[00:00:01]
TO ORDER THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
[CALL TO ORDER]
COMMISSION HERE AT 63 10 WILHELMINA DELCO DRIVE.LET'S GO AROUND THE HORN AND DO ROLL CALL.
UM, WE ARE GOING TO GO TO PUB.
THERE'S A COUPLE PEOPLE NOT HERE.
SHOULD THAT NOT BE, WE HAVE ENOUGH TO GET ROLLING, BUT SHOULD THAT NOT BE IN THE RECORD? I THINK WE'LL JUST GO WITH WHOEVER SAID THEY WERE PRESENT AND THEN OKAY.
IF NO ONE SAID THEY WEREN'T, THEN THEY WEREN'T.
[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]
LET'S GO TO PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS.WE'VE GOT, UH, SEVERAL SPEAKERS COMING TODAY, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, UH, READING THEM OFF.
SO, UH, UH, MEGAN, UM, GET ON UP THERE,
HI MEGAN AND MEGAN, AS YOU GET STARTED, IF YOU DON'T MIND STATING YOUR FULL NAME AND, AND WHY YOU'RE HERE TODAY.
I'M MEGAN MEISENBACH AND I'M IN THE JUDGES HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M SPEAKING AS AN INDIVIDUAL, HOWEVER, THIS EVENING AND ON THIS ISSUE WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT, I, I ASK YOU TO PLEASE WARN THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE DANGERS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT AND THE ADDITIONAL STUDIES THAT CAN BE MADE TO PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH AND SAFETY.
AND JACKSON, I'M GOING TO GO REALLY FAST THROUGH, UM, THE FIRST SLIDES.
UH, WELL, THAT'S A LITTLE TOO FAST BACK.
OKAY, SO THOSE ARE THE ADDRESSES.
ONE ADDRESS IS SORT OF IN T CAD ONE WAY AND ANOTHER WAY ON THEIR DOOR.
THIS IS FROM MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
BOULEVARD WEST, UH, NEAR RIO GRANDE AND OASIS.
NEXT, NEXT, THIS IS, AGAIN, SAME THING, JACK BROWN CLEANERS, THEY WANT TO REDEVELOP.
NEXT, UM, THIS IS A VIEW OF THE, THE, UH, EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UM, AND TIFF'S TREATS IS A LITTLE HOUSE, WHITE HOUSE THERE, AND JIMMY JOHN'S SANDWICHES IS NEXT TO IT, RIGHT ON MLK.
NEXT, ANOTHER VIEW RIO GRANDE IS ON THE RIGHT.
THIS IS THE ALLEYWAY THAT'S NOT VERY BIG.
AND THIS IS THE PENTHOUSE APARTMENTS.
AND THE JACK BROWN CLEANERS IS ON THE LEFT.
NEXT, THIS IS THE TRAVIS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT MAP, AND MLK IS AT THE TOP, A LITTLE BIT SLANTED, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S, UM, THE FOUR PROPERTIES THERE.
AND RIO GRANDE IS, IS THE LINE ON YOUR LEFT? THANK YOU.
THIS IS MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE, MS. HOWARD.
NEXT, UM, THIS IS PROBABLY TOO SMALL TO READ, BUT IT LISTS SOME OF THE CHEMICALS THAT HAVE BEEN FOUND ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, THIS IS A TCE E Q DOCUMENT AND MS. REYNOLDS WILL PRESENT A LOT MORE.
NEXT, UM, THIS SHOWS, UH, A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHERE THE PROPERTY IS.
AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER, UM, GATEHOUSE, UH, APARTMENTS IN YELLOW.
NEXT, THIS IS WHAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD LIKE TO DO.
HE'D LIKE TO HAVE RESIDENTIAL ON THE TOP FLOOR, UH, ABOVE PARKING AND ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF COMMERCIAL.
AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR 120 FEET IN HEIGHT, WHICH CONCERNS ME BECAUSE SURELY THEY'LL HAVE TO DIG IN THESE CHEMICALS.
AND THIS IS A TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP.
MAYBE YOU CAN MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT BIGGER.
THE BLUE DOT KIND OF IN THE TOP MIDDLE IS, UM, WHERE JACK BROWN'S CLEANERS IS.
NEXT, SO WE ASK YOU TO CONSIDER THE CHEMICALS THAT CAROLYN IS GONNA TALK ABOUT AND CONVEY SOME OF THE DANGERS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, AND NEXT I THINK WE HAVE, UM, CAROLYN REYNOLDS.
[00:05:02]
THERE WE GO.UH, JACK BROWN PR, THE JACK BROWN PROPERTY IS THE LARGEST AND LONGEST OPERATED DRY CLEANERS IN AUSTIN THAT I KNOW OF HAVING IT INTERVIEWED FOLKS, IT'S BEEN ASSESSED, AND NEXT, IT'S BEEN ASSESSED AND MONITORED FOR 20 YEARS UNDER THE TQS V E C, THE VOLUNTARY CLEANUP PROGRAM, AND RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION JUST LAST YEAR, BUT IT ONLY COVERS THE JACK BROWN PROPERTY.
THE SAMPLES FROM 10 MONITOR WELLS SHOWED IN 2007 THAT CONTAMINATION HAD ALREADY MOVED OFF OF THE SITE INTO THE CORNER OF 18TH AND OASIS.
THE FULL EXTENT OF COMMIT OF MIGRATION IS UNKNOWN STILL 17 YEARS LATER, AND IT'S, IT'S MIGRATING SOUTHWARD ALONG OASIS TO ABOUT 12TH STREET, WHERE IT'LL ENTER SHELL CREEK.
UH, SHOLL CREEK ITSELF CONSULTANTS EXCAVATED MOST OF THE CONTAMINATED SOIL AND AIRED OUT.
THE REST MAPS SHOW THE AFFECTED AREA ON THIS BROWN PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, SUBSURFACE GROUNDWATER AND CONTAMINANTS DO NOT PAY ATTENTION TO PROPERTY LI PROPERTY LINES OR TO ALLEYS, AND THEY HAVE CONTINUED TO MOVE TO THE SOUTH AND THE EAST.
REMOVING THE CONTAMINATED SOIL FROM THE SITE DID NOTHING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM FOR SURROUNDING LANDOWNERS WHOSE SUBSURFACE IS CONTAMINATED, THEIR TREES MAY BE POISONED, AND THEY MAY BE SUBJECT TO INFILTRATION AND INTRUSION BY VINYL CHLORIDE, A TOXIC AND CARCINOGENIC CHEMICAL THAT COLLECTS INTO THE HOUSE AND THEN INFUSES THROUGH THE FOUNDATION.
MORE IMPORTANTLY, SINCE THESE CLEANING CHEMICALS ARE HEAVIER THAN WATER, THEY ARE DO DENSE NON-AQUEOUS PHASE LIQUIDS, AND THEY SEPARATE FROM AND LIE BELOW THE GROUNDWATER, AND NO ONE HAS DELINEATED THAT PLUME.
NO ONE KNOWS THE LOCATION OR EXTENT.
IT IS SLOWLY DISSOLVING INTO THE GROUNDWATER AND MOVING TOWARDS SHO CREEK AND DEGRADING INTO DYE AND TRI ETHANES AND, AND THE CARCINOGENIC SPINAL CHLORIDE.
I MENTIONED THIS, THE, THE CONSULTANTS HAVE SIMPLY WHACKED THE TOP OFF OF THE ICEBERG AND DECLARED IT DISAPPEARED.
UM, MEANWHILE, CONTAMINANTS CONTINUE TO SPREAD, AND THEY'RE EXPECTING DILUTION TO BE THE SOLUTION TO POLLUTION, BUT THAT BOAT SAILED IN 1984 WITH THE HAZARDOUS WASTE RULES, MOVING THE FOCUS FROM RESIDENTS TO WORKERS IN BUILDINGS WITH DEAN APPLE AND GROUNDWATER PLUMES.
OSHA AND I ARE BOTH CONCERNED WITH EXCAVATION WORKERS AND FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION WORKERS AT THE BUILDING SITE.
NO ONE IS GOING TO BUILD AN 11 STORY BUILDING ON A SLAB WITH 10 FOOT DIFFERENCE IN ELEVATION AND LITTLE OR NO EXCAVATION ON A HILLSIDE.
BUT ALL OF THAT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IN OH SEVEN WHEN IT WAS CLEAR THAT THE GROUNDWATER CONTAMINANTS WERE OFFSITE.
I PROVIDED YOU IN THE EARLY MATERIALS, A PROPOSAL FROM INTER EAGLE SYNERGISTICS FOR $20,000, AND ONE WEEK THEY COULD PROVIDE YOU WITH THE DATA ON A ONE HALF INCH DEPTHS AND A 3D MODEL, KNOWING WHERE THE CONTAMINATION WAS.
SO PLEASE RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT THEY REQUEST THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER FULLY EVALUATE, IDENTIFY, LOCATE, AND DELINEATE THE VINYL CHLORIDE AND PERCH CHLOR ING IN GROUNDWATER AND THE DAPPLE PLUMES TO THE SOUTHEAST BEFORE APPROVING ANY REZONING OR CONSTRUCTION ON THIS PROPERTY.
JOHN, UH, SENCO ARE YOU ARE? AND IS LAURA MASSEN AND PAIGE, ARE Y'ALL BOTH HERE? ALL RIGHT.
SO, AND Y'ALL ARE DONATING YOUR TIME? CORRECT.
SO YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE NINE MINUTES, MR. MASSENGALE.
I AM JOHN MASSENGALE AND I'M REPRESENTING, UM, SO PARK BOAT REYNOLDS.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO TELL YOU ABOUT A GROUP THAT WITHOUT ANY FANFARE OR SPOTLIGHT, HAS BEEN QUIETLY STEWARDING THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE AREA AROUND BARTON CREEK
[00:10:01]
FOR OVER 50 YEARS.THAT IS A SMALL FAMILY OWNED BUSINESS.
ZER PARK BOAT RENTALS HAS BEEN IN THE SAME SPOT ON THE BANKS OF BARTON CREEK SINCE 1969.
WHEN HOWARD APPROACHED THE CITY OF AUSTIN WITH HIS IDEA OF RENTING CANOES ON THE CREEK, HE WAS WORKING FOR THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE AS A WRITER.
HIS LOVE OF NATURE AND PASSION FOR PRESERVING, SHARING NATURE'S BEAUTY LED HIM TO START THE CANOE REYNOLD COMPANY.
THE FOUNDERS OF ZILKER BOATS, HOWARD AND DOROTHY LOPEZ BARNETT, NOT COINCIDENTALLY, ARE ALSO FOUNDING MEMBERS OF THE AUSTIN SIERRA CLUB THAT THEY FOUND THEY HELPED FOUND THE YEAR BEFORE THEY STARTED THE BUSINESS IN 1968.
ZER PARK BOAT RENTALS HAS BEEN THE ONLY PRESENCE IN THE CREEK THESE LAST 50 PLUS YEARS.
THEY SELF-FUNDED THEIR FACILITIES, MAINTAINED THE SHORELINE, AND RESTORED THE TRAIL AND ROAD.
MANY TIMES AFTER FLOODING EVENTS, THEY HAVE SELF-FUNDED SAFE ACCESS TO THE CREEK BY DESIGNING AND BUILDING THE BEAUTIFUL NATIVE STONE STAIRS THAT LEAD DOWN TO THE CREEK.
USED BY TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE EVERY YEAR THAT PROBABLY EVERY ONE OF YOU HAVE WALKED DOWN.
THEY SPONSOR OPEN CREEK CLEANUPS AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH.
THEY'VE DONE THIS SINCE THE DAY THEY OPENED.
NOT ONLY ARE THEY STEWARDS OF THE BANKS OF BARTON CREEK, BUT THEY'RE THE SOLE CONTACT IN BARTON CREEK PROVIDING SAFETY VIA 9 1 1.
IN EMERGENCIES, AS THERE IS NO PARK POLICE, THEY'VE HELPED PEOPLE WHO'VE HAD SEIZURES.
HEAT STROKE, PROVIDED BANDANAS.
SUNSCREEN HELPED PEOPLE FIND LOST PETS.
FAMILY MEMBERS PERSONAL ITEMS CHARGE THEIR PHONES CALLED WILDLIFE RESCUE.
FOR HURT ANIMALS, THEY'VE HELPED LOST TOURISTS FIND THEIR WAY BACK TO THE PATH, TO THE POOL, TO THE PLAYSCAPE THAT RECOMMENDED PLACES TO VISIT IN THE PARK AND AROUND AUSTIN, WHERE TO EAT AND WHERE TO FIND RESTROOMS. AND THEY LOVE THAT PART OF THE BUSINESS TOO, HELPING OTHER PEOPLE ALSO, ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS WITH VARIOUS PEOPLE WHO BRING KIDS DOWN TO THE, TO EXPERIENCE.
THE WONDERS OF THE CREEK HAS ALWAYS BEEN A PART OF ZILKER PARK BOAT RENTALS.
THEY PROVIDE FREE BOATS FOR THE SUNSHINE CAMPS WITH AN ESTIMATED OVER 20,000 UNDERPRIVILEGED KIDS, THE SCIENCE CENTER, YOUTH, RIVER WATCHERS, TEXAS RIVER ACADEMY RIVER SCHOOL, AND MANY, MANY MORE.
THEIR SMALL FOOTPRINT OF OPERATIONS IS AT THE SAME 450 FOOT ELEVATION AS THE BARTON SPRINGS POOL.
BATHHOUSE ONE BUILDING THE CHECK-IN BUILDING WAS CAREFULLY BLAND, CAREFULLY PLANNED, AND THOROUGHLY DESIGNED AS AN OPEN AIR CAGE TO GIVE EASY ACCESS TO CUSTOMERS AS WELL AS TO ENABLE THE FLOW THROUGH THE BUILDING.
IF THERE WERE FLOODS, WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN MANY, THEIR 54 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN BARTON CREEK LED THEM TO WORK THE ENVIRONMENT WITH NO NEGATIVE IMPACT.
BECAUSE OF THIS, THEY, THEY FOUND THAT BECAUSE OF THIS, THEY FIND IT CURIOUS, THAT NO ONE HAS EVER COMMUNICATED WITH THEM ABOUT THE FOLLOWING PLANS, WHICH THEY FOUND OUT ON THEIR OWN.
WHEN REVIEWING THE VISION PLAN FOR ZILKER PARK DESIGN WORKSHOP AND ASSOCIATES WANT TO REDESIGN THE KWANZA HUT TO MAKE A WELCOME CENTER SLASH EDUCATION CENTER, A FULLY FUNDED AND DESIGNED EDUCATION CENTER THAT IS ALREADY IN THE WORKS OF THE BARTON SPRINGS POOL BATHHOUSE.
OTHERS ARE PROPOSING AN EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM, WHICH IS EYEING THE ZILKER PARK BOAT RENTAL LOCATION FOR THEMSELVES BECAUSE IT HAS EASY STAIR ACCESS, WHICH THEY ALREADY BUILD, AND HAS THE NICELY MAINTAINED SHORELINE THANKS TO ZER PARK BOAT RENTALS.
IF YOU WALK THE SHORELINE, INCLUDING THE MANY AREAS THAT HAVE ERODED AWAY, THE ONE PART THAT'S STILL MAINTAINED IS THE PART THAT ZER BOATS HAS BEEN ON FOR 54 YEARS.
ZER PARK BOAT RENTALS WANTS, WANTS PEOPLE AND KIDS TO LEARN ABOUT THE CREEK AND HAVE COLLABORATED WITH SOME CITY AND PRIVATE PROGRAMS. THE VISION PLAN DESIGNER, WHO HAS NO BUSINESS EXPERIENCE SUGGESTED MOVING CHECK IN FOR BOAT RENTALS TO THE TOP OF THE STAIRS AT THE KWANZA HUT, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT EXTREMELY INCONVENIENT FOR PEOPLE TO RENT BOATS UP AND DOWN THE STAIRS.
AND A PERSON WHO SAYS THEY HAVE NO INFLUENCE IN THE VISION PLAN SAID THAT IF ZILKER BOATS PLAYED THEIR CARDS RIGHT, THEY MIGHT GET A NEW FACILITY.
WHY WOULD SOMEONE SUGGEST CHANGING A PROVEN A SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS MODEL WITHOUT EVEN TALK TO THE CURRENT VENDOR WHO HAS INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT WOULD WORK IN THAT AREA AND WHO'S CLEARLY MAINTAINED THE AREA WITH THE ENVIRONMENT AS A PRIORITY? ONE SIGLER GROUP DID A GREAT JOB ON ITS INVENTORY REPORT, AND AGAIN, NO EXPERIENCE RUNNING A BUSINESS OF THIS TYPE MADE NO ATTEMPT TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCE IN THE CREEK.
WHEN MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION OF DESIGN WORKSHOP, SIGLER GROUP DID A NICE DESIGN OF TERRACING BARTON CREEK HILL, BUT THE CREEK DOES NOT NEED TERRACING, DOES NOT NEED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DISRUPTION.
THE CREEK HILLSIDE IS ALREADY FILLED WITH NATURAL BEAUTY, INCLUDING FULL GROWN NATIVE TREES, PLANTS, AND GRASSES, AND HOME TO MANY ANIMALS, RABBITS, FOXES, BIRDS, AND SNAKES, JUST TO NAME A FEW.
AND THEY SHOULD NOT BE DISTURBED.
SIGLER GROUP, ZER VISIONS WATERSHED PROPOSAL REQUIRES ZUCKER BOATS TO BE SHUT DOWN.
IN THE PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTING THIS DESIGN AND OR
[00:15:01]
RELOCATED, ZERBO SUGGESTED A MINIMAL RESTORATION UPSTREAM FROM ZILKER BOATS RENTALS.THAT BARKING SPRINGS, AS THAT IS THE MOST AREA, THE MOST NEGLECTED AREA WHERE CITY AND PARDON WORK SHED WITH THE IDEA OF ANYTHING BEING DONE THERE WOULD BE WASHED AWAY, LITERALLY MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN.
IN ADDITION, IT REQUIRED LENGTHY PROCESS OF APPROVAL THROUGH WATERSHED ZUCKER BOAT RENTALS.
A PARDON CONCESSION HANGS IN THE BALANCE WATERSHED IN THE PAST MONTH HAD CONCERNING VERBIAGE INSERT INTO ITS RFP PLAN THAT ALLOWS THE POWER OF RECOMMENDATION OR DISCONTINUATION OF CONCESSIONS.
WHILE ZUCKER BOATS APPRECIATES THE CONCERN FOR THE CONCESSION IN THE CREEK, THE ENVIRONMENT IS THRIVING.
ZER BOATS LOVES THE CREEK, AS DO MANY OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY.
TAKING THEM OUT OF THE MIX WOULD BE A BIG MISTAKE BECAUSE OF THEIR DEDICATION, LIKE NO OTHER THESE LAST 50 YEARS TO THAT AREA, IT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL ON AN ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY, CROWD CONTROL LEVEL.
THEY ARE THE ONLY RESILIENT AND SUSTAINABLE INFLUENCE DOWN THERE, AND THEY ARE SELF-FUNDING.
THEY DO NOT REQUIRE DONATIONS FROM NON-PROFITS AREN'T ASKING FOR HANDOUTS OR FAVORS, AND THERE ARE NOT ANY FUNDS FOR THIS PROJECT.
AND, AND, AND FROM A TRACK RECORD OF NEGLECT FROM THE CITY DEPARTMENTS OVER THE FAST PAST 54 YEARS, WE CAN'T EXPECT ANY PRETTY DRAWN OUT PLAN ON A COMPUTER TO BE A SUSTAINABLE LONG-TERM PROJECT.
THE ATMOSPHERE AND CULTURE CREATED BY ZILKER BOATS HAS, HAS CREATED SOMETHING UNIQUE AND WELCOMING TO EVERYONE.
AND THE MIX OF CULTURES THAT USE ZER BOATS IS DIVERSE AND UNLIKE ANY OTHER, GO DOWN ANY SATURDAY ON A BUSY SATURDAY AND COMPARE THE, THE MIX OF CULTURE AND PEOPLE DOWN THERE TO THE OTHER MORE MODERN CONCESSIONS AROUND THE LAKE.
NOT THE SAME CROWDS AT FREQUENT, THE LARGER, MORE SOPHISTICATED, POLISHED, MODERN FACILITIES ON LADYBIRD LAKE.
AND THIS IS BY DESIGN BECAUSE THEY'RE NESTLED ALONG THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE BANKS OF BARTON CREEK.
YOU WON'T SEE A HUGE MODERN FACILITY, BUT A MODEST AND MINIMAL STRUCTURE IS DESIGNED TO QUICKLY GET IN AND OUT OF, GET PEOPLE ON AND OFF THE CREEK ORDERLY WITH NO IMPACT ON THE AREA.
THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT YOU WANT TO CONTINUE THE STEWARD BARTON CREEK BECAUSE OF THEIR LOVE AND RESPECT FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE HISTORY THAT SURROUNDS IT.
PLEASE DON'T MOVE THEIR LOCATION ON THE CREEK OR SHUT ZUCKER BOATS DOWN IN THE PROCESS OF POLITICAL LAND GRABS BY PRIVATE INTEREST GROUPS OR UMBRELLA NON-PROFITS LUST.
ANOTHER PARK CONCESSION IS KILLED LIKE THE CONCESSION STAND AND THE TRAIN CONCESSIONS, WHICH WERE GIVEN TO NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS AND STILL DO NOT OPERATE AFTER YEARS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
AND THANK YOU FOR COMING AND DONATING YOUR TIME.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER GENERAL ALL RIGHT, CHAIR? YES.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ELIZABETH.
UM, YOU CAN ASK ELIZABETH, BUT WE CAN'T HAVE ANY CONVERSATION ABOUT, UH, THE DIALOGUE OR ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND I DON'T THINK I FIT INTO THAT CATEGORY.
BUT SOMEONE ELSE CAN YELL AT ME IF I DO.
UH, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT WE CAN GET A COPY OF THAT, UH, ELIZABETH FUNK WATERSHED, THE COPY OF THE SPEECH THAT JOHN JUST MADE? YES, SURE.
THEY HAVE MY EMAIL AND I WILL REACH OUT AND FORWARD THAT OUT TO YOU.
COULD YOU FORWARD THAT? MM-HMM.
[1. Approve the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on April 19, 2023]
UM, WE'VE GOT THE FIRST ITEM, UM, REVIEWING THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING.HAS, UH, ELIZABETH HAS DISSEMINATED THIS TO EVERYONE? I MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THE MINUTES WE'RE REVIEWING ANY COMMENTS ON THE PREVIOUS ME, THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING, CORRECTIONS CH CHANGES? ALL RIGHT.
WE'VE GOT A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
UM, MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? I'LL SECOND.
LET'S, YEAH, WE'RE, WE'RE GOOD.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING, WHICH WAS APRIL 19TH.
WE'VE GOT UNANIMOUS AND COHI AND NICHOLS ARE ALSO ON THE DIAS.
SPEAKING OF ON THE DIAS, UM, WELCOMING
[2. New Environmental Commission member welcome and introduction]
NEW MEMBERS, UM, MARIANA KRUEGER FROM, UH, DISTRICT THREE.UH, HOPEFULLY THIS WON'T BE QUITE AS LONG AS THE LAST FIRST MEETING WE HAD FOR SOME MEMBERS.
[00:20:01]
BUT WELL, IF YOU DON'T MIND, MAYBE TAKE A SECOND TO INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND KIND OF WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE HOPING TO GET DONE HERE.HI, MY NAME IS MARIANA KRUEGER.
I'M VERY GRATEFUL TO BE HERE APPOINTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VELAZQUEZ AND IS CHIEF OF STAFF.
SO GRATEFUL FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CO-CREATE A HEALTHY AND EQUITABLE CITY WITH ALL OF YOU.
I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT OUR ENVIRONMENT, BOTH ANIMAL AND HUMAN AND PLANT, AND I'M LOOKING TO FIND WAYS THAT WE CAN ALL WORK TOGETHER.
[3. Election of the Environmental Commission Vice Chair for May 1, 2023 through April 30, 2024 term]
IS THE ELECTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR.I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO MOVE THAT WE POSTPONE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING.
WE'VE GOT A SECOND FROM BRISTOL.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING.
UH, WE GOT UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF THAT.
WE'LL, WE'LL KEEP GOING AND MOVING INTO THE PUBLIC
[Items 4 & 5 ]
HEARINGS.UM, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR, LEDGE STONE WASTEWATER SERVICE EXTENSION, REQUEST 56 50, UM, AT 92 0 9 LEDGE, STONE TERRACE.
LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT A, AN OLD TIME FRIEND COMING BACK TO PRESENT TO US.
MY NAME IS KAYLA CHAPLIN WITH THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT.
UH, JACKSON, I HAVE A PRESENTATION.
WOULD YOU MIND PULLING THAT UP FOR ME? THANK YOU.
SO TONIGHT I'LL BE PRESENTING, I'M PRESENTING TWO S SCR AT THE SAME TIME.
SO IT'S THE ALLEGED STONE TERRACE AND 89 21 WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90 S E R NUMBER 56 72.
UM, THESE ARE BOTH WATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS.
OKAY, SO BEFORE I JUMP INTO THE PROJECT SPECIFICS, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF, OF BACKGROUND.
WHAT IN SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS, WHAT THE SERVICE EXTENSION PRO, SORRY, GUYS.
SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST PROCESS IS, SO A SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST, OR S E R BECAUSE IT'S A BIT OF A TONGUE TWISTER, IS AN APPLICATION FOR CITY WATER OR WASTEWATER SERVICE FROM A PROPERTY OWNER OR DEVELOPER.
AN S E R IS REQUIRED WHEN A PROPERTY IS LOCATED MORE THAN A HUNDRED FEET FROM AN ACCESSIBLE WATER OR WASTEWATER SYSTEM, OR WHEN EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE ISN'T ADEQUATE FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DEMANDS SERVICE MAY INVOLVE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW LINE OR AN ASSOCIATE FACILITY, OR UPGRADES TO EXISTING LINES OR FACILITIES.
THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING FOR THE ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE AS OUTLINED IN A SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST.
PER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SCRS REQUIRE COUNCIL APPROVAL IF A PROPERTY IS IN, IS LOCATED IN THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE AND OUTSIDE OF THE CITY'S FULL PURPOSE JURISDICTION.
SO FIRST IT WILL BE REV VIEWED BY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
THEN IT WILL GO ON TO WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION FOR A RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN ULTIMATELY IT'LL GO TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
AND ONE IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE IS THAT UNLIKE LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES, THAT YOU CAN PLACE CONDITIONS ON SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE VOTED FOR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL.
SO YOUR RECOMMENDATION CAN'T SPECIFY ANY CONDITIONS.
UM, AND THEN TONIGHT WE'RE RECOMMENDING, AS I MENTIONED, WE'RE GONNA DO TWO SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS IN THIS PRESENTATION.
THEY'RE SCHEDULED TO BE CONSIDERED BY WATER AND WASTE WATER COMMISSION ON MAY 10TH, AND THEN WE'LL SUBSEQUENTLY GO TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL ON MAY 11TH.
AND, UM, WHEN IT'S TIME TO MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU'LL NEED TO JUST MAKE TWO SEPARATE RECOMMENDATIONS, ONE FOR EACH S E R.
SO FOR THE FIRST SITE, THIS IS ALLEGED STONE TERRACE PROPERTY CONSISTS OF ONE TRACT OF APPROXIMATELY 77.78 ACRES, LOCATED AT 92 0 9 LEDGE STONE TERRACE.
THE SITE IS IN THE CITY'S TWO MILE E J OR EXTRA-TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.
IT'S ALSO LOCATED IN THE SLAUGHTER CREEK WATERSHED, THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, THE EDWARDS AQUIFER CONTRIBUTING ZONE, AND THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE.
AND THE SITE IS SUBJECT TO THE CITY, OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE.
SO, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 550 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITH 275 LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENT OR UES.
AND JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND FOR ANYBODY WHO DOESN'T KNOW, AN L U E
[00:25:01]
IS A TYPICAL FLOW PRODUCED BY A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED IN A TYPICAL SUBDIVISION, AND A SINGLE L U E IS, UH, ASSUMED TO REPRESENT 3.5 PEOPLE LIVING IN A RESIDENCE.UM, AND THEN A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT THIS SITE, A WASTEWATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, THE WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION, AND APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN JUNE OF 2020.
OKAY, SO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 89 21 WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90.
IT'S A TRACT OF APPROXIMATELY 69 POINT 12 ACRES.
IT'S ALSO IN THE CITY'S TWO MILE E T J SLAUGHTER CREEK WATERSHED, ALSO IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, EDWARDS AQUIFER CONTRIBUTING ZONE, AND THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE.
THIS SITE IS NOT SUBJECT TO SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE DUE TO VESTING RIGHTS ON THE PROPERTY.
SO, UM, THE REQUEST IS ALSO FOR, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, A WATER S E R FOR A 280 UNIT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITH 140 UES.
AND, UM, IT DOES HAVE A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR THE JUNCTION ATHLETIC COMPLEX.
I THINK MAYBE A FEW OF YOU WERE AROUND THEN, BUT IT, IT RECEIVED SOME VARIANCES AND ALSO HAD, AS I MENTIONED, THE SITE HAS SOME VESTING.
UM, BUT THE, IT HAS A NEW SITE PLAN, BUT THE PROJECT IS STILL IN THE SAME DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT.
UM, AND THIS SITE ALSO RECEIVED A WASTEWATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION, AND WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN JANUARY OF 2022.
OKAY, SO THIS IS JUST A MAP THAT SHOWS THE SITES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CITY'S FULL JURISDICTION.
UM, AS I MENTIONED, THEY'RE BOTH IN A TWO MILE EJ.
UM,
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY ARE NOT LOCATED NEAR ONE OF THE CENTERS OR CORRIDORS WHERE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SEEKS TO DIRECT NEW DEVELOPMENT.
SO HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTIES OUTLINED IN RED.
UH, THE SITE ON THE LEFT IS THE LEDGE STONE TERRACES PROPERTY, AND THE SITE ON THE RIGHT IS 89 21 WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90.
OKAY, SO THIS MAP IS SHOWING THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON THE LEDGE STONE PROPERTY.
THE SOUTHWESTERN AND SOUTHEASTERN CORNERS OF THE SITE CONTAIN A NATURAL CHANNEL OF SLAUGHTER CREEK AND ITS ASSOCIATED CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE.
AND THE NORTHEASTERN CORNER OF THE PROPERTY ALSO CONTAINS SOME WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE FOR DEVIL'S PEN CREEK.
AND THERE ARE TWO WETLAND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ALONG A NATURAL CHANNEL OF SLAUGHTER CREEK ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE.
AND THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ON THE SITE.
UM, AND THEN THE SITE ALSO, JUST SO YOU KNOW, IT DOES NOT DRAIN TO KNOWN, UH, OCCUPIED SALATE HABITAT.
THIS IS JUST A WRITTEN SUMMARY OF WHAT I DESCRIBED.
SO THIS MAP SHOWS THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON THE 89 21 WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90 SITE, AND THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE CONTAINS DEVIL P DEVIL'S PEN CREEK, AND ITS ASSOCIATED CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE.
