[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:05]
CALL TO ORDER THE SPECIAL CALL MEETING OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION.
TODAY IS THURSDAY UNUSUAL DAY FOR US TO BE MEETING FEBRUARY 6TH, 2025 AT 6:00 PM WE ARE IN AUSTIN CITY HALL.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROOM 1 0 0 1.
I WILL START WITH CALLING THE COMMISSIONER.
ALEJANDRA FLORES PARLIAMENTARY.
FELIX, HAVE TO SAY IT OUT LOUD.
I WILL TAKE THAT FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO HEAR YOU FOR ANY VOTE.
SO WE HAVE A COMPLETE GROUP HERE.
THERE ARE NO EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS TO BE TALKED ABOUT OR IS THERE ANY, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT? NO.
[Consent Agenda]
WE HAVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.IS IT, WE HAD SOME LAST MINUTE COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES.
UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES? IF NOT, WE'LL INCLUDE THOSE IN THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
ITEM ONE FROM JANUARY 7TH, 2025.
ITEM TWO IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
IT IS HISTORIC ZONING, C 14 H 2024 DASH OH 1 60 62, RUNNING ROPE RANCH AT 73 0 4 KNOX LANE.
ITEM THREE IS A REZONING CASE.
IT IS ON CONSENT C 14 20 24 18 SH 83 0 1 RIVERSTONE.
IT IS, UH, FROM MF TWO TO MF THREE.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM FOUR IS A REZONING CASE, C 14 20 24 DASH 0 0 0 6.
GREATER WALNUT AREA CENTRALIZED OLDER CONTROL FACILITY PROJECT LOYOLA FACILITY DISTRICT ONE.
IT IS A CITY OF AUSTIN PROJECT REZONING REQUEST FROM SF THREE TO P PUBLIC.
UM, AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM FIVE IS, UH, DISCUSSION ITEM C 14 20 24 DASH 0 1 7 3 IS A CITY INITIATED CASE OF 1 0 5 0 5 AND 1 0 5 4 5 DESAL ROAD, REZONING CASE FROM SF TWO TO SF SIX AND SF SIX C TWO GO.
UM, AND THERE'S A CITY ORDINANCE THAT THAT'S SUPPORTING THAT, BUT IT IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
UH, ITEM SIX IS A PUT AMENDMENT C 8 14 0 4 DASH 0 180 7 0 3 S SH GOODNIGHT RANCH.
UM, AND IT IS A STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO MARCH 18TH.
SO THE CONSENT AGENDA AGAIN REAL QUICKLY IS ITEM ONE, THE MINUTES.
ITEM FOUR IS AN INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT BY THE APPLICANT.
ITEM FIVE IS DISCUSSION, AND ITEM SIX IS A STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO MARCH 18TH.
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? DO I HEAR A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE.
[2. Historic Zoning: C14H-2024-0162 - Running Rope Ranch; District 10]
TWO, THE HISTORIC ZONING C 14 H 2024 DASH ONE 60, RUNNING ROPE RANCH AT 73 0 4 KNOX LANE.IT IS A REZONING FROM SF THREE TO SF THREE H.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, BUT OBJECTED TO BY THE OWNER.
UM, THE ONLY THING WE'RE HEARING TONIGHT IS THE HISTORIC ZONING CASE.
UM, THIS IS A PROJECT I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON, SO I'M GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF.
AND WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO ALSO LEAVE AND PROBABLY NOT COME BACK.
SO I WILL LEAVE IT IN OUR VICE CHAIR'S CAPABLE HANDS, YOU CAN TAKE OVER.
HEY, DO WE HAVE A STAFF? DO WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION TO, TO MEET YOU? GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.
UM, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME HERE.
ITEM TWO, CASE NUMBER C 14 H 20 24 0 1 6 2 IS AN OWNER OPPOSED HISTORIC ZONING CASE INITIATED BY THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AFTER THEIR REVIEW OF A RELOCATION PERMIT ON THE PROPERTY AT 73 0 4 KNOX LANE, KNOWN AS THE RUNNING ROPE BRANCH.
UM, SO IN OUR ORDER OF OPERATIONS THIS EVENING, UM, I WILL BE STAFF AND APPLICANT SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
THE COMMISSION FOUND THAT A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY MET THE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION CRITERIA FOR HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS, ARCHEOLOGY, LANDSCAPE FEATURES, AND COMMUNITY VALUE.
THUS, THEY RECOMMENDED HISTORIC ZONING FOR
[00:05:01]
THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ALREADY IDENTIFIED AS CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND WATER QUALITY ZONES, AND INCLUDING THE STATE IDENTIFIED ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT ON THE PROPERTY.THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS SIMILAR, UH, EXCEPT IT EXCLUDES THE PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN SET ASIDE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DETENTION POND.
AND, AND THAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS SHOWN IN RED ON THIS MAP ON YOUR SCREEN.
BOTH STAFF AND THE HLC SUPPORT THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL, UH, TO MOVE TWO INTACT HISTORIC BUILDINGS ON THE SITE, A LOG, CABIN, AND ATTACK BARN FROM OUTSIDE THE AGE ZONED AREA TO WITHIN ITS BOUNDARY 73 0 4 KNOX IS MOST RECENTLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE KNOX FAMILY WHO OPENED THE RUNNING ROPE BRANCH IN 1947 AS A DAY CAMP FOR BOYS.
THE LAND WAS PREVIOUSLY OCCUPIED BY A FARMSTEAD DATING TO THE TURN OF THE 20TH CENTURY, LOCATED LESS THAN A MILE FROM THE ORIGINAL SIDE OF THE ESPERANZA SCHOOL, A ONE ROOM TIMBER SCHOOLHOUSE, NOW LOCATED IN ZILKER PARK.
THE FARMSTEAD WAS PART OF THE RURAL SPICEWOOD SPRINGS COMMUNITY.
AND FINALLY, THIS PROPERTY WAS IDENTIFIED AS AN ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE BY THE STATE OF TEXAS IN 1969.
THE ONLY A CURSORY SURVEY WAS COMPLETED AT THAT TIME.
PRELIMINARY RESEARCH BY UT INVESTIGATORS INDICATED A HIGH PROBABILITY OF SIGNIFICANT ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES, INCLUDING EVIDENCE OF NATIVE AMERICAN ACTIVITY AROUND THE SITE'S.
MANY NATURAL SPRINGS, WHILE PRECISE LOCATIONS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ARE NOT DISCLOSED TO THE PUBLIC TO DISCOURAGE VANDALISM, THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION HAS CONFIRMED WITH HPO STAFF THAT THE SITE IDENTIFIED IN 1969 DID CORRESPOND WITH THE AREA RECOMMENDED FOR HISTORIC ZONING.
THAT CONCLUDES THIS STAFF PRESENTATION, AND I'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS IF Y'ALL NEED.
CAN YOU, IT'S THE SPEAK, IT'S THE, UM, WE START WITH THE PEOPLE IN FAVOR OF THE HISTORIC ZONING.
UM, 'CAUSE IT'S A HISTORIC ZONING CASE.
SO, UM, COULD THE, COULD YOU READ THE NAMES OF THE ANYBODY WHO IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF HISTORIC ZONING? YES.
OUR FIRST SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS CHAMP FITSU.
CHAMP, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
WHY NOT SIX? UM, I BELIEVE IT SAYS THE FIRST SPEAKER IN FAVOR.
UM, HE DID NOT IDENTIFY HIMSELF AS THE PRIMARY SPEAKER.
UM, THEN I GUESS WE HAVE SIX MINUTES.
YOU, UH, I AM IN FAVOR OF DESIGNATING THIS AREA, UH, AS HISTORICAL, UH, AND THE REASONS, UH, HAVE BEEN TOUCHED UPON ALREADY.
BUT THE PRIMARY ONE IS THAT, UM, THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO BURNED ROCK MIDDEN SITES THAT ARE LOCATED IN ON THIS PROPERTY.
BURNED ROCK MIDDENS ARE EARTH OVENS, ESSENTIALLY, THAT WERE DUG INTO THE GROUND.
THEY SERVED AS COOKING SOURCES, UH, FOR MANY DAYS.
UH, AND DURING THAT TIME, THE PEOPLE WHO WERE COOKING THERE WOULD CAMP IN THE AREA, UH, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE SPRINGS.
UM, THEY ARE NOT JUST COOKING SITES, ALTHOUGH THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS INTERESTING BECAUSE IN OUR PART OF CENTRAL TEXAS, THOSE TEND TO BE FROM THE ARCHAIC PERIOD, WHICH IS 3000 TO 15,000 YEARS AGO.
UM, SO THESE ARE EXTREMELY OLD, UH, SIGNIFICANT ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES.
ONE OF THE FEW SITES IN OUR AREA THAT HAS ACTUALLY BEEN EXAMINED IN DETAILS, THE GREENHAW SITE, WHICH IS ONION CREEK, UH, HAYES COUNTY.
THAT SITE WAS ALSO FROM THE ARCHAIC PERIOD THAT WAS A CLUSTER OF SIX MIDDENS THAT SURROUNDED A WATER SOURCE, SOMEWHAT SIMILAR TO THE SITUATION HERE WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE SPRINGS AND AT LEAST TWO BURNED ROCK MIDDENS.
THERE MAY BE MORE, BUT THERE ARE DEFINITELY TWO, UH, IN THE EXCAVATION OF THE GREENHAW SITE.
IN ADDITION TO DART POINTS, ARROWHEADS, COOKING IMPLEMENTS, AND ALL SORTS OF EVIDENCE OF, UH, ARCHAIC ERA, UH, SETTLEMENT AND AND USE.
THERE WERE AT LEAST TWO GRAVE SITES DISCOVERED.
UM, THESE SITES TENDED TO BE USED OVER THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
SO SAYING THIS IS AN ARCHAIC SITE TELLS YOU A BROAD RANGE.
FREQUENTLY THEY WERE REUSED AND USED OVER AND OVER AGAIN OVER TIME, UP INTO, UH, AS LATE AS LIKE THE 15 HUNDREDS, 16 HUNDREDS, UH, AND THE GREEN HALL SITE, THE LATEST EVIDENCE THEY HAD SHOWED THAT, UH, THE KOA, NATIVE AMERICAN INDIANS HAD USED THE SITE WELL INTO KIND OF RECORDED HISTORY.
UH, BUT THE OLDER STUFF IS ALSO INTERESTING.
UM, TWO OF THOSE ARE WITHIN OUR CITY LIMITS, RIGHT HERE IN, YOU KNOW, THIS BEAUTIFUL AREA THAT HAS NATURAL SPRINGS.
UH, AND WHAT I'VE HEARD THUS FAR IS A SUGGESTION THAT A DETENTION POND COULD PERHAPS BE PUT INTO THAT AREA.
UH, STRUCTURES COULD BE MOVED INTO THAT AREA.
UH, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT'S POSSIBLE.
UM, TO ME, THIS IS A, AN INCREDIBLY SIGNIFICANT SITE, ONE THAT DESERVES TO BE, UH, LOOKED AT BY, UH, ACADEMICS AND STUDIED.
UH, AND WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT'S BACK THERE.
WE DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE GRAVE SITES.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT SORT OF ARTIFACTS ARE BACK THERE.
[00:10:01]
A NATURAL WATER SOURCE FEEDS INTO, I BELIEVE, THE SHOAL CREEK WATERSHED.THERE CERTAINLY ARE SPRINGS BACK THERE, UH, AND THERE DEFINITELY ARE AT LEAST TWO BURNED ROCK MIDDENS.
SO I AM VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF DOING WHAT WE CAN TO PROTECT THE SITE, UH, FROM DEVELOPMENT.
UM, WE DON'T LIVE IN AN AREA WHERE THE PRERECORDED HISTORY IS RECOGNIZED AS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THERE AREN'T LARGE STRUCTURES, BUT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PRERECORDED HISTORY THAT WE HAVE NOT REALLY STUDIED AND LEARNED ABOUT.
UM, AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE THAT COULD BE DONE, UH, OR IT COULD BE DESTROYED.
UM, AND I'D PREFER TO SEE IT PROTECTED.
I APOLOGIZE FOR THE CONFUSION.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS SCOTT SIMPSON.
SCOTT, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, WE, UH, WE LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO THIS TRACK, SO OUR, OUR BACKYARD GOES INTO THIS AREA.
SO, UM, MY WIFE AND I, AND OUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS WERE JUST, YOU KNOW, MAINLY CONCERNED WITH TRYING TO PRESERVE THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AS IT EXISTS BACK THERE TODAY.
AND, UH, I THINK A FEW HOUSES BACK THERE, YOU KNOW, ARE PERFECTLY REASONABLE.
BUT, UH, GIVEN THE ARCHEOLOGIC FINDINGS THAT WERE, UM, DOCUMENTED BY THE UT FOLKS AND, UH, GIVEN THE NATURAL SPRINGS BACK THERE AND, UH, SOME WONDERFUL TREES AND THINGS LIKE THAT BACK THERE, WE JUST, YOU KNOW, DON'T, DON'T WANT IT TO BE DISTURBED.
IT'S A, IT'S A VITAL PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO, UM, YOU KNOW, REIGN ON PROGRESS AND, YOU KNOW, A REASONABLE NUMBER OF HOUSES BACK THERE, YOU KNOW, SEEMS, SEEMS REASONABLE, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, NOT, NOT, UM, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE SMALL HOUSES.
UH, WELL, I WON'T GET INTO THAT.
BUT, SO WE, WE, I, I, UH, UH, AM IN FAVOR OF THE, UH, HERITAGE DESIGNATION AND, UH, AGREE WITH WHAT THE CITY STAFFER SAID IN THE, AND THE ESTEEMED GENTLEMAN BEFORE ME.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKER'S IN FAVOR ON THIS ITEM.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS LEAH BOJO.
LEAH, YOU WILL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
I'M LEAH BOJO WITH RENER GROUP HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, I'M GONNA TRY TO KIND OF CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONFUSION ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT IS BEFORE YOU RIGHT NOW.
SO IF YOU'LL JUST
I THINK THIS MIGHT BE HELPFUL.
SO THIS IS THE ORIGINAL, THIS IS THE ENTIRE SITE.
UM, IT'S ABOUT A 5.8 ACRE PROPERTY, UM, IN NORTHWEST AUSTIN IN DISTRICT 10.
UM, AND IT HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN A PRIVATE RESIDENCE AND THE RUNNING ROPE BRANCH THAT, UM, COLIN REFERENCED, UH, AND THE CAMP.
UM, AND WHEN THE APPLICANT ORIGINALLY APPLIED FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT OR A RELOCATION PERMIT, I SHOULD SAY, FOR THE HOME, UM, THAT IS WHEN THIS PROCESS WAS INITIATED.
IT WENT THROUGH HISTORIC REVIEW AT THAT TIME.
UM, WE HAD, UH, WE HIRED, OUR TEAM HIRED DONNA CARTER, AN ESTEEMED, UM, HISTORIC ARCHITECT WHO I THINK IS COMING TONIGHT, ALTHOUGH I DON'T BELIEVE SHE'S HERE YET.
WE THOUGHT WE WERE GONNA FIND, LIKE WE OFTEN DO THIS KIND OF NUGGET OF AN HISTORIC HOME THAT'S BEEN ADDED ONTO OVER THE YEARS.
AND SO IT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T NECESSARILY LOOK AT THE OUTSIDE OF IT AND FIND WHAT YOU WANT, BUT YOU CAN USUALLY FIND THE ACTUAL HISTORIC PART INSIDE.
UM, TO, HONESTLY, TO A LOT OF PEOPLE'S SURPRISE, INCLUDING DONNA'S AND I THINK CALLANS, WE WENT OUT AND LOOKED AT THE SITE AND IN FACT, THERE IS NOT AN, AN ORIGINAL NUGGET OF A HOME.
IT HAS BEEN REMODELED AND RENOVATED IN CERTAIN STYLES OVER THE YEARS, MOSTLY IN THE NINETIES.
AND SO THE HOME WAS, WAS DEEMED NOT HISTORIC, UM, BY HISTORICALLY MARKET COMMISSION.
AND SO THEY, THEY, THEY REDUCED THE AREA TO WHAT YOU SEE HERE AND SAID, MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST INITIATE IT FOR THIS PART OF THE SITE.
THIS IS NOT THE PART WHERE THE HOMES ARE GONNA GO.
THIS IS THE PART THAT HAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON IT.
UM, SO IN THAT DISCUSSION WITH THEM, WE TALKED ABOUT HOW THIS IS ALREADY, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S ALREADY A PROTECTED AREA.
THERE'S, UM, SEVERAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES HERE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL BUFFERS, CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO IT CAN'T BE DEVELOPED ANYWAY.
UM, AND SO WE WANTED TO, SO WE DIDN'T REALLY SEE THE PURPOSE IN ZONING HISTORIC ON TOP OF THOSE REGULATIONS THAT ALREADY EXIST.
