[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:05]
FORUM PRESENT WITHIN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
I'M GOING TO NOW GO AHEAD AND CALL THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT SIX 5:00 PM IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, UM, AT CITY HALL.
UM, ROOM 1 0 0 1 3 0 1 WEST SECOND STREET.
I'M GONNA START WITH OUR ROLL CALL, UM, AND I'LL GO WITH THE ORDER THAT WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA.
UM, I ALSO WANT TO JUST MENTION THAT WE WILL NOT BE JOINED BY, UH, JERICHO TODAY.
UM, AND WE'LL OF COURSE, UH, RECOGNIZE ANY OF OUR OFFICIAL MEMBERS WHO MIGHT JOIN US.
FOR USUAL TONIGHT'S MEETING, WE'LL BE HY HYBRID, ALLOWING FOR VIRTUAL QUORUM AS LONG AS THE COMMISSIONER SERVING AS CHAIRS PRESENT IN CHAMBERS.
AS SUCH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS HERE IN CHAMBERS AND ATTENDANCE.
VIRTUALLY, SIMILARLY, SPEAKERS CAN PRESENT FROM THE CHAMBERS OR PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO SEND YOUR SIGN IN SHEET TO OUR STAFF LIAISON PER THE CLERK'S GUIDELINES THAT WOULD'VE BEEN SHARED IN ADVANCE.
AND PLEASE HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, YELLOW ITEMS FOR VOTING.
UM, I'M GONNA ASK COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE TO HELP ME TODAY TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M COUNTING RIGHT AND I'M NOT MISSING ANYTHING BUT COMMISSIONERS ONLINE.
AGAIN, PARTICULARLY WHEN A EXHIBIT OR SOMETHING IS BEING SHARED.
IF YOU ALL WANT TO BE RECOGNIZED AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE NOT NOTICING YOU, PLEASE JUST UNMUTE YOURSELF AND SAY SOMETHING VERBALLY.
UM, AND I WILL GO AHEAD AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU, IF YOU'RE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, YOU WILL RECEIVE AN EMAIL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION TAKING UP YOUR ITEM.
UM, AND WE WILL GO THROUGH IT, UM, AS SORT OF TOLD TO US.
AND I BELIEVE I HAVE ASSISTANCE FROM MS. GARCIA IN ANNOUNCING THE, OKAY.
SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UM, STAFF HELP US GUIDE THROUGH SPEAKERS TODAY AS WELL.
THAT STARTS US OFF WITH OUR FIRST ITEM, WHICH IS THE PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
DO WE HAVE SOMEBODY SIGNED UP? YES.
WE HAVE STUART HIRSCH, WHO IS SPEAKING IN FAVOR.
STUART, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES SPEAKERS FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
AND WE'RE SURE MR. HIRSCH IS NOT JOINING US VIRTUALLY AS WELL.
[Consent Agenda]
OUR FIRST, UH, ITEM FOR TODAY IS GOING OVER OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.UH, THIS IS OUR ACTIVITY TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ITEMS THAT ARE CONSENT APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, POSTPONEMENTS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS. I'LL GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH THAT.
UM, THE CONSENT, PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND IDENTIFY THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE FOR CONSENT, POSTPONEMENT AND NON-DISCUSSION.
OR AS A REMINDER, COMMISSIONERS, YOU WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST A CONSENT ITEM, PEOPLE FOR DISCUSSION, UM, OR TO BRING UP ANY OTHER SORT OF CONCERN THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
I'LL GO THROUGH THE CONSENT AGENDA, BUT THE, THE FIRST ITEM ON HERE IS OF COURSE, UM, THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
UM, THESE WERE SHARED PREVIOUSLY.
THESE ARE MINUTE MINUTES FROM OUR REGULAR MAY 13TH MEETING.
IF THERE'S NO CONCERN FROM COMMISSIONERS, CAN WE ADD THEM TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA? NOT SEEING OTHERWISE, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS PART OF IT.
SO THIS IS GOING THROUGH OUR PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AND STAFF, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M MISSING.
UM, SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO.
PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2024 DASH 0 0 2 0 0 1 62 0 1 CROW LANE, DISTRICT TWO.
THIS I BELIEVE IS UP FOR DISCUSSION STAFF.
UM, THE ASSOCIATED REZONING IS ITEM NUMBER THREE C 14 DASH TWO FOUR DASH 0 68 62 0 1 CROW LANE, DISTRICT TWO.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
I NUMBER FOUR IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2 25 DASH NINE ONE SH LY, NORTH DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION I NUMBER FIVE IS ASSOCIATED REZONING C 14 DASH 2 25 3 4 SH LY NORTH DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR DISCUSSION I NUMBER SIX IS A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA A DASH 2 25 DASH 0 0 2 7 0 1 LAKE AUSTIN, DISTRICT 10.
UM, THIS ITEM IS UP FOR CONSENT.
I NUMBER SEVEN IS A REZONING C 14, UM, DASH 9 25 DASH 0 2 6, LAKE AUSTIN BOULEVARD, DISTRICT 10.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR CONSENT.
I, NUMBER EIGHT IS PLAN AMENDMENT EAST 11TH AND 12TH STREET, URBAN RENEWAL AREA MODIFICATION NUMBER 13 EAST 11TH AND 12TH STREET URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AMENDMENT DISTRICT ONE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE 24TH.
I NUMBER NINE, UM, IS ASSOCIATED REZONING C 14 DASH 205 DASH 3 0 3 0 12 0 1 EAST 11TH STREET DISTRICT ONE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE 24TH.
I NUMBER 10 IS A PLANNED AMENDMENT NPA DASH 23 DASH 3 4 0 4 43 0 2
[00:05:02]
KNUCKLES CROSSING DISTRICT TWO.THIS ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 22ND.
ITEM NUMBER 11 IS OF REZONING C 14 DASH 2 25 DASH 0 4 2 9 1 1 7 NORTHGATE REZONE DISTRICT FOUR.
I NUMBER 12 IS ALSO REZONING C 14 DASH 2 24 7 9 6 IN THE MAR DISTRICT NINE.
THIS ITEM IS UP FOR STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE 24TH.
33 IS C 14 DASH IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 2 5 NANCY DRIVE, DISTRICT TWO.
I NUMBER 14 IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 3 5 CROSSTOWN TUNNEL CENTRALIZED ORDER CONTROL FACILITY.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 15 IS AN LDC AMENDMENT C 20 DASH 2025 DASH ZERO ONE AMENDMENTS TO THE EAST OVERSIGHT CORRIDOR REGULATING PLAN DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 16, UM, IS A REZONING CH 14 DASH ZERO SIX DASH 0 1 0 9 0 3 LAKESHORE PUT AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE, DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 17 IS A TREE TREE VARIANCE SP DASH 2025 DASH 0 0 3 CS SH PSH LIFEWORK AT TILLERY DISTRICT THREE.
UM, I JUST WANNA MENTION THAT THIS IS, UM, ON CONSENT, A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND NUMBER 18 IS THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS SP DASH 2 24 DASH 0 2 3 8 C 3 0 5 WEST MLK HOME TWO.
I NUMBER 19 IS THE ASSOCIATED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SBC DASH 2024 DASH 3 3 4 2 CMLK.
UH, STORAGE, UH, DISTRICT ONE, SORRY, SEPARATE.
WANNA MENTION MADE A MISTAKE THERE.
THIS IS A SEPARATE, UM, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MLK STORAGE DISTRICT ONE.
THE SIGN IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT I NUMBER 20 IS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SBC DASH 24 DASH SEVEN THREE C 34 0 4 VALLEY AVENUE DISTRICT THREE.
THIS ITEM IS ALSO OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
THAT IS ALL OF OUR ITEMS, UH, FOR PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND INCLUDE OUR MINUTES AS PART OF OUR CONSENT AGENDA CHAIR? YES.
I NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM ITEM 17.
COMMISSIONER HOWARD WILL COUNT YOU AS RECUSED FROM ITEM NUMBER 17.
DO YOU WISH TO STATE YOUR PURPOSE FOR RECUSAL? UH, MY ORGANIZATION'S A PARTY TO THIS, UM, INITIATIVE PROJECT NOW.
UM, SO THAT WOULD ALSO BRING US TO THE FACT, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO WISH TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN THEMSELVES FROM ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA? UM, IT, UM, YES.
DO WE, WERE THERE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR CONSENT AGENDA? I WAS JUST GONNA GET TO THAT NEXT PART OF THANK YOU.
CAN STAFF HELPS US UNDERSTAND IF THERE ARE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA AND, AND GUIDE US THROUGH THOSE.
CHAIR ARE, WE HAVE OUR, THE APPLICANT SPEAKING ON ITEM NUMBER SIX.
RICK, UH, IS SPEAKING IN FAVOR AND WE HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I'M REALLY JUST HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE SINCE WE'RE ON THE CONSENT.
THIS IS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND WE HAD A GREAT TIME MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA, UM, AND THEY REALLY APPRECIATED WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
WE'RE JUST ADDING THE MIXED USE COMPONENT, UM, SO THAT WE CAN ADD AN APARTMENT IN THE BACK FOR THE BUSINESS OWNER.
AND THAT WAS FOR ITEM SIX AND SEVEN.
UM, THE NEXT ITEM IS WE HAVE THE PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION FOR ITEM 11, MONICA GUZMAN.
MONICA, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
I AM CHAIR OF THE NORTH AUSTIN CIVIC ASSOCIATION CONTACT TEAM.
UM, WE ARE IN OPPOSITION UN UNTIL I HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK TO MR. TIFF, THE AGENT AGAIN.
BUT, UH, WE DID MEET WITH HIM ON THE SEVENTH AT THE PROPOSED SITE.
WE EXPRESSED CONCERNS ON WHAT WE THOUGHT THEY WANTED TO BUILD, WHICH WAS A CONVENIENCE STORE.
THAT AREA OF NORTHGATE IS A HOTSPOT.
AND I JUST FOUND OUT TODAY ON THE WAY DOWN HERE TO CITY HALL IS THAT THE APPLICANT ALREADY OWNED A STORE JUST DOWN THE STREET ON COLONY CREEK, WHICH IS ANOTHER HOTSPOT, JUVENILE GANG ACTIVITY, DRUG ACTIVITY, SEX WORKERS.
IT'S DANGEROUS TO BE OUT THERE.
WE TOLD MR. WHITLOW THIS, UM, HE CERTAINLY HEARD OUR CONCERNS ABOUT NOT WANTING ANYTHING AUTO RELATED BECAUSE OF THE CREEK RUNNING THROUGH THERE.
[00:10:01]
AND WE DIDN'T WANT IT POSSIBLE FOR SOMEONE TO WALK IN AND JUST BUY ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES BECAUSE OF THE OTHER ISSUES.HE ASSURED US THE APPLICANT ONLY WANTED A RESTAURANT WITH OUTDOOR SEATING, WHICH WE THOUGHT IT WAS AN ODD PLACE, BUT WE WERE LIKE, FINE, JUST NO CONVENIENCE STORE.
AND SO AT THIS POINT, I ADMIT, NEED TO CLARIFY, BUT IN WHAT I FOUND OUT IS THE APPLICANT ALREADY OWNS SEVERAL OTHER CONVENIENCE STORES AND AT LEAST TWO OR THREE OF THEM ARE IN KNOWN HOTSPOTS WITH DRUG ACTIVITY.
SEX WORKERS, UH, PEOPLE IN THE RESPECTIVE COMMUNITIES DO NOT LIKE THE, THE IDEA OF HIM POSSIBLY BUILDING ANOTHER ONE, UH, ESPECIALLY WHEN HE IS NOT REALLY ACTIVE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, DOESN'T HAVE A WORKING RELATIONSHIP ON ADDRESSING THE ISSUES.
WHEN HE SEES THIS KIND OF ACTIVITY HAPPENING ON HIS PROPERTY, HE DOES NOT CALL THE POLICE.
NOW GRANTED, IF THE POLICE COME IN THE FLIGHT, THEN HE'LL TALK TO THEM, BUT OTHERWISE BEING PROACTIVE IN TRYING TO MAKE IT A A BETTER, SAFER PLACE TO COME IN, HE IS NOT DOING.
THERE IS A GENERAL RETAIL SALES, A CONVENIENCE STILL LISTED, AND INITIALLY WE THOUGHT THAT WAS A CONVENIENCE STORE, BASICALLY LIKE A SEVEN 11.
BUT THANKS TO, UH, MS. HARD AND MR. WATS, THEY SAID, NO, THAT'S BIG BOX.
SO IT'S LIKE THE PROPERTY'S TOO SMALL FOR THAT.
WE JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE FOOD SALES, UH, LIKE A SEVEN 11, YOU KNOW, AND, AND ANY OTHER LIKE WALGREENS SMALL CORNER STORE THAT CAN FIT IN THAT SIZE PROPERTY BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO ACTIVELY MAKE IT A MORE WELCOMING, SAFE PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO BE.
UM, JUST TO HELP UNITE AND HAVE MORE COHESION IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE CAN'T DO THAT WHEN WE'RE WORKING AGAINST OR FEEL LIKE WE'RE BEING WORKED AGAINST ON ADDRESSING ISSUES TO MAKE IT A BETTER PLACE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MELINDA SHIRA, WHO IS JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
MELINDA, GO AHEAD AND PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR COMMENTS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE ON THIS COMMISSION GIVING A VOICE TO CITIZENS AND FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE IMPACT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT ON OUR EVERYDAY LIVES.
PRIOR TO THE RETURN OF COMMANDER'S FORUMS IN AUSTIN, I HELPED ORGANIZE AN ONGOING MULTI NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY MEETING THAT SOUGHT TO IDENTIFY THE UNDERLYING ELEMENTS DRIVING CRIME IN NORTH AUSTIN.
NEIGHBORHOODS INCLUDED THE NORTH AUSTIN CIVIC ASSOCIATION, GEORGIA ACRES AND ST.
ONE OF THE COMMON THREADS IDENTIFIED WAS THE ISSUE OF PARTICULAR CONVENIENCE STORES AND THEIR COMMON BUSINESS OWNER THAT WERE SUPPORTING A CRIMINAL ENVIRONMENT ALL OWNED BY THE APPLICANT.
HERE TODAY, A PD HAS GONE AS FAR AS ASKING THE APPLICANT TO STOP SELLING SINGLE SERVE ALCOHOL BEVERAGES AND THC PRODUCTS AT HIS, UH, MULTIPLE CONVENIENCE STORE LOCATIONS.
AND THE APPLICANT IS OPPOSED TO THAT.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ARE TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE WITH THIS APPLICANT AND, UH, NOT NOT GETTING ANY RESPONSE FROM HIM.
UH, I'VE DRIVEN BY THIS BY THE LOCATION AT GEORGE AND POWELL FOR, YOU KNOW, EVERY WEEKDAY, UM, FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS DRIVING MY KIDS TO GIMI LUTHERAN CHILDREN'S MINISTRY.
AND IT IS OBVIOUS THE LACK OF PROACTIVE INVOLVEMENT, EVEN ON HIS OWN PROPERTIES THAT THIS APPLICANT HAS ALLOWING THE REQUESTED REZONING WOULD ALLOW THE BUSINESS OWNER TO JUST EXPAND HIS NUMBER OF CONVENIENCE STORES IN AUSTIN.
HE ALREADY HAS ONE RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER ON COLONY CREEK AND INCREASES THE PUBLIC NUISANCE THAT THE OWNER HAS NOT BEEN OPPOSED TO IN THE YEARS THAT WE'VE SOUGHT TO ADDRESS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ON, ON HIS PROPERTY.
SO I, I REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THE CRIME STATS OF NORTHGATE AND COLONY CREEK.
I ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THE CRIME STATS AT GEORGE AND POWELL, UH, VISIT THESE PROPERTIES IN THESE COMMUNITIES THAT THIS ZONING IS GOING TO IMPACT AND REALLY, UM, UNDERSTAND THE, THE DECISION OF YOUR CHOICE TODAY BEFORE, UH, VOTING IN, IN FAVOR OF THE ZONING THAT'S GONNA ALLOW ANOTHER CONVENIENCE STORE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS THE APPLICANT IN FAVOR, RICKA KEEPERS FOR ITEM 13 RICKA.
GOOD EVENING, RIKA KEEPERS AGAIN.
UM, THIS PROPERTY IS GETTING REZONED TO SINGLE FAMILY THREE SO THAT WE CAN HAVE MORE DENSITY.
[00:15:01]
IT WAS, THERE WAS A TENANT IN THE PROPERTY, BUT BECAUSE OF THE COST OF LIVING IN AUSTIN, THEY HAD TO MOVE BACK TO THEIR HOMETOWN, SO NO ONE WAS, IS BEING DISPLACED AT ALL, UM, BY THIS REASON.BUT YEAH, I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM 14, ALAN RAINES.
I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE CITY FOR REZONING OF PROPERTY.
I HAVE A PRESENTATION TO MAKE.
I'LL ONLY PRESENT THAT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME IF WE GET PULLED.
SO I JUST ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, AND MS. RAM, BEFORE YOU PROCEEDED, JUST IF YOU ARE AN APPLICANT AND WOULD LIKE TO WAIVE YOUR RIGHT TO SPEAK, FEEL FREE TO JUST SORT OF INDICATE TO US AND WE CAN ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS A PRIMARY SPEAKER FOR ITEM 15 AND 16.
RICHARD, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION FOR ITEM 17 IS NATHAN TUCKER.
NATHAN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES GOING ON TO NEXT SPEAKER.
UM, I, WE JUST HAD MR. TUCKER JOIN US VIRTUALLY IS STAFF ROLLING IT UP TO TALK TO HIM? OKAY.
HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, SIR.
YEAH, I'M OPPOSED TO THE, UM, THE AMENDMENT TO CUT DOWN THE TREE.
LIKE I, I, SO I GOT THE THING IN THE MAIL THAT SAID THEY'RE WANTING TO BUILD HOUSING THERE, LOW INCOME HOUSING OR WHATEVER.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH WANTING TO BUILD HOUSING THERE.
IT'S BASICALLY JUST AN EMPTY LOT, LOT RIGHT NOW.
BUT I DO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THEM CUTTING DOWN.
I THINK WHAT THEY DESCRIBED AS A HERITAGE OAK.
UH, THAT SEEMS LIKE A REAL SHAME TO ME AND I JUST DROVE BY THE LOT.
IT SEEMS LIKE THEY DEFINITELY SHOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD SOMETHING THERE WITHOUT TEARING DOWN THE TREE.
SO THAT'S REALLY LIKE THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE.
I'M ALL FOR IF THEY WANNA DO THAT PROJECT, GREAT, BUT LET'S DO IT WITHOUT CUTTING DOWN THE TREE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT, YOU KNOW, IT MAKES OUR CITY GREEN.
UH, YOU KNOW, IT GIVES US THE AIR WE BREATHE AND REALLY, UH, JUST BEAUTIFIES THE CITY AND IT'D BE A SHAME TO HAVE TO CUT IT DOWN.
AND AS WE PROCEED, CAN I JUST QUICKLY MENTION, UM, SOMETHING TO OUR COMMISSIONERS ONLINE.
THERE'S FIVE FOLKS ON THE DAES AND WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE ONLINE.
UM, REMINDER, IF YOU TURN OFF YOUR CAMERA, YOU'RE CONSIDERED OFF THE D SO I THINK JUST COMMISSIONERS ONLINE, IF Y'ALL CAN HELP US KEEP THAT QUORUM CHECK.
I KNOW FOLKS MIGHT HAVE TO STEP AWAY, BUT TRY TO SEE THE THREE OF US IF YOU ARE VISIBLE AT ANY GIVEN TIME.
THANK YOU STAFF, PLEASE PROCEED.
UM, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS THE APPLICANT, UH, FOR ITEM 18, VICTORIA HASI, VICTORIA, FIVE MINUTES.
OKAY, SO NOW WE'RE SWITCHING OVER TO THOSE IN OPPOSITION.
WE HAVE THE PRIMARY SPEAKER, JOHN HILDRETH.
JOHN, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES CHAIR COMMISSIONERS.
I'M AN OWNER, RESIDENT AND BOARD MEMBER AT CAMBRIDGE TOWER, A CONDOMINIUM, UH, AT 1801 LA VACA, WHICH IS ABOUT A HALF BLOCK FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR, I'VE OWNED THERE FOR 32 YEARS, LIVED THERE 25 OF THOSE, 28 OF THOSE YEARS INCLUDING THE LAST, UH, 20 CONSECUTIVELY.
