City Council Special Called Meeting Transcript – 12/07/2019 Title: City of Austin Channel: 6 - COAUS Recorded On: 12/7/2019 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 12/7/2019 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [10:12:17 AM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. We have a wonderful and long day in front of us. Today is December 7th, 2019. We have a quorum so we're going to begin this special called meeting, not for action to be taken today, but for the council to be able to hear from the community. I think this is a really important opportunity. You know, when the staff came out -- first the council gave direction back in may based on the conversations that have been happening over the last six, seven, eight years before that, there was a lot of conversation in the community and among various places. When the staff came out with their proposal in October had already adjusted -- [10:13:18 AM] there had been real significant adjustments that have been made in this document since October with the first supplement and the second supplement and I think a large measure of that is in response to the community input that's been received. So this is changing a lot and will continue to do that. So I want to thank everybody for coming here today and over the course of the day. And I want you to know that both the council and the staff are listening, as are your fellow members of the community. We're going to -- usually when we do public hearings like this, there's some measure of informality that we have as we recognize people in accommodations. Given the number of people we have, and the time that we have, I'm going to do this one pretty much straight up. So I'm going to call people in the order that they are given. The one exception for that was a computer glitch from [10:14:18 AM] the clerk's office they told me so there's one person who signed up whose name didn't appear on the form, but I'm going to call that person in the appropriate place when she tried to sign up. Other than that speakers get two minutes to speak. You can also get donated time from up to two people, but it's one minute each if you donate time, which means that anybody can have up to four minutes. Their two minutes and two donated one-minute pieces. If you donate time you're doing that in lieu of speaking so you have a choice. You can either speak for two minutes or you can donate time for one minute. You also have the ability to sit here and listen to people speak and choose not to speak or to donate time if there's a choice that you wanted to make. That said then, colleagues, I would propose that we get right in to hearing from speakers. [10:15:21 AM] >> Tovo: Mayor? If I could make one very, very -- >> Mayor Adler: The time is 10:15 for us to start this meeting. >> Tovo: I wanted to make a couple of very, very brief comments. Thank you for am coulding whether you're here or in the atrium, we participate you being here to -- we appreciate you here. I want to say if you have little ones, there is on-site child supervision. I believe it's in the boards and commissions outside, and as we talked about on Tuesday, we have our mobile van from the animal center here today. So if you need a break from the land development code or if that conversation, it's a great opportunity to go out and see some of the animals that are available for adoption and our goal is to get all of them, with this crowd, both inside and outside, I think we can find families for all of those animals here today. Again, thank you so much for participating. Mayor, I also wanted to call the public's attention to fact that many of us have posted amendments that will be brought forward on Monday, and those are available on the council message board. So if you've never been to that before, if you go to the city's website, [10:16:24 AM] www.austintexas.gov, the most recent post you'll see threads where most of us have bought forward amendments that we would like our colleagues to consider on Monday. So that might be useful as you're preparing your comments for today. But again, thanks for being here. >> Mayor Adler: We also have, and I want to thank the clerk's office for being outside in the lobby area helping people sign up on kiosks and helping people understand rules, if you want to donate time to a speaker you need to come to the clerk down here at this table. That's something that she'll be able to -- they'll be able to handle. If you have any questions about order of process, the clerks are available. We also have translation services available until 3:00 P.M. This afternoon. So anybody that wishes to avail themselves of that opportunity also find the clerk. Let's go ahead and start. I'm sorry? Oh, staff, did you want to [10:17:24 AM] give an opening before we get into the public? >> Yes, we do. Thank you, mayor. Good morning, city manager, mayor and council. Annick Beaudet, co-lead of the land development code revision. Together with Brent Lloyd, we're pleased to be here today. And on behalf of the entire ldc revision team, we're pleased to be here for today's public hearing. Following your may 2nd direction the city manager assembled a multidisciplinary, multidepartmental team to produce a draft code and map responsive to your key policy direction given to us on may 2nd. On October 4th we released a draft code and map that was responsive and then we continued conversation with the community through various methods, one on one meetings, district town halls, public testing, and several open houses. In responses to what we heard and what we understood, we released a supplemental staff report on October 25th and a second [10:18:25 AM] supplemental staff report on November 25th that indicate how we as staff recommend further editing and revising the and for community you input. Staff recommendation has been in those documents. We look forward to hearing from the public today I'm going to hand it over to Brent Lloyd to go over in more detail the item before you this morning. >> Thank you mayor and council and city manager cronk. We're here today as professional staff. Before the hearing starts we want to briefly lay out the items. The first item before you is the land development code revision that was published on October 4th. As annick mentioned, that includes the revised recommendations in the supplemental staff report. And without going into too much detail it's important to understand that the code covers and touches all aspects of land use and development in the city of Austin. And by way of brief summary, [10:19:27 AM] its key components are chapter 1, which is a foundational chapter. That lays a groundwork for the land development code and broadly declares its applicability to all aspects of land development. Includes enabling provisions requiring compliance and enabling staff to enforce and administer the code. The second chapter is a procedural framework for administering the ldc. It establishes notification requirements and procedures for how the city interacts with the public concerning land development. The third chapter is the heart of the code, which is the zoning regulations. Per council's may 2nd direction it corporates a greater mix of land uses into the fabric of the zoning scheme. The fourth chapter covers a variety of general planning requirements that apply to all stages of development, and that includes water quality and drainage provisions that require [10:20:28 AM] redevelopment to manage storm water impacts to a far greater degree than current code in recognition of the challenges that flooding presents to our community. The code also includes corporation of water forward for the city's water goals and creates more environmental lay conscious and resilient development. It increases the nobility of the city -- enforceability of tree regulations, specifically in situations where trees are removed prior to development applications being submitted. And it carries forward Austin's foundational environmental laws and builds on them with regulations that enhance natural functions. The code -- this chapter is significantly expands the available of the affordable housing density bonus and greatly increases the potential of the city to realize income restricted units. And finally the remaining chapters all make significant improvements to existing code in the areas of subdivision, signage, transportation and utilities. [10:21:28 AM] Highlights include greater emphasis on transportation demand management and the incorporation of water forward measures as well as significant changes and improvements to site plan review and permitting requirements. And finally, the second item that's posted before you is amendments to the imagine Austin comprehensive plan and growth concept map. In these amendments embody the concept of missing middle housing per the council's policy direction and affirm the relationship of imagine Austin to the area wide future land use maps, which are incorporated into imagine Austin. So with that we've concluded our staff comments and we thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. I want to remind the public that sign-ups will be open until 3:00 P.M. And then after that point then sign-ups will be cut off. We're going to take a [10:22:29 AM] rolling lunch today so as to give people the opportunity to speak, so colleagues on the council around lunch time, if one or two want to go back and grab something, I would suggest that it's also okay to bring it back out here so that we don't have to take a break. There is an event this evening, the naacp gathering. I think that there are several councilmembers that want to be there for that, so we may take a short dinner recess so that people can go there and then come back. And we can figure that out as we get a little bit closer. All right. With that said, are we ready to go ahead and start? There are some folks that have signed up, many within the first group of 10, that have a video. [10:23:33 AM] By our strict rules these folks would have the -- one person could speak, two people donated time, that means they would have a four-minute block. They have asked for the ability to run I guess a 12-minute video consecutively, which would have some people move up. I've told them no because I want to keep this going, but I want to bring this up to the dais if anybody wanted to change that, we could. Otherwise we will have intervening speakers and then a pause back. Councilmember pool? >> Pool: I understand that the request had been made around about the time that the two-minute -- that the various rules that we're putting in place today were being announced. So I can understand the public's confusion and concern over having prepared something. That our process would be one way and then it's a different way today. So I would like to entertain [10:24:34 AM] that request, the respectful request from the members of the community that asked to be able to show the video uninterrupted. >> Alter: I concur with councilmember pool. >> Mayor Adler: So I will call some of the other speakers that would have been called earlier and I'll have the video then called sometime within the first 10 speakers, but I'm not going to start with the video. So let's then begin with David Guareno? Is he here? And you have time donated from Jim o'quinn? >> [Inaudible - no mic]. >> [Inaudible - no mic]. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. [10:25:35 AM] [Laughter] >> Mayor Adler: Is Kent Trenton Hendrixson here. You have four minutes, sir. >> Good morning, mayor, city councilmembers. My name is David. I'm a leader with central Texas now interfaith, and also a member of the all saints congregation. Francisco Martinez who is a leader with Guadalupe parish, will be speaking to y'all later this morning. Central Texas interfaith is a civic organization made up of 55 community ganizations from all parts of Austin and fast growing central Texas. Some citizens of our member organizations have already been displaced by Austin's runaway growth. These former austinites once added to the city's diversity as working or middle class people, families and disproportionately people of color. This hard experience leads central Texas interfaith to ask our fellow austinites a [10:26:36 AM] profound question: Is the Austin that we are becoming the city that we truly want to be? Central Texas interfaith is here today to help the city council to improve the draft code. We believe the land development code needs to address the following diversity issues before the third reading. Austin needs an inclusive and diverse population and should be welcoming to both established and new residents. Displacement due to skyrocketing land values, housing costs, rents and taxes, must be halted in order to maintain the diversity of our population. Renters should live free of the fear of eviction or displacement caused by the disappearance of affordable housing, particularly mobile home parks, which are often the only option left for low income families. Extra entitlements in residential zoning categories should not be granted by right, but should be calibrated to incentivize the construction of affordable units for rent and sale in all parts of the [10:27:37 AM] city. Home ownership is the foundation of strong families and communities, and remains an aspiration for working and middle class austinites. Home ownership should be an option across all income levels. We austinites are creative people, working together we can find a way to get this done. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause]. Is Michael najas here? Why don't you come on down. We've also found folks that when we have a lot of people speaking, if there's a lot of applause at the end of speakers that also, believe it or not, cumulatively takes it all the way out. So the convention here for folks hopefully we'll do that is to use the international sign for applause, and that lets me call the next speakers and [10:28:38 AM] get the next speakers up. Go ahead, sir. You have two minutes. >> Yes. Mayor, city councilmembers, my name is Michael najas. I'm an economist. Housing prices in Austin are set by supply and demand. The law of supply and demand is 200 years old. There's no monopoly in Austin. Housing pries are set by supply and demand. Increasing supply will lower prices. Some opponents to this new land use code have made a movie that says this is supply side economics and trickle down economics. Those referred to a macro economic tax policy pushed by Reagan in the '80s. It has nothing to do with this law. To my ears it's like confusing Iran contra with contraception. The propagators of this lie should be grouped in with anti-vaccinationers and climate deniers. Austin housing prices are rising automatically. Research linked this kind of [10:29:38 AM] rise in land prices to regulation, changing our laws is appropriate. It specifically mentions delays, multiple approvals, fees and a large minimum lot size in his list of regulations. Regarding affordable housing, the best system known to economists is vouchers. I have many questions about the bonus system in this proposed code. When Metcalf summarized affordable housing research, the top two items on his list are up zoning and reducing minimal standards. Land is expensive right now and having a minimal lot size forces a minimal price on housing, which many in Austin cannot afford. I think the law goes somewhat of the way in that direction. I think it should go more. Austin takes pride in its students, its musicians and its weird. These are not rich people. They are like more than half of Austin renters. I encourage you to pass this law and make Austin affordable for them. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. All right. Let's see if we can get this video up. [10:30:40 AM] Monica Guzman, is Monica Guzman here? >> [Inaudible - no mic]. >> Mayor Adler: And Monica has time donated from Jo Lynn avandano. Is Matthew cross here? Thank you. You can sit down. I just want to make sure you were here. Jackie Goodman is here. Time donated from Cynthia Vasquez. Is Cynthia Vasquez here? Is Michelle Meja here? She's here? Okay. And then what about Carmen Yanez Polito is here. You have time donated from Laura Fleming. [10:31:40 AM] And also from G Fuentes. Got you. So I have two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine 10, 10, 11, 12. And Frances Acuna here. That gets us up to 14, time donated by Erica Reyes. Okay, got you. All right. So I think that gets you to roughly like 15 minutes, 16 minutes total, okay? >> Mayor, I have earned my honor risk, please use it for me as I would for you. >> Certainly. Councilmember, it's good to have you back in this building. Mayor pro tem, it's good to have you back in the building. >> We should also have an additional minute donated to [10:32:40 AM] Frances Acuna by Fabian -- he's an actually speaker in our group. Donated. >> Mayor Adler: Where is that number? Where is he? >> He's 15 and he would like the full two minutes. >> Mayor Adler: We'll call him last and he can give his two minutes then. >> Okay. We'll start with -- if we can start with the Spanish language videos on the flash drive and we'd need interpretation unless the -- it's less than two minutes and then the YouTube link will be the longer video. >>>> Tovo: Mayor, while they're bringing up the video, I want to wish Carmen a happy birthday. [Cheers and applause] >> Thank you, councilmember. [10:33:49 AM] >> Mayor Adler: So do we know how we're going to do the interpretation with the running video? Are you okay with that? [Video playing]. [Laughter] >> I'm Ms. Sanchez and the street that I live on is dove springs. I live off dove springs. And I'm not in agreement with the changes they're going to make because it's a flood zone there. And with those changes it will be a problem and I'm hoping they don't do those changes. Thank you. >> My name is Jose Pena and [10:34:53 AM] I live in south Austin. By pleasant valley. And I'm not in agreement with the code changes. What they're planning. Because in this community we are people that and these changes are going to affect us and our taxes. And we don't have a way to move. And I've lived here for 24 years. And to make those changes, I don't know where I can go live. I'm very stressed about it. I'm very affected by this. >> My name is Anna Rodriguez [10:35:55 AM] and I live parallel to pleasant valley. And I'm not in agreement with these changes because over here we don't have the money for these changes. And we really need -- sorry. We really need you not to make those changes because we don't have the money. To be able to live through those changes. Please don't make the changes, thank you. >> My name is Tanya Vasquez. People know me by my nickname Ta. I recently moved into the [10:36:55 AM] survey 744 area. -- Fate 744 area. After civic over 60 years in the 78702 zip code area. >> My name is Floyd labee and I live on north gate boulevard. That's going to rundberg and north gate, in that area. >> My name is Andrea and I live here in Austin, Texas on Lamar and manchaca. >> My full name is Keisha Roberts and I live at 9120 north gate boulevard. >> So now we're here. And I'm happy. The thing that makes me happy is that when I go to H.E.B., the majority of the customers look like me. That's not what H.E.B. On east seventh looks like. They don't look like me. It's worth me standing here and having a person tell me, [10:37:56 AM] hi, how are you? It's great to see you, you can? And is a familiar face. She knows me. So I miss that over there, but I like what I see here. It's making me feel comfortable so I feel like I'm in a good place. >> I look at Austin, it's very unique, it's weird and very unique. It look like they're trying to change the climate here in Austin. And a lot of people here in Austin, they are passionate. They want change in a positive way, but the city is looking at things in a different way. They have a lot of people coming here from other states and they're moving here to Austin and it's like they're trying to push people out. And to me it's not fair. They should consider the people in Austin first. They should come first, not people from other states. They are the community, they are the citizens, and they have a right to say -- express their opinion and their voice. [10:39:04 AM] >> Repairs that I cannot afford. >> Property values are going up, development and flooding. >> I moved here for my son. So when I first moved here I didn't really realize how expensive it was as a single parent who has a double master's, as a person who is participating in the formal labor market, who is doing everything right, it's still taken me this long to get where I'm at. Knowing what I know now about transition Zones and the land development code, I almost feel trapped in that even if I do find somewhere to live and even though I have succeeded in being able to save this small amount of money, I cannot afford anything beyond 1450 a month. I just can't. >> I don't like the things that -- what's happening to Austin because they are building, they're building downtown hi-rise, and it looks like they're forcing people out. [10:40:05 AM] They're eliminating them like more expensive. We need affordable housing. People need places to live, decent places to live. Not to be forced out by changes and what the city is going to do. A lot of people like homeowners who have their houses, they may have -- I'm saying that I'm vice-president of north gate residential council and we care. We have a place to live. I mean, haca has done a great job of providing -- remodeling and fixing because they want it to last. They want to give our residents a place to give and they have done a lot of things. And we have to fight for it. >> Yeah. It's caused a lot of stress with me personally, with my family, with my children, my grandchildren now. And I'm going to get [10:41:05 AM] emotional because they've grown up in east Austin and they want to come back and live. And they know it's not going to be possible. And I've told my girls, we have two homes in east Austin and both of them are in need of repair. And I've told them if you ever sell these homes you will never be able to purchase them again, never. Now when we have a 1.7-million-dollar home right across the street from us, there's no way. It's not going to happen. So yes, stress, fear, not knowing what's in the future future. And I cannot assure my own kids, my own family, my own friends, oh, we're going to be fine. I can't -- I can't say that. [Applause]. >> Gentrification and [10:42:06 AM] displacement, we're seeing these issues happen all over cities. It's only for the elite, it's only for people who have -- who are millionaires or who can afford to live there. So I think that the city of Austin has to ask themselves, who is this land development code really for? Is it for the elites or is it for the people who are just trying to get by? >> I don't think it would be good because it benefits business. The politicians, they want Austin to look like Manhattan. That is not going to work because Austin is a different land mass than from New York City. New York City is an island, and I don't think it will not work because it will hurt the ecology of the land. You know, it will change it. I don't think it will not work at all. >> You know, while living in [10:43:10 AM] 78702, it was okay. We never really had to fear flooding. The storms, we had some awful storms, but we never really flooded there in the particular area that I was in. But because I work for the school district, when the Halloween flood happened and it really devastated this area, the 44 area, we were impacted as a school district because those are our families. And to know that -- and in hearing their stories of what they had to go through, I had so much fear for them. And you know, knowing that we lost some families to the flood and the children still live in fear when it rains. My daughter was telling me -- I didn't even realize this, she was telling me that when it rains and it storms, one of the schools [10:44:11 AM] actually dims its lights to calm the whole school down. Parents, I've talked to parents now that I've moved into 44, they still fear, and they actually had the city people, engineers, telling them it's going to flood again, we just can't tell you when. So after they went through this horrendous episode with the last flooding, no one could guarantee to them that it wouldn't happen again and what it would look like. And then to hear recently of some of my friends -- and it didn't even rain that hard for that long. And Nuckols crossing flooded and people couldn't get home. And that was the last rain was in this last month. So the fear is still there, the uncertainty is still there. [10:45:12 AM] >> Wow, I'm from New Orleans from Katrina and Rita, and I've been here going on 15 years. And when you have floods, everybody loses everything and then they've got to -- when a person lose everything in a flood, they've got to start all over again. >> I think that the community has always voiced their opinions. I think that they've always had a voice in this, but they have been unheard intentionally. >> We actually went to talk to the mayor -- this was like seven years ago, different mayor, and we asked him, you know, how are you going to work with us as families that have lived in this zip code for so many years. How are you going to work with us? How are you going to support us so we can stay in our neighborhood? I mean, because we were all stressing out, what were we going to do? People that didn't even live in Austin, they were coming from out of Austin, cough state, buying all these -- [10:46:13 AM] out of state, buying all these properties, so we were addressing that with the mayor and he goes, well, y'all don't like change? You're telling me not to help change Austin for the better? And then he made such a comment that I just wanted to just jump out at him because he said, I go to all of y'all's fiestas. What else do you want? And before his term ended, he planned to have 25,000 new people live in central Austin. That was his plan. Did he succeed? Yes, obviously. And it's grown. >> I want to say to look at the neighborhood and the zoning, the neighborhoods that people live here, don't change the zoning. Let the people decide. [10:47:15 AM] Changing the zoning that they'll change the value of the property. And they will build buildings and force people out. >> Does the community that you're going to impact, do they understand what's coming? Do they understand what is going to happen to themselves and to their loved ones? And if they don't, how can the city make them understand and give them the time that they need to be able to participate in this process? >> There's ways to do it. They should probably go out and ask some actual organizers that do this kind of work. Help me. Because I appreciate you went to school, you have all this background. That's wonderful. But when it comes to people, you don't know how to build that kind of relationship with people. >> I want the city to slow down. I want the city to show an equitable process of engagements. I want the city of Austin to try better, to reach people [10:48:16 AM] who don't speak English. I want the city of Austin to be able to understand in a number define what affordable is to somebody who is on a low income. And I want the city of Austin to listen to people who are on locations express how this land development code is going to impact their health. >> Because everybody can't afford to pay no $800 in rent. And it's hard. It's hard on some people. >> I just want my community at north gate and rundberg, to be safe. Give people a sense of pride that they care about their neighborhood. And you do change the city. Get ideas from the community, talk to the people, because we -- we know what's going on in our neighborhood. You don't. >> Like I said, for [10:49:16 AM] everybody to come together and see what we can bring to the table and see how we could solve these problems. [Applause]. >> Mayor, would you be open to just using the remainder of our time to say some words on behalf of the group. >> Mayor Adler: You have a little over two minutes, yes. >> Thank you. So as you can see, we are a collective and this is the struggle with, you know,, individuals speaking. We do as much as we can to reach people and to listen to folks. And we're incredibly concerned about this process, about how much even the most informed and privileged and organized communities have been shut out of the process. We use our networks across the city, and these folks understand. You don't have to be an economist, which I've always studied elaborate economic policy, neo liberal policy, to know that just adding [10:50:16 AM] supply does not bring the house down. Otherwise we wouldn't have 18 million vacant units -- 18 million more households households -- I'm sorry, 18-million-dollar units than households in the country, many in the most desirable city. 32,000 vacant dwelling units in the city of Austin. It's not about supply. It's about who's struggling for housing. I appreciate councilmember Casar -- mayor pro tem garza'bringing forward the equity overlay idea, but I want to encourage you all that equity does not mean degrading public process, people and the environment, who have a good quality of lie. It means increasing protections for the people who haven't had it. It means increasing environmental protection in east and east Austin. It means -- east and southeast Austin. It means protecting and proving. Ask Matt Mccarthy. Fitterring is a mid, it will never work. You will never be able to produce any units as affordbly as the ones that you have right now. Keisha talking about $800 a month and people can't pay [10:51:18 AM] it, that's haca. That's housing authority. That's your subsidized public housing. You had evictions from foundation communities this year for people who couldn't pay 7, $800 for a single room occupancy. And yet you have rental houses, a fourth to a third in the neighborhoods gave works in, a third of the single- family dwelling units are rented by people not protected by home homestead,, and they have landlords charging them less per square foot than our subsidized housing because they are in it for the shelter in the community, not for the profit. Slow this down, give us 180 days. You have an incredibly resourced community to help you find the solutions. Thank you. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: The next speaker, William Hudson. >> Kitchen: Mayor, I'd like to ask Carmen to send us a copy of the video if [10:52:18 AM] you haven't already. >> And we also have a policy paper we'll send you, but we don't want to take your attention away from the crowd. >> Mayor Adler: Is William Hudson here? Yes? Come on down, sir. You have donated time from Susan dial and from Douglas Hanson. Come on down. You have four minutes. At the other podium, dawn Lewis, is she here? You have time donated from Mary Farro? Got you, thank you. You will have three minutes. Go ahead, you have four minutes, sir. >> I am William Hudson and I live on great oaks parkway, a transition zone between mopac and shoal creek boulevard just north of 45th street. I do recognize a critical need for a revised code, but I am not ashamed of having invested a considerable percentage of our life [10:53:19 AM] savings into our retirement home that we are now trying to protect. My problems with the current proposals are: One, the aggressive timetable now being pursued by the council cannot achieve a city- wide consensus. Two, the one-size-fits-all approach ignores our own unique circumstances a as they apply to great oaks parkway and the adjacent cul-de-sacs. Three, no zone change notifications are planned to individual homeowners. Four, the city claims that we are not entitled to a rezoning appeals process. Our street is close to shoal creek and is extremely flat. In mega downpours the rainwater has nowhere to go, creating flooding which has been known to enter residences. Any increase in housing [10:54:21 AM] density accompanied by a relaxation of impermeable cover ordinances would only make this problem worse. We are surrounded by heritage trees. Any development of the area would threaten these precious assets regardless of any protective ordinances that are claimed by the city's environmental custodians. Our streets are quiet and children are able to play on them safely. Density development would exacerbate traffic flow and make them significantly less safe. Families would no longer want to live there. The mobility plan designation of 45th street as a primary corridor was a proposal that depended on further analysis. This was never completed. Lastly, the inclusion of [10:55:22 AM] great works parkway as a transition zone exceeds the plan's criteria regarding distance from a primary corridor, that is from 45th street. Thank you for allowing me to speak to you and a special thanks to those councilors who continue to support our neighborhood. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Is Angela Benavides Garza here? Why don't you come on up? You have three minutes. >> Good morning. I'm dawn Lewis and I'm here to talk to you about open spaces and parkland as you consider the revision of the land development code. And it's an honor to serve as councilmember alter's appointee to the parks board and to serve as the chair and I'm grateful to all of you who appointed your delegates to the parks board. I have some great colleagues to work with. So parks and green space play an important role in making Austin the special [10:56:23 AM] place it is today. Our north Austin plan -- imagine Austin plan states that as we grow into a more compact city we had need more parks distributed across the urban spaces. As you go through the process of making changes to adjust to Austin's growing pains, it is important not to forget the importance of preserving and protecting our parks and green spaces and providing urban parklands that will be accessible to everyone. A crucial tool that we need to prosecutor is the parkland dedication ordinance. The ordinance was adopted in 1985. It was modified in 2016 after two years of public input, including a public hearing and a consultation with stakeholder groups, including the real estate council, the downtown Austin alliance, the Austin builders association and the Austin neighborhood council. It's working. In our parks board recently unanimously passed a resolution asking that council maintain this ordinance in its current form. Since its inception, parkland dedication has added over 1700 acres of new [10:57:25 AM] parkland to our city and it has done so in a manner that has had minimal impact on development. Only six percent of parkland dedication cases resulted in land since 1985. So my point is that the ordinance is working, it's helping with imagine Austin. With this land development code it is really crucial that you put parks and green spaces and open land really top on your list. And I want you to think about when we plan for the future fourier grandchildren and our children, I want to think about climate change and what a crucial, crucial role that parks play in mitigating that. They help with floods, create urban canopies, you have pollen pollinators, you have cooling spaces. They're just crucial. We can't not do that to our grandchildren and children and put as much green space and parkland that we can into Austin. And the parkland dedication [10:58:26 AM] ordinance plays a really crucial role and we ask that you maintain that and to really do what you can to make sure that our city prioritizes and focuses on these places. Thank you. I appreciate your time. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. I've been asked by my colleagues to try to speed up the breaks in between speakers to I'll call multiple speakers in a row in order and if you could try to find your way down that will also enable people out in the atrium, if they hear their name they get to come in too. So the next speaker is going to be Ms. Garza. After her Fred Lewis will be coming up to speak. After that, Stacy live steep stay and then king and then Fabian montmayer. Mr. Lewis, you have time donated. Is Hadder here? No? What about Paula Rene mimm? [10:59:30 AM] You will have three minutes, Mr. Lewis. You have two minutes. >> Thank you for this. I know this is a tough thing to in my research, I know a lot of you know I'm working quite a bit. We were asked to take a break in December. We have decided in our community to work. I'm going to be -- what I have found in my research, enough people out there just don't know what's going on. And we need more time to give them that input, to get input from them to see how we can help each other and work together. We have two things. We need to make real affordable housing and we want our families back in a community, not more animals than families. We want families back and we want them protected as we move forward and we are not seeing both those things happen right now. And I know everybody has done a lot of work, I know because I have been working with developers, how can we create inclusive solutions such as moving people out of apartments that are breaking down and getting them in a better solution as well. [11:00:31 AM] We're coming up with inclusive solutions, but where we need the help is we're trying to push this through in a time families should be thinking about spending time with their families during the holidays. And we really need a little more time so that we can get more inclusive input in there across the board. And this is just based on my research and asking questions. Enough people just don't know what's going on. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thatch. Is Stacy -- thank you very much. Is Stacy lifestay here? Come on down. Mr. Lewis is next, he has three minutes. If Paul Kevin Smith and Anissa Castillo could start moving down. You have three minutes. >> Good morning. The first thing I wanted to talk about is that we obviously are going to have a problem with affluent people moving here and with changes in our code in displacement and it's going to be made worse. [11:01:31 AM] So it isotable that the city has no displacement program. It has no displacement staff. And it has no displacement budget. And that is despite the fact that we've had a 10-1 council for five years. We asked your staff, the people's plan, if they could put displacement on the calendar with codenext and we were told no. So the first thing you need to do is slow this down so that you have an anti-displacement program in effect before you adopt the code. Otherwise you are going to displays even more people. Second -- [applause] The mayor and some of you said you couldn't do a comprehensive revision of the code if people had their protest rights. That is not accurate. You can do a code and override people's protest rights, but you have to get [11:02:31 AM] nine votes. You actually have to create a community consensus. The second thing is if you had a community consensus in which people mostly agreed with the code, you wouldn't have 7500 protests filed, which is how many have been filed to date and will probably have 10,000 by the end of the year. [Applause] The third thing is the city citizens respect your legal department, they respect you, mayor, as a real estate lawyer. You have told them they have no protest rights. And you have said it definitively and repeatedly. So what I want to know is if and when a court rules people do have protest rights, are you going to let people file them after third reading when they've relied on your misstatements to not file them, or are you going to say like the city usually does, sorry you listened to us, you've waived your [11:03:33 AM] rights. [Applause] I think good faith -- I think good faith and respect for your citizens, if you are determined people have protest rights after you've said they don't, that you should allow them the opportunity to file. And third, lastly, I want to thank the four councilmembers who have worked for something you all should have worked for, which is a consensus code. So I want to thank councilmembers tovo, alter, pool and kitchen for trying to work together so that we have a code that we all could support. [Applause] Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: And then after you speak, we have David king. Is Mr. King here? You have time donated from Karen Kreps. Is Karen kimmry here? [11:04:34 AM] -- Kreps here? You will have two minutes. >> Good morning, Stacy lifestay and I'm speaking on behalf of the Rainey neighborhood. I had a chance a couple weeks ago to visit with land development code staff because I wanted to speak with them to try to understand the thinking behind their recommendation for unlimited F.A.R. For the Rainey area. And what I learned during that discussion is that staff was very diligently trying to achieve the objectives set forth for them for affordable housing. And what I also learned is that they didn't necessarily look at the unique situation that Rainey has and the challenges, and 2 challenges that we have when we made their recommendation. While we are not necessarily opposed to having the need and the necessity to revisit the city's land development code, we are opposed to unlimited F.A.R. In the Rainey area. I think that we can all agree that Rainey is a unique piece of land [11:05:37 AM] situated between I-35, lady bird lake, waller creek, Cesar Chavez, and it's not currently connected to the rest of the downtown grid. I think we can also all agree that there has been quite a bit of development already, a tremendous amount that's already on the books and approved, and we have all of this coming our way without yet a comprehensive mobility plan and the necessary infrastructure. So the neighborhood feels that development has clearly outpaced the infrastructure that we need and the planning that we need, and we also feel like we're just -- it's time that we get caught up. And we're struggling to figure out how the city plans to do that with everything that's currently on the books and been approved. So we feel that recommending unlimited F.A.R. For Rainey is actually an irresponsible act as this time. So here's the ask. [11:06:39 AM] For our unique piece of downtown -- [buzzer sounding] -- We request you not approve unlimited F.A.R. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Thank you. Mr. King, you are up. You have two minutes. Is falian Montemayor here? Did you want to speak or were you part of the other group? >> Make make. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Paul Kevin Smith here? You will be up next and have two minutes. Mr. King, two minutes. >> Good morning mayor pro tem, mayor pro tem and councilmembers. As Austin reforms its land development code and zone, I hope you will consider the results of a study by a doctoral student at M.I.T., the impractical of up zoning that reduced parking requirements in Chicago neighborhoods in 2013 and 2015. To see if it had any impact on housing development. [11:07:39 AM] The study also analyzed building permit data in upzoned areas between 2010 and 2018 before, while and after upzonings took place. And here's what the study found. Robust increases in values on parcels that received a boost in allowed building size and increases in property values indicating that upzoning increased prices of existing housing units. Okay, so let me say that again. [Laughter] Upzoning increased prices of existing housing units. [Applause] The land development reforms, however, had no impact on the number of newly permitted dwellings over five years. So it didn't increase supply either. [Applause] The study concluded that the short-term local level impacts of upzoning are higher property prices, but no additional housing construction. [11:08:40 AM] Why would Austin behave any differently than Chicago? We're weird, but not that weird. [Laughter] [Applause] Why rush to enact the massive citywide blanket upzoning. Staff has indicated the city must carry forward the current code well into the future. We have time to transition to the new code and avoid the negative impacts from massive citywide blanket upzoning. Please focus on robust sustained anti-displacement programs. [Buzzer sounding] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: After Mr. King speaks, then it's going to be Paul Kevin Smith for two minutes, but then Anissa Castillo, Tyler Markham and Gerard Kinney will be the people next. >> Good morning, mayor Adler [11:09:40 AM] and members of city council. Paul Kevin Smith. I first moved to Austin in 1980. I'm extremely concerned about global warming, this is the biggest threat our planet is facing now and into the future. I support the proposed land development code revision allowing for denser development in the central city particularly near major transit corridors that will allow austinites to take public transportation and walk. Allowing for denser development will also provide room for more Austin newcomers who live in central city rather than pushing them into the suburbs. Austin's average per capita footprint is 15 metric tons per year per person. Once the city passes the density of 3,000 people per square mile, per capita emissions tends to -- any further increases should continue to lower emissions. [11:10:41 AM] The U.S. Could achieve half the carbon reductions need to do hold global temperatures to a rise of two degrees celsius. However, the benefits of reducing carbon output through a denser central city may be off set by increased suburban sprawl. This speaks to the need to make room for newcomers so they are not forced to live in far-flung suburbs. I encourage you to support the proposed land development code for the sake of the environment. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Anissa Castillo and after her Carlos Chavez. Is he here? You will have two minutes. Is Mike gorse here? You will be next. You have time donated from Tyler Markham. Is he here? Yes? You will have three minutes. Go ahead. >> Good morning, mayor Adler, good morning councilmembers. My name is Anissa Castillo and I'm here representing the saint John neighborhood association park committee [11:11:42 AM] in district 4. And I'm here to strongly recommend to council that we maintain the existing parkland dedication ordinance. You already heard a little about this today. One of the chances our district faces is parkland deficiency and access to parks. What the existing ordinance is a tool, it's a tool that helps acquire parkland and it's a tool that helps make connections to parkland. The current ordinance supports the policy goal that every Austin resident be within a quarter mile walk or a half mile walk to a park. And this is so vital for the growth and the density that's coming here. Our neighborhood would not be supportive of any proposal which would weaken or limit the city's ability to acquire parkland in any location that needs it. St. John pocket park in the St. John neighborhood is a reality now. But the best thing about it and in listening to everyone here this morning so far is [11:12:44 AM] the community the pocket park brings together. This is what our parks do across the city. We have to continue to have that access, we have to continue to be able to acquire parkland. I want it to -- to St. John park. Please make this happen, it's good for the community, it's good for our health and thank you for your time today. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Chavez, you have two minutes. And then Mike gorse has three minutes. Gerard Kinney, is he here? Sorry. There you are. And then after him Brendan Edmunds will be next. Go ahead, sir. >> Hi, good morning, Carlos Chavez, a student at U.T. And I do not come to subvert this process. I have lived in district 3 for three years just off lake shore and pleasant valley. I come from a working class [11:13:47 AM] background, from anahuac, east of Houston. I have truly affordable rent. I pay 475 a month. I started out at 450 two years ago. People come to Austin seat belting opportunity and their dreams -- seeking their opportunity and dreams. In just a few years this former sleepy town has turned into the most expensive city in Texas. I think we need to adopt pragmatic forward seeing policies addressing the housing shortage. By and large I support the land development code. For too long have lower and middle class families been pushed out to suburbs. If we do not act, we risk pushing out a broad swath of people who cannot imagine calling themselves austinites. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Mr. Gorse, you have two minutes. Mr. Kinney, if you would come to the other podium. Brendan Edmonds, is he here? You're on deck. Mr. Gorse, go ahead, two [11:14:48 AM] minutes, sir. >> Okay, thank you, council. I'm Mike gorse, I live in the brentwood neighborhood. I bought a condo about five years ago. I feel like my situation is kind of analogous so what's going on in this room. If you got here at 8:00 yesterday morning like me, you got signed up earlier, but if you didn't, you signed up this morning, today, you are waiting until late in the afternoon if you get to speak at all. That's kind of like trying to find a house in Austin. If you got here 30 years ago, it was one thing. [Laughter] But if you are like me, like, you know, there were four different units that I tried to buy before I found one. One of them sold in a day, one of them I lost to a cash offer, another one the same thing happened, then finally I got one so that was good. What I want to say is that I -- you know, I could potentially be in the city for another 30 or 40 years so I think I might see things from a different angle from some people. I wanted to ask council to make a decision that the next generation will see as [11:15:50 AM] having been the right decision for our city. And I also want to say that our choice isn't between staying the same versus changing, since things have been changing and devolving over decades as it is with the current code and that will happen in one form or another whether we change our code or not. And things are interconnected in various ways. As far as transition Zones, I see them as opportunities for people to be able to live near mass transit. That -- and that doesn't mean that everyone who lives there is going to take -- to take the bus 100% of the time and not own a carral of the time. That's not something anyone thinks. But on the other hand, I remember being at a neighborhood association meeting a couple years ago and there was a couple talking about how they only had to have one car because they lived in brentwood and they thought that was good. I would like for more people [11:16:51 AM] to have -- [buzzer sounding] Thank you. Was that three minutes? >> Mayor Adler: That was two minutes, but that's how much time you had. That was the full measure of your time. Thank you for coming and speaking. The next speaker is Mr. Kinney. You also have two minutes. Brendan Edmunds two minutes. Richard rise, you have donated time. You will have three minutes when you come up. >> Thank you, mayor and council. Gerard Kinney here. I'm here wearing two hats. One is just as a citizen, also representing scenic austinen scenic Texas. We're concerned we have not been presented a copy of the language you will be voting on for signage in the current effort. We request that. The -- our goal, as you know, we hope you do nothing to prevent the original [11:17:51 AM] council expressed goal of eventually eliminating billboards in Austin and that you do nothing to allow digital off-premise signage which would strengthen the billboard industry's efforts in court to be able to have visual billboards. As a person from my neighborhood, which is cherry wood, I'm -- I have a couple of concerns, specific concerns. As you know, I'm actually a very avid proponent of urban development, quality urban development, but I don't think you are doing enough to actually encourage mixed use dense development on the corridors including our corridors, but you are doing too much to allow density to occur within the neighborhood. And so my specific suggestion right now, just a simple suggestion is do more to encourage the development on the corridor, but only upzone the properties that are actually on the corridor [11:18:52 AM] and delay the upzoning for the second tier of projects allowing a more incremental approach giving folks in that second tier a time to adjust over time to determine whether they want to stay or not stay, and not have the leap-frogging that I know is going to occur. Developers are going to see that property back in the neighborhood, buy that property, redevelop that before it happens on the corridors. So thank you. [Buzzer sounding] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Brendan Edmunds and then Richard wise will have three minutes. After that is rich Brock here? Why don't you come on down and get ready. Is bill spiesman here? You have donated time. You will have three minutes. Maya pilgrim here? You'll be up after that. [11:19:55 AM] Is Zach schlacter here? >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Mayor Adler: Let's begin with Brendan. >> Thanks for having me. >> Mayor Adler: Two minutes. >> Okay. I live in district 10 in the Enfield transition zone and I'm here to speak on behalf of my family and neighbors as well as other people living in similarly unwalkable transition Zones. One of my main things is the transition zone has been five lots deep where it's a little over a mile to the nearest school, park, grocery store. The zone is justified by a single bus line, the 18 bus that services none of these places. I'm fortunate it takes my approximately ten minutes to drive downtown to my office. I took the 18 bus to test it and see what the experience is like and it took almost 50 minutes. It's unlikely I or other will take the bus and not everybody in the transition zone lives downtown. I wouldn't have an issue with the density if there [11:20:56 AM] were walkable amenities or a viable transit option, but I don't take comfort in the hopes pitched ten years way and only adding more cars to the streets by taking off-street parking requirements since the current public transit option is not realistic and people will continue to own their own car. I'm done complaining and I'll try to propose a few ideas or solutions. My ideas is similar to the last gentleman, buffer the transition Zones one lot deep where the properties facing the corridor and don't go five lots deep into unwalkable established neighborhoods like the Enfield transition zone. Consider making added depth in the future penetration, the neighbors conditional on operational transit system, not a promise subject to 10 to 20 years of uncertainty. If you build it, they will come and I think the city should have to deliver the goods first on the transit. [Cheers and applause] And lastly, I'm under the assumption that the code will go through and I'd like to suggest that sidewalk [11:21:57 AM] funding be added to the 2020 transit bond and give transit Zones -- give priority so that -- sorry. Give priority to transition Zones so the sidewalks are built first in these transition Zones. I would also note streets like mine are 24 feet wide. [Buzzer sounding] Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, sir. >> Mayor? >> Alter: Thank you for coming to testify. If you are not already in touch with my office, if you could do so so we can further this conversation. We're very focused on that area. >> Sure. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Mr. Wise, you are going to have -- >> You should all have this flyer. >> Mayor Adler: Then Richard Brock, bill spiesman, Maya pilgrim. Go ahead, sir, three minutes. >> Mayor and council, Richard wise, a local architect and speaking on behalf of 200 academy, just south of Riverside off congress. This code rewrite is a huge task and I thank you for [11:22:57 AM] your leadership in trying to craft a code that can allow us to code while preserving and fostering creative culture. 200 academy offers a chance to bring back a vital part of that culture while adding compatible residential density desperately needed in the urban core. As part of the new code revision, I urge you to consider removing this historic property from the fairview park. The academy was first developed at the terrace motor court in 1950s. Willie Nelson brought the property and opened the Austin opera house that kicked off Austin's reputation as the live music capital of the world. In 1954 studios were built on this site and is still in operation today. In 1986, the same view the fair view nccd overarea was passed, Stevie ray Vaughn recorded live at the opera house. On a stage that's still standing but silenced by zoning overlay that restricts live music and [11:23:58 AM] limits development potential on this site. While the base remains -- the overlay limits the site to two stories 35 feet and a .35 F.A.R., less than our current single-family regulations. All of the parcels to the west of this property have already redeveloped up to 85 feet along congress. In the current draft, 32 of the 40 residential properties on east side of the property, the very properties that the nccd was designed to protect, are being removed from the f25 overly and upzoned to greater heights and density than is allowed on this 4.6-acre site. 200 academy meets all the criteria set out in the ldc code for corridors and centers, urban core, well connected streets, transit connectivity and high opportunity areas and is not vulnerable to displacement yet being held to a 1986 ordinance restriction counter to Austin's future. We need to take great care in crafting a code that will move us forward and not contribute to the loss of our cultural identity. [11:24:59 AM] 200 academy is a rare chance to help Austin change back and fulfill its December time donated my while adding density to the urban core. I thank you for your service and hope you will consider removing 200 academy and I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this before the code is codified. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Brock, you have two minutes. Bill spiesman. Is bill here? Hang on. Why don't you come on up. And you have -- you'll have three minutes. Go ahead, two minutes. >> Mayor, council, thanks forgiving me my two minutes. I want to begin by letting you all and everyone in the room know how fortunate I feel to own a home in brentwood, but I would not describe myself as being particularly elite. I just got here early and put in a bit of sweat equity. I purchased the same entitlements and protections that my neighbors or any [11:26:02 AM] other owner did. Things like setbacks, lot size, height restrictions and compatibility standards matter and factor into the quality of life in brentwood. If those things must change, I believe they have to change uniformly across the city of Austin with no one getting a pass, and the other way is likely not legal and certainly isn't moral or ethical. So what I want is I want to be treated equally under the law, which in this case is the existing ldc. I would suggest equal treatment I'm asking for is inherent in the existing ordinance and state law. Zoning my property differently does not meet the standard of equal treatment. I'm not a lawyer, but I still believe what I just said. I also want equal treatment for my neighborhood. According to city staff, 3% of the entire city is what's being proposed to be upzoned or to create the missing [11:27:02 AM] middle. So it's 3% citywide, but 10% of brentwood has been captured as r4 or rm1 for that purpose. So 3% citywide, but 10% in Austin. I would suggest the 7% overreach there could have been avoided if you had looked a little closer at the legally adopted brentwood neighborhood plan as it relates to the corridor boundaries and the single-family land youth. -- Uses. Finally, I want equal treatment for everyone in the city. Right now you are on the cusp of updating this land code -- [buzzer sounding] -- Sorry. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Thank you. [Applause] Go ahead, you have three minutes. Go ahead. >> Good morning, mayor, city councilmembers. Bill spiesman, president of the brentwood neighborhood association. I would like you to rethink your effort to push through [11:28:05 AM] this controversial land development code. The major problem with the code under consideration, it's incomplete and not based on comprehensive land use policy. It's chock full of cherry picked pieces of proposals such as transition Zones which imagine zone were buffer Zones with compatibility standards to protect from overdevelopment. The proposed code now turns this concept on its head. Now proposed transition zone is a cancer that eats into the neighborhoods. The proposed code is inadequately accounts you're accounts for what currently exists on the ground. Brentwood has done more to accommodate density than any other neighborhood in district 7, yet the proposed code slaps up as much zoning in our neighborhood as any other. And according to the previous speaker, it's even more than the -- than a lot of the neighborhoods in Austin. Since there is no underlying policy for this new code, it will be full of unintended [11:29:06 AM] consequences. For example, aid projections 80,000 students ten years from now. Modeling of the citywide effects of an early version of the proposed code showed ten-year projections of under 40,000 students due to displacement of families with children. That's 50% loss in families. This is not a city policy. It's an unintended consequence of the code without any underlying policy. The problem has not been addressed. It has not gone away. The city has just put their head in the sand and stopped modeling these effects. With lack of further modeling, we know of other problems coming. The lack of emergency vehicles, access to streets without onsite parking, where onsite parking is no longer required. Look at Rainey street. The fire chief highlighted three fires where trucks could not respond because of parked vehicles. They couldn't enter the neighborhood. Responding firemen had to grab fire extinguishers and [11:30:06 AM] run in to take care of the fires which northly were not structural fires. Other problems, how do we get our garbage collected when there is no curbside space without a car parked in it? What about water and sewer capacity? The new code requires these. Good government requires good comprehensive policy. It's incumbent on the city council to develop a comprehensive land use policy and only then establish a code that enables that policy. We need to go back to imagine Austin and the neighborhood plans. We need to develop a policy and a code with all interested parties at the table. Brentwood has done this for years, negotiating with developers and neighbors to find common ground and acceptable compromise. The city council and the city can do this as well. [Buzzer sounding] Right now we're headed down sixth street at 90 miles per hour with a bucket on the head. We have to stop the madness. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, sir. [Applause] Ms. Pilgrim will speak and you have four minutes to [11:31:07 AM] speak. Four minutes. Then Timothy bray, is Timothy here? Mr. Bray? No? What about Tommy it's Ates? Here? Come on down. After he speaks it's going to be Albert mizenbach, Scott turner, Kimberly Levinson, grecia white and Chesney Floyd. You have four minutes. >> Maya pilgrim, I live in district 7. This is [inaudible] Gutierrez from district 1 and Zach from district 9. We're here in support of the testimony and sentiment. This process has not been at all equitable nor has it effectively engaged those under threat of being pushed out of their homes with few options left in Austin. [11:32:07 AM] The equity office and community organizations must be involved. Upzoning and density do not equal affordability. I'm going to say that again. [Applause] Upzoning and density do not equal affordability. As Carmen pointed out, we don't have a housing low-income shortage. I did not say affordable housing. I said low-income housing because that went missing well before the missing middle. Without attention to protecting and growing low-income housing, which you didn't do by approving the domain at Riverside, you will continue the disastrous trends on communities of color in Austin whose neighborhoods, as you heard, are becoming more and more unwelcoming to them. If you realized you didn't get something right in two years, how do you think you are going to get it right in an even shorter period of time? [Applause] This ridiculous fast tracking flies in the face [11:33:09 AM] of priorities of affordability, health and environment and a government that works for all. We hope that you do right by our most vulnerable community members to stand to lose the most from this process. [Applause] Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Bray, do you want to come up and speak? You have time donated from Pete Gilchrist. Is Pete here? Gilchrist? Yes. Okay. Thank you. You will have three minutes, Mr. Bray. Tommy Yates will be up next. Let's go ahead. >> Hello, councilmembers. I'm here to talk about the character of the city and the nature of change. Change isn't always good and it isn't always bad, but it is inevitable. Even if we don't change the code, the city will continue to change. If we don't change the code. All big problems will continue to get worse. Property taxes and rents will keep going up, suburban sprawl will add commuters to [11:34:09 AM] highways, pollute our water sources and destroy green land. The train is moving, the hole gets deeper. It's going to take drastic act and soon to turn this train around. Change is a natural part of life. It can be good and bad. People grow up you, get married and divorced, have kids, kids move out, get older and need care. The average person moves 111 times in their life. We are talking about people already within the city. People whose life circumstances are changed. Electrical I or old enough or privileged enough to have bought a house 30 years ago. The majority of austinites are renters, renters who rent all types of housing from single-family homes. We have to be sure we create affordable housing, allow housing to become affordable every time and people of all incomes are able to move into neighborhoods. Change, it can be good, it can be bad. We've doubled in population every 20 to 30 years since 1860 and when it comes to [11:35:10 AM] housing and transportation we'll continue to change. Right now we're making it worse. A third of our growth will be from austinites having children. We are changing in the wrong direction. That is in large part because of current outdated urban exclusionary code. Is question is will we adapt and push in a way that's as good as possible or stop it and let us overwhelm us? We are a Progressive, open-minded city. Our codes reflect that. Right now it doesn't. That needs to change and I hope you will take this once in a generation opportunity to change it. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Tommy Yates is going to speak. Albert mizenbach? You have time donated from Megan mizenbach. Is Megan here? Thank you. And also from deton. You have four minutes, Mr. Mizenbach. On deck is Scott turner, Kimberly and Gracia white. [11:36:12 AM] >> Legal low, Tommy Yates and I am a board member of friends of Hyde park neighborhood association in district 9. My family has been in Austin since the 1800's. I happen to be lucky to go to U.T. And I -- of course I work now and live in Hyde park and live in the Adu. I really enjoy living in my accessory dwelling unit. It has all the comforts of home and allows me to be close to transit and I really enjoy, you know, being able to go back and forth from home to work and also go to all the little, you know, signature Austin shops, you know, on Duvall as well as on Guadalupe. I really enjoy that ads provide economic and racial and class diversity in our innercity neighborhoods and I really am hoping that, you know, Austin continues that housing structure as well as [11:37:13 AM] ads contribute to our overall housing goals as well as other missing middle products. As the friends of Hyde park association, we are asking that Hyde park being included in the new land development code and that Hyde park is included in the affordable housing requirements that other city neighborhoods are part of. And I am hoping that the city is able to have a land development code that allows for, you know, future generations to enjoy of the Austin we love and treasure. Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Mr. Mizenbach, you have four minutes. Is Scott turner here? Come on down to this podium. You have time donated from David Glenn and also from David -- from David Hartman. You also have four minutes. >> Mr. Mayor? Chair, if I may, so I know there are folks in the room, we have a variety of abilities and/or [11:38:14 AM] disabilities. I have hearing trouble and to I have this handy device I'll put in so I can hear everybody, but when you guys clap loudly, it basically explodes my eardrum. Aside from the time factor, if we could refrain from clapping, it is really is physically painful, I would really appreciate that. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Mizenbach, four minutes. Go ahead, sir. >> Honorable mayor and councilmembers, Albert mizenbach. I lived in Austin 45 years. I'm married to Megan. She was born here. We live in the home her parents built in 1953. Barbara Jordan wrote that a community is formed by the willingness of each of us to uphold the common good. I especially want to thank the councilmembers who upholding the common good. That includes Alison alter, Leslie pool, Kathie tovo, and Ann kitchen. [11:39:15 AM] But the majority of this council who are ignoring the needs of those who will be displaced by this code, I beg you to question your assumptions. Is your assumption that the mandate for maximum density is absolute? Is it that you do not need to honor existing agreements between the city and neighborhoods, or is it that you can -- you feel you should cancel individual property rights by fiat? These assumptions were hard wired into the initial code by excluding certain stakeholders from this basic design. Unlike in 1984, all stakeholders participated from the beginning and the code received unanimous approval. Something that this code will never receive. This has not been a democratic process. That code change in 1984 was [11:40:15 AM] a democratic process. Well, you do have the opportunity if you are willing to listen to all stakeholders, there is still the opportunity to create a code that will serve a common good. Civilization is maintained by nurturing long-term relationships in it. This is what stable neighborhoods are about. But treating current Austin residents and long-time residents is a clog in an urban political machine will leave a bitter after taste, it's manifestly unjust. Honorable mayor and councilmembers, you sacrifice much to serve the people of Austin. But will your conscience easily bear the damage this code leaves behind? Should it? The displacement of current dwellers on the land by [11:41:17 AM] powerful, aggressive interests has a long and sad history in America. Do you want to be remembered for continuing that history? Thank you for listening and thank you especially, councilmembers Alison alter, Leslie pool, Kathie tovo, and Ann kitchen. Your courage in standing up to overwhelming opposition is personally inspiring to me and to many he others. Don't give up. [Applause] I trust that Barbara Jordan would agree. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Turner, four minutes. Is Kimberly las Levinson here? Go ahead, sir, four minutes. >> Mayor and council, thank you for your hard work getting us to this point. Including the policy direction that you arrived in may. One aspect of that policy direction that tends to get lost in the noise about transition Zones and parking and property taxes is the [11:42:17 AM] affordability section. It's most important because it affects everyone in this room whether for or against the code. We all pay higher rents, higher mortgages and spend more time in our cars year and year. And this affordability section of the policy direction embodies the moral imperative we have as a city to provide housing for all of our citizens. That's something we've largely failed to do up to now and I think wife heard that in the room today. One of the goals in that section is not terribly controversial and it's easy to overlook, but it's noted as having the highest potential impact. That's the streamlined city codes and permitting processes. It acknowledging the impact complex and lengthy approvals have on affordability and housing supply. It's not meeting our needs as a city. We will never achieve the policy goals in that document when it takes a year and costs over $100,000 to add a single unit of housing to our capacity. The application fee alone is $15,000 and dsd routinely states this is because of [11:43:18 AM] the complexity of interpreting the code. Why does it take so long to get more housing approved? Because the code is full of well intentioned ordinances and rules that make up over 5,000 pages of code and criteria manuals that dsd and the other departments have to interpret. That's 13 different departments whose job is not to increase housing supply, but enforce and interpret their rules. Because for 35 years and counting the need for all types of housing, for all types of people was not prioritizing over enforcing 5,000 pages of regulations. Because our code is so come bye plated, every approval requires negotiation. This is time consuming. It's safe to say our ldc is broken when council is asked to vote on location of a dumpster in order to get approval for more housing. Or 1,000 other regulations, but the code doesn't work like that today. Streamlining that is so important. It affects the affordability of every home in every [11:44:19 AM] neighborhood. And I know that changing way we do things is often harder than changing the rules, but it's far easier to keep building single-family homes off into the sunset today than to change our process. It's why we like many cities with good intentions are stuck counting cars and encouraging small instead of making -- sprawl instead of making homes more affordable. I hope you will change that by streamlining code a priority, a new code set out in the policy direction and give us the housing we desperately need. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Kimberly, you have two minutes. Is grecia white here? Come on down. You will have two minutes. I was asked what the international sign language symbol for disapproval is if this is approval. Disapproval is this. So I would urge people to do that instead of hissing because it has the same impact as applauding. Go ahead, you have two [11:45:21 AM] minutes. >> Kimberly Levinson, vice chair of the pedestrian advisory council and vice president of the downtown Austin neighborhood association. I'm here today to firmly support the proposed changes in the land development code and ask you to go even furs. I don't urge this lightly. I dit based on the hard thanks there is one, an already shortage of housing in housing and affordable housing. It's inequitable to have restrictive housing supply that young people and people of color are being forced out of Austin. This is especially true of African-Americans. Since I moved here in 2004, the black population has decreased from more than 10% to 7.5% today, even though Austin's population has grown. Homelessness is already a serious problem and without a large number of new affordable homes being built it will become a permanent problem. And four, climate change [11:46:21 AM] demands that we find ways to house people in as efficient a manner with as little carbon footprint ago possible. All these things can only be accomplished by developing more affordable homes close to jobs, shops, amenities and mass transit. That means these homes plus be in close-in neighborhoods if we want to have a diverse, equitable and prosperous society with a cleaner and more sustainable environment. I urge you to focus on the future and help make Austin a livable and thriving community for everyone, not just for some. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Gracia white. Is David Sullivan here? Okay, you will be on deck. Colecia and then Justin Irvin. Two minutes. >> Thank you. My name is, Gracia. I'm here in support of the [11:47:21 AM] new ldc. I live on Riverside on the north side. When I used to live on the south side, the corridor acted as a barrier. I used to think twice about riding my bike anywhere because the idea of crossing Riverside was daunting. Now on the north side it's a bit eier, but not ideal. I want to live in a city where my apartment is close to bus routes, close to streets where I feel safe riding my bike, close to sidewalks where people on wheelchairs can get to where they need to safely. Lastly, I ask that you consider the Austin [inaudible] Coalition overlay in your process moving forward. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Floyd, you will be up. Mr. Sullivan, if you could come down to this podium. Is -- a couple more people, Barbara Macarthur, clawdet [11:48:25 AM] Lowe. Go ahead you have two minutes, Mr. Floyd. >> Thank you, mayor and councilmembers. I'm president of the heritage neighborhood association. Residents of our community have expressed many reasonable concerns about the nature and extent of the proposed changes the zoning code. Which include zoning approximately half of the sf-3 parcels in our neighborhood to multi-family uses. We have a high impact. Today I want to talk specifically about that mapping process. Despite our concerns, we've worked within staff's guidelines to the best of our ability to submit an alternative map on November 6. We believe this map is an example of a balanced approach. The plan achieves greater house capacity while reducing the number of older homes zoned multi-family to 50%. Or a quarter of our neighborhood core. Just to repeat that, we have increased housing supply and reduced the impact on our core neighborhood by half. But this process is still in [11:49:27 AM] its early stages and the plan needs much more work. We have not received a response from staff about our mapping proposal. We ask that council take concrete actions to ensure that communities have a voice in this process. Specifically we ask that the council establish and guarantee procedures and a time line for map adoption for all existing neighborhood plan areas. This process should engage all affected stakeholders in a collaborative, holistic planning process. Second, we ask you delay any adoption of final maps until after the historic preservation office has completed its survey of the Windsor, Hyde park, university neighborhoods announced on December 11 this month, and its mapping recommendations incorporated. Third, we ask you provide a main street zone that requires residential above the ground level and account for that increased capacity on the corridors in the final neighborhood plan maps. We oppose any changes to our neighborhood plan and our future land use map without these measures being [11:50:27 AM] incorporated. Without a substantial participatory process. [Buzzer sounding] Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. After Mr. Sullivan speaks, two minutes, is caleche here? Come on down. You have two minutes. Go ahead. >> Thank you very much, mayor, councilmembers and city manager. David Sullivan. I have the pivotal of everybody serving on the planning commission for 16 years and if I could say it out loud codenext project. I want to recommend you look closely at the recommendations from the urban plant institute, congress and new urban Austin and housing works with regard to affordability. People that are experts in building and planning have taken a close look at the code and they have good suggestions. So that's my main point. I want to follow that up with something else that would change the subject. When I talked before the [11:51:28 AM] planning commission in October, I mentioned the fact the code originally didn't say anything about art, music and culture. The code that came out in October did add a section in section 23-4 just a line that said that along with trees, parks, water quality and affordable housing, Austin should sustain art, music and culture, however, there's no text for that. So the planning commission and other groups that I mentioned here recommended that there be a stub-out in section 23-4f for art, music and culture. And city staff did not oppose that. The fact that they did not oppose it means that it will not be part of the base option that comes out that you'll discuss on Monday. So somebody from the city council will have to carry that. Councilmember kitchen. >> I did. >> Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Mayor, since he was so specific, I know we don't want to respond, but that is one of the [11:52:29 AM] amendments I posted on the message board yesterday. >> Great. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Before this speaker speaks, two minutes. Is Justin Irving here? Yes? Come up to this podium. Barbara Macarthur. Go ahead, sir. >> Thank you members of council for allowing me to speak today. My name is caleche and I work for a civil engineer in Austin where I've been a civil analyst two and a half years. My day to day jobs includes feasibility, site design and I'm here to speak in favor of the draft today. I'd like to bring to your attention a specific -- in order to call this rewrite of the code a success. A lot of people have invested time and energy. [11:53:30 AM] These are good things. However, we've not taken the same amount of time and energy on the nonzoning sections which make up roughly 1300 pages of the document. The nonzoning consists of all the minor details of the process which all have potential to affect aspects such as height, yield and use on a site. This includes everything from boards and commission process to demonstrating compliance for water quality. What these competing layers lead to is an incredible amount of lost time. This lost time leads to property or equipment sitting still which in turn leads to large he shall loans which is ultimately passed down. I strongly urge the council to address the continued complications brought on by these parts of the code and hopefully we can fully realize the potential of the zoning sections. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Irving. By the way, you are speaker number 35, if anybody is trying to see where their numbers are. Is Barbara Macarthur here? [11:54:31 AM] You have time donated from Michelle Madsen. Thank you. And David Anderson. You have four minutes. You have two minutes. >> Justin Irving, president of the Austin neighborhoods association. First and foremost, I'm here to support the previous comments from community, the comments are coming straight from community about their concerns about this plan. I think we all recognize that while the intentions of this plan seem very admirable, that there's concern that vulnerable populations are the ones paying the large majority of the bill for the benefits provided to people on their backs. And I don't think that council has listened to community. Mayor, when I've read statements about your confusion about the last 66 meetings and why people aren't, you know, why they are -- why there's misinformation and how we [11:55:31 AM] need to move on with this, it concerns me what you are not doing is turning that around and asking why don't people understand this, why does misinformation exist. What processes at the city did we not do to ensure we're not why we are right now with that problem. That really shows to me that we haven't listened to those communities expressing these issues. We haven't gone out and met them where they are. We keep going back to the same old play book on community engagement where we check the box. We do too little for too few people on engagement and that's why we're here today. It's not because people, you know, are opposed to environmental concerns or to affordability. We're all for those things. The last thing I want to say is I was just at -- just a couple weeks ago we saw the school changes meeting go down, and I see so many parallels here. [11:56:32 AM] You know, you had communities stand up and say no, this is not a plan for us, this is a plan for you. We had community come to that meeting and say, hey, you're not hearing us. We had an equity officer who was hired two weeks before the plan was voted on. [Buzzer sounding] Say this is racist. And then we had a 6-3-4 against vote. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> That's where we're ending this one I think. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Barbara Macarthur. Claudette, you have three minutes. Is Francisco Martinez here? >> I believe next week -- >> Mayor Adler: You have four minutes. >> I believe next week you are posed to approve on first reading both the text of the code and the maps. [11:57:33 AM] I understood by reading the transcripts from last week that no one really knows how much capacity you are creating with the upzoning. Then it would be hard and maybe it's not a good idea to use staff's time on that. Well, I downloaded the files from the city and I will tell you the file with the new zoning had had the column that tells you how much area removed from it. So I recalculated it. So now I know how much area there is for every upzoning code. So you've been presented with something that says you are creating market capacity for 398,000. That's the green box. If I read the book that you're going to pass and I don't count ads and I don't count preservation bonus and I only do the average density, because when you have a lot of housing types, the density of averages, and it's a net, [11:58:33 AM] so I subtract everything that's existing that might be replaced, I get 2.5 million. And when I use your ahbp, of course it's only a dream that you would have that because that means you might be producing some affordable housing, then it's 3.8 million units with the zoning. I even used cascadeia's numbers and get 2.2 million units you are creating. And I put on there their market list, which I have a lot of doubt in because they say in mu5, 60 to 90 feet, you will only be producing the same amount of units that are on seven lots in the current sf-3. 14 units per acre with mu5. With mu [11:59:34 AM] five. The apartments in my neighborhood that are mu 5 have 78 to 90 units per acre, so I would discount the red. But even if I discount the red, you can see clearly it's 1.3 million units. When you are creating that much capacity and not really getting anything for the citizens in return, except maybe you're making -- you're displacing a lot of people and you're making some people very rich. Then I think you -- [applause] -- Should -- shun up there should have said show me the numbers, not we don't care about the numbers. So that's what I'm here to say. You're asking so much of the people here. We're not stupid. We know we're going to be displaced. Half my street's been displaced. I actually live in a place that's late stage gentrification. I feel late stage gentrification. I'm one of the ones left. But yet, you glibly go [12:00:35 PM] along. Next week you want to pass this. Well, here's the numbers. And one more thing, if any of you looked at the envision scenario that said where their study says the market will eat the housing, it's all in east Austin. It's all in the eastern crescent and it's all in tarrytown. So this is your product, you should look at your product and see what your consultants say you were giving away. And if you don't, isn't that kind of negligent? [Cheers and applause] I'm sorry, but I looked at the data and I . Stand behind my analysis. Thank you. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Claudeette -- >> My name is claudeette Lowe. >> Mayor Adler: After you is Francisco Martinez here? Why don't you come on up. You have time donated from Dorothy Doolittle, thank you. [12:01:35 PM] And from Arletta Garcia. You will have four minutes when you speak. Did Austin Talbot already speak? So you will be up next. Go ahead. You have two minutes. >> My name is claudeette Lowe and I would like to talk about preservation. The preservation incentive is a joke. By far the vast majority of Austin was built 30 years ago or more and any house over 30 years old can be torn down and all a developer has to do is to get a bonus is to save only two walls, two standing walls. Dealtrition leaving only two walls is not -- demolition leaving only two walls is not renovation. This is a Trojan horse that will allow developers to tear down the very character of Austin. Please consider this preservation section and protect Austin's history. Finally concerning density, [12:02:36 PM] it's unfair for a few of the districts to bear the brunt of the development. Note the councilmembers who are voting for this are the ones whose districts aren't drastically affected. Please distribute density throughout the city equally. Thank you. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. After Austin Talbot speaks, thener speaker coming up is Zachary tallus, next Betty weed, Kelly Coleman, Norma Henderson and then Betsy Greenburg. Mr. Martinez you have four minutes. >> My name is Francisco Martinez -- >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. >> I'm a public school teacher of 15 years. Part of Guadalupe catholic church and a leader of central Texas atrophy. [12:03:37 PM] Last year there was testimony that gentrification has pushed people out of central east Austin. We are now working with a model community on Johnny Morris road with many displaced from east Austin were relocated. These families now face eviction. Either because -- is it because they were late in their payment? No. It is because they are unwilling to fix their homes up? No. They face eviction because the owner wants them gone and to replace them with higher value homes. Three weeks before Christmas they want our parishoner Maria out of her home, her children pulled from the schools and her community ties broken. They want this community disrupted. At her eviction hearing she had a lawyer and a dozen character witnesses testify on her leadership, management only had to say [12:04:37 PM] the owner wants his lot back. And she is being evicted. But our parishoner's trailer is old and mobile homes are not that mobile. There is nowhere for her to go. Like hundreds in this community, she's at risk of joining the ranks of Austin homeless, sleeping in cars on friend's couch, [indiscernible]. Our city needs more mobile park zoning with fair rules. So that residents like her have a place to go when the owner wants them gone. Today there are six residents from that park, half of whom are being evicted. In addition to preventing displacement and gentrification, our zoning needs to prevent homelessness. [12:05:38 PM] Or others will be at risk for joining them. This is for the good of the city of Austin. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Mr. Talbot you will be up next. Is Zachary thaddeus here? >> Harper- madison: Mayor Adler, if you may? If you are comfortable archbishop comfortable share the name of that mobile home park, I would like that. If not, you can just contact my office. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, sir. Is Zachary thaddeus here? Why don't you come down to this podium. Is Betty weed here? All right. Got you, thank you. And also coming close should be Kelly Coleman. Is Ms. Coleman here? No? What Mr. Norma Henderson? Thank you. Please be ready. And Betsy Greenberg? [12:06:40 PM] Is she here? No? Yes? Okay. Thank you. Go ahead, sir. >> My name is Austin Talbot. I'm here to keep things a little weird. Let's preserve our weirdness. The buildings aren't what make the city weird, the people are what make it weird. Let's create more weird housing. To create more weird housing we have to develop more and weirder developers. I'm going to tell you we don't just have a housing crisis, we have a developer crisis. We do not have enough austinites that want to and can build housing. So here's some ideas. This is allowed with the preservation bonus. This is great. It creates two naturally affordable housing, preserving one, creating one. So we need more weirdoes developing and being landlords. We need to empower our citizens. It's encouraging to see so many people here that care so deeply about their city to come out on a beautiful day and testify. You all need to be developers. We need a code that temporary here can understand and enact quickly [12:07:41 PM] so they can simply build flexible places for their family, friends and neighbors. This will what make things affordable. This will create the neighborhoods that people want to live in and want to preserve. So here's another one, we can add an attached studio, split the Adu in the back and now we have three natural affordables. There's zero is it subsidies and 300% more weirdness. No one should be against this. Instead of asking how can we make it harder for developers to gain the system, I ask you when we go through these amendments, ask how can we make the system easier to more austinites can become developers? Developers should not be a bad word. It should describe all of us. We're trying to build a community. That's a developer. How about this? I have a mother-in-law, my wife has a mother-in-law. This is the craziest thing I've ever heard. Let's build two mother-in-law suites. Two mother-in-laws in one place that's the weirdest thing I've ever had. But I'm a we're dough so I want to do it, but I can't do it. Increase complexity, plus increased cost creates fewer austinites. It's 1600 pages already. [12:08:42 PM] Can afford to on do it and even willing to go through it to do it. Developers are going to make their 31. They're businesses, they structure a pro Forma and they get it. [Buzzer sounds] We need to have people willing to do it regardless of the profit. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. I think we're up to Zachary thaddeus who will have two minutes and Betty weed has two minutes. We called Kelly Coleman. She wasn't here. Norma Henderson will have two minutes. Betty Greenberg will then be up. >> Hey, Democrats, the tides are turning. It started in 2015 when the Obama housing toolkit was released. Although it didn't have the force of law it was recommendations top policymakers to make changes. It recommended many of the things the housing activists have been calling for such as density bonuses, elimination of minimum parking, taxing vacant land, increasing the amount of multi-family zoning and other mechanisms. Every democratic candidate [12:09:42 PM] in favor of housing perform. Bernie Sanders says that earn needs a safe, affordable home. To that he calls on spending millions for funding, create new protections and combat regulations. He has restrictive ordinances zoning and plans to tie federal funds for transportation housing and zoning reform in the states. Julian Castro, he calls for a people first housing policy and says that housing is a human right. At hud he expanded fights for homelessness, prohibited discrimination against transgender individuals and importantly strengthened fair housing rules by allowing cities to further fair housing to [indiscernible] From hud. He would also prohibit discrimination based off of source of income which Austin tried to do, but was reversed by the Texas legislature. Like Sanders, Castro wants to tie funding to reform. Elizabeth Warren was one of the first for housing reform policy. She wanted to fund the [12:10:43 PM] rehabilitation of apartments. Like many of other colleagues she will tie additional money from the government and reform local zoning laws, reducing restrictions on new apartments and making sure they're in high opportunity areas. It's time for Austin to implement the reforms called for by every major democratic candidate. New ldc would be a significant step towards those goals. Which side are you on? Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Weed, before you speak, is Kelly Coleman here? No? Is Norma Henderson here? Why don't you come up to this podium. You will have two minutes. Betsy green entering on deck and Daniel hardsti Lewis. Pat [indiscernible] Is number 46 on death. Chaz whizwetz. You have two minutes. >> Thank you, council, mayor. My name is Betty weed. I want to also thank the [12:11:44 PM] many Austin residents who are here today addressing the many problems with this revision. I want to spe to the -- to my and my neighbors' little corner of central Austin, built in the '60s just off of oltorf. We moved here 30 years ago and were fortunate enough to afford our small home. We've powered out love in the street. We have our names and contact information. We watch out for each other. As younger residents have moved here they've been embraced and encouraged to raise their families here. We also appreciate that this is part of the community and that things will be pointing, but changing the zoning so dramatically will destroy what we most cherish in our neighborhood. [12:12:45 PM] When we moved here 30 years ago we could see this was a place we could age in place, but all of a sudden we find that our small street, which all the way up to oltorf is zoned at oltorf is sf 3, the rest of the street is sf 2. Half of our houses have been rezoned, will be rezoned to r4. The duplexes that are on the -- the small duplexes, small affordable duplexes that are on oltorf do not have good access on to oltorf. In fact, the three out of the four of them go on to our street. Those are not going to be the lots that are going to be redeveloped. The lots that will be redeveloped with four-plexes or six plexes are going to be on our small street. Our small street which will not be able to accommodate fire trucks and ambulances. [Buzzer sounds] So I would urge you to [12:13:45 PM] consider small areas such as this and how it is being affected. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Next speaker is Norma Henderson. And then after Norma is Betsy Greenberg here? Why don't you come down. You have same donated from Susan graham? Thank you. You will have three minutes. On deck number 45 is Daniel hardsti Lewis and pat [indiscernible]. Go ahead. You have two minutes. >> My name is Norma Henderson. I'm not used to this kind of stuff. This is only my second time that I'm talking like this. The first time was at the planning department. So I just hope my brain doesn't freeze. I'm an old austinite. I went to school at govalle elementary. Allen junior high, lbj and -- ugh and old Austin [12:14:45 PM] high. I now live at 2304 altavista in district 9, and I'm here because now at a ripe age of 77 I've worked all my life. Went straight to work right after high school, retired from southwestern bell after 35 years. We're living in our dream house on altavista. We weren't able to afford it even then, but we worked real hard, my husband and I. We worked steadily, budgeted, saved our money, and we are so happy with our neighborhood but now I'm worried about us old timers, our property taxes are starting to kind of affect us and I know the-million-dollar houses are starting to move in our neighborhood, which takes our property -- I retired off of a modest -- we did very comfortable, very good, [12:15:45 PM] we budgeted our money, but we're on a fixed income now. Our property taxes have gone up every single -- when I opened our envelope this last time I thought we'll have to dig io our savings. I would love to take the property taxes -- we've been in our house 51 years. The only reason I remember that, we moved in there when my third son, a week after we moved in my son was born and we had to live from little bluebonnet off of peach treehouse it was so small. We were so happy to find that little house on altavista. I don't want to have to be forced out, although I welcome everyone else to move into our neighborhood. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [Applause]. After Ms. Greenberg speaks for three minutes is Daniel Lewis here? Why don't you come up to this podium. You will have two minutes. Go ahead, Ms. Greenberg, three minutes. >> My name is Betsy [12:16:46 PM] Greenberg and I live in the heritage neighborhood, a small neighborhood bordered by Guadalupe and Lamar. So it was no surprise that nearly half of the properties currently zoned sf were mapped with transition Zones. The big surprise was that the envision tomorrow analysis on the city's website predicts a market capacity of only 6.4 housing units from all of the transition zoning. Creating citywide a total of 5900 acres were zoned weather r4 or rm1. The maximum capacity without any housing bonus is 35 acres -- 35 units per acre and 52 units per acre for r4 and rm1 respectively. This is a total capacity of nearly 247,000 housing units over 60% of the claimed [12:17:50 PM] capacity we're told the ldc supplies. Maximum capacity sometimes can't be achieved because of other constraints, so the envision tomorrow memo gives instead a base buildout density of 18 and 20 units per acre for r4 and rm1 using these supposedly more realistic numbers we get a lower capacity figure of 111,000 units. Out of all this capacity being zoned, our consultants say that the market capacity, ie, what they deem is economically feasible to build, is only 16,000 units or a total of a little under three units of housing capacity for every acre with transition zoning. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. Either this is a whole lot of neighborhood disruption for very, very little gain in housing capacity or the data provided by your consultants is simply not to [12:18:53 PM] be believed. And much more than the 9700 units claimed. Councilmembers, how can you make good decisions using data that makes no sense. Please take the time to make sure you have honest calculations needed for good decision making or you can just ignore this and everything else that gets said today and vote for the worst draft yet in just two days' time. Sadly, the choice is yours. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. I started to say Lewis you will have two minutes. Is pat caligiano here? Why don't you come up to this podium. [12:19:53 PM] Is caz here? Why don't you get ready? Go ahead, sir. >> Good morning, my name is Daniel and I'm here on behalf of the Austin cooperative business association. In all the seven years I've lived in Austin, and I've lived centrally, by the way, I've never paid more than 650 per month in rent. At a time when $800 a rent is considered affordable housing in central Austin, housing cooperatives helped me take out fewer student loans and now help me save while paying off the student loans. Cooperativers have had deeply affordable housing in the center of the city. The vast supply affordable housing on structures usually already on the ground usually with little or no modification. I'm sure many of the homeowners behind me remember purchasing their first houses. Between a student loan burdens, high rents and high property values, members of my generation have few avenues to build capital needed to put themselves on the equity ladder through property. Cooperatives provide housing affordable enough so that their members can save money for down payments, [12:20:54 PM] retirement, whatever else they would athletic to put it toward. In short they help to democratically build wealth in our communities. So how can you help us do that? Contact sensitive occupancy limits and expanding the group residential land use. The state of Texas sets a maximum occupancy limit to the number of bedrooms times three. The city should adopt a number of bedrooms times two, which would help automatically create affordable housing in existing structures throughout Austin. Similarly in the proposed code adult care for seven or more people is allowed by conditional use as you can see on that table there. Throughout the residential house scale Zones in the proposed sewed. However, self sufficient equivalent to this land use, group residential, is not allowed by conditional use permit in the urban Zones r2 r2 B and r2 C. The code makes significant strides especially regarding group residential, but [12:21:55 PM] deeper strides must be made to have an impact. I appreciate your efforts and the heroic efforts of the city staff and thank you for your time. >> Pool: Mayor, if I could ask this speaker here -- thanks for that -- those good suggestions. My staff and I have worked on different programs to support cooperatives and cooperative housing and I would like you to connect with my staff and pass along that information so that I can look at that. Thank you. >> Sure thing, thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Before Ms. Cagiano speaks, Mr. Whizwetz, do you want to come to the podium? You have time donated from Joe gusling. What about rose butler? So you will have four minutes when you have a chance to speak. On deck after that is number 48, Kendra Garrett, [12:22:57 PM] [indiscernible]. Go ahead, you have two minutes. >> Thank you, mayor and thank you for pronouncing my name correctly. [Laughter]. Most people can't, so thank you. And thank each one of you for being here today. I appreciate the time you're taking to look at this. My husband and I live south of the river in district 9. We've been there for 35 years. We plan to pass on our homestead to our kids and grandkids. We've helped the neighbors and they have helped us. A couple of times I've had to call 911 for my husband, and within minutes neighbors -- three neighbors came to our home to help. We've helped young families with their kids. They've come over and decorated our Christmas tree. We've babysat them which [12:23:58 PM] really helps the young moms to have a little time off. So we want to stay. I have three ideas to share with you. One, nurses recently I heard your Thursdays are quitting -- your nurses are quitting the hospitals in central and south hospitals because they cannot afford rent. I would like to propose that you allow seniors like us to build ads in our backyard and rent to a nurse, and the nurse could be on call to help us. Because we're on fixed incomes, we might need a little low loan, whatever you call that. We need a little help. Also -- this is a win-win. [12:24:59 PM] This helps seniors age in place. It helps nurses -- [buzzer sounds] She donated time. Can I get one more minute? Service providers, don't upzone -- number two, don't upzone existing affordable rentals for at least five years. Let your service providers, your policemen, firefighters, paramedics, teachers, bus drivers continue renting close to where they need to work. And lastly I'd like to suggest, mayor Adler, you mentioned last night that it's hard to find a parking solution for so many districts' needs. I would like to suggest that you think about allowing [12:26:01 PM] each district councilmember to come up with their own solution for the parking for their particular district. I think district 9 is going to say we want all parking off the streets. So thank you. [Buzzer sounds] >> Mayor Adler: You have four minute and then is Kendra Garrett here? Come on down. You have time donated from Pamela blue bleepbaker here? What about Kathie Mitchell. You will have four minutes. Is (saying name) Here? You have time donated. You will have three minutes. Number 50 is Chevron and you have time donated from [12:27:03 PM] Alexandra. You will have three minutes. Number 51, Sarah Rodriguez will on deck after that. Go ahead, sir, you have four minutes. I'dlike to touch on a couple of brief things I'm speaking for myself and I want to acknowledge this is a hard conversation and even after we hopefully pass a good code we're going to keep having this conversation. We need more housing for more people. We're in the middle of a housing crisis. We need more housing. Most of you up here on the dais know this already. You feel it in your bones. What happens if you allow too much housing? I don't think we're asking that question enough. You're going to unlikely have already heard people who want you to decrease housing capacity, resist that urge to weaken the code. Resist the urge to maintain the broken status quo. To consider the next couple of council meetings I think we should go back in time. [12:28:04 PM] I'm old enough to remember Obama care fight in congress. He had won both the popular vote and the electoral college made health care his initiative. In the spring of 2009 he took? With the democratic majority in both houses, yet as congress took up health care reform what would eventually turn into Obama care, Republicans in both houses stalled and attempted to put up roadblocks. Congressional leadership in both houses allowed the opposition to water down the reform until it became a mere shell . Of what the clear voter mandate was. And even before the ink was dry after the law was signed, the opposition party was already ready to challenge in court. Now it's 2019, the opposition party has done their best to erode Obama and yet health care remain remains a priority for voters. The council directed the city manager in may, but will vote against any housing reform. Look at the message board, despite it being crystal [12:29:05 PM] clear they will vote against any housing reform, they hope the other councilmembers will listen to their amendments. There's already well resourced groups looking to use the judicial system to block allowing more housing for more families. The lesson seems clear to me, do not fall for the bad faith amendments. Save everyone the time and energy and block every single one of them. It's not actually a compromise when the opposition has made clear they're uninterested in compromise. While people will come up here and ask you to slow down the process, let's look at the public input from last year. On the left the under up in the mayor's election didn't win a single precinct, not in Hyde park, pemberton, tarrytown or more. On the right, the prop a housing bond won by 50 percentage points. In both these elections there were over 200,000 voters. Each one of these are clear voter mandates. Public input distilled into its purest form. Regardless of your decision on the land development code, the public will give you a chance for input the next election day. Until then listen to your [12:30:06 PM] heart, look at the voter mandate and look at more housing. Upzone all of central Austin. We need more housing and services near good schools, transit jobs and other amenities. We need to expand the tax base. We know how to do that. This is another example of the tax base and expanding the tax base. Let's get rid of the apartment ban once and for all. This is a Boston triple decker. I've come up here and talked about this many times. It's a well loved type of house in Boston that was working house, multigenerational, affordable when they were built. This type of use used to be allowed by right in Boston. We nude to be able to build this all over Austin until exclusionary zoning came about. But even at throw stories it's only two bedrooms. For a lot of families that's not family friendly. But even with the preservation bonus or even in r3, with r3 with the F.A.R. Restrictions they're not big enough. So with the two bedroom [12:31:06 PM] triple decker, you still need a lot size of almost 6500 square feet. F.A.R. Should not be restricted. Just focus on the minimum lot size. [Buzzer sounds] Don't compromise future housing. And in conclusion, thank you. >> Mayor Adler: You will have four minutes. And you will have three minutes. Go ahead. >> Hi. My name is Kendra and I'm with the Austin justice coalition. I want to thank the mayor and council for this opportunity. Today we will be speaking on a number of recommendations from our response to ldc. But today I will be talking about corners of equitable opportunity. In the film the tale of two cities it discusses the housing situation in America, but aligned from that film is that there's a lot of trust in the marketplace on value. [12:32:08 PM] Our economic and monetary system is based on trust and value. But when we're talking about housing and communities, we're talking about people. And the problem is that market doesn't equally value all people. So [indiscernible] Is that the number of white residents that move into proceed dominantly non- white neighborhoods which have gone without proper investment for decades through private and public sector are now seen as vulnerable for investment. So we have to talk about equity in a real and tangible way. In Austin how can we invest in community starved for support while we open up other parts of the city to create an economically and culturally diverse landscape. One of our recommendations is the creation of these quarters of equitable opportunity. It stems from a three year program in Minneapolis St. Paul. It was a partnership of private and public entities that were able to build hundreds of units of equitable housing, provide small business opportunities [12:33:09 PM] for minority residents and invest in infrastructure. Austin can do the same thing. So outside of the need for partnerships and kind of program implementation, the ldc can support the creations of these corridors. So the first one is we support mayor pro tem's equity overlay. It is a tool that will be able to address affordability and displacement in vulnerable areas, but also allow the city to tailor its investments in these communities. A second way is within the ldc code is to reserve the right within the density bonus program to either eliminate the ability for developers to fee-in-lieu. [Buzzer sounds] -- Or require additional units that are deeply affordable. Setting these units at 30% mfi, the city will need these housing bond funding to pay the difference in these units. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> I thought I had four minutes. I had time donated by suki [12:34:11 PM] and also Rachel, who are both here. >> Mayor Adler: I didn't have Rachel. You will have four minutes. After you Chevron, you'll speak. And I had you with three minutes with one person donating time. After you is Sarah Rodriguez, number 51, Martha toreado, number 52, Miriam Connor is 53. >> Mayor, mayor pro tem, councilmembers. My name is (saying name) And I serve on the steering committee of planning our communities. Planning our communities is a group of people for molecular, economic opportunity and transit advocates, community organizers and social justice advocates. We recommend as you have heard before that we support the equity overlay that has been proposed by mayor pro tem Garza. We also recommend that we reduce or eliminate transition Zones in areas that are vulnerable to gentrification. And we also ask that we limit the redevelopment of multi-family properties that [12:35:12 PM] are naturally affordable. So that we may protect housing for communities of color and working class communities. However, as we have this conversation, we also ask you that we do not wish to eliminate our housing capacity, but only to shift it. And what we're saying is that we decrease development pressures in east Austin and vulnerable areas and we increase housing opportunities in our high opportunity areas. Thus we recommend that with the housing capacity in high opportunity areas we increase by identifying additional corridors and mapping imagine Austin centers. Particularly we would like to see an increase in opportunities in multi-family housing in those areas. Increasing the housing capacity in high opportunity areas allows our working class residents to access increased opportunities in their lifetime and reduce the development pressures in east Austin, which has long had to bear an inequitable share of the development in our city. I know folks have talked a little bit about capacity so let me share about the capacity crunching that I did on staff's data. [12:36:15 PM] District 6, 8 and 10 west of mopac currently are mapped for 22 percent of our overall capacity in this corridor vision. However, districts 1, 2 and 3 east of 35 are mapped for 42% of our overall capacity. That is east is mapped for nearly double of west of mopac. And I know there has been a question of what happens when we talk about the size of districts? Well, let me talk about what it does when I divide it by acreage because I know that is a question. West of mopac our capacity goes to 12 percent per acreage and east of 35 our capacity goes to 29%. We're now talking about more than double our capacity per acreage in the current revision is mapped on the reed and not the westside or in eye opportunity areas. So as we continue to talk I want to say what I'm seeing in front of me is not only a quote that's not equitable, it's not even equal in terms of where we're policing [12:37:15 PM] displacement in our community. And we have a commitment to high opportunity areas. I'm proud of being in a community that has supported housing choice in high opportunity areas. And I want to say here we are with the perfect opportunity for living up to that commitment of increasing opportunities significantly in these high opportunity areas with our land code revision. However, sadly I'm beginning to see we're beginning so second-guess ourselves, question ourselves. We're getting lost in debates over context sensitivity. And as important as these conversations are, I want to remind you that context sensitivity applied as much as in east Austin yesterday as it does in west Austin today. The homes of people of color were removed, their businesses displaced and their communities decimated. I will be honest, as proud as I am of the beloved community that I live in, I am saddened to see that we're letting fear guide us [12:38:15 PM] rather than principles of equity. And I'll take a little bit of time to talk about equity for a second. Trieding west and east Austin equitably does not mean we're being equitable. It does not mean that we are being equitable. Fearing the impacts of increasing housing in west Austin and in high opportunity areas today -- [buzzer sounds] -- Yet forgetting the impacts of increasing entitlements in east Austin is not equitable. So I ask that we continue our commitment to increasing housing in high opportunity areas and creating equitable opportunities for all. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Garrett pointed out that the clock only credited you for two minutes instead of four minutes. So if you want to speak, Ms. Garrett, for the balance of your time, you can. >> That would be great. Thank you so much. The third recommendation for [12:39:17 PM] the corridors of opportunity are allowing the zoning for the quarters for small childcare facilities, coffee shops and grocery stores that can provide people of color the opportunity for small business ownership and job opportunities. So looking through equitable lens, these corridors will look different in different parts of the city. On the westside it would be increased housing, missing middle, multi-family, both deeply affordable units. So the people at various income levels can live there and enjoy. On the eastside it's maintaining or adding affordable housing, but also grocery stores and amenities that help create healthy and complete communities. And everywhere should be minority owned businesses, creative spaces, transit and green infrastructure. So we have to lay the foundation through the ldc and in proper investment in these to create these complete communities. So while we're waiting to have an equitable adjustment at least for me that access and opportunity exists for all people everywhere. Thank you so much. [12:40:26 PM] >> Kitchen: When you're talking about the corridors of opportunity, when you're referencing a study or information or something like that, I would love to see it. >> It's a study from Minneapolis St. Paul and it was a three-year study from three years and I can send it to your office. >> Casar: And mayor? And again, I know we're not trying to do a back and forth, but on amendments that are brought up, I just want to thank ajc and poc and the how longing collision and others from -- coalition from having brought them forward. Many of them are sort of split on the message board between councilmember harper-madison, mayor pro tem Garza and I between the equity overlay, mobile home parts, childcare facility, corner stores and the anti-equity gentrification issues you brought up, many of them have been posted by many of us. Thank you for bringing them forward. >> Thank you so much. Mayor Adler Chevron Tarro. You have four minutes. And then I have Sarah Rodriguez. [12:41:40 PM] [Calling names of speakers]. >> Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I am also with pock planning our communities. And we create a space where people of color and working class communities can discuss is, collaborate for policies that improve the quality of life for their communities. The nuance of our group is we are pro people, not pro development. And anti-displacement, but not anti-development. First we address that we are working within a colonized system and timeline that has historically excluded the knowledge, practice and participation of people of color. We must continue to work towards a more inclusive and accessible process that addresses the needs and cultures of all communities, but especially those that have been neglected. Our group has worked with other groups concerned with equity and correcting systemic racism to envision using the land development code as an opportunity to advance interests of [12:42:41 PM] communities of color and working class communities to maximize affordable housing, minimize gentrification and dismiss displace., uphold the responsible for the equitable distribution of development and promote healthy communities by working with the local knowledge and community based solutions of underserved residents. Austin's housing crisis is causing the destruction of communities of color and forcing the displacement of working class people. We must be proactive and intentional in fighting gentrification and displacement in neighborhoods identified as vulnerable in the uprooted residential displacement in Austin's gentrifying neighborhoods and what can be done about it report. Corridors and gentrifying areas that have only recently seen investment after years of neglect should not have to bear the undue burden of density as opposed to areas that have excluded housing capacity. Austinites of color and working class austinites who have worked for increasing investment in their [12:43:42 PM] communities must not be penalized for getting better infrastructure and services. We can use tools like mayor pro tem Garza's proposal for the equity overlay to address affordability and displacement in vulnerable areas as well as a stabilization tool for consequences of the development that is rapidly uprooting indigenous residents with ties to the land. Further pep operating the trauma. These policies present implementable solutions to address the shared concerns echoed in this chamber. We must always consider how we grow as a city with equity, history and inclusion and mind and heart. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: You will have two minutes. Go ahead, please. >> Marlowe or Sarah? >> Mayor Adler: Sarah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: You have three minutes. >> It's kind of difficult to go after so many great [12:44:43 PM] speakers. As mayor Adler said my name is Sarah. I'm a native austinite and a fourth generation citizen. My senior year will Wynn talked about the growth that Austin was going to experience. Said in the next 10 years we'll see over a million people and I was pretty shocked by that number. It's hard to imagine sleep pi Austin growing that big, people being so interested in moving here, no offense to my hometn. But the truth is that we've long known Austin is set to grow. It grows -- it doubles every 15 to 25 years. What has been surprising has been the amount of time it's taken to admit that and be willing to work on that. But as you look it for it, I also ask that you look backward, face the inordinate amount of harm that has been done by housing and land policy to community of colors, not only in Austin, but around the nation. Your neighbors, your friends, your constituents. Therefore if you vote in favor of the ldc, I urge you to include protections for communities of color, specifically the recommendations made by the [12:45:44 PM] Austin justice coalition in regards to the equity overlay, changing the affordable units requirements in the city's density bonus program to channel redevelopment into city's high opportunity areas and away from tracts where the most vulnerable live and are in fear of displacement and other recommendations proposed by the Austin justice coalition. Really regardless of your decision with the ldc I ask that you further fund affordable housing because any decision made here is not really going to impact the deeply affordable housing that is needed. There needs to be extra funding for that and we also need to talk about what happens beyond policy, which is actually the work that goes into designing programs and giving residents a voice of the design and the funding of programs. So I love Austin. It's really sometimes hard to be proud of it. So thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Coming up on deck shortly is [12:46:45 PM] [indiscernible] Conley. First will be Marlowe tornado, Isabel Atkinson. Warren birkly is also nearing. >> Kitchen: Mayor, what number are we on? >> Marlena is number 52. >> Hi, good morning. My name is Marla and impart of the steering of the group planning our communities. Our group understand that we need a code that will minimize gentrification and displacement. We support the equity overlay that has been proposed in the land development code. We see it as an important tool to address affordability and displacement in vulnerable areas in our city. It is essential it will provide a boundary of where we should have transition areas in vulnerable neighborhoods. [12:47:45 PM] The incentivize or redevelopment of existing multi-family and increase on-site affordable housing requirements. It is tied to the UT uprooted study and vulnerability maps. It can provide the needs for the city to tailor its resources into neighborhoods that have been historically underserved. And equity overlay is not about particular neighborhoods, but about long-term commitment on the part of the city to plan in such a way as to not sacrifice its most vulnerable members. Again, we need a code that will minimize gentrification and displacement and it is your responsibility to make sure that we are learning and correcting mistakes that have been made in the past and that we are honoring equitable and inclusive growth by supporting this equity overlay. Thank you. [12:48:49 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Miriam Connor. Isabel at Atkinson, not here. >> I would like to say that the Austin justice coalition and poc have worked closely with harper-madison and with Casar, with Renteria, with Delia, and we're very happy with some of the work we've already been able to do together to protect vulnerable communities in Austin. I'd like to say particularly that I am in strong support of the idea of equity overlay. I think that's exactly in the spirit of the kind of thing that the Austin justice coalition is calling for. We need a nuanced approach. It can't be -- analogous to the problems with being colorblind in a society that had this long history of sort of protecting certain groups and throwing other groups under the bus. We can't be colorblind in our policies either. We have to acknowledge that there is nuance, that there is history. And in the spirit of equity, I want to speak about [12:49:51 PM] nccds. Nccds are fundamentally inequitable. They give certain specific neighborhoods in Austin power that no other neighborhoods have. And going forward with the land development code no other neighborhoods are going to get that power. Nccds do not serve the cause of affordable housing. 11th and 12th street nccds allow large entitlements with no requirements for affordable housing. Meanwhile other nccds sort of a completely different situation, but they still work as impediments to creating the kind of affordable housing that people of color need to see in this city. Nccds belong in a direct temporal continuum to the history of exclusionary zoning, whites only neighborhoods, and the racist past that has shaped housing in Austin. So it's time for us to move forward. We need to provide all communities with equitable opportunities for shaping their neighborhoods. We need to think of Austin [12:50:52 PM] as a whole city, planning it as a whole system as opposed to allowing certain neighborhoods exclusive privilege. Thank you for your time. >> I donated my name to [indiscernible]. >> Mayor Adler: You have an additional minute. >> Just to wrap up, the supplemental staff draft, the second instrumental staff draft says that they should be with the transition areas and should incorporate other code changes such as minimum lot sizes, preservation incentive and affordable housing bonus. We like these, however we think it's simpler and more consistent if we simply eliminate nccds altogether. I know this is a tough conversation, but getting rid of things that are part of our legacy of inequity and injustice is always going to be tough. So someone's got to say it and I'm here to say it. Thank you. [12:51:53 PM] [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> I'm Warren Berkeley with the Austin justice coalition and we have an affordable housing crisis in Austin. And while solving this we need to keep equity in mind. It will take policy and investments and we see the land development code revision as a key opportunity for a more equitable Austin. We support expanding density bonus programs, particularly in high opportunity areas. We don't support them in areas that would displace communities of color and other poc. The density bonus incentives on the transit priority network and imagine Austin centers must be strengthened and expanded to ensure that the greatest number of affordable units are produced to serve our most vulnerable population. Tenants in these units must have increased rights and protections. We also support expanded density bonus programs, again, except in places that would displace communities of color and working class people of Austin. [12:52:53 PM] For multi-family development, particularly in gentrifying area, we recommend no density bonus for these developments. We don't want incentives that displace current renters, especially in naturally occurring affordable multi-family developments, by providing no bonus entitlement and continuing current zoning as it is today, existing naturally occurring affordable multi-family housing would be less acceptable to redevelopment. And we also support helping low income homeowners stay in place providing them with flexible housing options within the code. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Tina Barrett here? Why don't you come on down? Is Shane Johnson here? You will be up next. Sarah wombold, you will be up after that. Liza Wimberley, you will be up next, in that order. So let's begin with Tina Barrett. [12:53:56 PM] >> Hi. I'm a 20 year resident of rosedale and I'm happy to admit that I'm also a developer. I build urban homes on small lots in the city core and I really want to keep doing this to make a living and support my family. The directive from city council states we need a yield of 135,000 housing units over the next 10 years. Not only that, but to have more diverse housing types and to make housing more affordable. The state of Texas isn't going to do this. Ordinary citizens aren't going to do this. The city isn't going to do this. We are the ones you are depending on to make this happen. Yet my central Austin neighbors want to make that harder. They believe that only single-family homes belong in central Austin and developers can build these and make plenty of money. Single-family homes are the easiest and cheapest thing to build. I can easily build homes now that sell well into the millions, like the one going up next to councilmember pool's house. This is not what I want to build. Give me the tools to build triplexes, four- plexes, cottage courts and townhomes. The more barriers that are in place, the more developers like me will throw up our hands and give you [12:54:57 PM] multi-million-dollar mansions and keep our neighborhoods only for the rich. Of all the ideas in the code rewrite I want to add that I strongly support the idea of graduated F.A.R. For higher unit counts. This is a win-win for all. Make it harder to build single-family houses or even giant duplexes, but let us build the density the city so desperately needs. And just in case you haven't read the Texas observer article that came out yesterday, it says Austin is one of the most sprawling cities in the state. Measured by population per square mile, it is less dense than Houston, dallas-fort worth or San Antonio. And it's getting worse. According to analysis by the "New York Times," average neighborhood density in the Austin metropolitan area fell by five percent from 2010 to 2016. The second highest decline in the nation. Because of all that sprawl, Austin leads the state's major metro areas in the average number of miles driven daily according to the Texas department of transportation. Our planet is on fire and we cannot keep the status quo. Thank you. [12:56:06 PM] >> Mayor Adler: I think you have -- do you have any time donated? >> One person. >> Mayor Adler: Three minutes. The person who donated time, will you go to the clerk? >> Should I start? Thank you, council. Shane Johnson. I'm a volunteer with the Austin justice coalition among various other organizations. I want to close out some of the remarks about the healthy and -- the complete communities initiative about helping make our communities healthy and connected. So healthy and connected communities of color and working class communities to be complete deserve a healthy built environment where they have access to healthy food, transit, [12:57:07 PM] education and job opportunities, amenities and green infrastructure. This requires the use of tools present in the land development code and additional policies as well. The ldc should support accessible childcare, elder care facilities, intergenerational housing, grocery stores, businesses in these communities, cooperatives, et cetera. This will require increasing public investment in communities of color and working class communities and provide increased housing options citywide to provide freedom of movement of anybody who wants to live in any part of Austin, shouldn't be restricted by their wealth or defacto by their race. Creating equitable complete communities allows rectifying past injustices as several folks before me said so we can build a better and just future while addressing -- through addressing historical injustice through intentional investment and planning. It should not -- that will not lead to the displacement [12:58:07 PM] of the very people we are aiming to serve. So I would like to add that my family -- I was born in Austin, couldn't afford to live in Austin, so we moved to pflugerville and saved money for 11 years to be able to move back into Austin. So there are lots of families who can't even do that anymore. They couldn't save money for 11 years and be able to afford to live here at all, let alone the folks who are being displaced out right. So I really want to undergird the support for the equity overlay and reiterate how we need no transition Zones in any of the areas identified as vulnerable by the UT uprooted study that you all commissioned. And this is what beginning to fight institutional racism in Austin in housing looks like. I want to commend all of you for the vote you took Thursday night to start investigating institutional racism in APD. I know that was difficult. But on the other hand, we, us community members of color, especially the black community, other folks, we've been telling you all [12:59:08 PM] that for years, there's racism in APD, it needs to be investigated. Now we've been telling you for years there's racism in housing policy. It needs to be fixed. We need deeply affordable, not just affordable or missing middle units. So I really hope that it doesn't take another few years. And I notice different groups, how different ideas for specific policy affects us, but there are -- we have some very broad areas of agreement as well, even if we're talking about different points. [Buzzer sounding] I'll finish by thanking the offices, mayor pro tem Garza, councilmember Casar, harper-madison and Renteria for working on the equity overlay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Sara wombalt. You have two minutes is Lisa gray here? [1:00:09 PM] No? What about lane Wimberley. Julia Austin, number 61, should be getting ready to speak, as should Julie Von Alexander set ready to speak. Paula Kaufman needs to be getting ready to speak. Go ahead, Ms. Wombalt. >> I live in district 5. I lived in Austin for over 11 years now and just want to kind of support all of the amendments that are been brought up before me. Specifically the equitable overlay that draws its data from u.t.'s uprooted study. When I think about housing in the city and have in the past, it really hits on all of the points that I think will make the land development code should it go through an equitable device for the whole city. [1:01:10 PM] It disincentivizes development of existing multi-family units and will increase onsite affordability. All of these features will sustain the neighborhoods for a valuable future. Also the housing down city bonus needs to be squarely looked at to make sure while it's expanded, it's not favoring developers, but favoring people who need affordable units. And I also support the removal of nc c.d.'ss. In short, if the land code is to go through, it needs to be one that is more equitable and that allows austinites of all races, ages and income levels to thrive in every single zip code in the city. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. You have three minutes. Julia Austin. Should come up to this podium. Go ahead, three minutes. >> Hello, Lisa Wimberley, I [1:02:11 PM] live in district 7. I've been hearing from my neighbors and some councilmembers is the -- we should perhaps stick it to the developers by making the code less friendly to more endeavorous housing options. If you make missing middle more difficult to build, you will somehow preserve the quaint, affordable Austin of yesteryear, stop demolition of old houses or make the developers develop less. I live in rosedale and I see changes that have taken place in the last decade. Judging from what I see, developers will not suffer even if the only thing they are allowed to build is single-family homes. Case in point, shoalmont, a small neighborhood just west of me. This whole area is zoned sf-2. Since 2008 after the passage of the mcmansion ordinance, 66 new single-family homes were built and sold in that neighborhood. The median size of these homes was 2800 square feet and median price 800,000. [1:03:11 PM] Just since 2018, ten new single-family homes were sold in that small neighborhood with the median size of 3,000 square feet and median price just over one million. The same is happening in Allen Dale where the median price is now 1.25 million and rose Dale, 1.3 million. Single-family homes are the cheapest and easiest to build. No need for site plan, no silts, no firewalls. Developers will not suffer if you make it hard to build four-plexs. What will suffer is climate, mass transits and affordability for future generation. Housing policy is climate policy is transit policy is social poll I is and climate change is real so we need to do something to make our [1:04:12 PM] city more environmentally sustainable. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Julie Austin is going to speak for two minutes. You are next; is that right? >> Hey, I'm here from dellwood 2 wearing the shirt and we are a functioning neighborhood that has single-family housing, we also have section 8 area, and our neighborhood just worked out with some developers to build a big new multi-family affordable apartment unit on I-35. I just want to say rezoning our neighborhood is going to make it less functional and more expensive. And we are working it out now. It's a charming, inclusive neighborhood. It's got lots of rental property in it. It used to be under the airport, but it's not anymore and we just have so many people that if this goes through and, you know, [1:05:13 PM] I'm r4 now, that people are going to get moved out of the neighborhood and out, you know, further because the rental housing will go, our houses that, you know, are owned for many, many years by people on the streets will become more -- the taxes will get higher and we're just worried and want you all to think about that. I also want to speak for groups of people here in Austin that kind of made the city what it is. And that is artists and musicians. And I'm a musician and my friend here Ellen is an artist, and we bought into Austin when we could, but I can tell you there's no more artists and musicians like us that could buy into Austin now. And that this is going to make it even harder. So I think what I want is more time for the council to think about these things, and we just don't feel secure as a group of people. [1:06:13 PM] I don't think any of us do in what's about to happen and we need more time. We need you to think about transit first and think about how that's going to help build our city and determine more affordable housing. And I just want to say thank you for listening to everyone today. [Buzzer sounding] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Liza Wimberley, you have four minutes. After liza -- what? Okay. >> Two Julias in a row. It's confusing. >> Mayor Adler: Then Julia vonn Alexander. Then aloha Matthews. And then Paula Kaufman. Sorry. >> No worries. As you just heard, Julia vonn Alexander, a born and raised austinite. I grew up on lost creek. And I still live in west Austin. [1:07:13 PM] I'm no councilmember pool's district in allendale. And I have a sense that there aren't too many folks from district 7 who are going to say what I have to say today so I wanted to make sure that voice was represented. A lot of my neighbors are really concerned about more density and they really don't want change, but I think our neighborhood could change for the better. We can't push all growth in Austin to most vulnerable austinites. Even my roommate and I can't afford to live where we do live and buy a house there. So why can't my neighborhood have more density with units that are affordable? Because some neighbors think it might not look pretty or fit in with what we have now or because of traffic. Well, streets in my neighborhood at least are pretty wide and I think they can accommodate a little more. Also if people who are coming to work in our neighborhood live closer, [1:08:13 PM] maybe we would have about the same or less traffic. So I think we have to do better. We can't continue to be duplicative and say we support equity and as west austinites we're not going to do anything to make any changes ourselves. I strongly encourage you to support the equity overlay and to not add transition Zones to vulnerable areas. Use the density bonus program to put more affordable units where I live, where we have tons of space and large lots. And just generally support the things that ajc has brought forward. I want to thank mayor pro tem Garza, councilmembers Casar, harper-madison and Renteria for their work on the equity overlay as well as work on affordable housing. With that I'll say thank you and make sure we do better. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Laura Matthews and then Paula Kaufman. [1:09:24 PM] >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Mayor Adler: I'm sorry? >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Good afternoon, councilmembers. I'm aloha Matthews from district 9 and I served on the city of Austin's flood mitigation task force. I want to thank councilmember Casar this morning. I saw the amendment on the plumbing code and I'm hoping that that will help with some of the flooding problems on lot to lot flooding. It's a serious problem here in Austin. I'm before you today because I don't believe that you can average impervious cover citywide. Impervious cover is -- and I learned this by being on the task force and I'm not an engineer, but I'm very lucky to have in my house an engineer and I have a child who is an attorney who I can ask questions of. And so I go home from meetings and I ask a lot of very specific questions. [1:10:25 PM] And I bring this map to you today that watershed presented to us that shows on the blunn creek head waters, this big Orange square, which means that our head waters is going to see an increase of 5% or more impervious cover under the code. Yet as the mayor explained to us last night, as Ms. Annick Beaudet explained to us, we're only going to have 1% impervious cover. We don't have to worry about flooding, don't have to worry about erosion. This is something I've discussed with Mr. Dutton in my one on one meetings, it's something we relayed to our councilmember, to the mayor last night in writing. So I would like you all to -- I don't know how that's going to be extrapolated into the land development code. I know it's important for our district because we have a deep and long history of protecting the blunn creek head waters. We have spent money, we hired, you are familiar with Dr. Lauren Ross, she did a study in the '80s. Watershed about a study in [1:11:27 PM] the '80s as well and we want to continue to protect blunn creek. And as well the folks in the onion creek watershed. They are experiencing deep and wide flooding and I know that councilmember kitchen is concerned about that and I thank you for your concern about that. [Buzzer sounding] Please address that. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Paula Kaufman. I'm sorry, go ahead. >> Hi, I'm Paula Kaufman and I live at d9 and I'm a weird landlord in other districts and I sincerely believe we can all find greater capacity more equitiably. So a lot of us have been accused of fear mongering because we said having 69,000 units buy right in d9 out of a total of 400,000 wasn't equal. Why don't all ten districts get 40,000 each and why does [1:12:29 PM] district 4 only get 10,000. So we asked the mayor and his staff to ask -- to show us the numbers. So what can the current infrastructure support. If it can't support 69,000, what's the plan to fund it? Bonds? Can we guarantee that our property taxes will not go up more than 3.5% a year for city taxes? You could lower the rates that we only pay that much each year and we can plan for that. But it's not okay to approve the maps as they are now and then try to fix them later. So we propose making sure that every councilmember understands the answers to these questions before in good faith being able to vote. Where do we find common ground? Adus cool, fee in lieu [1:13:31 PM] cruel. Those of us who have a property can have ads and what we don't have to pay for like the developer is debt service. Many of us can afford -- can offer affordable housing, so we were the urbanists before urbanists were cool. If those of you that want to live in the urban core, find yourself an old condo to live in. [Buzzer sounding] You won't get granite countertops but great quality of life. >> Mayor Adler: You had time donated from Donna Mauro. Is she here? >> Yes. >> Mayor Adler: You have an additional minute. >> Thank you. So we do advocate more adus, and we've talked even to local employers to say, hey, all this workforce that needs affordable housing, we have some available. Maybe they would be able to walk to work and not have to look for parking places. But then -- but then many [1:14:32 PM] people are concerned their property taxes would rise because of the ads. Maybe have a system where if we give affordable rents to people and they can prove that they are a certain percentage of median family income, that we could get a tax rebate for offering affordable housing. That helps everyone by keeping more people off the streets. But fee in lieu is not cool because there's no land so we're letting the developers get away with paying a fee and that housing doesn't get built. So if you want fast, affordable housing, let the people who have the land build it quickly and so you're not uprooting our workforce. So we have a really diverse neighborhood -- [buzzer sounding] -- And we are supporting those that would be displaced. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Brian register here? Why don't you come on down. You will have two minutes. Is Lucey beg here? You will be up next. You have time donated from [1:15:35 PM] Dorothy Bassett. Is Ms. Bassett here? No? You will have two minutes. Coming after you will be Mary Elizabeth. Is she here? And then after that Joshua Pelzer. Who is speaker 67. Then frank Carico. You have two minutes. >> Hi, Bryan register, what you do to vote. You all have been doing a good job and I'm optimistic about direction you are taking with the land code. Even people who have been down here quite angry who I disagree with about this issue have been bringing a whole bunch of numbers and it's a lot of constructive suggestions. I'm here to amplify the agenda and the Austin homeless group. They have sound wisdom about land codes too. But two points. So I am a liberal [1:16:36 PM] capitalist. I love the flexibility and consistency of the private property rights secure for us, and other things being equal, I like to let the market take care of things. Some of ajcs recommendations -- none abuse rights. Neighborhood conservation combining districts restrict property owners' use of property on the west side of town reducing affordability and density to benefit some homeowners on the west side of town already beneficiaries of Austin's history of segregation. They are incompatible with the citywide incentive program, remapping to greater consistency with other districting would be an improvement but eliminating them entirely the best approach. Second, the equity overlay is a really good idea. You might consider that the guy who yells about property because you might think discouraging -- both in incompatible with property owners land use of land. But these property owning [1:17:36 PM] landords don't especially deserve the windfall profits available to -- due to forces beyond their control. We don't respect private property and land so people can get rich by luck. The equity overlay doesn't encourage density, what it does is respect the historic segregation and misdevelopment of our city. So we have renders predominantly on the east side paying property taxes by way of rents, these taxes are paying for infrastructure which is making the land more valuable than the rest of the city. These renters do not deserve to be displaced for housing for other people affordable for those other people. [Buzzer sounding] Buzz though don't deserve the entire history of segregation and windfall profits available to them for which they have not responsible. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Beg, you have two minutes. And then after you Mary Elizabeth. Is she here? No? What about Joshua Pelzer. Come on down to this podium. [1:18:36 PM] After you are done speaking, frank Carico. You have time donated from Annie Compton. Here? No. You will have two minutes. Is Jane Bradbury here? Up next after that. Two minutes. >> Good afternoon. My name is Lucey beg. I'm an architect and everyone of a practice here with my husband colt. We are fortunate to live in the east Cesar Chavez neighborhood with our 6 and 3-year-old on a fall 2500 square foot corner lot. Thanks to a enlightened piece of code called small lot amnesty, we live in a 1700 square foot house within walking distance of downtown and a trail for a mortgage about half the asking price of similar sized properties around us. In part thanks to the modest footprint of our land. As you know, this is a rare opportunity in Austin because our current code dictates that homeowners should own at a minimum over double the amount of land [1:19:37 PM] that we do. So I was glad to see council give the directive in may to encourage the development of smaller homes on smaller lots. Modest homes are less expensive, more energy efficient, and in keeping with the scale of our existing central neighborhoods. My concern today is that in the residential areas zoned r2, you are missing low-hanging opportunities to realize this goal. Instead the revised code incentivizes bigger homes on roughly the same size lots. The increased F.A.R. Entitlements are one driver of this and I know there's some momentum to change those. The other is the new minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, an insignificant reduction from the current minimum. While there is provision for smaller lots, it requires houses on these to be attached to another one, a narrow mechanism to allow new duplexes to be sold as fee simple. On every corner lot in r2 Zones, you are missing the opportunity to let existing homeowners do what they did all over the east side until [1:20:38 PM] our current code, which is subdivide their property and let someone else build a small house with street frontage on the other half of it. Factly the process which allowed our process to live where we do now. I urge you today to remove the requirement for new houses on r2 lots to be attached to another one that are less than 5,000 square feet. Restore the development patterns on corner lots that proliferated -- [buzzer sounding] -- Before 1984 and give more people the opportunity to live in a small house on a small lot in the heart of our wonderful city. Thank U you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. You have one minute. Go ahead, sir. I'm sorry, two minutes. >> Good afternoon, councilmembers. My name is Josh Pelzer, I live in district 3. I participated in this year's stakeholder process on signs in hopes the city might remove its ban on outdoor digital advertising. Both cap metro and aid took part in those events, and [1:21:39 PM] each of them expressed a clear interest in the technology. I was under the impression that the stakeholder process was going to continue, but the release of the land development code called that into question. It doesn't reflect any of the requests or concerns voiced by cap metro, aid or any other parties involved. A few weeks ago, councilmember Flannigan suggested that the sign code be removed from the ldc, and yesterday he offered an amendment along those lines. I came here today to ask you to vote for that amendment. Our city's advertising laws are out of step with its reputation as a technology hub. And I'd like to see city council work to change that. I'm sure aid and cap metro feel the same way. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Carico, you have two minutes. Jane Bradbury here? Come down to this podium, please. Kirk Hoffman? Mr. Hoffman here? Why don't you start angling [1:22:40 PM] down, getting closer too. After Mr. Hoffman, Annette Garza will speak. You have two minutes. >> Thank you. So my wife and I moved back to Hyde park after a hiatus of about 35 years. We were in California for about five years and then the rest of the time we were in foreign service in very large cities around the world. Only a few of them had what I'd consider real neighborhoods for us to live in. So we came back here and we had an old piece of property that we rehabbed at the corner of avenue G and 46th street into a duplex where we live, and we decided to do a duplex as best as possible because we thought the added income would be good for us and it also blended in with the most of the neighborhood for the most part and we didn't want anything bigger because anything bigger wouldn't be fondly looked upon by our neighbors. [1:23:42 PM] There's been very little change in the 35 years we've been gone from Hyde park in terms of what I'd consider infrastructure improvements. We have a couple more bike lanes and a couple more pedestrian lanes, but by and large there's just a whole lot more traffic now with the same amount of sidewalks and pedestrian lanes and things like that. The biggest change of all to our -- this neighborhood, which is like a north U.T. Neighborhood, has been one thing in particular, and can any of the councilmembers take a wild guess at what that would be? It doesn't involve infrastructure improvements, it doesn't involve multi-family housing. In an indirect way it does. That's a hint. Okay, the guess is [1:24:45 PM] short-term b&bs. This north U.T. Neighborhood has got 70% rentals in it, okay? [Buzzer sounding] But in addition, it has even more if you consider short-term b&bs. You need to figure out a way to put a limit on this. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Bradbury. Mr. Hoffman, come on up to the podium. Next speaker will be Annette Garza, Kevin Richardson, Jarod ruska. Zisha mallimpervious cover, speaker 74. >> Thank you, mayor and councilmembers. Jane Bradbury and I am a professor at the university of Texas at Austin as well as a member of the brykerwoods pta. I live in the ridgely [1:25:45 PM] neighborhood which butts up against shoal creek and has experienced catastrophic flooding in the past. I have taken part in the 2019 stakeholder events focusing on the off-premium signs for aisd schools. Our public schools have to think creatively when it comes to funding and I'm a strong supporter of advertising initiatives. This looked like it was moving forward, however, until the release of the draft of the land development code. The ldc proposes a lot of changes to our sign laws, but none of those changes touches on our stakeholder processes. That's why I support councilmember Flannigan's amendment separating the sign ordinance from the ldc revision, devoting a stand-alone process to the sign code will help ensure stakeholders' concerns are addressed. In particular, I think that this raises a larger concern that has become quite [1:26:46 PM] evident throughout this entire process concerning the land development code, which is council's apparent deliberate obstruction of the individual citizen's right to contribute to our democratic and governing processes. It has become quite clear through development of this code and the way council has handled it that you don't want to hear what we have to say about it. You are continually lumping many different issues into this land development code in order to sweep them under the rug. You make it difficult for speakers to sign up such as having to come at 8:00 in the morning before the day in which we are supposed to speak. [Buzzer sounding] I urge you to listen to our testimony and consider the previous votes that we have taken. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [Applause] Mr. Hoffman, you are going to have two minutes to speak and then Annette Garza after that. Is Kevin Richardson here? Why don't you come to this podium. Go ahead, sir, you have two minutes. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and -- [1:27:46 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Hang on a second. There's a but upon you need to press. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor and councilmembers. It's good to see you all again. My name is Kurt Hoffman and I'm a resident of district 4. Mr. Casar's district. And I'm here with a simple request. Please support councilmember Flannigan's effort to pull the city of Austin sign ordinance out of the land development code revision. It should be addressed as part of a separate process, as it was initially. Over the last year I've attended a number of stakeholder sessions that the city dedicated to revision of our sign regulations. Groups like aisd and capital metro initiated the process because they wanted the freedom to install [1:28:46 PM] off-premise advertising and raise much-needed funds. In August the council held a hearing on the matter and directed staff to revise the sign ordinance with the stakeholder recommendations in mind. And do it as part of a stand-alone process. The land development code revision doesn't reflect those directions, but councilmember Flannigan's proposed amendment would fix the problem. It would remove sign regulations from the land development code so that they can be revised separately as the council originally intended. I urge you to support councilmember Flannigan's amendment. Thank you very much for your time and consideration regarding this matter. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, sir. You have two minutes. >> Hi, my name is Annette [1:29:47 PM] Garza deauto. I'm a mother and live in councilmember Flannigan's district. I've never met you personally, but I have conversed with you via email. Like I said, I'm in his district. I attended the stakeholder events related to the aid request for advertising rights, hoping it would help our local schools raise money. I came today to thank Mr. Flannigan for offering an amendment to pull the signs chapter out of the land development code. If the council were to approve the land development code before doing that, our entire stakeholder process would go to waste. And aid would miss automaker on an important source of -- out on an important source of funding. Please take his advice and allow the stakeholders to continue their work. I realize this is a long day for you guys so I thank you for everything that you do. [1:30:49 PM] Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Is Jarod ruska here? Come to this podium? Is Jason birch here? You are up fourth. Tim macc cart I, you will be up fifth. Two minutes. >> Thank you. Thank you for y'all's time. I know it's been a long day and I appreciate your patience. Kevin Richardson, I live in district 1, and I also attended the stakeholder events on capital metro's advertising signs earlier in this year. As a small business owner, I would definitely take advantage of transit ads if they were available. As a long-time austinite in east Austin, I think this would be great for small businesses as well. I Saturday down with a member of councilmember [1:31:50 PM] harper-madison's staff last month to discuss my concerns about the signage chapter this the land development code. It leaves out a lot of the recommendations that we were made at the stakeholder process I was in. I was in this room just this past August when council gave tentative approval to those recommendations and asked staff to come up with a plan in incorporating the local laws. That's why I urge every member of council to vote for the amendment Mr. Flannigan proposed yesterday. He wants the city to consider revising the sign ordinance within a separate process rather than bind it up with the land development code. Thank you again for your time. >> Thank you. I live in district 8, work [1:32:50 PM] in marketing here in Austin. I attended the stakeholder event on new off-premise signs mainly interested in small business advertising with capital metro. I also spoke on the matter before planning commission a few weeks back. When I first saw the land development code rewrite, I felt as though the stakeholders' work was being cut short, somewhat disregarded, perhaps even discarded. In short, there was no evidence of our recommendations in its pages. I found myself wondering why the city went to all the time and trouble of a stakeholder process if the staff intended to rewrite our sign ordinance on their own without input by the people and agencies that it impacts. That's why I respectfully request that you support the amendment councilmember Jimmy Flannigan recently offered. He believes, as I do, our sign ordinance should be written in a stand-alone process, not as part of the [1:33:50 PM] larger land development code. And without that process, I think capital metro and the other stakeholders are unlikely to meet their goals. I urge you to vote in favor of councilmember Flannigan's amendment, and I thank you sincerely for your time today to listen to my concerns. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Introduce yourself and two minutes. >> Z I mallik. I am a land use and real estate attorney in Austin. And on a daily basis I read the code, I analyze it, I interpret it, and I provide advice to clients as to get through this code. In addition to my daily -- my day to day job, I'm also an austinite born and raised and proud I get to live in this town. I'm here to speak in favor of the new land development code draft. I'd like to thank you all for the process you've [1:34:52 PM] undertaken and giving more specific directives back in may. I think the zoning section of the code includes a bolder vision and is a great foundation to begin the process for discussion. However, without changes to the nonzoning section which make up more than two-thirds of the code, I think we will not be able to realize the full potential of the remainder of the code. I'm going to give two examples. First, the competing layers of the nonzoning items. Second, the criteria manuals. So the first point, the competing layers of the nonzoning items, as it stands under the new draft, Austin energy, Austin water and public works all request the same right-of-way for a target property without actually looking at the specific property. So in practicality what it means is a landowner can end up dedicating three different easements for the exact same purpose. I'm not requesting waiving requirements as much as I'm trying to find ways to have those competing interests work together. And the delays I experience [1:35:52 PM] in my day to day job are often caused by these competing priorities, and without resolution will continue to slow down the process. Second, the criteria manuals. I hope that we can see a more specific direction regarding the timing of the the release of those manuals and a clear and transparent process for how those criteria manuals will be adopted. The language and text of the criteria manuals are incredibly important to the text of the code. [Buzzer sounding] Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: After Mr. Birch speaks, is Tim Mccarthy here? You have time donated from Mary Ann baker. Mary Ann baker here? No? What about -- so you will have two minutes. [1:36:53 PM] Felicia foster? You have time donated. Also from Lynn curry. You will have four minutes when you speak. Go ahead, sir, you have two minutes. >> Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and members of council. Jason birch, I'm a small business owner on Duvall street. I'm here to give a voice to other Duvall street business owners and state our concerns over the proposed code. As neighborhood business owners, we welcome increased density and its potential for more foot traffic. We are not fans of the old code as it frequently made it difficult if not impossible to make a modest expansion to a successful small business. We are looking forward to positive change, but we ask the mayor and council to proceed with caution. Duvall street neighborhoods were laid out during a time when street cars ran a loop through Hyde park to take people downtown. The corner business was there for the rest of the neighborhood's needs. Parking lots were not a priority and consequently most Duvall businesses have relied on grandfathering [1:37:55 PM] arrest variances to meet their parking requirements. Realistically we can only rely on so many patron age from inside the radius of walkability. Duvall businesses are at a disadvantage in that we are only served by a single direct bus line to bring customers from other parts of the city. We ask the mayor and council railroad rm1 and r4 are too aggressive for older mixed use neighborhoods who police are heavily reliant on-street parking. A single rm1 lot built out to ten units would absorb an entire block of street parking. Residential cars do not move once they are home, while business parking is far more dynamic. Please consider that the proposed zoning of Duvall may have consequences that you never intended. We ask that you do not forget the importance of the corner business in this new vision that you have for Austin. We -- when the ideal of a compact, walkable city is [1:38:57 PM] discussed, please remember that we are who you are walking to. We are the providers of nearby jobs, goods and services that help take cars off the roads and make our neighborhoods pleasant places to live. [Buzzer sounding] Practice that all night, two minutes perfectly. We'll be sending you an email. [Laughter] >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Mccarthy, you have two minutes to speak. After that Felicia foster. Come up to the podium. Is David Carole here? No? What about Anna guery. You will be up next. Go ahead, sir. Two minutes. >> All right, well, it's very convenient Mr. Birch and I are speaking back to back. I'm a renter in Hyde park, a student at the university of Texas who doesn't have a car and only rarely uses my wife's. I live along Duvall street [1:39:58 PM] and that's what I would like to talk about. It's a great street, one of the arteries I use to get myself around Austin, everything from down to downtown to the red lines when I worked at the domain. I walk on its good sidewalks, ride its great bike lanes that are some of the busiest in the city and ride the frequent 7 bus often packed during rush hour. That's why I was glad to see that the draft code recognizes it as a transportation network priority corridor. I support transportation related zoning in general. Some of my neighbors don't degree I've heard others say Hyde park is the wrong place because it's only two days and unable to accommodate growth. At odds with my experience, at odds with renters and students like myself and our goals as a city. Duvall's strengthist that, it is only two lanes, not a auroraing six-lane highway so using noncar means of travel is safe. [1:40:59 PM] Streets support the multimodal transportation. It's nothing if not a transportation network priority cordon and should be designated as such. Based on under representation of younger people in this process, you may have gotten the impression Hyde parkers are uniformly against a better land use code. I come here as a member of friends of Hyde park. A group that wants to see more housing built in the high opportunity zone we call home. We are Hyde park neighbors for more neighbors. Last fall when the people against code restrictions put prop J up for vote, Hyde park residents voted it down by 63%. We are not opposed to legalizing density, but we're never going to get that in core neighborhoods where it will be most developed. Excel from the new cord and ain orderrability corridor requirements. [Buzzer sounding] The context just right, I hope you make that happen. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Is David [1:42:01 PM] corole here? Anna? Come on down. You have time donated from Beth Dodd. Thank you. Is Gregory Smith here? You will have four minutes when you speak. Is rich Depalma here? You will be up third. Laura Matthews? Did she already speak, I think? Christie green, you will be up after that. You have time donated from Jeremy. >> Jay. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Three minutes when you are up. You have four minutes. Go ahead. >> Good afternoon. Thank you, mayor and council for listening and thank you for the opportunity to speak I'm a native austinite. I current live in district 6. I've also lived in district 10, 5, 7, 9 and 4. I'm in the building [1:43:01 PM] industry. I've been in it for 30 years. Under our current broken code. Our code that was developed to slow growth. It was developed as a way to displays a lot of what happened in the '80s. Did you know that according to the city of Austin data sets we have yet to beat our all-time record of residential building permits issued in 1985? Did you know that a small four-unit site plan can take over a year and $100,000 to get through the city of Austin? That's before the dirt starts to turn. Did you know that attached housing is more complex to build, uses a different set of contractors and codes? Did you know that attached housing construction is also difficult to finance? Especially for a family, but not so much for an investor or out-of-town investor. Did you know properties do not qualify for homestead exemption if they are rental [1:44:02 PM] units? If one investors owns the property, all the units, affordable or not, are subject to tax increases. Did you know that detached homes allow builders to work with residential contractors codes and inspections? Fit within the neighborhood. Character, scale, as well as reduce the barriers to financing and homeownership for families. Detached homes allow an owner the ability to add to their site or sell a portion of their site in order to stay in their home or pay their taxes. Add a home for an aging parent or expand for a result I-generational family. And used in conjunction gives homeowners more options to stay in their community. Cottages on good for homeowners, good for the neighborhood and good for people that provide homes. We need more homes, we need nor density. We need more options other than just attached housing in r4. We need a code that is simplified, less costly to administer, review, [1:45:03 PM] encourages diversity of home types and able to meet the needs of our citizens. Our population is growing fast. Our population has doubled every 20 years. It's been almost 40 since our current land development code was put into place. What was happening 40 years ago? We need to think about that and what we're doing today and where we're going to be 40 years from now. Everyone needs a place to call home. It's a great place to live. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Gary, you have four minutes. Rich Depalma, you have two minutes. Go ahead, please. >> Good afternoon, my name is Anna and I live in district 2. Normally I would be speaking with you about flooding, gentrification or displacement. For me, also before I forget, I sit on the zoning and platting commission. I'm not here speaking for or [1:46:04 PM] representing the commission. I'm also immediate pastor of the contact team and I'm not speaking for the contact team. As a resident of district 2, I am in a position where I'm having to speak for the residents that are Spanish speakers and do not read in English. We are needing to let you know that the information that is available about the land development code is only available in English. They have not been informed of what they need to know and what the impact they are going to get in regards to this proposal. I'm speaking for a family, Jose, they are both 65 years old. I'm speaking for the Sanchez family. They have been living in their home for ten years. The other family has been living in their home 20 years. I'm figure speaking for the Mendoza family. Been in their home 14 years. All are homeowners. One family has their home paid for. The other family has two years to go. The other family, they are almost halfway there. [1:47:04 PM] Two of the families do not own a computer so they would not have a means to access this information through a website. One family has a student -- their student has a school issued computer. They have not received anything, anything in writing. That would be the only way they would know what is going on. They would rely on written notifications. One family does not understand English. One family understands it a little bit, another family understands but cannot speak it. Two families are in the transition Zones. One family is in the r2b proposed zone. One family has seven grown children, lots of grandkids and great grandkids. One family has a 15-year-old and 5-year-old whose kids go to local schools. The questions and comments that they have is we have [1:48:05 PM] received nothing about this proposed land development code. What we do get, sell me your house, sell me your house. We also get phone calls asking me to sell our house. What they are also saying is this is our home. We were hoping to get old here. Today I cannot find a home for the same price for which I bought my home for. Our children are growing up here, two families have their kids in school and they don't want to change schools. Where would we go is what they are asking. One family is saying that if they were kicked out or displaced, they would probably have to move back to Mexico. Is this -- one family is asking is this because we're Mexicans? They are already closing the schools and mostly our Latino kids are enrolled in those schools. Is this a priority to serve the rich? That does not make it right. We also pay taxes. Again, this is what they are [1:49:07 PM] saying. They are saying our home -- the homes here are expensive. Taxes are increasing. We would have to move. Where would we go? Our schools are here. What can we do when the government is telling us to get out and then they take our homes? Why are we being treated like toys in this country? And that is what they are saying. In closing, this is what I'm saying now because of this. What is being done to these families that are not aware of what is being proposed because the information is only being provided in English is not something that is being done for those families, it is something that is being done to those families. One family said that they have heard information about this on the English channels but not the Spanish channels. [Buzzer sounding] They as individuals have a right to due process and they also have a right to equal access to the information. Thank you. [1:50:07 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Laura Matthews, is she here? She already spoke. Thank you. Christie green is here. You have three minutes. Gus peña, is he here? What about Colin Wallace? You'll be up speaking after that. You have time donated by Lillian Wofford. Mr. Depalma, two minutes. >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Mayor Adler: Then you have three minutes. >> Thank you. Good afternoon, council. For identification purposes only, I currently serve as the mayor's appointment to the parks and recreation board and I'm here speaking as a private citizen and not representing any other individual or organization. I first want to express support in creating a city that welcomes everyone and creates diversity of housing options needed while still protecting and leveraging the benefits of our heritage [1:51:07 PM] trees and parkland. This afternoon I'm here to discuss parks and preserving our parkland dedication ordinance. I know each of you feel the weight of your stewardship for our city and I too feel that stewardship for our parkland. Over the decades our ratio of parkland to 1,000 residents has continued to drop, currently rank 71 out of the largest cities in our residents being able walk within a half mile to a park. The city tried to change. This it was wise to do this prior to the land development code and the real impact to parkland for future generations. The 2015 and 2016 process involved a large cross-section of major shake holderrers from both parks and the build community. In January 2016 a consensus was obtained by all the stakeholders and the new parkland dedication ordinance passed. As a result of this exhaustive and collaborative [1:52:08 PM] work, the city of Austin staff and I were able to defend the ordinance across all the ordinances across the state during the 2017 legislative session. This is important. So this past October 2019, the parks and recreation board approved a motion that, quote, strongly urges the city council to uphold and keep the factor land dedication ordinance in its current version, end quote. Personally in the event that changes are made, I hope it is for the better and includes commercial properties as seen in the city of Minneapolis code and requires market value of the land versus the five-year average in the parkland fee calculation. Thank you very much for your time. >> Mayor Adler: You have three minutes to speak, Ms. Green. Colin Wallace, you will have three minutes. Is Bart wattly here? You will be up next. The third speaker. What about Karen Majid? You are here. [1:53:09 PM] Okay. What about Paula Mcdermott? Paula here? You will have two minutes. Go ahead. You have three minutes. >> Good afternoon. I'm speaking for me and my husband. We are here today to voice our objections to the proposed land development code. The proposed code is premised on the claim that higher density will result in more affordable housing. Something we definitely support. Now, this would be the case if you forced developers to build affordable housing. But our reading of the latest code is that to achieve higher density, you are providing developers with even more entitlements than they currently receive. Loosening the compatibility and impervious cover standards and increasing floor-area ratios. This will, as you claim, lead to higher density as it did in Houston. But the new developments will certainly not be affordable if you leave it [1:54:09 PM] to the developers to decide. They will be bigger, which means they will be more expensive. City staff apparently recognizes this fact. Of the projected 400,000 new units forecast to be built in the city under the proposed code, only 9,000 are affordable. That's only 2%. The high-end building spree that the proposed land development code would unleash in the city would also lead to greater gentrification throughout the city. As developers pay even more money for property that they can make even more profit from. This code rewrite would almost certainly result in the eventual displacement of me and my loving husband from our 1,000 square foot home in the north loop neighborhood. Our salaries simply wouldn't be able to keep up with the ever increasing property taxes that the proposed code would precipitate in spite [1:55:11 PM] of our homestead exemption. Where would we go? To the nearest enabled affordable. We would bottom part of the problem by displacing established homeowners in another part of town. Finally, the proposed zoning in transition Zones will dramatically change the residential feel of the affected neighborhoods while only increasing the forecast units in the city by 2%. Are you really willing to destroy the character of Hyde park, north loop, old Enfield, Clarksville, to say nothing of some of south Austin's established neighborhoods, so that developers can bulldoze the still relatively affordable missing middle houses to build high-profit, monstrous time donated tall luxury condos and they also block our sunlight. It's our opinion we will, all of us, forever regret this decision. It will take away a big part of what makes Austin a good place to raise a family or walk a dog or ride your bike [1:56:12 PM] or just hang out in the front yard. The charming uniquely Austin trio lined residential neighborhoods anchored by local area small businesses such as the peddler. [Buzzer sounding] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Mr. Wallace, you are going to have three minutes. Barb wattly? Why don't you come to this podium here. Karen Majid up after that. You have two minutes. >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Mayor Adler: A person donated and the clerk has that now? >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Mayor Adler: Make sure the clerk has that. Walk on down. That would be three minutes for you then. And Margo. >> Thank you, mayor, councilmembers. Thank you for taking on this thankless work that you are doing. My name is Colin Wallace, I'm the CEO of Austin parks foundation. I'm here to be a broken record and represent not only my organization but our [1:57:14 PM] partners at the trail foundation, the Waterloo greenway, the you mean law enforcement garden, the Norwood park foundation, stronger Austin, the Austin youth river watch, and the Barton springs conservancy. Collectively we are partners with you the city in bringing millions upon millions of dollars to bear and tens of thousands of volunteers every year to make our parks better. As rich Depalma said earlier, in 2016 after two years of a lot of public input -- bless you, mayor, and a collaborative comprehensive effort with the development community reca, downtown Austin alliance, Austin builders association, Austin neighborhoods council, we finally updated the parkland dedication ordinance. A very outdated ordinance, I might add. And this collective group of [1:58:16 PM] people is asking you publicly as we did via letter to do no harm to that parkland dedication ordinance. As it stands right now, a fee in lieu is required for parkland dedication 94% of the time. And right now the parks director and parks department have the ability to make that determination in that slim 6% of the cases where land should required. And we're urging you to let them continue to make that decision. We are aware that the mayor has put forth an amendment, pld5, that shifts this to the planning commission, and we are strongly opposed to that. So we urge you to reconsider and renegotiate that amendment and give -- keep the power to make those decisions with the experts, your partners, your appointed parks board, and your paid staff who are here [1:59:18 PM] and who really care about parks. Thank you very much for your time and doing this work. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Before you begin is Karen majik here? Why don't you come up. You will have three minutes. Go ahead, sir. >> My name is Bart Whatley. Atom an architect and been involved in Austin planning issues for many years now. We all want a more affordable and less segregated Austin, but we differ about ways to get there. It is apparent that focusing only on housing supply doesn't work. In fact, it's making things worse. The UT gentrification study highlights the fact that new housing in east Austin is attracting high wage earners and displacing existing residents more than it is leading to a filtering down and result in more affordable housing. We can't solve the problems of affordability until we address income and equality. We can't continue the status [2:00:20 PM] quo. Austin has been prioritizing increased tax revenue over citizens and catering to elites hoping there will be a trickle down effect. We focus on our urban and core instead of a comprehensive look at developing multiple centers. The proposed plan is part of the same process that's been failing Austin. Local policy has had detrimental effects. Commercialization of the housing stock with short-term rentals has increased rental rates and housing costs. More capacity than the market demands leads to inefficient patterns of density and fuels a speculative market. Upzoneing and new construction can destablize areas and remove residents from areas. Case in point the city rolling back density in transition Zones and areas of gentrification. All the while we have 1-800 number told that density simply makes housing more affordable. Solutions, we need development of multiple nodes as this is more supportive of walkability than a sprawling lines of density along transit [2:01:23 PM] corridors. The transit lines can improve the walkability roads. We need to reduce the -- [lapse in audio]. We seem to have an obsession with single-family zoning that has distracted us from adding the proper density to tods in imagine Austin corridors. Thank you. [Applause]. Is Margot Carrico here? After that Chris hernandezo. >> Margot -- >> Mayor Adler: Hang on a second. We're going to start over here and after you speak, the speakers after you will be Chris rendonzo, [calling names of speakers], Lorraine and number 93, Virginia Hoffman. Go ahead. >> My name is Karen and I'm the chair of the austin-travis county food policy board and I'll be reading a portion of out [2:02:24 PM] approved recommendation. We have a food access problem in the city of Austin which is not limited to low income families or segmented communities. Did you know that less than one percent of the food consumed in Austin is produced locally and there is approximately two days of food at any given time in grocery stores. It affects our entire food office. The city of Austin's ongoing land development code creates a unique opportunity to have a lasting and positive impact on the development of a more just and equitable food system. Embedding components of food security and food access into the code revision will allow communities and the city to meet community food system needs. The austin-travis county food policy board serves in the unique capacity of directly advising both the Austin city council and the Travis county commissioners' court to address health disparities, improve the availability of safe, nutritious, locally and sustainbly grown food at reasonable prices for all residents, particularly those in need, end food injustices and ensure the community has a voice in policy decisions that [2:03:25 PM] support a healthy and equitable food system. We are of the member that the current code and provision does not align with food systems components of imagine Austin and does not meet the necessary requirements to support a just equitable food community that meats the needs of residents, developers and businesses and corrects for historical injustices. A food system is an integrated and interconnected network that connects everything that happens with food with where and how it's grown to how it is ultimately disposed of. All current and future land uses in the city have the potential to be part of the food system if codes and ordinances allow for it. As a powerful policy lever, the new code should facilitate dexterity to allow as many uses for the food system as possible, including future developments of the food system not yet implemented or envisioned. We have a number of specific recommendations in the full document which I will send to each of your offices, and it has posted to our board site. The first being to develop the land development code -- the revised land development code using an environmental justice and food equity [2:04:26 PM] lens, including a formal equity analysis. Recently several councilmembers addressed the need for the code to have an equity overlay as it pertains to housing development. We would support that recommendation and request the equity overlay include environmental justice and food equity. The process which the city of Austin chose to undertake has the potential to embed inequities or to lead to improved outcomes that benefit everyone to reach the most equitable outcomes, the process must be a thoughtful one that engages input from a diverse set of stakeholders, however the timeline set out by the city has made it difficult for groups to delve into the code and present a comprehensive response. Additionally, more time would allow for the land development code revision team to complete a formal equity analysis and incorporate its recommendations into the code draft. We appreciate the chance to provide our feedback and look forward to being involved in the process to revise the land development code. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you [2:05:27 PM] T Chris -- >> Margot, and I'm speaking personally. I'd like you to imagine your retirement investment account. The one that you've been contributing to all those years. Now imagine that the control of the funds in that account have been taken over. That investment plan that you chose is being diverted by someone else. To explain, we've been overseas with a foreign service. We served in Baghdad during the surge, we served in Ukraine. The foreign service has mandatory retirement at 65, which meant we had to separate from post to go where? We decided to bank on Austin. We decided not to build a single- family home, we decided to build a duplex. We invested in the neighborhood. How is it that 10 councilmembers can vote to [2:06:28 PM] change my investment? Maybe councilmembers who are not affected, are not in a transition zone should not have a vote in this matter. [Cheers and applause] Okay. Our neighborhood I 70% rental right now. When you choose to turn residential property into high density development in an area that is 70% rental, it tips the delicate balance of home ownership and diversity to outside investor development and short-term rentals. It's no longer a good investment for a homeowner. It is displacement. I hear excuses. City staff say they have to do this because it's directed by councilman date. City manager cronk and mayor Adler say they have to do this because it's city council member mandated. [2:07:29 PM] And you know, when you upzone a neighborhood -- [buzzer sounds] -- Based on bus route -- sorry. Okay. >> Pool: Mayor, could I ask her -- >> This investment should be made by all. If you really believe in density, take it across the entire city. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [Cheers and applause] >> Tovo: Margot -- mayor, I had a quick question for our speaker, Margo. You referred to rental rate which I believe is 70%, I forgot, but you didn't indicate what neighborhood you're from. Would you remind us of the rental rate you cited and which neighborhood. >> I'm in the Hyde park neighborhood. I live at 207 east 46th street. >> Tovo: That and that rental rate that you cited was? >> 70% current, yeah. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> And diverse. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. After Ms. Rodenzo speakers, [2:08:31 PM] is [indiscernible] Here? You will be up here and have two minutes as well. Is Lorraine Atherton here? Lorraine? No? What about Virginia Hoffman. If you would move to this podium. Go ahead, sir. >> Good afternoon, mayor, councilmembers. My name is Chris. I live in district 7. I'm a professional engineer and I have been practicing in Austin for almost 25 years. Over that time I utilized the existing code almost daily. I want to applaud the council for its continued effort to rewrite the land development code. As you know the existing code is unwieldy and has many complicates conflicts and is the result of many decades of piecemeal policy making. The code needs to be a tool [2:09:33 PM] that shapes the community based on our community's priorities. The council wisely provided staff direction on these two -- these priorities and the draft code has been honed to meet these goals. A few comments I have a the proposed ldc rewrite are the following: The zoning is much better if it's home to meet the goal of adding housing where it needs to be in the core and it adds supply both to market rate and affordable housing. The non-zoning sections, the transportation, drainage, landscaping, still contain conflicting priorities which cut away at the shield in the core. City council is requested to prioritize these conflicting requirements. And third, the design criteria manuals which create the ability to implement these goals need to be in alignment with the council direction and not create policy, but follow [2:10:35 PM] policy. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Atherton if you would come on up. Go ahead, you have two minutes. >> Well, I'm chiamo. I'm grateful that all of us are here to work as one body to make Austin moving forward. My area I'm neutral here. I don't want to impose on the city to do what it cannot, neither would I like to support what would not help the society. So I have only four areas to talk about. Code adjustment, gentrification compensation, organized inclusiveness and disability, which is violated in all these things. So in code adjustment I want to say this code should be within American constitution. We should not overstretch our codes. Using quality -- qualified [2:11:36 PM] individuals to draft these codes, political scientists, lawyers, other people you have. Just stop to enforce the code on the people. Gentrification, I just wanted to highlight that people would like to come back to Austin, especially the eastside. I've always proposed some money. They lost more than two billion dollars in businesses and housing and everything. So if we can build apartment complexes like I suggested, we can section it in a way it could be rent to own, could be one big building for everybody, and we can also subsidize from other apartment complexes. We have the ordinances that can provide area for the gentrification issues like the homeless and the black people that are mostly affected at this time. If we can have apartment complexes, have some units, set aside, in connection with the city, that would help us. I'm just here for solution. I'm not here to credit ties [2:12:37 PM] anything. The deed is already done. All we need is mandating. And some of these things can be followed. So we just have to put up with the fact that we have problem and we can solve it. [Buzzer sounds] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. After Ms. Atherton, Ms. Hoffman will speak. Is Ms. Atherton here? Was not? Is Chris Bradford here? Why don't you come up to this podium. Go ahead. >> Good afternoon, mayor and city council. Thank you for taking the [indiscernible] And allowing me two minutes to try to save my neighborhood. My name is Virginia Hoffman. I live in a small pocket neighborhood called bow site. It was started in 1909 by an internationally renowned doctor who contributed to medical science. He owned and hardscaped most of bow site. As a result many of the oak [2:13:38 PM] trees from the late 1600s are preserved and sprinkled throughout the neighborhood. As a result many of the single-family homes are intentionally large and ensure their preservation. Sorry. The neighborhood is situated between two major corridors, 38th street and red river. Given the proposed transition of five lots in, we are doubly hit from two sides. This entire neighborhood will be obliterated. Excuse me. My lot is the fifth lot in and it's rezoned to allow 96 unrelated people on it. My house never to me has the same number and the house next to that has the same number. I do not call that a transition zone. That seems totally impossible and shocking to me. As mayor and council, I care about my neighborhood and for 35 years I have lived [2:14:39 PM] there and acted as a responsible citizen. Anyway, I ask that you consider what you're doing with this plan. I have personally invested much time into my community. I go off and I clean all the graffiti off in the whole neighborhood and I've done it for three years personally. So what you're proposing is taking my home away from me. So I ask you to look at the details of your code, at the details of the land, at the details of the neighborhood before you approve this code. It's like opening the floodgates before you have even notified the people below of the storm that is coming. They do not understand the detail of this code. [Applause]. And I do not think that you intend that, I really don't. I think you've put a lot of work into this and want something good from it and I do too. Thank you. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [2:15:48 PM] Chris Bradford and after you Michael curry. Come on down. You have time donated from David baldic here? What about George Henderson? >> [Inaudible - no mic]. >> Mayor Adler: Why don't you come to the clerk if you haven't donated time, she will take care of that. So then you would have three minutes. After that speaker number 96 would be Steve Swanson. Is Mr. Swanson here? All right. So you will be at the next podium. Go ahead, sir. >> Thank you. And I know you've gotten an earful this morning and this afternoon about zoning. Zoning is what generates the most opposition and beganners the most enthusiasm, but I'm afraid that the zoning code is drawing attention away from other equally important parts of the code such as transportation, drainage and water quality and I would like to especially pa size one specific change to the transportation code. [2:16:50 PM] The proposed transportation code would give the transportation director virtually unlimited authority to reduce development size and intensity. Section 238 Tennessee 30 D in particular gives the transportation director the authority to reduce intensity or intensity of the development to the extent necessary to ensure that the capacity of the street network can safely accommodate vehicle trips generated by the proposed development. The section also gives the director the authority to delay or require phasing of a development indefinitely until the city constructs transportation infrastructure that the director deems necessary. This expansion of authority would apply to any development generating over 1,000 trips per day, which is a 2,000 square foot fast food restaurant. This provision would essentially eliminate by-right zoning in the city of Austin. Despite what the headline number is, despite what density you believe you are approving for a site, the transportation director would be able to [2:17:50 PM] second-guess that determination and reduce the density based on a loose judgment about what can be safely accommodated. You might think you're approving a 300 unit apartment complex on a corridor and the transportation director can decide no, it's really just going to be 150 units. It is important to have clear objective standards for the zoning code. With a provision like this you don't really know what you can build until you go in with a site plan and go through the administrative process. That's just as bad as what we have now. In fact, it's worse. So I encourage you to reduce -- remove that provision. Thank you. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Curry, you're going to have three minutes. Mr. Swanson, if you would come to this podium. After you, Jay Crossley. Is Jay here? And you have time donated from Heather Yu and Matt [indiscernible]. Is Matt here? [2:18:50 PM] Then you will have three minutes. And after that ray Collins will speak for two minutes. >> Okay. Mayor, members of the council, thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Michael curry. One of the things that the nunns taught me in elementary school that made a big impression on me is that waste is a sin, whether it's the waste of food, whether it's waste of time, whether it's the waste of talent or any other part of life or a life itself. And I've been following the code revision over the last few years and I'm continuously reminded of the sisters' words. I see a sinful waste of people's time, waste of money and most importantly a wasted opportunity. When a community has a big project or confronts a big issue, especially a potentially contentious one, leadership can do two things. It can seize the opportunity to bring the community [2:19:50 PM] together around that issue or it can, as the city has done with the code revision process, to handle it in a way that turns the issue into a hatchet that leaves cleaves the community further and sews distrust and has a lopsided document that incorporates extreme ideas. That is what we have now. It's time to take a step back. It's time to bury the hatchet. From the start some of us have been calling for a consensus- based approach to code revision. After codenext was terminated last year, I pleaded with the city manager to adopt this approach. Unfortunately the city has gone in a different direction. Some may think that a broad agreement is not possible on contentious issues like code revisions. I know that it is possible because I've been there. The last time the code was revised after city efforts stalled, the city had the good sense to take a step back and let the stakeholders try to come [2:20:51 PM] together on contested issues. That council valued a code supported by a broad cross-section of the community. It was hard, it was tedious and sometimes tense, but the community did it, a code built on consensus was unanimously passedly the council. I call on you to go back to the community and give the community a chance to heal itself. Commit now to a consensus code that has the support of the full council. That would be the right thing to do. But since people don't always do the right thing, we have laws. And the law provides that when there's a significant controversy over land use changes it takes a three-fourth vote of the city council to affect that change. That is effectively the statutory definition of consensus. At a minimum you should embrace that standard. You shouldn't be dragged kicking and screaming to that standard. This community at a minimum deserves a code that is good enough, fair enough, [2:21:52 PM] equitable enough, smart enough and has broad enough smart to earn nine votes. Anything less is invalid as to those who will protest and protest aside does an extreme disservice to the community. Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Crossley, do you want to come up here for your four minutes? Mr. Swanson, why don't you speak. Mr. Collins, you're on deck. Go ahead. >> Good afternoon, Steve Swanson. I'm here as a grandparent and a 20 year volunteer in public education. I participate in a lot of community-based activities. My message today is the city of Austin made a promise in 2012 and it's broken it. The promise made was about the process for planning and the goals of planning for our future. The city of Austin, the staff and the council, I would encourage you strongly [2:22:52 PM] to seize the opportunity to understand and learn the processes and goals that were in the 2012 plan. And then fulfill them. Promises broken, the plan says partner up. The departments within the city are not partnering well as I understand it, and certainly the city and the county and the school districts and neighbors, as evidenced by today, are not partnering well. We were promised and shared the importance of leadership. We need leaders. Both the government and community to bring the community together to realize the potential in the plan since 2012. Austin hasn't fulfilled the process for detailed work plans. These would have been developed by a combination of city and county and school district and neighborhood people that actually would have been followed. [2:23:53 PM] Priority program number three actually calls for the joint committee, the city, county and school district, to lead the effort in education and workforce development and business development. That hasn't occurred. The plan called for enthusiastic community engagement -- automatic community engage, -- authentic community engagement, people able to share and understand and make decisions together. And there was supposed to be regular monitoring and evaluation to ensure it was unfolding well and not wasting our resources and not waste our money. Goals that were promised -- [buzzer sounds] Oh, that was quick. Sorry. >> Mayor Adler: Finish your thought. >> Thank you. Please take the time to learn about these processes and the goals in the imagine Austin plan. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Crossley, you have four minutes. Mr. Collins. You have two minutes. Is Wayne Jeremy here? Wayne Jeremy? No? What about Gary Westerman? Mr. Westerman, you will be up after that. You have time donated from [2:24:55 PM] Linda Westerman, so you will have three minutes. You're third up. And then Craig nazer here? I thought I saw him earlier. Thanks. Go ahead, sir. >> Thank you, mayor and councilmembers, for serving all the people of Austin and not just those of us privileged to be here in this room today and for the hard task ahead of you. My name is Jay Crossley. I live in district 4 with my wife and my five-year-old son. I worked for a 501(c)3 called farm and city and we work across the state on public policy issues dealing with transportation, sustainability and equity issues. We're trying to end traffic deaths across our state. We're trying to fight climate change by changing Texas public policies at all levels of government. We're trying to give access to transit for all people. We're trying to change Texas institutions to be more equitablnd get more equitable results. And a lot of times I'm a big data nerd and all this stuff [2:25:56 PM] and I show you guys a lot of powerpoints about growth in our region and you've seen it all. And it's time to act. And used space zoning has been a terrible mistake. It was born out of segregation and it has not served us well. Our current city in many ways is a disaster. Based on our car-dependent form. People are dying in our streets. More people will die this year in traffic crashes than last year and we've done a lot of great work in vision zero, but we need to take this seriously. We need to build a community that's safe and equitable for us all. Austin is more sprawling than any other Texas metro region. Primarily based on the city's land development code and the policies of campo. We drive more in Austin than in Houston because of these policies. And we cut down millions of [2:26:56 PM] trees every year. And if you care about trees and open space in Austin, you should allow people to live in the city of Austin because our region is destroying our land, and the campo official regional forecast is we will convert about 750 square miles of rural area to suburban. Primarily based on your policies here. And if you care about climate change, this is the thing you can do. This is your legacy as an elected official is to make this city sustainable. And vision zero, requiring car storage at bars? Come on. And most of our growth is people of color. Hispanic people lead our growth in our region. We add about 60,000 people a year and it's going to increase. Much of that growth is people being born here or coming from the other parts of Texas. We should be welcoming and we should be a thriving community and we shouldn't block the people of color who are coming to our region [2:27:57 PM] from living healthy places in the city of Austin. Ownership is the wrong metric to learn about affordability. I'm really concerned about the uprooted report, which defines affordability based on home ownership. People who are very low income don't own homes and so you have bad data and you need better data to make these decisions. And it's lack of zoning which causes displacement. Look at neighborhoods like the east Cesar Chavez. Completely displaced and has not grown in population. Look at other neighborhoods like over on east Riverside, but east of pleasant valley where the people have been added at all income levels. Look at Mueller, people have been added at all income levels. We need to learn from -- we know that density does provide affordability and no matter how many times people make up talking points, it's not true. We need homes for people. We need homes for a lot of people. We should be providing for at least half of our regional growth in this [2:28:57 PM] city. And your goal of 405,000 capacity actually isn't enough for what I want. That's not equitable and sustainable, but it's a lot better. So please don't go backwards from the progress we've made, all of the long work with so many people involved, but please make it as good as you can. [Buzzer sounds] And one final last thought, the E.P.A. Recommends not using the ite trip generation models and recommends you use the mxd and you could at least have the code allow for the mxd trip generation models. Thank you very much. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Collins, you have two minutes. And then you will have two minutes. Go ahead, sir. >> Can I have my slide, please? My name is ray Collins. I chair the south manchaca neighborhood plan contact team. Our geographic area is bounded by Ben white, stassney, manchaca and south first. The northwest quadrant of the map before you. Today I'm recording a vote which arose from an [2:29:57 PM] undistricted discussion of the ldc rewrite at our November 7th meeting and the clerk has a handout for you. Our neighborhood plan calls for owner-occupied short-term rentals only. The contact team voted unanimously against non-owner occupied short-term rentals as a land use. Prohibiting this land use is now even more important since the appeals court ruling on Austin's center ordinance. I estimate that since about 2012 there are hundreds of hours of video in the atxn archive of austinites telling the planning commission and council that they don't want non-owner occupied short-term rentals in their neighborhoods. And slide off, please. Following on to that, on may third, 2018, councilmember kitchen called a meeting in which the Southwood neighborhood association and the south snnp contact members and officers told Greg Guernsey, Jerry [2:30:58 PM] rusthoven and Laura Keeton of the planning and zoning department and dsd's mark Walters, among other things, that we didn't want non-owner occupied strs in our neighborhood. Even more recently there were two zoning cases which council didn't hear because they were withdrawn last December 7th in face of neighborhood resistance expressed as petitions. The builder was noted for building homes selling over a million, but the fact the sf5 zoning allowed for non-owner occupied strs was another important factor. Finally I'll point out that one lot down from one of these properties there's an sf3 subdivision with eight housing units, an hoa condo regime where the owners are only paying packs on 3100 square feet each and non-owner occupied strs are not allowed land use. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, Mr. Collins. [2:32:00 PM] Introduce yourself. >> Gary Westerman. >> Mayor Adler: You have three minutes. >> Nearly 50 years ago there was a neighborhood north of Austin called river oaks. Over the years the neighborhood was surrounded by Austin and annexed in 1990s. Parmer lane and Lamar were up sized and border the neighborhood to the north and east. If you look at the map, what we have is with the -- that is the size of the neighborhood. The ldc impact to it is 40%. I'll speak on this. Wells branch creek, that is a flood zone and if you go over to the left to the west, 10% of that is duplexes already. So we have a little bit of an area here of what's called r2-a zoned remaining. Now, with this one the wells [2:33:01 PM] branch creek, they have 50-year-old drainage pipes in this neighborhood. With all of this ldc impact, especially on the far side, those are broken. They're broken right now. And this causes 12 million gallons that comes down that creek from a dam right to the other side of this, to the upstream. Whenever it comes down, whenever it gets to the end there's a bridge which is a dam. In that dam you have a large whirlpool that forms that takes down more trees, so y'all are calling this an r2-a in a flood zone. Hey, I could easily say that 20% is unzoned. It will be at least 2025 before anything is done about that bridge. [2:34:01 PM] Minimum. And that would Kennedy on if y'all change your -- depend on if you change your mind and put another flood zone as a priority. I was looking at another one on imagine Austin last night and I don't see where that's been implemented. It was 2016 it gave Zones. All I see on this -- the -- the Zones that we have is roads just stop. There's nothing out there where you can put -- you don't have anything planned out there. So that seems to have gone away. The next one is on the one street to the north, I know of at least six seniors that live there. And they're on fixed incomes. So from that one, okay, you're going to get some of your people. They'll have to move out because they can't pay the taxes on fixed incomes. Conclusion: Would you please change our 40% ldc impact to what the city is [2:35:04 PM] of two percent or five percent, somewhere in between it? Not 40%. It would be nice if you would fix the creek while you're at it. Thank you for your time. >> Garza: Thank you, sir. Mr. Nazer, I'm going to call a couple more names so people can line up. Roy Whaley is next. Is he here? Amanda mazino. Patches bra sear, Charles deharcourt and [indiscernible]. You have two minutes, Mr. Nazer. >> Greetings, Austin city council. My name is Craig nazer. The line out the door this morning reminded me of a city council meeting almost 30 years ago when Austin was in a similar articulation point for our future. What that means is that you should pay attention. Density does not equally affordability. If it did, New York City would have been the most [2:36:05 PM] affordable city in America. [Cheers and applause] It's not! Affordability is a critical issue for the future of Austin. At the same time the Earth is on the verge of an environmental crisis. Climate change is upon us with rapidly increasing risk of flooding. Affordability and climate change are two issues that are frequently discussed publicly. Unfortunately there are more and more frequently pitted one against the other yielding so-called affordability with environmental sacrifice. What is less often discussed publicly is the amount of profit expected by those who develop our city for their own game. Without such discussions, affordability and the environment will always be sacrificed for profit. To sacrifice impervious cover limits to achieve affordability is inequitable. It is also green-washing. There is no question in my mind that this new code will increase impervious cover. It also creates incentives [2:37:05 PM] to maximize allowable impervious cover without any corresponding changes to existing storm water infrastructure. Combined with a non-linear predictions of climate change, rainfall amounts, this will increase flooding risk. The proposed code also provides no mechanism to fund more parkland near the increased density. If you allow increased deny without additional nearby parkland, not only will you degrade the parkland we already have through increased use, you will also be creating the Austin ghettos of the future. [Applause]. [Buzzer sounds] Easy access for all to the natural environment is a hallmark of Austin. A new code should not change that. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Whaley, do you want to come on up. You have two minutes and then [indiscernible], patches, Charles, Marissa. Marissa is by the way, speaker 107. >> Mr. Mayor, before you start my time I would like to ask an opportunity for [2:38:06 PM] everyone on the dais to stand up. Everyone in the auditorium to stand up and shake it out a little bit. [Laughter]. You've got to be tired of sitting up there. There you go, Ann. Everyone shake it out. >> Mayor Adler: Your time is starting. >> You got your blood flowing again. Start the time. My name is Roy Whaley. I'm a on long time environmental political activist here in Austin, Texas, central Texas. I want to start out by saying to not -- to want to change portions of the code is not to pay you don't support the code. To say that you support the code doesn't mean that you don't need to change portions of the code. I don't think too many people would argue that we need a new land development code because that's what we fight about all the time. What I do want to say, I want to -- there's so much to say about the code, but I want to -- to focus on park [2:39:06 PM] issues this afternoon. And specifically pocket park issues. As we densify the corridors, and I'm not pro -- I'm not anti-density. I am pro -- I am actually to a certain extent pro density on the corridors. But as we put more people there, we've got to have more places walkable for the people that are going there. We have to go back to the old Cat Stevens song, where do the children play, where do the puppies poop? [Laughter]. That's the first version. That wasn't the one that made the airwaves, but it's still true. You have to have a way to have your kids go, for you to go. The studies are there that show just seeing something green improves your mental health. And we have to have a place to have the puppies go poop because that improves their health, period. We're not -- people aren't [2:40:08 PM] going to put their dogs in a car and drive to zilker park or Roy Guerrero park to take their dogs for a walk. They have to have the pocket parks. [Buzzer sounds] Please maintain that. That was in there to start with, it has to stay there. It was in there to start with, it has to stay there. It was in there to start with, it has to stay there. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Who do you have as the next speaker in I've lost it on my computer. Why don't you come up. >> Patches Brashear. >> I live in dove springs and the equity overlay is not enough to protect me and my neighbors from displacement. I ask that all low income neighborhoods be excluded until we see success in high income areas after the rezoning. We have no choice but to accept there will be new developments, but it needs to happen in a manner that reduces disruption to current residents and stable eyes long time residents to [2:41:08 PM] also enjoy all the new benefits and amenities that development does bring. It's vital to create anti- displacement Zones to protect communities from economic effects of luxury development. We don't just need more housing, we need housing that poor people can afford. Prohibit large scale luxury in at risk neighborhoods. These high cost developments are the largest cause of displacement. Only allow small and medium scale development while protecting existing affordable housing. Demand that 100% of new housing in these heirs are affordable. No public giveaways for our already low cost properties. Banks make bad neighbors and we want local ownership and to have resources that promote home ownership, not just affordable rentals. Create tax freezes for long-term residents and low income communities to help people stay when gentrification poses a risk. Offer owner incentives for ads, remove restrictions on rv and tiny home parking to create more density while providing very low cost rentals to people who desperately need housing right now. Please allow special protections for seniors. [2:42:08 PM] They are the fastest growing homeless population. We must safeguard the investments of people who work decades to ensure they had housing in their older years. Give tax referrals to families who maintain long standing ownership. Dove springs is also an environmentally sensitive area. It is prone to flooding and we need to limit impervious cover by limiting the scale of development in our area. Williamson creek and several small spring fed ponds are inside the proposed transition zone in dove springs. We must have special protections in these areas. It's an injustice for city council to take actions they know to be detrimental to their constituents. We aren't asking for luxury apartments and microbreweries, we're asking for fair representation from our elected officials. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Amanda mazino here? No? What about Charles tarcourt? [2:43:09 PM] What about Marissa Mckinney? Why don't you come on down. You will have two minutes. Is Tricia Roberts here? Why don't you come on up to this podium. You have time donated by Bonnie cajo. You will have three minutes. Why don't you come on up. 109 is the next speaker after that, Nick van bavel. Is Nick here? Okay. Why don't you get ready because you will be up. Walk up to the podium when it clears. Allen -- Ann graham? Is she here? You have time donated from Lindsey Darington. You will have three minutes when the time comes. Go ahead. You have two minutes. >> Thank you, members of the city council for allowing me the opportunity to speak today. My name is Marissa Mckinney and I work at Coleman and associates where I'm a licensed landscape architect. I want to thank everyone for their hard work on codenext thus far. That being said, I want to emphasize this is still just a draft. I see this as an opportunity to further address areas of the code that can be improved. This needs to be a workable [2:44:10 PM] solution and a marked improvement from our current land development code. Beyond the zoning code there are so many elements that go into building a great city and we need to look at them as a whole. The most pressing issue is revisions to the criteria manuals referenced in the draft code. These have to be issued for comments prior to finalizing the code. We can't comfortably adopt a code when we don't know the full extent to which it will be applied. I have specific concerns regarding the landscape tree preservation and functional green sections of this draft which I have expressed directly in written form to city staff. Lastly, is the consideration to remove the commercial irrigation requirements for new landscapes as part of codenext. As someone who has installed and specified irrigation for over a decade, I can truthfully say that irrigation systems don't wastewater, people wastewater. Removing this requirement would have detrimental effective communication on newly installed landscapes that help not only beautify our city, but stabilize our [2:45:11 PM] slopes and enhance water quality. I'm grateful for the work that you've done and are continuing to do. I commend you for what you're doing to help us realize the goals of imagine Austin. And together we can make Austin a more affordable, liveable, compact and connected city for all. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Kitchen: Mayor? Ms. Mckinney, if I could ask you to send your concerns to my office. >> I will do. >> Kitchen: Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Is Maria mcconnor here? I may have called her earlier and I understand she may be here now. If she comes back we'll call her. Go ahead, you have three minutes. The next speaker, if you would come to the podium. >> Thank you. My name is Tricia Roberts. I have lived in the Rainey district for 26 years and I have spoken to you before, as have many of my neighbors, about the problems we face on a daily basis due to the unmanaged development you V must far permitted in the Rainey [2:46:13 PM] neighborhood. I was among 50 Rainey residents who presented -- who were present in this chamr on Thursday. And I have followed my council woman's advice to return today, and it's been a long day. For almost 10 years our neighborhood association has tried to work with you, but with little success. Together we initiated the big red dog traffic study in our area with funding from a developer, but since completion the city has refused to look at the results. We have also held numerous discussions with our district council woman's office, the city manager's office, the development commission, the Austin transportation department and the Austin police department. We have worked tirelessly to identify inexpensive ways to resolve or alleviate the many issues we face, but little has happened to date. [2:47:14 PM] Now we are a residential community of approximately 3,000 taxpayers and voters. That will soon grow to more than 5,000 when all currently projected and approved projects have been completed. We plus a handful of bars and residents co-exist on the edge of the city in a geographic backwater of about 16 square blocks. We have only two ways in and out of our community. We have inadequate sidewalks, poor street lighting, no crosswalks, no bike lanes, and more than three times the amount of traffic our local streets were designed to accommodate. To add to this evolving chaos bypassing the proposed code and by removing all restrictions on building heights in Rainey is completely irresponsible. So I am asking you to do the right thing and vote against [2:48:16 PM] unlimited F.A.R. For the Rainey district. Thank you for listening to me. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Amanda mazino here? No? Ann graham I think is the next speaker. You have time donated. Three minutes. Is Greg Anderson here? >> [Inaudible - no mic]. >> Mayor Adler: Greg, you have donated from Angela Hubin? No? What about -- so you will have two minutes when you come up, Mr. Anderson. Mr. Van bevel. >> Yes, thank you. Thank you, mayor, thank you, city council. My name is Nick van bavel. I'm a resident of Hyde park, district 9. [2:49:17 PM] I'm here to speak in favor of historic preservation and against the current land development code as it's proposed. I moved to Austin in 1982 and I brought a 1200 square foot bungalow in Hyde park in 1987. It was built in 1918, very cute, a very special home, and many homes on our block are -- were at the time similarly constructed. Although we've since moved from that house, we've stayed in Hyde park ever since so if I did my math right, that's 32 years that we've been in Hyde park. What makes our neighborhood special is -- and all of Austin special is that our neighborhood has unique characteristics. We have tree-lined streets. We have sidewalks. We have older homes. We have historic homes. [2:50:17 PM] Yes, we also have apartments. And we have multi-family residences. But it's not one giant block. Everything does not look the same. It's very diverse. We're a diverse neighborhood. We are economically diverse, racially diverse, and we're one of the highest density neighborhoods in Austin already. Okay. What are we afraid of? Good lord, we are afraid that this new code is going to destroy our neighborhood. It's going to irrelevant irrevokebly change our neighborhood. And there's something about history. Once you destroy it, you can never get it back. The philosopher George Santa Ana said those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. And that's exactly what's going to happen to our neighborhood if you move forward with this code. [Buzzer sounds] Approximate thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [2:51:19 PM] Ms. Graham, you have three minutes. Greg Anderson if you would come up to this podium, you will have two minutes. And then Nancy bessant, David foster, Cyril. Speaker 117 is Zoila Vega. >> My name is Ann graham. Thank you all for your time. On may 2nd, city council's directive said, quote, the new code should focus on the size and scale of the built environment and regulate uses through context sensitive policies that are clearly identified in the code and apply equitablely throughout the city. The proposed land development code does not meet the all parts of town criteria, nor the context sensitive policies that are contributed to the anger and frustration that you've been hearing from your constituents over the past months. Please slow this process down as the statesman shared [2:52:20 PM] in its editorial yesterday, indoles residents help shape their future. I'm in district 9, I've been 25 years in Hyde park. The local historic district program was set up by the city to preserve the history and character of Austin's unique neighborhoods, yet one of ours is being threatened by the egregious upzoning proposed for Duval as a transit corridor. For starters, please take Duval off the list. It was not identified as such in the imagine Austin. It is contrary to the promise of the Austin bargain. It doesn't allow for parking in most sections. And if there's an upzoning on the side streets there's no place to put additional cars. It isn't even a through road. It starts at university of Texas and ends in north Austin. It's only 2.3 miles long. Second, respect the local historic district program. Wanting to preserve older homes in a neighborhood does not mean putting them in amber. It means cultivating, nurturing and saving the future. Our local historic district has done just that, contrary to what most people think, based on a percentage of [2:53:21 PM] square foot in Hyde park, only 36% of our dwellings are single-family homes, 29% are apartments, 24% are duplexes and tri plexes. 20% as you've heard of our residents are renters and our monthly rents on an average are $500 a month less than the near eastside. We want to foster affordability in our neighborhood. How? Require that the affordability incentives be invested in situ. One more minute? Do not support landfill. We support three units per property. Save the front house and build one to two units in the back, maintaining the integrity of the context sensitivity of your challenge. Ironically if you read the statesman editorial you will notice that it said the part of the rush, one of the challenges is that fees such as fees developers would pay to support affordable housing in exchange for being able to build more units is on honoring that [2:54:21 PM] this is a developed driven project and where is the homeowner in this opportunity to afford to build these units? [Applause]. So the proverbial you is not us, it is the developer. Furthermore it incentivizes demolition which does not help the waste controls of the city. Flood controls have not been understood. The potential loss of tree canopy due to the increase in impervious cover from 34 to 64 percent is an increase in utility bills. And has anybody looked at the solar rebate program? $50 million has been invested by the city of Austin in residential -- [buzzer sounds] -- Solar rebate programs and there's nothing in this code that identifies what new buildings might shade out and make those sites unworthy. Thank you very much. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Oak hill>> It's been suggested we do this. We are down to 200 some-odd speakers to go. [2:55:21 PM] Greg Anderson is the next speaker and you have two minutes. And then Nancy Bess a an, you will go next after Mr. Anderson. David foster and then Cyril. Mr. Anderson, you have two minutes. >> Hello, hey, city council. Love all the attention to this issue and happy to see all the folks who are here today and of course the folks who are not represented well today, primarily the lack of renters and young people who are all more cost burdened by the day. Our land development code was written a long time ago as you know. It's now three years older than the average austinite. It was written in energy was cheap, Reagan was president and low density sprawl was all the rage. Despite knowing better today we all live under that same code with the same results, forcing people to live in auto dependent suburbia because we are unable to welcome new neighbors is doing far more damage than any of us care to admit. Zoning that favors inefficient land use drives [2:56:22 PM] cost and sprawl. Enough is enough. It's recognized more by the day that where you live determines how well you live. Blocking people from living in high opportunity areas with the hope of protecting the physical character of a neighborhood is done so at the expense of social character, our people, our neighbors. Please allow for more people to live closer to their work, their family and their friends. What's more northern protecting inner city suburban lifestyles from change or allowing a diversity of income earners to call or most amazing areas home. Price for inaction is staggering. How many people have to wake up in a tent or a car and head to work before we legalize housing in Austin, Texas. Housing is a community benefit. Please help us adopt a new land development code that allows for responsible land use as soon as possible. Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Bessant, you have two minutes. And then -- why don't you go [2:57:22 PM] ahead. You have two minutes. >> Thank you. The October 4th version of the land development code works a little better for my house than version 3, but it still needs work. In the 1980s a friend heard that a rare fish was, quote, standing in the way of progress, unquote, because a power company wanted to build another dam. My friend said if the fish had been preventing construction of a wind or solar power plant this might be standing in the way of progress, but the fish was actually just in the way of another dam that would make people use more energy and make the builders rich. Therefore he was routing for the fish. [Laughter] I bought my little house in brentwood at a time that people wanted big houses in Round Rock. I bought near a bus corridor so when I'm old I can walk to transit. Now that that foresight puts me in a, quote, transition zone, unquote, so my home's future seems unpredictable because of escalating taxes and I'm being criticized for standing in the way of progress. [2:58:23 PM] Because people who have been driving many miles daily for decades suddenly want to claim the small carbon footprint that I chose to live with for the last 38 years. Until this plan creates lots of mandatory, truly low priced affordable housing, I'm not standing in the way of progress, just in the way of people getting rich. Don't let builders buy out of providing affordable housing units. Don't displace the residents that made the central Austin a nice place to live. Make sure that retired people, diverse working class people, artists, musicians, et cetera, can actually afford this housing. Make sure that there's enough off street parking that trash collection and fire and rescue vehicles can maneuver through our streets. Don't take away our right to prevent our property from being taxed or zoned away from us without any say in it. [2:59:23 PM] Until then we're not standing in the way of doing anything except people getting rich. Take the time to do it right. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: After Mr. Foster speaks, is serial Barrios here? Come on down and Mr. Foster, you have two minutes. >> Please excuse the sunglasses, I just had cataract surgery and I have to say I didn't realize today how beautiful you all are. >> Mayor Adler: You get an extra minute. [Laughter] >> I get an extra minute at least. I'm here to speak on behalf of clean water action on the draft code and want to begin by thanking you all and your staff as well as city staff for all the hard work that's gone into this. In particular I appreciate watershed protection department's willingness to meet with us, talk via email and phone, but we're not there yet. We don't completely agree with watershed protection or [3:00:23 PM] this draft code. A couple weeks back you all received a letter from six environmental organizations where we highlight 12 items we like about the draft code, but discuss 13 other items where we think more work needs to be done. I want to briefly discuss a couple of those each. We like that the draft code lowers the trigger for water quality controls from 8,000 square feet of impervious cover to 5,000 square feet of impervious cover for new developments and redevelops. Close to my heart we like that there's a provision in the code that would first incentivize and require large developments and redevelops to use either city reclaimed water or water captured on site to meet nonpotable needs inside those buildings. This is not only going to stretch our water supply, it's an afordability component because out postpones that trigger with the lcra. Once we reach that point we'll have to start spending more for the water we draw from the river. [3:01:24 PM] It also lower utility bills because they will be able to use water captured on site. A couple items more work needs to be done. We're not happy with the provision that allows staff to on its own decide whether to remove heritage trees along corridors. Now, it is true this will save some number of weeks for some of these developments to happen, but we're talking trees that have been there decades or a century or more. And if you are not protecting trees-why wouldn't we do this for frees everywhere? [Buzzer sounding] Obviously I don't have time to finish. I've seen some of your proposed amendments. We like some, others maybe not so much. May we look forward to working with you and watershed protection to move this forward. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [Applause] >> I'm in the northwest part of Austin. I believe it's district 10. And I am new enough to Austin, I have to admit I didn't understand almost 90% of what was just said. [3:02:25 PM] I do want to share my perspective which is unique. Being a new resident from tech of California, I want to tell you the curbside appeal of Austin has plummeted. There's a term in software called code smell and I've listened to enough here today as uninformed as I am to tell you that you've got code smell. If you had something that was rejected a year ago in a general election, it was rewritten and released only two months ago with major revisions, and it was developed on a small budget of 8, 9 million. By a small team. Then those are signs of code smell. My impression of Austin -- my impression of Austin, even though I visited family here over the years is that it's a town with a -- instead of being a town that [3:03:25 PM] was an area -- an area called the domain, it is now a town getting into the practice of regularly declaring eminent domain. To get to the actions I think that are required is, first, just with people that are very well informed, there's already confusion about what your next steps are. So I'd say your first step would be an educational outreach. The other thing is your mobility plan needs some work. [Applause] You need to get something worked out where your light rail actually runs to the places you say it's going to run. And you need to add the number of buses that matches the 50 people that are coming here a day. If you want to publish your economic assumptions to how you are going to support the monthly payments -- [buzzer sounding] -- I have more. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. >> Pool: Mayor, could I ask the speaker to finish [3:04:26 PM] that last sentence? Mayor, I'd like to ask the last speaker to finish his sentence. I think he was cut off mid-sentence. >> Let me at least finish on a positive. Basically I was going to talk about your assumptions housing payments. The tech workers that are coming from California and other spots around the country, how is fame treating you? We know Amazon ended up supposedly in Brooklyn and that didn't happen. Facebook is spending more time on capitol hill than they are in mineral park. Google is here. Yes. And apple is really here. But how much of their billion dollar funds for affordable housing for the crisis that exists in northern California is going to come and support Austin when you guys get into trouble? [3:05:27 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Great. Thank you, sir. [Applause] >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Mayor Adler: I'm sorry? >> [Inaudible - no mic on]. >> Mayor Adler: Donating time to? >> Peggy macio donated time to me. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Yes, we have that. So you'll have three minutes. Next speaker is Zola Vega marcino. You have time donated from Sharon Blythe. Is Ms. Blythe here? Great. Thank you. So you'll also have three minutes. Eric wise will be up next. Is Eric wise here? Mr. Wise? You have time donated from Susan lippe. Is she here? No? Then you'll just have two [3:06:27 PM] minutes. Go ahead, sir, you have three minutes. >> Thank you. My name is Michael with the Austin heritage tree foundation and I live in south Austin. Today is pearl harbor today so please take a moment to remember and honor our service members that help keep us safe and free. I'm speaking today -- could you put my slides up? I am speaking today about changes to the heritage tree ordinance. And ask that council keep the public hearing for tree removal variance and create a heritage tree incentive program. Possible amendments have been posted by councilmembers to the council message board. City staff told you in your work session that the administrative variance will apply in a very small number of cases. Fewer fund -- if you were funding a fire station and staff told you it would only take a small number of tax dollars to build it, would [3:07:27 PM] that be sufficient to build it? A large number of heritage trees could be affected by the change to an administrative variance. On this slide is a satellite map of the tree and know pee from 2016 overlaid with the activity corridors from the growth map. Hair teenager trees over 30 inches in diameter are shown as medium to dark green areas so maybe there are 1,000 trees that could be affected. Certainly more than a small number. In my area, many developments have preserved heritage trees without incentives while offering 10% affordable housing. We support the proposal from councilmembers to create a heritage tree by allowing incentives such as changing F.A.R., narrow setbacks, et cetera. Allow the staff to approve this administratively, combined with the affordable housing bonus program if necessary, and the program to be developed by staff and [3:08:29 PM] it must be well defined, repeatable and provide adequate incentives. The public variance is still needed for transparency to leverage. Currently staff is very good at working with developers to accommodate heritage tree in the projects. Only one or two cases a year go to a public hearing. They work it out at a staff level even though it is public variance process. Cases go to the planning commission when a developer agrees with staff or a variance is required because heritage trees cannot be accommodated in the design, transplanted or prevents reasonable access or use. Staff could provide it administratively and still have a public process. A variance for removal should be decided in a public hearing to give staff more leverage to preserve trees. Applicants would prefer to work with staff rather than spending time and money going to the planning commission. A public process provides transparency and helps staff keep the process free from outside influence. [3:09:29 PM] So please keep the public hearing and create a heritage tree preservation bonus plan. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Vega, you also have three minutes. Eric wise will be up next with two minutes. Is Susan Lipman here? You will be up at the next podium, first podium that opens up. Is holly reed here? You'll be up after that. You have Joyce bashiano. Thank you. Heidi gibbons? Four minutes. >> I'm with the Austin heritage tree foundation. The revision poses significant changes in standards that will result in a large number of heritage trees removed. It doesn't have changes in standards, it is not just a few trees affected. This is huge. We're asking you to please delete the administrative areas by keep -- but keep [3:10:30 PM] the public variance. Second, [indiscernible] As determined by staff the change is from trees and -- extreme risk to lives or property. And and extreme risk in the future. It is very subjective. There have been several cases where the applicants plenty such an exaggerated report with a high risk. The trees were in [inaudible] Condition. Staff told me, well, there's nothing I can do because I have an independent certified arborist report that says this is in bad shape. That's also why you need a public variance. The last one is almost as important as the first one. It's for trails and driveways. Exchanging from tree prevents animal -- access to property, location access requirements or public safety. What it means is that if there's a tree on the way of [3:11:32 PM] the trail because they chose a certain alignment, the tree has got to go. For if there's a tree leaning or expanding branches over the trail, then you just remove the tree. However, removing heritage trees for connectivity is against the commitment of staff made with the urban trails master plan. Heritage tree are not preventing trails. Trails should be routed around trees whenever possible. As it is now, sometimes you can't and they get removed like in the case of the mlk line. Thank god councilmember pool worked that one out with us and we agreed to -- that one tree needed to be removed. Urban trails master plan says preserve trees because shade is needed by the trails. Look at that Boulder one. Urban trail work areas all heritage trees, native protected trees shall be preserved. But now we're trying to change the game and make it easy to remove trees. Heritage trees provide much [3:12:34 PM] benefits and trees that will replace them with. They are not replaceable. Young trees take a long time to grow and there's a high mortality rate. What I'm showing you here is the illustration in pounds per year for one heritage tree 30 inches in die am versus the accumulated from 45 trees that are two inches in diameter. Theoretically because we can never find 45 trees, usually they plant seven and pay the rest of the fee. And the bottom line is the one that's the true line -- [buzzer sounding] -- Mortality. Every 15 years. That's what happens to street trees. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Mr. Wise, you will speak. Is Susan Lipman, please come up. >> Hello, Eric wise, almost done with being a student at [3:13:34 PM] U.T. This was completely unplanned but I'm also here to talk about trees. Although on the opposite side. Preserving trees in the city is great. I like trees, I like sitting under trees, looking at trees, climbing trees, they are wonderful. But the best places to do that is outside the city where there are forests of trees. When we allow trees to be cut down in the city all over the -- excuse me, when we preserve trees in the city all over the place, it means we're prioritizing trees over people. Housing could be built here. Instead housing will take down a forest outside the city and a brand-new subdivision built with 30 single-family homes that will add 60 cars driving into Austin every day. Why don't we think about our heritage trees, appreciate them and where we can preserve them, along urban trails, in the greenbelt preserve them, in parks preserve them, but on [3:14:35 PM] residential lots you should be allowed to build residences and you shouldn't be forced to pay a ridiculous sum of money to cut down a single tree to build a 4%, 5%, 6% residence. One final thing that is not about trees, but it's just a long time frustration of a lot of people. And the city of Austin projects itself and claims to be this really Progressive, really open and wonderful place, but that's not the case. We know that's not the case. This current land use code is good. It's a step in the right direction, but it's nowhere near what can be done. Minneapolis showed that an equitable plan can be made. A truly equitable plan can be made. I believe the city of Austin can do that. So think about trees, think about holding up to what the city proclaims themselves to be and let's make a good code. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. After Ms. Lipman speaks, holly reed. Why don't you come up to [3:15:35 PM] this podium. You have four minutes. Next up to speak, speaker 124 is Lauren Woodward Stanley. Is she here? You'll be up next. You are the third speaker. You have time donated. You have three minutes. Then Carol fiscal impact upsson will be on-phillipsson will be on deck. >> Mr. Mayor, if I may, before the next speaker, I just wanted to thank our last speaker for coming up and speaking. If you look around the room, you will see that you are one of the only folks of your generation here and it's really important that everybody participate in the system so really appreciate you coming out. Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Lipman. >> Susan Lipman, south Austin off slaughter lane. I have quite a few considerations about this code and I signed up against it. Before I start I want to say thank you all for coming and [3:16:36 PM] being here at the super long hearing. This process is too rushed. Most people I've spoken to randomly might know codenext was abandoned last year but have no idea this land development code rewrite will significantly effect them. Please slow down. Two, the moment your property is up zoned, your land is raised at its highest possible value and your taxes go up. You likely don't have the skills, resources, time or capital to updevelop your property. Many residents will be forced out and while developers stand to gain maybe $30 billion. The code disproportionately affects east Austin. I support the equity overlay or some equivalent of it on this code or a future version to mitigate displacement and affordability in vulnerable areas. I don't want to live in homogenous white Austin. The code also places too much burden of densification [3:17:37 PM] on south and southeast Austin and not enough in west and northwest Austin. Upzoning should not precede ahead of but in tandem with transit and necessary infrastructure. We are flood prone. Climate chains will intensify the risk. , If heritage trees, I love them, we need them more than ever. And we need a vision. My vision is a green, safe, affordable, diverse walkable neighborhoods, designed with empowered input of residents and neighborhood organizations. And in my personal vision, Austin would use permanent culture principles to provide tree cover, shape the land, have tiers of vegetation and deep soil to manage storm flooding. [Buzzer sounding] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Reed, you have four [3:18:39 PM] minutes. Lauren Woodward Stanley, you will have three minutes. Go ahead. >> Okay. Mayor and council, my name is holly reed, representing the west Austin neighborhood group in district 10. West Austin neighborhood group supports Austin's growth and the growth of our urban neighborhoods through the planning process. We wish that this land development code revisions directive had been initiated with public outreach so that all Austin citizens could have participated and where density will be added in their neighborhoods without the serious consequences that will result from the code is currently written. This land development code revision has caused divisiveness throughout our city, but I I think all Austin neighborhoods are united in concerns for potential consequences along residential corridors. In central west Austin, the upzoning and transition Zones is not context sensitive in that it will [3:19:39 PM] result in the loss of existing affordable housing and will not provide new affordable housing given our market rate based economy. All of the rm zoned areas seen here are currently single-family zoned homes in historic neighborhoods. The transition zone on Enfield road has some of the last affordable moderate-to-heavy housing in west Austin. -- Multi-family housing. These are duplexes and town homes and apartment buildings that are currently occupied by students and people with moderate incomes and seniors. The entitlements in rm2 and rm1 zoning will incentivize tearing down and replacing this housing with multi-million dollar condominium buildings and high-rent apartment buildings. These old four-plex buildings on Enfield were demolished and being redeveloped as 18 luxury town homes with prices from 700,000 to $1 million a [3:20:41 PM] unit. On exposition boulevard, the Richardson apartment building rents from 5,000 to 7 thaw dollars a month. Is this the kind of missing middle housing that is intended by the land development code directive because this is the kind of multi-family housing that will result from transition zone entitlements in west Austin neighborhoods. Existing single-family homes along Enfield have been zoned rm1 into historic neighborhoods. Upzoning sf-3 properties in west Austin will incentivize the demolition of older homes and their replacement with very expensive market rate multi-family buildings. These will be opportunity Zones for real estate investors. Not missing middle homes, not for middle class families who need affordable housing, students or retired seniors on limited budgets. [3:21:41 PM] The new buildings will accommodate high income renters, short-term renters and investment property owners. At what expense to the existing neighborhoods? Up zoning will encourage redevelopment that destroys their original character, drives up land values, drives people out of their homes and makes them even more unaffordable. Mayor Adler, you made a promise. You said there's no sense in shoving density where it would ruin the character of the city we're trying to save in the first place. Where it is not wanted by its neighbors and where we would never get enough of3 the additional housing we need anyway. There are appropriate places in west Austin for adding more density. The town lake, Brackenridge tracts are transit based and adding density alliance with the central west Austin neighborhood combined plan. We respectfully ask that you shift rm1 zoning from our residential corridors to [3:22:43 PM] tracts where higher density is appropriate and make affordable units mandatory in order for developers to receive a bonus. [Buzzer sounding] Lastly, we support our neighbors' right by law to protest the rezoning of their property, the land development code revision will affect every person in the city of Austin. And there should be at least a three-quarter majority of council to approve such a profound plan. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [Applause] Lauren Woodward Stanley, you have time donated from shenny Clemons. You will have three minutes. Carol phillipsson, you will be up next. Then after you, Scott marks. Scat marks, is he here? No? What about Aaron Thompson? No? What about Shawn Williams? [3:23:45 PM] What about Ted Barnhill? What about Karen Mcgraw? Is Karen here? You have time donated from Karen sadde and also from Stan cosinesski? You will have four minutes. >> Can you remind me how many minutes? >> Mayor Adler: Three. Two plus one. >> I am Lauren Woodward Stanley, an architect, a member of the aia. Thank you for all your hard work, council. Immaterial also a co-founder of living city atx. Architects, scientists, developers and educators. Living city atx is a catalyst for equitiably integrating green infrastructure into our environment. We have a series of advocacy priorities. I'm going to run through these quickly and then speak [3:24:46 PM] on them if I have time, just to myself. Some pry -- the proposed land development code is an opportunity to implement strategies that support a climate resilient city and better to improve lives of residents with the fewes resources who are most affected by extreme weather. We understand the national environment, trees, floodplains and creeks are the foundation of our city's health and that our city can be resilient only when everyone is able to survive in safe, healthy environments. Increasing density is important, but must be -- responds to Progressive regulations. Innovative load is the first step. We've been advocating things like creating green spaces throughout the city and especially for residents in the densest and poorest neighborhoods. We support bringing back the civic open space chapter from a prior code draft. We recommend maintaining the parkland dedication ordinance. [3:25:46 PM] These are among some of the things. Support an urban canopy of 40%. We require development projects to capture water and provide shade and give developers the option of going beyond city requirements through a possible green density bonus program. We support functional green requirements for sites with a certain percentage of impervious cover. And looking into a green density bonus program beyond functional green requirements. So my other hat on as architect and civilian, I'll offer other comments. It's clear we need a new code. We created imagine Austin to set the course. As we commit to a new code, we should follow the lead of imagine Austin like integrate nature into the city. Are we doing the best we can to accommodate and integrate these core principles given the urgency of times and the most cutting edge approaches for making cities strong and [3:26:46 PM] for everyone. Those in the building planning fields will say the single greenest thing is limit sprawl and densify the center. Displacement will result in continued sprawl. So it's important we all be honest about that. As our met throw area grows, we need to consider other factors that help create a livable, healthy city, one that can forge a solid resilience. I encourage all of us to be bold enough to embrace another paradigm, one that doesn't rely on building alone to get us out of our troubles and one that doesn't pit one thing against the other. [Buzzer sounding] We ran out of time. I just very much encourage you all to think about integrating green in all its forms as we plan for growth responsibly. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Why don't you introduce yourself and then speak. >> My name is Carol [3:27:48 PM] phillipsson from district 10. I have no expertise regarding zoning but I have a passion to keep the integrity of Austin single dwelling neighborhoods intact. Everyone with a on council was elected to uphold what's best for the people, most importantly listen to them. It's things the city council has lost their focus and obligation to respect what their constituents want. You have for gotten what's best for your people, not what's best for profits. People are more important than profits. Remember why unit to be in public office. Put aside your personal agendas to help Austin be better not just bigger. Austin's growth is due to mayor variables, one being the beauty and the continuity of the way it was designed and developed to this day. Yes, I agree housing is needed, but what is proposed will change the beauty and integrity of our neighborhoods. Ample roadways and public [3:28:49 PM] transportation is inconceivable to me. But even more disturbing is your disregard for the risk of wildfire in high risk areas such as river place. High density developments is dangerous. Putting residents and their properties in harm's way. I would think that the city would be liable and held accountable for knowingly building high density or limited exit routes for residents. If you truly have the best interest, you will not proceed with this rezoning proposal. You will rethink your strategy, postpone any decision. It is not quantity that's important, it's quality. The quality of life for austinites now and the future. Keeping Austin a special place to live. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [Applause] We went through Scott marks, Aaron Thompson and Barnhill. Karen, come up. Four minutes. Next is sustainable -- next [3:29:51 PM] is Susan Moffett. Next up conner Kennedy. Thank you, sir. Come on and get ready. You have time donated by Rachel Mclaughlin, is she here? Don't see her. What about James Andrew or Andrew James? Is he here? You are going to have two minutes, Mr. Kinney. Ms. Mcgraw. >> Thank you, I live in Hyde park. I'm just going to run through this presentation and read it. Because time is so short today. Oops, you forgot Austin's citizens. How do I make this work? There we go. Years ago you decided to ignore citizens in this process. You trusted them to notify others about today's hearing, but you didn't notify anyone. [3:30:52 PM] And you aren't taking protests. And you didn't trust them to be worthy of being partners in this code. You also ignored the city's boards and commissions. In this massive rewrite that impacts every aspect of the city. You are eliminating all of the citizens' efforts to make Austin livable. You are eliminating neighborhood plans, neighborhood conservation combining districts, undermining local historic district by upzoning them. You are undermining national register historic districts by upzoning them and target and damaging future historic properties via the fake preservation incentive. But citizens have not been partners in this code. Other tools are also being undermined. Compatibility standards, mcmansion regulations, occupancy limits and naked planning toolings. Citizens have not been partners in this code. Citizens have a tremendous investment in Austin. [3:31:53 PM] Citizens own much of the land in the neighborhoods. They work with neighborhoods in planning, neighbors in planning and provide education to others. They support public events and contribute to their neighborhood's parks, schools and streets. Citizens are stewards of their neighborhoods. Citizens serve on city boards and commissions. Why are they not partners in this effort? This is a celebration of saving the fire station in Hyde park. This is a new park established by residents of north university. Neighbors actively deliberate on neighborhood changes. But you have made citizens into only audience members in this process. Six years and 10 million should have resulted in widespread concurrence. The city could have partnered with citizens to update neighborhood plans and solve the growth problem without destroying their neighborhoods. You don't trust that they [3:32:53 PM] are smart, willing and interested in being partners with elected officials, consultants and staff. Is this about the people of Austin? It seems to be about new people, not Austin's citizens. Maybe it is about getting central Austin land out of the hands of citizens and into the hands of investors. Investors often take profits from their projects to other cities and often don't care if they provide parking or create other impacts to local areas. Are you supporting investors over citizens? 68 hearings is not a sign of success, but failure. At this point an expenditure of resources there should be widespread consensus, not a marathon of objections. Hearings and dots placed on maps are not participation. Citizens know what constitutes participation. The city has not done this but the mayor wants to plan after this code is approved. [3:33:57 PM] Thank you, city councilmembers, tovo, alter, pool and kitchen for your support. I've been in Hyde park since 1979, and I served on Hyde park planning for 22 years, the planning commission three years and I won't tell you any more. I want to tell you one more thing if I have another minute. I heard today that nccds are racist. Please understand -- [buzzer sounding] -- That -- a nccd is an overlay that has nothing in it until you put something in it. It is not racist. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Ms. Moffett, you have three minutes. Conner Kinney will have two minutes. Bobby lavinsky, you will be up third followed by Ramos. [3:34:58 PM] >> Susan Moffett. Transition areas would dramatically upzone up to half of existing neighborhoods granting huge new base entitlements without affordability. Given land costs the resulting units even if small won't be remotely affordable. These up zonings will threaten being existing market affordable your applications and duplexes and garage apartments. Not to mention our small local businesses, day cares and performance venues in these areas. A 1,000 square foot new missing middle unit in the same blocks will cost roughly $3,000 a month. That's 140% mfi, far pricier than what's on the ground right now. City staff says they won't require onsite affordability in transition areas. The current map would [3:35:58 PM] effectively remove existing market affordable and missing middle housing in transition areas and replace it with unaffordable new units, which also don't have to provide parking so won't be accessible to residents with mobility impairments. Before the last tech boom, central neighborhoods weren't generally wealthy. Many long-time residents are teachers, state workers or renters who already struggle with rising rents and taxes. Financial analysts say proposed upzonings in transition areas will likely raise the cost of an average central Austin lot by 50 to 70% for the land alone. My neighborhood is over 70% renters. Homestead exemptions won't help them nor will they help our local businesses. Please greatly temper these up zonings for local businesses and day cares and require onsign affordability for projects of four or more [3:36:58 PM] with fee in lieu for smaller ones. Please remove Duvall as a residential corridor. It's the center of the neighborhood and the map up Zones a swath four blocks wide through the heart of it. Mayor, that was not remotely your Austin bargain. Please don't put more people in structures and areas with documented localized flooding until a fix can be implemented. Please require one onsite parking space per unit to ensure access for residents of all ages and emergencies and emergency vehicles. And finally, please distribute new housing capacity far more equitiably citywide than the current map does. We need each district to do its fair share. Please take the time to get this right. I think you can do that and thank you for your service. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Mr. Kinney, you have two minutes. >> I believe I've had one donated. >> Mayor Adler: Who is [3:38:01 PM] donating? >> Kevin Mclaughlin. >> I'm the chair of the planning commission and also led the nonresidential and residential work groups on planning commission so I've spent more times with transition Zones than just about anybody and more than my wife thinks is healthy. >> Pool: Excuse me, I wanted to ask mayor, could we see if Mr. Kinney is speaking for the planning commission or for himself? >> I am speaking just on my own, yes. Just for reference, not -- I have this one-page hand outyou might find useful looking at all the Zones at a glance. What Carolina kind of F.A.R.S and not to increase the amount of floor area or impervious cover that we're giving them, but it needs to be reallocated. Staff knows this is a problem. Several of you all filed amendments that know this is [3:39:01 PM] a problem. PC knows it's a problem. After discussing with staff, they think it would be helpful to give some more granular direction to I want to offer what my discussions with architects, builders, code consultants, et cetera. As just a reminder, we know that most development replacing single-family homes are still just single unit mcmansions which is why we need to graduate F.A.R. And impervious cover to make more units more attractive. There's fixed costs that make it not profitable a lot of time especially on smaller lots. I think that I'm going to run through this fast, but email this to everybody. The objectives that I think we can agree on are building more houses near transit, making sure that housing the family friend I, three two, I know there are many types of families. That there be compatibility and not incentivize large [3:40:02 PM] housing. Chris Allen has a point. The policy direction on the right is how you could address these things. Graduate the impervious cover and the F.A.R. For small lots, make sure that family-friendly units are feasible by offering absolute square footage. In ic as well as F.A.R. If necessary to make bonuses or family-friendly units, increase r4 up to 60% of impervious cover. On smaller lots you will not get four units, you will not get affordable bonuses. However, you can reduce it as smaller unit configurations of rm1 and r4. Finally, there's several things you can do to make larger housing more practical. Limit single unit to four F.A.R. What would be today. Discourage two units and for medium and large lots, make sure that we're not giving more square footage than we go to a duplex. [3:41:03 PM] You will see I have modeled out how this direction could work. It's not asking you to sign on to specific numbers. We've -- the darker colors show where entitlements have decreased. There's a note on parkland dedication at the end I hope you consider before taking that up. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you and the planning commission for your work as well. Come on down. >> Thank you, mayor and council. >> Mayor Adler: Brenda and Chris Allen will speak. Mr. Allen, you have time donated from two people. Is Greg Underwood here? No? What about Aletha? Is Chris Allen here? >> He's here. >> Mayor Adler: Bring him in. You have two minutes. >> Thank you, mayor and [3:42:04 PM] council, I'm here with the save our springs alliance. I want to thank conner Kinney for his service in the planning commission. He called me several times. He was somebody that tried to collaborate with us and I appreciate that. I'm passing out to you a list of amendments that are aimed at trying to work within the existing council direction that was given earlier this year. So that way we can ensure as we grow, as we densify, he with don't lose our connection to nature. That's a lot of the comments that was the living atx city, I can't remember the name of it, the lady speaking before. Agreed with all her comments. Most of the amendments track closely to a letter you considered at one of your work sessions that Dave foster spoke about earlier. It's a joint letter between several nonprofit environmental organizations and I think that we're trying to come up with recommendations that we can, you know, meet your goals and meet our goals at the same time. What I'm hoping is that on [3:43:04 PM] Monday you don't preclude further conversations, still gives us ability to work with staff on some of the concerns they might have raced Wednesday. There is some misconception on some of the amendments and things that if we talk about, we can probably iron them out. There's four amendments in particular I want to highlight. First off, I didn't say that much last year, I agree with rich on the parkland dedication ordinance. Please save that parkland dedication ordinance. Please don't amend it. Actually maybe make it stronger than what was in the current draft. I agree with Dave foster's comments on the heritage trees, please protect them. When we have staff determining a heritage tree needs to be removed because -- it's not being fixed right now. The other thing that I want to mention, there's a recommendation we have on the sheet that speaks to zoning f25 on properties with development agreements. [3:44:04 PM] There's nothing that we were trying to say is this code would supersede those. [Buzzer sounding] This code will increase development entitlements beyond what those development agreements anticipate, where the intensity would be more than what was initially negotiated. So we have to be careful about that and I want to be able to talk to staff about that because I think we can reach a good point on that one. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Ramos, come on up, you have two minutes. Is Brenda Mallick here? Chris, why don't you come on up. Chris Allen. Greg underrude, raise your hand. Thank you. After Mr. Allen speaks, is Gina Allen here? Yes? What about you have time donated from Jeff archer. Great, thank you. Speaker number 140 is tanner [3:45:06 PM] Blair. You have time donated from Jennifer Blair. >> She baled. >> Mayor Adler: You have two minutes. Ms. Ramos, you have two minutes. >> Thank you guys for setting up this time for letting us come up here and speak our grievances. I represent the Rogers Washington, holy cross neighborhood in east Austin. And to be frank, we of the holy cross feel the decision to push the new code rewrite through has been way too quick. We feel council should postpone the vote until the city is able to put more policies into place that will ultimately result in more equity for lower-income neighborhoods in east Austin. For years black and brown folks have been marginalized in Austin and the way the land use proposal is set now, the continuation of [3:46:07 PM] disenfranchisement and displacement will continue. And the U.T. Uprooted study, we see areas deemed vulnerable and more vulnerable and most vulnerable. As the code draft is current written, we would see the most vulnerable exact the most. A shout out to councilmember Garza for sending an email stating this is going to be taken into consideration while you move forward on the vote. We have to see more policies like this and protections like this to help out our communities. Our city should also look at trying to increase the density bonus in east Austin to incentivize and look to try to create empowerment funds so we can reinvest back into the communities and neighborhoods. As the current proposal stands, the investment that we would see would only be [3:47:09 PM] for housing and not necessarily affordable housing. And due to the incentive to build multiple houses on one lot, I don't think any affordable housing would come of it. I do agree with additional density -- [buzzer sounding] -- If our city wants to be the city of the future, but if we don't stop and add additional protections, resources and investments into businesses, infrastructure and education, then our city is just going to remain in the past. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, sir. [Applause] Mr. Allen, you have four minutes. If Gina Allen could come up to this podium so you'll be ready to go. Blair tanner, why don't you start coming forward. Mr. Allen, go ahead. You have four minutes. >> Thank you. I'm Chris Allen. I'm the architect that's been beta testing your code for you. Some of you have thanked -- [cheers and applause] Some of you have thanked Gina and me for our efforts [3:48:09 PM] as fear mongering or misinformation. This is my digital friend mark. He and friends think it's very cool several of you like to tell your constituents he's been made extra strong to make the buildings in our models look enormous. While the city has been less than transparent about what this code will mean, mark's blog has had 27,000 visits in the last month. In political terms, I guess mark and his friends might be little people, but they matter to us. A lot of mark's dedimension at friends are here with us. Scenario based modeling is the only way to beta test development code. It takes a particular skill set that combines experience in real estate, architecture and planning. The city's current code team is inexperienced, they don't understand how important this work is to refining code language. If you don't beta test your code, you get nothing but unintended con convince. At the 11th hour the code team has begun to do modeling. [3:49:11 PM] Illustrating our models are 100% accurate. Unfortunately Gina and I haven't had time to begin modeling any of the mixed use or commercial zoning districts so we're never going to know how messed up they are until the bulldozers fire up. I don't have a lot of time, but we should pause and ask you to look at this visualization and ask is this what you really had in mind? Do you want to displays renters and homeowners to make way for gigantic duplexes like this for the wealthy. The example on the upper left shows a r4 project that eats up the center of the land with a parking lot and only manages to hit .4 F.A.R. That's ridiculous. How many developers will leave a half a million dollars or more on the table when a 50% more F.A.R. Is available to them? The city's rm1 example on the upper left is even more [3:50:13 PM] laughable. Incorrectly stating first it shows a 1.0 F.A.R. Eye imported this model into my software yesterday and it's actually .4 F.A.R. This building would be 20 feet taller. Using all the available 40-foot height. The city's subject site has the impact dimensions as my example on the lower right. Same site, same zoning. What's going on here? At best the city team just doesn't understand real estate and architecture enough to know what happens in the real world and wasting money on these models. They are trying to put lip stick on a pig and trying to make you think their code isn't so awful. Either way, though showed you these illustrations on the eve of this hearing. You are going to have to figure out what's real in a hurry and you are going to have to remember that the effects of rising housing costs and displacement will hit many of your constituents hard if you guess wrong. Here's mark again. [3:51:14 PM] He's here to show I what's going to happen. In order to deliver more housing capacity, this code even sent I haveizes demolition of the most affordable homes like Windsor park or rosedale. The tenants from the bulldozed house in the hot neighborhood won't end up in the landfill with their house. They won't be able to afford the rent in the giant new luxury apartment buildings either. So unless they want to move to the suburbs, they are going to have to look for housing in more affordable neighborhoods like quail creek and dove springs. There they will have use enough to displays a lower income family. What happens to that lower income family? They are options are mostly outside the city limits. By up zoning to release the value underneath, this code will change the term Austin city limits from one associated with music -- [buzzer sounding] -- To one that divides the rich from the poor. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [Applause] Ms. Allen. You have three minutes with [3:52:15 PM] time donated from Jeff archer. Is tanner Blair here? You have three minutes. >> Good afternoon. I appreciate the time you've given us to speak today. On may 2 of this year the council produced a 19- page document to give staff direction on producing the fourth version of our new code. And then council gave them five months to accomplish this herculean task. The first three versions of codenext were written over a two and a half year period beginning October of 2015 and summarily dumped in the trash in August of 2018. If we couldn't get it right with numerous consultants and code writers in two and a half years and $8 million, how do we expect a team of staff members not specifically trained in code writing to finish in five months. [Applause] The planning commission reviewed the new code for five weeks and on November 13 offered up 115 amendments. These are mostly substantive changes. They are littered with requests for increase in [3:53:18 PM] entitlements. The staff proposed 20% of amendments and only agreed with 32%. Staff has also produced 37 pages of revisions to the October 4 document in the form of supplemental reports. Council gave another 25 pages of directions to staff just yesterday. This messy conglomeration of information is what council intends to vote on in two days. That's a lot of information to digest and incorporate into the current 1366 pages of code and we're expecting staff to wrap this up in five or six weeks during a holiday month. We should be ashamed at the pressure that has been placed on staff to accomplish this in such a ridiculously short amount of time and I can only imagine the countless nights and weekends they have been forced to work to get this ready for council to vote. This is not a recipe for success. At this point this code isn't even half baked. It's just a bunch of ingredients on a counter and nobody has decided whether we're making deep dish pizza orbiter day cake. -- Birthday cake. Everybody is offering up their favorite recipe but [3:54:19 PM] they haven't made it before to see if it's edible. When Chris and I started to test this code, we found numerous unintended consequences and because of testing it's become a parent this code is not going to cliff to deliver affordability. This code -- new housing for the top one percent. No matter how many units you cram on a lot, building new and bigger is less affordable. Sending homes to the landfill less affordable. If we hadn't brought these approximate forward, would anyone have noticed? What problems don't we know about. What happens when policy goes awry. 45th street in my neighborhood was up zoned 16 to 18 lots deep on each side of the street based on an imaginary bus line. That's around 350 lots total [3:55:19 PM] on a residential corridor. Please take a breather. Don't vote on this on Monday. [Applause] Give staff the chance to vet all the changes that have been proposed over the last eight weeks and give them time to get modeling done. Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Blair, you are going to have two minutes. Is Thad here? Why don't you come on down. Is Robert Nash here? >> Here. >> Mayor Adler: You will be up next after that. You have time donated from Chris curns. Is he here? No? Beverly? You will have three minutes when the time comes. Go ahead, sir, two minutes. >> I'm going to give you a break from the land development code, and I'm going to go over the history of ex exclusionary zoning in Austin. [3:56:19 PM] Austin said black people aren't allowed to live here, too bad. Fortunately for us 1917 the supreme court took care of that and said as a municipality you shouldn't be in the immaterial good of telling people where they can and can't live. We did what -- in 2019, racists don't give up and go away so we passed a zoning code, our first in 1931. Sure you can buy a house here, you can't go to the park here, you can't eat here, but you can buy a house technically so have fun on the east side because that's where you are going. That's what we got in 1931. Stuck with that until the civil rights act in 1964 that said, you know what, you actually can't do segregation anymore so you are going to have to integrate these facilities. And also the fair housing act of 1968 that got rid of deed restrictions, right, that said you can't buy a house, a private entity can't keep you from buying a house if you are a person of color. So once again I'm sure this is just a weird coincidence, [3:57:20 PM] but Austin wrote their second land code in 1967. Weird, radio it? By the way, in 1966, martin Luther king gave a speech in Chicago. He called that speech the poor people's movement, not the black people's movement. He recognized that economic segregation was a huge problem in America. Protesters stood outside with signs that said things like join the white rebellion and one that sounds really familiar to me, we Washington, D.C. Hard for what we got. So that brings us to 1967-68. Turns out we can't really segregate anymore, so what do we do? We come up with new clever ways. The racists don't go away. They say if I can't segregate on race, I'll segregate on economics. Build houses that poor people can't afford. What do you do? You soon everything to be a single-family home just like all of America did around this time and you make sure that poor people can't live in the urban core. That's how you do it. And that's exactly what we did in 1967. Turns out it was a terrible cold. We ended up rewriting is in [3:58:21 PM] 1984 and we doubled down on this. We went down from the idea that you can't build on apartment buildings, you can only build a single-family house in 1984. That also wasn't a great code. It's been amended dozens and dozens of times. The ones who say they want the zoning their house was built under, it was probably zoned many times. Probably it's been amended on a regular basis with the amendments to our regular codes. Here we are did defacto segregation in 2019. I don't care for the racist, classist policy. We produces a machine that produces inequality. [Buzzer sounds] People are mad because they're on the wrong side of the filter. They want to turn the knob down. We need to get rid of the machine and have housing for all kinds of people. [3:59:22 PM] Pre. >> Thank you, mayor and council. My name is that had swardarski. I'm the president for dellwood 1 and a former chair of the upper boggy creek planning team. I believe and the consensus of my neighbors is that this is too fast, too big and it has had no input. We believe that the reason that we're here this afternoon on one of the most beautiful Saturdays that we've seen all year is because the hard work has not been done on Monday nights in churches and schools where neighbors get together and decide what's best for their neighborhoods. As it turns out we have that system in place and that's the system that gives us the land development code we have today. It is neighbors getting [4:00:22 PM] together with neighbors and working through the land use issues in their neighborhood. And that system is a tried and true system that not only gave us the code that the last speaker said was horrible, but it did in fact evolve overtime as the planning teams made adjustments to the land code. [Applause] That system is now abandoned by planners at the city level who are going to overlay the entire city in a record time frame we might add. So too fast, too big. It touches zoom issues that have come -- so many issues that have come up today, but ultimately it comes back to the third and important issue, which is no input. None of my neighbors knew anything about this until just weeks ago. And we believe that the planning commission system with neighborhood input is [4:01:23 PM] where this code should be developed, tested and written. And ultimately if we're given that option, we could have a unanimous vote as we did in '84. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Nash, you had time donated from Chris Currens? Is he here? You have three minutes. At this podium is Joseph Fister here? What about chip Harris? Why don't you come up to this podium? You will have three minutes. Is Laura Lee swarbeck here? Please be ready. You will be next. After Patty mccamp Mabry, Jennifer Houlihan and cue gray is speaker number 233. >> My name is Robert Nash. My husband Joe and I live in what everyone is now calling missing middle housing. Specifically a duplex near [4:02:23 PM] Anderson high school. In our part of Austin, missing middle is not missing, it is abundant. Our neighborhood has a great many duplexes, garden homes, condos and apartments. We have assisted living and we have naturally occurring affordable apartments. On bus routes, no less. This broad array of housing types was planned with the more intense uses on the busier streets. But because we don't have parks in our area, the calmer, leafier, wind be interior single-family streets serve as our shared public space and is used by everyone. Many of my neighbors agree with me that we do need more density and that we in fact have room for density in our neighborhood if it is done more thoughtfully. However, we would liking to have a seat at the table in a meaningful way to collaborate with staff in deciding where that makes the most sense. The proposed code feels like too blunt an instrument, [4:03:24 PM] inserting density without regard for what is on the ground already. While I realize that you have been working on this code for a long time, the actual 1,300 pages of technical language and map were only released on October 4. Since then opportunities for public input have been too few, poorly publicized and scheduled at times of day when most people are at work. As a city I think we did more to ensure that people were aware to take a canvas bag to the grocery store than we've done to make sure people know how this massive land use change will affect them, much less solicit their meanful involvement. I support increased density in Austin, including in my own neighborhood, but I don't support this very rushed codenext and I would respectfully ask that you slow this process down and open is up to real collaboration with your neighbors. [Applause]. [4:04:24 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Go ahead, sir. Two minutes. >> Mayor, councilmembers. My name is chip Harris. Thank you for the opportunity to make comments. Please do not imitate the present political model utilized by those currently in control in Washington, D.C. A top-down model that turns a deaf ear to its citizens, resists the siren call that the ends will justify the means. The land development code is something that will affect every citizen in Austin. Please consider really making them part of the process, not as a footnote at the end, but rather as a building block and involved from the beginning. When our city created our neighborhood plan many years ago staff sat down with us over a months' long process and discussed with us over [4:05:26 PM] 100 properties that were being changed. They valued and incorporated the residents' input for many reasons one of which was the intimate knowledge of how the neighborhood worked and another was their institutional knowledge of what gave it its unique character. Conditional overlays were crafted that reflected the distinctive elements of each property. Over the past 10 years this neighborhood has nearly doubled in density. That's much more growth than its 1.7% that the city of Austin experienced last year. Our housing supply is growing organically and sustainbly and at a rate that will accommodate Austin's current growth patterns. Strive to make our city government special, not simply the reflection of the short-term interests of those currently in power. Have as your goal a land development code that [4:06:27 PM] reflects cooperation, not compulsion. Thank you. [Applause]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Tovo: Mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Is Joseph Fister here? >> Tovo: I'm getting questions about what the plan is for the evening? I know we have a large number of speakers and will be here for many hours. You had indicated earlier that we may take a break at some point and I wondered if we could get some sense of when that might be and also if we could give assurance to community members if they need -- if they look at the list and kind of estimate when they need to come back and they come back and have missed their time, as long as we're still in session if they can still speak? >> Mayor Adler: So, colleagues, I'm going to leave the dais from about 6:00 to 7:00 so that I can go to that event. If there's sufficient number of others who want to do that, we can take a recess or the count could continue working during that period of time. What's your pleasure on that? >> Harper-madison: I'd like to join you in -- [4:07:28 PM] tonight is the naacp annual gala. So I think there are a lot of us who probably received an invitation and it would behoove us to go and support the local chapter of the naacp at least for a little while. >> Mayor Adler: Let's take an evening break from 6:00 to 7:00 and we'll go ahead and do that. And yes, councilmember tovo, if someone is not here when we call them, we'll continue the practice we started earlier in the day. If someone's name is called and they get back here later while we're still hearing testimony we'll give them a chance to speak still. We will stay here tonight until everybody who has signed up has a chance to speak. Yes, councilmember kitchen. Tipped I would suggest that -- owe. >> Kitchen: I would suggest it might be 5:30 to 7:00 realistically. It takes a little while to get there, see people and a little while to get back. I think 6:00 to 7:00 is not realistic. So I would suggest a 5:30 to 7:00. >> Mayor Adler: Do you want to do a 5:30 to 7:00? [4:08:30 PM] How about 5:45 to 7:00? >> Kitchen: I think that works if we start on time, but what happens is we take these kind of breaks and we don't come back on time. So I'm trying to be realistic for the public. >> Mayor Adler: I thought you said 7:00 to start too. I didn't hear a change in that. >> Kitchen: Okay. That's fine. >> Mayor Adler: Let's continue on where we are. >> Tovo: And I won't be back right at 7:00. I'm doing a proclamation at the capitol. I'll catch up on any testimony I missed tomorrow. >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. Laura Lee swarbrock. Is Patty mccamp Mabry here: Go ahead, you have two minutes. >> Hi. My name is Laura Lee. I live in estj. I believe that a pattern of [4:09:31 PM] prejudice may have entered the city council and we must act quickly and aggressively to diagnose it and treat it for the sake of the health of our entire community. Code unjust isn't a revision. It's a new code. Rather than fixing we've opted to create, to get rid of hindrances in previous agreements with neighborhoods unless they were legally binding. We need special treatment to protect all Austin neighborhoods. You've gotten rid of special protections, but instead you should have protected everyone and worked with neighborhoods individually. Because you're lusting to change the city too fast, you've caused increasing disillusionment and hostility. You mask your injustice by using the words green and [4:10:33 PM] diversity. Justice requires deeds, not words. City council, I don't want to hear another word about affordability. This council was unmasked when you voted to rezone 1308 affordable housing units to pave the way for luxury expensive housing. Stop this pathogen of prejudice. I personally am tired of this pathogen of prejudice against the poor. I don't imagine you are in any way for affordability. Stop the lies. You have spoken lies so many times and sadly, so many people believe you. Stop the prejudice. I oppose red tag exceptions that allows for the city to continue to mask its agenda instead of fostering transparent government. Many state laws are being broken via code unjust. The city council continues on a path where we as a city will continue to be sued -- [buzzer sounds] [4:11:34 PM] -- And the bottom line is breaking Texas law and costing taxpayers money. This increase is making Austin unaffordable, it drives out the poor, it is unjust. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Speaker 154, Delana Faulk. Glenn roweling and Melissa brown. >> I live in the scenic neighborhood in oak hill and on the first map that's been drawn this neighborhood has a long stretch of r4 extra density put into it because it shows to be a bus line along there, but the bus line is only actually comes two times in the morning. [4:12:35 PM] And so very few people can actually use it and there's no sidewalks and it's not an appropriate spot for the extra increased level of density. I appreciate that Ms. Ellis has put an amendment in to ask for these routes that have almost no actual bus route to have the density put down to more of what is being put across most of the area. And so I ask for y'all to consider that amendment. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Houlihan, you have two minutes. Next speaker, please, come down to the podium. Go ahead. >> Thank you all for your service. My name is Jennifer Houlihan. I'm an ordinary mortal. I do not come representing any grand organization nor do I have a budget for stickers. But I have been following this issue for awhile. Live in district 5 near the [4:13:36 PM] curvature of the Earth where Brodie dead ends and I'm grateful to be able to participate in this conversation. When it started seven years ago I was a brunette, which some of you may remember. [Laughter]. I wrote a lot of speeches which I tossed out because the fact is I am a white homeowner over 50 and I dare say our voices have been well represented at this point in the last 67 meetings and it's time for someone else to have a chance to speak. I will make one plea, one exhortation to this group. As you deliberate and deal with something that is so extraordinarily emotional and side to self-esteem and their families, please focus on the facts. Where we run into trouble as a community, a R as a country, is when we stray [4:14:36 PM] from the facts and start responding to things that aren't true. It is no more true than everyone on city council, everyone in this building wants to eliminate single-family housing. That is no more true than saying windmills cause cancer. Please focus on the facts and the data that you have before you and do not get distracted from people who produce falsehoods and say things like, if part of it is wrong, that's fine, but that's what we believe. No. Someone earlier was looking for common ground. Common ground is facts. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Gray, you're going to have two minutes. Is Delena Logan Faulk here? No? What about Frances Cahill? What about Gwen roweling? Why don't you come down to this podium. On deck, Melissa brown, Jeff [4:15:38 PM] Thompson, William Hodge. Go ahead, sir, you have two minutes. >> My name is ky. I've heard that some people are interested in making the preservation bonus easier to use so less homes are preserved and less are torn down. The preservation is probably the most important. This is recommended by three groups that typically don't agree about everything. The infill builders, aia and preservation Austin all agree with this in some form and their recommendations. Using the preservation bonus should not trigger a site plan. If it does trigger a site plan it's fairly pointless in most cases. Who's going to subject themselves to a site plan in order to use the preservation bonus. I think that's fairly clear. The second is that there are a thousand and one reasons. So currently transition Zones we allow you to build one large house but not for detached homes. The it's a strange transition zone in my mind. So there are several reasons why this is a bad idea. [4:16:38 PM] One is there's a lot of deed restrictions that allow multiple adus, but do allow a -- but don't allow a four or six plex. This will reduce our housing capacity if we demand that the units be attached. The other reason is it causes a problem with the preservation bonus. If you have a lot and a house in the middle that you want to preserve, you can build multiple detached homes around that existing house. You can't add a six-plex that's all massed in one area. That won't be possible. So I can't tell you much, but in transition Zones, if it's required to be attached those homes will be torn down because there's no way to build around them because we don't have the flexibility. Lastly, I think the current code is in many cases very vague and I think that's a problem. And unfortunately I think the new code is more vague, which creates more problems. And I think that's a problem for the development community and for neighborhood preservationists. For instance, in the current code, 19 inches is protected [4:17:40 PM] and then heritage trees have more protection. [Buzzer sounds] In the new -- >> Mayor Adler: Finish your thought. Sir? I wanted to hear the end of that thought. >> So in the new code, there's really no rules. So sometimes you could remove a heritage tree with an administrative variance and sometimes you can't remove a keystone tree that's five inches or six inches. Ere's literally no rules, no way to plan when you look at a site on what you can do. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Casar: And mayor -- sir, I want to let you know that those areas of agreement in those groups on preservation I think we've largely covered in amendments that got posted yesterday. >> Great. >> Mayor Adler: After his roweling speakers is Melissa brown here? Why don't you come up to this podium. Is Jeff Thompson here? [4:18:41 PM] What about William Hodge? You can move to the podium when it opens up. You have time donated from Tiffany. Is she here? So you will have two minutes when you come up. Danielle Skidmore will be next in line. >> I'm Gwen. I'm here because I heard the mayor's interview yesterday on NPR. I unfortunately and regretfully found it disingenuous as questions about the speed of adopting the ldc were batted aside. When we bought in river oaks before it was annexed by Austin we didn't just buy a house, we bought a home in a neighborhood with character, heritage trees and grace. Two years after paying off my mom I found this on my door. This told me that that character of that neighborhood is going to be ripped away by the ldc. [4:19:41 PM] I didn't have any idea what was going on and I think a lot of other people in this city don't know either. The city could have decided to make informative fliers inserted into the Austin electric bills, but it didn't. Instead, I get this. Surely Austin doesn't need to drive its ldc fast train with folks' home dreams tied to the tracks, especially when we can't even provide the infrastructure. Our subdivision has an H.E.B. Down there on mopac and an H.E.B. On tech ridge. I cannot take a fixed route bus to either one of them. When Minneapolis wiped away single-family homes recently, the head of the building associations said that we have to stop dealing with emotion. We have to throw emotion away. Well, we're not Minneapolis [4:20:43 PM] and that ain't going to happen in Austin. [Applause]. The mayor wanted in that -- indicated in that interview that the ldc's impact would not be felt for about 10 years. I don't think that's true. Because we have a market-based system for property taxes. [Buzzer sounds] As soon as it's upzoned, one house sells, my property taxes go sky high. And I'm not going to be able to afford it. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you for your time. Go ahead and introduce yourself. You have three minutes. Mr. Hodge, do you want to come on up to the podium. Go ahead, you have two minutes. >> Hello. My name is Melissa brown. I had a whole speech prepared for today on what I wanted to cover, but after spending today hearing what everyone has to say, I wanted to point out that yes, we've had organic growth and things have happened within the city, but if you look around, what is happening is we have [4:21:43 PM] 1.4-million-dollar homes that are being built everywhere. We don't have affordable homes being built throughout the city. Right now what we're looking to do in r4 and rm1 Zones do allow for a little bit more density, but requiring them to be attached will not help the growth happen. We have the ability to expand our growth throughout the city, but limiting F.A.R. And requiring homes to be attached on single lots and adding months' long complexity to residential development with unlimited -- would ultimately lead to less homes, pushing for more families out of the city and creating a large divide of the haves and have notes. The majority of downtown surrounding schools contain over 50% of transfer students, which is a huge issue because families cannot afford to live near the schools and near the areas in which they work. For me personally I live in south Austin and I have to drive my son into school everyday because I can't afford to live near where I work, which is a huge [4:22:45 PM] problem. The school that my son attends is 75% of transfers. It's right down the street from here. We can't afford to do that. My five-year-old son has to wake up at 5:45 A.M. Every morning to leave our home at 6:30 A.M. To make it to school by 7:30. We need to look at the code and actually increase the density throughout the areas provided in the city of Austin. Thank you. >> Before Mr. Hodge speaks for two minutes, if Ms. Skidmore would come down to this podium. Is Irene pickart here? You will be third up. And Zenobia Joseph? Is she here? What will Rachel Forrester? What about hank long? So you will be fourth up. Go ahead, Mr. Hodge. Two minutes. >> Good afternoon, mayor, [4:23:48 PM] mayor pro tem, members of council, city manager. My name is William Hodge. I am a member of the board of adjustment, but I do want to state that I am here solely on my own behalf as an architect and as a citizen. Many of the things that I was going to say as usual were said by other people so I'll try to be brief. There's a lot of assumption on both sides of this debate that this density that is contemplated by the code is going to happen. That if you zone it, they will build it. And they being developers. I work for many clients including developers. That isn't necessarily the case. And my fear is that the amount of time and effort that so many people, including y'all -- god bless y'all for being here all day long. And as you just discussed, you have even more time that you have to spend here for all this effort that we might look back five or 10 years and say this didn't actually increase affordability, this didn't actually increase density. [4:24:48 PM] Many of the people who have spoken about many different ways in which there are a thousand little places in the new code which might work against the goals of increasing housing supply and increasing affordability -- I'm going to speak very quickly on one and that is the site plan requirement. None of us in my community in the architectural and building design community and development community, are against environmental protection, but requiring even a light version of a commercial site or a site development permit for a three-unit or a four-unit project is going to force developers or is going to motivate developers to simply continue what they're building right now. I know this for a fact because in the last five years I've had nine properties that were zoned multi-family or mixed use where my clients have decided instead to build one or two houses, and it is because of the 5,200-dollar cost of a site plan. [4:25:49 PM] Thank y'all very much. [Buzzer sounds] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Good afternoon. My name is Daniel Skidmore, a resident of district 9. This is Peter. Mayor Adler and council, thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment on the desperately needed update to our land development code. I want to acknowledge my gratitude of the years of hard work that you and the community have done on this task. I'm excited that we're nearing an end to a process that has extended for seven years since our imagine Austin comprehensive plan was adopted, a process that has included, you've heard it, over 67 public meetings in the last three years alone. My time before you is limited so I want to focus my comments on amendments 23 to 29 proposed by my councilmember yesterday. Although these amendments are entitled support, safety, functionality and complete communities in transition areas, in reality they are simply an attempt to find excuses to limit additional housing near our transportation corridors. [4:26:53 PM] For example, 24, do not zone as rm1 or r4 properties on streets with localized flooding. The style of housing does not predict flooding. In fact, out code will provide much needed tools to address existing problems. Retain current on-site parking requirements for residential properties and commercial properties near urban core public schools. We have other tools to manage street parking and enhance access to our schools. 26, remove transition areas on residential corridors that bisect existing by sale neighborhoods. It bears receipting, land use and transportation go hand in hand. If we are serious about substantive improvements to our public transportation system we must address land use too. Limiting density along our corridors, especially in the high opportunity areas, is not environmentally or economically sustainable. It's not equitable. And let's be clear, it is [4:27:53 PM] certainly not Progressive. As council deliberates on the code on Monday I urge you to maintain your focus -- [buzzer sounds] -- Of our commitment to adding housing capacity, especially within walking and rolling distance of our corridors. Thank you again for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you.. All right. Is Irene here. Come on up. Then -- then Zenobia Joseph I don't think was here. Rachel forester, hank long. After Mr. Long, Kirk Wilson? You will be up next. Then Eric Standridge. Up after that speaker, 171. Deborah Ford Femat, okay, you will be up after that. You have time donated from Hillary Miller. Is Hillary Miller here? -- Is Nina here? So you will have then four [4:28:56 PM] minutes. Go ahead, you have two minutes, man. >> Good afternoon, my name is Irene pickhart, I live in bryker woods, district 10. I appreciate all of you being here.úthank you so much. I want to talk about a different angle about -- about trees. Because I've heard a lot of comments today that we're protected trees, we're protecting heritage trees, particularly. But do you know what percentage of trees right now in the city of Austin are protected? There's a Texas A&M study that came out three years ago, with the Texas forestry association. Do you know what they found in Austin? Fewer than 3% of the trees in the city of Austin are protected. That means throughout all of these transition Zones, where mayor you said we're [4:29:56 PM] going to relax the set backs, all of those trees can go without a by your leave. There's nobody who can prevent those trees from -- from being cut down. And they are so much -- associated with our health. Here are the health impacts in the study that was just released. That trees impact the -- the closeness of trees impact heat stroke, but -- but COPD increased by nearly 70% in areas without trees. Respiratory, cardiovascular by 08%. This -- 80%. This is huge. If you don't live in a neighborhood that has trees [4:30:56 PM] or near trees, your -- you are literally a life and death issue. [ Buzzer sounding] So I'm asking you not to carve up my neighborhood like a Thanksgiving Turkey. Not to put transition Zones through it. Not cut down those trees. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [ Applause ] Please introduce yourself, you have two minutes. >> Hello, my name is hank long, I'm a freshman at the university of Texas at Austin, I would like to say that the people of Austin are tired of all of this. There has been complaint after complaint about how we need more public comment and we need more consultation and whatever this is. It's not public comment. We have a city right here that is half renters. Person after person here is some reactionary home owner who does not care about owners. In a city that is half renter, it is 80% homeowners. 90% anglos. It has to mean something. It has to mean that we have a representative sample of the public. [4:31:57 PM] When we talk about this city, we talk about everyone who lives here. Not just the people who have six hours to spare on a Saturday afternoon. I encourage you to pass this bill. No matter what you are hearing today, I know that the people of Austin are in favor of this. I know that the people of Austin want a good land use code and I know that this is good. Or better than what we currently have because honestly this is not a good land use code. It is better. It's bad. It's worse than the one bastrop has, a city of 7,000 people, that has triplex zoning in every single part of the city. We are a city of a million people. That thinks that our major Progressive reform, being shouted against by a board of reactionaries is to let single family zoning be only 90%. Should be 0%. Should be allowed to build a triplex on every lot, no height limits in height campus, we should be talking about parking maxes. [4:32:57 PM] I know a lot of people are not concerned about what's going to happen in 50 years. But I am. If we don't fix our climate crisis, we are all going to see -- we will be [bleep]. Right now climate change is a catastrophic rate. C o2 rising higher, higher, higher. If we are going to fix that, we need density in the downtown core. We need people to walk, bike, take the bus and we need people to stop driving and to stop sprawling half an hour away from Austin. So I encourage you to vote for this, I encourage you to vote for another better bill right after you vet for this. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: I understand everyone is really involved in, if we can keep the profanities out, I think we will move better. Kirk Wilson, Eric Standridge, come on up, sir. Ms. [Indiscernible] Why don't you move to the podium as well. You will be -- go ahead, sir. [4:33:58 PM] >> Next. >> Two minutes. >> All right. Thank you all for sitting there all this time to listen to us. >> Mayor Adler: Introduce yourself, please. >> I am not a reactionary homeowner, but I am a homeowner. >> What's your name for the record? Your name. Your name. Kirk, Mr. Wilson. Please proceed. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. I applaud your reference to provide affordable housing and to limit gentrification, but unfortunately I don't think this plan is the way to get there. It's not fairly applied. I don't buy that it's good for our environment. I think it's bad for our environment to have more density and development. I think it's disastrous for our traffic problems. It's being pushed through in a way that looks like you are trying to pull a fast one. I know you wouldn't do that. I live on a one block long street in Travis heights. [4:34:59 PM] It says that we are a transition zone. This plan cuts at the heart of Austin. It will cost a quality of life that we will never get back. This plan would change the nine homes in our little street from sf 1 to R 4. Right now there's roughly 18 cars on that short block. Go to R 4, you get four times as many cars, 72 cars on one short block. This is a neighborhood where you already have to wait for oncoming cars to pass before you can go because of all of the cars parked on both sides of the road. Too bad we don't have trains and subways and the other niceties real urban density requires, but we won't have them any time soon and you know it. If you really want to try to ram too many people into spaces into this -- suck it up, build the infrastructure first. What you have here is the classic case of the cart before the horse. I filed a protest. I urge you to honor those [4:36:00 PM] protests and follow the law by requiring a 3/4th vote of the council. I think that you know if up given more people more time to learn how this plan affects them, you would have a stack of protests many times higher than you have now. [ Applause ] Thank you. >> Tovo: May I ask a question of the speaker. So I didn't catch where you -- what part of town you lived in or what neighborhood you were describing. What you -- you don't need to give us a street address, but would you mind saying again what part of town it is. >> It's Travis heights. >> Tovo: Thank you. Is it -- okay. Would you connect with my staff and make sure that we know -- I think I know what area you are talking about. But I will send someone to find you. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Standridge, you have two minutes and then Ms. Feemat has four minutes. After that David piper, Patricia Shaub, speaker 177, Linda Gibson, Dale butler and Sarah sprites. [4:37:05 PM] >> Good evening. My name is Eric Standridge I consider myself extremely luck to have lived worked in east Austin for almost 20 years. I would like to share two of my concerns on the proposed rewrite. I think that considering all transit corridors as interchangeable is wrong. I think using a census track gentrification study to determine who wins and who loses in east Austin will only compound inequities. 11th and 12th street are two lane. They are not four lane boulevards in scale or capacity. Please give consideration to the capacities of the transit corridor before increasing entitlements adjacent to these communities. The gentrification study used census data and mapping algorithms to create borders and victims. My neighbors are continued loss, late stage and one block to the south is dynamic. One would be hard pressed to see the differences or borders in these communities in real life, but that is the sole metric used to [4:38:06 PM] justify these planning decisions that will protect some communities at the expense of others. That is wrong and it won't work. In the case of Robertson hill, which is central to the African-American cultural heritage district, a modest three by five blocks, both of which trigger transition zoning. It took decades of persistent work from stakeholders and city staff to turn vacant blocks and boarded up houses into vibrant, diverse, sustainable communities that support culture institutions, offices, multi-family projects, community scale retail and restaurants that welcome visitors from beyond the city limit. The majority of the housing in the neighborhood was redeveloped through public private partnerships as 08% median family homesteads steads. 80%. It will mean demolishing real affordable housing that represents real equity, real stakeholders and families that work and serve this city. Please. [ Buzzer sounding] Don't leave one census tract, one [4:39:07 PM] street, one family to fend for itself against intense development and speculation from all sides, thank you for your leadership and patience. >> Mayor Adler: Is David piper here? One moment, please, Mr. Piper, come on up. Go ahead, please. >> Okay. >> You have four minutes. >> Thank you. My name is Deborah Ford Femat, I live in allendale. I am an architect. I've worked for developers for 24 years of my life. I know that they don't do anything that they can't make the maximum amount of money from. And that includes building to maximum allowable limits. So one -- although I agree with the fact that Austin needs to increase density, I do not agree with the way that this code is proceeding, particularly in terms of contextual compatibility. I think six to 10 units is probably exorbitant when if we stayed within a three or [4:40:07 PM] four unit limit we would be creating more human-scale walkable buildings that are typical of New Orleans and many other of the great cities in this country. One of my greatest concerns, because my neighbor's house floods my garage whenever we have three days of rain, is flooding and the increased -- permeability. In may, I was so concerned that I called my insurance agent who told me that all flood insurance is threw through FEMA, all flood insurance is through FEMA. They sent me to -- they guided me to the national flood insurance program, flood insurance manual. And they led me to appendix L, which has the definition of a flood and this is the appear den picture in the [4:41:07 PM] April 2019 version. And this is the definition of FEMA's flood definition: A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of two or more acres of normally dry land area or of two or more properties at least one of which is the policyholders' property from one overflow of inland or tidal waters or, two, unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source. Now, what's most interesting about this is if a city takes action and this is coming straight from nema -- FEMA, sorry. If a city takes action that causes flooding, they will be considered a non-participating city and no one in this city will be allowed to purchase flood insurance. I wanted to get that out in public. >> Thank you! [4:42:09 PM] >> [ Applause ] >> Also, if you talk to your insurance agents, you will find that alterations of insured property that significantly increase risk of flooding or not covered. They are an exclusion. Also, items that are within your control, including but not limited to design, structural or mechanical effects, design, design, are not included in flood insurance. So when we start increasing impervious coverage from 45 to 60% in the shoal creek watershed where I live that floods on a regular basis, 15% I'm concerned. And I think everybody needs to be concerned about being able to buy flood insurance with the -- with the suggested increases in impervious coverage. One thing that -- that you can't just talk about flooding in terms of quantity. Actually, building [4:43:10 PM] configuration, mass configuration on land and the slope of the land determines flooding. It isn't just numbers. It isn't just rainfall. So civil engineering is a major part of this and I don't think, in these last five months, we've had time to get those studies done. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Councilmember alter? >> Alter: Excuse me, ma'am, can you send me that information? It was a little bit hard to absorb tonight. I want to -- >> Sure, I'll type it all. >> Alter: Maybe share it with us all. >> It is FEMA. >> Alter: I appreciate that. I would like to see it in writing so I can understand it better. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Piper, two minutes and then Patricia Shaub two minutes. Mr. Piper you go first. Linda Gibson after that, Dale butler and Sarah sprites. >> Dave piper, the president of the zilker neighborhood association. We accepted staff's offer to submit our own neighborhood [4:44:10 PM] maps and our zoning committee created zoning districts and then calculated housing capacity compared to the LCD districts with similar number of units per acre. We used the same buildout rates but didn't take advantage of bonus multiplier. Using tcad we calculated the average of every property and every zoning district in zilker neighborhood for Bert the LCD and our plan. For both. This all came out to a capacity of 13,382 dwelling units for the LCD and 14,686 for our plan. Our plan generated 1300 more units without transition Zones than the LCD generated with transition Zones. Primarily because we incorporated vmu, which produces more units than mu and Ms districts and it produces a lot more income restricted units without disrupting the established neighborhoods. As an example, mu 2 has buildout rate of 87% and a [4:45:12 PM] bonus multiplier of 2.0. Where do these numbers come from? And will you please make that methodology public for all of the other LCD districts. On to R 2 zoning. Generally speaking, why would people want a mcmansion with an old house in the front yard? They will just demolish them like they are doing now. I don't think the preservation incentive is going to preserve much. Would you also please make the public, the market research, that led to the preservation incentive? I think the only way that you are going to get what you are looking for is to restrict the size of a single unit on a lot and if they want more units, then allow more -- whatever you want to measure it, but -- but I think that's what it's going to take. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Shaub, Linda Gibson. [4:46:12 PM] >> My name is Patricia Shaub, thank you for hearing me today. Thanks to my two jobs I own a single family home in the holly neighborhood. One of the biggest employers since 1883. I'm 51. I would like to retiresome day. My dream since buying my house has been to build an Adu or even a duplex on my lot and have a source of rental income when I retired. It's a simple plan, really, I hope you decide on a code revision that will help make that plan doable for people like me and allow more housing units to be built and gets rid of parking minimums. In addition to my story, let me tell you about the people that I work with. During the day I work in a university office. Over 11,000 graduate students are in attendance where I work. Starting annual salary for a graduate student is $13,684. It's critical for graduate students to have ready access to campus for classes, labs, libraries, offices and meetings. [4:47:12 PM] Often graduate students have young families and need larger units than what west campus has to offer. But other central neighborhoods are far, far out of their price range. A code that allows for more decent places to live accessible to campus will mean a better quality of life for them and increase their chances for academic success. I ped DI cab on weekends. As service industry workers many of us can't afford to live in the city or work here seasonally living in van, back yard tents, staying with friends on couches or commuting from nearby towns. For the sake of these austinite who are also real stakeholders and make Austin a creative, lively place to live, please make more housing types available through equitable LCD -- >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, is Dale butler here? [4:48:13 PM] Sarah, come up on the spode yum, go ahead, you have two minutes. >> I'm Linda Gibson. >> Yes. Please go ahead, two minutes. >> Thank you, I'm Linda Gibson. I own a house in the transition zone, in crestview two blocks south of Anderson lane. I wanted to tell you the impact or the changes would have on that neighborhood. I have three concerns, I have an infrastructure concern, I have a concern for public safety and I also have a concern for possible discrimination against older austinites. Three things. Let me tell you on the lot that I currently own, and on every lot within my block, there is a potential of building up to 8 units with -- with basically the bonus. Within that, as many as 48 people could live on a single lot. Up to six additional unrelated persons. [4:49:14 PM] For that one block that means 576 people. Half a block actually because there's one behind it. And then there's one behind that, that backs up on to Anderson lane. So guess what is this that adds up to 1728 additional people. But I also forgot about the one across from me. Which is zoned in a lesser transition zone. About 288 people could live there. That's a two block zone. You have a total of 2,016 people who could live under the current proposal. On that two block street. My concern is with the 1959 infrastructure. We have 1959 plumbing, we have 1959 water supply, we have a 1959 gas line. And we have a 1959 fire hydrant. In addition to that, our [4:50:14 PM] street is about 35 feet across. With the cars, even half or even a quarter of those additional units -- [ buzzer sounding] -- Would cause problems for fire engine access and other critical emergency access. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Sprights you have time donated from Deanne freed home and Sarah. >> They she had to live. >> Okay. Then you will have three minutes. >> Is Linda baker here? Susan nyak. You will have two minutes. Laurie [indiscernible] You will be up after that. William stouts, speaker 197 is he here? What about Daniel Yanez? He's here? Okay. Find him. And meg Davis, speaker 201. [4:51:18 PM] Go ahead, you have -- you have three minutes. >> Thank you. I'm Sarah spites, I live in district 7. To begin with, I would just like to say thank to the four councilmembers who have worked hard with people in their districts, as well as me, worked with -- with councilman alter and Leslie pool, my councilman. And Ann kitchens and -- and Kathie tovo. I really appreciated their work with us. And I'm hoping maybe with -- with all of this input some of the more -- more of you will come to realize that this is not ready. And in fact that's my recommendation to you today is -- please postpone your voting. This needs a great deal more work. And I think it can be done. I mean, I think we can make some improvements and move forward, but working together. And -- and first thing that I want to say is my efforts to read this code, the main thing that I kept seeing was -- wow, we're really [4:52:21 PM] taking care of the developers here. I mean, they are handled so delicately in this thing. But it ignores safety considerations, it ignores crucial environmental issues, and elements that make a neighborhood work. And that was really sad for me to see and I know the mayor keeps saying, oh, we'll work these out, we'll work these out. But no, I think we need to work these out ahead of time. Let me give you an example of just I think what is a little sloppy and needs to be corrected and that's 45th street. I live in a little neighborhood called -- we call ourselves shoalmont. Bordered by 45 street on the south, Hancock on the north. Shoal creek, the actual creek on the east and bull creek road on the west. [4:53:25 PM] Initially it was built back in the late '40 and early '50s and it was intended for gis returning from World War II, you know, first homes, little bitty, 900 to 1100 square feet. My house is 1100 square feet. The lots are little. The houses are little. There are about 350 homes in this little neighborhood that I'm talking about. So the -- this was never intended and is not a fancy neighborhood. But boy one thing that they did was plant trees and thank goodness because we have no sidewalks, we have no one square inch of parkland, in this neighborhood. We all live in the street. That's -- we walk our dogs, the kids learn to ride their bicycles, their tricycles in the street. We run into our neighbors and visit with them in the street. That's the whole deal. Now, these little homes have one-car driveways. [4:54:26 PM] [ Buzzer sounding] Most of these -- anyway, I've already gone three minutes? 45th street is not straight and cannot handle any public transportation because the buses can't get down it. Yet they have it set up to do that. We've got to correct that. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Linda baker. And then Susan niak. >> You have two minutes. Is Laurie wedlick here. Come up to the podium. Go ahead, you have two minutes. >> Hi, my name is Susan niak, I live in rosedale which is very close to the area that the previous speaker was talking about, just on the other side of shoal creek, the actual creek and then up to Lamar and on 38th over to about 49th. And because it's a pretty dense area, there's a lot of commercial area in there and there's a lot of transit corridors, the neighborhood basically is getting [4:55:27 PM] sandwiched so that the entire neighborhood is being upzoned. And that may not be as annoying as if we look at other areas that are very similar around town that are not being upzoned, even though they look exactly like our neighborhood. And so that feels a little unfair on that side. And then, also, from an affordability perspective, we have watched the neighborhood, the develops come in, they buy a property that's very cheap or cheap from -- it's not cheap, but it's cheap from a perspective of -- more affordable in the neighborhood. They tear that place down. They put up multiple places on that same thing, but not one of them is even remotely as affordable as the one that they tore down. We see -- you can look at 39th and a half and medical parkway as an example of that. And then when you look at -- I will reiterate 45th street. That is a perilous street to drive. It is an impossible street to walk or bike on. [4:56:28 PM] And, you know, we are already adding more traffic because of the growth. And if we then add all of this extra density, you have to face the reality that you are going to have to use imminent domain to take a whole row of houses off of there to widen the street, because it's impossible for that to be safe given what it is. So I ask if you are going to do this, that you have triggers in place that the infrastructure is in place before you upzone certain areas -- [ applause ] -- Thank you for your time, I appreciate it. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Linda baker here? We caught her. Okay. Ms. -- Ms. -- Um widelick? You have two minutes. Is William stout here? Mr. Yanez, come on up. Next podium. Charlotte here? Donated time. Thank you. Is James Casey here? Mr. Yanez, you will have three minutes when you speak. Go ahead. [4:57:30 PM] >> I'm Laurie widelick, I want to address the lack of parity between different parts of the city with regard to upzoning. Why is all of the upzoning in the center and the east part of the city? Why aren't we upzoning the west part of the city? The industry for which Austin is best known is the high-tech industry. I've moved in that industry for more than 20 years. I have worked in a number of jobs, I have interviewed at a lot of jobs, all over the city. But the majority have been in west Austin. West Austin is a high opportunity area for the high tech industry. Let's treat it as such. In addition, I thought here proponents of density are always talking about how we need to combat economic segregation. West Austin has the highest [4:58:30 PM] income level and the lowest density in the entire city. That's the definition of economic segregation. Let's desegregate it. So -- in conclusion, let's remove some of that proposed upzoning from center and east Austin and move it to the west which can far better accommodate it. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Before Mr. Yanez -- >> Before I start -- >> Mayor Adler: Hang on. Let me get the next people involved here. Is meg Davis here? You will be up at this podium. You have time donated from -- from Jenny -- >> She left. >> So you will speak then for two minutes. Mayor ingle here? No? What about -- what about Ryan -- Ryan Beardmore? Ryan Beardmore? [4:59:30 PM] No? What about bill Bednar? No? What about Jason Patman? Yes? You will be up when the first podium opens up. After you speaker 207 is Karen Gotto, 210 is William Rhoades. Mr. Yanez, go ahead. >> Thank you so much. I want to make sure that you all have these. Okay. So I'm going to speak about -- >> I'm Daniel Llanes. I want to speak global warming, housing, displacement and systemic racial I can't. Equity. I'll start with the last one. As the previous speaker said, we live in a racist city. I graduate you on what you did with the police issue. We're heading in making Austin a raches place. We -- a righteous place. You should have no upzoning in [5:00:32 PM] the eastern crescent, whatsoever. Develop a displacement stage, a mitigation strategy for displacement which hasn't been done and this is an argument for delaying this thing, there's much, much more to learn and to integrate before we go forward. So vet the land development code rewrite through the equity lens prior to adoption. That means I'd like to see you have it vetted through the equity lens before first reading adoption. And, use the adopted neighborhood plans where they apply. Mine is govalle, Johnson terrace, as a guide to any changes in our zoning area. I'll move to housing compatibility and displacement. As I said, no upzoning isn't the another one crescent and maintain current residential property setbacks and compatibility standards. Preserve existing housing stock as a priority to elimination, [5:01:33 PM] demolitions, or new construction. Enforce -- this is a big one for renters, for those of you who think that property owners don't care about renters, enforce landlord maintenance standards. Eliminate the 10%, 80%, and the density bonus formulas. Those are mechanisms to give developers more latitude. Instead, establish incentives for price point affordable housing. 80,000 and below. Let's give incentives for that. Establish incentives for larger developments that would include 30% of the development as 80% -- I mean 80,000 K or below. That's real affordable housing. That's really attacking the problem. The 10% at 80% is a rouse. Something dear to my heart is the tree canopy. This is about global warning. You went to that global warming [5:02:37 PM] conference. I hope you bring those principles today. Preserve the canopy. I'd like to say a moratorium on tree cutting in general and no sacrificing trees for development. I'd like to also see an increase in the minimum size of protected trees and the varieties of trees, and now I move to flooding and -- yeah, flooding, so impervious cover, I'm recommending that you tap -- will you see will you see -- all impervious cover at 60% and limit residential to 45%. And one of the biggest things that we can do to mitigate the heat island effect is for the city to retrofit all parking lots with porous impervious surfaces. That will let -- you'll be leading then. Thank you very much and thank you for indulging me. And I love my community. I hope that you listen to them. And don't act like the school board. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [5:03:39 PM] Meg Davis? >> Yes, sir. >> Mayor Adler: We went through require Beardmore. What's your name? Let me find you. What's your name, please? At the podium? >> Oh, meg Davis. >> Mayor Adler: Meg. Okay. Got you. And you had time from Jenny, but she wasn't here. All right. So you have then two minutes and we got us down to Jason Patman, I think. Is that -- are you Mr. Patman? >> Yes, sir. >> Mayor Adler: Got you. After you speak, it's going to be Karen Gato. Is she here? Thank you. You'll be up. And William Rhodes, speaker number 210, is he here? What about speaker 211, Frederick Durre? What about Allen cook? Allen cook? Justin spitaro, you'll be up next and you have time donated from Jeanette. Go ahead, you have two minutes. >> Thank you. Thank you very much for your time today and your efforts on this. [5:04:41 PM] We have several concerns, and I'll just mention with -- we have heard that there's an amendment proposed that will weaken our city's existing parkland dedication ordinance by giving the city's only tool currently to take parkland land away, and we strongly oppose this and we hope that you will as well. As far as the minimal parking requirements, we worry that the minimal wagger requirements will work to constrain the streets even further and make our hope of a walkable, bikable, and emergency vehicle accessible even harder and less attainable. As cars jet out into streets and over sidewalks from parking. So we wonder if the parking requirements can be tied to street size and maybe the current transit access. [5:05:41 PM] Additionally, the affordability piece, others have said it better but how can individuals or families hope to compete against are developers when going for a home? These developers are looking to profit two to three times the value of that home. So if we make so it they don't even have to go through the rezoning process, it's going to make it for a very unaffordable situation. Additionally, as far as the infrastructure, the existing infrastructure of sewage, drainage, sidewalks, streets, and the occasional transit option when it's available in most neighborhoods are inadequate to support the density it currently has oftentimes, but definitely cannot support more density for a majority of the locations. By spacing the density out citywide instead of in planned corridor locations, following imagine Austin's or the domain, the city will soon find itself needing to improve upon all infrastructure citywide, and I [5:06:42 PM] would be very interested to know if there's been modeling that compares the fee -- the cost that the city will have to incur from citywide improvements to if they just focus on those corridors. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you very much for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Go ahead, sir. Introduce yourself. >> My name is Jason Patman and I'm a landscaper and builder and my passion has been for the last decade to study sustainable landscape and construction. What I'm seeing a lot lately, all over town, is just a general lack of really sustainable practices in the construction and landscape field. We're often allowing -- you know, making structures energy efficient, but there's general lack of good design. There's not a lot of passive systems, you know, systems that capture sunlight, thermal mass. We're building a lot of kind of old-school structures and we're not really setting ourselves up [5:07:43 PM] for a carbon neutral future. Furthermore, there's a lot of landscaping being done that's kind of desert- style landscaping, when central Texas isn't a desert. So we're creating these impervious cover landscapes that are -- you know, these rock gardens, we're saying we're decreasing irrigation but we're also removing the ability to sequester carbon with our landscapes and removing the native ecosystem of central Texas. So generally, I just feel like there's overall abusive sort of tactic that we're employing on our region, even pressed into builders so destroying communities, destroying the ecosystem, and it's happening all over the place. It's -- there's a spirit in Austin and it's not really being protected, you know. I don't know why we're allowing this density. It's not really -- it's not [5:08:48 PM] really -- this is a special place. This isn't Houston. It's not a big city. This place could have been a marble park. -- Could have been anational park. There's springs and trees here. We've got to fight for that and cherish that always in our building style, our landscaping. [Buzzer sounding] >> So thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Karen Gata, you have two minutes, and then Susan spitaro has three minutes. Is Joanna hedges here? Okay. You'll be up after that. Is Jay fisher here? What about Susan Dyar? What about Mateo barnstone? You'll be up after that. You have time donated from Candice Craig. Is Candice Craig here? No? What about Greg kilch? [5:09:48 PM] Okay. So Mr. Barnstone, you'll have three minutes. Go ahead, please. >> Hello. I'm Karen geto. I live in district 7. Thank you to Leslie pool and people who have -- councilmembers that are thoughtfully considering this proposal. We've heard a lot of very emotional and factual information today. I would suggest that maybe step back a minute and say let's consider this plan to just go forward as its written. We've heard data being done by professionals out of mit that have looked at and quantitatively determined what happens when a similar situation happens, which is basically what's been modeled by the architects that we get big homes that are high value, and we become a more exclusive, expensive city to live in. If that's the goal, then we've accomplished it as drafted. Scenario number two is, everybody [5:10:50 PM] leaves that currently has a home, it's all developed as planned, and we have, what, between 2.5 million and 1.5 million new homes and new -- we have no infrastructure to solution that and perhaps as my 79- year-old father says, we all just ride around in scooters, so that is another option. One thing I would suggest is that perhaps we either do -- we do thoughtful deployment of this plan, if we go down that path, and say let us prove it works, and say I would propose that the council members that vote for this should be the first initiatives to deploy the opportunity, so that they can test-market it and demonstrate the good methodology has been rolled out and we can all be very proud of this decision moving forward. If that doesn't seem like a solution, another opportunity would be for all the [5:11:51 PM] councilmembers to divide up equally the goal that you have and say of the 400,000 units -- [buzzer sounding] -- We'll each take a representative equal piece of this, put it in our districts and find a solution that way. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Spitaro, you have three minutes. >> Susan spitaro. I would like to reiterate what many have said, and that is the process is too rushed. It doesn't have to be this rushed. In a way it's really shame. You're all exhausted, everyone back here is exhausted. You created this when you didn't have to. Hearings could be held in January when the holidays are over. You know, shorter time -- I encourage you to do that. Are there things to be done now? Yes. One of the things that needs to be looked at, and others have said it, is the infrastructure, water, waste water, and roads. We have none of that for the kind of density you're talking about, so it does seem you could work on that plan first to get that in place, and then put the people [5:12:52 PM] that are using that in place. Secondly, there could be more efficiency in the permitting process. You can do that now. In the budget before last, you moved the development budget, the 50 million, into a enterprise fund and increased those fees significantly. It seems to me there should be heavy pressure on getting that as efficient as possible so that there's not more cost for inefficiency. You could do that for affordability. The other thing you could do is don't give any more incentives. Why would you incentivize someone to move here when we don't -- you all say we have no place to put them. But the thing I want to focus on most, and that is the home ownership. One lady said, you know, it's not factually true that you will eliminate them. And of course that's not true because when you rezone a single-family home, you are enabling the replacement of that home. And a home means so many things. [5:13:54 PM] One of the things that has not been mentioned is that for most people, most middle income people, the wealth that they accumulate is their home. It's the main asset that they have. They don't have millions of dollars or hundreds of -- they have a home. And, you know, what it used to be -- of course I'm an old person -- is that you rented for a while, then you saved up and you got a kind of small home, then you worked up and got a little better home, and then by the time you retire, you hope you kind of, you know, have been able to repair to pay down that home so you don't have a mortgage and you have a place to live. So home ownership is extremely important, and it's important for people at all income levels. And to take that away from middle class, lower middle class, or poorer people, is not a good thing. The other thing that it does is, it is amazing to me that those who want this are actually saying that you want to exempt the [5:14:57 PM] upzoning and the density in poor areas. Well, if that is your tool for providing affordability, then why wouldn't you do it in the poor areas? There must be something I just don't understand there. But it does not make sense. The data does not show that increased density -- [buzzer sounding] -- Increases affordability. Thank you very much for your time. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. And then I have Joanna hedges. Why don't you come down. You're going to have two minutes. And then Mr. Barnstone, you have three minutes. >> Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. First -- hang on. First she goes with two minutes. >> I apologize. >> Mayor Adler: That's okay. Then after you speak, then it's Angela Richter. Is she here? What about Ted zellaje? What about Carl Reynolds? [5:16:01 PM] Carl Reynolds? No? What about Ryan nill? You'll be up next. You have time donated from Robert burns. .Is Robert burns here? >> In the lobby. >> Mayor Adler: [Indiscernible]. Bring him in if he's here. Go ahead, ma'am. You have two minutes. >> Hello. And thank you for listening to us all today. I'm Joanna, I live in north Austin. My immediate plan for the plan is the disregard it seems to have for the uniqueness of our neighborhoods. The plan feels like it's being pushed through too quickly and without considering and analyzing unintended consequences. For example, in my neighborhood, the proposed high density Zones are not serviced by mass transit. Some of them even lack sidewalks. I'm very concerned about forcing more street parking on narrow streets and not requiring any kind of parking guidelines. Specifically, I'm worried about young children living in these [5:17:02 PM] family neighborhoods, like mine, and the lack of visibility that excessive street parking can create. Please look at street characteristics before removing any kind of parking requirements for these areas or adding more density. Please slow down this decision and put more thought and resources into building the infrastructure and transit options that some neighborhoods need before increasing this density. And finally, please protect your neighborhood green spaces and don't change the park dedication fund the way it's working. Thank you very much for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Applause. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Barnstone, you go ahead, you have three minutes. >> Thank you. Mayor, mayor pro tem, and councilmembers, my name is Mateo barnsociety. I'm speaking on behalf of the board for the congress for the new urbanism central Texas chapter. [5:18:03 PM] In a busy year filled with sequential -- consequential issues this is going to be the most important thing you do. When we continue to grow as a sprawling, hillier version of Houston, or com contact city envisioned by imagine Austin? I encourage you to take a longview about these issues understand think not just about all of us in this room and about all the people's lives we'll be impacting generations from now. We are in support of the rewrite of the land development code, and we believe that the council direction today, broadly speaking, is on the right path, aligning growth and density with transit is the sustainable path forward. That being said, no human endeavor this complex will ever be perfect and can always be improved upon, and specifically, we support mapping or zoning codes that permit three units on a lot throughout the city. [5:19:03 PM] Transit density throughout and along the full length of the corridors and transition Zones, applying the affordable housing bonus and tods, the elimination of all minimum parking requirements, regulations that require above ground parking to accounts toward year ratio, coupled with recalibration of allowable F.A.R. And bonus incentives. Removing regulations on sizes less than 5,000-square-foot, mapping to create 5 to 10-minute walk able neighborhoods, including mapping of small scale centers such as those at Duval and rosedale. Relaxing impervious requirements for missing middle housing, allowing the preservation bonus on lots that are currently vacant and a robot and active ongoing rewrite -- post-rewrite, small area planning process, to meet the goals of imagine Austin. In the words of [indiscernible], let me explain, there's too much, [5:20:04 PM] let me sum. I do not envy you. We are a deeply divided community with divergent divisions for what kind of city we want. You're ultimately going to have to make a choice between visions. I askist a sprawling and increasing I inequitable tract we're on still work? I submit it does not, and the vision as developed by Austin is the sustainable path forward. As our city of a million and region of two million rose to a city of two million and a region of four million. Let me tell you what this is not. This is not a choice between safe, quality, livable neighborhoods on one hand and affordable, sustainable, equitable, denser city on the other. That is a false choice. We really can't have our cake and eat it too. [Buzzer sounding] While there are no magic bullets, those are all different points of view, there's a secret ingredient in the sauce to make all these things work, and that is proximity. Thank you so much. [5:21:05 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Okay. So the next speaker is Ryan nill, and you have four minutes, I think. The last person walked in. Is Steven Englander here? What about merline Whitson? Edward kicker? Come on and grab this other podium. Is Anthony deforee? Anthony Defore? No? What about may Taylor? Okay. You'll be up next. Go ahead. You have four minutes. >> Thank you, mayor and councilmembers, thank you for being here so late and all day long. I know it's been a long day. So my name is Ryan nill. I'm with the Austin cooperative business association. We're kind of like a chamber of commerce for Austin area [5:22:08 PM] cooperatives. Housing coops, which I'm here to talk to you about today, are democratly managed by the tenants. They're a missing middle between rental and home ownership. Co-op members will vote on things like how much their rent is going to be and how much they're going to spend the rental income on. Common things co-ops choose to spend money on are things like food, maintenance, grounds type things, events. There are many things a co-op could choose to spend their money on and this control has allowed Austin co-ops to be rented at a rate that's 50 to 70% of the market rate in their neighborhood. They're also allowed for a deep sense of community and social engagement. That's just not really possible in most types of housing situations. I've lived in housing co-ops for ten years. I helped found the union [5:23:10 PM] cooperative in north central Austin and I can tell you I rent a bedroom there for $452 a month, that does include enough food for me to survive on understand a some of my utilities, so rent is more like 380 near Anderson and Lamar. I think these are a great community benefit. They're very affordable. And in the new code there are some things that I think are really beneficial for co-ops. The first is the addition of the cottage court use. This is the use where you have several buildings laid out around a common courtyard and this common shared space is great for co-ops. If you're not a co-op, it's great for fostering community with your made the basis. The next use is the co-housing use. If you can imagine that same cottage court, but one of the houses has a kitchen and the rest do not, so then all of the residents of this cottage court share a kitchen and break bread together and engage in cooking and cleaning together. I think this is a great way to [5:24:10 PM] build communities. There's nothing better than breaking bread with your neighbors. Additionally, we've still got the classic group residential which is how most co-ops today operate in the new code and I'm pleased to say that it's much more accessible in the new code, it's in more Zones than in the current code, so I think that's a really great advantage. I will say that there's some technical issues with the definitions for the co-housing and group residential use that really need to get fixed, but I won't go into it because it's really wonky. I will say, though, that I think the group residential use gets an interesting disadvantage compared to another use, which is the group home use. And this is, you know, essentially a, you know, supervised, like, halfway house type thing. And it's allowed in cup and pretty much every residential area, so a neighborhood could decide to have a halfway house in a particular parcel, but in that [5:25:12 PM] parcel, it might be impossible for them to agree to run a co-op because the co-op is not allowed by rights or cum or mup. I think as a minimum we should have the same standards for independent adults living in community as we do for people who have supervised kind of, like -- you know, they need help, kind of situations. And I know from living in my neighborhood, we've had some pretty abusive and neglectful group homes, so I think there's definitely a higher need for regulation on those types of housing. So I think there's a lot of positive things in the code. I think there's a lot we have kind of improve on and I do think these kind of housing uses are going to build a greater sense of community in Austin. [Buzzer sounding] People have mentioned how divided we are, and I think co-ops are a great way to start bridging that gap. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Edward kicker. >> Hi. >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. You have two minutes. [5:26:12 PM] Then after you is may Taylor. And then Cecile Taylor. You get to go too. Is James dew here? What about Ethan perene? Christopher Schaefer? Erica lazoya? Catherine tucheck? Okay. You'll be up after that. Go ahead, sir. Two minutes. >> I'm an Austin native and proud long-time resident of district 9. In fact, mayor Adler, I currently live in the house that you used to own on avenue C. Presumably, you moved there for the same reason that my wife and I did 13 years ago, because it's a great neighborhood with a great historic fabric. One of my many concerns with the current draft of the land [5:27:15 PM] development code is a failure to adequately address historic preservation. In Hyde park, when we moved there, we thought we were moving from Barton heights because we could see the mcmansions going up all around us, and we thought of all the neighborhoods in Austin, surely Hyde park is the one park with an active neighborhood association and nccd where we won't have to worry about mcmansions being put up next to us. And we liked the smallness, we liked that it already had a lot more density than most Austin neighborhoods, and the local historic district passed, and to my great chagrin, I looked at the maps when they were first published. And what did I find? I found that my beloved neighborhood, where I hoped to spend the next 30 years of my life, has effectively slung to the doughnut hole. A Guadalupe and 37th street and Duval, five lots in, it's all [5:28:19 PM] upzoned. I'm concerned about this. The question that I want to ask, that I hope will resonate in the two minutes that I have, is what exactly are you hoping that neighborhoods will do if they are concerned about historic preservation? I'm concerned about the break-neck pace of this process that really hasn't addressed what to do with local historic districts and other historic properties. I feel that my neighborhood over the last 30 or 40 years has bent over backwards to work with city staff and council, play by all of the rules, and now I feel that much of that has been push to the way side. [Buzzer sounding] So I hope you'll reconsider, especially these big transition Zones on the edges. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. So you each have two minutes. >> Okay. Thanks. My. I'm has he Taylor and I live in district 9. I'm here to express strong code to allow wider range housing types in all parts of the city, as well as allowing many more people to live in Austin rather [5:29:21 PM] than the suburbs. Can this can't solve our housing overnight but doing nothing gets us nowhere. I think of this process not as something we do primarily for ourselves but rather our children and future residents of our region. I live in the Mueller neighborhood and income restricted affordable housing and I'm acutely aware of how I benefit from decisions that were made 15 years ago or more, at a time when I was new to Austin and totally uninvolved in these issues. I feel an obligation to pay it forward by advocating to increase our housing capacity and expand the range of housing types that future austinites can have the same opportunities I have had. We need space for all kinds of people, not only those rich enough to ador large lot, single-family houses. As a parent, I spend a lot of time these days thinking about what kind of world we're leaving for our children and whether or not they'll be angry at us 30 years from now for our actions or inaxis. Climate change weighs heavily on my mind but I also think about this in regards to our city's [5:30:21 PM] housing and transit planning and all three of those issues are very closely related to one another. One of the best things we can do as a city to respond to climate change is to reduce transportation-related emissions. And the best way to do that is by allowing more people to live centrally so they can either have a shorter drive or take advantage of the transit and bike infrastructure improvements that we also need to be investing in. By living in miles, I'm able to rely almost exclusively on biking transportation and my family makes trips by bus or train. That wouldn't be possible if we lived in Kyle or Hutto as many families do. We need to address other things too to address housing affordability in the short-term but for long-term outcomes we need to go big and fast. Delays in that process has already cost us too much. [Buzzer sounding] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Hi! >> Hello. My name is -- >> Mayor Adler: Hang on. There's a button on that base. Can you press it? [5:31:22 PM] >> Hello. My name is Cecile and I'm six years old. I live in Mueller and I would like housing to be -- more housing to be built so that more people from other countries can live here and have a safe place to live and not live outside. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Good job. We have Catherine tucheck speaking for you nor two minutes, then we have Dan Mcclellan. Is he here? What about Stephanie Tabone? Why don't you come on down. You'll have two minutes. And then in line is Margaret Carico. Is Margaret Carico here? What about bright dorm blyzer? You'll be up next and second on deck is Margaret treviño. Is Margaret treviño here? What about Peter Ellis? [5:32:24 PM] What about Wolfgang fry? You'll come about. You have time donated and you also have tame from pat tuche. Is pat here? What about Simone fry? Go ahead, please. >> Thank you for today. I'm Catherine tucheck, the president of a neighborhood association in district 1. We say the speed of this process hasn't let us consider the significant impact so we voted unanimously to ask you to slow down a hurried and broad stroke process and give all neighborhoods time to discuss other feedback and alternate solutions. Our residents include a good mix of middle income, upscale, lower income renters. There are 48 affordable units with 12 in planning, currently providing 20% of the neighborhood as affordable at under the 60 mfi. That's better than city's 80%. [5:33:26 PM] This revision doesn't a support a more equitable distribution but puts a disproportionate amount in east Austin. We've worked with U.T. In grad discount housing for density for 700 to 800 students but we worked with them and they worked with us. The black line neighborhood is not opposed to increased density when there's a thoughtful plan behind it. Finally we have our black line heritage residents, the long time elderly African Americans, many who do not know about this. I sat with a 90-year-old African American that we'll Milly, and she lives a block off mlk. She said no idea, I explained to her that developers would be calling. While we were speaking, a developer called. Go, mayor pro tem Garza with your equity overlay, please extend it to the African American culture at historic district and while we [5:34:26 PM] support your fundamental goals, you've looked past black line's composition and approved our projects creating the opposite effect to preserve neighborhood character and maintain a compatible development scale. We respectfully ask that you respond to our concerns and slow this down. Thank you very much for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Thank you. [Applause] >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead, introduce yourself, please. >> Yes, I'm Stephanie Tabone. I think the new code is better than the last code, but it still doesn't make it. And there's so many things wrong with it. But I'm just going to speak to two things that really concern me. One is the fee-in-lieu for affordable housing. And while it's been intimated, nobody has just said it, and what I want to say about it is, why is there a fee-in-lieu for affordable housing? There should be no allowable fee-in-lieu for affordable housing. [5:35:27 PM] If you're really for affordability, now, I'm going to give you an example because I live in the transition zone, and at the end of my street there's a now six-acre lot and it currently can be 16 units per lot, but under the new base, 174 units can sit on that property, and when it's upzoned for bonus, 348 units can sit on that lot. And I don't believe that any developer should be allowed to pay to put 348 units on that six acres and not put a single affordable unit on it. And I -- this just infuriates me. The other thing is, the quarter-mile, no requirement for parking. So there's 348 units that will have no requirement for parking. Zero. And I just came back from Europe. [5:36:30 PM] We're kind of backwards. Right? Nobody had any cars, now they do. And let me tell you, it's a mess. So while you think everybody is going to be walking, and that could be great, I want that, I want more density, I want people to walk, I want mass transit, I want all the things that people want in this codenext, but I want it to be sensible. [Buzzer sounding] And it's not sensible to say zero parking for 348 units at the end of my street. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Is Margaret treviño here? >> There's somebody between us. >> Mayor Adler: Is there? I didn't mean to cut them off. Who's between you? Dan? What's your name, sir? >> [Off mic] I'm not sure -- >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. Sir, you'll be up next. >> My name is Maggie treviño, also Margaret treviño, but I go [5:37:31 PM] by Maggie. Believe it or not, I'm a real estate broker. So I'm kind of in a betwixt and between on certain things but I'm against this type of coding. Part of it's because for years I have worked, since I am multilingual, I have worked with a diverse clientele. The area which -- in which I live, we are extremely diverse. We have people that are lower income, we have blacks, hispanics, Vietnamese, a broad range of economic, and I am in district 2, in case y'all want to know that. Also, we have got special needs peoples also. We have several group homes, plus special needs families, too. [5:38:32 PM] We have seniors, and we have new families that are just about to have a new one. And part of it is, we are in the -- where we will get zinged very well, because we're on that margin, and we will be able to have as many as ten, according to the maps, per lot, ten units per lot, with no parking on site, and we're all be single-family homes. Nobody is wealthy. Everybody's middle class, pretty much, at both ends of the spectrum on the middle class. The infrastructure on these streets, they're not adequate in order to sustain that kind of density. They would have to have water -- [5:39:34 PM] [buzzer sounding] -- Fire trucks, new fire stations, even. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> A complete infrastructure problem. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Mr. [Indiscernible], you have two minutes. >> Thank you, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: I'm sorry? >> I said thank you, mayor. Members of the council, I appreciate your time and effort. I'm in district 7. I appreciate the effort put in by councilmember pool on many occasions. So there have been many good comments. You ever getting ready to all take a break and a lot of folks have left, so I was trying to think what can I say that hasn't been said. There have been many excellent comments. So a couple things came to mind, just a couple. You know, how did we -- how do we overcome a history of bad decisions? I mean, right now -- [indiscernible] I think that's why we have a divided council. It's too bad so many people have left because I do not support the rewrite as is, and like many [5:40:34 PM] others, I would urge patience on your part. But for those who have left, I would say, you know, I would agree, a lot of our zoning history has been racist. I agree with the threat of climate change in a compact city and better transportation would mitigate that. It's unfortunate, though, as important as it is to recognize those -- those realities, that there's so much left to be done. And my wife who spoke just ahead of me made a very good point. If there's anything you could take away from what she and I have to say, it's that we do not believe that there should be fee-in-lieu of affordable housing. I live on mccanles street. Our neighborhood is not antigrowth, we supported the growth of Camden on Lamar, we fought another not consistent with imagine Austin, but our neighbors support higher density and affordable housing, so if council really believes in affordable housing, then there should be no fee-in-lieu of [5:41:35 PM] affordable housing, as my wife said. The last thing I'll say, aside from that -- the need to be transparent about what our goals are, I came from Minneapolis, and so it's interesting to hear people talk about Minneapolis. It's been many years since I lived there. And I will say this -- [buzzer sounding] -- Minneapolis is not ideal. It has its own racist history, but what it does have is a lot of citizen participation, and I've joined citizen league meetings there. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> And that's what we would need here, I think. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> For the process. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. The last speaker we're going to have now is Wolfgang fry. Time donated -- did Simone fry come in? Okay. Then me saw pat tuche up there so you have four minutes. >> City council, you have heard many good reasons to slow down the process of the ldc revision and include local advice into the code rewrite. [5:42:35 PM] And I don't want to repeat all of that. I'm addressing city council today because we are affected by the new code because we live in a historic house in a historic district on avenue H, one block from Duval, and we're there in a transition zone, being zoned r1 hdh under the new plan. That would allow us -- allow six units to be on our property, up to 40 feet high, four stories. We are a contributing structure to the historic district. I'm addressing city council today because I'm generally sympathetic to the idea of smart gentrification and affordable housing within Hyde park. We have tried this by using [indiscernible] Architects and tried to build an Adu instead of our old garage. [5:43:36 PM] It didn't turn out, for reasons that is too long to discuss here, but they are not fixed by the new code, either. But at least the idea of alley flats as people who try to give a bonus for people who commit to affordable housing for at least five years is one of the things that we tried to do long before this was kind of an important topic here. I'm addressing city council also because I'm sympathetic to the idea of strong and reliable public transportation system but I can are the assignment of Duval street as a transportation corridor arbitrary and not justified by the facts on the ground. In fact, I've used previous bus lines 1, 5, 10, 801, and 7 on a regular basis, and it's completely acceptable to walk to their stops on Guadalupe and red river. As an example, while it is [5:44:36 PM] convenient to me to use number 7 to get to work, for my daughter to get to swim practice, she has held out here since 10 o'clock. Her twin brother uses 322 nearly every school day to get home from kealing and walks from red river. So Duval is nothing special, it is a short street. It actually turns out that Duval is a residential street with a lot of kids riding their bikes to elementary school in the morning, and our kids have been allowed to cross that street for years without any supervision. In fact, the number 7 bus takes about as slow to cross Hyde park as it does through U.T. Campus because there are so many speed bumps in there. I'm addressing city council because as a resident of Hyde park, I know that most of us have promised themselves that we will [5:45:37 PM] never sell to developers and, therefore, there's no immediate easing of the housing shortage within this area. And based on the current ground values that we have in this area, I would not expect that anything that has been developed here is affordable. We love this neighborhood. And while there is really no short-term change, in the long-term, it builds an incentive to tear down existing housing and build how profit housing. That puts the character of Hyde park as a walkable, green, vibrant neighborhood at risk because nearly one quarter of Hyde park is affected by the new code along Guadalupe, 38th and Duval. There are many ways to put more housing -- [buzzer sounding] -- Into Hyde park, and the assignment changes this. We are interested in keeping this walkable. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> -- Green and diverse [5:46:39 PM] neighborhood. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. Thank everyone for coming. We're going to take a break until 7 o'clock. 5:46. We're in recess. [City council in recess until 7 o'clock] [5:55:20 PM] Twixt: ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ [6:09:47 PM] (bleep) [6:17:14 PM] Practice stroke. ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ [7:38:26 PM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. It is 7:38. It is still December 7th, 2019. We're in city council chambers. We are reconvening the meeting. We apologize for that. We had a proclamation we had to deliver up at the capitol and naacp gathering. Councilmember tovo, you want to start us off? >> Tovo: Yes, I do. I have a constituent who's here to speak. She lives in district 9. As soon as I finish writing her name on all of it, I'll pass it down. She wanted to be able to share comments with you all. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. I see we have them here and we apologize for that. I'm going to go ahead and start back with the list that we have. If somebody is here and their name was called earlier, if you would please go to the clerk and [7:39:28 PM] let her know that you're back, and if the clerk could give me the names of people that are coming back, please -- please do that. And we're going to begin with bill Thomas. Is bill Thomas here? I'm probably going to need this list. Okay? Todd Shaw. Eric rough. Jeff Aubrecht. Rhonda Evans. Ron magson, Julie Ballard, Monica Lopez Mcghee, rosemary' Knorr, [7:40:33 PM] Alice -- did I get a hit? Come on down, Monica. You have two minutes. And you have donated time from Sarah cook, so you have three minutes. >> Mayor Adler and city council members -- [off mic] >> Mayor Adler: Hold on. We don't have a microphone on you yet so we want to record you for posterity too. Please start again. >> Okay. Hello, mayor Adler and city council members. Thank you for this opportunity to share my thoughts with you. My name is Monica Lopez Mcghee. I'm a six-year Hyde park resident living along Duval street. On Duval street, my husband and I saw a place to raise our now 11-year-old son, a place where we could walk to local businesses and build community, a place where we could build an additional dwelling unit for my mother who currently -- currently [7:41:34 PM] resides with us in our 980-square-foot home. This is the incremental financial stability and multigenerational living I strive towards. The proposed land development code overlooks residents like myself and not -- and not to uplift seniors like my parents on fixed income. If this was to uplift seniors like my parents on fixed income, that, I could get behind. But to make it possible for a ten unit housing complex on a lot like mine with no affordable housing necessary if a fee is paid is not for community. I'm for development. Code design development. I read the code. I researched and I attended neighborhood meetings and open houses, only to find that there are no case studies of cities who have successfully applied density as a solution to affordability. An economic theory that has no proof points is only a hypothesis. The impact on the east side is [7:42:36 PM] tenfold. So if this is real experience facing middle and lower class residents like myself, why do we not see more diverse faces today? Policies and procedures they weren't given notice or perhaps spending an entire day at city hall is not realistic, and perhaps through many years of profit-based decision making the black and brown people have been told their voices don't matter. The recent trustee decision in favor of the changes reinforces the same message. I invite you to build trust in the public process. You've heard a lot of feedback today. It is not enough. A thorough community engagement process is important and necessary. City staff needs time to hear the lived experience of residents and neighbors and write this into the plan. Collectively, we have insights that no amount of data can provide. Citizen engagement paired with city knowledge and skills can build neighborhoods that account for growth while honoring citizens. So I ask, please delay the vote and be responsive to what you're hearing. I ask that you reconsider [7:43:39 PM] upzoning along Duval from rm1 to an r4 that supports density and accounts for homeowners like myself, and minimize the unequitable burden of the current plan on east and southeast Austin. I ask that you preserve the parkland dedication ordinance so as we grow we still have restorative places to come together, to play and recreate. I ask that you take a close look at some of the flawed logic. Yes, Minneapolis has passed a change in land development but it was for more extreme than this proposal and we have yet to see the effects of it. Austin can lead the way forward with smut code design. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Rosemary Knorr. Alice agiston. Kelly Shannon. Jay archer. Gene smastria. [7:44:47 PM] Justin Haynes. Charles Newsom, Cindy [indiscernible], Jeb about it, Melinda Shera, [indiscernible] Randall, andrei Gouse. Shirley wilder, Nina françois, Lela forester. How many people have signed up? Okay. We'll get to you. Before you speakers Joseph Horton, Leanne Starkey, Kevin quist, come on down. Mimi hafferty, Tony house, Debbie Ramiro, Brian Rhodes, Michael Norman, [indiscernible] Sherman, Christine Clark, Mindy Sutton. [7:45:49 PM] Okay. You'll be next. Go ahead. You have two minutes. >> My name is [indiscernible] And -- >> Mayor Adler: Would you say your name again, please. >> Lisa forester. I'm a realtor, I work with people in 78704, usually they're moving because of high taxes so I find them places they can afford and be more comfortable without a burden. But I'm here today, I also live in 5, on south Lamar, 3600 south Lamar. I know that you're making this new zoning that you've created, will also create changes, and I think that people are going through the transitions now with change, it's going to be change if you choose to pass it, too, so I think for the resident it's going to be change no matter what, inevitable. My wish is that you consider, when you make these changes with zoning, that [7:46:50 PM] you consider a bigger picture, too, that it would be great, ideally, if you could pair it with something healthy for the people who already live here, so that they could know that they're going to be at least watched out for in another way. And I think in that way, you could make a lot of people more at peace with the change. If they knew you were looking out for their best interest, the ones who already live here. For example, I'll give you my personal example, now I'm going micro. I bought this new condo, 4600 south Lamar, four years ago, and there's no place to walk. There's no place to -- it's almost like we're in prison in our little condos, which weren't built very well, totally devastating, I'm surprised they could go through the permitting and passing of so many things that were wrong in that condo that we have to fix at an hoa now. It's just -- it's amazing. But I mean, just to be able to walk outside, I have to do it on south Lamar with the exhaust, with the cars, and they're just [7:47:50 PM] getting increasingly more busy on south Lamar. It would be so great if you could think about this when you're making your new plans. I was thinking that it would be nice -- doesn't have to be a big park -- [buzzer sounding] -- >> Mayor Adler: Finish your thought. >> Okay. For example, just a few doors down, there's people with big lots that have interesting commercial properties spattered in the middle. If we just had one quiet trail or something to go back there and come out, just a place to walk. I have to trespass to walk and have quiet. And -- into the shopping areas after dark. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Introduce yourself, please. You have two minutes. >> Hello. I'm Kevin quist. I've supported more diverse forms of housing in Austin for some time now, I honestly just value urban areas. [7:48:50 PM] Not because it's lower energy consumption or doubly effective in retaining thermal energy than single- family homes, because walkable lifestyles are good for physical health. I value dense urban housing because I love the feeling of vitality and energy that each one of us has felt in a city. It fulfills our deepest desires as social animals and I don't want to have swaths locked away for boring single-family neighborhoods. I can't take a stroll through Hyde park and feel like I'm part of a community. There's no life in these areas for people passing through. I would like that to change. I believe that adding a few fourplexes and eight plexus in the central city will be a step in that direction. Today I also heard discussion about affordability and claims that new housing an affordable. While it's electric you that new construction is not what I'd consider affordable, this is no reason to be against upzoning. Under the current code, [7:49:51 PM] developers don't ask for upzoning because it will be difficult to achieve and the developers will take the easy way out, and only redevelop single-family homes into the multi-million-dollar mcmansions that we have already seen. If they were given the option to build flower plexus, triflexes and eight plexus, wield see lower price points. On Portland, this is a condo, each one sells for $279,000, a comparable single- family home in the neighborhood sells for 769,000. So from an equity standpoint, I think the only way to prevent working class people from being bid out of the central city is to make sure there are enough homes built to go around. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mindy Sutton, before you speak, is Allen Singleterry here? Come on down to this podium. Caroline Bailey? [7:50:56 PM] Joe bevel? Homer [indiscernible], Connie, names Casey, Jim Christianson. Why don't you go ahead and start. >> Thank you. Mayor Adler and council, thank you so much for being here and I really, really do appreciate you guys being here. It's hard. I've been here most of the day, but I got to leave so -- but I'm back. My name is Mindy Sutton. I live in district 8. I live in west creek neighborhood, a small neighborhood in southwest Austin, about 850 homes. I'm here for myself, but also for my neighborhood, I serve on my neighborhood association board as president and I love my neighborhood. Weather best one in Austin. I'm biased -- -- we are the best one in Austin. I'm biased. Part of the issue with the new land development code, which I want to say we want to be behind it, we do, we need a new code, our neighborhood, like many others, and I'm surprised I haven't heard more team talk about this, as we're prone to [7:51:58 PM] localized flooding. We do have a creek, but our creek flooding is not as often as our lot to lot flooding is. A staff member in watershed that works with you guys or with ldc presented the Austin neighborhoods council and gave us a presentation. It was well done and I was happy to have him come. He was very generous with his time. Something jumped out, though, and I would like to point out to you that when he talked about the Dell -- I think I'm saying this wrong -- a flood model in south Lamar, they tested green Phil management and maxed out single-family residential with visually no impact. Some, in two- year flood, but little impact on structures, little impact. Minimal impact at 25- and 100-year floods. Doesn't sound like much but right now the city has -- I want to read this to make sure I say it right -- no adverse impact [7:52:59 PM] allowed. That the current code. That should go with new code. So if a model is showing that there's minimal impact, our neighborhood will have even more lot to lot and localized flooding. I love the idea of the plumbing code, if we add ads -- [buzzer sounding] -- Please, consider this and slow down. Please slow down. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Go ahead, sir. You have two minutes. >> My name is Allen Singleterry. 17 years ago my wife and I bought a tiredown in the Hancock neighborhood and poured everything we have in restoring and improving it. I would like to devote my two minutes from urging your support for one of the amendments to be proposed on Monday by my excellent councilmember, Kathie tovo. Her amendment 8 attempts to address one of the items at the top of my list of concerns with the revised code. My phrasing of the issue is, not every neighborhood street that's one block away from a corridor street has the size and infrastructure to support rm1 [7:53:59 PM] zoning. Amendment number 8 is titled, support safety, functionality, and complete communities transition areas. It reads in part, for the the safety of residents, ensure adequate sidewalks and infrastructure, water, sewer, and drainage -- if any of you desire something developed 70 years ago, I invite you to come sample the water pressure in my shower. Further down, develop a strategy for ensuring access for emergency vehicles, trash collection, work crews and other basic services in areas where parking is eliminated. Craft visual illustrations of how rm1 and r4 properties that full advantage would accommodate basic services like trash collection on a standard city lot. If you need an example of this issue, take a stroll down my street some morning between 7:30 and 8:all. Parents are bringing their kids to Lee elementary by car, bike, and on foot. [7:55:00 PM] Parked cars line both sides of the narrow streets so there's barely room for movement. There are no sidewalks, so young children and their parents are scrambling on lawns and wherever they can. If it's Friday, the garbage and recycling structure in the fray. Imagine this environment with three to ten times as many garbage cans. I ask that you look at the councilmember tovo's amendments and find a way to consider streets within transition Zones as unique and individual situations rather than blocks on a map that can be made for additional units. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you, sir. Mr. Christianson, come on down. Before you start speaking, is Elizabeth mcreevy here? Luisa hoberman, [indiscernible], Karen Fernandez, Benjamin steel, Mike white, [indiscernible] Herndon. Come on down. [7:56:02 PM] Catherine Mattingly. Rom Mcdonnell. Mike paulston. Erin dev. Erin dev? Okay. Go ahead and start, Mr. Christianson. >> My name is Jim Christianson. I'm a native austinite. I went to university junior high with you, I believe, for those that remember that school in Austin. As I said, I'm a native austinite. I've been involved in city planning for a long, long time. I was part of Austin tomorrow. Then we had, during Ron mullen's administration, the Austin plan. The Austin plan mass a million dollars and was thrown in the garbage plan. When neighborhood plans came up, I recommended our people and our neighborhood to not participate in it because it was going to be a waste of time. Well, ten years later, the neighborhood plans are being abandoned here. [7:57:03 PM] I'd like to just take a short time to appeal to you, to your basic politics. I'm a Democrat, and most of you are Democrats. And what do they stand for? They stand for transparency, they stand for fairness. They stand for giving people their right to vote, if they have a right to vote, and in this case, they do have a right to have a valid petition, and that's a point that's being missed throughout this process. I don't think that using a footnote in the legal treatise is a legal basis for denying people their right to vote and to have a valid petition. That's all I'm asking, asking to your democratic fairness. When you decide to vote on Monday, have you treated people fair? Almost 1300 people have come through the doors here. I checked with the guy out there. That's a lot of people. And that's a lot of voters, and [7:58:03 PM] the vast majority of them that have spoken today have said this process isn't fair. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Come on up sir, introduce yourself. >> I'm Mike white, brentwood neighborhood of district 7, I work for a nonprofit housing organization. I'm for density of all uses and housing types and support the update to the land use code, to increase housing supply and lessen the rate at which housing appreciates so my millennials can can meet the needs. We wouldn't have current affordable housing stock today if they didn't build -- build it 30 or 40 years ago. We need to build it now so there's more older housing stock in the future. A comment on F.A.R.S if we [7:59:06 PM] concrete it for more than two units we will just make bigger, more expensive units. If we increase the F.A.R., people should be able to build more on lots so units are smaller and less expensive. F.A.R.S should increase with allowable increases and we should be allowed three units on every residential lot. We should allow for increase in small scale retail and commercial uses under apartments along secondary arterials such as north loop and Houston and other streets that allow residents the option to walk without having to walk down large pedestrian unfriendly boulevards such as burnet and Lamar. And lastly, regarding impervious cover, I agree flooding is a concern. Keeping our trees is a concern. I'm hesitant to agree on any increase to impervious cover. As an alternative, if we increase building heights modestly so housing heights can be three stories, we can [8:00:08 PM] maintain a small impervious cover to support flood mitigation and keeping our trees while allowing increased units. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Dev. Come on up. As you are coming up, is Alex mead here? You have time donated from Wendy Rodriguez. You have two minutes. Is Susan pentell? Robert sotilar? Up next. Two minutes. >> Okay. My name is Mike fallston I live in district 10. I've lived here since 1977. And I am very much against the current land development code changes. They have been very confusing and a lot of people have at least in our area are having a lot of anxiety trying to understand it, frankly. Number 2, if I were you, I [8:01:08 PM] would initiate a one-year plan to really understand and monitor what Minneapolis, Oregon, and Seattle are doing this coming calendar year. Based on their current plans to eliminate single-family zoning. Much as you are talking about. The information I see for these three cities or in the one state is at best alarming. The residents there are just as angry as what you've seen here today here in Austin. It's the same problem, different people. Number 3, finally, the last request I have of you is to clarify what is your annual budget going to be for 2021 if the city does not implement this current land development code during this next year. Do you have enough, do we have enough property tax money to keep Austin effective? That's one big question. I wod also suggest that you shut down all the [8:02:11 PM] short-term rentals because that's what everybody is so concerned about, and above all schools. We lost four schools this last session. So somebody should be addressing that fairly quickly. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Ms. Paulson, I'm sorry I misidentified you earlier. Is Aaron dev here? Mr. Mead, you have two minutes. I do that all the time. >> Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. I'm Alex mead. I'm proud to stand before you today as the President-Elect of university Democrats at the university of Texas in Austin. But I want to start by talking about my dad who has a lot of catch phrases, and one of his favorite when stuck in Austin traffic this city was designed for about a third of the population it has today. It might sound hyperbolic, but our population currently is 950,000, and when our current land development [8:03:11 PM] code was written, it was 392,000. About 41%. My dad is not that far off. And we're seeing the effects on things like our $331,000 median house price. That's the highest, we're the only major metro in Texas that has that above 300,000. Rent prices are similarly high here as well. As U.T. Student, we see it as well in west campus and Riverside. In west campus the uno changes will help, but as you acknowledged, Mr. Mayor, in the consideration of that, there's still things that can be done in that area that are more effectively done through the ldc process. In Riverside, regardless of the long-term effects of the 4700 Riverside project, in the short term it will lead to displacement and students otherwise who would live there not having a place to live. We need a land development code that will help us compensate for all these things and build a city for the future. We need a land development code that expands into west [8:04:12 PM] campus and expands housing. That will allow students who would life in Riverside or do live there to find affordable housing within the city. We need a land development code that needs Austin housing policy into the 21st century. Then we can truly say our city was designed for the population size it has today. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Mr. Sotalar. Before you start your two minutes, is Andrew Homer here? Janet binke? Ted piper? Why don't you come on down. Jessica rolesson. Brian Poteet. Karen Carson. Chris page. Ricardo one. Okay. Go ahead and start. >> Hello, my name is Robert sotalar and I live in the Mueller neighborhood in district 9. I would like to urge you to support the revised land [8:05:12 PM] development code proposal before council today. The measures that this initial draft takes to expand multi-family, multi-unit and missing middle to all parts of housing particularly to central and west Austin that have traditionally limited those housing types are an important step forward not only for affordability and environmental sustainability but also social justice in our city. As detailed in scholar already works, it is an historic fact cities across the country including Austin use policies favoring exclusive single-family zoning with the intent of keeping racial minorities and lower socioeconomic classes out of select neighborhoods. That was the intent with Austin's 1928 master plan and has been T effect of subsequent zoning policies. The revisions proposed in the draft of the new code work to undo that shameful legacy boutique fully expanding the areas of the city open to multi-unit and multi-family and missing [8:06:12 PM] middle housing. This gives austinites a chance to access high opportunity areas and neighborhoods near the urban core so many of us work. It also promises to more equally distribute development need to do keep up with population growth including into central and west Austin rather than shunting it all into areas like the east side where the disproportionate influx of development that is off limits elsewhere in Austin contributes to displacement. The proposed code is not perfect, but it's a meaningful step in the right direction and an opportunity for city leadership to signal that they intend to right the historical wrong. I urge you all to seize this opportunity to move us in the direction of a more integrated, more affordable and more sustainable city. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. I think you are the next speaker. Why don't you come on up. I think it was you and then him. Introduce yourself. Two minutes. >> Good evening. My name is Ted piper. [8:07:13 PM] I've lived in Austin for over 20 years. And I've lived in the past six years in Hancock neighborhood in district 9 with my wife and three children. Mayor Adler was interviewed on Kut regarding the new ldc. There were two points that mayor Adler spoke of that I would like to weigh in today. Mayor Adler mentioned that the city of Austin has been spending over seven years talking about the policy that are built into the current 1400 pages we have for the ldc and because that we need to fast track this version of the ldc right now. As a taxpayer, I'm certainly aghast it's taken seven years to put this plan together, but in the two minutes I have today, I do not share that view that we need to fast track such a major rewrite of the ldc released two months ago in October. I like many in my neighborhood have not had enough time to digest the code, but under the [8:08:17 PM] codenext which mayor Adler rightly killed, my property and my neighbors were zoned sf-3. The latest code, it's zoned r4 and my neighbors rm1. This is a massive zoning change for my property and those in my neighborhood. Fast tracking a ldc that came out two months ago that proposes new drastic density in my neighborhood and across the city deserves far more community consideration, education, involvement, and input. Second point, mayor Adler spoke yesterday about representative democracy. Mayor, you mentioned that the citizens of Austin don't have to worry about reading the new 1400-page ldc because we can rely on our democraticly elected officials to represent us. Well, I believe I can safely say that the vast majority of constituents in the neighborhoods in district 9 do not at all believe the mayor or the codenext 4.0ldc is fairly [8:09:17 PM] representing us. [Buzzer sounding] In its current form the incentive is for council representatives to vote yes to increase density when their district is least impacted by increased density and vote know to increased density when their district is moat impacted. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Thank you for your time. Go ahead. Is councilmember Alvarez here? Why don't you come next. Go ahead, sir. Two minutes. >> I'm Chris page from district 1. My home is in a transition zone, and within the zone there are presently single-family homes, one and two stories homesteaded that have been up zoned to mu5a. That's a zero setback with 90-foot vertical. This is a unique problem for my property because I live on an extremely steep alluvial slope. For those of you don't know, [8:10:18 PM] that's clay and gravel embankment left behind by the historic flood of the Colorado river. Extremely unstable and brittle and held together and stabilized by vegetation, canopy that's existed there for over 100 years. If the mu5a zoning is put in, and again, this is a purely residential area, it will create an artificial canyon, a 90-foot sheer wall, wedged against a 45-degree angle alluvial bank and there will be no survival for the current vegetation. There's already extensive erosion issues that we are trying to counter by restoring that hillside. And if this zoning is allowed to happen, and trust me, I fully support the idea of affordable housing, increased density, everything else that our community needs to have homes that they can be secure in, age in, et cetera. [8:11:18 PM] Personally, I want to start -- like my wife and I are talking about starting our family this year. And our dreams are all wrapped up in our home. And if there is, in fact, development that allows our home to fall apart in a way that we cannot repair it or afford to, I think it will really, you know, impact us in a way that kind of unsettles goals that we've had for our entire lives. I would urge the recalibration and also greater context sensitivity within transition Zones. There's also a specific recommendation -- [buzzer sounding] -Towards the end of the handout that I gave you that I think could easily solve this problem. Allow neighbors to have the entitlements that they have, but keep the environment stable enough so that it's not destabilizing where affordable homes already exist. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Before [8:12:18 PM] council member speaks, and by the way, welcome back to the chamber, is Ricardo artulos bone here? Kelsey Howell? Brandon Bradley? Mary lake? Come on up. Is David spats here? What about rosemary Miriam? Heather Bailey? Carla Kenyan? Scott Snyder? Sara Simpson? John David -- come on down. Councilmember. >> Greetings, mayor and council. Thanks for your service. Thanks for this opportunity. I was excited to testify while the sun was still out, but that didn't happen, but [8:13:20 PM] that goes to show that just the commitment you've had here to stay here all day. But again, Raul Alvarez. I appear before you as an east side resident of district 3 and not in any other capacity. This is only the second time I appeared before you on a zoning case since I left the council in 2006. I think that what happens with regard to the ldc rewrite is very important. I have three kind of brief messages regarding the item that is subject of this hearing. The first message is that you look at preservation for densification, and I hear a lot about how we can build and bring affordable housing to different neighborhoods, but not a lot about how we can preserve the affordability. So I suggest that you before you move forward with the changes, you put some of these measures into place. As co-chair of the anti- displacement task force and in the attachments to the list I presented, I include some suggestions [8:14:21 PM] that are excerpted from the task force report, so those are my suggestions for things that could help with preservation, which is building more affordable housing. So I offer those as some suggestions and hope that you'll consider putting some of those into place, again before the effects of the land development code occur. S number 2 is that the goal from my point of view having been on the council and talked about the rewrite is that it have a clear and predictable code. The conversation historically has been about streamlining the code so the development process wouldn't be so long and cumbersome. It would shorten the development process and reduce the costs associated with navigating the development process. Seems like the only reason now we're doing a development code is produce for housing and that is a disconnect bus that wasn't in the conversation. [Buzzer sounding] Again, a little -- more than you probably care to read in [8:15:22 PM] my prepared documents. Thanks for the opportunity and I appreciate your service and happy to follow up, you know, in email or phone calls or meetings, et cetera. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Councilmember alter. >> Alter: Councilmember, if there's one more thing that you wanted to tell us, what would that be? You have a lot of experience both in the community and -- I value your opinion. >> I think for me the -- you hear a lot about we need nor housing, need more housing. My mantra is we need more affordable housing. As you see the tools in the development code and what they are trying to accomplish, what is it doing about affordable housing? Is there a linkage and is it significant. And for me I would ask you think about is it doing just more housing in general or do we need more affordable housing because -- again, there's some data that I provide in my packet about -- about the incomes and the median income and what's happening with that in our community, and that's [8:16:22 PM] making it very difficult to produce housing except for those people who earn a lot of money. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Good evening to you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Please introduce yourself. You have two minutes. >> Mayor and council, Sara Simpson. I live in district 9 and I don't think it should matter how long I've lived here in town. I've been in this room before to urge you to eliminate parking mince in the ldc to allow ads on all lots by right and eliminate barriers to missing middle housing. I still urge you to encourage the integration of these items into the ldc, but I'm here to primarily say yes please to the adoption of a new land development code. To let you know I support you and the city of Austin with a new set of values. We desperately need a new ldc. We need a new ldc to prevent sprawl and make our city [8:17:24 PM] more resilient in the face of climate change. As I've been listening to speakers, it's clear to me that you have not heard from enough of those who have lost because many of them no longer live here. They've chosen to leave because they've not melt welcome or had no choice or no home period. The current code has done this. I believe your task at hand is determine what is best for the historicry disadvantaged communities of Austin and what is best for all of Austin and the region that leads to many threats that accompany climate change. What does this look like? This requires leaving behind a ldc that has prioritized the voices of the privileges like neighborhood sociation and plans which largely represent the voices of affluent homes and only a small percentage of residents. I know my neighborhood association does not represent my voice and I've not been able to get a good opportunity to participate in that. This requires following the example of cities like Minneapolis and Oregon who allow three to four units, [8:18:24 PM] not just in some areas of town, while allowing greater density on primary transportation corridors and equity and flood mitigation efforts you deem appropriate. And following the lead of cities like Buffalo, new York and eliminating parking limits. I urge you to move -- [buzzer sounding] -- Forward with code rewrite and make bold moves. Thank you for your work on this and godspeed. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Introduce yourself, please. Two minutes. >> Hello. Hi. My name is Brendan Bradley, a freshman at the university of Texas of Austin and I'm here to speak in favor of the proposition. I am the first to admit that I'm not an expert on housing policy, but I know what is just and moreover I know that and I would like to address first what we've heard in session today. I know that council, you cannot create affordable housing until those units exist in the first place. And so I am in favor for that reason. But moreover, I would like [8:19:25 PM] to express the fact that we in this instance cannot allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. Talk to anyone who has been to these sessions before, anyone who has presented the sessions on gentrification and you will see we don't have enough units in Austin because we can't plan for growth 30 years ago. Like Mr. Mead was saying earlier. The fact is that we aren't in an ideal situation, but we still would need to take action and this code is an excellent first step. And an excellent first step. And I assure all those who have spoken before, who spoke of the fear of the change their facing, that I understand the fear they are experiencing, but what I need council to -- to caution council, there are thousands more who experience those worst fears realized who you never have heard from because they weren't able to stick around. There are thousands more who have experienced just as much of the worst fears you have heard today. Putting more housing addresses those concerns. And the last thing I want to talk about is the fact that [8:20:27 PM] we are facing this issue because Austin is the fastest growing city in the U.S. That's not something to be ashamed of, to be taken as a bad thing, rather it is just. Principle to the notion of just when you are born ought not dictate opportunities in life so you expect people to find great areas of opportunity and we have the honor in Austin to be that place. That means that our land development code needs to reflect that fact. We need to create a greater number of more affordable housing and this is not --en it is not because it is some necessary evil but the moralry right thing to do. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. John David Carson. Before you speak, is riland max here? Louis Herrera. Next speaker up. Third speaker. Is there anyone else in the room who wants to speak whose name I have not called? [8:21:29 PM] Then you are our last three speakers. Go ahead, sir. >> Mayor and council, John David Carson of district 9. I'm here to speak in support of the new code but an improved version that allows three units on every lot in the city, establishes an aggressive urban growth boundary in the etj. Fully eliminates parking requirements and generally implements policies that evolve us towards a more compacted city. You heard from many who asked to preserve is status quo. But it is not this proposed new code but the present one that is giving us increasing unaffordability, rising taxes, suburban sprawl and crippling challenge. The result of more people want to go live near stuff than we allow places to live. A few generations of zoning codes that promote a poisonous cocktail of single-family homes, abundant and free parking and functioning. [8:22:30 PM] Single-family zoning has been deteriorating us for the better part of a century. Why? Foremost, it is simply an in efficient use of urbanized land. That makes it expensive for the city to serve with public services and infrastructure. Without shared thermal walls it takes more energy to heat and call, its yards drain our aquifers and requires more impervious cover per capita and demands driving and subverts transit. In partnership with the car and internet, it isolates into you are own bubbles of fear and misunderstanding of others and spreads us out and separates us. But hey, the great news is that even just a duplex can perform twice as well. This is not Charles dickens' London, a bit of density does not mean disease, plague and the forfeit of all parkland. It's nearly 20 and this is like climate change. We know the problems and the solutions. It's just the status quo that's holding us back. Thank you for having the courage to create a better Austin for the future and not condemning us to the failing policies of the past. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. [8:23:32 PM] Please introduce yourself. >> Good evening. Riland, max. A current resident of west campus. I'm here to beg this council to expand into west campus, and maximize the housing in west campus. There are no vacancies, buildings currently under construction fully leased a year in advance and only the wealthy can afford to live in west campus. Don't relegate us to second class citizens. There are only 8,000 dorm beds for 55,000 students and these are more the wealthy. Double the price of a shared space and double number of dorm beds on campus, on land that doesn't exist, it wouldn't make a dent. It is absurd to prohibit building more housing and all that does is enforce the status quo over nonwealthy students, often students of color are forced to live in far places like Riverside and commute for hours. Stalling everyone else's [8:24:32 PM] commute. While wealthy peers get to live within walking distances of classes, friends and social life. It is unfair, absolutely cannot stand and we're asking to put an end to this classes status quo. By far the most successful housing program in the city. It will affect no one except us and we are begging for it. Everybody agrees the students should live by campus. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Herrera. You need to press the button on the stand -- on the stand on the microphone. >> There it goes. Hi, I'm Louis Herrera. I live at 2802 springs drive. This is the property there. It's an old building that my dad built in the late '40s, early '50s. [8:25:34 PM] I have four lots that are adjacent, some vacant, as you see. Anyway, we -- we're craftsmen, blacksmiths, artisans. Some of the projects we worked for the city are as you see there. And I guess 1987 I bought my father out and bought the property. And started getting involved in neighborhood issues. So I became part of the planning team there, as you can see. But this is the property there as you see, and those are my lots. And I'd like to point out that I feel like the zoning that you have proposed is appropriate for the property. And especially since there is a hill there. I think one of my neighbors spoke a little bit and he's concerned with the hill. But I think it's perfect for [8:26:34 PM] building and putting more density or affordable housing there. There you can see the topo and there's a difference of 70 feet from oak springs to the top on crest. As you can see there. So I think it's screaming for development. And it's -- I've accepted all the changes that have come in the last 20-something years and I think this is good. I'm all for it. I wanted to go over the recent developments that you see here. Let me go back here. That's elder care that's across the street from me. And then you have the integral -- [buzzer sounding] -- Care that was just built that's just right down the street from me. I think that's a six- story building that was just built. And then you have this next to me. [8:27:36 PM] That was just built. So this is what's going on and I accept it and I'm ready to, you know, hopefully this zoning that you have goes through. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> This is another warehouse here too that is currently there that's scheming for development. My property and that warehouse are the only ones left on the street. And this is a major transit zone, I would like to say. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Thank you for coming down, sir. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues, those are all the folks that we have. It is 8:28. Without objection, we will adjourn the meeting. We have special called meeting both Monday and Tuesday beginning at 10:00. Is there a motion to close the public hearing? We need a motion. Mr. Lent makes the motion. [8:28:37 PM] -- Mr. Renteria. Councilmember Ellis seconds. Any objection? Hearing none, the public hearing today is closed. Councilmember Casar is off the dais. Councilmember pool. >> Pool: Do you want to remind everybody about the meeting on Monday is also an opportunity for people who may not have been able to speak today to come and speak on Monday? And on Tuesday. >> Mayor Adler: We have an opportunity for people to speak. It's going to be one minute for everyone who speaks. >> Pool: Is the one minute if they had already spoken today? >> Mayor Adler: One minute. So we have time to do some work. We want to do some work as well. >> Pool: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: No transfers of time. With that, at 8:28, this meeting is adjourned.