UM, AND THEN, THEN IN PARTICULAR, AND THIS LINE IS AN ESTIMATE, BUT WE ASKED IF WE COULD NOT HAVE THE, THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN THERE BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE BE PROVIDING A DRAINAGE FACILITY, AND WE DON'T WANNA
[00:15:01]
HAVE TO GO THROUGH HISTORIC REVIEW OF A DRAINAGE FACILITY.THAT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE.
UM, SO NOW WE'VE SORT OF REDUCED IT DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.
UM, SO THIS IS AN EXHIBIT THAT SHOWS KIND OF WHERE THE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES THAT WE KNOW OF ARE TODAY.
AGAIN, UM, THERE'S AT LEAST SPRINGS AND A WETLAND.
UM, AND THEN THE BUFFERS THAT, UM, PROTECT THOSE FEATURES ROUGHLY COVER THAT, UM, THAT HATCHED AREA.
SO THAT AREA IS ENTIRELY UNDEVELOPABLE.
THIS IS A SURVEY, WHICH I THINK ALSO JUST GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF THE TOPOGRAPHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IT'S NOT HARD TO SEE WHERE THE, WHERE THOSE FEATURES ARE AND KIND OF THE STEEP SLOPES AND THINGS THAT GO ALONG WITH IT THAT WOULD MAKE, EVEN IF THERE WEREN'T THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS THERE, THAT WOULD MAKE THIS PORTION OF THE SITE, LIKE VERY DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO PUT ANY, ANYTHING ON.
THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE POOL WETLAND, SPRING POOL KIND OF THING THAT, UM, ORIGINALLY WAS PART OF WHAT THEY WERE PROPOSING TO PROTECT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT IT WAS A WETLAND AREA OR A SPRING FED AREA THAT IN THE FIFTIES IT LOOKS LIKE THE KNOX FAMILY PUT SOME KIND OF WALLS AROUND TO MAKE IT MORE LIKE A SWIMMING POOL.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED TODAY.
THIS IS, THIS WETLAND IS NOT FUNCTIONING, OR THE SPRING IS NOT FUNCTIONING.
IT'S IN FACT, UM, POLLUTING BECAUSE IT'S HOLDING THE WATER, UM, IN PLACE.
AND SO, UM, WE TALKED WITH THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT, AND HERE'S A COUPLE OTHER PICTURES JUST TO SHOW THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S JUST REALLY NOT, NOT FUNCTIONING THE WAY THAT IT'S INTENDED TO.
UM, AND THEY SAID THAT YES, IN FACT, AND I DON'T KNOW IF LIZ JOHNSON, THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER IS ON, BUT YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALL HAD CONVERSATIONS THAT YES, IN FACT WE WOULD RATHER BRING THIS BACK TO ITS ENVIRONMENTALLY FUNCTIONAL
UM, SO I FEEL LIKE THIS STORY IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE WHAT IT SHOWS IS THAT WE STARTED OFF WITH A SITE THAT DOES HAVE AN, AN INTERESTING AND IMPORTANT HISTORY AND A STORY TO TELL.
BUT THEN EACH TIME WE'VE LOOKED MORE CLOSELY AT IT, WE'VE SORT OF WHITTLED IT DOWN OR MADE AN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE TALKED WITH STAFF THAT THEY'RE GONNA ALLOW, THEY WOULD ALLOW ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF THIS PARTICULAR, UM, RESTORATION BECAUSE THEY RECOGNIZE THE ENVIRONMENTAL PART IS IMPORTANT, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE'RE GONNA FIND.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER RESTORATION IS GONNA BE NEEDED.
UM, AND EACH TIME WE FIND SOMETHING, WE SORT OF CHANGE THE REQUEST OR WHITTLE IT DOWN OR MAKE AN EXCEPTION THAT HISTORIC, UM, DESIGNATION WOULDN'T GENERALLY, UM, ALLOW.
AND I THINK THAT POINTS TO THE COMPLICATION ON THE SITE AND THE FACT THAT THE REGULATIONS THAT ARE THERE RIGHT NOW AND IN PLACE ARE, ARE GONNA PROTECT THESE FEATURES.
AND SO WE REALLY DON'T NEED TO ADD, AND WE ARE, AND THIS IS WHY WE'RE OPPOSING THIS, WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO OR NEED TO ADD ANOTHER LAYER OF REGULATION AND COMPLICATION TO AN ALREADY COMPLICATED SITE.
WE HAVE ONLY FILED A PRELIMINARY PLAN AND THEN THIS RELOCATION PERMIT THAT HAS INITIATED THIS PROCESS.
SO WE HAVE OBVIOUSLY SITE PLANNING, WE HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL WORK TO DO.
WE HAVE SUBDIVISION CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENTS.
WE HAVE MANY STEPS WITH THE CITY WHERE THESE THINGS WILL BE REVIEWED, AND THIS PART OF THE SITE CANNOT BE DEVELOPED AND WILL NOT BE DEVELOPED.
AND THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE, WITH THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION OR NOT.
UM, SO WHAT WE PROPOSE AND WHAT WE PROPOSED AT HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AS WELL AND WITH STAFF, IS THAT NOT, PLEASE DON'T ZONE THIS SITE HISTORIC, BUT INSTEAD LET US MAKE THESE COMMITMENTS.
WE'RE HAPPY TO PUT THIS IN A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT WE THINK BETTER TELLS THE STORY OF THE SITE, MAKES IT LIKE FUNCTION, AND KIND OF SHARE THAT HISTORY WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE THERE AND UNDERSTAND IT MUCH MORE THAN JUST ANOTHER OVERLAY OF REGULATION.
UM, WE'VE, WE ARE PROPOSING TO, THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO, THERE ARE TWO BUILDINGS ON THE SITE THAT ARE, UH, OLDER, UM, AND ARE IN GOOD SHAPE.
ONE OF THEM IS THIS TAC BUILDING AND ONE OF THEM IS THIS LOG STRUCTURE.
AND I WISH THAT DONNA WAS HERE BECAUSE SHE DOES A MUCH BETTER JOB THAN I DO.
BUT SHE EXPLAINED THAT THESE ARE ACTUALLY, THESE ARE ACTUALLY HISTORIC STRUCTURES AND THEY'RE EASILY PICKED UP AND THEY'RE INTACT, AND WE CAN MOVE THEM OVER TOWARD THE AREA WHERE THE OTHER HISTORIC, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL AND HISTORIC FEATURES ARE.
UM, WE'VE COMMITTED TO PROVIDING A MARKER OR A KIOSK SHOWING, MA'AM, WE ARE AT TIME.
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO WRAP UP? YEAH.
USE MAYBE ONE OF THEM AS A KIOSK OR SOMETHING, AGAIN, TO TELL THE STORY OF THE FAMILY AND THE, AND THE LAND AND, AND YOU KNOW, WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE IN THE PAST? UM, WE'VE COMMITTED TO, UM, PERFORMING SHOVEL TESTS ON THE, UM, THE LAND WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT WILL HAPPEN, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE AREN'T ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED, LIKE WAS DESCRIBED.
IT IS A TEXAS, UM, HISTORIC COMMISSION RECOGNIZED SITE.
SO THIS AREA IS WHERE THOSE, UM, ITEMS HAVE BEEN FOUND IN THE PAST, BUT WE'VE COMMITTED ALSO TO DOING SHOVEL TESTS IN THE, IN THE PART OF THE SITE WHERE THE HOMES WOULD BE, JUST TO MAKE SURE, AND OBVIOUSLY IF WE FIND ANYTHING, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE PROTOCOL THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE STATE.
UM, AND AND I, WE HAD ALSO TALKED ABOUT PUTTING A WALKING PATH THROUGH THE SITE TO KIND OF, AGAIN, LIKE MAYBE THROUGH MULTIPLE KIOSKS, KIND OF TELL THE STORY OF THE SITE.
UM, IT'S FUNNY, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT ORIGINALLY WAS BEING ASKED FOR WAS THAT THE, THE, THE PATH GO BY THE POOL.
THEN WE REALIZED THE POOL'S ACTUALLY NOT GREAT AND SHOULDN'T BE PRESERVED.
SO NOW IT WOULD JUST GO BY THE SPRING.
AND AGAIN, I THINK THIS POINTS TO THE SORT OF EVOLU E EVOLUTION OF THIS SITE AND THE STORY HERE.
UM, SO THIS IS JUST SORT OF A CONCEPTUAL PLAN
[00:20:01]
OF HOW THAT WOULD LOOK, WHERE WE WOULD PROBABLY PUT THOSE STRUCTURES, UM, AGAIN, THE AREA THAT CAN'T BE TOUCHED.AND THEN THE BLUE IS THE AREA WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAPPEN THROUGH SEPARATE PROCESS.
UM, AND SO AGAIN, WE WOULD ASK YOU TO DENY HISTORIC ZONING POTENTIALLY WITH THE DIRECTION THAT WE WORK TOWARD THIS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, SO THAT BY THE TIME WE GET TO COUNCIL, WE CAN PUT THIS COVENANT IN PLACE AND REALLY TELL THE STORY IN A WAY THAT I THINK IS A LOT MORE MEANINGFUL AND A LOT MORE, UM, IN HONOR OF THE SITE.
UM, AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS AND NO CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, THEN IS THERE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, SO COMMISSIONERS, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THOSE IN FAVOR OR POSED OR STAFF? I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE LADY WHO JUST SPOKE.
SO YOU ARE FROM NER GROUP, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
AND YOU ARE REPRESENTING THE LANDOWNER? YES.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE ULTIMATELY THE PLAN IS TO POTENTIALLY SUBDIVIDE OR DEVELOP THE TRACK VIA SUBDIVISION OR SITE PLAN, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
AND, AND YOUR CLIENT'S POSITION IS THAT YOU CAN, OR, OR THEY CAN PRESERVE THESE ELEMENTS PEOPLE LIKE, AND, AND, AND, AND ALSO ALLOW THEM TO, TO DEVELOP THE PROJECT THAT THEIR LIKING, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
THE PROJECT WOULD BE DEVELOPED EITHER WAY MM-HMM
UM, THE HO THE HOMES ARE, YOU KNOW, IN THE SEPARATE PART OF THE SITE.
BUT THIS WILL MAKE IT, UM, MUCH LESS COMPLICATED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL WORK THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN, UM, ON THE, THE PART OF THE SITE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
AND THIS WHOLE ISSUE SPROUTED UP WHEN YOUR CLIENT, UH, REACHED OUT TO THE CITY FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT? THAT'S RIGHT.
AND THEN AGAINST YOUR CLIENT'S WISHES, THE CITY DECIDED TO TRY AND PLACE THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
THROUGH THE HISTORIC REVIEW, IT WENT TO, THROUGH THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, THEY INITIATED THE ZONING.
IT WAS ACTUALLY THE, YOU KNOW, THEY INITIATE, UM, THE ZONING FOR THE WHOLE SITE.
IT WAS WHEN WE CAME BACK AND SHOWED THEM WHAT WE FOUND ABOUT THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE THAT THEY SAID, OKAY, WELL THEN THAT'S OUT.
AND THEN THEY REDUCED THE AREA TO THIS PART.
AND LIKE THEY, EVEN AT THE, IN THE CONVERSATION KIND OF SAID IT WAS A BELT AND SUSPENDERS APPROACH.
NOW, YOU SAID THE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL BE DEVELOPED REGARDLESS OF THE DESIGNATION OF, OF IT BEING HISTORIC PROPERTY? YES, SIR.
WILL IT BE DEVELOPED SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME? YES.
SO, SO THERE'S NO ECONOMIC HARM OR ANYTHING LIKE? WELL, I THINK THE, I MEAN, IT'S ONE SITE, IT'S ONE LOT MM-HMM
AND IT'S GOING TO, RIGHT NOW IT'LL BE SUBDIVIDED INTO LOTS, BUT THIS PORTION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS PART OF THE LARGER LOT.
SO IT WOULD BE PART OF LIKE THE ECONOMIC, UH, RE UM, SORRY, ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT WOULD ALL BE PART OF THE SAME PROJECT.
SO IT, THIS DESIGNATION DOESN'T AFFECT THE HOMES MM-HMM
BUT IT WOULD AFFECT FROM BOTH TIMING AND COST AND, AND JUST SORT OF COMPLICATION, UM, THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PORTION OF THE SITE.
AND LIKE, JUST IN THAT, THAT PIECE.
SO IF IT IMPACTS TIMING AND COST, I, I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO CONCLUDE THAT THERE IS AN ECONOMIC HARM.
UM, COMMISSIONER ZUKI
UM, IF THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION WERE TO BE IMPOSED, WHAT THEN WOULD BE THE LIKELY PROCESS THAT WOULD HAPPEN WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION THAT YOU WOULD PREFER TO DO WITHOUT THE ZONING? WELL, I THINK IT DEPENDS A LITTLE BIT ON EXACTLY WHAT WE FIND OUT THERE, WHICH WE DON'T KNOW YET.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GET TO SITE PLAN, UH, AGAIN, WE'VE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT ONE PRIMARY SPRING, SO WE KNOW THAT THAT NEEDS SOME HELP.
UM, THERE WILL BE CLEARING, THAT WILL HAPPEN.
THERE'S THINGS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A VARIETY OF THINGS THAT ARE GONNA HAPPEN, BUT WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT'S GOING TO BE.
AND SO EVERYTHING WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL HISTORIC REVIEW ON IT.
AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT THESE ARE THINGS THAT REALLY AREN'T RELATED TO HISTORIC REVIEW.
I MEAN, I DON'T MEAN TO SAY THERE'S NOT HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE TO THE SITE, BUT I MEAN, LIKE, THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD BE DOING ARE NOT HISTORIC THINGS.
IT WOULD BE LIKE, LIKE THE, THE SPRING, FOR EXAMPLE.
I, UM, I THINK THAT, LIKE YOU'VE MENTIONED, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GONNA FIND.
AND THE PRESENCE OF THESE ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES AND ELEMENTS, ESPECIALLY ONCE YOU GET INTO RESTORATION, WILL BE REVEALED AT THAT TIME, RIGHT? RIGHT.
AND SO I THINK I, AND I DIDN'T GO THROUGH AND WATCH, UH, HISTORIC COMMISSION MM-HMM
CONVERSATION, BUT, UM, I, I WORK IN A SITE THAT'S, UH, SIMILAR AND I KNOW THAT IF WE EVEN, UM, PLANT
PUT A PLANT IN THE GROUND MM-HMM
YOU KNOW, WE CAN COME ACROSS REALLY SENSITIVE, UH, ARCHEOLOGICAL FINDINGS.
AND SO IT SEEMS LIKE THE DESIGNATION IS IN RESPECT TO THE SENSITIVITY OF THE SITE, AND NOT JUST, NOT
[00:25:01]
JUST THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, BUT THE FACT THAT WE DON'T KNOW, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE IT IS JUST INCHES BELOW THE SURFACE.AND SO THE DESIGNATION IS ALSO PROTECTIVE OF THAT LEGACY AND THAT INDIGENOUS HISTORY, WE DO KNOW THAT IT'S ALREADY A REGISTERED HISTORIC WITH THE STATE REGISTERED ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE.
SO WE ALREADY HAVE THOSE, THAT PROTECTION IS IN PLACE AS A RESULT OF THAT DESIGNATION.
SO THIS IS NOT, THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THAT, THAT THAT GOES AWAY.
THAT DESIGNATION HAS BEEN THERE SINCE I, I THINK THE NINETIES.
SO THE, SO THE EXTRA, I GUESS I'M HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE EXTRA BURDEN IS AS A RESULT OF, OF THIS RECOGNITION.
THERE ARE CITY REGULATIONS RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES MM-HMM
UM, AND SO IT'S LIKE WITH, AGAIN, I'LL JUST KEEP USING THE SPRING JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, BECAUSE IT'S ONE, THE ONE THAT WE, IT'S LIKE SORT OF THE OBVIOUS ONE THAT WE DUG INTO, RIGHT? SO ORIGINALLY, UM, IT WAS PART OF WHAT THEY, WHAT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS LOOKING TO PRESERVE.
BUT THEN, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN ALL HONESTY, PEOPLE HADN'T BEEN OUT THERE AND WE GO OUT THERE, IT'S NOT, IT'S, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE, IT PUTS, IT, IT PUTS AT LOGGERHEADS THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND, AND PROGRESS, UM, RESTORING THIS AREA, AND WE'RE RESTORING THE WATER FLOW AND, YOU KNOW, ALL THAT WITH, UM, THE, WITH THE HISTORIC POOL.
WHEREAS, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN TELL THE STORY OF THIS PLACE, IF WE HAVE TO, WE ALREADY HAVE TO PROTECT IT BECAUSE OF THE STATE DESIGNATION, AND THEN WE CAN TELL THE STORY OF THIS PLACE THROUGH OTHER MEANS, UH, LIKE, LIKE WHAT I DESCRIBED, I THINK WE'RE GONNA DO A BETTER JOB OF SORT OF EXPLAINING TO PEOPLE WHAT THIS PLACE WAS AND, AND HOW IT WORKS AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENED THERE THAN JUST PUTTING A, A HISTORIC PROTECTION ON THAT BASICALLY SAYS NOTHING CAN CHANGE IN THIS AREA.