ALL OF US AT CAMBRIDGE WHO
UM, UH, A AFFIRM, UH, THE NEED FOR GREATER DENSITY AND, UH, MANY OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE DONE TO, UH, INCREASE DENSITY AND ADDRESS ISSUES OF PUBLIC TRANSIT AND PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY.
WE HAVE NEVER OPPOSED ANY OTHER, UH, PROJECT OF WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN MANY, UH, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD OVER THE YEARS.
OUR OPPOSITION TO THE APPROVAL OF THIS INCREASED DENSITY FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS SITE-SPECIFIC FOR THIS PARTICULAR BLOCK BETWEEN LAVACCA AND GUADALUPE.
BECAUSE OF OUR LIVED EXPERIENCE OVER DECADES OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN DEVELOPMENT PROCEEDS WITHOUT DOING THE ADEQUATE IMPACT ANALYSIS ON THE SAFETY AND MOBILITY
[00:20:01]
OF PEDESTRIANS, CYCLIST, TRANSIT, AUTOMOBILES, UM, UH, AND COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC.THIS PROPOSAL, UH, PLANS TO HAVE AN INGRESS OFF OF MLK IN A VERY CONGESTED, COMPLICATED, UH, INTERSECTION AND EGRESS ONTO AN ALLEY, AN ALLEYWAY WHICH SPILLS EITHER UNDER GUADALUPE CROSSING A SIDEWALK, A CYCLIST PATH, A BUS LANE, AND THEN INTO ONE LANE TRAFFIC ON A CURVE FROM UH, MLK, UH, TOWARDS 18TH STREET.
THE EGRESS ON THE LAVACCA END, THE ALLEYWAY NARROWS TO JUST MORE THAN 10 FEET, BARELY SUITABLE FOR A ONE-WAY, UH, EGRESS.
THAT ALLEYWAY IS ALREADY BEING USED BY A BUSINESS AND SOME BELOW MARKET HOUSING THAT EXISTS AS THEIR INGRESS AND EGRESS PUTTING 400 ADDITIONAL VEHICULAR TRIPS INTO THAT ALLEYWAY AS A PRIMARY, UH, EXIT AND INTO EITHER LA VODKA OR GU GUADALUPE.
OUR EXPERIENCE IS THAT CONGESTION ENSUES RECKLESS BEHAVIOR, ENSUES THREATS TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, WHICH WE HAVE PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED THREATENS TO, UH, THREATS TO VEHICULAR, UH, SAFE DRIVING, WHICH WE HAVE ALL EXPERIENCED WHO LIVED THERE.
AND THERE IS NO, THERE'S BEEN NO ANALYSIS DONE TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS THAT ARE DEFINITELY AFFECTED BY THE ADDED DENSITY OF THIS PROPOSAL.
IT IS TRUE AND I WOULD APPLAUD THE FACT THAT AS THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THIS BLOCK, THERE ARE ATTEMPTING TO ADDRESS AND SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLY WITH THE GOOD STREET, UH, STANDARDS, BUT IT'S A MINIMAL
SO OUR CONCERNS FOR THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST OF DENSITY CENTER ON THE FACT THAT THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT ADDRESS AND THE CITY HAS NOT BEEN REQUIRED BECAUSE OF THE SPECIFIC NUMBER OF, UH, TRAFFIC, UH, INTERACTIONS, A THOUSAND INSTEAD OF THE 2000 THAT'S REQUIRED, BUT WE BELIEVE THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION IS WORTHY OF THAT KIND OF ANALYSIS BEFORE APPROVING, UH, THE DENSITY THAT'S BEING REQUESTED HERE.
UH, WE ASK FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
UM, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM 20, SHERRY ALSUP WHO'S JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
SHERRY, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR COMMENTS.
UM, I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS ONLY.
OKAY, WE HAVE OUR NEXT SPEAKER WHO IS KEN JONES, WHO IS ALSO JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
KEN, GO AND PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR COMMENTS.
YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES, UH, LIKE SHERRY, I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT AND JUST JOINING TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMERS MIGHT HAVE.
AND CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES OUR SPEAKERS ON CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS AS WE PROCEED, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WISHES TO WISHING TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN THEMSELVES FROM ANY ITEMS? DO WE HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS WISHING TO PULL AN ITEM OR OTHERWISE HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER BAR RAMIREZ, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM NUMBER 11, PLEASE APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, I'LL JUST MAKE A NOTE OF THAT AS WELL.
UM, UM, WE HAD SOMEONE WHO COULD NOT SIGN UP IN TIME.
UM, MS. MITCHELL IS IN THE AUDIENCE.
MS. MITCHELL, SINCE THIS IS A DISCUSSION CASE WHEN WE GET THERE, UM, I'LL PROBABLY GIVE MY SOME OF MY QUESTION ANSWER TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE SOME TIME TO SPEAK.
[00:25:02]
THANK YOU MA'AM.ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WISHING TO PULL AN ITEM OR HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NOT SEEING ANY.
AGAIN, IS THERE A MOTION? SO THIS WOULD BE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, APPROVE THE MINUTES.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER WOODS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? UM, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THAT CONSENT AGENDA WITH COMMISSIONER HOWARD ABSTAINING ON ITEM NUMBER 17.
OKAY, THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH COMMISSIONER HOWARD ABSTAINING ON ITEM NUMBER 17.
[Items 2 & 3]
FIRST ITEMS, WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER TWO AND THREE AND WE'LL START WITH OUR STAFF PRESENTATION ON THESE MARIE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT.ITEM NUMBER TWO IS NPA 20 24 0 2 0 0.0 1 62 0 1 CROWE LANE WITHIN DISTRICT TWO.
THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM MIXED USE OFFICE TO MIXED USE STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS FOR AN ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE LAND USE.
GOOD EVENING BEVERLY ELA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE ON YOUR AGENDA CASE, C 1 4 2 0 2 4 0 1 6 8 FOR 6 2 1 CROW LANE.
THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 0.8 ACRES IN, IN SIZE AND IS CURRENTLY ZONED LOM LIMITED OFFICE MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING, THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO LR M-U-C-N-P NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, CONDITIONAL OVERLAY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN MINING DISTRICT ZONING.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE END OF CROW LANE, WHICH IS CLASSIFIED AS AN A SMP LEVEL ONE STREET AND IS DEVELOPED WITH AN EXISTING STRUCTURE CURRENTLY USED FOR PET SERVICES.
SURROUNDING ZONING INCLUDES MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTH A P WITH HOTEL AND THEATER USES TO THE SOUTH AND EAST, AND A MIX OF MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL ZONING TO THE WEST.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING L-R-M-U-C-O-N-P ZONING TO ALIGN THE SITE'S ZONING WITH THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT AND TO ALLOW LOW INTENSITY ACTIVITY CONSISTENT WITH THE SCALE OF THE AREA.
THE CONDITION OVERLAY WOULD LIMIT HIGHER INTENSITY USES THAT MAY BE LESS APPROPRIATE GIVEN THE SITE'S STREET XS AND NEARBY RESIDENTIAL CONTEXT.
THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, WE'LL GO DO OUR, OUR SPEAKER SIGNED UP WITH STARTING WITH THOSE IN FAVOR, MS. BROWN.
WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
CATHERINE, YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UM, CATHERINE, NICELY WITH MECAL OF STEWART AND WILLIAMS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I REPRESENT THE PROPERTY OWNER AND BUSINESS OWNER AT 62 0 1 CROW LANE, LOCATED IN DISTRICT TWO.
HOW DO THE PROPERTY HERE TODAY IS, UH, BEING REZONED FROM L-O-M-U-N-P TO L-R-M-U-N-P-C-O, THE PROPERTY SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL MULTIFAMILY USES AND WE'RE ASKING FOR LR IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR PET SERVICES USE.
I DO WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR PET SERVICES AND NOT KENNELS.
PET SERVICES WOULD ALLOW FOR ALL THE BOARDING SERVICES TO BE INDOORS AND KENNELS.
YOU USUALLY SEE KENNELS OUTSIDE THE PROPERTY IS A LITTLE LESS THAN AN ACRE AND THE REZONING IS IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR A SMALL BUS BUSINESS THAT PROVIDES PET SERVICES TO CONTINUE ON SITE, LIKE STATED BY STAFF.
IT'S CURRENTLY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN MIXED USE OFFICE.
IT HAS A 1950 STRUCTURE OF 1700 SQUARE FEET AND ACCESS THROUGH CROW LANE.
THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN IN THE FAMILY FOR MANY YEARS AND IS NO LONGER A HOME TONS OF YEARS AGO, SO IT WAS ZONED COMMERCIAL.
WE HAVE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORS SEVERAL TIMES AND HAVE ADDRESSED THEIR CHANGING CONCERNS, UH, WHICH HAVE BEEN OVERALL THE FENCE A SIDEWALK IF WE'RE FITTING TO THE REGULATIONS AND AN ANIMAL CODE.
WE HAD, UH, CODE COMPLIANCE GO THERE THREE TIMES.
AND WE ALSO HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE COUNCIL WITH MAYOR PER FUENTES OFFICE ON THIS CASE.
THEY ASKED ALSO ABOUT THE TIMES THAT THE DOGS ARE OUTSIDE AND THE SCHEDULE THAT THEY HAVE AND THE FENCE.
[00:30:01]
THEY HAVE A SO FEST IN BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES AND SO BECAUSE WE'RE ZONE COMMERCIAL, WE HAVE TO PUT A SOLID FENCE.THE CURRENTLY ALLOWED USES ARE ALL THESE, I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT WE ARE ALREADY COMMERCIAL AND THEN THE CO WOULD, UH, ELIMINATE ALL THESE USES AND JUST ALLOW FOR PET SERVICES.
YOU RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE HOA SKYBRIDGE REGARDING SOME OTHER CONCERNS THAT THEY HAD, THE BARKING OF THE BOARDED DOGS, THE VOLUME OF THE BUSINESS THAT CAN INCREASE AND THE NOISE DISTURBANCE.
THE DOGS ARE INDOORS AND CAN ONLY GO OUTSIDE IN A SCHEDULE WALKS AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE I DO HAVE THE SCHEDULE AND CODE COMPLIANCE CAME TO LOOK AT THE FACILITY AND RECOMMENDED ONLY 20 PETS MAX.
THEY ALSO HAD THE FIRE DEPARTMENT COME OVER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE, UH, COMPLIANT WITH FIRE CODE.
THE STRUCTURE IS LOCATED 200 FEET FROM THE NEAREST MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURE, SO IT'S REALLY FAR AWAY.
WE DID HAVE ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THAT HOME, THAT WAS A A COMMERCIAL ZONE PROPERTY, SHE THOUGHT IT WAS A HOME.
SO THAT MADE ME THINK THAT SHE'S NEVER HEARD THE DOGS BEFORE.
THE TRAIL AXIS, THERE'S A SILK FENCE IN BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES AND THERE IS A, UH, TRAIL IN THE H HO SKY SKYBRIDGE AREA, BUT THERE'S NO ACCESS FROM OUR PROPERTY TO IT.
THERE IS A, AN ACCESS POINT FROM THE MOVIE THEATER AND I THINK THERE'S SOME CONCERNS ABOUT IT.
SO THEY WERE REACHING OUT TO STAFF, UH, CODE COMPLIANCE ABOUT THAT.
THE PRIVATE TRAIL, LIKE I SAID, IS, IS NOT ACCESSIBLE BY THE DOG BOARDING FACILITY AND WE'RE DOING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE FENCE, WHICH WE'RE WORKING WITH THE SKY BRIDGE FOLKS IN ORDER TO CREATE PRIVACY AT THIS TIME.
THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE AND THAT'S THE FENCE.
IF YOU SEE IN THE BACK, IT HAS A VINE.
AND SO THAT WOULD BE REMOVED OR WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT A EIGHT FOOT FENCE, TALL WOOD ON AND WITH SOLID IN THE BOTTOM IN ORDER FOR IT TO AVOID THE, THE PETS TO SEE EACH OTHER DURING SUMMER.
WHEN THAT SCREEN GETS ELIMINATED, DO THE VEGETATION.
I'M OPEN FOR ANY OF THE QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
OKAY, NOW WE'LL BE SWITCHING OVER TO OPPOSITION.
OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IS JAMES YIDA, WHO IS RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATING TIME FROM GEORGIE MORRELL.
JAMES, YOU HAVE EIGHT MINUTES, UM, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I'M HERE TO URGE YOU TO DENY THE ZONING REQUEST FOR THE ACRE AT 6 2 0 1 CROW LANE.
I WAS HERE TWO WEEKS AGO TO SPEAK ON THIS.
SO MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD SOME OF THIS BEFORE, BUT I WANNA REFRESH YOU ON OUR STORY AND PROVIDE SOME NEW DETAILS NOT MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY.
I BELIEVE THE OWNER'S LACK OF ETHICAL STANDARDS LED TO THE DEATH OF OUR FAMILY DOG.
AS SUCH, I BELIEVE REZONING THE PROPERTY FURTHER ENDANGERED THE PET SUPPORTED THERE AND FURTHER DISRUPTS NEARBY, COMMUNICATE COMMUNITIES AND VALIDATES THE OWNERS' PATTERN OF NON-COMPLIANCE.
WE DROPPED WENDY OFF ON JULY 3RD.
ON JULY 6TH, THE OWNERS OF, UH, THE ACRE AT CROW LANE NOTIFIED US THAT SHE HAD GONE MISSING.
LATER WE LEARNED THAT THERE HAD BEEN A HIGHLY CREDIBLE SIGHTING OF HER ON JULY 5TH AT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX ACROSS THE STREET.
UH, THIS SUGGESTS WENDY, UH, OUR DOG HAD BEEN UNACCOUNTED FOR, FOR ABOUT 18 HOURS BEFORE WE WERE EVEN CONTACTED.
WE SPENT THE NEXT 11 DAYS SEARCHING FOR HER, DISTRIBUTING FLYERS, POSTING ONLINE, CHECKING SHELTERS, AND FOLLOWING LEADS.
ON JULY 17TH, I GOT A CALL THAT SOMEBODY HAD FOUND HER DECEASED ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND WENT TO VERIFY MYSELF.
UM, IT'S DIFFICULT TO COMMUNICATE HOW AWFUL THOSE 11 DAYS WERE AND THE WORST PART WAS NOT, WAS KNOWING THAT THIS WAS PREVENTABLE.
AFTER WENDY'S, WENDY'S DEATH, AN INDIVIDUAL REACHED OUT TO US WITH TROUBLING INFORMATION ABOUT THE OWNERS, WHILE ALSO INDICATING THAT THEY WERE NOT ZONED PROPERLY TO BE LOOKING AFTER DOGS.
I FILED A ZONING COMPLAINT AND FOUND OUT THAT I WAS JUST ONE OF SEVEN LAND USE CO UH, COMPLAINTS MADE BETWEEN JANUARY, 2023 AND JULY, 2024.
LIKE OTHERS, MY COMPLAINT WAS INITIALLY CLOSED WITH NO VIOLATION FOUND ONLY AFTER CONTACTING COUNCILMAN WOMAN VANESSA FUENTES WAS THE COMPLAINT REOPENED AND A VIOLATION FINALLY CONFIRMED.
UM, IT IS MY BELIEF THAT THE OWNERS OF THE ACRE KNOWINGLY OPERATED WHILE ZONED IMPROPERLY AND DID NOT TAKE STEPS TO CORRECT IT UNTIL THEY WERE FINALLY CITED, WHICH AGAIN TOOK SEVEN VISITS FROM THE SAME INSPECTOR.
COMMUNITY COMPLAINTS AND THE INTERVENTION OF OUR DISTRICT COUNCILWOMAN.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE OWNERS ARE TRUSTWORTHY, RESPONSIBLE BUSINESS OWNERS EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THE CARE OF ANIMALS.
HERE ARE SOME OTHER TROUBLING THINGS I FOUND DURING THIS WHOLE PROCESS.
UM, AN ILLEGAL GAMBLING O OPERATION WAS DISCOVERED ON THE PROPERTY IN 2018.
[00:35:01]
UM, THIS WAS REPORTED BY KU.YOU CAN SEARCH IT ON GOOGLE, JUST SEARCH KU CROW LANE GAMBLING OPERATION.
UM, THE CONDOS SHARING A FENCE WITH THE RESIDENTS.
THE SKYBRIDGE, HOA HAVE CITED MULTIPLE REPORTS OF LOOSE DOGS FROM THE OPERATION ACCESSING THE CONDOS.
UM, THIS IS A QUOTE, UM, RESIDENTS INCLUDING CHILDREN AND LEASH PETS HAVE BEEN STARTLED AND EVEN CHASED BY THESE DOGS, CREATING AN ONGOING SAFETY CONCERN.
THE SAME DOCUMENT ALSO ALLEGES THAT THE PROPERTY WAS BEING USED TO RENT OUT RV SPACES, WHICH I ALSO ASSUME IS NOT UNDER CURRENT ZONING.
UM, THIS IS ON PAGE 11 AND 12 OF THE, UH, ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET.
UM, FINALLY, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, WE FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT SHARING WHAT HAPPENED TO OUR FAMILY.
HOWEVER, ATTEMPTS TO TELL OUR STORY HAVE BEEN SUPPRESSED.
THIS IS A HUGE PART OF THE REASON WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY.
I BELIEVE THE OWNERS TOOK STEPS TWO AND ULTIMATELY SUCCEEDING IN HAVING MY WIFE'S ACCOUNT OF THE EVENTS REMOVED FROM GOOGLE.
WE CHOSE THIS BUSINESS BASED ON ITS STELLAR GO GOOGLE REVIEWS.
SO I FIND IT ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT THAT OUR STORY IS REFLECTED AMONG THE REVIEWS ON THE PLATFORM IN ORDER TO GIVE THE PUBLIC A CHANCE AT A WELL-ROUNDED IN, UH, UNDERSTANDING.
MY OWN GOOGLE REVIEW WAS TAKEN DOWN, UM, AND IT WASN'T UNTIL IT CAME BACK UP ABOUT FOUR MONTHS LATER THAT THE ACRE RESPONDED TO MY ONE STAR REVIEW.
UM, THE RESPONSE TO THE REVIEW WAS A LINEY, A LITANY OF DEFENSES.
UM, THESE ACTIONS SUGGEST AN EFFORT TO SUPPRESS LEGITIMATE FEEDBACK AND A FOCUS ON PUBLIC IMAGE RATHER THAN SAFETY.
MORE WIVES YELP, UH, REVIEW REMAINS.
SO PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT THAT IF YOU'RE INTERESTED.
ANOTHER RECENT NEGATIVE GOOGLE REVIEW ALSO INDICATES THAT THERE STILL MIGHT BE AN ISSUE WITH THE FENCE IN PERSON.
THIS IS A QUOTE, UM, IN PERSON.
THIS FACILITY IS NOT AS IT APPEARS ON THE VERY WELL MANICURED PHOTOS ONLINE, I WAS UNEASY IMMEDIATELY.
APPROVING THE REZONING REQUEST WOULD VALIDATE A BUSINESS BOTTLE THAT HAS DUE DATE RESULTED IN AT LEAST ONE CONFIRMED ZONING VIOLATION, MULTIPLE COMMUNITY COMPLAINTS, AND THE PREVENTABLE DEATH OF A BELOVED PET.
IT WOULD REWARD A PATTERN OF DANGEROUS AND REACTIVE RATHER THAN RESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR.
LIKE I'VE SAID BEFORE, THE WORST PART IN ALL THIS WAS KNOWING THAT WENDY'S DEATH WAS PREVENTABLE.
I TRULY BELIEVE THAT APPROVING THIS REQUEST WOULD ONLY RESULT IN THE DETRIMENT OF THE SURROUND SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND ITS PETS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS OLIVIA ALVARADO.
OLIVIA, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
MY NAME IS OLIVIA ALVARADO AND I'M A RESIDENT OF SOUTH AUSTIN.
HERE TO STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THIS COMMISSION TO DENY THE REZONING REQUEST FOR 6 2 0 1 CROW LANE.
I REVIEW THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE, UH, ZONING RE DESIGNATION, BUT A WRITTEN DOCUMENT SIMPLY CANNOT CONVEY THE REALITY OF THE LOCATION OF THIS BUSINESS.
IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN IT IN PERSON, IT IS SITUATED AT THE END OF A CUL-DE-SAC.
WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN CROW LANE ON EITHER SIDE OF YOU, THERE ARE TWO LARGE RESIDENTIAL COMPLEXES THAT YOU PASS THROUGH IN ORDER TO REACH THE ONLY BUSINESS ON THE STREET.
