED TO, UH, FINDING A MORE SOLID ANSWER FOR YOU, BUT, UM, AT THE END OF THE DAY, YES, THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL DO HAVE THE OPTION TO RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING FOR THE FOOTPRINT ONLY.
AND, AND IF I HAVE ANY EXTRA TIME FOR THE, UM, FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER OR THE PROPERTY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE, UH, I MEAN, CURIOSITY KILLED THE CAT HERE.
IT, IT, WHAT, WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS? I KNOW YOUR INTENT IS TO KNOCK DOWN THIS BUILDING.
WHAT, WHAT ARE THE PLANS, UM, FOR, FOR REPLACING THE STRUCTURE OR THE UTILIZATION OF THE PROPERTY? IS, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE PLANNING THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF FOCUSED ON THE COMMUNITY AND, AND THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE? UM, 10 SECONDS TRYING TO, TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, OF ITS HISTORIC NATURE? COMMISSIONER COX, I THINK SOMEONE MIGHT NEED TO PICK UP THAT QUESTION FOR A SUBSTANTIAL ANSWER.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO COMMISSIONER MAXWELL'S TIME TO PICK UP THAT QUESTION TO MR. SANDLIN.
YEAH, I'D LIKE TO ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER COX WAS JUST ASKING ABOUT.
I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND SORT OF THE GENESIS OF ALL OF THIS.
SO COULD YOU JUST REPEAT THE QUESTION JUST, UH, SO I MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
I THINK IT WAS FUTURE PLANS FOR THE PROPERTY, MAYBE FUTURE PLANS FOR THE PROPERTY? YEAH, NO, I'M, I THINK, YEAH, I THINK ME AND COMMISSIONER, UH, MAXWELL JUST WANNA KNOW, UM, KIND OF WHAT, WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE.
AND OBVIOUSLY YOUR INTENT IS TO REMOVE THIS BUILDING, BUT THERE IS A HISTORIC NATURE RELATED TO THE PROPERTY.
SO IS THERE ANY PLANS TO DO ANYTHING THAT MIGHT COMPLIMENT OR ENHANCE THAT, THAT HISTORIC NATURE, EVEN IF YOU DO INTEND TO REMOVE THE BUILDING? I THINK IT'S BEST TO START WITH THE MOVING GOALPOSTS AS FAR AS THE REGULATIONS ARE CONCERNED, AS FAR AS THE ABILITY TO PLAN ON, ON THIS PROPERTY AND COMPREHENSIVELY ACROSS THE BLOCK, WHICH AS I WAS KIND OF ALLUDING TO, IS ONE OWNER, UH, THROUGH DIFFERENT ENTITIES.
AND THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY AS A PIECE OF THESE ADJACENT PROPERTIES THAT
[01:00:01]
I BELIEVE ARE MOSTLY VACANT COULD ENABLE THE CURRENT ZONING, COULD ENABLE A DEVELOPMENT.WE DON'T HAVE PLANS YET BECAUSE WE WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS STEP-BY-STEP PROCESS TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH.
WE SEE THE VALUE AND WE SEE THAT THIS COULD BE A VERY NICE DEVELOPMENT AND THAT'S WHAT WE HOPE TO ACCOMPLISH SOMEDAY.
UM, AND WOULD, YOU KNOW, LIKE TO, UM, REFLECT BACK ON WHAT I WAS SAYING IN THE PRESENTATION, UM, UM, THIS IS COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT.
UM, I GUESS THERE WAS A REASON YOU ALL FILED THE DEMO PAR PERMIT THAT GOT THIS, UM, SORT OF PROCESS STARTED.
SO I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M ALSO CURIOUS, WAS THERE A PARTICULAR REASON THAT THE DEMO PAR PERMIT GOT FILED, SOMETHING THAT SORT OF TRIGGERED THIS PROCESS STARTING TO BEGIN WITH, SINCE IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU DON'T HAVE FIRM DEVELOPMENT PLANS AT THIS TIME? NO, UM, NO, NOT AT ALL.
THIS, UM, WAS IN PART A GOAL OF, UM, PURE, PURE EFFICIENCY WORKING ON OTHER, UM, UNRELATED ITEMS AND THEN COMING TO THIS ONE THAT IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED FOR, FOR DEMOLITION, WHICH GOING INTO THIS APPLICATION DID NOT BELIEVE THAT IT MET THE CRITERIA THAT STAFF ARE, IS, IS SAYING THE THREE CRITERIA.
SO, UM, IT WAS ACTUALLY SOMEWHAT OF A SURPRISE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T BELIEVE THAT THE, UM, HOUSE OR THE THE STRUCTURE HAD ANY, UM, ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES.
AND, AND, YOU KNOW, AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, I THINK IT'S, IT'S, UM, THAT'S MORE OR LESS, UM, HOW WE GOT HERE.
AND THEN ONE FINAL QUESTION, UM, REGARDING THE SORT OF OPPORTUNITY TO JUST DESIGNATE THE HISTORIC, THE STRUCTURE VERSUS THE REST OF THE SORT OF PARCEL, IS THAT, HAS SOMETHING HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH YOU BY STAFF OR ANY NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH RELATED TO THAT AS A CONCEPT? NO, IT, IT, IT HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED WITH US THAT, THAT BEING SAID, I DON'T, UH, BELIEVE BECAUSE OF ITS, ITS NATURE AND LOCATION AND ALL OF THE DATA WE'RE PROVIDING SOMETHING WE WOULD BE OPEN TO AT THIS POINT.
AND I ACTUALLY, BUT NO, IT HAS NOT BEEN COMMUNICATED WITH US THAT THAT WAS AN OPTION.
UM, AND I ACTUALLY DID HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, OBVIOUSLY IS IT, MISS MENTIONED THIS GOT FLAGGED WHEN THE DEMO PERMIT CAME UP, AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN THE PROCESS AND SORT OF HOW THAT GOT FLAGGED AND WHY YOU ALL TOOK UNDERTOOK THIS SORT OF CASE AS A RESULT.
COMMISSIONER, UH, CALLEN CONTRERAS PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UM, WHEN A BUILDING OVER 45 YEARS OLD IS UP FOR DEMOLITION, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT FLAGS IT FOR OUR REVIEW.
UH, WE THEN CHECK THE PROPERTY, UM, AGAINST OUR, UH, HISTORIC ZONING CRITERIA IN 25 2 3 52, AS WELL AS AGAINST THE 2016 EAST AUSTIN SURVEY OR, YOU KNOW, ANY OTHER RELEVANT SURVEY FOR THIS AREA.
UM, SO IN THIS CASE, THE SURVEY RECOMMENDED, UM, INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK ZONING AS WELL AS INDIVIDUAL LISTING IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER.
UM, THAT WAS KIND OF OUR TRIGGER TO GO AND DO SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH.
UM, AND WE FOUND, UH, THE ASSOCIATIONS, UM, THAT THEY, UH, CORROBORATED AND, UH, EXPANDED UPON THEM IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
UM, SO THEN IT GOES TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
LANDMARK COMMISSION SAYS, STAFF, DID YOU GET IT RIGHT OR DID YOU GET IT WRONG? UM, AND IN THIS CASE, UH, STAFF AND, UM, THE EAST AUSTIN SURVEY WERE CORROBORATED BY THE HLC VOTE.
I, I THINK MS. KING, THANKS FOR, UH, BEING HERE TONIGHT AND PRESENTING, UH, ON THE ITEM.
UH, YOU, IN, IN YOUR PRESENTATION YOU TALKED ABOUT THE, UH, TAX INCENTIVES THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE, I THINK THE WORD YOU USED WAS LUCRATIVE FOR THE FOR THE OWNER.
UM, BUT WOULD YOU AGREE IF, IF WE DEMOLISHED THAT OR IF WE ALLOWED THEM TO DEMOLISH THE HOUSE, UM, THE STRUCTURE, NOT THE HOUSE, THE STRUCTURE, THEN, YOU KNOW, THE OWNERS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO PUT UP A, A, A LARGER, THEY COULD PARTICIPATE IN DB 90, THEY COULD PARTICIPATE IN AFFORDABILITY AND LOCKED AND GET EXTRA HEIGHT EXTRA FAR.
DO YOU THINK THE THE TAX INCENTIVES WOULD BE MORE LUCRATIVE TO THE OWNER OR THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AND DENSITY AND, AND COMPACTNESS THAT WE
[01:05:01]
COULD GET BY PUTTING UP A REALLY GOOD, UM, HOUSING FACILITY HERE? UM, SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE VALUE OF THE OTHER BENEFITS THEY'RE DESCRIBING.I'M NOT AS INTIMATELY FAMILIAR WITH THEM.
BUT, UM, FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN PARTICULAR THERE, LIKE I MENTIONED, THERE'S A MYRIAD OF, OF RESOURCES AVAILABLE INCLUDING TAX CREDITS INCLUDING GRANT FUNDING, UM, AND INCLUDING TAX EXEMPTIONS.
SO I CAN'T SPEAK ON THE BALANCE TO WHICH ONE WOULD BE WORTH MORE, BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO THE COMPONENT OF, AGAIN, JUST THE VALUE OF PRESERVATION OF THIS PARTICULAR INTERSECTION AND OF THIS PROPERTY.
SO IT'S, I MEAN, I, THAT'S SORT OF NO, I, I, YEAH, YEAH.
NO, I MEAN, LIKE, LIKE I SAID, THEY COULD BE WORTH POTENTIALLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, POTENTIALLY MILLIONS, DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH MONEY THEY'RE SPENDING ON TAX CREDITS.
I MEAN, PRESERVATION AUSTIN UTILIZES, UM, TAX CREDITS FOR OUR HISTORIC LANDMARK AT 38 0 5 RED RIVER.
WE ALSO RECEIVED A CITY OF AUSTIN HERITAGE GRANT.
WE CAN'T QUALIFY FOR SOME OF THESE OTHER RESOURCES BECAUSE WE'RE A NONPROFIT, BUT WE'VE SEEN HOW LUCRATIVE THAT IT CAN BE FOR US, A SMALL NONPROFIT.
SO I IMAGINE THAT A DEVELOPER THAT HAS MUCH MORE RESOURCES AND MORE MONEY TO INVEST COULD POTENTIALLY, UM, GET A LOT OF MONEY OFF OF THOSE TAX CREDITS IN PARTICULAR WITH UP TO 45% OF THE, OF REHABILITATION.
SO, BUT TAX INCENTIVES WOULD PROBABLY, LIKE YOU SAID, WOULD PROBABLY BE WORTH HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, BUT THREE FLOORS OF, OF EXTRA HOUSING AND RENTAL UNITS MIGHT BE WORTH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
WELL, THEY COULD RENT, THEY COULD RENT THIS SPACE, AND IF YOU DECIDE TO ZONE JUST THE HISTORIC FOOTPRINT, THERE MIGHT BE OTHER SPACE ON THE PROPERTY THAT'S DEVELOPABLE WELL AS WELL.
OKAY, NEXT QUESTION, MR. SKIDMORE.
I GUESS I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE, UH, I GUESS THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE OF, SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S URBAN RENEWAL PLAN OF BEFORE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT WAS UH, SUBMITTED.
DID THE APPLICANT REACH OUT TO THE URBAN RENEWAL BOARD TO TALK ABOUT THEIR PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY? UH, NO.
AND AGAIN, AS WE FILED THE APPLICATION, UH, JUST ON INITIAL ANALYSIS, THERE WERE FIVE CRITERIA THAT NEEDED TO BE MET TO GET TO A CERTAIN POINT.
AND JUST THAT'S WHERE, UM, YOU KNOW, STAFF HAS FOUND THOSE THREE ITEMS THAT TOOK IT TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
UM, SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, NO, BUT HOPEFULLY THAT GIVES SOME COLOR TO WHY NOT A FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE OWNER LAST SPOKE BEFORE THE URBAN RENEWAL BOARD? I DON'T HAVE THAT DO, NO.
I GUESS I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF THEN FOLLOW UP THEN OF WILL, DOES THE URBAN RENEWAL BOARD NEED TO TAKE UP ACTION ON THIS DEMOLITION PERMIT? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
UM, THAT'S NOT PART OF OUR PROCESS, BUT UM, THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ENTERTAIN, UM, IF THE BOARD MEMBERS WISH TO, UH, TO SEE THIS PROPERTY.
SO HAS THERE BEEN ANY COORDINATION WITH THE URBAN RENEWAL BOARD AS YET? MM-HMM.
I MEAN, I THINK THE, THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES 11TH AND 12TH STREETS, AND, AND THIS PROPERTY CERTAINLY SPEAKS AT GREAT LENGTH TO THE IMPORTANCE OF PRESERVATION OF THE LEGACY OF, IN THE COMMUNITY.
SO IT, I GUESS I'M DEEPLY DISTURBED THAT THERE'S BEEN NO COORDINATION WITH THAT, WITH THAT GROUP.
I HAVE, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR MS. CONTRERAS.
ASIDE FROM SOME OF THE RIGHT OF WAY ISSUES THAT WERE POINTED OUT, ARE THERE ANY PRECEDENTS FOR SUCCESSFULLY PRESERVING AND OR REPURPOSING SIMILAR STRUCTURES IN AUSTIN OR IN EAST AUSTIN SPECIFICALLY? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
I MEAN, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES THAT HAVE BEEN PRESERVED, UM, BY OWNERS WHO ARE WILLING, UM, AND WHO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO, UH, TURN THESE AROUND INTO, UH, INTO SPACES THAT ARE, UM, WORKABLE FOR MODERN USERS.
UM, WE HAD, THIS IS JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT, UM, A FEW MONTHS AGO WE HAD AN APPLICANT, UM, WHO IS REHABBING THE GEESE STARK STORE, WHICH IS JUST A FEW BLOCKS AWAY, UM, I THINK ALSO AT THE CORNER OF 12TH STREET.
BUT IT IS A HISTORIC AGE, UH, LANDMARK COMMERCIAL BUILDING.
UM, IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR A LONG TIME AND, UH, WE NOW HAVE SEEN A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS COME TO OUR LANDMARK COMMISSION, UM, FOR A REHAB AND A REPURPOSING OF THIS BUILDING, WHICH WILL HOPEFULLY, UM, ATTRACT SOME NEW TENANTS.
AND DO YOU FEEL LIKE THOSE STRUCTURES WERE IN SIMILAR CONDITION TO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THIS CASE? UM, WITHOUT GOING INSIDE EITHER OF THEM, IT'S DIFFICULT FOR ME TO TELL.
[01:10:01]
CAN DEFINITELY SAY THAT THE OTHER STRUCTURE WAS, WAS VACANT FOR A WHILE, UM, AND HAD, UM, ACCUMULATED SOME DEBRIS, DEFINITELY HAD BEEN LEFT ON ITS OWN FOR A WHILE WITHOUT A LOT OF MAINTENANCE, SO, UM, MAYBE NOT THE SAME, BUT SIMILAR.AND DO, IN YOUR OPINION, ARE THERE IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER POTENTIALLY HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THIS AREA AND ALONG 12TH STREET BASED ON OUR DECISION AND CITY COUNCIL'S DECISION WITH THIS PROPERTY? UM, GOSH, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER, I CAN'T SPECULATE, BUT, UM, I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY POSSIBLE.
UM, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING'S POSSIBLE, SO.
AND, AND I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR MR. LIN, IF HE'S STILL AVAILABLE.
UNDERSTANDING THAT EUREKA HOLDINGS DOES OWN OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA, ARE THESE PROPERTIES ACTIVELY BEING REDEVELOPED IN LINE WITH THE GREAT STREETS CRITERIA THAT YOU WOULD HOPE TO MEET ON THIS PROPERTY THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING? I DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THAT.
UM, AND I WOULD IDEALLY THINK THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO, UM, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS.
I WANTED TO ADD THAT PART OF THE REASON THE DEMO PERMIT WAS APPLIED FOR WAS BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORS ASKED THE OWNER TO DO SO.
SO, SOUNDS LIKE UNCLEAR, BUT THOSE PROPERTIES ARE ACTIVELY BEING REDEVELOPED AT THE MOMENT.
THOSE, THOSE OTHER PROPERTIES OWNED BY EUREKA HOLDINGS? NO, NO, NO.
WE, I I HAVE NO, UM, I'M NOT SAYING THAT, NO.
THAT THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE, SIR.
AND LAST SPOT FOR A QUESTION? YES, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
SO MY APOLOGIES FOR WALKING IN LATE, AND IF YOU'VE COVERED THIS, AGAIN, MY APOLOGIES.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO ASK, UH, STAFF IS ABOUT WHERE, WHERE THIS, HOW THIS ALL COMES TOGETHER, BECAUSE CAN YOU TALK TO, UH, FOR EXAMPLE, HOW MANY OR HOW FEW PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY AND LIFE IN THE CITY HAVE BEEN PRESERVED AND THE, THE FACT THAT SO MANY HAVE BEEN DEMOLISHED, UH, WITHOUT REVIEW UP UNTIL RECENTLY, AND, AND, AND WHY THIS HAS VALUE IN THAT CONTEXT? CERTAINLY, COMMISSIONER, UM, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T GIVE YOU EXACT NUMBERS, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT, UM, THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH AFRICAN AMERICANS IN AUSTIN AND PARTICULARLY IN EAST AUSTIN, ARE, ARE MUCH FEWER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH OTHER, UH, FOLKS IN WEST AUSTIN, UM, WHO HAVE TRADITIONALLY, UM, HAD MORE OF PRESERVATION'S EAR IN THE PAST.
UM, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT OUR EQUITY-BASED PRESERVATION PLAN SEEKS TO REMEDY IN THE FUTURE, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY BEEN A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM, UM, THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF PRESERVATION.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETHING, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO LOOK CLOSELY AT, UM, AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
UM, JUST IN GENERAL IN PRESERVATION, IN PLANNING.
AND I DO WANNA POINT OUT, ONCE WHEN I WAS DOING A STORY ABOUT THIS, OF THE 650 PROPERTIES AT THE TIME, AND THIS MAY BE ABOUT 10 YEARS AGO, 50 WERE, UH, ALIGNED WITH AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY IN THE CITY, UH, AND ABOUT THAT MUCH OR FEWER WITH, UH, HISPANICS IN, IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
SO THAT, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME OUT OF THAT STUDY.
THE OTHER THING I WOULD LIKE FOR THE APPLICANT, IF HE'S STILL AVAILABLE TO ANSWER, IF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AS WELL AS AS PRESERVATION AUSTIN, HAVE STUDIED AND PRODUCE REPORTS THAT SPEAK TO THE HISTORY AND THE VALUE OF THIS IN TERMS OF CAPTURING AUSTIN'S HISTORY AND IN PARTICULAR AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY, THEN, UH, IT SEEMS, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU DON'T ACCEPT THOSE AS FACTUAL, IS, IS THAT WHAT I HEARD, OR DID I NOT HEAR THAT CORRECTLY? WELL, FIRST I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR THE, THE QUESTIONS.
