Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting, 05/10/01

>>MAYOR WATSON: RISE AND JOIN US IN AN INVOCATION, WE WILL BE LED TODAY BY THE REVEREND DR. ROBERT D NIX OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF AUSTIN. REVEREND THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US.

>> MY PLEASURE.

>> I'M REAL GRATEFUL TO BE HERE THIS MORNING, TO COME AS A CHRISTIAN MINISTER TO OPEN THIS TIME IN PRAYER. AND I JUST BEG THOSE WHO -- WHO DO NOT SHARE THAT CHRISTIAN FAITH TO BE PATIENT AND UNDERSTANDING. BEFORE THE WORK BEGINS, WE QUIET OUR HEARTS, LORD, BEFORE YOU. SENSE YOUR PRESENCE WITH US. RECEIVE YOUR LOVE. BE OPEN TO YOUR GUIDANCE. PSALM 62 SAYS MY SOUL RESTS IN THE LORD ALONE. MY SALVATION COMES FROM HIM. HE ALONE IS MY ROCK AND MY SALVATION. MOST HOLY AND LOVING HEAVENLY FATHER, TO PLEASE YOU IS -- IS OUR GREATEST CALL AND YOUR SERVICE IS PERFECT FREEDOM. YOU HAVE CREATED ALL THINGS AND YOU HAVE CREATED US IN OUR IMAGE. WE PRAY THAT OUT OF THE ABUNDANCE OF YOUR LOVE THAT YOU WOULD DIRECT THIS MEETING. SCRIPTURE SAYS THAT YOUR PEOPLE ARE TO SEEK THE PEACE AND PROSPERITY OF THE CITY TO WHICH YOU HAVE CARRIED US. WE PRAY FOR AUSTIN, FOR ITS PEOPLE, FOR THE INSTITUTIONS, PLACES OF WORK FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND SCHOOLS. BUILD THIS CITY, LORD, TO BE A LIGHT UPON THE HILL. THAT YOUR PEOPLE MAY THRIVE AND GROW AND LOVE ONE ANOTHER. AND I PRAY FOR THE SERVANTS GATHERED HERE, LORD, FOR THEIR HOMES AND FAMILIES AND FOR ALL THAT THEY BRING THIS MORNING. MAY YOUR PEACE GUIDE -- GUARD THEIR HEARTS. WE PRAY, ALSO, FOR -- FOR ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD DIVIDE US, CONFUSION AND ANXIETY AROUND, LORD, LEAD US TO -- TO LOOK TO YOU IN THESE THINGS AND TO BE NURTURED BY YOUR PRESENCE. NOW MAY THE LORD WITH HIS GREAT MERCY BLESS YOU AND GIVE YOU UNDERSTANDING IN HIS WISDOM AND GRACE. MAY HE NOURISH YOU WITH RICHES, AND MAKE YOU PERSEVERE IN ALL GOOD WORKS. MAY HE KEEP YOUR STEPS FROM WANDERING AND DIRECT YOU INTO PATHS OF LOVE AND PEACE. IN THE BLESSING OF GOD ALMIGHTY, THE FATHER, THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT BE UPON YOU AND REMAIN WITH YOU ALWAYS. AMEN.

>> AMEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, REVEREND, WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WILL CALL THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL TO ORDER. THIS IS A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCILL, MAY 10, 2001, MEETING IN THE BOARD ROOM AT THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY LOCATED AT 3700 LAKE AUSTIN BOULEVARD. CHANGES, ITEM 25 SHOULD ALSO BE SHOWN AS BEING CO-SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. ITEM NO. 44, THE SUGGESTED DATE AND TIME CURRENTLY SAYS MAY 17TH, 2001, THAT SHOULD BE CHANGED TO MAY 24TH, 2001. ON THE ADDENDUM, BY THE WAY, 44 IS THE ONE THAT IS ON THE ADDENDUM, IF YOU ARE LOOKING JUST A REGULAR AGENDA, BE SURE THAT YOU LOOK AT THE ADDENDUM TO SEE THE CHANGE TO MAY 24TH, 2001, AT 6:00 P.M. ITEMS SET FOR A TIME CERTAIN, 1:30 P.M., GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS, 4:00 PEOPLE ZONING ITEMS 30 THROUGH 42 AND 5:30 P.M., LIVE MUSIC AND PROCLAMATIONS. COUNCIL WE WILL GO DIRECTLY TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. LET ME TELL YOU THE ITEMS THAT I BELIEVE HAVE BEEN PULLED. ITEM NO. 5, ITEM NO. 6, ITEM NO. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, THOSE ARE THE ITEMS PULLED ALTHOUGH WE WILL WAIT ON APPOINTMENTS UNTIL THIS AFTERNOON. BECAUSE THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL WORKING DONE. ANY ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE PUT BACK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OR NEED TO BE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT, THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE -- AFTER READING THE CONSENT AGENDA I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 24, 25 WITH THE CHANGE AND CORRECTION THAT I READ A MOMENT AGO, 26, 27. AND ITEM NO. 44 ON THE ADDENDUM WITH THE CHANGE AND CORRECTION THAT I INDICATED TO MAY 24, 2001. IS THERE A MOTION?

>> MOVE APPROVAL.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AS IT WAS READ? ANYONE WISHING TO BE HEARD ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES. COUNCIL, A COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS. QUICK ITEMS, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME ANNOUNCE AGAIN THAT THE MEETING OF MAY 17TH, 2001, AND SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER WILL CONTINUE TO BEGIN AT 10:00 A.M. FOR AIR QUALITY REASONS. LET'S GO TO ITEM NO. 5, ON ITEM NO. 5, THERE HAS BEEN A REQUEST FOR A POSTPONEMENT BY THE APPLICANT AND THE SUGGESTED DATE WOULD BE MAY 24, 2001. MS. GLASGO?

>> MAYOR, ON THIS ITEM THE APPLICANT STILL NEEDS TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO ADDRESS BOTH THE DESIRES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEED TO COMPLY WITH COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS. SO HE NEEDS TO RECONCILE THOSE TWO ISSUES AND IS NOT QUITE READY TO COME BACK FOR SECOND AND THIRD READINGS NATURE I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO POSTPONE ITEM NO. 5 UNTIL MAY 24TH. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NO. 5. ITEM NO. 6, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THERE'S ALSO A REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JUNE 7TH, 2001. MS. GLASGO?

>> ON ITEM NO. 6 THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED THERE'S A NEED TO VISIT WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS TO EXPLAINED THE PROPOSED PROJECT SO THERE CAN BE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IMPACT WOULD BE TO THE PROJECT BEFORE THE CASE CAN COME BACK. THE APPLICANT WILL BE TRAVELING ON THE 24TH, HENCE THE ROBE FOR JUNE 27TH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE A MOTION TO POSTPONE UNTIL JUNE 7TH? MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. IS THERE A SECOND? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. COUNCIL, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE PURPOSE OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE TO ENGAGE IN A PRIVATE CONSULTATION WITH OUR ATTORNEY PURSUANT TO SECTION 551.071 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE TO DISCUSS CITY OF AUSTIN ACTING BY AND THROUGH ITS ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPARTMENT VERSUS CONVERGENT GROUP CORPORATION, CIVIL ACTION NUMBER A 01 CA 202, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF AUSTIN. MOTION MADE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO., WE ARE RECESSED TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, AT THE COMPLETION WE WILL RETURN AND TAKE UP OTHER ITEMS.

>> WE WILL RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL [INAUDIBLE]. NATURE WE WILL RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCILL IN 10 MINUTES. (AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL MEETING THURSDAY, MAY 10, 2001)

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I NEED TO ASK I BELIEVE -- WHO IS INDY? IS HE STILL IN THE AREA? I HOPE YOU WILL SHOW PRETTY QUICKLY.

>> IF I COULD GET A CITY ATTORNEY. WE ARE BACK IN SESSION. YOU NEED TO RUN. COUNCILMEMBER, HE JUST WALKED OUT.

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY. GREAT. MR. CITY ATTORNEY, I WANTED TO ESTABLISH SOMETHING ABOUT THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX RESULTS. ARE THOSE RESULTS MANDATES? ARE THEY ENTITLEMENTS OR ARE THE RESULTS OF THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX INFORMATION TO BE USED BY THE COUNCIL FOR DECISION-MAKING?

>> THEY ARE INFORMATION BY THE COUNCIL TO BE USED FOR DECISION-MAKING. IT'S NOT A ENTITLEMENT. IT STILL REQUIRES TO YOU VOTE AFFIRMATIVELY TO GRANT A SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE AND ON THE OTHER HAND YOU CAN VOTE NOT TO.

>>GRIFFITH: WELL, THE REASON HI SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS IS THE -- I HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS IS THE CONCERN ABOUT THE PERCEPTION THAT THIS IS BEING DONE RETROACTIVELY BECAUSE ALL THE DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS HAD BEEN MADE AND ACTUALLY THE BUILDING HAS STARTED UP AND IS MOVING WELL TOWARDS COMPLETION WITHOUT ANY OF THE -- WITHOUT ANY OF THESE INCENTIVES BEING VOTED ON. MY CONCERN IS IF WE GRANT THE $1.22 MILLION FEE WAIVERS RETROACTIVELY AND THIS SETS A PRECEDENT, THEN HOW MANY MORE RETROACTIVE FEE WAIVERS ARE WE GOING TO BE FACING AND WHAT WOULD THE TOTAL EXPOSURE BE FOR -- FOR THE CITY?

>> MR. LIBRACH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS HOW THIS ACTUALLY HAPPENED?

>> I WOULD BE GLAD TO ADDRESS IT, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS ITEM -- THIS SMART GROWTH MATRIX PROJECT WITH CAR AMERICA BEGAN AS THEY HAVE WITH ALL OF THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX PROJECTS, THAT THEY COME TO THE CITY PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF THEIR SITE PLAN. AND THEY GO THROUGH A PROCESS, FIRST AN INFORMAL PROCESS WITH THE CITY STAFF TO REVIEW THEIR PROPOSED PROJECT, AND WE DO AN INFORMAL SCORING WITH THEM ON THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX TO SEE WHERE THEY ARE. AND THEN THEY GO BACK AND THEY DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANT TO FORMALLY GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, AND IN ADDITION WHETHER THEY WANT TO INCREASE THE POINTS BY CHANGING THE PROJECT. IN THIS CASE, THE CAR AMERICA PROJECT THEY DID IN FACT GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF THEIR SITE PLAN AND THEY MADE THREE OR FOUR SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THEIR PROJECT AS A RESULT OF THAT INITIAL WORK WITH US. THEY CHANGED THE AMOUNT OF RETAIL ON THE PARKING GARAGE. THEY CHANGEED -- I CAN'T RECALL THAT OFFHAND, BUT THEY CHANGED TWO OR THREE OTHER SIGNIFICANT ITEMS. WE THEN SCORED THEM AND OF COURSE THEY DID NOT SCORE IN THE HIGHEST LEVEL, THEY SCORED AT THE SECOND LEVEL, THE FIVE YEAR RATHER THAN THE TEN YEAR PRESENT VALUE CONSTANT. SO THEN AT THAT POINT THEY BEGAN AND I GUESS GOT VERY SERIOUS ABOUT THEIR CONSTRUCTION AND DIDN'T FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE CONCLUSION OF THEIR WORK WITH US UNTIL MORE RECENTLY. BUT THEY STARTED THE PROCESS AS WE REQUIRE IN THE GUIDELINES FOR THE MATRIX, AND THEY COMPLETED THE PROCESS PRIOR TO RECEIVING -- OR THEY COMPLETED THE PROCESS EXCEPT FOR COMING FORWARD TO COUNCIL AND THAT COMPLETION ASPECT OF IT PRIOR TO RECEIVING A BUILDING PERMIT. SO I THINK IN THE SENSE THAT WE HAVE DEVELOPED THIS PROGRAM TO DO EXACTLY AS COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH INDICATES TO KEEP FROM PROVIDING RETROACTIVE FEES AND INCENTIVES TO BUILDERS, WE INSIST THAT THEY COME IN ON OR ABOUT THE TIME THAT THEY ARE READY TO FILE THEIR SITE PLAN AND PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION AND APPROVAL OF THEIR SITE PLAN THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX HAS TO BE COMPLETED. I THINK THIS MEETS THAT PARTICULAR TEST, COUNCILMEMBER. ALTHOUGH THEY DID -- IT HAS TAKEN OBVIOUSLY A GREAT DEAL OF TIME TO GET HERE HAVING MET THAT PARTICULAR TEST.

>>GRIFFITH: AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKED TO GRANT THESE BENEFITS AFTER A BUILDING HAS ALREADY STARTED UP AND IS SUBSTANTIALLY PROGRESSING TOWARDS COMPLETION?

>> I'M SORRY. NOT -- NO, IT IS NOT THE FIRST TIME. WE HAVE BEEN APPROACHED BY OTHERS WHO HAVE WANTED TO START THE PROCESS AFTER THEIR SITE PLAN HAS BEEN APPROVED, AFTER THEY ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION. AND WE HAVE SAID NO, THAT'S NOT THE WAY THE GUIDELINES READ. WE ARE -- YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GO TO COUNCIL, BUT WE'RE A STAFF NOT RECOMMENDING AND WILL NOT RECOMMEND IN FAVOR OF THAT. THIS IS -- IN THIS INSTANCE IT'S NOT QUITE THAT PROBLEM. THEY DID START AS WE HAD REQUESTED AND HAD LAID OUT IN THE GUIDELINES.

>>GRIFFITH: BUT DID NOT COMPLETE.

>> CORRECT.

>>GRIFFITH: SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. THE FEE WAIVERS HAVE BEEN CHARACTERIZED AS MONEY WE WOULD NOT GET IF WE DID NOT GIVE THE INCENTIVES. AND I THINK IN THIS SITUATION THAT'S NOT THE CASE. THIS BUILDING IS BEING BUILT FOR ALL THE RIGHT REASONS. IT'S BEING BUILT -- IT'S BEING MARKET DRIVEN. IT'S VERY ATTRACTIVE SPECULATIVE OFFICE BUILDING. AND OBVIOUSLY IT'S BEING BUILT BECAUSE OF MARKET FORCES, WHICH IS THE WAY IT OUGHT TO WORK. THE RENTS ARE HIGH. OCCUPANCY IS UP. GIVING $1.224 MILLION IN FEE WAIVERS IN A WAY THAT COULD BE PERCEIVED AS RETROACTIVELY IS JUST TAKING MONEY -- KEEPING MONEY OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, AND THIS IS -- THIS IS A TIME WE NEED TO LOOK MUCH MORE SERIOUSLY AT WHEN WE CHOOSE TO DO THAT AT OUR AUDIT AND MACHINE COMMITTEE MEETING YESTERDAY, WE LEARNED -- MEETING -- AWED I WANT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING WE LEARNED IN TERMS OF WHAT TO EXPECT AND NOT EXPECT IN TERMS OF SALES TAX AND OUR DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS ARE BEING ASKED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY WOULD CUT. WHAT SERVICES, WHAT -- WHAT EMPLOYEES, WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO WITHOUT IF IT CAME DOWN TO THAT. AND WHAT THESE -- WHAT THE FEE WAIVERS DO IS NOT KEEP EXPENSES FROM BEING MADE, BECAUSE THOSE SERVICES FOR A DEVELOPMENT STILL HAVE TO BE DONE. THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGES IS WHO PAYS FOR IT. INSTEAD OF THE PRONL PAYING FOR IT, THE REST OF US -- PROJECT PAYING FOR IT, THE REST OF US DO BECAUSE THOSE SERVICES HAVE TO BE DONE. AND THEY ARE LISTED SPECIFICALLY. THIS IS REAL MONEY. THESE SERVICES ARE BEING PERFORMED, AND THE CITY DEPARTMENTS ARE -- ARE GOING TO BE UNDER STRESS, AS WE LEARNED AT AUDIT AND FINANCE YESTERDAY. THIS IS NOT A GOOD TIME TO BE KEEPING MONEY OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND. THIS IS A GOOD TIME TO BE THINKING ABOUT HOW WE CAN GET MORE IN. THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX RESULTS ARE NOT, AS WE'VE LEARNED, ENTITLEMENTS, THEY ARE INFORMATION FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. WE NEED TO KNOW HOW MUCH WE MIGHT BE EXPOSING THE CITY FOR IN AVOIDING REVENUE IF WE DO THIS 1.224 MILLION BEFORE WE CONSIDER IT BECAUSE IT COULD BE THAT IT WILL BE PERCEIVED BY EVERY OTHER PROJECT THAT HAS STARTED UP SINCE THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX MIGHT THINK THEY SHOULD -- THEY HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS EARLY ON TOO AND WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THESE BENEFITS. AND IT'S JUST -- IT'S A TOUGH TIME FOR THAT BECAUSE OF WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE ECONOMY AND WITH -- WITH THE INCOME SHORTAGES THAT MAY OCCUR. TIMES HAVE CHANGED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE I CALL FOR A MOTION ON ITEM 23?

>>WYNN: MAYOR? I WANT TO THANK MR. LIBRACH FOR DOING A GOOD JOB OF CLARIFYING HOW IN FACT THIS ISN'T RETROACTIVE. THAT CAR AMERICA DID STEP FORWARD EARLY IN THEIR PROCESS, IN FACT CHANGED DESIGN ELEMENTS OF THEIR BUILDING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE PROGRAM. THE PROGRAM THEN THEREFORE OF COURSE BEING DESIGNED TO CREATE THESE CHANGES THAT WE WANT FROM A QUALITY STANDPOINT. SO THANKS FOR HELPING MAKE THAT CLEAR BECAUSE IT WAS -- IT WAS INTERESTING TO SEE HOW FAR ALONG THEY'VE COME. SO THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. MAYOR, I MOVE APPROVAL OF ITEM 23.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 23. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>>THOMAS: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.

>>THOMAS: JUST ONE CLARITY ON THE MONEY, THE SMART GROWTH ACTUALLY WHERE WOULD THE MONEY BE COMING FROM?

>> THE MONEY IS ALL IN THE FORM OF FEE WAIVERS SO THAT THEY WILL NOT BE PAYING THE CITY A SERIES OF FEES THAT THEY WOULD OTHERWISE BE PAYING TO THE CITY. SO IT'S NOT MONEY THAT'S TAKEN OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND OR ANY OF THE COFFERS OF THE CITY, IT'S MONEY THAT WE'RE FOREGOING.

>>THOMAS: THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. I JUST WANTED CLARITY.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR, ABOUT THOSE SERVICES --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: -- ARE THOSE SERVICES GOING TO BE PERFORMED? THE ONES THAT -- THAT WILL NOT BE PAID FOR IF WE DO THESE WAIVERS. WILL THOSE SERVICES BE IN FACT DONE?

>> WELL, IN FACT I GUESS I'M NOT QUITE SURE TO WHAT DEGREE THERE STILL ARE SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED, BUT MOST OF THEM, AS YOU ARE ALL WELL AWARE, THE BUILDING IS FAIRLY WELL COMPLETE. SO MOST OF THE INSPECTION AND FEE PAYMENT REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH BUILDINGS SUCH AS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE AND THE WORK HAS BEEN DONE. I SUSPECT THAT THERE STILL ARE SOME REMAINING THINGS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE DONE, BUT FOR THE MOST PART THEY ARE COMPLETE.

>>GRIFFITH: SO IF THE DEVELOPMENT, THE PROJECT DOES NOT PAY FOR THOSE SERVICES, WHO DOES?

>>GARZA: IN EFFECT, COUNCILMEMBER, THE WAY WE COLLECT FEES FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IS THE DOLLARS THAT WE'VE ALWAYS COLLECTED HAVE BEEN IN EXCESS OF THE EXPENSES WE HAVE IN THOSE DEPARTMENTS. AND IN FACT WHEN WE STARTED THE SMART GROWTH PROGRAM IT WAS TO TRY TO DIRECT GROWTH WHERE AND HOW WE WANTED IT TO HAPPEN. AND THIS IS PART OF A PROGRAM THE COUNCIL BEGAN IN 1997 AND HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL AND ONE THAT I THINK HAS PAID A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF BENEFIT TO THE CITY. THOSE DOLLARS ARE THERE WITHIN THAT FUND. WE'VE DONE THE INSPECTIONS. ANY ADDITIONAL INSPECTIONS THAT NEED TO BE DONE, WE CERTAINLY HAVE THOSE FUNDED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT. AND IT OUGHT NOT TO CAUSE US ANY UNDUE STRESS WITH RESPECT FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING. THE -- I THINK A LOT OF FOLKS TEND TO FORGET THAT THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX WAS DESIGNED TO STEER GROWTH WHERE WE WANTED IT. POLICY OF THE CITY SINCE 1979 HAS BEEN TO STEER GROWTH INTO THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND AWAY FROM THE EDWARDS AQUIFER AND THE HIGHLAND LAKES ZONE. THIS POLICY WAS WIDELY IGNORED BY CITY COUNCILLS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. AND I THINK THE COUNCIL PREVIOUS TO THIS ONE THAT SEVERAL OF US SERVED ON MADE MORE PROGRESS ON CARRYING OUT THAT AUSTIN TOMORROW PLAN, AS IT WAS CALLED, THAN ANY COUNCIL EVER. AND THIS WAS A KEY PART OF IT. AND WE CAN SEE THE FRUITS OF IT DOWNTOWN. ALL THOSE BUILDINGS THAT ARE BEING BUILT DOWNTOWN COULD VERY WELL HAVE GONE OVER THE EDWARDS AQUIFER WHERE FOR MANY YEARS OUR CITIZENS HAVE CALLED FOR US TO KEEP THE GROWTH SPARSE. AND ONE OF THE BEST WAYS WE WERE ABLE TO DO THAT IS THROUGH THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX. IT'S, YOU KNOW, POLITICS IS REALLY AN AMAZING THING, ESPECIALLY IN AUSTIN. BUT NOW WHEN WE SEE THE BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN, WE HAVE SOME LANES AND STREETS BLOCKED OFF, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S ALMOST NO ONE THAT WHEN THEY SEE ALL THAT GOES, WOW, I SURE AM GLAD THOSE BUILDINGS AREN'T OUT OVER THE AQUIFER. THEY INSTEAD SAY, WELL, THERE'S A BLOCKED STREET AND THERE'S TOO MUCH GROWTH GOING ON DOWNTOWN. BUT THIS IS SUCCESSFULLY A SUCCESSFUL POLICY, SOME THINK EVEN BEEN TOO SUCCESSFUL. AND AS COUNCILMEMBER WYNN POINTED OUT MR. LIBRACH DID A GOOD JOB SHOWING HOW THIS IS NOT A RETROACTIVE EXPENSE, AND I THINK THIS IS A VERY CCESSFUL POLICY, AND WHEN WE PUT A POLICY IN PLACE, THEN WE SHOULD HAVE THE GOOD FAITH TO FOLLOW IT. AND IF WE DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE IT ANYMORE, THEN WE SHOULD TRY TO CHANGE THE POLICY, NOT JUST FAIL TO IMPLEMENT THE POLICY THAT WE'VE OFFERED TO PEOPLE.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR, THAT'S --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HANG ON. I'LL ADD ONE THING SO YOU CAN REBUTT EVERYTHING AT ONE TIME. ONE OTHER PART OF THAT WAS IT WAS YES, IN FACT, TO STEER GROWTH INTO THE AREA WE WANTED SO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE THAT GROWTH WHERE YOU WANT IT AND CURRENT TAXPAYERS WOULD BENEFIT. BUT THERE WAS ANOTHER ASPECT OF THAT AND THAT IS HOW IT WAS DONE. AND SO THAT THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX, PERHAPS SOME HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT IS IN THE SMART GROWTH MATRIX, WHAT IT HAS IN THAT MATRIX R IT HAS A NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT TALK ABOUT BETTER DESIGN SO THAT WHAT WE ARE IN FACT AS A CITY DOING IS ACHIEVING OTHER GOALS THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO SEE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT BUILDING. AND THIS AMOUNT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS -- THAT'S A BIG PART OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THEY WENT THROUGH A PROCESS WITH OUR STAFF WHERE THEY DECIDED TO DO CERTAIN THINGS THAT THEY OTHERWISE WERE NOT GOING TO DO, BUT WE GET THE BENEFIT AS CITIZENS OF THAT CHANGE IN PLANNING. COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: YES, THANK YOU. I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THE -- THE INCOME, THE REVENUE THAT IS NOT GOING TO COME IN AS A RESULT OF THIS ACTIVITY WOULD, A, KEEP -- KEEP TAXES IN LINE, AND ALSO WOULD GO TO PAY FOR FIRE, POLICE, E.M.S., PARKS, LIBRARIES, PUBLIC HEALTH BEING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, PLANNING, AND FROM WHAT WE HEARD AT AUDIT AND FINANCE COMMITTEE, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE THINKING ABOUT MUCH MORE SERIOUSLY AND PROTECT THOSE INCOME SOURCES, THOSE REVENUE SOURCES AND LOOK AT SOME PAINFUL THINGS THAT MIGHT HAVE TO HAPPEN. AND IF WE KEEP DOING THIS, WE ARE -- THE PAIN IS GOING TO BE WORSE THAN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN OTHERWISE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 23 AAYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES WITH COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH BEING SHOWN AS VOTING NO. LET US GO TO ITEM 19. COUNCIL, BEFORE WE TAKE UP ITEM 19, LET ME MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT AT LEAST ITEM NO. 1. ON ITEM NO. 19. ITEM NO. 1 DEALS WITH THE FUNDING OF A PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND UTILITY RELOCATION ON LOOP 1 NORTH. AS COUNCIL IS AWARE, AND PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO SIT ON THE CAMPO POLICY COMMITTEE KNOWS THAT THERE IS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE ADDRESS AN HOV STUDY THAT WAS DONE FOR -- OR IS BEING DONE FOR U.S. 183 AND LOOP 1 BY THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE SAID AND OTHERS HAVE SAID ON THIS COUNCIL ABOUT HOW TO DEAL WITH THAT IS THAT WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A -- WHAT I GUESS I WOULD CALL AND I'M NOT SURE THIS IS A GOOD CHOICE OF WORDS, BUT THE WAY I THINK OF IT IS A BETTER SYSTEMS ANALYSIS OR SYSTEMS APPROACH OR SYSTEMS THINKING TO HOW WE DEAL WITH THE COMPLEX PROBLEM OF MEETING OUR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME NOT DESTROYING OR DOING DAMAGE TO ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS AS PART OF THAT. I HAVE -- HAD WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE SOME PRODUCTIVE CONTACT WITH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT DO THAT. WE ARE SCHEDULED TO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS ALONG THOSE LINES. AND THIS COUNCIL HAS PREVIOUSLY VOTED WITH REGARD TO LOOP 1 NORTH -- HAS PREVIOUSLY VOTED A -- ON A MINUTE ORDER DEMONSTRATING AND REVEALING CONCERN ABOUT THIS ADDITIONAL -- AND MAKING -- REVEALING WE ARE INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE WE ADDRESS TRANSPORTATION NEEDS AT THE NORTHERN PART. WHAT I WOULD NOT WANT US TO DO AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE ARE TRYING TO ENGAGE IN PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW WE DO A SYSTEMS ANALYSIS SO THAT WE DON'T -- IN AN EFFORT TO MEET ALL OUR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, DO UNDO DAMAGE TO THE CENTRAL AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WHAT WE DO IS WE WAIT TO SEE HOW THAT PLAYS OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE SO THAT WE DON'T VOTE TO DO SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY EX SASER BATES SOMETHING ELSE WE'RE TRYING TO FIX. SO WHAT MY RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO BE AT LEAST WITH REGARD TO NO. 1 WOULD BE THAT WE POSTPONE ACTION ON NO. 1 UNTIL JUNE 7TH, 2001, TO SEE WHERE WE ARE GOING IN TERMS OF TRYING TO COME UP WITH A SYSTEMS ANALYSIS OR SYSTEMS APPROACH OR SYSTEMS THINKING. I HAVE ACTUALLY TALKED PREVIOUSLY ABOUT AN APPROACH THAT'S WORKED IN OTHER CITIES THAT DOES A BETTER JOB OF INVOLVING THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LIVE NEAR THAT SORT OF TRANSPORTATION PROPOSAL, AND WE JUST NEED TO -- I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE A LITTLE FURTHER ON THAT SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT'S WHAT WE DO ON ITEM NO. 1. IS THERE FURTHER COMMENT ON NO. 19 BEFORE I CALL FOR A MOTION? LET ME ASK ABOUT ITEM NO. 2 THEN BECAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT ITEM 2. MR. LIBRACH, WOULD YOU ADDRESS -- ITEM 2 IS POSTED AS APPROPRIATING $4.55 MILLION TO A NEW ACCOUNT ENTITLED LAMAR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE EXTENSION TO PROVIDE AN EXTENSION OF THE BRIDGE OVER CESAR CHAVEZ STREET AND INTO THE SEAHOLM AREA. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THAT MIGHT BE DEALT WITH ON A PHASED BASIS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT?

