[00:00:02]
[CALL TO ORDER]
ORDER THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION.WE ARE AT AUSTIN CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, ROOM 1001.
I WILL START WITH THE ROLL CALL CHAIR.
I AM PRESENT VICE CHAIR BETSY GREENBERG.
PRESENT PARLIAMENTARIAN ALEJANDRO FLORES.
LET'S SEE, DAVID? UH, LONNIE STERN.
DO NOT SEE CHRISTIAN AND TAYLOR PRESENT.
I THINK HE IS TRAVELING TODAY.
WE HAVE EIGHT PRESIDENT, THREE ABSENT.
UH, WE WILL GO TO, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION GENERAL? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
WE HAVE NINE PRESENT AND THREE VACANT.
UM, ANY COMMENTS? ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? NO CHAIR.
[Consent Agenda]
MINUTES.ANY COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES FROM TUESDAY, JULY 7TH? HEARING NONE WILL INCLUDE THOSE IN CONSENT.
AGENDA ITEM TWO IS A REZONING CASE C 14 20 25 DASH ZERO EIGHT AND NINE AT 1120 AND 1122 SOUTH CAPITAL TEXAS HIGHWAY.
IT IS A REZONING CASE FROM LO AND LR TO L-R-V-C-O DB 90.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND IS SET FOR A DISCUSSION ITEM ITEM THREE IS A REZONING CASE, C 14 20 26 DASH 0 0 3 2.
IT'S A CITY INITIATED REZONING OF JIMMY CLAY GOLF COURSE IN ROY KAISER GOLF COURSE.
IT IS A, UM, QUEST IS TO GO FROM SF THREE AND DR TO P PUBLIC.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM FOUR IS A REZONING CASE, C 14 20 26 DASH 0 0 4 4.
A CITY INITIATED REZONING OF 58 0 7 ROSS ROAD, THE DELL VALLEY FOOD CO-OP.
UM, IT IS A REZONING FROM SS SIX TO LR.
STAFF RECOMMENDS LR WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY IS IN THE BACKUP AND THAT IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
ITEM FIVE IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SPC 2026 DASH 0 0 7 6 A AT 72 21 MCNEIL.
AGAIN, IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, UM, FOR A COCKTAIL LOUNGE IN CS ONE ZONING.
IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, SO WE HAVE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM JULY 7TH.
ITEMS THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE ARE ALL CONSENT APPROVAL BASED ON STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND A CO.
FOR ITEM FOUR, BASED ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND THE BACKUP.
DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? DO YOU WANNA READ CHAIR? WE DID HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP ON THE CONSENT AGENDA ON ITEM FOUR.
CHRISTOPHER, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
MY NAME IS CHRISTOPHER REYES AND I'M A FOUNDING BOARD MEMBER OF THE DELL VALLEY GROCERY CO-OP.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE REZONING OF THE ROSS ROAD PROPERTY.
FOR YEARS, DEWALI RESIDENTS HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NEED FOR BETTER ACCESS TO FOOD, HEALTHY FOOD, AND AFFORDABLE FOOD CLOSE TO HOME.
AND THE DE VALLEY FOOD CO-OP IS A COMMUNITY LED EFFORT TO DO JUST THAT.
THIS PROJECT IS TO HELP BRING GROCERIES AT AN AFFORDABLE PRICE TO THE AREA THAT HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN A FOOD DESERT.
AND WE WOULD REALLY LIKE YOUR SUPPORT IN HELPING THIS HAPPEN.
THE REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY IS AN IMPORTANT STEP TOWARDS MAKING THAT POSSIBLE.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COMMISSION TO SUPPORT THE REZONING AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
AND IT IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
OKAY, ANY MOTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND.
[2. Rezoning: C14-2025-0089 - 1120 and 1122 S Capital of Texas Highway; District 8 ]
IN CASE C 14 20 25 DASH 0 8 9 11 20 11 22 SOUTH CAPITAL TEXAS HIGHWAY, WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT.GOOD EVENING, BEVERLY ELA WITH AUSTIN PLANNING.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO ON YOUR AGENDA CASE.
[00:05:03]
FOR 11 20 11 20 AND A HALF AND 1122 SOUTH CAPITAL OF TEXAS HIGHWAY.THE SUBJECT TRACKS ARE APPROXIMATELY 15 AND A HALF ACRES AND ARE CURRENTLY ZONED LR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND LO LIMITED OFFICE AND ARE DEVELOPED WITH OFFICES AND A PARKING GARAGE.
THE REQUEST IS TO ZONE THE PROPERTY L-R-V-C-O DB 90 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL VERTICAL MIXED USE BUILDING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY DENSITY BONUS 90, COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING FOR A PROPOSAL OF A MIXED USE PROJECT, POTENTIALLY ACCOMMODATING APPROXIMATELY 475 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, OFFICE AND RETAIL SPACE.
THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WOULD PROHIBIT SERVICE STATION USE.
SURROUNDING ZONINGS INCLUDE LR MF ONE C-O-L-O-N-G-O TO THE NORTH LR NGO TO THE SOUTH WESTLAKE HILLS, ETJ TO THE EAST AND CITY OF AUSTIN.
ETJ HOUSE BUILT 30 53 TO ANNEXATION AND IRR TO THE WEST.
THE SUBJECT TRACKS ARE ADJACENT TO LOSS CREEK BOULEVARD AND A SMP LEVEL THREE AND SOUTH CAPITAL OF TEXAS HIGHWAY AND A SMP LEVEL FIVE REGIONAL MOBILITY ROADWAY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR LRVC DB 90 COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING BECAUSE IT ALIGNS WITH COUNCIL ADOPTED GOALS BY PROVIDING AN AVENUE FOR MORE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND INCREASED AFFORDABILITY IN A PART OF TOWN WHERE BOTH ARE CURRENTLY SCARCE.
THE PROPOSED ZONING WILL ALSO UNIFY BOTH SUBJECT TRACKS UNDER ONE CONSISTENT ZONING DESIGNATION, WHICH WILL OFFER MORE OPTIONS FOR REDEVELOPMENT.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT.
LEAH BOJO WITH RENER GROUP HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TONIGHT.
I AS, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THIS IS AN ITEM THAT WAS BEFORE YOU, UH, IN APRIL.
UM, SO I'M GONNA JUST TRY TO GO THROUGH THE HIGHLIGHTS.
UM, AND OF COURSE LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I'LL TRY TO GO EFFICIENTLY.
UM, AND THE, THE REAL SUMMARY HERE IS THAT, UM, THIS IS A, A, AN EXISTING OFFICE, COUPLE OF EXISTING OFFICE BUILDINGS IN A SEA OF SURFACE PARKING.
UM, WE ARE LOOKING TO REZONE THEM TO NOW LR DB 90 TO DO A MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND WHILE THIS IS A PART OF TOWN THAT DOES NOT HAVE GREAT TRANSIT, IT IS ALSO A PART OF TOWN THAT DOES NOT HAVE GREAT AFFORDABILITY OR GREAT HOUSING DIVERSITY OPTIONS.
UM, AND IT'S FINALLY, IT'S A PART OF TOWN THAT IS IN ONE OF THE BEST SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE COUNTRY.
UM, AND SO I THINK ACCESS IN A PLACE LIKE THIS IS ACTUALLY PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT, EVEN MORE SO THAN IN OTHER CASES.
UM, I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE, UM, THERE ARE SOME USES.
THEY ARE NOT SAFELY WALKABLE OR BIKEABLE, BUT THERE THERE IS A MIX OF USES NEARBY.
THERE'S A GROCERY STORE, THERE'S A FOUR MINUTE DRIVE, THERE'S A PHARMACY, THERE ARE RESTAURANTS THERE, THINGS LIKE THAT CLOSE BY.
UM, THIS IS AGAIN, KIND OF ZOOMED IN JUST TO SHOW YOU WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHAT'S ON THE SITE TODAY.
UM, AND THIS IS A MAP TO SHOW YOU JUST SORT OF WHAT'S NEARBY, WHICH SIDE OF WE ARE ON THE WEST SIDE OF CAPITAL OF TEXAS.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT MOST OF THE AREA TO THE WEST HAS BEEN TO SANEX ALREADY.
UM, AND UM, THEN YOU CAN SEE KIND OF THE, UM, THE WAY THIS, THE OFFICE IS SITUATED OFF OF THE 360.
UM, AND SO I WILL GO QUICKLY THROUGH THESE SLIDES.
UM, SO THERE IS LR ON THE SITE TODAY.
THERE'S JUST A COUPLE OF LITTLE, I THINK PROBABLY OLD PAD SITES THAT WERE THERE.
UM, WHEN WE ORIGINALLY CAME IN FOR LO, WE WERE LOOKING AT TO TRY TO KIND OF MINIMIZE THE CHANGE TO THE AREA, KEEP IT LO JUST ADD DB 90 AND MAKE IT CONSISTENT.
UM, WHAT WE HAVE, UM, SORT OF EVOLVED TO AT THIS POINT NOW IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO, IN THE INTERIM PERIOD, WE'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PUT A SMALL COFFEE SHOP OR BAKERY ON THE SITE.
UM, SO THIS WOULDN'T BE A FULL REDEVELOPMENT, WHICH MEANS WE WOULDN'T HAVE THAT USE, EVEN THOUGH THAT USE WILL BE AVAILABLE THROUGH DB 90.
IT'S NOT AVAILABLE UNTIL YOU DO THAT PROGRAM.
SO THIS IS SORT OF AN INTERIM VERSION OF THIS KIND OF A PHASING, UM, THAT WE WOULD, WHICH IS WHY WE'VE UPDATED OUR REQUEST TO LR.
UM, IT'S LIKE ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME EXCEPT FOR THESE FEW USES RIGHT HERE.
UM, I MEAN IT'S VERY, VERY SIMILAR.
SO, UM, IT HEIGHTS THE SAME IMPERVIOUS COVERS THE SAME, THE WAY IT WORKS WITH DB 90 IS THE SAME.
SO IT REALLY IS JUST ABOUT THESE COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL USES THAT WE WOULD HAVE IN THE INTERIM.
UM, I ALSO WANNA POINT OUT THAT IN OUR MANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORS, UM, WE HAVE HEARD A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT, UM, OTHER CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS HAPPENING AT THE SAME TIME.
SO IF WE WERE ABLE TO USE THE SITE A LITTLE BIT MORE EFFECTIVELY IN THE MEANTIME, IT MIGHT GIVE US A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY ON THE, ON THE REDEVELOPMENT TIMELINE.
SO THAT IS ALL THE THINGS I SAID.
SO THIS IS JUST TO REMIND YOU OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
UM, OF COURSE IMAGINE AUSTIN SUPPORTS MIX OF USES, VARIETY OF HOUSING, Y'ALL KNOW ALL THAT STUFF.
AND OBVIOUSLY THE, I'M GONNA REMIND YOU OF THIS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
UM, THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT, YOU KNOW, PUBLISHES THESE UPDATES AND WHAT I THINK IS NOTABLE THAT I POINTED OUT BEFORE IS WITH, WITH A FEW MINOR EXCEPTIONS, AS YOU MOVE FROM
[00:10:01]
EAST TO WEST, THE THE AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT'S BEEN PRODUCED GOES WAY DOWN.LIKE WE ARE NOT GOOD AT PUTTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING ABOUT INCENTIVIZING AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON THE WEST SIDE.
UM, AND SO THAT'S, I THINK ALL THE MORE REASON THAT A SITE LIKE THIS, MAYBE IF IT'S, EVEN IF IT'S NOT A PERFECT SITE, REALLY IS AN IMPORTANT PLACE FOR, UM, THAT KIND OF AFFORDABILITY.
UM, AND THEN I WILL AGAIN REITERATE THAT INS ISD, THIS IS NOT JUST LIKE GOOD SCHOOLS VERSUS MEDIUM SCHOOLS, LIKE INS ISD IS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT MORE PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO WITHOUT HAVING TO BUY A MILLION DOLLAR HOME.
UM, IT IS LIKE HEAD AND SHOULDERS ABOVE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
IT'S, IT'S A PRETTY INCREDIBLE PLACE AND UM, IT'S REALLY HARD TO GET YOUR KID IN THERE UNLESS YOU HAVE THE MEANS TO AFFORD A VERY EXPENSIVE HOME.
UM, THIS IS, THAT MEANS ISD THIS IS JUST SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNDARY LOOKS LIKE.
UM, I DID TALK ABOUT THIS BEFORE.
I KNOW WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT'S COMING, BUT THERE IS A PLAN FOR A SHARED USE PATH THAT WOULD COME WITH IMPROVEMENTS TO 360.
SO I DO THINK THE FUTURE OF THIS SITE IS GONNA GET BETTER THOUGH I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT GREAT TODAY IF YOU'RE NOT IN A CAR.
UM, AND THEN THIS IS HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY.
UM, I KNOW THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THOSE INTERACT AND SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT WE STILL WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO THE ROADWAY VEGETATIVE BUFFER PART OF THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY.
SO THIS ISN'T LIKE ON, I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL, 360 IS KIND OF NOT A STANDARD HIGHWAY LIKE YOU WOULD THINK OF.
AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE ARE STILL, UM, REGULATIONS THAT WOULD PROVIDE A STEP BACK THERE.
AND WITH THAT I WOULD REQUEST YOUR SUPPORT AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR, ASHLEY FISHER.
ASHLEY WILL BE JOINING US VIRTUALLY.
ASHLEY, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
WE'LL NOW BE HEARING FROM THOSE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION, STARTING WITH OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, SCOTT SMITH.
SCOTT, YOU WILL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE LOSS CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
FIRST, I WANT TO THANK, UH, THE CHAIRMAN AND THE COMMISSIONER FOR ALL THE TIMES, UH, THAT YOU'VE DEVOTED TO OUR CASE AND FOR LISTENING CAREFULLY TO BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.
WE'VE EVEN HAD SOME ONE-ON-ONE MEETINGS AND PHONE CALLS THAT HAVE BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL.
UH, LET ME BEGIN BY MAKING ONE POINT VERY CLEAR.
THIS IS NOT A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER AUSTIN NEEDS MORE HOUSING.