I AM STILL HERE, AND THAT'S NOT, NOT EXACTLY HOW, UM, IT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT IF, TO QUOTE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, THEY ARE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY DO IS MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK STATUS.
AND WHILE WE COMPLETELY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE HISTORY OF THIS BUILDING, WE, WE, WE FEEL THAT THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO HONOR THE HISTORY THAN WITH A STRUCTURE THAT'S FAR PAST ITS PRIME, ITS SERVICEABLE LIFE.
AND THERE, THERE HAS TO BE OTHER WAYS THAT WE CAN HONOR THIS RICH HISTORY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND ALSO BE ABLE TO, UM, LOOK AT THE COMMUNITY, HOW IT IS NOW AND, AND WHAT SO COULD, COULD BE HERE AS WE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE.
[01:15:01]
TIME IS LIMITED, COULD YOU GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF THE, THE WAYS THAT YOU ARE, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE.I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE A, UM, AN OPTION OFF THE CUFF, UH, BUT I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED IN THE PAST.
AS FAR AS OTHER AREAS SUCH AS THE HURDLE HOUSE, I THINK THAT'S COME UP SEVERAL TIMES.
UM, AS, UM, AN, AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING THAT COULD BE ENHANCED OR, UM, I JUST, I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO SPECIFICS OFF THE CUFF LIKE THAT, BUT I, I'M CERTAIN THAT THERE ARE OTHER WAYS THAN TO, UM, KEEP A STRUCTURE THAT'S WELL PAST.
ITS, ITS, UH, SERVICEABLE LIFE.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE AT THE END OF OUR Q AND A ROUNDS.
I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE HISTORIC ZONING.
OH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? SURE.
I THINK MULTIPLE DIFFERENT REASONS.
I THINK WE HAVE, UM, A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF SORT OF BACKUP MATERIALS SHOWING US CLEARLY SORT OF THE HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS WITH THE PROPERTY AND ALSO THE VERNACULAR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY ASPECT THAT WE HAVE HERE.
UM, I I ALSO WANNA SAY, I THINK, UM, THERE'S A REAL CONVERSATION TO BE HAD.
THIS WAS PART OF THE EAST AUSTIN SURVEY, SO WE KNOW THAT EVEN AT THE TIME WHEN 2016 WHEN THE SURVEY WAS RELEASED, THIS PLACE WAS CONSIDERED AS BEING, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE, UM, RECOMMENDED FOR THAT.
AND ACTUALLY I LOOKED IT UP IN THE SURVEY AND THIS WAS ACTUALLY EVEN RECOMMENDED FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER.
SO IT REALLY SPEAKS TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT STRUCTURE ITSELF, BUT ALSO THE ASSOCIATIONS WITH IT, WHICH I THINK MAKES IT VERY MUCH, UH, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WE CAN SUPPORT.
UH, TWO OTHER THINGS I JUST WANNA MENTION, UM, QUICKLY, IS THAT I REALLY HOPE THAT OUR STAFF, AS THIS GOES TO COUNCIL, CAN REALLY WORK, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN FIGURE OUT WITH THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AND AUSTIN ENERGY TO SEE HOW THE IMPACT WOULD BE.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO PUT ON AN, YOU KNOW, AN EXTRA BURDEN ON TOP OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HELP THEM AND SUPPORT THEM, SO TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THOSE THINGS CAN BE RESOLVED.
BUT I DO WANNA SAY WE'VE HAD, YOU KNOW, I'M THINKING IN MY HEAD, WE HAVE OTHER HISTORIC STRUCTURES SUCH AS THOSE IN THE HISTORIC WAREHOUSE DISTRICT, AND SOME OF THOSE WAREHOUSES ARE WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY AS WELL.
THEY DO COME INTO THE PEDESTRIAN REALM.
WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO RESOLVE THAT.
NOW I KNOW THOSE ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT AND HAVE LIKE DIFFERENT FRONTAGES.
BUT ALL THAT SAID, I HOPE THAT OUR STAFF CAN WORK WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, STAFF ON THAT.
AND THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS I THINK I'M OPEN VERY MUCH IF, IF FOLKS DO WANNA CONSIDER LOOKING AT JUST THE FOOTPRINT OF THE STRUCTURE, I'M OPEN TO THAT PARTICULARLY BECAUSE REALLY WHEN YOU SEE THE STRUCTURE, IT'S REALLY THE BACK PART OF THE STRUCTURE THAT SEEMS THE MOST DILAPIDATED.
NOW, OF COURSE, I'VE NEITHER DONE A SURVEY, NOR HAVE I GONE IN WITH AN ENGINEER, NOR HAVE I GONE INTERNALLY INTO THE STRUCTURE.
BUT AT LEAST WHAT'S VISIBLE OUTSIDE, IT'S THAT BACK ADDITION THAT SEEMS TO BE MORE, UM, IN WORSE CONDITION, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THAT ACTUALLY MIGHT NOT BE A CONTRIBUTING PART OF THE STRUCTURE AT ALL.
SO REGARDLESS, ALL THAT SAID, I'M OPEN.
IF FOLKS REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON JUST THE PARTS, THE SORT OF THE STRUCTURE BOUNDARY ITSELF, I'M OPEN TO THAT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SORT OF ADD TO IT AND STILL ALLOW SOME FLEXIBILITY TO BUILD AROUND IT.
BUT I DO THINK THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE AND I THINK WE'VE HEARD VERY CLEARLY FROM COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
AND I WILL SAY LIKE ANY OTHER HISTORIC THING THAT EXISTS, THERE IS ALWAYS COMPLEXITY ON WHAT PARTS OF A COMMUNITY SUPPORT AN ITEM BEING PRESERVED OR NOT.
I MYSELF HAVE NOT SUPPORTED ITEMS IN THE PAST FOR ASSOCIATIONS OR DIFFERENT THINGS.
IT'S A COMPLEX MATTER AND HISTORY'S A COMPLEX MATTER.
SO I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DEMAND THAT FOR SOMETHING TO BE HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT.
EVERY PERSON IN OUR COMMUNITY SHOULD BE SUPPORTING IT.
ALL OF THESE STRUCTURES IN OUR HISTORY IS COMPLEX AND I THINK WE SHOULD HONOR THAT.
I'LL A, I'LL DECIDE IF THIS IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OR A SUBSTITUTE, BUT, UM, SIMILAR TO WHAT COMMISSIONERS ZA SAID, I, I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT, UH, WE LIMIT OUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE ORIGINAL FOOT OR TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
ALRIGHT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT COMMISSIONER COGS? UH, I MEAN, JUST REPEAT EVERYTHING COMMISSIONERS ARE SAID, UH, BUT ALSO UNDERSTANDING THAT, UM, THE PARCEL IS MUCH LARGER THAN, THAN THE, THE, UH, CORNER IN WHICH THE STRUCTURE OCCUPIES THE PARCEL.
AND SO, UM, UH, MY HOPE IS THAT, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN DO SOMETHING GREAT WITH THE BUILDING.
THE CITY HOPEFULLY WILL BE COOPERATIVE TO, UH, TO, TO MAKING SURE THAT ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND THE PUBLIC
[01:20:01]
INFRASTRUCTURE WORKS TO EVERYONE'S BENEFIT.UM, BUT THEN ALSO HOPING THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER CAN DO SOMETHING WITH THE REST OF THE PROPERTY THAT ENHANCES, UM, 12TH STREET AND, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT LARGE.
SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE A SUBSTITUTE JUST PROCEDURALLY OKAY, SUB THAT'S A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
UM, ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST OR INITIALLY WANTED TO, WANTED TO VOICE SUPPORT SPEAKING FORWARD? I'LL, I'LL SPEAK AG WHAT I'LL KIND OF SPEAK AGAINST, UM, COMMISSIONER COX, WOULD YOU CONSIDER A FIVE FOOT BUFFERS ON THE FOOTPRINT PLUS FIVE FEET TO KEEP THE I DON'T, I ALSO DON'T WANT A DB 90 GOING RIGHT, A ADJACENT TO THE BACK WALL OF THIS FACILITY.
I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
COMMISSIONER HAYNES, I THINK, I THINK OUR BUILDING CODE WILL PROBABLY NECESSITATE SEPARATION ANYWAYS, SO THAT THAT FIVE FOOT MIGHT BE KIND OF A MOOT THING WHEN, WHEN THEY ACTUALLY GO TO TRY TO DEVELOP OUT THE REST OF THE, THE PARCEL.
ANYBODY ELSE? SPEAKING FOR OREGON AGAINST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? I'LL BRIEFLY SPEAK FOR, I, I LIVED FOR ONE YEAR, A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET FROM HERE, AND IT IS A VERY COOL STRUCTURE AND I THINK WE'RE LUCKY THAT THIS COMES ALL THE WAY TO THE CURB, TWO DIFFERENT CITY RIGHT OF WAY CURBS.
AND SO EVEN IF THERE WAS A BUILDING COMING UP TO THE BACK SIDES AND THE SIDE, YOU'D STILL HAVE A, A, A TREMENDOUS PUBLIC PRESENCE TO THIS BUILDING.
AND SO, UM, I DO WISH WE HAD SOME KIND OF TRANSFER DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TO JUST ALLOW FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
UM, THAT BEING SAID, UM, IT IS, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT ONE LANDOWNER CONTROLLING A LOT OF LAND IN THIS AREA AND JUST NOT DOING ANYTHING WITH IT FOR A LONG TIME.
AND THAT'S NOT HELPFUL WITH THIS CASE.
AND SO I'M EXCITED TO SEE THIS MOVE FORWARD, BUT IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR THIS DEVELOPER TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO TO ADD VALUE AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA, ESPECIALLY A LOT OF THOSE VACANT LOTS THAT REALLY COULD BE A LOT MORE.
I'LL MAKE THIS QUICK SINCE I'VE ALREADY SPOKEN, UH, IN FAVOR.
BUT I DO WANNA SAY I SUPPORT THIS MOTION AS WELL BECAUSE I HEAR WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ARE SAYING.
WE DO WANT TO HAVE A VIABILITY FOR DOING OTHER THINGS ON THE SITE AND UTILIZING THINGS THAT CAN BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO ESSENTIALLY PER, YOU KNOW, PRESERVING THE STRUCTURE ITSELF AND THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE IT HAS WITHIN THE FABRIC, HONESTLY, OF THAT INTERSECTION.
UM, THE ONE THING I'LL ADD IS, UM, YOU KNOW, I REALLY DO THINK, I REALLY HOPE THAT THE OWNER CAN WORK ON WORKING ON THAT PRESERVATION SOONER SO THAT THE STRUCTURE IS PRESERVED.
WE, YOU SEE PICTURES AND HONESTLY IT'S KINDA HEARTBREAKING FOR SOME OF THOSE OTHER, YOU KNOW, OLDER PICTURES THAT WE SEE.
AND IT WAS IN A, IN A SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER CONDITION, WHICH WOULD'VE ALLOWED US TO PRESERVE, I'M GONNA ASSUME EVEN MORE ELEMENTS WITHOUT COMPLETE RECONSTRUCTION OF SOME OF THOSE ELEMENTS.
BUT I, EVEN NOW, I THINK IT'S CRITICAL FOR US TO PRESERVE THIS.
AND I WOULD AGAIN SAY, YOU KNOW, I'M EXCITED THAT THE CITY'S BRINGING FORWARD OUR, OUR EQUITY-BASED PRESERVATION PLAN TO WORK ON THIS BECAUSE REALLY, YOU KNOW, SINCE THE EAST AUSTIN, UH, HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY WAS DONE, A LOT OF THOSE STRUCTURES ACTUALLY HAVE, YOU KNOW, THEIR CONDITION HAS WORSENED OR THEY HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN DEMOLISHED.
SO I THINK THIS IS THE PERFECT TIME FOR US TO REALLY TAKE THAT TO HEART AND MOVE SOME OF THESE PIECES FORWARD.
SO I'M EXCITED TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
ALRIGHT, I ONLY HAVE SPOTS FOR THOSE SPEAKING AGAINST, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER COX, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, TO GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT TO LIMIT THE ZONING TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
THANK YOU FOR EVERYBODY WHO CAME OUT TO SPEAK ON THAT TONIGHT.
[Items 15 & 16]
ON TO ITEM NUMBER 15 AND 16.WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THESE UP TOGETHER.
THIS IS THE PDA TWO, AND WE WILL FIRST HEAR FROM MR. ALLEN PANTY IT.
UM, I WILL BE PRESENTING TODAY ON, UH, PDA TWO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA TWO AND A ASSOCIATED DENSITY BONUS FOR COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES KNOWN AS DB TWO 40.
I'M ALAN PANY, PRINCIPAL PLANNER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO LAY OUT A LITTLE BIT OF THE BACKGROUND ABOUT WHY WE'RE HERE FIRST.
SO, UH, IN 1966, CITY COUNCIL UH, ADOPTED THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AREA FOR THE FIRST TIME.
UH, THE LAND USE KIND OF HAD THE FOLLOWING PURPOSE TO PROVIDE SUITABLE AND CONDUCIVE ENVIRONMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES AND RESEARCH ESTABLISHMENT
[01:25:01]
SPECIALIZED MANUFACTURING PLANTS AND SIMILAR ENTERPRISES PLUS RETAIL AND OTHER CUSTOMER SERVICE FACILITIES, AND NOT INTRUDE UPON NEARBY OR EXISTING FUTURE RESIDENTIAL ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT.UH, IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED FOR INDUSTRIAL ZONES AND COMMERCIAL HIGHWAYS.
I MENTIONED IN THE LAST 10 YEARS, OUR ANALYSIS HAS FOUND THAT THERE'S BEEN A GREAT INCREASE IN CASES WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES HAVE BEEN PERMITTED IN THESE PDAS.
UH, SINCE 2014, THERE'S BEEN 45 ZONING ORDINANCES, WHICH PERMITTED RESIDENTIAL USES AND 31 OF THOSE IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
SO EARLIER THIS YEAR, CITY COUNCIL INITIATED A RESOLUTION WHICH DIRECTED US TO CREATE A NEW DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM THAT WILL APPLY TO THE PDA ZONING DISTRICT AND ALLOW INCREASED HEIGHTS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES IN EXCHANGE FOR INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS OR A FEE IN LOOM.
UH, BEFORE I DIVE IN, DIVE INTO THE DETAILS, I WANTED TO KIND OF EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW PDAS CURRENTLY WORK, UH, AND THE TWO PROPOSALS FOR PDA TWO AND DENSITY BONUS TWO 40.
SO PDAS CURRENTLY ALLOW FOR, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES TO BE ADDED AS WELL AS COMMERCIAL USES AND OTHER INDUSTRIAL USES TO BE MODIFIED.
THEY ALLOW FOR MODIFIED SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WHICH INCLUDE HEIGHT, FAR IMPERVIOUS SETBACKS, UM, ET CETERA.
AND IT CAN BE USED IN COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY, INDUSTRIAL PARK, MAJOR INDUSTRY, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
THE NEW PROPOSED PDA TWO PLAN DEVELOPMENT AREA TWO WILL ALLOW FOR THOSE SAME COMMERCIAL USES TO BE ADDED OR MODIFIED.
INDUSTRIAL, UH, USES STILL BE MODIFIED AS WELL, AS WELL AS STILL ALLOW FOR MODIFICATION OF SITE DEVELOP STANDARDS, MODIFIED HEIGHTS AND MODIFIED FAR.
HOWEVER, THEY WILL NO LONGER BE ALLOWED TO ADD RESIDENTIAL USES THROUGH PDA.
TWO, THE BASE ZONES THAT WILL BE ABLE TO USE PDA TWO WILL BE INDUSTRIAL PARK MAJOR, INDUSTRY, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND R AND D.
I'LL EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT LATER WHY COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT.
UH, AND THEN SIMULTANEOUSLY THE NEW DENSITY BONUS TWO 40 WILL APPLY TO THE SAME BASE ZONES OF ORIGINAL PDA.
SO COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY INDUSTRIAL PARK, MAJOR INDUSTRY, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
IT WILL ALLOW FOR INCREASED HEIGHT TO A MAXIMUM OF TWO 40 WITH UNLIMITED FAR.
IT WILL ALLOW FOR THE ADDITION OF RESIDENTIAL USES AS WELL AS SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL USES, UH, AS WELL AND OTHER USES AS WELL, WHICH I WILL GO INTO DETAIL LATER.
IT WILL STILL ALLOW FOR AMENDING OF CERTAIN SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UH, BUT WILL REQUIRE SET ASIDE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS OR OTHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
SO DIVING A LITTLE BIT DEEPER INTO THE PROPOSED PDA TWO, THE PURPOSE OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AREA TWO WILL BE TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL USES AND REVISION OF SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN THE FOUR INDUSTRIAL ZONES.
I MENTIONED COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO USE PDA UNDER THE NEW PDA TWO, AND THAT IS BECAUSE COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY ALREADY HAS RESIDENTIAL USES ALLOWED IN THEIR BASE ZONE.
UH, UH, PEOPLE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ADD RESIDENTIAL USES THROUGH PDA TWO.
UM, AND NO NEW APPLICATIONS FOR PDA WILL BE ACCEPTED AFTER PA TWO IS UH, ADOPTED.
GENERALLY, AS I MENTIONED, UH, THE COMBINING DISTRICT WILL MODIFY PERMIT OR CONDITIONAL USES AUTHORIZED IN THE BASE DISTRICT EXCEPT FOR RESIDENTIAL USE.
IT WILL ALLOW TO MODIFY SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS APPLICABLE IN THE BASE DISTRICT EXCEPT FOR SUB CHAPTER CAKA COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS ARTICLE 10, UM, AND OFF STREET PARKING DESIGN OR LOADING REGULATIONS, SIGN REGULATIONS OR L SCHEME OR LANDSCAPING OR SCREENING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE IN THE BASE DISTRICT.
THE NEWLY CREATED DENSITY BONUS FOR COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY INDUSTRIAL ZONE DB TWO 40 WILL HAVE A PURPOSE TO ALLOW FOR MODIFIED SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND RESIDENTIAL USES TO BE ADDED IN CERTAIN EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BASED DISTRICTS IN EXCHANGE FOR COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
IT CAN ONLY BE COMBINED WITH COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY IP, MILI AND R AND D AND IT CANNOT BE COMBINED WITH PDA OR PDA TWO OR OTHER, UH, COMBINING DISTRICTS.
IT WILL ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND GRANT ADDITIONAL BUILDING HEIGHT FOR RESIDENTIAL USES IN EXCHANGE FOR INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING OR FEE IN LIEU.
IT WILL ALLOW CERTAIN COMMERCIAL USES TO BE ADDED AND WILL RESTRICT CERTAIN INDUSTRIAL USES WITH IT.