IT IS THE ONLY BUSINESS THAT WOULD BRING REGULAR TRAFFIC TO THIS OTHERWISE QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE RECOMMENDATION DOES MENTION THAT THERE IS A THEATER IN A HOTEL TO THE NORTH AND EAST OF THIS BUSINESS.
THAT'S TECHNICALLY TRUE, BUT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THE REALITY OF NAVIGATING THIS AREA.
YOU CANNOT REACH EITHER OF THOSE BUSINESSES FROM CROW LANE.
IF YOU TRIED TO WALK FROM THE ACRE TO THE REGAL MOVIE THEATER USING CITY SIDEWALKS, THAT WOULD TAKE YOU 27 MINUTES.
THIS IS NOT A STREET WITHDREW TRAFFIC.
ALLOWING THIS BUSINESS TO CONTINUE OPERATING AS A DOG BOARDING FACILITY WOULD NOT IMPROVE OR ENRICH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT WOULD ONLY ENRICH THE BUSINESS OWNERS.
JUST NOW, THE APPLICANT MENTIONED THAT DOGS AT THIS FACILITY ARE NOW ONLY OUTSIDE FOR SCHEDULED WALKS.
THE ENTIRE BRANDING OF THIS BUSINESS IS BUILT ON THE LARGE OUTDOOR SPACE FOR DOGS TO ROAM.
SITTING IN THIS ROOM, I JUST PULLED UP THE ACRES WEBSITE WHERE THEY CONTINUE TO ADVERTISE THEMSELVES AS A FREE ROAM FACILITY.
AS A RESIDENT OF AUSTIN, I'M APPALLED TO HAVE FOUND SEVEN PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
3 1 1 REPORTS OF ZONING VIOLATIONS BEING REPORTED AT THIS LOCATION BEFORE THE ACRE WAS FINALLY FOUND, FOUND TO BE IN VIOLATION OF ZONING LAWS.
TO BE CLEAR, THEY WEREN'T OPERATING IN SECRET.
THEY WERE OPENLY ADVERTISING AS A DOG DAYCARE FACILITY.
FROM DAY ONE, IT HAS NOT AND HAS NEVER BEEN OWNED, ZONED TO OPERATE AS SUCH, WHEN AUSTIN RESIDENTS REPORTED THIS TO THE CITY, THEIR CLAIMS WERE IGNORED AND CLOSED WITHOUT ACTION.
IT'S REPREHENSIBLE THAT IT TOOK TRAGEDY AND TIRELESS ACTIVISM BY DEVASTATED PET OWNERS TO EVEN GET THESE
[00:40:01]
COMPLAINTS RECOGNIZED.THE FAILURE TO PROPERLY INVESTIGATE THIS PROPERTY IN THE PAST IS A SERIOUS BREACH OF THE TRUST PLACED IN THE CITY BY ITS RESIDENCE.
AND I SINCERELY HOPE THAT YOU WILL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO RESTORE SOME OF THAT TRUST BY DENYING THIS APPLICATION AND TAKING THE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO ENSURE THAT THIS BUSINESS CEASES OPERATING AS A DOG DAYCARE FACILITY IMMEDIATELY.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS DAVID MALLU.
DAVID, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UH, I'M SPEAKING TODAY TO ASK YOU TO REJECT THIS REZONING REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY OF CROW LANE BECAUSE IT VIOLATES THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
THE REZONING REPRESENTS COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT INTO A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
COMMERCIAL USES SHOULD BE LIMITED TO ARTERIAL ROADS AND ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS NOT EMBEDDED WITHIN QUIET RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS.
THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN VISIONS, NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE QUIET AND SAFE.
A DOG BOARDING FACILITY WITH ALLEGATIONS OF NEGLIGENCE THREATENS THAT VISION.
IF YOU APPROVE THIS REQUEST, IT SIGNALS TO WHAT IT IS THAT COMMERCIAL USERS CAN CHIP AWAY AT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS PIECE BY PIECE.
PLEASE UPHOLD THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND REJECT THIS REZONING REQUEST.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MICHELLE GAMBOA.
MICHELLE, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
UM, I AM ALSO HERE TO OPPOSE THE REZONING REQUEST FOR 6 2 0 6 2 0 1 CROW LANE.
UH, THIS REQUEST, AS I WILL EMPHASIZE AS THE LAST SPEAKER DIRECTLY VIOLATES THE SOUTH CONGRESS COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND THREATENS NOT JUST THE SAFETY, BUT ALSO THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF THE COMMUNITY.
UM, ACCORDING TO GOAL THREE, SPECIFICALLY COMMERCIAL USE IS DESIGNATED TO SPECIFIC AREAS, NAMELY ALONG THE MAJOR CORRIDORS LIKE SOUTH CONGRESS, BEN WHITE AND I 35.
BUT THIS DOG BOARDING FACILITY, UH, SITS DEEP IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA WE HAVE SAID MANY TIMES, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF COMMERCIAL ENCROACHMENT THAT THIS PLAN, UM, PURPORTS TO PRE PREVENT.
NOT ONLY THAT, THE PLAN'S VISION STATEMENT SPECIFICALLY SETS OUT TO CREATE, QUOTE, A QUIET AND SAFE, SAFE COMMUNITIES.
BUT A FACILITY LIKE THE ACRE AND THIS DOG BOARDING, UM, FACILITY BY NATURE AND AS WE'VE SEEN THROUGH HISTORY, HAS ENDANGERED THIS VERY VISION AND BRINGS DOWN, UM, THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS' LIVES.
UH, THIS INCLUDES, LIKE WE SAID, IS NOISE FROM BARKING DOGS, SAFETY RISKS ESPECIALLY TO CHILDREN FROM ESCAPED ANIMALS, UH, INCREASED TRAFFIC AS WELL AS THE NOISE THAT COMES ALONG WITH, WITH IT THROUGH RESIDENTIAL STREETS.
SO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN EXISTS FOR A REASON TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN IT FROM INAPPROPRIATE COMMERCIAL USE.
AND SO WE URGE YOU TO UPHOLD THIS PLAN THAT THE COMMUNITY AGREED TO AND DENY THIS REZONING REQUEST.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS RYAN THOMAS.
HI, MY NAME IS RYAN THOMAS AND I'M ALSO IN OPPOSITION TO REZONING OF THE ACRE AT CROW LANE FOR DOG BOARDING.
I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT, UH, AS ALL OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE'VE ALREADY HEARD HAVE INDICATED, THIS IS A SIMPLE CASE OF ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS AFTER BEING CAUGHT NUMEROUS TIMES AND FINALLY HAVING TO FACE EVEN MINIMAL CONSEQUENCES.
THESE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE BUSINESS OWNERS WHO PROACTIVELY SOUGHT TO ENSURE THAT THEIR BUSINESS WAS READY TO DO WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO.
THEY HASTILY CONSTRUCTED A FENCE THAT WAS CLEARLY INCAPABLE OF KEEPING DOGS WITHIN IT.
AND WHEN THERE FINALLY WAS A PUBLIC OUTCRY THAT HAS REACHED YOU HERE TODAY, THEY HAVE DECIDED TO THEN ONLY TAKE SOME STEPS TO MITIGATE STEPS THAT IT SEEMS, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, HAVE NOT EVEN BEEN COMPLETELY HONESTLY PRESENTED TO YOU.
AND SO THAT BEING SAID, I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE REZONING OF THE FACILITY AT K CROWLEY.
AND CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR ITEM TWO AND THREE.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE THREE MINUTES FOR APPLICANT REBUTTAL.
I'M GONNA STICK TO THE REZONING CASE FOR THE REBUTTAL.
I KNOW THERE WAS A CONCERN OF, UH, SEVERAL VIOLATIONS, BUT I WILL LET STAFF ADDRESS THOSE BECAUSE CODE COMPLIANCE DID GO THREE TIMES OVER THERE.
THIS PROPERTY USED TO BE A CHILDCARE FACILITY FOR 45 YEARS, WHICH CREATES MORE
[00:45:01]
TRAFFIC THAN A PET SERVICE.IT'S A COMMERCIAL ZONE PROPERTY FROM THE BEGINNING.
PLANNING PRINCIPLES DO HAVE SOME STANDARDS ON WHERE COMMERCIAL SHALL BE ALLOWED, BUT THIS IS NEXT TO A POD ZONING, HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY, AND THE MULTIFAMILY DOESN'T HAVE EXIT THROUGH THAT CROW LANE.
THE FENCE MITIGATION IS ACTUALLY BEING, UH, HAPPENING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE FOR MANY YEARS THAT FENCE WAS JUST AGREED UPON.
THIS IS VERY COMMON IN MANY AND ESPECIALLY IN DISTRICT TWO WHERE PROPERTY OWNERS, ESPECIALLY SMALL BUSINESSES, DON'T KNOW WHAT ZONING IS.
I'M PRETTY SURE SEVERAL COMMISSIONERS, ESPECIALLY COMMISSIONER HILLER JUST TOLD ME IT'S VERY COMPLICATED TO UNDERSTAND ALL THESE ZONING CASES AND LABELS.
IMAGINE FOR A SMALL PROPERTY OWNER THAT IS TRYING TO GET THEIR BUSINESS GOING.
THEY REACHED OUT TO US AND I HAD TO EXPLAIN FROM THE BEGINNING WHAT PLANNING IS.
THEY DO HAVE SOME CODE VIOLATIONS, BUT LIKE I SAID, WE'RE WORKING WITH CODE COMPLIANCE ON THOSE AND HAPPY TO TALK MORE ABOUT THOSE.
IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WANNA ADDRESS, THAT IT DOES END IN A CUL-DE-SAC AND THAT'S WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING FOR ONLY PET SERVICES TO BE ALLOWED IN LR AND THE REST TO BECOME A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
REGARDING THE ILLEGAL GAMING USE, IT WAS RENTED TO AN OWNER BACK IN 2018.
JUST REMEMBER THAT I SAID THAT IT USED TO BE A CHILDCARE FACILITY FOR MANY YEARS DURING COVID, IT SHUT DOWN AND IT WAS RENTED TO SOMEBODY THAT DID CAUSE THIS ISSUE.
IT HAS BEEN REMOVED AND NOW IT'S A PET SERVICE.
HAPPY TO ADDRESS ANY OTHER ZONING QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU MS. LEY COMMISSIONERS.
THAT'S THE END OF OUR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
ON THE ITEM, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? AND A SECOND UP? I SEE A MOTION FROM, UH, VICE CHAIR WOODS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
UM, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SAY THAT THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
COMMISSIONERS THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH COMMISSIONER LAN AND HANEY OFF THE D UM, THIS, UH, OF COURSE TAKES US TO OUR ROUND ROBIN, SO COMMISSIONER'S REMINDER, AGAIN, EIGHT COMMISSIONERS HAVE THE ABILITY TO ASK THE QUESTIONS UP TO FIVE MINUTES EACH AND I'LL OPEN IT UP TO ANY COMMISSIONER TO START WHO MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, PLEASE START WITH A QUESTION TO STAFF AND UH, AND POTENTIALLY THE APPLICANT AS WELL.
IF, UH, IF YOU COULD REFRESH MY MEMORY ON YOU'RE RECOMMENDING PET SERVICES, IS THAT RIGHT? AND, AND WHAT I NEED TO UNDERSTAND BETTER IS HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO WHEN THE DOGS ARE ALLOWED OUTSIDE? AND I IF I CAN JUST QUIZ AGAIN QUICKLY TO SAY, JUST TO CONFIRM THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FROM BOTH ITEM NUMBER TWO AND THREE.
SORRY, STAFF, PLEASE CONTINUE.
BEVERLY ELA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UM, IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, IT, IT, THEY ARE ASKING FOR PET SERVICES.
UM, IT STATES WHAT THE PET SERVICES ARE FOR.
IT DOES NOT STRICTLY STATE WHEN IT, WHEN THE DOGS ARE ALLOWED TO GO OUT INTO, UM, ONTO THE YARD.
SO, UM, THAT IS WHAT I CAN SPEAK ABOUT.
UM, I'M NOT SURE, UM, IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS YEAH, IF THE APPLICANT COULD COME FORWARD AND CLARIFY IT.
I THINK IT WAS IN YOUR PRESENTATION AND I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT BETTER.
YEAH, WE CAN, UM, BRING THAT SLIDE UP.
COMMISSIONER SIMER, IF YOU CAN GO OH, SORRY.
UM, IT DOESN'T REALLY TALK ABOUT, LIKE BEVERLY SAID, IT DOESN'T REALLY TALK ABOUT THE, WHEN THEY WALK THE DOGS, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT AT THIS TIME THE SCHEDULE THAT THEY HAVE IS SEVEN TO EIGHT IN THE MORNING AND THEN IN THE EVENING BECAUSE OF THE HEAT NOW THE BEST PRACTICES ANIMAL CODE DID COME OVER AND PROVIDED THEIR BEST PRACTICES AFTER THE CODE VIOLATION.
AND SO THEY'RE LEARNING FROM ALL THAT'S HAPPENING, BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN CODE AT THIS TIME THAT TELLS THEM WHEN THEY HAVE TO TAKE OUT THE DOGS OR WHAT THEY NEED TO DO.
THIS IS AN ANTIQUATED CODE TOO.
SO THEN THEY'RE THEY'RE NOT OUTSIDE UNLESS THEY'RE BEING WALKED? YES.
THEY HAVE ONE SUPERVISOR PER THREE DOGS AT THIS TIME.
I, I'M SORRY OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE SPEAKERS HERE.
I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SAY WHAT HAPPENED BACK THEN, BUT AT THIS TIME THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
THREE DOGS AT A TIME FOR ONE WALKER AND THEY GO OUTSIDE AND YES, IT'S AN ACRE AND THEY, BUT THEY'RE SUPERVISED.
SO FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE, THE DOGS AREN'T LEFT OUTSIDE FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME? NO, THEY CAN'T BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE THAN THREE.
SO THAT DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH WHAT'S SHOWN ON THE WEBSITE RIGHT NOW FOR THE BUSINESS PROVIDE I CAN TELL THEM TO FIX THAT,
[00:50:01]
YES, OF COURSE.AND JUST TO, TO EMPHASIZE THEY ARE LEARNING FROM THEIR MISTAKES AND I JUST NOTICED THAT YOU HAVE MORE DOG BOARDING ZONING CASES COMING UP, SO IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT IS NEW AND THEY'RE LEARNING FROM EVERYTHING THAT IS BEST PRACTICE.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AT THIS TIME.
THANKS FOR YOUR INPUT, COMMISSIONER.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER AMIT, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
YEAH, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UH, THERE WERE A COUPLE SPEAKERS THAT MENTIONED THAT, UH, MAKING THE ZONING CHANGE WOULD GO AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD, UH, ADDRESS WHY YOU THINK THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
I, UH, MARINE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SO WHEN WE DISCUSSED, WHEN OUR TEAM DISCUSSED THE CASE, WE LOOKED AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND WE SAW THAT THERE WAS COMMERCIAL LAND USE, UH, PRETTY MUCH TO THE NORTHEAST AND SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE IS MULTIFAMILY LAND USE TO THE WEST AND MIXED RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH.
WE FELT THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE LAND USE THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING WAS COMPATIBLE WITH THOSE EXISTING LAND USES SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY.
I DO HAVE, UH, ONE OTHER, UH, QUESTION AS WELL, AND THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM STAFF IS THE REASON THERE'S SUCH A NARROW, UH, CO HERE IS UH, IS BECAUSE, UH, BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF STREET THIS IS, THE FACT THAT IT'S A DEAD END AND THE FACT THAT, UH, WE DON'T WANT, WE WANT LIMITED TRAFFIC ON THAT STREET.
AND SO IF THAT IS THE REASON WHY EVERY OTHER POTENTIAL USE HAS BEEN EXCLUDED THERE, UM, WHY ARE WE ALLOWING FOR THE PET SERVICES? DOES THAT ALLOW, DOES THAT REQUIRE FAR LESS TRAFFIC THAN EVERY OTHER, UH, POTENTIAL USE THAT'S BEEN EXCLUDED BEVERLY VILA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT? UM, AFTER CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPLICANT? IT IS, THAT WAS THE ASK THAT WAS BROUGHT TO STAFF.
UM, AFTER THE CONVERSATIONS THAT THE APPLICANT HAD WITH THE COMMUNITY.
UH, THE COMMUNITY HAD SOME CONCERNS WITH THE USES UNDER, UM, THE ASKING OF LR ZONING AND UM, THAT IS WHAT WE AS STAFF ARE PROPOSING IS TO ALLOW THE PROHIBITED USES AS, UM, ASKED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER AB UH, COMMISSIONER BALL, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
UH, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF PRIMARILY.
UH, WHAT IS THE CURRENT STATUS OF, I BELIEVE I HEARD THREE CODE VIOLATIONS AND, UM, YEAH, WHAT, WHAT'S THE CURRENT STATUS THERE AND IF THEY AREN'T RESOLVED, WHAT'S NECESSARILY THE GAP? I, I AM JUST GOING TO REITERATE YOUR QUESTION.
YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE CODE VIOLATION? UM, I BELIEVE THAT IT IS, UM, IN REVIEW, BUT I CAN DOUBLE CHECK THAT FOR YOU.
UM, I, I APPRECIATE YOU LOOKING IT UP RIGHT NOW.
THANK YOU FOR YEAH, FOR PULLING THAT.
UM, YES, SO THE CODE VIOLATION IS ACTIVE AND IT WON'T BE CLOSED UNTIL, UM, THE LAND USE, UM, IS UH, RESOLVED.
BUT I BELIEVE CATHERINE CAN SPEAK ON THAT AS WELL.
WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AS WELL.
UM, IT'S ONE CODE VIOLATION CALLED SIX TIMES BY THE SAME PERSON.
ARE WE HAVING DISCUSSION? WELL, SO I, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS THEN, UM, IS THIS A CODE VIOLATION THAT WOULD BE SOLVED ENTIRELY BY THIS REZONING OR ARE THERE OTHER OUTSTANDING PIECES TO IT? YEAH, WE, THE ONLY PENDING ITEM IS THE REZONING.
I CAN FORWARD YOU THE EMAIL FROM CODE COMPLIANCE.
IT'S BEEN CC'D TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER AS WELL, BUT I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT.
OH, AND SORRY, THERE'S ONE MORE JOINT, REMIND ME.
THERE'S A CODE VIOLATION FOR THE USE AND THERE WAS A COMPLAINT ABOUT FIRE AND SO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DID COME TO LOOK AT, UH, IF THERE WAS WATER ACCESSIBLE OUTSIDE THE SERVICE.
AND, AND WHILE I HAVE YOU HERE, ONE MORE QUESTION WHICH IS, UM, UH, SORRY IT'S FLYING OUTTA MY MIND AS SOON AS I'M ABOUT TO ASK YOU
UM, COMMISSIONER, IF YOU REMEMBER, WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
I THINK OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
SORRY FOR THE DELAY ON THAT
SO IT SOUNDED LIKE THE FENCE IMPROVEMENTS AND SOME OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ARE ONGOING.
IS THAT CURRENTLY THE CASE AND IF SO, WHAT'S THE TIMELINE LOOKING LIKE FOR THAT? YEAH, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT.
WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE SKYBRIDGE HOA LAST WEEK ON TUESDAY AND WE ESTABLISHED WHAT THEY WANT.
[00:55:01]
SINCE IT'S A FENCE THAT IS RIGHT IN THE PROPERTY LINE, THEY CAN BOTH AGREE THAT, THAT ALL BE REMOVED AND THEN TAKEN BACK.SORRY, CAN I HAVE THE PICTURE OF IT? THANK YOU.
UM, SO THAT'S ONE OPTION AND THE SECOND OPTION WAS TO, UM, THANK YOU.
I'LL, I'LL GET, I THINK I LEARNED HOW TO USE THIS.
SO IT'S A, YOU CAN SEE THE VINES.
SO THE PERSONAL OPTION IS TO REMOVE THAT SILT FENCE THAT HAS THE VINES AND BOTH PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD HAVE A SOLID WOOD FENCE.
THE SECOND OPTION IS TO HAVE A WOOD FENCE ON THE PROPERTY OWNER AT 6 2 0 1 AGAINST THE SILK FENCE, BUT THAT WILL DESTROY THE VINE.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE THE HOA WANTED TO GET BACK TO THEIR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY WANTED.
