City Council Work Session Transcript – 04/18/2017 Title: ATXN 24/7 Recording Channel: 6 - ATXN Recorded On: 4/18/2017 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 4/18/2017 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== [9:08:58 AM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. So we have a quorum present. Today is April 18, 2017. We are in the boards and commission room here at city -- at city hall. The time is 9:08, and we're going to begin today -- we're going to start with the codenext briefing. When we're done with the codenext briefing we're going to go into meeting management issues so we can discuss that. And then -- then we'll get to pulled items and then to executive session. We have a few executive session items to be -- to be -- to be heard. Okay? So today all across Austin is chill-out day, as we all take in the maps coming out today and recognize that this is just the start of a process, and we'll roll up our sleeves and work together to make sure that we all cross the finish line together, and that will start here today with our presentation on the maps. Staff? And consultants? >> Good morning, mayor and council. [9:10:59 AM] Greg Guernsey, planning and zoning department. I'm joined by John Mickey with opti coast on this lead project, and Peter park, one of my consultants to my left. To my right is Jorge, he is the project chair for the codenext project in my department. And we're excited today to present the maps, which kind of give the other half of the story for our new land development code, and so we'll give a short introduction and then go into the presentation. So today we're going to give you an overview of the mapping approach that we took to place the different land use categories throughout the city. We'll talk a little bit about embracing the neighborhood character, the neighborhoods that have been created since the late 1800s all the way to present, and how they impact the maps and how the code would impact them. We are growing, so this speaks to how we can grow in a manner that's consistent with city policy, imagine Austin, our small area plans. Meeting the housing needs, according to the blueprint that you just approved last week, and talking about future mapping and some of the feedback tools that the public will have in talking to staff, talking with you over the coming months. So we go back to imagine Austin. This is where the whole codenext process began. It was one of the eight priority programs that came out in June of 2012 when council adopted imagine Austin long-range plan, talking about the way and how we would grow, more compactly, working through nature, respecting the community character, and that has resulted in the codenext process coming to fruition with code coming out in January, the first draft, and the map coming out today. [9:13:09 AM] So it's been a long process. We spent time after the contract was approved, listened to the community, doing a diagnosis, really informed how the code was put together, talking about a community character manual, looking at over 100 different neighborhoods throughout the city, looked at different approaches about how to work with the code, and we settled on a hybrid code is coming forward, known as 2.5, and then the prescription papers, which was an educational tool that spoke to our community, the boards, commission, to council about some of the issues that are coming up. And we have the draft code in that. So I'm going to turn it over to John Mickey, and he's going to go through the mapping approach. >> Thank you, Greg. Morning, council members. So in terms of the mapping approach, there wasn't one item that really guided us as we worked with staff on the mapping. There was a -- Austin, the neighborhood plans and particularly their flums. Existing zoning, what were the existing entitlements and there is the existing overlays, existing uses on the ground, conductivity, how much conductivity was there in any part of the city, lot sizes, and in particular the community character manual assisted us as well. So in terms of policy guidance, again, imagine Austin, the neighborhood plans and the future land use maps. You know, we have often heard that these two things are diametrically opposed, they're at opposite ends, and what we found in the mapping process is that they actually are much more in line, and yes, there are places where there might be some friction, where there are questions about imagine Austin and neighborhood plans, neighborhood plans, some of them were done in the late '90s, they were a different time and throughout the different neighborhood plans what we found is there were common themes but there were maybe different terms that were used or we have now new tools that can help us really implement those neighborhood plans. The existing entitlements, so again, as we've mentioned in the past, you know, the zoning that you have today, what are people allowed to build today? [9:15:19 AM] The almost 4,000, there are about 3800 conditional overlays and the existing uses, those combinations, right, where there are over 400 combinations of the different pieces you all have in your zoning code, plus the 3,800 additional overlays that exist beyond that, and I think one of the things that we have mentioned a few times is each of those conditional overlays are anywhere from 6 to 12 pages each. So if we say that they're about 4 pages each, this 3800, that adds another almost 15,000 pages to your zoning code, and of course those documents, those conditional overlays, actually are not found in title 25. You have to do a search for that conditional overlay, to find out specifically what was being done on an individual property or in some cases when conditional overlays were passed they applied to multiple properties so you had to dig through many pages and read every single line to find what would apply to one property. And that leads to a question of transparency, understanding what you can do on a property both as an owner, as a member of the public and for staff as they come forward with recommendations as new development proposals come in. We have talked a lot about parts of the existing code that are being carried forward, these highly negotiated zoning districts, whether they're planned unit developments, your small area plans and transit oriented development sites, and your neighborhood conservation combining districts, where you all as community have made a lot of decisions on exactly what is happening in these neighborhoods. It's important to note that in the tods, the small area plans, where you all really focused on growth, you're getting about 13,300 new housing units. We're defining new housing units as kind of the unrealized capacity that's billable in the next ten years on those properties, so the tods can actually result in more new housing, but in the next ten years we expected about 13,300 units we built. It's important to understand that without -- without changes to the code and carrying those forward, all of those units of housing will be exactly where imagine Austin wants them, right? [9:17:26 AM] They're on one of -- they're on your major transit corridors. They are where the community has worked very hard and worked together to decide where those housing units happen. Within the planned unit developments there are another 16,500, more or less, units that could be expected to be built over the next ten years. Understand that in those planned unit developments there's actually much more housing entitled, but again, what can we expect to see in the next ten years? And so we're expecting about 16,500 units. It's really important about the community character that this was sourced from the public, right? We had over 400 people involved. We had 80 -- I want to say 85 of the neighborhood reporting districts participate in this. We had over 3,000 photos submitted by participants, and this was really helpful for us both as a team -- as a team, staff and consultant, to really understand what was the character, what was going on in all of these different parts of your city, the 325 square miles. This has been a really valuable tool for us, both in the writing of the code and then in the mapping and understanding what each neighborhood is like. We have a new handout, a map guide, if -- Jorge, could you pull that up real quick just a second? That just gives a brief overview of both how people can get involved, so the district map meetings that will be coming on, and it provides a guide to the different Zones that will be showing up in the maps, so that's a useful tool both when you're looking on-line at the map and when you look at events and you're looking at paper maps. And the important thing here is we've organized it to understand which of the Zones that are providing you with residential and kind of neighborhood types of development, and so here we have both (indiscernible)-based and transit-based Zones listed together because again the T 3 and T 4 neighborhoods, they're really similar in intensity and intent as many of your residential neighborhoods, districts. [9:19:36 AM] And so hence the color for the t-3 neighborhoods is a yellow that's slightly different than the new sf-1, sf-2, sf-3 Zones. Because it's closer intensity to those sf-3 Zones or the lmgr that we are proposing. And the t-4 is really complementary to mf-2, mf-3, and in some cases mf-4 zoning that you have today on the map, so again, the colors have been adjusted to really reflect what are they more closely aligned to. In a similar way in the commercial and mixed use Zones we have the different commercial Zones have been carried forward and cleaned up, and with newer, better standards and similar intensity, but we've included the bottom of this, the mixed use districts, the transect districts that are really about creating that walkable commercial environment. We have the other industrial Zones as well, so we have your industrial Zones, the other Zones that include open space, and we list the overlay districts that exist. That was our approach in terms of what we were looking at, what we were considering. I think the next thing we really wanted to dive into is, you know, how we were able to both in the text and the mapping work to embrace the neighborhood character, work with that community character manual, work with the neighborhood plans that have been produced in the past, and understand that in the new proposed zoning map that's shown here, in particular that there are many Zones that have been carried forward with a similar intensity with better standards. They just happen to have a new name, so your sf-1, sf-2, sf-3. So this map here is just showing you where have we carried forward sf-1, sf-2 and sf-3, again, with similar intensity, better standards and the new name. And when we say similar intensity and better standards, it's because as we discussed in the past, we've brought together all the parts of these use- based Zones and put them in an easier to find place, all these things are grouped together. [9:21:42 AM] We've integrated the residential design standards for those properties that happen in the urban core of your city, and we expect from this land that's zoned vldr, ldr around lmdr, that we would get around 21,800 units in the future. Some of that is because some of the lots haven't been built out. Some of that is because of the Adu ordinance that was passed recently that is incorporated in the new code, and some of that is for duplex development that happens under lmgr, your current sf-3 zoning. When one looks at the zoning map here on the right is an existing zoning map, on the left is the proposed zoning map, same yellow, different name, again, similar intensity, better standards, just a new name, so in this case sf-2 is renamed ldr. Moving on to some of the -- the Zones that are really increasing the controls on the form, so the similar intensity -- the T 3 neighborhood Zones. These Zones are single-family and duplex, so again, similar intensity to your sf-3. As you look at the maps you'll find that some neighborhoods where we have sf-3, again, here on the right and on the left, they're showing T 3 neighborhood and lmgr. Yellow slightly different, a little bit darker, just to emphasize it's a similar intensity, but new zone, new standards. In those t-3 neighborhood Zones where we've mapped it, we expect about 1,600 new units to be built. And I think it's important to understand that when he were talk about the new t/3 3 neighborhood Zones, one of the things -- I apologize, I have two new slides that are not in your handout, but really thinking about the duplexes and how we use both the community character manual and our mapping process and understanding -- in understanding lot sizes. [9:23:45 AM] These are three duplexes, two of them in old west Austin, one of them is in east Austin. There is a lot of discussion about your existing zoning code has a requirement for 7,000 square feet for a duplex. These three duplexes fit in very well with our neighborhood -- neighbors, so in each case they are the scale and the form of their neighbors, something that was built into the DNA of these t3 neighborhood Zones that we took from the community. But in every one of these cases these are less than 7,000-square-foot lots. They do share some things in common. They're50 feet wide. They have very different lot depths. But when one looks at these houses, what one truly experiences from the street, from a character standpoint, is what does it feel like from the street? And I'll back up one slide. Each of these, again, has a nice front yard. Each of these is in scale with their neighbors. It's that 50-foot width and the controls on how big -- how big that building is or the scale of that building that's most important, and that's something that we've incorporated into the t3 neighborhood Zones, is controls to make sure that these houses fit in with their neighbors. Even if the lot sizes again are smaller than 7,000 square feet, and part of this to is to emphasize that your existing zoning code, you know, both has historic -- historically has these smaller duplexes, but also that from a fair housing standpoint, if the experience from the street is the same, if you can accommodate the parking, if you can stay within the impervious cover limits that exist today, this opens up opportunities for more affordable housing to be built in terms of duplexes, more housing choices, and so this is one of the items that was brought into the t3 neighborhood zone. Moving up in scale, we think that this is -- the t4 neighborhood Zones are a zoning that's really important. House scale, that there are no -- the footprint is no larger than a house, they're no taller than their neighbors but they happen to have multiple units, and this is a zone, again, that in the handout that Jorge is giving out right now, is most similar at your mf-2, mf-3 and in some cases your mf-4 zoning, and so it's zone here on the map as old west Austin, where -- after of Enfield, you have a lot of mf-3 zoning, just north of west 6th and off of Lynn street you have a lot of mf-4 zoning, and the important thing here to note is that mf-4 zoning, if you drive around that neighborhood or you look at the buildings that are there, they're all house scale, right? [9:26:20 AM] The footprint of the building is about the size of a house, the height is about the size of a house, your mf-3 zoning along Enfield also has that same character of a lot of the houses are -- a lot of the buildings are the scale of a house. In the new code we're mapping loose of those as t4 neighborhood which is emphasizing that scale of house, and I think it's really important -- I think these slides here emphasize that, that these are aerial photographs from old west Austin, so on the right is a new building that was built under mf-3, just on Enfield. We call that scale of buildings, long apartment buildings, probably about 150, almost 200 feet home, we call that a block form building, a building where as you walk down the street or as you drive by it is almost continuous building frontage, all building. About two blocks away to a block to the west and a block to the north, are a series of house forms, house scale buildings. In those buildings there's a four-unit building, there's a single-family house, there's a four-unit building and 16-unit building. If one was to drive by those, one might not even recognize that there are more than one unit in those buildings, and one can see from the street here on the right is a block form, so that's the building on Enfield, it's 150 feet long, almost 200 feet long, and then on the left the house form, and this is what t4 neighborhood is emphasizing, house form, where if you walked down the street or you walk down the street, you experience a building and the space between buildings, where if you look down between those buildings you can see light, you can see air. In many cases you find trees, you find landscaping. Again, though, along that block many multiple units. Now, those are historic examples. A more contemporary example of where some of these house form apartment buildings have been built is in Miller, where they have built thesics to eight unit apartment buildings but again they're house scale. [9:28:22 AM] When one walks down the street one experiences in between the buildings light and aircrafts the potential for trees. Very much in character with what many of your neighborhood plans talked about. Many of the neighborhood plans talk about we're okay with multi-family or multiple units. We're just not okay with the scale of those buildings, and again, one should note that here the building here on the right that was built, it meets compatibility. It's two stories. Architect worked really hard to work on articulation, pushing and pulling of that facade, providing detail along it, but again, there is fundamentally a difference between a building that's almost 200 feet long and a series of buildings that might be 40 to 60 feet wide each with space between them, 10 to 15 to 20 feet between the buildings. Where we have mapped t4 neighborhood is primarily on places that are zoned mf-2, mf-3 today, or mf- 4, new zoning code. We're expecting to pick up a thousand, almost 600 units there. That number is a little bit low in some senses because in a lot of cases it's being mapped where you already have existing entitlements for a good number of units. One -- and one thing that I would emphasize is that when we presented the code text we talked about a framework of Zones. We said as we've written the text, before we got to the point of mapping we've identified these are Zones that we need, we found these in the DNA of the community. There are new Zones that we are proposing, and we mentioned, as we get into the mapping, as we work with the community there may be new Zones that we need and there may be some Zones that we find we're not needing to map as much. One zone that we've found is what we're calling t4 neighborhood corridor. It's a three-story neighborhood scale, so again, buildings there aren't very wide, they have space between them. And the importance here is we found this through mapping of understanding where you have T -- mf-4 zone today, where you have existing entitlements that we're looking at three stories, where we needed an additional zone district to accomplish this. [9:30:32 AM] And in this zone where we've mapped it we're picking up five -- almost -- we're picking up 550 new housing units. The last part of this community character is really emphasizing that there are also house- scale buildings that are being used for nonresidential uses, so I think I've mentioned a few times on west 6th you have a wonderful district, single-family houses that are being used for nonresidential. You have across south 1st from the school of the deaf you have along manor road. Many parts of your community have these houses that are no longer being used as single-family houses but we identified as something that's needed but in our zoning and as we mapped we mapped these easy neighborhood Zones that were open, that the community was open to these being used for nonresidential uses. With that open designation where we've mapped it in neighborhood form was really in response to existing zoning and existing conditions. There was not an effort, nor did we map this neighborhood open, in places where there wasn't either existing commercial uses on the ground or where the neighborhood plans weren't specifically calling for this, so I think that's an important take-away today: So with all of what we've talked about here in terms of embracing the character of the moving and moving forward with sf-1 and 2 and 3, and lmdr zoning, we're picking up 25,650 units. It's important to understand that this is again with -- especially with the t4 neighborhood an opportunity to move towards a fair housing efforts that you all want, providing housing choices in diverse places, so again, in all the zoning that I've talked about here this is across the city, opportunities to use these tools. In terms of moving forward on growing, compacting, growing connected, here what we really wanted to talk about was imagine Austin talks about a compacting connected city, and I think it's important to understand that while many of us have focused in on the zoning districts themselves, that there are tools within the overall land development code that are helping us across the city in all situations grow more compacting growth connected, and that we have better connectivity standards both for street network, sidewalk, trail network, and especially about block sale in terms of how walkable places are. [9:33:02 AM] And this is applicable across both the use-based and the form-based seasons, so the transect and -- Zones so the transect and non-transect, we're asks for more open spaces, and build upon the parkland dedication ordinance that you all passed last year. Imagine Austin talks about centers and corridors, through -- through -- they describe neighborhood centers, town centers, regional centers, job centers and centers in environmentally sensitive areas of the city. I think one of the things that we learned as we did the community character analysis with the community and as we got to understand the city more, that we wanted to add in nodes as well, and we'll talk about that in a second. When we talk about imagine Austin and the centers and corridors, it's important to understand that the regional center of downtown uno and south center waterfront, we are again bringing forward the zoning in a similar intensity with cleaner and better standards with a different name, but that in that regional center of downtown and that regional center that's been expanded recently to include waterfront, we expect in the next ten years you'll pick up 26,500 new housing units, right in the core of the city, right where the best transit is, right where the most jobs are, and one of the most vibrant parts of your city. When we talked earlier about the community character manual, part of the manual as citizens provided information as we explore it as we understood the maps, we understood there were different physical characteristics that were different across the city and we also recognized that there were nodes of activity that fell off the radar of imagine Austin. Imagine Austin was at 30,000 feet, right? Talked about those larger centers. But that what we recognized as we looked at the city there were smaller places, like corner stores that are found in east Austin and distributed throughout much of the core of the city. There were neighborhood crossroads, neighborhood main streets. [9:35:03 AM] And where imagine Austin did a good job of recognizing where these urban main streets in the downtown nodes. In the community character manual we also identified some more auto-related or auto centric types of commercial, your neighborhood strip shop centers, your drivable commercial corridors, long, long stretches of curb cuts and parking along the street, your regional commercial clusters in shopping malls and what we understand is from imagine Austin saying, we recognize that these places exist, but we as a community, as we move forward, want to shift from those listed on the right to those listed on the left, those types of places that both provide a walkable environment and a more compact and connected city. So again, as I mentioned earlier the new zoning code provides better standards for connectivity, provides better standards for the sizes of block and helps us move away from those items listed on the right. Turns up urban main streets what -- parts of what imagine Austin calls for in your corridors, these three to six story height areas, where you're really thinking about buildings being at the back of the sidewalk, that it might be multiple blocks in length. On the new zoning map you will find areas that previously were zoned cs-v mu, sometimes with a co, sometimes with an np, or maybe grd, and so in this case we're showing south