>> I CERTAINLY WILL, MAYOR. THE -- THERE ARE -- HAS BEEN THREE PHASES IN MIND FOR THE LAMAR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE FROM ITS INCEPTION. PHASE 1, AS YOU ALL ARE AWARE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND ABOUT TO BE COMPLETED. PHASE 2, AS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED, WOULD TAKE THE BRIDGE ACROSS CESAR CHAVEZ AND BRING IT DOWN TO GRADE. AT SOME POINT PARALLELLING LAMAR BOULEVARD, BUT POSSIBLY BUT NOT NECESSARILY ACROSS SANTA MARADA, SORT OF THE ACCESS ROAD FROM LAMAR TO CESAR CHAVEZ. PHASE 3 WOULD TAKE THE BRIDGE WHICH WOULD THEN BE A TRAIL UP UNDER THIRD STREET AND UNDER THE RAILROAD TRACKS TO A POINT NEAR FIFTH STREET. AND THOSE WERE THE THREE PHASES THAT WERE OUTLINED FOR THE PROJECT. I DON'T HAVE THE DOLLAR VALUES RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I THINK THE PHASE 1 WAS ROUGHLY AROUND 8 MILLION. PHASE 2.2.7. AND PHASE 3 ABOUT 2.7. WHAT WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT IS A RESULT OF THE WORK ON THE SEAHOLM MASTER PLAN IN WORKING WITH ROMA AND THE STAFF IS A POSSIBILITY OF SLIGHTLY CHANGING PHASE 2 SO THAT IT GETS TO GRADE SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, AND SO WE DO NOT HAVE AN EXTENDED BRIDGE ESSENTIALLY 1,000 FEET IN THE AIR FROM WHERE IT IS NOW TO SOME POINT WHERE IT MEETS LAMAR. WE ARE WORKING ON THAT. IT INVOLVES A DECISION THAT YOU ARE YET TO MAKE ABOUT THE SEAHOLM MASTER PLAN, IT INVOLVES A DECISION ABOUT THE POTENTIAL MOVEMENT OF SANTA MARADA AND WORKING WITH L.C.I.. IT INVOLVES A POSSIBILITY OF A BRIDGE FOR SANTA MAZARA OR A SLIGHT -- TO ACCOMMODATE THE PEDESTRIANS AND THE BICYCLISTS THROUGH AND AROUND SANTA MARADA. BUT WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE AT THIS POINT THAT WE THINK IS -- FOR PHASE 2 WE THINK WILL ACCOMMODATE THE DESIGN CHANGES THAT WE ARE ANTICIPATING, AND WE ARE HOPING ALSO TO SUBMIT THIS AS PHASE 2 AND PHASE 3 TOGETHER AS A SINGLE PHASE, IF YOU WILL, TO TXDOT FOR T 21 FUNDING TO POSSIBLY GET THE PHASE 3 FUNDING FUNDED TO US BY THE T 21 MONEY. SO THAT'S WHERE IT IS. THAT'S AS WE HAVE UNDERSTOOD IT TO DATE AND ARE WORKING WITH IT, AND THERE IS AT THIS POINT SOME WORKING GOING ON WITH RESPECT TO PHASE 2 TO MODIFY IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. WITH REGARD TO THE PHASE 2 PART, WHAT THAT WOULD DO IS WE COULD ALLOCATE MONEY THAT WOULD NOW ALLOW US TO CROSS CESAR CHAVEZ AND GET TO GRADE.

>> CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND THAT WOULD BE AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, AND MAYBE WE NEED TO GET EXACT NUMBERS, BUT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF A MILLION DOLLARS.

>> WELL, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT NUMBER. I KNOW THAT THERE IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTED THIS MORNING REGARDING THAT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT WOULD TAKE SOME -- IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'VE LOOKED AT SO FAR, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO TO FOUR MILLION PERHAPS TO GET TO GREAT AND TO -- GRADE AND BUILD THE REMAINING REQUIRED FOR PHASE 2. I DON'T THINK I'VE SEEN ANY CALCULATION ABOUT A MILLION TO GET TO GRADE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU COULD DO WITH A MILLION DOLLARS IS GET JUST PAST CESAR CHAVEZ AND BE THERE AT GRADE AT SANTA MARADA, AND THAT'S NOT A $4 MILLION DEAL.

>> WELL, I THINK THAT'S A PROPOSAL I'VE SEEN THAT WAS HANDED OUT THIS MORNING. I DON'T KNOW THAT I AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT MILLION DOLLAR FIGURE REALLY COMES FROM. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S ANYTHING THAT I'VE SEEN FROM MY STAFF.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: IT CAME FROM JANNA MCCAN AND SO DID D, THE 2.7 MILLION, THE SAME SOURCE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT. OH, I SEE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.

>>GARZA: SO SHE SAID WE COULD GET TO SANTA MARADA AND CROSS AT GRADE AND THAT LEAVES 3.4 MILLION TO REALLOCATE TO OTHER PROJECTS?

>>WYNN: MAYOR, MR. MANAGER, I DON'T THINK GETTING TO GRADE -- HAVING A GRADE CROSSING AT SANTA MARADA IS ACCEPTABLE. I BELIEVE WHAT JANNA AND THE NEW DESIGN CONTEMPLATES IS THAT FOR A MILLION DOLLARS OR SO WE COULD SPECK LA ACTIVELY BRIDGE SEERZ CHAVEZ. SANTA MARADA IS PLANNED TO BE SLEELGTS RELOCATED BUT RECON STUKTD AS PART OF THE NEW LIC/LBJ SAND BEACH DEVELOPMENT AND THE SEAHOLM. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE DEVELOPER IS PREPARED TO SPEND MOST OF THOSE DOLLARS AS PART OF THAT PROJECT AND SO I THINK WE CAN'T LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT ONE OF OUR -- I THINK OUR GOAL HERE HAS TO BE TO GET PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS NORTH OF SANTA MARADA. SO I WOULDN'T BE COMFORTABLE SAYING LET'S PUT A MILLION DOLLARS AND GET TO GRADE AND HAVE A GRADE CROSSING THERE. IT NEEDS TO BE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE RAISING, THE BRIDGING AND THE REDEVELOPMENT OF SANTA MARADA TO THE EXTENT THAT THE TIMING OF THAT IS SUCH THAT WE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT AND WE THEN ESSENTIALLY ONLY HAVE TO ALLOCATE A MILLION DOLLARS BECAUSE WE ACCOMPLISH THAT, THEN I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SUPPORT THAT, AND I LOVE THE IDEA, FRANKLY, OF HAVING A LESS EXPENSIVE SOLUTION AND USING THOSE FUNDS FOR SOME OTHER PRIORITIES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE JUST SAID? HERE'S WHAT I THINK I HEARD IS THAT WHAT YOU COULD KEEP OUR EYE ON THE LONGTERM GOAL IS STEP 1. AND THE LONGTERM GOAL IS TO GET US UP TO FIFTH STREET.

>>WYNN: RIGHT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: BUT STEP 2, AT LEAST IN THE ANALYSIS I HEAR, IS GO AHEAD AND GET US ACROSS CESAR CHAVEZ, AND THEN ANALYZE, BASED UPON CONSTRUCTION THAT'S GOING TO OCCUR WITH SANTA MARADA, PART OF THE SAND BEACH SETTLEMENT, THAT SORT OF THING, HOW WE CAN THEN GET FURTHER INCLUDING MAYBE GOING FOR T 21 DOLLARS, THAT SORT OF THING. BUT GO AHEAD AND GET US ACROSS CESAR CHAVEZ AND TAKE REMAINING DOLLARS AND MAYBE REALLOCATE THEM FOR OTHER SCHOOL SAFETY PROJECTS, OTHER SIDEWALK PROJECTS IN THE CITY AT THE SAME TIME. KEEP IT BASICALLY IN LINE WITH A PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE TYPE OF PROJECT, BUT GO AHEAD AND ALLOCATE THAT AT THIS POINT.

>>WYNN: YES, EXCEPT I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY. GETTING ACROSS CESAR CHAVEZ BUT ALSO NORTH OF SANTA MARADA, WHETHER IN ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION WHICH I BELIEVE WILL BE A WASTE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT WILL BE RECONSTRUCTED IN A MODERATE AMOUNT OF TIME, SO I MEAN IT SEEMS TO ME THE PHASES NEED TO BE TO GET PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLISTS NORTH OF SANTA MARADA WHEREVER AND WHATEVER THAT IS AND THEN A FURTHER PHASE CAN BE THEN GOING FROM JUST NORTH OF THERE TO FIFTH STREET.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HOW WOULD -- DO YOU HAVE A CONCEPT OF HOW THAT WOULD BREAK DOWN IN TERMS OF WHAT WE MIGHT VOTE TODAY IN NUMBERS? BECAUSE I AGREE, THAT MAKES SENSE AS A PHASING. GRADE AT CESAR CHAVEZ, THEN DO SOMETHING WITH REGARD TO EITHER ABOVE OR BELOW SANTA MARADA BASED ON DIFFERENT THINGS I'VE HEARD AND THEN GET US ACROSS FIFTH. BUT BECAUSE OF THE UPCOMING ACTIVITY WITH SANTA MARADA AND THAT SORE OF THING, THEY'VE MADE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT FLYING THROUGH THE AIR OR GOING UNDERGROUND IN THAT REGARD, HOW COULD WE -- WHAT WOULD BE YOUR THOUGHT AND RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO THE ALLOCATION OF MONEY TODAY AND GOING FORWARD TO TRY TO FIND OTHER MONEY AT ANOTHER POINT?

>>WYNN: ALL I CAN SAY IS WE'RE BEING TOLD ON A PRELIMINARY BASIS, SHE HAS DONE A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS FOR US, AND IF SANTA MARADA WAS BEING RECONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THE SEAHOLM, SAND BEACH REDEVELOPMENT, THEN IT WOULD ONLY COST THE CITY ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS TO THEN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION AND GET NORTH OF SANTA MARADA.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND THAT'S UNDERSTAND N.A.D. TO THE MILLION TO GET TO CESAR CHAVEZ?

>> CAN I TRY? FIRST WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION WITH PRIMARILY THE DESIGN THAT WAS PROPOSED AND THE REDESIGN HAS TO DO WITH ENHANCEMENT OF SEAHOLM. HOWEVER, WE'VE HAD TO BRING IN SOME OTHER CONSTITUENTS WHO ARE PART OF THE OTHER DESIGN ON THE LAMAR BRIDGE. THAT INCLUDED THE ADAPT AND THE HANDICAPPED COMMUNITY. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE WERE NOT PROPOSING AT GRADE AT SANTA MADARA IS THEIR FEE WITH THE TRAFFIC TURNING OFF OF LAMAR DURING RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC, THAT THERE WOULD BE DIFFICULTY FOR THOSE WHO ARE WHEELCHAIR TO BE ABLE TO CROSS. SO THE RESADDAM HUSSEIN WE CAME UP WITH WHICH I THOUGHT WE HAD BASICALLY BUY IN WAS IN FACT TO -- INSTEAD OF HAVING THE BRIDGE GO ACROSS ALL THE WAY TO FIFTH STREET, WE TAKE THE BRIDGE AND BRING IT DOWN AND AROUND AND KEEP THE 5% TILT I BELIEVE YOU HAVE TO HAVE TO BRING IT AROUND TO GRADE. AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS CREATE WHAT THEY CONSIDER AN EVEN VISIONARY TUNNEL THAT WOULD COME ACROSS AND TUNNEL UNDER. THE MONEY YOU HAVE PROPOSED BY THE CAPITAL METRO MONEY WAS OUR ORIGINAL BUDGET FOR THE DESIGN WAS 2.7 MILLION. TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT AND ACCOMPLISH WHAT YOU NEED TO DO WITH THE LIC AND THE OTHER DESIGN OF THE BUILDING SO IT DOESN'T AFFECT THAT BUILDING, WE WERE ABLE TO GET -- THIS IS ALSO A PART OF THE PROJECT YOU WILL SEE COMING UP ON THE 24TH AS WELL, WAS TO GET A GRANT OF 2 MILLION TO MATCH THE 4.5 MILLION. IT IS AN INCREASE IN DESIGN ALONG WHAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY PLANNED OF 2.7 MILLION WITH THAT EXTENSION ALL THE WAY TO FIFTH STREET. THE INCREASE, THE 4.5, WILL ACCOMMODATE THE HANDICAPPED COMMUNITY, THE PEDESTRIAN COMMUNITY, AS WELL AS HELP WITH THE FRONTAGE ON THE SEAHOLM ENTRANCE. AND IT IS CLEAR, IT IS TRUE THE LIC IS INTERESTED IN ASSISTING US WITH THE REALIGNMENT OF SANTA MARADA. IN ANY EXAMPLES WE HAVE TO DO THE REALIGNMENT OF THAT TO MAKE IT WORK T ONLY DESIGN YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL DESIGN ON LAMAR, WHICH WAS TO TAKE IT AS A BRIDGE ALL THE WAY ACROSS TO FIFTH STREET.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO HELP ME ON NUMBERS.

>> ON NUMBERS, WHAT WE BASICALLY WERE LOOKING AT, YOUR ORIGINAL DESIGN WAS 2.7 MILLION. TO DO THE REDESIGN, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE -- A TUNNEL WHICH I BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE DESIGN IN FRONT OF YOU, OR THE AIDES WERE BRIEFED ON YESTERDAY, TO INCLUDE A TUNNEL-LIKE DESIGN THAT COMES AROUND AND GOES OVER SANTA MARADA. IT WAS AN ADDITIONAL 2.7 MILLION DOLLARS TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. AND A PORTION THAT HAVE MONEY WAS FROM CAPITAL METRO AND THE OTHER WAS TO BE MATCHED AS A PART OF OUR ICE TEE GRANT. THAT IS ONE OF THE PROJECTS THAT SCORED VERY HIGH ON THAT PROFESSIONAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME SEE IF I'M EVEN COMING CLOSE. ONE MILLION, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, GETS US TO GRADE AT CESAR CHAVEZ.

>>WYNN: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THEN 2.7, SOME OF WHICH IS CITY, SOME OF WHICH IS GRANT MONEY, GETS US FROM SOUTH OF THE RAILROAD -- WELL, GETS US ACROSS SANTA MARADA? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE TELLING US?

>> LET ME TRY THIS WAY. FROM THE SWING OVER CESAR CHAVEZ ACROSS THROUGH CROSSING SANTA MARADA TO GET BOTH OF THOSE IT COSTS YOU AN ADDITIONAL $2.7 MILLION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HOW MUCH OF THAT IS CITY MONEY?

>> 2.7 IS TOTAL CITY, CAPITAL METRO MONEY. THE TOTAL PROJECT IS $6.5 MILLION. 4.5 CAPITAL METRO DOLLARS, AND 2.7 WOULD BE ICE TEA MONEY. 2.0, I'M SORRY, WOULD BE THE FEDERAL DOLLARS TO MATCH THE PROJECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING IS OUT OF THE 4.55 THAT IS CURRENTLY LISTED IN ITEM NO. 2 OF ITEM NO. 19 IS THAT YOU SUBTRACT 2.7 OUT OF THAT.

>> WHICH IS CITY ALREADY HAS AVAILABLE T TOTAL PROJECT, AND I THINK WHAT IS MS. LEADING HERE, THE TOTAL PROJECT IS NOT 4.55. THE TOTAL PROJECT IS 6.5 MILLION DOLLARS. OF WHICH 2.0 OF THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE A PART OF THE ICE TEA GRANT YOU WILL SEE COME BEFORE COUNCIL AT THE END OF THE MONTH.

>>GARZA: THE REAL QUESTION IS OUT OF THE 4.5 WHAT DO YOU NEED?

>> WE NEED ALL OF IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT'S DIFFERENT. WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS RECOMMEND WE PULL ITEM 2 OUT OF ITEM NO. 19 UNTIL WE CAN GET AN ANSWER THAT MAKES MAYBE SENSE TO AT LEAST ONE OTHER PERSON IN THE ROOM. I'LL TAKE A MOTION ON ITEM NO. 19, ITEMS 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 AND 7, WITH ITEM 1 BEING A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JUNE 7TH. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION MADE BY MAYOR PRO TEM. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. IS THERE DISCUSSION?

>>THOMAS: YES, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME SAY ONE THING BEFORE I CALL ON YOU. FOR THOSE WHO MAY HAVE SIGNED UP ON 19, 20, 21 AND 22, WE HAVE ALREADY HELD A PUBLIC HEARING SO WE WILL NOT BE CALLING ON SPEAKERS ON THESE ITEMS. COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. I'M SORRY TO HAVE INTERRUPTED YOU.

>>THOMAS: NO PROBLEM. SO EVERYBODY HAS CLARITY ON THE NUMBERS WE JUST WENT DOWN THAT WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE'RE NOT -- ON THE NUMBERS THAT WITH REGARD TO THE LAMAR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, I DON'T THINK THERE IS CLARITY. I THINK THERE'S MORE CONFUSION NOW THAN BEFORE. SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS IF WE GET CLARITY ON THAT I WILL BRING THAT PART OF THE ITEM BACK UP AT ANOTHER POINT DURING THE COURSE OF THE DAY.

>>THOMAS: I GOT THAT. WHAT ARE THE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE VOTING ON? 3, 4, 5 --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ON 3 IT WOULD BE 1.5 MILLION TO A NEW CONTRACT ENTITLED TRAFFIC SIGNALS FUND LG. 4, 15.8 MILLION LOYOLA LANE FOR PHASE 2 AND 3. 5, APPROPRIATING 3 MILLION TO A NEW ACCOUNT ENTITLED WILL YUN CON UNANIMOUS UNYUCK CREEK BRIDGE TO DIXIE DRIVE, 6, 1 MILLION TO COMPLETE THE FUNDING REQUIREMENTS FOR DITTMAR ROAD, AND 7, TRANSFERRING $3,442,970 FROM THE BUILD GREATER AUSTIN TO A NEW ACCOUNT CALLED BUILD GREATER AUSTIN AND APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL 2,557,030 TO THIS ACCOUNT FOR A TOTAL ROPEATION OF 6 MILLION.

>>THOMAS: I JUST NEEDED A LIST WHERE THE 14 DIFFERENT TRAFFIC SIGNALS, THE LOCATION OF THEM. I CAN GET THAT FROM STAFF.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DID YOU HEAR THAT, MR. LIBRACH?

>> I'M SORRY, NO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHERE ARE THE 14 SIGNALS ON ITEM 3 OF 19? COUNCIL, WHILE HE'S WORKING ON THAT, ON ITEM NO. 20 AND ITEM 22, I'M GOING TO TAKE THOSE UP TOGETHER AND THE MOTION WILL BE TO POSTPONE UNTIL JUNE 7TH BECAUSE THOSE ITEMS ARE RELATED TO ITEM 1 OF ITEM NO. 19.

>> I HAVE THAT LIST. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO READ IT?

>>THOMAS: I JUST NEED A COPY OF IT.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T YOU READ IT SO PEOPLE WILL HEAR IT. LAKE LINE, RIDGELINE IS ONE. PARMER SPECTRUM, TWO. GREAT HILLS SPECTRUM THREE. LAMAR, FAIRFIELD FOUR. LOYOLA, JOHNNY MORRIS FIVE. DOUGLAS, OLTORF SIX. FRANKLIN MLK SEVEN. CROSS PARK EXCHANGE EIGHT. LAMAR, LAMAR SQUARE IS NINE. RUNDBERG, MIDDLE FISKVILLE IS 10. RUNDBERG, METRIC. CONGRESS, SLAUGHTER. AND THE 14TH ONE IS STILL TO BE DETERMINED. WHAT THAT MEANS IS WE HAVE COMPLETED THE ANALYSIS FOR THOSE AND THOSE ARE IN ADDITION TO THE 12 THAT ARE IN OUR BUDGET THIS YEAR THAT WE'RE ALSO DOING.

>>THOMAS: THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER, THEN COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, THE -- I WAS WONDERING, COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, DID YOU GET YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWER ODD LOYOLA LANE?

>>THOMAS: YEAH, I GOT THAT ANSWERED.

>>SLUSHER: LOOKS TO ME LIKE THERE'S A NUMBER THAT WERE NEVER ANSWERED AT ALL. AND ALSO I KNOW OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN THAT DISTRICT HAS RAISED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT LOYOLA LANE THAN I HAD SOME QUESTIONS THAT HADN'T BEEN ANSWERED YET. SO I WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER THEM. BUT I WOULD CONSIDER PULLING THAT FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION UNTIL ALL THE QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED. BUT MR. LIBRACH, LET ME GO THROUGH MINE ANYWAY THAT YOU ALL WEREN'T ABLE TO ANSWER. IT SAYS STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE COUNCIL MEETING TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. I NORMALLY LIKE TO GET IT IN WRITING. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND FROM THE MEMO WE GOT HOW WE GOT FROM THE 3.6 MILLION ON JANUARY 27TH TO THE 16.6 MILLION NOW NECESSARY TO COMPLETE PHASE 1. YOU DID A -- THERE'S A CHRONOLOGY ON THAT, BUT IT WASN'T CLEAR TO ME AND I WAS REALLY HOPING TO GET THAT BEFORE THE MEETING. SO IT'S SORT OF DIFFICULT FOR ME TO VOTE ON IT WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION.

>> WELL, THE 16.6 I THINK IS THE COMBINATION OF PHASE 1 AND PHASE 3. AND WHAT ORIGINALLY HAPPENED I THINK IS THAT PHASE 1 WAS INTEPDED TO COVER THE ENTIRE LENGTH THAT NOW PHASE 1 AND PHASE 3 COVER. BUT PHASE 3 WAS SEPARATED OUT BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE FLOOD PROBLEMS ALONG THAT STRETCH. AND REQUIRED SOME FURTHER ANALYSIS, FURTHER DESIGN AND WE NEED TO DO COMBINE IT WITH A -- THE ISSUE OF A LEVY FOR THAT SPRING BROOK AREA. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS -- THAT'S THE KEY REASON WHY IT GREW IN COST FROM THE ORIGINAL 6.6.

>>SLUSHER: BECAUSE OF THE FLOODPLAIN?

>> FLOODPLAIN WAS A PORTION OF THAT COST, YES.

>>SLUSHER: UH-HUH. BUT I MEAN WE KNEW -- THE CITY KNEW IT WAS IN A FLOODPLAIN WHEN THE PROJECT BEGAN, DIDN'T THEY?

>> WE KNEW -- I THINK WE KNEW IT WAS IN THE FLOODPLAIN WHEN THE PROJECT BEGAN BACK IN THE EARLY 80'S. AND I THINK IT WASN'T UNTIL MUCH MORE RECENTLY THAT WE REALLY, FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT, UNDERSTOOD THE MAGNITUDE OF THE FLOODING PROBLEM AND THAT -- THE WAY IN WHICH IT WAS GOING TO NEED TO BE RESOLVED WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY THERE AS WELL. DECIDING WHETHER TO DO A LEVY OR SOME OTHER PARTICULAR WAY OF SOLVE THANKING PROBLEM.

>>SLUSHER: HOW MUCH -- WHEN IT WENT FROM -- IT WENT FROM A LEVEE TO A -- THE CHANGE IN THE FLOOD CONTROL, TALK TO ME ABOUT THAT.

>> THE ADDITIONAL COST THAT I THINK COULD BE ATTRIBUTED TO FLOOD CONTROL OUT OF THE TOTAL --.

>>SLUSHER: AND THEN ALSO THE CHANGE IN THE METHOD, INCREMENT INCREASE THERE.

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT -- WE MAY HAVE TO ASK SOMEONE ELSE ABOUT THE CHANGE IN THE METHOD. BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE AMOUNT THAT IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE FLOOD WALL AND THE LEVEE AND THOSE KINDS OF ISSUES, THE ACCESS ROAD AND ITEMS RELATED TO THE WALL WAS ABOUT FIVE AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS.

>>SLUSHER: JUST IN THE CHANGE FROM WHAT THE CITY HAD ORIGINALLY PROPOSED?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>SLUSHER: AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THAT'S 5.8 OF IT. OKAY. IT'S JUST HARD FOR ME TO ADD THESE ALL UP ON THE DAIS. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ELSE IS HAVING A SIMILAR CONCERN OR NOT. I YIELD THE FLOOR TO COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.

>>THOMAS: LED ME GIVE ME QUESTION AND MAYBE HE CAN ANSWER IT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.

>>THOMAS: THANK YOU. IS THE 15 MILLION OF LOYOLA LANE PREDOMINANTLY TRANSPORTATION -- TRANSPORTATION RELATED AS VOTERS APPROVED IT IN THE PAST?

