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.
Mayor Garcia: THIS IS THE
AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST
THE FIRST.
THE CITY COUNCIL HAS
RECESSED THE EXECUTIVE
SESSION AND WE WILL GO BACK
BEFORE IT TAKES ANY ACTION
ON ITEM NO. 3 OR ON ALL OF
THE ITEMS THAT ARE
DESIGNATED AT STRATUS ITEMS.
AT THIS TIME WE WILL GO TO
THE 1:30 TIME CERTAIN FOR
CITIZENS COMMUNICATION
GENERAL.
WE HAVE ERIKA GONZALEZ
FIRST, AND ELIZABETH RINCON
AFTER THAT.
MS. GONZALEZ, WELCOME.
THANK YOU.
HI, MY NAME IS ERIKA
GONZALEZ, I'M THE YOUTH
PROGRAM COORDINATE NATURE
FOR PODER, YOUNG SIMILARS
FOR JUSTICE -- YOUNG
SCHOLARS FOR JUSTICE.
THE MA'AM WAS INITIATED IN
1995 WITH COLLEGE AND HIGH
SCHOOL STUDENTS, TO PREPARE
STUDENTS OF COLOR TO VOICE
THEIR NEEDS AND THEIR
CONCERNS FOR THEIR COMMUNITY
ON ISSUES ON TRANSPORTATION,
EDUCATION, THE ENVIRONMENT
AND OTHER ECONOMIC AREAS.
SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT
YOUNG SCHOLARS FOR JUSTICE
HAVE DONE ... LAST SUMMER.
THIS SUMMER THE PODER YOUNG
SCHOLARS FOR JUSTICE HAVE
REVIEWED THE SUMMER PROGRAM
AND ACTIVITIES OFFERED BY
THE AUSTIN PARKS AND
RECREATION AND THIS WAS DUE
TO A GROWING COMMUNITY
CONCERN ABOUT THE ACCESS AND
THE AVAILABILITY OF SUMMER
PROGRAMS AROUND AUSTIN.
FIRST, WHAT WE DID IS WE --
WE RESEARCHED THE AMOUNT OF
AVAILABLE SITES AROUND
AUSTIN AND THEN AFTER THIS,
WE DEVISED A WEEKLY PLAN TO
VISIT EACH SITE.
AFTER THIS TWO TYPES OF
SURVEYS WERE CREATED.
ONE OF THE SURVEYS WAS FOR
THE YOUTH AND THE OTHER
SURVEY WAS FOR THE PARK
DIRECTORS.
AND YOU CAN SEE, THE
SURVEYS, A SAMPLE OF THE
SURVEYS ATTACHED IN THE
PACKETS THAT WE JUST PASSED
OUT.
IN TOTAL WE TRAVELED TO 13
CENTERS AND -- SITES,
ACTUALLY, AND SEVEN OF THEM
WERE CENTERS AND SIX OF THEM
WERE RECREATIONAL TEEN
ACADEMIES THAT WERE PART OF
THE TEEN RECREATION ACADEMY
PROGRAM.
OVERALL, WE SURVEYED OVER
200 YOUTH PARTICIPANTS AND
13 PARK DIRECTORS.
OUR ULTIMATE GOAL WAS TO
FIND OUT THE NEEDS AND THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE YOUTH
AND PARK DIRECTORS TO SEE IF
THERE WAS APPROPRIATE
EQUIPMENT AND SUPERVISE
BEING OFFERED AND ALSO TO
DETERMINE WHETHER THERE WAS
EQUAL GENDER EMPLOYMENT OF
STAFF AND OF PARK DIRECTORS.
AFTER ALL OF THIS WAS DONE,
THE SURVEYS WERE TABULATED
AND THEN GRAPHED ON CHARTS.
THE YOUTH, THE REST OF THE
YOUNG SCHOLARS FOR JUSTICE
WILL GO OVER ALL OF THE
INFORMATION AND RESULTS FROM
THE SURVEYS, BUT I WILL TALK
ABOUT THE PARK DIRECTOR
SURVEY RESULTS.
ACCORDING TO THE SURVEYS
FROM THE PARK DIRECTORS, ALL
OF THE CENTERS AND ACADEMIES
OFFERED SUMMER DAY
ACTIVITIES, NONE OF THE
ACADEMIES CHARGED MONEY FOR
THE ACTIVITIES, BUT FIVE OUT
OF THE SEVEN REC CENTER DID
CHARGE AN AVERAGE OF
ABOUT $50 PER WEEK.
ONLY TWO OF THE CENTERS
OFFERED SCHOLARSHIPS.
AND -- FOR ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED YOUTH.
CRITERIA FOR THE
SCHOLARSHIPS WERE BASED ON
BEING A NEIGHBORHOOD
RESIDENT, ON AGE AND ON
INCOME.
YOU CAN SEE THE BREAKDOWN OF
ALL OF THE STATISTICS AT THE
END OF YOUR PACKET, LABELED
PARK DIRECTOR SURVEY
RESULTS.
ALSO INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT
IS A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE
PODER YOUNG SCHOLARS FOR
JUSTICE, ALSO
RECOMMENDATIONS ACCORDING TO
ALL OF OUR DATA, A LIST OF
ALL OF THE SITE VISITS AND
SEVERAL RESPONSES COMING
FROM THE YOUTH AND PARK
DIRECTORS AS TO WHAT TYPE OF
ACTIVITIES THEY WOULD LIKE
TO SEE OFFERED.
AND ALSO THERE'S A SAMPLE OF
THE SURVEYS AND GRAPHS
SHOWING THE PERCENTAGES FROM
ALL OF THE SITE VISITS
BROKEN DOWN TO JUST THE
ACADEMIES [BUZZER SOUNDING]
SO FOLLOWING ME WILL BE THE
REST OF THE YOUNG SCHOLARS
FOR JUSTICE WITH OUR FINDING
AND RECOMMENDATIONS, THANK
YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. GONZALEZ.
ELIZABETH RINCON AND
FOLLOWING ELIZABETH IS
LESLIE SERRANO.
HELLO, MY NAME IS
ELIZABETH RINCON, PART OF
PODER'S YOUNG SCHOLARS FOR
JUSTICE.
OUR MAIN FOCUS WAS SURVEYING
THE YOUTH.
WE RODE THE CAPITAL METRO
BUSES EVERY DAY TO ARRIVE AT
THE REC CENTERS.
ON THE WAY TO THE REC
CENTERS WE TALKED TO A
DIVERSE GROUP OF PEOPLE.
ALSO RECRUITED BUS RIDERS
FOR PODER'S BUS RIDERS
UNION.
WE VISITED SIX CENTERS AND
16 ACADEMIES, MONTOPOLIS,
SOUTH AUSTIN, DOVE SPRINGS,
GIBB BINS, PARK ZARAGOSA AND
CAMACHO.
TEEN ACADEMIES INCLUDING
L.B.J., CROCKETT, DOBIE
MIDDLE SCHOOL, PIERCE ... WE
LEARNED THAT EACH AND EVERY
CENTER IS UNIQUE AND OFFERS
DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES.
AFTER WE SURVEYED THE YOUTH
AT THE CENTER WE RETURNED TO
THE PODER OFFICE AND WROTE
DOWN OUR REFLECTIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS IN OUR DAILY
LOGS.
THE FIRST CENTER WAS
MONTOPOLIS REC CENTER, BEING
ONE OF THE LARGEST CENTERS
IN ALL OF AUSTIN IT HAS
NUMEROUS ACTIVITIES.
THE MOST POPULAR ACTIVITY
WAS ARTS AND CRAFTS.
I THINK IF THIS ACTIVITY
WERE OFFERED FOR ALL REC
CENTERS THERE WILL BE MORE
CHILDREN SATISFIED.
SUMMER PROGRAMS WERE OFFERED
AT MOST OF THE REC CENTERS.
THE SOUTH AUSTIN REC CENTER
HAD MANY PROGRAMS FOR
CHILDREN OF DIFFERENT AGE
GROUPS.
WE FOUND SOME DID NOT
PROVIDE ADEQUATE SUPERVISION
FOR THE CHILDREN.
DOVE SPRINGS REC CENTER IS
AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF HOW
CHILDREN SHOULD BE
SUPERVISED.
THE ADULTS WERE INVOLVED
WITH THE CHILDREN, THEY HAD
PLAY TIME, READING TIME, TV
TIME, ALSO GAME TIME.
THIS IS A GOODED MONTH DEL
OF HOW AUSTIN SHOULD --
MODEL OF HOW AUSTINITES
SHOULD PROVIDE SUPERVISE FOR
THEIR CHILDREN.
AT THE CAMACHO REC CENTER
THERE WAS A TECHNOLOGY
CENTER.
APPROXIMATELY 15 COMPUTERS,
INTERNET SERVICES PROVIDED
FOR KIDS TO HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SURF THE NET.
THE YOUNG PEOPLE AT THE REC
CENTER SAID THEY ARE VERY
FORTUNATE TO HAVE THESE
COMPUTERS TO USE.
THE PARK DIRECTOR RECOMMENDS
THAT THE PROGRAM CALLED THE
QUICKEST LINK BE IMPLEMENTED
BACK TO THE CENTER.
THIS PROGRAM WOULD ALLOW THE
YOUTH TO HAVE HANDS-ON
EXPERIENCE WITH COMPUTERS.
THE MAJORITY OF AUSTIN'S
YOUTH WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE
ACTIVITIES OFFERED FOR
FEMALES.
A DANCE ROOM LIKE THE ONE AT
DOVE SPRINGS REC CENTER
WOULD BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT
AT ALL CENTERS, MOST OF THE
CENTERS AND TEEN ACADEMIES
HAD MOSTLY MALE
PARTICIPANTS.
WE NOTICED THE MOST TEEN
ACADEMIES HAD THE FEWEST
NUMBER OF FEMALE
PARTICIPANTS AND 100% MALE
STAFF.
THIS IS VERY UNFAIR TO ALL
OF AUSTIN'S YOUTH,
ESPECIALLY TO THE FEMALES
WHO SHOWED A DEEP DESIRE TO
PARTICIPATE.
SOME REC CENTERS ARE
UNFORTUNATE.
THE REC ACADEMY SUCH AS THE
ONE AT CROCKETT HIGH SCHOOL
DIDN'T HAVE COMMONLY NEEDED
MATERIALS SUCH AS
BASKETBALLS, VOLLEYBALLS AND
BEVERAGES WITH BLEACHERS.
-- BENCHES WITH BLEACHERS.
A FEW SUPPLIES AND
EQUIPMENT, LITTLE SUPERVISE,
NO FEMALE STAFF, RESULT IN
THIS LOW FEMALE YOUTH
PARTICIPATION.
WE WOULD LIKE THE BEST TO BE
OFFERED AT THE REC CENTER.
THIS WILL HELP KEEP THE
YOUTH OFF THE STREETS DOING
PHYSICALLY AND EDUCATIONALLY
CONSTRUCTIVE ACTIVITIES.
PLEASE CONSIDER IMPROVING
AUSTIN'S REC CENTERS AND
TEEN ACADEMIES, THANK YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MISS RINCON.
LESLIE SERRANO, FOLLOWING
LESLIE IS MS. ROXANNE
CAMPOS.
MS. SERRANO, WELCOME.
OKAY.
GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS
LESLIE SERRANO, IMPART OF
PODER'S YOUNG SCHOLARS FOR
JUSTICE.
I WILL GO OVER THE TOTALS OF
OUR RESULTS OF RECREATIONAL
CENTERS AND ACADEMIES IN
AUSTIN, YOU CAN FOLLOW ALONG
WITH ME IN YOUR PACKETS.
FOR THE FIRST CHART, FEMALE
AND MALE PARTICIPATION, CAN
YOU SEE THAT THERE ARE 67%
MALE PARTICIPATION, 33%
FEMALE, THAT MEANS THAT MORE
THAN HALF OF THE
PARTICIPATION IS COMING FROM
THOSE.
IN THE ETHNICITY CHART, YOU
CAN SEE MOST OF THE
PARTICIPATION COMES FROM
AFRICAN AMERICANS BEING 52%
AND MEXICAN AMERICANS 37%.
AND THE AGE PARTICIPATION
CHART, 55% OF THE
PARTICIPANTS ARE BETWEEN THE
AGES OF 11 AND 15.
AND FOR TYPES OF ACTIVITIES,
49% OF THE PARTICIPATION --
PARTICIPANTS PARTICIPATE IN
SPORT.
THE SECOND MOST POPULAR
ACTIVITIES, ARTS AND CRAFTS
WITH 20%.
IN CONCLUSION, YOU CAN SEE
MOST PARTICIPATION COMES
FROM AFRICAN AND MEXICAN
AMERICAN MALES, MOSTLY
BETWEEN THE AGES OF 11 AND
15 AND MOST PARTICIPATE IN
SPORTS.
IN -- IN THE PREFERRED
ACTIVITIES CHART, 38% PREFER
SPORTS, 21 PREFER ARTS AND
CRAFTS, 17 PREFER
EDUCATIONAL AND 7% PREFER
SOCIAL SERVICES.
WHEN ASKED IF THEY WOULD
LIKE TO PARTICIPATE IN
COME-ED ACTIVITIES, 82% OF
THE YOUTH SAID YES, 18% SAID
NO.
THE TYPES OF CO-ED ACTIVITY,
YOU CAN SEE THE MOST
POPULAR, VOLLEYBALL AND
SOCCER.
WHEN ASKED IF THEY WERE
AWARE OF SCHOLARSHIPS IN THE
CENTER OR ACADEMY, 89% OF
THE YOUTH SAID THEY WERE
UNAWARE.
11% SAID THEY WERE.
IN CONCLUSION, THESE CHARTS
SHOW THE WILLINGNESS OF
YOUTH TO PARTICIPATE IN
CO-ED ACTIVITIES AND THE
LACK OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING
SCHOLARSHIPS.
NOW ON THE TRANSPORTATION TO
THE CENTER CHART, YOU CAN
SEE 54% OF THE PARTICIPANTS
GET THERE BY CAR, 28% WALK.
THIS RELATES TO THE DISTANCE
TO CENTER CHART BECAUSE 54%
LIVE MORE THAN 10 BLOCKS AND
20% LIVE FIVE TO NINE
BLOCKS.
THIS SHOWS THAT THE YOUTH
WHO LIVE CLOSER TO THE
CENTER ARE NOT PARTICIPATING
IN THE DAILY ACTIVITIES.
AND PEOPLE FROM OUTSIDE OF
THE COMMUNITY ARE COMING TO
THE CENTERS.
THE TIMES AT THE CENTERS
THAT THE KIDS SPENT ARE 40%
OF THE PARTICIPANTS ARE
THERE IN THE AFTERNOON, 29%
ARE THERE DURING THE MIDDAY.
WHEN WE ASKED WHAT THE
PREFERRED TIME OF OPERATION
WAS, 29% SAID THEY STILL
WANTED TO USE IT IN THE
AFTERNOON AND 25% SAID
DURING THE MORNING AND 23%
PREFERRED THE MIDDAY.
THESE TWO CHARTS SHOW THE --
THAT MOST OF THE YOUTH ARE
THERE DURING THE AFTERNOON
AND MIDDAY.
MOST OF THE YOUTH DURING THE
MORNING ARE ON FIELD TRIPS
AND ARE AWAY ON RECREATION
CENTERS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU, MS. SERRANO.
[ APPLAUSE ]
ROXANNE CAMPOS, FOLLOWING
MS. CAMPOS IS SUSANA
ALMANZA.
MS. CAMPOS, WELCOME.
MY NAME IS ROXANNE
CAMPOS, IMPART OF PODER'S
YOUNG SCHOLARS FOR JUSTICE.
THROUGHOUT THE MONTH OF JUNE
WE SURVEYED 183 YOUTH AT SIX
SCHOOLS THAT WERE PART OF
THE SUMMER TEEN RECREATION
ACADEMY, SEVEN RECREATION
CENTERS TOLLING 13 SITES.
I CAN RELATE TO MANY OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE
YOUTH, ESPECIALLY FEMALE
TEENS REQUESTED.
ACCORDING TO OUR DATA, THE
MOST OF COURSE
RECOMMENDATION WE
ENCOUNTERED WAS THE
AVAILABLE OF FEMALE
PARTICIPATION.
THE MINORITY 68% WERE MALE
PARTICIPANTS AND 32% WERE
FEMALE.
SPORTS WERE CATERED TO
FEMALES SO WE RECOMMEND THAT
REC CENTERS INCLUDE CO-ED
ACTIVITIES FOR ALL YOUTH
SUCH AS VOLLEYBALL,
BASKETBALL, SOCCER,
AEROBICS, YOGA, ET CETERA.
WE ALSO RECOMMEND THAT THE
PARKS AND RECREATION PROVIDE
SCHOLARSHIPS FOR DAY CAMP
ACTIVITY BASED ON FINANCIAL
NEED, AGE, RACE AND/OR
GENDER.
THE MINORITY OF THE YOUTH
REQUESTED WEEKEND OPENINGS.
INSTEAD OF SPENDING MONEY ON
GOING TO THE MOVIES OR AT
THE MALL, THEY SAID THEY
WOULD PARTICIPATE IN
ACTIVITIES AT REC CENTERS IF
THEY WERE OFFERED DURING THE
WEEKENDS.
OTHER RECOMMEND -- ANOTHER
RECOMMENDATION IS FOR ALL
REC CENTERS TO SUPPLY MORE
EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS SUCH
AS COMPUTERS, SOCCER,
VOLLEYBALL NETS, EQUIPMENT
FOR GYMNASTICS AND MORE
STAFF MEMBERS.
A VERY IMPORTANT
RECOMMENDATION WE ARE
SUGGESTING IS THE PLACEMENT
OF REC CENTERS AT JOHNSON
HIGH SCHOOL AND MARTIN
JUNIOR HIGH AND THE -- THE
HIRING OF STAFF AS PARK
DIRECTORS AND/OR
CO-DIRECTORS AT ALL
RECREATION CENTERS.
ALONG WITH THE HIRING OF
FEMALE AND MALE CO-DIRECTORS
FOR ALL SUMMER ACADEMIES.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE LACK OF
FEMALE LEADERSHIP AUTHORITY
RESULTS IN THE LACK OF
FEMALE CAT DATE TERED SPORTS
AND ACTIVITIES, WHICH
RESULTS IN POOR FEMALE YOUTH
PARTICIPATION.
PLEASE CONSIDER THE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT PODER'S
YOUNG SCHOLARS FOR JUSTICE
HAVE REQUESTED WITH YOUR
HELP OF YOUTH PARTICIPANTS
AND PARK DIRECTORS -- AND
PARKS AND RECREATION CENTERS
IN AUSTIN.
AGAIN, THESE RECOMMENDATIONS
ARE MORE SPORTS CATERED TO
FEMALES, AVAILABILITY OF
SCHOLARSHIPS IN ALL REC
CENTERS, WEEKEND OPENINGS,
MORE EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS
AVAILABLE AT ALL REC
CENTERS, THE PLACEMENT OF
REC CENTERS AT JOHNSON HIGH
SCHOOL, LAMAR JUNIOR HIGH,
THE HIRING OF FEMALE STAFF
AS PARK DIRECTORS OR
CO-DIRECTORS AT ALL REC
CENTERS, THE HIRING OF
FEMALE AND MALE CO-DIRECTORS
FOR ALL SUMMER ACADEMIES.
WE STRONGLY SUPPORT THE
INVESTMENT TO OPPORTUNITIES
FOR YOUTH IN AREAS CONCERN
EDUCATION, ENVIRONMENT AND
RECREATION, THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. CAMPOS, THANK YOU ALL
STUDENTS FOR PARTICIPATING
IN THIS PROGRAM.
ENORMOUSLY IMPORTANT THAT --
THAT COMMUNITY PEOPLE,
CITIZENS, LOOK AT THE
SERVICES THAT THE CITIES
PROVIDE AND WORK TOWARDS
MAKING THOSE SERVICES BETTER
AND MAKING THEM SERVE THE
NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY
BETTER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
WORK.
SUSANA ALMANZA AND FOLLOWING
MS. ALMANZA LARRY MALONE
PARK -- NO, LARRY MALL LONE
TALKING ABOUT PARK BALL
FIELDS.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I'M SUSANA ALMANZA WITH
PODER, PEOPLE ORGANIZED IN
DEFENSE OF EARTH AND HER
RESOURCES.
TODAY YOU HEARD FROM SOME OF
OUR MEMBERS FROM THE YOUNG
SCHOLARS FOR JUSTICE.
I WANT TO THANK THOSE WHO
HAVE ALSO MADE CONTRIBUTIONS
FOR THE YOUNG SCHOLARS FOR
JUSTICE FUND BECAUSE IT VERY
IMPORTANT THAT WE NOT ONLY
HAVE YOUTH THAT ARE WORKING
DURING THE SUMMER OUTLET
THERE THROUGHOUT THE YEARS,
YOU KNOW, McDONALD'S
RECREATION CENTERS, SO
FORTH, BUT IT VERY IMPORTANT
THAT YOUTH GET INVOLVED IN
SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES.
AND LOOKING AT ISSUES
ESPECIALLY THAT IMPACT THEIR
DAILY LIVES AND MAKE THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS.
YOU HEARD FROM THE GROUP
OF -- THAT WERE WORKING FOR
US, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE
THIS TIME TO INTRODUCE
ALMANZA WHO WORKED WITH THE
SUMMER -- WOULD YOU RAISE
YOUR HAND.
HE WORKED ENTERING ALL OF
THE DATA FOR THIS SURVEY.
ALSO NANCY FLORES, ST.
EDWARD'S UNIVERSITY WHO IS
WRITING THE TANK FARM STORY,
SO SHE MIGHT BE CALLING SOME
OF YOU.
SHE'S WRITING A BOOK FROM
THE COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE.
ALSO WE HAVE MIGUEL GOMEZ
WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH
US, HE WAS HERE LAST TIME
DURING THE PRESENTATION.
AGAIN ROXANNE CAMPUS, LESLIE
SERRANO, ELIZABETH RINCON,
ERIKA GONZALEZ, I ASK YOU
ALL TO GIVE THEM A ROUND OF
APPLAUSE FOR THE GREAT JOB
THEY HAVE DONE THIS SUMMER.
[ APPLAUSE ] I TOOK A GREAT
EFFORT.
A LOT OF THESE YOUNG WOMEN
FELT VERY NERVOUS ABOUT
GETTING UP HERE, BUT THAT'S
WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT.
IT'S ABOUT PUBLIC
PARTICIPATION.
IT'S ABOUT NOT BEING AFRAID
TO VOICE THE CONCERNS THAT
AFFECT YOU.
AND THOSE ARE SOME OF THE
THINGS, THE SKILLS THAT
PODER IS TEACHING.
YOU MUST BE INVOLVED IN
PUBLIC POLICY AND YOU MUST
BRING BACK THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE
AFFECTING YOU, YOUR
GENERATION, TO MAKE THOSE
IMPROVEMENTS.
I THINK THEY MADE SOME VERY
GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS HERE,
LOOKING AT THE RECREATION
CENTERS AND THE TEEN
ACADEMIES, AS -- SEEING THAT
IS BASICALLY BECOMING A -- A
MALES CLUB, YOU KNOW, IT'S
BASICALLY FOR MEN AND THAT
BASICALLY THAT ALL THESE
CENTERS AND ACADEMIES YOU
HAVE MEN RUNNING IT.
WE KNOW FROM FACT THAT IF
YOU DON'T HAVE FEMALE
DIRECTORS OR CO-DIRECTORS,
THEN YOU ARE NOT GOING TO
GET THAT FEMALE
PARTICIPATION AND WE HAVE TO
REMEMBER THAT NOT ONLY ARE
THE MALE ENDANGERED SPECIES
IN OUR COMMUNITY, BUT THE
FEMALES ARE VERY MUCH AT
RISK AND ENDANGERED SPECIES.
SO I THINK THAT THEY MADE
FANTASTIC RECOMMENDATIONS,
THEY VISITED AND SAW ABOUT
SUPERVISIONS.
THEY LOOKED AT ALL OF THESE
THINGS, THEY BROUGHT TO YOU
THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.
I ASK THAT YOU LOOK AT IT.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S A BUDGET
CRUNCH GOING ON.
BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THERE'S
A LOT OF ISSUES OUT IN OUR
COMMUNITIES, THAT WE MUST BE
INCLUSIVE, FEMALE AND MALE
OUT THERE.
MAKE SURE ALSO IN STAFFING
THAT WE ARE NOT
DISCRIMINATING AND MAKING
ALL OF THESE CENTERS AND
ACADEMIES JUST A MALE RUN
ORGANIZATION SORT OF.
SO I THINK THEY BROUGHT VERY
GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS [BUZZER
SOUNDING] I HOPE THAT YOU
TAKE THEM TO HEART.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. ALMANZA.
[ APPLAUSE ]
LARRY MALONE, FOLLOWING
MR. MALONE, CAMILLE PERRY,
MR. MALONE?
WELCOME, SIR.
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR,
COUNCILMEMBERS.
MY NAME IS LARRY MALONE.
I'M THE INCOMING CHAIRMAN OF
THE YOUTH ATHLETIC COUNCIL
FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF THE
GOLDEN EAGLE YOUTH ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION AND GREATER
TEXAS YOUTH FOOTBALL LEAGUE.
I SIT ON THE COMMITTEE FOR
THE PARKS COMMITTEE FOR THE
NEW GUS GARCIA PARK.
THE REASON I'M HERE TODAY, I
WOULD FIRST LIKE TO THANK --
I SEE YOU SMILING.
I WOULD FIRST LIKE TO THANK
THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, JESUS
OLIVERES AND FRANK FOR THEIR
HELP, BEING INSTRUMENTAL IN
GUIDING THE COMMITTEE AND
THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE
RECREATION AT GUS GARCIA
PARK, GETTING THAT OFF THE
GROUND AND HOPEFULLY GETTING
THAT ONLINE SOON.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT --
THAT THE PROBLEM THAT WE ARE
FACING TODAY WITH -- WITH
YOUTH PROGRAMS ARE THE
COMPETITION OF DOLLARS,
ESPECIALLY WITHIN AISD, AND
THE CITY OF AUSTIN,
COMMUNITY YOUTH PROGRAMS
CAN'T COMPETE WITH SELECT
PROGRAMS THAT COME IN FROM
OUT OF THE CITY.
AND SPEND BIG MONEY TO RENT
FACILITIES AROUND
BASICALLY -- AND BASICALLY
BOOT YOUTH PROGRAMS OUT THAT
ARE COMMUNITY ORIENTED FROM
THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
I URGE THE COUNCIL TO -- TO
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH AISD
ON THESE ISSUES, THEY --
THEY AFFECT US.
YEAR AFTER YEAR WE ARE IN
JEOPARDY OF LOSING COMMUNITY
PROGRAMS TO OUTSIDE --
OUTSIDE SELECT PROGRAMS AND
IT'S -- IT'S BECOMING A REAL
SERIOUS ISSUE FNL.
THE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD
LIKE TO DISCUSS IS THE
COOPERATION BETWEEN THE
CITY, AISD AND THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT AS FAR AS
BUDGETING SOME OF THESE
PROGRAMS.
I THINK THAT IF -- IF WE
FOUND A WAY TO WORK TOGETHER
TO UTILIZE THESE FACILITIES,
IN -- IN A BETTER WAY FOR
EVERYBODY, THE AISD HAS A
LOT OF FACILITIES PARKS HAS
A LOT OF FACILITIES.
IF WE CAN FIND A WAY TO WORK
TOGETHER ON THIS, MAKE THESE
AFFORDABLE FOR COMMUNITY
PROGRAMS.
OUR COMMITTEE MET WITH --
WITH SOME OF THE PEOPLE FROM
A.P.D. AND OTHER COMMUNITY
LEADERS AND THEY SHOW
STATISTICS WHERE WE HAVE REC
CENTERS THAT COME INTO AN
AREA AND BALL FIELDS, THOSE
TYPE OF THINGS, CRIME GOES
DOWN.
AND THAT'S -- THAT'S AN
ABSOLUTE STATISTIC.
AND I'LL CHALLENGE ANYBODY
TO -- TO SAY DIFFERENT.
SO IT'S REAL IMPORTANT THAT
WE KEEP THE YOUTH INVOLVED,
KEEP THEM BUSY.
I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT PARK'S
BUDGETS AS THEY COME UP YEAR
TO YEAR.
WHEN YOU LOOK -- WHEN YOU
ARE LOOKING AT SOMETHING TO
CUT, CUT SOMETHING THAT
DOESN'T AFFECT THOUSANDS AND
THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF
KIDS LOOKING FOR SOMETHING
TO DO.
BECAUSE IF YOU TAKE AWAY
SOMETHING TO DO, THEY ARE
GOING TO FIND SOMETHING ELSE
TO DO.
[BUZZER SOUNDING]
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR. MALONE.
CAMILLE PERRY AND FOLLOWING
MS. PERRY GUS PENA.
THE PROBLEM THAT I WANT
TO ADDRESS TODAY HAS TO DO
WITH THE PARKING ORDINANCE
AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE
EXCLUDED OR CAN BE EXCLUDED
FROM THE DECISION-MAKING
PROCESS IN IMPLEMENTING IT.
THIS INCLUDES TAX PAYERS,
REGISTERED VOTERS,
HOMEOWNERS, LONG-TERM
RESIDENTS.
BECAUSE OF NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION BY LAWS RULES
THAT -- THAT MAYBE THEY
AREN'T INFORMED OF
ADEQUATELY OR -- OR
IMPLEMENTED CONSISTENTLY.
I REFERENCE THIS IN MORE
DETAIL IN THE LETTER THAT I
SENT TO YOU ALL DATED JULY
THE 5th.
IT TOLD ABOUT THE TWO VOTES
THAT WERE TAKEN IN FEBRUARY
AND IN JUNE AT OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
MEETINGS WHERE THE FIRST
VOTE INDICATED THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION WAS
NOT IN FAVOR OF BEING
INCLUDED UNDER THIS
ORDINANCE.
BUT A SECOND VOTE WAS
ALLOWED TO BE TAKEN IN EACH
CASE, THOUGH FOR DIFFERENT
REASONS WHERE THAT WAS
OVERTURNED.
I LEARNED FROM COUNCILMEMBER
THOMAS YESTERDAY THAT THE
PRESIDENT OF THE -- OF OUR
ASSOCIATION FOR OUR AREA
HAS -- HAS ADDED OUR AREA AS
BEING IN SUPPORT, OF BEING
INCLUDED UNDER THIS
ORDINANCE.
WHAT I OBSERVED AT THOSE
MEETINGS INDICATES TO ME
OTHERWISE.
THE PRESIDENT OF OUR
ASSOCIATION, IT IS A NEW
ASSOCIATION, WHEN HE WAS
ELECTED IN DECEMBER, THAT
WAS THE SECOND ELECTION OF
OFFICERS, HE SAID THAT A
QUORUM WAS PRESENT AT THAT
ELECTION.
I ASKED WHAT CONSTITUTES A
QUORUM.
HE SAID 10% OF THE NOW
APPROXIMATELY 30 MEMBERS,
WHICH MEANS THREE PEOPLE
COULD ELECT THOSE OFFICERS.
THERE WERE VERY FEW MEMBERS
AT THAT MEETING.
IT WAS NOT THE -- THE
VOTING -- THE ELECTION OF
OFFICERS WAS NOT EVEN
NOTIFIED AT THE PREVIOUS
MEETING AND IT WAS BASICALLY
ANNOUNCED BY E-MAIL.
A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD BEEN
LEFT OUT OF BEING NOTIFIED.
IT WAS REALLY ANNOUNCED AS
BEING ONLY A CHRISTMAS
MEETING.
THERE ARE VERY FEW MEMBERS
OF THIS ASSOCIATION AND A
LOT OF RESIDENTS THAT HAVE
ATTENDED AND NOT COME BACK.
THEY HAVE ATTENDED ONE OR
JUST A FEW MEETINGS.
SOME HAVE INDICATED TO ME
THE REASONS ARE THAT THEY
FELT LEFT OUT OR THEY'VE
BEEN UPSET AT WHAT'S
HAPPENED AT THESE MEETINGS.
BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE
INDICATED THEY PROBABLY
WON'T RETURN, I HAVE DOUBTS
THAT IF WE TOOK ANOTHER VOTE
AT THIS TIME THAT WE COULD
GET A SUFFICIENT
CROSS-SECTION TO REALLY
REPRESENT WHAT PEOPLE FEEL.
[BUZZER SOUNDING] I DOUBT
THAT THIS PROBLEM -- IS THAT
MY BUZZER?
Mayor Garcia: IF YOU
COULD SUMMARIZE, WE WOULD
APPRECIATE IT.
I DOUBT THAT THIS IS
UNIQUE IN OUR AREA.
FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN AT
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETINGS.
UM ... AND AS I HAVE THOUGHT
ABOUT THIS, I GUESS THAT I
HAVE -- THAT I HAVE WONDERED
WHETHER THE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS, BEING AN
ORGANIZATION, BECAUSE THEY
CHARGE TO USE CONNECT AS A
POLL TAX, ET CETERA, SHOULD
BE THOUGHT OF AS A QUASI
BRANCH OF THE CITY
GOVERNMENT.
Alvarez: WHAT IS THE NAME
OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION?
THE SOUTH LAMAR
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
Alvarez: WHAT WAS THAT
AGAIN?
SOUTH LAMAR NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION?
Mayor Garcia: SOUTH
LAMAR.
SOUTH LAMAR NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION.
Alvarez: THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
MR. PENA AND FOLLOWING
MR. PENA, MR. PAUL ROBBINS,
MR. PENA, WELCOME TO YOU AND
YOUR NEPHEW.
MY SON.
YOUR SON.
SON, YES, SIR.
THANK YOU MR. MAYOR FOR THE
WELCOME.
TO MY RIGHT IS MY BOY LUCIO,
PROUD STUDENT OF THE AUSTIN
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.
I AM GUS PENA, PRESIDENT OF
EAST AUSTIN CONCERNED
HISPANICS AND VICE-PRESIDENT
OF THE RAINBOW COALITION,
WHICH IS A LOCAL CHAPTER OF
THE STATE-WIDE COALITION,
STILL ON THE AUSTIN
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
DROPOUT PREVENTION REDUCTION
TASK FORCE.
NUMBER ONE, I WOULD LIKE TO
MENTION SOMETHING,
MR. MAYOR, MAYOR PRO TEM,
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND
CITY MANAGER, WHEN WE COME
OVER HERE, WE WANT TO LET
EVERYBODY KNOW WE ARE
ENVIRONMENTALISTS, I DON'T
CARE WHERE YOU ARE FROM, YOU
COME OVER TO EAST AUSTIN,
EAST FIFTH STREET, WE
STARTED THE CLEANUP PROCESS
BACK IN 1990.
1990.
SO WE ARE CONTINUOUSLY
CLEANING UP EAST AUSTIN, OUR
PART OF EAST AUSTIN, HELPING
OUT IN OTHER PARTS, ALSO.
WE DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT
WHEN SOMEBODY SPEAKS, HE'S
NOT AN ENVIRONMENTIST, WE
ARE.
I WILL FIGHT TO THE DEATH
REGARDING THAT ISSUE.
WE ARE ENVIRONMENTALISTS,
WHEN I SPEAK ON ISSUES, WE
SPEAK BECAUSE OF PAST
EXPERIENCE AND PAST NEGLECT.
I HAD A TANK FARM RIGHT IN
FRONT OF OUR HOUSE.
THE TRAIN RAN PERPENDICULAR
AND THEN RAN DOWN SOUTH ON
PEDERNALES TO BUILD THE
HOLLY POWER PLANT BACK IN
1957.
IT WOKE AT 4:00.
DAD DIDN'T HAVE TO WAKE US
UP TO GO TO SCHOOL AT
ZAVALA.
WE REQUEST THAT THE MAYOR
AND COUNCIL MOVE AND VOTE ON
THE STRATUS ISSUE.
YOU KNOW WHAT THE LAW
STATES, YOU KNOW WHAT THE
ORDINANCE STATES.
CONCESSIONS HAVE BEEN MADE.
I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY
WORKING SLAB ACTIVELY
TOGETHER.
SOMETIMES NOT AS FRIENDLY AS
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
REMEMBER YOU ARE SHOWING AN
EXAM TELL TO THIS -- EXAMPLE
TO THIS CHILD AND OTHER
CHILDREN.
HE REMINDS ME OF THAT DAILY,
I'M TRYING TO ACT
APPROPRIATELY.
BUT ANYWAY VOTE ON THE
STRATUS ISSUE.
I THINK WE HAVE SPENT ENOUGH
TIME ON THIS ISSUE.
PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT IT,
DIALOGUEED.
LET'S MOVE ON TO THE BUDGET
TO WORK ON HOUSING, WORK ON
OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE
CRITICAL TO THE POOR, THE
HAVE-NOTS, THE DISEND
FRANCHISED.
NUMBER TWO, VOTE YES ON THE
PLEASANT VALLEY VILLAS.
A LOT OF QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN
ANSWERED.
I HAVE CALLED OTHER PEOPLE,
ORGANIZATIONS THAT LIVE IN
THAT AREA, SOME OF THEM ARE
SCARED BECAUSE OF SOME SORT
OF RETALIATION THAT THEY ARE
TRASHING THEIR LAWNS IF THEY
SPEAK ABOUT, IN FAVOR OF
THIS PLEASANT VALLEY VILLA
PROPOSAL.
I SAID CALL AUSTIN POLICE
DEPARTMENT, ANY TIME THAT
YOU SEE AN UNUSUAL ACTIVITY,
CALL THEM, THAT'S WHAT THEY
ARE THERE FOR, MAKE A
REPORT.
NUMBER 3, MAYOR AND COUNCIL
AND MS. CITY MANAGER, TOBY
FUTRELL, I WOULD LIKE TO
THANK YOU ALL FOR THE
COMMENTS MADE IN REGARD TO
THE BUDGET YESTERDAY.
IT MADE ME FEEL REAL GOOD
THAT THE LIBRARY IS BACK THE
WAY IT SHOULD BE.
ALL OF THE PROGRAMS ARE
BACK.
WE WANT TO SEE THE PROGRAMS
THAT ARE CUT AT THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT CONTINUE TO FUND.
AS MR. MALONE SAYS, YOU ARE
TALKING NOT TO AN EXPERT BUT
A PERSON WHO HELPED BUST THE
GANGS BACK IN 1994, YOU
REMEMBER THAT, CHIEF, WE
WERE THERE, CHIEF McDONALD,
IF YOU DON'T KEEP THE KIDS
ACTIVE OR THE YOUTH, WHAT'S
GOING TO HAPPEN?
THEY ARE GOING TO DROP
OUTLET OR, A, OR B, BACK
INVOLVED IN GANGS, SOMEBODY
WILL SHOW THEM RESPECT.
THAT'S NOT THE KINDS OF
RESPECT THESE KIDS NEED.
WE NEED ALL OF THE YOUTH
PROGRAMS, SENIOR PROGRAMS
FULLY FUNDED SO AS NOT TO
HURT THE PUBLIC.
[BUZZER SOUNDING] LET ME
WRAP UP WITH THIS,
MR. MAYOR.
WE ARE VOLUNTEERING OUR
TIME, ANY TIME THAT YOU NEED
VOLUNTEERS TO CUT LAWNS,
SMALL LAWNS, NOT BIG ONES.
BUT ANYWAY, AT THE PARKS, WE
HAVE VOLUNTEERS READY.
WE WILL SIGN A WAIVER, GUS,
MAYOR GARCIA, SIGN A WAIVER
TO HELP YOU ALL OUT.
THE CITY HAS GIVEN A LOT TO
US, WE WANT TO GIVE A LOT
BACK TO THE CITY, ALSO.
PLEASE VOTE POSITIVELY ON
THE PLEASANT VALLEY VILLAS,
VOTE ON STRATUS.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.
PAUL ROBBINS, FOLLOWING
MR. ROBBINS, MR. SAM
ELLISON.
MAYOR, I HAVE BEEN ASKED
BY PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD
TO YIELD MY TIME TO MR. ERIC
FOX OF THE HUGHLAND BEND
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN
FORT WORTH.
I UNDERSTAND ON -- YOU
UNDERSTAND THAT HE COULD NOT
REGISTER ON CITIZENS
COMMUNICATION BECAUSE HE IS
FROM ANOTHER CITY AND FLEW
IN.
MR. SAMMY ELLISON HAS ALSO
YIELDED SOME OF HIS TIME AND
ANY AMOUNT OF THE TIME OVER,
THAT'S LEFT OVER,
MR. ELLISON WOULD LIKE TO
SPEAK.
MR. FOLK.
FOX.
MY NAME IS ERIC FOX, A
RESIDENT OF HUGHLAND BEND
ESTATE IN FORT WORTH.
ALONG WITH THREE OTHER
SURROUNDING HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATIONS AND THE TARRANT
COUNTY HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION HAS BEEN ENGAGED
IN A LEGAL BATTLE WITH THE
SOUTHWEST HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF
DALLAS FOR THE PAST FOUR
MONTHS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT LAST WEEK
A REPRESENTATIVE OF
SOUTHWEST HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
APPEARED BEFORE THIS COUNCIL
AND SUGGESTED THAT SOME IN
MY NEIGHBORHOOD,
SPECIFICALLY MY CITY
COUNCILMEN ARE RACESTS AND
BIGOTS.
NO ONE WHO OPPOSES THE
SOUTHWEST HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION IN
FORT WORTH IS EITHER A
RACIST OR A BIGOT.
THE CORPORATION IS FOND OF
FILING BASIS AND UNJUSTIFIED
LAWSUITS IN COURT, FEDERAL
COURT.
THEY UNDERSTAND THE FAIR
HOUSING LAWS, IF IN FACT WE
WERE RACISTS AND BIG BOTH, I
BET -- BIGOTS, I BET THEY
WOULD NOT HESITATE TO TAKE
US TO COURT.
THEY RESORT TO NAME CALLING
AND RACE BAITING.
UNFORTUNATELY IF YOU WRESTLE
WITH A PIG YOU ARE GOING TO
GET MUD ON YOU.
IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THEM,
THEY TAKE YOU STRAIGHT TO
FEDERAL COURT, WHICH THEIR
CASE WAS THROWN OUT.
IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THEM,
THEY WILL TRY TO INTIMIDATE
AND SCARE YOU INTO SILENCE.
WHAT THE CORPORATION DOES
NOT TELL YOU IS THE REST OF
THE STORY.
THE FORT WORTH CITY COUNCIL
DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION
OVER THIS PROJECT.
THE FORT WORTH HOUSING
FINANCE DISTRICT DOES.
THIS PANEL VOTED UNANIMOUSLY
TO DELAY THIS PROJECT AND
THUS ELIMINATE THE TEXAS
TAXPAYER FUNDING SOURCE OF
LOW INTEREST LOANS WHILE THE
SOUTHWEST HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WAS
GOING TO USE TO FUNDS THEIR
PROJECT.
THE PERSON WHO OFFERED THE
DELAYING THE MOTION IN -- IS
MY COUNTY COMMISSIONER AND
LIVES IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SHE'S HARD WORKING,
TIRELESS, DEDICATED PUBLIC
SERVANT FOR MANY MANY YEARS
IN TARRANT TARRANT COUNTY.
A PROUD DEMOCRATIC, ALSO
AFRICAN AMERICAN.
AND AFRICAN AMERICAN WHO
FOUGHT FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND
FOUGHT FOR FAIR HOUSING, I
WOULD PUT HER RECORD OF
FAIRNESS AND KNOWING GOOD
PEOPLE TO WELCOME INTO OUR
COMMUNITY AGAINST ANY BIG
DEVELOPER FROM DALLAS.
IT IS BEYOND THE PALE FOR
SOUTHWEST HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT TO MAKE THIS
OUTLANDISH STATEMENT AND
PASS IT OFF AS AN INFORMED
OPINION BASED ON THE FACT.
THEY ACCUSED SAYING THOSE
PEOPLE, THOSE PEOPLE ARE
SEATED HERE TODAY.
THOSE PEOPLE COME FROM
DALLAS AND ONLY ACT AS GOOD
CORPORATE CITIZENS WHEN IT'S
CONVENIENT FOR THEM.
THOSE CITIZENS -- THOSE
PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO DO
NOT CALL HOMEOWNERS UNTIL
THE DEAL IS ALMOST COMPLETED
AND WE ARE UNABLE TO STOP
THEM.
THOSE PEOPLE WERE THE ONES
WHO HAVE COMPLAINTS FILED
AGAINST THEM WITH THE DALLAS
BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU.
THOSE PEOPLE ARE THE ONES
THAT FALSELY REPRESENT
THEMSELVES BEFORE OUR
SUPERINTENDENT OF THE
CROWLLY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL
DISTRICT [BUZZER SOUNDING]
Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU
STOP FOR JUST A MINUTE.
PUT ANOTHER THREE MINUTES
BECAUSE MR. ELLISON ALSO HAS
GRANTED THE TIME TO THIS
SPEAKER, PUT THREE MINUTES
ON.
INCIDENTALLY, THE RULES
DON'T ALLOW THIS, WE ARE --
WE ARE WAIVING THE ROOMS AND
ALLOWING YOU TO SPEAK.
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR, I
WOULD THANK THE COUNCIL FOR
THEIR GRACIOUSNESS.
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE
CROWLLY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL
DISTRICT, THOSE PEOPLE ARE
THE ONES WHO HAD TO GO BACK
AND APOLOGIZE FOR THE
UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR TO OUR
SUPERINTENDENT. THOSE
PEOPLE ARE THE ONES THAT
ATTEMPTED TO JOIN OUR
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND
BUY OUR SILENCE WITH
A $50,000 CHECK AND
A $10,000 COMPUTER LAB FOR
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
THOSE PEOPLE ARE THE ONES
WHO MADE INQUIRIES ABOUT
JOINING OTHER STATE
ASSOCIATIONS IN ORDER TO
NEUTRALIZE OTHERS THAT ARE
CRITICS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THOSE PEOPLE SIT BEFORE YOU
TODAY ASKING THE STAY WITH
US TO RECOMMEND -- THE CITY
OF AUSTIN TO WELCOME THEM IN
THE COMMUNITY.
THE CITY OF FORT WORTH
ANSWERED THAT CALLING WITH A
RESOUNDING KNOW.
FLOW MOUND AND SAGINAW ARE
SAYING NO.
THE CITY OF KINNEY IS
RAISING QUESTIONS.
EVERY TEXAN DESERVES TO LIVE
IN A SAFE AND CLEAN HOME, A
HOPE FOR A BETTER TOMORROW.
HOWEVER THE CITY COUNCIL CAN
DEMAND RESPECT, TRUST,
CREDIBILITY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY FROM THEIR
DEVELOPERS.
I PROPOSE THAT THE DEVELOPER
BEFORE THIS COUNCIL IS
SEVERELY LACKING IN EACH OF
THESE VITAL CATEGORIES.
THE CITY OF AUSTIN SHOULD
DELAY THEIR PROPOSAL,
CONTACT COMMISSIONERDY I
DON'T KNOW BAGSBY IN FORT
WORTH AND OTHER TARRANT
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BEFORE
THIS CITY WELCOMES THEM WITH
OPEN ARMS.
I THINK THAT YOU WILL GET A
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
PORTRAIT THAN THE ONE THEY
ARE PAINTING FOR THEMSELVES.
THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE
DIFFICULTIES THE CITY OF
FORT WORTH AND TARRANT
COUNTY HAS HAD WITH THE
SOUTHWEST DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY.
I WOULD NOT YIELD BACK BUT
ALLOW SAM TO SPEAK FOR THE
REMAINDER OF THE TIME, THANK
YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
SIR.
THANK YOU.
TODAY AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION WILL BE MAKING A
DECISION CONCERNING THE BOND
RESOLUTION APPROVAL FOR THE
PROPOSED PLEASANT VALLEY
VILLAS DEVELOPMENT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME ON
JULY 18th TO SPEAK WITH YOU
IN REFERENCE TO OUR
CONCERNS.
UNFORTUNATELY, THERE HAS
BEEN SUCH LITTLE TIME TO
PROVIDE ANSWERS FOR ALL OF
THESE ISSUES.
IN A LAST ATTEMPT TO RECEIVE
ANSWERS TO MOST CRITICAL
AREAS OF IMPACT FOR ALL
RESIDENTS IN THIS LOCATION
OF AUSTIN, OVER 100 CITIZENS
HAVE SIGNED A PETITION THAT
HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO YOU TO
ASK FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF 45
DAYS TO ALLOW FOR THESE MOST
CRITICAL CONCERNS TO BE
ANSWERED.
THE CONCERNS ARE RELATED TO
TRAFFIC SAFETY AND THRESHOLD
AND CONCERNS TO THE
OVERCROWDING OF THE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
WE HAVE ALSO CONCERNS ABOUT
UNEXPECTED FINANCIAL COST TO
THE CITY, WHICH WE WILL
LEAVE THIS CONCERN TO AHFC
MUCH HOWEVER, IT IS
ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO TAKE
THE TIME TO PROVIDE THE
ANSWERS RELATED TO THE
TRAFFIC AND SCHOOL CONCERNS
AND HOPE THAT YOU WILL HONOR
THIS REQUEST TO DO SO.
DUE TO THE CHARACTERISTICS
OF THIS AREA, WHICH HAS A
HIGH DENSITY OF LARGE
APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN THIS
LOCATION OF EAST OLTORF,
MANY OF YOU WILL RECOGNIZE
THE REFERRAL TO THIS AREA AS
APARTMENT CITY FOR CLOSE TO
30 YEARS NOW.
BECAUSE OF THIS HIGH DENSITY
OF APARTMENTS AND
POPULATIONS, ALONG THIS
STRETCH OF ROAD IT IS
CRITICAL FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT
ANALYSIS TO BE PERFORMED BY
THE CITY.
THIS IS NECESSARY TO
GUARANTEE THE SAFETY OF ALL
RESIDENTS AND ESPECIALLY THE
SCHOOL CHILDREN.
FOR MOST OF THEM, THEIR ONLY
ROUTE TO COMMUTE TO SCHOOL
AND MOST OF THESE CHILDREN
WILL BE PEDESTRIANS.
THE OTHER CONCERN IS FOR
LOCAL [BUZZER SOUNDING]
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND HOW
THE CITY PLANS TO
ACCOMMODATE THIS INCREASE.
CAN I WRAP UP REAL QUICK?
Mayor Garcia: PLEASE.
AS LINDER HAS BEEN AT
CAPACITY FOR YEARS, THE
DEMAND WILL ONLY GROW.
THESE ARE IMPORTANT
QUESTIONS FOR ALL RESIDENT,
BUT EVEN MORE CRITICAL FOR
SMART HOUSING DEVELOPMENT TO
KNOW THE ANSWERS TO THESE
CONCERNS.
NOT ONLY IS IT IMPORTANT TO
PROVIDE FOR LOW INCOME
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES, WE
MUST ALSO PROVIDE FOR SAFE
ENVIRONMENT AND -- IN
RELATION TO TRAFFIC AND
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND WE
MUST PROVIDE THE BEST
QUALITY EDUCATION
OPPORTUNITIES TO ALL
CHILDREN THAT WILL HAVE TO
ATTEND LINDER ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR
LISTENING TO THESE CONCERNS,
HOPEFULLY YOU WILL FEEL THAT
THESE ARE IMPORTANT
QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO HAVE
THE ANSWERS BEFORE WE
CONTINUE FURTHER.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
SIR.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM FORT
WORTH, IS HE HERE?
YES, SIR.
DO YOU KNOW A FELLOW BY
THE NAME OF JACK BAGSLY.
WE HAVE A COMMUNICATION
ABOUT SOME COMMENTS THAT HE
MADE FROM THE U.S. DISTRICT
COURT, ABOUT SOME COMMENTS
THAT HE MADE AT A HOMEOWNERS
MEETING, ARE YOU AWARE --
THERE WERE SEVERAL
HOMEOWNERS MEETINGS, SIR.
I WOULD NEED MORE
INFORMATION.
THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE
NMBE ISSUES.
WITH THE NMBE ISSUES.
NOT IN MY BACK YARD, FOR
SCHOOL FOR TRAFFIC AND THE
ENVIRONMENT?
THIS HAS TO DO WITH A
LITTLE BIT MORE WITH
ATTITUDES TOWARDS LOW
SOCIO-ECONOMIC --
NO, NOT FAMILIAR WITH
THOSE AT ALL.
THANK YOU.
YOU BET, THANK YOU.
COUNCIL, THAT'S ALL OF THE
SPEAKERS THAT WE HAVE IN
CITIZENS COMMUNICATION, WE
NOW HAVE A 2:00 TIME CERTAIN
FOR ITEM NO. -- HELP ME WITH
THIS ONE, CHIEF.
THE ONE FOR THE CARVER
MUSEUM.
64.
CALLING UP ITEM NO. 64,
APPROVE EXECUTION OF A
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH
McSHANE CORPORATION OF
AUSTIN, TEXAS FOR THE GEORGE
WASHINGTON CARVER MUSEUM AND
CULTURAL CENTER AND CARVER
BRANCH LIBRARY EXPANSION IN
AN AMOUNT OF $9,973,600,
PLUS $400,000 CONTINGENCY
FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF
1E7B 373,600.
-- 10,373,600.
THIS IS THE LOWEST BID OF
SEVEN RECEIVED.
RECOMMEND SEE, 646789 WE
HAVE TWO SPEAKERS ON THIS
ONE, I WANT TO MAKE SOME
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS BEFORE
I CALL THEM.
TED AS MAYOR OF AUSTIN I'M
PROUD TO SUPPORT THE
CONTRACT FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE CARVER
MUSEUM.
THIS IS A CULTURALLY
SIGNIFICANT PROJECT IN OUR
AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY,
OF WHICH I'M GLAD TO BE A
PART.
HERE IN AUSTIN WE PRIDE
OURSELVES ON OUR DIVERSITY
AND THE CARVER MUSEUM IS A
PLACE WHERE ALL OF AUSTIN
CAN GLEAN FROM THE AFRICAN
AMERICAN EXPERIENCE.
AUSTIN, THIS IS YOUR CARVER
MUSEUM.
MAKE SURE THAT YOU MAKE TIME
TO VISIT IT.
I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE
HARD WORK OF THE CARVER
BOARD AND THE FRIENDS OF THE
CARVER.
WITHOUT YOUR DEDICATION TO
THIS EFFORT, WE WOULD NOT
HAVE GOTTEN THIS FAR.
I WANT TO THANK YOU.
ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THE DILIGENCE OF
OUR MINORITY AND WOMEN-OWNED
BUSINESSES.
PARTICULARLY I WOULD LIKE TO
CONGRATULATE OUR TWO AFRICAN
AMERICAN TRADE ASSOCIATIONS,
THE AUSTIN BLACK CONTRACTORS
ASSOCIATION AND THE AUSTIN
METROPOLITAN UNITED BLACK
CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION.
NOT ONLY WERE YOU ABLE TO
JOIN FORCES AND WORK
SUCCESSFULLY TOGETHER, IT IS
WITH YOUR KINSHIP ABILITIES
THAT GREAT MAJORITY
PARTICIPATION HAS BEEN
ACHIEVED.
MS. CAROL HADNOT, JAMES
HARPER, BEN [INAUDIBLE] AND
MS. JAN LAWSON, YOU HAVE
DONE GREAT WORK.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST, I WANT
TO SAY THAT THE GOALS THAT
HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED FOR THIS
PROJECT SYMBOLIZE THE LIFE
OF GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER.
DR. CARVER DIDN'T START
COLLEGE UNTIL AGE 30 BECAUSE
OF HIS SKIN COLOR, BUT THEN
AGAINST ALL ODDS HE ACHIEVED
EXTRAORDINARY SUCCESS AND
ALTHOUGH MANY OF OUR
MINORITY AND WOMEN
CONTRACTORS SEEM TO BE
WORKING AGAINST THE ODDS,
LIKE GEORGE WASHINGTON
CARVER, IT IS STILL POSSIBLE
TO ACHIEVE EXTRAORDINARY
SUCCESS.
AND THIS CONTRACT TODAY IS
INDICATIVE OF THAT FACT.
MR. CARVER MADE MANY
DISCOVERIES AND AMONG THEM
WAS THE INNOVATIVE METHOD OF
CROP ROTATION, WHICH WAS THE
DEVELOPMENT THAT ALLOWED FOR
OTHER CROPS THAN JUST --
OTHER THAN JUST COTTON AND
TOBACCO.
IN OTHER WORDS HE WAS
WILLING TO THINK DIFFERENTLY
AND AS A RESULT HE CONVINCED
SOUTHERN FARMERS TO
ALTERNATE SUCH CROPS AS
PEANUTS, SOY BEANS AND
PECANS.
BECAUSE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT,
THE SOUTH WAS ABLE TO
RECOVER FROM THE WAR YEARS
AND THE LOSS OF SLAVE LABOR.
WHAT AM I SAYING?
TO CONCLUDE, THROUGH
INNOVATIVE EFFORTS AND
DESPITE TRYING ECONOMIC
TIMES, THE MINORITY AND
WOMEN CONTRACTORS CAN
ACHIEVE SUCCESS AND BE
SUCCESSFUL IN DOING BUSINESS
WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
CONGRATULATIONS.
[ APPLAUSE ], LIKE THEY
SAY -- [ APPLAUSE ]
LAST WEEK WHEN I WENT TO
SALTILLO I LEARNED A NEW
TERM.
I WILL SAY IT RIGHT NOW.
[SPEAKING IN SPANISH]
CAROL HADNOT, AND
[INAUDIBLE] DAVIS HAYNES.
MR. BEN WARMATE, THAT'S IT.
DO YOU WANT TO GO FIRST?
I WILL GO FIRST, THANK
YOU, MAYOR.
ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, CAROL
HADNOT AND I CAME TO A
COUNCIL MEETING AND HELD UP
A BIG F SIGN, BECAUSE WE
THOUGHT THE COUNCIL HAD
DONE, OR THE CITY NOT THE
COUNCIL IN PARTICULAR, BUT
THE CITY HAD NOT DONE A GOOD
JOB WITH RESPECT TO ASSURING
THAT THE CITY PROJECTS AND
CONTRACTS AWARDED MET THE
SPIRIT AND THE LETTER OF THE
M.B.E. W.B.E. ORDINANCE WHEN
IT CAME TO AFRICAN AMERICAN
PARTICIPATION.
IT WAS A SAD DAY.
WE ARE HAPPY TO BE HERE
TODAY.
BECAUSE WHAT WE SEE WITH
THIS CONTRACT THAT IS ON
YOUR AGENDA FOR APPROVAL IS
THAT WHEN THE CITY, THE
COMMUNITY, CITY STAFF, YOUR
LEADERSHIP, THE CITY
MANAGER'S LEADERSHIP, AND
THE COMMUNITY AND THE
CARVER, FRIENDS OF CARVER
GROUP COME TOGETHER, THAT
GREAT THINGS HAPPEN.
WE ARE DELIGHTED WITH THE
PARTICIPATION THAT HAS BEEN
ACHIEVED ON THIS PROJECT.
AGAIN PARTICULARLY FOR
AFRICAN AMERICAN
CONTRACTORS.
WE APPLAUD YOU AND YOUR
STAFF AND WE KNOW AND HOPE
THERE WILL BE MUCH MORE TO
COME.
BUT BECAUSE OF THIS PROJECT
AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF
DR. CARVER, THE LIBRARY AND
THE MUSEUM, WE AGAIN ARE SO,
SO DEDICATED AND HAPPY TO BE
A PART OF THIS AND JUST
APPLAUD YOU IN EVERY WAY.
WE ARE READY TO GO TO WORK.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[ONE MOMENT PLEASE FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS] (TIME:
2:30 P.M.)
AND A BIG THANK YOU TO
DANA BERRY AND JAN LAWSON
WHO CAME UP WITH THE MODEL
FOR THIS PROJECT.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
IF WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF
THE FRIENDS OF THE CARVER
AND THE CARVER MUSEUM AND
THE CARVER LIBRARY, IF YOU
COULD JUST STAND AND BE
RECOGNIZED.
[ APPLAUSE ]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCIL, ARE THERE ANY
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 64.
THOMAS: SO MOVE, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.
IS THERE A SECOND?
Alvarez: SECOND.
Mayor Garcia: SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.
DISCUSSION?
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?
THOMAS: EVERYTHING WAS
PRETTY WELL SAID, BUT I CAN
REMEMBER WHEN I FIRST CAME
TO AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL AND I
WENT TO SEVERAL MEETINGS AND
I COULD SEE THE STAFF AND
THE FRIENDS OF CARVER AND
OTHER MEMBERS THAT WERE AT
THE MEETING AND CAME
TOGETHER AND REALIZED THAT
IT WAS AN IMPORTANT PROJECT.
IT COMPLETED -- IT GOT
STARTED AND IT WILL GET
COMPLETED.
WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO
THAT DAY, LOOKING FORWARD TO
THE GROUNDBREAKING, BUT I
ALSO TOLD THEM TO DREAM BIG
SO THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO
REACH THE GOALS THEY WANTED
TO REACH, AND I DO COMMEND
STAFF FOR THE THINGS THEY
HAVE DONE.
AND HOPE -- NOT HOPE.
WE KNOW THIS WILL BE A
BEAUTIFUL PROJECT.
AND I HOPE WE GOT EVERYTHING
WE WANTED IN THIS PARTICULAR
PROJECT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ, YOU
SECONDED THE MOTION.
Alvarez: AGAIN, MAYOR.
I JUST WANT TO THANK
EVERYBODY INVOLVED BECAUSE
IT WAS A VERY INVOLVED
PROCESS FOR EVERYONE.
AND THERE WERE SOME TENUOUS
MOMENTS AND I DO WANT TO
CONGRATULATE EVERYONE AND
COMMEND THEM JUST FOR
FINDING A WAY TO MOVE
FORWARD.
AND I THINK THE OUTCOME HAS
JUST BEEN EXCEPTIONAL, SO I
HAVE MY HATS OFF TO THE
CONTRACTOR AND ALL THE SUBS
THAT PARTICIPATED AND ALL
THE FOLKS FROM THE
ASSOCIATION WHO FACILITATED
THE STAFF, BECAUSE THIS HAS
BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE IN
THE PLANNING AND IT'S REALLY
GOOD JUST TO GET -- WHEN WE
PUT OUR ATTENTION ON A VERY
IMPORTANT PROJECT, NOT JUST
BECAUSE IT'S -- BECAUSE IT'S
THE CARVER MUSEUM, BUT
BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO
PUT MORE OF AN EMPHASIS ON
LARGE CIP PROJECTS BECAUSE
WE CAN MAKE -- TAKE THE
EXTRA MILE OR TAKE WHATEVER
EXTRA STEPS WE CAN TO ENSURE
MORE PARTICIPATION AND WE
GET MORE BANG FOR OUR BUCK
SO THAT IF YOU GET 10% OUT
OF A 10-MILLION-DOLLAR
PROJECT, THAT'S A LOT MORE
SIGNIFICANT THAN 10% OUT OF
A 100-MILLION-DOLLAR
PROJECT.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE TRYING
TO TAKE IT TO SEE IF WE
CAN'T PAY EXTRA SPECIAL
ATTENTION TO SOME OF THESE
LARGER CIP PROJECTS AND TRY
TO IMPROVE AS MUCH AS WE CAN
THE M./W.B.E. PARTICIPATION.
BUT I DO WANT TO COMMEND
EVERYBODY FOR THEIR
PARTICIPATION.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.
I WANTED TO INTRODUCE IN
CASE SOME OF YOU DID NOT GET
A CHANCE TO MEET ONE OF OUR
POLICY ASSISTANTS, ADANA
BERRY.
ADANA, WAVE.
[ APPLAUSE ]
ADANA SAID AT THE OUTSET OF
THE MEETING SHE MAY HAVE
FELT A LITTLE BIT UNWELCOME,
BUT BY THE END OF THE
MEETING THERE WERE HUGS AND
KISSES, SO WE APPRECIATE THE
MANNER IN WHICH YOU TREATED
HER DURING THAT MEETING.
AND I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH
THE WORK THAT SHE DOES TO
BRING THESE KINDS OF
PROJECTS TO FRUITION.
ARE THERE ANY
REPRESENTATIVES FROM -- ANY
OTHER REPRESENTATIVES HERE?
I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
OKAY.
THE MOTION AND A SECOND HAS
BEEN MADE, MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
ALVAREZ.
FURTHER DISCUSSION?
IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING -- OH,
SORRY.
MAYOR PRO TEM?
MAYOR PRO TEM?
GOODMAN: NO, NO, I WAS
JUST ANTICIPATING SAYING
AYE.
[ LAUGHTER ]
IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME.
Mayor Garcia: ALL IN
FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING
AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
THE MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE
OF SEVEN TO ZERO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
EVERYBODY.
[ APPLAUSE ]
THOMAS: MAYOR, IF I COULD
SAY ONE MORE THING, I FORGOT
TO THANK MY STAFF FOR
WORKING -- FOR DOING THE
HARD WORK, LINDA DAVIS FOR
HELPING ADANA IN THIS
PROJECT.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER
MS. LAWSON IS HERE FROM OUR
STAFF, BUT SHE ALSO WORKED
VERY DILL DILIGENTLY ON THIS
PROJECT.
THOMAS: SHE'S IN THE
BACK.
JAN LAWSON?
Mayor Garcia: JAN LAWSON.
OKAY.
GOODMAN: YOU KNOW, MAYOR,
THIS STARTED SO LONG AGO, I
FEEL AS IF I WAS VERY, VERY
YOUNG BACK THEN.
I DON'T KNOW IF I --
Mayor Garcia: YOU'RE
STILL VERY YOUNG, MAYOR PRO
TEM.
WE HAVE A 3:00 O'CLOCK TIME
CERTAIN, BUT WE HAVE A
LITTLE TIME TO TAKE UP SOME
ITEMS ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.
AND THE FIRST THING WE'LL DO
IS WE'LL READ THE CHANGES
AND CORRECTIONS AND TIME
CERTAINS.
MS. BROWN?
BROWN: THE CHANGES AND
CORRECTIONS, STARTING WITH
ITEM NUMBER 39, WHERE IT
SHOWS THE SUGGESTED DATE AND
TIME, THAT SHOULD BE
AUGUST 22nd, 2002 AT
6:00 P.M.
ON ITEM NUMBER 43 IT SHOULD
READ, APPROVE THE FISCAL
YEAR BUDGET 2002-2003 BUDGET
SCHEDULE, INCLUDING BUDGET
READINGS, AND SET PUBLIC
HEARINGS TO RECEIVE PUBLIC
COMMENT ON THE CITY OF
AUSTIN PROPOSED BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003,
RECOMMENDED DATES AND TIMES,
AUGUST EIGHT, 2002,
PROTECTIVE SERVICE, ENER
PRICE SERVICES, AUGUST 22nd,
2002, DEVELOPMENT,
ENVIRONMENT AND
TRANSPORTATION, CIP
MANAGEMENT SERVICES,
UTILITIES AND AUGUST 29,
2002, COMMUNITY SERVICES AND
GENERAL PUBLIC HEARINGS AND
AT 6:00 P.M.
THE BUDGET WILL BE READ AT
THE SEPTEMBER 9,
SEPTEMBER 10 AND
SEPTEMBER 12TH 2002 CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS AT ONE
TEXAS CENTER, 505 BARTON
SPRINGS ROAD, THIRD FLOOR
TRAINING ROOM AT 10:00 P.M.
THERE WILL BE NO MEETING ON
SEPTEMBER 11th, 2002.
ITEM NUMBER 70 IS POSTPONED
TO AUGUST 8TH, 2002.
ITEM 75 IS POSTPONED
INDEFINITELY.
ITEMS 89 HAS ADDITIONAL
COUNCILMEMBER SPONSORS AND
THEY ARE COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLEY AND MAYOR GUS
GARCIA.
ITEM 90, PLEASE ADD THE
WORDS IN PARENTHESIS, THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION PASSED A
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THIS
ACTION AT THEIR JULY 16TH,
2002 MEETING.
TIME CERTAIN ITEM, WE'VE
ALREADY DONE CITIZEN
COMMUNICATION AND ITEM 64.
AT 3:00 IS THE AHFC BOARD OF
DIRECTORS' MEETING.
4:00 ARE ZONING ITEMS, Z-1
THROUGH Z-10.
5 H 30, MUSIC AND
PROCLAMATIONS.
PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE SET FOR
6:00 P.M.
Mayor Garcia: ON ITEM
NUMBER 89, I HAVE HAD A
REQUEST FROM A COUPLE OF
COUNCILMEMBERS TO DO FIRST
READING -- I MEAN SECOND
READING ON SECOND AND THIRD
SO THAT TIME CAN BE GIVEN TO
HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEYS WORK
ON SOME WORDING.
SO UNLESS I HEAR SOMETHING
TO THE CONTRARY, ITEM NUMBER
89 WILL BE ONLY FOR SECOND
READING.
AND LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THE
CONCERN IS SO EVERYBODY
KNOWS.
THE CONCERN IS THAT THE
CITE
FOR OPTING IN IS DIFFERENT
FOR -- THE CRITERIA FOR
OPTING IN IS DIFFERENT FOR
THE SEWINGS THAT HAVE
ALREADY SENT LETTERS AS
OPPOSED TO THE ONES THAT
HAVEN'T.
AND I THINK THAT THE CONCERN
THAT COUNCIL HAS IS THAT
THOSE -- THAT CRITERIA FOR
OPTING IN NEEDS TO BE THE
SAME FOR THOSE THAT ARE
GOING IN INITIALLY AS WELL
AS THE ONES THAT ARE COMING
LATER.
SO THERE HAS TO BE
UNIFORMITY.
AND IF I'M NOT CORRECT IN
THAT STATEMENT, PLEASE
CORRECT ME ON THAT ONE.
THOMAS: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.
THOMAS: NOT TO CORRECT
YOU.
WE WERE LOOKING FORWARD TO
THE SECOND AND THIRD
READING.
SOME OF THE WORDING I
THOUGHT WE COULD MAYBE TAKE
CARE OF SOME OF THAT WORDING
THROUGH A FRIENDLY
AMENDMENT, SO ON TOP OF THAT
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO AND
WHAT I'VE HEARD, I THINK WE
TALKED ABOUT THIS EARLIER
ABOUT COST EFFECT AND ALSO
THE TIME OF THE COST OF
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AND
ZONING, ESPECIALLY WHEN
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 10
PLANNING AREAS FOR WHICH
THERE ARE A PLAN -- ON THE
WAY, I'M SORRY.
WE'RE LOOKING AT A LARGE
AMOUNT OF MONEY.
I THINK ALICE MIGHT CAN
EXPLAIN THAT.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
WELL, WE CAN TAKE IT UP,
SECOND AND THIRD, AND THE
AMENDMENTS CAN BE MADE ON
THE FLOOR, THERE'S NO
QUESTION ABOUT IT.
I JUST THOUGHT THAT MAYBE
LEGAL NEEDED A LITTLE BIT
MORE TIME.
THOMAS: ALSO, DEBRA
THOMPSON HAD SOME CHANGES
THAT WERE DONE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS IN
THE THINGS FROM THE
COUNCILMEMBERS AND THEY WERE
CONCERNED ABOUT.
IF YOU WOULD ALLOW US TO
DISCUSS IT.
Mayor Garcia: WE CAN DO
THAT.
THOMAS: WE'VE BEEN ON
THIS FOR TWO YEARS.
Mayor Garcia: SO I GUESS
WHAT WE'LL DO IS IF WE LEAVE
IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA,
THEN THE AMENDMENTS WILL BE
MADE AS PART OF THE CONSENT
AGENDA.
I HAVE A REQUEST FROM
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN'S OFFICE
TO PULL THAT ITEM.
Mayor Garcia: SO ITEM
NUMBER 89 IS PULLED.
AND I HAVE A REQUEST FROM
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS TO PULL
ITEM 90.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
AND THEN THE ONLY OTHER
ITEM THAT I'M AWARE OF
THAT'S BEEN PULLED IS ITEM
3, SO WE CAN DO THAT AFTER
THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AND
THEN ALL THE STRATUS ITEMS.
Mayor Garcia: RIGHT.
WE WILL NOT TAKE UP ITEM 3
AND THE STRATUS ITEMS UNTIL
AFTER WE DO -- WE CONCLUDE
THE EXECUTIVE SESSION, WHICH
WE RECESSED WHEN WE CAME OUT
HERE AT 1:40.
SO THOSE ITEMS WILL BE TAKEN
UP AFTER THAT -- AFTER THAT
EXECUTIVE SESSION IS
CONCLUDED.
SO ITEM NUMBER 89 IS PULLED,
ITEM NUMBER 90 IS PULLED,
ITEM NUMBER 3 AND ALL OF THE
STRATUS ITEMS ARE PULLED
UNTIL 3 AND THE STRATUS
ITEMS WILL BE TAKEN UP AFTER
THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
SLUSHER: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?
SLUSHER: COULD WE PULL 52
AND 53?
THESE GO TOGETHER.
THEY'RE FOR THE COMMUNITY
ACTION PLAN.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A SHORT
PRESENTATION ON THAT FROM
MR. HILGERS.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
MR. HILGERS, IF YOU'RE IN
THE -- 52 AND 53 HAVE BEEN
PULLED BY COUNCILMEMBER
SLUSHER FOR A PRESENTATION
ON THE COMMUNITY ACTION
PLAN.
ANY OTHER CHANGES AND
CORRECTIONS?
I THINK WE GOT THEM ALL.
OKAY.
THANK YOU, MS. BROWN.
THE NEXT ITEM IS A PREVIEW
OF ITEMS FOR THE NEXT
COUNCIL MEETING.
WE WILL HAVE A -- A
RESOLUTION ON LAND
RESTRICTIONS ON IH-35.
I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE
MAYORS ALONG THE CORRIDOR
AND THE RESOLUTION WILL BE
DRAFTED WITH ENOUGH TIME FOR
YOU TO LOOK AT IT.
WE HOPE TO BRING IT TO THE
NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER
THOMAS, COUNCILMEMBER WYNN
AND I WILL BE PRESENTING AN
ORDINANCE TO THE CITY
CO-SPONSORSHIP FOR THE 9-11
ACTIVITIES, PARADE AND
STREET CLOSURE ACTIVITIES.
THAT'S SEPTEMBER 11TH
MEMORIAL ACTIVITY.
ANY OTHER PREVIEW OF ITEMS?
CHIEF McDONALD, DO YOU HAVE
ANYTHING FOR THE CITY
MANAGER?
COUNCILMEMBERS, ANYTHING
ELSE?
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?
Alvarez: YES, MAYOR.
YOU HAD MENTIONED LAST WEEK
AN ITEM RELATED TO MEXICAN
AMERICAN CULTURAL CENTER AND
A POTENTIAL PARTNERSHIP WITH
THE MEXICAN CON SUL LAT'S
OFFICE.
THAT WASN'T READY TO BE PUT
ON THIS AGENDA, SO WE'LL
PROBABLY PUT THAT ON FOR
NEXT WEEK.
Mayor Garcia: RIGHT.
AND THEN -- SO THOSE ARE THE
THREE ITEMS, THE ONE THAT
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ IS
TALKING ABOUT IS TO DIRECT
THE CITY MANAGER TO CONSIDER
THE FEASIBILITY OF LOCATING
THE OFFICES OF THE MEXICAN
CONSULATE AND THE MEXICAN
CULTURAL CENTER SITE, AND WE
WILL BRING THAT NEXT WEEK.
WE'LL GO TO THE CONSENT
AGENDA.
GOODMAN: MAYOR, BEFORE
YOU DO, 55 NEEDS TO BE
PULLED.
Mayor Garcia: 55 NEEDS TO
BE PULLED.
GOODMAN: THE NUMBERS
AREN'T READY YET.
Mayor Garcia: THAT'S BY
THE MAYOR PRO TEM.
OKAY.
BROWN THE ITEMS I KNOW TO BE
ON THE --
BROWN: THE ITEMS I KNOW
TO BE ON THE CONSENT ITEM
START WITH ITEMS 15 --
Mayor Garcia: THOSE ARE
NOT CONSENT ITEMS.
15 ARE THE STRATUS ITEMS.
ALL THE STRATUS ITEMS HAVE
TO WAIT UNTIL WE FINISH THE
EXECUTIVE SESSION.
BROWN: I'M SORRY, MAYOR.
THEN I THINK WE START WITH
ITEM 37, 38, 39 WITH THE
CHANGES READ EARLIER, 40,
41, 42, 43 WITH THE CHANGES
READ EARLIER.
44, 45, 46,47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 54, 56,
57, 58, 59, 60, 61 --
Mayor Garcia: SLOW DOWN A
LITTLE BIT.
57, DID YOU SAY?
THAT'S SECOND AND THIRD
READING, CORRECT?
BROWN: YES, SIR.
Mayor Garcia: STARTING
WITH 54 IS SECOND AND THIRD,
CORRECT?
BROWN: YES.
Mayor Garcia: AND 56 IS
SECOND AND THIRD.
BROWN: 55 IS SECOND
READING ONLY.
Mayor Garcia: 55 HAS BEEN
PULLED BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM.
BROWN: 56 IS SECOND AND
THIRD.
57 IS SECOND AND THIRD.
58 SECOND AND THIRD, ITEM
59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 66,
67, 68, 69, 70 IS A
POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST 8TH,
71, 72, 73, 74, 75 POSTPONED
INDEFINITELY, 76, 77, 78,
79, 80, 81, 82, YEAH, 83, 84,
85, 86, 87, 88, 91, 92.
I'M SORRY, MAYOR, 91 AND 92
ARE 4:00 P.M.
Mayor Garcia: 91 AND 92
ARE 4:00 P.M., CORRECT.
BROWN: 93.
Mayor Garcia: THOSE ARE
PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 6:00 P.M.
ALL THE WAY TO 98.
THOSE ARE ALL PUBLIC
HEARINGS AT 6:00.
BROWN: SO 99 ARE THE
BOARDS AND COMMISSION
APPOINTMENTS.
AND THEY ARE AS FOLLOWS: TO
THE ARTS CENTER STAGE, TWO
CONSENSUS APPOINTMENTS, TOYA
HALEY, COURTNEY JOHNSON.
TO THE COMMISSION ON
IMMIGRANT AFFAIRS, CONSENSUS
APPOINTMENT, NICKLAUS TRAN.
ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION,
CONSENSUS REAPPOINTMENT,
LINDA L. SHAW.
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD, MAYOR
PRO TEM GOODMAN'S
REAPPOINTMENT, CONNIE
L.SEIBERT.
HISTORIC LANDMARK
COMMISSION, TWO CONSENSUS
APPOINTMENTS, JEAN MATHER,
DAVID D. WEST, WHO IS THE
HERITAGE SOCIETY
REPRESENTATIVE.
MECHANICAL, PLUMBING AND
SOLAR BOARDS, CONSENSUS
REAPPOINTMENT, MR. GARZA.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION, COUNCILMEMBER
THOMAS' REAPPOINTMENT, PAUL
E. MOORE.
ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
ADVISORY COMMISSION,
CONSENSUS APPOINTMENT, ROB
Q.KARUTHERS.
SOLID WASTE ADVISORY
COMMISSION, COUNCILMEMBER
ALVAREZ'S REAPPOINTMENT,
GERARD ACUNA.
URBAN FORESTRY COMMISSION,
CONSENSUS APPOINTMENT, HEIDE
DUES.
MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN'S
REAPPOINTMENT, DEBRA R.
RUSSELL.
URBAN RENEWAL BOARD, MAYOR
GARCIA'S REAPPOINTMENT,
ANTHONY J. NELSON.
ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION, COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLEY'S APPOINTMENT,
MELISSA WHALEY.
Mayor Garcia: WE HAVE
SOME PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED
UP ON SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT
ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA,
SO LET ME CALL YOU UP AT
THIS TIME.
