[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:04]
UM, THIS IS OUR FIRST MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 2025, SO HAVING A QUORUM PRESENT WITHIN COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
I NOW CALL THIS MEETING IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:08 PM AND FIRST WE WILL TAKE ROLL CALL.
I'LL GO IN ORDER OF HOW I SEE IT ON THE AGENDA.
I THINK SHE'LL BE JOINING US IN JUST A FEW.
AND I'D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE OUR, UH, CHAIR OF BOARD ADJUSTMENT.
UM, AS USUAL, OUR MEETING TONIGHT IS HYBRID, ALLOWING FOR A VIRTUAL QUORUM AS LONG AS THE PERSON LEADING THE MEETING IS IN THE CHAMBERS.
UM, SO WE'LL HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONERS PARTICIPATING VIRTUALLY AND IN PERSON.
UM, JUST REMEMBER TO HAVE YOUR VOTING RED, GREEN, AND YELLOW, UM, AND REMAIN MUTED WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING.
IF I MISS YOU, JUST COME OFFLINE AND LET ME KNOW.
IF YOU ARE ASSIGNED UP TO SPEAK, YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION TAKING UP YOUR ITEM AND SPEAKERS CAN DONATE TIME.
BOTH THE SPEAKER DONATING TIME AND THE SPEAKER RECIPIENT MUST BE PRESENT IN PERSON WHEN THE ITEM IS CONSIDERED.
[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]
ALRIGHT, SO, MS. GARCIA, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? YES.WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS PHILLIP WILEY.
PHILLIP, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
CAN YOU HEAR? HI, MY NAME IS PHILIP WILEY.
UH, I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, AND I HAVE A FEW NOTES I'D LIKE TO REFER TO IF YOU, UH, I, I KNOW THIS IS SMALL PRINT, UM, BUT THIS IS A LETTER THAT DANA WROTE FROM 2017 WHEN WE WERE DOING CODE NEXT.
UM, AND I BRING IT UP BECAUSE OUR, OUR BOARD WAS TALKING RECENTLY ABOUT WHAT OUR FOCUS AREAS MIGHT BE FOR THIS YEAR IN ADVANCE OF, UH, THE DOWNTOWN PLAN KICKOFF STARTING OR, OR EVEN BEING ACTUALLY INITIATED.
UM, AND, AND THE SAME WITH, UH, THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY.
UM, AND SO WE, AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS, IT, IT OCCURRED TO US THAT, UH, A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK ON, UH, ON PLANNING, UH, WAS DONE BY ALL OF US BACK IN THE CODE NEXT PERIOD.
AND WE LOOKED BACK AND SAW, UH, THERE WAS A PERIOD IN 2017 WHEN CHRIS RILEY CAME BACK TO LEAD DANA WHEN WE WERE DOING CODE NEXT BECAUSE HE HAD A PASSION FOR DOWNTOWN AND A LOVE FOR THE CITY.
AND, UM, WE CAME UP WITH A LIST OF, AT THAT TIME OF FIVE PRIORITIES THAT WE SAW, UM, FOR SPECIFICALLY FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA.
AND, UM, SO AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THESE, UM, THERE WERE THREE OF 'EM ON THE NEXT PAGE, PLEASE, THAT ARE STILL KIND OF OUTSTANDING AND RELEVANT THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE VERY TIMELY TO TALK ABOUT THIS THIS YEAR, AND TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION, UH, BECAUSE, UH, SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE EASILY OVERLOOKED BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT PLANNING IS, IS UNDERSTANDABLY DONE.
UM, AND, AND, UM, LARGELY IT CENTERS AROUND, UM, TRANSITION AREAS.
UH, SO A LOT OF TIMES WHEN, WHEN PLANNING IS DONE, IT'S UNO OR IT'S DOWNTOWN, OR IT'S THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN OR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, AND WE'RE NOT ALWAYS LOOKING AT THEM AS ONE COHESIVE, COHERENT, UM, AREA.
AND, UH, BECAUSE UNO AND DOWNTOWN ARE BOTH PART OF THE PRIMARY ACTIVITY CENTER, UH, WE, WE THINK THAT THERE, UH, COULD BE BENEFIT FROM LOOKING AT THEM TOGETHER.
SO ITEM THREE, WHICH I WILL BE FOCUSING ON IS, UM, SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT THE MLK AREA, UH, EXTENDING DOWN TO 15TH.
AND, UM, IT REALLY SHOULD GO UP TO ABOUT, UM, 21ST OR 22ND.
AND, UH, KIMBERLY LEVINSON, WHO'S ANOTHER PERSON ON OUR BOARD, WILL BE FOCUSED ON LOOKING AT THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT.
AND, UH, THAT'S THE AREA THAT SHE'S
[00:05:01]
IN AND THAT'S HER PASSION.SO, UM, I JUST WANT TO KINDA SOCIALIZE THIS WITH YOU THAT WE, WE PLAN TO COME BACK.
WE'RE NOT GONNA WAIT FOR THE PLAN.
AND, UH, UM, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MICHELLE CAMP.
MICHELLE, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
ALL, IS MS. KIM IN CHAMBERS OR IS SHE ON THE PHONE? SHE REGISTERED AS IN PERSON THOUGH.
I'LL GIVE HER A MOMENT AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER.
YEAH, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS BOBBY LAVINSKY.
BOBBY, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE.
UM, I'VE HAD PEOPLE SHOW UP TODAY FOR THE ITEM NUMBER 18, THE HAYES COMMENTS DEVELOPMENT.
I WANNA MAKE SURE PEOPLE KNOW THAT THIS STAT IS GOING TO BE POSTPONED TONIGHT.
UM, AND SO, UH, FEEL FREE TO REACH OUT TO US IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
UM, IF YOU'RE IN HERE OR IF YOU'RE ONLINE, UM, THAT ITEM WILL NOT BE, UH, CONSIDERED TONIGHT WILL BE POSTPONED.
I'M GONNA USE THIS OPPORTUNITY THOUGH TO SPEAK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S EQUALLY AS IMPORTANT AND ALSO PRESSING WITH TIME.
UH, THE MOPAC SOUTH EXPANSION IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
UM, THERE IS AN OPEN HOUSE, UH, WHERE PEOPLE, THEY'RE TAKING COMMENTS RIGHT NOW.
THEY ARE PROPOSING A FOUR LANE, FOUR LANE EXPANSION.
THAT'S REALLY A SEVEN LANE EXPANSION.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT WHERE THE AUXILIARY LANES ARE, SO AS THEY'RE MOVING THE, THE ENTRANCE RAMPS TO THE BRIDGES, UM, INTO THE OVERPASSES, UM, SO IT IS A MAJOR EXPANSION OF A HIGHWAY, UM, THAT OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE, THE ENTIRE HIGHWAY, UH, TRAVELS ACROSS THE RECHARGE ZONE.
UM, IT IS GOING TO HAVE A TREMENDOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND THEY'RE ONLY PROCEEDING UNDER AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.
UM, WE HAVE INCREDIBLY CON UH, CONCERN ABOUT THAT.
WE REALLY WANT PEOPLE TO BE SUBMITTING COMMENTS, UM, TO THE C TERM, A DEMANDING THAT THEY FULL PERFORM A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT BASED OFF OF THE KNOWN ENVIRONMENTAL RISK TO THIS SITE.
ALSO, I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT, JUST 'CAUSE THIS IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THIS IS REALLY COUNTER TO THE CITY'S MOBILITY PLANS.
UM, WE DON'T NEED WIDER HIGHWAYS, WE NEED BETTER HIGHWAYS.
WE NEED TO, UM, BE WORKING ON MOBILITY SOLUTIONS.
UM, WHAT WE'VE LEARNED THROUGH COVID, THROUGH THE COVID ERA IS THAT PEOPLE WILL TRAVEL LESS AND THAT, UM, THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE RELEASED DATA THIS YEAR THAT SHOWED THAT PEOPLE ARE TRAVELING LESS STILL TO THIS DAY, THAT THERE IS A PERMANENT EFFECT FROM THE, THE COVID ERA.
PEOPLE ARE NOT TRAVELING AS MUCH.
UM, ON MONDAYS AND FRIDAYS PARTICULARLY, THEY'RE WORKING FROM HOME MORE.
THEY ALL HAVE A HYBRID WORK STYLE.
UM, AND PEOPLE ARE STAGGERING THEIR COMMUTES THROUGHOUT THE DAY.
THE RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC IS NOT AS IMPORTANT.
SO IF WE CAN COME UP WITH SOME TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, SOME TRAFFIC, UH, UH, SOME TWEAKS HERE AND THERE TO MOPAC ON HOW IT FUNCTIONS, IT WOULD BE A LOT LESS COSTLY TO THE CMA TO THE PUBLIC AND TO EVERYBODY INVOLVED TO HAVE A, A LOWER SCALED PROJECT, UM, THAT I THINK IS FEASIBLE.
THE COUNCIL RECENTLY, UH, PASSED A RESOLUTION THAT SPEAKS TO, UM, WANTING A TO WORK WITH CREME ON AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN.
UH, WE HAVEN'T SEEN AN ALTERNATIVE REALLY CONSIDERED IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR OPEX SOUTH SINCE 2015.
THAT'S THE LAST TIME THAT THEY CONSIDERED AN ALTERNATIVE FOR THAT HIGHWAY.
UM, AND SO I'M GONNA BRING IT BACK AROUND TO THE, WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT NEXT WEEK.
THIS IS THE TYPE OF PROJECT THAT HAS INDUCED DEMAND EFFECTS AND IT INFLUENCES SPRAWL.
UM, ONE OF, UH, MY PARTNERS WITH RETHINK CAME UP WITH A REALLY GOOD IDEA.
SHE WANTED ME TO PROVIDE A MAP THAT WOULD SHOW WHAT PROPERTIES COULD BE DEVELOPED IF WE'RE EXPANDING HIGHWAYS LIKE THIS.
SO I, I PASS THAT MAP TO THE PEOPLE, UM, HERE OR HERE IN PERSON.
I'LL EMAIL IT TO THOSE, UM, THAT ARE ONLINE.
IT, THAT MAP SHOWS ALL THE PARCELS AT THE END OF MOPAC THAT ARE 30 ACRES OR MORE THAT ARE VULNERABLE TO SPRAWL OVER THE RETARD ZONE.
MICHELLE CAMP, ARE YOU PRESENT? HEARING NOTHING.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MS. GARCIA.
[Consent Agenda]
SO THE FIRST ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 17TH MEETING.THAT WAS OUR CONSENT ONLY MEETING.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY EDITS TO THOSE MINUTES? ALRIGHT, RECOGNIZING COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS ONLINE, WELCOME.
UM, HEARING NONE THOSE MINUTES AS POSTED WILL BE ADDED
[00:10:01]
TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.ALL RIGHT, OUR FIRST ACTIVITY TODAY IS TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ITEMS THAT ARE CONSENT APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, POSTPONEMENTS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS OR NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS. VICE CHAIR CZAR WILL READ THE PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND IDENTIFY THOSE THAT ARE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AND NON-DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS.
YOU'LL ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST CONSENT ITEMS TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
THESE ARE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS FOR THE NIGHT.
ITEM NUMBER TWO, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2 24 DASH FIVE THREE CHERRY REZONING DISTRICT ONE.
THIS ITEM IS WITHDRAWN THE ASSOCIATED REZONING.
ITEM NUMBER THREE C 14 DASH 2 24 22 CHERRY REZONING DISTRICT ONE.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 24 DASH 8.0 2 29 67 MANNAR ROAD DIVISION DISTRICT ONE NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 28TH.
THE ASSOCIATED REZONING ITEM NUMBER FIVE C 14 DASH 2 24 DASH ZERO SEVEN MANNAR ROAD DIVISION, THE REZONE DISTRICT ONE NINE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 28TH.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 20 24 5 0 1 SAXON TWO DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD REQUEST TO FEBRUARY 25TH.
THE ASSOCIATED REZONING IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN C 14 DASH 24 DASH 0 0 9 0 0 9 9 SAXON TWO DISTRICT E.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD REQUEST TO FEBRUARY 25TH.
I NUMBER EIGHT IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2023 DASH 0 2 5 2 5 5 2 4 WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90 DISTRICT EIGHT.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT I NUMBER NINE IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 20 20 24 DASH 0 1 64 CLUB CORONA, DISTRICT FOUR.
I NUMBER 10 IS A REZONING C EIGHT 14 DASH 2008 DASH 0 6 5 0 1 EAST RIVERSIDE AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE, DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT I NUMBER 11 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 4 STOUT HOUSE PATIO DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT.
I NUMBER 12 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2 24 DASH ZERO HUNDRED 12 5 3 0 1 MARTIN AVENUE, DISTRICT FOUR.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION EXCEPT TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IS REMOVED FROM THE LIST OF PROHIBITED USES.
I NUMBER THREE, UH, NUMBER 13 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2 24 DASH 0 3 7 0 4 EAST 53RD STREET, DISTRICT FOUR.