>> IF YOU HAVE IT, THERE SHOULD BE A MEMO FROM ME TO THE COUNCIL DATED APRIL 17TH IN YOUR PACKET THAT BEGINS I THINK TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I THINK THAT THE AMOUNT THAT IS FLOOD RELATED, AS I INDICATED HERE, IS ABOUT FIVE NATURAL MILLION, WHICH IS ABOUT 19.5% OF THE TOTAL PROJECT. THE TOTAL PROJECT AT THIS POINT IS 28.2 MILLION. FIVE AND A HALF I THINK WOULD BE CALLED FLOOD RELATED. ALTHOUGH THE WHOLE -- ALL OF OUR PROJECTS, ALL OF OUR ROAD PROJECTS ARE DRAINAGE RELATED IN THE SENSE THAT THEY ALL HAVE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS AND ALL NEED -- AND SOME OF THE FUNDS THAT GO TO ANY PROJECT, ANY ROAD PROJECT IS DRAINAGE RELATED. BUT THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY I THINK WE COULD SAY THAT THE ISSUES OF THE FLOOD WALL IS ABOUT 19.5% OF THAT TOTAL COST.

>>GARZA: I COULD ELABORATE. I THINK THOSE ARE ISSUES WE HAVE DEALT WITH IN TERMS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. I RECALL THAT THERE WAS A PROJECT AT BEN WHITE WHERE THE STATE DID NOT DO ADEQUATE -- NOT FLOOD, BUT DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, AND THE CITY HAD TO OUT OF ITS OWN MONEY PUT MONEY INTO THAT PROJECT TO TAKE CARE THAT HAVE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS. DRAINAGE IS PART AND PARCEL OF ANY ROADWAY PROJECT. WHEN YOU BUILD A ROAD, HAVE YOU TO TAKE CARE OF THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. UNFORTUNATELY WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROJECT THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM IS 19%, AS MR. LIBRACH TALKED ABOUT. THAT IS PART AND PARCEL OF ANY PROJECT. ANYONE WHO THINKS YOU COULD DO A PROJECT WITHOUT DEALING WITH DRAINAGE, YOU WILL HAVE AN INADEQUATE PROJECT AND CAN'T GET DONE IN A SATISFACTORY MANNER.

>>THOMAS: I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THE DRAINAGE PROBLEM WAS CONSIDERED AN EMERGENCY SITUATION BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEM THEY HAVE IN THAT GENERAL AREA, RIGHT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. OF COURSE IT'S TAKEN US A VERY LONG TIME TO DEAL WITH IT, BUT IT IS AN EMERGENCY FLOODING PROBLEM.

>>THOMAS: THANK YOU. MY QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED. I WOULD LIKE TO GET THAT VOTED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DID YOU HAVE ANY MORE?

>>SLUSHER: NOT REALLY, MAYOR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHAT I'LL SAY ABOUT LOYOLA LANE, I STARTED WRITING MEMOS BACK IN THE FALL, WHICH I THINK I'VE DISCOVERED THE BEST WAY FOR ME TO KEEP A SECRET IS PUT IT IN A MEMO AND SEND IT OUT. [LAUGHTER]. AND IN THOSE -- IN THOSE MEMOS AT THAT POINT IN TIME, I'VE SAID THAT THERE WERE BASICALLY THREE PROJECTS THAT I THOUGHT WE OUGHT TO PRIORITIZE. BUT ONE OF THOSE WAS LOYOLA LANE IN PART BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF TIMES WE'VE PROMISED THE CITIZENS THAT LIVE OVER IN THAT AREA WE ARE GOING TO GET THAT DONE. I WAS FRANKLY SURPRISED BY SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED ABOUT IT INDICATING OR AT LEAST IMPLYING THAT THERE MIGHT NOT BE SUPPORT FOR LOYOLA LANE. BECAUSE I JUST -- I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE THAT WE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AND THEN NOT GO FORWARD WITH THAT. SO I'M PLEASED THAT IT'S ON HERE AND IT'S ONE WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS. MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: THANKS, MAYOR THIS. IS RELATIVE TO THE GREAT STREETS PROGRAM. WHAT I HAD ORIGINALLY BEEN PLANNING TO DO AS LONG AS WE WERE PUTTING ALL THIS EXTRA MONEY INTO THAT ACCOUNT, WAS MAKE SURE THAT SOMEHOW THE OBLIGATION WENT WITH THAT FOR BICYCLE TRAVEL IN THE GREAT STREETS PLAN. AND THE MAYOR REMINDS ME THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE 15% PUT ASIDE FOR ALL PROJECTS, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S HAPPENED IN THE GREAT STREETS PROGRAM, OR AT LEAST THAT'S NOT STAFF'S ANSWER AND NOT THE INFORMATION I GET FROM OTHER PEOPLE. SO HOW DO WE -- OR HOW DO I, HOW DO I MAKE SURE THAT BICYCLING TRAVEL IS ACCOMMODATED WITHIN THE GREAT STREETS PLAN AND THAT THE MONEY THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN IS WHAT WILL FUND THAT AS WELL?

>> COUNCILMEMBER, I BELIEVE THE GREAT STREETS PORTION OF THIS PACKAGE OF ITEMS BEFORE YOU IS UNDER ITEM 21. THE ITEM UNDER 19, WE DO HAVE -- IF YOU HAVE EXHIBITn A, WHICH IS A COMBINATION OF BOTH THE ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED IN ITEM 19 AND THE ITEMS LISTED IN ITEM 21. THE ITEMS LISTED IN 19 HAVE A BULLET BESIDE THEM MEANING THAT COUNCIL HAS AT LEAST TO SOME DEGREE CONSIDERED THESE ITEMS IN THE PAST AND HAS SOME RECORD OF DECISION WITH REGARD TO THEM. WHEREAS THE ONES UNDER 21 THAT ARE NOT BULLETED ARE THOSE THAT ARE NEW. WITH RAP TO -- WITH RESPECT TO GREAT YOU STREETS, THOSE ARE WHAT WE CONSIDER TO BE MEETING THE 15% GOAL OF -- THAT COUNCIL HAD ESTABLISHED FOR THIS [INAUDIBLE] FUNDS ARE SHOWN IN GRAY. SO YOU HAVE A VARIETY OF THINGS THAT ARE EITHER IN THE ITEM 19 OR IN ITEM 21 THAT ARE SHOWN IN GRAY THAT ADD UP TO THAT 15% FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN USES. SO THE TOTAL, GRAND TOTAL OF THE 80 MILLION IS FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN COMES TO 15%, I BELIEVE. THE SPECK TO GREAT STREETS IT'S, THE MAIN IDEA IS TO WIDEEN THE SIDEWALKS, MAKE THEM PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY. THAT IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT PART I THINK OF THE GREAT STREETS DOWNTOWN PROGRAM IS TO CREATE A MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY DOWNTOWN. AND TO DO SO YOU MUST WIDEN THE SIDEWALKS. SO I THINK IT'S INHERENT BY DEFINITION IN THE PROGRAM ITSELF THAT BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF IN THE GREAT STREETS PROGRAM.

>>GOODMAN: WELL, HERE'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM. WE ARE ADDING MONEY. WE ARE ADDING AN ADDITIONAL 2.5 MILLION PLUS A LITTLE CHANGE INTO THE GREAT STREETS PROGRAM. NOW, ALTHOUGH THE SPECIFICS COME UP IN NO. 21, THE ANSWER TO ONE OF THE 21 GREAT STREETS PROGRAM QUESTIONS IS THAT THE CURRENT PLAN FOR GREAT STREETS DOES NOT PROVIDE BIKE LANES ON ALL STREET SEGMENTS CALLED FOR IN THE AUSTIN BICYCLE PLAN. SO I WAS WANTING THAT -- IF POSSIBLE, TO BE A LITTLE NUDGED.

>> WELL, WE CERTAINLY -- CERTAINLY COULD BE NUDGED. THE PLAN IS UNDER DEVELOPMENT. THERE ISN'T A GREAT STREETS PLAN AT THIS POINT THAT IS COMPLETE THAT -- AND WE MAY HAVE MISSTATED IN THE RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT. THAT IS ANOTHER 30 TO 60 DAYS BEFORE WE WILL HAVE A DRAFT THAT HAVE PLAN. WE'RE STILL WORKING WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT THAT WILL BE AND WE ALSO ARE TRYING TO MELD THAT PLAN WITH THE MOBILITY STUDY THAT IS THE DETAILED ENGINEERING LOOK AT DOWNTOWN INTERSECTIONS. AND FINALLY MELDING THAT WITH THE PARKING STUDY. ALL OF THOSE WILL BE RECOMMENDATIONS WE WILL BRING TO YOU FOR CONSIDERATION OVER THE SUMMER. AND WE CERTAINLY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY NOW TO BUILD INTO THAT BICYCLE PATHS THAT ARE CALLED FOR IN THE BIKE PLAN.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR? WHEN MY TIME COMES.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>GRIFFITH: YES, THANK YOU. TO BUILD ON THE MAYOR PRO TEM'S QUESTION, I ASKED WILL THE GREAT STREETS PROGRAM PROVIDE BIKE LANES ON ALL PROJECTS RECEIVING FUNDING. AND I GOT AN ANSWER, BUT I'M NOT REAL STRAIGHT ON EXACTLY WHAT THAT IS GOING TO MEAN IN TERMS OF PROVIDING BIKE LANES ON ALL STREET SEGMENTS CALLED FOR IN THE AUSTIN BICYCLE PLAN, WHICH I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF INTEREST IN DOING. THE ANSWER SAYS THE CURRENT PLAN FOR GREAT STREETS FORECASTED FOR 2005 DOES NOT PROVIDE BIKE LANES ON ALL STREET SEGMENTS CALLED FOR IN THE AUSTIN BICYCLE PLAN. BICYCLE PROGRAM STAFF WITH INPUT FROM MEMBERS OF THE BICYCLE COMMUNITY HAS ISSUED ITS RECOMMENDATION FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT ARE THE BARRIERS FOR HAVING BIKE LANES ON ALL STREET SEGMENTS CALLED FOR IN THE AUSTIN BICYCLE PLAN? WHAT ARE THE -- WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO TO GET THAT DONE AND WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH MAKING THAT DECISION NOW?

>> I'M JANNA MCCANN, THE URBAN DESIGN PERSON WORKING ON GREAT STREETS AND THE BIKE COMMUNITY TO ESTABLISH WHAT ROUTES COULD WE ENVISION OR REALIZEDDING BY 2005, WHICH IS ACTUALLY WE'RE TRYING TO MODEL IN THE DOWNTOWN ACCESS AND MOW BIMENT PLAN. THAT'S ONE ISSUE. I -- MOBILITY PLAN. WE'RE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE SORT OF FULL VISION, FULL BUILDOUT 2005 SCENARIO. WE'VE JUST NOW RECEIVED LIKE IN THE LAST WEEK FROM THE BICYCLE COMMUNITY AND THE BIKE PLAN, OUR OWN STAFF RECOMMENDATION ABOUT WHAT OUGHT TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THAT TIME. WHICH BASICALLY FOLLOWS THE ADOPTED BIKE PLAN.

>>GRIFFITH: SO IS THE GOAL STILL TO PROVIDE BIKE LANES ON ALL STREET SEGMENTS CALLED FOR IN THE AUSTIN BICYCLE PLAN?

>> YES THAT IS CORRECT IS THE GOAL.

>>GRIFFITH: THAT IS STILL THE GOAL, THE POLICY, WHAT WE'RE AFTER.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>>GRIFFITH: DO YOU SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT? IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO WORK ON OR ANYBODY WE NEED TO TALK TO TO BE SURE THAT'S GOING TO ACTUALLY HAPPEN?

>> WELL, THIS IS -- I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK THAT IT'S IN GOOD HANDS NOW. WE JUST HAVEN'T -- BECAUSE THE GREAT STREETS MASTER PLAN PROJECTED TWO-WAY STREET SYSTEMS VERSUS ONE-WAY STREET SYSTEMS, WE HAD TO RELOOK AT THE BIKE PLAN AND MODIFY IT AS IF TWO-WAY STREETS ARE GOING TO BE ADOPTED, WHICH WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE, WE WOULD PUT THE BIKE ROUTES ON ONE OF THOSE STREETS RATHER THAN DIVERT THEM ON TWO LANES. THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO RELOOK AT THE BIKE PLAN. THE IDEA IS WE WANT TO INTEGRATE THE BIKE PATHS AND THE FACILITIES ARE RECOMMENDED IN THE ADOPTED PLAN IN THE FINAL GREAT STREETS PLAN.

>>GRIFFITH: SO THE GOAL IS STILL THE SAME.

>> YES.

>>GRIFFITH: AND WE'LL JUST WORK TOGETHER ON ENSURING THAT HAPPENS.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM.

>>GOODMAN: COULD I OFFER A SUGGESTION TO STAFF WHEN THEY ARE ANSWERING COUNCIL QUESTIONS? THAT IS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT ANSWER FROM THE ONE WE HAVE IN THE YELLOW PAGES. SO IN THE FUTURE, IF THERE IS A QUESTION ASKED WHERE YOU CAN KIND OF PROJECT THE ONGOING PROCESS AND PROJECTED OUTCOME RATHER THAN JUST THIS INSTANT, I THINK THAT WOULD REALLY BE HELPFUL AND MAYBE WE WOULDN'T HAVE SO MANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THANKS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE COUNCIL -- COUNCIL, THE VOTE WILL BE ON ITEM 19, 1, WITH A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL JUNE 7TH, 3, 4, 5, 6 AND 7 AS READ, AND ITEM 2 IS PULLED OUT.

>>SLUSHER: MAYOR, I HAVE SOME MORE STUFF.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.

>>SLUSHER: AND I GUESS I WILL -- I WON'T -- I WILL GO WITH THE ANSWERS ON LOYOLA, I HAVE WANTED TO GET THAT PROJECT COMPLETED FOR A LONG TIME AS WELL. EVEN THOUGH IT TAKES OVER HALF OF THE QUARTER CENT COMING FROM CAPITAL METRO, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PROJECT. IT'S IN OUR DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE. IT'S AN AREA WITH A LOT OF AFFORDABLE AND REASONABLY PRICED HOUSING. AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. THAT'S WHY I WAS SURPRISED THAT THERE WERE SO MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT IT THAT SEEMED TO BE FROM A VERY NEGATIVE PERSPECTIVE QUESTIONING THE NEED FOR IT AND ALSO THE COUNTY APPARENTLY INCLUDING THE COMMISSIONER FROM THAT AREA, APPEARS TO BE OPPOSED TO THE PROJECT OR AT LEAST RAISING QUESTIONS ABOUT WHY WE'RE PUTTING THESE FUNDS INTO IT. THAT'S SORT OF A NOVEL APPROACH FOR ME. BUT IT COMES DOWN TO I THINK THIS PROJECT NEEDS TO HAPPEN, SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT IT. I HAD AN AMENDMENT I WANTED TO MAKE WHICH THERE IS A PART OF ANDERSON MILL ROAD THAT IS IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY THAT IS ALSO PART OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN. AND WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE COULD END UP WITH FOUR LANES COMING FROM EACH DIRECTION TO THE PART THAT'S IN THE CITY, AND THAT WOULD ONLY BE TWO LANES. AND I DON'T THINK THAT IS IS A SITUATION WHICH WE WANT TO HAVE. SO I'VE WORKED WITH THE MANAGER AND I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE ADD -- TAKE A MILLION FROM THE FUNDING FOR '02 AND '03, A MILLION OF THAT AND MOVE IT UP TO NOW FOR ANDER SON MILL AND POND SPRINGS. WEDDING AND ALLOCATE THAT FUNDING NOW.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE MAKER -- MS. BROWN, FOR SOME REASON I DIDN'T WRITE DOWN -- MAYOR PRO TEM, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN? -- COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

>>ALVAREZ: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT WILL BE PART OF THE MAIN MOTION.

>>SLUSHER: I HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. ONE ON THE ORDINANCE, THE YELLOW ORDINANCE IN OUR BACKUP, IT LISTS 1 THROUGH 7, AND THEN WE HAVE POSTPONED 1 AND 2 ON THAT. BUT THEN IT DOESN'T DETAIL THE BGA, BUT THAT WOULD INCLUDE -- SO INCLUDED -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE INCLUDED IN THIS ITEM, WE HAVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1.5 MILLION, LOYOLA LANE 15.8 MILLION,, WILLIAM CANNON UNYUN CREEK BRIDGE, 3 MILLION. DITTMAR ROAD 1 MILLION, AND BUILD GREATER AUSTIN A TOTAL OF 6 MILLION. SO IN THERE THEN WOULD BE 2.5 MILLION FOR SIDEWALKS, 1.5 FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS -- SEE, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. SOME OF THIS FROM BGA IS ALREADY DETAILED, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE EVERYTHING THAT IS ON OUR LIST. LIKE THE EMERGENCY STREET REPAIRS, THE MONEY FOR '02 --

>> COUNCILMEMBER, IF I MIGHT.

>>SLUSHER: PLEASE.

>> IF YOU WOULD REFER TO IF CHART, THERE IS BOTH A BGA FUNDING AND A BGA CATEGORY. CATEGORY DOWN AT THE BOTTOM, 18 THROUGH 23, ARE ALL CALLING BGA PROJECTS, BUT THERE IS ALSO A BGA FUNDING, WHICH IS THE MIDDLE COLUMN. AND SO I THINK THAT WE ARE TAKING CARE OF, I BELIEVE, IN ITEM 7 ON THE ORDINANCE THE BGA FUNDING THAT IS SPECIFIC TO ITEMS 18 THROUGH 23.

>>SLUSHER: AND THAT IS IN WHICH COLUMN IN THE BACKUP? THIS EXHIBIT A.

>> IN EXHIBIT A IT IS IN THE COLUMN LABELED BGA NOTE 2.

>>SLUSHER: BUT I JUST READ OFF ALREADY LISTED SEPARATELY NO. 5 WILLIAM CANNON ON THE ONION CREEK BRIDGE.

>> YES.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. THAT'S OVER IN THE OTHER COLUMN.

>> THOSE ARE --.

>>SLUSHER: SO WHY IS THAT ONE LISTED SEPARATELY? AND DITTMAR --

>> WHY ARE THEY LISTED SEPARATELY? LET ME ASK VICKI TO ADDRESS THAT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER, THEY -- VICKI SHUBERT WITH FINANCIAL SERVICES. THESE ARE LISTED SEPARATELY BECAUSE WE LOOK AT THOSE AS SEPARATE PROJECTS T BUILD GREATER AUSTIN MONEY THAT SHOWS UP AT THE BOTTOM OF THE CHART, WE APPROPRIATE ALL IN ONE LUMP AND GO OUT AND DO SEPARATE PROJECTS. FOR INSTANCE, IT'S -- IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE WAY WE'VE HANDLED BUILD GREATER AUSTIN ROAD CONSTRUCTION MONEY IN THE PAST WHERE YOU JUST APPROPRIATE ONE LUMP SUM OF MONEY FOR THAT PROJECT AND THEN WE GO OUT AND DO SMALLER PROJECTS OUT THAT HAVE MONEY. BUT --.

>>SLUSHER: THAT'S INCLUDED IN WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON IN THIS MOTION?

>> IT'S INCLUDED IN THAT SIX MILLION YOU HAVE REDUCED TO FIVE MILLION BY TAKING ONE MILLION OUT AND PUTTING IT ON ANDERSON LANE.

>>SLUSHER: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. JUST A COUPLE MORE THINGS. ONE, ON THE CONGRESS AVENUE PEDESTRIAN PART OF IT, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REQUEST AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WE LOOK AT A RAIL BETWEEN -- ALONG THERE BETWEEN THE CARS AND THE PEDESTRIANS, BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT STAND OUT IN THAT BRIDGE, WALK ACROSS IT OF COURSE, BUT ALSO STAND OUT THERE LOOKING AT THE BATS SO THEY ARE OUT THERE A LONG TIME WITH THEIR KIDS, AND IT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE DANGEROUS TO ME TO NOT HAVE A RAILING THERE BETWEEN THE TRAFFIC AND THE PEDESTRIANS. SO IF WE COULD --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO MOVE TO AMEND FOR LIGHT RAIL THERE. YOU MEAN A RAIL SO PEOPLE DON'T FALL OFF THE BRIDGE.

>>SLUSHER: I APPRECIATE YOU MAKING THAT CLEAR. AND IT'S NOT SO THEY DON'T FALL OFF, IT'S SO THEY DON'T GET INTO THE TRAFFIC COMING BY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I UNDERSTAND.

>>SLUSHER: I WAS GOING TO -- THAT WAS ONE OF MY LATER ITEMS I'M GETTING TO. I HAVE A LENGTHY LIST HERE. WOULD THAT BE FRIENDLY?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MAYOR PRO TEM, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

>>ALVAREZ: YES.

>>WYNN: MAYOR, THAT'S ITEM NO. 21.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OH, YEAH, I'M SORRY. WE'LL BRING THAT OCCUPY 21. THANK YOU. -- BRING THAT UP ON 21. WHEN I TAKE THE MAIN MOTION, I'LL BRING THAT UP AS PART OF THE MAIN MOTION. THANKS FOR POINTING THAT OUT.

>>SLUSHER: SO THEN FREIDRICH IS ON 21 AS WELL?

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>SLUSHER: WE'RE POSTPONING 20 AND 21. OKAY. WELL, LET ME JUST SAY A COUPLE OF REMARKS. I DON'T KNOW IF THESE CAN BE AT 19 AND 21, AT WHICH THEY ARE DIRECTED, BUT I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT WE ARE HERE TODAY ALLOCATING FUNDS THAT COME FROM CAPITAL METRO. THEY ARE GOING TO -- LARGELY TO REGIONAL PROJECTS TO IMPROVE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IN THIS AREA CONSISTENT WITH THE WILL OF THE VOTERS WHEN THE VOTERS TURNED DOWN LIGHT RAIL AND INSTEAD APPROVED ROADS AND SAID THAT'S HOW WE WANTED TO DEAL WITH OUR TRANSPORTATION AT LEAST FOR THE TIME BEING, THAT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION HERE TODAY ABOUT PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PROJECTS, AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT WE'RE PUTTING CONSISTENT WITH CAMPO'S POLICIES 15% OF THIS TOWARDS BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS AND THE BUILD GREATER AUSTIN PROGRAM WHICH IS 20 MILLION. THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN INTENDED FOR BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS AND FOR PATCHING STREETS WHERE THERE IS PROBLEMS CAUSED BY BUSES. SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. I WANTED IN PARTICULAR TO TLANG WILLIAMSON COUNTY REP I WAS, THE WHOLE COMMISSIONERS COURT REAL AAND REPRESENTATIVE KRUSE FOR WORKING CLOSELY WITH CAPITAL METRO AND THE CITY TO MAKE THIS A PRODUCTIVE PROCESS AND FOR INSTANCE ON THIS ONE THAT WE JUST PUT IN THE MILLION DOLLARS FOR ANDERSON MILL ROAD, WILLIAMSON COUNTY IS ACKNOWLEDGING WHAT THEY HAD ASKED US TO DO WAS TO SPEND A PORTION OF THE MONEY THAT'S BEING COLLECTED BY CAPITAL METRO IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY ON PROJECTS IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY. BUT THEY DIDN'T SAY THAT HAS TO BE OUTSIDE THE CITY. THEY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE PART THAT -- THEY JUST WANTED TAOS SPEND IT ON THE PARTS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY THAT ARE IN THE CITY. AND I CONSIDER THAT TO BE A KEY DISTINCTION AND REALLY PROGRESS BEYOND WHAT THE COUNTY IN WHICH MOST OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS LOCATED, BEYOND HOW THEY INTERPRET THIS. SO I REALLY WANTED TO THANK AND PRAISE WILLIAMSON COUNTY FOR ACTING IN A REGIONAL SPIRIT, AND I THINK THAT THIS WILL HELP US MOVE FORWARD AND TO DO THAT -- IMPROVE THAT REGIONAL COOPERATION EVEN MORE AS WE HEAD DOWN THE ROAD, SO TO SPEAK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE BEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM 19. ON 20 AND 22, I'LL RECOGNIZE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THOSE ITEMS UNTIL JUNE 7, 2000, BECAUSE THEY ARE RELATED TO THE MOTION ON ITEM 1 OF ITEM 19. MOTION MADE BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. IS THERE DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON 20 AND 22. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION WITH REGARD TO ITEM 21. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.

>>WYNN: YES, MAYOR, THANK YOU. I AM SLIGHTLY HESITANT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE DISCUSSION WE HAD ABOUT THE LAMAR STREET PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND THE HOPEFUL NEW COST ESTIMATES ON THAT PROJECT, I THINK SHOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON ITEM NO. 21. THAT IS, I THINK THERE WILL BE SOME -- HOPEFULLY THERE WILL BE SOME FUNDS AVAILABLE AND, YOU KNOW, I FOR ONE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SIDEWALK DOLLARS INCREASED AS AN EXAMPLE. THIS IS MY FIRST COMMENT. I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE PERHAPS SOME FUNDING THAT COULD BE ADDED TO ITEM 21. A QUESTION ON THE --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER, JUST -- I HATE TO INTERRUPT, BUT I AGREE WITH YOU AND THAT WAS WHY I STARTED THE CONVERSATION I WISH I HAD NEVER GOTTEN INTO A MINUTE AGO. WHAT I WILL DO IS IF WE GET ITEM NO. 2 OF 19 FIGURED OUT WHERE WE BRING IT BACK UP, I WILL RECOGNIZE YOU ON 21 AGAIN. SO THAT WE MAY END UP TAKING 21 UP AGAIN TO FIX OR AT LEAST TO PUT THAT ADDITIONAL MONEY INTO THE KINDS OF THINGS YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT.

>>WYNN: THANK YOU. MR. LIBRACH, ON ITEM 21, THIS -- I BELIEVE I READ THIS CORRECTLY IN THAT ALL OF THE T PROJECTS THAT THE CITY WILL BE SUBMITTING IN FACT ARE INCLUDED IN 21. IS THAT TRUE? WE HAVE THE UPPER BOGGY CREEK TRAIL, WE HAVE THE CONGRESS AVENUE BRIDGE --

>> THE LAMAR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE WAS IN ITEM 19. OR STILL IS, I GUESS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HE SAID CONGRESS. CONGRESS AVENUE BRIDGE.

>> CORRECT. CONGRESS AVENUE BRIDGE IS IN 21. BUT ONE OF THE FOUR THAT -- FOR T 21, COUNCILMEMBER, IS -- WAS IN 19.

>>WYNN: OKAY. AND SO WHAT'S THE FOURTH PROJECT? THAT WE'LL BE PROPOSING ON THE T 21?

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>> WALNUT CREEK, BOGGY CREEK, LAMAR BRIDGE, [INAUDIBLE].