SO WE HAD THE DISCUSSION AND I HAVE A, A MEETING WITH SITE PLAN COMMERCIAL IN ORDER TO SEE IF WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
TIMELINE WISE, WE'RE HOPING IT, IT CAN HAPPEN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T REALLY NEED TO GET REZONED TO HAPPEN.
SO THEY'RE WORKING ON IT ALREADY.
WE HAVE A COST ESTIMATES AS AS WELL ALREADY.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? OH, COMMISSIONER UH, WOODS, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, WHICH IS WE HEARD THAT THIS SITE USED TO BE USED AS A CHILDCARE FACILITY.
IS THAT ACCURATE? AND IF SO, WAS THE ZONING WHAT IT IS NOW DURING THAT TIME OR WAS IT UNDER A DIFFERENT ZONING? HI, I'M BEVERLY VELA WITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
UM, YES, SO LOOKING AT RECORDS, IT WAS USED AS A DAYCARE FACILITY.
UM, HOWEVER I DO NOT THINK THAT IT WAS THE CORRECT PERMITS WERE PULLED FOR THE DAYCARE FACILITY.
I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHEN WE MADE THE CHANGE TO ALLOW CHILDCARE FACILITIES IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS, BUT I THINK IT WAS IN 2023.
SO IT WAS, IT WAS OPERATING AS A CHILDCARE FACILITY BUT DID NOT HAVE THE CORRECT ZONING.
IS THAT ACCURATE? UM, I BELIEVE SO, UNLESS CATHERINE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? UH, COMMISSIONER, WHAT'S THE APPLICANT IS GONNA SAY SOMETHING? GO AHEAD.
SO, UH, CHILDCARE FACILITIES ARE A LITTLE COMPLICATED.
OUR ANTIQUATED CODE HAD DAYCARE FACILITY AS ALLOWED AND THREE TIERS.
THEY'RE ALLOWED FROM FIVE KIDS TO 10 KIDS.
I THINK IT WAS 11 TO 20 AND SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
WHEN I WAS A COUNCIL, WE DID CHANGE THE SCALE.
SO IT HAS BEEN COMPLIANCE, IT JUST FALLS INTO DIFFERENT TYPE OF PERMITS WHEN THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ALLOWED IN EVERY ZONE LO ALLOWED IT.
BUT LO USED TO ALLOW CHILDCARE FACILITIES ANYWAYS, IT DEPEND ON THE SCALE.
AND THE BUILDING IS ONLY 1700 SQUARE FEET.
IT'S A VERY SMALL UNIT SO IT DOESN'T, IT COULDN'T GO OVER 25 KIDS.
AND SO JUST GOING BACK TO STAFF, THANK YOU CATHERINE.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS UNDER THE CURRENT CO CHILDCARE FACILITIES WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED OR THEY WOULD BE BECAUSE OF THE BASELINE ZONING, WHICH WOODS, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, STAFF IS WALKING UP AND REVIEWING.
IF YOU COULD JUST GIVE A MINUTE.
I THINK STAFF IS TRYING TO RESOLVE THAT.
CAN CHILDCARE SERVICES IS ALLOWED, COMMISSIONER IS ALLOWED.
ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE THE CURRENT LOUD USES PER THE YELLOW THE SLIDES? THAT'S HELPFUL.
THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS, CHAIR.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS MS. NICELY, IF I MIGHT, I, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU JUST TO CONFIRM.
I THINK SOME OF IT IS ITERATIVE ACTUALLY COMMISSIONER POWELL ENDED UP ASKING SOME OF MY QUESTION.
JUST SO I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, ONE OF THE THINGS YOUR CLIENT IS DOING IS THAT IT'S GONNA BE A SOLID EIGHT FOOT HIGH FENCE.
SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE THE CHAIN MAIL OR THE SILK FENCE.
IT'S GONNA BE A FULLY SOLID FENCE.
UM, THE OTHER THING I THINK THAT YOU MENTIONED IS, SO FIRE HAS ALREADY SORT OF REVIEWED IT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU WOULD BE COMPLIANT WITH ANY SORT OF FIRE RELATED CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH A FACILITY.
UM, AND THEN THIRD THING, I KNOW THIS WAS MENTIONED IN YOUR SLIDES AS WELL, SO THERE IS NO ACCESS, THERE'S A TRAIL, THERE'S NO ACCESS TO THE TRAIL.
IS IT FENCED OFF SO THAT AN ANIMAL CANNOT ESCAPE? CORRECT.
LET ME, CAN I PULL UP
AND THANKS FOR THE GREAT QUESTION.
ALL THESE QUESTIONS WERE ASKED BY THE NEIGHBORS.
[01:00:03]
SO IF YOU SEE, UM, WHERE THE, THE LITTLE PLACE, UM, LET ME SEE.THERE'S A TRAIL THAT GOES IN BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES AND IT TRAILS ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WHERE IT SAYS IMPACTS SPORTS RIGHT DOWN THERE.
THAT TRAIL HAS AN ACCESS POINT TO THE SKYBRIDGE LOFTS, BUT THAT IS THEIR AREA.
IT DOESN'T HAVE ACCESS TO OUR PROPERTY.
IT'S DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT PROPERTY.
AND JUST TO CONFIRM, WHEN THE WORK IS DONE, ESSENTIALLY NEXT TO THE TRAIL THERE WILL BE A SOLID FENCE.
AND AT THIS TIME, THE WAY IT'S GOING IS THE SILK FENCE WILL BE HERE AND THEN THE SOLID FENCE WILL BE ON ON AGAINST IT.
AND MY LAST QUESTION IS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF OR YOU, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT IS THE HOURS OF, ARE THE HOURS OF OPERATION TIED TO PET SERVICE IN THE CODE? THERE ISN'T, BUT I CAN, UH, PULL UP THEIR HOURS OF OPERATION AND TELL YOU.
I I'M SURE I CAN LOOK IT UP, BUT I'LL MAKE SURE I GUESS SORT OF TIED TO THAT PIECE AS WELL.
BUT YEAH, THE CODE DOESN'T, UM, DOESN'T REALLY SAY WITH THAT, SPEAK TO THAT.
THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS AGAIN, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? IF NOT, DO WE HAVE, UM, A MOTION ON THE TABLE, COMMERS? I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THIS ITEM.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? UM, COMMISSIONER BARRY, IS THAT A SECOND? OKAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH.
IT SAYS A MOTION BY MYSELF AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BAR RAMIREZ.
THIS WOULD BE ON BOTH ITEMS NUMBER TWO AND THREE.
ANY COMMISSIONER WISHING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? I, I GUESS I'LL JUST START BY QUICKLY SPEAKING TO MY MOTION.
I, I REALLY WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE HONESTLY SORT OF THE PAINFUL AND HORRIFYING EXPERIENCE THAT FOLKS HAVE HAD TO GO THROUGH OVER HERE.
IT'S REALLY CHALLENGING HONESTLY, SORT OF HEAR ABOUT IT, LET ALONE TO EXPERIENCE IT.
I KNOW FOR A LOT OF FOLKS AND FOR EVERYBODY REALLY, PETS ARE PART OF YOUR FAMILY AND THAT LOSS, PARTICULARLY WHERE YOU FEEL LIKE THERE'S NEGLIGENCE INVOLVED IS REALLY PAINFUL.
HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK PART OF THE CHALLENGE WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE IS WHAT CAN WE SORT OF LOOK WITHIN THE CONDITIONS OF ZONING OR WHAT CAN BE SORT OF TIED TO THE WAY WE LOOK AT IT.
AND I THINK THERE IS SOME QUESTIONS AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE FOR RAISING THAT QUESTION OF HOW THE OPERATION IS DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE OPERATION IS INDEED TIED TO THE WAY THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO IT PER THE NEW ZONING.
SO I THINK I WOULD REALLY ASK THE APPLICANT TO WORK, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE COMPLIANT WITH THE CODE IN ALL SORTS OF FORMS. I UNDERSTAND MISTAKES HAPPEN, BUT AGAIN, HOW DO YOU SORT OF MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THAT YOU CAN PROFESSIONALIZE YOUR THING, BUT AT THE SAME TIME YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND SORT OF THE CONDITIONS OF ZONING.
I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH MOVING THIS CASE FORWARD TO COUNCIL, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMMOND? YEAH, I'D LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, IN A CASE LIKE THIS, I THINK I TRY TO AVOID THINKING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC BUSINESS AND THINKING ABOUT THE TYPES OF BUSINESSES THAT WE WANT IN A LOCATION LIKE THIS.
AND, YOU KNOW, AS I LOOK AT, UH, WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS WITH THE CEO, IT ALMOST SEEMS LIKE IT'S CRAFTED TO SPECIFICALLY FOCUS ON THIS ONE BUSINESS WITH A CEO THAT ONLY ALLOWS PET SERVICES.
UH, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY SEVERAL OTHER TYPES OF BUSINESSES OUT THERE, UH, THAT WOULD GENERATE SIMILAR AMOUNTS OF TRAFFIC.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME, UH, UH, CONCERNS ABOUT THIS BUSINESS IN THE PAST, I, I WORRY ABOUT, UH, MAKING A ZONING CHANGE THAT IS NOT GENERAL, BUT REALLY JUST FOCUSED ON ALLOWING THIS ONE BUSINESS THAT'S HAD, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY SOME ISSUES WITH THE COMMUNITY ALREADY, UH, UH, TO GO THROUGH.
SO JUST SOME OF MY THOUGHTS THERE.
COMMISSIONER HAMMED, UM, OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE? I'LL SPEAK BRIEFLY AGAINST IT.
OF, AND I GUESS LEMME START FIRST BY, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE IDEA OF DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL USES ON THIS PROPERTY AND EVEN USES THAT WOULD INCLUDE OF, OF FACILITIES FOR BOARDING DOGS OR DOG DAYCARE.
I AM STRUGGLING REALLY HARD RIGHT NOW WITH UNDERSTANDING HOW THE ZONING THAT'S BEEN REQUESTED, WHICH WE'RE BEING ASKED TO VOTE ON MESHES WITH LITERALLY THE BUSINESS MODEL THAT'S BEING ADVERTISED.
AND I, I WORRY THAT IF WE APPROVE THE ZONING RIGHT NOW, THEN HOW WILL, I MEAN, DOES IT NOW A CODE COMPLIANT PROBLEM BECAUSE THERE'RE NO LONGER MEETING THE NEW ZONING THAT THAT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR OF UNLIMITED OUTDOOR TIME.
AND SO I, I THINK THAT I, IT'S HARD FOR ME NOT TO LOOK AT THIS AND SEE THAT AS A PRACTICAL MATTER
[01:05:01]
THAT THE BUSINESS WOULD CONTINUE TO OPERATE OF AS IT HAS BEEN.I MEAN, IT'S LITERALLY IN THE NAME OF THE BUSINESS AND THAT DISCONNECT RIGHT NOW UNTIL IT'S RESOLVED, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS FOR, AGAIN, COMMISSIONER POWELL, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE IS SHARING AND, AND AGAINST THIS, BECAUSE TO ME, I, WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH IS I, I'M NOT SURE THAT I'M SEEING ENOUGH GOOD FAITH AND ENOUGH PROACTIVE ACTION KNOWING THAT THIS IS MULTIPLE YEARS OUT OF CODE COMPLIANCE.
I WANNA SAY THAT SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS NAVIGATING THIS COMPLEX PROCEDURE, I HAVE, YOU KNOW, SO MUCH EMPATHY FOR THAT, RECOGNIZING THAT THESE THINGS HAPPEN.
PEOPLE CAN BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE, NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS.
UM, WHAT'S CONCERNING TO ME IS, AGAIN, THE WAY THE BUSINESS IS CURRENTLY OPERATING OUT OF COMPLIANCE, AND I WOULD SAY THE LACK OF SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES, KNOWING THAT THE FENCE IS UNDER PROCESS, KNOWING THAT THERE HAVE BEEN DOGS ESCAPING IN SOME OF THE TRAGIC STORIES WE'VE HEARD.
I JUST CAN'T IN GOOD CONSCIOUS SUPPORT THIS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POWELL.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING FOR, WE'VE HAD OUR THREE AGAIN, SO THIS WOULD BE, WE HAVE TWO SPOTS FOR IF SOMEBODY WISHES TO SPEAK.
COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK THAT THIS IS AN IDEAL LOCATION FOR THE TYPES OF SERVICES THAT THEY'RE DELIVERING BECAUSE IT IS SURROUNDED BY HIGH DENSITY USE AND IT ALLOWS ALL THOSE PEOPLE WHEN THEY GO ON VACATION AN EASY PLACE TO BOARD THEIR DOGS.
SO I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, EVEN IF IT'S NOT ON A MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAY.
AND ADDITIONALLY, UM, AS THE DISCUSSION WITH COMMISSIONER WOODS EARLIER ABOUT ZONING FOR CHILDCARE SERVICES, I THINK THAT IS ANOTHER POTENTIAL, UM, OPTION FOR THIS AREA OR FOR THIS SITE.
UM, SO I, I DO THINK THAT, AND I HAVEN'T HEARD OF MULTIPLE STORIES.
I'VE HEARD OF ONE STORY AND I DON'T WANNA, YOU KNOW, LESSEN THAT, THAT IT WAS CERTAINLY A TRAGIC EVENT THAT HAPPENED, BUT I HEARD OF ONE DOG ESCAPING AND I HEARD OF SIX COMPLAINTS THROUGH THE CODE THAT WAS THE SAME PERSON COMPLAINING SIX TIMES.
SO I THINK, UM, WE'RE BEING TOLD A STORY FROM SOME FOLKS THAT ARE VERY UPSET AS I WOULD BE AS WELL, BUT I THINK THERE ARE POTENTIALLY HUNDREDS OF OTHER DOGS THAT VISIT THIS FACILITY THAT ARE SAFE AND THAT ENJOY THEIR DOGGY DAYCARE.
SO I JUST, I, I AM, I AM IN SUPPORT OF REZONING AND SUPPORTING THIS SMALL BUSINESS OWNER TO CONTINUE DOING THEIR WORK.
AND LAST SPOT FOR, HEY, CHAIR.
I KNOW THIS IS OUT OF ORDER, BUT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO PULL UP THE BACK OF FURIOUSLY AND I DO HAVE A CLARIFYING QUESTION THAT'S GONNA IMPACT THE WAY THAT I VOTE ON THIS IS, IS IT OKAY IF I TAKE ONE MORE QUESTION? IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION FROM THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS NOT SEEING ANY COMMISSIONER WOODS, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT THAT LIST THAT WE JUST SAW, CURRENT ALLOWED USES UNDER LO, THAT INCLUDES THINGS LIKE BED AND BREAKFAST, ART GALLERY, OUR WORKSHOP, MEDICAL SERVICES, CULTURAL SERVICES, NONE OF THOSE USES ARE RESTRICTED BY C OF COMMISSIONER WOODS.
WE'VE LOST YOUR VIDEO, WHICH MEANS YOU'RE OFF THE DICE AND CANNOT SPEAK.
SORRY, CAN YOU, DO I HAVE IT BACK? NO.
UH, I JUST WANNA CONFIRM THAT THOSE USES THAT ARE LISTED ON THAT SLIDE THAT WE JUST SAW AND THAT NONE OF THOSE ARE RESTRICTED BY THE CO THAT IS INCLUDED IN THIS REZONE.
IS THAT CORRECT? WE HAVE STAFF WALKING UP.
BEVERLY VELA WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT? THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT THOSE ARE THE USES UNDER THE LO AND THOSE ARE ALLOWED USES AND ARE NOT DISALLOWED BY THE CO.
SORRY, I JUST WANNA BE VERY CLEAR.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION, SHERRY, APPRECIATE IT.
I, I KNOW WE'RE STILL ON THE MOTION AND WE STILL HAVE ONE SPOT LEFT FOR, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND MAKE A SUBSTITUTE TO MY OWN MOTION HERE FOLKS.
AND MY SUBSTITUTE IS GOING TO BE THAT WE GO AHEAD AND POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO OUR NEXT MEETING.
THAT WOULD BE SOMEBODY HELP ME OUT HERE TWO WEEKS FROM NOW.
UM, IF I HAVE THAT CORRECT, THAT WOULD BE, UM, JUNE 10TH.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
SO I'M MAKING A MOTION TO POSTPONE THE ITEM TO JUNE 10TH.
DO I HAVE A SECOND ON? THAT'S A SUBSTITUTE.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HOWARD.
ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST? I'LL JUST QUICKLY SAY, I, I JUST WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE, I THINK COMMISSIONERS THERE ARE, I FEEL LIKE SOME OF Y'ALL MAYBE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND SOME OTHER THINGS.
I HOPE Y'ALL CAN, YOU KNOW, TALK TO STAFF AND OUR APPLICANT AND MAKE SURE,
[01:10:01]
I DON'T WANNA RUSH THIS.I DON'T WANNA GIVE COMMISSIONERS THE PROPER TIME TO GO AHEAD AND DIG INTO THE DETAILS, SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT MOTION.
UM, ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST A SUBSTITUTE MOTION? SO AGAIN, WE HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION BY AZAR, SECONDED BY, UH, HOWARD TO POSTPONE TO JUNE 10TH.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE OR RAISE YOUR HANDS.
UH, UM, COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND THANK YOU APPLICANT.
[Items 4 & 5]
US TO I NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE.THIS IS WAVERLY NORTH AND WE'LL START AGAIN WITH OUR STAFF PRESENTATION MARINE MEREDITH PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS PLAN AMENDMENT NPA 20 25 0 0 1 9 0.01 SH WAVERLY NORTH WITHIN DISTRICT NINE.
THE PROPERTY ADDRESS IS 37 10 CEDAR STREET.
IT'S WITHIN THE CENTRAL AUSTIN COMBINED NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM CIVIC TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE, AND IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
MR. TOMKO, JONATHAN TOMKO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS CASE NUMBER C 14 DASH 22 5 3 4 SH.
IT IS A REZONING OF 37 10 CEDAR STREET FROM SF THREE H-N-C-C-D-N-P AND SF THREE N-C-C-D-N-P TO MF FOUR HNCD.
NP STAFF RECOMMENDS GRANTING THIS REQUEST.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS LOCATED BETWEEN HOME LANE AND CEDAR STREET.
JUST SOUTH OF WEST 38TH STREET IS APPROXIMATELY 1.57 ACRES.
THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE TRACT IS A TWO STORY HISTORIC LANDMARK KNOWN AS THE CONFEDERATE WOMEN'S HOME.
THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE IS A LATER TWO STORY ADDITION THAT IS NOT HISTORIC TO THE NORTH ACROSS WEST 38TH STREET ARE TWO MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENT COMPLEXES, ONE WITH 34 UNITS AND ANOTHER WITH 14 UNITS TO THE EAST ACROSS CEDAR STREET ARE, UH, ONE THREE STORY MULTIFAMILY BUILDING WITH 14 UNITS.
UH, ONE TWO STORY MULTI, UH, FAMILY APARTMENT BUILDING WITH APPROXIMATELY 16 UNITS.
ONE'S TWO STORY SIXPLEX AND THREE, THREE SINGLE FAM FAMILY HOMES AND ONE DUPLEX TO THE SOUTH ACROSS WEST 38TH.
UH, 35TH STREET IS ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.
AND TO THE WEST ACROSS HOME LANE IS ONE TWO STORY MULTIFAMILY APARTMENT BUILDING WITH APPROXIMATELY 18 UNITS AND TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
THIS LOCATION IS APPROXIMATELY 1000 FEET EAST OF GUADALUPE STREET, WHICH IS AN IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CORRIDOR AND APPROXIMATELY 2000 FEET NORTH OF THE DOWNTOWN IMAGINE AUSTIN ACTIVITY CENTER.
IT IS A 15 MINUTE WALK FROM THE SUBJECT TRACK TO EIGHT BUS STOPS CAP METRO HIGH FREQUENCY ROUTES, 8 0 1, 8 0 3 AND SEVEN AND REGULAR BUS ROUTES 1 3 34 81 AND 3 35.
UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, UH, THIS REQUEST, UH, ZONING TO ALLOW REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH POLICIES AND PRINCIPLES OF CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION AND TO PROMOTE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED GOALS SUCH AS CREATING EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES OR PROVIDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
MS. BROWN, I'LL LOOK TO YOU TO GUIDE US THROUGH OUR COMMENT.
WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, ABBY KO, WHO IS RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATING TIME FROM ABBY PINNER.
ABBY PINNER, ARE YOU HERE? OKAY, THANK YOU, ABBY, YOU'LL HAVE EIGHT MINUTES.