AGAIN, THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ON STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH THE REMOVAL OF TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FROM THE LIST OF PROHIBITED USES.
I NUMBER 14 C IS A REZONING C 14 DASH HUNDRED FOUR DASH 0 4 5 2 1 0 BREWING AVENUE, DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION I NUMBER 15 IS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT TERMINATION C 14 DASH 86 DASH 0 6 9 R, CT 7 9 1 0 BURLESON ROAD DISTRICT TWO.
I NUMBER 16 IS A HISTORIC ZONING, C 14 H DASH TWO FOUR DASH 0 1 0 2.
FANNY DAVIS GAZEBO, DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 17 IS SUBDIVISION, UH, VACATIONS CA EIGHT DASH SEVEN NINE DASH 4 4 6 5 VC, THE VILLAGE OF PLEASANT VALLEY SECTION TWO TOTAL PLAT, UH, VACATION DISTRICT TWO.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO OFFERED FOR, UH, CONSENT AND CHAIR.
UM, IF WE WANT, WE CAN READ INTO THE CONSENT AGENDA ALSO, THERE WAS AN ITEM, WHICH IS AN ACTION ITEM NUMBER 18.
UH, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 28TH AS WELL.
IS, DOES ANYBODY NEED TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN FROM ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT? COMMISSIONER WOODS CHAIR.
I'LL BE ABSTAINING ON ITEM 17.
I'M A CONSULTANT ON THIS PROJECT, BUT MY INCOME IN THAT ROLE DOES NOT MEET THE THRESHOLD FOR RECUSAL.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? CHAIR SHERRY HERWE WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
I WANTED TO POINT OUT ON ITEM NUMBER NINE, IT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO ADDED ADULT ORIENTED USES AS A PROHIBITED USE.
SO SINCE THAT WAS NOT IN THE STAFF REPORT, I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL USE THAT WILL BE ADDED.
UM, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS NEEDING TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN OR SPEAKERS SIGNED UP ON CONSENT AGENDA? YES.
WE HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS MARTY COMBS.
HE'LL BE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION ON ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE.
MARTY, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
HI, UH, I'M A HOMEOWNER THAT'S WITHIN THE 500 FOOT, UH, LIMIT OF THE DESIGNATION FOR NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS AT, UH, THE INTERSECTION OF MAINOR AND
[00:15:01]
AIRPORT.AND I DO SUPPORT TALLER BUILDING HEIGHTS, BUT I HAVE TO SAY THAT I'M OPPOSED TO THIS PARTICULAR, UM, EXEMPTION BECAUSE IT, IT COMES OFF AS BEING PIECEMEAL AND I THINK THIS LONG-TERM INTERESTS, UH, PLANNING INTERESTS OF THE CITY, WE BETTER SERVE FOR THE RESIDENTS, UH, OF LIVING NEAR THAT AREA.
IF THE, UH, MAXIMUM DENSITY AND THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT WERE ACTUALLY INCREASE FOR EITHER THE TOD OR IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT, IF YOU'RE GONNA IMPACT THAT INTERSECTION TO PROVIDE AN EXEMPTION FOR INCREASED HEIGHT AS WELL AS INCREASED DENSITY FOR ALL PROPERTIES IN THAT INTERSECTION OF MAINLAND AIRPORT, BECAUSE THAT IS A VITAL CONNECTOR BETWEEN MUELLER, CHERRYWOOD AND ROSEWOOD.
AND SO HAVING TALLER BUILDINGS AND HIGHER DENSITY, UH, WHILE STILL APPLYING THE, UH, TOD UM, UH, INTENT OF ENCOURAGING BICYCLING AND PEDESTRIANS, UH, AND ACCESS WOULD BE BETTER SERVED, UH, IF THIS WERE, IF THIS WERE DONE TO THE, UH, RATHER THAN A PIECEMEAL, BUT THE WHOLE AREA THERE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION WILL BE SPEAKING ON ITEM 12, RACHEL FORSTER.
RACHEL, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
SHE WAS ALSO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION ON ITEM NUMBER 13 AS WELL.
BOBBY LEVINSKY WILL BE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
BOBBY, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS JENNY GRAYSON.
JENNY, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I BELIEVE THESE PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE SIGNED UP BEFORE THEY REALIZED IT WAS GOING TO BE POSTPONED.
WELL, LET'S JUST READ THEIR NAME OUT AND, AND THEN OUR FINAL SPEAKER ON THAT ITEM IS ABBY OVITZ.
ABBY WAS GOING TO BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
I DON'T BELIEVE SHE'S IN OUR QUEUE.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO PULL ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR OTHERWISE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE AGENDA? OKAY.
I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SEE A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
ALL IN FAVOR? ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER HAYNES.
UM, THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA AND OUR FIRST ITEM
[Items 6 & 7]
OF BUSINESS TONIGHT WILL BE THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT CASES.SO, UM, THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST IS TO, IS IT FEBRUARY 25TH? I BELIEVE FEBRUARY.
UM, AND SO FIRST THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, WE'RE NOT YET DIVING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE.
UM, AND THIS ONE FALLS INTO, THIS MUST BE WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM TODAY'S MEETING.
UM, NO STAFF INTRODUCTION WILL GO RIGHT INTO THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT.
FIRST, OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS VICTORIA.
VICTORIA, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
THIS WOULD BE THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT.
SO IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD? NO CHAIR.
UM, ALRIGHT, WE'LL HEAR FROM THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION TO THE POSTPONEMENT.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASSEY WITH THROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THIS CASE FORWARD THIS EVENING.
UH, WE HAVE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD BACK IN THE FALL AND, UM, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO REACH ANY AGREEMENTS.
UM, THEY DO HAVE SOME REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, BUT THE INFORMATION THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IS SITE PLAN RELATED, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE AT THIS TIME.
SO, UM, WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THIS CASE MOVE FORWARD THIS EVENING.
ALRIGHT, WELL, WE'LL OPEN UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION OR OTHERWISE ENTERTAIN A MOTION CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, I MOVE THAT WE HEAR THIS TONIGHT.
THIS CASE IS TONIGHT SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? NO.
WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE MOTION TO HEAR THE CASE TONIGHT.
[00:20:01]
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, MADAM CHAIR Y? YES.JUST A, A QUESTION BEFORE WE VOTE, UH, HAS STAFF OR HAS DID STAFF IN, IN MY NOTES, UM, I, I'M SORRY, I JUST STEPPED AWAY.
ARE WE ON, UM, FOUR AND FIVE OR SIX AND SEVEN? WE'RE ON ITEMS NUMBER SIX.
WE'RE ON ITEMS NUMBER SIX AND SEVEN, THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT FOR SAXON ACRES.
OKAY, SO WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON IS TO HEAR THE CASE TONIGHT.
UM, THOSE AGAINST TWO AND THOSE ABSTAINING.
ALL RIGHT, SO THAT'S, THINK THERE WERE THREE AGAINST.
SO WE WILL BE HEARING THE CASE TONIGHT.
UM, AND SINCE IT COMES IN ORDER BEFORE ITEM NUMBER 14, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM STAFF.
GOOD, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
I'M MARK WALTERS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
I'M HERE TO PRESENT, UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX MPA 20 24 0 0 0 5 DASH ZERO ONE SAXON TWO, DISTRICT THREE.
UH, THE REQUEST IS TO GO FROM SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO FUTURE TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND STAFF IS OPPOSED TO THAT REQUEST.
UH, THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER AT THIS TIME.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSION CYNTHIA HAD WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UM, THIS IS ITEM SEVEN ON YOUR AGENDA, KC 14 2 2 4 9 9 SAXON TWO.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THREE 18 SAXON LANE AND 6 3 2 8 EL STREET.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS APPROXIMATELY 2.89 ACRES UNDEVELOPED AND HAS ONE PROPOSED ACCESS ON SAXON LANE.
EL STREET IS ALSO A LEVEL ONE AND ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, BUT IS NOT SEEKING ACCESS.
THEY'RE NOT SEEKING ACCESS FROM THIS, UH, STREET.
THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED TOWNHOUSE, TOWNHOUSE AND CONDOMINIUM RESIDENCE.
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN F SIX NP, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO GO TO MF TWO.
DUE TO THE HISTORY ON THE SITE AND THE LACK OF IMPROVED INFRASTRUCTURE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE TO NOT GRANT THE REZONING FOR, UH, MF TWO NMP COMBINING DISTRICT.
THE CURRENT ZONING OF SF SIX NP IS A RECENT REZONING THAT THE CURRENT APPLICANT THROWER DESIGN LLC REZONED FROM SF THREE NP IN 2020.
THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY PROGRESS TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY SINCE THE PREVIOUS REZONING THAT STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED FOR CITY COUNCIL'S APPROVAL.
AS SUCH, THERE IS NOT A BASIS FOR STAFF TO CHANGE THEIR PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REZONING ON THE PROPERTY.
THERE ARE ALSO CONCERNS ABOUT GRANTING ANOTHER REZONING ON SAXON ROAD.
A LEVEL ONE DEAD END STREET GRANTING A REZONING WOULD MEAN SAXON ROAD IS OPERATING AT AN UNDESIRABLE LEVEL PER THE NTA.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HERE.
NOW WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASI WITH THROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
THE SUBJECT TRACT IS 2.89 ACRES OF UNDEVELOPED LAND.
IT HAS RIGHT OF WAY FRONTAGE ON TWO SEPARATE STREETS AS, UH, CYNTHIA WAS ME, CYNTHIA WAS MENTIONING EL MIRANDA AS WELL AS SAXON PROPERTY IS ALSO WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF EXISTING, UH, CAPITAL METRO BUS SERVICE WITH A TRANSIT STOP, UH, AT THE INTERSECTION OF MONIS AND AL MIRANDA.
THIS IS PERFORMANCE DATA PULLED FROM CAP METRO'S WEBSITE SHOWING, UM, THE, UH, ROUTE THREE 50 AND THE, UM, SERVICE, THE AVERAGE RIDERSHIP ON A, ON THE DAILY WEEKLY DAY IS JUST OVER 1500.
PROPERTY IS ZONED SF SIX, UM, BUT IT IS SURROUNDED COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES.
UM, AND I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY, WE'VE BEEN MADE AWARE THAT THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION BETWEEN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE ZONING MAP FOR THIS AREA.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THIS AREA IDENTIFIES QUITE A BIT OF SINGLE FAMILY YELLOW COLOR ON THE MAP, BUT IN REALITY, THE PROPERTY DOES HAVE LR A MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTIES IN THE AREA HAVE LR ZONING.
[00:25:01]
LR ZONING HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR SEVERAL DECADES PRIOR TO THIS PLAN, UH, PLAN BEING ADOPTED IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.UM, HOWEVER, I DO WANNA NOTE THAT IT, IT IS PRIMARILY USED FOR SINGLE FAMILY SURROUNDING THE SUBJECT TRACT.
AND SO WITH THAT, WE FEEL LIKE A LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY PROJECT HERE IS APPROPRIATE.
SO THIS IS A DEFINITION PULLED FROM, UH, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE MF TWO ZONING DISTRICT.
MF TWO ZONING DISTRICT IS INTENDED FOR LOW DENSITY MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT'S LOCATED NEAR SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
IN COMPARING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BETWEEN SF SIX AND MF TWO RESULTS IN AN ADDITIONAL HEIGHT OF OF FIVE FEET OR ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET OF HEIGHT.
UM, THERE ARE SOME INCREASES IN THE MAXIMUM BUILDING COVER, THE MAXIMUM PERVIOUS COVER, BUT ULTIMATELY THERE'S AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE POSSIBLE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.
SO I JUST WANNA COMMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, UNDER SF SIX THERE'S A MAXIMUM UNITS OF A MAXIMUM POSSIBILITY OF 36 UNITS.
SO THIS LANDOWNER DID EVERYTHING, UM, TO TRY TO BRING FORWARD AN SF SIX DEVELOPMENT.
THEY DID FILE A SITE PLAN WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN SHORTLY AFTER, UM, ACHIEVING THE REZONING TO SF SIX.
HOWEVER, DUE TO MARKET CONDITIONS, THEY HAD TO BACK AWAY FROM THAT SITE PLAN AND ARE NOW COMING BACK ASKING FOR AN UPZONING TO MF TWO.
THE ADDITIONAL UNITS THAT ARE, THAT WILL BE PROVIDED WITH THIS REZONING ACTUALLY BRING AN OPPORTUNITY TO INCLUDE SOME INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS WITH THIS, UH, WITH THIS PROJECT.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WILL HAVE BEFORE WE GET TO CITY COUNCIL.
UM, BUT WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND WE'RE AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND WE WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE SUPPORT FOR MORE UNITS IN THIS LOCATION.
DO WE HAVE ANY, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? NO CHAIR.
UM, LET'S, UH, MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SEE MOTION SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
AND THE MOTION WAS, UH, COMMISSIONER HA HANEY.
