Jul 10, 2020 Special Urban Transportation

ALEX, IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.

UH, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

I THINK THAT TIME MIGHT BE WRONG FOR THE GERMAN.

I THINK IT MIGHT BE AN HOUR EARLY.

SO WHAT DOES IT READ RIGHT NOW? THREE 31.

AND THE MEETING BEGAN AT THREE AND THAT'S A FOUR 31.

YOU'RE RIGHT.

GOOD CATCH.

SO YEAH, THE MINUTES AS AMENDED.

UM, IS IT, UM, I MEAN, A MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED, OR CAN WE JUST APPROVE IT AS AN EXHIBIT? I THINK YOU SHOULD RESTATE THE MOTION.

UM, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED? UH, THE MINUTES FROM JUNE 12TH, 2020 OR 2020.

I'LL SECOND MOVE WAS FROM SUSAN? YES.

AND SECONDED BY MARIO.

UM, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, OR RAISE YOUR HAND.

IS IT EASIER MAYBE, I GUESS YOU CAN'T SEE ANY OF THOSE TIMES.

IT IS UNANIMOUS MOVING THROUGH.

[2A. NEW BUSINESS Street Impact Fee Study results and draft policy recommendation – Discussion and Possible Action Staff: Cole Kitten and Liane Miller, Austin Transportation]

THIS IS MEDIA.

WE REALLY ONLY HAVE THE ONE.

IT IS THE STREET IMPACT FEE STUDY.

UM, WE WILL LISTEN FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.

UM, EMILY, ARE THERE PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC? NO.

I GUESS I SHOULD HAVE ASKED YOU IF PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK, NOT ON ANY TOPICS, BUT I GUESS NONE OF THOSE, NO.

SO THEN WE WILL START THIS WITH, UM, STAFF AND THEN WE WILL MOVE INTO A PROPOSAL, UM, BROUGHT BY COMMISSIONER HENNESSY, UM, IS THE STAFF HERE? COLE, KITTEN AND LEANNE.

I SEE THEM BOTH TAKE IT AWAY.

I CAN'T.

JUST LOOKING AT THE OFFICE AND THE MIXED USE, SO 55,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE PAID A LITTLE OVER 300,000 IN MITIGATION.

OKAY, GREAT.

UM, AND IF, UM, YOU, TIM COULD BRING IT THE SLIDE.

THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

SO YOU ALL CAN SEE, UM, WAS SLIDE PRESENTATION, BUT MY NAME IS LEANNE MILLER.

I AM A PROGRAM MANAGER WITH AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, UM, IN THE LONG RANGE PLANNING GROUP, OUR SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT DIVISION.

AND I'M HERE TO TALK TO YOU GUYS TODAY ABOUT THE STREET IMPACT FEE.

THIS ITEM WAS ON YOUR AGENDA, UH, LAST MONTH, BUT YOU HAD A PACKED AGENDA AND, UH, YOU KNOW, A STRICT TIMELINE.

SO WE, WE BUMPED THIS PRESENTATION TO TODAY.

UM, AND SO I HAVE A GOOD NUMBER OF SLIDES.

I WILL HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET THROUGH THEM, UM, EFFICIENTLY.

AND THEN, UM, I KNOW YOU HAVE TO HAVE, UH, SOME DISCUSSION TO HAVE ON THIS ITEM.

SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND START.

UM, UH, SLIDE TWO IS A, UH, AN OVERVIEW OF THE PRESENTATION.

SO I WANT TO JUST BRIEFLY COVER IMPACT FEES IN TEXAS.

WE'VE, UH, TALKED TO THIS, UM, THIS COMMISSION BEFORE ABOUT IMPACT FEES.

SO I KNOW THIS IS NOT A COMPLETELY NEW TOPIC, BUT, UM, JUST GIVE A REFRESH.

AND THEN, UH, SINCE WE BRIEFED YOU LAST, WE'VE COMPLETED THE STREET IMPACT FEE STUDY.

UM, SO I WILL COVER THOSE RESULTS AND THEN GO OVER OUR CURRENT RECOMMENDATION FOR, UM, FOR THE POLICY THAT COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER, UM, LATER THIS MONTH AND THEN, UM, KIND OF GO THROUGH THE SCHEDULE.

SO, UM, SLIDE THREE, THE, UH, TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IS WHAT GOVERNS IMPACT FEES IN TEXAS.

UM, THEY ARE ALLOWED FOR MUNICIPALITIES TO CHARGE, UM, NEW DEVELOPMENT, UM, TO FUND OR RECOUP THE COSTS OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS NECESSITATED BY AN ATTRIBUTABLE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT.

SO, UM, A SPECIFIC TOOL RELATED TO NEW DEVELOPMENT, UM, TO FUND INFRASTRUCTURE OVER A 10 YEAR PERIOD.

AND SO, UM, IMPACT THESE IN TEXAS ARE ALLOWED FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, STORM, WATER AND ROADWAY INFRASTRUCTURE.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS WATER AND WASTE WATER, UM, IMPACTS THESE AND HAS HAD THEM SINCE THE NINETIES.

AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE ARE PROPOSING A ROADWAY IMPACT FEE IN AUSTIN

[00:05:01]

GOING TO SLIDE FOUR.

UM, WHY ARE WE DOING THAT RIGHT? WHY ARE WE PROPOSING A STREET IMPACT FEE IN AUSTIN? SO WE HAVE A CURRENT PROCESS TODAY FOR TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.

UM, HOWEVER, WE FEEL THAT THE, AT TIMES THERE ARE, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, CHALLENGES WITH THAT PROCESS AND WE WANTED TO DETERMINE A METHOD FOR GROWTH TO PAY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE, TO SERVE IT IN A WAY THAT IS MORE, UM, MORE EQUITABLE, MORE PREDICTABLE AND MORE TRANSPARENT AND EVEN MORE FLEXIBLE THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY.

AND SO, AND WHAT I MEAN BY, UM, BY THOSE THINGS IS THAT, UM, MORE EQUITABLE IN TERMS OF EVERY DEVELOPMENT, BEING ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE STREETS NETWORK BASED ON THE SAME ASSUMPTIONS AND CALCULATIONS.

SO WHEN WE COMPLETE THE STREET IMPACT FEE STUDY, WE'RE ESTABLISHING THOSE, UM, THOSE CALCULATIONS AND THOSE ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE ENTIRE CITY.

AND THAT MEANS THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE, UM, IF IT'S THE EXACT SAME TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT NEXT DOOR TO ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT, THEY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.

UM, VERY, VERY SIMILARLY.

AND, AND TODAY WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT AT TIMES IS, UM, IS INEQUITABLE MORE PREDICTABLE, A DEVELOPMENT, BETTER KNOW, MORE FIRMLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR MITIGATION DOLLARS ARE GOING TO BE UPFRONT IN THE PLANNING OF THE PROJECT WITHOUT HAVING TO DO A, UM, AN INTENSIVE STUDY, LIKE A TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS.

AND WHAT THAT WILL DO IS MAKE, IF YOU ARE REQUIRED TO DO A TIA BY THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, IT WOULD MAKE THAT PROCESS MORE EFFICIENT, WHICH WILL OVERALL SAVE TIME IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, WHICH WE THINK IS A BENEFIT BOTH TO THE CITY AND TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.

UM, WE THINK THAT THE, AN IMPACT WOULD BE MORE TRANSPARENT, BOTH TO, UM, SUPPOSED TO DEVELOPERS AND TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE, TO KNOW WHAT MITIGATION FUNDS ARE BEING COLLECTED AND HOW THEY ARE BEING SPENT.

SO, UM, AS PART OF AN IMPACT FEE PROCESS IN TEXAS, UH, CITIES ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT BOTH, UM, ASSIST STAFF AND COUNCIL IN THE PREPARATION OF THE STUDY, BUT ALSO REVIEWS THE REVIEWS, THE PROCESS EVERY SIX MONTHS, THEY RECEIVE A REPORT, UM, ON A SIX MONTH BASIS, EXCUSE ME, CAN THE CAT, UM, AND, UH, SO, SO THAT PROCESS WITH AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE ALLOWS FOR MORE TRANSPARENCY AND, UM, AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT REVENUE IS BEING COLLECTED.

AND THEN THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY KNOWS THAT, UM, THROUGH, UH, THE ABILITY TO HAVE A WORKSHEET WHERE THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO, UM, UNDERSTAND BASED ON THEIR INTENSITY AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AND WHERE IT WOULD BE LOCATED, WHAT THEIR MITIGATION DOLLARS WOULD BE UPFRONT.

AND THAT HELPS THE, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S SURROUNDING THAT DEVELOPMENT ALSO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED OF THAT DEVELOPMENT WHEN THEY COME IN.

AND THEN THE PRACTICE IS ALSO MORE FLEXIBLE.

UM, WHAT HAPPENS A LOT IN THE PROCESS TODAY, IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH, UM, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR TRANSPORTATION IS THAT, UM, UH, DEVELOPMENTS CAN BE REQUIRED TO CONTRIBUTE THEIR PORTION OF A PRESENCE OF, UH, OF, UH, AN INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT.

AND THAT MIGHT MEAN THAT THEY CONTRIBUTE A PORTION OF THE COST OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT, MEANING THAT UNLESS THE FUNDING FOR THE REMAINDER IS, UM, THE CITY ALREADY HAS, WE MAY BE SITTING ON THAT, THAT FUNDING FOR A BIT BEFORE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT CAN BE MADE.

AND SO WHAT AN IMPACT FEE WOULD DO WOULD ALLOW FOR, UM, BECAUSE THAT, THAT MITIGATION IS REALLY TIED TO THAT SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENT.

UM, IN AN IMPACT FEE SCENARIO, YOU ARE ABLE TO POOL FUNDS FROM MULTIPLE DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN ONE AREA TO DO INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS.

AND SO YOU MIGHT TAKE, UM, MULTIPLE CONTRIBUTIONS FROM DEVELOPMENT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE ONE IMPROVEMENT, SO THAT, UM, IS ALLOWED FOR, UM, THROUGH THIS PROGRAM.

SO ULTIMATELY WE CONDUCTED A TO DETERMINE WHAT IS THAT FAIR AND REASONABLE FEE FOR DEVELOPMENT TO PAY, TO CONTRIBUTE TO, UM, THE CAPACITY PROVEMENT NEEDED TO SERVE IT.

SO I'M ON SLIDE FIVE.

THIS IS, UH, UM, AN ANALYSIS THAT WE DID KIND OF LOOKING BACKWARDS AT SOME EXISTING, UM, DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE COME IN AND HAVE DONE MITIGATION AND WHAT THEY CONTRIBUTED UNDER THE CURRENT PROCESS.

AND NOT TO SAY THAT THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, AN, A COMPLETE EXAMPLE OF WHAT EVERY MULTIFAMILY OR WHATEVER HE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, OR EVERY OFFICE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE ASKED TO CONTRIBUTE.

BUT I THINK IT REPRESENTS A LITTLE BIT OF THE, UH, THE, THE INEQUITY THAT WE SEE IN THE CURRENT PROCESS.

UM, AND THEN WE'RE COMPARING TO THE COLLECTION RATE OF SOME OTHER CITIES IN TEXAS THAT HAVE IMPACTED THESE.

SO IF YOU LOOK, UM, FOR INSTANCE AT THE, UM, YOU HAVE A, UM, UH, AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, AN OFFICE BUILDING, UM, A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND A SINGLE FOR MOST PRIMARILY SINGLE FAMILY, UM, DEVELOPMENT.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, EVEN

[00:10:01]

AND, AND THEN YOU LOOK AT THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH HAS MANY TIMES MORE OFFICE SPACE AND A RESTAURANT, AND THEN APARTMENTS IN A HOTEL ROOM, AND THEY, THEY PAID 500 AND TO SEE 1000.

SO THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE'RE, UM, WE'RE VERY BALANCED OR UNDERSTANDING, UM, THE, THE, THE, THE MITIGATION THAT WOULD BE NEEDED TO SERVE THESE DEVELOPMENTS.

SO, UM, AND THEN YOU COMPARE THAT TO KIND OF WHAT SOME OTHER CITIES WOULD HAVE CHARGED THOSE DEVELOPMENTS, AND YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT IT DOES RANGE.

UM, AND THAT MAY BE THAT 55,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE ACTUALLY WAS, WAS BEING, WAS ON THE HOOK FOR MORE THAN, UM, THAN OTHERS.

SO THINK THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF THE RESULTS THAT WE SEE IN THE PROCESS TODAY AND HOW WE COULD IMPROVE, UM, ONTO SLIDE SIX.

UH, THE, THE REQUIRED STUDY OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IS, UM, SPELLED OUT PRETTY CLEARLY IN STATE STATUTE THAT, UM, WE NEED TO PROJECT GROWTH FOR OVER THE NEXT 10 YEAR PERIOD IN, UM, IN THE CITY.

SO WE ESTABLISH AREAS, SERVICE AREAS WITHIN WHICH THE FEE WOULD BE COLLECTED AND SPENT.

AND THOSE SERVICE AREAS ARE RESTRICTED TO SIX MILES, UM, REALLY IN DIAMETER.

SO POINT TO POINT ANY POINT, SHOULDN'T BE LONGER THAN SIX MILES UP, UM, IN THE, IN THE STATUTE.

SO, UM, WE DEFINE THOSE AREAS.

THERE ARE 17 DIFFERENT WE'LL HAVE, UM, SLIDES THAT HAVE THAT, UM, THAT MAP ON THEM.

AND THEN, UM, WE PROJECT THE GROWTH THAT'S EXPECTED IN EACH ONE OF THOSE AREAS.

