Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting, 10/12/00

>> TODAY IS OCTOBER 12TH, 2000, MEETING IN THE BOARD ROOM AT THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY, HANCOCK BUILDING, WHICH IS LOCATED AT 3700 LAKE AUSTIN BOULEVARD. LET ME READ CHANGES AND CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA. ITEM NO. 22 SAYS APPROVE A RESOLUTION, SHOULD READ APPROVE AN ORDINANCE. SHOULD BE APPROVE AN ORDINANCE, ITEM NO. 23, WE ARE GOING TO SET PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN ANNEXATION AREAS, I AM GOING TO READ A COUPLE OF CHANGES, NOT THE WHOLE THING. IVANHO, DELETE THE WORDS ACROSS F.M. 2222 FROM. SO IT WILL READ NORTH SIDE OF F.M. 2222 AT, REPLACE THE -- REPLACE THAT WITH THE ORDER AT THE INTERSECTION OF F.M. 222 AND BELL MOUNTAIN DRIVE. IF YOU COME DOWN TO GRAND VIEW SECTION 14 AREA, APPROXIMATELY 72 ACRES LOJTED ON THE WEST SIDE OF F.M. 620. DELETE THE WORDS ACROSS F.M. 620 FROM AND PUT -- REPLACE THAT WITH AT, SO IT READS ON THE WEST SIDE OF F.M. 620 AT THE INTERSECTION OF F.M. 620 AND BOULDER LANE. ITEMS THAT ARE SET FOR A TIME CERTAIN: AT 10:00 A.M., THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REINVESTMENT ZONE NO. 15, 1:30 P.M. GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATION, 2:00 ITEM NO. 46 A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT OF A PROPOSED BUILDING ON THE 25 YEAR, 100 YEAR FLOODPLAINS ON SHOAL CREEK, 801 WEST FIFTH STREET. ITEM NO. 47 WILL BE TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE FOR THAT SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY. AT 3:30 P.M., THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE HOUSE HOUSE AND 4:00 P.M., ZONING ITEMS 50 THROUGH 63. AND AT 5:00 P.M. PROCLAMATION. COUNCIL, THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 5TH, 2000, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MOTION IS TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM TEMPORARILY ABSENT. COUNCIL, LET ME READ TO YOU THE ITEMS THAT I BELIEVE HAVE BEEN PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. 9, 11, -- LET ME ASK A QUESTION, HAS NO. 12 BEEN PULLED? LET ME ASK, ANY MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL, DO YOU WANT TO PULL NO. 12?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> MAYOR, I THINK COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH WANTED TO MAKE A MOTION ON IT, SHE'S NOT HERE RIGHT NOW.

>>SLUSHER: I WOULD PULL THAT UNTIL COUNCILMEMBER GOODMAN GETS HERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME START OVER. 9, 11, I AM READING WHAT HAS BEEN PULLED, 9, 11, 12, 15, 1, ON ITEM NO. -- 21, ON ITEM NO. 22, REMEMBER I JUST READ CHANGES ON THE ITEM, ITEM NO. 23 I ALSO READ CHANGES, LET ME JUST SAY, ITEM NO. 23, I WILL COME BACK TO THAT, 26 PULLED, 28 PULLED, 31 IS PULL. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE PULLED FOR THAT -- OR THAT COULD BE PUT BACK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA?

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: I WOULD PUT NO. 11 AND NO. 15 BACK ON.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE, COUNCIL?

>>GRIFFITH: YES, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: WE CAN PUT 21 BACK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. BUT THANK YOU.

>>GRIFFITH: TWO PEOPLE PULLED IT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES. HE'S NOT PULLING IT -- HE'S PULLING IT TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON AS PART OF THAT PROGRAM JUST SO THAT THEY ARE MADE KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. MY UNDERSTANDING THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS GETTING READY TO COME IN, SO I AM GOING TO WAIT UNTIL SHE GETS HERE BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE. BUT LET ME GET A MOTION ON THE TABLE FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE 10, 11, 13 ON SECOND AND THIRD READING, 14 ON SECOND AND THIRD READING, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, LET ME PAUSE ON ITEM NO. 23 FOR THE RECORD. ITEM NO. 23 IS TO SET PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE FULL PURPOSE ANNEXATION OF THE FOLLOWING ANNEXATION AREAS, THE IVANHOE AIR, CORTANA AREA, F.M. 2222 FRONTAGE AREA, RIVER PLACE BOULEVARD, F.M. 2222 INTERSECTION AREA, GRANDVIEW SECTION 14 AREA, ANDERSON DEVELOPMENT TRACT AREA, AVERY RANCH WEST, HIGHWAY 71 RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE DATES AND TIMES THAT WILL PART OF THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE OCTOBER 26, 2000, AT 6:00 P.M. AT THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY HANCOCK BUILDING, WHICH IS WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY MEETING, OCTOBER 26TH, 2000 AT 6:00 P.M., AND NOVEMBER 2ND, 2000, AT 6:00 P.M. NOVEMBER 2ND, 2000, AT 6:00 P.M. AT THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY HANCOCK BUILDING. CONTINUING WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA. 24, 25, 27, 29, 30, 32, AND ITEM NO. 64. 64 ARE BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS. THE FOLLOWING APPOINTMENTS WOULD BE MADE AS PART OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. TO THE ANIMAL ADVISORY COMMISSION, BETTIE DUNKERLY, A CITY OFFICIAL APPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS. SHERRI RACHEL, AN APPOINTMENT BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. DR. ROBERT SPITZ, A VETERINARIAN APPOINTMENT BY THE MAYOR. THE ARTS COMMISSION: A REAPPOINTMENT BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH EDUARDO BENEVITEDS. ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, DEBORAH WILLIAMS, TELECOMMUNICATIONS, CONSENSUS APPOINTMENT, ROSEMARY McMAHEL. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ.

>>THOMAS: SO MOVE, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. LET ME ASK IF THERE IS ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ. ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. THAT WILL TAKE US BACK TO ITEM -- JACKIE, ARE YOU READY -- MAYOR PRO TEM, ARE YOU READY ON ITEM NO. 12? THAT WILL TAKE US TO ITEM NO. 12, I WILL RECOGNIZE THE MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR, THIS CASE INVOLVED A DONG THAT -- A ZONING THAT DIDN'T QUITE FIT WHAT THE OWNER NOW PROPOSES TO DO. BECAUSE OF HAVING DIFFERENT ZONING AND A DIFFERENT LAND USE PLAN PROPOSED, THE -- THE STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT WERE ABLE TO PICKED AND CHOSEN AND IN MY OPINION TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CHARACTER. WHAT WE HAD DONE WAS SEE A CASE THAT WAS HERE FOR HISTORIC, WHICH I ALSO DIDN'T THINK WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS HOUSE, AND THE -- THE PROPERTY OWNER, I BELIEVE, HAS OFFERED A -- A SORT OF COMPROMISE, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS ENOUGH, BUT IF WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE, I WOULD LIKE TO -- TO HAVE -- OR HIS AGENT, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEM EXPLAIN IN TERMS OF SETBACK WHAT THEY WOULD OFFER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, MAYOR. MY NAME IS MIKE McCONE, I DO HAVE THE OWNER HERE, MR. DAN DAY. WE HAVE EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN MODIFYING THE DESIGN OF THIS PROJECT TO BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO THE HISTORIC HYDE PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT. WE PROPOSE A SETBACK OF 20 FEET INSTEAD OF THE 15 FEET AS -- AS REQUIRED UNDER THE MF 4. WE WOULD ALSO ADD -- EXPAND THE SIDE SETBACK TO THE NORTH FROM FIVE FEET TO SEVEN FEET AND THE SIDE SETBACK ON THE LOT ON THE SOUTH TO SEVEN FEET AS WELL. THIS WOULD GIVE GREATER RELIEF AND IN FACT SHRINK THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING TO A GREATER EXTENT THAN IS PROPOSED BY THE ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU ON FIRST READING. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT SUBSTITUTE OFFER FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD READINGS. IF THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO COUNCIL, WE WILL PROCEED WITH REDRAWING THE PLANKS AND SUBMITTING THOSE. REALIZING THAT BECAUSE IT IS A FEDERAL AND NATIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICT, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WILL HAVE DESIGN REVIEW OF THE PLANS. WE ARE TRYING TO STAY ON THEIR AGENDA FOR THE END OF THIS MONTH SINCE THEY ONLY MEET ON A MONTHLY BASIS. SO TIMELY DECISION TODAY WOULD BE VERY MUCH APPRECIATED AND WE COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT AND HOPEFULLY REDESIGN IT TO BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT OF HYDE PARK WHICH IS OUR DESIRE.

>>GOODMAN: COULD I GET CLARIFICATION, MAYOR. I THOUGHT IT WAS IF WE WERE LOOKING AT THE LARGEST SETBACK WOULD BE FROM THE FRONT 25 FEET, YOU SAID 15.

>> 15 IS THE MF 4. 25 IS THE S.F. 3. WE PROPOSE 20 AND GIVE YOU TWO ADDITIONAL FEET ON EACH SIDE THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE NEIGHBORS.

>>GOODMAN: WELL THE 20 SOUNDS FINE, BUT THE ADDITION OF ONLY TWO FEET ON THE OTHER DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THAT A NOTABLE CHANGE.

>> IT'S A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THAT IT'S MORE THAN THE FIVE FEET, WHICH THE ORDINANCE WOULD -- THAT'S PENDING WOULD PROVIDE. SO WE ARE GIVING RELIEF ON THE LONG DIMENSION AND TO SQUEEZE THE PROJECT ANYMORE, THESE ARE SOMEWHAT NARROW LOTS, SO WE CAN'T REALLY GET MORE THAN THAT AND BE ABLE TO MEET THE FOOTPRINT REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROPER FORMER -- PRO FORMA WE HAVE DEVELOPED FOR THE PROJECT. THAT IS A TWO FOOT GREATER, IF WE ARE TALKING PERCENTAGES THAT'S QUITE A BIG NUMBER, BUT I REALIZE IT'S ONLY TWO FEET, BUT THAT'S ABOUT ALL WE CAN GET THERE.

>> JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, WAS NOT ZONED MF --

>> IT'S BEEN ZONED MF 4 SINCE 1930 -- ZONED FOR MULTI FAMILY SINCE ZONING WAS INITIATED IN THE AREA. THIS WAS TO BE A AND WAS A TROLLEY ROUTE AND THE -- THEY WERE DESIGNED TO LIVE IN THE APARTMENTS ALONG THERE. IT JUST NEVER DEVELOPED THAT WAY. SO IT'S BEEN MF 4 EVER SINCE IT'S BEEN IN THE CITY. SINCE THERE WAS ZONING IN THE CITY FOR MULTI FAMILY, B SECOND BEFORE.

>> BUT YOU WEREN'T INTERESTED IN DOING MF AND HAVING THOSE SETBACKS WITH MF USE?

>> WE FELT IT WAS MORE IN KEEPING WITH HYDE PARK IN DEVELOPING A DUPLEX CONDOMINIUM REGIME, WHICH SELL THE PROPERTY AND -- BRING RESIDENTS INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS OPPOSED TO AN APARTMENT BUILDING. WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT WAS APPROPRIATE AT ALL. BUT WE DO NEED TO BUILD ABOUT 4,000 SQUARE FEET PER LOT, IE 2,000 SQUARE FEET PER UNIT TO BE IN THE MARKETPLACE FOR WHAT IS NEEDED BY FAMILIES THAT ARE SEEKING INNER CITY HOUSING IN THAT HIGH END MARKET WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO MARKET TO.

>>GOODMAN: YOU KNOW THAT PROJECT ON SPEEDWAY. IS THIS GOING TO LOOK LIKE THAT?

>> NO, MA'AM, NOT AT ALL. WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO ATTEMPT TO DO AND WHAT WE AGREED TO DO IS DESIGN A PROJECT THAT IS IN KEEPING WITH THE HYDE PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT THEY HAVE PUBLISHED IN THEIR INTERIM REPORTS. SO WE ARE WORKING WITH THAT, BUT WE DO NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING WILL BE SO THAT WE CAN PROCEED WITH REDRAWING THE PLANS. UNTIL WE HAVE THOSE SETBACKS, WE CAN'T REALLY BEGIN THAT BECAUSE EVERYTHING ELSE IS THROWN OFF, ELEVATIONS, ALL OF THOSE PARAMETERS FOR DESIGN.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR, WITH THE COUNCIL'S INDULGENCE, WE ALSO HAVE THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR HERE. MIGHT WE GET A NOT MORE THAN 3 MINUTE COMMENT FROM HIM ON WHAT HE THINKS ABOUT THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION? MR. KROMAC.