UM, UNLESS THERE IS OPPOSITION TO THAT, THAT MOTION PASSES.
ALL RIGHT, WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
WHO HAS OUR FIRST QUESTION OF 2025? OH, COMMISSIONER COX.
ZARA, IF YOU WANT TO GO FIRST.
COX
I KNOW, I, I DON'T, I DIDN'T WANNA AFTER THAT INTRODUCTION, I DIDN'T WANT TO BE THE FIRST ONE.
UM, WELL, I, I, WELL, I WILL GO AHEAD AND SET THE TONE FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR.
UH, THE QUESTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT, AND I'M HOPING THAT THEY CAN ELABORATE ON THEIR STATEMENT ABOUT POSSIBILITIES FOR INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS.
CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND, UH, WHAT, WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT AND WHY WE AREN'T EXPLORING THOSE POSSIBILITIES RIGHT NOW? SO THERE, THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY AND THE LANDOWNER IS, UM, IS COMMITTING TO PROVIDING SOME INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.
WE DON'T HAVE DETAILS IN TERMS OF THE PERCENTAGE AND THE LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY JUST YET.
PART OF THAT IS WANTING TO KNOW IF WE CAN GET THE COM, THE COMMISSION SUPPORT BEFORE WE GET TO COUNCIL, BEFORE EXPLORING IN DEPTH THOSE AGREEMENTS, UM, THAT WE WILL PUT INTO PLACE WITH AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PARTNER.
UM, ALSO, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THIS PARTICULAR LANDOWNER.
WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM ON THREE OTHER PROJECTS, THREE OTHER PROPERTIES ACHIEVING AND UPZONING THAT THOSE PROPERTIES EVENTUALLY WENT ON TO BECOME, UH, LITECH DEVELOPMENTS.
UM, SO WE, THE LANDOWNER ENVISIONS THAT THIS IS A GREAT POSSIBILITY WITH THIS PARTICULAR TRACT AS WELL.
SO WHATEVER AGREEMENT WE COME FORWARD WITH IN TERMS OF, UM, INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS, IT'S LIKELY TO BE MORE THAN THAT IN THE FUTURE.
I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE IF THAT'S HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK.
UH, I THINK, I THINK I UNDERSTANDING, UH, THE AFFORDABILITY ABILITY, UM, INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO DO, UH, SHOULD FACTOR INTO THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION ON WHETHER TO SUPPORT THIS OR NOT, RATHER THAN DECIDING IF YOU GET PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPORT BEFORE COMMITTING TO AFFORDABILITY.
BUT, UM, WITH THAT SAID, UH, I WAS CURIOUS, UM, STAFF MADE A COMMENT ABOUT Y'ALL NOT CONNECTING TO EL MIRANDA STREET, AND I'M CURIOUS, UM,
[00:30:01]
WHY IF THAT'S, IF, IF, IF THERE'S A PARTICULAR REASON WHY YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO HAVE DUAL ACCESS FROM SAXON AND EL MIRANDA, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE TRANSIT THAT YOU MADE REFERENCE TO IN YOUR PRESENTATION, IT WOULD BE MORE ACCESSIBLE FROM EL MIRANDA THEN THAN FROM SAXON.SO, UM, WITH THE TIA DETERMINATION WORKSHEET THAT WE SUBMITTED WITH THE ZONING APPLICATION, WE DID NOT PROPOSE VEHICULAR ACCESS TO EL MIRANDA.
NOW THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT AS THE SITE PLAN MOVES FORWARD WITH A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, THAT IT WON'T ACCESS EL MIRANDA.
WE JUST CHOSE TO LEAVE IT OFF FOR THE TIME BEING.
IN TERMS OF ZONING, WE DON'T HAVE A SITE PLAN PULLED TOGETHER FOR A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT JUST YET, BUT IT'S VERY POSSIBLE THAT IT COULD INCLUDE VEHICULAR ACCESS FROM EL MIRANDA, BUT IN THE LEAST PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FROM EL MIRANDA ABSOLUTELY MAKES SENSE AND IS SOMETHING THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN, UH, ON, ON THE TABLE FOR THIS, FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT COMES FORWARD, WHETHER IT WAS THE SF SIX DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY WERE ORIGINALLY, UH, LOOKING AT, OR IF IT'S AN MF DEVELOPMENT, I MEAN, IT, IT IS THE CLOSEST, UM, PATH TO GETTING TO EXISTING TRANSIT.
AND THEN I, I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION, JUST GOING BACK TO THE AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT, UM, I KNOW YOU AND RON KNOW WAY, WAY MORE WHAT'S POSSIBLE THAN, THAN PROBABLY ALL OF US, UH, SITTING ON THIS COMMISSION.
UM, UH, IS THERE A MECHANISM IN WHICH WE CAN GET SOME SORT OF AFFORDABILITY COMMITMENT FROM Y'ALL BEFORE WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT? I CAN'T.
I MEAN, MECHANISM WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS LANDOWNER'S GONNA PARTNER WITH AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, ENTITY TO MAKE PROMISES, UM, FOR THE INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT PROPOSAL OR THAT, UH, DOCUMENT TONIGHT AND WE'RE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE IT TONIGHT.
UM, NO, NO, NO, BUT, BUT ARE YOU MA I MEAN, UH, YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU AND RON COME UP TO US ALL THE TIME, UH, WITH, WITH, UH, LAND USE PROPOSALS.
UM, SO I FEEL LIKE IF Y'ALL MAKE A COMMITMENT TO US, EVEN IF IT'S RELATIVELY INFORMAL, UH, WE CAN'T HOLD YOU TO THAT OR AT LEAST TRY TO.
SO IS THAT THE COMMITMENT THAT YOU'RE MAKING TO THIS COMMISSION TONIGHT OR IS IT ALL STILL UP IN THE AIR? UM, IT'S, IT'S, THE DETAILS ARE STILL UP IN THE AIR, BUT IN THE LEASE IT WOULD PROBABLY LOOK LIKE AT AT LEAST 10% OF THE UNITS AT 80% MFI, IT COULD BE A SMALLER PERCENTAGE OF UNITS AT DEEPER LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY.
WE'RE NOT SURE OF THAT YET, BUT, UM, THERE, THERE IS A COMMITMENT THAT THERE WILL BE INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS LOCATED, UM, WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.
UM, MS. HASSEY, IF YOU COULD, UH, I HAD VERY SIMILAR QUESTIONS.
I THINK ON THE, UH, ONE THING ON THE AFFORDABILITY PIECE, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO DISCUSS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAS THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE DISCUSSED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? WE, UH, HAD COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT THEIR MEETING BACK IN OCTOBER AND AT THAT TIME, UH, THE AFFORDABILITY ASPECT OF THIS WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WE WERE PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT.
UM, BUT THAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THAT TIME.
AND, AND CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU DID HAVE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? YES.
SO THE CONVERSATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEIR, THEIR PRIMARY CONCERN IS THAT THIS IS UNDEVELOPED LAND TODAY.
AND SO PUTTING ANY DEVELOPMENT HERE IS GOING TO CREATE, YOU KNOW, CONCERN FOR DRAINAGE, UM, TRAFFIC, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
BUT OF COURSE WE KNOW THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS IN PLACE TO HELP FOSTER AND PROTECT, UM, THOSE PARTICULAR MATTERS OF DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THEY REALLY WANT TO SEE GREATER DETAILS THAT COME AT THE TIME OF SITE PLANS SUCH AS YOUR UNIT MIX, UM, THE BEDROOM COUNTS IN EACH UNIT, UM, THOSE SORTS OF DETAILS.
UM, AND WE JUST DON'T HAVE THAT YET.
AND ONE ASSOCIATED QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THE ITEM PROCEEDS TONIGHT IS, ARE YOU THINKING OF SORT OF LIKE CONTINUING TO SORT OF FIGURE OUT AND FIGURE OUT THOSE DETAILS AS THIS GOES TO COUNSEL? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
WE, WE WOULD, WE WILL HAVE A DOCUMENT IN PLACE BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL BY COUNSEL.
UM, AND JUST ON THE, UH, I THINK ON THE AFFORDABILITY QUESTION, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A CONSIDERATION OF LOOKING INTO THAT AND THAT'S SOMETHING AGAIN, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'LL FIGURE OUT THE DETAILS AS THIS GOES TO COUNCIL AND MAKE SURE THAT WHENEVER IT'S GETTING TO COUNCIL THEY HAVE A BETTER, MORE FULLER PICTURE OF WHAT WHAT MIGHT BE EXPECTED.
OKAY, SO NOTABLY NO ONE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS HERE, BUT WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE OPPOSED OR FROM THE LIKE
[00:35:01]
CONTACT TEAM.UM, AND I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS FOR THEM OR DISCUSSING THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS, AND I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE SOME HAVE BEEN HAVING CHALLENGES COMING UP WITH A NUMBER FOR AFFORDABILITY AND INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS, ET CETERA.
AND I ALSO KNOW THAT IN THE AREA THERE IS A ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NEARBY AND A REC CENTER AND THERE'S ALL THESE DIFFERENT, UM, UH, PLACES TO GO TO.
I'M CURIOUS ABOUT SOME OF THE OTHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT YOU'VE DISCUSSED BEYOND INCOME RESTRICTION, IF THEY, HAVE THEY ASKED ABOUT ANY OF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS OR RESTRICTING THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING OR ANY OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE ZONING THAT THOSE ELEMENTS, UM, DID NOT, WERE NOT DISCUSSED OR ASKED ABOUT AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING? UM, FROM WHAT I CAN RECALL, UM, IT WAS PRIMARILY, PRIMARILY WANTING MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW MANY UNITS THEY DID WANT.
THEY DID WANNA KNOW, YOU KNOW, ARE ANY OF THEM AFFORDABLE, WHAT ARE THE LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY AS PART OF ALL THE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT THEY WERE ASKING AND REQUESTING.
UM, BUT THERE WASN'T ANY, ANY, ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT, OH, YOU KNOW, IS IT POSSIBLE TO PARTNER WITH THIS DEVELOPER TO, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE MAYBE PUBLIC ACCESS TO AMENITIES ON SITE OR ANYTHING? NONE, NONE OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS WERE HAD.
UM, AT, AT THIS TIME I, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A SITE PLAN IN PLACE, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE AMENITIES WILL BE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.
UM, UM, SO REALLY ALL THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED TO THIS POINT IS, HAS BEEN INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS.
AND YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS DEVELOPER IN THE PAST HAS PARTICIPATED IN LITECH HOUSING.
AND CAN YOU TELL ME MORE ABOUT MAYBE SOME OF THE EXPERIENCES YOU'VE HAD IN THE PAST PARTNERING WITH MAYBE NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR OTHER GROUPS THAT HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL FOR, TO PROVIDE INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS? SO THIS, THIS PARTICULAR, UM, CLIENT, THEY'VE WORKED ON ANOTHER PROJECT OFF OF MONIS WHERE THEY PARTNERED WITH ST.
LOUISE HOUSE AND THROUGH ST HOUSE.
UM, IT WAS A PARTNERSHIP WHERE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF SINGLE WOMEN AND CHILDREN, UM, AND PROVIDING HOUSING, UH, FULLY FURNISHED HOUSING FOR, FOR THOSE FAMILIES AND IN PRECARIOUS SITUATIONS.
UM, THAT WAS ONE THAT WE WORKED ON THAT WAS ACTUALLY, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW, I I HAVEN'T FOLLOWED UP TO SEE IF THEY'VE ACTUALLY BROKE GROUND ON ANYTHING, BUT IT WAS A REALLY, UM, GREAT PARTNERSHIP WITH ST.
LOUIS HOUSE TO BRING THAT, YOU KNOW, BRING THAT FORWARD.
UM, THAT'S, THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION.
UM, I THINK THAT'S REALLY ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
ALRIGHT, OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, I HAVE A QUESTION OF, I GUESS FOR CITY STAFF IS ANYBODY WHO, I GUESS ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MEMO, IS THERE ANYBODY THAT CAN SPEAK TO THAT? I GUESS CYNTHIA HAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
I CAN TALK ABOUT KIND OF LIKE WHAT'S IN THE NTA AS FAR AS THE SUMMARY, BUT I CAN'T, I'M NOT TRANSPORTATION STAFF, SO I CAN'T ANSWER ANY TRANSPORTATION, LIKE A LOT OF TRANSPORTATION QUESTIONS.
IT, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE WHEN I READ THE STAFF REPORT THAT ONE OF THE PRIMARY REASONS THEY'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THE REZONING IS RELATED TO, UH, THE, THIS MEMO AND THAT THE VEHICLES PER DAY EXCEEDS 1200.
I THINK THE NUMBER COMPUTED THAT'S CORRECT.
IF ALL OF ALL OF THE ACCESS WAS TAKEN ON THAT SINGLE STREET WAS 1273, I'M SORRY.
