[00:00:10] ALL RIGHT Y'ALL, WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED. TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19TH, 2026. [CALL TO ORDER ] THE TIME IS 6:01 P.M.. WE ARE AT THE PERMITTING AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, ROOM 14056310 WILHELMINA DELCO DRIVE, AUSTIN, TEXAS. WE'LL START BY ESTABLISHING QUORUM COMMISSIONER CHANG. SIT. HERE. COMMISSIONER FLEURY HERE. VICE CHAIR. BRISTOL HERE. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN HERE. COMMISSIONER BRIMER HERE. AND I AM ALSO PRESENT. CHAIR KRUGER. WITH THAT, WE HAVE QUORUM AND WE'LL GO ON TO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATION. CHAIR, NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION. OKAY. SO NEXT WE'LL GO TO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING ON AUGUST 5TH, [APPROVAL OF MINUTES] 2026. IS THERE A MOTION? SO MOVED. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BREMER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HANDS. THAT IS UNANIMOUS. MOTION PASSES. SO NEXT WE'LL GO ON TO PUBLIC HEARINGS. [2. Name: 5811 Southwest Parkway Site-Specific SOS Amendment, C20-2026-008 ] ITEM NUMBER TWO. THIS IS FOR THE 5811 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT C20-2026-008. THE APPLICANT IS THOMPSON LAND ENGINEERING. THE LOCATION IS 5811 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY, AUSTIN, TEXAS, 78735 IN CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT. AND WE WILL START WITH THE STAFF PRESENTATION FROM LESLIE LILLY, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM MANAGER, AUSTIN WATERSHED PROTECTION. THANK YOU, CHAIR, AND GOOD EVENING, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS LESLIE LILLY WITH AUSTIN WATERSHED PROTECTION, AND I WILL BE GIVING A PRESENTATION THIS EVENING ON THE PROPOSED SITE SPECIFIC S.O.S AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPERTY, LOCATED AT 5811 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY AND ASSOCIATED WITH SITE PLAN SPC 20250066. SEE NEXT SLIDE. OH THERE WE GO. OKAY. SO BEFORE WE GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THIS PROJECT, I WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT AN SOS AMENDMENT IS. SO THE SOS OR SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE WAS AN ORDINANCE PASSED AND ADOPTED BY CITIZEN INITIATIVE IN 1992. AND A UNIQUE CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS ORDINANCE IS THAT THERE ARE NO VARIANCES ALLOWED TO IT WITHOUT A SUPERMAJORITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. AND THAT IS A UNIQUE PART OF THIS ORDINANCE. SO WHEN AN SOS AMENDMENT IS PROPOSED, IT HAS TO BE FIRST INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL. AND THE INITIATING RESOLUTION WAS PASSED IN 2019 WITH RESOLUTION NUMBER 20190131040. AND THAT WAS IN OCTOBER 31ST, 2019. WE'LL GET MORE INTO THE DETAILS OF THAT INITIATING RESOLUTION BECAUSE IT HAS IT HAS SOME CONDITIONS IN IT THAT AFFECT THE CONDITIONS OF OUR SUPPORT. AND HOW WE EXAMINE THOSE AMENDMENTS. SO SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE SITE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE LITTLE RED CIRCLE REPRESENTS THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY. IT'S IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, FULL PURPOSE JURISDICTION AND ALSO WITHIN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE AND SOME OTHER SITE FEATURES. IT'S IN THE BARTON CREEK WATERSHED AND IT'S IN THE BARTON SPRINGS THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE REGULATORY WATERSHED. AS I MENTIONED, IT'S IN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. RECHARGE THE FULL PURPOSE JURISDICTION. IT'S IN COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT, AND THE WHOLE PROPERTY IS ALL UPLAND AREA. SO THERE'S NO CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES OR WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONES. ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE NO CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON SITE THAT INCLUDES SEEPS, SPRINGS, WETLANDS AND OTHER PROTECTED ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES. THE SITE IS 3.026 ACRES, AND CURRENTLY IT HAS AN EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER OF 33.9%. SO A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT ABOUT WHERE THE SITE IS LOCATED. JUST WEST OF THE 290 AND MOPAC INTERSECTION YOU CAN SEE HERE. AND THE HATCHED AREA IS THE BOUNDARY OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE. AND SOME BACKGROUND ON WHAT THIS PROJECT IS. SO IT WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED IN THE 70S AS A MOBILE HOME PARK BEFORE THE PASSAGE OF THE SOS ORDINANCE. SO IT WAS NOT DEVELOPED WITH THE SAME REGULATIONS THAT WERE IN EFFECT IN 1992. AND BECAUSE OF THAT, IT WAS DEVELOPED WITHOUT ANY WATER QUALITY TREATMENT. AND ALSO THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROVIDED ON SITE WAS WAS DONE WITH A SEPTIC SYSTEM. BECAUSE OF THAT, THE SITE HAS HISTORICALLY STRUGGLED WITH LIKE A VERY OUTDATED SEPTIC SYSTEM AND FAILING DRAINAGE FIELDS. [00:05:01] AND SO REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE IS, YOU KNOW, WOULD INCLUDE THE REMOVAL OF THE SEPTIC SYSTEM AND THE UPGRADING OF THE SITE TO PROVIDE WASTEWATER TREATMENT USING PUBLIC WASTEWATER, CENTRALIZED PUBLIC WASTEWATER, AND THEN ALSO PROVIDING WATER QUALITY TREATMENT. AN IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE IS, YOU KNOW, MANY PROJECTS IN THIS KIND OF SITUATION MIGHT CONSIDER A REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION AND FOR REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, AS DEFINED IN 2526, WHAT A PROJECT IS ALLOWED TO DO IS KEEP THEIR EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER AND NOT, YOU KNOW, IMPOSE ON ANY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, NOT INCREASE NONCOMPLIANCE IF THAT'S A PART OF THINGS. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THIS PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM LIKE BEING APPLICABLE FOR THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION BECAUSE IT HAS RESIDENTIAL USE. SO THAT'S REALLY ONLY ACCESSIBLE TO PROPERTIES THAT HAVE SOME COMMERCIAL USE. AND THAT IS A PART OF THE WAY THAT THE INITIATING RESOLUTION WAS WRITTEN TO CONSIDER APPLYING SOME OF THOSE SAME FEATURES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION TO THIS SITE. SO THE SOS AMENDMENT, AS I MENTIONED, WAS INITIATED IN 2019. AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN JUST A SECOND. BUT HERE IS AN AERIAL OF THE SITE. YOU CAN SEE THE FORMER AND ABANDONED MOBILE HOME THAT IS NO LONGER IN USE AND HASN'T BEEN USED, HASN'T BEEN YOU KNOW, IN SERVICE FOR MANY YEARS. THE PRIMARY IMPERVIOUS COVER IS REALLY CONNECTED TO THE CENTRAL ROAD AND THE PADS FOR ALL OF THE MOBILE HOMES. SO THAT'S WHERE THAT ABOUT 33% IMPERVIOUS COVER IS COMING FROM. IT'S ALSO JUST ADJACENT TO SAINT ANDREW'S SCHOOL. IF YOU'RE WONDERING WHAT THAT BIG FIELD IS, JUST TO THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE, A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON HOW AND WHAT THE IMPERVIOUS COVER LOOKS LIKE FOR THE SITE. THIS IS A PLAN VIEW OF ONE OF THE PLAN SHEETS FROM THE SITE PLAN THAT SHOW THAT KIND OF DARK GRAY AREA, AND THAT REPRESENTS ALL THE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE. SO SOME DETAILS ABOUT THE INITIATING RESOLUTION. WHEN THIS INITIATING RESOLUTION WAS CONCEIVED, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF AND COUNCIL WERE CONSIDERING LIKE HOW THIS WEIGHS UP AGAINST THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. SO THERE'S, YOU KNOW, REFERENCE IN THIS INITIATING RESOLUTION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION AND IN THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE LISTED HERE. SO THERE'S FIVE OF THEM THAT WE CONSIDERED WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING THIS PROJECT FOR THE, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENT, AND THEY ARE AS FOLLOWS. AYE ALLOWS NO INCREASE IN EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE. B, IF FEASIBLE, IDENTIFIES WAYS TO DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. C PROVIDES WATER QUALITY TREATMENT CONSISTENT WITH 25826 REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE FOR ALL REDEVELOPMENT AREAS AND TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE TO THE ENTIRE SITE. D INCORPORATES ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE EFFICIENT STRATEGIES, AND E PRESERVES THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY REGULATIONS. THOSE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT REGULATIONS IN THIS AREA BECAUSE THEY PROTECT LARGE AREAS OF THE SITE AND REQUIRE A LOT OF VEGETATION TO BE MAINTAINED. SO WHAT IS THE PROPERTY? WHAT IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT LOOK LIKE? THIS IS KIND OF AN OVERVIEW. AND I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE TO KIND OF ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. RIGHT IN THE CENTER THERE IS A BUILDING AND THAT WILL SERVE AS A CHILD CARE FACILITY. THERE IS PARKING ALONG THE TOP AND TO THE RIGHT OF THE BUILDING THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHILD CARE FACILITY. A LOT OF THE OTHER AREAS, OPEN AREA THAT WILL BE PLANTED, AND THAT WILL BE USED TO SERVE AS COMPLIANCE WITH THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY OVERLAY. AND THEN ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, WHICH IS TECHNICALLY THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WOULD BE THE NON DEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT PONDS AND FACILITIES TO TREAT ALL OF THE RUNOFF ON THE SITE. SO WHAT IS THE SOS AMENDMENT CONSIDERING AND ASKING FOR SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PARTICULAR SOS AMENDMENT SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT. THE CURRENT REQUIREMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE SOS AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE A IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT OF 15%. NET SITE AREA AND THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE IS 33.9%, OR JUST A LITTLE OVER AN ACRE. WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED FOR THE SOS AMENDMENT, AND WITH CONSIDERATION FOR HOW THE INITIATING RESOLUTION WAS WRITTEN, IS A SMALL DECREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER TO 33.5%. [00:10:08] SO WITH THAT, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. AND THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE PLAN VIEW THAT YOU SAW OF THE DEVELOPMENT. SO THERE'S THE SMALL REDUCTION IN IMPERVIOUS COVER FROM 33.9 TO 33.5%. THE PROPERTY WILL BE PROVIDING NON-DRUG WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR THE ENTIRE SITE. ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY. THE PROJECT IS ALSO COMMITTING TO AUSTIN ENERGY GREEN BUILDING RATING FOR TWO STAR RATING AND BIRD FRIENDLY DESIGN. THERE WILL BE AN INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN. THERE WILL BE NO ARTIFICIAL TURF. THERE WILL BE INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE WHICH IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE SITE PLAN AND AND THE PLACEMENT OF THAT INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE HAS ALREADY BEEN KIND OF DEFINED. IT WILL, AS THE INITIATING RESOLUTION REQUIRED, COMPLY WITH THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY REGULATIONS. IN ADDITION, IT WILL PROVIDE TWO ELECTRICAL. TWO ELECTRIC CHARGING STATIONS. THE CALIPER INCHES OF TREES FOR MITIGATION WILL INCREASE FROM THREE INCHES, AND SO THAT INCH MEANS THE DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT. SO THE SIZE OF THE TREES THAT WILL BE PLANTED WILL BE ONE INCH BIGGER THAN WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED. AND ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHOWN WILL BE REVEGETATED WITH 609 S. THIS IS A SPECIFIC SPECIFICATION THAT REQUIRES NATIVE SEEDING AND PLANTING AND SOIL AMENDMENTS THAT HELP WITH RESTORATION. AND THEN LASTLY, THE PROJECT IS COMMITTING TO 100% NATIVE PLANTS FOR ALL OF THEIR LANDSCAPING PLANTS. A COUPLE OF THINGS ON THE SCHEDULE. WE ARE HERE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. FOR YOU TO CONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT. BEFORE TONIGHT, WE WERE CONSIDERING ALSO ATTENDING THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING, TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, KNOCK TWO THINGS OFF THE LIST, COME HERE AND THEN GO TO THAT MEETING BECAUSE IT'S JUST UPSTAIRS. BUT DUE TO SOME KIND OF CONSTRAINTS, WE DIDN'T WANT TO, YOU KNOW, NOT ALLOW STAKEHOLDERS TO BE ENGAGED IN THAT. SO WE HAVE ACTUALLY POSTPONED THAT MEETING TO SEPTEMBER 16TH, AND THAT THEN HAS CREATED A FEW OTHER POSTPONEMENTS FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. IT WILL BE OCTOBER 13TH WHEN IT WAS PREVIOUSLY NOTICED FOR AUGUST 25TH. SO WE WILL BE MAKING POSTPONEMENTS AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. AND THEN ALSO THAT PUSHES OUR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OFF TO NOVEMBER 5TH. SO WE WILL BE MAKING POSTPONEMENTS AT THOSE MEETINGS, BUT JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S ON THE RECORD. SO IT'S AVAILABLE FOR YOUR INFORMATION. AND WITH THAT, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE TO PROVIDE ANY QUESTIONS. AND DO YOU GUYS HAVE A PRESENTATION? YEAH. OKAY. SO I THINK THEY HAVE THEIR PRESENTATION AND WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. GREAT. THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT WE HAVE COMMISSIONER MORRISON ON THE DAIS, AND THEN LET'S GO AHEAD AND HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. OH, AND COMMISSIONER LUCKY ON THE DAIS. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS SARAH FAUST. I'M REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT ALONG WITH DOCTOR LAUREN ROSS. IS THAT THE ECHO? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BEFORE I START, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN BY BEING ON THIS COMMISSION. I HAVE BEEN ON THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION AND THE PARKS BOARD, AND I'M CURRENTLY ON THE WATER FORWARD TASK FORCE. AND SO I DO REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND THOUGHTFULNESS IN BEING ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. THIS IS ONE OF OUR, YOU KNOW, MOST IMPORTANT BOARDS THAT WE HAVE. AND SO THANK YOU. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. WE'RE JUST GOING TO TRY TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT ABOUT THE PROJECT AND SOME DETAILS, BUT I DO WANT TO ALLOW YOU GUYS TO LEAVE AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE TONIGHT. SO THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW OF THE SITE. I WANTED YOU TO BE ABLE TO SEE KIND OF SOME OF THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. SO 290 IS THE HIGHWAY CROSSING ON THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE AND THEN MOPAC GOING OFF. SO THIS IS NEXT DOOR TO THE SAINT ANDREWS SCHOOL IS THE BIG ATHLETIC FIELD. YOU SAW IN THE OTHER PICTURE ACROSS THE WAY THERE, ACROSS SOUTHWEST PARKWAY, YOU SEE THE TRAVIS COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT, AND THEN TO THE WEST, THERE'S SOME COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND APARTMENTS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO IT'S GOING TO BE THE PLAN IS FOR A DAYCARE FACILITY THAT WOULD SERVE ABOUT 250 CHILDREN WITH A COVERED [00:15:04] PLAY AREA AND A SPORT COURT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THE IDEA IS THAT THIS WOULD HOPEFULLY BE ABLE TO SERVE THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE ALREADY LIVING OUT THERE AND POTENTIALLY REDUCE CAR TRIPS FROM PEOPLE NEEDING TO DRIVE TO A CHILDCARE FACILITY ON MOPAC OR ACROSS 290 AS WELL. THERE'S, I THINK 2 OR 3 LARGE PRIVATE SCHOOLS LOCATED ON SOUTHWEST PARKWAY. AND I WOULD HOPE SOME OF THOSE STAFF WOULD BE ABLE TO USE THE CHILDCARE FACILITY FOR THEIR YOUNG CHILDREN. NEXT SLIDE. SO THE BUILDING WILL BE AN AUSTIN ENERGY TWO STAR GREEN BUILDING. AND WE'LL GO INTO SOME MORE DETAIL ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE. NEXT SLIDE. THIS SLIDE IS INTENDED TO WALK THROUGH A LOT OF WHAT LESLIE ALREADY DID. SO I'LL GO PRETTY QUICKLY, BUT WE'VE GOT THE, THE RESOLUTION THERE THAT PASSED IN 2019, WHICH HAD SPECIFICATIONS IN IT, NO INCREASE IN THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER, IF FEASIBLE, DECREASE IMPERVIOUS COVER. YES. THAT IS BEING DONE. PROVIDING SOS POND WATER QUALITY TREATMENT, WHICH YES, WE ARE DOING THAT FOR THE ENTIRE SITE, INCORPORATING ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE EFFICIENT STRATEGIES THAT WILL COME IN JUST A MINUTE AND THEN MEETING THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY REQUIREMENTS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. OKAY. THIS ONE IS COMPARING IT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION FOR THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, WHICH AS LESLIE EXPLAINED THIS IS NOT THE LEGAL STANDARD WE'RE PROCEEDING UNDER. HOWEVER, WE THINK IT'S USEFUL TO SEE HOW IT WOULD MATCH UP WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. SO NO INCREASE IN EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER. YES. NO INCREASE IN NONCOMPLIANCE WITH CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES. CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES. WETLANDS. YES. WE'RE COMPLYING WITH THAT. COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY REQUIREMENT. THERE'S NO SENSITIVE FEATURES. SO WE DO COMPLY WITH THAT COMPLIANCE WITH CONSTRUCTION PHASE, ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS AND WATER QUALITY TREATMENT EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED. AND THAT IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS HERE. AND THIS WILL BE BETTER THAN WHAT WAS PROVIDED. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS ALSO FROM THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. NO REDEVELOPMENT IN THE EROSION HAZARD ZONE AND MITIGATION LAND REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE WE'RE THE PROJECTS DOING THE SOS QUALITY PONDS. THERE'S NO MITIGATION NEEDED. THAT'S WHEN YOU DO A LOWER LEVEL OF WATER QUALITY TREATMENT. NEXT SLIDE. AND THIS IS WHERE DOCTOR LAUREN ROSS IS GOING TO TAKE OVER. I ALSO WANT TO EXPRESS APPRECIATION FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE TO OUR CITY. IT IS WHAT MAKES AUSTIN I THINK A REALLY SPECIAL PLACE. MY NAME IS LAUREN ROSS. I'M AN ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER. I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE PROJECT SINCE 2018, AND I WAS PART OF THE PROJECT TEAM WHEN THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION WAS PASSED. WE ALSO HAVE WITH US TONIGHT MR. GLENN IRBY, WHO IS THE OWNER AND DEVELOPER. DEVELOPER OF THE SITE, AND HIS ENGINEER, RICK THOMPSON, WHO PREPARED THE SITE. PLANS ARE PART OF THE TEAM THAT'S HERE TONIGHT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. VERY BRIEFLY, AS LESLIE LILLY SAID, THERE IS FOR 44,684FT² OF IMPERVIOUS AREA THAT WAS ON THE SITE WHEN IT WAS PURCHASED. THAT'S THE HATCHED AREA AND IT CONSISTS OF ROADWAYS, DRIVEWAYS AND THE MOBILE HOME BUILDING AREAS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. WE ALSO HAVE DILAPIDATED ON SITE SEPTIC SEWAGE SYSTEMS AND FAILING DRAIN FIELDS, WHICH DO REPRESENT A POTENTIAL CONTAMINATION OF THE UNDERLYING KARST GROUNDWATER. AS AGAIN HAS BEEN MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, THIS SITE IS OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE, SO IT IS OVER THE ACTUAL EDWARDS AQUIFER THAT FEEDS BARTON SPRINGS OR COLD SPRINGS IN TOWN LAKE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS IS A MAP THAT SHOWS WHAT IS PROPOSED FOR THE SITE. WE HAVE SET BACK FROM SOUTHWEST PARKWAY. SO THERE'S A DRIVEWAY THAT COMES IN AND THEN YOU SEE THE PARKING LOT AND [00:20:06] THEN THE BUILDINGS ARE BEHIND THAT. THERE IS A MULCHED UP OPEN PLAY FIELD. AND THEN I WILL SAY MR. GLENN IRBY WAS VERY INSISTENT THAT THE CHILDREN HAVE A PLACE TO PLAY WHEN IT'S RAINING. SO THERE'S ALSO A COVERED PLAY AREA, AND THERE'S A SPORT COURT KIND OF SNAKING ALONG THE BACK HALF OF THE PROPERTY IS THE DRIVEWAY THAT ALLOWS THE OWNER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RETENTION POND IS MAINTAINED. AND THEN THOSE CIRCLES REPRESENT THE IRRIGATION OF STORMWATER ONTO THE SOIL ON THE SITE. AND THE SOILS HERE ARE RELATIVELY DEEP. FOR THE RECHARGE ZONE, THEY ARE ABOUT 18 TO 40IN DEEP. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. WE ARE PROPOSING SOME SPECIFIC ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND WE'RE NAMING SOME OF THEM HERE TONIGHT. THE CITY REQUESTED AND THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO PROVIDE TWO ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS WITH THE GLASS IN THE BUILDING WILL BE BIRD FRIENDLY, MEANING THAT IT WILL BE ETCHED SO THAT BIRDS CAN SEE IT AND WILL NOT FLY INTO THE BUILDING. AS LESLIE LILY SAID, ALL OF THE LANDSCAPE WILL BE NATIVE LANDSCAPE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT EVERY TREE THAT IS PLANTED FOR MITIGATION ON THE SITE WILL BE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED. WE WILL USE INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT TO ELIMINATE THE PESTICIDES AND HERBICIDES THAT MIGHT OTHERWISE BE USED. AND THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO COMMITTED TO DARK SKIES LIGHTING. ALL OF THE LIGHTING FIXTURES OUTSIDE WILL BE SHIELDED. THEY'LL BE POINTED DOWN. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE POINTED UP INTO THE SKY. THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT PRESERVES THE SKY VIEWING OPPORTUNITY FOR THE RESIDENTS, AND IT IS ALSO AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION DURING BIRD MIGRATION TIMES. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THE DESIGN INCLUDES A SIDEWALK SLASH BOARDWALK ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF SOUTHWEST PARKWAY. RIGHT NOW, THAT'S NOT CONNECTED TO MUCH, BUT THE APPLICANT IS DOING THEIR PART TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE IS CONNECTIVITY FOR A PEDESTRIAN OR BIKEWAY ALONG THIS SIDE OF SOUTHWEST PARKWAY, THE INFRASTRUCTURE CROSSING THIS PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE ON IN PLACE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND I WANT TO REALLY COMMEND CITY STAFF, BECAUSE I THINK THEY WERE ALSO PART OF VERY CAREFULLY SPECIFYING HOW THIS BOARDWALK AND HOW THE FOUNDATION FOR THE BOARDWALK WILL BE CONSTRUCTED SO AS TO PRESERVE THE HERITAGE AND OTHER TREES THAT ARE GOING TO BE SCREENING THIS DEVELOPMENT FROM SOUTHWEST PARKWAY. AND OF COURSE, THOSE TREES ARE JUST INHERENTLY VALUABLE. THIS WILL BE A VERY PARTICULAR DESIGN TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO IMPACT FROM THIS BOARDWALK ON THE TREE ROOT SYSTEM. IF YOU WERE TO STUDY THE PLANS, YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE ARE, IN FACT, A KIND OF SHOCKINGLY LARGE NUMBER OF DEAD TREES ON THE SITE. AND THAT'S JUST BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT OUR LANDSCAPES ARE SUFFERING, RIGHT? AND SO THIS DEVELOPER AND THIS DESIGN HAS WORKED HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE MINIMIZING THE BURDEN AND PRESERVING THE LONG TERM VIABILITY OF THE TREES THAT ARE STILL ON THE SITE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE WILL BE INFORMATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNAGE FOR THE CHILDREN FOR THE STAFF TO SEE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. BARTON SPRINGS. RIGHT. THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS REFERENDUM WAS PASSED TO PROTECT BARTON SPRINGS. AND WE WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE TONIGHT THAT THIS IS A SENSITIVE AREA, THAT THE DEVELOPMENT MATTERS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT MATTERS. AND WE WANT TO ASSURE YOU THAT GIVEN THE CURRENT SET OF THE STATUS OF THE SITE AND GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS AGREED TO PROVIDE, WE BELIEVE AND WE REPRESENT TO YOU THAT THIS IS A SITE THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S MORE THAN 40 YEAR COMMITMENT TO MAKING SURE THAT ALL OF AUSTIN, AND PARTICULARLY BARTON SPRINGS, IS A RESOURCE THAT EVERYBODY CAN ENJOY FOR FOREVER. [00:25:04] REALLY? YEAH. THANK YOU. AND I THINK OUR NEXT SLIDE SAYS QUESTIONS. GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT PRESENTATION. LET'S GO AHEAD AND GO NEXT TO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION. CHAIR WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. THE FIRST SPEAKER IS JOINING US VIRTUALLY. LEE ZIEGLER. PLEASE PROCEED WITH YOUR COMMENTS. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE. MY NAME IS LEE ZIEGLER AND I'VE LIVED IN TRAVIS COUNTRY, DIRECTLY ACROSS SOUTHWEST PARKWAY FROM THIS SITE SINCE 1998. I'M SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION TO THE SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT AS IT STANDS, BECAUSE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER CLAIMS RELY ON ASSUMPTIONS THAT ARE NOT ADEQUATELY SUPPORTED BY OPTION CODE AND ARE LESS PROTECTIVE OF BARTON SPRINGS. IT'S BEEN STATED THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS USED EXCLUSIVELY AS A MOBILE HOME PARK BEFORE ANNEXATION, AND THE SEVEN REMAINING STRUCTURES HAVE BEEN UNINHABITED FOR 10 TO 20 YEARS. THEY SIT ON BLOCK MOSTLY OPEN UNDERNEATH WITH NO PADS, NO FOUNDATIONS, AND NO RECOGNIZABLE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. WATER AND ORGANIC MATTER DO PASS FREELY BELOW THEM. THESE TRAILERS HAVE NOT FUNCTIONED AS BUILDINGS FOR MANY YEARS, AND TODAY THEY ARE MERE REMNANTS OF THE PAST. KEEP IN MIND, IF IMPACTED SOIL BENEATH DETERIORATED ELEVATED STRUCTURES IS BEING COUNTED AND ASSUMED HERE TO BE IMPERVIOUS COVER WITHOUT OFFICIAL ASSESSMENT. THAT REPRESENTS A MAJOR REINTERPRETATION OF AUSTIN CODE. THESE ARE REASONS WHY I'M CONCERNED THAT THESE DETERIORATED STRUCTURES ARE BEING USED TO JUSTIFY INCREASING SSOS ALLOWED 15% IMPERVIOUS COVER TO ROUGHLY 33.5% IMPERVIOUS COVER BASED UPON NO LONGER EXISTING CONDITIONS. MY RECOLLECTION, CERTAINLY NOT PRECISE, IS THAT THE REFERENCE 2019 DAYCARE PROPOSAL NEVER RESULTED IN AN ORDINANCE, NOR A PLAQUE. IT WAS CONTROVERSIAL AND DID NOT MOVE FORWARD. YET TODAY IT IS TREATED AS AN ENTITLEMENT. IF AN ORDINANCE EXISTS, IT SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED. IF NOT, THE COMMISSION SHOULD NOT RELY ON ASSUMPTIONS THAT WERE NEVER ADOPTED, DESPITE ITS STATED REQUIREMENT FOR A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE LAND USE HISTORY ALSO DESERVES CLARITY. THE PRESIDENT SHIFT FROM MOBILE HOME RESIDENTIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, I BELIEVE IT'S NOW L R LIKELY OCCURRED WHEN THE TRAILERS COULD NO LONGER BE LICENSED. GIVEN THE ZONING CHANGE, IT WOULD SEEM COMMERCIAL UPLANDS WOULD BETTER QUALIFY FOR UP TO 25% IMPERVIOUS COVERING OF BARTON SPRINGS, PERHAPS NOW IN ITS IN ITS CHANGE OR IN A LESS CHALLENGING SOS AMENDMENT. WHILE A DAYCARE IS DESIRABLE. THE ISSUE IS WHETHER THIS SOS AMENDMENT IS BASED ON CLEAR, ACCURATE AND INTENTIONAL CODE SUPPORTED IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE DESIGNATION. BEFORE RECOMMENDING THE PROPOSED EXCEPTION, I URGE YOU TO EXAMINE CODE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS INTERPRETATION TO ENSURE ADEQUATE WATER QUALITY PROTECTIONS ARE UPHELD. AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BEATRICE ANDERSON. HI. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS BEATRICE ANDERSON WITH SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL HERE. I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT I AM HERE TAKING A NEUTRAL POSITION. I AM NOT HERE TO TELL YOU TO SUPPORT OR OPPOSE THIS ITEM. BUT I DO WANT TO OFFER SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS THAT WE THINK SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ON THIS IN A WAY ECHOING LEE'S POINTS. WE DO THINK THAT THERE IS A REAL OPPORTUNITY HERE TO YOU KNOW, REDEVELOP THE SITE IN A WAY THAT MAKES IT BETTER. AND ONE WAY THAT THAT CAN BE DONE IS REDUCING THE IMPERVIOUS COVER IN OUR MINDS IN A MORE MEANINGFUL AMOUNT. WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE. THE, THE THOUGHT THAT HAS BEEN PUT INTO THIS DESIGN. AND THE ALL OF THE EXAMPLES OF WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO CREATE THIS DESIGN THIS IN A THOUGHTFUL WAY. BUT I DO THINK THAT THE IMPERVIOUS COVER ONE IS, IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO BETTER ON THAT. [00:30:02] SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT THE PARKING LOT, FOR EXAMPLE THE PARKING LOT SETS AYE SETS ASIDE AROUND 21 SPOTS FOR ADMIN STAFF, WHICH WOULD BE TAKING UP AROUND 6000FT² OF OFFICE. WHICH TO ME THAT I'M NOT. I WOULD LOVE A LITTLE MORE CALCULATION ON WHERE THAT IS COMING FROM. IT SEEMS LIKE THEY ARE USING THE OLD CITY STANDARD FOR PARKING MINIMUMS, WHICH HAS SINCE BEEN ELIMINATED. SO IF THERE ARE, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE NUMBERS ON THE ACTUAL STAFFING NEEDS FOR THOSE 21 PARKING SPACES, BECAUSE THOSE SPACES ARE NOT NEEDED. THEN COULD THE PARKING LOT BE REDESIGNED AND THE IMPERVIOUS COVER REDUCED BY HOWEVER MANY SPACES? IN ADDITION, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT STANDALONE PARKING NEEDED FOR DROP OFF IF THE PARKING LOT COULD BE REDESIGNED TO LEAN INTO A A TRAFFIC FLOW, LIKE A CIRCULAR TRAFFIC FLOW AROUND THE BUILDING TO REDUCE THE OVERALL IMPERVIOUS COVER OF THE PARKING LOT. I THINK THAT IS A WAY THAT IT COULD BE REDUCED IN THE DESIGN. I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE INTENTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION EXCLUDING RESIDENTIAL IS TO REMOVE OR TO ELIMINATE THE POSSIBILITY OF DISPLACEMENT NOT ALLOWING A SITE TO BE A RESIDENTIAL SITE TO BE TAKEN OVER. RESIDENTS KICKED OUT AND THEN IT REDEVELOPED ON THOSE SAME STANDARDS IN A COMMERCIAL WAY. WHILE WE APPRECIATE THAT THE MOBILE HOMES ARE NOT CURRENTLY OCCUPIED WE DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S A COMMITMENT IN WRITING THAT THIS SITE PLAN AND THESE ALLOWANCES ARE BEING TIED SPECIFICALLY TO THE SITE PLAN AND NOT TO THE SITE ITSELF. AND WE JUST WANT TO BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT THE PRECEDENT THAT EVEN EVEN ADHERING TO THOSE REDEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ON A FORMER RESIDENTIAL SITE COULD IMPOSE. BECAUSE AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THAT WAS ELIMINATING THE POSSIBILITY OF DISPLACEMENT. AND OKAY, THAT'S IT FOR ME. THANK YOU. CHAIR. THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS. AND THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATIONS. WE'RE GOING TO GO NEXT TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS AND WE WILL START ONLINE WITH COMMISSIONER. HI. THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF REALLY QUICK QUESTIONS. THE FIRST ABOUT IMPERVIOUS COVER. I'M CURIOUS IF THE COVERED PLAY AREA IS PART OF THAT IMPERVIOUS COVER PERCENTAGE. YES. LIZ JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER YES, THE THE COVERED PLAYGROUND WOULD BE CONSIDERED IMPERVIOUS COVER. AND I ALSO JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO WHAT WAS SAID EARLIER ABOUT YOU KNOW, THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE ON PIER AND BEAM AND AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN DRIVEN ON, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DEFINITELY HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT WITH HOW WE'VE INTERPRETED IMPERVIOUS COVER OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS OR MORE THAT I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN MAKING THESE DECISIONS. YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY GOES OUT AND STARTS PARKING ON BARE EARTH, IT BECOMES COMPACTED AND WE DON'T LET THEM DO THAT. BUT HERE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DRIVING AND PARKING ON THIS AREA FOR QUITE SOME TIME. BUILDINGS ARE STILL THERE. EVEN IF THEY WERE COMPLETELY DILAPIDATED, THEY WOULD BE SIMILAR TO MATERIAL STORAGE SITES, WHICH WE DO CONSIDER TO BE IMPERVIOUS COVER. SO I AM CONFIDENT THAT THE AREAS THAT ARE SHOWN AS IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE ARE TRULY IMPERVIOUS COVER BASED ON HOW WE HAVE INTERPRETED THAT CODE SECTION FOR, FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. AWESOME. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT FOR THE PUBLIC AND THEN FOR THE APPLICANT, HAVE, HAVE YOU DONE ANY OF THE THE ANALYZES TO LOOK AT HOW MANY CARS WOULD BE NEEDED BY THE PREDICTED AMOUNT OF EMPLOYEES. THE APPLICANT IS CURRENTLY CONSIDERS THIS TO BE THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF PARKING. THEY HAVE DEVELOPED MANY, MANY SITES. THE CONCERN IS THAT IF WE DON'T PROVIDE ADEQUATE PARKING, PEOPLE END UP PARKING PLACES THAT ARE NOT DESIGNED FOR THAT. AND THERE'S, THIS IS NOT A PARKING DESIGN BASED ON CODE REQUIREMENTS. IT IS A, IT IS A PARKING DESIGN THAT IS BASED ON THE INTENDED USE OF THE SITE. THERE WAS A SUGGESTION THAT MAYBE THE CARS COULD JUST CIRCLE AROUND, BUT THE DAYCARE CULTURE THAT IS BEING CULTIVATED IS [00:35:03] ONE IN WHICH PARENTS PARK AND WALK THEIR CHILDREN INTO THE SCHOOL. AND THAT THAT IS A PART OF CONNECTING FAMILIES TO THE EXPERIENCE OF DAYCARE AND SOMETHING THAT IS IMPORTANT TO THE APPLICANT. AND HONESTLY, I HAVE SEEN AN EARLIER DESIGN AND I DON'T THINK WE SAVE MUCH, IF ANY, IMPERVIOUS COVER BY TAKING OUT THOSE PARKING SPACES IN THE FRONT AND CHANGING THAT INTO A DRIVE LOOP. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT'S THE END OF MY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BREMER. OH, GEE. I WAS KIND OF GOING LAST. TRY TO KEEP YOU GUYS ON YOUR TOES. YEAH. OKAY. HOW MANY KIDS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE HERE? WE'VE DONE SOME CALCULATIONS. WE THINK 250 MIGHT BE A HIGH NUMBER, BUT IT'S NOT 50 CHILDREN AND IT'S NOT 500 CHILDREN. IT IS AROUND 250 CHILDREN. WELL, THE REASON I'M ASKING IS THAT THERE'S PROBABLY A STAFF TO KID RATIO INVOLVED THAT YOU'RE WORKING TOWARDS, AND THAT TO SOME EXTENT, IS GOING TO DRIVE THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPOTS YOU'RE GOING TO NEED. SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 250 KIDS AND, YOU KNOW, SO HOW MANY TEACHERS? AND THEN YOU HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE ADMINISTRATOR SITTING THERE TO SUPERVISE THE WHOLE THING. BUT ALSO, MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS, HOW FAR AWAY IS THIS FROM, YOU KNOW, SOME SORT OF A MASS TRANSIT STOP THAT WOULD ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE, YOU KNOW, TO TAKE THE BUS. AND I GUESS THE DIRECTION I'M GOING WITH THIS IS THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THING. SURE. YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS DONE AWAY WITH THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPOTS BASED UPON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING OR LEANER, WHATEVER IT USED TO DO. SO TECHNICALLY SPEAKING, YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE ANY PARKING, RIGHT? YOU KNOW, YOU CAN JUST PUT UP A BUILDING AND DO THAT. BUT I DO RECOGNIZE THE NEED IN OUR CULTURE TO HAVE YOU KNOW, SOME PARKING SPOTS THERE. OTHERWISE THE BUSINESS WILL NOT BE SUPPORTED BY THE PUBLIC AND THE WHOLE. AND I ALSO RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT YOU KNOW, NOT EVERYONE CAN USE THE BUS, SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME PARKING PARKING SPOTS FOR THAT. HAVING HAD FOUR KIDS, I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF DROPPING THEM OFF AND ALL THAT. SO A LOT OF THIS IS FAMILIAR WITH TO ME FROM A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, BUT I REALLY HAVE TO WONDER IF YOU KNOW, THERE ISN'T A WAY TO WHITTLE DOWN THE AMOUNT OF PERVIOUS COVER, IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE PARKING, EVEN A LITTLE BIT BY REDUCING THE NUMBER OF SPOTS THAT ARE ON THERE. AND IN THE PAST, I BELIEVE WE HAVE DISCUSSED AND I DON'T REMEMBER IS THIS BEEN A WHILE AND I DON'T RECALL THE OUTCOME OF THE DISCUSSION, BUT BROADLY SPEAKING, THERE'S WAYS TO CREATE PARKING SPOTS THAT DON'T CREATE IMPERVIOUS COVER. SO, AND I KNOW LIZ IS UP THERE CHOMPING AT THE BIT TO SAY SOMETHING REALLY PROFOUND. SO I'M GOING TO YIELD THE FLOOR TO HER AND LET HER BE PROFOUND. SO LIKE POROUS PAVEMENT, PERVIOUS PAVEMENT WE ONLY ALLOW THAT TO NOT COUNT AS IMPERVIOUS COVER IF IT'S FOR PEDESTRIAN USE AND NOT OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE BECAUSE USUALLY IT'S BUILT OVER COMPACTED BASE AND OVER TIME IT HAS TO BE MAINTAINED. AND THE LITTLE HOLES THAT ALLOW WATER TO FILL TO FLOW THROUGH WILL GET CLOGGED. SO IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE PARKING ON IT, NO MATTER WHAT THE SURFACE IS, IT'S GOING TO BE IMPERVIOUS. COVER. OKAY. YEAH. I DIDN'T REMEMBER WHAT THE RESULTS OF THAT PREVIOUS CONVERSATION WERE. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT WE CAN WHITTLE BACK THE YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPOTS AND, AND SO FORTH TO SOME DEGREE. I KNOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET DOWN TO 15% AND STILL KEEP THIS PROJECT VIABLE, BUT, YOU KNOW, EVERY LITTLE BIT COUNTS TO SOME DEGREE. AND I'D LIKE TO WORK TO SEE IF WE CAN'T WHITTLE THAT DOWN TO SOME DEGREE. SO THAT'S KIND OF MY MY COMMENT ON THE WHOLE THING. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. I'M GOOD. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER MORRISON. THANK YOU GUYS FOR BEING HERE AND FOR THE PRESENTATION. [00:40:03] I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION THAT MAY BE FOR STAFF, BUT CURIOUS IF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE WILL EXPIRE IF THE SITE PLAN LAPSES OR THE CHILD CARE. CENTER SHUTS DOWN OR IF IT RUNS WITH THE LAND. REGARDLESS OF WHAT GETS BUILT. YEAH. LESLIE LILLY WATERSHED PROTECTION. SO THE SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENTS, BECAUSE THEY'RE BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PROVIDED IN A SITE PLAN, ARE TIED TO THOSE SITE PLANS. OUR SOS AMENDMENTS ARE ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A SUBDIVISION OR SITE PLAN, THEY REFERENCE THOSE CASE NUMBERS. AND THOSE SITE PLANS ARE SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE SAME RESTRICTIONS THAT ANY SITE PLAN IS, IS SUBJECT TO WITH EXPIRATION DATES AND OTHERWISE. SO THE SOS AMENDMENT GOES WITH THE SITE PLAN. IT DOESN'T CONVEY WITH THE PROPERTY. OKAY. SO BUT THEORETICALLY, COULD A FUTURE OWNER OF THE LAND OR THE PROPERTY AMEND IT? THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN AMENDMENT PROCESS THEMSELVES. OKAY. YEAH. THAT WAS THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO CLARIFY. THANK YOU. YEP. COMMISSIONER LUCCI. THANK YOU. YES. FIRST OF ALL, I WAS CURIOUS WHAT IS INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT MEAN? IT, IT'S A, IT'S A SERIES OF STRATEGIES FOR DEALING WITH EITHER VERMIN OR HERBICIDES THAT STARTS WITH THE LEAST TOXIC APPROACH TO DEALING WITH WHATEVER PEST INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT, WHATEVER PEST YOU'RE TRYING TO DEAL WITH. AND THE CITY HAS IMPLEMENTED THESE INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AS PART OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE, WE'RE COMMITTING TO DOING THE SAME PROGRAMS THAT ARE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE REFERENDUM REQUIREMENTS. GOOD. ALSO, ARE Y'ALL I'M SEEING ON THE, ON THE THE DIAGRAM HERE TREES THAT ARE COLORED IN AND THEN TREES THAT ARE DRAWN IN, BUT THEY'RE NOT REALLY COLORED. IT'S IN THE, THE SOUTHWEST PARKWAY EDGE. ARE THOSE TREES THAT EXIST RIGHT NOW AND, OR ARE YOU PLANNING ALL THE, I THINK ALL THE TREES THAT YOU SEE ARE TREES THAT EXIST. THE SHADED ONES ARE THERE'S ABOUT FIVE HERITAGE TREES ON THE SITE. EVERY LIVING HERITAGE TREE THOMPSON HAS DESIGNED AROUND. THERE IS ONE DEAD HERITAGE TREE THAT WILL BE REMOVED. SO THE SHADED TREES WITH A ROUND CIRCLE ARE LIVING HERITAGE TREES. THERE ARE ALSO. YOU CAN SEE TREES THAT HAVE KIND OF A STAR SHAPED, JAGGED LINE AROUND IT. THOSE ARE TREES THAT ARE CURRENTLY DEAD, BUT THEY ARE SURVEYED. THEY'RE ON THE PLAN, BUT THEY ARE NOT LIVING TREES. OKAY, THANKS. THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER FLEURY. YEAH. THANK YOU ALL FOR THE PRESENTATION, BOTH STAFF AND APPLICANT. I GUESS FIRST QUESTIONS FOR YOU ALL ON THE SITE PLAN. THANK YOU. IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE TAKING BIG EFFORTS TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE A GREAT SITE AND INTEGRATE IT WITH THE ENVIRONMENT. THE STORM WATER IRRIGATION THAT'S ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PLAN IS THAT CLEARING THE UNDERSTORY OF IT, OR IS THAT MAINTAINING THE EXISTING VEGETATION? OR WHAT'S THAT GOING TO LOOK LIKE WHEN ONCE IT'S INSTALLED? THAT'S A SUPER GOOD QUESTION. I DON'T THINK WE'RE CLEARING OUT. NO. YEAH. MY THE ENGINEER IS SHAKING HIS HEAD. WE ARE NOT. NO, WE ARE NOT CLEARING OUT THE VEGETATION. THOSE SPRAY NOZZLES WILL IRRIGATE UNDERNEATH THE EXISTING TREE CANOPY ON THE BACK SIDE. THIS IS A VERY TREED SITE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH. SO THEY WILL BE IRRIGATING IN THE BACK CANOPY UNDERNEATH THE CANOPY. GREAT. AND IF I UNDERSTAND THE INTENTION IS ALMOST ALL STORMWATER THAT FALLS ON THE SITE IS GOING THROUGH THAT SYSTEM. IT. SO THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS POLLUTION REDUCTION STANDARD IS. THERE'S NO INCREASE IN THE AVERAGE ANNUAL POLLUTANT LOAD FOR A. I THINK IT'S 14 DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF POLLUTANTS AND THE CITY STAFF. THAT ORDINANCE WAS PASSED ON AUGUST 8TH OF 1992, AND OVER THE YEARS, THE CITY STAFF HAS ESTABLISHED THE WATER QUALITY TREATMENT STANDARDS REQUIRED TO MEET THAT REFERENDUM GOAL. AND SO THIS SYSTEM CAPTURES THE AMOUNT OF WATER IN IT IN RETENTION AND IRRIGATION, WITH THE 72 HOUR [00:45:04] RELEASE TIME THAT MATCHES EXACTLY WHAT THE CITY STAFF HAS SAID HAS TO BE DONE TO ACHIEVE NO INCREASE IN THE AVERAGE ANNUAL POLLUTANT LOAD. OKAY. THANK YOU. I GUESS NEXT QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. THANK YOU ALL FOR EMAIL EXCHANGE. HAD A LITTLE EARLIER TODAY. I WAS JUST TRULY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ANSWER THE QUESTION, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT WE'RE PROTECTING MORE OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER? THERE WAS THAT OUTDATED INDICATOR THAT WAS SHOWING, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT GOING UP. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TODAY. BUT IS THERE AN INDICATOR OUT THERE THAT WE ARE QUOTE UNQUOTE IMPROVING THE EDWARDS AQUIFER OTHER THAN JUST KNOWING WE HAVE THIS ALLIANCE, THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE AND IT RESTRICTS DEVELOPMENT THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION. SO WE DO HAVE VERY PROTECTIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT RULES TO SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE IS ONE OF THEM. ANYWHERE ON THE RECHARGE ZONE, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, BARTON SPRINGS ZONE OR THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE WITH THE NORTH EDWARDS AND, AND LANDS DRAINING INTO OUR DRINKING WATER SUPPLY HAVE MUCH LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS THAN ELSEWHERE IN TOWN. AND THE SOS ORDINANCE HAS MUCH MORE STRINGENT NON DEGRADATION POLLUTION REDUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER. WHETHER WE'RE IMPROVING IT, I WOULD HESITATE TO GO THAT FAR. I DON'T THINK WE'VE WE COULD SAY THAT WE HAVE ANY INDICATION THAT IT'S BEING IMPROVED OVER TIME. BUT AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALSO AREAS OUTSIDE OF OUR JURISDICTION THAT ARE ANNEXING AND NOT NEEDING TO MEET THE SOS ORDINANCE. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO DEMONSTRATE THAT WE WOULD BE MAKING ANY IMPROVEMENTS. YEAH. YEAH. WELL, I APPRECIATE THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN THAT THAT YOU SHARED IS GREAT INFORMATION ON INDICATORS AND HISTORY AND WHATNOT. I GUESS KIND OF LAST QUESTION TO UNDERSTAND IMPERVIOUS COVER CALCULATIONS. IT'S NICE TO HEAR CONSISTENCY OVER 20 YEARS. I'M CURIOUS. SO IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE ALL IMPERVIOUS OR ALL IMPERVIOUS COVER IS TREATED THE SAME. SO COMPACTED EARTH IS TREATED THE SAME AS, YOU KNOW, PAVEMENT AND BUILDING OVER IT. YEAH. SO, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO KIND OF, AND IT GETS REALLY CONFUSING WHEN YOU TALK TO A, LIKE A DRAINAGE ENGINEER BECAUSE THEY THINK OF IMPERVIOUS COVER AS WHAT CREATES RUNOFF. THE WAY IMPERVIOUS COVER IS DEFINED IN AUSTIN'S CODE IS RELATED TO WATER QUALITY. AND SO WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT RUNOFF HERE. THAT RUNOFF IS KIND OF A SEPARATE THING THAT NEEDS TO BE HANDLED SEPARATELY. YOU CAN'T CREATE ADVERSE IMPACT, BUT IMPERVIOUS COVER IS DEFINED AS WHATEVER ANY KIND OF LAND BUILDINGS, ROADWAYS, PARKING AREAS STORAGE MATERIAL, ANYTHING THAT WOULD PREVENT WATER FROM INFILTRATING INTO THE AQUIFER. SO IF IT'S COMPACTED BASE, THAT'S, THAT PREVENTS WATER FROM INFILTRATING. IF IT'S A ROOF, IT PREVENTS WATER FROM INFILTRATING IF IT'S A SLAB ALL OF THAT. SO THAT IS ALL PRETTY MUCH TREATED THE SAME. NOW THE CODE ALSO HAS SOME EXCEPTIONS, LIKE A, A WOOD DECK WITH SPACE BETWEEN. IT COUNTS AS 50%. AND THE CRITERIA MANUAL HAS KIND OF LITTLE, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW WHAT IF THIS SITUATION CLARIFICATIONS HERE AND THERE, BUT IN GENERAL, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT PREVENTS WATER FROM INFILTRATING, IT'S CONSIDERED IMPERVIOUS COVER. OKAY. I GUESS WHAT I'M STRUGGLING TO SEE IS THAT AT A HIGH LEVEL, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS SITE IS CLOSE TO BEING RECOVERABLE BECAUSE MOST OF IT COULD BE SEEN AS COMPACTED OR DEGRADING CONCRETE. SO IF WE WERE TO RESTORE IT FOR, YOU KNOW, FULL FUNCTION, IT'S VERY CLOSE NOW, BUT IT'S GOING TO HAVE LESS IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE FUTURE, BUT IT FEELS MORE PERMANENT AS IN IT'S IRRECOVERABLE. AND SO WE'RE MISSING AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOWER IT WHILE WE BEFORE THIS IRRECOVERABLE DEVELOPMENT GOES IN. YEAH. IT'S NOT OUR LAND THOUGH, AND WE HAVEN'T FORCED ANYONE TO, YOU KNOW, DO ANYTHING. SO YEAH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. AND DO WE LOOK AT WHEN CONSTRUCTION AND STAGING, IF YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT A CONSTRUCTION SITE, THEY GO IN AND HAMMER THE SOIL AND DO WE MEASURE OR MAKE SURE THAT THAT COMES BACK TO BEING PERVIOUS? WE DO HAVE THE COMPACTION STANDARDS. SO YEAH THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS IS, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S BEEN DRIVEN ON AND THEN BY, BY CONSTRUCTION, THEN YEAH, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DECOMPOSE IT BEFORE REVEGETATING. YEAH. THANK YOU. NO MORE VICE CHAIR BRISTOL. THAT SEEM TO GO [00:50:10] BY REALLY FAST. IT'S ALREADY BAD TO ME. HI. OKAY. YEAH, I'VE GOT SEVERAL QUESTIONS HERE. SO IF I'M READING THIS PLAN. RIGHT, THE SPORT COURT AREA IS THREE ACRES. IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS RIGHT HERE. YEAH. WHY DO WE. OH, OKAY. OKAY. I WAS LIKE, GOLLY, THAT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF SPORT COURT THERE. I FOUND AN AREA WE CAN REDUCE. OKAY. OKAY, GOOD. ALL RIGHT. AND IS THERE ANY. I MEAN, YOU'VE GOT THE COVERED AREA OVER HERE. WHY WOULDN'T THE SPORT COURT BE THE COVERED AREA? LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE GOT TWO AREAS THAT ARE SEPARATED, BUT ONE IS COVERED THE COVERED PLAY AREA AND THE OTHER IS THE SPORT COURT AREA. WHY NOT MAKE THOSE TOGETHER? I THINK IT HAS TO DO WITH THE FUNCTIONALITY. THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS. ONE IS A PLAY AREA FOR CHILDREN AND THE OTHER IS A IS A SPORT COURT PLAY AREA. I THINK IT IS MULCH UNDER THE COVERS MONKEY BARS AND AND SWINGS. OKAY. OH, AND JUST FOR THE ONLINE FOLKS, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND SPEAKING INTO THE MICROPHONE TOO. THANK YOU. YEAH. SORRY. YEAH. I THINK THEY'RE DESIGNED FOR DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS ALSO SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE DIFFERENT AGE CHILDREN USING DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE FACILITY AT DIFFERENT TIMES, AND ONE'S MORE OF A PLAY AREA. AND THE OTHER WOULD BE COURT GAMES. OKAY. HOW SO I'M GOING TO CROSS OFF EVERYTHING HERE ON, ON THIS PAGE THAT I HAVE. SO YOU SAID THERE'S SEVERAL DEAD TREES. ARE ANY OF THEM HAVE OAK WILT OR IS IT THEY JUST RANDOM DEAD TREES BUT NOT OAKS? I KNOW THAT I KNOW THAT THE FREEZE WAS A PROBLEM AND THAT WOULD NOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH OAK WILT. I DON'T KNOW THAT OAK HILL HAS OAK WILT HAS BEEN SPECIFIC. AS FAR AS I KNOW. THERE IS NO OAK WILT ON THE PROPERTY. OKAY. AND THAT THE DEAD TREES ARE MORE ASSOCIATED WITH THE FREEZE AND THE LONG TERM CONSEQUENCES OF THE DRY, HOT WEATHER THAT AUSTIN IS EXPERIENCING. OKAY. AND STAFF, IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING AS WELL THAT THERE'S NOT OAK WILT ON THE. WE DON'T HAVE AN ARBORIST HERE, BUT THERE WAS AN ARBORIST INVOLVED IN THE REVIEW AND THEY DID NOT FLAG IT. BUT YEAH, I MEAN, WE HAVE BEEN SEEING A LOT OF DIE OFF OF TREES FROM THE DROUGHT AND THE, THE FREEZE FOR SURE. OKAY. OKAY. SO ARE Y'ALL FAMILIAR AT ALL WITH THE NATURAL LEARNING INITIATIVE? THERE ARE OUTDOOR LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS AND ANY OF THOSE BEST PRACTICES. I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M NOT COMPLETELY UNFAMILIAR, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IN DETAIL. OKAY. THOSE REALLY PERTAIN TO YOU KNOW, NATURAL PLAY AREAS. THE BENEFITS OF NATURE PLAY OSCILLATING BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, HIGH ENERGY AND LOW ENERGY MOVEMENT THAT YOU KNOW, TOUCHING ONLY TOUCHING SURFACES THAT ARE NATURAL ELEMENTS AS WELL. AND THAT'S A BIG DRIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. SO WHAT ARE THEY CALLED? DISHES. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES. BUT YEAH. IT IS, IT'S ALSO IN THE WHAT IS IT CALLED. IT'S A FIVE STAR RATING. TO GET CHILDREN, YOU GET A FIVE STAR RATING IF YOU HAVE MORE TIME OUTDOORS WITH CHILDREN AND THEY'RE ENGAGED IN NATURE PLAY. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND DEFINITELY LOOKING INTO THAT. AND BECAUSE YOU MIGHT, YOU MIGHT ALSO REALLY START THINKING ABOUT THOSE HARD SURFACES THAT THEY'RE PLAYING ON. BECAUSE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY RECOMMEND THAT CHILDREN DON'T DO FOR, FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT. SO, AND THAT YOU CAN FIND INFORMATION ON THAT THROUGH THE TEXAS CHILDREN AND NATURE NETWORK. AND I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND YOU KNOW, REACHING OUT AND CONNECTING WITH THEM. THEY HAVE GREAT, GREAT EXAMPLES AROUND THE STATE NOW OF, OF HOW THEY'RE DOING THAT. AND I REALLY RECOMMEND THIS BECAUSE PART OF THAT IS ALSO THEN THAT THEY'RE CONNECTING WITH NATIVE PLANTS WITH, YOU KNOW, THEIR TREES. BIRDS, PLANTS, YOU KNOW THEY HAVE TO HAVE CONTACT WITH LIVING AND GROWING THINGS THROUGHOUT THEIR DAY. [00:55:06] SO THERE'S, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO SEE Y'ALL INTEGRATE SOME OF THAT INTO THERE AS WELL. WHERE THE WHERE THE WATER IS DISTRIBUTED. IS THAT AN AREA WHERE, I MEAN, CAN THE, THE KIDS GO BACK THERE? OR IS THAT JUST KIND OF OFF LIMITS AND IT'S JUST DOING ITS THING? I LET ME JUST CHECK BECAUSE I THINK I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS WITH THE APPLICANT, BUT I THINK CHILDREN ARE. YEAH, CHILDREN WOULD BE ALLOWED PROPERLY SUPERVISED, OF COURSE. YEAH. BUT THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO BOTH IN THE BACK AREA. AND THEN THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT NATURAL AREA BETWEEN SOUTHWEST PARKWAY AND THE PARKING LOT WITH THAT HERITAGE TREE. AND THAT WILL BE PART OF THE SITE THAT WILL BE ACCESSIBLE TO CHILDREN AND STAFF. THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE FENCED OFF. OKAY. OKAY. SO I DO AGREE WITH THE IDEA OF, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO, TRYING TO REDUCE THIS IMPERVIOUS COVER A LITTLE BIT MORE. I MEAN. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S WHETHER, YOU KNOW, REDUCING THE PARKING AREAS FROM 21 SPOTS TO 18. YOU KNOW, IS THERE OTHER AREAS THAT CAN BE SQUEEZED DOWN SO THAT IT'S LIKE 30% INSTEAD OF 33.5%? I JUST WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT MORE SQUEEZIN TO GET INTO THAT PROM DRESS. AND THEN DID THIS. SO THIS DID NOT GO FOR A ZONING CHANGE. IS THAT CORRECT OR DID IT GO FOR A ZONING CHANGE? I HAVEN'T BEEN PART OF THE ZONING. NO, I DON'T THINK THERE'S. OR. LESLIE. NO. OKAY. OKAY. AND IT WON'T. I TAKE IT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO. LESLIE LILLY, WATERSHED PROTECTION. THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED IN 2006. SO IT'S NOT A PART OF THIS EFFORT FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT TO HAPPEN, BUT THERE WAS A REZONING THAT OCCURRED AT THAT TIME. OKAY. AND THAT'S THE LAST AND ONLY REZONING THAT HAS OCCURRED ON THIS PROPERTY SINCE IT WAS ANNEXED INTO THE ZONING JURISDICTION. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. I THINK IN IN, AS PART OF THE BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDING DESIGN ELEMENTS. I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, YOU KNOW, ALL NATIVE PLANTS YOU KNOW, REALLY DRILLING DOWN TO LOOK AT WHAT ARE SOME OF THOSE, THOSE PLANTS THAT CAN REALLY BE SUSTAINABLE, THAT ARE ALSO GREAT FOR THE BIRDS. YEAH. ON THAT, ON THAT SPACE. SO YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S TEXAS PERSIMMONS OR TURK'S CAP FOR THE HUMMINGBIRDS YOU KNOW YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT DIFFERENT PLANTS LIKE THAT. OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, OUT IN THAT AREA LIVE OAKS AND CEDAR TREES ARE ALSO GREAT FOR THE BIRDS. AND, AND I DO SEE, AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IT SAYS THE CALIBER OF TREES FOR MITIGATION HAS BEEN INCREASED FROM 1IN TO 3 INCH, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY LIKE HOW MANY TREES ARE BEING PLANTED ON THERE. LESLIE LILLY WITH WATERSHED. THERE IS CURRENTLY PROPOSED 32 TREES THAT ARE BEING PLANTED ON SITE, AND THEY ARE GOING UP IN SIZE BY ONE INCH. OKAY. OKAY. THANKS FOR CLARIFYING THAT. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR BEING HERE. AND I WANT TO SAY ESPECIALLY THANK YOU FOR THE WAY YOU PRESENTED YOUR INFORMATION. I THINK IT WAS CLEAR THAT YOU KNEW THE AUDIENCE AND WHAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO US. AND NOT EVERY APPLICANT TAKES THE TIME TO DO THAT. SO I JUST REALLY FELT THAT FROM YOU ALL AND FELT YOUR CARE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE PLAN. SO THAT THAT MEANS A LOT. LET'S SEE. QUESTIONS. I'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU ALL OR CITY STAFF MORE ABOUT THE WATER QUALITY TREATMENT THAT'S PROPOSED. I DON'T HAVE A CLEAR PICTURE OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. IS IT A SUNKEN RAIN GARDEN? CAN YOU TELL ME MORE ABOUT THAT? YEAH. SO. WELL, AND MAYBE WOULD YOU LIKE TO ANSWER THAT OR. OKAY. I'LL TRY. NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS THE STORMWATER GETS CAPTURED ANY POND, AND THEN IT GETS PUMPED TO AN IRRIGATION FIELD WHERE IT IS IRRIGATED ONTO THE THE SOILS OR ONTO THE SOIL. AND THEN IT'S VEGETATED. AND SO THE COMBINATION OF PLANTS TAKING UP THE WATER, SLOWING EVERYTHING DOWN, AND THEN FILTERING THROUGH SOIL PREVENTS ANY RUNOFF FROM LEAVING THE SITE OR THE FIRST FLUSH OF THE MOST [01:00:08] DIRTY WATER FROM RUNNING THIS LEAVING THE SITE. AND SO ESSENTIALLY THERE'S NO LIKE THE NO POLLUTANTS LEAVE THE SITE. IT'S SO NOT TO GET TOO MUCH IN THE WEEDS, BUT THE PREVIOUS SOS WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS WE CALLED IT RETENTION RE IRRIGATION. AND THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT THEY'RE DOING HERE. WE HAVE MADE SOME UPDATES TO THAT STANDARD. THAT, YOU KNOW MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT THE MAINTENANCE OF THESE SYSTEMS A LITTLE BIT EASIER. SO IT'S NOT CALLED THAT ANYMORE, BUT IT'S CALLED SOMETHING LONGER THAT I CAN'T REMEMBER ANYMORE. SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION INFILTRATION JUST ROLLS OFF THE TONGUE. SO ANYWAY, IT'S YEAH, IT'S A, IT'S THE TYPE OF WATER QUALITY CONTROLS THAT WE HAVE ON THIS SIDE OF TOWN. SO IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY A SERIES OF STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURES, LIKE TWO, TWO IN A SERIES. THANK YOU. AND OF THE 14 OR SO POLLUTANTS THAT YOU MENTIONED ARE MONITORED, DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY SENSE OF WHICH ONES MAY BE LIKELY TO INCREASE OR DECREASE? AND HOW DO YOU EVALUATE? IS THERE KIND OF LIKE A NET YOU KNOW, DIFFERENCE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT LIKE SOME INCREASE HERE IS OKAY, IF IT'S MET WITH SOME DECREASE HERE, OR DO YOU THINK THE NATURE OF THE POLLUTANT STAYS THE SAME? WE SORRY, WHEN YOU SAID SOME INCREASE HERE AND SOME DECREASE THERE. THERE THERE ARE PROPOSALS THAT MAKE THOSE KINDS OF TRADE OFFS, BUT THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM. ALL THE ALL OF THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THE SITE WILL BE CAPTURED AND TREATED. SO WE'RE NOT OVERTREATING PART OF THE SITE TO ALLOW OTHER PARTS OF THE SITE TO AND WE CAN DO THAT BECAUSE THE SITE IS FLAT. SOMETIMES TOPOGRAPHY JUST DOESN'T LET YOU CAPTURE EVERYTHING. THE CITY, SO THE ORIGINAL SOS CITIZENS PASSED REFERENDUM REFERENDUM HAD 14 CATEGORIES OF POLLUTANTS AND SOME OF SOME OF THOSE ARE ADDRESSED THROUGH THINGS LIKE THE INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN. AND SOME OF THEM ARE ADDRESSED BY STORM RUNOFF TREATMENT. AND THIS SYSTEM MEETS ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CITY HAS ACTUALLY. AND WE DID JUST, I SAY WE, BUT IT WAS YOU. THE CITY DID JUST RE REDESIGN. SO THEY ARE CONTINUOUSLY LOOKING AT HOW DO WE ACHIEVE THAT. NO INCREASE IN AVERAGE ANNUAL POLLUTANT LOAD STANDARD. THAT'S THE LANGUAGE FROM THE REFERENDUM. AND WHAT'S THE TECHNOLOGY THAT WE PUT IN PLACE TO DO THAT. AND A KEY PIECE OF THAT TECHNOLOGY IS THIS SYSTEM WHERE YOU CAPTURE THE RUNOFF, BECAUSE IT CAN'T ALL SOAK IN FAST ENOUGH. YOU CAPTURE IT AND YOU HOLD IT FOR 72 HOURS, AND THEN YOU MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE ENOUGH AREA THAT YOU CAN SLOWLY RELEASE THAT STORM RUNOFF INTO THE SOIL AND LET IT INFILTRATE AND GET UPTAKEN BY THE PLANTS. SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY RUNOFF OF STORMWATER. YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY BYPASS OF WHAT WE CALL THE WATER QUALITY VOLUME. I'M SORRY, THIS IS KIND OF NERDY, BUT I LIKE IT. THAT'S THE KIND OF ANSWER I WANTED. AND I DO HAVE A FOLLOW UP, THOUGH, THAT IS HELPFUL. THANK YOU. BUT I'M CURIOUS TOO ABOUT THE NATURE OF POLLUTANTS. SO THE SITE BEING USED AS A MOBILE HOME OR AN EMPTY LOT FOR THE LAST HOWEVER MANY YEARS VERSUS GOING TO WHAT WILL NOW BE A CHILDREN'S DAYCARE CENTER WITH A PARKING LOT AND CARS. WILL THE INCREASE PARKING ON SITE NOW, YOU KNOW, IMPACT THE LEVELS OF CERTAIN POLLUTANTS THAT WE EXPECT TO SEE. SO THAT'S MORE WHAT I'M CURIOUS. AND, AND THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL DESIGN TAKES INTO ACCOUNT IT ACTUALLY THE STANDARD NO INCREASE IN AVERAGE ANNUAL POLLUTANT LOAD. YOU WILL SAY, WELL, WHAT'S THE STANDARD? NO INCREASE OVER WHAT. BUT THAT STANDARD IS AN UNDEVELOPED SITE. SO YOU START WITH HOW MUCH POLLUTANTS WOULD COME FROM THE SITE IF THERE WAS NOTHING ON IT, AN UNDEVELOPED SITE. AND THEN YOU LOOK AT, OH, WE'RE GOING TO PUT 33.5% IMPERVIOUS COVER AND IT'S GOING TO BE ROADWAYS AND BUILDINGS. AND SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR SYSTEM HAS CAPACITY TO ACHIEVE THAT STANDARD FOR THE SPECIFIC IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THE SITE. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN MAINTENANCE FOR THAT SYSTEM. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S CONTINUOUSLY MONITORED BY WATERSHED? YES. CONTINUOUS. SORRY. YEAH. IT'S NOT CONTINUOUS. NO. YEAH. BUT EVERYONE WHO HAS ONE OF THESE SYSTEMS, STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURES IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE HAS TO HAVE AN OPERATING PERMIT [01:05:01] THAT IS RENEWED ANNUALLY. AND THEY DO GET REGULARLY INSPECTED. OKAY, COOL. THANK YOU. AND THEN I AM CURIOUS TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THE TREES. SO HOW MANY TREES ARE BEING REMOVED FROM THE SITE AND WHAT SPECIES ARE THEY? THERE IS A LONG ANSWER TO THAT IN THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. IT'S LIKE 530 632 32 INCH CALIBER INCHES OF TREES ARE BEING REMOVED. WHICH INCLUDES WHAT RICK AND INCLUDES. WE ARE MITIGATING THE DEAD TREES. I'M SORRY. HAVE A SENSE OF THAT. YEAH, I DIDN'T I DON'T KNOW IF I MISSED IT IN THE BACKUP, BUT I DIDN'T SEE A TREE LIST THERE ON THOSE TABLES. YEAH. I DON'T SEE IT. IF Y'ALL WANT TO TAKE SOME TIME TO LOOK THAT UP, THAT'S FINE. IN TERMS OF MITIGATION, IS IT 100% MITIGATION OR QUOTE UNQUOTE, OVER MITIGATION THROUGH REPLANTING ON THE SITE? OR IS THERE ANY PAYMENT IN LIEU INTO THE URBAN FOREST FUND? THERE'S A BIG PAYMENT INTO THE URBAN FOREST FUND. WE'RE PUTTING 32 TREES BACK. 32 TIMES FOUR IS ABOUT 128. AND WE'RE MITIGATING SOMETHING LIKE 600. SO THERE'S MORE THAN $100,000 THAT WILL GO INTO THE TREE MITIGATION. THE CITY'S TREE MITIGATION FUND. OKAY, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THE NUMBERS THAT YOU JUST SAID. SO YOU SAID YOU'RE NOT SURE HOW MANY TREES ARE BEING REMOVED, BUT YOU THINK IT WAS 623 CALIPER INCHES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BEING REMOVED. WE'RE GOING TO GET YOU THE RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. LOOK AT THIS. RIGHT ON THE PHONE. YEAH. WE ARE SORRY. WE ARE REMOVING 902IN. 902.5IN. WE ARE MITIGATING 128IN. AND WE ARE THE CREDIT IS FOR 525IN. AND THOSE, THESE NUMBERS, WE ACTUALLY HAD A CONVERSATION WITH CITY STAFF, LIKE WITHIN A FEW HOURS BEFORE THIS MEETING. SO IT'S WE HAD, WE, THE ARBORIST HAD CALCULATED THE MITIGATION ON SITE BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE ARE GOING TO PUT IN FOUR INCH TREES. CITY STAFF ASKED US TO PAY ADDITIONAL INTO THE FUND BASED ON AN ASSUMPTION THAT OUR FORAGE TREES ARE ONLY THREE INCHES. SO WE WILL BE OVER. WE WILL BE OVER. MITIGATING THROUGH THE COMBINATION OF PUTTING FORAGE TREES ON SITE, 32 OF THEM, BUT PAYING INTO THE FUND AS IF THOSE FOUR INCH TREES WERE THREE INCH TREES. I THINK I UNDERSTAND, SO JUST DOING ROUGH MATH. SO YES, PLANTING 128IN ON SITE, MITIGATING OR PAYING INTO THE FUND FOR 525IN. SO ABOUT 20% OF THE TREES ARE GOING TO BE PLANTED ON SITE, AND 80% IS PAYMENT IN LIEU. OKAY, THAT SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT. OKAY. YEAH, THAT TO ME IS SIGNIFICANT. I KNOW IT'S AN ONGOING CONVERSATION THAT WE HAVE AROUND THE MERIT OF PAYING INTO A FUND, LOSING MATURE TREES, THE THE RATE OF LOSS THAT WE HAVE FOR NEW NEW PLANTING. THAT IS THAT IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. DO YOU HAVE THE SPECIES LIST FOR THE TREES THAT ARE BEING REMOVED OR WE IT IS IN THE SITE PLANS. I'M GOING TO HAND IT BACK TO THE ENGINEER WHO SEEMS TO BE VERY GOOD AT FINDING THINGS ON A PHONE. OH MY GOODNESS, I'D NEVER BE ABLE TO DO THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE SO YOUNG, RICK. OKAY. WELL, I THINK, YEAH, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD DEFINITELY ASK TO ADJUST THAT RATIO SOME JUST KNOWING THE LOW SURVIVAL RATE THAT WE HAVE OF, OF TREES, AS YOU ALL ARE SEEING PARTIALLY ON THE SITE ALREADY TO PLANT NEW TREES, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S CLOSER TO LIKE 10% THAT SURVIVE AFTER THE FIRST FEW YEARS. SO, UNFORTUNATELY, NEW PLANTINGS DON'T ALWAYS TRANSLATE INTO MATURE TREES. SO YOUR REQUEST IS THAT THAT NUMBER 32 BE INCREASED. YES PLEASE. YEAH. THANK YOU. AND THEN I'D LOVE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THIS ELEVATED BOARDWALK TO PRESERVE THE HERITAGE TREES. THAT SOUNDED INTERESTING. YEAH. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT PAGE ON THE PLANS AND ALSO JUST WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE SITE PLANS, THERE IS A TABLE ON THE SITE PLANS THAT TELLS YOU EVERY SINGLE TREE AND HOW BIG IT IS AND PUTS WHAT SPECIES IT IS AND WHICH ONES ARE GOING TO BE REMOVED. SO THAT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE TO YOU ON THE SITE PLAN. [01:10:01] THE ELEVATED BOARDWALK SPECIFIES THAT THE PIER, THE IT WILL BE ELEVATED ON PIERS AND THAT THE PIER LOCATIONS HAVE TO BE ADJUSTED. THEY HAVE TO BE FIRST OF ALL, ER SPADED, WHICH IS A TECHNIQUE THAT IS LESS HARMFUL TO TREE ROOTS THAN IF YOU GET IN THERE WITH A SHOVEL. SO IT HAS TO BE AIR SPADED. AND THEN IF THEY ENCOUNTER A ROOT THAT I THINK IT'S 1.25IN OR LARGER THAN THEY HAVE TO SHIFT THAT PEER TO ANOTHER LOCATION SO THAT THEY CAN LEAVE THAT NICE BIG ROOT FOR THE TREE. AND THEY'RE NOT NOT DISRUPTING THAT. GREAT. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. THAT SOUNDS GREAT. I HAVE JUST TWO OTHER QUESTIONS. I DO HAVE A FOLLOW UP ON THE POROUS CONCRETE IDEA. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT IT WOULD STILL EQUATE TO IMPERVIOUS COVER. SO THAT WOULDN'T REDUCE THE LIMIT THERE. BUT ARE THERE ANY OTHER BENEFITS THAT WE POTENTIALLY GET FROM USING POROUS CONCRETE OVER TRADITIONAL CONCRETE, IF NOT FOR JUST A PERCENTAGE IMPERVIOUS COVER POTENTIALLY FOR PEDESTRIAN USES? OVER THE RECHARGE THOUGH ZONE THOUGH I, I WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE T, C, E, TCDC WOULD ALLOW IT? I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE. MAYBE. RICK, YOU KNOW, IF IF YOU DON'T KNOW. BECAUSE THEY ALSO HAVE STANDARDS FOR THE RECHARGE ZONE THAT REQUIRE. SO I GUESS WHAT, IT WOULD BE MORE DIFFICULT TO CAPTURE THAT RUNOFF FROM THE PERVIOUS PAVEMENT AND PUSH IT TO THE SOS POND. I THINK THAT IS ONE ISSUE THAT WE WOULD RUN INTO. AND ALSO IT'S JUST SORT OF, I FEEL LIKE A LITTLE BIT LIKE IT'S A LITTLE GREENWASHING. SOMETIMES IT MAKES PEOPLE FEEL LIKE IT'S DOING SOMETHING WHEN IT'S NOT REALLY DOING WHAT WE WANT IT TO DO. OKAY. THANK YOU. DID YOU GET AN ANSWER ON THE SPECIES? I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE. I WAS ASKING A DIFFERENT I WAS ASKING A DIFFERENT QUESTION ABOUT I WANTED TO KNOW ALSO BECAUSE WE HAVE ALSO TALKED ABOUT GEO BLOCK AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE PAVEMENT. IT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT THEY SOMETIMES PUT IN FIRE LANES AND COULD THAT. IS THERE ANY PARKING? WE HEAR YOU. WE HAVE HEARD YOU THAT YOU WOULD LIKE LESS IMPERVIOUS COVER. AND WE WOULD TOO. AND SO WE HAVE. SO I'LL JUST I'LL JUST PUT ON THE LINE WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT CAN ARE THERE ANY PARKING SPOTS THAT COULD BE REPLACED WITH GEO BLOCK. THAT'S WHAT YOU USE IN A FIRE LANE. THE OTHER THING THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS THE CITY HAS ASKED FOR A 25 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY. RICK, WHO HAS DONE A LOT OF ENGINEERING DESIGN, THINKS THAT THAT PARKING MIGHT WORK WITH A NARROWER DRIVEWAY AND MAYBE EVEN 20FT. AND WE ARE WILLING TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT. WE HAVE ONE MORE THING. DIDN'T WE HAVE ONE MORE THING? WHERE WE ARE, WE ARE WE, WE HEAR YOU. THAT YOU SIDEWALKS. INTERNAL SIDEWALKS. SOME OF THOSE MIGHT BE THERE BECAUSE CITY STAFF WANTS THEM. AND WE THINK THAT MAYBE WE DON'T NEED QUITE SO MUCH INTERNAL SIDEWALK. AND SO WE COULD LOOK AT THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN REALLY ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU TONIGHT, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE US TO TALK WITH THE CITY STAFF AND SEE WHAT WHAT CAN BE DONE. YEAH. THAT'S GOING TO MAKE THEM BOTH HAPPY AND FEEL LIKE THEY'RE APPROVING A PLAN THAT IS SAFE. AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE BUILDING BURN DOWN BECAUSE THE FIRE LANE WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH. YES. RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU FOR HEARING US AND GETTING CREATIVE AND ALREADY THINKING ABOUT SOLUTIONS. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. AND THEN THE LAST THING I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, WHICH I THINK COMMISSIONER MORRISON BROUGHT UP, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR ON IT. SO RESIDENTIAL BEING SHIFTED OVER TO COMMERCIAL USAGE THAT IS SPECIFIC TO THIS SITE PLAN, BUT NOT THE SITE ITSELF. IS THAT CORRECT? OR MAYBE YOU WERE ASKING SOMETHING ELSE ABOUT SITE PLAN VERSUS IN PERPETUITY. BUT THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN, IN PUBLIC COMMENT THAT I JUST WANT TO HAVE MORE CLARIFICATION ON. OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IF THEY WANT TO COME IN WITH A NEW SITE PLAN, WE'LL BE BACK IN FRONT OF YOU ASKING FOR A NEW AMENDMENT. WE'LL BE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS AGAIN. SO OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE ARE NOT DOING A BAIT AND SWITCH, THAT YOU ARE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS REFERENDUM THAT IS TIED TO THIS SPECIFIC PROPOSAL. [01:15:02] AND TO ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE, WHEN THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN, THE SITE PLAN NUMBER WILL BE INCLUDED AND REFERENCED IN THE ORDINANCE. SO THAT WILL, YOU KNOW, BE KIND OF A LEGALLY BINDING THING THAT SAYS THIS SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT IS TIED TO THIS CASE NUMBER FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. OH, YES. COMMISSIONER BREMER. YEAH. THANK YOU. THIS QUESTION FOR STAFF. WE'VE APPROVED SOME ITEMS OUT IN THIS DIRECTION BEFORE. OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, I'VE BEEN TRYING TO LOOK THEM UP AND I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO LOCATE THEM. DO YOU RECALL ANY OF THESE? WHAT? THEY WERE SPECIFICALLY ON 290. THERE WERE A COUPLE WE APPROVED. AND THEN THERE I BELIEVE THERE'S ANOTHER ONE ON SOUTHWEST PARKWAY. I CAN'T SEEM TO ACCESS THE SYSTEM. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BECAUSE I CAN'T OR IT SEEMS TO BE GIVING ME SOME SORT OF A SYSTEM ERROR. LESLIE. WATERSHED PROTECTION. I BELIEVE SOME OF THE CASES WE HAVE DISCUSSED AND BROUGHT BEFORE YOU WERE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AMENDMENTS. SO NOT SITE SPECIFIC. SOS AMENDMENTS. AND I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH SOME OF THOSE THAT WE'VE BROUGHT FORWARD, BUT MAYBE THE LAST ONE THAT WAS CONSIDERED BEFORE THIS COMMISSION WAS SUNSET RIDGE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AMENDMENT, MAYBE ABOUT A YEAR, YEAR AGO. I THINK THAT'S THE LAST ONE THAT WAS PRETTY CLOSE BY. THAT WAS THE REASON I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT, WAS I WAS WONDERING WHAT WE MIGHT HAVE APPROVED OR NOT APPROVED, AS THE CASE MAY BE, THAT MIGHT BE RELATED TO THIS AT ALL. IF THAT'S THE ONE YOU REMEMBER, CAN YOU? THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AMENDMENTS ACTUALLY HAVE A ARE MUCH MORE PERMISSIVE IN WHAT IS ALLOWED BECAUSE THEY ARE REGULATED UNDER A DIFFERENT STANDARD AND HAVE A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT ALLOWS THEM, DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY ARE, MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER OR MORE DISTURBANCE THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN A SITE LIKE THIS THAT CAN PRETTY MUCH ONLY PURSUE AN SOS AMENDMENT. YEAH. SO OUR LAW DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AMENDMENTS OR ZONING MECHANISM. AND SO A LOT OF THE, FOR THAT ONE, WHAT I RECALL IS A LOT OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPERIORITY ELEMENTS, WE CAN SAY THAT HAD BEEN RECOMMENDED BY BOTH STAFF AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WERE STRIPPED OUT BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT ZONING RELATED. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, THAT ONE IS PROBABLY NOT A GREAT ONE TO TO COMPARE WITH THIS ONE. THIS ONE WOULD HAVE BECAUSE IT IS AN ORDINANCE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN MAKE IT WHATEVER WE WANT. THAT COUNCIL WILL, YOU KNOW, APPROVE OR NOT APPROVE. THERE'S MORE FLEXIBILITY THERE. SO WE CAN ADD MORE TO THIS SORT OF REQUEST AND THEN A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AMENDMENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I JUST COULDN'T FIND THE THINGS BECAUSE WHATEVER THE REASON IS. BUT ANYWAY, THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY. WITH THAT I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO MOVED. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER REIMER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HANDS. THAT IS UNANIMOUS. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE GO ON TO A MOTION? OKAY. WITH THAT WE WILL HEAR A MOTION. THIS IS RECOMMENDATION NUMBER 2026 0818-002 COLON 5811 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY. SITE SPECIFIC. SOS AMENDMENT C TWO ZERO DASH 2026 DASH 008. WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE APPLICANT. THOMPSON LAND ENGINEERING HAS SUBMITTED A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE. CHAPTER 28, SUBCHAPTER A, ARTICLE 13. SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE AS MINIMALLY REQUIRED TO ADDRESS DEVELOPMENT AT THE SITE LOCATED AT 5811 SOUTHWEST PARKWAY. AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE SITE IS LOCATED IN BARTON CREEK WATERSHED, THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE, AND COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT. AND WHEREAS, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS THE SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE REQUEST FOR A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE. CHAPTER 28, SUBCHAPTER A, ARTICLE 13 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. [01:20:05] STAFF CONDITIONS. SMALL REDUCTION IN IMPERVIOUS COVER FROM 33.9% TO 33.5% SOS NON DEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR THE ENTIRE SITE. AUSTIN ENERGY GREEN BUILDING RATING OF TWO STAR BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDING DESIGN. INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT. NO ARTIFICIAL TURF. INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE COMPLIES WITH THE HILL COUNTRY ROADWAY REGULATIONS. TWO ELECTRIC CHARGING STATIONS. CALIPER INCHES OF TREES FOR MITIGATION HAS INCREASED BY ONE INCH 3IN TO 4IN. ALL DISTURBED AREAS ARE SHOWN TO BE REVEGETATED WITH 6O9S LANDSCAPE PLANTS. 100% NATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION CONDITIONS WORK WITH THE TEXAS CHILDREN AND NATURE NETWORK TO INCORPORATE BEST PRACTICES FOR OUTDOOR LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS, INCLUDING THE USE OF PLAYSCAPES MADE EXCLUSIVELY OF NATURAL MATERIALS AS PART OF THE BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDING DESIGN PACKAGE. USE NATIVE PLANTS THAT FEED OR ATTRACT BIRDS SUCH AS RED TEXAS, MALLOW, TEXAS PERSIMMON AND AMERICAN BEAUTYBERRY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES TO 18. OVERALL REDUCTION OF ON SITE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE TO 25%. NARROWING OF THE DRIVEWAY TO 20FT. INCREASE OF ON SITE TREE PLANTING TO 40 OR MORE TREES WITH THE REST OF THE MITIGATION PAID, AS INDICATED PER STAFF CONDITIONS. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BREMER. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SULLIVAN. OH, SORRY. THANK YOU. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I WOULD LIKE TO. ONE THING THAT. OH. COULD YOU TURN ON YOUR MICROPHONE? SURE THING. ONE OTHER THING. THE APPLICANT MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE DOING BUT DIDN'T COME THROUGH IN. THIS WAS DARK SKIES. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE ADD THAT TO THE CONDITIONS. INASMUCH AS THE APPLICANT MENTIONED THAT THAT WAS PART OF THEIR DESIGN. OKAY. THING IS, THE LANGUAGE INCLUSION OF DARK SKY BUILDING PRACTICES SOUND GOOD? YEAH. OKAY. GREAT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SO ONE THING JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN WE PUT BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDINGS DESIGN THAT DOES INCORPORATE DARK SKY. THE APPLICANT MADE THAT MORE CLEAR THAT THAT THERE'S TWO COMPONENTS OF BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDING DESIGN. SO I THINK THEY DID A GREAT JOB LIKE EXPLAINING THAT THAT INCLUDES TWO COMPONENTS. BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDING DESIGN IS, IS THE PACKAGE OF BOTH OF THOSE THINGS TOO. DOESN'T HURT TO REITERATE IT, BUT JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S CLEAR. THANK YOU. SO THOUGHTS. DOES THAT SATISFY DEPARTMENT OF REDUNDANCY DEPARTMENT. SO. OKAY. YEAH WE CAN THE REST OF THEM ARE TOO YOUNG TO LAUGH AT THAT. YEAH. WELL, WHAT CAN I SAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER ADDITIONS, AMENDMENTS, INCLUSIONS. AND ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT INCLUSION. THE LANGUAGE WOULD BE INCLUSION OF DARK SKY BUILDING PRACTICES. HEARING NO OBJECTIONS. THAT'S NOW INCORPORATED. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. SO WITH THAT WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. LET'S GO AHEAD AND GO TO A VOTE. COMMISSIONER CHANG SET. FOR COMMISSIONER FLEURY. FOR COMMISSIONER LUKE, FOR COMMISSIONER MORRISON, FOR COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN, FOR COMMISSIONER BRIMER FOR VICE CHAIR BRISTOL. AND I'M ALSO FOR WITH THAT MOTION IS UNANIMOUS AND IT PASSES. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NEXT WE'RE GOING TO GO ON TO WORKING GROUP UPDATES. [3. Update from the Artificial Turf Working Group regarding future meeting dates. ] ITEM NUMBER THREE UPDATE FROM THE ARTIFICIAL TURF WORKING GROUP REGARDING FUTURE MEETING DATES. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. ABOUT THE TURF GRASS. ABOUT THE GREEN ARTIFICIAL TURF. YES. YEAH. WELL I ONLY SAW THE TWO DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY WORKED ON, SO I DIDN'T PREPARE ANYTHING FOR THIS. NO. THAT'S FINE. SO THE LANGUAGE SAYS REGARDING FUTURE MEETING DATES. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY DATES THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE AND IF YOU DON'T, THEN THAT'S FINE. WELL, YEAH, BUT I WILL FORWARD THEM TO THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE WORKGROUP. OKAY. PERFECT. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY NOTES ON THAT? ALL RIGHT. SO ITEM NUMBER FOUR UPDATE FROM THE DOG'S HEAD WORKING GROUP REGARDING THE MEETING ON AUGUST 6TH, [4. Update from the Dog’s Head Working Group regarding the meeting on August 6, 2026, and future meeting dates. ] 2026 AND FUTURE MEETING DATES. VICE CHAIR. BRISTOL. RIGHT. SO YES, WE'VE ACTUALLY MET A COUPLE TIMES. JUST TALKING TO MYSELF OVER HERE. YES, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE TIMES. WE MET ON AUGUST 6TH AND THEN WE ALSO MET ON MONDAY THE 17TH. AND SO WE'VE HAD THE TWO MEETINGS AND THEY'VE GONE VERY WELL. IN THE LAST MEETING WE DECIDED TO FORM A SUBCOMMITTEE, WITHIN THE WORKING GROUP TO MEET WITH [01:25:04] KIND OF BROADEN OUR SCOPE OF PEOPLE THAT WE ARE INVITING INTENTIONALLY TO THE WORKING GROUP. AND SO THAT'S MEMBERS OF ENDEAVOR AND THEIR LEGAL DEPARTMENT THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND CITY STAFF AS WELL. SO THAT MEETING WILL TAKE PLACE ON AUGUST 25TH. AND THEN I'LL HAVE AN UPDATE AFTER THAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER NOTES OR COMMENTS ON THAT BEFORE WE MOVE ON? OKAY. NEXT WE'RE GOING TO GO TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. [FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS] PARDON ME CHAIR. YES. SO IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT REIMER MADE AN AMENDMENT TO ADD THE DARK SKY LINE. COULD WE PLEASE GET A SECOND FOR THAT TOO? YEAH, I DID THE OH. WHAT'S IT CALLED? YOU'RE THE EXPERT? YEAH, I SAID, ANY OBJECTIONS? ANY OBJECTIONS? THAT'S. HOW. IS THAT NOT SUFFICIENT SOMETIMES. THAT IS PART OF ROBERT'S RULES THAT SHE CAN ASK IF THERE'S ANY OBJECTIONS. AND IF THERE ARE NONE, THEN IT BECOMES PART OF THE MOTION. YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST. AND I DID FOLLOW UP WITH THE CLERK'S OFFICE, AND THEY ASKED THAT WE GET A SECOND FOR THAT. OKAY, I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY, OKAY. SECONDED BY SULLIVAN. LET'S JUST DO A REVOTE REALLY FAST. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ADDING INCLUSION OF DARK SKY BUILDINGS TO THE RECOMMENDATION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HANDS. AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS AND HAS BEEN INCORPORATED. DO WE NEED TO REDO THE FULL VOTE AGAIN ON THE RECOMMENDATION? NO, THAT WAS GREAT. THANK YOU. COOL. NO WORRIES. GOOD TO KNOW. ALL RIGHT. ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? WELL, WE WELL, I WAS GOING TO SAY WE WANTED TO HEAR ABOUT THE CITY COUNCIL, WHAT THEY DID ABOUT THE DOG'S HEAD. VOTE. OH. HAVE AN UPDATE FROM CITY STAFF. RIGHT. OKAY. REGARDING THE JULY 23RD VOTE. YEAH, I CAN BRING AN UPDATE AT THE NEXT MEETING. GREAT. AND THEN I THINK WE'RE ALSO HAVING AN UPDATE ABOUT THE REGULATORY PLAN LATER IN THE MONTH. IS THAT RIGHT? YEAH, I THINK TENTATIVELY IT'S THE SECOND ONE IN SEPTEMBER. BUT PENDING DISCUSSIONS IT MAY CHANGE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BRIMER. NO, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT WITH REGARD TO THE BRIEFING ON THE DOG'S HEAD THING, THERE WAS A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON IN THE COUNCIL MEETING. IT WAS HARD TO KEEP TRACK OF WHAT COUNCIL DID. AND MY THOUGHT WAS, AND I THINK COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN WAS THE SAME THOUGHT IS YOU COULDN'T TELL WHAT WAS GOING ON. AND WE'D LIKE FOR YOU TO KIND OF SCORECARD THE WHOLE THING AND SUMMARIZE IT. I'LL DO MY BEST. I WAS NOT AT THE MEETING. SO I'LL BE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, COMPARING AND CONTRASTING THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE. AND SO I'LL DO WHAT I CAN TO, TO SHED SOME LIGHT ONTO THAT. YEAH, YEAH. SO THAT'S WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR TO BE A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING. AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT I HAD IN MIND. SO FOR THAT AGENDA ITEM, I'M GOING TO SAY I'M HEARING SULLIVAN PROPOSED IT AND SOUNDS LIKE BRIMER SECONDING IT. SO WE CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. GREAT. AND THEN VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL. I'D LIKE TO HAVE AN UPDATE ON THE, THE COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION AROUND THE DATA CENTERS. AND, AND SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. I, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY SENT IT TO ME TODAY AND I DID NOT HAVE TIME TO READ IT. BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO KNOW AND TALK ABOUT. I'LL SECOND THAT. SO ARE YOU ASKING FOR A STAFF PRESENTATION ON THE RESOLUTION OR WHAT WAS THE REQUEST, THE ITEM, WHAT WOULD BE, I WOULD SAY STAFF PRESENTATION SO THAT IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ABOUT OR, YOU KNOW, WEIGH IN ON. CAN WE DO THAT? I'LL SEE WHAT STAFF WOULD BE AVAILABLE AND MAKE THE REQUEST. WE'LL PASS THAT ON. I WOULD, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S NO STAFF AVAILABLE, I'D LIKE TO HAVE A COMMISSION DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT WE RECOMMENDED BACK ON APRIL 1ST AND WHAT COUNCIL IS CONSIDERING. YEAH. WELL, WE'LL REACH OUT TO RELEVANT STAFF AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO. OKAY. I WILL NOTE CITY COUNCIL IS VOTING ON THIS NEXT THURSDAY. SO OUR WINDOW TO INFLUENCE IS IT, YOU KNOW, HAS PASSED, BUT WE DID ALREADY PASS A RECOMMENDATION. SO I THINK ANY UPDATE FROM CITY STAFF WOULD BE THE RESULTS FROM THAT VOTE COMPARED TO WHAT WE PASSED. YEAH. YOU CAN ALWAYS WEIGH IN AGAIN. TRUE. WE ALWAYS GET OPINIONS. YEAH. VICE CHAIR BRISTOL. I'M GOING TO GET THE WORDS WRONG, BUT THERE WAS ALSO THE COUNCIL WAS LOOKING AT THE HEAVY WATER USERS. AND WHO, YOU KNOW, OUR BIGGEST OFFENDERS LIST OR WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT, LIKE, YOU KNOW BUT I WOULD LIKE A, SOME SORT OF UPDATE ON THAT AS WELL. [01:30:04] I'LL SECOND THAT. I THINK IT'S THE LARGE LOAD WATER USERS. YEAH. THAT'S THE WORD I'VE HEARD. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. OKAY. HEARING NONE. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO ADJOURNMENT? ANY OBJECTIONS? HEARING NONE. THE TIME. TIME IS 7:31 P.M. AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. HELLO. HOW ARE YOU? * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.