Closed Caption Log, Council Meeting
Thursday, July 11, 2002, Part B

Part A | Part B | Part C

Note: Since these log files are derived from the Closed Captions created during the Channel 6 live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. These Closed Caption logs are not official records of Council Meetings and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records or transcripts, please contact the City Clerk at (512) 974-2210.

(executive session 3:30-5:00)

MAYOR GARCIA: For those of you that are here for the zoning cases, as soon as we get one more councilmember to the chambers, we will start.

And we have 16 cases that we'll go through.

MAYOR GARCIA: There being a quorum of the council in the chambers, I'm going to call to order the regular meeting of the Austin city council. And we will go to our 4:00 p.m. zoning hearing approval of ordinances and restrictive covenants. And Mr. Gurnsey, are you going to be doing this?

Yes, mayor. My name is Greg Gurnsey with the neighborhood planning and zoning department. I will guide you through the 4:00 o'clock zoning related hearings. Our first item is item Z-1 case C 814-88-0001. This is a restrictive covenant amendment, 2800 Waymaker way. The staff is asking for a postponement. The applicant agent indicates that they are agreeable to this. That's a postponement until August 8th, August 8th. The next item is item Z-2, this is case C-14-H 02-000 A, more land Melendez house. This is from CS-MU-CU, NP to CS-MU-H-CO, NP. This is ready for first reading. Next item is item number Z-3, C-14-H-02-0006, the Sears king residence. This is property at 209 West 39th street. The planning commission did recommend this for SF-3 H and NCCD zoning and this is ready for first reading only. Item number Z-4 is case C-14-02-0028. This is property located at 4604-4610 Terry road. This is a rezoning request from LO to LR-CO, which is neighborhood commercial conditional overlay combining district. As I understand the applicant is here and there may be a neighborhood representative here. I just want to make sure --

MAYOR GARCIA: I don't have anybody signed up on ski 4.

I understand this is ready for all three readings. This was recommended by the zoning commission.

MAYOR GARCIA: Anybody here on Z-4?

This is ready for all three reads. Z-5 is C-14-02-0035. I understand there is one citizen here to speak?

MAYOR GARCIA: We have five people signed up to speak.

There's only one in opposition?

MAYOR GARCIA: There's one in favor and one, two, three, four against.

That will be a discussion. Item Z-6 is C-14-02-0045. This is a rezoning case at 4404 west William Cannon drive. This is a request from a GR-CO to -- for tracts 1 and 3 and CS-1-CO on tract 2 to rezone the property to CS-1-CO, which is a commercial liquor sales district zoning for tract 1 and to rezone tracts 2 and 3 to GR-CO, community commercial conditional overlay combining district rezoning. This was recommended by the zoning and platting commission and it is ready for first reading only. Item number Z-7 is C-14-02-0052, property located at 10300 old San Antonio road. Staff understands the applicant would like to discuss this case and is in disagreement with two of the conditions recommended by the zoning and platting commission.

MAYOR GARCIA: This one says that the agent is Mr. Michael AULICK. You were registered in favor of. Do you still want to discuss it?

[ INAUDIBLE ] I sent you a letter supporting what the zoning and platting commission has requested with two exceptions, so I understand I'm supposed to talk about those two exceptions.

MAYOR GARCIA: Okay. I'll call you up when we call the case up.

Next is item number Z-8 which is case C-14-02-0053. This is property located in the 3600 block of presidential boulevard. This is a rezoning request from interim RR to AV. This is a discussion item. The applicant is the City of Austin and would like to discuss the zoning and platting commission recommendation. Another case, Z-9 is case C-14-02-0054. This is in north CROZIER, cardinal loop and Shepherd lane from I-RR to AV. This is also by the City of Austin's aviation department and also a discussion item and staff to like to discuss the zoning and platting commission's recommendation. Zoning case Z-10 is C-14--02-0056. This is a rezoning from SF-3 to MH, mobile home. We understand that the applicant would like to speak to this case and is opposed to the zoning and platting commission recommendation, so this is a discussion item. Item number Z-11 is zoning case C-14-02-0059. This is a rezoning case at 13498 Pond Springs road from interim RR, interim rural residence district to GR, community commercial district. The zoning and platting commission's recommendation is to grant GR-CO, community commercial-conditional overlay combining district zoning. And this is ready for consent on all three readings. Item number Z-12 is case C-14- 02-0061. This is a rezoning request at 2101 west slaughter lane from SF-2 to NO-CO. The applicant on this particular case has requested a postponement. This is their first request, to August 1st. The staff would offer this as a consent item to postpone until August 1st by the applicant. Item Z-13 is zoning case C-14-020062 at 11005 Burnet Road. This is a request for rezoning from LI, limited industrial services district, to CS-1, commercial liquor sales district. The planning commission recommended the CS-1 rezoning request, and this is ready for consent on all three readings. Item number Z-14 is zoning case C-14-02-0070. This is a rezoning request at 8801 IH-35 south the 100 and 200 block of slaughter lane east from interim RR to -- which is rural residential district zoning to CS, commercial services district zoning. The zoning and platting commission recommends CS-CO, general commercial services conditional overlay combining district zoning and this is for consent on all three readings. Item number Z-15 is case C-14-02-0089 at 7909 FM 1826 and we understand there is a citizen signed up for this rezoning request and so that is for discussion.

MAYOR GARCIA: Okay. I'll go back and recap. Z-1 is consent for postponement until August the eighth. Z-2 is consent first reading. Z-3 is consent for first reading, and we have one person signed up who does not wish to speak, is registered in favor of. Z-4 is consent for all three readings. Z-5 is a discussion item. Z-6 is consent for first reading. 7 is a discussion item. I don't have anybody signed up -- oh, yes, I do. Sorry. 8 is a discussion item, so is 9. I don't have anybody -- oh, that's the City of Austin, isn't it?

That's correct. The city staff could like to discuss.

MAYOR GARCIA: 8, 9 and 10 are discussion items. 11 I have is consent for all three readings and Linda Finley signed a card not wishing to speak and in favor as proposed. Z-12 is a consent for postponement to August the 1st. 13 is consent for all three readings, and so is 14. And 15 is a discussion item. Questions for the staff on the consent items?

SLUSHER: I've got a couple of things, mayor.

MAYOR GARCIA: Councilmember Slusher?

SLUSHER: On Z-4, I would like to make that just first reading because there's -- we've had some contacts from the neighborhood. I understand Stan refers to Franklin park neighborhood association on this and I'm not clear how that turned out. I wish they would have come today. But if we could pass that on first reading, I would appreciate that. I think that -- I think everyone is happy with the intended use, but we might want to add something on to narrow that or nail that down. Z-5 is still on consent?

MAYOR GARCIA: No, it's a discussion item.

SLUSHER: Z-67 is on consent.

MAYOR GARCIA: It's on first reading.

SLUSHER: Mr. Gurnsey, since these are both S.O.S. compliant, but one has -- is listed as having integrated management system, I other one I didn't see that -- between Z-5 and Z-6. I'm talking about Z-of now.

Z-6 is an already constructed shopping center. And the tenant that wishes to move into the center desires to move into space a couple lease spaces down from the tract that's zoned CS 1. So they're replacing one CS-1 tract with another and they're down zoning the previous CS-1 back to a retail district. It's already built and they're just basically shifting the tenant space of the liquor store within the existing shopping center.

SLUSHER: So there's not any construction taking place there?

Only interior remodel of an existing shopping center.

SLUSHER: Okay. I would still like to talk to him or have the staff talk to him between first and last reading. In the proposed Stratus agreement we have a native plant, grow green agreement in there. I would like to look at getting something exactly like it similar to that in this agreement. I'm going to say the same thing on Z-5 as well. And then, let's see, mayor, I think that's all my -- there was one more, I think, in the -- that's all I had, mayor.

On Z-15 we have one speaker we can recognize and it's on the consent agenda. Is that consent for first reading?

That's actually ready for all three readings.

MAYOR GARCIA: For all three readings. Okay.

There's only one person signed up in opposition.

MAYOR GARCIA: Can you -- are we going to have to do anything with number 4? Still consent for three readings?

That's consent right now. As I understand it, councilmember Slusher would like to take that on first reading only.

SLUSHER: On 4?

MAYOR GARCIA: You want to do first?

SLUSHER: Yes, sir.

MAYOR GARCIA: And you understand what he wants to do between the first and third?

I think he wants to hear the results of the neighborhood and what their position is.

SLUSHER: That's correct.

MAYOR GARCIA: Z-10 is a discussion item, did you say?

Yes. It's staff's understanding that the applicant disagrees with the unit limitation and the requirement to dedicate right-of-way on Z-10.

MAYOR GARCIA: I'll entertain a motion on the consent agenda. And the only change that we had was the two changes on 4, we're making that consent for first reading only. And on 15 it's consent for three readings. And we have one speaker that was -- that will be recognized as part of the consent discussion. I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing -- well, wait a second. We can't close the hearing because we haven't heard from one speaker. There's a bunch on number 15. Mr. Bunch on number 15.

Thank you, Mayor Garcia, members of the council. This is another zoning change in the south MoPac corridor, Barton Springs watershed, that would increase traffic, significant up zoning, so consistent with the resolutions that have been passed by 28 different neighborhoods and environmental groups, we urge a no vote on these up zonings until we have a plan for tract, water quality and neighborhood protection. Thank you.

MAYOR GARCIA: Thank you. Is the applicant here or the agent?

My name is Steve Metcalf. I represent H.E.B. If you want me to talk about the case, I can do that, or I can answer any questions you have. Just briefly -- [ INAUDIBLE ] right back here is a part of some land that was originally brought for a zone willing case back in 2000 and was zoned GR. At that time --

MAYOR GARCIA: I tell you what we'll do, I'm going to pull this for discussion, okay, so that we can have a full presentation. Let me get -- let me get the consent agenda out of the way. Is there a motion to close the public hearing.

SLUSHER: So move.

MAYOR GARCIA: And approve the items that are on consent? Motion by councilmember Slusher.

WYNN: Second.

MAYOR GARCIA: Seconded by Councilmember Wynn. Further discussion? All in favor, signify by saying aye?

Aye.

MAYOR GARCIA: Opposed no? Motion carries on a vote of seven to zero. The first discussion item is 5, Z-5, and we have the agent is here -- is the agent here on Z-5?

Would you like a short presentation?

MAYOR GARCIA: Yes, please.

Z-5 is case C-14-020035. This is a rezoning request from interim RR to MF-4-CO. The zoning and platting commission did recommend the MF-4-CO. A density limitation that's limited to that of SF-6, a trip limitation of 2000 vehicle trips a day. There's a 300-foot wide buffer along the north property line and that staff understands that this buffer would prohibit buildings and parking but would allow utility crossings, storm water and water quality and landscaping and sort of a vegetative buffer area. Also, this is within the Barton Springs zone and would be subject to S.O.S. If you have any questions, I'd be more than happy to answer them.

MAYOR GARCIA: Any questions for staff?

And the applicant is here as well.

MAYOR GARCIA: Is the applicant here? Mr. Hartman?

Thank you, mayor and councilmembers. My name is David Hart man with graves- Dougherty. I don't have a whole lot to add than what staff presents. We're here in full negotiations with the cherry creek Brodie neighborhood association for rezoning of this property and we're asking that it be rezoned tonight as the staff has indicated. Again, this property is going to be fully compliant with S.O.S. It has pretty severe environmental restrictions. As Mr. Gurnsey indicated. And the agreement that we have before you here this evening is fully supported by the cherry creek on Brodie neighborhood association. They have sent to councilmembers an e-mail asking for this to be passed on unanimous consent to first reading only. I'm sure that anyone here who would have any objections or concerns, we would be happy to talk with them as we proceed on to second and third reading. We have the neighborhood support. The property is going to be developed fully compliant with S.O.S., which winds up severely restricting it in terms of impervious cover. If you have any additional questions, I'd be happy to answer those questions. Thank you.

MAYOR GARCIA: Questions for the applicant?

SLUSHER: I've got one.

MAYOR GARCIA: Mr. Hartman? Councilmember Slusher.

SLUSHER: Sir, I'd like to -- I'm glad that you're complying with S.O.S. because it's the law, but I would like to see some sort of landscape arrangement worked out to where we're assured that there aren't going to be chemicals going into the aquifer off this site. And I think if you do that, you have a good argument there that you're going to be -- even if you prepared it to your current zoning of RR, that looking at S.O.S. is supposed to be non-degradation either way, but it's hard to control what individuals put on their lawns. I try to talk about that a lot, but I can't go around and talk to everybody about their yards too. But if we can get that sort of agreement on here where we know that nothing's going to be pouring off there that would pollute the aquifer and then show up at Barton Springs, I think that makes this often stronger and it makes a stronger argument for going to multi-family under S.O.S. than keeping it rural residential.

Yes, council, we would be interested in visiting with your staff about working out particular language in that regard. We kind of visited with the neighborhood association about the importance, particularly in the buffer area, of keeping the trees there. And if we in fact wind up removing trees, replanting trees of equal size, so we are very interested in landscaping and particularly the kind of -- how one would apply chemicals or not in that area and we would love to visit with your staff about that and hammer out the language on a go-forward basis.

SLUSHER: Let's do that between first and second and third readings. Mayor, I would move approval with that.

Don't we have some speakers.

MAYOR GARCIA: We have some speakers on this one. Mr. John Larkin? Mr. Larkin, you have 12 minutes. You don't have to use them all, but AERCA Taylor gave you three minutes, and others gave you their three minutes, so he already has 12 minutes if you will look at that clock there.

Do I hit start had?

MAYOR GARCIA: The minute you start talking it starts clicking.

Good evening. My name is John Larkin. I'm the president of the cherry creek on Brodie neighborhood association. We met several times with Mr. Hartman and Mr. Hartman -- Mr. Hartman and Mr. Harmon. We feel that they've worked with us in good faith to reach an accommodation with the neighborhood. If you'll notice, we had -- we had several folks who are speaking for and several folks who are speaking against. The three people who donated their time to me were originally speaking against. Their worry was that some of the language in the ordinance or the wording wasn't exactly what we had anticipated for the 300-foot buffer. Mr. Hartman has indicated that they will work to ensure between first and second reading that the language that we originally agreed to would be incorporated before the ordinance was brought up for second reading. In that context and given that they are going to attach a restrictive covenant to the property as to the way they handle tree removal and cleaning, given that they've indicated they're going to comply with our initial agreement, we are for this zoning case on first reading. I'd be more than happy to answer any questions.

MAYOR GARCIA: Questions for Mr. Larkin? Councilmember Slusher?

SLUSHER: You're cherry creek on Brodie, right?

Yes, sir.

SLUSHER: And I think you're one of the neighborhoods who said there shouldn't be any more up zoning until there was a regional plan, but you're willing to make an exception?

No, sir. Actually, if you look at the language of the e-mail, the e-mail that I sent representing roughly 9,000 homes to the city council on the Stratus cases, the first paragraph of my e-mail to you indicates and in the subsequently attached word document, indicates that our group is not against individual developers carrying forward with zoning petitions through the city ordained process. We were just against the city sponsoring massive up zoning cases and being the petitioner because it's our view that several citizens' rights are being waived in that process. Specifically of concern to us is the traffic impact analysis on a site by site basis that's part of the term sheet of Stratus. That's our major concern. So I just wanted to clarify that's not what I had said representing 9,000 homes. And so, you know, I can bring up as many of those neighborhood leaders as I need to to validate that for you.

SLUSHER: No, that's fine. I don't think that's exactly how it's being represented by everyone else. It was awhile back when I got your e-mail and I've heard from some other folks recently.

Right. I think there are going to be several factions leverages they're constituencies to their advantage through this process.

SLUSHER: That does happen some time in the politics of government. Thank you.

MAYOR GARCIA: Mr. Larkin. Vivian KAPUTO, bill bunch and Ben PRAGER. Mr. PRAGER does not wish to speak, is registered against. He notes that he doesn't like the current language of Z-5. Welcome.

Welcome, thank you. Did evening. My name is Vivian KAPUTO. I noticed because I was looking at the agenda for Stratus, I'm one of the ones that got a number. I was a little surprised when I saw it and when I came down and signed up, Mr. Gurnsey told me a little bit about it and that the neighborhood cherry creek on Brodie was for it and also that they hadn't been approving of this, but I was surprised at the way every time I deal with any development how staff facilitates developers, how staff will go and tell the developer, there is someone speaking against it and then how I will be approached by someone representing the developer and be asked not to oppose or what can we talk about? We've been negotiating with these people for a year and we'd like to get this through on first reading. I never saw the zoning signs, but I'm sure there is a picture in a file somewhere. I love in this neighborhood. This is the same person that has the grandfathered Randall's on the corner across from Stratus, the same things that I see on all the property. That grandfathered Randall's is 60% impervious cover, 861 parking spaces, four fast food restaurants. No TIA for Brodie and slaughter. Here's 311 more apartments. My concern is two fold. We have too much traffic there now. They have admitted on that, that Brodie has got too many cars on it. My concern is that I'm on a well. I depend on it for my drinking water. People in the neighboring subdivision are on city water. Who is going to guarantee non-degradation of my drinking water? I think it's great that you wanted to talk about native planting, but we have an apartment complex that's mainly concrete. I do not want to see this part of town become Oak Hill. Slaughter lane is all turning commercial. I don't want to say neighborhood plan because then some neighborhoods say yes, we'll do it if you give us a cookie. Give us this and we'll do this, we'll agree to it. I don't want to see that happen. It has to work for everybody in the area. I'm asking you, council, to prevent slaughter lane from becoming another overhead bypass through an old ranching rural area. Thank you.

MAYOR GARCIA: Thank you. Bill bunch? And following Mr. Bunch -- well, you're the last speaker. Mr. PRAGER registered not wishing to speak. Welcome.

Thank you, mayor, members of council. Bill bunch for the save our springs aappliance. Again urging a no vote on this proposal based on the same resolution I referenced earlier. I will say that that was a wrinkle in Mr. Larkin's neighborhood resolution that I was not aware of, but I'm very familiar with the resolutions that were passed by the neighborhoods up and down MoPac, central MoPac, and the environment Al groups because those were specifically done in the context of the road less traveled report on the choice for Barton Springs and MoPac. Showing the common features anded linkage between solving our problems with traffic on MoPac and saving Barton Springs. And those resolutions are very specific. It calls for looking at the big picture. You're looking at the piece by piece by piece and you're not getting the big picture. On this one piece alone, going from rural residential to the multi-family, that's an increase from 30 units to 300 units, that's roughly an order of magnitude increase in traffic. You know, it's fairly linear, there's somewhat less traffic from single-family to multi-family, but not much on a per unit basis. So here is 30 more acres on the recharge zone where we're going to get roughly in order of magnitude higher in traffic without knowing how that contributes to the bigger picture. We know also that traffic and pollution loading are directly aligned. We can talk about S.O.S. compliance, and certainly that's nice, but that should be a given. This is a zoning case. I've said this several times, but people still want to confuse these issues. And it's really not fair and it's not appropriate. Just because we initiated S.O.S. by citizens' action does not relieve you as councilmembers from exercising your best judgment in a zoning case. And that judgment should be asking what is best for community, not just what the landowner is asking for. And if you go in this area, there are plenty of apartments. It's not like we have a deficiency of apartments in this part of town. What we're deficient on is rural residential. We don't have very much of it. And yet that is the most protected and most appropriate zoning category for the recharge zone for the aquifer in this state most vulnerable to pollution. Y'all are aware of that fact and we would like to really see some action referencing that fact. Thank you.

MAYOR GARCIA: Thank you, Mr. Bunch. That's all the speakers that we have. Rebuttal?

[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]

THERE'S ONE ISSUE I WANT TO MENTION RELATIVE TO WHAT A SPEAKER SAID EARLIER AND SOMETHING WE'LL BE DISCUSSING ON STRATUS AS WELL, WHICH IS WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT PRESENTS THE LARGEST POTENTIAL IMPACT OR THE LARGEST RISK FOR INFILTRATION INTO THE AQUIFER, YOU MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT BY EXPANDING THE SCOPE OF PEOPLE'S PRESENCE AND PEOPLE'S IMPACT BECAUSE OF THINGS LIKE HERBICIDE, PESTICIDE, DROPPINGS FROM WHATEVER SORT OF ELEMENTS YOU PUT IN YOUR VEHICLES AND WHATEVER, THAT'S THE REASON THAT WE TALK ABOUT CLUSTERING AND THAT IS ALSO THE REASON THAT WE TALK ABOUT MAGNET DEVELOPMENT VERSUS OTHER KINDS OF POTENTIAL CAPTURE LAND USES, SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I DISAGREE THAT YOU CAN SAY RURAL RESIDENTIAL OR ANY SORT OF RESIDENTIAL IS SOMEHOW A MORE GUARANTEED PROTECTION FOR AQUIFER PROTECTION AND INFILTRATION BECAUSE WITH EVERY SINGLE DEVELOPMENT, THEN YOU ARE BRINGING THE IMPACT OF THE PEOPLE THAT WILL BE USING THAT DEVELOPMENT TO A MUCH BROADER SCOPE OF ACREAGE THAN YOU ARE WHEN YOU PUT IT TOGETHER WITH SOMETHING LIKE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH A MANAGEMENT REGIME AND HERBICIDES AND PESTICIDES VERSUS ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS RETAIL OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

DISCUSSION? THE MOTION IS FOR FIRST READING. AND THE REQUEST BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE RECORD. ALL THOSE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, NO. MOTION CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 0. ITEM NUMBER Z-7, MR. GARCY.