AUSTIN ABSOLUTELY NEEDS ADDITIONAL HOUSING.
THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS WHETHER THIS PARTICULAR ZONING REQUEST REPRESENTS SMART GROWTH AND WHETHER IT ADVANCES THE PUBLIC PURPOSE THAT JUSTIFIES GRANTING SUBSTANTIALLY GREATER DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS UNDER DB 90.
COMMISSIONER STERN SUMMARIZED THE ISSUE VERY WELL DURING PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS WHEN HE DESCRIBED IT AS A QUESTION OF HOUSING SUPPLY VERSUS SMART GROWTH.
I BELIEVE THAT DISTI DISTINCTION IS EXACTLY RIGHT.
ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS BY ITSELF DOES NOT NECESSARILY CREATE MEANINGFUL AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUCCEEDS WHEN RESIDENTS HAVE ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT, GROCERY STORES, SCHOOLS, PARKS, AND TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS THAT REDUCE THE COST OF DAILY LIVING.
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS SITE OFFERS VERY LITTLE OF THAT.
RESIDENTS HERE WILL REMAIN OVERWHELMINGLY DEPENDENT ON AUTOMOBILES BECAUSE THERE IS NO MEANINGFUL TRANS, UH, TRANSIT CONNECTION, NO WALKABLE ACCESS TO DAILY SERVICES AND VERY LIMITED ALTERNATIVES TO DRIVING WITHOUT THAT CONNECTIVITY.
THE PROJECT RISK BECOMING AN ISOLATED RESIDENTIAL ENCLAVE RATHER THAN THE COMPLETE COMMUNITY ENVISIONED BY AUSTIN'S PLANNING POLICIES.
THAT MATTERS BECAUSE DB 90 REPRESENTS A PUBLIC BARGAIN, THE CITY GRANTS ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, DENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT FLEXIBILITY IN EXCHANGE FOR A MEANINGFUL PUBLIC BENEFIT.
IF THE PUBLIC BENEFIT IS LIMITED TO THE MINIMUM AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS WHILE THE PROJECT RECEIVES SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, THEN WE SHOULD ASK WHETHER THE EXCHANGE TRULY FULFILLS THE INTENT OF THE PROGRAM.
THERE IS ANOTHER CONCERN CREATED BY THE REVISED ZONING REQUEST.
THE APPLICATION NOW SEEKS L-R-V-C-O DB 90 ZONING ACROSS THE PROPERTY, EXPANDING THE RANGE OF COMMERCIAL USES BEYOND THE EARLIER PROPOSAL, THE APPLICATION PROPOSES 475 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON APPROXIMATELY 15.5 ACRES AND ALLOWS BOTH MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL USES WITHIN THE LR ZONING DISTRICT.
THOSE ADDITIONAL PERMITTED USES ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE EVERY NEW COMMERCIAL USE HAS THE POTENTIAL TO GENERATE ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS.
YET THE SURROUNDING ROADWAY NETWORK IS ALREADY ONE OF THE MOST CONSTRAINED IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN.
RESIDENTS EXPERIENCE DAILY CONGESTION AND DIFFICULT TRAVELING TRA EXCUSE ME, DIFFICULT TURNING MOVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF LOSS CREEK BOULEVARD AND, UH, CAPITAL TEXAS HIGHWAY.
ADDING TO THE BROADER RANGE OF PERMITTED COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES COMBINED WITH NEARLY 500 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UH, RAISES LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS ABOUT CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC IMPACTS.
THESE QUESTIONS DESERVE CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, PARTICULARLY SINCE THE APPLICATION INDICATES THAT NO TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED.
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER A WAIVER WAS APPROPRIATELY GRANTED UNDER CITY PROCEDURES, THE PRACTICAL REALITY REMAINS THAT THIS INTERSECTION ALREADY EXPERIENCED SIGNIFICANT OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES.
[00:15:01]
WE ARE ALSO ASKING THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE PRECEDENT THIS CASE ESTABLISHES.THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY CORRIDOR EXISTS FOR A REASON.
IT REFLECTS DECADES OF PLANNING INTENDED TO PRESERVE SCENIC CHARACTER, MANAGE BUILDING, MASSING, AND ENSURE THE DEVELOPMENT ALONG HIGHWAY 360 REMAINS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING ARE APPRO APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET TALL.
THE REQUESTED ZONING WOULD ALLOW SUBSTANTIALLY GREATER HEIGHT AND INTENSITY THAN WHAT EXISTS TODAY, WHILE ALSO INTRODUCING A BROADER RANGE OF LAND USES.
IF THESE ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS ARE GRANTED, THERE SHOULD BE AN ACCOMMODATING, THEY SHOULD BE ACCOMMODATED BY MEANINGFUL SAFEGUARDS THAT PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE HILL COUNTRY CORRIDOR.
THAT IS WHY WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT IF THE COMMISSION IS NOT PREPARED TO RECOMMEND DENIAL, IT STRENGTHENED THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
SPECIFICALLY, WE ASK THAT THE OVERLAY PRESERVE THE VISUAL CHARACTER OF THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY CORRIDOR THROUGH APPROPRIATE HEIGHT TRANSITIONS AND MASSING CONTROLS IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY WHEREVER FEASIBLE REQUIRE MEANINGFUL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS THAT ENHANCE SAFETY, STRENGTHEN LANDSCAPING AND OPEN SOURCE COMMITMENTS, OPEN SPACE COMMITMENTS, EXCUSE ME, AND ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC RECEIVES BENEFITS COMMISERATE WITH THE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS BEING GRANTED CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS.
I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU CONDITIONER OVERLAYS EXIST PRECISELY BECAUSE EVERY PROPERTY IS UNIQUE.
THIS PROPERTY DESERVES CONDITIONS TAILORED TO ITS LOCATION, ITS TRANSPORTATION CONSTRAINTS AND ITS IMPORTANCE ALONG ONE OF AUSTIN'S MOST RECOGNIZABLE SCENIC CORRIDORS.
FINALLY, I'D LIKE TO LEAVE YOU WITH ONE QUICK THOUGHT.
THIS DECISION IS NOT SIMPLY ABOUT ONE PROJECT.
IT'LL HELP DEFINE HOW AUSTIN BALANCES HOUSING PRODUCTION WITH THOUGHTFUL PLANNING.
IF MINIMUM AFFORDABILITY ALONE JUSTIFIES SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES IN HEIGHT AND INTENSITY REGARDLESS OF LOCATION OR CONNECTIVITY, THEN FUTURE APPLICANTS ALONG HIGHWAY 360 WILL UNDERSTANDABLY EXPECT SIMILAR TREATMENT.
BUT IF THE COMMISSION REINFORCES THAT DB 90 SHOULD PRODUCE BETTER COMMUNITIES, NOT SIMPLY MORE UNITS, THEN TODAY'S DECISION WILL STRENGTHEN AUSTIN'S LONG-TERM PLANNING GOALS.
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU EITHER DENY THE REQUESTED ZONING CHANGE OR RECOMMEND SUBSTANTIALLY STRONGER CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT BETTER FULFILLS THE INTENT OF DB 90 AND PRESERVES THE CHARACTER AND PLANNING OBJECTIVES OF THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY CORRIDOR.
THANKS SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MATTHEW BAREND.
MATTHEW WILL BE RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM WALTER RICHARDSON.
WALTER, ARE YOU PRESENT? MATTHEW, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
I'M A RESIDENT NEARBY THE CITY VIEW DEVELOPMENT AND I OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION.
THANKS FOR THE, UH, OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO EACH OF YOU TODAY.
AS WE ALL KNOW, AUSTIN IS RIDICULOUSLY EXPENSIVE TO LIVE.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S GOAL TO CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
HOWEVER, AS WE, AS WAS STATED BY ZAP COMMISSIONERS AT APRIL 7TH MEETING, THERE ARE MUCH BETTER PROJECT SITES THAT ACHIEVE THE CITY'S GOAL.
MY TESTIMONY IS TWO-PART TODAY AS I WILL OUTLINE THE PROBLEM WITH THE CITY VIEW SITE AND I WILL PROPOSE POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE SITES AS A SOLUTION.
CITY VIEW'S APRIL 7TH ZAP MEETING TESTIMONY WAS THAT THE CITY VIEW REDEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONNECTED TO THE HEB SHOPPING CENTER DOWN THE ROAD ONCE THE SHARED USE BIKE PATH IS CONSTRUCTED.
WE HAVE HAD NUMEROUS MEETINGS WITH TXDOT OVER THE, UH, RECENT MONTHS AND IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THERE WILL NOT BE A SHARED USE BIKE PATH ANYTIME SOON.
TDOT PUBLICLY RELEASED THEIR 2027 UNIFIED TRANSPORTATION PLAN ON JULY 1ST, 2026, AND THAT 360 EXPANSION PROJECT EXPANSION BETWEEN BK AND MOPAC IS STILL NOT IN THE 10 YEAR PLAN.
THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE DATE THAT THE LOOP 360 EXPANSION PROJECT WITH ITS SHARED USE BIKE PATH WILL BE COMPLETED IS 2046.
ASSUMING THE PROJECT IS IN NEXT YEAR'S 10 YEAR PLAN, THAT'S 20 YEARS FROM NOW.
UM, AS AS THE PREVIOUS ZAP MEETING ON APRIL 7TH, CITY VIEW'S REPRESENTATIVE DESCRIBED A FUTURE SHARED USE BIKE PATH IN THESE WORDS, AS SOON AS THE PATH IS IN, THERE'LL BE A LOVELY SIMPLE BIKE RIDE TO HEB UNTIL THE BIKE PATH IS COMPLETED.
THIS QUOTE, LOVELY, SIMPLE BIKE RIDE TO HEB WILL LIKELY RESULT IN DEATH.
UH, AS UNFORTUNATELY SEVERAL OF OUR FELLOW AUSTINITES HAVE DIED VIA BICYCLE VEHICLE OR MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENTS NEARBY.
I'VE INCLUDED PICTURES OF TWO SEPARATE, UH, BICYCLES FROM THE AUSTIN GHOST BIKE PROJECT PROVIDING A MEMORIAL OF A BICYCLIST KILLED NEAR 360 IN LOSS CREEK.
ADDITIONALLY, A REFERENCE TO THE VEHICLE FATALITY AT LOSS CREEK AND 360 AND A MOTORCYCLE FATALITY AT WEST BANK AND 360.
[00:20:01]
SORRY.THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE CITYVIEW REDEVELOPMENT MAKES ZERO SENSE TO REZONE INTO 475 APARTMENTS WHEN LOOP 360 WILL CONTINUE TO BE A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE FOR AT LEAST 20 MORE YEARS.
IN CLOSING, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE A STRONG RECOMMENDATION AGAINST THIS REZONING DEVELOPMENT DUE TO THE PROBLEMS WITH THE SITE.
THE QUESTION IS, WILL YOU MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION TO PRIORITIZE PUBLIC SAFETY OVER LINING THE POCKETS OF THE DEVELOPERS? AS I MENTIONED IN MY OPENING, I HAVE OUTLINED THE PROBLEMS WITH THE CITY VIEW SITE LOCATION, BUT I'LL NOW SHOW YOU POSSIBLE EXAMPLES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING SITES IN DISTRICT EIGHT.
UH, SITE ONE AS YOU CAN SEE IS, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
UH, I'VE COMPLETED RESEARCH ANALYZING THE METRO BUS, UH, ROUTES COUNCIL DISTRICT MAPS AUSTIN WIE MAP, AND THE TRAVIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT.
IDENTIFI IDENTIFIES SEVERAL POSSIBLE SITES.
SITE ONE IS 2224 WALL CHARLTON.
IT'S ON THE BARTON CREEK BUS ROUTE.
IT'S IN THE SISD, WHICH I KNOW IS IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE, UH, OR TO COMMISSIONERS.
UH, IT'S, AND PEOPLE IN GENERAL, IT'S THE WILDFIRE RISK IS MODERATE.
SITE NUMBER TWO ALSO IN S RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM THE OTHER ONE BARTON CREEK BUS ROUTE.
UH, THE WILDFIRE RISK IS ELEVATED.
SITE NUMBER THREE IS WILLIAM CANNON.
IT'S ON THE WILLIAM CANNON BUS ROUTE.
IT'S IN AUSTIN HIGH OR AUSTIN, ISD AUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL.
AND THE WILDFIRE RISK IS NONE.
EXAMPLE FOUR, AND THESE ARE ALL IN DISTRICT EIGHT BY THE WAY.
UH, EXAMPLE FOUR IS, UH, BASICALLY AT BOSTON LANE AND US TWO 90.
IT'S ON THE OAK HILL BUS ROUTE.
THERE'S NO FO UH, WILDFIRE RISK PER THE WEI MAP.
IT'S 73 38 WEST UNI, UH, WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90 OAK HILL FLYER BUS ROUTE AUSTIN HIGH, NO WILDFIRE RISK.
AND THE LAST ONE THAT SEEMS THE MOST OBVIOUS, UH, AS BUS HAS, HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED BY ZAP COMMISSIONERS IS TO DETERMINE HOW TO REPURPOSE THE BARTON CREEK MALL.
I OUTLINE HERE THE BLUE, THE BLUE SECTION'S, BASICALLY SIX ACRES OR FIVE ACRES.
OBVIOUSLY THE MALL'S A LOT LARGER THAN THAT, BUT, UH, THE POINT IS THAT, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF THE MODEL THAT WE ALL KNOW IS UNDERUTILIZED RIGHT NOW.
AND, AND I THINK IN MY OPINION, IT COULD BE REPURPOSED.
OBVIOUSLY DEVELOPERS HAVE TO FIGURE THAT OUT ON THEIR OWN.
SO I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, UH, TODAY, AND I ASK YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THE REZONING APPLICATION.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION IS BECKY BARON.
BECKY B BECKY WILL BE RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM DELVIN DUVAL DELVIN, ARE YOU PRESENT? BECKY, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
HELLO, MY NAME IS BECKY BARON.
UM, I'M A PRESIDENT OF LAS CREEK AND I'M HERE TO OPPOSE THIS APPLICATION.
