[00:00:05]
AND REMEMBER COMMISSIONERS, WHEN YOUR CAMERA IS OFF, YOU WERE CONSIDERED AUSTIN DIOCESE.
SO MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION PRESENT.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE PANEL SEXIST STUCK UP.
THERE'S PEOPLE AT HOME WATCHING.
YOU DON'T THINK THEY'RE STARTING AGAIN AS IN IT'S BEEN STUCK AT FIVE 58 FOR AWHILE OR YES.
LET'S WAIT FOR AMY TO GIVE US A THUMBS UP.
THEY USUALLY CAN YOU ALL ARE LIVE AND READY TO GO RIGHT NOW.
HAVING DETERMINED THAT WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT CALLS THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD
[Reading of the Agenda]
AND READ THE CONSENT AGENDA WITHOUT SCREWING IT UP HOPEFULLY.AND UH, PAY ATTENTION GUYS CAUSE THIS, UM, THERE'VE BEEN SOME SHIFTS AND SOME, UH, SOME INTERESTING THINGS THERE.
SO, UM, I OF NUMBER ONE, UH, NPA 2019 ZERO ZERO 22.023 OR FIVE SOUTH CONGRESS BOULEVARD.
UH, DISTRICT NINE IS SET FOR INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT BY STAFF.
UH, I DON'T REMEMBER TO SEE EIGHT 1489 OH 3.0 TO THREE OH FIVE SOUTH CONGRESS.
DISTRICT NINE IS INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT BY STAFF.
ITEM THREE MPA 20 1601 TWO OH ONE S H NICKELS CROSSING ROAD SMART HOUSING DISTRICT TWO UM, AND C 14 2017 OR ONE ZERO S H NICKELS CROSSING ROAD, SMART HOUSING DISTRICT TWO STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JULY OF 14.
UM, ITEM NUMBER FIVE, MPA 2019 UH, OVER 15.01 50 10 AND 5,102 HEFLIN LANE.
DISTRICT ONE IS STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO JUNE 9TH.
UM, I'M NUMBER SIX IN PA 20 1901 SIX SHADY LANE MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JUNE 23RD I HAVE NUMBER SEVEN.
SEE 1420 1909 EIGHT SHADY LANE MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE.
THERE'S A NEIGHBORHOOD POST FILMING ON THAT UNTIL JUNE 23RD ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, UH, SEE 1420 2007 2001 GUADELOUPE STREET.
DISTRICT NINE HAS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JUNE 9TH.
ITEM NUMBER NINE, SEE 14 2019 OR ONE OH EIGHT PARKER HOUSE.
DISTRICT NINE HAS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONE UNTIL JUNE 23RD ITEM NUMBER 10, UH, 52 OH I'M SORRY.
SEE 14 2020 ZERO, ZERO ONE, THREE, S H E MARTIN LUTHER KING, REZONING DISTRICT ONE IS A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONE UNTIL JUNE 9TH.
UM, THIS IS THE ONE THAT'S INTERESTING.
COMMISSIONERS, UH, ITEM NUMBER 11 C 14 2020
UM, THERE WAS A, UH, APPLICATION FROM LRN P TO SEE US.
ONE MP, UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAYING.
UH, IT IS, UH, THERE IS A STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THERE'S BEEN A LAST MINUTE REQUEST, UH, FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD POSTPONEMENT BY A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT IS, UM, IT'S NOT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS BOUNDARIES.
UM, AND UH, THE NEAREST HOUSE IS ABOUT 300 FEET FROM THE CORNER OF THE PROPERTY BY I CAN TELL.
SO THAT MEANS THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS NOTICED.
UM, BUT WE HAD A LAST MINUTE, UM, UH, REQUEST AS IN LIKE FOUR 55 OR SOMETHING TO, UH, TO POSTPONE THIS.
UM, SO I AM OFFERING IT FOR CONSENT AND UM, YOU CAN CHEW ON IT AND IF SOMEONE WANTS TO PULL IT OR DISCUSS IT.
UH, WHEN I FINISHED READING THE CONSENT AGENDA, WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT THEN.
UM, I HAVE A NUMBER, 12 C 14 H, UH, AND THEN JUST REFER THAT AS OFFER FOR CONSENT.
UM, ITEM NUMBER 12
SEE I KNOW 14 PRELIMINARY PLANS.
C H J 20 1801 OH FIVE EASTERN PARK THREE.
DISTRICT TWO IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
14 C A 2019 ZERO ZERO FIVE 1.08 WHICH IS DEAN TERRORISTS RE SUBDIVISION OF LOT FOUR.
BLOCK D, DISTRICT FOUR OFFERED
[00:05:01]
FOR CONSENT.SEE EIGHT ZERO FOUR ZERO ZERO FOUR 3.0 9.3 A S H BERKMAN TOWER VIEW SUBDIVISION DISTRICT NINE THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
I DON'T NUMBER 16 SPC 2019 ZERO FIVE NINE ZERO EIGHT 76 RAINY STREET CUP.
UM, THIS IS AN APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 14TH.
THIS WAS THE ONE THAT GOT ALL THE ATTENTION.
SO THAT HAS AN APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT TO JULY 14.
UM, ITEM NUMBER 17 AND 17 THROUGH 19 ARE THE OTHER RAINY STREETS.
NUMBER 17 SPC 2020 ZERO ZERO SEVEN THREE 75 RAINY CUP.
I HAD A NUMBER 18 SPC
I HAD A NUMBER SPC 2020 ZERO ZERO SEVEN TWO 82 RAINEY'S DUP DISTRICT NINE OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
UM, AND UH, LAST ITEM NUMBER 20 UH, SITE PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE ONLY.
DISTRICT THREE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT AND IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, I'M ALSO OFFERING UP THE UM, THE MINUTES FROM THE PRIOR MEETING FOR CONSENT.
DOES ANYBODY WANT TO CALL OR DISCUSS ANY ITEMS ON ADRIAN? GO AHEAD ANDREW, IF WE CAN ALSO ADD ITEM A.
OKAY, YOU, LET'S GO TO THE AGENDA.
UM, I HAD A NUMBER C TO UH, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER INITIATING AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE TITLE 25 RELATING TO SIGN REGULATIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNIVERSITY OVERLAY.
DISTRICT A IS OFFERED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
[Consent Agenda]
THAT WISH TO PULL HER DISCUSS ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.I GOT A, WE'RE GOING TO DO HANDS SO I'M GOING TO GO WITH COMMISSIONER SEEGER FIRST AND THEN COMMISSIONER SHIT.
AM I BACK ON NOW? YOU'RE GOOD.
I HAVE A QUESTION ON THE 11 WHERE THERE WAS A LIGHT REQUEST FOR A POSTPONEMENT.
UH, DID THE UH, PRIMARY NEIGHBORHOOD OBJECT.
ARE THEY ASKING FOR THE POSTPONEMENT AT ALL? OKAY.
I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD AND OFFER DETAILS ON THAT.
YES, I GOT A CALL FROM THE ACTING PRESIDENT OF THE CAVALIER PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
NEIGHBORHOOD IS, THERE ARE A COUPLE HOUSES THAT ARE WITHIN THAT AREA, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ITSELF IS NOT IN THE COMMUNITY REGISTRY.
SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DIDN'T GET NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND UH, I WAS CONTACTED TODAY REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TO THE NEXT MEETING THAT YOU MIGHT MEETING AND SHE WAS ON WITH HIM OR CALL IN TODAY IF I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING.
BUT DID I HEAR THAT THEY NOT NOTICED AND SOMEONE CALLED IN TODAY? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ISN'T FIND OUT WHAT THE COMMUNITY REGISTRY.
SO THEY DIDN'T RECEIVE THE NOTICE.
UM, THERE THEY HAVE TO DO THAT TO BE NOTIFIED OF THINGS IN THEIR RIGHT COMMITTEE.
A COUPLE PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD RULE WITHIN THE AFFINITY BUT NOT THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
OBJECTING TO A POSTPONEMENT FOR ONE MEETING.
THE APPLICANT OBJECTS TO THE POSTPONEMENT.
I THINK WE HAVE THEM ON THE LINE IF, IF, UH, WE'RE ABLE TO BRING THEM ON.
COMMISSIONER IS GLENN COLEMAN TO THE APPLICANT? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.
UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.
I, I DO WANT TO PLEAD HARDSHIP ON THIS.
THE UH, WE HAVE A, UH, WE HAVE A LIQUOR STORE WAITING FOR A LEASE.
UH, COMPANY HAS, IS WAITING TO SIGN THE LEASE
[00:10:01]
FROM US, BUT WE CAN'T, OBVIOUSLY THEY WON'T SIGN THE LEASE UNTIL THE SITE PLAN GETS APPROVED.THE SITE PLAN REVIEWER CANNOT RELEASE THE FIGHT PLAN UNTIL HE CC US ONE ON THE MAP.
SO I NEED TO GET TO COUNCIL IN THESE VERY, VERY UNCERTAIN TIMES PRETTY QUICKLY.
BUT, UM, I GUESS MY REAL CONCERN AS SOMEONE WHO'S DONE THIS OFTEN IS THAT I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE BAR FOR A POSTPONEMENT? I'M NOT IN CAVALIER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, CAVALIER IS ACROSS THE STREET AND A LITTLE BIT, UM, A LITTLE BIT NORTH OF ME.
UH, I'VE NEVER HAD ANY CONTACT WITH THESE PEOPLE AND, AND I DON'T EXPECT THAT I WOULD EVER HAVE A REASON TO CONTACT THEM SINCE THEY'RE NOT SOMEONE THAT I WOULD LOGICALLY REACH OUT TO.
UM, THEY WERE NOTICED SOMETIME AGO TWICE, CAUSE THIS HAS BEEN TO THE DICE TWICE NOW.
AND I THINK IF THEY WERE NEGOTIATING PARTY THAT HAD REACHED OUT AND WE WERE HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH HIM, UM, THAT WOULD BE, NO, THAT WOULD BE ONE THING.
THEY WOULD HAVE STANDING POSITION TO SHOW UP, RATHER NOT SHOW UP, UH, AT THE LAST MINUTE AND SAY, HEY, I'M GOING TO POSTPONE IT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOOD FOR THEM.
AND I, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE ELEVATING HIM TO THE STATUS, THE NEGOTIATING PARTY, TO THE, TO THE LEVEL THAT IT RISES TO A POSTPONEMENT.
UH, I WILL CERTAINLY REACH OUT TO THEM, COMMISSIONER SEEGER AND I WILL CERTAINLY SEEK OUT, UM, THESE INDIVIDUALS AND WHO THEY ARE AND HEAR THEIR CONCERNS BETWEEN NOW AND COUNCIL.
THEN A BIG BIGGER COMMISSIONERS, UH, GRACES TO BE ALLOWED TO PROCEED FOR NOW WITHOUT, WITHOUT THAT HINDRANCE.
BECAUSE YOU KNOW, MANY OBSTACLES COULD COME BETWEEN NOW AND COUNCIL IS, IS HERE.
UH, I HAD A QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER SHAY AND THEN COMMISSIONERS ARE OKAY.
IS THAT IT FOR COMMISSIONER SEAT HERE? YES IT IS.
UM, SO CHAIR, UM, I HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, HAVE SAY IF YOU CAN HOLD ON ON RECUSALS JUST FOR ONE SECOND.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THIS ITEM ALL TIED UP.
UM, I JUST WANT TO ASK IS, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WISHES TO POLAR FURTHER DISCUSS ITEM NUMBER 11, WHICH HAS OUR GO AHEAD INSTEAD OF A QUESTION.
CONDITIONALLY GOING TO ENTER OVER TIME AT A REGISTRATION PERIOD IF WE HAVE NO SPEAKERS.
IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM, ANY OTHER INSURERS WISH TO SPEAK ON OR PULL ANY OTHER ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? UM, WITH THAT, DO WE HAVE ANY RECRUIT CELLS? START WITH COMMISSIONER SHEA.
UM, ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UM, HEFLIN DEVELOPMENT, UM, ON THE PROJECT MANAGER ON THAT, UH, RECUSING ON THAT ONE, I'M NOT SURE.
KASI, I'D LIKE TO RECORD REFLECT THAT.
I'M RECUSING FROM ITEM B 10 MY STAFF HAS CONTRACTED TO DO THE WORK ON THAT.
AND KRISHA HOWARD, DO I SEE YOUR HAND AS WELL? NO.
ANY OTHER RECUSALS? ALL RIGHT.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SHAVE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HEMPEL.
ALL IN FAVOR DISPLAY GREEN ITEMS. SHAY'S RECUSING.
SO IT HAD TO BE SOMEBODY ELSE.
HEMPEL ARE YOU GOOD WITH MAKING THE MOTION? OKAY.
AND KRISHA SCHNEIDER IS A SECOND.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT ITEMS. SO, UH, STAFF HAS REQUESTED A SIX MINUTE RECESS WHILE WE QUEUE UP THE COLORS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT CASKEY TRACT CASE.
UM, AND THAT IS YES, GO AHEAD.
UM, I THINK THEY HAD EVERYTHING CORRECT.
MY TV WAS ON PAUSE, SO THANK YOU.
ALRIGHT, UH, WITH THAT WE WILL COME BACK IN AT SIX 25, UH, SANTA RECESS.