AND WE CALL THAT THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, AND THEN, UM, PROJECT THE, UH, THE ROADWAY CAPACITY NEEDS, AND WHAT ARE THOSE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS THAT ARE NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE GROWTH WITHIN EACH SERVICE AREA? SO THOSE ARE THE THREE BASIC ELEMENTS OF THE, AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PROJECTS, WHAT, WHAT DO THOSE MEAN? UM, SLIDE SEVEN SHOWS THE DEFINITION FROM, UM, FROM THREE 95 OF WHAT THAT CIP IS, UM, IT'S ROADWAY FACILITIES ON OFFICIALLY ADOPTED ROADWAY PLAN TOGETHER WITH ALL OF THEIR NECESSARY APPURTENANCES.

SO THAT'S A REALLY CRITICAL PART OF THIS, UM, LAWS THAT ALLOWS US TO INCLUDE BOTH THE ROADWAY COMPONENTS OF THE STREET THAT NEEDS TO BE, UM, EXPANDED AS WELL AS THE PERTINENT IS, AND ALL THE ELEMENTS OF THOSE THREE CROSS SECTIONS AND THE OFFICIALLY ADOPTED ROADWAY PLAN IS IMPORTANT.

WE OBVIOUSLY ADOPTED THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN BACK IN APRIL OF LAST YEAR, COUNCIL ADOPTED THAT PLAN, AND IT INCLUDED ALL OF THE ROADWAY PROJECTS THAT, UM, HAVE BEEN NOW INCORPORATED INTO THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN FOR THE THREE IMPACT D SO IT'S MORE SPECIFICALLY SLIDE 18 SHOWS WHAT EXACTLY, UH, THE COMPONENTS OF PROJECTS THAT IMPACT THESE CAN PAY FOR.

SO THOSE THINGS THAT ARE CAPACITY RELATED AND ALL ELEMENTS OF OTHER CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

SO THE SURVEYING AND THE LAND ACQUISITION COSTS OF THE PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION, UM, AND AS WELL AS WE CAN, UH, USE IMPACT THE REVENUE TO PAY DEBT SERVICE.

SO, UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, UH, AUSTIN WATER DOES WITH THEIR IMPACT FEE REVENUE IS PAID DOWN.

UM, THEY DIS-EASE DEBT ON REVENUE BONDS THAT, THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY, UM, ISSUED TO MAKE AN INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS.

SO THEY'RE KIND OF PAYING DOWN THAT DEBT SO THAT, UM, THAT FREES UP FUTURE BONDING CAPACITY MORE QUICKLY.

AND THEN WE CAN USE THE FUNDING TO UPDATE THE STUDY ITSELF, BUT WE CANNOT PAY FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT IN THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN PROJECTS THAT, UM, ARE OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ON EXISTING FACILITIES.

UM, WE CAN'T UPGRADE EXISTING FACILITIES TO SERVE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

WE ONLY NEED TO LOOK AT THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT AND THEN, UH, NOT THE OPERATING COSTS OF THE PROGRAM.

SO, UM, ON SLIDE NINE, UH, WE HAVE, THIS IS A SCHEDULE KIND OF, OF WHERE WE'VE BEEN, UM, AND WHAT ACTIONS COUNCIL HAS TAKEN, AND THEN THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND, UM, COUNCIL COMMITTEES THAT WE'VE SPOKEN TO OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.

SO COUNCIL APPROVED THOSE STUDY ASSUMPTIONS, THOSE THREE BASIC ELEMENTS OF THE STUDY, UH, IN AUGUST OF LAST YEAR.

AND THAT ALLOWED US TO MOVE INTO THE LAST PHASE OF THE PROJECT WAS WITH CALCULATING THE MAXIMUM FEES BASED ON THE STUDY AND, UM, BRINGING A POLICY PROPOSAL FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.

SO THE IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THE REPORT IN MARCH AND THEN, UM, MADE IT POLICY RECOMMENDATION ON THE COLLECTION RATE AND, UM, OTHER POLICY ELEMENTS AT THEIR APRIL MEETING.

SO THAT WAS THE, KIND OF THE CONCLUSION OF THEIR WORK ON, ON THIS PROJECT.

UM, SO WHAT THOSE, UH, APPROVED STUDY ASSUMPTIONS ARE ON SLIDE 10, AGAIN,

[00:15:01]

17 SERVICE AREAS.

THIS IS ONE MAP OR A BETTER ONES THAT YOU SEE YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THEM MORE CLEARLY.

UM, THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, WHICH IS THE RESIDENTIAL AND EMPLOYMENT GROWTH OVER A 10 YEAR PERIOD.

AND THEN THOSE BROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN PROJECTS, UM, THAT I MENTIONED WERE, WERE DEFINED BY THE AUSTIN STRATEGIC MOBILITY PLAN.

WE WERE ABLE TO USE THAT PUBLIC PROCESS TO REFINE THESE PLANS, UM, DOWN TO, UM, TWO, TWO WHAT'S INCLUDED HERE, WHICH INCLUDES NEW ROADWAYS, UM, ROADWAY, EXPANSIONS, UH, ACCESS MANAGEMENT PROJECTS, IMPROVING SAFETY AND MOBILITY, AS WELL AS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT, BOTH, UH, SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AND GEOMETRIC IMPROVEMENTS LIKE THE ADDITION OR EXTENSION OF TURN LANES.

SO, UM, SLIDE 11 IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE, UM, THE ASM P WILL DEFINE AND, UM, THOSE THOSE RIGHT OF WAY, UM, RIGHT AWAY REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW ROADWAYS AND EXPANSIONS OF ROADWAYS.

UM, WE ARE UPDATING THE CRITERIA MANUAL, THE TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA MANUAL RIGHT NOW TO INCLUDE, UM, THOSE NEW CROSS SECTIONS THAT REALLY MEET OUR GOALS OF BEING A 50, 50 CITY IN TERMS OF MODE CHAIR IN AUSTIN.

THAT'S OUR ASM P GOAL OF BECOMING A 50, 50 CITY AND B HAVING MULTIMODAL STREETS THAT SERVE ALL MODES IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO GET THERE.

AND SO THOSE NECESSARY APPURTENANCES OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN INCLUDE THINGS LIKE THE SIDEWALKS, THE STREET TREES ZONE, THE, UM, THE BICYCLE FACILITY, THE MEDIAN.

SO NOT JUST THE ROADWAY, THE, YOU KNOW, THE ROAD BED ITSELF, BUT THE, UM, THE YEAH.

ENTIRE ELEMENTS OF THOSE CROSS SECTIONS.

UM, SO THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THOSE COSTS.

SO THE PROJECTS INCLUDE THOSE ELEMENTS.

UH, SLIDE 12 IS, UM, HOW TEXAS LAW DEFINES, UM, THE, THE SERVICE UNIT, WHICH IS REALLY THE MEASURE OF CONSUMPTION.

THAT'S ATTRIBUTABLE TO EACH UNIT OF DEVELOPMENT.

SO WE TAKE THOSE GROWTH PROJECTIONS AND THEN TRANSLATE THEM INTO, UM, THIS KIND OF DEMAND OR CONSUMPTION AND, UH, FOR ROADWAYS, UM, THAT UNIT IS A VEHICLE MILE.

SO ONE VEHICLE TO TRAVEL ONE MILE.

SO WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT HOW MANY VEHICLE TRIPS ARE BEING GENERATED, AS WELL AS THE LENGTH OF THOSE TRIPS AS A BASIS FOR, UM, FOR THE STUDY.

SO ON SLIDE 13, YOU'LL SEE HOW WE ACTUALLY CALCULATED THE MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE IN EACH, UM, IN EACH SERVICE AREA.

SO IT'S A FAIRLY SIMPLE FORMULA.

UH, THERE'S A LOT OF ELEMENTS THAT COME INTO THIS, OF COURSE, BUT ULTIMATELY WE'RE TAKING THE COST OF ALL THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PROJECTS, AND WE ARE DIVIDING THEM BY THE AMOUNT OF NEW SERVICE UNITS, THOSE NEW VEHICLE, MILES OF DEMAND, UM, AND THAT GETS YOU A DOLLAR PER VEHICLE MILE.

AND SO THEN WHEN YOU HAVE A DEVELOPMENT, IT'S GOING TO GENERATE X VEHICLE MILES.

SO YOU HAVE A DOLLAR PER HER PER VEHICLE MILE.

UM, AND THAT'S HOW YOU GET TO THE FEE THAT WOULD BE, UM, WOULD BE REQUIRED.

SO, UM, THIS MEANS THAT WE HAVE A MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE IN EVERY SERVICE AREA.

UM, AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE RECOVERABLE COST OF THE REALLY CAPACITY PLAN, THAT REALLY MEANS ONLY THE PORTION OF THE PROJECTS THAT CAN BE ASSOCIATED WITH NEW GROWTH OVER 10 YEARS.

SO THAT LITTLE GRAPHIC IN THE CENTER OF THE SLIDE IS SHOWING, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE ENTIRE COST OF THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN.

WE ARE ONLY ABLE TO RECOVER A PORTION OF IT.

I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT 56% OF ALL OF THE PROJECT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH GROWTH OVER A 10 YEAR PERIOD, ALSO ACCOUNTED FOR IN THIS CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES.

WE ACCOUNTED FOR, UM, CONTRIBUTION FROM DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE, AND HASN'T BEEN SPENT AS WELL AS CONDUCTED, UH, CREDIT CALCULATION THAT'S ALLOWED IN STATE LAW TO ACCOUNT FOR, UM, FUTURE AD VALOREM TAX SYSTEM FROM DEVELOPMENT.

SO WE WENT THAT EXTRA STEP AND CONDUCTED THAT CREDIT CALCULATION, UM, TO DETERMINE THE MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE IN EVERY SERVICE AREA.

SO ON SLIDE 14, YOU SEE, AGAIN, THE SERVICE AREA MAP, UH, THESE AREAS ARE NOT A GEOGRAPHY THAT WE ALREADY HAVE ESTABLISHED SUCH AS A ZIP CODE OR A CENSUS TRACK OR A, UM, A COUNCIL DISTRICT THEY'RE BASED ON THAT, UM, REQUIREMENT OF THE SIX MILE, UM, DISTANCE.

SO, UM, WE USED THAT, THAT AS A CRITERIA IN DEFINING THESE AREAS, AS WELL AS, UM, BOUNDARIES SUCH AS, UH, HIGHWAYS AND, UM, AND THE RIVER AS A, UM, A BOUNDARY BETWEEN KIND OF NORTH AND SOUTH.

SO, UM, THESE ARE THE AREAS IN WHICH WE HAVE A MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE FOR EACH, UM, FOR EACH AREA.

[00:20:01]

ON FIVE 15, I MEAN, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THE COLLECTION RATE FOR AN IMPACT FEE WOULD BE THE COUNCIL THAT ESSENTIALLY THE STUDY IS IT'S SETTING THE BOUNDS, RIGHT? THE MAXIMUM THAT COULD BE CHARGED AND TO BE DETERMINED, TO BE, UM, TO BE FAIR AND REASONABLE BASED ON, ON THIS TECHNICAL STUDY.

BUT THE COUNCIL COULD SET A COLLECTION RATE AT ANYTHING BELOW THAT, THAT NUMBER IN EACH SERVICE AREA.

SO, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS TO CONSIDER HOW TO COME UP WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION.

UM, THE FEE COULD BE VARIED BY SERVICE AREA.

SO YOU COULD USE A DIFFERENT COLLECTION OPTION IN EVERY SERVICE AREA.

UM, LAND USE COULD BE A CONSIDERATION HAVING A DIFFERENT RATE OR PERCENTAGE FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF LAND USES SUCH AS RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL.

THERE COULD BE A PHASED IN APPROACH.

SO YOU COULD START WITH ONE OPTION IN ONE YEAR AND TRANSITION TO ANOTHER OPTION IN A, IN A FUTURE YEAR.

UH, THIS IS WHAT THE CITY OF ROUND ROCK DID WHEN THEY ADOPTED THEIR ORDINANCE LAST YEAR.

UM, IN ALL SITUATIONS, UH, STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT DEVELOPMENTS ARE PROVIDED WITH OFFSET, UM, TO THEIR FEES, OTHERWISE DUE FOR ANY IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY BUILT.

SO THEY WOULD GET A DOLLAR, UM, CREDIT, UH, CENTER OR OFFSET FOR THEIR FEE OTHERWISE DO WHEN THEY COME IN TO, UM, TO GET THEIR BUILDING PERMIT.

SO, AND THAT COULD OFFSET THEIR FEE COMPLETELY.

AND THEN, UM, UH, REDUCTION.

SO OTHER TYPES OF ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS THAT COULD BE PROVIDED FOR ACHIEVING OTHER CITY OBJECTIVES, WHETHER THAT'S, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR TRANSPORTATION, DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, ABOUT WHAT TYPES OF REDUCTIONS ARE APPROPRIATE BASED ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S, UM, POLICY GOALS.

SO, UH, GOING TO SLIDE 16, THE IMPACT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAD AN INITIAL RECOMMENDATION, UM, TO, UH, TO, UH, FOR A COLLECTION RATE.

SO THEY WENT THROUGH A PROCESS TO DETERMINE THAT RECOMMENDATION.

THEY, UM, INITIALLY AGREED THAT HAVING A FLATTENED MAXIMUM OR PERCENTAGE ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY, UM, WAS BETTER IN THEIR MINDS AT, AT MEANING THAT EVERY SERVICE AREAS CONTRIBUTING THE SAME PERCENTAGE OR PROPORTION TOWARDS THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEED IN THAT AREA, RATHER THAN A FLAT RATE, WHICH WOULD MEAN SOME AREAS.