I, I THOUGHT I HEARD THAT YOU WERE SAYING THAT THEY ALREADY TALKED TO YOU ABOUT ADMINISTRATIVE, UM, CONSIDERATIONS AND THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT YOU'VE GOT SOME ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT THAT ARE GONNA MOVE THROUGH THIS SITE.
WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT THIS POOL RESTORATION CAN HAPPEN ADMINISTRATIVELY, NOT WITHOUT HISTORIC REVIEW, BUT ADMINISTRATIVELY.
UM, BUT BECAUSE AGAIN, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE'RE GONNA FIND, WE WOULD JUST, WE ARE, WE ARE PREFERRING NOT TO HAVE AN ANOTHER LAYER ON TOP OF THESE OTHER REGULATIONS.
NOT BECAUSE WE'RE CHANGE, NOT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THEM, BUT BECAUSE IT JUST, IT'S ALREADY QUITE DIFFICULT AND EXPENSIVE AND, AND LONG TO GET A PROJECT OR A SUBDIVISION OR HOUSING BUILT IN THE CITY.
UM, AND SO THIS IS GONNA ADD ANOTHER LAYER OF DIFFICULTY.
AND, AND THE OUTCOME WOULD BE THE SAME BECAUSE THE AREA WILL NOT BE ABLE, WILL NOT BE TOUCHED, WILL NOT BE DEVELOPED.
THAT'S WHAT IT FEELS LIKE, UM, A REDUNDANCY THAT'S NOT NECESSARY AND IS GONNA HINDER, UH, THE OTHER PART OF THE PROJECT.
CAN I HAVE THE CITY RESPOND TO THAT CITY STAFF? THANK YOU.
UM, SO THIS IS A BELT AND SUSPENDERS APPROACH.
UM, HOWEVER, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FELT VERY STRONGLY THAT, UM, HAVING BOTH PROTECTIONS WERE IMPORTANT, UM, TO THIS SITE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THINGS ARE ON THIS SITE.
AND, UM, THE TWO REGULATIONS ARE COMING FROM DIFFERENT RATIONALES AND ARE PROTECTING DIFFERENT THINGS, EVEN THOUGH AT THE END OF THE DAY, HOPEFULLY THEY'RE STILL PROTECTING THE SAME PLOT OF LAND.
UM, SO THAT'S A, A SHORT WAY TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
BUT, UM, ESSENTIALLY, EVEN THOUGH WE WILL HOPEFULLY GET TO THE SAME END, THE MEANS ARE DIFFERENT AND THE PROTECTIONS ARE DIFFERENT IN THAT THE HISTORIC ZONING WILL SPECIFICALLY, UM, FOCUSED ON THE PROTECTION OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, UM, AND THE, UH, THE LANDSCAPE FEATURES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE.
SO THE STUFF ABOVE THE GROUND AND ALSO, UM, THE SUBSURFACE, UM, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER REMAINS THERE.
UH, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
OH, OH, YOU CAN MAYBE LET THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ONLINE ASK QUESTIONS SINCE YOU ALREADY YOU ASKED, AND WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS ONLINE? UM, COMMISSIONER FLORES.
UM, I HAVE A, A COUPLE QUESTIONS AND THOUGHTS ON THIS.
SO ONE IS, AS OF NOW, IF IT WERE TO BE, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE HISTORIC CHANGE THEN, OR THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE P THAT THAT PIECE OF LAND WILL ALL OF A SUDDEN BECOME PUBLIC OR A PART OR A LAB FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND STUDY THE ARCHEOLOGICAL FINDINGS.
IS THAT CORRECT OR, YES, COMMISSIONER, IT WILL REMAIN PRIVATELY.
SO THE ALTERNATIVE, IF WE ACCEPT WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE, JUST THAT ALONE, IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL BECAUSE IT WOULD PROVIDE A WALKING PATH
[00:30:01]
AND PROVIDE SOME SIGNAGE AND WHATNOT.SO I THINK THAT ALONE IS ALREADY MORE HELPFUL.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE, AND THIS COULD BE MY IGNORANCE ON HISTORIC, UH, PRIVATE PIECES OF LAND, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE BENEFIT WOULD BE OF HAVING A PIECE OF LAND MARKED HISTORIC, MAKING IT SO COMPLICATED TO RESTORE.
BECAUSE EVEN WITHOUT THE HISTORIC RE, WITHOUT THE HISTORIC RESTORATION, WITHOUT THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION, SPRINGS AND WETLAND, UM, RESTORATION, GOING THROUGH THE CITY CPLAN REVIEW, IT'S SO COMPLICATED.
SO ADDING ANOTHER LAYER FOR NOT REALLY ANY BENEFIT, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S WORTH LIKE, ASSIGNING THAT BURDEN TO THE, TO THAT PIECE OF LAND.
UM, AND IT, IT ALSO SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD JUST BE A CONTINUING CONFLICT BETWEEN HISTORIC AND WETLANDS REVIEW.
IT WOULD BE VERY CONTRADICTING SINCE HISTORIC IS GONNA WANNA PRESERVE AND WETLANDS AND WATERSHED, IT'S LIKELY THEY'RE GONNA WANNA ENHANCE IT AND IMPROVE THE HEALTH OF THE CS.
UM, COMMISSIONER, UM, I DO WANT TO LET Y'ALL KNOW THAT WE HAVE, UM, LIZ JOHNSON, WHO IS WONDERFUL PROGRAM MANAGER WITH WATERSHED PROTECTION, UM, AND HBO STAFF.
AND, UM, OUR REVIEWERS ARE DEFINITELY EXCITED TO WORK, UM, WITH LIZ AND HER TEAM ON THIS COLLABORATIVE EFFORT.
BUT, UM, SHE CAN ALSO ANSWER SOME OF THE, UH, WATERSHED RELATED QUESTIONS AS WELL.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE ONLINE? AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION, UM, OF MS. CONTRERA.
UM, I WAS SURPRISED THAT, I MEAN, IS THIS TYPICAL TO JUST ALLOW THE APPLICANT FOR DEMOLITION TO EVALUATE THE STRUCTURE? I MEAN, NOT TO SAY THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THIS ONE, I MEAN, BUT I WALKED THROUGH THE HOUSE AND CONSIDERING JUST THE NARROW WIDTH OF THE DOORWAYS AND THE STAIRCASE, IT SEEMS TO ME UNLIKELY THAT THE HOUSE IS ALL OR PARTLY MODERN CONSTRUCTION.
I ASKED FOR BUILDING PERMITS, AND I WAS ONLY GIVEN WATER WASTEWATER AND ELECTRICAL PERMITS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER STAMPED A REPORT CLAIMING THAT A POTENTIAL HISTORIC HOUSE COULD NOT BE REHABILITATED.
ONCE, HOWEVER, ONCE THE PROPERTY OWNER REALIZED THAT HERITAGE TREES ON THE PROPERTY WOULD MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO ENLARGE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOME, THE HOME WAS NOT ONLY REHABILITATED REMODELED, BUT A SECOND STORY WAS ADDED.
UM, AND, AND THAT SEEMS TO BE A NOT UNCOMMON STORY.
I MEAN, INSTEAD OF RELYING ON EXPERTS PAID BY THE OWNER WHO'S WISHING TO DEMOLISH THE HOUSE, IT SEEMS TO ME, AND MAYBE YOU COULD RESPOND THAT THE ASSESSMENT I KNOW YOU CAN'T DO, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE MADE BY OUR CITY STAFF.
IF I SHARE THAT AS AN EXCELLENT POINT, UM, WE DO NOT HAVE A CITY ENGINEER, UM, AT OUR DISPOSAL, UNFORTUNATELY, WHO CAN DO THAT.
SO, UM, THE SORT OF COMPROMISE SOLUTION IS THAT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WILL ASK APPLICANTS TO HIRE ENGINEERS AND, UM, ARCHITECTS TO MAKE ASSESSMENTS.
AND WE DO HAVE ENGINEERS AND PRESERVATION ARCHITECTS ON THE COMMISSION WHO CAN HELP US TO VERIFY, UM, BECAUSE I CERTAINLY CANNOT DO THAT ALL BY MYSELF.
BUT, UM, ON EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY, WE'RE VERY THANKFUL FOR THEM IN THIS CASE.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF MS. CARTER IS HERE, BUT, UH, IN THIS CASE, UM, SHE IS, UH, A PRESERVATION ARCHITECT THAT I THINK I UNDERSTAND MYSELF AND OUR COMMISSIONER ARE TRUSTFUL OF.
UM, SO WHAT ABOUT, IT'S REALLY LOOKS LIKE A SWIMMING POOL, SPRING FED SWIMMING POOL.
IS THERE ANY IDEA OF THE AGE OF THAT FEATURE? UH, YES.
VICE CHAIR, THIS DATES TO, UH, PROBABLY LATE FORTIES, EARLY FIFTIES.
UM, AT THE TIME THE KNOX FAMILY MOVED ON TO THE PROPERTY AND ESTABLISHED THE RANCH.
UH, THEY HAD ALL THESE SPRINGS ON THE LAND, AND THEY DECIDED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO ENCLOSE AND SORT OF CAPTURE ONE OF THESE SPRINGS, UM, TO DO A SPRING FRED SWIMMING POOL FOR THE KIDS THAT WENT TO CAMP THERE.
UM, KIND OF LIKE A SMALL GARDEN SPRINGS, WHICH MAY NOT BE WORKING WELL RIGHT NOW, BUT HOPEFULLY COULD BE REHABILITATED AND MAYBE, UM, LIZ JOHNSON COULD COMMENT ON WHETHER WE WOULD JUST REMOVE THAT FEATURE OR, YEAH.
THANK YOU CHAIR FOR THE QUESTION.
SO, YOU KNOW, UM, I, I TALKED WITH THE APPLICANT AND, UM, KAYLIN AND, UM, HYDROGEOLOGY STAFF AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE HAVEN'T REALLY DIVED INTO TO WHAT, UH, KIND OF RESTORATION OF THAT AREA WOULD, WOULD LOOK LIKE.
[00:35:01]
NOW, THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD ACTUALLY TRIGGER ANY NEED FOR IT.SO, YOU KNOW, IF THEY LEFT THE, THAT AREA UNDISTURBED AND BUILT ON THE, UH, IN THE UPLANDS, YOU KNOW, THERE WOULDN'T ANY, BE ANY REQUIREMENT NECESSARILY TO RESTORE THAT AREA.
NOW, IF THEY WANTED TO REMOVE SOME, MAYBE IT'S, THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT MOSQUITOES OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE WOULD, WE WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF RESTORING SOME SORT OF HY HYDROLOGY FROM THAT SPRING INTO THE CREEK.
UM, IF IT WERE HISTORIC, WE WOULD CERTAINLY WANT TO WORK WITH, UM, HIS, YOU KNOW, THE HISTORIC FOLKS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE DOING IT IN A SENSITIVE WAY.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE, WE WOULD NECESSARILY HAVE TO REMOVE EVERY LITTLE SQUARE FOOT OF, UM, CONCRETE THERE.
SO, UM, BUT YEAH, I THINK, YOU KNOW, EITHER WAY WE WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK WITH, UM, WITH, UH, WHATEVER MAKES SENSE OR TO STRIKE THE RIGHT BALANCES BETWEEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.
AND THEN THE, UH, GOSH, WHAT WAS I GONNA SAY? WHAT PROTECTION IS OFFERED BY THE, UM, STATE DESIGNATION? I MEAN, IS THIS REALLY JUST A DUPLICATION OR IS IT ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION IF IT HAS HISTORIC ZONING? UM, SO IN MY UNDERSTANDING, UM, AND THIS IS, I'M, I DON'T WORK FOR THE STATE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, UM, UNLESS THERE ARE HUMAN REMAINS FOUND, UM, SO THE APPLICANT HAS TO LET THE STATE KNOW THAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO WORK.
IF THEY FIND SOMETHING, THEY HAVE TO REPORT IT, AND THE STATE HAS TO ISSUE COMMENTS, WHICH ARE ADVISORY, I BELIEVE, UM, ON PRIVATE LAND, THIS IS DIFFERENT ON FEDERAL LAND AND ON STATE OWNED LAND.
UM, BUT FOR PRIVATE LAND, THE RESTRICTIONS ARE, UM, A LITTLE BIT LESS BECAUSE I KNOW FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE NATIONAL HISTORIC DESIGNATION OR NATIONAL REGISTRY DISTRICT IS REALLY JUST HONORARY AND DOESN'T DO ANYTHING EXCEPT TRIGGER A REVIEW.
IT TRIGGERS A REVIEW AND IT DOES OPEN UP SOME FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES.
BUT, UH, IT IS ALSO A, AN ADVISORY REVIEW.
UM, AND COMMISSIONER MAJOR, YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
UM, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY.
UH, MS. CONTRERAS, I THINK, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
UM, SO, UH, I WANT TO TURN OUR ATTENTION TO THE, UH, CITY CODE VERY QUICKLY.
UH, SO CITY CODE REQUIRES THAT FOR THIS PROPERTY TO RECEIVE THE, UH, HD DESIGNATION, IT NEEDS TO MEET, UM, AT LEAST TWO ITEMS FROM A LIST.
THE CITY HAS CITED HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS AND ARCHEOLOGY.
I REALLY QUICKLY WANT TO JUST KIND OF HONE IN ON THE ARCHEOLOGY.
UH, SO I'LL, I'LL QUOTE THE, THE TEXT REALLY QUICKLY.
UH, IT SAYS THE PROPERTY HAS OR IS EXPECTED TO YIELD SIGNIFICANT DATA CONCERNING THE HUMAN HISTORY OR PRE-HISTORY OF THE REGION.
SO I KIND OF WANT TO BREAK THAT DOWN INTO A COUPLE OF ELEMENTS.
MY FIRST QUESTION IS, IS THE CITY OR THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION CLAIMING THAT THE PROPERTY ALREADY HAS THE DATA, OR IS THE CITY OR COMMISSION SAYING THEY EXPECT TO HAVE THE DATA? I THINK IN THIS CASE, COMMISSIONER, IT WOULD BE, IT IS EXPECTED BECAUSE THE STATE HAS IDENTIFIED DATA THERE.
HOWEVER, WE DO NOT HAVE A CITY ARCHEOLOGIST WHO CAN VERIFY THIS, YOU KNOW, ON OUR OWN.
AND THEN THE STAFF REPORT SAID THAT UT DID A PRELIMINARY, AN INVESTIGATION OF SOME SORTS.
UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY, ANY INFORMATION YOU CAN SHARE ABOUT, I'M SORRY, HERE IT'S PRELIMINARY RESEARCH BY UT INDICATES A HIGH PROBABILITY OF SIGNIFICANT ARCHEOLOGICAL DATA.
DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION YOU CAN SHARE ABOUT THAT STUDY BY CHANCE? I CANNOT, UNFORTUNATELY.
UM, THE LOCATIONS AND DETAILS OF UH, STATE ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES ARE PRETTY LOCKED DOWN, UM, TO DISCOURAGE VANDALISM.
SO WHILE WE WERE ABLE TO VERIFY THAT YES, THE SITE IS SOMEWHERE ON THIS PLOTT OF LAND AND IT'S WITHIN, UM, THE AREA THAT IS PROPOSED FOR HISTORIC ZONING, THAT'S AS MUCH INFORMATION AS WE CAN GET.
SO, SO SINCE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, I THINK IT'S CALLED, SINCE, SINCE THAT BODY IS RELYING ON THE STATUTORY RIGHT TO EXPECT TO YIELD SIGNIFICANT DATA, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT, THAT THIS DATA IS NEVER REALIZED.
WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT? I THINK GIVEN HOW MUCH EVIDENCE THERE IS THAT SOMETHING IS THERE MM-HMM
UM, I THINK IT'S UNLIKELY FOR THEM TO FIND NOTHING.
UM, AND I DO WANNA POINT OUT, UM, LEAH JUST REMINDED ME, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO DO SHOVEL TESTS ALL OVER THE SITE AS THEY DIG AS WELL.
UM, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS SURE COULD BE ELSEWHERE AND NOT JUST WITHIN THAT LITTLE H ZONE PROPERTY, BUT THE H ZONE PORTION IS THE MOST LIKELY TO YIELD THE HIGHEST AMOUNT.
[00:40:01]
UM, MR. CHU, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD ABOUT THE, I DID THE UT STUDY, OR I DIDN'T WANT THERE TO BE, UH, A MISUNDERSTANDING.THERE ARE NOTES FROM, UH, UH, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS ARCHEOLOGICAL PROFESSOR IDENTIFYING THE SITE THAT ARE PART OF THE RECORD.
I HAVE 'EM HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE THEM.
SO THIS IS NOT SPECULATIVE, UH, IT IS NOT.
POSSIBLY THERE'S SOMETHING THERE, THERE IS A HARVARD TRAINED ARCHEOLOGIST WHO IDENTIFIED SOMETHING LEFT FIELD NOTES AND HAD IDENTIFIED TEXAS ARCHEOLOGICAL COMMISSION SITES DESIGNATED.
