Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:03]

PRACTICE RUNNING A MEETING AND, UM, COMMISSIONER SHAW IS GOING TO, UH, TAKE OVER AT THE CLIMATE PLAN.

BUT, UM, JUST IN CASE THERE'S EVER ANY TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES OR COMMISSIONERS, AW, SHARE SHAW.

CAN'T MAKE IT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I CAN STILL RUN A MEETING.

SO, UM, WE WILL NOW CALL THIS

[Determination of Quorum / Meeting Called to Order]

MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT SIX OH THREE, HAVING A QUORUM IS COMMISSIONER YANEZ, PULIDO ON.

ALL RIGHT.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE, UM, ALMOST EVERYBODY, UM, COMMISSIONERS ANDERSON AZAR FOR AS MYSELF HOWARD YANEZ, PULIDO, MAYBE, UH, SCHNEIDER, SENIOR CHAIR, SHAW, UH, SHANE AND THOMPSON.

AND THEN I'D ALSO LIKE TO RECOGNIZE, UH, OUR EX OFFICIO MEMBER, DON LAYTON GIRL.

SO, UH, TONIGHT, YES, SHE WAS OUR CHAIR.

I JUST WANT TO LET STAFF KNOW.

I JUST GOT A TEXT MESSAGE FROM COMMISSIONER.

WHO'S HAVING A HARD TIME GETTING ON AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIGURE OUT THERE'S SOME TECHNICAL GOVERNMENT WITH HIM GETTING ON THE WEBEX.

I'M ASKING TO LOOK AT THE EMAIL, ANDREW.

I THINK HE MIGHT HAVE EMAILED YOU AND LOOK INTO THAT.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, WE ARE WELCOMING A NEW COMMISSIONER TONIGHT.

UM, COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY'S COMMISSIONERS ARE MENTIONED, AND SO, UM, WHEN HE IS ABLE TO JOIN WE'LL CIRCLE BACK AROUND AND HAVE HIM INTRODUCE HIMSELF.

SO, UM, JUST A FEW HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS BEFORE WE GET STARTED.

REMEMBER TO HAVE YOUR RED, GREEN, YELLOW ITEMS FOR VOTING TO REMAIN MUTED WHEN YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING AND RAISE YOUR HANDS AND BE RECOGNIZED IF I MISS YOU, JUST WAVE YOUR HAND AND VERBALLY, LET ME KNOW IF YOU'RE, IF IT NEEDED.

AND THEN, UM, WE'RE RIGHT NOW, WE'RE ONLY MISSING, UM, ONE, UH, COMMISSIONER WHOSE CHAIRS VACANT PLUS COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY UNTIL HE COMES ON.

SO SEVEN VOTES ARE STILL REQUIRED TO APPROVE THE MOTION.

AND SO FOR ANY PARTICIPANTS, REMEMBER TO SELECT STAR SIX TO UNMUTE, AND IF YOUR ITEM IS PULLED FOR DISCUSSION, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO REMAIN ON THE LINE.

YOU'LL RECEIVE AN EMAIL WHEN WE'RE ABOUT 15 MINUTES AWAY FROM TAKING UP THE ITEM.

ALL RIGHT.

SO, UH, FOR THOSE LISTENING, OUR FIRST ITEM TODAY IS TO REVIEW THE AGENDA AND VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

I'LL READ EACH PUBLIC HEARING ITEM AND IDENTIFY THOSE THAT ARE RECOMMENDED BY STAFF OR CONSENT APPROVAL, WHICH INCLUDE CONSENT POSTPONEMENTS AND NON-DISCUSSION ITEMS. ALL RIGHT.

THE FIRST ITEM ON

[Reading of the Agenda]

THE AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING.

DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE CORRECTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT.

SO MOVING ON VERY NUN, UM, I'LL MOVE TO THE AGENDA.

ITEM B PUBLIC HEARINGS.

SO FOR THE FIRST WE HAVE A PLAN AMENDMENT NPA DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO TWO 1.01, WOODLAND ON IHI 35 DISTRICT NINE.

UM, THIS IS FOR A PLAN AMENDMENT, UH, APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT ITEM B TO REZONING C 14 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO SEVEN FIVE WOULD LAND ON IHI 35 DISTRICT NINE.

THIS IS APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONE AS WELL.

ITEM B3 PLAN AMENDMENT AND PA DASH 2019 DASH OH OH OH 3.01.

DAVID CHAPEL, MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH DISTRICT ONE IS A STAFF POST COMMENT TO OCTOBER 27TH.

AND IT'S GOING TO BE HEARD IN TANDEM WITH THE ZONING CASES.

ITEM B FOR NPA DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO ONE 7.02902 MORROW STREET, DISTRICT SEVEN.

THIS WILL BE BOLD FOR DISCUSSION ITEM B FIVE REZONING C 14 DASH 2020 DASH ZERO ZERO FOUR SEVEN NINE OH TWO MORROW STREET, DISTRICT SEVEN.

THIS IS ALSO FOR DISCUSSION ITEM V6 REZONING C 14 2020 ZERO ZERO NINE THREE 43 29 SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE, DISTRICT THREE.

THIS IS A POSTPONEMENT BY BOTH NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT UNTIL OCTOBER 27.

[00:05:01]

ITEM B SEVEN, A PLAT VACATION C EIGHT S DASH EIGHT THREE DASH ONE SIX FOR VAC BRADLEY ADDITION PLAT VACATION DISTRICT SEVEN.

THIS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF ITEM B EIGHT SITE PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE ONLY S P 2019 DASH OH FIVE SIX ONE C CANING LANE, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT SEVEN.

HIS ITEM HAS BEEN HOLD FOR DISCUSSION ITEM B NINE SITE PLAN AS PC 2019 ZERO THREE THREE THREE.

CT, THE NORWOOD HOUSE PROJECT DISTRICT SIGN.

THIS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF ITEM B 10 PRELIMINARY PLAN C H J 2018 ZERO TWO ONE TWO EASTERN PARK ONE B LOT ONE, TWO, FOUR, AND SIX PRELIMINARY PLAN DISTRICT TWO.

THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF ITEM B 11 THREE, SUBDIVISION C EIGHT J DASH 2018 DASH ZERO TWO ONE 2.2 A EASTERN PARK ONE BE AMENDED PLAT RE SUBDIVISION OF LOTS, ONE A AND TWO, A DISTRICT TWO ITS ITEMS OFFER FOR CONSENT ITEM B12 RE SUBDIVISION C H J DASH 2018 DASH ZERO TWO ONE 2.1 A RESUB DIVISION OF LOT FOUR, A EASTERN CLARK SECTION ONE BE AMENDED IS CERT TWO.

THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM B 13 FINAL PLAT OUT OF AN IMPROVED, UM, PRELIMINARY PLAN, C H J DASH 2017 DASH OH TWO THREE 5.28.

BELLA FOR TUNA PHASE TWO ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM B 14 IS A CODE AMENDMENT IT'S C 20 DASH TWO ZERO ZERO TWO ZERO DASH ZERO ZERO SIX NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY REGULATING CLANS CIVIC USES THIS ITEM IS BOTH FOR DISCUSSION AND ITEM B 15 CODE AMENDMENT, THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY CLIMATE PLAN REVISION.

ALSO BOTH FOR DISCUSSION.

AND THEN ITEM B 16 IS A RESUB DIVISION C EIGHT DASH 2019 DASH OH ONE EIGHT FIVE.ZERO ARMADILLO PARKS DISTRICT TWO.

THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT WITH DISAPPROVAL FOR REASONS PER THE STAFF REPORT, EXHIBIT C.

ALRIGHT, SO, UM, LET ME GO

[Consent Agenda]

OVER THE ITEMS AGAIN.

UM, ITEM B ONE APPLICANT, INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT B TO APPLICANT INDEFINITE POSTPONEMENT, THE THREE STAFF POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 27TH.

UM, I HIM FOR BEFORE HIS DISCUSSION, THE FIVE DISCUSSION B6 WAS POORLY MEANT BY BOTH NEIGHBORHOOD AND APPLICANT TO OCTOBER 27TH.

IS CONSENT.

B EIGHT IS FULL FOR DISCUSSION.

BENIGN IS CONSENT.

BE 10 IS CONSENT, BE 11, BE 12, 13 ARE ALL CONSENT, BE 14 AND BE 15 ARE BOTH FOR DISCUSSION AND BE 16 IS FOR CONSENT.

UM, THIS CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SO DO ANY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES SOME ITEMS ON THE AGENDA? YES.

COMMISSIONER JAY.

YEAH.

SO I'M GOING TO HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF.

I OWN A REAL ESTATE.

UH, JUST WITHIN, I DUNNO, A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET FROM THERE.

YOU SAID B FIVE, FOUR AND FIVE OH FOUR AND FIVE.

OKAY.

ANYONE ELSE? OKAY.