>> I AM BERT KROMACK. I FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS 20 FOOT SETBACK FROM OUR ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT LAST EVENING, HE WAS KIND ENOUGH TO CALL ME AT HOME. I CHECKED, TWO INDIVIDUALS, STAN KAZINSKI OUR REDEVELOPMENT CHAIR AND THE PERSON HEADING UP THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING EFFORT. BOTH OF THEM INDICATED THEY WOULD PREFER THE 25 FOOT SETBACK BECAUSE ALL OF THE REST OF THE HOMES AND STRUCTURES ALONG THAT STRETCH OF DUVAL ARE 25 FEET OR 25 TO 30 FEET. MY HOUSE IS 30. NEXT DOOR. TWO FEET EXTRA ON THE SIDE IS NOT GOING TO MEAN A WHOLE LOT. AS FAR AS BEING IN THE CHARACTER, EXCEPT RIGHT AT 38TH, SOME OF THE MAJOR INTERSECTIONS, THERE IS NO LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT. MF 4 WOULD HAVE BEEN PROBABLY MORE -- DEVELOPMENT AS MF 4 WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE IN KEEPING. I THOUGHT THAT IT WOULD BE A GOOD SETBACK BETWEEN MY HOUSE AND MY NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH OF THIS LOT. BUT THERE ISN'T BECAUSE OF THE DUPLEX USE. I -- WE HAVE -- WE HAVE CONTINUED TO -- TO PLEAD WITH THE OWNER TO PUT A -- A LARGE SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH A DUPLEX GARAGE APARTMENT WHICH WE TEND TO ENCOURAGE IN HYDE PARK, BUT HE IS ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THAT. HE'S -- HE WANTS TO DO YOU DO PLEX CONDOMINIUM WHICH IS AN UNTRIED, RECENTLY NEW DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT. HE HAS DONE ONE SUCH DEVELOPMENT OVER ON AVENUE B IN THE 4500 BLOCK, IT'S NOT TURNED OUT VERY WELL. SO WE ARE NOT REAL PLEASED WITH THIS PARTICULAR FORM OF DEVELOPMENT. BUT AS FAR AS THE SETBACK, WE PREFER THAT THE LARGER SETBACK ON THE FRONT RATHER THAN ON THE SIDE. SIDE ISN'T GOING TO -- FIVE, SEVEN FEET, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THAT MAKE?

>>GOODMAN: YOU WOULD PREFER TO KEEP THE 20 THAT'S BEING OFFERED?

>> 25.

>>GOODMAN: 25.

>> YES. NOT THE 20.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY THEN NOT --

>> THE CLOSER IT GETS TO THE STREET, THE MORE -- AS CLOSE AS IT IS TO THE PROPERTY LINE, THE MORE IT OBLITERATES THE SIGHT OF THE OTHER HOUSES AS ONE DRIVES UP AND DOWN DUVAL WHICH IS A NICE GENTLE STREET FROM -- FROM OH -- FROM ITS BEGINNING, AT LEAST 32ND UNTIL 43RD, EXCEPT FOR, OF COURSE, 38TH, THAT BIG MONSTROSITY THERE. IT'S JUST -- IT WILL BE IN YOUR FACE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT IF IT'S UP CLOSE TO THE STREET. IT'S ALWAYS UNFORTUNATELY WHAT YOU SEE AS YOU COME UP 41ST STREET FROM HANCOCK GOLF COURSE, THAT'S WHERE YOU T INTO WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT WHEN YOU STOP AT THAT STOP SIGN.

>>GOODMAN: THANKS.

>> THE CONSENSUS AT LEAST AMONGST THE THREE OF US IS THAT WE WOULD PREFER THE 25 FOOT SETBACK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

>>ALVAREZ: I HAD A QUESTION, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FOR THE STAFF OR OWNER. BUT MS. GLASGO OR I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD HANDLE THIS CASE.

>> WE WILL STAND HERE AND TRY TO RESPOND.

>>ALVAREZ: I'M NOT SURE I'M FOLLOWING EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING ON. WHAT I THINK IS GOING ON IS THE OWNER HAS ASKED FOR I GUESS A LESSER SETBACK FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE? AND IS AGREEING TO GIVE MORE, A COUPLE OF FEET MORE ON THE -- ON THE SIDE SETBACKS; IS THAT RIGHT?

>> WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE, THE PROPERTY IS ZONED MULTI FAMILY 4. THE CITY COUNCILL'S MOTION WAS TO ZONE THE PROPERTY HISTORIC WITH SINGLE FAMILY 3 STANDARDS. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT THE SINGLE FAMILY 3 SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, WHEN YOU COMPARE THE STANDARDS, YOU HAVE THAT MULTI FAMILY 4 ALLOWS FOR -- FOR REDUCED SETBACKS, SINGLE FAMILY 3 REQUIRES, FOR EXAMPLE, THE FRONT BUILDING SETBACK UNDER SINGLE FAMILY 3 IS 25 FEET. AND THE APPLICANT IS ASKING THAT THEY WILL REDUCE THAT TO 20 FEET INSTEAD OF 25. AND THE -- THE SIDE, THE INTERIOR SIDE YARDS ARE FIVE FEET IN BOTH ZONING DISTRICTS. HE WANTS TO GO INCREASE IT BY 7 FEET.

>>ALVAREZ: TO SEVEN FEET.

>>GLASGO: TO SEVEN.

>>ALVAREZ: ON EACH SIDE. HE WANTS FIVE MORE IN --.

>>GLASGO: YES. REDUCE IT BY FIVE LESS --.

>>ALVAREZ: FIVE MORE FEET IN THE FRONT, GIVING TWO FEET ON EACH SIDE SETBACK. I JUST HEARD MR. KROMAC EXPLAIN HE DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS ENOUGH. UNDER WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY IS ON THE TABLE, THIS WOULD BE MORE OF A SIDE SETBACK THAN -- I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD.

>>GLASGO: OKAY.

>>GOODMAN: LET ME CORRECT ONE THING WE DID NOT ZONE IT HISTORIC. DLS OKAY,.

>>GLASGO: OKAY, THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GOODMAN: CO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT LEADS US TO [INAUDIBLE] [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>>GOODMAN: WELL, I JUST DON'T SEE THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO OFFER WHAT I THINK WOULD FIT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SO I WOULD REMAIN WITH THE ORIGINAL MOTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE ON SECOND AND THIRD READINGS, WHAT WAS PASSED ON FIRST READINGS. IS THERE A SECOND?

>>GRIFFITH: I WILL SECOND THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. COUNCIL, WHEN I READ THROUGH THE CONSENT AGENDA, I INADVERTENTLY SLIPPED OVER ITEM NO. 45, WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. COMMISSIONER GOMEZ MOVES APPROVAL, IS THERE A SECOND IN -- COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS MOVES APPROVAL, IS THERE A SECOND IN ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO., IT PASSES. NUMBER 21, I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>ALVAREZ: MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO I GUESS MAYBE ASK A QUESTION OR TWO OF THE FOLKS FROM THE FILM SOCIETY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ARE THEY HEAR? PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>>ALVAREZ: I DON'T KNOW IF -- I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A STAFF MEMBER WHO WANTS TO INTRODUCE THE AMENDMENT OR THE PROPOSAL OR WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT. BASICALLY --

>> WHAT DID HE SAY?

>>ALVAREZ: BASICALLY, GO AHEAD.

>>MAYOR WATSON: JUST GENERALLY DESCRIBE WHAT IT IS THAT -- [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>>GARZA: BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION WE WERE ASKED TO NEGOTIATE OR LEASE TO THE SOCIETY A TRACT OF LAND OFF OF 51ST STREET ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE MUELLER PROPERTY. SINCE THAT RESOLUTION WE HAVE BEEN IN NEGOTIATION WITH THE FILM SOCIETY. WE CONCLUDED THOSE NEGOTIATIONS ABOUT TWO OR THREE WEEKS AGO. WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT -- APPROVAL OF THIS LEASE. THERE IS AN EXCEPTION IN THIS LEASE OF -- OF DEALING WITH A SEVEN YEAR PERIOD, THE WAY WE NEGOTIATE IT WE DON'T INTEND AS PART OF THIS PLAN TO DEAL WITH THAT PROPERTY. FOR AT LEAST SEVEN YEARS, IF NOT LONGER. SO THAT IT'S PLENTY OF TIME FOR THE -- I MEAN, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE OTHER DEVELOPMENT WITHIN MUELLER, WE DON'T THINK THIS IS A CRITICAL PIECE FOR US AT THIS POINT. WE RECOMMEND THE LEASE. I THINK THE FILM SOCIETY IN TURN IS THEN GOING TO SUB OR LEASE THE WAREHOUSES AND SOUND STAGE, ET CETERA, TO THE FILM MAKERS HERE IN AUSTIN TAKE WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO FILMING HERE IN THE AUSTIN AREA. WE THINK THAT'S A GREAT ASSET FOR OUR CITY. WE REALLY DO RECOMMEND THIS, HOPE THE COUNCIL WILL APPROVE IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ FINISH WITH HIS PART.

>>GRIFFITH: SOUNDS GOOD.

>>ALVAREZ: AND I JUST WANTED TO -- TO JUST MAKE A COMMENT, MORE SO, MAYBE ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THE WORK THAT YOU ALL ARE DOING WITH THE YOUTH IN THE COMMUNITY AND THAT ARE PLANNING -- THAT YOU ARE PLANNING TO DO, BECAUSE WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT BRIDGING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER AREAS I THINK WHERE THERE'S DIVIDES. AND I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS ONE THE ARTISTIC DIVIDE. BUT THERE'S A LOT THAT FALLS UNDER THAT, WHETHER IT BE -- I THINK ALL SORTS OF MEDIA, INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, FILM PRODUCTION, KIND OF FALLS UNDER THAT CATEGORY, IF INDEED THIS IS A GROWING INDUSTRY HERE IN AUSTIN, I BELIEVE THAT AGAIN WE NEED TO LOOK CREATIVELY AT HOW WE CAN CREATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUNG FOLKS HERE IN THE COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE CAREER PATHWAYS IN THOSE AREAS, WHETHER IT BE FILM OR RADIO, TELEVISION, OR -- OR PUBLIC RELATIONS, ADVERTISING MEDIA, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. THOSE ARE ALL REALLY BIG INDUSTRIES HERE IN AUSTIN. I WAS JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO, YOU KNOW, ANY -- ANY IDEAS THAT YOU HAVE OR ANY -- YOU KNOW, ACTIVITIES THAT YOU HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN INVOLVED IN IN TERMS OF WORKING WITH YOUTH AND -- IN PARTICULAR IF YOU HAVE ANY PLANS TO REACH OUT TO YOUTH IN EAST AUSTIN AND SO IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THAT, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME JUST SAY TO FOLLOW-UP, ON WHAT COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ IS SAYING, THE GOOD NEWS WAS AT THE TIME WE CAME FORWARD WITH THIS PROPOSAL, THAT WAS ONE OF THE SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT WAS LAID OUT AND SO -- SO I APPRECIATE HIM HIGHLIGHTING THAT.

>> YES. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ AND CITY COUNCILL. I AM REBECCA CAMPBELL, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE AUSTIN FILM SOCIETY. WE'VE HAD 8 MONTHS TO BE WORKING ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE WHILE WE WERE NEGOTIATING THE TERMS OF THE LEASE WITH CITY STAFF. OF COURSE WE ARE A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION. WE ARE VERY MUCH BASED IN THE COMMUNITY AND WE ARE COMMITTED TO -- TO DIVERSITY AND TO SERVING MINORITY YOUTH. AND WE WANT TO SERVE EAST SIDE RESIDENTS. ONE OF THE MAJOR GOALS OF THIS -- OF THIS PROGRAM IS TO GET ACCESS TO THE FILM INDUSTRY FOR PEOPLE WHO TRADITIONALLY HAVE NOT HAD ACCESS AND SO WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS TO SET UP A TASK FORCE WITH REPRESENTATIVES FROM AISD SCHOOL TO CAREER PROGRAM, WE HAVE GOT THREE FILM PRODUCTION PROFESSIONALS ON THE TASK FORCE WHO ARE UNION MEMBERS, WE HAVE GOT REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE HAVE A FORMER MEMBER OF THE AISD SCHOOL BOARD ON THE TASK FORCE AND I DID DISTRIBUTE A PACKET TO EACH COUNCILMEMBER ON MONDAY THAT LISTS THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE ON THE TASK FORCE. THE FIRST SCHOOL THAT WE HAVE TARGETED TO TRY TO PLACE STUDENTS IN INTERNSHIPS IS GARZA HIGH. WE ARE ALSO RAISING FUNDS TO CREATE PAID INTERNSHIPS BECAUSE IN ADDITION TO -- TO NOT HAVING CONNECTIONS, THE OTHER BARRIER TO ACCESS TO THE INDUSTRY IS THE TRADITIONALLY YOU SERVE IN UNPAID INTERNSHIPS. OF COURSE IF YOUR FAMILY CAN'T AFFORD TO HAVE YOU DO THAT, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE ACCESS. SO WE ARE ENGAGED IN FUNDRAISING. SO I HOPE THAT THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO SAY THAT WHEN WE FIRST SAT DOWN WITH CITY STAFF, IN FEBRUARY, THEIR MAJOR CONCERNS WERE, OF COURSE, PROTECTING THE CITY FROM LIABILITY AND THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH AIRPORT REDEVELOPMENT. AND WE NEGOTIATED WITH THEM OVER 8 MONTHS AND WE WERE ABLE TO SATISFACTORILY MEET THEIR CONCERNS AS MR. GARZA TOLD YOU. I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO THANK THE CITY STAFF, IN PARTICULAR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER JIM SMITH, FOR VERY HARD WORK AND BEING VERY INNOVATIVE WITH US TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO DEAL WITH SOME DIFFICULT PROBLEMS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THE MUELLER NEIGHBORHOOD'S COALITION HAS OFFERED UNPRECEDENTED SUPPORT FOR OUR PROPOSAL IN APPROVAL OF THE WAY THAT WE WENT ABOUT CREATING IT. SO WE -- WE REALLY APPRECIATE AND WE ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE -- WE HOPE THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A JEWEL IN AUSTIN'S CROWN AND A REAL MECCA FOR CREATIVE PEOPLE TO COME TO AUSTIN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

>>ALVAREZ: I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP AND SEE WHAT -- WHAT WAS ALREADY IN THE WORKS IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE AND JUST FEEL FREE TO CALL UPON MY OFFICE IF YOU NEED ANY HELP IN TERMS OF IMPLEMENTING AT LEAST OUTREACH TO YOUTH IN PARTICULARS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: YES. WHAT DID YOU FIND OUT?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>GARZA: [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC]

>>GRIFFITH: THAT'S FINE I WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT.