THERE ARE SEVEN WETLANDS CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND ONE SEEP CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE ON THE PROPERTY.
THE SITE ALSO DOES NOT DRAIN TO OCCUPY SALOME HABITAT.
AND AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, I'VE JUST STATED AGAIN THAT THE, THE SITE DOES HAVE A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR AN ATHLETIC COMPLEX.
AND THEY WERE IN, IN THAT PROJECT, THEY RECEIVED THREE LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES FOR CUT AND FILL, EXCEEDING FOUR FEET OF DEPTH AND CONSTRUCTION IN THE WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE.
SINCE THEN, THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR, UM, A REVISED TYPE PLAN AND STAFF TOLD THEM THAT THEY NEEDED TO SUBMIT A NEW SITE PLAN.
SO THAT IS CURRENTLY IN REVIEW, BUT THESE APPROVED VARIANCES ARE STILL PART OF THAT NEGOTIATING.
THEY WERE NEGOTIATED INTO THAT, UM, PROJECT, AND THEY STILL APPLY.
AND THE, THE FOOTPRINT, THE DEVELOPMENT FOOTPRINT IS STILL THE SAME
[00:30:01]
ALL RIGHT, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.OKAY, SO THIS IS A MAP THAT SHOWS THE PROPOSED WATER EXTENSION FOR THE FIRST OPTION.
SO THE LEADSTONE TRACT IS, IS THE PINK HASHED AREA, AND THE PROPOSED WATER EXTENSION IS IN RED.
AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A PERPENDICULAR CROSSING FOR DEVIL'S PEN CREEK, WHICH CAN BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
AND TWO WATER SERVICE OPTIONS ARE BEING PROPOSED.
OPTION ONE, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE.
UM, HOWEVER, IN AUSTIN WATER HAS ALSO PROVIDED A SECOND OPTION TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY IF ADEQUATE SPACE IS NOT AVAILABLE EAST OF SOUTH BEND, ALONG US HIGHWAY TWO 90 IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ONGOING HIGHWAY EXPANSION PROJECT, OTHER A UTILITY CONFLICTS AND, AND IF THEY'RE UNABLE TO OBTAIN AN EASEMENT ALONG THAT PATH.
SO I'LL SHOW YOU THAT, UM, EXTENSION.
NOW, COULD YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE? SO IF THOSE CONFLICTS ARISE, THEN THEY WOULD USE THIS OPTION, WHICH IS ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THE FIRST, IT'S REALLY THE LITTLE BIT OFF OF HIGHWAY TWO 90 NEAR SOUTH BEND THAT CHANGES.
SO HERE'S A MAP OF THE OTHER TRACT HIGHLIGHTED IN PINK AND THE PROPOSED WATER EXTENSION HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.
AND AS I MENTIONED, THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ARE ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THE OTHER SITE AND THE TWO, AND THEY'RE ALSO TWO OPTIONS PROPOSED HERE.
UM, THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE GOING TO BE SHARED WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, THE ALLEGED STONE PRO PROPERTY.
AND IF THE PROJECT, IF THESE PROJECTS WERE, IT REALLY, WHOEVER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WATER IMPROVEMENTS IS WHICHEVER PROJECT NEEDS IT FIRST, ESSENTIALLY.
UM, AND THEN AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THERE ARE TWO OPTIONS PROPOSED.
IF THERE ARE THOSE CONFLICTS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THEN NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, THEN THIS WOULD BE THE OPTION THEY PURSUED.
UH, THIS IS JUST ANOTHER WRITTEN SUMMARY OF WHAT I DESCRIBED.
SO IF SERVICE WAS NOT EXTENDED TO THE SITE, THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SEEK WATER SERVICE FROM THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY.
SO THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR BOTH WATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS, UH, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
THE APPROVED WASTEWATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS ON BOTH SITES WILL EVENTUALLY ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW PUBLIC WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND THE PROPOSED WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IS SIMILAR TO WHAT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR THESE SITES.
AND, UM, THE PROPOSED WATER INFRASTRUCTURE IS CODE COMPLIANT.
AND THEN AGAIN, THE 89 21 WEST US HIGHWAY TWO 90 SITE ALREADY HAS APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR THE ATHLETIC COMPLEX, AND THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT WILL BE SIMILAR TO THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT'S ALREADY ALLOWED D UM, DUE TO THE SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
I THINK THERE MIGHT BE SOMEONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ALSO.
AND I'M NOT SURE, IS APPLICANT HERE IF, DID YOU ALSO WANNA DO A PRESENTATION? NO.
SO THERE, APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, AND WE ALSO HAVE STAFF FROM AUSTIN WATER HERE.
UM, AND WE'VE GOT, SO I, I GUESS THE APPLICANT, YOU GUYS DO NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION, BUT YOU'RE HERE AVAILABLE TO SPEAK IF NEEDED.
THEN LET'S, LET'S HEAR FROM THE ONE, UH, PUBLIC SPEAKER, UH, MR. LEVINSKY.
AND YOU'RE WANTING TO SPEAK ON BOTH ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY.
SO BOBBY LEVINSKY, SAER SPRINGS ALLIANCE, UH, WE OPPOSE THESE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST, UM, LAST TIME WHEN THEY WENT THROUGH THE CYCLE, UM, WE'RE AGAIN OPPOSED TO 'EM.
UH, I THINK MORE PARTICULARLY THE ITEM, I BELIEVE IT'S ITEM SIX.
IT'S THE ONE WITH THE US TWO 90 ADDRESS.
THAT'S THE PROPERTY THAT HAS, UH, VESTED RIGHTS BACK TO A 1995 PLAT.
UM, JUST TO TELL YOU THE CHAIN OF HISTORY WITH THIS, UM, THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED LAST TIME WAS FOR AN ATHLETIC COMPLEX.
THIS TIME IT'S FOR MULTI-FAMILY.
[00:35:01]
US, THAT'S A CHANGE OF CHANGE OF USE, A CHANGE OF PROJECT.UM, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DEAL WITH ON A SEPARATE, UH, AT A SEPARATE TIME WITH STAFF.
BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE SEEKING VESTED RIGHTS THAT THEY'RE NOT, WOULD NOT BE COMPLIANT UNDER CURRENT CODE.
WITH THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW, THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO GO GET SERVICE FROM, UH, WESTERN TRAVIS COUNTY PUA.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN THEIR, UM, CCN.
SO IT'D BE EASIER FOR THEM TO GO DO THAT.
AND I THINK THAT TELLS YOU WHY THEY'RE HERE.
IT'S THAT PROBABLY COST 'EM A LOT MORE TO TRY TO GET A PIPE OUT TO THIS PROPERTY FROM WHERE IT WOULD NEED TO GO.
A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE THAN IT WOULD BE JUST TO DEAL WITH AUSTIN RIGHT NOW.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE ARE AT WITH THIS CONVERSATION IS WHY AREN'T THEY JUST COMING INTO COMPLIANCE WITH OUR ENVIRONMENTAL CODE IF THEY REALLY WANT WATER SERVICE, IF THEY DON'T WANT TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CURRENT CODE, JUST SAY NO, HA LET WAIT FOR THEM TO OFFER IT TO US TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL CODE.
YOU CAN'T CONDITION SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST, BUT HAS BEEN LONGSTANDING PRACTICE THAT IF THE PROVISION OF WATER PROVIDES THEM A LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY GREATER THAN WHAT WOULD BE OTHERWISE AVAILABLE TO THEM WITH ALTERNATIVE SERVICE, WE SAY NO.
I THINK THAT'S A GOOD PRACTICE.
I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE THAT PRACTICE.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S OTHER, THERE'S OTHER CONCERNS WITH THIS SITE.
UM, I HAVE NOT HAD ENOUGH TIME TO LOOK AT THE, THE ROUTING OF THE PIPE.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S IN A BAD LOCATION WHERE IT WOULD CROSS THE CREEK.
IT WOULD ALSO CROSS A PROPERTY THAT WAS DEDICATED AS NO DEVELOPMENT UNDER THIS, UH, SUBDIVISION BACK IN 1995.
SO I'M NOT SURE WHETHER THAT'S COMPLIANT WITH THAT, UH, SUBDIVISION SITE OR NOT.
UM, GENERALLY I JUST THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT MORE QUESTIONS ON THIS, UM, THAN I HAVE ANSWERS TO FOR YOU RIGHT NOW, BUT, UM, WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO FOLLOW IT REGARDLESS.
UM, AND JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO SAY NO AND, AND, YOU KNOW, USE THE ONE TOOL THAT WE HAVE LEFT TO, UH, ENFORCE OUR ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AROUND THE HORN HERE AND, UH, SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR, OR THE APPLICANT.
UM, KREK, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH, WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU.
SO IT'S A, IT'S A GOOD TECHNIQUE.
UM, ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER SCOTT, DO YOU HAVE A, A GOOD MIC AND ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I HAVE A GOOD MIC, WHICH IS A START.
UM, CALEB, UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY RESPONSE TO, UM, WHAT MR. UH, LAVINSKY JUST SAID? I THINK, UM, SO I'LL TRY TO ADDRESS THAT.
I THINK PART OF IT WILL PROBABLY NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BY AUSTIN WATER REGARDING THE CCN.
UM, REGARDING THE CROSSING OF DEVIL'S PEN CREEK.
UM, AS I MENTIONED, THEY ARE PROPOSING A PERPENDICULAR CROSSING TO DEVIL'S PEN CREEK THAT CAN BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT DURING THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS.
SO PER REVIEW, THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE AND COMPLIANT WITH CODE.
UM, LET'S SEE, WHAT ELSE AM I MISSING? UM, OUR UNDERSTANDING REGARDING THE STATUS OF THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION IS THAT IT'S STILL IN REVIEW, BUT THE VARIANCES THAT THEY RECEIVED PREVIOUSLY UNDER THE ATHLETIC COMPLEX ARE, ARE VALID STILL.
AND THEY DO, AND AS, AS MR. LEVINSKY MENTIONED, THEY DO HAVE VESTING RIGHTS, UM, TO 1995.
SO THERE ARE SOME ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS THAT ARE IN PLACE, BUT THEY DO HAVE SOME, YOU KNOW, SPECIAL, UM, YOU KNOW, VARIANCES BECAUSE OF THAT.
I, I, UM, I'M LEFT FEELING LIKE I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION.
UM, I'M JUST NOT, I MEAN, YOU'RE SAYING SOMETHING DIF DIFFERENT AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO RECONCILE THAT AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT TO, WHAT TO SAY NEXT OR WHAT TO THINK REALLY.
MAYBE THE APPLICANT COULD COME UP AND SPEAK TO THAT.
UH, GOOD EVENING EVERYONE, UH, VITO WITH ENDEAVOR.
UH, SO, UH, WHAT, I GUESS IF YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT THE VESTING, UH, THAT WAS COORDINATED WITH STAFF AT THE TIME THAT THE SITE PLAN APPLICATION PROCESS WAS HANDLED.
[00:40:01]
WAS VETTED, THE VESTING WAS APPROVED AND THE PROJECT HAS MOVED FORWARD.UM, SO REALLY THIS IS JUST ABOUT COMING IN FOR THE S SCR TONIGHT.
IS, IS THAT YOUR QUESTION? DOES THAT SPEAK TO YOUR QUESTION OR ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING POINTS OF CLARIFICATION? I JUST, UM, I'M JUST HEARING TWO OPPOSING POINTS OF VIEW AND I, UM, I DON'T HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN EITHER ONE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO GET SOME CLARITY ABOUT WHAT POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WE MIGHT BE LOOKING AT.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, UM, GOING THROUGH, UM, APPARENTLY, UM, MAYBE KAYLA, MAYBE IF, UM, IF I HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT, WHAT ROUTE, WHAT ROUTE TO WATER WOULD TAKE AND WHERE IT WOULD CROSS, UM, WOULD IT CROSS CRITICAL FEATURES OR I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND WHAT, UM, I DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND.
I DON'T FEEL LIKE I'M, I'M IN A POSITION TO MAKE A A, AN INFORMED VOTE YES OR NO, UH, ABOUT THIS.
AND THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO PULL THE EXHIBIT UP AGAIN, BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE TWO CROSSINGS.
ONE WOULD BE AT TWO 90 ACROSS THE HIGHWAY.
UM, AND IT WOULD BE A PERPENDICULAR CROSSING OF TWO 90.
AND THE CODE ALLOWS A PERPENDICULAR CROSSING OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE FOR, FOR UTILITIES.
UM, AND THEN THE EIGHT INCH LINE IN THE BACK IS NECESSARY FOR LOOPING, WHICH IS A RE WHICH IS A REQUIREMENT IN AWS CODE, UM, TO HELP HAVE RESILIENCY IN THEIR SYSTEM.
UM, BUT UH, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH AW, AND IF FOR SOME REASON A CROSSING IS NOT POSSIBLE BACK THERE BECAUSE WE CAN'T OBTAIN EASEMENTS, OR IF THERE'S A LOT THAT CAN'T BE CROSSED, THEN THERE IS ANOTHER PROVISION IN THE AW CODE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT EIGHT INCH LINE IN THE BACK TO NOT HAVE TO BE BUILT AND ONLY BE THE 16 INCH IN THE FRONT ALONG THE HIGHWAY.
UM, IF, IF THAT CROSSING CAN'T BE MADE, UM, SO THEN IT WOULD JUST BE THE ONE AT THE HIGHWAY.
UM, BUT I, BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S A, THAT'S A SYSTEM RESILIENCY ISSUE TO TRY TO HAVE THAT LOOP.
KAYLA CHAMPLIN WATERSHED PROTECTION.
WHEN THE S SCR IS APPROVED, IT'S WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S A CODE COMPLIANT LINE, SO WHEN IT COMES IN AT SITE PLAN, IT WILL BE REVIEWED AND AT THAT TIME, IF IT'S DETERMINED TO NOT BE CODE-COMPLIANT OR THEY'RE UNABLE TO GET, UM, THIS ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THAT LINE CODE-COMPLIANT.
YEAH, ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF WILL REVIEW EVERYTHING BEFORE THE PLANS ARE APPROVED.
DO YOU HAVE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UH, YEAH, FOR SURE.
YOU KNOW, UM, I GREW UP NEAR THE AREA IN BE TERRA, SO IT REALLY DOESN'T SURPRISE ME THAT AN ATHLETIC COMPLEX, WELL PLANNED, ATHLETIC COMPLEX IS BEING REPLACED WITH MORE APARTMENTS.
CAUSE THAT'S HOW, UH, THEY'RE BUILDING OUT THERE NOWADAYS.
ANYWAYS, UM, I DO, I THINK READING THE DOCUMENTATION RIGHT, IT, UH, SAID THAT A WASTEWATER S E R WAS RECOMMENDED BY, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS COMMISSIONS.
UM, I THINK INCLUDING US, UH, YOU KNOW, PREVIOUSLY.
UM, BUT HOWEVER, I THINK IT IS FAIR TO NOTE THAT I THINK MANY OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS PROBABLY APPROVED THAT THINKING THAT IT WOULD BE A, UM, YOU KNOW, ATHLETIC COMPLEX, WHICH I THINK WILL HAVE A LOT LESS WASTEWATER AND WATER USAGE THAN, YOU KNOW, MULTIFAMILY HOMES, WHICH OF COURSE ARE SUPER NECESSARY, YOU KNOW, AS AUSTIN CONTINUES TO GROW.
BUT I THINK THERE'S SOME DEFINITE, UM, ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, SPEAKING TO, WOW, I GOT CLOSE THERE.
UH, SPEAKING TO, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, CITIZEN WHO WAS SPEAKING BEFORE REPRESENTING SAVE OUR SPRINGS, I WAS WONDERING IF, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT COULD SORT OF SPEAK ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT EXACTLY HAPPENS IF INSTEAD OF GETTING THIS S E R THEY GO THROUGH, UH, WEST TRAVIS COUNTY, IS IT A QUESTION OF JUST COST AND THAT'S WHY IT'S HAPPENING? WHAT I GUESS ARE THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? UM, AND JUST IMPACTS IN GENERAL OF, YOU KNOW, GOING THROUGH WITH, YOU KNOW, BUILDING THIS, UH, WASTEWATER EXTENSION, UM, VERSUS JUST USING, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY P U A WATER.
AND THAT WAS REALLY MY ONLY QUESTION.
AND COMMISSIONER QURESHI, UH, KILL CHAIRMAN WATERSHED PROTECTION, I'LL JUST SPEAK TO YOUR FIRST COMMENT ABOUT THE PREVIOUS WASTEWATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS THAT WERE APPROVED.
UM, THE FIRST ONE IN 2020 AND THE SECOND IN 2022 WERE 2020 END OF 2021.
BUT AT THE TIME THAT THEY WERE BROUGHT THROUGH THE PROCESS, THE
[00:45:01]
APPLICANTS WERE BOTH PROPOSING MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THE SAME, UH, AMOUNT AS BEING PROPOSED TODAY.SO THE, THE ACTUAL, UM, DEVELOPMENT USE HASN'T CHANGED SINCE THE WASTEWATER SCR WERE APPROVED.
SO WOULD WE SAY THAT THERE'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE LESS DEVELOPMENT? BECAUSE I GUESS SO BEFORE IT WAS GONNA BE MULTI-FAMILY AND THE COMPLEX AND NOW IT'S JUST MULTI-FAMILY.
UH, THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN WAS FOR AN ATHLETIC COMPLEX AND THEN WHEN THEY CAME IN FOR THE SCR AT THAT POINT THEY ALREADY HAD A REVISED SITE PLAN IN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
BUT YEAH, I WAS WONDERING IF THE APPLICANT COULD SPEAK TO SORT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THE PROS AND CONS OF, YOU KNOW, THE WASTEWATER REQUEST VERSUS, UH, USING, YOU KNOW, WEST TRAVIS COUNTY, UH, WATER PUBLIC USE AGENCY.
UM, SO WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUA ONLY PROVIDES WATER SERVICE IN THIS AREA OF TOWN, NOT WASTEWATER.
UM, WHICH IS WHY WASTEWATER IS WHAT WAS COME, WE CAME IN FOR ORIGINALLY, UM, WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUA IS UPDATING OR UPGRADING THEIR SYSTEM RIGHT NOW.
IT'LL BE A LITTLE QUICKER TO GO WITH.
UM, IT'LL ACTUALLY COST MORE TO, TO EXTEND WATER TO THE SITE FROM AW.
UM, IT'S JUST, IT'LL BE A LITTLE QUICKER.
UH, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
COMMISSIONER KRUEGER, YOU'RE, YOU'RE UP OR YOU CAN PUNT IF FOR YOUR FIRST ONE IF YOU WANT.
BEFORE THE APPLICANT SITS DOWN THOUGH.
UM, YEAH, I'M CURIOUS, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.
I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE TIMELINE FOR THE PIPE CONSTRUCTION, UM, AND WHAT IS WRITTEN INTO THE PLAN IN TERMS OF EITHER THE CITY OR YOU AS THE DEVELOPER TO KIND OF OFFSET ANY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF, YOU KNOW, GOING UNDER THE CREEK.
UM, AND JUST HOW LONG WE COULD ANTICIPATE THAT WOULD HAPPEN.
UM, AND THEN I DON'T KNOW IF THE PERSON FROM SAVE OUR SPRINGS IS STILL HERE, BUT, UM, THEY WERE MAKING REFERENCE TO THIS PLAN NOT BEING IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL CODE AND I WAS WONDERING SOME, SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
UM, AND THEN SIMILAR TO COMMISSIONER KASSI, I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT, UM, IF THE COUNTY WERE TO PROVIDE UTILITIES, WOULD, WOULD THE ROUTE OF THE PIPE BE THE SAME OR WOULD IT HAVE TO TAKE A DIFFERENT ROUTE? UM, AND I IMAGINE OTHER ROUTES HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED MAYBE NOT UNDER THE CREEK, BUT IF SO, WHAT ARE THEY OR WHY IS THIS THE BEST PATH FORWARD OR THE PROPOSED PLAN? UM, SO, UH, A FEW QUESTIONS THERE.
UM, SO, UH, AS FAR AS TIMING, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THE PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, WHEN IT'S ACTUALLY CROSSING THE CREEK, IT, I'D HAVE TO CHECK WITH OUR CONTRACTOR, BUT MAYBE A MONTH OR TWO, UM, OBVIOUSLY BE AS LITTLE TIME AS POSSIBLE.
UM, AND ALL OF YOU KNOW THAT, UH, THAT'S KIND OF PART OF THE CITY REVIEW IS WHAT GOES INTO THE PLANS, HOW WE'RE CROSSING AND MINIMIZING IMPACT TO THE, TO THE CRITICAL ART QUALITY ZONE IS, IS PART OF THE CODE.
UM, AS, AS FAR AS THE ROUTE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY UAS ROUTE IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.
UM, THEY COME DOWN AT CIRCLE DRIVE, UM, I THINK THEY CROSS THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE.
UM, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, OUR MAIN CROSSING IS ACROSS THE HIGHWAY, WHICH IS PROBABLY THE BEST PLACE TO CROSS THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO CROSS ONE.
UM, CAUSE IT'S ALREADY USUALLY IMPACTED BY THE ROAD TO SOME EXTENT.
UM, BUT, BUT YEAH, ALL OF THAT WILL BE EVALUATED DURING DESIGN AND WE'LL HAVE TO MEET CODE, WHICH IS, I MEAN, THE CODE'S WRITTEN TO PROTECT THOSE THINGS.
DOES THAT ANSWER I YES, THANK YOU.
I AM, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH CODE AND I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE PARTICULAR CODE, BUT COULD YOU MAYBE LAY OUT SOME SPECIFIC THINGS THAT HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION TAKES PLACE TO ENSURE THE RESTORATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT, WHICH MAY NOT COME UNDER YOUR AUSPICES, BUT IF YOU'D BE WILLING TO EDUCATE ME, I'D APPRECIATE IT.
YEAH, E EVERYTHING THAT'S DISTURBED HAS TO BE RE STABILIZED.
UM, SO, UH, AFTER CONSTRUCTION BY THE DEVELOPER OR WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY WOULD THAT BE? UH, LIZ DUNSTON, A DEPUTY ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.
[00:50:01]
SO WE DO HAVE REGULATIONS.THERE'S A, AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN COMPONENT, THERE WILL BE RESTORATION REQUIRED.
UM, AND IF THERE IS DISTURBANCE IN A CREEK BUFFER, FOR EXAMPLE, UM, IF THEY CAN'T BOAR UNDER THE CREEK, THEN THERE'S AN OPEN CUT THEN THAT WOULD NEED TO BE RESTORED WITH NATIVE.
UM, WE HAVE A STANDARD SPECIFICATION, UM, FOR THAT SPECIFIC SCENARIO.
UM, BEF IT WOULD HAVE TO BE STABLE BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTOR WOULD SIGN OFF AND, UM, ALLOW THEM TO, UH, OPEN THEIR PRO THE, HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
SO, AND THE CITY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANTING THOSE NATIVE, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE OKAY.
SO THAT WOULD BE PART OF OUR PROJECT.
AND THERE'S CERTAIN SPECIES THAT HAVE TO BE REPLANTED AND THEY'RE NATIVE AND UM, SO THERE'S A SCHEDULE FOR THAT.
COMMISSIONER COFER, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? UH, JUST A COUPLE CLARIFICATIONS I COULDN'T SEE.
ARE THERE ANY, UM, RECHARGE FEATURES ON EITHER OF THE PROPERTIES WHERE THIS IS PROPOSED? YES.
UH, KAYLA CHAIRMAN WATERSHED PROTECTION, DID YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT OR NO, YOU CAN.
SO ON THE LEDGE STONE PROPERTY, THERE ARE TWO WETLAND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
AND ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY THERE ARE, I THINK SEVEN, UM, THERE ARE SEVERAL WETLAND CFS, THERE'S A SEAT, C E F ALSO, SEVERAL OF THEM ARE ALONG THE CREEK, UM, THE CREEK LINE.
AND THEN THERE ARE A COUPLE SMALL ONES ON THE PROPERTY ITSELF.
BUT NO SINKS OR LIKE ACTUAL RECHARGE? NO, PETERS JUST, YES, NO.
UM, AND THEN APOLOGIES, I DON'T SEE THE, THE WASTEWATER ROUTING THAT HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH.
WOULD IT BE A SIMILAR YES, IT'S, IT'S VERY SIMILAR.
SO THAT THE SOUTHERN PERPENDICULAR CROSSING OF THE CREEK WOULD SORT OF JUST BE EXPOSED ONCE, CORRECT.
YEAH, IT WOULD BE SORT OF SIDE BY SIDE IN THAT PLACE.
THEY, IT'S KIND OF CLOSER TO THE OPTION TWO OPTION HERE, WHERE IT COMES DOWN, UM, FROM CIRCLE DRIVE.
AND THEN I GUESS JUST ONE LAST QUESTION TO, TO STAFF, JUST, IT, IT, DO YOU ALL HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS BETWEEN THE OPTIONS? I KNOW THAT THERE'S TWO OPTIONS GIVEN AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE FIRST ONE IS, IS WHAT THEY'RE LEANING TOWARDS, BUT IS, IS THERE A DIFFERENCE ENVIRONMENTALLY? NO, WE DON'T HAVE A PREFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO OPTIONS.
AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM IS, IS KIND OF WELL OUTSIDE OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
SO YEAH, JUST ABOUT WHICH ONE WILL WORK BETTER FROM A STANDPOINT OF HAVING ROOM IN THE ROAD.
SO, UM, I GUESS I COULD ASK YOU THESE QUESTIONS TO MR. TRU.
UM, WITH ALL OF THE SET, WITH ALL OF THE CFS AND THE SETBACKS THAT YOU HAVE TO APPLY TO THEM, IF YOU'RE NOT UNDER THE, UH, REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER, IMPERVIOUS COVER UNDER SOS, WHAT KIND OF IMPERVIOUS COVER WOULD YOU HAVE ON THAT PRO ON THAT UH, PLOT? UM, BRETT WILL COME UP AND HELP ME WITH SOME OF THAT, SO I, I'M KIND OF REPRESENTING BOTH, BUT CUZ BRETT AND I ARE, ARE WORKING VERY CLOSELY TOGETHER, BUT THERE, I THINK THERE'S STILL IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITATIONS ON THAT PROPERTY.
I MEAN EVEN IF THERE, IF IT WERE NOT AN SOS IT WOULD STILL BE 65% FROM, UH, FOR MULTI-FAMILY, BUT IF YOU HAVE TO TAKE UP MORE SPACE BECAUSE OF THE CFS AND THE SETBACKS FROM THOSE AND THE CRITICAL DRAINAGE FOR THE, FROM THE CREEKS, THEN THAT'S GONNA CUT INTO YOUR IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO IF YOU INCLUDED ALL OF THAT, WHAT WOULD YOUR ACTUAL YIELD BE FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER? UH, BRETT DENTON WITH DEN RESIDENTIAL, UM, SO THE, UH, THE TRACK WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT IS, UH, IS ABOUT 60 ACRES OR AL UH, 69 ACRES, ALMOST 70 ACRES.
THE ALLOWED DEVELOPER IMPERVIOUS COVER DEVELOPABLE AREA DUE TO CRITICAL AND WATER QUALITY ZONE SETBACKS IS 6.14 ACRES.
SO WE'RE LESS THAN THAN 10% IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THIS SITE.
THAT'S ALL, THAT'S ALL THAT'S ALLOWED.
SO WE'RE FAR BELOW WHAT SOS WOULD REQUIRE.
AND I DID HAVE THE SAME QUESTION THAT COMMISSIONER KHI HAD ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GOING WITH THE PUBLIC UTILITY, UH, AGENCY VERSUS, BUT IN, IN ITS ONLY TIMING THAT MAKES THAT DIFFERENCE.
OPTION ONE IS THE PREFERRED ONE
[00:55:01]
BY APPLICANT.UM, AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM IS REALLY THE ABILITY TO ACCESS THE RIGHT OF WAY OR, YOU KNOW, GET PERMISSION FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S REALLY OPTION TWO, YOU HAVE TO BORE UNDER TWO 90 TO GET ACROSS FROM THE NORTH SIDE.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WE'RE ACTUALLY VOTING TO ACCEPT, WE'RE VOTING TO APPROVE TWO ITEMS? WELL, THE TWO OP, YEAH.
TWO ITEMS WITHIN THE TWO OPTIONS.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE WOULD VOTE ON ONE.
I MEAN, YOU DON'T GET TO CHERRY PICK.
MY, MY FEELING IS PICK ONE AND WE VOTE ON IT.
AND THEN THAT'S WHAT YOU GO WITH.
YOU DON'T, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T GET THE LIST LIKE A BUNCH OF OPTIONS AND THEN WE VOTE ON ALL OF THEM AND THEN YOU GET TO PICK ONE LATER ON.
THAT'S KIND OF MY POINT, BUT, OKAY.
UH, I GUESS KAYLA'S UH, MENTIONED EARLIER THAT WHAT CAN BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED.
NOW I'M, I'M LOOKING AT, UH, YOUR SLIDE, AT LEAST ON MY PULL UP.
IT SAYS SLIDE 15, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, UH, ON YOURS.
UH, WHAT, WHAT PART OF THIS CAN BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED? IT'S A PERPENDICULAR CROSSING OF DEVIL'S PEN CREEK.
BUT THE REST OF IT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY US THEN THAT WHAT YOU'RE APPROVING IS THE WATER SERVICE EXTENSION.
AND, BUT THE, BUT SO THE, JUST THE ACTUAL GETTING THE WATER SERVICE, THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE LINE WHERE IT WILL GO EXACTLY, WILL HAPPEN DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS REVIEW PROCESS.
SO AT THIS POINT IT'S CONCEPTUAL.
SO THIS IS KIND OF LIKE A HYPOTHETICAL LINE? CORRECT.
UM, YEAH, AND I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION THAT COMMISSIONER HARRIS HAD.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS IN THE E T J, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
AND UNDER CURRENT STATE LAW, THIS WILL NEVER BE WITHIN THE CITY.
BUT, AND, AND SO MY POINT IS THIS IS NEVER SIT IN THE CITY AND WE'RE NEVER GOING TO ACCESS THIS.
SO WHY SHOULD WE EXTEND CITY SERVICES TO SOMEONE WHO'S NEVER IN THE CITY? IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT IF YOU WANNA BE IN THE COUNTY, THEN YOU SHOULD ACCESS COUNTY SERVICES.
NOW THE WASTE WATER REQUEST WAS DIFFERENT BECAUSE UH, IT REQUIRED, YOU KNOW, WASTEWATER IS DIFFERENT.
I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT IN A PROPER MANNER.
SO IT'S NOT TO POLLUTE THE ENTIRE WESTERN PART OF TRAVIS COUNTY WITH WASTEWATER AND ALL THAT OTHER SORT OF STUFF.
DRINKING WATER IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM MY PERCEPTION.
IN ANY EVENT, IF YOU WANT DRINKING WATER AND YOU WANNA BE IN THE COUNTY, THEN YOU NEED TO GO TO THE COUNTY.
CUZ YOU COULD HAVE LIKE BUILT IT IN THE CITY BUT YOU DIDN'T.
UH, KAYLA, IF THEY GET THE, IF THEY GET THE WATER FROM THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY HAS TO BUILD PIPELINES, WILL THE COUNTY HAVE TO, UH, ABIDE BY CITY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTRICTIONS, CODES, WHATEVER? UH, UH, YEAH.