[Item C1]
NOW GOING TO BRING UP ITEM NUMBER STILL C ONE C ONE DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO RESEND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION FROM APRIL 28 2020 REIGNING APPROVAL OF THE SIMON CASKEY TRACK PRELIMINARY PLAN LOCATED AT SEVEN SEVEN ONE FIVE WEST STATE HIGHWAY 71.THIS IS BROUGHT BY COMMISSIONER SHAY AND SEGER COMMISSURES.
I JUST WANT TO UM, BRIEFLY REVIEW THE RULES FOR RECESSIONS, UH, BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I'M GOING TO READ FROM OUR, OUR, UH, OUR RULES.
UM, AND THIS IS SECTION FIVE UPON THE DISCOVERY OF NEW INFORMATION THAT WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION AND, AND,
[00:15:01]
UH, COLLARS.I HOPE YOU CAN LISTEN TO THIS AS WELL.
THE DISCOVERY OF NEW INFORMATION THAT WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION.
THE COMMISSION MAY USE ITS DISCRETION TO RESCIND OR AMEND THE PREVIOUS ACTION.
A PREVIOUS ACTION AT THE REQUEST OF TWO OR MORE COMMISSIONERS.
SUCH A REQUEST MUST BE MADE AT THE FIRST MEETING AFTER THE MEETING WHERE THE COMMISSION TOOK ACTION SOUGHT TO BE RESCINDED AFTER A REQUEST TO RESCIND IS MADE, STAFF SHALL POST THE ITEM ON THE NEXT COMMISSION AGENDA OR REQUEST OR A SIN MUST BE BASED ON NEW EVIDENCE THAT MAY BETTER INFORM THE COMMISSION.
A DECISION TO RESCIND OR AMEND SHALL BE AFFECTED BY AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF A TWO THIRDS MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION.
SO WHAT WE WERE POSTED FOR TONIGHT IS THE RECEPTION OF OUR DECISION.
UM, IF THE COMMISSION DOES CHOOSE TO RESEND, WE WILL THEN POST I BELIEVE FOR THE NEXT, UH, JUNE 9TH MEETING TO RECONSIDER THIS ITEM.
UM, SO I'D LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONERS AND THOSE I'M OFFERING TESTIMONY TO, UH, KEEP IN MIND THE COMMISSION RULES THAT THIS MUST BE NEW INFORMATION.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, REHASHING THE SAME ARGUMENTS OR SAME POINTS FROM THE PAST IS, IS, IS NOT, WHAT IS A QUESTION HERE? UH, THE QUESTION IS, HAS, IS THERE ENOUGH NEW INFORMATION THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD RECONSIDER ITS, UH, ITS POSITION? UM, I'D LIKE TO REMIND FOLKS OFFERING TESTIMONY THAT, UM, IT IS, UH, REALLY, UM, PARTLY THAT, THAT YOU WERE HERE AND OFFERING TESTIMONY THAT IS, UH, OF SUBSTANCE.
UM, IT'S A, YOU CAN OFFER AGREEMENT WITH PRIOR, UH, FOLKS OFFERING TESTIMONY.
WE DON'T NEED TO RESTATE ARGUMENTS OF YOU'VE SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU JUST AGREE WITH WHAT WAS SAID THAT THAT CAN DO IT.
SO, UM, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN THIS UP FOR, UH, FOR THE SPEAKERS AND FAVOR, UM, AND TAKE THE, UH, THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY, UM, THEN CLOSE THE TESTIMONY AND, UM, AND WE WILL HAVE A ROUND ROBIN FORMAT, UM, AS WITH ALL CONDITIONER ITEMS AT WHICH SOMEONE CAN MAKE A MOTION.
UM, DOES EVERYONE UNDERSTAND THAT? AND IS EVERYONE GOOD WITH THAT? ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO HOW WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED HERE? OKAY.
UM, OH, WHEN I CALL UP RENEE, UH, LACUS VILLA HAQUEZ UM, TESTIFYING IN FAVOR OF HER SENDING THE ITEM.
RENEE, ARE YOU ON THE LINE?
DANNY ANDERSON, ARE YOU ON THE LINE?
UM, SO YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FOR TAKING THE TIME TONIGHT TO HEAR MORE DETAILS OF THIS CASE IN CONSIDERATION OF EVERYONE'S TOM, MY FELLOW NEIGHBORS THAT ARE ON THE LINE HAVE ASKED ME TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ALL OF US AS WE ARE ALL UNIFORM IN OUR CONCERNS AND THE REST OF US WILL NOT BE SPEAKING BACKUP IN CASE WE EXPERIENCE THE SAME TECHNICAL ISSUES THAT WE DID PREVIOUSLY.
THERE WERE SEVERAL ISSUES DURING THE LAST CASE THAT WE FEEL WORN OR RECONSIDERATION.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMISSION DOES NOT AND SHOULD NOT RECONSIDER CASES FRIVOLOUSLY AND SHOULD NOT, SHOULD ONLY DO SO WHEN THERE'S DEMONSTRATED EVIDENCE AND INFORMATION PERTINENT TO THE CASE.
AND PERTINENT TO THE COMMISSION'S DELIBERATIONS WAS EITHER NOT PRESENTED AT THE PRIOR HEARING OR WAS PRESENTED INACCURATELY.
WE BELIEVE THAT COMMISSIONER SHAY AND COMMISSIONER SEEGER HAVE ABSOLUTELY DEMONSTRATED SUCH EVIDENCE OF THIS CASE TRULY WARRANTS REHEARING.
I REVIEWED THE BACKUP FOR THE CONSIDERATION AND FEEL THAT IT DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB OF EXPLAINING THE MAJORITY OF OUR CONCERNS.
IN SHORT, THE COMMISSION MAY REACH THE SAME OUTCOME AS IT DID ON APRIL 28 BUT WE FEEL STRONGLY THAT REGARDLESS THE COMMISSION SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR ALL THE INFORMATION AND YOUR ACCURATE INFORMATION AND ITS DELIBERATIONS.
SOME OF OUR CONCERNS IN THE PREVIOUS HEARING ARE AS FOLLOWS.
FIRST, THE COMPLEXITIES OF THIS CASE RAISE A LOTS OF QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOT FULLY OR PROPERLY ADDRESSED AT THE HEARING DUE TO THE TECHNICAL ISSUES THAT WE EXPERIENCED AS WELL AS THE COMMISSIONS PROCEDURE OF NOT ALLOWING SPEAKERS TO REMAIN IN THE HEARINGS DURING DELIBERATION ON THE CASE.
QUESTIONS WERE ASKED OF SPEAKERS BUT NO SPEAKERS WERE ABLE TO RESPOND.
HAD THE SPEAKERS BEEN ABLE TO RESPOND.
THE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION IDENTIFIED BY ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORS WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BE HEARD AND CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSION WHEN THE COMMISSION ASKED ABOUT IT.
THIS PROJECT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR THE MANY PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE IMPACTED BY IT AND WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING FOR A BETTER OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE DIRECT, THOROUGH AND ACCURATE DISCUSSION OF THE MANY ISSUES THIS CASE RAISES.
SECOND, THE COMMISSION ALSO HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY AND FEASIBILITY OF HAVING AN EMERGENCY GATE INSTALLED AT THE POINT OF CONNECTION AND THEY WERE TOLD THEY COULD NOT DISCUSS THIS AS AN OPTION.
WE BELIEVE THAT INFORMATION WAS ALSO INACCURATE AND THAT THE GATE EMERGENCY GATE OPTION COULD HAVE AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AND CONSIDERED.
THIRD CITY STAFF TOLD COMMISSIONERS THAT THE PROPOSED CONNECTION OF THE NEW STREET WITH A REQUIREMENT OF CITY CODE AND REMOVING IT WOULD REQUIRE A VARIANCE REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT.
WE BELIEVE THIS INFORMATION WAS INACCURATE.
THE CITY CODE MAKES SUCH A CONNECTION, A REQUIREMENT UNLESS THE COMMISSION FINDS THE CONNECTION TO BE UNDESIRABLE.
NOTHING ABOUT THIS WAS BROUGHT TO THE COMMISSIONER'S ATTENTION
[00:20:01]
BY STAFF DURING THE HEARING, DESPITE THE FACT THAT COMMISSIONERS DIRECTLY ASKED TO THE STAFF THIS QUESTION LAST STAFF TOLD THE COMMISSIONERS THAT THEY WOULD BE, THERE WOULD BE A FUTURE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMISSION TO LOOK AT AND TAKE ACTION.ON THE ROAD CONNECTION AT FINAL PLAT.
AND WE BELIEVE THIS RESPONSE IS INCORRECT.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE CODE DOES NOT ALLOW THE CITY TO CHANGE THE CONNECTION AFTER PRELIMINARY PLAN UNLESS THE APPLICANT AGREED.
AGAIN, THE COMMISSION SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THAT FACT.
YOU BEGIN MINE WITH THE CREATION OF THIS NEW THROUGH STREET PRESENTS WHAT THE RESIDENTS AND ALL OF THE AFFECTED NEIGHBORHOODS VIEW AS A DANGEROUS TRAFFIC PATTERN AND THAT ONCE IT'S APPROVED IN THIS PRELIMINARY PLAN, IT'S DONE.
THERE IS NO FUTURE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMISSION TO WEIGH IN, SUGGEST OR CONSIDER ANY ALTERNATIVES OR OTHERWISE DELIBERATE ABOUT THE CONNECTION.
WITH THIS IN MIND, WE'RE ASKING THAT THE CASE BE REHEARD.
IS THERE, UM, UH, ANYONE ELSE ON THE LINE? UH, DON'T WANT TO TAKE MR ANDERSON'S WORD FOR IT THAT, UH, THAT WANTED TO SPEAK IN FAVOR.
UM, MS, UH, EMILY ANDERSON OR TERRY KNOX.
UM, UH, WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO THE SPEAKERS AGAINST HER SESSION.
UH, AGAIN, REMEMBER THAT EVERYONE IS MUTED BY DEFAULT AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HIT STAR SIX TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
IS JOHN JOSEPH ON THE LINE? YES, I AM.
YES, THIS IS JOHN JOSEPH AND I REPRESENT KB HOME LONE STAR AND I'M SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION TO THE EFFORT TO RESEND THE PRIOR ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING THE ASSIGNMENT CASKEY PRELIMINARY PLAN.
THIS APPLICATION WAS FILED ON JUNE IN JULY OF 2019 AND AFTER NINE MONTHS REVIEW HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF ENGINEERING PLANNING AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS INPUT NUMEROUS UPDATES TO CITY STAFF BASED ON LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE STAFF PRESENTED THIS PRELIMINARY PLAN TO YOU AS MEETING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS.
IT WAS APPROVED BY YOU THEN WITH ADVICE FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF AND SAY ILLEGAL THAT THE APPLICANT APPLICATION MET ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS.
MY QUESTION TO YOU IS HOW DOES THIS PRELIMINARY PLAN NOT MEET ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT? I ASKED THAT BECAUSE IF YOU CANNOT PROVIDE THAT SPECIFIC LEGAL REASON, OUR REASONS WHY THIS PRELIMINARY PLAN DOES NOT MEET ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS AND YOU CANNOT RESEND THE AFFORDABLE.
SO PLEASE TELL ME HOW THE BACKUP MATERIAL FOR THIS ITEM PROVIDES ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE OF HOW THIS PRELIMINARY PLAN FAILS TO MEET ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS AND MR. ANDERSON JUST NOW HAS FAILED, PRESENTED, PRESENT ANY NEW EVIDENCE.
THERE HAS BEEN NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE FROM STAFF, FROM LEGAL, FROM ANYONE AS TO HOW THIS PRELIMINARY PLAN FAILS TO MEET ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS.
AND IF THERE IS ANY FAILURE TO MEET LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS, WE MUST BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW WHAT THAT IS AND CURE THE DEFECT.
FAILING IN THAT, I'M URGING YOU TO NOT TAKE THIS DRASTIC UNFOUNDED ACTION.
YOU GOT THIS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.
PLEASE REFUSE THIS PRECISION ACTION.
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THEM.
UH, MR. MARK SIMON GETTING THE LINE
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? I CAN'T GO AHEAD.
GOOD EVENING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD BY ALL OF YOU AS AN INTRODUCTION.
MY NAME IS MARK SIMON AND I'M A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF AUSTIN.
I, ALONG WITH MY BROTHER STEVE AND MY SISTER BARBARA ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY OF THE SIMON CASKEY TRACK THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING TONIGHT.
MY FAMILY ASSIGNMENTS HAVE CALLED AUSTIN HOME FOR ALMOST A HUNDRED YEARS, BEGINNING WITH OUR PARENTS, JOEL AND LANE AND SIMON.
THE SIMON FAMILY HAS OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR NEARLY 50 YEARS.
WE BEGAN TO GO
THROUGHOUT THE NEXT FEW YEARS, WE PARTICIPATED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND OTHER LAND OWNERS IN NUMEROUS INFORMAL MEETINGS CONDUCTED BY CITY STAFF.
THESE MEETINGS WERE HELD AT VARIOUS OKO NEIGHBORHOOD CHURCHES.
MY BROTHER STEVE AND I MET WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
BE ASSURED THAT MY BROTHER STEVEN, I NEVER MISSED ONE OF THOSE MEETINGS.