>>GARZA: IT IS.

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO SAY HOW DELIGHTED I AM THAT THE FILM INDUSTRY IS GROWING INTO SUCH AN EXCITING DYNAMIC PIECE OF OUR NEW ECONOMY. AND I THINK THIS IS A TOTALLY APPROPRIATE USE. IN WORKING WITH -- WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, IT WAS -- IT WAS CLEAR, I THINK IN ALL OF THE MEETINGS THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN, THAT THIS IS AN INTERIM USE AND THAT -- AND THAT AS THE -- AS THE CONTRACT SAYS, IF AT ANY TIME LANDLORD IN ITS SOLE AND ABSOLUTE DISCRETION DETERMINES THAT THE TIPPED USE OF THE PREMISES OR ANY PORTION THEREOF FOR THE PURPOSES SET FORTH IN SECTION 3.2 OF THIS LEASE WOULD MATERIALLY I AM PIR OR -- IMPAIR OR INTERFERE WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT OF ROBERT MUELLER IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS MASTER PLAN, LANDLORD MAY TERMINATE THIS LEASE IN WHOLE OR IN PART UPON SIX MONTHS PRIOR WRITTEN NOTICE TO TENANT WITHOUT INCURRING ANY LIABILITY. TO TENANT BECAUSE OF SUCH TERMINATION. I THINK WE JUST NEED TO GET THINGS CLEAR ON THE FRONT END SO THAT WE CAN GO FORWARD INTO THE FUTURE WITH THE MOST POSITIVE OF RELATIONSHIPS AND I JUST WANTS TO BE CLEAR THAT -- THAT WE ARE -- WE ARE ALL IN AGREEMENT THAT IT'S AN INTERIM USE. A GREAT USE. AN APPROPRIATE USE. AND ONE THAT IS GOING TO BE VERY, VERY POSITIVE FOR OUR ECONOMY, FOR THE KIDS THAT WILL HAVE THOSE SCHOLARSHIPS. ARE WE STRAIGHT ON WHAT THE -- WHAT THE AGREEMENT ADDRESSES IN THOSE TERMS?

>> YES, WE DO AGREE WITH YOU.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION ON ITEM NO. 21?

>>GOODMAN: MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M SORRY, COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.

>>THOMAS: EXCUSE ME. IN THE AGREEMENT, WHAT PAGE IS THAT ON ABOUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID ABOUT --

>> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK OUR LAWYER, JAY HALEY TO -- TO ADDRESS THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF THE LEASE AND I MIGHT ADD THAT HE'S BEEN A PRO BONO ATTORNEY TO US, WE ARE REALLY APPRECIATIVE. ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. I AM JAY HALEY IT'S BEEN MY PLEASURE TO SERVE AS A VOLUNTEER WITH THE FILM SOCIETY TO WORK WITH THE CITY STAFF IN NEGOTIATING AND PREPARING THE TERMS OF THIS LEASE. COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, THE PROVISION THAT WAS JUST REFERENCED IS ON PAGE 16 OF THE DRAFT LEASE AGREEMENT THAT YOU HAVE. IT'S SECTION 3.1, I'M SORRY, 3.1 W, TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE WAS THE PROVISION BEING RESEARCHED, ABOUT MID-WAY THROUGH THAT PARAGRAPH.

>>THOMAS: OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> ANYTHING ELSE, MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS?

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM? THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM, IS THERE A SECOND?

>>GRIFFITH: SECOND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, IS THERE A DISCUSSION?

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: I JUST WANT TO SAY IT'S AN OPPORTUN MOMENTO CELEBRATE THE CREATIVITY, THANKS REBECCA AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME PUT AN! NATION ON THAT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS TRUE ABOUT AUSTIN, TEXAS, I HAVE SAID IT A NUMBER OF TIMES, IS THAT IT'S NOT A COINCIDENCE THAT WE HAVE BECOME A FOCAL POINT IN CREATIVE ECONOMY. THAT IS BECAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH CREATIVE ENERGY IN WAYS OTHER THAN JUST TYPICAL CONCEPT OF SOFTWARE OR MULTI MEDIA OREGON COMPUTER MANUFACTURING, THAT SORT OF A THING. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE IN MY VIEW OF WHERE THE CITY IS WORKING IN A VERY POSITIVE WAY TO NOT ONLY PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL CREATIVE ENERGY OF THE CITY, BUT ENHANCE THAT ORIGINAL CREATIVE ACTIVITY. SO -- SO I'M REAL PLEASED WITH WHERE WE ARE ON THIS. CAN USE AUSTIN KIND OF AS A BACON FOR THAT SORT OF CREATIVE ENERGY. FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE -- DOES ANYONE WANT TO TALK ON IT. ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? THE CITY MANAGER WANTS TO HAVE THE LEAD IN THE FIRST MOVIE. [LAUGHTER]. WITH THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I HOPE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 21.

>> MR. MANAGER THE FIRST MOVIE IS A HORROR FLICK, BY THE WAY. [LAUGHTER].

>>GARZA: I HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF EXPERIENCE. [LAUGHTER].

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE THERE. ITEM NO. 9, I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE -- NUMBER 9 AND 28 IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AS THESE ARE REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. I WOULD MOVE APPROVE OF ITEM NO. 26.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, WE WILL DO THAT AS PART OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. ITEM NO. 26 MOTION TO APPROVE, THERE IS A SECOND, I WILL SECOND THE MOTION, ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ON ITEM NO. 26. ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NO. 31. I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.

>>ALVAREZ: YES, MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THIS ITEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MR. REIKE.

>>ALVAREZ: I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN -- LET ME SEE. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE PROFESSIONAL SEVENS CONTRACTS; IS THAT WHAT THIS IS?

>> YES, SIR.

>>ALVAREZ: I'M LOOKING AT THE MATRIX AGAIN, THIS EVALUATION MATRIX, I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ABOUT -- ABOUT THE SCORING ON IT. IN PARTICULAR, I KNOW WE ARE REVISIT KNOWLEDGE THE MATRIX AND -- REVISITING THE MATRIX AND ALL OF THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES WITHIN THE MATRIX. BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THERE WAS A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT STRUCK ME ABOUT THE SCORING. AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN ELABORATE ON THAT. BUT THE TWO -- THE TWO ITEMS I'M LOOKING AT ARE ITEM 10, WHICH IS PRIMES EXPERTISE WITH AUSTIN ISSUES. AND NUMBER 6, WHICH SAYS PREVIOUS CITY OF AUSTIN WORK. SO THEY HAVE ZERO EXPERIENCE APPARENTLY, ACCORDING TO THIS MATRIX, IN TERMS OF CITY OF AUSTIN WORK. BUT UNDER NO. 10, THEY HAVE GOT ALMOST, YOU KNOW, 10 -- YOU KNOW, 9.25 OUT OF 10 POINTS IN TERMS OF PRIME'S EXPERTISE WITH AUSTIN ISSUES. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN ELABORATE ON THAT.

>> CERTAINLY COUNCILMEMBER. I AM PETER REIKE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION. THE -- THE QUESTION THAT YOU ASK PERTAINS TO THE APPARENT CONTRADICTION BETWEEN PREVIOUS CITY OF AUSTIN WORK AND PRIME'S EXPERIENCE WITH AUSTIN ISSUES. THE PREVIOUS CITY OF AUSTIN WORK IS IN ESSENCE AN EVALUATION OF THE NUMBER OF CONTRACTS THAT WERE AWARDED TO A FIRM OVER A FIVE YEAR, WITHIN A FIVE YEAR PERIOD. SO WE ARE STRICTLY LOOKING AT HOW MUCH WORK A FIRM ALREADY IS DOING UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE CITY AS THE EMPLOYER. AND ZERO FOR INSTANCE WOULD INDICATE THAT A FIRM ALREADY HAS AT LEAST TWO MILLION OR MORE IN CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY AWARDED IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. A NUMBER OF -- A NUMBER OF ANYTHING LESS IS A GRADUATED LESSER AMOUNT TO POSSIBLY NO WORK WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN AT ALL. THE PRIME'S EXPERTISE WITH AUSTIN ISSUES IS BASICALLY IS THIS A FIRM THAT KNOWS HOW TO DO BUSINESS IN AUSTIN, ARE THEY FAMILIAR WITH -- WITH THE PLANNING PROCESS, ZONING, PERMITTING, SITE DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES, ET CETERA. THAT EXPERTISE CAN -- CAN BE GATHERED BY ANY FIRM, PARTICULARLY LOCAL FIRMS LIKE ROBINSON IS, BY JUST WORKING IN AUSTIN. IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE WHETHER YOU WORK FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN OR WHETHER YOU WORK FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS OR ANY OTHER ENTITY WITHIN THE AUSTIN AREA, YOU CAN GAIN THAT EXPERIENCE EVEN SO YOU ARE NOT WORK -- EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE NOT WORKING ON A CITY PROJECT. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? THE EXPLANATION OR DID I ASTRAY? -- DID I STRAY?

>>ALVAREZ: OKAY. AND THEN THE OTHER ISSUE, MAYBE YOU CAN JUST TALK ABOUT THAT ITEM, IS THE ONE TEAM STRUCTURE AND WORK PLAN, WHICH IS ANOTHER ONE WHERE THERE WAS A BIT OF A DIFFERENCE THERE. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT GOES INTO THE SCORING ON THAT?

>> YES. AS PART OF -- PART OF THE PACKAGE, YOU ALSO HAVE AN OUTLINE OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS. AND THE TEAM STRUCTURE AND WORK PLAN, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THERE IS THE TEAM'S ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, WHO THE PROJECT LEADER IS, WHAT THE REPORTING RESPONSIBILITIES ARE, HOW THE FIRM INTENDS TO INTERFACE WITH OUR PROJECT MANAGER AND THE SPONSORING DEPARTMENT, IN THIS CASE WATER AND WASTEWATER, AND HOW SUB CONSULTANTS WILL FIT WITHIN THE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE. WE ARE ASKING FOR INSTANCE FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS AND A BRIEF NARRATIVE AS TO HOW THEY INTEND TO ADDRESS THE WORKINGS OF THE TEAM AND THE RELATIONSHIP WITH CITY STAFF.

>>ALVAREZ: OKAY. WELL, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THIS IS -- THIS IS ANOTHER TOUGH ONE TO CALL HERE BECAUSE THE SCORING IS VERY CLOSE. IT'S ABOUT -- ABOUT 3 POINTS OR LESS THAN 3 POINTS, TWO AND A HALF POINTS. AND THERE'S -- THERE'S SEVERAL CATEGORIES I THINK THAT ARE -- WHERE AGAIN THERE'S -- YOU KNOW, THERE'S DIFFERENT OPINIONS, I THINK, ABOUT HOW -- HOW SOME OF THESE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES SHOULD BE WEIGHED. AND I THINK THEY ALSO RELATE TO SOME OF THE OTHER CATEGORIES IN THIS MATRIX RELATED TO EXPERIENCE. SO -- SO ANYWAY, SINCE I DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO MEET WITH STAFF DURING THE WEEK, WHAT I AM GOING TO SUGGEST IS THAT WE -- THAT WE POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL NEXT WEEK AND -- NEXT MEETING BECAUSE I DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, SOME FURTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT -- ABOUT THE SCORING AND THIS MATRIX AND HOW WE MIGHT GO ABOUT MAKING THIS DECISION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IT WILL BE TWO MEETINGS, SO THE MOTION IS TO POSTPONE UNTIL THE 26TH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. DISCUSSION?

>>SLUSHER: I HAD A QUESTION OF MR. REIKE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: MR. REIKE, THE DEPARTMENT IS LOOKING AT THIS ISSUE AFTER A PREVIOUS CONTRACT WE HAD ABOUT -- ABOUT THE LOCAL EXPERIENCE AND I JUST WAS WONDERING WHEN ARE WE GOING TO SEE A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT?

>> WE EXPECT THAT WE WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL PROBABLY IN -- IN TRYING TO BRIEF YOU ON WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS, AS TO WHETHER WE ARE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.

>>SLUSHER: THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

>>WYNN: MR. REIKE, THE POSTPONEMENT AS PROPOSED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, IS THERE -- DOES THAT IN ANY WAY COMPROMISE THE PROJECT, INCREASE COSTS OR ANY OTHER ISSUES?

>> I DON'T THINK THAT THIS WOULD BE A CRITICAL DELAY TO THE PROJECT. SO, NO.

