* 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 ] [00:00:04] SIX O'CLOCK I'M GONNA CALL TO ORDER THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION TO DO. TODAY IS TUESDAY, JUNE 2ND. IT IS 6:00 PM WE ARE AT AUSTIN CITY HALL. COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROOM 1001. START WITH CALL THE ROLL. CALL FOR COMMISSIONERS CHAIR HANK SMITH. I AM PRESENT. VICE CHAIR BETSY GREENBERG. HERE. SECRETARY RYAN PKI. HERE. PARLIAMENTARIAN ALEJANDRA FLORES. DO NOT SEE HER. UH, LUIS OLUGO. HERE. SCOTT BOONE? NO. SCOTT BOONE. COMMISSIONER DAVID FOUTS. HERE. COMMISSIONER LONNIE STERN. HERE. COMMISSIONER ANDREW CORTEZ. HERE. COMMISSIONER CHRISTIAN SHEPPEY. AND COMMISSIONER TAYLOR. MAJOR. HE TOLD ME HE WAS NOT GOING TO BE HERE. SO WE HAVE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. WE HAVE SEVEN PRESENT. WE WILL GO ON. UM, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? CORRECT. OKAY. WE [Consent Agenda] WILL HAVE CONSENT TO GENERAL BE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. ITEM ONE IS THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF TUESDAY, MAY 19TH, 2026. THERE WERE SOME CORRECTIONS THAT WERE MADE. THE UPDATED VERSION HAS BEEN POSTED ONLINE AND WILL BE AVAILABLE UM, TOMORROW AS WELL. UM, ITEM TWO HAS BEEN PULLED FOR DISCUSSION C 14 20 26 DASH 0 0 0 1 34 16 DAVIS LANE. IT IS A-G-R-C-O TO GRCO TO CHANGE THE CONDITION OF ZONING. IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF BUT HAVE BEEN PULLED FOR DISCUSSION. ITEM TWO IS A EXTENSION OF TIME, SP 2017 DASH 0 2 4 8 C XT THREE DEERFIELD LANE ONE C IN DISTRICT EIGHT. IT IS 36 0 1 DAVIS LANE. UM, AND IT IS A APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A THREE YEAR EXTENSION FROM MARCH 1ST, 2026 TO MARCH 1ST, 2029. IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. ANY QUESTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT CHRISTIAN CHEE IS NOW ONLINE. HE NOT HERE EARLIER. YEAH, HE'S NOT. OKAY. I NEED TO SHOW, SO I NEED, CAN YOU TURN YOUR CAMERA ON CHRISTIAN, MAYBE , IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. CHAIR. UM, WE DID HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGN UP ON NUMBER THREE. IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE NOT CURRENTLY IN OUR QUEUE. THEY REGISTERED VIRTUALLY, BUT I JUST WANNA STATE THEIR NAME FOR THE RECORD. REESE HURLEY HAD SIGNED IN IN FAVOR. OKAY. UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED CHRISTIAN IS NOW LOGGED OFF, SO HE IS NO LONGER ONLINE. UM, ITEM [2. Rezoning: C14-2026-0001 - 3416 Davis Lane; District 5 ] TWO REZONING CASE AND HE IS BACK ONLINE, BUT NO PICTURE . ITEM TWO, REZONING CASE C 14 20 26 DASH 0 0 0 1 34 16. DAVIS LANE, GRCO TO GRCO. IT'S GONNA CHANGE THE CONDITION OF THE ZONING. AGAIN, IT'S RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. AND DO WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF? GOOD EVENING ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS REESE MCMICHAEL. I'M A SENIOR PLANNER WITH AUSTIN PLANNING AND I'LL BE INTRODUCING YOU TO ITEM TWO ON YOUR AGENDA. THIS IS CASE C 14 DASH 2026 DASH 0 0 0 1. UH, THIS IS A PROPERTY THAT'S LOCATED AT 34 16. DAVIS LANE IS CURRENTLY ZONED COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO CHANGE A CONDITION OF ZONING. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS UNDEVELOPED AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 7.31 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF DAVIS LANE AND BRODY LANE. OPEN SPACE AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES CHARACTERIZE THE NORTHEAST AND WEST OF THIS PROPERTY WHILE COMMERCIAL LAND USES CHARACTERIZE THE SOUTH UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING OF COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SERVICES. CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. UH, THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY ESTABLISHES PROHIBITED, USES SQUARE FOOTAGE RESTRICTIONS, ACCESS RESTRICTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARD RESTRICTIONS. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO MODIFY THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY ESTABLISH FOR THIS PROPERTY. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD REMOVE THE PROVISION THAT PROHIBITS DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE AS AN ACCESSORY TO COMMERCIAL USES. ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WITH LOW INTENSITY NEIGHBORHOODS SERVING COMMERCIAL USES, INCLUDING A DRIVE-THROUGH STAFF IS RECOMMENDING TO ALLOW THE MODIFICATION OF THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY BECAUSE THE [00:05:01] SUBJECT PROPERTY'S LOCATION WITHIN AN ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL AREA AT THE INTERSECTION OF TWO MULTI-LANE ARTERIAL ROADWAYS MAKES THE PROPERTY APPROPRIATE FOR SUPPORTING A DRIVE THROUGH BUSINESS. OVERALL, THIS PRO, THIS PROPOSED REZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NEARBY COMMERCIAL ZONING PATTERN AND IT IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE APPLICANT'S REASONABLE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY. I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE AGENTS FOR THE APPLICANT ARE ALSO IN ATTENDANCE AND CAN SPEAK TO THIS CASE AS WELL. OKAY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? GO AHEAD AND GET THE APPLICANT. OKAY, MICHAEL WHALEN ON BEHALF BEHALF OF THE, UH, APPLICANT. UM, AS YOU JUST HEARD, WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO REQUEST A VERY LIMITED AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY FOR THE PROPERTY, UH, AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BRODY LANE IN DAVIS LANE. UH, THE PROPERTY, AS YOU HEARD, IS UNDEVELOPED 7.31 ACRE TRACK. IT'S BEEN UNDEVELOPED FOR DECADES. IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED GRCO. IT'S LOCATED IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN AND IS NOT SERVED BY ANY TRANSIT. THE CLOSEST TRANSIT IS, UH, ON WESTGATE, UH, A LITTLE OVER A MILE AND A HALF AWAY, I THINK, NO, EXCUSE ME, 3,500, UH, FEET AWAY ABOUT A MILE. WE'RE NOT SEEKING ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS, INCREASED DENSITY OR BROADER COMMERCIAL FLEX FLEXIBILITY. THE ONLY CHANGE REQUESTED IS REMOVAL OF THE PROHIBITION ON DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE AND ACCESSORY USE TO LOW INTENSITY COMMERCIAL USES. ALL OF THE RESTRICTIONS IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, WHICH WE WILL LAY OUT IN A FEW SLIDES, WILL REMAIN IN PLACE. SCENARIO. THERE ARE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS SERVING RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL USES TO THE SOUTH AND MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS TO THE NORTH AND WEST DRIVE THROUGH USES THAT ALREADY EXIST AT THIS INTERSECTION IS A GAS STATION ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER AND A CREDIT UNION WITH A DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER AND A LITTLE BIT ZOOMED IN. UM, YOU CAN SEE, UH, THE INTERSECTION A BIT BETTER. THE DEVELOPABLE AREA AREA ON THE SITE IS LIMITED TO ONLY 25,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING. THAT'S IT, UH, WHICH IS ABOUT 7.85% OF A, OF THE 7.31 ACRE SITE. SO THE PROPERTY OWNER REALLY HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO PLAN FOR SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTED COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE CONCENTRATED PROBABLY ALONG THE FRONTAGE BECAUSE SOS ALSO APPLIES. SO THERE'S VERY LIMITED AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. SO, UH, TALK ABOUT THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND THE DENSITY LIMITATIONS THAT WILL REMAIN IN PLACE. YOU CAN SEE