SPEAKING ON ITEM NUMBER 39
IS MR. PAUL ROBBINS.
MR. ROBBINS, WELCOME, SIR.
COUNCIL, I'VE BEEN GIVEN
TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS
FOR SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING
ON VARIOUS RATES AND FEES
WITHIN THE UTILITY.
I'M ASKING YOU TO EXPAND
THIS HEARING TO SOMETHING
THAT I BROUGHT UP A COUPLE
OF DAYS EARLIER,
SPECIFICALLY THE USE OF THE
ELECTRIC UTILITY SURPLUS OF
$183 MILLION THAT CAN BE
USED TO BUY-DOWN ELECTRIC
RATES AND THERE BY OFFSET
THE HARSHEST EFFECTS OF THE
CITY'S CURRENT BUDGET
CRISIS.
I REALIZE THAT THIS MONEY
CANNOT BE DIRECTLY
TRANSFERRED INTO THE GENERAL
FUND, BUT WHAT IT CAN DO IS
YOU CAN TAKE THE SURPLUS OF
183 MILLION AND BUY-DOWN THE
DEBT WITH IT OR USE IT FOR A
ONE-TIME RATE DECREASE, AND
THEN THAT WOULD OFFSET ANY
TAX INCREASE THAT MAY BE
NEEDED TO RESTORE THE
GENERAL FUND.
Mayor Garcia: I THINK
THERE MIGHT BE SOMEBODY HERE
FROM ELECTRIC, AND I THINK
THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE
PROBABLY PURSUANT TO COUNCIL
POLICY OR OTHER PROVISIONS.
YES, MAYOR.
IT'S NECESSARY TO HOLD THIS
PUBLIC HEARING SPECIFICALLY
ON THE FUEL CHARGE IF
THERE'S GOING TO BE A CHANGE
MADE TO THAT CHARGE AND IT'S
RELATED TO THE ERCOT FEES
UNDER DEREGULATION.
WE COULD NOT EXPAND THIS
PARTICULAR PUBLIC HEARING, I
DON'T BELIEVE, TO INCLUDE
THAT.
THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A
SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARING IF
WE WANTED TO TAKE UP THAT
MANAGEMENT FUND.
Mayor Garcia: SO WE'RE
NOT GOING TO EXPAND IT, BUT
I MUST TELL YOU,
MR. ROBBINS, YOU KNOW THIS
VERY WELL, THAT PEOPLE IN
AUSTIN, WHEN THEY COME THEY
CAN SIGN UP TO SPEAK AND
THEY MAY SPEAK ON THE ISSUES
THAT ARE SET FOR THE PUBLIC
HEARING AND SOMETIMES THEY
SPEAK ABOUT OTHER THINGS.
ONCE YOU SIGN YOU CAN SPEAK
ON THE ISSUE THAT YOU WANT,
BUT IT WILL NOT BE
PURSUANT -- IT WILL NOT BE
ADDRESSING THE SUBJECT OF
THIS PARTICULAR PUBLIC
HEARING.
THIS IS MANDATED BY ERCOT
AND CITY REGULATIONS.
WE UNDERSTAND.
AND I THINK A SEPARATE
PUBLIC HEARING THAT WOULD
SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE IN THIS
BUDGET CRISIS WOULD BE A
LEGITIMATE GOAL.
Mayor Garcia: WE WILL
HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE
BUDGET OF THE ELECTRIC
UTILITY.
AT THAT TIME WOULD BE THE
MOST APPROPRIATE TIME.
GOOD EVENING.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU.
ON ITEM NUMBER 47 WE HAVE
MR. BILL BUNCH AND MR. RYAN
GREEN.
THANK YOU, MAYOR, MEMBERS
OF THE CITY COUNCIL, I'M
BILL BUNCH WITH THE SAVE OUR
SPRINGS ALLIANCE ENCOURAGING
YOU SO VOTE AGAINST
INCREASING YOUR ATTORNEY FEE
EXPENDITURES FOR FURTHER
DOCUMENTATION AND
NEGOTIATION ON A SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT.
I THINK THAT WERE THIS SUM
OF MONEY COMBINED WITH EVEN
A FRACTION OF THE 15 TO 16
AND A HALF-MILLION-DOLLAR
PACKAGE OF SUBSIDIES AND
OTHER EXPENDITURES, IF THAT
SUM WAS PUT TO FIGHTING FOR
THE PROTECTION OF THE
SPRINGS, WE'D GET A WHOLE
LOT CLOSER TO SAVING THE
SPRINGS AND WE'D GET A WHOLE
LOT MORE FOR OUR MONEY.
SPECIFICALLY ON 47, WHICH IS
THE PART WHICH LOOKS LIKE
IT'S AIMED AT DOCUMENT
DRAFTING, A LOT OF THAT IS
GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
THE MOST RECENT DRAFT WAS
ONLY MADE AVAILABLE LATE ON
YOUR WEB -- ON YOUR WEBSITE
LATE -- NOT YESTERDAY, THE
DAY BEFORE.
AND GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY, IT
SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE WORTH
IT FOR BOTH YOUR LAWYERS,
YOURSELVES AND YOURSELVES
AND FOR THE PUBLIC TO TAKE A
COUPLE MORE WEEKS TO LOOK AT
THE WORK PRODUCT THAT YOU'RE
PAYING SO DEARLY FOR HERE.
AND WE HOPE YOU WILL TAKE A
COUPLE MORE WEEKS TO LOOK AT
THAT.
WE ALSO FEEL LIKE YOU COULD
SPEND THIS MUCH MONEY AND A
LOT MORE DRAFTING THIS VERY
COMPLICATED KIND OF
AGREEMENT, BUT IF YOU DON'T
DEFEND YOURSELF TO THE
LEGISLATURE, YOU'RE NEVER
GOING TO BE ABLE TO ENFORCE
IT OR BE WILLING TO ENFORCE
IT.
WE HAVE A VERY DETAILED
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RIGHT
NOW THAT QUITE A BIT OF IT
IS CONTINUING IN FORCE AND
EFFECT EVEN THOUGH THE
CIRCLE C M.U.D.'S WERE
ANNEXED, A NUMBER OF THOSE
PROVISIONS ARE STILL RUNNING
WITH THE LAND, THE BARGAIN
THAT WAS MADE THAT UPON
ANNEXATION THIS LAND WOULD
BE TREATED AS ANY OTHER LAND
AND SUBJECT TO ZONING,
ETCETERA, ALL OF THOSE
RIGHTS YOU HAVE IN THE
AGREEMENTS THAT WERE STRUCK
IN THE 1980'S.
AND IF YOU WON'T STAND FIRM
AND ENFORCE THOSE NOW,
THERE'S NOTHING THAT YOU CAN
PUT INTO THIS DOCUMENT
TODAY, THIS NEW DOCUMENT,
THAT WOULD BRING YOU OR
FUTURE COUNCILS TO ENFORCE
IT.
SO I FEEL LIKE THERE'S A
WHOLE LOT BETTER USE OF THIS
SUM OF MONEY IN TERMS OF
STEPPING BACK AND LOOKING AT
THIS DIFFERENTLY AND
PURSUING A DIFFERENT
ALTERNATIVE.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MR. BUNCH.
MR. RYAN GREEN?
MR. RYAN GREEN?
MR. ROY WHALEY?
MR. WHALEY, WELCOME, SIR.
THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS ROY WHALEY.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE
NORTHWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION.
AND SPEAKING FROM A
NEIGHBORHOOD PERSPECTIVE,
RATHER THAN SPEND MONEY LIKE
THIS, WE WOULD RATHER SEE
THE PARKS KEPT UP AND THE
LIBRARIES KEPT OPEN.
IF WE HAVE TO SPEND MONEY
FOR ATTORNEYS AND ON LEGAL
FEES, I FEEL LIKE IT WOULD
BE BETTER FIGHTING TO
SUPPORT THE S.O.S. ORDINANCE
AND NOT GIVING MORE MONEY TO
A MULTI-MILLION-DOLLAR
CORPORATION.
NO SUBSIDIES THERE, PLEASE.
SUBSIDIZE THE PEOPLE OF
AUSTIN IF YOU WOULD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MR. WHALEY.
ON ITEM NUMBER 55, THAT ITEM
HAS BEEN PULLED, SO WE WILL
RECOGNIZE THE SPEAKERS AT
THAT TIME.
ITEM NUMBER 70 HAS BEEN
POSTPONED UNTIL AUGUST THE
EIGHTH, SO MR. STEVE SNYDER
WILL BE RECOGNIZED -- WE'LL
KEEP YOUR CARD -- ARE YOU
HERE?
YOU DIDN'T WISH TO SPEAK,
YOU JUST WANTED TO BE
REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF.
WE WILL RECOGNIZE -- WE WILL
MAKE THAT ANNOUNCEMENT AT
THE TIME THAT THIS ITEM
COMES BACK.
AND MR. RYAN GREEN, IS HE
HERE?
HAS HE COME BACK?
OKAY.
THANK YOU.
SOME FURTHER CLARIFICATIONS
BEFORE WE TAKE UP THE VOTE
ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
WITH ITEMS 78 AND 79 LAST
WEEK, WHICH IS THE ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE AUSTIN TOMORROW
PLAN FOR THE UPPER BOGGY
CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND
THE REZONINGS, I TOLD YOU AT
THAT TIME THAT THIS ITEM HAD
BEEN POSTPONED UNTIL TODAY.
I HAVE YOUR CARDS THERE NOW
ON ITEMS 91 AND 92, SO I
WILL RECOGNIZE YOU AT THE
TIME THOSE ITEMS ARE CALLED
UP FOR DISCUSSION.
AND ALL OF THE REST OF THE
PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP
HAVE SIGNED UP EITHER ON THE
PUBLIC HEARINGS OR ON THE
AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION.
OR ON ZONING.
OKAY.
LET ME GO THROUGH --
MS. BROWN, IF YOU CAN -- ON
ITEM NUMBER 90, MAYOR PRO
TEM, YOU INDICATED YOU
WANTED TO PAIK SOME COMMENTS
WITH REGARD TO THE CONSENT
AGENDA.
IT HAS BEEN PULLED.
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS PULLED
THAT ITEM, SO YOU CAN MAKE
THOSE COMMENTS.
AND LET ME ASK YOU ON ITEM
NUMBER 3, DO YOU WANT TO PUT
THAT BACK ON THE CONSENT
AGENDA, BECAUSE WE HADN'T
FINISHED THE DISCUSSION OF
THIS PARTICULAR ITEM?
GOODMAN: WHATEVER COUNCIL
IS COMFORTABLE.
I HAVE A MOTION READY BEFORE
FURTHER DISCUSSION IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION.
Mayor Garcia: BE GOING
BACK TO EXECUTIVE SESSION AS
SOON AS WE FINISH THE 3:00
O'CLOCK TIME CERTAIN.
AND AT THAT TIME WHEN WE
COME BACK WE'LL HAVE
CONCLUDED THAT PORTION OF
THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AND WE
WILL BE VOTING ON ITEM
NUMBER 3.
NOW, TO GO TO THE CONSENT
AGENDA, IT STARTS WITH ITEM
NUMBER 37, 38, 39, 40, 41
AND 42.
THOSE TWO ITEMS WERE
REVIEWED BY THE AUDIT AND
FINANCE COMMITTEE.
IT IS MENTIONED ONLY IN THE
ITEM 42, BUT 41 WAS CALLED
FOR REVIEW.
ITEM 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48,
49, 50, 51, 54, 56, 57, 58,
59, 60, 61, 62, 63.
WE'VE ALREADY ACTED ON 64.
65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 FOR
POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST THE
EIGHTH.
71, 72, 73, 74, 75 FOR
POSTPONEMENT INDEFINITELY.
76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82,
83, 84, YIF 85 IS TO SET THE
PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE FULL
PURPOSE ANNEXATION.
AND DO WE HAVE -- THE DATES
ARE -- ARE THE DATES FOR
THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS THE
SAME?
, AUGUST THE 22nd AND AUGUST
THE 29TH, IS THAT CORRECT ON
85?
IS THAT CORRECT, MS. BROWN?
BROWN: THAT'S THE STAFF
RECOMMENDATION FOR THOSE
DAYS.
Mayor Garcia: AND THE
LAST SECTION THAT SAYS
JANELLE, IT SAYS AUGUST THE
22nd AT LCRA BUILDING.
AND AUGUST 29TH, LCRA
HANCOCK BUILDING.
AND FINANCIAL DATA WILL BE
SUBMITTED WITH THE
ANNEXATION.
IT PERTAINS TO ALL OF THE
SECTIONS THAT ARE LISTED
THERE, THE ROBINSON TRACT,
ALL OF THOSE, THE SAME
HEARING.
Mayor Garcia: SO ALL
THOSE HEARINGS WILL BE HELD
ON THE 22nd AT 6:00 P.M. AND
THE 29TH AT 6:00?
BROWN: YES, SIR.
Mayor Garcia: 86, 87, 88,
AND THAT'S IT.
AND 99 THE BOARD AND
COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS.
THANK YOU, MS. BROWN.
I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON
THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SLUSHER: ON MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTIONLY
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.
IS THERE A SECOND?
SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLEY.
DISCUSSION?
GOODMAN: YES, MAYOR.
ON 59, EARLIER I SAW THE
DIRECTOR OF OUR PARKS AND
RECREATION DEPARTMENT, AND I
WAS WONDERING IF HE HAD
WANTED TO SAY A WORD ABOUT
WHAT WE'RE DOING ON ITEM 59,
WHICH IS A LIFETIME SWIM
PASS TO BARTON SPRINGS POOL.
WE DON'T GIVE MANY OF THOSE
OUT, AND I KNOW WE WANTED TO
AT LEAST READ OUT THE
RECOGNITION FOR THIS.
Mayor Garcia: JESUS AL
VAIR REZ?
HE'S GONE.
GOODMAN: DID HE LEAVE.
Mayor Garcia: CHIEF, DO
YOU WANT TO ANNOUNCE.
ACTUALLY, I'LL READ THE
ITEMS.
APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ISSUING
A FREE LIFETIME SWIM PASS TO
BARTON SPRINGS POOL TO
DR. JERENA JAHIKEY.
THIS IS RECOMMENDED BY THE
PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD.
IF YOU KNOW HIM, YOU MAY
WANT TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS.
GOODMAN: JUST IN GENERAL,
ALL OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE
GIVEN THE LIFETIME SWIM PASS
TO BARTON SPRINGS ARE
LONG-TIME SWIMMERS,
LONG-TIME ADVOCATES, AND SO
VERY GREAT CONTRIBUTORS TO
COMMUNITY WELL-BEING BECAUSE
THEY'RE TENACIOUS AND CARING
AND THEY'RE PART OF WHAT
MAKES LIFE VERY SPECIAL AT
THE SPRINGS, SO WE WANT TO
THANK HER FOR YEARS OF
CARING AND SWIMMING.
Mayor Garcia: IS SHE
HERE?
IF YOU'RE LISTENING TO
THIS -- TO THE TELECAST, THE
MAYOR PRO TEM AND THE
COUNCIL WANT TO CONGRATULATE
YOU FOR THE -- FOR STAYING
FAITHFUL TO THE SPRINGS AND
HOPE THAT YOU CONTINUE
SWIMMING THERE FOR A LONG
TIME.
OKAY.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE
CONSENT AGENDA?
IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE?
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
SEVEN TO ZERO.
AT THIS TIME I WILL RECESS
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL AND CALL
TO ORDER THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION.
AND WE HAVE THREE ITEMS, AND
MR. HILGERS WILL READ THEM
INTO THE RECORD AND WE WILL
ACT ON THEM AFTER BEING
READ -- AFTER BEING READ
INTO THE RECORD.
THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.
MY NAME IS PAUL HILGERS.
I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF THE AUSTIN HOUSING
FINANCE CORPORATION,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER FOR THE CITY.
WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IN THE
INTEREST OF TIME IS TAKE UP
AHFC ITEM NUMBER IS, WHICH
IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
TO THE AUSTIN HOUSING
FINANCE CORPORATION SPECIAL
CALLED MEETING OF JULY 18th,
2002.
Mayor Garcia: I'LL
ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE
MEETING OF JULY 18th.
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLEY.
I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
DISCUSSION?
ANY CORRECTION CORRECTIONS OR
ADDITIONS.
IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
SEVEN TO ZERO.
MR. HILGERS?
ALSO IF I COULD HAVE YOUR
PERMISSION TO GO TO AHFC
ITEM NUMBER 3, WHICH IS THE
AUTHORIZATION AND APPROVAL
OF THE NEGOTIATION AND
SCEETION OF A CONTRACT WITH
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE
CITY OF AUSTIN FOR A
12-MONTH PERIOD TO
ADMINISTER A TENANT BASED
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
FOR ELIGIBLE HOMELESS
HOUSEHOLDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED $430,650 WITH TWO
12-MONTH EXTENSION OPTIONS
NOT TO EXCEED $430,650
ANNUALLY FOR A TOTAL
CONTRACT AMOUNT OF
$1,292,250.
THIS IS A PARTNERSHIP WITH
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND
THE PASSAGE OF THIS PROGRAM
THAT PROVIDES RENTAL SUBSIDY
PROGRAMS TO ABOUT 60
FAMILIES A YEAR.
SO THAT'S WHAT THIS ONE IS
ABOUT, SO I WOULD REQUEST
APPROVAL OF THAT ITEM.
Mayor Garcia: IS THERE A
MOTION ON THIS ITEM?
THOMAS: SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.
IS THERE A SECOND?
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN.
DISCUSSION?
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES ON A VEET OF
SEVEN TO ZERO.
ACTUALLY, IT'S BOARD MEMBER
TOMZ, BOARD MEMBER WYNN.
YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT.
AHFC ITEM NUMBER 2 IS TO
APPROVE THE ISSUANCE OF
AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION PRIVATE ACTIVITY
VOLUME CAP MULTI-FAMILY
HOUSING REVENUE BONDS SERIES
2002 FOR THE PLEASANT VALLEY
VILLAS PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED AN AGGREGATE
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
$15 MILLION, THE ISSUANCE OF
AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION MULL FI FAMILY
HOUSING TAXABLE REVENUE
BONDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED AN AGGREGATE
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
$2,945,000 AND THE BOND
ENDENTURE AND FINANCING
DOCUMENTS FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE PLEASANT
VALLEY VILLAS APARTMENTS TO
BE OWNED AND OPERATED BY A
SINGLE PURPOSE TEXAS LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP AFFILIATED WITH
SOUTHWEST HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT.
MR. PRESIDENT, I'D LIKE TO
MAKE A BRIEF YEAR VIEW OF
WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM TODAY.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE -- I DON'T
KNOW IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THE
TESTIMONY NOW OR IF YOU WANT
LIKE TO HAVE --
Mayor Garcia: LET'S DO
THE PRESENTATION BY STAFF
FIRST.
YES, SIR.
AND THEN THE APPLICANT HAS A
BRIEF PRESENTATION AS WELL.
THERE ARE REALLY FIVE
REASONS IN SUMMARY, IN
INTEREST OF YOUR TIME, AS TO
WHY THE STAFF IS
RECOMMENDING THIS.
ONE IS THAT WE BELIEVE THAT
THIS IS A QUALITY PROVEN
DEVELOPER THAT WE HAVE
EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH
IN AUSTIN AND HE'S WORKED
WITH OUR SMART HOUSING
PROGRAM.
THIS DEVELOPMENT HAS AGREED
AND DEVELOPER HAS AGREED TO
REDUCE THE DENSITY ON THIS
PROPERTY FROM WHAT THE
ENTITLEMENTS ARE TO ALMOST
50%.
HE HAS AGREED TO PARTICIPATE
WITH THIS RENTAL DEVELOPMENT
IN OUR HOUSING CONTINUUM BY
PROVIDING INDIVIDUAL
DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT
OPPORTUNITIES TO THE
FAMILIES WHO WILL MOVE IN
THAT PROPERTY.
IT MEETS THE PRIORITY FOR
THE HIGHEST PRIORITY THAT'S
IDENTIFIED IN OUR ANNUAL
ACTION LAN THAT YOU'LL BE
APPROVING AFTER EXECUTIVE
SESSION, I HOPE, WHICH IS
THE PRODUCTION OF NEW RENTAL
UNITS SERVING 50% OR BELOW
MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME.
AND TODAY THE FINAL REASON
IS TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE,
THIS PARTICULAR ACTION
RELATIVE TO OUR ANNUAL
ACTION PLAN, I'LL BE
BRINGING BEFORE YOU AS A
CITY COUNCIL AN ANNUAL
ACTION PLAN TODAY WHICH
BRINGS $25 MILLION OF
FEDERAL AND LOCAL FUNDS TO
HER COMMUNITY FOR ALL OF OUR
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS THAT WE
WILL BE OPERATING IN OUR
ACTION PLAN.
THIS PROJECT REPRESENTS OVER
$29 MILLION INVESTED IN ONE
PROJECT WITH NO FEDERAL
DOLLARS TO ACCOMPLISH THE
OBJECTIVES THAT ARE OUTLINED
OF THE HIGHEST PRIORITY IN
THAT ACTION PLAN.
TO SO IT BRINGS AN
ADDITIONAL $29 MILLION TO
THE TABLE TO HELP SUPPLEMENT
WHAT WE HAVE WITH THE
20.5-MILLION-DOLLAR
APPROPRIATION FROM THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
AT THIS TIME WHAT I'D LIKE
TO TO ASK MR. CRAIG ALTER TO
COME AND GIVE A BRIEF
PRESENTATION OF EXACTLY SOME
OF THE DETAILS OF WHAT THIS
DEVELOPMENT ENTAILS.
MY MAP SHOWS EXACTLY WHERE
THE PROPERTY IS OVER ON THE
BURLESON HEIGHTS
NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND CRAIG HAS GOT SOME
PRETTIER PICTURES THAN I DO.
THANKS, PAUL.
CRAIG ALTER, VICE-PRESIDENT
WITH SOUTHWEST HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE BEFORE
YOU TODAY.
I'D LIKE TO SUMMARIZE WHAT I
SEE AS BEING THE SENTIMENT
THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM
THE AREA RESIDENTS, SOME OF
THE AREA RESIDENTS IN THE
BURLESON HEIGHTS
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
THIS IS QUOTING FROM A
LETTER SENT TO YOU BY
E-MAIL.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING HOUSING
PROJECTS, ESPECIALLY IN
AUSTIN ARE MUCH NEEDED
PROGRAMS.
THESE PROJECTS SHOULD STRIVE
TO INTEGRATE AND CO-EXIST
WITH NEIGHBORHOODS WHICH
SURROUND THEM.
CONSISTENT WITH CLASSICALLY
ACCEPTED PLANNING PRINCIPLE,
WE ARE CREATING A TRANSITION
FROM A SINGLE-FAMILY
NEIGHBORHOOD TO A DUPLEX
NEIGHBORHOOD TO A
MULTI-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE ARE -- WE ARE CO-EXISTING
AS ONE WOULD EXPECT IN A
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE LOTS ALONG WEAR ROAD
THAT WE'RE PROPOSING ARE
APPROXIMATELY THE SAME WIDTH
AS THOSE ALONG THE ROAD.
WE ACTUALLY HAVE MORE OPEN
SPACE BETWEEN OUR BUILDINGS.
ANOTHER QUOTE, IF I HAD BEEN
GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO
VOICE MY PREFERENCE ABOUT
THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT, I
WOULD HAVE RECOMMENDED AND
SUPPORTED SINGLE-FAMILY
OWNER-OCCUPIED AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
I FIND THIS NOT ONLY
CONTRADICTORY TO THE ISSUES
BEING RAISED ABOUT THE SUIT
ABILITY OF THE PROPERTY FOR
RESIDENTIAL USE, BUT ALSO
DISCRIMINATORY AGAINST THOSE
WHO CANNOT AFFORD THE LUXURY
OF BEING ABLE TO PURCHASE A
HOME.
THE PERSONS WHO LIVE IN THE
BURLESON HEIGHTS
NEIGHBORHOOD EITHER HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE
IN ORIGINAL ZONING CASE 25
YEARS AGO OR PURCHASED THEIR
HOME WITH THE FULL KNOWLEDGE
OF WHAT THE ZONING ADJACENT
TO THEM IS AND HAS BEEN.
MANY ISSUES HAVE BEEN RAISED
WHICH WE WILL NOT EVEN
DISCUSS RIGHT NOW.
IF YOU ARE DESIRING TO ASK
SOME QUESTIONS, WE WILL
RESPOND TO THOSE, BUT THOSE
QUESTIONS ALL PERTAIN TO THE
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THAT THE
CITY OF AUSTIN HAS US GOING
THROUGH AT THIS TIME.
IT'S EITHER A SITE
DEVELOPMENT RELATED ISSUE OR
IT'S A SUBDIVISION RELATED
ISSUE.
EVERY DEVELOPMENT HAS ITS
DIFFICULTY ISSUE, SUCH AS
OUR PRIMROSE AND SHADOW
CREEK, WHICH WE ARE DOING IN
PARTNERSHIP WITH THE AUSTIN
HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.
THAT REQUIRES SOME CREATIVE
THINKING AND THE PROBLEMS
THAT THAT SITE HAS HAS BEEN
RESOLVED AND THAT PROJECT IS
A GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHAT THIS
COMPANY WANTS TO DO DOWN
HERE AT PLEASANT VALLEY AND
OLTORF.
THE ISSUES BEING RAISED MUST
BE SEPARATED FROM THE
TOUGHER PROCESS.
WERE IT NOT FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC
COMMENTS THROUGH THE TEFRA,
A PROJECT SUCH AS THIS COULD
HAVE BEEN ALL THE WAY
THROUGH THE PLANNING AND
PERMITTING PROCESS.
THERE'S BEEN NO REFERENCE TO
THE FEASIBILITY OF THE
DEVELOPMENT, THE DEVELOPER'S
ABILITY TO PERFORM OR THE
DECENCY OF THE HOUSING BEING
PROPOSED.
SO, SHOULD THE JIEWT ANY OF
THIS PROJECT BE ANY
DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER
PROJECT GOING THROUGH THE
PROCESS, I SAY NO, IT SHOULD
NOT.
WE'VE HAD SOME COMMUNICATION
WITH THE RESIDENTS SINCE THE
LAST HEARING AND I'VE TALKED
WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND
WE'RE GOING TO MEET WHEN
SCHOOL IS BACK IN SESSION.
HE'S ANG CHUS SHUS TO TALK
ABOUT -- ANXIOUS TO TALK
ABOUT HOW WE WILL PRESERVE
AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE
AND TALK ABOUT THE PARKING
AND THE DRAINAGE ON THE LOTS
ON WE'RE ROAD.
WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY
COMMENTS SINCE MAY 12TH FROM
THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP.
ISSUES HAVE NOT BEEN
PRESENTED TO US, BUT TO
COUNCIL.
WE HAVE RESPONDED TO STAFF
AND TO COUNCIL TO EVERY
SINGLE ISSUE THAT HAS BEEN
RAISED.
TODAY YOU HEARD TWO ISSUES
AS THE BASIS FOR A 45-DAY
DELAY.
THAT IS SCHOOLS AND TRAFFIC.
TRAFFIC HAS BEEN SHOWN NOT
TO BE AN ISSUE IN TERMS OF
ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC BEING
GENERATED BY THIS PROJECT.
IF THROUGH REVIEW REGARDING
TRAFFIC COMES UP, WE WILL
OBVIOUSLY RESPOND TO THAT
ISSUE AS IT ARISES.
THE POSITIVE MESSAGE OF WHAT
THIS COMMUNITY WILL MEAN TO
280 FAMILIES BEARS
REPEATING, IT WILL CREATE
AFTER SCHOOL LEARNING
PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN,
TUTORING PROGRAMS, EVENING
ADULT EDUCATION, HOME
OWNERSHIP EDUCATION, SAVINGS
PROGRAMS, SUMMER CAMP
OPPORTUNITIES AND COMMUNITY
AMENITIES, INCLUDING MEETING
ROOMS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS.
THE PREVIOUS SUPPORTERS HAVE
CONTACTED ME, TOLD ME THAT
THEY WOULD RELAY THEIR
CONTINUED SUPPORT TO YOU AND
UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WOULD
BE NO TESTIMONY TODAY, SO
THEY DID NOT MAKE ARJMENTS
TO APPEAR -- ARRANGEMENTS TO
APPEAR.
THE CITY'S HOUSING POLICY
HAS BEEN WELL ESTABLISHED,
THAT IS, TO SERVE THOSE AT
OR BELOW 50% MEDIAN INCOME
AS THE PRIORITY.
THIS DOES THAT.
PLEASE END THE ENDLESS
EFFORT TO DID HE DERAIL THIS PROJECT
WITH YOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTE
TODAY.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
IS MR. PAUL DEKEY HERE?
HE IS REGISTERED WISHING TO
SPEAK, BUT THEN DONATING TO
MR. SAM ELLISON.
AND MR. ELLISON DID NOT SIGN
UP TO SPEAK.
IS MR. ELLISON HERE?
YOU NEED TO GO OUTSIDE AND
SIGN ONE OF THESE CARDS.
OKAY.
SHELLY LAMKOWITZ?
AND FOLLOWING HER IS
MR. PAUL DETKE?
THANK YOU.
I DIDN'T REALLY PREPARE A
SPEECH TODAY BECAUSE I
DIDN'T THINK WE'D BE ALLOWED
TO SPEAK.
I DIDN'T THINK THIS WAS
GOING TO BE A PUBLIC
HEARING.
I JUST WANT TO REITERATE
SOME THINGS.
IT ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE THAT
THINGS HAPPENED AT THE LAST
MINUTE WITH THIS PROJECT AND
WE TRIED TO KEEP UP WITH IT
WHEN WE FOUND OUT ON ABOUT
IT.
AT THE VERY END OF APRIL,
THE BEGINNING OF MAY.
THE REASON WE DID FIND OUT
ABOUT THIS PROJECT IS WE GOT
LETTERS IN THE MAIL FOR THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
SO WE'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THE
PROCESS ALONG THE WAY WITH
EVERY MEETING THAT WE MUST
ATTEND.
ALSO, MOST OF MY NEIGHBORS,
AT LEAST 50% ARE 60, 70, 80
YEARS OLD.
THEY CAN'T LEAVE THEIR
HOUSES.
SO WHEN WE TRIED TO HAVE
MEETINGS WE WANTED TO HAVE
THEM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE FIRST MEETING THAT THE
DEVELOPER HAD WAS ACROSS
I-35, SO WE REALLY COULDN'T
MAKE IT.
REALLY WHAT I WANT TO
REITERATE IS ALONG THE WAY
WE'VE LEARNED ABOUT THE CITY
PROCESS AND WE'VE TRIED
REALLY HARD TO KEEP UP WITH
IT AND DO THE BEST WE CAN.
AND PEOPLE KEEP SAYING DON'T
TURN THIS INTO A PERSONAL
ISSUE, BUT IT'S WHERE WE
LIVE AND IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT.
AND THE DECISIONS THAT YOU
MAKE TODAY WILL AFFECT US
FOR THE REST OF OUR LIVES.
THE ONLY THING WE'VE ASKED
OF THE DEVELOPER IS THAT
BENJAMIN ROAD REMAIN CLOSED.
AND WE'VE GOTTEN LETTERS
FROM THE CITY STATING THAT
WOULD BE THE CASE, YET WHEN
IT WAS ADDRESSED LAST --
DURING THE LAST AHFC MEETING
AND SOMEONE ADDRESSED THE
ISSUE OF HAVING AN ENTRY
INTO THIS PROPERTY, THERE'S
ONLY ONE, AND IT'S ON
PLEASANT VALLEY.
MR. HILGERS SAID THAT
THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO
ENTRANCES, SO THIS IS
ACTUALLY A PIECE OF LAND
LOCKED PROPERTY.
AND WHAT WE'RE CONCERNED
ABOUT IS IN THE FUTURE WHEN
OR IF THIS GOES THROUGH IS
OUR PROMISE THAT WAS MET BY
THE DEVELOPER GOING TO STAY?
BECAUSE IT'S THE ONLY THING
THAT WE'VE BEEN PROMISED.
SO REALLY THAT'S THE
IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR US IF WE
DON'T GET ANYTHING ELSE, BUT
WHAT WE REALLY WANT IS
HOMEOWNERS JUST LIKE THAT.
WITHIN OUR ZIP CODE THERE'S
OVER 40,000 PEOPLE.
WITHIN THAT THE CENSUS
STATES THAT LESS THAN 15%
ARE HOMEOWNERS.
THE REST IS APARTMENTS AND
DUPLEXES.
WE'VE BEEN IN A NEIGHBORHOOD
THAT IS 50-PLUS YEARS OLD.
WE WERE HERE FIRST AND YET
WE ARE NOT GETTING TREATED
LIKE THE CITIZENS THAT WE
SHOULD BE BY THIS MAN COMING
IN FROM DALLAS.
I WOULD JUST HOPE THAT YOU
RESPECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND
THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN
HERE FOR 50-PLUS YEARS AND
UNDERSTAND THAT WE JUST WANT
EQUAL RIGHTS JUST AS
EVERYONE ELSE DOES.
WE HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH THE
INCOME LEVEL OF THE PEOPLE
HERE, WE JUST WANT THEM TO
BE HOMEOWNERS.
AND IF MR. PATSHNIK WOULD BE
GOOD ENOUGH TO SELL THE
PROPERTIES TO PEOPLE WHO
WANT TO BE HOMEOWNERS WITH A
VESTED INTEREST, THAT'S ALL
WE ASK.
SINCE I'VE BEEN DOING THIS
PROCESS I FOUND SOME
LEGISLATION THAT'S JUST BEEN
PASSED CALLED THE AMERICAN
DREAM DOWN PAYMENT FUND
WHICH ALLOWS FOR DOWN
PAYMENT -- EXCUSE ME, DOWN
PAYMENTS FOR PEOPLE THAT
CANNOT AFFORD IT.
THIS IS THE TYPE OF PROPERTY
AND DEVELOPMENT --
[ BUZZER SOUNDS ]
THAT WE WOULD WELCOME INTO
OUR COMMUNITY AND ACCEPT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MA'AM.
MR. ERIC FOX.
AND MR. FOX, YOU'VE BEEN
GIVEN SOME TIME BY NICOLE
ELLISON.
YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES.
[ INAUDIBLE ]
Mayor Garcia: I CAN'T
HEAR YOU.
[ INAUDIBLE ].
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
MR. PAUL ROBBINS?
MR. ROBBINS?
YOU'RE DONATING YOUR TIME TO
SOMEBODY?
I HAVE YOUR CARD HERE.
AND FOLLOWING MR. ROBBINS IS
MR. GUS PENA.
WOULD IT BE OKAY WITH
MR. ELLISON -- IF
MR. ELLISON WENT FIRST?
THE PERSON YIELDING THEIR
TIME WAS THERE FIRST.
Mayor Garcia: I'LL CALL
YOU UP, MR. ELLISON.
YOU'RE THE LAST SPEAKER.
SO YOU WOULD RATHER I GO
BEFORE HIM?
Mayor Garcia: YOU'RE --
OKAY.
Mayor Garcia: I CANNOT
CALL HIM UP UNTIL I CALL
EVERYBODY ELSE UP.
NO PROBLEM.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I HATE TO
PUT IT THIS WAY, BUT I'VE
GOT A PRETTY GOOD RECORD OF
PREDICTING FAILURE,
PREDICTING FAILURE.
I REMEMBER BEING AT COUNCIL
DELAYED EIGHT HOURS, EVEN
THOUGH I WAS FIRST ON THE
AGENDA TO SPEAK AGAINST AN
EFFORT TO CHANGE THE CITY'S
CONSERVATION PROGRAMS.
AND I GOT A PAL PALTRY THREE
MINUTES TO SPEAK.
AND THE COUNCIL ROLLED OVER
ME.
AND ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF
LATER IT WAS ANNOUNCED THAT
THE CITY LOST 5 POINT --
WELL, IT CAME OUT THAT THE
CITY LOST $5.2 MILLION ON
THIS FAILED ATTEMPT.
I SAT IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
UNTIL MIDNIGHT WHEN IT TRIED
TO APPROVE THE CSC LAND
DEAL.
AND I SAID THIS IS HAPPENING
TOO FAST, YOU NEED TO BE
CONCERNED, AND WE ENDED UP
PAYING $1.4 MILLION TO BUY
BACK LAND WE ALREADY OWNED.
THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN AVOIDED
WITH MORE SCRUTINY.
I'M SORRY TO SAY THAT I
THINK THIS IS GOING TO
HAPPEN AGAIN.
IT'S NOT LIKE I'M GOING TO
BE HAPPY ABOUT THIS ONE OR
I'M GOING TO COME BACK AND
TELL YOU I TOLD YOU IT WAS
GOING TO COST MORE, AND IT
DID.
I WAS KIND OF PLEASED ABOUT
THE CSC.
I FELT VINDICATED, BUT THIS
IS GETTING KIND OF OLD.
COUNCIL, I THINK THAT THERE
ARE THINGS THAT YOU REALLY
HAVEN'T CONSIDERED AND I
THINK THEY'RE GOING TO WASH
UP BACK ON THE BEACH LIKE SO
MUCH WRECKAGE.
I'LL BE HERE TO SAY THAT I
WARNED YOU.
THEY INCLUDE THE COST OF
DRAINAGE, COST OF WATER
ACCESS, COST OF POWER LINE
MITIGATION AND THE PROBLEM
OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE
SAME AREA.
I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME,
SO I THINK THE MOST
IMPORTANT ISSUE HERE IS THE
COST OF POWER LINE
MITIGATION.
TWO PRIOR DEVELOPERS HAVE
ASKED THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TO
LET THEM REZONE OTHER
PROPERTY SO THEY WOULDN'T
HAVE TO BUILD UNDER POWER
LINES.
I DOUBT IF ANYBODY ON THIS
CITY COUNCIL LIVES UNDER
POWER LINES.
AM I CORRECT?
IS THERE ANYBODY ON THIS
COUNCIL THAT LIVES WITHIN
100 FEET OF A HIGH VOLTAGE
POWER LINE?
[ INAUDIBLE ].
OKAY.
[ BUZZER SOUNDS ]
Mayor Garcia:
MR. ROBBINS, THANK YOU.
SUMMARY WOULD BE THAT
THERE'S -- THERE ARE PARKING
LOTS, A STREET, PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS AND I THINK
PLAYGROUNDS EITHER ADJACENT
TO OR DIRECTLY UNDER THESE
POWER LINES.
Mayor Garcia: MR. GUS
PENA.
SLUSHER: MAYOR?
AFTER MR. PENA SPEAKS, I
WOULD LIKE SOMEONE FROM
STAFF TO SPEAK TO THE POWER
LINE ISSUE.
I CAN WAIT, MR. MAYOR, NO
PROBLEM.
Mayor Garcia: WE'LL GO
THROUGH ALL THE SPEAKERS.
I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE
Y'ALL CONSIDERATION.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR. PENA.
MR. MAYOR, I HAVE SIGNED
UP ALSO ON THE HOMELESS
FUNDING ALSO, AND I SIGNED
TWO CARDS, SO ARE YOU GOING
TO GIVE ME SIX OR JUST THREE
MINUTES?
Mayor Garcia: ON THE
HOMELESS?
THE FUNDING FOR THE
HOMELESS --
Mayor Garcia: THAT ITEM
HAS BEEN PULLED.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT AHFC
3.
I DON'T HAVE IT, BUT WE
ALREADY APPROVED THAT ITEM.
LET ME SPEAK TO THAT TOO.
I SIGNED UP FOR IT.
Mayor Garcia: SURE.
GIVE HIM THREE MINUTES
AGAIN.
MR. MAYOR,
COUNCILMEMBERS, MS. CITY
MANAGER, GUS PENA, PRESIDENT
OF EAST AUSTIN CONCERNED
HISPANICS.
AGAIN, MY BOY LUCIO, WHO I
TAKE TO THE COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS COURT.
HE'S WELL LOVED AND THEY
LIKE TO SEE HIM OVER THERE.
AND WE'VE BEEN TO THE
LEGISLATURE ON MANY HOUSING
ISSUES AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO
DO SO.
MR. MAYOR, I'LL TELL YOU
THIS AND I'M GOING TO BE AS
FRANK AND POSITIVE AND
PROFESSIONAL AS I CAN BE.
I FIND IT OFFENSIVE,
MR. MAYOR AND
COUNCILMEMBERS, AS AN EAST
AUSTIN NATIVE RESIDENT WHO
WAS BORN HERE IN AUSTIN TO
HAVE SOMEBODY FROM FORT
WORTH -- AND I'M GOING TO
SPEAK TO THE HOUSING ISSUES.
FROM FORT WORTH COME IN HERE
AND MAKE SLANDER US REMARKS
TO ANYBODY.
IT SETS A BAD TONE AND BAD
EXAMPLE TO MY SON AND A LOT
OF CHILDREN ALSO LISTEN TO
THESE PRESENTATIONS BECAUSE
IT INVOLVES THEM IN OUR
EAST
AUSTIN CONCERNED HISPANICS
ORGANIZATION.
THIS IS OFFENSIVE TO US,
SIR, AS AUSTIN RESIDENTS ON
TO HAVE SOMEBODY FROM
OUTSIDE OF AUSTIN COME IN
AND MAKE THOSE REMARKS AND
THAT IS NOT TO BE TOLERATED.
THAT IS UNPROFESSIONAL.
LET ME GET BACK TO WHAT
WE'RE SPEAKING TO.
THE HOMELESS FUNDING, I
APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.
WE HAVE A LOT OF HOMELESS
FAMILIES THAT ARE LIVING IN
HOTELS OR LIVING THREE TO A
SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING.
INDIVIDUAL FAMILIES NEED
HOUSING.
YOU CANNOT JUST GO TO HOME
OWNERSHIP IMMEDIATELY.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE A GOOD JOB
MAKING MORE THAN $10 AN
HOUR, AND THOSE ARE
STATISTICAL DATA THAT'S
AVAILABLE TO ANYBODY WHO
WANTS IT.
YOU HAVE TO START
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING WHICH
WE'VE BEEN PUSHING FOR AND
THEN YOU GO UP TO APARTMENTS
OR DUPLEXES AND THEN YOU DO
PURCHASE YOUR HOUSES.
IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
IT'S THE AMERICAN DREAM.
WE ALL WANT IT.
SOMETIMES IT'S NOT
REACHABLE.
BUT I WILL TELL YOU THIS
MUCH, A LOT OF PEOPLE SPEAK
TO THE ISSUE LAST COUNCIL
MEETING ABOUT, WELL, THERE
ARE AMENITIES OUT THERE, A
LOT OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES
ARE GIVING REDUCED RENT,
ETCETERA, WELL, WHEN ACC
STUDENTS COME BACK INTO TOWN
AND U.T. STUDENTS COME BACK
INTO TOWN AND A LOT OF OTHER
STUDENTS COME INTO TOWN
EXPECTING HIGH PAYING JOBS
OR GOING TO COLLEGE, YOU
WILL NOT HAVE THE INVENTORY.
I DO MY INVESTIGATION.
I'M A FORMER EEO INVESTIGATE
WE ARE THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY AND
JUSTICE.
WE DO OUR HOMEWORK.
WE DO NOT SUPPORT ANY ISSUE
THAT'S NOT RIGHTEOUS, THAT
THERE WILL BE AN ABSENTEE
LANDLORD OR SLUM LANDLORD.
WE FIND THAT TO BE THE CASE
HERE.
WE DO HAVE PEOPLE IN OUR
ORGANIZATION THAT LIVE IN
THAT IMPACTED AREA, BUT SOME
OF THEM ARE VERY SCARED TO
COME OVER HERE AND VOICE
THEIR APPROVAL AND SUPPORT
OF THESE ISSUES BECAUSE
SOMEBODY HAS BEEN PASSING
RUMORS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD,
MR. MAYOR, AND
COUNCILMEMBERS.
THAT IS NOT TO BE TOLERATED
ALSO.
THESE ARE SOME SENIOR
CITIZEN RESIDENTS ALSO AND
ALSO COUPLES THAT DESERVE
BETTER AND DESERVE RESPECT.
SOME YARDS HAVE BEEN
TRASHED.
AND I SCLD THEM TO CALL THE
AUSTIN PANNED MAKE A REPORT
OF IT AND THEN JUST CALL
THEM ANY TIME THIS OCCURS.
I'M HOPING IT DOESN'T OCCUR
AGAIN.
BUT ANYWAY, WE NEED
APARTMENTS, WE NEED HOUSING,
YES, WE DO NEED
SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING, HOME
HOPE, BUT YOU HAVE TO START
SOMEWHERE.
ANYWAY, I'LL WRAP UP AND SAY
PLEASE SUPPORT THIS ISSUE
AND WE'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF
LETTING PEOPLE COME IN AND
SLANDER ANYBODY HERE FROM
ANY PROFESSIONAL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
MR. MAYOR.
[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]
(TIME: 3:31 P.M.)
... .
ISSUES OF SAFETY AND
EDUCATION, SOMETHING THAT IS
VERY IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US.
LOW INCOME HOUSING
RESIDENTS, ANY RESIDENTS OF
THE 78741 ZIP.
THIS IS A SERIOUS CONCERN.
I DO ASK YOU TO PLEASE TAKE
THE TIME TO DO THIS.
DURING THIS PROCESS,
SOMEWHAT DISAPPOINTING
FOLKS, ALONG THE WAY, WE
RECEIVE A -- A NOTICE OF
PUBLIC HEARING FROM ZONING
AND PLATTING COMMISSION TO
ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS AT THE
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION.
IT STATES IN THAT LETTER
THAT THIS IS YOUR
OPPORTUNITY AND THIS IS THE
TIME THAT YOU MUST ADDRESS
YOUR CONCERNS.
AFTER THIS PRELIMINARY PLAN
IS APPROVED, THERE WILL BE
CERTAIN THINGS THAT WILL NOT
BE CHANGED.
I HAVE SENT LETTERS TO THE
COUNCIL, AND I HAVE ASKED
THE QUESTION OF WHY CITIZENS
WOULD BE DENIED THIS RIGHT
AND OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS
THEIR CONCERNS FOR SUCH AN
IMPORTANT STAGE.
I FEEL LIKE IT COMES HERE,
THE BUCK STOPS HERE.
I ASK YOU TO PLEASE TAKE
THAT SHORT DELAY AND TO
ANSWER THE FEW QUESTION GOES
WE HAVE REDUCED THIS DOWN
TO.
WE HAVE PASSED A LOT OF
QUESTIONS BY, WE ARE STILL
WAITING FOR ANSWERS, AND I
DON'T THINK WE ARE BEING OUT
OF LINE, WE ARE NOT TRYING
TO RAILROAD ANYBODY AND
WHAT'S BEING MENTIONED ABOUT
WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IS VERY
INACCURATE.
YOU DO HAVE A LOT OF
COMPASSIONATE PEOPLE HERE.
YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE
THAT HAVE BEEN IN THIS
NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OVER 50
YEARS.
I HAVE GROWN UP IN THIS
NEIGHBORHOOD.
MY WIFE, MYSELF, MY
DAUGHTER, WE HAVE GRADUATED
FROM TRAVIS HIGH SCHOOL.
WE HAVE MANY FRIENDS THAT
MAY HAVE THE NEED OF LOW
INCOME HOUSING ASSISTANCE.
WE DO SUPPORT THIS.
WE DON'T FEEL LIKE CERTAIN
TAX CREDIT FUNDED PROGRAMS
PROVIDE THE TYPE OF FUNDING
FOR THE MOST NEEDY.
THESE TEND TO BE THE -- THE
INCOME LEVELS OF 30% AND
BELOW -- TO LEAVE THE INCOME
LEVELS OF 30% AND BELOW OUT.
FOR PROFIT DEVELOPERS AND
MULTI TAX PROGRAMS, IN LOTS
OF SITUATIONS THESE RENTS
ARE STILL TOO HIGH FOR
PEOPLE WHO ARE THE REALLY
NEEDY.
THERE HAS BEEN SOME -- SOME
REPORTS, SOME STUFF GIVEN TO
THE SUNSET ADVISORY
COMMISSION ADDRESSING THIS
CONCERN.
ALL THAT WE HAVE EVER ASKED
IS JUST TO PLEASE TAKE THE
TIME, ANSWER THESE
QUESTIONS.
WE HAVE BEEN DENIED TIME
AFTER TIME THE SERIOUS
QUESTIONS THAT ARE PUSHED
OFF AS I HAVE TOLD YOU, IT'S
WORKED WITH US OR ELSE THIS
PROJECT COULD BE WORSE.
THIS APPROACH IS JUST NOT --
HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTABLE FOR
US AND HAS BEEN A PROBLEM
THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE
PROCESS.
BUT THERE IS REALLY A REAL
ISSUE THAT I WOULD LIKE
ADDRESSED.
MR. LINKOWITZ WAS
DISREGARDED BY THE CHAIR OF
THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION.
I WAS TOLD "YOU CAN ADDRESS
YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION
LATER."
WHEN LATER CAME, THE BOARD
MOTIONED FOR APPROVAL OF THE
SUBDIVISION, TOOK A VOTE,
AND LEFT US WITHOUT
ADDRESSING OUR CONCERNS.
I WOULD LIKE AN ANSWER TO
THIS, PLEASE.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, SIR.
MR. WALTER, YOU HAVE THREE
MINUTES OF REBUTTAL.
BOARD MEMBER SLUSHER WILL
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
ISSUES CONCERNING ACCESS
DRAINAGE.
THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I
HEARD ADDRESSED.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
SINCE MARCH, THAT'S WHEN THE
LETTER FIRST WENT OUT
STATING THAT WE WOULD LIKE
TO HAVE A MEETING.
SO THE PROCESS HAS BEEN OVER
MANY MONTHS.
I WOULD JUST YIELD MY TIME.
I THINK THAT I HAVE SUM
MIZEED EVERYTHING THAT I
NEED TO SUMMARIZE.
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?
Slusher: I WANTED
MR. HILGERS OR SOMEONE TO
ADDRESS THE CHARGE OR --
ABOUT THE -- ABOUT THE
ELECTRIC LOUNGE OR JUST THE
SITUATION ABOUT THE ELECTRIC
LOUNGE.
THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THE
SITUATION, AGAIN, WE WOULD
CHECK ON THIS AS WE WOULD
WITH ANY OF THE DEVELOPMENT
ISSUES AS WE GO FORWARD AS
THIS PROJECTINGS THROUGH THE
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT
THE POWER LINES ARE IN THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY AND IN THE
EASEMENT OF PLEASANT VALLEY
AND THEY ARE OVER PLEASANT
VALLEY.
THE CLOSEST BUILDING THAT
WOULD BE -- THAT WOULD BE --
TO THIS CAVE -- TO THIS 138
KV LINE IS ABOUT 70 FEET.
A DISTANCE OF ABOUT 70 FEET.
SO IT WOULD NOT BE DIRECTLY
UNDER THESE POWER LINES.
I WILL NEED TO CHECK WITH
AUSTIN ENERGY TO MAKE SURE
THAT THAT'S -- THAT THERE'S
NO PROBLEM, BUT I'M VERY
CONFIDENT THAT THAT IS NOT
AN ISSUE GIVEN THE FACT THAT
THERE ARE PROPERTIES THAT
ARE MUCH CLOSER TO THOSE
POWER LINES THAN THESE
PROPERTIES WOULD BE.
Slusher: OKAY.
THAT'S WHAT'S ALSO REPORTED
TO US LAST WEEK.
BUT -- BUT SINCE IT CAME UP
AGAIN, I WANTED TO HAVE IT
ADDRESSED AGAIN.
YES, SIR.
THANK YOU,.
Slusher: THAT'S ALL OF MY
QUESTIONS, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: FURTHER
QUESTIONS?
CHIEF.
MR. HILGERS, WOULD YOU
ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE
ENTRYWAYS.
YES.
IT IS TRUE THAT WE ARE IN A
SITUATION OF HAVING ONE
MAJOR ROAD INTO THIS
DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS
PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD.
BUT INTO THE DEVELOPMENT ON
THE MULTI-FAMILY SIDE THERE
ARE FOUR DIFFERENT
ENTRANCES.
ON THE DUPLEX SIDE, TWO
DIFFERENT ENTRANCES.
SO WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT
WAS THE ENTRY THAT THERE'S
AN ENTRANCE, THERE'S TWO
DIFFERENT ENTRANCES ON
PLEASANT VALLEY.
SO -- SO WHEN WE AGREE TO
CLOSE BENJAMIN, WE DID
REDUCE SOME FLEXIBILITY ON
THE BACK SIDE OF THIS
PROPERTY, BUT IN -- IN
DEFERENCE TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEIR
DESIRES TO DO THAT, THAT'S
WHAT WE HAVE ATTEMPTED TO
DO.
SO WE WILL BE WORKING
THROUGH THOSE ISSUES AS
WELL, THROUGH THE FINAL
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND THE
FINAL PLATTING AND FINAL
SUBDIVISION PROCESS.
THANK YOU.
BUT THERE ARE MORE THAN
ONE ENTRANCE TO THE
DEVELOPMENT.
GOODMAN: MAYBE SOME
INSIGHT INTO WHAT HAPPENED
AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
BECAUSE I INQUIRED ABOUT
THAT.
I THINK THERE WAS SOME
MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHEN
THERE WAS AN APPROPRIATE
TIME TO SPEAK AND WHETHER IN
FACT THERE WERE TWO ITEMS ON
THE AGENDA RATHER THAN THE
ONE.
SO THERE WAS A VARIANCE IN
REGARD TO THIS CASE AS WELL,
IN PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION
APPROVAL.
SO -- EXCUSE ME.
I WANTED NEIGHBORS ALSO TO
KNOW THAT THAT IS
PRELIMINARY, SUBDIVISION, IT
STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH THE
PROCESS SO THAT YOU WILL
HAVE TIME TO WORK WITH --
WITH MR. HILGERS AND
MR. ALTER AND SOMEBODY FROM
THE UTILITY ABOUT -- ABOUT
FINDING OUT THE -- THE EXACT
RAMIFICATIONS OF BEING CLOSE
TO THE KV LINES.
THE SCIENCE THAT WE HAVE BY
NOW.
BUT YOU WILL ALSO -- GET TO
SPEAK AT THE -- AT THE FINAL
SUBDIVISION HEARING.
APPARENTLY AT THAT MEETING
SOME FOLKS SPOKE ON THE
VARIANCE, THEY WERE SPEAKING
IN FAVOR OF THE VARIANCE
SHOULD THE SUBDIVISION BE
APPROVED.
AND -- AND THOUGHT, I
SUPPOSE, THAT THERE WAS AN
ADDITIONAL ITEM WHERE YOU
WOULD GET TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE
SUBDIVISION AS A WHOLE.
WHEN IN FACT THE COMMISSION
WAS TAKING BOTH OF THOSE
ITEMS AS -- AS THE
SUBDIVISION AND SO LATER IN
THE EVENING, I DON'T THINK
THEY CLARIFIED THAT FOR
PEOPLE AND SOME FOLKS WHO
WERE WAITING FOR A SECOND
ITEM DIDN'T GET TO SPEAK.
IN TRYING TO CLARIFY WHAT
HAPPENED THERE OR SOME
DEGREE SPECULATING ABOUT
WHAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED, I
WANT TO REASSURE THE
NEIGHBORS THAT THAT WAS NOT
INTENTIONAL AND THERE'S
STILL A PROCESS TO GO
THROUGH, NOT ONLY AT THE
COMMISSION, BUT -- BUT JUST
WORKING WITH THE FOLKS WHO
ARE PROPOSING THIS ISSUE SO
THAT ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS
WILL BE ANSWERED AND YOU
WILL GET TO SPEAK AT THE --
AT THE FINAL.
THANKS, MAYOR.
THANKS, MAYOR PRO TEM.
THERE CERTAINLY MAY BE
OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT I THINK
MR. POTASNIK WANTED TO
RESPOND BRIEFLY TO THE
COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE ON
THE GENTLEMAN FROM FORT
WORTH.
HE HAS SOME TIME.
I THINK THEY TOOK ABOUT
30 SECONDS.
I WANTED TO CLARIFY A COUPLE
OF ISSUES.
ONE BEING AS MOST YOU KNOW
WE HAVE AN EXCELLENT TRACK
RECORD AS A DEVELOPER, NOT
ONLY WITH THE STATE BUT HERE
IN AUSTIN, WITH THE
DEVELOPMENT THAT WE ARE
DOING FOR LOW INCOME
SENIORS.
THE HFC I'M PROUD TO SAY IS
THE OWNER OF THAT PROJECT,
SETTING THE STANDARD
NATIONALLY FOR SENIOR
HOUSING.
BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, I'M
NOT UP HERE TO DEFEND MY
CREDIBILITY.
BUT I DID WANT TO CLARIFY AN
ACCUSATION BEING MADE WITH
RESPECT TO A $50,000 PAYOFF
AS WAS BEING PUT BY THE MAN
WHO CAME IN HERE FROM FORT
WORTH.
THIS IS THE SAME PERSON WHO
GOT UP IN FRONT OF HIS
HOUSING FINANCE CORP AND
COMPARED OUR DEVELOPMENT IN
FORT WORTH TO THAT OF
OPENING OF A LIQUOR STORE.
HAVING SAID THAT,
THE $50,000 THAT WOULD --
THAT WAS OFFERED, WHICH IS
ON THE PUBLIC RECORD, WAS
OFFERED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
TO ENHANCE SECURITY, TO
ENHANCE ISSUES THAT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD THOUGHT WAS
IMPORTANT TO THEM.
INCLUDING $10,000 OF WHICH
THAT WOULD GO TO THE SCHOOL
FOR A COMPUTER LAB.
SO I DO WANT TO CLARIFY THAT
THIS COMPANY IS NOT A
COMPANY THAT SHOULD BE OR
WILL ACCEPT BEING ACCUSED OF
PAYOFFS IN ANY WAY.
I THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PAUL,
FOR HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR THE APPLICANT OR FOR THE
STAFF?
IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION ON ITEM AHFC-2.
SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION TO
APPROVE ITEM AHFC 2 BY BOARD
MEMBER DUNKERLY, IS THERE A
SECOND?
SECOND.
SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER -- I MEAN
BOARD MEMBER ALVAREZ.
DISCUSSION?
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?
Alvarez: MAYOR, FIRST OF
ALL, I APPRECIATE
MR. ELLISON COMING TO VISIT
WITH ME AND ALL OF THE
NEIGHBORHOODS PARTICIPATING
IN THE PROCESS.
AND REALLY I THINK -- I
THINK FORCED ME TO LOOK AT
IT A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY TO
SEE WHAT WAS HAPPENING HERE.
AND I THINK IT WAS GOOD
TO -- TO SEE THE
NEIGHBORHOOD NARROW DOWN THE
ISSUES, YOU KNOW, OF
CONCERN.
WE HAVE A PETITION, I THINK,
THAT PROBABLY ALL OF OUR
OFFICERS RECEIVED YESTERDAY.
THAT IDENTIFIED THE -- THE
MAJOR AREAS OF CONCERN AND
THERE WAS FOUR ITEMS.
ONE WAS -- HAD TO DO WITH
THE EXPECTED -- UNEXPECTED
FINANCIAL COST TO THE CITY
THAT RELATED TO SOME -- SOME
MATCHING FUNDS.
THE CONCERNS THAT -- THAT
THESE -- THAT THESE CREDITS
WOULD NECESSITATE AN
INVESTMENT BY THE CITY, I
THINK WE GOT SOME
CLARIFICATION FROM -- FROM
OUR STAFF AND FROM THE
APPLICANT THAT -- THAT
MATCHING REQUIREMENT WAS NOT
ESSENTIAL OR DIDN'T APPLY TO
THIS DEVELOPMENT.
AND ALSO THE TRAFFIC
CONCERNS.
CERTAINLY I THINK WE ARE ALL
CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, BUT I
THINK WE ARE GOING TO LOOK
AT THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD
WITH THE PROCESS.
AND SCHOOL CONCERNS, I THINK
THERE'S BEEN SOME ATTENTION
TO THAT ISSUE BY -- BY AISD
AND SOME OFFICIALS THERE
AND, FINALLY, THE OTHER
ISSUE, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS
IS -- IF THIS HAS BEEN
DISCUSSED MUCH, IS TO MAKE
SURE THAT THE CORRECT ZONING
AND BUILDING INFORMATION
IS -- IS INCLUDED WITH THE
INFORMATION THAT TDHCA HAS
ON FILE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN
SPEAK TO THAT, ABOUT
WHATEVER -- ABOUT WHATEVER
INFORMATION, YOU KNOW, WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT IS THE
SAME INFORMATION THAT TDHCA
HAS IN THEIR FILES FOR THE
APPLICATION FOR THE --
I WILL LET CRAIG RESPOND
TO THAT MUCH.
TDHCA HAS THE SAME SITE
PLAN THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED
TO THE CITY FOR APPROVAL.
SO IN TERMS OF THE UNIT MIX,
THE BUILDING TYPE, IT'S THE
VERY SAME THING.
Alvarez: OKAY.
SO THOSE ARE THE MAJOR
CONCERNS THAT WERE RISED.
AND THEN I GUESS -- THAT
WERE RAISED.
THEN I GUESS MORE
FUNDAMENTALLY, I THINK, JUST
LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT, IF
YOU LOOK AT -- YOU KNOW,
MOST OF THE TIME WHEN WE
HAVE THIS ISSUES, THERE'S
NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERN ABOUT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE ARE
AT THE ZONING STAGE WHERE,
YOU KNOW, THE ZONING IS --
IS WHAT WOULD ALLOW OR
DISALLOW A PARTICULAR
DEVELOPMENT AND IN THIS
CASE, THE APPLICANT ALREADY
HAS A ZONING, FH 2-SF 3, IS
GOING TO MOVE FORWARD,
COMPLYING WITH THE
REGULATIONS INTO THOSE
ZONING CATEGORIES.
SO THE ONLY REASON THAT IT'S
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
RIGHT NOW IS -- IS BECAUSE
OF THIS ISSUE OF WHETHER
THERE SHOULD BE TAX CREDIT
FINANCING TO MAKE THE UNITS
AFFORDABLE.
IF THAT WASN'T ON THE TABLE,
THEN A DEVELOPER COULD MOVE
FORWARD AND DEVELOP THESE
VERY SAME PROJECTS, VERY
SAME PROPOSAL, AND -- AND
THERE WOULD STILL BE
NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT THROUGH
THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS AND
THOSE APPROVALS THAT ARE
NEEDED.
BUT -- BUT SO TO ME IT SEEMS
LIKE THE -- WHAT'S ON THE
TABLE IS NOT WHETHER OR NOT
TO MOVE FORWARD, BUT REALLY
IT'S WHETHER OR NOT IT -- WE
FEEL STRONG ENOUGH THAT WE
SHOULD SUPPORT IT THROUGH
THIS TAX CREDIT FINANCING TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SOME
AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
AFFORDABLE HOUSING THROUGH
THE COMMUNITY.
FOR THAT REASON I AM GOING
TO SUPPORT IT, BUT I DO WANT
TO THANK THE NEIGHBORHOOD
BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT
OF INTEREST IN THIS ISSUE.
AND I HOPE THAT AGAIN A LOT
OF -- I THINK A LOT OF THE
ISSUES HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED,
I FEEL CONFIDENT IN MOVING
FORWARD, THAT WE WILL BE
ABLE TO MITIGATE ANY
POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS IN
TERMS OF TRAFFIC AND
DRAINAGE AND I THINK THOSE
CAN BE RESOLVED THROUGH THE
NORMAL PROCESSES.
SO -- BUT THANK YOU TO
EVERYBODY.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER -- I MEAN
BOARD MEMBER ALVAREZ.
FURTHER DISCUSSION?
THERE'S BEEN A MOTION AND A
SECOND.
MOTION BY BOARD MEMBER
DUNKERLY, SECONDED BY BOARD
MEMBER ALVAREZ.
NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL
IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING
AYE.
AYE.
OPPOSED NO.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
7 TO 0.
THANK YOU, MR. HILGERS, I
WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE
AUSTIN HOUSING FINANCE
CORPORATION.
[ APPLAUSE ] MOTION TO
ADJOURN.
AND A SECOND BY ME.
ALL THOSE IF FAVOR SIGNIFY
BY SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: AT THIS
TIME, I WILL CALL BACK TO
ORDER THE -- THE REGULAR
MEETING OF THE AUSTIN CITY
COUNCIL AND WE WILL GO TO
ITEM NO. 52 AND 53.
GOODMAN: BEFORE YOU GO TO
THOSE, ON 55, THEY HAVE
ASKED FOR A WEEK'S
POSTPONEMENT ON 55.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
55, IF WE COULD HAVE A
MOTION TO POSTPONE ITEM NO.
55 FOR A WEEK, WE HAVE THAT
MOTION FROM COUNCILMEMBER --
OR MAYOR PRO TEM, I WILL
SECOND THAT MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY
BY SAYING AYE.
AYE.
THAT'S POSTPONED UNTIL
AUGUST THE 8th.
WE WILL GO TO ITEM NO. 52.
AND THAT'S COUNCILMEMBER
SLUSHER.
MAYOR, THIS IS SOME
IMPORTANT WORK THAT THE CITY
DOES AND THAT'S WHY I PULLED
IT OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA SO
THAT MR. HILGERS COULD
DETAIL IT FOR A FEW MINUTES
FOR US.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCIL, I'M PAUL HILGERS,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER, DIRECTOR OF
NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
I WILL BE BRIEFER THAN I
WOULD LIKE TO BE TO DESCRIBE
ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE
ARE DOING IN THE INTEREST OF
YOUR TIME TODAY.
BUT I APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO GO OVER THIS
PROCESS FOR YOU BRIEFLY.
WHAT WE ARE ASKING YOU TO
APPROVE IN ITEM 52 AND 53 HE
IS OUR ANNUAL ACTION PLAN,
ACTION THAT WILL ALLOW US TO
PUT MORE MONEY INTO THE
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT RAMS THAT YOU
HAVE SUPPORTED SO --
PROGRAMS THAT YOU HAVE
SUPPORTED SO GREATLY IN THIS
CITY.
THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS THE
GRANT RECIPIENT FOR FEDERAL
FUNDS.
YOU WILL RECALL THAT OUR
DEPARTMENT ALLOCATES ITS
FUNDING THROUGH THE ANNUAL
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING
PROCESS.
WHEN WE APPROPRIATE OUR
FUNDS -- AND THEN WE
APPROPRIATE OUR FUNDS
THROUGH THE ANNUAL BUDGETING
PROCESS.
WE DEVELOP OUR BUSINESS PLAN
BASED UPON THE INPUT THAT WE
RECEIVE FROM THIS FIVE YEAR
CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND THE
INDIVIDUAL ACTION PLANS.
OUR CITIZENS PARTICIPATION
PLAN FAR EXCEEDS WHAT IS
REQUIRED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT.
AND JUST TO BRIEFLY REMIND
YOU, THIS PROCESS STARTED
BACK IN MARCH, WITH A
COMMUNITY NEEDS SURVEY.
IT THEN, WHERE WE -- WHERE
WE DISTRIBUTED OVER 3200
SURVEYS TO THE CITIZENS OF
AUSTIN TO DETERMINE WHAT
THEIR NEEDS WERE, WE HAD
FOUR STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS
BETWEEN MARCH AND MARCH
FIRST AND 22nd.
WE HAD TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS
AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION, THEN WE DRAFT
THE ACTION PLAN.
THE PUBLIC RESPONSE TO THE
ANNUAL ACTION PLAN OCCURS IN
THE DISTRIBUTION OF THAT
DRAFT PLAN, A 30-DAY PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD AND A -- TWO
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC
HEARINGS, WHICH WERE HELD ON
MAY 23rd AND JUNE 27th.
THEN WE ARE IN THE PROCESS
OF FINALIZING THE ACTION
PLAN.
WE HAVE THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH
OCCURRED ON JULY 16th.
AND THEN CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL, WE SUBMITTED TO
H.U.D. BY AUGUST THE 15th.
IN 2000, 2005, WE HAD THESE
PRIORITIES IN OUR FIVE YEAR
CONSOLIDATED PLAN, THOSE
WERE FOCUSING NOT
SURPRISINGLY ON OUR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAMS
THAT WE USE THROUGH OUR
SMART HOUSING PROGRAM.
OWNER OCCUPIED SERVICES,
FIRST-TIME HOME BUYERS,
RENTAL HOUSING.
WE ALSO HAD SERVICES LIKE
CHILD CARE SERVICES, YOUTH
SUPPORT SERVICES, FAIR
HOUSING COUNSELING AND
HOUSING AND INFORMATION
REFERRAL SERVICES THAT WERE
RECOMMENDED AS HIGH
PRIORITIES FOR US TO FUND.
WE SHOWED THIS CHART TO
REMIND THE COUNCIL AND THE
PUBLIC THAT WE FUND ALL OF
OUR HOUSING PROGRAMS THROUGH
OUR HOUSING CONTINUUM.
THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED
THIS HOUSING CONTINUUM AS
THE POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR
HOUSING INVESTMENTS.
THE CONTINUUM ALLOWS US TO
EVALUATE HOW OUR PROGRAMS
ASSIST RESIDENTS IN MOVING
TOWARDS SELF SUFFICIENCY.
ALSO, MORE IMPORTANTLY, IT
PROVIDES A FRAMEWORK FOR
COLLABORATION AND
PARTNERSHIPS.
THIS CHART LITTLE ALSO SHOWS
THAT WE RECOGNIZE THE
REALITY THAT THE HOUSING
CRISIS IS IMPACTING BOTH THE
VERY POOR AS WELL AS THE
MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES IN
OUR COMMUNITY.
THE NEXT CHART IS AN
IMPORTANT CHART BECAUSE IT
REALLY SHOWS WHERE THE
ALLOCATIONS COME FROM.
IT SHOWS THAT WE RECEIVE OUR
FRUNDZ FROM THE -- FUNDS
FROM THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK PROGRAM
WITH ITS PRACTICE INCOME AT
9.8 MILLION.
OUR HOME PROGRAM, WHICH IS
SPECIFICALLY FOR HOME -- FOR
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
IS $4 MILLION.
THE HOPWA PROGRAM IS
9 MILLION, EMERGENCY SHELTER
IS 3 MILLION.
HOPWA AND ESG ARE
ADMINISTERED THROUGH THE
[INAUDIBLE] THROUGH OUR
DEPARTMENT, THE ITEM HERE
THAT'S LISTED IN GREEN IS
ONE THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT
IN THAT IT SHOWS YOUR
COMMITMENT AND THIS CITY'S
COMMITMENT TO FUND HOUSING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES TO THE TOOUN OF
$5.8 MILLION IN GENERAL FUND
REVENUE.
I WILL SPEAK ABOUT THAT IN
JUST A FEW MINUTES.
THIS YEAR'S ALLOCATION
OF $15 MILLION OF NEW GRANT
FUNDS, PROGRAM INCOME AND
APPROXIMATELY $5.8 MILLION
IN NON-FEDERAL FUNDS
REPRESENTING A TOTAL OF
$20.8 MILLION.
WHEN YOU -- WHEN YOU LOOK AT
WHO IS SERVED, WHO WE PLAN
TO SERVE WITH THESE DOLLARS,
YOU WILL SEE THAT OUR
PROJECTED PERCENT OF CLIENTS
SERVED IS FOCUSED HEAVILY ON
THOSE THAT ARE 30 HE-- THAT
ARE 50% OR BELOW MEDIAN
FAMILY INCOME.
CLEARLY 78% OF THE PEOPLE
THAT ARE SERVED BY OUR
SERVICES ARE AT 50% OR BELOW
MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME.
THIS IS IN CLEAR DIRECTION
FROM THIS COUNCIL, BUT ALSO
FROM STRONG ADVICE FROM OUR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION WHICH FOCUSES OUR
ATTENTION ON THIS POPULATION
AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY AND IT
IS APPROPRIATE THAT WE
INVEST AS MUCH OF OUR
DOLLARS AND PROVIDE AS MANY
SERVICES TO THIS CATEGORY OF
INDIVIDUALS AS POSSIBLE.
THE -- THE NEXT CATEGORY --
THE NEXT CHART SHOWS THE
PROPOSED SOURCE OF OUR FUNDS
IN A DIFFERENT MANNER.
IT SHOWS THAT MOST OF OUR
MONEY COMES FROM THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM AND OUR HOME
DOLLARS.
IT ALSO SHOWS THE DIFFERENT
SHADES OF BLUE ON THIS CHART
AND THEY REPRESENT THE
DIFFERENT TYPE OF GENERAL
FUND DOLLARS THAT THIS CITY
IS CONTRIBUTING IF THE
BUDGETINGS FORWARD THROUGH
ITS SUPPORT IN ENHANCING OUR
SMART HOUSING PROGRAM AND
THE ADMINISTRATION AND
SUPPORT SERVICES OF OUR
DEPARTMENT.
THE COUNCIL IN OUR PROPOSED
BUDGET 3.1 MILLION TO
SUPPORT -- THE COUNCIL MADE
THIS AS A PRIORITY, IN SPITE
OF THE FACT THAT STAFF CAME
AND SAID WE WERE WILLING TO
RECOMMEND THIS AS AN ISSUE
THAT MIGHT BE LOOKED AT IN
OUR BUDGET.
THE COUNCIL SAID, NO, THEY
WANTED TO MAINTAIN THIS AS A
HIGH PRIORITY AND THAT ALONG
WITH OUR MILLION IN OUR
HOUSING TRUST FUND AND THE
MILLION DOLLAR TO SUPPORT
OUR ADMINISTRATION AND
SUPPORT SERVICES PUTS YOU IN
A UNIQUE POSITION IN THE
REST OF THE COUNTRY WITH
REGARD TO HOW MUCH YOU ARE
ACTUALLY DIRECTLY SUPPORTING
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES IN
THIS COMMUNITY.
THIS NEXT CHART, WHILE FULL
OF PRETTY COLORS, ACTUALLY
SHOWS THAT WE SPEND THESE
$20.5 MILLION ON A VARIETY
OF DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES.
40% OF THEM WILL BE USED TO
CREATE OR RETAIN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING UNITS.
ANOTHER 22% OF THESE FUNDS
SUPPORT COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES.
THE REST OF THESE PROGRAMS
ARE FOR PROGRAMS SUCH AS OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT
PROGRAM, OUR YOUTH SERVICES
PROGRAMS, OUR CHILD CARE,
FAIR HOUSING COUNSELING.
A VARIETY OF PROGRAMS THAT
WE USE TO SUPPORT OR HOUSING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES.
THAT IS THE SUMMARY OF -- AS
FAST AS I CAN DO, A SUMMARY
OF ALL OF THE ACTIVITY THAT
WE ARE DOING WITH THE
$20.5 MILLION.
THE OTHER ACTION THAT WE ARE
ASKING FOR AND
REPROGRAMMING, WHICH WENT
THROUGH THE SAME CITIZEN
PARTICIPATION PROCESS AS THE
ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, IS TO
ASK FOR THE AUTHORIZATION TO
REPROGRAM $2.170 MILLION,
THAT WAS IN OTHER CATEGORIES
OF HOUSING PROGRAMS, FOR THE
USE OF -- FOR AN ALTERNATIVE
USE, WHICH IS FOR
ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT
FOR FIRST-TIME HOME BUYERS,
WHICH IS A REQUIREMENT OF
THE FEDERAL PROCESS.
SO -- SO TO GET TO THE -- TO
THE ISSUE, WHAT WE ARE
RECOMMENDING IS THAT YOU
WOULD APPROVE STAFF
RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS
PLAN.
AND WE HAVE MADE THE
FOLLOWING CHANGES AS A
RESULT OF THE -- OF THE
COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE
RECEIVED, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT
EVERY COMMENT THAT WAS
RECEIVED ON THIS ACTION PLAN
WAS RESPONDED TO IN -- IN
OUR RESPONSE TO H.U.D. SO IF
YOU ARE INTERESTED IN HOW
YOUR COMMENT WAS RESPONDED
TO, IT IS IN OUR
DOCUMENTATION TO H.U.D. SOME
OF THE -- SOME OF THE MORE
IMPORTANT CHANGES THAT WE
MADE WERE TO HIGHLIGHT THE
FACT THAT WE ARE CONTINUING
TO FUND, TO COMPLETE THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS OF
THE VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE
AGREEMENT, NOT TO EXCEED AN
AMOUNT OF $105,000.
BUT THIS IS AN EFFORT, THE
COMMUNITY OF ADAPT WAS VERY
CONCERNED WE HADN'T
HIGHLIGHTED OUR COMMITMENT
TO THIS ENOUGH, SO WE HAVE
DONE THAT IN THE FINAL PLAN.
TO CONTINUE FUNDING BOTH THE
TENANTS' RIGHTS ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM AND ARCHITECTURAL
BARRIER REMOVAL PROGRAM.
THAT IS HIGHLIGHTED MORE IN
THE NARRATIVE THAN IT WAS
ORIGINALLY IN THE DRAFT.
TO STATE CLEARLY THAT THE
PROGRAM INCOME, WHICH IS
GENERATED FROM THE EAST 11th
AND 12th STREET
REDEVELOPMENT AREA WILL GO
INTO THE BACK INTO THE 11th
AND 12th STREET
REDEVELOPMENT.
THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO
STATE IN THIS PLAN SO WE
DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE
REPROGRAMMING PROCESS.
SO INCOME GENERATED BY 11th
AND 12th STREET ACTIVITIES
WILL GO BACK INTO 11th AND
12th STREET ACTIVITIES.
WE ALSO ARE RECOMMENDING A
CONDITIONAL PREAWARD A HALF
A MILLION OF NEXT YEAR'S
APPROPRIATION TO THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A YOUTH
SERVICES FACILITIES,
DEPENDING UPON WHETHER OR
NOT AMERICAN YOUTH WORKS
RECEIVES THE $2 MILLION
GRANT AND OTHER CONDITIONS
THAT WE WOULD PLACE UPON
THEM TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF
THE CATEGORIES AND
ELIGIBILITY THAT WILL BE
INVOLVED IN OUR NEXT YEAR'S
CONSOLIDATED PLANNING
PROCESS.
SECONDLY, WE ARE
RECOMMENDING THAT WE
CONDITIONALLY PREAWARD UP
TO $300,000 IN NEXT YEAR'S
APPROPRIATION TO SUPPORT THE
CONSTRUCTION OF AN
AMPHITHEATER WHICH IS TO BE
DEVELOPED WITH HEART AT HOME
NON-PROFIT.
THIS PARTICULAR ACTION WAS
NOT RECOMMENDED BY THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION, BUT STAFF IS
STILL ASKING FOR YOUR
APPROVAL OF OUR
RECOMMENDATION TO GO FORWARD
WITH THAT.
ANOTHER CHANGE THAT WE HAVE
MADE, A RESPONSE THAT WE
HAVE MADE WAS TO LET THE
COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC TO
KNOW THAT WE ARE CONTINUING
TO EVALUATE FUNDING FOR
DOWNTOWN FARMERS MARKET.
WE ARE WORKING WITH THE
SUSTAINABLE FOOD CENTER TO
FIND AN APPROPRIATE SOURCE
OF FUNDING TO MAKE THAT
ACTIVITY HAPPEN.
WITH THAT I WILL STOP AND
ASK IF THERE ARE ANY
QUESTIONS.
THIS IS A CULMINATION OF AN
AWFUL LOT OF WORK.
I AM PROUD OF THE WORK THAT
STAFF HAS DONE TO PUT THIS
TOGETHER.
