[00:00:01]
EVENING, EVERYONE HAVING A QUORUM.
NOW WITH THIS, I CALL OUR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO THE ORDER AT 6:05 PM AND FIRST WE ARE GOING TO TAKE ROLL CALL.
I'LL JUST GO IN ORDER AS I SEE IT ON THE AGENDA.
VICE CHAIR CZAR IS ABSENT THIS EVENING.
COMMISSIONER BREIRA RAMIREZ IS IN TRANSIT.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON IS NOT HERE YET.
AND COMMISSIONER COX, COMMISSIONER PHILLIPS AND COMMISSIONER HAYNES, UM, ARE NOT HERE THIS EVENING.
UM, CHAIR COHEN WILL BE JOINING US A LITTLE BIT LATER AND UM, THAT IS OUR ATTENDANCE MEETING.
ALRIGHT, SO AS USUAL, OUR MEETING IS HYBRID THIS EVENING, ALLOWING FOR A VIRTUAL QUORUM, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ARE JUST AT QUORUM, SO PLEASE REMAIN ON CAMERA AND OTHERWISE WE HAVE TO GO, UH, FOR A BREAK.
SO YOU CAN PRESENT FROM THE CHAMBERS, OUR SPEAKERS OR PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY AND OUR VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS.
JUST REMEMBER TO HAVE YOUR RED, YELLOW, AND GREEN AND ALSO SEND YOUR SIGN IN SHEET.
UM, IF I MISS YOU AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, JUST COME OFF MUTE AND LET ME KNOW.
TO OUR SPEAKERS, IF YOU'RE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION TAKING UP YOUR ITEM AND ALSO NOTING THAT SPEAKERS CAN DONATE TIME, BOTH THE SPEAKER DONATING TIME AND THE SPEAKER RECIPIENT MUST BE PRESENT IN PERSON WHEN THE ITEM IS CONSIDERED.
AND I'LL GO BACK TO COMMISSIONER BARRE RAMIREZ.
MS. GARCIA, DO WE HAVE ANYONE TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? NO.
[Consent Agenda]
MINUTES.SO DOES ANYBODY HAVE, UM, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS ON THE MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 25TH MEETING? HEARING NONE THOSE, UM, THE MEETING MINUTES AS POSTED IN THE BACKUP ARE GOING TO BE ADDED TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC HEARINGS.
OUR FIRST ACTIVITY TODAY IS TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ITEMS THAT ARE CONSENT, APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, POSTPONEMENTS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS, OR NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS. COMMISSIONER WOODS IS GOING TO HELP ME THIS EVENING AND READ THE PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND, AND IDENTIFY THOSE THAT ARE CODE, CONSENT, POSTPONEMENT AND NON-DISCUSSION.
AND AS A REMINDER, COMMISSIONERS, YOU'LL ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST CONSENT ITEMS TO BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 0 8 0.0 2 2 9 6 7 MAINOR ROAD REVISION DISTRICTS ONE AND NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
ITEM THREE IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 107 MAINOR ROAD REVISION REZONE DISTRICTS ONE AND NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
ITEM FOUR IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 1 6 7 AIRPORT AND KIG DB 90 TRACTS REZONING PARCEL A, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.
ITEM FIVE IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 0 1 0 AIRPORT AND KIG DB 90 TRACKS REZONING PARCEL B.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT UNTIL MARCH 25TH.
ITEM SIX IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 0 1 4 AIRPORT AND KIG DB 90 TRACTS REZONING PARCEL C THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT UNTIL MARCH 25TH.
ITEM SEVEN IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 0 1 12 AIRPORT AND KANIG DB 90 TRACTS REZONING PARCEL D THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT UNTIL MARCH 25TH.
ITEM EIGHT IS A REZONING C 14 DASH SEVEN NINE DASH 0 1 9 RCT 7 0 1 AND 7 0 3 EAST 55TH STREET PUBLIC RC TERMINATION PARCEL D THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT UNTIL MARCH 25TH.
ITEM NINE IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 15 AIRPORT AND KIG DB 90 TRACKS REZONING PARCEL E THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT UNTIL MARCH 25TH.
ITEM 10 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 0 1 7 AIRPORT AND KIG DB 90 TRACTS REZONING PARCEL F THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT UNTIL MARCH 25TH.
ITEM 11 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 0 1 16 AIRPORT AND KIG DB 90 TRACT REZONING PARCEL G THIS ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT UNTIL MARCH 25TH.
ITEM 12 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 21 GOODNIGHT COWBOY DISTRICT ONE.
[00:05:01]
ITEM 13 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 1 24 1 0 9 SOUTH LAMAR BOULEVARD, DISTRICT NINE.ITEM 14 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 180 4 4 9 3 0 SOUTH CONGRESS DISTRICT THREE.
ITEM 15 IS A RIGHT OF WAY VACATION 2024 DASH 0 20 24 DASH 3 0 2 LM 6 4 0 0 AND HALF BURLESON ROAD DISTRICT TWO.
ITEM 16 IS AN APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DENIAL OF WAIVERS OF DESIGN GUIDELINES.
SP 2022 DASH 0 2 8 C SH AVALON POINT.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WOODS.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN FROM ITEMS ON THE AGENDA? OKAY.
UM, MS. GARCIA, DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP ON SOME OF THE CONSENT ITEMS? YES.
OUR FIRST SPEAKER FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA IS ON ITEM FOUR, DAVID HARTMAN.
DAVID, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES
OUR NEXT SPEAKER ON THE CONSENT AGENDA IS FOR ITEM 12, ADAM RIOS.
ADAM, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
YES, IF YOU COULD, YOU, YOU CAN EITHER DO THE DESK OR THE D IS HERE.
UM, I WANTED TO WAIVE MY CONSENT TO SPEAK
OUR NEXT SPEAKER ON THE CONSENT AGENDA IS LEAH BOJO FOR ITEM 13.
LEAH, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
SHE'S WAIVING HER RIGHT TO SPEAK.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ON ITEM 14, DREW RAFAEL DREW, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER ON ITEM 14 IS OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, MICHAEL GRAFF.
MICHAEL, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
HI, UM, I'M MICHAEL GRAFF AND I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE FAIRVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, THE FAIRVIEW NE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION INCLUDES AREA BETWEEN SOUTH CONGRESS, SOUTH FIRST FROM WILLIAMS CREEK SNE.
UH, THIS INCLUDES ALL HOMES IN FAIRVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL AS THE BIRDS BLUEBIRD, RED BIRD, ET CETERA.
UH, THE, THE FAIRBURN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS REGISTERED THE CITY OF AUSTIN ONLY A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.
UH, AS SUCH, THE PROPOSED REZONING CASE, UH, FOUR NINE TEN FOUR NINE THIRTY OF SOUTH CONGRESS PREDATES THE CREATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN FORMED AS A, AS A COMMITMENT TO FOSTERING COMMUNITY, UM, PART OF WHICH INCLUDES PROVIDING A UNIFIED VOICE FOR COLLABORATION AND INVOLVEMENT IN THE CITY'S GROWTH ALONG THE TRANSIT CORRIDORS THAT FLANK OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UH, IN MIDDLE OF WILLIAMS WILLIAMSON CREEK, THE, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, OR EXCUSE ME, THE OFFA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT AT 49 10 AND 49 30 SOUTH CONGRESS AS THE DEVELOPMENT SLOPES DIRECTLY, UH, DOWN TO THE CREEK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BELOW, UH, INCLUDING A SINGLE HOME IN, IN MUCH OF THE GREEN SPACE ALONG HEARTWOOD, UH, WHICH IS RIGHT THERE.
UH, AS OF THIS EVENING, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS, HAS YET, UH, WE HAVEN'T HAD THE PLEASURE TO ENGAGE, UH, THE CONVERSATION OF THE OWNER'S AGENT, THE JENNER GROUP.
UM, HOWEVER, THERE HAS BEEN COMMUNICATION TO ORGANIZE A MEETING AT AN UP AND COMING DATE.
UH, THE LAST CHECKED WAS TBD, UH, FOLLOWING THE PLANNING COMMISSION THIS EVENING.
UM, AS SUCH, F AND A WOULD LIKE TO CONFIRM THAT THE OWNER AND THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATION, UH, INTENDS TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRIOR TO GOING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATE HAS SOME ITEMS THAT IT WOULD LIKE THE COMMISSION AND THE OWNER TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION REGARDING THE SITE'S DEVELOPMENT AS ALLOWED BY THE PROPOSED REZONING.
THESE ITEMS INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO THE PARTICIPATION IN AND SUPPORT OF BEAUTIFICATION, NATURAL PRESERVATION AND PUBLIC SAFETY ALONG WILLIAMSON CREEK, AS WELL AS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED CITY OF AUSTIN WILLIAMSON CREEK GREENWAY VISION, THE PARTICIPATION IN AND THE SUPPORT OF THE ONGOING MIDDLE WILLIAMSON CREEK FLOOD RI FLOOD RISK REDUCTION PROJECT AND EFFORT TO REDUCE FLOOD RISK IN THE AREA BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT.
THE PARTICIPATION IN SUPPORT OF CONSTRUCTION, BEST PRACTICES THAT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS, UM, AND THE CLEAN AND WELL CHAIN MAIN CONSTRUCTION SITE.
THE IMPLEMENTATION AND CONSIDERATION OF LONG-TERM IMPACTS ON THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE, UH, OF ITS EXISTING NEIGHBORS, BOTH HUMAN AND WILDLIFE
WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT ASPECTS OF THE ABOVE REQUEST MAY BE ADDRESSED IN THE BACKUP DOCUMENTS PROVIDED IN THIS MEETING THIS EVENING.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATE LOOKS FORWARD TO FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE DETAILS SURROUNDING THE DEVELOPMENT
[00:10:01]
AND A COLLABORATIVE GOOD FAITH RELATIONSHIP WITH THE OWNER AND THEUM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ALSO, UH, WE'D LIKE TO GO AS FAR AS TO INVITE THEM TO A MEETING OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ON MARCH 29TH AT THE HARTWOOD COMMUNITY GARDEN FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SOCIAL.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM IS MARIO PU MARIO WILL BE RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM JEAN ADAMS. MARIO, YOU'LL HAVE, OH, IS JEAN.
JEAN, ARE YOU PRESENT? I'M HERE.
MARIO, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
MARIO CANTU, CHAIR OF THE SOUTH CONGRESS CONTACT TEAM.
SO WE RECEIVED SOME, UH, INFORMATION FROM FAIRVIEW, UH, AND JUST LITTLE OVER A WEEK AGO.
AND WE JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE, UH, ANY CONCERNS, ANY ISSUES THAT THEY HAVE, UH, WE HAVE ENGAGED WITH THEM AND WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO ENGAGE MORE.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE A MEETING WITH THEM AS WELL AS WITH THE APPLICANT TOGETHER TO SOLVE ANY ISSUES AND OR CONCERNS THAT THEY MAY HAVE.
UH, BUT I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT, UH, A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS GONNA BE REALLY CLOSE OVER TO THE WILLIAMSON CREEK WATERSHED AREA AND LIKE, UH, THE GENTLEMAN THAT JUST MENTIONED THAT WILDLIFE IS AN ISSUE, LIGHTING IS AN ISSUE, AND THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT.
UM, I WOULD LIKE FOR COMMISSIONERS TO, TO AT SOME POINT TAKE A LOOK AT OUR DARK SKIES, UM, LIGHTING AND, AND SEE HOW OTHER CITIES ARE DOING THAT.
I, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IN B CAVES THEY PRETTY HA THEY HAVE A REALLY NICE AGGRESSIVE, UH, DARK SKIES WHERE THEY CAN COME IN THERE AND REALLY DO SOME REALLY NICE THINGS WITH A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE UP AGAINST THE WA UH, WATERSHED, UM, YOU KNOW, THE LIGHTING MAY BE, UH, UH, MAY CAUSE A LOT OF POLLUTION TO THE WILDLIFE AND TO, UH, THE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE LIVING IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
SO I, I ASKED TO LOOK AT THAT AND, UH, WE'RE GONNA BE WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT AS WELL.
WE'RE IN CONTACT WITH THE APPLICANT AND, UH, I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH EVERYBODY AND BE ABLE, UH, TO LET Y'ALL KNOW HOW THINGS GO.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE SPEAKING ON ITEM 15, MICAH KING.
MICAH, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
MICAH KING, UH, WITH WINSTED ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, TECHNICALLY THE APPLICANT, UM, IS TRAVIS COUNTY, UH, BECAUSE THEY OWN THIS, UH, ATTRACTIVE LAND THAT WE'RE SEEKING THE VACATION OF.
AND, UH, I KNOW THIS IS ON THE CONSENT APPROVAL AGENDA FOR, UH, RECOMMENDATION THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE VACATION.
UH, MY ONLY REQUEST TODAY WOULD BE THAT, UM, FOR CONTEXT, UH, WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS WITH THE CITY STAFF, UM, BECAUSE THE PROPERTY'S OWNED BY ANOTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE AND WAS NEVER DEDICATED BY A PLAT OR EASEMENT, UH, OR STREET DEED, UH, THERE WAS NO PROCESS IN PLACE, UH, PER STAFF AT THAT TIME, UM, TO GO THROUGH THE FORMAL CITY OF AUSTIN RIGHT OF WAY VACATION PROCESS, WHICH REQUIRES PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL AND PAYMENT OF FAIR MARKET VALUE AFTER WE WENT UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE LAND FOR THE ADJACENT OWNERS, UH, THEN THE COUNTY CHANGED OR THE CITY CHANGED ITS POSITION AND SAID, NO, YOU ACTUALLY ALSO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CITY PROCESS AND PAY US FAIR MARKET VALUE AS WELL.
AND SO MY ONLY REQUEST, UH, FOR THE COMMISSION WOULD BE TO CONSIDER, UH, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE VACATION, UM, WITH, UM, THE ADDITION OF LANGUAGE THAT COUNCIL CONSIDER A WAIVER OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE REQUIREMENT, UH, TO OFFSET THE AMOUNT PAID TO TRAVIS COUNTY FOR THE LAND.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS THAT WISH TO PULL ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR OTHERWISE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? AND FIRST I WANNA RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON FOR JOINING US.
I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THE MINUTES.
I SEE A MOTION BY COMM, UM, COMMISSIONER HANEY, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, UNLESS THEIR OBJECTION IS OBJECTION TO THAT, THAT MOTION PASSES.
ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE, THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ALRIGHT, SO FIRST WE WILL MOVE
[Items 2 & 3]
ON TO OUR PUBLIC HEARING.FIRST PUBLIC HEARING OF THE EVENING, UM, ITEMS NUMBER TWO AND NUMBER THREE, THIS IS THE MAINOR ROAD REVISION.
UM, WE WILL FIRST HEAR FROM MS. MEREDITH FROM THE CITY
[00:15:03]
RE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT.ITEM NUMBER TWO IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 24 0 0 0 8 0.0 2 2 9 6 7 MAINOR ROAD REVISION IN DISTRICTS ONE AND NINE.
PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 29 6 7 MAINOR ROAD WITHIN THE ROSEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA AND THE MLK TODD STATION AREA PLAN, THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM SPECIFIC REGULATING DISTRICT TO MIXED USE LAND, LAND USE, AND TO REMOVE THE SPECIFIED PROPERTY FROM ME FROM THE MLK TODD STATIONARY PLAN AND TO CHANGE THE BOUNDARY OF THE ML CO MLK TODD STATIONARY PLAN.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE CITY'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER THREE IS CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 2024 DASH 0 1 0 7.
IT IS A REZONING REQUEST OF 29 67 MAINOR ROAD FROM T-O-D-N-P TO CS DB 90 NP, EXCUSE ME.
STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANTING CS DB 90 NP REMOVAL OF THE TRACK FROM THE MLK JUNIOR BOULEVARD TOD STATIONARY PLAN AND THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A WAIVER OF THE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT OF DB 90.
THE SUBJECT TRACK IS APPROXIMATELY 0.68 ACRES, UM, AND CURRENTLY HAS A ONE STORY, UH, GARAGE AUTO REPAIR FACILITY CONSTRUCTED IN APPROXIMATELY 1984.
UH, THIS LOCATION IS LOCATED WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF TWO IMAGINE AUSTIN CENTERS AND ALONG TWO IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDORS.
I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
CHAIRMAN WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
SHE'LL BE RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM RON THROWER CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
VICTORIA HAD TO STEP OUT, UH, FOR JUST A QUICK SECOND.
IF YOU WILL INDULGE THIS FOR UH, JUST A MINUTE.
ALRIGHT, LET'S, UM, TAKE A REALLY QUICK BREAK.
UM, WE'LL COME BACK AT 6 25 ONCE WE SEE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON WARMUP CAMERA ALMOST THERE.
OKAY, SO WE WILL HEAR FROM MS. HASI FOR A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE PROJECT AND MS. HASI WILL BE RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM RON THROWER WHO IS PRESENT IN CHAMBERS.
SO MS. HASSI, YOU WILL HAVE EIGHT MINUTES.
APOLOGIES FOR HAVING TO STEP OUT FOR A SECOND.
THANKS FOR THANKS FOR, UM, OBLIGING, UM, VICTORIA HASSI WITH THROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
UM, THE SITE IS 0.68 ACRES LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MAINOR ROAD IN AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
THIS MAP SHOWS CONTEXT TO ELEMENTS OF THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS THE CAPITAL METRO TRANSIT SERVICE.
UM, MAINOR ROAD IS A, AN IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR AS WELL AS A FUTURE CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR.
AND THERE'S MULTIPLE CAPITAL METRO BUS STOPS WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF THE SITE.
FURTHER, THE SITE IS LESS THAN A HALF MILE SHOWN BY THE DASHED GREEN LINE, UM, TO THE MLK RAIL STATION.
THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE AREA.
SO THE TOD BOUNDARY IS A BIT FRAGMENTED FROM THE INTERSECTIONS AT MLK AND MAINOR.
HOWEVER, IT MAKES ABSOLUTE SENSE THAT THESE MAJOR INTERSECTIONS TO HAVE TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DENSITY AS WAS INTENDED BY THE CREATION OF THE TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICTS, ESPECIALLY WITH QUICK ACCESS AND EASY ACCESS TO, UH, TRANSIT TODAY.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE TOD PLAN IS OUTDATED.
AUSTIN HAS CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE PAST 16 YEARS AND WE FIND OURSELVES AS A CITY IN A DIFFERENT PLACE.
THE TOOLS CREATED BY THE TOD DOCUMENT TO ENCOURAGE DENSITY ARE NO LONGER CALIBRATED TO BRING PROJECTS FORWARD AND THAT IS WHY WE ARE ASKING FOR THE DB 90 OVERLAY TODAY.
YOU HAVE SEEN MANY REQUESTS FOR THE DB 90 OVERLAY AND IT'S BECAUSE IT IS CALIBRATED TO TODAY'S MARKET CONDITIONS AND ABLE TO BRING PROJECTS FORWARD.
SO TALKING ABOUT FLOODING IN THE AREA, THERE IS SOME FLOODING IN THIS AREA.
THE, UM, THE LINE THAT YOU SEE, THE BLUE LINE THAT FOLLOWS THE BOUNDARY OF THE TOD DISTRICT IS BOGGY CREEK.
THERE IS A DRAINAGE CHANNEL THAT FEEDS INTO BOGGY CREEK THAT RUNS ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY.
MUCH OF THIS AREA WAS DEVELOPED PRIOR TO THE CITY'S ADOPTION OF THE CURRENT WATERSHED
[00:20:01]
REGULATIONS AND THEREFORE THERE ISN'T ENOUGH AND SUFFICIENT INFRASTRUCTURE TO HANDLE FLOODING ISSUES.SO THERE ARE A LOT OF FLOODING ISSUES AND I'M SURE YOU'LL HEAR ABOUT SOME OF THOSE.
BUT, UM, THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, WE LOOKED AT DRAINAGE PATTERNS AS WELL AS TOPOGRAPHY AND FOUND THAT A MAJORITY OF THE WATER FLOW THAT FLOWS THROUGH THE CHANNEL TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY COMING FROM EAST OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD AND, AND THEN FLOWS INTO BOGGY CREEK.
SO THE SITE IS ENCUMBERED WITH A 30 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE AND THE FLOODPLAIN IS CONTAINED COMPLETELY WITHIN THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
NOTHING CAN BE BUILT IN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND IT CAUSES FOR A GREATER BUFFER DISTANCE OF AT LEAST 55 FEET FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH.
HOWEVER, THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALSO REDUCES THE BUILDABLE LAND AREA.
AND WHEN YOU ADD IN THE 10 FOOT SCREENING BUFFER AS WELL AS THE AREA FOR STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ON SITE, THIS MAKES ADDITIONAL HEIGHT NECESSARY TO BRING A PROJECT FORWARD HERE UNDER THE M-L-K-T-O-D PLAN, THERE'S A MAXIMUM OF 30 DWELLING UNITS THAT ARE POSSIBLE FOR THIS PROPERTY.
AND WITH PARTICIPATION IN THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, HEIGHT IS CAPPED AT 60 FEET, WHICH IS ALSO WHAT UH, THE BASE DISTRICT ZONING CS ALLOWS WITHOUT THE TOD, THIS COUPLED WITH MARKET CONDITIONS PROHIBIT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT THE TOD ENVISIONED FOR THIS SITE.
WITHOUT A REZONING, THIS PROPERTY WILL DEVELOP WITH MUCH, MUCH OF WHAT EXISTS TODAY, WHICH IS SINGLE STORY COMMERCIAL WITH SURFACE PARKING AND NO HOUSING UNDER THE DB 90 OVERLAY, THERE CAN BE UP TO 80 DWELLING UNITS WITH STRUCTURED PARKING, UM, ALL WITHIN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWANCE OF 90 FEET OF HEIGHT.
10 OF THOSE UNITS WOULD BE INCOME RESTRICTED AND THE REDEVELOPMENT WOULD BE FORCED TO COMPLY WITH WATERSHED REGULATIONS OF TODAY, WHICH WOULD ONLY IMPROVE MATTERS FOR THIS AREA.
WE ARE ASKING FOR THE WAIVER TO GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL AND THAT IS BECAUSE THE AREA IN YELLOW THAT YOU SEE IS A TRIANGULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
IT'S CONSIDERED RIGHT OF WAY, IT'S AN AREA THAT'S LARGE ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ON ITS OWN.
THE CITY DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT AREA AT THIS TIME AND THERE'S NO FORETHOUGHT FOR ANY PLANNING ANYTIME SOON.
SO NOT KNOWING WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE, THE FLEXIBILITY IS NEEDED SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE FAILING GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE IN THE FUTURE.
SO WITH REGARDS TO SETBACKS, STANDARD DB 90 COMPATIBILITY, WELL ACTUALLY LEMME BACK UP.
THE RED LINE YOU SEE IS THE HEIGHT ALLOWANCE UNDER THE TOD AS WELL AS THE CS ZONING DISTRICT AND THE HOR.
UM, THE STANDARD DB 90 COMPATIBILITY WOULD ALLOW A 90 FOOT BUILDING STARTING AT 25 FEET OF THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE AS SEEN IN THE TOP IMAGE.
AS I MENTIONED, THE SITE HAS A 30 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT CAUSING FOR THE BUILDING TO BE PUSHED FURTHER AWAY FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES BY AT LEAST 55 FEET.
THIS, THESE ARE GREATER SETBACKS THAN THE DBE TODD REQUIREMENTS AND THEY NEARLY MATCH THE REGULAR COMPATIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.
IN THE NEXT 10 MONTHS, THE CITY PLANS TO BREAK GROUND ON CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SECTION OF MAINOR ROAD.
IT WILL INCLUDE SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS AND SIX FOOT SHARED USE PATHS ALONG THIS SIDE OF MAINOR ROAD.
INTERESTINGLY, THE PLANS HERE SHOWN ACTUALLY DON'T FOLLOW THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR, UM, WHETHER IT'S THE TOD REQUIREMENTS OR JUST REGULAR COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS.
IT DOESN'T INCLUDE TREES OR SUFFICIENT SPACE TO HAVE TREES OR STREET FURNITURE.
AND SADLY, THE MONEY THAT'S GOING INTO PUTTING IN THIS INFRASTRUCTURE WILL LIKELY GO TO WASTE BECAUSE WHEN THIS PROPERTY REDEVELOPS, THE CITY WILL REQUIRE THAT THESE SIDEWALK INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO THE M-L-K-T-O-D REQUIRES THAT THIS SITE FOLLOW THE FIGURE ON THE LEFT WITH A FIVE FOOT CLEAR ZONE AND A SEVEN FOOT TREE AND STREET FURNITURE ZONE FOR A TOTAL OF 12 FEET.
WITH THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY TO DB 90, THE SAME SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS WILL APPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME AS THE COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR URBAN ROADWAYS.
HOWEVER, THE LANDOWNER FEELS STRONGLY THAT REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE SHOULD BRING A PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE IMPROVED CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR.
SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS WIDENING BOTH THE PEDESTRIAN ZONE AND THE TREE AND STREET FURNITURE ZONE TO A TOTAL OF 15 FEET.
AND HE'S COMMITTED TO DOING THAT WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE.
I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM THOSE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS DANIELLA VA.
DANIELLA WILL BE RECEIVING TWO MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM ANNA ABRAHAM.
ANNA, ARE YOU PRESENT? YES, DANIELLA, YOU WILL HAVE SEVEN MINUTES.
[00:25:02]
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.I AM AN AVID PUBLIC TRANSIT USER.
I ALSO WORK AT NELSON PARTNERS, AN ARCHITECTURE FIRM RECOGNIZED BY PROJECTS LIKE VERA LOFT, CHALMERS COURTS, AND ROSEWOOD COURTS.
I UNDERSTAND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WHAT IT TAKES TO CREATE RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT.
I AM HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE COMMUNITY DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND WE OPPOSE IN ITS CURRENT FORM.
OUR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SCALE SHOULD DO MORE THAN JUST MEET THE BASIC NEEDS FOR HOUSING.
IT SHOULD GIVE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.
AS IT STANDS, THIS PROJECT DOES NEITHER ONE CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS TRAFFIC FLOW.
THAT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT HAS A SINGLE EGRESS POINT WITHIN MAINOR ROAD, DIRECTLY OPPOSITE OF THE RAPID BUS STATION.
THIS AREA HAS A RAILROAD CROSSING, TWO TRAFFIC LANES AND TWO ADDITIONAL BIKE LANES ALL WITHIN 15 FEET OF ONE OF THE MOST CHAOTIC AND DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS IN AUSTIN.
THIS INTERSECTION IS ALREADY OVERLOADED WITH A SUM OF 17 DIFFERENT LANES AND A CONFUSING TRAFFIC FLOW AS WITNESSED BY THE PEDESTRIAN FATALITY HERE LAST YEAR AND TWO DAYS AGO.
THIS AREA IS DANGEROUS IN DIRE NEED OF SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS.
AS STATED BY THROWER, THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSES UP TO 130 DWELLING UNITS WITH A 1.8 PARKING RATIO TOTALING 234 PARKING SPACES EQUATING TO AT LEAST 468 CAR ENTRIES AND EXITS PER DAY THROUGH A SINGLE POINT OF ACCESS.
THIS WILL SEVERELY WORSEN TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON MAINOR ROAD, ALREADY A HIGH TRAFFIC AREA AND THAT STRAIN TO OUR SURROUNDING STREETS, INCLUDING ROUNDTREE AND MOSS.
AS IT STANDS, OUR STREETS ARE ALREADY USED AS CUT THROUGH ROADS WHERE FRUSTRATED DRIVERS STUCK IN TRAFFIC BLOW THROUGH STOP SIGNS AND SPEED.
THIS ISSUE WILL ESCALATE AND WITH A NUMBER OF YOUNG FAMILIES IN THE AREA, THESE LEADS TO GREATER RISK OF LOCAL PEDESTRIANS IN OUR COMMUNITY.
THE SINGLE ENTRY EXIT POINT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND OVERBURDENED INTERSECTIONS HAS RAISED SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS.
RESPONSE TIMES WILL BE DELAYED JEOPARDIZING THE SAFETY OF RESIDENTS BEFORE MOVING FORWARD WITH REZONING, WE ASK THE COMMISSIONERS TO SUPPORT A FULL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND CONSIDER TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE AREA.
ADDITIONALLY, WE URGE YOU TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO ENSURE ADEQUATE ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE SAFETY OF PEDESTRIANS AND FAMILIES IN THIS VULNERABLE AREA.
WE HAVE ATTEMPTED MULTIPLE TIMES TO ENGAGE WITH THROWER DESIGN TO DISCUSS THESE CONCERNS.
WE WILLINGLY OFFERED TO WORK WITH THROWER IN HELPING FORM AN ALLIANCE TO INCLUDE A PLAN TO REDEVELOP THE RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH WAS IGNORED.
WE SENT FOLLOW UP EMAILS ASKING MORE QUESTIONS, INCLUDING TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING AND WHICH I HAVE PICTURED HERE IN THE COMING SLIDES, WE NO RESPONSE.
THE LACK OF ENGAGEMENT IS DEEPLY CONCERNING, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE PEOPLE MOST AFFECTED BY THIS PROJECT ARE ACTUALLY BEING IGNORED.
WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT MUST BE SMART, IT MUST BE SUSTAINABLE, AND IT MUST BE INCLUSIVE.
REZONING TO DV 90 WITHOUT ADDRESSING STORM WATER, TRAFFIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS IS RECKLESS.
WE REQUIRE LOWER HIGH TRANSITION NEAR HOMES LIKE STEP BACKS AND GREENERY, A COMMITMENT TO STORM WATER AND INFRA INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS.
GROUND COMMERCIAL FLOOR FOR US IS NON-NEGOTIABLE.
IT BENEFITS LOCALS OUR COMMUNITY AND IT ALIGNS WITH THE TOD PRINCIPLES.
THE TOD DOES NOT NEED AN UPDATE, BUT WE'RE WILLING TO NEGOTIATE APPROVING DB 90.
HERE WE'LL ENCOURAGE PIECEMEAL, SONY AND OTHER DEVELOPERS WILL COME FORWARD EXPECTING THE SAME TREATMENT.
AND BEFORE WE KNOW IT, ZONING LAWS WILL BE WATERED DOWN CASE BY CASE, MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO HOLD A CONSISTENT AND PREDICTABLE LAND USE PLAN.
WE RECOGNIZE THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AUSTIN, BUT WE ALSO BELIEVE IT IS POSSIBLE TO MEET THE CITY'S HOUSING GOALS WITHOUT WHILE ADDRESSING SAFETY CONCERNS AND IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT.
INSTEAD OF MOVING FORWARD WITH A PROJECT THAT INCREASES EXISTING PROBLEMS, LET'S URGE THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY TO WORK WITH US TO CREATE A BETTER, MORE SUSTAINABLE SOLUTION.
THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT ONE BUILDING.
THIS DECISION WILL SHAPE FUTURE ZONING THROUGHOUT AUSTIN.
THE COMMISSION MUST ENSURE COMPATIBILITY REFORMS DO NOT BECOME A LOOPHOLE FOR RESPONSIBLE OF ZONING.
IF YOU OPPOSE THIS DEVELOPMENT IN ITS CURRENT FORM, I ASK YOU TO PLEASE STAND, LET THE COMMISSION SEE THAT WE'RE HERE, WE'RE ENGAGED, AND WE EXPECT BETTER FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY SELENA CONNELL.
SELENA, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND
[00:30:01]
PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.MS. CONNELL, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
SHOULD WE MOVE ON TO MS. GRAYSON? ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR ME NOW? YES.
JUST AS A HEADS UP FOR ANYBODY ELSE WHO'S VIRTUAL, IT TOOK ME ABOUT SEVEN TIMES TO TRY TO UNMUTE FOR SOME REASON.
SO ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK VIRTUALLY ON BEHALF OF A RESIDENT THAT IS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED REZONING THAT I DO FULLY OPPOSE THE REZONING DUE TO THE MULTIPLE FACTORS THAT DANIELA JUST MENTIONED, WHICH INCLUDE PARKING CONCERNS, THE LIVELIHOOD OF THE ACTUAL RESIDENTS THAT LIVE HERE, BUT ALSO THE MAJOR CONCERN, WHICH IS THE INABILITY TO COLLABORATE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL ALSO BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY, UH, JENNY GRAYSON.
JENNY, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
JENNY GRAYSON SPEAKING AGAINST ITEMS TWO AND THREE.
THE M-L-K-T-O-D IS HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL AS WRITTEN AND WE DO NOT NEED TO DISRUPT ITS SUCCESS BY REZONING THIS PARCEL FROM TOD INTO DB 90.
THE TOD IS NOT OUTDATED AND ACTUALLY SUPPLIES MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAN DB 90.
THE ML KT OD HAS CREATED OVER 1600 APARTMENT UNITS AROUND THE M STATION.
OF THESE MORE THAN OF THESE 1600 UNITS, OVER 400 OF THEM ARE AFFORDABLE.
THAT'S QUITE AN ACCOMPLISHMENT BY NATURE.
TODS REQUIRE 25% OF UNITS TO BE AFFORDABLE TO RENTERS AND OWNERS AT VARIOUS MFIS.
BUT IF YOU REMOVE THIS PARCEL FROM THE TOD, THE PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE UNITS DECREASES FROM 25 TO 12%.
WITH DB 90, ADDITIONAL HEIGHT HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN GRANTED BY ADDING MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS, BUT THIS WOULD WORK IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION.
BY REMOVING THIS FROM THE TOD, THE DEVELOPER WOULD GET MORE HEIGHT AND BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE LESS AFFORDABLE UNITS.
WE DESPERATELY NEED MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS THROUGHOUT AUSTIN AND KEEPING THIS PARCEL IN THE TOD IS THE ONLY WAY TO ACHIEVE THAT AS A CITY WHICH IS TRYING TO COMBAT AFFORDABILITY ISSUES AND RECENTLY FOUGHT FOR HOUSING OPTIONS FOR MIDDLE AND LOW INCOME EARNERS VIA THE HOME INITIATIVES.
IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT THIS PARCEL REMAINS IN A VERY SUCCESSFUL M-L-K-T-O-D, SO IT CAN CONTINUE TO PRODUCE THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE UNITS WHILE ALSO CREATING COMMERCIAL SPACES THAT ENCOURAGE WALKING AND BIKING.