ENSURES THERE IS NO CONFLICTS BETWEEN HEAVILY NOXIOUS INDUSTRIAL USES AND THE NEW RESIDENTIAL ONES.
UH, I WON'T GO INTO DETAIL OF ALL THE PERMITTED USES, BUT WE'LL BE ALLOWING BY RIGHT ALL THE RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, CERTAIN COMMERCIAL USES AND CERTAIN CIVIC USES.
CONDITIONAL USES WILL BE A, A SUBSET OF SOME OF THE COMMERCIAL USES AND CIVIC USES AS WELL AS A COUPLE OF AGRICULTURAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES THAT WILL STILL BE ALLOWED TO BE, UH, REMAINING AS LIGHT AND MANUFACTURING.
AND LASTLY, WE'LL BE PROHIBITING THE MOST NOXIOUS OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES COMMERCIAL USES AND CIVIC USES.
THE REGULATIONS GENERALLY FOR, UH, WILL CONFLICT OVER GOVERNING PROVISIONS
[01:30:01]
ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL USES REQUIRE COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER FOUR 18, ARTICLE TWO, WHICH INCLUDES BOTH THE RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND THE NON-RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS.UH, AND I'LL HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT THOSE.
UH, ALLOW FOR THE MAX HEIGHT OF 240 FEET AS WELL AS ALLOW FOR UNLIMITED FAR.
UH, ON THE RIGHT SIDE YOU CAN SEE A TABLE WHICH GENERALLY DESCRIBES THE MAX HEIGHT THAT WILL BE ALLOWED WITH THE DENSITY BONUS.
SO FOR R AND D, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH HAS A BASE HEIGHT OF 45 FEET, YOU WILL BE ADDED ADDING 120 FEET, WHICH WILL GET YOU TO THE MAX OF 1 65.
LINE INDUSTRIAL WILL GO FROM 60 TO 180 COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY, FOR EXAMPLE, FROM ONE 20 TO 40.
UH, SO IT WILL VARY AMONGST THE BASE USE BASE ZONES.
THE SET ASIDES, UH, THAT WILL BE REQUIRED FOR COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
SO THERE WILL BE A TIERED, UH, PROGRAM FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL USE THAT IS ADDED EVEN WITH NO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WILL BE 10% AT 60% MFI OR 8% AT 50% MFI FOR RENTAL AND 10% AT 80% MFI OR FEE IN LIEU FOR OWNERSHIP.
RESIDENTIAL USE PLUS THE FIRST TIER OF 30 FEET OF HEIGHT WILL HAVE THE SAME REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL USE PLUS 60 FEET OF HEIGHT, YOU WILL HAVE 12% AT 60% MFI OR 10% AT 50% MFI OR 12% AT 80% MFI FOR OWNERSHIP.
AND THEN LASTLY, FOR 120 FEET YOU'LL BE AT 50% 60 AT 60% MFI OR 12% AT 50% MFI OR 50% AT 80% MFI FOR OWNERSHIP.
UH, AS I MENTIONED, THE NON-RESIDENTIAL VIEW AMOUNT REQUIREMENTS FROM CHAPTER FOUR 18 WILL BE, UH, APPLIED.
THAT GENERALLY MEANS THEY WILL HAVE TO REPLACE EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL SPACES THAT QUALIFY.
AND I WILL TALK ABOUT WHICH ONES THOSE ARE IN IN A MINUTE.
UH, PROVIDE CURRENT NON-RESIDENTIAL SPACES WITH, UH, APPROPRIATE NOTICE THAT MEET THEIR REQUIREMENTS PAYMENT EQUAL TO SIX MONTHS RENT CALCULATED BY EDD WITH OUR SUBMARKET ANALYSIS AND GRANT AN OPTION TO LEASE, UH, THE NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL SPACES TO THESE PREVIOUS ONES.
THE NON-RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT, UH, WILL APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING USES.
SO CREATIVE SPACES SUCH AS ART GALLERY WORKSHOPS, PERFORMANCE VENUES OR THEATERS, UH, EXISTING BREWERIES, DISTILLERIES AND CRIES THAT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF BEING UNDER 20,000, UH, SQUARE FEET AND HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS OR FIVE YEARS OR MORE.
UH, FOOD MANUFACTURING UNDER 20,000 SQUARE FEET AND HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR FIVE YEARS.
CUSTOM MANUFACTURING UNDER 10,000 SQUARE FEET FOR FIVE YEARS AND LIGHT MANUFACTURING UNDER 10,000 SQUARE FEET, UM, AS WELL FOR 10 YEARS.
LASTLY, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE DENSITY BONUS WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH SUB CHAPTER E AND ARTICLE TWO OF OUR SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
UH, FOR MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS, THEY WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE THE SIMILAR AFFORDABLE UNIT SET ASIDE OR FEE IN LIEU REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
UH, THERE WILL BE A LIMITATION ON MIX OF USES AS FAR AS RESIDENTIAL USE NOT BEING ALLOWED BELOW A PERFORMANCE VENUE.
UH, WE WILL NOT BE RECOMMENDING A 75% OF BUILDING FRONTAGE AS COMMERCIAL SPACE AS WE HAVE IN SIMILAR ONES IN THE PRESS.
UM, AND WE ARE PROPOSING A 10 FOOT STEP BACK REQUIRED AFTER NINE, THE FIRST 90 FEET OF HEIGHT FOR THESE BUILDINGS.
UH, FOR COMPATIBILITY AND, AND SETBACKS, WE'LL BE REQUIRED TO MEET ARTICLE 10 COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, WHICH ARE THE NEW CITYWIDE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
UH, NO MODIFICATIONS THERE AND SETBACKS WILL BE REDUCED TO 15 FEET OR LESS RESTRICTIVE, DEPENDING ON THE BASE ZONE.
UH, LASTLY, WE DID GO TO COURTS AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE ON SEPTEMBER 18TH.
THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING, UH, INCLUDED, SORRY, REMOVING THE 10 FOOT STEPBACK AT 90 FEET, CHANGING ONE OF THE USES FROM, UH, FOR EMPLOYEE RECREATION USE FROM PROHIBITED TO CONDITIONAL, WHICH WE DID DO.
UH, AND ALSO, UH, THEY REQUESTED, UH, FOR LANGUAGE BASICALLY TO ALLOW FOR MORE COMMUNITY BENEFITS IF PLANNING COMMERCIAL OR COUNCIL, UH, DESIRED TO ADD MORE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
UM, AND THEY INCLUDED KIND OF MORE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS AS ONE OF THOSE REQUESTS.
UH, LASTLY FOR THE TIMELINE, UH, LIKE I SAID, WE WENT TO COJC ON SEPTEMBER 18TH, UH, WHICH WAS RECOMMENDED, UH, AS AMENDED, UH, WITH A VOTE OF 4 1 1.
UH, WE ARE HERE TONIGHT WITH Y'ALL AND IF IT MOVES FORWARD, WE'LL BE AT CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 24TH.
WE'LL GET TO QUESTIONS IN JUST A FEW.
MS. MEDINA, DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION? SURE, WE HAVE.
WE HAVE ONE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, ANGELA GARZA.
ANGELA, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, I WANNA SAY THANK YOU TO CLAIRE AND CHAIR CLAIRE AND JESSICA.
[01:35:01]
THAT YOU DIDN'T GET MY EMAIL.I DID SEND EMAILS ALL, UM, TO EVERYBODY AND CHAIR CLAIRE WAS THE ONE WHO RESPONDED TO ME TODAY, WHICH WAS AWESOME.
I AM, UM, HISPANIC, AMERICAN, MEXICAN, LATINA, WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL ME.
UM, INDIAN, WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL ME, AN AUSTIN, TEXAS NATIVE, GENERATIONAL NATIVE, AND I MATTER IN EAST AUSTIN.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH OTHER FAMILIES IN AUSTIN, TEXAS TO TRY TO HELP THEM UNDERSTAND WHAT THESE NEW CODE CHANGES ARE, THESE CHANGES ARE, AND WE RESPECT ALAN AS WELL AS A CASE MANAGER.
HE'S BEEN RELEASED A WEEK, SO HAS JOY.
UM, THE PROBLEM IS THAT THIS INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN TO THE PUBLIC FOR THEM TO WEIGH IN.
IT WAS NOT IN SPEAK IT UP AUSTIN FOR AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO ASK QUESTIONS.
I KNOW, DID I GO ABOVE AND BEYOND TO TRY TO GET MY DAD TIED IN AS WELL? UM, AS HE IS A NATIVE OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, WE SEE IT AS A DISRESPECT TO US THAT WHEN WE'RE NOT BEING INFORMED AND SHOULD GO THROUGH A PROCESS, IF WE'RE BEING REQUESTED TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS WITH CONTACT TEAMS, AND I'M ALSO AN INTERIM PRESIDENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE WORKING ON ANOTHER ITEM.
WHEN WE CAME UPON THIS NOTIFICATION, I SEEM TO BE THE ONLY ONE WHO GOT THIS NOTIFICATION.
I'VE CHECKED WITH OTHER PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
UM, I AM YOU DON'T HAVE A NEUTRAL OPTION.
WE NEED TO RESPECT OUR PEOPLE WHILE THIS IS HAPPENING AND NOT SEEING 'EM JUST AS BUSINESS.
UM, OUR PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WE ARE DOING OUR BEST OUT THERE TO SIMPLIFY THE LANGUAGE.
UM, THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE WORD ZONING MEANS.
AND THAT'S AS FOR CITIZENS AND NON-CITIZENS, WE WANT THEM TO FEEL COMFORTABLE IN HAVING THEIR VOICE, UM, AND SIMPLIFYING EVERYTHING FOR THEM.
I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE FOR AND AGAINST.
THE ISSUE IS THAT WE, MR. ALLEN'S INFORMATION'S IMPORTANT, BUT THAT THE INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE ON A PLATFORM FOR OUR COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO AND ASK QUESTIONS.
WE ARE FIGHTING HARD OUT THERE TO WIN THEIR TRUST, TO KEEP THEIR TRUST AS WE MOVE FORWARD OUT THERE AND SPEAK WITH THEM.
SO I AM REQUESTING THAT WHEN YOU MAKE PROCESS CHANGES AND POLICY CHANGES, THIS IS IMPORTANT WORK FROM ALAN.
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT OUR FAMILIES UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE GETTING THIS INFORMATION.
WE HAVE EVIDENCE OUT THERE THAT SOME OF THESE FOLKS ARE NOT EVEN GETTING NOTIFICATIONS JUST FOR ZONING CHANGES, THAT THEY SHOULD BE GETTING NOTIFICATIONS WITHIN 200 FEET AND 500 FEET.
THAT IS NOT GOOD FOR OUR COMMUNITY OVERALL.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE BEING RESPECTED AND THEY GET THIS INFORMATION.
WE ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO OUR ELDERS WHO HAVE DONE THIS WORK FOR GENERATIONS AND THAT THEY WANNA MAKE THAT WE, WHEN WE COME UP HERE, WE ARE BEING TRULY THEIR VOICE.
DO WE WANNA TAKE OPPORTUNITIES AWAY? NO, WE WANNA WORK WITH YOU AND PARTNER WITH YOU.
WE WANNA UNDERSTAND, WE WANT FAIR GROUND.
AND TO BE ABLE TO WEIGH IN AND CLEARLY UNDERSTAND IN ONE SPOT EXACTLY WHAT YOU INTEND TO DO, TO GIVE OUR PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO IT RESPECTFULLY.
UM, AND WE RESPECT EACH OF YOU FOR DOING THE WORK THAT YOU DO HERE.
SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M ASKING THAT YOU GIVE IT A POSTPONEMENT AND IT GOES BACK TO THE PROCESS AS SPEAK IT UP AUSTIN.
GIVE THE GENERAL PUBLIC A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN, THEN COME BACK IN, OKAY, NOW WE UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THESE NEW PROCESS CHANGES AND THINGS LIKE SUCH AS THOSE AS WELL.
AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR THE POSTPONEMENT.
AND I HOPE THAT SOMEONE CAN SEE WHY WE NEED THAT SO THAT WE CAN GO THROUGH THE PROCESS NORMALLY THAT YOU ASK US AND REQUIRE OF US OUT HERE WHEN WE'RE DOING THE WORK.
THANK YOU SO MUCH COMMISSIONERS, AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU DO.
AND THANK YOU FOR RESPECTFULLY RESPONDING TO MY EMAIL.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS, ON THIS ITEM.
UM, LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I SEE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WOODS, SECOND BY VICE CHAIR, UNLESS THERE IS OPPOSITION.
THAT MOTION PASSES AND I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR OUR FIRST QUESTION.
I THINK I'LL START USING THAT NOW.
I LIKE THE SOUND OF THAT AND I WANNA THANK, UM, THE SPEAKER WHO JUST SPOKE TO US BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN CLOSE TO MY HEART AS A COMMISSIONER HERE.
I'VE TALKED ABOUT TRANSPARENCY.
I'VE TALKED ABOUT US, YOU KNOW, USING LANGUAGE THAT PLAIN ENGLISH AND LANGUAGE THAT, THAT, UH, THE PUBLIC CAN UNDERSTAND.
COMING HERE AS SOMEBODY WHO WAS UNFAMILIAR WITH SO MANY OF THE ACRONYMS, IT WAS LIKE A FOREIGN LANGUAGE.
SO I I REALLY WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING AND, AND TALKING ABOUT THAT, UH, WITH US TONIGHT BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT ASKING, YOU'RE NOT OPPOSING THIS.
YOU'RE ASKING FOR TIME THAT THESE THINGS BE ABLE TO
[01:40:01]
BE COMMUNICATED TRANSPARENTLY AND IN LANGUAGE THAT THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTAND.BECAUSE THIS IS A PARTNERSHIP.
WE SHOULD BE WORKING ON THESE ISSUES TOGETHER AND NOT BE SO DIVISIVE.
SO THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS AND BRINGING THEM TO THE COMMISSION.
'CAUSE I REALLY THINK WE, WE NEEDED TO HEAR THAT TONIGHT AND I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE POSTPONEMENT IT.
ALL RIGHT, OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER COX, I'M SO HAPPY THIS WAS BROUGHT FORWARD SO I CAN COMPLAIN ABOUT PDAS MORE.
UM, IS THE INTENT THAT PDA TWO AND THEN THIS DB TWO 40, UH, THAT IS GOING TO COMPLETELY REPLACE PDA AS WE KNOW IT? UH, YES, YES, TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.
UH, ALAN PENNY, I JUST, UH, PDAS CURRENTLY THAT EXIST CAN STILL BE MODIFIED, UM, UNDER THEIR CURRENT PDA.
HOWEVER, ANY NEW APPLICATION AFTER PD TWO IS PASSED WILL, UH, WELL NO LONGER ACCEPT PDA APPLICATIONS.
UM, IT, IT, SO THE TWO 40 THING, UM, IS INTERESTING.
I MEAN, THAT'S LIKE A 20 STORY BUILDING, RIGHT? UM, DID, WHERE DID THAT TWO 40 COME FROM AND, AND THE MAP THAT YOU SHOWED US, WHICH WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE UP OR MAYBE YOU CAN EMAIL IT TO US, UH, WHERE ALL OF THIS MIGHT APPLY.
DO, DO WE EVEN HAVE WE EVEN DONE KIND OF AN ANALYSIS OF IF, IF 20 STORY BUILDINGS WITH PRACTICALLY NO SETBACKS ARE, ARE, ARE APPROPRIATE IN ALL OF THESE LOCATIONS? UM, SO TWOFOLD, UH, THE MAP IS, UH, WAS SHARED WITH, UH, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND I BELIEVE WAS SHARED OUT WITH EVERYONE.
SO HOPEFULLY YOU HAVE IT IN YOUR INBOX.
IF NOT, IT IS ON OUR SPEAKUP WEBSITE AS WELL.
UM, AS FAR AS THE APPLICABILITY, YES, WE HAVE SEEN, UH, SO FOR ZONING CASES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN REVIEW, FOR EXAMPLE, THE AVERAGE HEIGHT THAT IS BEING REQUESTED IS 175 FEET, UH, FOR ZONING CASES IN THE LAST 10 YEARS FOR THESE, UH, PDA DEVELOPMENTS, THE AVERAGE HEIGHT HAS BEEN 200 FEET.
SO THE TWO 40 WAS A, UM, KIND OF CALCULATION ESTIMATE ON WHAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED IN THE PAST, WHAT MOST OF THESE ZONING CASES HAVE REQUESTED AND WHAT WAS APPLICABLE.
SO LIKE 20 STORY BUILDINGS ALL ALONG AIRPORT ROAD, UM, OR NOT AIRPORT ROAD.
SORRY, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP 180 3, THE ENTIRE, WHAT IS THAT? DISTRICT FOUR
UM, YEAH, YEAH, THE DOMAIN, ALL THOSE AREAS.
AND I, I JUST, I'M, I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT, I MEAN, I, I KNOW YOU'RE TRYING TO STRIKE A BALANCE, BUT, UM, YEAH, I JUST, I'M VISUALIZING DOMAINS EVERYWHERE WHERE, WHERE THIS RED IS.
BUT, UM, LAST QUESTION IS, UH, WHY IN THE WORLD ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT PDAS IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING? LIKE, WHY DON'T WE JUST MAKE PEOPLE CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION TO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL AND THEN, AND THEN DECIDE ON THE ENTITLEMENTS AND AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS AND THAT SORT OF STUFF BASED ON THE BONUS PROGRAMS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE.
WHY, WHY, WHY ARE WE EVEN JACKING AROUND WITH PDA TO BEGIN WITH? UH, THAT'S PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR SOMEONE ABOVE ME AT COUNCIL.
UH, WE WERE REQUESTED TO, YOU KNOW, TO BRING THIS BACK.
UM, SO WHAT IS THE BENEFIT OF HAVING INDUSTRIAL AND HEAVY COMMERCIAL, UH, YOU KNOW, HIGHWAY CO WHATEVER, ZONING AS THE BASE ZONING FOR WHAT IS INTENDED TO BE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES? UM, I MEAN, BASED ON THE HISTORY OF HIS MIXED USE ZONES THAT USED TO BE INDUSTRIAL THAT ARE NO LONGER NECESSARILY, YOU KNOW, UH, THE BEST USE OR HIGHEST USE FOR THOSE AREAS.
UM, AND SO WE HAVE MIXED DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE CREATED IN THOSE AREAS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH INDUSTRIAL ANYMORE.
SOME OF THEM HAVE KEPT SOME INDUSTRIAL USES.
A A LOT OF THEM HAVE REMOVED THE INDUSTRIAL USES IT, IT KIND OF IS A, UM, A, A MIXED BAG.