UM, THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE IS CONTRIBUTING MORE THAN THE CITY OVERALL.

UM, AND THEN THEY ALSO AGREED THAT, UH, RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL RATES SHOULD BE DIFFERENT AND THAT WE SHOULD, UM, LOWER THE COLLECTED RATE FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, UM, BECAUSE OF THE CITY'S, UM, HOUSING, UM, HOUSING SUPPLY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOALS.

SO, UM, THEY, THEY RECOMMENDED, UH, UH, 50% OF THE MAXIMUM IN EACH SERVICE AREA FOR NON RESIDENTIAL USES AND 35% OF THE MAXIMUM FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND WHAT THAT 50% NUMBER REPRESENTS, UM, IS DEVELOPMENT AND THE CITY OVERALL, UH, THE COMMUNITY OVERALL SHARING THE COSTS OF, OF, UM, INFRASTRUCTURE TO SERVE NEW DEVELOPMENT.

THAT NUMBER IS ALSO WHAT WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.

HAD WE NOT CONDUCTED THE CREDIT CALCULATION? SO YOU DON'T DO TAKE THAT EXTRA STEP.

UM, STATE LAW SAYS THAT YOU CAN ONLY CHARGE 50% OF WHATEVER THE MAXIMUM IS, UM, BASED ON YOUR STUDY.

SO THEY FELT COMFORTABLE WITH, UM, WITH THAT NUMBER.

AND THEN, UM, THE 35% OF THE MAXIMUM FOR RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, AND THESE ARE THESE MAXIMUMS AND IMPACTS THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE RACE ARE REPRESENTED IN THE TABLE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE FOR SOME EXAMPLES, FIVE EXAMPLE LAND USES.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEDIAN NUMBER FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME UNDER THE ADVISORY, COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION THAT 3,300, UM, NUMBER FOUR, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS ALMOST EQUIVALENT TO WHAT WOULD BE THE ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY MAXIMUM CALCULATION THAT WE USE TODAY TO CHECK ANY MEDICATION.

AND THAT IS BEING REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT TO MAKE SURE, MAKING SURE IT'S, UM, ROUGHLY PROPORTIONATE.

SO, UM, THAT WAS ANOTHER REASON THAT THEY WENT WITH THAT, UM, WENT WITH THAT NUMBER.

SO THAT WAS OUR INITIAL, UM, RECOMMENDATION SLIDE.

17 SHOWS THE, THAT INFORMATION IN A BAR GRAPH FOR A HOUSING.

SO, UM, WHAT YOU SEE IS, UH, THE GRAY BARS ARE THE MAXIMUM BASED ON THE STUDY, AND THEN THE ORANGE BARS ARE THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME AMOUNT.

AND THEN THE BLUE BARS ARE THE, UM, KIND OF FIRST LEVEL OF MULTIFAMILY YOUR ONE TO TWO STORY, KIND OF HOW SCALE MULTIFAMILY, UM, INCLUDING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.

YOU CAN SEE THAT THESE NUMBERS, UM, THE MAXIMUMS AND THEN

[00:25:01]

THE RELATIVE, UM, COLLECTION RATES BASED ON THE 35% OF THE MAXIMUM, UM, VARY PRETTY WIDELY ACROSS THE CITY.

UM, FOR INSTANCE, SERVICE AREA, K IS THE, IS THE HIGHEST, THERE'S AN EXPENSIVE, UM, BRIDGE PROJECT IN THAT AREA.

AND RELATIVELY, NOT AS MUCH GROWTH WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CITY OVERALL.

SO, UM, AND THEN WE HAD, UM, SOME OF THE OTHER, UH, HIGHER AREAS ARE AREAS OF THE CITY THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE NEED.

A LOT OF NEWER ROADWAYS, UM, ARE, ARE IN THOSE AREAS.

AND MOST OF THOSE APPEAR, UM, A, B, C O P G.

THOSE AREAS ARE MOSTLY ON THE EASTERN PART OF THE CITY.

UH, SLIDE 18 SHOWS THE SAME, UM, SIMILAR FAMILY AND TOWNHOME INFORMATION WITH JUST THE DOLLAR AMOUNT.

I THINK SOMETIMES THE BAR GRAPHS CAN BE A LITTLE HARD TO SEE THAT NUMBER.

AND THEN THE, UM, AND THE NEXT LEVEL OF MULTIFAMILY.

SO THREE TO 10 STORIES, APARTMENTS, AND CONDOMINIUMS, WHAT THAT NUMBER WOULD BE.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, AS YOU GET MORE INTENSE IN, UM, IN DENSITY OF, OF, OF HOUSING, YOU HAVE A LOWER DOLLAR PER, UM, DWELLING UNIT.

UM, RIGHT.

SO AS YOU, UM, HAVE MORE UNITS, THE FEE MAY BE MORE, BUT IT'S LOWER PER UNIT AND THAT'S RELATED TO THE TRIP, UM, THE TRIP GENERATION RATES OF THOSE MORE INTENSE USES.

SO, UM, WIDE 19 SHOWS AN EXAMPLE OF A 3000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT AND WHAT THE MAXIMUM AND COLLECTED RATE WOULD BE, UM, USING THAT 50% NUMBER THAT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMEND AMENDED AGAIN, SAME, SAME SHIT SHAPE OF THE GRAPH AS THE HOUSING BASED, THE MAXIMUM SLIDE 20 IS THE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE DEVELOPMENT.

UM, AND IT'S THE PURPLE BARS ARE SHOWING YOU THAT 50% OF THE MAXIMUM SLIDE.

UM, AND THEN SLIDE 21 IS, UH, THE YELLOW BARS ARE SHOWING YOU THE 50% OF THE MAXIMUM FOR A 50,000 SQUARE FOOT, UH, RETAIL DEVELOPMENT, AGAIN, SAME, SAME SHAPE OF THE GRAPH HERE.

SO, UH, THE, THE LAST THING THAT THE, UM, THE IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, UH, WORKED ON WERE SOME DRAFT RECOMMENDED, UM, DRAFT REDUCTIONS.

SO ON SLIDE 22, THE, THEY CAME UP WITH, UM, A FEW DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATIONS, THEN PUT THEM INTO TWO DIFFERENT BUCKETS.

SO TECHNICAL REDUCTIONS WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT IS DOING SOMETHING, THAT'S ACTUALLY REDUCING THE NUMBER OF TRIPS THAT ARE BEING, UM, VEHICLE TRIPS THAT ARE BEING GENERATED AND THEN POLICY REDUCTIONS.

UM, THE DEVELOPMENT IS, IS MEETING SOME BALD POLICY GOAL THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS, EVEN IF IT'S NOT NECESSARILY TRANSPORTATION SPECIFIC.

SO, UH, THE TECHNICAL REDUCTIONS WERE FOR INTERNAL CAPTURE.

SO I'M MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS WHERE SOME OF THE TRIPS ARE NOT ACTUALLY LEADING THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF, THE STRUCTURE BEING CAPTURED WITHIN, UM, AND YOU COULD GET UP TO A 20% REDUCTION FROM THE EFFECTIVE RATE FOR INTERNAL CAPTURE, AND THEN A TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT REDUCTION FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE USING, UM, APPROVED TDM STRATEGIES, UM, WITH A REDUCTION OF UP TO 40% FROM THE EFFECTIVE RATE.

SO BETWEEN THE TWO OF THOSE COULD GET UP TO A 60% REDUCTION AND THEN, UM, A POLICY REDUCTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IT DIDN'T SPECIFY THE EXACT, UM, THE EXACT LANGUAGE AND, AND DEFER TO STAFF TO LOOK AT, IMAGINE AUSTIN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, A PROCESS TO, UM, TO SHAPES THAT, THAT, THAT, UM, POLICY REDUCTION.

SO, UM, WE'VE GONE BACK AND DONE THAT.

AND I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A FEW SLIDES.

SO SLIDE 23, WE WENT TO, UM, TALK TO PRESENTED THIS, UH, RECOMMENDATION TO MANY DIFFERENT GROUPS AND TO GOT SOME FEEDBACK ON, UM, WHAT PEOPLE WERE SEEING IN THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY AND THE RESULTS OF THAT RECOMMENDATION.

AND SO WHAT WE HEARD WERE, UM, SOME CONCERNS ABOUT HOW SMALLER AND INSOLE DEVELOPMENTS WOULD BE IMPACTED BY AN IMPACT FEE.

IF THOSE SPECIALIST, THOSE DEVELOPMENTS TODAY THROUGH THE CURRENT PROCESS ARE NOT, ARE NOT CONTRIBUTING ANY MITIGATION, UM, FOR TRANSPORTATION AND HOW THEY WOULD BE EFFECTED BY THIS, UM, WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE CONTINUING TO ENCOURAGE ADU AND THAT THIS POLICY WAS NOT, UM, IN CONFLICT WITH ANY EXISTING POLICY WE HAD TO DO ENCOURAGE YOU TO USE NOT WANTING TO DISINCENTIVIZE, UM, MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AS A, AS A POLICY GOAL, WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THAT THIS POLICY CONSIDERED EQUITY HISTORIC UNDER AN, AN INVESTMENT IN CERTAIN PARTS OF THE CITY, AS WELL AS AFFORDABILITY IMPACTS, UM, WANTING TO LOOK AT REDUCTIONS FOR, FOR DEEPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND HOW CAN WE, HOW CAN WE PROVIDE THE HIGHEST REDUCTIONS FOR THOSE TYPES, SO DEVELOPMENT, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ENCOURAGING SUSTAINABLE

[00:30:01]

TRANSPORTATION, MEETING OUR H AND P GOALS, AND THEN, UM, CONSIDERING THE CURRENT ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT OF BEING IN A PANDEMIC, UM, AS WELL AS, UH, WANTING, UM, YOU KNOW, WANTING TO, TO HEAR THAT GROWTH IS AS PAYING FOR ITSELF AS HELPING TO PAY ITS FAIR SHARE.

SO THIS IS A GENERAL SENTIMENT THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM, UM, SEVERAL DIFFERENT GROUPS, UM, THAT STAFF THEN TOOK BACK AND LOOKED AT AS WE WERE, I'M LOOKING AT THE RECOMMENDATION, LOOKING AT, UM, FURTHER REDUCTIONS AND HOW WE MIGHT, UM, MIGHT TWEAK OR CRAFT THE FINAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR COUNCIL.

SO WE STARTED WITH THAT IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION.

UM, BUT WHAT WE NOTICED WAS THAT WE WERE ASKING NEWLY, UM, DEVELOPING AREAS THAT ARE NOW PROBABLY THE MOST AFFORDABLE PARTS OF AUSTIN, THOSE, UM, EASTERN CRESCENT SERVICE AREAS TO PAY THE HIGHEST FEES.

UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST WE'VE FUNDED.

UM, MOST WE FUNDED AS A COMMUNITY AND A LOT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE HAVE TODAY, UH, WE HAVEN'T REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT TO ALWAYS PAY THERE.

THERE IS A COMMUNITY WIDE PROGRAM.

BONDS ARE AN EXAMPLE OF THAT.

SO IT SEEMED WE WERE HAVING AS A STAFF, UM, INTERDEPARTMENTAL TEAM OF PLANNERS FROM NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING PLANNING AND ZONING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, HAVING, HAVING, UM, FEELING THAT IT WAS SEEMING INEQUITABLE.

YOU ASK THE EAST SIDE TO ESSENTIALLY PAY ITS OWN WAY OR EAST SIDE DEVELOPMENTS THAT MAY THEN PASS THAT FEE DOWN TO THEIR, UM, TO THEIR CONSUMERS, KIND OF, UM, TO PAY THAT, UH, HAVE TO PAY THAT FEE.

SO OUR WHILE OUR, OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UM, BUILDS ON THE IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO ON SLIDE 14, I'M SORRY, 24 FOR, UM, SHOWING THAT, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WE UTILIZE THE CITY OF THE IMPACT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEES PERCENTAGES OF THE 50 AND THE 35%, BUT WE APPLIED THOSE TO THE CITYWIDE MAXIMUM.

SO IF WE ASSUMED IF WE ERASED ALL THE SERVICE AREAS AND ASSUMED, UM, WHAT ALL THE GROWTH AND ALL OF THE PROJECTS WOULD BE WHAT THAT CITYWIDE MAXIMUM WOULD BE.

AND SO WE WOULD HAVE A DOLLAR PER VEHICLE MILES FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL AT 50% OF THAT MAXIMUM.

AND THEN, UH, 3,500 IT'S KIND OF MAXIMUM FOR RESIDENTIAL USES A DOLLAR $850 PER VEHICLE MILE.

SO WHAT THAT DOES IS INSTEAD OF HAVING A DOLLAR AMOUNT AND EVERY SERVICE AREA, WE WOULD ONLY HAVE, UM, WE WOULD ONLY HAVE REALLY THOSE TWO NUMBERS AND THEN THAT RESULTS IN, UM, SO THE EXAMPLE LAND USES IN THE SLIDE, IN THE TABLES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE.

SO ON THE RIGHT, THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE LOOP FOR THOSE FIVE EXAMPLE LAND USES.

AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE LOOP? THAT'S OUR, UM, CONSIDERATION IN THE STUDY OF TRIPLINK.

SO TRIPLINK'S OCCURRING OUTSIDE OF THE LOOP BEING LONGER THAN TRIPS OCCURRING WITHIN THE CENTRAL CITY.

SO THE, UM, THE LOOP IN THIS CASE IS A ONE 83 71, THREE 60.

