* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:02] 6:01 PM LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THIS MEETING STARTED. UM, COMMISSIONER. OH, OKAY. UM, IT IS, IT IS THE REGULAR MEETING OF [CALL TO ORDER] THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, OCTOBER 2ND, 2024. UM, AT THE PERMITTING AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER EVENT CENTER. ROOM 1 4 0 5. LOCATED AT 6 3 1 0 WILHELMINA DELCO DRIVE, AUSTIN, TEXAS 7 8 7 5 2. NOW LET'S START WITH A ROLL CALL. COMMISSIONER QURESHI. HERE. VICE CHAIR COFER. HERE. BEDFORD'S. HERE. SHERA HERE. SULLIVAN. HERE. BRIMER HERE. OKAY. UM, LET'S OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMUNICATION. DO WE HAVE ANY GENERAL, OKAY. UM, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE APPROVAL [APPROVAL OF MINUTES] OF THE MINUTES. HAVE ALL THE COMMISSIONERS HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES? IS THERE A MOTION I MOVE? APPROVAL. SECOND. MOTION BY SULLIVAN. SECONDED BY FER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR HANDS. RESI FER, BEDFORD SHERA, SULLIVAN, AND BRIMER. MOTION PASSES. OKAY, NEXT STEP. [2. Presentation on Hays Commons Municipal Utility District (MUD) and request for a recommendation to initiate a Site-Specific Amendment to City Code Chapter 25-8, Subchapter A, Article 13 of the Save Our Springs Initiative – Leslie Lilly, Environmental Conservation Program Manager, Watershed Protection Department] WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ACTION ITEMS. PRE PRESENTATION ON HAYES COMMONS MUNICIPAL, MUNICIPAL U UTILITY DISTRICT. AND REQUEST FOR RECOMMENDATION TO INITIATE A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE CHAPTER TWO FIVE DASH EIGHT, SUB-CHAPTER A, ARTICLE 13 OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE. AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION. I THINK THAT'S THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. THE OTHER ONE. THANK YOU. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS LESLIE LILY. I'M AN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM MANAGER WITH WATERSHED PROTECTION. AND THIS EVENING I AM GOING TO BE GIVING A PRESENTATION REQUESTING THE INITIATION OF AN SOS SITE SPECIFIC CODE AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPOSED HAYES COMMONS MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 28 33 AND A HALF PLUS SPILLER ROAD. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THE HAYES COMMONS MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT OR MUD IS NOT BEING CONSIDERED THIS EVENING, AND WE'RE NOT BRINGING FORWARD THIS ITEM FOR RECOMMENDATION. HOWEVER, IT IS SPECIFICALLY LINKED TO THE, UH, THE INITIATION OF THE SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT. SO WE WILL BE DISCUSSING THE ITEM THIS EVENING. AND ALSO IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE IF THE SOS AMENDMENT IS INITIATED, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL COME BACK TO THIS COMMISSION ALONGSIDE THE MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT CONSENT AGREEMENT TO BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER AS A PACKAGE. SO WHAT IS A MUD? UM, A MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT IS A FINANCING MECHANISM THAT, UH, PROVIDES FINANCE FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DEFINED BY STATE LAW WITH THE CONSENT OF A CITY. SO THE CITY OF AUSTIN ENTERS INTO A CONSENT AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER, AND THAT, UH, CONSENT AGREEMENT REGULATES THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY AND PROVIDES SURETY THAT THERE THE APPLICABLE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS ARE, UH, APPLIED TO THE PROJECT, AND THAT THE PROJECT ALSO DEMONSTRATES THAT IT IS A SUPERIOR DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDES COMMUNITY BENEFIT. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO WE ARE NOT, UM, DIS WE ARE NOT VOTING ON, UH, OR NOT RECOMMENDING A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE MUD. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT INITIATION. NOW, WHY DO WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS INITIATION? WHY DO WE HAVE THIS SOS AMENDMENT WITH THIS CONSENT AGREEMENT? WELL, THE 1992 ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN SUCH THAT NO VARIATIONS OR, OR MODIFICATIONS TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOS ARE ALLOWED. SO THAT MEANS NO MODIFICATIONS COULD BE WRITTEN INTO THE CONSENT AGREEMENT FOR THE MUD. UM, AND SO THERE'S, SO A SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT WOULD NEED TO BE INCORPORATED IF THERE'S ANY REQUESTED MODIFICATIONS. THIS PARTICULAR ONE IS SPECIFIC TO IMPERVIOUS COVER. SO THE SITE SPECIFIC SOS AMENDMENT CONSIDERED FOR INITIATION TONIGHT WOULD ONLY APPLY TO THE HAYES COMMONS PROJECT. AND IF INITIATED AND THEN GOING ON, UH, FOR CONSIDERATION AT OTHER COMMISSIONS, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY SUPER MAJORITY AT COUNCIL. UM, AND SO THIS STEP, THIS INITIATION STEP IS REALLY THE FIRST STEP, UH, BEFORE THE TERMS OF THE SOS AMENDMENT [00:05:01] ARE EVEN CONSIDERED. SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE TERMS OR CONDITIONS FOR THE ACTUAL AMENDMENT ITSELF, JUST THAT IT RE REQUESTING THAT IT BE INITIATED. UM, NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS, UH, NEXT SLIDE. OH, THANK YOU. OKAY. SO THIS, UH, IS A FLOW CHART KIND OF SHOWING WHAT THE CODE AMENDMENT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT INITIATING A CODE AMENDMENT MEANS. SO DUE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF, UH, SOS, IT IS A CODE AMENDMENT AND THERE ARE TWO POSSIBLE PATHWAYS TO INITIATE A CODE AMENDMENT. ONE IS FOR IT TO BE FORMALLY INITIATED BY COUNCIL RESOLUTION OR TWO, THAT THE, UH, CODE AMENDMENT BE INITIATED FORMALLY THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH ALSO MAKES ITS DECISION BASED ON COMMISSIONS, RELEVANT COMMISSIONS AND THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE. WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THE FORMAL INITIATION THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION IS THE PATHWAY TO INITIATE THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. OKAY. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT HAYES COMMONS PROJECT. UH, WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE IS THE LOCATION OF HAYES COMMONS, AND IT'S ASSOCIATED CASE NUMBER C 12 M 20 24 0 0 0 3. AND THAT'S THE MUD, UH, CASE APPLICATION NUMBER. AND ITS LOCATION IS IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S, UH, ETJ. SO HALF OF A, APPROXIMATELY HALF OF THE PROJECT IS IN THE CITY'S ETJ. THE SOUTHERN PORTION THAT'LL SHOW IN A MAP LATER IS IN HAYES COMMONS, UNINCORPORATED COUNTY. THAT'S WHAT IT'S JURISDICTION IS. REGARDING REGULATIONS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE IN THIS PICTURE THAT YOU CAN SEE THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THESE ARE SOME, UH, DETAILS ABOUT THE, UH, THE MUD ITSELF. UH, THE TOTAL ACREAGE OF THE PROPERTY IS A LITTLE OVER 500 OR A LITTLE UNDER 500 ACRES, AND THE PROJECTED POPULATION IS 2,450 PEOPLE. AND THAT COMES SPECIFICALLY FROM THE PROPOSED 700 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES THAT ARE PROPOSED WITH THE PROJECT. SO THOSE 700 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ARE, UH, TO BE BUILT WITHIN THE 497 ACRES. ADDITIONALLY, THERE IS A TRACT OF 12.1 ACRES THAT'S