[00:00:04]
[CALL TO ORDER ]
THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 6:07 PM FIRST, LET'S TAKE ROLE.PLEASE LET US KNOW YOU'RE HERE WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, CHAIR WOODS.
COMMISSIONER LON IS NOT WITH US THIS EVENING.
COMMISSIONER POWELL IS NOT WITH US THIS EVENING.
I'M HERE AND COMMISSIONER HILLER IS NOT YET WITH US THIS EVENING.
AS USUAL, TONIGHT'S MEETING WILL BE HYBRID, ALLOWING FOR A VIRTUAL QUORUM AS LONG AS THE COMMISSIONER SERVING AS CHAIR IS PRESENT IN CHAMBERS.
THEREFORE, WE HAVE COMMISSIONERS HERE AT CITY HALL AND IN ATTENDANCE VIRTUALLY SIMILARLY, SPEAKERS CAN PRESENT HERE FROM COUNCIL CHAMBERS 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.
JUST AS A REMINDER FOR ANY COMMISSIONER'S ATTENDING VIRTUALLY TONIGHT OR IN THE FUTURE, PLEASE REMEMBER THAT OUR STAFF LIAISON NEEDS YOUR SIGN IN SHEET.
BEFORE YOU JOIN THE MEETING, PLEASE REMAIN MUTED WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING AND RAISE YOUR HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED.
BUT IF I DON'T SEE YOU, PLEASE UNMUTE AND LET ME KNOW.
VERBALLY, WE'LL HAVE ASSISTANCE FROM MS. GARCIA IN ANNOUNCING THE SPEAKERS DURING OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.
MS. GARCIA, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC COMMUNICATION THIS EVENING? NO.
[Consent Agenda]
THE CONSENT AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE JUNE 23RD MEETING.DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY EDITS TO THOSE MINUTES? OKAY, SEEING NONE, THOSE MINUTES WILL BE ADDED TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
AND 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. VICE CHAIR HANEY WILL READ THE PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND SPECIFY THOSE THAT ARE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AND NON-DISCUSSION.
AFTER THIS COMMISSIONERS, YOU'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST ANY CONSENT ITEMS BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.
VICE HANNEY, WOULD YOU MIND READING THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR US? SURE THING.
UM, SO ITEM NUMBER TWO IS A NA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2 0 2 6 DASH 0 0 1 9 0.0 1 3 7 0 1 SPEEDWAY 3 7 0 3 SPEEDWAY, AND 1 0 4 EAST 37TH STREET NPA IN DISTRICT NINE.
ITEM NUMBER THREE IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2026 DASH 0 2 37 0 1 SPEEDWAY 3 7 0 3 SPEEDWAY, AND 1 0 4 EAST 37TH STREET REZONING IN DISTRICT NINE.
UM, ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2 0 24 DASH 0 0 6 0.05 SHADY LANE IN DISTRICT THREE.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 20 25 0 0 5 SHADY LANE IN DISTRICT THREE.
THAT IS ALSO UP FOR APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT.
ITEM NUMBER SIX IS A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2 0 2 5 DASH ZERO 8.02, A AIRPORT AND KIG MULTIFAMILY AND DISTRICT FOUR.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR AN APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST 11TH.
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 15 AIRPORT AND KIG MULTIFAMILY IN DISTRICT FOUR, ALSO UP FOR APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST 11TH.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS NA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT IN PA DASH 20 25 0 2 4.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST 11TH.
ITEM NUMBER NINE IS A REZONING C 14 DASH 2025 DASH 0 0 9 6 CONGRESS VIEWS AND DISTRICT TWO.
THAT ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST 11TH.
ITEM NUMBER 10 IS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AMENDMENT 2 0 2 NPA 2 0 26 DASH 0 0 2 1 0 2 SOUTH SHORE PUD EDITION NPA AND DISTRICT THREE.
ITEM NUMBER 11 IS A REZONING C FOUR DASH 20 26 0 14 WESLEY GROCERY AND KITCHEN IN DISTRICT FOUR.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
ITEM NUMBER 12 IS A REZONING C ONE FOUR DASH 2 0 2 5 DASH 0 0 3 6 AND WALSH IN DISTRICT NINE.
ITEM NUMBER 13 IS, UH, SITE PLAN WAIVER SP DASH 2 25 DASH 0 2 5 1 C 815 WEST 11TH STREET OFFICE BUILDING IN DISTRICT NINE.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JULY THE 28TH.
ITEM NUMBER 14 IS A SITE PLAN EXTENSION SP DASH 2 0 1 7 DASH 0 3 8 7 CXT THREE POWELL
[00:05:01]
LANE PLAZA SITE PLAN EXTENSION IN DISTRICT FOUR.ITEM NUMBER 15 IS, UH, SITE PLAN CONDITIONAL USE USES PC DASH 2 26 0 1 1 AE ROSS AND SONDER SCHOOL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN DISTRICT 10 THAT I WAS UP FOR CONSENT AND ORDER.
16 IS A SITE PLAN CONDITIONAL USES PC DASH 2 0 25 DASH 0 3 4 A, UH, REFUGIO AUSTIN SCHOOL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN DISTRICT NINE.
ITEM NUMBER 17 IS A RIGHT OF WAY VACATION SP DASH 2 0 26 DASH 0 1 4 7 D DOGHEAD DEVELOPMENT AUSTIN FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION JUNE 1ST, 2026.
THAT ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.
ITEM NUMBER 18 IS A RIGHT OF WAY VACATION SP DASH 2 0 26 DASH 0 1 4 7 D DOG SAID DEVELOPMENT AUSTIN FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION JUNE 1ST, 2026.
THAT ITEM IS ALSO UP FOR DISCUSSION.
VICE CHAIR HANEY, I WANNA NOTE THAT WE HAD A POSTPONEMENT REQUEST ON ITEM 14, WHICH IS THE POWELL LANE PLAZA SITE PLAN EXTENSION, BUT SINCE THE REQUESTER IS NOT HERE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM, WE WILL KEEP IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA UNLESS ANY COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL IT FOR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE OR ABSTAIN FROM ITEMS ON THE AGENDA? MS. GARCIA, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS? YES, CHAIR.
BEGINNING WITH ITEMS TWO AND THREE, THESE ITEMS ARE BEING OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
WE'LL FIRST HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT DAVID HARTMAN.
DAVID, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
MR. HARTMAN'S WAIVING HIS TIME MOVING FORWARD.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS BUCK ARMSTRONG.
YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES MR. ARMSTRONG'S WAIVING HIS TIME NOW FOR OUR SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, WE'LL F WE'LL BE HEARING FROM MS. PAMELA BELL WHO WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
PAMELA, YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
SHE'S NOT IN OUR QUEUE RIGHT NOW, BUT IF WE SEE HER JOIN, WE'LL MAKE SURE TO COME BACK TO HER.
MOVING FORWARD TO ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE, THESE ITEMS ARE BEING OFFERED AS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO OUR AUGUST 11TH MEETING.
WE'LL FIRST BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT ALICE GLASGOW.
ALICE, YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES MOVING FORWARD.
WE'LL BE HEARING FROM OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS LONNIE STERN.
LONNIE WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY LONNIE, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
HE'S ALSO NOT IN OUR QUEUE AT THE MOMENT.
MOVING FORWARD TO THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION, WE'LL FIRST BE HEARING FROM OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, MARIO CANTU.
MARIO, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS BRAD MASSENGILL.
BRAD, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
UM, I'M HERE WITH SOME OTHER MEMBERS OF THE SOUTH CONGRESS CONTACT TEAM.
UM, AND WE, WE DEFINITELY SUPPORT THE POSTPONEMENT OF, WE HAVEN'T, HAVEN'T GOT AS MUCH TRACTION AS WE'D LIKE TO WITH THE DEVELOPER.
UH, THERE'S A, A MOBILE HOME PARK THAT USED TO BE THERE THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH FORCIBLY BROKE UP.
UH, SO WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO GET SOME SORT OF, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, ONE-TO-ONE REPLACEMENT.
IT'S TOO LATE MAYBE FOR SOME OF THE, THE PEOPLE THAT WERE DISPLACED.
BUT WE DO, WE DO BELIEVE THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME COMPARABLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN SAME AMOUNT, WHICH IS SOMEWHAT PROBLEMATIC.
UM, AND AS MUCH AS THAT MOBILE HOMES ARE DEEPLY AFFORDABLE IN APARTMENTS, EVEN, UH, YOUR, YOUR AVERAGE, UH, EFFICIENCY IS GONNA BE MORE THAN A, THAN A MOBILE HOME, WHICH CAN HOLD TWO OR THREE PEOPLE.
SO IT, IT WOULD BE OUR PREFERENCE THAT THIS WOULD ZONING WOULDN'T GO THROUGH AT ALL.
AND MAYBE, UH, LOOK AT PUTTING MOBILE HOME PARK BACK THERE LIKE WAS ORIGINALLY PROMISED WHEN THEY, UH, STARTED DOING THE REZONE, UH, TWO, TWO TIMES AGO OR TWO.
PUT IT INTO SOME TINY HOMES OR SOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING THERE.
IT'S CLOSE TO A GROCERY STORE.
WE DON'T NEED MORE, UH, VERTICAL MIXED USE AT THIS LOCATION.
THIS ITEM IS BEING OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
MILA, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
[00:10:01]
OFFERED FOR CONSENT.WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT MICHAEL WHALEN.
MICHAEL, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
MR. WHELAN'S WAIVING HIS TIME MOVING TOWARD TO ITEM 13.
WE'LL, FIRST WE'LL BE HEARING FROM OUR SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, BLAKE TOLET BLAKE, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
AND THIS ITEM IS BEING OFFERED AS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 28TH.
THIS ITEM IS BEING OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT VICTORIA HASSI VICTORIA, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
MS. HASSI IS WAIVING HER TIME.
THIS ITEM IS BEING OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT ELLE MEAD.
ELLE, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS BLAKE TOLLETT.
BLAKE, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
MR. TOLLETT IS WAIVING HIS TIME.
AND OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS DARCY GARDNER.
DARCY, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
MS. GARDNER IS WAIVING HER TIME.
THIS ITEM IS BEING OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
TTA TISHA, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
HER NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR IS ARIANA DE DEANI.
MS. D NE LEE IS WAIVING HER TIME.
MOVING FORWARD TO THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.
WE'LL FIRST BE HEARING FROM ERIC ROWE.
ERIC, YOU'LL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
I LIVE A FEW HOUSES DOWN FROM THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
UH, I'M HERE TO RESPECTFULLY OPPOSE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
UH, THIS REQUEST IS SIMPLY NOT ABOUT ONE PROPERTY CHANGING USE.
IT REPRESENTS ANOTHER STEP IN THE GRADUAL CONVERSION OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD INTO ONE WITH INSTITUTIONAL COMM.
THE PROPERTY IS ZONED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FOR A REASON.
PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE STABILITY, THE LIVABILITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
A PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL FACILITY ALREADY OPERATES ACROSS THE STREET IN A FORMER CHURCH, UH, THAT APPROVAL DOES NOT JUSTIFY ADDING ANOTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL USE NEARBY.
INSTEAD, IT HIGHLIGHTS THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF THESE DECISIONS.
EACH ADDITIONAL EXCEPTION MAKES IT HARDER TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND CREATES PRESSURE FOR FUTURE REQUESTS WHILE NO NEW CONSTRUCTION IS PROPOSED.
UH, THE ISSUE IS THE CHANGE ITSELF.
SCHOOLS BRING INCREASED TRAFFIC, PARKING, DEMAND NOISE ACTIVITY THAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT TO SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
ONCE APPROVED, THIS USE IS DIFFICULT TO REVERSE.
THE INVESTORS AND THE OPERATOR OF THE SCHOOL COULD HAVE PURCHASED A PROPERTY WITH THE CORRECT ZONING AND, UM, USE.
SO I RESPECTFULLY ASKED THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE LONG-TERM PRECEDENT.
THIS SETS TO PRESERVE OUR RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, FOR THOSE REASONS, I URGE YOU TO DENY THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS BETH ROWE.
BETH, YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES.
I OWN AND RESIDE AT 7 0 3 EAST 50TH STREET, WHICH IS THREE HOMES DOWN FROM THE PROPOSED SITE CHANGE.
I AM SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION FOR THE SAME REASONS.
BRINGING COMMERCIAL INTRUSION INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS MAINLY ON THE OWNERS WHO BOUGHT THE PROPERTY FULLY INTENDING THAT IT BECOME A SCHOOL.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE AN OPERATING SCHOOL IN A COMMERCIALLY ZONED AREA.
SO WHY DID THEY NOT CHOOSE THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD UNIVERSITY HILLS SLASH WINDSOR PARK? INSTEAD, THEY CHOSE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS HYDE PARK.
HYDE PARK IS A DESIRABLE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS MAY BE SOMETHING THAT COULD DRIVE THEIR ENROLLMENT.
HOWEVER, WE ARE A DESIRABLE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF THE PRESERVATION OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES.
AND THEN FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THEY COULD LOOK TO THE END OF OUR STREET WHERE ISD HAS RECENTLY CLOSED OUR RIDGETOP ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT 50TH AND CASWELL AND I'M SURE THEY COULD FIND SPACE THERE.
SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO NOT APPROVE THIS.
LOOKS LIKE NEITHER OF OUR VIRTUAL SPEAKERS ARE IN OUR QUEUE.