>> HOLD ON JUST A SECOND, COUNCILMEMBER. [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE].

>> PUTTING UP THE MINIMUM NECESSARY TO GET INTO THE GAME, IF YOU WILL. AND THAT'S 20%. SO IF IN THE CASE OF THE BRIDGE ON CONGRESS, IT WAS A 20% MATCH, PLUS WE ARE SHOWING IN THE APPLICATION THAT AN ADDITIONAL 10% OR SOME AMOUNT, PERHAPS 10%, WOULD BE MATCHED BY THE LOCAL COMMUNITY. THAT WAS A DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST. SO WE ARE SHOWING AT LEAST THE 20% FROM THESE FUNDS FOR THAT PROJECT AND THE 20%, I BELIEVE, FOR ONE OF THE OTHER PROJECTS. BUT IT VARIES DEPENDING ON THE SOURCE OF THE FUNDS. COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IS THE CITY SPONSOR PERCENTAGE LOCAL MATCH ON EACH OF THE FOUR PROJECTS? IT SEEMS TO ME THAT HISTORICALLY WE'VE KNOWN IT'S VERY COMPETITIVE TO GET THESE PROJECTS AND I WOULD HAVE -- IT WOULD STRIKE ME THAT IF AUSTIN WERE TO GET ONE PROJECT, IT WOULD BE DOING WELL. IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE GOT TWO PROJECTS. BUT IF WE PUT FORWARD AS A CITY FOUR PROJECTS, ONE HAS A 60% LOCAL MATCH, ONE HAS A 42% LOCAL MATCH, ONE HAS A 28% LOCAL MATCH, ONE HAS A 20% LOCAL MATCH, THEY'LL LOOK AT THAT AND SAY THE CITY OF AUSTIN APPROPRIATELY HAS RANKED THESE FOUR PROJECTS AND THEY'RE PREPARED TO PUT SO MUCH MORE OF THEIR LOCAL DOLLARS INTO X PROJECT AND THAT WILL BE THE FOCUS BY THE STATE. AND, YOU KNOW, IF WE ARE LUCKY ENOUGH TO GET ONE, IT'S LIKELY THAT. SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE EXACT PERCENTAGES OF CITY DOLLARS SHOWN AS THE LOCAL MATCH FOR THE FOUR T-21 PROJECTS, RECOGNIZING THAT ONE IS NOT EVEN PART OF THIS MOTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: LET ME SAY ONE THING ABOUT IT IF YOU DON'T MIND. GENERALLY YOU'RE -- I THINK YOU'RE ASKING A GOOD AND ACCURATE QUESTION. GENERALLY WHAT THEY DO, THOUGH, IS THEY LOOK AT THE PRIORITIZATION AND HOW MUCH MONEY YOU PUT IN DOES SEND A MESSAGE, THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT. BUT THE PRIORITY CAN BE BASED UPON THINGS OTHER THAN HOW MUCH MONEY IS PUT INTO IT, AND THEY RECOGNIZE THOSE OTHER FACTERS THAT MIGHT BE IN A MATRIX AND THEY TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT. SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS AN ACCURATE COMMENT, BUT IT DOESN'T END UP BEING THE SOLE THING IF THEY SEE THERE'S A DIFFERENT PRIORITY HERE.

>> WELL, I CAN TELL YOU ROUGHLY RIGHT NOW THAT THE MATCH FOR WALNUT CREEK, THE MATCH FOR THE CONGRESS AVENUE BRIDGE, CITY MATCH, AND UPPER BOGGY CREEK, THOSE THREE, ARE 20%. THE MATCH FOR THE LAMAR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, IF WE ASSUME WHAT IS IN THE STAFF'S RELIGIOUS, WOULD BE MORE LIKE 67 OR SO%.

>> I CAN GIVE YOU THE MATCH OF THE CITY PROJECTS. THE TOTAL BUDGET FOR NORTHERN WALNUT CREEK TRIAL IS 4.048 MILLION. THE LOCAL MATCH IS 52%. AND THE MATCHES IS THE 98 BOND. ON THE LAMAR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, THE PROPOSAL THAT WE HAD, THE BUDGET WAS 7.3 MILLION, AND 62% MATCH AND THE AMOUNT WAS 4.55, WHICH WAS THE CAPITAL METRO FUNDS YOU SAW. FOR UPPER BOGGY CREEK TRIAL THE TOTAL BUDGET WAS A 20% MATCH, 388,000, WHICH WAS A CMCA REFUND. ON CONGRESS AVENUE BRIDGE PEDESTRIAN ENHANCEMENT IT'S IT.4 MILLION. A 20% MATCH FOR GREAT STREETS, WHICH IS 400,000 AND A 10% MATCH OF 200,000 TO BE RAISE FRD THE PRIVATE SECTOR. AND THE TOTAL FOR ALL WITH A 50 MILLION BUDGET FOR ALL PROJECTS, THE MACHLS ARE APPROXIMATELY 7.5 MILLION. -- MATCHES.

>>WYNN: AND THESE PROJECTS WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL AT A LATER DATE FOR A VERY SPECIFIC ....

>> I THINK IT'S SCHEDULED FOR EITHER THE 17TH OR THE 24TH.

>>WYNN: OKAY. THAT'S ALL FOR NOW, MAYOR. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I NEED TO A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 21?

>>GRIFFITH: COULD I ASK ABOUT ONE THING BEFORE WE DO THAT?

>>MAYOR WATSON: SURE.

>>GRIFFITH: OKAY. NUMBER FIVE IS FREDERICK LANE. IT'S A MILLION DOLLARS FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF THAT ROADWAY. IS THAT GOING TO BE ENOUGH TO DO THAT JOB? WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOMETHING LIKE 375,000 MORE TO ACTUALLY DO THAT. WHAT ARE YOUR ESTIMATES SAYING?

>> THE ONLY ESTIMATE WE HAVE IS AN ESTIMATE FROM A PRIVATE CONSULTANT WHO'S REPRESENTING SOME OF THE LANDOWNERS ALONG THERE. WE HAVEN'T ACTUALLY DONE A CITY STAFF ESTIMATE AT THIS POINT IN TIME. AND I MIGHT POINT OUT THAT THAT IS A PROBLEM WITH MANY OF THE NUMBERS THAT ARE ON THIS LIST IS THAT IN SOME CASES WE HAVEN'T DONE ANY ENGINEERING AT ALL AND WE'RE GIVING YOU OUR BEST ESTIMATES OOTED THIS POINT. OTHER CASES WE'RE TAKING NUMBERS FROM OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS AND USING THEM. AND ORIGINALLY WHEN THEY CAME TO ME FOR THREE LANES IT WAS ONE MILLION AND FOR FOUR LANES IT WAS TWO MILLION, I THINK. I CAN'T RECALL. BUT THEN SUBSEQUENT TO THAT THEY DID REVISE AND THEY NOW SAY IT IS 1.3 SOMETHING MILLION. WE HAVE LEFT IT -- WE PROBABLY ARE SHORT IF THEIR ESTIMATES ARE CORRECT. I SUSPECT THAT WE ARE PERHAPS SHORT ON A FEW OTHERS AND PROBABLY OVERESTIMATED ON SOME OTHERS. SO THAT OUR HOPE IS THAT ALL OF THESE WILL WORK OUT IN THE END AND THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO FREDERICK AND ALL THE OTHERS, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT PRECISE TODAY ON WHAT THOSE AMOUNTS ARE.

>>GRIFFITH: MY CONCERN IS 375,000 IS A PRETTY BIG PERCENTAGE OF WHAT THE TOTAL IS ESTIMATED TO BE. AND THAT THE PROJECT WON'T BE FEASIBLE AND DOABLE ANY MORE. IF THE 1.375,000 IS -- TURNS OUT TO BE CORRECT, WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR MAKING UP THE DIFFERENCE AND CAN WE STILL DO THE PROJECT?

>> WELL, THERE WOULD BE TWO SUGGESTIONS I WOULD MAKE TO COUNCIL. ONE THAT I JUST MADE THAT THERE WILL BE SOME EVENING OUT OVER TIME WE THINK IN SOME OF THESE PROJECTS. SOME WILL COME IN OVER BUDGET, SOME WE HOPE WILL COME IN UNDER. ANOTHER -- THERE'S THREE SOLUTIONS. A SECOND WOULD BE TO FIND FUNDS FROM ONE OF THE OTHER ALLOCATED PROJECTS HERE. AND A THIRD WOULD BE WE BELIEVE THAT YOU HAVE NOT ALLOCATED FUNDS FOR PROJECTS FOR THE YEAR 2000 BOND FUNDS. AND THERE CERTAINLY ARE SOME SUGGESTIONS STAFF WOULD HAVE FOR THE BULK OF THOSE FUNDS, BUT THAT MAY BE A SOURCE FOR -- THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO CONSIDER FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF IT TURNS OUT TO BE THE PROBLEM.

>>GRIFFITH: DO YOU FEEL PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT IF IT DOES COME IN 1.375,000 THAT THE PROJECT WILL BE DONE?

>> WELL, I THINK THAT'S A DECISION FOR THE MANAGER AND THE COUNCIL, I GUESS, TO MAKE. IF IT DOES COME IN AT THAT AND IT OUT THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING IN UNDER, THEN WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND ASK THAT THAT BE PUT IN SOME OTHER FUNDING SOURCE.

>> IF I CAN ADD TO WHAT AUS TAN HAS JUST SAID. CERTAINLY WHEN YOU'RE OUT 300,000, IT'S EASIER THAN WHEN YOU'RE OUT 1.3 MILLION. SO AS A MATTER OF POLICY, THE COUNCIL IS INTERESTED IN HAVING THAT ROADWAY DONE AND WE HAVE CITY FACILITIES THAT ABUT UP TO THAT ROADWAY AND WE USE IT ALL THE TIME, WE CAN MAKE IT A PRIORITY AND 375,000 IS NOT OUT OF THE REALM OF THE ORDINARY FOR US TO LOOK AT ADDITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES. SO IF YOU CORPORATE THIS AS PART OF THAT RECOMMENDATION, WE'LL TAKE THAT AS A CHARGE SHOULD NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS BE IDENTIFIED FROM EITHER THE LAMAR BRIDGE, WE'LL GO IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO GET THE PROJECT DONE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND CLEARLY THIS IS AN ITEM OF KUHN'S PRIORITY.

>>GRIFFITH: THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION WITH REGARD TO ITEM 21. MOTION IS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. MAY I HAVE THE FLOOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: PLEASE.

>>SLUSHER: WE CAN AT A A 78 MILLION DOLLAR INFUSION OF UNANTICIPATED FUNDS AND TURN IT INTO A FISCAL SHORTAGE. BUT I WANTED TO PERSONALLY ADD MY CONGRESS AVENUE RAIL AMENDMENT, AND THAT WOULD BE A RAIL LEAN ALONG THE SIDEWALK BETWEEN THE CARS AND THE PEDESTRIANS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>>WYNN: I DO.

>>SLUSHER: I DO. AND I AM -- .

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE].

>>SLUSHER: I'M SURE THERE WILL BE A LOT OF CITIZEN INPUT ON IT. I DID WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IT IS IN HERE AND I APPRECIATE THE WAY THE NUMBERS IN THE AREA AND THE BUSINESSES IN THE AREA WORKED TOGETHER TO PUSH THAT FORWARD. I WANTED TO THANK OUR STAFF FOR RESPONDING TO THAT AND ALSO TO ONE THAT WAS IN THE OTHER -- THE PREVIOUS ITEM, THE GUADALUPE, THE DRAG PROJECT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO GET TWO MILLION FOR AND WE HAD A VERY WELL ORGANIZED AND VERY WELL DONE PRESENTATION FROM THE UNIVERSITY AREA PARTNERS AND STUDENTS LAST WEEK THAT REALLY HELPED PUSH THAT FORWARD. SO I THINK THIS HAS BEEN A REAL POSITIVE PROCESS AND I BELIEVE, MAYOR, THAT THAT FINISHES OFF MY LIST FOR NOW.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, THEN COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.

>>ALVAREZ: I WAS GOING TO OFFER WHAT I HOPE IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, BUT RELATED TO NUMBERS TWO AND THREE, WHICH ARE THE PEDESTRIAN -- THE SIDEWALK PROJECT ITEMS, HALF A MILLION FOR SCHOOL SAFETY AND HALF A MILLION FOR ARTERIAL AND NEIGHBORHOOD SIDEWALKS. AND I WAS HOPING THAT WE WOULD NOT SET ASIDE THE PROJECTS WE WOULD BE FUNDING AT THIS POINT. I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT PROJECTS HAVE BEEN SELECTED AND HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON EACH OF THESE CATEGORIES IN TERMS OF -- SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH THE STAFF IS ON THE SCHOOL SAFETY PROJECT LIST IS TO LOOK AT I GUESS WHAT SOME OF THE CRITERIA WERE FOR SELECTING PROJECTS BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS I NOTICED IS THAT ONE -- SOME OF THESE ROADS ARE NOT REALLY -- ESPECIALLY CLOSE TO SCHOOLS AND THAT WAS REALLY THE ORIGINAL INTENTION. AND I KNOW THAT OBVIOUSLY WE WANT TO CREATE PATHWAYS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO SCHOOLS, BUT THIS WAS -- I THINK THE INTENTION WAS TO LOOK AT THE MOST CRITICAL SAFETY NEEDS. AND AND I KNOW OF A COUPLE THAT ARE NOT ON HERE AND I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE SAYING LET'S PUT THESE IN THERE AS OPPOSED TO THESE OTHER ONES, BUT I WOULD LIKE SOME KIND OF DISCUSSION ABOUT, AGAIN, HOW WE RATED THESE AND WE RANKED THEM. WITH THE SECOND LIST ON ARTERIALS AND NEIGHBORHOODS, CHA I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS ALSO IS JUST KIND OF HOW ALL THESE RELATE TO THE PEDESTRIAN PLAN THAT WE HAVE. AND IF WE COULD HAVE -- JUST MORE ATTENTION TO THAT AND MAYBE HAVE SOME INPUT FROM THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION. THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING HAPPEN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, WOULD YOU CONSIDER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT ON PASSAGE OF THIS IF IT DOES NOT DESIGNATE WITH SPECIFICITY WHICH ONES ARE GOING TO BE UTILIZED AND THAT COULD COME BACK AT A LATER POINT AFTER COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ HAS HAD A ARE CHANCE TO VISIT WITH STAFF ABOUT THE PRIORITIZATION OR ANY OF US AND REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING, BRING THAT BACK AND HANDLE IT THE WAY WE'VE BEEN HANDLING IT TODAY.

>>WYNN: I DO.

>>MAYOR WATSON:/SOME ALL RIGHT. THAT WILL BE PART OF THE MAIN MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

>>THOMAS: WELL, WITH COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECT, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE LIST OF THINGS YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, IT APPEARS THAT A SIDEWALK WOULD BE FROM NORTHEAST DRIVE ALL THE WAY TO MANOR ROAD. AND ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE SIDEWALK PROJECT EAST 12TH STREET FROM CHICON STREET ALL THE WAY OUT TO SPRIK SPRINGDALE. BUT IN THE 2000 BLOCK RIGHT THERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING WITH SPECIFICITY. WE'LL HAVE THAT DISCUSSION LATER. THE FINAL THING THAT WE'LL DO -- I WANT TO SAY ONE THING BEFORE AND GET CLARIFICATION BECAUSE ALREADY THIS MORNING I'VE -- SO THAT WE HAVE THE RECORD CLEAR ON THE CONGRESS AVENUE BRIDGE PROGRAM, AS COUNCILMEMBER WYNN HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT, WE WILL HAVE COMING BACK TO US AN ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC. AND THE ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC WILL DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS PROJECT WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE SLOWING OF TRAFFIC ON THAT BRIDGE. AND WE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AT THAT POINT IN TIME TO REMOVE THAT PROJECT IF IN FACT IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE IN THE TRAFFIC FLOW. THAT'S CORRECT, ISN'T IT?

>>WYNN: THAT'S CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THERE WAS A QUOTE IN THE NEWSPAPER TODAY THAT SAID THAT VERY CLEARLY, BUT I JUST THOUGHT FOR PURPOSES OF WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON HERE TODAY, THIS ALLOWS THINGS TO GO FORWARD, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN IT WILL HAPPEN IF IT HAS AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON TRAFFIC FLOW.

>>WYNN: CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: YES, MAYOR. I HAD A QUESTION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. /AND THEN I'LL CALL FOR THE ROLL.

>>SLUSHER: IT RELATES BACK TO 19, BUT ARE WE LEAVING OPEN THE POSSIBILITY. I THINK YOU'VE SPOKEN ABOUT THIS ALREADY BUT I NEED CLARIFICATION NOW THAT WE CAN GRIND THROUGH THOSE NUMBERS FOR OUR SATISFACTION ON THE LAMAR PEDESTRIAN THAT WE WOULD COME BACK AND ACT ON IT THAT DAY?

>>MAYOR WATSON: MY HOPE WILL BE THAT BASICALLY -- WHAT I THOUGHT I UNDERSTOOD EARLIER TODAY, WE'LL COME TO AT SOME LEAST FRUITION AND WELCOME BACK ON 19, WE WILL BE ABLE TO VOTE WITH REGARD TO THE ITEM NUMBER 2. THEN AS SOON AS THAT OCCURS, IF THERE IS MONEY REMAINING, WE WILL GO TO ITEM 21. AND MY GUESS IS WHAT WE WILL DO IS TAKE A VOTE AT THAT TIME FOR THAT ADDITIONAL MONEY TO GO INTO SCHOOL SAFETY AND OTHER SIDEWALK PROGRAMS THE SAME WAY WE'RE DOING IT RIGHT NOW.

>>SLUSHER: THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I IN MIND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ITEM NUMBER 21. COUNCIL, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS UNTIL 1:30. MOTION IS MADE TO RECESS. WE ARE -- IS THERE A SECOND? BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. WE ARE IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30. BE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: GENERAL CITIZENS COMMUNICATION. GUS PENA. I CAN SEE YOU THROUGH THE WINDOW THERE. MR. PENA. THERE YOU ARE. YOU'RE FOLLOWED BY RICHARD TROXELL. IF MR. TROXELL IS OUT IN THE ANTE ROOM, WE'LL BE READY FOR HIM IN THREE MINUTES.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON MR. MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS. GUS PENA, PRESIDENT OF EAST AUSTIN CONCERNED HISPANICS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR. I WAS OVER THERE BEING ENTERTAINED BY MY BOY AND HIS SCHOOL WORK. NUMBER ONE I HAVE A DISCUSSION TO BRING FORTH TO Y'ALL. I'M GOING TO NEED A PURSUE TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FOR HOMELESS FAMILIES. I'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF WORKING WITH THE AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, WHATEVER THE -- THE ACRONYM STANDS FOR, BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GREAT PUSH. I APPRECIATE IS VERY MUCH. BUT I WILL TELL YOU THIS MUCH, I WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION WHEN THE DECISION WAS MADE TO ALLOCATE 10 MILLION DOLLARS TO TEACHERS AND CIVIL SERVANTS AND NOT ENOUGH IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC. I THINK THAT WAS AN IMBALANCE THAT WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO THE PUBLIC. NUMBER THREE, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE CITY ENSURES THAT FUNDING IS AVAILABLE FOR SUMMER JOBS FOR THE YOUTH PROGRAMS. THERE'S ONLY LESS THAN TWO WEEKS LEFT FOR SCHOOL AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE YOUTH AND THE KIDS ARE EMPLOYED OUT THERE AND NOT RUNNING AROUND AND HANGING AROUND ON THE STREETS. MY CHILD LUCIO HAD HIS -- ALL HIS THIRD GRADE CLASSES AT AUSTIN ELEMENTARY HAD THEIR PICNIC LAST WEDNESDAY AT EMMA LONG PARK AND I WANT TO PUBLICLY THANK THE DIRECTOR OF AUSTIN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT AND THE SITE MANAGER AND THE PARKS EMPLOYEE AT EMMA LONG PARK. ALL OF US FORGOT TO TAKE WATER FOR THE CHILDREN, EVEN THOUGH WE TOOK SODA WATER, BUT WATER IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SODA WATER. AND I ASKED FOR A COUPLE OF CONTAINERS OF ICE WATER AND THEY WERE OFFERED REAL QUICKLY AND I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR THEIR PROFESSIONALISM AND THE COURTESY FOR THE KIDS OUT THERE. AUSTIN IS VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THAT MUCH AND I WANT TO SAY CONGRATULATIONS AND THANKS TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FOR ALLOWING THAT TO HAPPEN. AND WHEN I BRING STUFF OVER HERE, SOMETIMES PEOPLE MIGHT NOT WANT TO HEAR IT, BUT THE PUBLIC WANTS TO -- WANTS US TO MAKE A STATEMENT. WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO ENFIELD, WE KNOW WHAT RECENTLY HAPPENED TO -- AND AMD WANTS TO EXPAND HERE IN AUSTIN. AND EVEN THE INCENTIVES AND ALL THE GOOD STUFF CAN SOMETIMES GET VERY OLD. WE HAVE GREAT NEEDS OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY, NOT ONLY HOUSING, BUT OTHER ISSUES, SIDEWALKS AND ACTUALLY REPAIRS ON SENIOR CITIZENS HOMES AND EDUCATION. WE CAN HELP OUT EDUCATION WITH THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. THOSE ARE PRIORITIES. LET THE COMPANIES AND THE CORPORATIONS COME OVER HERE AND SEE WHAT THEY OFFER TO THE CITY AND FOR THE CITY'S INTEREST INSTEAD OF US TRYING TO LURE THEM USING ALL THESE INCENTIVES WHICH ARE NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC. I'M NOT HERE -- JUST CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM. I'M NOT POSITIVELY SPEAKING, BUT I'M NOT HERE TO JUDGE ANYBODY, BUT THAT GETS KIND OF OLD AND IT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, SCHOOL IS LETTING OUT. I KNOW THERE ARE SOME NEEDS OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. [BUZZER]. -- AND LET ME WRAP UP. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LETTING ME SAY MY PIECE AND Y'ALL HAVE A GOOD DAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. MR. TROXELL?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. SORRY I'M LATE. TROUBLE PARKING TODAY. TWO TOPICS REAL QUICK. THE FIRST ONE IS GENTRIFICATION. I'VE BEEN OUT OF THE CITY. I DID WANT TO CHIME IN ON THAT. GENTRIFICATION IS WHEN A BUSINESS OR AN INDIVIDUAL GOES INTO -- THANK YOU. WHEN A BUSINESS OR AN INDIVIDUAL GOES INTO AN AREA AND TAKES ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE OF THAT AREA FOR STOLEN GAIN. QUITE OFTEN THAT IS A RACIST -- HAS A RACIST BY PRODUCT, BUT PRINCIPALLY IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT IT'S A POINT OF ECONOMICS. THE BOOKS THAT I PASSED OUT THERE IS SOMETHING THAT I WROTE THAT ADDRESSES THE JANIE TRAFICATION THAT IS OCCURRING IN EAST AUSTIN. PLEASE REVIEW IT AND PASS IT ALONG TO THE CEC. THINK ABOUT IT FOR JUST A SECOND. YOU'VE GOT AN AREA WHERE THE LAND IS PRIME, ALL OF A SUDDEN THE PRICES INFLATE. WHAT HAPPENS? WELL, THE TAXES GO UP. WELL, WHO IS AFFECTED FIRST? THE SENIORS AND THE FOLKS WHO ARE ON THE FIXED INCOME. AND SO THE STALL 'ERS AND FOLKS, THEY COME IN AND THEY TAKE I DON'T THINK OF THAT AND THEY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO LEAVE AT THAT POINT. WE COULD PREEMPT SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITH A CAP ON THE TAXES FOR THE SENIORS. ANYBODY WHO HAS LIVED IN THEIR HOUSE FOR 10 YEARS, BOOM, GO IN THERE AND YOU SAY THEY'RE TAXES ARE FROZEN. THAT'S ONE LITTLE SMALL SPECIFIC THING YOU CAN DO TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN DECIDE COLLECTIVELY WHAT IT WANTS TO DO AND HOW IT CAN INTERACT FAVORABLY TO BOTH THEMSELVES AND BUSINESSES AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS WHO MIGHT WISH TO COME IN AND PARTICIPANT IN THEIR COMMUNITY, BUT THEN THEY WOULD BE ACTIVE PARTICIPANTS. THE SECOND TOPIC I WANTED TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT TODAY WAS THE -- I'M NOW THE NATIONAL CHAIRMAN FOR THE UNIVERSAL LIVING WAGE CAMPAIGN. WE LAUNCHED THIS HERE IN AUSTIN. WE RAN TO GET IN HERE. WE'VE LAUNCHED THIS CAMPAIGN NOW IN NINE OTHER CITIES JUST LIKE WE LAUNCHED IT HERE IN AUSTIN. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF SUPPORT GROUPS HERE IN TEXAS. WE ARE EXPORTING THIS IDEA OF GETTING RID OF THE FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE AROUND THE COUNTRY, THE IDEA OF SUPPLANTING IT WITH ANYBODY WORKING A 40 HOUR WEEK SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET HOUSE FOG THEMSELVES, SHOULD BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT. IT'S NOT A GOVERNMENT PROJECT, IT'S THE IDEA OF A FAIR DAY'S WAGE FOR A FAIR DAY'S WORK. IT'S THE IDEA THAT WE THE PEOPLE CAN CHANGE SOMETHING. WE ARE NOT IMPOTENT. PLEASE COME ON TUESDAY, 6:30 TO 7:30. IF YOU SIGNED THE INTERACTIVE PETITION ONLINE TO 3907 MEDICAL PARKWAY FOR A ONE-HOUR MEETING. PLEASE COME ONLINE AT WWW.UNIVERSAL LIVING WAGE.ORG. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ONE QUICK COMMENT AS YOU'RE LEAVING. I'M GOING TO BE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT THIS AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THIS. ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT GETS RAISED ABOUT BEING ABLE TO JUST SAY YOU'RE GOING TO DO A CERTAIN THING WITH TAXES IN A CERTAIN AREA IS THAT IS -- CERTAIN ACTIVITY IS PROHIBITED BY THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION ON THE ABILITY TO DO SOME OF THOSE THINGS, BUT YOU HAVE RAISED AN ISSUE THAT I THINK IS ONE WAY THAT GENTRIFICATION CAN BE ADDRESSED BUT IT MAY REQUIRE THAT WE GET BEHIND A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. BUT I'M GLAD YOU POINTED THAT OUT.

>> IT WOULD TAKE A LOT. IT WOULD TAKE THE POLITICAL WILL AND IT WOULD -- BUT IT COULD ADDRESS A PROBLEM FOR ALL BENEFITS -- .