UH, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO PULL ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR OTHERWISE HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? NOPE.

ALRIGHT.

UM, CAN I GET A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? MOTION BY COMMISSIONER THOMPSON.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONERS ARE ALRIGHT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PROLIFIC GREEN ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN,

[00:10:01]

EIGHT, NINE, 10, 11, UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGENDA ON, BUT I WANT TO CIRCLE BACK AND WELCOME COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY TO THE COMMISSION.

IT'S VERY DIFFERENT DOING THIS VIRTUALLY A COMMISSIONER CONNOLLY.

I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WENT IN TO SAY A FEW WORDS, INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND ANYTHING ELSE YOU MIGHT WANT TO ADD? NOT, NOT REALLY.

HI.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE WITH Y'ALL LIKE YOU'LL GET TO KNOW ME SOONER OR LATER.

GREAT.

AWESOME.

SO MOVING ONTO OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS, JUST A QUICK REMINDER THAT DURING THE ROUND ROBIN SEIZE STATE WHO THE QUESTION IS FOR AND ALLOW A FEW SECONDS BEFORE ASKING A QUESTION, THAT'S WHEN WE GET TO THE GROUND.

UM, BUT THE FIRST DISCUSSION

[Items B4 & B5]

ITEM IS FOR ITEM B FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENTS.

AND WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION.

YES.

ITEM B FOUR IS PLANNING MINUTE NPA 2020 ZERO ZERO ONE 7.02.

THE PROPERTY ADDRESS IS NINE OH TWO NINE OH FOUR.

MORROW STREET IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.

THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO MULTIFAMILY LAND USE.

IT IS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.

WE DID NOT RECENTLY RECEIVE A LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN CONTACT TEAM, BUT THE STAFF CASE REPORT DOES INCLUDE, UH, RECOMMEND, UH, EXCUSE ME.

IT DOES INCLUDE COMMENT FORMS FROM PEOPLE IN FAVOR AND OPPOSED FROM THE, UH, 500 FEET BOUNDARY.

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

IS THERE WE ARE GOING TO TAKE ITEMS TOGETHER.

WAS THERE, UM, ANOTHER OR A DIFFERENT PRESENTATION? YES.

GOOD EVENING.

CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

MY NAME IS MARK GRAHAM.

I'M THE CASE MANAGER FOR THE COMPANION CASE, WHICH IS C 14 2020 ZERO ZERO FOUR SEVEN FOUR NINE OH TWO AND NINE OH FOUR MORROW STREET.

UM, JUST BUILDING ON OUR MARINES, UH, EXPLANATION.

THIS SITE IS APPROXIMATELY THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE, UM, CURRENTLY ZONED, UH, SF THREE, UH, FOUR, ESSENTIALLY A SINGLE FAMILY AND ATTACHED, UH, DETACHED AND ATTACHED UP TO ABOUT 7.6 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

THE REQUEST IS FOR , UM, WHICH WOULD PERMIT UP TO 17 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OR APPROXIMATELY 13 UNITS ON THIS PROPERTY.

UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE COMMISSION GRANTS A REQUESTED MF ONE IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE, UM, THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT.

THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE REQUESTED ZONING, UH, IS USED WHERE THERE'S A MIX OF DETACHED AND ATTACHED RESIDENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S USED AS A BUFFER BETWEEN A HIGHER MULTIFAMILY ZONE IN THIS CASE, THE ON THE EAST AND NORTH, UM, AND, UH, THE SINGLE FAMILY ON THE NORTH AND WEST.

UM, AND THE ALSO BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, UH, RECEIVED SUPPORT FOR CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE, UH, AMENDMENT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING STAFF.

UH, THE SECOND REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

UM, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THE 2017 STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT ADOPTED BY COUNCIL.

AND, UM, THEY SAID THIS LARGE GOAL OF 135,000 NEW UNITS OVER THE PERIOD OF THE BLUEPRINT, BUT A 10 YEAR GOAL FOR NORTH LAMAR OF 1,326 RESIDENCES.

THIS SITE IS ONLY ABOUT 450 FEET OFF OF LAMAR, A CORE TRANSIT CORRIDOR WITH, UM, UM, IT'S VERY GOOD ACCESS TO THAT.

AND, AND THIS ALSO A 10 MINUTE WALK FROM THE CRESTVIEW STATION, UM, COUNCIL'S GOAL, UH, PROPOSED AT 90% OF THE NEWLY BUILT AFFORDABLE HOUSING BE LOCATED WITHIN THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE OF TRANSIT SERVICE.

THE SITE MEETS THAT CRITERIA.

[00:15:01]

UM, AND LASTLY, UH, THE REQUESTS AS A PUBLIC NEED AND NOT A SPECIAL PRIVILEGE TO THE OWNER, THE LOCATION IS LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE CRESTVIEW TOD WALKABLE AREA.

UH, THE PROPOSED ZONING IS COMPACT AND COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.

UH, WE THINK PROTECTS THE DETACHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

UM, THE PROPOSED RESIDENCES MAKE A GOOD USE OF LAND NEAR THE PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN TRANSPORTATION.

A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AGAIN IS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED MF ONE NPS ZONING, AND THAT COMPLETES THE STAFF PRESENTATION.

OKAY.

DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ONLINE, VICTORIA HALSEY? I'M HERE.

UM, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

THIS IS VICTORIA HASI WITH THE THROWER DESIGN REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER.

UM, WELL SOMEONE CUE ME WHEN THE PRESENTATION IS UP.

YES, WE CAN SEE YOUR FIRST LINE.

OKAY.

MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

WE'RE THERE.

THE PROPERTY IS 0.7, FIVE ACRES LOCATED LESS THAN A QUARTER MILE FROM NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD, WHICH ISN'T IMAGINE OFF THE NEXT CITY CORRIDOR FURTHER THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE BOUNDARY OF THE CRESTY STAGE, THE CRESSEY STATION, WHICH IS AN IMAGINE AUSTIN TOWN CENTER.

THERE ARE SEVERAL TRANSIT STOPS AND A MIX OF USES WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF THE PROPERTIES.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

OKAY.

ORANGE.

AND I WANT TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO MANY PROPERTIES WEST AND SOUTH SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT TRACK THAT HAVE ONE, ONE ROLLING UNIT OR ARE ACTUALLY SCHEDULING UNITS.

MOST OF THOSE PROPERTIES ARE ZONED SOME COMBINATION OF EITHER SINGLE FAMILY OR TOD INFILL DENSITY IS OCCURRING HERE, AND IT'S, IT'S A POSITIVE IN THIS AREA, UH, AND FOR THE GREATER, UH, CITY OF AUSTIN.

AND ALTHOUGH UNDERSTANDABLY, THAT DOES COME WITH SOME GROWING PAINS, UM, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT STRUGGLES TO UPGRADE POORLY MAINTAINED AND LACKING INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WITH TIME GROWING PAINS WILL LESSEN BECAUSE GREATER DENSITY WILL PROVIDE MORE AND BETTER SYSTEM FOR TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE LIFE.

UM, NEXT LIFE SCENE EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY TODAY.

THE IS IN POOR CONDITION AND IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR DEMOLITION.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IMAGE IS A GOOGLE STREET VIEW LOOKING WEST DOWN MORROW.

THERE IS A SIDEWALK YOU CAN SEE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PARK.

SORRY.

THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DELAY THAT WE SEE.

SLIDE FIVE NOW.

OKAY, PERFECT.

I'M SORRY.

I JUST WANTED TO CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO, THERE ARE EXISTING SIDEWALKS ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF MARGE STREET AND NO SIDEWALKS ALONG THE NORTH SIDE, AND THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD HELP BRING SOME OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE TOO, TO THIS STREET.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IMAGE IS FURTHER WEST ON MORROW WITH THE SUBJECT TRACK SCENE ON THE RIGHTS OF PRESENTING DENSE BUSHES AND VEGETATE VEGETATION ALONG THIS PORTION OF THE STREET AND THE TRACK.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

LAST IMAGE OF LOOKING FURTHER WITH THE BALLPARK IS VISIBLE JUST BEYOND THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED HOMES TO THE LEFT SIDE.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO BOTH PROJECTS JUST FOR 11 TO 12 TOWNHOUSE STYLE, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UM, WITHOUT THE NEED TO SUBDIVIDE THE LAND AND STANDALONE SINGLE FAMILY, LOT, THE REZONING IS BENEFICIAL BECAUSE IT WILL ALLOW GREATER TREE PROTECTION WILL REQUIRE A GREATER SETBACK FROM THE REMAINING SINGLE FAMILY ZONED PROPERTIES AND WILL BE LESS OF A BURDEN ON THE TAXPAYERS DOLLARS, BUT MOST EXCITING WILL EASILY BRING MORE PEOPLE CLOSER TO GREATER TRANSIT OPTIONS AND ACTIVITIES ON THE IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISON OF SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

THE DIFFERENCES ARE MINIMAL TO NONE ON THE TABLE ON THE RIGHT SHOWS, THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE SUBJECT TRACKS AND WITHOUT A ZONING CHANGE, THE PROPERTY CAN BE SUBDIVIDED INTO AT MOST FIVE LOTS WITH, WITH EACH ONE, HAVING A MAIN HOUSE IN AN APU, SIMILAR TO MANY OF THE OTHER HOUSES.