AND I'M HAPPY TO PUBLISH THIS TO WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT.
I CAN LEAVE IT UP HERE, BUT, UM, NOT MADE UP.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM ANY COMMISSIONERS? I, I GUESS JUST IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY, FOLLOWING ON COMMISSIONER FLORES'S COMMENT, UM, UH, MS. BOHO THAT YOU'RE NOT PROPOSING THAT THE SITE WOULD BECOME PUBLIC PROPERTY? NO, WE'RE NOT, UM, UNDER ANY SCENARIO NO, NO, MA'AM.
WELL, WOULD THERE BE, AM I UNDERSTANDING RIGHT THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME SORT OF AXIS OR WALKWAY? IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THERE, THERE WOULD WE, WE DID MAKE THAT COMMITMENT, UM, AND AS PART OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, I'M HAPPY TO GO BACK TO THOSE BULLETS IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT WE DID MAKE A COMMITMENT TO A WALKING TRAIL.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE SITE WOULD BE PUBLIC, BUT THERE WOULD BE A TRAIL THERE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THAT DEVELOPMENT AND CONNECT THROUGH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD TO, UH, SEE THE KIOSKS AND UNDERSTAND THE STORY OF THE, THE, OF THE CAMP AND, AND THE SPRING AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
IS THERE A MOTION? DOES ANYBODY WANNA MAKE A MOTION? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL MOVE.
I'LL MOVE TO SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
UM, IF THERE'S NOT A SECOND, I'M HAPPY TO SECOND THAT.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND IS THERE DISCUSSION? I, FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, THIS HISTORIC DESIGNATION SEEMS REDUNDANT GIVEN THE OTHER PROTECTIONS IN PLACE ALREADY.
UM, I'M ALSO UNCOMFORTABLE GIVEN SOME OF THE MORE RECENT, UM, HLC FORCED REZONINGS, UM, THAT THIS WILL BECOME A, A MEANS OF PREVENTING SENSIBLE DEVELOPMENT FROM HAPPENING IN THE FUTURE.
UM, THERE WAS A CASE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD RECENTLY WHERE I THINK IT WAS USED FOR POLITICAL REASONS, SO I'M JUST VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH, WITH THE CITY INITIATING THIS TYPE OF THING AND EXPECTING A KIND OF SOCIAL, UM, DESIRE TO BE BORN PRIVATELY.
SO I WILL BE VOTING NO, THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? UH, I TOO WILL BE VOTING NO FOR, FOR VERY SIMILAR REASONS, UH, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT APPEARS, UH, MANY OF THE SAME OBJECTIVES CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED, UH, UM, THROUGH VARIOUS RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS AND, AND METHODS THAT THE APPLICANT WILL PERCEIVE.
UM, I ALSO THINK THE HD DESIGNATION COULD BE DUPLICATE, DUPLICATE, UH, GEEZ, SORRY GUYS.
UM, AND I'M ALSO JUST A LITTLE UNSETTLED THAT I SUPPORT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS AND, AND THE APPLICANT OPPOSES IT AND, AND THEY'VE COME WITH A PLAN THAT KIND OF REASONABLY IS, IS ABLE TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AND, AND ALSO POTENTIALLY OPEN IT TO THE PUBLIC, UH, WHICH WOULD NOT HAPPEN IF THIS, UH, HD DESIGNATION OCCURRED.
UM, SO IT'S NOT OPEN EITHER WAY BY, WELL, SO IT, IT'LL BE PRIVATE LAND, BUT I, I, I GUESS SCENARIO THESE FOLKS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK ANYMORE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE WILL BE SIGNAGE AND POTENTIALLY SOME, SOME WALKWAYS OR SOME TRAILS OR SOMETHING RESIDENCE.
THAT'S NOT THE SAME AS BEING PUBLIC.
SO FROM MY STANDPOINT, THAT THAT'S STILL A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAN ESSENTIALLY REALLY NO ONE HAVING ACCESS TO IT RIGHT NOW.
THERE'S NO REASON TO THINK THAT.
BUT, UM, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UH, COMMISSIONER STERN.
SO I KNOW THAT, THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY TALKING ABOUT THE PROPOSAL THAT'S ON THE TABLE.
UM, BUT SHOULD THIS, UM, NOT BE APPROVED, UM, WE COULD TAKE UP A, ANOTHER PROPOSAL THAT WOULD INCLUDE RESTRICTIVE, A SUGGESTION OF A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT WOULD, UM, REQUEST THAT PUBLIC ACCESS, UM, TO THAT SPRING AND THE BIO DETENTION POND, SO AS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS SOME PUBLIC ACCESS TO THAT SPACE.
UM, BUT, UM, LIKE THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS ARE SAYING, I'M, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHY THE HIGHLAND HILLS LOTS THAT ARE ALL AROUND THIS OTHER AREA ARE SOMEHOW FINE, BUT THESE PARTICULAR LOTS ARE HISTORIC AND SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.
IT FEELS LIKE PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT THEIR BACKYARDS ENCROACHED UPON.
AND I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WITH IT.
ANY VICE CHAIR? I, I JUST LIKE TO RESPOND.
[00:45:01]
THESE ISSUES AND ON ANOTHER SENSITIVE SITE THAT'S LOCATED AT ANOTHER SPRING.AND IN OUR, OUR HISTORY HERE IN TEXAS AND IN A LOT OF PLACES WHERE THERE ARE SPRINGS, THERE'S HISTORY AND A VERY RICH ARCHEOLOGICAL HISTORY IS FOUND NEAR SPRING OPENINGS.
SO THERE IS, THERE IS A REASON TO SUSPECT THAT THERE WOULD BE MORE RICH ARCHEOLOGICAL HISTORY ADJACENT TO THE SPRING AND THE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES.
THERE IS, THERE IS A JUSTIFICATION FOR THAT.
I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON THIS SITE, BUT THAT IS COMMONLY FOUND THROUGHOUT CENTRAL TEXAS AND ALL ALONG THROUGH WEST TEXAS.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE SETTLE, WHERE THERE'S WATER.
AND SO I, I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT, THAT THAT'S NOT SOME, UM, ARBITRARY CORRELATION.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I'D LIKE, I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT I ALSO WOULDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE ASSIGNING THAT HISTORIC DESIGNATION, UH, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE I'VE WORKED ON MULTIPLE PROJECTS IN EAST AUSTIN THAT HAVE SPRINGS AND WETLANDS, AND THEY DON'T, THE HISTORIC DOESN'T EVEN COME ACROSS.
AND WE SAW THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA OUR LAST MEETING OR A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO.
AND THE CONCERN THAT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION WAS TRAFFIC WAS, IT WAS NOT THE, IT WAS TRAFFIC THE DRIVEWAY, WHEREAS IT'S JUST NOT RELATED.
SO I WOULDN'T, I CAN'T, UH, I ALSO WOULDN'T BE COMFORTABLE VOTING FOR THIS DESIGNATION.
UM, MY COMMENT IS THAT THERE IS A 1907 RANCH HOUSE THERE, UM, REGARDLESS OF ANY ALTERATIONS THAT HAVE MAY HAVE BEEN MADE TO THAT RANCH HOUSE, THIS PROPERTY IS A SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY FOR HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS AND COMMUNITY VALUE AS A BOYS CAMP AND THE HEYDAY OF SUCH CAMPS.
AND THAT ALONE, 'CAUSE YOU ONLY NEED TWO CRITERIA, SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
UM, IT DOES MEET A THIRD CRITERIA FOR ARCHEOLOGY.
UM, IT, WHICH IS NOT THAT IT HAS THE INFORMATION, BUT IT SHOULD HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO YIELD SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION.
UM, THE OWNER OP OPPOSITION WILL REQUIRE THE POLITICIANS ON THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE A DIFFERENT CALCULATION.
UM, BUT OUR JOB IS REALLY TO DECIDE WHETHER THE, UM, CRITERIA IS MET FOR HISTORIC ZONING.
SO I'LL BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION IS I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA JOIN THE, THE, UH, ACTING CHAIR IN VOTING WITH STAFF HERE.
I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES I THINK WE SEE WHAT I MIGHT CALL STALKING HORSES, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE BRINGING ISSUES OF, OF TRAFFIC TO VOTE AGAINST ISSUES OF ENVIRONMENT.
UM, CERTAINLY THERE'S LOTS OF CASES WHERE IF WE COULD BLANK SLATE, SAY, HERE'S HOW WE WOULD ZONE THIS ENTIRE AREA.
WE DO ONE THING, BUT WE'RE IN A POSITION WHERE LOTS OF DEVELOPMENT HAS OCCURRED AND THERE ARE SOME PLACES WHERE WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTROL TO MODIFY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, AND, AND I THINK IN THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, STAFF HAVE MADE THE CASE.
UM, I, I AGREE WITH THE, UH, THE CHAIR THAT THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC COMPONENTS TO THIS AND I THINK THEY'RE WORTH PRESERVING.
AND I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVING LIVED THROUGH THE MID 2010S IS A BELT AND SUSPENDER WEARING PIECE OF HIPS OR TRASH.
UM, SOMETIMES THE SUSPENDERS ARE JUST DECORATIVE.
UM, AND I THINK THE BELT MATTERS HERE.
ANY OTHER? I JUST ONE THOMPSON ADD ONE MORE COMMENT, JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, WE TYPICALLY DO SUPPORT THE FINDINGS OF THE OTHER EXPERT COMMISSIONS AND YOU KNOW, NONE OF US SEEM TO BE EXPERT IN THIS AREA, AND THIS HAS GONE THROUGH AN EXPERT COMMISSION AND, AND THE RESULT OF THE PROPOSAL IS A COMPROMISE THAT DOESN'T INHIBIT DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT, THAT WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US IS A PRAGMATIC, UM, COMPROMISE, HIGHLY REVIEWED, UH, COMPROMISE.
SO, UM, JUST THROWING THAT IN FOR FUN.
I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT ALL OF THE COMPROMISING IS BEING DONE BY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NOT BY THE CITY OR ANYBODY ELSE.
SO AGAIN, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BE EXPERTS IN HISTORIC ANYTHING HERE TO RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS BEING IMPOSED AGAINST THE WILL OF THE OWNER.
WELL, ONE COULD ARGUE THAT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF COMPROMISE UP BY THE ARCHEOLOGICAL COMPONENTS THAT ARE GONNA BE DEVELOPED OVER.
I MEAN, IT WASN'T, IT'S IT'S NOT KNOWN.
SO THAT'S NOT, THAT'S ACCURATE.
AND I WOULD ASK THAT, YOU KNOW, I I THINK HOUSING'S REALLY IMPORTANT TOO, RIGHT? AND SO WHAT IS THE, THE NET CHANGE IN THE NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN THAT WE THINK WILL BE INCURRED, UM, BY APPLICATION, THIS HISTORIC DESIGNATION? AND I, I GUESS I DON'T SEE THE CASE HERE THAT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, ELIMINATING A HUGE SWATH OF POTENTIAL HOUSING STOCK.
I THINK DEVELOPMENT STILL CAN OCCUR IN A MEANINGFUL WAY HERE, UM, AND STILL PRESERVE THE HISTORIC COMPONENTS.
[00:50:01]
UM, SO IF, IF I MAY, I, I DO APPRECIATE THE, THE ANALYSIS OF HOW MANY POTENTIAL HOUSING UNITS ARE AT PLAY HERE.UH, BUT THE, THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS, DOES THIS PROPERTY MEET THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND, UH, FUTURE HOUSING IS, IS NOT PART OF THAT, THAT ANALYSIS AND JUST KIND OF FROM WHERE I'M SITTING, UM, THE, THIS IS A, THE CODE, THIS IS A VERY BROAD PORTION OF THE CODE.
IT'S VERY SUBJECTIVE, SIGNIFICANT CAN MEAN DIFFERENT THINGS TO DIFFERENT PEOPLE.
AND, UH, ESPECIALLY FOR THE ARCHEOLOGICAL OR EVEN THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION, UH, REGARDLESS OF WHICH ITEM YOU SORT OF WANT TO ANALYZE, JUST WHEN I THINK OF THE WORD SIGNIFICANT, IT'S, IT'S, IS THIS A BIG DEAL? WAS THIS IMPACT TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN? LIKE WHO DID IT IMPACT? HAVE I HEARD OF THESE PEOPLE BEFORE? AND LIKE, IT, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM EXTRAORDINARILY SIGNIFICANT TO ME TO WARRANT THIS PROTECTION.
UH, LIKE THAT, THAT'S REALLY HOW I'M LOOKING AT THIS.
IT'S JUST LIKE, SURE, IT'S LAND.
PEOPLE HAVE LIVED ON LAND IN THE PAST.
THEY'VE COOKED THERE, THEY'VE HUNTED THERE, THEY'VE BUILT STRUCTURES.
THAT'S, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY ALMOST EVERY PIECE OF LAND IN THIS COUNTRY.
SOMEONE HAS USED IT IN THE PAST, BUT IS THIS SO SIGNIFICANT THAT IT WARRANTS THIS, THIS DESIGNATION? AND I JUST DIDN'T REALLY QUITE HEAR ANYTHING TO SAY.
UH, IT, IT RISES TO THAT LEVEL.
AND THEN LASTLY, UM, THE, THE, THE POINT ABOUT SORT OF E EXPECTING TO YIELD QUOTE SIGNIFICANT DATA, UM, I MEAN, I'M A DEVELOPER, I HIRE LAWYERS, ENGINEERS, ALL SORTS, ALL THE TIME.
I, I TAYLOR WE EXPECT SO AND SO, SO AND SO, AND THEN I GO SPEND MONEY AND MY EXPECTATION NEVER REALIZE THIS.
I'M ALSO CONCERNED THAT THIS QUOTE EXPECTED TO YIELD SIGNIFICANT DATA JUST MIGHT NOT BE REALIZED.
IT, IT, IT, I DON'T WANNA CALL IT A FISHING EXPEDITION, BUT OKAY.
I, I THINK THAT'S A PART OF IT.
CAN PART TWO? YEAH, THANK YOU.
UM, I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO EVERYBODY.
I, I AGREE WITH SCOTT ABOUT THE, THE, THE, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE LIMITING THAT MANY HOMES, UH, BY, BY, BY, BY, UH, DESIGNATING THIS HISTORIC, I ALSO AGREE WITH RYAN ABOUT, YOU KNOW, NOT CREATING A PRECEDENT HERE ABOUT USING THESE, UH, USING THESE METHODS TO, TO LIMIT, UH, HOUSING IN OTHER AREAS.
WHAT I'M STILL NOT UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S A LOT OF JUDGMENT BEING MADE ABOUT HOW HISTORIC IS THIS REALLY? BUT WE HAVEN'T EVEN DUG THE AREA.
WE DON'T, SO THE, I MEAN, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY ACTUALLY BRING UP WHAT'S, WHAT'S ACTUALLY THERE.
UM, DO WE KNOW WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE AREA? WE, WE CAN SPECULATE WHAT'S IN THE AREA.
WE, DID I MISS SOMETHING? I BELIEVE THERE WERE PARTICULAR ARTIFACTS THAT WERE DESCRIBED, UM, THAT HAVE BEEN FOUND.
SO, SO FELIX, IF I MAY, THE, THE, THE GENTLEMAN WHO GOT, WHO GOT SIX MINUTES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT, FORGIVE ME FOR NOT RECALLING HIS NAME.
HE TALKED ABOUT MITTENS, WHICH ARE APPARENTLY LARGE STONES IN, IN THE GROUND.
THEY WERE USED TO COOKING OVENS.
I, I, YEAH, I I THINK I, I THINK THAT'S WHAT HE WAS RELYING ON.
UM, I'M SORRY, I DON'T THINK HE CAN SPEAK ANYMORE, BUT I, I THINK THAT WAS AN ARTIFACT HE DID LIST.
AND WE HEARD THAT FROM STAFF AS WELL.
I, I THINK, I THINK WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS, UH, IF WE ARE, IF WE'RE GOING TO, IF WE'RE GONNA MAKE A JUDGMENT ON HOW HISTORIC IS THIS REALLY, UM, I, I THINK IT MERITS A LITTLE BIT MORE INVESTIGATION ON WHAT CAN ACTUALLY BE FOUND IN THIS AREA.
BECAUSE IT'S NOT LIKE THERE ARE THAT MANY MORE HISTORIC SITES, YOU KNOW, IN THE CITY TO ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES IN THE CITY THAT WE CAN SAVE, THAT WE CAN, UM, UH, INVESTIGATE.
SO MAYBE IT MERITS A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, INVESTIGATION INTO WHAT'S ACTUALLY THERE.
AND IF THERE'S NOTHING, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S NOTHING THAT, UH, SIGNIFICANT, THEN LET'S MOVE FORWARD WITH DEVELOPING THE AREA.
BUT IF THERE'S SOMETHING TRULY SIGNIFICANT, THEN WE CAN ACTUALLY LOOK AT THIS MORE CLOSELY.
I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WITHIN OUR PURVIEW, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I'VE BEEN THINKING THIS WHOLE TIME.