ONE OF THE MAIN POINTS FROM THE NEIGHBOR SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF OUR DEVELOPMENT IS THAT NO ONE HAD OFFERED TO WORK WITH HIM.
CLEARLY THIS IS NOT BECAUSE TODAY NOR SINCE THE PROCESS BEGAN DECADES AGO, JUST LANDOWNERS ARE GUIDED BY PLANNING AND ZONING TODAY IN THE 1980S WE WERE DIRECTED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
[00:25:01]
CODES AS TO WHAT COULD BE DEVELOPED ON OUR PROPERTY AND FOLLOWED THEIR DIRECTION.WE WORKED DILIGENTLY FOR YEARS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO ESTABLISH THE ZONING AND RESTRICTED COVENANTS THAT GOVERN THE LAND USE OF THE PROPERTY TO THIS DATE, THESE COMPATIBILITY CAUSE THE FIVE HOW IT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE DEVELOPED BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING ASSIGNMENT AND CASSIDY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WERE SIMULTANEOUSLY AND COMPATIBLY ZONE TO ALLOW A LOOP ROAD TO CONNECT LITTLE DEER TO OAK HORSE THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
IN 1987 OUR ZONING ORDINANCE SIGNED BY THE MAYOR, FRANK COOKSEY, WENT INTO A FED.
THE PLAN PROPOSED BY KB HOMES IS AN ACCURATE REFLECTION OF THE ENTITLEMENTS FOR OUR PROPERTY.
DIDN'T WE AGREE TO 33 YEARS AGO? THE SIMON FAMILY RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSION UPHOLD THE ORIGINAL DECISION FROM THE APRIL 28TH MEETING TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AND NOT TAKE ANY ACTION TO RESCIND YOUR APPROVAL.
THIS PLAN IS 100% CODE COMPLIANT, WHICH IS WHY THERE IS NO REASON TO CHALLENGE YOUR PREVIOUS APPROVAL.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
UH, IS STEVEN SIMON ON THE LINE AND IF YOU NOT, STEPHEN SIMON, IF YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND MUTE YOUR PHONE.
STEVEN SIMON STAR 682 MOVED DOWN TO ANGELICA.
SIMON, ANGELICA SIMON ON THE LINE.
WE WENT DOWN TO ERIC SIMON, ERIC SIMON ON THE LINE.
ALL RIGHT, GO AHEAD AND JOCKO, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
ANY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS? THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.
I'M THE WIFE OF MARK SIMON, ONE OF THE SIMON FAMILY OWNERS.
AND I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE SIMON CASKEY INTEREST.
THE ASSIGNMENTS ARE LONGTIME MEMBERS OF THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY DATING BACK TO THE 1930S MY HUSBAND MARK AND BROTHER-IN-LAW.
THE PATH IN GOOD FAITH WORKED FOR OVER THREE DECADES WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND NEIGHBORHOOD TO ESTABLISH THE ZONING AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT GOVERN THE LAND USE OF THIS PROPERTY TO THIS DATE UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING PERMISSION TO COMPATIBILITY CODE.
DEFINE THAT HOW IT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE DEVELOPED.
THE PRELIMINARY PLAN PROPOSED LIKE HEY, BE CALM IS AN ACCURATE REFLECTION OF BEEF ENTITLEMENTS WHICH WERE AGREED TO 33 YEARS AGO.
I ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO UPHOLD ITS ORIGINAL DECISION FOR THE HUNDRED PERCENT CODE COMPLIANT PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR THE SIMON KASEY TRACK WHICH THE COMMISSION APPROVED AT THE APRIL 28 MEETING AND NOT TAKE ANY ACTION TO RESEND YOUR APPROVAL.
I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION.
RIGHT AND I'M GOING TO INFORM THIS.
STEVEN, ARE YOU THERE? STEVEN SIMON.
THE SECOND COMMENT HERE, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE THREE MINUTES, GOOD EVENING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION AND CONSIDERATION AND I HOPE ALL OF YOU ARE STAYING SAFE AND HEALTHY DURING THESE UNPRECEDENTED AND UNCANNY TIMES.
MY NAME IS ERIC SIMON AND I'M THE GRANDSON OF LENA AND JOEL SIMON.
MY FAMILY, THE SIMONS HAVE CALLED AUSTIN HOME FOR ALMOST A HUNDRED YEARS AND THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN IN MY FAMILY FOR NEARLY 50 YEARS.
I'M SPEAKING TONIGHT AS A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE SIMON CASKEY INTEREST IN FAVOR OF THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED OAK HILL SUBDIVISION.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IN RECENT WEEKS THERE HAS BEEN BACKLASH BY SEVERAL CURRENT RESIDENTS WHO LIVE ADJACENT TO THE SIMON CASKEY TRACT.
I WANT TO REITERATE THE EXTENT OF COMPLIANCE THIS PROJECT HAS HAD WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR NEARLY 40 YEARS AND WHY WE'RE SENDING YOUR VOTE WOULD BE A MISTAKE TO THE CORRECT CODE COMPLIANT DECISION MADE BY THE COMMISSION ON APRIL 28TH IN 1987 THE CITY OF AUSTIN ISSUED A ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE PROPERTY WHICH CLEARLY DEFINED THE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS WHICH WOULD BE PERMITTED.
THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION BY KB HOMES
[00:30:01]
IS FULLY COMPLIANT WITH THESE CODES.BACK IN THE EARLY 1980S THIS PART OF AUSTIN WAS SLEEPY AND MOSTLY UNDEVELOPED, BUT EVEN THEN CITY PLANNERS AND OFFICIALS UNDERSTOOD THAT ONE DAY OUT OF NECESSITY, AUSTIN WOULD NEED A GREATER NUMBER OF HOMES TO SUPPORT THE GROWING CITY.
FAST FORWARD TO TODAY, NEARLY 40 YEARS LATER AND THE NEED FOR NEW HOMES IS GREATER NOW THAN IT HAS EVER BEEN BY ALL AVAILABLE METRICS FOR OVER 15 YEARS, AUSTIN HAS BEEN ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES AND WELCOMES OVER A HUNDRED NEW RESIDENTS EACH AND EVERY DAY.
WE KNOW THAT FOLLOWING THROUGH THE APPROVED SUBDIVISION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT SOLVE THE HOUSING ISSUE, BUT FAILING TO APPROVE THIS DEVELOPMENT GOES ENTIRELY AGAINST THE CITY'S GREATEST NEED.
THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION BY KB HOMES IS STAFF RECOMMENDED CODE COMPLIANT AND 100% IN LINE WITH ALL THE STIPULATIONS THAT WERE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN.
THE REALITY OF THE OPPOSITION FROM OUR NEIGHBORS IS AS FOLLOWS.
NO NEIGHBOR WHO LIVES NEXT TO THE SIMON CASKEY PROPERTY WOULD WELCOME AN INCREASE IN CONSTRUCTION, TRAFFIC AND NEW HOMES.
OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE REAPED THE BENEFITS OF LIVING NEXT TO OUR UNDEVELOPED THOUGHT OF LAND FOR MANY DECADES AND UNDERSTANDABLY DO NOT WANT TO GIVE IT UP.
HOWEVER, THE SIMON AND CASCADES HAVE BEEN WORKING IN GOOD FAITH WITH BOTH WITH BOTH THE NEIGHBORS OF OUR PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR ALMOST 40 YEARS.
AS OWNERS, WE ARE ENTITLED TO DEVELOP OUR LAND SO LONG AS WE COMPLY WITH ZONING, RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS AND CODE.
THESE ARE THE REGULATIONS WE MUST FLY WITH AND WE HAVE THE SIMON FAMILY RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THE COMMISSION DOES THE SAME AND ABIDE BY THE RULES AND REGULATIONS AND UPHOLD THE MANY YEARS OF WORK AND AGREEMENTS OUR FAMILY HAS MADE WITH THE CITY.
THAT WAS ERIC SIMON WHO IS SPEAKING.
IS THAT, YEAH, THAT WAS, THAT WAS ERIC SIMON.
STEVEN SIMON, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
I AM ONE OF THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY AND OAK HILL.
KB HOMES IS A MR. SIMON, YOU MAY WANT TO MEET YOUR TELEVISION.
OH, YOU WANT ME TO START OVER? SURE, GO AHEAD.
I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY AND OAK HILL.
KB HOMES IS A SEASONED AUSTIN HOME BUILDER.
THEIR PROPOSAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY COMPORTS WITH US A SIGNED AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
THE BOARD SHOULD ALLOW THE CODE COMPLIANT PRELIMINARY PLAN OF APRIL 28TH TO MOVE FORWARD.
MANY THANKS FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.
UM, MS. STANLEY CASKEY ON THE LINE.
I REPRESENT MYSELF AND MY BROTHERS, STEVE, STEVE AND I ALONG WITH MY FATHER BOUGHT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IN 1982 LIKE THE SIMONS, WE ARE ALSO LIFETIME AUSTINITES.
MY FATHER AND I WERE ACTIVE IN THE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY BEGINNING IN 1985 ABOUT ANNEXATION AND ZONING.
WE ATTENDED MANY MEETINGS AT A CHURCH ACROSS HIGHWAY 71 IN WHICH THERE ARE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN, THE CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT, THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, NEIGHBORS, BUSINESSES AND LANDOWNERS.
THE REASON WAS TO COME UP WITH A REASONABLE GROWTH PLAN FOR OAK HILL.
AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS OF DISCUSSION, THE CITY PLANNING OFFICE,
IT WAS TO BE RESIDENTIAL WITH 20 SOMETHING HOME SITES WITH STREETS.
THE STREETS DRAWN IN THE PLAN ALSO HAD SETBACKS ON THE SIDE AND IN THE BACK.
[00:35:02]
WE WERE FINE WITH THAT PROPOSAL AT THE TIME.WE TALKED TO THE SIMON BROTHERS AND WE BOTH CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT OUR TWO PROPERTIES NEEDED TO BE DEVELOPED TOGETHER.
IN 2017 WE BEGAN TO HAVE SOME INTEREST IN OUR TRACKS.
I TOOK RICHARD, GARY AND JOE WILLIAMS TO VIEW THIS PROPERTY.
WE PARKED A LITTLE DEER CROSSING.
MR. KNOX CAME OUT TO GREET US AND WE TOLD HIM WHILE WE WERE THERE AND HE TOLD US THAT HE DID NOT WANT ANYTHING BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY.
A WEEK OR TWO LATER I RECEIVED A CALL FROM A REALTOR WHO SAID SHE REPRESENTED THE LANDOWNERS THAT BACKED UP TO OUR PROPERTY.
SHE TOLD ME THAT HER CLIENTS WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT AS A PARK.
I NEVER HEARD BACK FROM HER AND I UNDERSTAND WHY THE NEIGHBORS DON'T WANT THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF PROPERTY
THE NEIGHBORS HAVE NO CLAIM TO MY PROPERTY.
THE PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVED WAS RIGHT AND THE ONLY DECISION YOU SHOULD MAKE OUR PLAN MEET ZONING RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS AND CITY CODE.
WE HAVE DONE THE RIGHT THING FOR DECADES AND DECADES.
IT'S TIME FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
YOU HAVE TO STAR SIX TO UNMUTE, BUT CHARLES BRIGANCE IS CHARLES BERGEN'S HERE.
SO CAN YOU GO AHEAD AND STATE YOUR NAME? MY NAME IS CHARLES BRIGANCE.
I'M WITH CARLSON BRANSON DURING ENGINEERING.
WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.
UM, WELL, UH, GOOD EVENING, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
UH, AGAIN, MY NAME IS CHARLES BRIGANCE.
UM, AT YOUR PREVIOUS MEETING I INDICATED, UH, TESTIMONY AT THE MEETING THAT THIS PROJECT MET CURRENT CODE.
UM, AND THAT, UH, TESTIMONY WAS ALSO UPHELD BY THE STUDY STAFF WHO WERE VIEWED OUR PLANS FOR LITERALLY MONTHS TO GET TO THIS POINT.
AND, UH, THE ONLY POINT I WANTED TO MAKE TONIGHT IS THAT, UM, TO DATE I HAVE NOT BEEN MADE AWARE BY STAFF OR ANYBODY, ANY ASPECT OF THIS PROJECT THAT DOES NOT MEET CODE.
AND I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR, UH, CAUSE WE HAVE NOT BEEN TOLD OF ANYTHING THAT WOULD CONTRADICT THAT.
AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME VERY MUCH.
UH, JOHN'S INSPIRE HEARD YOU ON THE LINE.
ARE YOU HERE?
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO? I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING OR NOT ON THIS ITEM, BUT, UM, IF THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING, IF THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE IT SHOULD THE COMMISSION LAYS ON ANDREW, THIS PUBLIC HEARING? THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT, SO, UM, WE WILL MOVE INTO THE, UH, THE ROUND ROBIN PORTION.
UM, UP TO EIGHT OF YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES EACH.
UH, YOU CAN, UM, WE MAY BE ABLE TO DO QUESTIONS OR WE MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK AND UH, WE CAN ALSO ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT ANY TIME.
UM, AND BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT, I JUST WANT TO STATE THAT, UM, I TALKED A BIT WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT TODAY AND UH, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF, UM, ASSERTIONS BEING MADE THAT UM, THE COMMISSION DOES OR DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UH, AMEND OR PUT CONDITIONS ON A PRELIMINARY PLAN, UH, IF THE APPLICANT DID NOT REQUEST THEM.