DO YOU SEE, UH, TO THE WEST, MANY OF THOSE, A LOT TO SEE THE WEST, UM, WITH THE ZONING CHANGE, UH, THE PROPOSAL IS FOR 11 TO 12 WELLING UNITS ON THE SITE.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UH, DAMAGE HERE SHOWING THE BUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS,

[00:20:01]

UH, FOR THE DIFFERENT LOT LINES OF THE, OF THE SUBJECT TRACKS, THE LIGHT BLUE AREA OF VESSEL REPRESENTS THE 25 FOOT BUILDING SETBACK, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY COMPATIBILITY ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.

THERE'S ALSO A 25 FOOT BURTNER SETBACK.

SO YOU SEE THAT, UH, AT THE PROPERTY LINE FRONTING MORROW, AND THEN THE EAST SIDE OF THE LOT AND THE REMAINING REAR PORTIONS OF THE LOT ARE NOT IMPACTED BY COMPATIBILITY.

AND THEREFORE THERE ARE A, THERE IS A FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK AND A 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE GUIDANCE FROM OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THERE ARE MANY GOOD REASONS TO SUPPORT THE REZONING.

AND IN SUMMARY, THE PROPERTY WILL PROVIDE A GREATER LEVEL OF COMPACTING, CONNECTED DEVELOPMENT, PLACING MORE PEOPLE IN PROXIMITY TO URBAN ELEMENTS THAT ARE KEY TO ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE URBAN ENVIRONMENT FOR DECADES TO COME.

WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS REZONING REQUEST, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE, UH, MR. ENTRE, WE'RE ON THE PHONE AND THEN YOU CUT OUT.

OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

UH, RON'S ROLE WE'RE HERE.

YES.

THANK YOU.

JUST WANTED TO ADD A FEW THINGS, UH, TO WHAT VICTORIA HAD STATED.

UM, YOU KNOW, AS SHE IS, AS SHE INDICATED, THE PROPERTY CAN BE SUBDIVIDED AND POSSIBLY UP TO FIVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, WHICH EACH WOULD HAVE A DRIVEWAY AND IN SOME CASES, MAYBE TWO DRIVEWAYS.

SO EACH LOT FINDING OUT TOMORROW, WHICH I DO NOT THINK THAT THAT IS THE BEST DEVELOPMENT THAT THIS PROPERTY DESIRES.

I THINK THAT MULTIFAMILY ZONING WITH A SINGLE DRIVEWAY IS SINGLE POINT OF ACCESS IS DEFINITELY THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT SHOULD BE ON THIS PROPERTY.

THAT'S A GARAGE FOR A TRANSITION FROM THE THAT'S TO THE EAST AND TO THE SINGLE FAMILY THAT'S TO THE WEST.

AND, UH, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE WOULD SUPPORT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA FOR MF ONE ON THIS PROPERTY.

WE THINK IT'S VERY APPROPRIATE AND WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR POSITIVE CONSIDERATION TO THIS.

THANK YOU NOW.

UM, DO WE HAVE MR. CHIP HARRIS ON THE PHONE, MR. HARRIS? YES.

UH, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS CHIP HARRIS AND I LIVE IN THE CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE CRESSEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS TAKEN A POSITION OPPOSING THE REZONING OF THESE PROPERTIES.

THERE ARE ALSO LETTERS OF OPPOSITION IN THE BACKUP MATERIAL.

AND I'VE SPOKEN WITH RESIDENTS WHO LIVE NEAR THE PROPOSED REZONING, WHO ARE OPPOSED TO IT.

ONE OF THE CRITICAL ELEMENTS OF THE COUNCIL APPROVED CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IS REFLECTED IN ITS MAJOR RECOMMENDATION THAT STATES QUOTE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL AREAS SHOULD RETAIN S F THREE ZONING AND ALMOST ALL THE CITIES RATIONALE FOUND ON PAGE TWO OF THE BACKUP, SUPPORTING THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED PLAN AMENDMENT AND FLOWN CHANGE SEEMS TO IMPLY THAT THE PROPERTIES, IF 902 AND 904 MORROW ARE EITHER IN THE TOD WHERE THE HUNTSMAN PETROCHEMICAL SITE ONCE WAS, OR THAT THEY FRONT ON LAMAR BOULEVARD, NEITHER OF WHICH IS TRUE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PORTION OF THE PLAN.

I STATED EARLIER REGARDING RETENTION MSF THREE ZONING, WHICH DOES NOT SUPPORT THE REZONING OF THESE PROPERTIES TO MULTIFAMILY ALL THE OTHER STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN PULLED OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, APPLY TO THE T O D TO THE SOUTH OR TO LAMAR BOULEVARD.

AND NOT TO THESE TWO LOTS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MORROW, APPLYING THE STATEMENTS FROM PORTIONS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN TO AN AREA THEY WERE NOT INTENDED FOR INVALIDATES THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE PLAN BE AMENDED, IRONICALLY, THE AREA ACROSS THE STREET AND WITHIN THE TOD ON THAT SOUTH SIDE OF MORROW HAS ALREADY BEEN DEVELOPED WITH PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

AND IF YOU DO PLEXUS, WHICH SUPPORTS TO HAE UNDER RECOMMENDATIONS BY STAFF ON PAGE TWO, CHANGING THE FLUME ON THE NORTH SIDE TOMORROW TO MULTIFAMILY WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE RECENT DEVELOPMENT ON THE SOUTH SIDE, WHERE THE TOD EXIST.

AND JUST TO CLARIFY, I THINK THIS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE NINE

[00:25:01]

OF THE BACKUP FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENT.

IT STATES AT NINE OH TWO AND NINE OH FOUR MORROW, TOTAL QUOTE, APPROXIMATELY SEVEN ACRES IN QUOTES.

WHILE THE TOTAL LAND IN THE TWO, LOTS IS ACTUALLY LESS THAN THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE.

THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS CASE THAT JUSTIFIED A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THE CITY IS ENCOURAGING DENSITY ON THE CORRIDORS, BUT MORROW STREET IS NOT A CORRIDOR.

IT IS A NARROW 30 FOOT WIDE INTERIOR RESIDENTIAL STREET WITH PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON BOTH SIDES.

HOWEVER, POOR ARTERIAL CONNECTIONS IN THE AREA RESULT IN IT BEING USED AS A CUT THROUGH WITH HIGHER THAN AVERAGE TRAFFIC VOLUMES.

ZONING SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED AS IF ONLY EXACERBATE THESE PROBLEMS. IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THERE'S ALSO AN IMPORTANT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE ASSOCIATED WITH 900 TOMORROW.

IT HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED AS LONG AS I'VE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS SINCE 1980 BEING UNDEVELOPED.

IT HAS MANY MATURE TREES AND HELPS REDUCE FLOODING THREATS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE EXPECT IT TO BE DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS, INCLUDING 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER, BUT ALLOWS 55% IMPERVIOUS COVER THE LOSS OF THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL PERVIOUS COVER OVER 2100 SQUARE FEET ON A HALF ACRE LOT COULD CONTRIBUTE SUBSTANTIALLY TO FLOODING PROBLEMS. I'D LIKE TO SUMMARIZED BY ECHOING AND OTHER RESIDENTS CONCERNS.

WHEN YOU SAID THIS UP, SONY WOULD HAVE AN INVERSE EFFECT ON TRAFFIC, SAFETY, WALKABILITY, AFFORDABILITY, AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

PLEASE HONOR OUR APPROVED NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS PLAN AMENDMENT AND JUNK SOUNDING CHANGE REQUEST.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. HARRIS, DO WE HAVE MIKE LEVINE ON THE PHONE THREE MINUTES, PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUTE.

THIS IS MIKE LEVINE.

I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

AND AS CHIP MENTIONED, OUR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE DIDN'T PASS A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THIS, UH, CHANGE THE, THE PRIMARY REASONS BEING ONE THAT IS IN CLEAR VIOLATION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.

AND WE WONDER WHY WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.

IF WE HAVE TO KEEP COMING HERE AND ASKING YOU TO NOT CHANGE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AGAINST OUR WILL, TO THAT WHILE YOU KEEP, WHILE THE PETITIONER KEEPS SUGGESTING THAT IT'S SO CLOSE TO THE TRANSIT TO THE TOD, INTO THE CORRIDOR, WHY DON'T WE JUST DO IT? I GUESS I WONDER WHY WE EVEN HAVE DESIGNATIONS FOR CORRIDORS, IF WE'RE JUST GOING TO SAY, WELL, THIS IS CLOSE TO IT.