SO THE, THE, THE, THE WORK THAT WOULD BE DONE IF ASSUMING IT IS IN CITY, UH, REGULATORY AUTHORITY, SO IF ASSUMING THE, THE LINE WOULD BE IN THE EJ AND SUBJECT TO OUR REGULATIONS, THEN YES, IT WOULD HAVE TO APPLY WITH, UH, RANK CITY CODE.
SO FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE, MY QUESTION IS WE LOSE NOTHING FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE BY HAVING THE COUNTY DO THE LINES AS OPPOSED TO THE CITY DOING THE LINES.
SO I, NO, WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT THE PROPOSED LINE WOULD BE, UM, THE LENGTH OF IT, HOW MANY CROSSINGS THERE WOULD BE, ET ET CETERA.
BUT UM, HYPOTHETICALLY, YES, UH, YOU ARE CORRECT THAT IT WOULD STILL NEED TO BE MEET CURRENT CODE.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? I DO HAVE, THANK YOU.
UM, UH, PROBABLY GONNA ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS AND ASK SOME STAFF TOO.
UM, AND UM, I I, I, I HAVE DEEP CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, IT CROSSING THE CREEK AS WELL.
UM, I'M SURE THAT YOU HAVE LOOKED MANY, MANY TIMES ON
[01:00:01]
HOW THIS CAN BE ROUTED WHERE IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY CROSS THE CREEK.UH, I'M, I MEAN IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE COMING DOWN HIGHWAY, UM, TWO 90, THEN YOU DROP DOWN AND THEN YOU LIKE DOUBLE BACK.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IS IT BECAUSE OF THE HILL? IS THAT, IS THAT WHY YOU'RE GOING AROUND THE HILL OR CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHY IT DOESN'T JUST LIKE DROP DOWN HERE TO COME SO THAT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY CROSSING THE CREEK? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? PUT THE EXHIBIT OFF.
JACKSON, COULD YOU PULL UP OUR PRESENTATION AND UH, MAYBE WE COULD GET STAFF FROM AUSTIN WATER MIGHT BE ABLE TO ASSIST WITH THIS QUESTION.
SO I THINK IT'S PROBABLY PAGE 15 OF 22.
AND, AND I THINK THE QUESTION'S TIED BACK TO THE, THE LOOPING COMMENT THAT THE APPLICANT MADE EARLIER THERE.
I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU CAN COME FORWARD AND I CAN SHOW YOU ON MY MAP TOO, SO YOU CAN, BUT YEAH, IF AUSTIN WATER WOULDN'T MIND, UH, SPEAKING TO, SO CAN THEN COME DOWN LIKE THIS REDUNDANCY SEE ON DOWN TO REQUIREMENT AND THEN YOU GO DOWN AND THEN YOU COME BACK INSTEAD OF JUST COMING DOWN LIKE HERE TO SERVICE ALL OF THIS HERE.
SO THE, THE QUESTION WAS WHY ARE WE COMING DOWN ON THE TOP AND THEN BACK AROUND ON THE BOTTOM INSTEAD OF JUST GOING IN THROUGH THE BOTTOM? AND I, I THINK EITHER WAY YOU'D HAVE TO CROSS THE CREEK, RIGHT? IF YOU CAME THROUGH THE BOTTOM OR THE TOP.
UM, BUT, UH, LIKE, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, THIS IS A SYSTEM RELIABILITY ISSUE FOR AW, AND IT'S IN THEIR CODE THAT THEY WANT TO HAVE A LOOP SYSTEM SO THAT WATER CAN FEED FROM BOTH DIRECTIONS.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S, WE HAVE TO GO MEET WITH LANDOWNERS AND TRY TO GET EASEMENTS TO CROSS THE CREEK AT THE SECOND LOCATION.
SO IF THE LANDOWNERS DON'T WANT TO PROVIDE AN EASEMENT DOWN THERE, THEN UM, WE WOULD NOT BUILD THAT SECOND PIECE AND IT WOULD DEAD END ON THE HIGHWAY.
SO THERE WOULD ONLY BE THE ONE CREEK CROSSING, BUT, UM, IT'S AN AW SYSTEM REQUIREMENT THAT WE HAVE TO BUILD THAT.
UM, AND THEN MR. BRIMER WAS ASKING ABOUT, UM, AS WELL AS KREI, UM, LIKE WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS OF, OF NOT HAVING IT WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN? UM, AND I, I THINK THAT I, I SHARE THAT, BUT I'M GONNA ASK IT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT WAY OF STAFF.
UM, DOES IT BENEFIT US, THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO HAVE OVERSIGHT OVER THIS PROJECT ON THE WASTEWATER, I MEAN ON THE WATER LINE AS OPPOSED TO, UM, ANOTHER ENTITY SUPPLYING THAT WATER? IS THERE A BENEFIT? I I THINK IT'S PROBABLY, UH, A QUESTION WE WOULD NEED TO ASK AUSTIN WATER BECAUSE WE, AT AT LEAST IN WATERSHED PROTECTION, ARE REALLY ONLY INVOLVED IN THE REVIEW PROCESS.
SO, UM, BRETT, WOULD YOU MIND OR COLLEEN SPEAKING TO THAT? HI, I AM COLLEEN KIRK WITH AUSTIN WATER WAS THE QUESTION, UH, I'M SORRY, COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? I CAN.
UM, WHAT IS THE BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN, UM, FOR PROVIDING THIS INSTEAD OF ANOTHER ENTITY? UM, I THINK ONE OBVIOUS BENEFIT WOULD PROBABLY BE IT'S A RETAIL CUSTOMER THAT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, GETTING REVENUE OFF OF.
BUT ADDITIONALLY, WHEN WE'RE PROVIDING WASTEWATER SERVICE, IT'S ALWAYS AN ADVANTAGE TO ALSO PROVIDE THE WATER SERVICE.
UM, IT JUST KIND OF MAKES SENSE TO DO THOSE IN PAIRS.
SO IT, IT MAKES IT EASIER ON BILLING AND ALSO JUST, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GETTING BOTH SIDES OF THAT EQUATION.
UM, AND THEN, UH, MY LAST QUESTION, WHICH IS NOW COMPLETELY SLIPPING OUT OF MY MIND, I CAN, I CAN JUMP IN WITH A FOLLOW UP TO THAT JUMP IN.
UM, SO IN LOOKING AT THE MAP THAT'S UP ON THE SCREEN, AND I THINK A LOT OF US ARE TALKING ABOUT THE, THE SECOND OR THE SOUTHERN OF THOSE TWO CROSSINGS OF DEVIL'S PEN CREEK.
UM, IS THAT THE ALIGNMENT FOR THE WASTEWATER AS WELL? I MEAN, WOULD THAT AREA BE DISTURBED BY THE WASTEWATER LINE OR, OR NOT? NO, NO.
THE WASTEWATER IS ONLY FOLLOWING THE MORE NORTHERNLY UH, CROSSING.
IT HAS A SIMILAR, HAS THE SAME PREC CROSSING AS THE, THE 16 INCH WATER LINE AT THE TOP UP ALONG TWO 90, KIND OF ON THE SIMILAR SIDE.
[01:05:01]
YEAH.SO THAT AREA WOULD BE DISTURBED BY THE WASTEWATER LINE.
NOT TO MENTION THE TEXT AT PROJECT, BUT, OKAY.
UM, WERE YOU DONE WITH ALL YOUR QUESTIONS? OKAY, SO YEAH, UM, I THINK, I THINK THIS LAST ONE IS JUST MORE OF A STATEMENT THAT, UM, I, I FEEL, UM, AND THIS IS NOT TOWARDS STAFF OR TOWARDS ANYONE IN PARTICULAR, BUT I FEEL LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF A BAIT AND SWITCH IS HAPPENING HERE.
IT'S LIKE WE APPROVED THIS ONE, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS SPORTS COMPLEX AND NOW IT'S BEING CHANGED, UM, WITHOUT REALLY, YOU KNOW, IT, IT GETS SOME HOLDOVER AND, AND UM, YOU KNOW, THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT, I MEAN THE WASTEWATER LINE HAS ALREADY APPROVED THAT.
IT JUST LIKE, THERE JUST DOESN'T QUITE FEEL LIKE, UM, THERE'S SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT DOESN'T SIT WELL WITH ME.
UM, BUT UM, IT IS WHAT IT IS AND I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S, IT'S BEING COMPLIANT.
UM, BUT I JUST WANNA GO ON RECORD SAYING THAT THAT DOESN'T REALLY SIT WELL WITH ME.
AND I WOULD MAYBE FOLLOW UP TO THAT.
I MEAN, THE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS ARE A LITTLE BIT WEIRD CUZ WE CAN'T HAVE CONDITIONS AND STAFF CAN'T HAVE CONDITIONS.
UM, BUT THIS DID COME WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE, AND I KNOW YOU WALKED THROUGH IT IN YOUR PRESENTATION, BUT IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND JUST KIND OF GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE OR, OR WALK THROUGH WHAT, HOW STAFF CAME TO THAT DETERMINATION OF, OF WHY STAFF RECOMMENDED THE, THE, THE WATER SUPPLY OR THE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST.
SO, UM, AS WE MENTIONED, YES, WE HAVE TWO APPROVED WASTEWATER SCRS ON BOTH SITES, AND THE WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT'S BEING, WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.
AND THEN AS WE MENTIONED, AS WE WALKED THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CROSSINGS AND THE WHAT'S BE, AT LEAST WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED AND WHAT WE'VE REVIEWED IS WE BELIEVE TO BE CODE-COMPLIANT.
AND ALSO BECAUSE THERE'S THAT EXTRA REVIEW THAT WILL HAPPEN DURING THE SITE PUMP PROCESS, WE FEEL COMFORTABLE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
AND THEN AS WE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, IF, YOU KNOW, IF THIS WAS A SITE THAT DIDN'T HAVE VESTING RIGHTS, THAT DIDN'T ALREADY HAVE APPROVED LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES, WE WOULD PROBABLY BE LOOKING AT IT DIFFERENTLY.
IT'S ALREADY RECEIVED, IT'S ALREADY BEEN THROUGH TWO PUBLIC, UH, HEARINGS, ONE FOR THE ATHLETIC COMPLEX, AND ONE WHEN THEY CAME BACK THROUGH, UM, AFTER THEY SUBMITTED A REVISED SITE PLAN FOR THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO BECAUSE THEY'RE STAYING WITH WITHIN THE SAME FOOTPRINT, WE FEEL COMFORTABLE, UM, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, STAFF, APPLICANT? CLARIFY? YEAH, PLEASE.
UM, UH, CES WERE, UH, MENTIONED AS FAR AS BOTH SITES, BUT ON THE 89 21 IN PARTICULAR WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, SEVEN DIFFERENT CES AND WITH THE CURRENT SITE PLAN AND SO ON, ALL THE APPROPRIATE SETBACKS ARE BEING HONORED FOR THE CES.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THE ONE ALONG ALONG THE PAGE.
I JUST HAVE ONE FINAL QUESTION.
THERE'S SORT OF A, A DONUT BETWEEN THESE TWO PROPERTIES THAT LOOKS LIKE, IS THAT BEING DEVELOPED AS WELL? AND WILL THAT HAVE SERVICE VIA THIS WATER? UH, IT IS NOT.
THEY'VE GOT A FLAG, NOT, I HAVE A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR ME.
UM, SO YOU WERE SAYING THAT THE COUNTY COULD PROVIDE WASTEWATER SERVICES, BUT NOT WATER.
IS THAT CORRECT? DRINKING WATER.
UH, THE OTHER WAY AROUND, THEY DON'T WAY PROVIDE WASTEWATER.
SO IF SAY WE DIDN'T APPROVE THESES SCR, THEN WHAT WOULD YOUR BACKUP PLAN BE FOR WASTEWATER? UM, THE PUA IS IN THE PROCESS OF, UH, UPGRADING THEIR SYSTEM, SO IT WOULD JUST TAKE LONGER FOR THE WATER TO GET TO THE SITE.
UH, WE DO HAVE A MOTION PREPARED FOR THIS EVENING IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
I'M GONNA MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
YOU GUYS ARE Y Y'ALL ARE WELCOME TO SIT DOWN SECOND.
I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND.
SO THE PUBLIC HEARING'S CLOSED.
THE LEDGE STONE WATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST NUMBER 5 6 50.
[01:10:01]
WE'LL START WITH THAT ONE.UH, WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE APPLICANT AS REQUESTING A, UH, WATER SERVICE EXTENSION WITHIN THE AUSTIN TWO MILE EX, UH, TO TERRITORIAL, SORRY, JURISDICTION.
AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE SITE IS LOCATED, UM, IN THE SLAUGHTER CREEK WATERSHED, BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, EDWARDS AQUIFER, UM, CONTRIBUTING ZONE, AND THE DRINKING WATER PROTECTED PROTECTION ZONE.
AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS THE WATER SERVICE EXTENSION, THEREFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT W S E REQUEST, THIS IS RANDBERG.
I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE S E R SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? AND AS KAYLA NOTED EARLIER, THIS IS A LITTLE WEIRD IN OR DIFFERENT IN THAT WE CAN'T PUT CONDITIONS ON THIS.
IT'S JUST A, IT'S AN UP DOWN VOTE FOR, FOR, FOR BOTH, FOR ONE.
AND THEN THE NEXT ONE WILL BE ANOTHER MOTION.
SO WE CAN DISCUSS, UM, AS MUCH AS YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE OR CONTINUE TO, WE CAN DISCUSS INTERNALLY.
WE CAN'T ASK ANY MORE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR, OR STAFF, BUT YES.
SO CHAIR, UM, WHEN YOU HAD THIS BEFORE YOU BE THE EARLIER FOR THE WASTE WATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST, WHAT WAS THE DISCUSSION LIKE THEN? I MEAN, CAN YOU QU CAN YOU SUMMARIZE THAT BASICALLY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, EXTENDING, UH, YOU KNOW, MORE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA? YEAH.
UM, BUT I THINK A LOT OF THAT DISCUSSION WAS BASED ON, UM, LIKE COMMISSIONER BRIMER HAD NOTED BEFORE IT BEING EITHER ON A COLLECTED WASTEWATER SYSTEM OR, OR NOT.
UM, AND I DON'T KNOW ALL OF THE DETAILS OR I'M, I'M NOT AS VERSED IN THAT WORLD AS MUCH, BUT MORE OR LESS THEM HAVING THEIR OWN ONSITE, UH, YOU KNOW, SPRAY FIELD OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR, OR, OR NOT, IT NOT BEING IN A, UM, CITY OF AUSTIN PROVIDED COLLECTION SYSTEM.
I THINK THAT WAS THE MAJORITY OF THE DISCUSSION, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
WHEN WE DID THE IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE PUT A A, UM, UH, CLOSER TO, UM, THE, UM, OAK HILL, UH, WHERE TWO 90 AND 71 SEPARATE MM-HMM.
I CAN'T IMAGINE WALKING FROM THIS LOCATION TO A GROCERY STORE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO I HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH, UM, WITH THIS PROJECT OBJECT.
AND I REALIZE THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION.
THE QUESTION IS A SERVICE EXTENSION FOR WATER.
BUT I MEAN, THAT'S PART OF PART OF WHY WE'RE HERE DISCUSSING THINGS.
I, I WILL NOTE, UM, TO YOUR, UM, QUESTION ABOUT THE GROCERY STORE.
UM, THERE IS AN H E V BEING PUT IN, RIGHT, RIGHT BY THERE.
UM, SO WITH THAT SAID, BUT I I, SOME OF THE DISCUSSION, I'LL BE HONEST, SOME OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD LAST TIME WAS, YOU'RE PUTTING AN ATHLETIC FIELD HERE.
WHAT'S TO STOP YOU FROM TURNING THIS INTO SOMETHING ELSE LATER? AND THAT WAS IN THAT DISCUSSION.
SO THAT IS WHY I MADE THE STATEMENT EARLIER THAT I FEEL A LITTLE BIT OF BAIT AND SWITCH HAPPENED HERE.
UM, SO, UM, I WILL SAY, UM, IT DOES SOUND LIKE, UH, THEY ARE GOING TO, UM, YOU KNOW, REALLY HONOR THE SETBACKS, UM, WHAT THEY SAID EARLIER.
UH, IF THAT IS TRUE, THEN, UM, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'LL, THERE'LL BE QUITE A BIT OF LAND THAT, UH, REMAINS, UM, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY WILD AND NOT LANDSCAPED AND OVERLY PARKED.
UM, I GUESS MY, MY FEELING IS THAT, UH, WHAT, UH, BERG SAID IS WASTEWATER IS DI A DIFFERENT THING.
YOU HAVE TO COLLECT IT AND MAKE SURE IT'S TREATED PROPERLY.
SO I HAD NO PROBLEM SUPPORTING THE WASTEWATER COLLECTION BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE DE TREATED PROPERLY AND COLLECTED CENTRALLY AND PROCESSED AS EFFICIENT, PROPER MANNER AS POSSIBLE.
UH, AND I FELT THAT ANY OTHER STRATEGY FOR THEM, DISPOSING OF THE WASTEWATER WAS
[01:15:01]
NOT REALLY SATISFACTORY.SO I DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE WASTEWATER, UH, SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST.
HOWEVER, THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE FOR THEM TO GET WATER.
AND IT'S PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY.
THEY ARE IN THE COUNTY, THEY'RE NOT IN THE CITY.
WE'RE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO EXTEND WATER SERVICE TO A, YOU KNOW, A A FACILITY THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE CITY.
UH, WE'RE ALSO BEING ASKED TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE THEM THE OPTION OF PICKING ONE OR TWO THINGS.
IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT ALSO IF THEY HAD SAID, WELL, WE'RE GONNA DO PLAN A OR PLAN ONE, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE KIND OF GIVING THEM CARTE BLANCHE TO PICK TWO ITEMS. I WOULD'VE FELT MORE COMFORTABLE IF THEY WERE COMING WITH TO US AND SAYING, WELL, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE DOING.
UH, I, I FEEL LESS GOOD AT, UH, YOU KNOW, GIVING THEM THE OPTION OF PICKING MULTIPLE THINGS.
YOU KNOW, IT, I DON'T LIKE TO CHERRY, YOU KNOW, I DON'T LIKE PEOPLE CHERRY PICKING LATER ON JUST BECAUSE WE, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE, UH, SO I JUST FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE WHOLE THING.
UH, FOR THOSE, YOU KNOW, TO ME, THOSE ARE TECHNICAL REASONS.
I DO UNDERSTAND, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER BRISTOL FEELING THAT, UH, THE SETBACKS AND EVERYTHING ARE BEING ADHERED TO AND THAT'S GOOD.
BUT STILL I FEEL THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE IN THE COUNTY, THEY NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THE COUNTY SERVICES CUZ THAT'S WHERE THEY'VE ELECTED TO BE.
AND THEY NEED TO ENJOY THE VAST RESOURCES OF TRAVIS COUNTY AND LET TRAVIS COUNTY PROVIDE THEM WITH THE SERVICES THEY'VE, THEY CAN PROVIDE.
COMMISSIONER SCOTT? WELL, I THINK THAT ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, WHICH, UH, CONCERNS ME IS THAT THE, UM, THE AMOUNT OF TIME, UH, WASN'T MENTIONED AS TO WHAT IT WOULD TAKE FOR THE COUNTY, UM, TO PROVIDE WATER VERSUS THE, UH, THE CITY.
BUT, UM, IN ANY EVENT, UM, SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED THAT WE'VE BEEN IN DROUGHT CONDITIONS, UM, AND WE DON'T REALLY KNOW, UM, WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN, UH, A YEAR FROM NOW, 10 YEARS FROM NOW, 20 YEARS FROM NOW.
AND, UM, WE HAVE BEFORE US, UM, A COUPLE OF CHOICES.
ONE OF THEM POTENTIALLY IMPACTS, UM, UH, A CRITICALLY, UM, SANK, ENDANGERED, UM, PROTECTED AREA.
SO I WEIGH THAT PRETTY HEAVILY IN MY THINKING.
AND, UM, I, I THINK IT'S SORT OF, I FEEL AS THOUGH IT'S ALMOST KIND OF A SLEEPER BECAUSE I'M, BECAUSE OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE IS HERE TO SPEAK ON IT.
UM, I'M WONDERING ABOUT THE 20 OTHER, UH, ORGANIZATIONS, UH, UH, THAT, UM, ARE INTERESTED IN, UH, THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IN THE, IN THE BARTON SPRING, UM, AND, UM, RELATED, UM, AREAS.
SO I'M, I JUST, I HAVE TROUBLE, UM, I HAVE TROUBLE SEEING THAT THE NEED TO, UM, UH, TO VOTE FOR IT.
I, I MEAN, I, I I I SEE A LOT OF REASONS NOT TO.
UM, I THINK AS MANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ALLUDED TO THE QUESTION FOR ME, RIGHT? IS ARE THERE ANY ENVIRONMENTAL REASONS TO GO WITH THESE OPTIONS AS OPPOSED TO WITH WEST TRAVIS COUNTY? RIGHT.
I THINK TIME DEFINITELY EQUALS MONEY, AND I GET THAT.
UM, BUT IF THE ONLY PROS ARE LIKE TIME AND BILLING, RIGHT? THESE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, NOT THE, UH, DEVELOPER'S RELATION COMMISSION, UH, ALTHOUGH IT VERY MUCH SEEMS LIKE THE LADDER A LOT, BUT, UM, YEAH, THAT'S BASICALLY MY OPINION ON THIS.
UM, I JUST WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THE TENSION THAT I'M FEELING THAT MAYBE SOME OF US ARE ALL SPEAKING BETWEEN, WE NEED AN AFFORDABLE AUSTIN ONE THAT'S AFFORDABLE.
THAT'S AMAZING THAT THERE'S A PROPOSAL FOR MULTI-FAMILY UNITS.
AND WE ALSO NEED TO PRESERVE OUR WILD SPACES AND OUR WATERWAYS, AND HOW, HOW DO
[01:20:01]
WE HOLD BOTH THINGS AT ONCE? AND MY UNDERSTANDING TONIGHT IS THAT WE ARE NOT DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT THAT LAND SHOULD BE DEVELOPED THAT'S DECIDED BY SOMEONE ELSE THAT'S NOT DECIDED BY THIS COMMISSION.WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DECIDE IS, DO WE APPROVE THE S E OR NOT? SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M FOCUSING MY ATTENTION ON, WHILE ALSO ACKNOWLEDGING A LOT OF THE POINTS THAT ARE BEING MADE TONIGHT THAT MAYBE THIS ISN'T AN IDEAL DEVELOPMENT FOR SOME OR AN IDEAL PLACE OR WAY, BUT NOW THAT'S BEEN DECIDED BY SOMEONE ELSE.
SO WE HAVE TO DECIDE ABOUT THE S E R, UM, SHEIRA DISTRICT FOUR COMMISSIONER.
AND I GUESS MY ONLY THING RACHEL SCOTT HAS MENTIONED ABOUT DROUGHT CONDITIONS, AND I'M CURIOUS IF, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE ARE EXPERIENCING ANY SORT OF LIMITATIONS TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE WATER, IF THE, IF AUSTIN WATER WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS TO LET US KNOW.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THAT'S UP TO US.
AND IF IT WERE, THEN I, HOPEFULLY WE WOULD, WE WOULD BE INFORMED ON THAT.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK STAFF CAN OFFICIALLY RESPOND TO THAT, BUT I GUESS FOR FUTURE REFERENCE CONFIRMATION FOR S E R FOR WATER SUPPLY SCR, THAT, THAT THE CITY HAS THE WATER TO PROVIDE, OR THE WATER RIGHTS OR, OR WHATEVER TO, TO PROVIDE THAT WATER OR EXTEND THE WATER TO THAT SERVICE CHAIR, CALEB, CHAMPION WATERSHIP PROTECTION.
I JUST WANTED TO MENTION ONE THING, JUST ONE CLARIFICATION BEFORE YOU MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AUSTIN WATER SENT ME A MESSAGE, UM, THERE MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVE WATER OPTION.
UH, A COUPLE OF COMMISSIONERS SAID TRAVIS COUNTY, IT'S NOT ACTUALLY THE COUNTY, IT'S THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY.
SO IT'S A, IT'S A WATER UTILITY PROVIDER.
YEAH, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO, UH, ECHO, UH, COMMISSIONER KRUEGER'S COMMENTS.
UH, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S REALLY, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A TYPE OF PROJECT WHERE WE CAN SEE BOTH A BALANCE OF RESPECTING THE EXISTENCE OF THE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES AND RESPECTING THE SETBACKS WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, UH, BUILDING MUCH NEEDED HOUSING.
SO I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.
UH, I KNOW THIS IS SORT OF ME STILL, IS IT A NEWBIE, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE, UH, A QUICK COMMENT OF THANK YOU FOR MAKING IT SO EASY FOR ME TO FIND THE JUNE, 2020 AND NOVEMBER, 2021 BACKUP
AND I THINK IT'S JUST SORT OF A, A NOTE TO US AS THESE COME TO US, THAT THERE'S A, A LITTLE BIT OF A DOMINO EFFECT.
YOU KNOW, THE, THE WASTEWATER CAME TO US IN TWO DIFFERENT MEETINGS AND NOW WE HAVE THIS, AND, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS MEANS THAT THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE COMING DOWN THE PIKE THAT MIGHT IN AFFECT THOSE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, BUT, UM, I DON'T KNOW.
THIS IS A BIT OF A LEARNING EXPERIENCE FOR ME OF KNOWING WHAT MIGHT BE COMING NEXT.
I DIDN'T ASK IT A QUESTION AT THE TIME, BUT, UH, FREQUENTLY WHEN THESE SCRS COME TO US, THEY'RE PRESENTED TO US IN PAIRS.
IN OTHER WORDS, WE HAVE A WASTE WATER REQUEST AND A WATER REQUEST AT THE SAME TIME.
AND I DID FIND A LITTLE ODD WHEN THIS POPPED UP THIS TIME BECAUSE THE ADDRESS LOOKED FAMILIAR TO ME.
SO I WENT AND LOOKED IT UP AND FOUND THE PREVIOUS, YOU KNOW, THE ONE I HAPPENED TO DOWNLOAD ALL THIS STUFF CUZ I'M BORED.
UH, SO THE ONE THAT WHEN I WAS ON THE COMMISSION, I HAD, AND I, UH, AND I DOWNLOADED IT AND I SAW WHERE WE HAD APPROVED THAT, UH, WASTEWATER REQUEST BACK WHEN I WAS FIRST ON THE COMMISSION.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS A LITTLE ODD TO ME THAT WE DIDN'T APPROVE THAT IN PAIRS EITHER.
UH, IT WAS JUST AN OBSERVATION ON MY PART BECAUSE WE HAVE DONE A COUPLE OF THESE IN THE PAST AND THEY HAVE BEEN IN PAIRS WITH WASTEWATER AND WATER.
I DON'T EVER REMEMBER SEEING THIS OCCUR BEFORE AND MAYBE I JUST SLEPT THROUGH IT.
WELL MAYBE JUST NOTE, NOTE TO STOP FOR FUTURE ONES.
IF, IF WE KNOW IF, IF A WASTEWATER ONE IS COMING TO US OR A WATER IS MAYBE GIVE US THE, SOME FRAMEWORK ON HOW WASTEWATER OR THE OPPOSITE SIDE WOULD BE PROVIDED.
UM, AND IF WE ANTICIPATE THAT TO BE COMING BEFORE US AS WELL, UH, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
UH, COMMISSIONER KRUEGER D THREE,
[01:25:01]
I'M CURIOUS FOR THE PEOPLE WHO DO HAVE CONCERNS AND ARE LEANING TOWARDS VOTING AGAINST, IF YOU COULD TALK ABOUT LIKE, WHAT IS THE OUTCOME THAT YOU ALL ARE HOPING FOR IN NOT APPROVING THIS? I LIKE, WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD ACHIEVE? AND I'M ASKING GENUINELY NOT SARCASTICALLY,WE'RE NOT SARCASTIC ON THIS, UH, COMMISSION, SO YEAH, NOT AT ALL.
UH, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT MY INTENT TO STOP THIS FROM BEING BUILT.
THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ALL THAT SHIP SAILED, IT'S GONNA BE BUILT AND THAT'S OKAY.
UH, MY FEELING IS THAT, UH, PRETTY MUCH WHAT I SAID, FIRST OF ALL, THEY'RE GIVING US TWO OPTIONS.
THEY NEED TO PROVIDE US WITH ONE, TELL US WHAT THEY WANT SPECIFICALLY.
THEY, THEY DON'T GET TO PROVIDE US WITH MULTIPLE OPTIONS THAT ALLOW US TO APPROVE MULTIPLE OPTIONS.
YOU KNOW, THEY COME WITH ONE OPTION.
SECOND THING IS THIS IS, WE'RE NOT UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO APPROVE SERVICE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS.
THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED A SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST.
SO THERE'S NO BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF PROVIDING SERVICE TO AN ENTITY OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS.
THEY'RE NEVER GONNA BE PART OF THE TAX BASE OF THE CITY BECAUSE THE STATE HAS PASSED LAWS THAT LIMIT THE ABILITY OF THE CITY TO INCORPORATE THAT WITHIN THE CITY TAX BASE.
SO WE'RE GONNA BE PROVIDING SERVICES TO AN ENTITY THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE CITY.
NOW, THE, THE WATER PEOPLE SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, IT'S A CONVENIENCE TO THEM TO BE ABLE TO BILL THEM FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER.
WELL, THAT'S A CONVENIENCE, THAT'S NOT LIKE A REQUIREMENT THERE, THERE'S NO TANGIBLE BENEFIT THAT THEY CAN POINT TO THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S GONNA BE BETTER OFF AS A MUNICIPALITY BY DOING THIS.
ALSO, CITY STAFF INDICATED THAT IF THIS WATER MIN, UH, PIPED WATER OVER THERE, THEY'LL HAVE TO, TO THE EXTENT THAT IT MOVES INTO THE CITY LIMITS HAVE TO APPLY ALL, YOU KNOW, UH, HAVE TO BE, THEY'RE SUBJECT TO ALL THE CODE THAT ANYONE ELSE WOULD BE FAVORABLE TO.
SO WE LOSE NOTHING BY HAVING THE, THE, THIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT PROVIDE THE WATER.
THE DEVELOPMENT GETS BUILT, WE GET ALL THE HOUSING AND WE DON'T PROVI, THE CITY DOESN'T PROVIDE THE WATER.
SO THERE'S NO, THERE'S NOTHING INVOLVED HERE, THERE, IT'S NOTHING.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S, THERE'S NO DOWNSIDE TO US.
SO WHY WOULD WE, OKAY, SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, YOUR IDEAL OUTCOME IS FOR THE PUBLIC UTI, THE OTHER UTILITY COMPANY TO, IT'S IN THE COUNTY.
THEY'RE NEVER GONNA BE IN THE CITY.
IF THEY WERE GONNA BE ANNEXED IN THE CITY, THERE'D BE A LOGICAL REASON FOR US TO EXTEND THE WATER TO THEM, BECAUSE AT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, THEY'RE GONNA BE IN THE CITY.
BUT THAT'S NEVER GONNA HAPPEN.