MY HUSBAND AND I RECENTLY FINISHED WATCHING THE LINCOLN LAWYER AND IT'S A GREAT SHOW IF YOU NEED A GOOD SHOW TO WATCH.
BECAUSE OF THE LAST SAP MEETING BACK ON APRIL 7TH, IT REMINDED ME OF A COURT OF LAW, EXCEPT THERE WAS NO CROSS-EXAMINATION OR BURDEN OF PROOF.
I DID GO BACK AND RE-WATCH THE LAST SAP MEETING TWICE TO MAKE SURE I WAS REMEMBERING EVERYTHING CORRECTLY.
AND I WANTED TO THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT SOME IMPORTANT DETAILS THAT WERE MISSTATED.
IT WAS STATED THAT AT THE TIME THERE WERE ZERO APPLICATIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN DISTRICT EIGHT.
HOWEVER, PUBLIC RECORDS SHOW THAT, THAT THAT, THAT THE NER GROUP SUBMITTED A REZONING APPLICATION FOR CIRCLE C ON MAY 5TH, 2025 AND JUST GOT APPROVED ON MAY 5TH OF THIS YEAR.
MAYBE YOU DID NOT KNOW ABOUT IT, BUT IT DOES MAKE ME CURIOUS HOW MANY MORE APPLICATIONS FOR REZONING ARE CURRENTLY IN DISTRICT EIGHT IN REGARDS TO LOST CREEK, SEVERAL NEIGHBORS STATED CONCERNS ABOUT 360 BEING A DESIGNATED SCENIC HIGHWAY AS WELL AS LOST CREEK BEING IN A CERTIFIED DARK SKIES NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE DEVELOPERS ARE PROPOSING A 60 FOOT BUILDING TO GO ON THE CITY VIEW SITE AND IN OUR PREVIOUS MEETING IT WAS STATED THAT THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS ALREADY 60 FEET.
BASICALLY IMPLYING THERE WOULDN'T BE A SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT CHANGE.
I KNEW THE EXISTING BUILDING WAS NOT 60 FEET TALL, SO I WENT TO MEASURE IT AND IS ACTUALLY CLOSER TO 40 FEET.
THE PROPOSAL ALMOST DOUBLES THE HEIGHT OF WHAT IS THERE VALIDATING OUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE SHEER SIZE OF THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT CITY VIEWED AS OCCUPIED.
I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT ACCORDING TO JLL, CITY VIEW IS ONLY AT 36% OCCUPANCY.
I KNOW THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS AGAINST TRAFFIC CITIES, BUT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT DATA POINT.
A 36% OCCUPIED COMMERCIAL BUILDING IS SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN A 475 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING.
HERE ARE SOME PICTURES I TOOK OF THE CITY PARK CITYVIEW PARKING LOT AT 10:00 AM MONDAY MORNING.
ON ANOTHER NOTE, IT IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT I'M FROM HOUSTON WHERE THERE IS NO ZONING.
[00:25:01]
WE MOVED TO AUSTIN SEVEN YEARS AGO, OUR HOME IN HOUSTON WAS AROUND THE APART, UH, AROUND THE CORNER FROM APARTMENT COMPLEX.I DO NOT HAVE AN ISSUE WITH APARTMENTS.
THE ISSUE IS THE INGRESS AND EGRESS OF LOSS CREEK AND THE MASSIVE SIZE OF THE PRO'S DEVELOPMENT AT THIS LOCATION.
THE DOUBLE TURN LANE INTO LOSS CREEK ALREADY BACKS UP THE MAIN LANES AT DURING PEAK TIMES.
I CANNOT IMAGINE WHAT IS GOING TO BE LIKE WHEN THERE'S AN EXTRA 500 800 CARS MANEUVERING THAT SAME TURN EVERY DAY AND HAVING TO WAIT AT A LIGHT TO U-TURN.
WHILE IN HOUSTON, I WAS THERE FOR MULTIPLE FLOODS AND HURRICANES.
WE HUNKER DOWN FOR SOME AND EVACUATED FOR SOME.
IT IS TRULY HORRIFYING HOW QUICKLY THE ROADS GRIDLOCK DURING AN EMERGENCY EVACUATION, EVERYONE PANICS IN ITS PURE CHAOS.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MY HOME IN HOUSTON AND MY HOME IN LOCKS CREEK IS THAT IN HOUSTON I HAD MULTIPLE WAYS I COULD LEAVE MY HOME SAFELY AND EVACUATE IN THE EVENT OF DOWN TREES CONSTRUCTION, A TRAFFIC ACCIDENT OR A WEATHER EVACUATION IN LAS CREEK, LOST CREEK IS OUR ONLY MAJOR EXIT AND IS THE MAIN ARTERY FOR OUR 1200 HOMES.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT 360 IS BARELY A HIGHWAY.
ONE MINUTE YOU'RE GOING 60 MILES AN HOUR AND THE NEXT YOU'RE STOPPED AT A RED LIGHT.
THERE IS NO ACCELERATION LANES TO KEEP THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC MOVING AND T DOT NOTES THAT ARE INTERSECTION IS THE MOST DANGEROUS INTERSECTION ON 360.
BETWEEN THE HIGH VOLUME OF CARS AND CONSTANT RED LIGHT RUNNING, IT'S SCARY.
JUST RECENTLY ON JUNE 30TH, AT AND T WAS DIGGING AND CUT A HOLE IN A 10 INCH GAS PIPE, UM, TOWARDS THE ENTRANCE OF LAS CREEK BOULEVARD.
THIS EMERGENCY CLOSED LOST CREEK BOULEVARD COMPLETELY FOR 24 HOURS.
WHAT IF SOMETHING SERIOUS HAPPENED IN A SCENARIO LIKE A WILDFIRE? KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS A SUBURBAN AREA, NOT URBAN.
SPEAKING OF WILDFIRES, I WAS ABLE TO FIND THE WESTLAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT WILDFIRE ACTION PLAN FROM 2022 PREPARED BY CHIEF DAVID WILSON.
HE NOTES WHEN NOT, IF A MAJOR WILDFIRE OCCURS IN OUR AREA, IT WILL SEVERELY OVERLOAD OUR PERSONNEL AND EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF ALL OF OUR EQUIPMENT.
OVER THE LAST DECADE, WE HAVE SEEN EXTREME DROUGHT CONDITIONS AND HAVE ASSISTED OTHER AGENCIES WITH MAJOR WILDFIRES IN TRAVIS COUNTY AND TEXAS.
HE GOES ON TO SAY THAT LOST CREEK IS SURROUNDED BY HIGH FUEL CONTENT AND HAS A HISTORY OF DANGEROUS LIGHTNING STORMS. IF YOU DO NOT LIVE ON OR NEAR A GREEN BELT, OR IF YOU'VE NEVER LIVED IN A RISKY WILDFIRE, RISKY WEATHER AREA, YOU PROBABLY CANNOT EMPATHIZE WITH THE FEAR OF A WILDFIRE.
BUT THE REALITY AND FEAR FOR US IS VERY REAL.
ESPECIALLY DURING A DROUGHT, THE AUSTIN MONITOR RANKS AUSTIN AS FIFTH IN THE NATION OF HOMES AT RISK OF BEING DESTROYED BY A WILDFIRE.
WHILE THE PALISADES FIRE IS IN CALIFORNIA IS PROBABLY STILL FRESH IN EVERYONE'S MINDS MORE LOCALLY.
WE'VE HAD WILDFIRES IN BASTROP, SPICEWOOD AND STEINER RANCH.
DURING THE 2011 STEINER RANCH FIRE, THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY HAD TO EVACUATE FROM A SINGLE EXIT, WHICH CAUSED HOURS AND HOURS OF MAJOR BACKUPS AND BUMPER TO BUMPER TRAFFIC.
OFFICIALS REALIZED THAT, THAT THE EVACUATION WAS POOR.
AS YOU WERE AWARE, A LARGE PORTION OF DISTRICT GATE IS IN A WOOEY.
WE ALL AGREE THAT A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT ONLY 36% OCCUPANCY IS NOT A GOOD INVESTMENT FOR THE OWNER.
THEY CAN ALSO BE ARGUED THAT ADDING 475 APARTMENTS AT THE MAIN EXIT FOR 1200 HOMES AT A PRESSURE COOKER OF AN INTERSECTION WILL CREATE PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARD HAZARDS AND IS NOT A SOLUTION.
IN THE CASE OF DB 90, DISTRICT EIGHT WOULD ONLY GAIN ABOUT 47 AFFORDABLE UNITS IN LAS CREEK.
BUT AT WHAT COST? WHILE THE DEVELOPER IS MAXIMIZING PROFITS, THE NEIGHBORS ARE LEFT TO DEAL WITH MORE TRAFFIC AND AN ALREADY DANGEROUS INTERSECTION.
THIS FEELS LIKE CHECKING THE BOX IN PROFITS OVER HUMAN LIVES.
IN THE LAST ZAP MEETING, IT WAS SAID SEVERAL TIMES THAT A TRAFFIC AND WILDFIRE STUDY WILL BE CONDUCTED LATER.
THIS IS ONLY PASSING THE BUCK.
WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN TOLD A LOT OF MISINFORMATION.
SO I'M CURIOUS WHAT INFORMATION WILL BE USED FOR FUTURE TRAFFIC AND WILDFIRE STUDIES.
AS CHIEF WILSON SAID, I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT WE CANNOT EVER BE COMPLETELY PREPARED FOR A CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRE IN OUR DISTRICT, BUT I WOULD RATHER BE ON CNN SAYING WE HAD A PLAN THAT DIDN'T WORK THE WAY WE THOUGHT THAN TO SAY WE NEVER HAD A PLAN TO START WITH.
PLEASE WORK WITH US TO GET A SOLID PLAN IN PLACE THAT IS BASED ON FACTS AND REALITY VERSUS ASSUMPTIONS AND LIES.
ROSA WILL BE RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM MARVIN HACKER.
MARVIN, ARE YOU PRESENT? ROSA, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES.
HELLO, MY NAME IS ROSA TI AND I LIVE ON 1313 LIKE MOCKINGBIRD LANE, WILSON HEIGHTS.
AND MY FENCE BACKS UP TO THE SUB, UH, TO THE CITY VIEW.
SO TODAY I WANNA TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE PROMISE TO PROTECT THE WATER AND THE ENVIRONMENT.
I JUST ASKING YOU TO DENY THE CASE C 14 AND THE NING, AS YOU KNOW THIS, I DON'T HAVE TO SAY IT AGAIN, BUT THE ONE THING I HAVE TO SAY IS THAT THIS REZONING IS GOING TO BE DONE ON A HILL SIZE ZONE AND IS IN ONE OF THE MOST ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVE CORNERS IN AUSTIN.
IF YOU SEE HERE THE, IN THE PICTURE, YOU'RE GONNA SEE THE GREEN BELTS.
[00:30:01]
TO THE GREEN BELT.NOT ONLY THAT, WE ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE WATERSHED.
SO WE ARE IN THE INS, IF YOU CAN SEE THE GREEN SIDE HERE, THE INS CREEK WATERSHED.
THE INS CREEK WATERSHED IS CLASSIFIED UNDER WATER SUPPLY SUBURBAN.
IT'S INSIDE THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE.
THE CITY'S MOST PROTECTIVE NON AQUIFER CATEGORY, AND AS IT IS THE PREVIOUS COVER ARE WAY PAST 40%.
SO THE 475 UNITS AND PARKING IS GOING TO BLOW PAST THAT SLOPE.
THE OTHER THING IS, OH, THE OTHER THING IS WE BELIEVE THIS IS THE RESULT RIGHT NOW, THIS YEAR OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION HAPPENS.
THE FLOW, THERE IS NO WAY THAT THE WATER FLOW BUT TO THE BACKYARDS, TO THE POOLS, TO THE CREEK, TO THE WATER SUPPLY.
THIS IS A REAL CASE OF WHAT HAPPENS.
IT IS ALL GOING DOWNHILL TOWARD THE CREEK AND CITY VIEW WILL NOT BE ANY DIFFERENT.
AUSTIN OIL PLANT SAYS PROTECT THIS WATER BUILD DENSITY ELSEWHERE.
BUT I WANNA TELL YOU ABOUT WHAT IMAGINE AUSTIN SAYS.
WE'VE MENTIONED IMAGINE AUSTIN, THE DEVELOPER MENTIONED IT, BUT THERE IS A PART THAT WAS MISSING HERE.
IT SAYS IT PROTECTS THE IDEA OF COMPACT DEVELOPMENT TO ATTAIN GOALS FOR ECONOMIC VIBRANCY AND REDUCE ECOLOGICAL IMPACT.
WE CAN'T JUST STACK, WE ARE SEEM TO FORGET THE LAST PART OF THE SENTENCE, WHICH MEANS UN REDUCE ECOLOGICAL IMPACT.
SO THE WATERSHED PROTECTION MASTER PLAN WAS COMMITTING TO PROTECTING THESE WATERSHEDS LIKE IN CREEK.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE RETAIL PART.
THERE IS NOT A LOT OF RETAIL THAT IS, UM, THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED IN WESTLAKE.
YOU HAVE THE BARTON CREEK SQUARE, YOU HAVE THE VILLAGE AT WESTLAKE, YOU HAVE THE WESTLAKE MARKET.
HIGH RENTS DRIVE THE TURNOVER.
THESE RENTS ARE VERY EXPENSIVE.
THESE ARE LUXURY COFFEE SHOPS.
YOU ARE GOING TO BE BUILDING THIS ON THE BOTTOM OF REALLY LOW AFFORDABLE HOMES ASKING THESE FAMILIES TO BUY TWO CARS AND PAY $8 FOR A CUP OF COFFEE.
UM, THIS TO GET IN THERE, YOU'RE GOING INTO 70 MILES PER HOUR.
DON'T BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE GO 60 MILES PER HOUR, THEY GO 70 MILES PER HOUR.
AND THAT IS WHY THE ACCIDENTS HAPPEN.
AND YOU'RE GONNA TAKE RIGHT ONE ENTRANCE WITHOUT A TURNING LANE.