I'LL BE SPEAKING WITH YOU TONIGHT ABOUT THE REZONING CASE FOR, UH, 37 10 CEDAR STREET, WHICH IS A PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMUNITY, UM, CALLED WAVERLY NORTH.
UM, I'M SPEAKING TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF OSTA INDUSTRIES.
OSTA MEANS GOOD AND CHEROKEE, IN CASE YOU WERE CURIOUS.
UM, WE ARE A TEXAS-BASED WOMEN-OWNED, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING FIRM WITH 15 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, UM, WORKING IN MULTIFAMILY, PRIMARILY WORKING WITH THE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM.
UM, WE HAVE DEVELOPED OVER 3000 UNITS IN TEXAS AND AROUND 900 UNITS IN THE AUSTIN AREA.
UM, ONE THING THAT WE ALWAYS LIKE TO POINT OUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING TO NEIGHBORHOODS AND PARTNERS IS THAT, UM, THE LITECH PROGRAM, UM, BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS
[01:15:01]
OF THAT PROGRAM, UM, IT REALLY, UM, ENCOURAGES AND REALLY DEMANDS OF, UM, THE OWNERS TO MAINTAIN OWNERSHIP FOR AT LEAST 15 PLUS YEARS.SO MEGAN LASH, WHO IS SITTING BEHIND ME, UM, IS THE OWNER AND SHE WILL BE, UM, INVOLVED IN OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT OF THIS PROJECT FOR AT LEAST 15 YEARS AND BEYOND.
UM, AND THEN THE LAST THING I'LL NOTE ABOUT OUR ORGANIZATION IS THAT WE REALLY, UM, PRIORITIZE GREEN BUILDING PRACTICES.
UM, SO AS WAS STATED BY STAFF, UM, THIS PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS TWO DIFFERENT ZONING DESIGNATIONS.
UM, THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE LOT IS ZONED SF THREE H-N-C-C-D, UM, APOLOGIES.
NP IS ALSO IN THAT DESIGNATION.
UM, AND WE ARE REQUESTING TO REZONE, UM, THAT PORTION OF THE LOT TO MF FOUR H-N-C-C-D NP.
UM, AND THEN THE LOWER PORTION OF THE LOT THAT DOES NOT HAVE THE CURRENTLY, UM, HISTORIC, UH, BUILDING ON IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED SF THREE, UH, NCCD NP.
AND WE'RE REQUESTING TO REZONE THAT TO MF FOUR, UH, NCCD NP.
SO, UM, WE WOULD BE MAINTAINING THE H DESIGNATION ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE LOT, UM, AND, UM, AND, UH, REQUESTING TO REZONE TO MF FOUR ON BOTH PORTIONS.
UM, ONE ADDITIONAL COMPONENT THAT I JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT HERE, UM, IS THAT IN CREATING THIS, UM, PROPOSED 76 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING TO MAINTAIN, UM, THE HISTORIC BUILDING ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE LOT, WHICH, UM, CURRENTLY HAS A STATE ANTIQUITIES LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
UM, WE'RE PROPOSING TO, UM, FURTHER DESIGNATE THAT PORTION OF THE LOT, UM, AND GO WOULD GO THROUGH THE TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, UM, TO INCORPORATE, UM, HISTORIC TAX CREDITS ON THIS PROJECT AS WELL.
THIS IS A OVERVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE AND WHERE WE STAND TODAY.
SO AS PART OF THE LITECH PROCESS, UM, WE'RE REQUIRED TO GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO REQUEST THE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT, UM, FOR WHICH WE RECEIVED A UNANIMOUS SUPPORT VOTE, UM, ON FEBRUARY 13TH.
UM, AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY SUBMITTED OUR FULL T-D-H-C-A APPLICATION AT THE END OF FEBRUARY.
UM, OUR INITIAL REZONING CASE WAS INTENDED TO COME BEFORE YOU ON APRIL 22ND.
UM, THAT WAS POSTPONED, UM, ON, UH, REQUEST OF STAFF.
UM, IT WAS THEN POSTPONED, UM, AGAIN ON MAY 13TH, UM, AT THE REQUEST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND HERE WE ARE TODAY ON MAY 27TH.
UM, CURRENTLY THE CASE IS, UM, SCHEDULED TO GO TO COUNSEL ON JUNE 5TH.
UM, AND WE REALLY URGE YOUR BODY TO MAKE A DECISION TODAY, UM, BECAUSE, UH, WE WERE INFORMED THAT JUNE 19TH COUNSEL DATE, UM, IS CANCELED DUE TO JUNETEENTH.
AND WE REALLY, IN ORDER TO STAY IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR, UM, FUNDING APPLICATION, WE NEED TO HAVE OUR ZONING BY JULY.
SO IF WE WERE TO BE SO LUCKY TO BE AWARDED BY T-D-H-C-A, UM, THAT WOULD OCCUR IN JULY.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN NOW AND THEN WE WILL ALSO BEGIN OUR HISTORIC DESIGNATION TAX CREDIT PROCESSES AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, BEGIN THINKING ABOUT PERMITTING, UM, AND WOULD BEGIN CONSTRUCTION NEXT YEAR.
AND THIS IS SORT OF ALL JUST INTENDED TO LAY OUT FOR YOU THAT THE T-D-H-C-A PROCESS IS VERY DEMANDING IN TERMS OF CERTAIN TIMELINES.
AND SO WE JUST REALLY NEED TO ADHERE TO THOSE IN ORDER TO STAY ON TRACK TO BRING THIS PROJECT TO FRUITION.
UH, THE NEXT COUPLE SLIDES ARE INTENDED TO DEMONSTRATE SOME OF THE BENEFITS OF THIS PROJECT, UM, AND HOW THIS PROJECT WILL HELP TO HELP THE CITY TO MEET SEVERAL OF ITS, UM, IMPORTANT GOALS.
OF COURSE, THE FIRST OF THOSE GOALS IS CREATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ALL COUNCIL DISTRICTS.
THIS PROJECT WOULD BE LOCATED IN DISTRICT NINE, UM, WHICH IS CURRENTLY, UM, FALLING VERY SHORT IN TERMS OF MEETING ITS DISTRICT GOALS FOR THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT.
SO THESE 76 UNITS WOULD HELP THE CITY ACCOMMODATE MORE OF THAT TOWARDS THAT GOAL.
UH, THE NEXT GOAL WOULD BE, UM, A GOAL TO INCREASE HOUSING ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS, WHICH I KNOW HAS BEEN A LONGSTANDING GOAL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN DATING BACK TO IMAGINE AUSTIN AND OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLANS.
UM, THIS PROJECT, UM, AS WAS STATED BY STAFF EARLIER, IS A THOUSAND FEET EAST OF ONE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT CONNECT TRANSIT STOPS, AS WELL AS IN A VERY CLOSE VICINITY TO SEVERAL RAPID TRANSIT BUS STOPS.
AND THEN THE LAST, UH, STRATEGIC PRIORITY, UM, IT RELATES TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S RECENT RELEASE OF THE EQUITY BASED PRE, UH, PRESERVATION PLAN, WHICH CALLS
[01:20:01]
FOR PRESERVATION OF AUSTIN'S HISTORIC COMMUNITY ASSETS AND INCLUSIVE STORYTELLING.SO, AS WAS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE ORIGINAL USE OF THIS PROPERTY WAS AS A CONFEDERATE WOMEN'S HOME.
WE HAVE CONTRACTED WITH A LOCAL CONSULTANT WHO WE ARE EXCITED TO WORK WITH TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TELLING AN INCLUSIVE STORY, UM, THAT REALLY RECOGNIZES ALL ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF THIS PREVIOUS BUILDING.
UM, AS Y'ALL KNOW, WE ARE HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THE REZONING AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT, BUT, UH, WE JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE PRIMARY WAYS IN WHICH WE'VE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD UP TO THIS POINT AND HAVE MADE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO OUR PROPOSED SITE PLAN JUST BASED ON THEIR FEEDBACK.
SO AS Y'ALL CAN SEE, UM, THIS IS A PRETTY ROUGH COLOR SITE PLAN OF OUR PROPOSED, YOU KNOW, 1.567 ACRE SITE.
ONE OF THE INITIAL CHANGES THAT WE'VE ACCOMMODATED WAS TO MOVE THE ENTRANCE FROM, INITIALLY IT WAS PROPOSED ON HOME LANE, WHICH THE NEIGHBORHOOD HELPED US UNDERSTAND THAT HOME AND 37TH STREET ARE NOW BOTH, UH, PART OF THE LIVING STREETS, UM, INITIATIVE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO PROMOTE WALKABILITY AND BIKEABILITY.
SO, UM, IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, UM, WE'VE MOVED THE ENTRANCE TO CEDAR STREET.
UH, OUR INITIAL PROPOSAL HAD ABOUT 13 PARKING SPACES.
AND SO IN RESPONSE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S REQUEST TO ENSURE THAT WE COULD PARK, UM, MORE CARS AND VEHICLES ON THE SITE, WE HAVE NOW INCREASED THE PROPOSED, UM, UH, BUILDING TO A PODIUM STRUCTURE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR FOLKS TO PARK UNDERNEATH THAT.
SO WE'RE CURRENTLY ALLOWING FOR 77 PARKING SPACES.
UH, ADDITIONALLY, THE SETBACKS, UM, FOR ALL THE BUILDINGS ON CEDAR WILL MATCH THE HISTORIC BUILDING.
UM, WE WILL, WE'VE COMMITTED TO PROPOSING A SIDEWALK ALONG HOME LANE WHERE THERE CURRENTLY IS NOT A SIDEWALK.
WHENEVER WE SUBMIT FOR PERMITTING, UH, WE'LL BE MAINTAINING AS MUCH GREEN SPACE ON THE SITE, INCLUDING ON CEDAR LANE AS POSSIBLE.
ONE OF, IS THAT TIME'S UP? OKAY.
UM, YOU CAN FINISH YOUR THOUGHT AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON.
UM, WELL, REAL QUICK, THIS IS JUST AN, UH, OVERVIEW OF THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT THAT WE HAVE CONDUCTED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE ALSO WANTED TO REITERATE THAT IN THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION PROCESS, THERE'S STILL OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE ENGAGEMENT THERE.
AND THEN THESE ARE JUST SOME EXAMPLES OF OTHER HISTORIC PROJECTS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH AT DFW.
IF SOMEBODY WANTS, THEY CAN ASK.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MEGAN LASH.
MEGAN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MS SLASH OKAY, THANK YOU.
NOW WE'RE SWITCHING TO SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.
WE HAVE PAMELA BELL, WHO IS RECEIVING TWO MINUTES TO DONATE TIME FROM JULIA WILKINSON.
JULIA, ARE YOU HERE IF I GET A WAVE? IS JULIA HERE? THANK YOU.
UM, PAMELA, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
DO DO YOU HAVE OUR, UM, OUR PRESENTATION? YES.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO US.
WELL, WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? UM, I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE NORTH UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND WE'VE WORKED VERY HARD, UM, TO PRO TO PROPOSE WHAT WE THINK IS WORKABLE FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE FIND OURSELVES IN OPPOSITION TO THE MF FOUR NUNA WELCOMES AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT EXPECTS IT TO FIT INTO THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD RATHER THAN OVERWHELM WITH DENSITY TRAFFIC AND PARKING ISSUES.
NEIGHBORS HAVE MET WITH THE DEVELOPER ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS, AND WE SEEM TO AGREE ON MANY ISSUES.
HOWEVER, WE OPPOSE PLACING THE MF FOUR TAG ON THIS SITE.
THE DEVELOPERS HAVE STATED THEY ONLY NEED MF FOUR FOR 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE LAW SAYS THAT WE CAN'T KEEP THE ZONING AS SF THREE H-N-C-C-D NP WITHOUT HAVING TO RE-NOTICE.
WHY CAN'T YOU, AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION DE DENY THE MF FOUR REQUEST AND LEAVE IT AS SF THREE? SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
WE BELIEVE THAT OUR PROPOSAL FOR SF THREE, ALLOWING MULTIFAMILY AND 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER, IS AN APPROPRIATE REVISION TO THE NORTH UNIVERSITY NCCD AND WILL ACCOMMODATE THE PROJECT.
WE UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S ABOLISHED ALL PARKING REQUIREMENTS, BUT
[01:25:01]
THE WAVERLY DEVELOPMENT WILL GENERATE CARS FOR OVERNIGHT PARKING FOR ITS 76 DWELLING UNITS.AND WE HOPE THERE'S A WAY TO REQUIRE PARKING.
WE KNOW THAT PARKING IS A NO-NO, BUT THERE IS NO PARKING, AS YOU WILL SEE LATER.
SO, WHERE DO I HIT THIS? THERE WE GO.
THESE ARE VIEWS OF THE HISTORIC PROPERTY THAT BELONGS TO THE AUSTIN GROUPS FOR THE ELDERLY.
THE DEVELOPERS HAVE NOT CLOSED THE SALE ON THE PROPERTY.
AND HERE ARE SOME OF THE SURROUNDING HOMES.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF BUNGALOWS AND VERY MODEST APARTMENT DWELLINGS.
AND AT THIS POINT, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO KAREN MCGRAW.
I'M AN ARCHITECT AND I'M CON A CONSULTANT TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I HELPED CRAFT THEIR NCCD BACK IN 2004.
UM, LET'S SEE, LET'S SEE IF I CAN DO THIS RIGHT.
I'M SORRY, I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT, BUT, UM, SO WE CAN SEE HOW MUCH TIME WE'RE GONNA GIVE YOU.
IS MARGARET HERE? OKAY, SO THAT WOULD BE EIGHT MINUTES.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M DOING THIS CORRECTLY.
SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORTS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THIS HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY LARGE PROJECT.
AND SO THE CHALLENGE IS TO ALLOW IT, BUT ALSO PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO, UM, CAN WE ACHIEVE THAT? THE SF THREE ZONING WOULD MAKE IT POSSIBLE, BUT WHAT WE JUST LEARNED IN OUR PROPOSAL, WHICH YOU HAVE A COPY OF, SAYS TO KEEP IT SF THREE, BUT TO TWEAK SOME OF THE THINGS IN THE NCCD, WHAT WE'VE LEARNED IS THE CITY LAW DEPARTMENT SAYS IT WASN'T NOTICED CORRECTLY.
YOU CAN'T MAKE CHANGES IN THE NCCD.
UM, ANOTHER THING THEY'VE SAID IS YOU CANNOT REQUIRE PARKING AND AFFORDABILITY AND LOCK.
BUT ANYWAY, UM, SO THIS IS A RENDERING OF THIS PROPOSED BUILDING AND IT HAS A HEIGHT OF 52.5 FEET.
THIS IS THE LOWEST HEIGHT WE CAN GET UNDER A AFFORD BUILDING UNLOCKED.
IF YOU KEEP SF THREE, WHICH HAS A 35 FOOT HEIGHT TIMES ONE AND A HALF, 52.5 WITH MF FOUR ON THE SITE, UM, STARTING AT 60 FEET, IT COULD BE 90 FEET, WHICH IS ALMOST DOUBLED THIS HEIGHT.
SO YOU CAN SEE IT'S IN THE MIDST OF A LOT OF, UH, MORE MODEST BUILDINGS.
WHAT IS, WHAT I WANT TO SHOW YOU ABOUT PARKING IS THIS, BECAUSE THEY, THEY FIRST MENTIONED, WELL, THEY'LL PARK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS.
THIS LIES WITH 38TH STREET ON THE NORTH TWO LANE STREET.
SPEEDWAY TWO LANE STREET WITH BIKE LANES.
WEST 35TH HAS RESIDENT PERMIT PARKING BECAUSE IT USED TO BE THAT THE UT STUDENTS JUST USE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS THEIR PARKING LOT.
AND THAT WAS REALLY DEVISED TO HELP THE NEIGHBORS NOT TO HAVE ALL OF THEIR STREETS COVERED ALL THE TIME.
AND THEN THE GREEN STREETS ARE THE CITY'S HEALTHY STREETS.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE, OTHER THAN A FEW SPOTS ON CEDAR STREET, THERE'S NO PLACE TO PARK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO PROVIDE PARKING LIKE THIS.
THIS DOES NOT FOSTER A PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TENANTS AND THE NEIGHBORS.
AND IT ALSO MAKES THE THREE STORY BUILDING INTO FOUR STORIES.
IMPERVIOUS COVER IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THEM.
THEY WANT THE 70%, THAT IS THE WHOLE REASON FOR THE MF FOUR, WHICH WE COULD TWEAK IN THE NCCD UNDER SF THREE, ALTHOUGH WE'RE NOT BEING ALLOWED TO DO IT WITHOUT A RE NOTICE.
SO THE ONLY VALUE THAT IS NOT BEING AMENDED AND AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED IS IMPERVIOUS COVER.
I WANNA SHOW YOU THAT THERE IS A $110 MILLION GUADALUPE STREET FLOOD RISK REDUCTION PROJECT UNDERWAY.
THE RED BLOCK RIGHT THERE SHOWS YOU THIS SITE AND THE YELLOW LINES ARE SHOWING YOU ALL THE STREETS WHERE THEY WILL DIG THINGS UP AND PUT IN MORE INFRASTRUCTURE.
SO WE DON'T KNOW IF IT HAS ANY RELATIONSHIP TO THAT, BUT, UM, IMPERVIOUS COVER MATTERS.
[01:30:01]
IT DOES MATTER.SO WE HOPE YOU WILL SUPPORT THE NUNA RESOLUTION.
WE BELIEVE THE PROJECT CAN BE BUILT WITH THIS RESOLUTION, WHICH WAS
UM, AND THE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR WOULD HELP CONNECT THIS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE AT LEAST 50% OF THE FRONTAGE, UM, AND PARKING'S IMPORTANT, BUT WE'RE BEING TOLD NOBODY CAN REQUIRE PARKING.
UM, THERE IS A MINIMUM SITE AREA, BUT I THINK THAT'S OVER, OVER, UH, RUN BY AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED.
UM, WE ENCOURAGE THEM TO MATCH THE FRONT SETBACK OF NEW BUILDINGS TO MATCH THE HISTORIC BUILDING AND THEN TO INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER TO THE 70% THEY WANT TO HAVE.
AND THE NCCD TODAY, UNDER MULTIFAMILY, THEY COULD GET 65%.
THEY CURRENTLY HAVE ABOUT 52% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
THE CURRENT DESIGN IS VERY INWARDLY ORIENTED WITH ALL THE ENTRIES AND CIRCULATION AROUND A CENTRAL CORE.
AND THAT ISOLATES THE TENANTS FROM THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, ADDING THE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED SPACES AT THE GROUND LEVEL, AS WELL AS ENTRIES AND TRANSITION SPACES.
WALKWAYS, PORCHES WOULD HELP TO CONNECT THE TENANTS TO THE GREATER NEIGHBORHOOD AND PEDESTRIAN CULTURE.
UM, THE OTHER SHEET WE HAVE HERE TALKS ABOUT THAT AND THE DESIGN.
SO WE'RE HOPING THAT AS THEY GET REVIEWED BY THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AND THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, UH, THAT, THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE DESIGN.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, SINCE IT'S INWARDLY ORIENTED, IT JUST HAS SHEER STRAIGHT UP 40 FOOT WALLS ON THE SIDES.
AND IF THAT WAS ARTICULATED WITH SOME WALKWAYS AND UH, TRANSITION SPACES, WE THINK IT WOULD FIT MUCH BETTER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WITH THE HISTORIC BUILDING.
SO, UM, THEY ALSO WANT TO HAVE SIDEWALKS ON ALL SIDES OF THE PROJECT.
ONE THING THAT WAS NOT MENTIONED TO YOU, HOME LANE HAS A 25 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY, VERY DIFFICULT TO WORK WITH THAT STREET.
AND SO THAT'S PART OF THE DILEMMA HERE, EVEN THOUGH EVERYBODY WOULD LIKE SIDEWALKS THERE.
SO
SO, UH, I JUST, I JUST WANNA REMIND YOU THIS, THE STAFF SAYS YOU CAN VOTE MF FOUR CONDITIONED BY SINGLE FAMILY SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS EXCEPT FOR THE 40, THE 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
YOU CANNOT TOUCH PARKING, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD.
SO YOU CANNOT VOTE THE SF THREE, YOU CAN ONLY VOTE THE MF FOUR CONDITIONED WITH SINGLE FAMILY SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS EXCEPT FOR THE 70%.
SO THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE COMMISSION CAN DO GIVEN, UH, THE RULING OF THE LAW DEPARTMENT THAT OTHERWISE TO DO THE SF THREE.