SWITCHED PAGES OF, I GUESS I'M WONDERING IS IF WE TOOK ACCESS FROM BOTH STREETS, DO WE ANTICIPATE HAVING, OF FAILING IN TERMS OF LEVEL OF SERVICE? I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT.
THAT'S FOR TRANSPORTATION, BUT THEY ONLY PROVIDED TUBE COUNTS FOR SACKS AND THEY DIDN'T PROVIDE THE COUNTS FOR EL MIRANDA.
SO THE APPLICANT ONLY PROVIDED TUBE COUNTS FOR THE OKAY.
SO I GUESS MAYBE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT THEN.
CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? YEAH, I THINK THE, THE QUESTION I GUESS IS, IS OF, OR ACTUALLY IT'S A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT QUESTION FOR YOU.
OF, IS THAT BECAUSE A BIG CONCERN ON STAFF'S PART IS RELATED TO TOO MUCH TRAFFIC ON THAT SINGLE ACCESS OF, WHAT'S THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ACCESS OFF OF BOTH STREETS? I MEAN, IT APPEARS THAT WE HAVE RIGHT AWAY FRONTAGE ON THE CUL-DE-SAC, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
I WOULD SAY THERE, THERE IS OPPORTUNITY TO, TO HAVE CONNECTION
[00:40:01]
THROUGH BOTH, BOTH STREETS.I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.
OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS.
I THINK MY QUESTION IS BOTH FOR THE APPLICANT AND FOR THE CITY, MAYBE FROM THE APPLICANT FIRST.
SO MY QUESTION IS THAT, UM, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, UM, YOU DID NOT, IN TERMS OF MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU DID NOT TALK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING WITH, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS IN TERMS OF A COMMUNITY BENEFIT? THAT'S CORRECT.
WE DID NOT TALK ABOUT THAT AT THAT TIME.
AND THEN, UH, JUST FOR, IN TERMS OF, FOR UPZONING, THE, UH, ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS, TYPICALLY WE DO OR WE DO GET TO REVIEW WHAT THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS WOULD BE IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT.
CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THEY ARE AT THIS POINT IN TIME? THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT WOULD BE THE COMMITMENT TO INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING, INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS, AND, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS ON THAT.
UM, IT'S, IT'S THAT WILL COME AT SOME POINT IN TIME, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THEN I GUESS FOR THE CITY, WHAT I'M ASKING THE CITY IS WHAT IS YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS IN REGARD TO THIS, UM, PROJECT CYNTHIA HAD YOUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT? UH, WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY BENEFITS.
UM, I MEAN, NONE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AND SO WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY THAT ARE GOING FORWARD WITH THIS.
ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE THREE MORE SPOTS.
UM, I GUESS FOR THE APPLICANT OR OR STAFF, COULD, COULD SOMEONE SHARE WITH ME WHAT'S ON THIS SITE TODAY? EXACTLY? ARE THERE ANY HOMES HERE? IS THERE ANY I AM SORRY, COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME? WHAT EXISTS ON THIS SITE TODAY? THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE TODAY.
IT IS UNDEVELOPED AND UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT OR COMMITMENT TO ANY AFFORDABLE UNITS.
AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, UM, THAT'S ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THEY HAD TO ABANDON THE CURRENT SITE PLAN WAS BECAUSE OF THE PROJECT, NOT PENCILING NO AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS CURRENTLY.
I THINK QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, DO WE EVER CONSIDER HOUSING A COMMUTING BENEFIT? YES.
HOUSING IS A COMMUNITY BENEFIT WHEN IT'S GOTCHA.
AND I'M, I'M JUST CURIOUS, SO I KNOW WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, UH, IT GOT REZONED IN 2020, CORRECT.
AND I THINK I HEARD MAYBE IN STAFF BACK UP OR READ THAT THERE'S, THERE HAVEN'T BEEN CHANGES.
I'M JUST CURIOUS TO THE STAFF FOLLOW THE COST OF LIVING IN AUSTIN, TEXAS BETWEEN 2020 AND 2025 AND THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE SEEN IN COST OF LIVING AND HOUSING PRICES AND WHATNOT.
UH, THE CHANGES WERE IN REFERENCE TO THE CURRENT SITE, MEANING IT'S BEEN UNDEVELOPED, SO THAT'S WHAT THE CHANGES ARE IN ON REFERENCE TO.
SO THIS ENTIRE SITE'S SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL.
WOULD STAFF PREFER THIS BE ZONED COMMERCIAL? IT'S SURROUNDED BY SINGLE, MOSTLY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
UM, I KNOW THAT IT HAS A, THEIR COMMERCIAL ZONINGS, THE LR NEAR, LIKE SURROUNDING IT, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL ZONINGS, BUT MOST OF THAT IS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY USES, BUT IT IS COMMERCIAL ZONING.
UM, HAVE ANY OF THOSE USES THAT AREN'T COMMERCIAL APPLIED OR ASKED TO BE DOWN ZONED? NO.
UH, COMM, UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, MS. HOFFEY, IN, IN THE ANSWER TO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON'S QUESTION, YOU WERE, UM, OR WHAT I HEARD, MAYBE I MISHEARD THAT, UM, ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT ON THERE IS THAT IT MAY NOT PENCIL AND, YOU KNOW, SO MAYBE WE GET A 10 HERE, BUT, UH, THAT IT MAY NOT PENCIL BECAUSE THERE WAS NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
DID I HEAR THAT CORRECTLY? NO.
UM, WHAT I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN WAS
[00:45:01]
THAT THEY ATTEMPTED AN SF SIX DEVELOPMENT, THEY FILED A SITE PLAN WITH THE CITY, BUT DUE TO THE CHANGES IN THE MARKET, UM, THEY HAD TO ABANDON THAT BECAUSE IT WASN'T GOING TO WORK.UM, THE EXPENSE OF DEVELOPING THAT AND ACHIEVING, I BELIEVE THE SITE PLAN WAS FOR ABOUT 34 UNITS, UM, IT WASN'T GOING TO, WAS GOING TO WORK IN THE END.
AND SO THEY HAD TO ABANDON THAT PROCESS AND COME BACK AND ASK FOR A ZONING DISTRICT THAT WOULD ALLOW MORE DENSITY.
BUT THEN, BUT, BUT YOU'RE FAIRLY CONFIDENT THEN IN THE, IF WE GRANT THE UPZONING TO THE MF TWO AND THEN PUT A REQUIREMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT THAT WOULD PENCIL? YES.
THE, THE DEVELOPER IS COMMITTING TO THAT.
SO THAT AFFORDABILITY DOESN'T AFFECT THE, UH, UH, THE COST AND THE, THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TESTIFYING TO TONIGHT? THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN DO, YES.
MADAM CHAIR, CAN I ADD A FOLLOW UP? YES.
MR. THROW, IF YOU WENT IN, YOU'VE GOT A FEW MINUTES.
UH, COMMISSIONER HAYNES JUST RIGHT QUICK.
I MEAN THE, THE MF ZONING CATEGORY OFFERS AN OPPORTUNITY PROVIDE, PROVIDE MORE STACK UNITS AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
THE SF SIX STYLE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE TYPICALLY SEE IS JUST BASICALLY SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX STYLE CONSTRUCTION.
SO IT'S ONE UNIT, THREE FLOORS UP.
UM, SO WITH STACKED UNITS, YOU GET A LOT MORE ECONOMIES TO SCALE TO THE UNITS IN THE BUILDING, THE PLUMBING, THE ELECTRIC, EVERYTHING CERTAINLY HELPS FOR PROJECTS TO PENCIL A LOT BETTER TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS WELL.
SO THEN, UH, THE, UH, THE ADDED, IF WE DO GRANT, THE UPZONING HERE, THE ADDED DENSITY IS, IS BENEFICIAL THEN AND DOESN'T AFFECT THE, THE, UH, COMPONENT OF THE AFFORDABILITY ON THE, ON THE SITE? WELL, OF COURSE IT DOES AFFECT, RIGHT? THE PRO FORMA IS AFFECTED BY HAVING TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THE CLIENT IS COMMITTED TO DO IT AND THE INCREASE IN DENSITY OVERALL IN THE PROJECT HELPS MAKE THAT HAPPEN.
RIGHT NOW, NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE'RE PROMISING AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITH THIS UP SOUNDING AND IT, BUT IT, BUT IT DOES, UM, IT IS STILL ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE WHEN WE, IF WE INCLUDE AFFORDABLE UNITS ON THIS SIDE.
IF, IF WE DO THE UPSIDE, WE ARE COMMITTED TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN.
AND IT'S STILL ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE TELLING US.
IF WE'RE STILL WORKING OUT THE DETAILS OF IT, BUT YES.
UM, OH, I THOUGHT I SAW YOUR HAND UP, COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
UM, OTHERWISE I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
I THINK COMM COMMISSIONER BUR HAD ANOTHER QUESTION.
JUST, I WAS LOOKING, UM, AT THE NOTES, AND THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED THE 36 DWELLING UNITS THAT, UM, COULD BE BUILT WITH SF SIX, AND I WAS JUST CURIOUS, WAS THAT PRE HOME OR POST HOME ORDINANCE? THAT WAS PRE HOME ORDINANCE.
SO IT COULD BE THE SF SIX COULD MAYBE BE DENSER WITH OUR NEW POLICIES.
NO, HOME DOESN'T APPLY TO SF SIX.
UM, WITH THAT, LET'S ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
UM, I WOULD MOVE APPLICANT REQUEST SECOND.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER, UH, ANDERSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? UM, I WOULD, I ACTUALLY AM DELIGHTED TO SEE THIS COME TO US BECAUSE WE DO KNOW THAT SOMETIMES THE MARKET CHANGES AND THAT WHEN WE, IF IT FACE FIRST WE DON'T SUCCEED, TRY, TRY AGAIN.
AND I'M PARTICULARLY DELIGHTED AS I THINK SEVERAL COMMISSIONERS HAVE NOTED HERE TONIGHT THAT THERE WILL BE AFFORDABLE UNITS IN, UM, INCLUDED IN THIS VERSION OF THE PROJECT.
AND I THINK AS THE APPLICANT WELL POINTED OUT, IS THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A VERY LOW, DOUBLE LOW LEVEL OF MULTI-FAMILY DENSITY, UM, WITH AFFORDABLE UNITS IN AN AREA THAT THEY'RE DEFINITELY NEEDED VERSUS CONTINUING TO LET THAT LAND LAY UNUSED AND UNDERDEVELOPED HURTING OUR, BOTH OUR COMMUNITIES AS WELL AS OUR TAX BASE.
SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A SLAM DUNK AND I'M GLAD TO SUPPORT IT MOVING FORWARD.
ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST SPEAKING FOR COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? I'LL SPEAK BRIEFLY FOR IT AS WELL.
OF THIS RELATES TO THE, THE PROPERTY'S LOCATION BEING AWAY FROM THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND AWAY FROM THE HIGHWAYS.
SO OFTEN WE'RE SEEING MULTIFAMILY, IT IS LOCATED ON THESE REALLY BUSY ROADWAYS AND WE HAVE ALL OF THE HEALTH EFFECTS, NOISE AND AIR POLLUTION
[00:50:01]
AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS SET BACK FROM THE ROADWAYS, I KNOW THAT PRESENTS A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ON THE PART OF STAFF BASED ON REALLY PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS FOR CAPACITY ON THESE STREETS, BUT THE BENEFITS TO THE RESIDENTS BEING AWAY FROM THE HIGHWAYS, I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND SHOULDN'T BE IGNORED CHANCE TO SPEAK AGAINST.I WILL SPEAK TO FOUR, UM, BRIEFLY, I, UM, KNOW THAT WE'RE GONNA BE HEARING A CASE IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HEARD TONIGHT AND WE HAD A LOT OF EMAILS ABOUT SPRAWL AND JUST WANNA MAKE A POINT THAT THIS IS AN AREA WHERE WE WANT TO PUT HOUSING IF WE'RE SAYING NO TO SPRAWL IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.
SO FOR THAT, I'LL BE VOTING FOR THIS MOTION.
ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR? A CHAIR I THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION? YES, SIR.
UM, I'D LIKE TO GO WITH THE, UM, APPLICANT'S, UH, REQUEST, BUT ADDED A PROVISION THAT, UH, 10% OF THE UNITS MEET, UM, 80% MFI, UH, AFFORDABILITY AND THAT WE, UH, THAT WE RECOMMEND THE SECOND CUTS ON THE, UH, TO MEET THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANNOUNCED.
MS. HORY, I'M SORRY, I FORGET THE STREET NAME, BUT IT'S OKAY.
UH, SOPHIA HAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF, COMMISSIONER.
UH, WE CANNOT REQUIRE AFFORDABILITY ON AN MF TWO SITE, SO AFFORDABILITY DISCUSSION IS NOT ALLOWED FOR A MOTION ON THIS CASE PER LAW.