THAT'S AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS A CAR ONLY RETAIL ON A SCENIC HIGHWAY WITH NO SIDEWALKS OR TRANSITIVE AND WHAT FOR MORE RETAIL THAT WE ALREADY HAVE AND IT'S NOT BEING IN DEMAND.
WE HAVE TRASH AGAINST A WILDFIRE CORRIDOR.
I LIVED THERE AND THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ALREADY PUT THE HUGE TRASH CANS THEY LIFTED UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, WAKE US ALL UP AND WE'RE INFESTED WITH FLYING COCKROACHES IN MY BACKYARD.
THAT IS BECAUSE THEY DON'T CARE AND WE CAN'T COMPLAIN.
I CAN'T IMAGINE THE TRASH AFFECTING US AND THE WILDLIFE.
WE HAVE GRAY FOXES, BABIES IN MY BACKYARD AND IT'S JUST REALLY GOING TO AFFECT FOR WHAT? FOR 10 AFFORDABLE HOMES AND FOR ADDING A REALLY HIGH EXPENSIVE COFFEE, COFFEE SHOP OR LITTLE BAKERY.
THE LIGHTS, WE NEVER HAD LIGHTS IN AUSTIN.
LOOK AT THE LIGHTS THAT THE NEW CONSTRUCTION IS HAPPENING.
THIS IS GOING TO BE ALL OVER NOW.
THE IT IS NOT ABOUT COMPATIBILITY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU ARE HAVING 400 LETTERS SENT TO YOU COMPLAINING AND OPPOSING THIS ZONING.
WE DON'T, PLEASE DON'T MAKE THE NEIGHBORHOOD FIGHT AGAINST A DEVELOPER ON A LAYER ZONE IF YOU PASS IT BACK.
KEEP THE PROMISE THIS LAND WAS GIVEN.
THE CITY PLANS SAID STEER GROWTH AWAY FROM THIS WATERSHED.
LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE.
THIS IS THE WATER THAT WE DRINK.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR LISTENING.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS CHAIR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM AND WE WILL NOW BE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT FOR A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.
HELLO, COMMISSIONERS, I JUST, I'LL JUST QUICKLY OUTLINE JUST A COUPLE OF RESPONSES TO THE THINGS THAT WE HEARD.
UM, I JUST, I'LL START WITH THE FACT THAT THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT IS THAT 10% OF THE OF UNITS WOULD BE AT 50% MFI OR 12% AT 60, WHICH WOULD COME OUT TO ABOUT 45 OR 50 UNITS DEPENDING ON THE FINAL COUNT.
UM, THAT THE, THE CHARACTER OF THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY IS STILL PROTECTED BY THE VEGETATIVE BUFFER REQUIRED BY THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY ORDINANCE.
UM, AND AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, MAYBE THIS IS JUST, THIS IS A VERY, VERY MINOR CHANGE FROM WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.
I KNOW NOT ALL COMMISSIONERS WERE HERE, BUT
[00:35:01]
IMPERVIOUS COVER IS, IS IS HANDLED BY WATERSHED.SO THAT DOESN'T CHANGE EITHER WAY.
WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT 70 FEET, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME PROJECT.
IT'S REALLY JUST THAT, THAT ONE USE.
UM, SO AGAIN, I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
AND THAT CONCLUDES ALL THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
DO I HEAR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO MOVED A SECOND.
MOTION TO SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONER FLORES, CAN YOU TURN YOUR CAMERA? THERE WE GO.
QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, START DOWN HERE.
UM, SO I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERNS THAT THE LOST CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD FOLKS HAVE.
UM, AS YOU GUYS DID THE ANNEX FROM THE CITY, YOU ARE NOT LONGER REPRESENTED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT LOST CREEK SPECIFIC CONCERNS, PLEASE REACH OUT TO YOUR OWN MUNICIPAL REPRESENTATIVES AS YOU GUYS NOW ARE GOVERNED BY YOURSELVES.
UM, I'VE ACTUALLY LIVED IN THIS AREA.
UM, I MEAN THE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA, IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA, I'M OVERALL SUPPORTIVE, OBVIOUSLY, UM, THAT AREA, THAT HIGHWAY IS GONNA GO THROUGH SOME GROWING PAIN, UM, KIND OF JUST THE WAY THINGS GO.
BUT YEAH, I DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.
UM, I SUPPORTED THIS REZONING THE LAST TIME I CONTINUE TO SUPPORT IT THIS TIME.
UH, I THINK THIS IS A SENSIBLE AMENDMENT.
I WOULD JUST ALSO LIKE TO SAY THAT IN ADDITION TO THE 45 TO 50 CAPITAL A AFFORDABLE UNITS ON SITE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RELATIVE AFFORDABILITY IN A VERY EXPENSIVE PART OF TOWN.
AND SO, UM, EVEN PAYING A MARKET RENT TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE IN-SCHOOL DISTRICT, I THINK IS IMPORTANT.
UM, A QUALITY SCHOOLS ARE ONE OF THE REASONS WHY PEOPLE STICK AROUND IN CITIES AND WITHOUT THAT THEY LEAVE.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SEEING THAT ACROSS TOWN.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LOW OCCUPANCY HERE IS I THINK ENDEMIC WITH OFFICE SPACE AROUND THE CITY.
AND WITHOUT ALLOWING FOR ZONING CHANGES OF OBSOLETE OFFICE PROPERTIES, WE'RE BASICALLY CONDEMNING THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO LOWER PROPERTY VALUES OVER TIME, WHICH MEANS LOWER REVENUES, WHICH MEANS DISINVESTMENT IN THE CITY, WHICH OF COURSE IS EXACERBATED ANY ANYTIME A NEIGHBORHOOD DN X IS.
I DID NOT SUPPORT THIS LAST TIME FOR THE SAME REASONS I'M HEARING NOW.
THE CONCERNS ABOUT SAFETY, TRAFFIC, WILDFIRE, THE WATER SUPPLY, UM, THESE ARE ALL CONCERNS.
THERE'S THIS APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT, BUT, UM, I ALONE CAN'T STOP THIS.
AND SO I'D LIKE TO ASK QUESTIONS OF SCOTT SMITH WHO WENT THROUGH A LIST OF POSSIBLE CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT COULD IMPROVE THIS EVEN IF WE CAN'T STOP IT.
UM, CAN YOU GO REAL SLOWLY AND MAYBE WE'LL THINK ABOUT 'EM ONE AT A TIME.
I DO TEND TO TALK KIND OF FAST.
WELL, WE GAVE YOU LIMITED TIME.
WELL, UM, I'M NO EXPERT ON CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
IN CASE THIS GOES ON FOR HALF AN HOUR, WOULD WE BE ABLE TO MAKE A MOTION NOW? UM, GENERALLY WE GO THROUGH AND ANSWER QUESTIONS FIRST.
JUST IN THE CASE, I WOULD ASK THAT WE NOT SPEND A, A LOT OF TIME ON QUESTION DON.
IT'LL HALF AN HOUR, BUT I THINK HE WENT THROUGH THAT LIST IN UNDER A MINUTE AND RIGHT.
I CAN'T WRITE THAT FAST JUST IN CASE THERE'S ISSUE OF TRYING TO UNDERMINE THE PROCESS.
UNDERSTAND WE WILL THAT HAPPENING.
I'M CERTAINLY HAPPY TO READ THIS LIST.
I PROMISE IT WON'T TAKE HALF AN HOUR.
UM, SO FROM WHAT I KNOW ABOUT A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, IT JUST HELPS SHAPE THE PROJECT TO THE BEST OF ITS ABILITY.
UM, SOME OF THE, UH, SUGGESTIONS I MENTIONED WERE TO PRESERVE THE VISUAL, VISUAL CHARACTER OF THE HILL COUNTRY, UH, ROADWAY CORRIDOR THROUGH APPROPRIATE, APPROPRIATE HEIGHT TRANSITIONS AND MASSING CONTROLS.
SO I'M GONNA SAY FOR THAT ONE, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT BECAUSE DB 90 WILL OVERRIDE ANY HEIGHT LIMITS AND WITHOUT DB 90 IT'S GONNA STAY AT 40 FEET.
YOU ALREADY HAVE MASSING LIMITS IN THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY, AND YOU ALSO HAVE THEM IN SUB CHAPTER E AND YOU ALSO HAVE THEM IN SETBACKS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.
SO THOSE ARE ALREADY IN THE CODE ALREADY.
THE SECOND WAS TO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY WHEREVER FEASIBLE.
AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, THERE'S NOT CURRENTLY SIDEWALKS, THERE'S NO CONNECTIVITY TO ANY SITE AROUND.
SO SOME THOUGHT TO HOW PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY CONNECT TO THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE HELPFUL.
AND I DON'T THINK WE CAN ADD THAT TO THE ZONING.
UM, HOPEFULLY THAT IT'S, I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE IT'S ALREADY IN THE CODE AS WELL, ON SUB CHAPTER E WITH OPTIONS TO IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW FEASIBLE BECAUSE OF THE HIGH DIFFERENCE
[00:40:01]
FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THIS LINE, HOW FEASIBLE IT WOULD BE TO DO A DRIVEWAY PER SE.BUT THERE ARE OPTIONS TO IMPROVE CONNECTIVITY ALREADY INCORPORATED IN THE CODE.
SO HOPEFULLY IF THIS DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS, THERE WILL BE IMPROVED CONNECTIVITY.
UM, BUT WE CAN'T PUT IT INTO THE ZONING TONIGHT.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION JUST TO FOLLOW UP? SURE.
WHEN IT COMES TO THAT TYPE OF CONNECTIVITY, YOU SAID IT'S IN THE CODE, DOES THAT ENCOURAGE IT OR DOES IT REQUIRE IT, MEANING IS IT UP TO THE DEVELOPER TO DECIDE IF IT'S FEASIBLE OR ARE THEY ACTUALLY ASKED TO DO SOMETHING TO MAKE IT SO THAT PEOPLE CAN CONNECT? IT ENCOURAGES IT BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF WALKAWAYS WITHIN LOSS CREEK IF WE GET INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
HOW MANY SIDEWALKS ARE IN THE STREETS IN LOST CREEK? UM, QUITE A FEW.
I, THERE'S NOT AS MANY AS YOU HAVE IN MOST NEIGHBORHOODS FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD.
BASICALLY TPW MAKES THE CAUSE WHETHER TOUR QUIET OR NOT.
IT'S PART OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS.
UH, THE NEXT THAT I MENTIONED WAS, UM, MEANINGFUL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS THAT ENHANCE SAFETY.
I THINK, UM, SOME OF THE SLIDES SHOWED JUST HOW LIMITED, UH, ACCESS TO THIS SITE WOULD BE.
IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE CODE OR SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS COULD DISCUSS TONIGHT, UM, THAT WOULD HELP THE DEVELOPER MAKE SURE THAT STUDIES ARE DONE AND THAT IMPLEMENTS ARE MADE THAT ALLOW FOR SAFE ACCESS FOR NOT JUST LOST CREEK RESIDENTS, BUT ALSO FOR YOUR FUTURE RESIDENTS AT THIS DEVELOPMENT? RIGHT.
WHEN IT COMES THROUGH FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, THERE'LL BE A TRANSPORTATION REVIEW BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION STAFF.
THEY'LL LOOK AT INTERNAL AS WELL AS EXTERNAL TRAFFIC ROUTES TO THE PROJECT.
IF IT HAS ENOUGH TRAFFIC GENERATION THAT WILL WARRANT A TRAFFIC STUDY.
IT DOESN'T AT THIS POINT IN TIME, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN IT WON'T.
WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE ACTUAL SITE PLAN PHASE AND WE START PUTTING NUMBERS INTO WHAT THEY PLAN ON BUILDING, WE DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT IN TIME IT'S THE ZONING CASE.
SO JUST FOR MY EDUCATION, WE CAN TAKE BACK TO OUR MEMBERS.
I GUESS THE DEVELOPER WILL GIVE YOU A SITE PLAN AT SOME POINT? NOT US.
BUT THE CITY WILL GET A SITE PLAN AND THEN YOUR CITY STAFF WILL DETERMINE IF ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS CHANGES.
I GUESS IT'S AS ACCORDING TO CITY CODE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND ONE OF THE REVIEWS AT THAT SITE PLAN PHASE WILL BE THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AND THERE'LL BE COSTS FOR THE DEVELOPER.
UH, ANOTHER SUGGESTION, UH, STRENGTHENING LANDSCAPING AND OPEN SPACE COMMITMENTS.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S ALREADY SOME REQUIREMENTS AS TO HOW CLOSE TO 360 THIS DEVELOPMENT CAN GET.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, CLEAR TO THE DEVELOPER AND CLEAR TO THE PEOPLE THAT WILL BE PUTTING THIS IN PLACE? YES.
THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY ORDINANCE HAS THOSE SETBACKS IN IT.
AND THEN AS WELL WITHIN THE CODE ITSELF, WHEN THEY SUBMIT SITE PLANS, THERE ARE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE SITE PLAN.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE SO MANY SHADE TREES WITHIN THE PARKING LOT AND A LOT OF THINGS THAT WEREN'T IN THE CODE WHEN THEY BUILT THE ORIGINAL PARKING LOT WILL COME INTO PLAY WHEN THEY DEVELOP A NEW SITE.
UH, AND THEN I ALSO MENTIONED, UH, TO ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC RECEIVES BENEFITS, COMMISERATE WITH THE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.
UM, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT, I MEAN, JUST THE FEASIBILITY OF HOW MANY UNITS ARE PLANNING TO GO INTO THIS, UH, COMMUNITY.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO HELP THE DEVELOPER KNOW I I IS 475 UNITS EVEN REALISTIC? MEANING, UH, CAN YOU GET THOSE PEOPLE IN AND OUTTA THEIR COMMUNITY SAFELY? UH, I MEAN WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT TRAFFIC, BUT JUST THE IMPACT OF ADDING THAT MANY FAMILIES, THAT MANY CARS, UH, AT WHAT POINT IN THE PROCESS IS THAT DIGESTED AND DEBT SAFETY CONCERNS, FEASIBILITY? IS THIS EVEN THE RIGHT SITE TO ADD THAT MANY PEOPLE? BASICALLY THAT COMES INTO THE SITE PLAN PHASE WHEN THEY SUBMIT A SITE PLAN FOR EXACTLY WHAT THEY PLAN ON BUILDING ALL THE ZONING DOES IS GIVE THEM A RIGHT TO COME THROUGH AND NOT A RIGHT.