Lamar, where what -- as we move forward we looked at a lot of those Zones, transitioning into t5 main street, again, a new tool that can help you implement those very long zoning strings you have today, something that's more precise and more controlling on the forms within the neighborhoods. And so a lot of these are -- main streets are implemented on the map, you'll find at t5 main street, T 5 urban and T 5 neighborhood. [9:37:03 AM] The places where you have vmu, the urban is for some of those larger apartment buildings or maybe some of those areas where commercial on the ground floor wasn't the highest priority. And the neighborhood again is just emphasizing the fact that one expects to see space between the buildings and that based on the existing pattern on the ground and the zoning, that that was an appropriate tool to use. In the various places where we've mapped t5 nature and T 5 urban, we expect to pick up about 20,750 units of new housing. Along these important corridors. This map shows in dark purple those places where t5 main street is mapped, so it's not necessarily all the Zones we talked about but particularly T 5 main street. They're distributed both north and south and east and west within the city, but primarily in the core of the city. Neighborhood main streets. We think this is an important thing that in some weighs is a finer grain look at what imagine Austin said. In imagine Austin they talk about corridors, and they talk about corridors, it's all the same thing, but what we recognize both through the neighborhood plans and looking at existing entitlements, looking at what compatibility said in terms of what could be built that there was a need for areas, thinking they were going to stay one to three stories in height, that they were only going to be one or two blocks long, and so here in east Austin we're showing t4 main street applied, where currently you have cs-v-mu-co. Again, implementing at a different scale on these smaller corridors something that's -- that's -- that provides retail at a walkable scale, that fits in with what the neighborhood plans stay, fit with the compatibility standards you have today but also help us move towards the goals of imagine Austin. Again, just a perspective from south first street of what the character could be. This area was primarily implemented with t4 main street, T had neighborhood open and T 3 main street, and I'll talk about T 3 main street in a second because again as we mentioned there are new zoning districts we're developing. [9:39:18 AM] In a walkable environment, on top of retail that can provide amenities to neighbors. And here shown in light purple on gray are many of the places where we have mapped t4 main street and listed here is a couple examples where we found that. We now enter into things that imagine Austin didn't quite get down to this scale of neighborhood crossroads, and this is something we talked about at the soundtrack in 2015, that we looked at -- in particular here shown at mlk and Chacon, the idea that they're again one to three-story areas where the retail is really only at the intersections of those corners. So here we're showing the intersection of Mary street and fifth in Bouldin creek, so we have an area where you have a new library that's been built, and some existing retail uses along three of the corrs. And so we've remapped this t3 main street, and we did that again, because this node of activity both between compatibility with the neighborhood -- what the neighborhood plan was saying, we recognized that we needed a zone that allowed this mix of uses but that was really talking about a two-story main street in scale, that could happen. Here is an aerial photograph again showing the top left, the new library that's been built, and then on the other -- on the east side of this intersection, both on the north and south, existing commercial uses that are providing some amenities to the neighborhood at a really fine grain small scale. Again, this is implemented with T 4 main street depending on compatibility standards that exist, often with the T 3 main street that's two stories. We're not picking up a lot of number of units here, but the importance here is really thinking about the opportunity to provide in many communities that don't have this yet, that they don't have the small-scale insertion of walkable retail into their neighborhoods. [9:41:23 AM] We have an opportunity to pick up new housing units, not many, but it's really about providing those amenities that really make imagine Austin compact and connected work across the city. Examples of crossroads again, where we have mapped them today. And the last of these types is the corner store, often found in east Austin, in many of the communities, where it really is just one corner of an intersection has a retail use, and in some cases this actually even happens mid block, but again, it's one to two stories, and what we found here is that t3 main street is a great tool for that. Same scale as the rest of the neighborhood, fits in with the lmdr in terms of height, fits in with the t3 or t4 neighborhoods we have in terms of height, that they're only two stories in height, and so this is again opportunities where that can happen. And in this case we don't necessarily pick up units of housing there, but it is an opportunity to provide that walkable retail. So if one looks at the numbers that we've -- that I've talked about, we're looking at about 70,500 new units of housing in the core of the city, and then thinking about outside of the core, are those areas that are using the use-based zoning still as we move forward. Again, the commercial and the medium to high intensity residential, all of these Zones have been -- have a similar intensity to what they had before, they have new standards. They have better connectivity standards so this is difts. It doesn't exist in the zoning district but exists in the land development -- as they develop we expect there to be better connectivity, they're building the framework of streets that's needed for the city to continue to grow compactly and connected. And in addition the subchapter E standards that had to do with building buildings closer to the street or at the setbacks, those standards have been carried forward in these Zones so that incrementally over time each of these Zones is building something that's more walkable, that is providing building towards what imagine Austin calls for in compact and connected. [9:43:25 AM] And outside of the core we expect another 73,400 units of housing to be built. And the importance there is really about providing the capacity, you know, in the housing blueprint that was passed, that you all passed, and that understanding that imagine Austin talked about growing compact, growing connected, focusing on the centers and corridors and providing diversity of housing and in our estimations in the next ten years one can expect in the capacity of the new zoning map that we can reach about 143,900 units of housing, almost 144,000 units of housing, that's both along the centers and corridors, providing diversity of housing, but also geographically dispersed across the city to help us meet those goals. In terms of future mapping, I think this is an important topic here, is that you as a council passed -- sorry, the city passed a transportation bond, and you'll be moving forward on understanding these important corridors that are throughout your city. As these bonds -- as the studies go on the streets, it's an important time to think about important intersections or important nodes along those corridors, that maybe weren't necessarily identified in imagine Austin or in some cases actually identified as a center in imagine Austin. And do some very precise land use planning with that mobility study. I think one of the things we mentioned early on in the presentation is that as we went to map one of the big limiting factors was connectivity, and that in many places in your community there needs to be a fine grain understanding working with the constituents immediately around an intersection or in a smaller area, and understand how can we get better connectivity as a smaller grain -- at a smaller grain in a planning process, much like you've done in your small area plans, whether that be your tods or your other small area plans. And then last is also just remember that again, I've said this a few times, but that there are additional standards for these large sites, the connectivity, so that as -- after the code is adopted, there will be rezonings. [9:45:40 AM] You will still continue to do planning, but even in those areas where you haven't gone to plan yet, the sites that are 4 acres or larger there will be better connectivity, there will be better sidewalks, there will be a better set of tools to help implement the future for Austin. I'd like to end the presentation on some of the feedback tools, or actually Jorge ruslan is going to present the feedback tools. >> Thank you, John. Mayor and council, good morning, Jorge, I'm the project manager on codenext. I'll briefly touch on some of the feedback tools of a robust public engagement plan that we're still continuing to evolve and involve the community in. What you're seeing is a list of the council district map workshops that have been scheduled to date. One point of clarification is that with district 2 we're still working on finalizing that as a tentative date in times, but we're working with the other council offices to secure a venue by which we will invite constituents from all districts at those specific district meetings to come out and interact with the maps. At these meetings there will be interaction with not only the paper maps but there will be an opportunity for your constituents to do a one-on-one interaction with the digital maps that are available on-line as we speak, and have the opportunity to have one-on-one conversations with the codenext staff in order to understand the differences between the existing zoning of what prorpts are zoned today and -- what properties are zoned today and what is the proposed zoning that the draft maps are depicting. So we have found that particular format to be extremely effective when we had the conversations of the text portion of the map. When you have that one-on-one interaction, we've been able to have some direct conversations about specific standards of the code. We have the same expectations moving forward with the mapping portion as we engage with constituents. There will also be the ability to have office hours where constituents will be able to come into the office at one tech center, for example. [9:47:48 AM] -- One Texas center. We've been able to secure venues at public libraries throughout the city, where constituents can come out during office hours and sign up on-line for time slots so that they would be secured access to city staff and the maps on a one-on-one venue. And council member Flannigan has extended an invitation for us to use the district office and we thank you for that, council member. And these are just different venues by which we intend to be out in the community engaging with your constituents. The map comment tool is a very effective way for folks in the community to have a first interaction with the maps. As they view the maps on-line there's a direct comparison, a one-on-one comparison of what they will see in terms of the existing zoning and the proposed zoning. This is one of the tools that we'll use at the district meetings in order to provide information to your constituents about the differences between the zoning. If you note there, this is a portion of Austin where you're seeing a property that is currently zoned sf-3 single-family residence, and on the right-hand side the proposed zoning it shows lmdr, low medium density residential. So during these mapping meetings we'll be able to sit down and talk to property owners and explain the nuances and differences and improvements that the proposed new zoning maps are depicting. Within the on-line platform there's a section to provide comments, specific comments on any property, you're able to pinpoint a specific property and provide direct comments to the codenext staff and consultants and that will be shared throughout the codenext team. The code comment tool continues to be active, and there's been a substantial amount of participation from the community. That's already begun to shape some of the improvements that we're making not only to the text and the Zones themselves but also has started to give us insight as to what modifications through the mapping we need to make as the evolution of the map continues throughout the review process. [9:49:55 AM] So this -- this comment tool is still available, and anyone is welcome to provide comments on-line, and that is being shared with the consultants and we're trying to address those issues and concerns through forms like this and engagement with the planning commission and the zoning and platting commission when we engage with them at those times. So that concludes our presentation. We're happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. We've also been handed out a new zone appendix and two other documents. You want to to explain what these are? >> Yes, council members, what what you have on there there's an appendix to new Zones that we are depicting in the maps. You'll see the introduction of two new Zones. That's been a direct correlation between some of the feedback that we've gotten not only in interaction with the community but also in evaluating the effectiveness of the current code standards as we make calibrations to those. So that's the introduction of new Zones that we will have an opportunity to engage with the public. Those are posted on-line for anyone in the community to start to make comments. It's a way for us to start to custom Taylor some of these Zones specific to a particular context. You also received a copy of the zoning map guide that kind of walks you through what the different designation -- zoning destinations are and what the colors mean. When you take a first look at the map it could be quite busy, because you're looking at many colors. When we engage with you at the council district level, we will have the opportunity to not only provide you with a citywide map but we will zoom in on each specific district at a large scale, and we'll probably split the districts into two pieces so that the map is large enough for -- for constituents to distinguish street names and you'll be able to locate properties specifically and augment that with an interaction of the on-line tool with laptops at these locations. [9:52:07 AM] So that's some of the material you received on the dais. You also have questions and answers just generally about what is mapping and what is happening with this mapping interface as we move forward with engaging your constituents through the mapping process and through your district meetings. >> Mayor Adler: So there are five documents that have been handed out to us today. Will they all be attached as backup to the session so people can find them? >> Yes, sir, and they'll also be available on-line, mayor, for the community to have access, in advance of the public meetings. >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead and attach those five things just so the community knows what was in front of us here today, that would be helpful. >> Yes, sir. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Alter? >> Thank you, and we appreciate all the hard work on this project. I will have additional questions, but I did want to just clarify a basic part of the presentation to make sure I'm understanding it. On page 61, you list the different types of zoning and the new housing units, and you list 143,900. In the presentation you seemed to go a little bit back and forth over what was new because of this zoning versus what is already existing entitlements. I'm trying to understand this number in context of what, you know, our existing zoning would produce versus this zoning. Can you just help me understand how we should think about that, please? >> Sure. So the -- again, on slide 61, those are new housing, so in the -- in the analysis that was done we looked at how many housing units were on the ground today, and then said what is a realistic capacity that could be built in that new zone district apply to that property. And we took the delta and that got us the new housing units. In terms of -- so all of these numbers are -- could be thought of as -- the unrealized capacity, right, what could be built in it. [9:54:07 AM] So some of those apply to the puds, which again the zoning isn't changing on those or the small area plans because we're carrying those forward, and so again, this is the unrealized capacity in those districts that we expect to be built in the next ten years. More specifically to comparison to existing zoning in places maybe where we've changed the zoning today, in 20 -- 2014 as part of this project we did a capacity analysis. They're not quite apple to apple comparisons because at the time that that analysis was done, we looked at the zoning that exists in the city and we looked at what was vacant land, what was underutilized land. There are a whole series of decision-making that was used to decide how many units of housing could be expected to be built. Through that process if we had the zoning that you had in 2014 and we came back in a hundred or 200 years, so we ignored time, we just said, what would be built out, we saw that you could reach a number that was similar to what your housing goal is. But the problem there was that much of that land wasn't necessarily where imagine Austin wanted units. Much of the entitlements that were there were not in places where the market would deliver those units, and so one example one might look towards is some of the tods. Some of the tots have pud zoning -- tods have pud zoning today. Some of the tods say you can go ahead 15,000 units of housing, but what actually is being built on the ground is much, much much less intense, so the market is not right there yet to build something of that intensity. In a place where one would hopefully and ideally hope it to be because it is transit oriented development. In temples of where we were in 2014, we were -- I think -- I have to check the numbers, but I want to say we were around 120,000 units of housing but they weren't in the places where imagine Austin wanted them, right, because the zoning map that we looked at wasn't at that time looking to implement imagine Austin. [9:56:17 AM] The zoning -- the zoning we have now that is now in front of everyone and there's an opportunity to start a discussion is looking at about 144,000 units of housing just in the next ten years, right? So that's why I said it's not an apples to apples comparison because the capacity analysis was done in dwort 2014 did not think about time. Where is this zoning map is looking at what's realistic in the next ten years. >> Alter: One other question on the numbers here. When we did the strategic housing blueprint we talked about the need for 60,000 units of more affordable housing. How is that reflected? I mean, are these going to be affordable units or what has to happen? You know, it's not just our goal is to get 135,000 units. There's a particular mix and how does this help us achieve that goal? >> So there are a couple efforts going on. One is the affordable housing incentives program, which will work in tandem with the zoning, right, in terms of getting us affordable housing. But I think something that was recognized in the housing blueprint was that you're not going to get all of your -- all of your units through just affordable housing incentive programs. You're going to have to be able to get units from the private sector, from private-public partnership and just from the public sector. And one of the things that the zoning that we have proposed today allows is, if a public entity or public/private entity or a private entity wants to go out and build affordable housing, the zoning code isn't going to be the thing that stops them from building those housing units, or the zoning code will allow them to build housing. On top of what the affordable housing incentive program provides as well. >> Alter: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Casar -- >> Mine is on the same topic. [9:58:18 AM] I have other questions but I'll keep my questions to sort of this area. So I appreciate not just looking at what the Zones capacity is but what it is that we anticipate would come of that zone capacity, and of course we're going to have very engaged people over the course of the next few months between here and you getting commissions on that topic. I appreciate you putting the numbers out there. How -- how much access can we as council members or the community already have or expect to have to the ways that you guys came to those conclusions and those numbers so that we can -- can play with it and also feel like folks can understand it. >> Council member, we're certainly happy to provide and share that data, with not only the council offices but also the community. >> Casar: And then the -- my -- my understanding this morning, but tell me if I'm wrong, is that that incentives program and the density bonus calibration work is not yet out but is forthcoming? >> Correct. >> If I might also clarify, add to that, having the draft map is one of the first steps in property calibrating -- properly calibrating those incentive programs. Once we have an initial application of the Zones on the ground, it will help us then start to realize where are we having gaps, where is the market potential, all that analysis is being done not only by our consultants but within the whole team as we recount some of the Zones. This is one of the first initial steps in determining where the application of these Zones could happen and how the evolution of that program can continue. >> Casar: And so that's -- so you are going to find this map useful in order to finish your calibration of the density bonus work so we can know how many affordable units, more or less, we can anticipate out of that particular program, knowing that that is in no way going to get us -- it's not going to solve our 60,000 unit problem but it's a part of it, and so that is forthcoming -- it's coming soon? [10:00:37 AM] Do we have a date or timeline. >> We anticipate -- there's after affordability topic talk we will have in early may, where we expect to have some of these analyses complete which we can share with the community and be able to further have discussions on the evolution of the incentives program and how the calibration of the density bonus is happening at the zoning level. >> Casar: My last I think point on this topic spend I think it will be helpful for us to have transparency around, the community to know where some of this zoned capacity and expected housing production is going to be, both of the market rate units and the below market rate units through the incentive program so that we can show some level -- I think with the conversation around the institutional racism task force report shows level of equity around the city, that we are trying to expand housing capacity not just in any one given part of town but the community is able to speak up and understand the zone capacity for and the market to meet that capacity, both with the affordable units and the market rate ones. Because I think that clearly people want this to be as equitable of a process as possible for different neighborhoods in the city. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: Thank you all. You have done a lot of work. This has been much anticipated. Thank you all very much. I've a couple of basic questions, process kind of questions that maybe you can answer for us. If I'm a person and I apologize, I was late, I was presenting at the strategic roadmap conference, smart cities. So ... So if you covered this, just let me know. But how should people -- where -- how and where can people see these maps? [10:02:42 AM] Is it -- they're not online yet, right? >> Yes, they are. Councilmembers, they are live now as we speak. >> Kitchen: Okay. Let's just kind of talk us through it. Because people will be looking for this. >> Sure. >> Kitchen: They go on the codenext website. >> If you go off the codenext website, there's a link directly to the online portal to view the maps live and see the comparison of the Zones, the existing Zones and proposed Zones and start to provide comments immediately on any portion of the map or any specific property. >> Kitchen: Okay. So you can see -- you can pull back, if you just want to see the map, you can go online and see that. >> That's correct. You can see it as a city-wide level or you can zoom right into a particular parcel or lot. Depending on your interest. >> Kitchen: Codenext.engagingplans.org >> It's easier -- it's easier if you go off the codenext website where there's a direct link instead of trying to remember the entire url. >> Go to austintexas.gov/codenext you can get links. >> Okay, great. What if you don't understand how to read the maps? Is there a phone number to call? >> Yes, we're making available not only through the website, but the opportunity to sign up for office hours. There's also a phone number and we'll have some basic information where folks can come out and during office hours and have that one-on-one interaction for specific questions on specific properties or groups of properties, maybe at a neighborhood level, for example, to have an understanding of how the Zones were applied, what methodology we used, what information such as neighborhood plans or the future land use maps that we used in order to formulate the recommendation that we put on the maps. >> Kitchen: What if I pull up the map and I don't understand it. Can I just pick up the phone and call. >> Yes, but we think it's most effective to have that one-on-one interaction -- [10:04:44 AM] >> Kitchen: If I don't have time, if I have a very quick question, if I can't do the district hours can I pick up the phone and call? >> Yes. You can, constituents will be representatives within the planning department that will engage and answer questions. >> Kitchen: So is there a phone number on that website that people can then call? >> There should be, I haven't seen -- >> Kitchen: I'm trying to get very specific for people. Just so set expectations, when do you think they can start calling? >> As early as today. >> Kitchen: Okay. Uh-huh, okay. Then the last question related to that then is -- okay. So if I want to look at the map -- can you look at the maps and understand other kinds of issues? So, for example, if I'm trying to understand the impact on other environmental -- other imagine Austin goals like environment, for example, affordability or transportation. I'm thinking that -- I'm thinking that the map is not the place to look or -- how would I -- can I use the map to tell me how codenext is going to impact imagine Austin environmental goals? Or is that someplace else that I need to look? >> The map itself will not necessarily provide you that information. It's a starting point by which, as a community, we can understand the entitlements and the zoning classifications that are assigned to properties. Within the city. That -- those conversations happen during the mapping district-wide meetings and interaction with staff during office hours where we can make other staff available from the watershed department, for example or the transportation department. If we know that there are questions that are coming up that we can make that staff available and have access to them. >> Kitchen: And you are also having the meetings on the different issues like affordable housingability and transportation -- affordability and transportation. >> Correct. >> It would be helpful, I apologize if you have this already, it would be helpful to have on your website, tell us if you do -- if I want to understand what codenext does with the environment is there a link that says environment that I can get a q&a or just get a list of what the codenext does with regard to the environment? [10:06:56 AM] >> Yes, councilmember. That's already posted online. As we do these topic talks, we had one already on the natural and resilient that addressed the environmental issues. There's a presentation that's posted and there's a link to the video of the panelists that presented those issues. >> Kitchen: Is there a q&a? For those yet? >> I don't recall that there's a q&a. >> Kitchen: Okay. I'm thinking of something, you guys have been working all day and all night. I'm not saying you should have done this by now. Moving forward, what would be helpful to me, for example, if I wanted to understand the environment and I looked at this map, I can't understand from that, how would I do it, I would go to the website and there would be a link that would say imagine Austin environment. I would go to that, wouldn't have to wait for a long presentation. I could see a one or two pager that says this is how imagine Austin environment is carried forward number one, number two, number three, you see it here. I think this is wonderful, wonderful information. But for some folks it's a little too much to wade through. I know that you have a lot on your plate. You've been focusing on the map. I'm thinking moving forward that might be something that's helpful. >> Thank you. >> Kitchen: Okay. All right. I have other questions, but I will -- -- >> Mayor Adler: Anyone else have any other questions at this point? Ms. Houston and then Ms. Garza. >> Houston: Thank you, thank you so much for all of the we, that you've done. Just a suggestion on the slide, hold on let me get to the page, I think it's on slide 42. On the others, there's no north-south orientation. So if I'm looking for urban main streets, I see the purple color, I'm not sure where those streets are. So that I don't -- there's no orientation. So if there was something that you could say north I- 35 so I know which one of these lines is I-35 and which ones are east-west connectivities that would help with the orientation I'm sure for the people who are looking at it. [10:09:04 AM] Mr. Mickey, you talked about fair housing in one of the slides. I'm not sure -- I can't remember which slide that was on. But could you give me your definition of fair housing? Because -- sounded like you were using it differently than I'm accustomed to it being used. >> Sure. So again with the zoning, we're working towards providing opportunities for a diversity of housing types, a diversity of options of where one might be able to choose to live. In that sense I think we provided a series of zoned tools both in the use and the form based Zones that are -- provide a more diverse palette of tools, more guess set of options for housing types, single family, duplexes, providing opportunities for more duplexes in the T 4 neighborhood, more options for multiple units of housing but are still in the character of the neighborhoods. But then again especially in the different mixed use Zones, providing opportunities for some housing but also just as important access to some retail at a walkable scale. So I think if the zoning code we provide a series of tools in the mapping there's an opportunity to have further discussion about the way that those tools have been mapped across the city and what -- what implications there are with that. >> Houston: So I guess there's a federal definition of fair housing that doesn't talk to any of the things that you just said. If we could use something like income accessible housing, that might duplexes, four- plexes, triplexes, townhomes, all of the things so that people at different income levels and different family types have an opportunity to live all over this city. But, you know, the -- when you use fair housing, then that's very specific to discrimination against specific demographics. [10:11:04 AM] So I -- so I don't want to confuse people when we use that term because when you used it, I thought wait a minute, what are we saying? Are we going to add to our fair housing economic segregation as a part of that? Because that's what -- I think that I'm hearing you say that we're looking at all economic strata to be able to live throughout the city. But that's not a part of the fair housing act. So I don't -- I think that's what you are saying. So correct me if I'm wrong. Is that what you are saying, is that people of all economic strata will be able to live across the city if we use these various housing types across the city? >> I think the tools themselves provide the opportunities to build a diversity of housing types at different income levels. But it is still the code itself isn't going to deliver the units, right? So it's developers, whether that's private developers working to build market rate units that are smaller, but provide more units, so at a cost level that's more accessible. Whether it's a market -- private developer building a specifically affordable units, income affordable units. >> Income accessible. >> Income accessible. Or whether it's a public/private partnership or the public sector that's providing that housing. >> Houston: Okay. Again, I would just caution that we not use fair housing very loosely, because again it will confuse people based upon the fair housing act. >> All right. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Garza? >> Garza: On slide 25, was this more a point of compatibility? Because my questions are these two buildings, does the more compatible looking one have more units than the block form one? I'm trying to understand the point of this. [10:13:06 AM] >> Sure. So -- so in particular the two examples that we showed, the historic and the new, they may not quite compare exactly in terms of number of units. Given especially that one of the buildings, along that street is a single family house. But what we know both from -- from experiencing what was built in Mueller, experiences across the country is that it provides the opportunity to get very similar number of units. In a more compatible form. And, again, I think that's one of the things that we heard over and over again in many of the neighborhood plans, that they were okay with units, they just wanted something that was more compatible in form. >> Garza: So could the block form one, could it not be built under the new proposed code? >> Depends on the zone district that you're in. So the scale of the building that's shown in the block form building, potentially could be built under the t-5 urban zone, where we apply more of a block scale building. It could be built in -- there are Zones both use based and transect based that would allow that, just that we have also provided now tools that -- something that you've never had in your zoning code that specifically says we are okay with multiple units but we wanted a -- >> I'm talking specifically this building right here. Would that be allowed to be built with the proposed zoning, I think you said Enfield. Would that type of building be allowed to have been built there. >> That would not be allowed to be built under any of the t-4 neighborhood Zones. >> This is t-4 where it is now? >> I would have to check the map specifically. That building could be built under t-5 urban. [Indiscernible] Where the building can be longer. >> Okay. Then I misunderstood the slide. I thought that you were trying to make a different point. What do you define as the core? [10:15:08 AM] For the purposes of the number of that we provided -- the numbers that we provided in terms of the core. We used 183 on the north kind of working its way east much Ben white to the south. As we went along to the east, it was mopac but also followed lake Austin for a portion. We used that primarily because it was a good proxy for -- for -- for the core of the city. It doesn't match exactly the various definitions you have in your existing code for the core. Of the city, your residential design standards, a couple of other places in the code define the core in various ways, but we use that in terms of making a clean break in terms of counting units. >> Garza: Slide 58 talks about standards and connectivity, connectivity standards including streets, sidewalks, trails have been improved. Does that mean that -- that developers will be required to pay -- to pay for those standards, which would be, I'm assuming, more sidewalks that help create the -- ask that mean an end to the sidewalk that leads to nowhere, that issue that we see all over the city? >> So the new code would be asking for -- if a development happens and adjacent immediately adjacent to it there are sidewalks and trails that those sidewalks and trails are connected so, it's also going to ask that within the new development there are sidewalks and potentially trails provided as well. In addition to -- to connectivity of streets as well. >> Going to ask or going to require. >> Going to require. >> Okay. My last question -- my last general question, I thought much of the -- what I have heard, everyone has heard different things, certain parts, for example, may be -- may be a parcel in my district was zoned industrial a lot of the controversial zoning cases that come before us, it will be a parcel that's commercial and they try to turn it into residential. [10:17:22 AM] I guess I'm concerned that it doesn't seem as bold in ways where we -- where I would want more housing. Because it doesn't look -- it looks like anything residential pretty much stayed residential. Anything commercial stayed commercial. Anything industrial stayed industrial. There are those main street kind of zoning that I think maybe is trying to get to changing something industrial to more residential. But it still feels like this doesn't solve the problem which I was hoping codenext would do in making things more predictable when we have those -- because we can't control when someone decides to buy a piece of land and they want to make it residential, but it's commercial. They come to council and ask for that change. My question is does anything make any kind of changes like that? Anything that was commercial or industrial now change to allow residential there? The south Lamar example, there are parcels cs-vmu that allowed Mick of uses. There are parcels that may have just been gr, retail, where we are recommending that you consider using the t-5 [indiscernible] In that case it is allowing residential where previously it was just zoned for commercial use. >> Garza: Okay. >> But when one looks at the pattern along the corridor, a large number of those parcels were arrayed for mixed use so there are opportunity where that happens. >> So t-5 is the one type that would change current -- didn't allow -- >> Again, one could use a use based zone to do the same thing. It's just in the particular way as we move forward with the mapping. The t-5 [indiscernible] T-4 sometimes. [10:19:23 AM] One thing to note is that one of the challenges that we found was as we mapped was imagine Austin talks of a corridor, neighborhood plans talk of a corridor. The existing zoning is cs. But when one looks at Google Earth or walks that corridor, they are actually single family houses with single family uses in them still. Now, some that corridor may be those houses have transitioned over time to non-residential, but there are still people living in many of those houses. In that case, the zoning, the neighborhood plan, all say we want this to be commercial, we're okay with it. But the existing use is residential. So in that case, based on the entitlements on the neighborhood plans, we may have zoned T 4 main street or T 3 main street or a neighbor open because these are policy guidance that we have. There is the -- so we were not in that case we were taking something today that is residential but zone to allow commercial and we've matched the zoning with the zoning that it is today. >> Garza: There's nothing that does the reverse? I understand stuff that's zoned commercial now that's used as residential. Is there anything that is zoned commercial now that's a new or industrial that the new code would allow residential in? The t-5. >> Yeah, t-5. >> Garza: So t-5s do where it was only allowed to be commercial industrial now they can build residential there. >> Also T 4 main street or T 3 main street. A neighborhood center or a neighborhood cross road. Sometimes, for instance actually the Mary and fifth, my recollection is that the northwest corner was cs- vmu-np. The neighborhood plan was saying we want two stories. In that case the way we mapped it with T 3 did not add [indiscernible]. I believe the south side of that intersection was just lo and did not currently have mu attached to it. [10:21:29 AM] So we would be allowing some additional residential there. >> Garza: Okay. I'd yield. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Pool. >> Pool: I just wanted to make sure on page 25 that I was seeing everything in this example. The one on the left, which is the -- the existing multi-family, is that an extension off the back of it? Do you see that? Is that like a white roof? So what happened was it was maybe a home that was expanded in order to become a multi-unit -- because that's actually a little more contrast there. So you can see -- is that a building that's attached to that front piece as an extension on that building? >> So in walking that area, I believe that was originally built as a four-unit building. I did not look back in history to check, but I believe that it was actually built as a four-unit building. The little kind of -- >> Not that. The metal roof immediately to the back of the pitched roof the brown one which is your example of a multiple unit -- >> I believe that was a four unit building. The -- the left single family house adjacent to that is another four unit building that appears to originally be built as a four unit building. On the corner -- can we go back one slide. >>> This is attached to this. This was all built at the same time. >>> We believe it was all built at the same time. >> I wasn't sure everybody saw that was back there. I think the -- the representation or the comparison was this with this, but I didn't notice this at first. And it looked like it was just this piece here -- but in fact it has the additional -- stories behind it and I guess what the architect was trying to do was making the front and it might have been something that our design commission required. [10:23:44 AM] I don't know when that was built. But they may have said it needs to have some architecture that is reflective of the neighborhood that's being built in. >> I would guess that building is quite old. Just given the character. >> Pool: How do you define quite old? The '70s? >> I would -- >> Pool: Or the '30s? >> I would believe it was built well before the 1985 code. My guess would be it was built in the '40s or earlier. >> Pool: Really. >> Just because of the passenger in the neighborhood. In here -- >> Pool: Is this it here? >> It's right here. >> [Indiscernible] >> The point that John was making is -- is with the T 4, the length the building is limited, so you get house sides to part versus the ability to make -- the intention is to make house sized parts. John, that's a single family? >> That's a four unit. >> Okay. So the four unit, single family -- kind of smaller than the single family. So you can have multiple units and a variety of housing types and house size parts. This is 16 units? This is exactly an example of a missing middle. Multi-unit in house scale forms. Versus multi-unit in very large almost full block form. >> And the point being that the house scale form that may in fact hold as many people as that block form is more appropriate in certain parts of the city whereas the block form which houses maybe a similar number would be appropriate along the corridor or something like that. Okay. That makes sense. >> Correct. >> Pool: Was that the point that you were aiming for? [10:25:45 AM] >> It was, again that the t-4 neighborhood is [indiscernible] You don't have in your tool box. You don't have anything in your toolbox that says we are okay with multiple units but we want a very specific scale of building. >> Pool: Gotcha, so that piece is new, that requirement. >> Yes. >> Okay. .>> Tovo: Thanks very much for all of this work. I particularly appreciate the online maps that are side by side that allows individuals to see -- I need some sense of how long we are going to spend. I have about a zillion questions. >> Mayor Adler: We want to make sure that we get to the meeting management stuff. I don't know how long of a conversation we want on that. I would say this is important, though. I think if we went another 15 minutes to a half an hour that might be good. >> Tovo: Thanks, I see my colleagues have questions, too. One of the things that I'm having a little trouble understanding is the discussion about housing units to follow up on the original question that was asked about how the -- how the -- excuse me how they projected -- how the projected number of housing units was calculated. Referenced the zoning capacity study that showed if Austin doubled its population, the existing titles ... That number of projecting housing units could accommodate a doubling of population as of 2014. I'm not fully understanding how the number of new units was calculated despite your response. If you would hit on that. But also I would like to know if your projected number of new housing units assumes construction on -- on currently vacant lots? Does it -- does it assume redevelopment of existing properties? I assume it does. Does it also take into account the demolition of existing structures and the rebuilding and so how can you help us understand -- do we have -- do we have any data at that point on what -- what the number of projected demolitions and redevelopments would be? [10:28:05 AM] >> [Indiscernible] >> I have one more question to this body of questioning, that would be of the promised number of new housing units, have you -- have you projected that out by district? I think councilmember Casar asked the question with regard to affordable units. It wasn't clear to me whether that information is currently available by district on the projected number of total housing units as you've calculated. >> Thanks, I'm am election Alex Joyce with [indiscernible] Consulting team. As we begin to understand the mapping and how it would impact housing capacity, it was important to understand the -- the strength of the market in different parts of the city. And that comes down to looking at what are the current rents and vacancy rates, things that people look at what they are actually contemplating doing a development. As we all know, there's been a lot of development interest in the core of the city or the close-in neighborhoods. And so those are the areas that you will see where they have the most form based code applied to ensure that future development is consistent with the pattern that's are there today. Understanding and projecting development is inherently difficult. Right? Because we don't know whether we are going to continue on a hot market or if we're going to cool off. So the -- so the capacity that we're estimating here assumes that you -- that you develop not necessarily at the same trajectory you even are this year, but looking at maybe a five-year rolling average of development intensity. We know where development has been most intense and active today those areas are within the center areas of the city. As we map the T Zones we understand that the vacant land that exists today, if it's in the right location, probably be the easiest path to get more intense development. There are also parcels that have very slow intensity today, very low value structures relative to their land value. [10:30:11 AM] That is an indicator of an area or parcel that could have increased intensity into the future. Not every single one of those parcels that has development potential is likely to develop in the next 10 years, you have to temper those expectations as well. But the housing units that you see quantified today are just estimates of what we think is reasonably possible within the next 10 years in terms of housing production on the parcels as we see them today. That does include vacant, that does include currently developed parcels. And it is -- it is inclusive of the units that are there today and assumptions about replacing those units, yeah. >> Just so be clear, when you say assumptions about replacing those units, assumptions about the need to -- to utilize the entitlements to demolish what's there and -- and build something else? >> The units that are on the ground today are accounted for in the figures that you see. >> I was picking up on your last comment about the assumptions being -- being developed in part based on sites being redeveloped. >> Yes. The units that are on the ground today are accounted for -- >> Do you have I think we have hit on some of those, I want to follow up on some of the questions that may be the better opportunity to do that is outside of this meeting. The number of housing units, do you have it calculated by district? >> Yes, we do. We are getting detailed confirmation of that within the next hour or two. >> Tovo: Thank you very much. You kind of referenced that the projected housing construction numbers are based on where people want to build. And that -- that is one reason why we see -- I assume we're going to see some of those or a good number of those new housing units projected for the central city. And, also, when we had an opportunity to talk about -- to meet at the end of last week and look at a preview of the map, at that point it was a little easier to tell because there were different colors identifying the transects but now they are all yellow. [10:32:19 AM] It was really clear the neighborhoods throughout district 9, many of our very oldest neighborhoods in the city are