HERE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT IS CAPPED AT APPROXIMATELY 25,000 SQUARE FEET. THERE'S A LIMITATION ON TOTAL GENERAL RETAIL SALES AND TOTAL RESTAURANT SALES OR GENERAL RESTAURANT GENERAL USE. BUT THE TOTAL TOTAL CAN'T BE MORE THAN 25,000 SQUARE FEET. AND THE, UH, THIS SLIDE HAS THE PROHIBITED USES THAT ARE IN PLACE. AND AGAIN, THE ONLY ONE THAT WE'RE SEEKING TO, UH, REMOVE AS PROHIBITED IS THE UNDERLYING PROHIBITION ON DRIVE-IN SERVICES AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO AN OTHERWISE PERMITTED COMMERCIAL USE. UH, THIS IS INTERESTING. THIS IS 2013. THIS INTERSECTION HAS ALWAYS BEEN A SLOWER LENS AND INTENSE INTERSECTION THAN THOSE SURROUNDING IT. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, DAVIS USED TO BE A DEAD END AT BRODY. THE EXPANSION AND WIDENING STARTED IN 2013 AND WAS COMPLETE COMPLETED A COUPLE OF YEARS LATER. A QUESTION CAME UP, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS, WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE MARKETPLACE? WHY HAS THIS JUST NOT BEEN DEVELOPED FOR SO LONG? AND ONE REASON IS THAT IT'S BEEN SLOW TO DEVELOP IS BECAUSE IT'S LOCATED BETWEEN TWO COMMERCIAL CENTERS, SLAUGHTER AND BRO BRODY TO THE SOUTH AND WILLIAM CANNON AND BRODY TO THE NORTH, WHICH HAVE THE BIG RETAILERS, HEB, AND RANDALL'S AT, UH, THOSE RESPECTIVE CORNERS. HERE'S THE PRESENT DAY, UH, AND ARIEL. UM, IT FUNCTIONS AS A SMALL COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AND IS SET UP TO ATTRACT THE SMALLER TENANT MARKET. THE REQUESTED AMENDMENT WILL HELP ATTRACT END USERS THAT MAY WANT A SERVICE WINDOW COMMONLY ASSOCIATED WITH CONTEMPORARY NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL TENANTS LIKE COFFEE SHOPS. SO JUST TO SUMMARIZE, VERY NARROW REQUESTS THAT PRE PRESERVES THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS AND PROHIBITED USES ALREADY IMPOSED BY THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. IT WILL REMAIN RESTRICTED TO SMALL SCALE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BY THE, BY THOSE RESTRICTIONS. THE AMENDMENT SIMPLY ALLOWS FLEXIBILITY FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING END CAP USERS THAT MAY BENEFIT FROM AN ACCESSORY DRIVE THROUGH WINDOW SERVICE, UH, AT THIS. AND THIS SITE IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS USE GIVEN ITS LOCATION ALONG AS YOU HEARD, A LEVEL THREE A SMP CORRIDOR AND IN AN INTERSECTION THAT, AS I ALREADY MENTIONED, IT'S NOT SERVED BY TRANSIT AND THAT IT HAS ALREADY BEEN IMPROVED TO ACCOMMODATE COMMERCIAL ACCESS AND CIRCULATION. [00:10:01] AND WITH THAT, UH, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR, APRIL BROWN. APRIL, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES CHAIR. THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. OKAY. DO WE WANT TO VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO MOVED. MOTION TO HEAR A SECOND. SECOND. OKAY. MOTION IS SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OKAY. QUESTIONS. LONNIE, WE'LL START WITH YOU. UH, THANK YOU CARE AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS, UH, FOR LISTENING TO THIS ITEM AND NOT JUST PUTTING IT ON CONSENT. UH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, AND I'M NOT PULLING THIS ITEM BECAUSE I HAVE, UH, CONCERNS ABOUT THE APPLICANT OR BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE SINGLE PROJECT IS GONNA MAKE OR BREAK THE CORRIDOR. I'M PULLING IT BECAUSE I BELIEVE OUR BODY SHOULD APPLY A CONSISTENT PHILOSOPHY ACROSS THE CITY. AND IF WE'RE ROUTINELY GONNA SAY THAT CORRIDOR SHOULD BECOME MORE WALKABLE AND MULTIMODAL AND TRANSIT SUPPORTED, THEN WE NEED TO EXAMINE REQUESTS THAT MOVE US IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION EVEN WHEN THOSE REQUESTS APPEAR MODEST. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS AN ARGUMENT THAT THERE IS ALREADY A GAS STATION ON ONE CORNER AND A DRIVE THROUGH CREDIT UNION ON ANOTHER, BUT I DON'T VIEW EXISTING AUTO ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AS A REASON TO APPROVE ADDITIONAL AUTO ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. IF ANYTHING, IT DEMONSTRATES WHY WE SHOULD BE MORE CAREFUL ABOUT THE LAND USES. WE CONTINUE TO ENTRENCH. NOW, OUR RESPONSIBILITY ISN'T LIMITED TO DETERMINING WHETHER AN APPLICATION TECHNICALLY SATISFIES CODE REQUIREMENTS. WE'RE ALSO ONE OF THE FEW BODIES CHARGED WITH EVALUATING WHETHER OUR PROPOSAL ADVANCES THE GOALS EXPRESSED IN OUR ADOPTED PLANS AND POLICIES. SO IF WE ONLY ASK WHETHER SOMETHING'S LEGAL, THERE'D BE LITTLE REASON FOR MANY DISCRETIONARY ZONING CASES TO COME BEFORE US IN THE FIRST PLACE. NOW, UM, CITIES DON'T JUST MAGICALLY BECOME WALKABLE OR TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE THROUGH A SINGLE PROJECT. THEY BECOME THAT WAY BECAUSE OF THOUSANDS OF SMALL DECISIONS LIKE THIS ONE. AND EVERY TIME WE APPROVE OF THEIR DRIVE-THROUGH ANOTHER CUL-DE-SAC, ANOTHER AUTO ORIENTED SITE DESIGN, WE'RE MAKING A DECISION ABOUT WHAT KIND OF CITY WE'RE BUILDING. NO ONE DRIVE-THROUGH IS GONNA MAKE THIS A CAR. DEPENDEN CORRIDOR. THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. BUT DECADES OF APPROVING DRIVE-THROUGHS CREATES A CAR DEPENDENT CORRIDOR. NOW, SOME OTHER THINGS THAT KEEP IN IN MIND, IT LIKE DRIVE-THROUGHS TEND TO LOCK IN SITE DESIGNS THAT PRIORITIZE VEHICLE STACKING, CURB CUTS AND SURFACE CIRCULATION. AND THOSE DESIGN CHOICES CAN REMAIN IN PLACE FOR DECADES AND MAKE FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT INTO A MORE WALKABLE TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE FORM. MORE DIFFICULT. NOW, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT EVERY AUTO ORIENTED USE SHOULD BE PROHIBITED EVERYWHERE, BUT WHEN WE HAVE DISCRETION, I BELIEVE WE SHOULD USE IT TO MOVE INCREMENTALLY TOWARDS THE CITY'S ADOPTED GOALS RATHER THAN REINFORCING THE PATTERNS WE REPEATEDLY SAY WE WANT TO CHANGE. UM, AND SO IN CLOSING, UM, I'LL, I'LL REMIND THIS GROUP, THE FACT THAT AN INTERSECTION IS ORIENTED, AUTO ORIENTED TODAY DOESN'T MEAN IT SHOULD BE AUTO ORIENTED FOREVER. IN FACT, MANY OF AUSTIN'S MOST SUCCESSFUL URBAN PLACES WERE ONCE DESIGNED ALMOST ENTIRELY AROUND CARS. AND I THINK OUR ROLE IS NOT MERELY TO RATIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS, BUT TO EVALUATE WHETHER A PROPO A PROPOSAL MOVES US CLOSER OR FURTHER AWAY FROM THE CITY. WE REPEATEDLY SAID WE WANNA BUILD. SO FOR THAT REASON, I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR US TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS REQUEST RATHER THAN JUST APPROVING IT ON CONSENT. OKAY. I I, I APPRECIATE SOME OF THE POINTS YOU'RE MAKING. I'LL ALSO POINT OUT IN THIS AREA IT'S SUBJECT TO SOS, WE'RE 15% IMPERVIOUS COVER. WE'RE NOT GONNA SEE A HIGH DENSE DEVELOPMENT ANYWHERE IN THIS AREA. EVERYTHING IS GONNA BE SPREAD OUT, UM, JUST DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE OS ORDINANCE AND THE, THE LIMITATIONS ON IMPERVIOUS COVER. UM, AND SO I THINK FOR THAT REASON, THIS ONE LOOKS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. SOME OF THE OTHER ONES WE'VE SEEN IT. I'LL ALSO SAY I JUST FEEL LIKE, UM, GENERAL PRINCIPAL IS DIFFICULT BECAUSE THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS, SO I WAS JUST IN BARCELONA, RIGHT? THE ENTIRE CITY OF BARCELONA IS BASICALLY WHAT THE SIZE OF OUR DOWNTOWN PLUS UT. AND SO I THINK THE WAY THAT I THINK ABOUT IT BROADLY IS [00:15:01] AS, AS FOLKS, I GENERALLY TRY TO GIVE A LOT OF FOLKS LEEWAY INSTEAD OF DOING TOP DOWN PLANNING. BUT WHEN I THINK ABOUT WHERE WE SHAPE DECISIONS IS, OR THINGS WHERE WE CAN PLAUSIBLY SEE THAT IT WOULD BE NET POSITIVE FOR US TO DO NUDGING OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT 20 YEARS. BECAUSE THERE'S A WORLD WHERE YOU, WE TRY TO NUDGE AREAS WHERE THAT'S JUST INFEASIBLE IN THE, IN