A LOT OF THESE, UH, APPLICATION ZONING CASES WE'VE SEEN ARE LARGE PROJECTS AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SITES THEMSELVES, I BELIEVE THE MEDIAN SITE AREA OF THE LAST 10 YEARS, ABOUT EIGHT ACRES.
SO MOST OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS ARE NOT PURELY RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL.
WHAT'S, REMIND WHAT THE MINIMUM ACREAGE IS FOR API BELIEVE IT'S 10.
[01:45:02]
OKAY.AND YEAH, WHAT ARE WE REMOVING? LIKE ANY INCENTIVE WHATSOEVER FOR ANY PUDS TO EVER COME BEFORE US EVER AGAIN? UH, NOT TO MY UNDERSTANDING.
I'M VERY PRO PUDS, SO I, I I, YOU, YOU JUST REMINDED ME OF PUDS AND SO THAT, ANYWAYS, I, I APPRECIATE THAT.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR TWO 40 HEIGHT AS WELL AS, BECAUSE WE RECOMMEND ANYTHING ABOVE THAT TO GO TO A PUD IF YOU'RE WITH THAT INTENSITY.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS ADAM, TO OUR NOVEMBER THE 12TH MEETING.
UH, AND IN THE MEANTIME, BEGGED PLEADING GROVEL FOR STAFF TO GO TO, UH, COUNCIL'S COUNCIL, DISTRICTS ONE AND TWO, PRIMARILY ONE AND TWO, BUT SIX AND A LITTLE BIT OF WAY, WAY OUT ON 10.
BUT ANYWAY, TO HAVE SOME COMMUNITY MEETINGS TO GET THIS WORD OUT.
I, I, MS. GARZA, I HEAR YOU, I AGREE WITH YOU, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF THAT MOTION HAS ANY SUPPORT.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, CAN I MAKE A CLARIFYING REMARK? UM, I'D LIKE TO JUST CLARIFY FOR EVERYBODY ON THE COMMISSION THAT THIS EFFORT WAS BROUGHT BY COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE AND FOUR.
THEY HAVE PDAS ACTIVELY COMING TO THEM RIGHT NOW, AND THIS IS IN RESPONSE.
SO THIS IS ACTUALLY ADDRESSING COMMUNITY CONCERNS, JUST TO BE CLEAR.
COMMISSIONER HAYNES, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT MOTION? NO, I'M, I DO I THINK I DID.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION? ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON, UM, COMMISSIONER HAYES'S MOTION, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO NOVEMBER 12TH.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR? 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, THOSE AGAINST 1, 2, 3.
AND THOSE ABSTAINING? 1, 2, 3, 4.
THAT WAS 6 4 3 AGAINST FOUR ABSTAINING.
THANKS FOR THE USE OF THE HALL.
UM, WE'LL CONTINUE ON WITH WHERE WE WERE IN THE, WHICH, WHERE WE, OH, I WAS JUST, I WAS WONDERING WERE THERE NOT MORE, IT'S TOO LATE.
I SHOULD HAVE, BUT I THOUGHT THERE WAS MORE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION, BUT I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT I IT'S OKAY.
WAS NO, YOU ASKED FOR PEOPLE TO SPEAK AGAINST AND THEN I WAS WAITING FOR MY TURN, BUT I DIDN'T GET, I DIDN'T SPEAK UP.
BUT MAYBE I, MAYBE I'LL ASK QUESTIONS AND THEN I MIGHT DO THE MOTION AGAIN AFTER I ASK MY QUESTIONS.
UM, OKAY, SO WE'RE COMING UP TO OUR THIRD SPOT FOR OUR QUESTION.
I JUST HAVE A QUESTION TO STAFF ABOUT PROCESS AND SPEAK UP.
AUSTIN, DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED, UH, ONLINE ON THE SPEAK UP WEBSITE? I, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE SAME DAY THAT THE NOTIFICATION WAS SENT OUT.
WHICH 17TH? THE SUB SEPTEMBER 27TH.
SEPTEMBER 27TH IS WHEN SP UH, WEBSITE WENT LIVE AND IT'S THE SAME DAY THE NOTICE WENT OUT.
UM, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THE NOTICE WENT OUT TO ORGANIZATIONS LISTED IN OUR COMMUNITY REGISTRY AS WELL AS PUBLISHED, UH, IN THE STATESMAN AS REQUIRED PER CODE.
YOU MIGHT WANNA COME BACK UP HERE.
UM, SO MY QUESTIONS ARE, SO I'M GLAD TO HEAR ABOUT SPEAK UP AUSTIN.
I GUESS WHAT I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT IS MIXING RESIDENTIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES.
IT'S KIND OF ANTI EUCLIDEAN PLANNING, WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY WHAT WE'RE ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF, BUT WHAT CONCERNS ME IS, UM, AND I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THIS ZONING GUIDE FOR, AND IT SAYS THIS FROM 2016, SO IT'S CLEARLY VERY OLD, BUT IT SAYS THAT RESOURCE EXTRACTION IS PERMITTED IN LIMIT LIMITED IN INDUSTRIAL, WHICH IS THE MAJORITY OF WHAT WE SEE ON THE MAP.
SO I'M JUST CLARIFYING IT'S RESOURCE EXTRACTION STILL SOMETHING THAT'S PERMITTED IN THOSE PLACES BECAUSE THAT MEANS MINING AND QUARRIES.
AND I DON'T THINK MIXING RESIDENTIAL USE WITH QUARRIES AND MINING IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO.
UM, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT A, UH, IT IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT, OR SORRY, ONE OF THE USES I HAD LISTED AS, UH, PROHIBITED UNDER THE DENSITY BONUS.
SO IT WOULD NO LONGER BE ALLOWED IF A RESIDENTIAL USES IN THAT PARCEL, BUT THEN ALONG THE, THE WHOLE ANYBODY ELSE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THAT PARCEL COULD DO MINING.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT REALLY BOTHERS ME ABOUT THIS IS THAT WE'RE KIND OF, BECAUSE THERE IS A HOUSING CRISIS, WE'RE SHOVING HOUSING IN PLACES THAT THEY DON'T, IT DOESN'T, IT'S NOT BEEN PLANNED FOR.
[01:50:01]
UM, SO YEAH, I'M VERY MUCHAND THEN MY OTHER CONCERNS ARE, UM, CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, I KNOW THEY TALKED ABOUT IN CODES AND ORDINANCES ABOUT ALLOWING FOR PEDESTRIAN PLACES AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT A WAREHOUSE SIZE BLOCK, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY ALLOW FOR WALKABLE, HEALTHY QUALITY OF LIFE, THE THINGS THAT WE, UM, WANT TO SEE FOR OUR COMMUNITIES AND FOR OUR RESIDENTS.
SO CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THAT WILL BE BAKED INTO THE DB TWO 40? YEAH, SO THERE, I MEAN THERE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBCHAPTER E WHICH UH, REQUIRES, YOU KNOW, THE, UM, BLOCK SIZE, YOU KNOW, BREAKUP IN ITEMS LIKE THAT.
WE DIDN'T ADD ANY OTHER SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS, UH, BEYOND KIND OF NORMAL SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS.
AND THEN CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT OTHER PLACES THAT HAVE DONE THIS TYPE OF, UM, THESE TYPE OF ZONING CHANGES WHERE THEY'VE TAKEN INDUSTRIAL? I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WE THINK OF OLD, UM, BREWERIES OR, OR PLACES THAT, THAT LIKE WERE ONCE INDUSTRIAL, THERE ARE NOW APARTMENT COMPLEXES, BUT, UM, ARE THERE EXAMPLES FROM OTHER PLACES THAT YOU CAN NAME WHERE THEY'VE CHANGED ZONING TO PERMIT THIS TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL USE? ARE YOU SPEAKING OF OTHER CITIES OR OTHER, OTHER CITIES? YEAH, OTHER EXAMPLES? UM, I'M NOT AWARE.
I MEAN, I HAVE NOT DONE THE RESEARCH I GUESS OF OTHER, WHAT OTHER CITIES DONE, BUT, YOU KNOW, THE DOMAIN NORTH BORDER GATEWAY OR ALL KIND OF EXAMPLES WITHIN OUR CITY OF AREAS THAT WERE INDUSTRIAL, UM, AND THROUGH PDA ADDED RESIDENTIAL USES KIND OF TRANSFORMED THOSE INTO MORE MM-HMM
BUT THOSE WERE A HUGE, UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ACRES THE DOMAIN IS, BUT IT'S A LOT OF, UM, AREAS WOULD BE ABLE TO MASTER PLAN THAT SPACE.
THAT'S, UM, A LOT OF THE SITES WE DO SEE FOR PDAS ARE VERY LARGE SITES.
SO IN GENERAL AND UM, OKAY, SO THE DOMAIN AND THEN, SORRY, I THINK THAT'S, WHAT ELSE DO I, HAVE YOU RECEIVED MANY MUCH FEEDBACK FROM YOUR SPEAKUP AUSTIN WEBSITE? UM, WE'VE MAYBE HAD A COUPLE COMMENTS.
SO DO YOU INTEND TO DO MORE PROMOTION BEFORE THIS GOES BEFORE COUNSEL OF THAT SPEAK UP AUSTIN WEBSITE? UH, WE WILL FOLLOW KIND OF NORMAL PROCESS FOR CODE AMENDMENTS AS FAR AS NOTIFICATION, BUT NO, UH, OTHER ENGAGEMENT IS PLANNED AT THE MOMENT.
I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
I'M GONNA KIND OF TAKE UP THE MANTLE OF OUR FORMER CHAIR SHAW AND HIS CONCERN FOR THE LOSS OF INDUSTRIAL LAND.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO HOW THIS BALANCES THE, YOU KNOW, VERY URGENT NEED FOR HOUSING WITH THE PRESERVATION OF INDUSTRIAL LAND AND THE JOB CREATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THAT COMES ALONG WITH THAT? YEAH, I MEAN THE, THE GOAL IS TO, UH, THE REASON PDA TWO IS BEING PROPOSED AS WELL IS TO ALLOW FOR THOSE COMMERCIAL USES INDUSTRIAL ZONES TO STILL BE ALLOWED WITH THE PDA BUT DIFFERENTIATE WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES ARE BEING ADDED.
UM, ADDITIONALLY THE REASON WE HAVE THE NON RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS IS TO KIND OF, UH, SUPPORT AND MAINTAIN SOME OF THOSE LEGACY SMALL BUSINESSES, UH, FROM AUSTIN THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES THAT CAN STILL WORK WITHIN RESIDENTIAL USES.
AND CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THE PROCESS THAT COMMISSIONER MAXWELL ALLUDED TO? YOU KNOW, IS THIS BEING PROPOSED AS A RESPONSE TO AREAS THAT ARE ALREADY TRYING TO MOVE AWAY FROM INDUSTRIAL USES? GENERALLY, YES.
UM, I BELIEVE THE INTENT FROM THE RESOLUTION IS TO, UH, HELP MITIGATE THE NUMBER OF PD APPLICATIONS WE ARE RECEIVING THAT ARE ADDING RESIDENTIAL USES WITH NO COMMUNITY BENEFIT BEING ADDED.
SO NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR OTHER BEING REQUIRED AS PART OF THOSE.
AND CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE CALIBRATION OF THE DENSITY BONUSES IN THIS PROPOSAL? ARE THOSE IN LINE WITH SOME OF OUR OTHER DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS? YES, THE, UH, IT WAS A TIERED APPROACH THAT GENERALLY MIRRORS, UH, WHAT WAS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT A OF THE RESOLUTION, WHICH, UH, MIMICS KIND OF HOW DBE TALK FOR EXAMPLE, WORKS.
UH, DB 90 OR VMU, WHICH START AT 10%, UH, JUST FOR 60%.
MFI GOES TO 12 AND THEN 15 AND THE TIERS GO UP IN HEIGHT.
THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS, CHAIR.
YOU UNDERSTAND VICE CHAIR HAD A QUESTION AND THEN AFTER THAT WE'LL HAVE TWO MORE SPOTS.
I'LL START WITH CHAPTER FOUR 18.
SO, UM, DO I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY, RIGHT? SO WE'RE LOOKING AT CHAPTER FOUR 18 IN THE ENTIRE ARTICLE TOO, SO THE CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND ALL OF THOSE WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS WELL.
SO IN ADDITION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AS WELL? YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT.
SO EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE COVERED IN THAT WOULD BE PART OF THIS.
THE, THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, I'M NOT SURE YOU WOULD HAVE THE ANSWER TO THIS, BUT DO WE HAVE ANY UNDERSTANDING RIGHT NOW THE TIMELINE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE DENSITY BONUS SORT OF WORK? I KNOW THERE'S A MEMO THAT'S SUPPOSED TO COME OUT, I'M GONNA FORGET IF FEEL LIKE BY THE END OF THIS YEAR, BUT I DON'T KNOW, IS,
[01:55:01]
DO YOU HAVE ANY UNDERSTANDING OF THAT? YES, I HAPPEN TO BE LEADING THAT.OH, IT'LL BE COMING OUT AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
UM, AND SO YES, THE STUDY IS PROPOSED TO COME BY THE END OF THE YEAR.
THE RESOLUTION DID ASK TO, UM, CALIBRATE THIS PROGRAM AFTER THAT COMES OUT WITH ANY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT MIGHT BE COMING FROM THE STUDY.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THE MEMO COMES OUT IN THE END OF THIS MONTH AND THEN END OF THE YEAR.
AND THEN, UM, COUNCILOR PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATES THE AMENDMENTS AND THEN DO WE HAVE ANY TIMELINE ON WHEN WE MIGHT BE GETTING THOSE AMENDMENTS DONE? I KNOW THAT'S HARD TO PREDICT.
YEAH, I, I, THAT IS DEFINITELY ABOVE MY PAY GRADE.
UM, BUT I DO KNOW FOR EXAMPLE, RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME FROM THE STUDY WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN INITIATED.
SO THE UNO DOWNTOWN, OTHER CODE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN INITIATED ON OUR SCHEDULE WILL BE INCORPORATING RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE STUDY.
I ALSO WANNA SAY, I REALLY WANNA THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING THE POSTING LANGUAGE SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT OTHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS BEYOND AFFORDABILITY AS WELL.
UH, I KNOW THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT CAME UP AT UH, CODE'S ORDINANCES AS WELL.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHEN STAFF IS PLANNING ON CONSIDERING SOME OF THOSE OTHER, YOU KNOW, WALKABILITY, GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL AND SOME OF THOSE OTHER REQUIREMENTS? IS THERE ANY UNDERSTANDING OR TIMELINE ON WHEN THOSE MIGHT BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE PDA WORK? UH, FOR ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE BENEFITS IT WOULD BE INCORPORATED AFTER RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE STUDY AND WHENEVER AN INITIATION FOR AN UPDATE TO THIS OCCURRED.
SO JUST TO UNDERSTAND, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE BREAKING THIS INTO A PHASE ONE AND A PHASE TWO, THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE PROCESS IF IT WERE TO BE INITIATED? MM-HMM,
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, YEAH, AND I WAS GONNA ACTUALLY ASK IF WE COULD HAVE THE PRESENTATION PUT UP, 'CAUSE I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, BUT ONE QUESTION I DID WANNA TOUCH ON FOLLOWING COMMISSIONER AZAR, UM, IS I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED THAT WE'RE GONNA PASS PDA OR THIS DB TWO 40 AND SOME OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT WE'RE HOPING TO SEE BECAUSE THE SITES ARE LARGE, LIKE WALKABILITY AND SORT OF MOBILITY OPTIONS, THINGS LIKE THAT WON'T BE INCLUDED FOR AT LEAST A YEAR.
THAT JUST SEEMS REALLY PROBLEMATIC TO ME.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A TIMELINE FOR THIS, BUT ONE OF THE KEY ASKS OF THE RESOLUTION WAS WHAT CAN WE DO BESIDES HOUSING IN PDAS AND NOW WE'RE NOT GONNA GET ANYTHING BESIDES THE HOUSING FOR OVER A YEAR.
SO HOW ARE WE HANDLING PDA OR THESE DB 2040 CASES WITH NO COMMUNITY BENEFITS BESIDES THE HOUSING FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR AFTER THIS IS APPROVED POTENTIALLY? OR HAVE YOU ALL THOUGHT ABOUT THAT? UM, AGAIN, I MEAN THERE'S KIND OF THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS FOR A DEVELOPMENT AS FAR AS SUB CHAPTER E, UM, AND ANY OTHER SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS, BUT WE DIDN'T ADD ANYTHING EXTRA.
EVEN THOUGH THAT WAS ONE OF THE SPECIFIC ASKS, WAS THAT COMMUNITY BENEFITS BEYOND AFFORDABLE HOUSING BE CONSIDERED KIND OF REALLY ESSENTIALLY AS PART OF THESE CHANGES? YEAH, WE'RE STILL NOT GONNA GET ANYTHING ADDITIONAL TO LOOK AT FOUR DB 40 CASE 2040 CASES ASIDE FROM AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS.
IS THAT CORRECT? FOR A YEAR? UH, I DON'T KNOW THE TIMELINE BUT THE, THE RESOLUTION THAT ASKED TO LOOK AT THOSE AS PART OF THE RECALIBRATION EFFORT.
AND CAN WE GET THE SLIDES UP THAT, SORRY.
UM, SO RELATED TO THIS, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT PDA TWO.
UM, DO WE ACTUALLY THINK THAT THE NEW PD TWO IS GONNA HELP US PRESERVE INDUSTRIAL SPACES AS PER THE COMMISSIONER WAS, WAS TOUCHING ON, IT SEEMS LIKE PDA TWO MIGHT NOT ACTUALLY BE USED THAT OFTEN.
IS THERE A CASE THAT YOU HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT WOULD ACTUALLY WORK FOR PDA TWO GOING FORWARD? UM, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE KIND OF HISTORY OF ZONING APPLICATIONS OR OTHER ONES WE'VE SEEN, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN PDA, UH, APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE MERELY ADDED OR AMENDED THE USES THEY'VE ASKED OR CHANGED HEIGHTS OR IMPERVIOUS OR SETBACKS.
SO WE WOULD ANTICIPATE CASES LIKE THAT WOULD CONTINUE TO OCCUR.
SO THERE IS A SPECIFIC USE CASE TO CONTINUE WITH PD TWO? YES.
FOR, FOR SITES THAT HAVE NOT USED RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE PAST, WHICH HAS OCCURRED.
AND THEN I WAS INTERESTED IF WE COULD BRING UP THE CHART, UM, BECAUSE YOU HAD A, THERE WAS A CHART THAT'S I THINK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER ALONG THAT SHOWS THE DIFFERENT HEIGHT LIMITS WE'RE GONNA ALLOW BASED ON THE BASE ZONING.
AND I WAS JUST, IF YOU COULD WALK THROUGH THAT ONE MORE TIME.
I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO WHY WE WEREN'T OFFERING TWO 40 FOR ALL OF THESE.