THE ABILITY TO COME IN AND, AND DESIGN A SITE.
WHEN THEY PREPARE THE ACTUAL SITE PLANS, THEY MAY DECIDE OR FIGURE OUT THAT THEY CAN'T FIT A 60 FOOT BUILDING.
THEY CAN'T FIT ALL THESE THINGS ON THE SITE BECAUSE OF SITE CONSTRAINTS.
THIS DOES NOT MODIFY THE SITE CONSTRAINTS.
IT DOES NOT GUARANTEE THEM ANYTHING.
IT SAYS IF YOU CAN COMPLY WITH ALL THE CODE REGULATIONS FOR DRAINAGE, FOR TRANSPORTATION, FOR SAFETY, IF YOU CAN COMPLY WITH ALL THOSE THINGS, YOU CAN BUILD UP TO THIS AMOUNT.
IF YOU CAN'T COMPLY WITH THOSE THINGS, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO BUILD UP TO THIS AMOUNT UNTIL YOU HAVE A SITE PLAN.
WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWERS TO, TO THAT QUESTION.
IT GIVES THEM A, A CAP TO STRIVE FOR IF THEY CAN BEAT IT AND COMPLY WITH CODE.
WE DO ON, UM, SOME ZONING CASES, LIMIT THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE ALLOWED.
UM, MAYBE STAFF CAN TELL US WHETHER THAT IS EVEN A POSSIBILITY.
IN THE CASE WITH DB 90, GOOD EVENING, BEVERLY VILA AUSTIN PLANNING, WE CAN'T DO A LIMIT ON UNICAP ON DB 90, SO WE CAN'T DO THAT.
BUT IS IT TRUE THAT DURING THE SITE REVIEW PHASE IF SITE CONSTRAINTS ARE SUCH THAT THEY CAN'T FIT THIS, THEN THEY WOULD, THIS CODE WOULD PREVAIL OVER ZONING? YEAH.
AT THAT TIME IT'S COMPLETELY UP TO, UM, WHAT IS ABLE TO BE FIT ON THE SITE.
UM, SO YEAH, THAT WOULD BE AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
[00:45:02]
MAY I ASK ONE FINAL QUESTION? SURE.UM, WHAT KIND OF VISIBILITY IS THERE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR FOR CITIZENS IN GENERAL DURING THE SITE PLAN COMMUNICATION WHEN IT'S SUBMITTED AND THEN COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF? I, I ASSUME THEY PROBABLY HAVE COMMENTS AT SOME POINT.
THERE'S KIND OF LIKE A BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND STAFF.
UH, BEFORE THE SITE PLAN'S IMPLEMENTED OR APPROVED, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO REACH OUT TO THE RELEVANT STAFF MEMBER WHO'S, WHO'S EITHER, EITHER OUR, OUR FOLKS HERE, OUR LIAISONS HERE CAN POINT TO THE RIGHT PERSON OR DO A PUBLIC INFORMATION ACCESS REQUEST TO.
IT'S, UH, UM, THE TEXAS LAWS AROUND TRANSPARENCY ARE PRETTY BROAD, SO YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET THE INFORMATION YOU WANT AS THE YET PROJECT GOES ALONG.
AND YET I'VE HEARD FROM NEIGHBORHOODS THAT IT HAS BEEN, UM, LESS COOPERATION FROM STAFF.
AND STAFF HAS SAID IT'LL BE, NOW YOU NEED TO DO A PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST TO GET THAT INFORMATION, WHICH IT'LL BE HARDER.
DEFINITELY, UM, SLOWS DOWN YOUR ABILITY TO HAVE ANY SAY.
UM, IT'LL BE HARDER FOR YOU GUYS SINCE YOU GUYS DON'T HAVE A CITY COUNCIL OR MURAL OR ANY PUBLIC REPRESENTATIVE IN THE CITY, OBVIOUSLY.
UM, BUT I, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF TRY THEIR BEST AND SO THERE MAY BE DEPARTMENTAL REQUIREMENTS WHERE THEY CAN'T SHARE SOMETHING, UM, DUE TO EITHER LEGAL LIABILITY WITHOUT AN ACTUAL, LIKE, FORMAL REQUEST OR WHATEVER THE PROCESS IS.
UM, BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE THE AVENUES AVAILABLE TO YOU.
ONCE A CASE NUMBER GETS ASSIGNED TO A SITE PLAN, IT GETS POSTED ONLINE OPEN TO ANYBODY WHO HAS ACCESS TO THE INTERNET.
UM, COMMENTS ARE GENERATED AND POSTED ONLINE.
ANYBODY CAN ACCESS THOSE ONLINE AT ANY POINT IN TIME.
SO YOU CAN FOLLOW THE CASE NUMBER ONCE IT GETS ASSIGNED, IT'LL BE A, PROBABLY A FAIRLY SIMILAR NUMBER TO THE ZONING CASE.
SO IT'LL FOLLOW THE SAME C IT'LL BE A WON'T BE A C 14 NUMBER.
C 14 IF YOU GO TO THE AUSTIN DATA PORTAL AND SPECIFICALLY, OH GOD, IT'S NOT A OBVIOUS DATABASE.
I'LL TAKE YOU TO THE INFORMATION HERE.
I BELIEVE IT'S THE PERMIT DATABASE OR THE SITE DATABASE.
YOU CAN PUT IN THE CASE NUMBER AND IT'LL GIVE YOU LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE PIECE PIECE OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THAT ONE.
SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT TODAY, BUT WHEN I CHECKED YESTERDAY, THE PUBLIC SEARCH WAS BROKEN.
WELL, I WILL SAY STAFF HAS BEEN REALLY RESPONSIVE.
I'VE WORKED MAINLY WITH BEVERLY.
I, I'VE PROBABLY BURIED HER WITH EMAILS, BUT OUR, OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN RESPONDED TO AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
IT'S NOT WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE, UM, THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD.
WELL UNFORTUNATELY, THOSE TYPES OF CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS THAT YOU'RE WANTING ARE NOT ONES THAT WE CAN DO.
THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO ARE LIMIT, FOR EXAMPLE, PERMITTED USES.
'CAUSE LR ADDS SOME PERMITTED USES.
IT'S NOT, IN MY VIEW, A TERRIBLE ZONING CATEGORY.
BUT, AND EVEN FOR RESTAURANT LR HAS LIMITS TO SIZE AND HOW CLOSE IT CAN BE TO, UM, SINGLE FAMILY OR I THINK NO OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO IT'S, IT IS NOT TERRIBLE, BUT I THINK COMMISSIONER STERN MAY WANT TO PROPOSE.
SOME, UM, USE RESTRICTIONS FOR THINGS THAT ARE IN POSSIBLY WELL INAPPROPRIATE.
SOME OF THEM I THINK ARE INAPPROPRIATE EVERYWHERE.
COMMISSIONER SHERN COMMENTS? UM, SURE.
UH, I, I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, MY COMMENTS FROM APRIL STILL STAND.
I THINK THAT, UM, THE LOSS CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD DID A GOOD JOB OF SUMMARIZING SOME OF THOSE POINTS.
I, I FIND MYSELF AN URBANIST AND I BELIEVE IN SMART GROWTH AND THAT THIS LOCATION ISN'T WHERE WE SHOULD BE BRINGING THE CITY.
INSTEAD WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING, UM, WHERE WE HAVE URBAN AMENITIES FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO WALK OR BIKE OR TAKE A BUS INSTEAD OF DRIVE LITERALLY EVERYWHERE.
UM, WITH THAT IN MIND, THERE ARE TWO THINGS THAT I WOULD BRING UP.
ONE WOULD BE, I, I WOULD RECOMMEND A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROHIBIT ALL OF THE UNINTENDED POTENTIAL USES.
AND, UH, I'VE WORKED WITH STAFF ON THIS, SO I'VE ALREADY ELIMINATED A TON OF OTHER USES.
BUT, UM, THE ONLY TWO THAT ARE LEFT STANDING ARE OFFSITE ACCESSORY PARKING AND PEDICAB STORAGE AND DISPATCH.
I'M NOT EXPECTING PEDICABS TO SHOW UP HERE
UM, BUT, UM, OFFSITE ACCESSORY PARKING.
WE'VE ALREADY HAD THIS DISCUSSION IN OTHER PARTS OF TOWN LIKE TECH RIDGE, WHICH ARE EADS, BUT, UM, WE'VE DECIDED THAT THERE SHOULD BE A BUNCH OF WAYMO'S THERE INSTEAD.
UH, I'D LIKE TO AVOID THAT HAPPENING IN THIS AREA.
SO I'D, I'M GONNA RECOMMEND THAT WE ADD THOSE TWO USES TO OUR CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
UM, BUT ALSO WE'VE BEEN YEAH, TO YEAH, TO PROHIBIT THOSE USES THERE.
UM, IN ADDITION, GIVEN THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY ISSUE, LIKE, LIKE CAN ONE WALK TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL? I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT.
CAN YOU GET TO WESTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL BY WALKING OR BIKING?
[00:50:01]
I USED TO WORK IN, UH, LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PEOPLE WHO LIVED TWO BLOCKS AWAY FROM ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STILL DROVE THERE.SO I THINK THERE'S A COOL PEOPLE LIKE DRIVING
SO I THINK THAT'S A BIGGER ISSUE IN THE AREA.
THERE'S ACTUALLY NOT, I MEAN, AS YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT A SIDEWALK ON 360 TO ALLOW YOU TO WALK TO WESTLAKE FROM THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU, YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF THE CULTURE THAT EXISTS.
THAT'S COMPLETELY AUTO I'M PRAGMATIC, SO I'M JUST MAKING SURE.
SO I, I WOULD, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS PROVIDE A WRITTEN TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS.
NOW I KNOW THERE ARE EXISTING BUILDINGS THERE, BUT THEY'RE SCHEDULED FOR DEMOLITION, WHICH MEANS IT'S A GROUND UP REDEVELOPMENT AND RATHER THAN AN ADAPTIVE REUSE OR A BUILDING CONVERSION.
AND SO, UM, WE MAY NEED SOME CLARIFICATION, BUT I BELIEVE THAT ALLOWS US TO ASK FOR A TRANS, UM, A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SEPARATE FROM SENATE BILL EIGHT FORTY'S CONVERSION PROVISIONS BECAUSE OF THIS CONVERSION.
UM, AND I FURTHER ASK OF THE ANALYSIS DISTINGUISHED BETWEEN THEORETICAL TRIPS CREDITED TO THE EXISTING OFFICE ENTITLEMENT VERSUS THE ACTUAL CURRENT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, I'D ALSO HAVE IT ADDRESSED.
DRIVEWAY SAFETY SITE DISTANCE, THE LOSS CREEK AND LOOP 360 INTERSECTION EMERGENCY EVACUATION, THE ABSENCE OF SIDEWALKS, BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSIT, AND THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF NEARBY DEVELOPMENT AND TECHOPS LOOP 360 IMPROVEMENTS.
SO AGAIN, UM, I'M GONNA ASK THE GROUP WHEN WE GET TO IT, IF WE CAN ADD THE TWO ADDITIONAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY USES.
I THINK THAT ONE SHOULD GO BY AND THAT I SUPPOSE SEPARATELY I WOULD ASK IF WE CAN DO A TRAFFIC OR DIRECT, UM, THE TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS TO CONDUCT A TRANS, UH, A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE SITE WITH, UM, THE SPECIFIC THINGS THAT I, I MENTIONED.
UM, WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE ONLINE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ONLINE? I'M SEEING HEAD SHAKES.
UM, I WANNA MAKE A FEW BRIEF COMMENTS.
UM, A LOT OF THINGS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP ABOUT TRANSPORTATION INCREASING WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT.
EVERY TIME WE ADD ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT IN AUSTIN, IT INCREASES TRANSPORTATION NO MATTER WHERE YOU'RE AT.
IT'S AN UNFORTUNATE SIDE EFFECT.
BUT ANYTIME WE ADD A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME, YOU'RE ADDING PEOPLE TO THE ROADWAY.
UM, AND IF WE SIMPLY COME IN AND SAY NO MATTER WHAT, WE CAN'T ADD NEW CARS, THE ROADWAY 'CAUSE WE'RE AT CAPACITY.
WE'LL NEVER BUILD ANYTHING IN THIS TOWN.
UH, THE POPULATION OF AUSTIN HAS DOUBLED EVERY 20 YEARS SINCE 1860.
THERE'S NO SIGN THAT THAT'S NOT GONNA STOP.
ALL OF A SUDDEN RIGHT NOW WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO DEVELOP, WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO GROW.
UM, THE WWE, UH, WITH THE NEW BAPTIST THAT'S BEING PROPOSED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN, IF YOU TAKE OUT THE URBAN CORE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN IS NOT BEING IN A WWE.
ABOUT 90% OF AUSTIN IS IN A WOO.
WE, UM, AND SO COMPANY COMING IN AND SAYING THAT WE CAN'T DEVELOP WITHIN A WU BECAUSE IT'S THE WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE THAT INCLUDES BASICALLY ALL OF AUSTIN.
UH, SO WE WOULD BE PROHIBITED FROM DEVELOPING ANYTHING ANYWHERE IN AUSTIN.
UM, THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE IS EVERYTHING WEST OF MOPAC.
UM, IT IS HALF THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
UH, SO WE CLEARLY CAN'T ELIMINATE HALF THE CITY OF AUSTIN FROM DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I, SOME OF THE THINGS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ON HOW WE TELL STAFF TO MANAGE A DO A TRAFFIC STUDY, I WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH, 'CAUSE I DON'T WANNA DICTATE TO STAFF HOW THEY DO THINGS IN THE CODE.
THE CODE SPELLS HOW THEY DO THEIR TRAFFIC STUDIES.
AND I DON'T WANT TO BE A COMMISSION UP HERE WHO TELLS THEM DIFFERENTLY THAN INSTEAD OF DOING IT BY CODE, DO IT THIS WAY.