UM, OKAY THEN I'LL JUST LIMIT IT THEN TO THE, UM, THE SECOND CUT FOR THE, UM, UH, TRAFFIC INGRESS AND INGRESS FROM THE, UH, UH, FROM ELON STREET.
I THINK IF I'M READING THAT CORRECTLY, COMMISSIONER HAYNES, THIS IS SHERRY TIS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WE CAN'T REQUIRE CURB CUTS THROUGH A ZONING CASE.
THE APPLICANT HAS NOT ACTUALLY SAID THAT THEY'RE PROHIBITING ACCESS TO ELON.
THEY JUST DID NOT INCLUDE IT IN THEIR TIA MEMO.
SO THAT WAS NOT CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE NTA PROCESS AND THEY DID NOT GET COUNTS FOR IT, BUT WE CANNOT ACTUALLY REQUIRE CURB CUTS AND TECHNICALLY THROUGH THE ZONING CASE ACCESS IS NOT PROHIBITED TO ALMAND.
SO YOU WOULD NOT TO NEED TO INCLUDE THAT IN A MOTION BECAUSE THAT WILL BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
COMMISSIONER COX? CLARIFYING QUESTION.
YEAH, CLARIFYING QUESTION ON THAT.
WE, WE CAN AND HAVE PROHIBITED VEHICLE ACCESS AS PART OF ZONING CASES.
IS, IS IT JUST AN ISSUE OF, OF THE REVERSE REQUIRING THAT ACCESS? IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING MS. RE THAT'S RIGHT.
CURRENTLY THE ACCESS IS NOT PROHIBITED.
IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
YOU COULD PROHIBIT IT THROUGH THE ZONING CASE, BUT YOU CANNOT PERMIT IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT PROHIBITED AS IT STANDS.
RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE FRONTAGE ON BOTH STREETS.
AND SO THEN IT WOULD BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN WHERE THE ACCESS WOULD BE TO THE PROPERTY.
IF TRANSPORTATION FELT THAT THERE WAS A NEED, THEY COULD RECOMMEND PROHIBITING ACCESS TO A STREET THROUGH THE ZONING CASE.
THAT IS A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT'S LISTED IN THE CODE.
HOWEVER, AT THIS TIME, THEY'RE NOT RECOMMENDING PROHIBITING ACCESS TO ANY STREET.
I I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY AND CONFIRM THAT WE CAN PROHIBIT YES ACCESS, BUT, BUT FORCING THEM TO USE ACCESS IS NOT REALLY SOMETHING WE CAN DO.
AND THAT'S HOW IT'S LISTED UNDER CONDITIONAL OVERLAY PROVISION IN THE CODE.
COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS CLARIFYING QUESTION.
YES, I HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION ON WHETHER OR NOT, UM, AS YOU KNOW, THE, THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN RAISED AROUND THAT WE DON'T HAVE A, SOMETHING THAT KIND OF LAYS OUT THE AFFORDABILITY AS A COMMUNITY BENEFIT, THE INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING IN FRONT OF US.
ARE WE, ARE WE SETTING A PRECEDENT OR DOING SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T TYPICALLY DO IN TERMS OF VOTING OR APPROVING SOMETHING WHEN WE DON'T HAVE THAT DETAIL AS A COMMUNITY BENEFIT IN, IN EXCHANGE FOR UPZONING OR OTHER ENTITLEMENTS? ARE WE, ARE WE DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT? BECAUSE WHILE I THINK THAT THAT IT'S GREAT, AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THAT THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE HOPES THAT THAT'S GONNA HAPPEN, UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN FRONT OF US TO SAY, TO SAY THAT THERE'S A COMMITMENT THAT THAT OUTLINE THAT OUTLINED THAT PRIOR TO THE VOTE.
[00:55:01]
ARE WE TAKING A VOTE THAT WE DON'T TYPICALLY DO WITH KIND OF SAYING, WELL, WE'RE GONNA WISH FOR AND HOPE FOR THAT THESE COMMITMENTS WERE KEPT? I JUST WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HAVING NOT HAVING BEEN ON THE COMMISSION FOR JUST TWO YEARS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, WHAT HOW WE TYPICALLY DO THESE THINGS.STATE LAW WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO CONSIDER AFFORDABILITY WITH THE MF TWO REZONING THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING, BUT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND THAT THERE WEREN'T ANY ASSOCIATED WITH THE UP ZONING.
THAT'S A SO I WAS JUST ASKING ABOUT HOW, BECAUSE AS BEING A MEMBER OF THIS COMMISSION, THE VOTES THAT I HAVE TAKEN HAVE ALWAYS LOOKED AT WHEN YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT WHAT THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS ARE, NOT OF MARKET RATE HOUSING, BUT OF OTHER SORTS OF THINGS THAT THAT THAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY PROVIDING A, AN ADDITIONAL BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE CAN'T DO THAT? COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS, UH, IS SHERRY SIRUS AGAIN WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
I THINK WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS A PUD WHERE WE CAN NEGOTIATE BENEFITS, UH, WHEN THE APPLICANT IS ASKING TO DO THINGS ABOVE AND BEYOND AND ASKING FOR CODE MODIFICATIONS.
UM, BUT THIS IS A STANDARD ZONING CASE AND THROUGH A STANDARD ZONING CASE, STATE'S LAW WILL, STATE LAW WILL NOT ALLOW US TO, UH, REQUIRE, UM, AFFORDABILITY IN A STANDARD ZONING.
SO, UM, THE LAW DEPARTMENT HAS CONFIRMED THAT AND SO WHILE YOU CAN DISCUSS IT AMONGST YOURSELVES THAT THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO DO THAT, WE HAVE NO MECHANISM TO MAKE IT PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION OR REQUIREMENT THROUGH THE ZONING.
WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
THIS IS FOR THE MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, 1 2 3 4 5 2 7 8 9.
THOSE AGAIN? UH, IS THAT A GREEN COMMISSIONER COX? THAT'S GREEN.
THOSE AGAINST AND THOSE ABSTAINING COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER GAINS OFF THE DOCK.
ALL RIGHT, THAT IS 10 TO ZERO TO TWO WITH COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ AND COMMISSIONER HAYNES ABSTAINING.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU EVERYONE, UH, FOR THAT ONE.
[14. Rezoning: C14-2024-0114 - 5210 Bruning Avenue; District 9]
ITEM NUMBER 14, WHICH IS THE 50, UH, 5 2 1 0 BRUNING AVENUE.SO WE'LL HEAR FROM MS. HORI AGAIN.
CYNTHIA HORI PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM 14 ON YOUR AGENDA CASE C 14 20 24 0 1 1 4 0 1 1 4 5 2 1 0 BROODING AVENUE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON 7 0 5 EAST 53RD STREET AND 52 10 BROODING AVENUE.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS APPROXIMATELY 0.35 ACRES, PARTIALLY DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE FAMILY WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND HAS ACCESS TO EAST 53RD STREET, WHICH IS A LEVEL TWO AND BROING AVENUE, A LEVEL ONE AND IS OWN GENERAL COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN G-R-C-O-N-P.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, UH, THAT WE GRANT COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, VERTICAL MIXED USE BUILDING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY DENSITY BONUS 90 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IN SHORT, GR M-U-V-C-O DB 90 AND P COMBINING DISTRICT, THE PROJECT WOULD CONSIST OF APPROXIMATELY 30 RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
IT WILL NOT BE SEEKING A MODIFICATION FOR THE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE REQUIREMENT.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT GR DB 90.
THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL OVERLAY MAINTAINS THE CONDITIONS ON TRACK 61.
UM, ASIDE FROM WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONERS ARE READ INTO, INTO THE RECORD, OH WAIT, NO, THIS ONE IS FINE.
UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING GR M-U-V-C-O DB 90 NP TO ALLOW FOR UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT WITH THE TOTAL OF 139 DWELLING UNITS.
THE REZONING REQUEST WILL ALLOW FOR MORE DENSITY NEAR THE AIRPORT BOULEVARD CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR, WHILE PROVIDING A TRANSIT TO A TRANSITION TO THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE NORTH LOOP NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND WITHIN THE HIGHLAND MALL STATION REGIONAL CENTER.
ALL RIGHT, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE
[01:00:01]
APPLICANT.HELLO COMMISSIONERS, I'M TAMARIA DAVIS HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, OUR PRESENTATION WAS ORIGINALLY FOR THREE SITES, BUT I'M JUST GONNA SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT 52 10 BRUNING AND I THINK HE'S PULLING IT UP.
SO TO ORIENT YOU, UM, THE SITE IS ON THE EDGE OF THE NORTH LOOP NEIGHBORHOOD NEAR AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
THIS IS AN EXCELLENT LOCATION FOR MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL.
UH, IT'S A SHORT WALK TO TWO FREQUENT BUS ROUTES ON DUVAL AND AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
ROUTE THREE 50 ON AIRPORT AND ROUTE SEVEN ON DUVALL.
IT'S ALSO A SHORT BIKE RIDE TO MUELLER.
NEXT SLIDE HERE IS A CLOSER LOOK AT THE SITE.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE IS SITUATED BETWEEN EXISTING MULTIFAMILY AND VMU UH, DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EAST AND THE WEST.
THE CURRENT USE ON THE SITE IS, UH, IS PRIMARILY VACANT, AND THEN THERE'S A SINGLE FAMILY VACANT HOUSE AS WELL.
HERE YOU CAN SEE THE ZONING MAP.
UM, ON THE ZONING MAP, EVERYTHING THE SITE IS ALREADY ZONE COMMERCIAL, WHICH WOULD ALLOW UP TO 60 FEET IN HEIGHT.
SO WE'RE MAKING THIS REQUEST TO ADD RESIDENTIAL USES AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE DB 90 IS INTENDED TO GO AND A HIGH TRANSIT ON THE EDGE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD IN NEAR MAJOR CORRIDOR.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS ALREADY MIXED USE.
WE WE'RE KEEPING THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY LIST OF PROHIBITED USES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TRANSITIONAL HOUSING.
UM, AND WE'VE LET THE NEIGHBORHOOD KNOW THAT IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL USES THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE PROHIBITED, WE ARE ABSOLUTELY OPEN TO THAT CONVERSATION.
THIS REQUEST IS IN LINE WITH THE OBJECTIVES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
IT WILL PROVIDE WALKABLE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES.
AND WITH THAT, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS REZONING AND I'LL MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS LEAH BOJO.
SHE'LL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
LEAH, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
UM, I'M HERE TO, TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, BUT I DON'T NEED TO SPEAK.
WE WILL NOW BE MOVING ON TO OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.
OUR FIRST SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS DAVID ROSS.
DAVID WILL ALSO BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
DAVID, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
HE'S NOT CURRENTLY IN OUR QUEUE, BUT WE'LL GIVE HIM A FEW MINUTES IN CASE HE'S ONLINE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS RACHEL FORSTER.
RACHEL, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, BEFORE I SPEAK, CAN I ASK THE OTHER TWO APPLICATIONS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ONE, ARE THOSE COMING AT A FUTURE DATE OR ARE THOSE NO LONGER BEING CONSIDERED? THOSE WERE APPROVED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THEY'LL MOVE FORWARD TO COUNSEL.
UM, WELL THEN WHAT I'M SAYING IS APPLICABLE TO THOSE AS WELL.
UM, JIM'S ENTITLEMENT ATTORNEY WILL BE IN ATTENDANCE AT THE UPCOMING NORTH LOOP, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING CONTACT TEAM MEETING ON FEBRUARY 12TH.
SO I'D ASK THE DECISION ON ALL THE ITEMS WE POSTPONED UNTIL AFTER THAT MEETING.
UM, BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD NORTH NORTH LOOP ASSOCIATION AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING CONTACT TEAM IN NORTH LOOP HAVE A HISTORY OF SUPPORTING NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ENGAGING AND WORKING WITH DEVELOPERS TO BUILD THE BEST POSSIBLE PROJECTS.
SO, UM, I ASK THAT THIS PROP POSTPONED UNTIL WE HAVE TIME TO DISCUSS WITH THE DEVELOPER AS A NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVE MORE INFORMATION.
UM, I JUST HAVE A LOT OF OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AND, UM, WHAT THE BENEFIT OF DB 90 TO THIS PROJECT IS.
IT'S, UM, ABOUT A THIRD OF AN ACRE AND IT'S A TRIANGULAR SHAPED PROPERTY AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT'LL MEET COMPATIBILITY AND WHAT THAT, WHAT THE BENEFIT OF DB 90 FOR THIS PROJECT IS.
UM, ADDITIONALLY I WANNA MAKE A FEW COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF NEIGHBORS THAT WEREN'T ABLE TO ATTEND.
UM, THE OWNER HAS OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR DECADES AND HAS HAD OVER THAT TIME MULTIPLE CODE VIOLATIONS
[01:05:01]
AND, UM, JUST NOT ACTING AS A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND HAVING, UM, BEEN A LANDLORD ON THAT PROPERTY THAT ULTIMATELY THE TENANTS WERE REMOVED BECAUSE THE HOUSE WAS NOT COM NOT HABITABLE.SO I, I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN WITH A A 30 UNIT PRODUCT OUTSIDE MY HOUSE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ADNAN PER NAN, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES AND I HAD A POWERPOINT.