PROPOSED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN, UH, THE REMAINING 227.35 ACRES IS PROPOSED FOR OPEN SPACE, 157 ACRES OF WHICH ARE, UH, PROPOSED TO BE CONSERVATION EASEMENT. THE, UM, THE TABLE BELOW ALSO SHOWS THE FINANCIAL DETAILS, WHICH WOULD PROVIDE FUNDING FOR WATER, WASTE, WATER, UH, DRAINAGE, AND ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO, UH, WHAT I HAVE HERE IS THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND THE AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY. IN THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN, WHAT YOU CAN SEE IS AN AREA SYMBOLIZED IN YELLOW, AND THAT AREA REPRESENTS THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. UH, THE AREA SYMBOLIZED IN RED ON THE FAR EAST PORTION IS THAT 12.1 ACRE COMMERCIAL TRACT. AND THEN ALL OF THE AREAS SYMBOLIZED IN VARIOUS SHADES OF GREEN REPRESENT THE OPEN SPACE AND THE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS. AND THE DIFFERENT USES OF THAT ARE DESIGNATED FOR OPEN SPACE, SPECIFICALLY TO JUST DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE BOTTOM WESTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. THAT, UH, UNDEVELOPED AREA IS, UH, LITTLE BEAR CREEK THAT RUNS THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. UM, AND THAT IS A PART OF THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT WOULD BE PROPOSED WITH THE PROJECT. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO, IN DEVELOPING A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE INITIATION OF THIS SOS AMENDMENT, UH, STAFF LOOK AT A LOT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS, AND THERE ARE SEVERAL WITH THIS PROJECT, INCLUDING ITS LOCATION WITHIN SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS, CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, CREEKS. AND THEN VERY IMPORTANTLY, THERE IS A LOT OF JURISDICTIONAL, UH, CONSIDERATIONS, THE REGULATION OF BOTH WASTE WATER AND WATER, AND WHO IS REGULATING THE DEVELOPMENT AND HOW IT WOULD BE DEVELOPED UNDER CITY OF AUSTIN, UH, REGULATIONS VERSUS THE COUNTY REGULATIONS THAT THE DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE PROPERTY ARE LOCATED WITHIN. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO, TO GO A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT, YOU CAN SEE THE WATERSHED MAP. YOU HAVE, UH, BEAR CREEK IN THE NORTH, UH, AND THEN LITTLE BEAR CREEK IN THE SOUTH. AND YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE, UH, CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, UH, LIKE THE PINPOINTS WITH THE, THE BUFFERS AROUND THEM. AND THEN ALSO A MAP OF THE A HUNDRED YEAR FULLY DEVELOPED, UH, FLOODPLAIN THAT KIND OF RUNS THROUGH THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY AND ALIGNS WITH LITTLE BEAR CREEK. UH, NEXT SLIDE. UM, THIS IS, UH, TWO, UH, SELECTIONS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY [00:10:01] PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT AND THEN FIELD VERIFIED BY WATERSHED PROTECTION STAFF. IT SHOWS SEVERAL POINT RECHARGE FEATURES, SEEPS SPRINGS, RIM ROCK, AND, UH, A COUPLE OF WETLANDS. UM, SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL, UH, CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, CLOSE AND WITHIN, YOU KNOW, A, A GOOD DISTANCE FROM THE, UH, FROM LITTLE BEAR CREEK. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, SO THIS SLIDE REALLY IS AN ATTEMPT TO TALK ABOUT THE REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT. NOW, WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE IS A JURISDICTIONAL MAP, AND IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF, UH, THE PROPERTY, IT IS SYMBOLIZED IN BLUE. AND THAT BLUE REPRESENTS THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S ETJ. THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS, UH, SYMBOLIZED AND WHITE, AND THAT REPRESENTS THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S WITHIN HAYES COUNTY, UH, UNINCORPORATED AREA. SO RIGHT NOW, THAT PORTION IS ONLY REGULATED BY HAYES COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO THERE IS A SENATE BILL, SENATE BILL 2038 THAT CURRENTLY ALLOWS PROPERTY OWNERS TO PETITION TO RELEASE THEIR PROPERTY FROM THE ETJ OF A MUNICIPALITY. AND SO IT IS VERY POSSIBLE AND POTENTIALLY LIKELY THAT PROPERTIES IN THE ETJ WITHIN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE WOULD REMOVE THEMSELVES TO NOT COMPLY WITH THE MORE, UH, STRICT ENVIRONMENTAL RES UH, REGULATIONS THAT EXIST WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN VERSUS THOSE THAT EXIST IN TRAVIS COUNTY AND HAYES COUNTY AS OF NOW AT LEAST 16% AND COUNTING OF THE BARTON SPRING ZONE IN THE ETJ HAS CURRENTLY RELEASED. SO THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LAND THAT HAS, UH, RELEASED FROM OUR ETJ AND IS NO LONGER SUBJECT TO THE SOS ORDINANCE OR ALL OF THE OTHER, UH, REGULATIONS THAT PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL, UH, FEATURES WITHIN, UH, THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, THIS IS A EXHIBIT FROM THE APPLICATION SHOWING, UH, THE PARKLAND AND HOW THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF PARKLAND ARE DESIGNATED. SO THE CHARTREUSE COLOR GREEN IS THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREAS. THE DARK GREEN IS OPEN SPACE AND THE KIND OF LIME GREEN RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE IS PUBLIC PARKLAND. UH, THIS PROJECT, THE HAYES COMMONS MUD WAS PRESENTED TO PARKS BOARD AND THE PARKS BOARD AND, UH, PARTS STAFF PROVIDED RECOMMENDATIONS OF SUPPORT FOR THE MUD. UH, JUST SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT. THIS IS, UM, UH, DEMONSTRATING SUPERIORITY FROM A PARKLAND DEDICATION PERSPECTIVE AND APPROVED BY PARKS BOARD. NEXT SLIDE. UH, SO WHAT, WHAT ARE THE SOS REQUIREMENTS THAT WE ARE REALLY CONSIDERING AND AND CARE ABOUT WHEN WE'RE MAKING OUR, UH, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERATIONS? SO THERE'S TWO BIG ONES. ONE IS IMPERVIOUS COVER, AND IN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE, UH, SOS REQUIRES THAT, UH, A PROPERTY HAVE 15% NET SITE AREA IMPERVIOUS COVER. ADDITIONALLY, PROPERTIES WITHIN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE MUST PROVIDE NONDEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT FOR RUNOFF FROM ALL DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPOSED SOS AMENDMENT, UH, PROPOSED FOR INITIATION THIS EVENING WOULD, UH, ASK TO MODIFY, UH, THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THE SITE TO 25% NET SITE AREA TO COMPARE WHAT THE COUNTY REGULATIONS ARE. IF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY WERE TO, UH, RELEASE FROM THE ETJ, THE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IN TRAVIS COUNTY WOULD HAVE 30% IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR THE AREA THAT'S IN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER AND DESIGNATED FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND 45% FOR THAT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE RECHARGE ZONE. OUTSIDE OF THE RECHARGE, THERE ARE NO IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS. HAYES COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS FOR DEVELOPMENT. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO, UH, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MUD, UH, CONSENT AGREEMENT IS CLEAR SIM, IT'S AN AGREEMENT THAT INCORPORATES SOME CODE MODIFICATIONS AS WELL. UM, SO THE SOS AMENDMENT WOULD BE A PART OF THE CONSIDERATION FOR ENTITLEMENTS THAT WOULD BE A PART OF THE MUD CODE MODIFICATIONS. AND THE THREE THAT ARE BEING REQUESTED AT THIS TIME AND STILL UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE THE CUT AND FILL REQUIREMENTS UP TO BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED UP TO EIGHT FEET AND AN INTER BASIN DIVERSION MODIFIED TO ALLOW UP TO 25 ACRES TO BE DIVERTED FROM LITTLE BEAR CREEK TO BEAR CREEK. SO THESE WOULD BE CONSIDERED ALONGSIDE THE PROPOSED SOS AMENDMENT AT A FUTURE DATE IF THIS SOS AMENDMENT IS INITIATED AND THIS PROCESS MOVES FORWARD. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO, UH, WITH THAT BEING SAID, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE INITIATION OF THE SOS AMENDMENT BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. THE, SO THE SOS AMENDMENT ITSELF IS A CONDITION OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF SUPPORT FOR THE HAYES COMMONS MUD. THE [00:15:01] HAYES COMMONS MUD WILL REQUIRE CURRENT CITY OF AUSTIN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS FOR THE ENV ENTIRE PROPERTY, AND INCLUDING THE PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY HAYES COUNTY UNINCORPORATED, UH, AS MODIFIED BY THE MUD WITH THOSE MODIFICATIONS I SHOWED IN MY PREVIOUS SLIDE, INCLUDING THE MUD WOULD COMPLY WITH SOS NONDEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE PROTECTION CREEK SETBACKS LIKE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE TREE PROTECTION, INCLUDING PROTECTION FOR HERITAGE TREES, FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS, EROSION HAZARD ZONE PROTECTIONS, ET CETERA. UH, ADDITIONALLY, THE HAYES COMMONS MUD WILL REQUIRE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY TO BE ANN ANNEXED INTO THE CITY'S ZONING JURISDICTION WILL, WHICH WILL PREVENT FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS FROM USING SENATE BILL 2038 TO RELEASE FROM THE CITY'S ETJ. THE HAYES COMMONS MUD WILL ALSO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 157 ACRES OF CONSERVATION LAND AROUND LITTLE BEAR CREEK. AND ADDITIONALLY, IT WILL PROVIDE, UH, AND REQUIRE LIGHT POLLUTION REDUCTION AND BIRD FRIENDLY DESIGN CRITERIA AND THE BUILDING STANDARDS FOR THE PROPERTY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THE REVIEW SCHEDULE FOR BOTH THIS, UH, THE INITIATION OF THIS SOS AMENDMENT AND THE FUTURE CONSIDERATION OF THE MUD CONSENT AGREEMENT AND POTENTIALLY THE SOS AMENDMENT GOES AS SUCH, IT'S CURRENTLY BEING HEARD TONIGHT IN ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION FOR REQUESTING A RECOMMENDATION OF SUPPORT FOR THE INITIATION. IT WOULD THEN GO TO CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATION OF SUPPORT TO INITIATE IT. AND THEN ON OCTOBER 22ND, IT WOULD GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A POTENTIAL FORMER RE FORMAL RECOMMENDATION OF INITIATION. ONCE THAT HAS HAPPENED, BOTH THE PROPOSED SOS AMENDMENT AND THE MUD CONSENT AGREEMENT WOULD COME BACK TO THIS COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION ON NOVEMBER 6TH AND GO TO CODES AND ORDINANCES, JOINT COMMITTEE, WATER AND WASTEWATER COMMISSION. AND THEN FINALLY BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND SO WITH THAT, UH, I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION AND WE HAVE OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STAFF TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE MUD AND, UH, OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THE APPLICANT'S, UH, PRESENTATION UP. THANK YOU. UM, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AND CHAIR. UM, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. MY NAME'S ROBERT DEGAN WITH RIALTO STUDIO. WE'RE THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS FOR THIS PROJECT. UH, WE ALSO HAVE HERE WITH ME TONIGHT, JEFF HOWARD, UM, THE ATTORNEY FOR THE PROJECT. AND WE HAVE OUR ENGINEER AND SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, TEAM AS WELL HERE AS WELL TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. UM, I'M GONNA TRY TO MOVE REALLY QUICKLY THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION TO BE RESPECTFUL OF YOUR TIME, BUT, UH, WE CAN HAPPILY COME BACK TO ANY OF THESE SLIDES AND LOOK AT THEM IN MORE DETAIL IF NEEDED. NEXT SLIDE. UH, THIS SLIDE IS JUST LOCATING THE PROJECT FOR YOU. I THINK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN COVERED PRETTY WELL, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S AT THE TERMINUS OF SH 45, WHERE IT MEETS 1626, UH, ON THE EDGE OF THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. NEXT SLIDE. AND THIS SLIDE AGAIN REITERATES THE COMPLEX JURISDICTIONAL NATURE, WHICH I THINK HAS BEEN COVERED PRETTY WELL. NEXT SLIDE. UM, BEFORE I SHOW YOU WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, I WANTED TO SHOW YOU WHAT THE PLAN FOR THIS PROJECT WAS THAT WE INHERITED FROM THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER. IT CONSISTS OF A LARGE REGIONAL RETAIL CENTER AT THE CORNER OF S SH 45 AND 1626 ON THE LAND CURRENTLY OUTSIDE THE CITY'S CTJ. THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE WAS NOT FULLY PLANNED, UH, BUT WOULD THEORETICALLY BE DEVELOPED EITHER AS RESIDENTIAL AT A SIMILAR DENSITY TO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING OR AS COMMERCIAL USES WITH HIGHER IMPERVIOUS COVER TOGETHER. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE REFERRING TO AS THE MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE. THIS SCENARIO DOESN'T ALREADY EXIST TODAY FOR A COUPLE VERY IMPORTANT REASONS. THERE WERE ONGOING NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE UNDER-RESOURCED CITY OF HAYES, WHOSE ETJ THIS WAS IN, AND THE PANDEMIC DELAYED A NUMBER OF RETAIL PROJECTS. THESE TWO FACTS CREATED THE OPPORTUNITY FOR MY CLIENT TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY, UH, FOR MUCH LESS INTENSIVE, PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL USES. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT NEITHER OF THOSE CONDITIONS PERSIST. THE PANDEMIC SHUTDOWNS ARE IN THE PAST. AND THANKS TO CHANGES IN STATE LAW, THE SITE IS NO LONGER IN THE CITY OF HAYES JURISDICTION. NEXT SLIDE. INSTEAD, WE ARE PROPOSING A PLAN FOR APPROXIMATELY 700 HOMES ON MODERATE LOTS. A DRAMATICALLY DECREASED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ENTIRELY WITHIN THE SUBURBAN WATERSHED ESTATE, LOTS IN THE WEST, AND HUGE AMOUNTS OF PARKS AND OPEN SPACE WITH EXCELLENT TRAIL CONNECTIVITY. WE'RE CALLING THIS THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE, AND I'LL GO INTO MORE DETAIL TO WHY NEXT SLIDE. FIRST, LET ME BE CLEAR ON WHAT THE ALTERNATIVES ARE IN THE MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE. THE REMAINDER OF THIS SITE WOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE AUSTIN E-T-G-E-T-J AS SO MUCH OF BARTON SPRING ZONE LAND ALREADY HAS BEEN. AND ALL 498 ACRES WOULD BE DEVELOPED UNDER COUNTY RULES. IN THE SCENARIO WE'RE PROPOSING THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE, ALL 490 ACRES ARE BROUGHT [00:20:01] PERMANENTLY INTO THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S JURISDICTION. NEXT SLIDE. THAT RESULTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL BUFFERS FOR LITTLE BEAR CREEK AND THE SITE'S MINI WETLANDS AND RECHARGE FEATURES THAT EQUAL 2.4 TIMES AS MUCH PROTECTED LAND AS WE WOULD HAVE IN THE OTHER SCENARIO. NEXT SLIDE. THAT MEANS LESS THAN HALF OF THE ALLOWABLE IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE PART OF SPRING