10,300 OLD SAN ANTONIO ROAD, THE PROPERTY REQUESTED REZONING FROM MR TO GRMUCL AND APPROXIMATELY 2.4-ACRES OF LAND. THE ZONING AND PLATTING DID MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST WITH SEVERAL CONDITION, THAT PROPERTY HAVE A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY WITH BED AND BREAKFAST RESIDENTIAL INDOOR AND OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT, RESTAURANT, GENERAL LIMITED AND ALL OTHER INTERIM USES BEING PERMITTED TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLE TRIPS TO 200 TRIPS PER DAY, A MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMITATION OF 35 FEET, A MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE OF 35 FEET TO ZONE THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN, ALSO THAT THERE'S A RESTRICT COVENANT FOR THE RESERVATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF GATHERINGS, ON RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF GATHERINGS THAT WOULD OCCUR ON THE SITE, AND ALSO TO KNOW THAT THERE'S NOT A THIRD READING AND FINAL READING OF THE ORDINANCE UNTIL A SUBDIVISION IS FILED MAKING THE PROPERTY NORTH OF THIS TRACT AND THIS TRACT A SINGLE LEGAL TRACT. I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU AN EXHIBIT. THE AGENT POR THIS CASE IS MR. MIKE OLIK AND HE OWNS THE PROPERTY THAT IS A LITTLE BIT NORTH AND EAST OF THIS PROPERTY. YOU MAY RECALL AT COUNCIL EARLIER HAD APPROVED GRCO ZONING FOR AN OLDER HISTORIC HOUSE. THERE'S A LARGE AMOUNT OF FLOODPLAIN THAT WRAPS AROUND THIS TRACK AROUND OLD SAN ANTONIO TRAIL, HIGH SCHOOL TO THE SOUTH, 35 IS TO THE EAST. THIS PROPERTY ADJOINS THIS PROPERTY OWNED BY A MR. OLIK AND SUBJECT OF THE REZONING REQUEST ALSO TO GRMUCO ZONING AND SO IT'S ALLOW A PROPOSED CATERING BANQUET PROJECT. AND AS I UNDERSTAND, I'LL LET THE APPLICANT'S AGENT EXPLAIN TO MORE DETAIL, BUT THEY'RE IN MORE AGREEMENT WITH THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION OF THIS PLAT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF REZONING THIS BACK PORTION IN THIS AREA THE 2 RR WHICH IS THE HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN WHICH IS DEPICTED BY THE KIND OF PURPLE SHADED AREA T RED CROSS HASHED AREA IS SUBJECT TRACK. THE AQUA AREA IS... ALSO THE REQUIREMENT TO TAKE BOTH OF THESE TRACKS AND MAKE THEM INTO A SINGLE LOT, AND STAFF UNDERSTANDING THAT THESE ARE LEGAL TRACTS THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE SUBDIVISION, SO SUBDIVISION WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED NORMALLY OF AN APPLICANT GOING THROUGH OUR PROCESS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM AT THIS TIME. NOT AWARE OF ANY OPPOSITION FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND AGAIN I THINK WE HAVE ONE PERSON THAT MIGHT BE SIGNED UP IN FAVOR AND MR. OLIK IS HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER.

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MY NAME IS MICHAEL OLIK, I LOVE AT 10410 OLD SAN ANTONIO ROAD AND AS GREG SAYS I LIVED IN THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THIS AND WE WERE BEFORE THE COUNCIL LAST YEAR ZONING FOR OUR PROPERTY AND WE ARE LOOKING FOR THE SAME ZONING ON OUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE HISTORICAL ZONING WITH ALL THE SAME LIMITATION, THE REASON WE'RE BACK BEFORE YOU IS OUR BUYER AFTER THE ZONING AND THE INVESTIGATIONS WITH THE CITY STAFF FOUND THAT BECAUSE OF THE FLOODPLAIN ON OUR PROPERTY AND IN YOUR AGENDA HAVE A MAP THAT SHOWS THAT BECAUSE OF THE FLOODPLAIN RESTRICTIONS ON OUR PROPERTY COULDN'T BUILD ALL THE FACILITY THAT HE NEEDED, SO WE APPROACHED OUR NEIGHBOR FOR ZONING SO WE CAN HAVE A UNIFIED SITE PLAN, A UNIFIED PROJECT. THIS PROPERTY IS 1,000 FEET FROM IH 35. THERE'S A LOT OF URBANIZATION GOING ON IN THIS AREA. WE ARE LOOKING FOR THIS SEMI PUBLIC USE AS A TRANSITION FROM THE HOME AND STABLE THAT WE HAVE THERE NOW. SO BASICALLY, WE HAVE SUPPORT IF THREE OF OUR NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND THE ONLY TWO THINGS IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO NOT WISH TO ZONE THE FLOODPLAIN RR AND ALSO TO REQUIRE SUBDIVISION, THE FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS WILL CARRY THROUGH IN THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, THE RESTRICTIONS THERE, AND WE WOULD RATHER NOT DO A SUBDIVISION BECAUSE OF THE TIME AND THE EXPENSE INVOLVED, AS MR. GERNEY, BOTH OF THESE ARE LEGAL LOTS, THEY WERE DIVIDED IN THE 1960'S, SO IN THAT CASE I ASK YOUR SUPPORT FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RR ZONING IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND NOT THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE SUBDIVISION. I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

MAYOR GARCIA: HOW BIG IS THE FLOODPLAIN?

IT'S ROUGHLY A HALF AN ACRE OF THE SUBJECT TRACT OUT OF ABOUT TWO AND A HALF ACRES. OUR PROPERTY IS THREE AND A THIRD ACRES AND ROUGHLY THREE OR A LITTLE LESS THAN THAT IS IN THE 100 OR 50 FLOODPLAIN ACCORDING TO THE CITY MAP. OUR NEIGHBORS HALF ACRE ON A BLUFF THAT STEEPLY FALLS DOWN TO A CREEK. THE BROOD FLOODPLAIN IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE. [INAUDIBLE] BUT WE WOULD REALLY HOPE NOT TO HAVE THE ADDED EXPENSE OF THE ZONING -- I MEAN OF THE SURVEY FOR THE FLOODPLAIN RR -- OR THE ADDED EXPENSE FOR THE SUBDIVISION IF YOU WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

MAYOR GARCIA: QUESTIONS FROM MR. OLIK? THANK YOU, MR. OLIK. MR. PETER... YOU DON'T WISH TO SPEAK? THAT IS ALL THE SPEAKERS THAT THEY HAVE. HE'S REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING.

SECOND.

MAYOR GARCIA: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. MOTION CARRIES. IS THERE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM.

I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF FIRST.

MAYOR GARCIA: MR. GARCEY.

CAN YOU VERIFY THE ISSUE FOR MR. OLI ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN PROTECTION WOULD ULTIMATELY BE IN THE CITY STAFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE PURVIEW DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS?

YES, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, I THINK THESE MIGHT BE LEGAL TRACT, NOT LEGAL LOT, SO AT THE TIME THE SUBDIVISION, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY GRANDFATHERING STATUS.

AND HOW MANY READINGS ARE YOU PREPARED FOR.

RIGHT NOW WE ARE PREPARED FOR THE FIRST READING ONLY.

MAYOR, I'LL MOVE APPROVAL OF THESE SEVEN ON FIRST READING WITH REMOVING THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT, THE RR ZONING FROM THE FLOODPLAIN.

MAYOR GARCIA: ALL RIGHT. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. SECOND. FURTHER DISCUSSION? YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THE MOTION IS; RIGHT?

YES, MAYOR.

MAYOR GARCIA: ALL RIGHT. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. POSED, NO. MOTION CARRIES.

WE WILL GET BACK WITH OUR LAW DEPARTMENT AND DRAFT IT A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AWAY.

WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING ON THE 25TH...

IT WILL BE IN AUGUST.

MAYOR GARCIA: YEAH. OKAY. COUNCIL, IT'S 5:45 AND WE HAVE A TIME CERTAIN AT 5:30 THAT HAS SOME PEOPLE THAT NEED TO GO TO OTHER PLACE, SO WE ARE GOING TO RECESS FOR A FEW MINUTES, QUICKLY DO THE MUSIC AND DO THE PROCLAMATIONS AND WE'LL BE BACK TO YOU WITH ITEM NUMBER Z-8 AND 9, WHICH IS ONE ITEM AND... THEN WE'LL HAVE NUMBER 10, WHICH HAS ONE SPEAKER, AND THEN 15, WHICH HAS ONE SPEAKER. SO I'LL RESET. WE'LL RECESS THE MEETING AT THIS TIME AND WE'LL BE BACK AS SOON AS WE FINISH WITH MUSIC AND PROCLAMATIONS. THE COUNCIL WILL BE BREAKING FOR DINNER AND THE MAYOR WILL BE BREAKING TO INTRODUCE THE MUSIC AND HAND OUT PROCLAMATIONS. WE'LL BE BACK. DANIEL LINK.

MAYOR GARCIA: AS IS CUSTOMARY AT THIS HOUR OF THE DAY WHEN WE HAVE COUNCIL MEETINGS, WE BRING OUTSTANDING LOCAL MUSICIANS TO COME AND MAKE A PRESENTATION, PLAY A LITTLE MUSIC AND TELL US WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE PLAYING SO THAT YOU CAN FOLLOW THEM AS THEY MAKE THEIR -- THEIR RUNAROUND TOWN. TODAY WE'RE HONORED TO PRESENT THE MUSIC OF DANIEL LINK. DANIEL IS CELEBRATING THE RELEASE OF HIS NEW CD "GHOST STORIES" WHICH IS ABOUT RESURFACING, DISCOVERING THE GHOST OF WHO WE REALLY ARE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF LIFE. AS A MUSICIAN, DANIEL HAS ALWAYS TRIED TO DELIVER SPIRITUAL MESSAGES IN AN ART FORM. SO PLEASE JOIN ME IN WELCOMING DANIEL LINK AND ALSO IN MAKING A PRESENTATION OF THE PROCLAMATION TO HIM THAT READS AS FOLLOWS: BE IT KNOWN THAT WHEREAS THE LOCAL MUSIC COMMUNITY MAKES MANY CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARD THE DEVELOPMENT OF AUSTIN'S SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY, WHEREAS THE DEDICATED AUTHORS OF AUSTIN AS THE LIVE MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD, I THEREFORE, GUS GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM JULY 11, 2002, AS DANIEL LINK DAY IN AUSTIN, AND WE WANT YOU TO GIVE HIM A VERY WARM WELCOME. DANIEL LINK.

THANK YOU, MAYOR GARCIA. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS QUITE AN HONOR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. I'M GOING TO DO A SONG FROM MY NEW ALBUM CALLED "GHOST STORIES." THIS SONG IS CALLED "SOMEONE IN AUSTIN." [MUSIC PLAYING] [ APPLAUSE ]

THANK YOU ALL ONCE AGAIN. MY NAME IS DANIEL LINK AND YOU CAN COME SEE ME WITH MY BAND. WE ARE GOING TO BE AT THE SKY LOUNGE, NEXT FRIDAY, THE 19TH, STARTS AT 8:00 AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A GREAT BIG TWO-HOUR SHOW. PLEASE COME DOWN AND JOIN US. WE'D LOVE TO SEE YOU. THANK YOU AGAIN. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: DELORES AND RON AND IS NANCY HERE? YOU'RE THE CHAIRMAN OF MY COMMITTEE, AREN'T YOU? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SERVING. THIS MONTH OF JULY IS THE MONTH IN WHICH WE OBSERVE THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT MONTH. MAJOR ADVANCEMENT IN THE LEGISLATION OF THE UNITED STATES TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, AND AS SOMEBODY WHO HAS SOMEBODY IN MY FAMILY WITH A DISABILITY, I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE'VE MADE TREMENDOUS ADVANCES IN ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF OUR VERY WORTHY CITIZENS, SO I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DO ON BEHALF OF OUR DISABLED PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY, AND I DON'T THINK THEY'RE TOTALLY DISABLED, I THINK THEY JUST NEED THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE REST OF THE CITIZENS, BECAUSE I THINK THEY HAVE AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF CONTRIBUTIONS THAT THEY CAN MAKE TO OUR COUNTRY AND I THINK THAT IS ONE OF THE PILLARS OF THE PROGRAM THAT YOU HAVE. THIS PROCLAMATION READS AS FOLLOWS: BE IT KNOWN THAT WHEREAS JULY 26TH HAS A VERY SPECIAL MEANING FOR ALL CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES BECAUSE IT MARKS THE 12TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ENACTMENT OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT AND WHEREAS WE RECOGNIZE THAT CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES HAVE A RIGHT TO BE FULLY INCLUDED AND TO HAVE ACCESS TO OUR SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC MAINSTREAM, AND THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE A GREAT DEAL TO OFFER OUR COMMUNITY IN RETURN, AND WHEREAS THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS A STRONG COMMITMENT TO FULLY -- TO FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, THUS OFFERING MORE OPPORTUNITIES AND AN ENHANCED QUALITY OF LIFE FOR EVERYONE IN OUR COMMUNITY. NOW, THEREFORE, I GUS GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM JULY 2002 AS THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, OR ADA COMMEMORATION MONTH IN AUSTIN. I'M GLAD TO PRESENT THIS PROCLAMATION TO YOU AND I WOULD LIKE FOR ALL OF YOU TO SAY A FEW WORDS TO THE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY.

MAYOR GARCIA, IT'S AN HONOR TO ACCEPT THIS PROCLAMATION FROM YOU ON BEHALF OF AUSTIN CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES. THIS YEAR ON THE 12TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ADA WE WOULD LIKE TO APPROXIMATE PAY TRIBUTE TO TWO OF AUSTIN'S CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERS THAT HELPED WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. WE WERE SAD TO RECENTLY LOSE VIRGINIA ROBERTS WHO WAS A GREAT CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER HERE IN AUSTIN AND WAS THE PAST DIRECTOR OF THE TEXAS GOVERNOR'S COMMITTEE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. VIRGINIA QUIETLY LED A STRUGGLE FOR THE PASSAGE OF THE ADA AND WAS AN ADVOCATE FOR ALL CITIZENS AND CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES, NOT ONLY HERE IN AUSTIN, BUT AT THE STATE AND NATIONAL LEVEL. WE ARE ALSO SAD TO LOSE JUSTIN DART, ONE OF NOT ONLY AUSTIN'S CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERS, BUT ONE OF AMERICA'S GREATEST CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERS. JUSTIN DART WAS KNOWN AS THE FATHER OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES AND WAS ALSO PRESENT WITH VIRGINIA AT THE SIGNING OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT AT THE WHITE HOUSE ON JULY 26TH OF 190. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONER BROWN TO READ SOME OF THE PASSING REMARKS OF JUSTIN ON THE DAY OF HIS PASSING.

HE WAS A MAN BORN IN 1930, SPENT HIS ENTIRE 72 YEARS UNTIL HIS DEATH LAST MONTH PURSUING THE FREEDOM OF SPIRIT AND CONCLUSION OF ALL AMERICANS IN EVERY ASPECT OF LIFE. A MAN GREATLY DISABLED BUT ENABLED BECAUSE OF HIS DISABILITY. ON THE DAY OF HIS DEATH, 22ND OF JUNE LAST MONTH, HE HAD A FEW COMMENTS ABOUT HIS VISION, LIFE, AMERICA, WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THIS COUNTRY, HIS OWN PERSONAL THOUGHTS. THIS IS WHAT HE WROTE JUST PRIOR TO HIS DEATH: "LISTEN TO THE HEART OF THIS OLD SOLDIER, AS WITH ALL OF US, THE TIME COMES WHEN BODY AND MIND ARE WEARY, BUT I DO NOT GO QUIETLY INTO THE NIGHT. I DO NOT GIVE UP STRUGGLING TO BE A RESPONSIBLE CONTRIBUTOR TO THE SACRED CONTINUUM OF HUMAN LIFE. I DO NOT GIVE UP STRUGGLING TO OVERCOME MY WEAKNESS, TO CONFORM MY LIFE AND THAT PART OF MY LIFE CALLED DEATH TO THE GREAT VALUES OF THE HUMAN DREAM. "I CALL FOR SOLIDARITY AMONG ALL WHO LOVE JUSTICE, ALL WHO LOVE LIFE, TO CREATE A REVOLUTION THAT WILL EMPOWER EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING TO GOVERN HIS OR HER LIFE, TO GOVERN THE SOCIETY AND TO BE FULLY PRODUCTIVE OF LIFE QUALITY FOR SELF AND FOR ALL. "I DO SO LOVE ALL OF THE PATRIOTS OF THIS NATION AND EVERY NATION WHO HAVE FOUGHT AND SACRIFICED TO BRING US TO THE THRESHOLD OF THIS BEAUTIFUL HUMAN DREAM. "I DO SO LOVE AMERICA, BEAUTIFUL AND HER WILD CREATIVE BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE. "I DO SO LOVE YOU, MY BEAUTIFUL COLLEAGUES, IN THE DISABILITY CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. "I AM WITH YOU, I LOVE YOU, LEAD ON." [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: SAMANTHA, YOU HAVE SOME COLLEAGUES -- DO YOU WANT TO COME ON UP, GUS? ONE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENTS THAT MAKE THIS CITY SUCH A HIGH QUALITY CITY BECAUSE THEY DO RESPOND SO VERY EFFECTIVELY TO THE NEEDS OF OUR PEOPLE IS OUR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, E.M.S. AS WE KNOW IT. WE SEE THE TRUCKS PULLING UP AND DOWN I 35, ALL THE OTHER STREETS AND ROADS ALL OVER OUR CITY, RESPONDING TO PEOPLE IN EMERGENCIES, AND THEY DO IT WHEN WE HAVE A BIG EMERGENCY AND THEY ALSO DO IT FOR THE AVERAGE CITIZEN THAT MAY BE FEELING NOT -- NOT FEELING WELL AT ALL. I KNOW YOU RESPONDED TO MY WIFE WHEN MY WIFE WAS NOT FEELING REAL WELL. YOU DO IT WITH A GREAT SENSE OF PRIDE AND A SENSE OF SERVICE. AND IT'S IN THIS SPIRIT THAT WE PRESENT TO YOU A DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR THE INGENUITY, AND CREATIVE SKILLS THAT YOU REGULARLY PUT TO USE TO SAW THE AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY E.M.S. AS WELL AS RAPID RESPONSE TO SOUTHWEST TEXAS REGIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR TRAUMA WHEN THEY PAGING SYSTEM FAIL. GREG MIDDLETON IS SERVING PUBLIC ACCLAIM AND RECOGNITION. GREG'S MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT EFFORTS SHORTEN THE AMOUNT OF TIME THE SAN ANTONIO TRAUMA CENTER WAS WITHOUT COMMUNICATION. THIS CERTIFICATE IS PRESENTED IN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND APPRECIATION THIS 11TH DAY OF JULY IN THE YEAR 2002 AND IT'S PRESENTED TO YOU THE CITY COUNCIL OF AUSTIN, TEXAS. I SIGNED THIS BUT IT ALSO HAS THE NAMES OF THE MAYOR PRO TEM JACKIE GOOD MAN, COUNCILMEMBERS, SLUSHER, NEWLY SWORN IN BET -- BETTY DUNKERLY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR, SPEAKING FOR THE DEPARTMENT, WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE RECOGNITION, GREG IS OUR LEAD TECHNOLOGIST AND HE HAS PLAYED AND INTIMATE ROLE IN WHAT OUR FUTURE IS GOING TO BECOME AND THIS REALLY REPRESENTS ONE OF HIS STRENGTHS AND HIS STRENGTH IS THE ABILITY TO FIND SOLUTION, AND WE ARE ALL PROUD FOR THE RECOGNITION. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

COME ON, GUYS.

MAYOR GARCIA: THIS NEXT GROUP THAT IS COMING UP IS NOT GOING TO PLAY TODAY BUT THEY WANT YOU TO SEE THAT THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE MUSIC AND THE INSTRUMENTS, THE CHAMBER MUSIC, SO LET'S GIVE THEM A BIG HAND. [ APPLAUSE ] AUSTIN HAS ALWAYS, LIKE I INDICATED EARLIER, HAD A DEEP -- HAS A DEEP APPRECIATION FOR MUSIC AND THE BEST WAY TO BEGIN THE LOVE OF MUSIC IS TO TEACH MUSIC WHEN OUR YOUNG PEOPLE ARE AT THIS AGE. AND THE AUSTIN CHAMBER MUSIC GROUP HAS ALWAYS SEEN TO IT TO WORK WITH OUR SCHOOLS AND HELP BRING THIS WONDERFUL MUSIC TO AUSTIN. SO TODAY I'M GOING TO READ A PROCLAMATION AND I GUESS SOME OF YOU GUYS THAT ARE BETTER SPEAKERING THAN ME CAN RESPOND TO THE PROCLAMATION. THE PROCLAMATION READS AS FOLLOWS: "BE IT KNOWN THAT WHEREAS THE AUSTIN CHAMBER MUSIC CENTER HAS BEEN SHARING THE GIFT OF MUSIC AND AUSTINITES OF ALL AGES THROUGH ITS MUSIC ACADEMY SUMMER WORKSHOP AND OUTREACH COUNSELORS SINCE 1982, AND WHEREAS CONCURRENT WITH THE SUMMER MUSIC CAMP, THE AUSTIN CHAMBER MUSIC FESTIVAL SHOWCASE, FACULTY AND STUDENTS AND WHEREAS THE AUSTIN CHAMBER MUSIC CENTER CONSISTENTLY RANKS AS ONE OF THE TOP TEN MUSIC GROUPS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN BY THE AUSTIN ARTS COMMISSION. NOW, THEREFORE, I GUS GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HEREBY ENCOURAGE ALL CITIZENS TO ENJOY THE EXCEPTIONAL MUSIC AND DO HEREBY PROCLAIM JULY 2002 AS -- I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH THIS -- AS AUSTIN CHAMBER MUSIC FESTIVAL AND WORKSHOP IN AUSTIN, AND I PRESENT THIS PROCLAMATION TO YOU AND ARE YOU GOING TO PLAY A G OR A C OR WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO PLAY? [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU SO MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ] TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THIS FESTIVAL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH., MAYOR GARCIA, WE APPRECIATE THIS. WE'VE BEEN HAVING A VERY SUCCESSFUL WORKSHOP AT THE MOMENT WITH 130 STUDENTS RANGING IN AGE FROM OUR LITTLE ONES HERE THROUGH A GROUP OF ADULT AMATURES AND FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS WE'VE BEEN DEDICATED TO SPREADING THE LOVE AND ENJOYMENT OF CHAMBER MUSIC TO A MANY PEOPLE AS WE POSSIBLY CAN. WE BELIEVE STRONGLY IN THESE DAYS OF TECHNOLOGY AND RUSHING AROUND THAT WE ARE INVOLVED WITH THE ARTS AND MUSIC -- THE ARTS AND MUSIC MAY A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT PART AND SHOULD BE DEFINITELY INCLUDED IN EVERYONE'S EDUCATION. WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOU COME TO ANY OF OUR EVENTS. WE HAVE CONCERTS ON THURSDAYS, SATURDAYS AND TUESDAYS THROUGH THIS WEEK AND NEXT WEEK AND WE HAVE THE WORKSHOP AT ST. STEPHEN'S SCHOOL WHICH RUNS FROM 8:30 IN THE MORNING UNTIL 5:00 EVERY DAY. THE CONCERT THIS EVENING IS AT THE UNITARIAN CHURCH AT 7:30. WE HOPE. [INAUDIBLE] . AND WE HAVE A T-SHIRT. [ APPLAUSE ]

MY NAME IS JOSE LUIS HERNANDEZ, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMEND THE AUSTIN CENTER AND ESPECIALLY MRS. GOLDMAN FOR HER GREAT SUPPORT OF THE ARTS OF THIS CITY. SHE HAS BEEN COMMENDED. SHE HAS DONE GREAT EFFORTS IN BRINGING PEOPLE TOGETHER, YOUNG PEOPLE, AMATURE, OLDER PEOPLE, BRINGING THE COMMUNITY INTO THE ARTS AND CULTURE WHICH IS A GREAT THING FOR A DEVELOPMENT OF A GREAT CITY. IT IS WITH GREAT HONOR AND APPRECIATION ON BEHALF OF THE STUDENTS OF THE WORKSHOP THAT WE ACCEPT THIS PROCLAMATION AND WE THANK YOU FOR IT. [ APPLAUSE ]

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO THE CITY FOR THEIR SUPPORT. WITHOUT THAT, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO OPERATE.