UM, IT'S JUST SOME PICTURES, NOTHING FANCY.
WE'LL GET YOUR TIME STARTED WHENEVER THAT'S UP.
I MIGHT HAVE THREE EXTRA MINUTES, BUT I'LL TALK PAST.
SO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND, UH, LET THAT FRAME WHAT I'M SAYING HERE.
WHEN WE GOT THE NOTICE THAT THE PROPERTY WAS BEING, UH, BEHIND OUR HOME WAS BEING REDEVELOPED, WE WERE HOPEFUL THAT THE VACANT JUNKYARD OVERFLOW WAS GONNA BE TURNED INTO SOMETHING THAT WOULD SERVE OUR COMMUNITY.
HOWEVER, WE WERE LESS ENTHUSIASTIC ONCE WE FOUND OUT THAT JIM AND HIS FAMILY WERE STILL GONNA BE THE OWNERS, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE IMAGES ON GOOGLE MAPS.
AND IF YOU CAN JUST CYCLE THROUGH THE NEXT FIVE, UH, THIS HOME HAS BEEN IN DISREPAIR FOR NEARLY 20 YEARS.
THAT LEVEL OF THE NEGLECT DIDN'T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT.
FROM THESE IMAGES, YOU CAN SEE THAT SOME OF THE, UH, THAT AT ONE POINT THE HOUSE SERVED AS A HOME, UH, FOR SOME FOLKS BRIEFLY, THEY WERE GOOD NEIGHBORS.
AND WITH PEOPLE LIVING IN THAT HOUSE, WE WERE OPTIMISTIC THAT IT MEANT THAT ALL THE RODENTS THAT ONCE LIVED IN THAT HOME WOULDN'T RETURN.
INSTEAD, WE LEARNED THAT THE OWNERSHIP GROUP KICKED OUT THE RESIDENCE BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T INTERESTED IN ADDRESSING SOME CODE VIOLATIONS THAT CODE ENFORCEMENT OPENED UP.
UM, NOW, ONCE AGAIN, ONCE AGAIN, THE ONLY RESIDENTS ARE RATS.
I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THE 60 FOOT CRANE ON THE JUNKYARD, UH, THAT JIM OWNS, UH, HAS BEEN THERE SINCE THE SEVENTIES, SALVAGED BY JIM, BUT NEVER MADE OPERATIONAL.
IT'S BEEN SITTING THERE RUSTING LONGER THAN I'VE BEEN ALIVE.
IS THAT A, UH, A NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR? YOU TRUST WITH THE UPKEEP OF A 90 FOOT BUILDING BEHIND YOUR HOME TODAY, THOSE OWNERS ARE NOT ABLE TO MAINTAIN A PROPERTY WITH ONLY A SINGLE UNIT.
WHAT MAKES THE FOLKS ON THIS BOARD BELIEVE THAT THE GRANTING THEM 30 TIMES THE NUMBER OF UNITS WILL CHANGE THEIR HABITS? IT'S CLEAR THE PROPERTIES THAT THIS GROUP OWNS ARE NOT MAINTAINED IN THE SLIGHTEST AND WILL DESCEND IN A SQUALOR.
EXEMPTIONS ARE GRANTED BASED ON TRUST.
TRUST THAT THE PARTY BEING GIVEN THE EXEMPTIONS IS GOING TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH.
NOTHING I'VE SEEN ABOUT THIS PROPERTY INDICATES TO ME THAT THE PERSON WHO OWNS THIS WILL BE ACTING IN GOOD FAITH.
BY DEFAULT, THE OWNER HAS NOT SHOWN ANY PROPOSALS FOR WHAT THEY COULD BUILD, NOR WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO WITH THE ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS.
WHAT HAVE THEY DONE TO EARN THE TRUST NEEDED TO BLINDLY GRANT THEM ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS BY THIS BOARD? I ASK THAT THE PEOPLE HERE, AFTER SEEING THE STATE OF THE OWNER'S PROPERTIES, UM, WOULD YOU TRUST THE PERSON WITH A 90 FOOT BUILDING NEXT TO YOUR HOUSE? I IMPLORE THE BOARD TO UPHOLD THE EXISTING BUILDING RIGHTS AND NOT GRANT ANY ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS LAURA GAMBOA.
LAURA, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
I, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS BROOKLYN STEVENS.
SHE'S JOINING US VIRTUALLY BROOKLYN PRE PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
AGAIN, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES, YIELDED MY TIME TO ADNAN.
UM, AND I ECHO THE SENTIMENT WHILE I AM NEWER TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT LOT AND THE OTHERS PROPOSED IN THIS DEVELOPMENT NOT BE IN SUCH DISARRAY.
I DO HAVE A SIMILAR SENTIMENT ABOUT GRANTING THEM EXTENDED USE OF THIS PROPERTY, UM, JUST GIVEN THEIR HISTORY OF MAINTENANCE.
BROOKLYN, I APOLOGIZE, UH, FOR DONATION OF TIME.
BOTH PARTIES MUST BE PRESENT IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND YOUR TIME WON'T BE FORFEITED UNLESS YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMPLETE, UM, THE REMINDER OF YOUR TIME.
I, UM, UNDERSTAND AND I APPRECIATE THAT, UH, THAT, THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY SENTIMENT I HAVE IS JUST, UH, ASKING THE, THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER, UM, MAINTAINING THE EXISTING LAND USE, UM, AND NOT INCREASING IT JUST BASED ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S FEELINGS, UM, ABOUT THE CURRENT STATE OF THE PROPERTY.
[01:10:01]
UM, I'D ALSO, UH, BE WILLING TO PUSH FOR POSTPONEMENT, UM, TO ACTUALLY SEE SOME PLANS FOR DEVELOPMENT, UM, AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, ASSOCIATION.UM, AND I YIELD THE REST OF MY, MY TIME.
OUR FINAL SPEAKER, DAVID ROSS, IS CURRENTLY NOT IN OUR QUEUE.
SO THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM.
WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR, UH, SORRY, SORRY, QUESTION PLEASE.
UH,
WE, WE DON'T, WE, IF YOU DIDN'T SIGN UP OR I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ISSUE IS, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO MOVE ON.
I'M SORRY TO APPLICANT REBUTTAL.
UM, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT, UM, WITH DB 90 IS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, AND ALSO THAT THE, UM, THE OWNER WOULD PARTNER WITH THE DEVELOPER, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT THINGS ARE REGULATED AND THAT THE CITY ACTUALLY REGULATES THE AFFORDABILITY WITH DB 90.
ALRIGHT, WE'RE LOOKING FOR, UM, A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONER COX, BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THIS, BUT CAN WE GET CONFIRMATION THAT THE BACKUP WE HAVE IS ACTUALLY FOR THE SAME PROPERTY THAT WE JUST HAD A PRESENTATION ON? YES.
UH, MS. HORY, CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT QUESTION? BECAUSE THE, THE PRESENTATION THAT WE JUST HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC AND THE APPLICANT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE FOR THE SAME PROPERTY THAT THE BACKUP IS FOR.
CYNTHIA HAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UM, THERE ARE THREE CASES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SAME PRESENTATION THAT SHE GAVE.
SO THERE'S 1 1 2, 1 1 3 AND 1 1 4.
SO COMMISSIONER COX THIS EVENING, ITEMS NUMBER 12, ITEM NUMBER 13 AND ITEM NUMBER 14 WERE RELATED MM-HMM
UM, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE SEPARATE APPLICATIONS BECAUSE, UM, CORRECT.
THEY'RE, THEY DON'T SHARE THE, THE SAME RIGHT OF WAY.
AND SO WHILE WE WERE GOING THROUGH CONSENT TONIGHT, WE PASSED ITEMS NUMBER 12 AND ITEMS NUMBER 13 ON CONSENT WITH THE, UM, ADDITION OF REMOVING TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AS A PROHIBITED USE.
UM, BUT WE ARE HEARING NUMBER 14 THIS EVENING BE BECAUSE WE HAD A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP ON THAT ITEM.
ALTHOUGH THE ITEMS 12, 13, AND 14 ARE RELATED.
SO WE ARE, WE ARE ONLY DECIDING ON THE TRIANGULAR PIECE.
WE'RE ONLY DECIDING ON THE 0.35, TWO ACRES.
THAT IS ON BRUNING AVENUE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
I BELIEVE WE'RE LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING VICE CHAIR AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UNLESS THERE IS OPPOSITION, THAT MOTION PASSES AND I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
I'M NOT SURE IF WE HAVE AN ANSWER.
UM, DO WE KNOW WHEN THIS IS SCHEDULED TO GO TO COUNCIL? CYNTHIA HAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT? WE DON'T SCHEDULE UNTIL THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING COMMISSION, SO IT'S NOT GOING TO COUNCIL YET UNTIL WE MAKE A DATE.
AND AT THE, WOULD WE HAVE ANY, I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, LIKE, WOULD IT BE, WOULD IT, IS IT LIKELY THAT IT WOULD BE GOING IN FRONT OF COUNSEL AFTER FEBRUARY 12TH? UM, NOTICES FOR THAT? IT'S, IT'S A POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD GO, I BELIEVE.
ONE SECOND, THIS WOULD BE AN, A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS A MEETING ON THE FEBRUARY 12TH.
UH, OF COURSE, IF THIS MOVES FORWARD TODAY, CAN WE HAVE A COMMITMENT THAT Y'ALL WILL CONTINUE WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SEEING AT THAT MEETING, WOULD THEY WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS AND MAKE SURE THAT SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE BEING RESOLVED AS THIS GOES TO COUNSEL? YES.
UM, THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, AND THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT AS WELL, REGARDING, I GUESS, UM,
[01:15:02]
THE REDEVELOPMENT PIECE OF IT AND THE CODE VIOLATION ASPECT.I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE CODE VIOLATION, IS THAT SORT OF, IS PART OF THE IDEA OF THE DEVELOPMENT REALLY ENSURING THAT SOME OF THAT CAN BE CLEARED UP? I REALLY DO WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A BUNCH OF THINGS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN ON THIS SIDE.
SO IS PART OF THE REDEVELOPMENT THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED PART OF THAT PLAN? LIKE, CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT? UM, I AM, I CAN DEFER TO, TO LEAH BOJO ON THAT BECAUSE I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY ACTIVE CODE VIOLATIONS RIGHT NOW.
UM, I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY, BUT MAYBE SHE CAN CONFIRM.
UH, MS. BOJO, IF YOU'RE ONLINE, YOU COULD HELP US ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THAT WOULD BE GREAT AS WELL.
UM, SO THIS IS THE FIRST WE'VE HEARD OF THESE CODE VIOLATIONS, UM, BUT I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO TALK TO THE CLIENT AND LOOK INTO WHAT, WHAT THE PROBLEM IS, UM, BEFORE WE GET TO COUNCIL.
AND I GUESS JUST SORT OF THINKING ALOUD HERE, WHICH IS PART OF IT WOULD BE IF, I GUESS IF THERE'S A DEVELOP REDEVELOPMENT, THEN SOME OF THOSE CODE VIOLATIONS WOULD BE CLEARED UP BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE PART OF IT IS THAT SITE NEEDS REDEVELOPING AND THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE IS ABSOLUTELY JUST NOT UP TO CODE STANDARDS.
THESE ARE OLD, THESE ARE OLD EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS ON THE SITE, UH, AUTO SALES YARD AND UM, THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, I THINK THESE SITES ARE IN NEED OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER COX? UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I MEAN, DO WE, DO WE ALLOW PERMITS OR SITE PLANS OR ZONING APPLICATIONS TO BE FILED ON PROPERTIES THAT HAVE ACTIVE CODE VIOLATIONS? I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF RULE THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE KIND OF A, A, A, A CLEAR WRAP SHEET IN ORDER TO GET PERMITS.
UH, CYNTHIA HAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, YES, WE DO, BUT THERE ARE NOT ANY ACTIVE CODE VIOLATIONS ON THIS SITE.
THESE ARE PAST CODE VIOLATIONS.
UM, WE'VE, WE'VE HEARD FROM THE, THE, THE NEIGHBORS OF THESE PROPERTIES.
UM, HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS OR DO YOU KNOW IF THEY ARE AWARE OF THE VALID PETITION PROCESS IF THEY WANTED TO PROTEST THIS REZONING? UM, I HAVE NOT BEEN ASKED ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE PETITION, THE PROCESS YET REGARDING THESE CASES.
UM, AND I WAS JUST GETTING EMAILS THIS WEEKEND AND THIS PAST WEEK, SO I HAVEN'T HAD ANY, UH, QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT YET.