UM, AND WE, WE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THIS.
I'VE WORKED ON THESE CCDS A LOT.
UM, AND OTHERWISE IT WOULD TAKE A REIFICATION.
WE KNOW THAT APPLICANTS WANT TO GET GOING, SO WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR THAT REIFICATION, BUT WE'RE ASKING FOR YOUR HELP TO SEE IF WE CAN SUPPORT THE PROJECT AND GET IT TO FIT WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN A GOOD WAY.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS SUSANNA COX, WHO IS GOING TO BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
SUSANNA, GO AND PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR COMMENTS.
I'M 80 YEARS OLD AND I LIVE ACROSS FROM THE AGE CENTER AT 37 0 9 CEDAR STREET.
I WOULD LOVE TO ADD TO THE LIST OF SWEET NEIGHBORS THAT I HAVE, UM, PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I STRONGLY OBJECT TO THIS TOTALITY OF THIS CHANGE.
HOWEVER, UH, BASED ON WHAT YOU HEARD FROM KAREN MCGRAW, I BELIEVE THE AS IS THESE CHANGES WOULD SO DRAMATICALLY INCREASE TRAFFIC AND REDUCE ACCESS TO THE AREA THAT IT WOULD BE A DETRIMENT TO EVERYONE LIVING THERE, INCLUDING PROPOSED OCCUPANTS OF THE AGE PROPERTY.
PERSONALLY, I NEED A LITTLE BIT,
[01:35:01]
THE LITTLE BIT OF STREET PARKING THAT I HAVE IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE.UH, THIS CHANGE WOULD CERTAINLY OH, COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THAT.
I KNOW MY VOICE IS SMALL AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND ALL THE COMPLEXITIES OF THIS.
I'M NOT RICH OR POWERFUL, BUT I HOPE YOU CAN HEAR ME AND THE REST OF US THAT DON'T DARE TO SPEAK TO YOU.
IT TRULY APPEARS TO ME THAT THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO MIGHT BENEFIT FROM THIS CHANGE AS IT STANDS, ARE FOLKS WHO DON'T AND WON'T EVER LIVE HERE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HEARING ME.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS HELEN SNEAD.
HELEN, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY.
I THINK WE ALL DO THAT ARE HERE REPRESENTING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A PROPONENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I ALWAYS WILL BE, AND IN SO MANY WAYS, THIS IS THE MOST EXCITING WORTHY PROJECT, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT A PROJECT IS SUPPOSED TO ECLIPSE AND DISFIGURE THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IT WANTS TO BE IN.
I LIVE FOUR BLOCKS FROM THE, THE SITE FOR THIS PROJECT.
AND WHEN MY NARROW STREET HAS CARS PARKED ON BOTH SIDES, ONLY ONE CAR CAN GET THROUGH AT A TIME.
UM, I JUST CAN'T SEE HOW, WELL, I GUESS WHAT I WOULD SAY IS HOW WOULD YOU FEEL IF IT WERE YOUR STREET AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO JUST IN YOUR, IN YOUR WONDERFUL NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU WERE JUST SUPPOSED TO ACCOMMODATE ANOTHER, WHAT? 50 CARS? THESE PEOPLE ARE GONNA HAVE GUESTS, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE FAMILY VISITORS, WHATEVER, ON ONE.
THIS LITTLE STREET IS SUPPOSED TO ALL OF A SUDDEN HAVE ACCOMMODATE, UH, DOZENS AND DOZENS AND DOZENS OF CARS.
AND SO I JUST SAY, WHY ON EARTH? I MEAN, I CANNOT FATHOM THIS.
WHY WOULD YOU PUT THIS GARGANTUAN BUILDING IN A QUIET OLD NEIGHBORHOOD IN CENTRAL AUSTIN? I DON'T, I HONESTLY DON'T GET IT.
UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK ONE THING THAT'S BEEN OVERLOOKED IN ALL OF THIS IS, IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ON PEOPLE.
YOU KNOW, THOSE OF US WHO LOVE LIVE THERE, WE WANT MORE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO COME IN, BUT NOT LIKE THIS IN THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS HUGE BUNKER.
UM, SO ANYWAY, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT, UH, THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME JUST GIVE VOICE TO SOMETHING, UH, THAT IS VERY, VERY, VERY IMPORTANT AND PERSONAL TO ME.
AND ALSO JUST, I HOPE THAT YOU'LL REALIZE THAT, THAT THIS PROPOSED CHANGE WILL BE DANGEROUS AND DISASTROUS.
SO FOR SO MANY OF US WHO CALL THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HOME, THANK YOU.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS RICK IVERSON.
RICK, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES TO ITSELF, BUT, UH, OUR NEXT, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ANNETTE GULA.
ANNETTE, YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.
I WAS GONNA GIVE MY TIME, BUT I DIDN'T REALIZE I GOT HERE.
THAT DOESN'T NEED THE TIME, SO I DON'T WANNA TAKE UP YOUR TIME OTHER THAN TO SAY, MA'AM, IF YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING, PLEASE STAY ON THE MICROPHONE.
EVEN IF IT'S A FEW COMP, I'M DONE.
JUST TO MAKE SURE IT'S ON THE RECORD AND OUR ONLINE SPEAKERS CAN HEAR, WE WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S ON THE MICROPHONE, BUT APPRECIATE IT.
UM, OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS FRANK, MARY.
HE'S WAIVING HIS RIGHT AS WELL.
AND NOW GOING ON TO THE APPLICANT FOR REBUTTAL.
MS. DAKO, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
JUST GONNA GO BACK TO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN REAL QUICK.
UM, SO A, A CO A COUPLE COMMENTS.
UM, SO FIRST, FIRST AND FOREMOST, I JUST WANNA REITERATE THAT THIS DES DESIGN IS IN NO WAY FINALIZED.
UM, THE YELLOW PORTION, UM, THAT YOU'RE SEEING ON YOUR SCREEN RIGHT NOW IS WHAT WE INTEND TO KEEP EXACTLY THE SAME AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.
[01:40:01]
WE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RENDERING THAT THEY SHOWED IN THEIR PRESENTATION, AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.UM, WE HAVE DONE MULTIPLE OTHER PROJECTS THAT WERE HISTORIC ADAPTIVE REUSE PROJECTS THAT WE WERE ABLE TO CONVERT TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND I'LL TELL YOU, THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AND, UM, TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION ARE VERY, VERY STRICT IN TERMS OF DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT YOU CAN UTILIZE.
SO, UM, WE WILL ABSOLUTELY BE MIRRORING IN SOME WAYS AND THEN DIFFERENTIATING IN OTHER WAYS.
THEY'RE VERY CRAFTY WITH HOW THEY REQUIRE THAT.
UM, BUT MANY OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE EXISTING HISTORIC BUILDING.
UM, ONE OTHER THING THAT WE WANTED TO MENTION, UM, IS, UM, THAT IN OUR CURRENT PROPOSED DESIGN, WHICH AGAIN WAS IN RESPONSE TO THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE RECEIVED ABOUT REQUESTING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE NEW BUILDING NOT BE TOWERING OVER THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE WORKED WITH OUR ARCHITECT TO, YOU'LL SEE THE LIGHT BLUE AROUND THE DARKER BLUE IN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION BUILDING, UM, THAT AREA.
UM, WHICH AGAIN IS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE OUTLINE OF, OF THE NEW BUILDING THAT WILL BE TWO STORIES AND AGAIN, ALL PROPOSED.
UM, BUT THAT WOULD JUST BE TWO STORIES OVER THE PARKING PODIUM, WHICH AGAIN, WE'VE, WE'VE PUT IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT WE CAN PROVIDE SOME ONSITE PARKING.
UM, OUR CURRENT PARKING COUNT IS 77 SPACES, SO THAT WOULD BE OVER ONE TO ONE.
UM, IN TERMS OF SOME OF THE OTHER, UM, COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, UM, WE, WE RECOGNIZE THAT, UM, WE HAVE SEVERAL BUILDINGS IN AUSTIN THAT HAVE EXISTING PODIUM, UM, AND BUILDINGS OVER THE PODIUM.
SO WE RECOGNIZE THAT SOME OF THOSE MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS THAT WOULD ABSOLUTELY NOT BE, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT'S, THAT A NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD WANT TO LOOK IN, LOOK OUT AT THEIR FRONT DOOR AND SEE A PARKING LOT IN FRONT OF THEM.
AND SO THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE REALLY GONNA BE CONSIDERING IN OUR DESIGN.
UM, WE'VE ALREADY PROVIDED A FEW OPTIONS OF POTENTIAL SCREENING THAT WE COULD DO, INCLUDING, UM, SOME FAKE, YOU KNOW, WALL FACADES THAT MIRROR THE EXISTING BUILDING.
UM, AND AGAIN, IT'S JUST KIND OF DEPENDENT ON WHAT THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE WOULD LET US DO.
UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS, UM, THE REZONING COMPONENT, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS TODAY, UM, WE JUST WANNA REITERATE THAT, UM, WE REALLY DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO RE-NOTICE ON THIS CASE.
UM, AGAIN, AS I STATED BEFORE, UH, WE REALLY NEED TO STICK TO THE JUNE 10TH COUNCIL DATE IN ORDER TO STAY ON TRACK TO, UH, MEET OUR STATE DEADLINES.
AND OUR PROJECT IS, UM, SLATED TO BE THE FIRST, UM, HIGHEST SCORING PROJECT IN THIS REGION.
SO WE WOULD REALLY LOVE YOUR SUPPORT ON THE REZONING TODAY.
THAT'S THE END OF OUR, UM, SPEAKERS HERE AND THEN LOOKING AT STAFF JUST TO CONFIRM.
UM, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING MADE BY COMMISSIONER AHMED? SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE SKIDMORE, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
UM, AGAIN, A REMINDER EIGHT COMMISSIONERS CAN ASK QUESTIONS UP TO FIVE MINUTES EACH.
ANY COMMISSIONER WHO HAS QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ.
I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE NONPROFITS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE AGE BUILDING.
I HAVE ONE THAT'S VERY CLOSE TO MY HEART THAT'S THERE TODAY.
DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING THAT, ABOUT WHERE THEY WILL GOING OR HOW MUCH TIME THEY HAVE LEFT IN THAT BUILDING? YES, UH, THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.
UM, WE HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT, SO I'LL BACK UP, UM, AGE PUT THE PROPERTY ON THE MARKET IN AT THE END OF 2024 AND WE WERE EXCITED TO SEE IT GO UP FOR SALE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, UM, IT WAS THE END OF AGE'S TIME OWNING THE BUILDING.
THEY HAVE A NEW PROPERTY IN SOUTH AUSTIN THAT THEY'VE BUILT.
SO OUR UNDERSTANDING FROM THEM IS THAT, UM, ALL TENANTS HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED.
UH, WE WOULD NOT BE PURCHASING THE PROPERTY UNTIL LATER THIS YEAR.
UM, AND WE WOULDN'T BEGIN CONSTRUCTION UNTIL NEXT YEAR IF ALL THINGS MOVE FORWARD, UM, NEXT SPRING OR SUMMER.
UM, SO WE WOULD IN NO WAY REQUIRE TENANTS TO RELOCATE BEFORE THAT DATE.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER PAUL? YEAH.
QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT AS WELL.
UM, SO I SAW IN THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO THE BACKUP, IT WAS A JULY TIMELINE FOR THE HISTORIC TAX CREDIT.
COULD YOU TELL US MORE ABOUT THAT PROCESS? AND, UM, I BELIEVE THAT WAS A STATE LEVEL ONE, IS THAT RIGHT? UM, SO IT'S A, IT'S A MULTI-PART PROCESS THAT IS REALLY CONFUSING WITH PART ONE'S, PART A, PART TWOS AND PART BS.
UM, SO THE FIRST PART OF THE PROCESS IS, UH, WELL THE,
[01:45:01]
THE BUILDING AND THE NORTH PART OF THE SITE CURRENTLY HAS ITS STATE ANTIQUITIES LANDMARK.SO IT IS CURRENT CURRENTLY HAS A STATE DESIGNATION.
SO WE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR STATE TAX CREDITS ON THAT BUILDING CURRENTLY.
UM, BUT WE ARE INTERESTED IN SEEKING NATIONAL PARKS, UM, SERVICE DESIGNATION.
SO THE NEXT PART OF THAT PROCESS, WE'VE ACTUALLY ALREADY BEGUN.
SO WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR CONSULTANT, UM, TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FIRST TO THE TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION FOR FULL NATIONAL REGISTER DESIGNATION.
AND THEN IT WILL GO ON, UM, IN THE NEXT, IN THE FALL, UM, TO THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE TO GET A, TO REQUEST A FULL NATIONAL PARKS DESIGNATION, UM, NATIONAL REGISTER DESIGNATION.
AND THEN AT THAT, AT ONCE WE RECEIVED THAT DESIGNATION, WE WOULD THEN GO ON TO APPLY FOR STATE HISTORIC TAX CREDITS AS WELL AS NATIONAL TAX CREDITS, FEDERAL TAX CREDITS.
AND THEN A, A FOLLOW UP ON THAT, UM, IS THAT KIND OF THE MAIN DEPENDENCY FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY IN ADDITION TO, YOU KNOW, THIS PROCESS AND CITY PROCESSES? NO, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
OUR PLAN IS TO MOVE FORWARD AND WE HAVE, WE'VE, WE'VE WORKED ON SEVERAL OTHER PROJECTS IN THE PAST, UH, WHERE WE HAVE EVEN RECEIVED AN INITIAL DENIAL FROM THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE.
WE'RE A VERY TENACIOUS TEAM AND SO WE USUALLY DON'T TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER ON, ON THAT.
SO OUR, OUR PLAN IS TO PROCEED AND, AND MOVE FORWARD WITH, WITH STATE AND NATIONAL DESIGNATION.
UM, WE, WE HOPE THAT PANS OUT, BUT OUR ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO DEVELOP IT, UM, IN A SIMILAR MANNER AS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMUNITY.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
UM, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
MS. ATCO, CAN YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THIS OF THE REQUEST TO GO TO THE 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER? IT SEEMS LIKE THE OTHER SORT OF ENTITLEMENTS ARE SORT OF WITHIN WHAT THE SITE IS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT FOR A SECOND? SURE.
UM, SO CURRENTLY, UM, BASICALLY T-D-H-C-A REQUIRES THAT AT LEAST 50% OF THE UNITS, UM, EXIST IN THE EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
UM, SO WITH THAT IN MIND, WE'VE WORKED WITH OUR ARCHITECTURE ARCHITECT TO SEE WHAT, UM, THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS WOULD BE ON THE SITE AND THAT THAT IS 76 IN CONSIDERATION OF, UM, HAVING HALF OF THOSE UNITS IN THE EXISTING HISTORIC.
UM, SO THAT, THAT WAS THE FIRST STEP THAT WE TOOK IN ORDER TO SEE WHAT OUR MAX COVERAGE ON THE SITE WOULD BE.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, WE, WE KNOW THAT WE NEED THAT EXTRA FLEXIBILITY GIVEN THAT IT ISN'T A HUGE SITE.
SO HAVING THAT INCREASE TO 70% IN PREVIOUS COVERAGE JUST KIND OF GIVES US THAT ADDITIONAL ASSURANCE SINCE THERE ARE SO MANY UNKNOWNS AT THIS POINT AS TO HOW WE WILL BE ABLE TO DEVELOP THE SITE AND IF NATIONAL PARK SERVICE WOULD EVEN ALLOW US TO GO UP THE NUMBER OF STORIES THAT WE'RE REQUESTING.
SO THAT'S JUST TO GIVE US THIS ADDITIONAL ASSURANCE THAT WE CAN UTILIZE THE SPACE THE WAY WE NEED TO.
THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF AND MIGHT BE ONE FOR MS. HARDEN.
UM, I'M JUST TRYING TO SORT OF, UM, AND MR. DOKO, MAYBE YOU CAN HELP ME ANSWER AS WELL, JUST TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE THIS ISSUE HERE, WHICH IS OF COURSE THERE'S A PARKING ELEMENT WHICH WE CANNOT TOUCH 'CAUSE IT'S PART OF FORD WILLIAM LOCKED AND IT HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM 25 DASH TWO EXCEPT FOR THE TABLE.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, IF WE WERE TO HAVE ANOTHER ZONING CATEGORY BUT THEN HAVE TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE
UH, THIS CASE CAME IN TO US, UH, IN FEBRUARY AND UH, THE CASE WAS NOTIFIED GIVEN THE TIMELINE AND WE DID NOT NOTIFY FOR CHANGING THE NCCD.
UM, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR MF FOUR, UH, SEEMED REASONABLE GIVEN THERE'S SOME OTHER MF FOUR ZONE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE VICINITY, INCLUDING TWO LISTED IN THE, UH, DETAILED IN THE AREA CASE HISTORY.
UM, WHAT WOULD BE DONE AT THIS POINT IN TIME WITH NOT TOUCHING THE NCCD SINCE WE'RE NOT POSTED FOR THAT CHANGE, UM, WOULD BE, EXCUSE ME, UM, WRITING A CONDITION WITHIN THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS SITE, UM, THAT WOULD, UH, ALLOW FOR THAT IMPERVIOUS COVER TO BE 70% AND KEEP THE REMAINING SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AT SF THREE.
AND IF I, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY, WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS WE WOULD ZONE IT MF FOUR, BUT THEN WRITE A CONDITION IN THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD LIMIT ALL THE OTHER ENTITLEMENTS DOWN TO SF THREE, TO SF THREE EXCEPT FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO THAT MEANS IF THIS CASE WAS TO GO THROUGH, THEY WOULD USE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED AND THE FACT THAT A LOT OF THOSE SITE DEVELOPMENT
[01:50:01]
STANDARDS, EXCEPT FOR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER ARE AT SF THREE, THAT WOULDN'T MATTER.THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DEVELOP THEIR SITE IF FOR SOME REASON SOMETHING WENT WRONG WITH THE PROJECT AND YOU KNOW, THEY HAD TO SELL THE SITE OR DIDN'T EXECUTE THEIR OPTION TO ACQUIRE THE SITE, UH, THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD CHANGE IT WOULD BE MF FOUR ON PAPER.
HOWEVER, IT WOULD HAVE THE RESTRICTIONS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT HOLD IT DOWN TO SF THREE EXCEPT FOR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
MY LAST SORT OF QUESTION IS JUST SO I UNDERSTAND THAT, I BELIEVE BECAUSE IT'S IN THE NCCD, BUT WE CANNOT DO A REGULAR CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AS WE HAVE DONE IN OTHER CASES.
YES, IT WOULD NOT BE A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
IT'S A, A CONDITION, UH, UH, THAT IS IN THE ORDINANCE.
SO SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK UP THE ORDINANCE IN ORDER TO SEE THAT CONDITION THAT LAW WOULD WRITE INTO THE ORDINANCE IN THIS SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE.
UM, I'LL, I'LL IN MY REMAINING TIME, I JUST WANNA SAY, UM, IF I CAN ASK THE APPLICANT A QUESTION, I GUESS, I KNOW Y'ALL HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED THIS, BUT, UM, MS. TAKO, JUST TO CONFIRM, UM, THERE IS NO FLEXIBILITY ON TIME.
SO THAT'S PART OF THE CHALLENGE THAT WE, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE FORWARDED TODAY TO MEET THE DEADLINE FOR COUNCIL.
MS. LASH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UM, YES, UM, SORRY WE WERE HAVING A SIDE CONVERSATION ON, BUT YES, WE DO HAVE A DEADLINE TO, TO PROVE UP OUR ZONING, UM, BY, IT'S, IT KIND OF VARIES YEAR TO YEAR, BUT THEY LIKE US TO HAVE, UM, TYPICALLY BY THE END OF JULY AND WITH COUNCIL TAKING A BREAK, THAT IS A BIT OF A CHALLENGE.
UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS, CAN YOU SPEAK TO HOW THAT SF THREE EXCEPT FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER MIGHT WORK IN PRACTICE IN TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? AND THAT'S WHAT WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING.
IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN MY UNDERSTANDING SINCE AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED HAS CAME INTO FRUITION THAT SF THREE, IT HAS A LIMITATION PER LOT.
AND SO WITH THE SF THREE DOES NOT WORK FOR US FROM MY UNDERSTANDING.
AND WE'VE HAD TO GO THROUGH THIS A COUPLE TIMES.
WE WENT THROUGH THIS WITH THE KATIE LOFTS DEVELOPMENT THAT HAD SF THREE ZONING ON IT.