IT'S A PROGRAM THAT I THINK
WILL ALLOW US TO EXCEED OUR
GOALS WE SET UP IN OUR FIVE
YEAR PLAN OF CREATING OR
RETAINING 5,000 UNITS WHEN
WE COMBINE OUR SMART HOUSING
PROGRAM.
I THINK THAT THIS IS A
PROGRAM THAT THIS COUNCIL
CAN BE PROUD OF.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR MR. HILGERS?
Slusher: MAYOR, I DON'T
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
I MOVE APPROVAL.
I THINK THE STAFF HAS DONE A
GOOD JOB AND THE CDC AS
WELL.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER TO
APPROVE ITEMS 52 AND 53.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
THOMAS.
DISCUSSION?
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, ITEM 89.
THANK YOU, MAYOR.
ITEM NO. 89 IS THE LONG
PARKING ORDINANCE AND IT WAS
MY UNDERSTANDING THERE WAS
STILL SOME CONCERN OR
CONFUSION OVER THE LANGUAGE
ESSENTIALLY ON THE OPT-IN
PROVISIONS.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE STAPH
EXPLAIN WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
LAWN PARKING.
IS MS. THOMAS HERE?
DO YOU KNOW WHO IS GOING TO
HANDLE THAT PARTICULAR
ISSUE?
Thomas: MAYOR --
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?
Thomas: DEBORAH THOMAS
FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT
WAS GOING TO GIVE AN UPDATE
ON IT.
HOPEFULLY I CAN ANSWER SOME
OF THE QUESTIONS, IF NOT IF
THERE ARE ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE --
TWO PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED UP
TO SPEAK, BUT THIS ITEM THE
PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
I WILL JUST MENTION YOUR --
YOUR -- YOUR ITEM.
I THINK THAT -- YEAH.
THIS -- I WILL MENTION THAT
MR. WILLIAM J. THOMAS IS IN
FAVOR OF.
AND LINDA MOORE IS
REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF.
SOMEONE WILL HAVE TO TELL
ME IF I'VE GOT THIS IN THE
RIGHT PLACE.
THAT'S PRETTY GOOD.
IT UPSIDE-DOWN.
BUT YOU DID OKAY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, DEBORAH
THOMAS, I JUST WANTED TO GO
OVER A FEW OF THE CHANGES
THAT HAD BEEN MADE TO THE
ORDINANCE AFTER THE FIRST
READING.
THERE WAS ONE MAJOR CHANGE
AND THAT WAS WHERE
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS ADDED
TO SUBSECTION A 2 THAT --
THAT THE ORDINANCE WILL NOT
APPLY TO A LOT THAT ABUTTS A
SEGMENT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OR
ON WHICH PARKING IS
PROHIBITED.
ABOUT STREETS ON WHICH
PARKING WAS PROHIBITED, A
PERSON COULDN'T PARK ON THE
STREET, OR ON THEIR LAWN,
WHAT WERE THEY TO DO.
THAT WAS MADE.
ABOUT IF THAT'S THE CASE,
THEN THIS ORDINANCE DOES NOT
APPLY TO THAT SITUATION.
THERE WERE A COUPLE OF OTHER
SMALL CHANGES.
IN D 2, IT WAS JUST TO
CLARIFY THAT -- THAT THE
MANAGER WILL VERIFY THAT THE
PETITION SIGNATURE
REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN MET.
AS YOU WILL REMEMBER, IF --
IF PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO
REQUEST THAT -- THAT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD EITHER BE
INCLUDED OR EXCLUDED FROM
THE -- FROM THE
APPLICABILITY OF THIS
ORDINANCE, HE HAS TO FILE A
PETITION SIGNED BY 10% OF
THE OWNERS IN THE AREA.
THE -- THIS PROVIDES THAT
THE MANAGER WILL VERIFY THAT
THE SIGNATURE REQUIREMENT
HAS INDEED BEEN MET AND IF
IT HASN'T BEEN MET, THEN THE
MANAGER WILL NOT ACCEPT
THAT -- THAT APPLICATION.
THE FINAL CHANGE WAS TO D 6.
ORIGINALLY STATED THAT
APPLICATIONS WOULD BE
CONSIDERED IN FEBRUARY AND
IN APRIL -- BECAUSE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION WILL NOW
PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION, WE
DECIDED THAT THAT TIME WILL
NEED TO BE A LITTLE BIT
LONGER, SO THE APPLICATIONS
WILL BE SUBMITTED IN JANUARY
AND THE COMMISSION -- THE
COUNCIL WILL STILL CONSIDER
THEM IN APRIL.
BUT THAT WILL JUST GIVE
ENOUGH TIME TO GET TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AND GET
THAT RECOMMENDATION BEFORE
IT COMES TO COUNCIL.
IN ADDITION TO THE LIST AT
FIRST READING, SEVERAL
NEIGHBORHOODS WERE ADDED,
CHAMPIONS FOREST, COLONY
PARK ... DOWNTOWN AUSTIN
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION,
HERITAGE NEIGHBOR
ASSOCIATION, L.B.J.
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION,
MLK AIRPORT SECTOR, NORTH
PARK ESTATES, NORTHWEST
AUSTIN CIVIC ASSOCIATION,
SOUTH LAMAR NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION AND SPRING
MEADOWS NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION.
THE MAP THAT YOU HAVE
ATTACHED TO THE ORDINANCE
THAT SAYS -- THAT WAS FOR
BACK UP 1989 WAS -- DOES NOT
HAVE FOUR OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ON
IT AND WILL HAVE TO BE
AMENDED.
THIS MAP ALSO FAILS TO HAVE
FOUR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS ON IT AND WILL
HAVE TO BE AMENDED.
IF YOU DECIDE TO APPROVE
THIS.
I'M JAIBL FOR ANY QUESTIONS
THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
QUESTIONS FOR MS. THOMAS?
TELL ME AGAIN, MS. THOMAS,
THE STANDARDS FOR THE FIRST
WAIVE OF PEOPLE -- OF
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WANT TO
OPT IN DIFFERENT THAN THE
STANDARDS FOR -- FOR OTHER
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WANT TO
COME IN LATER?
THE FIRST WAVE HAD TO
SUBMIT LETTERS STATING THAT
THEY ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE
ORDINANCE AND DESIRE TO HAVE
THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD INCLUDED.
TO COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS'
OFFICE.
AFTER THE ORDINANCE IS
APPROVED, TO OPT IN OR OPT
OUT, TO BE INCLUDED OR
EXCLUDED, THE -- THE
PROPERTY OWNER HAS TO FIRST
SUBMIT A PETITION SIGNED BY
10% OF THE -- OF THE
PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
AREA.
Mayor Garcia: WHY IS THAT
STANDARD DIFFERENT FROM THE
ONE FOR THE FIRST GROUP?
THAT I WILL HAVE TO LET
MS. DAILY OR COUNCILMEMBER
THOMAS ANSWER.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS, DO YOU
WANT TO ADDRESS THAT ONE?
THE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE I
THINK THE FIRST GROUP HAD
ALREADY CAME TO AN AGREEMENT
AND THEN I THINK THE
OTHER -- THE SECOND -- I
COULD BE WRONG, WAS THE
REASON FOR THE 10%.
BECAUSE I THINK WE HAD MET,
LIKE I SAID EARLIER, WE HAVE
BEEN DOING THIS FOR TWO
YEARS.
THE FIRST GROUP HAD ALREADY
PRETTY WELL MET SEVERAL
TIMES AND AGREED TO IT.
THEN THE SECOND GROUP THAT
WE BROUGHT IN, WE BROUGHT IN
10% BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME
CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.
THAT WAS THE REASON.
Mayor Garcia: LET ME SAY
THIS ORDINANCE IS NEEDED AS
WE SEE SOME NEIGHBORHOODS
STARTING TO DECAY ANDY TEAR
RATE.
I HAVE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE
TWO DIFFERENT WAYS, THAT
SOME PEOPLE CAN SAY MY
NEIGHBORHOOD GOT IN, THEY
DIDN'T HAVE 10% OF THE
VOTERS, OF THE OWNNERS OF
THE PROPERTY.
I WILL SAY THAT, I SHOULD
CLARIFY THAT THE 10%
REQUIREMENT IS ONLY REQUIRED
IF AN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY
OWNER DESIRES TO AMEND THE
APPLICABILITY OF THE
ORDINANCE.
IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT
REQUESTS AN AMENDMENT, THERE
IS NOT A 10% REQUIREMENT.
SO TO THAT EXTENT IT IS
EXACTLY THE SAME.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PRESIDENT COULD AT THIS
POINT REQUEST IT AND AFTER
THE ORDINANCE IS PASSED THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
PRESIDENT CAN ALSO REQUEST
IT.
STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH THE
PROCESS OF GOING TO PLANNING
COMMISSION FOR A
RECOMMENDATION, BUT THE 10%
PETITION REQUIREMENT DOES
NOT APPLY TO THE PRESIDENT
OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION.
Alvarez: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?
Alvarez: YES, MS. THOMAS,
IS IS THAT A NEW PROVISION?
I DON'T RECALL THAT BEING
ADDED OR BEING A PART OF THE
FIRST READING?
IT'S BEEN ADDED SINCE AT
LEAST THE -- THE -- I'M
SORRY, THE -- THE
REQUIREMENT FOR THE PETITION
ITSELF, IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE
REFERENCING?
Alvarez: HAVING OR GIVING
THE ABILITY TO -- TO THE
CHAIR OR PRESIDENT OF A
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
TO -- TO REQUEST THAT AND
THEN THUS FORGOING THE
PETITION REQUIREMENT.
IT WAS PUT IN SOMETIME
BACK, IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN
IN THE ORIGINAL, BUT AT SOME
POINT IT WAS ADDED IN.
IT'S NOT JUST SINCE FIRST
READING.
IT WAS THERE I BELIEVE
BEFORE FIRST READING.
I JUST DON'T RECALL THAT.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?
WYNN: SO THAT PROVISION
WE ESSENTIALLY ALLOW A
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
BOUNDARY TO OPT IN, IS IT
LITERALLY SOLELY ON THE WISH
OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT OR
JUST INHERENTLY THEN IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BY
LAWS DO WE -- IS THERE SOME
REQUIREMENT BEFORE THAT
HAPPENED THERE WAS A -- YOU
KNOW, A VOTE OF THAT
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR
ARE WE JUST SORT OF GIVING
THE POWER TO THOSE
INDIVIDUAL PRESIDENTS?
WE ARE ALLOWING THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS
TO -- TO MAKE THOSE
DETERMINATIONS AS THEY -- AS
THEY DO.
THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT
REQUIRE THAT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
HOLD A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF
PUBLIC HEARINGS OR GET A
SPECIFIC NUMBER OF
AFFIRMATIVE VOTES FROM THE
MEMBERSHIP.
I GUESS IN PRACTICE
DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS JUST -- JUST,
YOU KNOW, SOME ARE MORE
FORMAL THAN OTHERS, SOME
HAVE LARGER MORE FREQUENT
MEETINGS THAN OTHERS, I
GUESS.
YES, THAT'S TRUE.
BASICALLY THAT WAS HOW THE
ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS WERE
DETERMINED.
WE ALLOW THEM TO
DETERMINE -- TO USE THEIR
OWN PROCESS FOR -- FOR
GETTING THE APPROVAL TO --
TO ASK TO BE INCLUDED IN THE
APPLICABILITY OF THE
ORDINANCE.
MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia: THIS MAY
STRENGTHEN NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS.
PEOPLE MAY WANT TO JOIN THEM
BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE
GIVING TOO MUCH POWER TO ONE
PERSON AND THOSE -- SOME OF
THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATIONS HAVE FOUR OR
FIVE PEOPLE AS MEMBERS, AND
THAT'S IT.
THAT CONCERNS ME.
MAYOR PRO TEM?
GOODMAN: I THINK BEFORE
WE GET TO THIRD READING,
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES
THAT I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT
AGAIN, TOO.
WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT
THEM FOR THESE MANY MONTHS
AS WE CAME TOWARD THE
HOPEFULLY END OF THE
PROCESS.
BUT THEY DON'T SEEM TO MAKE
IT INTO THE LANGUAGE WHEN WE
LOOK AT IT.
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS
ARE -- ARE USUALLY PRETTY
ORGANIZED EVEN WHEN THEY ARE
NOT RIGIDLY STRUCTURED.
BUT WE NEED TO HAVE SOME
SORT OF DOCUMENTATION, NO
MATTER HOW SMALL OR HOW
LARGE AN ASSOCIATION, SO
THAT IT'S NOT JUST A
ONE-LINE E-MAIL THAT COMES
IN WITHOUT PROCESS IN THAT
WE ARE MAKING 10% OF THE
RESIDENTS OF AN AREA SIGN A
PETITION IN ORDER TO GET OUT
OF WHAT THAT PRESIDENT SAYS
HAPPENS.
SO WHILE I'M SURE WHAT THEY
SAY HAPPENS HAPPENS, WE NEED
TO HAVE SOME KIND OF
STRUCTURED PROCESS THAT
PEOPLE CAN TRUST IN.
AS THE WOMAN WHO SPOKE TO US
IN CITIZENS COMMUNICATION
DID NOT.
SO IT'S TOO IFFY.
I THINK WE NEED TO OFFER
SOME KIND OF -- OF GUIDANCES
SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT
IT IS THAT THEY NEED TO COME
IN WITH, JUST DOCUMENTATION
OF THE PARTICULAR PROCESS
AND NOTIFICATION THEY WENT
THROUGH FOR THEIR
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND THAT COULD BE LIKE A
NOTARIZED STATEMENT WITH US
GIVING CRITERIA ON WHAT THAT
NEEDED TO INCLUDE.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO GET
BACK INTO BEING CLEARER
ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING MODE.
AND HOW NEIGHBORHOODS CAN
CHOOSE THIS WHILE THEY ARE
PLANNING, COME BACK AND
AMEND IT INTO A PLAN IF THEY
ARE ALREADY FINISHED, NOW
THAT WE HAVE -- THIS
ORDINANCE BEFORE US.
AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S
ADDRESSED CLEARLY ENOUGH
RIGHT NOW, EITHER.
THANKS, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: FURTHER
DISCUSSION?
Alvarez: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?
Alvarez: AND COMING BACK,
I GUESS ON THIRD READING, IS
AN ISSUE THAT I HAD RAISED
THE FIRST TIME WE DISCUSSED
IT ABOUT -- ABOUT HAVING A
MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR HOW WE
DEFINE A NEIGHBORHOOD OR
BECAUSE -- BECAUSE YOU COULD
GET TO THE POINT WHERE YOU
HAVE SOMEONE TRYING TO
DEFINE A FIVE-BLOCK AREA, SO
AS A NEIGHBORHOOD AND -- AND
TO SEE IF WE CAN INSERT A
REQUIREMENT THAT SAYS IN
ORDER TO PETITION FOR THIS
PARTICULAR -- THIS
PARTICULAR I GUESS ORDINANCE
TO APPLY THAT -- THAT YOU
WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A MINIMUM
SIZE, ALTHOUGH I THINK --
ARE WE ASSUMING THAT -- I
GUESS WITH THE -- THE MAYOR
PRO TEM'S SUGGESTION THAT WE
GO THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING PROCESS, BUT ARE WE
GOING TO ASSUME THEN THAT
THOSE ARE THE ACTUAL
BOUNDARIES OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREAS,
WHETHER THERE'S AN APPROVED
PLAN OR NOT THAT WOULD HAVE
TO BE -- FOLLOWED?
IN TERMS OF HOW WE DEFINE
THE AREA AND THEN HOW WE
CALCULATE THE 10% OR 20%,
WHATEVER THRESHOLD WE THINK
IS APPROPRIATE.
OR ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW THE
NEIGHBORHOODS TO DEFINE
THEMSELVES FOR THE PURPOSES
OF IMPLEMENTING THIS -- THIS
ORDINANCE.
I GUESS THAT'S THE ISSUE
THAT I'M TRYING TO ADDRESS.
IF WE HAVE A MINIMUM SIZED
AREA, IN ORDER TO CONSIDER,
YOU KNOW, THE APPLICABILITY
OF THIS ORDINANCE, THAT IF
WE WOULD DO IT THROUGH THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREAS
THEN I THINK THOSE WOULD
ALREADY BE DEFINED AND THAT
WOULD ADDRESS MY CONCERNS.
BUT JUST ANOTHER ISSUE TO
DISCUSS.
GOODMAN: MAYOR, IF I
COULD COMMENT ON WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ -- I
THINK THAT'S AN EXCELLENT
IDEA TO INCORPORATE BECAUSE
ESPECIALLY IF WE ARE NOT
WANTING TO PRECLUDE
NEIGHBORHOODS WHO WANT IN
PLANNING OR HAVEN'T PLANNED,
SO WE CAN PUT TOGETHER SORT
OF AN INTERIM PROCESS THE
WAY WE ARE DOING RIGHT NOW
WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PRESIDENT.
BUT WE DO DEFINITELY NEED TO
BE CLEAR ABOUT THE
BOUNDARIES SO THAT WE KNOW
WHAT IT IS THAT WE ARE
APPROVING AND FOLKS WHO
EITHER INCORPORATE INTO
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS WERE TO
CONTINUE ON WITH WHATEVER
PROCESS NOT IN A
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN KNOW
SPECIFICALLY WHERE THE
BOUNDARIES ARE FOR
THEMSELVES.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO, I THINK,
FOR THE 10%.
SO WE WOULD ALSO HAVE TO
HAVE A -- A PRECISE KIND OF
PROCESS AND EXPECTATION FOR
THAT AS WELL.
SO THAT -- THAT WAS AN
OVERSIGHT ON MY PART, BUT AN
EXCELLENT IDEA, I THINK.
MAYOR?
Dunkerly: WHILE WE ARE
REVIEWING THIS, AS WE SAID,
ALL OF US AGREE THAT THIS
ORDINANCE IS NEEDED.
BUT LOOKING AT THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, SOME OF
THE PLANS HAVE BEEN
COMPLETED.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A
RELATIVELY SIMPLE MATTER FOR
THOSE PLANS TO BE AMENDED
AND THEN BROUGHT BACK TO
COUNCIL.
SO LOOK AT THAT ANGLE AND
THEN THE OTHER CONCERN IS
WHAT DO WE DO WITH -- WITH
THOSE GROUPS THAT WANT TO BE
INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE
AND DON'T HAVE THEIR PLANS
COMPLETED YET.
IS THERE SOME INTERIM
APPROVAL THAT A NEIGHBORHOOD
CAN HAVE UNTIL THEY FINALLY
GET TO THE POINT WHERE THEY
ARE LOOKING -- WHERE THEY
ARE WORKING ON DEVELOPING
THEIR ACTUAL PLANS.
WE HAVE A NUMBER OF TOOLS IN
THESE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS
THAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS,
WHETHER THEY ARE LARGE OR
DISTRICT GROUP OR
SUBDISTRICT GROUP CAN CAN
OPT IN AND OPT OUT OF.
THIS COULD BE ONE OF THOSE
SAME TOOLS.
MY CONCERN IS THERE'S A NEED
THERE, I WANT TO FIGURE OUT
SOME WAY THAT A NEIGHBORHOOD
CAN HAVE SOME TEMPORARY --
PARTICIPATION IN THIS
ORDINANCE UNTIL THE TIME
THAT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
IS COMPLETED.
SO -- SO THOSE ARE SOME
ITEMS THAT I WOULD LIKE FOR
YOU TO THINK ON AND THINK
ABOUT AND -- AND WORKING
WITH THE STAFF GIVE US SOME
IDEAS ABOUT HOW THAT COULD
BE ACCOMPLISHED.
BEFORE THE THIRD READING.
Mayor Garcia: MS. THOMAS,
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT --
HOW LONG DO YOU THINK THAT'S
GOING TO TAKE TO DO THE
THINGS THAT THE COUNCIL HAS
REQUESTED?
I THINK THAT I COULD USE
A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
MAYBE TWO WEEKS.
Mayor Garcia: LET'S SET
IT UP FOR THE 22nd BECAUSE
WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING ON
THE 15th.
SO THIS ITEM WILL COME BACK
FOR THIRD READING ON THE 22
22nd OF AUGUST.
THAT WILL GIVE YOU ENOUGH
TIME TO WORK.
ESPECIALLY WITH THE
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT HAVE
ASKED SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AS
IN REGARD TO THE PROVISIONS
OF THE ORDINANCE.
OKAY.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION
FOR SECOND READING ON THIS
ITEM.
Thomas: SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN.
FURTHER DISCUSSION?
Thomas: YES, MAYOR.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO KNOW --
HOPE THAT ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS BEFORE WE COME
BACK ON THE THIRD READING, I
REALLY APPRECIATE THE PEOPLE
THAT HAVE REALLY WORKED,
STAFF, AND THE CITIZENS THAT
HAVE REALLY CAME FORWARD IN
THE BEGINNING OF THIS AND
THEIR ENDURANCE TO COME DOWN
CONTINUOUSLY WAITING FOR
THIS TO BE PASSED.
I APPRECIATE THAT.
AND I HOPE WE GET EVERYTHING
ANSWERED.
COUNCIL NEED TO -- TO BE
CLEAR ON WHAT WE ARE DOING,
I APPRECIATE THAT.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.
FURTHER DISCUSSION?
IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
OPPOSED NO.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
7 TO 0 FOR SECOND READING.
6 TO 0 TO 1 WITH
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER
TEMPORARILY OFF THE DAIS.
WE WILL NOW GO TO THE
4:00 TIME CERTAIN FOR
ZONING.
GOODMAN: MAYOR, BEFORE
THAT, IF YOU WANT TO, WE
WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE
POSTPONING ITEM 90 IN ORDER
FOR FOLKS TO BE ABLE TO GET
TOGETHER WITH COUNCILMEMBER
THOMAS AND TALK ABOUT THE --
A COUPLE OF ISSUES THAT HE
BROUGHT UP.
THAT WAS PROJECT AMERICA
DREAM --
Mayor Garcia: THAT WAS
90?
ITEM 90?
GOODMAN: YES, SIR.
Mayor Garcia: THE MOTION
BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS TO
POSTPONE THIS ITEM ONE WEEK?
GOODMAN: I'M NOT SURE
WHEN OUR NEXT MEETING IS.
DO WE HAVE A MEETING NEXT
WEEK?
Mayor Garcia: WE HAVE A
MEETING NEXT WEEK.
WE DON'T HAVE ONE ON THE 15
15th.
WE COME BACK ON THE 22nd.
GOODMAN: OKAY, LET'S GIVE
IT TO THE 22nd, BECAUSE I
KNOW EVERYBODY HAS A LOT ON
THEIR PLATES.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS IS THAT
OKAY WITH YOU?
ITEM NO. 90, POSTPONED UNTIL
8-22.
Thomas: THAT WOULD BE
FINE.
WE COULD DO IT NEXT WEEK.
22nd I WOULD GO ALONG WITH.
I JUST HAVE ABOUT FIVE
QUESTIONS, I WILL GET WITH
THE SPONSORS, WE CAN GET
THAT CLEARED OUT.
Mayor Garcia: THE MOTION
BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS
POSTPONE UNTIL AUGUST THE 22
22nd, THAT WILL GIVE
EVERYBODY TIME TO DISCUSS
THIS WITH COUNCILMEMBER
THOMAS.
THERE'S A MOTION AND I WILL
SECOND THAT MONTH.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY
BY SAYING AYE.
OPPOSED NO.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
7 TO 0 WITH -- WITH
COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY
WALKING SLOWLY OUT OF THE
ROOM.
[ LAUGHTER ]
COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY, YOU
VOTED FOR THIS, RIGHT?
YES.
SHE DID.
ZONING.
STARTING WITH ITEM Z-1.
MS. GLASGO, WELCOME.
Glasgo: THANK YOU, MAYOR,
GOOD AFTERNOON.
Mayor Garcia: ONLY 20
MINUTES LATE.
Glasgo: JUST A FEW, JUST
A FEW.
OUR ZONING CASES FOR TODAY
ARE AS FOLLOWS: ITEM NO.
Z-CASE C 14 R, 83-13, A
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT
AMENDMENT FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1606 NELMS DRIVE,
THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS
TO GRANT THE AMENDMENT TO
THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
Z 2, C 140115 LOCATED AT
1010 SAN ANTONIO STREET, THE
STHRIKT IS SEEKING A CHANGE
FROM DMUCO WHICH STANDS FOR
DOWNTOWN MIXED USE WITH A
CONDITIONAL OVERLAY TO DMU-H
WITH A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY
JUST ADDING HISTORIC ZONING
AND ALSO MODIFYING A
CONDITION OF ZONING WHICH
PREVIOUSLY LIMITED THE
AMOUNT OF -- OF RESIDENTIAL
SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT COULD BE
LOCATED ON THE SITE.
HISTORIC STRUCTURE HAS BEEN
RELOCATED FROM A PREVIOUS
LOCATION, WHICH HAD A GARAGE
APARTMENT, SO THIS AMENDMENT
WOULD ALLOW FOR THE
RELOCATED HOUSE TO HAVE A
GARAGE APARTMENT ATTACHED TO
IT.
THE CASE IS READY FOR FIRST
READING.
ITEM NO. Z-3, SOMEONE
C 14-106
LOCATED AT SLAUGHTER LANE.
THIS WAS MISPLACED OUT OF
ORDER ON THE AGENDA.
IT'S -- IT'S HAD ITS PUBLIC
HEARING WHICH WAS CLOSED,
IT'S READY FOR THIRD READING
AND IT HAS AN ORDINANCE.
MS. GLASGO, ON Z-2 TELL
ME AGAIN WHAT THE
RECOMMENDATION IS.
Glasgo: TO GRANT DMU-CO
ON FIRST READING, HCO ON
FIRST READING.
Z-3 CONSENT ON THIRD
READING.
Mayor Garcia: RIGHT.
Glasgo: Z-4, WE HAVE A
REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT TO
POSTPONE THIS CASE TO -- TO
AUGUST THE 29th.
HOWEVER, BETTY EDGEMOND, WHO
IS PRESIDENT OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN
THE AREA INDICATED TO ME
EARLIER THAT SHE IS -- SHE
AND THE NEIGHBORS ARE
OPPOSED, SHE'S RIGHT HERE,
NOTICE HER.
SHE IS OPPOSED TO THE
POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
Mayor Garcia: IS THIS THE
FIRST REQUEST BY THE
APPLICANT.
Glasgo: NO, THIS WOULD BE
THE SECOND REQUEST BY THE
APPLICANT.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY, WE DO
NOT ROUTINELY GRANT A SECOND
REQUEST.
SO -- SO IF WE ARE GOING TO
GRANT THAT ONE, THERE HAS TO
BE A MOTION BY THE COUNCIL.
Glasgo: SO THERE WILL BE
SOME DISCUSSION ON THIS, THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IS HERE.
ITEM NO. Z-5, C14-01--- C
140242, THE APPLICANT IS
SEEKING A POSTPONEMENT TO
AUGUST THE 22nd, FIRST
REQUEST, HE IS OUT OF STATE
TODAY AND COULDN'T BE HERE,
WE RECOMMEND THAT
POSTPONEMENT REQUEST.
Mayor Garcia: FIRST
REQUEST BY THE APPLICANT, SO
THAT'S GOING TO GO BY
CONSENT.
Glasgo: YES, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. GLASGO.
Glasgo: ITEM NO. Z-6, C
14-02-61 LOCATED AT 2101
WEST SLAUGHTER LANE.
THE CHANGE IN ZONING FROM
SINGLE FAMILY 2 TO
NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE WITH A
CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS
TO GRANT NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL WITH A
CONDITIONAL OVERLAY THIS IS
READYING FOR ALL THREE
READING.
Z-7 WILL BE A DISCUSSION
ITEM.
Z-8, CASE C 140269 LOCATED
AT 7612 COOPER LANE, THE
PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED
DR, WHICH STANDS FOR
DEVELOPMENT RESERVE, THE
APPLICANT IS SEEKING A
CHANGE TO L.O., WHICH STANDS
FOR LIMITED OFFICE.
THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDS NEIGHBORHOOD
OFFICE DISTRICT WITH A
CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AND A
MIXED USE OVERLAY, THE CASE
IS READY FOR FIRST READING
ONLY.
ITEM NO. Z-9, C 14-02-80
LOCATED AT 516 EAST
SLAUGHTER LANE, THE CHANGE
IN ZONING FROM INTERIM RR,
INTERIM RR, I'M SORRY, TO
MULTI-FAMILY 2.
THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS
TO GRANT M.F. 2 ZONING, THE
INDICATION IS READY FOR
FIRST READING.
ITEM NO. Z-10, CASE C
14-02-90, LOCATED AT HIGHWAY
71 EAST, -- INTEREST ... THE
ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS
TO GRANT GENERAL COMMERCIAL
SERVICES ZONING AND THE CASE
IS READY FOR ALL THREE
READINGS.
THAT CONCLUDES THE CONSENT
ITEMS, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: COUNCIL,
THE CONSENT AGENDA ON THE
4:00 P.M. ZONING HEARINGS
AND APPROVAL OF ORDINANCES
ARE FOLLOWS: ON Z-1, IT'S
CONSENT, THAT'S -- DOESN'T
REQUIRE AN ORDINANCE, THAT'S
JUST A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE
THE AMENDMENTS TO THE
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
Z-2 IS CONSENT FOR THE FIRST
READING.
Z-3 IS CONSENT FOR ALL THREE
READINGS.
Z-5 IS CONSENT FOR
POSTPONEMENT TO AUGUST 22nd.
6 IS CONSENT ON ALL THREE
READINGS.
7 IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
8 IS A CONSENT FOR THE FIRST
READING.
9 IS CONSENT FOR THE FIRST
READING.
AND 10 IS CONSENT FOR ALL
THREE READINGS.
WE CAN CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING ON THE ONES THAT
HAVE -- THAT ARE GOING ONLY
FOR FIRST READING, CORRECT?
Glasgo: YES, YOU CAN.
Mayor Garcia: SO OKAY.
SO -- SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING AND APPROVE THE
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
IN THE ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE
CONSENT AGENDA.
WYNN: SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: THERE'S A
MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND TO
APPROVE -- LET'S SEE.
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEMS
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
7 TO 0.
WE WILL GO TO ITEM Z-4.
AND -- AND THE FIRST THING
THAT I WILL DO, COUNCIL,
AND -- IS TO ASK IF ANYBODY
WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION TO
POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO AUGUST
THE 29th.
THIS -- THIS REQUEST BY THE
APPLICANT IS NOT AN
AUTOMATIC ONE BECAUSE IT'S
THE SECOND REQUEST THAT --
THAT THE APPLICANT MAKES.
SO -- SO IF THERE IS
SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO MAKE A
MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS TO
AUGUST 29th, I WILL
ENTERTAIN IT AT THIS TIME.
IF NOT, WE ARE GOING TO
CONSIDER IT.
WE HAVE SOME -- SOME PEOPLE
SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THERE BEING NO MOTION ON
THIS, WE WILL OPEN THE CASE.
MS. GLASGO, IF YOU COULD
TELL US ABOUT -- ABOUT Z-4.
ITEM NO. Z-4 IS CASE C
14-02-001 LOCATED AT 5209
THROUGH 5211 WASSON ROAD.
IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED RR AND
CS.
THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A
CHANGE TO MULTI-FAMILY 1.
THE -- THE STAFF AND THE
ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION DO NOT RECOMMEND
THE CHANGE IN ZONING.
SIMPLY BECAUSE OF -- FROM A
STAFF STANDPOINT AND THAT OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS
THAT THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT
FLOODING IN THIS AREA.
AND THE SECOND CONCERN IS
THAT THE ROAD IS
SUBSTANDARD.
ALTHOUGH THE PROPERTY IS
ZONED COMMERCIAL, IT IS --
IT IS OBVIOUSLY ALLOWS FOR A
VARIETY OF COMMERCIAL USES,
HOWEVER THE CONCERN STAFF
HAS, INCLUDING THE STAFF
THAT WE HAVE CONSULTED IN
WATERSHED PROTECTION AND
STREET AND BRIDGE -- THE
CONCERN IS THAT IF YOU HAVE
PEOPLE RESIDING IN AN
APARTMENT COMPLEX, YOU HAVE
CHILDREN, THIS WOULD CREATE
A SAFETY HAZARD FOR -- IN
THE EVENT OF A FLOOD.
THAT -- THAT WOULD CAUSE A
SAFETY CONCERN FOR THOSE WHO
LIVE IN THE AREA AND A
CONCERN FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT
BE ABLE TO -- WHO MAY HAVE
TO HELP EVACUATE PEOPLE IN
THE EVENT OF A FLOOD.
AND OF COURSE YOU WOULD HAVE
CHILDREN LIVING IN -- IN
THOSE APARTMENTS, TOO.
SO THOSE ARE THE MAIN
REASONS THAT STAFF DID NOT
RECOMMEND THE ZONING CHANGE
AND THAT OF THE ZONING AND
PLATTING COMMISSION BECAUSE
OF THE FLOODING CONCERNS AND
IT HAS NOT BEEN DEMONSTRATED
TO US THAT -- THAT IT'S AN
AREA THAT'S GOING TO BE
IMPROVED ANY TIME IN THE
FUTURE REGARDING THE -- THE
DRAINAGE PROBLEMS.
ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT HAS
OFFERED TO IMPROVE SOME OF
THE DRAINAGE, THE AREA THAT
FLOODS IS -- IS AND YOU HAVE
OFFSITE, HIS
PROPERTY IS OUT OF THE
FLOODPLAIN.
HOWEVER PART OF THE ROAD IS
UNDERWATER, 13 FEET
UNDERWATER WHEN IT DOES
FLOOD.
THE STREET AS I INDICATED IS
SUBSTANDARD, DOES NOT MEET
THE MINIMUM STANDARDS.
BUT WITH ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC
ON THE ROAD THAT WOULD BE A
CONCERN.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A
TOTAL OF -- OF -- OF ABOUT
98 -- I'M SORRY, ABOUT 126
UNITS.
AND -- AND WHAT -- ALSO I
WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO YOUR
ATTENTION, THERE IS A VALID
PETITION OF 34.72% THAT --
THAT THAT HAS BEEN FILED
WITH US AGAINST ZONING
CHANGE.
Mayor Garcia: SO WE HAVE
A VALID PETITION.
Glasgo: IT'S A VALID
PETITION OF THIS CASE, THAT
WILL REQUIRE AT LEAST A
MINIMUM OF SIX VOTES TO
CHANGE THE ZONINGS.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE?
Glasgo: MR. CONNALLY WAS
HERE -- HERE HE IS.
Mayor Garcia: PUT FIVE
MINUTES ON THE CLOCK,
PLEASE, THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF
THE COUNCIL, MAYOR, THIS
PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY
WAS APPROVED IN 1983, 84
TIME FRAME FOR 217 UNITS OF
APARTMENTS UNDER A SPECIAL
USE PERMIT, BUT THAT PERMIT
EXPIRED IN 1985 DUE TO THE
DOWNTURN IN THE ECONOMY.
THIS PROPERTY SAT VACANT
SINCE THEN.
WE HAVE A CLIENT THAT IS
INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING A
126 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY SITE
HERE.
AND HAVE MET WITH THE CITY
STAFF.
THE MULTI-FAMILY USE IS NOT
INAPPROPRIATE ACCORDING TO
CITY STAFF.
AGAIN, THE CONCERN IS OVER
THE ROADWAY AND THE -- AND
THE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS IN
THE VICINITY.
WE REQUESTED A POSTPONE FOR
THE PURPOSE OF TALKING WITH
CITY STAFF TO DEVELOP
ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING LAND
SWAPS TO OTHER PROPERTIES
THAT ARE -- THAT ARE MORE
APPROPRIATELY -- OR ACTUALLY
COULD USE THE C.S. ZONING AS
IT IS NOW.
THOSE MEETINGS HAVE TAKEN
PLACE WITH ONE PARTICULAR
USER, THEY HAVE REJECTED OUR
SITE AS A COMMERCIAL C.S.
USE FOR -- FOR -- FOR MINI
STORAGE WAREHOUSE.
THE OTHER -- THE OTHER
REASON FOR THE DELAY OR THE
REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT
UNTIL THE 28th WAS SO THAT
WE COULD MEET WITH CITY
STAFF TO DISCUSS
ALTERNATIVES ON HOW WE COULD
MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE AND NOT
TIE IT SPECIFICALLY TO THE
ZONING, BUT TO BE DONE AT
SITE PLAN, SO IT'S NOT THAT
WE DON'T WANT TO DO THE
IMPROVEMENTS, WE ARE JUST
TRYING TO FIND A MECHANISM
THAT WILL ALLOW US TO DO IT.
THE 126 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING WOULD RESULT IN ONE
OF THE LOWER TRAFFIC COUNT
OR TRAFFIC TRANSPORTATION
TRIPS PER DAY THAN IF IT WAS
DEVELOPED AS A COMMERCIAL
SITE, WHICH COULD GO
ANYWHERE FROM 1200 TO 1500
TRIPS PER DAY.
AGAIN, WE AGAIN ARE LOOKING
FOR FAVORABLE APPROVAL OF
THIS PROJECT FROM AFFORDABLE
HOUSING WITH THE IDEA
THAT -- THAT THE DEVELOPER
WOULD WORK TOWARDS IMPROVING
AND FIXING AND ALLEVIATING
THE RESTRICTIONS, IE THE
ROADWAY WIDTH AND THE
DRAINAGE AT ONE OF THE
LOCAL -- LOCAL BRIDGES AND
BOX CULVERTS.
WE DO WANT TO KEEP -- WE
UNDERSTAND THAT THE -- ONE
OF THE DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
IS -- WAS BUILT LIKE IN
1915.
PEOPLE VIEWED IT AS AN
HISTORIC TYPE OF DEAL.
WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THE
CHARACTER EVER OF THAT
STRUCTURE, WORKING WITH CITY
STAFF TO DETERMINE THE
DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES AND
WHAT THOSE COSTS ARE TO MAKE
THOSE IMPROVEMENTS.
AGAIN THE OWNER, THE
PROPOSED DEVELOPER OF THE
PROJECT WANTS TO HELP MAKE
THOSE IMPROVEMENT TO CITY
FACILITIES AND DEVELOP.
THIS IS A -- AN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING SITE IN SOUTHEAST
AUSTIN.
EXCUSE ME, SOUTH CENTRAL
AUSTIN.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[ONE MOMENT PLEASE FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS] (TIME:
4:32 P.M.)
(TIME: 4:33).
Mayor Garcia: YOU CAN
COME UP TO SPEAK.
I DIDN'T SEE THAT THE E WAS
MISSING.
IT IS CONFUSING QUITE
OFTEN.
MY NAME IS SYLVIA MARTIN.
I HAVE LIVED AT 5302
SUBURBAN DRIVE FOR 27 YEARS.
I'M ON THE BOARD OF THE
BATTLE BEND SPRINGS
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
I RESPECTFULLY RESPECT THAT
YOU FOLLOW THE ZONING AND
PLATTING COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATION AND DENY THE
APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR MF-1
ZONING.
WE HAVE MANY CONCERNS
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS
PROJECT.
WITHOUT QUESTION WASSON ROAD
IS COMPLETELY INADEQUATE FOR
THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC WITH
THIS DEVELOPMENT -- THAT
THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BRING.
A SPECIAL CONCERN WITH THE
EMERGENCY ACCESS AT TIMES OF
FLOODING ON WILLIAMSON
CREEK.
IN THE TIME I HAVE LIVED AT
THIS ADDRESS, I HAVE SEEN
WILLIAMSON CREEK FLOOD MANY
TIMES TO VARIOUS STAGES.
MOST OF OUR HOMES ON THE
WEST SIDE OF SUBURBAN DRIVE
ARE ON A 30 TO 40-FOOT BLUFF
OVERLOOKING THE CREEK.
ON THREE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS
I HAVE SEEN THE WATER RISE
TO WITHIN 10 TO 12 FEET OF
THE TOP.
AT THOSE TIMES THE CREEK
BECOMES A RAGING TORRENT
EASILY MEASURING OVER
100 YARDS OUT FROM THE EAST
BANK WHERE MY HOME SITS.
DURING THOSE FLOODS THE
WATER RISES AT AN INCREDIBLE
SPEED, SOMETIMES AT NIGHT.
THE POTENTIAL DANGER TO
RESIDENTIAL TENANTS AT THIS
LOCATION MUST NOT BE
UNDERESTIMATED.
AT LEAST THE COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE FEWER
TENANTS AND ONLY DURING
BUSINESS HOURS RATHER THAN
AN APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT
ENDANGERING SLEEPING
RESIDENTS WHO WOULD NEVER
EXPECT A RESIDENTIAL UNIT TO
BE LOCATED IN SUCH AN
UNPREDICTABLELY TREACHEROUS
LOCATION.
IN ADDITION TO THE DANGER TO
THE APARTMENT DWELLERS, THIS
DEVELOPMENT STANDS TO
INTERFERE WITH WATER FLOW AT
FLOOD STAGE.
THIS WILL INCREASE THE
FLOODING RISK TO RESIDENTS
ON THE BLUFF AND UPSTREAM
FROM THIS SITE.
FINALLY, IT APPEARS TO US
THAT THE NATURE OF THE
APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT WOULD
SIT IN A FLOODPLAIN LOOKING
OUT OVER A JUNK YARD WILL
OVER TIME SUFFER A SERIOUS
THREAT OF BECOMING SLUMS.
WE REQUEST THAT THE ZONING
FOR THIS SITE REMAIN CS OR
EVEN MORE DESIREBLY REVERT
BACK TO SF-1.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MRS. MARTIN.
I APOLOGIZE FOR THE MISS
PRONUNCIATION OF YOUR NAME.
MS. EVANS, LINDA EVANS.
AND FOLLOWING MS. EVANS,
LAURA FAIRBANKS IS
REGISTERED NOT WISHING TO
SPEAK, BUT AGAINST.
AND BETTY EDGEMOND.
YOU WILL BE NEXT.
WELCOME.
THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M LINDA EVANS.
I RESIDE AT 5304 SUBURBAN
DRIVE IN THE BATTLE SPRINGS
NEIGHBORHOOD.
MY NAME IS ON WILLIAMSON
CREEK RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE
SITE PROPOSED FOR
DEVELOPMENT.
I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT
THE COUNCIL CONCUR WITH THE
ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION AND DENY THE
REQUESTED REZONING OF THE
WASSON ROAD PROPERTY TO
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS
INCOMPATIBLE AND
INAPPROPRIATE ON THIS SITE.
AND AS FAR AS I CAN SEE,
THERE'S REALLY NO NEED FOR
ADDITIONAL APARTMENTS IN
THIS GENERAL AREA.
THERE ARE NUMBERS OF
PROPERTY WITH WIDE PRICE
RANGES ON EAST STASSNEY
LANE, SOUTH CONGRESS.
AND ST. ELMO.
WASSON ROAD, AS YOU'VE
HEARD, IS A LITTLE COUNTRY
LANE, WHICH WAS THE ORIGINAL
ROAD FROM AUSTIN TO
SAN ANTONIO.
THE ROAD IS BARELY ADEQUATE
FOR CURRENT TRAFFIC.
THERE ARE SEVERAL
SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ALONG
THE ROAD, A STORAGE FACILITY
AND SOME SMALL BUSINESSES
NEAR THE STASSNEY END.
THE ROAD AND THOSE
BUSINESSES ARE FAMILIAR WITH
THE CONDITIONS AND HAZARDS
OF THE ROAD, THE LOW WATER
CROSSING AND APPRECIATE THE
UNIQUE CONDITIONS OF THEIR
NEIGHBORHOOD.
DEVELOPMENT OF AN APARTMENT
COMPLEX IN THIS AREA WITH
THE TRAFFIC IT WOULD
GENERATE UNDER THE BEST OF
CONDITIONS WOULD BE
DETRIMENTAL TO BOTH THE
CURRENT RESIDENTS AND
PROSPECTIVE TENANTS WHO
MIGHT MOVE INTO THE PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT UNFAMILIAR WITH
THE AREA AND ITS
LIMITATIONS.
THE LOW WATER CROSSING AT
CONGRESS IS OFTEN CLOSED DUE
TO HIGH WATER AND HEAVY
RAIN.
THE ACCESS NEAR STASSNEY
ADJOINS A BUSY INTERSECTION.
WASSON ROAD HAS NO CITY BUS
SERVICE OR SCHOOL BUS
SERVICE AND NO SIDEWALKS.
AND I THINK THE DEVELOPER
SAID HE WOULD PROVIDE
SIDEWALKS FOR THE SITE.
I QUESTION WHETHER SITE
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS CAN BE
PROVIDED TO CONGRESS WHERE
THERE'S THE NEAREST PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION.
HE STATED THAT THIS PROJECT
WOULD PROVIDE QUALITY,
AFFORDABLE HOUSING; HOWEVER,
DUE TO THE LIMITATIONS OF
THE SITE, INCLUDING POOR
ACCESS AND A SALVAGE YARD
DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET,
A NUMBER OF APARTMENTS WILL
MORE LIKELY BRING DOWN THE
SCENIC AREA THAT THE WASSON
HOMEOWNERS HAVE BEEN
PROGRESSIVELY IMPROVING.
I THINK MANY OF US HAVE
LIVED IN APARTMENT COMPLEXES
AND WE ALL KNOW THAT
APARTMENT RESIDENCES DON'T
HAVE THE SAME INTEREST IN
MAINTAINING OR IMPROVING THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AS THOSE
INVESTED IN HOME OWNERSHIP
OR SMALL BUSINESSES.
MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION EXPRESSED
CONCERNS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL
IMPACT THAT COULD COME FROM
THE EXISTING ZONING.
I SHARE THOSE CONCERNS.
COMMERCIAL MAY NOT BRING THE
MOST DESIRABLE DEVELOPMENT
AND IDEALLY I WOULD LIKE TO
SEE IT REVERT BACK TO
SINGLE-FAMILY; HOWEVER I DO
AGREE WITH OTHER HOMEOWNERS
IN THE AREA THAT A SMALL
BUSINESS OR STORAGE FACILITY
IS BEFERABLE AND LESS
INTRUSIVE TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD THAN THE IMPACT
OF A NUMBER OF RENTAL UNITS.
I SYMPATHIZE WITH THE
CURRENT SITE OWNER'S NEED
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE.
[ BUZZER SOUNDS ]
Mayor Garcia: GO AHEAD
AND SUMMARIZE.
BASICALLY JUST I REQUEST
THAT YOU DENY THE REZONING.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. EVANS.
MS. EDGEMOND?
MS. BETTY EDGEMOND IS NEXT.
AND FOLLOWING HER IS DAVID
A.GLAUKA.
OKAY.
YOU'RE NEXT.
WELCOME.
MY NAME IS BETTY EDGEMOND
AND I WAS JUST THINKING, YOU
KNOW, WHEN WE HAD THE RAINS
IN NOVEMBER, NOT ONLY WAS
THE WASSON ROAD UNDERWATER,
CONGRESS AVENUE WAS
UNDERWATER.
I MEAN, THAT WAS TERRIBLE.
I ALSO WAS THINKING, TOO, IN
ABOUT 30 DAYS THEY'RE GOING
TO BE CELEBRATING THE WORLD
TRADE CENTER.
AND DID THEY SAY THAT
THEY'VE ALWAYS TREATED THE
FIREMEN IN THE WHOLE YEAR
THAT'S HAPPENED SINCE THEN
AS HEROES.
WELL, OUR HEROES ARE OUR
FIREMEN TOO AND WE DON'T
WANT THEM TO DROWN HAVING TO
RESCUE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT
ARE LIVING ON A ROAD WHERE
THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
ABANDONED US BECAUSE IT WAS
NO GOOD LIVING ON.
WE'VE NEVER OPPOSED THE
COMMERCIAL.
IN FACT -- WELL, WE HAVE WLO
AND IF YOU WANTED TO TURN
THE CS BACK TO WLO, THAT'S
FINE WITH ME.
AS YOU ALL KNOW, AS SOME OF
YOU KNOW, I SHOULD SAY, SOME
OF YOU THAT'S BEEN HERE A
LONG TIME, KNOW THAT THIS
WAS, WE THINK, ONE OF THE
ROADS THAT WAS ORIGINALLY
USED BY THE SPANISH WHEN
THEY CAME AND WENT TO SAN
MARCOS.
AND IN SAN MARCOS THEY TREAT
THEIR PART OF THIS ROAD LIKE
IF THE HISTORICAL ROAD IT
SHOULD BE DESIGNATED.
AND I WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO
DESIGNATE IS HISTORICAL,
BECAUSE IT IS A HISTORICAL
ROAD.
AND AS YOU -- IF YOU'VE EVER
HEARD ME TALK BEFORE, YOU
KNOW THAT THIS LOW WATER
CROSSING WAS AT ONE TIME THE
MAJOR SWIMMING HOLE BETWEEN
SAN ANTONIO AND AUSTIN.
AS YOU CAME INTO AUSTIN YOU
GOT OUT OF YOUR AUTOMOBILE
AND YOU WENT SWIMMING IN
WILLIAMSON CREEK WHEN IT WAS
LOVELY AND CLEAR AND THERE
WERE NO FLOODS.
SO I AM IN OPPOSITION TO THE
POSTPONEMENT.
I THINK WE NEED TO GET THIS
VOTED UP OR DOWN.
WE HAVE A 34% PETITION
AGAINST THE REZONING.
AND I KNOW THAT'S VERY
STRANGE AND I KNOW GUS KEEPS
LOOKING AT ME LIKE I CAN'T
BELIEVE THIS WOMAN IS
SITTING HERE SAYING I WANT
CS WHEN I'VE DEVOTED MY
WHOLE LIFE TO SAYING WE
DON'T WANT CS, IT'S TOO
INTENSE.
BUT IN THIS CASE IF YOU DO
HAVE TO RESCUE SOMEONE AND
HAVE TO GO ON TO WASSON
ROAD, THEN YOU ARE JUST
GOING TO BE RESCUING A FEW
PEOPLE AND NOT A LOT OF
PEOPLE.
AND THAT'S WHY I'M AGAINST
MORE RESIDENTIAL.
THERE ARE PEOPLE THERE --
HEY, WE HAVE HOMELESS PEOPLE
LIVING THERE, GOT A NICE
TENT AND EVERYTHING.
AND THEY KNOW WHAT THE
CONDITIONS ARE LIKE.
BUT I AM AGAINST THE
POSTPONEMENT AND I AM
AGAINST ANY MORE RESIDENTIAL
BEING ADDED TO WASSON ROAD.
WE HAVE CONCENTRATED ON
CONGRESS AND STASSNEY,
WILLIAM CANNON.
AND AS ANY OF YOU ARE
FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, IT'S
A VERY STRANGE INTERSECTION
TO GET TO WASSON ROAD WHEN
THEY -- WHEN THEY CUT
STASSNEY LANE THROUGH, THEY
MADE THIS A VERY STRANGE
ENTRANCE AND EXIT TO WASSON
ROAD.
SO THE LOW USES ARE THERE
NOW, THE LOW PEOPLE USES ARE
THERE NOW, ARE VERY
ACCEPTABLE.
THANK YOU.
[ BUZZER SOUNDS ]
STEVE I THINK IS GOING TO
SPEAK TO YOU.
BY THE WAY, DID ANY OF YOU
WANT TO SEE MY OLD MAP?
Mayor Garcia: YES, WE DO.
GO AHEAD AND GIVE IT TO
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER AND
THEY'LL PASS IT.
I WAS LAUGHING BECAUSE I
THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, OH, MY
GOD, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GO
DO RESEARCH ON THIS SPANISH
ROAD TO SEE IF ANY OF MY
ANCESTORS EVER CAME THROUGH
THERE.
FOLLOWING DAVID GLAUKA IS
KATE SEARS.
WELCOME, SIR.
THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS DAVE AND I'M
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE
BATTLE BENDS HOMEOWNERS'
ASSOCIATION.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD LIES JUST
ACROSS WILLIAMSON CREEK FROM
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
AND ADD FIRST LIKE TO TALK
ABOUT AN ISSUE THAT HASN'T
BEEN ADDRESSED, AND THAT'S
THE SEWER LINE THAT RUNS
ALONG WILLIAMSON CREEK
BETWEEN THE PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT AND THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S OLD, LEAKY AND OVER
CAPACITY BECAUSE OF ALL THE
APARTMENT BUILDINGS THAT
HAVE GONE INTO THE AREA.
AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS
NOT SCHEDULED TO REPLACE THE
LINE FOR AT LEAST FIVE MORE
YEARS, AND WE'RE CONCERNED
ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX IN
THE AREA HOOKING UP TO THE
SEWER LINE BEFORE IT'S
REPLACED COULD LEAD TO MORE
LEAKS AND POSSIBLE HEALTH
CONCERNS AND THE EROSION OF
PROPERTY VALUES FOR THE
RESIDENTS WHO LIVE ALONG THE
CREEK.
THE SECOND IS THE ISSUE OF
FLOODING WHICH WE'VE HEARD
QUITE A BIT ABOUT TODAY.
MY QUESTION IS DOES IT MAKE
SENSE TO BUILD AN APARTMENT
COMPLEX ON WHAT WOULD BECOME
AN INACCESSIBLE PENINSULA IN
A 100 YEAR FLOOD.
I DON'T CLAIM TO BE AN
EXPERT IN ZONING LAW, BUT
I'M PRETTY SURE THAT ZONING
LAWS EXIST TO PREVENT THIS
SORT OF THING FROM
HAPPENING.
IT DOESN'T SEEM VERY WISE TO
BUILD A RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURE SO CLOSE TO WHAT
BECOMES A RAGING RIVER,
PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU CAN'T
GET IN YOUR CAR AND LEAVE.
AND FLOODING WILL ONLY
BECOME WORSE AS MORE
DEVELOPMENT OCCURS UPSTREAM
IN THE WATERSHED.
AND WE'RE CONCERNED THAT
REPEATED FLOODING OF THE
APARTMENT COMPLEX COULD LEAD
TO AN EFFORT BY SOME
MISGUIDED SOULS TO TRY TO
CHANNELIZE THE CREEK IN THAT
AREA, WHICH WOULD BE
DISASTER FOR THIS BEAUTIFUL
AREA AS WELL AS FOR THE
PROPERTY VALUES OF HOMES
SITUATED ALONG THE CREEK.
FINALLY, THERE IS THE
APPROPRIATENESS OF LOCATING
AN APARTMENT COMPLEX NEXT TO
A LARGE JUNK YARD.
IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A GOOD
IDEA TO ASK ANYONE
REGARDLESS OF INCOME LEVEL
TO LIVE NEXT TO A HUGE JUNK
YARD.
WHY DON'T YOU COME OVER TO
MY PLACE, YOU CAN'T MISS IT,
IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THE BIG
JUNK YARD ON SOUTH CONGRESS.
AND SOME OF THESE APARTMENTS
ARE TWO-STORY, BUT HAVE A
DIRECT VIEW OVER THE FENCE
TO A GRAVEYARD OF
AUTOMOBILES.
SO WHAT DOES THIS TELL US
ABOUT THE DESIRE ABILITY OF
THESE APARTMENTS AND WHAT
THEIR MARKET VALUE MIGHT BE
IN 10, 15 YEARS?
WE'RE CONCERNED THAT WE'RE
SEEING A SLUM IN THE MAKING
AND THAT CONCERN HAS
SOMETHING NOG TO DO WITH THE
FACT THAT THIS IS SO-CALLED
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WE WOULD HAVE THE SAME
CONCERNS IF THESE WERE BEING
BUILT AS LUXURY APARTMENTS,
PARTICULARLY WITH SO MANY
OTHER APARTMENT BUILDINGS
NEARBY.
A DEVELOPER WOULD PROBABLY
NEVER PUT A LUXURY APARTMENT
BUILDING AT THIS SITE
BECAUSE OF THIS VERY
CONCERN, SO WHY SHOULD THEY
BE ALLOWED TO PUT AN
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
NEXT TO A JUNK YARD?
IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE TRYING
TO PREVENT THE USE OF THE
PROPERTY IN A MANNER FOR
WHICH IT IS ZONED, WE'RE
OPPOSED TO A ZONING CHANGE.
THE PROPERTY IS NOT ZONED
FOR A LARGE APARTMENT
COMPLEX FOR A SIMPLE REASON,
IT'S SIMPLY NOT APPROPRIATE.
THE BATTLE BEND SPRINGS
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
THEREFORE REQUESTS THAT YOU
UP HOLD THE RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION AND THE CITY
STAFF AND DENY THE ZONING
CHANGE REQUEST.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
KAY PIERCE?
IF I DIDN'T PRONOUNCE YOUR
NAME CORRECTLY FRKS YOU
COULD CORRECT ME ON THAT.
PIERCE IS RIGHT, NEXT.
MICHAEL CLAWSON WILL BE
AFTER YOU.
WELCOME.
THANK YOU.
MY NAME IS KATE PIERCE AND I
TOO LIVE ON SUBURBAN DRIVE
RIGHT ACROSS THE CREEK FROM
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
AND I TOO, BELIEVE IT OR
NOT, OBJECT TO IT.
IN 1995 THERE WERE OTHER
REQUESTS TO CHANGE THE
ZONING ON OTHER TRACTS ON
WASSON ROAD, EVEN THOUGH
IT'S NOT A VERY LARGE PIECE
OF LAND, THERE HAS BEEN
OTHER REQUESTS.
AND I WANT TO READ WHAT
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION SAID AT
THAT TIME ABOUT ONE OF THE
TRACTS.
THERE IS A FIVE-WAY
INTERSECTION AT STASSNEY
LANE AND CONGRESS.
THE GREATEST IMPACT ON
SAFETY AT THE FIVE-WAY
INTERSECTION OCCURS NOT FROM
THE WLO ZONING, BUT FROM
DEVELOPMENT OF MF-2 ZONING
ON WASSON ROAD AT THE AM AND
P.M. TRAFFIC PEAKS.
THERE IS LESS INTRIEWS ON
TRAFFIC PATTERNS WITH THE
WLO ZONING THAN THE MF
ZONING.
LARGE VEHICLES CANNOT BE
PROHIBITED ON WASSON ROAD NO
MATTER WHAT THE USE ON THIS
SPECIFIC TRACT IS.
THE OVERALL WOULD BE LESS
UNDER THE WLO USE THAN THE
MF USE BECAUSE OF THE HOURS
OF OPERATION.
FURTHERMORE THE NOISE FACTOR
NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED.
PARTIES CAN EXTEND UNTIL
VERY LATE HOURS OF THE
NIGHT.
UNDER BOTH SCENARIOS, THE
LEAST INTRUSIVE TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE THE
WLO USE.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT A LOT
HAS CHANGED ON WASSON ROAD
OR TO THE WORDS THAT HE SAID
IN 1995, SO I TOO
RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT
YOU DENY THIS ZONING CHANGE.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. PIERCE.
MICHAEL FAUSON AND FOLLOWING
HIM IS LEAH FAWS
FOSSBRENNER.
I REQUEST THAT YOU DENY
THE CHANGE FOR ZONE.
MY CONCERNS ARE WITH
TRAFFIC, BOTH WITH SAFETY
AND ACCESS.
A DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SIZE
WILL CERTAINLY INCREASE THE
TRAFFIC ON WASSON ROAD BY A
LARGE AMOUNT, THERE BY
CAUSING A DANGER TO ANY FOOT
TRAFFIC WHICH WOULD INCLUDE
NATURALLY WOMEN AND CHILDREN
GOING TO SCHOOL OR TAKING A
WALK IN THE EVENING OR THE
MORNING.
ACCESS IN MY PARTICULAR
NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NOW, WE
CAN GET OUT OF THE BATTLE
SPRINGS NEIGHBORHOOD ON BEN
WHITE, THE SERVICE ROAD ON
IH-35 OR CONGRESS AVENUE.
BOTH BEN WHITE AND THE
SERVICE ROAD ARE VERY
DIFFICULT TO GET OUT ON, SO
MOST RESIDENTS WILL GO OUT
ON CONGRESS AVENUE.
THE TRAFFIC THERE IS ALREADY
VERY HEAVY, AND WITH TWO
EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS
FURTHER UP THE STREET BY
STASSNEY AND CONGRESS, THE
GOTHAM RIDGE APARTMENTS, 296
UNITS AND NOW UNDER
CONSTRUCTION AND COMING ON
LINE, ANOTHER SET WITH MORE
UNITS AND THAT WILL BOOST
THE TRAFFIC ALREADY.
IF WE ADD ANOTHER IS 25
UNITS, THAT WOULD MAKE THE
TRAFFIC BE PRACTICALLY
UNBEARABLE, BUMPER TO BUMPER
MOST ALL THE TIME.
WE'LL HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT
TIME GETTING IN AND OUT OF
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR
THE ZONING CHANGE.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: MR. LEE
FAUSBRENNER.
THAT'S RIGHT, NOT SPEAKING
AND REGISTERED AGAINST.
AND STEVE COATS.
AND YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES.
CAN YOU GIVE SIX MINUTES?
THERE YOU ARE.
GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND
MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
I BOUGHT MY HOUSE SEVEN
YEARS AGO.
WASSON ROAD IS LIKE AN OLD
COUNTRY ROAD, ABOUT A
QUARTER OF A MILE LONG WITH
TWO SMALL BRIDGES NOT WIDE
ENOUGH FOR TWO CARS TO PASS
SAFELY AT THE SAME TIME.
THERE ARE EIGHT
SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ABOUT
HALFWAY DOWN WASSON ROAD AND
TWO MORE AT THE NORTH END OF
THE STREET.
ALL THOSE HEEMZ ARE
HOMESTEADED.
FOUR OF THE HOMESTEADERS ARE
RETIRED.
I HAVE PERSONALLY SPOKEN TO
ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS,
INCLUDING THE SALVAGE YARD,
THE MINI STORAGE BUSINESS
AND THE OTHERS.
THEY TOO OPPOSE THIS
REZONING.
-- THE PROPOSED REZONING.
THE APPLICANT IS AWARE OF
THE CONDITION OF WASSON ROAD
AND HAS PROPOSED TO WIDEN IT
AND REPAIR IT.
IT HAS ALSO OFFERED TO
ATTEMPT TO DO MINOR
RENOVATION TO THE BRIDGES.
IF REZONED THE SIDEWALKS AND
CURBS WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO
BE RECONSTRUCTED FOR THE
SAFETY OF THE CHILDREN.
THIS IN TURN WOULD PROBABLY
REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION OF
GUTTERS FOR RUNOFF ALL THE
WAY DOWN THE STREET.
IF THE APPLICANT OR THE CITY
HAS THE FUNDS IT WOULD TAKE
TO PROPERLY DO IT.
THE BILL FOR THESE
IMPROVEMENTS COULD ALSO END
UP BEING LEVIED AGAINST THE
CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS.
SINCE THIS PROPOSED PROJECT
IS WITHIN TWO MILES OF THE
NEAREST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL,
THE CHILDREN WOULD HAVE TO
WALK OR BE TRANSPORTED BACK
AND FORTH BY THEIR PARENTS.
SHOULD THEY WALK, THEY WOULD
HAVE TO CROSS STASSNEY AND
WALK FURTHER DOWN CONGRESS,
SERIOUSLY ENDANGERING THEIR
SAFETY.
THE CREEK WHICH WRAPS AROUND
THE BACK SIDE OF THIS
PROPERTY IS ANOTHER SERIOUS
DANGER.
WE HAVE ESTIMATED THE
CURRENT NUMBER OF TRIPS ON
WASSON ROAD TO BE 200.
WE ESTIMATE THE NUMBER OF
TRIPS CREATED BY THE
PROPOSED REZONING TO BE
APPROXIMATELY 1200.
EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT
WILL PROBABLY ONLY CLAIM
800, OUR ESTIMATE OF 1200 IS
SIX TIMES THE CURRENT.
EVEN WITH THE CURRENT NUMBER
OF OCCUPANTS ON WASSON ROAD,
IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO EXIT
THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WITH GOOD RAIN THAT OCCURS
AT LEAST 10 TIMES A YEAR,
THE BRIDGE AT THE NORTH END
FLOODS AND AND IS CLOSED.
THE SOUTH END CONNECTS WITH
THE SOUTH CONGRESS WITHIN
100 FEET OF THE INTERSECTION
OF STASSNEY AND CONGRESS.
AT THIS INTERSECTION A
LEFT-HAND IS ILLEGAL,
FORCING ALL TRAFFIC TO TURN
NORTH ON CONGRESS.
HOW DOES ONE EXIT OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD?
THERE IS ONE OTHER
ALTERNATIVE AND THAT IS EAST
MOCKINGBIRD.
HOWEVER, EVEN THIS EXIT HAS
ITS LIMITATIONS.
DURING TRAFFIC HOURS TRAFFIC
IS BACKED UP FROM STASSNEY
AND YOU ARE FORCED TO AGAIN
HEAD NORTH.
SHOULD YOU WISH TO HEAD
SOUTH ON STASSNEY, YOU MUST
FIRST TAKE A RIGHT UNTIL YOU
COME TO CONGRESS, THEN MAKE
A U-TURN.
DUE TO THE FREQUENT FLOODING
AT NORTH AND WASSON, THE
ONLY POSSIBLE PLACE FOR A
TRAFFIC LIGHT TO BE AT THE
INTERSECTION OF EAST
MOCKINGBIRD AND CONGRESS.
WITHOUT IT TRAFFIC JAMS WILL
OCCUR ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
STREET.
THE PROPERTIES AND HOMES
DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE
PROPOSED REZONING ARE BOTH
TWO TO THREE ACRES AND WORTH
APPROXIMATELY $200,000
APIECE.
WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY
18 ACRES OF LAND OWNED BY
FOUR SMALL BUSINESSES AND 10
SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES THAT
CURRENTLY ACCESS WASSON
ROAD.
THERE IS ONLY ONE
UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY
REMAINING, WHICH IS THE
PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
THE DENSITY PROPOSED FOR
THIS PROJECT IS NOT CAPABLE
WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE REQUEST THAT YOU DENY
THIS REZONING.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: COUNCIL,
THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS WE
HAVE.
NOW WE WILL GO TO THE
REBUTTAL.
MR. CONNELLY, THREE MINUTES
FOR REBUTTAL.
THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
DRAINAGE ON THIS PROPERTY
THAT WAS RAISED BY THE
NEIGHBORHOOD, MANY OF THE
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE FLOODING
ALONG WILLIAMSON CREEK, OUR
PROPERTY WILL NOT IMPACT
THAT AT ALL.
SMFK, OURS -- AS A MATTER OF
FACT, OURS WILL PROBABLY BE
THE ONLY PROPERTY IN HAVEN'T
THAT HAS A STORM WATER
DETENTION ON SITE TO
MINIMIZE AND REDUCE
FLOODING.
THEY ALSO HAD QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE FLOODING OF THE
DRAINAGE STRUCTURE ON THE
NORTH PART OF WASSON ROAD
THAT I DID NOT MENTION IS
THE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE ON
THE SOUTH PART OF WASSON
ROAD.
NOWHERE IN THE PUBLIC WORKS
RECORDS HAS THAT BRIDGE EVER
BEEN CLOSED, AND WE'VE EVEN
TALKED TO NEIGHBORS WHO
LIVED OUT THERE FOR 30
YEARS, AND IN NO ONE'S
RECOLLECTION CAN THEY
REMEMBER THAT THAT BRIDGE
FROM THE SOUTH HAS EVER BEEN
CLOSED.
SO AGAIN, WE ARE ALSO
WORKING WITH CITY STAFF TO
IMPROVE THAT TO BRING IT UP
TO CITY STANDARDS AND 25 AND
THE 100-YEAR STORM TO SERVE
THIS MULTI-FAMILY.
THE DOWN ZONING FROM CS TO
MF COMES WITH SEVERAL
BENEFITS.
THE HEIGHT ON CS IS 60 FEET
WITH AN IMPERVIOUS COVER
ALLOWABLE OF UP TO 90%,
WHEREAS THE MULTI-FAMILY
WOULD REDUCE THE HEIGHT TO
45 FEET AND REDUCE THE
IMPERVIOUS COVER TO 55.
SO AGAIN THE MULTI-FAMILY
USE ON THIS PROPERTY WOULD
BE COMPATIBLE TO THE
EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD
ACCORDING TO THE CITY STAFF.
THE IDEA THAT THIS WOULD BE
A SLUM OWE, THESE WILL BE
BUILT AS HIGH QUALITY, TAX
CREDIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
UNITS AND THE PROPERTY
OWNERS ARE REQUIRED TO OWN
THE PROPERTY FOR 16 YEARS
AND MAINTAIN IT ACCORDING TO
THE TDHC STANDARDS DURING
THAT TIME OR THEY WOULD LOSE
THEIR TAX CREDITS.
THERE ARE SEVERAL AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROJECTS IN TOWN
THAT AGAIN DON'T TURN TO
SLUM, THEY ARE VERY NICE
RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
AGAIN, THE IDEA HERE IS TO
PROVIDE SOME AFFORDABLE
HOUSING IN THIS AREA WHERE
THERE'S A LOT OF COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT GOING ON WHICH
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WILL
HAVE ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM TO GET
TO THESE AREAS OF WORK IN
THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO AGAIN, WE ASK THAT YOU
CONSIDER THE MF WOULD BE A
BETTER SUITED USE INSTEAD OF
CS.
WE'RE AWARE OF THE JUNK YARD
ACROSS THE STREET.
WE'RE WORKING WITH THAT
PROPERTY OWNER TO DO
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
ROADWAYS, LANDSCAPING, AND
AGAIN TO MAKE SURE THAT
EVERYTHING IS SAFE.
ALSO, THE TRANSPORTATION,
THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE INDICATES THAT ROADWAYS
OF LESS THAN 30 FEET HAVE
THE CAPABILITY OF HANDLING
1200 TRIPS PER DAY, AND
AGAIN, OUR --
[ BUZZER SOUNDS ]
-- ANTICIPATED
TRANSPORTATION IS 800 TO 900
TRIPS A DAY.
I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE
ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR MR. CONNALLY.
THANK YOU, MR. CONNALLY.
I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?
Wynn: SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, SECONDED
BY COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES.
AS INDICATED BY MS. GLASGO,
THIS APPLICATION HAS A 34%
VALID PETITION.
AND THE RELIGIOUS TO DENY
FROM STAFF AND -- AND THE
RECOMMENDATION TO DENY FROM
STAFF AND THE ZONING AND
PLATTING COMMISSION,
CORRECT?
CORRECT.
Mayor Garcia: SO I'LL
ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS
ITEM.
THIS.
Wynn: MAYOR, BASED ON OUR
STAFF -- THE HISTORY WITH
OUR STAFF IS THEY DO A VERY
GOOD JOB OF TRYING TO
BALANCE OUT TOWARD TWO
COMPETING ISSUES CITYWIDE.
THAT IS FOR US TO DELIVER
MORE HOUSING UNITS IN THIS
CITY, WE HAVE TO FIND THE
RIGHT SITES TO DO THAT, AT
THE SAME TIME WE ALSO HAVE
TO DO A VERY GOOD JOB AND BE
VERY SMART ABOUT WHERE WE
CHOSE THOSE SITES AND WE
NEED TO THINK ABOUT PUBLIC
ACCESS, SAFETY.
FLOODING IS A BIG ISSUE AS
WE WERE REMINDED AGAIN THIS
PAST MONTH.
BASED ON THE STAFF AND
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION, I'LL MOVE TO
DENY THE ZONING.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION TO
DENY BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
IS THERE A SECOND?
Slusher: SECOND.
Mayor Garcia: DISCUSSION?
IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
SEVEN TO ZERO TO DENY THIS
APPLICATION.
MS. GLASGO?
Glasco: MAYOR AND
COUNCILMEMBERS, OUR NEXT
ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER Z-7 IS
THE NEXT DISCUSSION ITEM.
THIS IS CASE NUMBER
C-14-02-0064.
IT'S LOCATED AT 2504 LARK
GLEN LANE.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY
ZONED INTERIM RURAL
RESIDENTIAL.
THE PROPERTY IS SEEKING A
CHANGE TO NO-MU, WHICH
STANDS FOR NEIGHBORHOOD
OFFICE, MIXED USE DISTRICT.
THE RELIGIOUS FROM THE
ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION IS TO GRANT
SINGLE-FAMILY-2 ZONING AND
THAT IS THE SAME
RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF.
THE PROPOSED USE FOR THE
SITE IS A CHILD CARE CENTER.
IN THE ORDINANCE YOU WILL
PROBABLY HEAR US REFER TO IT
AS A DAY CARE CENTER.
WE HAVE THREE DEFINITIONS OF
DAY CARE CENTERS.
WE HAVE A DAY CARE LIMITED,
WHICH ALLOWS UP TO SIX
CHILDREN IN A SINGLE-FAMILY
ZONING DISTRICT.
NOT ALL ZONING DISTRICTS IN
OUR CODE.
SECONDLY YOU HAVE DAY CARE
GENERAL, WHICH ALLOWS
ANYWHERE FROM SEVEN TO 20
CHILDREN IN CERTAIN ZONING
DISTRICTS.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE DAY
CARE COMMERCIAL, WHICH
ALLOWS IN EXCESS OF OVER 20
CHILDREN.
SO DAY CARE COMMERCIAL IS
WHAT THE APPLICANT IS
SEEKING HERE TO PROPOSE ON
THE SITE.
THAT WOULD ALLOW ANYWHERE
OVER 20 CHILDREN.
THE FIRST COMMERCIAL ZONING
DISTRICT THAT WOULD ALLOW A
DAY CARE CENTER WITH OVER 20
CHILDREN IS NO FOR THE
NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE DISTRICT
WITHOUT A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT.
THE SINGLE USE ZONING THAT
THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION IS RECOMMENDING
WOULD ALLOW THIS USE WITH A
CONDITIONAL USE SITE PLAN
THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE
APPROVED BY THE ZONING AND
PLATTING COMMISSION.
AND ALSO IS APPEALABLE TO
THE CITY COUNCIL BY ANY
AGRIEVED PARTY.
SO THOSE ARE THE TWO
DISTINGUISHING FACTORS HERE
THAT -- WITH A COMMERCIAL
DAY CARE ON PROPERTY ZONED
SINGLE-FAMILY, IT REQUIRES
SPECIAL APPROVAL BY THE
ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION.
JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE
INFORMATION HERE, THE
CONDITION USE PERMIT
REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, HOWEVER, FOR A
FACILITY A EXCEEDS A
THSAND SQUARE FEET WOULD
REQUIRE A SITE PLAN ANYWAY,
BUT THAT WOULD BE APPROVED
ADMINISTRATIVELY BY STAFF
AND ALSO A PUBLIC HEARING
PROCESS, SO THOSE ARE THE
TWO DISTINGUISHING FACTORS
BASED ON WHAT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDED
VERSUS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS
SEEKING.
AND I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER
ANY MORE QUESTIONS AFTER YOU
HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND
PEOPLE IN THE AREA.
Mayor Garcia: IS THE
APPLICANT HERE?
YOU HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO
MAKE A PRESENTATION.
IN CASE YOU WANT TO USE THIS
WHILE YOU'RE POINTING TO THE
GRAPHICS.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND
COUNCIL.
I'M THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY 2504, GLEN LARK
LANE.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR A CHILD
CARE OF TWEER KIDS, 24
MAXIMUM ENROLLMENT IS WHAT
WE'RE SEEKING.
LET MEF GI YOU A LITTLE
BACKGROUND.
WE PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY
IN JULY OF 1998 WITH PLANS
TO BUILD A PERSONAL
RESIDENCE AS WELL AS A CHILD
CARE CENTER.
IN 2000 WE FINISHED OUR
PLANS AND WE PUT TOGETHER
OUR BUDGET FOR CONSTRUCTION.
IN AUGUST OF 2001, A YEAR
LATER AND THREE YEARS INTO
THE PROJECT, WE GOT THE
ANNEXATION NOTICE THAT THE
PROPERTY WAS BEING ANNEXED
INTO THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
SO AT THAT TIME WE CALLED
THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S
DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE
CENTER AND ASKED WHAT DOES
THIS MEAN TO OUR PLAN?
THEY SAID NOW YOU NEED TO GO
THROUGH ZONING AND PLATTING
AND SUBDIVISION AND BUILDING
PERMITS AND THAT PROCESS.
SO WE SPENT THE LAST YEAR
GOING THROUGH THAT AND
WORKING OUR WAY THROUGH IT.
A YEAR AGO ON AUGUST 30TH I
APPROACHED THE CITY COUNCIL
DURING THE --
Mayor Garcia: WE WILL NOT
BE -- WE WILL NOT BE TAKING
THAT ITEM UNTIL ABOUT SEVEN.
JUST TO CONTINUE.
AUGUST 23rd AND AUGUST 30TH
OF LAST YEAR DURING THE
ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARINGS,
I DID COME SPEAK TO CITY
COUNCIL AND DISCUSS WHAT MY
PLANS WERE AT THAT TIME.
AND I ISSUED SOME DOCUMENTS
FOR YOUR PURPOSES FOR
REVIEW.
WE ALSO MET AND WE TRIED TO
ROUND OUT EXACTLY THE
PROCESS WE NEED TO FOLLOW TO
GO THROUGH WITH THE PLAN.
AND AT THAT TIME WE DID NOT
OBJECT TO THE ANNEXATION.
IN ADDITION, WE DID GET
SIGNATURES OF SUPPORT FROM
THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE IN
BLUE THAT ABUT THE PROPERTY.
IN MAY OF 2002 OF THIS YEAR
WE DID SUBMIT OUR PLANS FOR
THE ZONING OF THE NO-MU-CO
AND WE ALSO RECEIVED ONE
PHONE CALL FROM THE
HILLCREST RESIDENTS.
WE FOLLOWED THAT PHONE CALL
WITH A MEETING WITH THE
HILLCREST HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION AND AFTER A
COUPLE OF HOURS OF
DISCUSSING OUR PLANS AND OUR
PROPOSAL, THEY DID VOTE TO
SUPPORT US WITH OUR PROJECT.
I KNOW THIS MAY BE HARD TO
SEE, BUT WE DID HIRE AN
ENGINEER TO START THE
SUBDIVISION PLATTING
PROCESS.
IF YOU CAN SEE ON THIS MAP,
YOU CAN SEE THE FOOTPRINT OF
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
AND RIGHT UP AT THE FRONT IS
A SMALL CHILD CARE CENTER
FOR 24.
IT'S 900 SQUARE FEET IS THE
TOTAL.
I EXPRESSED TO THE ENGINEER,
HERE ARE SOME CONCERNS WE
HEARD FROM ZONING AND
PLATTING AND FROM THE AREA
RESIDENTS, THAT CONCERN
BEING JUST THERE'S
4.75 ACRES THAT WOULD HAVE
THE NO-MU, CO ZONING AND
THOUGHT THAT WAS EXCESSIVE
FOR A CHILD CARE CENTER.
SO OUR ENGINEER CAME UP WITH
WHAT I THOUGHT WAS A
WONDERFUL IDEA, AND THAT WAS
TO BREAK UP THE TRACT INTO
FOUR SEPARATE LOTS, EACH LOT
STILL BEING OVER AN ANCHOR,
SO INDIVIDUALLY THERE'S
STILL FIVE TIMES THE SIZE OF
THE NEIGHBORING SUBDIVISION
AND SO SEEK MO-MU, CO ONLY
ON THE LOT THAT'S HOUSING
THE CHILD CARE CENTER, BUT
ALLOW SF-2, SINGLE-FAMILY
ZONING TO EXIST ON THE OTHER
THREE TRACTS.
AND WE'RE WILLING TO DO
THAT.
IN ADDITION WITH THE
CONDITIONAL OVERLAY, WE'RE
GOING TO SAY NO APARTMENTS,
NO TOWNHOUSES, NO CONDOS,
JUST A SINGLE USE OF A
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE.