SO THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO POLL ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR
[00:15:01]
OTHERWISE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? COMMISSIONER ROJAN LIKE TO POLL ITEM 14.OKAY, SO WE WILL PULL ITEM 14 AND THAT WILL BECOME A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT ITEM BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO PULL IT FOR DISCUSSION? I'M SOLELY PULLING IT FOR DISCUSSION.
WE'LL PULL ITEM 14 TO BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? OKAY.
IS THERE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING? MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRETTON, SECONDED BY VICE CHAIR HANEY.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, THAT ITEM PASSES AND THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[11. Rezoning: C14-2026-0014 - Wonsley Grocery & Kitchen; District 4 ]
OUR DISCUSSION CASES STARTING WITH ITEM 11, WESLEY GROCERY AND KITCHEN DISTRICT FOUR.FIRST WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF ON THIS CASE.
GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONER SHERRY TIS WITH THE AUSTIN PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 11, WHICH IS KC 14 20 26 0 0 1 4.
AGAIN, WESLEY GROCERY AND KITCHEN.
IT'S LOCATED AT 3 0 1 AND 3 0 9 EAST WESLEY DRIVE.
THE REQUEST IS FROM MF TWO MP TO L-R-M-U-C-O MP.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS L-R-M-U-C-O MP NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL MIXED USE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WOULD PROHIBIT THE SERVICE STATION USE ON THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS A ONE PLUS ACRE VACANT LOT THAT IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EAST WESLEY DRIVE AND GESNER DRIVE THE LOTS TO THE NORTH ACROSS WESLEY DRIVE ARE DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND ARE ZONED SF THREE NP TO THE SOUTH.
THERE IS A MULTIFAMILY USE ALONG GESNER DRIVE AND A RESTAURANT AND COCKTAIL LOUNGE USE FRONTING ANDERSON LANE, US HIGHWAY 180 3 SERVICE ROAD AND THAT THOSE ARE IN THEIR ZONED GRMP AND CS ONE COMP RESPECTIVELY.
THERE ARE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS TO THE EAST AND WEST ZONE MF THREE MP.
IN THIS REQUEST, THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR L-R-M-U-C-O-M-P TO DEVELOP A NEIGHBORHOOD MARKET ON THIS SITE.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL MIXED USE, CONDITIONAL OVERLAY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE THE SITE UNDER CONSIDERATION MEETS THE INTENT OF THE LR BASE DISTRICT AS IT WILL ALLOW FOR LIMITED OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USES TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
THE PROPOSED ZONING IS COMPATIBLE WITH A HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL ZONING PATTERNS TO THE SOUTHEAST AND WEST.
THE PROPERTY FRONTS ON AND TAKES ACCESS TO WESLEY DRIVE, WHICH IS A LEVEL TWO COLLECTOR ROADWAY AND IT IS LOCATED NEAR A PUBLIC TRANSIT STOP ON GEORGIAN DRIVE TO THE WEST.
AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
WE'LL, WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT SOHIL MAGNOLIA SOHO.
YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES AND GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UH, IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL AGAIN.
HOW MANY MINUTES DID YOU SAY I HAD? FIVE MINUTES.
I'M THE APPLICANT FOR THIS REZONING CASE AT 3 0 1, UH, 3 0 9 EAST WESLEY DRIVE.
I'M HERE TO RESPECTFULLY ASK TO APPROVE, UH, THE REQUEST AND CONSIDER THE PLEA TO ALLOW THIS REZONING.
LAST I WAS HERE, I'D MENTIONED THAT WE ARE NOT OUTSIDERS.
THE LANDOWNERS AND MYSELF ARE LONGTIME LOCALS.
WE HAVE LIVED AND BUILT BUSINESSES IN AUSTIN, WHICH HAVE SERVED THEIR RESPECTIVE NEIGHBORHOODS FOR DECADES.
AND SINCE THE LAST HEARING, WE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORS AT THE SITE AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY FOR AN OPEN DISCUSSION AND TO HEAR THEIR CONCERNS.
OUR INTENT IS TO BUILD A BUSINESS THAT CAN BECOME AN ASSET FOR THIS UNDERSERVED NEIGHBORHOOD.
A TRUE NEIGHBORHOOD GROCER OFFERING FRESH FRUITS, PRODUCE MEATS ALONG WITH FULL KITCHEN SERVICES AND EVERYDAY GROCERY ITEMS. ONE CONCERN BROUGHT UP BY MULTIPLE NEIGHBORS WAS REGARDING CRIME.
THE OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY ALSO OWN AND OPERATE ANOTHER NEARBY BUSINESS.
UH, BEFORE THEY MOVED INTO THAT BUILDING, IT HAD BECOME A DEN FOR
TODAY IT'S A MINI HUB FOR NEIGHBORHOOD, FOR FOR THE NEIGHBORS TO SHOP AND GATHER, REPRESENTING A SUCCESSFUL TRANSFORMATION FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERN INTO A VALUED COMMUNITY ASSET.
SO WE SHARE THE NEIGHBOR'S DESIRE TO ALLEVIATE
[00:20:01]
CRIME IN AND AROUND THIS PROPERTY.AND TO BE REAL, IT'S A REAL PAIN IN THE ASS FOR THE EMPLOYEES AND THE OPERATORS, UM, WHEN THERE'S CRIME AROUND THEIR BUSINESS.
SO WE FEEL THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL BRING A POSITIVE CHANGE TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, WE ALSO WISH TO HIRE THOSE LIVING HERE AND MAKE IT A PEDESTRIAN FRIEND, PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY, A KEY, A KEY CONSIDERATION DURING THE DESIGN PHASE FOR THE, UH, FOR THE PAST FEW MONTHS, WE HAVE WORKED WITH THE CITY STAFF AND HEARD THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS, UH, TO MEET THE DESIRED SHARED OUTCOME.
WE HAVE SACRIFICED THE TRADITIONALLY HIGH REVENUE OPTIONS LIKE A DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE OR A FUEL STATION.
SO THE VISION REALLY IS A FAMILY, FAMILY-ORIENTED, HYPER-LOCAL GROCERY CONCEPT.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR THIS REZONING.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION KATHY KID.
KATHY, YOU'LL HAVE FIVE MINUTES AND EACH COMMISSIONER SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A HANDOUT AND I'LL MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS SENT OVER TO OUR VIRTUAL COMMISSIONERS AS WELL.
HI, I'M KATHY KIDD AND I REPRESENT MY NEIGHBORS AT 3 0 2, 3 0 4, 3 0 6, AND 3 0 8 EAST WESLEY.
WE ARE ALL OPPOSED TO THIS ZONING CHANGE, BUT THESE POINTS WOULD MAKE THIS BETTER.
WE ASKED THE CITY TO FIX THE T INTERSECTION PROBLEM.
SINCE ALL OF OUR MAILBOXES HAVE BEEN RUN OVER AND MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE HAS BEEN DRIVEN INTO TWICE, THE TRAFFIC IS A REAL PROBLEM.
TRASH BLOWS FROM MENDA NEWIE GROUPS CURRENT STORE ON NER ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE LOT.
WE ASK THAT THEY PUT A FEW GARBAGE CANS ON THEIR NEW LOT FOR THEIR CUSTOMERS AND THAT THEIR STORE TRASH BE SECURED IN CLOSED DUMPSTERS NOT LEFT OPEN AS IS USUALLY THE CASE AT MENDA.
EVERY DAY I PICK UP TRASH IN MY YARD THAT CAME FROM THEIR DUMPSTERS.
WE NEED CURBS INSTALLED WHERE THERE ARE NONE, SO PEOPLE CAN'T PARK IN OUR YARDS AND TO CONTROL RUNOFF.
I BELIEVE THAT'S A CITY ASK NEWEY GROUP SAID THAT THEY WILL HAVE A CLEAN STORE AND PARKING LOT AND CONTROL THE TRASH IN RATS.
AND WE ASK THEM TO BEGIN RAT CONTROL BEFORE THEY SCRAPE THE LAND.
WE WANT A PROHIBITION OF ANY KIND OF DRIVE THROUGH WINDOW FOR THEIR PIZZA HUT AND KITCHEN.
OUR STREET IS TOO SMALL TO HANDLE THAT KIND OF STALLED TRAFFIC.
WHAT WE ASK THAT THEY NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADD MORE FAST FOOD FRANCHISES ON THEIR PROPERTY OTHER THAN THE PIZZA HUT.
ALSO, WE DON'T WANT PAWN SHOPS OR FINANCIAL SERVICES LIKE TITLE LOANS.
WE ASK FOR AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE FOR SHADE AND CARBON CAPTURE.
A LARGE SLAB WILL RAISE TEMPERATURES BY SEVERAL DEGREES.
WE ASK THAT THEY CLOSE BEFORE MIDNIGHT, LATER HOURS.
ENCOURAGE CRIME SINCE THEY WILL SELL ALCOHOL.
WE PREFER THEY CLOSE AT 11:00 PM IN SOME.
WE WOULD LIKE TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN TYPES OF BUSINESSES, PROHIBIT A DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW CONTROL THE TRASH THAT BLOWS IN OUR YARDS DAILY FROM THEIR STORES.
GET CURBS TO HELP WITH PARKING AND RUNOFF, PLANT TREES FOR SHADE AND CARBON CAPTURE CONTROL.
THE RATS FIX THE PROBLEMS WITH OUR T INTERSECTION AND LIMIT HOURS OF OPERATION TO 11:00 PM WE WANT IT ALL CODIFIED.
PLEASE, TIMOTHY BRA CAN REACH ME IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR SOLUTIONS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
SO WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UH, THANKS FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
UM, I, I THINK ALL THE CONCERNS, UH, THAT THE N NEIGHBORS MENTIONED ARE VALID.
UM, AND I I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING THERE THAT, UH, IS NECESSARILY A STICKING POINT FOR US.
UM, I I I THINK SOME OF THE DETAILS COULD BE DISCUSSED AS FAR AS THE ACTUAL, UH, DURING THE EARLY PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, BUT SEEING THE NOTES HERE, I I THINK A LOT OF THIS IS, UH, CAN EASILY BE MEDIATED AND REMEDIED.
SO I DON'T SEE ANY REAL CONCERN WHERE WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO, UH, GET WHAT THE NEIGHBORS WANT.
SO THEY FEEL LIKE THIS BUSINESS IS NOT AN EYESORE, UH, FOR THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRETTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
THAT ITEM PASSES AND WE'LL MOVE INTO OUR ROUND ROBIN.
SO AGAIN, WE'LL HAVE SLOTS FOR EIGHT COMMISSIONERS AT FIVE MINUTES EACH.
WHO WOULD LIKE TO START US OFF? COMMISSIONER
[00:25:01]
ROJAN, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, THE STREET SIDE CONDITION OF THIS PROPERTY.
WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS, UM, OF THE DEVELOPER? ONE, THEY DEVELOPED THIS PROPERTY AS FAR AS WHAT HAPPENS ON THE, THE RIGHT OF WAY IN THE STREET ADJACENT PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY
UM, CHRISTINE BARTOL, PROGRAM MANAGER LAND USE REVIEW.
UH, SOME OF THAT WOULD BE UNDER TP W'S JURISDICTION, BUT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT, UH, AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
ARE THERE ANY DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AS FAR AS PLANTING OF TREES OR ANY OF THAT? YES.
YEAH, THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR SUB CHAPTER E.
AND THEN, UH, SAME, UH, ALSO FOR STAFF WHEN IT COMES TO DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICES, I, I DON'T SEE THAT LISTED AS A USE.
IS THAT A PROHIBIT, IS THAT A PROHIBITIVE THING? YES, UH, IN THE CODE UNDER A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY YOU CAN PROHIBIT USES, BUT YOU CAN ALSO PROHIBIT DRIVE IN SERVICES, WHICH IS LISTED IN, UH, 25 1 OF OUR CODE.
YOU CAN DO THAT ASSOCIATED WITH SPECIFIC USES.
SO YOU CAN DO ASSOCIATED WITH COMMERCIAL USES LIKE RESTAURANT OR SAY GENERAL RETAIL SALES LIMITED OR SAY FINANCIAL SERVICES A BANK.
SO YOU WOULD JUST HAVE TO SPECIFY WHAT YOU'RE PROHIBITING IT AS AN ACCESSORY TO 'CAUSE IT WOULD BE AN ACCESSORY TO A PRIMARY COMMERCIAL USE.
UH, AND I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
THANK YOU FOR COMING DOWN AND SPEAKING AGAIN.
SO I UNDERSTAND YOU SAID THAT YOU ARE VERY AMENABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, DO YOU FEEL THAT BETWEEN THE TIME WE HAVE OBVIOUSLY AT THIS MEETING AND WHEN THIS GOES TO COUNCIL, THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO FORMALIZE THAT AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE FORM OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING OR SOME OTHER METHODOLOGY? UH, IF I HAVE THE DAY CORRECT.
IS THAT FOR THE AUGUST, UH, IS THAT THE NEXT ONE? I AM NOT CERTAIN OF YOUR DATE AT COUNCIL, BUT I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE QUESTION IS WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO COMMIT TO HAVING SOMETHING IRONED OUT BETWEEN NOW AND THEN? UH, I DON'T SEE A REASON WHY WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
AND UM, THERE WAS ALSO QUESTIONS BROUGHT UP BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGARDING, UM, FOR ANY, UH, RETAIL FOOD SALES, THE ABILITY FOR YOU OR THE COMMITMENT FROM YOUR SIDE TO ACCEPT SNAP BENEFITS, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE COMMITTED TO THAT WE WOULD ACCEPT SNAP? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES.
THAT, THAT WOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM.
THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTIONS I HAVE FOR YOU RIGHT NOW.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
UH, YEAH, I HAD QUICK QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
UM, AND I JUST, SORRY, THE MICS SEEM A LITTLE LOUD TONIGHT.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO HOW SOME OF THESE ISSUES ARE NOT RELATED TO SONY OR SOME ARE, I I GUESS THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO CLARIFY WHAT'S POSSIBLE FROM THE COMMISSION SIDE.
UM, I THINK YOU MUST BE REFERRING TO, UM, THE RAT CONTROL, THE GARBAGE COLLECTION, THINGS SUCH AS THAT.
THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CONTROL THROUGH THE REZONING CASE.
THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A PARTY TO THE ZONING CASE.
UM, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A PRIVATE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORS.
AND GENERALLY THOSE THINGS ARE THEN NOT CODIFIED AS PART OF THE ZONING SO THAT WE JUST DO THE ZONING AS THE CITY AND THAT THE PRIVATE AGREEMENT MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S SOME ENFORCEABILITY RELATED TO THESE OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THE ZONING CASE.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, YOU ARE CORRECT.
BASICALLY, UH, PUBLIC RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, THAT'S TOO HARD FOR US TO ENFORCE.
SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE IN A PRIVATE COVENANT BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THEN IT WOULD BE UP TO THEM TO ENFORCE THAT AND RECORD IT WITH THE COUNTY.
UM, THINGS SUCH AS LIKE ALSO HOURS OF OPERATION, STUFF LIKE THAT.
WE USED TO TRY TO DO HOURS OF OPERATION AND PUBLIC RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, BUT IT WAS JUST NOT ENFORCEABLE AND THAT'S WHAT WE WERE TOLD BY THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
SO WE NO LONGER DO THAT ANYMORE.
SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IN A PRIVATE AGREEMENT.
AND SO GENERALLY WITH RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE FOR THE DEVELOPER AS I THINK COMMISSIONER ROJA JUST ASKED TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO SORT OF CODIFY SOME OF THESE REQUESTS BEFORE IT WAS APPROVED TO COUNCIL SO THAT THEY FELT COMFORTABLE.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, AND THEN I THINK JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION RELATED TO THE THINGS THAT WE CAN CONTROL AS COMMISSIONERS ALSO TO TOUCH ON BY DR.
[00:30:01]
IAN.THE THINGS RELATED TO LIKE THE DRIVE THROUGH AND SOME OF THE MM-HMM
USES, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY SORT OF MAKE SUGGESTIONS ON THIS EVENING AND CODIFY BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL.
YES, THAT COULD DEFINITELY BE PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT.
UH, BASICALLY WHAT A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY CAN DO IS IT CAN LIMIT USES, IT CAN, UH, LIMIT SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY.
THOSE ARE BASICALLY THE THREE THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE THROUGH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
SO YES, THAT CAN BE A PART OF THE ZONING RECOMMENDATION.
OBVIOUSLY WE MAY COME UP WITH A LIST OF THINGS BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD THIS EVENING, BUT THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OR THE DISTRICT THEMSELVES TO SAY MAYBE SOME OF THESE DO OR DO NOT GET INCLUDED IN THE FINAL VERSION.
JUST LIKE THE STAFF REC MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION, THE COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL AND ITS COUNCIL'S PURVIEW TO DECIDE TO ACCEPT THAT OR CHANGE THAT RECOMMENDATION WHEN THEY MAKE THEIR FINAL DECISION.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION COMMISSIONER.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH THE FOLLOWING, UM, AMENDMENTS.
UM, ONE WOULD BE TO, UH, RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL TO INCLUDE SOME CONDITIONAL USES.
THOSE CONDITIONAL USES WOULD BE THE CONSUMER CONVENIENT SERVICES, CONSUMER REPAIR SERVICES, FINANCIAL SERVICES, FOOD SALES, GENERAL RETAIL, CONVENIENCE, OFFSITE PARKING, PETTY CAB SERVICES, PET SERVICES, PRINTING AND PUBLISHING, UH, AND RESTAURANT USE, BOTH LIMITED AND GENERAL.
AND THEN TO ALSO PROHIBIT THE USE OF, UH, DRIVE IN, UH, ACCESSORY USE TO FINANCIAL SERVICES, FOOD SALES, GENERAL RETAIL, CONVENIENCE, AND BOTH OF THE RESTAURANT CATEGORIES.
I'M JUST LOOKING TO STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT ALL WORKS.
YES, THAT DEFINITELY COULD BE DONE AS PART OF YOUR CONDITIONAL OVERLAY FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT.
UM, IT MIGHT BE NICE IF YOU SEND US A LIST SO WE MAKE SURE WE HAVE THEM CORRECTLY.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BRETTON, WE'LL MOVE INTO DEBATE.
COMMISSIONER ROEN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? SURE.
UM, I, I WANT TO FIRST AND FOREMOST SAY THAT THOSE IN ATTENDANCE TONIGHT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FROM THE APPLICANT'S SIDE, I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT'S HAPPENED THUS FAR.
UM, I THINK THE GOAL FOR US ULTIMATELY IS TO GET THIS THROUGH WITH, UM, THE REQUEST FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, FULLY CODIFIED IN SOME FORMAT, WHETHER IT'S A MOU OR RESTRICTIVE COVENANT BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES TO ENSURE THAT THIS IS A VERY COMPATIBLE BUILT BUSINESS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
UM, I THINK THE CONDITIONAL USES WILL BE RE-REVIEWED BY THE COUNCIL, UM, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF ANY, UH, AGREEMENT THAT IS SET IN PLACE AT THAT POINT, UM, BY THE TIME IT IS HEARD AT COUNCIL.
SO, UM, THAT IS WHY I AM SETTING THESE CONDITIONAL USES.
ANY COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION? ANY OTHERS LIKE TO SPEAK FOR? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
AGAIN, THIS IS THE MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED.
THANK YOU SO MUCH TO OUR SPEAKERS APPLICANT AND TO MR. WAITES FOR YOUR THOUGHTS AND FEEDBACK ON THIS ITEM.
[14. Site Plan (Extension): SP-2017-0387C(XT3) - Powell Lane Plaza - Site Plan Extension; District 4 ]
TO ITEM 14, POWELL LANE PLAZA SITE PLAN EXTENSION.WE WILL FIRST HEAR FROM STAFF ON THIS ITEM.
MY NAME'S GABRIEL ROW JR WITH AUSTIN DEVELOPMENT SERVICE.
I'M THE CASE MANAGER FOR POWELL LANE PLAZA SIP PLAN EXTENSION CASE NUMBER IS SB 20 17 0 3 8 7 C XT THREE, LOCATED AT 82 40 GEORGIAN DRIVE.
THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR PROCESS AND ADMINISTRATIVE QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT VICTORIA HASI SINCE SHE'S OUR ONLY SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM.
I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND GIVE HER A TOTAL OF SEVEN MINUTES WITH HER INCLUDED TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA HASSE WITH ROWER DESIGN ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNER.
UM, WE ARE HERE ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION TO THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS ORIGINALLY IMPROVED IN 2017.
[00:35:01]
WAS INHERITED BY OUR CLIENT, THE CURRENT LANDOWNER WITH A TON OF CODE VIOLATIONS, SOME OF THOSE BEING USE VIOLATIONS.UM, WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER, UH, PROPERTY CHANGED OWNERSHIP, WE WERE SOUGHT TO HELP WITH THE SITUATION AND WENT DOWN THE PATH OF, UH, REZONING THE PROPERTY TO GET IT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE ZONING THAT IT NEEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION SALES AND SERVICE USE.
AND THEN ULTIMATELY WHAT RESULTED IN SEVERAL SITE PLAN CORRECTIONS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, SOME OF THOSE SITE PLAN CORRECTIONS WERE, UM, DUE TO CONVERSATIONS HAD WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE REZONING PROCESS.
AND, UM, THE FINAL SITE PLAN CORRECTION TOOK PLACE AND WAS APPROVED.
IT WAS FILED IN IN THE FALL LAST YEAR AND WAS APPROVED IN APRIL, LEAVING FOUR DAYS TO ACHIEVE BUILDING PERMITS BEFORE THE SITE PLAN EXPIRED.
AND SO THAT IS WHY WE'RE HERE ASKING FOR A THIRD EXTENSION.
UM, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR ENOUGH TIME TO ENSURE THAT, UH, MARKET CONDITIONS BEING CONSIDERED RIGHT NOW WOULD ALLOW THIS LANDOWNER TO BE ABLE TO FULLY REALIZE THE SITE PLAN THAT IS HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, SECOND OF OUR VICE CHAIR HANEY, WITHOUT OBJECTION, THAT ITEM PASSES.
WE'LL MOVE INTO OUR ROUND ROBIN.
SO EIGHT COMMISSIONERS AT FIVE MINUTES EACH.
WHO WOULD LIKE TO START US OFF? COMMISSIONER ROJAN.
UH, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY, UH, THE NEIGHBORS HAVE REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT ON THIS IN ORDER FOR THE COMMISSION TO HAVE ACCESS TO SOME OF THE CODE VIOLATIONS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY FILED AGAINST THE PREVIOUS OWNER.
UM, CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT THE CODE VIOLATIONS AND THE, UH, THE USE VIOLATIONS THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER, THAT THOSE WILL BE RECTIFIED, UH, BY THE SITE PLAN AND THE BUILDING PERMIT THAT'S CURRENTLY TRYING TO BE PULLED? YES, I CAN CONFIRM THAT.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, SOME OF THE CODE VIOLATIONS THAT WERE, UH, ASSIGNED HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEALT WITH, FOR EXAMPLE, THE ZONING ISSUE.
UM, THERE ISN'T A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY CURRENTLY, BUT ZONING WAS THE FIRST STEP TO, TO COMPLETE IN ORDER TO GET ALL OF THESE CLEAR, ALL THESE OTHER CODE VIOLATIONS.
SO ONCE WE, ONCE THE LANDOWNER'S ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THE SITE AND GO THROUGH THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS FOR COMMERCIAL PERMITTING, THAT WILL CLEAR THE REMAINING VIOLATIONS.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE CURRENT OWNER, UH, RUNS A BUSINESS THAT DOES FOUNDATION LEVELING AND THEY RUN THAT BUSINESS OFF THE SITE.
IS IT TRUE THAT THAT IS THE INTENT FOR THE SITE TO BE USED IN THE FUTURE FOR THE SAME USE THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING USED? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
UM, THERE'S A REQUEST FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO REMOVE THE RAZOR WIRE AROUND THE PROPERTY.
UM, CAN YOU DISCUSS WHETHER THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED? YES.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THAT WAS REMOVED BEFORE, UH, BEFORE THE ZONING ON THE PROPERTY WAS APPROVED BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 23.
UM, THERE WAS ALSO A REQUEST, I BELIEVE, FROM THE NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH TO ADD A PRIVACY FENCE TO THE PROPERTY, UH, TO IMPROVE THE ADJACENT CONDITION FROM THIS PROPERTY TO THE HOUSING TO THE NORTH.
UM, THAT FENCE HAS NOT BEEN BUILT.
CAN YOU CLARIFY THE PLANS FOR THAT FENCE? YES.
THAT THE PLAN FOR THAT FENCE HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE SITE PLAN.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE SITE PLAN CORRECTIONS WE DID, I BELIEVE CORRECTION NUMBER TWO.
AND IT HASN'T BEEN CONSTRUCTED AT THIS POINT IN TIME BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET TO IT BECAUSE THERE'S, UM, ILLEGAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE CONSTRUCTED RIGHT UP AGAINST THE FENCE LINE.
SO UNTIL THOSE BUILDINGS CAN GO AWAY, WE CAN'T PUT UP THAT PRIVACY FENCE.
AND THOSE WILL BE DEMOLISHED AS PART OF THE BUILDING PERMIT YOU SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
UM, AND THEN THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE IN ZONING, UM, AS IT PERTAINS TO ONE, THIS WAS ORIGINALLY FILED, I THINK BACK IN 2016 OR 2017 VERSUS ITS CURRENT, THE CURRENT ZONING CONDITIONS TODAY.
ARE THERE ANY SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES THAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THIS PROPERTY IF IT WERE A SITE PLAN WAS FILED? A SITE PLAN WAS FILED TODAY? NO, THERE'S NOT ANY SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES AS, AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE CURRENT, UH, SITE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED AND WE'RE LOOKING TO EXTEND, REDUCES THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, EVEN THOUGH THE IMPERVIOUS COVERS NEARLY 90% NOW.
UM, AND THAT IS ALLOWED, BUT, UM, IT, IT'S ACTUALLY AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE SITE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME'S.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? IF NOT, I WILL LOOK FOR A MOTION COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
SO, SORRY, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, UH, FROM THE APPLICANT, UM, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF FOR SOME REASON THE SITE PLAN WAS NOT EXTENDED AND SORT OF WHERE THAT WOULD PUT THE APPLICANT AND THE SITUATION THAT WOULD RESULT? UM, YES.
IF THE SITE PLAN WAS NOT EXTENDED, IT WOULD CAUSE FOR A COMPLETE REFILING OF A BRAND NEW SITE PLAN, IT WOULD RESULT IN THE SAME DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT WOULD COST UPWARDS OF A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS TO, TO GO THROUGH THAT ENTIRE PROCESS.