SO THERE'S NO REASON FOR US TO APPROVE, GIVE THEM THE SERVICES OF THE CITY AT NO BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
UH, TO JUST ADD TO THAT, I, I'M AFRAID I, I MIGHT BE REPEATING MYSELF, UH, EXCUSE ME IF I AM.
UM, I JUST LOOK AT IT AS, UM, UM, AN INSTANCE WHERE THERE ARE, FIRST OF ALL, I'M, I THINK THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IS, IS GOOD.
AND I THINK THAT, UH, THE PRESENTATION WAS, UH, WAS GOOD.
AND I, I LIKED THE, UH, THE FEATURES THAT, THAT WERE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED.
AND I, I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO ANIMOSITY TOWARDS THE DEVELOPER OR, OR THEIR PLAN OR WHAT, UH, OR THEIR CONSIDERATION.
I JUST, I SEE TWO OPTIONS AND I SEE ONE OF THEM AS PRESENTING A POTENTIAL RISK TO, UM, UH, A VERY, UH, CRITICAL, UH, AREA OF, OF AUSTIN AND ANOTHER OPTION WHICH DOES NOT.
AND TO ME, GIVEN THOSE TWO OPTIONS, I, I DON'T SEE WHY I WOULD VOTE TO, TO TAKE THAT RISK.
I, I, YES, THEY MAY BE, UH, GOING TO, UH, ADHERE TO ALL OF, ALL OF WHAT THEY SAY THEY ARE, BUT I, UM, WE, WE LIVE IN, WE LIVE IN UNPREDICTABLE TIMES.
UM, ANYTIME THERE'S CONSTRUCTION, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE STORMS COMING THROUGH RIGHT THIS WEEK THAT ARE PREDICTED WITH HAIL AND THIS AND THAT AND THE OTHER, UH, MAYBE STRONG WINDS,
[01:30:01]
WHO KNOWS? SO WHEN CONSTRUCTION IS UNDERWAY, THINGS HAPPEN.UH, FLOOD CAN HAPPEN DURING CONSTRUCTION.
THIS IS, THIS IS AGAIN, A CRITICAL WATER FEATURE.
AND, AND, UM, WHERE I COME DOWN AS A ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER, UM, IS USING MY IMAGINATION TO SAY, WELL, WHAT COULD GO WRONG? AND A LOT COULD GO WRONG AND HOPEFULLY NOTHING WOULD, BUT WHY, WHY TAKE THAT RISK WHEN THERE'S A, A PERFECTLY VIABLE OPTION THAT DOESN'T, UH, PRESENT THAT RISK? THAT'S, UM, SO, SO FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW, HAVING THIS RAISED BY THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE, I'M, I JUST COME DOWN ON, THAT'S THE WAY I COME DOWN.
UM, AND IT'S, AGAIN, IT'S WITH NO, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT ANGRY AT ANYBODY OR, UH, ANNOYED WITH ANYBODY.
IT'S JUST, UM, JUST WHERE I, I DRAW THE LINE WHERE I THINK THAT, UM, THAT WHAT, WHAT IS THE SAFEST THING TO DO? AND YES, IT MIGHT COST THEM A LITTLE MORE CUZ IF THEY HAVE SOME DELAY, AND THAT'S UNFORTUNATE.
BUT, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE, I'VE BEEN THROUGH A LOT OF DELAYS MYSELF IN, IN HOUSING PROJECTS, AND I, I KNOW THERE'S NO FUN AT ALL FOR ANYBODY INVOLVED.
AND IT'S, AND I HAVE COMPLETE SYMPATHY FOR THAT.
BUT, UM, I STILL HAVE, THAT'S, THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHAT MY, MY REASONING IS.
AND WHEN YOU SAY THERE'S ANOTHER VIABLE OPTION THAT DOESN'T PRESENT A RISK, ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE WESTERN TRAVIS COUNTY OPTION? BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE DEVELOPER WAS THAT THAT WOULD INDEED CROSS THE CREEK JUST AT A DIFFERENT AREA.
BUT DID I MISUNDERSTAND THAT? NO, YOU'RE CORRECT.
YEAH, IT WOULD, IT WOULD FOLLOW THE SAME LINE.
BECAUSE OF WHERE THE EASEMENTS ARE.
UM, THIS PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED.
UM, BRIER, I TOTALLY GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, UM, TO PROVIDE CITY SERVICES TO SOMEONE WHO IS OUT TO OUTSIDE OF THE TAXING, UH, ENTITY OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, UM, SEEMS FOLLY.
HOWEVER, UM, IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME.
AND WE HAVE APPROVED MANY, MANY, MANY THINGS IN THE EJ BEFORE.
UM, AND, AND WE WILL AGAIN, UM, UM, IS IT, UH, I KNOW THAT, UM, SERVICE REQUESTS IN THE PAST, UM, HAVE BEEN USED TO STOP DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I'M SURE THAT'S WHAT SOS WOULD LIKE TO SEE.
AND AGAIN, UM, UH, IF, IF I COULD WAVE MY MAGIC WAND AND PROTECT EVERY SINGLE PLACE THAT I LOVE IN THIS COUNTY, UH, I WOULD, UH, ESPECIALLY THIS PROPERTY, I HAVE AN INTIMATE, UH, RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS PROPERTY.
I USED TO RIDE MY HORSE THERE AS A KID.
I RODE ALL UP AND DOWN, UM, DEVILS CREEK, SLAUGHTER CREEK, UM, ALL OVER IT WHEN IT WAS A RANCH.
UM, YEAH, I'D LOVE TO SEE THIS NOT BE DEVELOPED, BUT IT WILL BE.
AND, UM, I THINK I HAD TO WRESTLE WITH THAT MYSELF, UM, IN THE LAST TIME THAT WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE WASTEWATER, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, POTENTIAL THERE.
UM, I, I DEFINITELY AM ON THE FENCE, BUT, UM, I, I'M STARTING TO SEE THE BENEFIT TO THE CITY, UM, AND, AND HAVING, UH, US PROVIDE THAT IT GIVES MORE LEVERAGE, UH, AS THINGS, UM, MOVE FORWARD AND DEVELOP, UH, IN THE FUTURE.
SO, UM, YOU WERE ASKING, UH, COMMISSIONER KRUEGER WHAT WE HOPE, UM, TO HAVE AS AN OUTCOME WITH, UM, BEING AGAINST IT, BUT THAT IS ACTUALLY WHAT I THINK I'M LEANING TOWARDS FOR BEING, FOR IT IS MORE LEVERAGE IN THE FUTURE.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT FURTHER? I, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW, HOW WOULD WE HAVE MORE LEVERAGE? WELL, IF YOU, IF YOU, UM, A ALLOW, IF, IF, IF WE SAY, OKAY, NO CITY OF AUSTIN'S NOT GONNA BE INVOLVED IN PROVIDING THE WATER, UM, THEN THAT GOES TO SOMEBODY ELSE THAT WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO OVERSIGHT ON.
NONE, RIGHT? UM, BECAUSE THIS IS BEING BUILT WITHIN THE COUNTY, SO,
[01:35:01]
UH, WITHIN THE EJ, SO IT'S ONLY E T J RULES APPLY AND 1995 RULES APPLY.UM, SO HAVING, UM, PROVIDING, UM, THE, THE, THE WATER LINE, UM, IT JUST ALLOWS US A LITTLE BIT MORE LEVERAGE, UM, IN THE FUTURE.
UM, AS OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, UM, THE, THE UTILITY DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, IT'S UP TO THEM TO REALLY PROVIDE THE LINE AND HOW THEY'RE GONNA DO IT AND WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO WITH IT AND SERVICE IT.
IS IT LEAKING? WHAT IF THEY PUT IT IN AND IT STARTS LEAKING ALL OVER THE PLACE? THEY DON'T HAVE TO REPAIR THAT.
BUT IF THE CITY DOES, THEN WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION WITH THAT AS WELL.
IF I, I'M, I HAVE HAVE A QUESTION THERE, BECAUSE I THOUGHT ONCE SOMETHING IS EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION THAT ONCE WE APPROVE IT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY SAY OVER THINGS, UM, GOING FORWARD THAT THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT TO.
AM I, IS THAT NOT CORRECT? THAT'S NOT CORRECT.
THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO, UM, AND I DON'T MEAN TO JUMP IN THEIR CHAIR IF YOU WANNA ANSWER IT.
UM, THEY, THEY WILL HAVE TO, UM, UH, SUBMIT A SITE PLAN.
UM, THEY'LL HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE SEE AS THEY COME FORWARD.
IF THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, IF THEY HAVE CUT AND FILL THAT THEY WANNA CHANGE, THEY'LL BE BACK HERE, UH, TALKING TO US ABOUT IT AGAIN.
UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO REFILE ALL THOSE THINGS, UM, WITH THE CITY.
AND IF I JUST GET A SLIGHT NOD FROM KAYLA THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
YOU WERE SUPER POKER FACE OVER THERE, SO APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, SO THE LEADSTONE SITE IS CURRENT CODE AND, UH, DOESN'T HAVE ANY VESTING RIGHTS.
IT'S, SO IT IS SUBJECT TO SOS THE 89 21, THE, THE, THE EASTERN ONE IS THE ONE THAT HAS THE VESTING.
SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
I APPRECIATE THAT, CUZ I, I DIDN'T, I, THIS IS A BIT COMPLICATED AND FOR SOME REASON I DON'T HAVE THE, THIS ON MY SCREEN.
I CAN'T SEE IT AND LOOK AT THE, LOOK AT IT MYSELF TO REVIEW IT.
UM, I CAN'T FIND IT ANYWHERE, BUT, UM, THAT ASIDE, I, I THOUGHT THAT IF IT WAS COMING FROM, UH, WOULD NOT CROSS THE RIVER, BUT IF IT CROSSES THE, THE RIVER OR THE CREEK IN, IN EITHER EVENT, THEN, UM, THAT CHANGES MY PERSPECTIVE.
SO I, I'M, I'M, I'M LEANING NOW, I'M LEANING TOWARDS, UH, VOTING FOR IT.
ALTHOUGH I, I AGREE, I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WAS DONE IN, IN THESE STAGES.
I, I DON'T LIKE THAT, BUT I, I STILL SEE OVERALL THE, UH, THE BENEFIT OF IT.
I HAVE A QUESTION THAT I WISH I THOUGHT OF DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT MAYBE ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS CAN ANSWER.
UM, WOULD LIKE THE CITY OF AUSTIN BE DRAWING FROM THE SAME WATER SOURCE AS THE WEST TRAVIS COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY AGENCY? WOULD THE SOURCE OF WATER BE THE SAME, JUST BE DIFFERENT PEOPLE PUTTING IN THE PIPES? PR PRETTY MUCH, YEAH.
I MEAN, I THINK IT WOULD BE BOTH FROM COLORADO RIVER.
POSSIBLY IN DIFFERENT SPOTS, BUT IT'D BE BOTH COMING FROM COLORADO RIVER, I THINK.
CHAIR DENT OR, UH, COMMISSIONER BRISTOL'S COMMENT.
UM, IF WE VOTE TO NOT ALLOW THIS S C R, UM, WE'RE NOT GIVING UP ANY OF THE E J COVERAGE THAT WE HAVE.
WE'RE JUST SAYING, NO, YOU CAN'T PLUG INTO THE CITY OF AUSTIN WATER SYSTEM, ANYTHING, ANY OTHER OVERSIGHT CITY HAS VIA THE E GK REGULATIONS OR TOWED OR WHATEVER IS STILL THERE.
THEY STILL HAVE TO COME TO US FOR ANY, YOU KNOW, CUT AND FILL REQUIREMENTS OR ENVIRONMENTAL REQUESTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO, AND BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOUR COMMENT ABOUT LEVERAGE IS TRUE IF WE HAD LEVERAGE, BUT WITH AN STR WE CAN'T SAY, YOU KNOW, PUT IN A BUTTERFLY GARDEN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW? SO THERE IS NO LEVERAGE TO BE HAD, YOU KNOW, NOW THERE'S NO LEVERAGE, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT YOU CAN POINT TO UNTIL THEY, OR IF THEY COME BACK TO US AND REQUEST A VARIANCE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES A VARIANCE, AND, AND IF THEY NEVER DO, THEN WE HAVE NO LEVERAGE WITH THEM IN THE FUTURE.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SPECULATING ABOUT THAT.
UH, YOU KNOW, THE ABILITY TO LEVERAGE THEM TO BE, YOU KNOW, FOR SOME REASON, UH, SO
[01:40:02]
WE'RE AT BEING ASKED TO EXAMINE THIS ITEM AS A SINGULARITY AND WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD DO THAT AS A SINGLE ITEM, AND IT'S NOT GONNA AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO EVALUATE A FUTURE PROJECT THAT THEY MAY CHOOSE TO PUT ON THAT PROPERTY.AND BY SAYING NO, WE'RE NOT LETTING THEM HOOK UP TO THAT.
YES, WE'VE APPLIED THINGS TO SCRS.
ONE OF, ONE OF THEM, I REMEMBER, I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WAS, BUT THERE WERE TWO HOUSES UP SOMEWHERE NEAR WHERE I LIVE, TWO INDIVIDUAL HOUSES THAT WE APPLIED SCRS TO, TO LET THEM HOOK UP.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S EASY TO LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE, WELL, THOSE ARE TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES THAT WE WERE ALLOWING TO HOOK UP TO THAT, OR SOME LITTLE VARIATION OF IT.
SO THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
THIS IS A LARGE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND THE IMPACT IS GREATER.
IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE, THE OTHER PEOPLE DIDN'T HAVE AN OP AN OPTION TO GET COUNTY WATER, SO THEY'RE NOT COMPARABLE.
AND SO YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT EACH, EACH PROJECT AND ITS INDIVIDUALITY.
AND WE, I'M SURE IN THE FUTURE, WE WILL EXTEND WATER SERVICE TO OTHER THINGS THAT ARE OUTSIDE AND WE WILL EVALUATE EACH SITUATION AS IT COMES UP AND MAKE THE DECISION.
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE APPLICANT HAS A COMPLETELY VIABLE ALTERNATIVE.
WE'RE NOT PREVENTING THEM FROM THE APARTMENTS.
AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
WELL, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE IF I DO OR NOT, BUT THEY'RE STILL GONNA BUILD THE APARTMENTS, THEY'RE GONNA BE THERE AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE WAY IT IS.
THE QUESTION IS, IS WATER GONNA BE SUPPLIED BY, YOU KNOW, SOME COUNTY AGENCY OR, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE UTILITY OR WHATEVER THAT IS, OR IS IT GONNA BE THE CITY OF AUSTIN? AND MY FEELING IS THEY NEED TO GET THE WATER FROM SOMEONE ELSE RATHER THAN THE CITY.
AND I'M JUST BASING IT ON THAT LITTLE PIECE OF INFORMATION THERE RATHER THAN LOOKING AT A BIGGER, BIGGER THING.
SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE.
WHICH IS THAT I THINK CHECKS AND BALANCES ARE IMPORTANT AND GOOD.
AND FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I DO REALLY TRUST OUR CITY STAFF AND THEIR ENDORSEMENT OF THIS PROPOSAL WEIGHS HEAVILY IN MY DECISION MAKING.
AND I'M READY TO VOTE WHEN YOU ALL ARE.
ANY OTHER FINAL COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY? ALL RIGHT.
WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA GO AROUND AND I'LL, UH, INSTEAD OF HANDS TO MAKE THINGS EASIER FOR ELIZABETH TOMORROW MORNING WHEN SHE'S, SHE'S DOING THIS, BUT, UM, CHAIR, THIS IS ONLY ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
THIS IS ONLY ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
SO THIS IS FOR, UH, THE WATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST 56 50 TO 92 0 9 LEDGE STONE, WHICH IS THE WESTERN OF THE TWO.
UM, ALRIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST.
SECOND, UM, SHI YOU SUPPORT THAT APPROVAL OR FOR I'M ABSTAINING.
I JUST DON'T, I'M, I HAVE SAID, OKAY, KRUEGER I SUPPORT.
SHE, SHE FOUR, THIS IS RANDBERG FOUR, BRISTOL FOUR COFER FOUR NICHOLS, FOUR SULLIVAN AGAINST PRIMER.
SO ELIZABETH, WE'VE GOT 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 6, 4.
MOTION PASSES, UM, WITH SIX TWO ABSTENTIONS AND TWO OPPOSED.
UM, DO WE WANT TO FURTHER DISCUSS THIS NEXT ITEM? UH, OR GO? LET'S, LET'S, WHY DON'T YOU READ THE MOTION AND THEN YEAH, WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S SOME DISCUSSION, UH, SPECIFICALLY SULLIVAN, IF YOU'VE GOT SOME IDEAS OR THOUGHTS ABOUT THE TWO DIFFERENT, LET ME CALL IT UP HERE.
THIS IS, UM, 89 21 US HIGHWAY TWO 90 WEST WATER SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST NUMBER 5 6 72.
[01:45:01]
WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A WATER SERVICE EXTENSION WITHIN THE AUSTIN TWO MILE EX TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE SLAUGHTER CREEK WATERSHED, BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, EDWARDS AQUIFER CONTRIBUTING ZONE AND DRINKING WATER PROTECTION ZONE.
AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS THE WATER SERVICE EXTENSION, THEREFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE WATER SERVICE EXTENSION.
THIS IS RAMAL SECOND THAT, SO WE'VE GOT A SIMILAR MOTION.
SECOND, ANY ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION, UM, SPECIFIC TO THE, THE, THE WEST, THE EAST TRACT OR, OR OTHERWISE? YEAH, CHRISTIAN.
SO, UM, I WOULD, I JUST WANTED TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THIS.
SO THE LAST PROPERTY, SO 92 0 9 LEADSTONE TERRACE IS, IS SUBJECT TO LIKE SOS ORDINANCE AND ALL THAT STUFF BECAUSE IT'S NOT UNDER THE 95 RULES, BUT THIS PROPERTY IS YES, NO, MAYBE SO CORRECT.
THIS PROPERTY IS, UM, HAS VESTED RIGHTS.
IT'S NOT SUBJECT TO THOSE KINDS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS.
JUST WANTED TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION.
IT IS SUBJECT TO, OH, SO SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS WE DISCUSSED TODAY THAT IT IS SUBJECT TO, IT STILL HAS THOSE CREEK BUFFERS AS WE DISCUSSED.
AND, UM, THE C E F BUFFERS AS WELL.
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, LET'S VOTE KREK FOR, UH, SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST.
I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND HIT HIM WITH YIELD ABSTENTION ON THIS ONE.
SIX, UH, 6 4, 1 ABSTENTION AND THREE AGAINST.
[6. Consider and make a recommendation for a site-specific amendment to City Code Section 25-8-514 (Pollution Prevention Required) of the Save Our Springs Initiative, and variances to City Code Section 25-8-364 (Floodplain Modification) and Section 25-8-641 (Removal Prohibited) relating to the removal of a heritage tree, and waiving requirements of City Code Section 25-8-41 (Land Use Commission Variances) to allow construction of the Slaughter Lane Improvement Project from Loop 1 (MoPac) to 650 feet east of Brodie Lane, located at 5015 ½ West Slaughter Lane (C20-2022-019) – Leslie Lilly, Environmental Program Coordinator, Watershed Protection, Naomi Rotramel, City Arborist, Development Services Department, and Randy Harvey, Capitol Program Consultant, Corridor Program Office]
ON THE AGENDA IS NUMBER SIX, CONSIDERING MAKER OF RECOMMENDATION FOR A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CODE CITY CODE SECTION 25 DASH EIGHT DASH 514 POLLUTION PREVENTION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE AND OF VARIANCES TO THE CITY CODE SECTION 25 8 360 4 FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION AND SECTION 25 8 60 41 REMOVAL PROHIBITED RELATING TO THE REMOVAL OF A HERITAGE TREE AND THE WAVING REQUIREMENTS.THE CITY CODE 25 8 41 LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF SLAUGHTER LANE IMPROVEMENTS FROM LOOP ONE MOPAC TO 650 FEET EAST OF BRODY LANE, LOCATED AT 50 15 AND A HALF WEST SLAUGHTER LANE C 20 20 22 19.
UM, THAT MIGHT BE THE LONGEST ONE SO FAR THIS YEAR.
SO, LESLIE, WHEN YOU'RE READY, MIGHT BE GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
I AM LESLIE LILLY, AN ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM COORDINATOR WITH WATERSHED PROTECTION.
AND TONIGHT WHAT I AM GOING TO PRESENT IS A SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT AND ASSOCIATED VARIANCES AS THEY RELATE TO THE SLAUGHTER LANE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, WHICH BEGINS AT MOPAC AND EXTENDS TO BRODY LANE.
THIS IS A PROJECT SPONSORED BY THE, UH, CORRIDOR PROGRAM OFFICE WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
SO, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE SOS AMENDMENT PROCESS IS, UM, IT COMES OUT OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE, WHICH WAS ADOPTED IN 92 AS A CITIZEN INITIATIVE AND AS A PART OF THE ORDINANCE, UH, SECTION 25,000 800 515 VARIANCES TO THE SOS UH, INITIATIVE, A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT.
SO SIMILAR TO A LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCE, ANY KIND OF MODIFICATION TO THE, UH, SITE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT ARE WITHIN THE, UH, INITIATIVE WITHIN THE SOS UH, ORDINANCE HAVE TO BE AMENDED ON A SITE SPECIFIC OR SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT.
AND THAT PROCESS ALSO REQUIRES A SUPER MAJORITY AT CITY COUNCIL FOR THE APPROVEMENT FOR THE, UH, APPROVAL OF THE SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT.
UM, AND THE INITIATION OF THE AMENDMENT FIRST STARTED AT CITY COUNCIL IN OCTOBER, WHERE THE CITY MANAGER IS DIRECTED TO INITIATE THE SITE SPECIFIC VARIANCES AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS AND FOR CITY STAFF TO, UM, WORK
[01:50:01]
WITH THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS THE CORRIDOR PROGRAM OFFICE, UM, TO DEVELOP A, UH, AN ORDINANCE THAT AMENDS, UH, SOS TO THE MINIMUM AMOUNT NECESSARY TO BUILD THE PROPOSED PROJECT.SO, SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS THE ORIGINAL, UH, SLAUGHTER LANE WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 87, SO BEFORE SOS AND WAS NOT BUILT COMPLIANT TO SOS AT THE TIME, SPECIFICALLY AS IT RE RELATES TO IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS AND THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION OR THE WATER QUALITY TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT.
THE IMPROVEMENT OF THIS PROJECT, THOUGH, WAS IDENTIFIED WITH AS ONE OF NINE CORRIDOR PROJECTS AS A PART OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN CORRIDOR, UH, MOBILITY PROGRAM.
AND THE IMPROVEMENTS WERE FUNDED AS A PART OF THE 2016 MOBILITY BOND.
SO, AS I MENTIONED, IT'S NOT CURRENTLY COMPLIANT WITH SOS, UH, REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER.
AND SO THAT IS WHAT THIS SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT IS LOOKING TO AMEND IS THE IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT.
UH, WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE IS SPECIFICALLY THE LOCATION OF THE SECTION OF SLAUGHTER LANE THAT'S PROPOSED FOR IMPROVEMENTS, AND IT IS ALMOST COMPLETELY WITHIN THE RECHARGE ZONE OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE, MEANING THAT IT HAS A CURRENT IMPERVIOUS COVER REQUIREMENT OF 15%.
AND, AND SOME, WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE IS WHERE THIS SECTION OF SLAUGHTER LANE IS RELATIVE TO SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES.
PART OF THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE WILLIAMSON CREEK WATERSHED, AND PART OF IT IS WITHIN SLAUGHTER SLAUGHTER CREEK WATERSHED.
ALL OF IT IS WITHIN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE, AND IT IS MOSTLY WITHIN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE.
AND THERE'S A SMALL PORTION ON THE EASTERN END OF THE PROJECT SITE THAT'S IN THE CONTRIBUTING ZONE.
UH, CURRENTLY THE EXISTING CONDITIONS IN TERMS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THE PROJECT WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY IS 54%.
UM, AND SO, AS I MENTIONED, THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PROJECT ARE LOOKING TO INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND MODIFY THE EXISTING, UH, UH, REQUIREMENT TO THE SOS AMENDMENT.
UM, THE PROJECT IS NOT PROPOSING TO IMPACT ANY EXISTING CF SETBACKS, UH, BUT THERE ARE SOME CLOSE BY CFS.
THERE ARE SOME CARS AND WETLAND FEATURES.
YOU CAN SEE THAT THE RECHARGE FEATURES ARE SYMBOLIZED IN LITTLE YELLOW STARS AND THEIR SETBACKS ARE SYMBOLIZED IN THE ORANGE HATCHING.
AND THEN THERE IS ONE WETLAND, C E F THAT'S DOWNSTREAM OF THE SLAUGHTER CREEK TRIBUTARY THAT SLAUGHTER, THAT SLAUGHTER LANE ALREADY CROSSES, UM, THAT IS SYMBOLIZED IN PINK.
UM, SO RIGHT NOW THIS SECTION OF SLAUGHTER LANE IS ALSO NON-COMPLIANT WITH THE SOS WATER QUALITY COMPLIANT, UH, REQUIREMENTS.
SO THAT IS ONE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE, OF THE CURRENT ROAD.
SO THERE ARE THREE PARTS TO THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE, AND THE FIRST PART I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS THE, SPECIFICALLY THE SOS AMENDMENT, UM, AND HOW IT RELATES TO THE IMPERVIOUS COVER.
THERE'S, UH, MODIFICATION TO FLOODPLAIN, AND THEN THERE IS ALSO A HERITAGE TREE ORDINANCE VARIANCE.
UM, ALL THREE OF THESE ELEMENTS ARE GOING TO BE INCORPORATED INTO, ARE PROPOSED TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THIS ORDINANCE, BUT WE'RE GONNA START WITH THIS FIRST SECTION.
SO THE PART THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED IN THE SOS AMENDMENT IS CODE SECTION 25,000 800 514 AS IT RELATES TO POLLUTION PREVENTION REQUIRED SHALL BE MODIFIED TO ALLOW THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THE SITE TO BE 69% NET SITE AREA.
THE, UH, ASSOCIATED IMPERVIOUS COVER WITH THAT INCREASE IS TWO ADDITIONAL LANES, UH, ONE IN EACH DIRECTION.
UH, AND THAT IS A PART OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ROAD.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS LITTLE TABLE, AS I MENTIONED, THE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY IS 54% AND THE PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS COVER WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY OF 69%.
SO I HAVE NOT MENTIONED ANY, UH, MODIFICATIONS TO THE, UH, WATER QUALITY TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THE PROJECT IS PROPOSING TO BRING THE PROJECT, UH, WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THEN ALSO REGIONALLY A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER INTO COMPLIANCE WITH SO S NON DEGRADATION WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS.
UM, SO WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE IS, UM,
[01:55:01]
KIND OF A PERCENTAGE INCREASE IN POLLUTANT TYPE THAT IS GOING TO BE REMOVED ABOVE WHAT IS REQUIRED BY THE SOS BY SOS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY.UM, AND THE WAY THIS READS IS THERE'S, UH, SEVERAL DIFFERENT KINDS OF POLLUTANTS THAT, UM, ARE REMOVED FROM IMPERVIOUS SURFACES WITH WATER QUALITY CONTROLS.
AND WHAT YOU CAN SEE ALONG THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IS THE PERCENT, UM, REMOVALS AFTER THE SOS, LIKE AFTER THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WATER QUALITY CONTROLS THAT EXIST AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY FEATURES, UM, THOSE, UH, INCREASES, UH, INDICATING IN EXCESS OF A HUNDRED PERCENT MEANS ALL OF THAT, UH, SOS ALL OF THOSE POLLUTANTS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED, ARE BEING REMOVED FROM AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, I WILL GET TO SLIDES SHOWING ALL OF THE DRAINAGE AREAS THAT ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WATER QUALITY CONTROLS IN THIS PROJECT AND IS A PART OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS.
SO THIS IS ANOTHER WAY OF US TO, UH, FOR US TO REPRESENT AND, AND CONSIDER THE POLLUTANT LOAD REMOVALS AND WHAT YOU CAN SEE ALONG THE BOTTOM, THE ROWS THAT, UH, INDICATE THE INCREASED PERCENT OF POLLUTANTS REMOVED AFTER THE PROJECT, AND SPECIFICALLY THE DECREASE IN POLLUTANTS UNTREATED AFTER THE PROJECT.
SO THERE IS A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, THERE'S QUITE A LOT OF, UH, IMPROVEMENTS TO AND REMOVALS OF POLLUTANTS FROM THE PROJECT REGIONALLY THAT ARE GOING TO BE A PART OF THE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE ROAD AS THEY RELATE TO, UH, IMPROVING THE WATER QUALITY FEATURES THAT, UH, TREAT THE ROAD, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER.
SO LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
AND THIS SHOWS YOU SPECIFICALLY ALL OF THE DRAINAGE AREAS.
SO HOW DO IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ROAD, UM, IMPACT A REGIONAL WATER QUALITY, UH, REQUIREMENTS? UM, EACH ONE OF THESE AREAS THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN A DIFFERENT COLOR, THERE'S RED ON THE LEFT, THERE'S BLUE, ORANGE, PINK, UH, YELLOW, AND THEN LIKE A LIGHT BLUE.
EACH ONE OF THOSE ARE DRAINAGE AREAS THAT ARE FEEDING INTO A DIFFERENT WATER QUALITY FEATURE AND THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE THAT REALLY CONTRIBUTE TO THE REGIONAL IMPROVEMENT OF WATER QUALITY AND BRINGING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER INTO COMPLIANCE WITH SOS NON DEGRADATION WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS DEAL WITH THE YELLOW, I MEAN THE RED AND THE BLUE WATER QUALITY PONDS.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE, UH, WATER QUALITY FEATURES TREAT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DRAINAGE, UM, FLOWING INTO THEM, INCLUDING SMALL SECTIONS OF THE ROAD.
SO THE IMPROVEMENTS OF TO THOSE PONDS ARE RESULTING IN NOT ONLY, UM, BRINGING THE ROAD THAT, UH, THE ROAD INTO COMPLIANCE WITH SOS NONDEGRADATION, BUT ALONG WITH IT A LOT OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER WITHIN THOSE LARGE DRAINAGE AREAS THAT EXCEED, UH, A HUNDRED ACRES.
UM, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THOSE ARE EXISTING PONDS THAT ARE BEING IMPROVED, BUT THERE ARE TWO ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY FEATURES THAT ARE BEING, UM, CONSTRUCTED.
AND THOSE ARE THE WATER QUALITY FEATURES THAT ARE REPRESENTED IN PINK.
AND THEN IN LIKE A LIGHT TEAL COLOR ON THE EAST END OF THE ROADWAY, THOSE ARE SOS PONDS.
AND THOSE ARE A PART OF THE ADDITIONAL VARIANTS THAT I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO NEXT BECAUSE THOSE PONDS ARE BEING PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN PART WITHIN THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN.
UM, SO THERE'S NOT, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF CONSTRAINTS ON PUTTING ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY PONDS AROUND THE ROAD, UH, JUST DUE TO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS, CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT AND EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND THE REAL ESTATE THAT EXISTS.