THIS APPLICANT IS ASKING TO NOT SUPPLY ANY COMMERCIAL SPACE IN THE BUILDING, AND THAT SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED IN THE ARTIA, WHICH IS MEANT TO PROVIDE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SPACES.
THIS IS CONTRACT ZONING MEANT TO CHANGE THE VALUE OF A LAND AND IT'S ILLEGAL.
THE DEVELOPER PURCHASED THIS LAND KNOWING THEY COULDN'T OR WOULDN'T DEVELOP BECAUSE OF THE CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
THE RIGHT OF WAY HASN'T MOVED OR CHANGED, AND THEY ADMITTED THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY TO REZONE IT.
THEY ALSO WANT TO EXCLUDE COMMERCIAL SPACE BECAUSE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY, AND THIS SHOULD NOT BE NEGOTIABLE.
I'M REQUESTING THAT YOU ALL NOT CONTRACT ZONE THIS PARCEL ALLOW IT TO REMAIN IN THE M-L-K-T-O-D AND PROVIDE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND COMMERCIAL SPACES TO ITS FUTURE RESIDENTS.
INGRESS AND EGRESS ARE ALSO AN ISSUE WITH THIS PARCEL, AND THE ONLY WAY TO ACCESS THE LOT IS IF A PERSON IS HEADING EAST ON MAINER.
PEOPLE WHO RENT OR PURCHASE HERE WON'T BE ABLE TO ENTER THE LOT FROM ANY OTHER DIRECTION.
JUST A FEW DAYS AGO, THERE WAS A FATALITY AT THIS INTERSECTION WHERE ONE PERSON DIED AND SIX OTHERS WERE INJURED IN A HEAD-ON COLLISION.
BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THIS VER THIS INTERSECTION, A MORE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES THE THREE CORNERS THAT MAKE UP AIRPORT AND MLK WOULD SERVE EVERYONE BETTER.
AGAIN, I'M REQUESTING THAT YOU NOT CONTRACT ZONE THIS PARCEL AND CHANGE IT FROM THE M-L-K-T-O-D INTO DB 90.
UM, PLEASE STICK WITH THE TOD.
UM, YES, PLEASE STICK WITH THE TOD.
IT PROVIDES MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND REQUIRES COMMERCIAL SPACES FOR WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS AND NEEDS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS JIM WALKER.
JIM WILL BE RECEIVING TWO MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM JESSICA NEGLEY.
JESSICA, ARE YOU PRESENT? JIM, YOU HAVE FOUR MINUTES.
I'M WITH THE CHERRYWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS ACROSS, UH, MAINOR ROAD FROM THIS PROPERTY.
BUT, UM, WE ARE PART OF THE MLK TODD EFFORT, SO JUST KIND OF REINFORCING SOME OF THE POINTS ALREADY
[00:35:01]
MADE.WE KNOW THE MLK TODD IS IS OLD.
WE KNOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS ARE OLD, BUT THE EXTENSIVE PUBLIC PROCESSES, THEY WENT THROUGH THE PRINCIPLES, THEY ESTABLISHED THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
YOU JUST HEARD JENNY TALK ABOUT.
THOSE ARE ALL GOALS THAT DESERVE, UH, A PLANNING PROCESS, A MORE EXTENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO BRING INTO CURRENT ALIGNMENT.
UM, SO I I, AND ALSO IT'S WORTH, I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN MENTIONED YET, THERE'S TWO METRO RAPID LINES THAT JUST OPENED THAT CONVERGED AT THIS INTERSECTION OF AIRPORT AND MAINOR ROAD.
SO THE TRANSIT AVAILABILITY HERE HAS ALSO UPDATED SINCE THESE THIS TODD WAS DONE.
AND THAT NEEDS TO BE PLANNED FORWARD AND, AND REFLECTED.
UM, I THINK IT'S A TERRIBLE PRECEDENT TO START CARVING OUT, UH, DB NINETIES OUT OF TODD'S.
I WOULD WONDER HOW THAT PRECEDENT WOULD APPLY TO THE NEW EODS AND WHY PARCELS WOULDN'T SEEK TO GET OUT OF THOSE AS WELL.
IF YOU SET THIS PRECEDENT TONIGHT, UM, A PLANNING PROCESS HERE WOULD ACTUALLY CREATE THE SPACE AND THE PROCESS TO DEAL WITH THAT EXTENSIVE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TRIANGLE.
THAT IS ALSO ON THREE OTHER CORNERS OF THIS INTERSECTION.
YOU'LL NOTICE ONE OF THOSE CORNERS RIGHT ACROSS TO THE EAST, THE CVS, IT'S BEEN FIGURED OUT HOW TO BRING THAT SPACE INTO BETTER USE.
THAT WOULD ACTUALLY HELP THIS PARCEL TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DEAL WITH THAT PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
UH, IT WOULD DEAL WITH THE, THE SAFETY, UH, ESPECIALLY ADDING MORE TRAFFIC.
THERE WAS A GREAT GRAPHIC EARLIER, UH, THAT, THAT DANIELLA SHARED, UM, THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED.
AND I WANT TO THANK VICTORIA FOR SHOWING THE CIP UH, PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING FROM THE CITY.
IT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE THAT WOULD ALSO COULD BE ADDRESSED SO THAT WE AREN'T PUTTING SOMETHING IN AND THEN MAYBE TEARING IT OUT.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GREAT ANOTHER COORDINATION ASPECT.
UM, AND THE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL ALL ALSO WOULD BE ADDRESSED IN A PLANNING PROCESS.
SO I I REALLY, I WORRY ABOUT THE PRECEDENT YOU'RE SETTING NOT JUST FOR THIS ONE INTERSECTION, UH, BUT FOR TOGS AND OTHER STATIONARY PLANS AROUND THE CITY.
I WOULD ASK FOR YOU TO, AND IT DOES FEEL LIKE A PAPER ENTITLEMENT, BUT I WOULD ASK FOR YOU TO OPPOSE THIS CASE UNTIL PLANNING STAFF CAN COME BACK AND EXECUTE A PROCESS.
I KNOW PLANNING STAFF ARE FOCUSED ON OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES.
BUT THIS IS A SITUATION, THIS IS A CASE, THIS IS A PRECEDENT WHERE YOU ALL CAN INSIST THAT PLANNING STAFF FIGURE OUT HOW TO ADDRESS THIS IN A MORE INTENTIONAL, THOUGHTFUL, LONG-TERM WAY.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF ANYBODY HACK ANY, WE'LL TAKE QUESTIONS AT THE END.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS VINCENT CALZONE.
VINCENT, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
I LIVE A BLOCK AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY.
UM, LAST WEEK I REACHED OUT TO THE CITY TO CLARIFY THE PETITION PROCESS, UH, SO THAT MY NEIGHBORS AND I CAN BE PREPARED IF WE NEED TO COLLECT SIGNATURES.
UM, AFTER SOME BACK AND FORTH, IT WAS COMMUNICATED TO US THAT THE SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR A VALID PETITION, UH, WOULD NOT JUST BE FROM THE PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE ZONING CHANGE.
UM, THE SIGNATURES REQUIRED WOULD BE FROM THE OVER 400 PROPERTIES AND THE MLK TODD.
UH, WE STILL AREN'T SURE IF THIS IS CORRECT OR IF OUR BROADER COMMUNITY IN THE MLK TODD IS EVEN AWARE OF THIS ZONING CHANGE HAPPENING.
UM, IDEALLY WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO COLLECT SIGNATURES AT ALL.
IDEALLY, UH, THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY, UH, WILL WORK WITH US, UH, TO IMPROVE THIS PROPERTY AND THE ENTIRE INTERSECTION AND MAKE IT SAFER AND MORE LIVABLE.
UM, BECAUSE OF THE GENERAL CONFUSION AROUND THE PETITION GUIDELINES, UH, AND THE COMPRESSED TIMELINE OF THIS, THIS ENTIRE PROCESS, I'M ASKING THAT YOU OPPOSE THE ZONING CHANGE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MISA RAMOS.
MISO REACHED OUT TO ME A COUPLE HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING STARTED AND STATED THAT SHE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO SPEAK BUT WANTED HER OPPOSITION ON THE RECORD.
SO I'LL KEEP AN EYE OUT IF SHE DOES JOIN US A LITTLE BIT LATER.
BUT OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS JOE DARINI.
YOU CAN KIND OF JUST SCROLL THROUGH.
THERE'RE JUST SOME PICTURES THAT ARE RELATED.
I'M THE HOMEOWNER AT 2 2 0 3 ROUNDTREE DRIVE.
UM, I'M ONE OF THE MAIN, UH, UH, HOMEOWNERS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE DYSFUNCTIONAL STORMWATER CREEK, WHICH REGULARLY WASHES OUT MY FRONT YARD.
UM, I'M HERE TODAY IN OPPOSITION AND, UM, WOULD ASK FOR AND, AND TO ASK FOR AN INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT OF THE LONG-TERM TERM IMPACTS OF THIS UNPRECEDENTED DEVELOPMENT.
[00:40:01]
UM, AND THE EFFECTS THAT IT WILL HAVE ON AN ALREADY FAILING DRAINAGE SYSTEM IN THE V VULNERABLE PROPERTIES NEARBY.IN ADDITION, THE ADDITIONAL RUNOFF FROM A 90 FOOT TOWER WILL OVERWHELM AN ALREADY INUNDATED DRAINAGE SYSTEM, SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASING FLOODING RISK FOR DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES, INCLUDING MY OWN.
MOREOVER, A STRUCTURE OF THIS HEIGHT WILL ACT AS A VERTICAL CATCHMENT FUNNELING EVEN MORE RAINWATER DOWN AND COM COMPOUNDING THE AMOUNT OF RUNOFF.
UH, I PROVIDED IMAGES WHICH SHOW THIS DRAINAGE DITCH CONSISTENTLY FAILS.
THIS IS THE CORNER OF ROUNDTREE DRIVE RIGHT HERE.
UM, UH, UH, CONSISTENTLY, UH, UH, IS FLOODED.
UM, AND, UH, AND, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT EVIDENCED HERE IN THESE PICTURES.
UM, FROM YEARS PAST WHEN WE REACHED OUT TO WATERSHED PROTECTION TO ASK IF ANY ASSESSMENTS HAD BEEN CONDUCTED ON THIS CREEK'S OVERFLOW, WE WERE SIMPLY TOLD TO CALL 3 1 1.
UH, WE THEN FILED AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST FOR ALL RECORDS RELATED TO ASSESSMENT, MAINTENANCE, OR STUDIES OF A DRAINAGE DATING BACK TO JANUARY 1ST, 2020.
THE ONLY RESPONSE WE RECEIVED WAS A SET OF UTILITY PLANS FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS FROM 2004.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THOROUGH DESIGNS HAS DONE SOME STUDIES.
WE'VE ASKED IF THEY COULD SHARE THOSE WITH US.
WE, WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE THOSE, THOSE STUDIES STATING THAT THEIR PROPERTY IS IS NOT DRAINING BACK TOWARDS THIS DITCH.
UH, MY NEIGHBORS AND I HAVE MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS REGARDING THE CITY'S PLAN FOR HANDLING THE INCREASED STORMWATER RUNOFF ON THE ALREADY OVERWHELMED EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND WITH NO PLAN IN PLACE TO MITIGATE, WE ARE EXTREMELY WORRIED ABOUT INEVITABLE DAMAGE TO OUR HOMES AND RISING FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS. AGAIN, THE PHOTOS I HAVE PROVIDED TODAY HIGHLIGHT THE INADEQUACY OF THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT.
THE 29 67 MENA ROAD WILL AMPLIFY THIS ISSUE AND WITHOUT CLEAR, WITHOUT CLEAR MITIGATION PLAN, THE CITY IS OPENING ITSELF UP TO A MAJOR LIABILITY.
THEREFORE, I AM, I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION.
UM, AND ASK THAT YOU OPPOSE AS WELL SO THAT ADDITIONAL RESEARCH CAN BE CONDUCTED, UH, AND OUR, OUR, UH, CONCERNS CAN BE ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER, UM, IN OPPOSITION IS GRETCHEN.
SHE WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
GRETCHEN, PLEASE PRESS SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
I'M REPRESENTING MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE COMMUNITY.
UM, I'M EXPRESSING SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT OUR RIGHT TO USE AND ENJOY OUR LAND, OUR RIGHT TO PRIVACY.
UM, WHILE WE UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR DEVELOPMENT, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR DEVELOPMENT.
THIS REZONING FAILS TO RESPECT THE BALANCE BETWEEN DENSITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY FOR THE NEIGHBORS.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT VIOLATES THE INTENT OF AUSTIN COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
THESE WERE PUT IN PLACE TO PROTECT EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS FROM PRECISELY THIS KIND OF OVERREACH.
UM, AT THE SCALE, EVEN THE MOST GENEROUS SETBACKS, TREE BUFFERS, ET CETERA, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SHIELD OR COMPENSATE FOR THE LOSS OF PRIVACY FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMEOWNERS.
I'VE OWNED MY HOME SINCE 2001.
UH, THE PROPOSED 90 FOOT STRUCTURE WILL TOWER OVER HOMES, CREATE AN INTRUSIVE DIRECT LINE OF SIGHT RIGHT INTO OUR BACKYARDS, OUR BEDROOMS, OUR FAMILY SPACES, EXCUSE ME.
UM, THIS IS INVADING PERSONAL AND PRIVATE ENVIRONMENT.
THIS IS WHERE KIDS PLAY FAMILIES AND FRIENDS GATHER.
THE RESIDENTS WHO HAVE BEEN HERE FOR YEARS AND WHO ARE NEW EXPECT A BASIC LEVEL OF SECLUSION.
THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT IN HOW WE EXPERIENCE OUR HOMES AND OUR EQUITY.
WE HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT LIGHT POLLUTION FROM INCREASED NIGHTTIME LIGHTING, NOT ONLY FROM THE STREET LAMPS, BUT FROM FLOORS, THE PARKING AREAS, WHATEVER SECURITY LIGHTS ARE ADDED.
THIS WILL ALL SPILL OVER INTO OUR YARDS, OUR WINDOWS, AND THIS DIMINISHES ALL OF OUR QUALITY OF LIFE.
AND NOTE THAT TEXAS NUISANCE CODE FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS, THE EFFECTS OF THIS LAND USE WOULD DISTURB AND PERSONS OF ORDINARY SENSIBILITIES AND OF ORDINARY TASTES AND HABITS.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY.
THE COMMISSION HAS A DUTY TO ENSURE ZONING CHANGES DO NOT COME AT THE DETRIMENT OF LIVABILITY AND BASIC NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTIONS.
THIS SHOULD THIS DEVELOPMENT MOVE FORWARD AS PROPOSED, IT WILL SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE REZONING CASES.
LIKE EVERYONE HAS CITED BEFORE ME, THIS IS WHERE THE RIGHTS OF EXISTING HOMEOWNERS IN FAVOR OF UNCHECKED DENSITY.
UM, I ALSO WANNA ADD, MA'AM, WE'RE AT TIME SPEAKER I, I'D LIKE TO ASK TO ADD TO THE LAST SPEAKER'S NOTE ABOUT THE FLOODING
[00:45:01]
IN 2003.MA'AM, WE'RE AT TIME RUSSELL PORTER, WHO OWNED A HOUSE ON ROUNDTREE.
FORGIVE ME, I WE NEED TO MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT SPEAKER.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS MARK HILTON.
MARK, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
I'M HERE TO VOICE MY CONCERNS AT WHAT APPEARS TO BE CLEAR.
CONTRACT ZONING, PUBLIC INTEREST MUST COME FIRST.
NOT PRIVATE GAIN YET THIS REZONING IS ENTIRELY IN FAVOR OF THE DEVELOPER.
THERE HAS BEEN NO EFFORT TO INCLUDE GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL, NO FLEXIBILITY ON HEIGHT REDUCTIONS AND NO COMMITMENT TO SITE PLANS OR UNIT SIZES.
ONE MINUTE THROWER SAYS THERE'S 80 UNITS.
SO I ASK, DOES THIS REZONING SERVE THE LONG-TERM PUBLIC INTEREST OR IS IT SIMPLY A WINDFALL FOR THE APPLICANT? WE KEEP HEARING ABOUT TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AND HOW PROXIMITY TO MLK STATION MAKES PARKING UNNECESSARY.
YET THE DEVELOPER PLANS FOR UP TO 1.8 PARKING SPACES PER UNIT.
THEN WE HEAR FROM THROWER'S EMAIL DATED FEBRUARY 27TH, THAT GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL ISN'T VIABLE DUE TO THE TIMING OF MARKET CONDITIONS YET, ENDEAVOR IS CURRENTLY BUILDING COMMERCIAL SPACE JUST ACROSS THE STREET THAT INCLUDES A PRE-K CENTER.
ACCORDING TO A MARCH 2ND, 25 ARTICLE IN BLOOMBERG BUSINESS TITLED, AUSTIN RENTS TUMBLED 22% FROM PEAK DUE TO OVERDEVELOPMENT.
DEVELOPERS ARE OFFERING UP TO EIGHT WEEKS OF FREE RENT JUST TO FILL UNITS, ADD AN IMPENDING RECESSION, AND THE ARGUMENT FOR HIGH DENSITY PROJECT HERE BECOMES EVEN WEAKER.
THE COMMISSION MUST TAKE A HARD LOOK AT WHO IS BEING ENTRUSTED WITH SHAPING WITH RESHAPING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE DEVELOPERS, AUSTIN GROWTH VENTURES ONLINE PRESENCE RAISES MA RAISES MAJOR RED FLAGS.
THEIR WEB, THEIR WEBSITE CONSISTS OF THE SAME REPEATED FUTURISTIC RENDERINGS FOR MULTIPLE PAGES AND NO PROOF OF AN ACTUAL REAL LIFE DEVELOPMENT.
A CREDIBLE FIRM SHOULD HAVE A PROVEN TRACK RECORD, YET THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THEY'VE BUILT ANYTHING.
DENSITY BONUSES ARE MEANT TO CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, NOT PROVIDE A LOOPHOLE FOR LAND SPECULATION REZONING.
THIS SMALL PARCEL WILL SELL TO DANGEROUS PRECEDENT, ENCOURAGING OTHER DEVELOPERS TO DO THE SAME.
A 90 FOOT APARTMENT TOWER, WHICH BETWEEN A TOW TRUCK AT A BIG GREAT GAS STATION, IS NOT THE CATALYST FOR AN UNPRECEDENTED CHANGE TO THE TOD.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JANE RIVERA.
JANE, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
GOOD EVENING CHAIR HEMPEL AND MEMBERS COMMISSIONERS.
I'M THE CURRENT AND LONGTIME CHAIR OF THE ROSEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM.
I CURRENTLY LIVE IN THE SAME HOUSE THAT I'VE LIVED IN FOR OVER 40 YEARS, AND THAT IS ALMOST AT THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE ROSEWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
AUSTIN HEIGHTS, WHICH THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN, IS AT THE NORTHERN MOST PART OF OUR AREA, BUT THE TOD IS A VERY CRITICAL PART OF THE AUSTIN HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND MANY OF THE RESIDENTS, INCLUDING THE MAIN SPEAKER THAT WE HAVE HERE TONIGHT, HAVE THEIR HOMES IN THAT AREA BECAUSE OF THE TOD, SHE USES THE TRAIN TO GO EVERYWHERE THAT SHE GOES.
IN AUSTIN, I CAN'T BECAUSE THE TRAIN DOESN'T COME DOWN FAR ENOUGH FOR ME, I HAVE TO DRIVE.
AND SO IT IS FOR MANY OF US HERE IN AUSTIN, THE TOD OFFERS INCENTIVES TO DEVELOPERS THAT ARE VERY NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED AND THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THOSE.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE TIME TO DO SOME COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN, SINCE THE CITY OWNS THAT, UH, TRACK THAT'S RIGHT NORTH OR ACTUALLY EAST AND NORTH OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
AND THE OWNER AND THE, UH, OWNER'S AGENT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT MAKES EVERYONE A WINNER.
THEY'D LIKE TO HAVE SOME COMMERCIAL ON THE GROUND FLOOR OF THE, UH, PROJECT THAT WOULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING BECAUSE THERE'S CURRENTLY IT'S DIFFICULT TO GET ACROSS MAINER ROAD IN ANY DIRECTION OR ACROSS AIRPORT, WHICH IS EVEN WORSE.
AND SO IT'S HARD FOR PEOPLE TO GO OUTSIDE THEIR IMMEDIATE AREA.
IN ADDITION, YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD THAT THE TOD REQUIREMENTS REQUIRE MUCH MORE AND DEEPER AFFORDABILITY THAN THE DB 90.
[00:50:01]
PLANNING TEAM SUPPORTS AUSTIN HEIGHTS REQUEST THAT YOU GIVE TIME FOR ALL OF THESE PEOPLE TO MEET TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH A COMPLETE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT SERVES EVERYBODY, INCLUDING THE DEVELOPERS' NEED TO MAKE MONEY.OUR NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
MONICA, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
LOOKS LIKE SHE'S NOT IN OUR QUEUE AT THE MOMENT.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS BARBARA MACARTHUR.
BARBARA WILL ALSO BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
BARBARA, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
I WANNA TALK ABOUT, UM, REMOVING THE TOD.
THIS IS SET A TERRIBLE PRECEDENT THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
THE TOD ZONING AND OVERLAY HAS A SPECIFIC PURPOSE TO SUPPORT TRANSIT.
FURTHERMORE, THE TOD PROVIDES SUPERIOR, VERY SUPERIOR, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CARES ABOUT PLANNING OR CARES ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THEY SHOULD DENY BOTH OF THESE REQUESTS.
THERE IS NO CRISIS TO HAVE MORE APARTMENTS IN AUSTIN.
FROM 2017 TO 2023, AUSTIN RELEASED MORE BUILDING PERMITS PER CAPITA THAN ANY CITY IN THE UNITED STATES.
WE HAD MORE BUILDING PERMITS RELEASED IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON THAT HAS MULTIPLE TIMES THE POPULATION.
SO THIS IS JUST A CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF SPOT ZONING THAT WILL HARM THE COMMUNITY.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY FRANCIS AIA FRANCIS, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
LOOKS LIKE FRANCIS IS NOT IN OUR QUEUE AT THE MOMENT.
WE'LL BE COMING BACK TO EACH OF THESE SPEAKERS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS IAN.
YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES, OR PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION WILL ALSO BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY LYNN MURPHY.
LYNN, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS.
I AM SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF AGENDA ITEMS TWO AND THREE.
AS A PROPERTY OWNER THAT WOULD BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THIS CHANGE, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST EMPHASIZE SOME OF THE POINTS THAT HAVE MOSTLY BEEN STATED ALREADY.
UM, PRIMARILY MY CONCERNS ARE TRAFFIC AND PUBLIC SAFETY AS WELL AS QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I THINK WE'RE JUST, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS UNIQUELY SITUATED IN THAT WE ARE SURROUNDED BY MAJOR ROADS.
SO THE ONLY WAY TO GET IN OR OUT OF OUR, UM, PURELY RESIDENTIAL AREAS IS THROUGH MAINOR AIRPORT.
AND SO WE ARE UNIQUELY AFFECTED BY TRAFFIC AND SAFETY CONCERNS AT THIS INTERSECTION.
UM, AND CURRENTLY THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S HERE JUST DOES NOT SUPPORT A RAPID INFLUX OF PEDESTRIANS OR CARS AT THIS TIME.
UM, THERE HAS BEEN A COUPLE INSTANCES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED BY SPEAKERS, BUT WE ALSO KNOW OF, UM, NEIGHBORS, PETS THAT HAVE BEEN STRUCK AND KILLED BY TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S A DIRECT IMPACT OF, UM, TRAFFIC AVOIDING THIS INTERSECTION.
UM, AND SO AS HAS BEEN STATED PREVIOUSLY, WE WOULD NEED SOMETHING TO BE DEVELOPED IN A MORE COHESIVE AND THOUGHTFUL WAY IN ORDER FOR, UM, RESIDENTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TO SUPPORT THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
SO AS, AS IS, THIS ISN'T A QUESTION OF WHEN OR IF IT WILL AFFECT TRAFFIC PUBLIC SAFETY OR THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF AUSTIN RIGHTS, IT'S HOW MUCH.
AND I THINK AS A BODY THAT'S CHARGED WITH PROTECTING AND PRESERVING PUBLIC SAFETY, IT WOULD BE FRANKLY IRRESPONSIBLE FOR YOU TO RECOMMEND THAT THIS GO FORWARD AT THIS POINT.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS JENNIFER CISNEROS.
JENNIFER, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
[00:55:05]
HELLO COMMISSIONERS.UH, I'M A RESIDENT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE 2008.
AT LEAST TO BE CLEAR, I AM NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT OVERALL.
I JUST ASK FOR IT TO BE RESPONSIBLE, WELL-PLANNED AND TO FALL WITHIN THE GUIDELINES OF THE MLK TODD ALREADY IN PLACE, UM, ARE ALREADY ESTABLISHED FOR THIS AREA RATHER THAN PIECING IT OUT, I ALSO WANT TO REITERATE THAT THERE WAS YET ANOTHER FATALITY JUST A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO ON AIRPORT BOULEVARD AT MAINOR ROAD.
SO TRAFFIC AND SAFETY CONCERNS ARE VERY REAL HERE.
UM, AS YOU CAN CLEARLY TELL OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR NEIGHBORS ARE QUITE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT, EXCUSE ME, AND THE PRECEDENT THAT THIS WOULD SET.
SO I JUST, I'M HERE TO STATE THAT I OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSED REZONING AND I URGE YOU ALL TO OPPOSE THIS AS WELL.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS CHRISTOPHER PAGE.
CHRISTOPHER, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
I'M GONNA CIRCLE BACK TO A COUPLE FOLKS THAT MAY HAVE MISSED THEIR TIME.
MONICA GUZMAN, FRANCIS UNA, AND CHRISTOPHER.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
I WILL, UM, HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
VICTORIA HASSI AGAIN WITH ER DESIGN.
UM, SO I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE IN UNITS THAT YOU HEARD ABOUT WHEN WE SUBMITTED THIS PROJECT, UH, THIS APPLICATION ALMOST A YEAR AGO.
WE SUBMITTED IN THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS DETERMINATION WORKSHEET THAT THERE WOULD BE ABOUT 130 UNITS.
THAT WAS JUST A ROUGH GUESS AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
SINCE THAT TIME, WE'VE DONE GREATER STUDY TO LEARN THAT REALISTICALLY THIS SITE CAN ACHIEVE PROBABLY SOMEWHERE IN THE BALLPARK OF 80.
THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE DISCREPANCY IN THE NUMBER OF UNITS.
WE DID MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AFTER Y'ALL GRANTED A POSTPONEMENT ON THIS CASE.
AND, UM, THERE WERE A LOT OF ISSUES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP.
I DID RESPOND WITH AN EMAIL ADDRESSING SOME OF THOSE ISSUES.
I ALSO TOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE ARE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER ABOUT A HEIGHT STEP BACK FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
SO WE ARE GONNA CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS AND I HAVE PUT IT OUT THERE TO GET ON THE BOOKS, ANOTHER DATE TO MEET, UH, BEFORE THIS CASE GOES FURTHER TO CITY COUNCIL.
UM, SOMETHING I WANNA TALK ABOUT.
THE COMMUNITY IS GOING TO BENEFIT FROM REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE IN MANY WAYS, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY IS SOME OF THE AFFORDABLE UNITS THAT WILL COME.
I WANNA CLARIFY THAT UNDER THE TOD REGULATING PLAN, YOU'VE HEARD THAT THE AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE, THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS ARE FAR GREATER AND THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT TRUE.
AND I WILL TELL YOU WHY THEY ARE DIFFERENT BETWEEN TOD AND DB 90.
BUT WITH TOD, THE DEVELOPER'S ONLY RESPONSIBLE FOR 10% OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF OCCUPIABLE SPACE VERSUS IN DB 90, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE, RESPONSIBLE FOR 12% OF THE UNITS AS BEING INCOME RESTRICTED.
UNDER THE TOD PLAN, THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ADDITIONAL 15% TO EQUATE TO A TOTAL OF 25.
AND THE CITY HAS INFORMED US THAT THEY DON'T HAVE THOSE FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THAT AT THIS TIME.
SO THEREFORE, LEFT AS IT IS TODAY UNDER TOD ZONING, THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY UNITS AND NO AFFORDABLE UNITS FOR THIS SITE.
UM, SOMETHING I ALSO WANNA CALL ATTENTION TO IS, YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY THERE'S AN AUTOMOBILE RELATED USE ON THIS SITE AS WELL AS THE SITE ADJACENT TO IT.
AND I WOULD THINK THAT UNDER THE PLAN THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO THIS PROPERTY UTILIZING THE T THE DB 90 OVERLAY, THAT'S GOING TO BRING UNITS, RESIDENCES VERSUS AUTOMOBILE RELATED LEFT UN UN ZONE AND, AND TO ITS CURRENT SITUATION, IT'S GOING TO GENERATE FAR MORE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, CONTRIBUTING FAR MORE TO THE CONCERNS FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AT THIS INTERSECTION BECAUSE THERE'S ANY NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL USES THAT COULD GO AT THE SITE, ALL OF WHICH ARE GOING TO GENERATE FAR MORE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC.
I WOULD, I BELIEVE IF THIS PROPERTY CAN REDEVELOP UNDER THE DB 90 ORDINANCE AND OVERLAY, IT WOULD BE ABLE TO BRING A MUCH BETTER SITUATION.
THANKS TO ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS.
UM, LOOKING FOR A VOTE TO CLOSE
[01:00:01]
THE PUBLIC HEARING.A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I SEE COMMISSIONER WOODS SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UNLESS THAT, UH, THERE'S OPPOSITION.
THAT MOTION PASSES AND WE WILL MOVE INTO OUR Q AND A.
SO THIS IS EIGHT COMMISSIONERS.
UM, YOU CAN ASK THE NEIGHBORS, THE SPEAKERS, THE APPLICANT STAFF A QUESTION.
SO WHO WOULD LIKE TO START? COMMISSIONER WOODS.
I WAS WONDERING IF THERE'S ANYONE FROM CITY OF AUSTIN STAFF WHO CAN SPEAK TO, UM, WHAT WE JUST HEARD ABOUT HOW AFFORDABILITY WORKS UNDER THE TOD AND THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR 15% OF THE AFFORDABLE UNITS.
AND JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE CITY'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS TOD WAS ADOPTED IN 2009, 16 YEARS AGO.
AND AT THAT TIME, UH, IT AS STATED IN SECTION 4.3 0.2 OF THE PLAN, THERE IS A DENSITY BONUS FOR PROPERTIES UNDER 60 FEET IN HEIGHT.
AND THAT INCLUDES 10% OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AT 60% MFI AS WAS STATED, AND UP TO 25% IF THE CITY PROVIDES FUNDING TO SUBSIDIZE THOSE UNITS.
UM, THE PROPERTY AS ITS CURRENTLY ZONED IS AT THAT 60 FEET HEIGHT.
SO THERE'S NOT REALLY A BONUS TO GO UP TO, TO, YOU KNOW, ADD ADDITIONAL UNITS UNDER THE DB 90.
IT WOULD BE 12% OF THE TOTAL UNITS MUST BE AFFORDABLE AT HOUSEHOLDS EARNING 60% MFI OR LESS, OR 10% OF THE TOTAL UNITS AFFORDABLE AT HOUSEHOLDS AT 50% MFI OR LESS.
SO DB 90 APPEARS IN THIS SITUATION TO, UH, BE PROVIDING AN AVENUE FOR A GREATER NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS GIVEN THE, UH, UNAVAILABLE, UH, UNAVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FROM THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT AND THE HEIGHT THAT THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED.
SO WHAT HAPPENS IF A PROPERTY OPTS INTO THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM UNDER THE TOD AND THE, IS IT ACCURATE THAT THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE FUNDING FOR THOSE, THAT ADDITIONAL 15%? WELL, THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY ADDITIONAL HEIGHT TO BE GIVEN SINCE IT'S ALREADY AT THE 60 FEET WITHIN THE PLAN.
BUT JUST THEORETICALLY, IF A, A PROPERTY WERE TO USE THAT DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, NOW THE MAXIMUM AFFORDABILITY THAT ANY PROPERTY PROPERTY COULD GET WITHIN THE TOD WOULD BE 10% OF UNITS AT 60%.
WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET UP TO THAT 25%.
THERE IS NOT CURRENTLY A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM IN THE TOD FOR PROPERTIES SEEKING A BONUS ABOVE 60 FEET.
I THINK THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS AT THE MOMENT, CHAIR.
CHAIR IS SOMEONE FROM A TD HERE.
CAN SOMEONE SPEAK TO OR, OR ANYONE ON STAFF? CAN SOMEONE SPEAK TO THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT BELONGS TO THE CITY THAT LOOKS AS THOUGH IT WAS MAYBE ONCE PURCHASED TO DO A FLYOVER, A SLIP? A SLIP LANE? YES.
UH, SO WE SPOKE WITH THE TTBW REPRESENTATIVE EXTENSIVELY.
I HELPED, UH, VICTORIA OBTAIN THOSE MAPS, UH, THAT SHE PROVIDED IN TERMS OF THOSE LANES.
UM, I THINK THERE WERE PLANS, UH, A LONG TIME AGO TO DO THAT SLIP LANE, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IS NOT SUPPORTIVE OF A PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT.
THE CITY STILL RETAINS THAT RIGHT AWAY, BUT THERE'S NOT CURRENTLY ANY PLANS THERE.
UM, WE REACHED OUT EXTENSIVELY TO SEE IF THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, ANY MOVEMENT TOWARDS PLANS AND THE MAPS THAT WERE PROVIDED WAS ALL THAT TPW WAS WILLING TO PROVIDE, UH, ABOUT PLANS WITHIN THAT IMMEDIATE AREA.
UM, I KNOW THAT THE MOBILITY BONDS THAT WERE APPROVED BY VOTERS DID INCLUDE THE AIRPORT CORRIDOR.