YEAH, AND I, I GUESS ALSO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IT WOULD TAKE LONGER POTENTIALLY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT
[00:40:01]
HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP AS CONCERNS.UM, UH, I MEAN, I CAN'T SAY WHAT THE CITY'S REVIEW TIME IS RIGHT NOW, BUT, UM, PERHAPS YES,
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER ROSN, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO SUPPORT THE, UH, SITE PLAN EXTENSION.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
COMMISSIONER ROSN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? UM, I THINK FOR THE REASONS THAT WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED, AND I APPRECIATE, UH, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE IMPACT TO THE CURRENT OWNER WHO WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL GENERATOR OF THE PROBLEMS THAT STARTED THIS IPLAN PROCESS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
UM, AND FOR THOSE REASONS, I THINK IT'S, IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT TO ALLOW THIS TO, UH, GET THE EXTENSION THAT THEY NEED OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION.
WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE BY COMMISSIONER BEDROSIAN FOR APPLICANT REQUEST, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
EXCUSE ME, STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH TO OUR APPLICANT AND OUR STAFF LIAISON, MR. GUERRERO, ON THIS ITEM.
[Items 17 & 18]
INTO OUR FINAL DISCUSSION ITEM.WE'LL BE TAKING THIS UP TOGETHER.
I JUST WANNA NOTE BEFORE WE DIVE INTO THIS ITEM, THIS IS SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE RIGHT OF WAY VACATION ON DOG AS A PART OF DOG HEAD DEVELOPMENT.
WE WILL ALSO BE HAVING A CONVERSATION IN THE FALL ABOUT THE DOG HEAD REGULATING PLAN, AND I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATION TO BE HAD AROUND THAT.
SO WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ROBUST QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS AND CONVERSATION ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE AT THAT POINT.
BUT I WOULD ASK THAT THIS EVENING, WE, UM, CAN FIND OUR COMMENTS BOTH FROM THE PUBLIC AND FROM COMMISSIONERS SPECIFICALLY TO THE RIGHT OF WAY VACATION THAT IS UP FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
SO LET'S HEAR FIRST FROM STAFF ON 17 AND 18.
I'M THE PROJECT MANAGER OF THE LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP WITH TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS, AND IT'S MY GREAT PLEASURE TO PRESENT THE TWO RIGHT OF WAY VACATIONS BEFORE YOU TODAY.
UM, OF COURSE WE HAVE, UH, OTTS, UH, OTTS LANE.
IT'S 8,700 OTTS LANE IS THE ADDRESS THAT WE'RE USING TO, TO ANCHOR THIS.
UH, AND THAT IS FILE NUMBER 22 6 7 1 4 0 7.
UM, IF VACATED, IT WOULD GO TO THE ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNER, WHICH IN THIS CASE IS DOG'S HEAD LAND JV LIMITED.
IT IS 2.9026 ACRES, UH, OR 1000, UH, EXCUSE ME, 126,437 SQUARE FEET.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT OUT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE VACATED AREA OR THE AREA AREA TO BE VACATED ON JUNE 10TH, 2020 SIXTH.
UM, ALL REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE RIGHT-AWAY VACATION.
AND THIS IS TIED TO A SITE PLAN.
THE SITE PLAN SP 2 2 6 0 1 47 D AS IN DOG.
THE SECOND RIGHT OF WAY VACATION ASSOCIATED WITH THIS IS, UH, EDWIN LANE, OR 4 0 5 EDWIN LANE.
THAT'S THE ANCHOR ADDRESS WE'RE USING.
UM, IT'S, UH, FILE NUMBER IS 20 26 0 7 1 4 2 2 LM.
IT IS 5.3307 ACRES, OR 232,205 SQUARE FEET.
UH, THIS IS WILL ALSO BE VACATED TO THE ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNER DOG'S HEADLAND JV LIMITED.
UH, PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT OUT FOR EDWIN ON JUNE 10TH, 2026 TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE AREA TO BE VACATED.
ALL REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE VACATION.
AND IT IS ALSO TIED TO SITE PLAN.
SP 20 26 0 1 4 7 D I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR VACATION PROCESS FROM LAND MANAGEMENT.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT, AMANDA MARO.
AMANDA, YOU'LL HAVE 10 MINUTES.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT RICHARD S FOR 10 MINUTES.
THAT'S WHAT SHE GETS FOR PUTTING HER NAME ON THE APPLICATION.
I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, AMANDA AND I ARE WITH ARMON BROWN.
UM, I DON'T KNOW, JUST A LITTLE CLICKER BRIEF PRESENTATION.
THERE'S HER, THERE'S THIS SEGMENT OF, OF ERGOTS, AND THEN THERE'S
[00:45:01]
THIS SEGMENT OF EDWIN.AND WHERE THAT FITS IN ON AN AERIAL MAP IS IT LOOKS LIKE THAT THE, THESE ARE ROADS THAT ARE, WERE COUNTY ROADS.
THEY BECAME CITY ROADS UPON THE ANNEXATION.
THAT WAS PURSUANT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHED TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AS A ROADWAY PLAN THAT SHOWS THESE ROADS GONE.
SO WE'RE COMPLETING THE CIRCLE.
NOW YOU ASK, WELL, WHY ARE THESE ROADS GONNA GO AWAY? THEY, THEY CRISSCROSS A PARTICULAR TRACK THAT IS SLATED TO BE, UH, PROPOSED TO BE A USER THAT NEEDS A 300 ACRE SITE.
UM, AND WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GONNA REROUTE, UM, I DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE THE ROADWAY PLAN.
THIS IS BASICALLY, THIS IS 2,600 ACRES.
SO THIS WOULD BE LIKE LOOKING AT MOPAC LAMAR CONGRESS I 35, THAT'S THE SCALE OF THIS MAP.
WE PLAN TO REROUTE ERGOTS AROUND THIS SITE TO FREE UP THE 300 ACRE SITE.
UM, ALL THE UTILITIES HAVE SIGNED OFF, THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ABUT IT AND WITHIN 300 FEET HAVE SIGNED OFF.
UM, WHAT ELSE CAN I TELL YOU? I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT.
YOU HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
OH, WE'VE BEEN TO URBAN TRANS URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, AND THEY VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
I THINK THE VOTE, ONE GUY DIDN'T VOTE, BUT EVERYBODY VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION, BEGINNING WITH OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, BRAD MASSENGILL.
I HAD NO CLUE I'D BEGIN 10 MINUTES.
UM, UH, I I'M JUST WORRIED WE'RE GETTING UP AHEAD OF OURSELVES THROUGH ALL THIS CHANGING LINES AND STUFF OUT HERE WITH THE TRAVIS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING TODAY.
AND THIS DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A DONE DEAL YET.
YOU KNOW, GETTING AHEAD OF OURSELVES, UH, YOU KNOW, SEEMS LIKE A, A STEAMROLLER IS HEADING OUR OH OH THIS OVER THIS WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT LIVES OUT THERE.
UM, I, I DON'T, IT'S SHOCKING THAT I'M THE ONLY ONE HERE, YOU KNOW, TO TALK ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT LIVE OUT THERE, UM, AND THEY'RE AT THIS OTHER MEETING TODAY.
SO HOW CAN THEY BE EXPECTED TO KEEP UP WITH ALL THIS STUFF? UM, THAT, THAT AREA OUT THERE, IT, IT'S BEEN PRESENTED AS THIS BONANZA, UM, BECAUSE IT'S A BIG FLAT AREA THAT NO ONE'S USING.
AND IT'S UNFORTUNATELY FOR REALITY, IT'S A FLOODPLAIN.
IF, IF YOU LOOK AT ANY OF THE MAPS AND WHAT IT IT CONSISTS OF IS, UH, A BIG GRAVEL FIELD, YOU KNOW, ON A BAND OF A RIVER SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES BY THE COLORADO RIVER, IT TELLS YOU A LOT ABOUT THE GEOLOGY THERE.
YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT THAT GRAVEL AND ALL THAT SAND GOT THERE FROM FLOODING, YOU KNOW, AND THE CITIES DIDN'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER IT.
BUT RECENTLY WE'VE LEARNED THAT THE STATE IS PUTTING IN A 22 FOOT WIDE TUNNEL THAT'S GONNA RUN ALL THE WAY FROM I 35, 8 AND A HALF MILES LONG, JUST UPSTREAM FROM THIS PROPOSED PROJECT.
IT'S GONNA DISCHARGE WHO KNOWS HOW MUCH WATER 22 FEET OF WIDE, OF A TUNNEL CAN PUT OUT FROM THE WHOLE, UH, I 35 PROJECT.
YOU KNOW, RECENTLY THE, UH, PEOPLE WORKING ON THE BONDS TRYING TO PRIORITIZE MONEY FOR DIFFERENT PROJECTS, IT CAME TO THEIR PRO THEIR, UH, ATTENTION THAT THE, THE LONGHORN DAM IS IN BAD SHAPE.
THERE'S SOME SERIOUS STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS WITH IT.
YOU KNOW, IT'S SUNK DOWN FARTHER ON THE LIST, SO IT'S GONNA BE FURTHER ALONG DOWN THE ROAD TILL IT GETS MORE MAINTENANCE.
ALL THIS STUFF IS, UH, VERY WORRISOME ABOUT THE SITE, LET ALONE ALLOWING ALL THIS PLANNING TO GO ON BEFORE THERE ARE EVEN ANY ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES OR ANY SORT OF, UH, CHECKS AND BALANCES WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
[00:50:01]
HAS BEEN PHENOMENAL.YOU KNOW, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO THE DEVELOPER IS.
WHY AREN'T THEY TELLING US WHO, WHO IT IS? IT'S JUST, IT JUST SEEMS LUDICROUS TO, TO BE GIVING CONCESSIONS TO A SECRET PERSON OR ENTITY OR CORPORATION OR WHATEVER.
WE NEED MORE CLARIFICATION, YOU KNOW, AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE Y'ALL TO, TO AT LEAST BE A SPEED BUMP IF NOTHING MORE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THIS IS, THIS HAS NOT BEEN HANDLED WELL AT ALL.
UM, I COULD PROBABLY ADD A LOT MORE, YOU KNOW, BUT I'M SURE YOU'LL BE HEARING A LOT MORE ABOUT THIS AS TIME GOES ON.
BUT Y'ALL, PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS AND, UH, DON'T BUY THE HYPE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS CAMERON SHAW.
CAMERON, YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES.
HEY, HELLO, CAMERON SHAW, DISTRICT ONE.
UH, THANKS FOR HEARING ME TODAY.
UM, AND I, I APPRECIATE YOUR REQUEST TO KEEP THIS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE TRANSFER OF THE RIGHT OF WAYS AND THE ROADS.
UM, AND REALLY THAT THIS IS JUST, UH, AHEAD OF THE GAME.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS REGULATING PLAN THAT'S COMING DOWN THE ROAD.
WE'LL FIGURE OUT ALL THE DETAILS LATER.
AND THAT'S REALLY BEEN THEIR POSITION IS, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA DO ALL THE PLANNING THAT THIS, YOU KNOW, REQUIRES, BUT WE'LL JUST LIKE KICK THE CAN, BUT WE'LL JUST BUILD THIS ONE FACTORY FIRST.
WE CAN'T TELL YOU WHO OR WHAT OR WHY OR WHAT ARE WE'RE GONNA DO THERE, BUT WE JUST NEED TO GO AHEAD AND, AND GET THIS DONE, AND THEN WE'LL DO THE PLANNING LATER FOR EVERYTHING ELSE.
UM, AND SO, YEAH, SO THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THE ANNEXATION AGREEMENT, UM, THAT HAPPENED ON THE 21ST WAS SIGNED, AND THEN THERE'S THESE REGULATING PLANS THAT COME LATER.
UM, AND THEN THERE'S THE TS THAT, UH, THE COUNTY DECIDED NOT TO VOTE TO PARTICIPATE TODAY.
UM, AND THEY'VE SAID THAT THE ENTIRE, UH, ANNEXATION AGREEMENT, UM, DEPENDS ON THAT PASSAGE OF THE TURS, THE FUNDING MECHANISM FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE THEY HAVE PLANNED.
UM, SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A REALLY PREEMPTIVE, I MEAN, SO IF, YOU KNOW, ON THE 23RD, IF THE CITY VOTES NOT TO GO FORWARD WITH THE TURS AND THEY'RE LIKE, BOOM, HEY, WHERE'RE JUST ANNEXED.
WELL, UH, THEN YOU JUST GAVE AWAY SOME OF THE COUNTY'S ROADS TO, UH, WE DON'T KNOW.
THE LAND ALSO HASN'T CHANGED HANDS YET.
THEY HAVEN'T EVEN SOLD THIS 300 ACRE TRACK LIKE THE SITE, SITE PLAN, THE PREP.
THEY WON'T SAY WHAT IT'S FOR, THEY KNOW, BUT THEY'RE UNDER NDA AS MANY OF CITY STAFF ARE.
SO THEY WON'T SAY WHAT IT'S FOR, BUT THEY WANT YOU TO START GIVING UP ROADS, UM, THE CITY RIGHT AWAY, WHICH WE JUST GOT.
UM, AND SO MAYBE JUST LIKE WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE TOURS PASSES, UM, TO START GIVING AWAY ROADS AND RIGHT AWAYS AND ACCESS, UM, BECAUSE A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT
SO, UM, YEAH, JUST LIKE HOLD OFF A LITTLE BIT, SEE WHAT HAPPENS, AND, UH, MAYBE DO THE PLANNING
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS BEATRICE ANDERSON.
BEATRICE, YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES.
UH, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY.
UM, KIND OF ECHOING WHAT CAMERON SAID, I I THINK THIS IS PREMATURE AND I REALLY JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO KIND OF TAKE A STEP BACK.
UM, WHILE WE ARE FOCUSING ON THE RWS SPECIFICALLY TODAY.