MAYOR GARCIA: THAT YOU HAVE IT, THE FUTURE CHAMBER MUSICIANS RIGHT HERE. [ APPLAUSE ] WE'LL BE BACK SHORTLY AFTER WE HAVE A LITTLE BITE TO EAT AND WE WILL CONTINUE OUR ZONING CASES AND WE WILL GO INTO THE 5:45 -- PUBLIC HEARING AND THE ACTION ITEMS THAT WE HAVE SCHEDULED FOR THAT TIME FRAME. FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT MAY WANT TO CONTINUE WATCHING US, WE'LL BE HERE UNTIL PROBABLY 2:00 IN THE MORNING. SO YOU HAVE TIME TO GO HOME AND REST A LITTLE BIT AND TUNE IN TO CHANNEL 6. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. LET'S GIVE OUR YOUNG MUSICIANS AND BUDDING POLITICIAN HERE, LOOKS LIKE MR. HERNANDEZ WILL BE BACK IN THE POLITICAL ARENA. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: IF EVERYONE WOULD TAKE YOUR SEATS, PLEASE, WE HAVE A FEW ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF BEFORE WE GO TO THE 5:45 TIME CERTAIN PUBLIC HEARING AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL MEETING. COUNCIL, WE HAD AN ITEM, NUMBER 7, THAT WAS POSTED AS AN ITEM THAT WAS PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION BUT THAT WAS REALLY NOT THAT WAY. NUMBER 7 IS MERELY TO AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION OF LEGAL SERVICES CONTRACTS WITH RENEE HIGS AND SCOTT DOUGLAS, FOR REPRESENTATION IN THE CIRCLE C NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION VERSUS CITY OF AUSTIN CIRCLE C LAND CORPORATION AND STRATUS PROPERTIES, CAUSE NUMBER GN 202018 IN THE 621ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, AND THIS IS RELATED TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEM SO WE SHOULD HAVE TAKEN THAT ITEM AT THAT TIME. THE FISCAL NOTE IS FOR $140,000. SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE OPPOSED, NO MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF ON A VOTE OF 6 WITH COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS TEMPORARILY OFF THE DAIS. OH, YOU'RE HERE. 7-0. SORRY ABOUT THAT. MS. BROWN, THAT IS ALL THE ITEMS OTHER THAN THE ZONING AND THE PUBLIC HEARING; CORRECT? OKAY. CAN SHE CALL Z 8 AND Z 9 TOGETHER?

YES, MAYOR.

MAYOR GARCIA: LET ME ANNOUNCE THAT THIS IS PART OF THE 4:00 TIME CERTAIN ZONING HEARINGS AND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCES AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS AND WE ARE Z 8 AND 9.

ITEM NUMBER Z 8 IS ZONING CASE Z 020053. 3600 PRESIDENTIAL BOULEVARD THIS IS IN THE AABA REPORT. IT CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 924-ACRES, THERE'S A ZONING REQUEST FROM INTERIM R TO AV ZONING. ON THIS PROPERTY, THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND AV PLATTING BUT NO PARKING AND AV FOR THE FLOODPLAIN AREA. Z 9, C 14-02-0054 FOR A 76 ACRE TRACT APPROXIMATELY AT CARDINAL LOOP AND SHAPARD LANE. THE ZONING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND AV ZONING AND RESTRICTED NO SURFACE PARKING AS WELL. STAFF WOULD -- THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THESE ITEMS. THEY'RE IN AGREEMENT CERTAINLY WITH THE AV ZONING THAT HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMISSION. THEY TAKE EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION OF PROHIBITING PUBLIC SURFACE PARKING WITH BOTH OF THESE CASES. ALSO IN THE CASE OF THE PROPERTY ON PRESIDENTIAL BOULEVARD, THE RR FOR THE FLOODPLAIN IN THE AVIATION AREA, THE NOISE CONTOURS WOULD NOT ENCOURAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND THEREFORE STAFF IS ALSO SUPPORT OF JUST PLAIN AV ZONING ON BOTH OF THESE PROPERTIES. THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT ARE HERE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR IF THEM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, STAFF WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM AT THIS TIME.

QUESTIONS FROM MR. GERNSEY? OKAY. THIS IS US. SO MR. SMITH? MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, AS GREG SAID, THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE AV ZONING, THE ONLY ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THE RESTRICTION THAT THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION PUT ON TWO ITEMS THAT GREG MENTIONED. THE FIRST IS PROBABLY THE ISSUE OF PUBLIC SURFACE PARKING. THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT THIS LAND NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE THAT TYPE OF PARKING. WE TRIED TO SHOW FROM THE MAP UP HERE AND WE'RE PASSING OUT MAPS RIGHT NOW THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE 4200-ACRES THAT EXIST OUT AT THE AIRPORT, YOU REMOVE THE YELLOW WHICH IS THAT AREA WHICH IS AIR FIELD AND THEN THE WHITE WHICH IS LAND WHICH IS ALREADY BUILT ON AND THEN THE LIGHT BLUE WHICH IS FLOODPLAIN, THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE'RE LEFT WITH ONLY 450-ACRES OF LAND WHICH CAN BE BUILT ON FOR AN AIRPORT THAT HAS TO LAST US ANOTHER 50 TO 100 YEARS SO WE HAVE TO HAVE MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY WITH THAT LAND THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THE NEEDS OF THE AIRPORT. SO WE THINK IMPOSING A RESTRICTION THAT NO PARKING CAN BE PUT ON THAT LAND IS A UNREALISTIC RESTRICTION IN TERMS OF THE PLANNING THAT WE HAVE TO DO FOR THE FUTURE. THE SECOND ISSUE AS GREG MENTIONED, THE RECOMMENDATION TO ZONE THE FLOODPLAIN RR WE THINK IS INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE AS THE AIRPORT WE ALREADY HAVE CONDITIONAL ZONING IN PLACE TO DEAL WITH NOISE CONTOUR, IN ADDITION WE HAVE HAZARD ZONING IN PLACE TO PROTECT AGAINST CERTAIN TYPES OF USES IN THE PROXIMITY TO THE RUN WAYS, SO FOR THOSE PARTICULAR REASONS WE DON'T THINK THE RR IS APPROPRIATE OR NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE FLOODPLAIN. IN ADDITION, BEING CITY OWNED, ANY TIME WE HAVE PROPOSAL FOR DEVELOPMENT OUT HERE, THEY'RE GOING TO COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL NUMEROUS TIMES AS WE GO THROUGH PLANNING, FINANCING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE PARTICULAR FACILITIES, SO THE COUNCIL WILL HAVE NUMEROUS OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT WHATEVER IS ULTIMATELY DOING TO BE BUILT AT THESE PARTICULAR SITE, SO FOR THOSE REASONS WE WOULD RECOMMEND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WHICH IS JUST AV ZONING WITHOUT ANY LIMITATIONS ON IT.

MAYOR GARCIA: QUESTIONS FOR MR. SMITH? ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO MOVED.

MAYOR GARCIA: MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON Z 8 AND Z 9.

MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER DUNK EARLY TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN SLUSHER.

I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING DISTRACTED BY SOMETHING ELSE. DID WE TALK ABOUT FLOODING AT ALL? POSSIBLY? EXACERBATION OF THE FLOODING SITUATION.

MAYOR GARCIA: DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON FLOODING MR. GERNSEY?

WELL, I'M THINKING BECAUSE OF THE FLOODING TRADITIONALLY THAT HAS STARTED COMING TO THE EASTERN WATERSHEDS AND BECAUSE TODAY WE ARE IN A DISASTER AREA, OR WE HAVE DECLARED THAT WE ARE, WAS THERE EXTRA CARE THAT CONTAIN AT THIS POINT IN TIME -- COULD BE TAKEN AT THIS POINT IN TIME FOR MITIGATION OF FLOODING THAT GOES BEYOND WHAT OUR ORDINANCES WOULD REQUIRE FOR PEOPLE'S SENSIBILITIES?

MAYOR GARCIA: EXCUSE ME JUST A MINUTE, MAYOR PRO TEM. SOMEBODY IS PLAYING MUSIC THAT IS COMING.

THAT'S OUTSIDE.

MAYOR GARCIA: OH, IT'S OUTSIDE.

THAT'S THE PROTEST.

MAYOR GARCIA: ALL RIGHT GO AHEAD, MAYOR PRO TEM.

[INAUDIBLE] COMPLIANCE WITH OUR FLOODPLAIN REQUIREMENTS AND THE CONCERN IS THAT YOU MAY HAVE SOME USES THAT MAY BE DESIGNED TO BE REMOVED FROM THE FLOP OR SOME STRUCTURES THAT MAY GO INTO THIS AREA THAT THE RR ZONING MAY PRECLUDE CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN THE FUTURE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKING, THOUGH, RIGHT?

IF THERE WAS A SURFACE PARKING LOT THAT WOULD COME IN, STAFF WOULD REVIEW THAT FOR COMPLIANCE AS HAVING ADEQUATE DRAINAGE AND FLOODPLAIN PROTECTION. THE AREAS THAT ALSO WOULD HAVE RESTRICTIONS IF ACTUALLY BUILDING IN A FLOODPLAIN, CERTAIN SURFACE PARKING LOT, PROHIBITED FROM SOME OF THOSE FLOODPLAIN AREAS, 25 YEAR FLOODPLAIN, IT MAY REQUIRE VARIANCES OF THE COUNCIL TO GO INTO THOSE AREAS. SO YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY LOOKING AT BUILDING SURFACE PARKING LOT IN THE MIDDLE OF A FLOODPLAIN AREA.

YEAH, IT'S NOT NECESSARY THAT YOU DO FOR IT TO EXACERBATE FLOODING, BUT LET ME CHECK MY FACTS REAL QUICK. I KNEW THIS WAS AN ISSUE THAT CAME UP AT THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION. WAS THAT RESTRICTION AGAINST SURFACE PARKING PART OF THE REGULATION THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY'S POSITION.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION, I KNOW THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION AND WHEN IT WAS AT THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION I GUESS ABOUT COMPETITION ABOUT HAVING SURFACE PARKING IN THE CITY -- ON CITY LAND VERSUS PRIVATE INTERESTS. I DON'T RECALL DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN ISSUE.

NO, I DOUBT IF THEY USED THAT PARTICULAR ARGUMENT BUT I AM -- WHAT I'M WONDERING ABOUT IS IF THIS MOTION AS MADE INCLUDED THE ABILITY TO HAVE SURFACE PARKING AND IF SO, WELL, LET ME GET THE ANSWER TO THAT, BECAUSE THE REST MAY BE --

WHAT I MIGHT OFFER IS THIS IS RIGHT NOW ALREADY FROM FIRST READING, WE BRING THIS BACK FOR SECOND AND THIRD. I CAN DISCUSS WITH THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT WHAT ADDED CONTROLS, IF ANY, THEY MAY BE LOOKING AT FOR SURFACE PARKING LOT.

OKAY. LET ME JUST ASK. COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY, DOES YOUR MOTION INCLUDE THE ABILITY FOR SURFACE PARKING? IS THAT PROHIBITED? IT DOES INCLUDE -- OKAY. IT'S NOT PROHIBITED. OKAY. SO EVEN THOUGH THIS IS ONLY FIRST READING, SINCE IT IS A CITY CASE, I'M TALKING TO US JUST AS I WOULD ANY OTHER DEVELOPER, CAN YOU AT THIS POINT IN TIME WITH THE ZONING OFFER AGREEMENTS OR PROMISES FOR BETTER MITIGATION OF RUNOFF THAN ORDINANCES REQUIRE?

YOU CAN ADD A CONDITION TO ADDRESS ENHANCEMENTS TO THE COLD THAT WOULD DEAL WITH WATER DETENTION AND WE CAN PURSUE THOSE WITH AVIATION IN THE SECOND AND THIRD READING AND GET WITH YOUR OFFICE TO DISCUSS THOSE.

OKAY. THANKS. THANKS, MAYOR.

THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. FURTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ON FIRST READING ONLY.

THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?

ALVAREZ: SO THE NUMBERS ON THIS MAP THAT YOU DISTRIBUTED, WHAT DID THEY REFER TO? THEY DO NOT REFER TO THESE TWO CASES, TWO OF THE CASES OUTLINED THERE?

THE NUMBERS ON THE MAP MERELY REFER TO THE LEGEND IN THE UPPER LEFT HAND CORNER WHICH ILLUSTRATES HOW MUCH ACREAGE EACH ONE OF THOSE REPRESENTS. ALL WE ARE WERE TRYING TO SHOW YOU IS THE GREEN AREA REPRESENTS 450-ACRES WHICH IS NOT IDENTIFIED RIGHT NOW FOR DEVELOPMENT AND OUT OF THE 4200-ACRES YOU HAVE AT THE AIRPORT THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE AVAILABLE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

ALVAREZ: OKAY AND THAT IS NOT PART OF THESE TWO [INAUDIBLE]

NO, IT ISN'T. THOSE GREEN AREAS DO NOT COINCIDE WITH THE AREAS WHICH WE WERE REQUESTING REZONING. IT WAS MERELY TO SHOW YOU AN ILLUSTRATION OF WHAT AMOUNT OF LAND OUT THERE IS NOT CURRENTLY OCCUPIED OR HAVE SPECIFIC PLANS FOR.

MAYOR GARCIA: I GUESS A BETTER WAY TO SAY, JIM, IS WHICH EYE OOTESTIMONIES ARE COVERED BY -- ITEMS ARE COVERED BY NINE, WHICH TRACTS HERE?

I'LL PUT UP A SEPARATE MAP.

YOU HAVE A MAP IN YOUR PACKET.

MAYOR GARCIA: YES.

YEAH, RON WILL...

MAYOR GARCIA: CAN YOU GET THAT MIC THAT... THERE'S A MIC RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF YOU, RIGHT THERE, IF YOU CAN GIVE SOME VOLUME TO THAT MIC, PLEASE.

MY NAME IS RON GENTRY, I'M THE MANAGER OF THE ENGINEERING OF PLANNING AT THE AIRPORT. THE TWO AREAS THAT YOU ARE BEING ASKED TO REZONE IS THE ONE AREA UP IN...

MAYOR GARCIA: THE VALLEY.

... WHICH CORRESPONDS TO SITE NUMBER 7. AND THE OTHER AREA IS THE DARK BLACK LINE THAT YOU SEE THROUGH HERE, IT'S THE PIECE TO THE SOUTH...

SO IT'S TRACTS 1, 2 AND 3?

IT'S PART OF NUMBER 1, ALL OF NUMBER 2, ALL OF NUMBER 3 AND [INAUDIBLE] NUMBER 4.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY. NUMBER 4 IS JUST A SMALL SITE.

YES.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY.

THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION IS WHERE IS THE LANDFILL, THE ONLY LANDFILL WITH RESPECT TO THIS TRACT?

RIGHT HERE.

OVER BY TRACT 3?

YES, SIR.

AND THAT IS NOT COVERED UNDER THE ACTION OR NOT HIGHLIGHTED HERE ANYWHERE; IS THAT CORRECT?

NO, BECAUSE THERE'S RESTRICTIONS ON THAT NOW AS TO WHAT WE CAN DO WITH IT.

RIGHT. OKAY.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU. FURTHER QUESTIONS? FIRST READING. MAYOR PRO TEM?

I'M SORRY, THERE IS ONE MORE. I FORGOT TO ASK. I KNOW THERE'S A MASTER PLAN COMING. BY DOING THIS NOW, HAVE WE DEFACTO BEGUN FINALIZING THAT MASTER PLAN BEFORE WE SEE THE MASTER PLAN?

NO. I MEAN THIS IS JUST A ZONING REQUEST PLAN. THE COUNCIL ULTIMATELY HAS TO APPROVE AND THAT IS FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS AS A PLANNING DOCUMENT. AGAIN, IT'S NOT A SITE PLAN EITHER. THINGS ARE GOING TO CHANGE FROM TIME TO TIME OVER WHAT THAT IS. IT'S BEEN A ATTEMPT TO LAY -- THE MASTER PLAN IS PROJECTING OUT WHAT OUR GROWTH IS GOING TO BE OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS AND ILLUSTRATE WHAT TYPE OF FACILITIES YOU'RE GOING TO NEED ON THE LAND OUT THERE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT PARTICULAR GROWTH. ESSENTIALLY IT'S LIKE A BUBBLE TYPE OF DIAGRAM, WITHOUT GETTING SPECIFIC, ABOUT WHICH BUILDING IS GOING TO GO IN WHICH PLACE.

OKAY.

MAYOR GARCIA: A MOTION AND A SECOND ON FIRST READING FOR ITEMS NUMBER 8 AND NUMBER 9 IN THE ZONING SECTION. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, NO. MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 7 TO 0 FOR FIRST READING ONLY.

10 IS C 1402-0056. THIS IS A ZONING REQUEST AT 6403 JOHNNY MORRIS ROAD ON APPROXIMATELY 5-ACRE TRACT OF LAND, THE PROPOSED ZONING IS FOR MH MOBILE HOME ZONING TO ALLOW MANUFACTURED HOME TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPERTY AND ALSO TO ZONE THE EXISTING MOBILE HOME AND MANUFACTURED HOMES ON THE PROPERTY. THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION DID RECOMMEND THE ZONING WITH AN OVERLAY THAT WOULD LIMIT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS ON THE PROPERTY TO 26. AT THIS TIME THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 18 UNITS ON THE PROPERTY. IN ADDITION THE COMMISSION AS PART OF THEIR MOTION MADE A RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE 43 FEET FROM THE CENTER LINE OF JOHNNY MORRIS ROAD BE DEDICATED. THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW CONSISTS OF PROBABLY 18 MOBILE HOME OR MANUFACTURED HOME PADS THAT ARE ON THE NORTHSIDE OF THIS PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY ZONED AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO ZONE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY TO BRING THE NORTHERN UNITS THAT ARE EXISTING INTO COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CODE AND ALSO TO ALLOW FOR THE EXPANSION FURTHER TO THE SOUTH IN THE COUNCIL'S BACKUP MATERIAL THERE IS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT SHOWS THAT THE GENERAL FLOODPLAIN, ALTHOUGH THEY WERE ON JOHNNY MORRIS ROAD, WERE NOT SUBJECT TO FLOODING THAT OCCURRED THE LAST WEEK OR TWO, HOWEVER THERE'S A LARGER OR MANUFACTURED HOME PARK THAT SITS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO THE SOUTH THAT DID INCUR SOME FLOODING, AND THIS PROPERTY OWNER WOULD LIKE TO EXPAND AN EXISTING PARK.

MAYOR GARCIA: COUNCILMAN SLUSHER?

SLUSHER: SHOW ME HOW CLOSE IS THE 25 YEAR FLOODPLAIN.

MIGHT BE EASIER IF I TURN TO THE EXHIBIT THAT'S IN YOUR BACKUP. IF YOU LOOK IN YOUR BACKUP THERE IS AN EXHIBIT THAT HAS SOME HEAVY DARKENED LINES, AND THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND THE 500 YEAR FLOODPLAIN ARE OUTLINED, 25 YEAR FLOODPLAIN WOULD ACTUALLY BE WITHIN THIS DARKENED AREA, THOUGH PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS LOCATED UP HERE, THE MOBILE HOME PARK THAT WAS SUBJECT THE SOME FLOODING OVER THE PAST WEEK OR TWO IS LOCATED FURTHER DOWN JOHNNY MORRIS ROAD.

IS THIS ONE EVEN IN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN.

NO.

SO IT'S NOT IN THE 25 OR THE 100.

NO.

... CAN'T BUILD IN 25, YOU CAN BUILD IN THE 100 AND ALL THE FLOODS THAT WE'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT IS TAKING PLACE IN THE 25...

THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE SEVERE FLOODING IS MY UNDERSTANDING IN THE MOBILE HOME PARK THAT HAS OCCURRED IN THE PAST BECAUSE OF CERTAIN EMIMPROVEMENTS THE CITY HAS MADE FURTHER TO THE SOUTH AND FURTHER TO THE EAST BUT THIS PROPERTY IS NOT SUBJECT TO FLOOD.

IT WOULDN'T BE SUBJECT TO IT ANYWAY REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THESE IMPROVEMENTS HAD BEEN DONE OR NOT.

THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY.

THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE. HE'S OPPOSED TO THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION THAT LIMITED THE EXPANSION OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS TO THIS PROPERTY TO ONLY 8 MORE. WE WOULD LIKE TO BUILD APPROXIMATELY 16 TO 18 MORE UNITS ON THE PROPERTY. ALSO TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION, STAFF, AFTER REVIEWING THIS, DID NOT MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATION WHAT ANY FURTHER RIGHT-OF-WAY WAS REQUIRED ALONG THIS SECOND OF ROAD WAY. THE COMMISSION MADE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE LIMITATION OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS BECAUSE OF THE CONCERN OF OVERBURDENING THE SCHOOL THAT IS NEAR AND ALSO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION BECAUSE OF A CONCERN OF NOT HAVING SIDEWALKS IN THE GENERAL AREA.

I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT. ARE THERE ANY -- IS THIS DEVELOPMENT PUTTING IN SIDEWALKS?

IF THEY WERE TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN, THE SIDEWALK, BUT ONLY ALONG THEIR PORTION OF THE TRACT.

RIGHT. ON THEIR PORTION, BUT... BECAUSE, I MEAN THIS IS GOING TO BE, I WOULD THINK, REASONABLY PRICED AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND PROBABLY THE MORE UNITS, THE MORE SO, I WOULD THINK.

I LEAVE IT TO THE AGENT. HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN BETTER THE COST OF THE RENTAL OF THE PAD SPACE.

OKAY.

MAYOR GARCIA: MR. WHITTINGTON?