really projected to have the most transformation through the code. When I tested that was told that indeed that is the case compared to the rest of the city. So I would just want to zero in on a couple and ask some questions that I think the community will be asking, too. In looking at -- in looking back at some of the commitments that were made in imagine Austin to really work as the code redevelops, the very famous page 204 or whatever it is that talks about exactly how that code rewrite should happen, it should happen with a commitment to preserving the existing neighborhoods, the existing character. I need to ask you about how those decisions were made, especially with regard to some of the central city neighborhoods. In their Flum, in their adopted neighborhood plan the council adopted neighborhood plan and associated zoning identified areas as single family 3, those are not mapping to lmdr, not even mapping to T 3. They are mapping to T 4 which I heard you describe earlier as a multi-family category. How are those choices made in this proposed map? I can give you a couple of examples. But I think the question is relevant for some of councilmember Renteria's district as well in looking at some of those areas, they are also going from F 3 to transect zone 4 which again is a multi- family category. Those don't seem consistent with the existing zoning and nor do they seem consistent with the commitments we made that the code rewrite was not going to substantially rezone sections of areas that had existing neighborhood plans. >> So in the mapping of the Zones, again, there were some places where I think it was neighborhood plans, and the future land news maps, imagine Austin, existing [10:34:30 AM] [indiscernible], things lined up very smoothly and we were able to implement either with the [indiscernible] Space Zones and transect Zones of a similar intensity. Also a recognition, though, as we looked at some neighborhoods, particularly in the core, again, that because of proximity to important corridors, transit corridors, that there were opportunities to think about -- additional capacity. Right? So whether that was -- that was multi-unit buildings in [indiscernible] Or applying the T 3 Zones. And so we looked at the neighborhoods. Right? And we are -- we are offering something we think balances both what the neighborhood plans were asking for and what imagine Austin was asking for. But it is the beginning point for discussion. Right? It is a beginning point for discussion. With these new tools, is this what the neighborhood plan wants, is this what the community wants? But there are opportunities again to look at those and reexamine those. >> Tovo: Yeah, I appreciate that. I think that's, you know, I do think there are points of real divergence from the existing adopted neighborhood plans on the ground. The area between south first and south congress, almost entirely residential except for the herb bar, I think. And a little niche off of south congress. That is T 4. A whole lot of old west Austin where again there are 100-year-old houses is going from -- there are multi-family tracts within there, but the sf 3 zoning is also going to what you have identified as a multi-family category. Over the next months, I would also like to talk a little bit about what your projections are for the loss of existing housing structure and I do think those will be conversations. I appreciate these are initial maps and I know that we will be hearing from members of the community who are engaging and will want to understand better as I do, you know, exactly what those -- what these maps would produce. [10:36:35 AM] But again why those choices were made -- why those choices are being proposed for certain areas to transform and frankly in some cases override their neighborhood plans, but that really hasn't been the approach taken in other areas of the city. Then I have some questions about affordable housing. But I'll yield and then come back to them if that's a good plan. .>> Casar: I want to hit on three things. To pick on some of the [indiscernible] Resolution my comments on that. Second, I want to talk about the fair housing points and then third a question on transportation. So I will try to be quick. As far as the sort of demolitions analysis goes, something that I think we all agreed to amend the most recent resolution on this to make sure that we were clear. I want to know when that analysis is put out, not just what -- what could -- what could be demolished because of -- what the net redevelopment would be based on the existing entitlement. So -- so in other words, if -- if something not just what could be redeveloped if we passed the maps as you all have proposed them, but what the -- what that net difference is relative to what happened if we just ended the contract with opticos and codenext and didn't do anything at all. I'm interested in what we were actually changing as opposed to what is likely to happen in the future if we pass this. I want to know sort of what the net is. On fair housing, I think it's important -- I do think that -- I don't know if I have a difference in opinion with councilmember Houston. But I do think that -- understand that the 1968 fair housing act is narrow in it's scope on what you can sue on, but our impediments on fair housing report that we have to turn in acknowledges the fact of income accessible housing disproportionately protects [10:38:41 AM] [indiscernible] To live up to the spirit of fair housing, even if you can't easily win a lawsuit over it. We need that income accessible housing across all over the city. Parts of my district may not have been red lined and were not necessarily designated to discriminate against communities of color, they have -- there are certain parts that are built out in a certain way so that they are more expensive and communities of color have a lot more trouble living on that side of the street than in other parts that were built and designed in different ways, which are basically now inhabited exclusively by folks of color. So I do think that I -- I do believe that to uphold the spirit of fair housing and what we actually have to report back to the federal government under the fair housing act does intersect a lot with work that you all are doing and creating income-restricted units is one of the few ways that I think we can guarantee long term that we aren't economically segregated which causes de facto segregation or segregation with people with disabilities and all of the other protected classes in the fair housing act. I think that we do have to be careful when we use the term, but I do think that in this time, income correlates so much to those other protected classes we complaint solve one without working on the other. I would just remind my colleagues and the staff in December of 2015 we actually passed a resolution asking for fair housing impact analysis of the proposed housing types and I still haven't seen that yet. I think the staff said that once -- once I think presented to our housing committee that might come out with the text and then later said it would probably come out with the maps. My understanding is that it's not out yet. I hope it will come since we asked for this almost a year and a half ago now. If any of our colleagues have forgotten exactly what it is we have passed I have copies, but it does ask for statements for proposed housing types that demonstrate how it could promote more housing choice over the life of the code, estimates of affordability of those housing types including transportation costs and providing options and analyses of the way this map gives low and moderate income residents the ability to live in higher income areas and rapidly gent flying areas as well as other goals. [10:41:00 AM] I hope people will be asking those questions. I know staff has said we will get those answers. But I think we did lay out pretty clearly working with the community exactly when some of those metrics are. I am expecting that along with many community members that work on this. The last question that I wanted to ask was something that maybe helpful is to look at how much housing capacity we are expecting in each district, but also around transportation corridors. I think that break down will be very useful because we can't forget the transit supportive promise of codenext. So as part of my first question about like these formulas and how it is that you are projecting zoning capacity relative to expected housing production over 10 years, if you can identify that also by sort of frequent transit service or expected corridors for transit service, I think that would be helpful, so we can explain to folks when they have the question why are you putting t-4 near this corridor that doesn't quite have bus service yet with, he can have a conversation that says we want to have transit service there, the current housing capacity is X, the net gain if we do this is going to be Y, that can enable capital metro to bring a frequent route there. I think that can help us explain to folks why it is that you are proposing what you are proposing or why we should change what you are proposing. Because I know that it's not just about the housing supply number, but the [indiscernible] Number and the transportation effect. If you all can show us on those corridors the increase in zoning capacity and based on your best guess the increase in anticipated housing units, then I think that can help us bring the transit and the shift out of single occupancy vehicles on to transit conversation into this. But I hope that I'm not asking too much. I see you all understanding your heads, I think that's a good thing. I appreciate that. If you want to respond to anything that I said on he on he. On -->> Just so you are clear the housing figures are net. [10:43:06 AM] I want to make sure that's clear to everybody. >> Casar: Net expected production which is different than lower -- >> Not expected production -- lower -- [multiple voices] >> Net increased capacity. >> Both of those numbers I'm sure will be plugged into your formula. >> Right. Just so that's fully clear. >> I think related to the fair housing question, there are ways that the code directly intersects and ways that it doesn't. To the extent that it does, which is producing impediments to delivering house to areas that being income accessible, that was a directive of imagine Austin and that is reflected in the maps. Just as a general rule, expanding the types of housing that can be built within different Zones. So providing more Zones that allow you to do broader array of housing types. Those are two very different ways that we are trying to direct aspects of fair housing, even if it isn't, even if we should limit the discussion to income accessible. >> And I think part of the resolutions directive was to not be so broad as to say different housing types just happen to do that. But actually to go into the different housing types that you expect, for example, going from a block form residential but instead saying we want to do this house form residential, this is what we think the -- the affordability impact could be in particular areas, that will be helpful so we can understand on a zone by zone basis or housing type by housing types basis what your rationale is behind that appreciate just one sort of broad statement that missing middle is good on this. Which is good and easy. But I think that people will be coming -- will be getting a little bit more into the nitty-gritty on which kind of missing middle, there will be questions about income accessibility. >> Sure, yeah. Related to the affordable housing density bonus program, until we have a map, it's hard to say exactly where and how much of the units that we're seeing are deliverable within the 10 years. [10:45:15 AM] Of or going to be affordable. But that detailed analysis and calibration of the bonus program is happening right now. Now that we all have the map, we can pivot into that discussion. We look forward to having full discussions on that. >> Casar: As far as helping guess how much this is improving mode shift away from single occupancy cars to transit service based on housing capacity, are you all able to draw some -- some concludes from your work in other cities and other research that if you do X you can help mode shift this much? >> Absolutely. Right now as the draft map rolls out, about 76% of the anticipated housing units are within a half mile of imagine Austin centers and corridors. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Say that number again. >> About 76%. >> Mayor Adler: Of the? >> Of the projected housing units are within imagine -- are within half mile of imagine Austin centers and corridors. >> I have a couple of questions. One for our staff. I think. Just remind me, we're also going to be receiving printed maps, I understand. Is there a timeline for that? >> At the district meetings, you will have the large maps and printed maps. So you will have those. The printed maps will be broken probably into pieces because some of your districts are very long. So you will be able to come up to the mapped to see those. >> Kitchen: I assume since these are spread out over a couple of weeks, that our offices will get those printed maps -- >> We can get some of those maps to you. >> Kitchen: I don't want to wait until my presentation. >> I'm -- I assure the public they will be able to see those. >> Kitchen: Great. On slide 9 or actually you don't need to turn to the slide, but you had? Discussion about neighborhood plans. I just want to understand what's still to be done. I understand that the south Lamar neighborhood plan is something that you all were still working on so that the map or I guess that's my question. [10:47:19 AM] The map may not yet reflect the man on the map is that -- >> So the south Austin combined neighborhood plan, one of the most recent neighborhood plan that's we completed, the mapping effort still needs to move forward, the characteristics created in the that. The other project is north shoal creek neighborhood plan, in process right now, understanding the direction they are moving forward in, the characteristics they are proposing and how that might translate into either [indiscernible] Space or form based zone. >> Kitchen: The map as it is right I know just reflects the existing zoning. >> Correct. >> Kitchen: I want to set expectations for that neighborhood that's a work in progress. The intention is to reflect that neighborhood plan. Okay. Then a few questions about -- I want to make sure that I heard you correctly. I think it was Alex. In terms of numbers coming out that were calculated by district, is that what you said was in process? >> Yes, it is. >> What's the timeline for that? >> We hope to have them to the team later today. >> Kitchen: Okay. That's a near term thing? >> Very near term. >> Kitchen: My request for that in providing that information it would be very helpful to understand the assumptions behind them. If you could write the assumptions on the information that we are getting with as much detail as possible, that will help us understand the numbers. So that we understand the assumptions behind it. And also I would expect that it's important to understand that these are not hard and fast numbers. So that for the public, and for us, these are ballpark numbers, best guesstimates, they are not something that people need to get upset about at this point. It's something that we're looking at. Here's how the assumptions were -- here's how the numbers were arrived at with the assumptions, those assumptions -- the idea is to track imagine Austin, I assume. [10:49:20 AM] But that may require some discussion about the extent to which it does. Right? If you could put all of that I'm just laying that out. Okay. Let's see. On the -- let's see, I had another question. I just blanked on it. I know what it was. This goes back to a question that councilmember Garza had. That had to do with the sidewalks. So I'm -- if I'm understanding correctly, the whole question of fee in lieu on a sidewalk or on a road is not addressed in the -- in the code. In other words, those were questions that we still have to deal with as a council. So although the code may make it -- I may be wrong about this, but right now, the code provides for -- you know, for connectivity with sidewalks and roads and those kinds of things. But there's also in some cases the potential for fee in lieu. So does this code change that? Or is that something that we're going to need to have a conversation about if we want to change the extent to which we do fee in lieu for sidewalks, for example. >> I think, councilmember, we'll probably have to get back with you and council on that. We can talk a little more with our transportation department how that would be reflected. >> I just didn't want to leave the impression for councilmember Garza and others that the code addresses everything that we might want to address in terms of -- in terms of making sure that sidewalks are built out and -- and those kinds of things. Just like the transportation impact fee is not yet reflected in the code that's in process. So ... Okay. Those are my questions. Wait, one last thing. I assume that when you are working on considering how -- how housing relates to transit, that you are having conversations with capital metro, that would be very important. [10:51:21 AM] I don't know if that's a question for Alex or whomever that is working on that, but I wouldn't want our staff to make some assumptions about where transit might go without having that conversation with capital metro. >> I think capital metro has sent me or just sent me comments from Todd, I think last week. >> Kitchen: That's great. Because that's, you know, that's important that we work in tandem on those kinds of assumptions. So ... >> I'm sure this is in my giant codenext binder. On this slide, I think it's slide 12 and then also in -- I'm just looking for a legend to tell me -- because I mean if I have these questions, I know the public will have these questions. This goes back to my question about, you know, where is something currently zoned commercial but now the new proposed changes would change it. You said T 4 or T 5. When I look at this legend, you know, tells the color, main street is. But where would one look to see what that allows? I saw a T 4 explanation in this thing that we were given. Is there a legend online that explains exactly what's allowed in those areas? >> A couple of items here in the guide book, the -- the further column to the right is a reference to the specific section number in the new -- in the proposed land development code. And -- and where -- so -- so if we go to T 4 main street, in particular, there's a reference that's -- that's title 23, 4 d-2140. That's where you find the specific standards. For where we said new zone, that is that addendum that you all have in front of you today with the three new Zones that are being proposed. [10:53:26 AM] There are a series of other handouts. There's a series of PDFs that show really the basics of each of the Zones. The fundamentals. That has been updated to reflect the new -- the three new Zones that will also be posted online today. And that was a matrix that -- that -- that both council, PC, zap and cad requested before. Each column in residential Zones what are the basics -- sorry, excuse me, lot size, set backs, height. That is provided as well. That's been updated. So there are multiple levels at which you can start to understand the different zoning districts. >> I'm just trying -- going back to my original question. For example, T 5 main street you said was one example where right now only commercial would be allowed and the change would allow some residential. So -- so it said that it's similar to cs, which does not allow residential. And so -- so T 5 does allow residential. I'm trying to understand exactly what kind of residential T 5 and is that what you are saying in this appendix? >> Sorry. So T 5 is in the -- in the text released at the end of January, you can find the exact reference there, the section number ends in 2180. Exactly within that zone that tells you the uses that are allowed. Sometimes T 5 was mapped where there was already a mixed use or vertical mixed use allowed. In some instances, especially where there was -- there was adjacent properties were allowing a mix of uses we applied it, T 5 main street as well. >> Garza: Okay. I don't really understand what you just said, but that's been most of this presentation, frankly. I have this handy book that is in my council binder, every council meeting. [10:55:27 AM] It gives every single use that is -- that a certain type of zoning would allow. That is in the -- that is somewhere for T 5 and T 4 that exact -- there's somewhere for me to look at exactly what T 4 and T 5 allows in the where? That's the code itself, councilmember, we will be happy to points to specific sections in the code where you can see the use tables that are associated with each transect zone. And in the non-tran sect Zones you have a use table at the beginning of each section so that you are able to determine the classification of [indiscernible] That are allowed by district. >> If somebody is looking at the map, mayor pro tem tovo said she may have T 4 and T 5. If they are looking at that you would have to see exactly where to go in the code to know where it's allowed. >> If you allow the term cheat sheet, it is to points specifically to those code sections. So the user doesn't have to jump around in the code and try to determine where that specific zoning classification is located within the code. >> This reference is -- the reference given is the proposed new code. >> Correct, proposed, okay, thanks. >> Thanks, do you have online a map that shows the volume, the density, the of the -- of the buildings that would be allowed in each of the different Zones? We are getting emails from different software providers that -- that say they can give us what -- what our zoning changes look like. We what the possibility is for each individual tract. [10:58:36 AM] I don't believe that we have that. I mean, we -- the comparison of the difference in heights and difference in set backs and coverage, I don't know if we have a volumetric tool that would calculate all of the different combinations of watershed regulations and -- and zoning regulations to come up with that different -- >> So the volumetric would be really helpful. John and Peter do you all work with that. >> We have not in the past worked with -- worked with -- as [indiscernible] One of the -- we have not worked with them in the past. >> It looked like just from the -- from looked like -- >> I don't want to actually explain it. >> What do you think the value is? >> The value, it will show us we're look at north Lamar and sf3 and P is going to be lmdr, for example. >> Right. >> And so the software that I think we're being asked to consider -- and I was asking if what we already have allows that would put the type of form on the map so we could see a 3D version of what it might look like. Right now. It's flat. It's 2d. It's different colors. So we have to -- the public has to bring their understanding of what lmdr means or what the range of it could mean and what that would look like on the street. So I think that it's probably really expensive, but I wanted to let -- just to raise that as a tool so that we know it's out there, and it may be something that would bring added value to the work we're attempting to do here to give people a better understanding of what things could look like. [11:00:49 AM] Again, it looks like from the e-mail that we got, which is boxed, it doesn't give you any architectural design or var nation -- variation. It's this deep or this narrow. So I would like to ask staff, since they have been contacted -- they got the same e-mail we did -- just to let us know what you find out and if that tool would be a useful one for us to pursue. >> Okay. Mayor protem. >> Thanks. So one thing I figured out this ING morning that might be helpful to bring up, just getting back to the question that council member Garza asked. In the code book, something like a h4 has certain uses, and it has different uses if it's an is-o. So that's the difference from having -- the ability to craft a restaurant or a bar with a use permit, and it's my understanding that the map will show -- if you zoom into the property, it will show if you're an is or an is-o. >> O means open, but what does is mean? >> So in the different Zones, there's additional form descriptors, and is is intermediate setback. >> Thanks. I couldn't find the key. I thought that would help because we'll all start getting questions about some of those uses if people are just looking at the big category and not at the distinguishing is or is-o. People will wonder why the maps are showing you can do a restaurant in the middle of a neighborhood. >> The intent where we've mapped the neighborhood