UM, I THINK THEY'VE MADE A LOT OF THOSE INVESTMENTS SO FAR.
I DON'T KNOW TO WHAT EXTENT THAT MONEY'S BEEN DRAWN DOWN, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY OTHER FUNDING SOURCE THAT I'M AWARE OF WITHIN THAT IMMEDIATE AREA THAT IS EARMARKED FOR MOBILITY IMPROVEMENTS.
YEAH, SO, SO SLIP LANES BEING THE ANTITHESIS OF TODS, SO THOSE ARE OFF THE TABLE, GONE? NO MORE, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY PLANS FOR THE SLIP LANES.
AND MAYBE FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT ACQUIRING THAT LAND OR IS THERE ANY INTEREST IN THAT? I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THOSE CONVERSATIONS OCCURRED.
UM, I KNOW THE LANDOWNER WOULD LOVE TO GAIN THAT LAND BACK THAT WAS TAKEN FROM THIS ORIGINAL PARCEL, BUT, UM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE THERE'S NOT BEEN ANY MOVEMENT ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO MARKET THAT.
AND EVEN IF THEY GOT TO THE POINT WHERE THEY DID WANNA MARKET IT, IT WOULD BE OFFERED TO, UM, CONDEMNING AUTHORITIES FIRST.
SO SCHOOLS, UM, UNDERSTOOD, OR GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, I DOUBT THEY'D WANT IT, BUT, UM, AND THE, THE REQUEST FOR NO GROUND FLOOR RETAIL CAN, CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH THAT? YES.
SO UNDER THE DB 90 ORDINANCE, UM, DB 90 OVERLAY, IT'S A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL.
WE ARE ASKING TO HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO NOT BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE IT, ALTHOUGH IT WOULD STILL BE AN OPTION, UM, AS THIS PROPERTY, UH, MOVES ALONG IN THE
[01:05:01]
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.IF IT MAKES SENSE, IF ALL THINGS COME TOGETHER AND IT MAKES SENSE TO INCLUDE SOME COMMERCIAL, IT COULD BE, UM, BUT TO REQUIRE IT IS PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE IF AT SOME POINT THAT TRIANGULAR PIECE IS REDEVELOPED, THIS PROPERTY'S COMMERCIAL COMPONENT WOULD LOSE STREET VISIBILITY, WHICH UNDERSTOOD, WE KNOW THANK YOU, WOULD CAUSE IT TO FAIL.
REPRESENTING THE AREA AROUND HERE, WAS ANYBODY, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT CAN SPEAK TO THE CREATION OF THIS PLAN WHERE ANY OF Y'ALL A PART OF THAT? MAYBE IN THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, MS. ER CARE TO COME UP? SO I, I DID A LOT OF TOURS BACK IN THE DAY OF THIS SITE WITH A LOT OF THE FOLKS THAT WERE IN THAT, I DON'T THINK YOU WERE IN THOSE MEETINGS, BUT I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS AT ONE POINT DESIRES TO GO TALLER, BUT FOR SOME REASON THE CITY KEPT IT AT 60 FEET.
DO YOU KNOW WHERE THOSE CAPS CAME FROM AND KIND OF SPEAK THAT? BASICALLY THE WHOLE IDEA WAS TO MAKE ALL OF THE TODS, THIS WAS THE FIRST TOD ADOPTED BY THE CITY AND THE ATTEMPT WAS TO MAKE IT AS HOMOGENIZED AS POSSIBLE SO THAT IT COULD FIT MULTIPLE SITES.
NOW, AT THE TIME THAT GREATER HEIGHT WAS CONSIDERED FOR THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL, THAT'S BECAUSE IT WAS CLOSE TO, AND THAT LITTLE TRIANGLE HAD NOT BEEN REMOVED CLOSE TO MAINOR ROAD.
AND ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE WITH THE CURRENT PLAN IS THAT THERE IS A ONE LANE INGRESS AND EGRESS FROM THIS PROPERTY NOW ONTO MAINOR ROAD.
IF THERE WERE A TWO LANE IN INGRESS AND EGRESS ONTO AIRPORT, A LOT OF THOSE CONCERNS WOULD DISAPPEAR.
BUT THAT TRIANGLE IS THE PROBLEM, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE ARE ASKING THAT THERE BE TIME GRANTED FOR CITY STAFF WHO KNOW WHAT THAT'S ALL ABOUT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DEVELOPER TO MEET AND BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THAT.
THAT'S ONE OF THE CRITICAL POINTS THAT ALL SIDES ARE MAKING, THAT IT'S JUST A PROBLEM.
OTHER QUESTIONS? OH, COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ, THIS IS ALSO FOR YOU MR. TOMKO.
UM, AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OR EXPERIENCED THE CITY RELEASING RIGHT OF WAY FOR COMMERCIAL USES? I JUST, I, I KNOW THAT THE COMMERCIAL, UM, THE CORRIDOR PROGRAM HAD, UM, ENVISIONED SOME POCKET PARKS ALONG THE WAY AND THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK ABOUT PUBLIC PLACEMAKING.
DO YOU ENVISION THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL TURNING TO BE COMMERCIAL? I MEAN, I DISTINCTLY REMEMBER WHEN THEY WERE DOING THE MOBILITY BONDS THAT THERE WAS A CARVE OUT FOR ART IN PUBLIC PLACES AND I THOUGHT THAT THEY WERE GONNA USE THOSE CORNERS FOR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT CURRENTLY STANDS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
I TRIED TO DO SOME RESEARCH AND REACH OUT TO SOME FOLKS BUT WAS NOT ABLE TO GET AN ANSWER.
UM, I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THEM SELLING OFF RIGHT AWAY LIKE THAT TO DO A COMMERCIAL SPACE, BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THE FLEXIBILITY OF, YOU KNOW, NOT WANTING TO COMMIT TO THAT WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THAT IS.
UM, I WISH THERE WAS A WAY TO COMPEL SOME KIND OF PLANS AROUND THOSE TRIANGLES TO HAPPEN NOW THAT REDEVELOPMENT IS STARTING TO OCCUR AT THESE CORNERS BECAUSE IT, IT'S KIND OF A ONCE IN A LONG TIME, UM, OPPORTUNITY TO, TO DO SOMETHING RIGHT AT THOSE CORNERS TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE CONCERNS.
UM, KEEPING THEM LONGER AFTER STUFF REDEVELOPS IS JUST GONNA MAKE IT HARDER TO DO SOMETHING IN A COMPREHENSIVE WAY.
SO I, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION.
IN TERMS OF THAT, I WOULD DEFINITELY WANT THERE TO BE CONTINUING ENGAGEMENT BETWEEN TPW, THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AS THIS CASE CONTINUES TO MOVE FORWARD, IF IT CONTINUES TO MOVE FORWARD.
MY OTHER QUESTION IS ABOUT DESIGN STANDARDS ON MAINOR.
THE APPLICANT SHOWED THE IMAGE FROM THE INTERSECTION FROM TPW AND IT HAS A SIX FOOT BIKE LANE ON A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK.
IS THAT, THAT DOESN'T MEET CURRENT CODE OR I JUST, I'M CONFUSED WHY WE WOULD BUILD SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T MEET CODE.
UM, SO AGAIN, THAT'S A TPW AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE, THE, THE APPLICANT SUSSED OUT FROM THE, THE PLANS THAT WERE RECEIVED FROM TPW THAT STAFF DIDN'T REVIEW.
IT SOUNDS LIKE, UH, THE APPLICANT IS OPEN TO DOING A GREATER STANDARD THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING PROPOSED.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A LEGAL MECHANISM THAT WE CAN REQUIRE THAT, BUT IF THEY'RE VOLUNTARILY CHOOSING TO DO THAT, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY WOULD ARGUE WITH THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED AGAIN AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
ALRIGHT, OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? UM, YES, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO JONATHAN, IF YOU
SO, UM, JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, GIVEN THAT THIS IS KIND OF A FIRST TIME WE'VE DONE SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WHAT DO WE FEEL ABOUT THE CONCERNS AROUND PRECEDENT AND SORT OF HOW FUTURE CASES WOULD BE HANDLED RELATED TO TODS AND PARTICULARLY OUR OLDER ONES THAT MAY NOT BE UPDATED QUITE AS QUICKLY AS WE MIGHT LIKE?
[01:10:02]
SO I THINK I SAID IT LAST TIME, WE HAVE A LOT OF TODS THAT HAVE NO PLANNING AROUND THEM WHATSOEVER AND HAVE NOT RECEIVED THAT LEVEL OF DUE DILIGENCE.UM, I PASS SITES LIKE THAT ALL THE TIME WHERE I'M LIKE, THAT'S NOT TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE AND I WISH WE HAD HAD A PLAN THERE IN PLACE BEFORE THAT WAS DEVELOPED THERE.
UM, WITH THAT SAID, THIS PLAN, UM, WAS THIS SITE WAS, UM, THIS DOD DID RECEIVE A PLAN.
UM, IT IS 16 YEARS OLD AS I MENTIONED.
UM, COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT WERE OUTLINED IN THE PLAN AND AND VALUES AT THAT TIME INCLUDED AFFORDABILITY.
UM, IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THOSE WOULD BE ABLE TO BE MET TODAY UNDER THE PLAN.
AND SO SINCE THERE ARE ARE OTHER VEHICLES THAT THE CITY CAN PROVIDE SUCH AS DP 90 TO MEET THOSE AFFORDABILITY GOALS, IT IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO TRY AND GET MORE INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING NEAR NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH WAS MENTIONED, THE TWO METRO RAPID LINES THAT HAVE STOPS WITHIN A STONE THROW OF THIS SITE.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE ARE STAFF TO DO A WHOLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ANOTHER TOD PLAN FOR THIS AREA GIVEN THAT IT'S ALREADY RECEIVED ONE.
AND GIVEN THAT WE HAVE NEW TRANSIT BEING, YOU KNOW, PROPOSED, UH, COVERING LARGE PORTIONS OF THE CITY THAT ALSO NEED PLANNING DONE.
SO, UM, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO POTENTIALLY DIRECT RESOURCES TO THIS AREA WHEN THERE'S SO MANY OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE NEVER RECEIVED A PLAN AND 'CAUSE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY COST TO THAT OF HOW MANY, UH, YOU KNOW, OPPORTUNITIES ARE MISSING IN OTHER PARTS OF TOWN, UH, BY FOCUSING RESOURCES, AN AREA THAT'S ALREADY BEEN LARGELY BUILT OUT UNDER THIS TOD.
AND THEN JUST RELATED TO THAT, UM, THERE WERE A LOT OF CONCERNS RELATED TO FLOODING AND SORT OF THOSE ISSUES WOULD BE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED AS WE LOOKED AT SITE PLAN.
IS THAT CORRECT? OR HOW IS THAT USUALLY HANDLED? YEAH, I DID WANNA POINT OUT SOMETHING ON THAT THAT I DID DO, UH, LOOK INTO, UM, AFTER HEARING MORE OF THOSE CONCERNS UNDER THE PROPOSED, UH, BASE ZONING OF CS, UH, IT'S A 95% IMPERVIOUS COVER AND A 95% BUILDING COVERAGE.
UM, THAT'S THE SAME AS WHAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED INTO THE PLAN.
SO THERE'S NO NET INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER BY GRANTING THIS REQUEST TO DB 90.
IT'S THE EXACT SAME IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT IT HAS TODAY.
AND IF I HAVE A FEW MORE SECONDS, I'M GONNA QUICKLY ASK THE APPLICANT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UM, SO I THINK JUST TO HIGHLIGHT, IT SOUNDS LIKE UNDER THE CURRENT PLAN, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS TAKING IT OUT OF THE TOD, WE WOULD POTENTIALLY END UP WITH, UM, MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS, POTENTIALLY A BETTER STREET SCAPE, POTENTIALLY STILL HAVING COMMERCIAL, EVEN IF WE DID GRANT THE WAIVER THIS EVENING.
I, I GUESS IS THERE ANYTHING THAT IS POTENTIALLY NOT BEING INCLUDED? BECAUSE IF WE LEAVE IT IN THE TOD, BECAUSE I GUESS I'M, I'M CONFUSED AS TO WHY THE TOD DOESN'T SEEM TO BE SERVING THE PURPOSE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE HERE, WHICH IS ADDITIONAL UNITS CLOSE TO TRANSIT SUPPORTED AREA.
IS THAT CORRECT? I, YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
I DON'T SEE ANY, ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE GAINED, UM, BY LEAVING IT IN THE TOD.
ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE GAINED THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR THIS AREA OR THE ENTIRETY OF, OF AUSTIN.
REALLY
ARE THERE SOME POTENTIAL WORK FIXES OR THINGS THAT CAN BE LOOKED AT AS YOU ALL MOVE INTO CYCLING? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED OR YOU'RE ALL OPEN TO? UM, AS FAR AS I KNOW, UM, I MEAN THE SITE HAS AN AUTOMOBILE RELATED USE AT THIS TIME AND THE TRAFFIC GENERATED FROM THAT IS WHAT IT IS.
UM, BUT ARE YOU ASKING, OH, SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY, I GUESS I HAD THE SAME UNDERSTANDING GIVEN HOW TRANSIT RICH THE AREA THAT THERE MAY NOT BE AS MANY CAR RELATED, UM, IN INGRESS AND RES, SO THE CONCERNS MIGHT BE MITIGATED THROUGH SITE PLANNING OR OTHER SORT OF FOLLOW UP ABSOLUTELY.
DECISIONS AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, CORRECT.
UH, AND THEN I GUESS THE FINAL QUESTION IS THAT THE PLAN IS TO WORK CLOSELY WITH TPW AS THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE CHANGES BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY YOU WOULDN'T WANT THIS SECTION TO HAVE A REALLY NICE BIKE LANE AND THEN TWO BLOCKS DOWN, IT'S NOT GREAT.
SO HOW WOULD THAT BE HANDLED? UM, I MEAN WHEN A SITE PLAN IS, IS PROVIDED TO THE CITY TO REVIEW, UM, YOU KNOW, TPW WILL GET THEIR FINGERS INTO IT AND GIVE US ALL KINDS OF COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DRIVEWAY, EXISTING DRIVEWAY IS, UM, CLOSER TO THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE, CLOSER TO THE INTERSECTION.
SO MY GUESS IS THAT TPW WOULD AT LEAST ASK US TO MOVE THAT DRIVEWAY FUR THE FURTHEST AWAY POSSIBLE FROM THE INTERSECTION.
UM, BUT THE SITE IS WHAT IT IS, SO, YEAH.
OTHER QUESTIONS COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS RELATED.
JUST WANTED TO VISIT ABOUT DRAINAGE A LITTLE BIT MORE SINCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD SUCH CONCERNS AND OF IS ANYBODY HERE FROM CITY STAFF MAYBE WATERSHED PROTECTION THAT CAN SPEAK TO THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT BEHIND THE
[01:15:01]
PROPERTY? WE RECEIVED THOSE PHOTOS IN, IN LAID BACK UP REALLY TIGHTLY BEFORE THIS MEETING.I DID REACH OUT TO WATERSHED PROTECTION.
UM, I CAN SPEAK GENERALLY, BUT UH OKAY.
WE DO NOT HAVE SOMEBODY FROM WATERSHED WITH US.
I'LL KEEP IT GENERAL THEN, IS IT LOOKS LIKE THAT DRAINAGE IS RECEIVING FLOW COMING OUT FROM UNDERNEATH AIRPORT BOULEVARD? YEAH, THAT WAS THE DEVELOPER'S ASSESSMENT AND I THINK STAFF, UH, GENERALLY WOULD AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT.
THERE IS, UH, A DRAINAGE PIPE THAT GOES AND IT DOES SLOPE FROM EAST TO WEST.
UH, I GUESS MAYBE KIND OF I COULD FOLLOW UP WITH THE APPLICANT MAYBE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE Y'ALL HAVE DONE SOME MORE DRAINAGE INVESTIGATIONS AND MAYBE IF YOU CAN SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT, WHAT, YOU KNOW IN TERMS OF, DO YOU, UH, MR. THROWER, DO YOU HAVE A GENERAL SENSE OF WHAT THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS TO THAT CHANNEL WHERE IT'S RECEIVING WATER FROM? I'VE NOT COMPLETED THAT LEVEL OF STUDY YET.
I'VE JUST LOOKED AT THE, UH, TOPOGRAPHIC LINES, LOOK AT THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S AVAILABLE ON PROPERTY PROFILE.
AND I'M SEEING THE SAME CONDITIONS YOU ARE THAT A LOT OF THE DRAINAGE AREA IS EAST OF AIRPORT AND FLOWS INTO THAT PIPE AND CONTINUES, UH, WESTWARD TO BOGGY CREEK.
SO WHEN I LOOK AT THE DRAINAGE AREA, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S, THAT STREAM CONTINUES ALL THE WAY UP THE EAST SIDE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD FOR QUITE SOME DISTANCE.
SO IT, I THINK IT'S DRAINING A BIG, A MUCH BIGGER AREA THAN JUST THE INTERSECTION OF MANOR AND AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN OUR EXHIBITS, WE DO DENOTE THAT THERE IS FLOODPLAIN IN THAT DRAINAGE CHANNEL ON OUR PROPERTY.
FLOODPLAIN GENERALLY DOES NOT START UNTIL THERE'S A MINIMUM OF 64 ACRES, UH, CONTRIBUTING TO IT.
SO, UM, I MEAN IF THAT'S THE BASELINE AND THE FLOODPLAIN BASICALLY STARTS AT THAT POINT, THERE'S A MINIMUM OF 64 ACRES THAT DRAINS INTO THIS SITE.
QUESTION ABOUT IMPERVIOUS COVER.
I KNOW STAFF HAS TALKED ABOUT EXISTING ALLOWABLE.
I GUESS THIS QUESTION IS STILL FOR THE APPLICANT EXISTING, UH, THE EXISTING ZONING ALLOWS 95% PROPOSED WOULD BE 95%.
DO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT IS OUT THERE TODAY? IT LOOKS LIKE MOST OF THE PROPERTY IS PAVED.
THERE'S NOT BEEN, UM, UH, A SURVEY COMPLETED AT THIS TIME TO GIVE THE GREATEST LEVEL OF ACCURACY FOR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, BUT ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S DRAINAGE CALCULATION VIEWER, THERE'S ABOUT 57% TODAY.
AND I SUSPECT A LARGE PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE THERE'S THE 30 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN THE BACK AND THEN THERE'S A TRIANGULAR PIECE THAT'S TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, I HAVE A QUESTION IF, IF NO OTHER COMMISSIONERS WANNA GO.
SO MR. TOMKO, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY'S RESOURCES ARE COMPLETELY STRAPPED ON INITIATIVES THAT ARE MOVING FORWARD AS CHAIR OF THIS BODY.
WE SEE THE CALENDAR OUT TWO YEARS AND EVERY MEETING IS PACKED WITH A DIFFERENT CODE, UM, COMING THROUGH.
I THINK THE SMALL AREA OF PLANNING IS, IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
THERE'S, THERE'S NO SHORTAGE OF NEEDS.
AND I WAS WONDERING OUTSIDE OF THE CITY HAS THE CITY, UM, AND THIS IS KIND OF A QUESTION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR A NOTE TO YOU, THERE'S OTHER RESOURCES LIKE THE LOCAL ULI, THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE, UM, PERHAPS PUTTING TOGETHER A TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, UM, PROGRAM OR EVEN THE A PA, THE COMMUNITY PLANNING ASSISTANCE TEAM.
UM, I KNOW THAT THOSE CAN BE SOMEWHAT COMPETITIVE, BUT I WONDER IF THERE'S OTHER AVENUES OF GETTING THESE SMALL AREA PLANS DONE.
ERIC KLIK, UH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UM, THERE, THERE ARE, UM, OTHER, OTHER TOOLS THAT HAVE SOMETIMES BEEN USED TO SUPPORT PLANNING AND UM, THERE IS ACTUALLY AN APPLICATION IN RIGHT NOW, UM, FOR THE CHERRYWOOD AREA FOR AN A I A, I THINK DAT IS ITS CURRENT ACRONYM.
UM, AND, AND SO THOSE ARE OPTIONS, UM, ON OCCASION, BUT IN GENERAL THERE ARE ALSO CAPACITY ISSUES IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, MAKING SURE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE IT ONTO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CALENDAR AND THE CITY COUNCIL CALENDAR.
SO WE ARE TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AS MUCH PLANNING AS WE CAN, UM, AND AS, AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO SO AND ARE ALSO LOOKING AT POTENTIAL, UM, POTENTIAL OPTIONS OF, OF WAYS TO LOOK AT, UM, ETOD, WAYS TO UPDATE THE, THE TOD AREAS, PERHAPS MORE COMPREHENSIVELY,
[01:20:01]
BUT WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE.THAT'S GOOD NEWS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT OTHER TOOLS AND I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD REALLY LOOK INTO U-L-I-A-P-A AND A I A WAS ANOTHER ONE I HAD FORGOTTEN ABOUT AS TO MAYBE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THERE TO GET SOME PLANNING ASSISTANCE.
UM, BUT THIS WOULD NEED TO BE A COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH YOUR STAKEHOLDERS AND THE CITY AND, AND OTHER DESIGNERS AND PLANNERS IN THE AREA.
SO THAT'S THE END OF MY QUESTIONS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HOWARD? COMMISSIONER HANEY? OKAY.
I'D LIKE TO MOVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH ONE DIFFERENCE, AND THAT IS THAT WE DO NOT GRANT THE WAIVER FOR, UM, NOT, NOT REQUIRING RETAIL.
SEE I COM, UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HANEY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THAT? I WOULD THANK YOU.
UM, IT'S BEEN 15 YEARS, BUT AS A COLLEGE OF STUDENT, I, I TOURED THIS AREA WITH SOME FOLKS THAT WERE CREATING THIS PLAN AND A LOT OF THE THINGS I SAID TO ME AT THAT TIME, REALLY STICK WITH ME.
ONE WAS THE ARBITRARY HEIGHT LIMIT OF 60 FEET.
AT THE TIME IT WAS CONSIDERED ARBITRARY.
WE HAD PARKING REQUIREMENTS BACK THEN.
THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS, THIS PLAN WAS SOMETHING FOR AUSTIN, BUT IT WASN'T NECESSARILY BOARD THINKING IN A LOT OF WAYS.
AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO REZONE IF WE'RE NOT GONNA RE, YOU KNOW, RECALIBRATE THIS ANYTIME SOON.
BUT IN, UH, AUSTIN'S METRO POPULATION, 2009 IS 1.32 MILLION.
TODAY IT STANDS AT 2.47 MILLION.
UM, YESTERDAY, THE SENATE HEARING ON HOUSING, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW THE AVERAGE AGE OF A HOME BUYER NOW IS 54 YEARS OLD.
AND I KNOW WE HEARD FROM SOMEONE EARLIER SAYING WE'RE NOT IN A CRISIS OF NOT HAVING ENOUGH APARTMENTS, BUT THE FACT IS, NUMBER ONE, WE DON'T KNOW THAT THIS WILL BE APARTMENTS, THIS COULD BE CONDOS AND YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S APARTMENTS OR CONDOS, IT IS HOUSING NEXT TO TRANSIT ON AN AMAZING CORRIDOR.
I LIVE 1.5 MILES FROM HERE AND IT COULD BE SO MUCH MORE THAN THE SCRAP YARD THAT IT IS TODAY.
IT'S SITS WITH CARS AND PAVEMENT AND IT JUST, IT COULD BE SO MUCH MORE.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WITH ITS CURRENT ZONING, NOTHING HAS HAPPENED IN 15 YEARS.
AND SO MY HOPE IS THAT WE GIVE IT THIS BETTER ZONING AND THAT WE SEE IT GET DEVELOPED SOMETIME VERY SOON.
ANY COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER SPEAKING IN SUPPORT.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
THIS IS FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION EXCEPT NOT GRANTING THE WAIVER FOR GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL OR FOR NO GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL.
THAT WAS, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HANEY.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
THANK YOU TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR COMING OUT AND YOUR COMMUNICATIONS REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU'VE PUT INTO THIS AND WE HOPE THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, WILL CONTINUE TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL.
[16. Appeal of Administrative Denial of Waivers of Design Guidelines:SP-2022-0218C.SH - Avalon Pointe]
TO, UH, ITEM NUMBER 16.THIS IS THE APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DENIAL OF WAIVERS OF DESIGN GUIDELINES.
JORGE
THAT'S A TOUGH ACT TO FOLLOW, BUT I DO HAVE ANOTHER EXCITING CASE FOR YOU, WHICH IS AN APPEAL.
YOU DON'T OFTEN SEE THESE KIND OF CASES AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO IF YOU WILL INDULGE ME JUST TO KIND OF WALK YOU THROUGH IT, THIS IS AN APPEAL FOR A DENIAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE WAIVER REQUEST UNDER LDC SECTION 25 2 7 6 4 C AS IN CHARLIE FOR THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT DESIGN REGULATIONS UNDER THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL SECTION 12.
THIS IS FOR THE PROPERTY AT 26 10 HUME PLACE CALLED AVALON POINT, UH, FOR A PROPOSED 126 UNIT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY UNO WEST CAMPUS SUBDISTRICT.
NOW THIS IS SUBJECT TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES PROVISIONS OF THE CODE SECTION I MENTIONED, WHICH REFERENCES THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL IN SECTION 12.
THE PROJECT WAS APPROVED ON JANUARY 29TH, 2024 VIA SITE PLAN THAT'S LISTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
AND ON JULY 13, THE APPLICANT WAS MADE AWARE BY URBAN DESIGN STAFF OF THE REQUIREMENTS TO INSTALL AND PROPOSED STREETSCAPE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S INCLUDED IN ATTACHMENT A OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.
IN A SUBSEQUENT COMMUNICATION, THE APPLICANT STATED THAT THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT ROOM TO ACCOMMODATE THE AND PROVIDE FOR THE REQUIRED STREETS SCAPE ELEMENTS, BUT FOR GRASS ON A PARTICULAR PORTION OF THE PROJECT.
SO THEY WERE MADE AWARE OF THOSE SPECIFIC DESIGN STANDARD REGULATIONS.
[01:25:01]
HOWEVER, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE STANDARDS HAVE A BUILT-IN FLEXIBILITY TODAY IN THE OUTER WEST CAMPUS.SUBDISTRICTS ONLY DEVELOPMENTS THAT EXCEED A LINEAR, UH, LENGTH OF 150 FEET OF FRONTAGE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE STREET FURNISHINGS SUCH AS TRAP, EXCUSE ME, TRASH RECEPTACLES, BIKE RACKS AND BENCHES.
THIS PARTICULAR FRONTAGE HAS ABOUT 46.5 LINEAR FEET THAT ACTUALLY INCLUDE ABOUT 30 LINEAR FEET OF DRIVEWAY AND CURB.
SO IT DOES NOT NEED TO PROVIDE THOSE STREET FURNISHINGS LIKE TRASH RECEPTACLES, BIKE RACKS, AND REQUIRE BENCHES.
IT DOES, HOWEVER, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE TWO STREET TREES BASED ON THE LINEAR FRONTAGE AND ALSO ONE PECAN STREET LIGHT POLE AS WELL AS A PEDESTRIAN CLEAR ZONE.
ON FEBRUARY 12TH, 2025, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A WAIVER OF THREE SPECIFIC DESIGN GUIDELINES IN THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL REFERENCED IN PEDESTRIAN SCALE, STREET LIGHTING, PEDESTRIAN CLEAR ZONE, AND STREET TREE SPACING.
THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DID CONSIDER THAT REQUEST AND AND DENIED THE WAIVER BASED ON THE STAFF ANALYSIS THAT IS INCLUDED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
NOW YOU MAY HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THE, ABOUT THE COMPLEXITY OF THE LAYOUT OF THE SITE, THE LACK OF ACCESS, THE TIGHT CONFIGURATION OF WHOM HUME PLAYS AS A RIGHT OF WAY, ALL OF WHICH STAFF RECOGNIZES AND AGREES.
IT IS A UNIQUE SITE AND IT HAS SOME SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES.
HOWEVER, URBAN DESIGN DID WORK AND ATTEMPTED TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT IN ATTEMPTING TO COME UP WITH A DESIGN SOLUTION THAT WOULD INCORPORATE THE REQUIRED STREET SCAPE ELEMENTS.
HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE THAT BASED ON DESIGN CHOICES MADE BY THE APPLICANT, THERE CONTINUES TO BE INSUFFICIENT ROOM TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUIRED STREET ELEMENTS.
SPECIFICALLY ON PAGE 18 AND 19 OF YOUR BACKUP, YOU WILL SEE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED ONE TREE PLANTED ON AN ABOVE GRADE PLANTER.
THIS WOULD NOT MEET THE STANDARD AS ONLY ABOVE GRADE PLANTERS ARE ALLOWED WHEN THERE IS A CONFLICT WITH EXISTING UTILITIES.
THERE ARE NO EXISTING UTILITIES AT THIS POINT.
THERE ARE PROPOSED UTILITIES WHERE THE PROPOSED TREE IS DEPICTED ON THAT PLANTER WOULD CAUSE A CONFLICT WITH PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITIES IN THE FUTURE.
SO IT WOULD CREATE AN ADDITIONAL CONFLICT.
ANOTHER REQUEST IS TO ATTACH STREET LIGHTING INSTEAD OF DOING STREET LIGHTING TO ATTACH IT TO THE BUILDING FACADE.
THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO STANDARDS IN THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY UNO STANDARDS THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE FOR ON THE FACADE LIGHTING TO ACCOMMODATE.
SO THERE WOULD BE NO STANDARD FOR US TO REVIEW AGAINST.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PROJECT FAILS TO PROVIDE THE PEDESTRIAN CLEAR ZONE, WHICH IS A PRIORITY THAT'S BEEN GIVEN IN THIS PROJECT TO THE DRIVEWAY AS PROPOSED, UH, TO ACCESS A PARKING GARAGE.
THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL IS A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM THE CODE PROVISIONS AND FAILS AND FALLS DEFICIENT OF MEETING THE MINIMUM DEPARTURE FROM THE PROVISIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID AN UNREASONABLE OR IMPRACTICAL RESULT.
AND DOES THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DENY THE WAIVER REQUEST? THEREFORE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE APPEAL COMMISSIONERS.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
NEXT WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
HELLO COMMISSIONERS, I'M LEAH BOJO WITH JENNER GROUP HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, UM, OH, PERFECT, THANK YOU.
OKAY, SO, UM, I'M GONNA TRY NOT TO REPEAT MUCH OF WHAT MR. RULAND SAID, BUT I DO WANNA WALK YOU THROUGH THIS SITE.
UM, SO I WANNA BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THIS LOCATION.
UM, SO THIS IS THE SITE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
YOU CAN SEE HERE, UH, IT'S A VERY SMALL SITE OFF OF A VERY SMALL, UM, STREET JUST OFF OF GUADALUPE.
OBVIOUSLY THE TRANSIT AND WALKABILITY AND PROXIMITY TO UT HERE ARE PRETTY FANTASTIC.
BUT I WANNA EMPHASIZE SPECIFICALLY THAT HUME IS A NARROW ROAD, A NARROW STREET, UM, AND THAT THIS IS A VERY SMALL LOT OFF OF IT.
IN FACT, IT'S NOT EVEN 10,000 SQUARE FEET, UM, OF DEVELOPABLE SPACE OF SITE AREA.
UM, WE ARE CURRENTLY, UM, HAVE AN APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR 142 MULTIFAMILY UNITS.
30 OF THOSE ARE AFFORDABLE UNDER THE UNO REQUIREMENTS AT 50 AND 60% MFI.
UM, AND THEN, UM, IT'S A 10 STORY BUILDING.
THERE ARE 18 PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE, SO I THINK THAT'S ABOUT A 0.1.
IT'S LESS THAN 0.14 PARKING RATIO, SO VERY, VERY LOW PARKING, WHICH OBVIOUSLY MAKES SENSE IN THIS LOCATION.
UM, AND THEN, UM, THE CONSTRAINTS, WHICH I'LL GET TO IN IN A MINUTE, WHICH, UM, JORGE MENTIONED AS WELL ARE THE LIMITED FRONTAGE, UM, AND THE LIMITED, AND THEN THE DRIVEWAY ACCESS
[01:30:01]
AND THE WAY THAT IT COMES OFF OF THAT KIND OF UNCOMMON INTERSECTION.SO HERE'S A ZOOMED IN PICTURE OF THE SITE.
THAT PINK LINE IS A PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTION, UM, ACCESS EASEMENT.
I YOU SAW REFERENCE TO IT IN YOUR BACKUP.
AND I JUST WANNA POINT IT OUT THERE BECAUSE I THINK IT IS PART OF THE WAY THAT THE SITE FUNCTIONS.
BUT THE MORE IMPORTANT PART IS THAT YOU CAN SEE, UM, THAT IT'S ABOUT, IT'S UNDER 46 AND A HALF FEET OF FRONTAGE THERE ON HUME PLACE.
UM, AND UM, OBVIOUSLY TUCKED OFF OF A BACK OFF OF THE MAIN STREET.
THIS IS NOT LIKELY TO BE A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE WALKING BY.
THIS IS GONNA BE PEOPLE EITHER COMING OR GOING FROM THAT DEVELOPMENT TO, TO UT OR ALL OF THE USES THAT ARE NEARBY.
UM, SO THIS IS A VERY DETAILED SITELINE, SITELINE OR TIMELINE, WHICH I WILL NOT GO THROUGH IN DETAIL, BUT THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT POINTS HERE.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, THE PROJECT WAS FIRST SUBMITTED FOR COMPLETENESS IN MAY OF 22, FORMALLY SUBMITTED IN JUNE OF 22.
IT WAS, UM, AS, AS JORGE MENTIONED, IT WENT THROUGH URBAN DESIGN DISCUSSION.
MY, I WAS NOT ON THE PROJECT AT THAT TIME, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THAT DISCUSSION IS THAT THERE WAS A MEETING, UM, I SAW SOME KIND OF CORRESPONDENCE, UM, ABOUT IT WHERE BASICALLY, UM, EVERYONE, UH, UNDERSTOOD THAT, UM, LETTER OF THE LAW COMPLIANCE WITH UNO AND THIS SITE WAS NOT GONNA WORK.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE SITE WAS MARKED ON THE SITE PLAN, COMMENT REPORT AS NOT APPLICABLE.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE BY THE REST OF THOSE COMMENT REPORTS, WHICH I JUST PUT IN THERE TO SHOW YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, THE REST OF THE SITE PLAN AS THIS NORMALLY HAPPENS WAS WORKED THROUGH.