UM, AS WELL AS, UH, IF, UM, THE DETERMINATIONS THAT ARE SUGGESTED IN CODE, UH, FOR ALLOWING TO NOT CONNECT STREETS AS TO, UM, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT GIVES THE COMMISSION PERMISSION TO APPROVE A PLAN THAT DOES NOT MEET THAT OR IS IT UM, MURAL OR IS IT ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT ALLOWS THE COMMISSION TO ACTUALLY ALTER A PLAN, UM, THAT DOES HAVE CONNECTING ROADS? UM, THOSE QUESTIONS I DON'T BELIEVE HAVE BEEN ANSWERED PUBLICLY WITH CERTAINTY AT THIS POINT.
UM, AND A LOT DEPARTMENT HAS, UH, ADVISED THAT, UH, IF WE DO, IF WE DID CHOOSE TO RESCIND THIS ITEM THAT THEY WOULD REVIEW
[00:40:01]
THE LEGAL GUIDANCE THERE AND WE MAY DO EXECUTIVE SESSION BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.SO, UM, JUST A, SO THIS IS TO DECIDE IF WE WERE SENDING, IF WE WANT TO RESCIND, THEN WE'D HAVE TO DELVE INTO THESE LEGAL QUESTIONS A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UM, AND SO WITH THAT, JUST A REMINDER THAT THIS DECISION WAS SUPPOSED TO BE BASED ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A NEW ENOUGH NEW EVIDENCE FOR US TO RECONSIDER AND IT REQUIRES NOT ABLE TO PASS.
SINCE NO ONE'S GOING TO START, I'LL GO AHEAD AND START.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF NEW INFORMATION, UM, ON BOTH SIDES.
I FEEL LIKE I'VE HEARD STUFF FROM THE APPLICANT SIDE THAT LOT OF INFORMATION I THINK SHOULD BE VETTED AND UM, AND ALSO IN REFLECTION OF WHAT HAPPENED AT THE LAST MEETING, I FEEL LIKE THERE WAS ALSO, UH, SPEAKERS THAT THEY WANTED TO SPEAK THAT SIGNED UP AND THERE WERE A LOT OF TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES AND I FEEL LIKE THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD THAT CHANCE TO BRING UP WHAT OTHER INFORMATION THEY HAD.
THE OTHER THING IS ALSO, I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHERE THE IDEA CAME FROM.
A LESS MESS THE APPLICANT, UM, THOUGHT OTHERWISE, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, EVERYTHING I HEARD IS THEY'RE OKAY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S MORE LIKE JUST HOW THINGS ARE CONNECTED AND UH, JUST THE SMALL, LIKE SMALL DETAILS.
I'M, NOBODY'S TRYING TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF UNITS OR DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW, UH, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS.
BUT I'M LOOKING THROUGH KIND OF WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.
I FEEL LIKE, UM, WITH THE, WITH THE GOING THROUGH AND KIND OF LOOK LOOKING AT IS NEW INFORMATION, UH, PER HOW WE CONDUCTED OUR MEETING.
I HAD MADE A MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS STOPPED.
I HAD PEOPLE, I MEAN MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE WERE A COUPLE OF NURSES THAT WANTED A SECOND AT IT AND IF THERE IS A SECOND AT LEAST WE COULD HAVE HAD THE QUESTIONS AND THE DISCUSSIONS, BUT IT NEVER GOT TO THAT POINT.
AND A LOT OF THAT HAD TO DO WITH, FOR INSTANCE, LIKE IS THERE ANOTHER WAY TO DO THIS IS STILL MEETS CODE.
THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO GET THE PROJECT TO MEET CODE, BUT IT WAS NEVER GIVEN THE CHANCE PROCEDURALLY BECAUSE UH, I WAS TOLD I COULDN'T MAKE THAT MOTION.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE WE HAVE MADE MOTIONS LIKE THIS BEFORE ON OTHER PROJECTS WHERE WE HAD SAID THAT WE'RE ALL CAME TO NOT HAVE THAT CONNECTION OR HAVE AN ALTERNATE TYPE OF CONNECTION THAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO MAKE THOSE MOTIONS AND AT LEAST IT SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST HAD GONE TO A DISCUSSION AFTER I GOT THAT SECOND.
UM, AND LET'S SEE, THE OTHER THING IS, UH, COMMISSIONER CHAIR KENNY WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH, YOU KNOW, I WOULD, I REALLY WANT TO HEAR FROM LEGAL ABOUT WHAT THIS MEANS BECAUSE WHAT IS IN CODE IS WRITTEN.
SOUNDS LIKE IT GIVES US THE RIGHT TO, UH, TO RE KIND OF USE ACTUAL PLANNING EYES ON IT, USE OUR, YOU KNOW, AS A PLANNING COMMISSION TO LOOK AT IT AND EVALUATE IT.
BUT NOW WE'RE BEING TOLD THAT WE GOT TO RUBBER STAMP IT.
SO I'M REALLY KIND OF LOST ON THAT.
AND BY RESENDING IT, WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO AT LEAST DEAL WITH IT WITH, UM, WITH CITY LEGAL AND BE ABLE TO GET ALL THE CARDS ON THE TABLE AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY HEAR ALL THE SIDES.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M IN FAVOR OF THE RECEPTION.
LIKE I SAID, WE MIGHT END UP IN THE SAME, SAME SITUATION, BUT AT LEAST WE HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EVERYBODY TO GET EVERYTHING OUT.
I UM, SECONDED COMMISSIONER SHAY'S MOTION FOR THE RESCINDED RECONSIDER BECAUSE THAT WAS OUR FIRST MEETING THAT WE HAD THAT HAD DISCUSSION CASES.
I THINK THAT THERE WAS, UH, PROBLEMS WITH AUDIO AND PERHAPS THE PROCESS OF NOT ALLOWING THOSE OPPOSED TO AN ITEM TO SPEAK WHEN THE ITEM IS PRESENTED BY STAFF AND THE APPLICANT.
I THINK THAT THAT BREAK IN PROCEDURE LED TO SOME PERHAPS MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE IT IS NOT IN MY ESTIMATION, CUT AND DRY AS TO WHETHER THERE CAN BE VARIANCES FOR ONE ISSUE OR ANOTHER, CAN THERE BE A DIFFERENT DESIGN? AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT AT ALL.
I WOULD LIKE LEGAL TO SPEAK TO US ONLINE, NOT IN WRITTEN FORMAT BECAUSE MANY US INTERPRET THINGS DIFFERENTLY.
I KNOW THAT SOME BELIEVE THAT WHETHER IT'S WRITTEN IN OUR CODE IS VERY CLEAR AND VERY UNDERSTANDABLE.
I DON'T, I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'RE REWRITING OUR CODE BECAUSE THERE ARE INSTANCES AND THIS IS ONE OF THEM WHERE IT IS SUBJECT TO SOME INTERPRETATION AND I, I'D LIKE TO HAVE THIS HEARD WHERE WE HAVE
[00:45:01]
THE APPLICANT AND WE HAVE THOSE OPPOSING THE CUT-THROUGH STREET.THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT THEY ARE OPPOSING IS THE CONTINUATION OF LITTERED LITTLE DARE CROSSING THAT WE ALL THAT WE CAN HAVE IT IN THE SAME TIMEFRAME, NOT BEFORE AND AFTER.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION OR DOES ANY OTHER QUESTION OR WISH TO SPEAK FOR SURE.
I GUESS I WAS HOPING THAT WE WOULD HAVE OUR LEGAL COUNSEL DURING THIS MEETING AND ALLOW US TO MAKE A FORMAL BASIS FOR A RECEPTION OR NOT.
I GUESS THAT'S, UM, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE NOW ABLE TO DO THAT.
I MEAN IF WE DON'T HAVE STANDING ON CERTAIN ISSUES THEN I DON'T, WHY WOULD WE EVER SINCE, SO I WAS HOPING TO GET INPUT FROM LEGAL TODAY.
BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT WON'T COME UNTIL AFTER WE DECIDE IF WE'RE GOING TO RESCIND OR NOT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE I, I WOULD SAY THAT, UH, IT'S CLEAR FROM THE TESTIMONY THAT AT LEAST BETWEEN, UH, THOSE WHO OPPOSE THIS AND THOSE WHO SUPPORT THIS PLAN, THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF, UH, OF THAT AUTHORITY, UH, ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, SO I, I'VE DISCUSSED THIS SOME WITH LEGAL, BUT UM, THEY OFFERED THAT TO REALLY GET A COMPLETE REWORK.
UM, THEY'D ASK US FOR A FIRST AND THEN WOULD COME BACK TO US PROBABLY AN EXECUTIVE SESSION NEXT MEETING.
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO ASK THE QUESTION OFF STAFF, ARE THEY GOING TO BUY BLUE BIKE NOW? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT DID NOT DO THIS? AND I DON'T BELIEVE THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT IS HERE AND LESS.
STEVE, ARE YOU HERE? I DON'T BELIEVE HE IS.
IF IT'S FINE, I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND ASK THE QUESTION.
IF SOMEONE'S OVER THE ANSWER, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
IF NOT, I GUESS THE ONLY QUESTION IS IN A, WE'RE NOT LEARNING, WELL LEAST I HADN'T BEEN FOCUSED ON THE DISTRICT OF GOVERNANCE BEFORE WHERE THERE'S A RESTRICTIVE GOVERNANCE UNDER PLACE THAT ASKS FOR THAT NEED TO BE CREATED.
IS THAT BINDING? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE AWARE THAT THIS NEED THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IN WINDED AMEND OF RESTRICTED GOVERNANCE IN ORDER TO CHANGE THAT? HOW DOES THAT FIT INTO A DECISION, A FINAL DECISION ON THIS CASE? OKAY.
WHO ARE YOU ASKING COMMISSIONERS ARE OR IS IT RHETORICAL? BUT THIS IS A STAFF QUESTION.
IF STAFF IS ABLE TO ANSWER THIS, IF NOT, UNDERSTAND THAT THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO THINK ABOUT FOR FUTURE.
NOT HEARING ANYONE, UH, VOLUNTEERING.
BUT UM, SO THAT UH, IT MAY BE DUE TO IT BEING A PRIVATE AGREEMENT BETWEEN PARTIES, BUT YOU'RE A SEEKER.
ARE YOU, UH, ANSWERING FISHER CZAR ON HIS TIME? OKAY, GO AHEAD.
WE'VE RECEIVED, UH, SOME ADDITIONAL BACKUP AND ON THE FIRST PAGE IT TALKS ABOUT THE DIFFERENT RE THIS WHOLE TRACT AND WHAT THE AGREEMENTS WERE.
IT SAYS, PLEASE NOTE THAT A RESIDENTIAL LOOP STREET WAS PLANNED TO EXTEND BETWEEN LITTLE DEER CROSSING ON THE WEST, WITHIN THE VALLEY VIEW ACRES SUBDIVISION, ROUTE THE SIMON TRACT AND CONNECT TO OAK FOREST LANE ON THE SOUTH WITHIN THE SAME WEEK BOOK SUBDIVISION, ALL DEBT.
ALTHOUGH IT WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
SO IT'S, IT'S ANOTHER MAN GRAY AGAIN WHERE WE SHOULD HAVE INTERPRETATIONS ON SOME OF THESE GRAY ISSUES.
AND I WANT TO ADD THAT ALSO BECAUSE IT IS RESTRICTED COVENANT.
SO THE CITY DOESN'T REALLY TAKE STANDING ON THAT.
IT'S NOT THEIR, UH, IT'S NOT THEIR FIGHT.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE SEEN ISSUE FOR A CITY AND RESTRICTED COVENANTS HAVE, YOU KNOW, CONFLICTED.
BUT IN THIS CASE HERE, I DON'T THINK IN ANY OF THE DESIGNS IT'S REALLY EVEN RESTRICTING BECAUSE ACCESS COULD BE, THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF ACCESS.
ACCESS COULD BE INTERPRETED AS
THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO LOOK AT THAT.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE DESIGN OF THE LOOP.
AND YOU KNOW, AND THE STREET, IT'S MORE ABOUT WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS AT THAT POINT.
BUT, UM, THAT'S MY INTERPRETATION.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LISTEN TO SPEAKERS MOTION?
[00:50:02]
I WILL MOTION.I MOTION THAT WE RESEND AND RECONSIDER SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SHEA.
UM, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK IN FAVOR OF YOUR MOTION? WHICH SECRET SECRETS HAVE SPOKEN IN FAVOR OF IT? UM, CAUSE YOU'RE ANDERSON, DO YOU HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION? WHAT'S YOUR MOTION PUSHER TO DENY? UH, WE HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO DENY, UM, THE, UH, THE BASE MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND ON MR ANDERSON'S MOTION AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CAUSEY.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? I DO.
WORKING ON THE INTERNET DOESN'T HELP, BUT, UH, I JUST CAN'T IN GOOD CONSCIOUS, INTENTIONALLY SEGREGATE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I DID REACH OUT TO THE GOOD FOLKS WHO HAVE BEEN LETTING US KNOW THAT THERE ARE CONCERNS DOWN THERE.
AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I FULLY UNDERSTOOD WHAT I THOUGHT TO HAVE UNDERSTOOD LAST TIME WHEN WE VOTED ON THIS.