opened, we were mapping conditions where existing conditions were already non-residential. [11:02:56 AM] Again, these are drafts. If for some reason we have mapped a neighborhood where it's not called under the neighborhood plan or not allowed in the zoning, please let us know. That was not the intent. >> And just to get back to the affordable housing, I have a quick affordable housing question and rapid fire questions that have been forwarded to me by members of the cag, the affordable housing incentives that have been finalized, will those be meshed into these certain zoning categories? For example, main street 4, it has the ability under certain conditions, a property that's redeveloping or developing and seeking certain entitlements has an affordability requirement. So will there be an affordable housing requirement built into what we have in our code book, our existing code book? Main street 4, t4, et cetera. >> Ian Carlton with -- northwest. Each of the Zones will identify whether or not a bonus option is available. Right now that's noted in several Zones where a particular building form has the option to build a bonus area, which is not required. It is optional. It is a bonus offered and within that bonus, an amount of affordability will be required or would be paid to opt out of that affordability. That's currently what's being calibrated now that we have the maps that indicate these particular Zones in markets and in space across the city. >> I guess for those properties that currently have mixed use, for them -- as I read it -- and I have to line up things a little better, but if they, under the current zoning, if they were to redevelop, there would be an affordability component. [11:05:17 AM] I think because there's a difference, I believe, between some of the properties and the entitlements they would get under the proposed maps, we're increasing their entitlements without -- and there won't be a requirement that there be additional affordability where right now were they to access those increased entitlements, there would be an affordability requirement. Again, it's a density bonus program. They don't have to. They don't have to build to those existing entitlementser but if they do, there's an affordability requirement. If we change it from mixed use, we've lost that opportunity to do that if there's not a requirement built in to the mainstream and some of the others categories that will be replacing mixed use. At least in district 9. I don't know where that change happens in other areas. >> Yes. So it very much depends on what these new proposed zone is on a site that was formerly bmu as to what the incremental bonus may be for building on that site. So it would vary by site and even within your council district as to which new zone would be applied to a parcel that was bmu and what a new bonus option would be to what the prior option was. It is difficult to identify -- those are not parallel. In one case it was not necessarily a bonus option. It was an option to actually completely change your zoning. Going forward, it will be a bonus built into the zoning, which should make it for legible and easier for people to interpret where bonus is available to them. >> Okay. I think that will make more sense once we actually have that document. So I will leave that for now. Just very quickly with regard to processes, council member kitchen talked about the ability to print out maps or get those large maps. I've already gotten some inquiries from the public about where and how they could get large scale maps. [11:07:21 AM] So if it's possible, if we have an account somewhere, where people can go -- if there's an opportunity to put a PDF online that people could take to a private printer, I think that will be valuable and people will avail themselves of that opportunity. >> We're already working on producing the maps that we will use at the various council districts. The council district meetings where the map will be available citywide online as a PDF. >> Great. >> And also the large scale maps that will be in sections by district will also be available as a PDF. >> Super, so people can take and print them. >> Yes >> Is it possible for the city manager to do a Q and a -- it was asked and the answer wasn't clear to me -- can we go a Q and a for the budget or is that the intent? Council member kitchen, I know you asked the question along those lines. I wasn't clear on the answer. >> Yeah, I wasn't either. That's a good idea. >> That's a good idea. >> I think that would be help ful. >> Thanks. And then I have a couple of questions forwarded from the community. It's my understanding that the draft comments, if community members want to get draft comments in before so that they can be considered or included within the commission. The commission drafts, they need to do so by June 7th. Is that correct? And then my follow-up question is: Is there a different time line for comments regarding the maps so those can be considered within the commission? >> That's correct, council member. We're looking at July 7th for comments on the maps, just to give additional time for the map review because we were at later time issuing the maps. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. The flooding maps and the impervious cover increases, I assume from the question that I received that that work is ongoing. [11:09:29 AM] Can you provide an estimate of when that work will be completed. >> That, we'll have to coordinate with our watershed staff. Now that we have a map out that assigns entitlements to onto properties that, modelling can sync up what we've proposed. There still needs to be work to mirror and parallel that work to determine what is effective. >> Do you have an estimate of that scope? June, July? >> We'll get back to you on that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Council member Houston and then Flanagan and then pool. >> Thank you. I've got a couple of questions for clarification. Did I understand the design standards and compatibility standards are going to be the same throughout the city or is that still going to be on an area by area basis. >> The residential design standards have been incorporated into both the form-based Zones. So we've incorporated the ordinance and we've also incorporated them into the you space Zones for those property residing within the core boundaries. And then compatibility has been integrated into the different zone districts to better shape the form of some of our buildings. >> So where there was no compatibility before, there will be some in the new code? And in areas where there was no compatibility, there will be some baked into the new code? >> Council member, just to make sure, there are places in the city where compatibility does not apply. >> That's what I'm asking. >> For instance, the east 12th street and ccds. [11:11:29 AM] The nccds have not been remapped through at least our process. As such, the compatibility would still not apply there. >> But only in the neighborhood conservation combining district on east 11. Through there are still places it doesn't apply outside of that zoning category? >> Correct. There are other situations where compatibility would not apply as well. >> And so it still will not apply in the new code? >> Correct. Correct. >> Again, that's equity in how the city has some of those protections in some parts and not in all parts. I just wanted to make sure that everybody understood that. And then the other thing is that for the areas in primarily -- well, I think probably all over Austin there's some areas that don't have area plans, and there are no future land use maps. So what are the guiding principles that you all use to decide what zoning categories would be there? >> So, again, when we had that large list of different things we were thinking about as we looked at the maps, in those places that didn't have a neighborhood plan or in particular a future land use map, it wasn't imagine Austin, existing entitlement, including cos where possible. It was connectivity, it was lots. There were a lot of things that were looked at, but it wasn't necessarily one thing. And there are large parts of the city where there were not neighborhood plans. >> Council member, I want to be clear. Compatibility standards in context still apply citywide. If you have a commercial industrial park next to an office part, compatibility standards may not apply, but where you have residential adjacent to commercial, which it's Tran sick or not, there are things built into the code that would protect them. [11:13:36 AM] There are places in Austin where compatibility doesn't apply today, and there may not be in the future, but it would be in that same context. >> And I don't want to get into it because we've had these conversations before. There are compatibility standards that applies in some parts of the city. It does not apply in other parts of the city, so you have three story houses built next door to two and the light, they don't get the sunshine. They don't get any of the amenities and the quality of life things that we're talking about. So I'm just trying to make sure that people understand that that's still going to be the way it's going to be with the new code adoption. >> And with the residential design standards today, they've applied to a specific portion of the city. And that policy that council has adopted that's been carried forward, the city council would make the residential design standards a requirement citywide, then we would change the code to make them citywide, but that's not the way they exist today. >> Yeah. >> I understand that. I just want to make sure that the public understands that. >> Mr. Flannigan. >> Well, I just want to thank y'all for the hard work you've done. Finally having the maps makes this a concrete conversation for the community in a way that it hasn't been. After all the meetings I've done in my district over the last couple of months and helping people try to understand what was in the text now that the maps have come out, it makes it a substantive conversation that I'm excited about and most of the people I've spoken to in my district are excited about. Getting to the nitty-gritty in this. There seems to still be some holdover zoning classifications, rural residential and developmental reserve specifically that don't even match what's currently on the ground now. Rather than go into a long conversation about a specific parcel, how should the community really be thinking about this map? [11:15:43 AM] Is it prescriptive in a way that the team has really thought about the whole map realistically and said, this is how things are supposed to go? Or should there be a lot of community conversation about changes and tweaks and identifying areas where housing should go and identifying areas where the housing shouldn't go? There's a lot of work being put in the map and I'm wondering what the intent was for the community at this point. >> So I think when you talk about the map when we created it, there was certainly areas that we left out, those areas that were the pods of the nccds. There were areas that were shown that were part of the neighborhood planning areas, and we followed those to inform our mapping process. Beyond the areas, there were plans mostly of your district we looked to imagine Austin. We looked to the different lots that may exist on the ground, but there are certainly areas where there's been no plan for that area that imagine Austin is silent and they've been pretty much left intact until at one point that we could do another planning study out in certain areas, as I spoke to in the budget discussion. We're looking at a new way to do smaller plans. We're looking at where development will be starting in certain areas or there's a certain development pressure that may be exerted to try to come up with criterias to talk about those areas. Certainly the areas that are larger tracts, you may have new preliminary plans. They may be coming in and looking for zoning changes to accompany that. I know John spoke to and addresses the tracts that are -- acres in size where you could start to address the outlying areas to make them walkable communities that's described in the code. [11:17:44 AM] The mapping isn't going out necessarily and just pail mail creating a certain level of density or a certain amount of commercial area where is there's not previous direction by counsel through the plan or through some other study that's been done for a smaller area. >> And I think to build on what Greg is saying, the map produced today is based on policy, as much as we could grab from your imagine Austin. Now that we have the maps out, there are opportunities to think about before the code is adopted, are there places where your constituents want to see some change. Where you haven't been able to get down to the granular level at this point to have this discussion. As we mentioned before, there are opportunities after the code is adopted to continue those conversations. So especially as you're doing the mobility bond planning for what's happening in the right of ways, that's a unique opportunities now that we're talking about what's happening in the transportation side, working with property owners and constituents, how do we want to see land use changes around the mobility quarters. I think that's an incredible thing that's presenting itself in the near term. >> Ms. Paul? >> I'm looking at the coding, the zoning code for an array of different schools. And so I was wondering because they seem to be different, depending on what the zoning was for them to begin with, but it ranges every from lmr to t4n, shallow setback to P, I guess for public or maybe park. Do you think that the schools -- what do you think about how the schools -- the land -- some of them do have the park attached to them. [11:19:49 AM] The city used to partner with the school district to put parks next to schools so there was a shared interest, but that didn't hold out in all of the schools. What do you think about the zoning for the land that aid owns. >> I think you look to the existing zoning applied to that property and move forward. We have not gone back and rezoned every public school in the city to be a particular district like P public or something. Public schools, charter schools are both recognized by the state of Texas as being that, and we have charter schools and public schools that have a variety of zoning that exists right now. >> So when, like, Mccallum high school was built -- because it's listed at sf3 and then changes to t4nss for shallow setback, so when that was built back in the '50s, '60s, I think. The zoning wouldn't have dictated what was built there or they didn't change it. They just were able because it was a school district, to build the school there? I'm just basically asking for some historical perspective on how that would have been decided. >> I think we'll have to get back to you on the nuances. I think we looked at what the existed zoning was and contacted what was around it and if there was a neighborhood plan that spoke a little bit to that area, then we may have applied that. I think the schools right now all over Austin -- >> They have an array of different zoning. >> They have an array of zoning that ranges from single family to P public to even more intensive zoning. >> So last question related to this, why would this -- for Mccallum, why would it be listed as a shallow setback? Is that the setback from the road or the depth of the parcel? What does shallow setback refer to? [11:21:50 AM] >> Shallow setback references the front setback of the building. So it is from the right of way,/property line at the street to the face of the building. >> And is there a number associated with what's considered shallow? 15 feet, 25 feet? >> It is in the zone district. I will tell you specifically what that range is that's expected. >> Okay. >> It is generally consistent, but there's -- we have some variability. I think generally speaking, the shallow setback is -- I want to say it's 10 to 15 feet, although I will have to check the code. But it is intended when you see, like, a t3 neighborhood shallow setback, the setbacks would be similar if not match the t4 neighborhood shallow setbacks. So you understand that, again, because they're -- when they're mapped next to each other, they have a similar setback so they're more compatible. >> And the setback goes to where a parking lot may be located or does it go back to the building? >> To the building. >> What's really important. There's the shallow. There's the intermediate. There's the deep. And this is exactly what the form base approach builds upon, from the community character, from the analysis of the way Austin neighborhoods already stand, these new Zones are created -- they're calibrated. Your current zoning treats it as one size fits all. These are more tailored to your neighborhoods in Austin. That's why there's more of them. The S, the I, the D are indicators of Zones that do a better job of capturing the character of existing Austin neighborhoods. >> And one example, again, one of the new Zones that's in the addendum you have today is t4 deep neighborhood setback. We weren't expecting to find that. [11:23:52 AM] As we went back to the map, where we showed the historic building, all of those have deep setbacks of about 35 to 40 feet. They're really deep. That's a characteristic that's very particular to that neighborhood. If it was to be mapped with one of the other Zones that we had in theory, a building could have come in and not been at those setbacks. Keep the character with those deep front yards that are very particular to that neighborhood. >> Thanks. >> Okay. Ms. Kitchen. >> Just a quick clarification on the maps just to be sure I'm understanding. The website says the maps will be released to coincide with the next open house. I'm understanding from our conversation today we're going to change that so that all of these maps can be available to anyone and the people don't have to wait for their scheduled time. >> That's correct, council member. So we're under production for each district map as we speak. So those need to be produced and also put online as PDFs, and they will be available. >> Okay. Maybe you could just change what the website says too. It makes it sound like you have to wait until your open house, which, you know, is weeks for some people. >> Certainly we can clarify that. >> Thank you. >> Mayor? >> Okay. Mayor protem? >> Just to add to that. It's not just weeks, but we want people to come to those public forums as prepared as possible. Some people want to get into the the details. As much as I love the map, it is small and having those maps available as soon as possible will be great. >> We'll try to get those to you as soon as possible so you will have them >> And online. >> And online. I think the idea was that we have certain limited staff creating those maps, and so we're actually producing them as the district meetings were occurring. [11:25:54 AM] So we'll get those out as quickly as we can so everyone can see them as soon as possible. >> So they can pull down a PDF and print it themselveses if they want to do that? >> Yes. Obviously you're going to be hitting the circuit here and the trail. Invited people to come in and set hours if they want to come in and talk to you. The maps, generally speaking, are intended to present what the policies and forms and plans have already established in the city, but certainly over the next year, we can have a discussion about providing greater protections or different uses or different policy decisions. That was not what you were charged with doing in doing these maps. But now we want everybody to roll up their sleeves, and let's make this great. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> All right. Council, let's go to the meeting management pages that we have. I think the goal here is to talk through some of these issues and then I or someone will bring an ifc to the council to adopt some of these to the degree we need to do that. Otherwise to reach agreement here and consensus on how we want to proceed and operate. I would suggest we start going through these and get a feel for where people are. I think the first specific ideas come to us on page four where we have the agenda process. Maybe if we just ran through these here one after the other pretty quick, I think the suggestion from staff was to post the final agenda a week earlier than we post it now so that it would be posted on the Friday two weeks before the council meetings take place, and that we would only be augmenting those with addendums or otherwise, to post things if there was an emergency. [11:28:16 AM] Otherwise we would be giving the community two weeks to see this item and see what the back-up was so people had that measure of notice. I support at least that. Anybody else? Ms. Houston? Mr. Flannigan? >> Thank, I wanted the opportunity to talk about this a couple of weeks ago when it was on the agenda. I had notes but I can't find it. As I thought about the issues that tend to generate discussion, as we've talked about before when those arise and they're ifcs or even staff items, we almost always grant a postponement if the public comes and says they need more time or a council member says they need more time. So that coupled with the fact that when there's an agenda posted, it has a lot of staff items. The staff are already working multiple weeks ahead and presenting to the city manager in advance of our council meeting and very often the draft agenda that we get a couple weeks earlier has those items on it. I think there is already an opportunity to see those, you know, what is likely coming on that date. So for me, at this point, I don't support a requirement that has us getting our stuff in several weeks ahead. I think most of the time, again, when people have asked for more time, they've gotten it. I think it ties our hands at times where we need to act fast. I understand we still have the addendum, but I don't think that's a -- I think that should really be exercised in a very, very limited basis because it, among other things, means it doesn't appear in the regular agenda. [11:30:19 AM] It doesn't give us an opportunity to talk about it at work session. A couple of examples that occur to me of time sensitive issues, there was during sequestration, we learned rather quickly that the senior meals program in the city was about to run out of funding. We had to quickly bring a resolution. I brought a resolution very quickly that allowed us to vote on that -- and my memory is foggy -- before the July break. If we're building in requirements that we kind of then forecast out two weeks ahead, we wouldn't have been able to act quickly. There was a demolition -- there was a landmark decision in decemberish where there were some odd voting things because people abstained and what not, and the community said, please consider this at the council level. I brought a resolution forward to ask this council to look at it. Had we had to delay several weeks for that consideration, that opportunity would have been lost. It wasn't a successful effort, but at least we considered it in a timely fashion and did so on a regular agenda. So, you know, I would offer those couple examples, and I have more and when I'm better organized, I can cite them for you. I think we have a lot of deadlines and days to keep track of and things going on. I, for one, am usually working on the meeting that's current and not working weeks ahead. So I don't see this as a huge time saver, and I hope that I've supported most of the requests for postponement when the community members have said we need time to discuss this. As a respective of district 9, I want the ability to act in a responsive and timely way, and that means being able to bring items in a timely fashion, which, for me, again, isn't two weeks out. [11:32:23 AM] >> Mr. Flannigan. >> City manager, when it says refers to emergency items only, is emergency something that's defined? >> I don't know that we've defined it, but say you had a council meeting on week one and you postponed an item, typically you postpone it for the next week, but that second week was already posted as a final agenda. You would have to -- that postponed item would have to be an addendum to week two. >> Actually I had a second question about postponements, but it says emergency items. How would we determine an emergency? >> I don't think there's a definition of an emergency. I think like many things, that's in the eye of the beholder. We could define it. >> I kind of tend to agree with the mayor protem. I don't think this really solves a lot of problems. I also don't see any problem with doing it either. I'm more inclined to be willing to postpone things and not force the postponement to go another two weeks. I think it would be rational to say the postponement would be on the agenda. If there's no definition for emergency items, like emergency items would require -- or a vote at a meeting or something along those lines, you get to the point where I don't know that we're all thinking this is the same thing. >> Speaker: (Off mic). >> That's the question. If we haven't defined what emergency item is, we're all going to have our own versions of what an emergency item is. >> Mr. Casar? >> So it seems to me -- in answer to your question, if we're regularly postponing stuff, how does this help, but on the meeting management side, I think the pros are that we don't discuss -- we skip over a lot of conversations around discussing a one-week postponement when something is posted for a week, we just give ourselves those two weeks. [11:34:42 AM] So I think the time this saves is somebody posted an ifc that comes up on Friday. At work session, there's a discussion, hey, we've only had 24 hours to look at this and we need another week. I think citizens coming forward asking for a week postponement because of the tight delay -- I think the pros are we might avoid some of those. The cons that I can think of several times where there was about to be a staff rfp for something and we need to get a resolution, et cetera, where there are those light emergencies. It's not as serious as meals on wheels not serving seniors, and so I think that I kind of like council member Flannigan, I'm feeling a little agnostic on it because I think there's -- for pros and I have to see how the cons go if they pop up, but my gut is as long as we're a little bit liberal with the word emergency, that we end up maybe not saving tons of time, but we save some discussions around week postponements that we seem to perennially have. >> Council member pool? >> Do we have a couple of uses of the word emergency? I know if we have something and it's an emergency, it goes into effect immediately rather than ten days. >> That's a different -- >> It's a different emergency, right? >> It's a different standard altogether. This is in your city code. We've created this. It's really for the managers through the agenda office to determine whether or not it's an emergency that should be posted because, of course, we would not -- you don't want to have addendums all the time. You really want to have an agenda. Addendums should be something that's very unusual. >> So just to drill down a little bit more on something that hadn't entirely been defined, the decision is made based on how important it is for a particular item to happen on a particular date or within a certain time frame. [11:36:49 AM] >> It could be the item is of a critical time. There could be a critical time frame to take action, and you would need to put that as an addendum on that current week's agenda. The problem with the addendum is once it's posted, you can't talk about that item in work session. You can only talk about it on Thursday. >> Oh, really? >> Because the posting. Typically the addendums are posted on Monday. >> Only for Thursday, not for Tuesday. >> Right. 