UM, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO IGNORE THE CONTEXT WHICH THIS IS, UH, WHICH THESE ARE COMING UP UNDER, WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH, UH, AS IMPORTANT CONTEXT, THE CITY COMPLETELY SIDESTEPPED ALL OF THE COMMISSIONS, INCLUDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS PUT TOGETHER.
SO THE PLANNING OF THIS ENTIRE SITE, WHICH IS LARGER THAN DOWNTOWN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOWNTOWN AND CAMPUS BETWEEN MOPAC AND 35, IS AN ENORMOUS SITE.
UM, I, I THINK IT REQUIRES MORE FORWARD PLANNING RATHER THAN THEM COMING TO YOU WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH WAS PUT TOGETHER BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, AND NOW ASKING YOU TO VACATE THESE RIGHT OF WAYS FOR, UH, THEIR FIRST TENANT WHO THEY ARE RUSHING INTO THE SITE, WHICH, AS CAMERON SAID, MIGHT NOT EVEN GO THROUGH.
IF THEY DON'T GET THE FUNDING MECHANISM FOR THIS, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THIS TENANT WALKS AWAY.
SO AS THEY AS CAME UP AT THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION MEETING ON THE SEVENTH, UM, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY GOING TO, ARE WE GOING TO NEED TO PUT THESE STREETS BACK? IT'S, WE DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A WASTE OF RESOURCES AND POTENTIALLY THE CITY GIVING UP THESE STREETS AND THEN HAVING TO REBUILD THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, IF
[00:55:01]
THIS TENANT WALKS AWAY.SO I THINK THIS IS PREMATURE BECAUSE THERE'S TOO MUCH, UH, WITH THIS PLAN THAT IS JUST NOT FINALIZED YET.
AND THEY HAVE, AGAIN, THE WHOLE RUSH ON THIS PROJECT IS BECAUSE OF THIS ONE TENANT.
SO WHEN YOU HAVE SO MUCH RIDING ON WHETHER OR NOT, WHETHER OR NOT THEY DECIDE TO WALK AWAY, AND IF THEY WALK AWAY, WHETHER OR NOT DOG'S HEAD WALKS AWAY FROM THE AGREEMENT AND DOES ANNEXES ITSELF, I JUST THINK THERE'S TOO MUCH, UH, THAT IS, UH, UNCERTAIN AT THIS POINT TO BE MAKING THESE SORTS OF PLANNING DECISIONS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE ASKING YOU TO MAKE THEM NARROWLY LOOKING AT JUST THESE SPECIFIC RIGHT OF WAYS RATHER THAN TAKING A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO FORMING A BETTER PLAN FOR THE SITE OVERALL, WHAT GIVEN ITS IMPORT AND ITS SIZE.
UM, SO I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO, UH, NOT, UH, UH, YEAH, NOT APPROVE THESE, UH, RIGHT OF WAYS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS ELIZABETH LEVINS.
ELIZABETH, YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES.
UM, AS I WAS THINKING ABOUT WHAT TO WRITE TONIGHT, I WAS THINKING, WHAT DOES THE PLANNING COMMISSION CARE ABOUT? WELL, THEY CARE ABOUT GOOD PLANNING.
SO I'M A RESIDENT ON THE DOG'S HEAD.
UM, I'M, I'M A PHYSICAL THERAPIST.
I DON'T WORK IN THE CITY, OBVIOUSLY, I'VE, BUT MY, UH, I'VE SPENT THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS ATTENDING MEETINGS, READING PLANNING DOCUMENTS, AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE VISION FOR THIS AREA.
AND THE MORE THAT I LEARN, THE MORE I KEEP COMING BACK TO ONE QUESTION.
IS THIS ACTUALLY GOOD PLANNING? GOOD PLANNING DOESN'T JUST CREATE NEW NEIGHBORHOODS.
GOOD PLANNING DOESN'T FORCE RESIDENTS TO FIGHT FOR INFORMATION.
IT INVITES THEM INTO THE PROCESS BEFORE DECISIONS ARE MADE.
AND GOOD PLANNING DOESN'T ASK US TO COMMIT TO INFRASTRUCTURE BEFORE WE FULLY UNDERSTOOD THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS, AND THE LONG-TERM COSTS.
I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO STOP GROWTH.
I'M ASKING YOU TO INSIST ON BETTER GROWTH, GROWTH THAT RESPECTS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY LIVING THERE.
GROWTH THAT PROTECTS ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LAND, INSTEAD OF TREATING IT AS VACANT SPACE, WAITING TO BE, WAITING TO BE DEVELOPED.
GROWTH THAT GIVES EQUAL WEIGHT TO PUBLIC BENEFIT AND NOT JUST PRIVATE INVESTMENT.
AS SOMEONE WHOSE HOME IS DIRECTLY AFFECTED, I CAN TELL YOU THAT THIS PROCESS HAS OFTEN FELT BACKWARDS.
RESIDENTS HAVE HAD TO CHASE DOWN INFORMATION DOWN INSTEAD OF BEING BROUGHT INTO THE CONVERSATION.
THAT ISN'T HOW PLANNING SHOULD WORK.
PLANNING IS ABOUT THE NEXT 50 YEARS, NOT THE NEXT MEETING.
PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO MAKE SURE THIS PROJECT REFLECTS AUSTIN'S VALUES OF TRANSPARENCY, ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP, AND COMMUNITY CENTERED PLANNING BEFORE IT MOVES FORWARD.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION IS GARRETT TONGUE.
GARRETT, YOU'LL HAVE FOUR MINUTES.
UM, MY NAME IS GARRETT TONGUE.
UM, IT SEEMS WILDLY PREMATURE TO ME.
GIVE UP CITY INFRASTRUCTURE FOR WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY ONE OF THOSE LIKE SCAMMY MYSTERY BOXES.
YOU KNOW, LIKE WE DON'T KNOW WHO IS GOING TO USE THE LAND.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S GOING TO BE USED.
THEY RULED OUT A DATA CENTER FOR THE FIRST TENANT, BUT THEY HAVE NOT RULED OUT A DATA CENTER FOR, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT, UM, DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA.
THE CITY AND DEVELOPERS BYPASSED YOUR COMMISSION WHEN THEY PASSED THE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
I, I THINK SEEDING THIS RIGHT AWAY IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE TO BEING BYPASSED FOR THE NEXT 45 YEARS.
WE SHOULD BE WELL INFORMED OF THE FACTS BEFORE ACTING.
THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE CITY SHOULD SERVE THE CITIZENS AND NOT CORPORATIONS.
PLEASE POSTPONE VACATING THIS RIGHT AWAY UNTIL WE HAVE THE FULL SCOPE OF THIS PROJECT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP AT THIS ITEM AND WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A TOTAL OF FOUR MINUTES FOR A REBUTTAL.
I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
[01:00:01]
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.MOTION TO BE MOTION BY COMMISSIONER AHMED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROJAN.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, THAT ITEM PASSES.
WE'LL MOVE INTO OUR ROUND ROBIN.
SO EIGHT COMMISSIONERS AT FIVE MINUTES EACH.
WHO WOULD LIKE TO START US OFF? COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, GO AHEAD.
UH, I'M NOT SURE THAT I HAVE A FULL FIVE MINUTES, BUT I'LL, I WILL START THINGS OFF.
I GUESS THESE QUESTIONS ARE FOR CITY STAFF, UH, FOLKS WHO GAVE THE PRESENTATION FROM RIGHT OF WAY AND MAYBE TRANSPORTATION OF IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT WE, UH, ARE ASKED TO DO RIGHT OF WAY VACATION.
SO I FOR I NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT OF WHEN THE CITY, UH, GIVES UP THIS RIGHT OF WAY.
HOW IS THAT LAND VALUED AND, AND WHAT DOES COMPENSATION LOOK LIKE? UM, FOR OUR PROCESS OF RIGHTAWAY VACATION, A THIRD PARTY APPRAISER IS ENGAGED BY THE OFFICE OF REAL ESTATE.
THE APPLICANT IS GIVEN A CHOICE BETWEEN A 30 DAY OR A 60 DAY APPLICATION OR APPRAISAL TIMEFRAME, DEPENDING ON THEIR DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE.
THEY CHOOSE THAT THEY'RE QUOTED, APPRISED TO ENGAGE THE APPRAISER.
UH, AND THEN THE APPLICANT REIMBURSES THE CITY TO DO THAT.
THE THIRD PARTY APPRAISER THEN COMES BACK WITH A FAIR MARKET VALUE OF BEST USE FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THAT AMOUNT IS GIVEN TO THE APPLICANT WHO THEN TRADITIONALLY PAYS THAT AMOUNT BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL FOR A VOTE.
AND THAT WOULD BE TRUE FOR BOTH TRACKS AS IT WERE FOR, UH, EDWIN AND THE HERZOG TRACK, RIGHT? IS THAT RIGHT? EDWIN AND, EXCUSE ME, RAMIREZ, UH, HER, HER, NO HERZOG, EDWIN, HER GOTS HER GOTS AND EDWIN.
IN, IN THIS PARTICULAR RIGHT OF WAY VACATION SITUATION, ACCORDING TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, UH, AS AGREED UPON BY COUNCIL, INSTEAD OF PAYING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE, THEY WOULD DEDICATE RIGHT OF WAY BACK TO THE CITY IN THE EQUAL AMOUNT OF THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE VACATED RIGHT OF WAY.
THEY WOULD JUST DEDICATE IT BACK WHEN THEY DO THEIR, UH, REDEVELOPMENT.
UNDERSTAND THAT OF MAYBE A BIT BIT MORE TECHNICAL QUESTION IN TERMS OF REMOVING THESE STREETS FROM THE STREET NETWORK OF, DID THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, UH, GATHER EXISTING TRAFFIC DATA AND UNDERSTAND THE TRAVEL PATTERNS ON THESE ROADWAYS TODAY? GOOD EVENING CHAIR, VICE CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
I'M OPAL BUA, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, AUSTRIAN TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
UH, CURRENTLY AS A DEPARTMENT WE ARE WORKING ON THESE PARTICULAR ROADWAYS AND WORKING WITH, UH, THE DEVELOPER AND ALSO WORKING WITH OUR PARTNER AGENCIES SUCH AS, UH, CAP METRO AND PROJECT CONNECT TO LOOK INTO THE VARIOUS OPTIONS AND THE DETAILED ANALYSIS FOR THE FUTURE STREET NETWORK AT THIS POINT.
SO AT THIS POINT WE HAVE NOT LOOKED INTO THE DATA, THE TRAFFIC DATA, BUT WE ARE LOOKING INTO THE PROCESS AT THIS POINT.
SO JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT, SO THERE HAVE NOT BEEN ANY EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS OR TRIP GENERATION, UH, DATA AVAILABLE FOR THE EXISTING USES ON, UH, THESE ROADWAYS OR THE ROADWAY NETWORK OR HOW THEY MIGHT AFFECT, UH, EXISTING PROPERTIES? UH, THAT IS CORRECT, BUT AS WE ARE PLANNING INTO THE FUTURE ROADWAYS, THEY HAVE WAY MORE CAPACITY THAN THE ROADWAYS THAT WE ARE REMOVING.
UH, AS YOU LOOK INTO THE ROADWAY ALIGNMENTS THAT ARE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL CONNECTIVITIES THAT, UM, THAT IS GOING TO BE THERE FOR THE ENTIRE AREA.
I GUESS MY QUESTION IS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING OUT THERE TODAY AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THESE TRACKS ARE VACATED, THE RIGHT OF WAY IS VACATED, HOW DO THE PEOPLE WHO CURRENTLY USE THE, UH, THE REMAINING STREETS ON THE NETWORK, HOW ARE THEY IMPACTED? THERE ARE GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL STREET AROUND THAT PARTICULAR AREA THAT IS GOING TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE EXISTING LANDOWNERS OUT THERE.
SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT THESE STREETS WILL NOT BE VACATED UNTIL OF NEW ROADWAYS ARE CONSTRUCTED AND OPEN FOR THE USE? RIGHT NOW THERE IS A SAPIN APPLICATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL, AND AS SOON AS THE SAPIN IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED, THERE IS GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL CONNECTIONS INTO THAT PARTICULAR AREA THAT IS GOING TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO, TO THE AREA.
[01:05:04]
SO THESE STREETS CANNOT BE VACATED UNTIL THE NEW ROAD.NEW ROADWAYS ARE COMPLETE AND USABLE.
THE ROADWAYS ARE GOING TO BE VACATED IF IT IS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.
CAN THE ROADWAYS BE VACATED WITHOUT REPLACING THEM WITH THE NEW ROADWAYS THAT ARE ON THIS, UH, CONCEPT PLAN? UH, THAT, THAT, THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS OFTEN.
UM, AS WE VACATE RIGHT AWAY FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS, THE NEW NEW DEVELOPMENTS COME IN AND AS PART OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, THE NEW DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTS NEW ADDITIONAL CONNECTIONS AND ROADWAYS IN THE AREA.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU IF YOU HEARD, BUT YOU ARE OUT OF TIME, BUT I IMAGINE SOMEONE ELSE MAY PICK UP ON YOUR LINE OF QUESTIONING.
I'M GONNA TRY AND FOLLOW, UM, HER LINE OF QUESTIONING.
SO, UM, FOR CONNECTIVITY FOR THE FOLKS THAT LIVE IN THE AREA, UH, WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU SAYING IS THAT CLOSURE VACATING THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND IF FOR SOME REASON IN A, IN A SEPARATE IT WOULD HAVE, YOU KNOW, THESE DEVELOPMENTS HAPPEN OVER MULTIPLE PHASES.
SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT 10 YEARS AFTER THE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS, THEN THE, THE OTHER RIGHT OF WAY WOULD BE ADDED.
SO IS IS IT SEEMS VERY INDUSTRIAL.
ARE THERE ANY PRIVATE PROPERTIES OR HOMEOWNERS OR RESIDENCES IN THE AREA THAT ARE USING THIS, THESE OTHER CONNECTIONS? OR IS IT NOT A BIG DEAL TO VACATE THESE CONNECTIONS? 'CAUSE WE IMAGINE AUSTIN, ONE OF THE TENANTS OF IMAGINE AUSTIN IS COMPACT AND CONNECTED CITY, AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CONTINUING TO KEEP PEOPLE CONNECTED.
UH, SO COMMISSIONER, JUST TO CLARIFY, AS WE ARE GOING TO VACATE THE RIGHT OF WAY, THERE IS A SITE DEVELOPMENT UNDER REVIEW RIGHT NOW, AND AS PART OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT, THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO CONSTRUCT NEW STREET CONNECTION.
I JUST WANTED TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
UM, YES, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY OR ADDITIONAL STREET CONNECTIONS THAT ARE PROBABLY GONNA HAPPEN IN THE, IN THE DISTANT FUTURE, AND THOSE ARE GONNA BE PART OF THE FUTURE PHASES OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK, I MEAN, WE WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE UNDER, I MEAN, IT MAKES ME FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WOULD BE A DIRECT EXCHANGE FOR EQUIVALENT AMOUNT OF RIGHT OF WAY AS LONG AS THAT CONNECTION IS CONTINUING TO HAPPEN.
SO CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IF I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, THAT THERE WILL BE A SITE PLAN THAT WILL CONTINUE TO CONNECT NEIGHBORS, RESIDENCES, COMMERCIAL USES IN THE AREA.
UM, AND THE VACATION OF THIS RIGHT OF WAY WILL NOT IMPEDE THOSE CONNECTIONS.
UH, THAT IS CORRECT, COMMISSIONER.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
UM, I WANNA FOLLOW ALONG THAT LINE OF, UH, THINKING, AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UM, IF THIS DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT GO THROUGH AND, UM, AND THE APPLICANT, UH, IS UNSUCCESSFUL IN, IN, IN BRINGING THE DEVELOPMENT TO THIS AREA, AND, UH, WOULD THEY STILL BE REQUIRED TO, UM, UH, TO DEDICATE AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF RIGHT OF WAY TO THE CITY? SO COMMISSIONER, WHEN WE CONSIDER A PARTICULAR RIGHT OF WAY VACATION, WE LOOK INTO THE INTENT OF THE RATIFICATION.
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IN THE CITY, WE HAVE AN ACTIVE SITE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
SO AS WE LOOK INTO THE CASE TODAY, WE LOOK INTO THAT PROPOSAL THAT WE ARE REVIEWING RIGHT NOW, IF THAT IS GONNA HAPPEN, NOT HAPPEN, THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE BEYOND OUR CONTROL.
SO RIGHT NOW, OBJECTIVELY SPEAKING, LIKE WE HAVE THAT SITE PLAN UNDER REVIEW, WE HAVE THAT, UH, NEW STREET CONSTRUCTION PLAN UNDER REVIEW, AND THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE CONSIDER WHEN CONSIDERING THE RATIFY APPLICATION APPLICATIONS.
UM, I'M SAYING, UH, LET'S JUST SAY THAT THE DEVELOPER GOES BELLY UP AND THIS DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T HAPPEN.
WE'VE ALREADY, UH, DEDICATED THE RIGHT OF WAY OR WE'VE, UH, VACATED THE RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, UH, DOES THE CITY HAVE A MECHANISM TO, UH, REGAIN OR, OR REDEDICATE OR, OR GET THE STREETS BACK IF, IF THE DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT GO THROUGH, IF SOMETHING HAPPENS TO THE DEVELOPER, IF, IF THE CLIENT PULLS OUT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IS THERE A WAY THAT THE CITY, UH, COULD GET THOSE STREETS BACK WITHOUT HAVING TO, UM, ESSENTIALLY PURCHASE 'EM? WE HAVE AN APPROVED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER AND THAT IT STATES THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL NEED TO
[01:10:01]
DEDICATE EQUAL AMOUNT OF RIGHT OF WAY TO THE CITY FOR FUTURE STREETS THAT IS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.AND WE WOULD, AND, AND AS THE CITY, WE WOULD HAVE SAY OF, OF WHERE THAT RIGHT OF WAY HAPPENS, UH, THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
I NEED TO LOOK INTO THE DETAILS OF ALL THE CLAUSES IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, BUT THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
I'M ASKING BECAUSE I THINK WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF RESIDENTS TODAY COME OUT AND SAY THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED THAT IF THIS DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT GO THROUGH, IF SOMETHING HAPPENS, UM, UM, AND THERE AND THERE'S NO SUPPORT FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, IT DOES NOT HAPPEN.
IF WE'VE GIVEN THESE STREETS AWAY, WOULD WE THEN GET THE STREETS BACK AS PART, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THERE IS GOING TO BE ADDITIONAL RIGHT AWAY FOR ADDITIONAL ESTATE CONNECTION.
UM, EQUIVALENT TO THAT, IF WE VAC IT THE RIGHT OF WAY, WE VAC IT THE RIGHT OF WAY, WE DON'T OWN THE RIGHT OF WAY ANYMORE.
AND AS PART THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO DEDICATE EQUAL AMOUNT OF RIGHT OF WAY TO THE CITY.
AND WE, AND I'M I'M ASKING DO WE HAVE A HAND IN WHERE THAT GOES OR WE DON'T.
THEY COULD DEDICATE US A A SQUARE OF RIGHT.
THAT IS GOING TO BE IN THE FUTURE STREET CONNECTION THAT WE ARE PLANNING RIGHT NOW IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
SO WE ARE GOING TO GET THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS NEEDED FOR FUTURE CONNECTIVITY IN THE AREA.
CAN WE PUT THE PRESENTATION BACK UP ON THE SCREEN AND LEMME SEE IF I CAN FIND THE NETWORK.
SO THIS IS THE ROADWAY PLAN THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
IT INCLUDES A REROUTE OF OTTS IN THE INTERIM BEFORE THE ROADS ARE BUILT, THERE ARE STILL WAYS FOR THE FOLKS THAT LIVE, OH, I THINK ABOUT A MILE AWAY OVER ON ERGOTS LANE.
THERE ARE OTHER WAYS FOR THEM TO GET OUT AND THEN AS PART OF THE YELLOW THAT YOU SEE THERE, THE NEW ROADS WILL BE, WILL BE ROUTED AROUND IT.
UM, LET ME THINK OF WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS YOU HAD.
YEAH, SO THEN THE, THE, THE SAFETY VALVE IS, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.
IF THE ROAD GETS VACATED AND THEN THE DEVELOPER GOES BELLY UP, HOW DO YOU GET THE ROAD BACK? HMM.
WELL IT'S ONE OWNER OF 2,600 ACRES, SO THEY WOULD NOT, I GUESS THAT ONE OWNER WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RUN THE RECLAMATION AND DUMP TRUCKS THAT USE THIS ROAD ANYMORE AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO RIDE AROUND IT.
MR. SETTLE IS AGAIN MY TIME, SO SORRY.
UH, COMMISSIONER GANNON, YOUR TIME IS UP, BUT MR. SETTLE, DID YOU FINISH YOUR THOUGHT ON THAT? YEAH, I, I JUST WANT EVERYBODY TO LOOK.
THE, THE ROADWAY NETWORK HAS BEEN SET AND THESE ARE BIG ROADS.
UM, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER SMALLER ROADS THAT'LL COME OUT OF THIS.
THIS IS WHAT'S BEEN AGREED TO IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER AHMED? UH, SO THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL HURDLES THAT THIS PROJECT WILL BE GOING THROUGH.
WE'LL, WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING IT FURTHER, UH, IN PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, AND I KNOW THERE'S GONNA BE SOME IMPORTANT DISCUSSIONS IN CITY COUNCIL COMING UP.
SO GIVEN THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THESE STEPS STILL NEED TO BE TAKEN, WHY THE, AND AND I FEEL LIKE THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS SPOKEN TO, UH, BY LOT OF THE SPEAKERS HERE.
WHY THE URGENCY ON THESE VACATIONS? WHY NOT? IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE RELATIVELY QUICKLY, SO WHY NOT WAIT UNTIL YOU'RE ABLE TO PASS THROUGH SOME OF THESE OTHER MILESTONES BEFORE YOU REQUEST THIS? SO THERE ARE SEVERAL CONDITIONS, LET ME BACK UP.
WE'RE COMPETING FOR THIS PARTICULAR USER WITH ANOTHER STATE.
THERE ARE SEVERAL CONDITIONS THAT, THAT THEY NEED CLEAR BEFORE THEY MAKE THEIR DECISION.
WE'RE HOPING THEY MAKE THE DECISION AND STAY HERE.
THIS IS COMPLICATED BY THE FACT THAT, UH, WHILE THE CITY BECAME THE OWNER OF THE RIGHT OF WAY ON TOP, WHEN THEY ANNEXED IT, THE FEE SIMPLE BELOW STILL WILL, WILL STILL BELONG TO THE COUNTY UNTIL THE COUNTY RELEASES THEIR RIGHT OF WAY.
SO WE'RE GOING IN THE SEQUENTIAL STEPS.
THE COUNTY WANTS US TO RELEASE IT FROM THE CITY FIRST BEFORE THEY TAKE IT UP AT THE COUNTY.
AND THIS IS ALL DONE IN CONNECTION WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, ROADWAY PLAN,
[01:15:02]
THE STREET VACATION, AND THE TURS.SO WE'RE WORKING SEQUENTIALLY TO TRY TO KEEP THIS USER ON THE HOOK.
NOW, NOT A CONCERN OF YOURS, BUT IT, IT IS OF INTEREST.
THIS IS A USER THAT OTHER STATES ARE OFFERING MAJOR INCENTIVES TO LURE THEM TO IT.
THEY CAME TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND IT'S TOUGH TO GET AN INCENTIVE DEAL FROM CITY OF AUSTIN, BUT THE CITY SAID, WE WILL MOVE YOU THROUGH THE PROCESS QUICKLY.
AND THEY SAID, WELL, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN THAT IS OUR INCENTIVE TO STICK WITH YOU AND TRY TO MAKE THE DECISION TO STAY HERE.
SO WE'VE GOT, WE WE'RE TRYING TO HONOR OUR AGREEMENT WITH THE USER TO GO FAST, AND THEN WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO HONOR THE PROCESS OF SEQUENCING AND KNOCKING THINGS OUT, ROAD, VACATIONS, TOURS, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
SO THESE VACATIONS ARE ESSENTIALLY BOTTLENECK TO MOVING THINGS AROUND.
THEY ARE ALONG WITH, UH, THE PARTICULAR, UH, TENANT THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND KEEP IN MIND WHAT THIS IS OUT HERE IS THIS IS A, A MAJOR RECLAMATION SITE.
IT'S BEEN MINED FOR SAND AND GRAVEL FOR 50 YEARS.
AND WHEN YOU GO OUT THERE, YOU GOTTA BE CAREFUL, YOU'LL GET, YOU GOTTA DODGE THE DUMP TRUCKS AND THE BIG EQUIPMENT MOVING AROUND BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON.
IT'S, IT'S BEING RECLAIMED EVERY DAY AS WE SPEAK.
WE GOT LUCKY COM, THE CONVENTION CENTER DIGGING A BIG HOLE, THE DIRT'S GOING OUT THERE FILLING IN HOLES.
WE GOT LUCKY WITH THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT BUILDING THE BIG TUNNEL AND BUILDING THE HIGHWAY AND WE'RE, WE'RE ACTUALLY TAKING THE DIRT.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF DIRT MOVING ACTIVITY OUT THERE.
AND THESE ROADS WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT THE CONNECTIVITY STAYS BECAUSE YOU GOTTA KEEP MOVING THOSE TRUCKS AROUND TOO.
IT, IT'S A, IT'S A THRESHOLD TO KEEP THIS POTENTIAL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER IAN, UH, QUESTION FOR TRANSPORTATION.
UM, IF, IF WE APPROVE THIS VACATION, THIS GOES TO COUNCIL AFTER US, CORRECT? YES, COMMISSIONER.
I THINK IT GOES TO COUNCIL ON JULY 23RD, THE SAME DAY THAT TARS GOES TO COUNCIL.
IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES THIS, IF WE APPROVE THE VACATION AND COUNCIL DOES AS WELL, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT ROADWAY IN THE INTERVENING TIME BETWEEN NOW AND THE, AND THE POINT AT WHICH THAT DEVELOPMENT, THE ACTUAL PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT TAKES PLACE? AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION THAT ENCOMPASSES THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
SO FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT TO HAPPEN, WE NEED TO VACATE THE ROAD.
AND ONCE WE VACATE THE ROAD, THERE IS GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, THE, THE RIGHT OFFI THAT WE ARE GOING TO VACATE.
BUT AM I CORRECT THAT THE, THE CONSTRUCTION IS CONTINGENT UPON THE TENANT THAT, UH, MR. SU IS MENTIONING ACTUALLY SIGNING THE DEAL AND COMING TO AUSTIN? CORRECT.
AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THE STIPEND THAT WE ARE REVIEWING IT.
IT INCLUDES THE VACATED AREA IN THE, UH, IN THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION, IT IS CONTINGENT ON THE RATIFY VACATION.