>>MAYOR WATSON: I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG WAYS OF DOING IT. BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IT STATEWIDE AND PROBABLY GET THE FOLKS TO VOTE ON A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

>> THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCIL, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECESS UNTIL 4:00 O'CLOCK. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES. WE ARE IN RECESS UNTIL 4:00.

>>MAYOR WATSON: CALL TO ORDER THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL AND I'M GOING FOR RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BRIEF DISCUSSION ON ITEM 19 AND 21. I'M NOT SURE WE'LL GET TO A RESOLUTION, BUT THEN WE'LL GO TO ZONING ITEMS. COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?

>>SLUSHER: THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, MAYOR. IS THE STAFF IN HERE ON THIS ITEM? I'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. I WENT FOR A WALK DURING THE BREAK ALONG THE -- WHAT THERE IS OF THE SHOAL CREEK TRAIL, AND IT ENDS AT SEVERAL PLACES. BUT THE IDEA BEING THAT THERE IS ALREADY -- THERE'S ALREADY AN UNDERPASS FOR CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS ALONG SHOAL CREEK UNDERNEATH CESAR CHAVEZ. SO ONE OPTION, INSTEAD OF PUTTING THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE ACROSS CESAR CHAVEZ AND THEN UP UNDER SANTA MARADIRA AND THEN ON TO FIFTH WHERE WE GET INTO THREE AND A HALF MILLION JUST TO GET PAST THERE, FOR ALMOST CERTAINLY LESS THAN THAT, WE COULD CONNECT UP TO SHOAL CREEK TRAIL AND HAVE THE CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS GO THAT WAY. AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME MEMBERS OF THE CYCLING COMMUNITY THAT ARE VERY INSISTENT ON HAVING THE BRIDGE COME ALL THE WAY UP TO FIFTH STREET. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THAT IS A VERY LARGE EXPENSE. SECOND OF ALL, EVEN IF THEY GET UP TO FIFTH STREET, THEN WE'RE JUST GOING TO BE PUTTING THE CYCLISTS ON TO LAMAR BOULEVARD, WHICH IS ONE OF OUR HEAVIEST TRAVELED STREETS WITH MOTORCYCLES, SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO INSTEAD ROUTE THEM DOWN SHOAL CREEK, ALONG THE SHOAL CREEK TRAIL. IT'S MORE SEENIC, SAFER FOR CYCLISTS. AND IF YOU'RE, FOR INSTANCE, HEADING TO THE SIXTH AND LAMAR AREA, ANYWHERE BETWEEN SIXTH AND 12TH, THAT TRAIL IS ONLY ONE TO TWO BLOCKS OFF OF LAMAR ALL ALONG THERE, PLUS IT GOES THROUGH ALL THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS, THE NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS BEING DONE ALONG SHOAL CREEK. SO IT SEEMS TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE TO ME. AND ACCORDING TO CITY STAFFERS THAT I'VE TALKED TO JUST BRIEFLY DURING THE COUNCIL'S BREAK, THIS WOULD BE CHEAPER, PROBABLY MUCH CHEAPER, THAN WHAT WE'VE SEEN THIS MORNING ON EXTENDING THE LAMAR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE. AND IF WE WANTED TO COME BACK AFTER -- IF WE CHANGE THE ALIGNMENT OF CESAR CHAVEZ AND SANTA MARIDA LIKE IT IS CONTEMPLATED IN THE SATISFY HOME PLANT, IF WE DID O. O. SEA HOME PLANT, IF WE DID DO THAT, WE COULD SEE HOW THEY GET THROUGH THERE AT ANOTHER TIME. SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS OFFER THIS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL THAT WE INSTRUCT THE MANAGER TO LOOK AT SPEEDING UP THE SHOAL CREEK PROJECT AND SEND THE CYCLISTS THROUGH THERE. AND THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE CONTINUING TO LOOK AT THE LAMAR OPTIONS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT ONE TO THE MIX BECAUSE, IKE LIFE EXPLAINED, I THINK IT WOULD BE LESS EXPENSIVE, SAFER, AND WOULD STILL ALLOW CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS TO COME OVER THE NEW BRIDGE AND GET TO THIS BUSTLING AND GROWING AREA AROUND SIXTH AND LAMAR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND IF -- IS YOUR NEXT MOTION GOING TO BE THE MONEY THAT NEEDS -- THAT'S NOT BEING USED OUT OF THAT AMOUNT GO TO OTHER SIDEWALK AND PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PROJECTS IN THE CITY?

>>SLUSHER: YES, MAYOR, I WOULD KEEP IT IN THAT CATEGORY AND SEND IT THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ TALKED ABOUT AND WE APPROVED THIS MORNING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. SO COUNCIL, THE MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 19 IS, AS YOU JUST HEARD IT, WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS YOU WOULD NOT HAVE AN ALLOCATION OF 4.55 MILLION AS IS CURRENTLY PART OF THE POSTED ITEM. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ. IS THERE DISCUSSION?

>>SLUSHER: MAY I JUST SAY ONE MORE THING? ONE THING I DISCOVERED OR REDISCOVERED DURING MY WALK WAS THAT IN ORDER TO DO THIS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHETHER TO TEAR DOWN THAT TRELLIS OR NOT. YOU CAN DO WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT EITHER WAY, BUT WE WILL HAVE TO DECIDE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I'M NOT CALLING FOR A VOTE ON THAT RIGHT NOW. [LAUGHTER].

>>MAYOR WATSON: PART OF THE JOY OF THE JOB IS TO GET TO REVISIT THESE THINGS OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

>>WYNN: MAYOR, COULD YOU REPEAT THE MOTION PLEASE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I'M NOT SURE -- .

>>SLUSHER: INSTRUCT THE CITY MANAGER TO ADD INTO OUR CONSIDERATIONS SPEEDING UP COMPLETION AND CONNECTION OF THE SHOAL CREEK TRAIL BETWEEN THE CESAR CHAVEZ AND SIXTH. AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A FEW MISSING PARTS IN THERE WHERE IT JUST RUNS OUT AND THERE'S OTHER PARTS OF IT THAT WOULD NEED SPRUCING UP IF WE'RE GOING THIS ROUTE. SO PUT THAT INTO CONSIDERATION FOR HOW WE'RE GOING TO DEAL WITH CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS THAT COME DOWN OFF OF A NEW LAMAR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE.

>>.

>>WYNN: ARE YOU SUGGESTING A DOLLAR FIGURE? ARE WE THINKING ABOUT NOT SHOWING THE 4.55 -- .

>>SLUSHER: WHAT I WOULD DO IS PUT THE 4.55 INTO THE -- KEEP IT IN AN ITEM FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SO WE HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT IN THAT CATEGORY, RUN THIS ALL THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ ADDED BY AMENDMENT THIS MORNING, AND SO THIS WOULD ALMOST CERTAINLY BE LESS EXPENSIVE THAN THE LAMAR ALTERNATIVE, THE PROPOSALS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE, BUT WE DON'T KNOW THE EXACT PRICE. CITY STAFF MEMBERS I TALKED TO DURING THE BREAK ALL SAID THEY THOLD THOUGHT IT WOULD BE LESS EXPENSIVE, BUT I'M NOT READY TO THROW AWE A DOLLAR FIGURE RIGHT NOW.

>> AND THAT POR AND THAT PORTION COULD COME OUT OF THE 4.55?

>>SLUSHER: DID I EXPLAIN THAT.

>>WYNN: YES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION IS AS IT WAS JUST STATED. WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT ON ITEM NUMBER 19 IS IT WILL BE DIRECTED TO THE MANAGER. WE WILL THEN GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 21. AND IF YOU'LL RECALL, THE MOTION THIS MORNING, WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT THERE WILL BE A SPLIT OF THAT ADDITIONAL MONEY BETWEEN SCHOOL, PEDESTRIAN, SAFETY PROJECTS AND WALK, INSTALLATION OF WALKS ALONG ARTERIALS AND IN NEIGHBORHOODS. BUT RIGHT NOW THE MOTION IS JUST ON NUMBER 19 FOR THE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE BRIDGE. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?

>>WYNN: ONE MORE ISSUE IN COMING UP WITH THIS, I HEARD COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER TALK ABOUT ESSENTIALLY WAITING UNTIL SUCH TIME AS SANTA MARIDA IS REALIGNED TO TALK ABOUT THE NEW PRICING FOR A NEW CONNECTION THERE. I WOULD HATE TO -- FRANKLY HATE TO WAIT UNTIL SANTA MARIDA IS ACTUALLY DONE, BUT MY BELIEF IS THAT IN RELATIVELY SHORT ORDER, CERTAINLY THIS CALENDAR YEAR, BECAUSE OF THE SEAHOLME WORK AND THE L.B.J. COMPANY WORK THERE ADJACENT THAT AS SOON AS SUCH TIME AS WE FIGURE OUT THAT WILL BE THE ULTIMATE REASSIGNMENT OF SANTA MARADA, THEN WE CAN BEGIN THIS NEXT -- THE PLANNING FOR THIS NEXT PHASE. DON'T WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY SEE THE SANTA MARADA FINISHED, BUT I SUSPECT -- IT'S RELATIVELY SOON AS TO WHERE THAT ROADWAY WILL BE, WHAT ELEVATION, ETCETERA. SO I'D JUST LIKE TO ENCOURAGE US TO NOT TO LOSE TOO MUCH MOMENTUM HERE.

>>SLUSHER: LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I THINK IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I WAS THINKING OR SAYING HERE, WHICH IS THAT -- NOT THAT WE ADD WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT DOING THIS SHOAL CREEK INTO THE MIX AND SEE IF WE CAN GET THAT DONE FASTER BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE SOME WORK GOING ON BETWEEN THIRD AND CESAR CHAVEZ, BETWEEN SIXTH ALL THE WAY UP TO 38TH STREET AND THEN WE HAVE A CONTRACT TO APPROVE THAT TRAIL, BUT WE COULD STILL KEEP IN THE MIX FOR THE NEXT FEW WEEKS OR AFTER THAT HOW -- WHAT WE'RE GOING DO TO DO ABOUT THAT AREA RIGHT THERE BY LAMAR. WE COULD KEEP DISCUSSING THAT IF SOMETHING ELSE EMERGES. I'M NOT -- I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS I'M NOT TRYING TO KILL ANY OPTION RIGHT NOW, BUT INSTEAD ADD ONE IN.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH?

>>GRIFFITH: YES. WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DOES THIS DO TO OUR MATCHING MONIES FOR APPLICATIONS TO THE STATE?

>> IN EFFECT YOU WOULD NOT BE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE LAMAR STREET BRIDGE PROPOSAL AS THE PROJECT PRICE. WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT ....

>>SLUSHER: WHAT'S THE DEADLINE ON THAT?

>> JUNE 18TH.

>> [INAUDIBLE].

>>SLUSHER: IF IT'S -- JUNE 18TH IS STILL A FEW WEEKS AGO. IF WE WERE KEEPING IT ON THE TABLE, WE WOULDN'T BE KILLING IT RIGHT NOW JUST BY ADDING IN THE OPTION OF LOOKING AT SHOAL CREEK. WE WOULD STILL HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY.

>> WE WERE USING THE 4.55 AS CONSTRUCTION OF THAT PROJECT AND MATCH FOR APPROXIMATELY 2 AND A HALF MILLION MATCH, SO I GUESS THE PROJECT WOULD BE -- I GUESS I ASSUME THAT WHEN YOU SAID PUT IT UNDER PEDESTRIAN BIKE WAY THAT YOU STILL CONSIDER THIS ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS?

>>SLUSHER: I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND.

>> YOU SAID YOU WANTED TO TAKE THE 4.5 MILLION AND REALLOCATE IT TO A PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK?

>> I WANTED TO LOW THAT IN FOR CONSIDERATION BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DECIDED EXACTLY HOW TO SPEND THE MONEY AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TODAY BECAUSE WE HAD DIFFERING ESTIMATES THIS MORNING. AND I DON'T WANT IT BASED ON MY HAVING WALKED ALONG SHOAL CREEK FOR AN HOUR OR SO TO KILL ANY PROJECT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON FOR AIL AWHILE, BUT I WANTED TO ADD IT INTO THE MIX AND I ASSUMED WE WOULD COME BACK BEFORE JUNE, WHAT, 18TH AND MAKE THAT DECISION?

>>MAYOR WATSON: THE DIFFICULTY IS THAT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THAT KIND OF TIME BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE TO MAKE THE APPLICATION BEFORE THAT AND WE HAVE OUR LAST MEETING JUNE 14TH.

>> WE WERE ACTUALLY, MAYOR, GOING TO BRING THE IC PROJECT BACK ON MAY 24TH OF THE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER, I THINK YOU'VE DONE GOOD WORK. MY RECOMMENDATION MIGHT BE THAT WE BRING BACK THIS ITEM AND SET IT FOR AN ITEM FOR THAT TIME BECAUSE THEN WE WILL HAVE A BETTER FEEL FOR IT.

>> WELL, -- .

>>SLUSHER: WELL, WHAT WOULD IT HURT TO HAVE SOME STAFF DOING SOME PRICE ESTIMATES.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I THINK THEY OUGHT TO, BUT BETS LETS NOT TAKE WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW WHERE WE MAKE SOME DECISION ON ITEM 19 AND 21, SUCH AS TAKE -- LET'S TAKE IT UP AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE END UP TAKING UP THE IC BECAUSE THEN THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND DO ALL THAT STAFF WORK.

>>SLUSHER: THAT'S FINE WITH ME IF WE DON'T NEED A VOTE TO DO THAT AS LONG AS WE GET THE WORK DONE, HAVE THE INFORMATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FOR THAT MATTER, IF WE WANT YOU WANTEDDED TO HAVE A VOTE, WE COULD POSTPONE -- YOU COULD MOVE TO POSTPONE THE APPROPRIATION OF THE 4.55 MILLION THAT IS CURRENTLY SET A -- SET AS ITEM NUMBER 2 AND 19 UNTIL WE BRING UP THE WHOLE THING.

>>SLUSHER: WELL, EITHER -- FINE. I'LL RESERVE IT FOR PUTTING UP TO VOTE. IT MIGHT BE 4.3.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WHY DON'T WE DO THAT. I'LL RECOGNIZE THAT YOU HAVE MOVED TO POSTPONE THAT. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. AND BY THE WAY, FOR THE RECORD, AND FOR THE MINUTES, COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER BY MAKING THAT MOTION IS WITHDRAWING HIS PREVIOUS MOTION. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?

>>GRIFFITH: YES, MAYOR. BECAUSE OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIS MONEY AND THE I. T. GRANT MATCH WILLING, IT GETS MORE -- MATCHING, IT GETS MORE COMPLICATED AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD SOLUTION THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO TO THE 4:00 O'CLOCK TIME CERTAIN.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, I'M ALICE GLASCO AND THE ZONING CASES FOR TODAY AND I'LL START OFF WITH THE CONSENT ITEMS AND A POSTPONEMENT REQUEST. ITEM NUMBER 39, C-14-2204 LOCATED AT 7,000-7200 HIGHWAY 290 EAST. THEY HAVE AGREED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION RELIGIOUS WHICH IS MULTI-FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY 3 WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE -- AND THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER WOULD LIKE TO MODIFY THE PLANNING COMMISSION SLIGHTLY REGARDING ACCESS, WHICH WOULD SIMPLY READ THE SAME WAY IT DOES CURRENTLY, EXISTING CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, WHICH STATES THAT NO ACCESS IS ALLOWED TO CORE ANYWAY DOUGH HILLS EXCEPT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES ONLY. CORONADO HILLS. A NO ACCESS THERE. THE OTHER CONDITIONS REMAIN THE SAME AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN THE CASE IS READY FOR FIRST READING. ITEM NUMBER 40, CASE C-14-2244, THE AGENT AGENT FOR THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED FOR POSTPONEMENT FOR 60 DAYS. THE PERSON INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THE PROPERTY HAS WITHDRAWN AND THE OWNER WOULD LIKE TO PURSUE OPTIONS WITHIN 60 DAYS. THOSE ARE THE TWO OPTIONS WE HAVE ON FOR CONSENT. THE OTHER ITEMS ARE DISCUSSION ITEMS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ITEM 39 WAS ON FIRST READING ONLY, COUNCIL. AND ITEM NUMBER 40 WOULD BE A POSTPONEMENT TO 7-19-2001. IS THAT RIGHT?

>> YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. WE HAVE SOMEBODY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR SOME REASON.

>> SHOULD WE LET HIM.

>> I SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

>> I'M SURE YOU DID. MR. GARCIA.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THE AGREEMENT THAT WE REACHED WITH THE APPLICANT WAS THAT THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE MODIFIED SO THAT THERE IS NO ACCESS FROM THE PROPERTY TO CORONADO HILLS. THE ACCESS WOULD BE THROUGH THE FRONTAGE ROAD ON 290. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT EMERGENCY VEHICLES CAN GET -- HE'S AGREED TO THAT. EMERGENCY VEHICLES CAN GET TO THAT PROPERTY MUCH EASIER FROM 290 THAN THEY CAN THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WHEREAS THE ORDINANCE READS THERE WILL BE NO ACCESS EXCEPT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES, WE WANT -- AND HE'S AGREED TO DO THAT. WE WANT IT REMOVED. WE WANT NO ACCESS FROM CORONADO HILLS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THE APPLICANT HERE? IS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT HERE? [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, WHILE CAPTIONERS CHANGE]

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS THERE AN OBJECTION TO POSTPONEMENT ON ITEMS 30 THROUGH 38? I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO POSTPONE ITEMS 30 TO 38 FOR TWO WEEK. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM. IS THERE A DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES, ITEMS 30 THROUGH 38 ARE POSTPONED FOR TWO WEEKS E..

>>GLASGO: ITEM NO. 41 IS CASE SOWN SOWN LOCATED AT -- CASE NUMBER C14-01-010016. APPLICANT SEEKING CHANGE TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TOYS GRANT LIMITED OFFICE CONDITIONAL OVERLAY ZONING WITH CONDITIONS, BUT THERE IS ALSO A VALID PETITION OPPOSING ANY CHANGE IN ZONING FROM THE CURRENT EXISTING ZONING OF SINGLE FAMILY 3. THIS SITE IS OCCUPIED BY A CHURCH, WHICH -- WHICH HAS EXISTING FACILITIES. THE CHURCHES ARE PERMITTED IN SINGLE FAMILY 3, HOWEVER THE -- THERE IS AN INTEREST TO INCREASE IMPERVIOUS COVER BEYOND WHAT IS ALLOWED IN SINGLE FAMILY 3 ZONING. WHICH IS 45%. THE REZONING REQUESTS TO LIMIT -- TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL WOULD ALLOW FOR AN INCREASE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER TO -- OF 68% TO -- TO THE LO DISTRICT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS AMENDED TO ACTUALLY OF 70%. THE -- THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY 3, GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT'S A -- IT'S A PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY AREA. WE FEEL LIKE THE SINGLE FAMILY ZONING SHOULD BE MAINTAINED. HAVING SAID THAT I WILL PAUSE THERE AND WAIT FOR QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL AFTER THE APPLICANT PRESENTS.

>> IS MR. GONZALES HERE? IS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT HERE? YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION.

>> MY NAME IS ERIC LANGHALL REPRESENTING THE CLIENT. WHAT WE HAVE AT THIS LOCATION IS AN EXISTING CHURCH THAT HAS A BUILDING THAT IS OLD, STARTING TO DETERIORATE, NOT UP TO CODE. AND BASICALLY WHAT THE -- WHAT THE CLIENTS ARE LOOKING TO DO IS TO REPLACE THIS BUILDING WITH A NEW BUILDING THAT WILL MAKE THE SITE A LOT MORE AESTHETICALLY APPEALING. BASICALLY THE ONLY REASON WE ARE CHANGING TO LO IS BECAUSE OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN S.F. 3, ONLY ALLOWS 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER. RIGHT NOW THE PARKING LOT LOT KSDZS OF DIRT THAT THE CARS PARK ON. WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT AN ASPHALT PARKING LOT. BUT TO PLACE THIS NEW BUILDING AND THE PARKING LOT THERE'S NO WAY WE CAN KEEP WITHIN 45%. SO THIS BASICALLY IS THE ONLY REASON TAKE WE WANT TO CHANGE TO LO ZONING. TO ALLOW MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER. LET ME GET MY NOTES HERE. SOME OF THE PETITIONS THAT I HAVE READ FROM -- FROM THE OPPOSITION HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT NOISE AND TRAFFIC THAT'S CAUSING HARDSHIP. WELL, BASICALLY RIGHT NOW, EVEN IF WE DO ORB DO NOT CHANGE THE ZONING -- DO OR DO NOT CHANGE THE ZONING THE NOISE AND TRAFFIC ISN'T GOING TO CHANGE. THE CHURCH ISN'T GOING ANYWHERE. IF WE STILL CHANGE THE ZONING WE ARE STILL GOING TO BE THERE. REGARDLESS WE ARE GOING TO STILL HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC. ALSO WE ARE LOOKING FOR A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY. THAT WILL KEEP THE CYTO A RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY ONLY. THAT -- KEEP THE SITE TO A RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY ONLY. IF THEY DO DECIDE TO SELL IT WILL STILL BE RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY, THEY CAN'T CHANGE IT TO AS THEY HAVE SAID A 7-11 OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. SO THAT'S -- THAT'S AGAIN THE REASON THAT WE WANT TO CHANGE TO LO IS JUST BECAUSE OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THEM REQUIRING FOR S.F. 3, 45% MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER.

>>MAYOR WATSON: CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? PARTICULARLY SINCE THE WAY YOU PHRASED THAT LAST STATEMENT. WHAT THIS WOULD ALLOW YOU TO DO, YOU SAY THE CITY OF AUSTIN SOMEHOW APPARENTLY IS -- IS REQUIRING YOU TO DO THIS. WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS NOT REALLY ACCURATE. BUT RIGHT NOW WHAT THE REGULATIONS WOULD DO IS PUT YOU AT 45% IMPERVIOUS COVER. WHAT YOU ARE SEEKING TO DO IS PAVE IT UP TO 70% IMPERVIOUS COVER?

>> YES, SIR.

>> NOW, I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD IN YOUR INITIAL PART OF YOUR PRESENT STAYING, WHY THE NEED FOR -- FOR THAT ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER.

>> RIGHT NOW, WITH THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE ON SITE, WE ARE RIGHT ABOUT AT 40% IMPERVIOUS COVER.

>> MY QUESTION IS WHAT -- WHAT IS THE PLAN THAT REQUIRES YOU TO GO TO 70%, THAT IS AS YOU HAVE SEEMED TO IMPLY, MAKES NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER IN THE ACTIVITY THERE OR THE ACTIVITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WHY -- WHY THE NEED TO GO UP TO 70% IF IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE?

>> WELL, WITH THE AMOUNT OF BUILDING SPACE THAT IS ON THE SITE EXISTINGLY AND THE PROPOSED BUILDING, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REQUIRE 50 PARKING SPACES. AND 50 PARKING SPACES IS GOING TO JACK UP OUR -- OUR IMPERVIOUS COVER UP TO CLOSE TO 70%.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SO THERE IS AN ACTIVITY THAT'S BEING DONE THAT MAY MAKE A DIFFERENCE WITH REGARD TO TRAFFIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT'S WHY YOU NEED TO HAVE ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS COVER.

>> RIGHT. THAT WAY WE CAN TAKE ALL OF THE PARKING OFF-SITE, BRING IT ON SITE AND HOPEFULLY EVEN SATISFY SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT PARKING AROUND THEIR HOUSE, AROUND THEIR -- IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SIR, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A VALID PETITION THAT'S BEEN FILED ON THIS.

>> YES, SIR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MS. GLASGO, IS IT CORRECT THAT PETITION IS VALID?

>>GLASGO: (NODDED HEAD).

>>MAYOR WATSON: SIR, THE OTHER THING THAT YOU NEED TO KNOW IS THE POLICY OF AT LEAST TWO COUNCILMEMBERS THAT -- YOU UNDERSTAND IF A VALID PETITION IS FILED YOU HAVE TO HAVE SIX VOTES TO MAKE A CHANGE IN ZONING.

>> RIGHT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND IT IS -- IT IS THE POLICY OF A NUMBER OF US, BUT OF -- THAT WE LOOK AT THOSE VALID PETITIONS VERY CLOSELY AND IN THIS INSTANCE I BELIEVE I CAN TELL YOU WITH SOME SENSE OF ASSURANCE THAT THERE ARE TWO MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL PREPARED TO VOTE AGAINST THIS SIMPLY BECAUSE THERE IS A VALID PETITION THERE, REGARDLESS OF SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE JUST ASKED YOU ABOUT FRANKLY WILL CREATE SOME CONCERN WITH REGARD TO -- TO THIS. WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IF YOU DON'T WORK OUT SOMETHING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD YOU ARE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO GET YOUR ZONING CHANGE.

>> RIGHT. WE FEEL THAT THIS PRESENTATION WILL HOPEFULLY CHANGE SOME OF THEIR VIEWS BECAUSE WE THINK THAT A LOT OF THE PETITIONS ARE BASED ON FALSE INFORMATION THAT WAS GIVEN TO THEM.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HAVE YOU MET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD?

>> YES, WE HAVE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HAVE YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH THE PEOPLE THAT YOU THINK MAY HAVE FALSE IMPRESSIONS AND THAT'S WHY THEY SIGNED THE IMPRESSION IF.

>> YES, WE HAVE. THEY BASICALLY --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOUR HOPE IS TONIGHT THEY WILL CHANGE THEIR MIND.

>> THEY DIDN'T EVEN WANT TO LISTEN TO US.

>>MAYOR WATSON: OKAY. I'M SORRY I INTERRUPTED YOU, PLEASE CONCLUDE --

>> I THINK THAT CONCLUDES -- EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE TO SAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. LET ME JUST ASK BEFORE WE GET INTO THE OTHER CARDS, -- LET'S JUST GO TO THE CARDS. NANNA HAIRSSTON, DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK OR BE SHOWN IN OPPOSITION?

>> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>>MAYOR WATSON: IS JIM McKARN HERE. IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK YOU CAN MAKE YOUR WAY TO THAT MICROPHONE OR I WILL JUST SHOW YOU IN OPPOSITION. [INAUDIBLE] BONET. YOU WILL FOLLOW MR. McKARN.

>> IT ON THE BACK OF ONE OF THOSE SHEETS.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> LET HER GO FIRST. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME AT THIS. NOT A GOOD ONE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: IT'S ACTUALLY A VERY EASY DEAL.

>> OKAY. MS. HAIRSTON IT'S ALL YEARS.