AND TO THERE ARE YOU BEING THAT MORAL STREET IS A PRETTY HIGH TRAFFIC CUT THROUGH, AS CHIP MENTIONED, AND COUNCILMEMBER COSAR JUST MADE IT A QUADRUPLE THE TRAFFIC ON IT POTENTIALLY BY REMOVING A TRAFFIC BARRIER AT ONE END OF THE STREET OFTEN CALLED THE PORK CHOP.

SO WE, UH, WE ARE ANTICIPATING A, A FOURFOLD INCREASE IN TRAFFIC THERE AS IS.

SO WE, AND THERE'S ALREADY BEEN A DEATH OF A CHILD DEATH ON THAT STREET.

AND SO WE'RE WONDERING WHY YOU'D WANT TO MAKE IT MORE DANGEROUS FOR CHILDREN.

UM, THE PARK THAT THEY OFTEN LIKE TO SITE BEING NEAR THE LOCATION IS A PRIVATE PARK THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO USE.

THAT WAS PART OF THE DEAL THAT Y'ALL CUT WITH THE DEVELOPER FOR THE CRESTVIEW COMMONS THERE.

SO THAT'S NOT A, IT SHOULDN'T BE COUNTED TOWARDS ACTUAL PARKLAND SINCE WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO USE IT.

IT'S PRIVATE BALL FIELD.

UM, AND THAT'S IT.

I'M JUST GONNA LEAVE IT THERE.

I DON'T THINK Y'ALL REALLY CARE ANYWAY.

SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. LEVINE, IS STEVE THREE MINUTES? YES, YES, I CAN.

THANK YOU.

GO AHEAD.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN? MY NAME IS STEVE, MY WIFE AND I LIVE IT.

OH, STREET, UH, THE STREET WHERE THESE PROPERTIES EXIST.

UM, I'M GOING TO SHARE THREE CONCERNS I HAVE TONIGHT.

UM, IT LEADS ME TO OPPOSE THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST.

UM, A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, I PARTICIPATED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CREST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IT'S BEEN REFERENCED ALREADY.

UM, THE PLAN WAS CREATED AFTER MONTHS OF GIVE AND TAKE BETWEEN NEIGHBORS AND CITY STAFF, OUR INTENTION, AND THAT OF THE PLAN WAS TO SUPPORT SINGLE FAMILY CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN PLACE COMMERCIAL AND MULTI-FAMILY ZONING ALONG BURNET ROAD ANDERSON LANE AND AMARA BOULEVARD.

THAT'S ALONG THOSE STREETS, THE TWO PROPERTIES AT NINE OH TWO, NINE OH FOUR MO ARE NOT ON

[00:30:01]

LAMAR BOULEVARD.

THEY WERE TOWARDS THE INTERIOR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SECONDLY, I AM CONCERNED WITH THE INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT WOULD RESULT FROM AN TO MULTIFAMILY.

SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES TEND TO ABSORB AND HANDLE A MUCH MORE OF THEIR OWN RUNOFF.

THEY CHANGED TO MULTIFAMILY AND INCREASED IMPERVIOUS COVER WILL CREASE A RAINWATER TO FLOW TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND ONTO THE STREET CRESTVIEW AT THIS TIME IS ALREADY DEALING WITH, UH, INCREASED STREET FLOODING AND SOME PROPERTY FLOODING WHEN HEAVY RAINS OCCUR.

THIRDLY, MULTIFAMILY ZONING WILL RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC, ON MOL AND ADJACENT STREETS.

YEAH, ADJACENT STREETS THAT ATTACH MORAL TO ANDERSON LANE, THE SAFETY AND RESIDENCE OF THE RESIDENTS LIVING ON THE STREETS AND THE PEDESTRIANS NAVIGATING THESE SAME STREETS WILL BE THREATENED.

UM, TRAFFIC CALMING EXISTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT WAS DEVELOPED OVER 10 YEARS AGO.

AND JUST NOT CONSIDER ANY OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S HAPPENED AT THE NORTH CROSS MALL OR AT THE COMMONS AREA.

THAT'S BEEN REFERENCED THIS EVENING.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO MY CONCERNS.

THANK YOU, MR. COONER IS MISS HOPPING ON THE PHONE? YEP.

I'M HERE.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YOU DIDN'T HEAR ME.

YES.

THANK YOU.

UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE SOME, UM, CITIZENS THAT WOULD PREFER TO, UH, DEFEND THE ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED BACK IN 2004.

UM, AND, AND WE UNDERSTAND THEIR REASONING BEHIND WHY THEY FEEL LIKE THIS PROJECT DOES NOT, UM, ALIGN WITH THEIR PLAN.

HOWEVER, I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS AND CITIES ARE NOT STATIC.

THEY ARE, THEY ARE LIVING, BREATHING, AND THEY ARE ALLOWED TO CHANGE THROUGH A DEFINED PROCESS.

UH, THE AREA HAS CHANGED, UH, HERE, THE CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED, UH, THAT BRING GOOD CAUSE FOR AMENDMENTS, EVEN BEYOND JUST THIS CASE, YOU KNOW, UH, THE ADOPTION OF THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE, UH, ADOPTION OF THE STRATEGIC HOUSING BLUEPRINT.

THESE, THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT, UM, GIVE GOOD REASON TO PAUSE AND RECONSIDER WHAT IS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS AND HOW MAYBE PORTIONS OF THESE AREAS CAN SUPPORT THE OVERARCHING GOALS THAT COUNCIL HAS, HAS, UH, CLEARLY GONE ON RECORD SAYING, ARE, ARE SIGNIFICANT AND IMPORTANT TO ACHIEVE.

UM, THIS REZONING DOES NOT DISPLACE ANYONE DIRECTLY.

AND I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT WAS MULTIFAMILY AND MULTIPLE UNITS IS GOING TO TAKE AWAY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME HERE THAT SOMEONE COULD OCCUPY.

BUT I WOULD ARGUE THAT THERE'S, THERE'S NOT MANY WHO WOULD WANT TO OCCUPY THE HOUSE AS IT TODAY, IT'S IN PRETTY POOR CONDITION.

SO ANYTHING YOU DO HERE, WHETHER YOU PUT IN A BRAND NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, EVEN ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, OR YOU SAID THE BUY THIS LOT AND BRAND UP TO FIVE NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES, ALL OF IT'S GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN, UM, I GUESS, A FORM OF DISPLACEMENT OR GENTRIFICATION, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE MARKET IS DOING RIGHT NOW.

AND THE MORE UNITS WE CAN GET HERE, THE LOWER COST, THOSE UNITS WILL BE, THEY WILL BE MORE ACHIEVABLE TO WORKING CLASS FAMILIES, THEN PUTTING A SINGLE NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THIS LOT.

UM, AND YOU KNOW, I DID HEAR A COMMENT THAT SINGLE, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT HERE WOULD NOT BE COMPATIBLE WITH SINGLE FAMILY, BUT I ARGUE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PROPOSAL HERE, THE PLAN HERE IS TO DO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

SO I'M NOT SURE HEALTHY WILL FAMILIES INCOMPATIBLE WITH SINGLE FAMILY.

UM, THEY, THEY ARE COMPATIBLE.

UM, IT'S JUST THAT THEY'RE, THIS IS GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF DENSITY OF SINGLE FAMILY THAN WHAT IS EXISTING TODAY.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I REALLY JUST WANT TO ASK THAT THE COMMISSION CONSIDER WHAT IS THE BEST SOLUTION HERE.

I UNDERSTAND THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT FRONT DIRECTLY ON THE CORRIDOR, BUT IT IS WITHIN THE DISTANCE OF, AS MARK SAID, IT IS WITHIN THE DISTANCE, UM, THAT COUNCILS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE MORE HOUSING.

SO THIS IS

[00:35:01]

WHERE WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT MORE HOUSING AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT IN DOING SO.

THANK YOU.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

UM, I THINK WE'VE GONE THROUGH ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS.

UM, CAN I GET A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION MADE BY A COMMISSIONER SEEGER SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR FOUR OR FIVE, SIX, SEVEN.

WE KEEP THEM UP ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, AND EIGHT, ALL THIS STAINING A FISHERY ON HIS FLEET.

I DON'T SEE YOURS.

THIS WAS JUST A CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, CORRECT? YEAH.

UM, YES.

CAN YOU SEE MY VIDEO NOW? NO, BUT I CAN HEAR YOU.

OKAY.

I CAN.

IT'S HARD BECAUSE I CAN SEE YOU ALL AND SEE MYSELF.

SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO SWITCH NETWORKS TO GET BETTER VIDEO, BUT I AM HOLDING UP GREEN FOR CLOSING.

OKAY, GREAT.

I THINK THAT IS EVERYBODY DOES.