MY NAME IS KEITH WHITTINGTON AND I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, AND WE HAVE HAD THIS PROPERTY IN OUR FAMILY FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS. THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN A MOBILE HOME PARK FROM THE VERY -- SINCE 1971. THE CITY ANNEXED THE PROPERTY BACK IN 1973, I BELIEVE, AND SUBSEQUENT ZONINGS INTERIM RESIDENTIAL, AND NOW SF 3 ON THE PROPERTY NOW WERE REALLY NOT APPROPRIATE, THOSE ZONINGS SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESPONDED TO EARLIER BUT WEREN'T. WE ARE SEEKING NOW TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE PROPERTY COMPLY SINCE IT IS A MOBILE HOME PARK, MAKE IT A MOBILE HOME PARK. THE -- OUR DESIRE IS TO ADD ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE PEOPLE ON THE PROPERTY. THEY DO HAVE FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS THAT HAVE CONTACTED US ABOUT TRYING TO MOVE A HOME ON THIS PROPERTY. THE -- THE TRACT IS WELL AWAY FROM ANY FLOODING. IT'S NEVER FLOODED. THE FLOODING THAT HAS OCCURRED ON JOHNNY MORRIS ROAD HAS BEEN AT 969, FURTHER DOWN, WELL OVER 1,000 FEET AWAY, SO I DON'T THINK FLOODING IS AN ISSUE N THE ZONING PROCESS, THE PLATTING PROCESS, THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT SIDEWALK WHICH I ACTUALLY CONCUR WITH THE CONCERN BECAUSE THERE ARE CHILDREN THAT LIVE HERE AND THERE IS ABOUT, OH, 1200 FEET, APPROXIMATELY, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THAT MAP OVER THERE, ABOUT FIFTEEN ACRES IN FRONT OF ME THAT DOESN'T HAVE A SIDEWALK AND THERE'S A BUS STOP OUT IN FRONT OF MY PROPERTY THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO GET ON A BUS AND GO PLACES, BUT THERE ISN'T A SIDEWALK FOR THE KIDS TO WALK TO SCHOOL. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT GETS PLAYED INTO THE CITY COUNCIL'S ACTIONS OR CAPITAL METRO'S STREETS OR SIDEWALK PROGRAM, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS OUT THERE FOR SOMEBODY TO TAKE SOME ACTION ON, BUT I'M SEEKING ONLY TO ZONE THE PROPERTY APPROPRIATELY FOR ITS CURRENT USE, ITS BEEN A MOBILE HOME PARK FOR, LIKE I SAID, OVER 30 YEARS, SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO DO AT THIS STAGE.

OKAY, MAYOR, EXCUSE ME, MR. WHITTINGTON, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT KIND OF USES ARE ALONG THE PART THAT IS NOT -- THAT DOESN'T HAVE SIDEWALKS?

Slusher: Okay. Do you have -- I guess it's probably not your department, but what's the cost -- anybody here that can tell me the per square foot or per foot cost of the sidewalk to put it in? I just hate, seems to me, to not do affordable housing because there's not a sidewalk on another property. I would like to try to deal with that.

I don't have the information right this moment, but this is only ready for first reading. And I could bring that information back --

Slusher: And the staff recommendation was to do the amount of --

Not to have a limitation. It would allow him to build the eight additional beyond -- eight to ten units additional beyond what the zoning and platting commission recommended >>slusher: move approval on first reading. I'll go out and take a look at it between first and final reading.

Mayor Garcia: Let me take a motion to close the public hearing.

slusher: So moved.

Wynn: Second.

Mayor Garcia: All in favor? Opposed no. Is there a second?

Wynn: Second.

Mayor Garcia: Motion by Councilmember Slusher, seconded by Councilmember Wynn to do first reading for staff recommendation on number 10. Discussion? Yes, sir. Councilmember Thomas.

Thomas: Has anyone checked the traffic impact? Because I don't know if a lot of people, but Johnny Morris is a two-lane street, and if we [INAUDIBLE] affordable housing, which I'm for, but how it would affect because in that same general area you do have ATC, which is the transit system, buses, and then you have a trucking company there on that same street. So that might be something we might need to look at also.

Councilmember, George Zapalac. The estimated impact of the zoning would be an additional 230 trips per day on Johnny Morris road.

Thomas: Okay. That's for just the eight additional --

That would be for the maximum number of units we would expect from the zoning. 2

Mayor Garcia: Further discussion?

Slusher: I want to follow on that. What's the amount of trips, with the difference between the zap recommendation and the staff recommendation?

It would be approximately half. The zap recommendation would be about half.

Slusher: Around 115?

Right.

Slusher: Okay.

Thomas: The 200 will be quite a bit for the general area if the traffic is already there. And I know you probably haven't checked that, but is there any way they could check what the traffic is at the present time, with the businesses already there? You probably [INAUDIBLE] is there any way we could find out what the traffic impact is already there, the number of trips?.

Yes, councilmember. It's currently about 1300 trips per day.

Thomas: So we're looking at 15 and 16. Okay. First reading, I would like to get a little bit more input.

Mayor Garcia: Motion and -- there's a motion and second for first reading. Can you request that between now and the second and third reading we do --

Thomas: Yes. Also it's flooded on one end and it's not that I've never known it to flood, but I just -- I would like to look at it a little bit more before the second and third reading.

Slusher: I agree.

Mayor Garcia: Okay. All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Mayor Garcia: opposed no? Motion carries on a vote of 7 to zero. And that brings to us the last zoning item. Which is number 15.

Case C 14020089 at 7909 FM 1826 at highway 290 west. A rezoning request from RR to GR for approximately one and a half acres of land. Council had previously approved GR zoning over the majority of this tract, but the zone -- with a zoning case from 1999. It's proposed for a new H.E.B. store that would be located on this property. The reason for this request is there have been 3 engineering studies done by the developer and that has determined that the flood plain is not as large as the area that was suggested at the time of the original rezoning request and that this area could be rezoned to retail development for GR, community commercial zoning. Staff didn't recommend this. It was recommended by the zoning and plat situation 8 to zero would be subject to S.O.S. I think you only had one speaker earlier.

Mayor Garcia: I was going to call the applicant. Ms. houseman.

Mayor and councilmembers, I'm Steve Metcalf. I represent H.E.B. I don't really have much to add from what Greg said. This is a 1.5-acre sliver. When the zoning case originally came through, the intent was everything that was not in the flood plain was supposed to be zoned GR. At the time we did not realize this sliver was not in the flood plain and since have learned that. That's we're why coming back with this. Just a reminder on the original zoning case, there was a very stringent restrictive covenant on all this property including this sliver that requires rain water harvesting, green builder standards, water quality monitoring, xeriscapings, parking lot vacuuming, energy conservation and among other things. Property is fully S.O.S. compliant. This sliver is not going to add any more impervious cover or traffic or square footage, it just has to do with siting the store. I would answer any questions you have.

Mayor Garcia: Questions for Mr. Metcalf. Councilmember Slusher.

Slusher: So, Mr. Metcalf, is it accurate that H.E.B. is going to close the store at the Y and move into this one?

That's -- I think that's their game plan, but, you know --

Slusher: You can't say that right now?

I can't promise they are going to close the store, but that's currently what they are going to contemplate.

Slusher: Okay. So you had come through -- was there any opposition to this case when you brought it through for the larger part of the tract?

No, it went on consent and we spent lot of time working with with neighborhoods and the environmental community coming up with the restrictive covenants and 4 the deal with the rain water harvesting and the xeriscaping and all that stuff.

Slusher: So nobody came down and spoke against this --

No.

Slusher: -- and this is where you have the little sliver you didn't realize was in the flood plain?

That's exactly right.

Slusher: And this is fully S.O.S. compliant?

Yes.

Slusher: That's my questions.

Mayor Garcia: We have one speaker, Mr. Bill bunch.

[INAUDIBLE]

Mayor Garcia: Okay, yeah, Mr. Bunch spoke when we had this item on consent, so he is registered against. Questions for staff? Well, let me entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

Mayor Garcia: Motion by Councilmember Slusher, seconded by Councilmember Wynn. All in favor signify by saying aye? Opposed? Motion carries. This is for consent on all three readings?

That's correct, mayor.

Mayor Garcia: Is there a question for staff? If not, is there a motion to approve this one?

Wynn: So moved, mayor.

Slusher: Second.

Mayor Garcia: Motion by Councilmember Wynn, seconded by Councilmember Slusher. Discussion?

Slusher: May I say quickly that we had a lot of discussion about development over the Edwards Aquifer, and I pointed out before there was a lot of development already there that wasn't built under the save our springs standard, and I think that's a source of a lot of our pollution in Barton Springs right now. But we do have to, I think, allow folks that are there to have a place to go to the grocery store. And H.E.B. is building this store under strict compliance with the save our springs ordinance, and that means that folks that already live there, whether it's an S.O.S. compliant neighborhood or not, but they are already living there, they will be able to go to the grocery store closer and have less car trips, and where they are going, that won't be polluting the aquifer because it's under S.O.S. H.E.B. has another store at Brodie and William Cannon 5 also built under strict s.o.s. compliance. I think we do need to let people shop for groceries living over the aquifer, but those when we do have a grocery store to comply with S.O.S. and that's what this one is doing. I'm done.

Mayor Garcia: Z 15 is for consent for all three readings. Further discussion? All in favor say aye? Opposed no. Motion carries on a vote of 7 to zero. Okay. That's all of the items that we have on the zoning. We're now to -- we already did the 5:30 time certain for live music and the proclamations. As we indicated earlier, there are -- the two public hearings are postponed. So we are to item number 23 to 42. Items 23 to 42 is a time certain item at 5:45, and it's entitled Circle~C land CORP (stratus) proposed settlement and zoning cases. And it goes to item number 42. Let me summarize for you what the council did on the -- at the meeting on June 27th. I'm calling all these items up together, and the council will consider the seven proposed settlement related items taken 13 zoning items at the same time. This excludes two zoning cases to be heard July 18th not posted on this agenda, and we explained why these are not posted here. On June 27th, the council passed the following motion: If someone signed up to speak by 1:00 A.M. on June 28, 2002, and has not donated time to someone, and has not either had his or her name read off at -- in favor, against or absent when called, that person may testify when the public hearing is reconvened on July 11th, 2002. Regardless of whether someone has signed up to speak on both the zoning and the agreement, that person is only signed up to speak one time for no more than three minutes. Further, in order to donate time to a speaker, the person donating time must be present at the time the speaker speaks. Once a person's name has been read into the record as not wish to go speak or not present when the name is called, that person will not be recognized to speak when the hearing is reconvened July 11th. We have 104 speakers entitle to do speak under the 6 motion passed by the council at its June 27 meeting. A speaker may only speak once on settlement and zoning items. And now at this time I'm going to ask the council if that is the -- your interpretation of that particular motion which passed unanimously. If there is any disagreement, please indicate so. Now let me make some announcements with regard to room capacity. The maximum number of persons that can be allowed in this chambers is 140, and the need tore the fire marshal to monitor capacity. If the fire marshal would raise his hand. That will be the person monitoring. To keep speakers focused and moving, we will ask that speakers please avoid repetitious remarks. We now have had about seven or eight hours of testimony and tonight we will have five more. Please avoid irrelevant testimony. These are important cases, and they contain substantial amount of critical decisions. We understand that if you are not in favor of or against the proposed settlement, you may have something new to add that has not been stated before, so if you have something new, you know, please make it part of your comments. I'm going to call for a motion that the council permit a limited number of stakeholders to be present during the entire time that the stratus items are being considered by the council. That is, stratus representatives to be present during the entire time the stratus items are being presented by the council. This is because stratus is the applicant on the bear lake zoning case, the owner of the property being zoned, and the party to the proposed settlement agreement. Furthermore, to attempt to bring balance, I'm going to suggest that those in opposition also be permitted to have the same number of representatives present in council chambers. That is, if S.O.S. and the neighborhood associations opposed to the agreement and zoning case should coordinate with which six representatives should be allowed to remain in chambers. So if the applicant has six people here, the opposition needs to have six people that will remain throughout the hearing. And I will entertain a motion to approve that proposal. 7

Wynn: Mayor, I move that the stratus and those organizations in opposition to these issues be allowed to have up to six representatives each in the council chambers the entire time of the hearing.

Mayor Garcia: Motion by Councilmember Wynn. Is there a second?

Thomas: I'll second that.

Mayor Garcia: Seconded by Councilmember Thomas. Discussion? All those in favor of the motion please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Mayor Garcia: Opposed no. Motion carries on a vote of 7 to zero. I will need a list of the speakers that will be speaking tonight. Of 100, there's only 28 that are here?

Yes.

Mayor Garcia: Okay. The first speaker is Jesse CARTIER. [chanting in the background, "let the people speak"]

Good evening, mayor, councilmembers and city manager. My name is Jessica flare.

Mayor Garcia: Let me announce that yes, you are speaking, and you are the first one. Thank you for being here.

Thank you. Thank you for allowing me to speak because I know there was an error on -- during the first reading and I had to get that corrected. My name is Jessica flare, a resident of circle north and I have been a resident of Austin for over 20 years and lived in the Oak Hill area for 13. I am proud to consider myself an Austinite. When I first heard about the Stratus development I was very disappointed and my initial reaction was to oppose any development N retrospect, my reaction was clearly an emotional response to the protection of undeveloped land. I wish all undeveloped land would be left in its natural state, but that is clearly a impractical thought. The growing of the urban development is necessary to support expansion. From a legal standpoint, it's not difficult to understand the language of 13 attorneys, one hand selected by S.O.S. advising not to challenge to 245 and 8 possibly claim ing this development causes immaterial meant danger stated by Mr. Hicks is legally weak. Therefore it makes no sense to ask city council to oppose their development as it would be clearly overturned in court. This will not stop Stratus from moving forward with their development, but it may stop them from being willing to deal with us. After learning of their legal right and getting over my initial emotional reaction I folked concerns on other potential issues such as traffic impact, setbacks and buffers and most importantly potential land pollution. I want to make sure Stratus follows every restriction with respect to developing appropriately over such an environmentally sensitive area. I live here too. I'm sorry, I just get a little distracted. I have attended --

Goodman: Mayor. Could we stop the clock for just a minute so that we can hear her speak?

Mayor Garcia: Let's give her about a minute and 30 seconds.

I'll try really fast. I have attended several meetings with our circle homeowners association and one with Stratus and have been surprised by the willingness of stratus to meet many of our neighbors' requirements. Even though they didn't have to. With that in mind, witnessing how reasonable Stratus has been, I have totally done a 180 and am now in support of Stratus and this development plan. I'm not saying we just give Stratus the agreement and all of our concerns have been met. I will continue to be actively involved and monitor this development carefully because after all these will be my new neighbors. I will be the first to speak out if Stratus breaks any part of their agreement or deviate from the protective measures crafted in this agreement that was designed to protect the future of the environment. But in my short time dealing with them, they have shown themselves well willing to work with us by setting back buffers much more than they had to and create height limitations and deed restrictions, and they let us be partners and advisors in their development plans. I believe together we can continue to make this work because their efforts so far have been quite the example for any developer to follow. Let's come together as a community and unite our 9 interests with the best interests and be prepared for the best developer who comes knocking on our door instead of practicing running away or stonewalling or try to to extort land. We simply cannot afford to go that route anymore. Thank you for your patience.

Mayor Garcia: Thank you, Ms. Blare. Councilmember Alvarez.

Alvarez: Mayor, do we know how many folks who, quote, unquote, meet the criteria on are actually going to --

Mayor Garcia: 104 people.

Alvarez: That's the number eligible. How many have actually signed up?

Mayor Garcia: 28. And some of these folks have been given time. The next speaker, Mr. James COLLETTE has had one person donate time to him. And so he has six minutes. And I will read into the record the names of all the other people who were identified as being eligible under the motion that was passed by the council. Okay? I'll read that as soon as we finish hearing all the speakers. Mr. Collard, welcome.

Thank you and good evening. My name is Jim Collette, and I am a board member of the save Barton Creek association and a regular member of the Austin sierra club. I've got a bachelor's degree in geography and a master's that I got in '93 from U.T. in biological sciences. After that I went to work for the City of Austin, first as an aquatic biologist, assistant to the endangered species biologist and performed salamander surveys and water quality studies and so forth. Then I moved on to being an environmental quality specialist, and did things like establish an Edwards Aquifer document collection which was the directive of council. And assisted in some installation of water quality monitoring equipment. I'm familiar with the basic issues around the aquifer and Barton Springs. There has been a lot of talk about the aquifer dying a death of a thousand cuts. So I made this graph here, if there is any confusion. In my estimation, the number of cuts that Barton Springs has received is about 999, and the -- you know, 10 if we say 1,000 cuts equals death, seems to me ha the proposal we're giving both of them take us beyond. But I can't really stand up here and rely on this kind of data so I have some more I would like to show you.

Mayor Garcia: You can take the Mike that Patrick is going to give you so you don't have to be walking back and forth. You can stand by your -- by your --

Okay. Here is Austin from the City of Austin's water quality watershed protection department. And these folks go out and collect the water, they do a great job. We can see here if we look from the top row of numbers down to the bottom row of numbers that we get increasing amounts of turbidity over the years. And everyone who -- anyone who goes down to Barton Springs knows this because you go down through the pool and the water is often much more cloudy than in the past T reason why this is a problem is that contaminants adhere to the sediments in the water. If we look at a graph from the sediment quality database, these are averages of the samples taken from different years of the years that they did sampling. And we can see the trend increasing of arsenic in the pool. It's clear and pretty undeniable. Now, the problem with this arsenic in the pool adhering to the sediment is that last year the average of five readings of the arsenic levels was 11,556 micrograms per kilogram of sediment. Arsenic is carcinogenic, decreases production of white blood controls, damages blood vessels. The E.P.A. water, drinking water limit is 10 micrograms of this per liter. So just one gram of sediment suspended in one liter of Barton Springs water creates an effective water quality arsenic level that is 1,155 times the E.P.A. limit. I think no one has really looked at this and it's a serious issue. I believe it's a health issue. Given how cloudy the pool gets especially on the weekend. Other contaminants we're seeing, mark Kirkpatrick, professor of buy from U.T. read off this list last week and you can see it's a pretty unsettling variety of chemicals. Arsenic, cadmium, copper, pesticides, I don't really have time to go through all of them. One that is particularly scary is BENZOPYRINE. 11 It's highly cars genic. It was found in five of ten sample from 1995 to 2000. The average level was 3.83 levels per kilogram and the E.P.A. level in drinking water is 200 NANOGRAMS, a tiny amount. So given the imminent threats to Barton Springs and health today, in my opinion we should hire an independent environmental services company to evaluate the threats to human health, especially to children that exist when contaminated sediment is stirred up and suspend understand the water column as often happens whether the pool is full of swimmers much we should post signs in English and Spanish. All the times I've been down there the warnings for coliform, I've never seen any signs in Spanish. So we should consider those folks as well. And so we need to create a plan to Korean up the aquifer and prevent buildup of toxic sediments in Barton Springs. By leaving the sediment in its pooling, and it's filling right now because of the flood, I'm sure you are going to clean it up, there's a chronic problem of -- by leaving it in the pool you are endangering the health of swimmers and hastening the demise of salamanders. We might think we would leave it there, but now it's so full of toxins it's a big problem. Give ten state of the springs, I suggest no new development within portions of the watershed under the city's jurisdiction until the city finds ways to reduce contamination from development. We should require true S.O.S. compliance in any zoning request changes made by Stratus or other developers. True S.O.S. compliance from Stratus is required because there are no precedents nor engineering studies that support city staff claims that the Stratus deal will leave the water at least as clean as under S.O.S. limits. And there is a very skilled water quality civil engineer that had tried to speak tonight, Jeff kesslel .but was presented. Given the above claims due to clustering as well as other substantive objections raised by thousands of other citizens, the city council should put the Stratus deal on hold until it is truly S.O.S. compliant with no non-contiguous clustering and complies with the will of the people as express understand law and the S.O.S. initiative. Thank you very much. [APPLAUSE] 12

Mayor Garcia: Thank you. The next -- thank you, Mr. Collette. The next speaker is [INAUDIBLE] HADIFAR, and he has one person that donated time to him. Alisa bryant. Welcome.

Hi. My name is HOMA and I'm 24 years old. I know there's not many young people here, but I encourage anybody my age to get involved.

Mayor Garcia: Just a minute. She has six minutes. So can you get the clock to six minutes? There you are. Now.

Okay. I have an example. Just think about maybe I guess 50 years in the future. And you are all supposed to meet your friends at a coffee shop. You are looking around, but have you to recognize them by their clothing because everybody is wearing gas masks. Because the air, it's gotten to the pointed of where you can't walk around for three minutes without having shallow breathing, without having some sort of filtration to clear the air for you to breathe on oxygen. You might think this is a little far-fetched, but about two months ago me and my friends, we left this house to go for a walk. We had some errand to run or another, and we walked outside and we immediately noticed the air just felt really muggy and warm and it hadn't been raining, it's been hot. And we walked for about, like, five minutes down his street, we're like, man, we can't breathe. We went back to his house and we got these gas masks he had gotten sort of as a hobby toy and we actually had to use it and I'm glad it worked because every three minutes we were walking, we had to switch breathing out of this gas mask. And we don't -- later on that day I found out it was due to them burning forests in Mexico. I guess the government allowed it, to clear way for more residences for them to build housing and whatnot for the overcrowding. I thought why can't they cut down the lumber and maybe use it for some of the houses they are building. 13 That entire week was declared an ozone action day week, and my friends had actually been feeling ill and didn't know why. We put it all together and I'm thinking it has to do with that, it must be the air. People, they were tired and didn't know quite why they felt bad, but they couldn't quite say they were sick. That's just one of the examples that what could happen to I guess five generations down the line. I would like to avoid that, and I'm sure you would too because I mean we're all humans and we don't want our friends and family to be sick in the future. This just doesn't affect Austin. This also affects us on a world wide level. There are meetings like this going on all around the world. People I'm sure just like me and other people here are concerned about what is happening to our air, what's happening to our water. Can our children's, children's, children drink from the lake they live five minutes away from or can we go swimming just because it's fun and to enjoy and relax. I might also note I think back in 1982, somewhere around 1982, the whitehead family came down with viral meningitis due to swimming in Barton Springs. And there is -- I was told they had a high fever of over 100 degrees. There must have been some sort of breakout that was happening around that time. But that was over ten years ago or exactly -- that was over ten years ago. And what is going to happen in the future? What is it going to be like for our Children's Miracle Network, for five generations down the line when we're all dead? Our decisions affect what happens to the world, and I know this is just one proposal in one city, but it's in a state that's in a country, and there are many other proposals like this going on. And what we say may not change anything, but hopefully I have reached somebody in their heart trying to say what's happening to our world. [APPLAUSE]

Thank you for your time.