AND SO KIND OF IN A NUTSHELL, I JUST ASKED FOR, YOU KNOW, IS THERE, COULD YOU SHOW ME THE PLAN THAT YOU WERE HOPING FOR? WHAT IS THE PLAN THAT YOU HOPE TO SEE IN THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT? UM, AND THE RESPONSE THAT I RECEIVED WAS YOU CAN UNEQUIVOCALLY SAY THAT WE AGREE THAT ALL OPTIONS ARE BETTER THAN THE CONNECTION OF OAK FOREST HARVEST TRAIL, LITTLE DEER AS THROUGH STREETS.
AND I MEAN, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THIS AREA.
I VISITED THE AREA, I'VE WALKED THEM AROUND IN CERTAIN AREAS ON FOOT AND THEN I CAN LOOK AT IT ON THE MAP.
LIKE THE LAND THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS UNEQUIVOCALLY A PART OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND I'M ALSO READING RIGHT NOW GOLDEN GATES FIGHTING FOR HOUSING AND AMERICA AND THIS, I UNDERSTAND THE ONES FIGHTING THE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, BUT PAGE TWO, UM, IN GENERAL, I'M HERE TO REMIND THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WILL BENEFIT FROM THIS ONCE IT'S BUILT.
IF WE WERE TO BUILD THIS TO WHERE THEIR ONLY ACCESS IS TO GET ON 71 AND THEIR ENTIRE LIFE IS TO WENT FROM 71 VERSUS BEING A PART OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY ARE PART OF.
I JUST FEEL THAT THAT'S A BIG FAIL ON OUR PART AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOOD PLANNING.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOOD FOR THAT COMMUNITY.
AND I HOPE THAT WE LOOK TO NOT RESCIND THIS.
ALSO MADE IT ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE MEETING.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE MAIN MOTION OR OF THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION MAKER.
DO WE HAVE A, DO WE WANT TO HAVE A SPEAKER AGAINST, I GUESS I'LL SPEAK AGAINST.
UM, I DON'T THINK THE, I MEAN I'M NOT SPEAKING AGAINST IT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT MOSTLY BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE IT WAS MORE OF A PROCEDURE PROCESS THAT, UM, WE DIDN'T HAVE TO HEAR ALL THE SIDES AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THE SIDES BE ABLE TO BE, UM, VETTED AND DISCUSS QUESTIONS BACK AND FORTH.
UM, WE WERE PRETTY MUCH TO THE POINT WHERE AS WE WERE ASKING OTHER QUESTIONS OF OTHER POSSIBILITIES THAT WE WERE SHUT DOWN, UM, I THINK WE WOULD BENEFIT FROM THE NEW ADDED DISCUSSIONS.
AGAIN, WE MIGHT END UP EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE AT AND UM, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT.
YOU KNOW, I DO HAVE A CONCERN OF THAT AS WELL, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WAY WE ALL AT LEAST HAVE EVERYTHING, ALL THE CARDS ON THE TABLE.
UH, AND EVERYBODY FEELS GOOD ABOUT THE DECISION BASED UPON ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WAS FAIR BROUGHT UP AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET DISCUSSED.
SO, UM, THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING FOR AT LEAST A CHANCE TO HAVE THOSE SIDES HEARD.
DO WE WANT TO, AS ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, WHAT'S YOUR, UH, AS OZZIE, I'VE BEEN CALLED FUZZY KASI BEFORE, SO IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME.
NO, I THINK, I THINK THE MAIN ISSUE IS DOES IT NEED CODES AND CODES AND REGULATIONS AND IT DOES, YOU KNOW, AT WHAT POINT DO WE HAVE, MMM.
THE AUTHORITY TO TWEAK THE ENGINEERING AND SEND THEM BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD.
YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THAT SHOULD HAPPEN SORT OF BEFORE IT COMES TO THE COMMISSION.
BUT I DO RECOGNIZE THE, I DO RECOGNIZE THE, UH, PROCEDURES WE HAD THAT DAY.
I DO RECOGNIZE THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY, SO I'M SORT OF HALF AND HALF, UH, BUT REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS AT THIS VOTE, UH, WE OUGHT TO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION OR DEBRIEF OR,
[00:55:01]
OR, UH, SOMETHING FROM STAFF THAT GIVES, TELLS US VERY CLEARLY WHAT OUR BOUNDARIES ARE.SO ANYONE ELSE WANNA SPEAK ON THIS MOTION? ALL RIGHT.
AND, UH, MR GANIS WEIRDO, IF YOU WERE HERE AND TRYING TO VOTE, WE HAVE TO SEE YOU FOR YOU TO VOTE.
I'M NOT SURE IF WE JUST CAN'T SEE YOUR VISION RIGHT NOW.
I'M NOT ABLE TO TURN, MY CAMERA WILL BE ABLE TO SEE ME.
I'M, UH, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN, UM, HAVE YOU SPEAKING OR VOTING IF WE CAN'T SEE YOU UNDER THE TEXAS OPEN MEETING? YEAH.
I'M TRYING TO FIND THE CHAT TIERS THAT I CAN TELL YOU ALL THAT TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.
PROBABLY SHOULDN'T USE THE CHAT EITHER.
UH, SO WITH NO OTHER SPEAKERS, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UH, WHICH IS TO DENY THE RECENSION.
UM, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE SUBSTITUTE SEVEN, ALL THE POSTS OR ALL ABSTAINING.
UM, UH, SO THE EMOTION TO, UM, TO DENY THE ASCENSION PASSES, UH, WHAT ARE REQUIRED NINE VOTES TO, TO, UH, BE RESCINDED.
UM, WE HAVE, UH, THREE MORE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA, UM, COMMISSION INITIATED ITEMS, BUT I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE HERE THAT LONG.
SO, UM, WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS.
[Item C3]
THE FIRST ITEM, UH, NEXT ITEM THAT WE'RE GONNA TAKE UP IS ITEM C3, UM, FROM FISHERS THOMPSON AND ANDERSON TO DISCUSS, UH, AND, AND DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO PROVIDE INPUT REGARDING THE BURNETT ROAD CORRIDOR.UM, BEFORE WE GET INTO THIS, I JUST WANT TO SHARE WHAT I'VE LEARNED AND, AND DISCUSSING WITH THE, UM, THE CORRIDOR STAFF, UM, WHICH IS THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD THAT LASTS THROUGH JUNE 4TH.
UM, SO IF THE COMMISSION WERE TO, UH, PASS A RESOLUTION OR SOME, UH, ACTION LIKE THAT AT THIS POINT, THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE RECORD.
UM, HOWEVER, ALSO AS PART OF IT BEING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, UM, THE CORRIDOR STAFF IS NOT ABLE TO COME AND OFFER TESTIMONY OR DO A Q AND A, UM, DURING THE COMMENT PERIOD.
SO, UH, HOWEVER, IN A TWIST, UM, IF WE PASS A RESOLUTION, UH, AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING, UM, THAT IS STILL INPUT, THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED BY STAFF.
AND I THINK IT PROBABLY WOULD BE, UH, IT JUST WOULDN'T BE PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD OF PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT, UM, AS PART OF THE FEDERAL AND STATE PROCEDURES, THEY HAVE TO SUMMARIZE ALL THOSE UP AND ANSWER THEM EACH INDIVIDUALLY.
WE WOULDN'T BE PART OF THAT, BUT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE THEM COME AND DO A Q AND.
SO WITH THAT, I'M SURE THOMPSON, I THINK THIS WAS YOUR ITEM.
AND SO I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO SORT OF PUT IT OUT THERE THAT I WAS, UH, SAW THE NEW PLAN FOR BURNET CORRIDOR RELEASED.
UM, AND THE PLAN FROM WHAT HAD BEEN DONE AND A CORRIDOR PLAN, I THINK IN 2013 OR EARLIER, WE SEE AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF CAR TRAVEL LANES AND, AND A LOSS OF TRANSIT PRIORITY LANES.
AND IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THAT'S GOING THE WRONG DIRECTION, UH, YOU KNOW, IN WITH, WITH WHERE WE NEED TO BE TO, TO FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE AND TO ENCOURAGE TRANSIT IN OUR CITY.
UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT HAPPENED AND HOW THOSE DECISIONS WERE MADE AND TO GET SOME FEEDBACK, UH, FROM STAFF.
I THINK UNDERSTANDING, HAVING STAFF ABLE TO TALK TO US, UH, WOULD BE CRITICAL, UH, TO REALLY UNDERSTAND HOW THOSE DECISIONS WERE MADE.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO PERHAPS TABLE THIS, UH, UNTIL, UH, OUR NEXT MEETING.
WHAT'S YOUR TOP? SO YOU MAKE AN EMOTION OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE A, THERE'S THE CHANCE TO SPEAK.
I WOULD LIKE TO GO CHANCE TO SPEAK REAL QUICKLY.
UM, BUT, AND THEN I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER SHAW? UH, YES, I LOOKED AT SOME OF THE BACKUP MATERIAL AND UH, I DO AGREE.
I'M VERY CONFUSED AND WANT TO HEAR FROM STAFF BECAUSE, UH, I LOOK
[01:00:01]
AT THE CAP METRO PROJECT CONNECT MAPS AND IT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THIS IS DESTINED.UH, BURNETT ROAD, UH, WAS UM, GOING TO HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, BUS LANES, UH, HOPEFULLY DEDICATED BUS LANES AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THE PLAN DOES NOT SHOW THEM THERE.
SO I AM EQUALLY CONCERNED AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM STAFF AS WELL.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? UM, I WILL SAY THAT, YEAH, I, I'M ALSO VERY CONCERNED, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE PLAN IS, UH, THERE'S THE FUNDED PLAN AND THE UNFUNDED PLAN.
UM, THE FUNDED PLAN WAS FUNDED THROUGH THE CORRIDOR BOND.
UM, AND REMEMBER THAT THE ORIGINAL PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED BACK IN 2013 HAD THOSE TWO SIGNAL RUNNING TRANSIT LANES.
UM, THERE'S ALSO AN UNFUNDED PLAN AND THE REASON FOR THAT UNFUNDED PLAN IS TO GO AHEAD AND GET ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE TO DO IT.
UM, SO THIS ISN'T A PLAN THAT'S NECESSARILY GONNA HAPPEN REAL SOON, BUT THESE ARE THE PLANS THAT OFTEN GO ON THE SHELF WAITING FOR FUNDING.
AND WHEN THE FUNDING SHOWS UP, THAT'S THE PLAN THAT GETS IMPLEMENTED.
AND UH, CONSIDERING THAT IT MIGHT BE IN THE FUTURE AND THAT WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT CONCRETE, UM, IT SEEMED MAYBE A LITTLE SHORTSIGHTED BASED ON, ON WHAT WE KNOW OUR MOBILITY NEEDS ARE.
SO, UM, I'M ALSO VERY INTERESTED IN AND, UH, FINDING OUT MORE ABOUT THIS AND POTENTIALLY OFFERING SOME FEEDBACK.
UM, THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS THAT WISH TO SPEAK OR DO WE HAVE A MOTION? WHAT'S YOUR SECRET NOW YOU'RE MUTED.
I MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THE HEARING, THEN STAFF CAN COME AND GIVE US THE EXPLANATION OF WHY THIS WAS GENUINE.
SO TILL THE JUNE 9TH MEETING, YES.
THAT'S THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD BEFORE THAT IS THE ONLY PROBLEM.
I DON'T WANT TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING.
SO, UH, UM, WELL FIRST OF ALL, CAN I GET A SECOND ON THAT SECOND BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON? UM, SURE.
SO YOU'RE JUST ANSWERING A QUESTION.
A RESOLUTION PERHAPS WOULD NOT BE PART OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT ARE ACCEPTED ON THAT.
HOWEVER, THIS IS CITY STAFF AND YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THEY DO LISTEN TO US.
SO I THINK JUST BECAUSE IT'S AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IF THAT'S MORE OF A STATE AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENT AND THEN A CITY PROCESS, IF OUR COMMENTS COULD STILL BE PART OF THE PROCESS.
AND I'M SURE IT MAKES SURE THAT WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE.
HE'LL EXPLAIN IT CHANGES QUARTER STAFF HAS PROMISED ME THAT THEY WILL SEND SOMEBODY ON JUNE 9TH.
ANY UH, FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL JUNE 9TH.
WHAT MISSION IS POSTPONED? UM,
[Item C4]
NEXT ITEM C FOR A DISCUSSION REGARDING TOPICS CLINIC COMMISSIONS SHOULD EXAMINE OVER THE NEXT YEAR AND IN THE LEAD UP TO THE 2022 REVISION OF THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN.HOW SUCH DISCUSSIONS CAN BE STRUCTURED, UM, FOR MYSELF AND VICE-CHAIR, KASI, UM, I WANTED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION BUT NOT NECESSARILY ACTION.
UM, AS WE ARE, AS I AM COORDINATING WITH STAFF TO BRING US BRIEFINGS, BUT ALSO, UM, I HOPE, UH, WE HAVE AN OPEN LINE OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ALL OF YOU AND MYSELF IN TERMS OF, OF WANTING TO BRING ITEMS AND, UH, ANY WAY THAT I CAN HELP IN COORDINATING WITH STAFF AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE HERE OR MAKING SURE THAT THINGS ALIGN ON THE CALENDAR.