SO THE SERVICE AREAS WITH INSIDE THE LOOP ARE F I J L AND DOWNTOWN.

AND THEN, UM, SO ALL SERVICE AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE LOOP WOULD BE PAYING THE SAME FOR THE SAME TYPE OF LAND USE AND ALL AREAS INSIDE THE LOOP WOULD PAY THE SAME.

SO WE FELT LIKE THIS SIMPLIFIED, UM, THE PROCESS OVERALL, WE WOULDN'T HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT, UM, DIFFERENT VALUES AND IT IMPROVED EQUITY BECAUSE, UM, DEVELOPMENTS ON, ON THE EAST SIDE, WOULDN'T BE BEING ASKED TO CONTRIBUTE MORE BASED ON HISTORIC, UNDER INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE, IN THOSE AREAS AS THOSE AREAS ARE, ARE DEVELOPING.

SO, UM, WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE FOR MORE EXAMPLES ON SLIDE 25, THIS IS, UM, WHAT, WHAT DOLLAR AMOUNT WISE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS WOULD PAY.

SO, UM, THERE'S THE 3000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, 10,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE, 50,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL DEVELOPMENT FOR THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE LOOP, UM, SERVICE AREAS, AS WELL AS WHAT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT, UM, LOW RISE MULTIFAMILY AND MID-RISE MULTIFAMILY, UM, RATES WOULD BE.

SO, UH, NOW WE WANT TO GO KIND OF GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE EXAMPLES AT THE BEGINNING THAT I SHOWED AT THE BEGINNING OF, OF WHAT WE HAVE, UM, RECEIVED FROM DEVELOPMENT IN THE PAST.

AND THEN HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO THE, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE WERE MAKING? SO SLIDE 26 IS LOOKING AT SERVICE AREA G UM, A, WHICH IS EAST AUSTIN, UM, INCLUDING THE COLONY PARK AREA.

WE TOOK THOSE EXHIBIT AND, UM, FOR EXAMPLE, COMPARED THEM TO THE STUDY

[00:35:01]

MAXIMUM.

SO WHAT WAS THE RESULT OF THE STUDY? AND THEN, UM, WHAT WOULD THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION FROM THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THEN OUR REVISED RECOMMENDATION AND HOW THAT CHANGED.

SO, AND THEN COMPARING AGAIN TO THOSE OTHER, UM, THOSE OTHER CITIES IN TEXAS FORT WORTH BEING THE LARGEST CITY IN TEXAS, BESIDES AUSTIN, UM, OR THE LARGEST CITY IN TEXAS THAT HAS REALLY IMPACT THESE TODAY.

UM, ROUND ROCK BEING, UM, CLOSE TO US, WE WERE BILL AND GEORGETOWN ARE ALSO WORKING ON THEIR, UM, PROGRAMS RIGHT NOW.

UM, AND THEN FRISCO IN PAST FROM BEING, UM, FAST GROWING CITIES IN TEXAS.

SO WE, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION TO THE REVISED STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE COLLECTED RATE WOULD GO DOWN SLIGHTLY, WOULD GO DOWN, UM, IN SERVICE AREA G WHICH WAS ONE OF THE HIGHER MAXIMUMS, UM, FROM, FROM THE STUDY.

AND THEN WHEN WE LOOK AT THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS IS SERVICE AREA I FOR, FOR THE CENTRAL OFFICE AREA.

AND, UM, WHILE STILL, UH, STILL LOWER THAN SERVICE AREA G BECAUSE OF THOSE LOWER TRIPLINK, UM, THE FEE.

AND I WENT UP SLIGHTLY WITH THE RECOMMENDATION, UM, TO HAVE IT A FLAT FLAT DOLLAR PER VEHICLE MILE ACROSS THE CITY.

SO WE FELT LIKE THAT WAS MORE EQUITABLE RESULTS, UM, GOING ON TO SLIDE 28, WE ALSO SO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS.

SO WE FURTHER DEFINE WHAT'S THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REDUCTION REDUCTION WOULD LOOK LIKE, AND THEN, UM, PROPOSED ONE FOR INSTILL UNITS.

SO, UM, EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LAND USES THAT ARE ADDING A SMALL NUMBER OF UNITS WITHOUT ADDING NEW PARKING AND THEN, UM, UH, BUILDING REUSE, UM, TO INCENTIVIZE THE REUSE OF EXISTING, UM, BUILDING STOCK, UM, AND THEN SETTING THE ULTIMATE MAXIMUM CUMULATIVE REDUCTION AT A HUNDRED PERCENT.

SO SLIDE 29, IT SHOWS THE DRAFT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE FOR THE INTERNAL CAPTURE AND PDM REDUCTIONS CAPTURING THAT, UM, 20% WOULD BE THE PRODUCE UP TO 20% FOR INTERNAL CAPTURE UP TO 40% FOR TDM, UM, FOR USING THEIR TDM PLAN.

SLIDE 30 IS THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REDUCTION.

UM, SO IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT QUALIFY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO ENTER AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR AT LEAST 15 YEARS, THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO CERTIFY, UH, OR THE CITY WOULD CERTIFY THE AFFORDABILITY LEVELS AND PERIOD OF AFFORDABILITY.

UM, AND THEN THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE TO UTILIZE TDM, UM, A TDM PLAN.

AND SO IF THE DEVELOPMENT QUALIFIED, MET THOSE QUALIFICATIONS, THEY WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR REDUCTIONS BASED ON A NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS BEING PROVIDED.

SO, UM, KIND OF A TIERED IF AT LEAST 10%, UM, THEN THAT NUMBER OF UNITS WOULD BE THE RE OR THAT PERCENTAGE OF UNITS WOULD BE THE REDUCTION RECEIVED AT, UH, AT LEAST 20% AFFORDABLE UNITS.

YOU COULD GET A 50% REDUCTION, AND THEN AT LEAST A 50% OF THE UNITS ARE AFFORDABLE.

IT WOULD BE A 100% REDUCTION SLIDE, 31 SHOWS THOSE OTHER TWO, UM, NEW NEW PROPOSALS.

SO THE INSOLE UNITS REDUCTION WOULD BE FOR EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LAND USES THAT ADD UP TO THREE ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS.

THEY COULD RECEIVE A HUNDRED PERCENT REDUCTION IF NO ADDITIONAL PARKING WAS ADDED.

WE BELIEVE THIS WOULD COVER THE EXAMPLE OF AN ADU, UM, THAT'S BEING ADDED WITH NO, NO ADDITIONAL PARKING.

UM, AND, UH, THE BUILDING REUSE REDUCTION WOULD BE FOR EXISTING OCCUPIED BUILDINGS TO BUILDING IS NOT BEING DEMOLISHED.

AND THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE IS BEING MODIFIED BY LESS THAN A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET WOULD RECEIVE, UM, A HUNDRED PERCENT REDUCTION.

SO THIS WOULD COVER CHANGES OF USE IN EXISTING BUILDINGS, AS WELL AS SMALL MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS.

SO, UM, SMALL REMODELS, THINGS LIKE THAT, UM, WE FELT LIKE THIS WOULD, UM, HELP OUT SOME SMALL BUSINESS, UM, TYPES OF USES.

AND THEN, UM, CUMULATIVE REDUCTIONS AGAIN, UP TO 100%.

SO SLIDE 32 IS SHOWING A SUMMARY OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.

I TRIED TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE THAT MAY HAVE CHANGED, UM, FROM THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION.

SO LOOKING AT THE CITYWIDE MAXIMUM, HAVING THAT TIERED APPROACH FOR THE AFFORDABLE UNIT, UM, THE INSTILL UNITS AND THE BUILDING REUSE REDUCTIONS, UM, ONE, ONE NOTE ON HERE, THE EFFECTIVE DATE, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING, UM, UH, THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PROGRAM.

SO STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT, UM, FOR PREVIOUSLY PLOTTED PROPERTIES, THERE WOULD BE NO COLLECTION OF FEES FOR ONE YEAR.

SO THEY WOULD HAVE A ONE YEAR GRACE PERIOD ESSENTIALLY, UM, TO RECEIVE THEIR BUILDING PERMIT BEFORE FEES WOULD BE COLLECTED.

UM, THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED

[00:40:01]

THAT WE EXTEND THAT GRACE PERIOD TO ALL PROPERTIES, UM, AS, AS A WAY FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT TO, TO HAVE THAT UNDERSTANDING AND HAVE THAT ONE YEAR GRACE PERIOD, AND ALSO TO ALLOW FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROCESS TO, TO ADMINISTER THIS PROGRAM.

SO, UM, SO THAT IS ALSO PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION INCLUDED IN THE, IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.

UH, NEXT SLIDE IS THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS.

SO SLIDE 33, UM, SHOWS THE, UM, WE HAVE OBVIOUSLY A MEETING TODAY.

UM, WE ARE REQUESTING A RECOMMENDATION, UH, OR I'M SORRY, BUT WE HAVE A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON TUESDAY, UM, WHERE WE WILL BE REQUESTING THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AS THEY IS THE, UM, ORDINANCE WOULD BE AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SO WE NEED THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS TO GO TO COUNCIL, UM, ON JULY 30TH COUNCIL, UH, HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE IMPACT, THE, UM, ORDINANCE.

AND THEN WE ARE ALSO HOLDING A PUBLIC MEETING ON JULY 21ST.

I MENTIONED WE WE'VE MET WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, BUT, UM, WE WANTED TO HAVE A, UH, OPEN TO ANYONE, UM, PUBLIC MEETING THAT, UM, IS GOING TO INCREASE FOOD, UM, SOME DIFFERENT PANELISTS THAT CAN PROVIDE THEIR PERSPECTIVE AND IMPACT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBER, COUNCIL MEMBER, KITCHEN, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR FROM THE CITY OF FORT WORTH, UM, SO THAT THEY CAN ALL KIND OF, UM, DISCUSS AND REFLECT ON THE, UM, ON THE CURRENT, UH, SLIDE 34 IS, IS THE WEBSITE AUSTIN, TEXAS.GOV/STREET IMPACT FEE IS WHERE, UM, YOU AND THE COMMUNITY CAN FIND THE STUDY REPORT.

OTHER INFORMATION ON THE IMPACT FEE, UH, PROGRAM YOU CAN SIGN UP TO RECEIVE EMAIL UPDATES WILL BE, UM, MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND HOW THEY CAN SIGN UP FOR THAT.

UM, YOU CAN REQUEST A PRESENTATION IF YOU'RE PART OF A GROUP THAT YOU THINK WOULD BE INTERESTED IN LEARNING MORE ABOUT THIS.

AND THEN YOU CAN ALSO FIND INFORMATION ABOUT THE IMPACT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN THEIR, UM, DELIBERATION.

UM, AND THEN MY LAST SLIDE IS JUST MY CONTACT INFORMATION.

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO EMAIL ME IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS BEYOND THIS MEETING, UM, ON, ON THE IMPACT OF THE PROCESS AND AGAIN, THE WEBSITE OFTEN TAXES THAT GO STRAIGHT IMPACT FEE.

UM, AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE.

UM, I WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU ALL.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

UM, COLE KITTEN, MY DIVISION MANAGER IS ON AND AS WELL AS, UH, JUST WHITAKER WITH KIMLEY HORN, WHO'S OUR CONSULTANT ON THIS PROJECT, UM, TO HELP ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ARE MAY HAVE.

SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION THERE TO DIGEST PROBABLY COULD HAVE STOPPED ALONG THE WAY.

I'M SORT OF TAKING NOTES, BUT, UM, THERE ARE MANY QUESTIONS AND PLUS WE DO HAVE A KIND OF, UM, DVD, UH, RECOMMENDATION FROM DAN TO GO THROUGH.

SO SOME OF THOSE MIGHT OVERLAP.

I DON'T KNOW DAN, I WOULD, UM, I THINK IF YOU DON'T MIND AND CAN KIND OF APPOINT YOU SORT OF LEAD QUESTIONNAIRE, IF YOU WANT TO ASK THEM NOW, DO YOU WANT TO SAVE STUFF FOR, I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO ASK EVERYBODY ELSE TO DO THEIR QUESTIONS CAUSE I'M SO IN THE WEEDS ON THE THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR, WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE THINKING BEFORE I START GOING INTO TECHNICAL DETAILS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

EITHER FROM Y'ALL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE, THE COLLECTION RATE ITSELF.

UM, ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO RAISE A HAND? UM, THEY HAVE SOME THINGS THEY WANT TO DISCUSS OR QUESTIONS THEY WANT TO ASK OR SPEAK UP SINCE I CAN'T SEE KELLY OR ALEX OR SAM.

UM, I DON'T WANT TO ASK A, A KIND OF A CORE QUESTION, ALTHOUGH THIS IS MAYBE GETTING INTO DAN'S, UM, STUFF, YOU KNOW, I LOVE A LOT ABOUT THIS, BUT THERE IS THIS SORT OF THEORY AROUND VMT BEING, UH, A CITYWIDE MEASURE.

AND I CAN UNDERSTAND JUST TACTICAL REASONS FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, BUT IN AN IDEAL WORLD, WOULDN'T IT BE TRUE THAT YOU WOULD DO A SIX MILE RADIUS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT AND YOU WOULD, OR YOU WOULD HAVE A MUCH SMALLER ZONE AND FIGURE OUT SOME WAY TO AMELIORATE THE EASTERN PRECEDENTS UNDER INVESTMENTS.

SO THIS IS GOING TO BE MORE EXPENSIVE.

I GET THAT.

THAT'S TRUE.

UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT HAS BEEN EQUITABLE TO THE OTHER PLACES THAT THEY BENEFITED FROM DECADES OR GENERATIONS THAT HAD DESTINY, BECAUSE NOW THEY'RE JUST KIND OF LOCKING IN THOSE SAVINGS.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO PUNISH THOSE PEOPLE, BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED.

IS THERE STILL ROOM TO FLEX ON THAT, ON THE, ON THE COLLECTION RATE ITSELF AND WHERE I THINK THE PERSON ABSOLUTELY PERCENTAGE EVERYWHERE, MAYBE HERE IT'S 30 IN THERE IT'S 45 OR I ABSOLUTELY ANTICIPATE THAT WE WILL HAVE A ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS

[00:45:01]

UM, I THINK WE, WE WANTED TO HOLD ON TO THE, THE IMPACT OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE'S INITIAL RECOMMENDATION AND INCORPORATE THAT, UM, AS A CITYWIDE LOOKING AT WITH A CITY WIDE LENS, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, THAT THERE MAY BE OTHER REASONS THAT WE WOULD, WE WOULD ADJUST THAT, UM, THAT COLLECTED RATE.

SO IF WE'RE GOING TO THIS, ISN'T A SPECIFIC PROPOSAL REALLY, BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE, I APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT.

I THINK THAT'S RIGHT ON THAT.

THE AREAS THAT, UM, HAVE BEEN UNDERSERVED GET, UM, SOME AMELIORATION AND THE OTHER ONES DON'T LOCK IN THAT ADVANTAGE BECAUSE SUDDENLY NOW IT'S EVEN FOR EVERYBODY WHEN IT WASN'T IN THE PAST, DOES ANYONE ELSE WANT TO THROW IN A QUESTION? I HAVE A QUESTION AND I HOPE I CAN STATE IT CLEARLY.

UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LIKED ABOUT THE GOALS OF THIS IS MEETS YOU STATED UPFRONT IS TO BE REALLY TRANSPARENT AND HAVE PREDICTABILITY.

UM, I ALSO LIKE THE IDEA OF PROVIDING A LOT OF WAIVERS FOR THE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS.

THEY'RE DOING THINGS THAT YOU WANT BUILDING INFILL WITH LITTLE PARKING, BUT THEN SOME OF IT I START TO WONDER IS WE ARE GOING THROUGH THE LAST PART ABOUT THE REDUCTIONS.

LIKE IF THAT TAKES AWAY FROM THE PREDICTABILITY AND LIKE HOW Y'ALL THOUGHT ABOUT MANAGING THAT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE WAIVERS OR REDUCTIONS WOULD BE PRETTY OBVIOUS, LIKE WE'RE PROPOSING 50% AFFORDABILITY OR WE'RE, UM, YOU KNOW, MOP BUILDING ANY NEW PARKING ON AN ADU, BUT OTHERS OF THEM MIGHT BE MORE UP TO A STUDY OR STAFF WORK TO BE DONE ON THAT.

AND DOES THAT HURT THE TRANSPARENCY? LIKE I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT I AM.

IS THERE A QUESTION THERE? NO, ABSOLUTELY.

I THINK THAT THAT IS, UM, COMPLETELY RIGHT.

AND, AND JEFF CAN PROBABLY HELP ME, UM, ON THE, THE TDM PORTION OF THIS, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE TDM, THE UP TO 40%, YOU KNOW, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT 40% SHOULD I EXPECT TO, UM, TO HAVE AS A REDUCTION, UM, WE WOULD HAVE A WORKSHEET EXACTLY.

WITH ALL OF THE TOOLS.

AND YOU COULD FIGURE OUT OF THOSE TOOLS THAT YOU UTILIZE AND INTO YOUR TDM PLAN, WHAT, WHAT TYPES OF TRIP REDUCTIONS ARE YOU GOING TO RECEIVE FOR THOSE? AND SO THEN YOU WOULD HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT PERCENTAGE OF A REDUCTION YOU WOULD QUALIFY FOR.

UM, FOR TDM, I REALIZED THAT'S NOT LIKE IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT, UM, IT'S PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA MANUAL THAT WILL BE COMING, UM, COMING IN THE FALL FOR, FOR PUBLIC FEEDBACK.

SO, UM, I AGREE THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT, UM, AS PART OF THE TRANSPARENCY ELEMENT YEAH.

UM, I'M NOT SURE IF I'M GOING TO ASK THIS QUESTION.

RIGHT.

BUT I WAS WONDERING IF, WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION TAKEN INTO, UM, HOW MUCH PARKING IS BEING PUT INTO A PROJECT? UM, AND IF THAT AFFECTS IT, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU MENTIONED IT WITH INFILL, BUT I WASN'T SURE IF IT WAS WITH OTHER THINGS.

THAT WE ACCOUNT FOR, UM, TRIPS BEING GENERATED FURTHER OUT FROM AUSTIN AND ARE TRAVELING INTO AUSTIN, BUT AS GEORGETOWN AND PFLUGERVILLE AND ROUND ROCK ALREADY HAS THEIR ORDINANCE, AS THEY ARE ALSO DEVELOPING IMPACTS THE ORDINANCES.

PARKING WOULD BE ONE OF THE THINGS, UM, THAT YOU WOULD LOOK AT IN YOUR TDM REDUCTION.

SO, UM, IF YOU WERE REDUCING YOUR PARKING, UM, OR, OR PROVIDING NO PARKING OR REDUCED PARKING BASED ON WHAT'S REQUIRED, YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD RECEIVE THAT IN YOUR, IN YOUR TDM REDUCTION.

THAT'S A YES.

AND I HAVE THIS SORT OF VERY SIMILAR QUESTION AND IT ACTUALLY SORT OF TAGS INTO SUSAN'S QUESTION BECAUSE POTENTIALLY LET IT SAY A CODE NEXT V3 COMES SOMETIME FROM NOW, AND IT HAS NO PARKING MINIMUMS, ET CETERA, HAVING A CLEAR SLIDER SOMEWHERE THAT SAYS, IF WE DO X, WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE Y AND BENEFIT WOULD BE VERY OFTEN IN TERMS OF GETTING TO TRANSPARENCY AND GETTING TO PEOPLE'S UNDERSTAND.

AND I HAVE ANOTHER SORT OF CONCEPTUAL QUESTION, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MAP AT THE SERVICE AREAS, THERE ARE GIANT HOLES FOR WESTLAKE AND ROLLINGWOOD AND SENSEI VALLEY, ET CETERA.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S BEEN AN ABILITY TO CONTINGENT EVEN THAT WHOLE NEW BRIDGE.

THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, A BRIDGE TO NOT AUSTIN IS BEING PAID FOR BY AUSTIN.

IS THERE A THEORY OF HOW TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT, UH, THOSE TRAVELERS, UM, THAT IS A QUESTION, BELIEVE IT OR NOT WE'VE RECEIVED BEFORE.

AND, UM, IT IS A, IT'S VERY VALID BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE CAN ONLY, THIS TOOL IS ONLY ALLOWS US TO LOOK AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN, UM, FULL AND LIMITED PURPOSE.

WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO LOOK AT THE, THE ETJ OR ADJACENT CITIES, SO WE CAN ONLY, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, CONTROL OUR, OUR OWN, UM, CITY AND DEVELOPMENT.

AND THAT'S JUST THE LIMITATION OF THE TOOL.

I THINK, UM, OTHER, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY TOLD AND THINGS LIKE THAT, OR OTHER, OTHER WAYS

[00:50:01]

UM, IT, WE MAY HAVE MORE, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD BE DEALING WITH THE SAME THING, WENT OFF NIGHTS, GO TO ROUND ROCK WHERE WE'RE NOT PAYING THEIR IMPACT FEE.

RIGHT.

SO, UM, BUT LAKERS ARE IN THE SENSE OF VALEO ENROLLING WITH HER RIGHT THERE.

SO THAT'S YEAH.

SO THEN I HAVE A ONE LAST QUESTION.

UM, DO OTHER CITIES BREAK THEIR SERVICE BREAKING IN FACT DAYS INTO THE SERVICE ZONES, THE WAY WE SORT OF HAVE, OR DO THEY INSIDE THE LOOP, OUTSIDE THE LOOP AND LIKE THAT LEVEL WHAT'S THE GRANULARITY.

I MEAN, WE DEFINITELY SERVICE AREAS.

I THINK OBVIOUSLY AS YOU HAVE MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF YOUR OR SQUARE MILEAGE OF YOUR CITY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE AREAS.

SO SMALLER CITIES HAVE FEWER AREAS.

AND I THINK A LOT OF TIMES THAT MEANS TOO, THAT THEY HAVE LESS VARIABILITY IN THE MAXIMUM THAT THEY SEE IN EACH OF THEIR AREAS.

AND SO IT IS MAYBE, UM, IT'S MAYBE MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THIS LIKE LARGE VARIABILITY BETWEEN LIKE A SERVICE AREA K, OR A SERVICE OR A G AND YOUR DOWNTOWN.

UM, BUT THERE ARE DEFINITELY CITIES THAT HAVE USED, I THINK FORT WORTH AS AN EXAMPLE, WHERE THEY LOOKED AT THEIR INNER INNER LOOP AND JUSTIN SPEAK TO THIS, WHETHER IT'S THEY'RE DOWNTOWN OR THEY'RE JUST INNER LOOP, UM, SERVICE AREAS THAT THEY DON'T CHARGE A FEE.

AND THEY JUST DETERMINED THAT THAT WAS OUR POLICY, UM, GOAL WAS TO INCENTIVIZE REDEVELOPMENT AND DEVELOPMENT IN THEIR, IN THEIR CENTRAL CITY.

SO THEY, THEY DON'T CHARGE A FEE IN THOSE AREAS.

WELL, UM, DO YOU, ARE THERE ANY OTHER HANDS, ANY OTHER VOICES FOR THOSE WITHOUT, AND WE CAN SEE.

AND THERE'S A THIRD DOCUMENT, UH, EMILY, IS THAT ATTACHED TO STAFFERS OR IS THAT, DAN'S THE BACKUP DOCUMENT ABOUT THE DATA ANALYSIS METHODS? IS THERE A PRESENTER FOR THAT OR ARE WE OH, THAT WAS JUST BACKGROUND.

UM, WELL THEN, UM, BE COGNIZANT OF TIME, ARE WE READY TO MOVE INTO A DISCUSSION, THE ACTION POSSIBLE FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION SEGMENT? AND THEN A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO THERE, MARIO THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

LEANNE, EARLY IN THE PRESENTATION, YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS WILL MAKE THE TIA PROCESS MORE EFFICIENT.

CAN YOU ELABORATE ON HOW THIS IS GOING TO DO THAT? YES.

SO, UM, UH, AND, AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, I AM NOT CURRENTLY CONDUCTING TIA, SO I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THIS IN A LOT OF DETAIL, BUT FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, UM, THE TA PROCESS TODAY, A LOT OF WHAT OCCURS IS DETERMINING WHAT A DEVELOPMENT PRORATA SHARE OR WHAT THEIR PROPORTION SHARE IS OF DIFFERENT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, UM, BASED ON TRIPS BEING GENERATED.

AND, UM, THE IMPACT FEE STUDY WOULD SIMPLIFY, YOU WOULD KNOW, UH, UPFRONT WHAT THAT IMPACT FEE IS.

AND THEN YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO, UM, USE THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT TO DETERMINE WHAT IMPROVEMENTS WOULD BE, AND THEN YOUR TIA TO DETERMINE WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPROVEMENT TO MAKE, TO BOTH BENEFIT THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE, UM, AND THE, THE, THOSE ARE SURROUNDING AREA.

SO THERE WOULD BE, UH, KIND OF, IT WOULD BE I THINK, A MORE STREAMLINED, UM, PROCESS.

UM, I DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HERE TO EXPLAIN IT VERY SPECIFICALLY.

UM, BUT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF, OF WHY THIS WOULD BE AN IMPROVEMENT.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE CASE IF THE IMPROVEMENTS IDENTIFIED IN THE TA WERE ALSO IDENTIFIED IN THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN, RIGHT? YEAH, DEFINITELY.

AND SO THE PROJECTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE ROAD, THE CAPACITY PLAN WOULD BE THOSE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO RECEIVE OFFSETS FOR AS WELL.

RIGHT? SO THOSE ONES YOU WOULD NOT BE PAYING FOR TWICE.

AND THEN HOPEFULLY AS A RESULT OF THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN, THE TA IS NOT IDENTIFYING ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED THAT AREN'T VERY LOCAL OR SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT, OR PROBABLY ONLY FOR CHANGES IN ZONING RATHER THAN SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASSUMED AS PART OF THE LAND USE PLAN IS THAT I DON'T NEED AN ANSWER TO THAT NOW, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN IMPORTANT ANSWER TO HAVE BEFORE A POLICY IS ADOPTED.

RIGHT.

AND WE TALKED ABOUT, GO AHEAD.

THE SURVEY, THE STUDY AREA BOUNDARY MAY NOT HAVE TO BE AS LARGE BECAUSE A LOT OF THE REASONS YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SERVICE AREA BOUNDARIES REALLY TO HELP CALCULATE THAT PRO PRO RATA SHARE AS OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO INTENT MAYBE TO POTENTIALLY DO AN IMPROVEMENT THAT IN THAT DIRECTION.

I THINK THAT'S PARTIALLY THE GOAL.

I MEAN, HAVING DONE TRAFFIC STUDIES, A LOT OF TIMES THE ARGUMENTS ARE ABOUT DISTRIBUTION AND IT'S REALLY ABOUT THE PROGRAM THAT YOU'RE GONNA PAY ON AN INTERSECTION WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO IT.

