* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [CALL TO ORDER ] [00:00:03] I'M HAVING A QUORUM PRESENT WITHIN THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM. I NOW CALL THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:02 PM FIRST, LET'S TAKE ROLE. PLEASE LET US KNOW YOU'RE HERE WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME. CHAIR WOODS. I'M HERE, VICE CHAIR HANEY. HERE. COMMISSIONER MAXWELL. HERE. COMMISSIONER AHMED. COMMISSIONER AHMED. IF YOU'RE SPEAKING TO US ONLINE, CAN YOU TRY ONE MORE TIME HERE? THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER LON. SORRY, YOU GOT FROZEN FOR A SECOND. NO PROBLEM HERE. THANKS. COMMISSIONER LON. COMMISSIONER GANNON. HERE. COMMISSIONER BARRERA RAMIREZ. HERE. COMMISSIONER BEDROSIAN. HERE. COMMISSIONER POWELL LOOKS LIKE IS NOT WITH US YET THIS EVENING. COMMISSIONER BRETTON. HERE. COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE. HERE. COMMISSIONER HILLER HERE. WONDERFUL. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE FOR THIS SPECIAL MEETING. AS USUAL, TONIGHT'S MEETING WILL BE HYBRID, ALLOWING FOR A VIRTUAL QUORUM AS LONG AS THE COMMISSIONER SERVING AS CHAIR IS PRESENT IN THE BOARD'S AND COMMISSIONS ROOM. THEREFORE, WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS HERE AT CITY HALL AND IN ATTENDANCE, VIRTUALLY SIMILARLY, SPEAKERS CAN PRESENT HERE FROM THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ROOM OR PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS. PLEASE REMEMBER TO SEND YOUR SIGN-IN SHEET TO OUR STAFF LIAISON PER THE CLERK'S GUIDELINES. AND PLEASE HAVE YOUR GREEN, RED, AND YELLOW ITEMS FOR VOTING. PLEASE REMAIN MUTED WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING AND RAISE YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. IF I DON'T SEE YOU, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO UNMUTE AND LET ME KNOW. VERBALLY, I WANNA RECOGNIZE THAT COMMISSIONER POWELL HAS JOINED US ONLINE AS WELL. WE'LL HAVE ASSISTANCE FROM MS. BROWN IN ANNOUNCING THE SPEAKERS DURING OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS THIS EVENING. MS. BROWN, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? NO. CHAIR. WE DO NOT. THANK YOU. [Consent Agenda] OUR FIRST ACTIVITY TONIGHT IS TO VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, ITEMS THAT ARE CONSENT, APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, POSTPONEMENTS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS, OR NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS. WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA THIS EVENING, SO I WILL READ THAT. AND THAT IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM OUR MARCH 24TH, 2026 MEETING. DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE EDITS TO THOSE MINUTES? OKAY, HEARING NONE, WE WILL CONSIDER THOSE AS A CONSENT ITEM. DO ANY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN FROM THAT ITEM? MS. BROWN, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THAT CONSENT ITEM? NO CHAIR. WE DO NOT. THANK YOU. IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH INCLUDES THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING? MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRETTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE. WITHOUT OBJECTION, THAT ITEM PASSES. THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA. SO WE WILL MOVE INTO OUR STAFF [2. Staff briefing on proposed amendments to City Code Title 25 (Land Development) to adopt a new citywide density bonus program that will replace Density Bonus 90 (DB90) and Vertical Mixed Use (V) combining districts and consist of five new combining districts that allow additional height and land uses and relax site development standards and compatibility in exchange for providing affordable housing and meeting certain other requirements. Presentation by Warner Cook, Principal Planner, Austin Planning. ] BRIEFING ITEM, WHICH IS A BRIEFING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE TITLE 25 I. GOOD EVENING CHAIR, VICE CHAIR, AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS WARNER COOK. I'M A PRINCIPAL PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT, NOW KNOWN AS AUSTIN PLANNING. FORGIVE ME, UH, . AND I'M HERE TODAY TO PRESENT OUR STAFF PROPOSAL FOR A NEW CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM. UH, FIRST BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE DETAILS OF THE DRAFT STAFF PROPOSAL, WE'LL WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CHALLENGES IN AUSTIN AS WELL AS A REMINDER OF WHAT DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS ARE AND HOW THEY WORK BEST AND WHAT, WHAT THEY NEED TO CONSIDER. WE'LL THEN GO THROUGH SOME OF THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND FEEDBACK. WE'VE HEARD ABOUT DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE WE LAUNCH INTO THE DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL. AND THEN BECAUSE DENSITY BONUS TOOLS ARE ONLY ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE REACH INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING HERE AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WE HAVE MANY OTHER TOOLS. SO WE'LL ALSO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON SOME OF THOSE OTHER STRATEGIES THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO POTENTIALLY UPDATE AS WELL OVER THE COMING YEARS IN ORDER TO CONTINUE MAKING PROGRESS ON OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS. AND THEN LASTLY, WE'LL GO INTO NEXT STEPS ON TIMELINE AND HOW THE PUBLIC CAN GET INVOLVED, UH, DURING THIS PROCESS. SO AS IS NO SURPRISE TO THIS COMMISSION AND TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT MAY BE TUNING IN, UM, AUSTIN HAS SEEN TREMENDOUS POPULATION GROWTH OVER THE LAST SEVERAL DECADES, AND HOUSING PRODUCTION HAS NOT GENERALLY KEPT UP WITH THIS GROWTH, ALTHOUGH THAT HAS BEEN CHANGING SOME IN THE RECENT YEARS. UM, AS THESE, AS THIS HAS HAPPENED, HOUSING COSTS HAVE INCREASED, MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR RESIDENTS TO FIND AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT MEETS THEIR BUDGETS. UM, IT IS A PRIORITY FOR COUNCIL AND THE CITY AND TO TRY TO INCREASE THE AVAILABILITY OF AFFORDABLE AND ATTAINABLE HOUSING, ESPECIALLY INCLUDING ALONG THE CITY'S HISTORIC INVESTMENT IN THE PROJECT CONNECT TRANSIT SYSTEM. UH, PROJECT CONNECT, AS YOU KNOW, INCLUDES LIGHT RAIL, A SECOND COMMUTER RAIL AND NEW HIGH FREQUENCY, HIGH CAPACITY RAPID BUS MINES. [00:05:01] UM, THIS HAS BEEN SHOWN IN OTHER COMMUNITIES TO POTENTIALLY INCREASE GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT PRESSURE IN THE AREAS WHERE THE NEW TRANSIT INVESTMENTS CAN GO. AND SO IN AN EFFORT TO MITIGATE THAT POTENTIAL IMPACT, POLICY MAKERS AND STAFF HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR SEVERAL YEARS NOW ON EFFORTS UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT TO, UM, INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE AND INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING THAT'S NEAR THESE FUTURE INVESTMENTS SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN MEANINGFULLY PARTICIPATE IN OUR NEW TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE. AND, UM, SOME OF THE WORK OF THE CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM HAS REALLY GROWN OUT OF WORK UNDER THE ETOD PROGRAM OF WORK. SO TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC ON OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS IN 2017, THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINTS SET A GOAL OF CREATING 60,000 NEW UNITS OVER 10 YEARS, WHICH WE ARE SLOWLY, UH, INCHING UP TO THAT MILESTONE OF 10 YEARS LATER, IT BEING 2026. AND IT ADVOCATES FOR USING MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF TOOLS TO MEET THOSE GOALS. UM, AND CERTAIN TOOLS MEET DIFFERENT AFFORDABILITY LEVELS BETTER THAN OTHERS. SO SOME LOWER, UH, INCOME HOUSING UNITS ARE BEST SERVED BY PUBLIC SUBSIDIES AND GRANTS. OTHER IN MFIS MEDIAN FAMILY INCOMES CAN BE FOUND MORE THROUGH PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS OR TAX INCENTIVES. AND THEN DENSITY BONUSES PLAY A ROLE AS WELL. UM, SO JUST A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A WHOLE ECOSYSTEM OF TOOLS AND WE'RE WORKING ON ONE OF THEM TONIGHT. UM, SPECIFICALLY, UH, WE MEASURE AFFORDABILITY USING MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME, WHICH ALIGNS WITH THE FEDERAL HOUSING, UH, DEPARTMENT'S CALCULATIONS. SO IN AUSTIN, THE CURRENT MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME FOR A FOUR PERSON HOUSEHOLD ON THE TABLE ON YOUR RIGHT IS $133,800, WHICH IS QUITE HIGH. IT'S HIGHER THAN IT'S BEEN IN IN OTHER YEARS PAST. UM, THESE FIGURES HELP DETERMINE WHAT THE INCOME LIMITS FOR RENTAL AND, UH, FOR RENTAL UNITS THAT ARE INCOME SUBSIDIZED CAN BE AT VARIOUS INCOME LEVELS. AND RECENT CAP GAP ANALYSIS BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH AUSTIN HOUSING FOUND THAT GENERALLY HOUSEHOLDS AT THE 80% MFI RANGE AND ABOVE, SO THAT'S ABOUT A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR A FOUR PERSON HOUSEHOLD, ARE ABLE TO FIND RENTAL HOUSING THAT'S AFFORDABLE TO THEM IN ORDER, IN OTHER WORDS, HOUSING THAT DOESN'T COST MORE THAN 30% OF THEIR HOUSEHOLD BUDGET. THE GREATEST NEED OR THE GREATEST GAP WHERE THE PRIVATE, PRIVATE, UH, REAL ESTATE MARKET IS NOT CURRENTLY MEETING THE NEED IS AT 50% MFI AND BELOW. AND SO THAT, THINK, THINK OF THAT AS ABOUT A $65,000 FOR FOUR PERSON HOUSEHOLD THAT TRANSLATES INTO ROUGHLY A $1,500 RENT FOR A TWO BEDROOM HOUSEHOLD. AND, AND THAT AND BELOW IS BECOMING VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND. SO DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS ARE ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE CAN GENERATE ADDITIONAL INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING AT THAT LEVEL. DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS ALLOW A DEVELOPER TO BUILD ADDITIONAL CAPACITY, EITHER THROUGH RELAXED SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT IN EXCHANGE FOR COMMUNITY BENEFITS BEING PROVIDED. AND TYPICALLY THIS IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT IT CAN BE ANY NUMBER OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS IN ADDITION TO HOUSING. WE CURRENTLY HAVE 13 DIFFERENT DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS. AND SINCE THE 2017 HOUSING BLUEPRINT, WHICH I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE STAFF ESTIMATION IS ABOUT 20% OF OUR TOTAL INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS HAVE COME FROM DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS. SO ABOUT A FIFTH OF OUR UNITS HAVE COME FROM THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM TOOL. BUT FOURTH FOUR FIFTHS ARE COMING THROUGH OTHER THINGS LIKE GAP FINANCING AND PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS. UM, AND BECAUSE TEXAS CITY CAN'T REQUIRE INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING BE BUILT BY DEVELOPERS IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS, THESE ARE ALL VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY NEED TO WORK FOR THE DEVELOPERS IN ORDER TO CHOOSE TO USE THEM. THAT MEANS THAT THEY'RE MARKET BASED AND THEIR SUCCESS DEPENDS ON THE CURRENT ECONOMIC AND REAL ESTATE CONDITIONS. UM, AS A RESULT, THEY TEND TO BE, BE MOST EFFECTIVE FOR UNITS IN THAT KIND OF MIDDLE INCOME TO THE MODERATE INCOME RANGE OF 50% TO 80% MFI. UM, WHICH LUCKY FOR US, AT LEAST AT THAT 50% MFI MATCHES THE GAP THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FILL MOST CRITICALLY HERE AT THE CITY IN 2026. BUT AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, OTHER TOOLS LIKE SUBSIDIES OR FEE WAIVERS OR TAX INCENTIVE CAN BE LAYERED ON TOP OF EACH OTHER TO CREATE DEEPER MFI, UH, AFFORDABILITY AT SAY 30%. MFI. OUR CURRENT ECONOMIC CONTEXT LOOKS VERY DIFFERENT THAN IT WAS EVEN FIVE YEARS AGO, AND ESPECIALLY PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC. UM, INTEREST RATES ARE MUCH HIGHER. CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND LABOR COSTS HAVE HAVE INCREASED. AND DEVELOPMENT IN AUSTIN HAS SLOWED. UH, THIS IS PARTLY IN DUE TO OUR OWN SUCCESS OF CREATING SO MANY AND DELIVERING SO MANY RENTAL UNITS IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS THAT THE MARKET HAS SOFTENED TO SOME EXTENT AND PARTIALLY DUE TO JUST LARGER ECONOMIC FORCES THAT ARE IMPACTING AUSTIN AND THE NATION IN GENERAL. UM, THIS REDUCES THE LIKELIHOOD OVERALL THAT DEVELOPERS ARE GOING TO BE USING A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM [00:10:01] JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE LESS LIKELY TO BUILD PERIOD. THAT ALSO MEANS THAT THEY'RE LESS LIKELY TO BUILD WITH A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM TODAY. UM, HOWEVER, AT THE DIRECTION OF COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE DONE A MARKET ANALYSIS AND TRIED TO REVIEW OUR EXISTING DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS. SOME OF THIS WORK WAS PUBLISHED IN EARLY 2025, AND THOSE FINDINGS HELP INFORM THIS PROPOSAL. SOME OF THE KEY FINDINGS THAT IMPACT HOW WE, HOW WE DELIVERED THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDE THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM CLEARER AND MORE CONSISTENT. SO NOT TRYING TO TWEAK IT A LITTLE BIT, UM, I HEARD THE OTHER DAY THE IDEA THAT IF IT'S 5% DIFFERENT, IT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT DIFFERENT. AND THAT'S REALLY DIFFICULT IN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR OUR STAFF AND FOR THE COMMUNITY TRYING TO BUILD THESE, THESE UNITS. SO WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THINGS MORE CONSISTENT SO THAT THEY'RE EASIER AND DON'T COMPETE WITH ONE ANOTHER OR CONFUSE THE COMMUNITY. UM, ALSO ANOTHER FINDING THAT I THINK IS ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO REMIND THE COMMUNITY OF IS THAT TALLER BUILDINGS DON'T ALWAYS EQUAL MORE BENEFITS. UM, TALLER BUILDINGS COST MORE ONCE YOU GET TO A CERTAIN THRESHOLD OF HIGH RISE CONSTRUCTION, WHICH ACTUALLY CAN MEAN THAT THE OVERALL VIABILITY OF A PROJECT OR A BONUS PROGRAM PROJECT CAN DECREASE. SO JUST KEEPING IN MIND THAT CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND LAND VALUE AS WELL AS THE BUILDING TYPE CAN AFFECT HOW LIKELY SOMEBODY WOULD BE TO USE A BONUS PROGRAM. AND THEY ALSO ARE GONNA WORK BETTER IN SOME PLACES THAN OTHERS. AUSTIN IS NOT ONE REAL ESTATE MARKET. AUSTIN IS A BUNCH OF SUB-MARKETS. SOME OF THEM ARE STILL DELIVERING NEW CONSTRUCTION TODAY. OTHERS HAVE SLOWED AND THE BENEFITS OF HOUSING MAY DEPEND ON THOSE FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS. LAST LITTLE PIECE OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION. , UH, OVER THE SUMMER AND INTO THE FALL, STAFF HAD THE CHANCE TO UNDERSTAND A NEW PIECE OF STATE LEGISLATION THAT WENT INTO EFFECT IN SEPTEMBER, KNOWN AS SENATE BILL EIGHT 40 OR SB EIGHT 40. UM, IT'S A RECENT STATE LAW THAT ALLOWS MIXED USE AND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING TO BE BUILT BY RIGHT ON PLACES THAT ARE ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL USES. UM, AND IT AIMS TO INCREASE HOUSING SUPPLY WITHOUT REQUIRING ANY REZONING. SO NOBODY HAS TO COME IN FRONT OF YOU TO ASK FOR A REZONING CASE. UH, IF THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SENATE BILL EIGHT 40, THEY JUST GO STRAIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR SITE PLANS. SO THAT CAN BE REALLY BENEFICIAL IN INCREASING HOUSING CAPACITY. BUT IT DOES IMPACT THE LIKELIHOOD THAT SOMEBODY WOULD CHOOSE TO USE A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM BECAUSE IF THEY CAN BUILD ENOUGH OF WHAT THEY WERE ALREADY INTERESTED IN BUILDING WITHOUT COMING IN FOR A REZONING CASE, THEY'RE LIKELY TO DO THAT. OKAY, SO WHAT HAVE WE HEARD ABOUT DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS SO FAR? AND YOU ALL ARE ON THE FRONT LINES HEARING A LOT OF THIS IN YOUR CASES. UM, BUT WE'VE ALSO DONE ENGAGEMENT, ESPECIALLY IN THE FALL OF 2024 THROUGH THE ETOD OVERLAY WORK, UM, AS WELL AS LISTENING TO COMMISSION MEETINGS, COUNCIL MEETINGS AND EVERYTHING. AND AUSTINITES HAVE EXPRESSED A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT OPINIONS, BUT PRIMARILY THEY FALL INTO SOME OF THESE CATEGORIES, UM, LOOKING THAT, LOOKING AT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ADDITION TO OTHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS. SO HOUSING MAIN CONTINUES TO BE THE TOP PRIORITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY WITH THESE BONUS PROGRAMS, BUT THEY ARE INTERESTED IN OTHER BENEFITS, A MIX OF THEM. UM, PEOPLE WOULD PREFER TALLER BUILDINGS, NEWER TO TRANSIT AND MID-RISE, AND SHORTER BUILDINGS FARTHER AWAY FROM TRANSIT LINES. UM, PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR A MIX OF INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS AT AT VARIOUS INCOME LEVELS, NOT JUST ONLY DEEP AFFORDABILITY OR MODERATE AFFORDABILITY. SO WHEN THAT'S POSSIBLE, WE LOOK TO ACHIEVE THAT. UM, THERE'S ALSO AN INTEREST IN BEING SENSITIVE TO SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT OR BEING ABLE TO KIND OF TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION SITE SPECIFIC ASPECTS IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT A NEW DEVELOPMENT BLENDS WITH ITS EXISTING CONTEXT. AND ALSO A DESIRE TO INTENTIONALLY AND PROACTIVELY BE PRESERVING EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, ESPECIALLY IF THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY GOT INCOME RESTRICTIONS TIED TO IT. SO WE'VE TRIED TO TAKE ALL OF THAT INTO ACCOUNT AS WE CREATED WHAT IS NOW BEING CALLED THE THE CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM COUNCIL DIRECTED US IN JUNE TO CREATE THIS NEW PROGRAM. THEY'RE LOOKING FOR A TIERED STRUCTURE, SO MULTIPLE DIFFERENT HEIGHT OFFERINGS, UH, WITH A RANGE OF, YEAH, AS I SAID, A RANGE OF ADDITIONAL HEIGHTS. UH, THEY WANTED US TO LOOK AT HEIGHTS BELOW AND ABOVE 30 ADDITIONAL FEET. UM, 30 ADDITIONAL FEET IS WHAT'S OFFERED IN THE EXISTING DENSITY BONUS 90 OR DV 90 PROGRAM. THEY ALSO ASKED US TO CONSIDER WHAT'S FEASIBLE IN THE CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS FOR AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS, UM, TO LOOK AT CONSIDERING COMMUNITY BENEFITS BEYOND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IF THEY, IF THEY WORK INTO THAT MARKET REALITY, UM, TO CONSIDER COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS AND WHAT THOSE MIGHT LOOK LIKE FOR THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM PROJECTS AND TO CONSIDER INCLUDING REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS OR UNIT REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS, UM, IN THIS NEW BONUS PROGRAM. AS PART OF THAT, THEY ALSO ASKED US TO EITHER UPDATE OR ALIGN OR FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO WITH THE EXISTING BONUS PROGRAMS THAT, THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN ANY GEOGRAPHY IN THE CITY. SO THAT'S VERTICAL MIXED USE AND DB 90 AND TO [00:15:01] CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, ANY PHASES OF DBE TODD THAT WERE TO COME. SO OUR GOALS ARE TO AS ALWAYS, ENCOURAGE THE CREATION OF NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PROVIDE MORE BONUS OPTIONS THAT CAN BE TAILORED TO DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD CONTRACTS ACROSS AUSTIN. THE PROGRAM HELPS MAKE THE REQUIREMENTS MORE CONSISTENT AND TRANSPARENT. UH, THIS WILL MAKE THE PROCESS MORE STREAMLINED FOR DEVELOPERS AND REVIEWERS AS WELL AS MORE KIND OF UNDERSTANDABLE TO THE NEIGHBORS WHERE THESE PROJECTS MAY BE BUILT NEAR. AND IT ALSO ACCOUNTS FOR THE IMPLICATIONS OF SENATE BILL EIGHT 40 AND MAKE SURE THAT OUR BONUS PROGRAMS AREN'T GONNA BE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE NEW BUYRIGHT ENTITLEMENTS ALLOWED UNDER THE STATE LEGISLATION. SO THE NEW PROGRAM WILL CONSIST OF FIVE NEW COMBINING DISTRICTS THAT CORRESPOND TO DIFFERENT HEIGHT TIERS. ONLY ONE TIER WOULD BE USED PER PROPERTY, SO YOU CAN'T STACK THEM ON TOP OF EACH OTHER. UM, THE CHART ON THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE TIERS AS WELL AS WHAT THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY BE CALLED IN THE ZONING CODE. SO THE FIRST TIER OR THE LEAST INTENSE WOULD BE ONE THAT OFFERS NO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, BUT DOES RELAX OTHER SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT'S COMPARABLE TO OUR EXISTING VMU PROGRAM AND WILL BE CALLED CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM BASE. UM, THE, IF YOU CALL IT ZERO, IT LOOKS TOO MUCH LIKE AN O SO IT'S BASE, UH, IF WE GO TO THE NEXT TIER, THAT WOULD BE A NEW TIER. WE DON'T HAVE A COMPARABLE HEIGHT RIGHT NOW FOR THAT. THAT IS 15 ADDITIONAL FEET ABOVE A BASE HEIGHT, UH, DBC 15. UH, THE NEXT TIER IS 30 FEET, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO OUR DB 90 AND E TWO OD SUBDISTRICT TWO HEIGHTS TODAY. THEN WE GO TO ANOTHER NEW TIER PLUS 45 FEET, AND THEN FINALLY PLUS 60 FEET DBC 60, WHICH IS COMPARABLE TO THE ETOD SUBDISTRICT ONE HEIGHT TODAY. SO WE ARE FILLING IN THE GAPS AND REPLACING EXISTING HEIGHT TIERS ALONG THE WAY WITH THE HOPE BEING THAT, UM, THESE NEW TIERS CAN BETTER CORRESPOND TO THE MARKET AND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF TOWN INSTEAD OF JUST A YES NO ON 30 FEET, WHICH IS I THINK A LOT OF WHAT THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL IS OFTEN FACED WITH DECIDING THE NEW CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM WOULD BE ALLOWED IN COMMERCIAL ZONES, NO RESIDENTIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONES. THE COMMERCIAL ZONES THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO BE COMBINED WITH THE SPACE DISTRICT ARE LISTED ON THE SCREEN, BUT INCLUDE ALL OF OUR OFFICE BASE ZONES, OUR GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES, COMMUNITY, COMMERCIAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, AS WELL AS OUR COMM COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY BASE ZONE AND POTENTIAL FUTURE MIXED USE ZONES. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR EXISTING KIND OF VMU AND DB 90 APPLICABILITY AND WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING FOR THE CITYWIDE ARE THE NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE BASE ZONE AND THE COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY BASE ZONE. UH, JUST DRAWING YOUR ATTENTION TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE TODAY IS ALLOWED UNDER SENATE BILL EIGHT 40 TO REDEVELOP WITH RESIDENTIAL TO 45 FEET. SO IT FELT LIKE THERE WAS NO PLANNING PRINCIPLE TO NOT HAVE IT AS PART OF THE BONUS PROGRAM AS WELL, SINCE WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE INCOME RESTRICTED HOUSING, EVEN ON NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE SITES. UH, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THINGS, COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY BEING A MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL ZONE, IT ALREADY TODAY ALLOWS RESIDENTIAL BUY, RIGHT, AND MOSTLY WHAT WE SEE ARE SITE DEVELOPMENTS, SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BEING MODIFIED THROUGH PLAN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS OR PDAS FOR THE CH PROPERTIES. UM, THOSE DON'T INCLUDE BENEFITS THAT THE CITY IS ABLE TO ENFORCE OR, UM, MONITOR OVER THE LONG TERM, TYPICALLY PRIVATE, UH, RESTRICTIVE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN NEIGHBORS AND DEVELOPERS. SO OFFERING THE CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM TO THIS BASE HEIGHT ALLOWS THE CITY TO GET IN THERE AND KIND OF PLAY THAT COMPLIANCE ROLE. UH, SO THE COMMUNITY DOESN'T HAVE TO. AND THEN LASTLY, I'LL NOTE THAT COUNCIL JUST INITIATED WORK TO CREATE MIXED USE BASE ZONES. AND OUR INTENTION IS THAT AS THOSE ARE DEVELOPED AND SCOPED AND EVENTUALLY POTENTIALLY ADOPTED, UH, THEY WOULD ALSO BE ELIGIBLE TO MATCH WITH THE NEW CITYWIDE PROGRAM. A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM IN GENERAL WORKS WHEN IT'S BALANCING THE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS AND THE ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS. UM, SO THE CARROTS AND THE STICKS FOR THE DEVELOPER. UM, I'LL GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE DIFFERENT TYPES OF BENEFITS AND ENTITLEMENTS IN THE NEXT FEW SLIDES AND HOW THEY'LL WORK. UM, BUT, BUT JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT THESE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR FOR THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AGAIN, THE MOST IMPORTANT AND KEY THING THAT WE'RE GETTING OUT OF OUR BONUS PROGRAMS, WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING IS, UH, KIND OF A CARRYING FORWARD OF A LOT OF OUR RECENT POLICY AND AND MARKET ANALYSIS SHOWING THAT 10% OF THE UNITS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO BE AFFORDABLE. THAT'S 10% FOR OWNERSHIP, 10% FOR RENTAL, 10%, WHETHER YOU'RE GETTING NO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT OR 60 ADDITIONAL FEET OF HEIGHT. IT'S JUST VERY SIMPLE, 10% ACROSS THE BOARD, UH, REGULATION, WHICH HELPS FOLKS UNDERSTAND WHAT WILL BE HAPPENING. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT IN OWNERSHIP, WE'RE TARGETING 80% MFI AS THE AFFORDABLE [00:20:01] SALES PRICE OF THOSE CONDOMINIUMS. FOR THE RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS, WE WOULD BE TARGETING 50% MFI FOR OWNERSHIP, WE ALLOW A FEE IN LIEU FOR RENTAL STAFF IS NOT RECOMMENDING A FEE IN LIE. WE'RE ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, UH, SOME PEOPLE KNOW THEM AS CHAPTER FOUR 18 OF CITY CODE WILL ALL APPLY TO THE NEW CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM. THIS INCLUDES BOTH TENANT PROTECTIONS, DEFINITIONS AND COMPLIANCE MEASURES AND UNIT REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS. SO SOME OF THOSE THINGS LOOK LIKE NOTICE TO THE TENANTS WHEN THE PROPERTY WILL BE REDEVELOPED, PAYMENT OF FOUR MONTHS RENT AND FEES, AS WELL AS MOVING EXPENSES, UH, A RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL FOR THE NEW UNITS, THE ABILITY TO BREAK YOUR CURRENT LEASE WITHOUT PENALTY ONCE YOU'VE RECEIVED NOTICE, AND TO GET THAT FULL SECURITY DEPOSIT BACK SINCE THE BUILDING WILL BE DEMOLISHED. UM, THE PIECE OF THIS THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM DB 90 AND VMU TO THE LARGEST DEGREE IS THE UNIT REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HEARD A LOT FROM OUR COMMUNITY. THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT EXISTING NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING BEING REDEVELOPED THROUGH A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM. IT CAN BE REDEVELOPED BY RIGHT, OF COURSE, ANYWAYS. BUT, UM, WE DON'T WANNA NECESSARILY BE TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE IT. WE'RE TRYING TO RAISE THE THRESHOLD OR MAKE IT SLIGHTLY MORE DIFFICULT TO REDEVELOP THESE, THESE SITES. AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT FOR THOSE QUALIFYING EXISTING MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURES THAT ARE RENTING AT 70% MFI OR BELOW TODAY, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MEET, UM, THE REDEVELOPMENT UNIT REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS THAT LOOKS LIKE THE EXISTING CODE REQUIREMENT, WHICH REQUIRES EITHER A ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENT OR TWICE THE BONUS PROGRAMS REQUIREMENT. ROUGHLY THAT TRANSLATES TO SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE MINIMUM OF 10% AND UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 20%. SO IN SOME CASES, DEPENDING ON THE EXISTING COMPLEX OF THE APARTMENTS, THERE MIGHT BE NOT VERY MANY OF THEM ON A SITE. OR MAYBE YOU'RE TAKING ONE SMALL SITE AND A COMMERCIAL SITE AND PUTTING THEM TOGETHER. UM, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET ALL OF THE EXISTING UNITS IN A FULL ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENT. IN OTHER CASES, IN VERY LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES WITH HUNDREDS OF UNITS, YOU'RE UNLIKELY TO BE ABLE TO DO ALL FULL ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENT FOR, FOR THOSE SITES. UM, BUT YOU ARE GONNA HAVE 20% OF THE UNITS BE AFFORDABLE INSTEAD OF 10. UH, THE FINAL COMMUNITY BENEFIT THAT'S REQUIRED OF DEVELOPERS USING THIS PROGRAM IS TO, UM, MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A MIX OF USES, BUT THAT IT REMAINS PRIMARILY A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT. UH, PREVIOUSLY EXISTING PROGRAMS TENDED TO LIMIT THE LOCATION OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES OR THE NUMBER OF TOTAL FLOORS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, OR WHICH USES COULD BE ON WHICH FLOORS. UM, AND ALL OF THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL AS COUNCILS MAYBE A LITTLE BIT TOO IN THE WEEDS. AND ADDITIONALLY, UH, WITH SENATE BILL EIGHT 40, THE, UH, THE NEW KIND OF STANDARD THAT'S BEEN SET STATEWIDE IS 35% ANYWHERE WITHIN THE BUILDING. 35% OF IT COULD BE NON-RESIDENTIAL FOR ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS. SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MATCH THAT AND NOT BE ANY MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THAT. UM, SO THAT COULD BE ON ANY FLOOR. THE MINIMUM YOU HAVE TO, UH, PROVIDE OF NON-RESIDENTIAL IS THE STANDARD PRACTICE OF 75% OF THE GROUND FLOOR STREET FRONTAGE, BUT THE SITE SPECIFIC WAIVER THAT EXISTS IN DB 90 AND DBE TODD WALL, SO CONTINUE ON. SO IF, IF EVERYTHING THAT I JUST LAID OUT WAS MET THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS, THE TENANT PROTECTIONS, THE UNIT REPLACEMENT, THE MIX OF USE STANDARDS, IF YOU DO ALL OF THAT AND YOU HAVE THE ZONING ON YOUR PROPERTY, THEN YOU CAN ACCESS THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS. UM, I ALREADY WENT THROUGH THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT TIERS, BUT JUST TRYING TO EXPLAIN AGAIN THAT THESE RANGE FROM NO ADDITIONAL FEET IN HEIGHT TO 60 ADDITIONAL FEET IN HEIGHT, UM, BUT YOU CAN'T ADD THEM ALL TOGETHER. SO THIS IS HOPEFULLY GOING TO STREAMLINE FOLKS ZONING STRINGS. SO YOU JUST HAVE ONE BONUS PROGRAM APPLIED INSTEAD OF TWO, THREE BONUS PROGRAMS IN YOUR STRINGS GOING FORWARD. UM, AS, AND AGAIN, THAT JUST HELPS THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTAND WHAT'S ACTUALLY POSSIBLE TO BE BUILT BY THEM FOR THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS, UH, WE WILL RECOMMEND WE ARE RECOMMENDING RELAXING THEM FROM THE CITYWIDE STANDARDS. SO ON THIS SLIDE, AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT SMALL APOLOGIES, BUT WE HAVE ON THE LEFT HAND THE CITYWIDE STANDARD FOR COMPATIBILITY, WHICH IS KNOWN AS ARTICLE 10 COMPATIBILITY. UH, IT BASICALLY STEPS UP AND YOU CAN ONLY REACH YOUR FULL DEVELOPMENT HEIGHT AFTER 75 FEET FROM A TRIGGERING SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY. UM, THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, WE HAVE KIND OF THE VARIOUS DENSITY BONUS COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE TODAY. WHAT STAFF'S PROPOSAL IS FALLS KIND OF IN BETWEEN EXISTING DB 90 STANDARD AND EXISTING DBE TODD SUBDISTRICT ONE STANDARD. UM, WHICH BASICALLY MEANS THAT THERE WOULD BE A 25 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER, NO BUILDING ZONE, [00:25:01] AND THEN YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO REACH UP TO 90 FEET IF YOUR BONUS PROGRAM ALLOWED YOU TO GET TO 90 FEET. SOME OF THE PROJECTS WOULDN'T NECESSARILY REACH 90 FEET IF THEY DIDN'T GET ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, AND THEN AFTER THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO STEP UP TO YOUR FULL FEET OF HEIGHT. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING. AND THEN LASTLY, WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR ZONING TEAM TO LOOK AT EXAMPLE USES TO ALLOW, PARTICULARLY IN OFFICE SPACE ZONES, WHICH TEND TO HAVE FEWER PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES WITHIN THEM. UM, POTENTIALLY WE ALREADY INCLUDE THINGS LIKE RESTAURANTS, UH, RETAIL GROCERY STORES, BUT WE'VE ALSO HEARD INTEREST IN THINGS LIKE SALONS AND, AND SOME OTHER USES. SO WE'RE WORKING THROUGH WHAT THAT LIST SHOULD BE. UM, AND THAT IS THE DENSITY BONUS PROPOSAL. I'M GOING TO VERY BRIEFLY HAND IT OVER TO ERICA LEE WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO TALK THROUGH SOME OF THE OTHER STRATEGIES. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. UM, SO I AM WORKING IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO SEE WHAT OTHER WAYS THE CITY COULD HELP INCENTIVIZE AND OR SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN ADDITION TO KIND OF THE, THE SUBSIDIES AND PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE AT PRESENT. SO WE'VE WORKED WITH CONSULTANTS TO IDENTIFY POTENTIAL, UM, POTENTIAL OPTIONS. THOSE INCLUDE THINGS LIKE POLICY CHANGES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSING, UM, OUR PROGRAMS AND FUNDING ON WHERE THE NEED IS AT PRESENT, WHICH IS, UM, AS WARNER MENTIONED, UNDER 50% MEDIA AND FAMILY INCOME. SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF POLICY CHANGES THAT COULD HELP BETTER ALIGN, UM, WHERE WE'RE, WHERE WE'RE IN WHAT DEVELOPMENTS, UM, WHERE WE FOCUS OUR, OUR INCENTIVES AND OUR FUNDING. UM, THE OTHER THING WE HAVE CERTAINLY HEARD IS THAT, UM, HAVING A QUICKER REVIEW TIMELINE COULD HELP, UM, MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING MORE AFFORDABLE AND MAKE IT MORE FEASIBLE TO INCLUDE AFFORDABLE UNITS. SO WE'RE CONTINUING TO LOOK INTO WAYS TO STREAMLINE THAT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS, INCLUDING, UM, POTENTIALLY LOOKING TO REDUCE, UH, OR ELIMINATE, UH, UNNECESSARY LICENSE AGREEMENTS. UM, ALSO LOOKING INTO ISSUES WITH, UM, HOW TO MAKE THE INSPECTION PROCESS FASTER, THINGS LIKE THAT. THEN WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT FINANCIAL INCENTIVES, BOTH IN TERMS OF PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS, THE POTENTIAL FOR OPERATING COST SUBSIDIES, WHICH WE KNOW HAVE OPERATING COSTS HAVE CONTINUED TO INCREASE, UM, THE POSSIBILITY FOR AFFORDABLE UNIT BUY DOWN, LIKE WE WANT TO GET TO THAT 30% MFI LEVEL, YOU KNOW, HOW MIGHT WE DO THAT, PERHAPS EVEN IN DENSITY BONUS DEVELOPMENTS. AND THEN, UH, WE'RE ALSO LOOKING INTO A NEW POTENTIAL FUND THAT COULD BE USED, UM, TO HELP SUBSIDIZE SOME OF THOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS. AND THEN, UM, THE LAST MAJOR CATEGORY IS JUST TRYING TO THINK ABOUT HOW, UH, DEVELOPMENTS CAN KEEP THEIR PRICES DOWN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. SO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO, UM, ENCOURAGE INFILL DEVELOPMENT WHERE THERE IS EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE SO THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS CAN BE LOWER. UM, ALSO LOOKING INTO MAKING SURE THAT THE CITY IS SUPPORTING MODULAR OR MANUFACTURED, UH, BUILDING TECHNOLOGY IF THEY ARE, UH, IN FACT LESS EXPENSIVE. UM, BUT ALSO, UH, DURABLE. AND THEN WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO BE LOOKING AT PARTNERSHIPS AND MAKING SURE THAT, UM, ENTITIES ARE, ARE PARTNERING EITHER PUBLIC PRIVATE OR PUBLIC PUBLIC, UM, TO GET THE GREATEST BENEFIT, UM, AND, AND THE MOST AFFORDABLE UNITS. SO I'LL BE WORKING TO DIVE INTO THESE POTENTIAL IDEAS OVER THE, THE NEXT SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS TO SEE WHICH OF THEM WE CAN BRING TO FRUITION. BUT THE IDEA IS THAT THESE COULD BE PAIRED WITH DENSITY BONUS DEVELOPMENTS SO THAT, UH, ALTOGETHER IT CAN HELP REALLY SUPPORT, UM, THESE, THESE DENSITY BONUS PROJECTS. JUST QUICKLY TO WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE NEXT STEPS AND TIMELINE, UH, THIS SLIDE SHOWS WE'VE, WE'VE REALLY, UH, IN EARNEST BEGAN THE PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT IN FALL LAST YEAR AFTER WE DID A KIND OF A BIG ANALYSIS AND LISTENING SESSION FOR ABOUT THE YEAR OR SO BEFORE THAT. UM, THIS SPRING WE'VE BEEN FINALIZING THE STAFF PROPOSAL AND STARTED REACHING OUT TO DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS TO SET UP BRIEFINGS, UM, GET READY TO PRESENT TO YOU ALL. UH, AND THEN WE HAVE OUR [00:30:01] COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT REALLY KICKING OFF, ESPECIALLY OVER THE MONTH OF APRIL. UM, WE'LL BE GOING TO THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE FOR A RECOMMENDATION ON THE 15TH OF APRIL. WE'LL BE BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A RECOMMENDATION AND A HEARING ON THE 28TH OF APRIL, AND THEN WE'LL BE AT COUNCIL ON THE 21ST OF MAY. SO THAT IS OUR CURRENT TIMELINE. UM, OUR, THERE WE GO. UH, OUR MAIN IN-PERSON EVENT THAT WE'RE CO-HOSTING WITH AUSTIN HOUSING. THE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY FAIR WILL BE, UM, SATURDAY, NOT THIS SATURDAY, BUT NEXT SATURDAY ON THE 11TH OF APRIL AT THE CONLEY G**O SENIOR ACTIVITY CENTER. UM, IT'LL BE FROM 10 TO ONE AND WE WILL HAVE BOTH HOUSING RESOURCES, UH, FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR HOUSING ASSISTANCE, AS WELL AS MULTIPLE DIFFERENT POLICY INITIATIVES INCLUDING THIS CODE AMENDMENT, UM, IF YOU WANNA WEIGH IN ON KIND OF FUTURE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY POLICY IN THE CITY. SO COME CHECK US OUT THERE. WE ALSO WILL HAVE A VIRTUAL OPEN HOUSE ON THE 13TH THE FOLLOWING MONDAY, SO YOU CAN REGISTER FOR THAT ON OUR SPEAK UP PAGE, UM, WHICH IS SPEAK UP AUSTIN.ORG/CITYWIDE DB. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION. THAT WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT WAS PRESENTED SO CLEARLY AND REALLY APPRECIATE ALSO THE BACKGROUND SO WE CAN KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE COMING INTO THIS. UM, I THINK BECAUSE THIS IS A COMPLICATED ONE WITHOUT OBJECTION, I WOULD LOVE TO SUSPEND OUR NORMAL RULES AND GIVE EVERY COMMISSIONER A CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS FOR EIGHT MINUTES. AND I'M VERY OPEN TO MULTIPLE ROUNDS OF QUESTIONS IF WE NEED TO DO THAT. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, WHO WOULD LIKE TO START US OFF? COMMISSIONER BRETTON, GO AHEAD. I LOOKED AT THIS AND, AND WROTE DOWN SOME QUESTIONS IN ADVANCE, HAPPY THAT WE HAVE BACKUP. UM, OKAY, SO I HAVE A, A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS. WHY DOESN'T THIS APPLY TO MULTIFAMILY? UH, WHEN DENSITY BONUS E TODD DOES, DO YOU EXPECT TO SEE REZONINGS FROM MULTIFAMILY? I'M LOOKING AT THESE REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS. DO YOU EXPECT TO SEE REZONINGS FROM MULTIFAMILY INTO SOME OF THESE COMMERCIAL BASE DISTRICTS, WHICH IS WHY IT'S NOT APPLYING TO MULTIFAMILY? WHAT, WHAT'S THAT LOOK LIKE? SURE. STEVIE GRID HOUSE DIVISION MANAGER, UM, AUSTIN PLANNING. SO WE DO ANTICIPATE THAT FOLKS WOULD POTENTIALLY COME IN WITH A REZONING REQUEST THAT WOULD REZONE THE BASE ZONE CONCURRENTLY WITH ASKING FOR THE DENSITY BONUS. SO TO YOUR POINT, THAT ABSOLUTELY COULD HAPPEN. UM, THE REASON, PART OF THE REASON WHY WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING JUST SORT OF APPLYING THEM BY RIGHT TO, TO RESIDENTIAL AS WE WANNA HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONVERSATION AROUND THAT, UM, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CASE WHERE WE DO HAVE NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT IS KIND OF COMING THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS, APPLYING THIS TO THE RESIDENTIAL. UM, THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT IT DOESN'T, E TODD'S A LITTLE WEIRD, UM, BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT BONUS AVAILABLE FOR THE MULTIFAMILY, BUT WE DON'T GIVE THEM ANY ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL USES. SO THERE'S NOT REALLY A MIXED USE PROJECT AT THE END OF THE DAY. IT'S JUST AT, IT'S A FULLY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT THAT'S TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THE BONUS. UM, AND SO AS WE MOVE INTO KIND OF A CITYWIDE PERSPECTIVE ON THESE, I THINK WE'RE ENVISIONING THAT THE FINAL PRODUCT WOULD BE MORE OF A MIXED USE PRODUCT, WHICH IS GONNA MAKE MORE SENSE, UM, IN A PLACE WHERE COMMERCIAL ZONING MAKES SENSE AS A BASE ZONE. YEAH. AND THE COMMISSION WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO EVALUATE WHETHER A CHANGE TO A COMMERCIAL BASE ZONE MAKES SENSE AND STAFF WOULD STILL AS PART OF THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR A CASE. AND THEN I JUST FOR A LITTLE ADDITIONAL CONTEXT, ABOUT ONE THIRD OF OUR EXISTING NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS ON COMMERCIAL BASED ZONES ALREADY TODAY, AND ABOUT TWO THIRDS IS ON MULTIFAMILY OR SOME KIND OF RESIDENTIAL BASED ZONE TODAY. JUST FOR YOUR CONTEXT, THAT'S VERY HELPFUL. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT AS WELL. I WOULD LIKE TO GO TO THIS SORT OF MIXED USE CONVERSATION FOR A SECOND. SO PART OF THE MIX OF USE REQUIREMENTS YOU HAVE IS THAT 65% SHOULD BE RESIDENTIAL IF YOU ARE PARTICIPATING IN THE PROGRAM. UH, IT FEELS A LITTLE BIT RIGID TO ME. DID YOU CONSIDER, FOR EXAMPLE, MAYBE JUST REQUIRING THAT THE BONUS AREA THAT IS GRANTED THROUGH WHATEVER PROGRAM TIER THEY'RE PARTICIPATING IN BE REQUIRED AS HOUSING? I DO ASSUME THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO JUST GIVE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WHEN THERE'S NO HOUSING, RIGHT? SO YOU WANT TO MAKE A REQUIREMENT? YEAH, SO THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT PLAY WITH WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE 65%. I MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION THAT MATCHING THE BUY RIGHTS AND BILL EIGHT 40 ENTITLEMENT. BUT ON TOP OF THAT, IT IS REALLY OUR BOTH IN, IN STATE LAW THAT ALLOWS US TO DO DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS. THE FOCUS IS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SO THERE NEEDS TO BE A HOUSING COMPONENT OR ELSE WE CAN'T REALLY, UM, CALL IT A BONUS PROGRAM. AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MORE HOUSING IS IN THIS MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, THE MORE INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS OR FEE IN LIE IS GENERATED FROM IT. UH, IF YOU START GOING [00:35:01] TO LIKE A 50 50 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL KIND OF, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE JUST TAKING AWAY THE TOTAL UNITS THAT YOU ARE THEN COUNTING TOWARDS THE BONUS REQUIREMENT OR THE AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENT. SO, YOU KNOW, SINCE THIS IS A HOUSING FIRST POLICY, WE FELT LIKE THIS WAS ACTUALLY INCREASING THE FLEXIBILITY QUITE A BIT SINCE WE'RE NO LONGER LIMITING THE LOCATION, BUT MAINTAINING OUR FOCUS ON LIKE A PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECT. WONDERFUL. UM, I DON'T EXPECT THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE THIS INFORMATION ON HAND CURRENTLY, BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE THE, UH, AMOUNT OF UNITS THAT ARE UNDER THAT 70% MFI. UH, THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THAT SENSE OF SCALE AS TO THE NEW, A NEW PROGRAM GOING INTO EFFECT AND AFFECTING THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL IN EVALUATING THE PROPOSAL. UM, I'M INTERESTED HOW YOU CAME TO RECOMMEND THE SAME REQUIREMENTS ACROSS THE, THE TIERS COM, FOR EXAMPLE, RIGHT? THE THE MINIMUM 10% OR ONE TO ONE REPLACEMENT WELL AND ONE TO ONE REPLACEMENT UP TO MAXIMUM 20%. I WOULD EXPECT THAT THAT WOULD PUSH AN APPLICANT INTO WANTING THE HIGHER TIER WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE NOTE THAT YOU MADE, THAT IF YOU GO HIGHER, SOMETIMES COSTS DO BUMP DEPENDING. SO PART OF THE REASON FOR 10% ACROSS THE BOARD WAS BACK TO THE JUST CONSISTENCY AND SIMPLICITY IS KING IN, IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS. UM, SO, SO REALLY, YOU KNOW, THE TALLER THE BUILDING, WE'RE STILL GETTING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, 10% OF A LARGER BUILDING IS STILL MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE THINKING ON JUST WHY 10% REGARDLESS OF HEIGHT TIER. UM, AND THEN WHY THE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT BETWEEN 10 TO 20, THAT IS EXISTING CODE THAT'S IN CHAPTER FOUR 18 AND WAS, UH, AN AMENDMENT BY COUNSEL DURING THE ETOD OVERLAY KIND OF PROCESS IN SPRING 2024. WE HAVE NOT YET SEEN THAT UNIT REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT IN ACTION, IF YOU WILL. YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T ACTUALLY SEEN A AN ETOD OVERLAID SITE PLAN GO ALL, YOU KNOW, GO FORWARD I'LL THROUGH. SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY KIND OF STAFF DATA ON WHAT'S WORKING AND WHAT'S NOT WORKING ABOUT THAT. AND AGAIN, SINCE IT WAS RECENT COUNCIL POLICY, WE FELT THERE WASN'T A REASON TO TO CHANGE IT AT THIS POINT. FAIR ENOUGH. UM, UH, QUESTION FOR SOME OF THESE SMALLER PROJECTS WHERE 10% MIGHT ACTUALLY END UP CREATING A FRACTION OF A UNIT, UM, IS THERE EITHER AN OPTION IN THE CURRENT REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT CODE OR IN THIS PROPOSAL THAT WOULD ALLOW A DEVELOPER TO BUY OUT THAT FRACTION? SO ANY FRACTIONAL CALCULATIONS ALWAYS ROUND UP FOR OUR UNITS , SO THANK YOU. YES. UM, WHY DID YOU CHOOSE NOT TO RECOMMEND FEE IN LIEU FOR RENTAL? YEAH, SO THAT HAS BEEN OUR CURRENT POLICY AND WE'VE HAD GOOD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT, UM, OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS ON THAT. UH, THEY ARE ABOUT TO KICK OFF THE UPDATE FOR THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT. AND WE DO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, IT'S VERY COMPLEX, EVEN JUST TALKING IN A ROOM FULL OF LIKE VERY SMART HOUSING PLANNERS, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE PROS AND CONS ABOUT BOTH ONSITE AND FEE AND LOU, AND THEY MEET KIND OF DIFFERENT GOALS HONESTLY FOR THE CITY. UM, YOU KNOW, ONSITE HELPS US GET GEOGRAPHIC DISPERSION, FOR EXAMPLE, FEE AND L COULD POTENTIALLY BE TARGETED AT LOWER MFI UNITS OFFSITE, FOR EXAMPLE. SO THERE'S A LOT OF PO GOOD THINGS ABOUT BOTH, BUT IT FELT LIKE A VERY LARGE POLICY CONVERSATION THAT THAT IS COMPLEX AND NUANCED THAT DESERVE MORE THAN JUST THIS ONE NARROW CODE AMENDMENT WAS GOING TO BE ABLE TO GIVE IT. UM, SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING RENTAL BE ON SITE. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, WE ARE AWARE THAT THIS IS A POLICY CONVERSATION THAT FOLKS ARE STARTING TO HAVE. OKAY. UM, UH, ALSO A QUESTION THAT I, I MAY NOT EXPECT YOU TO HAVE THIS INFORMATION ON HAND. UH, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THE NUMBERS ON THE OTHER 80% OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED OUTSIDE OF DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS, HOW THAT'S BROKEN DOWN COMPARED TO FEE WAIVERS AND PROPERTY TAX, NOT ABATEMENT, UH, BUT THE, THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS, UH, I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE HOW THOSE HAVE PERFORMED. UM, LET'S SEE. I THINK I HAD ONE MORE IN HERE. MAYBE I DIDN'T. NO, I, I DON'T THINK I DO. THAT'S ALL OF MY QUESTIONS. THANKS COMMISSIONER BRATTON. AND WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU IF YOU END UP HAVING MORE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS. YES. COMMISSIONER AHMED, GO AHEAD. THANK YOU CHAIR. UH, AND FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU SO MUCH TO STAFF FOR PUTTING TOGETHER VERY COMPREHENSIVE AND HELPFUL AND DETAILED PRESENTATION TO HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU GUYS ARE THINKING THROUGH IN TERMS OF THE SOLUTION HERE. UM, [00:40:01] MY FIRST QUESTION IS JUST KIND OF A HIGH LEVEL QUESTION AND THAT IS, UM, YOUR PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARY THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED, UH, IN THE SLIDES SUGGEST THAT AUSTINITES WANT TALLER BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT. WOULD YOU AGREE THAT TALL BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT ALL ELSE EQUAL ALL THINGS EQUAL ARE A GOOD THING THAT WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE? YES, . OKAY. SO IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANNA ENCOURAGE, THEN WHY DO WE HAVE DENSITY PROGRAMS THAT ONLY ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO BUILD, UH, UH, TALL BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT IN EXCHANGE FOR HOW IMPLICITLY DISINCENTIVIZING TALL BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT OVER SHORTER BUILDINGS? BECAUSE WE'RE ADDING ADDITIONAL COSTS IF DEVELOPERS WANT TO BUILD TALL NEAR TRANSIT VERSUS IF THEY WANT TO BUILD, UH, UH, SHORTER. SO WHY, UH, WHY FLIP AROUND THE INCENTIVE, UH, FOR THEM WHEN WE REALLY WANT THEM TO BUILD TALL? SHOULDN'T WE BE ADDING MORE COSTS IF THEY'RE BUILDING SHORT, UH, BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT? I WAS GONNA SAY, I, I THINK WE HEARD MOST OF YOUR QUESTION. YOU DID BREAK UP THERE, BUT, BUT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS JUST REPEATED IS HELPFUL. UH, WHY, WHY NOT TALLER BY, RIGHT? IS THAT GEN GENERALLY SOMETHING I'M, YEAH, I'M ESSENTIALLY SAYING IF WE'RE INCENTIVIZING, IF WE WANT TALLER BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT, THEN WE SHOULD ALL THINGS EQUAL ADD MORE COSTS TO DEVELOPERS LOOKING TO BUILD SHORT BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT, NOT TALL BUILDINGS, NEAR TRANSIT. SO WHY ARE WE ADDING ADDITIONAL COSTS AND THEREBY DISINCENTIVIZING, TALLER BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT INSTEAD OF THE OPPOSITE IF WE WANT THOSE TALL BUILDINGS TO MEET OUR, UH, HOUSING GOALS? YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, STEVE. GREAT HOUSE DIVISION MANAGER. UM, I THINK PART OF IT IS REALLY THAT TALL BUILDINGS NEAR TRANSIT IS NOT OUR ONLY GOAL FOR OUR TRANSIT LINES. UM, AND A LOT OF THE GOALS FOR THE CITY, FOR OUR TRANSIT LINES ARE ALSO DISCOURAGING DISPLACEMENT OF EXISTING LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES ALONG THOSE LINES, ENCOURAGING HOUSING THAT WILL ALLOW FOLKS TO ACCESS THE LINES THAT AREN'T, UM, NECESSARILY ALL KIND OF LUXURY UNITS. LIKE KEEPING OURSELVES FROM A PLACE WHERE WE COULD HAVE KIND OF ALL TALL, YOU KNOW, ALL OF OUR, OUR TALLEST BUT MOST LUXURY HOUSING ALONG OUR TRANSIT LINES AND THE FOLKS THAT NEED ACCESS TO THE TRANSIT THEN ARE LIVING SOMEPLACE ELSE. AND THAT'S PROBLEMATIC ALSO. UM, SO I THINK THIS IS ATTEMPTING TO KIND OF BALANCE, UM, MULTIPLE GOALS THAT SOMETIMES ARE COMPETING JUST BY DEFINITION. THAT'S THE, THE, WHAT WE GET TO DO AS POLICY MAKERS IS TRY TO, UM, BALANCE POTENTIALLY COMPETING GOALS. I THINK THERE'S A CONVERSATION TO BE HAD THOUGH FOR WHAT LEVEL OF BUYRIGHT ENTITLEMENT MAKES SENSE IN AUSTIN IN LOCATIONS AROUND TRANSIT, UM, THAT WE WILL BE TEEING UP AT LEAST A PIECE OF THAT CONVERSATION AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH CREATING THE NEW, UM, MIXED USE ZONES. UM, SO I DEFINITELY INVITE, UH, INVITE FOLKS TO DIG IN ON THAT AND THINK ABOUT LIKE, IS THERE A A MIXED USE ZONE THAT MAKES SENSE, THAT HAS A VERY HIGH INTENSITY BY RIGHT, THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE IN PARTICULAR LOCATIONS. WHAT ARE THE, THE KIND OF GROUND RULES FOR WHERE FOLKS WOULD RECOMMEND APPLYING THAT AND HOW DOES, HOW DOES THAT WORK AND INTERPLAY WITH THE DENSITY BONUS? THE PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE HERE WITH, UM, THIS EVENING TO SHARE IS BY DEFINITION A KIND OF A DENSITY BONUS PROPOSAL THAT IS LOOKING AT BOTH HOW DO WE INCENTIVIZE MORE I INTENSE DEVELOPMENT ALONG OUR TRANSIT LINES, BUT ALSO HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT WE'RE MAINTAINING KIND OF THE, UM, INCOME RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE UNITS AND ALLOWING THE COMMUNITIES, UM, THAT NEED THE TRANSIT TO CONTINUE TO ACCESS THE TRANSIT. UH, I THINK IT'S GREAT TO HEAR THAT YOU'RE LOOKING INTO BY RIDE ALLOWING FOR TALLER BUILDINGS. AND I THINK DURING SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE HEARD, UH, IN LIGHT OF, OR, UH, AFTER SB EIGHT 40 WHEN WE'RE, UH, TALKING ABOUT THE FALLOUT FROM THAT OR WHATNOT, THERE WERE SOME, UH, PROPOSALS OR UH, UH, INDIVIDUALS DURING PUBLIC COMMENT TALKING ABOUT THIS IDEA OF JUST ALLOWING BUY RIGHT TALLER BUILDINGS, ENCOURAGING THAT, GETTING MORE TAX REVENUE FROM THAT AND THEN USING THAT TAX REVENUE FOR COMMUNITY BILL, UH, BENEFITS, WHETHER IT'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR WHATEVER THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS ARE. BUT IN THE CASE OF, UH, THESE PROGRAMS, IS THERE ANYTHING OTHER THAN HEIGHT THAT WE CAN DO? BECAUSE IDEALLY IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE THEM TO HAVE AFFORDABLE, INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THEIR PROJECTS, YOU KNOW, TO KEEP THE INCENTIVES ALIGNED, IDEALLY WE ARE, UM, GIVING THEM SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T REALLY WANT THEM TO DO RIGHT. UH, BECAUSE WE'RE ADDING SOME ADDITIONAL COSTS TO GIVE THEM THAT. SO IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WE COULD GIVE THEM THAT'S NOT HYPE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING WE WANT, UH, IN TRANSIT CORRIDORS OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS HAD THOUGHT ABOUT AS YOU WERE KIND OF THINKING ABOUT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS HERE TO, UH, SOLVE THE ISSUE? SO YEAH, SO HEIGHT IS THE PRIMARY, UH, ENTITLEMENT THAT TENDS TO BE GRANTED IN THESE BRO BONUS PROGRAMS, [00:45:01] BUT I DIDN'T MENTION THAT IT WILL ALSO WAIVE FLOOR AREA RATIO, ANY KIND OF MAXIMUM DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENTS. IT DECREASES SETBACKS ON THE LOT. IT, AS I MENTIONED, RELAXES COMPATIBILITY SIGNIFICANTLY AS COMPARED TO THEIR BUY RIGHT COMPATIBILITY. SO THERE ARE OTHER THINGS, AND ESPECIALLY FOR INFIELD DEVELOPMENT, COMPATIBILITY CAN BE INCREDIBLY RESTRICTIVE. UM, SO JUST, I, I DON'T WANNA MAKE IT SOUND LIKE HEIGHT IS THE ONLY THING, BUT IT IS THE PRIMARY TOOL BASED ON THE WAY THAT WE REGULATE OUR BUILDING FORMS. UM, YOU KNOW, PREVIOUSLY THINGS LIKE WAIVING PARKING REQUIREMENTS COULD HAVE BEEN INCENTIVE, BUT YOU KNOW, FOR VERY GOOD REASONS WE NO LONGER HAVE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. SO THAT KIND OF IS AN INCENTIVE OFF THE TABLE, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST THESE ARE THE POLICY DECISIONS THAT, THAT WE HAVE. AND SO HEIGHT REALLY IS THE TOOL IN AUSTIN THAT WE HAVE. RIGHT. AND I WAS ONLY HARPING ON HEIGHT BECAUSE YOU SPECIFICALLY SAID YOU WANNA INCENTIVIZE HEIGHT IN TRANSIT AREAS AND IT WOULD, AND THAT'S WHY, IF YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING, THERE'S THIS MISALIGNMENT, RIGHT? UH, IT WOULD BE GREAT IF THERE WAS SOMETHING USED THAT WE DIDN'T WANT, UH, UNLIKE THE HEIGHT. BUT ANYHOW, LEMME MOVE ON TO ONE OTHER THING. UH, I WANTED TO ADD TO, UH, COMMISSIONER BRETON'S CONCERN ABOUT REQUIRING PROJECTS, UH, USING THE CITYWIDE DB, UH, TO BE AT LEAST 65% RESIDENTIAL. I, I KNOW WHEN YOU ANSWERED THIS QUESTION, YOU SAID THERE WAS SOME REASONS THERE HAD TO BE A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT, BUT I COULD SEE SOME SUBSTANTIAL COMMUNITY BENEFIT FROM HAVING TALL BUILDINGS IN SOME OF THESE AREAS THAT ARE MORE THAN 50% COMMERCIAL. LIKE FOR INSTANCE, AN URBAN MALL, WHICH A LOT OF OTHER BIG URBAN CITIES HAVE AND WE DON'T HAVE HERE IN AUSTIN. AND SO, UH, WHY NOT HAVE A DENSITY PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS FOR SOME OF THESE TYPE OF BUILDINGS THAT MIGHT BE MORE THAN 50% COMMERCIAL, BUT COULD HAVE A LOT OF SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT FOR OUR, UH, COMMUNITY AND CITY. SO WE DID CON WE HAVE CONSIDERED KIND OF WHAT, WHAT TOOLS ARE AVAILABLE FOR TALLER OR DENSER COMMERCIAL FORWARD BUILDINGS, EITHER A HUNDRED PERCENT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS OR PRIMARILY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS OUTSIDE OF THIS SINGLE BONUS PROGRAM, IS TO CONTINUE USING LIKE TOOLS LIKE THE PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BUT HOPEFULLY STREAMLINED A PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS SO THAT IT'S NOT AS CUMBERSOME OR CREATE MAYBE A, A PUD LIGHT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED. UM, SO WE, WE HAVE NOT AT THE CITYWIDE SCALE SEEN THE NEED FOR A TOOL THAT KIND OF INCENTIVIZES PRIMARILY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT TALLER HEIGHTS. YEAH, AND I THINK I WOULD I JUST SAY, OH, OH, SORRY, PLEASE. SORRY. IF I COULD ADD TO THAT, UM, I THINK THAT THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD NOTE IS JUST IN THE, THE SORT OF CONVERSATIONS OF THE, UH, THE PO I I DID IT , THE POLICY GOAL THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE, UM, IN, IN SORT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH KIND OF WHERE THESE WOULD BE APPLIED AT THE CORRIDOR LEVEL IMPACTING NEIGHBORHOODS AND KIND OF A DESIRE TO HAVE THAT DISPERSAL OF ACTUAL HOUSING UNITS. SO THAT'S SORT OF THAT THERE IS LIKE A POLICY CONVERSATION THERE WHEN WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE, THE COMMUNITIES AROUND THESE ABOUT SORT OF WHAT THE BENEFITS ARE THAT THEY WANNA SEE IN THAT BUILDING THAT IS GETTING EXTRA ENTITLEMENTS FROM THE CITY, A LOT OF INTEREST IS THERE AND MAKING SURE THAT THE AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE PRESENT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT IT'S PROVIDING ADDITIONAL HOUSING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK THE POLICY CONVERSATION, UM, GETS A LOT, A LOT DIFFERENT. UM, IF IT BECOMES SORT OF A, A FEE IN LIEU OF HOUSING ONLY OR PRIMARILY A FEE IN LIEU, UM, OR, AND THAT'S HOW WE'RE CALCULATING IT, WHERE FOLKS ARE PROVIDING, UM, FUNDING FOR HOUSING IN EXCHANGE FOR A TALLER COMMERCIAL BUILDING, THAT POLICY CONVERSATION IS A LOT DIFFERENT. GOT IT. AND, AND I ONLY ASK THAT BECAUSE I'VE SEEN OTHER URBAN AREAS LIKE NEW YORK AND OTHERS WHERE MULTI-STORY TALLER BUILDINGS THAT HAVE A LOT OF COMMERCIAL ACTUALLY ADD A LOT OF VIBRANCY AND MAKE MORE PEOPLE WANNA LIVE IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS. LIKE THE URBAN MALL EXAMPLE I GAVE COMMISSIONER AHMED, I THINK YOU, YOU COULDN'T HEAR, BUT YOU'RE AT TIME. BUT IF YOU DO HAVE MORE QUESTIONS AFTER EVERYONE'S HAD A CHANCE TO GO, WE CAN CERTAINLY COME BACK TO YOU. OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS. YES. COMMISSIONER POWELL. UH, JUST A QUICK NOTE. UM, FIRST OFF, I WANT TO COMMEND Y'ALL FOR THE 50% MFI LEVEL. I THINK IT'S, IT'S A GOOD RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY FEEDBACK OF, YOU KNOW, 60% FEELS LIKE ALMOST AT A POINT WHERE SOMETIMES FOLKS CAN, I DON'T WANNA SAY GAME THE SYSTEM, BUT MAYBE WHERE IT FEELS LIKE THERE'S EXTRA FLEXIBILITY, WHEREAS 30%, AS I KNOW FROM UH, SUPPORTING SOME PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS REQUIRES A WHOLE LOT OF WRAPAROUND SERVICES. SO COULD, COULD YOU TELL US MORE ABOUT HOW Y'ALL KIND OF FIXATE ON THAT 50% MFI NUMBER AND WHAT THE RESEARCH AND DATA WAS MOVING Y'ALL TOWARDS TO GET THERE? YEAH, AND UM, I'LL JUST SAY FOR EXISTING CONTEXT, VMU AND DB 90 AND DB TAUGHT ALL OF THOSE KIND OF RANGE ALL THE WAY UP TO 80% [00:50:01] WITH VMU IN SOME CASES TODAY. SO THERE'S REALLY A SMATTERING ACROSS OUR EXISTING PROGRAMS, BUT LIKE WE SAID, WE REALLY WANTED TO TARGET IN AT THE AREA OF MOST NEED. AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO ERICA TO MAYBE EXPLAIN SOME OF THE RESEARCH THAT HER AND HER CONSULTANT TEAMS WERE DOING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT NEED WAS. IF YOU WANNA SPEAK MORE ABOUT WHAT THE 50% IS IN AUSTIN TODAY. SURE. UM, WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT, UH, MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW IS OFTEN CLOSE TO 60% OF, OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME. AND THE REAL NEED IS FOR HOUSING FOR ESSENTIAL WORKERS WHO ARE OFTEN MAKING, YOU KNOW, AT THE 50% MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME AND BELOW. AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THE, THE GAPS IN HOUSING, UM, THE GAP IS ACTUALLY GREATEST AT THE 30% MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME LEVEL, BUT, UM, BUT THERE IS STILL A SIGNIFICANT GAP, UM, UP TO 50%. SO, SO REALLY JUST TRYING TO MATCH OUR