Mayor Garcia: Thank you. Cheryl key Dellahide and you have six minutes. 14

Thank you.

Mayor Garcia: Let me announce something before you start.

Sure.

Mayor Garcia: Colleen Lee donated three minutes to you. So you will have six minutes on that time clock right there. That's your time.

Thank you for letting me speak. What I have to say will take me 15 minutes. Colleen, thank you for your three minutes and I apologize that your right to speak has been abridged. In the future when wars are fought over water, Barton Springs will mean more than the soul of a city. It will mean its very survival. The Edwards Aquifer is sick, and I can say this because Barton Springs is sick. I can say this because the salamanders are dying and because every other time I go swimming there, I can leave there expecting an ear infection. We talk much about weather this is S.O.S. compliant or not. Clearly the S.O.S. ordinance has not gone far enough. One of the greatest philosophers of our time once said the love of money is the root of all evil. We crucified him. And now we worship him for 53 minutes once a week and the rest of the time we worship money. It probably won't be any surprise to anyone really paying attention for me to say the last time the law in this country truly represented the will of the people was during the IROQUOIS confederation, and this occurred before the white man arrived. Before an important decision was made the council would listen to all who wanted to speak. And by the way, there was no three-minute time limit. [LAUGHTER] In spite of his inability to practice democracy, the white man has surely lauded mobile forum of government -- LAUDED. Among the founding fathers of this nation, Thomas Jefferson was perhaps the most eloquent proponent of democracy and yet during his life and until his death he owned several hundred slaves. He is often defended on the grounds, oh, it was just a product of his time. But it doesn't work. Another founding father, john Adams, was a fervent 15 critic of the ownership of slaves and never owned one. I think that Abraham Lincoln expressed it best on the eve of the battle of Gettysburg when he described democracy as a government by the people, for the people and of the people. Surely if someone looks at this rule 245 it could best be described as a law of the greedy few, by the few and for the greedy few. [APPLAUSE] If the pollution that Stratus and other developers create were contained within the limits of their property and these developers were forced to live in the filth that they create, I might agree with those that would defend their right to develop. But such is not the case. Their right to develop no more gives them the right to pollute the region far beyond the property line is nor more than my right to do so so or your desk. You would suggest this rule 245 is not really the law of the land until it's constitutionality has been challenged. It is no secret that there are justices beholding to the greedy few. Even this doesn't -- what we the people are left with then are the examples of Henry David THOREAU and MAHATMA GHANDI. When the law of the land violates the people, then it's the duty of the people to practive civil disobedience. The birth of this nation began with an act of civil disobedience. [APPLAUSE] It is popular to brag that everything is bigger in Texas. So I see no reason why we can't have a bigger tea party in Austin than they did in Boston. With this in mind, I would advance to you the idea that the only way to save the aquifer is to defy this rule 245. Join the S.O.S. alliance in this lawsuit. Declare a moratorium on any further construction over the aquifer, with no grandfathering rules, and join with other jurisdictions to expand this moratorium over the entire aquifer. After a moratorium, then we can consider carefully what has happened and now we can save this sacred water source for perpetuity. In making your decision, consider its effect on all your constituents. 16 In a true democracy, the voice of the people does not merely include the voice of the alturistic, of the influential developers or the voice of the irate property owners or the voice of the environmentalists. Put all these voices together and add to them the voices of all the Austin citizens who are not present and still you would have only a representative sample of your constituency. In a true democracy, the greatest portion of your constituency are the grandchildren of the grandchildren of the grandchildren of our sons and daughters. [BUZZER] Without a crystal ball and without a scientific study, I can tell you that these unborn constituents want from you not a decision that will nearly postpone the death of the aquifer, but a decision that will preserve for them clean water. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: The next speaker is Vivian CAPUTO. And following her is Mary LLIMON. Welcome.

Thank you. Start my clock, please. My concerns tonight are the same as they have been all along. I'm glad I finally, after many months, have a chance. [SPEAKING IN SPANISH] Thank you very much. I've waited a very long time to speak, months. I resent the fact that I am not given the courtesy that is afforded other speakers.

Mayor Garcia: Can you hold it a minute? Why don't you give Ms. CAPUTO her three minutes back because she spent a little bit of time speaking to councilmembers. Go ahead.

Thank you. My concerns tonight are the same as they have been all along. There still has not been any representation for people that live south of slaughter and east of Mopac. I have tried to get involved with this process since it was bear lake P.U.D. I went to the planning commission. I've E-mailed all of you. I've E-mailed zoning commissioners. I've E-mailed environmental group leaders. 17 I've E-mailed Stratus. I can give you a laundry list that's very long. But I failed. I didn't get in on any of these talks. And I'm one of the people that may be affected the most. Not by something they dislike, like apartments by their ranchETTE in the case of the bear lake P.U.D. This is a human health and safety issue for people who get their water, their drinking water from the aquifer. This very simple statement seems to have been forgotten. I've only heard that tonight, and it's still in terms of Barton Springs, save the springs, save the salamanders. I would like to talk to you about potable drinking water. I am one of 50,000-plus people in southern Travis County and Hays County who gets their water. When I turn on the tap, the water that comes outcomes from a community well. I won't ask for a show of hands, but I would venture that the majority of you get your water from, your drinking water, water for laundry, pets, from the Colorado river. They are two different sources. I think many people here in Austin don't think about that when they do turn on their taps. So I depend on the aquifer for drinking water. So do people that are ranchers, small farmers, and the entirety of the MARbrink foundation. If you want to talk about Americans with Disabilities Act right here in southern Travis County, let's talk about the MARBRIDGE foundation. My time is running out. How will the City of Austin ensure proper monitoring of the water quality. Will the City of Austin be financially responsible for remediation of degradation of water quality related to the development? With the City of Austin provide potable water at current rates to all Barton Springs, Edwards Aquifer conservation district residents if the Stratus planned development results in polluting the aquifer water below the E.P.A. safe drinking water act minimal standards? It's real simple. When my water is no longer potable, is [INAUDIBLE] going to show up at my door and the bill is going to be footed by the City of Austin? 18 [BUZZER] Thank you. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: Thank you. She was speaker number 5. The next speaker is Mary L. Lehman and she is speaker number 6. And Colin Clark will follow as speaker number 7. Mr. Clark will have nine minutes because Carly dill lard and Arlene PICARD donated time.

Let me say first of all that I am sure the S.O.S. ordinance will be observed. Those 13 city lawyers who think that the rate of distress does not require eventually emergency action are like the frog who sat in the frying pan that slowly heats up. Instant action is eventually required no matter what the rate this distress goes up. Beyond that I'm here because I'm working with the Fannie Mae foundation to develop and find people who can develop guidelines so that the cities can keep their land when they hire a developer to improve it. Like other landowners. Also, that calls to mind Miller. Also so that cities can acquire land when they need it for the welfare of their citizens, which calls to mind Barton Creek. This is something that is -- I'm going to propose a new plan. I would have liked to talked to Darrell first since he's the go-between with the developer, but it is this. That the city, when it negotiates for long-term ownership, is able to forego PACTS in payment so that the credit can develop for it to buy that land. The point is that the city has a very long-term time span. It's here for a hundred years or more. Stratus isn't. We aren't. So we've got to think in those long terms. And if they did this, and I have checked with high-powered legal opinion, David Brooks, who has written textbooks on Texas law and municipal law, said there's nothing yet that makes this illegal. Okay. So the city would have to take a long time paying off the land by developing credit this way. But it's got a long time. And I feel that this kind of thing should be 19 investigated because Stratus will be getting something that makes their property more desirable. [BUZZER] So I'm saying that I'm working with Fannie Mae foundation. We should be thinking along these lines because Darrell is right you have to own the land if you want to protect it. Thank you. [APPLAUSE]

Mayor Garcia: Thank you, Ms. Lehman. Colin Clark. He has nine minutes.

Mayor? [INAUDIBLE]

Mayor Garcia: If he needs it. Are you -- yeah, if you could turn in that green slip to the city clerk and give her your name. And that gives you 12 minutes.

Mayor, I also have another card of time donated to me.

Mayor Garcia: Who is that?

[INAUDIBLE].

Mayor Garcia: Okay. If you could give it to the clerk. Thank you very much. So you have 15 minutes. There you are.

I have a video that I would like to show, and I'm not sure if it's set up, so maybe if one of the staff could just help me out with that. Mayor and members of the council, I can't see Darrell. I'm Colin clark. Employee of the Save our Springs. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm going to show -- well, first much all, for the record, we are very unsatisfied with this process, having the public speakers cut off is not the way democracy works. You have a large number of people behind this curtain who are effectively cut off from this hearing. [APPLAUSE] You also have a lot of people who showed up and have left because they were told they weren't going to be give ten chance to speak.

Slusher: Mayor. Excuse me. 20

Can you stop my minutes?

Slusher: There's a number of seats in here, so if people want to come in from outside, I don't think we've exceeded the fire limit. Looks like it's about half empty to me. [APPLAUSE]

You told them we couldn't come in. Six people each.

Mayor Garcia: Okay, we'll go back to Mr. Clark. Mr. Clark, welcome, sir, again.

Thank you, mayor. I'm going to show some video clips from the last hearing, and I want to preface that with an explanation why. I'm doing that because at the first hearing the staff had two hours to speak, which is understandable that they want to brief out what's going on. But the public had no chance to engage in that presentation. And then having three minutes each afterwards is not adequate to offer an alternative perspective on what the staff has to say. And the point of the first clip I'm going to show sue to highlight the assumptions under which this entire deal has been negotiated. I think your staff has done an amazing job under the direction -- okay, Stratus can build this much, that's too much, make it better. They've made it better. They've worked very hard and done the best that they can given the assumptions. But I just want to highlight that and get to-of these other maps here. And is there a remote Mike?

Mayor Garcia: Right over here.

For the Circle~C property, it's a different issue. Stratus claims the ability to develop consistent with the 1984 M.U.D. land use plan. But they acknowledge the reduction or constraints of their recent fish and wildlife consultation. Stratus claims their development rights vested in the mid 1980s when the four Circle~C M.U.D.s were created and the city and Stratus' predecessor entered into consensus agreement with the M.U.D. and the city approved preliminary plans consistent with the agreement. The M.U.D. consent agreement have an attached M.U.D. use plan, and that plan reflects office, retail and multi-family development on these particular Stratus 21 properties. Stratus claims that the M.U.D. consent agreements required the land to be developed consistent with the M.U.D. land use plan.

Okay. That's one part. If you would turn the lights back on, please. This is one of the original Circle~C land use plans from 1983. In all of this talk, it's been saying Stratus is grandfathered back to what they had filed in 1984. You will notices that this doesn't have those big scary numbers that we've been presented with as what Stratus could do under their grandfathering claims. Well, why not? Because in 1984, Mopac didn't go down to Circle~C. Okay? Circle~C was envisioned as something entirelily different what Stratus is claiming they can build. In a sense Stratus is saying we get to change our plans, we get to build out what we had filed in '93, but you can't change your ordinances at any time. So we're working from this assumption that they can build -- [APPLAUSE] Force -- from what they had filed in '93. Which is after the Save our Springs ordinance had been pass understand '92. -- had been passed in '92.

And lower development density with decrease in traffic should -- when compared to the level of development which might have otherwise occurred.

Okay. Compared to the level of development that might otherwise have occurred. Well, we don't know what that is. That's not certain. It's not written in stone that Stratus is going to get to build 8 million square feet and 3,000 homes.

A significant benefit of the proposed settlement is reduction of development intense with zoning based on the M.U.D. land use plans.

Again, zoning based on the M.U.D. land use plans. Here are the M.U.D. land use plans. They aren't consistent with what Stratus is asking for right now. Okay. These charts are actually up here. 22 But the point of this, there are two comparisons here. There is the big numbers, what Stratus might theoretically be able to do and what they could do under the deal. Well, where's the third comparison? What's the best case scenario? What if Stratus built that rural residential zoning with S.O.S. compliance? Where is that chart? Why can't we see what it would look like if the best thing happens? You see these charts too. This is important because throughout this process, I've been to a number of meetings following the staff where they give this presentation. And it's been somewhat disturbing to see staff have to be in the position of selling this deal to the public on behalf of Stratus. They've been doing the work for them. Bow Armstrong, where is he? [APPLAUSE] Bow, you live down the street. If you are watching on T.V., come down, you know, if you are so proud of this deal, be here to support it. We've got a lot of people supporting something else. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]

The agreement significantly reduces the amount of development that could otherwise be achieved under current regulations assuming zoning consistent with the M.U.D. land use plan.

Okay, I would like to applaud pat Murphy for actually adding the caveat with the zoning because a lot of times when this deal was being pitched, the neighbors were under the assumption that they could automatically have these ridiculously high numbers of development.

SO, YES, IN A FREE MARKET, PEOPLE WANT TO BUILD OUT THERE BECAUSE THEY CAN MAKE MONEY, THAT'S FINE, WE'RE NOT SAYING DON'T BUILD ANYTHING. RICKY BIRD WROTE INTO THE CHRONICLE AND SAID -- I'M SORRY, THE STATESMAN AND SAID WE WANT NO DEVELOPMENT. THE TWO POINTS THERE FROM DARRYL'S COMMENT, ONE, IT'S NOT A FREE MARKET WHEN YOU'RE GIVING $16 MILLION, YOU'RE ENCOURAGING DEVELOPERS THERE, ENCOURAGING THEM TO GO INTO THE AREA, TRY TO BAND THAT IS GRANDFATHERED AND EXTRACT MORE SUBSIDY, THE STAFF HAS SAID THAT WE'RE BUYING DOWN DENSITY, WE'RE BUYING DOWN THE NUMBERS FROM WHAT THEY COULD BUILD. IF THEY HAVEN'T ESTABLISHED THAT THEY CAN DO THAT, I DON'T THINK A PENNY OF OUR TAX MONEY SHOULD GO TO THEM BEFORE THAT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED. [ APPLAUSE ] THE SECOND POINT... [ APPLAUSE ] THE SECOND POINT FROM WHAT DARRYL HAD TO SAY WAS THAT WE HAD LIMITED REGULATORY POWER. THE ONE THING THAT WE DO HAVE POWER OVER THAT YOU HAVE POWER OVER, THAT WE DON'T ACTUALLY AS CITIZENS, WE CAN'T INITIATE ZONING POWER, YOU HAVE THAT, AND I'D LIKE TO READ SOMETHING THAT DARRYL WROTE WHEN HE WAS WORKING FOR THE CHRONICLE IN 1995. REGARDING THE SAME COMPANY, FREEPORT, WHEN THEY WERE TRYING TO GET SEWER LINE EXTENDED TO THEIR BARTON CREEK PROPERTIES. THE COMPANY'S TRADITIONAL APPROACH HAS TO BE TO SEEK AN AGREEMENT THAT INCLUDES CITY SEWER SERVICE. IT WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR THE COMPANY'S MOST ARDANT FACTORS ON THE CITY COUNCIL TO ARGUE IN FAVOR OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT M THE PAST AGREEMENT INITIATIVES TOOK THREAT OF SOME PLACE OF IMMINENT DOOM... NOW THE ONLY TERROR LEFT IS THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE. NOR CAN THE LEGISLATURE GRANT COMMERCIAL ZONING CHANGES ON THEIR PROPERTY. NOR CAN THE LEGISLATURE GRANT THEM COMMERCIAL ZONING CHANGES. ONLY YOU CAN DO THAT. [ APPLAUSE ] AND SO THERE ARE TWO THING, THERE THE ZONING AND THE SETTLEMENT, AND YOU HAVE OPTIONS BEFORE YOU, ANOTHER COMMENT FROM THE STAFF PRESENTATION THEY HAD A SLIDE THAT SAID WHAT ARE THE COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENTS AND THEY LISTED COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENTS. AT THE LAST HEARING ROBBIN SHOWED YOU THIS PICTURE OF BUILDING ALONG SOUTH MOPAC ALONG BARTON CREEK. IS THIS A COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT?

AUDIENCE: NO.

OKAY. THIS IS WHAT WE WILL BE GETTING OUT OF THIS DEAL, FURTHER ALONG SOUTH MOPAC. I DON'T THINK THAT YOU CAN PAINT THIS AS ENHANCING THE COMMUNITY, ADDING TRAFFIC ON TO MOPAC, LOADING DENSITY NEXT TO NEIGHBORS WHO WEREN'T NEGOTIATING WITH STRATUS. IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED THAT WE HAVEN'T OFFERED ALTERNATIVES. ONE ALTERNATIVE IS YOU COULD GIVE STRATUS WHAT THEY WANT ON THE BEAR LAKE PUD. THAT TRACK IS CLIENT, THE NEIGHBORS AGREEABLE TO THAT. THE REST OF THE TRACKS THE CITY INITIATED THE ZONING CHANGES SO YOU CAN WITHDRAW THOSE AND YOU CAN INITIATE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING FOR THE WATERSHED FOR THE SOUTH MOPAC CORRIDOR, LET NEIGHBORS HAVE A SAY IN HOW THEIR AREA IS DEVELOPED AND SEEK TO PROTECT -- LET THE PLANNING GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT RATHER THAN THE DEVELOPMENT GUIDE THE PLANNING. AND AS REGARDS TO THE LAWSUIT, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN US AND WE REALLY HOPE THAT YOU WILL. WE WANT THE CITY TO ARGUE IN COURT THAT THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE IS VALID, THAT IT'S EXEMPT FROM THE GRANDFATHERING LAWS. WE WANT YOU TO ARGUE IN COURT THAT WE HAVE HOME RULE ZONING POWERS. WE WANT YOU TO HAVE THE POWER TO ZONE THIS PROPERTY, WE WANT YOU TO ZONE IT IN A WAY THAT IS RESPECTFUL OF THE NEIGHBORS AND RESPECTFUL OF WATER QUALITY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OH, I HAVE ONE OTHER THING BEFORE I GO. THIS IS A MAP OF AUSTIN FROM 1980. I DUG IT OUT OF A CABINET IN MY PARENTS' HOUSE AND I BRING THIS UP TO POINT OUT A COUPLE OF THINGS. IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE, BUT IN 1980 MOPAC WAS BEING BUILT TO 290 -- I'M SORRY, 360. HAD NOT YET EXTENDED TO 290 AND HAD NOT YET BEEN EXTENDED SOUTH TO CIRCLE C. THESE COUNCILS DIDN'T MAKE THOSE DECISIONS BUT THOSE DECISIONS WERE MISTAKES. THE OFFICE BUILDINGS YOU SEE ALONG SOUTH MOPAC ABOVE BARTON CREEK. THOSE WERE MISTAKES. PUTTING MORE OFFICE ON SOUTH MOPAC IS MISTAKE AND I HOPE THAT YOU DON'T DO THAT. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] [CHEERING AND APPLAUSE]

MAYOR GARCIA: THE NEXT SPEAKER -- THE NEXT SPEAKER, HELLO ... THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. GEORGE COFFER AND MR. COFFER HAS THREE MINUTES AND FOLLOWING MR. COFFER IS MR. ROBBIN CRAVEY WHO HAS 12 MINUTES. BILL HOLLOW WAY, STEPHEN MOORE, AND STEVE ABBOTT, ACTUALLY, AND MARK STALEY HAVE GIVEN HIM TIME, SO MR. CRAVEY, YOU WILL HAVE FIFTEEN MINUTES. MR. COFFER, WELCOME, SIR.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU MAYOR, AND MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCIL FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS YOU. MY NAME IS GEORGE COFFER. I'M HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING ONLY MYSELF, NOT REPRESENTING ANY GROUP. I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE CONCEPT OF EXECUTING A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH STRATUS. I ABSOLUTELY KNOW IN MY HEART THAT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I KNOW IN MY MIND THAT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. I'VE BEEN FIGHTING THE GOOD FIGHT WITH MANY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM FOR ALMOST 12 YEARS, SLIGHTLY LONGER THAN 12 YEARS TONIGHT, I GUESS, AND THE LESSON THAT I HAVE LEARNED THE HARD WAY, AND THAT I HOPE WE AS A COMMUNITY CAN LEARN THROUGH THIS PROCESS IS THAT WITH ALL OUR GOOD VICTORIES, WITH ALL THE LAWSUITS WE'VE WON AND WITH VALIDATING THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT, THE BUILDINGS, ONE OF WHICH MR. CLARK SHOWED YOU, KEEP SPRINGING UP, SO THE LESSON I'VE LEARNED IS THAT JUST SAY NO AND DON'T DO IT AND LET'S DOWN-ZONE THEM AND IGNORE THINGS LIKE TAKINGS LAW IS SIMPLY NOT TO ANSWER IN MY OPINION. I URGE YOU STRONGLY TO FOLLOW YOUR OWN COUNCIL. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU HAVE ASSEMBLED THE BEST TEAM OF ATTORNEYS YOU CAN. AND I COMMEND YOU FOR THAT, ESPECIALLY YOU, MS. PUTRELL, FOR GATHERING THAT TEAM AND GETTING THAT ADVICE. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH TIME IN THREE MINUTES TO GO INTO DETAILS, BUT I WILL MAKE A PERSONAL PLEA AND THOSE OF YOU WHO KNOW ME AND MOW MY INPUT HAVE HEARD THIS BEFORE. AT THE RISK OF SOUNDING LIKE A BROKEN RECORD, MY WISH LIST HAS NARROWED DOWN QUITE A BIT, HAVING WORKED ON THIS FOR SIX MONTHS DAY IN AND DAY OUT. AND THERE IS A TRACT, TRACT 102 THAT I THINK IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO BE KEPT AS OPEN SPACE, OR AT LEAST THAT PART OF THE IT ALONG SLAUGHTER LAIN THAT IS IN FRONT OF, SO TO SPEAK, ONE OF THE WATER QUALITY TRACTS AND THAT IS THE HILLSHIRE TRACT. I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY GOOD FOR CITIZENS TO ACCESS THAT WATER QUALITY LAND THROUGH AN UNDEVELOPED PART OF TRACT 102, SO I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE CONCEPT OF CLUSTERING AND GET THE IMPERVIOUS COVER OFFER OF 102, GET IT ON TO ANOTHER TRACT, PERHAPS ON TRACT 110 WHERE THERE'S ALREADY GOING TO BE CONSIDERABLE DENSITY. THE ALTERNATIVES ARE JUST NOT ACCEPTABLE, IN MY OPINION. AND I URGE THE LISTENING AUDIENCE TO REALLY THINK HARD ABOUT WHAT THE ALTERNATIVES ARE. DRIVE OUT SOUTHWEST PARKWAY, DRIVE OUT BEE CAVES ROAD, DRIVE THROUGH BARTON PROPERTIES, DRIVE ALONG MOPAC, AND I DON'T LIKE IT ANYMORE THAN ANYONE ELSE AND IF WE SAY NO, WE ARE GOING TO GET MORE AND MORE AND MORE OF THAT WITH ALL THE BENEFITS -- WITHOUT THE BENEFITS THAT WE'LL GET THROUGH THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. I THANK YOU AND COMMEND YOUR ATTENTION YOUR HARD WORK, PLEASE KEEP NEGOTIATING HARD SO BY THE TIME WE GET TO THIRD READING SOME OF THE OUTSTANDING DETAILS ARE RESOLVED AND IMPROVED UPON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU, MR. COFFER. MR. CRAVEY IS SPEAKER NUMBER 9. HE HAD FOUR PEOPLE DONATE TIME TO HIM. I ALREADY READ THOSE NAMES. NUMBER 10 IS PAT SEE BERT. PAT DONATED TIME TO CLARK. AND NUMBER 11 IS NATANI A [INAUDIBLE]

BEFORE ROB-IN TALKS, I WILL BE LEAVING THE DAIS, I WILL BE LISTENING TO HIM TALK.

THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, AND THANK YOU, MAYOR. IT'S A PLEASURE TO SEE YOU TONIGHT. IT'S A PLEASURE TO SEE YOU, MS. CITY MANAGER. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANKS VERY MUCH TO THE FOLKS THAT DONATED THEIR TIME TO ME AND THANKS TO JOYCE CORNER. SHE WOULD HAVE DONATED TIME TO ME BUT SHE'S NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK TONIGHT. ONCE AGAIN, THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN COME TO THE COUNCIL REQUESTING AND DEMANDING THAT THE COUNCIL STAND FIRM AGAINST THE PILLAGE OF OUR AQUIFER AND THE DISFOLIATION OF BARTON SPRINGS. I KNOW HOW HARD IT IS TO SEE WORK UNDERTAKEN WITH THE BOAST MOTIVES REJECTED BY OUR PEERS, BUT I ALSO KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO BECOME SO IMMERSED IN DETAILS THAT WE LOSE SIGHT OF THE GOAL, THAT'S WHY THE COUNCIL MUST HEAR THE PUBLIC AND I URGE THE COUNCIL TO ALLOW ALL OF THOSE WHO HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO SPEAK. [ APPLAUSE ]

THE PROPOSAL BEFORE THE COUNCIL REPRESENTS THE LONG, HARD WORK OF MANY PEOPLE, PEOPLE LIKE GEORGE COFFER, PEOPLE I RESPECT VERY MUCH. THE DEVELOPMENT THAT IT ALLOWS IS FAR SUPERIOR TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED FOR THE LAND FIFTEEN YEARS AGO. BUT DESPITE ITS IMPROVEMENT OVER PAST PROPOSAL, I CAN'T SUPPORT, AND I WANT TO TELL YOU WHY. I'VE WRITTEN -- I'VE SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS BUT I TONIGHT WOULD JUST LIKE TO EMPHASIZE SOME POINTS. THE FIRST POINT IS THAT IT DOES NOT MEET S.O.S. THIS HAS BEEN GONE OVER SEVERAL TIMES SO I WON'T DWELL ON IT, EXCEPT TO SAY THAT ONE OF THE MOST TROUBLING ISSUES FOR ME IS THAT THE COUNCIL IS EVEN FAILING TO FOLLOW THE LAW TO GRANT A LIMITED ADJUSTMENT UNDER S.O.S. WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE FOLLOWED. BUT I DO WANT TO SPEND A COUPLE OF MINUTES TALKING ABOUT THE ZONING, BECAUSE I THINK THE ZONING HERE IS TOO INTENT AND I THINK PROPONENTS OF THIS PROPOSAL HAVE ATTEMPTED TO CONFLATE THE ISSUES OF WATER QUALITY CONTROLS AND ZONING. AND THE TWO ARE DISTINCT. WATER QUALITY CONTROLS UNDER S.O.S. DICTATE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND RUNOFF QUALITY FROM AN ACRE. ZONING DICTATES WHETHER THAT ACRE WILL HAVE A SINGLE RESIDENCE OR SEVERAL OFFICE TOWERS. IN MY VIEW, THE PROPER ZONING FOR THIS AREA IS RURAL RESIDENTIAL. WITH A SPRINKLING OF NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE AND NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL AT MAJOR INTERSECTIONS. NOW, IN AREAS WHERE COMPROMISE IS NECESSARY, THEN SINGLE FAMILY ONE OR SINGLE FAMILY TWO MICHAEL LOUED AND FOR QUALIFIED AFFORDABLE HOUSING I MIGHT GO HIGHER. THIS PLAN INCLUDES SEVERAL TRACKS WITH GENRE TALE OR COMMERCIAL ZONING. THE OVERRIDING PRINCIPLE OF ZONING IN THIS ZONE SHOULD BE THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE I'M SPEAKING OF SHOULD BE TO ALLOW NO ZONE THAT WILL GENERATE NEW DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE. ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY BUT DO NOT ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF USES THAT WILL DRAW VISITORS FROM OUTSIDE THE ZONE. NOW, COUNCIL MAY ARGUE THAT ITS HANDS ARE TOYED ON THIS ONE BECAUSE OF RETROACTIVE LEGISLATION THAT WAS INTENDED TO TIE THE COUNCIL'S HANDS. I WOULD ASK ANOTHER QUESTION AND THAT IS WHAT HAS THE COUNCIL DONE ON CASES WHERE ITS HANDS ARE NOT TIED? JUST HOW VIGILANT HAS THE COUNCIL BEEN AND CONSISTENT FROM PREVENTING INTENDED USES FOR THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. IN MY PLAN ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHICH US WAS A GREAT PRIVILEGE I SAW A NUMBER OF CASES COME THROUGH THAT I BELIEVE WERE TOO INTENT IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE AND WHICH HAD NO RETROACTIVE RIGHT. NOW, THIS IS A PLAN THAT SUBSIDIZED BY THE CITY. WE CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO SUBSIDIZE DESIRABLE DEVELOPMENT BUT HERE WE ARE GOING TO SUBSIDIZE UNDESIRABLE DEVELOPMENT. [ APPLAUSE ] THIS PLAN MAKES NEW GRANTS OF VESTED RIGHTS. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF THE COUNCIL COULD LEARN ONE LESSON, THIS WOULD BE IT: DON'T GRANT NEW VESTED RIGHTS THAT LASS A GENERATION. [ APPLAUSE ] DON'T TIE THE HANDS OF FUTURE COUNCILS. WE COMPLAIN ABOUT THE BAD DEALS MADE BY PREVIOUS COUNCILS THAT TIE OUR HANDS TODAY, YET WE CONTINUE TO DO IT. [ APPLAUSE ] IF THESE SURRENDERS OF CITY AUTHORITY ARE BAD IN PRINCIPLE, AND THEY ARE, THEN THE CITY SHOULD NEVER NEGOTIATE THEM. IF THESE GRANTS OF VESTED RIGHTS ARE INVARIABLY USED AS WEAPONS AGAINST THE CITY, AND THEY ARE, THEN THE CITY SHOULD NEVER GRANT THEM. [ APPLAUSE ] THIS PROPOSAL ACTUALLY PROMISES THAT IF A FUTURE COUNCIL DOWN ZONES THIS PROPERTY, THE CITY WILL PAY THE DEVELOPER. SUPPOSE THAT S.O.S. OR ANOTHER LITIGANT WINS A COURT DECISION VINDICATING THE CITY'S ZONING POWER. THIS AGREEMENT WOULD PREVENT THE CITY FROM EXERCISE THAT POWER. THAT IS A DEAL BREAKER. [ APPLAUSE ] THERE IS ALSO -- I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP A LACK OF PUBLIC NOTICE, AND I KNOW IT'S NEVER POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE COMPLETE PUBLIC NOTICE TO ALL AFFECTED PARTIES IN ANY LAND DEVELOPMENT CASE. I REALIZE THAT. BUT THERE'S ONE CATEGORY OF INTERESTED PARTIES WHOM THE COUNCIL HAS CHOSEN NOT TO DISTURB AND THAT IS ALL THE LAND HOLDERS WITH DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE WHO HAVE NO RETROACTIVE RIGHTS. THEY DESERVE TO BE TOLD THAT DEVELOPMENTS BY STRATUS AND BRADLEY AND OTHERS WITH RETROACTIVE RIGHTS ARE USING UP THE ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS ZONE. THE COUNCIL SHOULD ANNOUNCE VERY CLEARLY TO THESE LAND HOLDERS THAT, SORRY, WE JUST NEGOTIATED AWAY MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FOR YOUR LAND. WE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GRANT SOME SF 2 ON YOUR PROPERTY BUT NOW WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HOLD IT TO RR. THIS IS -- THIS PROPOSAL IS ALSO TOO COMPLEX. WHILE THERE ARE NUMEROUS OBJECTIONABLE FEATURES TO THIS PLAN, THEY CAN BE COVERED WITH THAT OBSERVATION, IT'S JUST TOO COMPLEX. SO I WOULD URGE THE COUNCIL TO DO THESE THINGS: GO BACK TO THE BARGAINING TABLE. JOHN KENNEDY SAID WE SHOULD NEVER NEGOTIATE OUT OF FEAR BUT WE SHOULD NEVER FEAR TO NEGOTIATE. [ APPLAUSE ] LET'S PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO BOTH SIDES OF THAT ADMONITION. I SUPPORT THE COUNCIL'S EFFORTS TO REACH A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT OF THE ISSUES WITH STRATUS, I JUST DON'T THINK WE'RE THERE YET AND WE WON'T REALLY BE THERE UNTIL WE KNOW HOW MUCH MORE DEVELOPMENT THE AQUIFER CAN TOLERATE. DELETE THE VESTED RIGHTS PROVISION. THE FIRST THING -- THAT'S THE FIRST THING THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF THIS PROPOSAL. IT'S GOT TO COME OUT. THE COUNCIL SHOULD TELL STRATUS, SORRY, THAT'S JUST OFF THE TABLE. WE DON'T HAVE THE RITE OR THE WISDOM TO TIE THE HANDS OF FUTURE COUNCILS THAT WAY. WE'RE NOT PASSING THIS BUCK TO THE NEXT GENERATION. AND THE COUNCIL SHOULD TELL ITS NEGOTIATORS DON'T EVER BRING US A PROPOSAL WITH THAT IN IT AGAIN. [ APPLAUSE ] SIMPLIFY THE PACKAGE AND UPHOLD THE LAW. TWO PRINCIPLES SHOULD GUIDE THE CITY IN REVISING THIS PACKAGE. FIRST, THE PROPOSAL SHOULD BE EASILY UNDERSTOOD BY EVERY CITIZEN. AND SECOND, IT SHOULD COMPLY WITH THE LAW. I WOULD URGE YOU TO STOP NEGOTIATING OVER SQUARE FEET OF CONCRETE AND FREE LAND. FIRST IT'S A WASTE OF STAFF TIME TO KEEP RECALCULATING THE IMPACT OF SCENARIO AFTER SCENARIO ON THESE TRACTS WHEN WE HAVE A STANDARD WRITTEN INTO LAW. LET'S FOLLOW THAT. WE'RE TOLD WE GET GOODIES IN THIS PACKAGE LIKE FREE LAND, BUT THEN WE'RE ALSO TOLD THAT THIS LAND ISN'T THAT IMPORTANT AND THE CITY WOULDN'T BUY IT IF WE HAD THE MONEY. SOUNDS LIKE A SHELL GAME. ANSWER THE QUESTION. BEFORE WE CONCLUDE THIS AGREEMENT, LET'S ANSWER THE CRITICAL QUESTION: CAN THE DEVELOPMENTAL LOUED IN THIS AGREEMENT BE TOLERATED BY THE AQUIFER AND THE SPRINGS? WE KNOW THEY'RE DEGRADING. LET'S DON'T WAKE UP FIVE YEARS FROM NOW AND SAY, WELL, WE TRIED. I REALIZE THERE'S A LOT OF MOMENTUM BEHIND THIS AGREEMENT, A LOT OF PEOPLE OF GOODWILL WHO HAVE INVESTED TIME AND ENERGY INTO IT. THE CITY HAS INVESTED TIME AND MONEY IN IT. IN THE COUNCIL APPROVES IT NOW, THOUGH, IT WILL BE TAKING A VERY HEAVY BURDEN OF RESPONSIBILITY. BUT WHETHER THE COUNCIL APPROVES THIS AGREEMENT OR NOT, IT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO DO WHAT THIS AGREEMENT NEVER CAN. TO REALLY SETTLE THE PRESERVATION OF BARTON SPRINGS. TO REALLY PROVIDE CERTAINTY ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE AQUIFER. I ASK THE COUNCIL TO COMMIT ITSELF NOW TO TWO VITAL ACTIONS. THE COUNCIL SHOULD ANNOUNCE IMMEDIATELY THE COMMENCEMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO PRESERVE THE SPRINGS, THE AQUIFER AND THE CREEK. THIS PLAN SHOULD INVOLVE ALL POLITICAL JURISDICTIONS WITH AUTHORITY OVER THESE RESOURCES. IT SHOULD PRODUCE AN INVENTORY OF ALL DEVELOPMENT ON THE GROUND AND ALL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CURRENTLY VESTED BUT NOT EXERCISED. IT SHOULD DEVELOP A MODEL THAT CAN SHOW US WHAT THAT DEVELOPMENT IS DOING AND WILL DO TO THESE RESOURCES. THE PLAN SHOULD CLEARLY SPELL OUT HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT IS TOLERABLE, IF ANY. OR HOW MUCH MUST BE ROLLED BACK, IF NECESSARY. FINALLY, IT SHOULD CLEARLY ALLOCATE RESPONSIBILITY AMONG THE VARIOUS POLITICAL JURISDICTIONS. ALSO IMMEDIATELY THE COUNCIL SHOULD PLACE ON THE AGENDA AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING A MORITORIUM ON ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE... [ APPLAUSE ] ... UNTIL THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS ENACTED INTO LAW. THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO ENSURE THAT FUTURE DECISIONS WILL REALLY PROTECT THE SPRINGS AND IT'S THE BEST WAY TO FOCUS THE ATTENTION OF THOSE WITH INTEREST IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. LET'S CLOSE THE LAND OFFICE WINDOW NOW. FORTUNATELY, THERE'S NO NEED FOR LAWYERS TO ARGUE ABOUT THIS ISSUE. THE U.S. SUPREME COURT THIS SPRING RULES THAT SUCH A MORATORIUM IS NOT A TAKING OF PROPERTY UNDER THE TAKING CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION. [ APPLAUSE ] SEIZE THE MOMENT. ONCE AGAIN, THE PEOPLE ARE ARROUSED. YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING OF MONUMENTAL IMPORTANCE... DO IT. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: NEXT SPEAKER IS NATANIA DIAMAT AND FOLLOWING HER IS LEOCHAMPIN.

THANK YOU. NORMALLY -- I'M A SCHOOL TEACHER SO RIGHT NOW I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA TIME TO READ SOME BOOKS, AND SO I SETTLED DOWN TO READING THIS BOOK, I THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT STRONG WOMEN BUT REALLY IT'S ABOUT PIRATES, STRONG WOMEN PIRATE, BUT IT'S ABOUT PIRATES, AND IT BRINGS UP A -- IT TELLS ALL ABOUT HOW THEY WENT THROUGH TAKING BOATS AND STEALING AND KILLING PEOPLE AND DOING ALL THE THINGS THAT PIRATES DO, SOMEWHAT ROW PLANTICKIZED NOW SOME 500 YEARS LATER. IT BROUGHT UP THE POINT HOW WAS PIRACY ALLOWED? I WANTED TO BRING UP SOMETHING THAT SAYS PIRACY WAS AN EXCELLENT INVESTMENT, WHICH WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER, AND WHEN... [LAUGHTER]

ELIZABETH ASCENDED TO THE THRONE... PROVIDED FINANCIAL BACKING FOR OTHERS. IT WAS CALLED GENTLEMAN PIRACY AND IN THAT DAY A GREAT DEAL OF IT WAS GOING ON. IN ENGLAND MANY OF THE ADMIRALS WERE INVESTING IN THEIR VOYAGES. IT CAME TO ME SOME TIME IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT WHEN I WAS READING THIS BOOK. STRATUS PROPERTIES ARE PIRATES. AND... [ APPLAUSE ] WHILE I HONOR THE INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF WORK THIS COUNCIL HAS DONE FOR -- ON THIS AND I BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE BEST INTENTIONS AT HEART, ARE YOU GOING TO BE THE COURT ADMIRALS AND ALLOW THIS TO CONTINUE, OR ARE YOU GOING TO NOT TOLERATE IT AND SAY, NO, YOU CAN'T COME INTO OUR LAND AND YOU CANNOT TAKE THINGS AWAY FROM US. OUR SPRINGS ARE WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO STEAL AND YOU CANNOT TOLERATE IT AND YOU CAN SAY, NO, YOU HAVE TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. YOU CANNOT LAND YOUR SHIP AT OUR PORT UNLESS YOU DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: I APOLOGIZE FOR READING MS. CHAMPION'S NAME THE WRONG WAY, I THINK IT'S PEG.

IT'S PEG, IT'S IN THE LEO. GOOD EVENING MAYOR, AND COUNCILMEMBER, MY NAME IS PEG CHAMPION AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK TO YOU. TONIGHT, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS, YOU ARE FACED WITH A CHOICE, AND WHAT YOU ARE DECIDING IS OF CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE TO AUSTIN AND TO OUR FUTURE. AND SO A QUESTION FOR OUR COUNCILMEMBERS AND FOR US ALL: WHAT DOES AUSTIN MEAN TO YOU? WHAT IS IT ABOUT THIS PLACE THAT MAKES IT UNIQUE AND SPECIAL? WHY IS IT RANKED AGAIN AND AGAIN IN THE TOP 25 GREAT PLACES TO LIVE? I DON'T NEED TO TELL YOU. IT'S BASED ON THE QUALITY OF LIFE HERE. ALL THE THINGS THAT WE ARE SO PROUD OF, THAT ANYONE WHO LIVES HERE COMES TO LOVE, THE PARKS, THE NATURE TRAILS, AND THE FACT THAT THERE EXISTS IN THE HEART OF THE CITY A CLEAR, CLEAN, NATURAL SPRING-FED POOL, BARTON SPRINGS. THERE ARE NO OTHER CITIES THAT I KNOW OF THAT CAN BOAST THAT. BELIEVE ME, I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT, BUT NOT THIS KIND. THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL BY STRATUS PROPERTIES WILL SURELY DESTROY BARTON SPRINGS. AND IT SUCCEEDS IN ONLY ONE GOAL; TO REPEL THE VERY GROWTH YOU ARE TRYING TO ATTRACT. OUR GOAL HERE TONIGHT SHOULD BE TO ENSURE THAT BARTON SPRINGS WILL THRIVE ADJACENT TO ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE HEARD LAST MONTH AND HERE AGAIN TONIGHT FROM EDUCATED SCIENTISTS WHO HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN FROM TELLING THE TRUTH, THAT THAT WILL NOT BE THE RESULT. WITHOUT BARTON SPRINGS, AUSTIN WILL BE A POORER PLACE. IN CLOSING I WOULD LIKE TO QUOTE MARGARET MURRAY AND HER CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY REGARDING THE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE. HAVING BEEN THE BASIS OF ALL OF OUR SOPHISTICATED SOCIETY, DOESN'T WILDERNESS ITSELF HAVE A RIGHT TO LIVE ON? PLEASE GRANT BARTON SPRINGS THAT RIGHT. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU, MS. CHAMPION, THANK YOU, MS. CHAMPION. THE NEXT TWO SPEAKERS ARE CAM MAGER AND PATTI MALINARD. MS. MAGGER, WELCOME.

MAYOR GARCIA, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, MY NAME IS CAM MAGGER AND I MOVED TO AUSTIN ON PURPOSE 12 YEARS AGO LARGELY BECAUSE OF BARTON SPRINGS. I WANT TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATE THAT YOU ARE ALL DOING YOUR BEST TO JUGGLE A NUMBER OF CONFLICTING LAWS AND TO FIND A SOLUTION TO ADDRESS THE COMPLICATED ISSUES INVOLVED IN WORKING OUT THIS DEAL, BUT TO ME THE ISSUE IS NOT COMPLICATED; IT'S SIMPLE. THIS WOULD FINISH OFF BARTON SPRINGS, THIS DEVELOPMENT. I FEEL THAT WE HAVE TO WAKE UP. WE HAVE TO TURN THIS AROUND. AND I FEEL THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE HAVING A CONSERVATION RIGHT NOW -- CONVERSATION RIGHT NOW ABOUT MORE DEVELOPMENT, WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT WORKING TO DIRECT THE DAMAGE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. [ APPLAUSE ] AND I'D LIKE TO SAY TO THOSE OF YOU WHO REPRESENT STRATUS PROPERTIES, I ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE YOU. YOU DO OWN THIS PROPERTY. YOU HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO BUILD ON IT. AND YOU'VE PUT TREMENDOUS ENERGY INTO PLANNING THIS PROJECT, THIS DEVELOPMENT, NEGOTIATING THIS DEAL, AND YOU HAVE MADE MAJOR COMPROMISES TO TRY TO PRESERVE SOME QUALITIES OF THE ENVIRONMENT. BUT I PERSONALLY FIND IT HEART BREAKING THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO DEVELOP PROPERTY OVER THE MOST FRAGILE AQUIFER IN TEXAS. [ APPLAUSE ] THERE NEEDS TO BE A MAJOR SHIFTING OF GEARS. INSTEAD OF MORE DEVELOPMENT, WE NEED TO FOCUS ON PRESERVING WHAT WE HAVE LEFT AND RESTORING WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN DESTROYED. YOU HAVE TREMENDOUS RESOURCES, AND AGAIN I'M SPEAKING TO STRATUS PROPERTIES. THERE'S SO MUCH THAT YOU COULD DO WITH ALL YOUR MONEY AND ALL THE HARD, HARD WORK YOU DO AND YOUR PLANNING ABILITIES AND YOUR BRAIN POWER AND ALL YOUR CREATIVITY. THERE'S PLENTY OF WORK TO BE DONE AND WONDERFUL CREATIVE CONSERVATION, RESTORATION PROJECTS TO BE UNDERTAKEN. I WOULD LIKE TO URGE YOU TO FEEL INTO THIS AND LOOK INTO YOUR HEARTS AND I THINK YOU'LL AGREE THAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS TO WITHDRAW THIS PROPOSAL AND LEAVE THIS LAND UNDEVELOPED. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU, MS. MAGGER. PATTI MOLINARD AND FOLLOWING MS. MOLINARD IS -- EXCUSE ME IF I DON'T PRONOUNCE THIS CORRECTLY. DADA DEVINE.

THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO LISTEN. I'M A 30-YEAR-OLD AUSTINITE, BEEN HERE FOR 26 YEARS, OWNING MY OWN BUSINESS, I'M A BARTON SPRINGS SWIMMER AND AN S.O.S. ADVOCATE. I BELIEVE THAT YOU'RE UP TO THIS CHALLENGE. YOU VOLUNTEERED FOR IT. MANY OF YOU USE IT AS YOUR CAMPAIGN PLATFORM, COMMITTING TO BE OUR HEROES. SO... [ APPLAUSE ] I WANT TO TALK FOR JUST A MINUTE ABOUT NO LIMITATIONS, ABOUT THE POWER THAT YOU HOLD AS OUR VOICE, ALL OF OUR VOICES. WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS TO BE SELF EVIDENT, THAT OUR MOST PRECIOUS RESOURCE IS WATER, THAT THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN AUSTIN IS REDUCING DRAMATICALLY, THAT OUR TAXES HAVE SKY ROCKETED, THAT OUR TRAFFIC IS OBSCENE, AND THAT OUR CITY'S POCKETS REMAIN RELATIVELY EMPTY. MONEY HAS NO HOME BUT LOTS OF FRIENDS. GOD BLESS THE CHILD WHO HAS ITS OWN. AUSTIN HAS. WILL IT IN THE FUTURE? DOUBLE IN MIRACLES? WHEN DO ANY OF US BELIEVE IN A MIRACLE? WHEN OUR CHILD IS DYING AND SOMEONE SAID THERE'S NO HOPE, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE I CAN DO, THEN WE CHOOSE TO BELIEVE IN A MIRACLE. MIRACLES OCCUR EVERY DAY. FOR A MOMENT I'M GOING TO MENTION 911 BECAUSE ON 911 A TERRORIST AND HIS GROUP ATTACKED OUR COUNTRY AND WAS SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE OUR GOVERNMENT AND OUR PEOPLE MISSED THE SIGNS. WE WEREN'T PROTECTING OURSELVES. ARE WE NOW NEGOTIATING WITH THE CRIMINALS AND BARGAINING FOR OUR LIVES? DO WE BELIEVE WE HAVE LIMITED MEANS TO DEFEND OURSELVES BECAUSE WE LEARNED THAT WE WERE VULNERABLE? IN MANY CASES SUCH AS TRAVEL, WE CONSIDER PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES TOO EXPENSIVE. WILL WE CONTINUE TO MAKE THOSE MISTAKES? AND IF SO, HOW WILL WE SURVIVE? IMAGINE THERE'S NO WATER, NO AQUIFER, NOTHING IS TOO SACRED ANYMORE. EVERYONE'S BEEN BOUGHT AND SOLD. OUR ENVIRONMENTAL CITY LOOKS LIKE NEW YORK, WHERE THE CITY'S WATERS ARE SO THICK WITH POLLUTION THEY MOVE LIKE OIL. AND IF YOU'VE NEVER BEEN THERE AND CROSSED THE RIVER YOU MIGHT NOT KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, BUT IF YOU HAVE, YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT RIGGER AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A A DRAGON THAT IS ABOUT TO POP UP ITS HEAD AND EAT YOU ANY MINUTE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU ASKED FOR WERE IDEAS. I'M LOOKING FOR A FINANCIAL ANGEL AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE AT THE TOP OF ALL OF OUR LISTS. SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO COMMIT TO OUR WATER AND OUR WAY OF LIFE, WHO WANTS TO BUY THIS LAND... [BUZZER SOUNDING] ... AND GIVE TO IT THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO PROTECT. I WANT TO SAY ONE LAST THING. I CHOOSE TO BELIEVE IN THE MIRACLE OF YOU. IN YOUR HUMANITY, OVER LAND AND MONEY AND HOUSING, AND THAT YOU CHOOSE TO LIVE AND WILL DO EVERYTHING HUMANLY POSSIBLE TO STOP DEVELOPMENT AND SAVE OUR AQUIFER. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: DADA DEVINE AND FOLLOWING MS. DEVINE IS ROBERT RAY SHIELDS. MS. DEVINE, WELCOME.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER, MY NAME IS DADA DEVINE. I'VE BEEN SWIMMING AT BARTON SPRINGS POOL FOR OVER 25 YEARS. I FEEL FRUSTRATED HAVING TO BE HERE TONIGHT ADDRESSING THIS ISSUMENT I THOUGHT THAT THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN HAD ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE BYPASSING THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE. IT SEEMS CLEAR TO ME THAT THE CITIZENS WHOM YOU SUPPOSEDLY REPRESENT HAVE MADE THEIR VIEWS CRYSTAL CLEAR ON THEIR DESIRE TO PROTECT THE WATER QUALITY OF THE AQUIFER AND OF BARTON SPRINGS. AS CRYSTAL CLEAR AS THE POOL WAS 25 YEARS AGO BUT NO LONGER IS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE AN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST TO NOTICE THE INCREASING DEGRADATION OF THE WATER QUALITY FROM YEAR-TO-YEAR AND IT DOESN'T TAKE LENGTHY ANALYSIS OF A BIOLOGIST TO DETERMINE WHAT IS KILLING THE SALAMANDERS. I CAN TELL YOU WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY. IT'S THE POLLUTION IN THE POOL. POLLUTION FROM DEVELOPMENT ON THE AQUIFER. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. 25 YEARS AGO BARTON SPRINGS WAS SO CLEAR AND SO FULL OF LIFE SCHOOLS OF ALL DIFFERENT KINDS OF FISH THAT WITH A PAIR OF GOGGLES YOU COULD PRACTICALLY IMAGINE YOU WERE IN THE CARIBBEAN AND SOME PARADISE. IT'S PRETTY SAD NOW DAYS HAVING TO TIME YOUR SWIM TO AVOID THE ALGAE BLOOM. I DON'T EVEN HEAR THOSE COUNTS ANNOUNCED ANYMORE, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS JUST BECAUSE IT'S SO FREQUENT THAT IF PEOPLE REALLY KNEW WHAT THE COUNT WAS THE POOL WOULD HAVE TO BE CLOSED ABOUT HALF THE TIME, PROBABLY. I RESENT THE UNQUESTIONED ASSUMPTION THAT THE LAND WILL BE DEVELOPED NO MATTER WHAT AND THAT THE CITY SHOULD ACCEPT THIS DEAL ASSORT OF A LESSER OF HOWEVER MANY EVILS OR BEST WE CAN DO SCENARIO. I RESENT THE CITY RUNNING FROM THE THREATS OF LAWSUIT. I CAN REMEMBER WHEN THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE WAS UP FOR VOTE. HIS BEEFY RED FACE SCREAMING INTO THE TELEVISION SCREEN THAT HE WOULD BANKRUPT THE CITY. THE BIGGEST WATER POLLUTER IN THIS COUNTRY AND AROUND THE WORLD AND WE'RE GOING TO LIPS. ... TO FURTHER POLLUTE OUR SPRINGS? [ APPLAUSE ] I DON'T GET IT. I HAVE LITTLE PATIENCE WITH BUREAUCRACY MASCARADING AS DEMOCRACY. REALLY, THERE SHOULD BE NO NEW DEVELOPMENT. REALLY, WE SHOULD BE UNDOING THE DAMAGE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. BUT ASIDE FROM THE RIDICULOUSLY FAR FETCHED POSSIBILITY THAT STRATUS MIGHT MUSTER UP SOME MORAL FOR THE TODAY AND DO THE RIGHT THING AND CHOOSE NOT TO DESTROY THE SPRING, IT'S YOUR JOB TO ENFORCE THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE TO THE STRICTEST DEGREE POSSIBLE. IT'S YOUR JOB. THIS IS WHAT YOU WERE ELECTED TO DO, CERTAINLY NOT THE PAY CRIMINALS WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS TO POLLUTE OUR WATER AND IGNORE THE MANDATE OF THE PEOPLE. [ APPLAUSE ] I WOULD LIKE TO SAY YOU MAY BE LEGALLY BOUNDED ALLOW SOME DEVELOPMENT ON THE AQUIFER BUT PLEASE LOOK AHEAD TO THE TIME WHEN THE SALAMANDER'S EXCONTINUATION IS ON YOUR CONSCIENCE, WHEN BARTON SPRINGS IS ANOTHER ENCLOSED CHLORINATED SWIMMING POOL THAT HAS A PRETTY VIEW. WHAT WILL YOU TELL YOUR CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN, THAT NOTHING COULD BE DONE? THOSE WOULD BE LIE, TONIGHT THERE IS SOMETHING YOU COULD DO. TAKE A STAND FOR WHAT YOU KNOW IN YOUR HEART IS RITE. EXTINCTION OF A SPECIE AND THE DEVELOPERS SO CALLED RIGHT TO DEVELOP AND SQUEEZE AS MUCH OUT OF THE CITIZENS AS POSSIBLE... THE CHOICE IS CLEAR. THANK YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] [CHEERING AND APPLAUSE]

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ROBERT RAY SHIELDS. MR. ROBERT RAY SHIELDS.

RIGHT HERE, SIR.

MAYOR GARCIA: MR. SHIELDS IS NUMBER 17 ON THE LIST.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR GARCIA, COUNCILMEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK. I WOULD LIKE TO START OFF, I'M SURE Y'ALL HAVE SEEN A COPY OF THIS. IT'S A DICOTOMY IN TERMS, IT SHOWS A GOOD LIFE IN AUSTIN BUT NOT IF IT'S THE DEATH OF BARTON SPRINGS. THE PERMANENT PROTECTION FOR BARTON SPRINGS, THAT IS REALLY THE ISSUE HERE. HOW MANY PEOPLE FEEL ALIVE TODAY, REALLY ALIVE? WELL, WE'VE GOT TO KEEP THE SPRINGS THE SAME WAY. WE NEED TO PERMANENTLY PROTECT THE SACRED PLACE OF THE HEALING WATER, GOOD COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS AND A CONNECTING AND MEETING PLACE FOR ALL PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. ENJOYING THESE SPECIAL WATERS HAVE BEEN THE PRIDE OF AUSTIN AND CENTRAL TEXAS FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS EVEN BEFORE THE CATO AND COMMANCHE FIRST BLESSED THESE SPRINGS WITH ITS PRESENCE. BARTON SPRINGS WILL WITH YOUR SUPPORT AGAINST FREEPORT STRATUS WILL BE THE HEART AND SOUL OF AUSTIN. EVEN THOUGH AUSTIN IS GROWING TO THE SIZE OF A DALLAS OR A HOUSTON WE DON'T NEED THE CLUSTER, SPRAWL AND DEVELOPMENT THEY HAVE AND THE FACT THAT THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE HAS VOTED -- WAS VOTED INTO POWER TO BEGIN WITH SHOULD BE TESTIMONY ALONE THAT WHAT WE WANT AS CONCERNED VOTING CITIZENS OF AUSTIN IS PERMANENT PROTECTION OF BARTON SPRINGS, BARTON CREEK. I'VE FOUGHT FREEPORT BEFORE. WE'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE AND AS OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS IT'S YOUR DUTY TO HELP PROTECT OUR CITY AND ALL OF THE NATURAL STRUCTURES FROM DESTRUCTION. YOU MUST WITH ALL GOOD CONSCIENCE NOT ONLY VOTE AGAINST THIS DEVASTATING DEAL OF DESTRUCTION BUT AS A SOLUTION VOTE INTO LAW A MORATORIUM ON ANY DEVELOPMENT IN THE BARTON SPRINGS WATERSHED IN OUR DYING BUT NOT DEAD BARTON SPRINGS. THE CITY SHOULD ALSO USE THE 15 MILLION TO CLEANUP THE SPRINGS IT'S ALREADY DAMAGED. [ APPLAUSE ] AND TO FIGHT FREEPORT MCMORAN HIDING BEHIND STRATUS BECAUSE THEY WILL FILE A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE CITY WHEN THEY DON'T GET OUR WAY WITH THE SACRED NATURAL RESOURCE. IF ANY OF THE 15 MILLION IS LEFT IT SHOULD BE USED TO KEEP THE LIBRARIES OPEN MORE OFTEN. [ APPLAUSE ] STRATUS PROPERTIES AND JIM ARMSTRONG AND FREEPORT MCMORAN ARE ONE IN THE SAME CORPORATE APPROXIMATE. GREED. WE'VE BEEN ATTACKED BY THESE PREDATOR GIANTS SINCE 1988. THEY WILL NOT GIVE UP UNTIL THEY'VE DESTROYED AND DEVELOPED AS MUCH AS THEY CAN FOR AS MUCH AS THEY CAN. THEY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO DEVELOP AT ALL. PERIOD. THIS CITY COUNCIL HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE SPRINGS AND THE CREEK BY VOTING NO THOUGH THIS DEAL AND ANY DEVELOPMENT DEAL ON THE BARTON SPRINGS WATERSHED, MAKING THIS DEVELOPMENT MORATORIUM LAW... [BUZZER SOUNDING] ... THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO LIVE WITH SHAME THE REST OF YOUR DAYS AND WALK BY A SLIME SLUDGE POOL THAT WILL BE BARTON SPRINGS IF FREEPORT GETS THEIR WAY. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SCIENCE CALLED ECOLOGY.

MAYOR GARCIA: LET ME SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO GIVE YOU TIME... [TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES]

THE PEOPLE WHO PROPOSED SUCH DEVELOPMENTS CAN TELL YOU THEY KNOW THE COST OF EVERYTHING BUT I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT THEY KNOW THE VALUE OF NOTHING.

THE GOLF COURSE IS ACTUALLY VERY REPULSIVE TO ME... [ APPLAUSE ]

THOSE WERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT CAME TO SPEAK TWELVE YEARS AGO. WASN'T THAT WHEN THE LAST TIME WE DID THIS? SO I INTERRUPTED THAT. . IT WAS VERY ENTERTAINING BUT I DID WANT TO SPEAK TO THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL. MY NAME IS MARGARET CARTER AND I'M OPPOSED TO THE STRATUS DEAL AND SOME WOULD ASSERT THAT SHOWS THAT I'M NAIVE, IF WE DON'T SIGN THIS AGREEMENT, STRATUS WILL CLAIM THEIR LEGAL RIGHTS TO HIGHER IMPERVIOUS COVER ON EVERY PARCEL. SO I WANT TO GET THIS STRAIGHT. THE STATE OF TEXAS IS GOING TO FORCE THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO COOPERATE WITH STRATUS IN CREATING A HAZARD TO OUR DRINKING WATER. THE STATE OF TEXAS WILL FORCE THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO COOPERATE WITH STRATUS TO POLLUTE THE HABITAT OF AN ENDANGERED SPECIE. THE STATE OF TEXAS WILL FORCE THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO COOPERATE WITH STRATUS AND IMPERIL ONE OF THE FINEST ATTRACTIONS IN THE CITY, BARTON SPRINGS POOL. THE STATE OF TEXAS WILL FORCE THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO COOPERATE WITH STRATUS AND ERECT BUILDINGS JOIN ADJOINING THE LADY BIRD JOHNSON WILDFLOWER CENTER. THIS IS NOT JUSTICE. THIS IS DOMINATION. LET'S WAKE UP AND RESIST. WE DON'T HAVE THE... [ APPLAUSE ] WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO RESIST. LET'S HAVE TOURNAMENTS, $100 A PLATE DINNERS, RAISE THE MONEY. [ APPLAUSE ] DO WE NEED THE CITIZENS OF AUSTIN TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS AND MARCH AROUND THE CAPITOL? LET'S GET MOVING, THE PROPER RESPONSE TO DOMINATION IS RESISTANCE, DON'T GIVE UP AND GIVE INTO THIS DANGEROUS DEAL. [ APPLAUSE ]

MAYOR GARCIA: PLEASE DO NOT POINT AT COUNCILMEMBERS. THAT'S NOT -- NO, SOMEBODY ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE. BRIAN GREEN AND FOLLOWING MR. GREEN IS JOHN BURNETT. WELCOME, SIR.

GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER. TONIGHT I SPEAK FOR MYSELF BUT I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE BOARD FOR THE SAVE BARTON SPRINGS ASSOCIATION FOR OVER TEN YEARS AND A SWIMMER IN THE SPRINGS AND THE KAYAKER IN THE CREEK FOR OVER TEN YEARS ALSO. I WENT KAYAKING TODAY AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I HAVE TO BE HERE TONIGHT. THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE IS NOT POWERFUL ENOUGH FOR ME TO DESCRIBE THE EXPERIENCE OF KAYAKING THE SPRINGS. EVERYONE SHOULD EXPERIENCE BARTON SPRINGS FROM THE LEVEL OF THE WATER AT LEAST ONCE AS I KNOW SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE. DURING STAFF'S LAST BRIEFING I HEARD SEVERAL REFERENCES TO FREEPORT STRATUS'S COOPERATION DURING NEGOTIATION. I'M HERE TO REMIND THAT FREEPORT'S COOPERATION ENDS AS SOON AS CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. REMEMBER FREEPORT'S VIOLATION OF TNRCC'S REGULATIONS WENT THEY SPILLED. FIRST DENYING THE RESPONSIBILITY AND THEN REPORTING THE SPILL AN ENTIRE MONTH LATER. STRATUS REPEATEDLY DENIED ACCESS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEMBER TO MONITOR STRUCTURAL CONTROLS AND WATER QUALITY AND TRIBUTARIES TO BARTON CREEK. TIM HAS BEEN THE MOST EFFECTIVE MONITOR OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS. FREEPORT STRATUS HAD TIM ARRESTED FOR TRESPASSING AND PRESSURED THE DA'S OR THE COUNTY'S OFFICE ASSIGNED THREE LAWYERS INTO PROSECUTING THE CASE. WE'VE FAILED TO ADEQUATELY MONITOR AND ENFORCE THE LAW AND OUR AGREEMENTS WITH REGARD TO CONSTRUCTION AND STRUCTURAL CONTROLS ESPECIALLY DURING RAIN EVENTS. ANY NEW AGREEMENT ON SUCH A MASSIVE SCALE MUST ADDRESS STRATUS'S TRACT RECORD AND FUND AND EMPOWER GREATER MONITORING THAN THE CITY HAS ATTAINED IN THE PAST. I WAS ALSO PRESENT AT THE FLOOD OF JULY 2ND AND WORDS FAIL ME HERE ALSO, BUT AWESOME AND TRAGIC AGAIN COME TO MIND. I HAVE READ THE REQUIRED WATER AND WASTEWATER REPORT AND NOTE THE EMISSION OF THE FLOODING OF THE SPRINGS BY THE SEWER LINE IN THAT REPORT. EVEN AT THE HEIGHT OF THE FLOODING OF THE FLOOD WATERS OF BARTON CREEK DID NOT BREACH THE WALLS OF ELIZA SPRINGS. THAT REPORT ASSERTED THAT THE OVERFLOW WAS GREATLY DILUTED BUT THE OVERFLOW THAT I WITNESSED SMELLED OF SEWAGE, DILUTED OR NOT. THE LESSON HERE IS THAT THE CURRENT BARTON SPRINGS PUMP STATION IS INEFFECTIVE AND FAILING AT THIS TIME. IF THIS MASSIVE BUILDOUT IS ALLOWED, I BELIEVE THE ONLY PRUDENT STEP IS TO SHUT DOWN THAT PUMP STATION AND REPLACE IT WITH A SERIES OF PUMP STATIONS ON HIGHER GROUND AND UPSTREAM. OF COURSE THIS CREATES MORE POINTS OF FAILURE. [BUZZER SOUNDING] THE CURRENT INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE REEXAMINED WITH RESPECT TO NEW DEVELOPMENT.

MAYOR GARCIA: LET ME SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO GIVE YOU TIME.

I HAVE ONE MORE SENTENCE.

MAYOR GARCIA: OKAY.

AND SURPRISINGLY HIGH FLOOD WATERS WE'VE SEEN THIS MONTH. S.O.S. HAS A TAPE OF THE JULY 2ND FLOOD AND I URGE YOU ALL TO MAKE TIME TO VIEW IT. THANK YOU.

MAYOR GARCIA: THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] JOHN -- JOHN BURNETT AND FOLLOWING MR. BURNETT IS JOHN COREY AND MR. COREY HAS THREE PEOPLE, DEBRA COREY, HAL HORTH AND [INAUDIBLE] . THEY'RE GIVING YOU TIME SO YOU HAVE 12 MINUTES. (ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS...).

MAYOR GARCIA: John, before you came up, the mayor pro tem sent me the following note, considering the mitigating of last week's very late hour, which would have meant he would need to be home in bed on a school night, could he have a minute or two? SoCo we have your -- so could we have your -- [ APPLAUSE ] .