SO THE HOPE IS THAT THE PROCESS IS STREAMLINED, THAT YOU'RE NO LONGER CRACKED AND CALCULATE THAT PRO RATA.

AND THERE'S SOME DISCUSSION THAT, YOU KNOW,

[00:55:01]

SO IT'S REALLY ELIMINATING THAT WHAT I CONSIDER THE MOST CONTENTIOUS PART OF A TIA IS THE PRO RATA ELEMENT.

SO, AND THEN THIS IS GOING TO BE PART OF A LARGER, MORE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REFORM.

I THINK, UM, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE UPDATE OF THE TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA MANUAL, UM, THE, THE CLARIFICATION OF THE TIA AND THE TDM PROCESS AND HOW THOSE WORK TOGETHER WITH THE IMPACT FEE, UM, ALL OF THAT WOULD BE BE, YOU KNOW, COORDINATED.

UM, AND OBVIOUSLY WHEN WE HAVE A FUTURE, I THINK A LOT OF RIGHT NOW, UM, THE, THE DRAFT TCM IS TRYING TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PROCESS, YOU KNOW, EVENTUALLY IF, AND WHEN WE HAVE THAT, THAT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WE'LL HAVE MORE CLARITY IN THE CODE ITSELF.

AND WE WON'T HAVE TO RELY ON JUST CRITERIA MANUALS OR ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES, UM, FOR SOME OF THESE PROCESSES AND AS ADDITIONAL TOOLS ARE, ARE ALLOWED FOR IN THE, IN THE CODE, I THINK WE WOULD SEE, UM, YOU KNOW, CHANGES TO THE IMPACT, THE ARTICLE AS WELL AS THERE ARE THINGS THAT, UM, INITIALLY COUNCIL MEMBERS BROUGHT UP AS, OOH, WE, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING A REDUCTION FOR THIS, OR IN ALIGNMENT WITH THAT.

AND WITHOUT THOSE THINGS BEING IN THE CODE, WE REALLY CAN'T INCORPORATE THEM INTO THE, INTO THE IMPACT THE ORDINANCE TODAY.

SO I THINK THAT THAT'S A FUTURE EVOLUTION AS WELL.

UM, CAN YOU PROVIDE ANY FEEDBACK OR CONTEXT FOR HOW THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE CAME TO THOSE INITIAL PERCENTAGES REGARDING RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL? SORRY.

YEP.

I WAS ON MUTE.

UM, YES, SO THEY, UH, THEY LOOKED, THEY WERE LOOKING AT A FEW DIFFERENT THINGS.

UM, FIRST THE STATES STATE LAW THAT I MENTIONED THAT IF YOU DON'T, UM, CONDUCT A CREDIT CALCULATION, YOU ARE, UM, REQUIRED, UM, TO, TO ONLY CHARGE 50% OF THE MAXIMUM.

SO, SO THEY, THEY CONSIDERED THAT AND THAT, THAT A LOT OF DIFFERENT CITIES, UM, THAT'S WHAT THEY DO.

THEY HAVE TO DO THAT.

UM, BASED ON, BASED ON THE STATE STATE LAW, THEY ALSO LOOKED AT THE COMPARISON CITIES, UM, WHAT, WHAT ARE WE CHARGING AND OTHER, OTHER COMMUNITIES IN TEXAS.

UM, AND THEN THEY LOOKED AT THAT, UM, THAT NUMBER ONE, THERE WILL THE SHARING OF, OF INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, COSTS BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT AND, UM, AS THE COMMUNITY OVERALL, AS WELL AS THAT, UM, ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY MEASURE FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME, UM, BEING SIMILAR TO TODAY, THEY LIKED THAT WE WOULD BE TRANSITIONING TO A PROGRAM THAT WAS, UM, SIMILAR, NEARLY EQUAL TO THE CURRENT REP PROPORTIONALITY.

THAT WAS, UH, ANOTHER MEASURE.

SO, AND THAT THEY FELT LIKE OTHER, UM, OTHER GOALS WOULD, WE WOULD BE ACHIEVED THROUGH THE REDUCTION.

UH, BACK TO THE NUMBER OF VEHICLE MILES GENERATED IN THOSE AREAS.

AND DO YOU, YOU SAID YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THIS THE, AND THE EXISTING ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY CALCULATION DRIVES ME NUTS CAUSE IT'S VERY UNHELPFUL.

IN MANY SITUATIONS, YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THIS SUPPLEMENT THAT REPLACES THAT, UH, UH, I GUESS MY, MY BIGGEST UNEASE IS ,

[01:00:22]

SO THAT WAS ONE WAY THAT WE ADDRESS, UM, ADDRESS THE MODE SPLIT GOALS.

ALSO THE, THE, UH, GROWTH PROJECTIONS WERE BASED ON, UM, AND THE IMAGINE AUSTIN GROWTH CONCEPTS.

UM, WE LOOKED AT THE DEMOGRAPHERS PROJECTIONS AND, AND IMAGINE OFTEN IN DEVELOPING THOSE BREASTS PROJECTIONS.

AND THEN I THINK IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT GENTRIFICATION AND EQUITY, THAT'S WHERE WE'VE REALLY HONED IN ON BEST STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UM, TO, TO TRY TO ADDRESS, ADDRESS THAT SPECIFICALLY TOWARDS THE MODE SPLIT OF THE 50 50 THAT'S IN THE S AND P IS THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON THE POLICY REDUCTIONS TO TRY TO DRIVE HOME THE 20% I'LL CALL IT INTERNAL CAPTURE MIXTURE, USE REDUCTION, AND THEN THE 40% TDM REDUCTION, THOSE WERE, THOSE WERE LARGELY TIED INTO WHAT'S KIND OF DRAFTED INTO THE TCM, BUT THOSE REDUCTIONS ARE THERE TO HELP INCENTIVIZE TO REACH THAT 50% GOAL.

AND THAT'S WHY THOSE SPECIFIC PERCENTS OR ATTRACTIVE, BECAUSE THOSE ARE REALLY TECHNICAL REDUCTIONS.

THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE IN THEORY GETTING THE REDUCTION OF THE IMPACT FEE BECAUSE OF REDUCING TRIPS OFF THE SYSTEM.

I THINK A GOOD SEGUE I'M BEING COGNIZANT OF THE CAM AND THE MEATINESS OF COMMISSIONER HENNESSY'S, UM, PROPOSAL.

WE WANT TO GET INTO IT IF YOU WANT TO SHARE IT ON, IF YOU CAN SHARE WHO CAN SHARE THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, BIG TIME DEVELOPERS AND PEOPLE LOOKING FOR ADU AND SMALLER DEVELOPMENT SAYS WE MIGHT LIKE IT TO BE.

WELL, I'LL INTRODUCE IT AND IT PROBABLY ALIGNS WITH MY QUESTIONING OR LINE OF QUESTIONS.

UM, AND I'M NOT EVEN SURE HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT RIGHT NOW, GIVEN I APPRECIATE THE REVISIONS TO THE PRESENTATION THAT WE SAW TODAY COMPARED TO THE DRAFT PRESENTATION THAT WE SAW, UH, IN PREPARATION FOR OUR JUNE MEETING.

UM, IT'S IT'S, EVERY TIME WE'VE SEEN IT, IT'S GOTTEN BETTER.

UH, AND THEN, LIKE I SAID, I'M STILL VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH NOT UNDERSTANDING HOW THIS PLAYS INTO THE LARGER ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.

UM, I THINK THERE ARE, THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT OPPORTUNITY HERE FOR THIS TO BE MORE SIMPLE GOING FORWARD.

AND I THINK THAT IT COULD ALSO BE A LOT MORE COMPLICATED WITHOUT CLARITY NOW.

UM, I ALSO, I'M ALSO NOT SURE THAT IT'S GOING TO ACHIEVE ITS SIMPLICITY GOALS, GIVEN THE LEVEL OF TECHNICAL DETAIL REQUIRED.

UM, I THINK IT STILL REQUIRES TRAFFIC ENGINEERS TO BE INVOLVED AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IN OUR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT ALL, ALL SORTS OF THINGS OVER THE LAST THREE AND A HALF YEARS, SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION, I'VE REGULARLY ARGUED AGAINST MY OWN BUSINESS.

UM, AND I THINK THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, MY CONCERNS ARE STILL THERE THAT THIS IS NOT AS, AS EASY TO IMPLEMENT AND FOR DEVELOPERS,

[01:05:01]

SO THAT'S WHERE MY CONCERNS LIE.

UM, AS FAR AS THE ACTUAL TECHNICAL ANALYSIS ITSELF, YOU KNOW, THE MATH IS ALL FINE BASED ON THE ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN AND THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD IN YEARS PAST.

UM, I THINK THAT THIS IS MAYBE LESS INTENTIONAL ABOUT INCENTIVIZING THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE WANT, OR THAT MAYBE, MAYBE I'M PROJECTING THERE THAT I WANT, UM, ESPECIALLY TO ACHIEVE THOSE, THOSE ASM PEOPLE.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S A BROAD OUTLINE OF HOW THIS, UM, RECOMMENDATION GOT DRAFTED AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC CONCERNS, STRIKE LANGUAGE, ADD LANGUAGE.

UM, YEAH.

UM, SO I I'LL ASK FOR BROAD QUESTIONS.

I, I SORT OF HAVE A GENERAL DISCERNMENT, UM, MY TAKEAWAY OF THE SENTIMENT, MUCH OF WHICH I AGREE WITH MUCH OF IT IS IN THE WEEDS FOR ME.

BUT I THINK FOR ME, THE ISSUE IS THAT IT DOES SEEM LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF MATH, BUT THE MATH IS STILL VERY FLEXIBLE.

AND SO THAT IT HITS AT THE TRANSPARENCY, I GUESS IT'S SUSAN'S QUESTION FOR ONE OF MY QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THERE ARE THESE RANGES IT'S HARD TO KNOW.

AND WHILE I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THE INTENTION TO ADD VALUE, UM, OR SORRY, THIS ATTENTION TO THE THINGS THAT ADD VALUE, ACCORDING TO COUNCIL'S OBJECTIVES, GET SOME, SOME FLEX THAT'S ALSO, IT'S JUST LACK OF TRANSPARENCY.

THAT'S JUST THE FUZZINESS THERE.

THAT'S DIFFICULT TO ME THE ISSUE, WHICH IS REALLY BULLET OR ITEM NUMBER TWO AND DAN'S PROPOSAL IS THAT, UM, REALLY BEING CLEAR ON THE CHARGE OF THE PEOPLE WHO NEED TO BE CHARGED THE MOST PARTS OF THEM THE MOST WITHOUT PUNISHING THOSE WHO SUFFERED FROM GENERATIONS OF NOT HAVING THE RIGHT INVESTMENT.

THAT'S A VERY TOUGH, UH, STICKY, WICKED TO RESOLVE.

AND I DID NOT KNOW THE ANSWER.

UM, I DON'T, I MEAN, I TRUST THE PEOPLE WORKING ON IT, BUT IT IS HARD TO SEE AND HEAR HOW THAT IS GOING TO BE CLEAR THAT SOMEONE'S GOING TO LOOK BACK AT THIS AND NOT IN ITS EXACT FEES AT CALCULATES, ET CETERA, BUT SAYS IN THIS BIGGER SENTIMENT WHERE THE CITY HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED EVENLY AND APPROACHED EQUITABLY, IT'S CLEAR HOW TO DO IT NOW.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT EITHER FOR OR AGAINST, LIKE, I THINK A LOT OF GREAT WORK IS HERE AND WE'VE SEEN IT EVOLVE.

I LOVE THAT.

SO THAT'S MY, MY 30 SECONDS OR WHATEVER IT IS.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE A SENTIMENT THEY WANT TO CONVEY, EVEN IF IT'S NOT INTO THE WEEDS OF ITEM TWO, A OR THREE B OR ET CETERA? YEAH, I DO.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

UM, I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT DANIEL'S OVERALL INTEREST HERE.

UM, HE MENTIONED THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT HE WANTS, AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD ON THAT.

UM, AND YOU MENTIONED DANIEL, YOUR, UM, THAT, THAT YOUR WORK ON THIS COMMITTEE OFTEN GOES, I THINK YOU SAID AGAINST YOUR BUSINESS INTEREST, OR I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU SAID.

I WAS WONDERING, UH, IF YOU COULD CLARIFY ABOUT THE BUSINESS INTERESTS AND, AND I'M ALSO WONDERING WHO FUNDED THIS TECHNICAL WORK.

OH, SURE.

SO THE ONTO THE LAST QUESTION FIRST, THAT'S OUR OWN R AND D DOLLARS THAT WE SPENT IN THAT'S FOR, UM, HELPING US BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING, UH, IN THE AREAS THAT WE'RE WORKING AND ALSO TO, UH, HELP PARTICULARLY SOME OF OUR JUNIOR STAFF, UM, HAVE THOSE KINDS OF RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES AND TO PUT THEIR NAMES ON SOMETHING THAT, UM, MEANINGFULLY CONTRIBUTES TO TRANSPORTATION, MOBILITY, RESEARCH, AND DISCOURSE.

SO, UM, ALL FUNDED WITH TIME, I GUESS, UH, THAT'S JUST A AGREEMENT WE HAD WITH THE, THE DATA PROVIDER THAT WE HAD ACCESS TO THAT DATA.

AND WE ALLOCATED OUR OWN STAFF TIME TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT RESEARCH AND, UM, CREATE THAT PUBLICATION.