ZONE. AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT HAYES COUNTY HAS NO IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS. UH, THE GRAPH HERE SHOWS ALLOWABLE IMPERVIOUS COVER BASED ON WHAT WOULD REASONABLY BE FEASIBLE IN ONLY THE AREA NORTH OF THE FLOODPLAIN ON THE HAYES COUNTY AREA. NEXT SLIDE. ALL THE IMPERVIOUS COVER WOULD ALSO BE SUBJECT TO TCEQ WATER QUALITY STANDARDS REQUIRING 80% TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLID REMOVAL AT MOST AND NONE FOR LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. SOS REQUIRES 100% NONDEGRADATION FOR THE ENTIRE PROJECT. THAT GRAPH AT THE BOTTOM HERE IS REALLY IMPORTANT, AS YOU CAN SEE, EVEN DEVELOPING AT THE SAME INTENSITY AS WE'RE PROPOSING, WHICH IS WHAT THAT MIDDLE BAR REPRESENTS WITH TCEQ. WATER QUALITY WOULD RESULT IN 10 TIMES THE TSS, UH, DISCHARGE FROM THE SITE. AND OF COURSE, DEVELOPING THE MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE WOULD RESULT IN 20 TIMES THE DISCHARGE FROM THE SITE. NEXT SLIDE. UH, WE'RE PROPOSING TO GET WATER IN WASTEWATER SERVICE FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN. UH, SO INSTEAD OF WATER FROM WELLS IN THE TRINITY, AN ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND ONSITE T LAP, WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE A MASSIVE CONSERVATION EASEMENT ALONG LITTLE BEAR CREEK. NEXT SLIDE. OUR PROPOSAL TAKES THE SITE FROM NO TREE PROTECTION TO AUSTIN'S FULL TREE ORDINANCE TO PROTECT THE SITE'S BEAUTIFUL OAK TREES. NEXT SLIDE. AND OF COURSE, IT'S NOT JUST THE BIG STUFF, Y'ALL KNOW BETTER THAN MOST HOW IMPORTANT AUSTIN'S FULL SUITE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND ZONING REC ORDINANCES ARE NOT TO MENTION MAKING SURE THIS PROJECT IS REVIEWED AND INSPECTED BY AUSTIN'S EXPERT WATERSHED PROTECTION TEAM. NEXT SLIDE. UH, WELL, THE LAST ONE WAS JUST THE PARKS, UH, UM, PLAN THAT WAS ALREADY SHOWN TO YOU. BUT THIS IS A GRAPH THAT WE SHOWED TO THE, UH, PARKS BOARD THAT DEMONSTRATES, UH, WHAT CITY OF AUSTIN PARK LAND DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS REQUIRE ON THE TOP AND THEN WHAT WE'RE PROVIDING AT THE BOTTOM. SO THIS IS A GOOD INDICATION OF WHY WE RECEIVED UNANIMOUS SUPPORT FROM THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD. NEXT SLIDE. OUR PROJECT ALSO EARNED UNANIMOUS, UNANIMOUS SUPPORT FROM THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DUE TO AN ONSITE TRAIL SYSTEM THAT TIES INTO THE VIOLET CROWN AND BUTTA PROPOSED TRAIL SYSTEMS PROVIDING EVENTUAL DIRECT CONNECTION TO DOWNTOWN AUSTIN AND DOWNTOWN BUTTA. NEXT SLIDE. WE'RE ALSO PROVIDING A CRITICAL LINK IN, UH, THE PROPOSED GREAT SPRINGS TRAIL FOR AN EVENTUAL CONNECTION ALL THE WAY DOWN TO DOWNTOWN SAN ANTONIO. UH, SO I KNOW I WENT VERY QUICKLY THERE AND I'M HAPPY TO GO BACK TO ANY OF THOSE OTHER SLIDES. BUT FIRST I WANTED TO, UM, HAND IT OVER TO JEFF HOWARD TO KIND OF GIVE SOME CLOSING THOUGHTS. UH, COULD YOU ADVANCE TWO MORE SLIDES? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. AND WHILE YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE SUMMARY OF THOSE BENEFITS THAT, UH, ROBERT OUTLINED, UM, I JUST WANTED TO, AGAIN, MY NAME IS JEFF HOWARD. I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT. I JUST WANTED TO SAY A FEW WORDS. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THIS ON THIS PROJECT FOR SEVERAL YEARS, AND IN THAT TIME, WE'VE COME TO KNOW MANY OF THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY THE AREA STAKEHOLDERS. YOU MAY HEAR TONIGHT THAT THE CITY SHOULD NOT BE CONCERNED BY THE NON-CITY ALTERNATIVE, UH, BECAUSE HAYES COUNTY WILL SIMPLY REQUIRE THREE QUARTER ACRE LOTS, OF COURSE, UM, A PROJECT LIKE THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH OUR CURRENT HOUSING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. BUT EVEN SO, LET ME JUST END RIGHT NOW. ANY NOTION, UM, THAT THIS IS AN OPTION, IT'S NOT. THE OWNER WILL NOT PURSUE A LARGE LOT SUBDIVISION BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A SUFFICIENT MARKET OR ECONOMIC RETURN FOR SUCH LOTS. UM, THE OWNER WILL EITHER PURSUE THIS DEVELOPMENT, UH, OF THIS PLAN WITH OR WITHOUT AUSTIN UTILITIES, OR IF THERE ARE ROADBLOCKS TO THAT, ALLOW OTHERS TO PURSUE A NONS SINGLE FAMILY USE. NO MATTER WHAT YOU MAY HEAR, A LARGE LOT PROJECT IS NOT AN OPTION BEFORE US. YOU MAY ALSO HEAR THAT 35% IMPERVIOUS COVER APPLIES IN HAYES COUNTY, BUT THAT'S A CODE REFERENCE IN HAYES COUNTY REGULATIONS. THAT DOES NOT APPLY HERE. IT APPLIES TO CONSERVATION AREAS. DOES NOT APPLY HERE, BUT IT'S IMMATERIAL. THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT ROBERT SHOWED YOU ASSUMED, UH, LESS THAN 35% IMPERVIOUS COVER ON, ON THE HAYES COUNTY PORTION, BUT STILL MORE THAN DOUBLE, UH, WHAT OUR PROPOSAL, UH, PROPOSES. SO I'LL JUST CONCLUDE BY SAYING THIS. THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF THE DISCUSSION FOR THIS PROJECT. UH, THERE WILL BE MANY MORE PUBLIC HEARINGS, UH, AND THERE'LL BE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO WEIGH IN FOR THIS COMMISSION AND OTHER POLICY MAKERS TO CAREFULLY WEIGH THE DETAILS BEFORE THERE'S A FINAL, UM, ACTION OR DECISION. BUT ACTION TONIGHT WILL ALLOW US TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION AND WE CAN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THE MERITS OF THIS, WHICH WE THINK ARE OBJECTIVELY VERY, VERY GOOD. UM, WHEREAS IF WE, WE DON'T HAVE A RECOMMENDATION, UH, THAT COULD POTENTIALLY SET US ON A VERY DIFFERENT PATH, UH, THAT I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO TAKE. SO WE HOPE THAT WE CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION. WE HOPE YOU WILL INITIATE, UM, THE SOS CODE AMENDMENT AND GIVE THE, THE OTHER COMMISSIONS [00:25:01] AND POLICYMAKERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN AND CONSIDER THIS PROJECT, PROJECT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'D BE VERY HAPPY TO, TO TRY AND ANSWER THEM. WE'VE GOT A TEAM OF ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, AND OF COURSE, UH, UH, OUR, UH, UH, THE CLIENT IS REPRESENTED AS WELL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. UM, LET'S OPEN IT UP TO CITIZEN COMMUNICATION. OKAY. WE'LL START WITH MIKE CLIFFORD AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE THREE MINUTES DONATED FROM ANN MASON. THANK YOU. IF YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME. UM, BEFORE I START MY SIX MINUTES, I HAD A, AN INSTRUCTION FOR THE COMMISSIONERS. UM, WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING A LOT ABOUT THE MUD, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS, UH, THE VARIANCE THAT WE'RE, UM, REALLY DISCUSSING. 'CAUSE THE TWO WERE INTERTWINED. SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT INSTRUCTION OUT THAT YOU'LL HEAR US GO BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE YOU CAN'T REALLY TALK ABOUT ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER. SO, OKAY. UH, NEXT SLIDE. SO, UH, THREE DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS ON THE TABLE. UH, THE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUESTS THAT MILESTONE HAS REQUESTED, UM, A T LAP, WHICH, UH, THEY WERE, UH, LOOKING AT, UM, BEFORE THEY CAME TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND ONSITE SEPTIC. UM, SO THOSE THAT WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING OR NOT NON RECOMMENDING, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S FAMILIAR WITH THE TERMINOLOGY. NEXT SLIDE. SO, THE SER OPTION THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND WAS RECOMMENDED, UH, THAT WILL LIKELY BE RECOMMENDED BY WATERSHED PROTECTION, HAS A NUMBER OF BIG ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT OUR COALITION, UH, WHICH INCLUDES, UH, GIA, SOS, UM, SIERRA CLUB, AND SEVERAL OTHERS. THE PROPOSED DENSITY IS REALLY THE BIG PROBLEM. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS TRACT MAY GET DEVELOPED AT SOME POINT, THAT IT CAN'T NECESSARILY STAY THE WAY IT IS FOREVER, BUT TO PUT 850 L LUS OVER 258 DEVELOPABLE ACRES IS, UM, IT'S INCONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S IN THE AREA, WHICH IS MOSTLY, YOU KNOW, 2, 3, 4 ACRE LOTS. SO THIS IS THE BIG ONE, THOUGH. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE OF 25% IMPERVIOUS COVER VERSUS 15% IN THE SOS ORDINANCE IS COMPLETELY UNJUSTIFIABLE. AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS MILESTONE HAS COME TO WATERSHED PROTECTION AND SAID, IF YOU DON'T GIVE US THE 25% VARIANCE, UM, WE'RE GONNA DO WHATEVER. WE'RE GONNA GO GET A TLA, WE'RE GONNA GO SELL IT, WHATEVER. BUT THE FACT IS, AND, AND SO WHEN THEY'RE ASKED ABOUT THAT MILESTONE SAYS, THAT'S THE MINIMUM WE NEED TO MAKE MONEY ON THE PROJECT. BUT THEY ALREADY TRIED TO PUSH A PLAT THROUGH LAST YEAR TO THE HAYES COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT. THIS IS PROBABLY SOMETHING YOU MIGHT NOT BE AWARE OF, THAT HAD A CONDO BASED DEVELOPMENT WITH FEWER LU SOMEWHERE AROUND 500 TO 600 L LU. AND THAT WAS REJECTED BY THE HAYES COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT. SO MY QUESTION FOR MILESTONE WOULD BE, IF 25% IS THE MINIMUM YOU CAN DO, WHY DID YOU A YEAR AGO PROPOSE A CONDO BASED, UH, DEVELOPMENT WITH 15% IMPERVIOUS COVER? BY THE WAY, YOU CAN LOOK ALL THIS UP. YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, JUST GOOGLE HAYES COMMONS VOTED DOWN, AND IT WILL PULL UP THE LINK TO THAT MAY 5TH MEETING OF THE HAYES COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT, WHERE MILESTONE WAS VOTED DOWN THREE TO TWO, UH, ON THEIR PLAT, THEIR CONDO BASE PLAT, WHICH HAD A 15% IMPERVIOUS COVER ON IT. UH, IT WAS VOTED DOWN BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO PUT A T LAP OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE. AND THE HAYES COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DON'T LIKE THAT IDEA BECAUSE THEY HAVE A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS, INCLUDING SOME OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE HERE TONIGHT WHO USE THAT AQUIFER FOR THEIR WATER. THEY HAVE WELLS INTO THE EDWARDS, THE, UH, MIDDLE TRINITY, LOWER TRINITY, AND HAYES COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DID NOT WANT, UM, THEM PUTTING A T LAP UP THERE. SO THERE'S REALLY NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS REQUEST FOR 25% IMPERVIOUS COVER. THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE WAS PUT IN PLACE EXACTLY FOR THIS REASON, TO KEEP DEVELOPERS FROM TRYING TO PUT TOO MUCH IMPERVIOUS COVER OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE. SO BEYOND THAT, WE HAVE MULTIPLE DYE TRACER STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE. I'M SURE THE COMMISSIONERS ARE WELL, VERY WELL FAMILIAR WITH THOSE. NICO HOWARD AND OTHERS HAVE DONE THOSE SHOWING A GROUNDWATER FLOW PATH FROM HAYES COMMONS TO AREA WELLS AND BARTON CREEK, AS WELL AS BARTON SPRINGS. SO THE BARTON SPRINGS ARE AT RISK HERE TOO, WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE FOLKS FROM SAVE OUR [00:30:01] SPRINGS WHO WILL BE TALKING AFTER ME. AND THEN THIS AREA IS REALLY FULL OF CARS FEATURES. THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT FROM OTHER AREAS. ON THE RECHARGE ZONE, THERE ARE PROBABLY AT LEAST 50 KNOWN CARS AND MAYBE ANOTHER 50 THAT ARE UNKNOWN BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SURVEY THIS, UH, PROPERTY. BUT, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY WHAT MAKES THIS ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE, IS YOU HAVE ALL THESE CAVES AND NOT CAVES, BUT SINK HOLES AND, UM, SEEPS AND SPRINGS. AND IF YOU PUT 850 ELU WEAVES OVER THAT, IT'S GOING TO CREATE A LOT OF POLLUTION GOING INTO THE AQUIFER. NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS SHOWS WHAT, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONE. THIS SHOWS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. YOU SEE THE RED SQUARE WHERE HAYES COMMONS IS, UH, YOU HAVE THIS FLOW PATH OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER THAT GOES RIGHT THROUGH THIS TRACK AND ALL THOSE KAR FEATURES SITTING ON TOP OF THAT, UH, LAND THAT ALLOW WATER TO PENETRATE INTO THE EDWARDS AQUIFER, THAT THEN FLOWS ALL THE WAY TO THE AREA WELLS OF THE AREA LANDOWNERS IN BOTH TRAVIS AND HAYES COUNTY. AND THEN OF COURSE IT FLOWS TO BARTON SPRINGS. NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS SHOWS SOME OF THOSE WELLS. UH, THERE'S QUITE A FEW OF THEM. YOU CAN SEE WHERE HAYES COMMONS IS. YOU CAN SEE JUST SOUTH OF HAYES COMMONS IS THE CITY OF HAYES, UH, WHICH IS ABOUT 300 PEOPLE. THEY GET THEIR WATER FROM THE, UM, FROM THE EDWARDS AND TRINITY AQUIFER. UH, THEY ARE VERY MUCH AGAINST THIS, UH, MILESTONE. NEGOTIATED WITH THEM FOR TWO YEARS, TRYING TO GET A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN PLACE. THEY FINALLY SAID, FORGET IT. YOU'RE JUST, YOU'RE NOT LISTENING, YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO DO HIGH DENSITY AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THE WATER SUPPLY. AND THEN FURTHER DOWNSTREAM, YOU HAVE ALL THESE OTHER PEOPLE IN TRAVIS COUNTY THAT ARE ALSO ON PUBLIC WELLS AND PRIVATE WELLS. NEXT, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET A SIX MINUTES. YES. OH, IT'S SIX. OKAY. ARE YOU SURE? OKAY. ALRIGHT. WELL, I GUESS, I MEAN, I'M ALMOST DONE. CAN I JUST FINISH UP? I THINK THIS IS PRETTY IMPORTANT INFORMATION, PERRY, GO AHEAD. OKAY, THANKS. I'LL, I'LL, I'LL BE QUICK. SO THIS SHOWS THE DENSITY COMPARISON. UM, YOU CAN SEE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING A TLA, BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT IT IS A MUCH LOWER DENSITY OPTION, UM, UH, SEPTIC AS WELL, MUCH LOWER THAN THAT. AND THIS, THIS CHART IS REALLY, YOU'LL SEE THIS AGAIN IN OUR PRESENTATION, 24 50 IS THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD BE HERE, BUT IF YOU ADD IN THE COMMERCIAL, IT'S 29 0 2. SO YOU'RE BASICALLY TALKING ABOUT PUTTING A SMALL CITY OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE. NEXT SLIDE. UM, THIS SHOWS, UH, THE, THE FLOW DIAGRAM, WE DIDN'T HAVE, I, I CALL IT MILESTONES, CONCEPTS OF A PLAN, BECAUSE IT'S NOT A PLA IT'S NOT REALLY A PLAN. IT JUST SHOWS, YOU KNOW, GENERALLY WHERE HOUSES ARE GOING TO GO. UH, BUT IF YOU SEE THOSE RED, THOSE RED ARROWS, I PUT THOSE TOGETHER LOOKING AT THE CONTOURS, AND IT SHOWS A LOT OF FLOW FROM THOSE IMPERVIOUS COVER AREAS OFF THE TRACK, WHICH MEANS INTO LITTLE BEAR CREEK AND INTO BEAR CREEK AND INTO THE RECHARGE, UH, FEATURES. NEXT. SO THIS IS THE LAST SLIDE. UM, JUST IN CONCLUSION, HAYES COUNTY CODE SPECIFIES MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF THREE QUARTERS ACRES. SO MILESTONE CAN'T GO BACK TO, UH, HAYES COUNTY AND TRY TO GET, UH, THEIR PLAT APPROVED. UM, THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT REJECTED THE, THE PLAT THAT WAS BASED ON A TLA. SO THEY CAN'T DO A T LAP. THERE'S NO RELIABLE WATER SUPPLY TO ACHIEVE ANYTHING CLOSE TO 467,000 GALLONS. AND IF THEY DID TRY TO DO A TLA, IT WOULD BE TIED UP IN THE, UH, SO