SO THE RESULT WILL STILL BE
VERY LOW DENSITY
DEVELOPMENT, VERY LOW
IMPERVIOUS COVER.
IT ALLOWS US TO COMPLY WITH
ALL BUILDING STANDARDS,
S.O.S., SET BACKS AND SO ON,
EVEN IN THIS CONFIGURATION.
SO THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA
WOULD SHOW THAT THIS AREA
WOULD STILL BE SF-2, WHICH
IS 450 FEET AWAY FROM THIS
AREA, SO A FOOTBALL FIELD
AND A HALF AWAY FROM THE
SUBDIVISION TO THE WEST.
IF I PUT IN A PLAY YARD FOR
THE KIDS BACK IN THIS AREA,
I'M STILL 300 FEET, A
FOOTBALL FIELD AWAY FROM
LARK GLEN LANE.
JUST TO REITERATE, WE ARE
PRIVATE CITIZENS.
I'M NOT A DEVELOPER, I'M NOT
A VENTURE CAPITALIST.
WE'RE NOT COMING INTO THE
CITY OF AUSTIN TO DO THE
DEVELOPMENT.
WE OWNED THIS PROPERTY THREE
YEARS BEFORE THE CITY OF
AUSTIN ANNEXED IT AND FORCED
US TO GO THROUGH THIS
PROCESS.
THIS WILL BE OUR HOME TOO.
THIS IS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO
LIVE AND THIS IS WHERE I'M
GOING TO RAISE MY FAMILY AND
MY KIDS.
[ BUZZER SOUNDS ]
ARE THERE QUESTIONS?
Mayor Garcia: WELL, WE
MAY HAVE QUESTIONS AFTER WE
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING,
BECAUSE YOU'RE THE
APPLICANT.
AND YOU WILL HAVE -- AFTER
EVERYBODY SPEAKS, YOU WILL
HAVE THREE MINUTES FOR
REBUTTAL.
SHELBY STANFIELD?
SORRY.
JOE STANFIELD DOES NOT WISH
TO SPEAK AND IS REGISTERED
IN FAVOR OF.
AND ELAINE STANFIELD, IS SHE
HERE?
IF YOU COULD COME UP.
WELCOME, MS. STANFIELD.
THANK YOU.
I ALSO OWN THE PROPERTY
THAT'S BEING REVIEWED AND I
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SOME
RELEVANT INFORMATION POINTS.
WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY
WITH THE INTENT AND THE
REALTOR THAT SOLD US THE
PROPERTY FOUR YEARS AGO THAT
I WORKED HARD WITH TO GET MY
ACCREDITATION CAN VOUCH FOR
THAT.
AT PLATTING AND ZONING
HEARINGS ON JUNE 25TH, TWO
PEOPLE SPOKE IN SUPPORT,
SANDRA HAMILTON, A 27-YEAR
PROFESSOR OF EARLY CHILDHOOD
EDUCATION, WHO HAS BEEN MY
INSTRUCTOR FOR NEARLY FOUR
YEARS, AND HAS BEEN A R.
AWARE OF OUR PLANS FOR THE
BEGINNING AND SUPPORTS THEM.
AND LINDA WELCH, AN
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AT ACC
WHO IS A FORMER CHILD CARE
COORDINATOR FOR THE CITY OF
AUSTIN FOR 11 YEARS.
HER ROLE WAS TO ADDRESS THE
NEED FOR CHILD CARE.
THEY BOTH STATED THAT
QUALITY CHILD CARE SHOULD BE
OF PRIORITY IN OUR COMMUNITY
AND THEY SUPPORT OUR
COMMITMENT AND GOALS FOR
THIS PROJECT.
THEIR TESTIMONY IS RELEVANT
BECAUSE THEY'RE COMMITTED TO
SUPPORTING THE COMMUNITY,
OPERATING AND SUPPORT
GUIDELINES OF THE TEXAS
DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND
REGULATIONS, SUPPORT CHILD
CARE AND NEYC TO NAME A FEW.
I FEEL IT IS IMPORTANT TO
DISCLOSE OUR INTEGRITY,
COMMITMENT TO PROVIDING A
QUALITY CHILD CARE FACILITY
THAT WILL BE AN ASSET TO OUR
COMMUNITY AND OUR WORK
ETHICS.
I AGREE COMPLETELY WITH THE
PRACTICES OF AUSTIN
COMMUNITY COLLEGE,
UNIVERSITY CHILD CARE CENTER
AND CHILD INC., ALL OF WHICH
I HAVE BEEN A PART OF AS A
PARENT OR A STUDENT
VOLUNTEER FOR YEARS.
ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY
SUPPORTERS ARE RHONDA AND
BILL PAVER OF THE STEPPING
ZONE.
WE'VE KNOWN THEM FOR YEARS.
ALTHOUGH WE HAVE NO DESIRE
FOR CAPACITY GREATER THAN
24, I ADMIRE THEIR
COMMITMENT TO PROVIDING
QUALITY EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES TO CHILDREN.
THEY TOO SEE OUR PROJECT AS
SMART GROWTH AND AN ASSET TO
THE COMMUNITY.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO
POINT OUT THAT WE HAVE
WORKED WITH THE CITY OF
AUSTIN, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF
LICENSING AND REGULATION,
WHO HAVE REVIEWED AND FELT
OUR PLANS MEET ADA AND OTHER
REQUIREMENTS.
WE MET WITH THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT REGARDING
ACCESSIBILITY.
AND OUR COMMUNITY, HAVE MADE
MANY EFFORTS TO VISIT WITH
COUNCILMEMBER GOODMAN'S
OFFICE AND HAVE HAD SEVERAL
CONVERSATIONS WITH ANDREW,
HOWEVER WAS UNABLE TO TALK
WITH JERRY, WHOM I WAS TOLD
I HAD TO SPEAK WITH HIM IN
ORDER TO GET IN TO SEE
MS. GOODMAN.
WE'RE TRYING OUR BEST TO
MEET OR EXCEED ALL QUALITY
STANDARDS.
THIS WHOLE PROCESS IS
INCREDIBLE AND I RESPECT IT,
HOWEVER I DON'T SEE HOW
ZONING THIS PROPERTY
N.O.-MU-CO WOULD POSE ANY
HARM TO THE COMMUNITY.
RATHER I SEE IT AS AN ASSET.
OUR DESIRE IS TO PROVIDE
QUALITY EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR
NEIGHBORS AS WELL AS LIVE
AND RAISE OUR TEAM ON THIS
PROPERTY.
WE WILL BE WORKING TOWARD
NEYC ACCREDITATION.
WE ARE NOT A LARGE COMPANY
COMING IN, RATHER WE HAVE
OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR FOUR
YEARS AND HAVE DISCLOSED OUR
INTENT AT PUBLIC HEARINGS
AND HAVE ERECTED A SIGN
BEFORE ANY OTHER PROPERTIES
RUR SOUNDING US WAS SOLD TO
INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS.
[ BUZZER SOUNDS ]
Mayor Garcia: IF YOU
COULD SUMMARIZE.
JUST THAT I FEEL WE'VE
PLACED LIMITATIONS ON A
REQUEST TO AACCOMMODATE ALL
OPPOSITION AND THAT ONE
THING I THOUGHT WAS REALLY
IMPORTANT IS AT THE PLATTING
AND ZONING HEARING THE
HILLCREST HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION VOTED IN SUPPORT
OF OUR PROPOSAL, BUT THAT
WAS STATED DURING OPPOSITION
AND SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT
WAS ACCURATELY REFLECTED.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
MR. GERALD W. GARCIA.
GERALD W. GARCIA?
AND THE LAST SPEAKER ON THIS
ONE IS LORI HAYWOOD, BUT SHE
REGISTERED NOT WISHING TO
SPEAK AND AGAINST THE
PROJECT.
MR. GARCIA, WELCOME, SIR.
GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR
HONOR, MEMBERS OF THE
COUNCIL.
I'M REPRESENTING THE
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OF
THE VILLAGES OF SHADY
HOLLOW, WHICH IS THE
PROPERTY TO THE WEST OF THE
TRACT IN QUESTION.
MY RESIDENCE IS AT 2508
NEMAN, WHICH IS LONG THE
WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF
VILLAGES OF SHADY HOLLOW
FAXED IN A LETTER TO THE
COUNCILMEMBERS OFFICE TODAY.
I'D LIKE TO QUOTE FROM IT
BRIEFLY.
WE'RE ASKING THAT THE
MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OPPOSE THE ZONING REQUEST OF
APPLICATION C-14-02-0064 FOR
THE ZONING.
THE OPPOSITION IS BASED ON
THE FOLLOWING POINTS: BETTY
BAKER, CHAIRMAN OF THE
ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION STATED AT THE
JUNE 25TH HEARING THAT, AND
I QUOTE, I DON'T THINK WE
COULD LOOK AT ANYTHING THAT
WOULD BE A BETTER EXAMPLE OF
SPOT ZONING THAN THIS
REQUEST.
WE'RE NOT ZONING THIS, WE'RE
ZONING THIS LAND.
I HAVE A REAL PROBLEM WITH
ANY CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS
THAT YOU WOULD COME UP WITH.
MOST OF THE THINGS THAT YOU
READ WOULD HAVE TO BE IN A
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
THEY WOULD NOT BE
ENFORCEABLE BY THE CITY.
IT WOULD BE AT THE EXPENSE
OF THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE
AREA TO ENFORCE IT.
MS. BAKER ALSO STATED, I
THINK OUR RESPONSIBILITY FOR
THE APPROPRIATE USE OF THIS
LAND IS NOT TO HELP OUT THE
PROPERTY OWNER WHO GOT
CAUGHT UP IN THE COURT
BUREAUCRACY.
FURTHERMORE THE, ANOTHER
COMMISSIONER STATED AT THE
SAME HEARING, AND I QUOTE,
THAT THE POINT IS THE ZONING
AND PLATTING COMMISSION,
DIFFICULT AS THIS DECISION
IS, WHICH IT IS, I THINK THE
ZONING THE APPLICANT IS
ASKING FOR IS INAPPROPRIATE.
FURTHERMORE, LOCAL STREETS
THAT ADJOIN THE PROPERTY IN
QUESTION ARE NOT, ACCORDING
TO THE AUSTIN TRANSPORTATION
CRITERIA MANUAL, DESIGNATED
FOR ZONING OTHER THAN
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES.
AND THERE ARE PROPERTIES
ALREADY ZONED FOR BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENT WITHIN A SHORT
DISTANCE OF THE PROPERTY IN
QUESTION THAT COULD SERVE
POTENTIAL CLIENTS OF THE
APPLICANT.
THEY MENTIONED SOME OF THEIR
SUPPORTERERS, INCLUDING
STEPPING ZONE.
THEY'RE BUILDING A CHILD
DEVELOPMENT CENTER ON BRODIE
LANE, WHICH IS NOT THAT FAR
FROM THE PROPERTY IN
QUESTION.
SO IN CLOSING, THE VILLAGE
OF SHADY HOLLOW HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION BOARD WOULD ASK
THAT YOU AND THE MEMBERS OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OPPOSE THE
APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE, MIXED
USE ZONING AND URGE INSTEAD
THAT THEY ACCEPT THE
RECOMMENDATION OF YOUR
COMMISSION AND THAT THE
PROPERTY IN QUESTION BE
ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE 2 IN A SIMILAR
MANNER AS ADJOINING
PROPERTIES.
THIS WOULD STILL PERMIT THE
APPLICANTS TO PURSUE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A CHILD CARE
FACILITY THROUGH THE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PROCESS.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MR. GARCIA.
LAURIE HEYWOOD IS NOT
WISHING TO SPEAK AND
REGISTERED AGAINST.
MR. STANFIELD, YOU HAVE
THREE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.
I'LL JUST MAKE A COUPLE
OF COMMENTS.
I DO HAVE SUPPORT FROM THE
DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING IN
TO THE SOUTH OF ME, WHICH IS
THE HILL -- THE OLYMPIC
HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION THAT'S
GOING TO BE 739 LOTS.
HILLCREST I DO HAVE AN
E-MAIL.
I WROTE TO THE HILLCREST
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION,
WHICH IS THE SUBDIVISION I
GO THROUGH TO ACCESS MY
PROPERTY, ASKING THEM IF
THERE WAS ANY NEED FOR US TO
GET TOGETHER AND VISIT
BEFORE THIS MEETING.
AND MARY'S RESPONSE TO ME,
WHO IS THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE HILLCREST
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, SAID
THAT SHE SPOKE WITH THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THEIR
FEELING WAS THAT THE
HOMEOWNERS'S ASSOCIATION HAS
ALREADY SHOWN SUPPORT AND
THAT FURTHER INVOLVEMENT IS
NOT NECESSARY AT THIS TIME.
SO I DO HAVE SUPPORT FROM
THE SUBDIVISION THAT WOULD
BE MOST IMPACTED.
AGAIN, THE VILLAGE OF SHADY
HOLLOW, I UNDERSTAND THEIR
CONCERNS, BUT IF WE GO THE
SUBDIVISION ROUTE, I'M
450 FEET AWAY FROM THAT
SUBDIVISION.
AGAIN, THIS IS LOW DENSITY
GROWTH.
WITH A LIMIT OF 24 KIDS,
WE'RE GOING TO SERVE
IMMEDIATE VICINITY.
I DON'T SEE HOW THIS COULD
IN ANY WAY INCREASE THE
TRAFFIC THROUGH THE
SUBDIVISION.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, AT THE
ZONING AND PLATTING MEETING,
COMMISSIONER AUGUSTNER SAID
MANY KIDS COULD JUST WALK
THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL ON THE
SIDEWALK.
AND WE DID GET THREE VOTES
AT ZONING AND PLATTING, SO
IT WAS NOT A UNANIMOUS VOTE
AGAINST US.
I GOT A BIT OF CONFIDENCE
OUT OF THAT.
I DO THINK THE CONDITIONAL
OVERLAYS THAT WE COULD SET
ON THIS PROPERTY WITH THE
USE OF A CHILD CARE FACILITY
ONLY WITH A LIMIT OF 24 KIDS
IS ENFORCEABLE.
I DO NOT THINK THAT THAT'S
OUT OF THE QUESTION.
AND RESPONSE TO OTHER
PROPERTY BEING AVAILABLE, I
CANNOT AFFORD THE OTHER
PROPERTY THAT'S COMMERCIAL
THAT'S IN THE MAJOR AREAS.
I KNOW THE PIECE OF PROPERTY
THAT STEPPING STONE JUST
PURCHASED, WHICH IS A ONE
ACRE LOT, FOR ALMOST
$300,000.
I'M NOT IN A POSITION TO DO
THAT.
I DO OWN THIS PROPERTY AND
THAT'S WHAT WE HOPE TO DO
WITH IT.
SO I'LL ENTERTAIN MY
-- ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU, MR. STAN SFOOELD.
Mayor Garcia: I'LL
ENTERTAIN A HOATION TO A MOTION TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
ON THIS ONE, MS. GLASGO,
ZONING AND PLATTING
RECOMMENDED SF-2?
Glasco: YES, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: AND THE
APPLICANT?
Glasco: THE APPLICANT IS
REQUESTING NO-MU ZONING WITH
A CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
Mayor Garcia: ARE THERE
QUESTIONS FOR MS. GLASGO OR
FOR THE APPLICANT?
Wynn: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
Wynn: SO WAS THE
APPLICANT REQUESTING A
CONDITIONAL OVERLAY N.O. FOR
THE ENTIRE TRACT OR -- I
THOUGHT I HEARD HIM SAY THAT
THE WESTERN HALF
APPROXIMATELY IS NOW
SINGLE-FAMILY.
RIGHT.
WHEN WE WENT TO ZONING AND
PLATTING IT WAS FOR THE
ENTIRE TRACT, BUT REFLECTING
UPON THE CONCERNS THAT WERE
EXPRESSED, WE SAID WELL,
THAT'S 4.75 ACRES.
THAT'S A LOT TO ZONE
N.O.-MU.
AND MY ENGINEER WAS'S GOING
THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION
PROCESS.
I SAID IS THERE ANYTHING WE
CAN DO THAT WILL PRESERVE
LOW DENSITY GROWTH, BUT AT
THE SAME TIME ADDRESS SOME
OF THE CONCERNS?
THAT'S WHEN HE CAME UP WITH
THE IDEA OF BREAKING IT DOWN
INTO FOUR INDIVIDUAL LOTS.
SO THAT'S HAPPENED SINCE WE
LAST MET WITH ZONING AND
PLATTING.
I JUST GOT THE PRELIMINARY
PLAN IN THE LAST COUPLE OF
DAYS.
SO I WILL OFFER TO GO THAT
ROUTE.
IF I'M REQUESTED.
Wynn: MS. GLASGO --
SO THE HIGHLIGHTED AREA
THEN ON THE MAP WOULD BE
SF-2 SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCES.
THE OTHER WOULD BE
NO-MU-
CO.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN HAD A
QUESTION OF MS. GLASGO.
> Wynn: IF YOU COULD REMIND
ME WHAT ARE THE RULES OF
CHILD CARE FACILITIES?
IS IT A PERMITTED USE IN AN
SF-ZONING?
IN SINGLE-FAMILY 2 ZONING
IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE THAT
REQUIRES A CONDITIONAL USE
APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION.
SO IT'S NOT PERMITTED OUT
RIGHT.
THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO
SUBMIT A SITE PLAN IF IT'S
ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY 2 TO
HAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVE IT.
Wynn: DURING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DELIBERATION OZ
THIS, DID THAT COME UP?
WERE THERE INDICATIONS THAT
THEY WERE WILLING TO
ENTERTAIN THAT CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT?
Glasco: WELL, IT DEPENDS
ON WHEN THE APPLICANT
SUBMITTED IT.
THE COMMISSION HAD COMMIT
KATEED THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD
THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD
ACHIEVE THE PROJECT THROUGH
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
THROUGH -- WHILE HAVING THE
PROPERTY ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY
2 AS OPPOSED TO NEIGHBORHOOD
OFFICE AND THE MIXED USE
COMPONENT.
THE APPLICANT'S CONCERN IS
THAT THE LACK OF CERTAINTY
WITH A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, WHEREAS WITH N.O.
ZONING, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO
IS SUBMIT A SITE PLAN THAT
IS APPROVED
ADMINISTRATIVELY.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS
SINGLE-FAMILY 2, REQUIRES
THAT THE SITE PLAN GOES TO
THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION FOR A PUBLIC
HEARING AND IS APPEALABLE TO
THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD
THERE BE ANY AGRIEVED
PARTIES TO THE COMMISSION'S
DECISION.
DOES THAT HELP YOU?
Wynn: THAT HELPS YOU.
I HAPPEN TO BELIEVE THAT
THIS WOULD BE A GOOD
LOCATION FOR A CHILD CARE
FACILITY, AND FRANKLY, THE
MORE WELL DONE CHILD CARE
FACILITIES WE HAVE IN AND
AMONGSTS OUR NEIGHBORHOODS,
THE BETTER FOR ALL OF US AS
NEIGHBORS, BUT I DO SEE AND
STRUGGLE WITH THE ISSUE OF
AN APPARENT SORT OF SPOT
ZONING IF YOU JUST LOOKED AT
A ZONING MAP AND SEE THIS
COMMERCIAL USE RIGHT IN THE
MIDDLE AND AMONGSTS SF-2
LAND.
WHAT IS THE STAFF
RECOMMENDATION?
> Glasco: THE STAFF
RECOMMENDATION WAS TO ZONE
IT SINGLE-FAMILY 2 ALSO AND
GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF
GETTING A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT.
SO IT DOES NOT PROHIBIT THE
USE, IT SIMPLY MAINTAINS
CONSISTENT ZONING, BUT
REQUIRES APPROVAL FROM THE
ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION FOR THE PLAN.
Wynn: MAYOR, IF YOU'RE
READY FOR A MOTION, I'LL --
Mayor Garcia: IMAYOR I AM READY.
Wynn: I WILL MAKE IT AS A
MOTION, THAT WE TAKE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION FOR SF-2
ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY.
AND I DO WANT TO OFFER THAT
I CERTAINLY WOULD BE VERY
ENCOURAGING AND VERY
RECEPTIVE TO THE -- A FUTURE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
CHILD CARE FACILITY.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN TO GRANT
THE ZONING AS RECOMMENDED BY
THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION.
IS THERE A SECOND?
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLEY.
DISCUSSION?
Slusher: MAYOR, I'VE GOT
A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.
Slusher: MS. GLASGO, I'M
CURIOUS AS TO HOW THE ACCESS
WOULD BE PROVIDED IF IT'S
ALL SF-2.
WOULD IT JUST BE A DEAD-END
STREET COMING FROM THE EAST?
BECAUSE IT COULDN'T BE CUT
THROUGH BECAUSE THERE'S
HOUSES BEHIND THERE.
> Glasco: WELL, SINCE IT'S
GOING TO BE A DAY CARE
CENTER THEY WOULD HAVE TO
HAVE A DRIVEWAY.
THE STREET THAT DEAD ENDS
RIGHT THERE ON THE THE SITE,
THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A
DRIVEWAY EXTENDED THROUGH
THE SITE TO CONNECT ON TO
THE STREET THAT IS STOPPED
AT THAT END.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE BEGINNING
A SUBDIVISION PLAN, THERE'S
A PRELIMINARY PLAN.
THE ACCESS TO THE SITE IS
GOING TO BE OFF LARK GLEN
LANE.
Slusher: THE STREETS
AREN'T NAMED IN THE MAP I
HAVE IN THE BACKUP.
WHY DON'T YOU GET THE ONE
THAT CORRESPOND TO THE MAP
I'M LOOKING AT HERE?
I CAN'T SEE IT, MS. GLASGO?
Glasco: THIS IS THE SITE
RIGHT HERE, AND THIS IS THE
STREET -- THIS IS LARKS GLEN
LANE.
THIS IS WHERE THE ACCESS
WOULD BE TO THE SITE.
Slusher: THANK YOU.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE
STAFF OR FOR THE APPLICANT?
THERE'S A MOTION TO GRANT
SF-2 ZONING AS RECOMMENDED
BY THE ZONING AND PLATTING
COMMISSION.
FURTHER DISCUSSION?
IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE?
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
SEVEN TO ZERO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THIS IS ON FIRST READING
ONLY, YES.
COUNCIL, I DID NOT CALL UP
THE MINUTES FOR APPROVAL, IF
WE COULD GO BACK TO THE
BEGINNING OF THE AGENDA
SOMEWHERE UP HERE.
PROOF THE MINUTES FOR
JULY 17TH, 2002.
ARE THERE ANY CHANGES OR
CORRECTIONS?
IS THERE A MOTION TO
APPROVE?
Thomas: SO MOVE, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS.
IS THERE A SECOND?
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
ALVAREZ.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
SEVEN TO ZERO.
I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND TO
COUNCIL THAT WE TAKE A
FIVE-MINUTE RECESS AND AT
THAT TIME FOLLOWING THAT
RECESS -- ACTUALLY, NO, I'M
GOING TO BACK OFF OF THAT.
I'M GOING TO ASK THAT WE
RECESS THIS MEETING AND THAT
WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
UNDER SECTION 551.071 TO
DISCUSS LEGAL ISSUES RELATED
TO SAVE OUR SPRINGS EYE
LINES AND CIRCLE C
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
VERSUS THE CITY OF AUSTIN,
CIRCLE C LAND CORPORATION
AND STRATUS PROPERTIES,
INC., CAUSE NUMBER GN-202018
IN THE 261 JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY,
TEXAS.
AND LEGAL ISHDZ RELATED TO
THE CIRCLE C LAND CORP
(STRATUS) PROPOSED
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
AND NUMBER TWO IS TO DISCUSS
LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO
LONGHORN PARTNERS PIPELINE,
LP, VERSUS CITY OF AUSTIN,
ET AL, CASE NUMBER
A-02-CA-00 IS-SS AND ETHYL
SPILLAR ET AL VERSUS
LONGHORN PARTNERS PIPELINE
LP, ET AL, CASE NUMBER
A-98-CA-55-SS IN THE UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
TEXAS, AUSTIN DIVISION AND
OTHER LEGAL ISSUES RELATED
TO HAZARDOUS PIPELINES.
THE COUNCIL IS NOW IN RECESS
AND WE'LL GO INTO EXECUTIVE
SESSION.
Thomas: BEFORE WE GO IN,
DO YOU KNOW HOW -- IF WE
COULD ASK STAFF HOW MUCH
TIME DO THEY NEED FOR 91 AND
92 BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME
PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN OUT
HERE SINCE -- HOW LONG IS
THE TIME, IF YOU DON'T MIND,
MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia: THE PROBLEM
IS 91 AND 92 IS THAT IT HAS
QUITE A FEW SPEAKERS.
IT HAS 19 SPEAKERS.
AND WE HAVE A 5:30 TIME
CERTAIN, SO WHAT I'M
RECOMMENDING IS THAT WE GO
AHEAD AND GO INTO EXECUTIVE
SESSION, CONTINUE THE
DISCUSSION.
WHILE THE COUNCIL IS IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION, I WILL
COME OUT AND DO THE MUSIC
AND THE PROCLAMATIONS, AND
THEN I'LL GO BACK IN AND
JOIN YOU FOR THE EXECUTIVE
SESSION.
AND THEN WHEN WE COME BACK,
THAT'S THE FIRST ITEM, WHICH
BASICALLY Y'ALL BE PART OF
THE 4:00 O'CLOCK TIME
CERTAIN, SO WE'RE AN HOUR
AND A HALF BEHIND, DOLORES,
SO Y'ALL UNDERSTAND THAT --
IT'S ABOUT AN HOUR OF
TESTIMONY.
NO, 91 AND 92 ARE NOT FOR
6:00 O'CLOCK.
THEY'RE PART OF THE ZONING
AT 4:00 O'CLOCK, UNLESS I'M
MISTAKEN, BUT LET ME CHECK.
NO, THEY'RE -- WE DON'T
START ON 6:00 O'CLOCK UNTIL
93.
SO THE COUNCIL IS IN RECESS.
DO WE HAVE OUR MUSICIAN
HERE?
THEY'RE HERE.
OKAY.
YES, THEY'RE HERE, MAYOR.
THEY'RE HERE.
Mayor Garcia: WHAT DID
YOU SAY, MR. CHAPA?
THEY'RE READY TO GO.
[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]
--
Mayor Garcia: WE'RE IN
RECESS, WE'LL BE BACK AT
ABOUT 6:30.
[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]
(5:30).
Mayor Garcia: LET ME ALSO
ANNOUNCE THAT WE'LL DO 91
AND 92 AND THEN WE'LL GO TO
THE TIME CERTAIN 6:00 P.M.,
93 THROUGH 98, AND THEN
WE'LL GO TO ITEM 15 THROUGH
36.
I WOULD SAY 6:30.
THAT'S MY GUESS, DOLORES,
THE BEST I CAN TELL.
[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]
(TIME: 5:31)
LEWIS,.
Mayor Garcia: HELLO.
AS IS CUSTOMARY NOW AT THE
AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL
MEETINGS, AT 5:30, TO
LIGHTEN THE LOAD, FOR THE
COUNCIL AND THE PEOPLE THAT
CAME TO VISIT US, WE INVITE
SOME OF OUR VERY, VERY
OUTSTANDING MUSICIANS TO
BRING US SOME MUSIC AND TO
CHEER US UP.
LIKE MAYOR PRO TEM, MAX
NOFZIGER USED TO SAY, TO
TAME THE BEAST IN ALL OF US.
TODAY WE HAVE, IF I
MISPRONOUNCE YOUR NAME, YOU
CAN CORRECT ME ON THIS, RICK
HORNYAK AND GARY LEWIS.
THEY MET RECENTLY THROUGH A
CHRONICLE AD, WHO SAYS THAT
THE CHRONICLE DOESN'T DO
SOMETHING THINGS?
AFTER SPENDING THE AFTERNOON
TOGETHER, THEY HAD AN
INSTINCT THAT THIS UNION
WOULD LEAD TO SOMETHING BIG.
RICK RECENTLY RELOCATED FROM
WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA AND
GARY LEWIS HAS BEEN IN
AUSTIN BEFORE THE BOOM.
WHICH BOOM WAS THAT?
WHATEVER BOOM.
Mayor Garcia: TOGETHER
THEY HAVE HONED THEIR
GUITARS INTO MUCH MORE THAN
MUSIC.
THEY HAVE DEVELOPED A
LASTING FRIENDSHIP.
SO PLEASE JOIN ME IN
WELCOMING RICK HORNYAK AND
GARY LEWIS.
[ APPLAUSE ]
[ (music) MUSIC PLAYING (music)(music) ]
[(music) SINGING (music)(music)) [ APPLAUSE ]
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
RICK AND GARY.
WE HAVE A PROCLAMATION FOR
YOU GUYS.
IT READS AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS THE LOCAL MUSIC
COMMUNITY MAKES MANY
CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARD THE
DEVELOPMENT OF AUSTIN'S
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND
CULTURAL DIVERSITY; AND
WHEREAS THE DEDICATED
EFFORTS OF ARTISTS FURTHER
AUSTIN'S STATUS AS THE LIVE
MUSIC CAPITAL OF THE WORLD;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GUS
GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF
AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HERE BY
PROCLAIM AUGUST THE FIRST AS
RICK HORNYAK DAY AND GARY
LEWIS DAY.
[ APPLAUSE ]
[ APPLAUSE ] FROM
Mayor Garcia: I OWE A
PERSONAL DEBT TO THESE YOUNG
MEN THAT ARE BEHIND ME HERE,
BECAUSE OUR THIRD SON WAS
BORN WITH A VISUAL
DEFICIENCY SHE -- A VISION
DEFICIENCY, HE WENT TO A
CAMP THAT YOU ALL HAVE IN
KERRVILLE.
HE SPENT TWO WONDERFUL
WEEKS -- LEARNING A LOT OF
THINGS.
I CAN REPORT TO YOU THAT
EVEN THOUGH HE STILL HAS
AGENT BIT OF A VISION
DEFICIENCY, HE'S NO LONGER
DISABLED.
HE WORKS, HE TAKES CARE OF
HIS MOTHER, HE TAKES CARE OF
HIS FATHER, WE ARE HOPING
THAT HE STAYS YOUNG SO HE
CAN TAKE CARE OF US AS WE
GET OLDER.
[ LAUGHTER ]
BUT -- OUR OTHER SON IS AN
INSURANCE EXECUTIVE, HE
FORCED HIS MOTHER AND ME TO
BUY SOME OLD FOLKS INSURANCE
SO WHEN WE GET OLD WE CAN GO
TO SOME NURSING HOME, SOME
WAREHOUSE SOMEPLACE.
I SAID I'M NOT GOING TO BUY
IT BECAUSE CARLOS IS GOING
TO TAKE CARE OF US.
WELL, HE WON THE ARGUMENT.
HE GOT TO HIS MOTHER AND THE
REST IS HISTORY.
I'M PAYING.
GOOD MONEY.
EVERY MONTH TO KEEP THAT
INSURANCE.
MY WIFE SAID, BUT WE CAN
CANCEL THE INSURANCE.
I SAID, "ARE YOU CRAZY?
YOU START PAYING THIS, YOU
CANCEL IT, ITS JUST LIKE YOU
GAVE MONEY TO PEOPLE.
YOU HAVE TO KEEP IT UNTIL
YOU GET OLD SO THEY CAN HAUL
YOU WAY SOMEPLACE."
BUT ANYWAY I REALLY
APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU
DO IN SO MANY DIFFERENT
AREAS.
THIS PROCLAMATION IS --
READS AS FOLLOWS: BE IT
KNOWN THAT WHEREAS THE
CAPITAL CITY LIONS CLUB WAS
CHARTERED IN 1947, THE FIRST
PREDOMINANTLY BLACK LIONS
CLUB IN THE STATE AND
NATION, AND WHEREAS BESIDES
SUPPORTING NATIONAL LION'S
CLUB ACTIVITIES, THE CAPITAL
CITY LIONS HAVE CONTRIBUTED
TO LOCAL CHARITIES AND
SPORTSS, HAVE ADOPTED TWO
SCHOOLS IN PARTNERS IN
EDUCATION, WONDERFUL
INFLUENCE IN THAT, HAVE
ESTABLISHED A [INAUDIBLE]
LIBRARY AT THE ALAMO
RECREATION CENTER.
WHEREAS WE CONGRATULATE THE
CAPITAL CITY LIONS ON THEIR
COMMITMENT TO BETTER, THEIR
MOTTO, WE SERVE.
THEIR MANY COMMUNITY SERVICE
ACTIVITIES ATTEST TO.
AS WELL AS ON THE LEADERSHIP
THEY PROVIDED WITHIN THE
LIONS CLUB ORGANIZATION IN
LOCAL AND DISTRICT OFFICER
POSITIONS.
AND YOU SEE SOME OF THESE
GUYS HAVE ALL THIS -- ALL
THESE BADGES OF SERVICE.
WHERE THEY HAVE SERVED THE
LIONS CLUB THROUGHOUT TIME.
NOW, THEREFORE, I GUS
GARCIA, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF
AUSTIN, TEXAS, DO HERE BY
PROCLAIM AUGUST THE 24th 24
24th, 2002, AS THE CAPITAL
CITY LION'S CLUB 35th
ANNIVERSARY.
LET'S GIVE THEM A BIG HAND.
[ APPLAUSE ]
THIS IS CHARLEY AKINS.
CHARLIE AND I WORKED
TOGETHER FOR A LONG TIME.
HIM AS A TOP ADMINISTRATOR
IN THE AUSTIN INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AS A MATTER OF FACT HE WAS
THE FIRST PRINCIPAL OF
ANDERSON HIGH SCHOOL WHEN I
WAS ON THE SCHOOL BOARD.
LET'S GIVE HIM A BIG HAND.
[ APPLAUSE ]
MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.
THANK YOU FOR THIS
PROCLAMATION REPRESENTING
THE CAPITAL CITY LIONS CLUB.
THANK YOU FOR -- FOR THE
SERVICE THAT YOU GIVE OUR
COMMUNITY.
I THINK THAT THE MOTTO "WE
SERVE" IS VERY APPROPRIATE
FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.
WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR
SERVICE TO AUSTIN AND SURELY
TO OUR COMMUNITY.
THESE YOUNG MEN HAVE BEEN A
PART, FOR THE MOST PART, OF
OUR CLUB FOR 35 YEARS.
THERE ARE SOME WHO ARE
CHARTER MEMBERS WHO ARE
HERE.
OTHERS WHO ARE YOUNG ONES
COMING ON TO TAKE OUR
PLACES, WE ARE DELIGHTED
THAT'S GOING TO TAKE PLACE.
BUT THEY HAVE REALLY GIVEN
SERVICE.
THEY ENJOY DOING IT.
I'M JUST DELIGHTED TO BE A
PART OF THIS GROUP.
I WANT TO PRESENT THE
PRESIDENT OF OUR LIONS CLUB,
WE CALL HIM THE LION BOSS.
HE'S A VERY CONSCIOUS CON SIGN TO US
AND DEDICATE -- CONSCIENCE
TO US AND DEDICATED PERSON.
THANK YOU SO MUCH,
CHARLES DIDN'T TELL ME THAT
HE WAS GOING TO PUT ME ON
THE SPOT LIKE THIS.
BUT I ALSO SAY TO YOU AND
THE CITY COUNCIL THANK YOU
SO MUCH FOR THIS
APPLICATION, I SPEAK ON
BEHALF OF THE CLUB AND THEIR
MEMBERS, THANK YOU AGAIN.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: AND
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN WILL BE
PREPARING TO MAKE ANOTHER
PRESENTATION WHILE WE TAKE
THE PICTURE OVER THERE.
AS SOON AS WE FINISH WITH
THE PICTURES, COUNCILMEMBER,
THIS MIC IS YOURS.
[ONE MOMENT PLEASE FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS] (TIME:
5:45 P.M.)
(TIME: 5:47 P.M.)
Wynn: OKAY.
FOR THE SECOND PROCLAMATION
THIS EVENING, IT'S A FUN ONE
FOR ME.
I'LL READ THE PROCLAMATION
AND THEN I'LL INTRODUCE A
COUPLE OF -- THREE OF OUR
GUESTS.
BE IT KNOWN THAT THE CITY OF
AUSTIN THROUGHOUT THE
HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION HAS
RELIED ON ITS POE ETCETERA
TO LEAD US INTO A BETTER
FUTURE AND WHEREAS THE
AUSTIN POETRY SLAM CREATES
AN OPEN FORUM THROUGH WHICH
AUSTINITES CAN EXPRESS
THEMSELVES OR ENJOY
SPECTACULAR PERFORMANCE
POETRY, WHEREAS THEY HAVE
REPRESENTED OUR CITY AT THE
NATIONAL POETRY SLAM EACH
SUMMER SINCE 1995 AND IN
FACT, AUSTIN HOSTED THE
NATIONAL POETRY SLAM IN
ABOUT '98 AT THE PARAMOUNT
THEATER TO A SOLD OUTCROWD.
AND THE 2002 TEAM HERE
BEHIND ME WITH TRAVEL TO
MINNEAPOLIS NEXT WEEK TO
DEMONSTRATE AUSTIN'S
IRRELEVANT REPRESSABLE
SPIRIT, HUMOR AND PASSION TO
REST OF THE NATION AND NOW
THEREFORE THE CITY OF AUSTIN
DOES PROCLAIM AUGUST 13TH
THROUGH 17TH, 2002 AS AUSTIN
POETRY SLAM WEEK.
IT'S SIGNED HERE BY OUR
MAYOR, GUS GARCIA, AND HERE
TO ACCEPT THIS WE HAVE THREE
OF THE FOUR TEAM MEMBERS
WITH US.
WE HAVE MIKE HENRY, WE HAVE
MATTHEW JOHN CONNALLY, AND
WE HAVE ANDY BUCK.
[ APPLAUSE ]
AND AS A SPECIAL TREAT, I'VE
ASKED MATTHEW JOHN CONNALLY,
WE HAD THE AUSTIN POETRY
SLAM ANNUAL CONTEST OR
SLAMOFF, WHATEVER IT IS, A
COUPLE, THREE WEEKS AGO AND
MY WIFE AND I ATTENDED.
IT'S A PHENOMENAL
PERFORMANCE.
MATTHEW JOHN CONNALLY WON
THE PERFORMANCE AND WE'LL
HAVE MATTHEW GIVE A QUICK
SLAM FOR US.
SO MATTHEW, JOHN CONNALLY.
PRAYERS TAKE ON MANY
FORMS.
ONE NIGHT WANDERING THE
STREET OF MY CITY LOST AND
ALONE I TOOK OUT MY NOTEBOOK
AND I PEN AND I BEGAN TO
WRITE THE CITY IS LONELY
TONIGHT.
EVERYONE HAS GONE TO SLEEP
BUT ME.
I WANT TO WRITE A POEM, ONE
TO KEEP ME COMPANY, SOMEONE,
SOMETHING THAT I COULD TALK
TO, A POEM FOR THE DUSTY
DESERT STREETS DOWNTOWN, OLD
BUILDINGS LEANING DOWN.
SOMETIMES WHEN I LOOK INTO
YOUR BROKEN WINDOW PAIN EYES
WE ASSUME SO ABAN DOD.
BUT WITH JUST A LITTLE
FIXING UP I WANT TO BUILD A
POEM, A POEM OF WOOD AND
NAILS AND GLASS AND GIRDERS.
A POEM I CAN ENTER.
I WANT TO WRITE A POEM I CAN
ENTER AND NOTHING BUT POEMS
INSIDE.
I WANT TO GIVE BIRTH TO A
PEOPLE.
I WANT TO GIVE -- POEM.
I WANT TO GIVE BIRTH TO
ENOUGH PEOPLE IN THE STREETS
WITH ME.
TONIGHT, PEOPLE, I WANT TO
WRITE A POEM, SO BAD THAT I
CAN TASTE IT.
I WANT TO WRITE A POEM I CAN
TASTE, A POEM I COULD SINK
MY TEETH INTO, ALL EIGHT OF
THEM!
, A POEM WITH MORE MEAT THAN
GRISTLE AND MORE VEGETABLES
AN MEAT AND MORE FRUIT THAN
VEGETABLES AND MORE GIN THAN
ANYTHING.
I WANT TO WRITE A POEM THAT
YOU COULD TASTE.
IMAGINE A POEM THAT YOU
COULD TASTE AND SMELL AND
SEE WRITTEN AND HEAR SPOKEN,
A POEM YOU COULD TOUCH AND
FEEL BECAUSE I'VE GOT TO
FEEL THAT POEM.
IF I CAN'T FEEL IT, THEN I
DON'T EVEN WANT IT.
I'VE GOT TO FEEL THAT POEM.
WHETHER VELVET OR SATIN OR
TREE BARK.
WHETHER SEA BREEZE OR BROKEN
PONY, THE TOUCH OF MY
LOVER'S HAND OR HER
GOOD-BYE, I WANT TO WRITE A
POEM THAT MAKES ME CRY AND
LAUGH AND BREAK SOMETHING
AND DANCE AND FALL IN LOVE,
A POEM THAT'S WET AND
DANGEROUS AND SELF-ASSURED
AND ORANGE.
A POEM WITH LAKES AND
CANYONS AND MOUNTAINS AND
ECHOES AND HEROES.
A POEM WITH LIGHTNING AND
HONEY AND ANGER.
A POEM THAT KEEPS THE BED
FROM SPINNING, A POEM THAT
BRINGS YOU MAGAZINES WHEN
YOU'RE SICK, A POEM THAT
LET'S THE DOG OUT WHEN YOU
DON'T WANT TO GET UP, AND A
POEM THAT PAYS YOU FOR THE
WHOLE WEEK YOU MISSED
ANYWAY.
I WANT TO WRITE A POEM THAT
STANDS BY US AND BY US ALL,
SPORTS STARS AND MUSICIANS
AND PLUMBERS, PRIESTS AND
SKULL 'TERS AND PILOTS, MEN,
WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND EVERY
COLOR OF SKIN THERE IS, A
POEM WITH EYES THAT SPARK HE
WILL AND HEARTS THAT BEAT
AND HANDS THAT GRASP.
A POEM THAT'S A FRIEND AND A
LOVER AND FAMILY.
A POEM THAT BRINGS US ALL
TOGETHER IN ONE ROOM TO
SPEAK OR IS JUST ONE PERSON
LISTENING ALONE, SO I TOOK
OUT MY NOTEBOOK AND MY PEN
AND I WROTE A ONE-WORD POEM.
YOU.
THANK YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Wynn: THANK YOU ALL VERY
MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: I WILL CALL
THE MEETING OF THE AUSTIN
CITY COUNCIL BACK TO ORDER.
WE HAVE THREE MEMBERS -- IF
THERE'S A COUNCILMEMBER
WITHIN MY HEARING DISTANCE,
IF YOU ALL COULD JOIN US.
THIS IS A LOT OF CHAIRS
HERE.
ON THE DAIS.
THE -- THE ORDER THAT WE
WILL FOLLOW WE WILL TAKE
ITEMS 91, 92, WHICH ARE PART
OF THE 4:00 TIME CERTAIN --
WHAT?
[INAUDIBLE]
Mayor Garcia: YEAH, THERE
WE GO.
OKAY.
WE WILL DO ITEMS 91 AND 92,
MS. GLASGO.
AND THEN WE WILL GO TO THE
6:00 TIME CERTAIN PUBLIC
HEARINGS.
AND -- AND WE DON'T -- IT
DOESN'T LOOK LIKE WE HAVE A
LOT OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO
SPEAK.
55.
WHAT IS THIS?
I THOUGHT WE HAD DONE THAT
55.
LET ME ANNOUNCE, ALSO,
THAT -- THAT MR. RICHARD
SUTTLE AND LEANN BRUNSON
SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ITEM
NO. 55.
THAT ITEM HAS BEEN POSTPONED
UNTIL AUGUST THE 8th.
WE WILL GIVE THE CARDS TO
THE CITY CLERKS SO THAT WHEN
IT COMES BACK UP THEY CAN BE
CALLED.
LET ME ANNOUNCE, ALSO,
THAT -- LET ME CALL THIS --
THIS COUNCIL MEETING BACK TO
ORDER.
LET ME ANNOUNCE THAT ON THE
STRATUS ITEMS, THE PUBLIC
HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED.
AND THOSE -- THOUGH MANY OF
YOU HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK,
I WILL NOT -- I WILL BE
CALLING YOUR CARDS UP, BUT I
WILL NOT BE CALLING YOU UP
TO SPEAK.
OKAY.
MS. GLASGO.
GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, MY
NAME IS MARK WALTERS WITH
THE CITY OF AUSTIN
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AND
ZONING TONIGHT.
TONIGHT IT MY ARRIVAL TO BE
PRESENTING TO YOU THE UPPER
BOGGY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN AND REZONINGS.
TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION WILL
BE CONSISTING OF TWO PARTS.
THE FIRST PARTLY BE
PRESENTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN ITSELF AND THE SECOND
PARTLY BE PRESENTING THE
REZONINGS THAT GO ALONG TO
IMPLEMENT THE LAND USE
PORTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN.
AND FOLLOWING THAT, THE
CHAIR OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING TEAM, STEVEN
CRAIGER, WILL SPEAK BRIEFLY
ON SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE
PLAN.
THE PLAN BOUNDARIES ARE
THE -- ON THE NORTH IS THE
RMA SITE, ON THE EAST IT'S
AIRPORT BOULEVARD, ON THE
SOUTH IS MANOR ROAD AND MLK
AND ON THE WEST IS U.T. AND
I-35.
THERE ARE FIVE FAIBDZ IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA.
THERE IS THE BLACKLAND, THEN
THERE'S RODGERS WASHINGTON
HOLY CROSS, CHERRYWOOD,
WILSHIRE WOOD, DELWOOD 1 AND
DELWOOD 2 TO THE NORTH.
LANDMARKS IN THE PLANNING
AREAS ARE THE FIESTA DELWOOD
SHOPPING CENTER, HANCOCK
SHOPPING CENTER IS RIGHT
ACROSS THE FREEWAY FROM
THERE, OLD ROBERT MUELLER
AIRPORT SITE ON THE
NORTHEAST, PATTERSON PARK,
VALUE SKYPARK, EAST SIDE
CAFE, HOOF VERDICTS AND --
HOOVERS AND JOHN MILLER'S
BARBECUE.
THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT BEGAN
IN SEPTEMBER OF 2000.
SINCE THEN WE'VE HAD OVER 40
PLANNING TEAM MEETINGS AND
NUMEROUS OTHER SUBCOMMITTEE
MEETINGS.
THE INITIAL SURVEY WAS IN
THE MIDDLE OF 2000-2001.
A 9% RESPONSE RATE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD-WIDE OPEN
HOUSE WAS HELD IN SEPTEMBER
OF 2001.
WE HAD ABOUT 75 TO 80 PEOPLE
SHOW UP FOR THE OPEN HOUSE.
THE FINAL SURVEY WAS SENT
OUT IN MARCH, APRIL OF 2002.
AND WE HAD A 96% APPROVAL
FOR THE PLAN.
THE GOALS FOR THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THERE ARE
SICK.
THEY GENERALLY COVER
PRESERVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD
CHARACTER, PROMOTING NEW
BUSINESSES THAT ARE
NEIGHBORHOOD SCALED AND
NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY,
REHABILITATING HOUSING AND
CONSTRUCTING NEW HOUSING TO
BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE
EXISTING HOUSING AND
ARCHITECTURE AND FOR A
VARIETY OF INCOME LEVELS AND
PRESERVE, ENHANCE THE PARKS
AND OPEN SPACE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE LAST
GOAL WOULD BE TO DEVELOP AND
PROVIDE A RANGE OF SERVICES
TO ENHANCE THE STANDARD OF
LIVING FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE ARE SEVERAL HIGHLIGHTS
OF THE PLAN -- AMONGST
THOSE, THE MOST IMPORTANT TO
THE PLAN IS FOR MANOR ROAD,
PLANNING TEAM ENVISIONS
MANOR ROAD BECOMING AN
ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION
CORRIDOR.
POSSIBLY A CORRIDOR THAT
LINKS THE ROBERT MUELLER
SITE, MANOR ROAD.
ROBERT MUELLER SITE AND
NORTHEAST AUSTIN TO DOWNTOWN
AND TO THE UNIVERSITY OF
TEXAS.
EXCUSE ME.
ALSO, THEY WANT ALONG MANOR
ROAD TO HAVE MIXED USE
DEVELOPMENT THAT SERVES AND
PROVIDES EMPLOYMENT AND
SHOPPING AND ENTERTAINMENT
OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEIGHBORS,
RESIDENTS OF THE PLANNING
AREA, AS WELL AS PEOPLE FOR
THE CITY AT LARGE.
AND ANOTHER IMPORTANT
ELEMENT IS THIS -- IS THE
VALUE SKYPARK.
A FORMER LONG-TERM PARKING
FOR THE OLD AIRPORT.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT
BE REDEVELOPED AS A MIXED
INCOME, MIXED USE
DEVELOPMENT IF ANYTHING WAS
EVER TO BE DONE WITH IT
CURRENTLY IT'S JUST AN EMPTY
VACANT PARKING LOT
SURROUNDED BY WALLS AND
WIRE.
FOR M.L.K. THEY WOULD LIKE
TO SEE A MIXED USE
DEVELOPMENT, LESS INTENSIVE,
MORE OFFICE ORIENTED MIXED
USE DEVELOPMENT.
FOR 38th AND A HALF STREET,
RIGHT HERE, THEY WOULD LIKE
TO SEE DELWOOD SHOPPING
CENTER IS EVER REDEVELOPED,
THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT IN
A MORE NEIGHBORHOOD
FRIENDLY, MORE PEDESTRIAN
ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT THAN IT
CURRENTLY IS.
THE TRANSPORTATION, THE
HIGHLIGHT IS THEY WOULD LIKE
TO SEE MANOR ROAD MAINTAINED
AT ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION
TO PROMOTE PEDESTRIAN AND
BICYCLIST, FRIENDLY LAND USE
AS SET FORTH IN THE LAND USE
SECTION OF THE PLAN.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH
THE CITY AT SOME TIME TO
REDUCE CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC
THAT SHOULD BE -- SUGGESTS
WILL INCREASE PARTICULARLY
AS THE MUELLER SITE COMES
ONLINE.
AND POSSIBLY HELP MITIGATE
THE EFFECTS OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT OF I-35 IN THE
FUTURE.
THE OTHER IMPORTANT
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT IS
THE UPPER BOGGY CREEK BIKE
WAY THAT COUNCIL APPROVED AS
POSSIBLE T-21 ENHANCEMENT
FUNDS, BUT IT DIDN'T GET
APPROVED BY TEXDOT, BUT THEY
WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THAT
STILL UNDER CONSIDERATION.
IT WOULD BE A BIKEWAY THAT
FOLLOWS THE CAPITAL METRO
RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM EAST 12th
STREET ALL THE WAY UP TO
HANCOCK CENTER AS THE FIRST
PHASE.
CAPITAL METRO DID INDICATE
THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING
TO WORK TO INVESTIGATE THAT.
THE OTHER IMPORTANT
HIGHLIGHT WOULD BE PARKS AND
OPEN SPACE.
THEY DEVOTED A LOT OF TIME
TO DISCUSSING HOW PATTERSON
PARK AND ALAMO RECREATION
CENTER AND PARK COULD BE
IMPROVED.
AND WHAT -- WHAT TYPES OF
IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY WOULD
LIKE TO SEE, AS WELL AS THEY
DID MENTION THAT BOGGY CREEK
HERE RUNS THROUGH THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHERE THEY
DREW THE NAME FROM.
THAT ANY MITIGATION EFFORTS
TO -- TO PREVENT FLOODING
AND EROSION BE DONE IN A
NATURALISTIC WAY AND AVOID
THE HARD SCAPES WITH ROCKS
WITH CAGES, CAGES WITH ROCKS
IN IT AND SUCH.
NOW I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT
THE REZONINGINGS.
THE CASE NUMBER IS C
14-02-0057.
THIS IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN COMBINING DISTRICT TO
IMPLEMENT THE LAND USE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UPPER
BOGGY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN.
THE PROPOSED REZONINGS WILL
AFFECT APPROXIMATELY 68
TRACTS.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDED THE NPCD TO THE
CITY COUNCIL WITH THREE
CHANGES FROM THE ORIGINAL
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THESE ITEMS WILL BE
ADDRESSED IN THE TRACTS WITH
ISSUES SECTION OF THIS
PRESENTATION.
THE CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS,
THERE ARE SEVERAL
CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS
THROUGHOUT THE PLANNING
AREA.
MOST OF THESE ARE TO LIMIT
THE MORE AUTOMOTIVE
INTENSIVE USES AND WHERE
POSSIBLE, WHERE THE PLANNING
AREA ABUTTED ADJOINING
PLANNING AREAS, THE
CONDITIONAL OVERLAYS WERE
MATCHED PRETTY CLOSELY TO
THE AREAS OF THE SOUTH.
THE PROHIBITED AND
CONDITIONAL USES WOULD BE
THE SAME ON ONE SIDE OF THE
ROAD TO THE OTHER.
PARTICULARLY FOR THE
ROSEWOOD TO THE SOUTHEAST
AND THE CHESTNUT
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF
THE PLANNING AREA.
THE INFILL SPECIAL USES,
THEY RECOMMENDED SEVERAL FOR
THE PLANNING AREA.
THE MIXED USE BUILDING WAS
USED QUITE LIBERALLY,
PARTICULARLY ALONG THE
COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS, MANOR
ROAD, MLK AND 38 AND A HALF
STREET AS WELL AS I-35 AND
THIS AREA OF AIRPORT
BOULEVARD.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD URBAN
CENTER, WHICH IS A -- VERY
PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED TYPE OF
REDEVELOPMENT, IT WAS
RECOMMENDED FOR THE FIESTA
DELWOOD SHOPPING CENTER, AS
WELL AS THE VALUE SKY PARK.
AND SMALL LOT AM MESSRY
WOULD BE APPLIED
NEIGHBORHOOD-WIDE.
THE PLAN ITSELF RECOMMENDED
THAT THE SECONDARY UNIT
GARAGE APARTMENTS ALLOWED ON
SMALLER LOTS BE ALLOWED ONLY
FOR THE CHERRYWOOD
SUBDISTRICT, WHICH IS IN THE
BACKUP THAT RICARDO
PRESENTED TO YOU JUST A FEW
MINUTES AGO.
OKAY.
WILL, THERE IS A STAFF
CORRECTION.
TRACT 28 NEEDS TO BE
CORRECTED AND DISTRIBUTED --
IN THE COORDINATE GNATS IT
HAS BEEN CREATED, BUT THE
NAP THAT GOES WITH IT NEEDS
TO BE CORRECTED.
THERE WAS AN OVERSIGHT ON
THE PART OF STAFF AND WE
HAVE REMEDIED THAT, SO TRACT
28 A WE WILL HAVE THE SAME
CONDITIONAL OVERLAY AS THIS
PART OF MANOR ROAD AND 28 B,
WHICH IS -- 2101 MANOR ROAD,
MALIK'S CONVENIENCE STORE, A
GAS STATION, AND THE OWNER
OF THE PROPERTY AND THE
PLANNING TEAM CAME TO AN
AGREEMENT THAT A SERVICE
STATION WOULD BE AN ALLOWED
USE WHICH IS PROHIBITED ON
THE REST OF MANOR ROAD AND
THAT THE AUTOMOTIVE USES OF
RENTAL, AUTOMOTIVE RENTAL
AND SALES WOULD BE ALLOWED
WHEREAS THEY ARE PROHIBITED
ON THE REST OF MANOR ROAD.
RIGHT NOW, THERE ARE -- PUT
THE TRACT BACK UP THERE.
THERE ARE SEVERAL TRACTS
THAT HAVE ISSUES THAT DIFFER
FROM THE -- FROM WHAT WAS
RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION.
AND THE ORIGINAL STAFF
RECOMMENDATION.
AND THOSE ARE THE -- THOSE
ARE THE TRACTS 3, 16 AND 17.
TRACT 3, THE RECOMMENDATION
FROM STAFF DIFFER FROM THE
P.C. IN THAT THE CONDITIONAL
OVERLAY FOR THAT TRACT HAS
BEEN REMOVED.
THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL
OVERLAY WOULD PROHIBIT
DRIVE-IN ACCESSORY USE AND
BASICALLY CELL TOWERS.
THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED AND
BOTH THE NEIGHBORS ADJOINING
TRACT 3, WHICH IS RIGHT HERE
ON AIRPORT BOULEVARD, IT A
LARGE VACANT LOT JUST SOUTH
OF PATTERSON PARK, THAT --
AND THE OWNER, MR. KOPEKNE,
AND THE RESIDENT SURROUNDING
THAT HAVE COME TO THAT
AGREEMENT.
THEY JUST BASICALLY LEAVE
THE TRACT AS IT CURRENTLY IS
ZONED.
TRACT 16 IS 2917 MANOR ROAD.
AND THERE'S BEEN A BARBER
SHOP OPERATING THERE FOR 22
YEARS.
HOWEVER, THE -- IT HAS BEEN
OPERATING ON RESIDENTIAL
ZONED PROPERTY FOR THE
ENTIRETY OF THAT TIME.
AND INITIALLY THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
RECOMMENDED THAT IT STAY
SINGLE FAMILY, BUT AFTER THE
NOTICE WAS SENT OUT, STAFF
WORKED WITH THE PROPERTY
OWNER TO -- TO SEE WHAT WE
CAN DO TO RECTIFY THE
SITUATION.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS
TO -- FOR L.R., IN AN
EXTREMELY LIMITING
CONDITIONAL OVERLAY.
THAT WOULD -- THAT WOULD
LIMIT IT JUST TO JUST A --
TO JUST A HANDFUL OF USES
AND 300 TRIPS PER DAY.
THERE IS A VALID PETITION
AGAINST THAT ZONING CHANGE
ON THE PART OF THE NEIGHBORS
ACROSS THE STREET.
FROM THAT THEY ARE
PETITIONING THAT THE LOT
STAY SINGLE FAMILY.
AND LIKE I SAID CURRENTLY
IT'S SINGLE FAMILY, BUT
EASEMENT -- HE'S BEEN
OPERATING A BARBER SHOP
THERE FOR 22 YEARS.
AND TRACT 17, WHICH IS 3001
MANOR ROAD, IMMEDIATELY TO
THE NORTH, THIS IS ABOUT
FOUR OR FIVE LOTS NORTH OF
THE INTERSECTION OF
CHERRYWOOD AND MANOR ON THE
EAST SIDE OF THE ROAD TO
HELP GIVE YOU SOME BEARINGS.
Thomas: MAYOR, YOU ARE
SAYING MANOR ROAD BUT IT'S
CHERRYWOOD.
THE INTERSECTION OF
CHERRYWOOD AND MANOR, THANK
YOU.
ON TRACT 17, AGAIN, THE
ORIGINAL PLAN WAS TO DOWN
ZONE IS TO SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT ONCE THE NOTICES WENT
OUT, THE PROPERTY OWNERS
CONTACTED STAFF AND WE
WORKED OUT A -- AN AGREEMENT
THAT WOULD LIMIT THE
PROPERTY -- THE ZONING TO
G.R. BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS
THE PERSONAL IMPROVEMENT
SERVICES WHICH WOULD ALLOW
FOR -- FOR CLASSES TO BE
TAUGHT THERE, PERSONAL
IMPROVEMENT CLASSES, YOGA,
ART CLASSES AND SUCH.
LIMITING TO 300 TRIPS PER
DAY.
AGAIN ONLY A HANDFUL OF
USES.
BUT AGAIN THE PROPERTY
OWNERS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE
OF CHERRYWOOD ROAD HAVE A
VALID PETITION AGAINST THAT
ZONING CHANGE.
IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED C.S.
AND -- AND THE -- THE
NEIGHBORS DO NOT WANT ANY
COMMERCIAL ZONING ALONG
CHERRYWOOD ROAD.
STEVEN CRAIGER WHO IS THE
CHAIR OF THE PLANNING TEAM
WOULD LIKE TO END THE STAFF
PRESENTATION WITH -- WITH A
QUICK DISCUSSION OF -- OF
PERTINENT PART OF THE PLAN.
STEVEN?
>MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBER, MY
NAME IS STEVEN CRAIGER,
CHAIR OF THE UPPER BOGGY
CREEK PLANNING TEAM.
I ORIGINALLY SINCE I WAS
TOLD I HAD UNLIMITED TIME,
THOUGHT THAT I MIGHT JUST GO
OVER THE PLAN ITEM BY ITEM,
THAT MAYBE WOULDN'T TAKE BUT
THREE OR FOUR HOURS, BUT I
WAS TOLD THAT PROBABLY
WASN'T A GOOD IDEA.
[ LAUGHTER ]
SO I WILL MAKE IT SHORT AND
SWEET.
AT LEAST SHORT.
I WANT TO THANK A COUPLE OF
PEOPLE FIRST.
I WANT TO THANK FIRST OF ALL
ALL OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT
BOTH RESIDENTS, BUSINESS
OWNERS, PROPERTY OWNERS,
THAT PARTICIPATED IN IT.
WE HAD A LOT OF FOLKS, SOME
CAME AND WENT, SOME STAYED
FROM THE BEGINNING TO END.
BUT I WANT TO THANK ALL OF
THOSE PEOPLE AND I'M NOT
GOING TO LIST THEM BECAUSE I
WOULD LEAVE SOMEBODY OUT AND
THEY WOULD GET MAD.
OR I MIGHT LIST SOMEBODY AND
THEY WOULD GET MAD.
Mayor Garcia: COULD I
INTERRUPT YOU FOR JUST A
MINUTE.
THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE
HOLDING THE BIG SIGN, IF YOU
COULD MOVE TO THIS SIDE TO
LEAVE THE PASSAGEWAY OPEN
FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO WALK
THERE.
GO AHEAD, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, SIR.
THANKS TO ALL OF THE
NEIGHBOR, PROPERTY OWNERS
FOR EVERYONE PARTICIPATING
IN THE CREATION OF THIS
PLAN.
I ALSO WANTED TO THANK BO
MCCARVER BACK THERE, WHO IS
THE VICE CHAIR AND VERY,
VERY HELPFUL.
IN FACT, I DON'T THINK WE
COULD HAVE DONE THIS WITHOUT
HIM.
ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO THANK
CITY STAFF, THE THREE PEOPLE
THAT HELPED US THE MOST,
RICARDO SOLIS, KATHRYN
WELDER.
RICARDO I'M STILL KIND OF
MAD OF HIM BECAUSE HE JUST
KIND OF ABANDONED US ABOUT
HALFWAY THROUGH TO GO BECOME
THE DIRECTOR OF NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING.
I'M NOT SURE WHY HE DID
THAT.
Mayor Garcia: PROGRESS.
ANYWAY, I WANT TO THANK
ALL OF THOSE FOLKS.
WE DIDN'T ALWAYS SEE
EYE-TO-EYE WITH CITY STAFF.
WHEN WE FIRST CAME UP WITH
THE IDEA OF SUBDISTRICTS,
THEY SAID NO.
KIND OF IN CAPITAL LETTERS.
BUT AS YOU KNOW, THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT'S COME TO
PASS, WE WANT TO THANK YOU
FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF
SUBDISTRICTS.
IT WAS SOMETHING WE WORKED
OUT.
I THINK IT WILL HELP OUR
PLAN, I THINK IT WILL HELP
PLANS IN THE FUTURE.
I'M SURE THAT YOU ARE GOING
TO BE WORKING ON SOMETHING
TO ALLOW PLANS THAT HAVE
ALREADY PASSED TO USE THE
SUBDISTRICT CONCEPT.
SO WE ARE VERY THANKFUL FOR
THAT.
GENERALLY, WHEN WE HAD A
PROBLEM, AN ISSUE WITH
STAFF, WE WERE ABLE TO
HAMMER OUT A COMPROMISE, FOR
THE MOST PART WORKED VERY
WELL.
I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF.
MARK MENTIONED THE
GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES AND
THAT OFFERED SOME CHALLENGES
BECAUSE OF THE DIVERSITY OF
THE AREA.
AND IT MADE FOR SOME
INTERESTING DISCUSSIONS
BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF
DIFFERENT THINGS GOING ON IN
THIS AREA.
A LOT OF DIVERSITY.
AND FOR THE MOST PART, WE
WERE ABLE TO HAMMER THINGS
OUT, TALK IT THROUGH, AND
REACH A PRETTY AGREEABLE
COMPROMISE.
I THINK -- I THINK WE USED
THE DIVERSITY OF OUR AREA TO
OUR ADVANTAGE TO CREATE A
VERY GOOD PLAN.
AND TO THAT END, I WOULD
LIKE FOR YOU TO SUPPORT THE
PLAN WITH A COUPLE OF LITTLE
CAVEATS THAT I'M GOING TO
MENTION.
THE PLANNING -- NUMBER ONE,
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
SUPPORTED OUR PLAN AND THEY
SUPPORTED THE SUBDISTRICTS
FOR WHICH WE ARE THANKFUL.
BUT THE ONE THING THAT THEY
DID THAT WE DID NOT WANT IS
THEY ADDED AN INFILL OPTION
TO THE DELWOOD 2, WILSHIRE
WOOD, DELWOOD 1 SUBDISTRICT.
THAT INFILL OPTION WAS THE
SECONDARY APARTMENTS.
WE DID NOT WANT THAT ADDED.
NOW, TRUST ME ON THIS, WE
DID THIS FOR ALMOST TWO
YEARS, SO WE HAD MORE THAN A
COUPLE OF MEETINGS AND WE
DISCUSSED EVERYTHING IN THIS
PLAN TO DEATH.
AND THE -- THE INFILL
OPTIONS ARE ONE OF OF THE MAIN
THINGS WE DISCUSSED.
WE AS A GROUP FELT LIKE THAT
THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT
WE WANTED FOR THAT
SUBDISTRICT.
AND SO WE WOULD ASK YOU NOT
TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE PLAN.
WE DON'T FEEL LIKE IT'S
NEEDED, IT DOESN'T REALLY
SERVE ANY PURPOSE.
AND WE THINK, ALSO, WITHOUT
BEING DISRESPECTFUL TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH I
DON'T WANT TO DO, WE DON'T
THINK ADDING THIS REALLY
FITS IN WITH THE WHOLE
CONCEPT OF NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING.
SO WE WOULD ASK YOU NOT TO
INCLUDE THAT INFILL OPTION
IN THE PLAN FOR THE DELWOOD
2, WILSHIRE WOOD, DELWOOD 1
SUBDISTRICT.
OKAY?
MARK MENTIONED THE TWO
PROPERTIES ON CHERRYWOOD
THAT -- THAT WE WERE NOT
ABLE TO RESOLVE.
I WAS HOPING TO BRING YOU A
DONE DEAL PLAN AND FRANKLY
WE GOT PRETTY CLOSE.
UNLESS SOMEBODY JUMPS OUT OF
THE WOODWORK HERE TONIGHT,
WE ONLY REALLY, I THINK,
HAVE TWO ISSUES, THOSE ARE
THE TWO PROPERTIES ON
CHERRYWOOD.
TO BE HONEST, THAT'S NOT
BAD.
I WISH WE COULD HAVE BEEN
100% IN AGREEMENT, BUT IT
WASN'T TO BE.
BUT STILL IN ALL, I THINK IT
A PRETTY GOOD PLAN AND I
HOPE BY THE TIME WE GET
THROUGH TODAY WE CAN WORK
SOMETHING OUT THAT WILL MAKE
EVERYONE RELATIVELY HAPPY ON
THOSE TWO PROPERTIES.
THE ONE OTHER THING THAT I
WANT TO MENTION, MARK
ALLUDED TO IT, I WANT TO
RE-EMPHASIZE MANOR ROAD AND
38th AND A HALF, WE WOULD
LIKE 38th AND A HALF AND
PARDON ME IF I AM MISTAKEN
ON THE CATEGORIES, BUT WE
WOULD LIKE MEASURE ROAD TO
BE CHANGED FROM THE
NEIGHBORHOOD FEEDER STREET
TO A NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR
STREET.
AND FOR MANOR ROAD TO BE
CHANGED FROM AN ARTERIAL
STREET ROAD TO AN
ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION
CORRIDOR.
IN OTHER WORDS, WE WANT THEM
TAKEN DOWN.
AND THE CAMPO PLAN DOES NOT
INCLUDE THAT.
SO WE WOULD LIKE YOUR
SUPPORT TO GET THOSE STREETS
CHANGED.
AND THAT'S -- THAT'S
BASICALLY ALL THAT I HAVE.
WE ARE CERTAINLY AVAILABLE
FOR QUESTIONS.
ALTHOUGH NOT ANY HARD ONES,
I HOPE.
PARDON ME, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: I'M SURE
THERE WILL BE SOME QUESTIONS
AFTER WE HEAR FROM THE
SPEAKERS.
I'M SURE.
THAT CONCLUDES THE STAFF
PRESENTATION, IF YOU HAVE
ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD BE
WILLING TO ANSWER THEM NOW
OR WE CAN WAIT UNTIL AFTER
THE --
Mayor Garcia: MAYOR PRO
TEM?
GOODMAN: SORRY.
RELATIVE TO WHAT MR. CRAIGER
JUST SAID, DO WE HAVE WITHIN
THIS POSTING THE ABILITY TO
CHANGE THOSE ROADWAY
DESIGNATIONS OR DOES THAT
HAVE TO COME BACK AS A
SEPARATE THING?
THAT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE
TO COME BACK AS A AUSTIN
METROPOLITAN AMENDING THE
ROADWAY PLAN.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR
STAFF?
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
DON'T GO AWAY, THERE WILL BE
QUESTIONS.
OH, I'M SURE.
Mayor Garcia: SAM BAKER.
MR. SAM BAKER.
YOU ARE THE FIRST ONE SET UP
TO -- SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK?
NO.
Mayor Garcia: HE'S
REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF.
EARL BERG.
[INAUDIBLE]
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK.
IS REGISTERED IN FAVOR OF.
RAYMOND JOSEPH.
DON'T WISH TO SPEAK.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
THANK YOU.
DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK,
REGISTERED IN FAIFER OF.
DOROTHY -- IN FAVOR OF.
DOROTHY WADE AND FOLLOWING
MS. WADE IS DOLORES GREG
DUFFY.
MS. WADE, WELCOME.
THANK YOU MAYOR, MAYOR
PRO TEM AND COUNCILMEMBERS.
I HAVE BEEN ON THE PLANNING
TEAM SINCE THE BEGINNING AND
I WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF
OUR ORIGINAL PLAN AS APPLIED
TO THE CHERRYWOOD
PROPERTIES.
OUR NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE HAD
CONCERN WITH THE TRAFFIC
THAT THE HEAVY TRAFFIC ON
CHERRYWOOD, THE SAFETY OF
OUR CHILDREN WHO -- WHO USE
THAT ROAD TO GET TO SCHOOL
AND TO -- TO CATCH THE BUS.
WE HAVE LIMITED SIDEWALKS ON
CHERRYWOOD.
THE PROPERTIES HAVE -- HAVE
ON -- ON CHERRYWOOD THERE
HAVE LIMITED PARKING
FACILITIES AND WE FEEL
THAT -- THAT COMMERCIAL USE
THERE WILL INCREASE THE ON
STREET PARKING, WHICH WILL
INCREASE THE HAZARDS TO --
TO THE TRAFFIC ON
CHERRYWOOD.
SO I AM HERE SPEAKING IN
FAVOR OF SINGLE FAMILY
ZONING FOR THOSE PROPERTIES.
THANK YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. WADE.
MS. DOLORES DUFFY.
AND FOLLOWING MS. DUFFY, IS
GERALD CARTER.
AND MS. DUFFY HAS -- HAS TWO
PEOPLE, MRS. THERESA SCOTT
AND FREDDIE CAIRO DONATING
TIME, SO I WILL GIVE
MS. DUFFY NINE MINUTES.
OH --
Mayor Garcia: YOU DON'T
HAVE TO USE THEM DOLORES.
OKAY.
THANK YOU, MAYOR.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I'M HERE
AND I'M GOING TO SPEAK IN
LAYMEN'S TERMS, ALL THIS
L.O., ALL OF THAT, I -- WE
ARE NOT ACCUSTOMED TO.
SO FIRST OF ALL, I'M DOLORES
DUFFY, I LIVE AT 3004
CHERRYWOOD ROAD.
I HAVE BEEN 36 AND A HALF
YEARS, ALMOST 37 YEARS.
EVERYTHING ON CHERRYWOOD HAS
ALWAYS BEEN RESIDENTIAL.
IF AND WHEN 3001 HAD CHANGED
TRACT 17, I CAN SAY TRACTS
16 AND 17, WAS CHANGED TO
COMMERCIAL THEN SOMEBODY
DROPPED THE BALL BECAUSE WE
WERE NOT NOTIFIED AS
NEIGHBORS AND I DO KNOW THAT
THERE IS SUPPOSED TO BE SOME
NOTIFICATION IF YOU ARE
GOING TO HAVE A ZONING
CHANGE.
NOW, THE ORIGINAL PLAN
WAS -- THE ORIGINAL PLAN,
THIS UPPER BOGGY CREEK TEAM
THAT I SAW ORIGINALLY,
WANTED EVERYTHING -- WANTED
THOSE TWO PIECES TO BE
SINGLE FAMILY.
THEY WANTED EVERYTHING TO BE
RESIDENTIAL.
NOW, WE WENT WITH THE
ORIGINAL PLAN.
BUT ONCE WE WENT BEFORE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AND
WHATEVER, IT WAS CHANGED.
THE STAFF CHANGED IT AND THE
PLANNING COMMISSION.
WELL, WE DON'T AGREE WITH
THE STAFF CHANGING NOR DO WE
AGREE WITH THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S CHANGES.
NOW, LIKE MR. RODGERS
STATED, PERHAPS HE DID AT
THE TIME WHEN THEY GOT
NOTIFICATION, HE SAID
HIMSELF THAT HE WORKED WITH
THEM.
BUT NOBODY WORKED WITH US AS
NEIGHBORS.
I HAPPEN TO GET IT BY
HAPPENSTANCE, OKAY?
NOW, IT'S RESIDENTIAL, WE
HAVE TRIED -- YOU KNOW, I
HAVE NOT -- NOBODY CAME
UNTIL AFTER THE PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING.
I DON'T CARE TO LIVE ACROSS
FROM A RESTAURANT, FROM A
FOOD SALES, AND FROM
ANYTHING ELSE.
I HAVE BEEN THERE ALMOST 37
YEARS AND I'M -- MY CHILDREN
WERE RAISED THERE.
I DIDN'T MOVE THERE IN FRONT
OF A COMMERCIAL PLACE OF
BUSINESS.
AS I FORESTATED, IF IT WAS
COMMERCIAL, I DON'T KNOW
WHEN IT CHANGED TO
COMMERCIAL.
NOBODY HAS EVER NOTIFIED US.
I AM AGAINST THOSE PROPERTY,
BOTH OF THEM, TRACTS 16 AND
17.
I THINK TRACT 16 SHOULD STAY
SINGLE FAMILY.
TRACT 17 SHOULD BE CHANGED
TO SINGLE FAMILY.
THOSE PLACES WERE SINGLE
FAMILY WHEN I MOVED THERE 36
AND A HALF YEARS AGO.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM
REMAIN SINGLE FAMILY.
NOW, THAT'S AS -- AS PLAIN
AS I CAN GET IT.
THAT I DON'T CARE TO LIVE
ACROSS FROM ANY KIND OF
BUSINESS.
YOU KNOW, MANOR ROAD IS
AROUND THE CORNER.
AND, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GET
ANYTHING -- WE HAVE A HIGH
VOLUME OF TRAFFIC ON
CHERRYWOOD ROAD AS IT IS.
WITH THE PARKING AND
EVERYTHING ELSE.
WE TRIED TO GET TRAFFIC
CALMING DEVICES OVER THREE
YEARS AGO.
TO THIS DAY, NOTHING HAS
BEEN DONE.
SO THE BUCK STOP HIS WITH
YOU ALL.
-- THE BUCK STOPS WITH YOU
ALL.
THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE.
TRACTS 16 AND 17 NEEDS TO
REMAIN SINGLE FAMILY.
THANK YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
GERALD CARTER, MR. G.
GERALD CARTER, FOLLOWING
MR. CARTER IS ALONZO WHITE.
MR. CARTER, WELCOME, SIR.
GOOD EVENING TO THE
MEMBERS AND TO THE MAYORS.
I'M REALLY SHOCKED BECAUSE
I'M THE ONE THAT ACTUALLY
PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AND I
BOUGHT IT THROUGH A REAL
ESTATE COMPANY THAT SOLD IT
TO ME AS COMMERCIAL.
AND I DON'T SEE HOW I WOULD
TRY TO CHANGE ANYTHING.
BUT WHAT'S ON PAPER.
AND I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU ALL
TO UNDERSTAND THAT I HAVE
BEEN THERE 23 YEARS AND I
HAVE BEEN PAYING COMMERCIAL
RATES, I HAVE BEEN USING
COMMERCIAL TELEPHONES, GAS.
AND I HAVE BEEN PAYING UNTIL
I JUST CAN'T PAY ANYMORE BUT
COMMERCIAL.
I HAVEN'T PAID NOT ONE
ELECTRIC BILL RESIDENTIAL.
NOR GAS BILL RESIDENTIAL.
NOR PHONE RESIDENTIAL.
AND I BOUGHT THIS FROM A
PROMINENT PERSON NAMED
WALTER [INAUDIBLE] AND JOHN
AGRENOWSKI.
THEY TOLD SOLD ME THE
PROPERTY.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO
EXPLAIN ANYTHING, BUT I HAVE
BEEN THERE SINCE 1981.
AND I HAVE PICTURES TO
PROVE, THE IMPROVEMENTS,
EVEN WHAT THE CITY HAVE GAVE
ME AS FAR AS USAGE AND
ALLOWED ME TO USE THE USAGE
OF THAT PROPERTY AS
COMMERCIAL.
AND NOT TOO LONG AGO, I WAS
GRANTED SOMETHING TO HELP
THE PEOPLES OUT IN THE
COMMUNITY AND I'M JUST
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S
GOING ON.
BECAUSE I MEAN I'M -- I'M
JUST SHOCKED.
TO BE IN THIS RIGHT NOW.
BUT I WISH THAT ALL WOULD
THINK ON -- THAT YOU ALL
WOULD THINK ON BEHALF OF THE
EFFORT THAT I HAVE GIVEN TO
THE COMMUNITY AND MAYBE
SOMEONE ELSE CAN UNDERSTAND.
BUT SOMEONE HELP ME OUT ON
-- I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.
I REALLY DON'T.
SO I THANK YOU ALL.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MR. CARTER.
[ APPLAUSE ]
ALONZO WHITE.
AND FOLLOWING MR. WHITE IS
ALBERTA MILLET.
MR. WHITE, WELCOME, SIR.
HOW IS EVERYTHING GOING
WITH YOU EBB MAYOR AND
COUNCILMEMBERS?
Mayor Garcia: GOOD.
THIS IS MY FIRST TIME
HERE.
I'M GOING TO SPEAK PLAINLY,
TOO.
I DON'T KNOW ALL OF THESE
TERMS AND EVERYTHING.
BUT I WAS BORN, LIKE, OVER
THERE SINCE ACTUALLY THE
FIRST GRADE.
I WAS BROUGHT UP ON
CHERRYWOOD ON THE SAME
BLOCK.
AND I ATTENDED MAPLE WOOD
AND JUNIOR HIGH AND HIGH
SCHOOL AND COLLEGE OVER
THERE.
IT'S ALWAYS BEEN ONLY SAY A
RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
NEVER BEEN NOTHING REALLY
COMMERCIALIZED.