IF THERE WAS THIS LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, AND I, YOU CAN KEEP GOING.
THEY UH, THAT ONE BACK THERE? YES.
SO YEAH, CAN YOU WALK THROUGH THIS ONE MORE TIME PLEASE? YEAH, SO, UH, THE WAY THAT DENSITY BONUS FUNCTIONS IS REALLY, UM, IT IS A DENSITY BONUS THAT GIVES 120 FEET EXTRA IN HEIGHT BASED ON THE BASE ZONE.
AND SO THAT IS THE REASON WHY NOT EVERYONE CAN REACH 240 FEET SIMILAR TO DB 90 WHERE NOT EVERYONE CAN REACH DB 90 OR 90.
I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT LOGIC.
I GUESS WHAT I'M CURIOUS IS WHY DID WE SAY 120 FEET WAS THE ONLY WAY YOU COULD DO THE BONUS? YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? LIKE, WAS THE GOAL TO GET EVERYBODY TO TWO 40 OR JUST TO USE ONE 20 IS THE ADDITIVE, I THINK.
AND WHERE DID THE, WHAT ONE 20 ADDITIVE COME FROM? UH, YEAH, IT WAS AGAIN, KIND OF A MIX OF THE WHAT PREVIOUS ZONING OR UH, REQUESTS HAVE HAD FOR PDAS AND KIND OF TRYING TO BALANCE THOSE HEIGHTS THAT ARE WE'VE SEEN AS COMMON REQUESTS WHILE ALLOWING FOR INCREASED UM, YOU KNOW, HEIGHTS.
AND, AND I GUESS WHAT I WAS CURIOUS, WHEN YOU WERE LOOKING AT THAT EIGHT ACRE, UM, SORT OF, WHICH OF THESE DIFFERENT BASE ZONES DID YOU SEE
[02:00:01]
THE MOST WITH THE LARGEST? I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE IS THAT WE THOUGHT ABOUT THE SITE SIZE WHEN WE ALSO THOUGHT ABOUT THE HEIGHT.UM, I DON'T THINK I HAVE THAT ANALYSIS.
I THINK THAT JUST MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR US TO UNDERSTAND IF SOME OF THESE NEED TO ACTUALLY BE BUMPED UP HIGHER OR ACTUALLY RESTRICTED MORE DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE SITES THAT WE ARE TYPICALLY SEEING.
BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'D WANT THE ZONING TO BE CA CALIBRATED WITH THE HEIGHT, POTENTIAL HEIGHT BONUS, THE SIZE OF THE POTENTIAL LOTS.
AND THEN I'M CURIOUS WHY THIS WASN'T ALSO INCLUDING, UM, CS OR WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE LOOKED AT BECAUSE THAT IS OUR MOST INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL ZONING.
I KNOW THAT WASN'T NECESSARILY IN THE RESOLUTION, BUT JUST DID YOU ALL LOOK AT THAT AS AN OPTION? WE, WE DID NOT.
UM, THE PDAS CURRENTLY ONLY APPLY TO COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY AND THE FOUR INDUSTRIAL ZONES AND SO WE DID NOT LOOK AT IN INCORPORATING OR ADDING ANY OTHER.
BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY CONSIDER AS A DENSITY BONUS FOR COMMERCIAL BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A NATURAL EXP UH, SORT OF EXPANSION OF A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM THAT TOUCHED ON MORE COMMERCIAL SPACES VERSUS JUST OUR INDUSTRIAL.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, IT IS, I GUESS SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD CONSIDER.
I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK IT ALIGNS WITH THE INTENT OF THE PROGRAMS OR THE RESOLUTION.
UM, THEN THE REASON IT'S CALLED DENSITY ONE IS FOR COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY IS MORE BASED ON, IT'S RELATED TO COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY SPECIFICALLY AND NOT OTHER COMMERCIAL, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY SORT OF DENSITY BONUS CURRENTLY FOR A COMMERCIAL, UH, INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL USE.
SO A CS RIGHT NOW WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO, UH, UH, APPLY FOR ANY SAVE PRO BONUS PROGRAM UNDER OUR CURRENT ZONING, IS THAT CORRECT? CS? WELL, I GUESS DB 90, YEAH.
SO YOU COULD GET TO DB 90 WITH CS.
UM, AND THEN, UH, THE RECALIBRATION, JUST TO CONFIRM, WHEN YOU ACTUALLY DO THIS MEMO THAT COMES OUT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IF YOU PASS THIS ACCOUNT COUNSEL, AND THEN JUST A FEW MONTHS LATER WE'RE GETTING THIS RECALIBRATION MEMO.
THIS WOULD ACTUALLY, THE NEXT CHART THAT SHOWS, I GUESS THE HEIGHTS BASED ON, IS THAT THE YEAH, THIS ONE.
UM, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE REEXAMINED, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.
UH, SO AS PART OF RECALIBRATION, THE STUDY WILL HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS ON RECALIBRATION IN GENERAL AND SPECIFIC TO EXISTING PROGRAMS AND OTHER THINGS.
UM, AND SO IF THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT THESE PERCENTAGES SHOULD BE DIFFERENT, THAT WOULD BE INCORPORATED WHEN WE HAVE AN INITIATED RESOLUTION TO AMEND THIS.
SO EVEN NEW PROGRAMS, ONES THAT ARE RELATIVELY NEW THAT WE HAVEN'T NECESSARILY SEEN A LOT OF USE OF YET, YOU MIGHT STILL BE RECOMMENDING RECALIBRATION FOR THOSE AS WELL.
UH, I CAN'T SPEAK NECESSARILY FOR WHAT WILL BE IN THE STUDY.
THEY WILL BE THE ONES POSTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT THERE WILL BE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON RECALIBRATION.
SO I WOULD ASSUME IF IT'S A REC, IF THEY'RE RECOMMENDING RECALIBRATION, THAT IT WOULD ALSO BE BROUGHT FORWARD TO OTHER PROGRAMS, BUT GREAT.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON IN, IN CASE I WAS STARTING TO USE MY THUMB.
SO, UH, I KNOW SOMETIMES CITY COUNCIL AND THEY LIKE WHAT WE DO.
THEY'LL TAKE MAYBE STAFF RECOMMENDATION PLUS PC RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THAT'LL BE THEIR BASE MOTION.
UM, YOU, YOU SHARED EARLIER THAT COJC PASSED THIS.
CAN YOU SHARE WHAT THE COGC AMENDMENTS WERE IN CASE WE LOOK TO MAKE THAT A BASE MOTION? YEAH, IF YOU CAN BRING IT UP AGAIN, I CAN SHOW THOSE PAGE, PAGE 16.
UH, SO THE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE TO REMOVE THE 10 FOOT STEP BACK AT 90 FEET OF HEIGHT, UH, CHANGING EMPLOYEE RECREATION USE FROM PROHIBITED TO CONDITIONAL, WHICH WAS ALREADY INCORPORATED IN THE ORDINANCE.
UH, AND THEN THE ALLOWANCE FOR MORE COMMUNITY BENEFITS, INCLUDING MORE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS.
I JUST WANNA GET THAT UP THERE IN CASE IT COMES UP LATER.
WE ARE AT THE END OF OUR EIGHT SPOTS.
WOULD THE COMMISSION BE OPEN TO ALLOWING ME TO ASK A FEW MORE QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE AIRPORT? I THINK THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.
SO, UM, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ALLOW FOR THREE MORE QUESTION SPOTS, UM, IS, IF THERE'S A SECOND ON THAT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARRA RAMIREZ.
UNLESS THERE'S OPPOSITION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
SO COMMISSIONER HAYNES, SORRY IF I MISSED YOU.
EARLIER'S, AND THEN WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER COX.
THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS ON THIS.
UM, MR. UH, PANTY, UH, PANTY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR RESPONDING TO MY EMAILS.
UH, I ALWAYS LOVE IT WHEN STAFF IS, UH, PROFESSIONAL AND RESPONSIVE.
AND YOU WERE BACK TO ME AT EIGHT 30 ON MONDAY MORNING, AND I ALWAYS LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THAT AND I APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWERS, APPRECIATE ALL THAT YOU'RE DOING.
UH, FOLLOWING UP A LITTLE BIT WITH WHAT, UM, UM, SEVERAL COMMISSIONERS TALKED ABOUT, UM, UH, IN THE, IN THE ORDINANCE THAT, THAT CAME TO Y'ALL, THERE WERE, THERE WAS NOT ONE, THERE
[02:05:01]
WAS ACTUALLY SEVEN SPECIFIC THINGS THAT Y'ALL WERE ASKED TO LOOK AT AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.NONE OF THOSE ARE INCLUDED NOW.
UM, THAT DOES CONCERN ME THAT, UH, THAT WE ARE NOT FOLLOWING.
I, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A SURVEY COMING AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT, YOU KNOW, COUNSEL SAID, DO THIS AND WE'RE NOT DOING THIS.
UH, THAT, THAT DOES CONCERN ME.
UH, THE OTHER THING THAT CONCERNS ME IS, UM, MAKE SURE I HEARD THIS RIGHT.
THE, THE MAILED NOTICES WENT OUT ON SEPTEMBER 27TH.
YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S THE DATE.
AND, UH, SNAIL MAIL OR EMAIL, UH, SNAIL MAIL, SNAIL MAIL.
AND SO MAIL DOESN'T GET DELIVERED ON SUNDAY.
SO THEY LIKELY HIT, UH, MAILBOXES ON TUESDAY THE FIRST, MAYBE MONDAY THE 30TH.
UH, IS THERE ANY DOUBT WHY, OR IS THERE A, DO YOU THINK THAT'S CONTRIBUTED TO THE LACK OF INFORMATION ON SPEAK OF AUSTIN? UM, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE LACK OF ENGAGEMENT ON SPEAK OF AUSTIN.
UM, DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA? UH, NO.
I MEAN, IT'S THE STANDARD PROCESS WE DO FOR CODE AMENDMENTS THAT AREN'T KIND OF SITE SPECIFIC OR, OR AREA SPECIFIC THAT ARE REZONING.
SO, SO IT, THE STANDARD, OUR STANDARD PROCESS IS TO MAIL 'EM OUT SEVEN DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE FIRST HEARING? I BELIEVE SO, YES.
I THOUGHT THEY WERE 14 DAYS, BUT, UH, I'LL CHECK THAT.
UM, THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE AS IT RELATES TO, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, AND IF YOU CAN PULL UP THE CHART, UM, YOU MADE SEVERAL COMMENTS ABOUT, UH, THIS BEING SIMILAR OR GENERALLY RELATED TO, UH, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE, UH, REQUIRE WITH EO DB 90.
NOT AFFORDABILITY, BUT, BUT SPECIFICALLY E TODD AND DB 90.
UH, YET IN, IN BOTH OF THOSE INSTANCES, UH, WE ARE AT, UM, 10% FOR, I, I BELIEVE ONE OF MY COMMISSIONERS KNOWS IT.
I, UNTIL COMMISSIONER HANEY JOINED US, I'M THE NEW GUY AND I'M STILL THE NEW GUY STILL TRYING TO LEARN THIS STUFF.
BUT WE WERE REQUIRED, UH, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, WE DON'T COUNT
UH, BUT, UH, UH, 10% AT AT 50 MFI AND 12% AT 60 MFI FOR DB 90.
AND THEN I BELIEVE THAT'S THE SAME FOR EO.
AND THEN FEE AND LIE, WE DO 125% FOR FEE AND LIE OF AT EO.
SO WHILE YOU SAY THEY'RE GENERALLY SIMILAR, IF I WAS TO DO MATH, THAT'S 30% LESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR JUST THE FIRST TWO, AND THEN WHEN WE GO 60 AND 120 FEET ABOVE, NEITHER OF THOSE ARE, ARE, ARE EVEN CONTEMPLATED UNDER DB 90, HENCE THE NAME, NOR ARE THEY CONTEMPLATED UNDER E TODD YET WE ONLY INCREASE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY 25%.
IT, BUT WE INCREASED THE HEIGHT BY FOUR TIMES.
SO WE ALLOWED DEVELOPERS FOUR TIMES THE BONUS, THE INCENTIVE, THE BUILDING THE INCOME RETURN AND ONLY INCREASE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY A SMALL FRACTION.
DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT WHY WE DO IT THAT WAY? UM, AGAIN, WE WERE FOLLOWING REALLY THE RESOLUTION FROM, FROM COUNSEL.
UM, IF YOU SEE THE EXHIBIT A, AND UNFORTUNATELY IT'S, I DON'T THINK IT'S IN BACKUP, BUT FOR THEM THEY HAD, UH, FOR PDA 10% AT 60% OF A FIVE FOR 60 FEET OF HEIGHT IS WHAT THEY CALLED IT, 12% FOR 90 AND THEN 15 FOR ANYTHING ABOVE THAT.
AND SO WE ARE GENERALLY MIMICKING THAT WITH A FIRST TIER, WITH ADDING RESIDENTIAL USE WITH NO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AT 10%, UH, THEN 12 AT 60 AND THEN 15 A HUNDRED.
I'M LOOKING AT IT AND IT SAYS, IT SAYS INCORPORATE THE EXISTING AFFORDABLE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS DB 90 VMU.
BUT, BUT YOU DIDN'T DO THAT HERE.
YOU WENT LESS THAN BOTH OF THOSE PROGRAMS. I WONDER WHY.
UM, IT, THERE IS AN EXHIBIT A THAT HAS A TABLE THAT SHOWS, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.
NO, I'M LOOKING AT THE RESOL, THE ORDINANCE PASS BY YEAH, THAT'S FROM, THAT'S FROM THE RESOLUTION AND THAT'S WHAT WE, IT'S, IT'S AN ATTACHMENT TO THE RES.
I DID WANT TO CLARIFY ONE THING FOR THE NOTICE.
IT GOES OUT 11 DAYS, UH, BEFORE IT'S POSTMARK, 11 DAYS BEFORE.
AND SO YOU COUNT THE MAILING DEBT.
I'M DEFINITELY NOT, UH, DEFINITELY CONCERNED ABOUT THE, THE, THE, THE TIMING OF THE NOTICES
[02:10:01]
AND THAT SORT OF THING.UM, THAT'S PROBABLY WHY NO ONE'S HERE BECAUSE THEY JUST HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT, BUT WE ALREADY VOTED ON THAT.
UM, SPECIFICALLY I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT THE AIRPORT.
UM, NOW THAT I'M, I'M KIND OF TAKING A DEEPER DIVE INTO THAT MAP.
UH, THE, THE HIGHEST DENSITY OF THESE PROPERTIES, UH, SUBJECT TO THIS DENSITY BONUS IS SURROUNDING OUR AIRPORT.
UM, HAS THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION, UH, BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THESE CHANGES AND, AND PROVIDE ANY FEEDBACK TO YOU IN YOUR DEPARTMENT? NO.
DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA? UM, I, I'M NOT SURE HONESTLY, WHAT THE CURRENT REVIEW IS FOR SITE PLANS THAT HAVE HEIGHTS NEAR THE AIRPORT.
I ASSUME THERE ARE SOME REVIEWS THAT ARE REQUIRED BASED ON HEIGHTS AND IN AS ASSOCIATED AIRPORT.
UM, CURRENTLY SOMEONE COULD APPLY FOR A PDA IN THOSE ZONES AND GET SIMILAR HEIGHTS.
AND SO IT WOULD FUNCTION IN A SIMILAR FASHION AS IT WOULD CURRENTLY.
SO ALL OF ALL OF THESE CHANGES WOULD STILL BE SUBJECT TO LIKE THE AIRPORT OVERLAY ZONE THREE, WHICH RESTRICTS RESIDENTIAL AND SCHOOLS AND THAT SORT OF THING WITHIN A HALF MILE OF THE AIRPORT.
I, I BELIEVE SO WE CAN CONFIRM YEAH.
CONFIRMATION THAT, THAT WOULD BE GOOD.
AND, AND HONESTLY, UM, BEFORE THIS GOES TO COUNCIL, IT WOULD BE, I THINK, BENEFICIAL.
WE'RE SPENDING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AT THE AIRPORT RIGHT NOW EXPANDING IT, AND WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO PUT ANY OF THE FAA GRANTS AT RISK BY, UH, BY POTENTIALLY HAVING ANY LOOPHOLES WHERE, UM, INCOMPATIBLE USES THAT.
THE FAA DEFINES, UM, UH, IF WE HAVE INCOMPATIBLE USES THAT THREATENS OUR GRANT FUNDING.
UM, SO MY HOPE IS THAT THIS CAN GO THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY RED FLAGS, UM, THAT WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING BEFORE THIS IS PASSED AT COUNCIL.
YES, COMMISSIONER BAR RAMIREZ, IF I MAY GO AGAIN.
UM, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS FOLLOWING THE LOGIC ABOUT THE LOSS OF INDUSTRIAL SPACES, HAVE YOU GUYS THOUGHT ABOUT THAT OR, BECAUSE TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE WHY WOULD ANYBODY CHOOSE PDA TWO IF YOU COULD HAVE DB TWO 40? BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S MUCH MORE LUCRATIVE TO HAVE RESIDENTIAL USES OVER INDUSTRIAL ONES.
AND AS WE'VE SEEN WITH THE DOMAIN OTHER AREAS, UM, YOU KNOW, AND I'M LOOKING AT THIS REPORT FROM 2020 FROM MR. WALTERS, THAT'S, UH, MARK, WHAT'S HIS NAME? MARK WALTERS.
THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A SUBSTANTIAL LAW THAT WE ARE ERODING OUR INDUSTRIAL USES AND LOSING, UM, MIDDLE SKILLED JOBS BECAUSE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, LOSING THE ABILITY TO HAVE, UM, AND ESPECIALLY IN AND AROUND THE AIRPORT WHERE THERE ARE THOSE TYPES OF USES NEEDED.
I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT HOW THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEELS ABOUT THAT.
YEAH, I MEAN, I, I THINK THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A, OF A BALANCE BETWEEN BOTH.
CURRENTLY PDAS ALLOW FOR THE SAME THING WITH NO COMMITTEE BENEFIT.
AND SO THIS IS VIEWED AS KIND OF A, UH, A WIN-WIN WHERE IT, WE, WE WILL STILL PROBABLY CONTINUOUSLY APPLICATIONS IN THESE AREAS, BUT WE WILL AT LEAST BE GETTING SOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN RETURN.
I GUESS YOU DIDN'T REALLY ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT ARE WE CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOSS OF INDUSTRIAL SPACES IN AUSTIN, OR DO WE JUST WANT TO HOUSE PEOPLE? UM, I DID NOT STUDY THE, YOU KNOW, THE INDUSTRIAL LOSS, SO I, THERE MAY BE A, A CONCERN, BUT YES, I WAS NOT PART OF THAT, SO I'M NOT SURE.