>>WYNN: OKAY, THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 31. COUNCIL, I WILL NOW ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GO INTO -- TO RECESS TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE PURPOSE OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE TO ENGAGE IN A PRIVATE CONSULTATION WITH OUR ATTORNEY TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ISSUES PRUDENT TO SECTION 551.071 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE -- LEGAL ISSUES RELATING TO LITIGATION WITH THE EAST AUSTIN TANK FARM, CHRISTIAN CHRISTIAN DSTEFFERUD, ET AL, VERSUS CITY OF AUSTIN, CAUSE NUMBER 99-02338, IN THE TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT. LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING PROPOSED LEASE AND MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE FILM SOCIETY OF AUSTIN. ALL IN REAL PROPERTY DISCUSSIONS TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING MATTER VALUE AND POSSIBLE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY ASSOCIATED WITH THE BARTON SPRINGS CLEAN DRINKING WATER PROJECT, MAY -- THAT IS ALSO KNOWN AS THE MAY 2ND, 1998 ELECTION, PROPOSITION 2. WE WILL ALSO DISCUSS ITEM NO. 9, WHICH WAS RATES OR RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF APPROXIMATELY 1.82 ACRE WATER LINE AND A TEMPORARY WORK SPACE EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY FROM A TRACT KNOWN AS BENDING OAKS PURCHASED FOR THE MAY 2ND, 1998 BOND ELECTION, PROP 2, BARTON SPRINGS CLEAN DRINKING WATER PROJECT AND ITEM NO. 28, WHICH RELATES TO A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS TO ACQUIRE THE FEE SIMPLE INTEREST TO A PARCEL OF LAND CONTAINING 1,051 SQUARE FEET AND A PERMANENT WATER LINE EASEMENT CONTAINING NINE SQUARE FEET SITUATED AT 1530 ... BARTON SPRINGS ROAD IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, OWNED BY TOOME YE ROAD PARTNERS LIMITED FOR THE BARTON SPRINGS PROJECT, FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF ... INCLUDED IN THE 1995-'96 CAPITAL BUDGET OF THE PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT. ALSO PUBLIC POWER UTILITY OF COMPETITIVE MATTERS PRUDENT TO SECTION 551.086 TO DISCUSS FINANCIAL PLANNING ISSUES, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES, WE ARE RECESSED TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. AS SOON AS WE RETURN, WE WILL TAKE UP ITEM NO. 33 AND 34.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL CALL BACK TO ORDER THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL SO WE CAN TAKE UP ITEM 33 AND 34. I'M NOT -- I APOLOGIZE. I'M NOT CALLING BACK TO ORDER THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL. I'M CALLING TO ORDER THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REINVESTMENT ZONE NO. 15. THIS IS ALSO KNOWN AS A T.I.F., TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ZONE, T.I.F. NO. 15. LET ME -- I THINK I MOVED QUICKER THAN I SHOULD HAVE. WE'RE ON ITEM NO. 33. DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A QUICK PRESENTATION?

>> ONLY IF YOU WOULD CARE FOR ONE, MAYOR. I DON'T WANT TO HOLD YOU UP GOING TO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T YOU MAKE A QUICK PRESENTATION ON THIS ITEM.

>> GOOD MORNING, I'M DAVE CRIDER WITH REDEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THE STOMACH YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU AND THE FOLLOWING ITEM YOU WILL TAKE UP AS A COUNCIL IS THE FINAL STEP UNDER CHAPTER 311 IN CREATING TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NO. 15. UNDER THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT WITH COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION, WITH THE CITY AGREED TO CREATE A SINGLE JURISDICTION TAX INCREMENT FANNING ZONE COVERING BLOCKS 2, 3, 4 AND 21 IN DOWNTOWN AUSTIN. THE CITY WILL SET ASIDE $100,000 A YEAR OF THE INCREMENTAL TAX REVENUE RECEIVED FROM THE KRZ PROJECT TO MAINTAIN PLAZAS, STREETSCAPES AND OTHER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED AND INSTALLED BY THE CITY WITHIN THE ZONE. IN AUGUST OF 1999, FOLLOWING PROCEDURES OF THE T.I.F. ACT, CITY COUNCILL CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVED AN ORDINANCE CREATING TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE NO. 15. AND WITH THAT ALSO ADOPTED A PRELIMINARY FINANCE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE LAW. THE COUNCIL ALSO APPOINTED THE T.I.F. BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THAT BOARD IS THE CITY COUNCIL. ON SEPTEMBER 7TH, 2000, MAYOR WATSON WAS REAPPOINTED AS CHAIR AND COUNCILMEMBERS ALVAREZ, THOMAS AND WYNN WERE APPOINTED AS NEW APPOINTEES TO THE BOARD. THIS REQUESTED ACTION IS REQUIRED BY SECTION 311.001 OF THE T.I.F. ACT. THE T.I.F. BOARD OF DIRECTORS MUST ADOPT THE T.I.F. FINANCING AND PROJECT PLAN, AND AFTER ADJOURNMENT, THE COUNCIL MUST APPROVE THAT PLAN BY ORDINANCE. THE PLAN MEETS ALL THE CRITERIA OUTLINED IN THE T.I.F. STATUTE. AND THE REINVESTMENT ZONE WILL LOOK FOR NO BONDED INDEBTEDNESS W THAT WE SHOULD HAVE ALL THE ACTION COMMENCED TO COMPLETE COMMENCEMENT OF T.I.F. ZONE NO. 15.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS CERTAINLY AN IMPORTANT THING TO DO IN TAKING CARE OF THE PLAZA AND THE AREA AROUND IT. AND THIS IS -- THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE MECHANISM TO DO THAT. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT BEYOND THE 100,000 THAT'S GOING TO BE COMMITTED TO THIS CARE-TAKING OF THE AREA, THAT THE REST OF WHAT IS GENERATED IN THE T.I.F. WILL GO IN THE GENERAL FUND. IS THAT -- IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, CALM, THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GRIFFITH: GOOD. JUST WANTED TO BE STRAIGHT. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER QUESTIONS? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM NO. 33.

>> MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M SORRY? DID YOU MOVE APPROVAL? MOTION TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH ON ITEM 333. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NO. 34. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> SO MOVED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. IS THERE DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 34. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REINVESTMENT ZOEN NO. 156789 MOTION TO ADJOURN BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE? MOTION CARRIES. THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED. WE HAVE ALREADY RECESSED THE COUNCIL MEETING TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION SO WE WILL NOW GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, IF I CAN EXPLAIN, WHAT -- YOU MET AS A BOARD OF DIRECTERS ON ITEM 33. YOU THEN NEED TO ADJOURN AND THEN ADOPT 34 AS A COUNCIL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WELL, THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT'S POSTED. BUT --

>> WE CAN DO THAT AFTER WE RETURN FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> THAT'S FINE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I APOLOGIZE. THE WAY IT APPEARS ON THE AGENDA IS NOT AS A COUNCIL ITEM. IT APPEARS AS A T.I.F. BOARD ITEM. THE T.I.F. BOARD HAS APPROVED IT. I UNDERSTAND THAT DOESN'T WORK. WE WILL COME BACK AND IMMEDIATELY TAKE THAT UP RIGHT AFTER THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. NAIRTS IT IS 1:08, WE HAVE ADJOURNED THE EXECUTIVE SESSION THE SKOUN WILL REMAIN IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30, AT 1:30 WE WILL HAVE CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS, WHICH IS THE NORMAL TIME. WE HAVE ADJOURNED THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE WILL TAKE UP OUR GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATION, THE FIRST PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IS CHRISTINA NOLASCO. CHRISTINA NOLASCO. WELCOME, FOLLOWED BY GUS PENA AND LYNN EMOTION I CAN'T.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, INITIALLY I WAS HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. HOWEVER THE DEPARTMENT CONTACTED ME AND REGARDING SOME CLARIFICATION REGARDING MY CONCERNS. THEREFORE TODAY I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE CITY OF AUSTIN AIR QUALITY PROGRAM. ONE OF THE PROGRAM'S MISSION IS TO PROMOTE AIR QUALITY EDUCATION AND OUTREACH THROUGH CITIZENS. BECAUSE AUSTIN IS ONE OF MANY CITIES AROUND THE U.S. WITH HIGH LEVELS OF GROUND LEVEL -- OZONE. AND DUE TO THE MANY DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS GROUND LEVEL OZONE HAS ON OUR HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT, I AM CONCERNED HOW MUCH INFORMATION AND EDUCATION IS BEING OFFERED TO THE SPANISH SPEAKING COMMUNITY. SINCE THEY, TOO, ARE CITIZENS OF THIS CITY. I SPOKE WITH A MEMBER FROM THE AIR QUALITY PROGRAM WHO INDICATED THAT THE PROGRAM DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH MATERIAL IN SPANISH. SO I COME HERE TODAY TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN A HOW I FEEL IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT WE ACKNOWLEDGE THIS DEFICIENCY WITHIN THE PROGRAM AND PROVIDE THIS POPULATION WITH THE INFORMATION NEEDED TO TAKE PART ON SOME OF THESE EFFORTS THAT ALSO AFFECT THEM. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, WE APPRECIATE YOUR BEING HERE. GOOSE PENA? GUS PENA? GUS PENA? LYNN MOSHIER, FOLLOWED BY PAUL MARTIN, THEN ROBERT SINGLETON.

>> HELLO, I'M HERE AS LYNN MOSHIER, TAXPAYER, VOTER, I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF YOUR MOVING CITY BOOKING ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME. FIRST, I WANT TO THANK MR. THOMAS FOR ACTUALLY FOLLOWING THROUGH ON HIS CAMPAIGN PROMISE TO VOTE AGAINST THIS MOVE. IT'S A DELIGHTFUL CHANGE TO MEET AN ELECTED OFFICIAL WHO CARES ENOUGH ABOUT THE VOTERS TO SPEAK THE TRUTH AND VOTE HIS CONSCIOUS. PERHAPS YOU SHOULD LISTEN TO HIM AS HE KNOWS THIS MOVE WILL CRIPPLE THE POLICE FORCE HE WORKED ON SO LONG. I MUST ALSO THANK MS. GRIFFITH FOR ALSO VOTING NO ON THIS MOVE AND NOT PAINTING US OVER AFTER REALIZING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FELL THROUGH THE CRACKS. SHE HAS THE COURAGE TO ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS AND HAS EXPERIENCED OUR FRUSTRATION IN NOT GETTING THE ANSWERS SHE NEEDS. MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN, THANK YOU FOR PROVING -- HELLO. THANK YOU FOR PROVING TO US THAT SOME ELECTED OFFICIALS CAN ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT THE CITIZENS AND MEAN WHAT THEY SAY. THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO THE MANY VOTERS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD WHO HAVE BEEN LIED TO AND MISLEAD BY THE -- MISLED BY THE COUNTY. WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOU. I CAN ONLY HOPE THE REST OF YOU CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO FOLLOW THEIR EXAMPLE. MR. WYNN, YOU ADMITTED THAT MOVING CITY BOOKING WAS THE WRONG MOVE, BUT YOU DIDN'T KNOW OF ANOTHER OPTION. WHY WOULD YOU VOTE ON ANYTHING THAT YOU KNEW WAS WRONG? AND YOU DO HAVE OTHER OPTIONS. THE ONLY WISE MOVE NOW IS TO LET THE SHERIFF MOVE INTO THE CJC, IF IT EVER OPENS, AND LET THEM TEST THE BUILDING AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR AT LEAST SIX MONTHS. YOU COULD DEMAND THE COUNTY DO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY THEY REFUSED TO DO FOR US. I BELIEVE THEN YOU WILL SEE THIS MOVE WILL CRIPPLE THE POLICE FORCE AND DESTROY TWO SCHOOLS, A DAYCARE, AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS AND THE BEST EXAMPLE OF A SELF SUFFICIENT TAX BASE THAT YOU HAVE AND NEED FOR THE FUTURE GROWTH OF AUSTIN. YOU SAY YOU WANT THE JAIL, SOBRIETY CENTER AND OTHER FACILITIES RELATED TO JUSTICE NEARBY FOR MAXIMUM EFFICIENCY. WELL, YOU HAVE A START. THE COMMUNITY COURT IS ALREADY RIGHT DOWN BY YOUR EXISTING FACILITY AT 7TH AND 35. 78% OF THEIR BOOKINGS ARE CLASS C MISDEMEANORS THAT GO TO THIS COURT. WHY WOULDN'T YOU BUILD ON WHAT YOU HAVE RATHER THAN FOLLOW THE COUNTY INTO DISASTER FOR EVERYONE. ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS WAIT. YOU HAVE THE COUNTY AT YOUR MERCY AS THEY NEED YOUR MONEY TO MAKE UP FOR THE DEFICIT ON THE BUILDING. PLEASE BE THE BOLD ONES WITH THE COURAGE ENOUGH TO DENY THE COUNTY THEIR WISHES AND DO THE RIGHT THING, TOM THING FOR YOUR CITIZENS AND YOUR POLICE FORCE. SHOW US THAT YOU ARE THE HONEST LEADERS OF THIS GREAT CITY AND WE WILL ALL ENJOY YOUR DIGITAL DOWNTOWN AND YOU WILL CONTINUE TO PROMOTE SMART GROWTH. I REALLY APPRECIATE THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE LOOKING AT COMMON SENSE AND NOT VOTING FOR THIS. THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MS. MOSHIER, PAUL MARTIN?