THAT'S A 11 WITH A COMMISSIONER SHANE MICKEY USING, SO I'M NOW ONTO OUR ROUND ROBIN.

SO WE'VE GOT AN EIGHT SPOTS AND EACH COMMISSIONER GONNA HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO ASK QUESTIONS AND PLEASE STATE WHO YOUR QUESTION IS FOR, UM, AND ALLOW A FEW SECONDS BEFORE ASKING A QUESTION.

SO, UM, DO WANT TO JUMP IN MISSIONARY, OUR CHAIR SHOP.

ALRIGHT, LET ME GET THE END THERE.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, RELATED, I GUESS, ON THE ZONING CASE, UM, WAS THAT WHO WAS, UH, CAN'T REMEMBER THE STAFF MEMBER WE HAD MARK.

HEY MARK.

UH, SO, UM, MY QUESTION IS RELATED TO, UH AND WHAT ARE THE, UH, STORM WATER, UH, DURING SITE PLAN STORM WATER DETENTION REQUIREMENTS.

ARE THEY REQUIRED TO LOOK AT STORM WATER, UH, AS PART OF THEIR SITE PLAN AND PUT IN CONTROLS IF NEEDED? UM, I DON'T KNOW.

I'M SORRY.

I'M LOOKING AT, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

I'M SORRY.

UM, I, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE STANDARD IS FOR THIS.

ALRIGHT.

UH, IS THE APPLICANT, MAYBE THEY CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION, MS. YES.

DEVELOPMENT AT THIS SITE.

UM, BECAUSE, OH, SORRY.

I'M GOING TO LET RON ANSWER.

OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONER SHAW.

UM, RON WE'RE HERE.

I READ THE PROPERTY TODAY HAS VERY, VERY LOW IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE.

SO DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, THERE WILL BE AN ANALYSIS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEFERENCE IN RUNOFF, BASED ON THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AVERAGE, DO THEY PROPOSE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE AND THERE WILL BE NO INCREASE IN STORM WATER FLOWS, LEAVING THE PROPERTY THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE TODAY.

SO ALL THE DRAINAGE, ALL THE WATER QUALITY IS PLANNED TO BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE SITE PLANNING PROCESS.

OKAY.

AND, UM, THIS IS SWITCHING BACK TO STAFF, SORRY ABOUT THAT.

ON THE, UM, COMMENT FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THE PARK A NEARBY PARK WAS NOT ACCESSIBLE.

I JUST WANTED TO CHECK THAT.

IS THAT, IS THAT ACCURATE? IS THAT PART NOT A PUBLIC PARK OR A PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE? DOES ANYBODY HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT? UM, I DON'T, I'M SORRY, MR. CRUSHER, MARK FROM STAFF.

I DO NOT HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT.

UM, I REFER YOU ON YOUR PREVIOUS QUESTION, UH, TO PAGE SIX, NUMBER SIX, UH, DOES TALK ABOUT THE ONSITE DETENTION REQUIREMENTS WHEN, UM, 8,000 FEET IS EXCEEDED.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

I'M DONE.

SORRY.

SORRY.

COMMISSIONER SCHNEIDER.

DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? OH, COMMISSIONER SECRET.

[00:40:03]

OH, YOU'RE ON MUTE.

YOU'RE ON MUTE COMMISSIONER SECRET.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER HERE.

CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU.

OKAY.

UM, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES.

ALONG THE SAME LINES, WE'VE HEARD SEVERAL TIMES FROM SEVERAL SPEAKERS THAT, UM, THE ADDITIONAL HOUSING ON THIS PROPERTY, WHAT EXASPERATE EXACERBATE FLOODING.

THIS IS NOT IN THE FLOOD PLAIN AREA, BUT THERE IS THERE A PROBLEM IN THE AREA WITH A LOCALIZED FLOODING? THAT'S IT'S THE QUESTION IS FOR MR. GRAHAM.

UM, I'M SORRY.

UH, COMMISSIONER, I DON'T HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT LOCALIZED FLOODING IN THIS AREA.

OKAY.

BUT THERE AM I CORRECT THAT THERE IS NO PLUG PLAY ON THIS PROPERTY OR NEAR THIS PROPERTY? YES.

UM, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMENTS ON PAGE SIX, AGAIN, UM, NUMBER THREE SAYS ACCORDING TO THE FLOOD PLAIN MAPS, THERE IS NO FLOOD PLAIN WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT LOCATION.

OKAY.

BUT WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT LOCALIZED.

OKAY.

WELL, THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT.

WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS AND SEEING NONE LAST CHANCE.

SORRY.

DOES ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION IN OUR MINDS? YOU THAT THE MOTION WILL BE FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENTS AND THE REASONING? YES, I UNDERSTAND.

OKAY.

LET'S SEE.

MOVE APPROVAL OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY.

CAN I GET A SECOND INSURERS ARE RIGHT.

ALL THOSE IN SAFER.

I'M SORRY.

WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT.

OH, SORRY.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR EMOTION COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? I MEAN, UNLESS NO ONE WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT.

IT'S OKAY.

UM, I SEE ONE HEAD.

YEAH.

SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK SOME PEOPLE, I THINK MAYBE KEN BROUGHT THIS UP, JUST THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, YEAH, THERE IS A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN HERE AND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN PROBABLY REALLY DID SPEAK TO THE NEEDS OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE WANTS OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT WAS PROBABLY FAIRLY RELEVANT FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF YEARS.

MY GUESS IS HERE WE ARE 16 AND A HALF YEARS LATER.

UM, THE NEEDS OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT NEEDS OF AUSTIN, THE NEEDS OF EVERYONE HAVE CHANGED.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T REALLY PUT TOO MUCH INTO A 16 AND A HALF YEAR OLD PLAN IN A CITY THAT IS ALMOST DOUBLED IN POPULATION IN THAT 69 AND HALF YEARS.

UM, IT'S DIRECTLY NEXT TO LAMAR.

YOU KNOW, IT'S GOT AN AMAZING TRANSIT TODAY.

KNOCK ON WOOD, EVEN BETTER CHANCE THAT A COUPLE OF YEARS, UM, I LOOKED AROUND IN THAT AREA AS FAR AS THE GENERAL COST OF HOUSING IN THAT AREA.

AND THE FACT IS THE LAND IS JUST TOO EXPENSIVE TO REQUIRE THEM TO DEVELOP UNDER SINGLE FAMILY.

I THINK IT'S JUST, YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE TO TRY AND DO SO.

I MEAN, IF WE WANT TO SAY WE ARE 100%, OKAY.

WITH ONLY THE TOP 15% OR 20% OF INCOME EARNERS TO BE ABLE TO LIVE HERE, THE, BY ALL MEANS WE SHOULD VOTE NO ON THIS, BUT IF WE WANT TO BROADEN THAT AND WHAT WE WANT TO ALLOW FOR A WIDER ARRAY OF INCOME MEMBERS TO BE ABLE TO LIVE THERE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO ALLOW FOR DIVERSITY OF HOUSING, IF WE'RE GONNA ALLOW FOR DIVERSITY OF INCOME EARNERS TO LIVE IN THESE AREAS.

AND SO I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THIS AND, AND KIND OF WISH WE WERE ACTUALLY GOING FOR A BIT MORE HOUSING HERE.

CANNABIS IS ONLY ABOUT 11 OR 12 UNITS, BUT YOU KNOW, ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE OF, YOU KNOW, THE DESPERATE NEED FOR A NEW LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE HAD MUCH BETTER TOOLS TO UTILIZE HERE, BUT HERE WE ARE, THEY CALLED AGAIN, THANK YOU.

ANY COMMISSIONERS WANTING TO SPEAK AGAINST .

I CERTAINLY CAN APPRECIATE THE NEED FOR, UM, GOOD COMMUNITY PLANNING.

AND THAT IS ACTUALLY MY INTEREST IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BECAUSE, UM, WHILE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IS A YEAR, MANY YEARS OLD, OR, YOU KNOW, 60, IF IT'S 16 YEARS OLD OR HOWEVER OLD, THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN IS THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ALSO HAS MANY AMENDMENTS AND, UM, AND PART OF USING A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND, UH, AND LISTENING TO ACTUAL THE EMPIRICAL DATA OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS AREA

[00:45:01]

IS NOT NECESSARILY TO PREVENT DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S ACTUALLY TO GUIDE SMART GROWTH ALONG THE NODES AND MARGINS OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN OUR CITY.

AND THIS AREA HAS ACTUALLY ABSORBED MANY, MANY HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF NEW UNITS SINCE THAT TIME ALONG KEY CORRIDORS LIKE LAMAR AND WILD LOOP AND ALL ALONG THIS AREA.

UM, MANY OF THESE AREAS HAVE, UH, HAVE ALSO ACCOMMODATED ADDITIONAL UNITS THROUGH GARAGE APARTMENTS.