EVERYTHING AS FAR AS ANY
KIND OF COMMERCIALIZATION
HAS BEEN ONLY ON LIKE MANOR
ROAD OR EITHER UP IN THE
DELWOOD AREA OR SOMEWHERE
AROUND THERE.
BUT IT'S BEEN SINGLE
FAMILIES.
I HAVE KNOWN ALL OF THESE
FAMILIES ALL OF MY LIFE,
EVEN NEW ONES WHO HAVE MOVED
IN.
LIKE THEY SAID, ABOUT KIDS
ON THAT STREET, THERE ARE
SMALL KIDS ON THAT STREET.
AND THERE'S ALSO ACTUALLY
SENIOR CITIZENS WHO ALSO
WALK ON THAT STREET FOR
EXERCISE.
AND THERE IS PARKING, THERE
IS ONLY VERY LIMITED.
I AM ACTUALLY AGAINST THIS
COMMERCIALIZATION OF THIS
BLOCK BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS
BEEN A SAFE AND FRIENDLY
NEIGHBORHOOD.
I MEAN, EVERYBODY LOOKS OUT
FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, IT'S
ALWAYS ACTUALLY BEEN THAT
WAY.
I JUST WANT IT TO STAY THAT
WAY THAT IS OUR VALUE OF OUR
BLOCK IS EVERYTHING IS FOR
EVERYTHING ELSE.
-- EVERYBODY IS FOR
EVERYBODY ELSE.
YOU KNOW?
I GUESS ANOTHER THING LIKE
IT WAS MENTIONED BEFORE,
THERE ARE OTHER VACANCIES ON
ACTUALLY MANOR ROAD,
RESTAURANT JUST CLOSED DOWN.
SO IF SOMEBODY WANTS
ACTUALLY TO DO THAT, IT'S
ONLY RIGHT AROUND THE
CORNER.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ON OUR
BLOCK.
YOU KNOW?
I GUESS THAT'S IT.
THAT'S ALL THAT I WANT TO
SAY.
I AM ACTUALLY TOTALLY
AGAINST IT.
THANK YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: ALBERTA
MILLET.
MY NAME IS ALBERTA MILLET
I AM A RESIDENT --
Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU
HOLD JUST A SECOND.
GIVE HER THREE MINUTE BACK.
FOLLOWING MS. MILLET IS
JOSIA WRIGHT.
HI, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO
SAY THAT I AM AGAINST IT.
I HAVE BEEN THERE, I RAISED
MY CHILDREN AND THERE ARE
ELDERLY FOLKS THAT HAVE
BOUGHT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
AND I THINK EVERYTHING
SHOULD BE IN ORDER AND
RESPECTFUL TO THE ONES
THAT'S THERE INSTEAD OF
BRINGING IN A RESTAURANT OR
ANYTHING ELSE.
SO I AM TOTALLY AGAINST IT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. MILLET.
JOSIA WRIGHT.
FOLLOWING MS. WRIGHT IS I
THINK IT'S -- RICK -- LUCY
M. COLLINS.
MS. WRIGHT, WELCOME.
OKAY.
HI.
GOOD EVENING, COUNCILMAN AND
MEMBERS.
I'M NOT GOOD AT SPEAKING IN
PUBLIC.
BUT I JUST WANTED TO SAY --
Mayor Garcia: THIS IS
JUST FAMILY.
[ LAUGHTER ]
OKAY.
I HAVE LIVED ON CHERRYWOOD
SINCE '69, 33, GOING ON 34
YEARS.
AND I RAISED MY FAMILY
THERE.
AND WE -- IT'S ALWAYS BEEN
FAMILIES ON THAT STREET AND
MY KIDS, WHEN WE FIRST MOVED
THERE, THEY USED TO PLAY OUT
IN THE STREET, BASKETBALL,
BASKETBALL, FOOTBALL, AND IT
WASN'T MUCH TRAFFIC RUNNING
THROUGH THERE.
AND WE COULD LIVE THERE WITH
THE DOORS -- LAY WELL WITH THE
DOORS UP AND STUFF.
BUT NOW THE TRAFFIC AND
STUFF HAS GOTTEN SO BAD WE
CAN'T HARDLY DRIVE OUT OF
THE DRIVEWAYS AT A CERTAIN
TIME OF THE DAY.
AND, UM, LOTS OF THE -- LOTS
OF THE PEOPLES ON THAT
STREET LIKE MYSELF THAT'S
OLDER WOMENS, THEY HAVE LOST
THEIR HUSBANDS AND THEY JUST
DON'T NEED ANYMORE.
IT'S NO BUSINESSES ON
CHERRYWOOD.
IT'S ON MANOR ROAD.
IT NEVER HAVE BEEN ANYTHING
ON -- ON THAT STREET BUT --
BUT FAMILIES.
AND I WOULD LIKE IF YOU ALL
WOULD JUST KEEP IT THAT WAY.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.
[ APPLAUSE ]
MS. COLLINS.
MS. COLLINS, FOLLOWING -- IS
MS. COLLINS HERE.
YES.
Mayor Garcia: YOU ARE
NEXT.
AND FOLLOWING MS. COLLINS IS
MAGGIE REISHER.
WELCOME.
THANK YOU.
AND GOOD EVENING TO
EVERYBODY.
IT'S GETTING LATE, I'M GOING
TO BE SHORT AND TO THE
POINT.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO
REITERATE WHAT OUR OTHER
NEIGHBORS HAVE SAID.
OUR STREET IS A RESIDENTIAL
AREA.
AND WE WANT TO KEEP IT THAT
WAY BECAUSE ALL -- LIKE WE
SAID, ALL OF OUR CHILDREN
AND GRANDCHILDREN HAVE BEEN
REARED THERE AND THAT'S
THEIR FUTURE.
AND IF -- IF IT WAS SOMEONE
ELSE THAT WAS -- THAT WANTED
TO KEEP THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD,
I'M SURE THAT YOU DON'T WANT
COMMERCIALIZED PROPERTY IN
YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN YOU
HAVE A QUIET AND DECENT
NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU KNOW
EVERYBODY AND YOU LOOK OUT
FOR EACH OTHER.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY
THAT -- THAT IF WE LET ONE
IN, AND THEN ANOTHER ONE
WANT TO COME IN.
AND WHEN YOU KNOW IT, THEY
WOULD BE UP IN YOUR DOOR.
AND I DO NOT WANT ANYTHING
UP IN MY DOOR.
[ APPLAUSE ] AND I WOULD
JUST LIKE TO SAY TO YOU ALL
IF YOU JUST TAKE US INTO
CONSIDERING, IF YOU HAD TO
LIVE THERE YOU WOULD BE
DOING THE SAME THING, THANK
YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
[ CHEERING ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. COLLINS.
MAGGIE REISHER, FOLLOWING
HER IS -- MY SPANISH
PRONOUNCE YAIG IS GETTING TO
ME ON THIS -- PRONUNCIATION
IS GETTING TO ME ON THIS
ONE, DOROTHY WADE.
THANK YOU, I'M MAGGIE,
OWN AND LIVE AT 3105 WITH
CHERRYWOOD ROAD.
I DO AGREE WITH MY NEIGHBORS
ABOUT THE CHANGING OF THE
ZONING.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT KEPT
SINGLE FAMILY.
I RAISED MY KIDS THERE.
TO BRING IN COMMERCIALS
PROPERTY LIKE THAT THERE IS
SO MUCH TRAFFIC, I CAN
BARELY GET OUT OF MY
DRIVEWAY.
FROM THERE ARE TIMES IT
TAKES ME FIVE MINUTES TO GET
OUT OF MY DRIVEWAY.
ASKING SOMEONE ELSE COULD
YOU PLEASE SAY IF THERE'S
ANY CARS COMING.
IF THEY PUT IN A RESTAURANT
THERE, LIKE THEY ORIGINALLY
SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO,
WE TELL BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT
THEY ARE PLANNING TO DO,
THERE'S NO WAY THESE KIDS
CAN GO GO UP AND DOWN THE
STREET, WE JUST CAN'T GET
OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY, BUS
STOPS IS RIGHT ON THE CORNER
BY MR. G.
MR. G HAS BEEN VERY GOOD
THERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH
MR. G.
HE'S BEEN QUIET.
EVEN THOUGH IT SINGLE
FAMILY, HE'S RUNNING A
BUSINESS OUT OF THERE.
WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH
THAT.
BUT TO BRING IN A RESTAURANT
OR SOMETHING ELSE LIKE THAT
WHERE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE
LINING UP ALL AND DOWN THE
STREET.
RIGHT NOW IF ONE OF THE KIDS
FROM U.T. HAVE A PARTY AT
THEIR HOME, YOU CAN'T EVEN
GET IN YOUR OWN DRIVEWAY
BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL UP AND
DOWN THE STREET.
WHICH IS NO PROBLEM, NOT
GOING ON 24-7.
BUT A RESTAURANT?
IT JUST DON'T MAKE SENSE.
NONE.
AND I BEG YOU, PLEASE KEEP
IT SINGLE FAMILY.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: DOROTHY
WADE, DOROTHY WADE.
I HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN.
Mayor Garcia: YEAH, OKAY.
THANK YOU.
I GUESS SOMEBODY SIGNED UP
FOR YOU AND THEN YOU SIGNED
YOURSELF.
MS. HOUSTON, HOW COME YOU,
COME ON IN, THEN DARYL
CALDWELL.
IS MR. CALDWELL HERE?
YOU ARE NEXT.
MS. HOUSTON, WELCOME.
THANK YOU, MAYOR, MEMBERS
OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
I'M ORA HOUSTON, I LIVE AT
2207 EAST 22nd IN BLACKLAND
NEIGHBORHOODMENT I AM HERE
IN SUPPORT OF THE ORIGINAL
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN THAT WAS
FLESHED OUT, CRAFTED BY THE
MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING TEAM
OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS OR
MORE.
A LOT OF HARD WORK WENT INTO
THAT PLAN.
A LOT OF THOUGHT WAS GIVEN
TO THE PLAN.
TO THE CHARACTER OF THE
NEIGHBORHOODS, THE DISTRICT
NEIGHBORHOODS.
-- THE DISTINCT
NEIGHBORHOODS AND WHAT WE
WANTED FOR THE FUTURE OF
THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.
THERE'S SOMETHING VERY
INTERESTING ABOUT THESE TWO
PROPERTIES.
IT'S THAT THEY HAVE A
HISTORICAL USE, REGARDLESS
OF WHAT THE ZONING IS, THEY
HAVE A HISTORICAL USE.
MR. G'S IS A BARBER SHOP
THAT IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL,
HISTORICALLY IT HAS BEEN FOR
THE PAST 20 YEARS A BARBER
SHOP, WHICH HAS BEEN
NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDLY.
THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH OF
MR. G'S HAS HISTORICALLY
BEEN COMMERCIAL.
NO ONE SEEMS TO KNOW WHEN
THAT HAPPENED, BUT IT
HAPPENED.
BUT HISTORICALLY IT HAS BEEN
USED AS A SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE.
THIS WHOLE THING CAME UP
BECAUSE THERE WAS NO WAY TO
MAKE MR. G'S LEGAL IN A
SINGLE FAMILY AND THE
RESIDENTS AND THE PLAN DID
NOT WANT TO FURTHER ENCROACH
COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES INTO
THE CHERRYWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD,
WHICH WOULD BE THE
PROPERTIES TRACT 17.
SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO THIS
POINT.
WE WISH THERE WAS AN EASY
SOLUTION TO THIS.
THERE'S BEEN SOME MISCUES ON
BOTH SIDES I SUSPECT AND YOU
ALL HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY
OF IRONING THOSE OUT.
THAT DOESN'T HELP YOU, BUT
THAT GIVES YOU A LITTLE
PERSPECTIVE ABOUT IT.
THE OTHER THING THAT I DO
WANT TO MENTION IS THAT
ALTHOUGH ON PAGE 27 OF YOUR
COUNCIL AGENDA, IT SAYS THAT
PERMITS SECONDARY APARTMENT
AND SMALL LOT AM AMNESTY ON ANY
LOTS IN THE AREA, WHICH
WOULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING AREA-WIDE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS NO
LONGER THE CASE AND I WANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR
ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WITH THE
SUBDISTRICTS, WE ARE UNDER
THE IMPRESSION THAT EACH
SUBDISTRICTS CAN CHOOSE THE
INFILL OPTIONS THAT ARE BEST
SUITED FOR THEM AND
ACCORDING TO OUR PLAN, THE
ONLY INFILL OPTION THAT IS
NEIGHBORHOOD-WIDE IS A SMALL
LOT AMNESTY.
SO I GUESS THAT'S A QUESTION
THAT YOU ALL WILL ADDRESS AT
A LATER TIME.
I SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN AS THE PLAN WAS
WRITTEN, WITH THOSE
EXCEPTIONS THAT -- THAT
SOME -- SOME PRIOR SPEAKER
MADE.
I THINK IT WAS STEVEN.
ABOUT -- ABOUT SOMETHING
THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
ADDED ON.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT I
SUPPORT THE PLAN.
THEY WORKED REAL HARD.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MS. HOUSTON.
DARYL CALDWELL AND FOLLOWING
MR. CALDWELL IS CHRISTIE
SHAW.
MR. CALDWELL, WELCOME, SIR.
THANK YOU.
MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS DARYL CALDWELL.
I AM HERE TO -- THIS EVENING
TO REPRESENT MY MOTHER ETHYL
CALDWELL AT 300 OF
CHERRYWOOD ROAD.
-- 300 OF CHERRYWOOD ROAD.
I -- 3006 CHERRY CHERRYWOOD ROAD.
I LIKE MOST OF THE NEIGHBORS
TONIGHT LIVED AND GREW UP
THIS THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
MY FAMILY MOVED THERE IN
1970.
MOST OF THE FOLKS HERE
TONIGHT WERE THERE BEFORE MY
FAMILY GOT THERE.
I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE
TELLING YOU THAT THESE FOLKS
ARE SURVIVORS OF RED LINING,
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS, WHITE
FLIGHT, GENTRIFICATION, AND
NOW ZONING.
I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE
SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL PLAN.
WE HOPE TO MAINTAIN OR
RETAIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
INTEGRITY AS IT IS AND AS IT
HAS BEEN FOR MANY YEARS.
TO US, THE -- THE HOUSES
ACTUALLY SERVE A DUAL
FUNCTION AS HOMEOWNERS.
THEIR SOURCE OF SHELTER, A
RESPITE FOR OUR PRIVATE
LIVES, AND ACTUALLY A REALM
OF CONTROL OF PERSONAL
PROPERTY.
WITH THE COMMERCIALIZATION,
WE LOSE THAT.
WE LOSE CONTROL.
WE LOSE WHAT WE ONCE FELT
VERY COMFORTABLE WITH IN
OUR -- ACTUALLY IN OUR SAFE
HAVEN.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO US.
AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE OUT IN
NUMBERS.
PLEASE CONSIDER ALLOWING US
TO RETAIN THE QUALITY OF
NEIGHBORHOOD LIFE AS WE ONCE
KNEW IT.
THANK YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, SIR.
CHRISTIE SHAW AND FOLLOWING
MS. SHAW, ROGER JENNINGS,
MR. JENNINGS HERE?
YOU ARE NECK.
MS. SHAW, WELCOME.
THANK YOU.
I THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
MY NAME IS CHRISTIE SHAW AND
I'M THE OWNER OF 3001
CHERRYWOOD.
I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY A
YEAR AND A HALF AGO AS A
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE
CHERRYWOOD OR I'M SORRY THE
UPPER BOGGY CREEK
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN HAS BEEN
IN -- IN CRAFTING FORM FOR
TWO YEARS, I THINK THEY HAVE
PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO IT.
I THINK THAT IT IS A FAIRLY
GOOD PLAN.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE CHANGE IN
OWNERSHIP KIND OF SLIPPED
THROUGH THE CRACKS AND WE
DID NOT FIND OUT UNTIL APRIL
THAT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN
CHANGING OUR ZONING TO S.F.
3.
SO WE GOT TOGETHER WITH CITY
STAFF AND WE PUT TOGETHER A
RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE IT
ZONED AS G.R.
MY HUSBAND AND I WERE
INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY
AND WE ARE VERY
CONSCIENTIOUS NEIGHBORS.
AND WE FEEL THAT A C.S.
ZONING IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR
THAT PROPERTY.
AND WE WANTED IT TO BE DOWN
ZONED TO G.R.
IN THE SAME NOTE, WE FEEL
THAT IT WOULD BE A GOOD
TRANSITION PROPERTY AND LET
ME SHOW YOU WHY.
Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU GET
THIS MIC OVER HERE.
OKAY, I'M SORRY.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
JASON.
I'M TRYING TO ORIENT
MYSELF HERE.
IN FACT I DON'T EVEN SEE
CHERRYWOOD ROAD ON THIS MAP.
ANYWAY, ON CHERRYWOOD ROAD,
CHERRYWOOD AND MANOR, THERE
IS QUITE A BIT OF COMMERCIAL
ACTIVITY THAT HAPPENS ON
THAT STREET CORNER.
IN FACT IF YOU GO IN MY BACK
YARD, ALL THAT YOU SEE IS
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY.
AND SO IT'S KIND OF AN
INTERESTING THING WHERE
ACROSS THE STREET THERE
IS RESIDENTIAL.
IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL.
ON THIS CORNER HERE,
IT'S PRETTY HEAVY DUTY
COMMERCIAL.
THERE'S AN AUTO PARTS
PLACE BEHIND US, THERE
IS A DAYCARE CENTER AND
ON THE CORNER HERE IS
GENE JOHNSON'S
AUTOMOTIVE.
WE CONTEND THAT IT WOULD
BE A GOOD USE OF
PROPERTY TO HAVE IT
ZONED AS MIXED USE, AS
LIMITED COMMERCIAL AS A
TRANSITION, WHO KNOWS
WHAT WILL BE HAPPENING
IN 30 YEARS, WE THINK
THAT IT COULD PROVIDE
SERVICES FOR THE
NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WOULD
BE SEEN AS A BENEFIT.
ADDRESSING THE WHOLE
RESTAURANT ISSUE, WHEN
WE MET WITH THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
COMMISSION, WHICH BY THE
WAY SUPPORTED US, ALSO
THE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION SUPPORTED US
AND THE CITY STAFF, WE
HAD DISCUSSED THE
CONCERNS AND I BELIEVE
THAT WE ADDRESSED THE
CONCERNS OF THE
OPPOSITION BY STRIKING
OFF ANYTHING HAVING TO
DO WITH RESTAURANTS.
IT WAS ALSO BROUGHT TO
THE ATTENTION THAT
SOMEBODY DIDN'T WANT PET
SERVICES THERE.
SO WE STRUCK THAT OFF
DURING THE MEETING.
SO THE WAY THAT IT STAND
RIGHT NOW, THERE WOULD
BE NO RESTAURANT GOING
THERE.
IN FACT WE HAD NEVER HAD
PLANS FOR THERE TO BE A
RESTAURANT THERE.
BUT SOMEHOW THAT BEGAN
EARLY ON IN DISCUSSIONS.
SO WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE
NEIGHBORS WERE OPPOSED
TO THAT.
IT WOULDN'T BE A VERY
GOOD PROPERTY FOR
RESTAURANT USE ANYWAY
SINCE WE HAVE DONE AN
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINED
THAT AT MOST THERE WOULD
BE 8 PARKING SPACES THAT
WOULD BE AVAILABLE
[BUZZER SOUNDING]
SO THAT LIMITS THE
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AT
THAT.
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MR. JENNINGS, ROGER
JENNINGS.
AND FOLLOWING
MR. JENNINGS IS LESLIE
LAWSON.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I AM CHRISTIE SHAW'S
HUSBAND.
AND ALSO CO-OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY.
A COUPLE OF THINGS
THAT -- THAT I WOULD
LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND
MENTION.
WE HAVE A LETTER HERE
FROM -- FROM OUR
NEIGHBOR DIRECTLY TO THE
NORTH THAT IS -- FULLY
SUPPORTS OUR EFFORT.
IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED
IN THAT.
WE ALSO HAVE A PETITION
THAT WE HAD SIGNED WITH
ALL OF THE PROPERTIES
THAT BASICALLY SURROUND
OUR HOUSE, WHICH IS THE
NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH,
THE SOUTH AND BEHIND US
AND ACTUALLY WE ALSO GOT
ONE PROPERTY DIRECTLY
ACROSS THE STREET FROM
US TO SIGN.
AND -- IN ACCORDANCE
WITH -- WITH WHAT THE
COMMISSION HAS GONE
AHEAD WITH.
THE COMMISSION'S
DECISIONS AS YOU KNOW
COME FROM DOZENS AND
DOZENS OF MEETINGS THAT
WE HAVE ATTENDED AND WE
THINK THAT WE HAVE BEEN
VERY FORTH RIGHT IN
TRYING TO KEEP THIS
ZONING VERY RESTRICTIVE.
WE THINK THAT IN THE
FUTURE SOMETHING SMALL
LIKE MAYBE A QUOAG GAW
STUDIO OR -- IN THE
DISTANT FUTURE,
SOMETHING LIKE THAT
WOULD BE REALLY
APPROPRIATE AND ADD A
LOT TO THE CHARACTER OF
THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HOPE THAT THAT'S WHAT
HAPPENS.
ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO
MENTION THAT I'M ALSO IN
FAVOR OF GERALD CARTER
AND HIM GETTING THE
APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR
WHAT HAS BEEN AN
ESTABLISHMENT THAT WE
LOVE AND WHICH IS A
JEWEL IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD.
REALLY SETS OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD APART FROM
OTHERS.
THAT WE VALUE GREATLY.
HE HAS NO BEDROOMS IN
THAT ESTABLISHMENT.
THERE'S NO KITCHEN
THERE.
IT WOULD BE A COMPLETE
WIPE OUT OF HIS VALUE AS
A OWE ON OF HIS PROPERTY
IF THAT WAS TO GO AHEAD
WITH SINGLE FAMILY.
SO I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO
GIVE PART OF MY TIME TO
SUPPORTING GERALD
BECAUSE HE IS SUCH A
GREAT NEIGHBOR TO HAVE
AND A REAL, REAL FINE
PERSON.
I WOULD HATE TO SEE LIKE
A WITCH HUNT HAPPEN
WHERE HE GETS SHUT DOWN.
ANYWAY, WE WOULD LIKE TO
SEE THIS GO FORWARD AS
HAS BEEN PRESENTED BY
THE COMMISSION.
AND WE HOPE THAT YOU
VOTE THAT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
LESLIE LAWSON IS
REGISTERED NOT WISHING
TO SPEAK, AND FOR.
AND SHE NOTES, PLEASE
PASS THE UBC PLAN AS
SUBMITTED BY THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
TEAM.
COUNCIL, THAT'S ALL OF
THE SPEAKERS THAT WE
HAVE.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING ON 91 AND
92.
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN.
SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
OPPOSED, NO. MOTION
CARRIES.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
OR FOR THE NEIGHBORS?
GOODMAN: YES, MAYOR
PRO TEM.
Mayor Garcia: MAYOR
PRO TEM?
GOODMAN: I WANTED TO
ASK ABOUT TRACTS 16 AND
17 OBVIOUSLY.
OKAY, SO THERE'S ONE
THAT EVERYBODY THOUGHT
WAS ZONED COMMERCIAL AND
ISN'T.
AND ONE THAT EVERYBODY
THOUGHT WAS ZONED
RESIDENTIAL AND ISN'T.
SO IS THERE RELATIVE TO
TRACT 16 SOME WAY FOR IT
TO REMAIN AT ITS CURRENT
USE WITH -- WITH LEGAL
NON-CONFORMING STATUS OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT?
--
OKAY RIGHT.
IF YOU DON'T MIND,
LET ME GO INTO THAT.
THE PROBLEM WITH THE
LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USE
IS THAT THIS IS NOT
LEGAL.
WHEN THE GENTLEMAN
BROUGHT THE TRACT, I
DON'T KNOW WHAT
REPRESENTATIONS WERE
MADE TO HIM, BUT IT WAS
ZONED SINGLE FAMILY AT
THAT TIME.
SO UNDER THE CODE, IT
CANNOT BECOME A
NON-CONFORMING USE
BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER
LEGAL TO BEGIN WITH.
NON-CONFORMING OF THE
USE OCCURS WHICH YOU
CHANGE THE ZONING ON A
USE THAT'S THERE, FOR
EXAMPLE YOU MAKE THE
ZONING MORE RESTRICTIVE.
THAN THE USE THAT'S --
THEN THE USE THAT'S IN
PLACE BECOMES A
NON-CONFORMING USE.
WHAT CAN BE DONE,
HOWEVER, IN THIS
PARTICULAR INSTANCE IS
WE COULD ZONE IT AT
THE -- AT THE
RECOMMENDATION THAT IS
COMING DOWN IF THE
GENTLEMEN WERE WILLING
TO ENTER INTO A
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT
THAT PROVIDED THAT UPON
THE CESSATION OF THE
USE, THAT HE HAS PLACED
ON THE PROPERTY, THAT IS
IF THAT USINGS AWAY,
THAT THERE WILL BE NO
OBJECTION TO A ROLLBACK
AND THAT IS IN OTHER
WORDS FOR THE COUNCIL TO
INITIATE ZONING TO ROLL
IT BACK TO SINGLE
FAMILY.
THAT WAY YOU WOULD
CONFINEE THE USE ON THIS
PIECE OF PROPERTY TO
WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE,
YOU WOULD MAKE IT LEGAL,
CONFINEE THE USE TO WHAT
IS CURRENTLY THERE, AND
THEN WHEN THE USE CEASED
THEN THE CITY COULD
INITIATE A ZONING THAT
WOULD ROLL IT BACK TO
SINGLE FAMILY 2.
THAT WOULD AND HIS THIS
GENTLEMAN.
I DON'T KNOW -- WE WOULD
HAVE TO EXPLORE THAT
OPTION WITH THIS
GENTLEMAN IF THE COUNCIL
WOULD LIKE FOR US TO AND
IF THE COUNCIL WOULD
LIKE FOR THE -- THE
OWNER TO CONSIDER THAT.
WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO DO
THAT.
GOODMAN: WE DON'T --
I'M SORRY.
Mayor Garcia: LET ME
SEE IF THE MAYOR PRO TEM
IS FINISHED.
MAYOR PRO TEM?
GOODMAN: NO, I STILL
HAD TRACT 17.
BUT LET ME ASK, WE DON'T
HAVE ANYTHING LESS THAN
LOCAL COMMERCIAL, RIGHT?
LOCAL RETAIL.
WE DON'T HAVE SUCH A
THING AS NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL.
THIS IS THE MOST
RESTRICTIVE COMMERCIAL
ZONING DISTRICT.
GOODMAN: I'M NOT
SURE --
THAT WOULD AFLOW A
HAIR SALON -- THAT WOULD
ALLOW FOR A HAIR SALON.
GOODMAN: BUT IF YOU
ARE WANTING TO GET IT AS
CLOSE TO DESCRIBING ITS
REAL AND CURRENT USE,
AND AT THE SAME TIME NOT
SETTING A PRECEDENT FOR
OR SETTING UP
EXPECTATIONS FOR FUTURE
PURCHASE OR SOMETHING,
MAYBE WHAT WE NEED IS A
WHOLE NEW ZONING
CATEGORY THAT GOES IN
WITH THE KIND OF
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
THAT COMES OUT IN
TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD
DISTRICTS IF IT IS A
RETAIL USE DESIGNED
SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT
NEIGHBORHOOD AND NOT FOR
PASSING CUSTOMERS OR
WHAT HAVE YOU, YOU KNOW,
IT'S A PRETTY -- YOU
HAVE YOUR REGULARS KIND
OF THING, WHICH SOUNDS
LIKE WHAT IT IS NOW.
I'M NOT SURE.
SO I'M NOT PREPARED TO
SAY THAT I HAVE THE
ANSWER TO THIS ONE, BUT
I DID WONDER IF THAT WAS
EXACTLY THE KIND OF
THING THAT NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING WAS SUPPOSED TO
ALLOW US TO DO.
TO INVENT THE TOOLS, IF
WE DIDN'T HAVE THEM.
FOR THE MECHANISM.
AND TRACT 17, OKAY, SO
IT IS ZONED CS.
DO WE KNOW WHEN IT WAS
ZONED CS.
GREG GUERNSEY AND I
SPENT A GOOD PART OF AN
AFTERNOON RESEARCHING
THE HISTORY ON THIS
REZONING.
AS FAR AS WE CAN TELL,
MY BEST -- SOMETIME
ABOUT 1960 IT WAS ZONED
COMMERCIAL, ZONED C.S.
WHEN THE ZONING DISTRICT
WERE CHANGED IN THE MID
'80'S.
GOODMAN: TRACT 16 WAS
REZONED IN 1980?
TRACT 16, BOTH 16 AND
17 WERE ZONED COMMERCIAL
BACK IN THE '60'S.
TRACT 16, MR. CARTER'S,
WAS ZONED IN -- DOWN
ZONED TO SINGLE FAMILY
IN JUNE OF 1980.
FROM MY TALKING WITH
MR. CARTER, HE PURCHASED
IT IN THE FALL OF THAT
SAME YEAR, HAD BEEN
OPERATING UNDER THE
ASSUMPTION THAT HE HAD
THE PROPER ZONING TO
OPERATE HIS BARBER SHOP.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
THIS IS PROBABLY NOT A
PLANNER QUESTION.
WHEN A FINANCIAL
INSTITUTION COMES INTO
THE NEGOTIATED
PURCHASE
AND CLOSING OF A PIECE
OF REAL ESTATE, DON'T
THEY KNOW WHAT THE
ZONING IS AND HOW COULD
THEY MISREPRESENT THE
CATEGORY?
AND I GUESS WE COULD ASK
MR. CARTER LATER, TOO,
IF THE TAX APPRAISAL HAS
BEEN EACH YEAR BASED ON
COMMERCIAL ZONING WHEN
IT DIDN'T HAVE IT FOR
THE LAST 20 ODD YEARS.
MAYOR PRO TEM?
TALKING WITH THE TRAVIS
COUNTY CENTRAL APPRAISAL
DISTRICT, THE TAXATION
IS BASED ON THE USE AND
NOT THE ZONING.
AND THAT'S -- WE HAVE
INVESTIGATED THAT FOR
SEVERAL DIFFERENT TYPES
OF ZONING DISTRICTS.
SO THE APPRAISER JUST
DRIVES BY AND DOES HIS
APPRAISAL THAT WAY AS
OPPOSED TO LOOKING A AT
THE ZONING DISTRICT.
SO HE'S BEEN PAYING
COMPARABLE TAXES TO
COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.
I DO BELIEVE SO.
I DON'T KNOW FOR A FACT.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
THOSE ARE ALL OF MY
QUESTIONS.
I HAD ONE MORE
TECHNICAL.
YOU KNOW THERE'S A VALID
PETITION HERE ON THE
PROPERTY THAT IS
CURRENTLY ZONED C.S.
I DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU
COULD HAVE A VALID
PETITION TO DOWN ZONE.
THE VALID PETITION
FOR TRACT 17, CHRISTIE
SHAW, MS. SHAW SIGNED
IT, THE PETITION WAS IN
THE CASE THAT -- THAT
SHE OBJECTED TO ANY
ZONING LOWER THAN THE
G.R.MUCONP AS THE STAFF
RECOMMENDATION, IT WAS
BASICALLY TO COUNTER THE
RECOMMENDATION IF IT WAS
TO BE DOWN ZONED TO
SINGLE FAMILY.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN
HERE SAYS THERE'S A
VALID PETITION FROM
NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS
WHO OBJECT TO ANY
COMMERCIAL ZONING.
THAT WOULD BE
MS. DUFFY AND HER
NEIGHBORS.
GOODMAN: THAT'S WHAT
I AM ASKING ABOUT.
TECHNICALLY I DON'T
THINK THERE IS SUCH A
THING AS A VALID
PETITION TO DOWN ZONE.
IT'S FOR THE
REZONINGS.
YOU CAN HAVE A VALID
PETITION FOR A REZONING.
TO REQUEST --
YEAH.
IT DOES NOT SPEAK TO
WHETHER IT'S AN UP
ZONING OR A DOWN ZONING.
THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT
CODE ONLY SPEAKS IN
TERMS OF REZONING.
GOODMAN: SO IF YOU
HAD A PETITION WITH THE
LANGUAGE SAYING "WE WANT
PROPERTY X TO BE DOWN
ZONED FROM SOMETHING TO
SOMETHING" THAT ALSO IS
PART OF THE VALID
PETITION PROCESS?
IF -- WELL, IF YOU
HAVE A -- IF YOU HAVE A
ZONING REQUEST, IF YOU
HAVE A ZONING CHANGE
REQUEST THAT YOU ARE
CONSIDERING, AND YOU
HAVE SOMEONE WHO FILES
AN OBJECTION, -- FOR
EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE THE
ZONING REQUEST WHERE YOU
ARE GOING FROM FROM A CS
TO A HIGHER
CLASSIFICATION, YOU CAN
HAVE AN OBJECTION TO
THAT HIGHER
CLASSIFICATION.
IF YOU HAVE A DOWN --
A -- A ROLLBACK, YOU CAN
HAVE AN OBJECTION TO A
ROLLBACK.
YOU CAN HAVE -- I
WOULDN'T -- I WOULD BE
VERY SURPRISED, FOR
EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAD A
SITUATION WHICH YOU HAD
SOMEONE COMING IN --
GOODMAN: I'M SORRY.
I ALMOST FORGOT WHERE
I WAS.
IF YOU HAD A SITUATION
IN WHICH YOU HAD SOMEONE
REQUESTING A CHANGE FROM
CS, FOR EXAMPLE, TO
L.I., I WOULD BE
SURPRISED IF YOU HAD
SOMEONE COMING IN
OBJECTING TO A CHANGE
FROM C.S. TO -- TO AN
S.F. OR A MULTI-FAMILY
CLASSIFICATION.
YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING?
GOODMAN: YEAH, YEAH.
AND SO IN THIS CASE, THE
ACTION IS BECAUSE IT'S
WITHIN A NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING AREA AND THAT'S
ABOUT TO BE ZONED, THAT
THE CATEGORY WOULD BE
C.S.-N.P. AND THAT IS
WHAT GAVE THE -- A BASIS
FOR A VALID PETITION
OPPOSED TO THE C.S.
WHICH EXISTS?
WELL, ACTUALLY --
OKAY.
MARK IS GOING TO HAVE TO
ANSWER THE QUESTION ON
THE PIECE OF PROPERTY
THAT EXISTS TO BE CS.
BUT AS FAR AS THE OTHER
PIECE WAS CONCERNED, IT
WAS A DOWN ZONING TO AN
S.F. 2.
FOR TRACT 17, THE
VALID PETITION IS
AGAINST ANY COMMERCIAL
ZONING DOWN ZONING OR
EVEN IF IT IS TO THE
LOWER --
GOODMAN: YEAH I KNOW
THAT.
AND THEY WANT TO
SINGLE FAMILY, THE
PETITION FOR THE
PROPERTY OWNER FOR TRACT
17 IS TO KEEP IT TO NO
MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN
THE G.R.-CO-MU.
GOODMAN: RIGHT.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIND
OUT IS HOW TECHNICALLY
POSSIBLY TO HAVE A VALID
PETITION FOR EXISTING
ZONING.
I THOUGHT VALID PETITION
WAS IN OPPOSITION TO A
ZONING CHANGE.
SO IS THE FACT THAT THIS
WOULD BE NOW ZONED
C.S.-NP THE BASIS FOR
BEING ABLE TO HAVE A
VALID PETITION IN
OPPOSITION TO THE C.S.
THAT EXISTS?
Glasgo: MAYOR, I WILL
GO AHEAD AND USE YOUR
TERMINOLOGY OF THE DOWN
ZONING.
[ONE MOMENT PLEASE FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]
(TIME 8:00 P.M.)
SHE'S WILLING TO GO
FROM CS TO GR AND THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IS
OBJECTING TO -- ANYTHING
OTHER THAN TO SF-2
GOODMAN: SO THE
REQUEST FOR GR TRIGGERS
THIS?
Glasco: NO, THE
REQUEST TO TAKE IT LOWER
THAN GR, TO SF-2.
THE OWNER WAS ZONED CS,
SHE'S OKAYED TO TAKE IT
DOWN TO GR, BUT DOES NOT
WANT ANYTHING LESS THAN
THAT.
AND THEN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD IS
OBJECTING TO ANYTHING
THAT'S NOT SF-2.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
SO IT'S THE NP, THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN THAT
TRIGGERS THE VALID
PETITION FOR ANY LOTS
WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
BOUNDARY.
YOU CAN LOOK AT THEM
THAT WAY, THAT'S THE
COMBINED, THE
COMBINATION OF ALL OF
THEM.
YOU'RE GOING TO GR AND
CS WITHOUT AN OVERLAY
AND CHANGING TO GR,-MU
WITH AN OVERLAY.
EVERYBODY GETS AN
OVERLAY, EVEN A HOUSE.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
SORRY TO TAKE A LONG.
THAT'S OKAY.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLEY?
Dunkerley: THANK YOU.
I WISH I KNEW ENOUGH TO
ASK THOSE QUESTIONS,
MAYOR PRO TEM.
I HAD ONE QUESTION I
WOULD LIKE FOR THE
NEIGHBORS AND MR. CARTER
WITH THE BARBERSHOP TO
CONSIDER.
WHEN I FIRST HEARD ABOUT
THIS ISSUE, THE
NEIGHBORS WHO TALKED TO
ME DESCRIBED THIS
BUSINESS AS VERY
UNOBTRUSIVE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AND ONE
THAT THEY REALLY COULD
LIVE WITH.
THEY JUST DIDN'T WANT --
THEY WANTED HIM TO --
THIS PROPERTY TO REVERT
TO -- TO STAY
SINGLE-FAMILY AFTER HIS
PARTICULAR USE CEASED.
SO I'M WONDERING IF
MR. CARTER WOULD ALSO
USE THE RESTRICTIVE
COVENANTS THAT WOULD BE
IN PLACE SO HIS SALON OR
BARBERSHOP WOULD BE
LEGAL, AND THEN WHEN
THAT USE CHANGED THAT IT
WOULD ROLL BACK OR WE
COULD ROLL IT BACK TO
SINGLE-FAMILY.
AND I WONDER IF THAT'S A
COMPROMISE THAT COULDN'T
BE CONSIDERED IN THIS
NEXT WEEK.
I EVEN HEARD ONE OF THE
NEIGHBORS TONIGHT SAY
SOMETHING ABOUT THAT USE
WAS UNOBTRUSIVE AND THEY
REALLY HAD NO PROBLEM
WITH IT, THEY WERE JUST
CONCERNED THAT IT BE
ROLLED BACK TO
SINGLE-FAMILY IF WE DID
ADJUST IT TO SOMETHING
THAT WOULD MAKE HIS SHOP
LEGAL AT THIS TIME.
COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLEY, ON -- WELL,
GO TO MR. CARTER AND
I'LL ADDRESS ANOTHER
ISSUE THAT THAT MAY
BRING UP.
I UNDERSTAND VERY
CLEARLY WHAT'S GOING ON,
SO I'M FINE WITH THAT.
WITH THE ROLL THE ROLLBACK.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH
THAT.
I JUST WANT TO CONTINUE
TO WORK.
[ APPLAUSE ]
IS THAT OKAY WITH
YOU?
COUNCILMEMBER --
Dunkerley: SO I
UNDERSTAND NOW THAT WE
WILL CONSIDER CHANGING
THE ZONING TO MAKE HIS
SHOP LEGAL, AND THEN
WHEN IT STOPS BEING THAT
SHOP THEN WE CAN ROLL IT
BACK TO SINGLE-FAMILY?
JUST SO WE HAVE BOTH
SIDES.
PICTURE, MS. DUFFY, DO
YOU WANT TO SAY WHETHER
OR NOT THAT'S SOMETHING
YOU THINK THE NEIGHBORS
ON THE STREET WOULD ALSO
BE AMANIABLE WITH?
I DON'T THINK WE WILL
HAVE A PROBLEM WITH
THAT, ONLY IF THERE WAS
A SIGN STATING THAT IT
WAS LEGAL THAT ONCE HE
CHOOSES TO SELL OR
WHATEVER, IT WOULD ROLL
BACK TO SINGLE-FAMILY.
WE'VE NEVER HAD A
PROBLEM WITH THAT.
IF I CAN ADDRESS THAT
ISSUE.
I THINK I NEED TO MAKE
VERY CLEAR, WE CANNOT
CONDITION IT UPON THE
SALE.
WE CAN CONDITION IT IN
THE ROLLBACK PROVISIONS
ON THE CESSATION, THAT
IS THE STOPPING OF THE
USE, WHICH IS WHAT I
REALLY THINK I HEAR YOU
ALL SAYING AND I THINK
THAT MEETS YOUR
OBJECTIVE.
BECAUSE I HAVE -- WE
HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT
ENFORCE ABILITY PROBLEMS
BECAUSE WHEN YOU DO A
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, IT
RUNS WITH THE LAND, SO
IT HAS TO BE THE TIED
WITH THE USE AND NOT
WITH THE SALE OF THE
PROPERTY.
FOR THE LAND, YES.
YOU'RE USING LEGALESE
NOW.
I APOLOGIZE.
LAWYERS ARE TERRIBLE
ABOUT THAT.
I HAVE SOME ATTORNEYS
IN HERE.
THEY CAN TELL ME.
BUT THE LAND.
YES, MA'AM.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I
MEAN, THE LAND WILL ROLL
BACK.
THE LAND -- THE
ZONING ON THE LAND WOULD
ROLL BACK ONCE THE
BARBERSHOP USE CEASES.
IT'S NOT TRIGGERED ON
THE SALE.
EXACTLY.
CITY ATTORNEY, THIS
WOULD MEAN IF MR. CARTER
RETIRED NEXT MONTH, THEN
WE COULD ROLL IT BACK TO
SINGLE-FAMILY, EVEN
THOUGH THERE'S NOT A
SALE?
NO.
LET ME MAKE PERFECTLY
CLEAR, IF THE BARBERSHOP
USE CONTINUED, AND WHAT
WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD
PUT IN A TIME FRAME.
WE WOULD PUT MAY IN
THAT -- 90 DAYS IS OUR
STANDARD TIME FRAME.
IF THE BARBERSHOP -- IF
MR. CARTER'S SON MOVED
IN AND STARTED CUTTING
HAIR AND WAS LICENSED TO
DO THAT, THEN IT WOULD
CONTINUE EVEN THOUGH
MR. CARTER RETIRED.
THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M
SAYING.
IF 90 DAYS FROM NOW IT
CEASED, WHETHER OR NOT
HE SOLD, IT WOULD
REVERT -- COULD REVERT
BACK TO SINGLE-FAMILY.
YES, MA'AM, IF THE
USE STOPPED.
OKAY.
IF THE USE STOPS.
AND IF HIS SON MOVES IN
THERE AND STARTED
CUTTING HAIR, YOU'RE
SAYING --
WE USUALLY PUT -- THE
WAY WE DO IT IS WE GIVE
A TIME FRAME IN THE --
90 DAYS.
IS I BELIEVE WHAT OUR
STANDARD IS.
AND ALICE IS SHAKING HER
HEAD YES, SO SHE'S
CONFIRMING THAT.
SO IT'S A 90-DAY WINDOW.
OKAY.
AND WHILE I'M HERE I
WOULD LIKE TO SAY THE
PROPERTY AROUND ON MANOR
ROAD HAS NO EFFECT ON US
ON CHERRY WOOD.
THE AUTO SHOP,
MR. JOHNSON'S, ALL OF
THAT, THE NURSERY BACK
THERE, THAT'S ON MANOR
ROAD.
THAT HAS NOTHING DO WITH
WHAT'S GOING ON ON
CHERRY WOOD ROAD.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE
THAT CLEAR.
COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLEY, STEVEN
CRAIGER, THE CHAIR OF
THE PLANNING TEAM, JUST
REMINDED ME THAT THE
PLANNING TEAM DID TAKE A
VOTE AND THE PLANNING
TEAM RECOMMENDED SIX
MONTHS AS AN OPTION AS
OPPOSED TO 90 DAYS.
AND ANOTHER POINT FROM A
PLANNING PRINCIPLE
PERSPECTIVE, SAYING THAT
IF TRACT 17 DOES STAY
COMMERCIAL, TRACT 16
WILL BE SURROUNDED, A
SINGLE-FAMILY LOT
SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL
ON ALL SIDES, SO IT
WOULD BE KIND OF STUCK
THERE JUST FROM A --
JUST FROM A PLANNING
PERSPECTIVE.
IT WOULD BE KIND OF
SANDWICHED IN THERE.
AND WE WOULD LIKE TO
SUBMIT THIS ON ALL THREE
READINGS.
LET ME MAKE A
SUGGESTION.
I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT
YOU PULL OUT THAT TRACT.
AND PULL OUT TRACT
17?
THE CARTER TRACT.
TRACT 16.
TRACT 16.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT
COUNCIL WANTS TO DO
ABOUT 17, BUT AS FAR AS
THE CARTER TRACT IS
CONCERNED, PULL IT OUT
TO GIVE US TIME TO GET
BACK WITH THE
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
WE PREPARED A MOTION
SHEET TO HELP FACILITATE
ANY VOTING THAT YOU
MIGHT DO.
Thomas: MAYOR, CAN WE
GET CLARITY ON 17 REAL
QUICK?
CAN WE GET CLARITY ON
17?
I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO
PULL 16 OUT.
Mayor Garcia: 16 IS
BEING PULLED OUT JUST SO
THEY CAN DRAFT A
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
Thomas: MR. AND
MRS. SHAW, WHAT I HEARD
YOU SAY THIS, THERE WAS
NEVER A RESTAURANT
INVOLVED.
YOU SAID YOU DID SOME
KIND OF SURVEY AND FOUND
OUT YOU COULDN'T DO A
PARKING SPOT, SO WAS
THAT SAYING THAT YOU ARE
CONTEMPLATING DOING A
RESTAURANT?
WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO
WITH THE PROPERTY?
WE HAD NEVER PLANNED
TO DO A RESTAURANT.
AND WHEN WE WERE
NOTIFIED OF THE CONCERNS
OF THE NEIGHBORS
REGARDING THE
RESTAURANT, WE ADDRESSED
THAT AT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING AND
WE STRUCK OFF ANY KIND
OF RESTAURANT LIMITS,
ALL OF THOSE.
THAT WAS PART OF A
COMPROMISE IN HOPING TO
GAIN THE SUPPORT OF THE
NEIGHBORS.
AND WE FELT LIKE WE WERE
FAIRLY SUCCESSFUL WITH
THAT.
IN FACT, WHEN WE TALKED
TO SOME OF THE OTHER
NEIGHBORS, THEY SAID
THAT THAT WAS AMENABLE
THEM.
THAT WOULD BE THEIR
BIGGEST ISSUE WAS A
RESTAURANT, AND WE FELT
IT WOULD BE
INAPPROPRIATE FOR THAT
PLACE TO BE A RESTAURANT
ANYWAY AT ANY TIME, SO
IT WAS NO PROBLEM.
AND THERE SEEMED TO BE
AN OPTION ALSO TO LIKE
PUT A DOG KENNEL OR
SOMETHING.
WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD
ALSO BE OBJECT OBTRUSIVE, SO WE
STRUCK THAT AS WELL.
AND THE REASON WE TALK
ABOUT THE EIGHT PARK
SPACES BECAUSE WE'RE
TRYING TO I AM FA SIZE
WHATEVER COMES THERE,
WHATEVER BUSINESS COMES
TO THAT SPOT WOULD HAVE
TO BE BY VERY
LIMITATIONS OF THE SIZE
OF THE LOT AND ITS
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS, BE
A VERY SMALL ENTERPRISE,
SOMETHING ALONG THE LINE
OF A YOGA STUDIO OR A
PAINTING STUDIO OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT,
OFFICES OR SOMETHING.
TO ADDRESS THE
TRAFFIC CONCERNS.
Thomas: I NEVER GOT
AN ANSWER WHAT YOU
PLANNED TO DO WITH IT.
HAVE YOU DECIDED?
WE HAVE NO PRESENT
PLAN.
WE'VE PURCHASED THE
PROPERTY AS A COMMERCIAL
PROPERTY, SO WE WOULD
HATE TO INCUR A LOSS
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT,
BUT AT THE SAME TIME WE
WANT TO PREVENT ANY
OBTRUSIVE BUSINESSES
FROM GOING IN THAT
PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE.
WE'RE THINKING MORE
LIKE 20 YEARS DOWN THE
LINE OR SOMETHING,
FURTHER DOWN THE LINE
THAT IT WOULD BE MORE
APPROPRIATE AT THAT TIME
OR SOMETHING.
THANK YOU.
Wynn: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
Wynn: MS. SHAW,
ANOTHER QUICK QUESTION.
SO YOU PURCHASED THE
PROPERTY 18 MONTHS OR SO
AGO I THINK YOU SAID?
CORRECT.
Wynn: WHAT WAS THE
USE WHEN YOU BOUGHT THE
HOUSE AND THEN WHAT ARE
YOU USING IT FOR NOW?
IT WAS A RESIDENTIAL.
AND IT'S BEING BEING USED AS
SUCH.
Wynn: Y'ALL ACTUALLY
LIVE THERE?
YES.
Wynn: THANK YOU,
MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
WHY DON'T YOU WALK US
THROUGH THE MOTION?
OKAY.
ON PAGE 1 OF 5 ONE
MOTION WOULD BE TO
APPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN AS RECOMMENDED BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FIRST THROUGH THIRD
READINGS; HOWEVER, AS
YOU KNOW, THERE ARE
SEVERAL TRACTS UNDER
DISPUTE, SO THERE ARE
ALTERNATIVES BELOW THAT
AND OTHER POSSIBLE
OPTIONS.
FOR TRACT 3, WHICH IS
THE PROPERTY ON AIRPORT
BOULEVARD, THE OPTIONS
THAT IT WOULD COME TO
WOULD BE LEAVE IT AS
OFFICE.
AND THIS WOULD BE
REFLECTED ON THE FUTURE
LAND USE MAP, WHICH
WOULD AGAIN THE REZONING
WOULD BE BASED ON THE
FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
Mayor Garcia: THAT'S
THE CANEKI TRACT?
YES, SIR.
AND FOR TRACT 16 THERE
ARE TWO CHOICES, EITHER
CHANGE IT TO COMMERCIAL
MIXED USE OR CHANGE THE
FUTURE USE MAP TO
SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL.
AND TRACT 17, AGAIN,
CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND
USE MAP TO REFLECT A
COMMERCIAL MIXED USE OR
CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND
USE MAP TO REFLECT
SINGLE-FAMILY.
AS FOR THE SUB
DISTRICTS, THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S
RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE
TO INCLUDE THE SECONDARY
UNIT IN THE NORTHERN
DISTRICT OF THE PLANNING
AREA OR TO GO WITH THE
PLANNINGPLANNING TEAM'S
RECOMMENDATION, WHICH
WOULD ONLY SECONDARY
UNITS IN THE CHERRYWOOD
SUB DISTRICT.
AND THAT WOULD BE VOTING
FOR THE PLAN AND THEN WE
COULD COME BACK -- AFTER
THAT WE COULD THEN GO
OVER THE ZONING
RECOMMENDATION.
Mayor Garcia: I
SUSPECT THAT WE PROBABLY
WILL GO THE ROUTE OF THE
POSSIBLE OPTIONS UNLESS
SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO THE
1-A.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S
WHAT -- ON TRACT 3 WE
WILL HAVE -- WE'RE GOING
TO LEAVE IT AS OFFICE,
CORRECT?
CORRECT.
Mayor Garcia: DO WE
NEED TO DO THAT IF WE'RE
GOING TO LEAVE IT AS IS?
YES.
IT WOULD JUST --
ACTUALLY, WE WOULD HAVE
TO REALLY MAKE A MOTION
OR VOTE ON IT.
IT WOULD JUST -- IT
WOULD STAY BECAUSE IT'S
NOT -- IT DOESN'T
INVOLVE ZONING, JUST A
LAND USE DESIGNATION IN
THE PLAN.
Mayor Garcia: AND I
THINK WE OUGHT TO TAKE
THE OPTION -- THE FIRST
OPTION BECAUSE TRACT 16
WE'RE GOING TO -- ARE WE
GOING DO THAT ONE?
OUR RECOMMENDATION AT
THIS POINT IS THAT TRACT
16 COME OUT.
AND IT COME OUT OF THE
PLAN.
AND WHEN WE GET TO
ZONING I WILL RECOMMEND
THAT IT COME OUT OF THE
ZONING AND THAT THESE
TWO MATTERS WILL COME
BACK TO YOU AT A FUTURE
TIME ONCE WE WERE ABLE
TO NEGOTIATE THE
RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS
THIS, AND THAT IS, YOU
WOULD -- YOU WOULD
ADOPT -- YOU WOULD
APPROVE THE UPPER BOGGY
CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
WITH THE MODIFICATION
THAT TRACT 16 IN THE
PLAN WILL BE REMOVED FOR
THE TIME BEING.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT
IF YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT,
LEAVE TRACT 3 AS LAND
USE -- ITS LAND USE AS
OFFICE, YOU NEED TO SAY
NOTHING.
YOU'RE SIMPLY APPROVING
THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN,
YOU REMAIN SILENT AS TO
3 AND WE'LL TAKE 16 OUT,
AND THEN YOU NEED TO --
THEN THE COUNCIL NEEDS
TO DECIDE WHAT IT WISHES
TO DO ABOUT 17.
AND THEN FROM THEN WE'LL
GO TO THE NEXT PAGE.
GOODMAN: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia: MAYOR
PRO TEM?
GOODMAN: I HAVE A
MOTION, ALTHOUGH AS I
LOOK AT THE OPTIONS, I'M
NOT SURE THAT MY MOTION
IS EXACTLY LIKE ANY OF
THESE, SO LET ME ASK
BEFOREHAND, ON THIS
MOTION ARE YOU ALSO
INCLUDING THE INFILL
OPTIONS OR DOES THAT GO
TO ZONING?
, THE SUB DISTRICT?
THAT WOULD BE 1-B-4
ON THE PAGE 2 OF 5.
AND THAT WOULD BE
REFLECTED THERE.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
WELL, LET ME TELL YOU
WHAT I WANT TO SAY AND
YOU TELL ME WHICH ONE OF
THESE THINGS IT IS.
OKAY.
GOODMAN: TO APPROVE
THE UPPER BOGGY CREEK
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AS
RECOMMENDED BY THE UPPER
BOGGY CREEK
NEIGHBORHOODS PLANNING
COMMITTEE OR STEERING
COMMITTEE.
AND WHAT I'M ALSO DOING
IS TAKING TRACT 16 AND
17 OUT OF THAT, STAYING
SILENT ON TRACT 3, AND I
WANT TO INCLUDE WHEREVER
IT GOES THE INFILL
OPTION AS RECOMMENDED BY
THE UPPER BOGGY CREEK
NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH
WOULD MEAN THE SECONDARY
UNIT ONLY IN CHERRY WOOD
AND THEN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD WIDE SMALL
LOT AMNESTY.
THEN I GUESS IT WOULD
BE TO APPROVE THE PLAN
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION WITH
THE EXCEPTION OF PULLING
OUT TRACTS 16 AND 17 AND
ADOPTING ON PAGE 2 OF 5
IT SAYS SUBDISTRICT B,
AND THAT WOULD BE THE
PLANNING TEAM'S OPTION.
THAT IS WHAT THEY
RECOMMENDED IN THE PLAN.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
AND I HAD THOUGHT THAT
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
DID SOMETHING DIFFERENT
THAN WHAT THE --
THAT IS CORRECT.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
B.
B.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
THAT'S MY MOTION.
Mayor Garcia: THAT'S
THE MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND?
Dunkerley: SECOND.
Mayor Garcia:
SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLEY.
DISCUSSION?
MARK, CAN YOU RESTATE
THE MOTION?
OKAY.
THE MOTION WOULD BE TO
IMPROVE THE UPPER BOGGY
CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
PLANNING COMMISSION WITH
PULLING TRACTS 16 AND 17
FROM THE PLAN RIGHT NOW
AND ADOPTING SUB
DISTRICT B ON THE SECOND
PAGE, THAT WOULD BE THE
PLANNING TEAM'S
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE
INFILL OPTIONS OF A
SECONDARY UNIT IN THE
CHERRY WOOD SUB DISTRICT
ONLY AND ALLOW SUB LOT
AMNESTY THROUGHOUT THE
ENTIRETY OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
AREA.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION
AND A SECOND ON THAT
ONE.
DISCUSSION?
Thomas: YES.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?
Thomas: DID WE ASK
THE QUESTIONS OF THE
PEOPLE ON THE -- ON THE
BLACK LAND?
I TALKED WITH
MS. HOUSTON EARLIER AND
SHE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT
THE POSTING.
AND THAT POSTING WAS A
CARRYOVER FROM BEFORE
THE SUBDISTRICT
AMENDMENT TO THE CODE
WAS COMPLETED, SO WE
COULDN'T NOTICE FOR
THAT, BUT WE COULD -- AS
COUNCIL COULD MAKE IT
MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN
WHAT WAS POSTED FOR THE
SUB DISTRICT AND WOULD
MAKE IT MORE
RESTRICTIVE.
SO THIS ADDRESSES
MS. HOUSTON'S CONCERN.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
FURTHER QUESTIONS?
IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED
NO?
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE
OF SEVEN TO ZERO.
PEOPLE THAT ARE IN HERE
ON TRACT 17 AND 16, ON
16 WE NEED TO WORK TO
DEVELOP THE -- PUT YOUR
PURSE DOWN DOLORES
BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DONE
THE ZONING YET.
AND ON TRACT 17 THAT
THERE WOULD BE MORE
NEGOTIATION ON IT, IS
THAT RIGHT, MAYOR PRO
TEM?
GOODMAN: YEAH, I
WOULD THINK SO.
Mayor Garcia: NOW WE
GO TO THE ZONING.
AND THE ZONING IS GOING
TO BE THE SAME.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE
MOTIONS OPTION, AND
THAT'S TO APPROVE THE
NPCD AND THAT'S TO
APPROVE ON ALL THREE
READINGS.
HOWEVER, FOR TRACTS
UNDER DISPUTE, ACTUALLY,
TRACT3 WILL REMAIN THE SAME,
REZONING ON CHANGES MADE
TO THE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP.
AND TRACT 3, WE'RE NOT
GOING TO SAY ANYTHING
ABOUT IT.
16 IS GOING TO BE PULLED
OFF.
AND SO IS 16.
SO B-3 AND B-4 ALL THE
WAY -- ON 17 WE'RE NOT
GOING TO VOTE ON IT, SO
THE VALID PETITION
DOESN'T APPLY, SO
THERE'S NO NEED TO DO
THAT, SO WE'RE NOT
VOTING ON THAT.
WE'RE PULLING IT OFF,
RIGHT?
THAT IS CORRECT.
SO WHAT YOUR MOTION TO
CONFORM TO THE PLANS
WOULD BE THAT YOU WOULD
BE -- YOU WOULD BE
APROVING THE REZONING
AND THEN YOU WOULD MOVE
ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE
SUB DISTRICT INFILL
OPTION AND YOU WOULD DO
B.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
EVERYBODY OKAY WITH
THAT?
MARK?
ON TRACT 3, IT VARIES
FROM THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S RELIGIOUS
IN THAT THE CONDITIONAL
OVERLAY RECOMMENDED BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
WAS DROPPED BY THE
PLANNING -- MEMBERS OF
THE SURROUNDING
NEIGHBORS AND THE
PROPERTY OWNER AGREED
TO -- THAT THEY DIDN'T
WANT THE CONDITIONAL
OVERLAY.
Mayor Garcia: SO ON
TRACT 3, WE GO TO 3-B.
IS THAT CORRECT?
CORRECT, SIR.
Mayor Garcia: IS THAT
THE MOTION, MAYOR PRO
TEM?
GOODMAN: WITH LO
REMAINING LO ON TRACT 3.
Mayor Garcia: RIGHT.
SO LO-NP.
IS THAT RIGHT?
COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLEY,
DID YOU HAVE A SECOND ON
TO THAT?
DISCUSSION?
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE?
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: WE'LL
HOOK UP THE MACHINE.
MOTION CARRIES.
AND 16 AND 17 ARE PULLED
OFF, BOTH, BOTH THE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND
THE ZONING.
LET ME MAKE -- SO
THAT WE WILL NOT HAVE TO
RENOTIFY -- I'M SORRY.
WHAT, ALICE?
I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND YOU.
WHATEVER I WAS ABOUT TO
SAY --
THAT'S DANGEROUS.
YOU KNOW THAT.
WE NEED TO HAVE A
TIME THAT WE'RE BRINGING
THIS BACK SO WE DON'T
HAVE A RENOTIFICATION
ISSUE.
Mayor Garcia: WE MEET
NEXT WEEK, BUT WE DON'T
MEET TO THE 15TH.
LET'S TRY FOR THE 22
22nd AND SEE WHAT WE CAN
ACCOMPLISH BETWEEN NOW
AND THEN.
Mayor Garcia: DOLORES
THREATENED ME WITH ALL
KINDS OF AILMENTS AND
THINGS LIKE THAT THAT I
HAD TO BRING IT UP
BECAUSE PEOPLE WERE, YOU
KNOW -- DON'T DO IT,
DOLORES.
DON'T DO IT, WHATEVER IT
IS THAT YOU HAVE TO DO.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
STAYING HERE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
WORKING ON THE PLAN, FOR
MAKING THIS A VERY GOOD
PROCESS.
AND WE'LL MOVE ON 16 AND
17 AS SOON AS WE GET
EVERYBODY -- AND THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
OKAY.
NOW WE'RE AT THE 6:00
O'CLOCK --
DID YOU VOTE?
Mayor Garcia: ANYBODY
SAY SOMETHING?
WE'RE AT THE 6:00
O'CLOCK TIME CERTAIN AND
THE FIRST PUBLIC
HEARING.
YOU CAN TAKE THE MAPS
DOWN.
IT IS TO CONDUCT A
PUBLIC HEARING TO
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR A
WAIVER FROM THE MINIMUM
DISTANCE REQUIREMENT OF
CITY CODE, SECTION 8-3-4
(A) BETWEEN AN EXISTING
RESTAURANT, JUAN IN A
MILLION, LOCATED AT 2300
EAST SESQUICENTENNIAL,
WHICH IS PROPOSING TO
ADD THE SALE OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE AND
THE CHURCH OF CHRIST
LOCATED AT 2305 EAST
CESAR CHAVEZ.
AND STAFF, WELCOME.
LUCY GALLON HAN WITH
WATERSHED PROTECTION AND
REVIEW.
Mayor Garcia: CAN YOU
GIVE MORE VOLUME TO THAT
MIC, PLEASE?
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO
DO THAT.
Mayor Garcia: THAT'S
MR. CHAPA.
OKAY.
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
CASE NUMBER SP 0201615
#W- IS THE REQUEST TO
WAIVE THE MINIMUM
REQUIREMENT IN SECTION
8-3-4-A FROM THE BE
APPLICANT.
THEY ARE PROPOSING TO
ADD ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
TO HIS EXISTING
RESTAURANT ON CESAR
CHAVEZ, WHICH IS
190 FEET FROM THE CHURCH
OFOF CHRIST LOCATED AT
2305 EAST CESAR CHAVEZ.
CITY CODE 8-3-4 D-12
PROVIDES THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER A
WRITTEN CONSENT TO THE
WAIVER OF THE 300-FOOT
DISTANCE REQUIREMENT
PROVIDED BY THE FOOT
WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE
PROPOSED BUSINESS TO BE
SUFFICIENT FOR THE
VACATION OF THE WAIVER,
HOWEVER, MR. MESA WAS
UNABLE TO OBTAIN A
LETTER OF CONSENT FROM
THE CHURCH OF CHRIST.
HOWEVER, CITY CODE
ALLOWS THE CITY COUNCIL
TO WAIVE THE 300-FOOT
DISTANCE REQUIREMENT
WITHOUT THE WRITTEN
CONSENT IF THEY
DETERMINE THAT
ENFORCEMENT OF THE
DISTANCE REQUIREMENT IN
A PARTICULAR INSTANCE IS
NOT EFFECTIVE OR
NECESSARY.
ANY QUESTIONS?
Mayor Garcia:
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
WE HAVE EIGHT SPEAKERS
ON THIS ITEM.
THE FIRST ONE IS
MS. FRANCIS MARTINEZ.
IS FRANCES HERE?
NO?
MARCOS DELEON.
WELCOME, SIR.
WE DON'T HAVE
COMMENTS FROM HER.
MY NAME IS MARCOS
DELEON.
I'M A MEMBER OF EL
CONCILIO.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I
WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT IS
THE FACT OF THE
SITUATION WE HAVE HERE
WHERE A RESTAURANT WANTS
TO ASK FOR A MIXED
BEVERAGE DRINK RIGHT
ACROSS FROM THE CHURCH.
WE HAVE WOULD -- THE
CHURCH DOES NOT WANT
THAT TO HAPPEN.
I THINK BY THE CHURCH
NOT EVEN GIVING CONSENT
TELLS US THAT THEY DON'T
WANT THAT TO HAPPEN.
WE HAVE BEEN HERE IN
MANY YEARS.
I STRONGLY FEEL THAT IF
YOU GIVE A WAIVER --
BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY
THING A CHURCH OR A
SCHOOL HAS THE
PROTECTION AGAINST
SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IS TO HAVE THAT.
AND FOR MANY YEARS JUAN
IN A MILLION RESTAURANT
HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE,
NEVER HAS SOLD ALCOHOL.
AND WE DON'T UNDERSTAND
WHY HE NEEDS TO DO THAT
NOW WHILE THE OWNER HAS
TO -- WHY THE OWNER HAS
TO SELL ALCOHOL NOW.
AND I WAS SURPRISED TO
HEAR TODAY THAT IT WAS
MIXED BEVERAGE, WHICH IS
EVEN HIGHER ALCOHOL THAN
BEER.
I SAW THE LETTERS FROM
THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL,
FROM THE PRINCIPAL.
I STRONGLY FEEL THAT WE
NEED SOME TIME TO TALK
ABOUT IT AND THAT THE
PTA AND THE PEOPLE FROM
THE NEIGHBORHOOD NEED TO
TALK, NEED TO HEAR
EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN.
I DON'T THINK THEY
REALLY KNOW WHAT'S
HAPPENING.
[ INAUDIBLE ] MY
UNDERSTANDING WAS A LOT
OF PARISHIONERS WERE NOT
IN FAVOR OF THAT.
SHE WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF
THAT.
WE'VE BEEN HAVING A LOT
OF PROBLEMS, FOLKS IN
OUR NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE
COMPLAINTS, A LOT OF
COMPLAINTS IN OUR
COMMUNITY IN REGARDS TO
DRUNK DRIVING.
WE'VE HAD ONE RIGHT IN
FRONT OF MY HOUSE, HAD A
WRECK AND THE GUY WAS
DRINKING.
LUCKILY HIS TIRES WERE
TWISTED SO HE COULDN'T
GET AWAY.
THOSE THINGS ARE
HAPPENING.
SO WE ARE CONCERNED.
I DIDN'T GET THIS NOTICE
UNTIL VERY LATE, BUT
FRANCES -- SHE HAD A
DEATH IN THE FAMILY.
SHE COULDN'T BE HERE.
BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WHY IS
THIS REALLY HAPPENING?
WHY DO A WAIVER?
THEY'RE RIGHT ACROSS THE
STREET.
IF YOU GO AND SEE IT,
THE CHURCH IS RIGHT
ACROSS THE STREET.
THEN WE HAVE METZ ON THE
LEFT, ZAVALA ON THE
RIGHT, ANOTHER NOT FAR
DOWN THE ROAD.
WE ARE OTHER BARS ON
THERE AS WELL.
OUR CONCERN IS ANOTHER
PLACE THAT YOU CAN SIT
DOWN AND DRINK, BUT
WE'RE TOLD IT IS MIXED
BEVERAGE.
I THINK THE PRINCIPLE
HERE IS THAT IT'S JUST
TOO CLOSE.
AND I THINK IF YOU DO
THIS WE'RE GOING TO SEE
MORE AND MORE.
AND WE HAVE A LOT OF
BARS AND RESTAURANT THAT
SELL A LOT OF ALCOHOL IN
OUR COMMUNITY AND WE ARE
TIRED OF THAT, SO THAT'S
WHY WE'RE IN PROTEST OF
THIS WAIVER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU, COMMISSIONER.
MR. ROBERT DONNELLLY?
WELCOME, MR. DONNELLY.
THANK YOU, MAYOR,
MAYOR PRO TEM, CITY
COUNCIL.
I'M ALSO OPPOSED TO THE
WAIVER FOR A MORAL
REASON.
AND I THINK IT'S MORALLY
WRONG TO PLACE A
BUSINESS RIGHT ACROSS
THE STREET FROM THE
CHURCH.
IT'S AN INSULT.
AND THEN BEHIND THE
RESTAURANT THERE'S
ANOTHER CHURCH, THE
LITTLE SCHOOL, IT'S FOR
THE CHILDREN THERE AT
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
AND THEY PASS THROUGH
THAT -- BY THAT
RESTAURANT EVERYDAY.
AND I THINK IT'S MORALLY
WRONG THAT YOU EVEN
SUGGEST GIVING A WAIVER
ON AN ISSUE THAT IS SO
SERIOUS.
I'M SURE Y'ALL ARE AWARE
OF WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING
IN OUR NATION WITH THE
CHILDREN BEING ABDUCTED
AND ALSO THAT IS
CONNECTED TO ALCOHOL.
AS YOU WELL REMEMBER,
ONE OF THOSE LITTLE
VICTIMS, HER FATHER WAS
SITTING DOWN DRINKING
BEER WITH -- WITH THE
ONE WHO COMMITTED THE
CRIME.
AND SO YOU SEE IT WAS
SOMETHING THAT IS
SERIOUS AND SHOULD BE
TAKEN SERIOUSLY AND
SHOULD BE THOUGHT OUT AS
SOMETHING BEING VERY
SERIOUS FOR OUR
CHILDREN.
FOR WHAT ARE WE GIVING
OUR CHILDREN, WHAT AN
EXAMPLE ARE WE SETTING
FOR OUR CHILDREN?
DO WE NOT CARE FOR THEM?
DO WE NOT CARE THAT
SOMETHING MIGHT HAPPEN
TO THEM BECAUSE OF THIS
BEING SO CLOSE TO THE
VICINITY WHERE ALL OF
THESE CHILDREN GATHER?
I THINK THAT IT'S
SOMETHING VERY SERIOUS
THAT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER
TO LOOK AT.
AND I APPRECIATE YOU AND
I HOPE THAT YOU TAKE
THIS INTO CONSIDERATION
AND LOOK AT IT AS THE
GRIEFIOUS ISSUE THAT IT
IS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU, MR. DONNELLY.
MR. GAVINO HERNANDEZ.
AND YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN
TIME BY RENE FUQUA,
KAREN HADON AND KEN
HAYS.
SO YOU HAVE A TOTAL OF
12 MINUTES.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE
THEM.
WELCOME, SIR.
WELL, IF YOU INDICATE
TO ME YOU'RE GOING TO
VOTE IT DOWN, I WON'T
USE THEM.
[ LAUGHTER ]
MAYOR, COUNCIL, MY NAME
IS GAVINO FERNANDEZ WITH
EL CONCILIO, WHICH IS A
COALITION OF MERKS MAN
AMERICAN ASSOCIATIONS.
AND I DID SPEAK TO THE
PASTOR OF THE CHURCH OF
CHRIST, AND I SPOKE TO
HIM ABOUT A WEEK AGO AND
HE WAS TOTALLY UNAWARE
OF THE REQUEST THAT IS
BEFORE Y'ALL.
AND I EXPLAINED TO HIM
AND EDUCATED HIM ABOUT
THE REQUEST.
AND HIS REMARKS TO ME
WERE GAVINO, WE ARE
ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THE
CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL,
ESPECIALLY WITHIN THE
PROXIMITY OF OUR CHURCH.
WE ALREADY ARE
EXPERIENCING PARKING
DIFFICULTIES WITH THIS
PARTICULAR RESTAURANT,
OFF STREET PARKING, OUR
CHURCH ON SUNDAYS AND
TUESDAYS DURING THE
WEEK, WE DON'T HAVE --
WE HAVE DIFFICULTIES IN
FINDING PARKING.
BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION
BECAUSE IT WAS VERY
UNCLEAR TO ME.
IS THIS REQUEST
PERTAINING ONLY TO THE
RESTAURANT OR DOES THIS
ALSO CARRY OVER TO THE
NEXT ADJACENT TWO HOMES
THAT MR. MESA HAS
RECENTLY BOUGHT?
Mayor Garcia: THIS IS
NOT A ZONING CASE.
IT'S A WAIVER.
IT'S A WAIVER -- DOES
THE WAIVER APPLY TO THIS
PARTICULAR BUILDING OR
DOES IT ALSO APPLY TO
THE TWO ADJACENT HOMES
THAT HE JUST RECENTLY
BOUGHT?
Mayor Garcia: I
THINK -- I DON'T KNOW
WHETHER WE -- SINCE THIS
IS NOT TALKING ABOUT A
FOOTPRINT.
IS IT TALKING ABOUT A
FOOTPRINT, MARTY?
HE'S PROPOSING TO ADD
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES TO
HIS EXISTING RESTAURANT
AT 2300 EAST CESAR
CHAVEZ STREET, SO THE
WAIVER REQUEST IS FOR
THAT BUSINESS, THAT
LOCATION.
Mayor Garcia: THE
RESTAURANT INCLUDES --
MR. MAY SO WILL BE
COMING UP, SO HE'LL
EXPLAIN THAT.
RIGHT.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE
ADJACENT HOME IS USING
FOR CATERING AND FOR
PARTIES AND THEY HAVE A
PATIO OUTSIDE.
WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE
ADJACENT HOME WAS ALSO
BOUGHT FOR THAT PURPOSE
BECAUSE WE SEE
REMODELING AND WE SEE
TEARING UP OF GRASS IN
THE BACK OF THOSE
PROPERTIES.
SO THAT IS A CONCERN TO
US, BECAUSE WHAT'S GOING
TO KEEP PATRONS FROM
GOING TO THE RESTAURANT
TO THOSE TWO ADDITIONAL
HOMES AND CONSUMING THE
ALCOHOL?
WE'RE AFRAID THAT THIS
COULD EVENTUALLY END UP
BEING A BEER GARDEN
RIGHT SMACK IN THE
MIDDLE OF OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WE ARE OPPOSING THE
REQUEST AND THE WAIVER.
THROUGH THE HOLLY
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH
THE CITY SPONSORED, IT
WAS ALSO SPOKEN TO AND
WE ALSO SPOKE TO THE
ISSUE OF NOT GRANTING A
WAIVER FOR ALCOHOL FOR
THIS PARTICULAR
RESTAURANT.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE
MET AT MR. MESA'S
RESTAURANT TO DISCUSS
DIFFERENT ZONING
CATEGORIES FOR CESAR
CHAVEZ.
AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE
ISSUES THAT WE RAISED.
THE LETTER, I'VE BEEN
TRYING TO CONTACT MR. --
I'M A MEMBER OF KRISTA
RAY.
A HUGE NUMBER OF
FAMILIES ARE MEMBERS OF
THAT, AND AT NO TIME
WILL WE EVER ASK OR TO
GIVE INPUT IN TO WHETHER
WE SUPPORTED OR DID NOT
SUPPORT AS PARISHIONERS
THIS WAIVER.
WE HAVE WITNESSED AT
THIS RESTAURANT ON SOME
EERCHGZ RENTALS FOR
PARTIES WHERE YOU BRING
IN LIVE MUSIC, WHERE
THERE HAS BEEN LIVE
MUSIC.
IT DOES NOT HAPPEN TOO
OFTEN, BUT IT HAS
HAPPENED.
AND WE ARE VERY
CONCERNED THAT IF THIS
WAIVER IS GIVEN, AGAIN,
THIS WILL BECOME THE
BEER GARDEN OF EAST
AUSTIN.
SOMEONE ASKED IF THERE
WAS A VALID PETITION.
IN MY INQUIRY, VALID
PETITION IS NOT
SOMETHING THAT PLAYS
INTO THIS BECAUSE IT IS
NOT A ZONING CHANGE,
IT'S A WAIVER.
SO YOU ALSO HAVE HOMES
TO THE SOUTH OF THE
RESTAURANT THAT ABUT THE
PROPERTY.
THESE ARE FAMILIES THAT
ARE WANTING AND TRYING
TO LIVE IN AN AREA AND
ENJOY SOME KIND OF
QUALITY OF LIFE.
THEY HAVE CHILDREN IN
THOSE HOMES.
ONCE YOU CONSUME
ALCOHOL, YOU TOTALLY
BECOME A DIFFERENT
PERSON.
AND WE CANNOT AFFORD AS
NEIGHBORS AND AS
HOMEOWNERS TO PROVIDE OR
SUPPORT SOMETHING LIKE
THIS AND HAVE ONE OF OUR
CHILDREN BE HARMED
BECAUSE OF THIS ACTIVITY
AS THE CONSUMPTION OF
ALCOHOL.
THERE ARE RESTAURANT ON
CESAR CHAVEZ THAT DO
SELL BEER WITH FOOD.
THIS IS THE ONLY ONE
THAT HAS A CHURCH ALMOST
IN FRONT OF ITS DOOR.
WE DID SUPPORT
RESTAURANTS GETTING A CS
THAT WOULD SERVE BEER ON
CESAR CHAVEZ, BUT THIS
IS VERY UNIQUE.
THIS IS ASKING -- THIS
IS GOING OVER AND
BEYOND, AND WE DO FEEL
THERE'S A SAFETY ISSUE.
AS THE COMMISSIONER
MENTIONED, THERE ARE A
LOT OF ACTIVITIES IN THE
EVENINGS, THE PTA, THE
CHURCH, THERE ARE A LOT
OF ACTIVITIES THAT ARE
GOING ON.
YOU HAVE SANTA RITA
COURT WHERE YOU HAVE A
LOT OF CHILDREN WITH
SINGLE MOTHERS OR
GRANDPARENTS THAT ARE
RAISING THE CHILDREN.
SO I REMEMBER I USED TO
WALK THOSE AREAS.
I USED TO HANG OUT ON
THE STREETS AT 10 OR 11
BECAUSE I WAS RAISED BY
MY GRANDMOTHER.
SO YOU DO HAVE THAT TYPE
OF TRAVEL AND ACTIVITY
WITHIN THE PROXIMITY OF
THIS AREA.
WE HAVE SEEN AND NOTICED
THE SUCCESS THAT
MR. MESA HAS HAD WITH
HIS RESTAURANT.
BECAUSE OF THE ENORMOUS
AMOUNT OF OFF-PARKING.
MANY OF YOU HAVE GONE
THERE TO EAT, TO GO
THERE TO EAT.
AND YOU WITNESSED THAT.
EVERYDAY YOU GO YOU FIND
DIFFICULTIES IN FINDING
PARKING.
IN 1976 A LITTLE CHILD
NAMED NUNCIO WAS HIT BY
A CAR RIGHT THERE AT
THAT INTERSECTION,
MILDRED AND CESAR
CHAVEZ.
HE WAS THROWN COMPLETELY
ACROSS THE STREET AND
HIT THE WALL TO THAT
PARTICULAR BUILDING,
WHICH WAS NOT JUAN IN A
MILLION'S RESTAURANT AT
THAT TIME.
SO THESE ARE THE SERIOUS
CONCERNS THAT
NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS
HAVE BROUGHT TO US AND
HAVE BROUGHT TO OUR
ATTENTION.