I really like swimming in Barton Springs. And I have fun there. And I also think that they shouldn't make -- or build buildings on top of the aquifer because then not just because everybody will not be able to swim in there, but everybody -- but the salamanders will die and all the other animals that live there will have to go somewhere else. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]

Hard act to follow. Thank you. What I would like to do is just give a nutshell of what I wanted to say just in case I run out of time, but I guess I'm not running out of time, but we'll see. What I'd like to do is I don't really study the issue like a lot of people here who made a lot of great points and really interesting points actually, but what I do watch is the bigger picture. And I think that -- I don't know about you people, but I'm kind of afraid of what's been going on in general for the last 50 years and I've been alive for almost that long, 58 years. And I think that there's a rule that we're not aware of that we should all be aware of and that is that nation's actually die. And the way that happens from the study that I have made of it or forced on me through schooling, which which I'm glad to know is nations die because they lose value. I mean that in a very practical way. If you don't value the very green dollar bill that I hand you, that's it, we're through. We can't barter any more. There's too much value going on for that to happen. So I'm pointing out to you that we may be at a pivotal point in our own history so that when you come to an issue say like water, okay, so you want to dilute the value for just a little while because we think that we'll save the water longer if we give in to somebody like Stratus. Well, fine, you do that on one point, but I'm going to go through here and point out other places that I think the mother LODE of values are all at threat, are under a threat. I think we're at a critical point that since all values are created, any value that you can stop diluting you're really going to do something important to preserve the nation that we're in. Now, that may -- time will tell whether this is an important year for us or not. We'll see how the world economy goes, but remember, England fell. England fell. They're not doing too well as we are, so we could fail. So let me say those things again in a little more detailed way and when I run out of time, you run out of time, but at least I made a point. I guess the last codicil to that is that the state legislature might also be nervous because the stock market is not doing so well. And George bush is actually getting to the morality bandwagon, as you remember, for whatever reason, but I think we can actually bring a pitch to the state that -- who are the conservative family value people up there exist at the ledge. And I'm not being sarcastic about it. I have family values also. And I think with time we can make the pitch that here's one water value, here's one value which is not as dramatic as others that we can take a stance on and that they might actually go for. And that's where our hope is. You guys are all doing a lot of reading and thinking, but, you know, it's not over until it's over. And I think that's one little corner that you haven't explored, that the state might be ready to make the connection in their minds that all values are connected, whether it's the value of water or the value of family or whatever, they're connected. So let me go through here. The preamble is going to be longer than the speech if I don't get going here. Let's see, starting where most of us agree. Recognizing the importance of the environment, we all think of ourselves as environmentalists. Therefore we can all agree that since water supports all life, not only is it illegal to pollute, but it's immoral as well. Okay. One disagreement, of course, is the developers and their alleged supporters that say that they're not polluting the water since there's no scientific evidence yet deemed sufficient by a judge indicating a death of the water. Just the same, you know, the most conservatives at the ledge knows, Stratus knows, the people living in the polluting developments know that science or no science, the water is dying and development is doing it. Every development of land near water for the last 50 years from New York to California gives us overwhelming precedence of pollution. So let's be honest. If we really supported moral values, we know it is a lie. What they're trying to do is push a legal clause or precedence, but they will actually kill the springs. We are in that process. So as long as we're all on that same page, and I think we are, because you people up there generally are -- I think that's what I get from you, from those of you who I know. Okay. It would probably are harder for me do it than these developers he or all these preceding them. It's part of the growing pain of a great nation. It's the test of a great nation. We are a country. We as a country are like a teenager with a first car. In our case water. Will we burn it up right away or take care it it for our future needs? This is a pivotal point in our history. Putting this aside temporarily, where the city council disagrees with me and others who say the depth of the water is imminent is what to do about the situation. We say it's wrong, don't do it, and the city council says we agree, but if we don't allow Stratus their way, the water will be polluted all the more quickly. The city council chooses to be realistic rather than moral, but here's a new face on the city council's lesser of two evil strategies. We are in a moral crisis. Here's a buckshot history of our decadence in the last 50 years. RJ Reynolds purposely poisoning people, purposely putting more nicotine in to make people addicted to cigarettes. Charles Dahmers. You know, 1958 there were no Charles Dahmers. No one was doing that kind of thing. This is a new thing. Worldcom, the stock market, Xerox, Enron, all of them are lies. All of them are lying and hurting people, hurting people's securities. Okay. Corporations hurting, killing other peoples without products like DDT, crop dusting, yet nevertheless selling those same foods here. Here's more. The school of the Americas, that's a great place. Psychology departments like at the university of Chicago and the university of northwestern in Chicago studied terror control for -- excuse me, studied terror tactics for mob control and they were using Guatemala. I think we're losing value, folks. Dictators killing nones and priests and bishops supported by financial interests. General know side among Europeans. We just had that, okay? Desperate semetic ping pong killing in the Middle East, meaning the Jews and Arabs are both SEMITES and yet they're killing each other. 9-11, cheapening of life. People killing their babies. How many moms do we have to hear about killing their kids? That means to me -- when I heard that one, I said we've really got to watch out. We're coming to a point where things might be too late to reverse the trend, okay? Children killing themselves and classmates, the drugs and crime statistics going up and down according to economic swings without any moral anchor. Everyone's cigarette. Church permissiveness, trivialization of the marriage agreement. It takes two jobs to raise a kid, but someone else does it anyway because no one's home. Come on, guys. Something's happening. Parents alienated from their children and children from their parents. Corporate driven assembly line test or teaching test answers that amounts to the same things at schools. Kids don't want to be robots. Learning is not achievements. Learning is the application -- achievement is the application of learning. We're learning that step and just teaching the answersment we're teaching the patterns to children. Kids are not robots. We're falling apart. The social fabric is screwed possibly, okay? All these things have three things in common. 50 years ago they either happened very rarely or not at all. Due to the profit motive at the step on values held dear by most Americans since the early 1700s. And lastly, each alone we can accept as not being alarming, but in concert as they are now, they scare the hell out of us. Okay. And this is what we can take to the state legislature, the moral majority who believes in values. I'm serious, those people I am sure, if I were in there shoes, had their education I might be doing the exact same thing they're doing. I think that at some point they're going to say hello, we are -- moral values are moral values, whether they're family or water or whatever. Especially in Texas, because it's not so long ago that the traditional value for water in Texas, which is in the semi air rid area, meant that you could get hung if you poisoned the well, okay? [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]. I mean, we have a chance with the legislature who believes in water. You can say look it, go to your roots. You guys are talking family values. Where are you? Are you not Texan at all? This is the semi ARID region. Like compost, deserts happen, it can happen, you know. With the water issue, it's a less dramatic place than other at risk traditional values that we can more easily get together on. We can say no to the pollution of our culture -- hello? I lost it. Okay. We can say no to the pollution of our culture with a no to the destruction of water. We can now emphasize the idea that a regional plan looks ahead to danger is indeed the most conservative conduct. Without the practical point of view, we none of us would be here, without this practical point of view, a reference for values, none of us would be here because Texans wouldn't have made it. They were just against nature. There was nobody there. It wasn't the east coast helping them out. We all can lead the nation to get back to our longest held values. Keep the providence of Texas natural abundance flowing. Be the first state. We could be the first state. We could pitch this to the ledge. Be the first state with incredible natural beauty that we have to act like cooperating, moral, productive people. Rekindle a belief in the land and waters Texans respect deep down. The president is talking morality for whatever reason. Take a chance. The moral majority ledge will also do that. There's no finger pointing. After all we are all guilty in the above list, perhaps in sacrificing our family unit in one way or another or buying stocks, not knowing what the money is actually being used for. I mean, a lot of us in here are -- we've got our retirement invested in that. So no finger pointing. Let's just take this opportunity for greatness with this one single water issue and I think we should do that. I think we have a chance. Okay. The last thing I would like to end with is -- and it's just a sentence. It's from I think, someone correct me, it's just -- [ Buzzer Sounds ] It's chief -- the chief of the NEZ pierce, chief Joseph. I need to drink of water. Okay. I'm going to finish this sentence and I'm gone, Gus. When the last river is pollute and when the last tree is cut and the last animal dead, then the white man will finally know that you can't eat money. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].

Burton peerson. And following Mr. Pearson is high lean Murphy. And Ms. Murphy is number 24. Mr. Burton. >>WYNN: Again, mayor, just to remind the folks, when we're off the dias we can hear and see the testimony. Thank you.

Thank you all very much. I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Dr. Burton Pearson. I am the director of the biology major of Concordia university here in Austin. This fall I'll be a University of Texas professor. I received a Ph.D. here around 1993 in evolutionary biology and ecology from the University of Texas. And I came tonight because I think very often under these circumstances biologists and scientists, because of how busy they are seems, don't really come out and speak to people about what some problems are and the things they should say, so I thought I would speak to you tonight. Some years ago early Americans sold large tracts of land for fees as they used this money. We say they didn't realize the value of what they sold. Today we sell the air we need to breathe and the water we need to drink and the entire eco system on which our very lives depend for pieces of paper. Not meat now, but paper, that we call money. [ APPLAUSE ] . We go out in outer space and imagine any developing world. Before they were age to understand the large complex systems of life. It's easier to invent the heel than it is to understand the complex workings of a cell. It's certainly easier to produce chemicals and machines than to understand the echo systems on which our lives depend. So all developing worlds come to a point we are now when they discover that what they are doing can no longer be continued based on the latest in biological knowledge. Our current knowledge is increasing at exponential rates and therefore I think our responsibility to apply this knowledge increases with an equally rapid pace. All or responsibility, yours and mine and the people. Currently our science -- let me remind you that science is the best environmental knowledge that our species possessed, period, right? It's not like the environment doesn't come from developers or politicians or even other aspects of our society, but from science. It tells us that we are one of the greatest periods of extinction in the years of the earth. The present rate is 10,000 times greater than the national rate. 10,000 times. Not 100 times or a thousand times, 10,000 times the natural rate. This comes from the museum of natural history. We know that this mass extinction is caused by human activity at this point. Since World War II, 1945, the proportion of CO 2 in the atmosphere has increased from three hundred parts per million to 370 parts per million. 23% increase in less than a lifetime, less than 57 years. We are definitely changing the world. There isn't a single scientist that won't say we are. Guess what, the elimination of habitats, and that's what we're attempting to prevent here tonight. We all live in the world, each of us must participate in reversing these alarming trends. We must each participate because each of us must breathe the air and the water. Am I almost done? The pollution contributed by the Stratus property is exactly the type threatening Barton Springs, the endangered species act says the primary threat are degradation. That's exactly what the Stratus development will bring. This project should be stopped because number one, endangers the air we breath and water we bring. Reduces other echo systems in the area. Reduces the possibility of salamander viability, reduces the tourism value. Stratus will not reimburse us for any of the echo system value that they will did he grade. It's not within the preferred growth corridor of the city. We are all --

MAYOR GARCIA: Sir --

Thank you. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].

MAYOR GARCIA: Eileen Murphy. Eileen Murphy?

Thank you. Three minute seems like a long time since I'm up here, but I want to say thank you for giving me the three minutes. The last time I tried to stand up against corporations, I got pepper sprayed and I guess I gave up for a while. And I probably wouldn't be here today except that I was swimming in Barton Springs when the city council meeting was going on, and I was encouraged to come. I have to say that Austin has changed a lot since I first moved here in '88 and so has the rest of the world. It has become increasingly corporate and increasingly hard to stand up to the corporations. And I want to applaud everyone for coming out here time and time again. [ APPLAUSE ] . Our voices are getting smaller and smaller, and it's really hard to keep it up but in '88 when I moved here, I loved Austin. It had a great quality of life, wonderful music. It had Barton Springs, it had a very low cost of living and no traffic. Now, I'm sure you know which of these changed. I hate to drive anywhere any more and the cost of housing is unbelievable, but one thing that has stayed the same is that when I moved here, downtown had more empty office space than I had seen in any other place I had ever been. It was a virtual ghost town. And I could ride my bike around and look at the darkened buildings. They would just light up floors just to make it look more hospitable. And I moved away and I've come back and I'm amazed that there are half-built office buildings, there is empty office space again, and I'm just -- I'm not an urban planner, I don't understand the economics of it all, but it does seem to me that the last thing we need is more office space in Austin. [ APPLAUSE ] . I think if somebody would like to build more offices Intel might have a building they'd be willing to give you and you could save a lot of money in developing that. It's already got the basic structure. Another property Stratus might consider is just down the street from me on holly street, the power plant that really needs to be closed down and it has beautiful waterfront lot. And personally, I would even welcome a Stratus office building instead of the fires that we get there. And trick or treating was a very depressing experience. Anyway, thank you for the time. [ APPLAUSE ] .

MAYOR GARCIA: Mr. Todd Wilson. Todd Wilson? And following Mr. Wilson is Darryl Smith. Mr. Wilson is number 25. Welcome, sir.

Thank you. Hello council, hello mayor. Thank you for allowing me to speak. I'm a native Austinite. I was born and raised in Austin, went to school here, grew up riding my bike down the greenbelt from the toys R us hill all the way to Zilker Park. Swinging on the rope swings, doing all the fun stuff there is to do. Of course swimming in the swims. I moved to Colorado for five years. Snowboarding was my life. I played in the mountains, had a lot of fun. Came back here and Austin totally changed. It still has a soul, still has Barton Springs, but I noticed so much more development, especially along MoPac, all the new buildings up above the springs. And I did notice a lot lower quality in the water. You could tell with the algae growing in it and different things like that. They used to add color Ryan, which had to do with the fact there was no algae growing in it, but it has changed and we've got to save it because there's a lot left to save. And that's one of the things that moving away and coming back I really appreciate what Austin has and I want to make sure that we keep it intact because I can remember growing up my aunt and uncle live over above Bull Creek. And I remember swimming in that place and swimming there pretty much everyday. And then all of a sudden it was polluted. They put up a sign no swimming. Nobody was allowed to swim. Of course people still swam there. We would hang our towels on the sign, but still having someplace that beautiful and not being able to swim in it is kind of like, I mean, it's a shame. It really is a shame. And I can't imagine Barton Springs sitting in the middle of Austin with signs saying no swimming. You know, I'm sure people would still sneak in and swim one way or the other, but we should do our best to prevent that from happening. The things that make a great city are great parks. And Austin is unlike any other city because it has the entire greenbelt. You can actually go to a section of wilderness in the middle of the city. Portland has a great park called forest park. It's kind of the same thing. Of course, San Francisco has golden gate park. There are a lot of other parks that are similar, but nothing like Austin because it's a thriving echo system. You have a creek running through the middle of town. And if we can preserve that in any way, we should. We should develop around it, we should make sure the ordinances protect it. There's plenty of places to develop around here. Nobody can deny that. What we've got do is do our best to make sure that we live up to not only the people that are here, but the people that are coming after us because that's really your job. That's why you set these ordinances in place is to make sure that future generations have at least something similar to what we have right now. Because, you know, what the future brings is what we create, so we've got to save Barton Springs and not hate it. We need to love to fly above. Keep on trying, roaring like a lion, because I'm not lying but tell the truth. The proof is how you live and we have to keep giving back. It's time to get on track and save this place. We have to keep up the pace. We can all win this. I can't dismy brother or my sis or my father or my brother. We all breathe the same air. We all swim in the same water. We all are family, but it's up to you, it's up to me, it's up to everybody to go ahead the job done because you know we've only just begun to evolve and we've got to solve the problems we make by polluting every river and lake. It's tame to wake up and live and time to wake up and give. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]. Thank you for allowing me to speak.

MAYOR GARCIA: Darryl Smith. And following Mr. Smith, Kathy Southerland.

That's a tough act to follow.

MAYOR GARCIA: We can always get a rapper to come along with you.

That might help. My name is Darryl Smith. I moved here in 1989 from Baton Rouge, Louisiana. I'm familiar with Freeport McMoran. They were called for polluting the Mississippi river in 1977 by the environmental protection agency. They were prevented then from dumping radioactive material into the river. Their solution to that was to pilot up on the Mississippi -- pile it up on the Mississippi levee in mountains that were over 90 feet tall. I saw them personally and any time the wind blew the winder would just pick up and blow into the river anyway. That was the year that "Star Wars" came out. And now we have attack of the clones and Stratus properties is coming back, and they're not to be trusted on any water quality issue in my experience. They will find some way, some loophole or something to continue to pollute. It seems their belief is that, well, if it's already partially polluted, what does it matter if we do it too? And I don't think that they would be good stewards of our land, our water, our aquifer. You have to be the stewards of our land, our water and our aquifer. I believe you should pull the applications, let them put together the plan on their own so that you can reject it more handily instead of spending so much time at the table with them. Perhaps you could make it so that if the pool is closed, then the table is closed or something like that. [ APPLAUSE ] Limit discussions of development that would pollute our water and destroy Barton Springs. It's hard to think of anything else that hasn't really been said already, so I hope it's all sinking in. And forgive me if I repeat. I know some women who feel that Barton Springs is their church and so if you don't protect that, then you're denying their freedom of religion. Thank you. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].

MAYOR GARCIA: Kathy Southerland. And following Ms. Southerland is Mr. Stevens. Ms. Southerland is number 27.

First of all, thank you mayor and city council for y'all's time. I sure do appreciate you coming and listening to all of us. There are many other activities I could be participating in right now, spending the time a summer vacation as a 16-year-old with few responsibilities. Instead I'm spending the night here along with hundreds of other people attempting to show our opposition to the Freeport Stratus development in question. In my brief 16 years here in Austin I have enjoyed the environment of this great city. This includes Barton Springs, which is an integral part of Austin's heart and soul. Barton Springs is the center of community all of its own. Daily hundreds of people travel to Barton Springs to meet and greet friends, socialize, ponder life's larger enigmas. Read and relax. We have commemorated this through the statue placed at the entrance. These three men represent the ideas of Austinites everywhere. To consider development in an area that would affect not only Barton Springs, but also the natural beauty and balance of Austin is atrocious. Increasingly I wonder whether Austin's government cares about the unique parts of the city they allegedly support and represent. The fact alone that hundreds of people have shown up at tonight's meeting should be proof enough that either the representative or the government is failing. Of course, I have little room to criticize. I cannot yet vote, but I can express my opinions to the fullest and most legal extent possible, hence here I am. So I ask that all councilmembers listen to the arguments presented tonight and remember that y'all have been elected to represent Austin, not a development company. Thank you for y'all's time. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].

MAYOR GARCIA: Peter Stevens. Mr. Stevens, welcome. Following her is -- she's number 28.

It's good to be back. I've been gone for a long time and I'm really sorry I have missed out on some important things. And I'm trying hard to catch up. I've been owning and operating a small struggling, but successful business, so that's why I haven't been here. And can I have $15 million, please, because it would really help. [ LAUGHTER ] Before I get into the substance of what I wanted to talk about, I just wanted to mention, you know, your lawyer, what's his name, Rene Hicks, last week or the week before last, said enter into a discussion on how we don't own wild animals A and while I agree with that from a religious perspective, it's actually not the legal fact, in that who owns wild animals is us, and it's in the state law, it's in most state laws of the country. It's a very ancient common-law that goes back to England and that's why we get to protect endangered species with the use of the endangered species act. It's a legal basis for that in that we own the Barton Springs salamander and the Barton Springs blind salamander around they are our property and that's why we get to protect our property. And what the developers collectively are doing to us are taking our property. So that's why we get to do that. But what I wanted to talk about mainly was Austin bashing. And this is -- this is a story, it's a true story that probably Jackie and Darryl will remember and you might be able to correct me on some of the details. But we act like there's nothing that we can do against Austin bashing except for that, the classic victim stance and what little our lobbyists seem to be able to do at the state legislature. Here's one-story of Austin bashing that had a different ending. Y'all remember Sally ship man, right? Yeah, Sally shipman, she was a rocking city council member. We didn't agree on all occasions. Once upon a time she did something that we asked her to do. She voted against a subdivision. Which she was legally required to vote for because it satisfied all the legal requirements, blah, blah, blah. We asked one of the city councilmembers to vote against the subdivision as a protest vote. And as it turned out, the subdivision went through, she was the only person to vote against it. Now, a certain Austin bashing legislature, and they all do have names and districts, and their own people they are supposed to be representing -- [ Buzzer Sounds ] This one's name -- could I please have three minutes?

MAYOR GARCIA: Please bring your Greenpeace of paper to the city clerk?

It's a happy ending.

GOODMAN: Mayor, could I ask Ms. Stevens to finish the story since she asked for my collaboration on facts? [ LAUGHTER ] .

Mark Stiles took offense to Sally shipman's voting against the subdivision. I assume he had some economic relationship with the developers. And so he called Sally shipman on to the carpet to come and appear before his subcommittee before the Texas state legislature. He was going to give her a tongue lashing before his subcommittee. So he issued a subpoena to Sally shipman to appear before his subcommittee. When I heard about this I'm like, well, dude, you know, what's with Mark Stiles and why has he had it out for Sally shipman so bad? So what I did was I wrote a letter to Mark Stiles' newspaper, the Beaumont paper, to the effect of hay, I hope that he's doing something for you guys because he's really causing trouble for us Austinites at home and he's humiliating my city councilmember by calling her on to the carpet for doing something we asked her to do. Unbeknownst to me, Sally shipman was from Beaumont and her brother still lives there. Her brother read that letter in the Beaumont paper and called his representative, Mark Stiles, and got -- and went to his office and got his finger all up in Mark Stiles' chest saying, what the hell are you doing beating up on my baby sister? [ LAUGHTER ] Mark Stiles ended up writing Sally shipman a letter of apology for calling her on the carpet and she didn't have to appear before his subcommittee. The point is that there are other ways of affecting these legislators, and it appears that we are asking these people to go out on a limb, at least that's their perception of it. Sally shipman went out on a limb and, you know -- I am not the most imaginative person, but you people can come to us and I call it the write home program. Let these Austin bashing legislators can be affected through their own communities and the newspapers from the districts that they come to. So one strategy. [ APPLAUSE ] .

MAYOR GARCIA: Larry lane? Larry lane? And following Mr. Lane is Michelle Weston. Mr. Lane is number 29.

Mayor and councilmembers, can you U.T. for the time that you've given us to speak. I wasn't really prepared tonight to speak, but I feel that the voice of my community has not necessarily been heard loud enough yet. I'm a homeowner in the villages of -- the new villages of western oaks. And although I'm a small voice in a large battle here, we are a neighborhood of over 2,000 homes, including over 500 which are multi-family in our area. And my concern tonight basically is equal representation. As I look at the proposal, I appreciate the time that the city has spent and that Stratus has spent to come up with negotiations for the people who are represented in the proposal, however, I feel that the people represented in the proposal don't necessarily represent the entire community or all of the communities that are going to be directly impacted by the proposal itself. That community, one of them is the community I live in, which will be directly impacted through the tracts 103 and 106. Our involvement in the negotiations just briefly over the last two months, I feel don't necessarily cover or provide us the remedial benefits that the impact of the that the development will have on our community. We already have a school that's overflowing that's located on a high traffic area of Davidson escarpment. Tract 103 at the end of the escarpment will create more traffic on that street. Right now in the proposal there's really no benefit to remedy the impact of that traffic on that street where kids are going to be crossing, there's no crosswalk, there's no light. It's a four-way stop. Also tract 106 is another one of the highest density tracts, going to extend Beckett, which is also a high pedestrian area and for recreational purposes, people walking through, walking dogs or going on the trails, again another high density area that's going to create traffic, going to create commercial use, but again no remedy for the impact that it's going to have on the community. My concern, I guess, as a taxpayer in trying to -- I'm a fairly new homeowner trying to understand the responsibilities of being a taxpayer, but also understanding the responsibilities of the elected officials. And for $15 million of tax money that's going into this development, I would expect -- I guess the least in return would be equal representation of all the communities that are going to be impacted by this. [ Buzzer Sounds ] And I just -- [ APPLAUSE ] . I just -- I plead that you -- [ Buzzer Sounds ] -- examine the proposal as closely as possible and look at the communities that are actually being benefitted from this and understand that the breadth of the development or the breadth of the impact of the development that all of the communities have not been represented and we need to go back and take a closer look at the proposal and come up with a stronger community plan to include everybody and make sure everybody is represented in all communities are covered within the proposal. Thank you. [ APPLAUSE ] . [ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS] Part C