WE WERE NOT ABLE TO USE AFFORDABLY UNLOCKED TO DEVELOP THE NUMBER OF UNITS WE WERE TRAINED TO BUILD ON THE SITE.
UM, I THINK MF THREE WOULD GET US THERE.
AGAIN, WE NEED THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
OUR, OUR MAX BUILDING HEIGHT THAT WE ARE SHOWING IS 45 47 FEET.
SO WE'RE NOT EVEN USING THE FULL MAX ENTITLEMENT THAT AFFORDABLY UNLOCK ALLOWS IT UNLOCK, ALLOWS US, OR EVEN MF FOUR, BUT S OF THREE, UM, DOES NOT GET US THERE WITH THE O WITH PUTTING AFFORDABLY UNLOCKED ON IT BASED ON WHAT I'VE ALWAYS BEEN TOLD, UM, IN MY READING OF AFFORDABLY UNLOCKED.
I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF SMART PEOPLE HERE THAT MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING, BUT THERE IS A MINI MINIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS PER LOT WITH SF THREE.
AND I'LL LET OKAY, THANK YOU STAFF JIM, IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS.
BUT I DO HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS I SAW THAT THERE'S, UH, COMMISSIONER WOODS, MR. TOMKO IS JUST GONNA RESPOND AND THEN
OTHER ZONING CATEGORIES ABOVE SF THREE DO NOT HAVE THAT CAP.
SO THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE TO BE CHANGED AS A CONDITION OF THE ZONING IS LIFTING THAT CAP AS WELL.
IN ADDITION TO THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT DON'T WORK FOR TRYING TO ADDRESS THIS CONCERN.
IS THAT CLEAR? UNDERSTOOD, THAT'S MR. TOMKO.
AND JUST ANOTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT ABOUT PARKING.
I SAW 77 PARKING SPACES JUST BASED ON KIND OF THE TRANSIT RICH NATURE OF THIS AREA.
I THINK I HEARD EIGHT BUS STOPS AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THREE, UM, RAPID BUS ROUTES, PROBABLY A LOT OF BIKE AND BUS COMMUTERS IN THIS, UH, COMMUNITY THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE CARS, 77 FEELS LIKE A LOT.
HOW DID YOU KIND OF COME TO THAT CONCLUSION THAT THAT WAS WHAT WAS NEEDED? YES, THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
SO OUR INITIAL PROPOSAL, UM, AND AGAIN, THESE ARE ALL VERY ROUGH SITE PLANS, UM, BUT IT, IT DID NOT INCLUDE ANY PARKING BEYOND WHAT WAS ALREADY BEING PROVIDED ON SITE.
SO IN ACCORDANCE WITH, UM, COUNCIL'S RECENT ACTION TO ELIMINATE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
UM, AND WE, WE RECOGNIZE THAT THIS COMMUNITY MAY HAVE AN IMPACT ON, UM, ON THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO IN RESPONSE TO THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD WITH OUR NEIGHBORS, UH, WE DECIDED TO INCREASE, UM, TO RAISE THE BUILDING UP, WHICH AGAIN, IT'S A, IT'S A, YOU KNOW, TWO-SIDED COIN.
EITHER YOU CAN HAVE PARKING ON THE GROUND FLOOR OR, YOU KNOW, OR YOU CAN CAP THE HEIGHT.
IT'S KIND OF ONE OR THE OTHER.
BUT, UM, IN RESPONSE TO MOST OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE WERE RECEIVING AT THE BEGINNING OF OUR CORRESPONDENCE WITH THEM, UM, WE DECIDED TO RAISE THE BUILDING UP IN THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, UM, TO A PODIUM THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR GROUND FLOOR PARKING.
[01:55:01]
THAT IN ADDITION TO THE STREET PARKING AROUND THE BUILDING, IT THAT'S CURRENTLY AT 76 OR 77 SPACES, UM, WHICH WE WILL BELIEVE WILL BE ABSOLUTELY AMPLE PARKING, ESPECIALLY GIVEN, LIKE YOU MENTIONED, ALL THE TRANSIT OPTIONS AVAILABLE THERE.SO THAT FOUR STORY SORT OF CENTRAL PORTION OF THAT BUILDING BEFORE IT STEPS DOWN IS JUST A RESULT OF THAT INCREASED ONSITE PARKING.
AND AGAIN, WE ARE, OUR CURRENT DESIGN HAS THE BUILDING STEPPED FROM THE EXTERIOR OF THE PROPERTY GOING IN THAT WOULD ALLOW, UM, THE, FROM THE STREET FACING SIDE, IT WOULD BE THREE STORIES MAX.
WELL OBVIOUSLY NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN IMPACT THROUGH ZONING, BUT MAYBE JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER THAT, THAT FEELS LIKE A LOT OF PARKING FOR THIS AREA THAT HAS SO MUCH GREAT TRANSIT.
THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS, CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER S SKIDMORE, UH, I GUESS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, I'M SORRY, JUST AS YOU'RE ABOUT TO SIT DOWN AND I'M STUCK ON PARKING AS WELL, I JUST, SOMETHING YOU SAID A MINUTE AGO OF I WANT TO REVISIT.
AM I TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING THE PODIUM AND THE PARKING, THE STREET LEVEL PARKING, THAT FIRST LEVEL PARKING OF TO APPEASE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS OPPOSED TO DESIRE ON THE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO IF GIVEN THE CHOICE, YOU WOULD BUILD A DEVELOPMENT WITH FEWER PARKING SPACES AND MORE HOUSING.
UM, BUT YES, I, I, OUR, OUR INITIAL PROPOSED DESIGN OF THIS SITE, UM, INCLUDED A THREE STORY, UM, BUILDING THAT WOULD NOT HAVE PARKING ON THE GROUND FLOOR.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? IF NOT COMMISSIONERS, WE'VE ALREADY CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE.
UM, DOES ANY COMMISSIONER HAVE A MOTION AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER, SKIP CHAIR.
DID YOU WANNA ASK COMMISSIONER? I I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
COMMISSIONER WOODS, UH, COMM MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER WOODS FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
UM, COMMISSIONER WOODS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? I WOULD, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
UM, THIS IS JUST IS SUCH AN EXCITING DEVELOPMENT TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD JUST HAS A LOT OF THINGS THAT I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR AS A CITY.
IT HAS THIS HISTORIC REDEVELOPMENT ASPECT, IT HAS SO MUCH TRANSIT IN THIS AREA.
UM, IT, YOU KNOW, SCORES WELL FROM A-T-D-H-C-A PERSPECTIVE, WHICH I KNOW WELL IS A VERY CHALLENGING AND COMPETITIVE PROCESS, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS GONNA ALLOW 76 HOUSEHOLDS AND FAMILIES TO MOVE INTO WHAT WE'RE HEARING, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY.
COMMISSIONER WOODS, I'M SO SORRY.
I'M GONNA HAVE TO ASK YOU TO PAUSE AGAIN, BUT I'VE LOST YOUR VIDEO.
UH, JUST REALLY EXCITED TO, TO ALLOW 76 FAMILIES TO, TO COME INTO THIS AREA THAT WE'RE HEARING IS A REALLY LOVELY AREA, WE KNOW HAS A TON OF AMENITIES AND IS A WONDERFUL PLACE TO WORK.
SORRY, COMMISSIONER WOODS, I'VE LOST YOU AGAIN.
YOU, YOU, I THINK YOU GOT THE GIST.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION? UH, COMMISSIONER POWELL? YEAH, I'LL SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS AND I, I WANT TO COMMEND THE APPLICANT FOR GOING THROUGH AND ENDEAVORING IN THAT TAX CREDIT PROCESS IN THE PROCESS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
HAVE HAD VISIBILITY INTO THESE PROCESSES.
THEY ARE, AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, RIGOROUS COMPLEX, BUT CLEARLY WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
AND THEN WHAT I WANT TO SAY TOO IS I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE NEIGHBORS, THE COMMUNITY SHOWING UP HERE, KNOWING THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT A STAGE OF PLANS RIGHT NOW.
THERE ARE STEPS TO COME AFTER THIS.
UM, I'M EXCITED TO SUPPORT THIS AND I'M EXCITED FOR Y'ALL TO CONTINUE TO HAVE PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POWELL.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WISHING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST NOT SEEING ANY? I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
SO THIS IS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WOODS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE OR RAISE YOUR HANDS.
A THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AND I WANT TO MENTION, UH, COMMISSIONER LAN IS NO LONGER, UH, PART OF THE MEETING.
SO THAT WOULD BE COMMISSIONER WOODS, COMMISSIONER HOWARD, UH, COMMISSIONER HANEY, COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ, COMMISSIONER AHMED AZAR, SKIDMORE, HILLER.
AND POWELL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION AND I SEE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON IS COMING ONLINE ONCE HE JOINS VIA VIDEO.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND ACKNOWLEDGE HIM AS WELL, BUT HE WAS NOT VOTING ON THIS MOTION.
[11. Rezoning: C14-2025-0042 - 9117 Northgate Rezone; District 4]
TAKES US TO ITEM NUMBER 11.[02:00:01]
EVENING, COMMISSIONER SHERRY TIS AS YOU SAID, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 11.UH, THIS IS KC 14 20 25 0 0 4 2, WHICH IS AT 9 1 1 7 NORTHGATE BOULEVARD.
THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE FROM GOCO MP TO G-R-C-O-M-P.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS GRCO MP, WHICH IS COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.
OUR PROPOSED CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WOULD PROHIBIT AUTOMOTIVE RENTALS, AUTOMOTIVE SALES, AUTOMOTIVE WASHING AND SERVICE STATION USES ON THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS A GRASSY UNDEVELOPED AT TRACT LAND THAT SLOPES STEEPLY TO THE SOUTH.
THERE IS FLOODPLAIN COVERING THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE SITE WITH A NATURAL DETENTION CULVERT FOR LITTLE WALNUT CREEK.
THERE ARE MULT ARE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST ZONED MF THREE MP TO THE SOUTH.
THERE IS A RETAIL CENTER ZONE, GRMP.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A REZONING FROM GOCO MP TO GRCO MP TO DEVELOP A RESTAURANT USE ON THIS PARCEL.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE NORTH AUSTIN CIVIC ASSOCIATION NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND THE CURRENT LAND USE ON THELAN FLAM, SORRY, IS COMMERCIAL LAND USE.
THEREFORE A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT IS NOT REQUIRED OF THIS CASE.
THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING GRCO MP COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING.
THE STAFF IS PROPOSING A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO PROHIBIT AUTOMOTIVE AND SERVICE STATION USES IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE PROPERTY CONTAINS BLOOD PLAIN AND IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS, THE PROPOSED REZONING WILL ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES.
THERE IS CAPITAL METRO BUS SERVICE ALONG NORTHGATE BOULEVARD AND THE SITE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS LOCATED ACROSS FROM CAPITAL METRO BUS STOP.
THE PROP, THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN 0.07 MILES OF THE ROMBERG LANE, FERGUSON ACTIVITY CORRIDOR AND POINT 10 MILES OF THE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY STATION REGIONAL CENTER.
SO, AND I DID WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR ISSUE SECTION, THE APPLICANT DID CONTACT THE STAFF AND SUBMIT A LETTER ON MAY THE NINTH STATING THAT THEY WERE AMENDING THEIR PRESENTING REQUEST TO ADD A LIST OF PROHIBITED USES THAT THEY AGREED TO WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
YOU CAN SEE THIS IS EXIST EXHIBIT D IN YOUR BACKUP.
AND I BELIEVE THE CONCERN TONIGHT IF I UNDERSTAND FROM SPEAKING WITH MS. GUZMAN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACT TEAM IS THAT THERE IS A CONCERN OVER, UH, CONVENIENCE STORE USE ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED FOOD SALES, UH, BY THE STAFF.
AND THAT THERE IS ALSO A CONCERN ABOUT GENERAL RETAIL SALES LIMITED.
AND SO I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
MS. BROWN, I LOOK TO YOU TO GUIDE US TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
YES, WE HAVE OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION, MONICA GUZMAN ON ITEM NUMBER 11.
MONICA, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, BUT RAMIREZ FOR PULLING THIS.
UM, THE ONLY THING I CAN DO IS GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION I HAVE RECEIVED SINCE THE LAST TIME I WAS UP HERE.
ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, COMMUNITY WHERE MR. PATEL HAS A STORE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN REQUESTS TO NOT SELL CERTAIN ITEMS SUCH AS ALCOHOL, ALCOHOL, BEVERAGES THAT COST LESS THAN LESS THAN $8, WHICH IS WHAT WAS REP, EXCUSE ME, RECOMMENDED BY THE POLICE.
UM, SO BASICALLY IN THE COMMUNITY'S ATTEMPT TO WORK WITH HIM, GET HIM TO TO BE PROACTIVE ABOUT MAKING IT MORE WELCOMING, SAFER, UH, BE MORE VIGILANT ABOUT CRIME THAT'S HAPPENING ON SITE AT HIS PROPERTY OR WHERE HIS BUSINESS IS LOCATED OR NEARBY.
AND HE'S NOT BEING RESPONSIVE.
NOW SINCE THE LAST TIME I STOOD UP HERE, I WAS OUT IN THE FOYER SPEAKING WITH MS. MITCHELL ABOUT OUR CONCERNS AND CLARIFYING.
SO THE GENERAL RETAIL SALES CONVENIENCE, I SAW THE LIST OF THINGS THAT INCLUDES, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE A WALGREENS, WHICH WALGREENS SELLS INDIVIDUAL, YOU KNOW, CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL, BOTTLES, CANS, WHATEVER.
WE DON'T WANT THAT, WHETHER IT'S CALLED C MART SEVEN 11 WALGREENS OR MINI STORE USA, WE DON'T WANT A BUSINESS THAT SELLS ALCOHOL.
IT'S ONLY GOING TO MAKE PROBLEMS WORSE.
WE ARE OPEN TO A RESTAURANT AND WELL, I'M CERTAINLY NOT AN EXPERT ON ALL THE DIFFERENT USES ALLOWED UNDER COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL.
THERE ARE TWO FOR RESTAURANTS.
SO WE DON'T SEE ANY REASON THAT FOOD, FOOD SALES AND THE GENERAL RETAIL SALES CONVENIENT CAN BE STRUCK OUT IN ADDITION TO WHAT MR. WHITLOW HAD ALREADY PROVIDED.
SO I MEAN, I I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO, TO
[02:05:01]
SPEAK TO THAT OTHER THAN WE'RE TRYING TO BE REASONABLE, ALLOW MR. PATEL TO BUILD A RESTAURANT IS WHAT WE WERE TOLD WAS DESIRED.A RESTAURANT WITH OUTDOOR DINING, WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
SO WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THERE IS PUSHBACK ON OUR WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE AREN'T THE TYPE OF SALES THAT WILL JUST INCREASE THE PROBLEMS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IF YOU'LL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, NEED CLARIFICATIONS, LET ME KNOW.
UM, BUT WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND CIRCLE BACK TO THE APPLICANT.
SO, I'M SORRY, JUST TO CONFIRM, IS MS. MITCHELL THE APPLICANT? MA'AM, ARE YOU THE YES, I AM.
I'LL HAVE TO ASK YOU DURING MY Q AND A, I'LL ASK YOU TO COME UP AND SHARE, UM, YOUR ASPECT, BUT WE CANNOT HAVE YOU AS PART OF PUBLIC COMMENT.
MS. BROWN, DO WE HAVE OTHER SPEAKERS SIGNED UP AT THIS TIME? UM, YES, WE HAVE OUR VIRTUALS.
UM, WE HAVE MELINDA RA WHO'S JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
MELINDA, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX AND PROCEED WITH YOUR COMMENTS.
UM, I SPOKE EARLIER ABOUT MR. PATEL'S PROPERTIES IN THE NORTH AUSTIN AREA AND ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, THE, THE NORTH AUSTIN COMMUNITY HAS COME TOGETHER TO TRY AND IDENTIFY WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO CRIME AND REALLY SUPPORTING THAT ELEMENT OF CRIME.
AND HIS CONVENIENT SOURCE HAVE COME UP AS A CONVERSATION IN MEETINGS AND, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO COME UP WITH IDEAS, TO WORK WITH HIM TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS. UM, YOU KNOW, HIS, HIS NON-RESPONSIVENESS ALREADY AT EXISTING PROPERTIES, ONE, WHICH IS JUST RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER ON COLONY CREEK.
WHY WE NEED A SECOND CONVENIENCE STORE JUST RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER ON NORTHGATE.
UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT HIS INTENT IS TO ADD A, AT A RESTAURANT.
UM, I SEE THAT HE HAS THE, HE HAS A SUNRISE, UH, LAUNDROMAT ON A
IT, TO ME, IT LOOKS LIKE THE INTENT IS TO HAVE ANOTHER CONVENIENCE STORE.
SO I FEEL LIKE WE WERE REALLY MISLED BY THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, MR. WHITLOW.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT GOOD.
THIS, THIS COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, I, I'VE LIVED IN THIS COMMUNITY SINCE 2011.
WE, WE TRY DO EVERYTHING THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN, BUT TO ADDRESS CRIME THAT THIS APPLICANT OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT CARE THAT HE IS ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY TO OCCUR ON HIS PROPERTY DAILY.
UH, NEIGHBORS DO NOT FEEL SAFE WALKING BY HIS PROPERTY.
THAT IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE IF IT'S THERE ON A DAILY BASIS AND NEIGHBORS DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WALKING BY HIS PROPERTY, THAT'S A, THAT IS A NUISANCE.
AND WHY WE WANT TO SUPPORT THAT IN OUR COMMUNITY.
I JUST, I DON'T UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T THINK THAT THE CITY LOOKS AT THIS, THE, THIS, IT'S ALL LIKE WHAT? IT LOOKS GOOD ON PAPER, POTENTIALLY.
UM, HE IS REGISTERED AS SEVERAL DIFFERENT OWNER, UM, BUSINESS NAMES.
SO MAYBE WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, PUTTING TWO AND TWO TOGETHER ON, ON FROM THE CITY.
MAYBE THE CITY'S NOT ALLOWED TO INCLUDE THESE FACTORS IN THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.
[02:10:01]
THAT IS TIME, BUT IT, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS OF ITEM 11.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER 11? THAT'S A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER POWELL, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ.
IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, THAT MOTION PASSES.
THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH COMMISSIONER ANDERSON ON THE DICE AND COMMISSIONER HANEY OFF THE DICE.
UM, THAT TAKES US, UM, COMMISSIONERS TO OUR Q AND A IF, AND THIS WOULD BE, AGAIN, EIGHT EIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS HAVE THE ABILITY TO ASK QUESTIONS FOR UP TO FIVE MINUTES.
IF Y'ALL WOULD, UH, INDULGE ME AND COMMISSIONERS, IF I CAN TAKE THE FIRST SPOT I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER.
MS. MITCHELL, CAN YOU PLEASE COME, UM, AND SPEAK TO IT.
SO YOU WOULD HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
WELL, NOW SHE'S COMING UP CHAIR.
I THINK I DID SEE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON ON THE DAAS FOR THAT PIECE.
I'M SORRY FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING CONCLUSION.
UM, SO MR. PATEL IS PLANNING ON OPENING A RESTAURANT.
I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BY THE LAST CALL.
UM, NOBODY'S REQUESTING A CONVENIENCE STORE HERE.
UM, WE DID JUST SPEAK, WE, I GUESS THAT WAS THE RULE.
WE, I DID JUST SPEAK WITH MS. GUZMAN.
UM, WE HAD A NICE CHAT OUT THERE.
WE'RE HAPPY TO, I'M NOT HAPPY TO.
'CAUSE THERE'S A VERY LONG LIST UNDER GENERAL RETAIL SALES, CONVENIENCE, UH, LET'S SEE, HOUSEHOLD CLEANING, MAINTENANCE PRODUCTS, DRUGS, CARDS, STATIONARY NOTIONS, BOOKS, TOBACCO PRODUCTS, COSMETICS, SPECIALTY ITEMS, APPAREL, JEWELRY, FABRICS, CAMERAS, PHOTOGRAPHY SERVICES, HOUSEHOLD, ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT RECORDS, SPORTING EQUIPMENT, KITCHEN UTENSILS, SMALL HOME APPLIANCES, ART SUPPLIES AND FRAMING, ARTS AND ANTIQUES PAINT, INTERIOR DECORATING SERVICES, OFFICE SUPPLIES AND BICYCLES.