>> I'M LANA HAIRSSTON, MY 12TH YEAR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I HAVE LIVED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 31 YEARS. FIRST, BEFORE I READ MY SPEECH, I AM GOING TO ADDRESS ERIC'S SPEECH WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT A BUILDING. THE BUILDING, OLD BUILDING TO BE REMOVED, IF YOU WILL KINDLY LOOK, HE HAS AN OLD CHURCH, A BUILDING, A HOUSE. SO WHAT'S GOING TO BE REMOVED? THAT'S NUMBER ONE, WE DON'T KNOW. WE FEEL AT THIS TIME THAT THE NEIGHBORS BORDERING THIS EXISTING CHURCH PROPERTY HAVE HAD MORE THAN THEIR SHARE OF STRESSFUL NOISE AND EXCESS TRAFFIC FROM THE MANY CHURCH SERVICES TAKING PLACE ON VARIOUS NIGHTS AND EARLY MORNINGS DURING ANY TIME OF THE WEEK. NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS ARE RECEIVED BY ME, PLUS NEIGHBORS CALLS TO 911 AND OTHER NUMBERS COMPLAINING TO THE CHURCH PEOPLE REGARDING NOISE FROM LLOYD MUSIC, LOUD TALKING MEMBERS, LOUD MUSIC, VEHICLE BRIGHT LIGHTS AT NIGHT AND EVEN THE BLOWING OF CAR HORNS TO PURPOSELY IRRITATE THE COMPLAINING NEIGHBORS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE TRAFFIC GENERATED BY THE PROPOSED LO ZONING WOULD HAVE A DEFINITE NEGATIVE EFFECT ON THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. WE VALUE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR LITTLE COMMUNITY AND THEREFORE FEEL THE MORE INTENSIFIED REZONING ABOVE S.F. 3 OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WOULD HAVE MANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. ESPECIALLY HOMES WITHIN 200 TO 300 FEET OF THE CHURCH PROPERTY. THEREFORE WE ASK THAT THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION CONTINUE AT THE S.F. 3 CURRENT ZONING. AS PRESIDENT OF THE GEORGIAN ACRES NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION I HAVE A REAL COMMITMENT TO QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND I DO MEAN BIG-TIME COMMITMENTS. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: JIM McKARN, FOLLOWED BY MR. BONET AND THEN MS. BONET.

>> MY NAME IS JIM McKARN. MY PROPERTY IS LOCATED DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE CHURCH. I FEEL THAT ALLOWING A ZONING CHANGE ON THE CHURCH PROPERTY WOULD BENEFIT NO ONE. THE CHURCH CONGREGATION HAS ALREADY GROWN TOO LARGE FOR THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE SITE. AND REZONING THE PROPERTY WILL ONLY TEMPORARILY SOLVE THEIR PROBLEM. THE PASTOR IS PROBABLY A VERY STRONG LEADER TO ACHIEVE THE DEDICATION THAT HE HAS FROM HIS CONGRESS GAUGE. IT'S NOT A TYPICAL CHURCH WHERE THERE ARE A COUPLE OF SERVICES ON SUNDAY. THE MEMBERS ARE AT THE CHURCH ALMOST EVERY DAY. AND FOR VERY LONG PERIODS OF TIME. I FEEL THAT THERE IS A NEED -- THERE IS NEED FOR A MUCH LARGER SITE IS INEVIDENTABLE. WHEN THE CHURCH MOVES THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL BE LEFT WITH LO ZONED LAND COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THE STREETS AROUND THE CHURCH ARE NARROW. AND IN MY OPINION NOT DESIGNED TO CARRY BUSINESS TRAFFIC. I THINK IT'S UNFAIR TO THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE AREA TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO LO. THE NEIGHBORHOOD APPEARS TO BE IN THE EARLY STAGES OF REVITALIZATION AND TO BURDEN IT WITH INXATABLELY ZONED LAND IS NOT RIGHT. THERE MAY ALSO BE ISSUES WITH FLOODING, I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFICS OF SITE, BUT IT'S IN AN AREA OF TOWN THAT HAS EXPERIENCED FLOODING IN THE PAST. AGAIN I FEEL THE SITE WORKS WELL FOR A SMALL CONGREGATION, BUT THE CURRENT CHURCH HAS ALREADY OUTGROWN IT AND EXPANDING ON THE CURRENT SITE WOULD BE A BIG MISTAKE.

>> MR. BONET.

>> LET ME JUST SAY WHILE HE'S COMING UP THAT IF -- I'M NOT SUGGESTING THIS HAS ALREADY HAPPENED, DON'T TAKE THIS PERSONALLY, BUT WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS AND ANOTHER ITEM AND IF WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE DOING IS REPEATING WHAT SOMEONE ELSE HAS SAID, I WILL TELL YOU THE PURPOSES -- FOR PURPOSES OF WHAT I HAVE ALREADY INDICATED FIRST, YOU HAVE -- THERE HAS TO BE SIX VOTES FOR A ZONING CHANGE. I HAVE ALREADY I THINK INDICATED THAT TWO PEOPLE HAVE INDICATED THEY ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR THE VALID PETITION, MEANING THERE WON'T BE SIX VOTES. REGARDLESS OF HOW EVERYBODY ELSE PLAYS OUT. SO IF YOU DON'T NEED TO REPEAT YOURSELF, DON'T REPEAT YOURSELF. MR. BONET.

>> MR. MAYOR, I'M GOING TO TRY NOT TO REPEAT SOMETHING. I LIVE JUST IN FRONT OF THE CHURCH. THE -- THE CHANGE OF ZONING, I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT IT. BECAUSE ON THE FIRST VISITS THEY DID TO US ABOUT -- ABOUT CHANGING, BUILDING A NEW CHURCH, THAT WOULDN'T BOTHER US AND THEN -- YOU KNOW. THE IDEA WAS TO CHANGE THE ZONING BECAUSE SUPPOSE WE CHANGE THE ZONING AND EVERYTHING IS ACCEPTED? THEY SAY WE CHANGE OUR MIND, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE THAT CHURCH SOME OTHER PLACE. I'M GOING TO LEAVE THE THREE BUILDINGS WHO ARE NOT CHURCHES, AND WE ARE GOING TO SELL THEM LATER. SO -- SO WHY -- WHY ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THE ZONING, IF YOU ALREADY HAVE A CHURCH THERE? YOU DON'T NEED TO CHANGE THE ZONING. AND TO AVOID THAT PROBLEM THAT WE CAN'T HAVE ANOTHER BUSINESS, DUPLEXES, I DON'T KNOW, DIAMOND SHAMROCK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT GOING INTO THAT PLACE IN THE FUTURE, THE CHANGE IN ZONING, WOULD HELP TO DO THAT. SO THAT'S WHY I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA. THAT'S ALL, THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET ME TRY TO CUT TO THE CHASE A LITTLE BIT. AND SAY AGAIN WHAT THE MAYOR WAS SAYING. I FOR ONE COULD NOT VOTE FOR THIS EVEN IF THERE WAS NOT A VALID PETITION. BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION. THE CASE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SIX VOTES TO BE APPROVED. AND WE ALREADY KNOW THAT UNLESS ALL THE OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS VOTED FOR IT, MY HAVING SAID THAT, IS THE ONLY WAY IT WOULD PASS. SO MAYBE WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY OTHER COUNCILMEMBER WHO FEELS STRONGLY TO MENTION NOW AND PERHAPS THEN THE NEIGHBORS WON'T HAVE TO SIT HERE AS LONG AS THESE CARDS INDICATE.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: COUNCILMEMBER?

>>GRIFFITH: I FEEL THE SAME WAY THAT YOU DO ABOUT THIS ONE, EVEN IF THERE WERE NO VALID PETITION, PAVING 70% OF THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE A PROBLEM FOR ME.

>>GOODMAN: HAVING SAID THAT, LET ME ASK IF ALL OF THE SPEAKERS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP FEEL THE NEED TO -- TO CONTINUE BEING CALLED UP AND SPEAKING OR IF -- IF YOU DON'T MIND WE COULD GO DIRECTLY TO A VOTE. [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>>GOODMAN: OKAY.

>> I'M BRAD BALLARD, MY PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE CHURCH. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH THE CHURCH. BUT I -- I DON'T WANT THE -- THE ZONING CHANGE AS WELL. AND I WISH SOMEONE WOULD HAVE COME AND SPOKEN TO ME ABOUT IT BECAUSE -- BECAUSE I THINK THEY ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS, I DON'T WANT TO RUN THEM OFF. I'M INTERESTED IN A COMPROMISE. BUT I'M AGAINST THE ZONING CHANGE. THAT'S ALL.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>THOMAS: MAYOR PRO TEM?

>>GOODMAN: COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?

>>THOMAS: YES. I KNOW YOU SAID YOU ALL MET. HAS ANYONE SAT DOWN, HAS THE CHURCH WILLING TO COMPROMISE OR THE NEIGHBORS WILLING TO COMPROMISE EITHER WAY, HAVE YOU ALL WORKED ANYTHING OUT? [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>>THOMAS: SOMEONE IN THE BACK, ARE YOU WITH THE CHURCH, MA'AM? [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MS. RODRIGUEZ, WHILE YOU ARE COMING UP, IF I MIGHT MAKE A SUGGESTION, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THIS AT ALL, YOU MAKE YOUR WAY UP, WE WILL HEAR FROM YOU. WHAT COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS IS ASKING IS A VERY VALID QUESTION. IT SOUNDS TO ME, I HAVE BEEN DOING THIS A WHILE NOW, SOMETIMES YOU CAN TELL WHEN, WELL, THE PEOPLE ARE SAYING THEY HAVEN'T BEEN CONTACTED, MAYBE THEY -- THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF ONGOING CONTACT, THAT KIND OF A THING. I WILL TELL YOU BASED UPON THE PRESENTATION THAT I HAVE SEEN UP TO NOW, I'M NOT AT ALL SURE THAT SUFFICIENT TIME AND ENERGY HAS BEEN PUT INTO TRYING TO WORK SOMETHING OUT. AND BASED UPON WHAT YOU HAVE JUST BEEN TOLD ABOUT THE WAY A VOTE IS GOING TO GO, LOOKING AT A VALID PETITION, IT STRIKES ME THAT -- THAT IF -- I THINK COUNCIL PROBABLY WOULD ALLOW A COUPLE OF WEEKS FOR PEOPLE TO TRY TO WORK SOMETHING OUT. IF YOU END UP IN THE SAME POSITION WITH THE VALID PETITION, YOU PRETTY MUCH KNOW WHERE YOU ARE AT THAT POINT. I WILL TELL YOU WHAT, I DON'T THINK YOU ARE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION RIGHT NOW. WITHOUT OBJECTION FROM COUNCIL I WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU ALL -- HAS THERE BEEN ANY REQUEST FOR A POSTPONEMENT ON THIS? BY THE APPLICANT?

>>GLASGO: YES, MAYOR. THE CASE WAS POSTPONED FROM A PREVIOUS MEETING.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WAS GOING TO SAY TYPICALLY WE ALLOW FOR THAT. I'M CONFIDENT THAT COUNCIL, I MAY BE WRONG ABOUT THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT COUNCIL WOULD ALLOW FOR A -- FOR A PERIOD OF TIME FOR YOU ALL TO TRY TO WORK SOMETHING OUT BASED UPON WHAT COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS HAS JUST REQUESTED.

>>THOMAS: THAT WAS WHAT I WAS GOING TO, IF THE COUNCIL WOULD ALLOW THEM TWO WEEKS TO SIT DOWN AND WORK IT OUT. IF NOT -- IF NOT AT LEAST THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE IT APPEARS THAT THE COMPROMISE HAVING -- LIKE ONE NEIGHBOR SAID HE - BEEN CONTACTED. I WOULD SUGGEST AND HOPE THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD GIVE HIM AT LEAST TWO WEEKS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: PLEASE COME FORWARD, ALTHOUGH IT'S --.

>> OKAY. IF YOU CAN SEE THE PROBLEM, THE MAIN CONCERN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE TO COMMERCIAL. IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN TO THESE PEOPLE THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY COMMERCIAL CONVENTION STORE, LIQUOR STORE, GOING TO STAY THE CHURCH THEY DON'T MIND IF WE BUILD THE CHURCH AND THE PARKING LOT. THE LONGER WE KEEP THE CHURCH THERE. THEY NEED A BETTER BUILDING. THE BUILDING IS -- IS UP -- BACK IN THE 50'S, IT NEED A LOT OF IMPROVEMENT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, MA'AM. IF I MIGHT INTERRUPT YOU, LET ME SEE IF I CAN MAKE THIS ANY MORE CLEAR. YOU ARE GETTING READY TO LOSE.

>> I KNOW THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND I'M TRYING TO OFFER YOU A WAY TO -- TO PERHAPS NOT LOSE. AND IT'S REALLY NOT THE TIME AT A ZONING HEARING FOR THE COUNCIL TO EXPLAIN AS YOU JUST INDICATED TO THESE PEOPLE THAT THERE'S NOT A CHANGE. THAT REALLY SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT DOES BEFORE YOU GET HERE OR YOU LOSE.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO LISTEN TO ME BECAUSE THEY DON'T BELIEVE ME. THIS LADY TOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I WAS A LIAR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: WELL, MA'AM --

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.

>>MAYOR WATSON: YOU DON'T WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEND TWO WEEKS WORKING ON IT?

>> I DO. I DO. I WANT TO SPEND AND EXPLAIN TO THEM ONCE IF YOU GIVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY AND THEY --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: HOW ABOUT IF THE CITY PROVIDED YOU A FACILITATOR DURING THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AS PART OF ONE OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE TO HELP COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES? WOULD THAT BE OF BENEFIT? WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD CONSIDER TO BE BENEFICIAL? [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>>MAYOR WATSON: WELL, MA'AM, THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO BE DOING THIS. WHAT I'M -- I WILL TELL YOU AFTER FOUR YEARS OF DOING THIS, SITTING HERE WHERE I AM SITTING HERE RIGHT NOW, IT APPEARS TO ME THERE HASN'T BEEN THE KIND OF COMMUNICATION BEFORE I VOTE AGAINST SOMETHING OR VOTE FOR SOMETHING -- MA'AM, MA'AM, MA'AM, MA'AM. WHAT I'M OFFERING IS A CITY SERVICE WHERE THE CITY WILL PROVIDE A FACILITATOR TO MAYBE WE CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY WHERE THERE'S NOT A WIN OR LOSE HERE. BUT EVERYBODY FEELS A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE ABOUT WHAT THE SITUATION IS. THERE -- THERE MAY HAVE BEEN THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID WRONG. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN MISREPRESENTED, MAYBE EVEN BAD STUFF SAID THAT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SAID. WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS THAT -- THAT BEFORE WE GO DOWN THE ROAD WHERE THERE'S JUST WINNERS AND LOSERS, WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT ALLOWS FOR FACILITATION AND I DON'T MEAN TO DEBATE IT HERE, EITHER WE CAN TAKE A VOTE IN THE NEXT FIVE MINUTES, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT BENEFITS THE PROCESS.

>> [INAUDIBLE - NO MIC].

>>MAYOR WATSON: MS. GLASGO, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING?

>>GLASGO: WE CAN CERTAINLY FACILITATE A MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE APPLICANT AND ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION, WHICH MIGHT HELP EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT ARE RAISED. WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.

>>MAYOR WATSON: ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, WITHOUT -- WITHOUT OBJECTION OF COUNCIL, WHAT I WOULD DO IS ENTERTAIN A MOTION THAT CLOSES THE PUBLIC HEARING OR RECESSES THE PUBLIC HEARING. RECESSES THE PUBLIC HEARING, ASKED THAT THE ITEMS COMES BACK IN TWO WEEKS, INSTRUCT STAFF TO PROVIDE A FACILITATOR AND PROCESS TO AT LEAST ALLOW FOR BETTER COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THESE PARTIES SO THAT WHEN WE COME BACK IN TWO WEEKS WE AS A COUNCIL WILL FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THAT COMMUNICATION HAS OCCURRED REGARDLESS OF HOWEVER WE ARE INCLINED TO VOTE.

>>THOMAS: SECOND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, IS THERE A SECOND?

>>GRIFFITH: SECOND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED SAY NO. MOTION CARRIES. THIS HEARING IS IN RECESS. MS. GLASGO OR MR. GUERNSEY OR SOMEONE WILL BE IN CONTACT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT. AND YOU, MA'AM, OR THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT CREATE A FACILITATED PROCESS.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

>>GLASGO: MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS, OUR NEXT ITEM IS TELL ITEM NO. 42, C14-01-0032, LOCATED AT 4601 EAST ST. ELMO ROAD, FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO LO. THIS IS OUT OF OUR SMART HOUSING INITIATIVE. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO PARTICIPATE UNDER THAT INITIATIVE. THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE ZONING, HOWEVER THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED A DENIAL OF THE REZONING TO YOU. THE PROPERTY COMPROMISES OF APPROXIMATELY 1.3 ACRES. THE PROPERTY HAS ZONING THAT INCLUDES RURAL RESIDENTIAL FOR THE CONVEYOR IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND THE BALANCE OF THE TRACT HAS LIMITED OFFICE ZONING. THIS ZONING WAS CREATED THROUGH AN -- THROUGH ST. ELMO AREA STUDY THAT WAS CONDUCTED IN THE MID '80'S. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO COMBINE THIS 1.2 ACRE TRACT WITH AN ADJOINING PROPERTY THAT IS A LITTLE OVER TWO ACRES IN -- IN AN ATTEMPT TO BUILD APPROXIMATELY 35 HOUSING UNITS THAT WOULD -- WOULD SUPPLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR HOUSING THAT IS TARGETED AT -- TO CITIZENS WHO FORWARD THEN THE INCOME THAT IS ESTABLISHED -- WHO FALL WITHIN THE INCOME IN THE SMART HOUSING GUIDELINES. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARD FROM SEVERAL SPEAKERS AT THE HEARING, THERE WAS A PETITION ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE OPPOSING THE REZONING AT 21%. THE STAFF FEEL THAT THE REQUEST IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS TRACT. IT'S GOING TO BE COMBINED WITH AN ADJOINING PROPERTY THAT IS ALREADY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY 6. THIS -- THIS PROPOSAL WOULD THEN PROVIDE ADDITIONAL HOUSING IN THIS AREA THAT WOULD BE A TOTAL OF 35 UNITS. I WILL PAUSE HERE AND RESPOND TO QUESTIONS IF ANY ARISE AFTER THE APPLICANT PRESENTS THE CASE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: PLEASE COME FORWARD, YOU WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE COUNCIL. MY TOM IS TOM McMULLEN, I'M WITH THE APPLICANT KING FISHER CREEK. WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS PUT 35 TOWNHOME UNITS ON APPROXIMATELY 4.5 ACRES. WHICH -- WHICH WILL ALLOW US TO BE -- AS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSCIOUS AS POSSIBLE. AS OPPOSED TO HAVING TO SQUEEZE 35 UNITS ON TO THE EXISTING APPROPRIATELY ZONED 3 ACRES. SO THAT'S -- THAT'S WITH A WE WOULD LIKE TO DO. -- THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO. WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IT IN A TOWNHOME CONFIGURATION. WE ARE NOT WED TO THAT. THERE'S SEVERAL WAYS TO GET OUR PROJECT GOAL, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO. AT SOME POINT I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SELL THESE TO INDIVIDUAL OWNERS, IF I CAN DO IT AS TOWN HOMES, I CAN DO IT LIKE THAT. WE HAVE ONE VALID PETITIONER TO THE EAST OF US COMPROMISING 21.7% OF THE ADJOINING LAND OWNERS. SHE DOES NOT LIVE ON THE PROPERTY. ON HER PROPERTY. SHE'S CURRENTLY RENTING HER PROPERTY. YOU KNOW, I -- I WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS AS NICE AS POSSIBLE. AND I THINK OUR RIGHTS ARE EQUAL TO HER RIGHTS. I DO HAVE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS OF BOTH HER PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST OF US. SHOWING THAT MOST OF IT IS COMMERCIAL USES. THERE REALLY IS NO RESIDENTIAL USE. AND A -- IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN SEEING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THEM WITH YOU. WOULD THAT HAVE ANY INTEREST?

>>GOODMAN: WHY DON'T YOU WAIT UNTIL THE END OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

>> OKAY. I THINK THAT WILL SHOW YOU THAT WE ARE NOT PROPOSING SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BRING DOWN THE NEIGHBORHOOD -- DEVALUE HER PROPERTY. WE MET WITH THE KENSINGTON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE [INAUDIBLE] NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. ESSENTIALLY WE WERE TOLD THEY DO NOT WANT ANY RENTAL AND THAT THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT. AND I BELIEVE BOTH OF THOSE ASSERTIONS, BUT AGAIN ALLOWING US TO DO THE PROJECT ON FOUR AND A HALF ACRES WILL MAKE IT ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY. GET IT TO 8 UNIT AN ACRE AS OPPOSED TO 12 UNITS AN ACRE AND WE CAN BACK IT UP FROM THE CREEK. SO THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL. YOU ARE PROBABLY ALSO GOING TO HEAR FROM THEM THAT AN HOUR BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING GOT A LETTER FROM A CITY STAFFER TALKING ABOUT A 75 FOOT SETBACK. I GUESS THAT OUR FEELING IS THAT THEY FELT THAT WOULD PROBABLY TORPEDO THE PROJECT. AND, YOU KNOW, WE THINK WE CAN DO IT. BUT EVEN IF WE CAN DO IT AS -- CAN'T DO IT AS TOWNHOMES WE CAN DO IT AS CONDOMINIUMS, LET'S SAY. WE THINK THAT IT CAN GET DONE. WHEN WE HAD THE MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, WE WERE EXPECTING TO RECEIVE SOME FEEDBACK SUCH AS POTENTIAL ZONING OVERLAYS, OR -- OR DEED RESTRICTIONS, THAT TYPE OF A THING. INSTEAD BASICALLY THEY CUT OFF COMMUNICATIONS. SO I JUST RELAYED TO THEM I'M SORRY THAT IT'S HAPPENING, BUT WE NEED TO DO THIS PROJECT AND WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IT AS NICE AS POSSIBLE. IF WE CAN'T THEN, YOU KNOW, WE WILL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT SOME WAY TO GET IT DONE. YOU KNOW, EXACTLY HOW WOULD I GET IT DONE TODAY? WE ARE AT THE FIRST STAGE OF THE SMART GROWTH PROCESS. AND I GUESS THAT'S TO -- TO LAY OUT WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO. SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS 35 TOWNHOMES, WE NEED TO REZONE THAT BACK PIECE. SO -- SO I DON'T HAVE A -- A RENDERING THAT WOULD SHOW YOU, YOU KNOW, IRONCLAD WHAT WE WOULD DO. BUT IT'S THE FEELING OF OUR ARCHITECT AND ENGINEER THAT THE WORST CASE WE COULD DO IS CONDOMINIUMS, THAT WOULD WORK. EVEN IF WE HAD TO GO TO THREE STORY IN A CONDOMINIUM FORMAT, WE COULD DO THAT. OUR LAST PROJECT IN TOWN WE WANTED TO DO TOWN HOMES, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO DO THAT, WE ENDED UP DOING IT IN A MULTI FAMILY, THREE STORY FORMAT. I DID WANT TO DO THAT ONE, ALSO, AS -- AS -- AS TOWN HOMES, I JUST WASN'T ABLE TO DO IT. SO I GUESS THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR HELP TO MAKE THIS AS NICE AS POSSIBLE. AND I GUESS I'M -- I'M FREE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCILMEMBERS DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? BEFORE THE NEXT SPEAKER?

>>WYNN: I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM ALL OF THE SPEAKERS FIRST I GUESS.

>>GOODMAN: DORA BROWN FOLLOWED BY JACK HALLISON.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME ISADORE A BROWN, I'M A MEMBER OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE FOR SCAN. SCAN IS THE COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATION SERVING THE 78744 ZIP CODE. OUR MEMBERSHIP IS COMPOSED OF APPROXIMATELY 14 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS IN 78744 AND ONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN 78745. I'M SPEAKING NOW ON BEHALF OF DONNA LEE, THE PRESIDENT OF SCAN. WHO HAS BEEN DELAYED AND MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND AT ALL. WE ARE HERE THIS AFTERNOON IN OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING REQUEST MADE BY THE DEVELOPERS OF THE PROPOSED KING FISHER CREEK PROJECT ON EAST ST. ELMO. THE FOLLOWING SCAN MEMBERS WILL BE SPEAKING TO YOU ON MATTERS OF GRAVE CONCERN TO OUR COMMUNITY. I WILL BRIEF GOING OVER THE MATTERS CONTAINED IN SCAN'S LETTERS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION DATED APRIL 11TH, 2001. JACK HALLISSON WILL PRESENT THE HISTORY OF THE SITE IN QUESTION. ANOTHER PERSON WILL DISCUSS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES RELATIVE TO THE SITE. TIM JONES WILL DISCUSS FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. THEN EMILY SLOAN WILL YIELD HER TIME TO ME AND I WILL DISCUSS EXAMPLES OF THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT WE BELIEVE IS DETRIMENTAL TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. LEE SLOAN THEN WILL DISCUSS DENSITY AND THE OVERALL IMPACT OF THIS PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE. AN ADDITIONAL SCAN MEMBER WHO MANY OF YOU KNOW, MARGARITE JONES HAD INTENDED TO BE HERE TO PRESENT THIS PERSPECTIVE OF A RENTER IN CONNECTION THIS KIND OF HOUSING, HOWEVER SHE HAS A SICK CHILD AN IS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND.

>>GOODMAN: MA'AM, LET ME INTERRUPT JUST A SECOND AND STOP THE TIME. THAT WAS BACK AT 1:18. THE RULES DON'T ALLOW YOU TO SPEAK TWICE EVEN IF SOMEONE CEDES THEIR TIME TO YOU. YOU HAVE TO DO IT ALL AT ONE TIME.

>> OH, ALL RIGHT.

>>GOODMAN: CAN YOU REARRANGE THAT.

>> YES, I CAN DO IS THAT.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU.