AND YOU ALSO NEED TO
REMEMBER, COUNCIL, THAT
THIS IS A COMMUNITY
WHERE THE LEVEL OF
EDUCATION IS THE 12TH
GRADE AT A VAST
MAJORITY, AT A HIGH
MAJORITY.
SO IF IT WERE NOT FOR
INDIVIDUALS LIKE MYSELF,
MARCOS DELEON, SUSANNA
ALMANZA, WHO
CONSISTENTLY DIG IN AND
DO RESEARCH ON A LOT OF
THESE TECHNICAL ISSUES,
MANY OF THESE WOULD PASS
WITHOUT ANYONE
QUESTIONING.
BUT AS YOU GO DOWN TO
EACH OF THOSE HOMES AND
EXPLAIN TO THEM WHAT
POTENTIAL THIS MIGHT
BRING TO THEM, SENIOR
IVE?w?w?w
SECOCOx
THEYE AMAZED TO FINDIS IS BEING
PROPOSED BECAUSE THEY@@@@TTO US ABOUT
YOUTH GONE GRE GATING ON
THAT PARKING LOT
ANYWHERE FROM ONE TO TWO
TO THREE
MAYOR, YOU REMEMBER THE
ISSUE WE HADITH THEE+++++ADOR O O O O O
CHAVEZREHEY WERERERERERERERERERERERERER T THE MORNING THROUGH FRIDAY
DURINGNG
AND WITH YOUR HELP AND
OTHERS ON THE COUNCIL,
WE WERE ABLEOURS.
AN THE CHILDREN HAVE SOME' STUDY BECAUSE
THEY W W W W NO LONGE
BEIN+wwwwwwwwwww
IC.cccc
SO THATccccc THIS
ALSO GOING TO LOOK AT AN
CuCuCuCuCuONS,
UP UNTIL 12 AND NOT$@$$$$$
UNTIL 2:00 A.M. IN THE
MORNININAVE BEEN WORKING
WITHPOLICE
DEPARTMENT IN TRYING TO
MINIMIZE AND REDUCE BARS
AND RESTAURANTS ON CESAR
CHAVEZ BECAUSE OF THE
PROXIMITY TO THE
NEIGHBORHOOD. AND LIKEI MENTIONED, THIS'F'F'F'F'F
URANT IS
RIGHT SMACK IN THE
MIDDLE OF A
NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE,
SENIOR CITIZENS, THAT FROM THE -- FROM
SANTAITA COURTS THE
LAUNDRY, TO THE STORE,
TO@ISw CHURCH AND TO
THE METZ SWIMMING POOL.
SO I STRONGLY URGE YOU
TO PLEASE DENY THIS
REQUEST FOR THE SAFETY
OF OUR CHILDREN AND FOR
THE SAFETY OF OUR
COMMUNITY.
AGAIN, PARKING, I DON'T
KNOW HOW THIS PLACE CAN
QUALIFY FOR AN EXPANSION
WITHOUT MEETING THE
PARKING QUALIFICATIONS.
AND AGAIN IN SPEAKING
WITH A LOT OF THE
NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA,
THEIR HIGHEST FEAR IS
THAT CHILDREN COMING AND
GOING TO ACTIVITIES IN
THE AREA, IN THE
EVENINGS, WILL BECOME
PRIME TARGETS
UNFORTUNATELY.
WE ALSO REMEMBER THE
ABDUCTION OF A ZAVALA
STUDENT, MAYOR, AT
7:00 A.M. IN THE
MORNING.
THIS IS RIGHT DOWN THE
STREET.
YOU KNOW, WITH ALL DUE
RESPECT TO FATHER LARRY,
CHRISTO RAY IS FAR AWAY.
IT'S A FAR LOCATION FROM
THE CHURCH OF CHRIST.
AND I THINK IT IS UNFAIR
THAT MEMBERS OF CHURCH
OF CHRIST, BECAUSE
THEY'RE NOT FAMILIAR
WITH THIS KIND OF
PROCESS AND THEY'RE NOT
POLITICALLY ACONSTITUTE
OR INVOLVED, THAT
THEY -- THAT THAT ENOUGH
IS A GOOD REASON THAT NO
RESPONSE FROM THEM IN
WRITING IS A GOOD REASON
TO GRANT THEM THIS
WAIVER.
I AM SCHEDULED TO GO
TOMORROW AND GET A
LETTER FROM HIM
INDICATING HIS
OPPOSITION TO THIS
WAIVER.
WE WERE SCHEDULED TO DO
THAT TODAY, BUT WE WERE
NOT ABLE TO FIND A TIME
TO ACCOMMODATE THE --
THAT TRANSACTION, BUT
LIKE I MENTIONED TO YOU,
I DID TALK TO HIM OVER
THE PHONE AND HE WAS
VERY CONCERNED AND VERY
STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THIS
WAIVER.
AND I JUST HOPE THAT
THIS COUNCIL WILL
PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD
FROM POTENTIALLY
INCREASING THE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE THAT CONSUME
ALCOHOL AND MIXED
BEVERAGES.
I MEAN, THAT -- THAT
REALLY, REALLY CONCERNS
US.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU, MR. FERNANDEZ.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS JUAN
MESA.
BEFORE I FINISH, I DO
WANT TO REITERATE OUR
WHOLE HEARTED SUPPORT IN
YOU NOT VOTING FOR THE
STRATUS DEAL.
THANK YOU.
[ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].
Mayor Garcia:
MR. JUAN MAY SO, AND
FOLLOWING HIM IS
MS. SUSANA
SUSANNA ALMANZA.
SHE HAS BEEN GIVEN TIME
BY TWO PEOPLE, SO SHE
WILL HAVE NINE MINUTES.
MR. MAY SO, WELCOME,
SIR.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR
AND CITY COUNCIL.
MY NAME IS JUAN MESA.
MY WIFE AND I HAVE OWNED
JUAN IN A MILLION
RESTAURANT FOR THE PAST
22 YEARS.
WE'VE BEEN RESPONSIBLE
NEIGHBORS AND WE WORK
WITH COMMITTEES AND THE
COMMITTEE WILL WORK WITH
US.
EVERYBODY AROUND IS FROM
THAT AREA MOSTLY.
AND I DID SPEAK TO MANY
PEOPLE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD, WE SPOKE
TO A LOT AND ON GOT A LOT
OF SUPPORT FROM THE AREA
BUSINESSES.
WE SENT LETTERS OF
INTENT, YOU KNOW,
SEVERAL WEEKS BEFORE
COMING HERE, AND METZ
RESPONDED TO US AND THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH
RESPONDED TO US.
THEY GAVE US THEIR
BLESSING.
AND THE LETTER YOU HAVE.
AND SO DID THE SCHOOL.
WE SENT A LETTER TO THE
CHURCH ACROSS THE STREET
AND THE SAME LETTER THAT
I SENT TO THE OTHER
PEOPLE, AND THEY NEVER
RESPONDED FOR OR
AGAINST.
WE'RE RIGHT ACROSS THE
STREET FROM THEM.
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SO
EASY FOR THE PASTOR TO
WALK ACROSS THE STREET
TO TALK TO US.
I DID REQUEST -- ON THE
LETTER I SAID THAT I
WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO
HIM OR TO HIS PARISHNERS
IF HE WANTED ME TO, AND
I GOT NO RESPONSE.
WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED
WITH THE COMMUNITY
AGAIN.
WE HAVE HELPED THE
CHURCHES AROUND THERE,
THE SCHOOLS.
I WAS THE PTA PRESIDENT
AT METZ ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL WHEN MY KIDS WERE
GOING THERE.
WE HAVE HELPED GIRL
SCOUTS, BOY SCOUTS,
LITTLE LEAGUES.
WE HAVE GIVEN TO JUST
ABOUT EVERYBODY.
THE REASON WE ARE
REQUESTING A WAIVER IS
BECAUSE OUR CUSTOMERS
HAVE SOMETIMES REQUEST A
BEVERAGE WITH THEIR
FOOD.
IT'S A FAMILY
RESTAURANT.
WE'RE NOT A FAR.
AND -- WE'RE NOT A BAR.
AND WE WOULDN'T SERVE
ALCOHOL WITHOUT --
WITHOUT MEALS.
SO I THANK YOU FOR
HAVING ME HERE, THANK
YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME,
LISTENING TO ME AND
GIVING ME THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO
YOU.
AND I WOULD APPRECIATE
YOUR SUPPORT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU, MR. MESA.
SUSANASUSANNA ALMANZA?
AND FOLLOWING SUSANA --
AND SHE HAS NINE
MINUTES, IF YOU COULD
PUT NINE MINUTES ON THE
CLOCK -- RENE REYES, AND
THEN AL LEWIS.
WELCOME.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR,
MAYOR PRO TEM, AND CITY
COUNCILMEMBERS, I'M
SUSANNA ALMANZA WITH
PODER.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO
FIRST STATE THAT I
RECOGNIZE MR. JUAN MESA
IS A BUSINESSMAN AND HE
HAS CONTRIBUTED A LOT TO
THE COMMUNITY.
THERE'S NO QUESTION OF
THAT WHATSOEVER.
AND THAT IS NOT THE
ISSUE THAT I HAVE.
IT'S NOT A PERSONAL
ISSUE WITH MR. JUAN
MESA.
BUT WHAT I DO HAVE IS AN
ISSUE OF WHAT KIND OF
EXAMPLE THAT WE'RE
SETTING.
IT IS A FAMILY
RESTAURANT.
I'VE EATEN THERE AND I'M
SURE MANY PEOPLE HAVE.
WHAT KIND OF A MESSAGE
DO WE SEND TO OUR
CHILDREN THAT WE CAN'T
EAT WITHOUT CONSUMING
ALCOHOL?
MR. MESA IS ALREADY OPEN
SEVEN DAYS A WEEK AND HE
SERVES BREAKFAST AND
LUNCH.
DOES THAT MEAN THAT HE
WOULD BE EXTENDING HIS
HOURS TO LATE IN THE
EVENING SO THAT PEOPLE
CAN CONSUME ALCOHOL WITH
THEIR DINNER ALSO?
HE HAS THE HOUSE, IT WAS
SINGLE-FAMILY, THAT HE
NOW HAS OPEN FOR
MEETINGS AND DINNERS,
THE PATIO OUT IN FRONT
OF IT.
HE'S NOW BOUGHT THE NEXT
SINGLE-FAMILY HOME THAT
WAS ADJACENT TO THAT
ALSO.
PARKING IS DEFINITELY AN
ISSUE THERE.
WITH THE CHURCH IT'S
EVEN AN ISSUE.
AND NOW THAT WE HAVE
OPENED THE CENTER THERE,
I THINK THAT THAT'S A
BIG ISSUE THAT I WISH
THAT MR. JUAN MESA WOULD
ALSO THINK ABOUT.
I THINK THAT THAT
BUSINESS MAKES A LOT OF
MONEY.
YOU CAN GO THERE ANY DAY
AND THERE'S ALWAYS
PEOPLE THERE.
I THINK WHEN DO WE GET
TO POINT THAT WE FEEL
LIKE WE HAVE TO BE
CONSUMING ALCOHOL AND
MAKING MORE MONEY?
IT'S A VERY BIG ISSUE TO
ME WHERE YOU DRAW THE
LINE OF HOW MUCH MONEY
IS ENOUGH, YOU KNOW,
THAT YOU NOW ARE WANTING
TO CONSUME ALCOHOLISM IN
A RESTAURANT THAT IS A
FAMILY RESTAURANT AND
WHAT KIND OF MESSAGE ARE
WE SENDING TO OUR
FAMILIES AND TO OUR
CHILDREN WHEN WHEN WE GO
TO THOSE PARTICULAR
PLACES?
WE HAVE AN OUTBREAK, A
CRISIS, AND I THINK YOU
HEARD NOT TOO LONG AGO
ABOUT THE POLICE REPORT.
IT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.
I SIT OUT THERE IN THE
COMMUNITY AND WITNESS
WRECKS THAT PEOPLE HIT
THAT ARE DRUNK AND LEAVE
THE SCENE.
THERE ARE SCENES WHERE
THE POLICE DON'T COME,
WHERE PEOPLE DON'T,
BECAUSE NOTHING'S BEEN
DONE.
MY SISTER, HER CAR WAS
HIT AT FOUR IN THE
MORNING. THE DRUNK
DRIVER TOOK OFF.
SHE'S LOST.
THAT HAPPENS EVERYDAY IN
OUR COMMUNITY.
THERE IS A CRISIS.
WE DON'T JUST HAVE
PEOPLE WHO SOCIALIZE
DRINKING.
THEY THINK THEY HAVE TO
DRINK UNTIL THEY JUST
CAN'T EVEN STAND ANY
MORE.
AND I'M BEING SERIOUS.
WE HAVE A CRISIS IN EAST
AUSTIN.
I CAN'T EVEN TELL YOU
THE YOUNG GIRL THAT GOT
HIT, LEFT TWO CHILDREN,
THE DRIVER THAT HIT AND
LEFT HER, EVERYDAY YOU
SEE SOME DRIVER HIT
SOMEONE, LEFT THE SCENE,
A YOUNG DRIVER DRUNK,
KILLED A FOUR-YEAR-OLD
CHILD.
EVERYDAY YOU OPEN AND
SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING IN
OUR COMMUNITY WITH
ALCOHOLISM.
THERE IS A BIG ISSUE.
AND NOW WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT THE CORE, THE CORE
OF EAST AUSTIN NOW
CONSUMING ALCOHOLISM
NEXT TO CHURCHES AND
SCHOOLS THAT ARE
SURROUNDING OUR
COMMUNITY.
AND WANTING TO NOW SELL
ALCOHOLISM AND POSSIBLY
NOW EXTEND THE HOURS OF
OPERATION.
LIKE I SAID, I HAVE
NOTHING PERSONAL AGAIN,
MR. MESA.
I RESPECT HIM.
HE IS A GOOD PERSON.
BUT I THINK HE'S WRONG
IN NOW BRINGING
ALCOHOLISM TO HIS FAMILY
RESTAURANT AND TO THE
CENTER POINT OF THE
COMMUNITY.
AND ALSO I'D LIKE --
ANOTHER ONE JUST OPENED
NOT TOO LONG ON CESAR
CHAVEZ AND COMAL AND
THEY SAME CAME AND SAID
LOOK, THE MEXICAN
COMMUNITY DOES NOT HAVE
A NICE PLACE TO HAVE
DINNER, HAVE A DRINK AND
DANCE, MAYBE LISTEN TO A
LITTLE MUSIC.
IT SOLD THE PEOPLE ON.
LATER ON, A COUPLE OF
WEEKS, IT WAS A
PROSTITUTION PLACE.
YES, SIR, THE WOMEN DOWN
THERE WERE EXPLOITING
FROM GUATEMALA,
SALVADOR?
AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE
RESTAURANT WAS?
I KNOW IT'S NOT GOING TO
BE MR. MESA'S BECAUSE HE
SERVES GOOD FOOD.
THEY SERVED TA CO-S IN
FOIL.
AND THEY SAID IT WAS
GOING TO BE A NICE
RESTAURANT. AND NOW
THEY HAVE CCS AND
SOMEONE COULD COME IN
AND OPEN A BUSINESS AT
THE CORNER.
I DON'T THINK WE WANT
CESAR CHAVEZ TO BECOME
WEST SIXTH STREET.
SIXTH STREET DOWN HERE
IS NOT SURROUNDED BY
COMMUNITIES, IT'S NOT
SURROUNDED BY
SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES,
IT'S NOT SURROUNDED BY
SCHOOLS.
IT'S NOT SURROUNDED BY
CHURCHES.
IT'S NOT SURROUNDED BY
FAMILIES.
AND THIS IS A PROBLEM
THAT WE HAVE WHEN WE
STORT GOING ALONG AND
START COMMERCIAL LIESING
ALL OF CESAR CHAVEZ,
MIXED USE, TRYING TO I
IMITATE SIXTH STREET AND
NOW OPENING UP TO
ALCOHOLISM AND DRINKS.
I REALLY THINK WE REALLY
NEED TO LOOK ABOUT
WHAT'S HAPPENING TO OUR
COMMUNITY BECAUSE A LOT
OF YOU WILL PROBABLY
PASS BY THERE AND COME
AND HAVE A DRINK, BUT
YOU WON'T LIVE THERE ON
A DAILY BASIS.
AND YOU'RE NOT SEEING
THE CRISIS.
THERE IS AN EPIDEMIC.
THERE IS A CRISIS IN OUR
COMMUNITY.
YOU CAN SEE THE ABUSE,
THE BATTERNESS THAT'S
HAPPENING THERE, THE
ABUSE AND NEGLECT OF THE
CHILDREN, THAT ARE
HAPPENING IN THAT
COMMUNITY, AND YOU CAN
TIE IT BACK TO
ALCOHOLISM.
AND NOW WE HAVE A
REPUTABLE FAMILY
RESTAURANT THAT NOW IS
GOING TO BE SELLING
ALCOHOL AND DRINKS.
AND I'M VERY CONCERNED
ABOUT THAT AND I ASK
Y'ALL TO REALLY LOOK AT
THOSE PARTICULAR ISSUES.
LIKE I SAID, RIGHT NOW
IT'S SEVEN DAYS A WEEK
BREAKFAST AND LUNCH.
WILL THOSE HOURS BE
EXTENDED?
WILL WE NOW BE LOOKING
AT LATE HOURS, LIVE
BANDS WITH THE PEOPLE,
THEIR PROPERTY BACKING
UP TO THIS PARTICULAR
AREA?
AND I ASK Y'ALL TO GO BY
THERE TONIGHT AND SEE
ALREADY WHERE WE'RE
HAVING TO CONFRONT, LIKE
GAVINO SAID THERE'S A
STORE AND WHAT'S
HAPPENING THERE ALREADY.
JUST LOOK AT WHAT'S
ALREADY THERE.
AND THEN WE'RE BRINGING
MORE.
AND YOU'VE GONE THERE,
SO YOU NOW IT SO TIGHT
TO FIND PARKING.
SO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO
DID WITH THOSE BACKYARDS
AND IMPERVIOUS COVER AT
100%?
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING
TO HAVE TO DO TO THOSE
PARTICULAR -- THOSE
HOMES IN ORDER TO EXTEND
IT, TO HAVE ADEQUATE
PARKING FOR WHAT'S GOING
ON?
SO LIKE I SAID, I ASK
FOR YOU TO LOOK AT THAT.
IT'S NOTHING THAT --
AGAINST MR. MESA AND HIS
FAMILY.
HE'S RAN A REAL GOOD
FAMILY DINNER, BUT I
THINK HE'S ABOUT TO END
THAT PROCESS.
AND I THINK THAT WHO'S
REALLY GOING TO GET HURT
IS THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE
THE PEOPLE WHO COME
THERE ARE GOING TO LEAVE
AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO
BE LIVING WITH THE
EVERYDAY THINGS THAT ARE
HAPPENING AND THAT WE'RE
HAVING TO CONFRONT IN
THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
AND THE POLICE KNOW
THAT.
THAT'S WHERE THEY MAKE
THEIR MOST MONEY, IN OUR
COMMUNITY, ARRESTING
PEOPLE.
IT'S SO BAD THAT THEY'VE
HAD TO PUT GIANT SIGNS
ACROSS RIVERSIDE, YOU
DRINK, YOU DRIVE, YOU GO
TO JAIL.
YOU KNOW, -- (SPEAKING
SPANISH) THAT'S A BIG
SIGN IN OUR COMMUNITY
BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SUCH A
PROBLEM WITH ALCOHOLISM
AND A LOT OF YOUNG
PEOPLE THAT ARE
CONSUMING.
SO I ASK YOU TO PLEASE
THINK ABOUT WHAT IS
HAPPENING HERE AND I ASK
ALSO MR. MESA TO PLEASE
THINK OVER ABOUT WHAT
HE'S ABOUT TO DO, WHAT
HE'S REALLY ASKING FOR.
AND ALSO TOO I WANT TO
SAY THAT WATER IS THE
LIVE BLOOD OF MOTHER
EARTH AND WE'VE GOT TO
PROTECT OUR WATER.
SO I ASK YOU TOO TO NOT
VOTE FOR STRATUS.
THANK YOU.
[ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].
Mayor Garcia:
MR. REYES.
AND FOLLOWING MR. REYES
IS MR. AL ST. LOUIS.
WELCOME, SIR.
THANK YOU.
GOOD EVENING MAYOR
GARCIA AND COUNCIL.
I LIVE IN EAST AUSTIN.
AND I'VE BEEN OUT THERE
FOR OVER 21 YEARS.
I LIVE ABOUT HALF A MILE
FROM JUAN IN A MILLION
AND I AM NOT OPPOSED TO
THE WAIVER.
I ASSURE YOU THAT THERE
ARE MANY PEOPLE IN EAST
AUSTIN AND ACROSS THE
CITY THAT SUPPORT JUAN
IN A MILLION.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU, MR. REYES.
MR. AL ST. LOUIS.
AND FOLLOWING HIM IS
MR. HEYME.
THANK YOU, MAYOR AND
COUNCIL.
SOMEBODY, MR. MAYOR, YOU
AND I CAN HAVE A CHAT
ABOUT TED WILLIAMS
INSTEAD OF THESE SERIOUS
TOPICS.
Mayor Garcia: YOU GOT
IT.
MUCH OF WHAT I WANTED
TO SAY HAS BEEN SAID
ALREADY BY SUSANA AND
GAVINO.
ANYWAY, ALCOHOL, A
CHURCH SETTING, THE
FISCAL I AM IMPACT, THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT,
THE PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACT
HAVE ALL BEEN ADDRESSED,
INCREASED CRIME, TRAFFIC
ACCIDENTS, INJURIES,
WOUNDS.
DO I NEED TO SAY MORE?
THE ALCOHOL NEEDS TO BE
LIMITED.
AT THE SAME TIME,
TONIGHT WHILE YOU'RE
CONSIDERING MAKING
ALCOHOL MORE ACCESSIBLE
IN A CITY WHERE IT'S
VERY ABUNDANT, AT THE
SAME TIME YOU'RE DOING
THIS YOU'RE ALSO VOTING
AGAINST AN AN TA AN AN ANTIDOTE
TO ALCOHOL.
AND THAT IS THE FUTURE
OF BARTON SPRINGS.
AND I LOOK AT THIS AS
THE FUTURE OF THE HEALTH
OF THE CITY, THE HEALTH
OF THE PEOPLE, THE
HEALTH OF THE CHILDREN.
AND I HOPE YOU WILL TAKE
THAT INTO ACCOUNT.
I KNOW SOME OF YOU ARE
VERY INTERESTED IN
HEALTH ISSUES AND THE
PUBLIC HEALTH AND THAT'S
WHAT THIS IS ABOUT, THE
PUBLIC HEALTH.
WHERE ARE WE CHILDREN
GOING TO BE ABLE TO
FUNCTION?
SO AT THE SAME TIME
YOU'RE CONSIDERING THESE
WAIVERS, AND THEY SEEM
SMALL, BUT YET THERE'S A
DIRECTION HERE.
YOU HAVE THREE PUBLIC
HEARINGS IN A ROW ON
ALCOHOL, NOT ONLY THE
CHURCH, BUT A SCHOOL
SETTING AND THE DAY CARE
SETTING.
AND AT THE SAME TIME
YOU'RE GOING THAT, I'M
AFRAID YOU'RE DENYING
FUTURE GENERATIONS THE
USE OF BARTON SPRINGS,
WHICH I CONSIDER TO BE A
VERY POTENT ANTI DOTE TO
ALCOHOL.
ALCOHOL IS POISONOUS FOR
THE BRAIN, BARTON
SPRINGS, COLD WATER,
STIMULATES THE BRAIN.
IT'S GOOD FOR THE BRAIN
IN OTHER WORDS.
SO I'M GOING TO ASK YOU
TO STRETCH A LITTLE BIT
WHILE I'M TALKING ABOUT
THIS SUBJECT.
ALCOHOL, VERY BAD FOR
THE BRAIN.
WE KNOW A LOT MORE ABOUT
IT NOW THAN WE DID 10
YEARS AGO THANKS TO THE
ADVANCES IN CHEMISTRY
AND BIOLOGY.
AND WE'RE STILL LEARNING
ABOUT THE GOOD EFFECTS
OF BARTON SPRINGS ON THE
BRAIN.
WHERE ARE THOSE CHILDREN
GOING TO PLAY IF YOU
VOTE TONIGHT TO RUIN
BARTON SPRINGS?
I'VE SWAM THERE FOR
ABOUT 27 YEARS.
I'D LIKE TO SWIM THERE
FOR ANOTHER 27 YEARS.
Mayor Garcia: MR. ST.
LOUIS, KEEP YOUR
COMMENTS ON THE ISSUE AT
HAND, PLEASE.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE
BRAIN, SIR.
Mayor Garcia: THIS IS
NOT ABOUT THE BRAIN.
AN THE PUBLIC HEALTH
AND YOUR ATTITUDES
TOWARDS ALCOHOL AND THE
CHILDREN OF THIS
COMMUNITY.
AND I'M TRYING TO TELL
YOU THAT BARTON SPRINGS
IS GOOD FOR THE
COMMUNITY, IT'S GOOD FOR
THE FUTURE OF AUSTIN,
IT'S GOOD FOR THE FUTURE
OF ITS CHILDREN.
AND ALCOHOL WE KNOW IS
NOT.
ONLY IN VERY LIMITED
MODERATE USES.
AND IT'S HARD TO ALCOHOL
IT, AS WE ALL KNOW.
WE'VE HAD SOME
HORRENDOUS CRIMES IN
THIS CITY THANKS TO
ALCOHOL.
SO I HOPE YOU WILL
STRETCH YOUR MINDS A
LITTLE BIT AND CONSIDER
ALL THESE PEOPLE HERE.
LOOK AT THE ISSUES.
PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO
TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT
THE HEALTH AND FUTURE OF
THIS COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU.
[ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].
Mayor Garcia:
MR. HIMEK?
GOOD EVENING,
MR. GARCIA, MR. ALVAREZ,
MR. SLUSHER,
MS. GOODMAN, THE REST OF
THE CITY COUNCILMEMBERS.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO JUST
LET YOU KNOW A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT MR. MESA AND
THE WAY HE IS, HIS
CHARACTER.
AND HE WOULD NEVER DO
ANYTHING TO HURT THE
EAST SIDE, FIRST OF ALL.
AND BEFORE THAT, I WOULD
LIKE TO LET THE FIRST
PERSON THAT WAS OUT HERE
KNOW THAT OUR HEART GOES
OUT WITH MS. MARTINEZ
FOR HER LOSS.
I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE
WITH LETTING YOU KNOW
I'M -- A LOT OF PEOPLE
HERE KNOW ME FROM THE
RESTAURANT.
THEY THINK THAT I'M
MR. MESA'S SON.
I'M NOT.
BUT EVERYONE SEES ME
THERE, THEY TREAT ME
LIKE FAMILY.
IT'S A FAMILY
RESTAURANT.
WE ARE THERE TO SERVE
AND TO SERVE ONLY.
AS YOU KNOW, WE DO SOME
CATERINGS AT NIGHT, IN
THE MORNINGS, DURING
LUNCH, BUT ALCOHOL IS
SERVED -- IS NOT SERVED
AT THE RESTAURANT, BUT
PEOPLE CAN BRING IT IN.
WE CANNOT SELL IT, BUT
PEOPLE CAN BRING IT IN.
THIS WAIVER WOULD HELP
THE RESTAURANT, HELP,
YOU KNOW, LIMIT WHAT
PEOPLE WILL DRINK IN THE
RESTAURANT, OTHERWISE
THEY CAN BRING AND BRING
AND BRING AND DRINK AS
MUCH AS THEY WANT.
DURING CATERERINGS WE
WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE
SOMEBODY THERE DOING THE
BEER, THE ALCOHOL,
ASKING FOR ID'S
DEFINITELY, OTHERWISE
NOT MUCH OF THAT CAN BE
DONE IF THERE'S NO ONE
THERE GOING ON WITH THE
ALCOHOL.
MR. MESA HAS BEEN
HELPING THE EAST SIDE
COMMUNITY.
I KNOW FOR SURE THAT HE
WOULD NEVER DO ANYTHING
TO HURT ANYONE IN THE
EAST SIDE.
AS I SAID BEFORE, HE'S
GOT THE SUPPORT OF
MR. RAY, A FEW
ELEMENTARIES THERE,
BUSINESS OWNERS DOWN ON
CESAR CHAVEZ, ALL OF THE
NEIGHBORS, AND I HOPE
EVERYONE HERE SEES THIS
THE WAY I DO.
IT'S A FAMILY
RESTAURANT, FAMILY
ATMOSPHERE.
MR. MESA IS ALWAYS THERE
TAKING CARE OF THE
CUSTOMERS.
AND HE WILL NOT STOP
BEING THERE FOR A LONG,
LONG TIME.
HE WILL BE THERE TO HELP
WITH THE ALCOHOL.
HE'S GOING TO RUN THE
PLACE AND MAKE SURE THAT
EVERYONE'S SAFE ALL THE
TIME.
WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR
A WAIVER SO WE CAN
HELP -- LIKE THE
GENTLEMAN BACK HERE
SAID, ALCOHOL HAS TO BE
LIMITED.
WE WANT TO HELP TO LIMIT
THE ALCOHOL THAT IS
BEING SOLD TO PEOPLE.
WE'RE GOING TO HELP DO
THAT THROUGH THIS
WAIVER.
I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU,.
[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]
(9:01.
Alvarez: GOOD
EVENING, I HAVE A
QUESTION BECAUSE SEVERAL
CITIZENS ASKED IF THIS
WAS GOING TO LEAD TO AN
EXPANSION OF HOURS AT
YOUR BUSINESS THERE, I
WAS JUST CURIOUS.
DEFINITELY WE HAD
THOUGHT ABOUT MAYBE
DINNER, BUT NOTHING
AFTER 9:00.
YOU KNOW, I WORK SO MANY
HOURS ALREAD AS IT IS,
YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT
TO -- YOU DEFINITELY
WILL NOT SEE ME THERE AT
12:00 OR 1:00 A.M. IT'S
A FAMILY RESTAURANT.
IT WILL STAY LIKE THAT.
THAT'S A FAMILY
RESTAURANT.
IF WE WERE TO EXTEND OUR
HOURS FOR DINNER, I
GUARANTEE YOU KNOW LATER
THAN 9:00.
Alvarez: I WAS JUST
CURIOUS ABOUT THAT.
THANK YOU.
I WILL STAY HERE IF
ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANY
QUESTIONS.
Mayor Garcia: RIGHT
NOW YOU OPEN AT ABOUT --
BREAKFAST AND LAUNCH,
ONLY, MAYOR FROM 7:00 IN
THE MORNING UNTIL
3:00 IN THE AFTERNOON,
YES, SIR.
Mayor Garcia: YOU ARE
GOING TO ADD DINNER --
IF I SEE A DEMAND
THAT WAS THERE TO
DINNER, I MAY BE BECAUSE
PEOPLE WILL WALK TO MY
PLACE FROM WHERE THEY
LIVE.
AND I WOULD LOVE -- I
WOULD LIKE TO OFFER THEM
DINNER IF I COULD, YES.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
FURTHER QUESTIONS
ANYBODY?
THANK YOU.
QUESTIONS FOR ANYBODY
ELSE?
ALL RIGHT.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION ON THIS ITEM.
THERE'S A MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY
TO APPROVE THE WAIVER.
IS THERE A SECOND.
Slusher: SECOND.
Mayor Garcia:
SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.
MAYOR, BECAUSE YOU
HAVE NOT RECEIVED A
WRITTEN CONSENT FROM THE
CHURCH, THERE ARE
CERTAIN FINDINGS THAT
WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE IN
THE EVENT THAT THE
COUNCIL DECIDES THAT THE
300-FOOT DISTANCE
REQUIREMENT MAY BE
WAIVED WITUT THE
WRITTEN CONSENT FROM THE
CHURCH.
Slusher: MAYOR,
THERE'S A LETTER FROM
THE CHURCH IN OUR BACKUP
FROM THE -- FROM THE --
CHURCH OF CHRIST.
OH, FROM THE CHRISTO
REY.
THIS BASICALLY HAS TO
DO WITH THE CHURCH OF
CHRIST.
Dunkerly: COULD I ADD
THIS TO MY MOTION, THAT
THIS IS JUSTIFIED
BECAUSE THE HOURS THAT
THE ALCOHOL WILL BE
TYPICALLY CONSUMED AND
THE HOURS THE CHURCH
TYPICALLY CONDUCTS THEIR
ACTIVITIES DO NOT
COINCIDE AND CONFLICT.
Mayor Garcia: THE
FINDING THAT MARTY IS
TALKING ABOUT, MS. TERRY
IS TALKING ABOUT, ARE IN
THE REQUEST FORM THAT --
THAT TALKS ABOUT THE
FACT THAT THE CITY -- WE
HAVE TO DETERMINE THAT
THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT
IN A PARTICULAR INSTANCE
IS NOT IN THE BEST
INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC.
IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT, THOSE SIX
ITEMS?
YES, SIR, YOU DON'T
HAVE TO FIND ALL OF
THEM.
YOU CAN FIND -- BECAUSE
IT'S OR, CAN YOU FIND
ONE OF THOSE.
AND THOSE ARE LAID OUT
AS POSSIBLE FINDINGS
THAT YOU COULD MAKE.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU LOOK
AT F, IT SAYS FOR ANY
OTHER REASON THE CITY
COUNCIL AFTER
CONSIDERATION OF THE
HEALTH, SAFETY AND
WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC
AND THE EQUITIES OF THE
SITUATION DETERMINES IS
IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF
THE COMMUNITY.
IF MS. DUNKERLY ADDS
THAT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE
TO WHAT SHE HAS
SUGGESTED AS A FINDING,
THEN WE ARE ALL RIGHT.
Mayor Garcia: WHAT
ABOUT E?
EFFECTIVE OR
NECESSARY --
SHE CAN -- THAT'S
FINE, TOO, BUT --
Mayor Garcia: YOU
JUST HAVE TO HAVE ONE --
YOU JUST HAVE TO HAVE
ONE OF THOSE.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY,
SO COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLY, YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT E AND F.
Dunkerly: YES.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
THE SECOND, IS THAT --
IS THAT OKAY BY THE
SECONDER OF THE MOTION?
Slusher: YES, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia:
DISCUSSION ON THE
SNOTION.
DISCUSSION ON THE
MOTION?
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?
Alvarez: I WANTED TO
GIVE -- MAKE A FEW
COMMENTS BECAUSE THIS IS
A DIFFICULT ISSUE.
ANY TIME YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT THE CONSUMPTION OF
ALCOHOL, BECAUSE OF THE
PROBLEMS, IT DOES CREATE
IN SO MANY DIFFERENT
VENUES, SO MANY --
ESPECIALLY IN DIFFERENT
PARTS OF EAST AUSTIN.
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING
REAL HARD ALONG SIXTH
STREET, CESAR CHAVEZ, 7
7th STREET, TO TRY TO
MITIGATE THOSE PROBLEMS,
BUT TYPICALLY THOSE
PROBLEMS ARE WITH BARS
AND THAT KIND OF
SITUATION WHERE THAT'S
ALL YOU REALLY HAVE IS
FOLKS THAT ARE JUST
SELLING THE ALCOHOL AND
THAT'S HOW THEY ARE
MAKING THEIR MONEY AND
THE MORE THEY SELL, THE
MORE MONEY THEY MAKE,
THAT'S THEIR BUSINESS.
SO -- AND SO IN THIS
SITUATION, CERTAINLY
IT'S A LONG-STANDING
RESTAURANT THAT'S BEEN
THERE, YOU KNOW, A
COUPLE OF DECADES OR SO.
IT'S VERY -- YOU KNOW,
CERTAINLY KIND OF A
FIXTURE, YOU KNOW, IN
THAT PART OF EAST
AUSTIN.
AND AGAIN IT'S A FAMILY
RESTAURANT.
I THINK IT BEEN
MENTIONED ABOUT
EVERYBODY WHO HAS SPOKEN
THAT IT'S A FAMILY
RESTAURANT AND FOLKS
WANT TO KEEP IT THAT
WAY.
AND I THINK WHAT WILL
KEEP IT THAT WAY IS HOW
YOU MANAGE THE FACILITY
AND -- AND AGAIN I
THINK, YOU KNOW,
EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN TO
THE INTEGRITY OF
MR. MESA, YOU KNOW, THE
WAY HE RUNS HIS
OPERATION.
I THINK THAT BECAUSE
OF -- BECAUSE OF THE
INTEGRITY THAT HE HAS, I
THINK WE CAN REST ASSURE
THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A
GOOD BUSINESS, THAT IT'S
NOT GOING TO BE
DETRIMENTAL FOR THE
NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT HE
WILL TAKE THE NECESSARY
SAFEGUARDS TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS
PROTECTED.
FOR THAT REASON, EVEN
THOUGH THIS IS A
DIFFICULT KIND OF ISSUE
TO -- TO CONSIDER, YOU
KNOW, I THINK BECAUSE
OF -- BECAUSE OF
MR. MESA'S REPUTATION
AND HIS COMMITMENT TO
THE COMMUNITY, I WILL BE
SUPPORTING THIS MOTION,
ALSO.
Mayor Garcia: FURTHER
COMMENTS?
OKAY.
ALL THOSE IF FAVOR OF
THE MOTION PLEASE
INDICATE BY SAYING AYE.
AYE.
OPPOSED NO.
NO.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION
CARRIES ON A VOTE OF 5
TO 1 TO 1 WITH
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS
VOTING NO AND THE MAYOR
PRO TEM TEMPORARILY OFF
THE DAIS.
MAYOR, WE WILL BE A
RESOLUTION WITH THE
ADDITIONAL FINDINGS THAT
ARE NECESSARY.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
ITEM NO. 94 IS TO
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER A REQUEST
FOR A WAIVER FROM THE
MINIMUM DISTANCE
REQUIREMENT OF CITY CODE
BETWEEN THE PROPOSED BAR
AT 120 WEST FIFTH AND
AMERICAN YOUTHWORKS, A
PUBLIC SCHOOL LOCATED AT
216 EAST 4th STREET.
LISA CALLAHAN AGAINST
WITH WATERSHED
PROTECTION DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW.
THIS IS CASE NUMBER SP
02015 AW.
THIS IS A REQUEST TO
WAIVE THE 300-FOOT
DISTANCE REQUIREMENT IN
SECTION 8-3-4 A.
THE APPLICANT
MR. GILBERT CORTEZ IS
PROPOSING A BAR AT 120
WEST FIFTH STREET, WHICH
IS 278 FEET FROM
AMERICAN YOUTH WORKS.
MR. RICHARD HALPAN
FOUNDER AND C.E.O. HAS
PROVIDED WRITTEN CONSENT
TO THE WAIVER REQUEST.
CITY CODE SECTION 8-4-3
D 2 PROVIDES THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL MAY
CONSIDER A WRITTEN
REQUEST OF THE WAIVER OF
THE 300-FOOT DISTANCE
REQUIREMENT PROVIDED BY
THE PUBLIC SCHOOL WITHIN
300 FEET OF THE PROPOSED
BUSINESS TO BE
SUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION
FOR THE WAIVER.
ANY QUESTIONS?
Mayor Garcia:
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON
THE APPLICATION AT 120
WEST FIFTH STREET?
WYNN: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?
WYNN: WHAT IS THE$
CURRENT USE OF THE
PROPERTY NOW.
IT'S VACANT.
IT WAS A BAR BEFORE.
IT WAS A BAR PREVIOUSLY.
IT CURRENTLY VACANT.
WYNN: THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
THE -- WE HAVE ONE
SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM.
MR. GILBERT CORTEZ.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR,
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I'M GILBERT CORTEZ, I'M
CURRENTLY ASKING FOR A
WAIVER FOR THE 300-YARD
FROM THE SCHOOL.
MY LOCATION, WHICH IS
120 WEST FIFTH STREET
HAPPENS TO BE IN THE
WAREHOUSE DISTRICT.
RIGHT NOW THE SCHOOL IS
ABOUT 279 YARDS FROM THE
FRONT DOOR OF MY
BUSINESS.
I HAVE TALKED TO
MR. HALPAN, HE HAS SENT
ME A LETTER AGREEING TO
LETTING ME OPEN UP THE
BAR.
MY HOURS OF OPERATION
WILL BE FROM 4:00 IN THE
AFTERNOON TO
APPROXIMATELY 2:00 IN
THE MORNING.
HIS SCHOOL CLOSE AT
5:00.
MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY.
THE KIND OF BAR THAT I'M
PUTTING IS AN UPSCALE
LOUNGE, IT'S CATERING TO
PROFESSIONALS THAT ARE
AT LEAST, THAT ARE 21
AND OLDER.
NOW, BASICALLY I AM JUST
ASKING FOR YOUR WAIVER.
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: I WILL
ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
Slusher: SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION
BY COUNCILMEMBER
SLUSHER, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED
NO?
MOTION CARRIES.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION ON THIS ITEM?
Slusher: MOVE
APPROVAL, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION
BY COUNCILMEMBER, IS
THERE A SECOND?
SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
DISCUSSION?
Slusher: DO WE
NEED -- WE DON'T NEED
ONE OF THE REASONS OFF
THE LIST ON THIS?
BECAUSE --
Mayor Garcia: MARTY,
WHERE IS MARTY.
NO, YOU DON'T NEED A
REASON BECAUSE YOU HAVE
THE CONSENT FROM THE
AFFECTED SCHOOL.
Slusher: OKAY.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
Slusher: I WOULD JUST
SAY THAT IN PARTICULAR
SINCE IT'S DOWNTOWN,
THAT IT'S GOOD TO HAVE
THEM -- I'M REALLY HAPPY
TO HAVE AMERICAN YOUTH
WORKS DOWNTOWN, IT'S AN
EXCELLENT LOCATION FOR
THEM.
BUT I THINK THE FACT
THAT THEY ARE THERE
SHOULDN'T PREVENT A
NIGHTCLUB OR A
RESTAURANT FROM BEING
ABLE TO SELL ALCOHOL AND
I'M GLAD MR. HALPAN
AGREES AND HAS GIVEN HIS
PERMISSION.
Mayor Garcia: FURTHER
QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION?
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE. -- WAIT A
SECOND.
YEAH, ALL IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
AYE.
NO.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED
NO.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE
OF 5 TO 1 WITH
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS
VOTING NO AND -- AND
MAYOR PRO TEM
TEMPORARILY -- ARE YOU
VOTING ON THIS ONE?
YES?
OKAY.
THE VOTE IS 6 TO 1.
NUMBER 95, CONDUCT A
PUBLIC HEARING TO
CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR
WAIVER FROM THE MINIMUM
DISTANCE REQUIREMENT OF
CITY CODE SECTION 8-3-4
(B) BETWEEN A PROPOSED
BAR AT 217 CONGRESS
AVENUE AND ESCUELITA DEL
ALMA LEARNING CENTER A
DARE CARE CENTER AT 213
CONGRESS AVENUE.
IT'S A REQUEST TO
WAIVE THE 300-FOOT
DISTANCE REQUIREMENT IN
SECTION 8-3-4 (B) OF THE
AUSTIN CITY CODE.
THE APPLICANT'S AGENT
MR. EDDIE HURST IS
PROPOSING A BAR AT 217
CONGRESS AVENUE.
WHICH IS 138 FEET FROM
ESCUELITA DEL ALMA
LEARNING CENTER, LOCATED
AT 213 CONGRESS AVENUE.
THE OWNER AND DIRECTOR
OF THE LEARNING CENTER
HAS PROVIDED WRITTEN
CONSENT TO THE WAIVER
REQUEST.
CITY CODE SECTION 8-3-4
D 2 PROVIDES THE CITY
COUNCIL MAY CONSIDER A
WRITTEN CONSENT TO THE
WAIVER OF THE 300-FOOT
DISTANCE REQUIREMENT
PROVIDED BY THE DAYCARE
FACILITY WITHIN 300 FEET
OF THE PROPOSED BUSINESS
TO BE SUFFICIENT
JUSTIFICATION FOR THE
WAIVER.
Mayor Garcia: DO YOU
KNOW THE HOURS OF
OPERATION FOR THIS ONE?
[INAUDIBLE]
8:00 P.M. UNTIL 2 --
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
THE -- THE LEARNING
CENTER I THINK OPERATES
FROM ABOUT 7:00 IN THE
MORNING UNTIL ABOUT
4:00 IN THE AFTERNOON,
4:00 OR 5:00 IN THE
AFTERNOON.
WE HAVE ONE -- ONE OTHER
QUESTION, THE -- THE
PEOPLE FROM ESCUELITA
WERE TELLING US THEY
HAVE HAD SOME
DIFFICULTIES WITH WHAT
THEY SUSPECT COULD BE
GAS LEAKS.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT
WE CHECKED?
WE DID VISIT WITH
MS. FLORES ON SOME OF
THE ISSUES SHE HAD WITH
THE BUILDING.
THEY ARE SEPARATE FROM
THE WAIVER REQUESTS.
WE ARE WORKING WITH --
WITH HER TO CORRECT THE
PROBLEMS THAT SHE'S
HAVING ON THE GAS LEAK
AND SOME OTHER ISSUES
SHE RAISED.
JANA GALAGHER THE HEAD
OF OUR INSPECTION
DIVISION IS WORKING WITH
HER TO CORRECT ALL OF
THE ISSUES SHE HAD.
Mayor Garcia: IF WE
ARE TO APPROVE THIS
WAIVER, CAN WE MAKE IT
CONDITIONAL ON THEM
GETTING A LETTER FROM
ESCUILITA SAYING THAT
THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN
RESOLVED.
I WILL HAVE TO REFER
THAT TO MARTY, I'M NOT
SURE THAT WE CAN DO
THAT.
IT'S UNRELATED TO THE
WAIVER.
IT'S UNRELATED.
AND THE CITY HAS A
SUFFICIENT POLICING ARM,
OTHERWISE TO SOLVE THE
PROBLEMS.
I AM ASSUMING THAT
THE -- THAT WHAT WE ARE
HAVING IS WE HAVE GAS
LEAKS THAT THE SCHOOL IS
LEASING THE PREMISES
FROM THE LANDOWNER, AND
THAT THE GAS LEAKS ARE
OCCURRING AT THE METER
WHICH SERVES THE
FACILITY.
IS THAT CORRECT?
CORRECT.
WE HAVE SUFFICIENT
POLICING ABILITY TO TAKE
CARE OF THAT ISSUE WITH
THE LANDOWNER, WITH
GETTING THAT CORRECTED.
AND WITH -- WITH RUNNING
INTERFERENCE WITH
SOUTHERN UNION GAS.
Mayor Garcia: I GUESS
THE QUESTION THEY ASKED
IS HOW TO GO ABOUT DOING
THIS, WHO DO THEY CALL
AT THE CITY, WHO ARE THE
CODE ENFORCE HERS.
JANA GALLAGHER IS
CURRENTLY WORKING WITH
HER TO ADDRESS THE
ISSUES.
WE COULD ALSO GET WITH
ALICE GLASGO WITH HER
CODE ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE
TO MAKE SURE THAT --
Mayor Garcia: I THINK
WHAT WOULD BE MORE
APPROPRIATE, BECAUSE THE
CITY BUREAUCRACIES CAN
SOMETIMES GET, YOU KNOW,
A LITTLE TOO COMPLICATED
FOR SOME FOLKS IS FOR
YOU TO CALL THEM, TO
MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE
SATISFIED --
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO
DO THAT.
OKAY.
Mayor Garcia: WE HAVE
TWO% ON THIS ONE.
EDDIE HURST, FIRST.
AND FRANCIS JAMIE
SECOND.
SECOND.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR
AND COMMENT.
MY NAME IS EDDIE HURST.
I'M THE OWNER'S AGENT.
I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU
A LITTLE INFORMATION
ABOUT THE MANAYO'S DANCE
BAR, IT'S BEEN IN
OPERATION SINCE 1984, IT
IS A TWO-STORY BUILDING.
ALTHOUGH FOR THE PAST --
SINCE 1984 THEY HAVE
JUST UTILIZED THE BOTTOM
AREA TO SERVE FOOD AND
TO HAVE ENTERTAINMENT.
WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR
THE WAIVER FOR IS THE
SECOND FLOOR, WHICH IS
CONNECTED TO THE
BUILDING.
IT IS ONE UNIT.
BUT NOT UTILIZED.
WE ARE MAKING CURRENT
UPGRADES OF EXIT STAIRS
ON THE FRONT AND THE
REAR FOR THE SAFETY OF
ANY CLIENTS, AS WELL AS
WE WILL INVESTIGATE THE
HIGH PRESSURE GAS OR
LEAK VALVE, WHICH WE
SUSPECT IF WE CAN DO
ANYTHING TO HELP WITH
THAT GAS SMELL FOR THE
NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR THE
TENANT WE WILL GLADLY
TAKE CARE OF THAT.
BEYOND THAT, I WOULD
JUST SAY THAT WE
WOULD -- WE HAVE BEEN
RESPONSIBLE, MY CLIENT
HAS BEEN RESPONSIBLE IN
THE COMMUNITY AND WE ARE
MORE THAN WILLING TO
WORK WITH THE CITY AND
THE SCHOOL TO MAKE SURE
BOTH PARTIES ARE HAPPY.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
MS. FRANCES JAMIE IS
REGISTERED NOT WISHING
TO SPEAK, DID NOT
INDICATE WHAT HER
PREFERENCE WAS.
THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS
THAT WE HAVE.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
Slusher: SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION
BY COUNCILMEMBER
SLUSHER, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED
NO.
PUBLIC HEARING IS
CLOSED.
IS THERE A MOTION ON
THIS ONE?
THIS AGAIN IS A DOWNTOWN
FACILITY AND THE
BASICALLY THE -- THE
PEOPLE AT ESCUILITA ARE
NOT AGAINST IT, THEY
WOULD JUST -- BECAUSE
THE HOURS DON'T
CONFLICT.
BUT -- BUT I FOR ONE
WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT
PROBLEM RESOLVED AND
ALSO I WOULD LIKE TO
MAKE SURE THAT -- THAT
SINCE YOU CLOSE AT
2:00 IN THE MORNING,
THAT THE SIDEWALK BE
CLEANED BEFORE 7:00 IN
THE MORNING WHEN PARENTS
ARRIVE WITH THEIR
CHILDREN.
THAT -- THAT I NEED FOR
YOU TO WORK WITH
ESCUILITA TO ARNG HOW
THAT'S -- ARRANGE HOW
THAT'S GOING TO BE DONE.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION.
WYNN: I WILL MOVE
APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER,
I GUESS THIS IS.
Mayor Garcia: RIGHT.
SECOND.
Mayor Garcia: SINCE
THERE'S CONSENT, THERE'S
NO NEED TO GIVE THE
REASON.
THERE'S A SECOND FROM
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
NO.
OPPOSED NO, MOTION
CARRIES WITH A VOTE OF 6
TO 1 WITH COUNCILMEMBER
THOMAS VOTING NO.
NEXT IS A PUBLIC HEARING
TO CONSIDER A VARIANCE
REQUEST TO ALLOW A
PLACEMENT OF A
MANUFACTURED HOME IN THE
100 YEAR AND 25 YEAR
FLOODPLAINS OF ONION
CREEK AT 6910 ONION
CREEK [SIC] DRIVE.
STAFF?
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR,
COUNCILMEMBERS, I'M
DAVID WALKER WITH THE
WATERSHED PROTECTION AND
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DEPARTMENT TO PRESENT
AGENDA ITEM NO. 96.
THE APPLICANT HAS
REQUESTED A PERMIT TO
ALLOW PLACEMENT OF A
MANUFACTURED HOME AT
5910 ONION CROSSING
DRIVE IN THE 25 YEAR AND
100 YEAR FLOODPLAINS OF
ONION CREEK WITH THE
FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION
BELOW THE 100 YEAR
FLOODPLAIN.
SHE REQUESTED VARIANCES
TO ALLOW THIS PROPOSAL.
MS. COULD THE OWNED A
MANUFACTURED HOME AT
6910 ONION CROSSING
DRIVE DESTROYED BY A
FLOOD ON NOVEMBER 15th,
2001, HER FLOOD
INSURANCE POLICY
CONSIDERED THAT THE HOME
WAS DAMAGED BEYOND
REPAIR AND PAID FOR THE
REPLACE OF THE MOBILE
HOME.
WILL FOR THE REMOVAL OF
THAT MOBILE HOME.
SHE'S CURRENTLY LIVING
IN A REPLACEMENT MOBILE
HOME IN ANOTHER
LOCATION.
HOWEVER THE LOT THAT SHE
OWNS AT 6910 ONION
CROSSING DRIVE IS
ENTIRELY WITHIN THE 25
YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND ALSO
100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN.
THE 25 YEAR FLOODPLAIN
IS ABOUT 5 AND A HALF
FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL
AND HER LOT.
THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN
IS APPROXIMATELY
10.3 FEET ABOVE GROUND
LIVELY AT HER LOT: --
GROUND LEVEL AT HER LOT.
SHE REQUESTS, IN MY
LATEST COMMUNICATION
WITH HER, SHE'S
REQUESTING THAT SHE BE
ALLOWED TO PLACE THE
HOME AT 7 FEET GROUNDS
LEVEL WHICH WOULD STILL
BE BELOW THE 100 YEAR
FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION.
THE WATERSHED PROTECTION
REVIEW DEPARTMENT
RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF
THIS REQUEST.
IN CONSIDERATION OF THE
DANGER TO LIFE AND
PROPERTY, THE
SUSCEPTIBILITY OF THE
PROPOSED FACILITIES AND
ITS CONTENTS TO FLOOD
DAMAGE AND THE EFFECTS
OF SUCH DAMAGE ON THE
INDIVIDUAL OWNER, THE
DANGER THAT MATERIALS
MAY BE SWEPT ON TO OTHER
LANDS, THE INJURY OF
OTHERS, THE SAFETY OF
ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY
DURING TIMES OF FLOOD
FOR ORDINARY AND
EMERGENCY VEHICLES, THE
EXPECTED HEIGHT,
VELOCITY, SEDIMENT
TRANSFER OF FLOOD
WATERS, THE AVAILABILITY
OF ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS
NOT SUBJECT TO FLOODING
OR EROSION DAMAGE FOR
THE PROPOSED USE, THAT
CONCLUDES MY
PRESENTATION.
Mayor Garcia: SCWES
FOR STAFF?
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
IS THIS IN THAT AREA
AT -- WHAT THEY CALL
THAT IN -- ONION CREEK
MEADOWS?
YARBY BEND AND ONION
CREEK FOREST NORTH.
IT'S THE -- THE NUMBER
ONE FLOOD HAZARD AREA
THAT THE CITY DEALS
WITH.
IT'S THE AREA WHERE WE
HAVE SPENT APPROXIMATELY
2.5 MILLION OVER THE
LAST SEVERAL YEARS
BUYING OUT MANUFACTURED
HOMES TO MOVE THEM OUT
OF THIS AREA.
WHERE IS THIS PARTICULAR
APPLICATION AT, ON THAT
MAP?
THE NEIGHBORHOOD
IS -- IS EAST OF SOUTH
PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD
AND -- AND SOUTH OF --
OF EAST WILLIAM CANNON
AND HER PARTICULAR LOT
ON THIS -- THIS DISPLAY
RIGHT HERE, THIS BLUE IS
THE FLOODPLAIN OF ONION
CREEK.
WHERE IS SHE AT?
THIS IS WILLIAM CANNON,
SOUTH PLEASANT VALLEY
ROAD.
HER LOT IS RIGHT HERE.
THE TOPOGRAPHY THROUGH
THE AREA IS UNEVEN, EVEN
THOUGH IT MIGHT HAPPEN
THAT SHE'S FAR AWAY FROM
ONION CREEK IN THIS
PARTICULAR LOCATION.
WHAT TYPICALLY HAPPENS
IN THE LESSER STORM
EVENTS, THE FLOOD STAYS
IN THE BANKS AND COMES
OUT THROUGH THIS AREA,
THERE'S A LITTLE
DRAINAGE DITCH RUNNING
THROUGH HERE, ANOTHER
DRAINAGE DITCH THAT
COMES DOWN OFF THE HILL.
THIS IS WHERE THE
TORNADOS TOUCHDOWN IN
NOVEMBER 2001, DROPPED
QUITE A BIT OF WATER,
WATER COMING DOWN THIS
DITCH.
THEN THERE'S A LOW AREA
RIGHT THROUGH HERE.
SO -- THERE'S ALSO A LOW
AREA HERE.
SO IN THE HIGHER FLOODS
WHAT HAPPENS IS SOME OF
THE FLOOD WATERS STAY IN
THE MAIN CHANNEL.
SOME OF THE FLOOD WATERS
JUMP THE BANKS RIGHT
THROUGH HERE AND THEY
HOOK UP WITH THIS
DRAINAGE DITCH AS WELL.
AND YOU GET QUITE A BIT
OF FLOW COMING THROUGH
HER PART OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO SHE'S HERE ABOUT --
ABOUT ONE HOUSE OFF OF
SOUTH PLEASANT VALLEY
ROAD.
Mayor Garcia: WHAT'S
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION
ON THIS ONE.
TO DENY.
Mayor Garcia: WHAT?
TO DENY.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
MS. COOT?
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR
AND COUNCIL.
HE RECOMMENDS TO DENY.
I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU
TO -- TO LET ME MOVE
BACK ON MY PROPERTY.
YES, IT FLOODS.
IT FLOODED.
THAT ONE TIME.
THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED
THERE BEFORE ME HAD
LIVED THERE 27 YEARS
PRIOR TO MY BUYING THE
HOME.
THEY NEVER HAD A
PROBLEM.
I BELIEVE THAT SOME OF
THE PROBLEM WE HAD LAST
YEAR DURING THIS FLOOD
WAS BECAUSE SOME
PROJECTS HAD NOT BEEN
FINISHED THAT THE CITY
WAS WORKING ON.
IT DID NOT FLOOD THROUGH
THIS LAST RAIN.
YES,
WATER CAME UP IN THAT CREEK,
ALMOST UP TO THE STREET OVER
BY THE CREEK, BUT NOT INTO
MY AREA AT ALL.
WE HAD NO WATER ON MY
PROPERTY AT ALL THROUGH THIS
LAST HEAVY RAIN THAT WE HAD.
WHEN THE FLOOD CAME, IT CAME
FOUR FEET UP.
IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN I WENT
OUT OF MY HOME, I WAS ARM
PIT DEEP IN WATER.
THAT PUT JUST SIX INCHES OF
WATER IN MY HOME.
THAT CAUSED -- IT WAS AN
OLDER HOME, THAT'S WHY THE
INSURANCE COMPANY TOTALED IT
OUT.
UM ... I PROPOSE TO PUT MY
HOME 7 FEET ABOVE WHERE IT
WAS -- WHERE IT WAS BEFORE.
NOT 7 FEET ABOVE THAT, BUT
THREE FEET MORE HIGHER THAN
WHAT IT WAS.
IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 4 FEET
OFF THE GROUND.
IF YOU RAISE IT 3 FEET, THAT
PUTS ME 2 FEET 6 INCHES OUT
OF THE WATER THIS LAST FLOOD
IN NOVEMBER OF 2001.
YOU TAKE A CHANCE EVERY DAY
OF YOUR LIFE DRIVING YOUR
CAR, A TORNADO COULD COME
THROUGH THERE, ANYTHING CAN
HAPPEN.
THAT'S JUST THE
PROBABILITIES OF LIFE.
IF I'M WILLING TO TAKE THE
CHANCE TO LIVE THERE AND
CARRY MY FLOOD INSURANCE AND
THE FLOOD INSURANCE PEOPLE
ARE WILLING TO INSURE ME,
WHICH THEY ARE, I DON'T SEE
THAT -- THAT IT'S A BIG
PROBLEM.
I'M A CHANCE TAKER, LIKE A
LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD
AND WE HAVE TO BE IN ORDER
TO SURVIVE.
THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY MEANS
A LOT TO ME, WE ONLY LIVED
THERE THREE YEARS, BUT IT
FEELS LIKE HOME.
IT'S QUIET, THE NEIGHBORS
ARE GREAT.
NOT A LOT OF LOUD NOISE, NOT
A LOT OF TEENAGERS THERE.
OLDER PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF ARE
IN THAT AREA.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO
SAY EXCEPT THAT I REALLY
WANT TO GO BACK THERE.
I WANT TO LIVE THERE.
IT'S PAID FOR.
FOR ONE THING.
I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO FIND
ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY TO
PUT MY HOME ON.
THAT I CAN AFFORD.
THEY ARE -- THEY DON'T COME
CHEAP AND THEY DON'T COME
WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN,
AND THAT'S WHERE I WANT TO
LIVE.
I ENJOY AUSTIN AND I ENJOY
IT'S AMBIENCE, I ENJOY THE
PEOPLE THAT LIVE AROUND ME
THERE.
I ASK THAT YOU GRANT ME THE
ABILITY TO MOVE MY HOME BACK
THERE.
THANK YOU.
Mayor Garcia: COUNCIL,
THAT'S ALL OF THE SPEAKERS
THAT WE HAVE ON THIS
PARTICULAR ITEM.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
GOODMAN: SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING, IS THERE
A SECOND?
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
7 TO 0.
I HAVE CONCERNS WITH THIS
ONE BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN IN
THAT AREA.
AS A MATTER OF FACT I
VISITED THE AREA AFTER
NOVEMBER THE 15th STORM.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT WE
HAVE CLIMATE CHANGE.
AND WE HAVE HAD DEVELOPMENT
OF THE UPPER REACHES OF THE
WATERSHED.
SO -- SO THIS KIND OF
EVENTS, YOU KNOW, WILL
PROBABLY HAPPEN MORE OFTEN.
AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS
WITH MR. COLLIER, WITH
MR. HEIGHTS.
I THINK THAT THE CITY IS
AT -- YOU KNOW, IS -- IS
CURRENTLY LOOKING AT WHAT WE
NEED TO DO TO PROTECT THE
INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE THAT
LIVE THERE.
SO -- SO I WILL BE VOTING TO
DENY THIS ONE.
SO -- ANYBODY HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR
COMMENTS?
WYNN: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN?
WYNN: JUST -- YOU KNOW,
THIS IS ALWAYS A DIFFICULT
ISSUE WHEN YOU FACE A HOME
OWNER WHO HAS THIS
GUT-WRENCHING ISSUE.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US.
ESPECIALLY WITH AFFORDABLE
HOUSING BEING SUCH A
CHALLENGE FOR US AND, YOU
KNOW, JUST -- JUST IN MANY
WAYS THESE ARE AFFORDABLE
HOMES FOR PEOPLE.
ULTIMATELY THE COSTS
INVOLVED WITH OUR EMERGENCY
PERSON THEM AND THE RISKS
THAT THEY TAKE IN THE EVENT
OF THESE FLOODS, IT'S NOT
JUST THE HOME OWNER WILLING
TO TAKE A RISK THAT WE HAVE
TO CONSIDER.
WE HAVE TO CONSIDER, YOU
KNOW, OUR EMERGENCY
WORKFORCE WHO IS CALLED OUT
INEVITABLY WHEN THIS HOME
SITE IS FLOODING, THERE'S
PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, TENS OF
THOUSANDS OF ACRES IN AUSTIN
THAT ARE UNDERWATER AT THE
SAME TIME.
AND OUR FIRE GUYS AND OUR
EMS, OUR FIRST RESPONDERS
ARE JUST OVERWHELMED FOR --
FOR, YOU KNOW, A DAY OR MORE
AT A TIME TO TRY TO HELP
FOLKS.
WE ARE CONSTANTLY RESCUING
PEOPLE IN ALUMINUM BOATS ALL
OVER TOWN.
SO I HAVE TO -- I HAVE TO
JOIN THE MAYOR AND VOTE TO
DENY THE VARIANCE.
GOODMAN: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia: MAYOR PRO
TEM.
GOODMAN: I WAS THINKING
THE SAME AT THE BEGINNING,
BUT THEN WHEN SHE MENTIONED
THAT SHE IS INSURED, THAT'S
KINDS OF AN AUTHORITY, CAN
STAFF SHED ANY LIGHT ON WHY
THE INSURANCE COMPANY WOULD
GO AHEAD AND GIVE HER
FLOODING INSURANCE IF
THEY -- IF THEY THOUGHT
THERE WAS A RISK?
WELL, THE FLOOD INSURANCE
IS PROVIDED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT THROUGH THE
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE
PROGRAM.
AND THE -- THE POLICIES ARE
MADE AVAILABLE TO -- TO
PRETTY MUCH ANYBODY IN A
PARTICIPATING COMMUNITY AND
THE CITY OF AUSTIN BECAUSE
WE ENACT LAND USE
REGULATIONS TO -- TO PREVENT
THE CREATION OF NEW FLOOD
HAZARDS, WE ARE ABLE TO
PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROGRAM,
THEREFORE ANYBODY WITHIN THE
CITY OF AUSTIN, WHETHER THEY
LIVE IN THE FLOODPLAIN OR
OUTSIDE OF THE FLOODPLAIN
AND REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY
REPETITIVE LOSSES THEY HAVE
HAD ARE ELIGIBLE TO PURCHASE
FLOOD INSURANCE.
IF SHE WAS ALLOWED TO BUILD
NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE
FLOODPLAIN BELOW THE 100
YEAR FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION,
SHE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO BUY
FLOOD INSURANCE, BUT THE
COST OF HER PREMIUMS MIGHT
BE MORE THAN WHAT SHE'S
ACCUSTOMED TO PAYING RIGHT
NOW, BECAUSE FOR NEW
CONSTRUCTION, IT SUBJECT TO
ACCIDENTACTACTUARIAL RATES, AS OPPOSED
TO SUBSIDIZED RATES THAT
WERE THERE BEFORE THE
FLOODPLAIN MAPS WERE DONE.
COULD YOU ELABORATE JUST
A LITTLE BIT.
I NOTICED A PAUSE WITH THE
MAYOR PRO TEM AND ONE OF MY
THOUGHTS WAS THAT PEOPLE MAY
NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT A PARS
PA INVENTORY COMMUNITY --
PARTICIPATEORY COMMUNITY IS.
WHAT IS THAT THAT WE DO THAT
MAKES THIS INSURANCE
AVAILABLE.
IT'S KINDS OF A QUID
PROPERPROQUO PROGRAM WHEN IT MAKES
AVAILABLE FLOOD INSURANCE
AND ALSO ELIGIBILITY FOR
FEDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE
AND IN EXCHANGE FOR THOSE
BENEFITS THE COMMUNITY
AGREES TO ENACT THE
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
REGULATIONS, WHICH
SPECIFICALLY ARE THE -- THE
CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT SHE
IS ASKING A VARIANCE FROM.
SO IN EXCHANGE FOR THE LOCAL
COMMUNITIES PROACTIVELY
MANAGING THEIR RISK, THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MAKES
INSURANCE AVAILABLE TO NOT
ONLY MS. COOT BUT ANYBODY
ELSE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
Futrell: HOW COULD WE
LOSE THAT DESIGNATION?
WE COULD LOSE THAT
DESIGNATION BY DEVELOPING A
PATTERN OF GRANTING
VARIANCES FROM THE
FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT
REGULATIONS.
NOT ACTING TOO
SYSTEMATICALLY AND
EQUITABLELY ENFORCE OUR
REGULATIONS.
Futrell: I THINK THAT'S
JUST A CAUTIONARY POINT.
I KNOW THESE ARE ALWAYS HARD
THE VARIANCES, BUT THAT
IS -- THE VERY INSURANCE IS
A PART OF THE FACT THAT WE
ARE VERY CAUTIOUS ABOUT
VARIANCES TO THE RULES.
I MIGHT ALSO POINT OUT
THAT THE CITY DOES RECOGNIZE
THIS IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT
HAZARD FOR THE CITY AND A
PRIORITY PROBLEM FOR THE
CITY AND FOR OUR DEPARTMENT
AS WELL.
WE ARE WORKING WITH THE LCRA
AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,
THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND
TRAVIS COUNTY TO -- TO
ADDRESS THE FLOOD HAZARD
PROBLEMS AND ENVIRONMENTAL
RESTORATION PROBLEMS ON
ONION CREEK.
SO WE ARE WORKING.
A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO THERE
WAS A STUDY DONE THAT
INDICATED THE MAGNITUDE OF
THE SOLUTIONS IN THIS AREA
MIGHT BE IN THE AREA OF 60
TO $80 MILLION TO ADDRESS.
AT THAT POINT WE WENT TO THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO SEEK
FEDERAL PARTICIPATION.
SO IT'S GOING TO BE A
LENGTHY PROCESS.
I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE ON
A TIME FRAME THAT WOULD BE
SATISFACTORY TO MS. COOT,
BUT THE CITY IS DOING WHAT
IT CAN TO ADDRESS THE NEEDS
OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS
NEIGHBORHOOD.
Mayor Garcia: FURTHER
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
IF NOT I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION?
[INAUDIBLE]
Mayor Garcia: YOU ARE --
WHY DON'T YOU COME UP.
WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO
THIS BUT --
I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING
ME THIS LEEWAY, WHAT THEN
HAPPENS TO THE PROPERTY.
I WAS TOLD BY THE FLOODPLAIN
PEOPLE THAT I WAS AT THE TOP
OF THE LIST FOR BUYOUT.
SHOULD I NOT BE ABLE TO GET
BACK ON THERE.
SO IN WHAT TIME FRAME DOES
THAT HAPPEN AND -- AND I
WANT YOU ALL TO REALIZE HOW
REALLY VERY HARD IT IS TO
FIND A PIECE OF PROPERTY TO
PUT THIS THING ON.
I BOUGHT IT WITH THE
ANTICIPATION OF GOING BACK
ON THAT PROPERTY.
SO I'M KIND OF STUCK LIKE
CHUCK HERE.
Futrell: YOU WANT TO TALK
A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE
BUYOUT PROGRAM AND -- AND
HOW WE TRY TO FUND THOSE
PROGRAMS AND TIME SCHEDULES.
YEAH.
THE BUYOUT PROGRAM THAT'S
GOING ON WAS FUNDED THROUGH
A -- THROUGH A GENERAL
OBLIGATION BOND AND PASSED
IN NOVEMBER OF 1998, RIGHT
AFTER THE OCTOBER '98 FLOOD,
AUTHORIZED 2.44 MILLION FOR
THE ACQUISITION OF HOMES IN
THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE CONCENTRATED THOSE
ACQUISITIONS WITHIN THE 10
YEAR FLOODPLAIN.
ALONG ONION CREEK DRIVE,
THAT SHADY CEDAR -- THE AREA
THAT FLOODS MOST FREQUENTLY.
[INAUDIBLE]
AND WE HAVE SUPPLEMENTED
THAT ORIGINAL BOND WITH SOME
ADDITIONAL MONEYS FROM THE
REGIONAL STORM WATER
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, AN
ADDITIONAL 180,000.
WE HAVE MANAGED TO BUY 38
MOBILE HOMES TO DATE.
ALL OF WHICH HAVE BEEN
REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY AS
OF TODAY.
AND I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY
SOME MISINFORMATION AS FAR
AS BEING AT THE TOP OF THE
BUYOUT LIST BECAUSE THE --
THE PLAN FOR THE BUYOUTS IS
TO CONCENTRATE ON THOSE
AREAS CLOSEST TO THE CREEK
AND WORK OUR WAY IN AS MONEY
BECOMES AVAILABLE.
AND BECAUSE MS. COOT'S
PROPERTY IS SOME DISTANCE
IN, I DON'T THINK WE ARE
GOING TO GET THERE WITH THE
LOCAL FUNDING OF BUYOUTS.
THANK YOU.
IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN
WHAT THE PROPOSED SOLUTIONS
WOULD BE FROM THE PROJECT
THAT WE ARE DEVELOPING WITH
THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
Futrell: DO YOU HAVE JUST
A QUICK IDEA, I KNOW THAT I
AM ASKING YOU THIS OFF THE
CUFF, BUT DO YOU KNOW HOW
MUCH IS LEFT OUT OF OUR 1998
BONDS?
NO, I SURE DON'T.
OUT OF THE 98.
THERE'S VERY LITTLE LEFT OUT
OF THE BUYOUT BONDS, I KNOW
THAT.
[INAUDIBLE]
Futrell: MAYBE ONE THING
THAT YOU COULD DO IS FOLLOW
UP WITH THE COUNCIL TO SORT
OF GIVE US AN ACCOUNTING OF
WHERE WE ARE WITH THOSE
DOLLARS.
CERTAINLY.
I BELIEVE THERE'S AN
ADDITIONAL 320,000 IN NEXT
YEAR'S PROPOSED BUDGET FOR
ADDITIONAL BUYOUTS.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
FURTHER QUESTIONS?
IF NOT I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION ON THIS ISSUE.
WYNN: MAYOR, I MOVE TO
DENY THE VARIANCE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN TO DENY
THE VARIANCE.
I'M GOING TO SECOND THAT.
DISCUSSION?
LET ME SAY THAT -- THAT
LOOKING AT WHAT HAPPENED IN
THAT PARTICULAR AREA REALLY
IS -- IT BROKE MY HEART WHEN
I WENT THERE.
I WENT THERE RIGHT AFTER THE
FLOODING.
AND MY WISH IS THAT WE COULD
FIND A WAY AND THE PRESIDENT
OF THE ASSOCIATION TOLD ME
THAT HE WANTS US TO BUY
THOSE PROPERTIES SO THAT
THEY CAN GET OUT OF THERE.
THE PRESIDENT OF OF THE
HOMEOWNERS SITUATION JUST
SPENT A LOT OF MONEY PUTTING
HARDWOOD FLOORS IN HIS HOME.
THE GARAGE WAS A PICKUP THAT
HE RESTORED THAT WAS WAS
HIS -- THAT WAS HIS FAVORITE
PICKUP.
BOTH OF THOSE, YOU KNOW,
WENT AWAY IN THE FLOOD.
SO WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING
ABOUT HELPING THE FOLKS IN
THAT AREA MOVE TO SAFER
GROUND BECAUSE GIVEN WHAT WE
HAVE IN CLIMATE CHANGE,
GIVEN WHAT WE HAVE IN
DEVELOPMENT OF THE UPPER
REACHES OF THE WATERSHEDS, I
CAN GUARANTEE YOU THAT THERE
WILL BE OTHER STORMS.
WE DIDN'T GET HIT IN THIS
LAST ONE BECAUSE THE
WATERSHEDS WERE NOT THE ONES
THAT WERE HARDEST HIT.
BUT IN OTHER AREAS LIKE NEW
BRAUNFELS, VICTORIA, ALL OF
THOSE OTHER PLACES, THEY SAW
TREMENDOUS FLOODING.
IN NEW BRAUNFELS 500 YEAR
STORMS ARE NOW COMING EVERY
FIVE YEARS.
SO IT IS A SERIOUS
SITUATION.
GLOBAL WARMING IS LIFE AND
WELL, WE NEED TO MAKE -- IS
ALIVE AND WELL.
WE NEED TO DO THINGS TO
PROTECT THE HEALTH AND
SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE THAT
ARE IN HARM'S WAY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE
MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE BY
SAYING AYE.
OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES.
THAT VOTE IS -- IS -- THAT
MOTION IS BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN AND THE SECOND IS BY
ME.
AND THE VOTE OF 7-0.
97 IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC
HEARING FOR THE FULL PURPOSE
ANNEXATION OF THE FOLLOWING
ANNEXATION AREAS: AVERY
RANCH AREAS, CITY OF AUSTIN
WALNUT CREEK PARKS, McKINNEY
PARK EAST, McKINNEY PARK
EAST AND CAMERON BUSINESS
PARK.
AND I GUESS BEN WE WILL --
WE WILL DO EACH ONE.
YES, SIR, EACH ONE OF
THOSE AREAS IS A SEPARATE
HEARING.
I GUESS WE WILL START WITH
THE AVERY RANCH.
I WILL START OFF BY SAYING
THAT FIRST MY NAME IS BEN
LUKENS FROM THE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
SUSTAINABILITY.
WE HAVE GOT -- THIS IS THE
FIRST PUBLIC HEARING FOR
EACH OF THESE AREAS.
THERE WILL BE A SECOND
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 8th,
ORDINANCE READING IS
SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 29th.
ANNEXATIONS IF APPROVED WILL
BE EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 27th.
THE SERVICE PLANS ARE ON THE
TABLE TO THE LEFT.
FIRST AREA IS AVERY RANCH,
118 ACRES BEING ANNEXED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF
THE DEVELOPERS REQUEST FOR
ANNEXATION.
TRACTS ARE IN THE CITY
LIMITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
JURISDICTION, THE AREA IS A
COMBINED TOTAL OF
[INAUDIBLE] 46 ACRES,
COMMERCIAL RETAIL FOR
60 ACRES.
ESSENTIALLY THE SERVICE PLAN
SAYS THE CITY WILL TAKE OVER
FROM THE COUNTY PROVIDING
SERVICE AND PROVIDING
ADDITIONAL ENHANCED SERVICES
NOT AVAILABLE FROM THE
COUNTY.
I WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS
REGARDING THIS ANNEXATION
AREA.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR BEN.
MR. LUKENS ON THIS ONE?
OKAY.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS.
NO, SIR.
Mayor Garcia: CAN WE
CLOSE ALL OF THE FOUR PUBLIC
HEARINGS AT ONE TIME.
NO, EACH ONE OF THESE
AREAS IS A SEPARATE PUBLIC
HEARING.
YOU WOULD CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ONE
AND THEN PROCEED TO THE NEXT
ONE.
Mayor Garcia: AVERY
RANCH.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
CLOSE THEM.
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE AVERY
RANCH AREAS.
SO MOVE.
SECOND.
MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO TEM,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
OPPOSED, NO. MOTION CARRIES
ON A VOTE OF 5 TO -- 4 TO 0
TO 3.
WITH THREE COUNCILMEMBERS
OFF THE DAIS, COUNCILMEMBERS
SLUSHER, ALVAREZ AND THOMAS.
CO AWOL NUT CREEK PARKS.
THESE ARE 439 ACRES OF
CITY PARKLAND IN WALNUT
CREEK.
AGAIN THE SERVICE PLAN
ESSENTIALLY CITY TAKES OVER
FROM THE COUNTY FOR
PROVIDING SERVICES AND
PROVIDE ENHANCED SERVICES
NOT AVAILABLE FROM THE
COUNTY.
THAT'S -- THAT'S -- I WILL
TAKE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING
THE ANNEXATION.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR MR. LUKENS ON THIS?
IF NOT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MONTHS MOTION TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
SO MOVE.
SECOND.
Mayor Garcia: ALL THOSE
IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING
AYE.
AYE.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE
OF 4 TO 0 TO 3.
McKINNEY FALLS EAST.
THIS PROJECT, McKINNEY
FALLS PARK EAST --
Mayor Garcia:
INCIDENTALLY, NO SPEAKERS ON
ANY OF THESE ANNEXATIONS.
THAT'S CORRECT.
IS A PRELIMINARY
SUBDIVISION PLAN, 276 SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS, 52-ACRE.
AGAIN, ESSENTIALLY THE CITY
WOULD TAKE OVER FROM THE
COUNTY IN PROVIDING SERVICES
AND WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
ENHANCED SERVICES NOT
AVAILABLE FROM THE COUNTY.
THIS -- IT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING THIS WILL BE
A -- A SMART HOUSING
SUBDIVISION.
THAT'S THE PRESENTATION ON
THIS AREA.
Mayor Garcia: THERE'S NO
SPEAKERS ON THIS ONE.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
IF NOT I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING.
SO MOVED, SECOND.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
THE MAYOR PRO TEM, SECONDED
BY COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
4 TO 0 TO 3.
CAMERON BUSINESS PARK.
YES, SIR.
THIS AREA IS -- IS ACTUALLY
HALF OF AN EXISTING 10-ACRE
BUSINESS PARK THAT WAS
ANNEXED IN 1976, I HAVE NO
IDEA HOW -- HOW THAT TOOK
PLACE.