CHAIR, CAN WE STILL ASK THE APPLICANT QUESTIONS? YEAH, WE HAVEN'T, I, I I GUESS I'M A LITTLE LOST BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS THE CITY.
DID YOU MEAN THE, OH, I'M SORRY.
OR THE APPLICANT FOR DEMOLITION
JUST TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE I THINK WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY IS THIS AREA IS NOT GONNA BE DEVELOPED NO MATTER THE OUTCOME OF THE HISTORIC ZONING.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY, FOR ALL COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPING THIS SITE OR NOT DEVELOPING THIS PORTION OF THE SITE.
EITHER WAY, IT'S NOT GONNA BE DEVELOPED.
WE'RE NOT PUTTING HOMES IN THIS AREA SO THAT THE OUTCOME WOULD BE THE SAME.
'CAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE FOLKS ARE TALKING ABOUT A SCENARIO WHERE WE'RE ADDING HOUSING TO THIS AREA, WHICH THAT'S NOT, NOT TO THIS PART, NOT TO THIS PART.
[00:55:01]
IF YOU'D LIKE TO HEAR EXCUSE TO THAT THE QUESTION JUST A MINUTE AGO.IF, IF YOU'D LIKE ABOUT, SO WE, WE HAVE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE COMMITTED TO PUT IN, IN A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT IF WE COULD NOT HAVE THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION IS THE SHOVEL TEST.
SO I, WHICH I THINK GETS EXACTLY TO YOUR POINT, WHICH IS IF WE FIND SOMETHING WE HA WE, IT IS A, IT IS AN ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE REGISTERED BY THE STATE.
SO IF WE WERE TO FIND SOMETHING, WE WOULD HAVE, THERE IS A PROCESS, WE WOULD HAVE TO, TO CATALOG THAT AND, AND GO THROUGH THOSE, THOSE STEPS.
SO, BUT IF THERE ISN'T ANYTHING FOUND, THEN WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DEVELOP IT.
IF WE PUT THE, I MEAN, YES, IF WE PUT THE H ON THEN AND NOTHING IS FOUND, IT, IT, THE H DOESN'T GO AWAY, THE H STAYS THERE AND, AND MAKES THE, SOME OF THE OTHER PROCESSES MORE COMPLICATED.
I HOPE THAT, SO DOES IT, DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU WILL BE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF FIGURING OUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE AREA BEFORE YOU PROCEED WITH ANYTHING ELSE? WE HAVE TO BECAUSE IT'S, I MEAN, I THINK YOU, I DON'T KNOW THE RULES ON WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO.
IF IT'S NOT AN ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE, I'M NOT GONNA GO GO TO THAT BECAUSE THIS ONE IS SO, SO ALREADY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THERE'S AN H THERE OR NOT, IF WE DIG A HOLE TO PUT A HOUSE IN, EVEN ON THE OTHER PART, UM, WE HAVE TO NOTIFY THE STATE AND CATTLE AND THEY COME OUT AND THEY FIND IT AND THEY CATALOG IT AND THEN THEY COVER IT BACK UP, I THINK.
OR THEY, IF IT'S SIGNIFICANT, THEY PUT IT IN A MUSEUM IS THE WAY IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME,
AND, AND SO THAT IS ALREADY GONNA HAPPEN.
SO, BUT IF WE DON'T FIND ANYTHING OR, OR PARTICULARLY IF WE DON'T FIND ANYTHING ON THE PART OF THE SITE THAT WE'RE PUTTING THE HOMES ON, UM, OR ANYWHERE THAT WE DIG, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY, UM, THEN WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PROCEED WITH DEVELOPMENT UNDER OUR PROPOSAL.
I, HELLO, MY NAME IS KIM MCKNIGHT.
I'M A DIVISION MANAGER FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION.
UM, THERE ARE REGULATIONS REGARDING ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES ON PUBLIC LAND.
THIS IS A RECORDED SITE, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN A STATE ARCHEOLOGICAL LANDMARK.
A RECORDED SITE CAN BECOME A STATE ARCHEOLOGICAL LANDMARK, BUT THEY'RE DIFFERENT.
SO WE HAVE A LOT OF RECORDED SITES.
IT'S NOT QUITE THE SAME THING, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF PROTECTION.
UM, THERE ISN'T REALLY, I MEAN, I THINK IT'S WONDERFUL THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO DO SHOVEL TESTS, BUT UH, PRIVATE LAND DOES, UM, DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF REQUIREMENTS FOR NOTIFICATION PROTECTION AS PUBLIC LAND.
SO, UM, I AM NOT THE EXPERT, BUT, UM, THERE ISN'T NECESSARILY A REQUIREMENT, UM, UNLESS WE'RE DEALING WITH HUMAN REMAINS, WHICH OBVIOUSLY WOULD TRIGGER LOTS OF ISSUES.
HAVE WE COVERED EVERYTHING? ARE WE READY TO VOTE? IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE.
SO, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION? LOOKS LIKE THREE.
AND ALL OPPOSED TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
IS THAT ONLY SIX? I THOUGHT THEY WERE SEVEN.
THANK YOU FOR HELPING ME COUNT SEVEN.
UM, SO THE MOTION FAILS AND SOMEONE SUGGESTED MAKING AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION.
IS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE MOTION THAT SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE? UM, I, I WOULD, I GUESS, UM, MY MOTION WOULD BE TO, UH, LET'S SEE, ALLOW THE, UM, DESIGNATION, I GUESS ALLOWED THE, UM, O UH, UH, OWNER APPLICANT TO CONTINUE WITH, UM, THE ZONING REMAINING AT SF THREE.
BUT, UM, CAN, ADDING THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, ALLOWING ARCHEOLOGICAL ACTIVITY ON THE SITE, ALLOWING, UH, PUBLIC TRAIL ACCESS INTO THE WETLAND AREA AND PROVIDING INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE, UM, TO RECOGNIZE THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND IN THIS AREA.
CAN WE GET A COMMENT FROM MS. MCKNIGHT ABOUT WHAT, WHETHER WE CAN, I'M GONNA BE LOOKING TO MY COLLEAGUES HERE.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT, UM, WE CANNOT NECESSARILY, AS PART OF THIS, THIS HISTORIC ZONING CASE REQUIRE A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
IS THAT CORRECT? ABOUT PUBLIC ACCESS? AND ALSO MAYBE WE CAN'T REALLY HAVE A MOTION ON SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY NOT ON THE AGENDA.
'CAUSE WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA IS HISTORIC ZONING OR NOT HISTORIC ZONING.
UM, BUT ISN'T THAT, THAT WAS SORT OF ON THE, UM, OWNER'S PROPOSAL ON THE BACKGROUND.
AND I MIGHT THINK THAT COMMISSIONERS WOULD, IN SUPPORT OF THOSE IDEAS, WOULD WRITE TO COUNCIL MEMBERS.
[01:00:01]
I DON'T THINK, I THINK WE'D BE VIOLATING OPEN MEETINGS TO VOTE ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ON OUR AGENDA.'CAUSE THOSE DO ALL SOUND LIKE GREAT IDEAS, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY IN OUR POWER TO HAVE THAT RIGHT NOW.
SO THE DEFAULT IS TO LEAVE IT AS IT IS WITH THE, THERE'S STILL OTHER
AND THEN YOU HAVE NO PROTECTION FOR THE TRAIL ACCESS, ARCHEOLOGICAL ACTIVITY, OR INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE.
THAT'S, WELL, THERE'S STILL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS ON THAT PROPERTY, THAT PART OF THE PROPERTY WHERE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE ARCHEOLOGICAL FINDINGS ARE.
SO THERE'S STILL SOME PROTECTIONS ON THAT PROPERTY.
IT'S JUST, OKAY, THE SUSPENDERS NOT THE BELT.
ALSO, IF I MAY, COMMISSIONER STERN, UM, JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN HERE DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE APPLICANT LANDOWNER CAN'T AGREE TO THOSE THINGS LATER IN THE PROCESS.
SO THIS ISN'T THE, THE LAST BITE AT THE APPLE FOR, FOR THOSE BINDING PROVISIONS.
UH, AND I SEE A LOT OF HEADS NODDING, SO, UH, I'M NOT IN THE MINORITY WHEN I SAY THAT.
THEY CAN STILL VOLUNTARILY AGREE IN A BINDING FASHION, LEGALLY BINDING FASHION.
IT'S JUST PROBABLY NOT GONNA HAPPEN HERE TONIGHT IS ALL, IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO, I GUESS, UM, FOR, I GUESS POINT OF CLARIFICATION MAYBE FOR STAFF IS, UM, I, I, ARE WE, UM, INADVERTENTLY, UM, GETTING IN THE WAY OF THE OWNER'S ABILITY TO DEVELOP, TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY? OR ARE WE REMOVING A BARRIER FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER BY NOT PASSING THIS TONIGHT? DID YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING? YES, VICE CHAIR.
I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SAY YOU WERE CORRECT EARLIER.
WE CAN ONLY VOTE FOR THE HISTORIC OR NOT VOTE ON THE HISTORIC, UM, AS PART OF THIS ITEM.
AND, UM, AND THEN THE STAFF FOR A SECOND QUESTION.
IF WE, SINCE WE HAVE NOT APPROVED HISTORIC DESIGNATION, THEN FOR THE OWNER, CAN THEY PROCEED? UM, THEY HAVE TO GO TO COUNCIL.
HOW ARE WE IMPEDING THEIR, UM, ABILITY TO PROCEED? NO, IT'S REALLY THE VOTE OF THE COUNCIL THAT MATTERS.
WE ARE JUST MAKING A RECOMMENDATION.
AND OUR RECOMMENDATION IS NOT SUPPORTING THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
AND WE ARE COMMITTED EVEN IF IT'S, IF IT'S VOLUNTARY, IF YOU CAN'T MAKE THE DIRECTION, WE ARE COMMITTED TO THOSE BULLETS THAT WE LAID OUT AND THAT I LAID OUT IN MY PRESENTATION.
AND JUST A POINT OF PROCESS CLARIFICATION.
UM, SO AT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, UM, A OWNER OPPOSED CASE MUST GET A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE THREE QUARTERS, UM, TO MOVE ON TO Y'ALL.
UM, AND THEN AT COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS TONIGHT, THE CASE WILL PROCEED TO COUNCIL, WHICH WILL ALSO REQUIRE A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE IN FAVOR OF HISTORIC ZONING IN ORDER TO IMPOSE THAT.
AND HOW OFTEN DOES THAT HAPPEN? ALMOST NEVER.
AND JARED, CAN WE MAKE COMMENTS THAT GO ON TO COUNSEL ABOUT WHY WE DIDN'T APPROVE IT? BECAUSE, UM, THE HISTORIC COMMISSION HAS INCLUDED COMMENTS ABOUT WHY THEY DID APPROVE IT.
UH, COMMISSIONER STERN, I WILL.
UH, SO I HAVE A PRETTY GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE, THE OFFICE OF THE COUNCILMAN WHO APPOINTED ME.
I I WILL CERTAINLY BE REACHING OUT TO HIS CHIEF OF STAFF AND HIS POLICY DIRECTOR TO, UH, SHARE MY OPINIONS.
UH, SO THAT'S A LITTLE MORE INFORMAL, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S KIND, I MEAN, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE IT ON THE PACKET.
'CAUSE I MEAN, OUR, OUR MAIN I THINK THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER PKI PROBABLY SPOKE TO THIS BEST ABOUT OUR CONCERN ABOUT IMPOSING HISTORIC, UM, DESIGNATION WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER IS NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT.
BUT NORMALLY IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
IT'S THE PROPERTY OWNER ASKING FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
WELL, SOMETIMES THEY ASK FOR DEMOLITION.
IT IS, I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO, I DON'T WANNA GET INTO LIKE A, LIKE A, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THIS THAT MUCH, BUT WHETHER THE OWNER WANTS TO START DESTINATION OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT SHOULD BE THE, THE, THE, UH, THE DETERMINING FACTOR.
IF A, IF A, IF A SITE, UH, IS, IS SUPPOSED TO BE HISTORIC FOR WHATEVER REASON, IF THE OWNER COULD WANT TO REDEVELOP IT ANYWAY, REGARDLESS OF THE VALUE, REGARDLESS OF THE VALUE OF THAT SITE TO THE CITY AND TO THE STATE.
AND THAT'S WHY IT TAKES A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE AT THE COUNCIL.
UM, I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE ON.
WE'VE DISCUSSED IT, WE'VE REPEATED OURSELVES.
UM, AND I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR ALL THE COMMENTS.
[01:05:01]
THE NEXT DISCUSSION CASE IS, DO WE NOT MAKE A VOTE? WE VOTED IT WAS THREE TO SEVEN.UM, DID YOU KNOW YOU VOTED NO, SORRY.
[5. Rezoning: C14-2024-0173 - City Initiated: 10505 and 10545 Dessau Road; District 1]
ITEM FIVE IS OUR NEXT DISCUSSION CASE.UM, THAT IS C 14 2020 4 0 1 7 3.
IT IS A CITY INITIATED ZONING AT 1 0 5, 0 5 AND 1 0 5 4 5 DESAR ROAD IN DISTRICT ONE.
UM, DO WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION? UH, NO.
UM, JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS CASE NUMBER C 14 2024 DASH 0 1 73.
IT IS A REZONING REQUEST OF 1 0 5 0 5 AND 1 0 5 4 5 DESAL ROAD FROM SF TWO TO SNSF SIX CO TWO GO.
THIS, UH, CASE WAS INITIATED BY THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2024.
THE RESOLUTION IN INDICATED, UH, INITIATED REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY TO A COMMERCIAL BASE ZONING DISTRICT, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE BASE ZONING.
DISTRICT STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANT GRANTING GO GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT ZONING FOR THIS TRACT.
THE SUBJECT TRACT IS APPROXIMATELY 17.5 ACRES.
THE TRACT CURRENTLY HAS THREE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES CONSTRUCTED ON IT BETWEEN 2000 AND 2024.
THE TRACT HAS APPROXIMATELY A THOUSAND FEET OF FRONTAGE ALONG DESAL ROAD TO THE WEST, WHICH IS AN IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR, AN A SMP TRANSIT PRIORITY CORRIDOR, AND AN A SMP LEVEL FOUR ROADWAY.
IT HAS THREE LANES OF TRAVEL IN EACH DIRECTION.
TO THE NORTH OF THIS TRACT IS ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO THE EAST IS UNDEVELOPED.
LAND TO THE SOUTH IS UNDEVELOPED LAND AND TO THE WEST, ACROSS DESAL ROAD ARE TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND ADDITIONAL UNDEVELOPED LAND THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS THE CITY, HOWEVER, UH, AN ORGANIZATION, A NONPROFIT CALLED FOSTER VILLAGE IS SEEKING, UH, THIS REZONING PER THE LETTER IN THE STAFF REPORT TO REPURPOSE FOR COMMERCIAL OFFICE USE BY THE NONPROFIT.
THIS REZONING APPLICATION, IF SUCCESSFUL, THE NONPROFIT WOULD EXPLORE ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH A HEADQUARTERS AND A RESOURCE CENTER FOR FOSTER VILLAGE INCORPORATED, WHICH IS AN AUSTIN BASED NONPROFIT, UH, CREATED TO MEET BASIC AND HOLISTIC NEEDS OF FOSTER YOUTH AND THEIR CAREGIVERS.
THAT, UH, LETTER IS IN THE BACKUP.
UH, THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS, UH, REZONING BASED ON A REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY AND IN, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF, UH, THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL.
I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WELL, LET'S WAIT AND TAKE ALL OUR TESTIMONY, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN DO QUESTIONS.
IS, ARE THERE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM OF THE SPEAKER, THE APP APPLICANT, OR PROPERTY OWNER OR CHAIR? WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER IN FAVOR.
SHE'S NOT THE APPLICANT, BUT SHE IS OUR SPEAKER IN FAVOR.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER, UH, CRYSTAL SMITH.
CRYSTAL, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
I AM THE FOUNDER AND CEO OF FOSTER VILLAGE.
THANK Y'ALL FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DO.
UM, I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE WORK THAT I DO, WHICH IS, UM, AROUND CHILD WELFARE.
SO I JUST WANNA SHARE WHAT FOSTER VILLAGE IS BECAUSE I THINK, UM, THAT WILL HOPEFULLY CLARIFY WHAT OUR, UM, INTENTION IS FOR THE PROPERTY.
UM, WE FOUNDED FOSTER VILLAGE.
I'M GONNA LEARN HOW TO USE THIS THING.
UM, BACK IN 2016, UM, BASED ON MY FAMILY'S EXPERIENCE AS A LICENSED FOSTER HOME, AND WE SAW A LOT OF GAPS IN THE SYSTEM AND A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE COMMUNITY TO PROVIDE THAT WRAPAROUND SUPPORT THAT WAS LACKING FOR THESE KIDS AND FAMILIES.
SO SINCE 2016, UM, WE HAVE GROWN AND SERVED OVER 11,000 CHILDREN IN THE AUSTIN AREA.