THERE WERE MANY OTHER MEETINGS, MANY COMMENTS CLEARED, AND THE SITE PLAN WAS ISSUED ON JANUARY 29TH, 2024.
UM, AT THAT POINT, BUILDING PERMITS WERE THEN APPROVED AND CONSTRUCTION BEGAN AROUND OCTOBER OF, OF 24.
UM, THIS WAS ALL LEGAL PERMITS IN HAND.
UM, YOU KNOW, REASON TO BELIEVE THAT, THAT THIS APPLICATION HAD BEEN PROPERLY APPROVED BY THE CITY REVIEWERS.
UM, IT WAS, UM, AS A RESULT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD COMPLAINT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT ABOUT THE PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTION, IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER.
AT THE POINT OF THE CITY CAME OUT TO INVESTIGATE AND SAW THE STREETS SCAPE SITUATION AND STARTED ASKING QUESTIONS.
AND AT THAT POINT IN MID-JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, CONSTRUCTION WAS PUT ON HOLD WHILE THIS SITUATION WAS SORTED OUT.
SO THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN ON HOLD FOR TWO MONTHS, UM, JUST AT A STANDSTILL WAITING FOR RESOLUTION OF THIS, UM, UPON THAT, AND THAT'S AROUND THE TIME WHEN I CAME IN TO HELP WITH THE PROJECT.
AT THAT TIME WE HAD, I BELIEVE, FOUR STREETSCAPE OPTIONS THAT WE RAN BY URBAN DESIGN STAFF.
NONE OF THEM WERE GONNA WORK, WHICH IS NOT SURPRISING IN ALL HONESTY BECAUSE AS YOU SAW, THIS IS A VERY COMPLICATED
UM, AT THAT POINT WHILE WE WERE WORKING THROUGH STREETSCAPE OPTIONS, WE WERE ALSO WORKING THROUGH THIS APPEAL PROCESS AND, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO USE IT.
UM, WE FINALLY WERE APPROVED TO USE THIS PROCESS.
WE SUBMITTED A WAIVER REQUEST, AS TOGE SAID IT WAS DENIED.
ALL THREE OF THEM WERE DENIED, WHICH I'LL GET INTO IN A MINUTE.
UM, AND SO THAT IS HOW WE GOT HERE.
UM, THIS IS JUST A SECTION OF THE CODE THAT DESCRIBES THE WAIVER.
UM, IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING BECAUSE THIS IS A SPECIFICALLY AN UNO WAIVER PROCESS, WHICH IS WHY I WANTED TO POINT IT OUT.
UM, THE, THE THINGS ARE IN THE BUILDING CRITERIA MANUAL, BUT IT'S BECAUSE OF THIS SECTION IN 25 2 7 64 A THAT SAYS THAT THEY HAVE TO BE COMPLIED WITH.
BUT THEN IT ALSO LAYS OUT THE WAIVER PROCESS IN C AND SPECIFICALLY IMPORTANTLY, I THINK IT SAYS IF THE PROVISION IS UNREASONABLE OR IMPRACTICAL AS APPLIED TO THE SITE, WHICH I THINK IS EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE, UM, AND EXACTLY WHY WE, UM, WHY THIS WAIVER MAKES SENSE FOR THIS SITE.
UM, I THINK THE ONLY OTHER OPTION WOULD BE NOT BUILDING ANYTHING HERE, AND I THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY A GREAT LITTLE TUCKED AWAY SITE THAT HOUSING MAKES SENSE ON AND NOT MANY OTHER THINGS TO DO.
UM, SO THIS IS A SORT OF A HIGH LEVEL, YOU KNOW, DESCRIPTION OF THE UNO TREE SCAPE REQUIREMENTS, PEDESTRIAN SCALE LIGHTING, PEDESTRIAN CLEAR ZONE AND TREE SPACING, WHICH JORGE DISCUSSED.
YOU CAN SEE BY THE MEASUREMENTS HERE THAT THIS ISN'T, WOULD NOT WORK ON THIS VERY SMALL FRONTAGE.
UH, I'LL GO QUICKLY THROUGH MY LAST COUPLE OF SLIDES IF THAT'S OKAY.
UM, SO THESE ARE THE WAIVER REQUESTS.
WE DID REQUEST, UM, LIGHTING ON THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING TO LIGHT THE SIDEWALK TO MAKE SURE IT'S SAFE.
UM, BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLACE FOR THE LIGHT POLE CLEAR ZONE.
I'LL SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE ON THIS, UM, EXHIBIT WHY IT DOESN'T WORK.
BUT THERE WILL ACTUALLY BE A PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO WALK THROUGH AND TREE SPACING.
WE DID HAVE TO PROPOSE IT ON, UH, AN ABOVE GROUND PLANTER BECAUSE THERE'S NOWHERE TO PLANT IT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE DRIVEWAY, UM, IS 20 FEET WIDE, BUT BECAUSE OF THE ANGLE ON THE ROAD, IT'S ACTUALLY 30 FEET OF FRONTAGE.
SO THE DRIVEWAY CAN'T BE ANY NARROWER BY CODE.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE, UM, THE WATER LINE EASEMENT, WHICH IS RECORDED AND WAS PUT IN PLACE WITH THE APPROVED SITE PLAN IS THERE.
UM, WE DID PULL THE CURB OUT TO TRY TO KIND OF MAKE THAT SIDEWALK ANGLE WORK A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
AND THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY THERE TO THE LEFT KIND OF IN THE PINK IS REALLY THE ONLY AREA OF THE SITE WHERE WE HAVE LIKE, YOU KNOW, QUOTE UNQUOTE CURB.
UM, SO THIS IS WHAT WE PROPOSED.
UM, WE HAVE, YOU CAN SEE THE ABOVE GRAIN PLANNER THERE IS THE GREEN CIRCLE.
UM, WE CAN'T COMPLY WITH A CLEAR ZONE, BUT I DO WANNA BE CLEAR THAT WE CAN MAKE A WALKABLE AREA THERE.
IT'S JUST THAT THE CLEAR ZONE, TECHNICALLY IT WOULD BE FURNITURE ZONE THEN CLEAR ZONE AND BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE SHAPE OF THE SITE IS, WE CAN'T QUITE DO IT IN THAT ORDER.
BUT THERE WILL BE ROOM TO WALK AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE LIGHT ON THE BUILDING AS WELL.
[01:35:01]
SO THIS IS A SUMMARY OF THE DATES, AGAIN, APPROVED SITE PLAN STARTED CONSTRUCTION WITH A PERMIT IN HAND, WAS SORT OFAND WE'RE REALLY HAPPY TO BE HERE AND HOPEFULLY, UM, GET THIS RESOLVED.
SO WITH THAT, WE WOULD REQUEST YOUR REVERSAL OF THE WAIVER DENIAL, UM, SINCE THIS SITE DOES NOT ALLOW COMPLIANCE.
AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW BE MOVING ON TO THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS WALTER ASH.
WALTER, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
MY NAME IS WALTER ASH AND UH, I REPRESENT THE, UH, OWNERS OF 26 0 6 AND 26 0 8 GUADALUPE STREET, WHICH IS A PROPERTY THAT WE HAVE LEASED TO AN AUSTIN INSTITUTION, KIRBY LANE CAFE FOR 25 YEARS.
SO THIS IS AN ADJACENT PROPERTY THAT'S ON GUADALUPE AND IS BACKED UP.
THE PART THAT SHE TALKED ABOUT.
SHE SHOWED A PINK LINE ON HER AERIAL VIEW THAT SHOWED A PRIVATE WAY.
AND SO I'M GONNA DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE BIT AS WELL.
UM, I'D LIKE TO POINT YOU TO THE COMMENTS AND EXHIBITS SUPPLIED BY TIM FINLEY, WHICH APPEAR ON PAGES 46 THROUGH 51 OF YOUR BACKGROUND MATERIALS.
UM, HE REPRESENTS THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR TO US ALSO ON GUADALUPE STREET.
AND HE ACTUALLY TOUCHES, UH, THE HUME PART OF HUME PLACE THAT, UH, GOES TO GUADALUPE.
UM, AND I AGREE WITH, UM, ALL OF HIS COMMENTS IN THAT.
AS HE POINTED OUT, THE APPLICANT CHANGED THEIR SUBMITTALS TO REMOVE REFERENCES TO PRIVATE WAY, TO THE PRIVATE WAY.
IT WAS CLEARLY SHOWN IN A JUNE, 2022 SUBMITTAL, BUT WAS REMOVED FROM FUTURE SUBMITTALS, WHICH WERE THEN USED FOR REVIEW BY CITY STAFF.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ONE THAT'S IN HIS EXHIBIT, THERE'S A ONE THAT I BELIEVE IS DATED JANUARY, 2024, WHICH WAS THE ONE RIGHT BEFORE THIS SITE PLAN.
IT IS NOT MENTIONED, SO THEY HAD NO WAY OF EVEN KNOWING IT WAS THERE.
THEY HAD SEEN IT, MAYBE THEY HAD WOULD'VE HAD A DIFFERENT, UM, ANSWER TO SOME OF THEIR COMMENTS.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE WASTEWATER SEWER LINE FOR KIRBY CAFE FOR KIRBY LANE CAFE RUNS THROUGH THIS PRIVATE WAY, EASEMENT TO HUME PLACE.
THE PREVIOUS BUILDING THAT WAS THERE ON THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT FIVE FEET INTO THE 10 FOOT EASEMENT PRIVATE WAY.
AND WE ALWAYS ASSUMED THAT IT WAS EXISTING NON-CONFORMING AND THAT WHEN THIS EXISTING NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE WAS EVER REMOVED, ANY FUTURE STRUCTURE WOULD HAVE TO RESPECT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PRIVATE WAY EASEMENT AND SET BACK THE ENTIRE 10 FEET SO THAT ANY FUTURE ACCESS TO BE ABLE TO GET TO THAT SEWER LINE OR WHATEVER ELSE NEEDS TO BE IN THAT, IN THAT PRIVATE WAY, EASEMENT WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE.
IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE PLANS THAT THEY'RE SHOWING NOW AND EVEN THE PLANS SHE SHOWED THERE, UM, THEY HAVE PAVEMENT SIDEWALK OVER IT.
AND THE BUILDING IS ALSO, AGAIN BUILT ALL THE WAY TO I THINK FIVE FEET.
LIKE THEY WERE TRYING TO JUST DO A FIVE FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, NOT ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THERE'S A 10 FOOT PRIVATE WAY EASEMENT THAT THEY NEED TO RESPECT AS WELL.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THE REMOVAL, UM, OF THE REFERENCE THE PRIVATE WAY BY THIS APPLICANT WAS JUST AN ACCIDENTAL OVERSIGHT OR WAS AN INTENTIONAL INTENT TO MISLEAD CITY STAFF.
BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO RESPECT AND ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECORDED PRIVATE WAY EASEMENT MOVING FORWARD IN ANYTHING THAT GOES FORWARD.
I BELIEVE MR. MCCONE AND OTHERS MAY SPEAK TO SAFETY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS LOCATION.
UM, THERE, THE PME PLACE IS A VERY NARROW STREET, 20 FEET ON ONE SIDE AND I BELIEVE 12 TO 15 FEET ON THE OTHER SIDE.
UM, AND IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A NOT A SAFE PLACE FOR STUDENTS WE HAVE OR TO TO BE WALKING IF YOU'RE TRYING TO ADD HUNDREDS OF STUDENTS WALKING MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY IN AND OUT.
UM, UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY HAS BEEN A VERY SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM BECAUSE IT HAS INSISTED ON MAKING A MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY SIDEWALK AND SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD IN EVERY WAY.
AND SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY REASON TO WAIVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS SITE.
UM, I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY FUTURE QUESTIONS AND WOULD POINT YOU TO, UM, OTHER CONCERNS THAT WERE LISTED.
I THINK THERE'S A LETTER FROM A LADY WHO REPRESENTS SAFE HORNS ABOUT SOME OTHER SAFETY CONCERNS, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT A 10 STORY BUILDING IF THIS STREET IS SO ACCESSIBLE, LIKE IT'S HISTORICALLY BEEN, I BELIEVE IT WAS A HOSTILE, IT'S MAYBE TWO OR THREE STORIES.
HAD A RESTAURANT AT ONE POINT, THERE WAS A FAUX RESTAURANT, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT HAD BEEN THERE.
SO IT'S BEEN A RESIDENTIAL SITE FOR AT LEAST THE 20 YEARS I'VE KNOWN IT.
UM, BUT NOT TO THIS DENSITY, BUT IF YOU'RE TRYING TO PUT A 10 STORY BUILDING AND THE ROADS ARE TOO NARROW TO BE ABLE TO GET A FIRE TRUCK THERE, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY REALLY BEEN THOUGHT THROUGH VERY WELL.
[01:40:01]
MAY NEED TO WORK TOGETHER AND FIGURE OUT SOME OTHER WAY TO DO IT.UM, AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS MIKE MCCONE.
MIKE, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES COMMISSIONERS.
I COME TO YOU ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THE STAFF PRIMARILY BECAUSE WE HAVE A SITE THAT IS HIDING THE P THIS SITE IS LOCATED ON A NON-STANDARD STREET THAT WILL NOT MEET FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS OF A 25 FOOT WIDE ACCESS.
IT IS LOCATED WHERE THERE IS A 10 FOOT PORTION RUNNING SOUTH TO 26TH STREET WHERE THERE IS A SEWER LINE AND AUSTIN ENERGY WANTS TO PUT IN A NETWORK UNDERGROUND SUPPLY.
WE HAVE SUPPORTED, WE BROUGHT, WE BEING UNIVERSITY AREA PARTNERS, DEVELOPED THE UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AS A PRIVATE EXERCISE BACK IN 20 2001 THROUGH 2004.
IT CAME TO THE CITY COUNCIL PREPARED BY A FORMER CITY ATTORNEY AND WAS IMMEDIATELY, UH, APPROVED BY, UH, AFTER A LONG DISCUSSION WITH NEIGHBORS, UH, FOR THE, UH, WORKING WITH FIVE SEVEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS IN THE COMBINED CENTRAL AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE COME TO YOU TONIGHT SAYING, NO, THIS CANNOT BE BECAUSE IT'S NOT SAFE.
AND UH, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, UNIVERSITY AREA PARTNERS IS A NONPROFIT CORPORATION AS WELL AS A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO READ INTO THE RECORD THE LETTER FROM KATHY NORMAN, OUR PRESIDENT, UH, RE ITEMS NUMBER 16 SP 2022 DASH 2001 C TWO SH.
GREETINGS TO THE AUSTIN CITY COUNT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF UNIVERSITY AIR PARTNERS ON MARCH THE 11TH, 2025, THE BOARD VOTED TO SUPPORT THE CITY OF AUSTIN STAFF DENIAL OF THE REQUESTED WAIVERS.
SINCERELY, KATHY NORMAN, PRESIDENT UNIVERSITY AREA PARTNERS.
THERE IS A LOT MORE TO THIS CASE THAN WHAT IS BEING SPOKEN TO TONIGHT.
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS IS THE VENUE THAT THEY HAVE BROUGHT THIS TO.
UH, I HAVE LOOKED AT IT AS WELL AND WONDER IF WE SHOULD NOT BE ALSO A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE, UH, DUE TO THE, UH, LACK OF A PEDESTRIAN WAY TO A STREET THAT IS, UH, MEETS THE STANDARDS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR A STREET AND PROVIDES SAFE ACCESS FOR BOTH THE DELIVERIES AND VEHICULAR ACCESS FOR ALL THE SERVICES AND THE NECESSARY, UH, SAFETY FOR THE STUDENTS TO WALK.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, I DIDN'T REALIZE I WOULD GET A REBUTTAL
UM, I, I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD.
I'LL JUST MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THIS A PUBLIC HEARING? I BELIEVE SO.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE
MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL SECOND JOHNSON BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
UNLESS THERE'S OBJECTION TO THAT, THAT MOTION PASSES, I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
WHO HAS OUR FIRST QUESTION? JOHNSON? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
UM, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR, UH, THE APPLICANT, MS. BOJO AND, AND STAFF MAYBE IN THAT ORDER.
UM, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE, THE SORT OF CRUX OF THE ISSUE THAT THERE, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOUR CLIENT CLAIMS THERE ISN'T ROOM TO BASICALLY FIT THE REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE NARROW FRONTAGE OF THE SITE.
UM, OBVIOUSLY AT WHAT TWO THIRDS, THREE QUARTERS OF THAT FRONTAGE IS TAKEN UP BY A DRIVEWAY, UH, SERVING, YOU KNOW, JUST A HANDFUL OF PARKING SPACES, LIKE 10 15 WHAT, 18 PARKING SPACES? UM, WHY IS THERE A, A 30 FOOT DRIVEWAY ON THIS SITE? I MEAN, IS THAT A REQUIREMENT? IS THAT DRIVEN BY A REQUIREMENT IN UNO? WHAT, WHAT'S THE SORT OF RATIONALE BEHIND PUTTING THAT DRIVEWAY, UH, THERE AND MAKING IT THAT SIZE? COMMISSIONER THE DRIVEWAY IS AS NARROW AS IT CAN BE.
[01:45:01]
IT'S 20 FEET WIDE FOR THE DRIVEWAY PART.IT'S JUST THAT BECAUSE OF THE ANGLE ON THE INTERSECTION, THE WHERE THE DRIVEWAY MEETS THE FRONTAGE IS THE 30 FEET.
SO THE DRIVEWAY CANNOT BE NARROWER AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
UM, AND I BELIEVE THE REQUIREMENT IS DRIVEN BY 25 2 7 62 SITE ACCESS E STATES THAT A SITE THAT DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO AN ALLEY MUST PROVIDE A SERVICE AND DELIVERY AREA AT LEAST 30 FEET DEEP FROM THE FRONT SET BACK LINE.
SO IT'S NOT JUST THAT YOU WANTED TO PUT, UH, OR YOUR CLIENT WANTED TO PUT 18 PARKING SPACES TO SERVE A HUNDRED AND SOMETHING UNITS.
IT WAS, THEY HAD TO PROVIDE VEHICULAR ACCESS NO MATTER WHAT.
UM, AND THAT'S WHY THE DRIVEWAY IS KIND OF THE SIZE IT IS.
MY UNDERSTANDING THAT, AND THEN I WOULD ADD TO THAT, THAT AT THIS POINT IN THE PROCESS AS WELL, UM, IF THERE WERE, YOU KNOW, TO TO, TO MOVE TO CHANGE THAT PARKING AND CHANGE THAT DRIVEWAY WOULD BE A MAJOR REDESIGN TO THE PROJECT.
I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT, AND AND MAYBE THIS GETS INTO, UH, STAFF A LITTLE BIT, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WOULD BE FOR MR. RUSLAN FROM URBAN DESIGN.
UM, YOU KNOW, ARE THERE WAYS THAT WE CAN NARROW DOWN THAT, THAT DRIVEWAY, APRON AND GET A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, CLEAR ZONE ON THE SITE WITHOUT HAVING TO, YOU KNOW, SCRAP THIS PROJECT THAT'S LITERALLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, YOU KNOW, 120 SOMETHING HOMES.
UH, ARE THERE WAYS YOU CAN WORK WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, TO NARROW DOWN THAT APRON? OBVIOUSLY THE BUILDING ITSELF CAN'T REALLY CHANGE FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THE REQUIREMENTS AND CODE FOR FIRE AND ELECTRICAL ACCESS.
ARE THERE WAYS WE CAN NARROW DOWN THAT DRIVEWAY AND WORK TO SORT OF MEET, MEET IN THE MIDDLE ON THE, THE LITTLE STRIP OF THE 40 FOOT STRIP OF FRONTAGE? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
I I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A WAY TO, TO NARROW THAT DRIVEWAY JUST BASED ON THE CODE SECTION THAT WAS JUST CITED.
HOWEVER, THERE, THERE IS A DESIGN CHOICE MADE HERE ON THIS PROJECT TO PROVIDE PARKING.
THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR PROVIDING PARKING.
THERE ARE OTHER PROJECTS IN THE AREA THAT HAVE ELECTED NOT TO PROVIDE PARKING AND HAVE MET THE REQUIRED STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS THAT UNO REQUIRES.
SO, SO AGAIN, IT COMES TO AN ISSUE OF CHOICE.
COULD IT BE DESIGNED DIFFERENTLY? WELL, OF COURSE, BUT STAFF HAS NOT SEEN AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN THAT WOULD ACCOMMODATE OR COME CLOSE TO MEETING THE REQUIRED STREETS SCAPE ELEMENTS AS OUTLINED IN THE CODE.
EVERY OTHER PROJECT IN UNO HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY ABLE TO MEET THOSE CODE REQUIREMENTS AND THIS SHOULD BE NO EXCEPTION.
SO JUST TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, I JUST HEARD FROM MS. BOJO THAT THERE IS A, A CODE REQUIREMENT FOR SOME SORT OF VEHICULAR ACCESS ALONG SITES WITH CERTAIN FRONTAGES.
IS THAT TRUE? I MEAN, IF THERE, I'M, I'M NOT, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO PUSH FOR NO PARKING HERE.
I'M JUST CURIOUS, EVEN IF THERE WERE NO PARKING ON THIS IN THIS BUILDING, WOULD THEY NOT STILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SOME SORT OF VEHICULAR ACCESS ON THEIR FRONTAGE UNDER THE, THE UNO STANDARDS? THAT'S NOT MY UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE THEY, IF THEY WERE TO ELECT NOT TO PROVIDE PARKING, THERE WOULDN'T BE A NEED FOR A DRIVEWAY, A DRIVEWAY TO TO WHAT IF THERE WAS NO PARKING GARAGE, FOR EXAMPLE.
THESE ARE ALL HYPOTHETICALS JUST TO MM-HMM
IN THE INTEREST OF FULL DISCLOSURE, BECAUSE STAFF HAS NOT SEEN A DESIGN SOLUTION THAT EXCLUDES PARKING.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE THEY ARE ELECTING TO PROVIDE PARKING SPACES AND ACCESS TO AN INTERIOR PARKING GARAGE, THAT ACCESS IS REQUIRED AND DO DO THINGS LIKE THE REQUIRED ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER, VAULTS AND FIRE CONTROL APPARATUS.
DO THOSE REQUIRE, UH, ACCESS? I, I, I UNDERSTAND, I KNOW DOWNTOWN THOSE ARE ALWAYS EITHER FACING AN ALLEY OR FACING A ROADWAY, YOU KNOW, THIS KIND OF GIANT BLANK SPACE CARVED OUT OF A BUILDING SO THAT AUSTIN ENERGY VEHICLES, FOR INSTANCE, CAN GET WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE OF THE TRANSFORMER.
IS THAT THE SAME IN THIS PART OF TOWN AS WELL? THAT, THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
IT'S, IT IS VERY SIMILAR TO DOWNTOWN.
IT'S, IT'S NOT AN A, IT'S A CLEAR ZONE.
SO IT'S FOR, FOR SAFETY REASONS AND FOR ACCESS AS WELL.
WHERE THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SPACING THAT IS REQUIRED TO ACCESS THOSE INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENTS.
AND ARE STREET SCAPE ELEMENTS LIKE PLANTERS, TREES, LIGHT POLES, TYPICALLY ALLOWED IN THOSE CLEAR ZONES FOR AUSTIN ENERGY OR FIRE ACCESS? NO, THEY ARE NOT COMMISSIONER.
THAT WOULD MAKE OUR LIFE MUCH EASIER, WOULDN'T IT?
SO IT SEEMS LIKE EVEN COMMISSIONER, EVEN ABOUT THE PARKING AND COLLECT COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, THERE WOULD STILL BE A VERY LIMITED AMOUNT OF FRONTAGE IN WHICH TO FIT STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE OF VEHICULAR ACCESS REQUIREMENTS OR, OR SORRY, CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR AUSTIN ENERGY.
UM, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? YES, WE ARE AT TIME.
COMMISSIONER HANEY, THIS QUESTION IS FOR STAFF.
AS YOU'RE SITTING DOWN, UM, WHEN WAS THIS SITE PLAN
[01:50:01]
APPROVED ON JANUARY 29TH, 2004.AND WHEN DID WE DECIDE THAT IT WAS NO LONGER APPROVED? I DON'T BELIEVE THE APPROVAL WAS REMOVED.
THERE WAS AN APPROVED SITE PLAN THEN ON THIS.
I'M THE NEWEST, NEWEST PERSON HERE, SO YOU GOTTA TALK TO ME LIKE I'M A KINDERGARTNER.
UM, SO I, IF WE HAVE AN APPROVED SITE PLAN, WE'RE, WE'RE NOW BACK HERE, WE'VE HAD TO STOP CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S NOT APPROVED.
NO, IF I MAY, MADAM CHAIR TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION, PLEASE.
IT, IT'S NOT THAT THERE'S NOT AN APPROVED SITE PLAN, THERE IS AN APPROVED SITE PLAN.
THE SITE PLAN AS APPROVED IS DEFICIENT IN THE REQUIRED STREET SCAPE ELEMENTS THAT UNO MANDATES.
SO, SO WE APPROVED SOMETHING, BUT NOW WE'RE SAYING IT'S DEFICIENT.
WHAT, WHAT THE CITY APPROVED IS DEFICIENT.
UH, I WILL DEFER TO MY COLLEAGUES IN DSD TO TALK ABOUT THIS SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS.
I'M, I'M JUST, I'M VERY CONFUSED AS TO OKAY, LIKE WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF AN APPROVAL? IF WE CAN SUBSEQUENTLY GO BACK AND SAY, EH, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY MEAN TO APPROVE THAT.
WE'RE NOT SAYING WE DIDN'T, OR, OR IT'S DEFICIENT.
LIKE, I MEAN, ISN'T THE PRESUMPTION OF AN APPROVAL THAT IT IS NOT DEFICIENT? I MEAN, I, I JUST, I'M, I'M, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WRAPPING MY MIND AROUND THIS.
WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT THE APPROVAL DOES NOT STAND THE APPROVED SITE LAND STILL EXISTS, HOWEVER, AS APPROVED, IT WAS DEFICIENT IN THE REQUIRED STREETS SCAPE ELEMENTS PER THE UNO STANDARDS.
SO I I I, I GUESS I JUST AM, AM A LITTLE DENSE.
UM, CAN, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME LIKE WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS BETWEEN IT'S DEFICIENT AND IT'S NO LONGER APPROVED AND I, I JUST, I, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ONCE WE HAVE A SITE PLAN AND WE'VE, YOU KNOW, GONE THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS AND WE'VE STARTED BUILDING AND THEN WE SAY, OH, JUST KIDDING, YOU GOTTA STOP WORK BECAUSE WE FOUND SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T LIKE.
IS, IS, AM I GETTING THAT TIMELINE RIGHT? IS THAT KEITH MORRIS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IN GENERAL? YES.
SO THE LIKE PART IS WHERE, LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT FOR A MINUTE.
THIS IS A MATTER OF DOES, THERE IS A SECTION OF CODE THAT WAS NOT REVIEWED FOR DURING, UH, DURING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW IS NOT COMPLIANT WITH THAT SECTION.
WE CAN EITHER SUSPEND THE, THE SITE PLAN OR WE CAN WORK WITH, UM, WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO BRING THIS MATTER INTO COMPLIANCE.
SO THEY ARE NOT UNDER A STOCK WORK ORDER, THEY'RE NOT UNDER THE SITE PLAN IS LIVE AND ACTIVE.
THIS IS MAKING THIS ELEMENT WHOLE FOR THE SITE PLAN.
UM, AND IS IT STANDARD PRACTICE TO GO THROUGH AND REVIEW THESE EX POST FACTO AND, YOU KNOW, SAY, YEAH, DID WE REALLY GET THIS RIGHT OR NOT? OR IS THAT JUST KIND OF AN ARBITRARY THING? 16 YEARS, I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS.
SO, SO HUGE STREET IS ALSO UNLIKE ANY STREET IN THE CITY.
YEAH, I, I, THAT'S, THAT'S THE I WENT TO THAT'S I KNOW, I KNOW THAT.
YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE CRUX OF IT.
COLLECTIVELY IN THIS ROOM, THOSE OF US HAVE WORKED ON DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY.
WHEN WE ALL LOOKED AT THIS, I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS.
ALSO, HENCE WHY YOU'VE NEVER SEEN AN APPEAL FOR THIS SECTION OF CODE EVER.
SO Y'ALL ARE BREAKING, UH, YOUR TREADING NEW TERRITORY TONIGHT.
ALRIGHT, WELL THEN I, I DON'T FEEL SO BAD FOR NOT UNDERSTANDING.
YOU'RE IN THE SAME BOAT AS YOU.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? I THINK, UH, CONTINUING THE CONVERSATION ABOUT HUME STREET, HUME PLACE OF THE SEGMENT, I GUESS THIS IS FOR CITY STAFF AGAIN, MAYBE URBAN DESIGN.
THE SEGMENT OF HUME PLACE THAT EXTENDS SOUTH TO 26TH STREET IS EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY IS 12 AND A HALF FEET WIDE.
I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT 20 FEET WIDE.
THE ACTUAL RIGHT OF WAY IS OUR UNDERSTANDING.
IS THAT RIGHT? DIFFERENT PART I THINK, I THINK WHAT I'M SEEING FROM THE DRAWINGS IS IT'S 12 AND A HALF FEET WIDE.
IT'S 26TH STREET AND 20 FEET GOING EAST TO GUADALUPE.
AND THE APPLICANT CAN CONFIRM THAT AS WELL.
OH, THAT'S WHY YOU, THIS PART YOU ANSWER? NO, GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER.
THE UM, THE PART GOING SOUTH IS 12 AND A HALF FEET.
THE PART GOING EAST IS 20 FEET.
OKAY, SO 12 AND A HALF AND 20 FEET.
SO THEN BACK TO URBAN DESIGN OF THOUGHT EXERCISE HERE, HOW WOULD WE ACHIEVE
[01:55:01]
THE UNO STREETSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS ON THE REST OF THE RIDE OF WAY, NOT JUST IN FRONT OF THE APPLICANT'S FRONTAGE, BUT EXTENDING SOUTH TO 26TH STREET? HOW WOULD WE PHYSICALLY ACHIEVE THAT AS THOSE FOR THE REST OF THE STREET? PARDON ME, COMMISSIONER, I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING.AS THOSE SITE LENGTHS COME IN, IT WOULD BE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUIRED, UH, STREET SCAPE ELEMENTS.
NOW, BASED ON THE FRONTAGE OF EACH PARTICULAR PROJECT, IF IT'S UNDER 150 FEET, THE FLEXIBILITY THAT THE CODE ALLOWS WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS ELEMENTS TO PROVIDE.
THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO PROVIDE THE STREET TREES, THE PEDESTRIAN CLEAR ZONE AND THE LIGHTING.
SO PEDESTRIAN CLEAR ZONE IS FIVE FEET.
THE LIGHTING WOULD BE A PECAN STREET LIGHTING THAT'S A PHYSICAL ON THE GROUND AND THE STREET TREES ARE PLANTED ON THE GROUND AS WELL.
AND, AND AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO DRAW THIS PICTURE IN MY HEAD.
HOW WOULD WE PHYSICALLY FIT THAT IN 12 AND A HALF FEET AND STILL MAINTAIN VEHICULAR ACCESS TO 26TH STREET? UH, I'M NOT SURE WE WOULD HAVE TO SEE A DESIGN SOLUTION TO THAT.
I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT.
SO I'LL ASK AGAIN IF WE HAVE 12 AND A HALF FEET FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS WIDE, AND THAT'S BETWEEN THE PIZZA PRESS MM-HMM
AND THE SEVEN 11 AND THOSE STRUCTURES, I HAVE FRONTAGE ON 26TH STREET, HOW WOULD WE PROVIDE THOSE FEATURES AND STILL PROVIDE VEHICULAR ACCESS IN, IN OTHER PROJECTS THERE'S BEEN THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT AND OTHER PROJECTS.
HOW WIDE DOES A VEHICULAR A WHAT'S THE MINIMUM WIDTH FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS? UH, I BELIEVE IT'S 10 OR 11 FEET FOR THE ACTUAL TRAVEL LANE.
DEPENDING ON THE WIDTH OF THE RIGHT OF WAY, I DON'T HAVE THOSE EXACT FIGURES.
UH, I GUESS I, MOVING ON TO THE QUESTION OF THE EASEMENTS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY THE FOLKS SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION, MAYBE THIS IS TO THE APPLICANT.
CAN WE, UH, UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION AROUND WHAT'S CALLED THE, UH, FORGIVE ME, I GOTTA GO BACK TO THAT PAGE, THE PRIVATE WAY.
UM, I'M HAPPY TO EXPLAIN IT AND SHOW YOU ON THE MAP, BUT I WOULD POINT OUT THAT IT'S A PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTION THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE PURVIEW OF THIS.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE AT THE MOMENT.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER RA MERAZ? SORRY.
UM, MR. ROSALINE OR SOMEONE THAT CAN TALK TO DESIGN, I JUST HAVE, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AS WELL.
SO IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE 16 FEET TO WORK WITH.
IS THAT THE FRONTAGE OF THE 46? THERE'S ONLY 16 FEET IN WHICH YOU COULD PUT STREET TREES AND, AND A, A LIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THE ISSUE IS THAT THERE ARE PLANNED UTILITIES THAT CONFLICT WITH A LIGHT AND THE TREE.
AND SO THEY'RE DOING A TREE IN A CORRECT PLANTER AND THEY CAN'T FIT A POLE A, A LUMINEER POLE ADJACENT TO THAT, UH, TREE IN A BOX.
THERE WAS, IF I MAY MADAM CHAIR, THERE'S PHYSICALLY NO ROOM TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE BASED ON THE DESIGN PROPOSAL GIVEN.