[ LAUGHTER ]
WE DID THE RESEARCH FOR
ANOTHER AREA, WE -- SO THIS
ANNEXATION BRINGS THE ENTIRE
SITE INTO THE CITY'S FULL
PURPOSE JURISDICTION.
IN THIS CASE, AGAIN, WE
WILL -- WE WILL -- THE CITY
WILL TAKE OVER FROM THE
COUNTY AND PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL ENHANCED SERVICES
NOT AVAILABLE FROM THE
COUNTY.
Futrell: DID I HEAR YOU
ACKNOWLEDGE AN ERROR, BEN?
NO?
WYNN: BEFORE HIS TIME.
Futrell: OH, I SEE.
GOODMAN: MOVE TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Mayor Garcia:
MOTION BY
THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE A SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
MOTION CARRIES WITH
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER,
ALVAREZ AND THOMAS
TEMPORARILY OFF THE DAIS,
THAT'S ALL OF ITEM 97.
98 IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC
HEARING FOR THE FULL PURPOSE
ANNEXATION OF THE ANDERSON
MILL ROAD MUNICIPAL
ANNEXATION PLAN AND WE HAVE
RECEIVED A -- A COMMUNIQUE
FROM MR. MIKE REAGAN,
PRESIDENT OF THE ANDERSON
MILL ESTATES HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION.
IN ORDER TO SAVE TIME FOR
THE COUNCIL AND AVOID
DUPLICATE DISCUSSIONS, WE
ARE DEFERRING OUR COMMENTS
AND QUESTIONS ON THE
ANNEXATION ITEM NO. 28 [SIC]
ON YOUR AGENDA UNTIL THE
AUGUST THE 5th MEETING IN
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE HELD
AT THE HOPE PREBS PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO
PARTICIPATING IN THE HEARING
ON MONDAY, AUGUST 5th.
IS THAT A HEARING YOU ARE
GOING TO HAVE?
YES, SIR, IT'S A HEARING
THAT CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC
HEARING AT THE HOPE
PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
Mayor Garcia: OUR PUBLIC
HEARING.
YES, SIR, YOUR PUBLIC
HEARING.
Mayor Garcia: I'M SORRY,
OKAY, GOOD.
I GUESS THAT I HAVE TO LOOK
AT MY CALENDAR, WHAT TIME IS
THAT PUBLIC HEARING?
AT 6:30 AT THE CHURCH,
11512 OLSON DRIVE.
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO
PUBLIC HEARINGS, THE NEXT
ONE, OF COURSE, WILL BE
AUGUST 5th.
IT'S A MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION
PLAN AREA.
SO THE -- SO THIS AREA WILL
BE ACTUALLY BE ANNEXED IN
2004.
AND WE WILL SPEND NEXT YEAR
NEGOTIATING A SERVICE PLAN.
IN THIS CASE AGAIN, I WILL
SAY THE SERVICE PLAN
ESSENTIALLY SETS OUT THAT WE
TAKE OVER FROM THIS CASE THE
TWO DIFFERENT COUNTIES,
WILLIAMSON AND TRAVIS
COUNTIES AND PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL ENHANCED SERVICES
NOT AVAILABLE FROM THOSE TWO
COUNTIES AND WE WILL ALSO BE
PROVIDING WATER AND SEWER
SERVICE TO THE PORTION NOT
CURRENTLY RECEIVING
CENTRALIZED SERVICE.
THAT'S THE CONCLUSION OF --
OH, I OUGHT TO POINT OUT
THIS IS DRIVEN BY THE
ANNEXATION THAT -- THE
PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF THE
ANDERSON MILL MUDD, SPA
AREA.
SO THIS WILL FILL IN AN AREA
THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE
ISOLATED FROM THE BALANCE OF
THE COUNTY.
THIS IS ANDERSON MILL MUD.
SO THIS WOULD -- THIS IS --
IT'S IMPORTANT TO ANNEX THIS
INTERVENING AREA ADJACENT TO
THE MUDD.
Mayor Garcia: THE ORANGE
ONE IS ANDERSON MILL ESTATES
HOME -- ANDERSON MILL
ESTATES.
RIGHT, THIS IS ANDERSON
MILL ESTATES.
THIS IS ANOTHER AREA, THERE
ARE ACTUALLY THREE
NEIGHBORHOODS IN THERE.
Mayor Garcia: ACTUALLY
IT'S CALLED ANDERSON MILL
ROAD MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION
PLAN, IS THAT WHAT IT'S
CALLED.
ANDERSON MILL ROAD
MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION PLAN
AREA.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION
TO CLOSE.
SO MOVED.
MOTION BY THE MAYOR PRO
TEM, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE. OPPOSED, NO.
MOTION CARRIES ON A VOTE OF
5 TO 0 TO 2 WITH
COUNCILMEMBERS THOMAS AND
SLUSHER TEMPORARILY OFF THE
DAIS.
COUNCIL, WE -- THE ONLY
THING THAT WE HAVE LEFT IS
THE STRATUS ITEMS.
AND FOR THAT ONE WE NEED TO
HAVE EVERYBODY HERE.
AND I'M GOING TO PROPOSE
THAT -- THAT WE TAKE ABOUT A
FIVE MINUTE POTTY BREAK SO
THAT WE CAN ALL BE READY.
AND WE WILL BE BACK IN FIVE
MINUTES.
(TIME: 9:46) (SHORT BREAK)
Mayor Garcia: HELLO
AGAIN.
AT THIS TIME, COUNCIL, WE
CONCLUDED THE EXECUTIVE
SESSION AND NO DECISIONS
WERE MADE, BUT THERE'S AN
ACTION.
AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH A
POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING
THE LONGHORN PARTNERS
PIPELINE LP VERSUS THE CITY
OF AUSTIN ET AL, CASE NUMBER
A 02 CA-001-SS AND ETHYL
SPILLAR, ET AL VERSUS
LONGHORN PIPELINE, ETD AL,
CASE NUMBER A-98 C 5 SS IN
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE WESTERN
DISTRICT OF TEXAS, AUSTIN
DIVISION.
AND THEY'VE PUT OUT IN
TALKING POINTS FOR ME, SO
I'LL GO THROUGH THEM QUICKLY
HERE SO EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THE LONGHORN PIPELINE
PROJECT WAS FORMED TO RETURN
A 50-YEAR-OLD PIPELINE INTO
SERVICE TO BE USED TO
TRANSPORT REFINED PETROLEUM
PRODUCTS UNDER PRESSURE FROM
HOUSTON TO WEST TEXAS AND
EVENTUALLY BEYOND.
THE LONGHORN PIPELINE RUNS
THROUGH THE CITY OF AUSTIN,
PASSING NEAR HOMES, SCHOOLS
AND PARKS AS WELL AS
CROSSING THE ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE EDWARD'S AQUIFER.
FOUR YEARS AGO THE CITY OF
AUSTIN JOINED IN A FEDERAL
LAWSUIT FILED IN AUSTIN
SEEKING TO ENFORCE THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO
CONDUCT AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT STUDY TO
ASSESS THE POTENTIAL RISK TO
THE HUMAN AND NATURAL
ENVIRONMENT BEFORE THE
PIPELINE BEGAN OPERATIONS.
THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT SAM
SPARKS RULED IN THE LAWSUIT
THAT HE DID NOT HAVE THE
AUTHORITY TO PREVENT THE
PIPELINE PROJECT FROM MOVING
FORWARD.
THE CITY OF AUSTIN
APPRECIATES THE CONCERN
EXPRESSED BY JUDGE SPARKS IN
HIS RULING AND THE COMMENTS
HE MADE ON THE COMMUNITY'S
BEHALF.
BUT THE CITY ALSO HAS GRAVE
CONCERNS ABOUT THE SAFETY OF
ITS CITIZENS AND THE
RECOLLECTION FOR THE
ENVIRONMENT AND FOR THAT
REASON HAS DECIDED TO ASK
THAT HIS ANALYSIS BE
REVIEWED BY A HIGHER COURT.
[ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]
OKAY, OKAY.
THANK YOU.
NORMALLY, NORMALLY --
[ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ].
NORMALLY THE CITY COUNCIL
DOES NOT DIRECT THE COURSE
OF LITIGATION BY PUBLIC
DISCUSSION AND VOTE,
HOWEVER, BECAUSE THE ISSUES
INVOLVED HERE HAVE
APPROPRIATELY ATTRACTED SO
MUCH INTEREST, ATTENTION AND
CONCERN FROM CITIZENS AND
THE MEDIA, THE AUSTIN CITY
COUNCIL DESIRES TO MAKE IT
AND THE INDIVIDUAL
COUNCILMEMBERS' FEELINGS
PUBLICLY KNOWN, AND I'LL
RECOGNIZE THE MAYOR PRO TEM
AT THIS TIME.
GOODMAN: WELL, YOU
ALREADY KIND OF MADE MY
MOTION, MAYOR.
THE APPEAL MOTION IS THAT I
WOULD -- THAT I WOULD LIKE
TO MAKE IS TO AUTHORIZE THE
CITY MANAGER TO TAKE ALL
APPROPRIATE STEPS TO APPEAL
THE TRIAL COURT'S DECISION
IN LONGHORN PARTNERS
PIPELINE, LP VERSUS CITY OF
AUSTIN, ET AL, CASE NUMBER
A-02-CA-001-SS, AND ETHYL
SPILLAR, ET AL VERSUS ROBERT
M. WALKER, ET AL, CASE
NUMBER A-98-CA-255-SS IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
TEXAS, AUSTIN DRITION
DWITION TO THE UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
FIFTH CIRCUIT, AND IF
NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE
AND IF AT ALL POSSIBLE FOR
US TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO THE
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
FOR THIS AND ANY OTHER
LITIGATION THAT MIGHT
OVERTURN FEDERAL LEGISLATION
WHICH I BELIEVE TO BE
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Wynn: SECOND.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
THE MAYOR PRO TEM.
AND YOU HEARD THE SUN STANCE
OF THE MOTION -- SUBSTANCE
OF THE MOTION.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN.
DISCUSSION?
IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR,
SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE?
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
CITY MANAGER, YOU HAVE YOUR
MARCHING ORDERS, AND CITY
ATTORNEY.
[ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ] THIS
IS THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO
PROCEED ON THIS PARTICULAR
ITEM, ITEMS 15 THROUGH 36.
I'M CALLING UP THE STRATUS
ITEMS NUMBER 15 THROUGH 36
FOR CONSIDERATION.
FIRST WE WILL ANNOUNCE THAT
THE COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER
SETTLEMENT ORDINANCE ITEMS
NUMBER 15, 18, 19 ON A THIRD
READING TO BE EFFECTIVE
AUGUST 15TH, 2002.
THAT THE COUNCIL WILL
CONSIDER SETTLEMENT
RESOLUTIONS NUMBER 16, 17,
20 AND 21 FOR ADOPTION.
AND THEN WE WILL -- THE
COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER
STRATUS ZONING ITEMS NUMBER
21 THROUGH 36 ON THIRD
READING TO BE EFFECTIVE
AUGUST 15TH, 2002.
AS I INDICATED EARLIER, THE
PUBLIC HEARING ON THESE
ITEMS HAS BEEN CLOSED.
WE HAVE HAD 42 PEOPLE SIGN
UP TO SPEAK, AND LIKE I
INDICATED, THE PUBLIC
HEARING IS CLOSED, BUT I
SAID THAT I WAS GOING TO
READ THE NAMES OF THE PEOPLE
WHO SIGNED CARDS.
THEY'VE BEEN ADVISED THAT
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS
CLOSED AND THERE WAS NOT
GOING TO BE ANY PUBLIC
TESTIMONY.
LET ME SAY THAT WE'VE HAD
ABOUT 13 HOURS OF PUBLIC
TESTIMONY, AND ON TOP OF
THAT, BECAUSE OF THE NEW
TECHNOLOGY OF E-MAIL, I
SUSPECT WE HAVE RECEIVED
PROBABLY MORE E-MAILS ON
THIS ISSUE THAN ANY OTHER
ISSUE.
ADDITIONALLY --
[ CHEERING ]
ADDITIONALLY MR. BUNCH HAS
SENT SEVERAL CARDS TO MY
HOUSE GIVING ME MY E-MAIL
AND THE E-MAIL OF ALL THE
COUNCILMEMBERS AND THE
TELEPHONE NUMBERS FOR
EVERYBODY SO WE CAN CALL AND
SEND MESSAGES.
I TOLD MY WIFE NOT TO DO IT
BECAUSE WE HAD ENOUGH
E-MAILS COMING IN, BUT I
APPRECIATE ALL YOUR
INTEREST.
SO I'LL READ THE NAMES OF
THOSE IN THE RECORD AND
WE'LL GO FROM THERE.
AND I THINK ALL THESE PEOPLE
ARE REGISTERED AGAINST, SO
I'M NOT GOING TO SAY AGAINST
OR FOR.
BILL BUNCH, LEEANN BRUNSON,
JULIE LOCK, AMY BABBAGE,
EARL OLDERMAN, COLLEEN LEE,
AA ALEASE I CAN'T SARATEGLA.
GINGER -- BEGINGER McEL RAY.
SUSAN CELRAY.
BENJAMIN ALEXI, STAN
AUSTRUM, HARRIET HARRIS,
MICHAEL SIENNO, CHRISTIAN
SIENNO, AL ST. LOUIS, INGRID
MORTON, LINDA AIR HEART, PAT
BRODNIX, CARL PEARSON, CAR
LEAN SILL I CAR LESS THAN SILVA.
MAR LESS THAN RUPP.
LEE LA PERRY, TONY BELL,
CHARLES HULA.
COLBERT, I THINK.
MARK LUDWILDER.
LAURA SKILLING.
CAN McGORE.
MARIAN MULHAK.
KATHY McPORTER.
T.S.BRUDEN.
MICHELLE WESTON, MARY
BRUDEN, TIM CROSS, SUSANNA
ALMANZA, GAVINO FERNANDEZ,
JANIS RANKIN, SHANE
HERMOSIS.
THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO
HAVE SIGNED UP TODAY.
[ INAUDIBLE ]
Mayor Garcia: LET ME CALL
YOUR ATTENTION.
WE HAVE ALLOWED 13 HOURS OF
PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
LIKE I SAID, WE RECEIVED
PROBABLY 500 E-MAILS.
I THINK THE PEOPLE HAVE
SPOKEN ON IT.
I THINK THE COUNCIL
UNDERSTANDS WHERE YOU ARE.
I GUESS MY ONLY REGRET ON
THIS IS SOME OF YOU HAVE
ATTACKED A COUNCILMEMBER
THAT I THINK IS ONE OF THE
BEST ENVIRONMENTAL
COUNCILMEMBERS WE'VE EVER
HAD, AND THAT'S
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.
I REALLY REGRET THAT THAT
WAS DONE BECAUSE I HAVE
SERVED WITH COUNCILMEMBER
SLUSHER MANY YEARS AND I
HAVE SEEN HIS WORK.
AND WHAT HE DID WAS VOTE HIS
CONSCIENCE.
SO OTHER THAN THAT
EVERYTHING I THINK HAS WENT
ALONG WELL.
AND I APPRECIATE IT.
[ INAUDIBLE ]
Mayor Garcia: Y'ALL HAD
YOUR CHANCE TO SPEAK.
I WANT MY CHANCE TO SPEAK
WITHOUT INTERRUPTION.
(GAVEL SOUNDING).
Mayor Garcia: NOW, LET ME
ANNOUNCE THAT THE COUNCIL
HAS VOTED ON FIRST AND
SECOND READINGS ON THESE
ITEMS THAT ARE ORDINANCES.
AND WE'LL BE VOTING TONIGHT
ON THE RESOLUTION ITEMS.
AND WE HAD PUBLIC HEARINGS
ON JUNE 27TH, JULY 11th AND
JULY 17TH.
SO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON
THESE ITEMS ARE CLOSED.
AT THIS TIME -- WELL,
FOLLOWING THE PUBLIC
HEARINGS THE COUNCIL TOOK TO
HEART THE COMMENTS THAT WERE
MADE AND THEY HAVE MADE SOME
CHANGES TO THE AGREEMENT AND
I THINK WE WILL BE TALKING
ABOUT THOSE, BUT THE STAFF
IS GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE
CHANGES AND THEN WE'LL CALL
THAT FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION
AND THEN TAKE ACTION.
MS. GORDON, WELCOME.
THANK YOU, MAYOR AND
COUNCIL.
I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU AN
UPDATE ON ITEMS THAT YOU
DIRECTED STAFF TO REVIEW AT
THE JULY 18th MEETING.
AND THESE WILL BE CHANGES IN
THE AGREEMENT AND THERE WAS
ALSO REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.
CHANGES IN THE AGREEMENT
WERE IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS,
AND WE'LL GO OVER THOSE IN
SOME MORE DETAIL.
THE PIPELINE, SOME
PROVISIONS WERE ADDED TO
ADDRESS ISSUES RAISED BY
COUNCIL.
THE WATER QUALITY
MAINTENANCE AND THE BARTON
SPRINGS/EDWARD'S AQUIFER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT
WORKING WITH THE CITY ON
MAKING SURE MAINTENANCE AND
TRACKING AND MONITORING OF
THOSE PONDS OCCURS.
DOWN ZONING PROVISIONS HAVE
BEEN CHANGED.
THERE'S BEEN DEDICATION OF
TRACTS 1 AND 2 WHICH WILL
RESULT IN ABOUT 25 ACRES OF
ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE WHICH
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER IT WAS
ONE OF HIS ITEMS THAT WAS AN
AMENDMENT.
ON THE DIAS WE HAVE INCLUDED
FOR YOU REVISED ORDINANCES
WHICH REFLECT SCRIBNER'S
ERRORS AND CORRECTIONS TO
MAKE SURE THOSE ORDINANCE
MATCH WITH THE AGREEMENT.
SO I'LL GO THROUGH THEM.
THOSE ARE THE ZONING
ORDINANCES.
AND THEY ARE TRACT 1, TRACT
110, WHICH IS THE REVISION
NUMBER 3.
AND THAT WAS THE REQUEST BY
MAYOR PRO TEM GOODMAN ON THE
CHIP TESTING TO LOOK AT THE
ALLOCATION OF CS.
AND WE'VE REDUCED THE CS
ALLOCATION ON THAT TRACT BY
67 ACRES AND THE MAJORITY OF
THAT TRACT WILL BE G.O. AND
GR.
ON TRACT 101 THERE'S A
REVISION, AND YOU HAVE THAT
ON THE DIAS.
ON TRACT 102 THERE'S
REVISION NUMBER 3, WHICH IS
THE MOST CURRENT.
TRACT 106 HAS BEEN REVISED.
TRACT 108, TRACT 114 AND ALL
OF THESE REVISIONS, AGAIN,
ARE TO MIRROR THE AGREEMENT.
WE WENT BACK AND TICKED AND
TIED ALL THE REFERENCES, ALL
THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND ALL
OF THE AMOUNTS TO MAKE SURE
THE ZONING ORDINANCES HAD
THE MOST ACCURATE
INFORMATION.
WE WANT THE TO BRING THOSE
TO YOUR ATTENTION.
ALSO THE STAFF IS GOING TO
PRESENT SOME INFORMATION
THAT YOU REQUESTED US TO
LOOK INTO FURTHER.
I'M GOING TO ASK NANCY
MCCLINTOCK TO COME UP AND
GIVE YOU SOME ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION ON THE LETTER
THAT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU AT
THE LAST MEETING FROM THE
SCIENTISTS AT THE UNIVERSITY
OF TEXAS AS WELL AS SOME
DISCUSSIONS AND A LETTER
FROM THE DISTRICT REGARDING
THE DISCUSSIONS WITH OUR
STAFF.
WE ALSO HAD SOME ADDITIONAL
REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION ON
CLUSTERING, AND I'LL PRESENT
YOU WITH SOME ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION WHICH WE THINK
WILL CLARIFY SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN
RAISED.
PARKLAND DEDICATION, WE'D
LIKE TO WALK YOU THROUGH
THAT ALLOCATION.
THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL
INFORMATION -- I GUESS
THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN OUT IN
THE PUBLIC IN TERMS OF WHAT
THE PARKLAND WAS FROM THE
ORIGINAL M.U.D. TO NOW AND
WE HAVE AN EASIER WAY TO
CONVEY THAT INFORMATION TO
YOU, SO WE WILL INCLUDE
THAT.
I'LL JIS GIVE YOU THE QUAIR
CLA FASHION TO THE WATER
QUALITY POND MAINTENANCE AND
THE AGREEMENT.
THE AGREEMENT BEFORE YOU
INCLUDES PROVISIONS THAT
IDENTIFIES THAT BARTON
SPRINGS/EDWARD'S AQUIFER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND
THE CITY WILL WORK ON AN
INTERLOCAL, WHICH IS EXHIBIT
Y, AND THAT'S THE FRAMEWORK
FOR THE AGREEMENT THAT WOULD
ALLOW THEM TO DO THE
MAINTENANCE AND TRACKING AND
MONITORING ON THOSE PONDS.
I'M GOING TO CALL UP NOW
NANCY, AND THEN WE'LL GO --
SHE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY LES
TO GO OVER THE CLUSTERING.
AND THEN I'LL COME BACK TO
YOU AND WE'LL GO OVER THE
PIPELINE AND WE'LL GIVE YOU
MORE INFORMATION ON THE
DOWNZONING PROVISIONS.
NANCY?
THANK YOU.
COUNCIL, PRIOR TO THE LAST
PUBLIC HEARING ON STRATUS,
YOU RECEIVED A LETTER FROM
52 U.T. BIOLOGISTS, AND THE
LETTER DETAILED THE
SCIENTISTS CONCERNS RELATED
TO THE IMPACT OF ADDITIONAL
URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN THE
BARTON SPRINGS ZONE ON WATER
QUALITY IN THE AQUIFER AND
IN SPRINGS AND ON THE BARTON
SPRINGS SALAMANDER.
YOU ALSO HEARD FROM A
SPEAKER THAT SAME NIGHT WHO
SPOKE OPPOSING THE STRATUS
DEAL, A SCIENTIST ALSO FROM
U.T. WHO SPOKE OPPOSING THE
STRATUS DEAL AND INDICATED
THAT HE HAD THE WEIGHT OF
THE 52 U.T. SCIENTISTS
BEHIND HIM.
YOU ASKED ME TO -- HE ALSO
INDICATED THAT THE
SCIENTISTS HAD ALL
VOLUNTEERED TO HELP CRAFT A
BETTER DEAL, SO YOU,
COUNCIL, ASKED ME TO GO AND
COMMUNICATE WITH THOSE
SCIENTISTS REGARDING THEIR
OPPOSITION TO THE DEAL AND
THEIR OFFER TO HELP.
I CONTACTED THE AUTHOR OF
THAT LETTER, DR. DAVID
HILLIS, AS WELL AS FIVE
OTHER OF THE SCIENTISTS THAT
SELECTED THE ONES WHO I KNEW
TO WORK IN THE ARENA OF
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES OR
ECOLOGY.
MANY OF THE SIGNERS OF THE
LETTER WERE IN FACT
MOLECULAR BIOLOGISTS, BUT I
ELECTED FIRST TO CALL THE
ONES WHO WORKED IN THE
ECOLOGICAL AREAS.
IN ADDITION TO DR. DAVID
HILLI;, DR. CA MEAL PARDON
ME SAN, DR. NORMA SALER,
DR. DICK RICHARDSON.
ACROSS THE BOARD THEY WERE
SURPRISED AND UNHAPPY THAT
THEIR LETTER HAD BEEN CRACK
SIZED AS BEING IN OPPOSITION
TO THE DEAL.
I'D LIKE TO READ DIRECTLY
FROM SOME OF THE
COMMUNICATIONS THAT I GOT
FROM THEM AS ON OPPOSED TO
SUMMARIZING THEM.
FROM DR. DAVID HILLIS, AND
THIS WAS ACTUALLY IN AN
E-MAIL TO COUNCIL.
I HOPE THAT ALL OF YOU GOT
IT.
THIS IS THE AUTHOR OF THE
LETTER WHEN I WAS APPROACHED
BY WRITING A LETTER FOR MY
CONCERNS AND OTHER
BIOLOGISTS ABOUT BARTON
SPRINGS TO THE CITY COUNCIL,
I MADE IT CLEAR THAT I DID
NOT KNOW ALL THE DETAILS OF
THE STRATUS PROPOSAL AND
STATED THAT POINT IN THE
LETTER AND THAT I DID NOT
WISH TO COMMENT ON THE
POLITICAL SOLUTIONS OR
DETAILS OF THAT PROPOSAL.
AT THE SAME TIME I
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE ARE
CLEAR FACTUAL ISSUES SUCH AS
THE CONTINUING DEGRADATION
OF THE SPRINGS RELATED
DIRECTLY TO URBAN
DEVELOPMENT WHERE THE
SCIENCE IS CLEAR, AND I
TRIED TO RESTRICT THE
COMMENTS IN THE LETTER TO
THOSE ISSUES.
ALTHOUGH I STILL SUPPORT THE
CONTENT OF THE LETTER, I
HOPE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
REALIZES THAT ANY
INDIVIDUAL'S COMMENTS OR ANY
STATEMENTS BEYOND WHAT IS
ACTUALLY IN THE LETTER WERE
NOT AUTHORIZED OR EXPECTED
BY THE OTHER LETTER SIGNERS.
THAT IS CERTAINLY TRUE FOR
ME, AND SO I EXPECT FROM THE
REST OF THE SIGNERS OF THE
LETTER.
FROM ANOTHER ONE OF THE
SCIENTISTS, DR. CAMILLE,
PARMASEAN.
I APOLOGIZE FOR THE WAY THIS
LETTER HAS BEEN USED BY
OTHERS TO ADVOCATE SPECIFIC
POLICY.
I VIEW THE LETTER AS A
REMINDER OF THE DELICATE
NATURE OF THE GEE GEOLOGY AND
BIOLOGY OF THE BARTON CREEK
SYSTEM WITH A KNOT THAT ANY
FURTHER DEVELOPMENT WOULD
LIKELY POSE AN INCREASED
THREAT TO THE PRESERVATION
OF THE ASSOCIATED ENDANGERED
SPECIES.
THE LETTER --
[ CHEERING ]
THE LETTER WAS NOT WRITTEN
TO TARGET ANY ONE POLICY,
NOR TO RECOMMEND A SPECIFIC
PROPOSAL, NOR WAS I GIVEN
ANY INDICATIONS THAT IT
WOULD BE USED AS SUCH.
THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER GOOD
COMMENTS IN THIS LETTER AS
THERE WERE MANY GOOD
COMMENTS IN THE ORIGINAL
LETTER FROM THE 52
SCIENTISTS.
THERE'S NO -- THESE
SCIENTISTS DO NOT INDICATE
THAT THEY SUPPORT THE DEAL,
NOR THAT THEY OPPOSE THE
DEAL, SIMPLY THAT THEY DO
NOT HAVE EITHER THE
EXPERTISE OR THE KNOWLEDGE
TO FULLY EVALUATE THE
PROPOSAL.
DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE
SCIENTISTS --
[ INAUDIBLE ]
COUNCIL HAS THE LETTER.
AND DESPITE THE FACT THAT
THE SCIENTISTS WERE NOT
INCLINED TO MEET WITH US TO
TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE
DEAL, THEY HAVE -- THEY'RE
VERY AGREEABLE AND WANT TO
MEET WITH US RELATIVE TO THE
CITY'S STRATEGIES TO PROTECT
THE AQUIFER AND TO TALK
ABOUT WHAT OTHER WAYS WE
MIGHT BE ABLE TO
COLLABORATE.
THE OTHER ISSUE THAT YOU
ASKED US TO FOLLOW UP ON WAS
A COMMENTS OF ONE OF THE
SPEAKERS FROM THAT HEARING I
GUESS ON THE 18th, WHICH
HAPPENED TO BE AN EMPLOYEE
OF THE BARTON SPRINGS,
EDWARD'S AQUIFER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
AND SHE SPOKE RELATIVE TO
HER CONCERNS ABOUT THE
PROTECTION OF SOME CRITICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON
THIS TRACT.
AND SO DAVID JOHNS, OUR
HYDRO GEOLOGIST WHO
NEGOTIATED THE SETBACKS,
WENT AND MET WITH THE
DISTRICT STAFF.
AND WE HAD RECEIVED A LETTER
FROM THEM SAYING THAT
THEY'RE SATISFIED AND
COMFORTABLE THAT THE
CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL
FEATURES ARE PROTECTED
THROUGH THIS AGREEMENT.
AND THAT THE PROVISIONS IN
THE AGREEMENT THAT ANY
FUTURE CRITICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES THAT
MIGHT BE FOUND ON THE GROUND
WILL ALSO BE ABLE TO BE
PROTECTED.
SO I HAVE COPIES OF THAT
LETTER FOR ANY OF THE
COUNCILMEMBERS WHO WOULD
LIKE IT.
ANY QUESTIONS.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR MS. McCLINTOCK?
> Goodman: I HAD LIKE IT A
COPY OF THE LETTER.
[ INAUDIBLE ]
Mayor Garcia: NO, SIR,
THE PUBLIC HEARING IS
CLOSED: WE.
WE NEED TO HAVE A MOTION TO
ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO GO
BEYOND THE 10:00 O'CLOCK.
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER
SLUSHER, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE?
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: OPPOSED NO?
MOTION CARRIES.
IT CARRIES SEVEN TO ZERO.
MR. TULL?
I'M LES TULL WITH THE
WATERSHED PROTECTION AND
REVIEW DEPARTMENT.
IT HAD BECOME OBVIOUS THAT
THERE STILL WERE QUESTIONS
WITH REGARD TO THE ISSUE OF
CLUSTERING AND SOME FURTHER
EXPLANATIONS OF WHAT WOULD
BE SORT OF A TYPICAL
DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO UNDER
THREE DIFFERENT CONDITIONS.
SO I'VE PREPARED THIS
GRAPHIC FOR YOU TO GO OVER
RATHER QUICKLY THREE
DIFFERENT CONDITIONS.
STARTING AT THE TOP OF THE
GRAPHIC WE HAVE HERE, WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT AN EXAMPLE, A
HYPOTHETICAL 100-ACRE SITE.
THE PROPERTY UNDER AN RR
ZONING, WHICH WOULD HAVE A
REQUIREMENT FOR A MINIMUM
LOT SIZE FOR EVERY SINGLE
FAMILY LOT OF AT LEAST ONE
ACRE WOULD RESULT IN
APPROXIMATELY 48 LOTS, AT
15% IMPERVIOUS COVER.
WITHIN THAT 100 ACRES,
AGAIN, 48 LOTS, THE
ASSUMPTIONS UNDER THE CITY
CODE WOULD BE THAT YOU WOULD
HAVE 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF
IMPERVIOUS COVER PER LOT AND
THERE WOULD BE ABOUT THREE
AND A HALF ACRES OF ROADWAY
IMPERVIOUS COVER.
IF THAT SAME PROPERTY, THAT
SAME 100 ACRES, WERE ZONED
AS COMMERCIAL AND BROKEN
INTO FOUR LOTS, WE ASSUME
25-ACRE LOTS IN THIS CASE,
YOU WOULD HAVE PARKING AND
BUILDINGS AS SHOWN HERE,
EACH LOT MEETS THE S.O.S.
REQUIREMENT OF 15% PER LOT
AND THERE WOULD BE ABOUT ONE
ACRE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER IN
ROADWAYS.
UNDER A SITUATION WHERE THE
100 ACRES WAS ACTUALLY
DEVELOPED IN A CLUSTER
SCENARIO, WHAT WE SEE IS
THAT YOU COULD ACTUALLY
TRANSFER HALF OF THE
IMPERVIOUS COVER ON TO ONE
OF THE LOTS, LEAVING A 45%,
THAT WOULD BE ON THE UPPER
LOT ON THE BOTTOM DRAWING,
THE LOWER LOT TO BE THE
S.O.S. AT 15%.
IN THAT CASE YOU WOULD
PROBABLY HAVE ABOUT
THREE-QUARTERS OF AN ACRE OF
ROADWAY IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND ALONG WITH IT, THOUGH,
YOU WOULD HAVE 50 ACRES OF
OPEN SPACE THAT WOULD BE
UNDEVELOPED.
I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS ON THAT.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR MR. TULL?
MAYOR PRO TEM?
GOODMAN: NOT A QUESTION,
MAYOR, BUT I WANT TO THANK
STAFF FOR COMING UP WITH
THAT.
AND A LOT OF THE
CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD
LATELY WITH FOLKS WHO DON'T
REALLY UNDERSTAND THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHEN WE
SAY SOMETHING COMPLIES WITH
S.O.S. WITH THE CLUSTERING
AND THE LIMITED ADJUSTMENTS
THAT ARE PROVIDED FOR WITHIN
S.O.S. SO THAT A 6-1 VOTE
WOULD MAKE THAT TOTAL
COMPLIANCE, THIS IS THE
ISSUE THAT CAME UP, WHAT IS
THE BENEFIT THAT YOU GET
FROM CLUSTERING?
AND LES -- I GUESS HE DID IT
ALL BY HIMSELF, BUT IN HIS
TRYING TO SIMPLIFY IT ENOUGH
TO BE ABLE JUST TO TELL
WHERE THE IMPACT IS AND WHY
CLUSTERING IS
ENVIRONMENTALLY BENEFICIAL
WAY OF PROTECTING MORE OF
THE LAND ON THE AQUIFER FROM
BEING DISRUPTIVE AND
IMPACTED, THAT WAS A PRETTY
GOOD REPRESENTATION.
AND THE ISSUE IS REALLY AN
ENVIRONMENTAL ONE RATHER
THAN THE RHETORIC THAT SOME
OF US HAVE BEEN INDULGE
WILLING IN.
IT REALLY IS AN
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE.
AND FOR A LONG TIME MANY
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO
GO TO A MORE CLUSTERING
ARRANGEMENT WHENEVER
DEVELOPMENT HAS TO HAPPEN
OVER THE AQUIFER IN ORDER TO
LEAVE THE MOST CONTIGUOUS
LAND UNTOUCHED TOTALLY SO
THAT EVEN IF YOU GO BY A
15%, 20%, 25% IMPERVIOUS
COVER COVER LOAD ON THE
QUOWFER, THAT ALWAYS WAS A
FAIRLY ARBITRARY FIGURE.
SOME OF THE AQUIFER CAN TAKE
MORE THAN THAT, SOME OF THE
AQUIFER CAN TAKE NONE OF
THAT.
SO IN AN EFFORT TO DELETE
AND DOWNSIZE THE IMPACT OVER
THE AQUIFER, CLUSTERING IN
MY OPINION IS A MUCH BETTER
WAY TO PROTECT THE DELICATE
FEATURES.
AND WHEN YOU SEE THE REGULAR
S.O.S. IN THE MIDDLE, THAT'S
STILL THE SAME 15% THAT'S
SPREAD OUT.
AND I THINK THAT WHEN YOU GO
TO THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL
LOT, WHAT YOU ARE SEEING IN
THAT CONTEXT IS THAT YOU
WILL HAVE A 15% IMPACT ON
EVERY PIECE OF LAND WHERE
YOU CAN GET THAT AT LEAST
ONE-ACRE LOT.
SO THAT YOU'VE HAD A DIRECT
PEOPLE IMPACT TO EACH ONE OF
THOSE ACRE LOTS, AND THAT
MEANS DRIVEWAYS TO THEM, AND
THAT'S CARS AND THAT'S
FAMILIES AND THAT'S KIDS AND
PETS AND IMPORTED PLANTS AND
THE WHOLE THING.
SO AT THE REQUEST OF A
NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO TRY TO
PUT IT INTO SOME KIND OF
COMPARATIVE CONTEXT, THIS IS
WHAT STAFF DID, AND I
APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE
TIME AND TROUBLE YOU WENT
TO.
AND I HAVE BEEN GETTING
MESSAGES FROM A LOT MORE
PEOPLE NOW WHO DO UNDERSTAND
SOME OF THE NUANCES A LITTLE
BIT BETTER AND THE
COMPARABLES BETWEEN WHAT ONE
GROUP OF FOLKS HAS CHOSEN AS
WHAT THEY SAY IS THE RIGHT
WAY TO ACT ON THIS AND WHAT
OTHERS HAVE DECIDED IS THE
BEST WAY TO PROTECT THE
AQUIFER AND IS AS A MATTER
OF FACT A BETTER WAY.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR,
COUNCIL, MY NAME IS PATRICK
MURPHY.
LAST COUNCIL MEETING WE WENT
THROUGH THE PARKLAND
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CIRCLE C
M.U.D.S AND I WANTED TO
PROVIDE BETTER CLARIFICATION
OF THAT FOR YOU THIS
EVENING.
THIS EXHIBIT THAT WE HAVE
HERE IS BASICALLY THE CIRCLE
C M.U.D. LAND PLAN.
WE USED THIS EXHIBIT BECAUSE
IT CLEARLY SHOWS THE NORTH
AND SOUTH BRANCHES OF
SLAUGHTER CREEK.
THE ORIGINAL M.U.D. CONSENT
AGREEMENT HAD TWO PARKLAND
PROVISIONS IN IT.
ONE WAS FOR AN ORIGINAL
412-ACRE DEDICATION.
THAT OCCURRED IN 1984.
THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THIS
NORTH BRANCH AND THE CIRCLE
C METROPOLITAN PARK IS HERE
WHERE I'M POINTING.
SO THE ORIGINAL 412-ACRE
PARKLAND DEDICATION OCCURRED
IN 19 1984, AND THAT IS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE NORTH
BRANCH AND ALSO IS
ASSOCIATED WITH M.U.D.S 2
AND 3, WHICH WERE PART OF
THAT.
THE DEDICATION CAME OUT OF
M.U.D.S 1, 2 AND 3, AND
AGAIN, THAT WAS DEDICATED IN
1984.
AN ADDITIONAL 50-ACRE PIECE
OF PARKLAND WAS DEDICATED
IN -- FOR THE VELOWAY HERE.
AND THAT 50-ACRE DEDICATION
OCCURRED IN 1991.
AND SO THE TOTAL PARKLAND
DEDICATED WITHIN THE CIRCLE
C M.U.D. WAS AT AROUND
462 ACRES.
THE M.U.D. CONSENT AGREEMENT
ALSO INCLUDED A SECOND
PROVISION FOR PARKLAND
DEDICATION IN THE FUTURE.
IT WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
SOUTH BRANCH OF SLAUGHTER
CREEK AND IT WAS 301 ACRES.
THIS PARKLAND WAS TO BE
DEDICATED ADD FINAL PLATTING
OCCURRED OF THE PROPERTIES
ASSOCIATED WITH THIS.
ALL OF THE PARKLAND IN THE
SOUTHERN BRANCH, THE 3
HUNDRED ACRES, WAS CRITICAL
TRANSITION ZONE ASSOCIATED
WITH FLOODPLAIN AND MOSTLY
UNDEVELOPABLE LAND.
NONE OF THAT LAND WAS
DEDICATED.
THE 50 ACRES THAT WAS
DEDICATED WAS PART OF THAT
OVERALL AND THE REMAINDER OF
THE PARKLAND THAT WAS GOING
TO BE DEDICATED IN THAT
301 ACRES WAS PART OF A
DEANNEXATION.
ABOUT HALF OF THAT PARKLAND
WAS DEAN NECKED FROM THE
M.U.D., AND THAT'S WHEN IRA
YATES SPLIT WAYS WITH
BRADLEY, AND THAT IS THE
AREA ASSOCIATED WITH THIS
PORTION OF THE TRACT.
MUCH OF THAT PARKLAND --
SOME OF THE PARKLAND THAT
WAS REMAINING ENDED UP BEING
IN PRESERVES, THE J-17 TRACT
IS HERE.
IT SHOWS UP HERE IN GREEN.
THIS IS J-17.
IT'S A PRESERVE TRACT, AND
THAT IS THIS AREA.
N THE YATES' CONSERVATION
EASEMENT IS HERE AND
INCLUDES ANOTHER PORTION OF
WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THAT
301 ACRES OF PARKLAND.
THE REMAINING ACREAGE OF
THAT PARKLAND IS ASSOCIATED
WITH FRAGMENTS OF THE
ORIGINAL 301 ACRES.
MOPAC AND 45 OBVIOUSLY WENT
THROUGH THESE AREAS AND
SPLIT THE PARKLAND.
PART OF THE PARKLAND BECAME
THE NATIONAL WILDFLOWER
RESEARCH CENTER.
OTHER PORTIONS OF THE
PARKLAND ARE LOCATED WITHIN
TRACTS 112, WHICH YOU CAN
SEE HERE AND HERE, 113 HAD A
PIECE OF THE PARKLAND
SURROUNDING IT.
THERE'S 113.
1110, THIS PORTION OF 110 --
ACTUALLY, THIS IS AN ERROR
HERE ON THE BOTTOM.
THIS WAS ONE OF THE BRADLEY
PARCELS HERE IN THE CORNER
OF 45 AND MOPAC.
BUT 110 HERE, THIS WAS ALSO
PART OF THE 301 ACRES.
AND YOU CAN SEE THIS
TRIBUTARY HERE THAT GOES
THROUGH 110, A COUPLE OF
PORTIONS OF THE PARKLAND ARE
WITHIN PIECES OF THE BRADLEY
SETTLEMENT.
HERE IS THE ESCARPMENT AND
AT 45 AND ON THE OTHER SIDE
OF 45 HERE.
ALL OF THE PARKLAND THAT WAS
IN THAT 301 ACRES IS
UNDEVELOPED.
IT IS NOT -- NONE OF IT WAS
INCLUDED IN ANY OF THE
CALCULATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT
FOR STRATUS, AND IT IS
THERE, IT'S NOT PARKLAND,
AND THERE'S A REASON AND
THERE ARE MANY REASONS FOR
THAT.
I'M GOING TO LET JUDY
PLUMBER CLARIFY SOME OF THE
PARKLAND DEDICATION
REQUIREMENTS AND THE REASON
THAT THAT WAS NOT DEDICATED
AND ACCEPTED AS PARKLAND.
THANK YOU.
I'M JUDY PLUMBER WITH THE
REAL ESTATE DIVISION.
ONE OF THE THINGS I DO IS
CALLED MANDATORY PARKLAND,
BUT IN PARTICULAR THE
PARKLAND DEDICATION
ORDINANCE WAS CREATED IN
1985.
THE FOUR M.U.D.S THAT
TRIGGERED ABOUT 713 ACRES OF
PARKLAND WAS CREATED IN
1983, SO IN 1984 WE -- THE 4
412 ACRES THAT WAS THE NORTH
BRANCH OF SLAUGHTER CREEK
WAS DEDICATED.
SO THAT FULFILLED TWO OF THE
MUD'S OBLIGATION.
THEN IN 1985 YOU HAVE YOUR
PARKLAND DEDICATION THAT
COMES INTO EFFECT.
AND I WANT TO BE REAL CLEAR,
THERE ARE TWO MECHANISMS FOR
PARKLAND DEDICATION.
ONE IS THE CREATION OF A
M.U.D. AND THE OTHER IS
SUBDIVIDING FOR RESIDENTIAL
PURPOSES.
THE PARKLAND DEDICATION
ORDINANCE FROM 1985 TRULY IS
TRIGGERED BY RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION.
IT ISN'T TRIGGERED BY
COMMERCIAL.
SO WHEN THE 423 ACRES WAS
PULLED OUT, DEANNEXED FROM
TWO OF THE M.U.D.S, WHICH
WAS M.U.D. 1 AND 4, THAT
LEFT A BALANCE OF THE
301 ACRES.
THAT THEN REDUCED THAT 301
BY ABOUT IN HALF.
SO YOU LOOK AT THE 301, YOU
SUBTRACT ABOUT 150 ACRES,
YOU LOOK AT THE DEDICATION
OF THE VELOWAY AND YOU HAVE
ABOUT 100 ACRES THAT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT.
WITHIN THAT 100 ACRES YOU
WOULD HAVE EVENTUALLY SEEN
POSSIBLY SOME PARKLAND
DEDICATION FROM WHAT I CALL
THE J-17 TRACT, WHICH IS
ABOUT 261 ACRES THAT WE
PURCHASED WITH WATER QUALITY
MONEY IN THE FALL OF 1998.
SO AS PART OF THIS, WHEN IT
IS NOT PART OF THE M.U.D.
AND IF IT IS NOT SUBDIVIDED
FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES,
YOU'RE NOT TRIGGERING WHAT
WOULD BE THE PARKLAND
DEDICATION THAT ORIGINALLY
WAS THOUGHT OF IN 1983 WHEN
THEY LOOKED AT THE
713 ACRES.
I MUST SAY ALL OF THAT
713 ACRES WAS ALL
FLOODPLAIN.
IT WAS THE FLOODPLAIN FOR
ALL FOUR OF THE M.U.D.S.
AND THAT'S HOW IT WAS
ORIGINALLY CREATED AND
THOUGHT OF.
IS THAT A LITTLE CLEARER?
DOES THAT HELP?
I SEE SOME QUESTIONS.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR MS. PLUMBER?
ALSO I WANT TO SAY THAT
WHEN WE LOOK AT PARKLAND
DEDICATION, RARELY DOES
PARKS EVER LOOK AT A TRACT
THAT'S UNDER SIX ACRES.
THEY ALWAYS LOOK AT LAND
THAT IS ADJACENT TO EXISTING
PARKLAND.
AND MANY OF THE PIECES IN
PARTICULAR BECAME KIND OF
FRAGMENTED AND NO LONGER FIT
WITH THE ORIGINAL VISION
FROM 1983.
Alvarez: MAYOR, I DO HAVE
A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ.
Alvarez: IN YOUR
CALCULATION YOU KIND OF
BROUGHT IT DOWN TO ABOUT
100 ACRES AFTER I GUESS PART
OF IT WAS DEANNEXED AND THE
301 FIGURE BY ABOUT 50% AND
THEN THE VELOWAY DEDICATION.
AND THEN YOU WENT ON AND
TALKED ABOUT THE LAND THAT
WE PURCHASED.
SO HOW DOES THAT FIT INTO
DEDICATION VERSUS US
PURCHASING THE 100 ACRES
REMAINING.
OUT OF THAT 100 ABEARS,
SOME OF YOUR PARKLAND
DEDICATION WOULD HAVE COME
THROUGH WHAT WAS PURCHASED
ON J-17.
ULTIMATELY WE DID ALSO A
CONSERVATION EASEMENT WITH
MR. YATES ON 389 ACRES.
HE HAD 651 ACRES PURCHASED
IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA AS
PART OF YOUR WATER QUALITY
PROJECT.
SO THOSE ULTIMATELY WHEN --
ONCE THEY WERE OUT OF THE
M.U.D., BUT IF THEY HAD EVER
BEEN SUBDIVIDED FOR
RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES, THAT
WOULD HAVE TRIGGERED YOUR
PARKLAND DEDICATION THAT
WOULD HAVE MADE UP THAT
BALANCE OF 100.
Alvarez: OKAY.
COUNCIL, THE NEXT ITEM I
WANTED TO UPDATE YOU ON WAS
SOME OF THE ISSUES RELATED
TO PIPELINE.
THERE ARE SEVERAL ISSUES
THAT CAME UP AT THE LAST
MEETING IN TERMS OF SETBACKS
AND REQUIREMENTS FROM THE
PIPELINE.
AND WHAT I WANTED TO DO WAS
EXPLAIN TWO CONCEPTS.
ONE WAS HAVE CHIEF WARREN
COME UP AND GIVE YOU SOME
BACKGROUND ON THE
660-FOOT -- I GUESS IT'S THE
TERM THAT HAS BEEN USED.
IT'S NOT REALLY A SETBACK,
AND CHIEF WARREN WILL
EXPLAIN THAT IN GREATER
DETAIL AS WELL AS WHAT IS
CONSIDERED A HIGH
CONSEQUENCE AREA AND HOW
DOES THAT AFFECT DEVELOPMENT
AROUND A PIPELINE OR ANY
PIPELINE SET BACKS OR
PROVISIONS.
THE TERMS WERE MISS
INTERPRETED OR MIS-- I GUESS
MISUSED IN TERMS OF WHAT
PEOPLE THOUGHT THE 660 MEANT
AND WHAT THAT MEANS TO
PIPELINES AND HOW THAT
IMPACTS THE STRATUS
DEVELOPMENT.
ALSO WE HAD SEVERAL
QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL AS WE
WERE GOING THROUGH AND
REVIEWING THESE ISSUES AND
WE WANT TO GIVE YOU SOME
INFORMATION OTHER CITIES ARE
DOING AND GIVE YOU SOME
RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHAT OUR
STAFF THINKS ARE MEASURES TO
ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES
SURROUNDING THE SITE -- THE
PIPELINE AS WELL AS SAFETY.
AND THERE WERE SOME
INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE
REPORT THAT WE'LL ALSO GO
OVER.
SO WE JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU
A COMPLETE BRIEF OVERVIEW OF
SOME OF THE ISSUES RAISED SO
THAT YOU CAN HAVE THE BEST
INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE?
REGARD TO PIPELINES AND THEN
WE'LL GIVE YOU OUR
RECOMMENDATION ON STRATUS,
WHICH WE THINK WILL ADDRESS
THOSE ISSUES.
AND I'M GOING TO ASK CHIEF
WARREN TO COME UP AT THIS
TIME.
GOODMAN: AND MAYOR, WHILE
HE'S COMING UP...
Mayor Garcia: MAYOR PRO
TEM?
GOODMAN: MIKE BLIZZARD
WAS THE FIRST ONE TO START
GATHERING UP THE INFORMATION
AND TRY TO MAKE HEADS OR
TAILS TO WHAT THE REFERENCES
WERE BECAUSE OFTEN IT SEEMED
TO BE A COMBINATION OF
NATURAL GAS REGULATIONS OR
SUGGESTED GUIDELINES THAT
KEPT GETTING MIXED UP WITH
LIQUID GAS, SO THERE WERE
REFERENCES THAT WE COULDN'T
REALLY PINPOINT THEM EASILY.
SO WITH A LOT OF RESEARCH WE
WERE ABLE TO DO THAT.
AND SOME PEOPLE I THINK
MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT MIKE WAS
SAYING IN TERMS OF LAYING
OUT LINEAR FEET AND TALKING
ABOUT ZONES OF HIGH
CONSEQUENCE BECAUSE THOSE
REALLY ARE TERMS THAT WE
UNDERSTAND MUCH BETTER NOW.
AND MIKE DID SEND A
CLARIFYING E-MAIL TO MAKE
SURE THAT PEOPLE DID NOT
THINK THAT HE WAS SAYING
THAT THAT HAD BEEN A SETBACK
OR THAT ANY ORDINANCE HAD --
HAS YET BEEN PASSED IN THE
COUNTRY TOOK THAT AS A
SETBACK.
IT IS AN AREA OF HIGH
CONSEQUENCE AND THERE WERE
MANAGEMENT PLANS AND SO ON.
BUT THAT WAS SOMETHING I
WANTED TO SAY ABOUT MIKE
BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE
MISSMISQUOTING HIM AND HE WANTED
TO CLARIFY THAT IN THIS
E-MAIL.
COUNCIL, I'M GARY WARREN
WITH THE AUSTIN FIRE
DEPARTMENT.
AND IN REFERENCE TO THE
660 FEET THAT IS LISTED IN
THE CODE OF FEDERAL
REGULATIONS, WHAT THAT IS
BEING USED FOR IS A DISTANCE
THAT IS JIBED IN A CODE --
DESCRIBED IN THAT CODE OF
FEDERAL REGULAR LAYINGS FOR
PIPELINE OPERATORS TO USE TO
ESTABLISH A ZONE ON EITHER
SIDE OF THE PIPELINE.
AND INSIDE THAT ZONE THEY'RE
SUPPOSED TO REPORT
ACCIDENTS, LEAKS, INJURIES,
DEATHS, ANY KIND OF
CONSEQUENCE OF ACCIDENTS
ALONG THAT PIPELINE FOR DATA
COLLECTION.
THAT DISTANCE HAS BEEN
PRESCRIBED IN THE CODE OF
FEDERAL REGULATION FOR OVER
30 YEARS AND IT'S USED FOR
DATA COLLECTION.
AND A COUPLE OF REASONS WHY
THEY DO THAT DATA COLLECTION
IS, ONE, SO THAT THEY CAN
KNOW AREAS OF THE PIPELINE
THAT MAY HAVE INDICATIONS OF
DEGRADATION OF INTEGRITY,
AND THE OTHER REASON IS SO
THAT THEY CAN KNOW WHICH
AREAS OF THE PIPELINE THEY
MIGHT NEED TO CONCENTRATE
THEIR RESOURCES SO THAT THEY
CAN BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO
THESE.
AND THOSE ARE TWO OF THE
REASONS WHY THEY DO THAT
DATA COLLECTION.
RECENTLY, HOWEVER, THERE HAS
BEEN A CONSULTANT THAT
WORKED ON THAT THEORY OF
THAT DISTANCE AND USING A
MODEL OF A RADIANT HEAT FLUX
AND WHAT KIND OF DAMAGE IT
CAN DO AROUND A LEAK THAT'S
BEEN IGNITED, THEY STUDIED
UP ON HOW FAR THAT SHOULD BE
TO VERIFY WHETHER 660 FEET
IS A GOOD DISTANCE OR NOT.
AND WHAT THEY CAME UP WITH
WAS NOW THAT WE HAVE VERY
LARGE PIPELINES AND WITH
VERY HIGH PRESSURES, THAT IT
MIGHT BE THAT THEY NEED TO
STUDY AN AREA THAT'S MORE
LIKE A THOUSAND FEET INSTEAD
OF THE 660, BUT AT ANY CASE,
IT IS TO ESTABLISH THIS ZONE
FOR DATA COLLECTION.
AND THAT'S TO BE USED TO
ANALYZE THE EFFECTS OF THE
PIPELINE FAILURES OVER TIME.
Wynn: MAYOR?
CHIEF, SO IT'S NOT A
SETBACK, THAT'S JUST AREA
THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE
DATA GATHERED FOR FIRE --
WELL, THESE WERE
CONSULTANTS.
THAT'S THE ONE THAT THEY
WERE SAYING MAY BE NEEDED TO
USE IN THE VERY LARGE
PIPELINES WITH THE VERY HIGH
PRESSURES, OVER A THOUSAND
PSI.
THE PROBLEMS FOR THE STUDY
AREA OUGHT TO BE A THOUSAND
FEET, NOT JUST 660.
Wynn: YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT A STUDY AREA?
FOR AT THAT TIME TA
COLLECTION.
AND CHIEF, WHAT IS THE
AREA OF CONSENSUS FOR A
HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE?
IT IS THE ONE THAT'S
ESTABLISHED IN THE CODE OF
FEDERAL REGULATIONS?
660.
NO, FOR HAZARDOUS LIQUID
PIPELINES AS OPPOSED TO
NATURAL GAS PIPELINE.
THE 660 WAS USED FOR NATURAL
GAS FOR AN AREA OF STUDY,
AND THE DEFINITION OF A HIGH
CONSEQUENCE AREA FOR
HAZARDOUS LIQUID PIPELINE
WITH AN URBAN POPULATION?
OH, YES, THERE'S OTHER
PARTS OF THAT DEFINITION.
AN URBAN POPULATION IS ALSO
DESCRIBED AS AN AREA THAT
NEEDS TO BE STUDIED FOR
CONSEQUENCE.
AND THAT WOULD -- LIKE IN
AUSTIN THAT WOULD INCLUDE
THE ENTIRE CITY OF AUSTIN
WOULD ALSO BE AN AREA THAT
WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT
STUDY AREA.
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR THE CHIEF?
THANK YOU, CHIEF WARREN.
THANK YOU.
AS PART OF OUR RESEARCH
ON THE PIPELINE ISSUES, WE
WENT OVER AND LOOKED
THROUGHOUT THE -- THERE WERE
SOME CITIES THAT WERE CITED
IN INFORMATION THAT WERE
RECEIVED IN SOME NEWS MEDIA
AS WELL, AND WE WENT BACK
AND LOOKED AND DID OUR OWN
SEARCH AND WE HAD KEVIN
COLE, ONE OF OUR OUTSIDE
ATTORNEYS, ASSIST US IN THE
RESEARCH AS WELL AS OUR OWN
CITY STAFF, AND I JUST WANT
TO HIGHLIGHT TWO AREAS FOR
YOU.
IN ALL OF THE -- IN ALL OF
THE PIPELINE ORDINANCES OR
POLICIES THAT WERE ADDRESSED
IN VARIOUS CITIES, FIRST,
THERE WEREN'T A LOT OF
CITIES THAT WE COULD FIND
THAT HAD SPECIFIC PIPELINE
ORDINANCES.
AND AMONG THE ONES THAT WE
WERE ABLE TO FIND, WE DID
FIND THE FOLLOWING
INFORMATION: THERE WERE NO
UNIFORM SETBACKS OR
DISTANCES.
THERE WERE SETBACKS AS LOW
AS 10 FEET, WHICH IS A
H.U.D. REQUIREMENT, TO
60 FEET TO 125 FEET.
AND THE MOST WE FOUND WAS
150 FEET.
THERE WERE NO UNIFORM
MEASURES FOR THE TYPE OF
PRODUCTS THAT THE ORDINANCES
APPLIED TO, SO YOU MIGHT
HAVE NATURAL GAS, YOU MIGHT
HAVE HAZARDOUS LIQUID, YOU
MIGHT HAVE CRUDE OIL.
SO THERE WAS NO CONSISTENCY
AND IT DEPENDED ON THE
LOCATION AND THE FEATURES OF
THE VARIOUS CITIES.
THERE WAS ALWAYS A PROCESS
FOR VARIANCE AND WAIVERS OF
RULES.
AND THE SPECIFIC RULES
RELATED TO WHETHER OR NOT --
WHAT WERE THE CONDITIONS ON
THAT PIPELINE.
SO IF THERE WERE ADDITIONAL
FIRE MEASURES, THEY MIGHT BE
ABLE TO HAVE A DIFFERENT
PROCESS IN TERMS OF THE SET
BACKS, IF IT AFFECTED BEING
ABLE TO DEVELOP THE PROAT,
THERE WOULD BE A WAIVER
VARIANCE FOR THAT.
THERE WERE MITIGATION
MEASURES.
MOST OF THESE ORDINANCES
ADDRESSED FRAGILE
POPULATIONS, WHICH WOULD BE
ELDERLY OR DISABLED
POPULATIONS OR NEAR A SCHOOL
OR POLICE OR EMERGENCY
LOCATION OR HOSPITAL, AND SO
THERE WERE SOME SPECIAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR THOSE
POPULATIONS.
WE FOUND THAT REDMOND,
WASHINGTON HAD SETBACKS OF
25 FEET FOR EASEMENT AND
THEY HAD UP TO 500 FEET IN
THE HIGH CONSEQUENCE AREA,
WHICH THEY DEFINED AS BEING
THOSE FRAGILE POPULATIONS,
WITH THE IDEA THAT THOSE
WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO
EVACUATE OR THEY WOULD TAKE
A LONGER TIME TO EVACUATE,
BUT THEY DID HAVE VARIANCES
BASED ON LOCATION OF THE
PIPELINE, THE TYPE OF
CONSTRUCTION AND MITIGATION
MEASURES.
AND ALSO THIS WAS JUST A
PROPOSAL.
IN FAIR FAX COUNTY WHERE
THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT AND
THEY ENACTED A PIPELINE AND
THEY STARTED OUT WITH THE
SAME LEVEL OF SETBACKS AS
RICHMOND, WASHINGTON AND
SOME OF THE OTHERS CITED,
THEY ENDED UP WITH 10-FOOT
FROM THE EASEMENT BECAUSE OF
THE INABILITY TO APPLY THE
ORDINANCE IN A UNIFORM WAY
ACROSS THE CITY.
AND SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME
EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE FOUND.
ONE THING WE DID LOOK AT AND
OUR STAFF HAD SOME
RECOMMENDATIONS AND I'LL
CALL THE CHIEF BACK UP, IS
WHAT WOULD BE MITIGATION
MEASURES THAT WOULD ADDRESS
IMPROVING SAFETY MEASURES IN
THE BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES
AROUND OR ADJACENT TO OR
CLOSE TO THE PIPELINE AS
WELL AS PROVIDING EVACUATION
PROCEDURES?
WE ALSO LOOKED IN DETAIL THE
CITY MANAGER AND MANY
MEMBERS OF THE STAFF
REVIEWED THE PIPELINE REPORT
290 -- 219.
AND WHAT WE FOUND WAS THE
FOUR MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS
IN THAT REPORT WAS THAT THE
NUMBER ONE RECOMMENDATION
WAS YOU WANT TO PREVENT
DISTURBING THE EASEMENT
WHERE THE PIPELINE IS.
SO THAT GOES TO DEPTH OF
WHERE THE PIPELINE IS BURIED
AND THE 10, 50, THE 60 FEET
IMMEDIATELY OVER THE
PIPELINE THAT MIGHT BE
DISRUPTED BECAUSE THAT WAS
WHAT WAS ONE OF THE
TRIGGERING EVENTS.
ALSO, THEY SUGGESTED THAT
YOU CUSTOMIZE THE SETBACKS
AND THE MITIGATION MEASURES
SO ALLOW FOR YOU TO ACCOUNT
FOR DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES,
LOCATIONS, THE PRODUCT IN
THE PIPELINE AND OTHER
FACTORS INSTEAD OF THE
ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL, YOU HAVE
SOMETHING THAT REALLY
ADDRESSES WHAT YOU'RE TRYING
TO ACHIEVE IN THE ORDINANCE.
THEY'RE ALSO -- THEY TALKED
ABOUT COORDINATION AND
MAPPING WHERE THE PIPELINES
ARE FOR BETTER MANAGEMENT OF
THE ISSUE AND THEY PUT IN
THERE A COMPENSATION TO
DEVELOPERS FOR TAKING OR
DEVALUING OF PROPERTY AS A
RESULT OF ANY ORDINANCES.
AND THEY ALSO INCLUDED
INFORMATION ON VARIANCES OR
SOME TYPE OF PROCESS.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS
BASED ON THE MOTTO THAT THE
FIRE CHIEF HAS BEEN USING,
SO I WANTED TO CALL HIM UP
VERY QUICK THROUGH TO AN
OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE
RECOMMENDATIONS THEY'VE BEEN
MAKING AND HOW WE
INCORPORATED THOSE IN THE
STRATUS AGREEMENT AND I'LL
GO TRACT BY TRACT HOW WE
HAVE APPLIED THOSE
STANDARDS.
ONE TO GET AT WHAT WE THINK
WILL ALLOW FOR THOSE ISSUES
TO BE ADDRESSED AND TO MAKE
SURE THAT THERE'S -- THERE'S
MEASURES THAT ARE
APPROPRIATE IN THIS
AGREEMENT.
CHIEF WARREN?
OKAY.
WHAT I HAVE IN MIND IS THAT
FOR ANY STRUCTURES THAT ARE
PROPOSED TO BE BUILT WITHIN
400 FEET OF A PIPELINE THAT
A TECHNICAL REPORT BE
SUPPLIED TO ME AT THE TIME
THAT THE SITE PLAN IS
SUBMITTED SO THAT I CAN SEE
THAT VERIFICATION HAS BEEN
MADE, THAT THE FIRE RATING
FOR THAT TYPE STRUCTURE IS
BEING MADE COME TRUE IN
ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION.
AND THAT WOULD BE IN MOST OF
THESE CASES, WOULD BE ONE
HOUR.
SO I'M ASKING FOR A ONE-HOUR
FIRE RATING FOR EACH OF THE
STRUCTURES THAT ARE GOING TO
BE BUILT WITHIN 400 FEET OF
THE PIPELINE.
AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT
THE CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND
THE MATERIALS MAY HAVE TO
CHANGE ACCORDING TO ITS
PROXIMITY TO THE PIPELINE
BECAUSE THE AMOUNT OF
RADIANT HEAT THAT'S PRODUCED
AT A FIRE CHANGES WITH
DISTANCE.
SO INSIDE THAT TECHNICAL
REPORT WOULD BE SUBMITTED TO
ME BY WHICH A PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEER WOULD PUT HIS STAMP
ON A REPORT THAT TELLS HOW
THE BUILDING WILL BE BUILT
TO PROTECT THAT ONE-HOUR
FIRE RATING FOR THE
STRUCTURE.
THE OTHER PART OF THAT WOULD
BE ALSO TO DEMONSTRATE THAT
THE OCCUPANTS OF THE
STRUCTURE WOULD BE PROTECTED
FOR ONE HOUR AS THEY
EVACUATE THE AREA.
AND IF THOSE THINGS CAN BE
PROTECTED, THEN THESE PEOPLE
WILL BE AFFORDED THE SAME
AMOUNT OF PROTECTION AS
STRUCTURES IN OTHER PARTS OF
THE CITY.
COUNCIL, WITH THAT IN
MIND, THE RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT WE ARE PUTTING FORTH IN
THE STRATUS AGREEMENT IS
THAT WITHIN 400 FEET OF ANY
PIPELINE THERE WOULD BE THE
TECHNICAL REPORT THAT GOES
TO THE CHIEF WHICH REQUIRES
THE ONE-HOUR FIRE STANDARD
IN TERMS OF BUILDING
MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES AND
THE ONE-HOUR EVACUATION
CRITERIA.
AND AS THE CHIEF EXPLAINED,
THAT WOULD ALSO ALLOW FOR
THE MAXIMUM PROTECTION WE
FEEL IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE
THAT THERE'S SAFETY.
IN TERMS OF THE LONGHORN
PIPELINE, WHICH HAS BEEN
CARVED OUT BY THE CITY IN
SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS AS
BEING A PIPELINE THAT WE
FEEL HAS MORE HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS IN IT AT THE
PRESENT TIME OR IN THE
FUTURE, I SHOULD SAY, WE
HAVE ALSO THE 400 FEET
TECHNICAL REPORT REQUIREMENT
AND WE HAVE SETBACKS UP TO
DIFFERENT AMOUNTS BASED ON
THE TYPE OF USE THAT MIGHT
BE ON A TRACT.
SO FOR TRACT 103 WE HAVE
SETBACKS UP TO 200 FEET,
WHICH WILL BE EXCEEDING WHAT
WE FOUND IN OTHER CITIES.
IN OUR CITIES WE FOUND THE
150 FEET STANDARD, SO THE
200 FEET UP-TO AMOUNT ALLOWS
US TO ADDRESS THAT SET BACK.
THAT IS ALSO THE
MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
WE WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT
THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO
WITH SOME OF THE OTHER
DEVELOPMENTS, DEVELOPMENTS
IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO
WHERE 103 IS HAVE
DEVELOPMENTS THAT WILL BE
GOING IN.
SO THIS IS A STANDARD THAT
WE THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO
BRING BACK SOME PROPOSALS
ON, BUT WE THINK THIS WOULD
ALLOW FOR MAXIMUM
PROTECTION.
IN TRACT 106 IT'S UP TO
150 FEET IS THE SETBACK
ALONG WITH THE TECHNICAL
REPORT, AND THAT IS THE
RETAIL, SO WE THINK THAT IS
APPROPRIATE.
AND IN TRACT 107, IT'S NOT
ADJACENT TO LONGHORN
PIPELINE, SO THAT WOULD JUST
HAVE THE ENGINEERING STUDY.
AND THOSE ARE ALL THE
TRACTS.
SO THAT IS THE WAY THAT
WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE.
Futrell: LISA, 102, DID I
MISS THAT?
THAT ALSO HAS THE LONGHORN
RUNNING THROUGH IT.
102 HAS A USE THAT IS
TARGETED TO BE
MINI-WAREHOUSE OR JUST
STORAGE, NO OCCUPATIONAL
USE.
AND THERE'S A 50-FOOT -- UP
TO A 50-FOOT SET BACK ON
EITHER SIDE OF THAT
PIPELINE.
THAT'S IN THE CURRENT
PROPOSAL.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL, ARE
THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT?
Futrell: I BELIEVE, LISA,
ANOTHER PIECE OF THE
PROPOSAL STATES THAT IF WE
WERE TO PASS A CITYWIDE
ORDINANCE THAT WAS LESS
RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT IS IN
THIS AGREEMENT THAT STRATUS
WOULD HAVE TO AGREE TO
COMPLY WITH WHAT IS IN THE
CONTRACT.
THAT'S CORRECT.
AND IF WE HAD SOMETHING THAT
WAS MORE RESTRICTIVE, THEN
THEY WOULD STILL LIKE TO
HAVE THE CURRENT AGREEMENT
APPLY TO THEM.
AND THE STANDARD WOULD BE
STRICTER THAN ANY STANDARD
THAT WE APPLY CITYWIDE RIGHT
NOW.
FUTURE FOUGHT AND COUNCIL,
AS --
Futrell: AND COUNCIL, AS
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE,
THE PREMISE THAT THE CHIEF
TALKED ABOUT IN ALLOWING A
MIXTURE OF BUILDING
MATERIALS, EVEN LOW JIS TA
KEL ISSUES ON THE PROPERTY
ITSELF, SUCH AS BERMS AND
FIRE WALLS, AS WELL AS
SETBACKS OF 400 FEET AROUND
ANY PIPELINE IS OUR
BEGINNING PLACE FOR BRINGING
BACK TO YOU SOME APPLICATION
CITYWIDE ON PIPELINES.
AND WE'LL BE DOING THAT VERY
QUICKLY.
OKAY.
COUNCIL, THE LAST ITEM WE
WANTED TO PROVIDE YOU WITH
AN UPDATE ON IS THE
DOWNZONING LANGUAGE.
AT THE FIRST READING AND
SECOND READING CONCERNS WERE
RAISED ABOUT THE
PROVISIONS -- THOSE
PROVISIONS AND THE EFFECTS
THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE ON THE
CITY.
SO I'M GOING TO HAVE ALLISON
GALLOWAY, OUR CITY
ATTORNEY -- ONE OF OUR CITY
ATTORNEYS COME AND ADDRESS
THAT ISSUE.
THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
CALLS FOR THE CITY TO PAY
STRATUS IN THE EVENT OF
DOWNZONING.
THAT WAS CLEARLY
UNACCEPTABLE, SO WE
NEGOTIATED FOR QUITE SOME
TIME TO COME UP WITH AN
ALTERNATIVE, AND THE
ALTERNATIVE THAT WE CAME UP
WITH IS THAT THE CITY HAS
NOW IN FRONT OF IT THE
ZONING ORDINANCES THAT WILL
PUT INTO PLACE THE ZONING
THAT IS THE BASE ZONING.
WE HAVE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE
ESSENTIALLY TEXT CHANGES OR
MAP CHANGES TO THE ZONING
ORDINANCE THAT WOULD AFFECT
A CHANGE IN USE OR A CHANGE
IN THE CHARACTERIZATION OF
THE USES.
IF THE CITY COUNCIL OVER THE
OBJECTIONS OF THE LANDOWNER
DOES IN FACT DOWNZONE OR
REZONE THE PROPERTY IN ANY
OF THESE TEXTS OR MAP
CHANGES, THEN THE TRACT THAT
IS DOWNZONED WILL COME OUT
OF THE DEAL.
TRACT 102, 104 AND 105 WILL
COME OUT OF THE DEAL AND ALL
FOUR OF THOSE TRACTS WILL BE
RESTORED TO THE STATUS THAT
THEY ARE IN TODAY BEFORE WE
SIGN THE AGREEMENTS.
AND THEY WILL BE ALLOWED TO
PURSUE DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE
LOTS AS THEY CHOOSE TO
PURSUE THEM.
Futrell: JUST ONE
CLARIFICATION.
ON 102, IS IT ISN'T THE ENTIRE
TRACT OF THAT.
IT IS THE PART BEING
CONVEYED TO THE CITY.
Futrell: THE PART THAT
FRONTS ON THE PROP 2 LAND
AND GIVES US EXTENDED ACCESS
TO THE PROP 2 TRACT THAT'S
RIGHT BEHIND IT.
DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS?
Mayor Garcia: QUESTIONS
FOR ALLISON?
THANK YOU.
MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THAT
CONCLUDES THE ISSUES THAT
YOU ADDRESSED -- ASKED US
TO -- I CAN'T TALK RIGHT
NOW.
THAT CONCLUDES THE ISSUES
THAT YOU ASKED THE STAFF TO
ADDRESS.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO US TO
CLARIFY AT THIS TIME?
Mayor Garcia: MAYOR PRO
TEM?
GOODMAN: YEAH.
PART OF WHAT I WAS LOOKING
AT EARLIER HAD TO DO WITH
THE THIRD-PARTY ENFORCEMENT
AND THE MONITORING AND
MAINTENANCE AND FEES BY
THE PROPERTY OWNERS WHICH
ARE GOING TO PAY FOR THAT.
THE SECOND LIEN CONCEPT FOR
MAKING SURE THAT IS
GUARANTEED AND ENFORCED FOR
PERPETUITY.
THE LANGUAGE, THOUGH, THAT I
SEE HERE I THINK IS ASSUMING
THAT ALL THE PARTIES,
INCLUDING THE DISTRICT, HAVE
WORKED OUT THAT AGREEMENT,
AND THAT'S NOT SO.
SO AS -- IN FACT, SOME OF
THE LANGUAGE -- WELL, WE
SHOULDN'T TELL THEM WHAT TO
BE DOING, BUT IF I WERE
THEN -- THERE WERE SOME
LANGUAGE CHANGES THAT I
WOULD ASK FOR.
SO HOW WOULD THAT ABSOLUTELY
BE GUARANTEED AS PART OF
THIS WHEN IT'S NOT YET
FINISHED?
HOW WOULD IF COME BACK?
THE CITY MANAGER IS
AUTHORIZED TO NEGOTIATE AND
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH
THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT
ALONG THE GENERAL GUIDELINES
OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE
SET OUT IN THE AGREEMENT.
WHAT THOSE DOCUMENTS DO ARE
PROVIDE A BASIC FRAMEWORK
FOR ASSESSING THE FEES TO
THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT
ASSOCIATIONS THAT WOULD
BE -- THAT WILL OWN AND BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
MAINTENANCE.
THE ASSOCIATIONS WILL THEN
CONTRACT DIRECTLY WITH THE
DISTRICT THROUGH THIS
AGREEMENT TO PERFORM ALL OF
THOSE ACTIVITIES, AND THE
DISTRICT WILL BILL ON A
QUARTERLY BASIS OR IF WE
NEED TO ADJUST THAT WE CAN
CERTAINLY DO SO.
THE VARIOUS ASSOCIATIONS
WILL LEVEE THE MONIES IN
ORDER TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
ALL THE PARTIES WILL COME
TOGETHER ONCE A YEAR TO
DETERMINE WHAT THE
MAINTENANCE PLAN WILL BE FOR
THE NEXT YEAR AND HOW MUCH
THAT WILL COST.
AND IF THERE NEEDS TO BE
ADJUSTMENTS IN SOME OF THE
LANGUAGE, THE CITY MANAGER
IS AUTHORIZED TO DO THAT
WITHIN THE BASIC FRAMEWORK
OF HOW WE SET IT OUT IN THE
AGREEMENT.
GOODMAN: I THINK
EXECUTION, THOUGH, WITHOUT
COUNCIL SEEING WHETHER THE
CONCEPTS WERE TRULY ABLE TO
BE TRANSLATED INTO THE
CHARGE THAT WOULD GO FROM
THE CITY TO THE DISTRICT
WOULD NEED TO COME BACK HERE
EVEN IF IT WAS AN AMENDMENT.
IS THERE A PROVISION FOR
AMENDMENTS?
NOT CURRENTLY AS IT'S
WRITTEN.
Futrell: ALLISON, LET'S
TALK ABOUT THAT AS A
PROBLEM-SOLVING DISCUSSION.
WE HAVE A DEFAULT PROVISION
IN THERE IF AN AGREEMENT IS
NOT REACHED.
THAT'S CORRECT.
Futrell: SO YOU COULD
ALSO BRING BACK--
WELL, THE DOCUMENT AS
IT'S WRITTEN GIVES THE
AUTHORITY TO THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
DOCUMENT.
IF WE CANNOT REACH AGREEMENT
ON THAT DOCUMENT, THEN, YES,
WE WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK
UP TO THE COUNCIL OR THE
CITY WOULD HAVE TO UNDERTAKE
THE OVERSIGHT.
THE ASSOCIATIONS WOULD STILL
BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING
THE -- THE MONITORING, THE
MAINTENANCE, ALL OF THAT.
GOODMAN: LET ME BE MORE
CLEAR ABOUT WHAT I'M TRYING
TO FIND OUT ABOUT.
THE LANGUAGE THAT'S INCLUDED
RIGHT NOW, IF I READ EVERY
WORD AND THE IMPLICATIONS
AND THE CON NOTATIONS THAT
COME WITH THE TONE OF
ANYTHING THAT'S WRITTEN, ARE
NOT TOTALLY WHAT I WAS
ASKING FOR US TO DO.
AND THE EXPECTATIONS OF WHAT
I WAS TRYING TO PUT FORWARD
FOR THE DISTRICT TO BE,
THEY'RE NOT JUSTITTLE
ENGINEERING FIRM OUT THERE
THAT WE'RE GOING TO HIRE ON
AND THEY'RE GOING TO COME
CHECK THE PONDS AND CLEAN
THEM UP.
THEY'RE GOVERNMENT AND I
THINK THAT THEY NEED TO BE
SPOKEN OF IN THAT CONTEXT.
THEY ARE OVERSIGHT AND
ADMINISTRATORS OF MAKING
SURE THAT S.O.S. WATER
QUALITY PROTECTION STANDARDS
DO NOT EVER SLIP AND THAT
THE POLLUTION, THAT THE
DESIGN OF ENGINEERING
SOLUTIONS SAYS WILL WORK
WILL ALWAYS WORK.
THAT'S NOT HOW IT SOUNDS IN
HERE.
NOW, THAT'S NOT FINISHED
BECAUSE THAT'S NOT SOMETHING
WE CAN DO HERE.
WE CAN'T DICTATE TO THE
DISTRICT HOW THEY BEST THINK
THAT THEY CAN ADMINISTER AND
IN EFFECT MONITOR.
AND I WAS ONCE TOLD THAT
THERE WAS IN FACT AN
AMENDMENT PROCESS OR A
PROVISION FOR COMING BACK AT
CERTAIN TIMES ON CERTAIN
ISSUES MUTUALLY AGREEABLE,
ESPECIALLY WHEN WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT THE PLAN
COMING TOGETHER AND
PARTICIPATING IN THE HABITAT
CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE
SALAMANDER.
Futrell: TWO THINGS ON MY
MIND, ALLISON.
SEE IF EITHER OF THOSE WORK.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO A
NEGOTIATE ONLY WITH THE
BRINGING BACK OF THAT TO
COUNCIL OR, TWO, TO INSERT
AN AMENDMENT CLAUSE THERE SO
THAT AFTER -- I DON'T KNOW.
TALK THROUGH WHICH OF THOSE
MIGHT GET TO THE MAYOR PRO
TEM'S CONCERN BECAUSE THIS
IS A CRITICAL PART OF THE
PROPOSAL ON THE WATER
QUALITY ISSUE.
WE CAN CERTAINLY BRING
THAT BACK TO COUNCIL TO
APPROVE IF THAT IS WHAT YOU
WOULD LIKE TO DO.
IT WOULD REQUIRE MAKING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE LANGUAGE IN
THAT PARTICULAR SECTION.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
WELL, TELL ME HOW WE WERE
PLANNING TO DO THE PLANNING,
THE BIG PLAN THAT EVERYBODY
WOULD LIKE TO DO FOR THE
WHOLE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE,
SINCE THAT IS WHAT AFFECTS
THE SALAMANDER.
AND THE CONSERVATION, THIS
WAS AN AMENDMENT TOO SOME
TIME AGO.