WE DO THIS THROUGH OUR HOMELIKE RESOURCE CENTERS.
I EMPHASIZE HOMELIKE BECAUSE THAT IS REALLY AT THE HEART OF OUR MISSION.
UH, THESE KIDS TYPICALLY ARE GOING THROUGH VERY, UM, INSTITUTIONAL LIKE SETTINGS.
AND SO OUR RESOURCE CENTERS ARE DESIGNED TO BE, UM, HOME-LIKE WHERE THEY COME AND THEY GET ESSENTIAL ITEMS, THERAPEUTIC SUPPORT SERVICES, AND CONNECTION WITH COMMUNITY.
UM, THESE ARE SOME OF OUR OTHER STATS.
OVER 98% OF THE CAREGIVERS THAT WE HAVE SERVED, SO THAT THE SUPPORT THAT THEY RECEIVE FROM FOSTER VILLAGE WERE A, WAS A SUSTAINING FACTOR FOR THEM TO CONTINUE CARING FOR THE KIDS IN THEIR HOME.
CHILDREN DO NOT STAY AT OUR RESOURCE CENTERS.
THIS IS, UM, DAYTIME HOURS WHERE THEY'RE COMING AND GETTING ESSENTIAL ITEMS AND, UH,
[01:10:01]
OUR PROGRAMMING AND SERVICES, AND THEN THEY GO HOME TO THEIR FOSTER HOMES.BUT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE FACED, UM, SPECIFICALLY IN NORTH AUSTIN IS THAT OUR RESOURCE CENTERS HAVE REACHED CAPACITY.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE ONE RESOURCE CENTER IN DRIPPING SPRINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN AT.
IT'S A, UH, IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA AS WELL.
AND, UM, WE'VE HAD THAT SINCE 2017.
AND THEN WE'VE BEEN LEASING ANOTHER LOCATION, ANOTHER HOUSE IN NORTH AUSTIN SINCE 2019.
AND, UM, OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, OUR, UH, DEMAND HAS INCREASED OVER 30% YEAR AFTER YEAR.
IN TERMS OF FAMILY SERVED IN NORTH AUSTIN.
WE DID A HEAT MAP AND THE AREA THAT WE SAW THE GREATEST NEED WAS RIGHT WHERE WE'RE LOOKING, UM, AT THIS PROPERTY ON DESAL ROAD.
SO AGAIN, OUR RESOURCE CENTERS.
WE PROVIDE THERAPEUTIC SUPPORT SERVICES.
EACH RESOURCE CENTER HAS A PLAY STUDIO WHERE KIDS CAN COME AND PLAY AND BE CHILDREN WHEN THEY ARE NAVIGATING REALLY, REALLY HARD CIRCUMSTANCES.
UM, OUR STAFF IS HIGHLY TRAINED IN TRAUMA AND HOW TO HELP KIDS AND FAMILIES NAVIGATE TRAUMA.
UM, FAMILIES GET CLOTHING AND ESSENTIAL ITEMS FREE OF CHARGE AND THINGS LIKE BEDS, CAR SEATS, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
AND THEN WE HOST SUPPORT GATHERINGS FOR THE CAREGIVERS AS WELL.
AND, UM, WE HAVE LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM, UM, LOTS OF FOLKS, CFPS, UM, LOCAL TRAVIS COUNTY, UH, COURT, UM, SOME OTHER ORGANIZATIONS FROM NEIGHBORS, UM, WHO HAVE, UH, HAD TO LIVE ALONGSIDE US OVER THE YEARS, ARE ALL VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF OUR ORGANIZATION.
WE ALSO ARE OPEN TO THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF VOLUNTEERING.
AND, UM, IT REALLY IS AN INCREDIBLE RESOURCE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND SO THAT IS OUR GOAL FOR THIS PROPERTY.
AND, UM, THAT'S WHY I, UH, ASK THAT YOU WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR.
THIS IS A PHOTO OF SOME OF OUR OTHER KIDDOS JUST AT OUR CURRENT RESOURCE CENTERS TOO, SO THANK YOU.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION? NO.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS FROM ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS? YEAH, I JUST HAD ONE QUICK QUESTION.
UH, I WILL ALSO THROW IN A COMMENT.
I DO WORK WITH FOSTER VILLAGE THROUGH MY CHURCH.
UH, SO I'M A BIG FAN OF YOU GUYS.
UH, MY QUESTION WAS FOR CITY STAFF, UH, VERY QUICKLY WAS THE VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION FROM COUNCIL? UNANIMOUS? I THINK IT WAS, YEAH.
I JUST, I'M NOT GONNA VOTE AGAINST MY COUNCIL MEMBER.
THAT'S JUST WHAT I WANTED TO CONFIRM.
UM, I'LL HAVE TO, ERIC, YOU CAN DOUBLE CHECK, BUT ERIC'S GONNA CHECK.
UH, I'M ESSENTIALLY JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I ALIGN MY VOTE WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER APPOINTED ME.
SO, SO THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THAT DISTRICT INITIATED THAT RESOLUTION.
SO, SO IT'S PROBABLY DISTRICT ONE.
OH, WE CAN GO THEM IF YOU WANNA GO UP THERE FIRST.
YOU HAVE A QUESTION? WE'LL GO ONLINE FIRST.
NO, IT'S MORE, IT'S MORE COMMENT.
I, I JUST, UM, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT, UM, THE, YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THIS AT FIRST, I HAD A KNEE JERK RESPONSE BECAUSE THIS LOCATION IS NOT VERY WELL CONNECTED TO THE TRANSIT SYSTEM.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'VE TAKEN A LOOK, BUT YOU ARE, YOU'RE IN THIS DONUT HOLE, YOU'RE JUST SOUTH OF TRANSIT, YOU'RE JUST NORTH OF TRANSIT, YOU'RE JUST SOUTH OF PICKUP.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE YOU'RE DEALING WITH FOSTER YOUTH, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE A VERY HARD TIME GETTING TO THIS LOCATION.
SO, UM, I, I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE.
YOU MAY WANT TO GET AHEAD OF THAT AND START TALKING TO CAT METRO ABOUT EXPANDING THE PICKUP ZONE TO TRY TO REACH THIS LOCATION.
UM, BECAUSE IT, IT, IT IS VERY CLOSE, BUT YOU'RE, YOU HAVE NO ACCESS TO THIS LOCATION.
AND IN FACT, I THOUGHT I WOULD BE OPPOSED TO AN OFFICE BEING IN THIS LOCATION, BUT WHEN I SAW WHAT IT WAS FOR, YOU KNOW, I FELT DIFFERENTLY.
BUT AGAIN, THIS IS NOT THE BEST LOCATION FOR WHO YOU'RE TRYING TO SERVE IF ACCESS IS AT THE TOP OF YOUR LIST.
ANYBODY ELSE ONLINE WITH QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER THOMPSON? YEAH, I JUST HAD, UH, CLARIFYING QUESTIONS ON, UM, THE BACKGROUND ON Y GO.
AND, UM, AND CAN YOU HELP ME BETTER UNDERSTAND THE RELATIONSHIP OF FOSTER VILLAGE TO THIS PROPERTY? THEY'RE NOT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, SO I, I SEE THE RESOLUTION, BUT I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE RELATIONSHIP OR WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO.
IT SAYS THERE'S NO PLAN RIGHT NOW, SO I'LL LET THE, UH, THE
[01:15:01]
PROPERTY OWNER ANSWER THAT SECOND QUESTION.BUT STAFF RECOMMENDED GO LARGELY BECAUSE OF THE LARGE, UM, THE INTENSITY OF THE ROADWAY AND SIMILAR ZONING ALONG THAT AREA.
THERE WAS AN MF UH, FOUR ZONING APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET NORTH THAT WAS GRANTED IN JUNE OF 2023.
UM, IT'S LISTED IN THE, UH, AREA CASE HISTORY SECTION OF THE STAFF REPORT.
SO IT WOULD BE A SIMILAR HEIGHT, UH, IN TERMS OF THE INTENSITY.
UM, I THINK THE OTHER COMMISSIONER ON THE SCREEN, I DON'T SEE THE, THE NAMES IN THERE, FORGIVE ME, HAD MENTIONED ABOUT TRANSIT ACCESS, GRANTING A LITTLE BIT HIGHER INTENSITY, UM, USE ON IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR AND A TRANSIT PRIORITY CORRIDOR MAY BRING ADDITIONAL SERVICE TO THIS AREA IN TERMS OF ENSURING THAT THIS, WHAT IS SIX LANE ROADWAY, UH, THAT, UH, HAS A VERY NARROW BIKE LANE ALONG THE SIDE OF IT DOES PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS AS WELL.
UM, ACROSS THE STREET TO THE NORTH, THERE WAS A, SOME ADDITIONAL GEO ZONING.
UM, IT'S NOT DEVELOPED TO ITS FULL, UH, MAXIMUM ENTITLEMENTS, BUT IT IS ZONED THAT WAY TO WHERE THERE'S A PRECEDENT WITHIN THIS AREA ALONG THE CORRIDOR FOR THIS INTENSITY OF, UH, ZONING.
AND SO, UM, YOU DIDN'T FEEL THAT THE ENDNOTE THE NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE WAS IN WAS INSUFFICIENT FOR THE NEED, OR IT'S NOT JUST ME, IT'S, IT'S STAFF AS A WHOLE HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IT AND FELT THAT THIS WAS THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF ZONING FOR THIS AREA, GIVEN OUR ZONING, UH, PRINCIPLES TO ALLOW A REASONABLE USE OF THIS LAND TO ENTICE TRANSIT.
UH, THAT, THAT'S CERTAINLY ONE, UH, RATIONALE.
UH, IT'S A REASONABLE USE OF THE ZONING GIVEN O UH, OF THE LAND, GIVEN OTHER COMPARABLE ZONING WITHIN THE PROXIMATE AREA OF THE SITE.
UM, THE ROADWAY IN TERMS OF IT BEING AN AS SMP LEVEL FOUR ROADWAY, THAT'S A SECOND FROM THE HIGHEST, WHICH IS A FREEWAY.
UM, YEAH, I'M JUST SEEING IT SURROUNDED BY A BUNCH OF SFS.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT WHY NOT A MORE TRANSITIONAL ZONING OR NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED ZONING.
I MEAN IT, WITH IT BEING SUCH A, A LARGE TRACK TOO, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, WOULD, WOULD MAKE IT REASONABLE FOR IT TO BE A MORE INTENSE SITE TO POTENTIALLY DEVELOP THE CORRIDOR, AS IMAGINE AUSTIN ENVISIONED, UH, TO HAVE, UH, A MIX OF USES AND INTENSITIES, UH, UH, ALONG THOSE MAJOR CORRIDORS.
UM, THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES, UH, HAVE NOT BEEN THERE THAT LONG.
AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, ALONG THAT CORRIDOR TO THE SOUTH ARE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE DENSE THAN WHAT'S BEEN DEVELOPED THERE HISTORICALLY IN THE PAST OF THE COURT MM-HMM
OR IS KIND OF SHIFTING IN THAT DIRECTION TO BE MORE INTENSE.
UM, I'LL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTION.
OH, UH, COMMISSIONER MAJOR, I DID LOOK INTO THE, THE, THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION.
IT WAS, UH, THAT RESOLUTION, WHICH IS IN THE BACKUP OF THE STAFF REPORT, WAS APPROVED ON CONSENT, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER CO CADRE'S MOTION, UH, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FUENTES 11 ZERO WAS THE VOTE.
COULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF? YES, MA'AM.
I AM THE ATTORNEY FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND FOR FOSTER VILLAGE, AND I'M A FORMER FOSTER YOUTH MYSELF.
UM, I WANTED TO RESPOND TO COMMISSIONER THOMPSON'S QUESTION ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS LONG, UH, BEEN A SUPPORTER OF FOSTER VILLAGE, UM, UH, BENEFACTOR.
AND WE, THE FOSTER VILLAGE ACTUALLY HAS A LEASE ON THE PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR SEVERAL MONTHS THAT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO UTILIZE BECAUSE OF THE ZONING.
AND, AND WE, AND THEY HAVE NOT UTILIZED TO, TO AVOID INFRINGING UPON, UH, THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS.
BUT, UM, THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER ACTUALLY OFFERED UP, UM, THIS TRACT BECAUSE HE WAS AWARE THAT AS, UH, CRYSTAL HAD ENUNCIATED THAT THE, THE, THE, WE JUST OUTGROWN THE RESOURCE CENTERS AND, AND WE REALLY NEED TO EXPAND TO A LARGER AREA.
NOT THAT THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS, UH, IS TERRIBLY LARGE THAT WE PLAN TO UTILIZE ON THE TRACT, BUT IT'S MUCH LARGER THAN WHERE, UH, WHERE FOSTER VILLAGE IS COMING FROM.
SO THAT, THAT'S THE RELATIONSHIP.
SO YOU'VE LEASED THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND THEN YOU'D LIKE TO BUILD ON THIS INTO LARGE OFFICE SPACE? NO, UM, WE WERE NOT, WE, WE ARE LEASING, WE ARE NOT PLANNING TO BUILD REALLY ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR MAYBE ADDING A COUPLE MORE PARKING SPACES AND, AND MAYBE CLOSING IN THE, THE PATIO AT SOME POINT, THE BALCONY.
SO, SO WHY IS THE ZONING NECESSARY FOR THAT USE? WE CANNOT UTILIZE A GENERAL OFFICE SPACE OR AN OFFICE SPACE UNDER THE CURRENT SINGLE FAMILY ZONING.
SO THE STRUCTURE THAT THE STRUCTURE THAT YOU'RE GONNA OCCUPY IS ZONED AS SINGLE FAMILY AND YOU CAN'T USE IT AS AN OFFICE? YES, MA'AM.
UH, AND LIKE, BUT THIS ZONING WOULD ZONE 17 WHOLE ACRES FOR LARGE OFFICE, LARGE SCALE OFFICE SPACE.
SO THOSE SEEM LIKE VERY DIFFERENT USES OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S
[01:20:01]
THAT.WELL, UM, THE, THE GENERAL OFFICE USE, UH, WOULD ENABLE US TO USE AN OFFICE SPACE THERE.
THE BOTH TRACKS ARE ALSO GREATLY IMPEDED BY, UH, CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES AND BUFFERS THAT GREATLY LIMIT THE DEVELOPABLE, THE DEVELOPABLE LAND, UH, TO BE ABLE TO PUT A, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU COULD PUT A LARGE OFFICE ON EITHER TRACT EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO BECAUSE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
WE, THE FOSTER VILLAGE, GOT THESE TRACKS BECAUSE OF THE NATURAL BEAUTY AND BECAUSE OF, OF IT BEING, UH, SERVING A THERAPEUTIC PURPOSE FOR VISITORS, UM, THAT'S JUST PART OF THE MISSION IS TO CREATE A SAFE SPACE THAT'S PEACEFUL.
AND IT'S HARD TO FIND THAT IN AUSTIN.
IT'S REALLY HARD TO FIND A PIECE OF PROPERTY FOR A NONPROFIT IN AUSTIN THAT ALLOWS THAT.
SO, UM, I, I THINK THE GEO WOULD ENABLE US TO HAVE AN OFFICE SPACE THAT'S NON-CONTROVERSIAL IN TERMS OF IT BEING AN APPLICABLE USE WITHIN THAT ZONING CATEGORY.
AND, AND, UH, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.
THANKS FOR HELPING ME UNDERSTAND.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I THINK I HAVE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.
UM, THIS IS A LARGE INCREASE IN ENTITLEMENT ON A LARGE LOT.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY SF PROPERTIES.
UM, GENERALLY I DON'T THINK ZONING THAT STARTS WITH THE LETTER G SHOULD BE NEXT TO PROPERTIES ZONED SF.
AND I BELIEVE THE OFFICE USE COULD BE IN A LOWER CATEGORY.
UM, BUT COULD YOU SHOW THE SLIDES THAT I GAVE? UM, BASICALLY YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S A LEASE ON THIS PROPERTY.
IS THIS A LONG-TERM LEASE? THE CONCERN I HAVE IS IT, THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN ADVERTISED FOR SALE FOR $3.8 MILLION, UM, AND THE ZONING CHANGE WOULD JUST INCREASE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY.
DO YOU WANNA GO THROUGH THOSE? THAT'S KIND OF HARD TO READ.
WE CAN SKIP THAT, BUT, UM, IT'S SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
THERE'S MORE DETAILS, THEY'RE SMALL, BUT, UM, THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ADVERTISED FOR $3.8 MILLION.
UM, IT DOESN'T, TO ME REALLY MAKE SENSE.
IT'S JUST GONNA MAKE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE FOR THE NONPROFIT IS NEVER GONNA PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY, OR IS THE NONPROFIT SEEKING TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY, THE NONPROFIT IS SEEKING TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY.
ARE YOU CONCERNED THAT THE INCREASED ZONING IS GONNA INCREASE THE PRICE? YOU HAVE NO, $3.8 MILLION? NO, WE ARE NOT.