A PROCESS, CONTEST THE CASE HEARING. SO REALLY OUR FUNDAMENTAL CONCLUSION FROM THIS IS, WHY SHOULD CITY OF AUSTIN GRANT THIS VARIANCE TO 25%? THEY CAN JUST SIT BACK AND SAY, NO, WE'RE GONNA STICK TO 15%. AND MILESTONE MIGHT TAKE THEIR MARBLES AND GO HOME, BUT THEY HAVE NO THEIR CHOICE. THEY'LL BE BACK THE NEXT DAY AND THEY'LL SAY, OKAY, WE'LL DO 15%, WE'LL DO CONDOS OR MULTIFAMILY HOUSING. THEY'LL FIGURE IT OUT. IT'S NOT THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S JOB IN LIFE TO HELP MILESTONE FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAD THEIR BOTTOM LINE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANKS. SAME. OKAY, WE'VE GOT JIM CAMP, IF YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES? YES, MA'AM. UH, MY NAME IS JIM CAMP AND I LIVE AT 38 0 3 KETTLEMAN DRIVE IN HAYES COUNTY. UH, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US, ALLOWING US TO SPEAK, UH, AND GIVE YOU OUR THOUGHTS ON THIS. UH, I LIVE IN SOUTHWEST TERRITORY NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPOSED, UH, DEVELOPMENT. I WANNA GIVE YOU A LITTLE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE. [00:35:02] IN 1985, RANDY MARINE HOME BUILDERS PROPOSED A 350 ACRE DEVELOPMENT NAMED SHAVANNA WOODS ON MUCH OF THE SAME LAND AS HAYES COMMONS. UH, THE PROPOSAL CALLED, CALLED FOR A HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, MINING THE EDWARDS, UH, AQUIFER IN DISCHARGING TREATED WATER INTO BEAR CREEK. OUR NEIGHBORS MET WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND HOPED TO HAVE A LOWER DENSITY, IMPERVIOUS COVER AND OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. RANDY MARINE DISMISSED OUR APPEALS, WENT TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN WITH THEIR PROPOSAL FOR BEAR CREEK MUD. NUMBER ONE, WE ASKED THE CITY OF AUSTIN STAFF AND COUNCIL TO CONSIDER OUR SOLE SOURCE DRINKING WATER SOURCE AND THE WATERSHEDS THAT FEED BARTON SPRINGS. THE DEVELOPER WENT TO THE TEXAS WATER COMMISSION. IT'S NOW CALLED THE TCEQ WITH THE SAME PROPOSAL AFTER MONTHS OF HEARINGS AT THE TEXAS WATER COMMISSION AT THE TIME IN HEARINGS. IN HEARING FROM THE TRAVIS HAYES COUNTY DE DELEGATION FROM BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS TO PROTECT THE SENSITIVE AREA, THE TEXAS WATER COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO DENY THE MUD. THE PROPERTY CHANGED HANDS. IN 2017, WALTER SOUTHWEST REQUESTED AUSTIN WATER AND WASTEWATER FOR HAYES COMMONS. THE CITY OF AUSTIN REQUIRED THAT THE APPLICANT COMPLY WITH CITY ORDINANCES. IN EXCHANGE FOR THE SERVICE, THE APPLICANT REFUSED TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND EVENTUALLY SOLD INTEREST IN THE LAND TO MILESTONE BUILDERS. NOW, MIKE CLIFFORD TOLD YOU THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT WORKED WITH THE CITY OF HAYES, UH, FOR A COUPLE YEARS, BUT THE CITY WOULD NOT BUY INTO THIS HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, AND ITS PROPOSED TAP. SO THEY VOTED AGAINST THE MUD, AND OF COURSE, MIKE MENTIONED THAT THE APPLICANT WENT TO THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT AND THEY SAID NO. SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU IS TONIGHT TO DENY THE HAYES COMMONS PROPOSAL OF A VARIANCE FOR THE SOS ORDINANCE. UM, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK WE HAVE BOBBY LEVINSKY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS BOBBY LAVINSKY. I'M HERE WITH THE SEA, OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. I AM JOINED HERE ALSO WITH, UH, TANIA KAREEM, WHO IS OUR, UH, SCIENCE DIRECTOR. UH, WHILE WE ARE THE NEXT GENERATION OF S OS, I WANTED TO BRING WITH ME THE, THE SPIRIT OF THE BARTON SPRINGS UPRISING, WHICH IS WHY I BROUGHT OUR POSTER SHOWING THE PROTEST FROM THE BARTON CREEK PUD. UM, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, THE SOS ORDINANCE IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE TOOL THE CITY HAS TO PROTECT THE BARTON SPRINGS POOL, THE EDWARD, UH, THE ENDANGERED SPECIES THAT RELY ON IT, AND OUR ABILITY TO KEEP SWIMMING THERE AS PART OF THE HABITAT PERMIT. BECAUSE THE EDWARDS AQUIFER IS A LIMESTONE AQUIFER, IT LACKS THE NATURAL FILTRATION, SO WE HAVE TO PROTECT IT THROUGH OUR ORDINANCES. UM, WE DO THAT, UH, IN TWO WAYS WITH THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE. UH, DOES THESE TWO PROVISIONS WORK TOGETHER IN CONCERT WITH ONE ANOTHER? THERE ARE IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMITS AND WATER TREATMENT TR WATER QUALITY TREATMENT METHODS. BOTH OF THOSE ARE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE NONDEGRADATION STANDARD. THEY WORK IN CONCERT WITH ONE ANOTHER. UM, HERE WITH THE BARTON SPRINGS, UH, ZONE WITH THE, UM, I'M SORRY, THE RECHARGE ZONE. WE HAVE A 15% NET SITE AREA REQUIREMENT. IT IS THE MOST STRINGENT OF ALL OF THE AREAS WITHIN THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT IS ON A DIRECT PATH TO BARTON SPRINGS, AS POINTED OUT, UM, BY MIKE EARLIER. UH, NEXT SLIDE. THE APPLICANT HERE WANTS TO INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. I WANNA PUT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS OUT HERE FOR YOU BY 32 ACRES OF IMPERVIOUS COVER, IT IS AN INCREASE OF 48 TO THIR TO 80 ACRES OF IMPERVIOUS COVER AT THIS SITE. THE ONLY JUSTIFICATION THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING YOU IS THAT THEIR INVESTORS WANT MORE MONEY. THEY OBFUSCATE THE FACT THAT WHEN THEY PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY BACK IN 2017, THEIR PROPERTY IN THE, ON THE AUSTIN SIDE WAS LIMITED TO THE 15% NET SIDE AREA. SUDDENLY THEY NEED THE 25% IMPERVIOUS COVER TO MAKE THE NUMBERS WORK. THE HAYES COUNTY SIDE, IT WAS LIMITED TO 22.5% IMPERVIOUS COVER. SUDDENLY THEY NEED THE 25% IMPERVIOUS COVER TO MAKE THE NUMBERS WORK. WE'RE NOT HERE IN THE BUSINESS OF CORRECTING THE INVESTOR'S MISTAKE FOR MAKING A BAD INVESTMENT. [00:40:01] THEY DON'T HAVE WATER TO SERVE THE SITE. THEY DON'T HAVE WASTEWATER TO SERVE THE SITE. THEY BOUGHT A PROPERTY WITH ENTITLEMENTS THAT ARE LESS THAN WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR YOU TONIGHT. THEY'RE ASKING YOU TO SOLVE THEIR PROBLEM. THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO. SUCH A VARIANCE LACKS PRECEDENT. AND CAN I GET THE NEXT SLIDE? I'M SORRY. I'M ACTUALLY BLIND RIGHT NOW. , UH, SO THE SAVE SPRINGS ORDINANCE HAS, UM, UH, TO, UH, AN AMENDMENT PROCESS ACTUALLY. SO IT SAYS THAT THERE'S NO VARIANCES TO IT, BUT THERE IS A QUALIFICATION IN THE SOS ORDINANCE AND IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT HERE. SO IT SETS OUT THE SITE SPECIFIC ORDINANCE WHERE IF THERE IS A SITUATION WHERE WE NEED TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT FOR THE BETTERMENT OF WATER QUALITY, WE WILL DO THAT. THAT'S NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE. THE AMENDMENTS MUST BE INITIATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR PLANNING COMMISSION AS, AS STATED BEFORE. AND CITY COUNCIL HERE HAS DECLINED TO INITIATE THIS SOS ORDINANCE. WE'VE MET WITH THEM OVER THE SUMMER. THE OFFICES DIDN'T WANNA BRING IT FORWARD. COMMENTS WE GOT FROM THE OFFICES WERE, WHILE WE SUPPORT HOUSING, WE DON'T SUPPORT HOUSING AT THIS LOCATION. IT'S NOT JUST HOUSING AT ANY LOCATION. THIS IS AN AREA WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT. CAN I GET THE NEXT SLIDE? SO I'VE LOOKED THROUGH THE HISTORY. THERE'S, THERE'S BEEN 34 AMENDMENTS TO THE SOS ORDINANCE. NONE OF THEM ARE APPLICABLE HERE. WE HAVE NEVER SEEN A GREENFIELD SITE