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILL. I AM OUT OF BREATH, I JUST GOT HERE. IF I AM BREATHING HEAVY, I PLEASE APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. AGAIN, I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT CENTRAL BOOKING. IT'S AN ISSUE WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING HERE FOR SOME TIME NOW. WE KNOW THAT THIS IS COMING TO A VOTE SOON. WHAT WE REALLY HAVE BEEN ASKING ALL ALONG IS THAT THE CITY COUNCILL TAKE THE LEAD IN THIS MATTER AND REALLY LOOK AT THE ISSUES AND THAT WHEN YOU MAKE A DECISION, WHEN YOU VOTE, THAT YOU KNOW IN YOUR HEART OF HEARTS THAT YOU ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING HERE FOR BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY. THAT IN FACT YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE -- WITH NOT ONLY THE FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE INVOLVED HERE, BUT ALSO THE POTENTIAL IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. OUR CONCERN ALL ALONG HAS BEEN THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO FUNDAMENTAL IMPACT STUDY ON THE TRAFFIC, THE PARKING, AND THE SAFETY ISSUES OF -- THAT MAY OCCUR IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IF CENTRAL BOOKING IS MOVED TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WHAT WE HAVE PROPOSED RECENTLY IS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER DELAYING MOVING OVER TO THE NEW BOOKING FACILITY, BUT THE -- LET THE COUNTY MOVE OVER, WHICH WILL THEN REDUCE BY 20 TO 25% THE NUMBER OF BOOKINGS AT THE CURRENT FACILITY, WHICH, OF COURSE, IS ONE OF THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AT THE CURRENT FACILITY IS THAT -- THAT IT'S OVERCROWDED. THE CITY THEN COULD OBSERVE THE SITUATION IN ADDITION TO HOPEFULLY DOING SOME SORT OF REVIEW OF THE MATTER IN TERMS OF REALLY LOOKING AT THE TRAFFIC SITUATION THERE. BY THE WAY, YOU HAVE A QUARTER MILLION SQUARE FOOT BUILDING THAT'S OPENING AT THE SAME TIME, WHICH -- WHICH THE COUNTY HAS RARELY ACKNOWLEDGED HAS INSUFFICIENT PARKING FOR THAT BUILDING ALONE. SO WE HOPE AS YOU GO FORWARD HERE OVER THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO AND CONTINUE TO CONSIDER THIS MATTER, THAT YOU WILL START TO TAKE A HARD LOOK, NOT ONLY AT THE FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE INVOLVED HERE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE SIGNIFICANT WE CERTAINLY SYMPATHIZE WITH YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE FINANCIAL COST OF -- OF DELAYING MOVING OVER THERE OR -- OR NOT MOVING TO THE NEW LOCATION. HOWEVER, I THINK THAT YOU HAVE TO WEIGH THAT AGAINST THE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS THAT YOU MAY HAVE IF YOU PROCEED NOW WITH THE COUNTY AND MOVE TO THE NEW FACILITY. YOU MAY BE EMBARRASSED TO RUN INTO A SITUATION SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR FROM NOW DOWN THE ROAD WHERE YOU REALIZE, BOY, THIS WAS A HUGE MISTAKE, WE HAVE VERY SERIOUS PROBLEMS HERE. TODAY I THINK IF YOU WERE TO VOTE TODAY, YOU DO NOT REALLY HAVE A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT THOSE PROBLEMS COULD BE, COMMON SENSE SUGGESTS THAT THERE COULD BE MAJOR PROBLEMS. I THINK EVEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WILL ALLOW THAT MUCH. THEIR SOLUTION, OF COURSE, IS TO SAY WELL, YOU KNOW, WE WILL MONITOR THE SITUATION AND WE WILL REACT. UNFORTUNATELY FOR OUR COMMUNITY, REACTING TO CRIME IS NOT A SUFFICIENT ANSWER HERE WHEN YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DELAY YOUR DECISION, SEE WHAT HAPPENS, REEVALUATION, MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT I NEED TO MAKE A GOOD DECISION AND MOVE FORWARD AND TAKE THE LEAD AS OPPOSED TO FOLLOWING THE COUNTY. THANK YOU. [BUZZER SOUNDING].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, MR. MARTIN, ROBERT SINGLETON. ROBERT SINGLETON? ROBERT SINGLETON? BRUCE BETH RANGE. IS -- BRUCE DEATHERAGE. IS MR. PINA HERE? ROLANDO PINA? YOU WANT ME TO PASS THOSE OUT? OKAY.

>> MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM, COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS BRUCE DEATH RANGE AND I COME BEFORE YOU -- DEATHERAGE AND I COME BEFORE YOU ONCE AGAIN TO REMIND YOU ABOUT SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER. YOU WILL, I'M SURE, RECALL THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTED BY THE DOWNTOWN AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND ABOUT 400 SIGNATURES ON A APPELLATE WISHES TO KEEP CENTRAL BOOKING AND MAGISTRATION FROM MOVING TO 10TH AND NUECES STREETS. WE ARE JOINED BY MANY PARENTS FROM OUTSIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHOSE CHILDREN ATTEND PEASE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. ONLY ONE BLOCK AWAY FROM THE BUILDING. WE CONFIDENTLY ANTICIPATE IF THE MOVE DOES TAKE PLACE THAT POLICE CAR TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY IN OUR HERETOFORE QUIET WEEKENDS WILL ESCALATE TO TRULY MIND BOGGLING PROPORTIONS. ONE OF THE SEVERAL PROPOSED SOLUTIONS, REALLY A WORSENING OF THE SITUATION, IS TO GIVE 12 PUBLIC PARKING PLACES ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO OVER TO THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF POLICE CARS. WHOSE DRIVERS WILL BE BUSY IN THE PROCESS OF BOOKING. CITIZENS ACCESS TO THE COURTHOUSE FACILITIES WILL BE EVEN HARDER THAN IT IS NOW. THIS HAS -- IS JUST ONE OF OUR CONCERNS. OTHERS, FOR EXAMPLE, ARE, 1, THE NEED AND COST OF INCREASING FOOT PATROL IN THE AREA; 2, THE NEED AND COST OF A SPECIAL OFFICER AT PASTE SCHOOL; 3, EVEN THOUGH THE SHERIFF'S PLAN CALLS FOR QUOTED, STEERING THOSE ARRESTEES RELEASED TO GUADALUPE AND BUS SERVICE, UNQUOTE, THESE PEOPLE ARE TRULY FREE TO GO WHEREVER THEY CHOOSE, LIKE INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD; 4, THE ARRIVAL OF FAMILY AND FRIENDS AND LAWYERS FOR THOSE BEING BOOKED, HOW CAN THEY BE ACCOMMODATED? AND, NUMBER 5, PROBLEMS STILL UNKNOWN WITH COSTS, BOTH SOCIAL AND MONETARY, ADDRESSED IN THE CURRENT -- THAT ARE -- THAT ARE NOT ADDRESSED IN THE CURRENT PLAN. THE REAL SOLUTION TO THIS IS NOT TO MOVE. BUT TO KEEP CITY BOOKING AND MAGISTRATION AT 7TH STREET AND I-35. FOR SIX MONTHS OR SO, AT LEAST, TO SEE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, YOU SHOULD REMAIN AT 7TH AND I-35. WE FEVERENTLY HOPE THAT THIS IS THE COURSE THAT YOU WILL TAKE, THANK YOU.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WON'T GIVE YOU CREDIT FOR THAT ONE. BUT I WILL SAY, MR. CHAPPA, THE TOP OF THIS MICROPHONE CAME OFF. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A GOOD THING OR A BAD THING IF YOU WANT TO TRY TO FIX IT. I AM USING THE CITY MANAGER'S NOW. ROLANDO PINA. IF YOU WILL COME FORWARD. FOLLOWED BY JENNIFER GALE AND THEN PATTI LEO.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MY NAME IS ROLANDO PINA, I LIVE IN SOUTH AUSTIN, I HAVE BEEN IN AUSTIN, TEXAS FOR 20 YEARS, I AM HERE TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT THE BILLION BUBBA MARCH. WE ARE GOING TO BE MARCHING FOR A GET OUT OF VOTE MARCH THIS SATURDAY, OCTOBER 14TH, AT 3:00 P.M. WE WILL BEGIN OUR MARCH SOUTH OF THE BROKEN SPOKE, SOUTH OF -- THREE BLOCKS SOIT OF 3201 SOUTH LAMAR. -- SOUTH OF 3201 SOUTH LAMAR. THIS SATURDAY OCTOBER 14TH, 2000 AT 3:00 P.M.. THE BILLION BUBBA MARCH IS ABOUT GETTING OUT THE VOTE AND REALIZING WHAT AUSTIN IS BECOMING. WE HAVE AN ELECTION NOVEMBER 7TH. EARLY VOTING STARTS OCTOBER 22ND. HOWEVER, WE HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES THIS ELECTION CYCLE THAT WILL CHANGE THE FACE OF THIS CITY, INCLUDING LIGHT RAIL AND -- AND WHETHER PEOPLE BE FOR IT OR AGAINST IT, BOTH PARTIES WILL BE THERE. WE ALSO HAVE A BOND ELECTION THIS NOVEMBER 7TH, THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT IS ABOUT. THIS MARCH IS FOR ALL OF THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN. AND WE WILL ESPECIALLY WANT TO INVITE THE YOUNG KIDS, THE CHILDREN OF THIS CITY, OUR FUTURE VOTERS, WHO WILL BE ENTERTAINED BY THE AUSTIN LYRIC OPERA, WHICH IS NEW TO US, THEY ARE NEW TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY ARE NEW TO US, AND ALSO THE SOUTH AUSTIN COMMUNITY GOSPEL CHOIR WILL BEGIN THE MARCH AND WILL MARCH AND SING ALONG WITH US. THANK YOU ALL COUNCILMEMBERS FOR BEING THERE FOR US FOR THIS GREAT CITY OF AUSTIN AND THIS EVENING WE WILL HAVE A BOOTH AT THE SOON TO BE BUILT MEXICAN AMERICAN CULTURAL CITY, THIS IS [INAUDIBLE] LA ROSA THIS EVENING. WE WILL HAVE A BOOTH THERE, HAVING AIL OF THE EAST SIDE BUBBAS COME TO THE MARCH ON SATURDAY. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC] COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ SINCE MR. PINA REFERENCED THAT, I WANT TO AT SOME POINT SHARE A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE MOST FOLKS OUT THERE MIGHT KNOW TODAY IS COLUMBUS DAY, BUT -- BUT US IN THE LATINO COMMUNITY CELEBRATE IS A DIFFERENT DAY, WHICH IS NOT TO CELEBRATE NECESSARILY THE DISCOVERY OF -- OF "AMERICA" BUT REALLY TO CELEBRATE RESISTANCE AND THE SURVIVAL OF INDEGINOUS PEOPLE AND THE THEIR DESCENDANTS ON THIS CONTINENT. WHEN COLUMBUS GOT HERE, THE LAND WAS ALREADY HERE, THE INHABITANTS WERE ALREADY HERE. THE DISCOVERY IS A MYTH, REALLY, BUT IT REMINDS ME OF A JOKE JAY LENO MADE A FEW NIGHTS AGO. IT WAS A FICTITIOUS REMARK THAT ONE OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES MIGHT HAVE SAID. AND I WON'T MENTION WHO THAT CANDIDATE WAS. FICTITIOUS CANDIDATE WOULD HAVE BEEN. BUT BASICALLY IT WAS MAKES REFERENCE TO A PROTEST AT SOME GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY AND IT TALKS ABOUT HOW SOME NATIVE AMERICANS ARE PROTESTING OUTSIDE OF THIS GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY AND THE FICTITIOUS COMMENT IS THAT THOSE PEOPLE SHOULD JUST GO BACK TO WHERE THEY CAME FROM. BUT ANYWAY SO AGAIN THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS OF LOOKING AT WHAT HAPPENS, YOU KNOW, -- WHAT HAPPENED WHEN COLUMBUS ARRIVED IN THIS LAND. BUT WITH THAT AS A BACK DROP I WANTED TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU THAT SOME OF US CELEBRATE DELA DEROSA IN TERMS OF THE SURVIVAL BY INDIGENOUS PEOPLE PEOPLES, WE DO CONSIDER OURSELVES MASTESOES, A MIX OF INDIGENOUS AND EUROPEAN LINEAGE. SO AGAIN SOME -- WE KIND OF LOOK AT THIS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, WANTED TO SHARE A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT. THERE IS ACTUALLY A CELEBRATION THIS EVENING THAT I WANTED TO MENTION, IT'S AN ANNUAL CELEBRATION PUT ON BY THE UNITED EAST AUSTIN COALITION AND I BELIEVE IT STARTS AT 6:00. IT'S THE -- I DON'T KNOW, 16TH OR 17TH ANNUAL CELEBRATION AT THE MEXICAN AMERICAN CULTURAL CENTER, 600 RIVER STREET. EVERYONE IS WELCOME TO COME AND CELEBRATE THIS EVENT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER. JENNIFER GALE. JENNIFER GALE? JENNIFER GALE? PATTI LEO? PATTI LEO? PRA PATTI LEO? STEFAN FEHR.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR. COUNCIL. I WOULD LIKE TO PLUG ANOTHER MARCH THAT'S COMING UP THIS SATURDAY. ON OCTOBER 14TH, THERE WILL BE A MAJOR IMMIGRANTS RIGHTS MARCH, THEY WILL BE CALLING FOR AN UNCONDITIONAL AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS FOR GUARANTEED LABOR RIGHTS AND FOR DEMILITARYIZATION OF THE U.S.-MEXICAN BORDER. THIS IS AN UNUSUAL EVENT BECAUSE MANY OF THE UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS WILL BE MARCHING. THEY WILL NEED SOLIDARITY FROM PEOPLE WHOSE RESIDENCE HERE IS IN CONSTANTLY IMPERILED. THE MARCH WILL START IN FOUR DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE CITY. IT WILL START IN THE NORTH AT -- AT L.B.J. BUILDING'S PARKING LOT TO THE WEST AT THE DUNCAN PARK, TO THE EAST AT ECKERD'S DRUG STORE IN THE PARKING LOT AT 11TH AND I-35, AND IN THE SOUTH AT THE PARKING LOT OF THE AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN. PEOPLE START GATHERING AT ABOUT 1:00. AND THEY WILL BE MARCHING TOWARDS THE CAPITOL AT 2:00. AND THEN THERE WILL BE A RALLY AT 3:00 BY THE CAPITOL. THANK FOR YOU HEARING ME.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. COUNCIL, THOSE ARE ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO THE GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATION, LET'S GO BACK TO ITEMS NUMBER 9, AND -- ITEM NO. 9.