IT, IT'S THE, UH, IT WILL, IT, IT MAY INCREASE THE PRICE FROM THE ENTITLEMENT, BUT IT IS GREATLY IMPEDED BY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTRICTIONS OF RESTRICTED DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL.
UM, THAT, SO, YOU KNOW, WE, WE NEED A SPACE THAT WE CAN OPERATE AN OFFICE IN.
AND WE IS
UM, AND HOW MUCH LARGER IS THIS HOUSE COMPARED TO THE ONE AT 1, 2, 4, 10 LIMERICK AVENUE? THAT'S THE SPACE YOU HAVE IN NORTH AUSTIN? TWICE THE SIZE.
AND THE LAND IS SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER.
THE LAND IS SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER.
THAT'S LIKE A QUARTER OF AN ACRE.
AND THIS IS, I DON'T KNOW, 17 ACRES OR SOMETHING.
SO THE LAND ACTUALLY HAS NATURE TRAILS ON IT THAT WE DON'T, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO, ASIDE FROM CLEANUP AND MAINTENANCE, UH, THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING WITH.
AND WE REALLY VALUE AS A PART OF THE MISSION TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO UTILIZE, UM, SO THAT THE LARGER SCALE OF THE LAND IS, IS WHAT THE PURPOSE, UM, UH, WOULD BE, WOULD BE USED FOR FOR FOSTER VILLAGE.
AND DO YOU HAVE A PURCHASE CONTRACT THAT'S CONDITIONAL ON THE GEO ZONING? NOT ON THE GEO ZONING.
IT'S CONDITIONAL ON BEING ABLE TO UTILIZE THE PROPERTY AS AN OFFICE SPACE.
SO ANY ZONING THAT GAVE YOU OFFICE ENTITLEMENT, WOULD YOU WOULD BE BUYING IT? WE WOULD, WE WOULD, WE'RE GONNA TRY TO BUY IT.
I'D BE LYING IF I SAID WE HAD THREE POINT DOLLARS IN MY POCKET TO BE ABLE TO BUY IT RIGHT NOW.
MAYBE IN THE BANK INSTEAD? NO, NOT IN THE BANK.
I MEAN, THE, MY CONCERN IS THIS IS A ZONING THAT'S BEING REQUESTED FOR THE BENEFIT OF FOSTER VILLAGES, AND THERE'S REALLY NO GUARANTEE THAT FOSTER VILLAGES WILL BE
[01:25:01]
THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY OR EVEN A TENANT GOING FORWARD WHEN IT'S BEEN OFFERED FOR SALE.WE HAVE, UH, JUST TO RESPOND TO THAT IN OUR LEASE, WE HAVE AN OPTION TO PURCHASE, UM, THAT'S TIED TO THE LEASE, BUT NOT 3.8 MILLION IN YOUR POCKET.
THAT'S CORRECT,
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, IF I MAY, UM, DID FOSTER VILLAGE SPECIFICALLY REQUEST THE GEO THE, THE GEO ZONING OR, UM, OR DID THAT ORIGINATE WITH THE CITY THAT IS WORKING IN COLLABORATION WITH THE CITY? I THINK THINK TOO, UM, I, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
IT, IT'S, THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE AND WE'VE PULLED THE APPLICATION A COUPLE OF TIMES AND REF REFILED.
I, I HONESTLY CANNOT REMEMBER.
I WISH I COULD IS, IS THE INTENTION TO DEVELOP IT.
UM, IT'S JUST A LITTLE INCONGRUENT WITH WHAT THE CITY WAS SAYING ABOUT THE SCALE THAT THEY WANNA SEE ON THIS, UM, ROADWAY.
SO I, I LOVE EVERYTHING ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND I WANNA SUPPORT YOU IN ANY WAY I CAN, BUT ALSO IT'S JUST NOT LINING UP FOR ME THE WAY IT'S BEING, UM, PACKAGED.
AND IT, IT, WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE CITY WAS THAT THIS UP ZONING AND LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT, IT'S REALLY DIFFERENT THAN THE PICTURE YOU'RE PAINTING.
AND SO I'M JUST REALLY CONFUSED ABOUT THIS IS UNUSUAL TO GET SOMETHING LIKE THIS HERE.
AND WE, WE, WE, FOSTER VILLAGE DOES NOT HAVE ANY PLANS FOR, FOR DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO FIND, UH, A ZONING CLASSIFICATION THAT MATCHES THE CITY'S FUTURE LAND USE, UM, PLAN AND MAP AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UM, GIVING US ON A CORRIDOR.
AND I THINK THE GEO LINE, AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, LINED UP WITH THAT AND ALLOWED US TO USE A PROPERTY FOR, TO CONTINUE A NON-PROFIT, BUT OKAY.
THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO OTHER SITE PLAN OR ANYTHING TO DEVELOP ANYTHING ON THE TRACKS, WHICH WOULD BE FINE IF THERE WA IT'S JUST CONFUSING WHY YOU WOULD NEED SUCH A LARGE ZONING, UM, FOR, FOR THE USE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO JUST TRYING TO MATCH IT UP.
AND I THINK, I THINK TOO, IT'S, UH, IT'S, IT'S QUITE EXPENSIVE FOR A NONPROFIT TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
AND BECAUSE BOTH TRACKS ARE, ARE PART OF IT, I THINK THEY'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE BRINGING THEM TOGETHER AT ONE TIME, UM, TO TRY TO HAVE, UH, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF EFFICIENCIES AND MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY GOING FORWARD.
I'M GUESSING, WELL NOT NECESSARILY THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT ON COSTS, UM, TRYING TO BE EFFICIENT WITH COSTS AND, AND BECAUSE BOTH PROPERTIES ARE AT STAKE, WE DON'T WANT TO GO HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THIS.
A SECOND TIME ON THE SECOND PROPERTY, SO, OKAY.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDES? I THINK IT WAS THE VERY LAST SLIDE IN THAT WHOLE PACKET.
OR NOT THE YEAH, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE, THAT LAST ONE.
UM, SO THAT'S IN THE FOR SALE PACKET.
UM, SO THAT IT IS BEING ADVERTISED AS IF IT COULD BE MULTI-FAMILY.
UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
IS SHORT-TERM RENTAL ALLOWED ON THIS? WOULD IT BE ALLOWED IN GO, CAN I ANSWER THIS? I'M LIKE, WHAT, WHAT ARE THEY PLANNING HERE AND WHO'S PLANNING THAT? UH, JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN, UH, THE CITY CAN'T PROHIBIT, UH, SHORT TERM RENTALS ON THIS PARTICULAR ZONING CATEGORY.
UH, UH, I THINK WHAT'S BEING SEEN THERE IN TERMS OF A SITE PLAN IS PURELY PERSPECTIVE.
'CAUSE THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE A, A RECORD OF A SITE PLAN BEING FILED FOR THIS SITE AT THIS TIME.
COULD YOU SPEAK TO WHETHER OTHER, AT LIKE LIMITED OFFICE, ARE THERE OTHER DESIGNATIONS THAT COULD MEET THE NEED OF THE, UM, APPLICANT OR THE FOSTER VILLAGE? SO THE RESOLUTION, LIKE, UH, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, UH, DIRECTED INITIATED ZONING OF THE PROPERTY TO A COMMERCIAL BASED ZONING DISTRICT OR OTHER APPROPRIATE BASED ZONING DISTRICT.
SO STAFF WAS PROVIDED THE LETTER, UM, IN A CITY INITIATED REZONING CASE.
THE CITY STAFF FILES THE APPLICATION, NOT THE, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY MM-HMM
UM, BECAUSE FEES ARE BEING WAIVED, THE CITY IS INITIATING THE REZONING.
UM, SO WE FILLED OUT THE APPLICATION AND CAME UP WITH THE RECOMMENDATION IN TERMS OF THE REQUEST BASED ON ADJACENT PROPERTY ZONINGS, WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE DISTRICT ZONING CATEGORIES, UH, HAVE THEIR, YOU KNOW, ENTITLEMENTS IN TERMS OF, UH, THE, THE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, IMPERVIOUS COVER HEIGHTS, ET CETERA.
[01:30:01]
THAT WAS PROVIDED, UH, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE USES OF USING THE PROPERTY FOR OFFICE, UH, STAFF CONSIDERED THOSE USES THAT THE APPLICANT MIGHT NEED.AND, UH, AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL USES GIVEN SOME OF THEIR SERVICES NOT BEING RELATED TO OFFICE, UM, UH, I DON'T KNOW THAT, UH, WE WANTED THEM TO HAVE TO COME BACK FOR ADDITIONAL USES IF THEY ARE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE CHILDREN ON THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S NOT A TRADITIONAL KIND OF OFFICE USE.
IT COULD SKIRT EDUCATIONAL OR OTHER CHILDCARE SERVICE, UH, USES.
UM, SO THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT STAFF TOOK IN CONSIDERATION.
AND THEN IN TERMS OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WE WERE LOOKING ABOUT A LOT, UH, LOOKING AT WHAT HAS CURRENTLY BEEN HAPPENING ON THE CORRIDOR.
AND SO AS I MENTIONED, THERE WAS JUST A REZONING CASE THAT WAS DONE 400 FEET TO THE NORTH OF THIS TRACT.
UM, IT'S SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY ON THREE SIDES AS WELL, VERY SIMILAR TO THIS TRACK THAT WAS GRANTED, UM, BY THIS BOARD, THIS BODY AND COUNCIL, UH, MF FOUR ZONING.
SO THE GEO ZONING IS KIND OF ANALOGOUS TO, IT'S AT THE SAME LEVEL OF THAT MF FOUR ZONING.
SO, UM, THERE, EXCEPT IT'S HOUSING, IT'S COMMERCIAL VERSUS HOUSING, YES.
BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE AT THE SAME LEVEL OF INTENSITY IN TERMS OF SIZE, YOU KNOW, UH, SOME OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
UH, AND SO SEEING THAT ALONG THE CORRIDOR WAS WHAT ALLOWED STAFF TO, YOU KNOW, SAY, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF THIS CORRIDOR? WHAT IS THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLANS SAY FOR THIS CORRIDOR? WHAT ARE SOME OF OUR TRANSPORTATION PLANS LIKE THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLANS SEE FOR THIS CORRIDOR? AND THEY SEE MORE INTENSE DEVELOPMENT ON THIS CORRIDOR GIVEN ITS PROXIMITY.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THAT MUCH FURTHER NORTH FROM, UH, 180 3.
IT'S NOT THAT MUCH FURTHER EAST FROM THE DOMAIN AND OTHER INTENSE, UH, DEVELOPMENT AREAS.
SO, UM, THE AREA IS CHANGING IN TERMS OF THE LEVEL OF INTENSITY OF THE ZONING THAT HAS BEEN THERE HISTORICALLY VERSUS WHAT IS KIND OF COMING, UH, IN, IN THIS, UH, THIS SETTING.
SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UH, AND AGAIN, THERE'S NOT MY PERSONAL RECOMMENDATION, IT IS ALL STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IN TERMS OF EVALUATING THE SITE OF WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS SITE GIVEN THE USE AND, YOU KNOW, THE OPPORTUNITY TO REZONE THE PROP, THE PARCEL, UM, UNDER THIS REQUEST IS, IS GEO.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT STAFF FELT COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING IN THIS CASE.
WOULD, I GUESS THIS IS A QUESTION FOR, UM, FOR LAWYER.
WOULD, UM, YOU'RE THE LAWYER FOR THE OWNER, RIGHT? FOR BOTH PROPERTY OWNER? FOR BOTH.
WOULD YOU, I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD BE THE OTHER PARTY, BUT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO SIGN A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT PROHIBITING SHORT-TERM RENTALS? UH, CAN, UH, JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN? SO, UH, ONE OTHER CLARIFICATION.
RESIDENTIAL IS NOT ALLOWED IN GEO, SO SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE NOT ALLOWED.
I THOUGHT YOU JUST SAID IT'S ALLOWED.
I SAID IT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.
I'M SORRY, JUST A CLARIFICATION.
I THINK I SAW COMMISSIONER STERN'S HAND, I THINK YOU DID
UM, AND I'D LOVE TO UNDERSTAND THE REASONING WHY WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE OR LIMITED OFFICE EXACTLY.
AND WHY WE'RE GOING ALL THE WAY TO GENERAL OFFICE.
CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THAT? IS IT BECAUSE THAT WAS WHAT THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION SAID? UH, THE, THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION DID NOT SPECIFY GO.
UH, IT AGAIN, TO, UH, QUOTE WHAT IS STATED IN THE, THE RESOLUTION, IT, UH, IT SAYS THE RESOLUTION INITIATED REZONING OF THE PROPERTY TO A COMMERCIAL BASE ZONING DISTRICT, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE BASE ZONING DISTRICT.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT WAS GIVING DISCRETION TO STAFF TO COME UP WITH A SUITABLE REZONING FOR THIS, WHETHER THAT'S COMMERCIAL OR NOT.
UM, SO IT DID NOT SPECIFY A PARTICULAR CATEGORY.
UM, THE LEVEL OF INTENSITY OF THAT ROADWAY IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY, UH, RECOMMEND NO, OR LO ON, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDING GEO IS KIND OF THE MIDDLE GROUND OF THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS, THE TWO ABOVE THAT BEING GR AND CS, UM, LARGELY SEEN AS THE MOST COMMON FIVE.
SO IT KIND OF IS THE MIDDLE GROUND THERE AS WAS NOTED BY THE APPLICANT.
THERE ARE SOME ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS AND, UH, OTHER THINGS THAT, UH, WOULD, YOU KNOW, ENCUMBER REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY IN A SUBSTANTIAL WAY.
SO, UM, AGAIN, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS GO, UM, AND THE STAFF TOOK IN CONSIDERATION ALL OF THOSE FACTORS, YOU KNOW? NO.
[01:35:01]
WHEN WE MAKE A ZONING RECOMMENDATION, WE TAKE IN CONSIDERATION ADJACENT ZONING, UH, ENTITLEMENTS, WHAT'S BEEN GRANTED AS OF RECENTLY IN TERMS OF WHAT THE TREND AND PRECEDENT IS FOR THE AREA, AS WELL AS TRANSPORTATION AND ROADWAY AND TRANSIT, UH, CONSIDERATIONS AS WELL.AND SO TO HAVE A NO OR AN LO IN THIS LOCATION ALONG AN A SMP LEVEL FOUR ROADWAY WOULD BE PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL.
UH, AND, YOU KNOW, I CAN UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT, UH, THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE ABOUT SINGLE FAMILY BEING ADJACENT, BUT WITH THE SITE BEING SO FAR, I MEAN, THE NEAREST STRUCTURE IS OVER A HUNDRED YARDS FROM THE EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT ARE THERE THAT NOW, UM, THEY'RE PRETTY FAR AWAY IN TERMS OF, UM, THERE'S SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS OF TREE COVER AND, AND OTHER THINGS THAT ARE PROVIDING KIND OF A, A NATURAL BUFFER THERE IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND WOULD MOST LIKELY RE REMAIN BECAUSE OF REDEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS, UH, THAT ARE ENCUMBERING THE SITE.
UM, SO THERE ARE, I'M CONFUSED ABOUT TWO THINGS THAT YOU'VE SAID SO FAR.
UM, SO FIRST, UM, IT SOUNDS, THE WAY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE SAYING THAT GEO IS MORE INTENSE, BUT I MEAN, GEO IS MORE, UH, UH, IS LESS INTENSE, BUT JAIL IS MORE INTENSE THAN LIMITED OFFICE OR NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT, YES.
I'M TALKING ABOUT IT THIS MORNING.
JUST MAKING SURE THAT LIMITED OFFICE AND NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE GIVE US LOWER INTENSITY OPTIONS OF A COMMERCIAL DEPARTMENT, GENERAL OFFICE.
SO WE HAVE TWO OTHER ZONING CATEGORIES THAT WOULD MEET THE BILL OF THE COUNCIL DIRECTIVE OF COMMERCIAL AND GIVE US OFFICE AND WOULD FULFILL THE NEEDS OF FOSTER VILLAGE, THE NONPROFIT WITH AN OFFICE CATEGORY.
THAT IS A CORRECT STATEMENT, HOWEVER, STAFF DOES NOT TYPICALLY RECOMMEND THOSE.
AND ROAD SECOND POINT WAS, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT ALONG DESSA ROAD, BUT WE JUST SAW THE SITE PLAN, AND THIS IS NOT ALL DIRECTLY UP ON THE CORRIDOR.
THIS IS ON MEANDERING, YOU KNOW, ROADWAYS OFF OF THE CORRIDOR.
IT LOOKS LIKE A WHOLE BUNCH OF
I MEAN, IT, IT LOOKS LIKE A WHOLE BUNCH OF DUPLEXES ALMOST THE WAY THAT IT WAS SET UP ON THAT SITE PLAN.
SO THIS IS NOT LIKE, UH, YOU KNOW, A FIVE STORY BI, YOU KNOW, UM, MULTIFAMILY, UH, PROJECT RIGHT ON THE CORRIDOR THAT WOULD SUGGEST THE SIX STORY BUILDING HEIGHT.