72-hour posting. >> I think before I really know what I want to do on this, I really do want to understand everything that this affects because it does affect the staff in preparing the items. And then it seems to hem us in on what we may or may not be able to discuss on a particular date. This is actually providing more strike ures to our processes than I thought it would. On the first part, I thought, sure, post items, and we'll take them up two meetings later. I need to think about it a little bit more before I know how comfortable I am with it, mostly because I don't completely understand how it's going to affect everybody who works within this process. >> Ms. Kitchen? >> I would suggest if we do end up going forward with this, and I understand people are not quite settled on it, that we use the term time sensitive instead of emergency. Emergency connotes a qualitative decision making, which I think would be of some concern to council members and also put the staff in a bad position if they're having to decide if something is qualititively an emergency. I would rather say time sensitive -- if we go forward with it, I would rather say time sensitive and the council member who felt it needed to be put on could make that case and I also think that it would be important for a council member to determine if it's time sensitive and we'll have to honor among ourselves the goal here, that we would not put something on with that little bit of time unless it truly was time sensitive, and we would define time sensitive as meaning there would be negative impacts on, you know, people if the decision was not made by a specific time period. [11:39:31 AM] I too need to think about this one. I do, in general, like the idea of having more notice, but, to me, the notice is as long as we can talk about it on the Tuesday before, I think that's important. A bigger issue for me is amendments. When we bring amendments on the dais without having made them available to people ahead of time, I think that's a big issue for us in trying to talk through them. It takes time. It's also difficult for the public. So my suggestion would be -- and I know this is not here, but I would suggest that we think about for major issues that we're dealing with that are large issues, you know, with a lot of public input, we could define that further. I think we should have deadline on posting our amendments. Now, I think we could also understand that that wouldn't preclude us from on the dais, things come up on discussion, having to amend things, but I don't think we should be bringing our amendments on the day of for major things. Just like we can identify those items as we talk about them, just like we do for time certain items or when we decide on major items, how we're going to handle public input, we could also flag items as a major items and set deadlines for ourselves because I really think that's important. To me, that makes more -- to me, that's more helpful for us than this. This, I still need to think about how I feel about this. >> Yes, Ms. Garza. >> I think this is where council member kitchen was going, but I wonder if there's a middle ground. Instead of Friday, make it a Monday or Tuesday so it's not a full two weeks. It's -- I don't know. What would that be? Adding a couple of days. So instead of it being Friday, you would do it the Tuesday before. I mean, I hear what the mayor protem is saying. [11:41:35 AM] I still think we need more time. My biggest concern is much of our weekends and mainly our staff, when it comes out on Friday, they're spending the entire weekend because we mostly have our staff meetings on Monday, so I expect my staff to be ready for a staff meeting on Monday and answer questions, and so they sometimes never get a weekend. So I would like to give them more of an opportunity. Maybe if it comes out on Tuesday, they're watching the work session in the background and working on new items. Maybe that's a new middle ground. With regard to the amendments, I don't know how I like the idea in general, but practically speaking, sometimes, depending on what happens with the one amendment, I may or may not want to make an amendment based off that. So you would have to be basically looking into the future and trying to figure out where the vote would be for that one amendment and then if that passes -- it's like a flowchart. If it passes, then go to this amendment. If it doesn't pass, go to this amendment. I don't know how we could do that practically. >> I didn't mean that you had to bring them. I didn't mean that it was all amendments. I was also thinking the day before or something like that. We talked about them -- >> Council -- I want to get to some >> I want to get to this. >> I want to get to some over here -- let me just finish my thought. I thought it would be the day before. We signal at work session. It's like signalling the work session with language. >> Council member? >> Yeah, I'm a little worried we're approaching this like we're making decisions like this all has to be set in stone. Some of that comes from a requirement, changes in chapter -- 25. It seems we ought to be able to self-impose -- let's try this for three council meetings, doing it two weeks before and see it if helps any without having to go through the changing of the code. [11:43:39 AM] I mean, this is Austin. We're innovative. Let's have a prototype. Let's try it and see if it works. Find the kinks, and eventually we can codify it. I'm not sure legally if we can do that, but it seems like we're hamstringing ourselves into feeling like we have to do it in a codified way. There's going to be things that we find that work and don't work, as we do it. So I wanted to throw that out. I do support having the two-week notice with an option for the time sensitive. I think it's fair to our staffs. It's fair to our families. It's fair to the community, who, you know, if I don't happen to see something until Monday that has to then be pulled for Tuesday or Thursday, to notify people who may not be live and breathing council. There's not a lot of leeway for letting people know they need to mobilize or just get information if there's a new topic that comes up that came out of the blue and you really need to get up to speed, having that extra time, I think, could be very beneficial. From what I've seen, it's not -- there's not a lot of time sensitive things that are the things that are causing the problems that we're having in terms of time management. >> So for me, I support this because I think we need more time. It's the drill not only that we put ourselves through in the office, it's the drill we put the staff through in terms of giving them to react. When something comes up on Thursday or posted on a Friday and we don't fix that by postponing it when we get together on Tuesday because everybody has had to go through the drill, and we don't get back the lost time for what it was we thought we were going to be spending time on for the meeting that's coming up on Thursday. [11:45:40 AM] I think it's real important, like Ms. Pool says, to think about the issues and make sure we're not creating a logistical issue. I would go to three weeks if there was a problem because it was two weeks. A lot of what we do doesn't require us to think that fast, if there was no other way to get around logistic issues. So we could certainly take a look at that. I wanted the back-up to be fairly complete on the day that it gets posted so that, you know, we're not posting something but the back-up doesn't come for another week or two when you really couldn't do anything on it and the community is not put on notice and the staff is not put on notice. My understanding is, manager, that this recommendation came from the staff, and I understand that the staff is prepared to move up their process a week earlier so that the staff has managed to get that all in. I recognize the need for us to be able to be flexible with emergencies or things that are time sensitive. Certainly mayor protem, everything you mentioned, I think we would still handle expeditiously because those thing call for expedited work. It doesn't happen that often. When it does, I think that we would certainly be able to address that. I just think that giving notice to the public will help us be more -- give more notice to ourself, to our staff, and everybody can do better time management for themselves and their families. I like the idea of considering the idea of having -- for a major item a posting of amendments early so long as it doesn't limit what can happen on the dais so the community can discuss that. I would have to think through lo gesticly how you do those things. We talked about the third item. I would like legal to take a look at how we remove all of these things out of the code, and we adopt rules of procedure or operation for us that we can just change a lot more easily and maybe something that would be an intermediate step would be something that does that, that takes all those things out, creating rules, and moves all of them into the rules so we're not losing anything but then as we make changes, we're making changes to kind of the rules as opposed to the code. [11:48:03 AM] >> We can certainly do that. I think when the rewrite of your council procedures came at the beginning of 2015, you all were very specific about what you wanted. I think you've had an opportunity to work through and say, let's make changes. I just wanted to say that now that I've looked at it, it's the items for council that are -- they're supposed to come to the agenda office no later than six day before the meeting. I can assure you that rule is not always in line. It says if an item comes later that, the council will certify that the item is time sensitive because it's immediately critical to the interest of the city. And it's certified on a form that's provided by the city manager. So it's written in there it's not an emergency. It's time sensitive. >> Okay. Mayor protem? >> And that would be a start, to back up to the Wednesday and get our materials in, as the code currently specifies. I had a couple others. The affordable housing on a ISD land that we had to move forward on. The business code amendment that we adopted because there was a pressing potential case coming forward on congress avenue, and nobody was aware until that point that an adult oriented business could actually open up on congress avenue across from mexicarte. I'm sure there are others. This is just the one I brought forward. Like happened with the last council, there were some developmental things that were going on with regard to decks and tramways and various other things. That, I think, we adopted as an emergency. It happen frequently enough that I think that it would be really challenging to have all of those items ending up on an addendum. I think beyond that, my concern is we're going to spend a fair amount of time talking as a council about what constitutes an emergency and whether it was properly coming forward on this agenda or whether it should wait two weeks. I think it would be helpful for us to look at the last couple of agendas and figure out where we spent our time talking and whether it would have really been different if it came two weeks ahead of time. [11:50:14 AM] I think zoning cases are going to require a lot of discussion and do. Code changes, the same. Things like the strategicic housing plan are going to take time, and we spend our time there. I don't think moving the posting is going to change the conversation. Frankly, a good example is the item we had a few weeks ago. There were amendments and at some point we realized we were going to need to spend more time reviewing those and when we suggested suspending it, when it came back -- we all had had a week to think about it. I think I would propose that we consider getting our materials in on Wednesday, which the code currently says, and then, as a council, just sort of be mindful in a meeting if there are a lot of amendments coming forward, that maybe the best idea is to postpone it at that point. Wait a week, review, and vet those amendments with our stakeholders and then vote on it next week. Even when we do postpone, sometimes we've had really fruitful conversations that lead to better outcomes when it comes up for a final vote. And so having that initial conversation allows us to really reflect and review and think about the amendments when it comes back, but I really would encourage us all to kind of look at the agendas and see where we've spent our time. Most everything goes the week it's posted with not a lot of requests for postponement of things because they're controversial and people needed more time. Anyway, that's all. >> Mr. Flannigan >> Council member troxclair has had her light on for a long time. >> I didn't see you walk back in. >> No problem. I just wanted to express my support of this item. This was what my staff was most excited about because we don't have complete information until Friday. [11:52:15 AM] Everybody ends up working over the weekend. It's not fair to them, and I would just say that the reason we've had this conversation in the first place is because what we're doing, right, what we're doing right now is not working as efficiently as we would like it to. So I think we have to be willing to make -- I think we have to be willing to make a change and to try some things. If it doesn't work, we can go back. But if we do make some changes, and they're successful and things are working better, then maybe we can ultimately get back to only meeting every other week, which would kind of solve the problem of things rolling over to the next week. I think the mayor has said kind of from the beginning of the ten-one council that the way things are set up is that we have to be reactive instead of proactive. I think that this is a big reason why. So having information sooner would certainly help me be able to make sure that I'm making informed decisions that, I have the information from staff. I mean, there's been a lot of times where I feel like I have to put -- I have to pull something for work session because I haven't had the time to get the response back from a Q and a or I haven't had time to gather the information that I need. So I feel like it would save me time and overall I think this could be one of the most beneficial changes that we make. I hope we move forward on it. I think the number of items I would appreciate more time on greatly out numbers the emergency items. I think as long as we have a system in place to accommodate for emergency items, which it sounds like we already do and could possibly make improvements to if we needed to, would help us be much more efficient. >> Mr. Flannigan, and then we'll go on to the next one. >> I just wanted to reiterate that. It used to operate that way, if I'm not mistaken. What excites me most about two weeks in advance is the two work sessions, the opportunity to have this conversation twice before we have to take our vote. [11:54:24 AM] I think several times we've had this moment, and we end up postponing things because we needed to have this conversation again. If we give ourselves two weeks, I think the ultimate success of that is every other week council meetings. If we're coming into a work session, and there's two active agendas, I think that also gets a little confusing. Because we'll be in this work session talking about Thursday and the following Thursday's agendas. That's a little confusing as well. I think it's worth trying, hopefully leading to the point -- along with the other items I'm seeing in this presentation, getting to a place where we go back to every other week. >> Okay. Moving on to the next item? >> Something you just said. So if we post two weeks in advance, we would also post at that following work session that we could talk about either agenda? The agenda that was posted on Friday -- >> We certainly could, if we wanted to. >> Okay. That seems weird, but okay. >> Okay. I think the next thing we're talking about were council work sessions, trying to be a little more orderly about that, letting them know we have two hours. I'm at the top of page five now. >> Yes. >> I have skipped the agenda process with a deadline to file before because that relates, I think, to the timing of the posting. >> Correct. >> So I went to the top of page five. Which was the council work sessions. That makes sense to me. I think our work expands to the time we have to try to do it this way. I think certainly if we make some of the agenda changes we're talking about, where there's more time, I think we'll be better able to do that because people will be better able to answer questions outside of the work session, and we can more use the work session to talk to each other. [11:56:27 AM] I see this as kind of related to the agenda item in terms of it being able to succeed, but I think we should try to do something like this. Manager? >> I just wanted to mention if we do move to posting the agenda two weeks in advance of the meeting, the budget -- the Q and a process would kick in, just like it normally does. So you would have two weeks. You would get the responses to your questions more likely that first week, so you will have that additional information to consider beforehand. >> Okay. Council member alter? >> I just wanted to follow up. One of the things I find most challenging is not getting the Q and as back until Wednesday afternoon or Thursday morning, and, you know, there are other questions that you may have after it, and then they're not necessarily things that have to be all of council, but they make you feel more comfortable about your vote, you you don't have the opportunity to keep asking questions through Q and a, which may be a perfectly fine format, or somebody's questions raised issues for you, and you haven't thought about that and you don't have the time to process that if you're not getting those back. So I would very much like to see some at least rolling deadlines that happen, you know, if you get your question that has to be responded to within a certain number of hours so that we keep this flow moving forward. >> Okay. Time stamp? >> That's a good idea. Council member Garza? I'm sorry, Mr. Renteria? >> I kind of like that idea where if we're going to be once every two weeks, that that extra week that we don't meet, that we do go and discuss some of the staff briefing. I think that will be an excellent idea so we can take care of these briefings that sometimes we have to postpone and delay and not take it up. [11:58:32 AM] So I can support that. >> Council member Garza. >> I'm curious, did previous councils have a lot of briefings? >> We've always had -- resolutions require briefings. >> That's our vehicle for bringing things that we want to bring forward to council, we do the briefings. Like the murke (phonetic) Incentive, that was a briefing from staff. We did that on Thursday because it's an economic incentive. We could have allowed it to be done here. That one we allowed public comment on. That's a way to bring this briefing back to council. So we do need that opportunity. >> Okay. >> I was just wondering if it could be the maximum would be one briefing by staff and one briefing by council. For example, I'm asking for a briefing next week, and I it -- because now there's a staff one. If there doesn't need to be a staff one the week there's a council one, but allow for one of each. >> For clarification, are you saying a counsel discussion item or a briefing. >> A council initiated. Sometimes we ask for briefings. >> Okay. We can do. That council member kitchen and then mayor protem. >> Let's see. I was noting on the previous page that we said that ifcs that direct the city manager would be posted for the work session. I'm not certain that . >> A lot of our ifcs ask the city manager to take some action, so, I'm not sure what the thinking there was, as an additional recommendation. [12:00:39 PM] And then, I agree, councilman Garza on the briefings, so there allows more than one, and then finally the use of memos, rather than briefings on complex policy issue, I think we already do that. I'm not thinking of a briefing that why had that wasn't something that we needed to have in front of us. So I would be very cautious about that, because I think the memo -- I think the briefings on these policy issues are important, whether they are complex or not, if we have a decision. >> Can someone on staff explain what that was? Ifcs direct the city manager would be posted for the work session? >> Yes, chief of staff, city manager's office. What we're trying to do is differentiate between ifcs that are fee waivers versus those that ask staff to come back with policy recommendations, so we're trying to differentiate between those, so that if you're going to be taking action, if you brought an ifc, our recommendation was to bring it first on a Tuesday work session, have your opportunity to discussion a work session, take no action on Thursday council meeting but then delay it to the next council meeting after that. Of course, this is like a fee waiver item, which is typically ifc, then you can go ahead and move forward with those. Won't have to wait until the following work staff. >> Give staff additional time to comment -- >> I think it's to give you more time to discuss those items. >> Okay. I think that relates to the question, then, about the agenda setting. >> Just with that, with that explanation, that's not something I would want to do, so -- >> Mayor pro tem? >> Tovo: I wanted to clarify, council member Garza, you asked whether the work session was a place for the briefings. It seems they started out as council and got moved to the work sessions. [12:02:44 PM] That's just something to think about. It would help me, too, to know when briefings are coming forward, whether they've been scheduled by the staff or whether they are requested by council members. I think they had that discussion in the work session, I'm still more interested in that. I'm interested for committee meetings, too, because