SO BECAUSE OF THE CLEAR ZONE THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THE VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE PARKING GARAGE, WHAT IS LEFT OVER IS BEING UTILIZED MOSTLY BY UTILITIES ON THE, ON THE END NEXT TO THE VEHICULAR ACCESS, WHICH LEAVES A VERY SMALL SPACE TO PROVIDE SPACE FOR POTENTIALLY A STREET TREE, A LIGHTING ELEMENT, UH, AS WELL AS THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WAY.
SO IT, IT BECOMES EXTREMELY CHALLENGING TO BE ABLE TO MEET THOSE ELEMENTS.
AND WE BELIEVE THAT'S BASED ON THE DESIGN CHOICE FOR THIS PROJECT AND ANOTHER DESIGN CHOICE WOULD BE TO MOVE THE BUILDING BACK AND HAVE MORE ROOM OR SOMETHING POTENTIALLY CORRECT.
AND SO THERE'S, THERE'S WAYS TO POSSIBLY ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THOSE ELEMENTS.
NOW WE HAVE GIVEN FLEXIBILITY WHEN THERE'S EXISTING UTILITIES AND THERE'S A STREET TREE THAT'S REQUIRED WHERE YOU CAN MOVE THE OFFSET OF THAT TREE.
WE'VE DONE THAT AND THE, AND THE STANDARDS PROVIDE FOR THAT FLEXIBILITY.
IT'S WHEN IT'S PROPOSED THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY IN THE CODE.
OTHER QUESTIONS? YOU FIRST? COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? UM, YEAH, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
SO LET'S START WITH THE BASICS HERE.
UM, HOW MANY UNITS ARE WE GONNA BE BRINGING WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND HOW MANY OF THEM WOULD BE AFFORDABLE? 142 TOTAL.
AFFORDABLE AT 50 AND 60% MFI AND THAT'S IN COMPLIANCE WITH UNO PER THOSE.
UM, AND YOU ALL ARE COMPLYING WITH ALL OTHER ASPECTS OF UNO AS WELL, THAT SOUNDS LIKE LOWER ON PARKING AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND THIS WAS ALL REVIEWED BY CITY STAFF? YES.
WHEN YOU WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS? YES.
[02:00:01]
HAVE THE SITES CONSTRAINTS OR THE, I SHOULD SAY THE STREET RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE THE BUILDINGS AND THE WALKABILITY OF THE AREA, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.WOULD YOU SAY THAT THE, UM, DESIGN CONSTRAINTS RELATED TO, OR I SHOULD SAY THE ENCOURAGE STREET SCAPE IMPROVEMENTS ARE HELD IN HIGHER ESTEEM THAN THE ACTUAL BUILDING OF UNITS? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M FEELING LIKE IS HAPPENING HERE.
YES, I WOULD, BECAUSE IF THERE'S NO, THE SITE IS LESS THAN 10,000 SQUARE FEET, THERE'S NOWHERE TO, THERE'S NOWHERE TO MOVE IT TO.
IT WOULD JUST BE A, IT WOULD REDUCE IT SIGNIFICANTLY.
AND I GUESS THAT'S THE RELATED QUESTION IS WE'RE HEARING FROM CITY STAFF THAT THERE WOULD BE AN ENCOURAGEMENT TO REDESIGN THIS PROJECT.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THAT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT AND OR EXPENSIVE? UM, WELL THE FIRST PROBLEM WOULD BE THAT WE HAVE AN APPROVED PERMIT THAT WE'VE STARTED, UM, CONSTRUCTION ON.
SO LIKE THE, THOSE UTILITIES, UM, THAT THEY'RE DESCRIBING AS PROPOSED, WE'RE PROPOSED WITH THE STIP PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR.
UM, AND THEN, UM, YEAH, AND THEN IF THERE'S ANY, ANY MOVEMENT OF THIS BUILDING OR RECONFIGURATION OF THIS BUILDING, WE'RE GONNA LOSE UNITS, UM, WE'RE GONNA LOSE UNITS AND THEREFORE LOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS.
AND, AND I GUESS JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND REDESIGN THIS BUILDING TO COMPLY WITH THESE STANDARDS, RESUBMIT ALL OF THE PAPERWORK AND COME BACK INTO CONSTRUCTION.
WE'D PROBABLY HAVE TO VACATE EASEMENTS.
AND IT WOULD BE LIKE STARTING OVER.
AND WHAT, JUST A ROUGH TIMELINE OF HOW THAT, HOW LONG THAT WOULD TAKE? I MEAN, MOST SITE PLANS ARE A YEAR.
AND DO YOU KNOW, JUST OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, HOW MANY PEOPLE APPLIED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS THIS PAST YEAR? I DO.
90 90,000 INDIVIDUALS WANTED TO COME TO UT.
SO I GUESS I'M JUST WANTING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WOULD WE BE VALUING STREETS SCAPE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS OVER UNITS THAT STUDENTS COULD POTENTIALLY LIVE IN? YES.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SUPER QUICK.
UM, DO YOU HAVE A ROUGH ESTIMATE OF WHAT THIS PAUSE HAS COST THE DEVELOPMENT MAYBE PER MONTH? YES, I SURE DO.
UM, THE LAST TWO MONTHS HAVE COST, UM, UPWARDS OF A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS.
UM, STAFF MAY BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE ENTIRE ISSUE IS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
IT'S THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
IT WAS, WHY WAS THE MECHANISM TO STOP CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING PULLED INSTEAD OF POSSIBLY JUST SAYING, LOOK, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET YOUR CO UNTIL WE RESOLVE THIS.
I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY WE'D WANT TO THROW AN ADDITIONAL MILLION DOLLAR COST AT A BUILDING.
THERE WAS NO ASK FROM STAFF TO YEAH.
THEY'RE COMMISSIONER, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THEY'RE NOT UNDER A STOP WORK ORDER.
AND FOR, FOR THE REASONS YOU JUST MENTIONED AND, AND FOR THE REASONS THAT WE'VE ALL SAID THIS IS A, AN ODD SITE.
HOW DO WE DO THIS AND WORK ON IT TOGETHER? SO THEY ODD ALL AROUND.
AND I SEE THE APPLICANT ON THE WAY IN.
I APOLOGIZE IF THAT WAS MISLEADING.
WE DO NOT HAVE A STOP ORDER, WE A STOP WORK ORDER.
WE HAVE JUST STOPPED WORK BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW, UM, WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO BUILD.
AND SO IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO CONTINUE UNTIL WE HAVE CERTAINTY THE UNCERTAINTY WITH OTHERS LAW.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? DID YOU GET ALL YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED EARLIER? I DID.
UM, WELL, SINCE SEEMS WE'RE OUT OF QUESTIONS, I, THIS IS AN APPEALS PROCESS, SO SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T COME TO US VERY OFTEN.
SO I WANTED TO READ SOMETHING FROM LEGAL ABOUT, UM, WHERE OUR DECISION GOES.
SO THIS DECISION IS FINAL, RIGHT? SO THIS IS, UM, THIS IS NOT GOING TO COUNSEL AND THE THREE CHOICES THAT WE HAVE AS A COMMISSION, UM, THE POWER TO ACT ON THE APPEAL ARE EITHER TO UPHOLD, TO MODIFY OR TO REVERSE THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION.
SO IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHOOSES TO TAKE NO ACTION, THE APPEAL IS DENIED.
SO TO DESCRIBE THE UPHOLDING THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION, THAT MEANS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGREES WITH THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION NOT TO GRANT THE WAIVERS BY MODIFYING THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION.
THAT MEANS PLANNING COMMISSION DECIDES THAT ONE OR MORE OF THE BCM SECTIONS, THAT'S THE THREE THAT WERE SPECIFIED EARLIER, SHOULD BE WAIVED, BUT NOT ALL THREE.
AND THEN BY REVERSING THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECIDES THAT ALL THREE OF THE BCM SECTIONS SHOULD BE WAIVED.
IS EVERYBODY CLEAR ON THAT? MM-HMM
UM, WELL I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER A MOTION, UM, AND THAT WOULD BE TO REVERSE THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION, UM, WITH SOME, UH, OFFERINGS THAT I THINK CAN MAYBE HELP BRING TOGETHER THIS VERY NON-STANDARD STREET, IF THAT WAS A GOOD DESCRIPTION THAT WE HEARD EARLIER OF THIS, UH, PROJECT THAT'S ONGOING.
UM, THE THREE ITEMS, UM, THAT WOULD BE UP FOR DISCUSSION AND PART OF MY MOTION WOULD BE THAT THE PEDESTRIAN LEVEL LIGHTING THAT'S INTEGRATED WITH THE BUILDING DESIGN IS TO BE EQUAL IN FOOT CANDLES AS TO WHAT THE PECAN STREET LIGHT POLE WOULD
[02:05:01]
PROVIDE THAT IN LIEU OF TREES IN RAISED PLANTERS BECAUSE THOSE HAVE NOT BEEN SHOWN TO DO WELL AT ALL.OR EVEN MOVABLE PLANTERS WHERE IRRIGATION WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO MAKE THAT WORK.
UM, REPLACE THOSE WITH VEGETATION IN PLANTERS WITH PERMANENT IRRIGATION LIKE VINES, A GREEN SCREEN WHERE YOU CAN HAVE VINES GROW TALLER AND EVERGREEN AND OR PERENNIAL SHRUBS AND GROUND COVER THAT ARE FROM THE AUSTIN GROW GREEN GUIDE.
AND THE THIRD THING WOULD BE PAVERS.
UM, SO THE PAVERS ARE NOT SOMETHING THAT'S SPECIFIED IN UNO, BUT THEY ARE SPECIFIED IN GREAT STREETS AND I THINK WOULD GO A LONG WAY AS TO, UM, INDICATING THE MAIN ENTRY AND MAKING THIS, UM, A LITTLE MORE COHESIVE WITH THE, THE REST OF THE UNO AND THE GREAT STREET STANDARDS.
UM, SO REQUIRING THAT THE PAVERS, UM, WOULD BE REQUIRED AT THE ENTRY THRESHOLD TO THE MAIN ENTRY DEVELOPMENT.
ALRIGHT,
I WISH I WOULD'VE ASKED IT EARLIER.
SO THEY'RE ONLY REQUIRED TO PROVIDE, THIS IS ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE FRONTAGE, THAT'S THE 46 FEET.
WHAT ABOUT A LONG HUME PLACE? 'CAUSE I'M JUST IMAGINING MYSELF AS A STUDENT, IT'S DARK AND YOU HAVE 20 FEET OR 12 FEET.
IS THERE ANY LIGHTING REQUIRED ON HUME? I DUNNO, THAT'S MY QUESTION.
NOT AS PART AS THIS DEVELOPMENT, I DON'T THINK.
MR. RECENTLY? PARDON ME, MADAM CHAIR, I MISSED, I MISSED THE QUESTION.
IF YOU, IS THERE ANY LIGHTING REQUIRED ON THE RIGHT OF WAY ACCESSING ON HUME PLACE TO THE PROPERTY? I'M THINKING ABOUT PEDESTRIANS THAT ARE WALKING NOT AT THIS TIME BECAUSE THERE'S NO PROJECTS LEADING TO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.
BUT, BUT IF I MAY, MADAM CHAIR, TO CLARIFY, IF THE COMMISSION PROCEEDS, AS THE MOTION IS FRAMED, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THEIR WAIVER REQUEST TO INCLUDE THOSE SPECIFIC WAIVERS.
SO THERE'S NOT A WAY, A MECHANISM FOR THE COMMISSION TO MODIFY THE WAIVER REQUEST.
WHAT'S BEFORE YOU IS THE WAIVER REQUEST TO EITHER ACCEPT THEM ALL, ACCEPT ONE AND PERHAPS NOT OTHERS OR REVERSE COMPLETELY, WHICH WOULD MEAN APPROVING ALL THREE WAIVER REQUESTS.
IF THE COMMISSION TAKES ACTION TO MODIFY THOSE WAIVERS, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO RESUBMIT THE WAIVER REQUEST FOR THE DIRECTOR'S CONSIDERATION AS OUTLINED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, MS. BOJO, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? YES.
UM, WE ARE HAPPY TO, TO, UM, REVISE OUR WAIVER REQUESTS AND RESUBMIT THEM IMMEDIATELY.
AND I FEEL VERY GOOD ABOUT THE MOTION THAT YOU'RE MAKING.
UM, I JUST WOULD ASK THAT PARTICULARLY ON THE PAVERS THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONFIRM THAT THE UTILITIES WILL BE OKAY WITH IT OR THAT WE'RE ABLE TO WORK AROUND WHATEVER THE UTILITIES NEED THERE.
BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE UTILITIES IN THAT AREA AS WELL.
YES, THEY HAVE CONCRETE, UM, OTHER, SO SORRY, LET ME ASK THE COMMISSION AND MAYBE STAFF WHERE
WHAT, WHAT IS THE COMMISSION DOING RIGHT NOW? ARE WE STILL VOTING ON THE REVERSAL? SO, SO MADAM CHAIR, YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD POTENTIALLY TAKE ACTION TO REVERSE THE DIRECTOR'S DENIAL OF THE WAIVERS AND THEN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPLICANT TO REVISE THEIR WAIVER REQUEST AND COULD INCLUDE THE ELEMENTS THAT YOU JUST POINTED OUT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, UB.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, MY MOTION IS SIMPLY TO REVERSE THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION WITH THE NOTE OF THE THREE POINTS THAT I MADE EARLIER IN CONSIDERATION FOR THE APPLI APPLICANT'S, UM, FUTURE WAIVER REQUEST CHAIR.
CAN I RAISE A, A POINT OF A POINT OF INQUIRY, I SUPPOSE, OR MAYBE A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE? DO WE YES.
DO WE HAVE CITY LEGAL AVAIL IN THE ROOM OR ON THE LINE? I JUST FROM WHAT WAS SENT TO US FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY, IT SOUNDS LIKE IF WE REVERSE THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION, IT'S FINAL AND WE APPROVE THE WAIVER EXACTLY AS WRITTEN.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THE MOTION WE VOTE ON IF WE'RE RECOMMENDING, IF WE WANT TO GET THE END RESULT, THE APPLICANT COMES BACK WITH A NEW WAIVER REQUEST THAT MATCHES YOUR LANGUAGE.
[02:10:01]
THAT WE ARE NOT, THAT WE'RE MAKING THE RIGHT VOTE, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO CONFIRM THAT BEFORE WE DO IT.WE DON'T HAVE LEGAL IN THE ROOM.
UM, BUT DO YOU KNOW IF MR. MADDOX IS AVAILABLE VIA PHONE? HE'S ONLINE.
WE ARE REACHING OUT TO HIM RIGHT NOW TO TRY TO GET HIM ONLINE OR, OKAY.
CAN I ASK NATIONAL CLARIFY CLARIFYING QUESTION, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE COULD DENY THIS REQUEST AND THE PROJECT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO MOVE FORWARD AS IS, IS THAT CORRECT OR WOULD NOT NECESSARILY? I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
THEY DO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO RESUBMIT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE'RE MAKING.
IF, IF YOU DENY THE APPEAL, WHICH IS THE REQUEST, THEY'RE APPEALING THE WAIVERS, THEN THE PROJECT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO INCORPORATE THOSE ELEMENTS AS SPELLED OUT IN UNO.
IF YOU REVERSE THE DIRECTOR'S DENIAL OF THE WAIVERS, THEN YOU COULD GIVE GUIDANCE OR RECOMMENDATIONS TO AMEND THE WAIVER REQUEST, WHICH THE APPLICANT CAN THEN, I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT THE APPLICANT COULD THEN CONSIDER AMENDING THE WAIVER REQUEST BACK TO THE DIRECTOR.
THE DIRECTOR THEN CAN CONSIDER THOSE, APPROVE THEM OR DISAPPROVE THEM AND THEY MAY END UP BACK HERE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AND THAT WAS ACTUALLY MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
IF IT GETS DENIED AGAIN BECAUSE IT IS STILL NOT COMPLIANT TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW, WE WOULD POTENTIALLY SEE THIS CASE AGAIN.
THE APPLICANT MAY APPEAL TO THE COMMISSION AGAIN.
CAN WE CALL, I THINK WE'RE STILL SEEING IF WE CAN GET LEGAL ON, HE TOLD US HE NEEDED JUST A MINUTE, SO I'LL GET BACK TO Y'ALL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
SO I, I JUST GOT AN EMAIL FROM MR. MADDOX.
UM, HE SAYS, CONCERNING YOUR MOTION, THE, THIS APPEAL ONLY CONCERNS THE THREE BCM SECTIONS LISTED ABOVE AND IS LIMITED TO THE EXACT REQUEST MADE BY THE APPLICANT OR THE DIRECTOR TO CONSIDER FOR WAIVER.
NO ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS MAY BE PLACED ON APPROVAL OF SITE PLAN OR BUILDING PERMIT.
SO, UM, WHAT I HAD STATED TO BE TACKED ONTO THE, THE MOTION ISN'T VALID AND CAN ONLY BE, UM, SET AS SUGGESTIONS IF THE APPLICANT WAS TO AMEND THEIR WAIVER AND COME BACK, UM, WITH THOSE ELEMENTS.
SO THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
THAT'S MATCHING WHAT LEGAL SAYS.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, DOES THAT HELP ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OR DO YOU STILL, WOULD YOU STILL LIKE TO TALK TO IT? IT HELPS.
I GUESS MY NEXT QUESTION IS, SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT MOTION DO WE TABLE THIS OR POSTPONE TO ANOTHER DATE SO THAT THE APPLICATION OR SO THAT THE WAIVER REQUEST CAN BE AMENDED? SO IF NO ACTION TONIGHT, THE APPEAL IS DENIED.
SO I I DON'T KNOW IF THAT SPEAKS TO, UM, POSTPONING IT OR NOT.
OH, LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO CAN HELP
UH, GOOD EVENING CHAIR, UH, P COMMISSION, UH, STEVE MAX WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
HOW I, I ONLY BRIEFLY HEARD YOUR QUESTION AS I WAS COMING DOWN THE STAIRS.
MR. JOHNSON WOULD, OR COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESTATE YOUR QUESTION? YES, THANK YOU.
SO MY QUESTION IS, IF WE, SO IT WAS THE INTENT OF THE CHAIR'S MOTION TO ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO AMEND THEIR WAIVER REQUEST TO INCLUDE CONDITIONS IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WE CANNOT IMPOSE ANY CONDITIONS OTHER THAN WHAT WAS EXPLICITLY STATED IN THE REQUEST.
SO IF WE WANT TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO AMEND THEIR WAIVER REQUEST, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT ACTION WILL WE TAKE TONIGHT TO AVOID SIMPLY OUTRIGHT DENYING THE REQUESTED APPEAL OF THE DECISION OR SIMPLY APPROVING EXACTLY AS WRITTEN THE APPEAL OF THE DECISION? CAN WE POSTPONE THE, OUR DECISION ON THE APPEAL TO GRANT THE APPLICANT TIME TO AMEND THEIR WAIVER REQUEST? SO THE, THE APPEAL BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION THIS EVENING IS THE ONE THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE DIRECTOR, AND THE DIRECTOR HAS REVIEWED THAT AND DENIED THOSE WAIVERS.
AND NOW THOSE EXACT WAIVERS ARE COMING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, SO WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN DO THIS EVENING IS IF THEY, IF THEY DENY THE APPEAL, THEY'RE BASICALLY APPROVING THE DECISION OF THE DIRECTOR NOT TO WAIVE ANY OF THE THREE, UH, BUILDING CRITERIA AND MANUAL SECTIONS.
UM, IF YOU MODIFY THE MODIFICATION CAN ONLY BE TO APPROVE ONE, BUT LESS THAN THREE OF THOSE SECTIONS.
AND IF YOU, UM, APPROVE THE APPEAL, THEN YOU'RE GRANTING THE WAIVERS THAT AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT.
SO IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD LIKE THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK AND SUBMIT SOMETHING TO THE DIRECTOR, TONIGHT'S COURSE WOULD BE TO
[02:15:01]
DENY THE APPEAL.PEEL PROBABLY SIGNAL TO THE APPLICANT THAT PLEASE RETURN WITH A DIFFERENT SET OF WAIVERS, UM, FOR THE DIRECTOR'S CONSIDERATION.
THE DIRECTOR MAY IN IN FACT APPROVE THOSE, BUT IF NOT, THEN THOSE WILL RETURN TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SO JUST TO, JUST TO CLARIFY, AND I APPRECIATE YOU, YOU GIVING THAT ANSWER.
IT DOES HELP TO SUMMARIZE AND MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD.
UH, WE CAN EITHER SAY YES TO THE REQUEST AS WRITTEN OR NO, WE CAN SAY YES OR NO TO PARTS OF THE REQUEST, BUT NOT THE WHOLE THING.
BUT WE CANNOT CHANGE CONDITIONS OF THE REQUEST.
THAT THAT'S CORRECT BECAUSE WHAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE DIRECTOR WAS THE WAIVER OF THOSE SECTIONS.
THAT'S WHAT THE DIRECTORS CONSIDERED AND THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE APPEAL BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. MADDOX CHAIR? I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK.
IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE A, IF THAT'S OKAY.
UM, SO IN THE INTEREST OF, UM, GETTING THIS PROJECT MOVING FORWARD AGAIN, UM, MY REQUEST, MY AMENDED REQUEST WOULD BE THAT YOU, UM, REVERT ALL THREE, ALLOW US TO SUBMIT A CORRECTION WITH, 'CAUSE AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER, THE SITE PLAN IS NOT RED TAGGED RIGHT NOW, WE'RE JUST NOT WORKING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE CERTAINTY TO KNOW WHAT IS GONNA BE APPROVED IF YOU, UM, REVERT THE WAIVERS AND SO THAT WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH WHAT IS PHYSICALLY ABLE TO BE BUILT.
WE WILL SUBMIT, UM, A CORRECTION SHOWING WHAT YOU HAVE ASKED US TO INCORPORATE.
IF THAT CORRECTION IS APPROVED, IT WILL, WHAT, I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS I THINK THERE WILL BE A TIME LATER IF WE WERE TO NOT FOLLOW YOUR INSTRUCTION, WHICH I PROMISE YOU WE WILL
BUT IF YOU DENY, IF YOU, UM, REVERT THE DECISIONS RIGHT NOW, I THINK IT WOULD ALLOW US TO START MOVING FORWARD ON OUR SITE PLAN AND, AND RESUME, UM, CONSTRUCTION.
I MEAN, I CAN EVEN PLAN A TIME TO COME BACK AND REPORT TO YOU ON THAT IF THAT'S IMPORTANT OR HOWEVER WE COULD HANDLE THAT.
BUT I WOULD JUST ASK THAT WE'VE MOVED FORWARD TONIGHT SINCE WE'VE BEEN ON HOLD FOR SO LONG, IF POSSIBLE.
SO, UM, IN LIGHT OF ALL OF THAT DISCUSSION, UM, I'M AMENDING MY MOTION, UH, TO SIMPLY REVERSING THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION ON ALL THREE OF THE BUILDING CRITERIA, MANUAL SECTIONS.
UM, AND JUST BRIEFLY SPEAKING, YES, MR. LEY.
JUST TO CLARIFY, THERE IS NO OBLIGATION FOR THE APPLICANT TO RETURN BECAUSE THIS POSITION WOULD BE FINAL, SO YOU'LL BE REVERTING THAT.
JUST TO CLARIFY THAT, WE APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT'S WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH STAFF, THAT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED, BUT THERE WOULD BE NO CODE REQUIREMENT TO COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION.
SO IN SPEAKING TO, UM, THAT MOTION, I, THIS IS SUCH A STRANGE STREET AND A JUST LIKE A RELIC OF PLANNING AND WHERE AUSTIN WAS, THAT I, I REALLY FEEL EVEN IN, BECAUSE I'M A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND I'VE WORKED ON A LOT OF THE GREAT STREETS IN, IN UNO STREETSCAPES, EVEN IN A A, A TYPICAL REGULAR CONDITION, IT CAN BE QUITE TRICKY BECAUSE URBAN DESIGN DOES GET THE SHORT STICK A LOT OF TIMES WITH UTILITIES AND WHERE YOU HAVE TO MOVE THINGS.
AND THIS IS THAT TIMES A THOUSAND IN THIS VERY TIGHT SPACE.
SO, UM, I, KNOWING MS. BOJO AND THAT, UM, I REALLY FEEL THAT THERE, THERE'S A, A HAPPY MEDIUM THAT CAN REFLECT THE INTENT AND TRY TO AMPLIFY THE SAFETY FOR THIS SITE.
BUT I REALLY WOULD HATE THE THOUGHT OF THIS PROJECT HAVING TO PAUSE OR GO AWAY, ESPECIALLY GIVEN WHERE WE ARE WITH TARIFFS AND PRICE INCREASES IN EVERYTHING EVERY DAY.
SO ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST FOUR YOU, MR. ANDERSON? WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY IN AUSTIN, TEXAS.
I DO NOT THINK WE HAD SUPPORT AT ALL AT FIRST.
AND THANKFULLY, STAFF EVENTUALLY GOT ON BOARD.
AND I'M PRETTY SURE I HEARD STAFF SAY TONIGHT THAT POSSIBLY FOR A 142 UNIT BUILDING 18 PARKING SPACES IS MAYBE TOO MUCH.
YOU CHRIS RILEY WOULD BE LAUGHING OUT LOUD RIGHT HERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I HEARD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THIS LOCATION ISN'T SAFE.
LAST SEMESTER I HAD A STUDENT WHO WAS COMING INTO AUSTIN FROM KILLEEN FOUR TIMES A WEEK.
[02:20:01]
I HAD ANOTHER STUDENT FROM NEW BRAUNFELS COMING IN FOUR TIMES A WEEK.SOMEBODY WALKING DOWN A GOOFY ALLEY IN A GOOFY NEIGHBORHOOD, 24TH STREET, THAT CAR SEWER THAT IS MAJORITY AUTO LANES, THAT IS NOT SAFE.
IF YOU GO THERE DURING ANY TIME OF DAY, YOU'LL BE LIKE, AUSTIN, TEXAS, WHAT IS HAPPENING? AND WHY AREN'T YOU PAYING ANY ATTENTION TO THIS INTERSECTION? THERE'S 5,000 KIDS CROSSING THE STREET, EVERY RED LIGHT, AND THEN THERE'S LIKE SEVEN HORNS, LIKE, HA HA HA HA, THAT PLACE IS NUTS.
WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT NOT SAFE, JUST GO WALK DOWN QUAD RIGHT NOW.
GO WALK THROUGH A LOT OF PLACES IN WEST CAMPUS THAT ARE DESPERATE FOR ATTENTION.
WE JUST ADDED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF BEDROOMS, THAT'S AWESOME.
THIS IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
I LOVE THESE NON-STANDARD SITES.
THE FACT THAT WE JUST DID AWAY WITH WINDOWLESS BEDROOMS AND WE'RE ABOUT TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, NO HEIGHT LIMITS.
I THINK WE'RE ABOUT TO SEE A LOT COOLER THINGS EVEN HAPPEN WEST CAMPUS.
SO EXCITED TO SEE A LOT MORE ATTENTION AND, YOU KNOW, HOLISTICALLY THINK ABOUT HOW TO MOVE PEOPLE ON TWO FEET IN THAT AREA VERY SOON BE A GREAT USE OF OUR TIME.
ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST? OKAY, LET'S, UH, GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
THIS IS TO REVERSE THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION ON THE APPEAL.
AND I HOPE TO SEE SOME OF THOSE, UH, UNSTANDARD DESIGN IDEAS COMING BACK TO THE DIRECTOR.
[17. Briefing on North Lamar Transit Center and South Congress Transit Center Station Area Vision Plans and Related Recommendations. Presentation by Ana Villarreal, 512-978-2089, ana.villarreal@austintexas.gov, Planning Department. ]
WE ARE GOING TO HEAR A BRIEFING ON THE NORTH LAMAR TRANSIT CENTER AND SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTER STATION AREA, VISION PLANS AND RELATED RECOMMENDATIONS.SO THIS IS, UM, EVERYBODY PAY ATTENTION.
UM, THIS IS SOMETHING, AN ITEM THAT'S COMING TO US IN A MEETING OR TWO, UM, I THINK IT'S IN APRIL.
AND SO, UM, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS AND THEN YOU'LL SEE ITEM NUMBER 19 IS FORMING, UM, UH, THE WORKING GROUP THAT WOULD TAKE UP THESE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO, UM, MS. VILLA, IT'S NOT WORKING.
DO I NEED TO TO, THERE YOU GO.
GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
I'M PRINCIPAL PLANNER AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ETOD, STATIONARY PLANNING TEAM.
UM, I'M HERE TODAY TO SHARE SOME IMPORTANT UPDATES ON THE NOR LAMAR AND CELL CONGRESS, JAN CENTER STATIONARY VISION PLANS.
UM, I'LL START BY PROVIDING AN OVERVIEW OF EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AND STATION AREAS, AND THEN I WILL REVIEW THE DRAFT STATIONARY VISION PLANS.
NEXT, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS THAT IS HAPPENING IN TANDEM WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE VISION PLANS.
AND LASTLY, WE'LL DISCUSS OUR TIMELINES FOR THE ADOPTION PROCESS.
FIRST, I'LL START WITH A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF ETOD.
SO ETOD, UH, OR THAT'S THE SHORT FOR EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THAT IS AN APPROACH TO PLANNING THAT PUTS HOUSING, JOBS, SERVICES AND RETAIL NEAR PUBLIC TRANSIT STATIONS.
BUT ETOD GOES BEYOND JUST THINKING ABOUT PLACES.
IT FOCUSES ALSO ON THE PEOPLE IN THESE PLACES, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN LEFT OUT OF PAST PLANNING EFFORTS.
THIS INCLUDES PEOPLE OF COLOR, HOUSEHOLDS EARNING LOW INCOMES, SENIORS, PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, AND HOUSEHOLDS WITH LITTLE OR NO ACCESS TO CARS.
IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, NUMEROUS STRIDES HAVE BEEN MADE TO ENSURE THAT ETOD INITIATIVES ARE INCORPORATED INTO FUTURE TRANSIT INVESTMENTS.
IN NOVEMBER, 2020, AUSTIN VOTERS APPROVED THE EXPANSION OF THE CITY'S PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION NETWORK THROUGH PROJECT CONNECT.
FOLLOWING THE APPROVAL PROJECT CONNECT INITIATED THE ETOD STUDY TO ANALYZE STRATEGIES THAT WOULD PROMOTE EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT AROUND TRANSIT STATIONS.
BUILDING ON THE FINDINGS FROM ETOD STUDYING THE ETOD PO POLICY PLAN WAS DEVELOPED AND ACCEPTED IN 2023 TO GUIDE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AROUND TRANSIT STATIONS.
THIS ETOD POLICY PLAN DOES A COUPLE OF THINGS.
IT DIRECTS STAFF TO INITIATE IMAGINE AUSTIN AMENDMENTS AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS, AND ALSO IDENTIFIES TWO STATIONARY PLANS AS PRIORITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT.
THAT IS THE NORTH LA MAR TRANSIT CENTER AND THE SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTER, AND INCLUDES IMPORTANT SECTIONS SUCH AS THE ETOD GOALS, ETOD TYPOLOGIES, AND THE POLICY TOOLKIT THAT WE REFER TO OVER AND OVER THROUGHOUT THE VISION PLANS.
[02:25:01]
UM, THAT IS A COMMUNITY DRIVEN PLANNING EFFORT THAT ESTABLISHES A FRAMEWORK FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TRANSIT CENTER AND THE HALF MY RADIUS SURROUNDING THE TRANSIT STATIONS.AND WE USE A CONCEPT OF STA STATION AREAS AND TRANSIT CENTER, UM, THROUGHOUT THE VISION PLANS.
SO FOR CLARITY, WHEN WE REFERENCE THE TRANSIT CENTER, WE'RE REFERRING TO THE TRANSIT STOP AND TRACK OF LAND WHERE THE STATION SITS.
WHEN WE MENTIONED THE STATION AREA, WE'RE REFERRING TO EVERYTHING THAT EXISTS WITHIN THE HALF MILE BOUNDARY FROM THE TRANSIT CENTER.
UM, CAP METRO KICKED OFF THE ENGAGEMENT, UH, OF THESE TWO PLANS WITH A SERIES OF WORKSHOPS INVOLVING COMMUNITY MEMBERS, UH, NEAR THE NOR LAMAR AND SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTERS IN THE SPRING OF 2023, FOLLOWED BY A SECOND ROUND OF ENGAGEMENT IN THE FALL OF 2023 BEFORE THE WORK WAS TURNED OVER TO THE CITY.
AND FINALLY, LAST YEAR, WE HOSTED THE THIRD ROUND OF ENGAGEMENT.
UH, WE HAD TWO OPEN HOUSES IN NOVEMBER, ONE PRE STATIONARY VISION PLAN, AND THEN A JOINT VIRTUAL MEETING THAT SAME WEEK.
UM, THERE HAS BEEN A VERY BOLD ENGAGEMENT THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE VISION PLANS.
UH, AND THIS SLIDE INCLUDES A SUMMARY OF THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT THAT TOOK PLACE DURING THE FIRST TWO ROUNDS OF ENGAGEMENT FOR BOTH THE NOR LAMAR AND SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED.
UM, THIS INCLUDES, UH, SENDING POSTCARDS.
THERE WERE, UH, FLYERS DISTRIBUTED, UH, DIFFERENT ONLINE SURVEYS, FOCUS GROUPS THAT WERE HELD WITH COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPANTS, UM, DIFFERENT TABLING EVENTS IN PUB, IN-PERSON PUBLIC WORKSHOPS, AND ALSO MULTIPLE OPEN HOUSES.
AND THEN WE ALSO HOSTED THAT THIRD ROUND OF ENGAGEMENT THAT I JUST MENTIONED THAT INCLUDED THE TWO OPEN HOUSES, UH, IN PERSON AND OUR VIRTUAL COMMUNITY MEETING.
UM, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SUMMARY OF, UM, THE WHOLE OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT FOR THE TWO PLANS, UM, THEY ARE AVAILABLE AS THE INDEX ON THE VISION PLANS.
UM, AND IT IS VERY DETAILED AND INCLUDES THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED IN ALL THE PHASES.