IT, IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT TO THROW OUT JUST TO KEEP OUT A CONVENIENCE STORE, BUT IF IT'S NECESSARY, WE WILL, WE'RE HAPPY TO STRIKE IT.
UH, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY ON TOP OF THAT, THEY'RE SUDDENLY, THIS IS THE FIRST WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT IS THE VERY FIRST WE'VE HEARD THAT THEY WANT FOOD SALES ALSO STRUCK, WHICH WOULD PROHIBIT LIKE A DELI MARKET TYPE THING, WHICH COULD ALSO BE PART OF THE RESTAURANT.
SO WE DO NOT AGREE WITH THAT PART, BUT, WE'LL, WE'LL STRIKE GENERAL RETAIL SALES, WHICH IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD STOP A CONVENIENCE STORE.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND
UM, YOU KNOW, WE AGREED TO THE FIRST POSTPONEMENT.
THEY SAID THAT THEY HAD LIKE FIVE DAYS NOTICE, BUT IN REALITY WE EMAILED THEM BEFORE, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS FEBRUARY, THAT WE EMAILED THEM AND, AND REC TOLD THEM FEBRUARY 10TH, WE EMAILED MONICA AT AND THE NCA CONTACT TEAM AND TOLD THEM OUR INTENTION AND REQUESTED A, A MEETING TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT IT.
THEY, UH, I BELIEVE RESPONDED A MONTH AND A HALF LATER IN MAY.
UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE HAPPY TO GIVE THEM THE FIRST POSTPONEMENT.
WE JUST, I'M CONFUSED WHY WE'RE BEING PAINTED AS PUSHING BACK AND NOT COOPERATING.
UM, TONIGHT'S THE VERY FIRST TIME WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE OTHER, THE FOOD SALES.
Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I'M HERE.
UM, IN MY QUESTIONS I, I'LL JUST QUICKLY ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS.
JUST TO CONFIRM, WHAT I HEARD FROM YOU IS THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD BE OKAY WITH NOT HAVING GENERAL RETAIL SERVICES BE ALLOWED ON THE SITE.
GENERAL RETAIL SALES CONVENIENCE.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH GUS QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONER
SO IT, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S NOT REALLY A DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE OPPOSITION HERE BECAUSE BOTH
[02:15:01]
PARTIES ARE FINE WITH HAVING A RESTAURANT THERE.UH, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, UH, MS. GUZMAN, I AM REALLY CLEAR ON DOES, UH, YOU KNOW, NOT ALLOWING FOR GENERAL RETAIL SALES SOLVE THE ISSUE? IF NOT, WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC, UH, USES THAT YOU WANT TO DISALLOW AND MAYBE STAFF CAN GIVE THE BEST RECOMMENDATION SINCE BOTH PARTIES ARE IN AGREEMENT? THAT RESTAURANT IS FINE THERE.
UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER AHMED FOR THAT QUESTION.
AGAIN, I'M MONICA GOSMAN, CHAIR OF THE NACA CONTACT TEAM.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING, AND, AND IF I'M WRONG, OUR UNDERSTANDING IS FOOD SALES COULD STILL INCLUDE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES THAT SOMEONE CAN WALK OUT WITH.
SO THAT WOULD BE LIKE A CONVENIENCE STORE TO US.
THERE'S RESTAURANT USES AVAILABLE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT EVEN IF FOOD SALES WAS STRUCK OUT, A RESTAURANT CAN STILL BE BUILT.
SO THAT'S WHY WE DON'T SEE WHY IS THERE A PROBLEM STRIKING OUT FOOD SALES IF RESTAURANT USE IS STILL AVAILABLE? WE'RE OKAY WITH A RESTAURANT.
WE'RE OKAY WITH A RESTAURANT WITH OUTDOOR DINING.
WE'RE OKAY WITH A RESTAURANT SERVING, UH, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR CONSUMPTION ON SITE.
THERE'S THE KEY FOR CONSUMPTION ON SITE.
NOW, GRANTED, IT'S ON THE BUSINESS TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE NOT SERVING SOMEONE TO THE POINT OF INTOXICATION.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALWAYS THAT RISK AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT WE'RE OKAY WITH A RESTAURANT THAT SERVES ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.
WE JUST DON'T WANNA SEE A BUSINESS THAT ALLOWS SOMEONE TO WALK IN, PURCHASE AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE, AND THEN WALK OUT AND START DRINKING BY THE TIME THEY'RE IN THE PARKING LOT.
THAT'S OUR ISSUE BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS TOO MUCH.
ALCOHOL CHANGES YOUR BEHAVIOR, AND AS I SAID BEFORE, ALREADY IT'S A PROBLEM AREA.
UH, A DELICATESSEN SOUNDS REALLY COOL.
I I LOVE DELICATESSENS AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THAT CAN'T BE DONE AS A RESTAURANT.
SO HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.
SO THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF THEN.
UH, IT SEEMS LIKE THE, THE REQUEST IS REALLY CLEAR HERE TO FIND SOME WAY TO BE ABLE TO DISALLOW ALCOHOL AS LONG AS IT'S NOT BEING CONSUM CONSUMED ON SITE.
IS THERE A WAY TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT WHILE STILL ALLOWING FOR A RESTAURANT AND POTENTIALLY SOME BASIC, LIKE A DELICATESSEN OR WHATNOT? NO, THERE'S NOT.
BECAUSE IT EITHER FALLS UNDER A RESTAURANT, USE A RESTAURANT, LIMITED ALLOWS SALE BEER AND WINE.
A RESTAURANT GENERAL USE ALLOWS THE SALE OF OTHER ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ALONG WITH FOOD AS LONG, IT'S LESS THAN 51% OF THE RECEIPTS FOR THE BUSINESS.
THAT MAKES WHAT A RESTAURANT INSTEAD OF A COCKTAIL LOUNGE.
UM, SO WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT FOOD SALES, LET ME READ YOU THE DEFINITION OF FOOD SALES.
SO YOU SEE WHERE THE QUANDARY IS.
SO FOOD SALES IS THE USE OF A SITE FOR RETAIL, SALE OF FOOD OR HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTS FOR HOME CONSUMPTION.
THIS INCLUDES GROCERY STORES, DELICATESSENS MEAT MARKETS, RETAIL BAKERIES, AND CANDY SHOPS, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES CONVENIENCE STORES BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE CONSIDER THAT A SMALL GROCERY.
SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CONCERN IS THAT THESE BUSINESSES ALSO DO SELL ALCOHOL THAT CAN BE TAKEN OFFSITE.
UM, THEY'RE NOT A RESTAURANT USE WHERE YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE THE ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION ON SITE WITH FOOD.
UM, AND SO, UH, GENERAL RETAIL SALES CONVENIENCE IS AGAIN LIKE A, A WALGREENS, UH, A SMALL STORE THAT CAN SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE.
ALSO, SAME THING WITH THE FOOD SALES DEFINITION.
IT INCLUDES CONVENIENCE STORES, GROCERY STORES, THINGS THAT WHERE YOU CAN SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.
AND SO THAT IS WHY THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS CONCERNED ABOUT THOSE USES ON THE PROPERTY.
I, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
SO IS THE APPLICANT OKAY WITH REMOVING FOOD SALES AS A USE? SORRY, MS. MICHELLE IS WALKING UP.
NO, WE'RE NOT, WE'VE, WE'VE AGREED TO THROW OUT DOZENS OF THINGS ALREADY.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT, NOT OKAY WITH STRIKING FOOD SALES.
'CAUSE I MEAN, TO ME IT REALLY IS A SEMANTICS ISSUE.
WHAT WE'RE CALLING FOOD SALES IN THIS LAND USE LINE IS THE SAME AS THE CONVENIENCE STORE USE.
IT'S HAS THE SAME NEFARIOUS, UM, ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED.
SO I THINK THAT'S THE STRUGGLE
[02:20:01]
WHEN I'M HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY AS THAT, UM, THE DEFINITION INCORPORATES THEIR CONCERN.UM, AND THAT IT SEEMS LIKE IF YOU HAD A RESTAURANT, A GENERAL RESTAURANT, OR A LIMITED RESTAURANT, YOU COULD STILL HAVE THINGS LIKE A DELI, RIGHT? YOU COULD STILL ORDER FOOD AND TAKE IT TO GO LIKE MANY OF US DO.
BUT IT WOULD PROHIBIT PEOPLE FROM TAKING ALCOHOL TO GO, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN OR I'M INTERESTED IN FOR, UH, IN SUPPORTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? NOT SEEING ANY COMMISSIONERS.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE? COMMISSIONER BAR RAMIREZ? YES.
I MOVE TO, UM, ACCEPT, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH AMENDING EXHIBIT D, WHICH WOULD PROHIBIT GENERAL RETAIL CONVENIENCE AND FOOD SALES.
UM, DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? SECOND? COMMISSIONER HANEY, UM, UM, COMMISSIONER, IF I, IF I MIGHT JUST ASK A QUESTION IF YOU, I, I THINK I GOT LOST A LITTLE BIT HERE.
I CANNOT REMEMBER IF THE APPLICANT WAS OKAY WITH INCLUDING FOOD SALES OR NOT.
SO WE'RE ADDING GENERAL, UH, OKAY.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ AND, UH, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HANEY.
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SURE.
I HAVE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME ON NORTHGATE AND IN THE AREA SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE BUS STOPS.
UM, I DO ANALYSIS OF BUS STOPS AND THEIR PLACEMENT AND LOOK AT AMENITIES AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS, UH, KIND OF SCARY TO WALK AROUND THERE AND I WOULDN'T WANNA BE THERE AT NIGHT.
AND THERE IS A, UM, A CONVENIENCE STORE NOT 800 FEET AWAY.
SO I REALLY DON'T SEE THE NEED.
IT'S THE CONVENIENCE STORE IS AROUND THE CORNER FROM THIS LOCATION THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
SO I FEEL I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS COMING FROM AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THEIR REQUEST.
AND I THINK IF THEY TOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY WERE GONNA HAVE RESTAURANT AND NOW THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY'RE NOT, THEN THEY SHOULD BE OKAY WITH THE, WITH THE CHANGES AS WE'VE SUGGESTED.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING FOR AGAINST THIS MOTION.
COMMISSIONER EMMETT? YEAH, I'LL SPEAK FOR THIS MOTION AS WELL.
IT SEEMS LIKE, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY, UH, YOU KNOW, IN OUR, UH, BACKUP NOTES AS WELL, UH, THE LETTER MENTIONED, UH, THAT THE INTENT IS A RESTAURANT THERE THAT'S BEEN COMMUNICATED.
AND SO EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT SAID THEY WANNA HAVE, UH, FOOD SALES ALLOWED, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S ALIGNMENT ON THE INTENT OF HAVING A RESTAURANT.
AND THIS MOTION, UH, SOLVES THAT, UH, AND REALLY GETS, YOU KNOW, BOTH THE OPPOSITION AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT IN LINE.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WISHING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS MOTION NOT SEEING ANY.
SO THIS IS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HANEY.
THIS WAS, OH YES, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, PERHAPS A SUBSTITUTE, UM, IN MAKING FOOD SALES CONDITIONAL USE.
THEREFORE, IF THAT WERE TO COME BACK IT WOULD BE FINE TUNED.
I STAND ODDS FROM A COUPLE PEOPLE.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? I'LL GO AHEAD AND SECOND THAT.
UM, SO THIS WOULD BE, IS SUBSTITUTE BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER ZAHAR.
UM, THIS WOULD BE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND OTHERS, PLEASE CORRECT ME.
SO THIS WOULD BE STAFF RECOMMENDED, UH, RECOMMENDATION WITH GENERAL READER, RETAIL CONVENIENCE, UM, NOT ALLOWED.
AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE FOOD SALES AS A CONDITIONAL USE.
COMMISSIONER, DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT INTENT.
I THINK THAT'LL WORK WITH EVERYBODY.
SO JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT TO WHERE, UH, WE CAN JUST UNDERSTAND THIS A LOT BETTER BEFORE IT GOES THROUGH.
AND THEN THERE'S A WHOLE NOTHER PROCESS SHOULD THAT COME BE A LOT MORE FLESHED OUT.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WISHING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST? I JUST WANT TO ECHO THAT.
THAT SOUNDS LIKE IT PROVIDES THE MOST FLEXIBILITY GIVEN THE SCENARIO.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? NOT SEEING ANY.
CAN WE GO AHEAD AND TAKE A MO UH, VOTE? THIS WOULD BE ANDERSON AZAR STAFF RECOMMENDATION, GENERAL REGIONAL SERVICES, CONVENIENCE, UM, NOT ALLOWED FOOD SALES AS A CONDITIONAL USE.
THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY FOR ALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT.
[02:25:01]
HEARING ITEMS. UM, THIS TAKES US[Items 21 - 25]
TO OUR, UH, DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS. THESE WERE BY COMMISSIONERS.AND I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ALL OF THESE, UM, TOGETHER BECAUSE IT MATTERS AND WHETHER FOLKS WANT TO STEP OFF OR STEP ON A COMMITTEE.
SO STAFF HAD EARLIER SHARED OUT WITH US, UM, SORT OF WHERE WE STAND WITH APPOINTMENTS.
THERE'S SOME REVISED APPOINTMENTS THAT WE NEED TO DO AND WE HAVE SOME, UM, OTHER FLEXIBILITIES.
I JUST WANNA REMIND FOLKS AGAIN THAT AT THIS POINT WHERE WE STAND, WE HAVE A VACANCY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE A, UM, VACANCY ON THE SOUTH CENTER WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
ALTHOUGH COMMISSIONER ANDERSON IS WILLING TO STEP INTO THAT POSITION.
SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
AND THEN WE STILL HAVE A VACANCY FOR A, UH, FOR AN ALTERNATE BACKUP FOR COMMISSIONER HILLER ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
THAT WOULD MEAN COMMISSIONER HILLER WOULD STILL SERVE ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE, BUT IN CASE HE'S NOT ABLE TO MAKE IT, THE ALTERNATE, UH, WOULD BE CALLED UPON TO JOIN.
IS THERE ANY INTEREST IN SERVING ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE? CURRENTLY? COMMISSIONER POWELL, COMMISSIONER AMAD AND COMMISSIONER LAN ARE ON THERE.
AND THEN AS AN ALTERNATE TO THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COM, UH, COMMITTEE, WHICH COMMISSIONER HILLER IS THE PRIMARY ON THERE? ANYONE? WE CAN CERTAINLY GET BACK TO IT.
THANKFULLY WE'RE NOT AT CRITICAL CAPACITY, BUT I WOULD HIGHLY ENCOURAGE, I THINK WE SHOULD PARTICULARLY I THINK FOR THE COMP PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE, IF WE CAN FIND SOMEONE.
'CAUSE SOMETIMES IT JUST QUORUM CAN BE DIFFICULT IF THERE'S ONE VACANCY.
SO WE SHOULD TRY TO FORWARD THAT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.
COMMISSIONERS AGAIN, WE'RE NOT DONE YET.
YOU CAN THINK THIS OVER AS WE GO THROUGH.
UM, THERE'S A NUMBER OF RENOMINATIONS SO IF FOLKS ARE FINE, I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT MOTION.
AND UM, STAFF IF WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT I'M DOING THIS CORRECTLY.
SO ON CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE, WE ARE RE NOMINATING MYSELF.
COMMISSIONER ZAHAR, COMMISSIONER BARR RAMIREZ.
WE'RE ALSO PUTTING ON COMMISSIONER WOODS ON HERE INSTEAD OF COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING FLEXIBLE ON THAT.
AND WE ARE, LET'S ACTUALLY START THERE.
SO THIS WOULD BE RELATED TO CODES AND ORDINANCES.
RAMEZ ON THERE WITH PHILI MAXWELL ALREADY SERVING A TERM.
DO I HAVE A SECOND ON THIS? COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE.
WITH THOSE THREE APPOINTMENTS, IS THERE ANY OBJECTION? NOT SEEING ANY.
THIS TAKES US TO THE SMALL YEAR PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
CURRENTLY COMMISSIONER HANEY IS STILL CONTINUING HIS TERM AND WILL CONTINUE TO SERVE THAT OUT.
WE WOULD BE, UH, REAPPOINTING COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ AND COMMISSIONER HOWARD TO THE, UH, SMALL YEAR PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
ARE THOSE COMMISSIONERS OKAY WITH STILL BEING APPOINTED TO THAT COMMITTEE? I'M SEEING NODS.
COMMISSIONER POWELL? SO THIS IS
ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? MOTION? COMMISSIONERS NOT SEEING ANY.
AND THIS TAKES US TO THE VACANCY.
THIS SOUNDS SORT OF WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR AGREEING TO SERVE IN THIS.
DO I HAVE A SECOND TO MY MOTION? COMMISSIONER AMED.
SO WE HAVE AZAR AMED FOR THE SALT CENTER WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD FOR COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO BE APPOINTED TO IT.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS? NOT SEEING ANY THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY LAST CALL.
WE WILL KEEP THOSE ON OUR AGENDA UNTIL FILLED.
IS THERE ANY INTEREST IN SERVING AS AN ALTERNATE ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE OR ON THE VACANCY FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
NOT SEEING ANY, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT STAYS ON.
AGAIN, REMINDER, IF THERE'S ANY INTEREST, YOU CAN EMAIL STAFF AND WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE, UM, APPOINTED TO THOSE BODIES AS WELL.
I KNOW WE'RE A LITTLE SHORT TODAY, SO HOPEFULLY WITH MORE COMMISSIONERS ON THE DICE, WE'LL WE'LL BE ABLE TO FILL THOSE SPOTS.
AND THANK YOU ALL FOR THE SERVICE IN THESE BODIES.
[WORKING GROUP/COMMITTEE UPDATES ]
US TO OUR WORKING GROUP AND COMMITTEE UPDATES.THAT'S I NUMBER 26 CODES A JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, THIS WILL BE AN UPDATE FROM ME.
WE'VE NOT HAD A MEETING SINCE OUR, OUR LAST UH, MEETING.
WE HAD TO CANCEL OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING.
SO WE DO NOT HAVE A MEETING THAT TAKES US TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
DO WE HAVE UPDATES FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE? COMMISSIONER POWELL IS OFF THE DESK.
THAT WILL BE COMMISSIONER AMIT YOURSELF.
AND COMMISSIONER LAN IS ON THE NOT PRESENT
[02:30:01]
EITHER.UM, THAT TAKES US TO JOIN SUSTAINABILITY COMM UH, COMMITTEE COMMISSIONER HILLER, DO YOU HAVE ANY UPDATES ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE? NO UPDATES.
UM, SMALLER YEAR PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ, HANEY SKIDMORE.
ANY UPDATES? THERE ARE NO UPDATES.
AND SOUTH CENTER WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.
THAT WOULD'VE BEEN COMMISSIONER MAXWELL AND SHE'S NOT PRESENT.
UM, GOVERNANCE RULES AND PROCEDURES WORKING GROUP.
WE HAVE, UM, JUST TO PROVIDE FOLKS AN UPDATE.
WE JUST NEED TO CHECK IN WITH THE CLERK'S, OFFICE, LAW OFFICE, UM, AND OTHERS TO MAKE SURE AND WITH OUR STAFF TEAM ON PLANNING SIDE AS WELL TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WORKS, UH, SMOOTH.
AND THEN WE'LL BE BRINGING IT BACK LATE SUMMER FOR ADOPTION AND THAT THAT WORKING GROUP WILL, UH, BE DISSOLVED.
CURRENTLY WE HAVE NO OTHER WORKING GROUPS COMMISSIONERS THAT
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
TAKES US TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. DO WE HAVE ANY REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? NOT SEEING ANYTHING.I'LL JUST QUICKLY MENTION COMMISSIONERS THROUGH THE, I'M GONNA HAVE TO REMEMBER THIS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
OUR JUNE MEETINGS DO NOT HAVE ANY, UM, UM, THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ITEMS ON THEM.
WE HAVE SOME OUTSTANDING REQUESTS FOR BRIEFINGS.
WE'LL TRY TO SEE IF WE CAN ADD THEM TO THOSE TWO MEETINGS WITH THE CAVEAT THAT BECAUSE IT IS SUMMER, IT MIGHT BE HARD TO SCHEDULE THOSE BRIEFINGS BECAUSE THERE MIGHT BE DIFFERENT SORT OF FOLKS COMING IN AND OUT.
UM, THAT IS THE ONLY THING I HAVE TO ADD TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT FOLKS WISH TO REQUEST? HANG NONE.
IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND ADJOURN THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 8:36 PM THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.