A A HUMAN TIMELINE. YOU KNOW, IT MAY BE A WORLD THAT THIS PART OF BRODY LANE IS DENSE IN THE YEAR 20 80, 26. YEAH, I COULD SEE THAT. NO, I COULD SEE THAT WORLD. UM, BUT DENYING THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE NEW DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT LIKE, I PROMISE YOU IT'S GONNA BE SICK. IT LIKE 80 YEARS IS GONNA BE GREAT. I JUST, I I THINK YOU HAVE TO BE INCREMENTAL BOTH WAYS. YEAH. OKAY. YEAH, AND I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER STERN'S COMMENTS HERE. UM, THIS CASE KIND OF REMINDS ME OF THE PANDA EXPRESS ONE WE HAD, UH, LAST YEAR, WHICH WAS IN A SIMILAR KIND OF SETUP, UH, A CORNER ON A, I BELIEVE ON SLAUGHTERING ANOTHER CAR CENTRIC AREA. UM, AND I THINK WE ULTIMATELY AGREED, OR THIS BODY VOTED TO APPROVE THAT RECOGNIZING THAT THE PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT THERE WAS VERY, UH, JUST RIGIDLY IN A, IN A CAR ORIENTED, UH, MANNER. AND THERE WAS REALLY KNOW, UM, NEAR TERM, UH, PATH OF PROGRESS THAT WOULD LOOK DIFFERENT. AND UM, I LOOK AT THIS ONE HERE, UH, SIMILARLY WHEN I LOOK AT THE AERIAL VIEWS HERE, I SEE, YOU KNOW, UH, MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS, BUT THEY'RE SURROUNDED BY PARKING LOTS. I SEE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, I SEE, UH, STRIP MALLS, I SEE GAS STATIONS AND UH, A DRIVE THROUGH BANK NOW ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SITE AS WELL. UM, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER, UH, OLUGO. I, YOU KNOW, WOULD LOVE ONE DAY FOR THIS PART OF THE CITY TO LOOK MORE LIKE A CITY, BUT IT TODAY IS NOT. AND I DON'T THINK WE'LL BE ANYTIME SOON. AND, UH, FOR THAT I, I DON'T SEE ANY REASON TO, TO NOT APPROVE A USE OF LAND THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA. ANYBODY ELSE? YES. UM, I GUESS I JUST REALLY DON'T LIKE DRIVE-THROUGHS. I LIVE BY ONE THAT BACKS UP ONTO LAMAR. UM, AND THIS HAS BACKUP THAT SAYS WE'RE GONNA MAKE SURE THERE'S ADEQUATE QUEUING AREAS SO IT DOESN'T BACK UP INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT WE DON'T SEE THAT, RIGHT? WE JUST READ THOSE WORDS AND WE DON'T REALLY KNOW THAT IT'S A DRIVE THROUGH SPECIFICALLY FOR DONUTS OR COFFEE BECAUSE WE'RE KIND OF, IF WE REMOVE THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF JUST BLINDLY. THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS CASE FOR ME AND THE, UM, PANDA EXPRESS ONE IS THAT THAT WAS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHERE THIS IS JUST SAYING MAKE THIS INTO A PERMITTED USE. I WOULD FEEL A LOT MORE COMFORTABLE IF THIS WAS AT LEAST MADE TO BE A CONDITIONAL USE SO THAT IT HAS TO COME BACK FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. SO IF THERE'S A SECOND, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE CHANGE THIS TO, UM, CONDITIONAL RATHER THAN BLANKET APPROVED. I JUST WANNA THROW IN ONE MORE THING OUT THERE. UM, SO I RECENTLY WAS WORKING WITH CAP METRO ON THEIR TRANSIT PLAN 2035. ONE OF THE CHANGES TO THAT IS TO BRING THE ROUTE THREE 18 RIGHT THROUGH THIS INTERSECTION FROM GOING, UM, HEADING WESTWARD ON DAVIS AND THEN UP BRODY LANE. UH, SO IT WILL GO RIGHT IN FRONT OF THIS LOCATION. IT'S NOT A, AN AMAZING ROUTE, ALTHOUGH I HAVE USED IT AND OUR FAMILY HAS BEEN DEPENDENT ON IT, UM, FROM EMPLOYMENT IN THE PAST. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S A ROUTE GOES A GOOD, YOU KNOW, IT KIND OF COVERS THE SOUTH OF THE CITY. UM, AND IT'S GONNA GO RIGHT THERE. SO WITHIN THE NEXT, I DON'T THINK IT'LL BE VERY LONG BEFORE THEY GET TO THIS BECAUSE IT'S A FAIRLY SIMPLE CHANGE, BUT IT IS WITHIN THEIR 10 YEAR PLAN. AGAIN, I THINK IT'LL PROBABLY BE SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, BUT THERE WILL BE TRANSIT THERE AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE AS CONTEXT, EVEN IF NOT NECESSARILY A DECIDING FACTOR. YEAH. UM, SO FOR ME, I THINK THE, THE