AND, UM, WHAT ACTUALLY BROUGHT THIS UP IS THAT, UM, NEXT MONTH, UH, MAYBE AT THE JUNE 9TH MEETING, MAYBE AT THE NEXT MEETING, UM, WE ARE GOING TO BE A, ONCE AGAIN REVIEWING THE LONG RANGE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PLAN.
UM, HOWEVER, BECAUSE THE CITY SWITCHED TO A TWO YEAR CYCLE, THERE'S ACTUALLY NOTHING HAPPENING THIS YEAR.
UM, WE COULD SAY SOME WORDS, BUT, UM, THERE'S USUALLY, WE W IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS WE'VE BEEN DOING A TRANSMITTAL LETTER THAT TALKS ABOUT PRIORITIES THAT WE MIGHT HAVE.
HOWEVER, THE, UH, THE JOINT CONFERENCE OF PLAN COMMITTEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO MEET, UM, DUE TO COVE ID.
UH, SO WE DO NEED TO DO SOMETHING FOR THE CHARTER, BUT WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO DO MUCH.
UM, BUT, UH, IN REVIEWING THIS WITH STAFF, UM, I USED TO BE ON THE JOINT COMP PLAN COMMITTEE BY THE TIME THE JOINT COMPLIMENT COMMITTEE SEES IT, THAT THING IS PRETTY MUCH DONE.
AND, UH, AS A REMINDER, THIS PLAN IS THE LIST OF CAPITAL PROJECTS FROM WHICH TYPICALLY THE BONDS OR, UM, EVEN THE YEARLY CAPITAL BUDGET, UM, KIND OF SELECT FROM THIS LIST OF CAPITAL PROJECTS.
UH, SO IT'S KIND OF A MENU FROM WHICH DEPARTMENTS CAN, CAN ORDER
[01:05:01]
OR, OR BOND TASKFORCES CAN ORDER.UM, BY THE TIME IT GETS TO US, THE DEPARTMENTS ARE PRETTY MUCH DONE WITH IT.
UM, IF WE WANTED TO ACTUALLY HAVE SOME INPUT INTO WHAT IS ON THIS LIST, WE WOULD NEED TO, UM, START TALKING TO THEM.
AND WE HAVE THE JOINT COMP PLAN COMING IN AND YOU KNOW, LATE IN THE DECEMBER, JANUARY, FEBRUARY, UM, SO, UH, THAT IS AN EXAMPLE.
WE HAVE THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMING UP IN TWO YEARS, UM, TO, FOR THE REVISION OF THAT.
UM, THAT WAS A BIG DEAL THE FIRST TIME WE DID IT.
UM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT STAFF HAS IN MIND ON THAT, BUT AS THE APPROVERS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OF UP TO US, UM, AND AS A REMINDER, THE MOBILITY PLAN, THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT, THOSE ARE ALL APPENDAGES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO, UM, UH, FROM MY OWN PERSPECTIVE OVER THE NEXT YEAR, UH, IN MY TENURE AND I'M WORKING TO SCHEDULE SESSIONS AND THEN LOOKING AHEAD TO THAT, UM, I JUST WANTED TO GET SOME THOUGHTS FROM THE COMMISSION, HAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE WANTED TO START HAVING PERHAPS MORE REGULAR BRIEFINGS FROM STAFF, UH, MAYBE UPDATES ON, YOU KNOW, ARE WE HITTING OUR PERFORMANCE METRICS THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT THAT ARE ATTACHED TO THE HOUSING BLUEPRINT NAVY OR THE MOBILITY PLAN.
UM, DO WE WANT TO START LOOKING AT DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? WHAT ARE Y'ALL INTERESTED IN DOING BEYOND JUST THE ZONING CASES THAT WOULD GET MR. SCHNEIDER? UH, THANKS, CHAIR FOR BRINGING THIS UP.
I THINK IT'S, IT'S A IMPORTANT AND REALLY RELEVANT TOPIC.
I FEEL LIKE, UH, UM, AFTER A FEW MEETINGS WHERE WE REALLY ARE DIVING IN ON SOLVING CASES, I, I SOMETIMES LOSE THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE BROADER THINGS THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT, THAT, THAT I WANT TO DO AS A COMMISSIONER.
AS I THINK BACK OVER THE LAST YEAR OR SO, WE'VE HAD THE MOBILITY PLAN, WE'VE HAD THINGS LIKE, EVEN THE REVISIONS TO THE FLOOD PLANS THAT, AND I KNOW SOON WE'LL HAVE THE REVISION TO THE, TO THE CLIMATE GOALS PLAN, THINGS THAT ARE REALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, 50,000 FOOT LEVEL THAT ULTIMATELY HELPS SHAPE THE DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE WHEN IT COMES TO ZONING CASES.
SO, UH, I WOULD, I DON'T KNOW WHAT, I DON'T KNOW.
YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A MOBILITY PLAN.
I KNOW WE HAVE A CLIMATE PLAN.
I KNOW THERE'S LIKELY OTHER LARGE HOLISTIC VIEW, UH, PLANNING, UH, DOCUMENTS LIKE THAT, PROCESSES LIKE THAT, THAT WE OUGHT TO BE LOOKING AT.
I JUST, UM, I'M NOT SURE I CAN NAME THEM.
UM, BUT GETTING THEM QUEUED UP, UH, OVER THE COURSE OF SEVERAL MONTHS I THINK WOULD BE A BIG HELP TO ME.
UM, TO REALLY TRY TO GET THAT BROADER PICTURE AS WE THINK ABOUT AMENDMENTS TO THINGS LIKE IMAGINE AUSTIN.
YEAH, THE COMMISSIONERS WENT AWAY IN PARISHIONER, CHARLOTTE AND HOWARD.
UM, SO WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING THE, I LANDED A DRAFT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, REALLY DID A LOT OF WORK ON LOOKING AT THE METRICS THAT WERE PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND UM, AND THEN ALL THE OTHER STRATEGIC HOUSING PLAN AND THE, UH, ALSO THE MOBILITY PLAN AND IT LOOKED LIKE THERE COULD USE SOME WORK ON THE ALIGNMENT OF KIND OF WHAT WE'RE MEASURING TO KNOW IF WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING GOALS.
SO I WOULD DEFINITELY LIKE TO, UM, UH, WORK ON THAT AS WELL.
I THINK WE ALREADY HAVE A LOT OF GOOD DATA, LIKE I SAID, FROM OUR REVIEW OF THE, UH, PLANNED CODE FOR SURE.
SO I THINK AS A, HAVING BEEN ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUST OVER A YEAR, I THINK, UM, AND UH, HAVING NOT BEEN HERE WHEN THE, UH, COMP PLAN WAS DONE, I THINK IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE, ALTHOUGH I SAW THE LOD PLAN, UH, UNFOLD, WHICH WAS REALLY A PRETTY EXCITING, I THINK IT'D BE NICE TO SEE THEY, HOW THESE ALL TIE IN.
AND SO LEADING UP TO THE ACTUAL REVISION, I THINK IT'S BEEN IMPORTANT FOR US TO TALK ABOUT THAT CONNECTIONS BETWEEN ALL THE PLANS AND TO BE ABLE TO EVALUATE THAT AND REALLY REMIND OURSELVES ABOUT WHEN WE LOOK AT ALL OF THE PLANS, THE AMENDMENTS, THINGS THAT ARE ON THE COMMISSION AGENDA TO THINK ABOUT HOW THEY REALLY SHOULD BE NESTED WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN.
SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING MORE ABOUT THE PLAN ITSELF.
[01:10:01]
OTHER PLANS THAT ARE COMPONENTS OF THE PLAN REALLY SORT OF REINFORCED THE OVERARCHING GOALS OF THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN.UM, SO I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF DISCUSSION STUDIES ABOUT, UM, LET'S SAY AREAS ALONG THE CORRIDOR.
I KNOW THAT, UM, IMAGINE AUSTIN TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THE MIXED USE AND DENSITY, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH CREATING NICE ROBUST CORRIDORS.
UM, BUT AS WE'VE SEEN ON THE LAST CODE, WE STARTED HAVING DISCUSSIONS ABOUT LET'S SAY AN AREAS OF GENTRIFYING OR UM, DIFFERENT ISSUES.
THEN WE SAID, OH, WHAT IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING? AND YOU KNOW, I, YOU KNOW, BEING IN REAL ESTATE, AS I STARTED LOOKING IN LIKE DIFFERENT AREAS, I'VE ACTUALLY SEEN THAT IF WE DO NOTHING, I'VE BEEN WATCHING THESE PRICES GO ASTRONOMICALLY BEING UP AND UP AND UP.
AND I'M LIKE, IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING, WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN? RIGHT? UM, CAUSE THE FEAR IS IF WE DON'T, IS TO NOT DO ANYTHING, BUT WE DON'T DO ANYTHING.
BUT SO IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A, WE, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT REALLY HAPPENS.
AND RIGHT NOW THE TWO CONCEPTS DON'T WORK.
YOU KNOW, WE IMAGINE AUSTIN ROBUST QUARTERS, BUT OH, BUT NOT HERE, NOT THERE.
BUT THEN WHEN WE DON'T DO IT, WHAT ARE THE REPERCUSSIONS? AND IT'D BE GREAT TO BE ABLE TO TALK TO OTHER REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONALS AS WELL AS OTHER STUDIES LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL MARKET RATES OF WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THOSE AREAS WHEN THERE'S NOTHING BEING DONE.
AND THEN COMPARED TO AREAS THAT IF WE DO DO SOME THINGS SMART, BE SMART ABOUT HOW WE CRAFT THESE CORRIDORS IN THESE MORE SENSITIVE AREAS, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY CREATE A BETTER BALANCE THAN JUST DOING NOTHING.
BUT I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE MORE REAL STUDY AND METRIC DATA.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, WE HAVE THE WHOLE CITY THAT HAS ALREADY KIND OF EVOLVED LIKE THAT AND WE CAN ALSO LOOK AT IT AND, UH, HELP US MAKE A BETTER, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, ANSWER TO THIS AND COME TO A BETTER CONCLUSION.
ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO WEIGH IN CONDITIONER? HANDFUL.
HI, I REALLY, UM, APPRECIATE THAT YOU BROUGHT THIS TOPIC UP.
I WOULD BE INTERESTED AS A COMMISSION IF WE COULD, UM, CARE MORE ABOUT TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTS.
UM, AND, UM, THESE GROWING CENTERS, NODES AND ACTIVITY CENTERS FROM THE LAST VERSION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS DONE SO THAT THE CITY, UM, DECISION MAKERS, THE PUBLIC CAN BE BETTER INFORMED ABOUT, UM, UH, WHEN WE DO THE UPDATE, UM, HOW WE NEED TO BETTER OR WHAT THE NEXT UPDATE NEEDS TO BE AROUND THOSE KINDS OF AREAS.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? FOR SURE.
I THINK EVERYTHING EVERYONE JUST SAID WAS PERFECT.
HOW IS IT, IT'S ALREADY EIGHT YEARS OLD COMPREHEND AND YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW SOME OF THE THINGS WE REALLY HOPED THE COMPANY WOULD ACHIEVE.
WE HAVEN'T EVEN BEGUN TO ACHIEVE A LOT OF THOSE THINGS.
I'D LOVE TO GET AN UPDATE FROM STAFF, WHOEVER THAT MIGHT BE AS FAR AS KIND OF HOW WE'RE DOING, YOU KNOW, ACCESS TO HOUSING.
YOU KNOW, HOW MANY PEOPLE DO WE CONTINUE TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S VERY STRANGE TO HAVE A CITY THAT'S SO STRONG ON JOB GROWTH, BUT SO DIFFICULT TO FIND A HOME KNOW.
AND OUR 36 YEAR OLD LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS CERTAINLY NOT HELPING.
SO WHATEVER WE CAN UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT.
AND I KNOW THERE'S COMMENTARY OUT THERE ABOUT, WELL WE'VE AMENDED IT.
YEAH, I'M A 41 YEAR OLD PERSON, A NEW HIP AND A NEW LIST AND A NEW, I'VE GOT A LOT OF NEW THINGS BUT I THINK I'M STILL 41 SO A AMENDING IT DOESN'T QUITE WORK.
SO HOW ARE WE DOING AS FAR AS BEING A MORE WALKABLE COMMUNITY? TRANSPORTATION IS PRODUCING ABOUT THIRD APPROACH AND IF NOT A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR US IN AUSTIN.
SO HOW ARE WE DOING ON THAT? UM, WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH SAUL? YOU KNOW, AS WE, AS WE ARE UNABLE TO LEGALIZE HOUSING HERE IN, WE'RE SEEING TONS OF HOUSING BEING BUILT, REPLACING FARMS, REPLACING FORCE 2030 35 MILES OUT.
WHAT IS THAT? DO YOU KNOW? I'D LOVE TO GET WHATEVER WE CAN HEAR FROM AS FAR AS LIKE THE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP, ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND HOW MUCH WE'RE FAILING THE FUTURE BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE ARE GROWING AS A CITY.
THE METRO AREA CAN JUST THINK ABOUT AUSTIN NEAR A METRO AREA FOR SURE.
AND THEN HOW ARE WE DOING A MODE SHIFT? I KNOW WE JUST SAW SOMETHING FROM STAFF SHOWING THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO DO IT WITH TRANSIT LANES AND ADD MORE SINGLE-OCCUPANT VEHICLE LANES AND THAT'S A BIG FAIL.