WELL HOPEFULLY THE, THE RESIDENTS IN OPPOSITION THAT ARE PRESENT THERE OR ON THE LINE OR JUST LISTENING IN, UM, REACH OUT TO STAFF TO ASK THEM ABOUT WHAT'S CALLED A VALID PETITION IF YOU'D LIKE TO OPPOSE, UM, THIS ZONING CHANGE.
UM, A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, IS THERE A REASON WHY YOU REQUESTED DIFFERENT ZONINGS FOR YOUR DIFFERENT PARCELS? UM, AND, AND WHY THAT? THE SMALLEST, WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE MOST DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP PARCEL? UM, YOU'RE REQUESTING DB 90 ON, UM, WE ACCEPTED STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT, UM, I THINK IT'S APPLICATION ONE, UM, OR ITEM, UH, 12, UM, WOULD BE A VMU AND NOT DB 90 DUE TO THE ADJACENCY TO THE SINGLE FAMILY.
SO YOU'RE REQUESTING DB 90 BECAUSE IT'S ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY? NO, THE, OH, NO, WE'RE REQUESTING DB 90 BECAUSE IT HAS TWO MAJOR FRONTAGES AND AN ALLEY I OKAY.
UM, AND YOU MENTIONED, YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THE OWNER WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPER HAS, DO YOU KNOW IF, IF THIS IS ACTUALLY A REAL THING, IS THERE A DEVELOPER INVOLVED FOR THIS OR IS THIS LARGELY JUST TRYING TO SECURE ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS AND THEN, AND THEN BASICALLY SHOPPING AROUND FOR A DEVELOPER? I AM NOT SURE OF, UM, WHAT THE, WHAT THE OWNER'S DOING.
I KNOW HE'S ACTIVELY SEARCHING FOR SOMEONE, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHERE THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. DAVIS OR MS. BOJO, WHOEVER WANTS TO TAKE IT, BUT, UM, I HEARD A QUESTION FROM A NEIGHBOR.
MS. FORSTER ASKED IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THE BENEFITS OF DB 90
[01:20:01]
ON THIS SITE AND, AND WHY THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT.WELL, DB 90 HAS A FEW BENEFITS, UM, MAINLY THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, IT ALSO HAS THE SCREENING OF THE HVAC UNITS.
UM, IT HAS A COMPATIBILITY SETBACK AS WELL.
UM, THE GROUND FOUR RETAIL IS, AND THE STREET SCAPE IS ALL ALSO PART OF THE DB 90 BENEFITS.
AND THEN I'LL, I'LL SEND MY NEXT QUESTION TO MS. FORSTER, IF THAT, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT KINDA WHY DB 90 WOULD BE REQUESTED ON THIS SITE? I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE DB 90 REGULATION IN GENERAL, BUT I, UH, I'M MORE CURIOUS ABOUT HOW THIS SPECIFIC SITE DUE TO ITS SMALL SIZE AND UNUSUAL SHAPE, DB 90 WOULD, WOULD BENEFIT THE SITE.
MS. DAVIS, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO, TO SPEAK TO THAT SPECIFICALLY? UM, MOSTLY WITH THAT IS, IT'S JUST THE PROXIMITY TO TRANSIT MAKES IT A REALLY GOOD LOCATION AS FAR AS THE DESIGN AND THE LAYOUT.
WE WON'T REALLY KNOW HOW THAT, HOW IT ALL LAYS OUT UNTIL WE GET TO CYCLING.
AND CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT THAT'S HAPPENED WITH THE NORTH LOOP NEIGHBORHOOD THUS FAR? YES.
WE'VE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD A FEW TIMES, I BELIEVE THREE TIMES SO FAR, UM, TO REVIEW THE PROJECT INITIALLY BEFORE WE EVEN FILED, UM, FOR THE ZONING CASE.
AND THEN, UM, AND THEN AFTERWARDS TO EXPLAIN WHAT OUR REQUEST WAS.
AND CHAIR, THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
AND I, I SEE MR. AON, IF YOU WANNA COME UP TO THE MIC.
IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU HAD A, A STATEMENT, A CALL, UH, I THINK OFFICIALLY YOU WERE ON THE, UH, INVITE LIST ONLY ONCE IF SIR, YOU, YOU HAVE TO SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE.
I THINK, UH, THIS ITEM WAS ONLY DISCUSSED AT ONE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING.
UM, AND THEN WE HAD A LOT OF FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THEY INTENDED TO USE D THE DB 90 ENTITLEMENTS.
AND THEN TWO WEEKS AGO WE GOT, UH, AN ITEM IN THE MAIL STATING THAT THIS MEETING WAS HAPPENING.
SO THERE WAS NO FOLLOW UP IN BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, I THINK TWO MONTHS AGO.
AND THEN THIS, UH, UH, DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE HAVING TODAY.
UM, ALSO JUST A, A CLARIFYING POINT TO YOUR, UH, QUESTION.
THE, THE WAY THEY ADDRESSED THE CODE VIOLATIONS WAS BY KICKING THE PEOPLE OUT AND THEN CONDEMNING THE PROPERTY EFFECTIVELY BY BOARDING IT ALL UP.
UH, THAT DIDN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM BREAKING INTO IT, BUT IT'S NOT LIKE THE CODE VIOLATIONS WENT AWAY, JUST THE PEOPLE WHO THE CODE VIOLATIONS WOULD APPLY TO WERE REMOVED.
SO, UH, THEY DIDN'T ACTUALLY FIX ANYTHING.
THEY JUST REMOVED THE PEOPLE FROM THE EQUATION.
I AND I, YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SPEAK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT I'M, I'M CURIOUS IF THE, THE OWNER IS NOT THE DEVELOPER AND IT'S A ANOTHER DEVELOPER THAT'S DOING THE PROJECT, WOULD THAT POTENTIALLY GIVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD A LITTLE MORE SURETY IN THE, THE DEVELOPMENT BEING SOME QUALITY THAT YOU CAN TRUST? YEAH, THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION.
LIKE IF THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY WAS BEING TRANSITIONED AND THE CURRENT OWNER WAS NOT IN CHARGE OF MAINTAINING SAID PROPERTY, THAT WOULD GIVE US MORE CONFIDENCE.
BUT JUST SOMEBODY ELSE BUILDING A PROPERTY, I DON'T THINK DOES ANYTHING TO ASSUAGE ANY OF THE CONCERNS WE HAVE.
IT'S NOT THE QUALITY OF THE BUILD OF THE HOUSE THAT'S, UH, CONCERN.
IT'S, UH, THE OVERALL MAINTENANCE OF OR LACK THEREOF OF THE HOUSE THAT IS A CONCERN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, YEAH, I THINK THIS QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.
UM, I AM CURIOUS, GIVEN THAT THE COMPLICATED NATURE OF THESE THREE SITES AND JUST SORT OF, IF YOU COULD WALK US THROUGH THE THINKING OF HOW WE ENDED UP WITH EACH ONE WHERE WE DID, I THINK THAT THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR US TO SORT OF PROCESS WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING, EVEN THOUGH THE OTHER TWO SITES HAVE OBVIOUSLY BEEN SOMEWHAT APPROVED EARLIER THIS EVENING.
YEAH, SO WE JUST TAKE THEM AS INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASES, SO THAT'S HOW WE MOVE THEM ALONG.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE PART OF A PROPOSED UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THAT HAS TO GO THROUGH.
UM, IT'S JUST WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
SO WE HAVE TO TAKE EACH ZONING CASE INDIVIDUALLY THE WAY THEY ARE SUBMITTED.
SO IT DEPENDS HOW THEY'RE SUBMITTED.
UM, 12 AND 13 COULD HAVE BEEN PUT TOGETHER, BUT THEY ARE, THEY WERE ALL SEPARATED.
AND I GUESS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THAT THEN IS THAT STAFF FELT COMFORTABLE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DB 90 ON THIS PARTICULAR SITE? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION IN OUR BACKUP THAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING RIGHT NOW.
WE WERE COMFORTABLE WITH DB 90 ON THIS SITE PARTICULARLY, WE WERE NOT OKAY WITH IT, UM, ON 0 1 1 2.
THAT'S WHY WE RECOMMENDED THE V AND THE APPLICANT AMENDED TO A V.
AND IN TERMS OF, UM, SITE SIZE, WE'VE SEEN SOME FAIRLY SMALL
[01:25:01]
SITES THAT HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN APPROVED FOR DB 90 AND MOVE SORT OF EVEN NOW INTO SITE PLAN, I BELIEVE.SO THE SIZE OF THE ACREAGE IS NOT NECESSARILY A HUGE CONSTRAINT WITH THESE BUILDINGS, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, IT'S A CONSIDERATION, BUT IT'S NOT A DETERMINATION OF WHY WE WOULD MAKE DB 90, UH, A REZONING.
BUT YES, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME SMALL SITES CONSIDERED FOR DB 90.
AND THEN I GUESS JUST TO HIGHLIGHT, THE APPLICANT HAS NOTED, AND I THINK SOUNDS LIKE YOU DISCUSSED THIS AS STAFF, THAT IT IS VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY TO TRANSIT.
SO ASIDE FROM THE ISSUES RELATED TO THE SORT OF SHAPE AND SIZE OF THE SITE, IT WOULD BE A GOOD PLACE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL DENSITY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE WOULD GET UNDER DV 90, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
WE HAVE THREE MORE SPOTS FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, THE QUESTION IS FOR THE APPLICANT I BELIEVE, OR PERHAPS FOR THE CITY STAFF.
UM, AGAIN, I'M GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT WHAT ARE THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS.
UM, WE, YOU, YOU, YOU SPOKE ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS.
UM, HOW WOULD THAT WORK? WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE? WHAT ARE THE OTHER THINGS, IF THERE ARE OTHER THINGS IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL GREEN SPACES AND, UM, PARKS OR POCKET? I KNOW THIS IS A VERY SMALL PARK, BUT CAN YOU KIND OF GIVE US AN IDEA OF, OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE? MS. HODRA IS COMING.
UM, THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS, UM, THAT I COULD LIST FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENT REVIEWS INSIDE THE BACKUP.
UM, SO THEY'RE, UH, CLOSE TO THE HIGHLAND MALL STATION REGIONAL CENTER.
UM, THEY'RE ADJACENT TO THE 53RD STREET ACTIVITY CORRIDOR.
UM, THERE'S A BUS STOP ON DUVAL 0.15 MILES AWAY.
SIDEWALK AND BIKE LANES ARE PRESENT ALONG EAST 53RD STREET IN BROODING.
UM, THESE ARE JUST ITEMS THAT ARE CLOSE BY.
UH, THERE'S AN ELEMENTARY 0.3 MILES AWAY, UH, BROING GREEN PARK, WHICH IS A POCKET PARK.
UM, THE HOUSING CHOICE WOULD EXPAND THE NUMBER OF UNITS AND HOUSING CHOICE THAT SUITS A VARIETY OF HOUSEHOLD SIZES, INCOMES, AND LIFESTYLE NEEDS.
UM, EXAMPLES LIKE APARTMENTS AND LIVE WORK UNITS, ALL OF THAT.
UM, WHICH ARE PART OF THE AUSTIN AND, UH, THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT.
AND THEN IT PROVIDES A MINIMUM OF 10% OF THE UNITS FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING AT 80% MFI OR LESS.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU WANT ME TO KEEP GOING.
YEAH, WELL, I MEAN, SO FAR WHAT I HEARD, UM, REALLY IN TERMS OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GEOGRAPHY, BUT THEN YOU DID SAY THE 10% MM-HMM
THE GEOGRAPHY BEING WHAT THEY'RE LOCATED NEAR AS OPPOSED TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, IN WHAT COMMUNITY ACTUAL BENEFITS GIVEN BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.
SO THE, UM, OH, SCREENING REQUIREMENTS.
THOSE OTHER ITEMS IN THE DB 90 ORDINANCE.
UM, I HAVE A FEW OF THEM HIGHLIGHTED, BUT IT'S A, IT'S A LARGE ORDINANCE.
UM, THE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED COMMERCIAL SPACES, UH, THE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS, UM, THAT THE COMPATIBILITY BUFFERS THERE, MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT MAY NOT PRODUCE SOUND IN EXCESS OF 70 DECIBELS.
UM, THAT'S, THAT'S JUST A FEW OF THEM.
AND SO THE, UM, THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENT WOULD BE 10%, DO, DO, HOW MANY UNITS WOULD THAT ACTUALLY GENERATE? JUST, I, I DON'T HAVE THAT ON HAND.
DOES THE APPLICANT KNOW 13 VICE CHAIR? IF YOU WANNA JUMP IN? I, I, I DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THE NUMBER OF UNITS, BUT I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION STAFF CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
UNDER DB 90, UM, THEY'D BE REQUIRED TO DO 10% UNITS AT 50% MFI OR THEY WOULD BE DOING 12% AT 60% MFI.
AND THEN FOR OWNERSHIP, IT'S 12% AT 80% IN THE
SO IT'S A LITTLE COMPLICATED, BUT IT DEPENDS ON WHAT AFFORDABILITY LEVEL THEY DO.
I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
SO DID WE KNOW THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? DID I HEAR 13? UH, I DON'T HAVE A NUMBER.
UM, AND IT'S USUALLY DETERMINED THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
I DON'T KNOW IF MS. DAVIS OR MS. BOJO IF YOU'VE HAD PRELIMINARY TALKS.
WE DON'T HAVE A DESIGN RIGHT NOW, SO IT WOULD BE DETERMINANT SITE PLAN FOR TIA, JUST BASED ON LOT SIZE.
WE USED, I, I BELIEVE 130 UNITS, SO, SO IF IT WERE 10% IT WOULD BE 13.
ALRIGHT, LAST TWO SPOTS FOR QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, LOOKING FOR A MOTION VICE CHAIR.
[01:30:01]
OKAY.ALRIGHT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? UM, SURE.
ONE, I THINK IT DOES MAKE SENSE TO MOVE THE ZONING CASES FORWARD AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE WE WANNA HAVE SOME DEGREE OF CONSISTENCY, PARTICULARLY AS COUNCIL AND OTHERS ARE LOOKING AT IT.
I ALSO WANNA SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A PLACE, AS WE MENTIONED, SORT OF CLOSE TO BLOCK, UH, CLOSE TO TRANSIT, HAVING PROXIMITY TO SORT OF A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT AMENITIES AND USES.
THIS IS THE KIND OF PLACE WHERE I THINK THIS SORT OF DEVELOPMENT MAKES SENSE.
AND OF COURSE, INCOME RESTRICTED UNIT GO LONG WAY AND SORT OF, UM, YOU KNOW, SUPPORTING THE COMMUNITY IN SORT OF DIFFERENT NEEDS.
HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK THERE'S TWO THINGS I ALSO WANNA MENTION THAT I, I THINK WE HAVE, UH, ONE COMMITMENT FROM THE APPLICANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE GONNA CONTINUE TALKING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, INCLUDING SEEING HOW THAT CONVERSATION GOES IN FEBRUARY AS THIS MOVES FORWARD.
AND THEN SECONDLY ALSO, UM, ESSENTIALLY SEEING THAT THERE IS SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER OUR CODE VIOLATIONS ACTIVE OR NOT, BUT SEEING IF WHATEVER SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE THAT MIGHT BE CREATING A NUISANCE FOR THE NEIGHBORS, IF THOSE CAN BE WORKED ON.
HAVING SAID THAT, I I ALSO WANNA SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN IN THIS SPOT BEFORE, IT'S REALLY CHALLENGING, BUT SOMETIMES PART OF THE REZONING IS TO SORT OF, YOU KNOW, HAVE THAT REDEVELOPMENT SO SOME OF THOSE OLDER ISSUES CAN BE RESOLVED.
WE'RE SEEING THIS IN SOME PLACES WHERE SMALLER SCATTERED PARCELS END UP WITH USES THAT REALLY CAUSE A LOT OF NUISANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I REALLY WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT'S A VERY REAL THING, BUT HAVING THAT ABILITY TO LOOK AT IT IN A UNIFIED WAY, HAVING SOME UNDERSTANDING OF, UH, MOVING AHEAD WITH A PROJECT, HOPEFULLY THERE CAN BE SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY BENEFITS THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND AT LEAST THEY GET NEW NEIGHBORS WHO CAN LIVE WITH THEM IN THEIR COMMUNITY AND BE PART OF THAT.
ANYONE SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER COX? YEAH, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
UM, SEE IF I CAN GET A SECOND FOR POSTPONING THIS CASE TO OUR FEBRUARY 11TH MEETING.
LOOKING FOR A SECOND? I DON'T SEE A SECOND.
OKAY, THEN I'LL JUST SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.
UM, I I, I'M NOT HAPPY WITH THE WAY THIS CAME BEFORE US AND ACTUALLY I'LL BE ASKING, UH, CHAIR TO REOPEN THE CONSENT VOTE SO I CAN CHANGE MY VOTE ON A FEW ITEMS. UM, I THINK IT WAS CONFUSING THE WAY THAT THIS WAS PUSHED FORWARD, ALTHOUGH I, I UNDERSTAND ADMINISTRATIVELY WHY IT WAS, I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE IF, UM, THE NEIGHBORS OF THIS PROPERTY HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THEY NEED.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT FRUSTRATED, UH, AS A LOT OF, UH, RESIDENTS ARE WHEN THEY COME TO US ABOUT OUR CONVOLUTED PROCESSES.
AND SO, UM, I WAS HOPING TO POSTPONE THIS, UH, TO GIVE TIME, UH, FOR THE DEVELOPER, UH, AND THE RESIDENTS TO MEET AGAIN AND TALK THROUGH SOME OF THESE ISSUES.
UH, AND, AND ALSO GIVE THE RESIDENTS A LITTLE BIT OF BREATHING ROOM TO UNDERSTAND OR AT LEAST RESEARCH OR REACH OUT TO STAFF TO UNDERSTAND THE, THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND HOW THEY CAN OBJECT IF THEY WANT TO, UM, AND UNDERSTAND THE, THE IMPACTS OF THE DB 90 ZONING SINCE IT IS QUITE COMPLICATED WHAT, UH, THE CITY APPROVED.
AND SO, UM, I THINK THERE IS, UH, A VERY APPROPRIATE USE CASE.
I DON'T KNOW IF DB 90 IS IT, MAYBE IT IS.
UM, BUT I FEEL LIKE THIS IS HALF BAKED.
I'M AFRAID THIS MIGHT BE JUST ENTITLEMENT SHOPPING.
UM, AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS A BIT MORE FLESHED OUT BEFORE WE HAVE TO MAKE A FINAL VOTE ON IT, WHICH IS WHY I WILL OPPOSE THE, UH, VOTE TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST? LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS THE MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HANEY FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR? FOUR NINE.
THOSE AGAINST COMMISSIONER HAYNES, WHAT COLOR WAS THAT? GREEN.
SO THAT IS 10 TO THOSE AGAINST.
COMMISSIONER COX, WHAT WAS YOUR VOTE AGAINST? AGAINST? OKAY, SO 10 TO ONE TO ONE WITH COMMISSIONER COX VOTING NO.
AND COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS ABSTAINING.
UM, COMMISSIONER COX, I, I DIDN'T FORGET YOUR REQUEST.
I JUST, I DIDN'T KNOW WHEN THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO DO THAT WOULD BE.
UM, CAN SOMEONE HELP ME WITH THE PROCESS ON THAT? SURE.
SO, UH, WE WOULD NEED A MOTION AND A SECONDARY RECONSIDER AND A
[01:35:01]
SUPER MAJORITY HAS TO VOTE IN FAVOR FOR IT TO BE OPEN AGAIN.AND THEN WE WOULD REDO THE VOTE ON IT.
A SUPER MAJORITY FOR, UH, OUR BODY IS NINE FOLKS AND SOMEBODY CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
COMMISSIONER COX, DID YOU WANT TO MAKE THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER? YEAH, I JUST, I JUST WANNA CHANGE MY VOTE ON ITEMS 12 AND 13.
SO I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO, TO REOPEN THE VOTE SO THAT I CAN CHANGE MY VOTE ON THAT.
I SEE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAYNES.
ALL RIGHT, ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, WHAT YOUR VOTE? SURE.
UM, WE ARE, WE'VE LOST COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
COMMISSIONER AND COMMISSIONER BARR RAMIREZ.
SO WELL, UH, THE CONSENT AGENDA HAS BEEN REOPENED.
UM, AND SO GOING BACK TO OUR ORIGINAL READING OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, CAN YOU STATE FOR THE RECORD WHAT YOUR VOTE IS ON ITEMS 12 AND 13? YES, MY SHARE.
SO SORRY, SINCE WE'RE RECONSIDERING THE MOTION, THE MOTION HAS TO BE MADE AGAIN.
SO I'M MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA AS NOTED EARLIER IN THE MEETING.
AND NOW, YES, WE CAN TAKE THE VOTE ON IT.
AND NOTING COMMISSIONER COX, WHAT IS YOUR VOTE ON ITEMS NUMBER 12 AND 13? UH, NO ON ITEMS 12 AND 13? YES.
ON ALL OTHER CONSENT ITEMS. OKAY, ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR.
SO, UM, THAT IS ALL OF OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS THIS EVENING.
GOING ON TO WORKING GROUP AND COMMITTEE UPDATES.
[WORKING GROUP/COMMITTEE UPDATES]
NUMBER 19 COJC, CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.UM, OUR MEETING WOULD'VE BEEN TOMORROW, BUT THERE ARE NO CODE ITEMS READY FOR US TO HEAR.
SO, UM, WE ARE HOLDING OVER UNTIL FEBRUARY MEETING NUMBER 20, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE, UH, CANCELED OUR JANUARY MEETING AND ARE LIKELY TO HAVE A, UH, AS NEEDED, UH, SPECIAL FEBRUARY COMMITTEE, 21 JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
ITEM 22, SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ HAS GONE.
COMMISSIONER HOWARD, DO YOU HAVE ANY UPDATES? I, I DON'T.
SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
UM, WE HAVE NOT MET THIS MONTH.
ITEM NUMBER 24, CITY OF AUSTIN BUILDINGS WORKING GROUP CHAIR.
WE DO NOT HAVE ANY UPDATED THIS TIME.
NUMBER 25, OUTREACH AND PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP.
TECHNICAL BUILDING CODE UPDATES.
GOVERNANCE RULES AND PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP.
I KNOW, UH, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON IS NOT HERE THIS EVENING, BUT I WILL SHARE THAT WE HAVE MET, MET COMMISSIONER.
MOVING ON TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
ANY COMMERS? COMMISSIONER COX? I DON'T KNOW.I THOUGHT WE HAD A STANDING ITEM FOR, UM, APPOINTING PEOPLE TO, UH, THE COMMITTEES AND GROUPS, BUT, UM, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A STANDING ITEM.
SO, SORRY, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
YEAH, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE MENTION, UM, IT, IT, IT'S PROBABLY OBVIOUS, BUT, UM, MY, MY TERM IS GOING TO EXPIRE AT THE END OF FEBRUARY.
UM, AND I AM ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, SO I JUST WANTED TO THROW IT OUT THERE.
MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE AN ITEM AT SOME POINT BEFORE FEBRUARY 28TH TO, UH, MAYBE A APPOINT A NEW MEMBER FOR THAT COMMITTEE IF WE THINK THAT THAT'S NECESSARY.
UM, UH, JUST TO MENTION, SO, UM, COMMISSIONER COX, THERE'S A HOLDOVER PERIOD, SO IF YOU, AS LONG AS YOU'RE WILLING TO SERVE, UM, COMMISSIONERS CAN CONTINUE SERVING IN THE HOLDOVER PERIOD IF THERE IS A, UH, SORT OF MOVE BETWEEN NOMINATIONS.
HAVING SAID THAT, OF COURSE WE WILL SORT OF HONOR THAT RESPECT AND WE'LL MAKE IT SO THAT WE PUT IT ON.
BUT I WOULD ALSO BE A LITTLE HESITANT.
IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE TO WAIT UNTIL THE NEW FOLKS, IF THEY ARE TO BE NEW FOLKS ARE HERE SO THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY BE PARTAKING THAT ACTIVITY AS WELL.
BUT OF COURSE, WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE DO NOT LEAVE ANY GAPS ON THE JOINT COMMITTEES.
BUT REGARDLESS, LIKE THIS IS A NOTE FOR EVERYBODY, WHICH IS, UM, EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT, IF YOU'RE NOT BEING RENOMINATED OR YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO CONSIDER RENOMINATION AT THIS TIME, THERE WILL BE A HOLDOVER
[01:40:01]
UNLESS, UH, THE COUNCIL MEMBER APPOINTING YOU, EXPRESSLY REMOVES YOU FOR SOME REASON.'CAUSE I'M SURE THIS AFFECTS MORE PEOPLE THAN JUST ME.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY, UH, I AM MAKING SOME BIG CHANGES THIS YEAR, AND SO, UM, THE END OF FEBRUARY DATE, UH, WILL, WILL UNFORTUNATELY HAVE TO BE, UH, MY LAST DATE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO, UM, SO YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE JUST IN CASE WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT ANY SORT OF GAPS, PARTICULARLY WITH A LOT OF THE, UH, IMPORTANT THINGS THAT ARE COMING UP THIS YEAR.
SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO GET ON OUR AGENDA HERE FAIRLY SOON.
AND I THINK WE CAN CARRY IT UNTIL THERE'S ACTION NEEDED ON IT.
UH, SO WE'RE JUST BEING PREEMPTIVE.
OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? ALRIGHT.
UM, WELL THANK Y'ALL FOR A, A GOOD FIRST MEETING OF, UH, 2025 AND I WILL ADJOURN OUR MEETING AT 7:49 PM THANK YOU SO MUCH.