SO NOT IN CRESTVIEW, BUT IN THE NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO I THINK, UM, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THE NUANCED FIGURE THAT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN, UH, IF WE FIND AN EXTREMELY DENSE DEVELOPMENT IN, UM, IN AN AREA THAT IS ON A NARROW STREET, THAT IS NOT ACTUALLY A CORRIDOR, BUT WE TEND TO FIND IS A PATTERN IN WHICH OUR, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ADVOCATES FOR DENSITY ADVOCATE FOR NODES AND CORRIDOR DENSITY, AND THEN LATER WANT EVERYTHING ELSE IN BETWEEN AS WELL.

UM, AND THAT IS A TREND THAT WE SEE IN A LOT OF THESE NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO I THINK SOME OF THE CONCERNS ARE VERY LEGITIMATE AROUND STORMWATER, WHICH I DO HOPE WOULD BE IN THE SITE PLAN IF THIS PASSES, UM, BUT ALSO IN TRAFFIC SAFETY, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY LOOKING AT THE PARALLEL TRENDS AND WHAT'S HAPPENING TO TRAFFIC RIGHT NEXT TO THE SITE.

SO, UM, IT'S CERTAINLY NOT A VOTE A VOTE FOR, FOR, UH, ACKNOWLEDGING WHAT IS LAID OUT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN.

HERE IS NOT A VOTE AGAINST A GROWTH OR ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S FOR SMART COMMUNITY PLANNING, COMMISSIONER, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER FOR SPEAKING FOR MICHELLE CONNELLY? UM, I, I AM, I WASN'T GOING TO SPEAK CAUSE IT'S MY FIRST TIME HERE.

AND I, I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, I SHOULD PROBABLY JUST BE QUIET FOR THE FIRST TIME.

UM, BUT YOU KNOW, I MIGHT AS WELL JUST SAY SOMETHING VERY BRIEF.

UM, YOU GUYS WILL ALL, UH, KNOW WHO I AM AND WHERE I'M COMING FROM, BUT, YOU KNOW, AS SOMEONE WHO, UH, WAS NOT, UH, RAISED IN THE UNITED STATES, BUT WAS RAISED IN THE GLOBAL SOUTH, IF THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE WORLD, OR TO ENJOY THE LIFESTYLE THAT AFFLUENT MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES IN THE UNITED STATES ENJOY, UH, THAT WOULD REQUIRE FIVE PLANETS OVER IN TERMS OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

SO THE FUTURE, IF IT'S GOING TO BE INCLUSIVE, IT'S, IF IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE COMMITTED TO ANTI-RACISM AND CHANGE, IT HAS TO BE A FUTURE THAT IS ABOUT SHARING AND THAT SHARING HAS TO BE ABOUT SHARING SPACE.

SO THANK YOU.

THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

AND THAT'S WHY I'M VOTING FOR THIS.

THANK YOU.

AND HE COMMISSIONER FINALLY, AND THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING AGAINST OR NEUTRAL NEW COMMISSIONERS SPEAKING FOR YES.

COMMISSIONER SEGER.

YES.

I'M A LITTLE CONFLICTED ON THIS.

SO I ENDED UP GOING OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TODAY JUST TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON THE QUEST FEW DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.

IT'S VERY ATTRACTIVE.

IT IN NO WAY SEEMS TO INTERFERE, BUT THE TRAFFIC ON MAURO, I WAS THERE ABOUT QUARTER TO 12.

I THOUGHT THAT MIGHT BE A TIME WHERE THERE WOULD BE PERHAPS SOME TRAFFIC, ET CETERA.

I WAS THE ONLY PERSON ON MOROZ STREET BETWEEN LAMAR AND THE FIRST LIGHT TURN CROSS STREET.

I THEN DROVE AROUND THE TALL BEAT TO SEE JUST WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKED AT BECAUSE WE'VE HAD CASES ON TOBY TO INCREASE THE DENSITY.

THERE, THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF ADU IN SEPARATE BUILDINGS.

SO THERE ARE, THEY'RE NOT EVEN THOUGH THEY SHOW AS A BREAK, THEY'RE REALLY NOT FLAPS WITH ONE HOUSE ON THEM OR RENT ONE RESIDENT'S ON THEM.

ALSO, I LOOKED AT THE PROXIMITY TO NORTH LAMAR.

YES, NORTH LAMAR IS A COURTROOM.

IT'S THE CORRIDOR.

IT'S AN IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR ALSO.

IT'S ALSO VERY CLOSE.

THAT LOCATION IS VERY CLOSE TO, UH, THE NORTH AUSTIN TRANSIT CENTER, SO THAT YOU'RE NOT LIMITED JUST TO THE EIGHT OH ONE.

THERE ARE OTHER BUSES YOU CAN TAKE.

IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE.

I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE, BUT THE PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IS PROBABLY WHAT THREW ME OVER TO THE SIDE.

UH, UM, UH, PR UH, VOTING TO A PRO ALSO TO THE PEERS.

THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN IN TRANSITION, OR AT LEAST THESE FEW BLOCKS HAVE BEEN IN TRANSITION FOR A WHILE.

THERE SEEMS TO BE OLDER, ADDITIONAL UNITS ON THESE PROPERTIES,

[00:50:01]

AND IT ISN'T AS THOUGH IT WOULD BE A BRAND NEW BOAT COMING IN, BEEN THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE THAT MODE.

I WILL VOTE FOR THIS.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CEDAR.

UM, WE'VE GOT ONE MORE SPOT FOR SOMEBODY SPEAKING AGAINST OR NEUTRAL.

ALRIGHT.

WITH THAT.

UM, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND VOTE.

AND THIS IS VOTING FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENT, WHICH WAS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO MULTIFAMILY AND THE REZONING, WHICH IS FOUR FROM SF THREE TO NP, TO MF ONE AND P UM, THAT WAS A MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CZAR.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, 10.

I'M ABSTAINING AGAINST ALL.

SO TEN ONE ZERO.

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON.

UM, WE'RE GOING, MOVING ON TO ITEM B

[B8. Site Plan (Environmental Variance Only): SP-2019-0561C - Koenig Lane Commercial; District 7]

EIGHT, THE SITE PLAN, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL VARIANCE ONLY.

AND THIS WAS WELL FOR DISCUSSION BY COMMISSIONER LEIGHTON FOR A WHILE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

UM, AND DO WE HAVE STAFF ANDREW, UM, TO TALK ABOUT THIS AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE THE APPLICANT OR ANY OTHER ASSIGNED OUT, ARE YOU THERE ANDREW DEVELOPED NURSES DEPARTMENT FOR THEM? MR. GARNER, YOU STILL THERE? YEP.

OKAY.

GO AHEAD.

I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE VARIOUS REQUESTS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

KENNETH LAND COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 15, 12 AND A HALF WITH CANUCK LANG.

THE CASE NUMBER IS SP 2019 ZERO FIVE SIX ONE C.

AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN AN URBAN WATERSHED CLASSIFICATION, BESIDES IS A 0.16 ACRE LOT THAT HAS EXISTED AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN IMPERVIOUS COVER UNTIL 33% GROWTH AREA.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE IN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 25 EIGHT TWO 61 TO ALLOW A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY AND PARKING LOT WITHIN A GROUP OR QUALITY ZONE.

AND PROPERTY IS ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL USE AND IS SURROUNDED BY OTHER COMMERCIAL USE PROPERTIES OF SIMILAR LOT SIZE BY CODE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES BASED ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE COMMERCIAL BUSINESS.

THE PROPERTY LIES HOLDINGS IN THE BOUNDARIES OF CRITICAL OR QUALITY ZONE AND DUE TO THE WIDTH AND TRAFFIC VOLUME ALONG KINDERGARTEN ON STREET.

PARKING IS NOT AN OPTION.

THEREFORE, IN ORDER TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ONSITE, PARKING MUST BE PROVIDED, WHICH MUST BE LOCATED IN A CRITICAL OR QUALITY ZONE.

THEN THE VARIANCE PACKET YOU HAVE READ THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSES IS OVERALL PERVIOUS COMING OUT THAT 55% GROSS SITE AREA WHEN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE AMOUNT IS 70% GROSS SIDE AREA ORIGINALLY IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, SEVENTIES COVER AMOUNT OF 67%.

YEAH.

WHEN WORKING WITH STAFF TO MINIMIZE THE PROBABILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING SEVERAL BEDS.

THOSE ARE STRIPS THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY THAT WILL CAPTURE AND TREAT STORM WATER RUNOFF BEFORE ENTERING THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM AND THEIR PROVIDER PORES PAYMENT FOR ALL PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS, AS A ADDITIONAL MEASURE TO LOWER THE PERFECT COVER, EITHER A RAIN GARDEN NOR RAINWATER HARVESTING ARE FEASIBLE AT THIS TIME FOR PROJECTS, SINCE THERE IS NEITHER ACCESSIBLE, A STORM DRAIN OR ADEQUATE ROOF DRAINS FOR IRRIGATION SYSTEM, NOR A LARGE ENOUGH AREA FOR A LEVEL SPREADER THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MAIN GARDEN.