AND SO THE DAY AFTER COUNCIL AGREES TO THE VACATION, IS THAT ROADWAY BLOCKED OFF FOR USE BY THE RESIDENTS OF THAT AREA? POTENTIALLY.
UM, AND AS FAR AS THE, THE TIMING, YOU SPOKE TO IT EARLIER, IS THERE ANY, ARE THERE ANY, IS THIS SOLELY TO APPEASE THE TENANT OR ARE THERE ANY ASPECTS TO THE PLANNING PROCESS THAT REQUIRED THIS TO BE DECIDED ON TONIGHT? IT, IT HOLDS UP A FINAL APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN BECAUSE THE SITE PLAN STRETCHES OVER THIS ROAD AND IN, IN TERMS OF THE OTHER FOLKS THAT ARE USING THIS ROAD, UM, WE CAN PULL THE EXHIBIT UP AGAIN, THE FOLKS THAT MIGHT USE THIS ROAD, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY DO OR NOT.
I'VE GOT OTHER OPTIONS, MULTIPLE OPTIONS FOR CONNECTIVITY.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER BRETON.
OKAY, SO I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
SO AS I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS PROCESS, UH, AS THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE TALKED TO AT LENGTH, I'M GONNA TRY AND STATE IT CLEARLY FOR EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM SO THAT IT'S UNDERSTANDABLE.
SO IF WE MOVE FORWARD AND APPROVE THIS AND COUNSEL MOVES FORWARD AND APPROVES THIS AS WELL, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER PIECES CONTINGENT TO GETTING THE DEVELOPMENT DONE AND THAT INCLUDES PEOPLE WE CAN'T CONTROL, RIGHT.
THE POTENTIAL, UH, TENANT THAT WILL BE A PART OF THIS, BUT ALSO THE
[01:20:01]
COUNTY ALSO SOME OTHER, UH, PIECES HERE LIKE THE REGULATING, I GUESS I SHOULDN'T SAY THAT WE, WE CAN CONTROL THAT, THAT'LL COME TO US LATER.UM, THAT IS THAT STEP, IF WE GO THROUGH WITH VACATING THIS RIGHT OF WAY THE COUNCIL APPROVES IT, IT CAN POTENTIALLY BE BLOCKED OFF.
IT MAY NOT BE, IT MAY BE, BUT REGARDLESS, THERE ARE OTHER CIRCULATION OPTIONS IN THIS AREA FOR PEOPLE MAKING THEIR WAY THROUGH.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND WHETHER THE TENANT OR THE USER SHOWS UP OR NOT UNDER THE ROADWAY PLAN THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL, THIS ROAD WILL WILL COME OUT AND ANOTHER ROAD WILL BE BUILT.
AND SO, UH, AS I UNDERSTOOD, UH, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, DIRT BEING MOVED IN THIS AREA AND THESE ROADS CURRENTLY ALLOW FOR THAT INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY TO GET THROUGH, WHETHER THAT'S A DUMP TRUCK OR WHATEVER ELSE.
UH, WOULD YOU EXPECT THAT THAT RIGHT OF WAY MAY BE BLOCKED OFF FOR, UH, OTHER USES? SO IT'S ONLY FOR THOSE USES? OR WOULD THAT HA MAYBE POTENTIALLY WAIT UNTIL CONSTRUCTION HAPPENS AROUND THIS SITE? I'M GONNA GO OUT ON A LIMB AND SAY THAT ONCE THIS IS VACATED, THAT ROAD PROBABLY WON'T BE THERE ANYMORE AND IT BECOMES PART OF THE SITE THAT YOU SAW ON THAT DIAGRAM.
AND THAT WOULD HAPPEN VERY SOON AFTERWARDS AS A PART OF MAYBE, UH, TO STATE THIS.
YES, I'M SEEING SOME NODS BACK THERE.
YEAH, I JUST WANT, I GET DOWN ON A LIMB HERE, I GOTTA THE GUY THAT OWNS THE 2,600 ACRES GOTTA GIMME THE NOD.
UH, I MIGHT STATE THIS, UH, AS I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR, UH, EXPLANATION OF THIS, IT'S REAL HARD TO REEL IN A FISH ALL AT ONCE.
UH, IT TAKES STEPS AND STEPS AND THERE IS STILL, IT SEEMS A LAYER OF THE COUNTY WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY UNDER THE CITY AND THIS RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THERE'S STILL STEPS TO BE MADE AFTER POTENTIALLY COUNSEL EITHER APPROVES OR DENIES THE REQUEST.
IF THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN, WHETHER WE DENY THIS REQUEST OR COUNSEL DENIES THIS REQUEST OR FURTHER ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE WAY THINGS WORK OUT, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN ANYMORE.
IT SEEMS LIKE IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THERE IS THE AGREEMENT THAT IF THIS DOESN'T GO THROUGH RIGHT OF WAY WOULD BE VACATED TO THE CITY.
IS THAT CORRECT? PROBABLY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THE CITY WOULD DELIVER A BILL TO US FOR THE VALUE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AND SAY, IF YOU'RE NOT GONNA BUILD THE ROAD BACK, THEN WE WANT OUR MONEY.
THAT'S PRACTICALLY HOW IT WOULD HAPPEN.
AND SO THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE CHOICE OF BUILDING AN EQUIVALENT AMOUNT OF RIGHT OF WAY SOMEWHERE IN THE SITE REPLACING THE ROADS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST IF THEY DON'T EXIST IN THE FUTURE OR PROVIDING THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY BACK TO THE CITY.
IS THAT CORRECT? AND IT'S PROBABLY BUILD THE ROAD ACCORDING TO THE PLAN THAT'S ALREADY APPROVED OR PAY US THE MONEY.
IT'S PROBABLY HOW IT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
UM, I THINK THAT THIS IS A WONDERFUL EXAMPLE OF HOW CONVOLUTED EVERYTHING IS
THIS IS, UH, ONE OF MANY STEPS WHICH MAKE IT VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO GET SOME THINGS DONE.
THAT'S, AND I, I THINK THE KEY IS THERE'S STILL CONNECTIVITY EVEN AFTER THIS ROAD IS VACATED.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? UM, YEAH, JUST A COUPLE QUICK ONES HERE.
SO I KNOW MR. SETTLE, THAT YOU'VE HAD EXPERIENCE WORKING ON OTHER BIG DEVELOPMENTS AND I KNOW THAT ENDEAVOR, THE CLIENT HERE HAS ALSO DONE SOME ROADWAY VI VACATIONS LIKE THIS ARE NOT UNCOMMON WHEN YOU GET INTO LARGE ACREAGES, PARTICULARLY THINGS THAT MIGHT BE REPURPOSED.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
THIS 2,600 ACRES HAS VERY, VERY LITTLE INFRASTRUCTURE ON IT.
THERE'S JUST A, A FEW ROADS, NOT GREAT ONES, UM, TO REPLAN IT AND REIMAGINING IT.
OFTEN WE HAVE TO UNDO MISTAKES THAT WERE MADE IN THE PAST AND PUT ROADS WHERE THEY NEED TO BE, NOT WHERE THEY WERE.
YEAH, I MEAN I GUESS I THINK THE EXAMPLE I WAS THINKING OF WAS MILLER AND MAYBE COLONY PARK BOTH HAD SITUATIONS LIKE THIS WHERE WE HAD TO DO VACATE VACATIONS BEFORE WE COULD ACTUALLY START THE PLANNING BECAUSE THAT'S A PREREQUISITE OF ACTUALLY MOVING FORWARD WITH THE FULL RE-IMAGINING.
AND THEN I'M ALSO CURIOUS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS HAS BEEN MOVING QUICKLY, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE YOU ALL HAD IDENTIFIED THESE PARTICULAR ROADWAYS AS ISSUES EVEN AS YOU STARTED TO TALK TO THIS POTENTIAL CLIENT AND AS THE DEVELOPMENT MOVE FORWARD THAT THESE, WHERE THESE WERE LOCATED WAS SORT OF A ROADBLOCK, GENERALLY SPEAKING TO REIMAGINING THIS SITE.
[01:25:01]
BECAME AN ISSUE AT THE VERY DAY ONE AND IT'S, THAT'S IT'S BEEN PART OF THE PROCESS SINCE DAY ONE.SO I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THAT YOU ALL KNEW THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GONNA THE RIGHT OF WAY VACATION WAS KIND OF A KEY ISSUE THAT YOU ALL IDENTIFIED FROM THE GET GO? YES.
AND THAT WOULD BE, WOULD YOU SAY THAT'S REGARDLESS OF THE CLIENT OF THEIR INTEREST? YES.
SO JUST GENERALLY REDEVELOPING IS GOING TO REQUIRE THIS RIGHT OF WAY YES.
SO EVEN IF YOU CAME BACK, IF THIS USER GOES AWAY, WE STILL WANNA REROUTE THE ROADS PURSUANT TO THE PLAN THAT'S BEEN APPROVED AND FREE UP THIS SITE FOR THIS, THIS DEVELOPMENT SITE.
AND THEN, UM, I THINK RELATED TO THAT, WE'VE SEEN THE ROADWAY MAP AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME CONVERSATIONS ABOUT FLEXIBILITY RELATED TO THAT.
SO THE FINAL VERSION OF THE ROADWAYS MAY STILL CHANGE IS, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THERE WERE SOME FLEXIBILITY EVEN, BUT THIS IS SORT OF THE ROADBLOCK WE HAVE TO GET THROUGH FIRST BEFORE WE CAN START TO TALK ABOUT WHAT'S NEXT? YES, YES.
AND THEN THE FINAL QUESTION THAT JUST RELATED TO THAT IS, UM, WHAT IS THE TIMELINE EXPECTED ON SORT OF CONSTRUCTION IN AND AROUND THIS AREA? YOU KNOW, SAY POTENTIALLY THE CLIENT DOES COME IN AND THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY, HOW LONG WOULD WE EXPECT THAT AREA TO BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION? BUT THEN THERE WOULD ALSO BE FURTHER PHASES AFTER THAT, CORRECT? YES.
UM, TELL ME YOUR QUESTION AGAIN.
OH, JUST, I WAS JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE TIMING RELATED SPECIFICALLY TO THE, YOU KNOW, THIS INITIAL GROUP COMING IN THAT THAT CONSTRUCTION WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE THE KEY POINT TO BEGIN WITH, BUT THEN THERE WOULD BE FUTURE PHAGES OF CONSTRUCTION AFTER THAT AS WELL, CORRECT? YES.
SO WE MIGHT ACTUALLY SEE SOME CONSTRUCTION THERE.
WE WOULDN'T HAVE A LONG PERIOD I THINK OF QUESTION.
THE QUESTION WAS IF WE'D HAVE A LONG PERIOD OF INACCESSIBILITY AND NO CONSTRUCTION, I THINK IS WHAT I NO, YOU, YOU'LL HAVE ACCESSIBILITY EVEN AFTER THE ROAD IS GONE BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER ROADS THAT CONNECT, BUT YOU WILL SEE ACTIVITY VERY QUICKLY, VERY QUICKLY.
THANKS COMMISSIONER MAXWELL, OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH QUESTIONS? ANY COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO TAKE A SECOND ROUND OF QUESTIONS? WE HAVE ONE MORE SLOT.
COMMISSIONER BREIRA RAMIREZ, DID YOU HAVE A, A FOLLOW UP? YEAH, GO AHEAD.
IT'S, IT'S ABOUT BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY.
I THINK I SAW ON THE MAP THAT YOU SHOWED THERE ARE A COUPLE OF BRIDGES OVER THE RIVER.
WILL THEY HAVE ACCOMMODATING ALL MODES FOR CROSSING? THOSE ARE IN THE PLANNING STAGES AND OF COURSE THAT WILL BE IN THE DISCUSSION AND OF, AND I'M GUESSING THERE WILL BE MULTIMODAL BRIDGES IF THE BRIDGES OCCUR.
BECAUSE I THINK I SEE THREE THAT'S THAT'D BE GREAT FOR THE CONNECTIVITY.
THANKS COMMISSIONER BARRER RAMIREZ.
WE ARE ALL OUT OF QUESTION SLOTS, ASSUMING WE DON'T WANT TO TAKE A VOTE TO EXTEND QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, DID YOU HAVE, DID YOU HAVE ONE MORE ROUND THAT YOU WANTED TO GET THROUGH? I, I STILL HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS.
I'M STILL RECOGNIZE WITHOUT OBJECTION.
I THINK WE CAN TAKE A NINTH SLOT.
I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, WHEN I LOOK AT THE ADJACENT ROAD NETWORK AND LOOKING AT THESE, THESE ROADS, IT'S ESSENTIALLY A LOOP TODAY AND WE'RE ASKING TO, UH, CLOSE OFF THAT LOOP SO THAT THE REMAINING ROADWAYS OF WILL BE A DEAD END.
AND THEN I LOOK AT THE, I CAN'T TELL BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE EXHIBIT IS THE NEW ROAD NETWORK, BUT IT'S NOT OVERLAID ON THE EXISTING ROAD NETWORK.
BUT I SEE AN ENCLAVE OF WHAT APPEAR TO BE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES OF AT THE BACK OF THIS.
AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THEY CAN ACCESS, UM, OR HOW THEY MAINTAIN ACCESS.
UM, OTHER SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SPOKE TO THIS BEFORE OR EARLIER, THIS IS ALL FLOODPLAIN AND I'VE, I'VE PERSONALLY DRIVEN THESE ROADS AND I KNOW THAT WHEN FLOODING DOES OCCUR, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF SHALLOW FLOODING OUT THERE.