SO THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED THROUGHOUT THE DIFFERENT ROUNDS OF ENGAGEMENT HELPED CREATE THE DRAFT NORTH LAMAR AND SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTER STATIONARY VISION PLANS, AND THAT WAS RELEASED FOR PUBLIC REVIEW IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR AND LATER PRESENTED TO THE COMMUNITY AT THE THIRD ROUND OF ENGAGEMENT.
IMPORTANT TO NOTE IS THAT THESE DRAFT VISION PLANS HAVE BEEN REFINED IN COLLABORATION WITH SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING HOUSING DEPARTMENT, T-P-W-E-D-D, PROJECT CONNECT AND CAP METRO.
THE PUBLIC CAN ACCESS, DOWNLOAD AND COMMENT ON THE VISION PLANS THROUGHOUT THE SPEAKUP PAGE.
BOTH VISION PLANS INCLUDE AN ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS, PROPOSED CHARACTER FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA, A SERIES OF MAPS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, CONCEPTUAL IMAGES OF HOW CAB METRO'S TRANSIT CENTER COULD LOOK LIKE AN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, AND ALSO SUMMARY OF ALL ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS.
UH, BUT NEXT I WILL GIVE YOU SOME KEY FEATURES OF THOSE PLANS STARTING WITH THE NOR LAMAR TRANSIT CENTER.
UM, THE STATION AREA CAN BE FOUND AT THE INTERSECTION OF US 180 3 RESEARCH BOULEVARD AND NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD.
THE TRANSIT CENTER ITSELF IS A KEY BUS TRANSFER HUB FOR SEVERAL HIGH FREQUENCY BUS ROUTES IN AUSTIN, BUT THE PROPERTY ITSELF, UM, ISN'T USED TO ITS FULL POTENTIAL WITH A BIG PART OF IT ALLOCATED AS AN UNDERUTILIZED PARK AND RIDE FACILITY.
SOME OF THE MOST PRESSING CHALLENGES OF THE AREA INCLUDE A CAR DOMINANT INFRASTRUCTURE PATTERN, THE LACK OF OF SAFE WALKING AND BICYCLING CONNECTIVITY, OLDER HOUSING STOCK, AND A LACK OF OPEN SPACE AND GROCERY STORES TO UNDERSTAND THE STATION AREA.
WE ALSO MAKE REFERENCE TO THE ETOD POLICY PLAN, WHICH RECOGNIZES THAT THE AREAS AROUND PROJECT CONNECT STATIONS ARE DIFFERENT AND THEREFORE CATEGORIZE INTO EIGHT DIFFERENT TYPOLOGIES.
THE NORTH LAMAR HAS THE ENHANCED APOLOGY FOR THE PROTECTION OF LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND COMMUNITIES OF COLOR, WHILE ENSURING AFFORDABILITY THROUGH SENSITIVE DEVELOPMENT, MEANING IT HAS A RELATIVELY HIGH POPULATION, IS VULNERABLE TO OR EXPERIENCING DISPLACEMENT AND HAS HIGH RECENT GROWTH.
ETOD EFFORTS SHOULD INCLUDE PROTECTING EXISTING RESIDENTS AT RISK OF DISPLACEMENT, BUILDING AND PRESERVING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AND INCREASING ACCESS TO SERVICES.
ANOTHER SECTION OF THIS PLAN PRESENTS A PROPOSED VISION FOR THE TRANSIT CENTER THAT INCLUDES THE DESIRED USES AND CONCEPTS THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO SEE INTEGRATED INTO THE DESIGN FOR THE NOR LA MAR TRANSIT CENTER.
UH, IT IS ENVISIONED TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT TRANSIT OPERATIONS WHILE ADDING AMENITIES TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
THIS CONCEPTUAL ILLUSTRATION INCLUDES A MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WITH STOREFRONT RETAIL AT STREET LEVEL, A BUSINESS CENTER WITH FLEXIBLE COMMERCIAL AND SMALL LOCAL BUSINESSES, A PUBLIC
[02:30:01]
PARK AND ALSO A TRANSIT PLAZA.THE TRANSIT CENTER SITE IS ENVISIONED TO HAVE INTERACTIVE WAY FINDING FIRST LAST MILE MICRO MOBILITY, ACTIVE STOREFRONTS TRANSIT SHELTERS TO PROTECT RIDERS FROM THE WEATHER CAP, METRO AMENITY CENTER, MIXED INCOME HOUSING, NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES, ET CETERA.
AND HERE IS ANOTHER STREET VIEW OF THE FLEXIBLE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG US 180 3.
UM, THIS RENDERINGS ARE MEANT TO BE A PROPOSED OPTION FOR WHAT THE TRANSIT CENTER COULD LOOK LIKE, UH, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE.
UM, SO CAP METRO WILL WORK OVER THE YEARS AHEAD TO REFINE THIS VISION WITH THE COMMUNITY ON A SEPARATE PLANNING PROCESS.
AND, UH, THERE WILL ALSO IDENTIFY A DESIGN SITE FOR, UM, I MEAN A DESIGN FOR THE SITE.
UM, A KEY COMPONENT OF THE PLAN INCLUDES THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
UM, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THIS IS A PARCEL LABEL, PARCEL LEVEL MAP ILLUSTRATING THE AREAS WHERE GROWTH IS ENCOURAGED AND ALSO AREAS WHERE OUR PRIORITIES SHOULD BE PRESERVATION AS A COMMUNITY CONTINUES TO INVOLVE.
UM, WE HAVE DESIGNATED PROPERTIES FRONTING 180 3 POWELL LANE AND THOSE NEAREST TO THE TRANSIT CENTER AS TOD MIXED USE.
THIS INCLUDES THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY, IDEALLY WITH A MIX OF GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL OR OTHER ACTIVE USES WITH RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL OR OFFICE USES ON ON THE UPPER FLOORS.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE DESIGNATED AREAS NEAR ANDERSON LANE AND NORTH LAMAR AS MIXED USE INDUSTRIAL TO INCLUDE LOW IMPACT INDUSTRIAL USES LIKE CAR REPAIR SHOPS, WHOLESALE WAREHOUSES, AND FOOD PROCESSING FACILITIES WITH ADDED OPTIONS FOR RETAIL OFFICE AND ATTACHED MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION ON THE NORTHERN END OF THE NOR LAMAR TO ENABLE STATION AREAS TO PLAN MORE SEAMLESSLY BETWEEN PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND MORE ACTIVE COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE AREAS.
THIS CHARACTER DISTRICT INCLUDES A VARIETY OF BUILDING SIZES SUCH AS MULTIFAMILY, DUPLEXES, TOWN HOMES, OR SMALL SCALE OFFICES AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.
UM, NEXT I WILL DISCUSS THIS SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTER STATION AREA VISION PLAN.
UM, THIS TRANSIT CENTER STATION AREA IS LOCATED ON RAHAM LANE OFF OF SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE AND NEXT TO US TWO 90 AND BEN WHITE.
THIS TRANSIT CENTER ALSO SERVES AS COM SERVES THE COMMUNITY WITH SEVERAL FREQUENT BUS ROUTES AND THE PLANNED BERGSTROM SPUR TRAIL THAT WILL CONNECT THE STATION AREA WITH AN OFF STREET MULTI-USE PATH TO THE EAST AND WEST.
LARGE PARCELS OF COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES ARE COMMON HERE.
HOWEVER, AREA REDEVELOPMENT HAS BROUGHT IN SEVERAL LARGE MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS AND THE AREA IS REDEVELOPING FAST INCREASING DISPLACEMENT PRESSURES ON EXISTING RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES.
SOME OF THE MOST PRESSING CHALLENGES OF THE AREA, A CAR DOMINANT INFRASTRUCTURE PATTERN HIGHWAY US TWO 90 STANDS AS AN INFRASTRUCTURE BARRIER THAT DIVIDES THE STATION AREA NORTH TO SOUTH, MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE AND ISOLATING COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
THERE'S ALSO LARGE BLOCKS OF MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE LIKE OF SAFE WALKING AND BICYCLING CONNECTIVITY, AND VERY LIMITED OPEN SPACES ACCORDING TO THE ETOD TYPOLOGIES, UH, THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER.
THE SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTER STATION AREA IS CLASSIFIED WITH THE TYPOLOGY ALIGNED POLICIES TO PROVIDE AFFORDABILITY AS REDEVELOPMENT OCCURS, MEANING THAT IT HAS A RELATIVELY LOW POPULATION, IS VULNERABLE TO OR EXPERIENCING DISPLACEMENT AND HAS HIGH RECENT GROWTH.
ETOD EFFORTS SHOULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE CHANGE OCCURRING TODAY TO MAXIMIZE COMMUNITY BENEFITS IN REDEVELOPMENT AND INFO OPPORTUNITIES TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD TO LIVE HERE WHILE PROTECTING EXISTING RESIDENTS AT RISK OF DISPLACEMENT.
AS FOR THE TRANSIT CENTER ITSELF, THE PLAN ENVISIONS THAT IN THE FUTURE IT WILL BE REDEVELOPED TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT TRANSIT OPERATIONS WHILE ADDING AMENITIES TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
THIS CONCEPTUAL ILLUSTRATION AND VISIONS THAT THE SITE WOULD REDEVELOP TO MOVE THE TRANSIT CENTER TO WHERE THE PARK AND RIDE LOG NOW SITS WITH A SHADED TRANSIT PLAZA WRAPPED AROUND FLEXIBLE COMMERCIAL SPACES.
MIXED INCOME HOUSING WILL TAKE PLACE OF THE CURRENT BUS SPACE.
THIS VISUALIZATION SHOWS THE TRANSIT CENTER WITH WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE FUTURE BERGSTROM SPUR TRAIL.
UM, IT HAS ALSO ACTIVE STOREFRONTS, MIXED INCOME HOUSING, SMALL BUSINESS AND WORKFORCE TRAINING SPACES AND ACCESS TO FIRST AND LAST MILE MICRO MOBILITY CONNECTIONS.
AND HERE'S JUST ANOTHER STREET VIEW TO SHOW
[02:35:01]
HOW, UH, WE CAN ACTIVATE THE GROUND FLOOR OF NEW BUILDINGS ON THE SITE, MAKING IT A LIVELY TREE-LINED URBAN ENVIRONMENT WITH ACCESS TO SERVICES.AND AGAIN, UH, AS IN THE CASE FOR THE NOR LAMAR, THESE RENDERINGS ARE MEANT TO BE ASPIRATIONAL.
THEY ARE NOT FINAL DESIGN CAP METRO WILL WORK WITH THESE COMMUNITIES TO FURTHER REFINE THE CONCEPT AND IDENTIFY PARTNERS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE.
UM, SO THIS MAP IS A PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THE SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSITED CENTER STATION AREA.
THE SUBOR AND RAT LANE CORRIDORS ARE PROPOSED FOR HIGH DENSITY TOD MIXED USE.
UM, AND AGAIN, THIS INCLUDE THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT WITH GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL OR OTHER ACTIVE USES, UM, AND THEN RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL OR OFFICE SPACES ON THE UPPER FLOOR.
UM, AND THEN WE HAVE INDUSTRIAL AREAS, UM, AROUND EAST ST.
ELMO AND INDUSTRIAL LANE THAT WE ARE LARGELY MAINTAINING THEM AS MIXED USED INDUSTRIAL.
AND WE ALSO HAVE A FEW NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION PROPERTIES THAT ARE CLOSEST TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
UM, IMPORTANT TO NOTE IS THAT AREAS BEYOND THE COLOR PORTIONS OF THIS MAP WILL CONTINUE TO BE GOVERNED BY THE LAND USE CATEGORIES OF THEIR UNDERLAYING NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.
AND THAT TAKES ME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENTS.
UM, WE ARE PROPOSING, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENTS IN TANDEM WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE VISION PLANS.
THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND U FUTURE LAND USE MAPS, UH, THAT I DISCUSSED EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION OVERLAP WITH FUTURE LAND USE MAPS IN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.
THESE AMENDMENTS ARE INTENDED TO ENSURE THAT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP INCLUDED IN EACH OF THE VISION PLANS GOVERN THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE STATION AREA, THEREBY PREVENTING ANY CONFLICTS.
UH, AND THIS MAP ILLUSTRATES THE TWO, UH, DIFFERENT STATION AREAS.
THERE WILL BE FIVE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS, UH, FOR THE NOR LAMAR TRANSIT CENTER AND FOUR IMPACTED, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS FOR THE STYLE CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTER STATION AREAS.
UM, ON MARCH 4TH AND FIFTH, AND THAT WAS LAST WEEK, WE HELD TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS COVERING AMENDMENTS TO NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.
UM, AND WE SENT OUT NOTICES TO, UH, PROPERTIES IMPACTED BY THESE.
UM, WE, UH, NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS, UTILITY ACCOUNT HOLDERS, AND THE COMMUNITY REGISTRY ENTRY WITHIN THE 500 FEET OF THE GEOGRAPHY, UH, THAT IS COLORED ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
UM, AND THAT TAKES ME TO THE ACTIONS THAT WE WILL BRING FORWARD, UM, FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING IN MARCH 25TH.
UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENTS WILL BE MOVING FORWARD ON THE SAME TIMELINE AS CONSIDERATION OF THE STATIONARY VISION PLANS, AND WE WILL ALSO HAVE A CODE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TITLE 25 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH, UH, THE REGULATIONS AND AMENDMENTS, UH, PROCESS FOR THE STATIONARY PLANS SHOULD THEY GET ADOPTED.
SO THERE WILL BE A TOTAL OF 12 ITEMS THAT WE WILL BRING FORWARD FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ON MARCH 25TH.
UM, AND THIS IS JUST, UM, AN OVERVIEW OF THE TIMELINE, AGAIN, INCLUDING THE DIFFERENT ROUNDS OF ENGAGEMENT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT, COMMUNITY MEETINGS THAT WE HOSTED LAST WEEK, AND WHAT IS, UH, LEFT IN THE REMAINING OF THIS PROCESS, WHICH IS A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THIS PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON APRIL 24TH.
UM, AND WITH THAT I WILL JUST LEAVE, UH, OUR CONTACT INFORMATION AND WE WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION.
UM, ANY COMM OR COMMISSIONERS WITH THE FIRST QUESTION? YES, I SEE COMMISSIONER HOWARD AND THEN I'LL GO COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, I'M GONNA APOLOGIZE.
IS THERE ANY WAY WE COULD SEE THE ILLUSTRATIONS FOR THE NORTH LAMAR STATION? AGAIN, I COULDN'T SEE IT, UM, PREVIOUSLY, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
AND THEN I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE PARTICIPATION AT THE MEETINGS, IF SOMEONE CAN SHARE ABOUT THAT.
ARE THESE THE ILLUSTRATIONS THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO? YES, I DIDN'T SEE THOSE.
SO LET ME KNOW IF YOU WANT ME TO.
SO TO ARIEL THE, UM, THE BIRD'S EYE VIEW OF THE MASSING.
AND IF I COULD ASK ABOUT THE PARTICIPATION AT THE MEETINGS? YEAH.
UM, ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE LAST OPEN HOUSES OR THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENTS? MM-HMM
THE, THE, THE MEETING'S ON THE FOURTH AND THE 5TH OF MARCH.
YEAH, WE, UM, UH, HOSTED THOSE VIRTUALLY.
WE HAD ABOUT 10 COMMUNITY MEMBERS ATTEND THE NOR LAMAR TRANSIT CENTER, UH, COMMUNITY MEETING.
AND THERE WAS ABOUT, WHAT WAS LIKE 25,
[02:40:01]
UM, ABOUT 25, UH, RESIDENTS THAT JOINED THE SOUTH CONGRESS TRANSIT CENTER COMMUNITY MEETING.AND THEY'RE BOTH, UH, THEY WERE BOTH RECORDED AND UPLOADED TO THE SPEAKER PAGE.
DID YOU HAVE ANY THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTIONS I HAD.
WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
THANK YOU FOR THIS, UH, PRESENTATION.
MS. AL, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU GO TO THE NORTH LAMAR TRANS CENTER MAP? I THINK YOU WERE JUST ONE OR TWO SLIDES AWAY FROM IT.
UM, THE, UH, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, SORRY.
SO I THINK THIS IS A, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, REALLY GREAT OVERALL PROGRESS.
I'M EXCITED TO SEE THESE STATION AREAS MOVE FORWARD IN PLANNING.
UM, I, I CAN'T HELP BUT NOTICE THAT IT APPEARS ALL SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES MORE OR LESS WERE JUST COMPLETELY LEFT OUT OF THE TOD AREA.
CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THAT DECISION, UM, OR THE PROCESS THAT LED TO THAT? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE THE SAME WAS TRUE FOR THE, THE SOUTHERN, UH, I FORGET SOUTH CONGRESS, UH, TRANSIT CENTER AS WELL.
THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF THAT HALF MILE RADIUS THAT ARE CURRENTLY DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY OR LARGELY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOD.
I JUST WANNA KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS THE RATIONALE BEHIND DOING THAT? YEAH, UM, THERE ARE, UM, DIFFERENT GOALS THAT WE HAVE.
UH, WHEN WE WERE LOOKING IN, IN CREATING THIS FUTURE LAND USE MAP, ONE OF 'EM IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE INCORPORATE, UH, THE, THE FUTURE LAND USES THAT WILL INCENTIVIZE REDEVELOPMENT IN AREAS WHERE APPROPRIATE, BUT ALSO THE, WE ARE TRYING TO PROTECT AREAS, UH, FOR DISPLACEMENT.
WE WE'RE, WE KNOW THAT REDEVELOPMENT SOMETIMES BRINGS, UM, DISPLACEMENT PRESSURES AND WE ARE NOT INCLUDING, LIKE YOU SAID, ANY, UH, RESIDENTIAL AREAS WITHIN, UH, THE, THE IMPACTED FUTURE END USE, UH, THAT WE'RE PRESENTING BEFORE YOU.
BUT THEY, THEY ARE PART OF A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, UH, AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO BE GOVERNED BY THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT.
SO IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE NOT PLANNING FOR THOSE AREAS, THOSE AREAS ARE CURRENTLY SITTING IN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS.
AND I, I DON'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF, I'M JUST TRYING TO BE TIME SENSITIVE.
SO IS IT A POLICY WITHIN THE ETOD PLAN TO NOT INCLUDE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN ANY ETOD AREAS? OR IS THAT A DECISION THAT WAS MADE FOR THESE TWO ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS? UM, I KNOW THAT THE, FOR, FOR THE ETOD PHASE, PHASE ONE FOR THE OVERLAY, THEY DECIDED NOT TO INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
UM, AS IN THE CASE FOR THIS ONE, WE'RE FOLLOWING THE SAME, UM, THE SAME LOGIC OF WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE ARE ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT, THAT WE ARE PROTECTING THE CURRENT RESIDENTS OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND IT'S GENERALLY SOMETHING THAT WE ARE, UH, HERE OVER AND OVER WHEN WE MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PROTECTING THOSE AREAS.
AND, AND I GUESS IF I STILL HAVE TIME, I I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU SAY RESIDENTIAL AREAS, YOU MEAN MEAN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS? CORRECT.
BECAUSE I SEE HERE, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IT APPEARS THAT ONE OF THE EXISTING, WELL THREE LARGE EXISTING INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS ARE INCLUDED IN THE TOD FUTURE LAND USE MAP HERE.
I THINK THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE CASE ON, ON THE SOUTH CONGRESS AS WELL.
IS, IS IT, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, LIKE, ARE WE SAYING WE DON'T THINK SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SHOULD EVER BE INCLUDED IN A TOD PLANNING AREA? IS THAT A POLICY THAT WE'VE ADOPTED? I DON'T THINK WE'RE NECESSARILY SAYING THAT, BUT I THINK THE, THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAP, UH, IS FOCUSED ON MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE, UH, INCLUDING THE DENSITY THAT'S APPROPRIATE NEAR THE TRANSIT CENTERS.
UM, SO WE, WE ARE FOCUSING ON, UM, INCREASING THE DENSITY WHERE IT'S APPROPRIATE AND, AND WE'RE TRYING TO, AGAIN, AT THE SAME TIME PROTECT SINGLE FAMILY, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES FROM SEEING, UH, SOME DISPLACEMENT THAT MAY OCCUR IF, IF, IF WE INCLUDE TOO MUCH OF THAT REDEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE AREA.
AND DO I STILL HAVE TIME? I'M SORRY, CHAIR.
I, I CAN'T QUITE, YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE AND 10 SECONDS.
YEAH, I, I, I THINK I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, AND I, I DON'T MEAN TO BE PICKING ON YOU MS. BIAL AT ALL.
UM, I, I JUST, IT CONCERNS ME THAT WE ARE, UH, IN 2025, I MEAN, TODAY WE LOOKED AT THE M-L-K-T-O-D, WHICH WAS, UH, WHAT, 20 YEARS OLD NOW.
UH, AND THAT HERE WE ARE PLANNING SUPPOSEDLY EQUITABLE TOD AREAS, AND WE'RE SAYING ACROSS THE BOARD, IT SEEMS LIKE WE WON'T TOUCH SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
I, I KNOW THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SOUTH OF ANDERSON LANE ARE TYPICALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, I WON'T SPEAK TO THE CHARACTER OF PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE, BUT THOSE ARE MILLION DOLLAR PLUS HOMES PREDOMINANTLY.
[02:45:01]
ME THAT WE ARE OKAY WITH PERPETUATING THIS OUTDATED NOTION THAT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SOMEHOW NEED PROTECTION, UH, EVEN WHEN THEY'RE IN WALKABLE TRANSIT RICH, UH, AREAS WHERE WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING FORWARD THINKING PLANNING.UH, I, I REALLY WOULD'VE HOPED TO SEE SOME OF THESE TOD STATION AREA, UH, FUTURE LAND USE MAPS EXTEND INTO SOME OF THESE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPED PROPERTIES WHERE IT'S APPROPRIATE.
I, I DON'T AGREE, I GUESS WITH THE NOTION THAT IT'S INAPPROPRIATE TO EVER UP ZONE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME FOR A TOD DEVELOPMENT.
SO MAYBE THAT'S MORE OF A COMMON THAN QUESTION.
BUT, UH, I DO APPRECIATE YOU ANSWERING MY OTHER QUESTIONS.
OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, AND THEN COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, IF YOU, YOU, YOU WERE ON A ROLL IF YOU WANNA KEEP GOING WITH MY TIME.
SO I MEAN, JUST ADDING ONTO THAT A LITTLE BIT.
SO PART OF THE SOUTHERN PLAN THAT WE JUST SAW, THAT PART OF THAT WAS IN THE DAWSON NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO A PLAN FROM 2002 WHEN THE AVERAGE MEDIUM PRICE IN AUSTIN WAS ABOUT 197,000.
TODAY THE AVERAGE MEDIAN LISTING PRICE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF DAWSON IS 955,000.
SO WAS THERE AN ACTUAL STATED GOAL OF PROTECTING EXCLUSIONARY ZONING? UM, NOT NECESSARILY.
I THINK, UM, AGAIN, THESE AREAS THAT WERE LEFT OUTSIDE OF OUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP THAT WE'RE PROPOSING, PROPOSING WITHIN THE VISION PLANS, THEY DO HAVE THEIR OWN FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
UM, SO WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY SAYING THAT WE SHOULDN'T INCREASE DENSITY OR WE SHOULDN'T ALLOW CERTAIN THINGS THERE, THERE IS CURRENTLY A PLAN FOR FUTURE DEVELOP DEVELOPMENT WITH THOSE AREAS.
WHAT WE TRIED TO DO IN THIS FUTURE LAND USE MAP WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT AREAS THAT ARE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE TO THE TRANSIT CENTER, THAT, UM, WE LAID THE, THE, THE, THE, THE WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BRING IN THE SERVICES AND THE HOUSING AND THE RETAIL.
SO I MEAN, ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES OF COURSE IS THE AVERAGE PERSON WHO BUYS THE MILLION DOLLAR HOME VERSUS THE AVERAGE PERSON WHO BUYS INTO A FOURPLEX THAT'S $340,000 EACH IS MUCH LESS LIKELY TO WANNA WALK TO TRANSIT, ANY ONE OF THAT PROPERTY VERSUS THE, THE LESS EXPENSIVE NOW WITH MORE HOMES, POSSIBLY EVEN CHILDREN.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS, YOU KNOW, I KNEW WITH THE NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WE HAD TRANSITION ZONES.
IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY OF TRANSITION ZONES BEING ADDED TO THIS, OR ARE WE JUST AGAIN, TRYING TO PROTECT EXCLUSIONARY ZONING? WE, WE HAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION ZONE THAT IS MEANT TO PROVIDE THAT, UM, UH, TRANSITION FROM MAINLY RESIDENTIAL AREAS TO AREAS THAT ARE MORE COMMERCIAL FOCUSED.
UH, IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL, UH, CATEGORIES, WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO INCLUDE THOSE AND CONSIDER THOSE, UM, AS AMENDMENTS TO THE PLAN WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD.
COULD WE TALK ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE A LITTLE BIT? SO, UM, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO UNDERSTAND LIKE THE NEEDS OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE? AND IT SEEMS LIKE SO MUCH OF WHAT WE DO TODAY AS A CITY IS WE'RE JUST LIKE SITE BY SITE.
DO ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE, DO ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A MUCH BETTER HOLISTIC WAY TO LOOK AT THINGS.
I THINK COUNCILLOR VALO APPEARED THE OTHER DAY WAS TALKING ABOUT LIKE, HOW DO WE MAYBE EVEN LOOK AT A FEE AND LU TO ALLOW IT TO REALLY CAPTURE AN ENTIRE AREA AND TO REALLY DO A LOT BETTER BY AN AREA INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING LITTLE ONE-OFFS EVERYWHERE THAT ARE MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE AND LESS EFFICIENT? YEAH.
WELL, WE DID, UH, COLLABORATE CLOSELY WITH BOTH TPW, UH, AND THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE ARE INCLUDING IN THIS TWO VISION PLANS IS SOMETHING THAT, UH, IS IMPLEMENTABLE.
WE, WE ARE AWARE THAT SOMETIMES, UH, PLANS GET ADOPTED AND THEN IMPLEMENTATION, WHEN IMPLEMENTATION COMES AROUND, IT'S HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE PLANS, UH, GET BUILT.
SO THEY HAVE REVIEWED THE PLANS, UM, THEY ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE PROVIDED WITHIN THE PLANS.
UM, THERE ARE SOME, UM, DIFFERENT, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON SIDEWALKS.
UM, THERE'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAKE SURE CROSSWALKS ARE, UH, LOOKED AT.
UM, AND AGAIN, THEY, THEY REVISED AND APPROVED THE, THE PLAN THAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD.
COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? UM, YES.
CAN WE BRING UP THE SOUTH, UH, SECTION OF THE PRESENTATION? AND, AND THIS IS KIND OF JUST MORE OF A GENERAL QUESTION.
I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BY THE MAP AND I'LL POINT OUT THAT SPECIFICALLY, BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THESE RENDERINGS, I SEE REALLY SHORT BUILDINGS AND I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT WE'RE UNDER DEVELOPING SOME OF THESE AREAS BECAUSE LET'S BE CLEAR, THIS IS WHERE SOME OF OUR KEY BUS SERVICES ARE, CORRECT? MM-HMM
SO LIKE WHAT TYPE OF RIDERSHIP ARE WE AIMING FOR IN THESE LOCATIONS? DO WE HAVE THOSE NUMBERS? ARE THOSE TIED TO THIS PLAN AT ALL? WELL, THE, THE IMAGES THAT YOU SEE ALL THE RENDERINGS IN, AND THIS MASSING IS JUST THE CONCEPTUAL, UH, PLAN CAB METRO, UH, WILL BE ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY AND DOING A REFINEMENT OF THE VISION PLAN.
SO THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY THE DENSITY THAT WILL BE, UH, COMING TO THE SITE.
SORRY, I CUT YOU OFF JUST 'CAUSE I HAVE
[02:50:01]
A LOT OF QUESTIONS.SO I JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHAT IS THE HEIGHT YOU EXPECT TO ADD TO THE PHLEGM FOR THESE PARTICULAR TYPES OF BUILDINGS AND THESE SITES? THAT IS CAP METRO, AGAIN, WILL WORK, UM, WITH THE CITY ONCE THEY SELECT A SITE AND A DESIGNER.
SO WHEN WE INCLUDE THESE PLUMS, SORRY AGAIN TO INTERRUPT, JUST TO BE REALLY CLEAR ABOUT THIS.
WHEN YOU BRING BACK THESE NEIGHBORHOOD AMENDMENTS, WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT PHBS, BUT WE WILL HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE HEIGHT WILL BE FOR ANY OF THESE, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, THE, THE HEIGHT THAT WILL BE ALLOWED, THAT TIES TO THE ZONING, THE BAY ZONING.
SO WITH THE PLAN, UH, ALONG WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THERE IS A MATRIX OF ZONINGS THAT WILL BE ALLOWED WITHIN EACH OF THE CATEGORIES THAT, THAT WE MENTIONED.
THAT IS THE TTOD MIXED USE, THE MIXED INDUSTRIAL AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION.
AND IF WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH I THINK IS THE ONE THAT SHOWS THE ACTUAL NOTE.
SO IT'S THE ONE THAT HAS THE MAP WITH THE FEATURE, THE CO COLOR CODING.
SO FIRST OF ALL, I'M JUST GONNA SAY THAT I FIND THIS VERY CONFUSING BECAUSE THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT BROWNS NOTED ON THE, OR AT LEAST IT LOOKS LIKE BROWN TO ME, BUT I CAN'T REALLY SEE WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION IS VERSUS THE MIXED USE TOD.
SO IF YOU COULD CLARIFY THAT ON THIS, BECAUSE TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ALL TRANSITION AND I'M NOT SEEING ANY MIXED USE TOD, BUT MAYBE I'M MISREADING MY BROWNS HERE.
I THINK LIKE THE COLOR SCHEME IS NOT TRANSLATING THE SAME AS IN THE COMPUTER, BUT WHAT YOU SEE PROBABLY IS LIKE THE YELLOW COLOR THAT IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION.
AND WHAT YOU SEE AS BROWN, THAT IS THE TOD.
SO WHEN YOU ALL LOOKED AT THESE TWO PLANS, DID YOU ALL CONSIDER HOW WE DID OUR A T PITIES? LIKE SO ARE WE THINKING ABOUT DENSITY BONUSES? ARE WE THINKING ABOUT HOW THIS INTERACTS WITH, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGING RIDERSHIP? ARE WE THINKING ABOUT PEDESTRIAN RIGHT AWAY? IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME OF THOSE THINGS WERE DONE, BUT IT'S NOT TO THE SAME STANDARD, IT'S KIND OF A DIFFERENT SET OF STANDARDS.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? YEAH, THE, THE DENSITY AND THE RIDERSHIP IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WE CONSIDER WHEN LOOKING AT THIS AND THAT'S WHY YOU WOULD SEE THAT.
UM, ALL ALONG, UH, MAIN STREETS AND CLOSER TO THE TRANSIT CENTERS, WE HAVE THE HIGHEST DENSITY THAT WILL BE ALLOWED.
UM, THAT WILL BE THE TTOD MIXED USE.
COMMISSIONER RERA RAMIREZ IS GIFTING YOU SOME TIME.
SO JUST ONE OTHER RELATED QUESTION.
UM, SO JUST TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU CAN BRING THAT UP REALLY FAST, UH, THE ONE THING I DID WANNA TOUCH ON WHEN WE DID OUR ETOD PLANS, WE EXCLUDED SOME USES THAT WERE CAR ORIENTED MM-HMM
SO I JUST WANTED TO FLAG THAT AS A, WE HAD A VERY CLEAR LIST OF WHAT WE DID AND DID NOT WANT OUR NEAR OUR TRANSIT CENTERS RELATED TO OUR RAIL AND I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED THAT THAT'S NOT BEING CONSIDERED IN THIS PLANT.
SO JUST TO END WITH THAT COMMENT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER, DID YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.
I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION, SORRY ABOUT THIS.
SO JUST TO LOOK AT BOTH OF THESE PLANS, JUST TO SEE A BIG HIGHWAY THAT'S SEPARATING SO MUCH OF THE LAND USE, WE'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND AND I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW ARE WE THINKING ABOUT THAT IN TERMS OF THE FRAME? AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING WE SEE ON A PHM, BUT JUST HOW ARE WE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE SOME OF THAT WALKABILITY AND MIXED USE TO ACROSS THE HIGHWAY OR CERTAINLY ACCOMMODATE THAT IN A BETTER WAY THAN HAVING TO GO UNDER A FREEWAY TO MAYBE GET TO SOME OF THESE TRANSIT ZONES? I MEAN, LIKE, I THINK I APPRECIATE THAT THE PH FLU IS ON BOTH SIDES OR THESE CHANGES ARE ON BOTH SIDES, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY WORK IF THERE'S NO CONNECTION.
YEAH, AND WE DO HAVE A CONNECTIVITY MAP, UH, INCLUDED IN THE VISION PLAN FOR BOTH THE NORTHERN MARTIN AND SOUTH CONGRESS AND THEY TALK, UH, SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WAYS TO IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY FOR BOTH.
UM, AS WE KNOW, LIKE THESE, UH, HIGHWAYS ARE OWNED BY TECH DOT, BUT I KNOW THAT TPW HAS WORKED CLOSELY WITH THEM, UH, AND WE ARE FOLLOWING THE GUIDELINES ON THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN.
SO WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS INCORPORATED HERE.
ALRIGHT, THREE MORE SPOTS FOR QUESTIONS.
CAN I MAKE A SUPER QUICK COMMENT? YES.
COULD WE PULL THAT MAP BACK UP? THAT WAS JUST UP OF THE, THE SOUTH LOCATION.
SO JUST SPEAKING FROM MY, WITH MY HABITAT HAT ON, SO OUR HABITAT HEADQUARTERS IS SO CLOSE TO HERE THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE A NUMBER OF CLIENTS AND EMPLOYEES THAT WALK FROM THE TRANSIT STATION.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE, I, IF I'M MISTAKEN, CORRECT ME, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WERE EVER APPROACHED BY THIS AND I KNOW THAT THAT WOULD'VE BEEN GREAT TO HAVE OUR PROPERTY IN THERE AND JUST OTHER PROPERTIES OBVIOUSLY I CAN'T SAY I WANT THAT I WOULDN'T BENEFIT PERSONALLY, BUT THERE ARE OTHER LOCATIONS THAT ARE NEARBY THAT I KNOW PEOPLE ARE WALKING TO AND FROM THIS SITE THAT AREN'T HERE THAT ARE GREAT AND RIP FOR REDEVELOPMENT.