WE'RE AT THE END OF OUR QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, UM, I'LL MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR BOTH ITEMS. BEFORE YOU GET A SECOND, DO YOU MIND ADDING THE COJC RECOMMENDATIONS TO THAT? SURE.
TO BE PERFECTLY CLEAR, I WAS GONNA MOVE THE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS A BASE, ASSUMING THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO ADD OR SUBSTITUTE THAT, BUT NOBODY SECONDED IT.
SO WE CAN LET IT DIE, AND YOU CAN DO THAT IF YOU WANT TO.
AND DOES THAT, DOES THAT INCLUDE SUBJECTOR EE STANDARDS FOR ALL OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS? SO THAT MEANS THAT IT MEET, UH, MEETS ALL OF THOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS? THAT'S A CLARIFYING QUESTION TO STAFF, I THINK.
OH, SO WOULD THESE DEVELOPMENTS HAVE THE SUB-CHAPTER E? YES, BOTH, UH, AS PROPOSED OR WITH COJC AMENDMENTS, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE SUB CHAPTER E, SO, OKAY.
IS THAT A SECOND? UM, LOOKING FOR A SECOND FOR COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER ANDERSON BRIEFLY? SURE.
SO I, I KNOW THE CITY WORKED REALLY HARD.
WE, WE, WE HEARD ABOUT DESIRES OF HAVING MORE PLAIN LANGUAGE AND CODE, AND THAT WAS A DESIRE OF CITY COUNCIL BACK IN 2012 WHEN WE PASSED, IMAGINE AUSTIN.
[02:15:01]
HE KICKED OFF A NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND UNFORTUNATELY A, A NIMBY LAWSUIT KILLED THAT.SO WE ARE STUCK WITH THE TERRIBLE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF TOOLS, AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE A BAD CODE A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
AND THE FACT IS, THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT'S DONE IN THIS BUILDING THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT AND WE'RE JUST ALL TRYING TO DO OUR BEST.
AND SO I APPRECIATE STAFF BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
ANYONE SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION? COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I MEAN, AFTER HEARING WHEN THE NOTICES ACTUALLY WENT OUT ON THIS, UM, AND THE ONLY PUBLIC FEEDBACK WE GOT ON THIS WAS A DESPERATE PLEA TO GIVE THEM MORE TIME, UM, I WAS KIND OF HOPING THAT SOMEONE WHO VOTED NO ON THE POSTPONEMENT MIGHT RECONSIDER THEIR VOTE.
UM, BUT IF THAT'S NOT THE CASE, I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT, UH, THIS WITHOUT, WITHOUT A PUBLIC, UH, A, A PROPER, UH, PUBLIC PROCESS.
THIS IS, THIS IS POTENTIALLY GOING, NOT, NOT POTENTIALLY, THIS IS GOING TO DRAMATICALLY CHANGE, UM, THE EAST SIDE OF AUSTIN, NORTHEAST SIDE OF AUSTIN, SOUTHEAST SIDE OF AUSTIN, I'M PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT ENCOURAGING ALL OF THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT, UH, IN, IN PROXIMITY TO THE AIRPORT, UH, WHERE IT SHOULD NOT BE HAPPENING IN THE FIRST PLACE, BUT THEN ALSO JUST ALLOWING 20 FOOT TALL BUILDINGS TO GO UP.
UM, AND IN A BUNCH OF AREAS WHERE I JUST DON'T THINK THE COMMUNITIES ACTUALLY REALIZE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING.
UM, AND, AND SO I THINK, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE NOT ONLY A PUBLIC PROCESS, UH, FOR THAT SPECIFIC REASON, BUT THEN I ALSO, YOU KNOW, EVEN SUPPORTERS OF PDAS, I, I HEARD CONCERNS ABOUT NOT INCORPORATING A LOT OF THE ASPECTS THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE INCORPORATED, UM, THAT WE MAY GET OUT OF SOMETHING LIKE A PUD, UH, WHERE OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE ARE NOT GONNA GO FOR PUDS IF THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO GET A 20 STORY BUILDING WITH, WITH, UH, WHATEVER REQUIREMENTS ARE PRESENTED HERE.
SO, UH, I THINK THIS NEEDS MORE TIME TO COOK MORE CONSIDERATION, UH, FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, BUT IF THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN, THEN UH, I CERTAINLY CAN'T SUPPORT IT.
ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? YEAH, I, I'D SAY I AM IN LUKEWARM SUPPORT OF THIS.
UH, I THINK I AGREE WITH MR. PONTY THAT AS DRAFTED, THIS IS SORT OF A, A STEP ABOVE STATUS QUO WHERE ANYBODY WITH AN ALLY OR OTHER, UH, INDUSTRIAL, UH, COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY ZONE PROPERTY COULD COME IN TODAY FOR A PDA ONE AND ASK FOR THE EXACT SAME HEIGHT WITH ZERO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THIS WAY WE GET A LITTLE BIT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT'S BETTER THAN NONE.
UM, I DO THINK THIS IS JUST YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WHY WE NEED TO COMPREHENSIVELY RETHINK OUR CODE.
AS COMMISSIONER ANDERSON POINTED OUT, WE STARTED THAT PROCESS IN 2012.
UM, DESPITE TRYING AND SPENDING MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, WE'RE NOW LOOKING AT THE START OF A NEW CITYWIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WILL TAKE SEVERAL YEARS AND LIKELY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND WILL PROBABLY LEAD TO ANOTHER NEW CODE PROCESS SO THAT WE HAVE A NEW SHINY STATE-OF-THE-ART ZONING CODE IN 30 OR 40 YEARS.
UM, WE NEED TO DO THAT FASTER.
THIS IS NO AMOUNT OF PLAIN LANGUAGE ADDED TO OUR SEVERAL THOUSAND PAGE LONG ZONING CODE IS GOING TO MAKE IT EASIER TO USE OR CLEARER.
UH, IT'S JUST GOING TO MAKE IT HARDER AND HARDER.
UH, WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT OUR PROCESS COMPREHENSIVELY.
WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WE ALLOW AND WHERE WE ALLOW IT COMPREHENSIVELY.
AND, AND I THINK TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE WITH THAT EFFORT, UH, THAT SAID, THIS IS BETTER THAN THE STATUS QUO.
WE SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
SO, UM, I'M ALSO REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TIMING OF THESE NOTICES AND THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN PROVIDING KEY INFORMATION ON THESE PDAS OR PLAN DEVELOPMENT AREA ZONING, UM, TO COMMUNITIES AS WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT.
AND, AND THAT THAT TRULY HAVE LANGUAGE BARRIERS AND LACK RESOURCES AND ARE LARGELY RELIANT ON VOLUNTEERS TO TRANSLATE ZONING TO THEIR COMMUNITIES.
IT, IT'S JUST NOT RESPECTFUL AS OUR SPEAKER WHO IS ASKING FOR A POSTPONEMENT STATED, SHE ALSO STATED THAT SHE AND MANY IN HER COMMUNITY ARE NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSING THIS.
THEY ARE JUST ASKING FOR TIME TO UNDERSTAND IT AND FIGURE OUT ITS IMPACT TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEIR FAMILIES.
AND I'M, I'M WITH RESPECT TO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I'M NOT REALLY UNDERSTANDING HOW A LAWSUIT, UM, WOULD PRECLUDE THE CITY OR THIS BODY FROM USING PLAIN LANGUAGE IN OUR NOTICES AND, AND IN OUR CODE AND IN OUR POSTINGS.
PERHAPS I, I MISSED SOMETHING BECAUSE THAT LAWSUIT WAS PRIOR
[02:20:01]
TO MY SITTING ON THIS BOARD, SO I DON'T KNOW.BUT I WILL JUST SAY THAT WE'VE HEARD THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN FROM PEOPLE WHO TEND TO COME FROM COMMUNITIES OF COLOR AND LOWER INCOME COMMUNITIES WHO SAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT THEY'RE NOT MEANINGFULLY ENGAGED ON CHANGES THAT ARE TAKING PLACE IN THEIR COMMUNITIES.
AND AT SOME POINT I HOPE THAT WE WILL HEAR THEM.
SO I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS, NOT BECAUSE I'M OPPOSED TO IT, BUT BECAUSE THE PROCESS ITSELF REALLY NEEDS TO CHANGE.
THE CITY NEEDS TO TAKE MORE RESPONSIBILITY IN ENGAGING WITH COMMUNITIES.
THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT TAKES WHEN THEY WANT TO, TO REALLY, TRULY, AND MEANINGFULLY ENGAGE WITH COMMUNITIES.
AND YET THAT'S NOT HAPPENING ON SO MANY OF THE ZONING CASES THAT ARE COMING BEFORE US.
COMMISSIONER WOODS SPEAKING FOR, I AM GONNA GO AHEAD AND MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO RECONSIDER COMMISSIONER BARRE RAMIREZ POSTPONEMENT TO NOVEMBER 12TH.
I THINK THAT MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER HAYNES.
I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER HAYNES DOESN'T MAKE IT HERS.
SHE'S, IT'S, AND I'LL, I'LL SECOND THAT TO NOVEMBER 12TH TO NOVEMBER 12TH.
I'M, I'M ASKING FOR A RECONSIDERATION.
SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN, CAN I, TO ME WHAT THAT MEANS? YEP.
JUST WITH THE, THE PROCESS IS, SO BECAUSE I VOTED AGAINST IT, WE CAN RECONSIDER WITH A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
UM, CAN I OFFER AN AMENDMENT TO THE RECONSIDERATION? UH, YES.
LIKE I AM LEGALLY, UM, CAN WE RECONSIDER FOR A DIFFERENT DATE? THAT WAS MY CONCERN, QUITE HONESTLY, WITH THE ORIGINAL POSTPONEMENT.
SO I'M, YEAH, POINT OF PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE, I GUESS RECONSIDERING FOR A DIFFERENT DATE WOULD JUST BE A NEW MOTION TO POSTPONE.
SO THAT'S, I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I WAS CURIOUS.
'CAUSE I HAD ACTUALLY PLANNED TO OFFER EVERY, UH, A DIFFERENT OPTION.
SO I HAVE A SECOND, SO I'M NOT SURE.
CAN I, WITH, I THINK DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON THE RECONSIDERATION THEN, THEN WE, WE CAN AMEND, WE CAN THE I CHAIR, UH, I WAS GONNA SAY, SO WE COULD DO ONE OF TWO THINGS.
ONE IS, IF THERE WAS NO OBJECTION, YOU CAN WITHDRAW THE MOTION IF THERE IS OBJECTION.
UM, THERE CAN BE A SUBSTITUTE TO THE, SINCE THE MOTION IS BACK ON THE TABLE AND IT WAS NEVER, NEVER SUBSTITUTE, AND OUR RULES APPLY ONE LEVEL OF SUBSTITUTION.
SO IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, I WILL GO AHEAD AND WITHDRAW THAT MOTION.
AND I'D LIKE TO OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO, UM, POSTPONE THIS ITEM TILL THE OCTOBER 22ND MEETING, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HANEY.
DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? ABSOLUTELY.
AND I, AND I, I'M NOT OPPOSED, LET ME BE VERY CLEAR HERE.
WE HAVE HEARD THE URGENCY FROM SOME OF OUR COUNCIL FRIENDS REGARDING PDA CASES THAT ARE ACTUALLY CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS AND WOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR ZONING.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, OUR CITY COUNCIL ONLY HAS AT THIS 0.4, UM, MEETINGS AFTER THIS ONE THIS WEEK LEFT BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF THE YEAR.
AND SO GETTING THOSE ZONING CASES ACTUALLY PROCESSED AND THROUGH WITH US NOT LOOKING AT THIS AGAIN UNTIL NOVEMBER 12TH, WOULD ACTUALLY JUST CAUSE A LOT OF LOGISTICAL ISSUES.
SO I'M VERY OPEN TILL NOVEMBER 12TH, BUT I PREFER IF WE GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE TILL THE 22ND, AND THEN IF WE CAN HAVE ADDITIONAL TIME, WE COULD THEN POSTPONE AGAIN AT THAT POINT IF THAT'S A FEASIBLE OPTION, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST, SO I HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
UM, NOT OPPOSED TO THE MOTION, BUT WANT TO KNOW IF THE, THE SPEAKER WHO CAME AND SPOKE THINKS, UH, THAT'S ENOUGH TIME TO REALLY COMMUNICATE AND ENGAGE WITH HER COMMUNITY? UM, GOING BACK TO EVERYTHING, UM, NO, THAT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME.
UM, THESE PEOPLE ARE ALREADY, ARE WORKING AROUND THE CLOCK, WEEKENDS, NIGHTS, HOLIDAYS, BECAUSE THIS STUFF IS COMING FAST AT THEM.
AND PLEASE, PLEASE DON'T CALL US NIMBY THAT REALLY DON'T, I I REALLY GET OFFENDED BY THAT WORD.
SO WE REALLY, PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO BRIDGE OVER AND OUR FAMILIES WORKED REALLY HARD FOR OUR PROPERTIES THROUGH GENERATIONS.
UM, SO I WOULD SAY NOVEMBER THE 12TH IS PROBABLY GONNA BE BETTER WITH THE COMMITMENT THAT SPEAKING UP AUSTIN GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PROCESS OF ENGAGEMENT THAT WE ARE ALL REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH AS WELL, FOR OTHER ADDITIONAL THINGS AND TO KEEP THE CONSISTENT PROCESS TO ALLOW THE PLATFORM OF THE FAMILIES TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK AND ASK QUESTIONS JUST LIKE YOU HAVE THIS, THIS, THIS IS GOOD INFORMATION THAT WE'RE SEEING, BUT WE'RE NOT SEEING IT UNTIL WE GET HERE.
AND I PROMISE YOU, IF OTHER PEOPLE KNEW ABOUT THIS AND WHAT EXACTLY WHAT IS WAS GOING TO DO, YOU WOULD HAVE A BUNCH MORE PEOPLE HERE.
[02:25:01]
WOULD HAVE A BUNCH MORE PEOPLE HERE, BUT THIS SHOULD LET YOU KNOW THAT IT WAS JUST POSTED, BUT NO ONE WAS ALERTED THAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO SPEAK ON THIS OR ANYTHING LIKE THIS.OTHERS? SPEAKING FOR COMMISSIONER COX? UM, I'LL, I'LL SPEAK FOR THE POSTPONEMENT BECAUSE I THINK ANY POSTPONEMENT IS BETTER THAN NO POSTPONEMENT, BUT I, I DO WANT Y'ALL TO CONSIDER THAT.
UM, WE, WE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY HERE SAYING, YOU KNOW, EGGING US ON TELLING US TO, TO, TO PASS THIS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
I HAVE A STRONG SUSPICION THAT ANYONE TUNED IN TO THE CITY PROCESSES KNOW THAT WE'RE EVALUATING THIS.
AND IF SOMEONE REALLY DOES HAVE A PROPERTY THAT THAT COULD BE, THAT COULD, UH, BENEFIT FROM THIS, UM, IS CERTAINLY GOING TO WAIT TO, TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF WHATEVER ENDS UP GETTING PASSED IN THE END.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE URGENCY, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE DON'T WANT TO DELAY, UH, DEVELOPMENT IN, IN THE CITY.
UM, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A, IT NEEDS TO BE BALANCED BETWEEN PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND FORMING AUSTINITES OF WHAT'S HAPPENING, ALLOWING THEM TO HAVE THEIR SAY, BUT THEN DOING IT IN A TIMELY WAY THAT WE AREN'T UNNECESSARILY DELAYING PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE.
AND SO MY HOPE IS THAT WHEN WE GET TO OUR NEXT MEETING AND THIS COMEBACKS COME, COMES BACK TO US, IF, IF WE FEEL LIKE, UH, THAT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS STILL HASN'T, UH, PLAYED OUT, UM, AND WE DON'T KNOW OF ANY SUPER URGENT THINGS IN THE PIPELINE THAT ARE DEPENDING ON THIS TO GET PAST AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, UM, THEN WE MAY CONSIDER ANOTHER POSTPONEMENT AT THAT TIME.
BUT I DO CERTAINLY SUPPORT THIS POSTPONEMENT.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST FOUR? I'LL SPEAK FOR YES, COMMISSIONER, JUST TO BRIEFLY HIGHLIGHT THAT, UM, I APPRECIATE THAT OPENNESS TO A POSTPONEMENT AND I'M REALLY HOPING THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ACHIEVE IN THESE TWO WEEKS IS LOOKING MORE AT THIS CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW FOR MORE COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND SPECIFICALLY PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED AND COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS IN ADDITION TO SOME OF THE HOUSING BENEFITS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THERE.
LAST SPOT AGAINST, LET'S GO AHEAD, I'LL TAKE THE AGAIN, BUT TO ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION OF THE MOTION MAKER, IS COMMISSIONER MAXWELL IS YOUR INTENT OR YOUR HOPE? UH, LIKE MY HOPE WAS, I THINK IT'S COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UH, THAT, THAT, UM, STAFF WILL DO BRIEFINGS OR THAT YOUR HOPE IS
TELL ME WHAT, WHAT ARE YOUR HOPES, DREAMS, AND ASPIRATIONS FOR TWO WEEKS? I, SO I GUESS MY, MY, THE ISSUE THAT I, WE HAVE HEARD AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S CONVERSATIONS SO THIS AND UM, AND SHE WAS INITIATED IN JULY IN RESPONSE TO SEVERAL PDA CASES THAT HAD ALREADY COME THROUGH THE PIPELINE.
AND THE CONCERN WAS THAT THERE WAS NOT AFFORDABLE HOUSING MANDATED.
SO THEY ASKED STAFF TO GO AND LOOK AT THIS, THAT'S THE RESOLUTION.
AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS AROUND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND WHATNOT, BUT I THINK THERE'S ALSO A BALANCING ACT HERE OF PDA CASES THAT LITERALLY MAY END UP IN FRONT OF COUNCIL WITH NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS OR VERY POOR ONES BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT PASSED THIS ITEM.
AND SO, AND THAT IS LITERALLY THE REALITY WE'RE FACING BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF THE YEAR.
AND AGAIN, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT MANY COUNCIL MEETINGS, US DELAYING TILL NOVEMBER MEANS IT IS LIKELY NOT GOING TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL, WHICH MEANS THOSE PDA CASES WILL BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAN IF THIS WAS ACTUALLY IN PROCESS AND BEING APPROVED.
AND THAT'S JUST THE REALITY OF WHERE WE ARE AT WITH OUR ZONING.
AND THE PLEA, I THINK FROM SOME OF THE COUNCIL OFFICES WAS TO PLEASE, CAN WE MOVE THIS FORWARD SO WE CAN, UH, MOVE THOSE ZONING CASES, THOSE PDA ZONING CASES AWAY, UH, FORWARD IN THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE.
SO THIS IS A SORT OF, I DON'T KNOW, BALANCING ACT HERE.