KEY IS LIKE THE INCIDENTAL USE FOR THE COMMERCIAL. YOU KNOW, LIKE I I LOOK AT LIKE EVEN SOME OF OUR MOST DENSE AREAS LIKE THE DOMAIN WHERE YOU GOT LIKE A STARBUCKS OR A KAVA AND ALL OF THOSE ESTABLISHMENTS HAVE, UM, A DRIVE THROUGH AS AN INCIDENTAL USE. UM, AND IN THIS AREA I APPRECIATE THE, THE HISTORY ON THE [00:20:01] TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND YOU KNOW, THE INTERSECTION AND MAYBE AT THE TIME THAT THIS WAS PASSED, IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE FOR THERE TO BE A, UM, DRIVE THROUGH, UM, IN THIS AREA. BUT I THINK, UM, RIGHT NOW WE'RE, WE'RE LIVING IN A MUCH DIFFERENT TIME THAN 2001. SO, UM, I SUPPORT IT. YEAH, I'M NOT SURE WHEN THIS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WAS WRITTEN, BUT I'VE BEEN IN THAT AREA SINCE 1985 AND THERE WERE TWO CROSS STREETS. THERE WAS RIDDLE ROAD WHERE SLAUGHTER IS NOW, AND THERE WAS CONVICT HILL ROAD WHERE CONVICT HILL ROAD IS TODAY. AND THERE WAS NO WILLIAM CANNON, NO SLAUGHTER LANE, NOTHING ELSE UP HERE. BACK THEN, THERE WAS NO DEVELOPMENTS. THIS WAS A TWO LANE ROADWAY, SO IT WOULD'VE MADE SENSE YEARS AGO TO MAKE THIS A NO DRIVE THROUGH 'CAUSE THERE WAS NOTHING OUT THERE. IT'S CHANGED A LOT IN THE 40 YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN THERE. . OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION. UM, I HAVEN'T HEARD A SECOND. THE MOTION IS TO ADOPT THE STAFFS RECOMMENDATION? NO, THE MOTION IS TO DO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMITT APPROVAL. WELL MAKE IT CONDITIONAL USE, MAKE IT CONDITIONAL USE INSTEAD OF PERMITTED USE. RIGHT. YOU SECOND THAT SORT OF A COMPROMISE. OKAY. SO IT'S UNDER A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO US AGAIN WHEN THEY HAVE A SITE PLAN AND THEY'RE READY TO GO FORWARD WITH SOMETHING AS A AND GET APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE. IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DO LOOKING AT STAFF? THEY'RE SHAKING THEIR HEAD YES. SO WE CAN DO THAT. THERE'S NO LEGAL RESTRICTION. WHILE WE CAN'T, IT WOULD JUST MEAN COMING BACK TO US AGAIN FOR A SECOND. LOOK. UH, OUTSIDE OF THINGS LIKE THE, THE ALCOHOL AND OTHER, OTHER RESTRICTIONS WE HAVE AROUND, YOU KNOW, IS SOMETHING GONNA BE INAPPROPRIATE FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD? RIGHT? LIKE, THERE, WE'VE DONE THAT BEFORE WITH, UH, LIKE, UM, THE CELL OF ALCOHOL I THINK IS THE PROBLEM COMES UP. I I WOULD NOT SUPPORT THIS MOTION, BUT I'M HAPPY TO SEE IT, YOU KNOW, SEE IT RUN. OKAY. WHAT DOES THE APPLICANT THINK OF THAT MOTION? THANK YOU, UH, FOR ASKING MICHAEL WAY ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. UM, I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW HARD IT IS TO GET STUFF BUILT IN THIS TOWN AND TO SPEND MANY OF, YOU KNOW, THE COST OF A SITE PLAN TO SPEND THE MONEY ON A SITE PLAN, UH, TO THEN COME HERE AND HAVE IT REJECTED IS EXTRAORDINARY. IT'S A, IT'S A PIECE OF THE PROCESS THAT I'VE BEGGED, UH, OUR LAND USE OUR, OUR PLANNERS AND OUR OTHERS TO CONSIDER REVISING SO THAT YOU CAN GET A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVED WITHOUT A FULL BLOWN SITE PLAN, WHICH IS WHAT IT REQUIRES NOW, YOU KNOW, IT REQUIRES SOME VEHICLE TO COME BEFORE YOU AND THAT'S THE VEHICLE TYPICALLY, UH, NOT ALWAYS HAVE TO BE A FULL SITE PLAN, BUT, UH, FOR THE MOST PART THAT'S THE EXPECTATION. SO, I MEAN, GIVEN HOW LITTLE LAND WE'RE ALLOWED TO BUILD ON HERE AND HOW SMALL THIS STRUCTURE'S GONNA BE, IT'S JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA JUSTIFY, UH, LEGAL FEES, WHICH ARE OUTRAGEOUS AND . UH, AND THE SITE PLAN, TELL ME ALL ABOUT THAT, MICHAEL AND THE, AND THE SITE PLAN PROCESS AS WELL. . SO THAT'S, THAT'S ALL. AND, AND I THINK IT WAS BY THE WAY, THE, THE ORDINANCE PASSED IN 2001, SO IT HAS BEEN 20, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S OLD ENOUGH TO DRINK. YES. AND UH, UH, UH, TO O LOGO'S