I'M JUST CURIOUS, HOW CAN WE ONLY SEEM TO GO EAST AND JUST CERTAIN DIRECTIONS BUT THEN COMPLETELY ALMOST FAIL TO GO NORTH AND WEST? IS IT BECAUSE AGAIN, SINGLE FAMILY ZONES AND PROTECTING EXCLUSIONARY ZONE? OKAY.
ALRIGHT, SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND I GUESS WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE IN NEXT MONTH.
[02:55:01]
YEAH.UM, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A, LET'S DO A FIVE MINUTE BREAK BEFORE WE GET TO THE A CT PLAN AND THE AMENDMENTS.
SO WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE AT 9 0 8 TO START COMING ON CAMERA SO WE CAN ESTABLISH OUR QUORUM.
COMMISSIONER HOWARD OR COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, CAN YOU COME ONLINE SO WE CAN GET STARTED AGAIN? I MEAN, ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
[18. Discussion and action recommending adoption of the Austin Core Transportation Plan (ACT Plan) as an attachment to the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP). Presentation by Cole Kitten, 512-974-6442, cole.kitten@austintexas.gov, Transportation and Public Works Department.]
WE ARE GOING TO DIVE BACK INTO ITEM NUMBER 18, WHICH IS DISCUSSION AND ACTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE AUSTIN CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN.UM, SO THIS WAS A, UM, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEM THAT WAS HEARD AT OUR LAST MEETING.
UM, SO WE'VE ALREADY HAD THE PRESENTATION AND WE HAVE, I BELIEVE, ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE QUESTION AND AN ANSWER.
UM, SO I UNDERSTAND, UM, MR. COLE KITTEN IS HERE FOR, UH, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS WE MAY HAVE.
SO SINCE I WAS GONE LAST TIME, UH, AT THE LAST MEETING, I'LL JUST OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS AND THEN, UM, ONCE WE SEE THOSE SLOWING DOWN, WE CAN START GETTING INTO AMENDMENTS.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS NOW THAT MR. KITTEN IS HERE? CHAIR, I BELIEVE WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THE SIDE.
SO, UM, STAFF IS NOT PRESENTING, BUT WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS ADAM GREENFIELD.
ADAM, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
ADAM GREENFIELD HERE WITH SAFE STREETS AUSTIN.
UH, THANKS FOR TAKING, UH, OUR COMMENTS ON THE ACT PLAN.
UH, WE COMMENCE STAFF FOR THEIR GREAT WORK ON THIS PLAN.
UM, IF ENACTED AS PROPOSED, IT WOULD BE A BIG STEP FORWARD FOR DOWNTOWN.
HOWEVER, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PLAN GO A LOT FURTHER IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE POTENTIAL OF DOWNTOWN.
SPECIFICALLY, UH, OUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOCUS OO ON THE CONTINUED, UH, UH, ONE-WAY CONFIGURATIONS PROPOSED FOR FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, AND EIGHTH STREETS.
UH, ONE WAY STREETS WERE ENACTED IN AUSTIN, BEGINNING IN THE 1960S.
IT WAS A DIFFERENT ERA WHERE REALLY WE, WE CENTERED CARS AND CAR MOVEMENT.
WE SUBSEQUENTLY FOUND OUT THAT IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE SACRIFICED BASICALLY EVERYTHING ELSE WE CARE ABOUT IN A DOWNTOWN WALKABILITY, BIKEABILITY SAFETY, AIR QUALITY, UH, THE LOCAL ECONOMY, THE HEALTH OF LOCAL BUSINESSES, PROPERTY VALUES, AND SO FORTH.
UH, AT THIS POINT IN 2025, OVER 75 CITIES AROUND THE US HAVE CONVERTED PROMINENT ONE-WAY STREETS BACK TO WE HAVE NOT FOUND ANY EXAMPLES OF FAILED ONE TO TWO WAY CONVERSIONS.
THEY ALL SEEM TO HAVE SUCCEEDED, UH, IN MAKING THEIR STREETS SAFER, BETTER FOR BUSINESSES, MORE WALKABLE AND BIKEABLE.
AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT HERE TOO.
UH, THE KEY QUESTION I REALLY THINK FOR, FOR YOU ALL AS COMMISSIONERS IS, IS WHAT DOES DOWNTOWN MEAN TO YOU? IS IT A A PLACE TO SPEED THROUGH ON THE WAY TO SOMEWHERE ELSE, OR IS IT A DESTINATION? BECAUSE IF WE SEE IT AS A DESTINATION, THEN UH, WE REALLY HAVE TO TAKE ON THESE, THESE ONE WAY HIGH SPEED HIGHWAY LIKE ARTERIALS.
UM, UH, IN STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE OF SUCH CONVERSIONS, UH, THEY'VE ACTUALLY ALSO FOUND THAT, UH, IT'S, IT'S OFTEN EASIER, UH, TO
[03:00:01]
DRIVE THROUGH DOWNTOWN BECAUSE TWO-WAY GRIDS DISTRIBUTE TRAFFIC AROUND THE GRID MORE EFFECTIVELY THAN ONE WAY COUPLETS DO, WHICH ARE A FRAGILE, UH, UH, IN, IN MANY INSTANCES.UH, WE'VE ALSO DONE CONCEPTUAL CROSS SECTIONS OF THE, UH, SAME STRETCHES IN THE ACT PLAN, AND IT SEEMS TO US CERTAINLY POSSIBLE, UH, THAT WE CAN CONVERT ALL STREETS TO TWO WAY AND ALSO INCLUDE THE OTHER FACILITIES THAT WE REALLY WANT, LIKE BUS LANES, PROTECTED BIKE LANES IN BOTH DIRECTIONS, UH, TREES AND AND SO FORTH.
UM, SO, UH, AND SPECIFICALLY SIXTH STREET, UM, WE, WE REALLY DO STRONGLY SUPPORT KEEPING IN THE PLAN, UH, PROTECTED BIKE LANES IN BOTH DIRECTIONS.
WE ACTUALLY THINK THAT THERE IS SPACE FOR INCLUDING, UH, A PARKING LANE ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET AS WELL.
UH, PARKING ACTUALLY, UH, ENCOURAGES SIDEWALK DINING USE BY PROVIDING THAT, UH, PROTECTIVE BUFFER THERE.
SO AGAIN, WE THANK STAFF FOR THEIR EXCELLENT WORK ON THIS.
UH, WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE ALL OF THOSE STREETS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ONE WAY CONVERTED TO TWO WAY, AND, UH, THEN WE WILL, UH, MOVE TOWARDS A DOWNTOWN THAT REALLY MAXIMIZES ITS POTENTIAL.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS MATEO BARN STONE.
MATEO, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
MY NAME IS MATEO BARN STONE AND I'M RESIDENT RESIDENT OF AUSTIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF C-N-U-C-T-X.
BUT I'M SPEAKING TONIGHT IN MY PERSONAL CAPACITY.
UH, I SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE AUSTIN CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, ALONG WITH THE CHANGES PROPOSED BY THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND SAFE STREETS AUSTIN TO CONVERT DOWNTOWN'S REMAINING ONE WAY STREETS TO TWO WAY STREETS.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE REASONS WHY THIS WOULD IMPROVE OUR DOWNTOWN TWO WAY STREETS.
IMPROVE ACCESSIBILITY AND CONNECTIVITY ONE WAY.
STREETS CAN BE CONFUSING AND INCONVENIENT, OFTEN FORCING DRIVERS TO TAKE UNNECESSARY DETOURS, INCREASING TRAVEL TIME AND MAKING NAVIGATION AND EFFICIENT TWO-WAY STREETS ARE ALSO MORE RESILIENT WHEN TRAFFIC BACKS UP ON ONE STREET.
DRIVERS HAVE MORE OPTIONS TO REACH THEIR DESTINATION EASING CONGESTION ACROSS THE ENTIRE GRID.
INSTEAD OF FUNNELING CARS INTO RIGID PATTERNS, UH, A TWO-WAY SYSTEM NATURALLY DISTRIBUTES TRAFFIC, CREATING A MORE ADAPTABLE, EFFICIENT FLOW.
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE REALLY NEED TO PRIORITIZE DOWNTOWN AS A DESTINATION AND NOT A PASS THROUGH THE MESSAGE SHOULD BE YOU'VE ARRIVED AND NOT, HERE'S A FAST WAY TO GET OUT OF HERE.
UH, YOU CAN'T DESIGN A PLACE TO BE BOTH COMMUTER CORRIDOR AND A VIBRANT, WELCOMING SPACE WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO LINGER, SHOP, DINE, AND ENJOY TWO-WAY CONVERSIONS.
STRENGTHEN DOWNTOWN IN SEVERAL KEY WAYS THEY ENHANCE SAFETY.
UH, STUDIES SHOW THAT MULTI-LANE, ONE-WAY STREETS ENCOURAGE HIGHER SPEEDS, MORE AGGRESSIVE DRIVING TWO-WAY STREETS, NATURALLY CALM TRAFFIC, REDUCING, SPEEDING, AND THE SEVERITY OF C COLLISIONS.
THIS IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT FOR PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS WHO EXPERIENCE FEWER CONFLICTS AND SAFER, SAFER CROSSINGS WITH SLOWER AND MORE PREDICTABLE VEHICLE MOVEMENTS THAT BOOST ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES.
CITIES THAT MADE THIS TRANSITION REPORT INCREASED FOOT TRAFFIC, STRONGER BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND HIGHER PROPERTY VALUES, AND THEY ALIGN WITH MODERN URBAN PLANNING.
WE'VE ALREADY CONVERTED A NUMBER OF STREETS TO TWO-WAY STREETS BEFORE, AND IT HAS ONLY WORKED EVERY TIME WE'VE TRIED IT.
IF ANYONE CAN POINT ME TO A FAILURE, I LOVE TO HEAR ABOUT IT.
BUT THE REALITY IS THESE CHANGES HAVE CONSISTENTLY DELIVERED POSITIVE RESULTS.
CONVERTING ONE WAY STREETS TO TWO WAY STREETS, CREATES A SAFER, MORE ACCESSIBLE, MORE ECONOMICALLY THRIVING DOWNTOWN.
THERE'S THE COMMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ACT PLAN AND THE, WITH THE ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS OF CONVERTING OUR REMAINING ONE WAY STREETS TO TWO WAY STREETS.
AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UM, I BELIEVE THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE NEED TO CLOSE, SO I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.
AND A SECOND IS MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HANEY.
UNLESS THERE IS OBJECTION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
UM, ALL RIGHT, LET'S OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
I KNOW THAT THERE WAS, UM, SOME AT THE LAST MEETING SEEING NONE.
UM, THIS IS GOING THROUGH OUR AMENDMENT PROCESS, SO, UM, I WILL, UM, CREATE THE BASE.
[03:05:01]
I, I APOLOGIZE.I, UH, I USED OPENED IT UP FOR QUESTION.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION, COMMISSIONER? MS? NO, I DID.
A QUESTION FOR STAFF IF THAT'S, IF, IF I'M NOT TOO LATE.
SO MY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS RELATED TO THE PRIORITY PROJECT ON SIXTH STREET.
UH, AND I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, DID, DID, UH, F CONSIDER CONVERTING SIXTH STREET BETWEEN I 35 AND BRAZOS TO TWO-WAY TRAFFIC AS PART OF THIS PROCESS? AND IF THEY DID, WHY DID THEY DECIDE ULTIMATELY TO LEAVE IT ONE WAY IN THE WESTBOUND DIRECTION? ALL RIGHT.
UH, GOOD EVENING, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS.
I'M DIVISION MANAGER IN TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS OVER THE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT DIVISION.
UM, UH, OVERSEEING OUR LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND THE AUSTIN CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN.
UM, SIXTH STREET, UH, WAS EVALUATED FOR TWO WAY VERSUS ONE WAY.
UM, ONE OF OUR PRIMARY, UM, UH, LENSES THAT WE LOOKED AT, ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WAS, WAS BASED ON INITIALLY OUR, OUR MODAL, UH, NETWORK NEEDS, UM, INCLUDING OUR VEHICLE CAPACITY CONSTRAINTS.
UM, SO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE COULD DO WITH THE CONSTRAINED RIGHT OF WAY DOWNTOWN, UM, WAS BASED ON, UM, AT, AT, AT A MINIMUM PRESERVING THE VEHICLE CAPACITY INTO AND OUT OF DOWNTOWN WHERE WE SEE MOST OF OUR, OUR, UM, CONGESTION OCCUR.
SO IN REGARD TO SIXTH STREET, UM, WE SEE THAT SIXTH STREET IS TWO LANES AS IT ENTERS FROM I 35, UM, AND PA SABINE.
AND THEN IT OPENS UP TO FOUR LANES.
AND SO, UM, DOWNSTREAM OF THOSE, UH, THAT TWO LANE, UM, IS CONSIDERED, UH, EXCESS CAPACITY.
AND SO OUR BASE RECOMMENDATION, UH, FOR STRICT SIXTH STREET WAS TO REALLOCATE THAT SPACE DOWNSTREAM OF THE BOTTLENECK TO MORE EFFICIENT MODES, INCLUDING SUPPORTING, UM, WIDER SIDEWALKS AND, AND, UM, SIDEWALK CAFES, UH, WITHIN THAT, THAT SECTION OF SIXTH STREET.
UM, BUT WHAT WE ALSO SAW AND WHAT PRECLUDES OUR RECOMMENDATION TO CONVERT SIXTH STREET TO TWO-WAY IS THAT SIXTH STREET DOES SERVE AS A SIGNIFICANT, UM, UH, TRAVEL PATTERN FROM I 35 AND PAST LAMAR.
SO, UH, SIXTH STREET IS, IS ONE OF THOSE PRIMARY ONE WAY ROUTES, UM, INTO AND OUT OF DOWNTOWN.
AND, UM, SO IN ORDER TO, UH, PRESERVE, UM, AT A MINIMUM, UH, WHAT OUR, OUR VEHICLE TRAVEL PATTERNS ARE TODAY, UH, THE BASE RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONTINUE THAT ONE, UH, ONE WAY, UM, WESTBOUND DIRECTION.
UH, I'M NOT SURE IF WE'RE STILL FOLLOWING RULES FOR TIME FOR QUESTIONS.
SO THEN A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO, TO THE CITY STAFF THEN IS, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES IF WE WERE TO CONVERT IT TO TWO WAY BETWEEN I 35 AND BRA? SO THIS IS MORE OF A POLICY, UM, DECISION THAN ANYTHING.
AND, UH, BEING, UH, A LONG RANGE PLANNER, I DO VALUE THE DISCUSSION IN, IN, UH, ENVISIONING THE FUTURE THAT WE WANT.
UM, AND SO CONVERTING SIXTH STREET TO TWO WAY IS, IS ENTIRELY IN THE REALM OF FEASIBILITY, AND IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT THOSE OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES ARE.
UM, CONVERTING IT TO TWO WAY WOULD PRECLUDE, UM, THE ABILITY TO USE SIXTH STREET AS A CROSS TOWN ROUTE, UM, WITHOUT EXPANDING THE NUMBER OF TRAVEL LANES BEYOND TWO.
UM, IN MOST CASES, AS WE CAN SEE ON SECOND STREET AS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF A A A TWO LANE, TWO-WAY ROADWAY, UM, YOU HAVE TO OPEN UP POCKETS FOR LEFT TURNS.
UM, A LOT OF THE CONFLICTS OCCUR AT, AT, AT TURNING, UM, MOVEMENTS.
SO, UM, THAT OFTEN LOOKS LIKE ENSURING THAT AT THE INTERSECTIONS IT'S THREE LANES WIDE INSTEAD OF TWO LANES, SO THAT TRAFFIC CAN CONTINUE THROUGH THE INTERSECTION WHILE, WHILE THERE'S, THERE'S CARS, UM, WAITING TO TURN LEFT.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? DID I SEE YOUR HAND?
[03:10:02]
ALRIGHT, CHAIR, I'M STILL HAVING A, A HARD TIME HEARING YOU.I, I WASN'T TRYING TO ASK A QUESTION OR ANYTHING.
UM, YES, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY IN LIGHT OF YOUR JUST MOST RECENT COMMENT, UM, UH, MR. KITTEN THAT I THINK WE'RE SEEING THIS PLAN AND THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT THAT THIS IS SETTING THE VISION FOR WHAT WE WANT FOR DOWNTOWN.
AND I GUESS I'M CURIOUS WHAT YOU ALL THINK OF LIKE THE TIME HORIZON FOR THIS, BECAUSE SOME OF THE PROJECTS, AS NOTED, GO OUT A LONG WAY, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S PARTIALLY DUE TO FUNDING AND HOW EXPENSIVE IT IS.
SO I THINK LIKE WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT SETTING THINGS IN STONE, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY SETTING UP A SORT OF PARADIGM OF HOW WE THINK ABOUT DOWNTOWN FOR X NUMBER OF YEARS.
AND I GUESS, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT? BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE MAYBE RUNNING INTO SOME CONCERNS IS WE DON'T WANNA SET A POLICY THAT DOESN'T GIVE US FLEXIBILITY.
AND WE ALSO UNDERSTAND ALL THIS IS VERY EXPENSIVE, BUT IT ALSO SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE NOT REALLY THINKING LIKE WE'RE LIVING WITHIN THE CURRENT PARADIGM, MAYBE NOT THINKING SO MUCH ABOUT THAT FUTURE PARADIGM, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
SO MUCH LIKE THE GREAT STREETS PLAN DID IN 2000, IT, IT DID SET THE VISION, UM, FOR THE FUTURE OF DOWNTOWN STREET SCAPES.
UM, THE GREAT STREETS STANDARD ESTABLISHED A VERY PRESCRIPTIVE 44 FEET FROM CURB TO CURB.
AND SO GOING INTO THIS, UM, PART OF IT WAS REEVALUATING WHAT OUR NEEDS ARE BETWEEN THE CURBS.
AND SO THE THINGS THAT, UM, WE'VE LEARNED THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS, UH, THAT WE NEED AS TRANSPORTATION HAS EVOLVED SINCE 2000, IS THAT WE NEED TO ALLOCATE SPACE FOR, UM, BICYCLE MICRO MOBILITY, UM, DEVICES, UM, WHILE STILL PRIORITIZING THAT BEHIND THE CURB SPACE.
SO THE ACT PLAN, WHILE NOT BEING, UH, PRESCRIPTIVE TO A DIMENSION, IT DOES LAY OUT WHAT THE STREET ELEMENTS ARE THAT WE THINK ARE, ARE, ARE REQUIRED OR ARE NECESSARY TO CREATE A COMPLETE BICYCLE NETWORK, CREATE A TRANSIT PRIORITY NETWORK DOWNTOWN, UM, ALLOCATE SPACE TO, UH, TREE FURNITURE ZONE SIDEWALKS, UM, WHILE PRESERVING OUR ABILITY TO MOVE IN AND OUT OF DOWNTOWN, UM, THROUGH VEHICLES.
SO IT'S, IT'S, WHILE IT'S NOT PRESCRIPTIVE, IT'S, IT'S STILL ESTABLISHING A VISION, A LONG-TERM VISION AS TO WHAT THOSE NEEDS ARE.
UM, AS FAR AS THE TIMING GOES, IT, UH, IT IS DEPENDENT ENTIRELY ON THE SCALE, UM, OF THOSE PROJECTS AND THEIR, AND THEIR COST.
BUT THERE ARE, UM, THE FOUR PRIORITY PROJECTS ARE LINKED TO OUR MAJOR OR OUR MEGA TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS OCCURRING DOWNTOWN.
SO I 35 CAPITAL EXPRESS, SO EIGHTH AND SEVENTH STREET ARE VERY MUCH LINKED TO THE CHANGES THAT ARE GONNA OCCUR WITH I 35.
SO EIGHTH STREET'S CONVERSION TO EASTBOUND IS TO SERVE THE NORTHBOUND ON RAMP TIE 35, WHICH DOESN'T EXIST TO TODAY.
OUR PATH IS SEVENTH STREET TURNING LEFT, AND THEN, UH, A SINGLE LANE ON RAMP.
UM, SO, UH, EIGHTH STREET, SEVENTH STREET CONVERSION TO TWO-WAY IS ALSO SUPPORTIVE OF THAT CHANGE TO I 35.
SO THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE SOME OPERATIONAL THINGS THAT NEED TO BE TIMED IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, BUT IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SCALE OF THAT INVESTMENT, HOW MUCH FUNDING WE CAN BRING TO THE TABLE TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES.
SO WE WILL ESTABLISH THE BASE MOTION, WHICH IS, UM, I, I'LL READ IT HERE.
UM, TO, UH, RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE AUSTIN CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN OR THE A SMP.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BARR RAMIREZ.
HERE'S WHERE WE'LL GO THROUGH OUR AMENDMENT PROCESS AND ALL NINE OF US WILL GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER, UM, AN AMENDMENT.
AND, UM, THE LAST TIME WE DID THIS, WE DID TWO ROUNDS.
WE'LL SEE IF WE NEED THAT MANY.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN REASSESS AFTER WE GET TO THE END OF TWO, BUT, UM, I'LL JUST GO AS IS IN ORDER ON THE AGENDA, UM, OF COMMISSIONERS.
[03:15:01]
THEN THE PROCESS THERE FOR MAKING AN AMENDMENT IS YOU STATE YOUR IDEA, WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.YOU'LL RESTATE YOUR MOTION, MAYBE EVEN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT ANY EDITS AS YOU HEAR IDEAS FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS.
WE'LL LOOK FOR A SECOND AND THEN WE'LL VOTE ON IT.
UH, WE'LL, WE WILL GO BACK AND FORTH FOR AND AGAINST AND THEN WE'LL VOTE.
UM, SO, UM, I'LL START WITH YOU.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON PASS PASS.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO CONVERT ALL SEGMENTS OF FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, AND EIGHTH STREETS TO TWO-WAY VEHICLE FLOW.
UM, WELL, WE'LL, WELL, DID YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THE, THE IDEA FIRST? SURE.
SO JUST SPEAKING TO THAT A LITTLE BIT, I THINK WE HEARD FROM SAFE STREETS AUSTIN, YOU KNOW, THE SAFETY, HEALTH AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF HAVING TWO-WAY VEHICLE FLOW.
THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, INFORMATION IN THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION BACKUP THAT SPEAKS TO THIS, UM, HOW MANY PEDESTRIAN CRASHES WE ARE CURRENTLY HAVING DOWNTOWN, AND HOW MUCH SAFER TWO-WAY STREETS ARE FOR PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS.
UM, AND I THINK WE, WE HEARD THAT AS WELL THIS EVENING, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT I NEED TO GET INTO IT TOO MUCH MORE.
SECOND
UM, SO THE FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH AND EIGHTH ALL HAVE TRANSIT PRIORITY LANES.
AND I'M CURIOUS HOW TWO-WAY CONVERSIONS WOULD IMPACT TRANSIT PRIORITY ON THOSE ON ALL SEGMENTS.
AND SO, AND JUST HOW WOULD WE FIT IT ALL IN? THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, THERE ARE SEGMENTS OF FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH AND EIGHTH THAT HAVE, UM, TRANSIT PRIORITY LANES IDENTIFIED, UM, INTO AND ACROSS DOWNTOWN.
SO THOSE SEGMENTS CURRENTLY HAVE, UH, THREE TRAVEL LANES, TWO OF WHICH ARE GENERAL PURPOSE, AND ONE IS A TRANSIT ONLY LANE.
SO A TWO-WAY CONVERSION OF THOSE SEGMENTS, UM, WOULD CAUSE SOME OF THOSE CAME.
UH, SAME ISSUES OPERATIONALLY.
UM, HOW MANY REMAINING GENERAL PURPOSE LANES WOULD THERE BE AND WHERE ARE THOSE LANES GOING, UH, COMING FROM AND GOING TO? SO IN THE CASE OF EIGHTH STREET, IT IS A THREE TRAVEL LANE SECTION.
UM, TWO OF THOSE LANES ARE SERVING THE TWO LANE NORTHBOUND ON RAMP.
AND THE THIRD LANE IS PRIMARILY SERVING THE TRANSIT ONLY LANE FROM GUADALUPE TO TRINITY.
AND THEN EAST OF TRINITY, UM, WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT THIRD LANE AS SERVING, UH, CONTINUING TO SERVE TRANSIT IN THE EASTBOUND DIRECTION.
JUST A, A SINGLE, UM, FUTURE HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT ROUTE.
THE CURRENTLY THE ROUTE FOUR, UM, THAT WOULD CONNECT TO, TO EAST SEVENTH STREET.
SO WHEN WE LOOK AT CONVERTING THOSE ROADWAYS, IT, IT, IT CAN IMPACT OUR ABILITY TO INCLUDE THOSE TRANSIT PRIORITY LANES, UM, DEPENDING ON OUR, OUR OPERATIONAL NEEDS, BALANCING THE MODES, UM, WITHIN THAT, WITHIN THAT AVAILABLE SPACE.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, I GUESS THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF AGAIN, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONSE.
IN TERMS OF BALANCING MODES AND OPERATIONAL NEEDS, COULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THE TECHNICAL ANALYSIS? I GUESS, I'M SORRY, I WANNA GO INTO THE WEEDS, BUT AS A TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER, I CAN'T HELP MYSELF OF WHEN THIS PLAN WAS PROPOSED, HOW ARE THE, HOW WAS, HOW WERE THE OPERATION, HOW WAS IT ANALYZED OPERATIONALLY, IF YOU'D INDULGE ME? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT TOOLS WERE USED TO DETERMINE, UH, YEAH, JUST HOW TRAFFIC WOULD FLOW.
IS THIS VISIM OR, YEAH, THIS WAS YOUR TRADITIONAL SYNCHRO, UM, LEVEL ANALYSIS TO UNDERSTAND, UH, VEHICLE DELAY AT, AT SIGNALED INTERSECTIONS SO THAT THAT SYNCRO ANALYSIS WAS DONE WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS AND FUTURE CONDITIONS.
AND THAT'S WHAT IDENTIFIED OUR PRIMARY, UM, CONSTRAINTS OCCUR AT OUR GATEWAYS INTO AND OUT OF DOWNTOWN.
UH, TO CONTINUE THE, THE ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS FROM THAT POINT WAS DONE BASED ON OUR, BASICALLY OUR, OUR CAPACITY CONSTRAINTS.
[03:20:01]
UH, LIKE A, A VEHICLE VOLUME, UM, ANALYSIS OF THE NUMBER OF TRAVEL LANES AT THOSE CONSTRAINED INTERSECTIONS.AND OUR APPROACH WAS AT A MINIMUM TO PRESERVE THOSE, THOSE, THE NUMBER OF LANES AT THOSE INTERSECTIONS THAT WERE ALREADY FAILING.
AND TO, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE CONSTRAINED INTERSECTIONS, YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE, THE GATEWAY INTERSECTIONS? CORRECT.
SO THOSE ARE THE INTERSECTIONS THAT, UH, NOMINALLY I 35 AND LAMAR ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE OF DOWNTOWN.
ALRIGHT, OTHER QUESTIONS? SO, CAN I MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IF THERE'S NO OTHER OTHER QUESTIONS? SO AT THIS POINT, I THINK IT COULD JUST BE I I'M MY OWN.
SO I WOULD JUST, I'M FINE WITH THE TWO-WAY CONVERSION.
I THINK AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT PRECLUDE TRANSIT ONLY LANES OR IN THE SECTIONS OF THE MAP, OR IN THE SECTIONS OF THE PLAN THAT ALREADY DESIGNATE TRANSIT ONLY LANES THAT THOSE TRANSIT ONLY LANES ARE PROTECTED.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, DID YOU WANNA TURN YOUR, UH, YOUR STATEMENT INTO A MOTION? I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT HOW I WANNA WORD IT.
I AM AFRAID THAT INCLUDING WHERE IT DOES NOT PRECLUDE TRANSIT, ONLY LANES WILL ALLOW FOR THAT TO GET IN THE WAY OF THESE TWO-WAY VEHICLE FLOW CONVERSIONS.
SO I THINK THAT WHAT I'M GONNA PROPOSE IS A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION TO STAFF TO CONVERT ALL SEGMENTS OF FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, AND EIGHTH STREETS TO TWO-WAY VEHICLE FLOW.
UNDERSTANDING THAT WE CAN'T BE TWO PRESCRIPTIVE AND WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO SOLVE FOR THIS RIGHT NOW.
BUT I THINK THAT'S THE AMENDMENT THAT I'M GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH, EXCLUDING WHERE IT DOES NOT INCLUDE, EXCUSE ME, WHERE IT DOES NOT PRECLUDE TRANS ONLY LANES.
SO IT'S JUST GONNA BE A GENERAL REC MY AMENDMENT WOULD BE A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION TO CONVERT ALL SEGMENTS OF FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, AND EIGHTH STREETS TO TWO-WAY VEHICLE FLOW.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? COMMISSIONER WOODS? I DON'T THINK I NEED TO ANY FURTHER.
UM, ANYBODY SPEAKING, UH, FOR THE MOTION? COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? YEAH.
UM, I JUST WANNA SAY, YOU KNOW, MR. KITTEN, UH, OTHERS WHO WORKED ON THIS, I, I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS AND CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND YOUR, THIS IS A, A BALANCING ACT AND, AND A VERY LONG AND TEDIOUS ONE, UH, JUGGLING DIFFERENT PRIORITIES FOR THE MANY YEARS IT'S TAKEN TO PULL THIS PLAN TOGETHER.
UM, BUT I THINK IF WE, WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SAY THAT WE PRIORITIZE PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE TRANSIT, UH, MODES THROUGH DOWNTOWN AND NOT PRIORITIZE VEHICLES, WE HAVE TO ACT ON THAT.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I WOULD HOPE THAT IF WE'RE FACED WITH A DECISION ON ANY SEGMENT OF THESE STREETS TO REDUCE VEHICULAR CAPACITY IN ORDER TO GAIN TRANSIT, BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN CAPACITY, WE REDUCE VEHICULAR CAPACITY.
I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S THE CLEAR POLICY IMPERATIVE THAT THE CITY HAS ADOPTED FOR YEARS NOW.
UH, AND I THINK WE NEED TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT IT AND SAY, LOOK, WE DON'T WANT TO JUST MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO.
WE DON'T WANT TO MAINTAIN THE PERFORMANCE OF, UH, SIXTH STREET OR FIFTH STREET OR SEVENTH STREET.
WE DON'T WANT TO REINFORCE THE EXISTING PATTERNS NECESSARILY.
AND SO I THINK COMMISSIONER WOODS', UH, AMENDMENT IS A GREAT STEP IN THAT DIRECTION TO SAY STRONGLY, UH, THAT WE ARE PLANNING FOR A FUTURE THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE STATUS QUO AND NOT JUST PLANNING TO MAINTAIN THAT STATUS QUO.
UH, SO I'M EXCITED TO, TO SUPPORT THIS.
COMMISSIONER SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER BERE RAMIREZ, I, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY, I'M, I LOVE SAFETY.
I THINK THIS, I THINK TWO-WAY CONVERSIONS MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.
I JUST KNOW THAT IT'S VERY HARD TO FIT TRANSIT IN ANYWHERE.
AND SO WE WORKED REALLY CLOSELY WITH MY CAT METRO HAT ON FIGURING OUT WHERE THESE TRANSIT LANES WOULD GO.
AND SO THEY'RE A PRIORITY FOR, FOR THE SYSTEM, AND I THINK IT'S, IT'S A GOOD THING TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE IN THERE.
SO I, I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST IT.
UM, I JUST WANT TO APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER WOODS FOR BRINGING THIS AND REALLY EMPHASIZE STRONGLY THAT PRETTY MUCH EVERY GROUP THAT HAS LOOKED AT THIS PLAN HAS SAID, PLEASE, CAN WE DO
[03:25:01]
MORE TWO-WAY CONVERSIONS? AND IT MAKES ME SAD THAT WE'RE UP HERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE TRADE-OFFS BETWEEN BIKE LANES, POTENTIALLY, AND, YOU KNOW, SAFETY AND TRANSIT.THERE'S TOO MANY CARS IN ALL OF THIS PLAN, AND I WANNA MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT TWO-WAY CONVERSIONS ARE SAFER, THEY'RE BETTER FOR OUR DOWNTOWNS, THEY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO STAY, THEY'RE BETTER FOR THE ECONOMY.
SO LET'S PRIORITIZE THAT VERSUS VEHICLE FLOW, FLOW FLOW THROUGH, WHICH I THINK I'VE HEARD A LOT OF, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS A BALANCING ACT, BUT I THINK THIS IS IN THE WRONG BALANCE AND THIS IS THE RIGHT STEP.
AND I REALLY WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT HAS BEEN THE CONSISTENT FEEDBACK ABOUT THIS PLAN.
LAST SPOT, SPEAKING AGAINST COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
YEAH, I'LL SPEAK AGAINST, UH, AND I SHOULD SAY THAT IT PAINS ME TO SPEAK AGAINST IT BECAUSE I AM A HUGE ADVOCATE FOR TRANSIT, RIGHT? I AM, UH, I AM A DOWNTOWN RESIDENT WHO, YOU KNOW, USES ALL THE MODES.
I'M WALKING, I'M DRIVING, I'M BIKING, AND I'VE LOOKED AT THIS PLAN AND I POURED OVER IT LITERALLY LIKE PAGE BY PAGE WITH MY ENGINEER NERD HAT ON.
AND WHERE THE TWO-WAY CONVERSIONS ARE PRACTICAL TO MAINTAIN, QUITE FRANKLY, ACCESS IN THE CORE OF AUSTIN, WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING HAS OCCURRED.
I MEAN, AND I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHEN MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WANT TO MAKE A, YOU KNOW, A POLICY STATEMENT.
BUT WE HAVE TO LIVE IN THE PRACTICAL REALITY OF THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO LIVE DOWNTOWN RIGHT NOW, MYSELF INCLUDED, THAT WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T SOLVE THE PUZZLE FOR THE WORLD WE LIVE IN.