>> ITEM NO. 9 IS A 1.82 ACRE WATER LINE EASEMENT, THIS WATER LINE IS THE WATER LINE LCRA IS BUILDING FROM -- FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN INTO HAYS COUNTY. IT'S GOING TO CROSS A TRACT THAT WAS PURCHASED AS PART OF THE MAY PROP 2, THE BARTON SPRINGS CLEAN DRINKING WATER. WE KNOW IT AS BENDING OAKS, A 361 ACRE TRACT WE PURCHASED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. AS PART OF THE CONSIDERATION, WHICH THE CONSIDERATION FOR THIS EASEMENT IS 31,711 DOLLARS, LCRA WILL ALSO BE BUILDING A NEW FENCE, NEW GATE. THIS EASEMENT WILL ALLOW FOR ONE WATER LINE. IT WILL NOT HAVE COMMUNICATION LINES WITH IT. IT WILL BE PROVIDED A FIRE HYDRANT. THEY WILL CLEAN THEIR EQUIPMENT AS THEY COME INTO THE PROPERTY TO HELP PROTECT FOR OAK WILT, THERE WILL BE SOME RESTORATION. THIS EASEMENT IS ASSIGNABLE IN WHOLE OR IN PART.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY QUESTIONS? I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM NO. 9.

>>THOMAS: SO MOVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THE CITY'S APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM DOES NOT IN ANY WAY MEAN THAT WE SUPPORT THE LCRA PIPELINE. I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE DAMAGING TO THE ENVIRONMENT. AND THE EDWARD'S AQUIFER. BUT THAT LEGALLY THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE BUT TO SELL THEM THIS PROPERTY FOR THE PIPELINE. TO GO ACROSS AND MS. PLUMBER IN HER NEGOTIATIONS HAS GOTTEN SOME ITEMS IN THAT WE WOULDN'T GET IF WE WENT TO CONDEMNATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ON ITEM NO. 9? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NO. 28. SOMEBODY GOING TO MAKE A PRESENTATION ON ITEM NO. 28?

>> MAYOR, COUNCIL, I'M LARRY O'NEIL, MANAGER OF REAL ESTATE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION. THIS ITEM IS TO AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE 1,051 SQUARE FEET OF PERMANENT LAND FOR -- FOR ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION. IT'S SITUATED IN A NINE SQUARE FOOT EASEMENT FOR A WATER LINE THAT WILL GO INTO THE PROPERTY. IT'S SITUATED AT 1530 AND 1608 BARTON SPRINGS ROAD. THIS IS TO AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE THAT PROPERTY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY QUESTIONS BY COUNCIL? IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION IS TO APPROVE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ON ITEM NO. 28? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON ITEM NO. 28? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, OPPOSED SAY NO., MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 28. COUNCIL, THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE 2:00 TIME CERTAIN. WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND WE DO IS -- THERE'S REALLY NO NEED TO RECESS. WELL, WHY DON'T WE RECESS UNTIL 2:00. I WILL TAKE A MOTION.

>>GOODMAN: SO MOVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO RECESS UNTIL 2:00 BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. MR. HEIGHTS, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING? DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING?

>> I HAD A PRESENTATION FOR THE 2:00.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. I WILL GET YOU AT 2:00 THEN. THANK YOU. I WAS HOPING THAT YOU HAD SOMETHING FOR US TO KILL SOME TIME BETWEEN NOW AND 2:00. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES, RECESSED UNTIL 2:00.

>>MAYOR WATSON: BEFORE WE GO TO OUR 2:00 TIME CERTAIN, LET'S GO TO ITEM NO. 34, WHICH IS AN ITEM THAT WE HAVE ALREADY PASSED SITTING AS THE TIF BOARD, BUT I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO PASS IT AS THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL.

>>WYNN: MOVE APPROVAL MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. NO, THE MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER AND COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. ITEMS NUMBER 46 AND 47. 46 IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT OF A PROPOSED BUILDING ON THE 25 YEAR AND 100 YEAR NROONS OF SHOAL CREEK AT 801 WEST FIFTH STREET AND TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT TO DEDICATE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO THE LIMITS OF THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. THE MOTION THAT WAS TAKEN UP TWO WEEKS AGO TO ALLOW THIS TO BE HELD AS A PUBLIC HEARING SOMETIME OTHER THAN 6:00, MY MOTION WAS IT INCLUDED A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES. FOR PURPOSES OF OUR RECORD, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO CONDUCT THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT A TIME OTHER THAN 6:00 OR LATER IN THE EVENING. THERE IS A MOTION? MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. MR. HEIGHTS?

>> MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM, COUNCILMEMBERS. THIS IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT OF A PROPOSED BUILDING ON THE 25 YEAR AND 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN OF SHOAL CREEK AT 801 WEST FIFTH STREET AND TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENTS TO DEDICATE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO THE LIMITS OF THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. THIS SITE PLAN INCLUDES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 16 STORY, MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL BUILDING WITH A REDUCED FOUR STORY HEIGHT ALONG THE BANKS OF SHOAL CREEK AND ALONG WEST AVENUE. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND PARTIALLY WITHIN IN THE 25 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. THE LOAD LOAD PROHIBITS -- THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PROHIBITS IN THE 25 YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND LIMITATIONS ON THE 100 YEAR. THE STAFF RECOMMENDS IT DUE TO THE ENGINEER OF RECORD CERTIFYING THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY IDENTIFIABLE INCREASE IN THE FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION TO ANY OTHER LOCATION. THIS VARIANCE IS ALSO CONTINGENT ON TWO THINGS. FIRST, A PROGRAM TO ENSURE NO ADVERSE FLOODING OF ANY OTHER PROPERTY APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT. SECOND ACCESS TO THE BUILDING BY DIRECT CONNECTION WITH AN AREA ABOVE THE REGULATORY FLOODPLAIN. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE ANYONE THAT HAS ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL AT THIS POINT? ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON ITEM NO. 46 AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD?, I WILL ENTERTAIN A NOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, MOTION MADE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, IS THERE A DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. COUNCIL WE WILL GO TO ITEM NO. 47, WHICH IS TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW ENCROACHMENT OF A PROPOSED BUILDING ON THE 25 YEAR AND 100 YEAR FLOODPLAINS OF SHOAL CREEK AT 801 WEST FIFTH STREET AND TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT TO DEDICATE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO THE LIMITS OF THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. THERE IS A MOTION.

>>GOODMAN: I WILL MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 47 WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. COUNCIL, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING UNTIL 3:30 P.M. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH TIM PARALEGAL OFF THE DIAS. FOR THE RECORD, TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. FOR THE RECORD, AT 3:30 P.M., I WILL NOT IMMEDIATELY CALL THE CITY COUNCILL BACK TO ORDER, BUT INSTEAD I WILL CALL TO ORDER THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING OF THE HOUSE HOUSE, WE ARE IN RECESS UNTIL 3:30. COMFORTABLE IN DOING SO BECAUSE IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT THOSE ACTIONS WERE BASED ON FOLLOWING PREMISES. ONE AN INDUCEMENT RESOLUTION WAS A PRELIMINARY FIRST STEP IN A ROUTINE ANNUAL PROCESS ESTABLISHED BY THE TEXAS BOND REVIEW BOARD, TWO, THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF AN INDUCEMENT RESOLUTION DOES NOT BIND THE HOUSE HOUSE TO FINANCE THE PROJECT OR SHOULD IT BE CONSTRUED AS FINAL APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT. THREE, SINCE PROJECT SELECTION IS BASED ON A LOTTERY, MANY OF THE PROJECTS WILL FAIL TO GET THE CHANCE TO THE OBTAIN THE STATE BOND AUTHORITY. AND, FOUR, UPON RECEIVING A FAVORABLE DRAW IN THE STATE'S BOND LOTTERY, A PROJECT WILL BE SUBJECT TO DUE DILIGENCE BY THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION AND REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING AND BE BROUGHT BACK TO THIS BOARD FOR FINAL DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT AND THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS BY THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION. SINCE THE PREMISES ARE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME FOR ITEM 49, THE PROJECT DESCRIBED THEREIN, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD APPROVE THIS INDUCEMENT RESOLUTION.

>>SLUSHER: SORRY, MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, ALL APPEAR OPPOSED, MOTION PASSES 5-ON WITH THE MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS, THANK YOU, SIR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BROKE THE -- BEFORE THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> SO MOVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER THOMAS, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER SLUSHER, ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES WITH THE VICE-PRESIDENT AND BOARD MEMBER GRIFFITH TEMPORARILY OFF THE DIAS. WE ARE ADJOURNED FROM THE HOUSE HOUSE, THE CITY COUNCILL OF AUSTIN, TEXAS IS CURRENTLY IN RECESS, THE CITY COUNCILL OF AUSTIN, TEXAS WILL RECONVENE AT 4:00 P.M. HIS THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT YOU -- THAT YOU GRANT THE REQUEST TO AMEND THIS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, AND IT DOES NOT NEED AN ORDINANCE, ITEM NO. 51 IS ANOTHER RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AMENDMENT REQUEST, C 14-78-222, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT YOU AMEND THE REQUEST TO APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT. ITEM 52, ANOTHER RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, TERMINATION, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT YOU TERMINATE THE COVENANT UNDER ITEM NO. 52. ON ITEM NO. 53, STAFF REQUESTS A POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY THE 11TH. THIS IS THE BENNETT TRACT CASE, NEGOTIATIONS STILL ONGOING. ITEM 52, C 14-00-2089, A CHANGE IN ZONING ON WEST SLAUGHTER LANE FROM INTERIM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO CS, GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT ZONING CHANGE WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND OTHER CONDITIONS. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM NO. 55, CASE C14-00-2093, LOCATED AT 6300 SOUTH CONGRESS AVENUE. THE CHANGE IS FROM FAMILY 3 TO FAMILY 2 -- MULTI FAMILY 2 WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, IT HAS TO DO WITH AN ADJUSTMENT IN DENSITY. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. ITEM NO. 56, CASE C14-00-2114 LOCATED AT 9007 CULLEN LANE FROM INTERIM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. AND OTHER CONDITIONS. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. ITEM NO. 57, CASE C14-00-2120 LOCATED ON TUSCANY WAY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER THE 26TH. ITEM NO. 58 IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WAS HOPING THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOMETHING TO DO ON THE 26TH, THAT'S GOOD. [LAUGHTER].

>>GLASGO: ITEM NO. 59, CASE C14-00-1253, LOCATED AT 3900 MANCHACA ROAD, THE CHANGE IS FROM SINGLE FAMILY 3 TO LIMITED OFFICE, MIXED USE. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS LIMITED OFFICE MIXED USE ZONING WITH CONDITIONS, THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM 60, CASE C14-00-2154 LOCATED AT 5106 NIXON LANE FROM SINGLE FAMILY 2 TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS LRCO WITH OTHER CONDITIONS, THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM NO. 61, CASE NUMBER C14-00-2155 LOCATED ON HIGHWAY 290 WEST FROM DEVELOPMENT RESERVE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COMMERCIAL -- GENERAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND OTHER CONDITIONS. THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM 62, CASE C14-00-2167, LOCATED AT 1800 PEYTON GIN FROM SINGLE FAMILY 3 TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST WITH CONDITIONS, THIS CASE IS READY FOR ALL THREE READINGS. ITEM 63, CASE C14-00-2168, LOCATED AT 7100 GREENSHORES DRIVE FROM DEVELOPMENTAL RESERVE TO LA, LAKE AUSTIN, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS LA ZONING, THIS IS READY FOR FIRST READING ONLY. THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE ZONING CASES TODAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. ITEM NO. 58, WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF THAT. THE STOCKLINS. WHAT I NEED TO LET YOU KNOW IS AT 5:00 WE ARE GOING TO GO TO THE RESOLUTIONS. TODAY'S COUNCIL MEETING IS GOING TO BE CUT SHORT. I AM GOING TO TRY TO MOVE RAPIDLY THROUGH THE CONSENT ITEMS, GET TO THAT ITEM , IF THERE -- IF THERE ANY WAY -- HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO THE APPLICANT ABOUT THIS?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: HAVE YOU NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS WITH THE APPLICANT YOUR CONCERNS SO THAT MAYBE YOU ARE NOT IN OPPOSITION?