SO I'M WANTING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE CITY AND THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT HAVE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE FOLKS WHO USE THIS NETWORK TODAY WILL STILL BE ABLE TO GET OUT OF WHEN ONLY HALF OF IT REMAINS.
I KNOW WHEN THE FUTURE NETWORK IS BUILT, BUT WE ARE BEING ASKED TODAY TO VOTE ON, UH, TO ABSOLUTELY VACATE THIS RIGHT OF WAY THAT IT'LL BE GONE AND THEN IT'LL BE, UH, MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS SITE PLAN, WHICH I HAVEN'T SEEN.
SO HOW, HOW DO THE FOLKS THAT ARE USING THE EXISTING ROADWAYS, AND I'M TRYING TO TOGGLE BETWEEN EXHIBITS HERE, UH, RAMIREZ AND HERZOG, SO THE NORTH, THE NORTH LIMIT OF RAMIREZ RIGHT BEFORE IT TURNS FROM GOING PLUS OR MINUS NORTH SOUTH,
[01:30:01]
ASSUMING THIS EXHIBITS, WELL, IT'S NOT PLAN NORTH OF HOW DO THE FOLKS THAT ARE THERE THAT ARE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES OF HOW DO WE KNOW ONCE WE START TEARING UP THESE ROADS, NEXT TIME IT FLOODS, THEY CAN STILL GET TO THEIR PROPERTY? I GUESS THAT'S FOR STAFF, THE PEOPLE THAT CAN SEE THE SITE PLAN.WHEN WE DID OUR ASSESSMENT DURING THE VACATION PROCESS, WE IDENTIFIED THAT EVEN IF WE VACATE THESE STREETS, THERE ARE GOING TO BE WAYS FOR THE EXISTING RESIDENTS TO ACCESS THEIR RESIDENTS.
DID YOU, UH, DID YOU LOOK AT THE EXISTING FLOODING CONDITIONS ON THOSE ROADWAYS TO DETERMINE WHAT FLOOD EVENT THEY WOULD HAVE ACCESS THOSE? I'VE GOTTEN STUCK OUT HERE BEFORE MYSELF IN A FLOOD
YES, THERE ARE FLOOD ISSUES CURRENTLY AT THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION AND EVEN THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT WE ARE VACATING, THOSE ALSO PROBABLY GET FLOODED DURING THE, DURING A FLOOD EVENT.
SO THIS IS AN EXISTING CONDITION THAT EXISTS TODAY.
I'M SURE I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME.
COMMISSIONER ONE, ONE THING THAT COMMISSIONER, ONE THING THAT MAY GIVE YOU SOME, SOME ASSURANCE, WE HAVE SITE PLANS IN FOR PATENT, WHICH WILL BRING THAT, IMPROVE THAT ROAD OUT OF THE FLOOD PLAIN OR CLOSE.
AND, UH, SOON TO FOLLOW WILL BE SITE PLANS AND CONSTRUCTION FOR DALTON AS WELL.
SO OVERALL, THE, THE ACCESS WILL IMPROVE FOR EVERYBODY OUT THERE, BUT THERE'S JUST, THERE'S NOT THAT MANY PEOPLE ON THIS END THAT, THAT WE'RE AFFECTING.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, THE, THE ANSWER TO YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS THAT THERE ARE FLOOD CONDITIONS TODAY ON THE ROADS THAT ARE BEING VACATED.
IS THAT CORRECT? UH, THAT'S CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER OR CHAIR? COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, DO YOU WANNA, I MEAN, OBJECT HERE, BUT DO YOU HAVE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS? WELL COUNT.
COUNCIL AMINA, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, A POINT OF ORDER.
MADAM CHAIR, I THINK, UH, THE CURRENT SPEAKER HAS NOT BEEN RECOGNIZED AND I'M, I'M GONNA JUST HAND IT BACK TO COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE TO DIRECT HER QUESTION TO WHOEVER SHE WOULD WISH TO.
I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION AND THEN I'LL, I'LL STOP.
UH, IS A BIT THAT YOU CAN TELL I'M FRUSTRATED BECAUSE WE'RE BEING ASKED ESSENTIALLY TO TRUST THIS AND THAT THE ROAD NETWORK, WHICH HAS BEEN APPROVED IN A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY COUNCIL IS A SORT OF A DONE DEAL AND THAT THERE'S A SITE PLAN PROCESS OCCURRING.
BUT IT FEELS TO ME THAT WE'VE NOT DONE DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT USE THE ROAD TODAY, OTHER THAN JUST BEING TOLD IT WILL BE BETTER THAT, UH, THAT THERE WON'T BE DAMAGED BY THIS, UH, VACATION.
YOU KNOW, THE, THE FOLKS THAT ARE USING THE REMAINING ROADS TODAY.
AND I, IT IS, UH, AND I, AND I KNOW THAT IT, THEY ALL FLOOD, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE FACT THAT IT'S A LOOPING ROADWAY MEANS THAT IF ONE HALF IS FLOODED, FOR EXAMPLE, THE ROAD THAT'S BEING VACATED OR THE THE ROAD THAT REMAINS, YOU CAN GET OUT THE OTHER WAY.
AND I DON'T HAVE ANY REAL SENSE THAT THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT HAS, NOBODY'S TOLD US EXACTLY WHAT THE TRIP GENERATION TODAY IS OR HOW, YOU KNOW, WHO'S USING IT.
IT HASN'T BEEN PREPARED FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS YET.
THANKS, COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, THAT'S YOUR TIME.
SO WE WILL MOVE INTO OUR ROUND.
WE'LL WRAP UP OUR ROUND ROBIN AND MOVE INTO MOTION AND DEBATE.
I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION FROM THE COMMISSION ON THIS ITEM, VICE CHAIR HANEY.
I, UH, MOVE TO PROPOSE, UH, TO APPROVE STA STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR A SECOND.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
VICE CHAIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? I THINK, UH, WE'VE HAD AMPLE DISCUSSION THIS EVENING.
UM, AND I, I KNOW THAT, UH, THIS IS ONE OF PERHAPS HUNDREDS OF, UH, STEPS, UH, IN GETTING THIS LAND DEVELOPED.
UM, I THINK, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT LAYS OUT, UH, THE, THE PLANNED ACCESS FOR THIS ROAD.
I'VE PERSONALLY DRIVEN, UH, THESE ROADS, UH, THAT ARE, I GUESS CONSIDERED TWO LANES, BUT VERY NARROW, TWO LANE ROADS.
UH, I'VE SEEN THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE REPLACED WITH TWO AND THREE LANE ROADS ON EACH SIDE.
SO I THINK THE CITY'S GOING TO BE GETTING, UH, MORE THAN, UH, MORE THAN ENOUGH TO OFFSET THE VALUE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT THEY'RE GIVING
[01:35:01]
UP.COMMISSIONER, SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION COMMISSIONER AHMED? YEAH, I'D SAY I'M ON THE FENCE WITH THIS, BUT MY CONCERN IS NOT NECESSARILY WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY REQUEST ITSELF, BUT JUST WITH THE TIMING OF IT, UH, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE WITH A LOT OF UNCERTAINTIES RELATED TO THIS PROJECT, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS THE TIME YET.
UH, AND THERE ALSO SEEMED TO BE A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY ON WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THIS RIGHT OF WAY GOES THROUGH AND THEN THERE ARE, UH, ISSUES WITH THE DEVELOPMENT NOT HAPPENING.
ARE YOU WISHING TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM? LET ME THINK ABOUT THAT.
UH, OTHER COMMERS SPEAKING FOR THE MOTION COMMISSIONER BRETON.
SO, UH, I THINK AS HAS BEEN STATED BY COMMISSIONER HANEY, BY CHAIR HANEY, UH, THIS IS ONE IN A NUMBER OF STEPS TO ACTUALLY SEEING SOMETHING CHANGE.
I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THE MAP AND I DON'T SEE ANY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES OFF OF ACCESS TO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES OFF OF EITHER OF THESE RIGHT OF WAYS AND THE EXTENT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO US AND THE CITY HAS WALKED THROUGH, AND I HAVE SEEN THE REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED AS BACKUP WHERE ALL OF OUR CITY DEPARTMENTS HAVE LOOKED THROUGH, OR AT LEAST THE ONES THAT ARE A PART OF THE REVIEW TO SAY YES OR NO.
UM, THERE WAS SOMETHING MENTIONED IN THERE ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY FOR VEHICLES TO TURN AROUND AT SOME OF THESE DEAD ENDS.
IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'VE BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE LANDOWNER TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THOSE RIGHT OF WAYS ARE VACATED AND REMOVED AND ACCESS IS GONE, THAT THAT WILL BE, YOU KNOW, PLANNED FOR.
SO GIVEN AS COMMISSIONER MAXWELL HAS MENTIONED THAT THIS IS ONE OF THE STEPS TO ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THIS LAND HOLISTICALLY AND GETTING A BETTER CIRCULATION PLAN AND BETTER USE, WHERE THE CONCESSION THAT IS BEING MADE IS ACTUALLY US GETTING PROPERTY TAX AND RESIDENTS GETTING AMENITIES AND BETTER FACILITIES.
I'M SUPPORTING THIS OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION, MOTION.
COMMISSIONER SKIDMORE, I, I'LL SPEAK BRIEFLY AGAINST THE MOTION AND JUST CLARIFY WHERE I STAND ON THIS.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE VACATION OF RIGHT OF WAY.
I MEAN, IN MY PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE, I KNOW WE DO THIS FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS OF MY DEEP FRUSTRATION.
AND MY PROBLEM WITH THE TIMING IS THAT OF WE'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE THIS VACATION, UH, SORT OF AFTER, UH, QUOTE UNQUOTE PLANNING THIS SORT OF REGULATING OR THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
AND I HAVE AM FRUSTRATED THAT, UM, BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT AND THE WEALTH OF THE POTENTIAL OWNER, THAT EVERYBODY IS, UH, ESSENTIALLY TREATING THEM DIFFERENTLY THAN SOMEBODY WHO'S JUST TRYING TO GET THEIR SMALL REGULAR SITE APPROVED FOR THE CITY.
AND, UH, AND THAT JUST REALLY, REALLY FRUSTRATES ME DEEPLY, IS THE ORDER OF OPERATIONS FOR THIS.
I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CARRYING COMING FORWARD WITH THE REGULATING PLAN FOR THIS, BUT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO ESSENTIALLY APPROVE, UH, A DEED TRANSACTIONS TO GIVE AWAY LAND OR SELL LAND.
AND FOR THOSE REASONS, I'M JUST, UH, UNCOMFORTABLE WITH APPROVING IT AT NIGHT.
OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING FOR THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER MAXWELL? UM, YEAH, I THINK I WOULD ALSO JUST POINT OUT TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THAT THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, THE UTC, REVIEWED THIS IN DETAIL THAT IS ACTUALLY THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE.
IT WAS APPROVED, UH, LIKE I BELIEVE WE HEARD ALMOST UNANIMOUSLY.
AND I DO WANNA SAY THAT THERE'S AN UNDERSTANDING THAT VACATIONS HAPPEN REGULARLY.
I KNOW THAT THE TIMING OF THIS ONE MAY SEEM A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER, BUT I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A, I HAVE A LOT OF FAITH IN OUR, IN OUR CITY STAFF AND THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW TO MAKE SURE THAT BOTH, ALL THE CONTINGENCIES ARE CONSIDERED AND THAT THERE IS SORT OF A PROCESS FOR BOTH IF THE DEVELOPMENT MOVES FORWARD AND IF IT DOES NOT.
AND I THINK MORE GENERALLY, I'M EXCITED ABOUT WHAT COMES NEXT ABOUT IF WE DO THIS, WHAT WE GET TO AS A RESULT, WHICH SEEMS LIKE NOT ONLY BETTER ROADS, BUT A BETTER PLAN FOR THE DOG'S HEAD AREA.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING AGAINST THE MOTION.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR HANEY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON ITEMS 17 AND 18.
[01:40:04]
AND AGAINST AND ABSTAINING.OKAY, SO THAT ITEM PASSES 7 1 1.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS WHO WERE HERE THIS EVENING TO THE APPLICANT AND TO MR. TINOS FOR HELPING US WALK THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
[PERMANENT COMMITTEE UPDATES ]
PERMANENT COMMITTEE UPDATES, STARTING WITH THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE.UH, OUR NEXT MEETING IS ON AUGUST THE 19TH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE.
UH, THAT COULD BE COMMISSIONER AHMED.
YEAH, THERE ARE NO UPDATES RIGHT NOW.
THE LAST MEETING WAS CANCELED, SO IT WON'T BE FOR A WHILE THAT WE MEET AGAIN.
JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE.
COMMISSIONER BRETTON, CAN YOU PROVIDE UPDATES FOR US? NO UPDATES AT THIS TIME.
AND SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO OUR NEXT MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 9TH.
[WORKING GROUP UPDATES ]
GUIDE? URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES UPDATE WORKING GROUP? UM, I BELIEVE THAT THE WORKING GROUP IS GONNA START MEETING PROBABLY NEXT MONTH.UM, WE'LL MOVE ON TO FUTURE AGENDA
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ]
ITEMS. I'M GOING TO PLACE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM OR LOOK TO PLACE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM, UM, ON OUR NEXT AGENDA, WHICH IS GONNA BE THE, THE APPROVAL OF OUR ANNUAL INTERNAL REVIEW.CAN I GET A SECOND FOR THAT, PLEASE? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MAXWELL.
OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION? OKAY.
SEEING NONE, I WILL ADJOURN THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 7:49 PM THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH.