[CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:04] 609. I'M GOING TO CALL TO ORDER THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION. TODAY IS TUESDAY, AUGUST 18TH, 2026. AGAIN, IT IS 6:09 P.M.. WE WILL START WITH A ROLL CALL. ROLL CALL. CHAIR HANK SMITH, I'M PRESENT, VICE CHAIR BETSY GREENBERG HERE. SECRETARY RYAN ZINKE. COMMISSIONER OR PARLIAMENTARIAN ALEJANDRO FLORES. LUIS LUGO HERE. SCOTT. BOONE. COMMISSIONER. DAVID FOUTS HERE. COMMISSIONER. LONNIE STERN. HE IS NOT HERE. COMMISSIONER. ANDREW. CORTEZ PRESENT. COMMISSIONER CHRISTIAN SEPI. AND COMMISSIONER TAYLOR MAJOR HERE. AND SINCE YOU'RE ON REMOTE. COMMISSIONER MAJOR, DID YOU FILL OUT YOUR FORM AND FAX IT IN OR EMAIL IT IN? NO, BUT I'LL DO IT TONIGHT IF YOU'LL DO IT TONIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY. IS THAT OKAY IF HE DOES IT TONIGHT BEFORE WE LEAVE? WAIT. IS THAT BEING PASSED AROUND THE ATTENDANCE? OH, YEAH. I NEVER GOT IT. IF YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND FILL IT OUT. WE DO NEED THAT BEFORE WE MAKE ANY VOTES. OKAY. GO AHEAD. AND IF YOU CAN DO IT RIGHT NOW, I THINK YOU CAN JUST SAY HE'S ATTENDING REMOTELY AND NOT ABSTAINING. RIGHT. SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THE FORM. THANK YOU. YEAH. I DON'T HAVE ANY ABSTENTIONS TONIGHT. YEAH, BUT BUT YOU STILL NEED TO FILL IT OUT OVERNIGHT OR FAX IT IN. EMAIL IT FAX EMAIL IT IN. SORRY, EMAIL THAT I'M OLD. I FAXED IT BEFORE YOU VOTE. OKAY. I CAN START DOING IT NOW. THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU. ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION? NO. CHAIR. OKAY. ITEM ONE WILL BE THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. [Consent Agenda] WE HAVE TWO SETS OF MINUTES. ONE FROM TUESDAY, JULY 21ST, 2026 AND ONE FROM AUGUST 4TH, 2026. ANY COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES? IF NOT, THOSE WILL STAY ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM TWO IS A REZONING CASE C142025-006 FOR CIRCLE C, TRACT 110 IS 11, TEN AND A HALF. SOUTHWEST SOUTH PARKWAY SOUTH MOPAC EXPRESSWAY SOUTHBOUND. SORRY CIRCLE C LAND IS WHAT IS INCLUDED. THE STAFF REQUEST IS. OR THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS CSMUCO TO CSMUCO. THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE CONDITIONS OF ZONING FOR TRACT ONE AND GOMUCO2GOMUCO TO CHANGE CONDITIONS OF ZONING FOR TRACT TWO. SO THERE'S TWO TRACTS INVOLVED. IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND IT IS UP FOR DISCUSSION. ITEM THREE IS AN EV VARIANCE. SP 2026-0221D SP GREAT WAVE IS A PERMIT AND AGAIN IT IS A APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. THE REQUEST IS TO VARY FROM LDC 258341 TO ALLOW CUT UP TO 20FT AND REQUESTED VARY FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 258342 TO ALLOW FILL UP TO 20FT AND THE CONSENT REQUEST IS TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEN PENDING LEGAL REVIEW. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE FIVE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS. I'M GOING TO READ THOSE INTO THE RECORD. THE FIRST ONE IS TREE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS AT 150%, WITH 110% OF THOSE UNITS ON SITE IN TERMS OF CALIPER INCHES AND A MINIMUM OF 670 TREES PLANTED. SECOND ITEM THAT WE'RE ADDING ON IS AN ON SITE WATER RECLAMATION VIA A RAIN BARREL CATCHMENT SYSTEM FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE. THIRD ITEM IS PROVIDING NO MOW ZONE WITHIN 50FT OF THE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE ALONG MOPAC, EXCEPT AS NEEDED AROUND THE DETENTION POND. THE FOURTH BULLET IS 100% NATIVE PLANTING AROUND THE SITE, AND NO ORNAMENTAL TREES WILL BE INCLUDED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPENDIX F. AND FINALLY, THE FIFTH BULLET IS. 10% OF NEW PARKING SPOTS WILL INCLUDE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS AND AGAIN, THIS IS PENDING LEGAL REVIEW AND INCLUDES ALL OTHER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. SO ARE THERE I MEAN SORRY, JUST STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS WITH CONDITIONS. SO THE CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM TWO TO JULY 21ST AND AUGUST 4TH, 2026. ITEM TWO IS A DISCUSSION CASE. ITEM THREE IS CONSENT APPROVAL AS MODIFIED BY WHAT I READ INTO THE RECORD. IS THERE ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM THREE? IS THERE ANYBODY ON THE LINE TO SPEAK ON ITEM THREE? SO WE HAVE ASHLEY WHO'S IN. SHE'S WAVING HER RIGHT. SHE'S IN THE BACK. SHE'S SAYING SHE DOESN'T NEED TO TALK AND WE'RE GOOD TO GO. SO THE CONSENT AGENDA AGAIN IS ITEM. THE MINUTES FROM THE TWO MINUTES. ITEM TWO IS DISCUSSION. AND ITEM THREE IS THE APPROVAL AS MODIFIED BY WHAT I READ INTO THE RECORD. [00:05:04] DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? MOTION. MOTION. SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. THAT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. DISCUSSION ITEM ITEM TWO. REZONING C142025-006 FOR CIRCLE C, TRACT 110, DISTRICT EIGHT. I DO WANT TO READ INTO THE RECORD A EMAIL I GOT FROM CITY LEGAL. SO IT'LL KIND OF NARROW THE DISCUSSION TODAY. SAYS FOR ITEM TWO REZONING LOCATION C142025-006 FOR CIRCLE C, TRACT 110, DISTRICT EIGHT. THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS REVIEWED THE CASE AND THE NOTICE FOR THIS REQUIREMENT FOR THE CASE. THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS NO CONCERNS WITH THIS CASE MOVING FORWARD TONIGHT, AS DISCUSSED IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE ZONING CASE DOES NOT IMPACT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, NOR DOES IT INVOLVE SB 840 AT THIS TIME. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO REALLY HAVE ANY DISCUSSION OVER THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR SB 840 BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT INVOLVED IN THE ZONING CASE. AS A REMINDER, AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT BEFORE THE COMMISSION TODAY, JUST THE REZONING REQUEST. THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WILL ADDRESS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH CITY COUNCIL. AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WOULD REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. AT THAT STAGE, THE PUBLIC WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE AMENDMENT. THE ZONING CASE MAY BE MAY PROCEED. PLEASE MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION YOU SEE FIT FOR THE ZONING REQUEST. SO THAT IS FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. SO REALLY, WE'RE LIMITING OURSELVES. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, SB 840 OR THE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN CIRCLE C AND THE CITY AND SO FORTH. THOSE WILL BE RESOLVED AT CITY COUNCIL, NOT HERE TONIGHT. THIS IS JUST THE ZONING CASE. SO IF WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. I ALSO JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT THERE WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT REQUEST FOR THIS ITEM. HOWEVER, THAT REQUEST HAS BEEN RESCINDED, SO WE'LL BE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS CASE OBVIOUSLY AS A DISCUSSION ITEM. SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO ON THE AGENDA. CASEY 1420 250064 CIRCLE C TRACT 110 LOCATED AT 110, TEN AND A HALF SOUTH MOPAC EXPRESSWAY SOUTHBOUND. THIS CASE WAS LAST HEARD AT THE MAY 5TH ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WHERE CSMUCO COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING TO CHANGE THE CONDITIONS OF ZONING WAS APPROVED ALONG WITH ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS. SINCE THEN, THE APPLICANT HAS AMENDED THEIR REZONING REQUEST TO REVISE THE SUBJECT TRACT BOUNDARY TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL 0.294 ACRES. THE UNDEVELOPED SUBJECT TRACT NOW CONSISTS OF 67.432 ACRES AND IS IDENTIFIED AS TRACT ONE, WHICH IS THE ENTIRETY OF THE ORIGINAL TRACT B AND TRACT TWO, WHICH IS THE NEWLY ADDED 0.294 ACRE PORTION OF TRACT B1. TRACT ONE IS CURRENTLY ZONED C, S, M, U, C O, AND TRACT TWO IS CURRENTLY ZONED GOMUCO, COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING. THE ORIGINAL REQUEST FOR TRACT ONE HAS NOT CHANGED. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY FOR BOTH TRACKS. THE REQUEST WOULD REMOVE THE PROHIBITION ON VEHICULAR ACCESS TO DAHLGREN AVENUE FOR BOTH TRACKS ONE AND TWO, AND REMOVE CURRENT SEVEN CURRENTLY PROHIBITED USES FROM TRACT ONE ONLY. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING C, S, MUCO FOR TRACT ONE AND GOMECO FOR TRACT TWO. TO CHANGE THE CONDITIONS OF ZONING AND TO ALLOW THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. I'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. WE ALSO HAVE STAFF FROM TRANSPORTATION AVAILABLE. OKAY. OKAY, SO CHAIR BEFORE WE GET STARTED READING THE NAMES, WE ALSO HAVE A LIST OF THOSE WHO ARE NOT SPEAKING. WE WOULD LIKE TO READ THOSE OFF NOW. OKAY, OKAY. NOT SPEAKING FOR ITEM TWO IN FAVOR IS KATE KINISKI. IN OPPOSITION IS SEVEN SEVEN VASSAR. AND THEN REBECCA BUTLER, AMY WAGNER, SUSAN DAVIS AND THEN FOR THREE WAS ADRIAN FLANNERY AND THEN FOR ITEM THREE AS WELL, IT WAS AMBER ORTIZ. GREG. AND THAT WAS IN FAVOR IN THE PREVIOUS ONE IS IN OPPOSITION. THAT'S JUST FOR THE RECORD. AND SO NOW GOING TO SPEAKERS, WE'RE GOING TO START WITH THE APPLICANT, AMANDA SWARR, WHO IS RECEIVING A TOTAL OF NINE MINUTES WITH DONATED TIME FROM TAMARA DAVIS. TAMARA, ARE YOU ARE YOU HERE? YES. 10S. I ONLY GET ONE TIME. [00:10:13] GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS AMANDA SAWYER WITH TURNER GROUP. THANK YOU FOR LETTING US PRESENT THIS TO YOU THIS EVENING. AS STAFF MENTIONED, YOU HEAR 110. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME YOU'VE SEEN THIS CASE. THIS CASE WAS BEFORE YOU ON MAY 5TH. AT THAT TIME, THE COMMISSION VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO RECOMMEND THE ZONING CASE TO MOVE FORWARD. SINCE THEN, THERE HAVE BEEN. THERE'S BEEN ONE SLIGHT CHANGE TO THE CASE. HOWEVER, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE CASE REMAINS ENTIRELY AS IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED ON BY THIS COMMISSION, AS STAFF MENTIONED. WE HAVE ADDED A TRACT TWO TO THIS CASE, WHICH CONSISTS OF 0.294 ACRES. THAT'LL SHOW YOU ON THE NEXT SLIDE SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE THAT IS LOCATED. BUT NO CHANGES ARE TO TRACT ONE. SO WHAT IS SHOWN IN BLUE ON THIS SLIDE IS THE ORIGINAL ZONING CASE AREA WHICH IS KNOWN AS TRACT ONE. TRACK TWO IS THE SMALL YELLOW AREA. THAT IS THAT 0.294 ACRES. THE AREA WAS ADDED AS AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION IS. THAT IS WHERE THE ACCESS POINT TO DAHLGREN HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONTEMPLATED. HOWEVER, WE WERE ADVISED THAT IT WAS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE THAT AREA IN THE REZONING. THERE ARE. I WILL REPEAT, THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO WHAT WAS APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION FOR. THE AREA IN BLUE IS TRACT ONE AND THE ONLY ADDITIONAL PIECE TO THIS CASE IS THE ADDITION OF THE TRACT TWO, WHICH WILL HAVE THE VEHICULAR ACCESS THAT CROSSES IT. SHOWING THIS AS STAFF MENTIONED IT, I'M A VISUAL PERSON. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RED LINE ORDINANCE IN YOUR BACKUP TRACT, BE THE CHANGES TO THAT OR WHAT'S KNOWN AS TRACT ONE. TRACT B ONE IS WHAT IS KNOWN AS TRACT TWO. AGAIN, THIS REZONING IS PART OF A LARGER TRACT 110 TRACT 110 CONSISTS OF 190.94 ACRES. THIS IS JUST WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS PROPERTY WILL BE CLUSTERED. I'M GOING TO HIT JUST A COUPLE OF HIGHLIGHTS PRETTY QUICKLY TO RUN THROUGH. I KNOW THERE'S A COUPLE OF COMMISSIONERS THAT AREN'T HERE. JUST A REMINDER, THIS IS NOT AN UNENTITLED TRACT. THIS TRACT CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF ENTITLEMENTS FOR 651,000FT² OF OFFICE. WE ARE PROPOSING UP TO 1000 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THERE IS ALSO EXISTING APPROXIMATELY 10,000FT² OF RETAIL THAT WILL IS ALLOWED TO CARRY OVER THINGS THAT HAVE NOT CHANGED. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE TO RUN THROUGH THESE REAL QUICK. WE HAVE MADE NO CHANGES TO THE PERMITTED OR PROPOSED RESTRICTED USES, AS THEY WERE ORIGINALLY PRESENTED TO THIS COMMISSION ON MAY THE 5TH. ALL OF THE SETBACKS AND HEIGHT LIMITATIONS THAT ARE IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY REMAIN. AS A REMINDER, THAT IS A 375 FOOT SETBACK BEFORE YOU CAN GET TO 60FT IN HEIGHT. TODAY'S SETBACK IS 75FT UNDER CURRENT CODE. AGAIN, MAINTAINING THE 1000 UP TO 1000 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE PROPERTY. THAT IS A TOTAL OF 5.2 UNITS PER ACRE ACROSS THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY. AGAIN, ONLY 16.3 ACRES OF IMPERVIOUS COVER ALLOWED. THAT'S 8.6 ACRES ACROSS 198.6% ACROSS 190 ACRE TRACT. THE PROJECT IS FULLY COMPLIANT. THERE IS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISION THAT IS, 10% OF THE UNITS WILL BE PROVIDED AT 80% OF THE MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME. THAT IS A PRIVATE, RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT HAS BEEN EXECUTED BY ALL PARTIES. THERE IS THE PROPOSED TRAIL NETWORK. THE CHANGE IN USES DOES PROVIDE, AS WE TALKED IN LENGTH LAST TIME, A SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN OVERALL VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY, AS WELL AS PEAK HOUR TRIPS PER DAY FROM THE USE THAT IS ALLOWED ON THE SITE TODAY TO THE PROPOSED USE. AND THEN THE TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESS REQUIREMENTS. THIS IS THE PIECE. I JUST WANT TO TAKE A QUICK MINUTE TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON. SO WHILE THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO WHAT WAS PROPOSED AND WHAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY VOTED ON BY THIS COMMISSION, THERE HAS BEEN SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT HAS COME OUT. SO AS YOU ALL HEARD LAST TIME, WE ARE HAVE BEEN REQUIRED BY CITY STAFF TO PROVIDE TWO POINTS OF VEHICULAR INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR THE SITE. I'M. AGAIN, I'M A VISUAL PERSON. GIVEN WHERE THIS SITS. THAT LEAVES TWO OPTIONS. ONE BEING A VEHICULAR ACCESS POINT TO DAHLGREN, WHICH IS SHOWN ON THE LEFT. THAT WILL BE IN A GATED DRIVEWAY FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT ALLOWS INGRESS AND EGRESS. THE SECOND WOULD HAVE BEEN THE FULL EXTENSION OF SOUTH BAY. I WILL AGAIN NOTE THAT SOUTH BAY WAS PULLED FROM THE S&P SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND IS NO LONGER CONSIDERED A CITY ROAD. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, TWO QUESTIONS THAT WE RECEIVED BOTH AT THE COMMISSION AND SUBSEQUENTLY WAS, [00:15:06] IS THERE THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE A SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH BAY AND MOPAC SO THAT THERE COULD BE ONE SINGULAR POINT AND THAT BE A FULL TURNING MOVEMENT? WE RECEIVED FEEDBACK FROM TXDOT IN WRITING THAT THEY WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR THE FULL SIGNALIZATION OF THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH BAY AND MOPAC. THE SECOND QUESTION THAT WE RECEIVED IS WHY DON'T YOU GO AND GET ANOTHER VEHICULAR ACCESS POINT ON MOPAC BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH RIGHT OF WAY THERE. TXDOT INFORMED US THAT THERE IS A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT WAS ENTERED INTO AS PART OF A LAWSUIT SEVERAL DECADES AGO. I CAN'T EVEN SAY YEARS AGO AT THIS POINT. AND THERE ARE NO VEHICULAR ACCESS POINTS, ADDITIONAL VEHICULAR ACCESS POINTS ALLOWED ALONG MOPAC. THEREFORE, WE ARE CONTINUING TO PURSUE THE VEHICULAR ACCESS POINT ON DALE GREEN, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE INGRESS AND EGRESS OF PATRONS OF THIS PROPERTY AND WOULD ELIMINATE THE FULL CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC AS YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT, IF SOUTH BAY WERE TO BE EXTENDED. THE. I BELIEVE YOU RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE CIRCLE C HOA. I KNOW WE'RE TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT ZONING, AND OFTENTIMES WE DON'T TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC AND ZONING ANYMORE. HOWEVER, THERE IS AN EXISTING PROHIBITION OF ACCESS, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. THERE IS ALSO A PRIVATE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. THE CIRCLE C. BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND STRATUS DID EXECUTE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE DOCUMENT, WHICH DOES REMOVE. SHOULD THE ZONING CASE BE APPROVED, IT DOES REMOVE THE PROHIBITION OF ACCESS ON DALE GREEN, AND THAT DOCUMENT HAS BEEN EXECUTED BY ALL PARTIES AND IS HELD IN ESCROW PENDING THE COMPLETION OF THIS CASE. THIS IS A COPY OF THAT DOCUMENT. THE MAJOR CHANGES ARE THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS IN THIS DOCUMENT THAT THE ORIGINAL THIS ONE PARDON ME. EXCUSE ME. CONTEMPLATES GATED ACCESS. IT PROVIDES A LOT OF ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS THAT THE HOMEOWNERS. HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WANTED TO BE IN THE COVENANT WITH THE PREVIOUS ONE WAS MORE OF A JUST A CARTE BLANCHE APPROVAL FOR ACCESS. I TALKED A LOT. I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THERE MAY BE, AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR AFFIRMED RECOMMENDATION OF THIS CASE AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ANNA BAKER, AND SINCE WE HAVE A LOT OF SPEAKERS, THOSE ON DECK IS ABHINAV VASUDEVAN AND THEN KYLIE SCHNEIDER. SO ANNA BAKER, GO FIRST. I'M THE PRIMARY FOR THE OFFICE AND THIS IS YOUR TIME TO SPEAK SO YOU CAN TALK ABOUT WHATEVER YOU WANT. REGARDING THIS CASE, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO BEAR IN MIND WHAT I READ INTO THE RECORD FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. AND THEN ALSO, IF YOU CAN LIMIT THE DISCUSSION TO THE CHANGE WE'RE MAKING, SINCE WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED THE MAIN SITE, IF WE CAN JUST KIND OF FOCUS ON THE CHANGE AGAIN, IT'S YOUR TIME. SPEAK ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT. I'M JUST ENCOURAGING YOU TO TO DO THOSE THINGS. WE'RE CURRENTLY SPEAKING THOSE IN FAVOR? SO ANNA BAKER, IF SHE'S NOT, I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THE ZONING CHANGE. OKAY, SO ANNA BAKER'S NOT HERE THEN. ABHINAV. I KNEW HE WAS BAKER. MAYBE IT WOULD BE AN ELISA BAKER ON THE RECORD. OKAY, THEN WE CAN COME BACK AND MAKE SURE YOU'RE THERE. WE HAVE ABHINAV. YES. YOU'RE UP AND ABHINAV HAS THREE MINUTES. CAN I SIT DOWN SOMEWHERE? YES. OKAY. SO HERE. YES. WE HAVE A HOUSING CRISIS IN AMERICA. MANY YOUNG PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD TO BUY A HOME. AND THIS IS PRIMARILY AN ISSUE OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND. TOO MUCH DEMAND, NOT ENOUGH SUPPLY. AND THE SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM ISN'T MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING OR MORE REGULATION. THE SOLUTION IS TO ALLOW THE FREE MARKET TO PROVIDE MORE SUPPLY. THE SOLUTION IS TO ALLOW DEVELOPERS SUCH AS STRATUS TO BUILD MORE HOUSING. IT IS SIMPLE ECONOMICS 101 THAT PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND. AND PEOPLE DO WANT MORE HOUSING, BUT THEY JUST DON'T WANT IT IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS OFTEN CALLED NIMBYISM OR NOT IN MY BACKYARD, AND I DON'T BLAME THEM. RESISTING CHANGE IS HUMAN NATURE AND THEY OFTEN WIN. IT IS EASY TO TELL DEVELOPERS TO JUST BUILD SOMEWHERE ELSE. [00:20:03] BUT IF EVERYONE IN AUSTIN SAYS THE SAME THING, WHERE EXACTLY IS THIS SOMEWHERE ELSE GOING TO BE? WHEN EVERYONE PRACTICES NIMBYISM, THE ENTIRE CITY OF AUSTIN SUFFERS. THE ENTIRE U.S. SUFFERS. NIMBYISM IS ULTIMATELY A LOSE LOSE GAME, A FORCE AGAINST PROGRESS. THE NEW RESIDENTS WHO WOULD MOVE INTO INTO NEW DEVELOPMENTS. THE PEOPLE WHO WOULD ACTUALLY BENEFIT. THEY ARE NOT HERE AT THIS MEETING BECAUSE THAT GROUP DOESN'T EXIST YET. I AM HERE TO SPEAK FOR THAT GROUP, WHICH HAS NO VOICE. I BELIEVE I AM A STRONG BELIEVER IN THE FREE MARKET. WHEN I SEE NIMBYISM IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I FEEL THAT IT IS MY DUTY TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST IT. I SAY YES IN MY BACKYARD. I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULD HELP STRATUS BY SENDING THEM OR TAXPAYER DOLLARS. ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WE SHOULD GET OUT OF THE WAY AND GIVE THEM THE FREEDOM TO BUILD, TO LIVE, AND TO LET OTHERS LIVE. IS THE AMERICAN WAY OF DOING THINGS. ALL THAT STRATUS IS ASKING FOR IS A REZONING FROM OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL. THINK ABOUT IT. DOES THIS HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH TRAFFIC OR THE ENVIRONMENT, OR WHATEVER OTHER EXCUSE THAT NIMBYS COULD POSSIBLY COME UP WITH. IT'S A SIMPLE QUESTION. WOULD IT BE BETTER TO HAVE MORE HOUSING OR MORE OFFICE SPACE? I THINK THE ANSWER IS OBVIOUS. WE COULD USE A LOT MORE HOUSING. HOPEFULLY MY SPEECH IS FOOD FOR THOUGHT FOR THOSE WHO ARE ON THE COMMISSION. IT'S INCREDIBLY EASY TO ASSUME THAT NOBODY IN THE CIRCLE C NEIGHBORHOOD ACTUALLY SUPPORTS THE PROJECT. HOPEFULLY MY SPEECH SERVES AS EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. AND NOW I'LL BE SWITCHING OVER TO THOSE IN OPPOSITION. WE HAVE OUR PRIMARY SPEAKER, LISA LYONS, WHO IS RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM RUSTY RUBY. RUSTY, ARE YOU HERE? OKAY, LISA, YOU WILL RECEIVE NINE MINUTES. HELLO AGAIN. I'M LISA LYONS. I'VE LIVED IN CIRCLE C FOR 23 YEARS, AND I DO BELIEVE THERE'S AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS TO ADDRESS. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THIS 1000 UNITS ON TRACK 110 ADDRESSES IT. TONIGHT I'LL FOCUS ON TWO THINGS. WHY THE ACCESS POINT NOW BEING PROPOSED REVERSES THE DECISION THAT THE CITY DELIBERATELY MADE IN 2002, AND WHAT THE CITY THE CITY STANDS TO LOSE FINANCIALLY BY NOT AFFIRMING THAT DECISION. SAYING NO TO THIS REZONING IS NOT A LOSS FOR THE CITY. IT IS A GAME. THE DULL GREEN VERSUS SOUTH BAY A DELIBERATE DECISION. THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAY PROHIBITED VEHICLE VEHICLE ACCESS TO DALE GREEN AVENUE. SOUTH BAY LANE WAS BUILT TO CONNECT THIS PROPERTY TO MOPAC INSTEAD. THAT WAS ALWAYS THE INTENDED ACCESS POINT. KIKER ELEMENTARY WAS SITED FAR FROM SOUTH BAY FOR THE VERY SAME REASON TO KEEP THE TRAFFIC OFF THE ROAD NEAR THE SCHOOL OPENING, DALE GREEN DOESN'T VIOLATE A COVENANT. IT ALSO UNWINDS A SPECIFIC SAFETY DECISION MADE BY THE CITY IN 2002. PROCESS OUT OF ORDER. WE'VE BEEN TOLD REPEATEDLY THAT THE TRAFFIC ISSUES ARE TO BE EXAMINED AT SITE PLAN, NOT AT ZONING. SO WHY WAS THE MOPAC NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND ACCESS QUESTION INTRODUCED AT THIS POINT. WHY DID CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEERS STEP OUTSIDE THE PROCESS TO MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL ON A SPECIFIC SAFETY SOLUTION, ONE THAT ALSO INVOLVES TXDOT, WHICH DOESN'T FORMALLY WEIGH IN UNTIL SITE PLAN? BY GOING OUTSIDE THE ESTABLISHED PROCESS, THE CITY DIDN'T RESOLVE ONE TRAFFIC SAFETY ISSUE. IT CREATED TWO THE ACCESS POINT ERROR STAFF MATERIALS DESCRIBE CITY ENGINEERS AS REQUIRING TWO SEPARATE FULL ACCESS POINTS, WITH DALE GREEN AS THE NECESSARY SECOND OPTION. THAT IS NOT WHAT THE ENGINEERS TOLD US DIRECTLY WHEN WE MET WITH THEM. AS A CODE MATTER, ONLY ONE FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS POINT IS REQUIRED, AND EVERYTHING BEYOND THAT IS A SHIFTING SET OF INFORMAL SAFETY CONCERNS AND NOT CODE RECORDS FROM OUR PEER SHOW THAT TPW ON JUNE 25TH MET WITH THE APPLICANT'S ENGINEERING CONSULTANT. ACCORDING TO THOSE RECORDS, A CONCERN WAS RAISED THAT FUTURE FUTURE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTS SENDING CHILDREN TO KIKER WOULD HAVE NO DIRECT ROUTE AND WOULD HAVE TO RELY ON AN UNSIGNALIZED MOPAC SOUTHBOUND INTERSECTION, WHICH WOULD BE UNSAFE, AND THAT WAS WITHOUT A SECOND ACCESS POINT. STAFF WOULD NOT SUPPORT THE REQUEST. KIKER ELEMENTARY IS ROUGHLY 500FT FROM TRACK 110. IT'S EASILY WALKABLE TODAY, BUT IT WON'T BE WALKABLE IF YOU OPEN UP DOLL GREEN TO ACCESS THE TRAFFIC FROM TRACK ONE. TEN STAFF REPEATED THIS REASONING LATER IN AN EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH A CIRCLE C RESIDENT. THEY EXPLAINED THAT THE MOPAC SOUTH BAY DRIVEWAY WOULD BE RESTRICTED TO RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT, ONLY TO PREVENT UNSAFE NORTHBOUND MANEUVERS THROUGH THE SOUTH BAY TURNAROUND. AND THAT RESTRICTION WAS THE REASON A SECOND CONNECTION, EITHER ON SOUTH BAY OR DAHLGREN, WAS NEEDED. STAFF ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED IN AN EMAIL THAT THE FINAL DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION ISN'T THEIRS TO DECIDE. IT DEPENDS ON TXDOT'S APPROVAL. WHEN WE MET WITH TPW STAFF IN JULY, WE ASKED WHAT CODE APPLIED. [00:25:05] WE WERE TOLD PLAINLY THAT THE CODE REQUIRES ONE FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS POINT, AND THE PUSH FOR A SECOND CONNECTION WAS THEIR PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT CALL. AND NOT A CODE, NOT A CODE MANDATE. THEY ALSO TOLD US THEY ONLY EVALUATED THE CONFIGURATION THAT THE APPLICANT CHOSE TO PRESENT, NOT WHETHER DAHLGREN WAS NECESSARY OR WHETHER SAFETY ALTERNATIVES EXISTED. A RECOMMENDATION IS NOT A REQUIREMENT. ROUTING IT THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL STREET ACROSS FROM AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IS A CHOICE AND NOT AN INEVITABILITY. WHAT STARTED AS ONE SAFETY CONCERN AT SOUTH BAY MOPAC HAS NOW BECOME TWO. A COVENANT, AMENDED AS AMANDA MRS SWORE, REFERENCED THE CIRCLE C, H, O AND STRATUS ARE NOW OR HAVE NEGOTIATED A SECOND AMENDMENT TO TRACK 110 COVENANT. AFTER STRATUS ERRONEOUSLY FILED THE FIRST AMENDMENT ON JULY 31ST. DESPITE THE HOA BOARD HAVING ALREADY VOTED AND WITHDRAWN THE APPROVAL ON JULY 29TH. THE SECOND AMENDMENT PERMANENTLY BANS VEHICLE ACCESS BETWEEN TRACKS 110 AND SOUTH BAY LANE, WHILE KEEPING THE SOUTH BAY MOPAC CURB CUT OPEN. IT REVERSES THE PRIOR PROHIBITION ON THE DAHLGREN ACCESS, ALLOWING ONE GATED ACCESS POINT NEAR GOLDSWORTHY LANE, BUT LEAVES HOW THAT GATE IS USED UP TO THE CITY TO DECIDE. THAT DECISION IS STILL ON THE TABLE TONIGHT. IF APPROVED FOR OPEN USE RATHER THAN AS A FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS POINT, THE GATE WOULD BE LIMITED TO RESIDENTS, GUESTS AND ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL, WITH DELIVERIES AND CONSTRUCTION ROUTED TO MOPAC INSTEAD. BUT IT STILL MEANS THAT ONGOING VEHICLE TRIPS ONTO A RESIDENTIAL STREET NEXT TO AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. AND IT DOES NOT STOP COMMERCIAL VEHICLES FROM ATTEMPTING TO GET THROUGH THE GATE, THEN GETTING TURNED AWAY AND THEN MAKING U-TURNS SO THE TRAFFIC IS STILL GOING TO COME. THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING TO DESIGNATE DALE GREEN ACCESS AS EMERGENCY FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ONLY, AND NOT A GENERAL RESIDENT TRAFFIC ACCESS POINT. THE AMENDMENT WAS WRITTEN TO DEFER THAT DECISION TO YOU, AND IT'S NOT FINAL. AS MISS SWOYER REFERENCED, IT SITS IN ESCROW AND IT ONLY RECORDS IF THE PROJECT RECEIVES THE FULL ZONING APPROVAL. WHY TEX-DOT NEEDS TO BE AT THE TABLE. SOUTH MOPAC IS A TXDOT FACILITY, NOT A CITY STREET. THE APPLICANT'S TRAFFIC ANALYSIS RELIES ON THE SOUTH BAY CROSSOVER, BUT NO ONE HAS CONFIRMED WITH TXDOT WHETHER THIS IS AGREED TO OR IF IT WAS EVEN FORMALLY ASKED. WE MET WITH TXDOT IN JULY JUST TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS FEASIBLE. WE LEARNED ABOUT THE 1990 CONSENT DECREE THAT PREVENTS CURB CUTS. THEY GAVE US NO INDICATION THAT THE STATE WILL GIVE UP THE ONLY CROSSOVER THAT IT HAS FOR MILES ON A CITY ZONING TIMELINE, AND CONFIRMED THAT THEY WON'T STEP INTO THE PROCESS UNTIL SITE PLAN. BUT IF TXDOT DECLINES, THE ACCESS PLAN IN THIS CASE IS BUILT ON. FALLS APART, AND DAHLGREN BECOMES THE FALLBACK. BY DEFAULT, THE CITY SHOULD BE AT THE TABLE WITH TXDOT BEFORE ANY ACCESS CONFIGURATION IS LOCKED IN. WE ALSO LEARNED AT THAT SAME MEETING WITH TXDOT THAT AERIAL VIEWS SUGGEST THAT THIS CROSSOVER WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO CARRY A BRIDGE. SO WHAT'S BECOME A ZONING QUESTION IS. NOW WE WANT A BRIDGE, IT A CONTINUATION OF THE CROSSOVER BRIDGES THAT WE'VE SEEN AT SLAUGHTER AND AT LA CROSSE. WE ASKED THE CITY TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO ADVOCATE FOR THAT BRIDGE, WHICH WOULD SOLVE ALL THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS FOR TRACK 110 AND THE NEARBY VALOR SCHOOL AND THE BROADER AREA. I KNOW I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, BUT THERE'S AN EXHIBIT THERE THAT TALKS ABOUT THE CITY'S OWN ROLE IN BUILDING OUT SOUTH BAY THE RIGHT OF WAY, THE EASEMENTS, THE REGULATORY OVERSIGHT. IT WAS PLANNED AS A FOUR LANE DIVIDED COLLECTOR, WITH STRATUS OBLIGATED TO BUILD TWO LANES, AND THE CITY WOULD BUILD THE OTHER TWO. WE'D ASK THE COMMISSION TO HAVE STAFF CONFIRM ON THE RECORD WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE OBLIGATIONS, AND WHY SOUTH BAY IS BEING SET ASIDE IN FAVOR OF DALGREEN. IF THE CITY RELEASES STRATUS FROM THESE OBLIGATIONS, THE ROADWORK DOESN'T DISAPPEAR. IT WILL STILL BE NEEDED AND THE CITY WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO PAY FOR IT. THIS IS A DIRECT TRANSFER OF COSTS FROM A PRIVATE DEVELOPER CURRENTLY UNDERGOING LIQUIDATION TO THE. THE AUSTIN TAXPAYERS. SO WHAT? THE CITY LOSES. ASK WHAT THE CITY IS ENTITLED TO AND WHAT IT LOSES. HERE. IT'S GOING TO LOSE TAX REVENUE. A COMMERCIAL TRACK GENERATES THAT MULTIFAMILY REVENUE THAT MULTIFAMILY DOES NOT. INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING TIED TO THE REVENUE AND ENVIRONMENTAL FUNDING. UNDER THE AGREEMENT, WHICH I CANNOT NAME. STRATUS OFFICE SPACE IS ASSESSED $0.25 PER YEAR PER $100 OF BUILDING VALUE PAID TO THE HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY TRUST FOR THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE. MULTIFAMILY ISN'T SUBJECT TO THAT ASSESSMENT. REZONING ROUGHLY 650,000FT² OF OFFICE SPACE HERE PERMANENTLY REMOVES THAT VALUE FROM THE BASE. USING PUBLIC AUSTIN OFFICE VALUATION BENCHMARKS OF $250 TO $450 PER SQUARE FOOT. IT'S A FORGONE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT OF ROUGHLY 400,000 TO $650,000 EVERY YEAR IN PERPETUITY. THIS REQUEST ALSO FAILS THE CITY'S OWN IMAGINED AUSTIN SCORECARD. [00:30:02] IT IS A FIVE OUT OF 13 VERSUS AN EIGHT OR A NINE FOR COMPARABLE REZONINGS THAT THE CITY HAS ACTUALLY APPROVED. WE ARE ASKING YOU TO RECOMMEND THE DENIAL OF THE CASE AS STRUCTURED AND DIRECT THAT TRACT 110 RETAIN ITS EXISTING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, INCLUDING THE DAHLGREN ACCESS PROHIBITION PROTECTING KIKER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THIS OPPOSITION SPANS NEARLY EVERY PART OF CIRCLE C BECAUSE IT'S A SHARED RECOGNITION THAT THIS REQUEST BREAKS THE 2002 BARGAIN AND ASKS THE CITY AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO ABSORB THE COSTS. IF THE COMMISSION CONSIDERS ANY MODIFICATION. INSTEAD, WE REQUIRE STRATUS TO FULLY FUND THE INFRASTRUCTURE OBLIGATION IN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, INCLUDING SOUTH BAY IN WRITING BEFORE THE ANY ENTITLEMENT IS GRANTED. DON'T LET THE CITY ABSORB THE BILL FOR A PROJECT THAT FAILS ON ITS OWN GROWTH PLAN ON ITS OWN SCORECARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS KRISTIN DAVIS, WHO IS RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM HEATHER PUGH. HEATHER, ARE YOU HERE? YOU WILL RECEIVE SIX MINUTES. THANK YOU. HOW DO I GO FORWARD ON MY PRESENTATION TO THE NEXT SLIDE? OKAY, PERFECT. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS KRISTEN AND I'M A RESIDENT OF CIRCLE C. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M HERE TO DISCUSS THE REZONING FOR TRACT 110 AND THE REQUEST TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY AND CERTAIN RETAIL USE ON THE PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY PROHIBITED. IN SHORT, STRATUS WANTS TO CHANGE FROM WHAT IS APPROVED AS OFFICE SPACE TO BUILD 1000 APARTMENTS UP TO 60FT HIGH. SHOULD BE NOTED THAT TRACT 110, AS LISA MENTIONED, IS GOVERNED BY A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE CREATION OF THE HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY TRUST. NOW YOU ASK, WHAT IS THAT TRUST? WELL, ITS PURPOSE IS TO RECEIVE THE PROCEEDS FROM ASSESSMENT SPECIFICALLY FOR OFFICE SPACE FOR ACQUISITION AND PRESERVATION OF ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE, REGIONAL WATERSHED AND HABITAT PROTECTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS. IT GOES ON TO SAY THAT ALL AREAS OF THE LAND THAT ARE DEVELOPED FOR OFFICE USE CATEGORY WILL BE SUBJECT TO THIS MANDATORY ASSESSMENT. AND AS LISA MENTIONED, THAT WOULD BE ABOUT $500,000 A YEAR TO GO DIRECTLY TOWARD ADDITIONAL CONSERVATION. SO WHERE IS THIS TRUST? I ASKED THE COMMERCIAL ARM OF OUR HOA AND WAS TOLD IT WAS NEVER CREATED. IT DOES NOT EXIST AND THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A PENNY PUT INTO IT. SO WHY DID THE CITY MAKE SUCH AN EFFORT TO PROTECT TRACT 110 ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY. THE TRACT WAS SO IMPORTANT TO THE CITY THAT THEY NEGOTIATED THIS TRUST TO ENSURE THAT THERE WERE YEARLY FUNDS THAT WOULD BE PUT TOWARDS ADDITIONAL CONSERVATION. CHANGING FROM OFFICE SPACE TO MULTI-FAMILY ELIMINATES THIS YEARLY FEE. AND WHILE STRATUS HAS POINTED TO CONSERVING THE REMAINDER OF THIS LAND, LET'S NOT FORGET THAT THEY THAT THEY PLAN TO USE ALL OF THEIR REMAINING IMPERVIOUS COVER. THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE, THE BARTON SPRINGS WATERSHED, AND THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION ZONE. AS YOU KNOW, THIS AREA IS FULL OF LIMESTONE CAVES AND KARST FEATURES. AND BECAUSE OF THE INCREASED PERMEABILITY, RUNOFF FROM TRACT 110 CAN REACH OUR BELOVED BARTON SPRINGS AND AS LITTLE AS THREE DAYS. THE EXISTING RESTRICTIONS ON MULTIFAMILY, RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL USE WERE INTENDED TO LIMIT DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY AND REDUCE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH INCREASED TRAFFIC. WASTEWATER STORMWATER RUNOFF NOISE POLLUTANTS SUCH AS OIL, GREASE, FERTILIZERS AND PET WASTE, AND A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT INCREASES INTENSITY. AND THAT IS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM. I RECOGNIZE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THE PROJECT WOULD COMPLY WITH SAVE OUR SPRINGS. HOWEVER, SAVE OUR SPRINGS IS A REGULATORY MINIMUM. IT DOES NOT RENDER THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY UNNECESSARY, BECAUSE THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WAS ADOPTED. TO PROTECT THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY, THE BURDEN SHOULD BE ON STRATUS TO DEMONSTRATE THE CIRCUMSTANCES. JUSTIFYING THESE PROTECTIONS HAS CHANGED AND IN THIS CASE THEY HAVE NOT. THIS AREA REMAINS OVER THE EDWARDS AWKWARD RECHARGE ZONE. THE WATERSHED HAS NOT CHANGED, AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY OF THE SITE REMAINS. THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND AUSTIN WATER CREATED THE AUSTIN WILDLANDS PROJECT TO PROTECT WATERSHED AREAS SUCH AS THIS. THEIR MISSION SAFEGUARD A NETWORK OF CONSERVATION LAND FOR THE BENEFIT OF WATER, WILDLIFE AND PEOPLE. HERE'S A MAP OF THE LAND THAT THEY OWN. AS YOU CAN SEE, TRACT 110 IS ADJACENT TO AS MUCH CONSERVATION LAND AS POSSIBLE. I PERSONALLY MET WITH JUSTIN BATES FROM AUSTIN WILDLANDS TO DISCUSS WHY THIS AREA IS SO CRITICAL. HE LET ME KNOW THAT EVEN SOMETHING SEEMINGLY SMALL, SUCH AS PET WASTE, INCREASE HUMAN TRAFFIC JUST FROM WALKING WHEN THE AREA IS MUDDY. GREASE AND EMISSIONS FROM VEHICLES ARE DETRIMENTAL TO SENSITIVE LANDS SUCH AS THIS, AND EVEN WORSE, [00:35:04] WOULD BE PARTIAL OR FULL SERVICE. RESTAURANTS WITH COOKING OIL, GREASE AND OTHER POLLUTANTS VENTED INTO THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT. AMANDA SWORN THE CITY MAY POINT TO IMAGINE AUSTIN AND THE CITY'S GOALS OF ENCOURAGING INCREASED DENSITY ALONG MAJOR CORRIDORS, AND I RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE TO PREPARE FOR GROWTH. HOWEVER, IMAGINE AUSTIN ALSO INCLUDES WATER AND OUR ENVIRONMENT, AND AS A CITY, WE'VE COMMITTED TO PLAN FOR AND ADAPT TO INCREASED DROUGHT, SEVERE WEATHER, EXCUSE ME, SEVERE WEATHER AND OTHER POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON OUR WATER SUPPLY. IN FACT, IN 2024, THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL, INCLUDING MAYOR WATSON AND COUNCIL MEMBER ELLIS ALL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AUSTIN'S WATER FORWARD PLAN, WHICH RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF CONSERVATION, WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AND SUSTAINABLE LONG TERM PLANNING. THIS COMMISSION IS ENTRUSTED WITH MAKING DECISIONS THAT WILL OUTLAST ANY SINGLE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. MY FATHER WAS A LIEUTENANT COLONEL IN THE ARMY, AND HE TAUGHT ME THE SAYING SLOW IS SMOOTH AND SMOOTH IS FAST. CAREFUL PLANNING IS NOT THE ENEMY OF HOUSING. IT IS HOW AUSTIN BUILDS THE RIGHT HOUSING IN THE RIGHT PLACES, WHILE PRESERVING THE RESOURCES THAT CANNOT BE REPLACED. ANY DEVELOPER CAN BUILD APARTMENTS, BUT I DON'T KNOW ANYONE THAT CAN CREATE WATER. I FORMALLY ASKED THE ZONING AND PLANNING COMMISSION UPHOLD CURRENT RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS AND MULTIFAMILY BECAUSE THEY WERE PUT IN PLACE FOR A REASON. AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO BELIEVE ME. ASK THE AUSTIN WILDLANDS, AND IF YOU HAVE YOUR HEART SET ON MULTIFAMILY, I HUMBLY ASK THAT INSTEAD OF HIGH DENSITY, CONSIDER LOW DENSITY HOUSING WITH A RESTRICTION ON ALL RETAIL TO PROTECT THE LAND, PROTECT THE WATER, AND IN TURN PROTECT ALL OF AUSTIN. I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO SHOW YOU THE CURB CUT. YOU CAN SEE IT RIGHT THERE. SO THE ONE THAT SHOULD CONNECT SOUTH BAY IS VERY EASILY VISIBLE FROM THIS AERIAL VIEW. AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WAS INTENDED. YOU CAN SEE LACROSSE WHICH IS TO THE NORTH. AND THAT IS EXACTLY THE CROSSOVER THAT WE NEED AT SOUTH BAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ANNA BAKER, WHO IS RECEIVING THREE MINUTES AND DONATED TIME FROM ADRIAN FLANNERY. ADRIAN, CAN YOU GIVE ME A WAVE? AND SO, ANNA, NOW YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES. OKAY. THIS IS ALREADY ON. THE GREEN IS ON. OKAY. OKAY. HELLO. GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FOR TRACT 110. MY NAME IS ANNALISA BAKER. I'M A WIFE AND A MOTHER OF THREE WONDERFUL CHILDREN, ALL OF WHOM ATTEND OR HAVE ATTENDED KIKER ELEMENTARY. AND IN FACT, MY YOUNGEST STARTED THIRD GRADE TODAY, I BELIEVE APPROVING THE REZONING OF TRACT 110 FROM COMMERCIAL USE TO MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR NEARLY 1000 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT MISTAKE, WITH SERIOUS LONG TERM CONSEQUENCES FOR OUR COMMUNITY. MY FAMILY HAS LIVED IN CIRCLE C AFTER MOVING FROM EAST AUSTIN SINCE 2019. WE CHOSE THIS AREA BECAUSE OF THE COMMUNITY, THE SCHOOLS AND THE SAFETY. THIS IS A PLACE WHERE NEIGHBORS LOOK OUT FOR ONE ANOTHER, WHERE CHILDREN CAN WALK OR BIKE TO SCHOOL, PLAY OUTSIDE WITH FRIENDS, AND ENJOY A LEVEL OF SAFETY THAT HAS BECOME INCREASINGLY RARE. LET ME BE CLEAR I AM NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT. I'M OPPOSED TO THE IRRESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT, THE KIND THAT FAILS TO ADEQUATELY CONSIDER THE IMPACT ON EXISTING RESIDENTS INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES. APPROVING A ZONING CHANGE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SIZE WOULD BRING THOUSANDS OF ADDITIONAL RESIDENTS INTO AN AREA WHOSE ROADS, SCHOOLS AND EMERGENCY SERVICES ARE ALREADY EXPERIENCING STRAIN. OUR INNER NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS WERE NEITHER DESIGNED NOR INTENDED TO SUPPORT THE LEVEL OF DENSITY BEING PROPOSED. ONE OF MY GREATEST CONCERNS IS THE IMPACT ON OUR SCHOOLS. AS A PARENT, I SEE FIRSTHAND WHAT MORNING DROP OFF AND AFTERNOON PICKUP LOOKED LIKE AT KEICHER EVERY WEEKDAY. TRAFFIC IS ALREADY CONGESTED AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IS ALREADY A CONSTANT CONCERN. IT IS DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE HOW THOSE CONDITIONS COULD SAFELY ACCOMMODATE THE ADDITIONAL VOLUME GENERATED BY A DEVELOPMENT OF THIS MAGNITUDE. THE IMPACT GOES FAR BEYOND TRAFFIC. ACCORDING TO THE JUNE 2026 ISD EDUCATIONAL IMPACT STATEMENT REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN. KIKER ELEMENTARY IS ALREADY OPERATING AT 103% OF CAPACITY, AND IS PROJECTED TO REACH 106% WITHIN FIVE YEARS. EVEN WITHOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT, ADDING HUNDREDS OF NEW FAMILIES WILL ONLY COMPOUND THOSE CHALLENGES. [00:40:01] WITH THE AISD BUDGET CUTS, SCHOOL CLOSURES AND THE NEW BUS HUB SYSTEM, THE PRESSURES ON TRAFFIC, SCHOOL OPERATIONS AND STUDENTS AND STAFF SAFETY WOULD BE EVEN MORE SEVERE. SCHOOL OVERCROWDING AFFECTS CLASSROOM SIZES, ACCESS TO SPECIALIZED SERVICES AND THE LEVEL OF INDIVIDUAL SUPPORT AVAILABLE TO STUDENTS. OUR TEACHERS, ADMINISTRATORS, SPECIAL EDUCATION PROFESSIONALS AND SUPPORT STAFF POUR THEIR HEART AND SOUL INTO THEIR WORK, TIRELESSLY TRYING TO MEET THE NEEDS OF EVERY CHILD. MANY OF THESE RESOURCES ARE ALREADY STRETCHED THIN. ADDING MORE STUDENTS WILL PLACE EVEN GREATER DEMANDS ON EDUCATORS AND REDUCE THE AVAILABILITY OF RESOURCES FOR THE SERVICES FOR THE CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, AS WELL AS THE STAFF WHO DEPEND ON THEM. FINALLY, THE EFFECTS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT BE LIMITED TO THE AREA IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING CAICARA ELEMENTARY, DAHLGREN, LA CROSSE, AND SOUTH BAY. THEY WILL BE FELT THROUGHOUT ALL OF CIRCLE C. IT WILL IMPACT GETTING TO AND FROM THE LOCAL SHOPS LIKE H-E-B AND THE OTHER BUSINESSES ON SLAUGHTER. GETTING TO AND FROM MOPAC AS MOST PEOPLE ATTEMPT TO ACCESS MOPAC FROM LA CROSSE. FOR THESE REASONS, I RESPECTFULLY URGE YOU TO RECONSIDER YOUR PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS FROM MAY 5TH. CONSIDER THE VARIOUS POINTS AND INFORMATION PRESENTED TO YOU TONIGHT FROM ALL OF THE PEOPLE HERE THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION. CONSIDER THE LONG TERM IMPACTS THIS DECISION WILL HAVE ON TRAFFIC SAFETY, SCHOOL CAPACITY, PUBLIC SERVICES, AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENTS. PRIORITIZE THE WELL-BEING OF THE PEOPLE WHO CALL CIRCLE C HOME AND ENSURE THAT ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IS BOTH RESPONSIBLE AND SUSTAINABLE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. WE HAVE ANDREW LEEPER. ANDREW, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. OKAY. HELLO. HOW ARE YOU GUYS? GOOD EVENING. I'M HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE'RE LOSING SIGHT OF WHAT SHOULD TRULY BE AT THE CENTER OF THIS DISCUSSION. THE SAFETY OF OUR CHILDREN. I THINK SHE JUST SPOKE TO IT VERY ELOQUENTLY, BUT I WANTED TO SHARE THIS FOOTAGE. THIS IS ACTUALLY FROM THIS MORNING AT THE SITE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS IS A NORMAL TRAFFIC. THIS IS THE THE DROP OFF. IT'S NOT AS INSANE AS THE PICKUP, BUT WE NEEDED TO SUBMIT THIS VIDEO SO THAT YOU COULD SEE IT. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DEBATE ABOUT TRACT 110 AND THERE ARE LOTS OF ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEVELOPMENT, PROPERTY RIGHTS, DENSITY AND GROWTH. THEY'RE ALL IMPORTANT. BUT THIS I THINK IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING. LOOK AT THE CARS AND LOOK AT THE CONGESTION. LOOK AT THE KIDS WALKING BETWEEN VEHICLES AND THE PARENTS TRYING TO GET THEIR KIDS SAFELY INTO SCHOOL. THIS IS TODAY. THIS IS WITHOUT ANY EXTRA CARS. IT IS PACKED. IT IS NOT A SAFE SETUP. AND THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, CROSSING GUARDS, BUT THERE ARE KIDS CROSSING IN BETWEEN. PEOPLE ARE ON THEIR PHONES ALL THE TIME. AND SO NOW IMAGINE ADDING POTENTIALLY THOUSANDS OF ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS TO THIS AREA. AND IMAGINE DIRECTING A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THAT TRAFFIC STRAIGHT ONTO DALE GREEN, STRAIGHT AT THE SCHOOL ADJACENT TO KIKER. THIS NEW ZONING PLAN THAT OPENS DAHLGREEN AND STEERS ALL OF THOSE CARS OUT THAT WAY DOES JUST THAT. IT'S NOT JUST A TRAFFIC PROBLEM, IT IS A SAFETY PROBLEM. AND WHAT CONCERNS ME MOST IS THAT IT FEELS LIKE THIS PROJECT IS BEING PUSHED FORWARD WITHOUT ADEQUATELY ADDRESSING WHAT THAT IMPACT WILL ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE FOR THE FAMILIES AND CHILDREN WHO LIVE THERE. WE ALL GET THAT AUSTIN IS GROWING. WE WE UNDERSTAND DEVELOPMENT IS INEVITABLE. AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, DON'T DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY. THAT'S NOT REALISTIC. BUT WHAT I AM SAYING IS THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER SOLUTION. THIS IS NOT IT. WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIND A WAY TO ACCOMMODATE RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT DUMPING THE CONSEQUENCES ONTO AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. AND THE FAMILIES WHO ALREADY STRUGGLE GETTING THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL SAFELY. OUR CHILDREN DON'T GET A SECOND CHANCE IF WE GET THIS WRONG. ONCE THE ROADS ARE BUILT, ONCE THE TRAFFIC IS HERE, ONCE THOUSANDS OF CARS ARE MOVING THROUGH EVERY DAY, IT WILL BE INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT TO UNDO. SO I'M ASKING YOU TONIGHT TO SLOW DOWN AND LOOK BEYOND THE PLAT, THE DRAWINGS AND THE TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS, AND LOOK AT THESE KIDS THAT ARE THERE EVERY DAY. LOOK AT THE FAMILIES WHO ARE GOING TO LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THIS DECISION EVERY SINGLE SCHOOL DAY. WE CAN DO BETTER. WE CAN FIND A SAFER ACCESS PLAN. WE CAN FIND A BETTER WAY TO MANAGE THE TRAFFIC. WE CAN WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER TO CREATE A SOLUTION THAT ALLOWS THIS PROPERTY TO BE DEVELOPED WITHOUT PUTTING OUR CHILDREN AT GREATER RISK. GROWTH AND SAFETY SHOULD NOT BE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. SO PLEASE, BEFORE YOU APPROVE A PLAN THAT COULD FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE THE TRAFFIC AROUND KIKER AND RISK SAFETY, JUST ASK ONE SIMPLE QUESTION IS THIS THE SAFEST, SAFEST SOLUTION WE CAN COME UP WITH FOR OUR KIDS? [00:45:04] IF THE ANSWER IS NO, THEN WE OWE IT TO THEM TO KEEP WORKING UNTIL WE FIND ONE. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I'M GOING TO CALL MULTIPLE NAMES UP JUST SO Y'ALL CAN GET PREPARED. SO WE HAVE JEFFREY BOWEN AND FOLLOWING JEFFREY IS GOING TO BE JAMES MOSLEY AND THEN FARRIS BOGG. JEFFREY YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSIONERS JEFFREY BOWEN, DISTRICT EIGHT. I'M ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL, AND I'M ALSO THE BOARD OR THE CHAIR FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. BUT I'M SPEAKING PRIMARILY FOR MYSELF AND ALSO FOR AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL. YOU'VE HEARD A LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY, THAT THESE, THAT THESE NEIGHBORS HAVE TALKED ABOUT. AND THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT ISSUES REALLY ON THE TABLE. YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S ACCESS ISSUES. YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT THEY'VE HAD, THERE'S EVEN THE TAX ISSUES WITH, WITH THE CONSERVANCY, WHICH HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN ADDRESSED. WHERE IS THAT GOING TO GO? HOW IS THAT GOING TO IMPACT THAT? ALSO WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT THE ACTUAL ROAD, WOULDN'T THAT BE BASICALLY BACK ON THE DEVELOPERS VERSUS THE TAXPAYERS? WE JUST GOT THROUGH SIGNING OFF ON A $6.6 BILLION BUDGET AND THE CITY IS SCRAPING, CAUSING MORE AND MORE AFFORDABILITY. SO I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO BE LISTEN TO THESE LISTEN TO THESE PEOPLE. I'VE ALWAYS BEEN A BIG PROPONENT THAT THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS NEED TO BE REMEMBERING WHO THEY ACTUALLY ALSO REPRESENT. AND THAT IS THESE PEOPLE BACK HERE. WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS IMPACTING THEM, WHETHER IT BE THE EAST SIDE, WHETHER IT BE THE SOUTHWEST SIDE, WHATEVER. THESE PEOPLE'S VOICES NEED TO BE HEARD. AND THAT'S WHY AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS COUNCIL IS SUPPORTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT THE HOA, BUT THE NEIGHBORS, THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY LIVE THERE. SO WE ASK YOU TO PLEASE TAKE THEIR THOUGHTS AND CONSIDERATIONS INTO THE TO THE ENTIRE SCOPE OF THIS. THERE'S BEEN MANY CHANGES ON THIS. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN THIS ENTIRE PROCESS. AND THAT AT SOME POINT NEEDS TO STOP. WE NEED TO BE VERY TRANSPARENT WITH ALL OF THE DECISIONS THAT IMPACT THESE PEOPLE AND US ALSO AS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONERS. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT INFORMATION IS OUT THERE FOR US. AGAIN, PLEASE TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION AND RESPECTFULLY THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS JAMES MOSLEY, FOLLOWED BY FARABAUGH AND THEN KRAIG KUJAWA. SO, JAMES, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. HELLO. THANKS. HOPEFULLY THIS ISN'T A FOREGONE CONCLUSION BY THIS COMMISSION. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS COMMISSION IS ONLY DEBATING WHETHER OR NOT TO CHANGE THE ZONING. IT DOESN'T GET INVOLVED IN TERMS OF YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT PLANS OR TRAFFIC STUDIES. BUT THOSE ARE ALL LINKED. MEANING IF THE CHANGE TO MULTIFAMILY ZONING ISN'T ALLOWED, THEN NONE OF THESE OTHER THINGS COME UP. IF IT IS ALLOWED, THEN THEY ALL COME UP. AND SO IT'S HARD NOT TO TALK ABOUT THOSE DEVELOPMENT PLANS. I'LL GET INTO THE TRAFFIC. BUT I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHY THE CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTS DENSE DEVELOPMENT, BUT THIS JUST ISN'T THE RIGHT LOCATION. DENSE DEVELOPMENT PLACED IN CENTRAL AUSTIN CAN HELP TAKE CARS OFF ROADWAYS. IT CAN GET PEOPLE TO WORK. BUT THIS AREA IS AN EMPLOYMENT CENTER. IT'S NOT GOING, YOU KNOW, IT'S TO PREVENT URBAN SPRAWL IS THE MAIN GOAL OF DENSE DEVELOPMENT. BUT AS THE CROW FLIES, THIS IS TWO MILES NORTH OF OF THE HAYS COUNTY LINE. PRETTY MUCH EVERYBODY THAT'S GOING TO LIVE IN A MULTIFAMILY UNIT, IF THE ZONING IS APPROVED, IS GOING TO GET ON MOPAC. IT'S GOING TO ADD TRAFFIC THAT'S ALREADY THERE. IT'S NOT GOING TO DECREASE URBAN SPRAWL. AND THE FUNNY THING IS AND I CALL IT HYPOCRISY. OUR OWN CITY COUNCIL IS OPPOSING THE SOUTH MOPAC PROJECT. THIS IS ONLY GOING TO ADD MORE CARS ONTO MOPAC. AND YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD ABOUT YOU KNOW, AFFORDABILITY. I MEAN, THERE'S ALREADY NONE OF THE APARTMENTS IN THAT AREA ARE AT CAPACITY. SO YES. COULD IT DECREASE THE PRICES OF APARTMENTS BY SOME AMOUNT OF MONEY? YES. BUT IT JUST IT ISN'T THE RIGHT AREA. IT'S NOT ACCOMPLISHING THE GOALS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ACTUALLY PUT OUT. [00:50:02] SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE TRAFFIC. I MEAN, YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN IT. IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD AREA. YOU'VE GOT VALOR SCHOOL AT THE CORNER OF MOPAC AND 45 WHICH IS ENCOUNTERED PROBLEMS. AND SO MORE THAN LIKELY SOUTH BAY THAT CUT WILL BE OPEN. BUT AS SOON AS A BIG APARTMENT COMPLEX IS TEX-DOT IS NOT GOING TO ALLOW TRAFFIC TO CROSS MOPAC AT THAT CUTOVER. IT'LL BE TOO DANGEROUS, SO IT'LL BE CLOSED OFF. SO YOU'LL EITHER HAVE CARS BEING FORCED TO TRAVEL SOUTH ON MOPAC, FINDING THEIR WAY TO A ESCARPMENT AND COMING BACK AROUND ON 45. OR THEY'LL TAKE DALGREEN. I MEAN, IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD LOCATION FOR A THOUSAND APARTMENTS. THERE'S NO WAY AROUND THAT. AND SO AGAIN, I KNOW YOU DON'T GET TO MAKE THAT DECISION. YOU DON'T GET TO MAKE THE DECISION ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. BUT GUESS WHAT? STRATUS ISN'T THE DEVELOPER. THERE'S ACTUALLY NO DEVELOPER HERE WITH A PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF YOU. THERE WON'T BE IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL EITHER. SO THE ONLY THING THAT THIS THE ONLY REASON WHY STRATUS IS HERE IS TO INCREASE THE VALUE OF THE LAND FOR WHEN THEY SELL IT. THAT'S IT. I REMIND YOU THAT YOU'RE UNDER NO REQUIREMENT TO PASS OR TO VOTE FOR AFFIRMATIVELY CHANGING THE ZONING TO MULTIFAMILY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO. YOU DON'T NEED TO LET A DEVELOPMENT PLAN COME FIRST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS FOLLOWED BY CRAIG. FAIRS. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. PUSH THE GREEN BUTTON OR IT'S ALREADY PUSHED. ALL RIGHT. SO AS AN EX-MILITARY, I HAD TO READ CATCH 22 MULTIPLE TIMES. AND I SEE A LOT OF REPEAT OF CATCH 22 IN GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENTS. AND WE HAVE ONE HERE. WE HAVE THE TPW STAFF THINKING THEY'RE FIXING A PROBLEM. THEY DECIDED OUT OF PROCESS, NOT IN SITE PLANNING WITHOUT FULL TRAFFIC STUDY TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO DIVERT TRAFFIC FROM MOPAC TO DAL GREEN. THIS IS NOT STRATUS PROBLEM. STRATUS WAS FULLY SIGNED UP TO DAL GREEN AS SAFETY EXIT, BUT TP W DECIDE TO MAKE THAT DECISION. WHY? BECAUSE IN THEIR PERCEPTION, IT'S SAFER ON MOPAC. NOW BACK TO THE CATCH 22. IN FUNNY BEHAVIOR, WE ACTUALLY CREATED TWO PROBLEMS. WE HAD THE PROBLEM ON MOPAC. NOW WE CREATED THE PROBLEM ON DALGREEN. NOT ONLY WE CREATED ON THE DALGREEN, WE HAVEN'T FIXED THE FIRST ONE BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO GO ON DALGREEN WHEN THEY REALIZE THE CONGESTIONS ON DALGREEN, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, I'M NOT GOING TO GO ON DALGREEN. I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO MOPAC. SO THAT'S WHERE WE STUCK TODAY. INSTEAD OF FOLLOWING THE CITY OWN PROCESS, INSTEAD OF DOING ALL THIS WORK DURING THE SITE PLANNING, IF YOU APPROVE THE ZONING WHERE TEXDOT CAN ENGAGE ACTIVELY, WHERE ALL CITY GOVERNMENT AGENCY CAN INVOLVE ACTIVELY RATHER THAN HAVING US GETTING STUCK. WHENEVER WE WANT TO ENGAGE WITH SOMEBODY, WE'RE TOLD WAIT UNTIL SITE PLANNING TO DO THE TRAFFIC STUDIES, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, DOING UNILATERAL DECISIONS THAT ARE NOT BASED ON CODE. IF YOU FOLLOW THE CODE, WE CODE IN ALL THE CODES, FIRE OR EVERYTHING ELSE, ALL YOU NEED IS ONE SAFETY EXIT AND ONE FULL EXIT. WE WOULD HAVE GONE WITH THAT AND WE COULD HAVE PROCEEDED. AND WE FULLY WENT TO SITE PLANNING AND WE HAD THE TRAFFIC AND WE WOULD ENGAGE ALL THE GOVERNMENT AGENCY SOLVING THIS PROBLEM. WHAT COULD HAPPEN AS USUAL WITH GOVERNMENT STUFF, THIS TRAFFIC PROBLEM GOING TO HAPPEN, CONGESTION GOING TO HAPPEN. MOPAC IS NOT SAFE AND THREE, THREE YEARS DOWN THE LINE WILL BE SITTING DOWN AND ASKING OURSELVES HOW WE GOT THERE. SO THIS IS HOW WE GOT THERE. SO AGAIN, THEY ASK IF IT'S WITHIN THE AUTHORITY OF THIS COMMITTEE TO SAY NO, WE REJECT EPW ASKING FOR TWO EXIT. FULL EXIT. GO WITH WHAT THE CODE REQUIRE, WHICH IS ONE FIRE ACCESS EXIT AND ONE FULL EXIT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CRAIG KUJAWA. CRAIG WILL BE RECEIVING THREE MINUTES OF TIME FROM STEPHANIE BROWN. STEPHANIE, ARE YOU HERE? OKAY. CRAIG WILL RECEIVE SIX MINUTES. ON DECK IS CHRISTINE OLSEN AND THEN DENISE WADE. HEY THERE. MY NAME IS CRAIG KUJAWA. I LIVE IN CIRCLE C WITH MY WIFE AND THREE YEAR OLD SON, QUINTON. SO ANDREW'S AMAZING VIDEO. YOU SAW THE LINE OF KIDS WALKING DOWN THE SIDEWALK. [00:55:01] I SAW THAT, AND I THOUGHT IN MY MIND'S EYE, THAT'S MY SON, RIGHT? IN ABOUT TWO YEARS, THAT'S WHAT HE'S GOING TO BE DOING. AND THE REASON I'M HERE TO SPEAK WITH YOU HUMBLY TODAY IS BECAUSE MOVING A CIRCLE C, I NEVER THOUGHT I WOULD WORRY ABOUT HIS SAFETY IN DOING SO. THE AREA, AS PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED, IT'S VERY CHALLENGING. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE KNOWN THIS, BUT WE'VE HAD CROSSING GUARD INCIDENTS, PLENTY OF NEAR MISSES. YOU JUST ASK ANY OF THEM. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN BAG OF STORIES. THE TRAFFIC AS YOU SAW, CHAOTIC DURING PICKUP. I JUST I JUST TOOK A VIDEO WITH MY CELL PHONE. I WISH I COULD SHARE IT WITH YOU TODAY. IT'S WAY WORSE, IF YOU CAN IMAGINE THAT DURING PICKUP VERSUS DROP OFF. SO WHEN YOU ADD THAT MAJOR NEW SOURCE OF RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC, NOT JUST THE TRAFFIC BUT THE FLOW OF THE TRAFFIC, PEOPLE HAVE TO HAVE THEIR HEADS MORE ON A SWIVEL. THEY HAVE TO LOOK UP FROM THEIR CELL PHONE. THEY'RE TEXTING FURIOUSLY ON, OF COURSE, AND THAT'S ACROSS FROM DIRECTLY THE SCHOOL. YOU'RE NOT STARTING FROM A CLEAN SLATE. YOU'RE ADDING MORE TRAFFIC AND MORE RISK TO AN INTERSECTION THAT'S CLEARLY UNDER STRAIN. THE REZONING, OF COURSE, AS WE ALL KNOW, ALLOWS A THOUSAND APARTMENTS. IT REMOVES THE LONG STANDING PROTECTION. NOW, WHEN THAT WAS REMOVED, NOTHING MEANINGFUL WAS PUT IN ITS PLACE. THE RESULT IS DIRECT APARTMENT ENTRANCE THAT WE'RE ALL TALKING ABOUT, RIGHT ACROSS FROM KIKER LITERALLY COULD NOT BE IN A WORSE PLACE, I FEEL. AND PUTTING MORE TRAFFIC AND DIRECTIONS AND THINGS THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT WHEN THEY'RE BRINGING THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL. NOW, I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME NEW PROPOSALS THAT THAT THEY DISCUSS SOME HARSHLY WORDED NEW SIGNAGE. BUT SIGNAGE ALONE, AS WE KNOW, DOES NOT SOLVE A CAPACITY OR SAFETY PROBLEM. IT JUST DOESN'T. NOW, THE DEVELOPERS NUMBERS MAY SHOW FEWER DAILY TRIPS FROM FOR MULTIFAMILY THAN FULL OFFICE, BUT THOSE ARE MODEL NUMBERS DISCONNECTED FROM OUR LOCALITY. THEY DON'T TELL US WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS DURING THE CONCENTRATED PERIODS OF A DROP OFF OR PICKUP THAT YOU SAW TODAY. AND THERE'S STILL NO REAL PEAK HOUR STUDY ON THIS INTERSECTION. AND THAT'S NOT A TECHNICAL CHANGE. IT ADDS MORE TRAFFIC TO AN INTERSECTION UNDER STRAIN RIGHT NEXT TO AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. AND THAT'S WHY IT DESERVES MORE SCRUTINY, CERTAINLY MORE THAN IT'S GETTING SEEMINGLY TODAY. THERE'S NO REASON TO MAKE THIS CHANGE. AND WE CAN TAKE THE THE TIME TO FIND A BETTER OPTION. TRACK 110 BIG PIECE OF LAND. WE'VE SEEN IT UP TO THE POWERPOINT. I FEEL LIKE I SHOULD HAVE TRIED HARDER AND HAD MY MY OWN POWERPOINT ACTUALLY. BUT IT'S CLEAR THAT WE'VE GOT SOME BIG BRAINS IN THIS ROOM, MANY BEHIND ME, SOME REALLY BIG ONES IN FRONT OF ME. SURELY WITH ALL THOSE BIG BRAINS, WE CAN FIND A BETTER WAY TO HANDLE ACCESS WITHOUT PUTTING A MAJOR DRIVEWAY THIS CLOSE TO AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. SURELY. THE 2002 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROVIDED A THOUGHTFUL FRAMEWORK. THEY PROBABLY SPENT A WHOLE LOT OF TIME THINKING ABOUT HOW THEY COULD PROTECT DAHLGREN FROM TRAFFIC AND THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE TODAY. BEFORE WE REMOVE A PROTECTION THAT HAS STOOD MORE THAN 20 YEARS 20. WE SHOULD REMEMBER WHY IT WAS PUT IN PLACE. I'M ASKING YOU HUMBLY TO DELAY THIS CHANGE UNTIL STRATUS COMES BACK WITH A SAFER ACCESS OPTION, OR THAT WE THINK OF ONE TOGETHER. THE CONSEQUENCES OF GETTING THIS WRONG ARE MUCH GREATER THAN THE COST OF JUST TAKING THE TIME TO DO THIS RIGHT. AND THE CONCERN IS NOT LIMITED TO JUST A FEW RESIDENTS. YOU CAN SEE MANY BEHIND ME TODAY. IT IS BROAD AND WELL DOCUMENTED. WE HAVE A PETITION OF OVER 950 SIGNATURES FROM CIRCLE CITY RESIDENTS, PROVEN OPPOSED TO THE ZONING REAPPLICATION AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED BECAUSE OF THE CONCERNS EVERYONE'S DISCUSSING. A JULY POLL OF 225 CIRCLE C RESIDENTS SHOWED THAT 90% OPPOSED. 5% WERE IN FAVOR AND 5% SIMPLY DIDN'T KNOW. WE'RE NOT SAYING DON'T BUILD. WE'RE SAYING BUILD RESPONSIBLY. I MEAN, WE OWE THAT TO OUR KIDS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CHRISTINE [01:00:02] OLSEN, FOLLOWED BY DENISE WADE AND PHIL GORMAN. CHRISTINE, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. HI, THIS IS CHRISTINE OLSEN. I AM CHRISTINE OLSEN. NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN, HANK. IT'S ALL BASED ON ANY HOA BOARD MEMBERS HERE TODAY. I DON'T SEE ANY, BUT APPARENTLY THEY SEND LETTERS. ARE THERE. OH, GOOD. I'M SO GLAD. THAT'S THAT'S AWESOME. SO BASED ON THE MEETING THAT ALREADY OCCURRED REGARDING TRACT 110 THIS YEAR, I'M QUITE CONFIDENT ALL OF YOU HAVE ALREADY MADE YOUR DECISIONS PRIOR TO THIS PRESENTATION TODAY. NO ONE WANTS MORE LUXURY RENTAL APARTMENTS THAT ARE MOST DEFINITELY NOT AFFORDABLE. FROM DOG'S HEAD TO SOUTH FIRST TO WEIRD DEVELOPMENTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY, YOU'RE WASTING RESOURCES BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO RESIDENTS. NO ONE WANTS THESE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS EXCEPT DEVELOPERS. AND MAYBE THAT GUY IN THE RED SHIRT. THESE LARGE SCALE, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS SEEM TO IMPRESS YOU BECAUSE YOU KEEP APPROVING ZONING WITHOUT STUDIES. WHY? THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOES NOT NEED MORE LUXURY HOUSING. BUT WE DO NEED MORE THREE BEDROOM AFFORDABLE UNITS FOR TEACHERS, FIREFIGHTERS, AND OUR SERVICE INDUSTRY PROFESSIONALS WHO WOULD LIKE TO PURCHASE CONDOS. THAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT, RATHER THAN THESE VANITY MIXED USE RENTALS ARE NEEDED. LISTENING TO RESIDENTS DOESN'T SEEM TO BE HAPPENING. I REPEAT, NO ONE WANTS THIS. SO LET'S STOP ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL. PETER IS PRECIOUS. WATER RESOURCES FOR BARTON SPRINGS BECAUSE TRACT 110 IS LOCATED ON A RECHARGE ZONE. LET'S PAY PAUL OUR SCHOOLS TO MAKE UP FOR OUR STATE GOVERNMENT'S WILLING UNWILLINGNESS TO FUND OUR PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM. YOU ALL ARE JUST KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. OUR CITY NEEDS TO REVISE THEIR MASTER PLAN. MAYOR KIRK WATSON AND COUNCILOR PAIGE ELLIS, WHO MAY BE ON ZOOM RIGHT NOW. AND WE NEED TO FOCUS MORE ON WHAT AUSTIN USED TO BE A CITY OF PEOPLE WHO CARED ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE THOUGHT. WE ARE FAR FROM THAT WITH THIS LEADERSHIP. STOP BLINDLY APPROVING ZONING WITHOUT STUDIES. DO BETTER. ZAP! AND I HOPE ANYONE LISTENING RIGHT NOW WILL VOTE IN NOVEMBER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS DENISE WADE, FOLLOWED BY PHIL GORMAN AND ALI SHEFFIELD. DENISE, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. DOES IT MATTER? OKAY. IT DOESN'T MATTER. HELLO. GOOD EVENING. WHILE YOU HAVE ALREADY APPROVED THE REZONING IN THE LAST MEETING THAT WE HAD IN ON MAY 5TH. AND YOU'VE MADE THAT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED IT AND ESSENTIALLY SAID THAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO APPROVE THIS WITHOUT LISTENING TO ANY OF THIS. THE CHANGE THAT WE'RE ASKED THAT IS BEING ASKED OF IN THIS ADDITIONAL ZONING MAY SEEM LIKE A SMALL PARCEL OF LAND, BUT IT IS A, IT IS A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WILL HAVE A GREAT AND HUGE IMPACT ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WHAT I'M SHOWING YOU RIGHT NOW IS THE TRACT 110. IMAGINE AUSTIN SCORECARD THAT CAME FROM YOUR PACKET, NOT OURS. WE DIDN'T MAKE THIS UP. THIS CHART ISN'T BASED ON OUR OPINIONS ABOUT WHAT SHOULD AND SHOULDN'T BE BUILT. IT USES YOUR OWN IMAGINED AUSTIN DECISION GUIDELINES. AND WHEN YOU COMPARE THIS PROPOSAL WITH OTHER MULTIFAMILY REZONINGS THAT WERE MENTIONED EARLIER, THE DIFFERENCE IS STRIKING. TRACT 110 SCORES ONLY FIVE YES CRITERIA. AND AS ONE PERSON RECENTLY PUT IT, IF THAT WERE MY CHILD'S TEST SCORE, THEY'D BE FAILING. SO WHY THE DIFFERENCE? AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE CHART, TRACT 110 IS NOT ON AN IMAGINED AUSTIN ACTIVITY CENTER OR CORRIDOR. IT DOES NOT HAVE PUBLIC TRANSIT WITHIN A QUARTER MILE. IT DOES NOT HAVE GOODS, SERVICES AND EMPLOYMENT WITHIN HALF A MILE. AND IT DOES NOT HAVE GROCERY OR FOOD ACCESS THAT IS NOT CAR DEPENDENT. THESE AREN'T MINOR DETAILS. THEY TELL US SOMETHING FUNDAMENTAL ABOUT THIS LOCATION. THE HIGHER SCORING PROJECTS ARE LOCATED WHERE. IMAGINE AUSTIN DIRECTS THIS KIND OF DENSITY ALONG ACTIVE ACTIVITY CORRIDORS WITHIN A REGIONAL CENTER WHERE RESIDENTS CAN REALISTICALLY CONNECT TO TRANSIT, EMPLOYMENT SERVICES AND DAILY NEEDS. TRACT 110 IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT. [01:05:04] IT FRONTS MOPAC, A FREEWAY, NOT A CORRIDOR. THAT DISTINCTION MATTERS BECAUSE PUTTING 1000 RESIDENTS RESIDENTIAL UNITS NEXT TO A FREEWAY DOESN'T SUDDENLY CREATE THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IMAGINED AUSTIN CALLS FOR. INSTEAD, RESIDENTS WILL STILL NEED CARS TO REACH GROCERIES, RESTAURANTS, SERVICES, EMPLOYMENT, AND ALL THOSE VEHICLES HAVE TO GO SOMEWHERE THAT'S SOMEWHERE. SHOULD NOT BE ON TO DALE GREEN AVENUE. AT THE SAME TIME, CONVERTING THIS PROPERTY TO PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL USE WILL NOW CREATE THOUSANDS OF NEW RESIDENTIAL TRIPS EACH DAY, MAINLY ON TO DALE GREEN. SO I ASKED THIS COMMISSION TO LOOK CAREFULLY AT THIS CHART. THINK BEYOND JUST THE OVERSIMPLIFIED PRO AFFORDABILITY HOUSING RUBBER STAMP TO CITY COUNCIL MENTALITY THAT'S BEEN PERVASIVE THIS PAST YEAR. IF IMAGINE AUSTIN IS SUPPOSED TO GUIDE WHERE AUSTIN PLACES MAJOR RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, THEN WE SHOULDN'T DISREGARD THOSE PRINCIPLES WHEN THEY POINT TO AN INCONVENIENT AND UNPOPULAR CONCLUSION. HOWEVER, SINCE YOU HAVE ALREADY OVERLOOKED THIS BEFORE, DO NOT APPROVE THIS ACCESS ZONING REQUEST FOR DOG RING ACCESS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS PHIL GORMAN, FOLLOWED BY ASHLEY SHEFFIELD AND MATTHEW OWENS. PHIL, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. HELLO FOLKS. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. MY NAME IS PHIL GORMAN. I AM HERE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE CIRCLE C BOARD OF DIRECTORS. WE HAVE A VERY NARROW REQUEST FOR YOU HERE TONIGHT. IT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE TONIGHT. IT IS A REQUEST FOR THE PROPOSED SECONDARY VEHICULAR ACCESS POINT FROM TRACT 110 TO BE DESIGNATED AS EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY, AS ORIGINALLY INTENDED BY BOTH THE CIRCLE C BOARD AND BY STRATUS. THIS APPROACH FULLY SATISFIES FIRE SAFETY AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS WHILE PROTECTING THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL STREETS FROM UNINTENDED CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC AND UNNECESSARY CONGESTION. IT IS ALSO LIKELY TO REQUIRE FAR FEWER AND LESS DISRUPTIVE SAFETY MITIGATION MEASURES IN THE SCHOOL ZONE. THREE INDEPENDENT FACTORS MAKE UNRESTRICTED OR GATED GENERAL PURPOSE ACCESS UNNECESSARY AND UNDESIRABLE. NUMBER ONE, THE ELIMINATION OF CROSS TRAFFIC AT SOUTH BAY AND MOPAC. SO WITH THIS CHANGE AND WITH TEX-DOT UNLIKELY TO PUT A STOPLIGHT OR BUILD AN OVERPASS AT THIS INTERSECTION, NORTHBOUND MOPAC TRAFFIC WILL BE DIRECTED ONTO NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS TO REACH NORTHBOUND MOPAC VIA LACROSSE, ADDING A GENERAL PURPOSE ACCESS POINT FROM TRACT 110 WOULD COMPOUND THAT REDISTRIBUTION AND INCREASE CUT THROUGH VOLUME ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS THAT WERE NEVER DESIGNED FOR IT. SO WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DAHLGREN, EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD ROAD IN THE AREA IS A LEVEL ONE STREET, AND IT IS NOT EQUIPPED IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION TO HANDLE THE AVERAGE DAILY TRIP COUNTS EXPECTED FROM TRACT 110. NUMBER TWO IS THE AISD EDUCATIONAL IMPACT STATEMENT FINDINGS REGARDING REGARDING KIKER AND THE OTHER SCHOOLS. THE STATEMENT FROM AISD INDICATES THAT STUDENTS FROM TRACT 110 WHO ATTEND KIKER ARE EXPECTED TO BE WALKERS. THEY CAN USE ANY PLANNED PATH, NETWORK AND PEDESTRIAN GATES COMPARABLE TO EXISTING PEDESTRIAN GATES THAT CONNECT BREA COURT MANOR WAY TO YOU AROUND CLAYTON ELEMENTARY ACROSS LA CROSSE, ISD IS ALSO REDUCING BUS SERVICE AND USING KIKER AS A PICKUP POINT FOR OTHER SCHOOLS, WHICH MAKES IT LIKELY THAT NEARLY ANY STUDENT WHO WILL END UP LIVING ON TRACT 110 WILL BE A WALKER. EFFECTIVELY, THIS REMOVES ANY STUDENT TRANSPORTATION JUSTIFICATION FOR ROUTINE VEHICULAR ACCESS THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. NUMBER THREE IS TXDOT'S PLANNED TEXAS TURNAROUND. SO, ALTHOUGH NOT YET FUNDED, THE TEXAS TURNAROUND AT HIGHWAY 45 AND ESCARPMENT IS ALREADY RECOGNIZED AS NEEDED DUE TO THE VALOR SCHOOL AND SOME OTHER REASONS, AND IT CAN EASILY BE COMPLETED BEFORE TRACT 110 OPENS. ONCE OPERATIONAL, IT WILL ALLOW SOUTHBOUND MOPAC TRAFFIC AN EFFICIENT WAY TO REVERSE DIRECTION NORTHBOUND. COLLECTIVELY, THESE FACTORS DEMONSTRATE THAT A FULL ACCESS OR GATED GENERAL PURPOSE CONNECTION IS NOT REQUIRED, AND DESIGNATING THIS POINT AS EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY MEETS ALL LEGITIMATE PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS WHILE PRESERVING THE CHARACTER AND ORIGINAL INTENT AND SAFETY OF THE. THE ORIGINAL PLAN FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU CONSIDER THIS REQUEST AND ON BEHALF OF THE CIRCLE C HOA. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. [01:10:05] OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ALI SHEFFIELD. ALI RECEIVED THREE MINUTES OF DONATED TIME FROM JENNY. JENNY, ARE YOU HERE? ALI WILL RECEIVE SIX MINUTES. SHE'LL BE FOLLOWED BY MATTHEW OWENS AND ALICIA KISWANI. DEAR COMMISSIONERS. HI, MY NAME IS ALI SHEFFIELD. I'M A RESIDENT OF CIRCLE C AND I HAVE 18 YEARS OF COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE EXPERIENCE. I'VE BEEN AN UNDERWRITER, A DEPUTY CHIEF UNDERWRITER FOR FANNIE MAE, LENDING UP TO $2 BILLION A YEAR. STRICTLY ON MULTIFAMILY. I DON'T SAY THIS TO IMPRESS YOU, BUT TO EXPLAIN, I UNDERSTAND THE FUNDAMENTALS OF COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE AND PROVE THAT I'M AN ADVOCATE FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT. YOU ALL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO TAKE A SECOND LOOK AT A ZONING CASE THAT STILL NEEDS SOME TWEAKING. TO BE CLEAR, MY GOAL IS TO FIND A WIN WIN FOR STRATUS AND OUR COMMUNITY. BUT HOW? THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN IS ONLY TO THE BENEFIT OF STRATUS AND A DETRIMENT TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD OF 6000 HOMES. I COULD TALK ABOUT SCHOOL SAFETY, THE FACT THAT THERE ARE NO BUSSES OR PARK AND RIDE OPTIONS, WILDFIRE CONCERNS, AND SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES LIKE THE EDWARDS AQUIFER, WATER SAFETY AND CAVES. BUT I'M GOING TO STICK TO WHAT I KNOW. REAL ESTATE FUNDAMENTALS. THIS ZONING MODIFICATION STUCK STRUCK ME AS UNUSUAL FOR TWO REASONS. ONE, THE RADICAL CHANGE FROM OFFICE TO A THOUSAND UNITS, AND THE SECOND, THE INGRESS EGRESS ACCESS BEING PROPOSED OFF DAHLGREN. SO I DID A LITTLE RESEARCH, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE ALL AWARE STRATUS IS CURRENTLY A PUBLIC COMPANY. IN MARCH 2026, THEIR SHAREHOLDERS VOTED TO LIQUIDATE THE STOCK AND TAKE THE COMPANY PRIVATE. IN DOING SO, THEY WERE ACQUIRED. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO SELL ALL OF THEIR ASSETS. THEREFORE, STRATUS GOAL IS TO OPTIMIZE THE LAND VALUE OF TRACK 110 BY CONVERTING IT FROM OFFICE TO MULTIFAMILY. SMART. IT'S CALLED A LAND PLAY. ADJUSTMENTS WILL PROBABLY. THIS ADJUSTMENT WILL PROBABLY INCREASE THE VALUE OF THIS LAND BY MY ESTIMATE, APPROXIMATELY $10 MILLION. BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT A THOUSAND CLASS A UNITS IS A LOT OF UNITS. IT'S PRACTICALLY A CITY, AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO MANAGE. LET'S SAY IN MY 18 YEAR CAREER, I HAVE ONLY SEEN TWO PROJECTS THIS LARGE ONE IN HOUSTON AND ONE IN MICHIGAN. BUT SOUTHWEST AUSTIN, IN A SUBMARKET THAT HAS A PHYSICAL VACANCY OF 10.4% TODAY, IT'S ALREADY OVERBUILT, ACCORDING TO REESE, WITH 13,900 UNITS AND ANOTHER THREE PROPERTIES TOTALING 953 UNITS BEING DELIVERED IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS IS ADDING ANOTHER THOUSAND UNITS TO THE CURRENT SUBMARKET INVENTORY NEEDED. FOR EXAMPLE, CARRINGTON AT OAK HILL. IT'S A 335 UNIT COMPLEX. IT FINISHED CONSTRUCTION IN APRIL 2025. TODAY, IT'S STILL 66% OCCUPIED. AND GUESS WHAT? 15% CONCESSIONS. YIKES. THAT DEMONSTRATES THERE'S VERY LITTLE DEMAND FOR ADDITIONAL MARKET RATE DEALS IN THIS SUBMARKET. I SEE THE WANT FROM STRATUS, BUT I DON'T SEE THE NEED FOR THE COMMUNITY. CIRCLE C IN SURROUNDING AREAS WOULD BENEFIT FROM THE CURRENT ZONING OF OFFICE AND RETAIL TO ADD JOBS AND RESOURCES WE NEED AND WANT. THE SECOND PIECE THAT IS UNPRECEDENTED IS CHANGING THE INGRESS AND EGRESS FLOW OF TRAFFIC, GOING FROM OFFICE RETAIL THAT WOULD HAVE VEHICLE ACCESS FROM MOPAC THAT WAS PURPOSELY PUT IN PLACE IN 2002, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO A THOUSAND CLASS A UNITS THAT WOULD ONLY HAVE ACCESS TO MOPAC NORTH THROUGH A TWO LANE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ROAD. DAHLGREN. HOW IS THAT SMART DEVELOPMENT? GUYS, WE'RE NOT HOUSTON. WE HAVE ZONING LAWS FOR A REASON, AND THIS IS THE REASON WHY YOU ALL ARE SITTING UP HERE TODAY. MY PROPOSAL BUILD OUT SOUTH BAY CROSSOVER, WHICH WAS CLEARLY ORIGINALLY THE INTENTION [01:15:06] BASED ON HOW THE ROADS ARE DEVELOPED TODAY. IF YOU JUST GO DRIVE, YOU CAN SEE THE LITTLE CURVE ON MOPAC. THIS WAY THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. TRACK 110 WOULD HAVE THE NORTH AND SOUTH INGRESS AND EGRESS DIRECTLY ONTO MOPAC. WHY INVOLVE DAHLGREN, WHICH WAS ALWAYS INTENDED TO BE PROTECTED FROM THE TRAFFIC COMING FROM TRACK 110? THIS CHANGE, THIS ZONING CHANGE IN ACCESS REQUESTS IS INTRUSIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S A DETRIMENT TO THE INTEGRITY OF A VERY WELL PLANNED OUT COMMUNITY, A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT, AND THE MAIN REASON WE'RE ALL HERE TRYING TO PERSUADE YOU WITH ALL OF OUR MIGHT TODAY. FOR THESE REASONS, I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO DENY THIS ZONING CASE AND HOW IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN. AS YOU CAN HEAR, WE ARE ALL ALIGNED AS A NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU EACH HAVE YOUR OWN VOICE AND DECISION. DECISION TO MAKE THAT WILL AFFECT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN. PLEASE DO NOT PASS THE BUCK TO CITY COUNCIL TO DECIDE. YOU EACH HAVE YOUR OWN VOTE. PLEASE DENY THIS CASE AND ALLOW STRATUS TIME TO WORK WITH US, THE NEIGHBORS, SO WE CAN HAVE A WIN WIN FOR EVERYBODY. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. CAN I TAKE ONE SECOND? WE HAVE. COMMISSIONER STERN HAS JOINED US. HE IS ON THE LINE. I JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT. COMMISSIONER STERN, HAVE YOU FILLED OUT YOUR SHEET FOR ATTENDANCE? HE'S. GOOD. SO I JUST WANTED TO STOP AND SAY WE HAVE ONE MORE COMMISSIONER ONLINE NOW. SORRY. GO AHEAD. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MATTHEW OWENS, FOLLOWED BY ALICIA KISWANI AND FOLLOWED BY GREG THOMAS. MATTHEW, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. ALL RIGHT. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. STRATUS HAS OWNED THIS PROPERTY. FOR WHAT, NOW? OVER 25 YEARS, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE BY TAX RECORDS AND TCAD, YOU CAN SEE HOW FOR A LONG TIME, THIS PROPERTY WAS VALUED AT JUST UNDER $1.4 MILLION. AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO IT SINCE THEN. UP UP UP UP UP. SO IT MAKES SENSE. THEY WANT TO SELL IT, RIGHT. GET SOME MONEY. CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY THE TAXES ON IT LIKE A LOT OF US. CAN YOU GO? HOW DO I ADVANCE THE SLIDE? PERFECT. THANK YOU. YOU CAN SEE THEY'VE GOT SOME PROTECTIONS HERE AGAINST THE NET APPRAISED VALUE, WHICH, ACCORDING TO TAX CODE, WILL EXPIRE AT THE END OF THIS YEAR. WHICH MEANS THEY GOT TO SELL THIS PUPPY FAST. GUESS WHAT? IT'S A FREE MARKET. WE WANT THEM TO MAKE MONEY. THEY'VE OWNED IT. GREAT. FINE AND DANDY. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS. NEXT SLIDE. THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO DO THAT AT THE EXPENSE OF EVERYONE ELSE ON THIS MAP AND IN THIS ROOM, AND THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO MAKE THAT YOUR PROBLEM IN OUR PROBLEM. THEY'VE HAD THIS PROPERTY FOR 25 YEARS. THEY'VE SOLD ALL THREE OF THOSE PROPERTIES IN THE ORANGE STAR, AND THEY'VE BEEN AWARE OF THIS DECADES OLD CURB CUT PROHIBITION. SO THEY WENT AHEAD AND DECIDED TO SELL ALL THE REST OF THIS STUFF, BUT WITHOUT PLANNING ON, HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET PEOPLE IN AND OUT OF THIS OTHER THING THAT WE WANT TO SELL? SO NOW BOOM. LIGHTNING STRIKES RIGHT THERE WHERE ALL THOSE KIDS ARE BETWEEN MY HOUSE AND MY KIDS SCHOOL, WHERE THAT RED STOP IS. IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM. IT'S NOT YOUR PROBLEM. THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OFF OF THIS. THAT CAN EASILY HAVE CREATED AN EASEMENT FOR ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY. THEY CHOSE NOT TO DO THAT. IT'S NOT UP TO YOU TO HIT THE STAPLES EASY BUTTON AND SOLVE THE PROBLEM FOR THEM. SO PLEASE VOTE ACCORDINGLY THAT UNLESS THERE IS INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED REZONING, IT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE, IT IS UNSAFE AND IT SHOULD BE DENIED UNTIL THAT HAS BEEN FIXED AT THEIR EXPENSE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ALICIA KISWANI, WHO IS FOLLOWED BY GREG THOMAS AND TRAVIS WADE. ALICIA, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN. MY NAME IS ALICIA KISWANI. I'M A FORMER KAYAKER, PARENT AND CURRENT VALOR SOUTH AUSTIN PARENT. RIGHT NOW, DIRECTLY IMPACTED PARTIES ARE RECOMMENDING, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONSTRUCTING DECELERATION AND ACCELERATION LANES OFF OF SOUTH MOPAC FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT AND CLOSING THE SOUTH BAY CROSSOVER ENTIRELY. RESPECTFULLY, I WANT TO ADDRESS WHAT THAT MEANS FOR VALOR SOUTH AUSTIN SITTING DIRECTLY AT THE CORNER OF MOPAC AND HIGHWAY 45. [01:20:03] MY TWO KIDS GO TO SCHOOL THERE, AND AN INGRESS EGRESS LANE OFF OF MOPAC WOULD RUN STRAIGHT INTO VALOR'S DAILY SCHOOL TRAFFIC. ALREADY KNOWN BY. FOR BACKING UP ONTO THE SHOULDER OF MOPAC EVERY MORNING AND AFTERNOON SINCE SCHOOL STARTED LAST WEDNESDAY, I'VE GOTTEN DAILY REMINDERS AND EMAIL AND TEXTS ABOUT CAR LINE SAFETY PSA ABOUT NOT USING THAT SOUTH BAY CROSSOVER, AND YET PEOPLE DO. WHY? WELL, BECAUSE WE'RE HUMAN AND WE LOOK FOR THE EASIEST, FASTEST, MOST EFFICIENT ROUTE, EVEN IF IT'S THE DANGEROUS ONE. AND THIS WILL ONLY GET WORSE. THE VALOR SCHOOL RIGHT NOW IS AT ABOUT 1500 STUDENTS, AND IT IS NOT AT CAPACITY. THIS YEAR ALONE, IT GREW 15% YEAR OVER YEAR, AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO GROW AS THE SIXTH THROUGH 12TH GRADE PROGRAMS ARE EXPANDED. CLOSING THE CROSSOVER WITHOUT AN ADDITIONAL OPTION MEANS THOUSANDS OF CARS EITHER ENTERING OR CIRCLING 45 ESCARPMENT LACROSSE AND MOPAC EVERY SCHOOL MORNING, OR LINING UP AGAINST THIS NEW INGRESS AND EGRESS. I KNOW THIS MIGHT SOUND LIKE I AM ACTUALLY FOR DULL GREEN ACCESS INSTEAD, BECAUSE IT'S NORTH OF VALOR AND I AM NOT. NEITHER OPTION PUTS CHILD SAFETY FIRST. DOG GREEN IS A TWO LANE RESIDENTIAL STREET NEVER BUILT FOR 1000 PLUS UNITS OF NEW TRAFFIC. CLOSING THE CROSSOVER AND ADDING AN ACCESS POINT ON SOUTH MOPAC JUST ADDS CONGESTION ON A HIGHWAY WHERE PEOPLE ARE ALREADY DRIVING AT VERY HIGH SPEEDS. I UNDERSTAND THAT LIFE PRESENTS REALLY BAD OPTIONS, AND SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO PICK THE WORST. THE BEST, WORST ONE. BUT AS A FORMER AND CURRENT VALOR PARENT THIS IS CHOOSING WHICH OPTION PUTS WHICH KIDS AT RISK. AND LET ME SAY WHAT WE'RE ALL DREADING HERE TONIGHT. ONE DAY A TERRIBLE ACCIDENT WILL HAPPEN ON DALE GREEN OR ON MOPAC. A MOM AND DAD WON'T COME HOME. A YOUNG LIFE WILL BE CUT SHORT. OR A BABY IN A CAR SEAT WON'T MAKE IT. AND WE'LL ALL SAY THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. COMMISSIONERS YOU TONIGHT HAVE THE POWER TO HELP US AVOID IT. I UNDERSTAND TRAFFIC STUDIES COME LATER IN THE PROCESS. BUT YOU'RE IN THOSE SEATS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW THE PROCEDURE AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN A NUANCE NEEDS AN EXCEPTION. I'M ASKING THIS COMMISSION TO RECONSIDER THEIR RECOMMENDATION THAT COUNCIL AND THAT COUNCIL DENY THIS ZONING CASE UNTIL A TRAFFIC STUDY IS COMPLETED. WE NEED REAL DATA ON WHAT ROAD NETWORK CAN, WHAT THIS ROAD NETWORK CAN REALLY HANDLE AND ON THE RECORD, BEFORE A FINAL DECISION IS MADE. WE DO NOT GET AN UNDO BUTTON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS GREG THOMAS, FOLLOWED BY TRAVIS WALD AND CARLOS GONZALEZ. GREG, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS GREG THOMAS, AND I'M HERE TODAY TO ASK THAT THE REQUEST FOR ZONING CHANGE ON TRACK 110 IN CIRCLE C BE DENIED. I'VE BEEN AN AUSTINITE SINCE I WAS NINE YEARS OLD. MY WIFE AND I, ANN MOVED TO CIRCLE C 33 YEARS AGO. THE REASON WE CHOSE TO MOVE SOUTH WAS BECAUSE OF MY JOB. THE SELECTION OF CIRCLE C WAS BECAUSE IT WAS THE FIRST MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY IN THE SOUTH. OVER THE YEARS OF BEING ANNEXED BY AUSTIN, SOS CHALLENGES AND SUCH, THE COMMUNITY AND THE DEVELOPER HAVE ESSENTIALLY KEPT, IN ESSENCE, OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN AS OUR LONG TERM PARTNER. THIS IS NOW LIQUIDATING THEMSELVES. THEY'RE NOW TRYING TO THROW A MAJOR SHIFT INTO ONE OF THE FINAL PIECES OF THE PLAN, ALL IN THE NAME OF A QUICK FINANCIAL GAIN. I AM AGAINST CHANGING THE ZONING FROM COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL AND ENABLING A 1000 UNIT LUXURY APARTMENT COMPLEX ON TRACK 110 FOR MANY REASONS, ESPECIALLY WITH THE CHANGE FOR DIRECT ACCESS PROPOSED. THE MASTER PLAN WAS DESIGNED TO BALANCE RESIDENTIAL, RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL. THIS TRACK HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE BIGGEST OPPORTUNITY TO BRING COMMERCIAL SPACE AND JOB OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESIDENTS LIVING IN SOUTH AUSTIN. SHIFTING THE TRACK TO RESIDENTIAL USE THROWS OFF THE BALANCE OF THE PLANNED COMMUNITY. WE INCREASED THE NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BY 20%. WE DO THIS BY PLACING THOSE UNITS IN A SPACE THAT HAS BEEN RESTRICTED BY VARIOUS AGREEMENTS, AND WOULD FORCE TRAFFIC INTO AN ALREADY HEAVILY USED TWO ROADS THAT ACT AS THE MAIN ARTERIES FOR THE CURRENT RESIDENTS. WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE POTENTIAL FOR BACKUPS AND ACCIDENTS WHEN VALOR WAS PUT IN A SIMILAR PIECE OF LAND, AND THAT WAS WITH TEX DOT AGREEMENTS TO HELP MITIGATE THE ISSUES. AND WITHOUT DIRECT ACCESS, THE VALOR PROBLEM IS JUST A COUPLE HOURS OF AN ISSUE EACH SCHOOL DAY. AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH TWICE THE PEOPLE AND MORE THAN TWICE THE TRAFFIC AS VALOR WILL HAVE SIMILAR ISSUES AND WILL BE COMPLEX IN RUSH HOUR AS WELL [01:25:03] AS GIVE ISSUES THROUGHOUT THE DAY. WE GET A TASTE OF THE TRAFFIC AND SAFETY ISSUES EACH SCHOOL DAY MORNING, WHICH HAS INCREASED EACH YEAR WITH THE ADDITION OF NEW COMMUNITIES SOUTH OF 45 AND VALOR THAT USE ESCARPMENT AND RELATED SIDE STREETS AS CUT THRUS. JUST TWO MONTHS AGO, WE GOT ANOTHER TASTE WHEN PORTIONS OF ESCARPMENT WERE CLOSED FOR PAVING AND PORTIONS OF CURRENT RESIDENTS WERE FORCED DOWN LA CROSSE TO ACCESS MOPAC OR TO GET TO H-E-B. WE ALL HAD TO SIT THROUGH LONG LINES THAT BACKED ALMOST BACK TO DALGREEN. IT DOES NOT SEEM WISE FOR THE CITY TO SET A PRECEDENT AND APPROVE A ZONING CHANGE FOR AN ENTITY THAT ALREADY HAS NO PLAN TO BE AROUND TO DEVELOP IT. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU HELP KEEP THIS PROBLEM AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE LEFT TO HONOR WHAT WE'VE DONE FOR 30 YEARS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS TRAVIS WALD, FOLLOWED BY CARLOS GONZALEZ AND THEN SATOSH SASTRY. SO, TRAVIS, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. HI. THANK YOU. HI. GOOD EVENING. YES. WE ARE TOLD THAT AUSTIN NEEDS MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THAT IS TRUE. AND IN FACT, IT'S A MORAL OBLIGATION TO THE TEACHERS, FIRST RESPONDERS, NURSES, SERVICE WORKERS, AND FAMILIES BEING PRICED OUT OF THE CITY THAT THEY SERVE. BUT BECAUSE WE NEED WHAT? BECAUSE THE NEED IS REAL. WE MUST BE HONEST ABOUT WHAT MEETS THAT NEED AND WHAT MERELY BORROWS ITS NAME. WHEN YOU VOTED A FEW MONTHS AGO TO AFFIRM THIS REZONING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAS ONE OF THE PREMISES THAT PROMPTED YOU TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF IT, AND RIGHTFULLY SO. YET STRATUS DESCRIBES THIS PROPOSAL AS A CLASS A+ RESIDENTIAL IN THE MULTIFAMILY INDUSTRY. CLASS A MEANS PRESTIGIOUS PROPERTIES COMMANDING THE HIGHEST RENTS AND SALE PRICES. YET AFFORDABILITY IS OFFERED AS A REASON. OR WAS OFFERED AS A REASON TO APPROVE THIS REZONING. SO LET'S LOOK BEYOND THE LABEL AND EXAMINE THE PROMISE. ACCORDING TO STRATUS RESPONSE AT THE JUNE TOWN HALL, THE COMMITMENT IS ONLY 10% OF THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS FOR HOUSEHOLDS EARNING UP TO 80% OF MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME. IF A THOUSAND APARTMENTS ARE BUILT, THAT WOULD MEAN 900 CLASS A MARKET RATE APARTMENTS AND JUST 100 AFFORDABLE UNITS. IT'S A HIGH END DEVELOPMENT WITH A LIMITED AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT, AND 80% OF MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME DOES NOT REACH MANY OF THE AUSTINITES FACING THE GREATEST HARDSHIP, THE DEEPEST NEED IS SIMPLY MORE UNITS. IT IS FOR HOMES THAT WORK, FOR HOMES THAT WORKING PEOPLE AT LOWER INCOMES CAN AFFORD. A REZONING OF THIS SCALE IS A PUBLIC ACT THAT CREATES PRIVATE VALUE. IF THAT VALUE IS GRANTED IN THE NAME OF AFFORDABILITY, THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO DEMAND A COMMITMENT EQUAL TO THE CLAIM. WE SHOULD NOT CONFUSE A SMALL FRACTION WITH A PURPOSE. WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW 10% TO BECOME THE MORAL COVER OF THE OTHER 90%. AND WE SHOULD NOT CALL SOMETHING AFFORDABLE MERELY BECAUSE THE WORD HELPS TO WIN APPROVAL. THIS COMMISSION MUST JUDGE THE PROJECT BY ITS CONSEQUENCES. WHO CAN LIVE HERE? WHO IS LEFT OUT? AND WHAT AUSTIN RECEIVES IN RETURN. AND TO EVERY MEMBER OF THIS COMMISSION, IF YOU CONTINUE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS ZONING BY AFFIRMING THIS REZONING, DO NOT TELL PEOPLE OF AUSTIN THAT YOU VOTED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. YOU WILL BE VOTING FOR 900 CLASS A MARKET RATE APARTMENTS IN EXCHANGE FOR 100 AFFORDABLE UNITS. THAT IS NOT A VICTORY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IT IS A HIGH END DEVELOPMENT WITH AFFORDABILITY USED AS THE PRICE OF ADMISSION. YOUR VOTE SHOULD REFLECT THIS PROJECT ACTUALLY DESERVES NOT WHAT THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO CALL IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CARLOS GONZALEZ. I WILL BE COMING BACK TO HIM IF IF HE POPS UP, WE HAVE SANTOS SASTRE WHO'S ALSO JOINING US VIRTUALLY. SANTOS, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I LIVE NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF TRELAWNEY LANE AND DAHLGREN FOR OVER 26 YEARS, AND MY KIDS AND ALL THE KIDS ON MY STREET GO TO KIKER ELEMENTARY AS ANDREW LEEPER SHOWED US THE VIDEOS. [01:30:02] THIS AREA IS REALLY CONGESTED AT DROP OFF AND PICK UP TIMES RIGHT NOW. AND I SHUDDER TO THINK WHAT AN ADDITIONAL 1000 HOUSES IS GOING TO DO TO THE TRAFFIC HERE AND THE SAFETY OF THE KIDS. THESE ROADS, THE INNER NEIGHBORHOOD ROADS, WERE JUST NOT DESIGNED FOR THAT KIND OF TRAFFIC. SO I URGE YOU TO RECONSIDER IN LIGHT OF THE SAFETY OF OUR KIDS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HEARING ME OUT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. GOING BACK TO CARLOS GONZALEZ, WE DO NOT SEE HIM. AND SO THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. SO WE'LL ROLL INTO APPLICANT REBUTTAL. HELLO AGAIN. I JUST WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO TALK ABOUT A FEW OF THESE THINGS AND JUST REITERATE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A CHANGE TO THE REQUEST THAT YOU UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. I ALSO DO WANT TO RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH ONE OF THE STATEMENTS THAT ONE OF THE SPEAKERS SAID THAT NOBODY WANTS THIS. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE DESERVE A CHOICE OF HOUSING TYPES IN ALL PARTS OF TOWN. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS CREATES AND DOES. THIS IS NOT A CHANGE IN THE DEVELOPMENT BOX. IT'S A CHANGE OF USE ON A PROPERTY THAT IS ALREADY ENTITLED. THIS CREATES HOUSING DIVERSITY IN A HIGH OPPORTUNITY PART OF TOWN. REGARDING THE TRANSPORTATION CONCERNS THAT WE HEARD, THIS CHANGE OF USE PROVIDES FOR A REDUCTION IN THE VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY. THE EDUCATIONAL IMPACT STATEMENT SPECIFICALLY SAYS FROM AISD THAT NO SAFETY IMPACTS ARE BROUGHT UP AT THIS TIME. ONE OF THE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT I DID WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS THE EMERGENCY ACCESS. THE SPECIFIC REQUESTS THAT WE LIMIT THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY TO, THAT WE HAVE BEEN DIRECTED AT STAFF BY STAFF AS PART OF OUR ZTA THAT TWO FULL POINTS OF ACCESS ARE REQUIRED. WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THAT TRANSPORTATION IS USUALLY NOT HANDLED AS PART OF PART OF ZONING ANYMORE. THIS IS OLD PRACTICES THAT ARE NOT PART OF CURRENT BEST PRACTICES. HOWEVER, BECAUSE IT'S THERE, WE ARE IN A POSITION THAT WE ARE WITH OUR REZONING, WE ARE NEEDING TO ADDRESS THIS SO THAT FULL TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS CAN BE EVALUATED AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE PUSHING TOWARDS. APPROVING THIS MODIFICATION ALLOWS FOR THE CITY TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THE FULL ANALYSIS AND DETERMINE WHETHER THAT DOES NEED TO BE GATED AND A FULL, PARDON ME, GATED IN EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY, OR WHETHER IT DOES MAKE SENSE AND IS REQUIRED TO BE A FULL ACCESS POINT. I'LL JUST AGAIN SAY WHAT WE HEARD OVER AND OVER IS THIS IS A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE. THIS GIVES MANY OTHER RESIDENTS THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE IN THIS GREAT PART OF TOWN. AGAIN, THAT'S A HIGH OPPORTUNITY. AND I WOULD JUST REITERATE THAT THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE REQUEST THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THAT CONCLUDES SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. THERE WAS A GENTLEMAN WE WE SKIPPED. IS HE HERE OR ONLINE? I CAN CALL HIS NAME ONE MORE TIME. NO HE'S NOT. HE HAS NOT POPPED UP. SO. YOUR SPEAKER, YOUR MIC PLEASE. SORRY. I MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I SECOND AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OKAY. I'VE GOT A FEW QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I WANTED TO TRY TO CLARIFY A FEW POINTS. A LOT OF THINGS HAVE BEEN TALKED ABOUT, THAT THIS IS SIMPLY A PLOY TO MAKE MORE MONEY. AND THIS IS A ZONING STAFF QUESTION. ARE WE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THEM TO HAVE 1000 CLASS A UNITS ON THE SITE BY DOING THE ZONING CHANGE? ABSENT ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS, WE'RE APPROVING THE PROHIBITED USES, THE SEVEN PROHIBITED USES THAT ARE ON THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. WE'RE APPROVING THAT THEY BE REMOVED AND ALLOWED. AND THAT DOES INCLUDE MULTIFAMILY ALONG WITH THE VEHICULAR ACCESS TO DOG REMAIN REMOVING THAT FROM THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. OKAY. BUT IT'S NOT WE'RE NOT SAYING BY ZONING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD 1000 CLASS A UNITS. THEY WOULD HAVE TO. YES. WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT AT ALL. THEY WOULD HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY GO THROUGH THE SITE PLAN PROCESS AND AT THAT POINT BE HOW MANY UNITS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE DETERMINED. OKAY. DO MOST OF THE ZONING CASES YOU SEE GO THROUGH AND I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR SINCE 1982 DOING LAND DEVELOPMENT IN AUSTIN. I'VE LIVED IN DISTRICT EIGHT SINCE 1968, SO I'VE GOT A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA. [01:35:02] DO MOST OF THE ZONING CASES STAFF SEES INCREASE THE VALUE AND MAKE LAND MORE MARKETABLE OR DECREASE THE VALUE, MAKE IT LESS MARKETABLE? I MEAN, IT DEPENDS. THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION. I MEAN, IT CAN DEPENDING ON COMMERCIAL USES WHAT WHAT ENTITLEMENTS ARE ADDED BY ZONING. IT CAN MAKE IT MORE MARKETABLE. I MEAN, MOST MY EXPERIENCE IS ZONING REQUESTS WE SEE MAKE THE LAND MORE MARKETABLE AND MAKE IT WORTH MORE MONEY. THEY DON'T COME IN HERE TO DEVALUE A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND MAKE IT LESS VALUABLE AND LESS MARKETABLE. SO IT WOULD IT WOULD BE STRANGE. SO WHAT THEY'RE DOING BY MAKING THE LAND MORE VALUABLE, MORE MARKETABLE, IS WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE DOES WHEN THEY COME THROUGH AND ASK FOR IT. CORRECT. THAT'S NOT OUT OF THE NORM. IT'S NOT OUT OF THE NORM. AND AND IT'S ALSO NOT, YOU KNOW, CASES CAN COME CONCURRENTLY OR LIKE HAVE A SITE PLAN RUNNING CONCURRENTLY OR NOT HAVE A CONCEPTUAL PLAN. THEY COULD JUST BE LOOKING TO REZONE FOR ENTITLEMENTS. GENERALLY, ZONING IS THE VERY FIRST STEP IN THE PROCESS. CORRECT? SO YOU YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU CAN DO BEFORE YOU SITE PLAN AND DEVELOP A SITE BEFORE YOU FILE A PLAT. YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN BE. THAT'S WHAT THE ZONING, THE USES THAT ARE ALLOWED THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS. OKAY. SO THE FACT THAT WE'RE SEEING THE ZONING FIRST, THE YES, IT'S GOING TO INCREASE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AND MAKE IT MORE MARKETABLE. THESE ARE WHAT EVERY ZONING CASE THAT WE SEE UP HERE DOES FOR THE MOST PART. NOT EVERY CASE, BUT MOST OF WHAT WE DO WE SEE DOES FOR THE MOST PART. I MEAN, EVERY CASE IS UNIQUE AND HAS, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT VARIABLES AND CONSTRAINTS. BUT FOR THE MOST PART, THERE'S NOTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY AS TO WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. ALL THE OTHER ISSUES, THE DRAINAGE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL, THE WATER QUALITY, ALL THOSE ISSUES WILL BE ADDRESSED AT THE SITE PLAN. ONCE WE KNOW WHAT IT IS THEY'RE GOING TO DO AND WHO'S GOING TO DO IT. STAFF WILL REVIEW THAT AT THE SITE PLAN PROCESS. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS PEOPLE HAVE. YES. KIND OF RELATED TO THAT. SOMETIMES THERE'S A DEVELOPER, NOT JUST A PROPERTY OWNER, BUT EITHER WAY, THIS SAYS THAT DALE GREEN THE ACCESS TO DALE GREEN WILL BE CONDITIONED ON THE ZONING APPROVAL, NOT ON DEVELOPMENT. SO ONCE THE ZONING IS APPROVED, DALE GREEN WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR ACCESS. BECAUSE DALE GREEN IS NOT A PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. DALE GREEN THE PROHIBITION. DALE GREEN IS ONLY PART OF THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT IS ESTABLISHED. AND WHEN WE REMOVE THAT CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND THE ZONING IS APPROVED, THEN DALE GREEN IS APPROVED FOR ACCESS, WHETHER THERE'S DEVELOPMENT OR NOT. IS THAT A CORRECT UNDERSTANDING? YES. DALE GREEN IS ONLY FOR IT WITHIN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. ONCE THAT CONDITIONAL OVERLAY IS MODIFIED, THEN ACCESS TO DALE GREEN WILL NOT BE NO LONGER BE PROHIBITED. THANK YOU. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. NOT A QUESTION. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR COMING OUT. THE ONLY NOTE I WILL SAY, I THINK ONE PERSON MADE A VERY SNIDE REMARK ABOUT THE ONE PERSON HERE WHO WAS IN SUPPORT. PLEASE DON'T DO THAT. THEY'RE THE ONE PERSON HERE SURROUNDED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO I'M SURE ARE VERY MAD AT THEM. PLEASE TREAT YOUR FELLOW RESIDENTS WITH RESPECT AND DIGNITY. AS THE MAYOR'S APPOINTEE, I TRY TO KEEP A VERY WIDE VIEW OF WHAT THE CITY NEEDS AND HOW THE FUTURE IS GOING TO NEED TO GO. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER A FEW THINGS. I THINK A LOT OF FOLKS, YOU KNOW ONE OF MY CLOSEST FRIENDS THERE'S HIS DAD BOUGHT A HOUSE IN THE BETTER PART OF WEST LAKE HILLS, SOUTHWEST AUSTIN, FOR WEST LAKE HILLS. THE. YEAH, LIKE THE. THE FOUR. I GUESS THERE ARE DIFFERENT PARTS LIKE THE THE SOUTHWEST, LIKE THE BETTER PART, LIKE, YOU KNOW, LIKE, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE BETTER PART OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? LIKE THE, I DON'T KNOW, THE MAJORITY. ANYWAYS, THE POINT IS HE BOUGHT IT FOR $200,000 IN, I THINK THE 90S. IT'S NOT WORTH $2.5 MILLION. I WANT TO SAY NONE OF THE KIDS OF ANYONE HERE IS, ARE GOING TO LIVE IN AUSTIN. IF THAT HAPPENS AGAIN FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS, THAT MUST BE STOPPED. SAFETY IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. WE DON'T WANT A REPEAT OF 2021 WHERE THERE WAS A GIGANTIC SPIKE IN HOUSING, AND THAT LED TO AN EVEN BIGGER SPIKE IN CRIME AND HOMELESSNESS. AND WE HAVE THAT EVERY EVERYWHERE. RIGHT. THE, I LIVE NEAR I GUESS NOW CLOSED BECAUSE OF THE AUSTIN IC SITUATION. THE SCHOOL AND EVERY SINGLE MORNING WAS ABSOLUTE MAYHEM. AND THAT HAPPENS, YOU KNOW, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT WAS THERE. I THINK WE ABSOLUTELY NEED BETTER PUBLIC SAFETY WHEN IT COMES TO THE TRAFFIC LAWS. [01:40:02] BUT I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A MUCH BIGGER PICTURE WHEN IT COMES TO SAFETY, BECAUSE OTHERWISE THE ENTIRETY OF THE SOCIETY IS GOING TO COLLAPSE. AND SO I APPRECIATE EVERYONE COMING OUT HERE. I APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO'S RESPECTFUL, WHO'S TRYING TO BE THOUGHTFUL AND ANALYTICAL. AND I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE TRY TO BE CIVIL WHENEVER WE'RE EVALUATING, BECAUSE EVERYONE'S GOING TO COME AT IT FROM DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR TP STAFF. THEY NEED TO GO ON RECORD WITH NAMES OR ANYTHING? NO. ASK THE QUESTION FIRST. SO IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, WE HAD A CONVERSATION AT THE LAST ZONING CASE. AND THERE WERE TWO LEVEL THREE ROADWAYS, I THINK IT WAS SOUTH BAY. THIS CONNECTION, SOUTH BAY CONNECTION TO MOPAC, AS WELL AS THE EXTENSION OF DALE GREEN TO SOUTH BAY THAT WERE REMOVED FROM THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN. IS THAT CORRECT? DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE A SMP. YES. DANIEL MORGAN TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS, YES. SO THE EXTENSION OF SOUTH BAY WAS REMOVED. AFTER COMMUNICATING AND WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY. THEY WANTED THAT REMOVED FROM THE LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN. THE A SMP SO THAT WAS REMOVED, CORRECT. AND THOUGH. AND WHAT ABOUT THE CONNECTION FROM DAHLGREN? I GUESS THAT, YOU KNOW, AS A RESULT, YOU KNOW, ALSO HAS TO BE REMOVED. CORRECT. SO CURRENTLY IN THE LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, DAHLGREN REMAINS AS A DEAD END. IT IS A LEVEL THREE ROADWAY IN ADDITION TO LACROSSE, WHICH IS ALSO A LEVEL THREE. CAN YOU JUST GIVE US AN EXPLANATION OF WHAT LEVEL THREE ROADWAY MEANS? SURE. IT'S MORE OF A COLLECTOR ROADWAY. SO BOTH DAHLGREN AND LACROSSE ARE DIVIDED. THERE'S A MEDIAN. I THINK THE LONG RANGE PLAN FOR DAHLGREN IS A TWO LANE ROADWAY WITH A SHARED USE PATH. THE LONG RANGE PLAN FOR LACROSSE IS ALSO A TWO LANE ROADWAY WITH PROTECTED BIKE LANE. OKAY. SO THOSE ROADWAYS, IN ESSENCE, ARE INTENDED TO KEEP TRAFFIC FLOWING AND PROVIDE A MEANS FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TEACHERS, PARENTS, STAFF YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO ARE VISITING RETAIL SPACES, YOU KNOW, WITHIN CIRCLE C AN OPTION FOR PEOPLE TO GET OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THOSE LEVEL THREE ROADWAYS WERE REMOVED FROM THE CITY'S MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN AS A RESULT OF CONVERSATIONS THAT WERE OCCURRING WITH CIRCLE C NEIGHBORHOOD. IS THAT DO I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY? AS. SO THE THE DULL GREEN AND LACROSSE WERE NOT REMOVED. THE SOUTH BAY CONNECTION WAS REMOVED. THAT'S RIGHT. SO I WOULD AGREE WITH SOME OF THE TESTIMONY THAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WAS IT WAS MENTIONED THAT YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT SMART DEVELOPMENT, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVING CONNECTIVITY OPTIONS AND OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE TO LEAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, IS, IS NOT SMART DEVELOPMENT. YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S CONTRARY TO PROPER PLANNING PRINCIPLES, BUT THAT'S THE SITUATION THAT WE FIND OURSELVES IN TONIGHT IS IF THOSE ROADWAYS EXISTED, THEN MAYBE ACCESS WOULDN'T ALL BE FUNNELED TO THIS INTERSECTION AT DALE GREEN. AND WHAT'S IS IT LACROSSE WHERE THE SCHOOL IS AT, CORRECT. YES. LACROSSE. YEAH. AND THAT, I THINK IS UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF THE CITY WANTED TO, TO APPLY FUNDING TO CONSTRUCT THOSE ROADWAYS OR EVEN IF THOSE ROADWAYS WERE TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY, SAY, THE DEVELOPER, THAT OPTION NO LONGER EXISTS. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK AT THE LAST MEETING, WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION FOR THE ZONING OF TRACT ONE. I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THOSE CONNECTIONS SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN REMOVED AND PERHAPS WE WOULD NOT BE HERE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT ALL OF THIS TRAFFIC BEING FUNNELED DIRECTLY TO THIS SCHOOL SITE. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE ZONING CASE. I WOULD LIKE THE TP STAFF AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO REVISIT WHAT IT TAKES TO GET THOSE ROADWAYS ADDED BACK TO THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN. I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD THIS WITH THE SAME PASSION THAT Y'ALL HAD TO GET THOSE ROADWAYS REMOVED. THOSE ROADWAYS ARE THE SOLUTION TO THE CONNECTIVITY FOR THIS SITE. AND I WOULD URGE YOU ALL TO WORK WITH CITY STAFF TO GET THOSE ROADWAYS ADDED BACK TO THE SNP. [01:45:06] THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I HAVE. SORRY. WHILE YOU ALL ARE STILL THERE. THANK YOU. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE OBVIOUSLY ACCESS TO DULL GREEN IS THE BIGGEST CONTENTIOUS ISSUE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. IN A SCENARIO WHERE THAT ACCESS IS DENIED, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS YOU HAVE AND WHAT MIGHT BE SOME WAYS TO MITIGATE THOSE. I KNOW THIS IS A BIT THEORETICAL, BUT I REALLY WANT TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT ACCESS TO DULL GREEN. AND IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT ABSOLUTELY NEEDS TO HAPPEN OR IT'S MAYBE JUST THE BEST OPTION. I WANT TO HEAR FROM YOUR EXPERTISE. JUAN VALERA, SUPERVISING ENGINEER AT DPW FOR THE SOUTH AREA. SO OUR MAIN CONCERN, IF YOU'RE ONLY WITH ONE DRIVEWAY, IT'S GOING TO BE AT SOUTH BAY. SOUTH BAY IS A HIGH SPEED, HIGH VOLUME SITUATION. WITH A, WITH LARGELY UNINTERRUPTED TRAFFIC FLOW IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. AND WE FELT THAT THAT WAS AN UNSAFE SITUATION. AND SO WE FELT LIKE A DRIVEWAY TO DULL GREEN. PROVIDED A REASONABLE CONNECTION TO TO A LEVEL THREE. CITY OF AUSTIN. ROADWAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND REGARDING THE CONCERN ABOUT TRAFFIC GOING BY THE SCHOOL. HOW DO YOU FACTOR THAT IN? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT'S, YOU KNOW PUTTING A LOT OF TRAFFIC ON AND OFF A HIGH SPEED ROADWAY IS A VERY, VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION. IT'S ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WHY OUR ARTERIALS ARE SO DANGEROUS. SO HOW DID YOU LOOK AT THE, THE SAFETY CONCERNS THAT YOU'VE HEARD ABOUT TODAY FROM THE NEIGHBORS IN REGARDS TO HAVING THAT TRAFFIC ON? DALE GREEN, WHERE YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF KIDS GOING TO SCHOOL, PEOPLE WALKING AROUND. SURE. AGAIN, I KNOW EVERYBODY IS PROBABLY TIRED OF HEARING THIS, BUT AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN, THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO PRODUCE A TIA. AND WITHIN THAT TIA WILL BE A SCHOOL ANALYSIS AND FROM THAT WILL COME. MITIGATIONS WHICH WILL CREATE A SAFER SITUATION. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF A MITIGATION YOU'VE DONE FOR THE PROJECT? AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE SIGNALS AND SPEED CONTROL. YEAH. AND I THINK SIGNALIZATION WOULD PROBABLY BE ONE OF THE STRONGER MITIGATIONS. HEY, THIS IS MARTY RAHMAN WITH TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. WE ANTICIPATE SOME ANALYSIS AT THE DAHLGREN AND LACROSSE THERE. WE ANTICIPATE ALSO A SIGNAL ANALYSIS. IT MIGHT BE WARRANTED. SO WHAT WE HAVE DONE SO FAR, IT IS A ZONING LEVEL ANALYSIS THAT WE HAVE DONE. SO WE HAVE NOT GONE TO THAT OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS FOR A PARTICULAR INTERSECTION, BUT WE ANTICIPATE A SIGNAL MIGHT BE NEEDED. AND WE WILL EVALUATE THAT SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS DURING THE SITE PLAN. THANK YOU. LET ME ASK TWO QUESTIONS. ONE ON ZONING CASES. WE DON'T DO ZONING CASES IF IT DOESN'T HAVE ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE. MOST OF OUR ZONING CASES ARE THERE'S NOT ADEQUATE WATER, WASTEWATER, DRAINAGE ROADWAYS. IT'S NOT AT ALL UNUSUAL TO HAVE A ZONING CASE WHERE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS SIMPLY NOT THERE YET, BECAUSE THERE'S NO SITE PLAN THERE THAT AGREE IN GENERAL. WHAT? YES, I GUESS IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE GETTING OUR HORSE AHEAD OF THE CART. WE'RE TRYING TO APPROVE A ZONING BEFORE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE. AGAIN, ZONING ALWAYS COMES FIRST. INFRASTRUCTURE WILL FOLLOW. ONCE WE HAVE A SITE PLAN AND KNOW WHAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE. CORRECT. IN THE ORDER. YES. IN THE ORDER OF PROCESS, ZONING COMES FIRST AND THEN SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMITS AND SITE PLAN REVIEW COME SECOND. REGARDLESS OF WHAT GETS BUILT ON THIS SITE, IF THERE'S NO ACCESS TO DALE GREEN AND EVERYTHING HAS TO ACCESS MOPAC VIA BACK BAY, IS THAT GOING TO BE SOUTH BAY? SORRY. FORGET WHICH BAY IT IS. I DRIVE THAT ROAD EVERY DAY. I COME DOWN THERE AT 5:00. [01:50:02] TRAFFIC ON MOPAC IS BUMPER TO BUMPER. THESE PEOPLE WILL BE LEAVING AN OFFICE BUILDING, AND THEY'LL BE HAVING TO CROSS THAT LANE OF TRAFFIC OR MERGE INTO THAT LANE OF TRAFFIC EVERY DAY AT 5:00. TO ME, THAT'S EXTREMELY UNSAFE. REGARDLESS OF WHAT'S GOING ON. SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS COME UP WITH WHAT IS THE SAFEST WAY TO GET PEOPLE IN AND OUT OF A TRACK, REGARDLESS OF WHAT IS DEVELOPED. AND IF YOU JUST RELY ON COMING OFF OF SOUTH BAY ONTO MOPAC, IF IT'S MULTIFAMILY OFFICE, COMMERCIAL RETAIL, IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY DANGEROUS INTERSECTION. IF EVERYBODY IS FORCED AT ONE POINT TO GET ONTO MOPAC. AGAIN, I DRIVE THAT EVERY DAY COMING HOME. SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON THERE. SO WHILE IT'S NOT DARK GREEN IS A RESIDENTIAL STREET, IT'S A WIDE ENOUGH STREET AND A MAJOR ENOUGH STREET TO WARRANT THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC. BUT THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED ON THAT ROADWAY, AND THAT WILL COME UP AS PART OF THE TIA PROCESS THAT YOU GUYS LOOK AT WHENEVER A SITE PLAN IS DONE AND WE SAY, DO WE HAVE 1000 UNITS? DO WE HAVE 500 UNITS? WHAT ARE WE BUILDING ON THIS SITE? WHAT IS THE TRAFFIC GENERATED? WHEN IS IT GENERATED? THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IN YOUR T I AYE AS TO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO THE SURROUNDING STREETS TO MAKE IT AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE FOR EVERYBODY. CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. ONLINE. IS THAT ME OR LONNIE, MR. CHAIRMAN? YEAH. SORRY. OKAY. LONNIE'S DRIVING. I'M NOT. I'M NOT GOING TO LET LONNIE TALK BECAUSE HE'S DRIVING. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, IF THAT'S OKAY. SURE. SO I WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY IN MAY WHEN THIS FIRST CAME TO THE COMMISSION. SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS, WHAT DID THE COMMISSION APPROVE IN MAY IN TERMS OF ZONING? HE WAS NOT HERE. HE WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY. NO, LONNIE, I THINK YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT SOMEBODY ELSE. OKAY. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU GET CONFUSED. WE BOTH HAVE A VERY SULTRY, SMOOTH VOICE, YOU KNOW? YEAH. OKAY, I KNOW THE COMMISSIONER ASKED FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT I WAS JUST GOING TO WRITE. HE ASKED WHAT WAS APPROVED. SO CSMUCO. COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING WAS APPROVED TO CHANGE THE CONDITIONS OF ZONING. THERE WERE SOME ADDED CONDITIONS AND THOSE ADDED CONDITIONS INCLUDED FOR PROHIBITED USES, AUTOMOTIVE SALES, PERSONAL STORAGE, PAWNSHOP SERVICES, VEHICLE STORAGE. THREE OF THOSE USES ARE ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, SO THERE WAS NO NEED TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. AND THEN THERE WERE ALSO LIMITS TO THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, WHICH LIMITED IT TO 16.38 ACRES. THEY LIMIT THE RETAIL TO 10,000FT² AND LIMITS THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS TO 1000. SO THAT WAS WHAT WAS RECOMMENDED ON MAY 5TH. AND WE'RE SO AND THEN TODAY WE'RE ASKED TO VOTE ON REPEALING Q CONDITION OVERLAY SPECIFICALLY FOR TRACK ONE. THE ITEMS LISTED MULTIFAMILY GENERAL RETAIL RATE. SO NO TRACK ONE AND TRACK TWO WOULD HAVE THE VEHICULAR ACCESS REMOVE THE PROHIBITION REMOVED, AND THEN ONLY TRACK ONE WOULD HAVE THOSE PROHIBITED USES REMOVED. SO ALL WE'RE DOING IS ALLOWING THIS DEVELOPMENT TO TAKE ACCESS TO DOG EFFECTIVELY. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM BECAUSE I MISSED THE DISCUSSION A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. RIGHT. I DON'T MIND GOING ON RECORD RIGHT NOW THAT I PLAN TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE ZONING. AND I'LL REALLY QUICKLY EXPLAIN TO THE PEOPLE LEFT IN THE ROOM WHY I'M OKAY WITH IT. FIRST AND FOREMOST, I THINK HAVING, YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY 1000 UNITS MAXIMUM WHERE CHILDREN CAN WALK TO SCHOOL IS REALLY CRUCIAL. BUT I ALSO THINK JUST HAVING HOUSING NEAR MOPAC IS CRUCIAL. AND THEN I LISTENED TO A LOT OF THE POINTS FROM PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, AND IT JUST SOUNDED LIKE FOLKS IN THE ROOM THOUGHT THIS WAS A FOREGONE CONCLUSION. AND I THINK THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE. I THINK WE'RE AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS FOR THE CHAIRMAN'S POINT. SITE PLAN REVIEW TIA THOSE THINGS ARE FORTHCOMING. SOMEONE MENTIONED BEING OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE. I PULLED UP THE MAP. THAT'S TRUE, BUT A GOOD PORTION OF CIRCLE C IS OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE AS WELL. ALL THAT TO SAY, DEVELOPMENT OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE HAS TO GO THROUGH TCQ LAST TIME I CHECKED. AND THEN LASTLY SOMEONE TALKED ABOUT VACANCY RATES. I'M A FREE MARKET GUY PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS GUY. AND TO ME, I THINK FOLKS IN THE ROOM WHO OPPOSE THE ZONING CHANGE SHOULD BE A LITTLE EXCITED ABOUT THE LOWER VACANCY RATES, [01:55:01] BECAUSE THAT MIGHT POTENTIALLY PUSH THIS PROJECT OFF INTO THE FUTURE, OR IT MIGHT NEVER HAPPEN BECAUSE THIS IS JUST A ZONING, THIS ISN'T A PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT THE BUILDING. AND THEN LASTLY, IF THE TRAFFIC IS, IS GNARLY, AS FOLKS SAY MAYBE POTENTIAL TENANTS MIGHT COME OUT AND SEE IT AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS EVERY DAY. AND PEOPLE MIGHT NOT LEASE UP THE BUILDING. RIGHT. SO, SO I JUST DON'T THINK THIS IS A FOREGONE CONCLUSION, BUT I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT WE CAN GET SOME FAMILIES PRETTY CLOSE TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. I THINK SOMEONE MENTIONED 500FT. AND, BUT THE BIG ONE IS IT'S NOT A FOREGONE CONCLUSION. WE HAVE SITE PLAN TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. SO THESE QUESTIONS WILL BE ANALYZED AND LOOKED AT AND SOLUTIONS WILL BE PROPOSED. AND TODAY'S VOTE DOES NOT EXCUSE ME. TODAY'S VOTE IS NOT A PERMIT TO BUILD A BUILDING. IT WE'RE STILL EARLY IN THE PROCESS. AND BECAUSE OF THAT I'M FINE VOTING YES. SO THAT IF SOMEONE DOES, YOU KNOW SUBMIT A SITE PLAN FOR REVIEW, CITY STAFF CAN CAN GET THE PROPER INFORMATION TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION REGARDING TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, WATER AND SO FORTH. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. I DO HAVE A COMMENT ABOUT SOME OF THE CONCERNS REGARDING TRAFFIC SAFETY. SO I WORK IN TRANSPORTATION. I SPENT A COUPLE OF YEARS DOING A LOT OF RESEARCH AND EXAMINING TRAFFIC SAFETY, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO THE SAFETY OF PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF VEHICLES. THERE'S A LOT OF COUNTERINTUITIVE THINGS ABOUT IT THAT I LEARNED. ONE OF WHICH IS THAT CONGESTION IS ACTUALLY REALLY GOOD FOR SAFETY. IT IS VERY ANNOYING AND IT'S INFURIATING TO SIT IN. BUT CARS DON'T MOVE REAL FAST. WHEN THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC, WHEN THERE'S A TRAFFIC JAM, THINGS MOVE SLOWLY. IT DOES FORCE PEOPLE TO DO IT, TO PAY MORE ATTENTION, TO GO SLOWER. SO IF, GOD FORBID, THEY DO HIT SOMEONE, THEY'RE GOING AT A MUCH LOWER SPEED. THAT IS GOING TO BE LESS LETHAL. I CAN SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE SKEPTICAL OF THAT, BUT THIS IS WHAT THE DATA SHOWS THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER. AND IT'S HANG ON VEHICLES. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU GUYS NOT TO COMMENT. WE WERE VERY QUIET. WE LISTENED TO EVERYTHING YOU SAID. I DO NOT WANT COMMENTS FROM YOU ALL OR I WILL CLEAR THE AUDIENCE. DO I MAKE THAT CLEAR TO EVERYBODY OUT THERE? THANK YOU. YES. ANYHOW APPRECIATE THAT. WHEN CARS MOVE SLOWLY, THEY ARE LESS LIKELY TO HIT SOMETHING. AND IF, GOD FORBID, THEY DO, IT'S MUCH LESS LIKELY TO SERIOUSLY INJURE OR HARM THEM. I WORKED A LOT WITH VISION ZERO. I'VE STUDIED THIS QUITE A LOT, AND THE CONSENSUS IS PRETTY CLEAR AMONGST THE DATA SHOWS IS THAT WHEN TRAFFIC IS GOING SLOWLY, WHEN THERE'S A TRAFFIC JAM, FAR FEWER, FAR FEWER PEOPLE GET HURT WHERE I'VE SEEN A LOT OF PEOPLE GET KILLED. GENERALLY TENDS TO BE ON REALLY BIG ROADS WITH VERY LITTLE TRAFFIC. THERE'S A LOT OF EXCESS CAPACITY. THIS IS OVERWHELMINGLY WHERE PEDESTRIANS GET STRUCK AND SERIOUSLY INJURED AND KILLED. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S REALLY ANNOYING TO BE CAUGHT IN TRAFFIC, AND IT FEELS SCARY WHEN YOU ARE SURROUNDED BY CARS. BUT, AND ONE OF THE WEIRD THINGS ABOUT TRAFFIC SAFETY IS OFTEN WHEN YOU FEEL A BIT UNSAFE, WHEN YOU FEEL THAT THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, THREATS AROUND YOU WHEN THERE'S PEOPLE AROUND, ESPECIALLY LOTS OF PEDESTRIANS. ANOTHER GREAT THING THAT KEEPS PEOPLE SAFE WHEN THEY'RE WALKING IS OTHER PEOPLE WALKING. THE MORE PEDESTRIANS YOU HAVE, THE FEWER THE LOWER THE RATES OR THE FEWER PEOPLE YOU'D HIT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MOST DANGEROUS CITIES FOR PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF VEHICLES, THEY'RE VERY MUCH CONCENTRATED IN PLACES THAT ARE HOSTILE TO PEDESTRIANS. YOU MIGHT THINK IT WOULD BE NEW YORK OR BOSTON OR SAN FRANCISCO, WHERE THERE'S LOTS OF PEOPLE WALKING. IT'S NOT THE CASE. IT'S OVERWHELMINGLY IN PLACES LIKE FLORIDA. ALSO IN TEXAS PLACE. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHERE THOSE HAPPENING, IT'S BIG ARTERIAL ROADS WHERE THERE IS FREE FLOWING TRAFFIC NOT PLACES WHERE IT'S LOCAL ROADS THAT HAVE A LOT OF CONGESTION. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A REAL OBNOXIOUS THING. AND I GET IT, I LIVE NEAR THREE SCHOOLS. AND IT'S ANNOYING TO HAVE TO DRIVE OUT DURING THING. I WALK MY DURING RUSH HOUR. I'M FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO WALK MY KIDS TO SCHOOL, BUT I AM VERY GLAD WHEN THE CARS ARE NOT MOVING FREELY AND I CAN WALK MY KIDS WHO ARE IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND PRESCHOOL WHEN I SEE THOSE, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE TRAFFIC'S JAMMED UP, THAT'S WHEN I KNOW THINGS ARE GOING TO BE AT LEAST SAFER. PEOPLE ARE MORE ALERT. THE CARS ARE NOT MOVING SO FAST. [02:00:01] I UNDERSTAND THERE'S SKEPTICISM, BUT I ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THE DATA YOURSELF. RESEARCH IS WIDELY AVAILABLE ONLINE. IF SOMEONE ASKS YOU A QUESTION. YES. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR LISA LYONS. COME UP TO THE PODIUM. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER FOUTS. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, LISA LYONS. I'M SORRY, LISA LYONS, SHE HAS TO ASK YOU THE QUESTION FIRST, WHICH IS THE DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT ABOUT I DO, I DO, I DO I AGREE WITH YOU THAT WHEN CARS ARE GOING SLOWLY, THERE'S PROBABLY A HIGHER SURVIVAL RATE. BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHILDREN AND CHILDREN AND MBAS WITH AUTOMOBILES. THEY'RE GETTING HIT RIGHT HERE. THEIR HEAD, THEIR TORSO. THERE IS A HIGHER FATALITY RATE WITH CHILDREN GETTING HIT BY CARS THAN FIVE FOOT TALL ADULTS. THAT'S THE DISTINCTION WE'RE MAKING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY. SO THE RESEARCH IS IT APPLIES AS LONG AS YOU ARE A PERSON OR ANYTHING BEING HIT. IT'S IT'S ABOUT THE SPEED OF THE VEHICLES. AND THERE'S DEFINITELY A LOT TO BE SAID ABOUT HOW OUR VEHICLES AND OUR TRUCKS ARE ESPECIALLY DANGEROUS FOR CHILDREN. IT'S A WHOLE OTHER TOPIC. BUT ULTIMATELY IT IS ABOUT SPEED OF THE VEHICLE. IT'S REALLY A MATTER OF PHYSICS. IT'S FORCE. IT'S THAT, YOU KNOW, THE MASS AND THE ACCELERATION APPLIED TO VEHICLE. THANK YOU. LONNIE, YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR CAR. I'M OUT OF MY CAR. IT'S AMAZING. AND IT'S PROBABLY YOU'VE WATCHED 100% OF MY CAR DRIVING FOR THE MONTH. THANK YOU. AND I'M SORRY FOR BEING LATE, BUT I WAS AT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN SAN MARCOS, SO THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM. I WILL SAY JUST TWO THINGS. ONE, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT THAT WAS MENTIONED BY ANOTHER COMMISSIONER ABOUT SOUTH BAY. I MEAN, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A PLAN IN THE PAST TO AVOID THAT CONNECTION, BUT A LOT OF YOUR COMPLAINTS ABOUT DAHLBERG ARE BECAUSE OF YOUR PROBLEMS WITH SOUTH BAY. BUT IF YOU CONNECTED IT THERE, THERE WOULDN'T BE QUITE SO MUCH FUNNEL TO THE ONE STREET, BE IT AS IT MAY. I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE TO UNDERSTAND THAT STATE LAW, AND YOU CAN LOOK UP SB 840. IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD IT YET, YOU WILL BECOME VERY FAMILIAR WITH IT SAYS THAT YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, YOU CANNOT PREEMPT. HANG ON. OKAY. WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT SB 840 AGAIN. LONNIE, YOU WEREN'T HERE IN THE VERY BEGINNING. THE CITY ATTORNEY SAID WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT H 4840. BECAUSE THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT. SO I READ THAT INTO THE INTO THE MINUTES BEFORE THE MEETING EVER STARTED. SO I'M GOING TO CUT YOU OFF AND NOT TALK ABOUT 840. IT DOESN'T APPLY BECAUSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. ALL RIGHT. WELL THANKS. I'M SORRY I MISSED THAT PART. BUT AND THEN I WOULD FURTHER SAY, FOR THOSE WHO LIVE DOWN IN THIS PART OF TOWN, YOU MIGHT BE FAMILIAR WITH THE COSTCO SHOPPING CENTER NEARBY. THAT IS WHAT IS ALLOWED TO BE BUILT THERE. AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SAYING THAT ABOVE, ABOVE THE RETAIL CENTER, ABOVE WHAT IS BUILT IN THAT AREA COULD ACTUALLY BE HOUSING AND APARTMENTS AS WELL AS RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL USES. SO WHILE I'M NOT SAYING IT'S THE SAME DEVELOPER, I'M NOT SAYING IT HAS THE SAME SITE PLAN. WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF WE DO NOTHING, YOU'RE GOING TO GET A STRIP MALL AND OR YOU MIGHT GET SOME OFFICES, BUT THERE'S LITERALLY A THOUSAND PEOPLE WHO MIGHT BENEFIT FROM THIS IN ANOTHER WAY AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE COMING FROM AT THIS POINT. THANKS. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? COMMENTS. I ALMOST WISH, EXCEPT FOR THE TIME THAT WE COULD HEAR EVERY CASE TWICE. I KNOW YOU WOULDN'T. YEAH. I JUST LOVE BEING HERE. IT REALLY RINGS TRUE, WHAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT ABOUT THE SPRAWL, ABOUT THE ADDED TRAFFIC ON MOPAC, WHICH IS ALREADY A PROBLEM ABOUT THE SCHOOL SAFETY PROBLEMS, ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ON THE RECHARGE ZONE. YES. MAYBE THERE'S A NEED FOR HOUSING IN AUSTIN, BUT I SAY THAT BELONGS IN MY BACKYARD. I LIVE IN AN E TOD. WE'LL HAVE ACCESS TO THE TRAIN. THIS AT BEST WILL HAVE A PARKING RIDE, PARK AND RIDE. THAT'S SORT OF A WISH RATHER THAN A PLAN. AND IT IS NO PLAN FOR AN ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT. IT DOES BOTHER ME TO REMOVE THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THAT RESTRICTS ACCESS TO [02:05:09] DARK GREEN WHEN THERE ISN'T EVEN A PLAN TO BUILD ANYTHING THERE. THAT REALLY BOTHERS ME. THAT SEEMS LIKE IT COULD BE DONE LATER WHEN THERE IS A PLAN. I HOPE THE CITY COUNCIL WILL LISTEN TO THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS AND HOPEFULLY BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE THE WIN WIN THAT SHOULD BE POSSIBLE HERE. BUT OVERALL, I FEEL VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS. THE ONE THING THAT I HAVE TO LOOK AT IS THIS AGREEMENT WAS DONE IN 2002, 27 YEARS AGO, 26 YEARS AGO. AND THINGS HAVE CHANGED IN AUSTIN IN 26 YEARS. WE CHANGED OUR MASTER PLAN IN THE LAST 26 YEARS, OUR OVERALL GOVERNING PLAN OF HOW WE DO THINGS HAS CHANGED IN THAT AMOUNT OF TIME. SO TO LOOK AT THIS SITE AND SAY THAT THIS SITE NEEDS TO CHANGE BECAUSE IT'S THE LAST PIECE OF LAND IN CIRCLE C TO BE DEVELOPED, SOMEBODY HAS TO GO LAST THEN. YEAH, IT NEEDS TO CHANGE. IT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT UP WITH CURRENT CODE AND NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT IN TERMS OF WHAT ARE THE NEEDS OF AUSTIN TODAY COMPARED TO WHAT THEY WERE 25 YEARS AGO. AND IT'S DIFFERENT. WHAT'S GOING ON IN AUSTIN TODAY IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WENT ON 25 YEARS AGO. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPER IS LOOKING TO DO IS TRY TO GET THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE. BUT WHAT IS OFTEN NEED RIGHT NOW. AND DOES IT NEED ANOTHER OFFICE BUILDING AT THIS INTERSECTION? AND THE ANSWER IS I DON'T THINK IT DOES. I THINK IT NEEDS MORE RESIDENTIAL THAN IT NEEDS MORE OFFICE SPACE. AND THIS IS GIVING THEM THE OPTION TO DO THAT, NOT REQUIRING THEM TO DO IT. IT'S JUST GIVING THEM THE OPTION TO PUT IN MULTIFAMILY IF THEY CAN MEET ALL THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND IT MAKES SENSE FOR THEM. WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY DONE, BACK BAY WENT THROUGH IT WAS SHOWN ON THE PRELIMINARY PLANS. SOUTH BAY, SOUTH BAY. SORRY, IS THERE A THERE IS A BACK BAY BACK THERE. I RIDE MY BIKE DOWN BACK BAY. SO SOUTH BAY WENT THROUGH. SO THE ROADWAY SYSTEM HAS CHANGED. DAHLGREN WENT THROUGH THE SOUTH BAY, SOUTH BAY WENT THROUGH TO MOPAC. I MEAN, ALL THESE THINGS WERE DONE ON A MASTER PLAN. AND THEN YOU START TAKING THINGS AWAY. YOU HAVE TO CHANGE OTHER THINGS WHEN YOU DO THAT. WE CAN'T TAKE AWAY HALF THE ROADWAY SYSTEM AND SAY, MAKE THE REST OF IT WORK WITHOUT HALF THE ROADWAYS THERE. WE HAVE TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS IN WHAT WE'RE DOING. SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN THOUGHT ABOUT, TALKED ABOUT FOR A LONG TIME. AND THINGS HAVE CHANGED. THE DEMANDS OF AUSTIN HAVE CHANGED. THE ROADWAY SYSTEMS HAVE CHANGED. WHAT YOU HAVE ACCESS TO OUT THERE HAS CHANGED. AND I THINK THIS IS THE SOLUTION THAT MAKES SENSE WITH WHAT AUSTIN NEEDS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION I MOVE TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. SECOND. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ARE WE INCLUDING THE RESTRICTION ON THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AS WE DID IN THE AS WE DID LAST TIME? THAT REMAINS ON EVERYTHING WE DID BEFORE REMAINS ON THE CASE. THIS IS JUST LOOKING AT THE NEW PIECE OF LAND THAT'S BEEN ADDED IN THERE. IS THAT CORRECT STAFF. IF THAT'S THE MOTION. IF THAT'S THE MOTION. IS THAT YOUR MOTION? STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS EVERYTHING THAT WAS THERE BEFORE WITH THE ADDITION OF THIS ADDITIONAL PIECE OF LAND AND ACCESS TO ACTUALLY, YOU WOULD NEED TO INCLUDE THAT IN YOUR MOTION THAT IT INCLUDES ALL THE CHANGES THAT IT INCLUDES THE PREVIOUS APPROVED ACCOMMODATION AND ALL PREVIOUS AGREED UPON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONDITIONAL CONDITIONAL CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS AT OUR PREVIOUS MEETING. I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? THAT WAS NOT A QUESTION. HIS MOTION IS TO INCLUDE EVERYTHING PREVIOUSLY DONE. SIMPLY ADDING TRACT. TRACT TO TWO TO THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH THE CONDITIONS AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. CORRECT? OKAY. YEAH. THAT'S THE MOTION. SECONDED. OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I'LL SPEAK PLAINLY SINCE I THINK WE'VE ALREADY HEARD A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS. I THINK THE TRAFFICKING IS A VERY REAL THING THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO GET LOOKED AT. THE SAFETY THING IS VERY REAL, I THINK. I THINK THE STUDIES ARE ARE DEFINITELY CORRECT, BUT I THINK IT'S I THINK THAT THE FUNDAMENTAL THING THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THAT LIKE SOMEBODY WITH A, WHO'S HAD TO LIKE, YOU KNOW, HOW TO LEASE THE NEPHEWS WITH A LOT OF LIKE EXURBAN OR I'M LIVING AN SUV, HITTING A KID AT ALMOST ANY VELOCITY IS GOING TO BE QUITE BRUTAL. RIGHT? SO I CAN, I CAN APPRECIATE LIKE, THAT'S, THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE THERE. I THINK THE TAX DIFFERENCE HERE IS GOING TO BE GIGANTIC. I DON'T THINK ANYONE HERE WANTS AN EVEN HIGHER PROPERTY TAX BILL. THE HOUSING DIFFERENCE IS GOING TO BE GIGANTIC. WE ARE IN A OUR OFFICE VACANCY RATE. IT'S EVEN HIGHER THAN THE RESIDENTIAL ONE. WE WANT TO DRIVE THE HOUSING COSTS AS LOW AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE ACROSS THE BOARD, AND IT'S GOING TO HELP MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SMOOTH DEVELOPMENT [02:10:05] ACROSS THE CITY INSTEAD OF HAVING TO, YOU KNOW, I'M HAPPY TO HAVE AS MUCH DEVELOPMENT SIMILAR TO COMMISSIONER GREENBERG IN MY NECK OF THE WOODS. UNFORTUNATELY, ONLY, ONLY SO MANY BLOCKS THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED AT ANY GIVEN TIME. SO WE HAVE TO PICK WHAT WE CAN, WHAT WE CAN. AND I THINK RESIDENTIAL IN THIS AREA MAKES SENSE. OKAY. MR. CHAIRMAN, I WAS JUST PIGGYBACK ON WHAT YOU SAID REGARDING HOW TIMES CHANGE. A COUPLE OF PEOPLE MENTIONED HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I THINK IT'S REALLY AWESOME THAT FOR X NUMBER OF YEARS, YOU'VE HAD THINGS THE EXACT WAY YOU WANTED AND IT BENEFITED YOU. THAT'S A HUGE WIN. BUT BUT WE LIVE IN A CITY. CITIES CHANGE. DEMOGRAPHICS CHANGE PEOPLE'S IDEAS, CHANGE. THE WORLD AROUND US, CHANGES TRANSPORTATION CHANGES PEOPLE'S DESIRES, PEOPLE'S FAMILY STRUCTURES. THE ECONOMY CHANGES. AND I THINK AS A FUNCTION OF A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE OUR RULES AND LAWS AND THINGS WE ABIDE BY CHANGE WITH THE TIMES WHEN APPROPRIATE. AND I THINK THIS IS SIMPLY A REFLECTION OF THAT, THAT AUSTIN IS DIFFERENT TODAY THAN IT WAS 24, 25 YEARS AGO WHENEVER THIS RESTRICTION WAS IN PLACE. OKAY. THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE. RAISE YOUR HAND. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SO IT PASSES ON A 6 TO 1 VOTE. OKAY. WHAT ELSE DO WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA? WE HAVE CODES IN ORDER. [PERMANENT COMMITTEE UPDATES] THE JOINT COMMITTEE. DO WE HAVE AN UPDATE? WE HAD A MEETING SCHEDULED FOR TOMORROW TO HEAR SAVE OUR SPRINGS. HAVE A WONDERFUL NIGHT. UPDATE. HOWEVER, THE EXACT SAME ITEM WAS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION'S AGENDA FOR THE EXACT SAME TIME. AND I GUESS THAT STAFF WAS LIKE, IT'S FINE. IT'S LIKE MAYBE NOT FOR THE PUBLIC, BUT ANYWAY, SO OUR MEETING IS CANCELED AND WE'LL HEAR THAT CASE. OKAY. NEXT MONTH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE. WE HAVEN'T HAD A MEETING SINCE OUR LAST ONE, BUT IT SOON. RIGHT. IT'S COMING UP SOON. SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE. THE PERSON THE HEADSET IS NOT IN THE STATE RIGHT NOW. OKAY. COMMISSIONER. OKAY. YEAH. OH. LAND USE COMMISSION RULES. THERE'S NOTHING GOING ON THERE. ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? [FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS] DO WE HAVE A PLAN FOR TALKING ABOUT THE LAND USE ROLES, KNOW THE, THE TRANSPORTATION, TRANSPORTATION THAT IS COMING UP IN SEPTEMBER. SEPTEMBER. YES. YOU'LL GET TO CHAIR THE MEETING. I'LL GET TO CHAIR THE MEETING. AND AGAIN, REMINDER, I WILL NOT BE HERE FOR EITHER MEETING IN SEPTEMBER. I WILL FINALIZE THE DATE. WE'LL MEET WITH THE AUTO PILOT. HE'S GOING TO BE BOWLING OUT IN EUROPE. OKAY WITH THAT? IT IS 822 AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.