AND, AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS HAS KIND OF, UM, COME QUICKLY COMPARED TO SOME OF OTHER CODE CODE AMENDMENTS, BUT THERE IS A REASON FOR THAT, WHICH IS BECAUSE OF THESE SPECIFIC ZONING CASES AND IF THEY, BUT IF, OH, I'M OUTTA THAT.
ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS FOR THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HANEY TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL OCTOBER 22ND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.
THOSE AGAINST TWO, THREE AND ABSTAINING ONE.
ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO THIS AGAIN.
4 1 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 8 AGAINST THREE.
[02:30:01]
THERE WE GO.THOSE AGAINST, WERE COMMERS JOHNSON, ANDERSON HAYNES AND PHILLIPS ABSTAINING WAS, UH, COMMISSIONER RAMEZ.
OKAY, SO THAT MOTION PASSES WE'VE POSTPONED TO OCTOBER 22ND.
VICE CHAIR, CHAIR MIGHT MAKE A QUICK COMMENT.
UM, SO, UM, JUST A REMINDER TO THE COMMISSION THAT ON THE 22ND WE'RE GONNA BE HEARING THE SITE PLAN LIGHT ITEM AS WELL.
SO JUST A REMINDER, WE'RE NOW LOOKING AT A REGULAR, UH, ZONING AGENDA PLUS TWO CODE ITEMS, WHICH WE'VE TRIED TO SHY AWAY FROM.
SO ONE, I GUESS BE PREPARED FOR, UM, A LONGER MEETING THAN USUAL TWO.
I WOULD, I WOULD ASK, I THINK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE IF FOLKS CAN HAVE QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY STAFF AND OTHERS IN ADVANCE, I THINK THAT WOULD REALLY HELP US IN MOVING BOTH OF THOSE ITEMS. UM, THANK YOU CHAIR.
REALLY APPRECIATE YOU COMING DOWN TONIGHT.
[17. Discussion and action to recommend to City Council prioritizing the creation of the Red River sub-cultural sub-district and to expedite the development of a cultural overlay that factors regulatory, operational, and financial options to improve existing businesses of the district. Sponsors: Commissioner Haynes and Commissioner Phillips.]
ON TO ITEM NUMBER 17.SO THIS FIRST ONE IS DISCUSSION AND ACTION TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIZING THE CREATION OF THE RED RIVER SUBCULTURAL AND SUB-DISTRICT, AND TO EXPEDITE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CULTURAL OVERLAY THAT FACTORS REGULATORY.
SO, UM, COMMISSIONER HAYNES AND COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, THIS WAS YOUR ITEM, AND I UNDERSTAND, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, YOU HAVE SENT AROUND SOME LANGUAGE.
I, I'LL ADMIT I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THIS ON HERE THIS QUICK.
UH, AND SO I WILL ADMIT I HAD TO SCRAMBLE A LITTLE BIT, UH, AND YOU GOT A LANGUAGE UNFORTUNATELY, UH, THIS EVENING AND IT'S BEEN IN YOUR INBOX NOT VERY LONG.
SO, UH, I WILL, UH, ABSOLUTELY APOLOGIZE TO THAT.
I DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A CHANCE TO PUT IN THE, WHEREAS IS AND THE WHAT, FOURS AND NOW THEREFORE BE IT RECOMMENDED.
BUT, UM, BUT, UH, WE DID HEAR, UH, WHEN WE HEARD THE CREATIVE SPACES, UM, LAST MEETING OR TWO MEETINGS AGO, UM, TALKED ABOUT HOW THAT WOULD NOT APPLY TO THE, UH, TO THE ONLY CULTURAL DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE IN THE, IN THE CITY, AND THAT'S THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT.
AND SO WHAT, UH, I AM TRYING TO DO IS MAYBE IN THE PARLANCE OF CITY GOVERNANCE, CATCH THIS ITEM UP TO THE CREATIVE SPACES ONE, OR AT LEAST HAVE IT COME, UH, VERY QUICKLY BEHIND.
AND SO THAT, UM, WE CAN DO SOMETHING TO HELP THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT, UM, AND GIVE IT THE TOOLS AND THE OPTIONS AND THE, UH, THE INCENTIVES THAT WE PASSED, UH, SIMILAR THAT WE PASSED TO THE, UH, FOR THE CREATIVE SPACES, UH, INITIATIVE, UH, LAST MEETING.
AND SO MY IDEA WOULD BE TO TAKE THOSE BULLET POINTS AND PUT THOSE, I'LL, I'LL OBVIOUSLY REFER, UH, I'M SURE SOMEBODY FROM LAW IS ON THE LINE, UHHUH, AND, UH, BUT WE WOULD PUT THOSE AS WHEREAS STATEMENTS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL THAT WE, UM, UH, THE FIRST BULLET I THINK IS THE IMPORTANT ONE THAT WE EXPEDITE THE CULTURAL OVERLAY FOR THE RED RIVER, UH, CULTURAL DISTRICT.
UM, AND I'M NOT GONNA READ IT.
YOU ALL CAN READ THE BULLETS THERE.
UH, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S MY THOUGHT AND I HOPE THAT ENCOMPASSES AND INCORPORATES WHAT THE FOLKS FROM THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT THINK THEY NEED TO KIND OF GET THE, IT'S BEEN ON HIGH CENTER RIGHT NOW WITH THE STAFF AND THEY NEED TO PUSH TO GET IT OFF A HIGH CENTER.
I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS TO THE SPONSORS OR STAFF.
I COULD GET SOME CLARIFICATION MAYBE FROM STAFF.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT COUNCIL HAS ALREADY SENT THIS DIRECTIVE TO STAFF TO, TO LOOK INTO SOMETHING SIMILAR OR IT WAS INCLUDED WITH PART OF CREATIVE SPACES.
DO WE, DO WE NEED TO SEND A RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS OR CAN WE ACTUALLY ASK STAFF TO START ON IT RIGHT NOW AND BRING SOMETHING TO US SO WE CAN VOTE ON IT SOON? I'LL TAKE A SHOT AT ANSWERING, BUT AS MS. JOY IS WALKING, OH, NOPE.
UH, I'LL TAKE A SHOT AT ANSWERING.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT, UH, THAT WE NEED, I, I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF WOULD, UM, WOULD, THE PUSH IS ENOUGH IF, IF JUST THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES THIS RECOMMENDATION, BUT THAT IT NEEDS COUNCIL'S RECOMMENDATION TO GET STAFF TO GO THE EXTRA STEP.
[02:35:02]
CAN I, UH, MAY I ADD A A PLEASE? OH, WELL, SO I ACTUALLY ASK A QUESTION, UH, AS WELL, BUT JUST TO CLARIFY A POINT THAT SOME FOLKS OR MAY NOT BE AWARE OF, UM, THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS A HOUSING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE, AND THEY HAVE RECENTLY INSTITUTED A NEW PROCESS WHEREBY, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION WILL ACTUALLY BE CONSIDERED AT THEIR MEETINGS, AND THAT IF THEY ARE ACTUALLY APPROVED BY THE HOUSING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE, THAT THEN THEY WOULD THEN BE PLACED ON A PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA.AND THIS HAS ACTUALLY BEEN A PROCESS THAT'S BEEN USED BY THE MOBILITY COMMITTEE FROM THE, UM, UTC, WHICH IS THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, SO THAT THEY CAN WORK MORE CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH THEIR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
UM, THAT PROCESS IS STILL BEING WORKED OUT IN TERMS OF KINKS, BUT IN THEORY, IF WE ACTUALLY DID THIS TONIGHT, THAT COULD BE AN ITEM THAT WOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE HOUSING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE AND OFFICIALLY VOTED ON BY THAT BODY AND THEN SENT ON TO COUNCIL.
IF THAT HELPS ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
UM, SO THAT'S ONE THING, BUT THEN I WAS GOING TO ACTUALLY ASK THE MOTION MAKERS ABOUT, UM, HOW WOULD WE, HOW WOULD THIS IMPACT EXISTING BUILDINGS IN THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT, UM, SAY THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT WANTED TO REDEVELOP THAT DOES NOT CURRENTLY INCLUDE A CULTURAL ITEM? IS THAT, IS THAT SORT OF ADDRESSED AS IT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOME HOUSING AND WHATNOT ALONG THAT AREA THAT ARE NOT CULTURALLY RELEVANT, SHALL WE SAY.
UM, SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS HOW THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THIS.
IT IS, IT'S MY INTENTION, UM, IT, YOU, YOU ARE MUCH MORE AWARE AND, AND, AND MUCH MORE VERSED ON THE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT AND I, BUT, UM, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT IS THE CULTURAL DISTRICT IS THE AREA, IT'S RED RIVER AND THEN A BLOCK AND A HALF ON EITHER SIDE UP TO 10TH AND DOWN TO SIXTH.
UM, AND SO, UM, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF A BUILDING IN THAT AREA IS AIR QUOTES CULTURAL, UM, AS LONG AS IT'S INSIDE OF THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT, IT IS PART OF THAT DISTRICT.
AND SO IT'S NOT AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AS OPPOSED TO THE AREA THAT, THAT IT INCLUDES.
AND I GUESS, SORRY TO ASK MY QUESTION IN A MORE CLARIFYING WAY.
IF A BUILDING THAT IS NOT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF DAY, SAY IT DOESN'T HAVE A MUSIC VENUE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IT'S JUST SAY APARTMENTS IS IN THIS CULTURAL DISTRICT, IF IT WANTED TO REDEVELOPMENT, IS IT IMPACTED BY BEING, YOU KNOW, SORT OF IN THIS DISTRICT THAT IT WOULD THEN REQUIRE CERTAIN THINGS IF THEY WANTED TO REDEVELOPMENT? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? NO, I, OKAY.
UM, MY ANSWER TO YOU WOULD BE, UM, IT, IT WOULD BE IMPACTED, BUT, BUT WHAT I WOULD HOPE IS THAT THE, AND AND YOU'LL SEE THE, THE FIRST BULLET THERE IS, IS FOR US TO EXPLORE DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
NOT, I, I DON'T WANT THIS TO BE ONLY REGULATORY.
I DON'T WANT, I WANT THIS TO BE ECONOMIC.
I TAX INCENTIVES, UM, YOU NAME ZONING, UH, PRIORITIES.
AND SO THAT IF THERE IS A BUILDING THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE A MUSIC VENUE, THERE'S NOT A CREATIVE SPACE BUT WANTS TO REDEVELOP, UH, IT WOULD BE MY DESIRE, MY RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL THAT, THAT IF, IF THEY DO CREATE A ZONE FOR THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT, IT TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT AND ALLOW THEM TO, UH, DEVELOP WITHOUT A CREATIVE SPACE IF THEY SO CHOOSE.
OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, SEE VICE CHAIR, OH, WAS POINTING ON CHAIR.
COULD I TAKE A QUICK POINT OF PRIVILEGE AND JUST ADD ON TO THAT? UH, THE PALM DISTRICT ACTUALLY SPECIFIES REALLY WELL WHAT'S ALLOWED TO BE DONE AND NOT DONE, INCLUDING THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT ON WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE REDEVELOPED.
I THINK LOOKING AT THE LANGUAGE THAT, UH, AS IT'S PRESENTED HERE, WHAT YOU'D REALLY SEE AFFECTING THINGS WOULD BE MAYBE, UH, THE SOUND ORDINANCE, LIKE A AGENT OF CHANGE TYPE OF STUFF.
UM, AND, AND, AND POSSIBLY DEPENDING ON HOW IT ACTUALLY COMES OUT, UH, LIKE HOW, HOW THEY STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THE ORDINANCE.
IT, IT COULD ACTUALLY BAR SOMETHING FROM NOT HAVING A CREATIVE SPACE, BUT THAT'S THE INTENT.
IT'S TO PRESERVE A SPACE, A PART OF THE TOWN, UH, TO MAKE IT AFFORDABLE FOR BOTH THE, THE LIVE MUSIC VENUES FOR THE ARTISTS MUSICIANS, FOR THE SOUND ENGINEERS, THE LIGHTING ENGINEERS.
IT'S, IT'S TO KIND OF KEEP IT ALL TOGETHER IN A KIND OF COMMUNAL AREA.
AT LEAST THAT, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
I, UM, I THINK THESE POINTS ARE ALL REALLY VALID AND I, I KNOW WE WORKED, THERE WAS A WORKING GROUP ON THE PALM DISTRICT, THERE WAS A, UM, THE CREATIVE SPACES THAT WE PASSED THROUGH AT OUR LAST MEETING.
ARE WE A HUNDRED PERCENT POSITIVE THAT THIS ISN'T DUPLICATIVE OF OTHER EFFORTS THAT ARE GOING ON ALREADY? THAT'S, THAT'S MY CONCERN IN SAY, IN MOVING THIS FORWARD IS THAT STAFF IS ALREADY WORKING ON SOMETHING OR IT'S,
[02:40:02]
I ARE, ARE WE SURE, I'M NEVER A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE CLAIRE CHAIRBUT, UM, THE, THE THING THAT GOT ME CONCERNED AT, AT THE MEETING WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT WAS, UM, UH, MR. JACKSON'S PRESENTATION THAT, THAT THE CREATIVE SPACE, WHICH I A HUNDRED PERCENT SUPPORT AND WANT TO DO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING INSIDE THE CREATIVE SPACE, UM, UM, HE SPECIFICALLY SAID IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT.
BUT THAT WAS BECAUSE OF COLD CAPITAL VIEW CORRIDORS OR, SO THAT IS SOME, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S THE STATE AND THAT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING CITY'S IN CONTROL OF.
UM, AND SO WE'RE, WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE A REGULATORY OR AN ECONOMIC OR A CULTURAL ZONE OVER THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT, UM, DOES, DOES NOT IMPACT THE CAPITAL VIEW CORRIDOR.
AND THAT THAT'S STILL GONNA BE THERE.
IT, IT IS GONNA LIMIT THE VERTICAL HEIGHT OF THESE BUILDINGS UNTIL, OR UNLESS THE STATE LEGISLATURE CHANGES THE, THAT THAT PROVISION ON THE CAPITAL VIEW CORRIDOR.
AND VICE CHAIR CHAIR, I WAS JUST GONNA MENTION SOMETHING, AND THIS IS NOT TO SAY THE MERITS OF THE ITEM ITSELF, BUT I DID WANNA MENTION THIS.
SO, UM, ON AUGUST 14TH OF THIS YEAR, IF YOU GO LOOK AT ITEM NUMBER 28, IT WAS A RESOLUTION INITIATING AN UPDATE TO THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN PLAN.
IT WAS INITIATED, LED BY COUNCILMAN CORY, WHO REPRESENTS DOWNTOWN, INCLUDING THE RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT, ALONG WITH OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I WANNA READ FROM THE RESOLUTION.
UM, AS PART OF THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN PLAN UPDATE, THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO ENSURE THE IMPLEMENTATION AND COORDINATION OF RECENTLY COMPLETED PROJECTS AND PLANS THAT ARE SHAPING DOWNTOWN'S FUTURE TO INCORPORATE THE NEEDS OF UNIQUE FEATURES OF DOWNTOWN AND TO ADDRESS ISSUES THAT AFFECT GROWTH, INCLUDING PALM DISTRICT PLAN.
IT ALSO INCLUDES CULTURAL DISTRICTS IN GENERAL.
AND THEN THE NEXT BEAD FURTHER RESOLVED AS, AS PART OF THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN PLAN UPDATE, THE CITY MANAGERS DIRECTED TO PROVIDE DETAILED INFORMATION FOR IMPLEMENTATION, INCLUDING COST ESTIMATES, POTENTIAL PARTNERS, FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES, FINANCING TOOLS, AND ANY NECESSARY CODE AMENDMENTS FOR IDENTIFIED PROJECTS, PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND INFRASTRUCTURE RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, SO AGAIN, I'M, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SEEING ANYTHING BY THE ITEM, BUT THERE IS A PLANNING ITEM THE COUNCIL HAD INITIATED IN AUGUST OF THIS YEAR.
I KNOW IT'S MOVING FORWARD AND OUR STAFF IS, UM, CURRENTLY LOOKING AT VARIOUS SORT OF RESOURCES INCLUDING POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT CONSULTANTS TO BRING IN TO THAT WORK.
SO IT WILL BE PROCEEDING INCLUDING THAT, UM, RECOGNITION OF THE PALM DISTRICT PLAN AND THE CULTURAL DISTRICTS.
I, I MIGHT, UM, WHEN THIS GOES THROUGH, UM, CRAFTING IT INTO A RESOLUTION, MAYBE WRITING IT SO THAT IT SUPPORTS THAT, WHAT VICE CHAIR JUST READ AND REALLY FOCUSING IN ON THE RRCD, RED RIVER CULTURAL DISTRICT AS RELATED TO THE DOWNTOWN PLAN.
SO THIS IS JUST PROVIDING MORE, UH, MORE EMPHASIS ON THAT IN ADDITION TO WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN INITIATED, JUST AS A, A, A COMMENT.
WELL, UM, THIS IS, UH, AN ACTION ITEM IF WE SO WISH IT TO.
SO, UM, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, DID YOU WANNA TURN THIS INTO A MOTION? UH, YES, I DO.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION, UM, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSIONER ZA, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO HELP ME, UM, PULLING THE LANGUAGE FROM THE ITEM YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT.
AND IN ADDITION TO PRIORITIZE, UH, I'M SORRY, EXPEDITE A CULTURAL OVERLAY.
THE FIRST BULLET POINT OF MINE.
SO THE, THE MOTION IS EXPEDITED CULTURAL OVERLAY FOR THE RC RCD TO PRIORITIZE THE EVOLUTION AND PRESERVATION OF THE CULTURAL SPACES USING REG REGULATORY TOOLS, ECONOMIC INCENTIVES, AND ZONING POLICIES IS APPROPRIATE.
SECOND, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, YOU ARE THE CO-SPONSOR, SO, OKAY.
UM, ANY MORE YOU WANNA SAY AROUND THAT? COMMISSIONER HAYNES? OKAY.
UM, ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THAT MOTION?
[02:45:01]
OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THAT.THAT IS, UM, UH, MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER HAYNES, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
I'M SO SORRY IF I COULD JUST READ THIS AGAIN.
SO I'LL READ THE FIRST PART AND THEN IF YOU CAN READ FROM THAT, PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPORTS THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN PLAN UPDATE AND RECOMMENDS TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO EXPEDITE A CULTURAL DISTRICT, A CULTURAL OVERLAY FOR THE RRCD, TO PRIORITIZE THE EVOLUTION AND PRESERVATION OF THE CULTURAL SPACES USING REGULATORY TOOLS, ECONOMIC INCENTIVES, AND ZONING POLICIES AS APPROPRIATE.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE IS OFF THE DAIS.