>> WELL, WE ARE IN ON POSITION. WE ARE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 12TH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY.

>> WE SPOKE AT THAT MEETING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: VERY GOOD. COUNCIL THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE 50, 51, 52, 53 A POSTPONEMENT TO JANUARY 11TH, 2001, 54 ON ALL THREE READINGS, 55 ALL THREE READINGS, 56 ALL THREE READINGS, 57 A POSTPONEMENT TO OCTOBER 26TH, 59 ON ALL THREE READINGS, 670 ALL THREE READINGS, 61, 62, ON ALL THREE READINGS AND 63 ON FIRST READING ONLY. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR I WILL MOVE APPROVAL WITH A QUESTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOVES THE APPROVAL WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA AS RED, THERE IS A SECOND? SHE COULDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.

>>GOODMAN: THE QUESTION IS 58, THE PEOPLE IN OPPOSITION ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS OPPOSED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, RIGHT? WHAT WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I DON'T KNOW THAT.

>>GOODMAN: RIGHT?

>>GLASGO: YES, YOU HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON YOUR AGENDA.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHAT --.

>>GOODMAN: WE USUALLY HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION POSTED UNLESS WE PARTICULARLY WANT TO GO BACK TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION, I HAD NOT HEARD ANY COUNCILMEMBER MENTION THAT. SO WHAT I BELIEVE WE ARE ABOUT TO DO OR COULD BE ABOUT TO DO IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SUPPORTIVE OF.

>> WE ARE SUPPORTING THAT.

>>GOODMAN: RIGHT. THAT'S HOW WE ARE POSTED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T WE DO THIS. LET'S PASS THE CONSENT AGENDA, COME BACK AND SEE IF WE CAN'T TAKE CARE OF THAT IN A RAPID FASHION. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ON THE ZONING AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANT CONSENT AGENDA? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. LET'S GO TO ITEM NO. 58. MS. GLASGO, WHY DON'T YOU TELL US WHERE WE ARE ON ITEM NO. 58, LET'S SEE IF WE CAN'T WORK OURSELVES TO A QUICK RESOLUTION.

>> OKAY. ITEM NO. 58, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, THIS IS CASE C14-00-2122 LOCATED AT 10505 RANCH ROAD 620 NORTH. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CHANGE IN ZONING TO GR, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT AND CS-1 FOR COMMERCIAL LIQUOR SALES FOR A LIQUOR STORE. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IS TO JUST GRANT GR, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL FOR THE ENTIRE SITE AND NOT THE COMMERCIAL LIQUOR SALES. THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS JUST RECOMMENDING LR, WHICH IS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONING WITH SOME CONDITIONS RELATING TO A FENCE AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS. SO IT'S JUST -- IT'S JUST REALLY A MATTER OF THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ONE THING, THE STAFF IS NOT RECOMMENDING EVERYTHING THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUST LOWERED THE REQUEST TO A DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICT. AND I WILL JUST PAUSE THERE AND AWAIT FOR QUESTIONS SHOULD ANY ARISE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR, BEFORE --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: IF I COULD ASK MS. GLASGO, WE HAVE JUST BEEN HANDED A PETITION. IS THIS A VALIDATED PETITION?

>>GLASGO: CORRECT, THIS PETITION SHOWS YOU THE NAME DIDS THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED. THE REASON THAT YOU HAVE ZERO PERCENTAGE IS BECAUSE OF THE PROPERTIES ARE IN THE COUNTY AND PROPERTY THAT IS OUTSIDE OF OUR ZONING JURISDICTION, THOSE PROPERTIES DO NOT TRIGGER PETITION RIGHTS, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY'S JURISDICTION.

>>GOODMAN: THANKS. THANKS MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET'S APPROACH IT THIS WAY. DO WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT HERE?

>> YES, MY NAME IS CHARMS DUNN I AM HERE REPRESENTING MAO CHHY, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. PLEASE SET THE CLOCK. BEFORE WE DO THAT, MAYOR PRO TEM I'M NOT SURE I COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU WERE SAYING WHEN WE WERE VOTING ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. AND IF THERE'S NO NEED TO MOVE OURSELVES TO A -- THROUGH A FULL PROCEEDING, I SURE WOULD LIKE TO AVOID THAT. I'M SURE EVERYBODY ELSE WOULD. WOULD YOU AGAIN, BEFORE HE SPEAKS, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO JUST CUT TO THE CHASE.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, I IMAGINE THE APPLICANT STILL IS IN SUPPORT OF WHAT THEY ORIGINALLY REQUESTED. BUT AS WE ARE POSTED ON OUR AGENDA EACH WEEK, WHAT WE HAVE IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AS OPPOSED TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. SO I THOUGHT THE ONLY TWO FOLKS WHO WERE WANTING TO PULL IT WERE THE ONES WHO WERE OPPOSED TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS NOT WHAT WE WOULD HAVE VOTED ON, BUT HERE IS THE APPLICANT TO PROBABLY, AS OPPOSED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION -- WHO IS PROBABLY OPPOSED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION, SO WE ARE KIND OF BACK TO SQUARE 1.

>> I WILL BE BRIEF.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. MY NAME IS CHARLES DUNN. I AM HERE REPRESENTING MR. CHAY AND HIS FAMILY THE OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS PROPERTY CONSISTS OF TWO SUBDIVIDED LOTS ON RM 620 AT THE CORNER OF BOULDER LANE AND THE ENTRANCE OF CANYON CREEK. THIS PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED INTO THE CITY AT MR. CHAY'S REQUEST WHEN IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT A WATER WELL WOULD PREVENT HIM FROM BEING ABLE TO UTILIZE AN ONSITE SEPTIC SYSTEM FOR HIS EXISTING USE. IN OBTAINING WASTEWATER SERVICE FROM THE CITY, HE WAS REQUIRED TO BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY TO GET SERVICE FROM THE M.U.D.. IT DOES CONSIST OF TWO LOTS, OF 1.25 ACRES EACH. THE CORNER LOT ON YOUR ZONING MAP AS TRACT 3 IS AN EXISTING CHEVRON CONVENIENCE STORE WITH GAS ACCESSORY CAR WASH. IT WAS BUILT AND IS OPERATED BY MR. CHAC AND HIS FAMILY SINCE 1996. THE ADJOINING TRACTS 1 AND 2 ARE A VACANT TRACT AND MR. CHAY'S INTENT IS TO BUILD A NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL CENTER ON THOSE. TRACT 1 IS VACANT AND HE WOULD LIKE TO ON TRACT 1 DO -- DO A LIQUOR STORE WHICH WILL BE OPERATED BY MR. CHAY AND HIS FAMILY. PRIOR TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION, WE HAD CONTACTED ALL OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS AND GROUPS AND ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. PEACE LUTHERAN CHURCH ADJOINED TO THE NORTH, TALKED WITH THEIR PASTOR, CANYON CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, 620 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WE GOT NO RESPONSE BACK FROM THEIR REPRESENTATIVE. AND WE WERE CONTACTED BY THE TEXAS METHODIST FOUNDATION, WHICH IS ACROSS BOWLER LANE. NONE OF THESE PARTIES HAD INDICATED THAT THEY WERE OPPOSED TO THIS ZONING CHANGE. WE DID ALSO MEET WITH THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER, MR. DUSON ROSOLOVICH WHO HAD SPOKEN AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THERE WERE SOME ISSUES WHICH I BELIEVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADDRESSED IN THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING VEGETATIVE SCREENING AND A FENCE AND SOME THINGS LIKE THAT. MR. CHAY IS NOT OPPOSED TO THAT PORTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION. HE WOULD LIKE TO -- WOULD REQUEST THAT THE ZONING FOR GR FOR TRACTS TWO AND THREE, THE EXISTING CONVENIENCE STORE AND CAR WASH DOES REQUIRE GR TO BE A CONFORMING USE UNDER THE CITY CODES. THAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE EXISTING CONVENIENCE STORE WOULD BE GR. SO THEY -- YOU WOULD DEFINITELY REQUEST THAT. HE WOULD ALSO LIKE GR FOR -- FOR TRACT 2, WHICH WOULD BE THE NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL CENTER. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY CS 1 FOR -- FOR A LIQUOR STORE AND WAS -- HE WOULD BE HAPPY TO -- TO RESTRICT THE CS 1 TO LIQUOR SALES ONLY. THE -- THE CS 1, OBVIOUSLY, IS A GOOD NEIGHBORHOOD USE. THE -- THE OPERATION OF A LIQUOR STORE HAS VERY LIMITED HOURS OF OPERATION FROM 10:00 IN THE MORNING UNTIL 9:00 AT NIGHT. IT'S NOT OPEN ON SUNS AND IS NOT OPEN ON HOLIDAYS. IT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD APPROPRIATE USE. IT DOES REQUIRE NEIGHBORHOOD'S BACKUP AND IS A NEIGHBORHOOD-RELATED USE. AS I SAID, MR. CHAY IS NOT OPPOSED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RELATIVE TO THE ADDITIONAL ITEMS, BUT DOES REQUEST THE GR AND CS 1 ZONING BE GRANTED. HE'S ALSO IN SUPPORT OF THE TRIP LIMITATIONS THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED. WE BELIEVE THAT THE REQUESTED SDONGS ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LOCATION ON 620. AND WILL BENEFIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH SERVICES THAT ARE CURRENTLY REQUIRE EXTENDED COMMUTES TO RECEIVE. WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. WILLIAM STOCKLIN. PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY TO THE MICROPHONE, CALLED BY EVELYN STOCKLIN AND THEN -- I'M GOING TO LET YOU HANDLE IT.

>> OKAY.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, COUNCIL, STAFF, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M WILLIAM STOCKLIN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IF YOU WOULD DO ME A FAVOR, MOVE THAT MICROPHONE A LITTLE CLOSER TO YOUR MOUTH.

>> YES, SIR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE YOU GO.

>> IS THAT BETTER?

>>MAYOR WATSON: A LOT BETTER, THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHTY. MY NAME IS WILLIAM STOCKLIN. I LIVE DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PEACE LUTHERAN CHURCH ADJACENT TO THE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. I AGREE WITH THE CITY PLANNING BOARD PROPOSAL OF THE LO-CO. THEIR ARGUMENT WAS THAT IT'S INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENT AND DUE TO THE POX TEE -- PROXIMITY OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, WHICH I WOULD AGREE WITH. JUST A LITTLE BIT, THE ENTRANCE IS THE ENTRANCE TO THE 620 OAKS, WHICH IS WHERE THIS IS PROPOSED, AND IN THE CANYON CREEK WHICH IS ALL RESIDENTIAL HOUSES. THERE'S NUMEROUS RESIDENTIAL HOUSES IN THE AREA. ALSO TO THE RIGHT OF THIS PLACE IN SPITTING DISTANCE THERE IS A CHILD CARE CENTER AT THE PEACE LUTHERAN CHURCH, WHICH IS GOING TO BE EXTENDED INTO A DAYCARE -- INTO -- INTO A PRESCHOOL. AND ADJACENT TO THAT, DOWN THE ROAD, IS ANOTHER PRECARE CENTER, A LARGE PRECARE CENTER WHICH HAS INFANTS IN IT. ACROSS THE ROAD, AS HE MENTIONED IS THE METHODIST CHURCH FOUNDATION AND NEXT TO THAT IS THE CATHOLIC, LARGE CATHOLIC CHURCH. SO AS I UNDERSTAND THE CS 1 IS THE MOST PERMISSIBLE ZONING THAT YOU CAN GET. THE FEAR THAT A LOT OF US HAVE, ALREADY YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR FROM MR. DUCHON OF THE IMPACT THAT HE HAS, HE LIVES RIGHT BEHIND IT. BUT THIS CAN EASILY EXPAND INTO A NIGHTCLUB, BAR, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. WHICH SCARES THE DAYLIGHTS OUT OF US, IT'S A PEACEFUL COMMUNITY WITH A LOT OF KIDS, A LOT OF PEOPLE, AND WE DON'T NEED TO -- THE NOISE, EXCESSIVE NOISE, SMOKE, DIRT, DUST, WHICH WILL -- WHICH WILL OCCUR IN THAT HAPPENS. CS 1, IF IT'S APPROVED, ISN'T FAIR TO HAVE ALL THE COMMUNITY PEOPLE DECREASE THEIR VALUE IN PROPERTY, AND MY WIFE HAS BEEN A REAL ESTATE AGENT FOR 15 OR 20 YEARS AND I OWN QUITE A FEW PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AS RENTAL PROPERTIES, I GUARANTEE YOU IT WILL IMPACT -- IT WILL IMPACT THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE LIVING CONDITIONS OF THE PEOPLE LIVING THERE. FOR ONE PERSON TO MAKE MONEY OFF OF -- OFF OF LIQUOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, SIR. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, MR. STOCKLIN, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER HAS A QUESTION FOR YOU.

>>SLUSHER: I WANTED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION, SIR.

>> YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK LOUD, MY HEARING IS PRETTY POOR.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. IS YOUR OBJECTION TO THE LIQUOR STORE OR TO -- TO -- THAT IT COULD TURN INTO A NIGHTCLUB, YOUR UNDERSTANDING UNDER THE ZONING, IT COULD TURN INTO A NIGHTCLUB LATER? OR IS IT AN OBJECTION TO BOTH?

>> BOTH.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY.