POINT, THE, THE ORDINANCE IS OLD ENOUGH TO DRINK AND, UH, I, I THINK GIVEN WHAT THE MARKET HAS DONE TO THE SITE, UH, AND NOTHING HAS HAD ANY TRACTION AND JUST TRYING TO HAVE AS, UH, COMMISSIONER CORTEZ POINTED OUT, YOU KNOW, A SMALL SINGLE LANE BECAUSE THAT'S ALL THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO HAVE GIVEN THE SOS RESTRICTIONS IS AN END CAP, MAYBE WITH A SINGLE LANE FOR COFFEE OR SOMETHING LOCAL TO TRY AND, UH, SUPPORT THE REST OF THAT RETAIL. YOU KNOW, THAT RETAIL'S GONNA BE HARD. OKAY. SO THE PROCESS WOULD BE WE VOTE ON THIS MOTION. IF IT'S PASSED, THEN WE HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE. IF IT DOESN'T PASS, THEN WE CAN ENTERTAIN A SECOND MOTION. SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ADD ONTO THIS PROJECT. RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY, AYE. 1, 2, 3, 4, ALL THOSE OPPOSED, 1, 2, 3, 4 IS TIED. SO THAT DOESN'T CARRY, IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION I MOVE TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION? OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? I THINK THE ARGUMENTS GIVEN BY STAFF ARE PRUDENT. UM, I THINK THE USE MAKES SENSE FOR THE SPACE. I THINK AS A CITY WE'RE TRYING TO BE MORE EFFICIENT. WE'RE TRYING TO BE MORE PRUDENT WITH PEOPLE'S TAX DOLLARS. I THINK WE CAN'T TAKE ECONOMIC GROWTH FOR GRANTED. THE PROPERTY TAXES OF DEVELOPMENT ARE GOING TO HELP KEEP BOTH THE CITY AFLOAT, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AFLOAT, AND THE GENERAL CHURN OF THE ECONOMY GOING. AND SO FOR THAT, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE COMPELLING AND CLEAR REASONS FOR [00:25:01] WHY WE WOULD MAKE THINGS, YOU KNOW, TO COST WHAT IS MAYBE TENS OF THOUSANDS OR A HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS MORE. UM, I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THAT HERE, ESPECIALLY IN THE CONTEXT OF EVERYTHING ELSE WE APPROVE. SO WITH THAT, I THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE, UH, COURSE OF ACTION. YEAH. AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE A MUCH MORE DENSE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, BUT ON 25,000 SQUARE FEET, YOU JUST CAN'T DO IT. UH, SO I THINK YOU'RE VERY LIMITED ON WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO HERE. THAT'S, THAT'S SMALL UP THAN SOME OF THE NEW MCDONALD'S JUST SINGULAR INSIDE COMMISSIONER STERN. WE'RE, UM, THANKS. I, UM, I, I I WANNA REMIND THIS BODY THAT, UM, WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO IS MAKE A CHANGE. UM, IF WE DO NOTHING, WE KEEP THE STATUS QUO. UM, WHICH IS FINE BY ME. I, I AM, I I AGREE WITH, UM, UM, WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER AL LUGO THAT WE DO NEED TO FOCUS ON BUILDING MORE TAXABLE PROPERTY INSIDE THE CITY. I'M NOT SURE THAT LOW SLUNG SUBURBAN DRIVE THROUGH DEVELOPMENT IS THE WAY TO MEET THAT NEED. UM, THE LAST THING I WANNA BRING UP IS JUST OFTENTIMES NOW, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN, UM, NO ZONE ACTION DAY. SO ALL OF US ARE BEING TOLD NOT TO LEAVE OUR CARS RUNNING. AND HERE WE ARE CREATING ANOTHER PLACE WHERE PEOPLE HAVE TO NOT LET THEIR CAR IDLE, UH, IN THE HEAT. SO I JUST WANNA REMIND YOU THAT YOU HAVE THE POWER TO PREVENT THIS. I, I MEAN, WHATEVER THE BASE LOAN BASE LEARNING ALLOWS, THAT'S NOT RESTRICTED, THAT COULD BE BUILT HERE WITHOUT A DRIVE THROUGH, IS STILL GOING TO BE ONLY ACCESSIBLE BY AUTOMOBILES. SO BY PROHIBITING A DRIVE THROUGH HERE THE BUS THAT MAY COME 10 YEARS FROM NOW. I MEAN, NO, TO, TO SHARPEN THE POINT, I LIVED IN A PLACE THAT WAS EXACTLY LIKE THIS, THAT EVEN HAD 1, 2, 3 BUS STOPS OF WHICH MAYBE AN I COUNTED AT 1.3 PEOPLE PER WEEK USED. EVERYONE DROVE TO THE GROCERY STORE, TO THE FAST FOOD CHAINS, TO THE LOCAL DINERS. THE PEOPLE DROVE TO THE MALL THAT WAS FIVE MINUTES AWAY BY WALKING. IT'S YEAH, LIKE, YEAH, COMMISSIONER AT P'S