AND SO THO PUTTING THOSE, UH, WATER QUALITY PONDS IN THAT LOCATION, UM, WAS DETERMINED TO BE THE PREFERRED LOCATION.
UM, AND IT IS ALSO HELPING BRING THE WATER THAT'S FLOWING OFF SLAUGHTER LANE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH SOS RIGHT THERE WHERE IT IS FLOWING INTO THE CREEK.
AND THEN ALSO SPECIFICALLY IMPACTING A DOWNSTREAM RECHARGE FEATURE AND THE WETLAND THAT I MENTIONED ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS MAP.
SO THE LOCATIONS OF THOSE PONDS ARE, ARE SPECIFICALLY BRING WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS TO DOWNSTREAM, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES.
SO THE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS ARE THE MAIN REASON FOR OUR RECOMMENDATION IN SUPPORT OF THE MODIFICATION TO THE SOS AS IT RELATES TO THE SITE SPECIFIC INCREASE IN IMPERVIOUS COVER.
[02:00:01]
UM, NOW I'M GONNA SHIFT TO THE ONE OF THE VARIANCES, THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION VARIANCE THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, UM, AND EXPLAIN WHAT THAT VARIANCE IS AND HOW IT RELATES TO THE SOS AMENDMENT.AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE, UH, NAOMI RO TRAMEL, THE CITY ARBORIST ON THE LINE TO TALK ABOUT THE HERITAGE TREE VARIANCE THAT'S GOING TO BE INCORPORATED, UH, INTO THIS ORDINANCE AS WELL.
UH, SO AS I MENTIONED, THERE'S THESE TWO ADDITIONAL VARIANCES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED TO BE BUILT INTO THIS SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT.
UM, I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO THE 1 25 8 360 4
SO WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE IS KIND OF A ZOOMED IN, UH, DETAIL OF THE TWO WATER QUALITY SOS PONDS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO TREAT THE STORMWATER FLOWING OFF OF SLAUGHTER CREEK, I MEAN SLAUGHTER LANE.
AND THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION SPECIFICALLY IS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THESE PONDS.
UM, THEY ARE TREATING DOWNSTREAM CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, A RECHARGE FEATURE AND A WETLAND FEATURE.
UM, THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS ON A LOT OF THE OTHER LOCATIONS THAT WERE CONSIDERED.
THERE IS A TECHNICAL MEMO THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE BACKUP THAT KIND OF, UH, DOCUMENTS THE, THE, UH, CONSIDERATIONS AND ALL THE THOUGHT THAT WENT INTO THE LOCATIONS OF THESE PONDS.
GIVEN ALL OF THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE, THE EXISTING ROAD.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THE RIGHT OF WAY IS QUITE LIMITED IN BUILDING WATER QUALITY FEATURES.
UM, AND AS I MENTIONED, THERE'S EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND REAL ESTATE CONSTRAINTS THAT, UM, LED THE CONSULTANT TEAM IN THE CORRIDOR PROGRAM OFFICE TO SELECT THESE TWO.
AND ALSO, IF YOU READ THROUGH THE TECHNICAL MEMO, THERE WAS 20 LOCATIONS EXAMINED, AND THESE TWO, UM, WERE THE, THE PREFERRED LOCATIONS.
SO AGAIN, WE SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR VARIANCE BASED ON, UM, ALL OF THESE CONSIDERATIONS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL, UM, BENEFITS THAT IT'S PROVIDING TO THE DOWNSTREAM CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES.
UM, ALSO THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION THAT IS PROPOSED AND THE MITIGATION REQUIRED FOR IT WILL BE, UH, ADDRESSED WITH A FEE AND LIE PAYMENT FOR THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION INTO THE RIP PER UH, MITIGATION FUND.
UM, SO NOW WE ARE GOING TO SHIFT OVER TO DISCUSSING THE HERITAGE TREE VARIANTS.
AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE NAOMI ON THE LINE, UH, CITY ARBORIST, AND SHE IS GOING TO DISCUSS THIS PARTICULAR PART OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.
LESLIE, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
NAOMI ROMMEL, CITY ARBORIST DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
I APOLOGIZE THAT I HAVE TO DO THIS REMOTELY.
I'M ATTENDING TO A FAMILY, UH, MEDICAL ISSUE.
UM, SO THE HERITAGE TREE VARIATION REQUEST IS TO REMOVE, UH, THE CORRIDOR, THE CITY OF AUSTIN CORRIDOR PROGRAM, THE SEEKING TO REMOVE THE REMOVAL OF A HERITAGE TREE WITH A SINGLE STEM OVER 30 INCHES IN DIAMETER, WHICH IS TREE 3003.
THE REQUEST MEETS THE CITY ARBOR'S APPROVAL CRITERIA SET FORTH IN LDC 25 8 6 2 4 82, AND THE VARIANCE IS RECOMMENDED.
UM, LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CODE HERE.
UM, THE VARIANCE IS TO ALLOW, AS I STATED, UM, UH, THE REMOVAL OF A HERITAGE TREE WITH A STEM GREATER THAN 30 INCHES AS ALLOWED IN 25 8 6 43.
THAT'S LAND COMMI COMMISSION VARIANCE, AND A COUPLE OF SECTIONS IN 25 8 6 24 A 1 26 A, WHICH IS PART OF THE HERITAGE TREE ORDINANCE.
UM, SO THE APPROVAL CRITERIA FOR THIS, I'LL JUST SKIP ON DOWN, UM, IS IN 6 24.
SO THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DEPARTMENT MAY APPROVE AN APPLICATION TO REMOVE A PROTECTED TREE ONLY AFTER DEMONSTRATING THAT THE TREE PREVENTS REASONABLE USE AND ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY, REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY, AND FOR A TREE LOCATED ON PUBLIC PROPERTY OR A PUBLIC STREET OR EASEMENT, THESE ARE IN THE MEDIANS, UM, THAT PRESENTS AN OPENING OF NECESSARY VEHICLE TRAFFIC LANES IN A STREET OR ALLEY OR PREVENTS A CONSTRUCTION OF UTILITY AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES THAT MAY NOT BE FEASIBLY REROUTED AND ALLEGEDLY WENT THROUGH THAT.
UM, THE VARIANCE REQUEST, I'LL GO OVER THE EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, UM, THE REQUEST,
[02:05:01]
THE TREE CONDITION, THE CONSTRAINTS AND CONSIDERATIONS, AND THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS IN PROJECT BENEFITS, AND THEN THE TRANSPLANT INVESTIGATION AND TREE HEALTH ASSESSMENT.AND THEN FINALLY, I'LL GO INTO MITIGATION EFFORTS.
UM, AS LESLIE KIND OF POINTED OUT ON THIS AREA, UM, IT'S BETWEEN IT'S SLAUGHTER LANE BETWEEN PEC AND BRODY.
UH, WE'VE GOT A FOUR-LANE ROADWAY DIVIDED BY A GRASSY MEDIAN, UM, ON BOTH SIDES.
THERE'S COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL, AND PUBLIC LANDS USE USES THIS LINE CORRIDOR.
THERE'S A FEW TREES IN THE MEDIAN, INCLUDING TREE 3003.
UH, THIS TREE IS SURROUNDED BY A LIMESTONE TREE, WELL SUNKEN IN FOUR FEET BELOW GRADE, AND THEN LESS THAN SIX FEET FROM THE CURB.
UH, TREE THOUSAND THREE, UH, 3000 HAS BEEN HIT BY MANY TIMES BY VEHICLES.
I'LL GET INTO THAT LATER AS, UM, MANY OF YOU HAVE DRIVEN PAST THAT SAMOR TREE.
UM, SO, UH, FEW OF THESE COLLISIONS, UM, RESULT IN FATALITIES.
UM, AS I SAID, UH, THE HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL REQUEST IS TO THE LAND USE COMMISSION UNDER 25 8 643.
THE CITY OF AUSTIN CORRIDOR PROGRAM IS REQUESTING THE REMOVAL OF THIS TREE, SALI OAK TO IMPLEMENT MOBILITY IMPROVEMENTS BASED ON ONE, THE POOR STRUCTURAL CONDU CONDITION OF THE TREE DUE TO MULTIPLE VEHICLE COLLISIONS.
THE TREE IS NOT A CANDIDATE FOR TRANSPLANT DUE TO THE STRUCTURE MAIN TRUNK DECAY.
UM, WE HAD A BACKUP THIRD PARTY ARBORIST, UH, TO, UM, TOMOGRAPHY OR SONOGRAM ON THE TREE TO, TO EXAMINE THE EXTENT OF DECAY AND THE EVALUATION DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ROOT FLARE AND THE SURROUNDING GRADE.
SO, LIKE I SAID, IT'S, IT'S WELL BELOW THE EXISTING GRADE AND THERE'S NO ROOTS.
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS PICTURE UNDERNEATH THE, UM, TRAFFIC LANES.
UH, THE TREES LOCATION PREVENTS, UH, UH, THE OPENING OF NECESSARY VEHICLE TRAFFIC LANES IN A PUBLIC STREET THAT MEETS THE APPROVAL CRITERIA PER LDC 25 8 64 A SIX A.
AND THE THE TREES LOCATION RESTRICTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SLAUGHTER LANE CORRIDOR, IMPENDING REASONABLE USE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THE TREE POSES A SAFETY HAZARD TO MOTORIST BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION NEAR THE BACK OF THE CURB.
UH, AND THEN THERE IS ALSO EXTENSIVE DAMAGE FROM BEING STRUCK BY MOTORISTS.
UM, MYSELF AND MY CERTIFIED AND VERY, UM, QUALIFIED ARBORIST STAFF, UM, UH, EXAMINED THIS TREE OURSELVES.
UH, WE MEASURED IT, UH, AND EVEN WHEN WE WERE THERE, ONE OF THE GUARDRAILS HAD RECENTLY BEEN, UM, DAMAGED.
UH, WE FOUND THAT, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE IN THIS PICTURE, I'VE OUTLINED IT TO THE SIDE THAT THERE'S MANY FISSURES AND DECREE DECAY CRACKS, UM, AND INTERNAL DECAY IN THE TREE ITSELF.
WE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT QUALIFIED FOR DEAD DISEASE, IMMINENT HAZARD UNDER THE CODE.
THIS IS ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION THAT WE ARE SEEKING A LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANTS.
UM, PART OF, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS PICTURE, AND I'LL GO INTO THE TRANSPLANT FEASIBILITY THAT, UM, BASICALLY TO PICK UP THIS TREE, MOVE IT ON IN A BIG TREE, REMOVE, UH, I THINK IT'S GONNA FALL APART, UM, BASED ON ALL THESE FIGURES AND THE MAIN DECAY, THE TREE AND THE LOAD RESTING UPON IT, AND THAT THERE IS REALLY NOT ANY ROOTS BEYOND SIX FEET ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TREE.
UM, SO LIKE I SAID, THE MAINSTEM WAS, UM, DECAY WAS ASSESSED BY A PRIVATE ARBORIST COMPANY, UM, SOUND TESTING, AND AGAIN, IT'S NOT STRUCTURALLY, UM, FEASIBLE FOR IT TO BE TRANSPLANTED.
UH, LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS BACKGROUND.
UM, I'LL TALK ABOUT THE CONSTRAINTS AND CONSIDERATIONS, UH, THE PROJECT LIMITS AND ADJACENT LAND USE IN ORDER TO EXPAND TRAVEL LANES.
UH, WE'RE UNABLE TO ADD A WESTBOUND TRAVEL LANE NORTH EXISTING DEVELOPMENT OF US THE RIGHT OF WAY, IMPACTING ABOUT 14 PARK SOLES.
AND LIKE I SAID, RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND PUBLIC.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS INTO EX IN EXISTING CULVERT FURTHER EAST WOULD NEED TO BE EXTENDED CAUSING THE CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE IN A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN, THE ADDED TRAVEL LANES TO NEED TO STAY INSIDE THE RIGHT OF WAY AND EXPAND INTO THE SLAUGHTER LANE MEDIUM.
THE LOCATION OF THE TREE, 3003 WITHIN THE MEDIUM AND BEHIND THE CURB PRESENTS A OPENING OF PREVENTS
[02:10:01]
THE OPENING OF NECESSARY VEHICLE TRAFFIC LANES IN A PUBLIC STREET AND MEETS APPROVAL UNDER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 25 8 6 2 3 A SIX A.UH, THE REQUEST IS, UM, PART OF THE MOBILITY BONDS IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE APPROVED BY AUSTIN VOTERS IN 2016.
TREAT 30,003 CURRENTLY IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE TRANSPORTATION CRITERIA.
MANUAL LA LATERAL OFFSET REQUIREMENTS AND POSE A SAFETY HAZARD TO MOTORISTS AGAIN PER TCM 11.1 0.1.
THE MINIMAL LATERAL OFFSET OF 18 INCHES ARE REQUIRED FOR EXISTING TREES AND A MINIMUM LATERAL OFFSET FOUR FIVE FEET IS REQUIRED FOR NEWLY PLANTED TREES.
SO THIS TREE CONTINUES TO BE A CONTINUED COLLISION RISK PROJECT BENEFITS ARE 60 MILLION IN CRITICAL MOBILITY, SAFETY, CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENT, SECURING FUNDING, FEDERAL FUNDING.
UH, THEY ADDED EXTRA LANES FOR BETTER VEHICLE TRAVEL.
UH, EIGHT FOOT YEAR FOOT, UH, SHARED YOUTH USE PATH FOR SAFE COMMUNITY CONNECTIVITY THROUGH THE QUARTER AND CYCLIST AND PEDESTRIANS.
UM, I ACTUALLY LIVE CLOSE BY THERE AS WELL.
THEY'RE INCREASED SAFETY FOR USES OF THE, UM, S U P BY CREATED A VEGETATIVE BUS BUFFER STRIP BETWEEN THE S SEP AND VEHICLES, MEANING THAT THERE WILL BE, UM, LIKE AN AREA FOR THE, THE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATIONS, UH, NEW SIGNALS AND IMPROVING EXISTING SIGNALS AND ADA COMPLIANT CURB RAMPS AT EACH INTERSECTION.
UM, THE REQUEST AGAIN, UM, IS OH, UH, UH, TOO MANY ONE BACKUP.
UM, AS I STATED BEFORE, UM, DURING THE INVESTIGATION, UH, VISUALLY WITH A SOUNDING MAG ONSITE, MYSELF AND STAFF, UM, OBSERVED SIGNIFICANT DECAY AT THE STEM UNION DUE TO MULTIPLE WOUNDS.
UM, WE HAD A BUNCH OF VINES IN THE CANOPY, WHICH ADDS EXTRA WEIGHT ON THE LOAD BEARING OF THAT TREE ON TOP OF THAT DEAD DEFECT.
AND WHAT I MEANT ABOUT STRUCTURAL OR MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS IS YOU'VE GOT THAT SINGLE STEM, BUT IT ALL SPLITS AT THE SAME PLACE, INHERENTLY, NOT SO MUCH ON LIVE OAKS.
UM, BUT THAT'S A WEAK BRANCH ATTACHMENT.
BUT WHEN YOU HAVE ALL THESE WOUNDS AND THE COLLISIONS AND DECAY RIGHT BELOW THAT, ON TOP OF THESE MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS, UM, THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY IT COULD NOT BE TRANSPLANTED.
UM, THE ROOT COLLAR IS ALSO BURIED.
UH, SO WE WOULD LIKE ALSO THAT PRESENTS, UM, AREAS FOR OPPORTUNISTIC SUNSHINE DECAY.
UM, THE RESISTANCE DRILL DECAY DETECTED LOSS OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY AT ONE OF THE FOUR DRILLING POINTS, AND IT WAS DISQUALIFIED FROM TRAN FOR TRANSPLANT DUE TO LOSS OF THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY AGAIN.
MITIGATION FOR TREE TWO 3003 34 INCH LIVE OAK IS 102 INCHES.
UM, FOR THE PROJECT, IT'S 883 INCHES.
IN THIS SEGMENT, UH, THE CORRIDOR PROGRAM IS PLANTING 102 NEW TREES, WHICH IS ABOUT 490 INCHES IN THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY.
AFTER PLANTING NEW TREES, THE REMAINING MITIGATION MOUNTED 69,576, AND THE CORRIDOR PROGRAM SPANS TO TRANSPLANT THREE HERITAGE TREES THAT WERE ASSESSED FOR FEASIBILITY OF TRANSPLANTING TREE NUMBER 3000 3007 3018 FOR ESTIMATED COST OF FIVE 500,000, UH, $545,000.
UM, THE ONE THING I DID WANNA SAY, IT'S, UM, MYSELF AND, UH, MY STAFF, LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND ARBORIST WORKED, UH, FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS WITH THE CORRIDOR PROJECT IN DEVELOPING ENHANCED STANDARDS FOR TREE PLANTING.
UM, AND CAME UP WITH A MANUAL, UH, WORKED WITH THE CONSULTANTS ON THE MANUAL TO GET TREES BACK ON THE GROUND.
UM, SO THE CORRIDOR PROJECT WILL BE FOLLOWING THIS MANUAL.
AND THEN THE, OH, THIS IS YOU, LESLIE.
UM, SO BASED ON, UM, ALL OF THESE CONSIDERATIONS, WE, UH, WATERSHED PROTECTION AND DS E D ARE PROVIDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND ASSOCIATED VARIANCES WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT THE PROJECT PROVIDE COMPLIANCE WITH SOS NON DEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR ALL NEW AND RECONSTRUCTED IMPERVIOUS COVER ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE ROAD.
[02:15:01]
WILL PROVIDE IMPROVED WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR ALL EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER.THE PROJECT WILL UPDATE TWO EXISTING WATER QUALITY PONDS TO PROVIDE SOS NON DEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR 121.6 ACRES OF OFFSITE DRAINAGE, INCLUDING 31.9 ACRES OF OFFSITE AND PERVIOUS COVER.
THE PROJECT WILL REDUCE IMPACT TO TWO CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, A RECHARGE FEATURE, RECHARGE FEATURE WITHIN THE TRIBUTARY OF SLAUGHTER CREEK.
AND THE PROJECT WILL PAY INTO THE RIPARIAN ZONE MITIGATION FUND IN LIEU OF PROVIDING MITIGATION FOR THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION ASSOCIATED WITH NEW QUAL NEW WATER QUALITY PONDS.
AND BEYOND THAT, UM, BEYOND THE SOS AMENDMENT AND VARIANCES IDENTIFIED THE PROJECT WILL COMPLY WITH CITY CODE.
UM, AND WITH THAT, THAT IS THE END OF MY PRESENTATION, BUT THE APPLICANT, THE, UH, CORRIDOR PROGRAM OFFICE ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SECTION OF SLAUGHTER LANE.
IF, IF, UH, QUARTER PROGRAM'S READY? WE'RE READY.
UM, AND I'M JUST GONNA GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF INFO, MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE SPECIFIC PROJECT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
UM, NAOMI AND LESLIE ACTUALLY COVERED SOME OF OUR INFORMATION ALREADY, SO THIS WILL BE A LITTLE BIT OF A REVIEW.
UM, SO AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A COPY OF THE MAP THAT, UH, LESLIE SHOWED EARLIER, SHOWING EXACTLY WHERE THIS PROJECT IS IN RELATION TO THE, UH, THE DIFFERENT WATERSHED AREAS.
THIS IS A MAP SHOWING THE ENTIRE SEGMENT OF SLAUGHTER LANE CORRIDOR THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE CORRIDOR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM.
AS LESLIE MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS, THIS, UH, CORRIDOR IS ONE OF THE NINE CORRIDORS THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE 2016, UH, MOBILITY BOND.
AND, UH, SUBSEQUENTLY IN 2018, UM, ALL OF THE PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE GONNA BE IMPLEMENTED ALONG SLAUGHTER LANE WAS ALSO APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN THE, THE APPROVED QUARTER CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM.
UM, SPECIFICALLY THIS SEGMENT, C2, WHICH GOES FROM MOPAC, UM, TO BRODY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY ON THIS PROJECT, UH, IS A CAMPO GRANT RECIPIENT.
SO APPROXIMATELY 80% OF THIS, OF THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO BE FUNDED BY A FEDERAL GRANT.
UM, THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS, THE QUARTER PROGRAM IS ENGAGED IN VERY COMPREHENSIVE PUBLIC OUTREACH.
STARTING BACK IN PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, UH, WE HAD MANY PUBLIC, UH, PUBLIC MEETINGS TO VET AND, UH, RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE BE COMING TO SLAUGHTER LANE.
AND SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS SEGMENT, BECAUSE IT'S A CAMPO GRANT RECIPIENT RECEIVING FEDERAL FUNDS, UM, WE HAD ALSO, UH, ANOTHER PUBLIC MEETING SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE THAT WAS REQUIRED FOR TEXT DOT.
SO, JUST TO GO OVER SOME OF THE, THE QUICK IMPROVEMENTS HERE.
WOW, THAT'S REALLY HARD TO READ
UM, SO JUST WANTED TO KIND OF COVER SOME OF THE BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT.
UH, THIS SLAUGHTER LANE PROJECT, AGAIN, STARTS AT MOPAC END ZIP BRODY.
UM, THE, THE PRIMARY GOAL OF THIS CORRIDOR MOBILITY PROGRAM WAS TO REDUCE CONGESTION, INCREASE LEVEL OF SERVICE AND MOBILITY, ALSO INCREASE SAFETY AS WELL AS TURN, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TRANSFORM OUR CORRIDORS FROM WHAT ARE, ARE TYPICALLY VEHICULAR CENTRAL, UH, INTO CORRIDORS THAT WILL BE, UM, AVAILABLE FOR ALL TRANSPORTATION MODE USERS, WHETHER THEY'RE TAKING TRANSIT, DRIVING VEHICLES, WALKING, BIKING.
SO WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO REBALANCE AND MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THOSE MODES OF TRAFFIC HAVE ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE ALONG THESE CORRIDORS.
UM, SO THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE GOT COMING, UH, TO SLAUGHTER LANE HERE IN THIS, SPECIFICALLY THIS AREA, UH, ONE OF THE BIG BENEFITS IS THAT WE'RE GONNA BE REDUCING 27% DURING PRE PEAK TRAVEL TIMES.
UM, THE REST OF THESE BULLETS, I BELIEVE WERE ACTUALLY ON NAOMI'S SLIDE, WHERE WE'RE BRINGING EIGHT FOOT SHARED USE PATHS ALONG THE ENTIRE STRETCH TO ACCOMMODATE, UH, BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.
UM, WE'RE ACTUALLY MOVING THAT EXTRA WIDE SHARED USE PATH SIDEWALK FURTHER BACK OFF OF THE STREET FROM WHERE THE EXISTING SIDEWALK CURRENTLY IS.
UM, YOU'LL SEE IN A PICTURE THAT I HAVE THAT CURRENTLY THE SIDEWALKS ARE RIGHT AT THE BACK OF THE CURB.
WE ARE MOVING THAT BACK TO CREATE A, A SAFER, UH, SPACE, UM, FOR THOSE USERS BY, IN INTRODUCING A, A VEGETATIVE BUFFER BETWEEN THAT SHARED USE PATH AND THE NEW CURB LINE AROUND THE CURB LINE, EXCUSE ME.
UM, ALSO INCREASING SAFETY AT ALL OF THESE BECAUSE OF THAT SETBACK, AS WELL AS, UH, BRINGING NEW SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE CORRIDOR AREA, UH, UPGRADING TECHNOLOGY, ALLOWING,
[02:20:01]
UH, THE TRANSPORTATION OF PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO HAVE, UH, LIVE ACCESS TO, UH, ADJUST SIGNAL TIMING AND, AND MAKE A, MAKE A, UH, ADJUSTMENTS TO THOSE SIGNALS ALONG THE WAY AND BETTER MONITOR TRAFFIC, UM, AS WELL AS, UH, OUTFITTING THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR WITH A D A COMPLIANT, UH, PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES THROUGHOUT NEW CURB RAMPS.UM, ALL OF OUR SHARED USE PATHS, OF COURSE, WILL BE ADA COMPLIANT.
THIS IS JUST A RENDERING THAT'S, UH, THAT, THAT WE CREATED TO KIND OF DEMONSTRATE, UH, EXACTLY WHAT, UH, THESE IMPROVEMENTS, UH, MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
THIS, OF COURSE, IS A, A CORNER AT AN INTERSECTION SHOWING THE NEW HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS AND, AND PEDESTRIAN RAMPS.
THIS IS AN EXISTING AND A PROPOSED RENDERING EXISTING SHOT ON THE RIGHT, PROPOSED RENDERING ON THE LEFT, UM, AROUND THE, THE BOWIE HIGH SCHOOL AREA.
YOU SEE, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE EXISTING SIDEWALK RIGHT AT THE BACK OF THE CURB.
AND THEN OF COURSE, THE NEW, UH, DESIGN SHOWING THE ADDITIONAL TRAVEL LANE THERE, UH, ON SLAUGHTER, AS WELL AS THAT, THAT SETBACK OF THE SHARED USE PATH, UH, WITH THAT VEGETATIVE BUFFER NOW TO ADD ADDITIONAL SAFETY FEATURES.
AND THIS IS JUST, UH, UH, ANOTHER RENDERING, UH, OF THAT SAME KIND OF INTERSECTION.
GOT A LITTLE BIT WIDER SHOT THERE.
ON THE LEFT, YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THE NEW TREES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE PLANTED, UM, ALONG THE CORRIDOR THAT, THAT NAOMI MENTIONED IT ALL, UH, AS WELL, UM, AS PART OF OUR MITIGATION.
SO, UM, THIS IS THE LAST SLIDE I HAVE, SO THAT'S IT.
UM, WE HAVE ONE PUBLIC COMMENTER AS WELL, I BELIEVE.
MR. LAVINSKY, YOU'VE GOT THREE, THREE MINUTES, IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR STICKING AROUND.
THANK YOU GUYS FOR LETTING US COMMENT.
UM, BOBBY LEVINSKY SPRINGS ALLIANCE.
UM, I'VE SIGNED UP OPPOSED TO THIS.
I THINK REALLY WE'RE PROBABLY MORE OF A NEUTRAL ON THIS PROJECT.
UM, GENERALLY IF YOU ASKED US, WE WERE EX SUPPORT EXPANSION OF LANES IN THIS AREA, WE JUST SAY NO, THAT IT'S NOT REALLY HOW I'M LOOKING AT THIS ONE.
I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT IT THIS AS IT'S, IT'S A PROJECT THAT THE CITY'S MOVING FORWARD WITH.
HOW CAN WE, UM, YOU KNOW, MITIGATE THE ENVIRONMENTAL HARM THAT IS GOING TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
UM, AND THEN ALSO JUST FROM THE LENS OF THE CITY COMPLYING WITH ITS OWN REGULATIONS, I THINK THAT'S ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT HERE.
IF THIS WERE A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, THEY'D PROBABLY HAVE TO COME UNDER THE REDEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, UM, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS INCREASING IMPERVIOUS COVER, SO IT DOESN'T QUITE APPLY.
BUT IF YOU KIND OF LOOK AT THAT SAME PROCESS, YOU WOULD WANT THEM TO, UM, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE SOS QUALITY, QUALITY PONDS AND TREAT AS MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER AS POSSIBLE.
STEPH'S DONE A REALLY GREAT JOB ON THIS PROJECT.
GENERALLY, I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT WE'D ADD, UM, AS A REQUEST IS FOR THE PORTION OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT IS NOT MEETING THE SOS STANDARD.
UM, WE, WE WOULD REQUEST THAT THE CITY, UH, EITHER MITIGATE THROUGH PAYING INTO THE, UM, BARTON SPRINGS MITIGATION FUND, UM, REDEVELOPMENT MITIGATION FUND, OR DEDICATING LAND AS MITIGATION.
WE MAKE THAT REQUEST OF ANY, UM, AGENCY THAT'S BUILDING ROADS IN THIS AREA, LIKE, AND WE WILL DO THAT WITH SOUTH MOPAC WHEN TEXT DOT TRIES TO EXPAND THAT.
UM, AND SO WE THINK THE CITY SHOULD FOLLOW THAT SAME STANDARD.
UM, ALSO AS NOTED ON THE SLIDES, UM, THIS IS AN AREA WITH A LOT OF CFS BLOWING SINK.
CAVE IN PARTICULAR IS A REALLY IMPORTANT ONE THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY CLOSE NEARBY.
WE'D LOVE TO SEE ENHANCED, UH, COORDINATION THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT WITH, UH, THE WILDLANDS, UH, TEAM.
UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION ON THAT BETWEEN THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS.
UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOMEWHAT OF ONGOING CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE YET TO BE RESOLVED ON WHO IS THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBLE PARTY TO, UM, MANAGE THAT ASSET.
UM, HOWEVER, UM, JUST WITH THIS PROJECT IN MIND, UM, DYE TESTS HAVE SHOWN THAT IF POLLUTANTS IS GOING INTO BLOWING C CAVE HIT BURNT SPRINGS WITHIN TWO DAYS, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE ENHANCED PROTECTIONS FOR IT.
UM, SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE COULD BE SOME ADDITIONAL, UM, PROTECTIONS THAT COULD ENSURE THAT BOTON CAVE, UM, IS MANAGED BY WILDLANDS, THAT WOULD BE REALLY GREAT
UM, I KNOW THAT'S NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO THIS, UM, ITEM THAT BEFORE YOU, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO GET IT OUT THERE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
UM, THE BIG REQUEST THAT I DO HAVE FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM THOUGH, IS TO, UM, REQUEST ADDITIONAL MITIGATION, UM, AND, UH, HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW THAT WOULD LOOK, UH, FOR THE PROJECT.
UM, I THINK WE SHOULD MAYBE RECESS FOR A COUPLE MINUTES AND THEN COME BACK FOR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS.
LET'S MAYBE RECESS FOR FIVE, UH, AND COME BACK AND THEN,
[02:25:01]
UM, GET INTO QUESTIONS FOR, FOR EVERYONE.LET'S WANDER BACK TO OUR SEATS.
UH, WE'LL RECONVENE THE, UH, GENERAL MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
WE'RE ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX.
HEARD PRESENTATIONS FROM STAFF AND THE APPLICANT, UM, AND, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTER.
UH, SHI I'M SORRY YOU'RE ALWAYS ON THE HOT SEAT TO START.
I KNOW, RIGHT? NO TIME TO THINK.
UM, AT LEAST I DID GET TO CLEAR MY BLADDER, SO THAT'S A SLIGHT POSITIVE.
UH, OTHERWISE I WOULD'VE JUST BEEN, YOU KNOW, DOING THE, UH, THE INCESSANT TAPPING OF THE FEET THE WHOLE TIME.
UM, YEAH, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, UH, IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA SAY THAT GROUP AROUND THE AREA.
NOW, COMMISSIONER BRIMER HAS ME SECOND GUESSING MYSELF, BUT, UH, YEAH, YOU KNOW, AS SOMEONE WHO, UH, WHO WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL AROUND THE SOUTHWEST PART OF TOWN, YOU KNOW, GOT A LOT OF FOND MEMORIES OF DRIVING AROUND ON 1826 AND, UH, AND SLAUGHTER.
UM, I'VE DONE A LOT OF DUMB THINGS.
UM, HITTING A TREE HAS NOT BEEN ONE OF THEM.