TOOLS, UM, WITH THE NEED, WHICH IS, WHICH IS HOW WE LANDED AT THE 50%. AND WARNER MAY HAVE SAID THIS, BUT UM, SOME OF OUR MORE RECENT DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS HAD AN OPTION OF LIKE 12% AT 60% MEDIUM FAMILY INCOME OR 10 AT 50. SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SORT OF JUST CONTINUING TO TO POINT TOWARDS, UH, THE GREATER NEED AT THE 50% MFI. UH, ABSOLUTELY. I JUST WANT TO DEFINITELY SECOND THAT. I THINK, UM, FROM THE RESEARCH I'VE SEEN, IT SHOWS EXACTLY WHAT Y'ALL ARE SHARING IS THAT THAT 50% REALLY GETS CLOSER TO THE NEED. AND AGAIN, THAT 30% IT IS OF COURSE THAT IS THE BIGGEST NEED ALWAYS, BUT REQUIRES SO MANY, UH, BASICALLY SUBSIDIES FOR THOSE DEVELOPMENTS TO PENCIL OUT OR HAVE ANY HOPE OF PENCILING OUT. SO, UH, JUST WANTED TO COMMEND AND APPRECIATE Y'ALL WITH THAT. AND SIMILARLY, NOT A QUESTION, BUT JUST THE SIMPLICITY OF FIXING IT AT 10% I THINK IS, IS VERY, VERY HELPFUL. UM, AND I HOPE AS THIS, YOU KNOW, PROCEEDS AND, UH, EVENTUALLY GOES INTO EFFECT THAT, UH, THE COMMUNITY CAN START TO, IT'S AN EDUCATIONAL ELEMENT. THE COMMUNITY CAN START TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 50% AND 60% AND 80%, UM, BY NATURE OF THIS POLICY EXPLICITLY CALLING OUT 50%. SO THAT, THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE FOR NOW. I MIGHT HAVE QUESTIONS LATER, BUT JUST WANT TO COMMEND Y'ALL ON FOLLOWING THE RESEARCH AND THE DATA THERE. THANKS, COMMISSIONER POWELL, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER GANNON. OKAY. THANK YOU GUYS FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. IT'S VERY COOL. I LOVE SEEING THE EFFORT TO KIND OF PUT EVERYTHING TOGETHER, FIGURE IT OUT. UM, WILL THESE BE REPLACING LIKE VMU ARE, ARE THERE GONNA BE SOME OF THE DENSITY BONUSES THAT ARE TAKEN OFF THE BOOKS AND REPLACED WITH THESE? SO OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THAT FOR VMU AND DV 90, WHICH KIND OF HAVE DIRECT REPLACEMENTS WITH THE NEW CITYWIDE PROGRAM, THAT WE WOULD STOP ACCEPTING NEW REZONING APPLICATIONS FOR THOSE. BUT THAT THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ALREADY HAVE DASH V OR DASH DB 90 WOULD CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THEIR EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS. UM, SO, SO BASICALLY COUNSEL WOULD ADOPT THE NEW PROGRAMS AND THEN ALL NEW REZONING APPLICATIONS WOULD GO THROUGH THE NEW PROGRAM AND THE KINDA EXISTING PROGRAMS IN THOSE CASES WOULD BECOME LEGACY PROGRAMS AND REMAIN IN CODE SO THAT SITE PLANS COULD STILL BE SUBMITTED FOR THOSE FOLKS THAT DO HAVE THOSE ENTITLEMENTS. OKAY. UM, SO WE HAVE 13, 13 DENSITY BONUSES CURRENTLY. RIGHT? UH, I, UH, MOST OF THOSE ARE GEOGRAPHICALLY SPECIFIC. OKAY. EITHER WITHIN OUR TODS OR DOWNTOWN OR ETOD OR THE PUD ORDINANCE IS TECHNICALLY DENSITY BONUS, SO YEAH. YEAH. AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD A LITTLE BIT OF NUANCE TO THAT. SHOULD COUNCIL DECIDE THAT THEY WANTED TO TAKE THE POLICY ACTION? THEY COULD CERTAINLY DIRECT LIKE A FUTURE PROJECT TO REZONE. UM, BUT WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE'RE BASICALLY PUTTING THE TOOLS ON THE BOOKS. WE'RE SURE NO LONGER ACCEPTING NEW APPLICATIONS FOR THE OLD TOOLS THAT THESE ARE REPLACING. UM, AND WE COULD DO CITY INITIATED REZONING IN THE FUTURE, BUT THAT'S OKAY. NOT THE INITIAL RECOMMENDATION. COOL. UM, AND THEN JUST GOING THROUGH, UM, I HAVE QUESTIONS ON, UH, SORT OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND THE ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE IDENTIFIED. UH, I GUESS STARTING WITH COMPATIBILITY, UM, WITH THE COMPATIBILITY REFORM THAT WE DID RECENTLY, THERE WERE EXCEPTIONS OR EXEMPTIONS, SORRY, FOR, YOU KNOW, 16 UNITS OR LESS AND SITES THAT ARE UNDER A CERTAIN SIZE, WOULD WE BE CARRYING THOSE EXEMPTIONS OVER INTO THIS NEW, UH, COMPATIBILITY? SO THOSE EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE BAKED INTO THE CITYWIDE STANDARD HAVE NOT BEEN BAKED INTO OUR DENSITY BONUS RELAXATIONS BEFORE. IT'S KIND OF JUST A WHOLESALE REPLACEMENT OF THE CITYWIDE STANDARD WITH THE NEW DENSITY BONUS STANDARD. UM, I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT FAMILIAR WITH ALL THE EXEMPTIONS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, SO I DON'T WANNA SAY WHETHER THEY SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T BE INCLUDED. [00:55:01] I HADN'T CONSIDERED THAT. MM-HMM . UH, UP TO THIS POINT. I THINK THAT THE, I MEAN, I THINK THAT WE DID GREAT WORK ON COMPATIBILITY AND, UH, BUILDING THOSE EXEMPTIONS IN REALLY INCENTIVIZES KIND OF A SMALL SITE DEVELOPMENT. UM, YOU GUYS PROBABLY KNOW I'M A BIG SINGLE STAIR FAN. I THINK THAT THESE ARE, UH, YOU KNOW, WELL CALIBRATED KIND OF WHAT WOULD THAT TAKE? ENCOURAGE. YEAH. RIGHT. ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TAKE A SHOT, RIGHT. . UH, BUT I THINK THAT THOSE EXEMPTIONS HELP ENCOURAGE, UH, THESE SMALLER FORMAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, LEND ITSELF TO MORE FINE GRAIN URBANISM AND, UM, I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF COMMUNITY BENEFIT TO THEM. UM, SO I, SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, HOW THOSE THINGS START LOOKING. I MEAN, THAT MIGHT BE TOO IN THE WEEDS. I, I KNOW THIS IS KIND OF A, IT'S ONLY THREE, SIX PAGES HERE. WE CAN'T COVER EVERY, THAT SEEMS LIKE A FANTASTIC KIND OF AS PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERS AMENDMENTS AT YOUR NEXT MEETING, WHICH WILL ABSOLUTELY BE WHAT'S HAPPENING. LIKE THAT SEEMS LIKE A GREAT AMENDMENT. AND THEN, AND THEN, UM, I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THERE'D BE, UH, SITE STANDARDS THAT ARE RELAXED BEYOND JUST HEIGHT. UM, COULD YOU TALK MORE ABOUT THOSE? YEAH, SO THOSE, UH, TODAY INCLUDE IN DECREASING THE FRONT AND SIDE AND INTERIOR YARD SETBACKS, UM, AS WELL AS WAVING ANY FLORIDA AREA RATIO, UH, OR DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE REQUIREMENT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN PLACE FOR THE SITE. UM, I THINK BUILDING COVERAGE IS ALSO WAIVED. THERE'S, THERE'S A WHOLE LIST OF THINGS THAT ARE THERE IN THE EXISTING DB 90 AND KIND OF VMU. SO WE'RE CARRYING THOSE SITE STANDARD MODIFICATIONS FORWARD. SO SOME OF THOSE WOULD ALREADY BE WAIVED BY SB EIGHT 40. RIGHT. PRIMARILY THE FLOOR AREA RATIO IS THE BIG THING THAT'S ALREADY WAIVED BY RIGHT. WITH SB EIGHT 40, THE SB EIGHT 40 BY RIGHT. DEVELOPMENT IS LIMITED TO 54 DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE. UM, SO THE DWELLING UNIT CAP BEING REMOVED THROUGH THE BONUS PROGRAM OKAY. IS POTENTIALLY STILL QUITE AN INCENTIVE DEPENDING ON WHAT A PROJECT IS LOOKING TO DO. SURE. YEAH. NO, THAT'S GREAT. UM, AND THEN, UH, YOU HAD MENTIONED REMOVING UNNECESSARY LICENSING AGREEMENTS. IS THAT FOR STREET TREES? SO WILL BE, WELL, PROBABLY NOT STREET WELL, I, I MEAN PROB WELL, WELL ACTUALLY , SORRY, THAT HAD TO THINK THAT ONE THROUGH. UM, I DON'T KNOW , THAT IS, THAT IS THE DISCUSSION THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. OKAY. OKAY. BUT, BUT YES, WORKING WITH TRANSPORTATION TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT WHICH ARE THE THINGS THAT REALLY NEED, UH, LICENSE AGREEMENTS AND WHICH ARE THE THINGS THAT DON'T. OKAY. UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO IT YET. AND DOES THAT, UM, DOES THAT FOLD INTO THE OTHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS? UH, OR I GUESS WHAT ARE THE OTHER COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT, THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED? AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN TALK ABOUT, UM, DESIGN STANDARDS. I SAW THAT IN THERE, BUT I WASN'T SURE WHAT THE DESIGN STANDARDS REFERENCED. YEAH. SO THE MAIN COMMUNITY BENEFITS ARE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THE REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND THE MIX OF USE THAT YOU ARE GETTING. UM, OBVIOUSLY MANY OF OUR DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS ADD IN OTHER OPTIONS FOR COMMUNITY BENEFITS OR REQUIRE ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY BENEFITS. UM, LIKE DOWNTOWN HAS DESIGN STANDARDS, LIKE YOU JUST MENTIONED. WHILE WE DID HEAR THAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD REALLY PREFER A MIX OF THOSE. LOOKING AT THE MARKET REALITY TODAY, IT'S DIFFICULT FOR EVEN JUST THE 10% TO PENCIL IN MOST OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS AUSTIN. SO TRYING TO MAKE THIS A CITYWIDE PROGRAM THAT WORKS AT KIND OF A WIDE SCALE, THE FOCUS BEING ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THAT WAS WHERE OUR RECOMMENDATION IS COMING FROM. SO YOU WON'T SEE ADDITIONAL KIND OF OPEN SPACE BENEFITS OR TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE THINGS BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS, IT'S REALLY KIND OF A CONTEXT AGNOSTIC PROGRAM. UM, BUT THAT NEEDS TO RESPOND TO KIND OF RENTS THAT ARE VERY DIFFERENT IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF TOWN. SURE. NO, THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, UH, HELPFUL. THANK YOU. UM, AND THEN WITH AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED, UH, THERE'S KIND OF A MATRIX ON THE, UM, THE, THE MFI RATE THAT YOU CAN DO. SO IF, IF FOR SALE, UH, WE'RE TRYING TO HIT 80%, YOU CAN GET THAT THROUGH A MIXTURE OF, YOU KNOW, 60 AND A HUNDRED PERCENT. ARE WE BRINGING IN A MA LIKE, UH, AVERAGING, I GUESS FOR THE MFI INTO THIS, THAT IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'VE HAD FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE DENSITY BONUS STUDY. WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THAT AT THIS TIME. UM, BUT, OR AT LEAST IN THIS PROGRAM, . YEAH. AND I THINK THE PRIMARY, SINCE WE'RE TRYING TO TARGET THE 50%, WE CAN'T GO A WHOLE LOT LOWER THAN 50%. SO LIKE HOW YOU WOULD WANNA GET THERE WOULD BE ALLOWING SOME UNITS LOWER AND SOME UNITS HIGHER, WHICH WOULD THEN FOLKS WOULD PROBABLY JUST COME IN AT 60 AND THEN THEY WOULDN'T BE MEETING THE NEED. SO IT'S A LITTLE HARDER, [01:00:01] BUT LOWER THAT PERCENTAGE. MFI GETS THE HARDER TO DO AN AVERAGING APPROACH, THEN IT BECOMES, YEAH. AND THEN ON THE OWNERSHIP SIDE, 80% TENDS TO REALLY BE THE, THE LOWEST THAT WE'VE SEEN THAT HOMEOWNERS CAN STILL QUALIFY FOR KIND OF TRADITIONAL MORTGAGE PRODUCTS AS WELL. SO IF, EVEN IF THE DEVELOPER COULD DELIVER UNITS THAT COULD SELL IT 60% MFI, IT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE HARD TO FIND HOMEOWNERS THAT COULD PURCHASE, THAT COULD QUALIFY TO PURCHASE THOSE UNITS. SO THAT'S, THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT WE'VE SEEN AS A POTENTIAL HURDLE THAT IS A REASON THAT WE TEND TO STICK AT 80% FOR OWNERSHIP. CAN I DO ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THAT? YOU MAY NOT, BUT WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU IF YOUR QUESTION DOES NOT GET ANSWERED. I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER GANNON. UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER MAXWELL'S GOT QUESTIONS NEXT. YEAH. AND I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA ASK IF WE COULD BRING UP THE PRESENTATION AND LOOK AT SLIDE 26, JUST 'CAUSE I WANTED TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS. AND AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE SLIDES, I'D LIKE TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO MY DISTRICT, UH, DISTRICT FIVE, BECAUSE A LOT OF THOSE VMU BUILDINGS ARE ALL ALONG THE SOUTH LAMORE CORRIDOR AND Y'ALL MADE 'EM LOOK BEAUTIFUL, SO THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. . NOT ONLY WAS THE PRESENTATION INFORMATIVE, IT ALSO LOOKS GREAT. UM, SO JUST WALKING THROUGH THIS EXAMPLE, UM, I NOTICED IN HERE THAT THE ZERO IS 45, UM, BUT WE KNOW THAT THERE'S KIND OF A RANGE IN TERMS OF WHERE WE MIGHT USE THIS. SO JUST TALKING THROUGH THIS ONE, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IF YOU GO FROM 45 TO 60, YOU'RE AT 105, BUT WE MIGHT HAVE CASES WHERE THIS IS ACTUALLY A HIGHER OR LOWER, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, SO THE 45 BEING KIND OF THE SB EIGHT 40 MINIMUM HEIGHT, I, I KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY NECESSARILY THE, THE HEIGHT OF ALL OF THE LOWEST BASE ZONES THAT WOULD, UM, BE THERE, BUT KIND OF THEIR, THEIR OTHER OPTION IS SB EIGHT 40, SO WE TOOK THAT AS THE FLOOR. SO, UM, THE TOTAL HEIGHT FOR THE BASE ZONES THAT IT IS ELIGIBLE FOR RANGES FROM 45 FEET TO ACTUALLY 180 FEET FOR COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY. SO COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY'S MAXIMUM BASE HEIGHT IS 120 FEET TODAY. SO ADDING 60, WHICH IS THE BIGGEST BONUS PROGRAM TO THAT, GETS YOU TO 180. SO IT'S KIND OF A, A VERY WIDE RANGE AGAIN, THAT WE THINK CAN CONFIDENTLY WORK IN MANY DIFFERENT PARTS ACROSS AUSTIN. YEAH. AND SO A FOLLOW UP TO THAT IS HOW DO YOU SEE THE DB 90 REPLACEMENT WORKING? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY AT THIS LEVEL OF FI IF YOU'RE STARTING AT 45, YOU'RE REALLY NOT GETTING THAT MUCH MORE THAN A DB 90, SO TO SPEAK. SO HOW DOES THAT INTERACT OR DO YOU THINK MOST CASES WILL BE THAT YOU WILL ACTUALLY BE STARTING AT MORE LIKE WHATEVER, 60 AND THEN THAT'S WHY THE, THE REPLACEMENT FOR DB 90 WOULD WORK BETTER, IF THAT MAKES SENSE? YEAH. THE MOST FOLKS THAT ARE COMING INTO REZONE INTO A BONUS PROGRAM TODAY ARE ALSO LOOKING TO REZONE INTO A HIGHER INTENSITY BASE ZONE. AND, AND THOSE TEND TO BE 60 FEET IN HEIGHT. SO I WOULD SAY THAT THE, THE KIND OF MOST TYPICAL BASE HEIGHT YOU WOULD SEE WOULD BE 60 FEET FOR THESE BUILDINGS, AND THEN YOU WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT ZERO TO 60 ON TOP OF THAT TYPICALLY. AND THEN I GUESS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THIS, BECAUSE YOU DID MENTION PDAS, WHICH I KNOW HAVE BEEN AN ONGOING ISSUE FOR US AND FOR Y'ALL, FOR EVERYBODY. UM, SO IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S MAYBE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER? SO WE DO HAVE SOMETHING MORE THAT'S LIKE A, A PLUS, I DON'T KNOW, 80 OR EVEN ONE 20 THAT'S THAT GRADATION BETWEEN SAY OUR ONE TWENTIES AND WHAT WE'RE GETTING DOWNTOWN. AND I KNOW THAT WE HAD ONE POINT TALKED ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE TOWN ZONING, SO LIKE HOW DO WE SEE THAT, NOT THESE SMALLER SCALE, BUT JUST ABOVE THAT, BUT BEFORE YOU GET INTO THE TOWER BUILDINGS, ARE WE THINKING ABOUT DENSITY BONUSES OR CATEGORIES FOR THAT ? YEAH, I THINK THERE'S DEFINITELY A SPECTRUM. AND I THINK THAT THE DENSITY BON THE COM, THE SORT OF CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM IS LOOKING AT SORT OF THE MODERATE MIDRISE PRIMARILY STICK-BUILT PART OF THAT SPECTRUM MM-HMM . AND THEN YOU'VE GOT DOWNTOWN THAT YOU'RE ALL THE WAY IN HIGHRISE AND WE'RE DOING DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS AND WE'RE PROPOSING, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT GETS SOMEBODY TO A 1200 FOOT BUILDING. UM, THE MIDDLE REALLY IN MY MIND IS A COMBINATION OF FIGURING OUT KIND OF WHAT A SORT OF FUTURE VERSION OF THE PUD PROCESS MIGHT LOOK LIKE FOR A SMALLER, SIMPLER SITE. MM-HMM . SO REALLY KIND OF FIGURING OUT IF THERE IS A RECOMMENDATION TO BE MADE AROUND PUD LIGHT AND THEN WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA BE BRINGING FORWARD WITH THE MIXED USE, LIKE NEW ACTUAL MIXED USE BASE ZONES THAT COULD GET PART OF THE WAY THEY'RE ALL, PARTICULARLY IN COMBINATION WITH THESE DENSITY BONUSES, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET PART OF THE WAY THERE. MM-HMM . UM, BUT TO YOUR POINT, LIKE THAT MIDDLE, THE SORT OF MIDDLE INTENSITY WE'VE GONE OVER INTO STEEL, BUT WE'RE NOT QUITE TO A DOWNTOWN HEIGHT YET, IS, IT'S A TOUGH NUT TO CRACK. IT'S ALSO A NUT THAT THE MARKET IS NOT BUILDING A WHOLE LOT OF MM-HMM . BUT EVEN IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, LIKE THAT WAS PRIMARILY SORT OF UNO, UM, DOMAIN AREA WAS WHERE THOSE KINDS OF PROJECTS WERE HAPPENING ANYWAYS. UM, SO I THINK FROM THE SORT OF PUTTING TOGETHER A DENSITY BONUS, THAT PENCIL'S PERSPECTIVE, LIKE WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY GONNA SEE HUGE UPTAKE OF A DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM AT THAT HEIGHT BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRAINTS OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION. WELL, AND I GUESS MAYBE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS, AS THE MARKET CHANGE, WOULD WE EXPECT THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY END UP WITH A HIGHER, MORE LAYERS THAT GO SORT OF REALLY ADD IN, YOU KNOW, THAT SORT OF ADDITIONAL HEIGHT BEFORE WE GET TO OUR DOWNTOWN OR, YOU KNOW, UNO LEVELS? YEAH, DEFINITELY THIS PROGRAM, THE CITYWIDE [01:05:01] PROGRAM IS SET UP SO THAT IN THE FUTURE OF COUNCIL OR THE, YOU KNOW, PLANNING COMMISSIONER, YOU KNOW, WAS INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL HEIGHTS BEYOND PLUS 60 THAT WE COULD, CAN KIND OF KEEP GROWING FROM THERE. I WOULDN'T REALLY RECOMMEND TOO MANY MORE HEIGHTS IN BETWEEN 15 FOOT HEIGHT INCREMENTS. IT'S ALREADY BASICALLY JUST A FLOOR, SO NOT REALLY RECOMMENDING ONES IN BETWEEN. BUT EVEN JUST FROM THE NAMING OF IT AND TRYING TO THINK THROUGH IT LOGISTICALLY, WE'VE, WE'VE ANTICIPATED THAT IN THE FUTURE, SOMEDAY THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL ONES. WE'RE JUST, WE'RE NOT REALLY SEEING, UM, A DEMAND AT A LARGE SCALE ACROSS THE CITY OR THE FINANCIALS AT A LARGE SCALE ACROSS THE CITY TO RECOMMEND ANYTHING ABOVE LESS 60 RIGHT NOW. GREAT. AND THEN MOVING ON TO SOME OTHER QUESTIONS, UM, RELATED TO THE CHAPTER FOUR 18 AND SORT OF REPLACEMENTS IN ONE FOR ONE, I KNOW THAT SOMETIMES WE HAVE TENANT GROUPS THAT HAVE SPECIFIC ASKS THAT ARE SOMETIMES WE'RE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE THAT IF WE, IS THERE A VIEW TO MAYBE MAKING SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO FOUR 18 SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE, LIKE IF THE TENANTS OF A PARTICULAR BUILDING WANTED SOMETHING BESIDES THE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT WE HAVE IN FOUR 18? OR HOW WOULD WE KIND OF WORK WITH GROUPS TO RESPECT WHATEVER THEY MAY WANT, WHICH MAY NOT BE A ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENT OR SOMETHING YOU, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? I JUST, I GUESS I GET A LITTLE CONCERNED WHEN WE SAY WE'RE RIGIDLY GONNA FOLLOW A SET OF GUIDELINES FOR EVERY SINGLE REDEVELOPMENT. YEAH, WE CAN. SO ON THE SAME TIMELINE THAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD, THIS CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM, THE MAY 21ST COUNCIL MEETING, UH, STAFF IN AUSTIN PLANNING AND AUSTIN HOUSING ARE ALSO WORKING ON A SLIGHT FOUR 18 MODIFICATION MM-HMM . UM, JUST TO CLEAN UP SOME OF THE PROCESS THINGS THAT WE'VE LEARNED ALONG THE WAY. AND SO WE COULD LOOK AT THAT THERE IS ALREADY IN FOUR 18 KIND OF COUNCIL HAS THE ABILITY TO WAIVE THAT REQUIREMENT AS PART OF THE CODE FOR INDIVIDUAL SITES. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S AS CLEAR THAT IT'S, THAT IT COULD BE MODIFIED. YEAH. SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING I NEED TO TALK TO THE LAW DEPARTMENT ABOUT. AND I WOULD ALSO SPECIFICALLY SAY IF WE HAD SAY BO OR SOMEONE WHO'S REPRESENTING OR WORKING WITH AT TENANT GROUP, I WOULD HATE FOR THEIR WISHES TO BE SORT OF, YOU CAN'T DO THAT BECAUSE OF OUR INFLEXIBILITY, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY NOT THE THING WE WANT FOR PROTECTING TENANTS. UM, SO THAT WAS ONE THING I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT. AND THEN YOU MENTIONED THE USE TABLES AND SORT OF UPDATING, WHICH IS VERY EXCITING. AND I GUESS I'M CURIOUS, DO WE THINK THAT WE'LL SEE THAT AS PART OF THIS UPDATE OR IS THAT A LONGER TERM PLAN? AND WHERE ARE WE WITH FIXING THAT? BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF US HAVE EXCITED ABOUT THIS. I'M SORRY IF I GOT YOU EXCITED. WE'RE NOT PLANNING A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE USE TABLE AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, BUT WHAT I, BUT WHAT WE DO WANNA LOOK AT IS THE LIST OF KIND OF PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED ACTIVE USES THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED TO VMU AND THEN DB 90, THAT'S KIND OF BEEN A COPY PASTE SET OF USES, UM, SINCE 2005. AND SO WE'RE JUST WORKING, YOU KNOW, HERE IT IS 20 YEARS LATER, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THOSE USES ARE REFLECTIVE OF THE DAILY NEEDS FOLKS ACTUALLY WANNA SEE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WE'RE NOT SOMEHOW PRECLUDING THEM, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, BEING SENSITIVE TO THESE BUILDINGS ARE GONNA BE REALLY CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOODS. SO LOUD, YOU KNOW, CROSSFIT GYM BARS LIKE THAT CAN BE KIND OF DISRUPTIVE. SO, UH, WE'LL IN THE STAFF REPORT WE'LL HAVE LIKE THE FULL RECOMMENDED LIST OF THOSE. BUT, AND, AND I GUESS RELATED TO THIS IS KIND OF A FOLLOW ON THE DBE TODD, WE DID A LOT OF REALLY INTENSIVE WORK ABOUT WHAT WE WANTED TO SEE IN THAT BONUS PROGRAM BECAUSE IT'S CLOSE TO TRANSIT. AND I GUESS, ARE WE THINKING THAT MOST OF OUR DB CURRENT DBE TODD PROGRAM WILL STAY IN PLACE AS AN OPTION JUST BECAUSE THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR TRANSIT ORIENTED AND SOME OF THAT IS OBVIOUSLY NOT REFLECTED IN THIS CITYWIDE APPROACH? YES, CORRECT. WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY CHANGES TO DV EAD PHASE ONE THAT APPLIES AROUND THE LIGHT RAIL AND PRIORITY EXTENSIONS AT THIS TIME. AND, AND WOULD WE EXPECT FUTURE SECTIONS WHERE WE HAVE NOT, WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH OUR EAD POLICY, SAY LIKE THE EAST RIVERSIDE CORRIDOR, THEY WOULD END UP SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THESE TWO OR LIKE MIGHT END UP MATCHING. HOW'S THAT GONNA WORK? SO EAST RIVERSIDE CORRIDOR SPECIFICALLY, WE ARE WORKING ON AN AMENDMENT TO THE EAST RIVERSIDE COURT ORDER PLAN AND AT THIS POINT WE'RE THINKING THAT WE WOULD JUST BE MODIFYING THE REGULATING PLAN. GOTCHA. SO IT WOULD CONTINUE TO BE ERC SORT OF A SPECIAL CATEGORY OF ZONING IN AND OF ITSELF WITH THE TRANSIT ORIENTED INTENSITIES ALONG EAST RIVERSIDE. GREAT, THANK YOU. THANKS, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL. OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ROEN, GO AHEAD. UH, PRIOR TO BEING SEATED ON THE COMMISSION, I WAS, UH, A LEADER IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD HELPING TO NEGOTIATE A LOT OF THE DB 90 CASES THAT WERE COMING THROUGH AT THE TIME. UM, PULLING OFF OF WHAT FELICITY HAD JUST ASKED ABOUT THE, REGARDING THE HEIGHT, WE DID HAVE SOME DEVELOPERS THAT WERE VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN HEIGHTS THAT WERE GETTING BEYOND DB 90 INTO THAT ONE 50 TO 180 HEIGHT. UM, AND WE HAD SOME NEGOTIATIONS AT THE TIME RELATED TO THE FACT THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD'VE SUPPORTED THAT ON THAT PARTICULAR SITE, UM, IF THEY WERE INTERESTED IN THAT PARTICULAR ADDITIONAL BONUS. RIGHT. NOW, IS THERE ANY METHODOLOGY WITH THIS NEW PROGRAM FOR THEM TO ASK FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT OUTSIDE OF THE 60 FOOT, THE 60 ADDITIONAL FEET IS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT? UM, THERE'S, THERE'S, WE HAVEN'T SENT A NOTICE YET. , UM, I COUNCIL COULD ADOPT THE PLUS 60 FEET AND THEN TELL US, HEY, WE ALSO WANNA SEE A PLUS WHATEVER MORE FEET AND WE COULD COME BACK WITH THAT IN A FUTURE CODE AMENDMENT. UM, BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY [01:10:01] IS, DEPENDING ON THE SITE, AGAIN, THAT CAN GET YOU TO 180 FEET IF IT'S A COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY SITE, I KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY EVERY SITE, UM, IS ELIGIBLE FOR THAT, BUT THAT IS KIND OF THE, THE MAXIMUM ON THOSE MORE INTENSE CORRIDORS THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING. AND IS, YOU MENTIONED THAT IT WAS RELATED TO THE FACT THAT YOU HAVEN'T SEEN A LOT OF CASES COME THROUGH. IS THERE AN UNDERSTANDING FROM PLANNING STAFF THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THE HEIGHT, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OUTSIDE OF THE CITY URBAN CENTER SHOULD BE CAPPED OUT AT 180 FEET AT THE HIGHWAY OR AT 120 FEET INSIDE? I WOULDN'T SAY THAT THERE'S ANY MAXIMUM HEIGHT THAT PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDS ACROSS THE CITY. UM, BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THE TOOLS OF A BONUS PROGRAM, WHICH ARE IS VERY MUCH A ONE SIZE FITS ALL, TAKE THIS, YOU GET THIS, UM, WE FEEL THAT THAT IS APPROPRIATE, YOU KNOW, AT LOWER AND MODERATE HEIGHTS. ONCE YOU'RE STARTING TO GET INTO MUCH TALLER HEIGHTS, WE JUST FEEL LIKE ADDITIONAL TOOLS LIKE A P LIGHT OR PDAS OR OTHER THINGS MAY BE MORE APPROPRIATE. UNDERSTOOD. UM, THERE IS ALSO THE GROUND FLOOR REQUIREMENT FOR MIXED USE. UM, AT 75% OF THE, OF THE STREET FRONTAGE. ONE OF THE THINGS WE RAN INTO WAS TRYING TO FILL A NEIGHBORHOOD FULL OF, OF DB 90 PROJECTS WITH A BUNCH OF OF SMALL BUSINESSES ON THESE GROUND FLOORS. THAT CAN BE VERY DIFFICULT IF THAT IS THE ONLY REQUIREMENT THAT SATISFIES THAT 75%. ARE THERE OTHER OPTIONS TO CONSIDER, LIKE ADDITIONAL URBAN PLAZA SPACE ON THE GROUND LEVEL OR RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, STOOPS FACING IN THE STREET, OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO SATISFY A REQUIREMENT? YES, STAFF IS INTERESTED IN EXPLORING THAT. FOR NOW. WE'VE RECOMMENDED, AGAIN, WHAT WHAT OUR REVIEWERS ARE ALREADY USED TO IN ORDER TO REALLY TRY TO INCREASE CONSISTENCY AND GET PERMITTING TIMES, UM, DOWN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. SO IN INCLUDING A BUNCH OF NEW OR KIND OF UNIQUE REGULATIONS IS DIFFICULT IN THAT. THAT SAID, WE HAVE HEARD DIFFICULTY WITH A SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT, SO WE'RE OPEN TO WORKING WITH, YOU KNOW, A WORKING GROUP OF FOLKS OR WHOEVER ON, ON IDEAS ON THAT. AND I WOULD JUST ADD THE PROPOSAL AS IT'S CURRENTLY DRAFTED ALSO ALLOWS THE WAIVER TO HAPPEN THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS. SO IF YOU HAVE A SITE WHERE THAT 75% CONTAINS COMMERCIAL IS NOT GONNA BE APPROPRIATE, ACHIEVABLE, A WAIVER CAN BE GRANTED TO WAIVE ALL OR SOME OF THAT REQUIREMENT OR DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT INSTEAD. AND SO THAT WAIVER CAN BE TAILORED TO A DIFFERENT USE. YOU COULD OFFER A DIFFERENT OPTION FOR THAT AS PART OF THAT WAIVER PROGRAM? YEAH, I MEAN YOU COULD, IT'S COMING THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS. COUNSEL IS THE DECISION MAKER. SO I'M NOT GONNA SAY THE WAIVER IS AN EASY WAIVER , BUT CERTAINLY THE PROPOSAL COULD BE PROPOSING SOMETHING ALTERNATE TO MEET THE INTENT, UM, IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THE WAIVER. EXCELLENT. UM, AND MY, MY FINAL COMMENT IS RELATED TO, UH, IN INCENTIVE INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPERS TO MAKE THIS SOMETHING MORE ATTRACTIVE, OBVIOUSLY TO GET THEM TO BUILD THIS HOUSING THAT WE DESPERATELY WANT THEM TO DO. UM, HAVE, HAVE WE ENGAGED THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TO GET FEEDBACK DIRECTLY FROM THEM? YES, WE'VE GOTTEN FEEDBACK, UM, BOTH FROM, UH, CONSULTANTS WHO REACHED OUT TO DEVELOPERS DIRECTLY TO GET THEIR FEEDBACK, UM, AS WELL AS, UH, A FOCUS GROUP WHERE DEVELOPERS WERE TALKING ABOUT THE, THE CHALLENGES WITH, WITH MAKING DEVELOPMENT HAPPENED QUICKLY AND AFFORDABLY. YES. EXCELLENT. UM, AND ONE FINAL QUESTION. UH, WHEN IT COMES TO FEE AND LIE, IS THERE ANYTHING SIMILAR TO THE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEES THAT TIES THAT FEE AND LIE MONEY TO A REGION OR AREA OF THE CITY? UM, I CAN'T SPEAK ON EACH OF THE FEES THAT FEE AND LOSE FOR HOUSING THAT EXIST, BUT THE, THE CONCEPT OF GEOGRAPHICALLY FENCING THAT HAS COME UP BEFORE, IT IS A DELICATE BALANCE BECAUSE, UH, THE FEE THEN NEED, THE CITY NEEDS SOMEWHERE TO SPEND THAT FEE WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHIC BALANCE. AND IF THIS IS, YOU KNOW, HOUSING GOING IN, IN A HIGH OPPORTUNITY TRANSIT RICH AREA, IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE FOR THE CITY TO EITHER PURCHASE OR TO, AND MAYBE THERE'S NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER THAT'S ABLE TO PURCHASE LAND IN THAT AREA THAT'S COMING AND LOOKING FOR FINANCING. SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT FEES THAT WE'RE COLLECTING ARE BEING ABLE TO BE TURNED AROUND AND, AND ACTUALLY TURNED INTO UNITS. SO GEOGRAPHICALLY FENCING IS ONE THING THAT WE DID IN, IN THE E 2D OVERLAY BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT THE CITY OWNED LAND AT THE GROVE RIVERSIDE SITE, FOR EXAMPLE. SO WE KNEW THAT THERE WAS GONNA BE A PLACE THAT MATCHED, UM, IN THE CITYWIDE PROGRAM, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT TO, TO TAKE A FEE, YOU KNOW, FROM ONE PLACE AND SEND IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. BUT ALSO HOW BIG IS THAT GEOGRAPHY THAN IF YOU'RE GONNA KEEP IT IN THERE. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. THANKS COMMISSIONER ROJAN, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER HILLER, GO AHEAD. I JUST WANNA REITERATE HOW MUCH I APPRECIATE THE PROGRAM. I FEEL LIKE IT'S BEEN SUPER INFORMATIVE AND I DON'T REMEMBER ALL OF YOUR NAMES. SO IF I SAY WARNER AND ELIZABETH, THOSE WERE THE TWO I CAUGHT. UH, FORGIVE ME FOR BEING OVERLY INFORMAL. [01:15:01] UH, I, I, I'D, I WOULD, UH, LOVE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT KINDA THE PLANNING PROCESS IN GENERAL, PARTICULARLY ABOUT DISCARDED IDEAS AND KIND OF HOW YOU CAME UP WITH THIS PARTICULAR PLAN. I KNOW IT WAS IN CONSULTATION WITH LOTS OF DIFFERENT VOICES AND YOU JUST MENTIONED, UH, WITH COMMISSIONER PEDROZA AND THAT YOU TALKED TO DEVELOPERS AND YOU GOT SOME FEEDBACK IN THAT REGARD. WHEN YOU DECIDE TO TAKE ON THIS KIND OF PROJECT, WHERE DO YOU START? LIKE IS IT FROM A AFFORDABLE HOUSING PERSPECTIVE AND YOU'RE LIKE, HEY, LET'S MOVE IN FOR WHAT SUITS OR FOR WHAT BEST SERVES THAT COMMUNITY? ARE YOU STARTING MORE FROM, WE HEAR A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT OUR CURRENT ZONING AND OR IS IT LIKE, HEY, WE ARE UNDER CAPACITY BY A CERTAIN NUMBER OF UNITS? WHERE DID WE FILL PREVIOUSLY? SORRY, I JUST THREW A BUNCH AT YOU. UH, PICK WHICH QUESTION YOU WANNA START WITH . UM, BUT ANYWAY, PLEASE, PLEASE GIMME SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. YEAH, SURE. SO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, UM, EVERY PROJECT IN AUSTIN YOU WILL FIND IF YOU'RE HERE LONG ENOUGH, IS ITS OWN UNIQUE, UM, STORY TO TELL THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. I THINK THE STORY THAT IT HAS TO TELL IN TERMS OF THE GENESIS OF IT WAS A COMBINATION OF WORK THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR SEVERAL YEARS NOW AROUND FIGURING OUT HOW TO SUPPORT, UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT WORKS IN CONCERT WITH TRANSIT, AND PARTICULARLY THE PROJECT CONNECT INVESTMENT THROUGH OUR EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. AND WE'D DONE DID A LOT OF ENGAGEMENT AROUND THAT, PUT REGULATIONS ON THE BOOKS, DID ADDITIONAL ENGAGEMENT AROUND HOW MIGHT WE KIND OF EXPAND THOSE PROGRAMS TO ENCOURAGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ENCOURAGE EXTRA, UM, DENSITIES ALONG TRANSIT AT THE SAME TIME, UM, COUNCIL APPROVED THE DB 90, WHICH WAS A NEW PROGRAM AT THE TIME, APPLIED IT, YOU KNOW, THIS BODY WENT THROUGH QUITE A FEW REZONING PROCESSES. I THINK WE'VE REZONED ABOUT 80 PROPERTIES INTO THE DB 90 AND HAD MANY, MANY NIGHTS OF CONVERSATIONS WITH COMMUNITY ABOUT THE PLUSES AND MINUSES OF THAT PROGRAM ON PARTICULAR SITES. UM, AND SO COUNCIL THEN TOOK A RESOLUTION THAT BASICALLY SAID, HEY, WE'D LIKE TO LOOK AT SOME ALTERNATIVES TO DB 90 THAT PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY TO COUNCIL AND MORE FLEXIBILITY TO COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO NOT HAVE KIND OF A ONE SIZE FITS ALL BONUS. AND MAYBE WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT DISPLACING NATURALLY OCCURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHEN WE APPLY IT. UM, AND WE SORT OF TOOK THOSE TWO STREAMS OF INPUT, BOTH THE INPUT FROM COUNCIL ON A DESIRE TO KIND OF REFORM THE DENSITY BONUS 90 PRO, UM, PROGRAM TO WORK BETTER. AND THEN THE INPUT THAT WE HAD ALREADY RECEIVED, KIND OF LOOKING AT HOW TO INCREASE BOTH IN DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS ALONG OUR TRANSIT LINES. AND THEY KIND OF, THE STREAMS MERGED AND THAT BRINGS US, UM, TO THIS PROJECT. SO I THINK THAT IN TERMS OF HOW KIND OF COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT LIKE NEIGHBORS DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AND ALL OF THE, THE STAKEHOLDERS ARE INVOLVED, THEY'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN VARIOUS STAGES, BOTH WITH THE EQUITABLE TOD WORK THAT STARTED IN 2023 IN PARTNERSHIP WITH CAP METRO, UM, WITH ENGAGEMENT, SPECIFIC ENGAGEMENT WORK THAT WE DID AT THE END OF 2024, ONGOING CONVERSATIONS. AND THEN THE FOLKS THAT SHOW UP LIKE EVERY TUESDAY AND THURSDAY, UM, TO TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC REZONING CASES, LIKE THOSE VOICES ARE ALL IN, IN THE MIX IN TERMS OF THE ENGAGEMENT PIECE OF IT. UM, AND THEN A MUCH LARGER AND MORE COMPLICATED STORY TO TELL AROUND THE INTERAGENCY COORDINATION TO GET HERE. I I THINK WHAT I'M GETTING AT, AND I APPRECIATE THAT ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND, BUT IS IS KIND OF LIKE IF WE'RE STARTING WITH THE END IN MIND, LIKE, HEY, WE NEED 25,000 ADDITIONAL UNITS, HOW DO WE GET THERE? CAN WE REVERSE ENGINEER THE CREATION OF THAT? IF WE IMAGINE A MARKET ENVIRONMENT WHERE DEVELOPERS ACTUALLY WANNA, YOU KNOW, START DIGGING IN AND BUILD THINGS, UM, WHICH OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, INCLUDES EXTERNAL FACTORS WE CAN'T CONTROL, RIGHT? LIKE INTEREST RATES. UH, THAT SAID IS, IS IS THAT KIND OF HOW YOU APPROACH THIS OR DO YOU APPROACH IT WITH, HEY, WE HAVE, WE GET A LOT OF FEEDBACK THAT SHOWS THIS PARTICULAR FLAW, LET'S START ADJUSTING FOR THAT. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I, I THINK IT'S A COMBINATION OF THINGS LIKE STEVIE SAID, YOU KNOW, WE, WE REALLY START FROM COUNCIL POLICY DIRECTION. SO THE POLICY PLAN FOR ETOD IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR. UM, IN THIS PROJECT SPECIFIC CASE, WE HAVE A JUNE 5TH, 2025 RESOLUTION FROM COUNCIL THAT SAYS, LOOK AT ADDITIONAL HEIGHTS, LOOK AT REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS, LOOK AT THIS. RIGHT? SO SOME OF THOSE GOALS WERE BAKED IN FROM THE BEGINNING IN, IN, IN A WAY OF WE WANT MORE TOOLS, OKAY, SO WE NEED A PROGRAM THAT INCLUDES MULTIPLE HEIGHTS, RIGHT? WHAT DO THOSE HEIGHTS LOOK LIKE? WELL, WHAT ARE EXISTING THINGS? BECAUSE WE'RE ALSO BEING TOLD THAT IT NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING THINGS TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. SO I THINK PART OF IT IS COMING FROM WHAT IS THE POLICY DIRECTION WE'RE GETTING AND THAT'S DRIVING SOME OF THE GOALS, BUT THEN AGAIN, THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND THE MARKET ANALYSIS ARE ALSO DRIVING WHAT'S POSSIBLE AS WELL AS THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE DRIVING WHAT'S KIND OF FEASIBLE FROM THAT. SO YEAH, AND I WOULD ALSO ADD THIS IS [01:20:01] NOT, THIS RECOMMENDATION IS NOT A PLAN. SO WE HAVE A LOT, LIKE THIS IS A SPECIFIC KIND OF TARGETED RECOMMENDATION AROUND MAKING CHANGES TO OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO PUT IN PLACE A PARTICULAR PROGRAM. WE ARE GUIDED BY PLANS INCLUDING THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT AND IMAGINE AUSTIN THAT AT IT ATTACHES TO AND SORT OF ALL AND THE EQUITABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT POLICY PLAN THAT THAT COUNCIL ACCEPTED IN 2024 OR 2023 RATHER. LIKE THOSE ARE KIND OF ALL OF THE ACTUAL PLANNING DOCUMENTS THAT WENT THROUGH MUCH MORE OF A TRADITIONAL PLANNING PROCESS WHERE YOU SORT OF SET GOALS AND LOOK AT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND COME UP WITH A, AN OVERALL SORT OF FRAMEWORK AND A PLAN THAT GUIDES THE WORK. UM, THIS BODY OF WORK, WHILE IT IS PLANNERS WORKING ON THIS BODY OF WORK, IT'S NOT A PLAN PER SE, IT'S LIKE AN ACTUAL KIND OF TARGETED AMENDMENT TO THE CODE TO DO A PARTICULAR THING. UM, IF THAT HELPS. AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT, UH, MOVING ALONG, BUT IN, IN YOUR OPINION, DO YOU, UM, DO YOU FIND THAT THE FEE IN LIEU HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL AT HELPING THE CITY REACH ITS GOALS FOR SPENDING THAT MONEY IN ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS? OR DOES IT, DOES IT KIND OF SIT AROUND WAITING FOR THE PROJECT TO OCCUR? LIKE IS THERE A BACKLOG OF PROJECTS CURRENTLY WHERE YOU GO, HEY, IF, IF NOT FOR, UM, A PROBLEM SPENDING, SORRY, IF NOT WITH A PROJECT READY TO BREAK GROUND, WE COULD SPEND THIS MONEY? WE ARE PHONING A FRIEND. OKAY. ALTHOUGH WE COULD PROBABLY ANSWER IT AS WELL, BUT WE HAPPEN TO HAVE BRENDAN KENNEDY WITH AUSTIN HOUSING SITTING IN THE ROOM. SO BRENDAN, YES, GOOD EVENING. UH, BRENDAN KENNEDY, DIVISION MANAGER WITH AUSTIN HOUSING. SO I OVERSEE, UH, ONE OF THE GAP FINANCING, UH, SET OF PROGRAMS FOR BOTH RENTAL AND OWNERSHIP HOUSING THAT IS PRIMARILY USED FOR, UH, SPENDING THOSE FEE AND LIE DOLLARS. SO I WILL SAY WE CANNOT GET, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY, WE GET MORE APPLICATIONS AND WE HAVE AVAILABLE FUNDING. WHAT I WILL SAY IS TO THE POINT EARLIER, THERE ARE EXISTING PROGRAMS THAT PRODUCE A FEE AND LIE THAT ARE GEOGRAPHICALLY RESTRICTED. UM, THIS INCLUDES OUR TODS, UH, CERTAIN PODS AS WELL PAY A FEE IN LIEU THAT IS REQUIRED TO HAVE GEOGRAPHIC RESTRICTIONS. THOSE OCCASIONALLY DO POSSIBLY TAKE, UH, UH, ONE OR TWO FISCAL YEAR FUNDING CYCLES EITHER TO GET TO A LEVEL OF ACCUMULATED FEES TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, INVEST IN A PROPERTY AND ACTUALLY FILL A GAP OR TO HAVE A, A PROPERTY THAT COMES FORWARD REQUESTING FUNDING. BUT AS A GENERAL RULE OF THOSE FUNDING SOURCES, WE RECEIVE MORE APPLICATIONS THAN WE HAVE AVAILABLE FUNDING FOR, UM, AND ARE ABLE TO QUICKLY DEPLOY THOSE FUNDS. IS THERE ANY REASON TO, TO SHOW PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT TOWARDS THOSE OVER OTHER TYPES OF PROJECTS? UH, WHEN YOU SAY THOSE, DO YOU MEAN, UM, LIKE, WOULD YOU EVER WANT TO INCENTIVIZE FEE IN LIEU BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU MORE CONTROL OVER WHERE THE, THE UNITS GET BUILT AND HOW THE MONEY GETS SPENT? THAT AGAIN, IS A VERY KIND OF BROAD, THERE'S LOTS OF PROS AND CONS TO THAT DISCUSSION. UM, WE, UM, A AGAIN, FEE AND L DOLLARS HELP US TARGET DEEPER AFFORDABILITY. UM, A LOT OF THOSE DEEPER AFFORDABILITY LEVELS DO REQUIRE SOME SORT OF SUBSIDY, WHEREAS DENSITY BONUSES TYPICALLY DON'T ACCESS SUBSIDY. ON THE OTHER HAND, DENSITY BONUSES HAVE GEOGRAPHIC DISPERSION, UH, IN CERTAIN HOUSING TYPOLOGIES WE DON'T NORMALLY GET THROUGH FEE AND L IT'S, IT'S VERY MUCH A BROAD ARGUMENT, UM, OF PROS AND CONS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WILLING TO HAVE. BUT I, I WOULDN'T SAY I HAVE A STRONG PREFERENCE EITHER WAY. WE'VE HAD A VERY ROBUST DISCUSSION ON IT AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO SO. GOT IT. THANK YOU. THANKS COMMISSIONER HILLER. COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, GO AHEAD. CHAIR OF, WELL ONE OF THE PERKS OF BEING NEAR THE END OF THE ROUND ROBIN IS MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE FAR SMARTER THAN I HAVE ASKED MOST OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD JOTTED DOWN ALREADY AND MORE ELOQUENTLY THAN I WOULD HAVE. BUT I DO HAVE A COUPLE THINGS THAT I, I GUESS I WANNA UNDERSTAND A BIT BETTER OF. IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM IS REPLACING OR NOT, I REALIZE IT'S THE NEXT STEP FOR VMU AND DB 90, AND I KNOW THERE'S THE QUESTION OF WHAT HAPPENS TO EXISTING ZONINGS, UH, BUT WE WEREN'T AREN'T TOUCHING DBE TODD OF, SO WE'RE DOING THIS TO UH, CALIBRATE CLEAN UP, SORT OF MOVE FORWARD THIS DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM OF, FROM A GEOGRAPHIC STANDPOINT OF IS THERE MORE LAND THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE IN THE CITY FOR THIS NEW CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM THEN IS AVAILABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THOSE PROGRAMS UNDER VMU AND DB 90? I THINK THAT IT SOMEWHAT, RIGHT. AND DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE Y'ALL QUANTIFY THAT, UH, JUST, JUST FROM THE FACT THAT THE NEW PROGRAM OFFERS ADDITIONAL BASE ZONES? I CAN SAY CERTAINLY YES, BUT TO THE EXTENT I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT IS, UH, 'CAUSE VMU AND DB 90 DON'T OFFER AS MANY BASE ZONES. SO THERE ARE RIGHT PROJECTS TODAY THAT WOULD NOT [01:25:01] HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR BASE ZONE. I, I THINK I WOULD ADD TO THAT THIS WILL BE APPLIED THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS. SO ANY LAND THAT IS ADDED IS GONNA BE BECAUSE IT IS, HAS AN ELIGIBLE COMMERCIAL BASE ZONE AND HAS GONE THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL PROCESS TO REZONE THAT PROPERTY. OUR THOUGHT BY PROVIDING A RANGE OF DIFFERENT HEIGHTS GOING ALL THE WAY FROM ZERO TO 60 ADDITIONAL FEET WITH SOME INTERVALS IN THE MIDDLE, THAT THERE WILL LIKELY BE ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES THAT WOULD FOLKS WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE SAYING YES TO. OR YOU MIGHT HAVE SOMEBODY THAT COMES IN AND ASKS FOR DBC 60 AND YOU SAY IN THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION, THE CONTEXT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FOR 60 ADDITIONAL FEET, BUT 40 ADDITIONAL FEET WOULD, UM, OR 20 OR 45, SORRY, 45, I'M GOOD. DON'T LISTEN TO ME. THAT'S WHY SHE'S HERE GIVING YOU THE DIRECTS DIRECTIONALLY ANYWAYS, SO YOU GET THE, THE 15 ADDITIONAL FEET WOULD MAKE SENSE IN THAT LOCATION. SO IN THAT SENSE, WE'D ACTUALLY, I THINK POTENTIALLY THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL ELIGIBLE SITES THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY, UM, DEEMED ELIGIBLE BY PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL FOR V AND DB 90 BY VIRTUE OF THESE ADDITIONAL TIERS, BASICALLY. CORRECT. OKAY. HAVE YOU, HAS, HAVE Y'ALL TRIED TO QUANTIFY THAT AT ALL IN A SORT OF GIS SORT OF GEOGRAPHIC CONTEXT? LIKE DOES THIS MAKE, UH, WE SORT OF, IT'S IT SENSE THAT INTUITIVELY THERE'LL BE MORE OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE? DO WE THINK MORE OF THOSE OPTIONS WILL OCCUR IN LIKE OUR EASTERN CRESCENT OF THAT? I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT BETTER IS LIKE FROM A PERFORMANCE METRICS STANDPOINT OF WHAT'S THE, WHERE DO WE THINK THIS, THE BIG WIN IS HERE, YOU KNOW, FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING? I KNOW THAT'S A REAL BROAD QUESTION, BUT ALL THE DETAILED STUFF WAS, IT'S, IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO SAY BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO KIND OF CITY INITIATED MAPPING OF THIS TOOL TO COMPARE IT TO. UM, AS FAR AS JUST LOOKING BRIEFLY AT LIKE WHERE DB 90 CASES HAVE BEEN APPLIED, THEY'VE BEEN APPLIED IN NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS ALL OF AUSTIN SO FAR. YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T SEE LIKE A VERY OBVIOUS HEAT MAP WHEN I LOOKED AT IT THE OTHER DAY. RIGHT. UM, JUST SCANNING IT VISUALLY, NOT DOING A LOT OF HARD ANALYSIS. SO, SO IT REALLY IS BASED ON WHERE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE INTERESTED IN POTENTIALLY REDEVELOPING OR CHANGING THE USE OF THEIR SITE, WHICH COULD BE ANYWHERE. I, I, YEAH, IT'S, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO FORECAST, BUT THE THINKING IS THAT SETTING UP OPTIONS THAT COULD WORK IN MORE PLACES WILL TRANSLATE INTO MORE ACTUALLY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THOSE OPTIONS IN MORE NEIGHBORHOODS. THANK YOU. OF, I THINK MY NEXT QUESTION IS REALLY ABOUT PROCESS MOVING FORWARD, JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IT TIMELINE AND CAN DO MY HOMEWORK APPROPRIATELY. SO NEXT STEP IS CODES AND ORDINANCES APRIL 15TH, WHAT WILL THEY SEE? WILL THEY SEE A DRAFT ORDINANCE? UH, I DO NOT BELIEVE A DRAFT ORDINANCE WILL BE READY FROM THE LAW DEPARTMENT BY THAT TIME. I WOULD NOT, I WOULD NOT EXPECT THAT FOR CODES AND ORDINANCES. IT WILL DEFINITELY BE READY FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AS IS OUR, OUR USUAL KIND OF PROCESS. THEY'LL SEE A VERSION OF THIS PRESENTATION, BUT HOPEFULLY, HOPEFULLY ALSO A STAFF REPORT WILL ALSO BE POSTED BY THAT POINT AS WELL. UM, THAT GOES INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE WRITTEN OUT OF THE RATIONALE THAT I JUST GAVE VERBALLY FOR, YOU KNOW, WHY THIS CHOICE. OKAY. AND THEN, SO BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE 28TH OF APRIL, THEN WE'LL, WE'LL SEE THAT, I GUESS THE FRIDAY BEFORE, BASICALLY YES, YOU'LL SEE THE, THE STAFF REPORT AS WELL AS THE AFFORDABILITY IMPACT STATEMENT AND THE DRAFT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE. OKAY. YEAH, JUST TO BE CLEAR, 'CAUSE I, I'M FEELING MY, MY THE LAW EARS ARE BURNING AND BY DRAFT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE WE MEAN DRAFT OF THE CODE LANGUAGE. YES, BECAUSE THE DRAFT ORDINANCE DOESN'T GO IN THE BACKUP UNTIL COUNCIL. OKAY. DRAFT CODE'S A DISTINCTION THAT MATTERS. I GUESS I'M ASKING MUCH, I'M THINKING, I'M SURE MC FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ARE ALSO THINKING ABOUT LIKE, WE NEED SOMETHING TO START FROM IN TERMS OF FOR US TO LOOK AT AND, AND RED LINE AND PROPOSE AMENDMENTS FROM AND SUCH. YEAH, AND I THINK THE STAFF REPORT WILL PROBABLY BE THAT DOCUMENT. SO THE STAFF REPORT WILL HAVE THE SPECIFICS ABOUT KIND OF THE TERM SHEET LEVEL SPECIFICS ABOUT THE REGULATIONS THEMSELVES. SO THERE WILL BE MORE SPECIFIC TO THAT. UM, THEN THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AHEAD OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WILL HAVE OUT THE, THE STRIKE THROUGH AND UNDERLYING VERSION OF THE CODE LANGUAGE ITSELF. THANK YOU. I THINK THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE, AND I I APOLOGIZE, I KNOW I'M REVISITING IT A LITTLE BIT. THIS IS SLIDE 24, WHICH IS THE REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THE BRACKETS. SO OF WE'RE BASICALLY SAYING NO LESS THAN 10% OR MORE THAN 20%? CORRECT. SO THE CURRENT CODE TODAY REQUIRES THE LESSER OF ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENTS, FULL REPLACEMENT OF ALL EXISTING UNITS FOR TWO TIMES THE PROGRAM'S REQUIREMENTS. SO TWO TIMES 10%, 20. OKAY. SO IT DEPENDS [01:30:01] ON THE SITE WHETHER YOU CAN MEET A FULL ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENT BEFORE YOU HIT THAT 20% CAP OR NOT, WHICH IS WHAT THE TABLE ON THIS SLIDE EXPLAINS A FEW EXAMPLES OF. SO IN SOME CASES IT DOESN'T RESULT IN A FULL ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENT, YOU JUST HIT THAT 20% CAP AND THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE HELD TO. IN OTHER CASES, UM, THE 20, THE 10% IS ACTUALLY JUST MORE THAN ENOUGH TO REPLACE ALL THE UNITS DEPENDING ON HOW LARGE OF A NEW PROJECT YOU'RE BUILDING. SO IT REALLY DEPENDS ON WHAT'S ALREADY THERE AND WHAT'S BEING BUILT. BUT IT WOULD NEVER BE LESS THAN 10% OF THE UNITS AND IT WOULD NEVER BE MORE THAN 20% OF THE UNITS. SO IF YOU HAVE A, A LARGE PROJECT THAT IS SORT OF AFFORDABLE BY VIRTUE OF, IT'S NOT A FORMAL PROGRAM, BUT JUST THE, THE MARKET I GUESS, AND ITS AGE THAT IT'S POSSIBLE THERE WON'T BE A, THAT SORT OF ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENT, BUT IT WOULD STILL BE 20%. CORRECT. OKAY. AND IF IT'S REPLACED WITH, UH, RENTAL, THEN IT'S 50% MFI AND NOT 70, RIGHT? SO THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S THE IMPROVEMENT. SO THE UNIVERSE OF UNITS THAT TRIGGER THIS REQUIREMENT ARE 70% MFI AND BELOW THEY'RE REPLACED AT 50% MFI FOR THE FIRST 10% AND THEN EVERYTHING OVER THAT AT 60% MFI ACTUALLY PER CURRENT CODE, BUT REGARDLESS LOWER THAN THE EXISTING RENT LEVELS. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK. THANKS COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, COMMISSIONER BARR, RAMIREZ, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? I DO. THANK YOU. HI. UM, GREAT JOB LADIES. THANK YOU FOR PULLING THIS TOGETHER. UM, MY QUESTION IS ABOUT SLIDE 31 AND LIKE THE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPER INCENTIVES. I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HEIGHT AND SETBACK. UM, THIS IS REALLY ABOUT LIKE PERMITTING AND STREAMLINING PERMITTING. AND I THINK MY CON MY CONCERN OR MY QUESTION IS ABOUT HOW THE CITY PROJECTS TO DO THIS. ARE YOU ANTICIPATING ADDITIONAL STAFF, ADDITIONAL RESOURCES? UM, I KNOW THAT IT'S A CHALLENGE AND I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT YOUR APPROACH FOR DOING THAT. VERY GOOD QUESTION. UM, SO AS YOU KNOW, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN WORKING ON A, UM, UH, AN EXPEDITED REVIEW PILOT. AND SO I'LL BE WORKING WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND, AND OTHER RELEVANT DEPARTMENTS TO SEE, YOU KNOW, IS THERE A WAY WE CAN BUILD ON THAT, UM, TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, FINGERS CROSSED, UH, TO HAVE EVEN BETTER EXPEDITED REVIEW FOR, UH, DEVELOPMENTS WITH A PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE UNITS. SO IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE BUILDING ON THE EXPEDITED REVIEW THAT SMART HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS, UM, I THINK RECEIVE OR SUPPOSED TO RECEIVE, UM MM-HMM . SO, SO IT'S REALLY JUST TRYING TO SEE ARE THERE OTHER WAYS THAT, UM, WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT THOSE, UH, DEVELOPMENTS REALLY MAKE IT THROUGH THE PROCESS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. SO I, I DON'T KNOW YET, UM, WHAT WILL BE POSSIBLE, BUT WE'LL BE LOOKING AT ALL POTENTIAL OPTIONS. THANK YOU. AND I, I GUESS I WAS ALSO COM OR INTERESTED IN THESE OTHER FINANCIAL INCENTIVES. ARE THEY SOMETHING THAT WE ALREADY DO OR WE HAVE EXAMPLES OR ARE THERE PRECEDENTS, LIKE FOR OPERATING COST SUBSIDIES? ARE THEY ALL LEGAL UNDER OUR CURRENT STATE LAWS? WELL, SOME OF, SOME OF THESE WOULD BE ACTUAL SUBSIDIES. SO, UM, SO I'LL, I'M WORKING WITH, UH, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER JOHNSON, WHO'S LOOKING AT A POTENTIAL NEW FUND THAT COULD PERHAPS BE USED MORE FLEXIBLY THAN SOME OF OUR EXISTING FUNDING IS ABLE TO BE USED. UM, AS YOU KNOW, BONDS HAVE VERY SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS, UM, ABOUT HOW THEY CAN AND CAN'T BE USED. SO IT IS LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY NEW FUNDING SOURCES. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND THEN MY, MY LAST QUESTION IS ABOUT THE FREQUENCY WITH WHICH WE PLAN TO RECALIBRATE. I KNOW THAT OVER TIME MARKETS CHANGE, THERE'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THE THRESHOLDS MIGHT NEED TO BE ADJUSTED. SO HOW OFTEN DO YOU INTEND TO REVISIT? DO YOU PLAN ON PUTTING THAT INTO THE CODE, SAY EVERY FIVE YEARS, TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE REQUIREMENTS? UH, WE DO RECOMMEND RECALIBRATION AND THEN AS, AS SOON AS I'LL SAY THAT, I'LL SAY THAT THIS LANGUAGE WILL BE ADOPTED INTO THE ZONING CODE AND IT IS MORE DIFFICULT TO CHANGE THAT SECTION OF CODE THAN OTHER SECTIONS OF CODE JUST BECAUSE OF A HEIGHTENED NOTICE AND PROCESS REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT. SO, AND THEN ONCE THIS PROGRAM IS ADOPTED AND STARTS APPLYING TO SITES, IF YOU ARE GOING TO GO IN AND CHANGE THE TEXT OF THAT, IT WILL TRIGGER PROPERTY SPECIFIC NOTICE FOR THE EXISTING SITES THAT HAVE IT. AND SO IT CAN BE CHALLENGING. I'M JUST REALISTICALLY IT IS CHALLENGING TO [01:35:01] GO AND CHANGE THINGS LIKE THE 10% AT 50% MFI. NOW WHAT I WILL SAY IS FOR, FOR INSTANCE, THE OWNERSHIP FEE IN LIEU, WE DO CALIBRATE THAT EVERY YEAR BASED ON WHAT THE SALES PRICE OF COMPARABLE THINGS ARE AT MARKET AND AFFORDABLE. AND SO, SO THE FEE AND LIE, BECAUSE IT'S SET BY THE SEPARATE ORDINANCE DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS, THAT CAN BE A LITTLE BIT MORE NIMBLE THAN THE ACTUAL JUST BASELINE REQUIREMENT OF 10%. AND I WILL JUST ADD TO THAT, I THINK THE PERCENTAGES THAT WE WERE RECOMMENDING BE PUT ON THE BOOKS NOW WILL BE GOOD FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS BECAUSE OUR MARKET IS GONNA TAKE A NUMBER OF YEARS TO GET BACK TO THE PLACE THAT IT WAS EVEN TWO YEARS AGO IN TERMS OF DELIVERING THESE PROJECTS. SO I WOULD NOT WORRY FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS ABOUT THESE NUMBERS NEEDING TO BE RECALIBRATED. YEAH, AND I THINK I'M NOT SO MUCH CONCERNED ABOUT THE PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABILITY OR THE PERCENT OF UNITS, I'M MORE THINKING ABOUT THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS OR THE HEIGHT OPPORTUNITIES AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. AND OTHER, UH, COMMISSIONER IAN WAS MENTIONING, YOU KNOW, THAT SOMEBODY WANTED TO GO UP TO 150 FEET. SO ACKNOWLEDGING THAT WHAT WE CONSIDER TODAY AS MID RANGE MAY NOT BE MAY BE SMALL IN THE FUTURE. UM, I THINK THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. THANKS COMMISSIONER BARRER RAMIREZ, VICE HANNEY, ANY QUESTIONS FROM YOU? I HAVE A FEW. UM, FORTUNATELY MY VERY BRIGHT AND TALENTED FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ASKED SEVERAL OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE, SO I'LL BE HOPEFULLY KIND OF BRIEF. UM, ONE QUESTION ON THE, UH, 75% GROUND FLOOR RETAIL REQUIREMENT. UM, Y'ALL HEARD ME MAYBE ASK THIS ON OTHER THINGS. DID Y'ALL CONSIDER MAKING THAT AN ADMINISTRATIVE WAIVER? UH, THERE ARE LIMITS TO WHAT WE CAN ADMINISTRATIVELY WAIVE. GOT IT. AND OUR CURRENT LEGAL FRAMEWORK. AND SO WHAT WE RECOMMEND INSTEAD IS THAT FOR THINGS THAT ARE WAIVED, THAT THEY HAPPEN AT THE TIME OF REZONING AND THAT'S A COUNCIL DECISION. OKAY, UNDERSTOOD. AND THAT'S USUALLY THE ANSWER THAT I GET, BUT I ALWAYS ASK, ASK ANYWAY, . UM, AND THEN, UH, ON THE, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SO WE'VE GOT 40 YEARS FOR RENTAL AND 99 FOR OWNERSHIP, AND I KNOW IN THE VARIOUS PROGRAMS ALL THROUGH THE CITY THERE'S DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, LENGTH REQUIREMENTS. I'M JUST WONDERING HOW WE GET CAME TO THOSE TWO. UH, EXACTLY. I'LL PASS IT TO EITHER ERICA OR BRENDAN IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE ANYONE SUGGESTION. THAT'S NOT A QUESTION THAT I'VE BEEN ASKED BEFORE, SO I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER, BUT WE COULD FOLLOW UP IF NOBODY IN THIS ROOM HAS A GOOD BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE. I'M SAYING LOTS OF HEADS SHAKING NOW. , I, I THINK, UM, THE IDEA WITH THE OWNERSHIP WAS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AS PERMANENT AS POSSIBLE, BUT LAW SAID 99 YEARS WAS THE MAXIMUM, NOT SURE WHY. UM, AND THEN THE 40% WAS INTENDED TO MATCH THE AFFORDABILITY PERIOD OF, UH, OUR SUBSIDY PROGRAMS LIKE OUR RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS, UM, BECAUSE, UH, A DEVELOPMENT COULD BOTH GET, USE THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM AND UM, ALSO SEEK SUBSIDY. SO I THINK THOSE WE'RE TRYING TO MATCH. GOT IT. THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE. THANK YOU. UM, AND THEN I THINK I UNDERSTAND THIS, BUT, UM, WHAT ADVANTAGE WOULD SOMEONE WHO'S USING THE NO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, UM, WHAT, WHAT WOULD THEY RECEIVE OVER JUST GETTING THEIR SB EIGHT 40 ENTITLEMENT AND GOING ALONG THEIR MERRY WAY? YEAH. UH, THIS, THIS QUESTION I HAVE BEEN ASKED BEFORE OKAY, EXCELLENT. UM, IN, IN ONE, ONE REASON IS REALLY JUST TO PUT ALL THE TOOLS ON THE BOOKS, LET'S REPLACE VMU, BUT PER PRIMARILY WHAT WE WOULD SEE IS COMPATIBILITY, RELAXATION, AND THE DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE CAP REMOVAL AS BEING THE, THE PRIMARY REASONS THAT IT WOULD STILL POTENTIALLY FOR SOME PROJECTS AND SOME NEIGHBORHOODS BE BENEFICIAL TO SEEK THE PLUS ZERO HEIGHT. GOT IT. UM, THANK YOU. AND THEN THE LAST ONE, THIS MAY BE A LITTLE BIT IN THE WEEDS, BUT HOW DO Y'ALL DETERMINE THE 70% MFI FOR THE EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING? HOW, HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN? UM, THE HUD PUBLISHES VARIOUS OH, METHODOLOGIES FOR HOW THAT'S DETERMINED. AND WE ACTUALLY DON'T PUBLISH A 70% MFI HERE AT THE CITY RIGHT NOW, BUT, UM, WELL ACTUALLY, SORRY, SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT QUESTION, BUT, UM, HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE WHAT THE RENT IS? NOT, NOT WHAT THE 70% IS, BUT HOW DO YOU DETERMINE LIKE WHAT THE, WHAT THE CURRENT RENT IS AT ON THOSE UNITS? OKAY, SO THE, THE, YES, IF THE REQUIREMENT IS TRIGGERED, THEN I BELIEVE IT'S LIKE THE LAST 12 MONTHS OR THE LONGEST LEASE TERM IF THAT'S NOT A 12 MONTH LEASE. UM, AND SO THE, [01:40:01] THE OWNER WOULD NEED TO PRODUCE RENT ROLLS AND THEN WE WOULD KIND OF VERIFY WHICH UNITS MET THAT THRESHOLD. FANTASTIC. UM, THAT IS ALL I HAVE. THANKS VICE CHAIR HANEY. UM, I'LL TAKE A TURN. I WANNA THANK EACH OF YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME SPENT ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS THIS EVENING, BUT ALSO FOR WHAT I IMAGINE I CAN ONLY IMAGINE HAS BEEN AN UNBELIEVABLE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS. SO WE'RE REALLY GRATEFUL FOR YOUR WORK AND FOR YOU BEING HERE THIS EVENING. JUST A HIGH LEVEL CLARIFYING QUESTION, I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY. THE NAMING IS DIFFERENT FROM DB 90 IN THAT THE NUMBER IS REFERRING TO THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT INSTEAD OF THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. UM, BECAUSE OUR, WE, BECAUSE WE ANTICIPATE NEW BASE ZONES COMING ONLINE THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HEIGHT IS AND IT'S A JUST A COMPLETE RANGE, UH, OF BASE ZONE HEIGHTS THAT THIS PROGRAM REFERS TO. WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE TOWARDS A A MORE CLEAR, THIS IS THE EXACT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT THAT'S GOING ON THIS PARCEL. I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY. I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS AROUND THE REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, WHICH I KNOW COMMISSIONERS HANEY AND SKIDMORE HAVE TOUCHED ON. BUT I JUST WANNA CLARIFY. SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW, IF THIS APPLIES ONLY TO HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE RENTING AT A 70% RATE BASED ON THE HUD GUIDELINES, ARE WE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE RENTING EACH UNIT? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THAT'S 70% IS DEPENDENT UPON HOUSEHOLD SIZE. UM, SO WHAT WE WOULD CALCULATE IS, UM, THE, THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR THE UNIT, THERE'S AN EQUIVALENT FOR THE ASSUMED KIND OF HOUSEHOLD SIZE THAT CAN MATCH THAT NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BE CALCULATING THE INCOME BASED ON. IS, AM I CORRECT THERE? I'M LOOKING, YES. UM, OKAY. IS THERE A CONCERN THAT SINCE WE'RE REPLACING THOSE WITH 50 AND 60% UNITS, THEN POTENTIALLY PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING DISPLACED BY THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT THEN WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR THOSE LOWER INCOME THRESHOLDS? IF THEY'RE PAYING 70% RENT, THEY MIGHT NOT QUALIFY, THEY MIGHT NOT MAKE LITTLE ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY MOVE INTO THOSE 50 AND 60% UNITS. THAT IS A POSSIBILITY, AND AGAIN, THAT IS PART OF OUR EXISTING CODE TODAY. IT, SO, AND THERE WAS, I WILL SAY THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF CONVERSATION ON THE DAIS AROUND THAT POSSIBILITY WHEN THIS PARTICULAR SET OF PROVISIONS WAS PUT ON THE BOOKS. UM, AND TO WARNER'S POINT, WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANYBODY USE IT YET. SO WE'RE WANTING TO REALLY KIND OF SEE A PROJECT MOVE FORWARD INTO SITE PLAN USING, UM, THESE PROVISIONS BEFORE WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CHANGE THEM. THOSE ARE IN A NON ZONING SECTION OF THE CODE, SO THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE STREAMLINED TO, A LITTLE BIT MORE NIMBLE TO ADJUST. UM, OKAY. WHEN WE DO START SEEING FEEDBACK, SO IF WE SEE INSTANCES WHERE PEOPLE ARE, WHERE A REDEVELOPMENT IS HAPPENING AND PEOPLE DON'T QUALIFY TO MOVE INTO THE REPLACEMENT UNITS, WE CAN CHANGE THOSE THRESHOLDS POTENTIALLY. YES, POTENTIALLY. AND I DO WANNA BE CLEAR THAT ALL OF THE EXISTING TENANTS DO GET THE OTHER PROTECTIONS. SO EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T QUALIFY TO MOVE INTO ONE OF THE NEW INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS, YOU WOULD GET SECURITY DEPOSIT BACK FOUR MONTHS, RENT, ALL OF THAT. AND SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT WITHIN THE SAME BUILDING, SOME TENANTS WOULD HAVE RELOCATION REQUIREMENTS TRIGGERED AND OTHERS WOULD NOT BASED ON THE RENTS THAT THEY'RE PAYING. IF THE WHOLE BILL, IF ANY ONE UNIT IN THE BUILDING RENTS AT 60% MFI OR BELOW, THAT IS TRIGGERING THE REQUIREMENT NOW FOR, FOR, FOR THE EXISTING TENANTS AT THAT BUILDING. BUT NOT ALL OF THE TENANTS, DEPENDING ON THEIR EXISTING MFIS WOULD QUALIFY FOR THE NEW INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT A, SORRY TO BELABOR THIS POINT, IT'S NOT A UNIT BY UNIT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE THAT'S BEING PROVIDED. IT'S WHETHER OR NOT THE NEW DEVELOPER HAS TO PUT IN 10 OR 20% NEW AFFORDABLE UNITS THAT IS EITHER TRIGGERED OR NOT TRIGGERED. YEAH, I THINK IT'S JUST CONFUSING BECAUSE IT'S ALL UNDER THE SAME PART OF CODE. AND SO I LIKE TO GENERALLY CALL THE WHOLE SECTION REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS. YOU'RE REDEVELOPING QUALIFYING UNITS, SO YOU'RE REDEVELOPING A, A STRUCTURE THAT INCLUDES 70% MFI UNITS. IF THAT HAPPENS, TWO THINGS, YOU GO DOWN TWO PATHS MM-HMM . ONE IS CALLED TENANT PROTECTIONS IN MY MIND. AND THAT IS LIKE ALL OF THAT GOES TO EVERYBODY BECAUSE IT'S BEEN TRIGGERED AND THAT'S THE, THE NOTICE, THE FOUR MONTHS RENT, ALL OF THAT, RIGHT, RIGHT. TO OF FIRST REFUSAL OF THE NEW UNITS, MAYBE NOT INCOME RESTRICTED, THEN THE, THE TENANTS THAT ARE, THE UNITS THAT ARE AT THE 70% MFI, WE CALCULATE THOSE ON THE RENT ROLLS AND THAT NUMBER IS WHAT DETERMINES BETWEEN 10 AND 20% IN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. AND SO DEPENDING ON HOW MANY UNITS ARE IN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND HOW MANY EXISTING TENANT TENANTS QUALIFY FOR THOSE UNITS, THERE MAY BE A MISMATCH THERE. OKAY. THAT WAS REALLY HELPFUL. THANK YOU FOR TALKING ME THROUGH THAT . I APPRECIATE IT. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO EXPLAIN. WELL, AND SO THEN KIND OF GOING IN THE OTHER DIRECTION, AND I'M JUST SORT OF TALKING [01:45:01] THROUGH THIS AS I'M UNDERSTANDING IT, IT'S POSSIBLE WE'RE OFFERING RELOCATION ASSISTANCE MORE BROADLY THAN IS STRICTLY NECESSARY BECAUSE WE'RE OFFERING IT TO THE WHOLE BUILDING IN SITUATIONS WHERE ONLY A FEW UNITS MIGHT TRIGGER IT. BUT THAT'S, WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT BECAUSE WE WANNA OFFER RELOCATION ASSISTANCE WHEREVER WE CAN. AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY? WELL, I WANNA BE REAL CLEAR, WE'RE NOT OFFERING CITY RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. THIS CONVERSATION CAME UP DURING EAD. THIS IS A REQUIREMENT, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG ON THE DEVELOPER PROPERTY OWNER TO PROVIDE THOSE BENEFITS IN EXCHANGE FOR OPTING INTO THIS PROGRAM. YEAH. AND THAT'S A, THAT'S AN IMPORTANT, UH, DIFFERENTIATION. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'LL MOVE AWAY FROM REDEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS. , UM, MY ONE QUESTION AROUND, SO PROJECTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE 65% RESIDENTIAL. WHAT WAS THE COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL, I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THE COMMERCIAL PERCENTAGE REQUIREMENT IN OUR, IN THE DB PROGRAMS THAT THIS IS REPLACING? SO DB 90? YES. SO IN VMU AND DB 90, BOTH OF THEM ALLOW FOR A MAXIMUM OF TWO FLOORS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL. THEY'RE WRITTEN SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY, BUT GENERALLY JUST TWO FLOORS MAXIMUM. SO DEPENDING ON THE HEIGHT OF THOSE BUILDINGS, THAT CAN BE, IT'S GENERALLY AROUND THE 35%, UH, NON-RESIDENTIAL, IT'S MOST CASES THAT'S THE SAME OR A LITTLE BIT MORE NON-RESIDENTIAL THAT'S BEING ALLOWED. IF YOU DECIDED TO BUILD A THREE STORY VMU BUILDING, WHICH YOU TECHNICALLY COULD HAVE DONE, YOU COULD HAVE ONE FLOOR RESIDENTIAL AND TWO FLOORS OF COMMERCIAL, AND THAT WOULD BE 66% NON-RESIDENTIAL. UM, SO THAT IS LIKE THE MOST THAT I COULD FIGURE OUT HYPOTHETICALLY IN THE PREVIOUS PROGRAM YOU COULD HAVE SEEN OF NON-RESIDENTIAL. SO WE'RE CALCULATING IT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, BUT GENERALLY IT'S THE SAME FOR MOST BUILDINGS AS WE WOULD'VE SEEN UNDER DB 90. YES. OKAY. THAT'S HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LACK OF FEE IN LIEU OPTION FOR RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS. ONE IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK HAS COME UP FOR THIS COMMISSION A LOT, WHICH IS WHETHER WE FEEL LIKE THE CITY HAS THE COMPLIANCE AND MONITORING CAPACITY TO ACTUALLY MAKE SURE THAT THOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS THAT ARE BUILT THROUGH THE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS ARE BEING LEASED TO PEOPLE WHO INCOME QUALIFY. CAN Y'ALL SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT? UH, I WOULD NEED TO DEFER TO AUSTIN HOUSING. I KNOW THAT THEY ARE, UM, WORKING ON, YOU KNOW, EVALUATING THEIR OWN COMPLIANCE MEASURES RIGHT NOW. AND SO I WOULD JUST NEED, I DON'T KNOW THE STATUS OF THAT. MR. KENNEDY, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN SPEAK TO? I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE FAR ENOUGH ALONG YET. HI, BRENDAN KENNEDY, UH, DIVISION MANAGER AUSTIN HOUSING. SO I'M NOT DIRECTLY, UM, RESPONSIBLE FOR, UH, SOME OF THE WORK THAT'S GOING ON TO REVISIT AND ENHANCE OUR MONITORING, BUT UM, I CAN SAY WE RECEIVED A COUNCIL IFC TO THAT EXACT POINT. UM, WE HAVE STAFF, UH, INCLUDING, UM, SOME NEW STAFF AND A REORGANIZATION OF OUR STRUCTURE THAT IS MEANT TO ENHANCE OUR IN-HOUSE MONITORING AND THAT WILL APPLY TO BOTH OUR SUBSIDIZED UNITS AS WELL AS, UH, ENHANCED MONITORING FOR OUR INCENTIVIZED OR DENSITY BONUS UNITS AS WELL. SO THAT'S VERY MUCH IN PROGRESS. I BELIEVE HOUSING AND PLANNING, UH, COMMITTEE WILL BE RECEIVING AN UPDATE LATER THIS MONTH, UH, ON THAT EFFORT AND THE RESPONSE TO THAT IFC. SO I'LL HAVE MORE INFORMATION FOR Y'ALL SHORTLY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I WILL FOLLOW MY OWN RULES AND CUT MYSELF OFF, BUT I MAY GIVE MYSELF A SECOND ROUND OF QUESTIONS. , UM, WITHOUT OBJECTION, I'D LOVE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMISSIONERS WHO HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER ROUND. UM, COMMISSIONER GANON, I RUDELY CUT YOU OFF. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE WITH YOUR QUESTIONS? I I JUST WANNA FOLLOW UP REAL QUICK. UM, AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE QUESTIONS EVERYONE'S ASKED. SUCH GOOD ONES AND A LOT OF THE STUFF I WROTE DOWN HAVE HAS BEEN, UH, ADDRESSED. SO, AND THANK YOU GUYS FOR STAYING SO LATE. UM, CAN YOU GUYS HELP ME UNDERSTAND FEE AND LU IS THIS, UM, DO MULTIPLE DENSITY BONUSES POINT TO THE SAME POLICY OR DOES THE FEE AND LIE POLICY LIVE WITHIN DIFFERENT DENSITY BONUSES? THE GUARDRAILS OF A FEE AND LIE IF IT'S PART OF THE POLICY ARE WITHIN THE CODE LANGUAGE. SO FOR INSTANCE, FOR DBE TODD, I KNOW, UM, THE FEE AND LIE WAS SET AT 125% OF WHAT THE ONSITE WOULD'VE BEEN AND IT WAS GEOGRAPHICALLY FENCED. THOSE ARE PARTS THAT ARE IN THE CODE LANGUAGE IN THE ZONING CHAPTER, BUT THE ACTUAL FEE METHODOLOGY AND, AND WHAT WE CALCULATE YEAR TO YEAR IS SAID OUTSIDE OF THAT. SO, UH, WE HAD SAID THAT, UM, OR YOU HAD, HAD MENTIONED THAT THIS WAS PART OF A LARGER POLICY DISCUSSION. UH, THAT POLICY DISCUSSION WOULD THEN SORT OF CHANGE THE FEE AND LIE PROCESS THAT LIVES OUTSIDE OF THE, THIS PARTICULAR DENSITY BONUS. AND IT, AND NO, I GUESS WHAT I, WHAT I MEANT TO SAY WITH THAT IS THAT THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT UPDATE, WHICH AGAIN, WE'RE COMING UP IN ABOUT 10 YEARS OF, SO WE'RE LAUNCHING THAT AS A CITY. UM, WE THINK THAT THAT KIND OF LARGER POLICY SCAN LOOK BACK, LOOK [01:50:01] AHEAD, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORT IS THE MORE APPROPRIATE PLACE TO TAKE UP SUCH A NUANCED CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER WE, IN WHAT CASES DO WE PREFER ONSITE VERSUS V AND L AS A COMMUNITY. BECAUSE AS BRENDAN AND, AND I HAVE MENTIONED, THERE'S SOME CASES WHERE IT MAYBE THE PREFERENCE AND SOME CASES WHERE IT WOULDN'T BE, UM, IT JUST FELT LIKE MOVING TO A COMPLETE SHIFT OF STARTING TO RECOMMEND FEE IN LIE WAS WE DIDN'T HAVE THE POLICY GUIDANCE TO, TO LOOK AT THAT OKAY. AT THIS TIME. YEAH. AND THEN I THINK SORT TO IMPLEMENT ANYTHING THAT CAME OUT OF THAT, WE WOULD THEN BE LOOKING AT CODE AMENDMENTS TO INDIVIDUAL DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS THAT EACH ONE OF THOSE PROGRAMS HAS SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF WHETHER ONSITE IS REQUIRED OR ALLOWED, UM, THAT WE WOULD NEED TO BE MODIFYING BASED ON THAT. SO IF, IF, IF WE GOT THE POLICY AND, AND, AND OUR WORKING GROUP LOOKED AT IT AND THOUGHT, WELL, FOR A CITYWIDE POLICY, MAYBE JUST TO BUILD IN MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY SINCE THIS IS GONNA BE A CITYWIDE THING, UM, THAT MAYBE FILO SHOULD BE ALLOWED FOR BOTH RENTAL AND OWNERSHIP, THAT WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE COULD MAKE, UH, FOR THIS POLICY WITHOUT AFFECTING, UH, ANY OTHER POLICIES. YES, IT, UH, AS PART OF YOUR, UH, HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF THIS, YOU COULD RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS THAT INCLUDE ADDING A FEE IN LIE FOR THE RENTAL COMPONENT. AND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO WORK OR SUGGEST IDEAS TO STAFF, WE'RE HAPPY TO ALSO RESPOND TO AND WITH OUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE KIND OF GUIDE AND SUGGEST THINGS THAT COULD MAKE THAT BETTER. BUT OUR, OUR RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE ON SITE, BUT WE'RE WILLING TO HELP GUIDE A FEE AND LIE CONVERSATION. SURE. I'M, I'M JUST WONDERING LIKE, WHAT IS THE RANGE THAT I CAN CAN, AND IT WOULDN'T AFFECT EXIST, IT WOULDN'T AFFECT DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS, LIKE OKAY. IT WOULD JUST BE FOR THE CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM. AND THEN IN THE SAME VEIN, AND UH, I'M BUILDING OFF OF SOMEONE ELSE'S QUESTION HERE, BUT, UH, UM, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE CALIBRATION TO MARKET. AND I KNOW THAT THERE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, THERE'S A CONCERN THAT WE'RE GOING INTO AN AIR, AN ERA WHERE WE WON'T BE BUILDING AS LARGE AND AS MUCH. UM, BUT WHEN WE ARE OUT OF THERE, IS THERE, I GUESS SIMILARLY, IS THERE A PLACE IN THE CODE WHERE WE CAN POINT TO A CALIBRATION METRIC AND THIS MIGHT BE WAY TOO IN THE WEEDS FOR RIGHT NOW, BUT, UM, THAT THIS POLICY COULD REFERENCE SO THAT EVERY TIME WE NEED IT, IF IT, IF WE ROLL THIS OUT AND THERE'S NO UPTAKE OR IT TURNS OUT THAT, THAT THERE WAS, OH SHOOT, WE REALLY DID NEED TO CHANGE THIS ONE PIECE OF IT TO REALLY GET MORE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE. IS THERE AN EASIER WAY THAN HAVING TO SEND OUT NOTIFICATION TO THE WHOLE CITY? SO I WOULD WOULD LOVE TO SAY THAT YES, THERE'S AN EASIER WAY, BUT BASED ON THE GUIDANCE THAT WE'VE RECEIVED ON KIND OF THE LEGAL PARAMETERS THAT WE'RE WORKING WITHIN, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO VERY SPECIFICALLY KIND OF TALK ABOUT WHAT ENTITLEMENT IS ON A PROPERTY AND WHAT MAXIMUM ENTITLEMENT ON IS A PROPERTY. SO LIKE CHANGING HEIGHT EASILY IS OFF THE TABLE. LIKE IF WE CHANGE HEIGHT, WE'VE GOTTA ACTUALLY DO THE NOTICE AND AND CHANGE THE ZONE. UM, AND CURRENTLY SORT OF THE PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE UNITS TO GET TO THE HEIGHT AS PART OF THE PROGRAM ARE ALSO IN THE CODE BAKED IN, IN THE ZONING CODE AND WOULD NEED A AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE THAT REQUIRES PROCESS THAT GOES WITH THAT. OKAY. COOL. THANK YOU GUYS AND I APPRECIATE IT. EVERYONE'S SAYING SO LIKE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE A SECOND ROUND OF QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER ROSN, GO AHEAD. I KNOW I'VE ALREADY MENTIONED THE FACT THAT I'VE GOT DEVELOPERS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHO HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I GUESS I WANT WOULD LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY ON IS THESE ARE EFFECTIVELY SINGLE FLOOR ADDITIONS THROUGH THIS PROGRAM AT 15 FEET. MAYBE WE'RE, WE'RE NOT REALLY GETTING TWO FLOORS OUT OF THIS, RIGHT? IT IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF BUILDING YOU'RE BUILDING REALLY. I MEAN, A FLOOR IS TYPICALLY LIKE 10 TO 12 STORIES, BUT 10 TO 12 FEET. SORRY. YEAH. 10 TO 12 FEET IS A STORY. THERE WE GO. CORRECT. BUT 15 FEET IS NOT ENOUGH FOR TWO STORIES. SO YOU'RE NEVER GONNA GET A TWO STORY BUMP FROM THAT ADDITIONAL 15 ADDITIONAL, DEPENDING ON LIKE WHERE CONSTRAINTS BY ZONE AND STUFF, 15 FEET COULD BE TWO ADDITIONAL FLOORS AND SOME REALLY UNIQUE SITUATIONS WITH THE ADDED, WITH THE ADDED FLOORS WITH SPACE BELOW IT. CORRECT. 15 FEET OF ADDITIONAL FEET COULD, COULD ALLOW TWO ADDITIONAL FLOORS IN SOME CASES BECAUSE I THINK WITH THE CONVERSATION ABOUT US WANTING TO PRIORITIZE TALLER BUILDINGS IN TRANSIT AREAS, FOR INSTANCE, WHICH IS ONE OF THE MAIN GOALS OF THIS PROGRAM IN GENERAL, MY FEAR IS THAT IT IS D IT IS GIVING, AND FORGIVE ME ALL NEIGHBORHOODS CROSS AUSTIN FOR SAYING THIS, BUT IT IS GIVING THE NEIGHBORHOODS A TOOL TO BARGAIN DOWN FROM A TALLER BUILDING BY ASKING FOR THE, UM, 45 FOOT INSTEAD OF THE 60 FOOT FOR INSTANCE, WHICH MAY ACTUALLY TAKE THAT PROJECT FROM A PENCILED PROJECT TO AN ABSOLUTELY UNBUILDABLE PROJECT. HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION [01:55:01] ABOUT SAY, GOING TO 30 FOOT INCREMENTS AND DOING A 30, 60 90 SO THAT WE END UP WITH AN ENCOURAGEMENT AND MAYBE THAT 30, 60 90 COMES WITH ADDITIONAL BENEFITS TO, OR AMENITIES COMMUNITY BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY? SO THE COMMUNITY CAN SAY, WELL WE COULD, WE COULD, YOU KNOW, WE COULD SUPPORT THE ADDITIONAL 30 FEET 'CAUSE WE KNOW WE'RE GETTING AN ADDITIONAL X OUT OF THIS NEGOTIATION. YEAH. SO JUST TO THE LAST THING THAT YOU SAID, ADDING 90 FEET DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT YOU CAN START GETTING PLAZAS AND, AND OTHER THINGS. AGAIN, THAT TYPICALLY PUSHES FOLKS INTO A NEW CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY WHERE JUST GETTING THE 10% AFFORDABLE HOUSING BECOMES CHALLENGING. SO I DON'T WANNA ADDING MORE HEAT FEET ABOVE 60 FEET IN MOST CASES FROM WHAT WE'VE SEEN, DOESN'T RESULT IN MORE COMMUNITY BENEFITS AND IN FACT MAKES IT LESS FEASIBLE FOR THE OVERALL PROJECT TO PENCIL WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON THE CITYWIDE SCALE. I I KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY IN EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD AS AS TO WHAT YOU JUST SAID. SO, UM, WE HAVE NOT LOOKED AT ADDITIONAL FEATS ABOVE 60 ADDITIONAL FEET IN HEIGHT. COUNCIL'S DIRECTION TO US WAS VERY SPECIFIC TO LOOK AT HEIGHTS BELOW AND ABOVE 30 FEET. THEY DID NOT SAY IN 15 FOOT INCREMENTS, BUT THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN REALLY THINK ABOUT IT BETWEEN ZERO AND 30 FEET IS TO PUT SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE. AND SO IF WE'RE ALREADY DOING 15 FOOT INCREMENTS, IT WAS JUST KIND OF A LOGICAL NEXT STEP. UNDERSTOOD. AND I THINK, UH, SEVERAL OF US HAVE WORKED WITH DEVELOPERS UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE, THERE ARE ACTUALLY HEIGHTS THAT ARE BUILDABLE AND HEIGHTS THAT ARE NOT REALLY PENCIL. THEY JUST DON'T BUILD BUILDINGS OF CERTAIN HEIGHTS. AND I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I'M JUST LOOKING TO SAY IS THERE THE, THAT NUANCE BUILT IN HERE COMBINED WITH THE FACT THAT FROM MY EXPERIENCE, THE THE IMPEDIMENT TO A TALLER BUILDING IS TYPICALLY THE CONVINCING OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THIS IS A BENEFIT TO THEM. NOT THAT IT'S A BENEFIT, THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T SEEM NEED TO BE CONVINCED. IT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS THAT SEEM TO BE CONVINCED THAT IT'S ACCEPTABLE TO BUILD A 90 FOOT BUILDING ADJACENT TO THEIR TO THEIR HOUSES. YEAH. AND I WILL SORT OF ADD ONE THING THERE THAT MAY BE USEFUL FOR THIS BODY TO THINK OF. IN ADDITION TO SORT OF PUTTING THESE TOOLS ON THE BOOKS AND WAITING FOR FOLKS TO COME ASK TO APPLY THEM, OUR STAFF IS ALSO ENVISIONING HOW MIGHT WE IMPLEMENT OUR PLANS MOVING FORWARD. LIKE IF WE ADOPT AN AREA PLAN THAT HAS SPECIFICS AROUND KIND OF THE CHARACTER OF A PARTICULAR SITE AROUND A TRANSIT CENTER, WHAT TOOLS WOULD WE BE USING TO REMAP AND ACTUALLY DO CITY INITIATED REZONINGS? UM, OR COUNCIL COULD DIRECT SORT OF BROADER CITY INITIATED REZONINGS IF THEY, THEY WANTED TO. THAT'S CERTAINLY THEIR, THEIR CHOICE. UM, SO I WANT DEFINITELY THINK ABOUT THESE TOOLS NOT JUST FROM A KIND OF PERSPECTIVE OF A PROPERTY OWNER REQUESTING AN INDIVIDUAL REZONING ON AN INDIVIDUAL PARCEL AND WHAT THAT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE, BUT POTENTIAL CITY INITIATED REZONINGS TO IMPLEMENT PLANS THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SIMILAR PROCESS AND A SIMILAR CONVERSATION, BUT IT WOULD BE IN THE CONTEXT OF A LARGER AREA AND NOT JUST THAT ONE SITE. UNDERSTOOD. AND I THINK THAT WHAT I WILL SAY, JUST FOR THE KNOWLEDGE OF SAYING IT, WE DID LOOK AT DB 90 AS SOMEWHAT OF A PRE-NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. LIKE THE CITY HAS ALREADY REQUESTED A BUNCH OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT WE NO LONGER HAVE TO ASK FOR 'CAUSE THEY'RE BAKED IN. AND I THINK THAT IT IS A METHODOLOGY THAT HELPS MOVE THESE PROJECTS INTO THE FIELD WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOES FEEL LIKE THERE'S ALREADY A TON OF COMMUNITY BENEFIT BUILT INTO THIS OVER, YOU KNOW, THE STANDARD, UH, BY RIGHT, UH, ENTITLEMENTS ON THE SITE. SO, UH, I WILL REITERATE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, UH, THANKS TO YOU ALL FOR ALL OF THE KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU'VE BUILT, UH, BROUGHT TO US TONIGHT AND FOR A STAIN. SO WE'LL HAVE TO DISCUSS THIS WITH US. THANK YOU. THANKS COMMISSIONER ROSN, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE A SECOND ROUND COMMISSIONER MAXWELL. UM, AND I WAS TRYING TO WAIT TO GO LAST 'CAUSE I HAD SOME PROCESS QUESTIONS JUST ABOUT NEXT STEPS SINCE WE HAVE KEPT YOU HERE FOR TWO HOURS, . UM, LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT'S COMING NEXT AND I THINK A COUPLE KEY QUESTIONS THAT I, UH, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE STARTED, STARTED WITH, WE ARE EXPECTING TO SEE SOME, A KIND OF VERSION OF THIS THAT WE CAN WORK ON AS A WORKING GROUP HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS. OR WOULD WE HAVE THE STAFF MEMO SOONER? DO YOU HAVE A TIMELINE ON THAT PIECE? WE'RE STILL FINALIZING THE STAFF REPORT AND THEN IT'LL HAVE TO BE EXECUTIVE REVIEWED. SO I DON'T HAVE AN EXACT TIMELINE. WE ARE WORKING AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE TO GET THAT OUT, BUT, BUT I WANNA BE CLEAR, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS NOT GONNA SAY ANYTHING D DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THESE SLIDES ARE. IT'S NOT GOING TO SUDDENLY HAVE DIFFERENT HEIGHT TIERS OR DIFFERENT NAMES OR MORE BENEFITS. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT COMMISSIONERS CAN PLEASE START USING THIS AS A BASIS. YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT OR IDEAS ABOUT ANY OF THESE, GO AHEAD AND START THINKING OF AMENDMENTS. UM, AND THAT'S A GREAT SEGUE TO MY NEXT QUESTION, WHICH, UM, I KNOW YOU ALL MENTIONED NOTIFICATION AND GIVEN THAT THIS IS ON A PRETTY QUICK TIMELINE, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE NOTIFICATION KIND OF WHAT THAT'S LOOKING LIKE AND WHAT PEOPLE MIGHT BE SEEING THESE PURPLE POSTCARDS? [02:00:01] IF THEY'RE PURPLE AGAIN? YES. NO PURPLE POSTCARDS, NO POSTCARDS. AGAIN, WE ARE JUST DOING, WE'RE RECOMMENDING PAPER DISTRICTS THAT DON'T APPLY TO ANY SITES YET. SO WE'RE DOING PUBLISHED NOTICE IN THE STATESMAN AND COMMUNITY REGISTRY THAT'S BEEN SENT TO OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF THAT TENDS TO PUSH THOSE NOTICES OUT FOR US. SO FOLKS ON THE COMMUNITY REGISTRY OR YOU KNOW, WHO SIGNED UP FOR THOSE THINGS SHOULD START SEEING THAT HOPEFULLY GO OUT IN MAYBE ABOUT A WEEK OR SO ONCE THE PRINTING HAPPENS. BUT UM, SO, UH, WE'VE, WE'VE ALSO GOT, LIKE I SAID, THE WEBSITE AND WE'VE BEEN PUSHING IT OUT MADLY THROUGH NEWSLETTERS. UM, SO IF YOU HAVE OTHER WAYS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE US TO SHARE THE INFORMATION, UM, FINALLY WE DO HAVE A FORM ON THAT SPEAK UP SITE THAT YOU CAN REQUEST A BRIEFING FROM US. IF YOU'RE A NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION OR AN ADVOCACY GROUP OR PROFESSIONAL GROUP THAT WOULD LIKE MORE OF ONE-ON-ONE CONVERSATION WITH QUESTIONS, WE CAN TRY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT AS WELL. GREAT. AND THEN A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THAT, WHICH IS, I KNOW THAT SOMETIMES BECAUSE OF OUR NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS, WHICH I THINK MS. GREY HOUSE REALLY OUTLINED HOW SPECIFIC THEY NEED TO BE, WE SOMETIMES RUN INTO THINGS THAT ARE SORT OF OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT OR PARTICULARLY WORK ON OR MAKE AMENDMENTS AROUND. AND I GUESS GIVEN THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT, I JUST WANTED TO REALLY HIGHLIGHT ARE THERE, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, DISCUSSING FEE AND LIE AND THAT ACTUALLY CHANGING THOSE REQUIREMENTS. WE THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE INSIDE THE SCOPE OF WHAT YOU ALL ARE PUTTING ON THE NOTIFICATION. UH, I WILL NEED TO DOUBLE CHECK WITH, UH, THE LAW DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE, UM, I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, OUR NOTIFICATION LANGUAGE INCLUDES THE FACT THAT WE ARE RETIRING REPLACING DV 90 VMU, IT INCLUDES THE FACT THAT WE'RE ALLOWING ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AND USES THAT WE'RE MODIFYING SETBACKS OR MODIFYING SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND COMPATIBILITY. SO I THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT THE NOTICE GENERALLY COVERS. UM, IF YOU WERE GONNA NOT DO ANY OF THOSE THINGS ANYMORE, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A PROBLEM, BUT WE'LL CONFIRM ON THE FEE AND LOOP QUESTION SPECIFICALLY. AND THEN I GUESS RELATED QUESTION TO THAT IS JUST THOSE ADDITIONAL TIERS, EVEN IF THEY COULDN'T BE FULLY CODE COMPLIANT, BUT LIKE CERTAINLY RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE ADDITIONAL TIERS ADDED IN AND THAT THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WAS A PHASE TWO OR SOMETHING. I THINK THAT'S A KEY QUESTION FOR US BECAUSE QUITE HONESTLY, GIVEN HOW LONG IT'S TAKEN TO DO SOME REFORMS REFORMS TO OUR PUD AND THE PROBLEMS WITH PDAS, THAT IS JUST A KEY THING THAT I KNOW THIS COMMISSION'S REALLY GONNA WANNA ADDRESS WHEN WE GO THROUGH OUR WORKING GROUP AMENDMENTS. YEAH, I THINK THAT CERTAINLY IT COULD BE A RECOMMENDATION. WE AREN'T PUTTING SPECIFIC HEIGHTS INTO THE, THE NOTICE, SO THOSE COULD CHANGE BY THE TIME THAT COUNT. YOU KNOW, IF COUNCIL WANTED TO STRIKE THE PLUS 60, THEY COULD STRIKE IT. UM, YEAH, THAT, THAT SHOULD BE SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE. BUT AS FAR AS HEIGHTS ABOVE 60, I THINK JUST BECAUSE OUR COMMUNITY MATERIALS HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT THAT'S THE, THE TALLEST WE'RE RECOMMENDING IT MIGHT NEED TO BE A PHASE TWO. UM, WE CAN SEE. OH, THAT'S GREAT. AND THEN, UM, ONE KIND OF FINAL QUESTION IS ASSUMING EVERYTHING GOES ON TIME , UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WOULD BE THAT MONTH BETWEEN WHEN WE ARE SORT OF REVIEWING THIS, A PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN, YOU KNOW, COMING TO COUNCIL AND I GUESS THERE WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OR SORT OF, UM, SORT OF WHAT YOU EXPECT TO HAPPEN IN THAT MONTH. OBVIOUSLY LAW WILL BE VERY BUSY DURING THAT TIME, BUT ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED TO ADD IN THERE? YEAH, UM, WE ARE PLANNING TO HOPEFULLY BE ON A WORK SESSION OF COUNSEL TO HAVE A SIMILAR KIND OF QUESTION AND ANSWER WITH THEM IN A LESS FORMAL SETTING THAN DURING THE ACTUAL COUNSEL HEARING ON THE 21ST. SO THAT SHOULD BE HAPPENING SOMETIME IN MAY, WE BELIEVE. UM, AND THEN AGAIN, MORE ORGANIZATIONAL BRIEFINGS AND THINGS. WE ARE, WE ARE, WE HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS ON OUR ONLINE THING KIND OF SURVEY TEMPERATURE CHECK AS WELL. SO WE'RE HOPING TO PACKAGE THAT FEEDBACK BOTH FOR YOU AND THEN AGAIN FOR THE UH, CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. GREAT. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE PROCESS QUESTIONS AND ALL OF THE GREAT ANSWERS THIS EVENING. UM, THANK YOU FOR REALLY BEARING WITH US AND LETTING US UNDERSTAND THIS SO DEEPLY. WE APPRECIATE IT. OTHER COMMISSIONERS NEEDING A SECOND ROUND? I DO. I'M SORRY, SHARE. I JUST WANT TO TIE UP THIS QUESTION AROUND COMPLIANCE AND MONITORING. UH, I APOLOGIZE IF I'M ASKING AGAIN, BUT I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S, THERE'S GONNA BE INCREASED STAFF CAPACITY GOING FORWARD FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE IF THIS PROGRAM IS WILDLY SUCCESSFUL, WHICH WE HOPE IT WILL BE IN A LOT OF THESE NEW DEVELOPMENTS ARE BUILT WITH ONSITE UNITS. DO YOU FEEL LIKE HOUSING HAS A STAFF REQUIRED TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE UNITS ARE TRULY BEING LEASED OUT TO TENANTS THAT INCOME QUALIFY? SURE, AND I, I WANNA CLARIFY WHEN I SPEAK TO INCREASED STAFF CAPACITY, I THINK I SHOULD MAYBE SAY LIKE AN INCREASED STAFF FOCUSED AND REVISED PROCESS WITH THE EXISTING STAFF AND RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE. UM, IF THERE ARE, AGAIN, WE ARE IN THE MIDST OF A REVIEW OF WHAT OUR EXISTING MONITORING EFFORTS LOOK LIKE, WHAT THE NEEDS ARE, UM, AND WHAT THE PROPOSAL WILL LOOK LIKE IN THAT, UM, APRIL HOUSING AND PLANNING COMMITTEE, UH, BRIEFING THAT WE'LL PROVIDE, WE'LL GIVE MORE DETAILS ON THAT, UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE ARE ANY REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL STAFF OR RESOURCES, UM, THAT WILL COME OUT OF THAT PROCESS. SO WE'LL BE BRIEFING MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND UH, STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL ON WHAT THAT WILL LOOK LIKE. BUT WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF THAT. SO I DON'T HAVE DETAILS AT THIS TIME, [02:05:01] BUT WE'LL HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THAT BY THE TIME THAT COUNCIL CONSIDERS THIS SOUNDS LIKE SO, OR, OR AT LEAST A, A FULLER UNDERSTANDING OF OF YES, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF THE NEW PROCESS. AND JUST TO KIND OF KEEP WHAT THIS LINE AROUND FEE AND LIE, SOMETHING I'VE HEARD KIND OF FROM THE AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IS THAT THERE IS A LEVEL OF SUPPORT THAT'S OFFERED TO RESIDENTS IN, FOR EXAMPLE, HOUSING TAX CREDIT COMMUNITIES, AND MORE SORT OF CAPITAL A AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENTS FROM PROPERTY MANAGEMENT THAT MIGHT NOT BE POSSIBLE. INDEN BONUS UNITS, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, IF A RESIDENT IN A HOUSING TAX CREDIT DEVELOPMENT LOSES THEIR JOB AND THEY TELL PROPERTY, THEY TELL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT ABOUT THAT, THERE IS A LOT THAT KIND OF HAPPENS IMMEDIATELY TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT RESIDENT IS NOT ALSO GONNA LOSE THEIR HOUSING. NOT JUST IN TERMS OF SUPPORT SERVICES, BUT JUST IN TERMS OF CAPACITY THAT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FOR AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENTS HAS. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS A CONCERN THAT WE DON'T SEE THAT KIND OF SUPPORT IN THESE DENSITY BONUS UNITS WHERE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT IS MORE, IT MAYBE THEY'RE LARGER COMMUNITIES, THEY DON'T DEAL WITH LOWER INCOME TENANTS AND THE SERVICES THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED FOR THOSE TENANTS? UM, I THINK CERTAINLY LIKE THREE ELEMENTS THAT WE SEE IS ONE THAT A LOT OF THE AFFORDABLE DEVELOPERS AND OWNERS TEND TO BE MISSION-DRIVEN ORGANIZATIONS. UM, SO THAT IMBUES THEM WITH, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THOSE, UM, SKILLS AND INTERESTS THAT YOU MENTIONED. THE SECOND IS THAT THOSE PROPERTY MANAGERS TEND TO BE FOCUSED ON AFFORDABLE, UM, HOUSING AND SO MORE FAMILIAR WITH HOW TO WORK WITH, UM, LOW INCOME FOLKS. AND AS YOU MENTIONED YOU MENTIONED SUPPORTIVE SERVICES AND YOU KNOW, ON SITE, UM, PROGRAMMING AS WELL THAT TENDS TO BE REQUIRED AS PART OF A LOT OF FUNDING PROGRAMS. ALL OF THOSE ARE ELEMENTS OF AFFORDABLE, FULLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE DON'T SEE AS MUCH, UM, IN DENSITY BONUS UNITS. AND SO I DO THINK IT'S, UM, PART OF THE CONVERSATION SOMETHING THAT YOU KNOW IS, UH, REALITY WHEN IT COMES TO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT TYPE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS BEING PROVIDED BY THOSE UNITS. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S COME UP AS AN ISSUE IN THE PAST WITH OUR EXISTING DENSITY BONUS UNITS? UM, I WOULD SAY COME UP AS AN ISSUE. UH, I WOULD SAY GENERALLY THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND DENSITY BONUS UNITS AND THEIR, UM, DIFFERENT LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT AND FAMILIARITY WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING BROADLY HAS COME UP, UM, AS A TOPIC THAT WE'RE AWARE OF. YES. OKAY. AND THEN JUST TRYING TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS TO OUR FEE IN LIE DOLLARS. NOW ARE THOSE GOING STRAIGHT INTO OUR HOUSING TRUST FUND AND RESERVED FOR RHODA AND ODA SPECIFICALLY? YES. FOR, SO IT, IT VARIES DEPENDING ON WHERE THE FEES ARE GENERATED FROM . CORRECT. SO WE HAVE, WE HAVE FUNDS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO EACH FEE AND LOSE SOURCE, SO THAT INCLUDES THE VARIOUS DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS DOWNTOWN, THE TODS, NORTH BENET GATEWAY, EAST RIVERSIDE ALL HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO GENERATE FEES. THEY ALL HAVE GEOGRAPHIC OR SPENDING RESTRICTIONS, BUT THEY ARE UTILIZED BY THE RHODA AND ODA PROGRAMS. PUDS LIKEWISE ARE OCCASIONALLY GENERATE FEE AND LIE WITH SPENDING RESTRICTIONS. UM, THOSE MIGHT HAVE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS OR USES THEY COULD GO TO. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, GENERALLY SPEAKING, FEE AND LIE DOLLARS GO TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND TO BE UTILIZED FOR, UM, USE FOR GAP FUND FUNDING AND FINANCING THROUGH RDA NODA. ARE THERE ANY FEE AND LIE DOLLARS FROM ANY OF OUR DENSITY BONUS PROGRAMS THAT ARE NOT GOING TOWARD SUBSIDIZED AFFORDABLE HOUSING? UH, WE, I BELIEVE SOME OF OUR FEE AND LOSES GO TO SOME TYPE OF HOUSING VOUCHERS AS WELL THAT ARE GENERATED THROUGH THE DOWNTOWN. SO IN MY MIND THAT IS STILL AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT IT'S NOT STICKS AND BRICKS WITH SUBSIDIZED AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT IT DOESN'T ALL GO TO NECESSARILY CONSTRUCTING NEW UNITS. CORRECT. YEP, SURE. PREVIOUSLY DOWNTOWN TENNESSEE BONUS FUNDS AND POTENTIALLY IN THE FUTURE, THOSE ARE SET ASIDE FOR SPENDING ON SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND VOUCHERS. PREVIOUSLY IN THE PAST FOR THOSE POPULATIONS HAVE BEEN A, A RECIPIENT OF THOSE FUNDS. AND IS THE INTENT OF THE FEE IN LIEU THAT MIGHT BE GENERATED FROM THE OWNERSHIP UNITS HERE THAT IT WOULD GO DIRECTLY TOWARD RHODA AND ODA? YES. YEAH, THE STAFF'S NOT RECOMMENDING ANY KIND OF GEOGRAPHIC RESTRICTIONS. AGAIN, SINCE THIS IS A CITYWIDE PROGRAM FOR THE OWNERSHIP FEE AND LIE, SO THAT WOULD GO TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND FOR HOUSING STAFF TO DEPLOY, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE PRIORITIES THAT THAT PRO THAT THE OUR FUNDING PROGRAMS TRY TO TARGET IS SOMETHING THE WORKING, COULD THE WORKING GROUP LOOK AT PUTTING DIFFERENT STIPULATIONS ON THAT FEE AND LIE FUNDING TO KIND OF PROTECT IT AS AFFORDABLE FUNDING FOR DEVELOPMENT SPECIFICALLY [02:10:01] GOING FORWARD? IS THAT WITHIN OUR PURVIEW? IS THAT A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE CAN MAKE? YOU COULD AND WHEN YOU DO, WE'LL DEFINITELY BE BRINGING IN OUR PARTNERS AT AUSTIN HOUSING TO KIND OF REVIEW WHAT'S BEING RECOMMENDED. IN GENERAL, THE MORE RESTRICTIVE YOU GET WITH IT, THE HARDER THE MONEY BECOMES TO SPEND ON PROJECTS. UM, SO THAT'S JUST, I THINK I'LL, I'LL LEAVE IT AT THIS. SO GEOGRAPHIC FENCING, IF YOU KNOW EQUITABLE TOD OVERLAY GEOGRAPHICALLY FENCED, BUT IT GEOGRAPHICALLY FENCED ALONG THE ENTIRE PROJECT CONNECT SYSTEM. THAT'S A FAIRLY LARGE GEOGRAPHIC AREA, UM, TO WORK WITH. IF YOU GET TOO SPECIFIC, IT BECOMES HARDER TO ADMINISTER AND HARDER TO SPEND THE FUNDING ON WORTHY PROJECTS. UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED. I THINK I MOSTLY JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS ONLY POSSIBLE FOR USE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING SPECIFICALLY. I KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN HARD TO SORT OF TRACK THOSE DOLLARS IN THE PAST AND WHERE THEY'VE ENDED UP AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT OUR FEE AND LIE DOLLARS AROUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING ARE TRULY GOING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND. THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR PATIENCE WITH ME. DO ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS? I'M HOPING WE DON'T NEED A THIRD ROUND OF QUESTIONS BECAUSE YOU ALL HAVE BEEN SO GENEROUS WITH YOUR TIME ALREADY. THANK YOU. THIS MEANS YOU'LL BE REALLY QUICK ON THE 28TH, RIGHT? YES. AND WE'LL HAVE NO QUESTIONS ON THE, AND IF I COULD MAKE A FINAL PLUG, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T MENTION IT DURING THE Q AND A SESSION. WE ARE HOLDING A HOUSING FAIR AND OPEN HOUSE AS SHOWN IN THE SLIDE DECK ON APRIL 11TH. WE INVITE EVERYBODY TO COME ON OUT. IT'S GONNA BE A GREAT TIME. AWESOME. WELL, MS. COOK, MS. GREATHOUSE, MS. LEE, MR. KENNEDY, THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR BEING WITH US THIS EVENING AND ANSWERING ALL OF OUR QUESTIONS AND FOR ALL OF YOUR WORK ON THIS. SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO OUR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. OH, EXCUSE ME. LET'S FIRST GO INTO OUR BOARD'S [PERMANENT COMMITTEE UPDATES] COMMITTEES AND WORKING GROUP UPDATES. SO WE WILL FIRST HEAR FROM THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE. WELL, AS YOU MAY HAVE HEARD, WE HAVE A MEETING ON APRIL 15TH AND I THINK I KNOW WHAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT . UM, I I WILL ALSO TRY, IF THEY HAVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN OUR BACKUP, UH, WE WILL SEND THAT TO OR SEE IF WE CAN GET MS. BROWN TO SEND THAT AROUND TO, TO THE WHOLE COMMISSION. SO, SO EVERYONE HAS IT, UH, AS FAR IN ADVANCE AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE. WE HAVE A MEETING PLANNED FOR TOMORROW EVENING OR LATE AFTERNOON JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE. UH, WE MET LAST WEEK AND I HAVE A FULL ONE HOUR OF BRIEFING ON GREEN CONCRETE THAT I AM SUPER EXCITED TO SHARE WITH YOU GUYS RIGHT NOW. NO, NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. UH, BUT IF, BUT IF YOU'RE INTERESTED I'LL SHARE WITH YOU LATER. I'M SO GLAD YOU'RE ENJOYING YOUR TIME ON THAT COMMITTEE. SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE. WE HAVE OUR NEXT MEETING ON MAY THE SIXTH SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD. ? YES. COMMISSIONER MAXWELL WAMP WAMP. UH, AS OF THE MARCH 26TH, UH, COUNCIL MEETING, UH, COUNCIL RECOMMENDED DISSOLVING THE SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD. NOW I THINK DUE TO SOME TCHOTCHKES IN HOW THAT ALL WORKS, WE STILL TECHNICALLY CAN MEET FOR THE NEXT, THE FOLLOWING MONTH AFTER THAT DATE. IT IS YET TO BE SEEN WHETHER OR NOT WE WILL. THANK YOU. WE WILL TAKE THAT OFF OF OUR AGENDA MOVING FORWARD. LET'S [FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ] MOVE INTO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO BRING A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO FORM A WORKING GROUP RELATED TO THE CITYWIDE DENSITY BONUSES. WE'LL BE HEARING THIS AGAIN ON APRIL 28TH, AND SINCE WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO OFFICIALLY FORM THAT WORKING GROUP UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING, I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE COULD START MEETING THIS WEEK IN A SUB QUORUM AND THEN OFFICIALLY KIND OF CODIFY THAT WORKING GROUP AT OUR NEXT MEETING. SO FIRST MAY I PLEASE HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER GANNON. UM, LET'S JUST KIND OF TAKE A QUICK, UH, UNOFFICIAL POLL OF WHO WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THAT WORKING GROUP. WE CAN TAKE UP TO FIVE PEOPLE. I AM DEFINITELY INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THAT WORKING GROUP, OTHER COMMISSIONERS. OKAY, SO WE'VE GOT, IF I RAISE IT AS HIGH AS POSSIBLE, DO I GET PREFERENCE? UH, SO, OKAY, WE HAVE GOT COMMISSIONER BRETTON, HILLER, ROJAN, AND GANN. GREAT. WONDERFUL. THANK YOU ALL. AND I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER BARR RAMIREZ. I DID NOT LOOK YOUR WAY. I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M NOT LEAVING YOU OUT. NO, IT'S OKAY. I THINK I AM BEYOND THE FIVE ANYWAY. SO AND YOU GUYS NO, YOU'RE, I TRUST YOU. YOU'RE GONNA DO GREAT. WONDERFUL. THANK YOU. SO, UM, THE FIVE OF US CAN THINK ABOUT A TIME THAT WE CAN GET TOGETHER AS A SUB QUORUM AND THEN WE'LL FORM THAT WORKING GROUP OFFICIALLY AT OUR NEXT MEETING. ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? YES, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL. UM, CHAIR, I HAD ALSO HEARD THAT THERE WAS, UM, THERE IS A POTENTIAL UPDATE COMING AROUND OUR URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKED BY THE DESIGN [02:15:01] COMMISSION TO POTENTIALLY HAVE A WORKING GROUP TO SORT OF HELP THEM GET THAT, TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'D LIKE TO SEE IN THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SORT OF IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE WAY WE CURRENTLY DO THOSE, UM, SUGGESTIONS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST A, A QUICK WORKING GROUP ON THAT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THAT MAY BE WITH US SORT OF ON THE SAME TIMELINE IN THE NEXT SIX WEEKS OR SO. AND FOR A SECOND FOR THAT WORKING GROUP, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GANNON. OKAY. SO FOR OUR NEXT MEETING WE WILL FORM THAT WORKING GROUP. THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU. THANKS, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL. OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? YES, COMMISSIONER GANNON. UH, THIS IS A FOLLOW UP ON A PAST FUTURE AGENDA ITEM. , I'LL, I'LL OUT. OKAY. DO WE, DO WE KNOW WHERE OUR, UM, OUR, OUR MESSAGE BOARD IS ? UH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. WE CAN, I'LL FOLLOW UP ON THAT. GREAT. THANKS COMMISSIONER MAXWELL. OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? OKAY, SEEING NONE, I WANNA JUST, UH, REMIND US THAT WE WILL BE HOLDING OFFICER ELECTIONS AT OUR NEXT MEETING. SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICERS, PLEASE SEND THEM TO OUR STAFF LIAISON BY EMAIL. AND IF THERE'S NO OTHER BUSINESS, I WILL ADJOURN THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 8:18 PM THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.