AND LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, FIFTH AND SIXTH STREET, IF YOU WERE TO CONVERT THEM THROUGH FIFTH AND SIXTH AND LAMAR, LIKE, YOU CAN'T MOVE CARS THROUGH IT.
AND I THINK IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE FOR US TO JUST SAY, WELL, TOUGH, YOU SHOULDN'T DRIVE.
BECAUSE UNTIL WE HAVE REAL TRANSIT ACCESS, AND WE'RE A DECADE AWAY FROM IT STILL, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO BALANCE THOSE THINGS.
SO WHERE THEY'VE PROPOSED IT, WHERE THEY'VE PROPOSED IT ON SEVENTH OR EIGHTH AND NINTH AND SEVENTH, WHERE THEY'VE ALREADY DONE IT ON FIFTH STREET, WHERE WE'RE TAKING LAVACCA, WHERE WE'RE PRIORITIZING GUADALUPE FOR PROJECT CONNECT, WHERE WE'RE TAKING LAVACCA AND WE'VE SOLVED THE PUZZLE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD GEOMETRICALLY WHERE WE HAVE SPACE FOR THESE, FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE THROUGH THE CITY.
UH, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE, THEY'VE DONE IT WHERE WE'VE PRIORITIZED TRINITY AND SAN JACINTO.
SO I THINK THAT A BLANKET RECOMMENDATION TO JUST SAY CONVERTED ALL THE TWO WAYS, IGNORES THE REALITY OF HOW THE SYSTEM ALL COMES TOGETHER.
AND THEY'VE SPENT WEEKS AND MONTHS AND YEARS DOING THAT.
SO FOR US TO JUST, FOR ME TO COME IN RIGHT NOW AND SAY, OH, WELL JUST CONVERTED, IT'S EASY.
IT'S NOT, I KNOW IT AND I LIVE IT, SO I I I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.
THIS IS FOR COMMISSIONER WOODS'S, UM, GENERAL RECOMMENDATION ABOUT TWO-WAY ON FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH AND EIGHTH STREET SECOND, AND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, FOUR SIX, THOSE AGAINST 1, 2, 3.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
UM, YES, I WOULD LIKE TO INCORPORATE SEVERAL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE UTC, AND I'M CURIOUS IF WE WOULD BE OPEN AS A BODY TO DOING THAT AS A GROUP OF AMENDMENTS VERSUS ME DOING THOSE INDIVIDUALLY, IF THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE BODY
AND IF I CAN INTERRUPT REALLY QUICKLY, I'D LIKE TO, UM, MAKE A MOTION TO EXTEND OUR MEETING UNTIL 10 30, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.
UM, UNLESS THERE'S OPPOSITION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
UM, WE'RE BACK TO UTC AS A GROUP.
SO IF THE, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION FROM THE COMMISSION, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST, UM, THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE UNI, UM, THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, AS NOTED IN OUR BACKUP.
UM, PARTICULARLY THE BE IT FOR FURTHER RESOLVED, UM, ITEMS, WHICH ARE, I THINK, GENERAL AND SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS PLAN.
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? OKAY.
UM, CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE UTC RECOMMENDATIONS AS NOTED IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION BACKUP.
UM, PARTICULARLY THE ITEMS ON PAGE TWO NOTED AS BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, WHICH ARE THE ACTION ITEMS RELATED TO THE, UH, ACT PLAN SECOND
[03:30:01]
BY COMMISSIONER WOODS.DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? UM, YES.
AND I KNOW THAT WE JUST HAD A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION, BUT I THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY A GOOD OVERARCHING GROUP OF RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND I KNOW THAT OUR UTC UM, COMMISSIONERS LOOKED AT THIS PLAN VERY CLOSELY AND HAD REALLY, I THINK, THOUGHTFUL FEEDBACK.
AND I'D LIKE TO SEE ALL OF THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, INCORPORATED AND SORT OF BROUGHT FORWARD TO COUNCIL AS IMPROVEMENTS, AND THAT'S WHY I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND THEM AS PART OF OUR PC AMENDMENTS.
ANYBODY SPEAKING? UH, FOR OR AGAINST? YEAH.
I'M GONNA BE THE DIFFICULT ONE TONIGHT.
CAN, UH, CAN WE PULL THE, I I'M TRYING TO PULL UP THE BACKUP FROM IT RIGHT NOW.
I JUST WANT TO READ THROUGH EACH OF THEM SINCE WE'RE GONNA DO A, A BLANKET RECOMMENDATION.
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR STAFF TO PUT THAT, PULL THE BACK UP ON THE SCREEN? I'M, I'M, YEAH, I CAN.
I'VE GOT IT ALL DOWNLOADED AND, AND THEY'RE JUST, CAN'T GET THE FILE NUMBER.
AND COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, DID YOU WANT ME TO READ EACH ONE? IF YOU PULL IT UP ON THE, YEAH, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
SO NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THE UTC RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE AUSTIN CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION RE RECOMMENDS THE AUSTIN CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN PRIORITIZES THE NEEDS OF PEDESTRIANS, CYCLISTS, AND NON-CAR MODES OF TRANSPORTATION THROUGHOUT THE DOWNTOWN AREA OVER CALL VOLUME THROUGHPUT.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE UTC RECOMMENDS THE AT A CT PLAN, CONTINUE THE PROTECTED BIKE LANE ON RED RIVER STREET FROM SEVENTH STREET TO 12TH STREET, AS CONTEMPLATED BY THE 2023 BICYCLE PLAN AND THE ACTIVE PROJECT LISTED IN THE 2025 LOCAL MOBILITY ANNUAL PLAN TO ENSURE A CONTINUOUS PROTECTED BICYCLE FACILITY THAT CONNECTS WITH THE PROTECTED BIKE LANES ON ROBERT MOND DRIVE, AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE UTC RECOMMENDS ADDITIONAL ONE-WAY TO TWO-WAY CONVERSIONS ON FIFTH STREET, SIXTH STREET, AND OTHER STREETS AS IS FEASIBLE.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE UTC RECOMMENDS QUICK BUILD OPTIONS AT A LOWER COST FOR MORE FACILITIES IN THE SHORT TERM TO IMPROVE CURRENT CONDITIONS UNTIL MORE FUNDING BECOMES AVAILABLE FOR FULL STREET REBUILDS.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE UTC RECOMMENDS THAT THE STREET TREES AND OTHER SHADE STRUCTURES BE EMPHASIZED AS CRUCIAL TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE THROUGHOUT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE A CT PLAN.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE UTC RECOMMENDS THAT THE A CT PLAN INCLUDES A ROBUST PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGY THAT ALIGNS WITH THE GOALS OF THE A SMP AND RECENT COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS THAT SEEK TO LIMIT THE GROWTH OF ADDITIONAL NEW PARKING DOWNTOWN AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVE THAT THE UTC RECOMMENDS AN IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE THAT COINCIDES WITH THOSE OF THE I 35 CAP AND STITCH IN THE AUSTIN LIGHT RAIL.
I'M SORRY I COULDN'T PUT MY FINGER ON IT.
UM, SO YOU WERE SPEAKING AGAINST NO.
ANY COMMISSIONER SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
THIS IS ON THE UTC RECOMMENDATIONS AS I JUST READ ALL OF THIS IN FAVOR.
WELL, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, WHAT'S YOUR VOTE? IS THAT YELLOW? I THINK GREEN, YEAH.
I THINK AS LONG AS IT'S, UH, I, I, I'M, OKAY.
MOTION PASSES EIGHT TO ZERO TO ONE WITH COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE ABSTAINING.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THE TWO OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE DESIGN COMMISSION, UH, RECOMMENDATION SPECIFICALLY, UH, THEIR RECOMMENDATION THAT STREET TREES BE MANDATORY IN CORRIDOR PROJECTS PRESENTED IN THE AUSTIN CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, AND THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE GREEN COSTS AND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ESTIMATES AS PART OF BASE ESTIMATES AND NOT ADDITIONAL LINE ITEMS. UM, AND HAPPY TO SPEAK TO THAT.
YEAH, IF YOU WANNA ADD SOME, UM, SOME BACKGROUND TO THAT, AND THEN WE'LL OPEN UP FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE UTC RECOMMENDATIONS DID A GREAT JOB, IN MY OPINION, OF, OF SORT OF EXPANDING UPON THE A CT AS PRESENTED.
UM, THE DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS I GENERALLY AGREE WITH AS WELL.
I THINK THESE TWO, PARTICULARLY, UH, THE STREET TREES, UH, JUST THINKING ABOUT, UH, EARLIER ZONING CASE WE WERE LOOKING AT, AT MLK AND AIRPORT, UH, WE HAVE A CITY CORRIDOR PROJECT THAT IS NOT INCLUDING STREET TREES
[03:35:01]
ON TWO OF THE, THE SORT OF EAST STONE MAJOR CORRIDORS IN OUR CITY THAT ARE FUNDED BY A BOND.UM, I THINK IT'S A SHAME WHEN THE CITY BUILDS TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS, UH, SPECIFICALLY STREET SCAPES THAT DON'T EVEN MEET OUR OWN CITY CODE.
UM, IN TERMS OF STREET SCAPE ELEMENTS, UH, URBAN DESIGN FEATURES, THINGS LIKE TREES.
UH, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, SUPER CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, BOTH FROM A PEDESTRIAN SAFETY STANDPOINT, FROM A COMFORT STANDPOINT, UH, FROM AN AESTHETIC STANDPOINT.
AND I THINK ESPECIALLY DOWNTOWN, UH, WHERE WE HAVE A, A PARTICULARLY HIGH CONCENTRATION OF PEOPLE AND ACTIVITY, IT MAKES SENSE THAT OUR CITY PROJECTS, UM, SHOULD BE THE BEST THAT THEY CAN BE.
AND I THINK REQUIRING STREET TREES, UM, WILL HELP ACHIEVE THAT GOAL FURTHER, INCLUDING THE GREEN COSTS AND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ESTIMATES AS PART OF BASE ESTIMATES.
UH, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S INCORPORATING BEST PRACTICES FOR LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT, THINGS LIKE BIOSWALES AND, UH, NATURAL VEGETATIVE STORM WATER RETENTION FEATURES, UH, IN A WAY THAT IS LESS LIKELY TO BE VALUE ENGINEERED OUT OF A PROJECT AS IT GOES ON.
UH, AND IT'S SAYING THAT AGAIN IN OUR DOWNTOWN, IN THE JEWEL OF OUR CITY, UM, THE WAY THAT WE DESIGN OUR PROJECTS AND BUILD THEM AS A CITY, UH, IS VERY IMPORTANT.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR COMMISSIONER JOHNSON OR OTHERS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, DID YOU WANNA TURN THAT INTO A MOTION? GET A SECOND? YEAH.
SO I MOVE TO ADOPT THE DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, THAT STREET TREES BE MANDATORY IN CORRIDOR PROJECTS PRESENTED IN THE AUSTIN CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, AND THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE THE GREEN COSTS AND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ESTIMATES, BE A PART OF THE BASE ESTIMATES AND NOT A LINE ITEM.
UM, DID ANYBODY, WHEN YOU SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS MOTION? OKAY.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
NINE TO ZERO, THAT MOTION PASSES.
WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
I DON'T HAVE ANY PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
UM, WE'LL CIRCLE BACK MYSELF, CHAIR.
I DON'T HAVE ANY, UM, GO TO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
I AM THINKING ABOUT A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION TO STAFF TO CONSIDER HOW THE PLAN'S VISION FOR SIXTH STREET CAN ALSO MEET THE REVITALIZATION AND SAFETY GOALS FOR OLD SIXTH STREET, WHICH I KNOW IS ANOTHER CITY OF AUSTIN PRIORITY.
DID YOU HAVE ANY MORE BACKGROUND ON THAT? SURE.
I MEAN, WE, WE HAVE THIS EXISTING CITY PRIORITY OF MAKING SIXTH STREET DOWNTOWN INTO A MORE WALKABLE AND LIVABLE KIND MIXED USE DISTRICT.
AND I KNOW THERE ARE SPECIFIC STREETS SCAPE, UM, ELEMENTS TO THAT.
AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT STAFF ARE WORKING, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT IN CONFLICT WITH ANY OF THE PRIORITIES FOR OLD SIXTH STREET, AND THAT THE ACT PLAN AND THE PLANS FOR OLD SIXTH STREET CAN WORK TOGETHER.
QUESTIONS FOR COMMISSIONER WOODS OR OTHERS ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU WANNA TURN THAT INTO A MOTION? YEAH, I'LL MOTION A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION TO STAFF TO CONSIDER HOW THE PLAN'S VISION FOR SIXTH STREET CAN ALSO MEET THE REVITALIZATION AND SAFETY GOALS FOR OLD SIXTH STREET, ANOTHER CITY OF AUSTIN PRIORITY.
I SEE A COM A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
UM, ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? OKAY.
THIS IS ON THE SIXTH STREET, MAKING SURE IT MESHES WITH THE REVITALIZATION OF OLD SIXTH STREET.
MOVING ON TO COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
STILL DON'T HAVE ANY THANK YOU.
UM, YEAH, I HAVE A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION I'D LIKE TO MAKE.
UM, I THINK JUST OVERALL SPEAKING TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE EARLIER AND SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE'VE HAD FROM SAFE STREETS AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, UM, JUST TO, UH, ASK THAT THE PLAN PRIORITIZE SPECIFIC FACILITIES RELATED TO SAFETY AND MOBILITY ABOVE THE ADDITIONAL, ADDITIONAL CAR LANES AND OR PRIORITIZATION OF, UM, TRAFFIC, GENERALLY SPEAKING.
AND I KNOW THAT'S A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION, BUT JUST TO PUT THAT INTO THE ACT PLAN IS LIKE A CORE PIECE OF THIS, SINCE IT IS A VISION PLAN FOR THE LONG TERM OF DOWNTOWN, THAT WE SHOULD
[03:40:01]
BE THINKING ALWAYS ABOUT HOW WE CAN INCREASE SAFETY AND MOBILITY FOR OUR DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS.ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU WANNA TURN THAT INTO A MOTION? UM, YES.
SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE ACT PLAN PRIORITIZE KEY FACILITIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO BUS LANES, UH, PROJECT CONNECT AND TRANSIT LANES, BIKE LANES IN BOTH DIRECTIONS.
TREES TWO EIGHT VEHICLE FLOW AND ON STREET PARKING ABOVE MORE THAN ONE VEHICLE LANE IN EACH DIRECTION.
UM, ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST? UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE A NOTE THAT PART OF THE REASON I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE THIS IS TO ENSURE THAT OUR DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS, SUCH AS COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, UM, ARE CONTINUE TO SEE IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR ACTUAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, IT'S REALLY CRITICAL THAT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN DOWNTOWN CONTINUE TO FEEL SAFE, EVEN THOUGH IT IS OBVIOUSLY A MAJOR CONNECTION POINT AND DOES HAVE A LOT OF VEHICLE TRAFFIC.
SO REALLY PRIORITIZING THAT AND ENSURING THAT OUR TRANSPORTATION STAFF ARE CONSIDERING THAT IN EVERY DECISION THEY MAKE WITH THESE PROJECTS REALLY FEELS IMPORTANT.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? YEAH, I THINK I DO HAVE AN AMENDMENT.
JUST A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION OF FOR TO THE CITY STAFF, UH, OF, SO LET ME EXPLAIN.
UH, THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THE LIMITS OF THE CORE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, BUT I'M LOOKING AT THE SOUTH FIRST STREET BRIDGE, UH, AND, UH, A DESIRE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE INCLUDE TRANSIT PRIORITY LANES ON THE BRIDGE.
UH, I DON'T, I, I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED BECAUSE THE LIMITS ARE SORT OF C CHAVEZ, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S, WE EXPRESS THAT AS OF A KEY COMPONENT WHERE I THINK THEY'VE DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB OF GETTING THE TRANSIT PRIORITY IN THE EAST WEST IN DIRECTION, BUT I DON'T KNOW, GOING SOUTH OF THE RIVER, ASIDE FROM THE NEW LIGHT RAIL BRIDGE, BUT THAT'S ON THE EAST SIDE OF DOWNTOWN THAT WE'VE SPECIFICALLY NOTED THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT.
WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
I'LL, UM, I'LL ASK A QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER RE RAMIREZ WITH YOUR CAT METRO HAT ON.
HAVE HAD Y'ALL THOUGHT ABOUT TRANSIT PRIORITY LANES ON SOUTH FIRST? YES.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A SITE THAT DEDICATED FUNDS TO PRIORITY LANES ON SOUTH FIRST STREET.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT FOR A LONG TIME.
SO, UM, MAYBE IT'S JUST MAKING A RECOMMENDATION OR A REFERENCE TO THAT REPORT OR THAT STUDY IN THIS PLAN.
SO YOU'RE NOT DUPLICATING WORK.
UM, IT'S JUST A CONSIDERATION FOR YOU COMMISSIONER WORK.
RIGHT, SO IT'D BE BE IT'S THE TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT THAT RECOMMENDS, UH, TRANSIT PARTY LANES ON SOUTH FIRST STREET BRIDGE.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, DID YOU WANNA TURN THAT INTO A MOTION? I'M TRYING TO DECIDE IF IT STILL NEEDS TO BE A MOTION.
I, I THINK IF IT'S COVERED IN OTHER DOCUMENTS, IT APPEARS TO BE COVERED IN THE PROJECT CONNECT DRAWINGS OF, FOR THE RELEASE WITH ANITA SCHEMATIC OF, SO I DO THINK A REFERENCE, IF I CAN JUMP IN A REFERENCE TO IT IN THIS PLAN WOULD BE HELPFUL.
YOU, YOU, YOU REVIEWED IT THOROUGHLY AND YOU DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THAT WAS ANOTHER INITIATIVE THAT WAS GOING ON, SO I THINK IT COULD BE A USEFUL REFERENCE TO ADD IN.
THEN I THINK THAT'S THE MOTION IS TO MAKE REFERENCE TO, UH, PROJECT, UH, CAPITAL METRO'S TRANSIT PRIORITY PLAN.
IS THAT RIGHT? PROPER WORDING, TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT.
TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WOODS? ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THIS, UH, IN CASE YOU COULDN'T SEE MY FRANTIC WAVING.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
AND DESPITE YOUR HESITATION, UM, I DO FEEL LIKE THE CONNECTIONS FROM SOUTH OF THE RIVER FOR ALL OF US WHO LIVE IN SOUTH AUSTIN ARE SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY WANNA BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT.
AND I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN PRIORITIZED FROM CAP METRO AND GLAD TO SEE IT REFERENCED IN THIS DOCUMENT AS A CONSIDERATION FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENT, UM, FOR ALL OF US SOUTHEAST.
[03:45:01]
THANK YOU.ALRIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
THIS IS, UH, FOR REFERENCING THE TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT INFRASTRUCTURE REPORT.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, THAT IS NINE ZERO.
AND BACK TO MYSELF, I DON'T HAVE ANY AMENDMENTS THAT WERE NOT ALREADY MENTIONED.
AND SO, UM, WITH THAT, WE ARE AT THE END OF TWO ROUNDS OF OUR AMENDMENTS PER OUR RULES.
UM, WE'LL GO BACK TO THE BASE MOTION, WHICH WAS, UH, MOVING FORWARD THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE A CT AS PART OF THE A SMP.
UM, AND NOW IT WOULD BE AS AMENDED.
SO, UM, I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR ANYBODY SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND SPEAK FOR, OF THE RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE, UH, THE A CT PLAN OF, I THINK, I MEAN, I COVERED SOME OF THIS EARLIER WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE TWO-WAY CONVERSIONS, BUT OF STAFF IS, IS TRYING TO JUGGLE A LOT OF PRIORITIES, NOT JUST IN TERMS OF MODE AND VEHICLE PRIORITIES, BUT LITERALLY TRYING TO SOLVE THIS PUZZLE THAT EXISTS IN THE
AND I FEEL LIKE WHILE THERE'S ALWAYS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT, I THINK THEY'VE BEEN REALLY THOROUGH IN THEIR APPROACH TO IT, AND THE CHANGES THEY ARE PROPOSING OF WILL DRAMATICALLY IMPROVE THE AMOUNT OF RIDE OF WAY THAT'S AVAILABLE FOR PEDESTRIANS AND FOR BICYCLES.
MICRO MOBILITY WILL DRAMATICALLY IMPROVE THE, THE KIND OF USER EXPERIENCE FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE DOWNTOWN OR VISIT DOWNTOWN.
SO I, UH, I APPLAUD THEIR WORK.
I DO WANNA MAKE ONE MORE COMMENT ABOUT SORT OF ONE WAY, TWO WAY.
I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THAT JUST BECAUSE THE STREET IS ONE WAY DOESN'T MAKE IT INTRINSICALLY LESS SAFE, THE SAFETY COMES FROM THE AVERAGE VEHICLE TRAVEL SPEEDS.
SO WHEN WE, IF WE HAVE STREETS THAT ARE ONE WAY AND, UH, THE TRAVEL SPEEDS ARE LOW, THEN FROM A PEDESTRIAN STANDPOINT, WE'RE STILL DERIVING THE SAME SAFETY BENEFITS.
NOW IN PRACTICE IN AMERICA, THAT'S HARD TO ACHIEVE IN A LOT OF OUR SUBURBAN ROADWAY CONTEXT, BUT I, I THINK IT'S JUST IMPORTANT TO REALIZE IN AN URBAN CONTEXT ONE-WAY STREETS AREN'T UNSAFE IF THE TRAVEL SPEEDS ARE LOW.
I MEAN, WHEN YOU TRAVEL ALL OVER THE WORLD, YOU SEE LOTS OF ONE-WAY STREETS ALL OVER IN EUROPE AND ALL OVER IN ASIA, AND THEY HAVE LOW TRAVEL SPEEDS.
SO, UH, THAT'S WHY I THINK WHEN USED APPROPRIATELY, THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A PLACE EVEN IN OUR URBAN ENVIRONMENT.
ALRIGHT, ANYBODY ELSE SPEAKING BEFORE OR AGAINST COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? I MEAN, I'VE NEVER DISAGREED MORE STRONGLY WITH COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE THAN I DO RIGHT THIS VERY MOMENT.
I MEAN, I HAVE NEVER SEEN AN EXAMPLE OF A MULTI-LANE, ONE-WAY TERRIBLE PLACE THAT'S SAFE.
THAT'S JUST, I MEAN, JUST BY DEFAULT, EVERY TIME I'VE WATCHED THESE GO TO TWO WAY, JUST, IT GETS A THOUSAND TIMES BETTER ACROSS THE, ACROSS THE WORLD.
EVERY SINGLE TIME I'VE WATCHED ANY OF THESE GO AND I'VE GO TO, TO VISIT DIFFERENT CITIES THAT ARE DOING THIS, AND I'M REALLY SORRY THAT WE CONVERTED THESE ONCE, TWO WAY STREETS INTO WHAT THEY ARE TODAY.
AND I'M SORRY THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE VOTES HERE TODAY TO, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGE BETTER USAGE OF THIS SPACE IN THE FUTURE.
BUT HOPEFULLY THE FOLKS THAT ARE PUSHING FOR THIS WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO BECAUSE ONE WAY STREETS THAT THEY BY DEFAULT ENCOURAGE SPEED.
SO IT'S LIKE SAYING, WELL, YOU KNOW, IF PEOPLE WOULD BEHAVE THEN THEY WOULDN'T BE SO TERRIBLE.
WHAT THE PROBLEM IS, WE ENCOURAGE THE MISBEHAVIOR AND THEN THAT PLACE BECOMES LESS SAFE.
SO HOPEFULLY WE GET THERE, BUT WE DIDN'T QUITE GET THERE TODAY.
WOULD IT BE IN ORDER TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER A VOTE? I THINK YES.
CAN YOU HELP ME WITH THE PROCESS FOR THAT? CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE VOTE BY WHICH WE DECIDED ON THE TWO WAY ON COMMISSIONER WOOD'S FIRST MOTION.
SO BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T VOTED ON THE BASE MISSION, WE CAN MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND WE WOULD NEED A SUPER MAJORITY TO RECONSIDER SUPER MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT OR THE SUPER MAJORITY OF OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT.
WOULDN'T WE JUST NEED A SIMPLE TO RECONSIDER? ISN'T IT JUST SOMEONE FROM THE PREVAILING SIDE? YEAH.
NEEDS TO BE, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.
YEAH, I THINK WE CAN, I THINK WE CAN RECONSIDER WHERE THE SIMPLE MAJORITY,
[03:50:01]
THERE'S A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE VOTE ON COMMISSIONER WOOD'S, UM, INITIAL, UM, AMENDMENT.BACK TO THE BASE MOTION AS AMENDED.
WE WERE HAD SPEAKERS FOR, UM, ANYBODY SPEAKING AGAINST BRIAN, DID HE NOT? CAN HE NOT HEAR YOU? I THINK HE CANNOT HEAR US.
YOU VOTE WELL, I, I DIDN'T ASK FOR AGAINST VOTES, I JUST COUNTED THE FOUR.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, WERE YOU ABLE TO HEAR THE PREVIOUS VOTE COUNT TO RECONSIDER COMMISSIONER WOODS'S? UH, SECOND.
YES, I WAS OPPOSED TO THE RECONSIDERATION FOR THE RECORD.
OKAY, SO, UM, BACK TO SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THE BASE MOTION AS AMENDED, IF THERE'S NO OTHER SPEAKERS SPEAKING AGAINST, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
OKAY, ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR, THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
ALL RIGHT, CHAIR, WONDER PRIVILEGE? YES.
I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU AS SOMEONE WHO WORKS AT RED RIVER IN SEVENTH WHO'S WORKING AT RED RIVER IN SEVENTH RIGHT NOW.
SORRY ABOUT ALL THE NOISE IN THE BACKGROUND.
THANK YOU TO ALL THE PLANNING.
COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF ARE PASSING THIS.
ANYTHING THAT MAKES A LITTLE EASIER TO GET AND SAFER, GOD SAFER TO GET AROUND DOWNTOWN, I COULD NOT SUPPORT MORE I THAT, THIS IS WHY I WANTED TO BE HERE TONIGHT.
[19. Discussion and action to appoint a member to serve on the Equitable Transit Oriented Development and Vision Plans working group. (Sponsors: Vice-Chair Azhar and Commissioner Woods)]
UH, DISCUSSION ACTION ITEM THIS EVENING.NUMBER 19 IS TO APPOINT A MEMBER, UH, TO SERVE ON THE ETOD AND VISION PLANS WORKING GROUP.
SO THAT'S THE BRIEFING THAT WE HEARD EARLIER TONIGHT.
UM, CURRENTLY WE HAVE MYSELF, UH, COMMISSIONERS, MAXWELL WOODS BARRE, RAMIREZ JOHNSON AND CHAIR COHEN, UM, SITTING ON THAT.
AND WE HAVE SPOT FOR ONE MORE MEMBER.
DID ANYBODY WANT TO BE ADDED TO THAT WORKING GROUP? YES.
I, I THINK, OH, SORRY, I THINK WE WERE WAITING.
THERE'S ANOTHER OR MORE PEOPLE JOINING IN APRIL.
I THINK WE WERE WAITING, BUT THIS ITEM COMES TO US, UM, OH, SOONER THAN THAT.
POTENTIALLY BEFORE THEY EVEN COME ON.
DO WE HAVE A DATE? DO WE KNOW WHEN THIS ITEM WILL COME TO US? DO WE HAVE A DATE CERTAIN YET OR NO? UM, LET ME PULL UP MY, UH, OR EVEN A DATE.
YEAH, FROM THE FEBRUARY, SORRY, THE FEBRUARY I HAD CREATED A PRESENTATION ON THIS.
OKAY, SO THIS COMES BACK, OH, IT COMES BACK ON MARCH 25TH.
SO WE'LL HAVE TWO WEEKS AS A WORKING GROUP TO COME UP WITH AMENDMENTS, UM, FOR THIS.
SO IT'S AT OUR NEXT, OUR NEXT MEETING AND IT'S SCHEDULED FOR COUNCIL ON APRIL 24TH.
THAT'S A GOOD POINT IS IF YOU'RE GOING ANYWHERE FOR A SPRING BREAK, UM, WE'LL JUST HAVE TO DO
SO WAS THERE ANY OTHER MEMBERS THAT I HAD NOT LISTED THAT WOULD LIKE TO JOIN? OKAY.
UM, AND FORGIVE ME, I MISSED THE LAST MEETING.
WAS THAT GROUP VOTED ON AND SOLIDIFIED? NO.
SO, UM, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, CREATE A WORKING GROUP THAT WILL FOCUS ON THE E TODD DEVELOPMENT AND VISION PLANS, UM, UH, AMENDMENTS THAT WILL BE COMING THROUGH AT THE NEXT MEETING.
THOSE MEMBERS ARE MADE UP OF MYSELF, CHAIR HEMPEL, COMMISSIONERS, MAXWELL WOODS, BARRE, RAMIREZ, JOHNSON, AND BOA, CHAIR, COHEN.
UM, ALL OF THOSE, WELL, ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
[03:55:01]
OF THOSE IN FAVOR? OKAY.SO, UM, WE SHOULD COME TOGETHER AS A GROUP PRETTY QUICKLY, DECIDE WHO THE LEADER IS AND GET GOING ON REVIEWING THE MATERIALS.
[WORKING GROUP/COMMITTEE UPDATES]
ON TO WORKING GROUP AND COMMITTEE UPDATES.SO, UH, NUMBER 20, CODES AND ORDINANCES, JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE ARE MEETING NEXT WEDNESDAY AND WE ARE REVIEWING THE UNO.
UM, HELP ME WITH THE LANGUAGE ON THAT.
UM, WHAT ARE WE REVIEWING AT CODES AND ORDINANCES? HAS TO DO WITH UNO.
UM, 21 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
UH, I SUPPOSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY.
OH, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, YOU'RE ON THAT ONE.
YEAH, I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE MET THE, UH, YET THIS YEAR.
LET ME DOUBLE CHECK MY CALENDAR, UH, FOR WHEN OUR NEXT MEETING IS.
UH, HONESTLY IT MIGHT BE, UH, MIGHT BE LIKE NEXT WEEK.
OH, SO BEAR WITH ME FOR JUST A MOMENT AS I PULL THAT UP.
WE'LL COME BACK TO, UH, TO THAT ONE.
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE CHAIR.
SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
NUMBER 24, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD, UH, MEETING NEXT MONDAY, NUMBER 25.
CITY OF AUSTIN BUILDINGS WORKING GROUP.
UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY UPDATES ON THAT.
COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, DID YOU FIND THE DATE YET? I DID NOT.
OUTREACH AND PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP.
UM, ALL, WE DON'T HAVE ANY MEMBERS ON THE COMMISSION ANYMORE WITH THAT ONE.
TECHNICAL BUILDING CODE UPDATES, WORKING GROUP WE HAVEN'T MET.
AND NUMBER 28, GOVERNANCE RULES AND PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP.
UM, CHAIR, I, I DID WANT TO ASK, AND HONESTLY THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR THE PARLIAMENTARIAN, UH, IN A POST OF IRONY, BUT, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS HAS VOLUNTEERED TO SORT OF TAKE OVER AS, UM, CHAIR OF THE RULES OF GOVERNANCE, UH, WORKING GROUP.
I, IS THAT A DECISION THAT NEEDS TO BE VOTED ON OR MADE BY THIS BODY OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN JUST DECIDE WITHIN THE WORKING GROUP? I BELIEVE YOU CAN JUST DECIDE THAT WITHIN THE WORKING GROUP.
YEAH, BECAUSE COMMISSIONER WOODS IS ALREADY A MEMBER.
ALRIGHT, SO ONE MORE SHOT AT THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY, OR SORRY, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE UPDATE NUMBER 21.
NO, I'M NOT SEEING IT ON THE, UH, ON THE CALENDAR HERE.
UH, WE HAVEN'T HAD A MEETING YET THIS YEAR.
WE, WE WILL HAVE ONE UH, COMING UP HERE SOON.
UM, AND I'LL, I'LL SHARE THAT DATE BY EMAIL WITH THE, THE STAFF LIAISON SO THAT FOLKS CAN VIEW IF THEY LIKE.
THAT IS ALL OF OUR, UM, WORKING GROUPS.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
ITEMS. COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.UM, YES, I'M ACTUALLY WANTING TO BRING IN ITEM, UM, IT'S GONNA BE A CODE AMENDMENT RELATED TO THE CASE THAT WE SAW THIS EVENING, UH, WHICH WAS ITEM NUMBER SIX IN SOUTH MAR.
AND SPECIFICALLY THAT IS RELATED TO THE OP OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE FEE IN LIEU FOR SOME, UM, OF OUR DB 90 CASES AND SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO COMMERCIAL AND POTENTIALLY NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.
UM, I THINK IT'S AN EXCITING OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND WHAT WE CAN DO WITH OUR DB 90 CASES AND ALSO, UH, CONTINUE TO HAVE THAT, UM, THE IN THE BENEFITS FOR OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND.
SO THAT ITEM WE EXPECT TO BE ON OUR, HOPEFULLY ON OUR NEXT COMMISSION.
ALRIGHT, I'M LOOKING FOR A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? NO CHAIR, BUT A A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE.
I DID FIND OUR NEXT MEETING, IT'S APRIL 9TH FOR THE, FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
THAT WAS A, A MYSTERY WE FINALLY SOLVED.
ALRIGHT, UM, WELL IF THERE'S NO OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, UM, CHAIR? YES, I'M SO SORRY TO INTERJECT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE A QUICK REMINDER TO EVERYONE ABOUT THE APRIL 1ST JOINT COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
IT'LL BE TAKING PLACE AT CITY HALL AT 2:00 PM 2:00 PM YES.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE A REMINDER APRIL AND THANK APRIL.
AND JUST ISN'T A MATTER OF INTEREST THAT THERE IS GONNA BE A AVAIL THEN A REMOTE OPTION VIRTUAL, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO FIRST, AND WE ARE COVERING, UM, REMIND ME WHAT WE'RE COVERING AT THAT ONE PRESERVATION BONUS.
[04:00:01]
OKAY, UM, WITH THAT, UM, WE'LL SAY GOODNIGHT TO EVERYBODY AND I'LL ADJOURN OUR MEETING AT 10 14.