POINT IS EXACTLY RIGHT ON THAT FRONT. IT'S NOPE. YEAH, PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO USE, IT'S STILL GONNA BE AUTO ORIENTED REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A DRIVE THROUGH. SO I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, YEAH, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO CHANGE THE USES, RIGHT? WE'RE JUST LOOKING TO ADD THAT THE DRIVE THROUGH AS AN ACCESSORY OR AL USE AND YOU KNOW, FOR ME, YOU KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT BE THE CHANGE THAT IS REQUIRED IN ORDER TO ACTIVATE THE SITE, YOU KNOW, THAT HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED IN, YOU KNOW, 25 YEARS. UM, THAT MIGHT BE THE, THE THING THAT MAKES THAT PENCIL. AND, YOU KNOW, HONESTLY, I THINK THAT THAT'S BETTER THAN HAVING A SITE THAT THEY'RE UNDEVELOPED FOR ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, 10 OR 15 YEARS UNTIL THE ECONOMICS DO WORK. UM, YEAH, I MEAN THE, THE, FOR ME, YOU KNOW, THE, THE INCIDENTAL USE IS, IS KEY. UM, WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO CHANGE ANY OF THE ZONING OR ANY OF THE RESTRICTIONS ON THE ZONING. UM, SO YEAH, I, I, I SUPPORT THE MOTION. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES, I'D REALLY NOT LIKE TO SEE A DRIVE THROUGH ON THIS SITE, BUT IF IT'S WHAT'S NEEDED TO ACTUALLY BRING SOMETHING OF TAXABLE VALUE TO THE CITY, UH, I'M IN SUPPORT OF IT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT, UH, THIS IS GOING TO BE ACTIVATED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY OTHER THAN AUTO ORIENTED USE IN THE NEAR TERM. I WOULD REALLY PREFER TO SEE SOMETHING ELSE ON THIS SIDE. BUT, UM, I, I AM BEG BEGRUDGINGLY IN SUPPORT OF THIS, YEAH, EVERYTHING ELSE OF EM, BRODY LAND HAS BEEN DEVELOPED. UH, THIS IS ONE OF THE LAST FEW REMAINING SITES THAT'S NOT SET ASIDE AS BRODY WATER QUALITY PRESERVE. IT'S AT THE CORNER OF BRODY AND DAVIS. SO, UH, BRODY IS THE MAIN ROAD UP AND DOWN AND EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN DEVELOPED. A LOT OF LAND THAT ARE SET ASIDE IN WATER QUALITY, PRESERVE LAND THAT WILL NEVER BE DEVELOPED. UM, AND THIS IS REALLY ONE OF THE LAST FEW SITES THAT HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED. SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION BEFORE WE PROCEED. CAN WE GET A SECOND ON THIS MOTION? OH, THANK YOU. MOTION A SECOND. OKAY, THANK YOU. I THOUGHT WE HAD A MOTION. A SECOND. SECOND. STILL ONLY SECOND . ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? 2 6 2. THE MOTION PASSES. OKAY. THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH. UM, WE HAVE SOME ABSENCE. SO I'M, AGAIN, I'M GONNA PASS OVER ITEM [4. Discussion and action to approve a recommendation to the Austin City Council regarding the division of responsibilities between the Zoning and Platting Commission and the Planning Commission. (Sponsored by Commissioner Osta Lugo and Chair Smith) ] FOUR, WHICH IS DISCUSSION TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES. IT'S THROUGH A REPORT FROM CODES AND ORDINANCES. [ PERMANENT COMMITTEE UPDATES] NO UPDATE AND COMPREHENSIVE [00:30:01] PLAN. JOINT COMMITTEE HAS NOT MET SINCE THE LAST MEETING. SMALLER AREA PLANNING, JOINT COMMITTEE, UH, NO UPDATE AND THE LAND USE [WORKING GROUP UPDATE ] COMMISSION WE'VE PASSED OVER. ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? [FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ] I THINK WE DO HAVE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM. MAYBE YOU COULD REMIND US WHEN THAT'S COMING. I BELIEVE THAT WAS REQUESTED TO COME LATER OR TOWARDS THE MIDDLE OF THIS MONTH. SO WE'RE AIMING FOR OUR NEXT AGENDA, NEXT MEETING? I BELIEVE SO. AND IF NOT, WE'LL SEND OUT AN EMAIL WITH A, WITH A TIMELINE. OKAY? OKAY. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU Y'ALL VERY MUCH. * 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.