THIS IS GONNA BE BACK OFF THE ROAD ACCORDING TO THAT SITE PLAN.
SO I'M, I'M NOT SURE WHY WE NEED TO HAVE SIX STORY POTENTIAL OFFICE BUILDINGS SEVERAL BLOCKS OFF THE ROAD.
WHY, WHY DO WE NEED THAT HEIGHT THERE? UM, SO JUST TO CLARIFY BEFORE I ANSWER THE QUESTION, UH, AS I STATED, THAT SITE PLAN IS PURELY SPECULATIVE IN THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS PROVIDED BY COMMISSIONER GREENBERG, THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A SITE PLAN FOR THIS SITE.
UH, THE SECOND COMMENT WAS WHY, UH, THE INTENSITY IN TERMS OF THE ZONING, IN TERMS OF THE REQUEST, UH MM-HMM
AS, AS I MENTIONED, TYPICALLY WE DO NOT SEE THE LOWER INTENSITY LO OR NNO ON ROADWAYS THAT ARE THIS INTENSE.
THOSE ARE TYPICALLY TUCKED INTO LIKE A NEIGHBORHOOD, LIKE A CORNER STORE, YOU KNOW, A COFFEE SHOP, DRY CLEANERS, THINGS THAT YOU MIGHT WALK TO IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS NOT EXACTLY A WALKABLE AREA LIKE THAT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SIX LANE MAJOR ROADWAY.
AND SO STAFF'S, UH, ZONING PRINCIPLES STATE TO PUT MORE INTENSE ZONING ALONG MAJOR CORRIDORS AND ROADWAYS.
THAT'S KIND OF HOW, UH, STAFF, YOU KNOW, WHERE STAFF LOCATES THOSE USES WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.
AND SO WHEN THE REQUEST HAS COME IN TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY AND TO COME UP WITH, UH, A REQUEST, UH, THAT MEETS THE USES AND NEEDS OF THIS ORGANIZATION, STAFF LANDED ON GEO AFTER TAKING CONSIDERATION THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AND RECENT REZONINGS WITHIN THE AREA.
THIS IS WHAT THIS STREET LOOKS LIKE AT THE SECTION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
OKAY? THIS IS BASICALLY A BRIDGE.
THIS BUILDING IS NOT GONNA BE RIGHT UP ON THIS ROAD THE WAY CONDOS WOULD BE ON THE ROAD ON LAMAR BOULEVARD.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET A SIX STORY BUILDING RIGHT UP HERE.
THIS IS IN A GREEN SPACE NEXT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS, THIS IS NOT, THIS IS NOT SOUTH LAMAR, THIS IS NOT SOUTH CONGRESS IN THIS SECTION OF DESA.
IT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY THERE ISN'T TRANSIT IN THIS AREA.
THERE IS SERVICE UP HERE, THERE IS TRANSIT SERVICE WAY DOWN HERE, BUT THIS IS A BRIDGE AREA OVER A GREEN SPACE.
SO I, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT THERE ARE LESS
[01:40:01]
INTENSE OFFICE OPPORTUNITIES, AND THIS IS NOT GONNA BE FRONTAGE OFFICE ON THE STREET FOR THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS.UM, COMMISSIONER DEPORT TWO, ARE WE, UH, TO LONNIE'S POINT, ARE WE JUST ABLE TO RECOMMEND A LOWER INTENSITY COMMERCIAL? I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE TRYING TO CLARIFY WHY GO IS IS BEING RECOMMENDED.
CAN WE AS A, AS, AS A BOARD, CAN WE JUST RECOMMEND A LOWER INTENSITY? YES, YOU CAN RECOMMEND WHATEVER Y'ALL WOULD LIKE.
I KNOW JUST ANYTHING GO OR LOWER, WE CAN'T GO.
I, I MEAN, AGAIN, TO LONNIE'S POINT, WE SHOULD RECOMMEND THE LOWEST POSSIBLE INTENSITY THAT WILL SUIT THE BILL FOR, FOR WHAT IS REQUIRED.
IT'S WHAT
MEANING NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE, NOT NO
THAT'S NO, THERE'S NO LO AND GO AND THEY ALL ALLOW OFFICE DAYCARE SERVICES.
AND THAT WAS MY, THAT WAS THE POINT OF THE QUESTIONING, WAS TO TRY TO IDENTIFY ARE THERE SPECIFIC USES THAT CAUSED YOU TO KEEP PUSHING IT UPWARD? BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME THERE WERE NONE THERE.
THOSE WERE NOT THE REASONS THAT CAME FROM THE STAFF.
AND IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE IF WE WANT TO MAKE THE EFFORT TO PROTECT THIS AREA AND, AND, AND THE VALUE THAT THIS AREA PROVIDES, ESPECIALLY IN THE LOCATION THAT IT IS, WE SHOULD DEFINITELY RECOMMEND A MUCH LOWER INTENSITY THAT AND, UM, THE APPLICANT, UH, WAIT, SORRY.
UM, I'M, I'M UNSURE IF THE, THE OWNER, UH, THE FOSTER HOME IS THE APPLICANT.
UM, BUT IF THEY DON'T REQUIRE ANY, ANY ANYMORE, THEN I, I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULD PUSH FOR THAT.
I MEAN, IF THEY NEED A, IF THEY NEED A THREE STORY STRUCTURE, I COULD SEE GOING IN THE MIDDLE, YOU KNOW, TO LIMIT IT OFFICE.
BUT IF THEY DON'T, IF THEY JUST NEED THE EXISTING STRUCTURES, THEN THEY JUST NEED AN OFFICE DESIGNATION.
SO WHY NOT JUST GIVE THEM AND NO FOR NOW? AND IF THEY NEED TO UP ZONE LATER, YOU KNOW, UP ZONE LATER.
UH, I THINK IT HAS ADVANTAGES IN THAT IT WON'T UNDULY INCREASE THE PROPERTY VALUE, WHICH COULD BE A BURDEN ON THE NONPROFIT, UM, BY KEEPING THE ZONING LOWER.
SO, SO, SO THIS APPLICATION IS, IS BY THE CITY, UH, AT THE URGING OF CITY COUNCIL, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
UH, IS IT, IS IT SAFE TO ASSUME THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME CITY COUNCIL HAS, HAS REQUIRED STAFF TO, TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO REZONED PROPERTY? NO.
NOT FREQUENTLY, BUT IT DOES HAPPEN.
AND, UH, IN THE PAST, HAS COUNSEL PUT RESTRICTIONS, LIKE HAS COUNSEL SAID, HEY, STAFF REZONED THIS PROPERTY, AND HAVE THEY PLACED RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT THEY DON'T WANT? THAT ZONING TO BE A RESOLUTION COULD SPECIFY A SPECIFIC ZONING THAT THEY WANT TO SEEK REZONING TO, BUT IN THIS CASE, THIS RESOLUTION WAS WRITTEN A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBLY TO WHERE IT DID NOT SPECIFY TO YIELD FLEXIBLY TO YIELD TO STAFF'S DISCRETION.
UH, TO, TO ANY DISCRETION THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
AND IS IT SAFE TO ASSUME THAT IF COUNSEL WANTED TO, UM, PROHIBIT A SPECIFIC TYPE OF ZONING FOR THIS TRACK, THEY COULD HAVE ALSO INCLUDED THAT IN THE RESOLUTION? IS THAT TRUE? CERTAINLY, YES.
IS THERE A MOTION OR MORE DISCUSSION? UH, I, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COULD I ASK ONE MORE QUESTION BEFORE WE DO THAT? FINE.
BUT WE'RE ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS.
WE COULD HAVE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING OKAY.
AFTER THE TESTIMONY, BUT SURE.
WELL JUST, I JUST, UM, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE SOME SUPPORT FOR, UH, AN AN NO ZONING, AND I'M CURIOUS HOW FOSTER VILLAGE WOULD FEEL ABOUT THAT ZONING DESIGNATION.
UM, IF, IF I CAN BE, IF I CAN BE FRANK, UH, YOU JUST WANT TO USE THE PROPERTY
AND WE'RE NOT GETTING ANY USE OUT OF IT.
I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE A MOTION, UH, I'M GONNA TAKE THE MINORITY OPINION, BUT I WILL MOVE TO PASS, UH, TO ADOPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
[01:45:02]
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT? I'LL SECOND THAT.ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? UH, SO I, I'LL BE VERY BRIEF.
I, I, I, I FULLY SYMPATHIZE WITH MANY OF THE POINTS MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE ARTICULATED SPECIFICALLY.
LIKE, WELL GUYS, THEY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ZONING NEARBY AND SO FORTH.
I, I GET THOSE THINGS, BUT, UH, I'M GONNA BE VOTING FOR THIS FOR, FOR REALLY ONE PARTICULAR REASON.
UH, SOME FOLKS WENT INTO THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS OFFICE.
SHE, SHE SPONSORED A RESOLUTION.
THAT RESOLUTION WAS CO-SPONSORED BY THREE OR FOUR OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS IN THE PAST UNANIMOUSLY, UH, WHICH IS TO ME AN INDICATION THAT COUNCIL WANTS THIS.
UH, COUNCIL SAID, HEY, YOU CAN DO A BASE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, WHICH INCLUDES GEO OR SOMETHING ELSE.
UH, WHICH TELLS ME, YOU KNOW, STAFF, SORRY, COUNCIL YIELDED TO STAFF'S DISCRETION.
AND ON TOP OF THAT, UH, COUNCIL WOULD'VE BEEN WELL WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS TO SAY, HEY, WE DON'T WANT THIS PARTICULAR ZONING ON THIS TRACT.
UH, NO, THEY HAVEN'T, THAT THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT, THEY HAVEN'T SEEN THIS CASE YET.
AND THEN IT GOES TO COUNSEL, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND, BUT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, RELU, EXCUSE ME, STAFF COUNSEL'S RESOLUTION COULD'VE DIRECTED COUNCIL, SORRY, COUNCIL'S RESOLUTION COULD HAVE DIRECTED CITY STAFF TO LOOK AT ZONING OPTIONS FOR THIS TRACK THAT DID NOT INCLUDE X, Y, Z.
AND THERE, THERE WERE NO RESTRICTIONS HERE.
AND THIS IS, THIS IS, THIS IS THE ZONING THAT, UH, CITY STAFF HAS, HAS DONE A GOOD JOB LAYING OUT.
UH, I THINK THEY DID A FAIRLY DECENT JOB ANSWERING QUESTIONS AS TO WHY OTHER COMMERCIAL ZONING ZONING OPTIONS WERE NOT CHOSEN.
AND, UM, I MEAN, QUITE SIMPLY, I'LL, I'LL JUST BE VOTING IN FAVOR, UM, BASED ON HOW COUNCIL VOTED THAT, THAT'S FOR ME, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO.
AND THIS, THIS, THIS TRACKS WITH WHAT, WHAT'S IN THE RESOLUTION.
SO, UM, ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION, OR SHOULD WE JUST VOTE? OKAY.
ALL ALL IN FAVOR OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
ALL OPPOSED TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION SIX.
ANY ABSTAINING ONE? SO THAT IS TWO IN FAVOR.
SIX AGAINST AND ONE ABSTAINING.
IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION THAT SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO STERN? I MOVE.
I MOVE THAT WE, UM, THAT WE RECOMMEND NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE ZONING FOR THIS PARTICULAR TRACT.
I SECOND, I'D LIKE TO SECOND AS WELL.
SORRY,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION OR I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
UM, ANY OTHER, FELIX? I JUST WANNA SAY YOU'RE MY FAVORITE.
WE JUST NEED TO SECURE OFFICE USE FOR THIS ORGANIZATION.
AND AGAIN, IT IS VERY HARD TO ACCESS THIS SPACE WITH TRANSIT, GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENT THAT'S THERE.
SO BUILDING OVERLY INTENSE IS PROBABLY NOT IN ANYONE'S BEST INTEREST RIGHT NOW.
AND THEN, AS AN ASIDE, I'M SORRY FOR BEING SO CRABBY TODAY FOR STAFF, SO I APOLOGIZE IF I CAME OFF AS OVERLY TERSE.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UM, I'LL BE VOTING.
NO, IT, TO ME IT SEEMED LIKE STAFF WAS, WAS OPPOSED TO NO.
AND, AND THEY GAVE A LIST OF REASONS.
SO I'LL JUST BE VOTING NO BASED ON KIND OF STAFF'S OPPOSITION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE ZONING ON THIS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.
AREN'T THERE 10 OF US HERE? I'M REALLY HAVING A TROUBLE COUNTING.
I'LL, I'LL BE VOTING NOW AND ONE OPPOSED.
UM, SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE.
THANK YOU FOSTER VILLAGE FOR EVERYTHING YOU DO.
[01:50:01]
YEAH, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.AND THE WILLINGNESS TO, YOU KNOW, USE A, I THINK IT'LL BENEFIT YOU BECAUSE THEY SHOULDN'T CHARGE YOU AS MUCH.
WE HAVE WORKING GROUP COMMITTEE UPDATES, CODES AND ORDINANCES.
JOINT COMMITTEE WE HAVEN'T MET.
WE HAVEN'T MET SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE MET YESTERDAY WAS NOT YESTERDAY SEEMS LIKE ONLY YESTERDAY.
AND WE HEARD THE RECOMMENDATION FOR, WHAT WAS IT CALLED? THE A T IT WAS A CT CORE TRANSIT SOMETHING, UM, WHICH WAS THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN FOR DOWNTOWN.
AND THIS IS MAKING ITS WAY TO DIFFERENT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
SO, AND OF COURSE NOT OF COURSE, BUT IN THIS CASE I'M NOT WILD TO HEAR IT AGAIN.
BUT, UM, IF THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION WISHES TO HEAR THIS, WE COULD PERHAPS SOME, MAYBE PEOPLE WANT THIS AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AND I'M SURE THEY'D BE HAPPY TO COME TO THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL.
UM, SO THAT'S THAT FOR THE WORKING GROUP COMMITTEE UPDATES FUTURE.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS THAT PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR? WERE WE GOING TO GET A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS? UM, WE DID BRING THAT UP MAYBE AT THE MEETING IN JANUARY.HAS THERE BEEN ANY MOVEMENT ON THAT? MAYBE WE WANT TO REMIND THEM THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN HEARING ABOUT THE CHANGES TO THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
I THINK WE NEED AN UPDATE ON OUR RULES.
UM, YEAH, I KNOW WE'RE WAITING FOR CITY LEGAL, BUT THEY WERE COMPLAINING THAT THE RULES THAT WERE DRAFTED VIOLATE OPEN MEETINGS.
BUT IF THE, THE, IN THAT CASE, AND I, I DID UNDERSTAND WHY THE CURRENT RULES ALSO VIOLATE OPEN MEETINGS.
AND SO I THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT THOSE NEW RULES BE, UM, EDITED AND ADOPTED.
AND WHAT IF WE DON'T, WHAT IF WE JUST EDIT THEM AND ADOPT THEM AGAIN WITHOUT WAITING FOR CITY LEGAL? WITH OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE, THE OPEN MEETINGS REQUIREMENTS, I BELIEVE Y'ALL WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE ANOTHER DRAFT FOR REVIEW.
UM, IT WOULD STILL NEED TO GET REVIEWED BY OUR LAW DEPARTMENT, BUT I DON'T SEE WHY Y'ALL WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
THEN I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM FOR OUR NEXT MEETING.
WELL, WE JUST NEED TWO SPONSORS.
I, I THINK I HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE WE, THE CURRENT DRAFT VIOLATES OPEN MEETINGS AND THAT WE COULD FIX IT AND EXPEDITE, HOPEFULLY THE PROCESS.
ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? WELL, I, I THINK RYAN MENTIONED AN UPDATE ON THE RESPONSIBILITY CHANGES FOR PLANNING, UH, FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COMMISSION.
STAFF HAS TO DO THAT BECAUSE, SO WE CAN'T PICK A DATE FOR THAT.
HI, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
ERIC THOMAS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UH, SORRY, I WAS IN A CONVERSATION IN THE BACK AND I KINDA MISSED WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR A BRIEFING ON ESSENTIALLY FUTURE ITEMS THAT ARE COMING TO THE COMMISSION, IS THAT CORRECT? NO, IT'S BEEN, THERE'S BEEN A PROPOSAL TO CHANGE THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LAND USE COMMISSIONS.
UM, WE, IS THAT RIGHT WHAT YOU WERE? WELL, YEAH.
WE, AND SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR A BRIEFING ON THE STATUS OF THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
UH, I DON'T THINK WE CAN COMMIT TO A DATE NIGHT TO NIGHT, UH, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK AT FUTURE AGENDAS FOR THE NEXT, THE, THE COMING MONTHS AND, AND PICK A DATE, UM, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
[01:55:01]
GOOD.OKAY, SO NEXT MEETING WE'D LIKE TO HAVE THE, UM, RULES AGAIN.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM? OKAY, THEN I THINK WE CAN ADJOURN AT WHATEVER TIME IT IS.