SO THANKFULLY THAT ONE HOPEFULLY WILL STAY ON THE BUCKET LIST.
UM, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY I THINK, YOU KNOW, USUALLY INCREASING AMOUNT OF LANES AND PAVING IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT REALLY LOOKED UPON NICELY, I THINK IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE IT'S A MEDIAN, RIGHT? IT'S KIND OF, UH, IT'S KIND OF IFFY, I GUESS, FROM A PEDESTRIAN STANDPOINT.
YOU KNOW, THE BLOCKS ON SLIDER LANE TEND TO BE PRETTY LONG, SO HAVING THE MEDIAN GIVES YOU A NICE LITTLE WAY TO NOT HAVE TO GO TO AN INTERSECTION, ALTHOUGH I DO NOT CONDONE JOINT JAYWALKING, RIGHT? SO DON'T, UH, HOLD THAT AGAINST ME.
UM, BUT YEAH, NO, I'M A BIG FAN OF THE SHARED USE PATH TOO.
UM, I THINK CUTTING DOWN ON THE AMOUNT OF POLLUTANTS THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE SPREAD BY, UM, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS PROTECTION FEATURES ARE GOOD.
UH, YEAH, I MEAN, THAT'S BASICALLY MY COMMENTS ON THIS.
SCOTT, YOU GOT ANYTHING? HI, THANKS FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS.
UM, A LOT OF WORK THAT WENT INTO THAT.
AND, UH, APPRECIATE, APPRECIATE YOU GOING TO THE TROUBLE.
AND, UM, I JUST WANTED TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SAY THAT ANYTIME I CAN SEE REMOVAL OF THOSE, THOSE, UM, MOVABLE OBJECTS, THAT I ALWAYS SEEM TO HIT
SO IT'S BATTERING MY CAR, AND I IMAGINE A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE'S AS WELL.
SO I, I MUCH PREFER TO SEE A SEPARATION OF, UM, UH, TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN AND, UH, BICYCLE MULTIPLE USE, UH, AREAS, UH, WITH AT LEAST A, A, A GREEN STRIP.
UM, AND, UM, I DON'T THINK I SAW, I DON'T, I MAY BE WRONG, BUT I DON'T THINK I SAW, UM, CURVES THERE.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT A REAL BIG FAN OF CURVES.
I GREW UP IN IOWA, AND, UH,
SO, YOU KNOW, HE DIDN'T WANNA BE GOING ALONG, YOU KNOW, HITTING THE CURB ALL THE TIME.
SO THAT BECAME LIKE EVERY VACATION.
MY, MY DAD WAS HUGGING THE CENTER LANE, AND MY MOM WAS GOING NUTS.
YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TOO CLOSE, YOU'RE OVER THE LINE.
AND, UH, SO I DON'T LIKE CURBS.
I THINK THEY'RE, I THINK THEY'RE DANGEROUS, AND I THINK AUSTIN HAS WAY TOO MANY CURBS.
AND, UH, I JUST LAUGH AT THE IDEA OF GETTING MY, MY CAR, UM, ALIGN ALIGNED, BECAUSE HOW LONG'S IT GONNA STAY IN ALIGNMENT LIKE A DAY? UM, AND I'M, I'M A, I'M A CAREFUL DRIVER,
AND SO IF WE CAN GET RID OF SOME OF THOSE CURBS AND, UM, JUST MAKE, UH, DRIVING, UH, AND, AND OTHER USES AND PROMOTING, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU PUT IN MORE LANES, THAT DOES TEND TO PROMOTE MORE TRAFFIC.
BUT, UM, THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT, UM, THERE'S GONNA BE, THERE'S GONNA CONTINUE TO BE A LOT OF CAR USE, UH, FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE WHILE WE TRY TO CATCH UP WITH WHAT WE NEED AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING A LONG TIME AGO.
UH, AND JUST DIDN'T, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE VISIONARIES WEREN'T HERE, UM, AT THE RIGHT TIME FOR US TO, TO PUT IN, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE KIND OF, UH, UH, SUBWAY STRUCTURES AND WHATNOT THAT, UH, A LOT OF OTHER CITIES HAVE.
AND ALSO, WE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE RIVERS EVERYWHERE AND WE HAVE 305 SQUARE MILES OF CITY, SO IT'S NOT EXACTLY THE
[02:30:01]
SAME AS WASHINGTON DC THAT'S, YOU KNOW, LIKE A SMALL CONTAINED AREA.SO IT'S, IT'S, THIS IS, THERE IS NO OTHER CITY THAT'S LIKE AUSTIN, SO, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T REALLY COMPARE IT.
IT'S LIKE APPLES AND ORANGES WHEN YOU TRY.
SO I THINK IT, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS THE BEST THAT CAN BE DONE GIVEN WHAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH.
AND I THINK A LOT OF THOUGHT LOOKS LIKE A LOT OF THOUGHT AND PLANNING HAS GONE INTO THIS.
AND, UM, AS MUCH AS I'D LIKE TO SEE EVERYBODY JUST SORT OF DRIVE THEIR CARS OFF A CLIFF AND, AND JUST START, UH, GOING BACK TO HORSE AND WAGONS OR SOMETHING, THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE EVER GONNA GET FROM WHERE WE ARE FROM GASOLINE TO ELECTRIC AND SO FORTH, UM, IN ANY SANE WAY.
BUT, UH, WE GOTTA JUST KEEP TRYING AND, AND I THINK WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING IS, UH, LOOKS LIKE IT'S, UM, BEEN WELL THOUGHT OUT.
THANK YOU ALL BOTH SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS.
I KNOW THAT WAS A LOT OF WORK AND FOR SAYING THIS LATE THROUGH ALL THE OTHER ITEMS, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.
UM, THERE ARE SO MANY THINGS THAT I AM EXCITED ABOUT IN THESE IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, I LOVE THE UPDATED, YOU KNOW, INFRASTRUCTURE, SHARED USE PATHS, ALL OF THAT, BUT I AM NOT EXCITED ABOUT THIS EXTRA LANE.
UM, AND I JUST DON'T AGREE THAT MORE LANES EQUALS LESS TRAFFIC.
AND I THINK WE'VE SEEN THAT, YOU KNOW, ACROSS THE STATE, ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS WITHIN THE AUTHORITY OF THIS COMMISSION TO RECOMMEND OR NOT RECOMMEND RIGHT NOW, BUT, UM, THE PLAN LOOKS GREAT TO ME, ASIDE FROM ADDING AN EXTRA LANE OF TRAFFIC, OF CAR TRAFFIC, UM, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT SPACE DIG DEDICATED TO MORE, YOU KNOW, UH, MICRO MOBILITY OPTIONS FOR FOLKS.
UM, AND THEN IN TERMS OF THE HERITAGE OAK, I HAVE A, UM, JUST A THOUGHT.
SO LAST NIGHT I WAS AT THE LADYBIRD JOHNSON WILDFLOWER CENTER WALKING AROUND FOR THEIR TWILIGHT TUESDAYS, AND THEY HAVE A BEAUTIFUL CIRCLE OF HERITAGE OAK TREES WITH PICTURES, UM, FROM THE TREES WHERE THE ACORNS WERE TAKEN.
SO IT'S KIND OF THE, THE OFFSPRING OF THESE BEAUTIFUL, YOU KNOW, REALLY OLD OAKS FROM AROUND TEXAS.
AND I THOUGHT LIKE, JUST KIND OF A, A BEAUTIFUL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT COULD BE, IF WE DO HAVE TO TAKE DOWN A TREE, WHAT IF WE WERE ABLE TO HARVEST SOME OF THE ACORNS FROM THAT TREE AND PLANT THEM ELSEWHERE AS JUST KIND OF LIKE A HUMAN PLANT, YOU KNOW, CONNECTION AND JUST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT LIKE, THIS TREE WAS HERE LONG BEFORE WE WERE, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEING TORN DOWN BECAUSE OF US, BECAUSE WE'RE HITTING IT WITH OUR CARS.
IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT THE TREE'S FAULT.
UM, AND SO I JUST WANNA PUT THAT OUT INTO THE ROOM FOR THE PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE CONTROL OVER THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT THAT COULD BE JUST A NICE WAY TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE TREE AND, AND CONT THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR NOW.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS.
UM, THIS IS SHEIRA COMMISSIONER FOR DISTRICT FOUR, AND REALLY, UM, HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
MY FIRST QUESTION IS, IN REGARD TO THE TREE MITIGATION, WE LOST A LOT OF LIMBS AND WINTER STORM URI, AND WE'RE STILL EXPERIENCING, UM, WELL, RECENTLY IN OUR RECENT STORM, WE ARE EXPERIENCING FLOODING FROM THE CULVERTS BEING BLOCKED BY THE DEBRIS FROM THOSE LIMBS.
SO I'M CURIOUS IF THAT IS NOW, UM, YOU'RE TAKING THAT INTO CONSIDERATION IN YOUR TREE MITIGATION, LIKE WHAT KIND OF TREES YOU WILL PLANT? ABSOLUTELY.
UH, RESILIENT TREES, OBVIOUSLY, UM, UH, OUR GSD, THE ST.
ARBOR PROGRAM HAS BEEN INTRINSICALLY INVOLVED, UM, DURING THE STORM AND AFTERWARDS AND COORDINATING WITH ALL OUR SISTER DEPARTMENTS ON THAT, CONTACTING THE FOREST SERVICE, UM, WORKING WITH REGIONAL FOREST SERVICE ON THE AMOUNT OF CANOPY LOSS WE DID, UM, WE DID EXPERIENCE.
SO ABSOLUTELY TREE SPECIES SELECTION, UM, STRUCTURE MAINTENANCE, PROPER PLANTING, PROPER SOIL VOLUME, ALL IS VERY RARELY VERY, UH, CAREFULLY WORKED OUT AND CONSIDERED.
UM, ABSOLUTELY, AND THANK YOU FOR THAT.
UM, IT HAS BEEN PRETTY DEVASTATING, THE LOSS OF FROM THE STORM.
[02:35:01]
MY SECOND QUESTION IS IN REGARD TO THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS RECOMMENDATION ABOUT CONTRIBUTING TO THE BARTON SPRINGS MITIGATION FUND.AND I'M CURIOUS WHAT THE RESPONSE WOULD BE TO THAT, UH, LESLIE LILLY WATERSHED PROTECTION, AND THEN I'LL LET, UM, MY COLLEAGUES AT THE CORRIDOR PROGRAM OFFICE RESPOND TO THAT AS WELL.
UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS IN DETERMINING, UM, THAT MITIGATION FUND IS, UM, WE'RE STILL, UM, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE MITIGATION CALCULATOR MIGHT, UM, APPLY TO THIS PROJECT, BECAUSE AS YOU SAW ON THE DRAINAGE MAP, THERE IS A VERY SMALL SLIVER OF ROAD GOING THROUGH SEVERAL DRAINAGE AREAS.
SO WHEN WE CONSIDER THE ACTUAL CALCULATION FOR MITIGATION FUND REQUIREMENTS, UM, IT IS NOT THAT CALCULATOR WASN'T NECESSARILY MADE FOR THIS EXACT SCENARIO.
SO EVEN UNDERSTANDING WHAT THAT CALCULATION WOULD BE UNDER THE MITIGATE, UH, UNDER THE BARTON SPRINGS, UH, REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION IS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE STILL DISCUSSING THAT, BUT, UM, MAYBE MY COLLEAGUES AT THE QUARTER PROGRAM OFFICE CAN DISCUSS THE ADDITIONAL OFFSITE DRAINAGE THAT THEY'RE DOING THAT, UM, WE'VE ALSO BEEN CONSIDERING WITH, UH, THE MITIGATION PART OF THE CONVERSATION.
I'LL, UH, ATTEMPT TO ANSWER HERE THAT I MAY ASK MY, MY FRIEND MARK HERE TO STEP IN.
UH, WOULD YOU MIND PULLING THE, THE PRESENTATION BACK UP WITH THE, THE DIFFERENT WATERSHED MAPS ON IT, SHOWING THE DRAINAGE AREAS THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE PROJECT? NO, IN, IN LESLIE'S PRESENTATION, I'M SORRY, THINK IT'S PAGE NINE OF 14 AND LESLIE'S PRESENTATION.
JACKSON, IS THAT THE ONE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? YEP, YEP.
SO, AS LESLIE MENTIONED, THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, MUCH BACK AND FORTH OF ABOUT HOW TO KIND OF VIEW, UM, YOU KNOW, REQUIRED MITIGATION FOR THIS BECAUSE OF THE CALCULATOR NOT REALLY FITTING THIS, THIS TYPE OF SCENARIO.
SO WHAT WAS DECIDED AND WHAT WAS KIND OF AGREED UPON WAS, UH, INSTEAD OF BEING ABLE TO TREAT, UM, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THE ROADWAY TO THE NON DEGRADATION STANDARDS THAT, THAT THE SOS REQUIRES, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS YOU SEE THE, THE, THE OVER, UH, DRAINAGE AREAS THERE IN RED BLUE, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ACTUALLY TAKING AND MODIFYING A COUPLE PONDS TO NON DEGRADATION STATUS AND OVERTREATING WHAT IS NOT CURRENTLY TREATED.
SO IN THE GRAND SCHEME, WE'RE TREATING ABOUT THREE TIMES OF THE AREA THAT WE WOULD BE, HAVE BEEN REQUIRED TO TREAT, UM, IN THE ROADWAY BY TREATING IT AT A MORE REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE IN THESE WATERSHEDS.
SO WE'RE ACTUALLY ADDING A, AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF WATER QUALITY ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE WOULD'VE BEEN REQUIRED TO DO, UM, AND, AND BEING ABLE TO TREAT ALL OF THESE CONTRIBUTING AREAS THAT ARE FLOWING INTO, UM, INTO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE OVERALL WATERSHED.
SO MARK, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO THAT, BUT, AND THIS IS, UH, MARK BERNSTEIN.
I'M WITH THE CORRIDOR PROGRAM OFFICE.
I, UH, AUGMENTED STAFF IN SUPPORT OF THE CORRIDOR PROGRAM.
SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS PROJECT, OUR FIRST GOAL WAS TO TREAT THE EXISTING PA THE PROPOSED PROJECT TO NON DEGRADATION SOS STANDARDS WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE STARTED, AND WE LOOKED AT 20 DIFFERENT SITES TO PROPOSE TO, TO BUILD THE WATER QUALITY INFRASTRUCTURE.
BUT DUE TO THE TIGHT RIGHT OF WAY, THE BUILT OUT CONDITION ALONG THE CORRIDOR, SEVERAL CFS CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ALONG THE AREA, ONE BY ONE, THOSE AREAS WERE RULED OUT AND WE WEREN'T FEASIBLY ABLE TO TREAT TO NON DEGRADATION STANDARDS, THE, THE RIGHT OF WAY LIMITS.
SO WHAT WE THEN STARTED TO LOOK AT IS, CAN WE LOOK AT A, UH, BE CREATIVE AND LOOK AT A REGIONAL SOLUTION? SO SINCE WE COULDN'T TREAT FEASIBLY OUR IMPERVIOUS COVER ONSITE, WE STARTED LOOKING AT CAN WE TREAT AN EQUIVALENT AREA OF IMPERVIOUS COVER OFFSITE? AND WHAT WE ENDED UP DOING IS THE LARGE AREA IN RED AND THE LARGE AREA IN BLUE, WE UPGRADED THAT TO NON DEGRADATION SOS WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.
AND THAT FAR EXCEEDS THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT'S WITHIN OUR RIGHT OF
[02:40:01]
WAY.AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE LOOKED AT IS IN LIEU OF OUR MITIGATION, UM, INSTEAD OF PAYING A FEE, CAN WE ADD THE VALUE DIRECTLY BY TREATING THOSE AREAS TO NON DEGRADATION STANDARD? SINCE WE COULDN'T FEASIBLY DO THAT WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY DUE TO ALL OF THE CONSTRAINTS THAT WE FACED.
SO WE LOOK AT THAT AS THAT WAS OUR MITIGATION RATHER THAN FEE IN, IN LIEU OR PAYMENT IN LIEU, WE LOOKED AT CAN WE DO TREATMENT IN LIEU OFFSITE, REGIONALLY, AND UPGRADE THOSE AREAS THAT WERE ALL BUILT OUT BEFORE SOS CAME INTO PLAY.
UM, JUST CURIOUS REGARDING THAT, YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO GO AWAY YET.
ON THE, THE SINKHOLE EVALUATION MITIGATION ENGINEERING REPORT WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE BRODY CAVE BIO FILTERS, IT LOOKS LIKE THE TWO NEW, UM, QUALITY FEATURES ARE THE, UH, BRODY CAVE BIO FILTERS, A AND B.
IS THAT RIGHT? IS THAT WHY THAT AREA WAS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE ENGINEERING REPORT? THE TWO NEW AREAS ARE ON THE NEAR BRODY.
SO YOU SEE THE CYAN COLOR ON THE EAST RIGHT SIDE OF THE CREEK, AND THEN YOU SEE THE ORANGE TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE CREEK.
THOSE ARE THE TWO NEW FEATURES THAT WERE WATER QUALITY FEATURES THAT WERE BUILT.
THOSE ARE AREAS OF SLAUGHTER CREEK, OF SLAUGHTER LANE THAT CURRENTLY HAVE NO TREATMENT.
THOSE AREAS UNDER THE EXISTING CONDITION FLOW DIRECTLY INTO THE CREEK WITHOUT ANY WATER QUALITY FEATURE.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE AREAS OF EMPHASIS WHEN WE LOOKED AT WHERE TO PLACE WATER QUALITY WAS TRYING TO FOCUS ON THE AREAS OF SLAUGHTER LANE THAT HAD RECEIVED NO TREATMENT WHATSOEVER.
UM, AND SO WE ADDED THOSE FEATURES TO MAXIMIZE THAT AND CAP CAPTURE, UM, AND TREAT THOSE AREAS TO NON DEGRADATION.
AND THAT'S DIRECTLY UPSTREAM OF THE, UH, IN, OF THE, OF THE FEATURE, JUST, JUST DOWNSTREAM OF THE, OF THE EXISTING CULVERT.
I APPRECIATE ANYTHING THAT KEEPS, UM, RUNOFF OUT OF SLAUGHTER CREEK, FRANKLY.
UM, I'M JUST CURIOUS WITH, WITH THE ENGINEERING REPORT BEING INCLUDED HERE, IF, IF THOSE TWO WILL BE BUILT TO THE SPECIFICATIONS THAT WERE OUTLINED IN THAT ENGINEERING REPORT? YES, THAT'S THE ENGINEERING REPORT THAT'S INSIDE A AND B THAT'S PART OF OUR SITE PLANS.
WILL C AND D EVER BE BUILT THE ONES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED FOR THE, THE SOUTH AREA OF SLAUGHTER? I ASSUME THAT THIS IS, BECAUSE THIS IS THE WESTBOUND LANE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING THAT THIS, THESE ARE THE TWO THAT WERE IDENTIFIED, PRIORITIZED, I'M NOT SURE, UH, LESLIE LOLLY WATERSHED PROTECTION, THE, THERE ARE ONLY TWO NEW WATER QUALITY FEATURES BEING CONSTRUCTED.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT TO PICK? YEAH, THAT WAS THE EARLIER REPORT.
YEAH, WE WE'RE PICKING JUST THE TWO THAT ARE HERE.
SO THE TECHNICAL MEMO, I THINK THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, THERE'S A LOT OF OPTIONS THAT WERE, UM, SELECTED FROM, AND THESE ONES PROVIDED THE BIGGEST BENEFIT, THESE TWO PARTICULAR, UH, WATER QUALITY FEATURES.
UM, AND THEN BACK TO SORT OF THE RIPARIAN ZONE MITIGATION FUND PAYMENT, ESPECIALLY NOW THAT WE KNOW IT CAN BE USED FOR RESTORATION
SO IT, IT IS GEOGRAPHICALLY LIMITED TO, UM, EITHER LAND WITHIN THE AREA OR, UM, PAYMENT PER USED TOWARDS PURCHASING MITIGATION LAND.
UM, THERE WOULD NOT BE A, UM, A, UH, COMPONENT FROM THAT PARTICULAR FUND THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO BE USED FOR PROJECTS.
UM, AND THEN JUST MORE FROM A PERSONAL CURIOSITY STANDPOINT, APOLOGIES, UH, THE CERA MESA CROSSING WHERE THE VIOLET CROWN TRAIL TRAVERSES SLAUGHTER, THAT CROSSING MAKES PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL USE OF THE MEDIAN, THE GRASSY MEDIAN THERE.
IS THAT BEING CONSIDERED, OR WILL IT JUST HAVE THAT CURB CUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET? NOW? THERE IS, UH, MUCH OF THE GRASSY MEDIAN IS MAINTAINED WE'RE THE LANES DO NOT TAKE UP THE ENTIRETY OF THE GRASSY MEDIAN.
THAT'S, UH, THERE'S ABOUT A AVERAGE 14 TO 16 FOOT GRASSY THAT IS MAINTAINED AFTER CONSTRUCTION THROUGH THE LIMITS, AND THAT CROSSING IS BUILT INTO OUR DESIGN PLANS, AND IT'S BEEN COORDINATED WITH THAT GROUP.
I THINK, UM, I WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THE MITIGATION FUND THAT YOU WERE DISCUSSING.
I WAS REFERRING TO THE MITIGATION FUND THAT, UM, MR. LEVINSKY HAD TALKED ABOUT, BUT THE RIPARIAN ZONE MITIGATION FUND, UM, UH, WOULD NOT NECESSARILY HAVE A GEOGRAPHIC COMPONENT TO IT.
SO I JUST WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO, UH, THANK STAFF FOR THEIR PRESENTATIONS.
[02:45:01]
SO THEY WERE VERY, VERY INFORMATIVE AND WELL PUT TOGETHER.UM, IT'S ALWAYS UNFORTUNATE TO HAVE TO CONSIDER REMOVING A HERITAGE TREE, BUT IF THE ALTERNATIVE IS A, IS THE COMPLETION OF A CRITICAL MOBILITY PROJECT AND WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS, THEN I'M SUPPORTIVE.
UM, YEAH, AND I JUST WANT TO SAY
SO, UM, BUT THINGS LIKE BETTER, UH, SIGNALIZATION, UH, SMOOTHER PAVEMENT, UH, REMOVING, UH, OBSTACLES LIKE A TREE THAT'S TOO CLOSE, I MEAN, I CAN IMAGINE THAT A LOT OF THE COLLISIONS WOULD'VE BEEN WITH TRUCKS THAT WERE, UH, YOU KNOW, WIDE ENOUGH THAT THEY HIT THE UPPER PART OF THE TRUCK WOULD HIT THE TREE.
SO IT WASN'T A LOT OF THOSE CRASHES.
I MEAN, THE CAR COULD CRASH, BUT A HIT A TREE, A TRUCK COULD TAKE OUT SOME LIMBS.
UM, SO I CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF POSITIVE THINGS THERE, BUT, UM, INDUCED DEMAND IS GONNA FILL UP ANY LANES THAT WE BUILD.
UM, OTHERWISE, I, I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS.
I'M A BIG SUPPORTER OF THE, OF THE, UH, CORRIDOR PLAN.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BREMER.
STAFF FOR, UH, THAT, UH, LESLIE, YOU HAD YOUR PRESENTATION UP THE NEXT TO THE LAST SLIDE, UH, THAT SAID RECOMMENDATIONS, THE ONE BEFORE THAT.
COULD YOU BRING THAT ONE BACK UP? UH, YEP.
SO FORWARD ONE, IS THAT RIGHT, BRO? NO, THIS MAY BE THE RIGHT ONE.
HANG ON, I GOTTA BRING UP MY NOTES HERE.
SO YOU'RE GONNA REPLANT, UH, 3000, 3007 AND 3018, RIGHT? THOSE ARE THE TREES THAT YOU'RE GONNA PICK UP AND MOVE, RIGHT? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER, THIS IS NEAR RIDGE, MILL CITY ARBORIST.
THE, THE REASON I ASK IS THIS, THAT, UH, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, UH, A SMALL SECTION OF, OF, UH, SLAUGHTER LANE, RIGHT? AND, AND THE WHOLE THING'S GONNA BE WIDENED AT SOME POINT.
IS THAT NOT CORRECT? ALL THE WAY OVER TO I 35 AND PERHAPS FURTHER EAST THAT IS NOT PART OF THE CORRIDOR PLAN.
JUST THAT, THAT PART, IT'S JUST THIS SEGMENT IS THE ONLY SEGMENT ON SLAUGHTER LANE WHERE ANY ADDITIONAL LANES THROUGH LANES ARE PROPOSED.
I WAS READING, UH, THE BARTLETT ARBORIST REPORT AND, UH, IT MENTIONED A NUMBER OF TREES ON HERE.
UH, AND, UH, THEY DIDN'T MENTION THAT ONE DIDN'T MENTION TREE 3018, ALTHOUGH, UH, THE OTHER REPORT, UH, TREE TRANSPLANT FEASIBILITY FIRST PASS QUARTER WEST SLAUGHTER LANE, THIS WAS DONE BY ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN.
I THINK THEY MENTIONED TREE 3018.
I WAS A LITTLE BIT CURIOUS WHY THESE BOTH REPORTS DIDN'T COVER THE SAME, ALL THE SAME TREES.
IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON COMMISSIONER BY NAOMI RUMI, CITY ARBORIST? UM, SO WE ASK PER THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL, UH, FOR TREE PLANT, TREE TRANSPLANT FEASIBILITY STUDIES.
SO THE TREES THAT CAN SAFELY BE MOVED WILL BE LOOKED AT.
UM, OF COURSE WE LOOKED AT, UM, THIS, UH, 34 INCH LIVE OAK VERY CAREFULLY FOR THAT.
UM, NOT ALL TREES CAN BE REMOVED OR CAN BE MOVED.
UM, AS YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO GET THE BIG BLASTS AND EITHER, YOU KNOW, CRANE IT IN, UM, WITH A COUPLE OF BULLDOZERS AND SUCH.
SO NOT ALL TREES ARE KENT TRANSPLANT.
UM, THE BARTLETT REPORT, UH, PRIVATE ARBORIST REPORT IS SEPARATE FROM THE TREE TRANSPLANT FEASIBILITY STUDY.
UH, NOW THE ONLY HERITAGE TREE ON THIS LIST WAS THE ONE THAT YOU RECOMMENDED TAKING OUT.
UH, THE TREE TRANSPLANT REPORT, UH, MENTIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GONNA BE TAKING OUT A LOT OTHER, OR YOU'RE GONNA BE TAKING OUT, OR YOU CAN RELOCATE, UH, SEVERAL OTHERS, BUT ARE YOU GONNA BE JUST CUTTING DOWN THE REST OF 'EM? BECAUSE THEY'RE SMALLER THAN THAT? THERE'S ONE WHICH IS 29 INCHES, WHICH IS JUST AN INCH SMALLER THAN THE, UH,
[02:50:03]
HERITAGE TREE THING.I CAN'T, OH, THAT'S, UH, TREE 3007.
WHAT DO YOU, IS THAT, LET'S SEE, THAT'S ON THE LIST THERE.
SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE GONNA BE RELOCATING THAT ONE YOU WERE PROPOSING FOR TRANSPLANT 3000, 3007 AND 3018.
BUT, UH, THE OTHER ONES, YOU'RE JUST GONNA CUT DOWN, IS THAT CORRECT? THE ONLY TREE IS THE ONE THAT'S IN THE VARIANCE.
BUT THE OTHER TREES THAT ARE NOT HERITAGE TREES THAT YOU'RE GONNA JUST CUT DOWN, THERE ARE REMOVALS OF OTHER TREES, MAINLY IN THE WATER QUALITY WHERE THE, WE'RE ADDING THE TWO WATER QUALITIES.
THERE'S SMALLER TREES IN THOSE LOCATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO CLEAR TO THE RIGHT.
BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ONES IN THE MEDIAN.
THERE, THERE ARE COMMISSIONER FRYER.
I'M GONNA ALSO HAVE THE CONSULTANT STEP IN.
UM, BUT THEY MEET THE REASONABLE USE AND ACCESS AND NECESSARILY VEHICLE LANES, UH, PRESCRIBED IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO YOU'RE, SO IS THE ENTIRE MEDIAN GONNA BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO BUILD THE ROUTE? IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING? I'M GONNA GIVE IT OVER TO JENNIFER.
NO, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT REMOVING THE ENTIRE MEDIAN.
WE'RE NARROWING THE MEDIAN A LITTLE BIT ON BOTH SIDES, BUT AS MARK MENTIONED EARLIER, THERE'S ABOUT A 16 FOOT OR SO MEDIAN THAT WILL BE MAINTAINED FOR, FOR THE ENTIRE WIDTH.
SO WE'RE ONLY REDUCING THE WIDTH OF THE EXISTING MEETING.
IT'S NOT BEING DELETE, NOT BEING REMOVED ENTIRELY.
AND PART OF THE MEETING YOU'RE REMOVING IS THE PART WHERE THE TREES ARE THE, THERE'S, THERE'S SOME TREES THAT ARE LIKELY TO REMAIN DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY ARE IN THE MEDIAN, BUT THEN SOME THAT WILL BE REMOVED BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THEY FALL IN THE AREA OF THE MEDIAN THAT'LL BE NARROWED.
CAN YOU SPECIFY THE TREE NUMBERS THAT ARE GONNA BE REMAINING? UM, I CAN YOU, YEAH.
DO WE HAVE IT? I MEAN, THAT'S ALL IN OUR, IN OUR SITE PLAN THAT WE'RE SUBMITTING THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED THROUGH THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
WE'RE FOCUSED TODAY ON THE ONE THAT REQUIRED YEAH, I UNDER YEAH, I UNDERSTAND.
AND, AND TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION EARLIER, UM, NAOMI AND I WENT OUT IN THE FIELD TOGETHER AND LOOKED AT ALL THE TREES IN THE MEDIAN, AND SOME OF THEM WERE IN GOOD ENOUGH CONDITION THAT WERE OBVIOUSLY IN GOOD ENOUGH CONDITION THAT DIDN'T REQUIRE THAT LEVEL THREE TREE STUDY THAT BARTLET PROVIDES.
SO THAT'S WHY THE TREES AREN'T EXACTLY THE SAME IN BARTLETT AND IN THE EDI REPORT.
IT'S BECAUSE NOT ALL OF THEM NEEDED THAT.
THEY WERE OBVIOUSLY IN EXCELLENT CONDITION, SO THEY DIDN'T NEED THAT LEVEL THREE TO, TO DETERMINE THE, UM, TO DO THE, THE SPECIFIC TREE ASSESSMENTS, UH, TO DETERMINE IF IT WAS SUPER HEALTHY, CUZ WE COULD TELL THAT IT WAS HEALTHY.
UM, NAOMI, MAYBE WANT TO CHIME IN HERE.
NAOMI RUTH MALIS CITY ARBORIST.
UM, SO STAFF DOES NOT DO ADVANCED LEVEL ASSESSMENTS.
UM, THOSE ARE DONE THROUGH EITHER RESIST AUTOGRAFT, SONOGRAPH, UH, TOMOGRAPHY, THEY'RE FLIPPED PULL.
THERE'S DIFFERENT, UH, ROOT COLOR EXCAVATION.