SO DOES THAT MEAN WE'RE JUST GETTING UP, LET THEM KNOW A LOT MORE FROM STAFF AS FAR AS ALL THOSE THINGS.
AND THEN OF COURSE THE STREET STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT AND ASN, BUT HAS IT BEEN ADOPTED INTO IMAGINE AUSTIN? SO
[01:15:01]
YEAH, HOW ARE WE DOING ON HOUSING GOALS? AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, HOW BAD ARE WE FAILING? ALL RIGHT.WHERE'S YOUR SEGER? I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A STUDIES DONE AND MORE EMPHASIS ON THE IMMIGRATION OF NATURE INTO OUR DENSE ENVIRONMENT.
WE NEED TO HAVE DENSITY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE HOUSING.
HOWEVER, WE ALSO NEED TO HAVE TREES AND PARKS AND FRESH AIR SO THAT WE CAN BE HEALTHY.
AND I REALLY LIKE TO SEE SOME EMPHASIS ON THAT THIS TIME AROUND.
IF THEY HAD A CONVERSATION WITH, SO SAID SOME BORING THINGS.
I JUST WANT TO SAY
THEY BOTH HAVE THEIR, YOU KNOW, OUR HOUSING BLUEPRINT WAS ADDED AND I THINK THE LESSON IS THAT IT WAS A LONG RANGE BARKS PLAN LAST YEAR.
THEY MADE IT IN STRATFORD GIVEN A PRESENTATION.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE HOW THESE AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED ON, HOW THEY HAVE BEEN IN, HOW IT HAS ALL WORKED TOGETHER WITH THE EXISTING BRAND THAT WE HAD DOCUMENTED THOUSAND 12.
SO JUST TO SEE IF THESE UPDATES ARE WORKING IN CONGRUENCY WITH THE LARGER PLAN AND HOW THAT IS TO MOVE FORWARD.
AND I THINK THAT HELPS US AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
WE SEE HOW SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE COMING UP WITH SINCE THAT CAN SOMETIMES YOU'VE GONE FLIPPING HOW THEY'D BE COMBINED AND ASSESSED BY US.
ANYBODY ELSE? OH WELL ONE TWICE.
UH, I'M GOING TO KEEP THIS IN MIND AND START TALKING TO STAFF.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE I'M STARTING FROM THE FRAMEWORK OF JUST THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN ITSELF AND DOING KIND OF AN INVENTORY OF ALL THE SUB PLANS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
AND, UH, AND, AND MAYBE USING THAT FRAME TO MOVE THROUGH THESE SUBJECTS IS, IS, IS AN APPROACH THAT THAT MIGHT WORK.
AND, UM, I WOULD SAY GENERAL, IF THERE'S, IF THERE'S A TOPIC THAT YOU'D LIKE TO GET A BRIEFING ON OR, UH, TALK, UH, JUST, YOU KNOW, GET AN UPDATE ON, UM, UH, GET SOME ANALYSIS, SEE WHAT STAFF KNOWS ABOUT THIS OR, OR INVITE, UH, GUESTS IN, UM, UH, PLEASE, YOU KNOW, GET IN TOUCH AND WE'LL FIGURE OUT HOW TO FIT IT IN THE SCHEDULE.
[Item C5]
ITEMS. C, FOUR C FIVE.SO THIS IS, UH, RIGHT NOW, UM, I, I DON'T THINK, AND ANDREW CAN CHIME IN IF I'M GETTING THIS WRONG, BUT I DON'T THINK WE FORMALLY ADOPTED THE THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER RULE, WHICH IS A MODIFICATION OF OUR OWN PRACTICE.
UM, AND, UH, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ANDERSON OUT, UM, A LITTLE BIT BEFORE THE MEETING.
UM, AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW, UM, DURING
UM, AND THEN THE FIRST THREE SPEAKERS FOR AND AGAINST ARE GIVEN THREE MINUTES.
BUT THEN AFTER THAT, AFTER THE FIRST THREE SPEAKERS, AFTER THE PRIMARY SPEAKER FOR AND PRIMARY SPEAKER AGAINST, WE HAD THEM DONE AT ONE MINUTE.
UM, AND, UH, CURRENTLY WE'RE GIVING EVERYBODY WHO SHOWS UP THREE MINUTES.
UM, SO, UH, I WANTED TO REVISIT THAT.
I THOUGHT THAT SOME OF THE TESTIMONY THAT WE RECEIVED, UM, AT OUR LAST MEETING GOT A LITTLE REPETITIVE AND, UM, UH, I COULD STAND TO GO BACK TO OUR OLD RULES.
SO, UM, BUT I WANTED TO, UH, TO JUST PUT THAT ON THE FLOOR AND SEE WHAT WE HAVE.
I THINK W WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH, UM, HAVING THE SPEAKERS SPEAK BEFORE THEIR ITEMS INSTEAD OF AT THE FRONT, UH, HAS HELPED A LOT.
UH, THE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES SEEM TO BE GETTING SMOOTHER AND SMOOTHER.
SO, UM, IF WE HAVE 30 PEOPLE SIGN UP, YOU KNOW, I WOULD, I WOULD RATHER NOT HAVE IT BE A, YOU KNOW, TWO HOURS OF MAYBE A ONE HOUR INSTEAD OF TWO HOURS, WHICH ALSO GIVES US TIME TO TALK ABOUT THE MORE BIGGER PICTURE PLANS AND THINGS THAT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE ON THE AGENDA.
SO THAT ALL ALL, UH, THAT'S FOR HUMBLE.
UM, TECHNICAL QUESTION, WHEN DOES THE TIME START? IS IT RIGHT WHEN THEY ARE GETTING A MUTED AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THEY'RE ON MUTE OR NOT OR, AND WHEN THEY START SPEAKING OR HOW IS IT MORE TIME? BECAUSE THERE'S THE TECHNICAL CHALLENGE TO GET TO START SPEAKING.
I'VE BEEN TIMING THEM IS, UM, JUST, UH, WHEN I CALL HER NAME, THEY AFFIRMED THAT HERE AND I SAY, OKAY, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, THAT'S WHEN THEIR THREE MINUTES STARTS.
[01:20:01]
SO WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU HEAR THEIR VOICE, I, THEY'RE ON THE LINE AND, YEAH.SO A LEAD CAN AMEND OUR PROCESS, UM, DEPENDING ON THE CASE OR A MIDSTREAM, CAN YOU REVIEW WHAT WE CAN AMEND, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THAT PROCEDURE? SO, UM, THESE ARE NOT, UH, THE TIMES ARE NOT IN OUR BYLAWS.
UM, THEY WERE APPROVED ON A VOTE.
UM, AND THEY'VE BEEN REVISED A COUPLE OF TIMES AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN HERE.
UM, SO, UH, THE, YOU KNOW, WHEN I FIRST RAISED THIS WITH STAFF, THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, SINCE YOU GUYS VOTED ON IT THE FIRST TIME, UM, I THINK THAT YOU GUYS SHOULD VOTE ON IT IF YOU WANT TO REVISE IT.
SO, UM, WE, WE COULD CONCEIVABLY OPEN UP A A MEETING.
WELL, NO, I'M GOING TO REVISE THAT.
UM, THE REACTION FROM STAFF WAS THAT, UM, WE SHOULD HAVE THE RULES FOR TIME LIMITS POSTED IN THE AGENDA POSTING.
SO WE NEED TO DECIDE BEFORE THE MEETING STARTED.
IT WOULD BE TOUGH TO CHANGE IT ONCE THE MEETING STARTS.
WHAT'S YOUR CZAR? THANKS FOR THE QUESTION REGARDING, AND THEN THIS MIGHT BE FROM STAFF TO HELP ME ANSWER THIS STILL FOR A DEMO AGENDA.
IS THE SIGN UP DYING THE SAME OR THE SIGN IT DYING? SHE SAID, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A CERTAIN TIME BY WHICH YOU HAVE TO SIGN UP IN DARK GRAY RULES.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN, AND DAN DIDN'T DO THE AGENDA? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
UM, MY, UH, STAFF'S HAS POST FOR ONE MEETING AND WE'LL TAKE THE EFFECT THE FOLLOWING MEETING.
UM, SO WE HAVE, AND SO I THINK THE LATEST AND ADDENDUM TO THE AGENDA GOES OUT IS FRIDAY AT NOON AND I BELIEVE THE SIGNUPS ARE DUE ON SUNDAY AT NOON.
COMMISSION LIAISON, ANDREW, RIGHT.
SO THE SIGNUP FOR BOTH THE REGULAR AGENDA AND, AND DEN DEM WOULD BOTH BE NOON THE DAY BEFORE THE MEETING.
AND UH, AND IS IT CORRECT THAT THE LATEST THAT UH, ITEMS ARE ADDED TO THE AGENDA IS FRIDAY, MAN, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE INVOLVED.
HAS SOME ITEMS MAY NEED TO BE REVIEWED BY THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
WHAT IS THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT REQUIREMENT FOR POSTING 72 HOURS? SURE.
I THINK THAT HELPS ANSWER MY QUESTION.
AND I ALSO, I THINK THAT, I THINK WE COULD BE RESPONSIVE AS A, AS A COMMISSION, SOMEWHAT ORGANICALLY ABOUT POSTPONING THINGS OR SURE.
TAKING OTHER ACTIONS IF SOMETHING IS SIGNIFICANT AND POSTED QUITE LATE FOR SURE.
I MEAN IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE WE COULD, WE COULD SET TIMINGS FOR SPEAKERS BASED ON THE IDEA THAT THERE WAS A, UH, A BIG CASE, UH, THAT HAD LOTS AND LOTS OF SPEAKERS, UH, WITH THE IDEA THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO HEAR EVERYBODY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE DON'T WANT TO BE DOING THIS AT THREE IN THE MORNING CAUSE WE'RE NOT MAKING GOOD DECISIONS AT THREE IN THE MORNING.
UM, AND IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE, YOU KNOW, NO MATTER WHAT'S POSTED ON THE AGENDA, IF THE RULES ARE AT THE CHAIR'S DISCRETION OR AT THE MAJORITY'S DISCRETION, WE COULD ADD TIME.
IT SEEMS LIKE HAVING THE SHORTER TIME AS A STANDARD AND IF WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP AND WE WANT TO ADD TIME TO SPEAKERS, UM, THAT, THAT COULD BE SORT OF AN AD HOC DECISION.
I'M BEING ADVISED BY STAFF THAT THAT IS NOT RECOMMENDED, UM, THAT ALL THE SPEAKERS
[01:25:01]
NEED TO BE TREATED THE SAME.UM, BUT UH, SINCE THE TIMELINES ARE POSTED AT THE TIME OF THE MEETING, HOWEVER, WE HAVE TRADITIONALLY OFTENTIMES GIVEN SPEAKERS ADDITIONAL TIME BY UTILIZING OUR QUESTION TIME, TRY AND PUT HIM IN A BIT OF A CONVOLUTED MOTION
AND THEN IF SPEAKERS, SO SHE MAY HAVE MORE THAN SIX SPEAKERS FOR IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN SIX, SIX SPEAKERS, IT GOES DOWN TO ONE MINUTE BURST SPEAKERS.
IT'S SORT OF LIKE A, IF, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TOO HARD, TOO COMPLICATED FOR YOU AND THE STAFF AND FIGURE OUT HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED UP BY MISSING.
SHE THINKS IF THAT'S ONLY FIVE SPEAKERS SIGN UP, THEY ALL SPEAK FOR A FEW MINUTES.
IF MORE THAN SIX SPEAKERS SIGN UP, THEN YOU GO BACK TO OUR SPEAKER TIME ALLEGATION, WHICH WOULD BE THE BAR MINNEAPOLIS APPLICANT HAS FIVE MINUTES, THEN THREE SPEAKERS BEFORE THREE MINUTES EACH AND THEN WE GO TO ONE MINUTE AFTER THAT.
BUT AS FAR AS LIKE A THRESHOLD AND SAYING HOW MANY SPEAKERS HAVE SIGNED UP? DO I HAVE A SECOND FOR THEM? MOTION.
I LIKE THAT IDEA OF TRYING TO SET UP A HIERARCHY, UM, THIS WAY AT LEAST THEY'LL, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO TRY TO PUT TOGETHER SOME, UM, LIKE A PRIMARY SPEAKER.
AT LEAST THE PRIMARY SPEAKERS AND THE OTHER PEOPLE CAN SPEAK OTHERWISE.
OTHERWISE EVERYBODY'S GOING TO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE, HAVE A LACK OF ORGANIZATION, BUT AT LEAST THIS WE CAN PUSH FOR MORE ORGANIZATION OF SPEAKERS.
UM, IF I, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE MOTION IS.
IS IT UH, SIX TOTAL OR SIX FROM EITHER SIDE OR BOTH? WHAT WAS THE MOTION AGAIN? I WOULD SAY SIX FROM EITHER SIDE, NOT SIX TOTAL.
SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE EITHER SIX, FOUR OR EITHER SIX AGAINST EITHER WAY YOU DRIP THE SWITCH, BUT IT CANNOT BE SIX AND FOUR AND AGAINST, CAUSE THAT WILL BE MOST CASES.
THAT DOESN'T SOUND REASONABLE.