>> LET ME FINISH THIS AND THEN I WILL GRAB THE OTHER NOTES THAT I LEFT IN MY CHAIR. THANK YOU. SCAN MET WITH THE DEVELOPERS OF THIS PROJECT ON APRIL 2ND. FOLLOWING THAT MEETING WE UNDERTOOK OUR OWN INVESTIGATION, WHICH INCLUDED AN EXAMINATION OF THE AREA, SPECIFICALLY THE SECTION OF EAST ST. ELMO WHEN TRAVELS ALONG THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF THIS PROPERTY AND THE WILLIAMSON CREEK TRIBUTARIES WHICH RUN THROUGH THE PROPERTY. WE FOUND THIS SECTION OF EAST ST. ELMO TO BE A TWO LANE STREET WITH A VERY UNEVEN SURFACE, IT HAS NO SHOULDERS, NO SIDEWALKS, VERY DEEP BAR DITCHES ON EACH SIDE OF THE ROAD. VISIBILITY IS VERY LIMITED IN ALL DIRECTIONS. VEHICLES CANNOT SAFELY EXIT THIS PROPOSED SITE. I SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE THERE AS I ALMOST GOT KILLED BOTH ENTERING AND LEAVING A DRIVEWAY. THERE'S NO SAFE PLACE FOR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC TO WALK ALONG THE ROADWAY. AGAIN I KNOW I HAVE TRIED WALKING THERE. IT ISN'T SAFE. THERE'S NO PLACE FOR PEDESTRIANS TO CROSS EAST ST. ELMO. THERE'S NO SAFE PLACE FOR SCHOOL BUSES OR CITY BUSES TO STOP FOR RIDERS AND THERE NOR BICYCLE LANES. FOR THESE REASONS ALONE SCAN IS OPPOSED TO THE ZONING CHANGE AT THE PROPOSED SITE. ADDITIONALLY TRIBUTARIES OF WILLIAMSON CREEK FLOW THROUGH THIS PROPOSED SITE, WE BELIEVE IT TO BE AN ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVE AREA. [BUZZER SOUNDING].

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU. WE WILL HOLD ON WHILE YOU GO GET YOUR NOTES.

>> I HAVE THOSE HERE.

>> THE THREE MINUTES FROM EMILY SLOAN.

>> I'M SPEAKING NOW WITH A DIFFERENT HAT ON, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, NOT A REPRESENTATIVE OF SCAN. I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AND OTHER FACTORS CONCERNING THIS SITE. I OPPOSE THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST FOR REASONS THAT WILL BE STATED BY OTHER SPEAKERS. AND I WANT TO SHOW YOU THE ELEMENTS OF DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE THAT WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT DENSITY. THIS PROJECT PROPOSES 35 UNITS, MORE THAN 200 PEOPLE ON THREE ACRES OF BUILDABLE LAND. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT QUALITY CONSTRUCTION. NOT AS SHOWN IN THE PICTURES. SIDING FALLING OFF AND MISSING SCREENS ON PROPERTY THAT IS ONLY ONE YEAR OLD. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT MANAGEMENT THAT IS INSENSITIVE TO THE ENVIRONMENT. ALLOWING PEOPLE TO CHANGE AND SPILL OIL FOR THEIR CARS, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT MANAGEMENT THAT ALLOWS THE CREEK TO CLOG UP WITH TRASH. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT OVERLOADED DUMPSTERS AND INFREQUENT GARBAGE REMOVAL. WE ARE CONCERNED WHEN MANAGEMENT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO ABANDON SOFAS, MATTRESSES AND OTHER FURNISHINGS BESIDES DUMPSTERS. ITEMS THAT THE DUMPSTER OPERATOR IS NOT OBLIGATED TO REMOVE AND THAT REMAIN ON THE PREMISES FOR A LONG TIME. WE ARE CONCERNED WHEN MANAGEMENT PERMITS A BURNED OUT HAWK OF A CAR TO REMAIN ON THE PREMISES. WHEN HULK. WHEN DEVELOPER PROVIDE A PITIFULLY SMALL PLAYSCAPE AND ONLY ONE PICNIC TABLE FOR HUNDREDS OF RESIDENTS. WE HOPE THAT WHOEVER DEVELOPS AND MANAGES THE SITE ON EAST ST. ELMO WILL PROVIDE BETTER QUALITY AND MANAGEMENT THAN THAT SHOWN IN THE PICTURES. BY THE WAY, THOSE PICTURES WERE TAKEN AT DOUGLAS LANDING. THIS APPLICANT'S ONLY AUSTIN DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS THEIR TRACK RECORD AND WE FEEL IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. WE BELIEVE THAT THE RESIDENTS OF SMART HOUSING DESERVE THE SAME AMENITIES AS THOSE OF US WHO LIVE IN "DUMB" HOUSING. PLEASE DENY THIS ZONING REQUEST CHANGE. BECAUSE DOING SO IS IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE TENANTS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE ENVIRONMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU, MS. BROWN. MR. HALLISSON IS FOLLOWED BY TIM JONES, FOLLOWED BY LEE SLOAN.

>> AIM A LITTLE BIT SPOILED. YOU NEED TO GET THAT NEAT LITTLE VIEW SCREEN THAT THROWS ALL OF THIS UP. I'M PASSING OUT A LITTLE SEGMENT, MY WIFE PEG IS GOING TO HOLD UP AN AREA OF THE -- OF THE ZONING. WE DIDN'T SEE AN EASEL EARLIER. SHE'S NOT GOING TO HOLD IT UP. SHE MINDS JUST AS SHE ALWAYS DOES. WE HAVE BEEN RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA FOR 27 YEARS. WE ARE MEMBERS OF SCAN. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU TODAY. I'M GOING TO TRY TO DEVELOP A CONCEPT THAT -- THAT I'M GOING TO USE SOME WORDS AND I ADMIT THAT I AM USING BUZZ WORDS THAT -- THAT -- I CAN'T SEE MR. SLUSHER, I WANT TO KEEP AN EYE ON HIM. THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO DEVELOP A CONCEPT I'M GOING TO USE SOME WORDS THAT ARE FAMILIAR, BUT BEAR WITH ME WHILE I DEVELOP THE IDEA THAT I'M TRYING TO GET ACROSS. THERE IS A CONTINUITY BETWEEN THE SEATED PLANNING COMMISSION TODAY AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT ZONED THESE TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY. ONE WAS ZONED IN '86, ONE IN '84. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TODAY IS A PART OF A LARGER TRACT OF WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS CLEAVED OFF A VERY SMALL PORTION. HE CHOSE THE PORTION DOWN HERE IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND HE CHOSE THE PORTION THAT HAPPENS TO BE APPEARING RATHER ODDLY AS LO. WHEN YOU SEE IT IN CONTEXT WITH THE LARGER PIECE, YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THIS ZONING WAS APPLIED. WE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WORKED, THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION, WORKED 15 YEARS AGO TO DEVELOP A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. WE COME FROM OFFICE WAREHOUSE TO LO TO S.F. 6 TO S.F. 2, WE WERE DOING DE FACTO NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING BEFORE IT WAS POPULAR. IT'S A PROCESS THAT'S GOING ON TODAY ALL OVER AUSTIN. IF YOU ALLOW A PORTION OF A -- OF THE ZONE TRACT TO BE ADDED ON, TO A MORE DENSE TRACT, THIS RR FOR EXAMPLE, ADD IT ON TO THIS, THUS MAKING A LARGER S.F. 6 TRACT, YOU ENTIRELY CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE -- OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE S.F. 2 AND THE S.F. 6. MY POINT THAT IS WE HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS. PLEASE DO NOT ZONE THIS, REZONE THIS PARTIAL TODAY BECAUSE IT DESTROYS THE CREDIBILITY OF WHAT PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO DO ALL OVER THE CITY. AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD -- IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS. WE HAVE BEEN DOING IT. FOR A LONG NUMBER OF YEARS. WE HAVE BEEN HERE 27 YEARS. WE HAVE WORKED IN COOPERATION WITH LANDOWNERS, THE CITY, THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE DO NOT REZONE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. JONES? WHEEG FOLLOWED BY LEE SLOAN. THAT'S THE ORDER YOU SIGNED UP IN, DO YOU WANT TO TRADE? SHE SIGNED UP, BUT SHE'S NUMBER 4 AND TIM IS NUMBER 3. YOU CAN TRADE SEQUENCE. WE WILL TRADE THAT TO MS. SLOAN FIRST AND THEN -- THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRADED MS. SLOAN NOW AND TIM TO FOLLOW.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBERS, I SHALL BE BRIEF. MY NAME IS ANA MONGA, I'M THE PERSON THAT FILED THE VALID PETITION. AND I BELIEVE THAT YOU HAVE BEEN PASSED OUT SOME -- SOME PRETTY TREMENDOUS SUPPORT FROM MY NEIGHBORS. IN SUPPORT OF MY VALID PETITION. WHICH THEY WERE UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IMMEDIATELY UP AGAINST THIS PROPOSED REZONING. I WANT TO ADDRESS WHAT THE DEVELOPER SAID ABOUT MY PROPERTY JUST -- JUST TO PUT THE RECORD STRAIGHT. I DO NOT RENT OUT THAT PROPERTY. THAT PROPERTY HAS BEEN -- HAS BEEN IN MY POSSESSION FOR THE LAST 7 OR 8 YEARS. MY HUSBAND WHO DIED 7 AND A HALF YEARS AGO BOUGHT IT, I AM WORKING ON IT AND I HAVE MY OWN DREAMS WITH THAT PROPERTY. AND IT IS IN NO WAY A RENTAL PROPERTY. I WANT TO ADDRESS THE ENVIRONMENTAL AREA, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT IT IS SIGNIFICANT. IT IS ONE THAT IS LITTLE KNOWN -- LITTLE KNOWN BY AUSTIN RESIDENTS BUT NEVERTHELESS THE -- SUBSTANTIAL. THERE ARE NATURAL SPRINGS TO THE NORTH OF EAST SAINT ELMO. THERE ARE WELLS IN THE AREA WHICH ARE STILL MAINTAINED AND OVERSEEN BY THE CITY AND THESE CREEKSMY AROUND DOWN INTO WILLIAMSON -- MEANDER TO WILLIAMSON CREEK AND McKINNEY FALLS. I'M GOING TO READ FROM THE WORK STUDY DONE IN 1984 BY THE CITY, REFERRING TO THIS PARTICULAR AREA, AND I QUOTE, A MAJOR TRIBUTARY FLOWS THROUGH THE STUDY AREA AND -- IN AN EAST DISTURB WEST DIRECTION, THIS TRIBUTARY IS WELL DEFINED, HEAVILY WOODED, POSES SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, I REPEAT HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT OR HIGH AMOUNTS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER MAY CREATE ADVERSE IMPACT ASSOCIATED WITH FLOODPLAIN ENCROACHMENT, DECLINING OF WATER QUALITY AND VEGETATION REMOVAL. FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATIONS, CHANNEL ALTERATIONS AND DRAINAGE MODIFICATIONS SHOULD BE AVOIDED. THE FRONT PART OF 4601 EAST ST. ELMO, AS WE ALL KNOW IN THAT AREA, HAS A WONDERFUL DIP DOWN WHICH [INAUDIBLE] WENT OUT AND DECLARED THAT IT DOES FIT INTO THE WET LAND FEATURES. HE FOUND SEVERAL PLANTS DOWN THERE. I WANT TO TELL YOU WHAT A WONDERFUL AREA THIS IS. WHAT A HABITAT IT IS FOR WILDLIFE. FOUR LEGGED CREATURES AND TWO LEGGED AS WELL AS MANY, MANY PLANTS. I'VE HEARD IT SAID THAT THIS IS THE BEST WET LAND IN AUSTIN. IT'S THE LEAST KNOWN POSSIBLY BECAUSE IT'S IN THE SOUTHEAST AREA OF TOWN WHICH ONLY NOW IS BECOMING POPULAR BECAUSE OF THE NEW AIRPORT. [BUZZER SOUNDING].

>> SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO DENY THIS APPLICATION FOR REZONING. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN CAREFULLY PROTECTED BY ITS INHABITANTS FOR MANY YEARS. THEY HAVE BEEN WONDERFUL STEWARDS AND CONTINUE TO BE SO. WE SHOULD BE BUILDING CONTINUITY, ENHANCING OUR WILD LANDS, WOOD LANDS AND STREAMS.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU.

>> A DEVELOPMENT OF THIS NATURE MAY KILL IT.

>>GOODMAN: THANKS. LET ME ASK IF LEE SLOAN IS HERE. OKAY. I THOUGHT IT WAS A FEMALE LEE AND THAT WAS HER. TIM JONES FOLLOWED BY LEE SLOAN. FOLLOWED BY TOM McMULLEN.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR PRO TEM. COUNCIL. MY NAME IS TIM JONES. I'M WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, BUT I'M HERE IN MY CAPACITY AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN AND FRIEND OF MONGALA SERELS. IF YOU COULD REFER TO THE MAP THAT I HAVE JUST PASSED OUT, I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS VARIOUS PARTS OF THE GEOGRAPHY. WHAT WE ARE CONCERNED WITH REZONING HERE IS THAT AREA THAT IS SURROUNDED BY THE PINK LINE AND TRUNCATED BY THE BLACK LINE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE. YOU WILL NOTICE THAT THERE ARE TWO GREEN LINES IN THAT TRACK. THE FIRST GREEN LINE UP FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE DENOTES THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE FOR THAT BRANCH OF WILLIAMSON CREEK. THE SECOND LINE DEMARKS THE -- THE WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE. YOU WILL NOTICE THAT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF THE DEVELOPMENT BUILDINGS AND PARKING LOT WOULD BE GOING INTO THE WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE. IN THIS PART OF TOWN, UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH WE HAVE, WE ARE LIMITED TO 30% IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE. IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE PERHAPS THAT IS -- THAT WOULD BE EXCEEDED IN -- IN THIS. AND AS IS. NOW, WHEN YOU GO TO THE TOP OF THE PAGE, YOU SEE TWO OTHER GREEN LINES. THOSE ARE ON EITHER SIDE OF -- OF THE SPRING RUN AND WETLANDS BELOW TODD PARKER SPRINGS, WHICH IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ST. ELMO ROAD. YOU WILL NOTICE THAT -- THAT THERE ARE ALSO THERE IS THE DRIVEWAY INTO THE TRACT AS WELL AS THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING, AS WELL AS THE FOOTPRINT OF THE SPORTS COURT INSIDE THAT -- THAT SETBACK. THAT IS A 75 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE -- FROM THE SPRING RUN OF THE CREEK. SO -- SO IF -- IF WE -- IF THE DEVELOPER HAD TO SETBACK FROM THE WET LAND, HE WOULD BE PUSHING EVEN MORE DEVELOPMENT INTO THE PINK SURROUNDED AREA, WHICH WOULD INCREASE HIS IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE WELL ABOVE 30%. THE -- ALL OF THESE ASPECTS WOULD START REQUIRING VARIANCES. I BELIEVE THAT UNDER THE SMART HOUSING INITIATIVE, WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ENTERTAINING VARIANCES. THAT THIS HAS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. THERE WERE -- THERE WERE IDEAS OF INCREASING THE BUILDING HEIGHT, INCREASING PERHAPS THE PROXIMITY TO THE NEIGHBORING OR TO THE NEIGHBORS TRACT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- [BUZZER SOUNDING].

>> -- SAID THAT THERE WOULD BE PERHAPS SIX VARIANCES INVOLVED HERE [BUZZER SOUNDING].

>> NONE OF WHICH ARE UNATTAINABLE UNDER SMART HOUSING. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY MORE, BUT I WILL HAVE TO CONCLUDE. PLEASE I DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN ZONE THIS TO SF 2.

>> THANK YOU.

>>GOODMAN: MR. SLOAN, FOLLOWED BY MR. McCULLEN AND THE LAST CARD THAT I HAVE AFTER THAT IS ELIAS LIMONE.

>> ELIAS IS NOT SPEAKING, I BELIEVE. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN. MEMBERS OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL, MY NAME IS LEE SLOAN. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF KENSINGTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND ALSO A MEMBER OF SCAN. I HAVE BEEN ASKED TO SORT OF SUMMARIZE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD POSITION ON THIS, I WILL TRY TO BE BRIEF. FIRST, TO REPEAT, THE ZONINGS THAT ARE NOW IN PLACE ARE THE RESULT OF LONG HOURS, OF VERY CAREFUL CONSIDERATION BY PAST PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND PAST CITY COUNCILLS AND THEY WERE CRAFTED TO PROVIDE PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION OF THESE UNIQUE ENVIRONMENTAL CREEKS AND WET LAND AREAS OF AUSTIN. ACCORDINGLY, WE FEEL THERE NEEDS TO BE OVERWHELMING REASONS TO CHANGE THESE OR VOID THESE PROTECTIONS. NOW, OUR FUNDAMENTAL CONCERN WITH THE DEVELOPMENT IS TWOFOLD. FIRST, IT'S THE EXTREMELY HIGH DENSITY THAT'S GOING -- GOING TO BE CRAMMED INTO THIS ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE TRACT. WHEN YOU TAKE OUT THE WED LANDS THERE'S NOT MUCH LEFT TO CRAM THE UNITS ON. SECOND IS THE TOTAL LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE AREA THAT WOULD SUPPORT SUCH A DEVELOPMENT. LET ME SAY AT THAT POINT, I BELIEVE THE CITY STAFF AND DEVELOPERS WHO HAVE WORKED WITH US IN THE PAST WOULD CONCUR, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ALWAYS TRIED FIND SOME WORKABLE SOLUTION THAT ALLOWS REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY AND AT THE SAME TIME MAINTAINS INTEGRITY AND EQUALLY OF LIFE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND ENVIRONMENT. OUR POSITION IN THIS CASE IS PRETTY SIMPLE. IF THE DEVELOPER WOULD AGREE TO SET ASIDE THE CREEKS AND WETLANDS, TO SET BACK THEIR PROJECT AWAY FROM MONGOLA'S PROPERTY TO THE EAST, TO DOWN SIZE THE PROJECT TO A SIZE COMPATIBLE WITH THE REMAINEDDING BUILDABLE LAND AND SUPPORTABLE INFRASTRUCTURE, AND WE WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE A MIX OF OWNER OCCUPIED AS WELL AS RENTAL UNIT, THEN KENSINGTON PARK COULD SUPPORT THIS DEVELOPMENT. HOWEVER WE HAVE CONTRARY TO WHAT THE APPLICANT SAID, WE HAVE HAD FEEDBACK, WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS WITH THEM. THE APPLICANT CONTINUES TO INSIST ON THIS HIGH DENSITY 35 UNIT NUMBER. THEY HAVE BLUNTLY TOLD ME IN CONFERENCE CALLS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN TAX CREDITS, THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD 35 UNITS, BASICALLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ENVIRONMENT BE DAMNED. THEREFORE WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT COUNCIL JOIN WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WITH THE MEMBERS OF SCAN, AND COUNCIL JOIN WITH COMMISSIONERS BAKER, HEIMSATH, GARZA, BAKER AND REDULLA IN DENYING THE APPLICANT'S ZONING. IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS I OR OTHERS WOULD BE HAPPY TO TRY TO ADDRESS THEM.

>>GOODMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. McMULLEN, MR. LIMONE IS MY LAST CARD IN OPPOSITION.

>> MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, I'M KARL CONNOLLY, I WILL BE CLOSING FOR MR. McMULLEN.

>> THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY, THE THREE ACRES FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUILDING THIS 35 UNIT PROJECT. THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE SENSITIVE WATER ZONES ALONG THE CREEK ON THE FRONT PART OF THE THREE ACRE TRACT, WHICH AGAIN IS NOT THE TRACT THAT'S IN QUESTION, BUT -- BUT IT'S BECAUSE OF THIS SETBACK THAT -- THAT THE -- IT WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE ZONING APPROVAL ON THE REAR ONE AND A HALF ACRE TRACT AGAIN TO ALLOW US TO SET BACK THE DEVELOPMENT FROM THAT PROJECT, WHETHER 35 UNITS OR LESS, THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY TO THE REAR WOULD ALLOW AGAIN MOVING OF THE PROJECT TO THE REAR AND IT IS IN -- IN THE DEVELOPERS INTENTION TO DEVELOP THIS PROJECT UNDER A SMART HOUSING SCENARIO. IT IS TO DO IT WITHOUT VARIANCE. PEOPLE'S PERCEPTION THAT THINGS MAY APPEAR TO BE GREATER THAN 30% IN A TRANSITION ZONE. AGAIN IN THE PLANS THAT WE HAVE PRESENTED SO FAR TO THE CITY HAVE BEEN CONCEPTUAL SO THAT WE COULD WORK WITH BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, CITY STAFF, ENVIRONMENTAL PEOPLE, TO IDENTIFY WHAT IS THE BEST APPROPRIATE SITE PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY. AGAIN, IT IS OUR INTENT TO DESIGN THIS PROJECT IN A FASHION THAT WOULD ALLOW NO VARIANCES REQUIRED. SO -- SO AGAIN WE ARE ASKING FOR THE ZONING OF THE REAR ONE AND A HALF ACRES TO ALLOW THIS MOVEMENT OF THE TRACT, THE DEVELOPMENT FURTHER BACK ON THE PROPERTY. LIKE IT WAS MENTIONED, WE WERE NOTIFIED LATE BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT THIS -- THE CITY STAFF HAD CONCERN ABOUT THE CREEK ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. SINCE THEN WE HAVE MET WITH THE CITY STAFF. DISCUSSED OPTIONS AND ISSUES REGARDING THOSE SETBACKS. AND FEEL THAT WE CAN WORK WITH THEM THROUGH THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS TO COME UP WITH A GOOD ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE PROJECT. AND AGAIN IT IS THE -- THE DEVELOPERS' INTENTION TO MAINTAIN THE NATURAL AND TRADITIONAL CHARACTER OF THIS WATERWAY IN THE FRONT TRACT. WE WILL NOT BE TAKING OUT ANY TREES. AGAIN, OUR INITIAL SITE PLAN HAD OVER 50 FOOT OF SETBACK. AGAIN THE 75 FOOT SETBACK, IF IT IS APPROPRIATE, THEN WE WILL ADJUST THE SITE PLAN ACCORDINGLY. AGAIN ALL OF THAT WILL COME DURING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. SO AGAIN WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO REINFORCE THE FACT THAT WE WILL BE DEVELOPING THIS PROJECT WITHOUT VARIANCE.

>>GOODMAN: THANKS MR. CONNOLLY.

>> ANY QUESTIONS?

>>GOODMAN: SO DO WE UNDERSTAND THAT WAS THE REBUTTAL, YOU TOOK THE REBUTTAL.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>>GOODMAN: OKAY, MAYOR, THOSE ARE ALL OF THE SPEAKERS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH, IS THERE A SNEKD SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. ANY DISCUSSION OPPOSED SAY NO. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION WITH REGARD TO ITEM NO. 42.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR?

>>MAYOR WATSON: YES, COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH.

>>GRIFFITH: I WOULD MOVE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOTION PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION. IS THERE A SECOND?

>>SLUSHER: SECOND.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. IS THERE A DISCUSSION?

>>SLUSHER: YEAH, I WOULD SPEAK TO THAT. THE -- TO ME, I VISITED THIS SITE. I THINK WE HAVE BEEN PRETTY CONSISTENT ABOUT APPROVING APARTMENTS ESPECIALLY IN THE CENTRAL CITY AND UNDER SMART HOUSING. BUT TO ME THIS IS FAR OUT. IT'S STILL LARGELY RURAL AREA. THERE IS SOME SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY HERE AS WE HAVE -- AS WE HAVE SEEN TONIGHT. SO THAT COMBINATION OF THING, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT. THE MOTION IS TO DENY THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>>GOODMAN: YES, MAYOR.

>>GOODMAN: I THINK THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE OPPORTUNITIES WE HAVE FOR SMART HOUSING, ET CETERA, WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT EXISTS AND THERE'S NEVER BEEN REALLY A LACK OF MULTI FAMILY IN THE SOUTHEAST OR THE NORTHEAST. AND SO I THINK WHERE WE NEED TO PUT OUR BEST EFFORTS IS NOT NECESSARILY IN AN AREA LIKE THIS.

>>MAYOR WATSON: FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION SAY AYE. POSSESSED NO. MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA -- [APPLAUSE] -- NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA WILL BE ITEM NO. 43, COUNCIL LET ME READ TO YOU ITEM NO. 43, THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPOINTMENTS. FOLKS, PLEASE TAKE YOUR CONVERSATIONS OUTSIDE. (READING LIST OF APPOINTMENTS) [ONE MOMENT PLEASE FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

>> AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION, ELEANOR COCKRAN. APPOINTMENT AT LARGE, DR. FLOYD DAVIS, AN APPOINTMENT AT LARGE BY CONSENSUS. CINDY GARCIA, A RESIDENT APPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS. STEVEN MORALES, REPRESENTING PEOPLE WITH PILOT'S LICENSES, CONSENSUS. HANNAH RITTERING, AN AT LARGE BY CONSENSUS. MICHAEL VOTIKI A BUSINESS APPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS. JOSEPH TROKTA AN AT LARGE APPOINTMENT BY CONSENSUS, PHIL WILLIAMS BY CONSENSUS, AMANDA KAYLOW BY CONSENSUS. BOND OVERSIGHT, AL DECHRISTA FARROW. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, AUSTIN DOLNIG, CONSENSUS APPOINTMENT. URBAN RENEWAL BOARD, BOTH REAPPOINTMENTS BY THE MAYOR, BENEFIT SUFENTES AND JOHN HALL. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, SONYA SANTANA, A REAPPOINTMENT BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. BOARD AND COMMISSION TASK FORCE, ALL THESE WOULD BE CONSENSUS APPOINTMENTS. BILL SPELMAN, BETTIE BAKER, MAYOR RUTH HOLDER, LEN IN ADDITION LIONS, JOSEPH MARTINEZ. LEONARD LIONS. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THE APPOINTMENTS.

>>GRIFFITH: MAYOR, I MOVE APPROVAL.

>>MAYOR WATSON: COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH MOVE APPROVAL, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>>SLUSHER: SHOW ME VOTING NO ON THE BOARD --.

>>MAYOR WATSON: I WANT TO BE SHOWN VOTING NO ON THE BOARD AND COMMISSION TASK FORCE, ALSO. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IF FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES ON ALL APPOINTMENTS WITH COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER AND THE MAYOR BEING SHOWN VOTING NO ON BOARD AND COMMISSION TASK FORCE. NEXT ITEM THAT WE HAVE WILL BE OUR PROCLAMATIONS AND LIVE MUSIC. BUT THERE IS NO OTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL, SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. MOTION MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER GRIFFITH. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED NO. MOTION CARRIES, WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU ALL. [5:30, LIVE MUSIC AND PROCLAMATIONS].