THE --
GOODMAN: CAN I FINISH?
THE DISTRICT IS GOING AFTER
THAT, THAT GRANT, AND WE
WERE GOING TO PARTICIPATE
AND OTHERS WERE GOING TO
PARTICIPATE TOO AND STRATUS
AGREED TO PARTICIPATE SO
THAT CONCEIVABLY THERE COULD
BE ISSUES THAT ARE LAID OUT
IN HERE THAT AFTER STUDY AND
NEGOTIATION AND WORKING ON
PLANS WITH OUR REGIONAL
NEIGHBORS COULD BE CHANGED.
AND I WAS TOLD THAT WOULD BE
ABLE TO COME BACK AND BE
MUTUALLY AMENDABLE AS WELL.
WE HAD NOT SET UP THE
HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY
TRUST.
THERE IS A YEAR IN ORDER TO
SET THAT TRUST UP.
THE TRUST IS THE VEHICLE FOR
FUNDING THE REGIONAL
PLANNING.
IT IS NOT THE MAINTENANCE.
THE WATER QUALITY IS
STRICTLY DEALING WITH THE
PERFORMANCE MONITORING
AND --
GOODMAN: I KNOW, AND I'M
NOT SAYING -- THOSE ARE TWO
DIFFERENT THINGS.
WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT
WITH THE HABITAT PLAN IS NOT
WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.
I THINK THAT'S A TOTALLY
DIFFERENT THING.
> WHAT WE NEED YOU TO DO IS
GIVE THE CITY MANAGER SOME
DIRECTION IN HOW TO GO
FORWARD WITH ADDING YOUR
CONCEPT INTO THE MAINTENANCE
PLAN AND THEN WE CAN
NEGOTIATE THAT AND BRING
THAT PLAN BACK TO COUNCIL,
IF THAT'S YOUR PLEASURE.
Futrell: ALLISON, HOLD
FOR JUST A SECOND BECAUSE I
THINK I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS
SECTION.
CASEY, WHERE IN THE
AGREEMENT DO WE HAVE THE
DISCUSSIONS --
I THINK WHAT THE MAYOR
PRO TEM IS REFERENCING IS
THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS IN
THE AGREEMENT THAT SAYS THAT
VARIOUS INTERESTED PARTIES
OUT THERE ARE GOING TO GET
TOGETHER TO TALK ABOUT
REGIONALLY ABOUT THINGS LIKE
RETROFIT.
AND OBVIOUSLY THE AGREEMENT
NOT ONLY ALLOWS, BUT
CONTEMPLATES THAT THOSE
DISCUSSIONS ARE GOING TO
HAPPEN, HOPEFULLY BE
FRUITFUL AND THEN COME BACK
TO THE COUNCIL FOR ACTION.
THAT IS IN HERE, MAYOR PRO
TEM, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU HAD
REFERENCE TO.
GOODMAN: AND THERE WAS
ALSO WHAT WE CALLED THE
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM,
BUT IN TERMS OF THE
SALAMANDERS, THAT WAS ONE OF
THE FIRST AMENDMENTS
RELATIVE TO THE DISTRICT
GOING AFTER THAT GRANT WITH
PARTNERS SO IT'S A MATCHING
THING.
AND STRATUS HAD AGREED TO
PARTICIPATE ACTIVELY.
WHICH MIGHT IMPLY THAT SOME
DAY THERE MIGHT BE
AMENDMENTS TO THIS AGREEMENT
MADE IN A PERFECTLY
POSITIVE, FORWARD-THINKING
WAY.
YES, MA'AM.
AND LIKE MOST CONTRACTS,
THIS ONE HAS AN AMENDMENT
CLAUSE.
GOODMAN: OH, COOL.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO
FIND OUT.
I'M SORRY, I JUST DIDN'T
QUITE GET WHERE YOU WERE
GOING.
Futrell: BUT IT SOUNDS
LIKE WE MAY HAVE STILL ONE
UNRESOLVED ISSUE.
AND THAT IS THE NEGOTIATE
AND EXECUTE WITH THE
DISTRICT.
IF THAT IS A CHANGE YOU
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, I THINK
WE COULD MAKE THAT FAIRLY
QUICKLY.
WE COULD SIMPLY SAY WE'LL
BRING BACK TO DISCUSS THAT
INTERLOCAL WITH THE DISTRICT
IF THAT MAKES YOU MORE
COMFORTABLE.
GOODMAN: OKAY.
YEAH.
THERE ARE SOME ISSUES WHERE
I THINK MAYBE WE'VE
RELEGATED THE AQUIFER
DISTRICT TO SOME SORT OF
HIRED HAND STATUS AND WE'RE
NOT REALLY GIVING THE
OVERSIGHT AND THE CONTROL
AND RESPECT THAT ANOTHER
GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE IN
THAT CONTEXT, ESPECIALLY
SINCE THEY'RE GOING TO BE
LOOKING AT WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS AND LET THE
ENGINEERS AND DESIGNERS DO
WHAT THEY SAY THEY WOULD,
WHICH IS S.O.S.
SO -- AND THEN THERE ARE
PRACTICAL ISSUES LIKE IT
LOOKS LIKE A REIMBURSAL KIND
OF SETUP.
AND IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT
SORT OF ATTITUDE TOWARD WHAT
ROLE THEY WOULD PLAY.
Futrell: I KNOW IN OUR
DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM -- AND
LISA, I KNOW YOU WERE THERE
IN THE ORIGINAL MEETINGS.
OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT OUR
INTENT.
WE SEE THEM AS AN IMPORTANT
PARTY IN THIS AGREEMENT.
I BELIEVE THERE'S A
DISCUSSION OF ACCESS TO CEF,
THEIR ABILITY TO TEST AND TO
MONITOR AS WELL AS
IMPLEMENTING THE
MAINTENANCE.
SO WE'LL WORK THROUGH THAT
AND MAKE THE CHANGE TO BRING
BACK THE AGREEMENT ONCE
EXECUTED.
I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY
WHEN WE MET WITH THE
DISTRICT THEY WERE VERY
ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT
PARTICIPATING IN THIS
PORTION OF THE AGREEMENT.
AND WE ORIGINALLY WANTED TO
GO TO THE MEETING, BUT THEY
WANTED TO HAVE MORE PUBLIC
NOTICE, SO THEY ASKED US TO
COME ON THE 15TH SO WE COULD
IRON OUT AND SET OUT STAFF
AND THE ELECTED OFFICIALS
THAT WILL PARTICIPATE WITH
US TO CRAFT AN AGREEMENT
THAT'S AGREEABLE TO THE
DISTRICT AND TO THE CITY
COUNCIL.
SO THAT WAS ALL WITH THE
INTENT -- I THINK FOR THIS
AGREEMENT WHAT WE WERE
TRYING TO DO WAS PUT JUST
THE BASIC VERY BARE BONES
FRAMEWORK THAT WE COULD SEE
AS A STARTING POINT FOR THE
DISCUSSION, JUST KIND OF THE
FIRST DRAFT OF THE THAT'S
WHAT'S THIS THERE.
WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO
INCORPORATE ANY OF THE
CLARIFYING LANGUAGE THAT YOU
FEEL THAT WE'RE MISSING AS
WELL AS HAVE THOSE DETAILED
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
DISTRICT.
SO THAT WAS ALWAYS THE
INTENT AND I THINK THE 15TH
WOULD BE THE FIRST
OPPORTUNITY TO START THAT
PROCESS.
GOODMAN: I THINK TO SOME
DEGREE THE ROLE WAS MISS
INTERPRETED AND THERE'S
ALWAYS A TERRITORIAL
DIFFICULTY AND WITH THE CITY
GIVING UP SOME CONTROL TO
ANOTHER GOVERNMENT.
[ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, FOR
CHANGE IN CAPTIONERS]
(TIME: 11:00 O'CLOCK P.M.)
THE FIRE STATION WOULD BE
BUILT WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE
THE STRATUS PROPOSAL ON THE
TABLE.
THOSE WERE ALL OF THE
ASPECTS.
(TIME: 11:02 P.M.)
Futrell: PART OF THAT HAS
BEEN LOADED INTO THE TOTAL
PACKAGE.
PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE WE
WERE AT THE TABLE TALKING,
WE WENT ON AND WORKED
THROUGH THE ISSUE ON THE
FIRE STATION SIDE.
AS YOU KNOW THAT WAS PART OF
A PRIOR ANNEXATION
AGREEMENT.
THE CRASH WAS ALREADY
ALLOCATED FOR THE FIRE
STATION AND OCCURS WITH OR
WITHOUT THIS AGREEMENT.
VICKI IS ALSO HERE, VICKI
RAN THE NUMBERS ON THE
PAY-BACK PERIODS, NET
PRESENT VALUE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S
ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANT
TO TALK ABOUT ON THE
PACKAGE.
Slusher: I WOULD RATHER
TALK MORE ABOUT WHY WE DID
THIS AND WHAT WE CAN GET FOR
IT.
Futrell: OKAY.
Slusher: ONE WAY THAT'S
BEEN CHARACTERIZED BROADLY
IS THAT THE CITY IS
SUBSIDIZING GROWTH, IS
GIVING INCENTIVES TO MAKE
DEVELOPMENT POSSIBLE OR TO
HELP DEVELOPMENT HAPPEN OVER
THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE.
ACTUALLY THE OPPOSITE IS
TRUE.
SO I WOULD LIKE YOU TO GO
INTO A LITTLE DETAIL ON
THAT.
[ LAUGHTER ]
REALLY, IT'S JUST THAT
SIMPLE.
WHEN THE ORIGINAL GROUPS
WERE COMING TOGETHER,
TALKING ABOUT -- THIS WAS
ACTUALLY PRIOR TO CITY
INVOLVEMENT, WE WERE TALKING
ABOUT WORKING OUT A
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH
STRATUS.
THE CONCEPT WAS A BUYDOWN OF
DENSITY.
AT THAT TIME THAT GROUP
PROPOSED A -- A $10 MILLION
CASH BUYDOWN.
AND I THINK THE HOPE WAS
THAT THE CITY
HAD $10 MILLION CASH.
THAT WAS PART OF WHAT WENT
AWRY IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS IS
BECAUSE WE AREN'T IN A CASH
SITUATION, SO WHEN WE GOT
INVOLVED AND STARTED TRYING
TO FIND ANOTHER WAY TO DO A
DENSITY BUYDOWN.
SO WHAT THIS PROPOSAL HAD
IS -- HAS IS NOT CASH ON THE
TABLE.
WE ALL KNOW IT STILL EQUATES
TO REVENUE TO THE CITY, BUT
IT DOESN'T REQUIRE THE CITY
TO HAVE A POT OF CASH
BECAUSE IT'S SPREAD OUT OVER
A DEVELOPMENT PERIOD OF
TIME.
IT IS FOREGONE REVENUE, IT'S
NOT ALREADY IN THE COFFERS,
NOT ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR OR
TAKEN FROM ONE AREA OR THE
OTHER.
THE INFRASTRUCTURE
INVESTMENTS ARE ACTUALLY
SOMETHING THAT WE TYPICALLY
PARTICIPATE IN WITH THE
DEVELOPER.
IT'S NOT OUTSIDE OF YOUR
NORMAL PRACTICE.
BUT IT IS ALSO LOADED IN TO
THIS PACKAGE.
AND -- AND THE DIFFERENCE
IS -- IS GOING TO ALWAYS BE
HOW SOMEONE IS LOOKING AT
IT.
THE HOPE WAS THAT FROM THE
FISH CONSULTATION LEVELS OF
DEVELOPMENT, THAT WE COULD
CUT 50% OR GREATER OF THE
DENSITY WITH THIS PACKAGE.
THAT'S THE -- THE BROAD VIEW
OF IT.
I DON'T KNOW CASEY OR LISA
IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE DETAIL
THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD.
Slusher: LET ME FOLLOW ON
THAT, THOUGH, MS. FUTRELL.
UNDER THE PLAN APPROVED BY
THE FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE, WHICH IS AT S.O.S.
LEVELS OF DEVELOPMENT, AT
S.O.S. IMPERVIOUS COVER,
THE -- THE -- THE FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE APPROVED
2.1 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF
OFFICE AND RETAIL.
AND THAT'S WHEN YOU WERE
ASKED TO COME INTO THE
PROCESS, RIGHT?
Futrell: YES, AFTER
FISH -- THE CITY WAS VERY
CLEAR THAT WE WEREN'T GOING
TO BE AN ACTIVE -- IN ACTIVE
DISCUSSIONS ON THIS UNTIL
AFTER THEY HAD FINISHED WITH
THEIR FISH CONSULTATION.
Slusher: THAT HAD
2.1 MILLION.
THAT'S 1.8 OF OFFICE, 3 --
1.8 MILLION AND 310,000 OF
RETAIL.
AND SO THEN YOU PUT THE
BUYDOWN PACKAGE ON THE TABLE
AND NOW WE ARE DOWN TO
750,000 SQUARE FEET OF
OFFICE, COMPARED TO
1.8 MILLION APPROVED BY
FISH.
AND 250,000 OF RETAIL
COMPARED TO 310,000 APPROVED
BY FISH.
Futrell: I THINK THAT
LISA HAS FOUND AN ORIGINAL
CHART WHERE WE WERE --
REMEMBER WE WERE NOT
STARTING FROM THEIR 245
CLAIMS.
WE STARTED FROM THEIR FISH
CONSULTATION, WHICH HAD
ALREADY KNOCKED IT DOWN
FAIRLY DRAMATICALLY.
AND BEGAN THE BUY-DOWN FROM
THAT NUMBER.
Slusher: RIGHT, THE MUDD
LAND USE PLAN AND FINAL
PLATTING TOTALS 9.7 MILLION
SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE
RETAIL.
Futrell: I'M GOING TO
LOOK TO MAKE SURE WE'RE --
LISA MAYBE GRAB THE
MICROPHONE.
Slusher: LET ME TRY
SOMETHING ELSE BECAUSE WE
HAVE ALSO HEARD WHY DON'T
THE CITY TAKE THAT MONEY AND
BUY SOME OF THE LAND.
BUT, ONE, THE CITY DOESN'T
HAVE THAT MONEY --
[ APPLAUSE ] --
Slusher: YOU HEAR WHAT I
SAID?
THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE THAT
MONEY.
Futrell: THIS IS A PAYOUT
OVER A LONG PERIOD.
AUDIENCE: [ YELLING ]
Mayor Garcia: Y'ALL
PLEASE WOULD ALLOW THE
COUNCILMEMBER TO HAVE THE
DISCUSSION.
HE ALLOWED YOU TO SPEAK,
PLEASE EXTEND HIM THE SAME
COURTESY THAT HE EXTENDS
YOU.
AUDIENCE [ LAUGHTER ]
Mayor Garcia: LET ME TELL
YOU THIS.
IF WE CANNOT HAVE SILENCE IN
THIS ROOM, I WILL ASK THAT
IT BE CLEARED SO THAT THE
DISCUSSION CAN CONTINUE.
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?
Slusher: WELL, LET ME
REPEAT WHAT I SAID THEN.
WE HAD 9.7 MILLION OFFICE
AND RETAIL UNDER THE MUDD
LAND USE PLAN AND WHAT HAD
BEEN FINAL PLATTED IN THIS
AREA.
THE CITY TOLD STRATUS WE ARE
NOT GOING TO TALK TO YOU
UNLESS YOU COME IN WITH
S.O.S. OR BETTER THAN S.O.S.
LEVELS OF DEVELOPMENT.
SO THEY WENT TO FISH AND
FISH CUT THAT 9.7 DOWN TO
2.1.
AND I MIGHT ADD THAT STRATUS
DIDN'T GO IN THERE AND ASK
FOR THE 9.7, BUT THEY CAME
OUT WITH 2.1 MILLION SQUARE
FEET.
THE CITY AND THE
ENVIRONMENTAL STAKEHOLDERS
SAID THAT'S STILL TOO MUCH.
EVEN THOUGH IT WAS AT WHAT
S.O.S. WOULD ALLOW, I
SUPPOSE YOU CAN GET IT TRACK
BY TRACK OR CLUSTERING.
BUT THE CITY GOT THAT CUT
DOWN TO MORE THAN HALF
THROUGH THIS BUY-DOWN
PACKAGE.
THAT'S NOT MONEY THE CITY
COULD HAVE JUST HAND -- USED
TO BUY LAND.
THAT IS -- THAT IS WAIVED
FEES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
INVESTMENTS THAT WILL LATER
GET BACK THE MONEY ON.
Futrell: THAT'S RIGHT.
BUT EVEN MORE IMPORTANT IS,
IT'S THAT IT'S OVER TIME.
SO IT'S -- IT HAS A MUCH
LESS VALUE IN CURRENT
DOLLARS AND THE REASON IT
ISN'T AVAILABLE TO JUST
PURCHASE LAND IS IT IS
FUTURE FOREGONE REVENUE.
IT WAS JUST A WAY TO TRY TO
FIND A PACKAGE THAT COULD
BUY DOWN DENSITY.
IT'S NOT CASH.
Slusher: IT'S ACTUALLY
CAUSING THERE TO BE LESS
DEVELOPMENT, NOT MORE.
Futrell: LESS THAN WOULD
BE ALLOWED UNDER THE FISH
CONSULTATION AGREEMENT,
THAT'S RIGHT, BY ABOUT 50%
LESS.
Slusher: MS. GORDON --
Futrell: I THINK SHE WAS
GOING TO SHOW YOU THE CHART
ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT SHOWS
YOU THE --
SHOW YOU THE GRAPHS.
GIVES YOU A VISUAL OF WHAT
YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IN
TERMS OF REDUCTIONS.
THIS IS THE LAND USE OF
OFFICE OF 8 MILLION, THEN
THIS IS THE PROPOSED
AGREEMENT, WITH 750,000.
RETAIL IS 1.6, 1.7 MILLION.
THIS IS 250.
ON THE GRAPH YOU CAN REALLY
SEE THE DIFFERENCE.
THEN ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE,
WE TAKE THE S.O.S., WHICH
LIKE -- LIKE COUNCILMEMBER
SAID WOULD BE TRACK BY TRACK
S.O.S. OR WITH THE
CLUSTERING, EITHER WAY WE
ARE STILL TALKING ABOUT TWO
MILLION SQUARE FEET VERSUS
750,000 SQUARE FEET AND THEN
310,000 SQUARE FEET VERSUS
THE 250.
AND THAT WAS WHAT WE USED
THE REVENUES OR THE FOREGONE
REVENUES TO BUY.
YOU ARE RIGHT, THERE'S NOT
CASH TODAY IN THE DOOR.
THIS WOULD BE OVER 10 TO 20
YEARS, WHEN YOU WOULD GET TO
THE FINAL BUILDOUT.
Futrell: IT ALSO WASN'T A
ONE TO ONE CASH VOLUME FOR
THE BUY-DOWN OF THE DENSITY.
WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT
BEFORE, BUT WE DID AN
EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF WORK ON
THEIR APPRAISALS AND THEIR
ESTIMATES AND DID A
REDUCTION BASED ON RISK AND
TIME AND MARKET FACTORS.
IT'S -- IT'S NOT QUITE HALF
OF THE VALUES.
IT'S A -- THAT WE COULD
SUBSTANTIATE BY THEIR
APPRAISALS.
Slusher: OKAY.
THAT'S WHAT'S SHOWED
MS. GORDON, THAT'S WITH THE
15 MILLION OVER 10 TO 20
YEARS, THEN THE EXTRA
1.4 MILLION SOME FOLKS HAVE
BEEN ADDING IN AND SAYING IS
PART OF THE BUY-DOWN
PACKAGE, THAT'S ACTUALLY
1.4 MILLION FOR A FIRE
STATION THAT WOULD BE BUILT,
WHETHER OR NOT THIS
AGREEMENT IS APPROVED AND
WOULD -- SINCE WE ANNEXED
THE AREA, WE PROVIDE
SERVICES AND THAT WOULD
PROVIDE FIRE SERVICE TO THE
PEOPLE IN THE AREA, FIRE
PROTECTION TO THE PEOPLE IN
THE AREA.
THAT'S CORRECT.
WHEN WE HAVE ANNEX, WE ARE
REQUIRED BY STATE LAW TO
COMPLETE A SERVICE DELIVERY
PLAN AND THE SERVICE HAS TO
BE EQUAL TO WHAT WE PROVIDE
IN OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY.
SO THE FIRE STATION WOULD BE
WARRANTED ONCE WE ANNEX THIS
AREA, SO THAT HAS ALREADY
BEEN INCLUDED IN THE CITY'S
MODEL.
IT NOT AN ADDITIONAL
1.4 MILLION.
IT'S A COST THAT WE WILL
INCUR INDEPENDENT OF THE
STRATUS PROPOSAL.
Slusher: OKAY.
I WILL YIELD FOR NOW, MAYOR.
AUDIENCE: YOU CAN BUY
LAND OVER TIME, TOO.
AUDIENCE: YEAH!
Mayor Garcia: MY OTHER
QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
OKAY.
COUNCIL -- COUNCIL IS THERE
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION THAT
YOU ALL -- THAT YOU ALL WANT
TO HAVE WITH THE STAFF?
IF NOT, WE HAVE ON THE
ACTION THE FOLLOWING
OPTIONS: WE CAN TAKE ALL OF
THE ITEMS AT ONCE, TO BE
EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST 15th,
THE YEAR 2002.
OR WE CAN APPROVE THE
SETTLEMENT ORDINANCE NUMBER
15, 18, 19 ON THIRD READING
TO BE EFFECTIVE AUGUST 15th.
APPROVE THE SETTLEMENT
RESOLUTION ITEMS NUMBER 16,
17, 20 AND 21.
SO -- THE RESOLUTIONS.
AND THIRD APPROVING THE
ZONING, STRATUS ZONING ITEMS
22 THROUGH 36 ON THIRD
READING.
AND THAT ORDINANCE TO BE
EFFECTIVE AUGUST 15th, 2002.
SO -- SO AT THIS TIME, I'M
GOING TO ASK IF WE CAN --
PROBABLY WE -- WE MIGHT BE
BETTER TO VOTE ON THEM
SEPARATELY.
UNLESS THERE'S A MOTION TO
VOTE ON ALL ITEMS TOGETHER.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION
EITHER WAY.
WYNN: MAYOR, IT'S GOING
TO TAKE THE SAME NUMBER OF
VOTES ON -- I DON'T SEE THE
RATIONALE FOR TAKING THEM
SEPARATELY.
IT'S ALL -- IT'S ALL
EFFECTIVE AUGUST 15th.
Mayor Garcia: EXCEPT FOR
THE RESOLUTIONS, THEY --
THEY THE RECOMMENDATIONS
NEED SIX VOTES, THE
ORDINANCES.
THE ORDINANCES FOR THE
ZONING, MS. JEFFERSON THE
ORDINANCE FOR THE ZONING, DO
THEY REQUIRE SIX VOTES?
SINCE THEY ARE ON THIRD
READING, THEY WOULD ONLY
REQUIRE A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
HOWEVER, SINCE THEY ARE SO
TIED TO ITEM NO. 15, THE
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, MY RECOMMENDATION
WOULD BE TO -- TO HANDLE
THEM ALL AS A BLOCK.
WYNN: WITH THAT IN MIND I
MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE TAKE
UP ALL STRATUS ITEMS AND
APPROVE ITEMS 15 TO 36 TO BE
EFFECTIVE AUGUST 15th, 2002.
Mayor Garcia:, OKAY,
MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN.
IS THERE A SECOND?
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
DUNKERLY?
DISCUSSION?
Slusher: MAYOR, I HAVE A
QUESTION FOR MR. BRENNER.
AUDIENCE OH!
Slusher: I WOULD RATHER
NOT GIVE UP THE FLOOR RIGHT
NOW --
Mayor Garcia: LET ME SEE
IF COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER CAN
FINISH HIS QUESTIONS, THEN
WE WILL GO TO THE MAYOR PRO
TEM.
Slusher: OKAY.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.
Slusher: DO YOU WANT TO
STATE YOUR NAME.
I'M STEVE BRENNER AND I
REPRESENT STRATUS
PROPERTIES.
AUDIENCE: OH!
Slusher: I THINK YOU
PROBABLY -- SENT OUT A
LETTER YESTERDAY TALKING
ABOUT A PLAN THAT I SUGGEST
WHERE THE COMMUNITY SHOULD
GET TOGETHER AND PURCHASE
SOME PROPERTY FROM STRATUS.
SINCE THE CITY DOESN'T AT
THIS POINT HAVE THE MONEY
AND I WOULD PREFER NOT TO
SEE THE OFFICE TRACT
DEVELOPED AT LEAST TO THE
LEVEL THAT IT IS.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU
WOULD BE INTERESTED, IF
STRATUS WOULD BE WILLING TO
NEGOTIATE A RIGHT OF FIRST
REFUSAL WITH THE CITY ON
TRACT 110.
YES, SIR.
WE HAD -- WE HAD TALKED
ABOUT THE FACT THAT -- THAT
WE WOULD HAVE THAT INTEREST.
AND THAT FOLLOWING THIS --
HOPEFULLY FOLLOWING THIS
AGREEMENT, THAT WE WOULD BE
HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND TALK
TO YOU ABOUT THAT.
Slusher: OKAY.
THAT'S NOT AMONG THE FIRST
TRACTS THAT YOU ALL PLAN TO
DEVELOP, IS IT?
NO, SIR.
OKAY.
AND IF THERE WERE MONEY TO
BUY IT EVEN OUTSIDE OF THE
RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL,
WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO
ENTERTAIN THAT?
YES, SIR, WE'VE HAD THAT
DISCUSSION.
THE A FAIR PRICE.
YES, SIR.
Slusher: OKAY.
AUDIENCE: FAIR TO WHO?
Slusher: THANK YOU, SIR?
Mayor Garcia: -- EXCUSE
ME, JUST A SECOND.
CITY MANAGER WANTED TO SPEAK
ON THE ISSUE OF GREEN
BUILDER.
Futrell: I JUST WANTED TO
BE SURE THAT THIS WAS IN THE
RECORD.
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER ASKED
ME AND I THOUGHT WE HAD SAID
IT EARLIER, BUT I JUST WANT
TO BE SURE.
WE DID MAKE A REVISION
THAT -- THAT WAS SOMETHING
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER'S
OFFICE HAD ASKED US ABOUT.
IT HAS TO DO WITH THE CITY
TAKING A MORE ACTIVE
ENFORCEMENT ROLE OR
CERTIFICATION ROLE ON THE
GREEN BUILDERS STANDARDS.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE
THAT THAT WAS ON THE RECORD
THAT THAT LANGUAGE HAS BEEN
CHANGED.
Mayor Garcia: MAYOR PRO
TEM?
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER ARE
YOU THROUGH WITH THE
QUESTIONS?
Slusher: MAYOR, YES, SIR,
ALSO THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THE
AGREEMENT, I WOULD HOPE THAT
WE CAN HAVE A TASK FORCE OR
ADVISORY COMMITTEE, RATHER,
TO PERIODICALLY LOOK AT
THE -- TO RECONCILE THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE GREEN
BUILDING MEASURES AND THE
CITY CODE.
SOMETIMES THEY CONFLICT.
Futrell: THAT'S VERY
TRUE, PROBABLY LONG OVERDUE,
YES, WE WILL FOLLOW-UP ON
THAT.
COUNCILMEMBER, YOU HAD ALSO
EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN
THE -- IN THE TRUST, THE
HILL COUNTRY CONSERVANCY
TRUST LAND PURCHASE.
POTENTIALLY -- WE HAVE FIVE
MEMBERS OF IT, OF
POTENTIALLY CHANGING WHERE
THE CITY HAS TWO
REPRESENTATIVES.
ARE YOU STILL INTERESTED IN
US MAKING THAT ADJUSTMENT?
Slusher: THAT'S A --
THAT'S A TOUGH ONE, MAYOR
PRO TEM.
BUT I THINK SINCE THE WILD
FLOWER CENTER HAS BEEN SO
INVOLVED IN THE AGREEMENT,
THAT I WOULD MOVE TO ADD
THEM AND TAKE ONE OF THE
CITY REPRESENTATIVES OFF.
Futrell: OKAY.
Mayor Garcia: THAT WAS
THE CITY MANAGER.
MAYOR PRO TEM?
GOODMAN: ACTUALLY, BEFORE
I GIVE MY CASE A TURN, THE
AMENDMENT TO BRING THE
AGREEMENT BACK FROM THE
DISTRICT NEEDS TO BE AMENDED
IN.
SO I GUESS THAT'S TWO DIRECT
THE CITY MANAGER TO BRING
THE AGREEMENT WITH BARTON
SPRINGS, EDWARD'S AQUIFER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT OF
ADMINISTRATATION AND -- WHAT
WAS THE LANGUAGE I USED?
ADMINISTRATION, OVERSIGHT
AND ENFORCEMENT OF -- OF --
OF INSPECTION, MONITORING,
MAINTENANCE, REPAIR,
REMEDIATION, OR REDESIGN.
THAT SHOULD DO IT.
WE WILL STRIVE TO EXECUTE
AND WE WILL NEGOTIATE AND WE
WILL BRING BACK FOR YOU THAT
AGREEMENT SO THAT YOU CAN
ALL TAKE A LOOK AT IT BEFORE
ITS EXECUTED.
GOODMAN: WOULD THAT BE A
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN IS THAT A
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?
WYNN: YES, SIR.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY, IS
THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?
[INAUDIBLE]
Mayor Garcia: OKAY.
MAYOR PRO TEM?
GOODMAN: ALONG THOSE
LINES, THERE WAS ALSO THE
GOVERNANCE, SPEAKING OF, THE
DISTRICT HAD A --
YES.
THE WAY THE MEMBERSHIP WOULD
NOW WORK ON THE LAND
PURCHASE CONSERVANCY IS, I
BELIEVE, WE WOULD HAVE ONE
CITY PERSON, ONE PERSON FROM
THE DISTRICT, ONE PERSON
FROM HILL COUNTRY
CONSERVANCY, WHO AM I
MISSING HERE, ONE FROM
WILD
FLOWER.
I'M MISSING ONE PERSON
SOMEWHERE.
WHAT'S OUR FIFTH.
ONE FROM STRATUS.
Futrell: ONE FROM THE
STRATUS SIDE, COLLECTING ON
THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT,
PUTTING IT INTO THIS TRUST
FOR LAND PURPOSE, EDUCATION
AND ALSO FOR PART OF THE
REGIONAL PLAN WHEN WE
DISCUSSED BEFORE.
GOODMAN: NOW, I DID REFER
TO MR. [INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE
LIKE I SAID HE WAS THE ONE
WHO STARTED TRYING TO GATHER
TOGETHER WHAT THE VARIOUS
OPTIONS WERE FOR PROTECTION
AND WHAT OTHERS HAD DONE IN
THE COUNTRY RELATIVE TO
PIPELINE SAFETY.
ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU WERE IN
THE -- IN THE OPPORTUNITY
OF -- OF NEW DEVELOPMENT
RATHER THAN IN EXISTING
NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE,
WELL, WE ARE GETTING FEET --
WHEN YOU SAID FOOT, FEET,
50 FEET, 60 FEET, A THOUSAND
FEET, A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE
ASSUMING THAT ANY ONE OF
THOSE QUOTES WAS A SETBACK.
AND SO -- SO DOING A LOT OF
RESEARCH TO FIGURE IT OUT
AND REFERRING TO YOUR E-MAIL
THAT CLARIFIED WHAT YOU
RELATED.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE
SURE BECAUSE I WASN'T HERE
IN THE ROOM.
THERE WAS MISINTERPRETATION
OF THAT AGREEMENT AS WELL.
TYPICALLY THE ACTUAL
SETBACKS ARE VERY SMALL.
50'S 75, 100 FEET TOPS
BECAUSE YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT NO DEVELOPMENT
WHATSOEVER IN THERE.
WHAT PEOPLE ARE TALKING
ABOUT NOW IS MUCH MORE
SIMILAR TO WHAT REDMOND
WASHINGTON IS ABOUT TO DO.
THEY ARE AT THE END OF THEIR
PUBLIC PROCESS, THIS HAS
GONE ON FOR MONTHS ABOUT
THIS.
THE ONLY MISTAKE THAT I CAN
FIND THAT I MADE WAS I
MISINTERPRETED MULTI-FAMILY
HOUSING IN THAT ONE WHERE IT
SAYS MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING OR
FACILITIES THAT EXCLUSIVELY
GO WAS -- DID THAT MEAN
MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING OR
MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING THAT
WAS FOR EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE
ELDERLY OR HANDICAPPED.
I CALLED THEM, THAT WAS THE
CASE.
THEY SAID THEY HAVE ALSO
LOOKED AT THEM, INCLUDING
MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING
ESPECIALLY IF IT'S OVER A
CERTAIN AMOUNT OF STORIES.
I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK
THAT'S A REASON NOT TO DO IT
BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE HAS.
NO UNELSE HAD DONE THE
S.O.S. ORDINANCE AS WE HAD
WHEN WE HAD DONE IT.
SO I DON'T THINK -- NOT
EVERY COMMUNITY HAS A
CONVERTED USE GASOLINE
PIPELINE MOVING THROUGH
HEAVILY POPULATED AREAS.
AND THAT'S FOR SURE.
I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH
THE FIRE CHIEF, HIS
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT, WHAT I'M
TALKING ABOUT IS VERY
DIFFERENT.
I'M REALLY TALKING ABOUT
LAND USE PLANNING.
WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT IS
IF WE BUILD A STRUCTURE,
WHAT WOULD WE DO?
I'M SUGGESTING THAT THE BEST
WAY TO PREVENTS AN ACCIDENT
IS NOT TO BUILD THAT SORT OF
STRUCTURE AT ALL.
[ CHEERING ]
IT'S A VERY BIG
DIFFERENCE.
I HAVE COLLECTED A LARGE
AMOUNT OF DATA THAT SHOWS
THAT CONCENTRATIONS OF
PEOPLE IN THAT VICINITY OF A
PIPELINE, 150 FEET ARE IN
DANGER.
I ALSO TALKED TO THE FIRE
CHIEF ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY
OF TENANTS NOT KNOWING
THAT -- THAT -- WHAT TO DO
IN THE EVENT OF A PIPELINE
RUPTURE.
AS MOST OF YOU ALL KNOW THEY
ARE NOT NOTIFIED BY THE
PIPELINE COMPANIES.
THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY
ARE.
IN REDMOND WASHINGTON THEY
WROTE IT IN THE LAW,
EDUCATION PROGRAMS.
YOU ALL WEREN'T PUTTING THAT
IN STRATUS.
THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE
TO DO THAT.
YOU ARE ABOUT TO GRANDFATHER
THEM OUT OF HEALTH AND
SAFETY REGULATIONS NEXT TO A
PIPELINE.
AFTER LOOKING AT IT FOR ONLY
DAYS.
[ CHEERING ] I'M ONE GUY.
YOU ALL HAVE THE POWER OF
THE ENTIRE CITY.
[ CHEERING ] [ APPLAUSE ] SO
THAT'S -- THAT'S WHAT I HAVE
A PROBLEM WITH RIGHT NOW IS
THAT WE ARE ABOUT TO SET
THIS INTO STONE AND WE ARE
ABOUT TO GRANDFATHER THEM,
WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE
TO GO BACK AND CHANGE IT.
I'M NOT SURE THAT YOU ALL
HAVE LOOKED AT IT FULLY.
I CAN BARELY LOOK AT IT
FULLY, I'M JUST ONE PERSON,
THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE TO
SAY.
[ CHEERING ]
Mayor Garcia: MAYOR PRO
TEM, BACK TO YOU.
ANYTHING ELSE?
GOODMAN: WELL, I KNOW
THAT WE HAVEN'T LAID
EVERYTHING OUT.
ALTHOUGH FOLKS HERE IN THIS
ROOM AT THIS TIME HAVE MADE
THEIR DECISION, THEY KNOW
WHO THEY TRUST AND THEY ARE
FOLLOWING THAT POSITION AND
THE THINGS THAT WE LAY OUT
THAT ARE FACTS THAT WE WANT
TO -- TO SHOW PEOPLE AS
COMPARABLES SO THAT THEY CAN
UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE
DECIDING WHICH IS THE VERY
BEST WAY TO PROTECT THE MOST
OF THE AQUIFER LAND THAT WE
CAN POSSIBLY DO WITH ALL OF
OUR AUTHORITY.
AUDIENCE: LET THE --
GOODMAN: IT'S MY TURN TO
TALK, PLEASE.
Mayor Garcia: LET ME SAY
THAT -- LET ME SAY THAT YOU
ALL HAVE -- YOU ALL HAD THE
CHANCE TO SPEAK.
THE MAYOR PRO TEM IS
SPEAKING, I WOULD APPRECIATE
IT IF YOU LET HER SPEAK,
PLEASE!
OR I'LL CLEAR THIS ROOM.
AUDIENCE [ YELLING ]
GOODMAN: WELL, I DIDN'T.
THERE ARE PEOPLE AT HOME
ACTUALLY WHO ARE INTERESTED
IN THE INFORMATION THAT WE
ARE TRYING TO GET OUT TO
THEM AND THAT WE HAVE SHOWED
THEM.
AUDIENCE: PEOPLE WHO
WANT TO --
YES.
COUNCILMEMBERS, WE DID HAVE
A LOT OF GOOD INFORMATION
OUT AND THERE WERE A LOT OF
PEOPLE WHO TOLD ME THAT THEY
WERE GOING TO SIT HOME AND
CATCH HOWEVER LONG IT TOOK
TO GET TO THIS ITEM SO THAT
THEY COULD SEE THAT
INFORMATION.
AND THEY ARE LISTENING AND
THERE ARE OTHERS THAT THEY
TRUST AS WELL AND THEY
WANTED TO HEAR WHAT THOSE
OTHERS HAD TO SAY AS WELL.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MAYOR PRO TEM, FURTHER
COMMENTS, QUESTIONS?
THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN, SECONDED
BY COUNCILMEMBER DUNKERLY,
HAS BEEN AMENDED AND THE
AMENDMENT HAS BEEN FRIENDLY.
Alvarez: MAYOR?
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ?
Alvarez: I DID WANT TO --
TO EXPAND ON SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT I HAVE BEEN
DISCUSSING OVER THE LAST
SEVERAL WEEKS, I GUESS, THAT
WE HAVE BEEN CONSIDERING
THIS ITEM.
AND -- AND YOU KNOW IT HAS
BEEN A VERY -- A VERY
EMOTIONAL ISSUE FOR SURE.
AND -- AND BECAUSE IT'S SUCH
A -- BECAUSE OF THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE ISSUES
INVOLVED AND -- AND I
CERTAINLY DON'T CONSIDER
MYSELF ANY GREATER OF AN
ENVIRONMENTALIST THAN ANY
FOLKS ON THIS COUNCIL.
AND IN FACT I LOOK TO YOU
KNOW, ESPECIALLY THE FOLKS
RIGHT TO MY RIGHT AND LEFT A
LOT FOR GUIDANCE ON A LOT OF
THE ISSUES PERTAINING TO
BARTON SPRINGS AND THE
AQUIFER.
SO I THINK -- I CERTAINLY
DON'T QUESTION THEIR
INTEGRITY OR THEIR MINUTE TO
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT.
-- THEIR COMMITMENT TO
PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT.
MOST OF THE ISSUES THAT WE
TRY TO -- OR THAT WE HAVE TO
CONSIDER HERE, IT'S ALL
ABOUT WEIGHING THE RISKS
INVOLVED AND, YOU KNOW,
WHETHER IT'S IN THIS CASE UM
RISKS OF -- THE DIFFERENT
SCENARIOS WITH THE DIFFERENT
RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
IMPACTS ON THE SPRINGS, THE
DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT
PATTERNS THAT COULD UNFOLD,
DIFFERENT LEGAL WAYS THAT --
OF DEALING -- WITH THESE
PARTICULAR ISSUES AT HAND
AND THE DIFFERENT -- AND
THEN, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW,
WHAT THE -- WHAT THE RISKS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE
DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO --
TO ACHIEVING THE GOAL, I
THINK, THAT WE ALL
ULTIMATELY AGREED TO IS THAT
WE NEED TO PROTECT WATER
QUALITY, WE NEED TO PROTECT
BARTON SPRINGS.
I THINK THAT'S ULTIMATELY
WHAT EVERYONE HERE IS TRYING
TO ACHIEVE.
I DO WANT TO COMMEND
EVERYBODY FOR THEIR HARD
WORK.
LIKE I SAID THE STAFF AND --
THE FOLKS AT STRATUS, THE
PUBLIC THAT'S BEEN INVOLVED
AND ALL OF THE
COUNCILMEMBERS THAT HAVE PUT
A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT AND
STAFF I KNOW HAS SPENT MANY
NIGHTS WITH VERY LITTLE
SLEEP DISCUSSING AND
FLESHING OUT THESE ISSUES.
AND BASICALLY THERE'S A
COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS I
THINK THAT WE CAN GET BOGGED
DOWN IN THE SPECIFICS OF
WHAT ARE WE GETTING OUT OF
THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE HERE
AND DETAILS ABOUT THE 20 OR
30 THINGS THAT -- YOU KNOW,
THAT WE ARE ACHIEVING AS A
RESULT OF THAT.
BUT I THINK FOR ME AND I DID
DISCUSS THIS A LITTLE BIT IS
SOME OF IT BECOMES DOWN TO
MORE PHILOSOPHICAL KINDS OF
ISSUES AND -- AND YOU KNOW I
TALKED ABOUT -- ABOUT THE
WHOLE NOTION OF WHETHER WE
SHOULD BE PROVIDING
INCENTIVES IN THE DRINKING
WATER PROTECTION ZONE,
GRANTED THAT IN THIS
PARTICULAR CASE THEY ARE
BEING USED TO BUY-DOWN SOME
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS THAT ARE
BEING CLAIMED.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, IF WE
ARE GOING TO PROVIDE
INCENTIVES FOR DIFFERENT
THINGS, WHETHER IT'S HOUSING
OR DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT,
THEN CERTAINLY ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION IS ONE OF THOSE.
ONE OF THE -- ANOTHER ISSUE
THAT I DISCUSSED WITH MANY
PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY IS
ABOUT THE -- ABOUT THE ISSUE
OF -- OF PAYING FOR
INFRASTRUCTURE OVER -- IN
THE DRINKING WATER
PROTECTION ZONE AND THAT
FROM MY POINT OF VIEW IT'S
JUST SOMETHING THAT I CAN'T
REALLY SUPPORT IN CONCEPT.
[ CHEERING ]
Alvarez: ANYWAY, PLEASE
LET ME FINISH, BECAUSE I'M
JUST TRYING TO COMMUNICATE
TO MY COLLEAGUES AS MUCH AS
TO EVERYBODY HERE AND AT
HOME ABOUT MY POSITION
BECAUSE I THINK IT JUST REAL
EASY FOR FOLKS TO THINK THAT
YOU JUST PLAYING TO THE
CROWD OR GRAND STANDING AND
REALLY I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT I GUESS TO
CONSIDER ALL OF THESE
DIFFERENT THINGS BECAUSE YOU
CAN GET BOGGED DOWN IN ALL
OF THE DETAILS AND THERE'S
SOME -- THESE KIND OF ISSUES
THAT FOR ME ARE VERY
IMPORTANT AND DEAR TO MY
HEART AND THAT I FEEL VERY
STRONGLY ABOUT.
AND -- AND SO I THINK THE
INFRASTRUCTURE QUESTION IS
ONE OF THOSE IS THAT, YOU
KNOW, SHOULD WE BE HELPING
TO FINANCE THAT OR NOT.
OTHER ISSUES ARE JUST
ABOUT -- ABOUT HOW DO WE
ENSURE THAT WE GET THE
OUTCOME THAT WE WANT.
I KNOW THE OUTCOME AS WE
HAVE DEFINED IT HERE TO A
CERTAIN DEGREE IS -- IS HOW
MUCH OF THE -- OF THE
DEVELOPMENT, THE -- HAS THE
CLAIMS, THAT STRATUS ARE
MAKING, THE DEVELOPMENT
CLAIMS, GRANDFATHERED
CLAIMS, HOW MUCH WE ARE ABLE
TO MITIGATE THAT THROUGH OUR
INCENTIVE PACKAGE.
BUT I MEAN I THINK, LIKE I
MENTIONED, THE OTHER
OUTCOMES ARE DO WE KNOW WHAT
THE OUTCOME IS GOING TO BE
IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION, IN TERMS OF
TRAFFIC.
AND I THINK THOSE ARE MUCH
HARDER QUESTIONS.
I MEAN, IT'S REALLY HARD TO
TELL WHETHER -- YOU KNOW,
WHETHER THROUGH THE
INCENTIVE PACKAGE, YOU KNOW,
WHAT ULTIMATELY THE OUTCOME
MIGHT BE IN THOSE TERMS.
AND THAT'S ONE OF THE
REASONS THAT I ALSO WOULD
LIKE TO SUPPORT THE TIA, THE
REQUIREMENT FOR THE TRAFFIC
IMPACT ANALYSES BECAUSE YOU
KNOW AS PART OF THIS DEAL WE
ARE ALSO MAKING CERTAIN
ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT FUTURE
DEVELOPMENT AND HOW THAT'S
GOING TO IMPACT TRAFFIC AND
WORSE EVEN HOW THAT'S GOING
TO IMPACT WATER QUALITY OR
THE ENVIRONMENT.
AND SO IF WE ARE MAKING
CERTAIN ASSUMPTIONS AND THEN
THOSE ASSUMPTIONS ARE NOT
CORRECT, THEN SHOULD WE HAVE
A WAY TO GET OUT OF -- OR
SOMEHOW FACTOR THAT INTO THE
AGREEMENT.
I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE
ISSUES THAT STRATUS WAS
REALLY FIRM ABOUT IN TERMS
OF THEIR RIGHTS TO DEVELOP
AT CERTAIN LEVELS.
AND IF THE CITY AT SOME
FUTURE DATE COMES BACK AND
SAYS "WELL, WE ARE GOING TO
DOWN ZONE YOU SOME MORE,"
YOU KNOW WHICH CERTAINLY IS
NOT PART OF WHAT THEY WERE
THINKING AS PART OF THIS
AGREEMENT, SO THEY WANT SORT
OF A SAFEGUARD IN THAT -- IN
THAT EVIDENT EVENTUALITY.
SO I THINK IN TERMS OF
TRAFFIC, CERTAINLY I THINK
THAT'S ONE OF THE AREAS
WHERE WE COULD TRY TO SAY,
YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THE
TRANSCRIPTION THAT WE ARE
ASSUMING THIS DEVELOPMENT IS
GOING TO PRODUCE, SO LET'S
TRY TO MONITOR THAT AND MAKE
SURE THAT THAT INDEED IS
WHAT WE ARE DOING OR AS THIS
DEVELOPMENT UNFOLDS.
AND CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW,
THERE'S ALL OF THE LEGAL
QUESTIONS INVOLVED AND I
THINK THAT'S -- YOU KNOW,
ONE OF THE BIGGEST -- YOU
KNOW, THE DEBATES YOU KNOW
THAT WE HAVE HAD IS -- IS
WHAT INDEED, YOU KNOW, ARE
OUR -- IS OUR ABILITY TO
CHALLENGE THE CLAIMS LEGALLY
AND, YOU KNOW, I REALLY DO
THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME
CLAIMS THAT WE CAN MAKE, WE
HAVE HEARD THAT THESE ARE
NOT NECESSARILY THE
STRONGEST CLAIMS.
BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS
SORT OF A SERIES OF -- OF
DECISIONS, I MEAN, THAT WE
COULD LOOK AT THAT -- THAT
MAY OR MAY NOT END UP BEING
SUCCESSFUL.
BUT I ALSO THINK THAT MAYBE
THIS APPROACH MAY OR MAY NOT
BE SUCCESSFUL.
AND SO FINALLY, I THINK, UM,
THE -- THOSE ARE SOME --
SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT I
HAD COMMUNICATED TO -- TO MY
COLLEAGUES THAT WERE OF
CONCERN.
I HAD RAISED SOME ISSUES
ABOUT THE LONGHORN PIPELINE.
I DO THINK THAT THE
ATTENTION THAT'S BEEN PAID
TO THAT ISSUE RECENTLY, YOU
KNOW, WITH THE FIRE CHIEF
AND STAFF LOOKING AT IT I
THINK ARE GOING TO HELP
PROTECT THE -- YOU KNOW, OR
I GUESS AT LEAST MAKE SURE
THAT THE DEVELOPMENTS ARE --
UNFOLD OR MOVE FORWARD WITH
THOSE ISSUES IN MIND.
AND THEN THE -- THE LAST,
ONE. OTHER ISSUES THAT I
HAD RAISED WAS ABOUT SORT OF
THE TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT
AND HOW ALL OF THIS IS GOING
TO HAPPEN BECAUSE CERTAINLY
WITH THE APPROVALS OF THE
ZONING, I MEAN THAT'S
USUALLY ONE OF THE BIGGEST
BARRIERS TO PROCEEDING WITH
A DEVELOPMENT.
AND IF -- IF -- AND SURE
ENOUGH WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT
SPECIFIC SORT OF KIND OF
DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE BEING
CONSIDERED FOR SPECIFIC
TRACTS AND WE HAVE HEARD
ABOUT A -- ABOUT A CHIP
MONITORING OR TESTING
FACILITY, THOSE KIND OF
THINGS.
SO WHO IS TO SAY THAT THOSE
KIND OF DEVELOPMENTS WON'T,
YOU KNOW, WILL PROCEED VERY
QUICKLY IF INDEED THERE'S
FOLKS WAITING THERE TO
PROCEED.
BUT I THINK THAT ONE OF THE
OTHER THINGS THAT I WOULD
LIKE TO HAVE SEEN IS FIGURED
OUT HOW -- HOW WE COULD --
COULD CREATE A TIME LINE FOR
SORT OF HOW MUCH DEVELOPMENT
HAPPENS AND HOW QUICKLY AND
IT'S -- TRACT 110 IS THE
SORT OF THE -- ALMOST THE
LARGEST IN TERMS OF THE
POTENTIAL IMPACT FROM THE
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS --
IS TRY TO KIND OF RESERVE
THAT FOR THE TAIL END OF THE
DEVELOPMENT SO THAT WE CAN
SEE, YOU KNOW, AS THE REST
OF THE DEVELOPMENT UNFOLDS,
HOW IS THAT AFFECTING THESE
ISSUES THAT WE ARE CONCERNED
ABOUT IN TERMS OF WATER
QUALITY AND TRAFFIC AND
JUST -- AND SEE IF -- IF OUR
ASSUMPTIONS HAVE BEEN
CORRECT ALONG THE WAY.
AND IF YOU DO TRACT 110 AT
THE END, THEN MAYBE YOU HAVE
SOME TIME TO -- TO COLLECT
SOME -- SOME FUNDS OR FIND
THE FUNDING NECESSARY MAYBE
TO BUY DOWN SOME MORE OF
THAT DEVELOPMENT AND I KNOW
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER HAS
WORKED VERY HARD WITH
STRATUS TO WORK ON THAT,
EVEN, YOU KNOW, AS THIS
MOVES FORWARD AND IF IT GETS
APPROVED THAT THAT IS EVEN
AN OPTION AND SO I DO WANT
TO COMMEND ALSO THE FOLKS
WHO HAVE WORKED ON THAT
ISSUE.
BUT -- BUT BASICALLY I JUST
THINK IT'S -- YOU KNOW,
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE
CONCERNS THAT I HAVE.
I MEAN, I WOULD LIKE TO --
THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES
UNRELATED TO STRATUS THAT WE
HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT AND
THAT KIND OF ARE ALMOST
STEMMING FROM THIS
DISCUSSION IS THE WHOLE
ISSUE OF KIND OF
TRANSFERRING DEVELOPMENT
RIGHTS OR SWAPPING LAND IN
THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE
WITH LAND THAT COULD
POTENTIALLY BE DEVELOPED IN
THE DRINKING WATER
PROTECTION ZONE.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT
THAT WE FLESH THAT OUT.
BUT I -- THE ISSUE OF THE
PIPELINE SAFETY ALSO HAS
COME UP.
ESPECIALLY IN LIEU OF THE
RECENT DECISION THAT WE HAVE
DECIDED TO APPEAL.
AND SO I THINK THAT WE HAVE
BEEN DISCUSSING WELL, HOW
ARE WE GOING TO LOOK AT THAT
IN TERMS OF THE CITY-WIDE
EFFORT AND SO I THINK THOSE
ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT
I THINK WE SHOULD AT LEAST
TAKE MORE TIME TO LOOK AT
AND FIGURE OUT HOW ARE WE
GOING TO DEAL WITH THIS ON
SORT OF A CITY-WIDE BASIS
AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
APPLYING THEM TO THIS
PARTICULAR AGREEMENT IN A
CONSISTENT FASHION.
AND SO I THINK THAT -- THAT
THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES
OR IDEAS THAT I HAVE HAD AND
IT'S JUST KIND OF REAL HARD
TO TRY TO INTEGRATE THOSE
TO -- IN AN AGREEMENT LIKE
THIS.
BUT THOSE ARE -- BUT THOSE
ARE I GUESS THE SUBSTANTIVE
REASONS THAT -- WHY I CAN'T
SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR
DEVELOPMENT.
[ APPLAUSE ]
[ CHEERING ]
[ CHEERING AND APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia: ANY OTHER
DISCUSSION?
Thomas: YES, SIR, MAYOR.
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER THOMAS?
Thomas: I -- SITTING HERE
FOR A LONG TIME, I LISTEN TO
A LOT OF PEOPLE SPEAK.
AND I KNOW THAT I'M GOING TO
[INAUDIBLE] THE ATTENTION
WHEN THEY COME TO THE
COUNCIL BECAUSE WE ARE HERE
TO SERVE THE PEOPLE.
I LOOKED AT THIS AGREEMENT.
I RESPECT BOTH SIDES, I
RESPECT S.O.S. AND THE HARD
WORK THEY DO.
I RESPECT MR. [INAUDIBLE]
FOR THE INFORMATION THAT HE
BROUGHT FORWARD.
I EVEN RESPECT STRATUS TO
EVEN TRY TO DO THE RIGHT
THING.
AND I WILL BE MONITORING,
MAKING SURE THAT THEY DO THE
RIGHT THING TO PROTECT THE
AQUIFER.
THIS IS A BIGGER PICTURE,
THOUGH, IT'S BIGGER THAN
STRATUS.
I THINK THAT WE NEED TO COME
TOGETHER AND FIGHT AN ISSUE
THAT'S WAY BIGGER THAN WHAT
THE EYES ARE REALLY SEEING.
MR. BLIZZARD SAID SOMETHING
THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
UNDEVELOPED LAND THAT
STRATUS IS IN THE PROCESS OF
DEVELOPING.
WE ARE DEALING WITH SOMEBODY
HERE, TALKING ABOUT
PIPELINES THAT MIGHT AFFECT
PEOPLE'S LIVES.
BUT I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK
AT THIS PICTURE THE BROAD
PICTURE.
IT'S BIGGER THAN STRATUS.
I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY
CANDID IN LOBBYING THE RIGHT
PEOPLE TO CHANGE SOME OF THE
FEDERAL REGULATIONS THAT WE
CAN PROTECT THE PEOPLE ALL
OVER THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REALIZE
THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE LIVING
IN AREAS WHERE PIPELINES
REALLY ARE, NOT EVEN
PROTECTED THE WAY THAT THE
PIPELINE WAS PUT OUT THERE
BY STRATUS PROPERTY.
IT'S TOUGH TO MAKE A
DECISION.
I DON'T NEVER MAKE DECISIONS
TALKING TO PEOPLE.
I NORMALLY MAKE DECISIONS
RIGHT HERE, LISTENING TO
PEOPLE.
AND TONIGHT IT'S GOING TO BE
A TOUGH DECISION TO MAKE.
BUT AFTER THIS DECISION IS
MADE, WE ALL SHOULD NEED TO
LOOK AT THE BROAD PICTURE
AND COME TOGETHER.
AND WORK TOGETHER ON SOME OF
THE WHOLE ENVIRONMENTAL
ISSUES WHICH I HAVE ALWAYS
SAID, I THINK MR. BUNCH KNOW
THAT, TALKING TO HIM SEVERAL
TIMES.
I'M VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES.
I THINK I HAVE SHOWN THAT
SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE.
I STILL SAY WE NEED TO COME
TOGETHER BECAUSE THERE'S A
BROADER PICTURE THAT WE NEED
TO LOOK AT.
ALL OVER THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
THANK YOU.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Mayor Garcia:
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER?
Slusher: EXCUSE ME.
I APPRECIATE YOUR KIND WORDS
EARLIER TONIGHT.
I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF
THAT -- THAT WORKED SO HARD
ON THIS DEAL.
I DON'T CARE WHAT ANYBODY
SAYS ABOUT YOU, I THINK YOU
ALL DID A GREAT JOB.
I HAVE MANY TIMES SAID I
PREFER THAT WE NOT HAVE ANY
DEVELOPMENT ON THESE TRACTS.
BUT THEN THE CITY DOESN'T
OWN THEM.
THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE THE
MONEY TO BUY THEM.
SO I THINK THIS IS THE BEST
OPTION FOR THE SPRINGS AT
THIS POINT.
NOW, I SAW THERE'S A
GENTLEMAN IN THE CROWD HERE
THAT CAME IN TO MY OFFICE, A
WEEK OR TWO AGO, AND ONE --
A SCIENTIST WHO COLLECTED
SOME NAMES ON A LETTER.
I AGREED WITH SOME OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS IN
AUSTIN AND IN THE WORLD.
AND WE HOUNDED IN ON
STRATUS.
I SAID "WHAT'S YOUR
ALTERNATIVE, WHAT'S YOUR
PLAN?" HE SAID, "WELL, IN
AN IDEAL WORLD I WOULD DO
THIS."
SO I LET HIM GO THROUGH
THAT.
I SAID "WHAT ABOUT IN THE
REAL WORLD?
HE SAID THAT I WOULD RATHER
TALK ABOUT THE IDEAL WORLD.
WELL, UP HERE WE HAVE TO
DEAL WITH THE REAL WORLD.
AND IN THE REAL WORLD, I
THINK THIS IS THE BEST
OPTION WE HAVE.
FINE.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT,
ALTHOUGH THIS IS NOT AN
IDEAL SOLUTION, I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE
HAVE COME A LONG WAY.
WE SAW EARLIER THAT WE HAVE
9 MILLION, HAD 9 MILLION
SQUARE FEET APPROVED BY THE
CITY COUNCIL IN 1984.
AND IN PLACE UNTIL JUST A
YEAR AGO.
THEN WE SENT THEM TO THE --
SENT STRATUS TO THE FISH AND
WILDLIFE.
THEY GOT IT DOWN TO
2.1 MILLION.
S.O.S. LEVEL WITH
CLUSTERING.
SAME AMOUNT THAT YOU CAN GET
WITHOUT CLUSTERING.
THE CITY GOT IT DOWN TO
HALF.
HALF THE AMOUNT OF
DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU COULD
GET WITH S.O.S., OR THAT
FISH WAS GOING TO ALLOW.
THE FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE ARE THE ONLY ONES
WITH THE ABILITY TO TRUMP
THE STATE GRANDFATHERING
LAWS.
GOT A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS
IN HERE.
PROHIBITION ON BIG BOX
RETAIL, TRAIL EASEMENTS,
NATIVE PLANTS AGREEMENTS,
WHICH I CAN'T STRESS -- IT
MIGHT NOT SOUND REAL STRONG,
BUT NATIVE PLANTS, WHEN YOU
STOP HAVING THESE LAWNS THAT
PEOPLE HAVE TO PURE THE
CHEMICALS ON, THAT'S GOING
TO MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE IN
THE AQUIFER.
AND I STILL CHALLENGE THE
FOLKS THAT ARE IN THE
NEIGHBORHOODS, OVER THE
AQUIFER, TO WORK WITH
YOUR -- DON'T PUT CHEMICALS
ON YOUR OWN LAWNS, AND WORK
WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS TO NOT
CHEMICALS ON THEIR LAWNS.
BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE DOWN
HERE THAT ARE SAYING DON'T
PUT ANY DEVELOPMENT OUT
THERE ON STRATUS, EVEN
THOUGH THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE
THE MONEY TO BUY, DON'T PUT
ANY DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE,
AND THEIR OWN NEIGHBORHOODS
ARE BUILT LIKE TWO AND THREE
TIMES THE AMOUNT OF
DEVELOPMENT ALLOWED IN THIS
AGREEMENT AND THERE'S
CHEMICALS COMING OFF THOSE
LAWNS POLLUTING BARTON
SPRINGS RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S GOT TO BE
STRAIGHTENED OUT.
IT CAN BE DONE.
PEOPLE HAVE THE POWER IN
THEIR HANDS RIGHT NOW TO
CLEAN UP THE SPRINGS.
Audience: (GRUMBLING).
Slusher: PEOPLE, YEAH,
THAT'S RIGHT.
WE HAVE TO LIVE IN THE REAL
WORLD.
BUT YOU CAN TAKE THE --
YOUR --
Mayor Garcia: PLEASE
ALLOW COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER
TO SPEAK.
SPEAKER: OF.
dience: [ YELLING ]
Slusher: I HAVE LISTENED
TO THE FEW ALTERNATIVES THAT
CAME FORWARD AND I HAVEN'T
HEARD ONE THAT IS BETTER OR
POSSIBLE IN MY OPINION.
BUT I DO THINK --
Audience: PEOPLE --
[ YELLING ]
Slusher: LOOK, WE LET YOU
ALL SPEAK FOR 18 HOURS, 18
HOURS OF TESTIMONY.
I'M GOING TO FINISH MY
REMARKS.
I'VE HAD PEOPLE COME IN HERE
AND TRY TO SHOUT ME DOWN
BEFORE.
IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
I BELIEVE IN PROTECTING
BARTON SPRINGS, I ALSO
BELIEVE IN THE DEMOCRATIC
SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE IN THE
UNITED STATES.
WE ARE THE ELECTED
REPRESENTATIVES OF THIS CITY
AND WE HAVE TO DELIBERATE
AND DECIDE WHAT TO DO.
Audience: [INAUDIBLE]
Slusher: THAT'S RIGHT.
THAT'S WHY THE SEVEN OF US
ARE UP HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE
THE MAJORITY RULES.
[ GAVEL SOUNDS ]
Slusher: WHY WAS I?
APPROVE.
Audience: [ YELLING ]
SLUSHER: I'M GOING TO
FINISH.
I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE MY
DECISIONS ON PEOPLE
HOLLERING FROM THE CROWD.
THAT'S NOT THE WAY
GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO WORK
UP HERE.
YOU ALL CAN HOLLER ANDLE ALL YOU WANT.
BALLOT BOX, WE ARE ENTRUSTED
LE TO VOTE AND DO
WHAT WE THINK IS IN THE BEST
INTERESTS OF THE CITY.
NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU
HOLLER, I'M GOING TO FINISH
MY TALK.
SHORTER IF YOU LET ME GO ON
AND TALK.
I DON'T THINK TRACK 110
OUGHT TO BE AN OFFICE -- I
DON'T THINK IT OUGHT TO BE
ANYWHERE NEAR THE LEVEL THAT
IT IS IN THIS AGREEMENT.
ALTHOUGH IF YOU GO BACK,
ONCE AGAIN, JUST SAY NO,
THAT'S WHAT?
PEOPLE-- WHAT SOME PEOPLE SAY.
IT'S GOT 2.1 MILLION SQUARE
FEET UNDER FISH AND
WILDLIFE, A MILLION LESS
THAN HALF OF THAT UNDER
THIS.
Audience: [ YELLING ]
Mayor Garcia: MR. BUNCH,
MR. BUNCH!
MR. BUNCH!
Audience: MISSTATING THE
FACTS.
YOU ARE MISSTATING THE
FACTS.
[INAUDIBLE]
Mayor Garcia: MR. BUNCH
[ APPLAUSE ]
Slusher: 2.1 MILLION CAN
BE ACHIEVED UNDER THE FISH
AGREEMENT.
Mayor Garcia: MR. BUSH, I
HAVE A BEFORE.
PLEASE LET COUNCILMEMBER
SLUSHER FINISH.
PLEASLET ME
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER
FINISH.
Audience: [INAUDIBLE]
Slusher: SO I THINK WE
NEED TO EITHER BUY OR SWAP
FOR THIS LAND.
IF WE ARE GOING TO NOT HAVE
THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT
THAT'S ON THERE.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Slusher: WELL, THAT'S --
THAT'S -- JUST -- LET ME
FINISH, PLEASE.
SO THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE THE
MONEY TO BUY IT.
I'M GOING TO -- I'M GOING TO
KEEP LOOKING FOR WAYS TO
SWAP IT.
SEE, THAT'S -- SELL THE
POLICE HELICOPTER.
THAT'S GREAT!
THERE'S ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE.
SELL THE POLICE HELICOPTER
TO PUT INTO BUYING LAND FROM
STRATUS.
THAT'S GREAT.
CUT BACK ON PUBLIC SAFETY --
[ APPLAUSE ]
Slusher: GO AHEAD, GIVE
THAT A BIG HAND, YEAH.
LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR THAT
WASN'T MY SUGGESTION.
THAT WAS JUST ONE FROM ONE
OF OUR CITIZENS TO -- TO
BEGIN SELLING OFF POLICE
ASSETS, TO BEGIN SELLING OFF
POLICE ASSETS AND
ENDANGERING PUBLIC SAFETY.
THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES IN
THIS CITY.
THERE'S -- THERE ARE A LOT
OF IMPORTANT ISSUES IN THIS
CITY.
WE NEED TO SPEND OUR MONEY
BUILDING MORE RECREATION
CENTERS IN EAST AUSTIN.
WE NEED TO INVEST MORE IN
OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE NEED MORE LIBRARIES.
WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
WE CAN'T SPEND ALL OF OUR
MONEY OVER THE AQUIFER.
SO LET ME -- I HAVE SAID.
Audience: [ YELLING ]
Slusher: I'M GOING TO
FINISH.
I'M GOING TO FINISH MY
REMARKS.
I'M GOING TO FINISH MY
REMARKS.
SO -- IN -- THE NEXT
THING -- I DID TRY TO SWAP
THE AIRPORT.
THE SAME PEOPLE DOWN HERE
OPPOSING THIS DEAL TONIGHT,
COUNCILMEMBER WYNN AND I
COULDN'T EVEN GET A --
COULDN'T EVEN GET FOLKS TO
LET US EVEN DISCUSS THAT
ISSUE.
SAID MANY OF THE SAME
THINGS.
WHEN WE TRIED TO SWAP JUST
DISCUSS SWAPPING MUELLER
AIRPORT, SOME -- SOME OF THE
SAME PEOPLE, SAME
ATMOSPHERE, SHUT THAT DOWN.
SHUT IT DOWN, DIDN'T EVEN
GET TO TALKING.
SOME OF YOU ARE SENDING
E-MAILS OUT SAYING SWAP
MUELLER AIRPORT.
WELL, YOU KILLED THAT
CHANCE.
YOU MANAGED TO KILL THAT
ONE.
I'M GOING TO HAVE SOME MORE
SWAP IDEAS.
I'M GOING TO HAVE SOME MORE
SWAP IDEAS, BUT I HAVE AN
IDEA HOW YOU ALL CAN HELP
RIGHT NOW.
I SENT IT OUT TO FOLKS
YESTERDAY.
I GOT A LOT OF POSITIVE
RESPONSES.
SINCE THE CITY CAN'T AFFORD
TO BUY THIS, LANDS GET THE
PEOPLE OF AUSTIN TOGETHER,
LET'S HAVE THE COMMUNITY BUY
THIS LAND AND IF YOU CAN GET
THE MONEY FOR IT, WE DON'T
HAVE TO STOP -- WE DON'T
HAVE TO STOP AT THIS TRACT.
[ APPLAUSE ]
Slusher: ARE YOU ALL
SAYING YOU ARE GOING TO
CONTRIBUTE SOME MONEY TO BUY
THIS LAND, IS THAT WHAT YOU
ARE SAYING?
Audience: YEA!
Slusher: I CAN'T TELL IF
THAT'S A YES OR A NO.
Audience: [ YELLING ] HOW
MUCH DO YOU WANT?
Slusher: I'M GOING TO
RAISE A LOT OF IT.
Audience: [INAUDIBLE]
Slusher: WELL, THE REASON
THEY CAN'T DONATE IT IS
BECAUSE I THINK THEY HAVE
SOMETHING CALLED
SHAREHOLDERS.
BUT, MA'AM, MA'AM, I'M NOT
DEBATING WITH YOU.
I'M GIVING MY REMARKS AN
ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE OF
THE PEOPLE.
IF YOU WOULD SIT DOWN AND
STOP INTERRUPTING EVERY
OTHER WORD THAT I SAY I
WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IT.
FOLKS ARE GOING TO GIVE TO
THIS COMMUNITY EFFORT?
Audience: YEAH!
Slusher: ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT!
, ALL RIGHT!
WE ARE GETTING STARTED.
SEE I HAVE A LOT OF --
Audience: [ YELLING ]
Slusher: DON'T APPROACH
THE DESK.
THANK YOU.
FIRST DOLLAR.
[ CHEERING AND APPLAUSE ]
Slusher: YOU ARE GOING TO
NEED A LOT MORE.
Slusher: WE NEED ONE OF
THESE EVERY DAY, EVERY DAY,
EVERY DAY.
SO --
Audience: [ YELLING ]
Slusher: ALL RIGHT.
I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU
ALL COULD JUST PUT THE MONEY
ON THAT TABLE UP THERE
RATHER THAN APPROACHING THE
DAIS.
THAT WOULD BE BETTER OR WE
COULD PASS A COLLECTION
PLATE I SUPPOSE.
Audience: [ YELLING ]
Slusher: BOTH, BOTH.
Audience: [INAUDIBLE]
Slusher: WELL, SIR, I
DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE A --
IF YOU ARE A REAL ESTATE
APPRAISER OR NOT, BUT WE
HAVE TO DO SOME OTHER
THINGS.
NOW, YOU ALL CAN KEEP
BRINGING UP THE MONEY, I'M
GOING TO BE ABOUT FINISHED
HERE IN A MINUTE.
SO THERE'S SOME OTHER STUFF
WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO DO.
I TALKED ABOUT -- I TALKED
ABOUT CLEANING UP THOSE
YARDS, STOP PUTTING
CHEMICALS IN THE AQUIFER.
THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
THERE'S A LOT OF FOLKS NOT
JUST OUT THERE ABOUT CIRCLE
C AND THE VILLAGE OF WESTERN
OAKS, THERE'S SOME
NEIGHBORHOODS RIGHT HERE IN
THE CENTRAL CITY BUILT IN
THE '50'S WHERE PEOPLE ARE
PUTTING CHEMICALS ON THEIR
LAWN, POURING RIGHT INTO
BARTON SPRINGS, CAUSING
POLLUTION DOWN THERE.
THAT CAN BE CLEANED UP WITH
NO MONEY.
Audience: [ YELLING ]
Slusher: AND TEXDOT, BIG
PROBLEM.
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION --
Audience: [ YELLING ]
Slusher: YOU ALL ARE
LOOKING REALLY GOOD OUT
THERE.
YOU ALL ARE LOOKING REALLY
GOOD RIGHT NOW.
AND THEN -- SO TEXDOT,
REGIONAL PLAN.
JUDGE POWERS AND I ARE GOING
TO CONVENE A REGIONAL
PLANNING SUMMIT IN
SEPTEMBER.
HOPEFULLY WE WILL GET IT
DONE IN SEPTEMBER.
MIGHT BE EARLY OCTOBER.
AND THAT'S JUDGE JIM POWERS
DOWN IN HAYS COUNTY.
I TELL YOU WHAT, WE HAVE GOT
A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS
CROWD THAT HAVE CALLED FOR A
REGIONAL PLAN.
THEY DO A REGIONAL PLAN
FIRST.
OKAY.
I TELL YOU WHAT, LET ME ASK
YOU THIS, DO YOU THINK
PEOPLE AROUND THIS REGION,
DO YOU THINK THEY WANT US TO
TAKE THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD?
DO YOU THINK THEY ARE DYING
TO HAVE PEOPLE COME DOWN AND
HOLLER AT THEM FROM THE
AUDIENCE?!!
DOWN AT THE DRIPPING SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL, THE HAYS
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COURT?!!
IS THAT THE WAY WE ARE GOING
TO SAVE THE AQUIFER BY
HAVING -- IS THAT THE KINDS
OF RESPECTFUL DIALOGUE THAT
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE WITH
OUR PARTNERS IN THE REGION?
BUT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE IT.
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE IT.
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THAT
REGIONAL PLAN.
I TELL YOU WHAT, I'M
DETERMINED T2222 GOING
TO GET A REGIONAL PLAN.
WE ARE GOING TO GET -- WE
ARE GOING TO GET SOME OF
THIS LAND THROUGH COMMUNITY
PURCHASE.
AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE --
YOU NEED TO GIVE ONE OF
THESE EVERY DAY.
NOT JUST WHEN YOU ARE DONE
AT THE CITY COUNCIL ON TV.
WE NEED ONE EVERY DAY, $365 FROM
EVERY ONE OF YOU ALL FOR A
COUPLE OF YEARS AND A BUNCH
OF OTHER PEOPLE IN THIS
CITY, WE WILL GET THAT LAND
AND GO ON BEYOND THAT AND
BUY SOME MORE.
THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS
TAKE IN OUR OWN HANDS, ALL
RIGHT.
Audience: [INAUDIBLE]
[ APPLAUSE ]
Slusher: ALL RIGHT.
SO I'M DONE.
LET'S GO.
Audience: THE PEOPLE NOT
REALTORS.
Audience: YOU DON'T HAVE
TO DECIDE!
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU
COUNCILMEMBER.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING
THAT THEY JUST HAVE TO SAY?
[ LAUGHTER ]
WYNN: I THINK THE
REVEREND SLUSHER HAS SAID IT
ALL.
Audience: DON'T VOTE!
Audience: JUST SAY NO.
GOODMAN: THERE IS ONE
MORE THING TO SAY.
BECAUSE FOLKS AREN'T
LISTENING TO WHAT THIS IS.
AND WHENEVER YOU HAVE AN
ISSUE ABOUT DEVELOPMENT OVER
THE AQUIFER, I DON'T KNOW OF
ANY COUNCILMEMBER ON THIS
COUNCIL WHO WANTS AND
SUPPORTS DEVELOPMENT OVER
THE AQUIFER.
AND SOME OF US HAVE PRETTY
GOOD CREDENTIALS TO PROVE
THAT.
WE ALSO DON'T HAVE ALL OF
THE POWER THAT A LOT OF
FOLKS THINK WE HAVE.
WE DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO
DECIDE THAT HAYS COUNTY WILL
COME ON BOARD WITH WHAT WE
THINK ARE THE BEST WATER
QUALITY PROTECTIONS LIKE
S.O.S.
IT WAS DARYL PRETTY MUCH BY
HIMSELF WHO GOT BUDA TO BE
ABLE TO NOW SAY THAT THEY
HAVE S.O.S. IN THEIR E.T.J.
BUT NOBODY ELSE ON THE OTHER
TWO THIRD OF THE AQUIFER CAN
SAY THAT.
SO I THINK THAT'S PROOF THAT
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER IS A
PRETTY DEVOTED
ENVIRONMENTALIST AND THE
STAFF THAT WE HAVE, LET ME
JUST NAME NANCY, BECAUSE
SHE'S TAKEN A LOT OF HEAT,
SHE'S ONE OF THE BEST AND
MOST ACTIVE
ENVIRONMENTALISTS THE CITY
EVER HAD.
SHE WOULDN'T BE IN THIS JOB
HAD SHE NOT BEEN.
AND FOR ME THERE'S JUST A
REAL SIMPLISTIC THING HERE.
IF WE HAD THE POWER TO
EITHER SAY NO DEVELOPMENT
AND THAT WOULD HAPPEN, OR IF
WE HAD THE MONEY OR ANYTHING
ELSE TO TRADE, TO TRY TO
KEEP THIS FROM BEING
DEVELOPED, AND A LOT OF
OTHER ACREAGE MUCH LARGER
AND MUCH MORE FRAGILE THAN
THIS, WE WOULD DO IT IN A
FLASH.
BUT SOMEBODY MAY HAVE
NOTICED THAT WE
WERE $71 MILLION IN THE HOLE
THIS YEAR.
AND WE ARE IN DEBT.
Audience: [ YELLING ]
GOODMAN: FROM A BETTER
TIME.
BECAUSE THIS PROPOSAL
DEVELOPS OVER LESS OF THE
AQUIFER THAN FISH AND
WILDLIFE ALLOWS AND THAT
STRAIGHT S.O.S. ALLOWS
BECAUSE IT CLUSTERS.
BECAUSE INSTEAD OF 15% OF
EVERY PARCEL AND TAKING THAT
IMPACT OF PEOPLE TO EVERY
PARCEL, IT ONLY KEEPS 15% OF
THE TOTAL.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS LIKE BEING
IN A HIGH SCHOOL GYMNASIUM.
SO I WILL JUST SAY I DON'T
THINK I'M CONSTITUTIONALLY
ABILITY VOTE FOR -- ABLE TO
VOTE FOR MORE DEVELOPMENT
FOR MORE ACREAGE OVER THE
AQUIFER, THAT'S WHY S.O.S.
WOULD IMPACT MORE THAN THIS.
IT DOESN'T GIVE US THE
ABILITY TO TRY TO TRADE
VALUE RATHER THAN JUST CASH
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE CASH.
IT DOESN'T GIVE US THE
ABILITY TO TRY TO PUT A
PERPETUAL MAINTAIN AT THE
COST OF THE PROPERTY OWNER
INTO PLACE, WHICH THIS DOES.
IT DOESN'T GIVE US THE
ABILITY TO HAVE A THIRD
PARTY ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM
WITH THE DISTRICT.
IT DOESN'T GIVE US THE
ABILITY TO HAVE HABITAT
PLANNING AND REAL REGIONAL
COOPERATION HAPPEN.
BUT THIS -- THIS AGREEMENT
WITH ALL ITS PROVISIONS
DOES.
THAT'S WHY IT IS BETTER THAN
GOING FOR S.O.S. THAT
DOESN'T GIVE YOU ANY OF
THOSE EXTRA THINGS, THAT
IMPACTS MORE ACREAGE AND IF
WE WERE TO TRY TO GO THEN TO
COURT AFTER THAT AND SAY,
"WELL, WE REJECTED THE
S.O.S. AND REREJECTED THE
CREEDING OF THE 1704 --
CEDING OF THE 1704 RIGHTS,
NOW WE ARE GOING TO SUE THEM
TO GET S.O.S. AND DEVELOP
MORE OVER MORE OF THE EARMG,
THAT'S WHY IT DOESN'T MAKE
SENSE.
Mayor Garcia: THANK YOU,
MAYOR PRO TEM.
OKAY.
THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE
TABLE IS TO -- TO APPROVE
ITEMS NUMBER 15 TO 367 TO BE
EFFECTIVE AUGUST -- 15 TO 36
TO BE EFFECTIVE AUGUST 15th,
2002.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY
BY SAYING AYE.
AYE.
OPPOSED NO.
Audience: NO.
THE MOTION CARRIES ON A
VOTE OF 6 TO 1 WITH
COUNCILMEMBER ALVAREZ VOTING
NAY.
Audience: RECALL!
[ YELLING ]
Mayor Garcia: I WILL
ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO
ADJOURN.
Slusher: SO MOVE.
Mayor Garcia: MOTION BY
COUNCILMEMBER SLUSHER.
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WYNN.
ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY
SAYING AYE.
AYE.
Mayor Garcia: WE ARE
ADJOURNED.
11:58 P.M.
End of Council Session Closed Caption Log