I W I WONDER A SIX IS, I MEAN I'M, I MEAN THAT GETS, SEE WHAT SIX TIMES THREE LUCKY AT 18 WHAT, 18 MINUTES WITH SOME, I MEAN WHAT WOULD BE BE OPEN FOR LOOKING AT A LARGER NUMBER? I MEAN I DON'T KNOW LIKE 10 OR, I JUST THINK THAT'S NOT MUCH TIME AND WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT SIX WITH THREE MINUTES UP HERE.
SO THAT'S REALLY THAT THRESHOLD DROPPING DOWN TO A MINUTE JUST SEEMS LIKE WE'RE NOT SPENDING THAT MUCH TIME LISTENING TO PEOPLE.
IT SEEMS TO WANT TO CHIME IN AND SAY THAT STAFF IS A PLACE THAT WE CANNOT DO IT BY THE ITEM OR THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS, WHICH I THINK SUGGESTS THAT THE OLD METHOD THAT THE FIRST THREE ARE GIVEN THIS MUCH.
AND JUST AS A REMINDER, THOSE WERE THE RULES.
COVERT IS THAT THE FIRST THREE PEOPLE GOT THREE MINUTES AND THEN AFTER THAT EVERYBODY JUST GOT ONE MINUTES PER SIDE.
UH, CHRIS OR THOMPSON, I'M THINK YOU WERE SPEAKING AND THEN COMMISSIONER SEGAL.
I WAS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING TOO.
COMMISSIONERS ARE, BUT IF, IF STAFFER RECOMMENDED IT AGAIN, SECRET COMMISSIONERS ARE ALLOWED DONATION OF TIME.
I WOULD THINK THE DONATION OF TIME WOULD WORK AS USUAL.
UM, JUST I GUESS UNDERSTANDING CHAIR, I, MY HAND COMES OFF THAT I SHOULD GO.
THE STAFF IS NOT HAPPY WITH YOUR MOTION.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THERE, IT'S VERBOTEN OR WHATEVER.
UM, BUT, UH, DISCUSSION, BUT I GUESS I WOULD NOT, I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THAT DISCUSSION.
UM, I'M GONNA THROW SOMETHING OUT THERE.
UH, ARE, ARE NON-COVERED RULES ARE THAT THE FIRST THREE SPEAKERS GET THREE MINUTES AFTER THAT.
SOMETHING THAT IN MY VIEW IS PRETTY GENEROUS IS WHAT IF WE DOUBLED THAT AND SAID THE FIRST SIX GET THREE MINUTES.
BUT IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN SIX PEOPLE SIGN UP, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO START DOING TIME MANAGEMENT.
AND AFTER THAT YOU GET ONE MINUTE THINKING ABOUT IT.
I THINK YOU PULLED YOURS DOWN.
[01:30:02]
SECOND BY COMMISSIONERS ARE.UM, AND SO JUST TO SPEAK TO MY EMOTION, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'VE STARTED BRUSHING UP AGAINST THOSE LIMITS AT SOME OF OUR ITEMS BEFORE AND, UH, YOU KNOW, BUT TYPICALLY WE DON'T HAVE THAT MANY SPEAKERS.
SO TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, NOTHING WOULD CHANGE, BUT IF WE GET SOMETHING WITH A WHOLE HECK OF A LOT OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DO NEED TO MANAGE OUR TIME.
SO I THINK THAT THAT'S ALREADY DOUBLED THE AMOUNT OF SPEAKERS THAT WE GET THREE MINUTES BEFORE.
AND SO IT'S, UH, IT GETS PRETTY REASONABLE.
UH, AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T HAVE FACE TO FACE CONTACT YOU, IT'S HARD TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE CONNECTING WITH PEOPLE AND JUST NEED TO GET THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE TO MAKE THEIR ARGUMENT.
THE COMMISSIONER'S SPEAKING ON THAT, YOU WISHING TO SPEAK, CROCHET, ARE YOU VOTING YOU'RE ALREADY VOTING.
ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THE MOTION HEARING? NONE.
UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON THE MOTION TO PROVIDE THE FIRST SIX SPEAKERS, NOT INCLUDING THE APPLICANT.
UH, AND THEN AFTER THAT, SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE ONE MINUTE EACH.
I'M GOING TO QUICKLY SAY SOMETHING TO SAY.
UH, UNDER OUR CURRENT RULES THEY ACTUALLY GET SIX.
I ACTUALLY ASKED ABOUT THIS RICK.
SO I WASN'T SURE HOW THEY DETERMINED THE PRIMARY SPEAKER OF OPPOSITION BEFORE AND APPARENTLY THEY JUST GOT TO FIGURE IT OUT FOR THEMSELVES.
SO, UH, I THINK, UM, STAFF COULD PROBABLY FIGURE SOMETHING OUT IF PEOPLE WANT TO GET TOGETHER AND DESIGNATE A PRIMARY SPEAKER.
SO LET ME, UH, I'M IN THE MOTION AND SAY PRIMARY SPEAKER, UH, AGAINST AND THE APPLICANT, THEY BOTH GET THE SIX MINUTES AND THEN THE F AND THEN THE FIRST SIX GET THREE, AND THEN AFTER THAT ONE.
SO IS THAT OKAY WITH YOUR COMMISSIONERS ARE OKAY.
SO THE MOTION AS AMENDED, UH, AGAIN, UH, APPLICANT AS WELL AS PRIMARY SPEAKER AGAINST GET SIX MINUTES FOR SIX PEOPLE GET THREE MINUTES.
AND THEN AFTER THAT, EVERYBODY GETS ONE MINUTE.
READ FOR MY LITTLE SCRIPT HERE.
[Item D ]
SO LET'S MOVE ON TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. WITH THE REMINDER THAT WE HAVE, UM, THE BURNET ITEM IS, IS, UH, COMING UP.UM, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN ITEM.
UH, COUNCIL HAS, UH, A KIND OF GENERAL, UH, ORDINANCE COMING UP ON JUNE 4TH REGARDING, UM, GIVING, UH, BUSINESSES, SOME FLEXIBILITY IN, UH, GOING INTO PARKING OR, OR MAYBE OTHER AREAS TO HELP EXPAND THEIR SPACE.
UM, I'VE BEEN WORKING ON SOMETHING FOR A WHILE AND HAVE SOME MORE SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS.
SO IF, IF THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION IS, IS PRETTY GENERAL AND WE CAN OFFER SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS RELATED TO LAND USE, UM, THEN, UH, I'D LIKE TO OFFER THEM TO STAFF FOR, FOR IMPLEMENTATION, UM, FOR ANYONE INTERESTED IN SECONDING THAT THEY GET A SECOND PUBLICATION OR ANDERSON.
UM, AND THEN WE ALSO WILL HAVE A, UM, THE LONG RANGE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
UH, IF I CAN GET AN INFORMAL, UM, KIND OF SHOW OF HANDS, UH, JUST AS A REMINDER, WE'RE ON A TWO YEAR CYCLE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING AND THERE WON'T REALLY BE ANY EFFECT.
IF WE DO ANYTHING THIS YEAR WE COULD JUST VOTE TO, TO UM, REDO IT.
WHEN I THOUGHT IT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO GET A PRESENTATION ON THE LONG REACH SIP PLAN AND HAVE SOME DISCUSSION AND THEN THE MEMBERS OF THE JOINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE COULD AT THEIR DISCRETION GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH TRYING TO INITIATE SOME STUFF.
SO THERE WOULD BE A DISCUSSION BUT I DON'T THINK MUCH ACTION.
IF WE BROUGHT IT UP AT JUNE 9TH, WE WOULD HAVE, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT AND THEN TAKE ACTION AT OUR SECOND MEETING IN JUNE IF WE PUSH IT TO JUNE TO LATER JUNE BECAUSE OUR JUNE 9TH MEETING STARTS LOOKING STACKED UP, WHICH I JUST KIND OF DO IT IN MY DISCUSSION PROBABLY, UM, JUST EVEN OUT THE TIMES WE'D HAVE TO TAKE ACTION.
THAT SAME MEETING, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS A PROBLEM BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY DOING ANYTHING.
UM, IS EVERYONE, CAN I JUST GET A SHOW OF HANDS ON, ON WHO'S
[01:35:01]
OKAY WITH ME KIND OF USING DISCRETION ON WHICH MEETING TO SCHEDULE THAT ON.UM, DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER FUTURE ITEMS FOR THE JUNE 9TH MEETING? OKAY.
NOT NEW ITEMS BUT JUST I GUESS I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF HAS ENOUGH TO ASK FOR DO ITEMS SPECIFICALLY FOR ONE, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE GREEN.
IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED TO CONSIDER, I KNOW, I GUESS WE'RE STILL WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM THEM.
UM, THEY WILL BE COMING JUNE 23RD.
UM, WHICH IS RIGHT AFTER APPARENTLY THEY WILL BE BRIEFING COUNSEL ON WHAT THEIR OPTIONS ARE.
SO THEY SAID THAT'S THE EARLIEST THEY CAN DO IT.
AND THE OTHER ONE THAT I THINK I ADOPTED BY WAS JUST SOME GUIDANCE FROM STAFF REGARDING JUST A GUT ISSUE THAT WE HAD THE VEINING AND I THINK I WAS JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND FOR ENGINEERING DISTRICTS, THE WATER WAYS ARE GENERALLY BURNING GOOD TO YOUR PREVENTION, THE DISTRICTS.
HOW DO WE LOOK AT THEM? WHAT KIND OF USES ARE WE THINKING ABOUT FOR THEM AND SORT OF WHAT KIND OF ALL DO YOU APPLY FOR REASSESSMENT WITH THESE DISTRICTS? THEY NEED TO BE MORE THAN ONE EXAMPLE OF THAT.
UM, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT, UH, ASKING STAFF TO INCLUDE, UM, SOME INFORMATION ON THAT IN THE PRESENTATION OF THAT CASE? WHEN IT COMES UP, I, THAT'S FINE WITH ME AS WELL.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UH, JUST DATA ON AFFORDABILITY AND LOCKED.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE HOW MANY DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THAT PROGRAM AND MAYBE SOME CHARACTERISTICS OF THAT PROGRAM.
I'VE BEEN REALLY STARING A LOT OF, UH, DEVELOPERS TO IT AND ASKING THEM TO EXPLORE IT AND I THINK IT'D BE GOOD TO SEE WHAT KIND OF PRODUCTION WE'VE GOTTEN OUT OF THAT ORDINANCE.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT ONE? YEAH, LOTS OF, I WOULD SAY COMMISSIONER CZAR AND COMMISSIONER SHAW.
ARE YOU OKAY WITH ME SCHEDULING THAT JUST BASED ON WEDNESDAY I CAN GET HERE AND WHEN THE SCHEDULE IS SUPER TIGHT.
IN A YEAR WOULD BE, I THINK, UH, APRIL MAY TIME PERIOD, SO ANYTIME NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS WOULD BE GOOD KNOW, THAT'D BE FINE.
I JUST HAVE A COMMENT TO ADD TO THAT.
UM, IN A SMALL AREA OF PLANNING COMMITTEE, WE HAD A REALLY GOOD PRESENTATION FROM STAFF ON AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED AND SOME OF THE OTHER PROGRAMS THAT THE CITY HAS.
SO MAYBE SOMETHING MORE COMPREHENSIVE THAT IT'S, IT'S THAT PRESENTATION THAT THEY COULD GIVE TO THE COMMISSION I THINK WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL.
THAT WAS YOUR MOST RECENT MEETING? YEAH, I GUESS IT WAS OUR MOST RECENT IN PERSON MEETING.
CLARA, WAS IT THE ONE THAT WE ASKED HIM TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION ON ALL THE TOOLS? YEAH.
SO IT WASN'T OUR MOST RECENT, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS MAYBE A COUPLE OF THEM AGO.
WE TOLD THEM THAT WE WOULD LIKE THAT TO BE PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION, BUT I WILL PUSH, I'LL GO AND PUSH JEFFREY ON THAT BECAUSE I AGREE.
I THINK IF WE ALL KNEW ALL THE TOOLS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO US BECAUSE THEY'RE IN SO MANY DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS AND COMPARTMENTS RIGHT NOW, IT'S HARD TO KEEP TRACK OF.
IF WE ALL HAD ONE SPOT, THEN I THINK THAT'D BE GREAT.
JUST GETTING BASICALLY THE SAME PRESENTATION.
DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? YEAH, I JUST WANT TO MAKE, I HEARD SOME DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT I ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE MAYBE SOME METRICS ON WHAT KIND OF PRODUCTION CAME OUT OF EACH OF THOSE PROGRAMS. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS PART OF THEIR PRESENTATION.
I DO HEAR TOOLS THAT I ACTUALLY WANT TO SEE.
WHAT, WHAT ARE WE GETTING OUT OF EACH OF THOSE TOOLS? WHAT ARE THEY YIELDING? YOU KNOW, ANNUALLY THEY WENT INTO THAT KIND OF DETAIL.
ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT'S ALREADY DOING SITUATIONAL AWARENESS AND LONG RANGE PLANNING? UM, IT'S GOOD STUFF.
[Item E]
THAT IS FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. DID ANY OF THE JOINT COMMITTEES OR WORKING GROUPS MEET SEE A NOSE? AND, UH, WITH THAT, UM, DID I MISS ANY ITEMS? SCREW ANYTHING UP? I'M SEEING NOS.SO, UM, WITH THAT, IT'S SEVEN 51.
[01:40:01]