UM, SO IF I SEE AN OBVIOUS DEFECT, UM, I AM NOT DOING THOSE TESTS MYSELF, ALTHOUGH I COULD, BUT THAT IS NOT STAFF'S, UM, JOB.
SO THAT'S WHEN WE ASK FOR THAT DIFFERENT LEVEL OF A HIGHER LEVEL OF ASSESSMENT ABOUT THAT TREAT IS WHAT I CAN'T SEE VISUALLY OR WITH THE MALLET TEST.
I DO WANT A BACKUP RETE, UH, REPORT FOR ADVANCED TESTING.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT AS FAR AS THE, UM, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE NEED IN ORDER TO BUILD THE ROADWAY, I UNDERSTAND THE JUSTIFICATION IS THERE TO REMOVE THE, THE TREE IN QUESTION 3003, BUT THE BARTLET REPORT SAYS THAT THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS YOU DO TO MITIGATE THE FACT THAT IT IS PERHAPS THE LEAST STABLE THAT YOU CAN REMOVE THE VINES TO REDUCE THE WEIGHT ON THE UPPER, UH, PORTION, THAT YOU CAN ADD FERTILIZER TO IT IN ORDER TO MAKE IT GROW BETTER.
AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS THAT YOU CAN MITIGATE THE DAMAGE THAT'S BEEN DONE TO IT TO MAKE IT A HEALTHY AND CONTINUE TO GROW TREE.
SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU, AND IT'S, AND CUTTING IT DOWN IS A OPTION IN ORDER TO KEEP IT HEALTHY.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, YES, YOU CAN CUT IT DOWN BECAUSE YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO THAT, BUT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN IT'S RIGHT.
UH, COMMISSIONER BRIMER? YES, MA'AM.
UM, SO ONE THING ABOUT ARBORIST REPORTS RISK ASSESSMENTS AND FROM PRIVATE ARBORIST COMPANIES, WE DO CONSIDER THAT FOR REASONABLE USE AND ACCESS.
SO USUALLY ON THESE THINGS, UH, THESE REPORTS, UM, AND THIS IS THROUGH THE TRUE
[02:55:01]
RISK ASSESSMENT QUALIFICATIONS.UM, IT'S A ADVANCED CERTIFICATION THAT ALL MY STAFF I'VE HAD FOR 10 YEARS AND STUFF THAT YOU WILL OFFER THOSE OPTIONS IN THAT REPORT AS A MITIGATION.
SO BARTLETT IS NOT LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN ITSELF, THEY ARE JUST LOOKING AT THE TREE AND HOW THEY WOULD DO TO ANY OTHER EITHER COMMERCIAL OR, UH, PUBLIC ENTITY.
SO THEY'LL ALWAYS HAVE THOSE OPTIONS IN HERE, BUT THEY ARE NOT THE CODE AUTHORITY ON TERMS OF REASONABLE USE, UH, REASONABLE ACCESS, AND A NECESSARY VEHICLE LANE.
UM, I HOPE THAT UNDER THAT HELPS BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF JUST LIKE THE STANDARD, UH, MITIGATION.
I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, I READ BOTH REPORTS AND, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE, THE MATERIAL THAT'S AVAILABLE TO ME AS PART OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S HERE.
AND SO I JUST ASKED MY QUESTION BASED UPON, YOU KNOW, THE INFORMATION THAT'S HERE THAT I, THAT I READ.
SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH, WIDEN THE STREETS AND YEAH, TRAFFIC SUCKS IN AUSTIN, BUT HEY, YOU KNOW, UH, AND I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN, IT'S GONNA SUCK AFTER THEY MAKE IT 12 LANES LOT BY EACH DIRECTION.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.
I WAS ON THE KATY FREEWAY ON SUNDAY TWO WEEKS AGO, AND THEY HAVE 10 LANES EACH DIRECTION AND IT STILL SUCKS.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT GONNA CHANGE.
BUT WE'RE NOT HERE TO JUDGE THAT.
WE'RE HERE TO MOVE, YOU KNOW, DECIDE ABOUT A TREE.
BUT, UH, ANYWAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COMMISSIONER BRIMMER, IF I MAY, UM, ALSO ADD THAT, UH, THE FATALITIES, UM, ON THIS TREE, UM, WERE NOT NECESSARILY CAUSED BY TRUCKS HITTING THEM.
UM, THERE ARE FAMILY MEMBERS, UM, THAT, THAT HIT THEM.
UH, AND THEN THE CORRIDOR PROJECT OFFICE AND OUR CONSULTANTS HAVE WORKED, UM, VERY MUCH WITH THESE FAMILIES, UM, FOR THE FATALITIES.
MY, MY MY POINT WAS ABOUT TRUCKS HITTING THE TREE IN CO OH GOD.
UM, SO FIRST OFF, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS, UM, UH, GREAT PRESENTATION, I MEAN, REALLY IN DEPTH.
UM, AND, UH, I AM, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I ALWAYS HATE TO SEE A TREE REMOVED, UH, WHEREVER IT IS.
AND, UH, ESPECIALLY ONE SO OLD, I CAN'T BELIEVE IT SURVIVED, YOU KNOW, HAVING A WELL AROUND IT AND BEING HIT AND, YOU KNOW, ALL THESE THINGS.
UM, SO I, I DO AGREE, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN HARVEST THOSE, UH, SOME ACORNS, THAT WOULD BE A GREAT, UM, A GREAT THING WAY TO HONOR, UM, UH, THAT TREE AND, AND ANY OF THE OTHER ONES, UM, THAT ARE BEING REMOVED.
UM, I, UH, I SHARE COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN'S, UM, ENTHUSIASM FOR IMPROVING ANYTHING, UH, WITHIN, UM, THE WATER QUALITY ZONES, UM, TO MAKE THIS BETTER.
UH, YOU KNOW, FOR THOSE OF US WHO LIVED IN AUSTIN FOR A LONG TIME, SLAUGHTER LANE WAS ONE OF THOSE ROADS THAT PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN BUILT.
UH, AND, UM, IT, UH, BUT IT IS, AND WE CAN'T GO BACK.
UH, WE CAN ONLY GO FORWARD AND, AND HOPEFULLY MAKE THINGS, UM, BETTER THAN WHAT WE, UH, HAVE TODAY AND LEAVE THEM IN A BETTER SHAPE, UH, THAN WHAT WE, UH, CURRENTLY HAVE.
SO I APPRECIATE ALL Y'ALL'S WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CAVES, UH, HAVE AS MUCH BIOFILTRATION AROUND THEM, UM, MAKING SURE THAT THE WATER IS GONNA BE, UH, UM, FILTERED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, UH, BEFORE IT ENTERS BACK INTO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE WATERSHEDS, UM, CAPTURING ALL THAT, THAT HORRIBLE STUFF THAT COMES OFF THE ROADS.
I I ALSO SHARE THE IDEA THAT NO MATTER HOW MANY, UM, LANES YOU BUILD, UH, IT WILL, IT WILL FILL IN.
UM, SO I HOPE THAT WE CAN REALLY, UH, MAKE SURE THAT THOSE, UM, SHARED YOUTH PATHS ARE REALLY, UM, UH, FLUSHED OUT AND EFFECTIVE.
UM, AND, AND NOT JUST SOMETHING THAT'S RIGHT UP NEXT TO TRAFFIC.
UM, I THINK THAT AS WE LOOK AT THOSE, YOU KNOW, THOSE BECOME A FAIRLY DANGEROUS SCENARIO, UM, EVEN WHEN YOU PUT THE LITTLE POLES AND STUFF THERE.
SO HAVING SOMETHING THAT'S OFF, UM, OFF IN, IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKES MORE SENSE.
UM, I'M, I'M HAPPY THAT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY THERE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THESE CHANGES, UM, AND THAT THERE ARE AREAS TO BE ABLE TO PUT THE TWO NEW, UM, WATER QUALITY PONDS.
SO, YOU KNOW, OVERALL, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, I I THINK Y'ALL DONE A THOROUGH JOB WITH PROVIDING A LOT OF BACKUP ON THIS, SO I APPRECIATE THAT TOO.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, UM, I I, I, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS ONE OF
[03:00:01]
THOSE PROJECTS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'LL LOOK BACK ON AND GO, OKAY, THIS REALLY MADE A DIFFERENCE.YEAH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE VERY DETAILED PRESENTATIONS.
UM, BO BOTH OF THEM, BUT, UH, OR ALL THREE OF THEM, I GUESS, INCLUDING, UH, THE ARBORIST ONE.
UM, I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, THE RECHARGE FEATURES.
UM, AND I BELIEVE BLOWING SYNC IS AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BRODY IN SLAUGHTER.
SO WE'RE PUTTING IN THE TEAL AND ORANGE ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY AREAS THAT WEREN'T TREATED BEFORE.
UM, SO ON THAT FLOW LINE, I MEAN, IS THE, IS THE SINK ON THE FLOW LINE, LIKE STORM WATER THAT COMES OFF THE ROAD, OR I GUESS UPSTREAM IN THE WATERSHED FLOWS OVER THE SINK ITSELF? UM, LESLIE LOWLY WATERSHED PROTECTION, SO THOSE FEATURES AND, AND THE ASSOCIATED WETLAND, UM, WITH THAT SINK, THEY ARE DOWNSTREAM IN CHANNEL AND THE, UM, IMPERVIOUS COVER FLOWS INTO THE CHANNEL AND THEN DOWN TOWARDS THE RECHARGE FEATURE, UM, DOWNSTREAM TOWARDS THE RECHARGE FEATURE.
AND RIGHT NOW, THE WATER FLOWING OFF THE ROAD IN THOSE DRAINAGE AREAS INDICATED IN, IN THE SMALL ORANGE AND THE TEAL OR CYAN COLORED, UM, DRAINAGE AREAS, UM, ARE UNTREATED NOW AND JUST FLOWING DIRECTLY INTO THE CREEK.
IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO MY, I THINK IT'S PAGE NINE AGAIN, I THINK NINTH SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE THE TWO DRAINAGE AREAS.
THEY'RE THE SMALLEST ONES ON THE, UH, ON THIS MAP ALL THE WAY ON THE EASTERN END.
THOSE SECTIONS OF SLAUGHTER ARE CURRENTLY UNTREATED AND FLOW DIRECTLY INTO THE CREEK.
UM, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE WHERE THE RECHARGE, WHERE THE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ARE, BUT THEY'RE IN THE CREEK MM-HMM.
UM, I, I, I THINK CATCHING THAT WATER AND CLEANING IT NOW, UM, IS FANTASTIC.
UM, AND, AND I DO THINK THE IDEA TO KIND OF LOOK AT IT AT A WATERSHED BASIS AND, AND RETROFIT THESE OTHER, UM, PONDS NORTH, I GUESS, OF SLAUGHTER.
UM, SO THE, THE RED, THE RED WATERSHED AREA AND THE BLUE, THOSE HAVE PONDS THERE NOW, BUT THEY ARE JUST NOT CLEANING TWO SOS STANDARDS OR THEY WERE BUILT BEFORE SOS OR WHAT? UM, THAT IS CORRECT.
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU CAN SEE REGARDING THE IMPROVEMENT OF THOSE PONDS IS, UH, WHAT IS SYMBOLIZED AS LIKE A LIME GREEN AREA ADJACENT TO THE SOLID OPAQUE, UM, AREAS THAT ARE THE WATER QUALITY PONDS THAT EXIST.
SO WHAT IS IMPROVING THEM AND BRINGING THEM INTO COMPLIANCE WITH SOS IS THE RE IRRIGATION OR INFILTRATION OF THE WATER THAT IS, UM, RETAINED WITHIN THOSE WATER QUALITY PONDS AND THEN MOVED INTO THOSE RE IRRIGATION INFILTRATION AREAS THAT WILL FURTHER, UM, FILTER THE POLLUTANTS OUT OF THE WATER IN THOSE, UM, IN THAT, UH, THE, THOSE SOIL AREAS THAT CAN, UH, FURTHER CLEAN THE WATER BEFORE THEY ENTER, UM, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER PARTS OF THE WATERSHED.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE, THE TEAL ONE DOWN IN THE SOUTHEAST THAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, THAT HAS A, A PROPOSED INFILTRATION AREA FOR IT ALSO, IS THAT RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, YEAH, NO, I THINK THAT'S A, A GREAT WAY TO, UH, I MEAN, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA ASK YOU THE DETAILS, LESLIE, OF YOUR, YOUR MATH, UM, BUT THE TABLES SHOW A LOT ON THE LOADS, MORE OR LESS HOW YOU'RE IMPROVING THE, THE LOADS TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS AND, AND, AND MANY OTHER ELEMENTS, UH, WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE, WITH THE RECHARGE ZONE.
UM, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ARE, ARE, ARE, DO ANY OF THESE HAVE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL TRAPS OR IS THERE ANY CONTROLS FOR HAZMAT IN ANY OF THESE? UM, FOR THE 18 WHEELER OF GASOLINE THAT'S DRIVING DOWN SLAUGHTER? I'LL HAVE TO CONSULT THE DETAILS ON THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THEY DO, YES.
YEAH, THAT WOULD BE, I MEAN, I, I KNOW THAT'S ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT IN THE, IN THE RECHARGE ZONE IS NOT JUST DURING STORM EVENTS, BUT LARGE, UH, HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPILLS IF WE CAN CATCH IT BEFORE, BEFORE IT GOES DOWNSTREAM.
SO YEAH, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING, UM, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND JUST CIRCLING
[03:05:01]
BACK WITH US ON THE DETAILS OF THAT.UM, AND THEN OUR LAST QUESTION WAS, UM, DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE MANAGEMENT OF HAZARD'S MATERIALS, IS THERE ANY IDEA OR GUIDANCE FOR THE CONTRACTOR WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING THIS? I'M JUST THINKING OF THEM PUTTING IN THAT POND AT BLOWING, YOU KNOW, BLOWING SINK AND, AND NOT KNOWING THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE THE REFUELING TRUCK RIGHT THERE OR, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IS, IS THAT, HAS THAT BEEN DISCUSSED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? YES.
THE CITY HAS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR WORK WITHIN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE AND IN THESE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES THAT THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE DIRECTED TO FOLLOW.
AND THAT'LL INCLUDE SEDIMENTATION, EROSION CONTROLS, AS WELL AS HANDLING OF MATERIALS.
AND, AND I GUESS REFUELING OF VEHICLES OR, OR CORRECT.
OR SPILL CONTAINMENT AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
UM, THOSE ARE THE ONLY QUESTIONS I HAD.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANYBODY? I HAVE ONE.
UM, ARE THERE ANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR RAIN GARDENS IN THIS PLAN? DOES THAT, DO THEY MAKE SENSE OR ARE THEY NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS KIND OF PLAN? YES, AND WE, WE LOOKED AT THAT, UM, AND ONE OF THE PONDS THAT WE ARE BUILDING, THE ONE IN ORANGE IS ACTUALLY A RA IS A LARGE RAIN GARDEN ITSELF.
UM, SO WE DID INCORPORATE THAT.
WE ALSO LOOKED FOR SMALLER OPPORTUNITIES ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT WE HAVE VERY LIMITED RIGHT OF WAY ALONG THE AREA.
WE'RE HOLDING THE OUTSIDE CURB SO THE OUTSIDE CURBS DON'T MOVE, AND THAT LEAVES VERY LITTLE SPACE BEHIND THE CURB WHERE THE WATER IS FLOWING DOWN TO FOR THOSE OPPORTUNITIES.
UH, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SECONDED BY SCOTT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND.
UM, THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE PRESENTATIONS, UM, AND, AND FIELDING QUESTIONS AND, AND STICKING AROUND.
DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, MA'AM? I DO.
AND IT'S A LONG ONE, SO PREPARE YOURSELVES, AND IF YOU'RE ALL AWAKE BY THE END OF IT, I HOPE TO VOTE ON IT.
MAY 3RD, 2023 C 20 DASH 20 22 19 SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT AND RELATED VARIANCES, WHEREAS ON OCTOBER 27TH, 2022, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RESOLUTION NUMBER 2 22 27 DASH 38 TO INITIATE VARIANCES AND AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, INCLUDING SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 25 DASH EIGHT, SUB CHAPTER A, ARTICLE 13, SAVE OUR SPRINGS IN, UM, INITIATIVE AS MINIMALLY REQUIRED TO ADDRESS PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE LOCATED ALONG SLAUGHTER LANE FROM LOOP ONE, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS MOPAC AND, UM, TO 650 FEET EAST OF ROADY LANE AND RETURN TO COUNCIL WITH THE PROPOSED VARIANCES AND AMENDMENTS AS SOON AS FEASIBLE, WHEREAS THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS ASKING TO AMEND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE LDC 25 DASH EIGHT, ARTICLE 13, SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE AND RELATED VARIANCES TO CHAPTER 25 DASH EIGHT, SUB CHAPTER A, WATER QUALITY AND B TREE AND NATURAL AREA PROTECTION AND DANGEROUS SPECIES OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AS MINIMALLY REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT THE SLAUGHTER LANE IMPROVEMENT PRODUCT TO EAST OF ROADY LANE, S P DASH ZERO, I'M SORRY, S P 2022 DASH 0 3 360 D.
AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER PORTION OF THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE, AND WHERE A STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND ASSOCIATED VARIANCES FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, THE PROTECTION IS PROVIDING COMPLIANCE WITH SOS NON DEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR ALL NEW AND RECONSTRUCTED IMPERVIOUS COVER.
TWO, THE PROTECT, UM, THE PROJECT, UH, IS, IS PROVIDING IMPROVED WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR ALL EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COLOR COVER.
THE PROJECT IS UPDATING TWO EXISTING WATER QUALITY PONDS TO PROVIDE, SORRY, IS, UM, THE PROJECT IS UPDATING TWO EXISTING WATER QUALITY PONDS TO PROVIDE SOS NON DEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR 121.6 ACRES OF OFFSITE DRAINAGE, INCLUDING 31.9
[03:10:01]
ACRES OF OFFSITE IMPERVIOUS COVER.THE PROJECT WILL REDUCE IMPACT TO TWO CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, RECHARGE FEATURES WITHIN A TRIBUTARY OF SLAUGHTER CREEK.
THE PROJECT WILL PAY INTO THE RIPARIAN ZONE MITIGATION FUND, AND LIEU ARE PROVIDING MITIGATION FOR THE FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE NEW WATER QUALITY PONDS.
SIX OTHER THAN SOS AMENDMENT AND VARIANCES IDENTIFIED THE PROJECT COMPLIES WITH CITY CODE.
THEREFORE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE SITE-SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMISSION CONDITIONS HARBOR HARVEST ACORNS FROM THE TREE THAT WILL, OR TREES THAT WILL BE REMOVED TO BE CULTIVATED WITH EITHER AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN NURSERY OR LADY BIRD JOHNSON WILDFLOWER CENTER AND REPLANTED WITHIN THE PROJECT ZONE OR WITHIN THE AREA ON PUBLIC LAND TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LIVE OAKS TO BE PLANTED IN THE AREA TO REFLECT THE LIVE OAKS LOST UP FOR THE PROJECT.
WHAT'S THE PROCEDURE FOR DOING THAT? DO WE NEED TO GET A SECOND AND THEN REQUEST A MODIFICATION, OR DO WE MODIFY IT? AND THEN WHAT'S, I'M GONNA SAY THIS OUT LOUD AND ELIZABETH, HOW THEY GONNA NOD OR STOP NODDING IF I SAY IT WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE YOU CAN ADD AN AMENDMENT.
UM, IF IT IS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THE MOTION, THEN IT WOULD BE A REPLACEMENT MOTION THAT WE WOULD NEED TO VOTE ON.
BUT IF IT'S JUST AN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, SUCH AS AN ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION CONDITION, THEN IT CAN BE ADDED AS LONG AS NO ONE OBJECTS TO IT, AND THEN WE WOULD VOTE IF SOME ONE PERSON OBJECTS, WELL THEN WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS HAVE EACH VARIANCE BE A SEPARATE MOTION.
QUESTION FOR STAFF, IS THAT, ARE WE BEING ASKED TO REVIEW THIS AS ONE? UH, ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT VARIANCES ARE PART OF THE ORDINANCE, THE SITE SPECIFIC ORDINANCE THAT IS BEING PRESENTED TO COUNSEL, OR HOW CAN WE ADDRESS PRIMER'S WANTS? CORRECT THERE, THE, THE, THE ORDINANCE AND THE VARIANCES ARE BEING WRAPPED UP AS ONE PACKAGE THAT WILL BE GONE, THAT WILL GO TO, TO CITY COUNCIL.
UM, TYPICALLY THE VARIANCES, UM, AREN'T NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT WOULD NORMALLY GO TO CITY COUNCIL, BUT BECAUSE THIS IS AN SOS AMENDMENT, THE PROCESS IS USUALLY JUST TO WRAP IT ALL UP TOGETHER SO THAT COUNCIL SEES THE FULL PICTURE.
UM, AND SO IF YOU HAVE CONCERN, IF YOU AS A BODY, FOR EXAMPLE, WANT TO SUPPORT ONE VARIANCE BUT NOT THE OTHER, OR HAVE CONDITIONS RELATED TO ONE VARIANCE OR NOT THE OTHER, UM, YOU, YOU CAN DO THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD NEC YOU, YOU COULD DO IT THE WAY THAT COMMISSIONER BRIMMER IS SUGGESTING ONE BY ONE OR HAVE IT AS A SINGLE MOTION IF, IF EVERYONE AGREES.
WHY, WHY DON'T YOU TRY TO WALK? YEAH, GO FOR IT.
WHAT'S YOUR OBJECTIVE IN HAVING THESE BE SEPARATE? PERSONALLY? UH, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A VOTE ON THE PARK THAT ADDRESSES THE WATER QUALITY AND THEN HAVE A SEPARATE VOTE ON THE HERITAGE TREE.
WHY? UH, BECAUSE I WOULD VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE WATER QUALITY AND AGAINST THE HERITAGE TREE.
THEN WHAT I WOULD SAY IS, UM, PROPOSE A, UH, UH, A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT, YOU KNOW, TRIES TO KIND OF WALK, WALK THROUGH THAT, AND THEN WE'LL VOTE ON IT.
WELL, I'M NOT AS GIFTED VERBALLY IS YOU WILL NEED A, A SECOND.
SO YEAH, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY, LESLIE, TELL ME IF I GET THIS WRONG, BUT THE, THE CODE MON, THE CODE SECTION FOR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND FLOOD PLAN MODIFICATION ARE THE
[03:15:01]
ONES MORE RELATED TO THE WATER QUALITY ELEMENTS.UH, AND THE SECTION 25 8 26, 26 41 REMOVAL PROHIBITED IS THE ONE MORE RELATED TO THE TREE REMOVAL? UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAVING THE, I DON'T, I DON'T.
25 8 41, UH, LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES, WHICH ONE IS THAT RELATED TO? 25,000 8 41 IS THE SECTION THAT SETS OUT HOW THE PROCESS FOR, UH, LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCES.
SO WE'RE WAIVING SOME OF THOSE FINDINGS OF FACT REQUESTS IN THE PROCESS OF GRANTING THESE EXPERIENCES, UM, WITHIN THE SOS AMENDMENT, IT FUNCTIONALLY WAIVES THE, UH, VARIANCE REQUIREMENT, THE LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCE PROCESS AND FINDINGS OF FACT, UM, WHEN THEY GET ADDED TO, UH, ONE SINGLE ORDINANCE WITH THE SOS AMENDMENT.
SO BRIMER, I WOULD SAY IF YOU WANT TO HAVE AN AL A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, THAT MOTION WOULD BE TO VOTE ON, TO HAVE A MOTION JUST ON THE ELEMENTS THAT EITHER YOU SUPPORT OR YOU DON'T.
AND, AND THEN WE SEE IF WE SEE IF IT GETS A SECOND, AND THEN WE SEE, UH, HOW THE VOTE GOES.
DOES THAT MAKE SOUND GOOD? SOUNDS GREAT.
SO, WHICH, WHICH, UH, LET'S START WITH THE WATER QUALITY.
HANG ON NOW, I'M GONNA JUMP IN HERE REAL QUICK.
UM, SO, UM, LET'S MAKE THIS EASIER, RICK.
AND, UM, IF YOU CAN GET A SECOND FOR SPLITTING THESE APART, THEN I WILL SPLIT THEM APART.
I'M GONNA NEED ABOUT FIVE MINUTES.
SO, WELL, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DISPENSE WITH IT PRETTY QUICKLY.
UH, AND I, I, THE, THE WOMAN WHO I'M LOOKING FOR HELP FROM HAS HER FINGER UP, SO, YES.
WELL, JUST TO CLARIFY, SO THAT'S A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, AND IT WAS SECOND.
IF EVERYBODY AGREES THAT THEY WANT TO SPLIT THAT UP, THEN, BUT IS THIS, YOU SHOULD VOTE ON IT.
JUST, JUST VOTE ON IT FOR ME SO I CAN HAVE IT IN THE MINUTES.
UM, THERE'S A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO SPLIT UP THE ELEMENTS RELATED TO WATER QUALITY AND THOSE RELATED TO THE HERITAGE TREE REMOVAL AND TO VOTE ON THOSE SEPARATELY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? PUT YOUR MIC ON, PLEASE.
SHE ASK IF THERE'S ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE YOU VOTE.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT SPLIT COMMISSIONER SCOTT? BECAUSE IT'S A GOOD IDEA.
SO NOT MUCH DISCUSSION, BUT, UH, SOME, UM, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? MM-HMM.
WE'LL DECIDE WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO REGARDING THE TREE, AND WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ADDING ANOTHER LANE IS GOING TO HAVE A DETRIMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND WILL CAUSE MORE TRAFFIC.
AND LIKE, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO, TO ADD A LINE SAYING SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT? YEAH, SO IN GENERAL, EES, WE, WE COULD ADD THAT AS A A WHEREAS STATEMENT.
IN THE BEGINNING, UH, KIND OF IN THE PREAMBLE, UHHUH, OR WE COULD AS IT AS A, I GUESS A CONDITION WHICH WE BE JUST THAT WE'RE DISCLOSING THAT OR SOMETHING, BUT YES.
AND IT WOULD JUST, ALRIGHT, SOUNDS GOOD.
MOTION ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, WHICH IS TO BREAK APART THE WATER QUALITY ELEMENTS AND HERITAGE TREE ELEMENTS AND VOTE ON THEM SEPARATELY.
SO WE GOT BRIMER, SULLIVAN, BERG, UM, SHERA, SCOTT, AND IS THAT IT? DO YOU VOTE FOR IT? KREK.
DID YOU GET THAT ELIZABETH? ALL RIGHT.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED EVERYBODY ELSE? KRUEGER, UH, COFER.
SO WE ARE, AND I NEED FIVE MINUTES FOR OKAY.
[03:20:01]
UH, WELL, LET, LET ME, LET ME SEE IF I CAN PULL THIS OFF WITHOUT, LET ME, LET, LET ME, LET ME SEE IF, UH, I CAN PULL THIS OFF HERE.SO, UM, I HAD A MOTION BEFORE THE BODY THAT, UH, WE LOOK AT ALL OF THIS AS ONE ELEMENT.
UM, I WOULD SAY WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE PARTS THAT ARE WATER QUALITY RELATED AND I GUESS IN OUR OPINION, UM, WHICH IS ALL OF IT EXCEPT FOR THE REMOVAL PROHIBITION SECTION 25 8 6 41.
UH, AND, UH, UH, SECRETARY BRISTOL'S ALREADY READ INTO THE RECORD THE MOTION THAT SHE PREVIOUSLY READ.
UM, SO WITH NO CHANGES TO THAT EXCEPT FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE ELEMENT RELATED TO THE SECTION 25 DASH 8 6 41 REMOVAL PROHIBITION RELATED TO THE REMOVAL OF A HERITAGE TREE.
UM, I SAY WE LET THAT MOTION STAND AS IT IS AND VOTE ON THAT AND THEN COME BACK AND VOTE ON THE SECOND PART.
YOU DON'T, I DON'T, YOU DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO? I THINK I HAVE TO.
I THINK I SHOULD, UH, ELIZABETH THUNK, UNLESS IF IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT, IF YOU'RE JUST TAKING OUT THOSE ELEMENTS OF HERITAGE TREE, I DON'T THINK YOU DO HAVE TO READ IT INTO THE RECORD SINCE IT'S ALREADY BEEN READ.
IF WE VOTE ON THE HERITAGE TREE QUESTION FIRST AND IT FAILS, THEN WE'RE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
I'LL DREAM UP THIS WHILE YOU'RE, WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING AT YOUR WORDS THERE.
UM, SO ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX, UM, WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER RECOGNIZES THE SLAUGHTER LANE CORRIDOR PROJECT IS BRINGING BEFORE US, UM, A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE SECTION 25 8 5 41 AND VARIOUS OTHER ELEMENTS, UM, SPECIFIC TO THE SECTION 25 86 41, THE REMOVAL PROHIBITION RELATED TO THE REMOVAL OF A HERITAGE TREE WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES, STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS, UH, AMENDMENT OR THIS, UH, COMPONENT OF THE AMENDMENT.
ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION RIGHT NOW? CORRECT.
I'M JUST, I'M JUST SAYING IT AND ELIZABETH'S GONNA TYPE IT UP TOMORROW MORNING, UM, BECAUSE I ALREADY STARTED IT, SO THAT WAS A LITTLE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.
UH, I, YES, COMMISSIONER SCOTT
WE'RE GONNA TAKE A THREE MINUTE RECESS AND ATTEMPT TO WRITE THIS AND THEN WE'LL RECONVENE AT 9 41.
UM, IT'S ACTUALLY 9 43, UH, RECONVENE THE GENERAL REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
UM, WE ARE ON AGENDA ITEM SIX, UM, DISCUSSING THE SLAUGHTER LANE PROJECT.
AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOTION, WE HAVE A NEW MOTION.
WE HAVE A NEW MOTION SPECIFIC TO THE, TO THE TREE ELEMENTS.
UM, WE, SINCE WE SPLIT THOSE APART, TECHNICALLY WE HAVE TWO MOTIONS AND I WILL READ THEM BOTH IF THAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE COURT.
WELL, I THINK JUST READ THE FIRST ONE AND WE'LL VOTE ON THE FIRST ONE, AND THEN WE'LL SEE WHERE IT GOES AFTER THAT.
MAY, MAY 3RD, 2023 C 20 DASH 20 22 19 SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT AND RELATED VARIANCES, WHEREAS ON OCTOBER 27TH, 2022, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RESOLUTION NUMBER 2020
[03:25:01]
2 2 1 0 2 7 DASH 0 38 TO INITIATE VARIANCES AND AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, INCLUDING SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 25 DASH EIGHT, SUB CHAPTER A, ARTICLE 13, SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE AS MINIMALLY REQUIRED TO ADDRESS PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE LOCATED ALONG SLAUGHTER LANE FROM LOOP ONE MOPAC TO 650 FEET EAST OF BROADY LANE AND RETURN TO CANCEL WITH PROPOSED VARIANCES AND AMENDMENTS AS SOON AS FEASIBLE.WHEREAS THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS ASKING TO AMEND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO, UM, PERTAINING TO THE TREE AND NATURAL AREA PROTECTION, ENDANGERED SPECIES OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CODE AS MINIMALLY REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT THE SLAUGHTER LANE, UM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FROM LOOP ONE MOPAC TO EAST SEP BROAD LANE.