when we changed procedures, and indicated that two council members have to sponsor something to get on the committee agenda, it's not cheer whether it's an item for council or a staff item coming forward. Because it's always listed under council. As an aside, I hope we can clarify on our committee agendas, where those items are coming from. I don't know if I should talk to staff and talk to them about it or if it's a colleague, so -- >> And are these -- would these be set times? Because every once in a while and today might be one of them, we don't really have two hours worth of discussion about council agenda items. We might have 30 minutes of council agenda items and then could move on to the next, to the next section. >> Correct. So, were they intended as goals or were they intended -- I think they are aspirational. I think if you get through the pre selected items through 9 and 11:00, then the staff briefings hard stop at 11:00 then do that for an hour and hard stop at skew session. >> It wouldn't preclude us from doing staff briefings earlier. >> Tovo: I'm interested to know how this would impact zoning. Is zoning within this and things need to be stepped up in time so those are also coming forward in advance? >> Jerry rest over, planning and zoning department. [12:04:45 PM] If we're talking about having the meeting posted, the back-up be done that time as opposed to what we have right now. That would affect the zoning. I think ultimately would probably lead to quite a few more postponements. The reason being there's a lot of work that goes on behind the scenes before you all see a zoning case, specifically, we have to mail out notice, and we have to take out ads in the newspaper. The newspaper requires us to take that add out three weeks before it's required. And then my staff requires -- staff requires a weekend before that. And we bail out notice, both the zoning commission at the same time and determined pre determined dates and just take out one app, so, a lot of time, the cases going to the planning commission two weeks before it comes to the city council, and if it's a consent case, if there's not disagreement about it, the law department will then write the ordinance based upon the planning commission's action, so all of this takes a lot of times people have their own deadlines to complete the work, so between requesting notification staff to send out the notice. Requesting law department to write the ordinance, rewristing my staff to update the planning report based on planning commission actions, for all of these things to be done, it would have to be three weeks prior to the city council meeting. My concern is we're mailing out notices saying they are on the city council date and if there's a postponement or what not, that we would end up doing a lot more postponements. I know that we have that already. But I think setting everything back two weeks and making sure all of the documents are together and stuff like that, would probably lead to more postponements. >> I think that doesn't increase transparency for the public about when things coming forward and usually, because of the way zoning cases work and they go through different boards and commissions, people are really following those cases are not learning about it, in many cases, not learning about it when it appears on the council agenda. [12:06:53 PM] Sometimes they are but not usually. >> I notice they have people from down here for no reason. >> That is a concern. I hope that if there's council support for making this change, that I hope we might consider an exclusion for zoning and other items that require public notice. I think it sounds like it's going to create a lot of confusion and chaos. >> Good point. >> Mayor? >> Miss Houston in >> Houston: Mr. Rest over, there's some instances on the agenda where it came to council and had not been reviewed by planning commission or hadn't been reviewed by zoning and planning, so how did those get on the agenda and how can you keep those from happening like that? >> If I know a case that has not gone to planning commission, I will not post it on the city council agenda. The exception being those case where's I had my staff do a duel notice, try to save the city money. A lot of times we try to save money by mailing a duel notice, saying planning commission meeting is this date and planning commission is on this date. Because we've already notified it for a certain city council date, we're required to put it on your agendaened ayou guys usually always postpone those cases. I'm not intentionally putting them on knowing the planning commission postponed it, rather, we're mailing out a notice to save money by mailing out two at once, or both in one notice and once I do that, I'm kind of obligated to keep it on the planning commission agenda. What I've done different from the previous council, I've gotten the understanding when we were having our discussions about, you know, the single, one day a month and the impact that was having, is I do understand there are cases sometimes where the code does not allow me to schedule a meeting for the planning commission Tuesday and council Thursday but there are sometimes that happens when the case gets postponed in the planning commission, it gets postponed for Tuesday and also pre scheduled for the Thursday council agenda. [12:09:01 PM] I got a message from a lot of you that you don't like that, when you're looking at backup over the weekend as council member troxclair said, you don't have the action item yet. I've taken to doing staff postponements in that case to the next council meeting so you have a chance to consider the impact of the council decision in more than a two-day period. >> Yes, counsel member alter. >> Alter: It would be great if you know the weekend before that you're going to postpone it. If that could be noted. I know you give us your Jerry's picks, if we're not privy to that information, or the community is not privy to that information, I know you're required by law to do certain things but it seems like you could give us that information earlier, particularly if it's a staff postponement and we're not likely to be voting unit, I think that would be useful. >> Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Council member Flannigan? >> Flannigan: I don't understand what you're saying when you say requiring the posting of the agenda two weeks prior would create more postponements or it would delay things more than two weeks. I don't understand why that's the outcome and I don't think for a second it reduces transparency when what we're doing is requiring the community have two weeks of this posted, instead of what we do now, we post things one week. If anything, this increases transparency to the community of what we're doing on the council meeting. Is there something I'm missing in this process that you're concerned about. >> I'm not trying to address the transparency issue, I'm trying to address we have to decide what goes on the agenda well before you guys see it so we mail out notices about a month before because the city council meeting started that process, taking out newspaper ads and mailing out notices and there are staff reports that need to be completed. [12:11:04 PM] There's documents that we received from the public, no letters, things like that. There's copies of sign restricted covenant, there's the ordinance and all of those things take time to prepare and my concern is a lot of those things cannot be prepared until after we have the planning commission or staff recommendation, and a lot of times the planning commission or staff recommendation, if we were to go two weeks ahead, would not yet be complete or would be completed in not enough time to allow a lot of those documents to be prepared for the council back-up. >> That's true now. We postpone things regularly now. >> That's true. But it would be exaggerated if we were going two weeks. It happens today because planning commission postpones cases and I have to postpone them at council because they haven't taken action or they took action that Tuesday and the case is Thursday. If I'm leaping two it weeks ahead that problem is exasperated. >> Flannigan: I want to do the Matt because I don't think those numbers add up for me. I think we already put things late on the agenda. I think this is addressing a problem that might make a zoning case go an extra week or two. I think that's good. I think that's a positive in the community knowing in advance something will take a little longer. This will reduce postponements because we'll give ourselves more time to understand issues in advance. We already sent out notices to the community saying a zoning case is on a certain day and it's not on that day. I mean, that happens now. So, I need to know more about the math you're doing on that. >> We'll walk you backwards through the process. >> If I may, it may be helpful for you all in deciding the pros and cons if we actually map out what the dates would look like. Like if we do this, when could we do it, because there are considerations with zoning that we would have to work as far as publication. We have a new agenda management system that will be coming online later this summer, early fall. [12:13:10 PM] That would show you, okay, if we do it for two weeks out, when would the deadlines be for different things, when would your -- when would you be able to submit q&a, when would the q&a be finished and available to you. It might happy you weigh the pros and cons of dividing to select a one-week or two- week period. >> Mayor? >> And when you're doing that time line, what the mayor pro tem said, if there were options to treat zoning cases differently, that made sense, that gave us additional time, maybe a zoning case, that is pure consent, could move forward. But other ones would not be able to move forward. That would be the default. Maybe there are other options to take a look at. Council member pool? >> Pool: I think that's a great idea the city clerk said about mapping it out or calendering it out. And you can do an option, instead of Friday, two week before, make a Monday, which is a ten-daytime frame. Maybe just shift it that one weekend. >> If I could add, mayor -- >> If it's not too much work. >> The idea of -- I think we could have the items posted on the agenda, it's just a matter of if the back- up is prepared and ready two weeks out. On the draft agenda we usually include the items. Second concern, I forgot to mention. When council mass has a meeting this week and next week. And they want to postpone it from this weeks to next week. If that's already closed the only way we would be able to do that is addendum. That's something we're trying to avoid. There's minimum postponement period because the agenda is complete. >> Let's move on. We have logistics to look on on that. >> I was going to say, having offered that suggestion of maybe excluding those things that required a posted public hearing, and notice and what not, sounds just from my conversation with the city attorney, that that's probably not reasonable, because then we would have two different sets of agendas for the same meeting, so I think it -- I'm not sure it would work to exclude zoning from the change, if it moves back. [12:15:32 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Continuing on. By the way, there's been a request for this meeting this week, that the briefing on the public safety contracts take place at 4:00. So that the attorney can be here and brief us. We can start that conversation then. The next thing we have are council meetings, actually starting on time, trying to do a better job on that. A appreciate everyone's efforts on that. We're doing a much better job on that. On signing up on the consent agenda, we started to try to call the consent agenda, no discussion on the consent agenda. If somebody wants to make comments, we just pull it so we can get the consent agenda voted on. One thing I think that might be helpful is that if we cut off the sign-ups for the consent agenda at 10:00, so that at 10:00, we know which items have been pulled and which items haven't been pulled. We get into our conversation in the middle of it items start getting pulled and that throws us all off. So, having that 10:00 cut-off time for people to sign up things on the consent agenda I think makes sense, recognizing that if something got pulled, then a pumped item would be subject to the same sign-ups as everything else. >> And I think our code currently has that provision in it. I think it may actually be 9:45. >> This is only to pull, for a citizen to pull the item from consent. There's no provision in your current rules that state when a cut-off -- is the last time they can register for consent. >> Okay. So, I think we're just going to start doing that. I mean, that's something that works. The next one is setting the break times. I think we're generally following this. What is seen here is dinner from 5:30 to 6:30. [12:17:36 PM] Would probably move that to 6:45. I think we're having trouble making 6:30s. But 6:45s seem to work. This contains the suggestion that anything we haven't reached by 10:00 gets postponed. And that we take that into account as we're doing our time management at the meeting, that we actually allow for ourselves to start establishing a practice that we'll look at the agenda at 6:45 and figure out what we're going to do the rest of that night and recognizing that we may let things go, because it doesn't look like it's going to get called before it gets pulled. >> So, that have that same thing happen about the multiple agendas, if it were postponed, then we would need to know, is it postponed for two weeks or not? And then maybe, if there's two agendas, the Friday before, we can collapse them into one. >> If you move to just having -- posting two weakness advance, if you postpone something in a council meeting, you are, in essence, postponing it for three weeks because you're postponing it for the next time it can be posted on the agenda, which is -- >> Right. >> Or we can set a rule that things that have been posted for a meeting and get postponed could be put on the agenda. We could have an emergency item posted Friday and we could say something that was postponed from the meeting yesterday, could also be reposted on Friday. It doesn't have to be postponed for three weeks. >> Right. You could do an addendum -- instead. >> We could -- >> It doesn't necessarily -- in fact that would make more sense to me. If something has already been posted for two weeks and the community hasn't had hey chance to discuss it, we didn't goat get to it. I feel comfortable that coming up the following meeting. >> The piece that I was interested in see if we could do it. Say you have an addendum Thursday night and Friday is the posting deadline, by state line, for the next week's meeting, couldn't we reissue the agenda Friday, with having collapsed the agenda items into the regular agenda? [12:19:48 PM] >> I am. I think the better practice who be have an addendum with different items that we post on that Friday for the next week. >> We wouldn't be able to talk about it at work session. >> If you post it Friday, you could talk about addendum items on Tuesday. >> So the addendum would be published the next day? >> Okay. >> And then we can talk about them Tuesday. >> Currently H addendums are typically posted Monday which causes the problem with you discussing them on Tuesday's work session, but if we move the posting of the addendum to Friday, then we have plenty -- we have more than the 72 hours, and you could talk about them on the Tuesday work session. >> Thanks. >> Are the will. >> And if there was a reason that we needed an addendum posted on a Monday, that doesn't preclude us from having a Friday addendum which would have emergency items and postponed items and things we know about. Emergency items and postponed items and Monday if there's an exigency that required an addendum, we could do that, too. Recognizing we only talk about a Friday addendum in that Tuesday work session. Okay? As we go through this, are we going to try and seriously be done by 10:00? Are we prepared to take steps to do that? Which means more time management than what we're doing? Maybe there's a way for us to move more quickly? Terms of the debate that we do amongst each other on the dais? We have some things that are coming up about timing for the public. Maybe we come back to that after we hit some of those other items. Council member Flannigan, miss kitschened and pool? [12:21:50 PM] >> Flannigan: I was pleased with the last meeting. Everyone printed out their sheets clearly. It helped me lay them all out and understand as things are going and I think if we hold ourselves from returning to dinner and decide ing1 that moment what we're going to postpone in terms of public not having to stick around until 10:00 A.M. In case it comes up, I think it's a reasonable conversation. Whether or not we literally hold ourselves to a 10:00 P.M. Standard, I think we can always overrule ourselves day of of. There's no way from stopping us from doing that. >> Mayor Adler: Miss kitchen next, and miss pool and mayor pro tem? >> Kitchen: Couple things. I think we should hold ourselves to 10:00 P.M. I think we need to do that. I think if we talk about it after we come back from dinner as the mayor is suggesting that we can have an assessment at that time of what is happening. I think it's just necessary for us to try that. And I think that we're going to have to treat it in such a way that we're going to stick to it, otherwise it would become meaningless, just as it is meaningless now that we have to vote to go past 10:00 P.M. I also agree with the mayor that anything we had to postpone in that way could go, or would go on the next agenda, that we would fix whatever we need to do about posting so that that could happen. >> Mayor Adler: Council member pool? >> Pool: The piece of that that gives me the greatest concern, normally I would be all over that, if we have a highly controversial issue and we have big public comment and we can't limit how many people speak but only the amount of time that they can speak, I would be uncomfortable, and unwilling, to shut down our meeting, at 10:00, if the public meeting has been running for however many hours. >> Mayor Adler: Those may be two different things. This is an agenda decision -- at 6:45, we'll say, you know what, we're not going to get to this item. [12:23:55 PM] This item never be postponed. I never heard anyone suggest that if we're in a middle of an item we would stop consideration. >> Pool: I want to make sure. I hear people saying I want to stop at 10:00, if we measure how much time it will take and think we can go three hours or so, yeah. But if we're in the middle of the public hearing. We will be here inle the cow's come home because people want to talk us to. >> Mayor Adler: That sounds right to me. >> You can work both ways. If you get done by 9:00 you get to go home early but the items you think you can get done between dinnertime and 10:00 P.M., if it carries past 10:00, yes, keep on working on that item. >> Mayor Adler: Council member alter? >> Alter: I don't think we make good decisions after 10:00 P.M., so I wholeheartedly support this. I would suggest that one thing that we could do with respect to amendments if we can't get them posted before. It was really helpful to have the amendments for the strategic housing plan over dinner, so if there's an item we have a lot of amendments for, maybe we can have those passed out, you know, before lunch so you have lunch to look at them or before dinner so you have a little time to look at them and talk about them with your staff, because -- there may be one or two that come out afterwards or you think of something because of that, I think it would speed thingses up a lot if we're able to have a little bit of time to reflect and figure out where this goes in this item, or that item E. >> Mayor Adl: I think another thing to consider, too, relative to what you started off saying, is if we were to go past 10:00 P.M. In order to allow public participation, one thing we might consider if it's past 10:00 P.M., is at the end of the public discussion, we close debate and we don't take the vote but we postpone the vote until the following week, in other words we extend the meeting past 10:00 for the purpose of taking the test. [12:26:01 PM] That's also an option. Council member ka czar? >> Casar: I was kind of on board until that comment. I might have concerns with sending everybody home saying if you want to be around to see the vote or hear us talk about it, watch online or come back. I think it depends on the item, obviously, if it's a first or second reading it might be different. I'm not saying that I -- that we should set it up one way every time. I guess I have concerns of saying after -- if it's after 10:00 P.M. And public comment is over, we set a rule that we shut this thing down. I don't mow. I think that you promise that we be done before midnight. I don't know if you promised we would be done before 10:00 P.M. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem? >> Tovo: I agree. I think it's a case by case thing but I think we should be more thoughtful about wetter it's a smart idea to move forward and if council members are saying it's late and I'm tired, it would really help me if we could make the decision next week, I think we should consider it. But I don't -- I wouldn't - - I think at this point, I probably wouldn't support a hard and fast rule that after 10:00 we can't take votes especially for the reason council member Casar said. I suggest we back up the discussion of what gets post postponed to prior the dinner and for people staying over the dinner hour wait to find out they are postponed. I think we should have a practice of doing that before the dinner break so those folks can go home. >> And if we can also post that in some way so that people who are not following and can see that their item has been postponed, and that may already exist but I'm not aware of it. >> It is. We could update the actions taken by council page, to include any items you decide to postpone when you decide to take those items up. [12:28:12 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Next item we have on chart are the amendment item, music and proclamations. For what it's worth, I like the music. >> Yeah. I'm going to fall down on keeping the music at 5:30, and proclamations. I think that's something folks look forward to and having the musical interlude is frequently helpful to resetting what our brains are doing. I don't want to do away with the music at council meetings. I would like to add music on the plaza, in addition, we could look at that. But I don't see that as a good substitute to what we're actually doing at council meetings. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem? >> Tovo: I agree. It doesn't appear that would be a time-saver. I forgot what the statistics were. Our typical dinner break is an hour and ten minutes, or 20 minutes. And proclamations about 30 minutes. Those get accomplished on our dinner break not doing business anyway, so I think that's a nice way of using that time. All right. Skipping then to the next section. We donated the time. The question is do we reduce the time people -- right now people sign up for three minutes and can donate three minutes of time. It's been suggested that we reduce the time donated to 2 minutes when someone donates time and we reduce the number of speakers who can donate from four to two so one speaker doesn't have the allowed 15 minutes, which is allowed right now. It would give any speaker seven minutes and I would support something like that. [12:30:14 PM] >> I'll just say I'm undecided if we're taking a poll on it. >> I would support it. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> I'm sorry, imalley trying to follow. Is that the -- you're talking about recommendations on page 11, you you said? >> Mayor Adler: Page 9. Sorry. Council member Garza? >> Garza: I have a question related to this and how the ordinance is written. The first 20 speakers get three minutes and after that it's one? We don't really do that, because the first two, there could be one person that gets 15 and they are still counted as one speaker. Isn't that right? >> Mayor Adler: I count, when someone donates time, I count the person who denighted their time as a speaker as well. >>. >> Okay. >> Mayor Adler: So first three speakers, whether they speak or donate their time are nine minutes. >> We had an item, we got all of the way down to speaker 23, I remember. I didn't think that counted the people that donated. >> Mayor Adler: There's sometimes within two or three speakers and I just let everybody speak, just because it didn't -- I didn't call the last three for one minute. Generally speaking, I count everybody as a full speaker, because if I didn't do that, I could have 20 people who each spoke for 15 minutes. That didn't seem to be fair. I was thinking about this left -- it seems -- I guess I'm concerned, the unintended consequence of that rule, that we cut people off who were there wanting to speak because other people have donated time to other -- I guess those people have to be there too. >> Mayor Adler: Right. >> We minimize their three to two if they donate. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go on to the next one then. The closing speaker sign-up is the next items here on 11, page 11. [12:32:25 PM] The question is, do we close the speakers when council -- when the discussion begins? Right now, people can sign up over the course of the discussion while it's happening. That's the question there. Does the speaker have to be present at the beginning of the discussion in order to be able to sign up. Mayor pro tem? >> I think when it came up, I spoke about this. I -- this isn't a provision I can support. I think there may be a couple people, I count one or two times during the course of the meeting where somebody who is present signs up for something they might not have otherwise come up with, but I think, as I look back on the years, I spent as a community member sitting in the council change Bers, it is often the case, on a big item, or at least sometimes the case on a big item where somebody may be watching the TV and find some things came up and that was the item they waited for and came down and didn't get here when the sign-up started. I have done that myself because I was watching something and staying at work until the last possible minute and by the time I got here it had already been called up but I had plenty of time to sign up and speak. I think that has an opportunity to really cut off people who are very interested in an item, have been following it along but just couldn't get here because of traffic or work or other reasons for an item when it starts, so I don't think it amounts for so many people, during the course of one meeting, and I am concerned it would shut off people who have legitimate and active interest in it, in an issue, but just didn't manage to get here on time. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Flannigan? >> Flannigan: I have to agree with mayor pro tem. [12:34:27 PM] There's been items that the couldn't wasn't sure when they could take it up. Once we decided to take it up. They left their homes to come down to city council. Because they couldn't sit in council all day long to wait for the item. Looking at the numbers, it's a rare occurrence. We're talking 10, 15 minutes. But it's only been once or twice, I think. Often I'm surprised how few speakers there are on some items over the last couple months, so I think this one maybe causes some problems for community members that really have to be at work and they are taking a 15-minute lunch break to come down to council or whatever that might be. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Miss pool? >> Pool: I like the one consent items that are withdrawn or postponed per changes or corrections, close registration before the meeting. I think that's a good one to pull out of there if we can get general agreement on that. It's the last one. Closing speaker sign-up. There's one, two, three, four staff recommendations and it's number four. >> So, consent items are withdrawn or postponed, we just don't have any speakers on them? >> Yeah. And then if they're withdrawn or postponed, obviously they would be posted at another time and there woe be a chance for speakers. >> Mayor Adler: I like that as well and notice would be changes in the correction sheet. People can see the items that are postponed. Mr. Renteria? >> Renteria: I really don't mind any -- I went through both experience when coming to city hall, where we had to get it here at -- usually, if you want to be the first speaker, get here at 8:00 in the morning, we sign up, and then, then you take off, and then you wait on TV, see when your item is going to come up and then you run back down here, and then, you know, the way it's done now, where somebody could come in and speak, I have seen that happen, so, I don't see a because of that very often, so I don't have a problem with that. [12:36:38 PM] >> Mayor Adler: On the top of page 12 we have general citizens communication. One option would be to reduce the number of speakers, increase the time period that people can speak to once every six weeks as opposed to once every three meetings I guess is what it is right now and, we can go from 10:00 to 5:00, but then go from six weeks so that we gave people more opportunity to be able to make the list. Miss pool? >> Pool: I think that Manges sense. The six weeks. I don't know, ten is what we have now. Five seems not enough. If send feels like too many, we can go to eight. I think the important thing for me is the six weeks in between speakers. >> Okay. Mayor pro tem? >> It seems like with the change that we adopted two years ago, there hasn't been -- it doesn't feel like there's been terribly much repeat that we have people who are regularly signing up every four weeks so I think before -- if this ends up in the resolution, I want to see some data on that, and it also seems like we had more than a couple agendas where we didn't have a full run of ten speakers last week. I don't remember how many we had but may not have been five by the time we had two postponements. >> What I can tell you, in 2016, 40% of your meetings had fewer than then slots filled. 20 percent of the people who registered, did not show and then 17 percent of the people who did register, registered for multiple meetings throughout the year. >> Tovo: That's not a huge number, really, not compared to what it used to be. That seems like a pretty good -- I guess if you're able to share those in writing, that would be helpful, did that in our -- oh, I apologize. Thank you. Too much late night code reading. [12:38:38 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Renteria, did you have your light on? >> Renteria: Sorry. >> Mayor Adler: That's okay. Anybody else want to comment on the citizens communication item? >> I'm good with the staff rec on this. >> Mayor Adler: Miss Houston? >> Houston: I would like to think why you think moving citizens communication from 5:00 to 5:30 was an option. >> I think we pose that out there especially if you're going to eliminate the live music. I might have heard from a number of you that it seems like at noon, that's when your -- consent's over, you're starting to get not item, you're into your groove on discussion on items then I have to stop for the noon citizen communication. If you moved it to 5:30 and incorporate it into your proclamations and everything, then that would eliminate your getting out of your groove of discussion on the morning items. If you're going to keep live music, then I would not recommend that. >> Houston: Thank you for just explaining why you put it in there. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. I think those are all of the things that we had on this. Yes? >> We do have one more that we want to bring to your attention. This involves time certain items. I know with your council meeting you typically have consent at 10:00, staff briefings at 10:30 and different items throughout the day. The code calls that items on the council agenda have to be done at time certain but doesn't tell you what time they need to be. What we found from some council meetings you have dead air times between items so sometimes you have to in a sense recess, if you could, you could be taking up other business at the same time. So we're thinking about keeping consent at 10:00, staff briefings at 10:30 but also bringing the ability to take up either bond sales or your public -- your hfc, your board meetings, your zoning, we want to bring that down to 10:30 and of course public hearings at 4:00. [12:40:45 PM] >> Mayor Adler: That makes perfect sense to me. That sends good. Why don't you go ahead and make that agenda change. I'm sorry, what? >> I would just be concerned about the zoning, changing iffer' ever going to -- >> We're going to bring it down to 10:30. The thing is, we would do zoning consent at that time and zoning discussion probably at 2:00. >> Mayor Adler: Right. Did you have something? >> I think I'm going to think about that one, because sometimes what we think is a zoning consent, may turn into a zoning discussion, and I think it's just -- I think the zoning was set in the afternoons because it's easier for people to get down here in the afternoons so I'm completely on board with moving the board meetings and other things to the morning consent. I think that makes great sense. Less on with the zoning consent moving. >> Our thought with the zing it would be like last year where we had zoning one council meeting a month, in that we just establish a practice that if it's a discussion zoning item, we would take it up at 2:00 and do consent at 10:30. You know if your item doesn't pass at 10:30, it would be at 2:00, and that's when it would be discussed. That's our thought about that. >> I guess what I want to think about. We have members of the public that are unclear which time to show up and if they want to discuss it and have a group, occasionally it happens that they think something is going on consent but there are last-minute questions and people will come down and talk. If they miss the consent piece by the time they show for the afternoon, it's a discussion, or they come down and say please pull it off consent and they have to be down there at 10:00 to do that and they have to be done at 2:00, I think we should think through the zoning piece. For one our zoning staff will be here anyway at 2:00 for the discussion items. So, it's not a great savings. It may even -- I don't know if that's helpful. Our scoping staff has to be here in the morning and back in the afternoon. [12:42:51 PM] >> That's correct. My concern would be twofold, one, what you just mentioned, one, that we would be down here anyway, a lot of times we're here at 10:00 anyway. Baugh, I do think we are required on the notices to say what time the item was going so my concern was all of the notices would have to say 10:30 and people come down at 10:30 expecting them to go at 10:30 and told oh, no, because of the discussion, it's going to be 2:00 so come back in a few hours. I'm concerned people will be here then. >> Mayor Adler: I moved what you talk about the bond hearings but keep zoning set at 2:00 P.M. One other thing that's been suggested, we have historically had really, really long agendas for the last meeting in June, which is coming up here in another month and a half. I understand that the manager is asking that, no new items from staff be put on that agenda, so that the only things on that agenda will be things that are postponed to that agenda. We can postpone things to that agenda but there won't be any new things posted. I think we should consider doing that same rule ourselves which is that there will be no first postings of ifcs on the last meeting in June, so post them earlier. Everybody has two months to get ready for that, but we can postpone an ifc if we want to, to that last meeting in June. There just won't be any new ones on that last meeting in June. >> Unless it's time sensitive >> Mayor Adler: Unless it's time sensitive. And that goes for the staff as well, unless there's a time emergency. Yes? >> Would that also be useful practice at the end of the year so that we close everything down in that last meeting in December? >> Mayor Adler: Sounds right to me. >> Okay. >> Mayor Adler: Our last two meetings in June have gone past 2:00, so we're going to do better this year. [12:44:57 PM] >> Are we gloving on to a new recommendation? >> Mayor Adler: We've gone through the list. That's the ones I have here. >> I may have some others in various places that I can't pull up right now, but I want to continue to think about and maybe talk about now or in the future the idea that's come up a couple of times to moving to every other week and council member Flannigan, you asked the question about every year week, but there were months it was three weeks and overall it worked out to every other week. Is that about right? But in looking at the last couple agendas, we had 40ite els, in the 40 range, and one of the things I've been thinking about is whether we are -- whether it is as efficient to have multiple meeting was 40 or so items, or consolidate those three meetings into two meetings that go a bit longer, because a lot of what we're -- a lot of what is being spread out are consent items anyway, and we tend to kind of use -- how do I say this? We tend to sometimes talk about things that we might otherwise talk about if we had less time or a more packed agenda. I just want to think about that. One way of achieving -- do I need to rephrase that? I was up extremely late reading code. I think that -- anyway, I think that might help us accomplish every other meeting or accomplish every other week more frequently, if we think about moving our agendas back up beyond 40. I don't know that it's -- it sounds counter intuitive when we talk about creating longer agendas, but I don't know that they -- I'm not sure that we are -- anyway, I think I've painfully articulated that point. >> Just a friendly comment, don't pull our items. >> Mayor Adler: What? >> Don't pull the items for discussion. [12:46:59 PM] Just a joke, just a joke. But, mayor pro tem, you did very politely describe the staff comments when we were talking about the advantage of a short agenda with fewer items versus the long item, and we all know that just because there are fewer items on the agenda, doesn't mean it's going to be a short meeting. >> Thank you. Yeah. It would be interesting to see the data and let me say, I'm somebody that asked questions and likes the answer. I say that who is maybe contributing to the issue. >> Mayor Adler: One of the other things that got mentioned. Is some of the folks have -- in the discussion that we do, there's sometimes debate that we reach make that are not necessarily necessary for the actual voting of resolutions. People explained the position that they took or are messaging more generally to the community, and some people have said to me, if we all did that, if all 11 of us did that each time, it would be a really long agenda, so some people feel like they are deferring but then they are also saying they got a chance to explain it. I didn't avail myself of that opportunity as I'm concerned about the time management issue, so maybe there might be a different form or different way for people to be able to do that messaging to the community. I just throw that out, because I've heard that comment as well. Yes? >> I'm wondering if maybe for next year when we -- I'm jumping back to the conversation about meeting every other week instead of having three meetings a month, maybe next year we could look at having the meetings be two a month, given or take because I don't think we can change the schedule for fiscal 7 for this year, for calendar '17. >> Mayor Adler: We could. >> Okay. Well, and let's also think about maybe moving that direction in calendar 18. Maybe that would give us a little bit of time to put some of these additional is efficiencies into place and also decide at the end of December, whether we think we should also go to two a month. [12:49:09 PM] >> Mayor Adler: I think what would be help if, if you could draft a resolution for us that would take everything out of the code, let us establish kind of a procedure rules, that's easier for us to manipulate, and work with, and then if you could record this conversation as best you can for that, and let's then bring that to council. Okay? Sf yes, council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: I just want to comment on the two versus three meetings a month. I think it's very important for us to keep the 10:00 deadline so I wouldn't want to load up two meetings and lose that ability. My -- you know, I may be the only one, but my personal preference is having the shorter meetings rather than load up two meetings so three meetings a month is not of concern to me. I would rather -- I would rather have them shorter. I think that makes more sense. >> Mayor Adler: I would have to think about that. Council member alter? >> Alter: If we were to move to every other week meetings we could put the briefings on the middle meeting and take that time out of our work sessions and out of our council meetings and be able to kind of focus on that and those would be available for everyone who couldn't attend to watch. But that would allow some of that timing to happen while also allowing us to not be focused on agenda every week of the month. >> Mayor Adler: Okay? All right. It is 12:50. City council is going to go into closed section and take up three items pursuant to 55174 of the government code. We're going to take up the following two personnel items. E-2, city clerk. E-2, city auditor -- hold on, hold on. >> I think the question is are you going to come back and do discussion of the pulled items or are you not going to do that? [12:51:12 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Flannigan, you pulled items, do you want us to do that? Do you want to daylight questions? >> Flannigan: Quickly, on the first one, I had a question for real estate. I don't know if they're here. Here she is. It's not a question about the need but more so the process. We've implemented the different process for the planning and zoning and planning development building and I'm curious for this project it does seem it had to be on a certain plot of land why be wouldn't follow a similar process. >> Council member, we also started this process on this tract over five years ago before we came up with this. I think I visited every tract on 183. And the area is trying to find a piece of land that would work. This is kind of a special purpose and for what we were looking for, we felt like that we needed to have more projects under our belt before we tried to put something like this under our new process >> Flannigan: Okay, thank you. Item no. 30, is this is more of a question for my colleagues to understand. Seems like the lower section of allendale is not connected to the upper section of allendale. That's the cemetery right there in that open space. It seems that would be part of the planning area. My instinct if we're doing planning it shouldn't be tied to where neighborhood associations are planned but good planning areas. >> I sent out a map for you all to look at. While rosedale, I don't disagree, that Hancock with be that dlination, what we found, there was a council action back -- it was one of the last ones that happened in 2014 and the direction in 201406-12, this was in June, initiating planning process, council changed the ordinance to make the lines the way they are on here and this got lost in the shuffle when we changed over councils at the end of December '14 and we came in in '15 and it just didn't get made, so, it's -- it's just essentially some clean-up. [12:53:31 PM] >> Flannigan: Thank you very much. >> Yep. >> Mayor Adler: Council member alter, you had pulled something? >> Alter: I meant to pull item no. 23 but the numbers got switched Monday so it came out at no. 24. This is about the expertise available to real estate, and I guess I wanted to start by saying I'm very supportive of of the city taking advantage of this type of expertise and analysis to have data-driven decisions. My questions are to ensure I understand when and how we utilize this information and how we maximize expertise we're leveraging in this contract. So, do we have an existing contract to provide similar services, and what have we done in the past for this type of analysis? "P" mayor, council members, this particular service had been used infrequently in the past and when it was used it was used on a contractual scale that was small enough that it fit within the city manager's authorization, so, we have not had a multi-term contract that was large enough to bring before council, so, this is the first iteration of this contract. As for the types of projects, I turn that over to Mr. Canally. >> As James alluded to, we've used eps to help us on the homestead preservation, housing, real estate, lots of different topics. We felt it was more efficient to get a master contract in place. We do have other contracts in place locally. We've used Texas perspectives who have seen John hockenyost tomorrow who willow come in. We like to have a nice balance to provide a national perspective. When looking at this upcoming work, it is focused on areas of real estate transactions as it relates to zoning matters the last couple weeks, also transactions the city is looking at. [12:55:39 PM] We also, from a economic development perspective, we're looking athe new economic development opportunities we want to make sure we have that expertise on board. Finance, we look at public improvement districts that we evaluate that come to us as well as the county. We need the have the ability to quickly respond to those and housing, housing utilized eps and we believe having us all use that same eps will help the H collaboration between different efforts. >> Can you help me understand when and how it will be decided to utilize this consultant's time? >> I think would would, like other master contracts we have in place, as issues come up, sometimes they come from an item from council. I would say one of the upcoming issues we'll be using it on is the county park redevelopment as we go out and complete that rfp process, we'll have him on board. Usually they are tied to our council initiatives that are either coming from a resolution, or other staff issues that we've brought forward to you, and as we proceed, this is a resource that we need. We'll run that out of the -- out of our -- out of the cfo will kind of keep tabs on that and make sure we are utilizing it, but we also feel it's an option for council's staff. We know that during the last couple discussions on some of these developments, there's been a desire for council members and staff to have a better look at some of the economics of this, and we would have that resource available for that as well. >> Thank you. Would it be possible for my office to get copies of previous reports that they've done for you? This is an issue that I'm really very interested in in making sure that we have the economic knowledge we need and data that we need to make the best decisions possible for our city. So, I would really appreciate that information, if I could see it. >> Absolutely. >> Maybe we can have a continuing conversation about how we're utilizing this that doesn't need to be at work session. [12:57:45 PM] The last thing I wanted to ask is if you could explain to me what this contract is providing that our real estate service office is not able to provide in and of itself. >> So, we can put some of that in writing. Again it's not solely for real estate. It would be for some of the affording housing analysis that we've done. As an example, in the past E pe S, the principal helped on homestead preservation doing the analysis, looking at each strict, looking at how it would -- property values, the inkrent we would be able to capture. Really, in most cases it's augmenting the staff effort. They are staff-led efforts but we sometimes need to bring those to bear to get something done in a quicker matter. >> Thank you, I appreciate talking to you more about this resource. >> Mayor Adler: Greg? Mayor pro tem? >> Tovo: I have a couple questions about the item regarding bowie high school. I don't think we want to get into a discussion since we're past lunch time. I know the trustees voted to purchase the tracts of land to do the expansion for bowie, I'm not sure why we're talking about development, when it sounds like they arrived at a good one with additional tracts and I submitted questions, asking how accountables are accountable to impervious limits. And the issue with the school district. That's an issue that has come up through the years a lot -- about how impervious cover limitses impacted by portables and how we can encourage aid in the case there's portables on campus especially in environmental areas over the years and years, how we could encourage them to move beyond that model [12:59:51 PM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. Now we're going to go in closed section to take up three items pursuant to government code. Two items e-2, e-3 city auditor benefits and item e-4 which is the legal issue related to lake Austin collective and the open meetings act. Without objection, we will now go into closed session. When we come back we'll be coming back to end the meeting. [3:20:45 PM] (Troxclair) We are out of closed session. In closed session we discussed personnel matters and we did not discuss the legal matter that was on the agenda. This meeting of the Austin City Council is adjourned. At 3:21 p.m.