UH, THE CODE DICTATES HOW THE REVIEWS TAKE PLACE, NOT US AS A COMMISSION.
IN MY MIND, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I HAD TO SAY.
BUT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT HOW THE STAFF INTERPRETS THE CODE.
UM, THE CODE DOESN'T SAY TO USE THE MAXIMUM, UM, TRAFFIC ALLOWED IN THE CURRENT USE, IT SAYS TO LOOK AT WHAT'S CURRENT.
IT, IT DOESN'T SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A STAFF INTERPRETATION OF HOW THEY DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THERE SHOULD BE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
UM, I'VE HEARD DIFFERENTLY FROM STAFF, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
WE ALSO, UM, BUT IF YOU READ THE CODE, THERE'S REGULAR CODE REVIEW PROCESSES THAT GO THROUGH AN ENTIRE PROCESS COMBINING PROFESSIONAL EXPERTISE AND POLITICAL INPUT FROM THE ELECTED LEADERS OF THE CITY.
UM, SO WE DO LOOK AT 'EM QUITE REGULARLY TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE ALIGNED WITH WHAT WHATEVER THE CITY AGREES IS THE BEST PRACTICE.
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S WISE FOR US TO AD HOC KIND OF IMPROVISE ON A DAY BY DAY BASIS HOW WE FEEL TODAY.
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? WE WANNA HAVE A STANDARD RIGHT PROTOCOL AND I THINK THE STANDARD WAY IT'S BEING DONE IS INCORRECT.
UM, BUT I DO THINK THAT WE COULD ADD TO OUR MOTION THAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THERE BE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IF AND, AND LEAVE IT AT THAT SIMPLE RECOMMENDATION.
I KNOW THAT'S NOT, STAFF'S GONNA SAY WE CAN'T
[00:55:01]
DO THAT.COMMISSIONERS DANIELLE MOORE IN TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS, UM, REQUIRING A TIA IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD ADD IN A ZONING ORDINANCE.
AGAIN, IT'LL BE TRIGGERED DEPENDING ON WHAT'S PROPOSED FOR THE USE AT TIME OF SITE PLAN.
UM, AND AGAIN, BASED ON CODE AT THE TIME OF SUBMISSION.
SO IF THAT CHANGES, THEN MAY I POINT OUT THAT THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS THAT, UM, WAVERED THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REALLY DRAMATICALLY UNDERREPRESENTED THE CURRENT OCCUPANCY OF THIS BUILDING.
OVER ALMOST 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACES.
YOU SAW THE PICTURES OF HOW LIGHTLY POPULATED.
AND SO THE DAILY ALLOWANCE, THE HIGH FLOOR OF HOW MANY DAILY TRIPS WERE ASSUMED THAT ALLOWED THEM TO WAIVE THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
I IMAGINE THAT THAT ASSUMPTION WOULD BE MADE.
AGAIN, TALK ABOUT CODE INTERPRETED.
SO I'M GONNA STOP THE DISCUSSION.
STAFF INTERPRETS CODE BY THE CODE AND I'M NOT GONNA TELL STAFF HOW THEY SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T INTERPRET THE CODE WHEN THEY DO A TRAFFIC STUDY.
IT'S NOT OUR JOB UP HERE TO COME IN AND DO THAT.
HOWEVER WE CAN, WE DON'T REQUIRE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
WE DON'T WRITE THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BUT WE DO GIVE A RECOMMENDATION AND I WOULD LIKE OUR RECOMMENDATION TO INCLUDE A RECOMMENDATION FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
AND AT THE ZONING PHASE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WOULD PLUG IN FOR NUMBERS ON A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD, UM, BEVERLY VELA AUSTIN PLANNING.
UM, WHILE THAT CANNOT GO INTO THE ORDINANCE, UM, A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION TO STAFF, UH, TO STAFF TO DO A STUDY OR FOCUS ON THE AREA CAN ABSOLUTELY BE RECOMMENDED.
UM, JUST CANNOT BE INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE.
AND I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION.
UM, FROM COMMISSIONER STERN, YOU MENTIONED THE OFFSITE ACCESSORY PARKING AND THE PADDY CAB STORAGE AND DISPATCH.
DID YOU WANT THAT PROHIBITED OR AS CONDITIONAL? UM, I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE THEM PROHIBITED.
SO THAT WOULD JUST BE, UH, THAT'S ONE THING THAT'S JUST, UM, TO ADD THOSE TWO USES AS PROHIBITED WITHIN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
CHAIR, MAY I ASK A QUESTION? SURE.
UM, IF WE WERE TO, I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW IT WOULD WORK STRUCTURALLY, BUT IF WE WERE TO ASK YOU TO DO AN ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WOULD HAVE TO DUPLICATE YOUR EFFORTS IF THEN THE TPW SAID THAT WE HAVE TO DO A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS LATER ON, OR HOW WOULD THAT WORK EXACTLY? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPHRASE YOUR QUESTION? SO IF WE SOMEHOW RECOMMEND YOU GUYS TO DO A TRAFFIC IMPACT IMPACT ANALYSIS AND YOU GUYS DO A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND THEN TPW SAYS THAT WE NEED TO DO, LIKE, WOULD IT HAPPEN THAT IT WOULD DUPLICATE THE EFFORTS ON THE STUDY PROCESS OR COULD YOU JUST DO IT ONCE? SO THE REQUIREMENT FOR A TIA IS ON THE APPLICANTS, THE APPLICANT PERFORMS THE TIA AND THEY SUBMIT IT TO THE CITY STAFF FOR REVIEW.
SO IT WOULD BE SOMETHING YOU'RE REQUIRING OF THE APPLICANT.
YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT THAT WE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD LOOK AT LATER.
BUT AGAIN, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE AS PART OF A ZONING ORDINANCE.
PUTTING IT IN A ZONING IS PUTTING THE CART AWAY BEFORE THE HORSE.
WE'RE GIVING THEM A CAP ON WHAT THEY CAN BUILD, NOT AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD.
AND IT, YOU CAN'T REALLY DO A TIA ON THE CAP NOT KNOWING WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO.
UM, SO UNTIL THEY HAVE A SITE PLAN THAT SAYS, WITH ALL THE OTHER CONSTRAINTS ON THE PROPERTY, THIS IS WHAT WE CAN FIT.
YOU DO THE TIA TO YOUR SAKE ON WHAT'S REALLY GONNA BE BUILT.
YOU DON'T MAKE UP A NUMBER AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE COULD DO.
UH, SO WE'RE GONNA COMPARE THEORETICAL TO WHAT IS THERE TODAY WITH THEORETICAL TO WHAT COULD BE BUILT.
YOU CAN'T DO, YOU CAN, BUT IT'S NOT GONNA BE YOUR TI THAT'S WORTH ANYTHING.
YOU REALLY GOTTA LOOK AT WHAT IS REALLY, WE'RE WE'RE STILL JUST MAKING A RECOMMENDATION, RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATION, EVEN IF IT IS ENACTED AT SITE PLAN, THAT THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS WHAT I STATED IN ALL OF MY, UM, SPEAKING POINTS, UM, THAT I WOULD NOT WANT PUT INTO THE RECOMMENDATION.
BUT, UM, THE CONCERN IS THAT IF WE DON'T DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THEORETICAL AND ACTUAL TRIPS, IT MAY NOT ACTUALLY TRIGGER THE TRANS, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
IT MIGHT STAY BELOW CORRECT THAT THRESHOLD.
AND I, I, I'M WORRIED ABOUT THAT.
SO I WOULD RATHER MOVE FORWARD KNOWING THAT WITH 500 AND SOME UNITS PLUS A RETAIL COMPONENT UNDERNEATH THAT, IT IS EXTREMELY LIKELY TO HIT THAT.
ESPECIALLY IF WE CONSIDER THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT A REDEVELOPMENT, IT'S STARTING FROM SCRATCH.
AND SO I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND THAT WE DO THAT SO THAT WAY THEY CAN LOOK AT THINGS LIKE, HOW DOES ONE GET TO THESE PLACES? ONE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW IS THAT TDOT IS A KEY STAKEHOLDER.
AND THIS DISCUSSION AS WELL, WHICH IS NOT GONNA BE, IS, YOU KNOW, THEY WILL RECEIVE THE TIA IF IT IS TRIGGERED WHEN THE SITE PLAN APPLICATION IS FILED.
THEY'RE THE ONES WHO WILL GOVERN ACCESS TO 360.
AND AS FAR AS THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS CONCERNED, YOU'VE GOT MAYBE THREE OR 400 FEET OF LOSS CREEK THAT STILL REMAINS IN THE CITY'S JURISDICTION.
[01:00:01]
WEST IS NOW TRAVIS COUNTY AS IT WAS DIS ANNEXED WITH LOST CREEK PROPER.SO THAT WON'T BE INCLUDED IN THE TIA, ALL OF THE INTERSECTIONS, ALL OF THE SIGNALS, ALL OF THE SIDEWALKS ALONG 360, ALL OF THOSE COMPONENTS WILL BE AT THE DISCRETION OF TDOT, WHICH IS NOT PARTY TO THIS ZONING CASE.
SO I WOULD AGREE THAT WE SHOULD JUST LET THE CODE RUN ITS COURSE BECAUSE WHEN YOU, WHEN THEY DE ANNEXED, WALL CREEK BOULEVARD ALSO CAME OUT OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S JURISDICTION, THEN WENT TO TRAVIS COUNTY.
SO A LOT OF THE CONTROL OF LAW CREEK BOULEVARD, IT BELONGS TO THE COUNTY.
A LOT OF THE, AND ALL OF THE CONTROL OF 360 BELONGS TO TEXDOT.
RIGHT NOW ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THIS SPECIFIC SITE.
WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE U-TURN THAT WE CONTINUE TO ASSUME IS GOING TO BE THERE.
WELL, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ACCESS TO WALL CREEK BOULEVARD.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY SIDEWALKS.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY BIKE ACCESS, NOTHING.
AND, UH, THAT IS A CONCERN, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE SAID WE'RE BUILDING AN URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
THERE AGAIN, WE'RE PROVIDING A ZONING RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION OF A CAP OF WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO.
SO AGAIN, THEY HAVE TO, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO ADD THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL OVERLAY PROHIBITING THOSE OTHER USES THAT WOULD BE ATTACHED TO THIS.
YOU WANNA MAKE THAT MOTION AND THAT HERE'S WOULD BE A STANDALONE.
HERE'S THE THING, LONNIE, I'LL SAY, AND I AS I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO SECOND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF TRADE OFFS TO DIFFERENT APPROACHES THAT ARE SUBOPTIMAL.
LIKE FOR INSTANCE, I DON'T LIKE THE, OR LAZY YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
I THINK THAT'S A SUBSTANDARD WAY OF DOING ZONING.
RIGHT? I THINK THAT KIND OF TRYING TO MICROMANAGE THINGS ON SUCH A PERVERSE LEVEL CREATES A LOT OF COSTS THAT END UP HURTING THE CITY, HURTING THE STAFF, HURTING THE ABILITY TO EXECUTE ON THE THINGS THAT REALLY MATTER.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT I DO UNDERSTAND THAT CONCERNS COMING FROM AND WANT US TO KIND OF MOVE TOGETHER IN A VERY EFFECTIVE MANNER, I WILL VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE PUTTING FORWARD, DESPITE ME THINKING THAT'S JUST, THAT IT'S NOT A, NOT THE WAY THAT I WOULD SORT OF APPROACH THIS PROBLEM SET SIMILARLY, I'M SURE HOW YOU FEEL, HOW MAYBE YOU FEEL LIKE, OH, OR MAYBE A COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR GREENBERG FEELS ABOUT LIKE, OH, MAYBE THIS PROCESS HERE IS NOT TO YOUR LIKING.
THERE IS AN ELECTED BODY, THERE IS A PROFESSIONAL CLASS THAT REVIEWS THE CODE.
OUR ROLE IS TO MAKE SURE AND EVALUATE, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE ZONING OF WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR THIS, WHAT DO WE WANT TO SCORE HERE AND HERE.
AND IT ISN'T TO RE-LITIGATE THE PROCESS AT THE CODE LEVEL OR THE
AND SO FOR THAT, I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE, UM, COMMISSIONER STERN'S, UM, AMENDMENT.
WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE A MAIN MOTION YET.
OH, SO YOU NEED THE MAIN MOTION BEFORE.
WELL ANYWAYS, I'LL SUPPORT LONNIE'S, UH, COMMISSIONER STERN'S, UM, AMENDMENTS AND THE BASE MOTION, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S THE COMPROMISE THAT MAKES SENSE FOR GETTING SOMETHING DONE.
DO YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION? NO, LET'S HAVE THE MAIN MOTION FIRST I MOVE TO APPROVE, UM, THE REZONING RECOMMENDATION AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
AND SECOND TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
NOW WE CAN HAVE, NOW I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE, UM, SOME ADDITIONAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS TO, IN INCLUDE, TO INCLUDE PROHIBITING THE FOLLOWING USES OFFSITE ACCESSORY PARKING AND PEDICAB STORAGE.
WHAT ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE, THAT'S DIRECTION TO STAFF OUTSIDE OF THE RECOMMENDATION? I FEEL LIKE THAT SHOULD BE A SEPARATE ITEM.
IT'S NOT PART OF OUR MOTION WILL VOTING FOR THESE LEAD TO MORE SUPPORT FOR THE, THE MAIN RECOMMENDATION.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE PETTY CABS OUT IN THIS AREA.
THE OFFSITE ACCESSORY PARKING AREA IS WHERE BASICALLY, UM, DRIVERLESS CARS NEED A PLACE TO PARK.
THEY CAN'T JUST DRIVE AROUND THE CITY ALL NIGHT LONG.
UM, THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED ON THE HIGHWAY.
I DON'T SEE IT BEING AN ISSUE COMING OUT TO 360 TODAY.
BUT AS WE GET MORE AND MORE DRIVERLESS VEHICLES AND FEWER AND FEWER PEOPLE WITH CARS AND GARAGES, YOU'RE GONNA NEED MORE AND MORE PLACES FOR THESE CARS TO GO IN.
IT'LL BE A, IT'LL BE A VALUABLE PROBLEM FOR WISER PEOPLE TO SOLVE 20 YEARS FROM NOW.
AND IF WE COME IN AND PROHIBIT DEVELOPMENTS TODAY FROM HAVING THAT ACCESS, WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL IN HOW WE DO THAT.
'CAUSE AS THAT INDUSTRY GROWS AND YOU GET MORE AND MORE DRIVERLESS CARS THAT NEED TO GO SOMEPLACE AND RECHARGE AND STOP, UM, THERE NEEDS TO BE A PLACE TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE SOMEWHERE.
I JUST WANNA REMIND THE CHAIR THAT, UM, ALL OF OUR EXISTING PARKING GARAGES WILL VERY LIKELY HAVE SPACE AVAILABLE FOR LEASE AT THAT TIME.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT NEEDS TO BE HERE IN THE WATERSHED.
A A PLAN NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THIS SEPARATE AND APART FROM WHAT WE'RE DOING TO SAY THIS IS HOW WE'RE GONNA HANDLE THIS ISSUE.
IT'S, AND IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO THE FUTURE, YOU CAN
[01:05:01]
ALWAYS REMOVE THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAYBUT WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS UNDERSTAND NOT TO DO THESE RIGHT NOW.
SO THE MOTION WITH THE SECOND IS TO THE BASE MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH THE CONDITION THAT WE NOT ALLOW CONDITIONAL USES FOR OFFSITE ACCESSORY PARKING AND NOT ALLOW CONDITIONAL USE FOR PETTY CAB STORAGE AND DISPATCH JUST VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT.
THAT'S WHAT WE'LL BE VOTING ON.
WELL, WE'RE VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT FIRST.
SO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS ON THE, ON THE AMENDMENT, THE BASE ZONING WITH NO OFFSITE, UH, ACCESSORY PARKING AND NO PEDICAB STORAGE AND DISPATCH.
UH, DID YOU, DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR YOUR AMENDMENT? THERE'S A, A MOTION AND A SECOND.
SO THIS IS JUST A, A VOTE ON THAT QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? YES.
IS THE APPLICANT AGREEABLE TO THAT
UM, HONESTLY, WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS EARLIER TODAY, I THOUGHT WE WERE MAKING THEM CONDITIONAL AND I THINK THAT'S FINE.
I DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF ANXIETY ABOUT THE SHARED PARKING JUST BECAUSE I THINK OUR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ARE EVOLVING.
UM, I'M NOT GONNA STOP THE CASE TONIGHT OVER IT, BUT, UM, I WOULD PREFER TO LEAVE THAT ONE OFF.
WE WILL NOT BE DOING PETTY CABS HERE.
I'VE DRIVEN THAT ROADWAY ON A BICYCLE.
YOU GOTTA HAVE SOME POWERFUL LEGS TO GET DOWN THAT WALL STREET BOULEVARD.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? OKAY, SO WE'RE BACK TO THE BASE MOTION, WHICH IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS RECOMMENDED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SUPPORTING THE BASE RECOMMENDATION, RAISE YOUR HAND.
AND THIS IS JUST STAFF APPROVAL.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? WE HAVE THREE OPPOSED.
THAT WOULD PASS ON A SIX TO THREE VOTE.
NOW DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOME COMMENTS TO STAFF AS TO HOW WE WOULD LIKE THEM TO PROCEED AND JUST THESE WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION TO STAFF OF HOW WE WANT YOU TO PROCEED? OH, I, I WOULD MAKE THE SAME COMMENT THAT I MADE BEFORE, UM, THAT I RECOMMEND THAT TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS PROVIDE A WRITTEN ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS, TRANSPORTATION AND EMERGENCY ACCESS IMPACTS.
UM, I, I CAN CONTINUE, BUT UM, THE ANALYSIS SHOULD DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THEORETICAL TRIPS CREDITED TO THE EXISTING OFFICE ENTITLEMENT VERSUS ACTUAL CURRENT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS.
IN THE COURSE OF THIS DISCUSSION, WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT ONLY BEING 30% OCCUPIED AT THE MOMENT.
UH, IT SHOULD ALSO ADDRESS DRIVEWAY SAFETY SITE DISTANCE, THE LOST CREEK BOULEVARD AND LOOP 360 INTERSECTION EMERGENCY EVACUATION, THE ABSENCE OF SIDEWALKS, BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSIT.
AND THEN THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF NEAR, UM, NEARBY DEVELOPMENT AND TECH STATS LOOP 360 IMPROVEMENTS PLAN.
I'M GONNA ASK STAFF A QUESTION IF, IF HE GETS A SECOND ON THAT RECOMMENDATION.
DO WE NEED ANYTHING ELSE? DO WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE ON THAT? WE'RE JUST DIRECTING STAFF.
WE'RE NOT PUTTING A MOTION, WE'RE NOT PUTTING IT INTO A ZONING ORDINANCE.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR AN ORDINANCE.
HE JUST WANTS TO DIRECT I THAT IS A MOTION.
WELL, I'M ASKING DO WE NEED YEAH.
CAN HE ASKING THAT IN HAVING A SECOND? DOES THAT ACCOMPLISH WHAT HE'S WANTING TO DO? AND IT MAY BE A ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER QUESTION MORE THAN A STAFF QUESTION.
UM, SO I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE CAN BE A VOTE ON IT THERE.
NOTHING WILL JUST BE PLACED IN THE ORDINANCE, RIGHT? MM-HMM
DO WE NEED A VOTE ON THAT OR IS A MOTION YES, WE CREATE WORK GROUPS BY A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR HAND.
I'D JUST LIKE, SORRY, ON THE DISCUSSION, I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I SEE HOW THAT MAKES SENSE.
I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE VOTING FOR IT THOUGH, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE'S SO MANY, OR I KNOW THERE'S SO MANY CASES IN AUSTIN, ALL OF THEM THAT IT WOULDN'T BE, IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR TO ASK ONE DEVELOPMENT TO DO THAT IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN THROUGHOUT ALL THE, THE ENTIRE CITY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR HAND.
SO THAT MOTION DOES NOT PASS ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY.
WE WILL MOVE ON WITH OUR AGENDA.
[01:10:01]
WE AT IN OUR AGENDA? UH, THE ANNUAL, YEAH.[6. Discussion and action to approve the 2025 Annual Internal Review and Report. (Sponsored by Chair Smith and Vice Chair Greenberg)]
DISCUSSION AND ACTION.TO APPROVE THE 2025 ANNUAL INTERNAL REVIEW AND REPORT, WE, THIS COMMISSION, EVERY COMMISSION HAS TO SUBMIT AN ANNUAL REVIEW BY JULY 31ST, WHICH IS NEXT WEEK.
UM, IT'S NOT A REAL DETAIL STUDY.
THEY ASK A FEW QUESTIONS AND IT'S AN ONLINE REPORT THAT STAFF CAN'T DO.
SO I WILL BE THE ONE REQUIRED TO INPUT THE DATA ONLINE.
UM, I CAN READ TO YOU THE BASIC QUESTIONS AND I'M TRYING TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION WORKING WITH STAFF.
UM, LEMME GET THE RIGHT, HERE WE GO.
UM, SO THE QUESTIONS ARE BASICALLY THE NAME OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSION.
HAS THE BOARD OF COMMISSION'S ACTIONS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR COMPLIED WITH CITY COUNCIL DIRECTIVES AND BYLAWS? QUESTION MARK? UM, YES.
HOW MANY RECOMMENDATIONS DID YOUR BOARD OF COMMISSION APPROVE? I'M TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION ON WHAT THEY MEAN BY THAT.
UM, BECAUSE WE APPROVED TWO THINGS, BASICALLY, THE PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT AND NEW DEVELOPMENT, UH, REGULATION AND THE REQUEST THAT COUNCIL INITIATE AREA REGULATORY PLANS.
UM, THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO THINGS WE'VE ASKED.
BY DEFINITION, HOW MANY RECOMMENDATIONS DID YOUR BOARD APPROVE? WE RECOMMENDED EVERY ZONING CASE.
UM, SO I CAN LIST OUT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
I CAN LIST OUT 200 ZONING CASES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS IF WE, IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION THEY WANNA GO.
SO I'VE ASKED STAFF TO GET CLARIFICATION.
IS THAT WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR? BECAUSE NOT ONLY DO I HAVE TO GIVE THE NUMBER OF THOSE, I HAVE TO PLEASE LIST THE RECOMMENDATION NUMBERS.
UM, SO I WOULD HAVE TO INPUT A LOT OF DATA TO ANSWER THOSE THE WAY IT COULD BE INTERPRETED AS THAT'S A REQUEST FOR EVERY ZONING CASE OR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE.
UM, BUT STAFF'S GONNA CLARIFY THAT WITH ME.
UM, QUESTION FIVE IS, WHICH RECOMMENDATIONS ARE CLOSELY ALIGNED TO THE ORGANIZATION'S CORE MISSION? BOTH OF THOSE ARE, UM, WHICH RECOMMENDATIONS ARE ADJACENT TO THE ORGANIZATIONS? I THINK THOSE ARE CLOSELY ALIGNED, NOT ADJACENT.
SO NEITHER ONE OF THEM ARE ADJACENT.
PLEASE SHARE ANY FURTHER CONTEXT THAT COULD SUPPORT OR EXPLAIN YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE WILL PROVIDE THE MOTIONS THEMSELVES.
IS THERE ANOTHER BODY THAT OVERLAPS THE ROLE? YES.
UM, DO THE BYLAWS NEED TO BE UPDATED? NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
UM, ON A SCALE OF ONE TO 10, HOW ENGAGED ARE THE BOARD MEMBERS OR COMMISSION MEMBERS? I THINK THEY'RE VERY, WHAT? I DON'T KNOW.
IS THAT A ONE OR A 10?
I'M INCLINED TO SAY FIVE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE I'M ASSUMING WHEN I GET TO THE ACTUAL QUESTION, IT'LL TELL ME WHICH ONE IS ONE AND WHICH ONE IS 10.
I THINK 10 IS A HIGHER NUMBER.
BUT ON A SCALE OF ONE TO 10, HOW ENGAGED IS THE COMMUNITY? THEY'RE VERY ENGAGED.
DO YOU SEE ANY GAPS IN IMPORTANT POLICIES THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY COVERED BY A BORDER COMMISSION? I THINK WE HAVE A BOARD OF COMMISSION FOR EVERYTHING.
UM, AND LIST THE BOARD'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR THE NEW CALENDAR YEAR.
DO WE HAVE ANYTHING FOR THE NEW CALENDAR YEAR WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT RIGHT NOW THAT WE HAVEN'T ALREADY THOUGHT ABOUT
BUT I THINK THIS WILL BE MORE, IS THERE SOMETHING VERY SPECIFIC? NOT AGENDA ITEMS, BUT THIS IS A, SOMETHING WE WANT TO YEAH.
ALONG THE LINES OF THE PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENTS AND NEW DEVELOPMENT AND REQUEST COUNCIL INITIATED AN URBAN, AN AREA REGULATORY PLAN.
IT SEEMS LIKE WE NEED SOME CLARIFICATION ABOUT LAND USE POLICY WEST OF MOPAC, AS YOU STATED SO ELOQUENTLY.
WELL ALL OF THAT IS DESIRED IS DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE.
SO THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE IS, IS A LINE ON A MAP THAT'S GENERALLY EVERYTHING WEST OF MOPAC.
BUT, UM, OUR, OUR CODE DOESN'T REFLECT THAT IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.
LIKE WE CAN NEVER USE THAT AS A REASON NOT TO BUILD, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT 22, 22 COUNCIL BOARDS WERE BUILT SPECIFICALLY AROUND THAT.
WELL IT'S JUST, UM, IT NEVER SEEMS TO APPLY TO SIX 20 OR 360 OR 2222.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND THE BEST ARGUMENT I CAN MAKE IS ABOUT THE, UM, IMAGINE AUSTIN GROWTH PLAN.
YOU KNOW, THAT CHECKLIST, BUT THAT'S IT.
THERE, THERE'S NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON GUADALUPE AND A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON SIX 20.
AND, AND YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT WHEN YOU LOOK AT ZONING, ZONING IS UNIFORM ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY.
THE WATERSHED REGULATIONS ARE VERY DIFFERENT EAST AND WEST.
AND THE WATERSHED REGULATIONS APPLY REGARDLESS OF THE ZONING.
SO THE ZONING DOESN'T GET YOU AROUND A WATERSHED.
REGULATION ZONING IS UNIFORM THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
WE DON'T WANT TO TREAT ONE SIDE OF THE CITY DIFFERENTLY THAN WE TREAT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CITY WHEN IT COMES TO ZONING.
WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T BUILD WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND ITS SPECIFIC ORDINANCES WHICH DO VARY GREATLY FROM WHAT IS IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE.
AND EVEN WITHIN THOSE ZONES, THERE'S, THERE'S VARIOUS DEGREES.
THE CLOSER YOU GET TO THE BARTON CREEK, THE MORE STRINGENT THOSE GETS.
SO WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IS REALLY A CODE ISSUE, NOT A ZONING ISSUE.
UM, NOW IF YOU WANTED TO LOOK AT DOING DIFFERENT ZONING THROUGHOUT THE CITY BASED ON THOSE CONTROLS, THAT WOULD BE A WHOLE DIFFERENT APPROACH TO ZONING,
[01:15:01]
UH, THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE NOT TO, AND AGAIN, ZONING IS SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH BOTH.ONE DOESN'T GET YOU JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DO SOMETHING IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND YOU CAN'T DO IT IN ZONING DOESN'T MEAN WELL THE ZONING DOESN'T APPLY.
SO THAT'S THE WAY IT, IT WORKS ON THE, WHICH IS WHY A LOT OF THIS STUFF WE DO IN ZONING, IT'S LIKE IT JUST DEFERRED.
IT'S, YOU HAVE DIFFERENT REGULATIONS, UM, AND, AND THESE THINGS AND, AND THAT'S ADDRESSED AT THE SITE PLAN PHASE FOR THAT REASON.
BECAUSE DIFFERENT REGULATIONS APPLY AT THE SITE PLAN PHASE.
DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU'RE AT AND WHAT YOU'RE DOING, UH, YOU MIGHT HAVE LIKE A 60% IMPROVE DISCOVER.
YOU MIGHT HAVE A 60% IMPROVE COVER LIMITATION IN THE ZONING CASE.
THEN WHEN YOU GET TO THE, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT BE IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE LIMITED TO 20%, 20% OR 15%.
SO IT'S, IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT WE CAN SAY, YEAH, YOU CAN BUILD 60% IMPERVIOUS COVER PER THE ZONING.
I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, MY CONCERN IS NOT REALLY JUST WATER.
I MEAN WE HAVE ISSUES LIKE FIRE PRONE AREAS MM-HMM
WE HAVE, UM, ISSUES WHERE, UM, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RURAL ROAD VERSUS URBAN.
UM, AND THE WWE APPLIES, LIKE I SAY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE WWE MAP AND YOU PULL OUT THE URBAN CORE, AND I'M MAKING A NUMBER UP, IT'S ROUGHLY 90% WHEN I EYEBALL IT OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS NOW SUBJECT TO THE WWE.
AND WHICH COMMISSION WINDS UP WORKING ON THAT.
THE FIRE DEPARTMENT REGULATES THAT.
UH, SO I ACTUALLY KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT 'CAUSE I USED TO SERVE ON BUILDING AND STANDARDS.
UM, SO THAT WOULD BE A, OH GOD, IT'S A REAL LONG NAME.
SO BUILDING STANDARDS IS THE QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY OCCASIONALLY WORK TOGETHER.
THERE IS ONE FOR FIRE, THERE'S ONE FOR ELECTRICAL, THERE'S ONE FOR, THERE'S, I THINK THAT THERE'S A COUPLE MORE.
SO THOSE WORK TO MAKE PROPOSALS, THEY WORK WITH FIRE DEPARTMENT WITH THE RELEVANT CITY BODIES.
THEY PROPOSE THINGS I THINK SOMETIMES BUILDING IN ANGELES REVIEWS THEM.
UH, WE DO AN ANNUAL REVIEW OF ALL OF THE CURRENT CODES BASICALLY.
AND THEN THE BOARD GOES PROPOSED TO THE CITY AND THEN THE CITY ADOPT.
THEY'RE JUST, IT'S JUST NOT US.
THERE'S A TECHNICAL ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL KNOWN AS THE TARP.
AND THE TARP LOOKS AT ALL REVIEWS FROM EVERYBODY.
SO THE
THEY SUBMIT THAT TO THE TARP TECHNICAL ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL.
THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL MAKES COMMENTS BACK TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THE FIRE DEPARTMENT DECIDES WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO LISTEN TO THOSE COMMENTS OR NOT, AND THEN APPROVE AND MAKES THEIR RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF THOSE ORDINANCES.
OR YOU CAN JOIN THE CODES AND ORDINANCES.
JOINT COMMITTEE, THAT'S WHAT I, CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE, YES.
YOU CAN JOIN THAT COMMITTEE CODES AND ORDINANCES DOES LOOK AT CHANGES TO THE WWE CODE AND THEN IT GOES TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN IT GOES TO COUNCILS.
IT'S CHANGING BECAUSE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, RIGHT.
THE CODES AND ORDINANCES HAVE, HAVE KIND OF GOTTEN SCRAMBLED AND THEY WERE BASICALLY MAKING CHANGES ON A WEEKLY, DAILY BASIS.
AND IT'S ALL BEEN RAINED IN NOW AND SAID, NO, WE'RE GONNA MAKE ANNUAL CHANGES.
UH, WE CAN'T CHANGE THE RULES EVERY WEEK.
UM, SO WE'RE GONNA, ALL THE RULES ARE GONNA GET ROLLED UP INTO AN ANNUAL REVIEW PROCESS MOVING FORWARD.
SO ANYWAY, THAT'S WHAT I'M GONNA DO WITH THIS ANNUAL REPORT UNLESS ANYBODY SAYS THEY WANNA STEP IN AND DO IT.
UM, I TRUST YOU TO DO IT, BUT MAYBE IF BY THE 30TH IT COULD BE, WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT DAY OF THE WEEK THAT IS.
UM, IT COULD BE SHARED WITH THE STAFF.
AND THE STAFF COULD SHARE IT WITH THE COMMISSION SO THAT IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES THAT ANYONE WANTS TO MAKE BEFORE THE 31ST AND IT'S DUE ON THE 31ST, THERE'S NOT REALLY A PENALTY.
IT DOESN'T, IT IT COULD PUT US INTO AN AUDIT POSITION WITH CERTAIN, WITH THE AUDITOR.
SO WE COULD, WE DON'T WANNA BE ON THE BAD SIDE RIGHT.
OF FOLLOWING THE RULES ONCE IT'S, THEN I'D SAY JUST SHARE IT AND IF THERE'S ANY FEEDBACK, ANY POSSIBLY CHANGES COULD BE MADE.
THAT'S A QUESTION I WOULD ASK STAFF TO LOOK TO.
IT COULD BE SHARED IF, IF I, IF I FILL IT OUT JULY 28TH AND IT GOES ONLINE JULY 28TH MM-HMM
EVERYBODY WILL HAVE ACCESS TO IT AND CAN LOOK AT IT IF SOMEONE RAISES THEIR HAND AND SAY, OOH, I DON'T LIKE THE WAY YOU ANSWER QUESTION SEVEN, CAN YOU CHANGE IT? CAN I GO IN AND CHANGE IT BEFORE THE 31ST? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
I'LL MAKE SURE TO REACH OUT TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE FOR THAT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW OF A WAY TO MAYBE DON'T SAVE, FILL IT OUT MAY.
I'LL, ILL, IF THERE'S A WAY TO NOT SAVE, I'LL DO THAT.
IF THERE'S A WAY TO PRINT IT BEFORE I DO IT, I'LL EMAIL IT TO EVERYBODY.
BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT THE CHAIR FOR PLANNING COMMISSION DID.
I THINK THERE MAY BE A WAY YOU CAN SAVE YOUR SCREEN, BUT I'LL CONFIRM WHAT THE CLERK'S OFFICE JUST MAKE SUBMIT.
IF THERE'S A WAY I CAN SAVE SCREEN AND EMAIL IT TO EVERYBODY, I'LL EMAIL IT TO OUR, OUR LIAISON AND SHE CAN EMAIL IT OUT TO EVERYBODY.
UM, CODE IN ORDERS IS A JOINT COMMITTEE, NO UPDATES SINCE THE LAST MEETING.
CONFERENCE PLAN, JOINT COMMITTEE, THERE'S NO UPDATES.
SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE.
WE DON'T MEET UNTIL SEPTEMBER.
WE CAN WORKING GROUP UPDATE LAND USE COMMISSION ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
[01:20:01]
GONNA KIND OF SQUANDER UNTIL CITY COUNCIL GIVES US DIRECTION.OH, SO TAYLOR MAJOR HAS THE DOCUMENT HE DOES.
AND, UH, I THINK REALLY UNTIL COUNCIL GIVES US A LITTLE MORE DIRECTION ON THAT ONE.
IT'S JUST GONNA KIND OF HANG OUT THERE, I'M AFRAID.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ]
SO THIS HAS COME UP BEFORE AND TODAY ABOUT THE WAY IT'S DECIDED WHETHER OR NOT TO DO A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.WE HAD A BRIEFING ON THAT, SO WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER BRIEFING ON THAT.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE, WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO VOTE TO HAVE A WORKING GROUP, BUT THAT WE PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA TO PERHAPS HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGE THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN OR CHANGE THE WAY THE CODE IS INTERPRETED CONCERNING EXACTLY.
THE THEORETICAL VERSUS THE ACTUAL IS IS THE MAIN THING THAT, THAT BOTHERS ME.
BUT I WOULD, WE COULD LOOK AT THAT.
UM, SO I'D LIKE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING TRAFFICKED IMPACT TO DIALYSIS.
CAN YOU JUST EXPAND A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT YOU MEAN BY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEORETICAL AND ACTUAL? YEAH.
WELL WHEN THEY SAY THE CASE WE HEARD TODAY, THE OCCUPANCY OF THOSE BUILDINGS IS ABOUT 30% OCCUPIED.
AND YET WHEN THEY CALCULATE WHETHER OR NOT THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC THEY USE AS IF THE BUILDING'S FULLY OCCUPIED.
FOR T ONLY LOOKING AT USE 30% OCCUPANCY TO USE.
SO YOU'RE ONLY LOOKING AT THE DELTA.
THAT'S I FEEL LIKE THAT THAT'S STANDARD PRACTICE THOUGH, RIGHT? YES.
BUT ROAD CAN SAY STANDARD PRACTICE IS TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL, THE PROBLEM IS YOU HAVE TO DEFINE ACTUAL 'CAUSE ACTUAL CHANGES ON A MONTH TO MONTH BASIS.
HEY, THAT'S, EVERY MONTH'S GONNA CHANGE.
SOMEONE'S GONNA MOVE IN AROUND OF EVERY BUILDING.
WELL, LET'S HAVE THIS IN THE FUTURE.
IT COMES UP OVER AND OVER AND I GET WHY IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE TRANSPORTATION STAFF COME AND, AND TALK TO US ABOUT THE PROS AND CONS OF USING ACTUAL VERSUS THEORETICAL, UM, DENSITY.
WHEN YOU DO A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE VERSUS LIKE A, THERE'S A, A LOWER LEVEL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, IT'S LIKE BELOW 2000 IT'S NOTHING.
AND THEN ABOVE 2000 YOU GET ONE LEVEL AND THEN ABOVE FIVE YOU GET MORE.
WELL, REGARDLESS OF THAT IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS HOW, HOW IT'S CALCULATED.
AND I THINK THAT THAT'S, I FEEL LIKE THAT THAT'S REALLY GONNA GOING TO BE REALLY DIFFICULT TO DO.
LET'S JUST SAY THAT YOU HAVE A RESTAURANT THAT IS CLOSED DOWN, RIGHT? RIGHT.
AND HAS A FULL CAPACITY OF, YOU KNOW, STARTING UP AS A RESTAURANT AND PRODUCING ALL OF THE TRIPS THAT IT'S ENTITLED TO AND THAT THE DEVELOPER OF THAT RESTAURANT PROBABLY PAID FOR MITIGATION TO THE CITY IN TERMS OF INTERSECTIONS OR STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WELL THERE IS, AND YOU'RE SAYING A MANUAL THAT SAYS OVER A RESTAURANT AS MANY SQUARE FEET, HOW MANY TRIPS IT IS.
AND WE'RE NOT OBJECTING NECESSARILY TO THAT.
WE'RE JUST OBJECTING TO WHAT THEY'RE COUNTING SOMETHING.
I THINK IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE.
YOU GO DOWN THE, THE SLIPPERY SLOPE OF SAYING THIS IS A VERY POPULAR RESTAURANT, IT'S MAXED OUT EVERY NIGHT.
OR THIS IS A REALLY LOUSY RESTAURANT AND WE ONLY GET 10 CUSTOMERS A DAY, SO WE'RE GONNA DO A TIA BASED ON 10 CUSTOMERS A DAY BECAUSE NO ONE LIKES THE RESTAURANT
UH, IT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE TO GO DOWN, BUT I WOULD RATHER HAVE STAFF COME IN AND GIVE US THOSE PROS AND CONS.
LET'S, LET'S, LET'S DISCUSS IT.
SO IS THIS AN OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATION? YES.
CAN WE, FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEM, CAN WE GET A FIRST AND A SECOND OR TWO CO-SPONSORS ON THIS ITEM? I'LL CO-SPONSOR IT.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR EXPLANATION WITHIN THE TIA STRUCTURE PROS AND CONS OF USING THEORETICAL VERSUS ACTUAL NUMBERS.
WELL ACTUALLY WE'VE ALREADY HAD THAT.
UM, THAT'S THE REQUEST THOUGH, CORRECT? NO, THE REQUEST IS THAT WE'LL CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION I THINK OUT OF THE PRESENTATION.
WE'VE ALREADY HAD A PRESENTATION ON THIS ISSUE, NOT ON THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE.
WE HAD, UH, OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF TIAS AND DIFFERENT TYPES OF STUDIES, BUT NOT ON THE PROS AND CONS OF THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE.
AND JUST THERE'S NO, TO BACKTRACK A LITTLE PRESENTATION, THERE ARE, IT'S WRITTEN INTO THE CODE WHAT THE PROCESS IS FOR CALCULATING RIGHT TRIPS AND IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT GOES AGAINST WHAT IS ALREADY WRITTEN INTO CODE? THAT'S THE QUESTION WE'RE ASKING.
WELL, LIKE WE'RE RECOMMENDING, UM, EASEMENTS THAT AREN'T IN THE CODE RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S GOING AGAINST WHAT'S IN THE CODE.
WELL WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING THAT.
WE'RE ASKING CITY COUNCIL TO LOOK AT THAT AND LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND STAFF TO LOOK AT THAT.
I MEAN OUR, IT IS WITHIN THE AUTHORITY OF OUR BODY TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE.
THE CODE AND THE STAFF MAY COME BACK IN AND SAYS, WE ABSOLUTELY CANNOT DO AN ACCESS EASEMENT.
WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS GETTING INFORMATION ON THE BEST WAY TO PROCEED WITH ACTUAL VERSUS THEORETICAL ON TIAS.
AND WE, THIS, THIS IS GONNA KEEP HAPPENING OVER AND OVER WITH THE SCHOOL CLOSURES, SO IT MIGHT BE WORTHWHILE
[01:25:01]
FOR US TO GET AHEAD OF IT.AND KNOW WHAT LINES IN THE SAND WE NEED TO DRAW.
SO WHAT I'M GONNA DO IS I'M GONNA DRAFT UP SOME LANGUAGE AND SPEAK WITH THEIR TRANSPORTATION STAFF AND THEN WE'LL SEND YOU THE, THE TWO CO-SPONSORS, THE POTENTIAL LANGUAGE THAT WE'LL BE USING.
BUT I THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO INCLUDE A POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION IN THE AGENDA ITEM.
ANYTHING ELSE? IF NOT, IT'S 7 25 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.