>>MAYOR WATSON: EACH WEEK WE ANNOUNCE THAT WE HAVE SOMEONE THAT IS MAYOR FOR A DAY. AND AS I'VE EXPLAINED IN THE PAST WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS WE HAVE GONE TO AREA SCHOOLS AND WE HAVE ASKED THAT YOUNG PEOPLE PARTICIPATE IN A PROGRAM THAT REWARDS THEM FOR BEING GOOD STUDENTS AND CITIZENS IN AUSTIN BY LETTING THEM COME DOWN AND BE MAYOR FOR A DAY AND HELP ME WITH PROCLAMATIONS AND LIVE MUSIC. AND I'M REAL PLEASED TO READ THE FOLLOWING PROCLAMATION. BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM ELIZA ROSE WILKINSON AS MAYOR FOR A DAY IN AUSTIN, TEXAS. [APPLAUSE]. AND I CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN ME IN RECOGNIZING THAT 10-YEAR-OLD ELIZA IS A FIFTH GRADER AT SANCHEZ ELEMENTARY WHOSE FAVORITE SUBJECT IS WRITING BECAUSE IT ALLOWS AN ESCAPE AND ALLOWS HER TO EXPRESS HER FEELINGS. IN RECOGNIZING SHE ENJOY VOLUNTEERING AND HELPING ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE AND IN RECOGNIZING THAT SHE HAD A LONG LIST OF PROJECTS SHE HOPED TO TACKLE AS MAYOR FOR A DAY INCLUDING ENCOURAGING JUNIOR HIGH AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TO SAY NO TO DRUGS AND BE GOOD EXAMPLES TO THEIR YOUNGER SIBLINGS. TO ELIMINATE POLLUTION, TO PROVIDE INSURANCE FOR ALL TODDLERS AND YOUTH, AND TO HELP CHILDREN WHO HAVE NO ONE TO LOVE THEM. WE ARE PLEASED TO HONOR HER AS MAYOR FOR A DAY FOR HER KIND HEART AND WE ENCOURAGE HER TO CONTINUE HER EFFORTS TO HELP THOSE LESS FORTUNATE THAN HERSELF. IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MAYOR WILKINSON. [APPLAUSE]. NOW SHE IS GOING TO HELP ME WITH OUR FIRST PROCLAMATION AND THAT IS WITH OUR LIVE MUSIC. BEFORE WE READ THAT PROCLAMATION, I WANT TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT BILLY WOLFE. BILLY WOLFE'S FIRST ENCOUNTER WITH TEXAS CAME UPON HIS AF RIFE IN AUSTIN DURING THE SUMMER OF 86. THE COLD WATER SURGING OUT BENEATH THE ROCKS PROVIDED THE RELIEF HE SOUGHT FROM THAT SUMMER HEAT. BUT MORE PROFOUNDLY THE SPRINGS BECAME A SOURCE OF INSPIRATION FOR HIM AS A YOUNG COMPOSER. IT WAS THE INSPIRATION HE NEED TO DO CREATE THE CD KNOWN AS SPRING. AND THAT CD PAYS HOMAGE TO THE STATE'S WATER WONDERS. HE HAS CAPTURED THE SOUL OF THE WATER OASIS. IF YOU LISTEN TO IT, WATER AND WILDLIFE SOUNDS ARE DIGITALLY SAMPLED AT THE SOURCE SO IT COMBINES A MUSICAL CLARITY, MUSICAL QUALITY TO PRODUCE A UNIQUE EXPERIENCE IN WHICH A LISTENER CAN EASILY GET LOST. TAKING THIS INSPIRATION ONE STEP FURTHER, WOLFE HAS COLLABORATED WITH THE BELIEF IN ME ORGANIZATION TO CREATE TREASURE IN THE CREEK. MORE THAN 800 AUSTIN AREA SCHOOL CHILDREN WILL DANCE AS FISH, FROGS, BIRDS, KRAUFISH AND SALAMANDERS ON STAGE AT BASS CONCERT HALL ON MAY 14TH AND 15TH. EVERYBODY PAY ATTENTION. MAY 14TH AND 15TH. HONORING THE STATE'S MOST PRECIOUS NATURAL RESOURCES, OUR WATER, AND HE'S GOT TICKETS FOR SALE. [LAUGHTER]. OUR WATER AND THE ABUNDANT WILDLIFE THAT DEPEND ON IT. IT'S AN HONOR TO INTRODUCE BILLY TO YOU TODAY AND MAYOR WILKINSON IS GOING TO START OFF THE PROCLAMATION.

>> BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, ELIZA WILKINSON, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM MAY 10, 2001, AS BILLY WOLFE DAY.

>> AND WE ON-. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND THE MAYOR AND I CALL ON ALL SIT SENSE TO JOIN US IN RECOGNIZING THE MANY OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE LOCAL MUSIC COMMUNITY TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF AUSTIN'S SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY AND IN RECOGNIZING THE DEDICATED EFFORTS OF ARTISTS THAT FURTHER AUSTIN'S STATUS AS THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD. IT'S SIGNED BY ME AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN. I RECENTLY HAD SOMEBODY COME INTO MY OFFICE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION ABOUT SOMETHING THEY WANTED TO DO IN AUSTIN. THEY HAD THEIR LAPTOP COMPUTER AND AS PART OF THE BACKGROUND MUSIC, WHICH BY THE WAY IT'S THE FIRST TIME ANYBODY HAD BACKGROUND MUSIC WHEN GIVING A PRESENTATION, IT WAS FROM YOUR CD SPRING. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BILLY WOLFE. [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILL. IT'S AN HONOR TO BE HERE. I CAN'T IMAGINE ANYTHING BETTER ON A HOT SUMMER DAY THAN TO DIVE INTO BARTON SPRINGS, ANY SPRING IN TEXAS. THEY ARE ALL SO BEAUTIFUL. AND THE FEELING THAT YOU GET, THE RELIEF, THE STRESS, EVERYTHING JUST VANISHES. SO I FELT VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THAT AND WANTED TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT WOULD MAYBE HAVE THAT EFFECT ON A LISTENER AT HOME AT THE END OF A HARD DAY AFTER BEING STUCK IN TRAFFIC OR FOR ANY REASON. AND I ALSO WANTED TO TAKE IT ONE STEP FURTHER. LAST SUMMER WHEN WE WERE IN OUR TERRIBLE DROUGHT I GOT THE IDEA THE THEME FOR THE BELIEF IN ME EVENT FOR THE YEAR SHOULD BE WATER CONSERVATION. AND SO WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS ALL YEAR. LET ME TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT BELIEVE IN ME. I'VE BEEN THE MUSIC DIRECTOR FOR BELIEVE IN ME FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS. BELIEVE IN ME IS -- IT'S A PERFORMING ARTS EDUCATION ORGANIZATION THAT USES DANCE TO TEACH COMMITMENT, CONFIDENCE, TEAM WORK, RESPONSIBILITY, LOTS OF POSITIVE CHARACTER TRAITS TO CHILDREN AGE 9 THROUGH 15. IT'S A IN-SCHOOL PROGRAM. WE'RE IN FOUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND ST. MARY'S FOR AN HOUR EACH WEEK THE CURRICULUM IS DANCE AND THEY LEARN COREOGRAPHY WITH PROFESSIONAL CHOREOGRAPHERS AND MUSICIANS PUTTING TOGETHER A PROJECT WHICH CULMINATES AT THE END OF THE SCHOOL YEAR WHICH WE'RE ABOUT TO PERFORM ON MONDAY AT BASS CONCERT HALL, WHICH IS A REAL NICE VENUE FOR THESE KIDS, AND THEY GET THE BEST TREATMENT POSSIBLE AND THEY GET THE REALIZATION THAT ALL OF THIS HARD WORK PAYS OFF TO SOMETHING GREAT. IT'S A GREAT PROGRAM AND I REALLY THANK THE CITY'S SUPPORT OF THAT AND I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD SUPPORT PROGRAMS SUCH AS BELIEVE IN ME JUST AS MUCH AS YOU WANT TO SUPPORT AUSTIN AS THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE. ARTS EDUCATION IS JUST AS IMPORTANT. WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS PLAY THE OVERTURE AND THE MEMBERS ARE GOING TO COME OUT AND PERFORM A REAL SHORT EXCERPT FROM THE FINALE. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]. (music) (music) GTSZ

>> FISH GOT TO DANCE IN THE WATER ALL DAY. (music) (music).

>> WE GOT SNAKES AND SNAILS AND TURTLES, SALAMANDERS, CRAWDADS LIVING IN THE RIVER FROM THE BAYOU AND THE BOG. (music) (music).

>> WE GOT WATER HERE, WE GOT WATER THERE, YOU JUST MIGHT THINK WE GOT LOTS TO SPARE. BUT NOW MORE THAN EVER WE NEED TO SAVE ALL THE WATER, PLANTS AND ANIMALS THAT NATURE GAVE. (music) (music).

>> WATER HERE, WATER THERE, EVERYWHERE YOU SEE (music) (music). (music) BE AWARE AND TRY TO SHARE THE TREASURE IN THE CREEK (music) (music). (music) TREASURE THE CREEK! (music) (music). [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BILLY WOLFE AND BELIEVE IN ME. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND LET'S NOT FORGET THEY WILL BE PERFORMING AT BASS CONCERT HALL MAY 14 AND 15 AND NOW YOU'VE GOTTEN A TASTE OF THIS. FOLKS, IF YOU ARE HERE TODAY OR YOU ARE WATCHING ON TV, YOU SEE THIS GOING ON, GET TICKETS AND GO SEE THESE KIDS. BELIEVE IN ME IS ONE OF THOSE JEWELS OF AUSTIN, ONE OF THOSE WONDERFUL PROGRAMS AND YOU CAN GET JUST A TASTE OF IT HERE. IF YOU ARE ALREADY HERE, BILLY DOES HAVE TICKETS. I WANT TO SAY THAT AGAIN. BILLY WOLF A AND THE KIDS FROM BELIEVE IN ME. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: COME ON UP, GUYS. MAYOR WILKINSON IS GOING TO START OUR NEXT PROCLAMATION.

>> BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, ELIZA WILKINSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, FOR ONE DAY DO HEREBY PROCLAIM THAT MAY 6 THROUGH 12, 2001, AS GOOD WILL WEEK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN RECOGNIZING THAT GOOD WILL INDUSTRIES OF CENTRAL TEXAS HAS A 43-YEAR HISTORY OF HELPING PEOPLE GAIN NEW JOB SKILLS AND START NEW LIVES OF INDEPENDENCE. IN RECOGNIZING THE GOOD WILL WEEK CELEBRATES THE 180 LOCAL AFFILIATES IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA AS WELL AS THE 45 INTERNATIONAL MEMBERS IN 34 FOREIGN COUNTRIES. AND IN RECOGNIZING GOOD WILL HELPS PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND OTHER BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT OVERCOME THEIR CHALLENGES. AND BECOME INDEPENDENT, TAX PAYING MEMBERS OF THEIR COMMUNITY. WE CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN CONGRATULATING GOOD WILL INDUSTRIES OF CENTRAL TEXAS FOR ITS DEDICATION INDICATED SERVICE TO MORE THAN 5,000 PEOPLE EACH YEAR AND ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT GOOD WILL'S MISSION THROUGH DONATIONS TO ITS THRIFT STORES. IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE NEED TO SAY A BIG THANK YOU TO GOOD WILL INDUSTRIES. [APPLAUSE].

>> JUST FOR THE GROUP, I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST INTRODUCE OUR CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, CHARLIE BROWN. CHARL WREE IS ONE OF 19 VOLUNTEERS THAT SERVE ON OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND HE PUTS IN COUNTLESS HOURS EACH WEEK O BEHALF OF GOOD WILL INDUSTRIES, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE CITY. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO MAYOR WILKINSON AND MAYOR WATSON. YOU SAID SO MANY OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO SAY, MAYOR, I SHOULD HAVE READ THIS PROCLAMATION FIRST.

>>MAYOR WATSON: MOST FOLKS AROUND HERE LEARN YOU NEVER WANT TO TALK AFTER ME.

>> I DON'T THINK I WANT TO. I'M TALKING AFTER YOU, I'M AFTER THE DANCERS. I WILL KEEP THIS VERY SHORT AND SIMPLE. I WANT TO REITERATE THAT OF COURSE OUR MISSION IS TO PUT PEOPLE TO WORK. WE DO THAT BY HIRING THEM. WE DO THAT BY PROVIDING THEM WITH SERVICES THAT WILL LEAD THEM TO GET HIRED. AND IN LAST YEAR ALONE, JUST ONE YEAR WE PUMPED OVER $4 MILLION OF WAGES INTO THIS ECONOMY FOR PEOPLE NEWLY EMPLOYED. THAT'S A STAGGER GO NUMB, BUT IT'S ONLY DONE WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE CITY, THE COUNTY AND THE PEOPLE IN THIS AREA AND MANY OF OUR PARTNER AGENCIES INCLUDING SAFE PLACE AND SOME OF THE OTHERS WHO YOU WILL HEAR FROM LATER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>MAYOR WATSON: GOOD JOB. [APPLAUSE].

>> BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, EE LIZA WILKINSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, FOR ONE DAY DO HEREBY PROCLAIM MAY 16, 2001 AS SAFE PLACE DAY OF HOPE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN RECOGNIZING THAT THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY BEGAN TO MEET THE NEEDS OF SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BY OPENING THE FIRST RAPE CRISIS CENTER AND THE FIRST SHELTER FOR BATTERED WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN TEXAS 24 YEARS AGO. IN RECOGNIZING THAT SAFE PLACE HAS SINCE BECOME ONE OF THE LARGEST AND MOST COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PROVIDERS OF ITS KIND IN THE COUNTRY. AND IN RECOGNIZING THAT TODAY SAFE PLACE IS DEDICATING ITS STATE OF THE ART SHELTER, SCHOOL AND FAMILY TREE CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER. WE CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN CELEBRATING THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THOSE DEVOTED TO THE SAFE PLACE MISSION AND IN COMMITTING OURSELVES TO SUPPORTING THE CONTINUING EFFORTS TO ELIMINATE SEXUAL AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN OUR COMMUNITY. IT'S SIGNED BY ME, KIRK WATSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, I'M PROUD TO PRESENT THIS TO KELLY WHITE AND ASK HER TO SAY A -- MAKE A FEW COMMENTS. BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT BEING MAYOR OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS OCCURRED DURING THAT PAST FOUR YEARS IS GREATER CONTACT AND INVOLVEMENT WITH SAFE PLACE AND I WILL TELL YOU IT'S ONE OF THOSE PARTS OF MY EXPERIENCE WHEN I LOOK BACK ON THE YEARS THAT I WAS MAYOR, IT WILL BE ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT I HOLD THE MOST DEAR. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU OUR COMMUNITY. KELLY WHITE. [APPLAUSE].

>> I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE MY BONGO PLAYER, SELENA RAMERO. I'M GOING TO PLAY THE KEYBOARD AND STEPHANIE IS GOING TO SING. [LAUGHTER].

>>MAYOR WATSON: I MAY TAKE AWAY YOUR PROCLAMATION. [LAUGHTER].

>> I THOUGHT OH, DEAR, I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE BELIEVE IN ME GO LAST. LET ME JUST PUT IN MY BIT. FIX THAT NEXT TIME. SELENA IS ACTUALLY MY BOARD CHAIR. SO, OKAY. AND STEPHANIE IS ONE OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M PLEASED TO BE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE THOUSANDS OF CENTRAL TEXAS WOMEN, CHILDREN AND MEN THAT HAVE BEEN ASSISTED THROUGH THE YEARS TO HEAL FROM THE WOUNDS OF SEXUAL AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. AS THE MAYOR SAID THAT WHAT USED TO BE THE AUSTIN RAPE CRISIS CENTER CREATED IN 1974 AND THE CENTER FOR BATTERED WOMEN WHICH WAS CREATED IN 1977, WE'RE WERE THE FIRST PROGRAMS OF THEIR TYPE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND THE FIRST IN THE NATION. BOTH HAVE BEEN LEADERS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. AND I AUSTIN CONTINUES ITS LEADERSHIP IN PROVIDING THESE CRITICAL SERVICES WHEN IN 1998 THE -- THESE TWO FOUNDING PROGRAMS MERGED TO BECOME SAFE PLACE. ON MAY 16, AUSTIN WILL AGAIN DEMONSTRATE ITS LEADERSHIP IN THE STRUGGLE TO END RAPE, SEXUAL ABUSE AND VIOLENCE WHEN IT DEAD INDICATESITY NEW FACILITIES. OUR NEW SHELTER HOUSES 30 WOMEN AND 75 CHILDREN. WE PROVIDE ONSITE CHILD CARE AND ONSITE SCHOOL. AND WE ARE -- THIS IS MADE POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE COMMITMENT OF THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY, OF MAYOR WATSON AND THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCILL TO ENSURING ALL AUSTINITES HAVE A SAFE PLACE. WITH THE OPENING OF THIS FACILITY, SAFE PLACE HAS BEEN ABLE TO INCREASE ITS SHELTER CAPACITY BY 50%. THAT SOUNDS PRETTY GREAT, BUT DESPITE THIS INCREASE, WHICH WE JUST MOVED INTO THE NEW SHELTER, ACTUALLY BEGAN OPERATIONS IN FEBRUARY, ALL AUSTIN SHELTERS CONTINUE TO OPERATE AT CAPACITY AND BEYOND AND TODAY THERE ARE 15 WOMEN AND 35 CHILDREN ON A WAITING LIST TO GET INTO THE SAFE PLACE SHELTER. WE TRY NEVER TO LEAVE ANYBODY JUST ON THE LIFT. WE WORK HARD. WE HAVE HOTLINE ADVOCATES THAT DO IMMEDIATE SAFETY PLANNING. WE WORK WITH OTHER SHELTERS IN OTHER COMMUNITIES. AND WHEN SOMEBODY IS IN EXTREME DISTRESS OR IN DANGER OR WHEN THEY ARE COMING IN A HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOM OR EMERGENCY FROM THE POLICE, WE WILL TAKE THEM IN AND IF THAT MEANS THEY SLEEP ON A COUCH, WE TAKE THEM IN. SO WHAT I KNOW IS THAT DESPITE THESE NUMBERS, I KNOW THAT WE ARE VERY, VERY LUCKY TO BE DOING THIS WORK HERE IN AUSTIN. THROUGH THE YEARS -- LET ME TELL YOU HOW MANY -- I'VE HAD PEOPLE COME TO VISIT OUR FACILITIES AND OUR PROGRAM FROM AROUND THE WORLD BECAUSE WE ARE KNOWN AS BEING ONE OF THE BEST IN THE WORLD. MANY OF THOSE PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN REPLICATED ACROSS THE NATION AND OVER SLS SEAS WHAFMENT THEY SAY IS HOW HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS HERE, HOW HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THIS AND WHAT I KNOW IS THAT WE HAD SUCH A LEG UP TO BEGIN WITH BECAUSE WE'RE DOING THIS WORK HERE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS WHERE WE HAVE A POPULACE AND A CITY GOVERNMENT AND JUST PEOPLE THAT CARE SO VERY, VERY MUCH ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND ABOUT THE WORK. SO WE'RE BLESSED TO BE HERE DOING THIS. AND WANT TO SAY A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU AND PARTICULARLY TO MAYOR WILKINSON FOR PRESENTING US WITH THIS. [APPLAUSE].

>> BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, ELIZA WILKINSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, FOR ONE DAY, ON DO HEREBY PROCLAIM THAT MAY 13 TL THROUGH 19 N., 2001, AS HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN NEWS RECOGNIZING THAT THE THEME OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK 2001 IS RESTORE, RENEW, REDISCOVER YOUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS. AND IN RECOGNIZING WE SHOULD DO ALL WE CAN TO KEEP THESE COMMUNITY ICONS ALIVE AS FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS MUCH OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM AND RECOGNIZING THIS STEWARDSHIP IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSONS A STUDENT CAN LEARNED. AND IT'S SIGNED BY ME ON BEHALF OF ME AND MAYOR WILKINSON AND I'M PROUD TO PRESENT THIS TO THE CHAIR OF OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD. [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. MAYOR, MS. MAYOR. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS RESOLUTION REGARDING HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK. ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, THE HERITAGE SOCIETY, THE HERITAGE MARKETING STAFF OF THE AUSTIN CONVENTION AND VISITORS BURR REAND EVERYONE ELSE IN THE CITY WHO WORKS SO HARD TO PRESERVE OUR HISTORY AND PAST TO EDUCATE PEOPLE OF OUR PAST, I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THIS AND ACCEPT IT AS THE HONOR THAT IT IS. I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE A SPECIAL THANKS TO MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN. SHE HAS BEEN A CHAMPION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN AUSTIN FOR AT LEAST 20 YEARS THAT I KNOW OF.

>>MAYOR WATSON: [INAUDIBLE].

>> VERY WELL SAID. I KNOW BETTER THAN TO TRY TO COMPETE WITH MR. MAYOR. SO WE -- THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK, THERE ARE SEVERAL EVENTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY, SPECIFICALLY THE HERITAGE HOMES TOUR ON SATURDAY AND I KNOW THAT IS ALWAYS A WONDERFUL EVENT AND IT IS MOTHER'S DAY SO TAKE YOUR MOMS TO HIS TORIC PRESERVATION WEEK. THAT'S WHAT I DO. ALSO THE HERITAGE MARKETING STAFF HAS DONE A REALLY WONDERFUL BOOK MARK WHICH -- I'M SORRY, I LEFT IN THE CAR. BUT I WILL BE PASSING OUT TO THE COUNCIL AND IT CELEBRATES THE HISTORY OF THE AUSTIN SCHOOL SYSTEMS FROM 1875 -- 1865 I BELIEVE WAS THE FIRST SCHOOL. SO WE HAVE A VERY RICH HISTORY IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND ESPECIALLY BEING THE STATE CAPITOL AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE FOCUS ON IT AS WE GO FORWARD IN WHATEVER CLIMATE THAT WE HAVE. THANK YOU. APPLAUSE PLUS. [APPLAUSE].

>> BE IT KNOWN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT I, ELIZA WILKINSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, FOR ONE DAY, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM MAY 11, 2001, AS CITY BOARD AND COMMISSION APPRECIATION DAY.

>>MAYOR WATSON: AND WE CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN RECOGNIZING THE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND OTHER APPOINTED GROUPS IN HELPING TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN AUSTIN. IN SALUTING THE LONGTERM DEDICATION AND COMMITMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS BOTH PAST AND PRESENT AS THEY CONTINUE TO FILL A VITAL ROLE BY ADVISING THE CITY COUNCILL ON MATTERS OF GREAT IMPORTANCE TO OUR COMMUNITY. AND IN RECOGNIZING THAT 44 CURRENT BOARD OR COMMISSION MEMBERS HAVE CONTINUED THEIR CONTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY SERVICE FOR 10 YEARS OR MORE. WE CALL ON ALL CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN THANKING THESE DEDICATED AND SELFLESS CITIZENS FOR THEIR WORK ON OUR BEHALF AND RECOGNIZING THE CITY COUNCILL WILL BE HOSTING A SPECIAL RECEPTION AND DINNERER IN THEIR HONOR MAY MAY 11. AND IT'S SIGNED BY ME, AND I'M PLEASED TO PROVIDE THIS PROCLAMATION TO SOME OF OF OUR LONG STANDINGING VOLUNTEERS IN OUR COMMUNITY. WHY DON'T YOU COME OVER AND --

>> MARY IS GOING THE TALK FIRST.

>>MAYOR WATSON: DUE HEAR THAT?

>> WELL, IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DEFINE SENIORITY HERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: SHE SAYS MARY IS GOING TO TALK FIRST BECAUSE SHE HAS SENIORITY. I'M NOT GOING TO GET IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS DEAL.

>> MR. MAYOR AND MS. MAYOR, THANK YOU SO MUCH ON BEHALF OF ALL THE CITIZENS WHO SERVE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IN THE CITY, I CONGRATULATE THE CITY COUNCIL FOR RECOGNIZING THE FACT THAT THEIR LONGTERM SERVICE AND I WOULD LIKE TO APPEAL TO ALL CITIZENS TO BECOME MORE AWARE OF WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE CITY AND TO VOLUNTEER TO BE ON ONE OF THE BOARDS. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR WILKINSON AND MAYOR WATSON. IT'S BEEN MY PRIVILEGE TO SERVE ON THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION AND I ALWAYS TELL SOME OF THE STAFFERS YOU NEED TO BLOW YOUR HORN MORE BECAUSE I THINK THE ELECTRIC UTILITY IS ONE OF THE GREAT ASSETS OF THIS CITY. I WOULDN'T ASK ANYBODY TO PUT A PENCIL TO IT, BUT I THINK IF YOU TOOK -- THE UTILITIES STARTED IN 12898. IF YOU PUT A PENCIL TO IT, I BELIEVE THAT THE GENERAL FUND TRANSFER FROM THE ELECTRIC UTILITY WOULD HAVE PAID FOR EVERY CAPITAL ASSET THAT THE GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS HAVE. I'M NOT GOING TO ASK ANYBODY TO PROVE THAT, BUT -- [LAUGHTER]. AND I WANT TO THANK THIS COUNCIL AND PRIOR COUNCILS FOR NOT ENFORCING TERM LIMITATIONS ON US AND I WANT TO ASK YOU TO DO ME A FAVOR. WHEN YOU PUT THE NEXT CHARTER REVISIONS BALLOT BEFORE THE VOTERS, I WANT YOU TO INCLUDE A PROVISION TO TAKE AWAY THE TERM LIMITATIONS FOR CITY COUNCILMEMBERS. THE BALLOT BOX IS THE BEST TERM LIMITATION THERE IS AND WHEN YOU GET A GOOD COUNCILMEMBER, THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO STEP DOWN BECAUSE THEY SERVED, WHAT, A FEW TERMS OR WHATEVER. THANK YOU.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE].

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT CONCLUDES OUR PROGRESSES MATIONS AND LIFE MOOFJT BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT, AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE PROCLAMATIONS, THE SUPPORT THAT MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY PROVIDE TO OTHER FOLKS. I'M REAL PROUD OF OUR MAYOR FOR A DAY. MAYOR WILKINSON. AND TYPICALLY WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT IS DOING AS WELL AS MAYOR WILKINSON IS DOING AND AT SANCHEZ ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND HAS THE KIND OF VALUES WE HEARD EXPRESSED WHEN SHE WANTED TO BE MAYOR FOR A DAY, SHE'S GOT FOLKS THAT ARE SUPPORTING HER TOO. SO I WOULD ASK HER TO STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE AND INTRODUCE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE WITH HER TODAY THAT ARE SPECIAL TO HER AND IMPORTANT TO HER THAT PROVIDE HER SUPPORT. SO MAYOR?

>> MY MOTHER, MY LITTLE SISTER, AND MY GRANDMA ARE HERE.

>>MAYOR WATSON: TELL US THEIR NAMES.

>> BIG C WILKINSON, DANIELE AND VICTORIA MEDFORD.

>>MAYOR WATSON: THAT'S GREAT. WOULD YOU ALL STAND UP? WE'RE REAL PROUD OF HER TOO. FOLKS THAT IS CORRECT CONCLUDES OUR PROCLAMATIONS, BUT BEFORE WE STOP, I WANT ASK EVERYBODY TO HELP ME ONE MORE TIME SAY THANK YOU TO OUR MAYOR FOR THE DAY, MAYOR WILKINSON FOR DOING SUCH A FINE JOB. LET'S GO UP HERE AND TAKE A PICTURE.

End of Council Session Closed Caption Log