OUTFALL STAFF HAS DETERMINED THESE DESIGN DECISIONS PROVIDE GREATER OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BECAUSE FOR A LOT THIS SIDE AND AN URBAN WATERSHED, AND WITH THE MINIMAL AMOUNT OF THE PREVIOUS COVER PROPOSED OUR QUALITY TREATMENT WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED FOR, FROM AUTUMN AT ALL, NOT EVEN THE SEA AND LOOP TEAM ADOPTION.

THEREFORE STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT ALL VARIOUS REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET AND THEN THE PROPOSED PROJECT PROVIDES GREATER OVERALL NINE PROTECTION IS ACHIEVABLE WITHOUT THE BARRIERS STAFF RECOMMENDS EXPERIENCE WITH CONDITIONS AND THE CONDITIONS ARE FOUNDED IN THE PACKET.

I CAN READ THOSE VERY ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MR. GARNER.

UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THE APPLICANT NOR ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR OR AGAINST.

UM,

[00:55:01]

SO, SO YOU VOTE TO CLOSE, HAVE A HEARING ALL THOSE IN FAVOR LOST, RIGHT.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

UM, ALRIGHT.

I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR A ROUND ROBIN, UM, COMMISSIONERS, UH, ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS MS. CHARLENE BEVEL? YEAH.

SO I'M THE REASON THAT THIS GOT COLD.

UM, IT'S IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S ACTUALLY A HALF A BLOCK FROM MY HOUSE.

NOW.

I WANTED TO BE SURE THAT THE CONCERNS OF THE BRENTWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN THE LETTER THAT THEY SENT, UM, GOT LOOKED AT.

UM, I THINK THE PICTURES ARE VERY TELLING THE, THE, IT BASICALLY MOVED, UH, FROM A RESIDENTIAL USE TO A COMMERCIAL USE IN 2014, SIX YEARS AGO.

UH, IT'S BEEN IN CODE ENFORCEMENT SINCE THEN THE CURRENT OWNER REMOVED TREES IN THE BACKYARD.

UH, THEY PAVED OR EXCUSE ME, UH, PUT GRAVEL DOWN IN THE BACKYARD.

THEY PULLED PERMITS FOR SIDING AND THEN REMOVE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS.

UM, THEY, UM, FALSELY CLAIMED THAT IT WAS A HOMESTEAD.

THEY, UH, PUT APPLICATIONS OUT SAYING THAT THEY HAD A COMMERCIAL USE AND THEN BACKTRACK, IS IT, OH, NO, IT'S A RESIDENTIAL USE.

UM, SO IT'S TAKEN SIX YEARS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO FINALLY GET THEM.

THEY'VE ALSO PUT INTO SITE PLANS AS BEING THE SECOND ONE, UH, SINCE 2018.

SO I'M, I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT IT'S NOW IN FRONT OF US, BUT THIS IS FULLY IN THE FLOOD PLAIN.

UM, UH, THIS, UH, FLOWS INTO ARROYO SECO, WHICH THEN FLOWS INTO SHOAL CREEK.

THERE ARE NO, UM, GIVEN, GIVEN THE, UM, PERFORMANCE OF THE CURRENT OWNER IN, AGAIN, CUTTING DOWN TREES, PUTTING IN, UM, UM, ILLEGAL PARKING AND THAT, THAT, UH, THAT WE CAN IN NO WAY, RELY ON THEM TO MAINTAIN THESE VEGETATIVE BUFFERS AND STUFF AND SUCH.

AND SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS, AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE, ONE OF THE PICTURES THAT THE BACKYARD IS ENTIRELY FLOODED.

SO IF THEY PUT DOWN MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER, UH, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE WORSE PROBLEMS ARE GOING TO POTENTIALLY FLOOD THE ADJACENT HOMEOWNERS.

UM, AND THIS REALIZED OF THE, UM, OWNER, WHICH I BELIEVE IS IN QUESTION HERE IN TERMS OF BEING GOOD STEWARDS OF THIS SITE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT YOU GUYS IN, UM, POTENTIALLY, UH, APPROVING AN ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE IN THE MIDDLE OF A FLOOD PLAIN, UM, THAT YOU UNDERSTOOD THAT YOU'RE PROBABLY ADDING TO, UH, AREA FLOODING, UH, NOT ONLY IN THIS AREA, BUT DOWNSTREAM, UH, ALONG SHOAL CREEK.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

UM, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION THERE? I DO HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER CHRIS HARRINGTON ON THE PHONE AS WELL IN CASE THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM YES.

TO HEAR FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.

BUT I DO WANT TO SHARE THAT THIS FEELS STRANGE.

I THINK TYPICALLY THE ROLE OF MEXICO VISIO REPRESENTS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS OR TO HAVE A DIRECTOR IN THE ROLE OF EX-OFFICIO IS MORE TO BRING AN EXPERTISE, NOT NECESSARILY ISSUES, A BLOCK OVER HALF BLOCK AWAY IN A PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD FROM A RESIDENCE.

I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S PROBABLY A CONVERSATION NEEDS TO HAPPEN ABOUT THAT ROLE.

AND MAYBE THE THINGS LIKE THIS, THIS JUST FEELS VERY STRANGE.

BUT WITH OUR ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER ON THE PHONE, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS HAS STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

CAN WE ASK THE ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER TO WEIGH IN ON THIS PLACE? WHAT DO YOU MEAN? HI, THIS IS CHRIS ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.

I'M HAPPY TO RESPOND TO, UM, THE, UH, STATEMENTS IN THE LETTER.

AND SO THIS HAS BEEN IN CODE A CODE ENFORCEMENT ENFORCEMENT.

THEY ARE SUBMITTING THIS PERMIT APPLICATION TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE.

IT IS CORRECT.

IT IS ENTIRELY LOCATED WITHIN THE FLOOD, PLAIN.

THAT IS WHAT, UH, ALSO THEN DEFINES THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE FOR THIS LOCATION, WHICH IS WHAT IS NECESSITATING THE VARIANT WITH REGARD TO THE TREES.

THERE ARE STILL TWO TREES BEING PRESERVED ON THE PROPERTY.

THERE IS A REDUCTION IN GREENERY VISIBLE BETWEEN THE TWO PHOTOS, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THE LADDER PHOTO IS A LEAF OFF PHOTO.

SO PHOTO TAKEN IN THE WINTER TIME WHEN THE DECIDUOUS TREES WOULD NOT HAVE BLEEDS, THOSE TWO TREES ARE STILL THERE.

THERE WAS CLEARLY SOME VEGETATION REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY, UH, BUT IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THERE WERE ANY PROTECTED TREES REMOVED FROM

[01:00:01]

THE PROPERTY WITH RESPECT TO FLOODING.

AGAIN, IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE FLOOD PLAIN THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN.

SO THE FLOOD PLAIN RE REVIEW, UH, FOR NO ADVERSE IMPACT, THE APPLICABILITY OF ONSITE DETENTION IS ALL SOMETHING THAT WOULD ALREADY BE COVERED AS PART OF THE REVIEW TO ENSURE THAT THE APPLICATION ULTIMATELY ACHIEVE CODE COMPLIANCE.

AND JONATHAN GARDNER WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MAY BE ABLE TO ALSO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

DO YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN AND DOES ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH JUST OUR, LIKE, IS THIS PARKING THAT THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO PUT IN OR IS THIS JUST A REQUIREMENT OR CODE? AND THEN WE'RE GETTING PARKING BECAUSE WE HAVE AN ANTIQUATED CODE THAT'S AUTO CENTRIC.

THIS IS JONATHAN GARNER.

THE PARKING IS REQUIREMENT CODE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.

AND TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROPOSED USE, THE PARKING HAS TO ALSO VIEW SUPPLY.

UH, A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF FOUR SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS GALVIN, THIS LOCATION, BUT THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING AND ONLY FOUR SPACES ARE BEING PROPOSED.

THAT PARKING IS IN THE 25 YEAR FLOOD, PLAIN, A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAIN, UH, WHICH IS BEING CURRENTLY REVIEWED BY THE FLOOD PLAIN ENGINEERS IN WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT.

THE APPLICATION IS STILL LACKING SOME INFORMATION, WHICH ALSO REQUIRES ADDITIONAL INPUT FROM TECHSTOP BECAUSE OF THE ASSOCIATION WITH PROPERTY TO KEENAN LANE OR IN 22 TO 22.

UM, SO THERE'S A PROCESS IN PLACE TO BRING EVERYTHING INTO COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR FLOOD PLAIN REVIEW, UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS AN EXISTING BUILDING, IT DOES THE PARKING THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THAT BUILDING DOES NOT MEET THE EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE LOCATED IN ATLANTA.