UH, WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE SITE IS LOCATED WHEN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER PORTION OF THE BARTON CREEK BARTON SPRING ZONE.
AND WHEREAS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AS AND ASSOCIATED VARIANCES, INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF THE HERITAGE TREE FOR THIS FOLLOWING REASONS.
UM, AND I'M ACTUALLY GONNA TAKE OUT THE FOLLOWING REASONS, PART OF THAT, BECAUSE THAT IS ALL ON THE OTHER ONE.
UM, THEREFORE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE SITE-SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE HERITAGE TREE.
THE COMMISSION CONDITIONS ARE HARVEST ACORNS FROM THE TREE THAT WILL BE REMOVED TO, TO BE CULTIVATED EITHER AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN NURSERY OR THE LADY BIRD JOHNSON WILDFLOWER CENTER AND REPLANTED WITHIN THE PROJECT ZONE OR WITHIN THE PUBLIC IN THE, WITHIN THE AREA ON PUBLIC LAND.
AND TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LIVE OAKS TO BE PLANTED IN THE AREA TO REFLECT THE, THE LIVE OAKS LOST FOR THE PROJECT.
UM, CAN I, UH, JUST INTERJECT ABOUT THE TREE SEED HARVESTING? I DON'T THINK THAT THE CITY REALLY HAS A NURSERY NECESSARILY.
AND, UM, I'M NOT SURE IF LADY BIRD JOHNSON WOULD BE INTERESTED.
THERE ARE OTHER NONPROFITS OR IN THE, THE, THE CITY THAT MIGHT BE, SO IF IT, I MIGHT RECOMMEND NOT BEING AS PER PRESCRIPTIVE ON WHO WOULD HARVEST THE ACORNS.
SO THAT COULD SAY, UM, HARVEST ACORNS FROM THE TREE THAT WILL BE REMOVED TO BE CULTIVATED AND PLANTED WITHIN THE PROJECT ZONE.
SO I'LL JUST TAKE OUT WHO, WHO WILL BE CULTIVATING THEM.
YOU, WHEN IS THIS PROPOSED, UH, PROJECT GONNA HAPPEN? BECAUSE YOU CAN'T TAKE ACORNS UNTIL THEY'RE PRODUCED.
SO IF THIS IS GONNA HAPPEN SOON, THERE WON'T BE ANY ACORNS.
I BELIEVE THERE'LL BE TIME TO, TO HARVEST ACORNS.
ANY DISCUSSION? UH, I'M JUST REAL QUICK HERE.
I'M ACTUALLY GONNA GONNA ALLOW RICK TO SECOND THAT BECAUSE IT'S HIS MOTION.
DO YOU WANNA, DO YOU WANNA SECOND THAT ONE? BRAMER SECOND.
ALL SECONDED BY BRIER UN SECONDED.
AND THEN RE SECONDED BY BRAMER.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS PRESENTED, WHICH IS TO ALLOW THE REMOVAL OF THE TREE MORE OR LESS.
UH, DO YOU WANT TO READ THE, AGAIN, I AM GOING TO, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE IT IN YOUR BRAINS, EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.
UM, THE NEXT ONE WOULD JUST BE THE VARIANCES THAT PERTAIN TO WATER QUALITY.
I HAVE REMOVED OUT ALL MENTIONING OF THE HERITAGE TREES FROM THIS MOTION.
UM, AND, UM, IT WOULD JUST BE FOR THE WATER QUALITY ONES, SO IT WON'T HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION CONDITIONS RELATED TO.
DOES THAT FEEL GOOD FOR EVERYBODY? OKAY.
[03:30:04]
ALL RIGHT, LET'S VOTE.UM, I BELIEVE THAT IS IT FOR THAT AGENDA ITEM ON MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM.
THAT WAS A GREAT PRESENTATION.
UM, ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, UH, UM, WHICH IS A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON FACILITATING AN INFORMAL WORKING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD.
I BELIEVE THIS IS YOURS, MR. UH, COMMISSIONER BRAMMER? YES.
SHOULD WE EXTEND THE MEETING IF IT'S GONNA TAKE LONGER THAN 10 MINUTES? YEAH, I MOVE TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 10 10 AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO EXTEND AFTER THAT AS NEEDED IF WE NEED TO.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF EXTENDING TO 10.
AND COMMISSIONER BRIER, DO YOU WANNA GO UP THERE SO YOU'RE BETTER ON CAMERA? CUZ OTHERWISE IT'S A LARGER U HUMAN.
I'M NOT SURE I'M READY FOR WHAT? GO.
SO WE KNOW YOU'RE, WE CAN'T GO PAST 10 45.
LET ME KNOW THAT YOU MIGHT REMEMBER, UH, THE SESSION OR TWO AGO WE HAD A MEETING, UH, INVITED THE, UH, UH, KANE FROM THE, UH, I FORGET HIS LAST NAME, UH, WHAT WAS HIS NAME? UH, KATIE KING CARPENTER, KANE CARPENTER FROM THE, UH, UH, AVIATION DEPARTMENT TO SPEAK TO US ABOUT A, UH, MUDS BUILT OVER AT THE, UH, AIRPORT.
AND HE DID A FINE JOB IN UPDATING US ON THE STATUS OF THAT.
HOWEVER, UH, IN DISCUSSING SOME ACTIVITIES OVER THE AIRPORT OVER THE PAST, UH, YEAR OR TWO WITH SOME RESIDENTS IN THE AREA, AND HAVING SPOKEN WITH AN EX COMMISSIONER, UH, ON A, A GARY, UH, CONCERNING SOME ACTIVITIES OVER THE AIRPORT, UH, I WENT TO THE, UH, AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE SETTING UP A, UH, INFORMAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM TO EVALUATE COMMONALITY COMMON THINGS THAT WE SHOULD BE WORKING ON, UH, THAT MIGHT FALL UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
AND I WANTED TO FOCUS THAT ON ACTIVITIES THAT WERE OUTSIDE OF THE AIRPORT, UH, PROPERTY BECAUSE THE, UH, THE, UH, AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION AND THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT HAVE A HANDLE ON THE ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE PROPERTY OF THE AIRPORT.
AND WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO, UH, YOU KNOW, EXTEND OUR, UH, JURISDICTION OVER SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY PROPERLY SUPERVISED AND MANAGED BY OTHER PEOPLE.
HOWEVER, UH, THERE IS SOME CONCERN BY SOME OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT THEIR AC THEIR, UH, INTERESTS ARE BEING ADEQUATELY SERVICED OUTSIDE OF THE AIRPORT PROPERTY, OR, YOU KNOW, THE PHYSICAL LIMITS OF THE AIRPORT.
SO I WORKED WITH, UH, SOME MEMBERS OF THE, UH, AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION TO DRAFT A PROPOSAL WHERE WE WOULD WORK TOGETHER WITH THEM.
UH, A SIMILAR PROPOSAL WILL BE INTRODUCED BY THE, UH, YOU KNOW, ON, ON TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION AT THEIR NEXT MEETING.
AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS PROPOSAL ADOPTED BY US SO WE CAN START WORKING TOGETHER TO TRY TO MANAGE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL, UH, ISSUES THAT ARISE BECAUSE OF ACTIVITIES THAT OCCUR ON THE AIRPORT THAT EXTEND OUTSIDE THE FISCAL BOUNDARY OF THE AIRPORT.
AND I'D LIKE TO, UH, IF I COULD, UH, READ THIS.
I BELIEVE IT'S, UH, AS PART OF THE DOCUMENTATION, HOWEVER, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE CHANGE IN THE TEXT HERE.
UH, I WAS REQUESTED TO MAKE THE, THE FOLLOWING CHANGE.
I'D LIKE TO CHANGE THE WORD CITIZENS, WHICH APPEARS IN THE FIRST THREE PARAGRAPHS AND MAKE THAT WORD RESIDENCE.
SO I'M GONNA READ THE, UH, THE TEXT OF IT HERE.
WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE CITY OF AUSTIN REQUIRES A FIRST CLASS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TO SERVE ITS RESIDENTS AND THE TRAVELERS TO AND THROUGH THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO SUPPORT A VIBRANT ECONOMY.
[03:35:01]
THE LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF THE AUSTIN BERGS FROM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT REQUIRES A STRONG MANAGEMENT, LONG-TERM PLANNING AND COAST COOPERATION WITH VENDORS, CONTRACTORS, AIRLINES, AND THE CITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT SURROUNDING A B I A NEEDS TO BE PROTECTED FOR THE HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE CITIZENS OF THE AIRPORT AND AUSTIN.WHEREAS THE CITY OF AUSTIN DEPARTMENT OF AIR AVIATION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE O OVERSIGHT OF AUSTIN BERGSTROM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.
ITS OPERATION PROJECTS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS, AVIATION CONTRACTS, ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, LONG-TERM PLANNING, AND QUALITY OF SERVICE FOR THE CUSTOMERS OF A B I A AND THE RESIDENTS OF AUSTIN.
WHEREAS THE AUSTIN AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS THROUGH THE COUNCIL ON AVIATION PROJECTS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION PROPOSES FOR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM.
AND REVIEW AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS THROUGH THE COUNCIL ON AVIATION CONTRACTS THAT ARE PRESENTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION FOR THE COUNCIL FOR ACTION AND REVIEW AND MAKE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE COUNCIL ON QUALITY OF SERVICES AT AUSTIN BERGSTROM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TO THE RESIDENTS OF AUSTIN, CUSTOMERS OF THE AIRPORT IN THE LONG-TERM PLANNING OF AUSTIN BERGSTROM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.
IN ADDITION TO OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES, WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION SHALL ASSIST THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER AND THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT IN STUDYING, PROMOTING, AND ENFORCING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION POLICIES TO ENSURE THE HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE AND QUALITY OF LIFE OF ALL THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY ARE ALL THE CITIZENS WITHIN THE CITY'S INCORPORATED BOUNDARIES, AS WELL AS THOSE WITHIN THE EXTRA-TERRITORIAL DIC JURISDICTION WHERE THE BOUNDARIES APPLY AND ADVISE THE CITY COUNCIL'S, CITY MANAGER AND THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT CONCERNING POLICIES, PROJECTS, AND PROGRAMS THAT AFFECT THE QUALITY OF LIFE OR HAVE POTENTIAL TO AFFECT THE ENVIRONMENT AS SPECIFIED IN THE AUSTIN TEXAS CODE TWO DASH ONE DASH 1 44 SECTIONS H THROUGH L.
THEREFORE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION DIS ESTABLISH PERMANENT WORKING RELATIONSHIP WILL ALLOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS, ADVICE, AND SUGGESTIONS ON ANY PRO PROJECT.
THE EN WHOSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MAY EXTEND OUTSIDE THE LEGAL BOUNDARIES OF A B I A INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.
DISCUSSIONS REGARDING PLANNED ACTIVITY OR PROJECT WILL OCCUR IN ADVANCED APPROVAL OF SAID PROJECT OR ACTIVITY A ANY ON ALL FINAL DECISIONS WOULD BE MADE BY THE AVIATION DEPARTMENT AND AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION WITHIN THE SCOPE, THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES.
I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
I WILL RECOMMEND THAT ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION COMMISSION APPROVE THIS RECOMMENDATION.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER SECOND IN BY SCOTT, YOU QUESTIONS ANYBODY? UM, YEAH.
FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONER BREMER AND FORMER COMMISSIONER GUERRE FOR, UH, TAKING THE LEAD ON THIS.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, UM, CUZ AT FIRST, YOU KNOW, BEFORE I LOOKED AT IT, I WAS THINKING MAYBE IT WOULD BE LIKE A, YOU KNOW, LIKE A COMMITTEE OR SOMETHING, MAYBE NOT A WORKING GROUP.
CAUSE I THINK A WORKING GROUP GETS DISSOLVED AT SOME POINT, OR UNLESS THE COMMITTEE DOESN'T.
BUT I THINK WHAT YOU'RE ASKING HERE IS THAT ANY PROJECT THAT COMES BEFORE THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION WOULD ALSO COME BEFORE US AT SOME POINT.
THE IDEA IS TO ESTABLISH A WORKING GROUP THAT WOULD ADDRESS WHATEVER THAT TYPE OF THING IS.
BUT IT WOULD ONLY COME TOGETHER IF IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO IMPACT THE ENVIRONMENT OUTSIDE THE BORDER OF THE AIRPORT.
SO IF, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE BUILDING A NEW TERMINAL, FOR EXAMPLE, AND THERE'S AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE TERMINAL THAT WOULDN'T COME BEFORE US.
CUZ THE TERMINAL IS PHYSICALLY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE AIRPORT.
AND RIGHT NOW AS I STAND HERE, I CAN'T SEE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TERMINAL RIGHT.
IMPACTING ANYTHING OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY OF THE AIRPORT.
IT'S NOT WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION.
THEY WILL TAKE CARE OF IT CUZ THAT'S THEIR JOB AND RESPONSIBILITY.
SO WOULD THAT BE LIKE THE STAFF FOR THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION THAT WOULD THEN SAY, HEY, THIS NEEDS TO COME BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION BEFORE IT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THIS EXACTLY WHAT, WELL, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE ANSWERS RIGHT NOW, THAT'S TOTALLY IT.
I DON'T, I, I'VE TRIED TO WORD THIS CAREFULLY SO THAT
[03:40:01]
WE DON'T CREATE ANY STEPPING ON THE TOES AND CODE CONFLICTS AND THAT SORT OF THING.SO I WANT TO ENCOURAGE COOPERATION.
I DON'T WANT TO SET UP CONFLICTS.
SO I'VE TRIED TO BE COOPERATIVE AS OPPOSED TO CONFRONTATIONAL, GOTTA CRACK A FEW EGGS AND MAKE AN OMELET.
WELL, I'LL LET SOMEONE ELSE CRACK THE EGGS, BUT I'M, YOU KNOW, THERE'S OBVIOUSLY THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE TO START OUT WITH SOMETHING AND THEN AS THINGS DEVELOP, THEN IT'S UP TO SOMEONE ELSE LATER ON TO HONE THINGS IN TO ADJUST TO WHATEVER THE CURRENT SITUATION IS.
I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND FROM LIKE AN ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION PERSPECTIVE, IF YOU HAD ANY IDEAS ON SORT OF LIKE RIGHT.
AND THAT'S WHY I WENT TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION AND TO WORK WITH THEM ON THE WORDING.
AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE GOING TO, UH, INTRODUCE A SISTER, BROTHER, WHATEVER, UH, RECOMMENDATION SIMILARLY WORDED TO THEIR, UH, COMMISSION THEIR NEXT MEETING.
SO RIGHT NOW IT'LL BE MOSTLY COMMISSIONER BREMER WORKING WITH THE CHAIR OF THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION AND THEY WILL COMMUNICATE THEN WITH STAFF WHAT NEEDS TO, AND HOW, WHAT THE PRIORITY OF THAT WILL BE.
DOES THAT KINDA MAKE SENSE? SO THAT'S WHY IT'S SO INFORMAL.
WE'RE STILL TRYING OF FIGURING IT OUT.
I'LL WORK WITH THEM
YOU KNOW, CAUSE I WAS KIND OF THINKING LIKE, OKAY, YOU KNOW, HAVING BEEN ON THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE AND YOU KNOW, YOU SEE SORT OF DIFFERENT, UH, DEPARTMENTS INTERACT, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION OR, UM, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS OTHER SORT OF RESOURCE ORIENTED OR, YOU KNOW, QUALITY OF LIFE ORIENTED STUFF.
I CAN SEE DIFFERENT REASONS WHY OTHER SORT OF SPHERES MAY WANT TO SORT OF GIVE THEIR, THEIR TAKE ON THE AIRPORT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S ALSO JUST LIKE TOO MANY CHEFS SPOILING THE POT OR DISH OR HOWEVER THE SAME.
JUST CURIOUS ABOUT SORT OF IMPLEMENTATION DETAILS.
AND I ADVI, I I USE THE WORD ADVISE.
SO WE'RE NOT THERE TO PASS JUDGMENT, WE'RE THERE TO SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.
WELL THEN YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, PAST JUDGMENT.
BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, MY, MY RECOMMENDATION HERE IS THAT WE ADVISE AND WE MAKE SUGGESTIONS TO SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, HOW ABOUT IF YOU PAINT IT BLUE INSTEAD OF ORANGE? AND THEN IN THE END IT'S UP TO THEM BECAUSE IT'S THEIR AIRPORT, NOT OURS, AND THEY HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE FINAL DECISION.
BUT WE CAN WEIGH IN AND OFFER OUR OPINION.
AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO GO WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION OR PART, THEN THAT'S GREAT.
IF NOT, THEN WE'VE DONE OUR DUTY AS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TO GIVE OUR BEST JUDGMENT ON WHATEVER THE PROJECT IS, AND THEN THEY'RE FREE TO RUN WITH IT OR NOT AS THEY FEEL IS APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR PARTICULAR SITUATION.
AND THEY RUN AN AIRPORT AND WE DON'T.
SO IN THE END, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE END RESULT.
BUT FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE, WE'RE PROVIDING INPUT.
I JUST HOPE THAT WHOEVER, UH, TAKES THE REINS AFTER YOU TAKES IT JUST AS SERIOUSLY.
UM, SO THIS, I DIDN'T REALIZE WE COULD HAVE INFORMAL WORKING RELATIONSHIPS, SO I'M JUST CONFIRMING THAT WE CAN, AND IT WOULD WORK JUST AS YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN DOING, GOING TO THAT COMMITTEE, YOU BROUGHT US A MOTION TODAY AND WE WOULD REVIEW IT DURING OUR MEETINGS IF THERE WAS A, A MOTION FOR US TO TAKE ANY ACTION.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, ELIZABETH QUASHED.
SO THE MOTION WAS UPLOADED AS BACKUP AND THAT'S WHAT BRIER JUST READ.
SO HE JUST MADE A MOTION AND IT WAS SECONDED BY SCOTT.
AND NOW YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING IF THIS IS, YOU CAN DO THIS.
I DON'T KNOW OF ANY EXAMPLE OF THAT HAPPENING IN THE PAST, BUT LIKE IN TERMS IT IS ALL GOOD.
SO, UM, HOW WOULD WE RECEIVE UPDATES? WOULD WE NEED TO RECEIVE UPDATES SIMILARLY TO HOW WE RECEIVE UPDATES ON COMMITTEE REPORTS? I THINK THAT AS ISSUES ARISE THAT THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION HAS CONCERNS ABOUT, THEY WOULD TELL THE AIRPORT STAFF WHO ARE INVOLVED IN WHATEVER THAT ISSUE IS THAT THEY NEED TO PRESENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
UM, I THINK THAT THAT'S HOW I ENVISION IT WORKING.
UM, AND OTHER COMMISSIONS HAVE SAID, YOU KNOW, HEY, BEFORE WE CAN ACT ON THIS, WE WANT TO HEAR WHAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION HAS TO SAY, GO TO THEM AND THEN COME BACK TO US.
SO THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
YEAH, I WAS JUST GONNA ADD, SO WE'VE GOT THE JOINT COMMITTEE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND
[03:45:01]
THE PARSON REC BOARD.SO I WAS THINKING MAYBE KIND OF SOMETHING SIMILAR, BUT I HAVE NO IDEA.
YEAH, YEAH, I MEAN THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I HAD IN MIND, THAT YOU HAVE TO START SOMEWHERE, AND THIS IS KIND OF WHERE I'M STARTING AT.
CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT LEVEL? RIGHT NOW I SEE THIS AS MORE OF A, YOU KNOW, UH, HOW TO PUT IT, IT REQUIRES A LOT OF ACTIVITY TYPE OF THING WHERE I WORK SPECIFICALLY WITH SOMEONE ON THE AIRPORT COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, IN AN ACTIVE THING WHERE I HAVE TO GET ONTO THEIR AGENDA ON A REGULAR BASIS, KEEP UP WITH THEM, FIND OUT WHAT THEY'VE GOT GOING ON.
IT'S NOT A AUTOMATIC TYPE OF THING WHERE I'M AUTOMATICALLY NOTICE NOTIFIED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO IT'S A, YOU KNOW, AN ACTIVE THING IS RATHER THAN A PASSIVE THING.
AND WE'RE NOT MEETING ON A REGULAR BASIS, ALTHOUGH THAT COULD BE SOMETHING WE SET UP.
I KNOW THE PERSON THAT I, YOU KNOW, ON THE, UH, AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION.
SO IT'S NOT THAT WE COULDN'T MEET ON A REGULAR BASIS, BUT YOU KNOW THIS, LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A STARTING POINT.
I, I SORT OF EN ENVISION, UM, SOME BENEFITS OF THIS THAT, UM, SUCH AS THE, UH, I THINK I JUST REACHED MY, UH, LIMITS HERE FOR THE NIGHT
UM, THINGS LIKE THE, UM, JET TANKS FOR EXAMPLE WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE MIGHT HEAR ABOUT, UH, BEF KIND OF EARLY ON RATHER THAN AFTER THE FACT AND COULD BE A A PLUS FOR EVERYONE.
WELL, I DON'T WANT TO BRING UP ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR, BUT THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE MORE PROMINENT AS YOU DRIVE DOWN 180 3, UH, THAT YOU SEE ON THE HIGHWAY THAT MAYBE YOU DIDN'T SEE BEFORE.
BUT THERE ARE SEVERAL EXAMPLES THAT LEND THEM, LEND THEMSELVES TO US BEING ABLE TO OFFER AN OPINION.
UH, YOU KNOW, I SPENT A LOT OF TIME RESEARCHING THE FUEL TANK SYSTEM AND THEY DID HAVE LITERALLY 12 OPTIONS TO PLACE ON DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE PROPERTY.
I WILL ALSO SAY THE AIRPORT COMMISSION DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON WHERE THE TANKS WERE PUT.
UM, THIS IS A, A, UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I MEAN, AS LONG AS, AS LONG AS THERE ARE NO, UM, LEGALITIES, YOU KNOW, RESTRICTING US FROM DOING THIS AS WELL AS, UH, YOU KNOW, WITHIN OUR OWN BYLAWS, WHICH SOUNDS LIKE COMMISSIONER BRIMER HAS RESEARCHED AND LOOKED INTO.
I WILL, UH, SAY THAT AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE TO, UM, GO PAST OUR ALLOTTED TIME, WE WILL NEVER HEAR ANY OF THE, UM, COMMITTEE REPORTS AS WE WILL.
IT'S LIKE TONIGHT WE DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO HEAR ANY COMMITTEE REPORTS, SO I JUST WANNA TOSS IT OUT THERE.
SECOND SECOND BY SHI ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
I MEAN, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OKAY.
WE'VE GOT A MOTION, UH, ON, ON THE FLOOR A SECOND.
UM, UH, LET, LET'S GO AROUND AND, AND, AND VOTE KHI.
ALL RIGHT, CARRIES, CONGRATULATIONS.
[10. Report on the Balcones Canyonlands Conservation Plan Citizen’s Advisory Committee – Jennifer Bristol ]
COMMITTEE REPORTS.UM, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY COMMITTEE REPORTS? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT, MA'AM? OF, OF, OF WANT TO REPORT? THANK YOU CHAIR FOR CALLING ON ME.
UM, THE BALCON CANDY LANDS, UM, IS, UH, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO MEET HERE AGAIN, UM, PRETTY SOON, UM, UH, IN THE, UM, INTERIM.
UM, I WILL SAY THAT, UM, I THINK THERE IS SOME CONCERNS, UH, WITHIN, UM, THE, YOU KNOW, UM, THAT THERE'S A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW THAT IS PUSHING CLOSER AND CLOSER TO THOSE EDGES OF, UH, THE ALCON'S CANYONLANDS.
UM, AND, UM, THE, UH, LEGISLATURE HAS JUST PASSED,
[03:50:01]
UM, UH, WELL, UH, TENTATIVELY, UM, A BILL, UM, THAT NO LONGER ALLOWS, UM, MUNICIPALITIES, UM, TO REGULATE, UM, THE REMOVAL OF ASH JUNIPER, UM, WHICH WILL GREATLY IMPACT, UM, THE ENDANGERED SPECIES OF THE GOLDEN CHIEF WARBLER AND THE THREATENED SPECIES OF THE BLACK CAT BURIAL.SO THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS, UM, COMING OUT OF THE LEGISLATURE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO ADDRESS ON HOW, UM, THE ENDANGERED SPECIES WITHIN OUR GEORGIA JURISDICTION CONTINUE TO BE MANAGED PROPERLY AND MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE.
UM, AND, UM, AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ITSELF.
ANYBODY ELSE GOT ANY OTHER STUFF?
[9. Report on the Joint Sustainability Committee – Haris Qureshi (member) and Richard Brimer (alternate member) ]
UH, YEAH, THE JSC MET, UH, A FEW WEEKS AGO.WE HAD AN INTERESTING PRESENTATION FROM, UH, SOMEBODY THAT WORKED IN THE CITY OF TEMPE ABOUT, UH, TAKING MONEY FROM SUCKERS, I MEAN TAKING FEDERAL GRANTS TO HELP, UH, YOU KNOW, FURTHER BUILD UP THE COMMUNITY.
IT WAS ACTUALLY PRETTY INTERESTING.
I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND A LOT OF IT CAUSE I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND HOW MONEY WORKS, BUT, UH, I FEEL LIKE I WANT TO GET THE DOCUMENTATION AND SEND IT TO, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS PARTIES WITHIN WATERSHED AND, YOU KNOW, OTHER CITY STAFF CUZ HEY, HEY, FREE MONEY ALWAYS HELPS.
IF YOU, IF IF YOU FIND THAT, GET IT TO ELIZABETH SO WE CAN, CUZ THAT MIGHT BE CONDITIONS THAT WE TALK ABOUT ON DIFFERENT PROJECTS THAT COME BEFORE US.
[12. Report on the South Central Waterfront Advisory Board – David Sullivan]
THINK I WAS TOLD EARLIER THAT, UH, MY NAME IS ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA TOMORROW TO BE APPOINTED TO THE, UH, SOUTH CENTRAL WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD.AND SO THE NEXT MEETING IS ON, UH, MAY 15TH.
UH, AND I'M SORRY, ALL IN ONE HOUSE SWOOP.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
AGENDA ITEMS? YES, YES, PLEASE.UM, I'M NOT SURE IF Y'ALL WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THIS, BUT, UM, MY WORK IS AN AIR QUALITY AND THE EPA HAS ANNOUNCED THAT THEY'RE, UH, CONSIDERING LOWERING THE PM 2.5 STANDARD, AND THAT PUTS AUSTIN AT RISK OF BEING NON-ATTAINMENT FOR PM 2.5.
SO I MIGHT GET, I COULD SHOW YOU THE DATA AT SOME POINT.
EPA IS LOWERING THE, UH, NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD FOR PM 2.5 PAR PARTICULATE MATTER SMALLER THAN 2.5 MICRONS.
IT'S AN AIR QUALITY STANDARD MATTER NO FOR.
SO YES, I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES, WE WOULD LIKE A PRESENTATION OR I WOULD SECOND THAT AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM, IF THAT'S THE PROPER TERMINOLOGY.
I CAN JUST SHOW YOU WHAT, WHAT'S UP.
ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? I, UH, I'M GOING TO, UH, UH, ASK TO PRESENT MY, UH, UM, PRESENTATION ON, UM, ON, UH, FEMA HAZARD MITIGATION.
UH, NEXT WEEK I HAD A LOT OF, UH, OTHER THINGS THAT I HAD TO ATTEND TO, SO I COULDN'T FINISH THE VISUALS THAT I WANTED TO HAVE, UH, FOR THE PRESENTATIONS, UH, THIS WEEK.
SO INSTEAD I, I WANNA DO IT AT OUR NEXT MEETING.
I, ONE QUICK ITEM THAT I'D BROUGHT UP TO STAFF BY EMAIL AND I'M REALIZING THAT IT, MAYBE IT'S JUST NOT IN OUR PURVIEW, LIKE AS I MARINATE ON IT AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, THINKING ABOUT THE ZILKER PARK VISION PLAN.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE ONE OF THE BEST THINGS WE CAN DO FOR ZILKER IS MAKE SURE THAT THE VISION PLANS IN OTHER PARKS ARE FUNDED, UM, AND SORT OF GETTING A, A PRESENTATION, I REALIZE THIS IS AGAIN, OUT OF OUR PURVIEW, BUT OF THOSE SORT OF SHELVED VISION PLANS THAT HAVEN'T REALLY HAD ANY ACTION ON THEM, UM, GUERRERO FOR EXAMPLE, HOLLY MM-HMM.
UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW, JUST A LITTLE BIT UP FOR DISCUSSION CUZ THE MORE I'M MARIN OUT THE MORE I THINK IT, MAYBE IT'S OUTSIDE OF OUR SCOPE, MAYBE KATIE COIN ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER.
I, I THINK YOU COULD CERTAINLY MAKE A CASE FOR THAT DEPENDING ON HOW YOU'D LIKE TO FRAME THE REQUEST.
THERE ARE COMPONENTS OF, OR SHOULD BE COMPONENTS OF ALL PARKS PLANS THAT INCLUDE ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS.
ALL OF PARK'S WORK IS RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENT, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE PROGRAMMING IS IN A PARK.
THOSE PROVIDE IMPORTANT REFUGE FOR HABITAT, UH, AND PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFITS THAT ARE DIRECTLY TIED TO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS. SO SURE.
[03:55:03]
YEAH, I WOULD SAY, AND THEN MAYBE THE ELEMENT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THE JOINT COMMITTEE, THE ARMOR COMMISSIONER AND PARKS.I KNOW THAT THAT WAS KIND OF SPECIFIC TO, TO BARTON SPRINGS POOL, BUT THAT MIGHT BE AN AVENUE AS WELL.
YEAH, IT WAS SPECIFIC TO THAT ITEM.
UH, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, JOINT, SINCE JOINT COMMITTEES WERE MENTIONED, UM, TONIGHT EARLIER, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT USUALLY IS COMING FROM COUNCIL, COUNCIL INITIATED, UH, JOINT COMMITTEE.
UM, BUT IT, IT WAS ALSO SOMETHING THAT WHEN I WAS ON ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION SEEMED LIKE A GAP, UH, IN TERMS OF JUST THE OVERLAP BETWEEN THOSE TWO MM-HMM.
JUST CONTINUE THINKING AND TALKING ABOUT THAT AND SEE IF WE CAN GET SOMETHING ROLLING.
YEAH, AND I, I, THAT WAS ACTUALLY STEMMED FROM MY REQUEST AND I AM GOING TO REACH OUT TO CHRISTINE AL I HAVE INTERACTED WITH HER QUITE A BIT OVER THE YEARS.
UM, AND WHEN, AND GO AHEAD AND, YOU KNOW, COPY SOME OF THE OTHER, UH, PROGRAM LEADS.
BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IF WE ARE MAKING THAT REQUEST FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, THAT IT IS MORE OF JUST LIKE A BROAD QUESTION LIKE HOW ARE ALL PARKS PRIORITIZED? UM, WHILE I DID ASK ABOUT SCHOOLS, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT, UM, ASIDE CUZ THEY HAVE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT TO ALSO INCLUDE THOSE IN THAT, UM, PRIORITIZATION AND UNDERSTAND THAT.
UH, I'M GONNA ADJOURN THE MEETING.