UM, AS FAR AS THE, UH, HOUSING, I GUESS THE BIGGEST QUESTION IS THIS TO ACHIEVE THESE GOALS, THE CITY NEEDS TO PUT A LOT MORE HOUSES, A LOT CLOSER TO DOWNTOWN.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, WE NEED A LOT MORE HOUSES AND TO ACHIEVE THE TRANSPORTATION AND EQUITY AND ALL KINDS OF GOALS THAT MANY OF THEM NEED TO BE CLOSER TO THE CORE OF THE CITY.

UM, AND WHEN YOU SAY HOUSES, YOU MEAN HOUSING? YEAH.

[01:10:01]

UM, AND SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M INTERESTED IN SEEING I, I LIVE IN AUSTIN BECAUSE ANOTHER AREA OF PRICED ME OUT OF IT.

UM, AND I HATE FOR THAT TO HAPPEN TO AUSTINITE.

AND I'M VERY AWARE OF, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR ME TO SAY THAT OUT LOUD EVERY NOW AND THEN TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, UM, KNOW PEOPLE ARE HERE BECAUSE THEY ARE A PART OF A PROBLEM SOMEWHERE ELSE.

AND WE ARE GOING TO LOSE PEOPLE THAT, UM, WANT TO BE HERE, BUT ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT.

IT'S ALREADY HAPPENING.

SO, UM, YEAH, THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE AND MY LEVEL OF INTEREST.

AND JUST TO ANSWER THE BUSINESS QUESTION ABOUT 40% OF OUR WORK IS, UM, OR MY DEPARTMENT'S WORK RIGHT NOW IS, UH, CITY OF AUSTIN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW.

UM, I WOULD LIKE THAT TO DECREASE BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE IT TO BE EASIER AND FOR US TO SPEND LESS TIME ON IT.

UM, SO THAT, THAT'S MY, THAT WAS MAYBE A LITTLE FLY, UM, BUT NOT PARTICULARLY ARGUING AGAINST VISITS INTERESTS, JUST THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SPEND LESS TIME HAGGLING OVER DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS.

HM.

I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL LAWYER, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE LESS, UM, LESS POLLUTION.

WELL, DO WE WANT IT, UH, THIS, UH, THIS, UH, UM, PROPOSAL IT'S RECOMMENDATION IS ANYONE HAVE, UM, SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT THEY OBJECT TO, OR DO WE WANT TO MOVE TO DISCUSS IT? AND I THINK, UH, PARDON ME, DO WE NEED TO DISCUSS IT FIRST? KELLY IS, IS THAT, DO WE NEED A MOTION TO DISCUSS THIS AT THIS POINT? OH, SORRY.

UM, YEAH, YEAH, WE SHOULD HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE TEXT OF THE RECOMMENDATION.

IS THERE A MOTION OR, UM, STREET IMPACT FEE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM COMMISSIONER HENNESSY? IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO MOVE TO CONSIDER THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION BEFORE US.

I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST I'LL SECOND THAT, UM, ALRIGHT.

SO THEN WE HAVE BEFORE US, UM, UH, FOR THE RECOMMENDED TO STAY THE SAME OR SOMETHING IT'S RECOMMENDATION 28, 20 ZERO SIX 12 DASH RECOMMENDATIONS.

BE APPROPRIATE TO, UM, EITHER INCENTIVIZE APARTMENTS IN SOME OF THOSE OUTER LOOP AREAS OR INCENTIVIZE MORE HOUSING IN THE INNER LOOP AREAS, UH, AND GETTING AWAY FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY OPTIONS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TODAY.

WHO HAS CONCERNS, QUESTIONS COMMENTARY ON THE TEXT? CAN I ACTUALLY BE THAT DAN, JUST INTRODUCE IT TO US A BIT.

I MEAN, I HAVE READ IT, BUT, UM, COULD YOU JUST SHARE, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE WITH US THAT HASN'T BEEN COVERED IN OUR CONVERSATIONS? I THINK THE MOST SPECIFIC THING THAT I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT IS THE, UM, CONSIDERATION OF THE VMT THAT THESE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS GENERATE AND JUST HOW WIDELY SPREAD THEY ARE, PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU CONSIDER IT ON A PERSON TRIP BASIS.

AND, UM, THE LOAD SPLITS THAT ARE GENERATED, UM, THE, YOU KNOW, THE TECHNICAL STUDY THAT WE SHOWED SO THAT SOME OF THOSE, UH, OUTER LOOP ZONES, THE AVERAGE VEHICLE TRIP, UH, FROM, TO AND FROM THOSE LOCATIONS IS THREE TIMES AS LONG AS THE TRIP VEHICLE TRIPS THAT ARE INSIDE THE LOOP.

AND THAT ALSO DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE FACT THAT A NUMBER OF THOSE INNER LOOP ZONES HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER TRANSIT AND NON SINGLE AUTO MODE SHERIFFS TOO.

UM, SO YOU KNOW, THOSE OUTSIDE THE LOOP ZONES ARE PUTTING AT LEAST THREE TIMES AS MUCH STRAIN ON THE VEHICLE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK AS THE INNER LOOP IS.

AND, UM, MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO THAT, UM, OUTER LOOP DEVELOPMENT AND ENCOURAGE THE INNER LOOP DEVELOPMENT, BUT ISN'T THERE THE TROUBLE THAT THE FACULTY CAN ONLY ADDRESS A NEW DEVELOPMENT.

SO THIS SORT OF BAKED IN FACT THAT THERE ARE SOME PLACES WITH ROADS AND OTHER PLACES WITHOUT SHOOTING PEPE CAN'T I THINK LEGALLY ADDRESS THAT.

SO IT CAN'T ALL THE ONLY THING THAT IS THE LEGALITY ABOUT IT IS THE MATH THAT CAME.

MY ART HELPED THE CITY WITH, WE CAN SET THE POLICY ANYWHERE WE WANT BETWEEN ZERO AND THOSE MAXIMUM FOR EVERY ONE OF THOSE ZONES.

SO, UM, I THINK THAT THERE'S A, A WIDER RANGE, PARTICULARLY ON THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT MAY

[01:15:01]

WELL, IT ENDED THE IMAGINE AUSTIN AND ASAP THEORIES, SHOULD WE NOT HAVE TO BE INCENTIVIZING, YOU KNOW, SMALL SCALE OFFICES AND RESTAURANTS AND MIXED USE OF THOSE ARE CONTAINED WITHIN HIS SERVICE AREA.

AT LEAST HE DOES NOT CONTAIN THIS IN THE DEVELOPMENT.

MAYBE JUST TO CLARIFY, SINCE I'VE ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND SOME HAVE PROBABLY SOUNDED CREDIBLE, THIS IS COMPLICATED AS HELL, AND I'M NOT ATTENDING THIS TO SUGGEST TO JEFF AND LEANNE AND COLE THAT LIKE MAYBE THE ANSWER HERE, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE QUESTIONS GET ASKED AND THAT THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED ARE, AND THAT PEOPLE ARE VERY DELIBERATE ABOUT THE DECISION THAT WE'RE MAKING WITH RESPECT TO THESE IMPACTS AND THE GREATER GOALS.

I GUESS, HERE'S THE QUESTION, MAYBE THIS IS FOR THE ENERGY OF HOW LONG DOES THIS DOCUMENT LIVE? IS THIS REVISITED EVERY FIVE YEARS, 10 YEARS, THREE YEARS, EVERY FIVE YEARS, UM, IT'S REQUIRED TO BE UPDATED EVERY FIVE YEARS, UM, WHERE WE ARE, OBVIOUSLY WE CAN UPDATE IT ANY AT ANY TIME, UM, WE RECEIVED DIRECTION TO DO SO.

UM, AND THAT'S WHAT, ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS IN PLACE IS TO, IS TO MAKE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, THAT THEY, THEY FEEL THERE IS A NEED TO UPDATE TO STUDY.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETS EVERY SIX MONTHS TO REVIEW THE PROGRESS OF THE STUDY.

AND THE SECOND THING THAT WE'RE DOING AS PART OF THIS THING, THIS CODE, ISN'T IT, A PORTION OF THE ORDINANCES AND CODE A PORTION OF IT'S A STANDALONE ORDINANCE.

SO THE ACTUAL FEE STRUCTURE WE DO IS A STANDALONE ORDINANCE.

AND WHY IS THAT IMPORTANT? THAT MEANS IT CAN BE UPDATED A LITTLE BIT EASIER THAN YOU CAN ACTUALLY UPDATE THE LAND, THE CODE.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE HEARD STRUCTURING THE POLICY THAT WAY IS THERE, IS THERE A POTENTIAL FOR MAKING AN ADMINISTRATIVE SO THAT SHE CAN BE CHANGED IN EVEN EASIER THAN GOING TO COUNCIL? IT'S PROBABLY AN ATTORNEY, BUT MOST OF THE TIME, I WOULD SAY THAT THE, THE WAY CHAPTER THREE 95, WE CHANGED THE CODE.

IT WOULD PROBABLY NEED TO GO TO COUNCIL THOUGH, THE FEE STRUCTURE.

NOW, MOST OF THE, UH, REDUCTIONS AND ALL THE ELEMENTS TO CALCULATE THE FEE, THAT'S GOING TO BE ADMINISTRATIVE THAT DOESN'T NEED TO GO TO COUNCIL, BUT THE ACTUAL RATE THAT WE SAY WE NEED TO PROBABLY GO TO COUNSELING AND SAMWELL HAS BEEN QUIET.

MR. MERADO.

OH, I SAW ALLEY'S HAND.

I WAS WONDERING IF IT WOULD MAYBE BE WORTH ADDING SOME EXPLICIT LANGUAGE IN, IN THIS, UM, CAUSE I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO CALL OUT, UM, THE IMPACT THAT PARKING HAS ON, UM, LIKE TRIPS TO CERTAIN AREAS.

UM, SO I NOTICED THAT THE WORD PARKING, I DON'T THINK OF PARENTS IN THE DOCUMENT, UM, WITH MY, MY BRIEF CONTROL F SEARCH, BUT, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE ADD SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT AROUND THAT.

UM, I THINK IT'S, IT'S WORTH ADDING, UM, AN EMPHASIS ON IT IS BURIED IN THE TDM, BUT YOU SHOULD.

I, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE TDM FOR GRANTED FOR JUST LIKE ADDRESSING THE PARKING, BUT YEAH.

ALLIE, IF YOU WANT TO SUGGEST SOMETHING, I WOULD CONSIDER ALMOST ANYTHING YOU THINK BE FRIENDLY HERE, I'M ON BOARD WITH THE CONCEPT.

SO I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO WHAT YOU SUGGESTED.

IS THERE A CHAT THAT IS A WEBEX, I WAS GOING TO PULL UP NOTEPAD AND TYPE SOMETHING UP.

IF YOU COULD SLACK IN PUBLIC SLACKER AND FELLOW COMMISSIONER, MAYBE BEFORE WE GET INTO THE WEEDS OF EDITING THE LANGUAGE, CAN WE DO LIKE A STRAW POLL IF THIS IS ACCEPTABLE TO EVERYBODY SUPPORTED AND I DON'T WANT TO GO ON A VALLEY, DO THAT WORK, WE'RE GOING TO TEAR THE REST OF IT AS A PRACTICE.

I'M SURE.

KNOW IF I'M VISITING PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE, BUT JUST TO SHOW OUR HANDS WHO WOULD THINK ABOUT SUPPORTING THIS AS IS, YOU KNOW, BASED ON WHAT THE SENTIMENT IS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE LESS THAN THE EXACT WORDS.

AND I THINK IF YOU THINK YOU WOULD SUPPORT IT AS IS YOUR HANDS.

SHEET OR THE WORKSHEET THAT ADDS UP TO THE REDUCTION, BUT THAT THOSE REDUCTIONS ARE NOT FLAT ACROSS THE CITY, THAT CERTAIN ZONES, UM, CAN HAVE A DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, MAXIMUM MINIMUM WINDOW BECAUSE THEY ARE IN A ZONE.

SO THAT'S GOOD.

SO IF YOU WANT TO ADD IN A SENTENCE AROUND PARKING, UM, I MEAN, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS A SPECIFIC SUGGESTION THAT THIS IS GOING TO PUT WORK ON ME REAL QUICK, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE, UH, IT'D BE CLEAR THAT THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY FOR KIND OF FLOATING, UM, EITHER THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVELY CHANGING THE SCORE

[01:20:01]

AND THAT ACCOUNTS FOR SOME PREVIOUS EQUITY IMBALANCES, THAT MIGHT BE A WAY TO DO THAT COMMISSIONERS.

THIS IS EMILY SMITH AND STAFF LIAISON.

I JUST WANT TO, I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO UNMUTE MYSELF WHEN I WAS SHARING MY SCREEN OF, UH, TO SHARE THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO LET, UM, COMMISSIONER RUDENESS AND OTHERS KNOW THAT, UM, IF YOU SEND ME OR JUST VERBALIZED TO ME, YOU KNOW, UH, AMENDMENT LANGUAGE, I I'M SHARING MY SCREEN WITH THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION IN WORD DOCUMENT FORM.

SO I CAN TRACK CHANGES AND LIKE DISPLAY WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE, UM, FOR, FOR EVERYONE.

AND FOR THOSE FOLLOWING ALONG ON ATF SET, TO TRY TO BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.

SO I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT.

UM, IF THAT HELPS WITH YOUR DELIBERATION, A QUICK CLARIFICATION, MARIO, TO YOUR COMMENT IS THAT, AND THIS MAY JUST BE A QUESTION FOR DAN, IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO GET AT ON ITEM NUMBER TWO? IT JUST MAY NEED TO BE CLARIFIED A LITTLE BIT MORE.