THE BILLING CODE 25, 793.

THIS DICTATES WHETHER A DEVELOPMENT WITH FLOOD PAIN CAN BE APPROVED.

UM, THEREFORE, UM, BECAUSE THE PARKING IS A REQUIREMENT OF CODE, UM, BUT NOT ALLOW AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE BUILDING, THEN A WAIVER OR APPROVED VARIOUS, THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP TO, OR APPROVAL OF THE PARENT.

THANK YOU.

ONE OTHER THING TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS ABOUT LOCALIZED FLOODING.

UH, THE APPLICATION IS ALSO IN REVIEW FOR PARTICIPATION IN THEIR REGIONAL STORMWATER EVASION PROGRAM OR OUR SMP AS WE CALL IT, UM, TYPICALLY FOR A LOCK THIS SIZE IN URBAN WATERSHEDS, THIS, UM, WITH THE MINIMAL AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER BASED ON SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, IS A CANDIDATE FOR PARTICIPATION IN OUR S AND P PROGRAM, UH, WHICH THEN GOES TO FUND LARGER REGIONAL STORMWATER PROJECTS THAT YOU MIGHT SEE HAPPENING IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.

THE DOLLARS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROGRAM GETS SPLIT WITHIN THE SAME WATERSHED CLASSIFICATION AS THE PROJECT ITSELF.

THANKS.

AND JUST CHECKING IN WITH CITY HALL.

IT SEEMS LIKE I DEFINITELY, UH, I HAD, UH, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

UM, THE FIRST IS I THINK I'M CLEAR ABOUT HOW, UH, AN APPROVED, IF WE IMPROVE THIS, HOW THAT IMPACTS THE EXISTING CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES.

IT'S TRYING TO GO AROUND WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WHEN A CODE ENFORCEMENT IS ISSUED.

ONE OF THE EASIEST WAYS TO START TO COMPLIANCE IS TO GET AN APPROVED SITE PLAN SINCE THIS SORT OF COURSE, THE ISSUE WAS ABOUT ILLEGAL NONCONFORMING DEVELOPMENT.

AND THE ONLY WAY TO, UH, EXCUSE ME, THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE FOR THIS, TO REMOVE ALL THE LEGAL DEVELOPMENT OR TO IS TO GET A SITE PLAN APPROVED.

UM, THAT IS AN APPLIANCE DEVELOPMENT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS.

THIS IS THE STEPS THAT THE AFRICAN IS CHOOSING TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF OBTAINING A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THANKS.

UH, AND, UH, UH, I HAVEN'T REVIEWED THIS TERRIBLY CAREFULLY CAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS ALL CONSENT.

UM, CAN YOU TALK THROUGH, IS THE APPLICANT MAKING CHANGES THAT WILL IMPLY IMPROVE PROTECTION AGAINST FLOODING

[01:05:05]

BELIEVES THAT THERE ARE SOME IMPROVEMENTS BEING MADE, UH, SUCH AS THE AREA SAY IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU SEE THAT HAS, UH, A LOT OF THE DECOMPOSED GRANTED A PORTION OF THAT IS BEING REMOVED AND TURNED BACK TO GRASS OR LANDSCAPING.

UM, OTHER THAN THE OUTLINE OF THE PARKING LOT, WHICH IS THERE'S AN EXHIBIT IN THE PACKET THAT YOU CAN SEE THERE, EVERYTHING NORTH OR TOP OF THAT PARKING LOT WILL GO BACK TO GRASS.

SO THAT WILL ALLOW FOR SOME INFILTRATION TO HAPPEN.

UM, THE VEGETATIVE FILTER SHIPS THAT ARE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE ARE AN ITEM THAT WILL ALLOW FOR SOME WATER TO BE CAPTURED AND TREATED BY UPTAKE AND TRANSPORT, EXCUSE ME, TRANSPIRATION OF THE PLANTS, UM, TO HOLD ANY POLLUTANTS OR TO TREAT THE POLLUTANTS BEFORE THAT WATER RUNS OFF INTO THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM CAN THEIR RIGHT OF WAY ALONG KEENAN LANE.

SO THERE ARE SOME IMPROVEMENTS BEING MADE.

UH, NOT ALL OF THE WATER WILL BE ABLE TO BE CAPTURED AND DETAINED ON SITE.

THAT'S JUST NOT A POSSIBILITY FOR A LOT THIS SIDE.

UM, BUT THERE ARE SOME IMPROVEMENTS BEING MADE TO CAPTURE SOME, TO ALLOW SOME GEOMETRY, TO ALLOW SOMEONE TO BE TREATED BEFORE IT INSERTS INTO THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM.

SO, SO IN SHORT, ARE, ARE, IS IT THE STAFF'S POSITION THAT THIS IS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ON THE LOT IT'S FAST POSITIONING THAT THIS ISN'T IMPROVEMENTS.

IT'S ALSO AN IMPROVEMENT UPON WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED WITHOUT THESE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS.

AS I SAID, AT THE OUTSET FOR A LOT, THE SIZE AND THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER IS BEING PUT DOWN THERE GENERALLY IS NOT A REQUIREMENT FOR, FOR ONSITE WATER QUALITY, NOR IS THERE A REQUIREMENT FOR ONSITE DETENTION TYPICALLY, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER THOMPSON, I GUESS.

CAN I JUST GET CLARITY ON THAT LAST LITTLE BIT? ARE YOU SAYING THAT IF, IF THIS WERE DENIED AND THEY BASICALLY JUST HAD TO GO BACK AND DEVELOP COMPLETELY TO CODE, THEY, THEY COULD DO SO UNDER, AND, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE AS ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY THAT THEY COULD PUT PARKING IN FOR THEIR NEW USE.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF ISSUES THERE WITH THAT STATEMENT.

ONE, THERE THERE'S NO PROVISION THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT TO HAPPEN AND A CRITICAL OR A QUALITY ZONE WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE VARIANTS, REMOVING THE SITE FROM A CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.

LET'S SAY IT'S CONSIDERED UPLANDS, UH, FOR A LOT.

THIS SIZE WITH AN AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER PROPOSED WE'VE HAD IS LESS THAN 8,000 SQUARE FEET.

TYPICALLY ONSITE WATER QUALITY, UH, TREATMENT IS NOT REQUIRED.

AND GENERALLY A LAW LIKE THIS CAN PARTICIPATE IN A REGIONAL STORM STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE ONSITE DETENTION, BUT YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION, THERE'S NOT A WAY THAT THIS PROPERTY CAN BE DEVELOPED, UH, IN COMPLIANCE WITH CODE WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THIS VARIANCE.

OKAY, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER SHANE, AND THEN COMMISSIONER SEEKER.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION.

SO IF WE APPROVED THIS, UM, WHAT I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT OTHER, UM, OPPORTUNITY AND WHATEVER THE OPPORTUNITY IS, IS THE APPLICANT YET? SO LET'S SAY THEY'RE ABLE TO GET THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DRIVEWAY THROUGH AND THE PARKING THROUGH, UM, WHAT HAPPENS.

I MEAN, THIS IS SPECIFICALLY JUST FOR THE EXISTING BUILDING OR DOES THIS ALLOW THEM AT CERTAIN POINT TO TEAR DOWN THE EXISTING BUILDING AND THEN REBUILD IT? BECAUSE, I MEAN, I KNOW IF, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S A WHOLE THING THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE BUILDING IN THE FLOOD PLAIN.

WELL, THE REASON WE'RE LETTING THIS IS BECAUSE IT'S AN EXISTING BUILDING AND WE'RE TRYING TO ALLOW THIS EXISTING SITUATION TO BE THERE.

I MEAN, CAUSE THE HOUSE HAS BEEN THERE FOR LONGER THAN, THAN MANY OF US IN THE ALIVE.

SO, UM, WE'RE TRYING TO ALLOW THAT TO BE THERE, BUT IF WE GRANT THIS, DOES THAT GIVE THEM COME A FREE PASS, THAT THEY COULD JUST REDEVELOP THAT EXISTING BUILDING AND TEAR DOWN AND BUILD NEW OR AT THAT POINT, UM, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS THEY DON'T INCREASE IMPERVIOUS COVER OF THAT FOOTPRINT, DOES THIS ALLOW THEM TO REDEVELOP THAT FOOTPRINT QUESTION TO STAFF SELLING OUR OWN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES? I'LL TAKE A STAB AT ANSWERING THAT QUESTION IN TERMS OF REDEVELOPING, THE EXISTING

[01:10:01]

BUILDINGS THAT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND TO SAY THEM IN SAME FOOTPRINTS, STAFF WOULD VIEW THAT AS AN EXISTING NONCOMPLIANCE AND WOULD BELIEVE WE WOULD APPROVE THAT.

UM, POTENTIALLY IN MY, MY OFFICER CAN SPEAK TO THAT ISSUE.

UM, SORRY, I