>> IT'S DEFINITELY BOTH.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. SO -- SO BUT YOU SEEM TO -- I MEAN, YOU SEEM TO BE PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE -- IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT A LIQUOR STORE AND NIGHTCLUB WOULD BE TWO SEPARATE THINGS AS FAR AS DAMAGING THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> YES. IF YOU LOOK AT IT, ALREADY THEY TALK ABOUT TRACT 1 AND 2 WHICH CONFUSES ME. ALMOST LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THERE IS SOMETHING COMING BEHIND IT.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. MAYBE THE APPLICANT WILL SPEAK TO THAT IN THE REBUTTAL. THANK YOU, I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD. WHAT'S YOUR -- WHAT'S THE CONCERN ABOUT THE LIQUOR STORE? YOU STATED WHAT YOU WOULD -- CONCERN THAT YOU WOULD HAVE ABOUT A NIGHTCLUB PRETTY VIVIDLY, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE LIQUOR STORE ITSELF?

>> IT BRING, I DON'T THINK IT'S -- IT'S THE -- AS THESE PEOPLE HAVE SAID, AS THE PLANNING BOARD SAID, IT'S INCONSISTENT FAMILY LIVING. I MEAN, YOU HAVE PEOPLE COMING IN THERE -- MOST PEOPLE COMING TO THE LIQUOR STORE WILL NOT ALL BE SOBER. YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A DISRUPTION. YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR MR. DUCHON HAS THE BUSINESS HAS ALREADY. IT'S GOING TO ADD TO THAT.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY.

>> IT DEFINITELY HAS AN IMPACT ON THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTIES.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. I THINK IT'S TRUE THAT THAT COULD BE THE CASE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE FOR ALL STORES OF THAT KIND. I KNOW THERE WAS ONE DOWN THE STREET FROM ME WHERE I LIVED BEFORE WHERE I LIVE NOW, I NEVER NOTICED ANY DISTURBANCE OR EVEN DROP IN PROPERTY VALUES. FROM THAT. I MEAN, IT'S TRUE, THOUGH, THERE ARE -- THERE ARE SOME STORES OF THAT KIND THAT DO CAUSE PROBLEMS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF I ACCEPT IT AS A GENERAL RULE.

>> WELL, YOUR EXPERIENCE IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE I HAVE BECAUSE --.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY.

>> MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN IT DOES HAVE A VALUE. THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE BUSINESS FOR 0 YEARS, ALL OF THEM TELL ME IT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY VALUES.

>>SLUSHER: I WILL CAREFULLY WEIGH THAT, THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MRS. STOCKLIN.

>> OKAY. HELLO. I'M EVELYN STOCKLIN, I'M BILL'S WIFE. WE ARE RESIDENTS, JUST ONE BLOCK AWAY FROM THE LOT THAT HAS -- WOULD HAVE THE PROPOSED LIQUOR STORE ON IT. I DON'T THINK THE ZONING ON THAT CORNER LOT, I DON'T SEE THAT THAT'S EVEN A FACTOR BECAUSE THAT BECAME A CHEVRON GAS DECISION AND CAR WASH FOUR YEARS AGO BEFORE THE -- BEFORE ANY OF THOSE LOTS WERE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN. SO I THINK THAT'S A GRANDFATHERED, I DON'T THINK THAT IS REALLY PROBABLY AN ISSUE HERE AT ALL. BUT ANYHOW, CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> UH-HUH.

>> CAN YOU HEAR ME? OKAY, SO WE -- BILL AND I HAVE BEEN HOMEOWNERS HERE FOR OVER 20 YEARS AND MANY OF THE RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN RESIDENTS THERE FOR OVER 20 YEARS. AND IT'S BEEN A VERY QUIET, STABLE COMMUNITY AND WE REALLY LIKE IT THAT WAY. AND WE REALLY WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. MR. CHAY, WHATEVER, THE OWNER, HE IS NOT A RESIDENT OF EITHER OUR SUBDIVISION 620 OAKS OR THE CANYON CREEK SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT AND IF HE WERE, I DON'T THINK HE WOULD WANT ANY CS ZONING RIGHT OUT THERE AT THE ENTRANCE OF 620 OAKS AND CANYON CREEK, EITHER. BECAUSE IT IS -- I'M SORRY, I'VE BEEN A REAL ESTATE AGENT IN AUSTIN FOR 20 YEARS. AND IT IS -- IT WOULD BE A NEGATIVE IMPACT TO OUR SUBDIVISIONS. THE -- VERY LARGE CANYON CREEK, ONE ENTRANCE IN, ONE -- THE SAME EXIT OUT. SO THEY CANNOT EITHER GO INTO THE SUBDIVISION OR OUT OF THEIR SUBDIVISION WITHOUT PASSING THIS LOT. AND THEY, OF COURSE, ARE CITY OF AUSTIN. WE ARE NOT. WE ARE IN THE ETJ. BUT IF YOU LOOK -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE MY PINK MARKS HERE ON THIS MAP OR NOT, BUT THIS IS THE VERY LARGE CANYON CREEK AND THE CANYON CREEK THERE. THAT'S ALL -- ALL CITY OF AUSTIN, THEN ALONG HERE, ALONG 620, THAT'S CITY OF AUSTIN, ALSO. SO WE, 620 OAKS, WE ARE SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES BY CITY OF AUSTIN, SO WE BELIEVE THAT WE, TOO, WILL BECOME CITY OF AUSTIN. SO WE HOPE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO LISTEN TO US SERIOUSLY ABOUT OUR PLEA THAT WE DO NOT WANT -- THAT WE DO NOT WANT -- A LIQUOR STORE OR ANY TYPE OF CS 1 ZONING. WE WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WILL GIVE US THE LR WITH CONDITIONS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED AT THE MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 12TH. SEE, HERE IS THE -- ON THE CORNER HE'S BOULDER LANE, 620. AND HERE'S THE CHEVRON GAS STATION AND CAR WASH WHICH WENT IN A LONG TIME, FOUR YEARS AGO BEFORE THEY WERE CITY OF AUSTIN OUT HERE. HERE IS THE PROPOSED LOT. I LIVE RIGHT THERE. SO I FAXED YOU ALL MANY, SEVERAL LETTERS, I HOPE THAT YOU READ THEM. I SAID, WE DO NOT APPROVE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A BAR OR A LIQUOR STORE AT THE ENTRANCE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT [BUZZER SOUNDING] IN HELPING US MAINTAIN OUR HOMES WITHOUT THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF SUCH BUSINESSES. I HAVE LOTS OF SIGNATURES AND JUST TIME RAN OUT SO I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO TALK TO EVERYBODY IN THE SUBDIVISION, BUT EVERYBODY I TALKED TO WAS HAPPY TO SIGN MY LETTER. THANK YOU NATURE THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME?

>>MAYOR WATSON: UNLESS SOMEBODY CRIES OUT, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. THANK YOU. YES, SIR? AND -- AS DIRTY HARRY SAID, ONE OF THOSE GREAT DIRTY HARRY MOVIES, A MAN HAS TO KNOW HIS LIMITATIONS, BUT LOOKING AT YOUR NAME, I KNOW THAT I AM LIMITED.

>> OH, SIR, I HAD THE PROBLEM 30 YEARS LEARNING THAT MYSELF. AFTER THAT IT BECOME A LITTLE BIT EASIER, I AM DUSON RADOSOLVICH, EASY.

>> THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. DAD GUM IT.

>> I DO APPRECIATE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU AND TO EXPLAIN THE PLIGHT THAT MY WIFE AND I HAVE ENDURED IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS. BY THE EXISTING BUSINESS AND WE FEAR THAT EXPANSION AND ADDITION OF THE BUSINESS UNDER THE ZONING THAT IS REQUESTED WOULD EVEN -- WOULD EVEN FURTHER DETERIORATE NOT ONLY OUR QUALITY OF LIFE, BUT ALSO THE VALUE OF OUR PROPERTY, WHICH ALREADY HAS BEEN DIVIDED 29%. AND THAT'S THE FACT. WE HAVE EXPERIENCED WITH THE PRESENT BUSINESS, TERRIBLE GASOLINE SMELL, INTENSE LIGHT SHINING DIRECTLY INTO OUR WINDOWS, HIGH LEVEL OF NOISE FROM THE CAR WASH, GARBAGE CONTAINER PICK UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, CAR WASH OPERATING ALL HOURS IN THE NIGHT, AND IT IS DIRECTLY UNOUR WINDOWS. BUSINESS PATRONS CROSSING INTO OUR PROPERTY AND TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH WE DO HAVE -- FEAR OF -- FOR OUR SECURITY. AND WE BELIEVE THAT EXPANDED BUSINESSES IS GOING TO ONLY TO WORSEN THE SITUATION AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO IMPROVE ANYTHING AND TO SERVE VERY SMALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE. I HAVE REQUESTED FROM THE ZONING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THEY HAVE BEEN VERY FORTHCOMING, TO INCLUDE IN THEIR DELIBERATIONS THE NEED FOR -- FOR FENCING OFF THE PROPERTY OF BUSINESS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WITH THE FENCE THAT IS GOING TO PREVENT THAT KIND OF A NOISE, LIGHT. IMPROVE THE SECURITY OF OUR -- OF OUR PROPERTY AND OURSELVES. AND THIS IS WHY THEY HAVE COME FORWARD WITH THAT -- WITH THAT LR-CO RECOMMENDATION. I WOULD APPRECIATE VERY MUCH IF YOU CAN -- IF YOU CAN DO THE SAME THING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU, SIR. COUNCIL, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION IS TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION WITH REGARD TO ITEM NO. 58. I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY? HE'S ENTITLED TO REBUTTAL. -- COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH MOVES TO RECONSIDER

>>GRIFFITH: ABSOLUTELY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE MOTION TO CLOSES THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES OF REBUTT TALL, I'M SORRY, SIR.

>> THE QUESTION REGARDING TRACT ONE AND TWO. WHAT WAS DONE, TRACT 1 IS STRICTLY AN ENVELOPE FOR THE CS 1 USE AS PART OF -- OF A LITTLE BIT LARGER -- RETAIL CENTER. SO WE JUST TOOK THE PIECE THAT WE THOUGHT NEEDED TO BE CS 1 AND WE ARE REQUESTING ZONING ONLY FOR THAT LITTLE WINDOW FOR THE -- FOR THE LIQUOR SALES. TWO OTHER ITEMS, WE DID VISIT WITH PEACE LUTHERAN CHURCH, THEY WERE AWARE OF THE PLANS AND WERE NOT OPPOSED TO IT. JUST AS ONE NOTE RELATIVE TO MR. R, HE DID OWN THIS PROPERTY AND DID SELL BOTH OF THESE TRACTS TO ANOTHER PARTY WHO THEN SOLD THEM TO MR. CHAY, SO HE DID OWN THESE TRACTS AND HAD OPPORTUNITY TO -- TO TAKE DARE OF -- TO TAKE CARE OF ANY ISSUES RELATIVE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THESE WHEN HE DID OWN THOSE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WILL ENTERTAIN A MANAGES TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION WITH REGARD TO THE SUBSTANCE OF ITEM NO. 58, ON FIRST READING ONLY.

>>GOODMAN: MAYOR, ON FIRST READING I WOULD MOVE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND IF I COULD COMMENT BRIEFLY IF THAT'S SECONDED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON FIRST READING ONLY. IS THERE A SECOND?

>>GRIFFITH: YES, SIR. I SECOND THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: THE REASON THAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT, PROBABLY I WOULD FOR ALL THREE READINGS, BUT AS LONG AS WE ARE DOING FIRST READING I DEFINITELY AM WANTING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I THINK MIGHT BE A PRECEDENT SETTING ACTION THAT WE TAKE HERE LOOKING AT THE SIZE OF THE LOTS AND SOME OF THE CROSS STREETS. AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE APPLICANT IS -- IS -- IS AFTER AND ACTUALLY I THINK THAT -- THAT COULD WORK IF THERE WERE NOT OTHER -- OTHER SITUATIONS THAT MIGHT DOMINO. BUT SINCE I DO THINK THAT THAT'S A POSSIBILITY FOR THIS TIME, I WOULD RATHER GO FOR PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>>SLUSHER: I DO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: I HAVEN'T BEEN OUT TO VISIT THIS SITE. I AM GOING TO GO LOOK AT IT, I'M SORT OF LEANING TOWARDS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, SO I JUST WANT TO TELL FOLKS BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND READING, I MAY CHANGE MY MIND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I THINK THAT'S A FAIR STATEMENT. I THINK THIS WILL END UP PASSING ON FIRST READING, I THINK A COUPLE OF PEOPLE MAY WANT TO GO LOOK FACE TO DAYS WITH -- FACE-TO-FACE BEFORE THEY MAKE A FINAL DECISION. FOR ONE SHOULD BE SURPRISED IF THERE'S A CHANGE IN VOTE. FURTHER DISCUSSIONS?

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR, A PROCEDURAL QUESTION. IS IT CORRECT THAT -- THAT WHAT IS ON -- WHAT IS ON CONSENT FOR ZONING IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED, IS THAT -- I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO SAY?

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT IS THE GENERAL RULE

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU, I JUST NEEDED THAT CLARIFIED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON FIRST READING ONLY. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL AT THIS REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, OPPOSED NO. THE MOTION CARRIES, WE ARE ADJOURNED, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>SLUSHER: I THINK THAT'S A RECORD.

End of Council Session Closed Caption Log