[18. Discussion and action to assign a new member to the Codes and Ordinances Joint Committee. Sponsors: Commissioner Maxwell and Chair Hempel. ]
NUMBER 18.AND, UH, THIS IS TO POSSIBLY OR DISCUSS AN ACT ON ASSIGNING A NEW MEMBER TO THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL NOW HAS A CONFLICT AND WILL NEED TO STEP OFF OF THAT BODY.
UM, SO WE'RE LOOKING TO APPOINT A NEW MEMBER TO CODES AND ORDINANCES AND, UM, I'LL START, UM, BY SAYING WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE ON THAT.
THIS IS A ONCE A MONTH WEDNESDAY, UM, THAT A LOT OF THE CODES, ALMOST ALL OF THE CODES THAT WE SEE HERE GO THROUGH THAT BODY.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD BEFORE WE NOMINATE.
UM, YES, IT'S BEEN A REAL PLEASURE BEING AT CGOC AND I THINK IT GIVES YOU, IT'S LIKE GETTING A SNEAK CREEK OF EVERY MOVIE THAT'S COMING,
UM, SOMETIMES I, IF PEOPLE DON'T APPRECIATE SNEAK CREEKS, BUT BELIEVE ME, GETTING TO KNOW THE SPOILERS IS ACTUALLY FUN.
SO I REALLY ENCOURAGE WHOEVER GETS TO BE ON CGOC TO REALLY TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DIVE IN AND SEE THESE ITEMS BEFORE WE SEE THEM AT PC AND COME PREPARED.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER COX, I WAS JUST GONNA NOMINATE COMMISSIONER HAYNES FOR THE POSITION.
DOES COMMISSIONER HAYNES ACCEPT, ACCEPT THAT POSITION OR THAT NOMINATION? WE'LL TAKE OTHER NOMINATIONS AS WELL, IF THERE ARE ANY.
DID YOU ACCEPT THAT NOMINATION? UH, THIRD WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH AT 6:00 PM I'M GOING NO, 'CAUSE I'M GONNA NOMINATE COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ.
DO YOU ACCEPT THAT NOMINATION? I DO.
CHAIR I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE, UM, COMMISSIONER WOODS.
DO YOU ACCEPT THAT NOMINATION? I DO.
ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS? UH, I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER HAYNES.
I DON'T LIKE COMMISSIONER COX AS MUCH AS I LIKE COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
SO, UM, IT'S BEEN A MINUTE SINCE WE VOTED ON NOMINEES.
SO WE'LL HAVE THREE NOMINEES, UM, COMMISSIONERS, BARRE, RAMIREZ, WOODS, AND HAYES.
AND THEN WE TAKE THAT UP IN ORDER.
THAT IS CORRECT CHAIR, WE TAKE IT UP IN ORDER OFF NOMINATION AND ESSENTIALLY KEEP GOING DOWN THE LINE, UM, UNTIL ESSENTIALLY SOMEONE GETS THE MAJORITY VOTE TO SERVE ON THE BODY.
ONE, UM, IT'S NOT FORBIDDEN, BUT, UH, COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE BEING NOMINATED MAY CHOOSE NOT TO VOTE FOR THEMSELVES.
I WILL SAY THAT IF WE RUN INTO A PROBLEM WHERE WE'RE LIKE GETTING SHORT OF ONE OR TWO NO VOTES, WE MIGHT HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SECOND ROUND AND ASK THEM TO VOTE FOR THEMSELVES JUST SO THAT WE CAN GET SOMEONE PLACED.
UM, THE OTHER THING REMINDER IS THAT YOU CANNOT VOTE FOR MORE THAN ONE PERSON.
SO THAT'S WHAT MAKES THIS TRICKY.
UM, AND I BELIEVE THAT SINCE THIS IS A, A JOINT COMMITTEE, THIS HAS TO GO TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
SO WHOMEVER'S IN THIS ROLE LIKELY WOULDN'T START UNTIL THE NOVEMBER MEETING.
JUST TO CLARIFY, I ACTUALLY LET THE LIAISON KNOW THAT I WILL BE ATTENDING THE OCTOBER MEETING AND THAT WOULD LIKELY BE MY LAST.
WE HAVE FOUR OR FIVE ITEMS ON THAT MEETING.
AS THERE'S THREE PEOPLE NOW NOMINATED.
I JUST WANTED THROW OUT THERE THAT IF ANYONE WANTED TO NOT BE A PART OF THAT, THEY'RE WELCOME TO SPEAK UP OR NOT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND WE'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ.
UM, I'LL JUST, I KNOW THIS IS KIND OF AWKWARD, BUT WE'LL JUST GO DOWN THE LINE AND
[02:50:01]
YAY OR NAY, SHOULD I SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WHY I WOULD LIKE TO BE ON THE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE? WE CAN ASK ALL THREE OF THEM TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR DO.IS THAT NOT, UM, WE DON'T WAY, AGAIN, THIS IS, WE DON'T DO THIS VERY OFTEN, SO YES.
SO WE MIGHT ALLOW ALL THREE TO SPEAK AND THEN WE CAN GO TO THE VOTES.
SO I WAS THE CHAIR OF THE COJC FOR TWO YEARS.
I REALLY ENJOY BEING A PART OF THAT, UM, PART OF THAT COMMITTEE SIMPLY BECAUSE AS COMMISSIONER MAXWELL NOTED, YOU DO GET A SNEAK PRE PREVIEW OF WHAT'S HAPPENING.
I THINK THAT YOU ARE DOING, UH, REALLY IMPORTANT WORK.
AND SO, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE.
I THINK I LEARNED A LOT AS BEING PART OF THE COMMITTEE AND I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO SERVE IN THAT ROLE.
UM, WHEN I TRANSITIONED OVER TO PLANNING COMMISSION, I WASN'T, UM, PERMITTED TO BE ON THAT COMMITTEE AGAIN 'CAUSE THERE WAS ALREADY FULL.
SO, UM, AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO SERVE.
I, I WOULD LOVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON SOME OF THESE BEFORE THEY COME TO PLANNING COMMISSION, AND I KNOW THAT ANY OF US WOULD DO A GREAT JOB IN THAT ROLE.
COMMISSIONER HAYNES, I'M GONNA VOTE FOR COMMISSIONER BARRE RAMIREZ.
THOSE ARE A GREAT STUMP SPEECH.
OKAY, SO WE'LL START WITH YOU.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ON THIS IS FOR COMMISSIONER BARRERA NAY.
YOU HAVE TO PICK ONE OUT OF ALL THREE.
AND COMMISSIONER HOWARD? CAN'T HEAR.
SO, UM, COMMISSIONER BARRER RAMIREZ HAS REACHED SEVEN VOTES, SO CONGRATULATIONS.
YOU ARE OUR NEW APPOINTEE TO THANK YOU.
[19. Discussion and action to nominate two commissioners to serve on the Small Area Planning Joint Committee.]
ON.THAT'S NOT YOUR ONLY OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE ON ANOTHER COMMITTEE.
UM, THERE ARE, WE NEED TO NOMINATE TWO COMMISSIONERS TO SERVE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, SO, UH, I DON'T HAVE MY REFERENCE HERE OF HOW FREQUENTLY THIS MEETS, BUT THIS IS A COMMITTEE, UM, THAT WORKS WITH ZAP MEMBERS.
AND IF YOU ENJOY THINKING ABOUT THE SITE SCALE AND MORE OF DESIGN, I SERVED ON THIS COMMITTEE AND I REALLY ENJOYED IT.
UM, THE MEETINGS ARE ABOUT ONCE A MONTH, BUT, UM, SOMETIMES GET CANCELED.
UM, SOMEONE ELSE WHO'S JOINED OR SERVED ON THIS ONE HAVE ANY ELSE, ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? I WOULD ECHO WHAT YOU JUST SAID AND I'M CURRENTLY SERVING ON THE COMMITTEE AND I THINK THAT IT'S, UM, IT'S INTERESTING IN THAT YOU DO GET TO SEE SOME OF THESE SMALL SITE PLANS AND, AND SMALLER PLANS.
AND THEN IT DOES GET CANCELED.
ALRIGHT, SO I'M LOOKING FOR, UM, NOT ONE, BUT TWO COMMISSIONERS TO SERVE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
ANYONE WANT TO NOMINATE? I WILL NOMINATE COMMISSIONER HANEY
UM, AND ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO STEP UP TO THIS ONE? OTHERWISE, IF WE DON'T FILL IT TODAY, WE CAN KEEP THIS AS A ROLLING AGENDA ITEM.
UH, CHAIR, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.
I'M NOT SURE IF STAFF CAN HELP US WITH THIS OR SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT KNOW.
DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS RIGHT NOW WHO ARE NOT SERVING ON A JOINT COMMITTEE? SO NOT THE WORKING GROUPS WITH THE JOINT COMMITTEES? I'M NOT SERVING ON A JOINT COMMITTEE AT THE MOMENT.
I OKAY, SO JUST COMMISSIONER HAYNES OR, UH, HANEY AND COMMISSIONER WOODS.
AND I THINK COMMISSIONER HOWARD, YOU ARE NOT ALSO ON A COMMITTEE, A JOINT COMMITTEE? THAT'S CORRECT.
I, UH, GOT REAPPOINTED, SO I'M HAVE TO GET REAPPOINTED TO A COMMITTEE.
UM, SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINEES?
[02:55:01]
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON COMMISSIONER HAYNES.I DON'T KNOW IF YOU YES, VICE CHAIR HANE.
CAN I JUST ASK A QUESTION? COMMISSIONER HAYNES, UH, QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
COMMISSIONER HOWARD, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO SERVE ON THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE IF I NOMINATED YOU, SIR? I WOULD.
THANK YOU, GERALD, GO AHEAD AND, UH, NOMINATE COMMISSIONER HOWARD TO SERVE ON THE BODY AS WELL.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO SAY A FEW WORDS IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, UM, BUT YOU'RE NOT RUNNING AGAINST EACH OTHER.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS FOR COMMISSIONER HANEY FOR THE FIRST SPOT.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE BACK AND COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? COMMISSIONER, HOW ARE YOU NOT VOTING FOR YOURSELF? OH, I THOUGHT WE WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO VOTE FOR OURSELVES.
WELL CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU BOTH.
YOU ARE OUR NEW, UH, RECOMMENDED APPOINTEES TO THE SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
ALRIGHT, SO AS A REMINDER THAT WILL GO TO COUNCIL FOR THEIR FINAL APPROVAL.
SO, UM, I BELIEVE STAFF WILL ALERT YOU WHENEVER THAT'S BEEN APPROVED AND YOU CAN START ATTENDING THOSE MEETINGS.
CODES AND ORDINANCES, JOINT COMMITTEE UPDATE.
DID WE, I'M SORRY IF I MISSED IT.
DID WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUGGEST, UM, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS THAT IS AT THE END AFTER WE GO THROUGH THE COMMITTEE AND WORKING GROUP UPDATES? SORRY ABOUT THAT.
THEY, THEY HAVE THE AGENDA ORDER HAS SWITCHED A LITTLE BIT, SO OKAY.
[WORKING GROUP/COMMITTEE UPDATE]
ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE WE MEET NEXT WEDNESDAY.THERE'S A PRETTY, UH, HEFTY AGENDA, UM, TO REVIEW, UH, SEVERAL FOUR CODE ITEMS. UM, SO COMMISSIONERS, YOU MIGHT BE PREPARED FOR A SLIGHTLY LONGER MEETING THAN TYPICAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
UH, WE TOMORROW WE ACTUALLY MEET TOMORROW.
AND, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE TAKING UP IS THE, UH, WHAT ARE WE TAKING OUT THE, NOT ONLY THE DISCUSSION OF THE IMAGINE AUSTIN, BUT THE, UH, EQUITY BASED PRESERVATION PLAN.
SO WE'VE GOTTA PASS THAT TO GET IT HERE IN TWO WEEKS.
WE'LL HEAR THAT ON OUR SPECIAL CALL MEETING ON THE 21ST.
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
UH, WE, WE MET A WEEK AGO AND WE VOTED TO GET A BRIEFING ON THE, UH, AUSTIN'S TREE ORDINANCE.
AND SO WE DEVELOPED SOME QUESTIONS AROUND, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE, WHAT, UH, HERITAGE TREES AND JUST THE BASIC TREE ORDINANCE AND AROUND FINES AND UH, UH, AROUND, UH, COMPLIANCE ISSUES AS WELL.
UH, WE ALSO HEARD A BRIEFING FROM AUSTIN ENERGY, UM, ON AN INTERESTING TOPIC CALLED SOLAR FOR ALL.
SO I'M SURE WE'LL BE HEARING MORE ABOUT THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
BUT IT'S A PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS SOLAR PANELS TO BE PUT ON ROOFTOPS.
UM, AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE AN AFFORDABILITY PROGRAM, UM, THAT IT, THE SOLAR PANELS GO ON ROOFTOPS AND THEN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PAYING ENERGY BILLS WHO MEET A CERTAIN INCOME REQUIREMENT WOULD GET A 20% DISCOUNT ON THEIR ENERGY BILLS FOR A DECADE.
AND AFTER THAT, UM, THE ROOFTOPS THAT GOT THE SOLAR PANELS, THEY WOULD OWN THEM.
SO WE'RE LOOKING INTO THAT AS WELL.
UM, SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE, WE DID NOT MEET OR WE WON'T BE MEETING.
AND SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
UM, WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY RECENT BUSINESS.
THE AUSTIN BUILDINGS WORKING GROUP.
WE HAVE NOT MET OUTREACH AND PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP HAS NOT MET.
AND THE 2024 TECHNICAL BUILDING CODE UPDATES.
I FINALLY HAVE AN UPDATE ON THIS
UM, THIS, UH, THESE ITEMS ARE ACTUALLY COMING BACK TO COUNCIL IN THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY, SO I WILL BE ACTUALLY REACHING OUT TO OUR WORKING GROUP MEMBERS SO WE CAN FIGURE OUT, UH, BEST NEXT STEPS PROBABLY THIS WEEK.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
US TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. COMMISSIONER COX.YEAH, BASED ON, UH, THE PUBLIC FEEDBACK WE GOT TODAY AND SOME OTHER
[03:00:01]
FEEDBACK, UH, THAT WE'VE RECEIVED, I'M HOPING TO HAVE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO DISCUSS AND HOPEFULLY HAVE A Q AND A WITH, UH, CITY STAFF, INCLUDING THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ON, UH, POTENTIAL CODE CHANGES THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED RELATED TO COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS NEAR OUR, UH, UH, WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE, UM, OR NATURE PRESERVES.UM, AND OTHER AGENDA ITEMS? VICE CHAIR, CAN I JUST ASK FOR CLARIFICATION OF THAT? UM, COMMISSIONER COX, I'M ASSUMING THIS IS IN RELATION TO THE TELECOM TOWER, UH, TESTIMONY THAT WE HEARD EARLIER TODAY DAY.
IT'S RELATED TO IT, BUT, BUT I'VE GOTTEN FEEDBACK THAT IT'S, IT'S A MUCH LARGER THAN JUST THAT ONE SITE.
UH, THE DISCUSSION NEEDS TO BE HAD.
UH, NO, I COMPLETELY APPRECIATE THAT AND I, THE ONLY THING I WAS GONNA SAY WAS I, I ALSO WOULD REALLY LIKE FOR, UM, LEGAL STAFF TO TELL US WHAT'S, I KNOW TELECOM IS KIND OF UNIQUE, WE'VE BEEN TOLD IN THE PAST BECAUSE OF FEDERAL LAWS THAT GUIDE LOCATION OF TELECOM TOWERS, WE HAVE, THERE'S SOME LIMITATIONS AND MAYBE THEY DON'T APPLY IN THIS CASE, I'M NOT SURE, BUT I WOULD LOVE TO GET THAT CLARITY AS WELL.
OTHER ITEMS? COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
SO AGAIN, WE'VE BEEN HEARING A LOT FROM COMMUNITIES ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND PLAIN LANGUAGE AND HOW WE'RE NOTICING, AND I'D LIKE TO GET THAT ON A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM WITH THE HOPE THAT WE CAN HAVE A BETTER SYSTEM OF HOW WE'RE NOTICING, UM, OUR COMMUNITIES, WHAT LANGUAGE WE'RE USING, UM, IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, DO WE USE, UH, BUREAUCRATIC LANGUAGE OR DO WE USE PLAYING ENGLISH AND OR SPANISH AND JUST A WHOLE CONVERSATION AND PERHAPS SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND THAT.
SINCE WE HAVE, WE TEND, WE HAVE HEARD THAT A NUMBER OF TIMES.
IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? OKAY.
I'M SORRY, I WAS NOT A SECOND.
OH, I THOUGHT I HEARD TALKING TO, I'LL SECOND THAT.
I, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, SO WE HAD TALKED BUT BEFORE WAS WE GOT THIS HOST OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM OUR PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP AND WE HAD, UM, SORT OF INDICATED IF IT WAS POSSIBLE TO DISCUSS THOSE WITH STAFF AS WELL.
SO I THINK IT'S SORT OF ALL OVERLAYS WITH KIND OF THE THING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND I, I DON'T KNOW, HAVE, HAS THE WORKING GROUP HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO SOME OF THE STAFF RELATED TO THE PROCEDURAL SORT OF, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU ALL HAD RECOMMENDED OR SUGGESTED? UM, I DON'T THINK SO, BUT I THINK THAT, THAT I, I DON'T WANNA DELAY AND WAIT FOR THAT TO HAPPEN BECAUSE THIS IS, COMES UP AND ESPECIALLY AS WE'RE MAKING DECISIONS AROUND, UH, THINGS THAT REALLY IMPACT PEOPLE'S, UH, LIVES AND, AND THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEIR COMMUNITIES.
SO, SO I THINK IT IT CAN STAND ON ITS OWN REGARDLESS.
I THINK, AND PARTIALLY BECAUSE THE WORKING GROUPS ARE ALSO CLOSED, THEY'RE NOT SORT OF PUBLIC CONVERSATIONS.
SO I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO KEEP THIS ITEM.
UM, BUT I WOULD ALSO, AGAIN RECOMMEND THE WORKING GROUP SHOULD REALLY CONSIDER, UM, HAVING THAT CONVERSATION WITH OUR STAFF AS WELL.
STILL LOOKING FOR A CO-SPONSOR ON THAT ONE.
I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT YOU WERE NO, I THOUGHT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON WAS PLEASE.
COX, THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING UP.
NO OTHER A AGENDA ITEMS. OKAY.
UM, WITH THAT I CALL OUR MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:14 PM THANK YOU.
WALKING DOWN THE STREET, YOU MIGHT HAVE RUN ACROSS SMILING FACE, STAB YOU IN THE BACK AS SOON AS YOU TURN AND WALK AWAY.
AND I, WHOA LORD IS BRINGING ME DOWN.
WELL, IF THINGS DON'T CHANGE AROUND, THERE AIN'T NO USE OF ME.