I WAS INTENDING TO PUT LIKE A, A TACTIC FOR ACCOMPLISHING.

BUT YES, IT IS RELATED TO THAT.

SO EMILY, IF WE WANT TO JUST, UH, UH, CRAFT OFF HANDS, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A CHAT CHAT WHERE I COULD JUST CHAT.

IT WOULD BASICALLY BE TO BE, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, ITEM TO B WOULD BE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF, UM, UH, THIS, UM, FLEXIBLE PROPORTIONALITY OR FLEXIBLE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM REDUCTIONS, UM, ARE GENERATED ADMINISTRATIVELY OR, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE POSSIBILITY TO BE GENERATED WITH, HEY, JUST WHILE SHE'S TYPING THAT.

DID I HEAR THAT WE ONLY HAVE FIVE MINUTES LEFT FROM THE STUDY HALL FOR MY MONDAY TWO 30? I DON'T KNOW IF THIS ROOM IS JUST GOING TO END, UH, OR IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

1130 IS 1130 IS THE HARD STOP.

THAT WAS A HARD STOP IN THREE MINUTES.

SO, UM, IS IT POSSIBLE COMMENTARY ERIN SMITH THAT, UM, WE CAN SEND AN EMAIL APPROVAL OF OUR VOTE IF WE START TO GET CUT OFF HERE OR DO WE JUST NEED TO SAY YES, NO.

AS HE IS RIGHT NOW.

I MEAN, I'M GOING TO POLITELY PUSH BACK ON THE ASSERTION THAT THERE'S A HARD STOP AT 1130.

I MEAN, Y'ALL SHOULD TRY TO WRAP THIS UP OBVIOUSLY AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, BUT I'M NOT A WINNER OF YEAH.

FOR LIKE LITERALLY, YOU KNOW, A, UM, A MEETING, YOU KNOW, OCCURRING BACK TO BACK.

THAT'S GONNA, I MEAN, YEAH, OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT DESIRABLE TO GO OVERTIME, BUT SINCE IT'S THE LAST TIME, Y'ALL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS BEFORE COUNCIL TAKES ACTION ON IT.

I THINK YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO, AT THE TIME YOU NEED TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION, BUT OF COURSE DO TRY TO EAT IT.

NO PROBLEM WITH IT.

SO I'VE GOT TO BE, AND IF ALLIE WANTS TO ADD ONE HER, SO, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'LL DO THE NEXT TWO MINUTES.

YOU COULD PROBABLY DO IT THE NEXT FOUR.

UM, SO PLEASE DON'T KICK US OFF THAT QUICKLY.

SO FOR ME, UM, IT'S BASICALLY A SENTENCE THAT SAYS, UM, ENSURE, UM, THAT MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM FEE REDUCTIONS ARE CALCULATED IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE MANNER.

AND THAT JUST COULD BE A BACK SINCE YOU WERE HERE ON THIS CALL, LEON AND JEFF, THAT CAN BE UNPACKED TO SAY WHATEVER THOSE WORKSHEETS ADD UP TO BE, WHETHER IT'S 35 HERE AND 42 THERE THAT'S POSSIBLE.

ALLIE, DO YOU HAVE A STUDENT OF HANDY? UM, THE SENTENCE I CREATED WAS, UM, UH, POSSIBLE TO SEE, UM, EMPHASIZE THE IMPACT THAT PARKING HAS ON VEHICLE TRIPS TO A PROJECT AND INCENTIVIZE THE REDUCTION OF PARKING AND FEATURE DEVELOPMENT, UM, COULD BE SLOWED DOWN.

WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE HEARING.

TALK FAST ON THE CALLS.

UM, EMPHASIZE THE IMPACT THAT PARKING HAS ON VEHICLE TRIPS TO A PROJECT AND INCENTIVIZE THE REDUCTION OF PARKING AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

AND I'M NOT MARRIED TO THE PROJECT VERSUS DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGE.

I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE RECOMMENDATION, BUT I THINK WE GET THAT SENTIMENT, UM,

[01:25:01]

UM, ALL RIGHT.

UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WITH, UH, LANGUAGE TWEAKS? YEAH.

UM, MARIO, I WASN'T ABLE TO UNMUTE IN TIME, BUT, UH, JUST FOR FUTURE REFERENCE, UM, STRAW POLLS ARE NOT, UM, ALLOWED ACCORDING TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.

UM, THEY'RE NOT APPROPRIATE BECAUSE THEY DON'T ACTUALLY, CAUSE IT'S LIKE, DOESN'T TAKE FINAL ACTION ON A MEASURE.

UM, I KNOW WE'RE UP AGAINST TIME, BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE I CAN DO THIS FAST.

WE, I REALLY WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE CITY STAFF'S REACTION WAS TO, UM, RECOMMENDATION ONE, UM, ABOUT HAVING AN AUDIT AND ANALYSIS BECAUSE, UM, I FEEL LIKE DANIEL MAKES GOOD POINTS IN HERE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR FIVE YEARS IN CONJUNCTION WITH, UM, THE REWRITE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF STAFF FEELS LIKE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY DIDN'T ADDRESS BEFORE, UM, AND HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT, UH, ANOTHER, ANOTHER STUDY, UM, THAT I, YOU KNOW, THIS IS OUT OF, OBVIOUSLY IT'S OUT OF THE SCOPE OF THE STREET IMPACT FEE PROPOSAL SPECIFICALLY.

UM, BUT IT IS DEFINITELY DIRECTION THAT, UM, COULD BE MADE TO STAFF, UM, FROM THIS BODY FROM COUNCIL.

UM, SO I WOULD SAY THAT IF IT'S, IF IT'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU SUPPORT AND WANT TO MOVE FORWARD, UM, I DO THINK THAT THE REVISIONS TO THE, THE TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA MANUAL, UM, WHICH INCLUDE THE TIA PROCESS, THE TDM PROCESS, UM, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE STREET IMPACT FEE, UM, IS A MAJOR REWORK OF, OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, UM, IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE ASN P GOALS.

SO WHILE IT'S NOT NECESSARILY AN AUDIT, UM, I BELIEVE THAT WE ARE, WE ARE MAKING THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT OBVIOUSLY BLENDED ALL DEVELOPMENT CODE PROCESSES, ANOTHER ELEMENT OF, OF THAT, UM, THAT WE DON'T HAVE FULL CONTROL OVER, UM, THE TIMEFRAME.

LAST MINUTE, URGENT FEELINGS IN COMMISSIONERS NEED TO GET OUT BEFORE WE VOTE DURING THIS QUESTION'S FROM WHAT'S ONE PRICE.

WE'VE MOVED TO THIS, IT'S BEEN SECONDED.

WE'VE HAD A DISCUSSION.

UM, LET'S CALL IT A VOTE ALL IN FAVOR OF, UH, APPROVING THIS RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED.

UM, RAISE YOUR HAND OR SAY, AYE.

AYE.

I SAID ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE.

AND, UH, ALEX, I DON'T SEE YOU.

AYE.

AND KELLY I'M STAYING OR, OH, WELL, OKAY.

SO LIZZIE I'S NAYS.

I'M STILL JEN'S HALEY, ARE YOU IN A NAVY OR AN EXTENSION OR? HEY, I'M AN I.

OH, OKAY.

THEN, UM, THERE ARE NO NAYS AND NO ABSTENTIONS.

CREDIT FOR OTHER PEOPLE'S WORK.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO ASHLEY.

WHO DID A LOT OF THE ANALYSIS AND THE HEAVY LIFTING FOR THE BACKGROUND AND MY EDUCATION ON THE, UM, WITH SUPPORT FROM JACKSON ARCHER TOO.

SO THANK YOU TO THE TWO OF THEM FOR DOING A LOT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING ON THIS.

JANUARY LAST TIME.

UM, SO WE'RE GOING TO, I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN SKIP STAFF AND COMMITTEE REPORTS OR IF WE ARE LEGALLY REQUIRED TO DO ALL THE STEPS NOW PER ROBERT'S RULES, YOU MAY NEED TO LIKE SEE IF THERE'S ANY OBJECTION TO, OKAY.

CAN WE CONSENT DIFFER THE STAFF AND COMMITTEE REPORTS UNTIL WE NEXT MEET ANY OPPOSITION? GOOD,

[3F. STAFF AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Project Connect Advisory Network]

GOOD.

CAN WE JUST HAVE 30 SECONDS TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT PROJECT CONNECT WITH THE, UM, WITH THE PANDEMIC, BUT, UH, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT.

ARE YOU BREAKING UP KELLY? YEAH.

THAT I KNOW THE, THE, THE NEW PLATFORM GIVES US CONSTRAINTS, BUT, UM, SINCE WE'RE ONLY FOUR MINUTES OVER I'LL I'LL, I WANTED TO SAY THAT WHEN, AND I DON'T THINK THIS HAPPENED TODAY, BUT JUST IN THE FUTURE, LIKE WHEN WE WANT TO CALL THE QUESTION AND SHORT CIRCUIT DEBATE, IF ANYONE ELSE STILL WANTS TO CONTINUE THE DEBATE, THEN THERE HAS TO BE A TWO THIRDS VOTE, UM, TO, TO CALL THE QUESTION TO SAY, NO, WE'RE WE'RE ENDING DISCUSSION AND WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A VOTE NOW, MARIO, I THINK YOU'RE ON, SORRY.

LET ME JUST GO OFF VIDEO.

CAN YOU HEAR, CAN YOU HEAR ME BETTER NOW? I'M OFF THE VIDEO SHOOT.

UM, I WAS JUST SAYING

[01:30:01]

SORRY.

I WAS SAYING, I LOOKED AT THE FACES WHEN I ASKED THE QUESTION.

IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE I DIDN'T SEE YA.

NO, NO, I KNOW, I KNOW.

I'M SORRY.

I WAS PROBABLY BREAKING UP.

I SAID, I DON'T THINK THIS HAPPENED TODAY.

I'M JUST LETTING THEM KNOW BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE WE, UH, WE DO ALWAYS HAVE THE FUTURE, YOU KNOW? YEAH.

SUSAN WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT PROJECT CONNECT THAT IT GETS IMPORTANT.

I JUST WANT IT TO, AND THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR EMILY AS WELL.

UM, SO WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY PASSED SOME, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND PROJECT CONNECT IN JUNE, UH, THE LPA PATH WITH CITY COUNCIL AND CAP METRO BOARD.

AND THIS IS KIND OF IN THE PROJECT CONNECT BASTARD NETWORK UPDATES THAT WE'RE GOING TO, BUT I JUST WANT IT TO LIKE, LOOK AT THE TIMELINE BECAUSE I KNOW CITY COUNCIL WILL ADOPT AN ELECTION IN PROBABLY AUGUST.

AND WE WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S TIME FOR THIS BODY TO MAKE ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION BEFORE THAT HAPPENED.

I THINK THE KEY WOULD BE TO GET A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING SCHEDULED BEFORE THAT HAPPENS.

THE SCOPE OF WHAT YOU CAN RECOMMEND OR COMMENT ON HIS CHANGES LIKE AFTER COUNCIL, IF COUNCIL WERE TO CALL AN ELECTION, SO WOULD BE YOU AND I CAN CONNECT, BUT I JUST THINK WE SHOULD TAKE CARE AND SCHEDULING OUR NEXT MEETING AROUND THAT JUST IN CASE THERE IS SOME APPETITE FOR MORE RECOMMENDATIONS.

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. THERE SHOULD BE THERE'S APPETITE FOR A PROJECT, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. ARE THERE OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS THAT PEOPLE FEEL THE NEED? I THINK THE 750.

SO IT'S MOVING US INTO SOMETIMES TO REPORT ON, UH, SORRY.

NO, NO, THAT'S COOL.

THAT'S GOOD.

AND SO, YEAH, IT'S VERY GERMANE.

SO IT ROLLS INTO NICELY

[4A. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Austin Community Climate Plan update (Staff; August)]

THANKS.

THERE'S THE $750 MILLION COUNTER PROPOSAL OR ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL, UM, FLOATING AROUND.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD AGENDA ITEM.

I DON'T KNOW STAFF IS TAKING SERIOUSLY OR IF IT'S PURELY CITIZEN DRIVEN.

UM, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD SAY THE, IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION BOND, UM, I WOULDN'T CALL IT A COUNTERPROPOSAL.

I THINK MOST PEOPLE THAT ARE, ARE, UM, IN FAVOR OF PROJECT CONNECT.

ABSOLUTELY.

BUT IN ADDITION TO, OR IF IN THE CASE THAT, UH, WE DON'T DO A BOND, UM, FOR PROJECT CONNECT THAT WE WOULD DO A EXTRA TRANSPORTATION BONDS, BUT, UM, YEAH, THAT, WITH THAT IN MIND, UM, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD WANT TO TALK ABOUT, UM, AND A FEATURE MAYBE SPECIAL CALLED MEETING BEFORE THE AUGUST A CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

DO YOU WANT TO SPONSOR OR CO-SPONSOR? UM, YEAH, THAT'D BE GREAT.

UM, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'VE WORKED ON, SO, ALRIGHT.

SO THIS SUSAN IS A SPONSOR FOR THE PROJECT CONNECT.

HE WANTS TO COSPONSOR.

I, I CAN SEE A HANFORD.

CO-SPONSOR PERFECT.

WE'RE EIGHT MINUTES OVER.

UM, ANYTHING ELSE BURNING HOLES IN PEOPLE'S THINKING TO TALK ABOUT OKAY.

WITH THAT, UM, CONSENT, UH, THAT WE ADJOURN ANY OBJECTIONS.