WHERE THE DIVE STER IS JUST TRYING TO ASK FOR MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER. YOU'LL SEE THAT WE'VE HELD A HARD STANDARD EVEN FOR THE BARTON SPOOL BRINGS SPOOL ITSELF. WE REQUIRE REDUCTIONS OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. WITH THOSE SOS AMENDMENTS, WE DRIVE A HARD BARGAIN, LET'S NOT GIVE IT AWAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU TANIA. KAREEM, YOU'LL STATE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS TANIA. UH, GOOD EVENING. UH, COMMISSIONERS. I'M REPRESENTING SOS ALLIANCE TO OPPOSE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF THE SOS ORDINANCE. YESTERDAY OUR TEAM MET WITH MILESTONE REPRESENTATIVES TO GAIN A BETTER UNDERSTANDING AS TO WHY THEY'RE PERSISTENT ON THIS 10% INCREASE. THEY STATED, IF WE ACHIEVE 100% POLLUTION TOTAL, UH, 100% POLLUTE IN LOAD REMOVAL. WHY DOES THE EXTRA 10% EVEN MATTER? OTHER THAN THE OBVIOUS ANSWER THAT UNNECESSARILY ADDING MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER ACCELERATES THE RAPID DESCENT TOWARDS CLIMATE CRISIS. THEIR CLAIM OF A HUNDRED PERCENT PER UH, POLLUTANT LOAD REMOVAL IS UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE WATER QUALITY CONTROLS ARE EFFICIENT AND RELIABLE ALL OF THE TIME, WHICH EVERY ENGINEER KNOWS IT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE. BEFORE I ELABORATE, I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT WHY THE 15% WAS DETERMINED AS THE THRESHOLD FOR THE ORDINANCE. UM, ACCORDING TO DR. LAUREN ROSS, A PEN PHD, WHO HAS CONTRIBUTED HER EXPERTISE WITH SOS SINCE ITS EARLY DAYS, 15% WAS A LEVEL AT WHICH ADDED POLLUTANT LOADS COULD BE REMOVED USING THE SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION SYSTEM, WHICH IS ON THE RIGHT. UM, AFTER THE ORDINANCE PASSED, RETENTION, IRRIGATION SYSTEMS BECAME THE STANDARD, AND THE WATERSHED WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT HAS MADE NUMEROUS MATHEMATICAL ADJUSTMENTS TO REFLECT THE CHANGE IN CONTROLS AND MAINTAIN THE ORDINANCE. NO INCREASE IN POLLUTANT LOADS REQUIREMENT TO THAT POINT. NO INCREASE IN POLLUTANT LOADS LOOKS PROMISING ON PAPER, BUT RARELY DOES THAT TRANSLATE ONTO THE FIELD. IN MY EXPERIENCE AS AN ENGINEER, DR. ROSS'S 30 PLUS EXPERIENCE, WE HAVE NOT YET TO SEE A RETENTION IRRIGATION SYSTEM WITHOUT SOME FUNCTIONAL ISSUE BECAUSE OF HUMAN ERROR AND MAINTENANCE. NE OH, SORRY. YES, THANK YOU. UM, BECAUSE OF HUMAN ERROR AND MAINTENANCE, NE UH, NEGLIGENCE ENGINEERED CONTROLS ARE INHERENTLY UNRELIABLE. PUMP FAILS, RETENTION BASIN OVERFLOWS OR, UH, REMAINS RETENTION BASINS OVERFLOW OR REMAIN STAGNANT FOR MONTHS, SPRAY HEADS BREAK AND WATER IS DISCHARGED OVER JUST A FEW FEET. INSTEAD OF THE INTENDED ACREAGES. WATER QUALITY STRUCTURES ALSO FREQUENTLY FAIL DUE TO SEDIMENT BUILDUP AND VEGETATION OVERGROWTH. AND TO REINFORCE THIS CLAIM, A NEW 2009 REPORT FROM THE CENTER FOR WATERSHED PROTECTION, A TRUSTED SOURCE FOR POLICYMAKERS AND AGENCIES LIKE WPD TO DEVELOP WATERSHED MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES CONFIRMS THAT WHILE WATER QUALITY BMPS OFFER SOME BENEFITS, THEY ARE INSUFFICIENT TO COUNTER THE EXTENSIVE DEG DEGRADATION CAUSED BY SURPASSING 15% COMMISSIONERS. THIS AMENDMENT IS SIMPLY TO DEEPEN THE POCKETS OF INVESTORS, AS BOBBY HAD EXPLAINED, AND IN THIS CASE, IF YOU DON'T COMPLY WITH THEIR QUOTE REQUEST, UM, I HOPE TODAY'S PUBLIC COMMENTS HAVE CREATED SOME LEVEL OF CLARITY ABOUT THE HOLLOW THREATS TOWARDS THE CITY. I HOPE YOU CAN TAKE ACCOUNT TO THE, OF THE FACTS PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY AND CONSIDER UPHOLDING THE 15% THRESHOLD, PARTICULARLY, PARTICULARLY TO PRESERVE A [00:45:01] CRUCIAL BUFFER THAT PROTECTS THE RECHARGE ZONE AND MITIGATES DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS ON THE HEALTH OF OUR WATER QUALITY WILDLIFE HABITATS, AND HYDROLOGIC CYCLE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BRIAN ZIK, I PRACTICED IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. PATTY. I'M BRIAN ZOIC AND I'M THE ADVOCACY DIRECTOR AT, SAY, BARTON CREEK ASSOCIATION. WE'RE ONE OF THE OLDEST CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS IN AUSTIN, FOUNDED IN 1979. WE DON'T WORK TO PROTECT JUST BARTON CREEK. WE WORK TO PROTECT STREAMS THROUGHOUT CENTRAL TEXAS. WE HAVE SPENT PROBABLY AS MUCH TIME ON ONION CREEK AS WE HAVE ON BARTON CREEK. THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS IN THE ONION CREEK WATERSHED. WE, WHAT I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT OR WHAT THE ODDS ARE FOR APPROVAL OF THE TEAP, THE TEXAS LAND APPLICATION PERMIT. THIS WOULD ALLOW, UM, MILESTONE TO WATER. ITS TREATED WASTEWATER ONTO IRRIGATION FIELDS ON SITE. NEXT SLIDE. TCQ HAS ALREADY BANNED ONE FORM OF WASTEWATER PERMIT OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE, AND THAT'S DISCHARGE PERMITS. THEY DID THAT IN 1996. NEXT SLIDE. IN FACT, TCQ HAS BANNED TWO OF THE THREE TYPES OF PERMITS THAT IT CAN ISSUE. IT'S BANNED DISCHARGE PERMITS OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE, AND IT'S ALSO TO BAN TLA PERMITS WITH SUBSURFACE DRIP THAT ONLY LEAVES TLA PERMITS WITH SPRAY IRRIGATION. THEY DO ALLOW THAT, BUT EVEN AT THIS POINT, THERE IS ONLY ONE SUCH APPLICATION IN OPERATION ON THE RECHARGE ZONE. AND THAT IS THE OFFICE BUILDING THE PARK AT BARTON CREEK, UH, AT THE INTERSECTION OF 360 AND MOPAC, UH, THANK YOU. ONION CREEK IS A PRISTINE STREAM. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? IT'S A VERY LOW PHOSPHORUS STREAM. UH, IT WOULD'VE BEEN PROTECTED UNDERNEATH THE, UH, PRISTINE STREAMS PROPOSAL, WHICH WAS CONSIDERED BY THE LEGISLATURE IN, IN 2021. AND BY TCQ IN 22, TCQ DOES RECOGNIZE THE CATEGORY OF PRISTINE STREAMS. UH, THIS IS A MAP. THE MAP THAT YOU'RE SEEING WAS INDEED PREPARED BY TCQ TO SHOW WHERE THE, UH, PROTECTED PRISTINE STREAM WATERSHEDS WOULD BE. THE ORANGE ONE AT THE, UH, RIGHT MIDDLE, RIGHT. THAT'S ONION CREEK. NEXT SLIDE. . THE REASON THAT THIS IS IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE TCQ HAS BEEN, UH, EXERTING MORE SCRUTINY ON WASTEWATER PERMITS ON PRISTINE STREAMS. MOST NOTABLY, TCQ FINALLY ISSUED A NEW PERMIT FOR THE CITY OF LIBERTY HILL, WHICH HAS A DISCHARGE PERMIT ON THE SOUTH SAN GABRIEL RIVER. UM, IT IS A DISCHARGE PERMIT, BUT IT IS ALSO TOO ON A PRISTINE STREAM, JUST THE SAME AS ONION CREEK. THAT PARTICULAR CASE WENT FOR MANY YEARS, SEVERAL YEARS, AND IT ALSO WENT THROUGH NOT ONE BUT TWO CONTESTED CASE HEARINGS. IT ALSO TWO T UH, THE TCQ COMMISSIONERS ISSUED THAT PERMIT WITH THE LOWEST EVER PHOSPHORUS LIMIT. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS A, UH, SCHEMATIC OF THE SITE PLAN FOR, UH, COMMON THAT WE PREPARED BASED ON THE TLAP APPLICATION TO TCQ, WHICH, UH, WAS ONLY GOING TO APPLY TO THE HAYES COUNTY PORTION. THERE ARE TWO THINGS I WANNA HIGHLIGHT ON HERE. ONE IS, IS THAT THE RED SWATCH, AS YOU SEE, THOSE ARE THE IRRIGATION FIELDS WHERE THE WASTEWATER WOULD BE. I, UH, COULD I WHAT? OH, COULD I JUST LIKE THE LA NEXT SLIDE? YES. OKAY. I'M SORRY. OKAY. IN SUMMARY, THIS IS JUST WHAT WE WANNA SAY. UH, HAYCOM TEAP WILL NOT BE QUICKLY AND EASILY APPROVED BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHTENED SCRUTINY THAT TCQ COMMISSIONERS HAVE BEEN APPLYING TO, BOTH TO WASTEWATER PERMITS ON BOTH WASTE, UH, PRISTINE STREAMS AND ON THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE. UH, THE LIBERTY HILL CASE IN PARTICULAR INDICATES THAT THIS COULD GO ON FOR MANY YEARS. UH, EVEN IF THE PERMIT WERE ISSUED. IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT TCQ COMMISSIONERS WOULD VERY LIKELY INCLUDE STRONGER REQUIREMENTS FOR HAYCOM AND TA THAN TCQ STAFF HAS ALREADY PROPOSED. AND BASED ON THAT, WE FEEL THAT THE TLAP IS NOT QUITE THE HORRIBLE OPTION THAT, UH, SOME HAVE SUGGESTED. IT IS. WE FEEL THAT FIRST OF ALL, IT HAS A REALLY GOOD CHANCE OF NOT EVEN BEING APPROVED BY TCQ. AND IF IT IS APPROVED BY TCQ, IT HAS A REALLY GOOD CHANCE OF BEING APPROVED WITH BETTER, UH, STANDARDS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I BELIEVE WE HAVE A VIRTUAL ATTENDEE, CAROL PENNINGTON. UH, MS. PENNINGTON, IF YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUTE. UH, MS. PENNINGTON, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUTE. THANK YOU. [00:50:07] MS. PENNINGTON, COULD YOU PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUTE YOURSELF? THAT'S STAR SIX ON YOUR PHONE. THANK YOU. TO COME BACK. WE CAN COME BACK IF THAT'S EASIEST. YEP. UH, WE'LL SKIP TO LEE BURTON AND HAVE CAROL PENNINGTON IF SHE CAN AFTERWARDS. THANK YOU. SO LEAVE BURTON. UH, THIS IS CAROL PENNINGTON. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YEAH. , SORRY. LEE. LEETON. . YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW. UH, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. HELLO COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS CAROL PENNINGTON AND I LIVE IN CHAPARRAL PARK WITHIN A MILE FROM THIS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. NEXT SLIDE. THE FIRST COLUMN OF THIS TABLE IS WHAT MILESTONE PROPOSED IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR WHEN THEY APPLIED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR A MUD. THE MUD CREATION SUBMITTAL SHOWS 621 HOUSES WITH A POPULATION OF 2,188 AS SHOWN IN RED. NOW, CURRENTLY SIX MONTHS LATER, THEY'RE PROPOSING 700 HOUSES WITH A POPULATION OF 2,450 ON JUST 259 ACRES SHOWN IN BLUE. THE NUMBER OF ACRES WAS CALCULATED BY TAKING THE COMMERCIAL AND PARKED SLASH EASEMENTS FROM THE 497 TOTAL ACRES. AS MENTIONED, THEY HAVE APPLIED FOR A P LAP AND IN THAT APPLICATION THEY LISTED 200 ACRES OF SERVICE AREA AND 600 HOUSES AS SHOWN IN GREEN. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE HAYES COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATION REQUIRES THREE QUARTER ACRE LOTS WHEN THE PROPERTY IS OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE. SO USING THAT CALCULATION, THE NUMBER OF HOUSES SHOULD BE 267 WITH A POPULATION OF 935, WHICH FITS WITH THE COUNTY NEIGHBORHOODS ALREADY OUT HERE. THE BEST OPTION FOR MILESTONE AND THE AQUIFER, ONE THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKING OF THEM FOR TWO YEARS, IS TO HAVE LARGE LOTS AND INDIVIDUAL SEPTIC SYSTEMS WHEN USING AN OSSF. HAYES COUNTY, OSSF REGULATION CALLS FOR TWO AND A HALF ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE SHOWN IN PURPLE. THIS TRANSLATES TO 103 HOUSES AND 361 PEOPLE. THEY HAVE TOLD US THIS IS NOT IN THEIR BEST FINANCIAL INTEREST. WELL, THIS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AND IMPERVIOUS COVER IS NOT IN THE AQUIFER'S BEST FINANCIAL INTEREST. NEXT SLIDE. WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THE HAYES COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE THESE REGULATIONS? THEY KNOW THIS COUNTY. IT IS HILL COUNTRY. THE VALUE, THE TWO AQUIFERS THAT RUN THROUGH IT BECAUSE THEY KNOW THOUSANDS OF RESIDENTS GET THEIR DRINKING WATER FROM THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS A MAP OF THE SUBDIVISIONS CLOSE TO HAYES COMMONS THAT HAS BEEN OUT HERE SINCE THE 1970S. THE SMALLEST LOT IS ONE HALF ACRE, THE LARGEST 159 ACRES. WE ARE ALL ON THE BARTON SPRINGS PORTION OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE AND HAVE EITHER INDIVIDUAL WELLS OR COMMUNITY WELLS FROM THE EDWARDS AQUIFER. WE ALSO HAVE ONSITE SEPTIC SYSTEMS. ALL OF US. DO YOU THINK IF OSSF LEAK AND CAUSE POLLUTIONS, WE WOULD KNOW THAT BY NOW THAT MINDSET NEEDS TO BE SQUASHED. IF THEY WERE BAD FOR THE AQUIFER, BARTON SPRINGS POOL WOULD'VE BEEN CONTAMINATED ALREADY. UNLESS YOU HAVE PROOF THAT OSS FS ARE BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, THEN IT SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE. I ASK YOU, WHY DO YOU THINK MILESTONE WANTS THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO SUPPLY SERVICES SO THEY CAN CRAM 700 HOUSES WHERE THEY SHOULD NOT BE? PLEASE VOTE NO. TO INITIATE THIS SOS AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND BACK TO LEE BURTON. THANK YOU. YES. FOR REAL. THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. I'M LEE BURTON. I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR SAVE BARTON CREEK ASSOCIATION. UM, WE'VE BEEN AROUND FOR SEVERAL DECADES AND WORKING CLOSELY WITH SOS AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN. AND YOU KNOW, I'VE HAD SOME AMAZING VICTORIES IN PROTECTING, UH, EDWARDS AFER RECHARGE ZONE, UH, BARTON SPRINGS. UH, WHAT I WANTED TO REMIND YOU, AND BY THE WAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HEARING US. I KNOW YOU HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT JOB TO DO AND IT'S COMING AT YOU FROM ALL SIDES. I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THIS SERIOUSLY, THAT IT ONLY TAKES ONE UNWISE DECISION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UH, TO UNDO DECADES [00:55:01] OF GOOD WORK. AND, YOU KNOW, IF THIS WERE TO GO THROUGH THIS AMENDMENT, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT, IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO UNDO IT. ALSO, JUST LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IF THINGS HAPPEN THAT ARE NOT EXPECTED, WHICH WE KNOW OCCURS FREQUENTLY IN THESE TYPES OF SITUATIONS. UM, AND IT ALSO POTENTIALLY WOULD OPEN A PANDORA'S BOX. YOU KNOW, IT WOULD SEND A SIGNAL, IT WOULD BE SETTING A PRECEDENT, UH, PROBABLY GREEN LIGHTING, OTHER SIMILAR INITIATIVES IN THE FUTURE. AND SO I HOPE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY ABOUT WHAT YOU DO RIGHT NOW CAN REALLY IMPACT WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE DECADES FROM NOW AND FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. UM, THE OTHER THING TOO IS MY COLLEAGUES I THINK HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB OF, UH, PRESENTING IS THAT IT'S NOT INEVITABLE THAT, UH, IF YOU DON'T APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT TO RAISE IT TO 25%, THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING WORSE THAT HAPPENS. THERE'S MANY OTHER OPTIONS. AGAIN, WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SEPTIC OPTION, UH, JUST STICKING TO THE 15%. AND SO I HOPE YOU REALIZE THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU'RE NOT THINKING THAT YOU'RE FORCED TO DO THIS AND TO MAKE A BAD DECISION. SO AGAIN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. UH, REALLY APPRECIATE THIS AND WE TRUST YOU TO MAKE A GOOD DECISION TO PROTECT THIS AQUIFER, UH, AND ALL THE FEATURES AROUND IT FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. WE HAVE MICHELLE CAMP, UH, CALLING IN. UH, SHE WAS NOT ABLE TO APPEAR TODAY. GOT IT. OKAY. AND WE HAVE CRAIG ZU. HELLO, CRAIG NASER, CONSERVATION CHAIR, LONE STAR CHAPTER SIERRA CLUB IN A LONG TIME. AUSTIN RESIDENT, THE SOS ORDINANCE, WAS BORN AT AN AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON JUNE 7TH, 1990. HOW MANY OF YOU WERE THERE? 1990. OKAY. HOW MANY? OKAY. I WAS, AND I TESTIFIED IN SUPPORT. OVER 900 OF US SIGNED UP TO SPEAK TO PROTECT BARTON SPRINGS IN 1992. THE SOS ORDINANCE, A CITY CITIZEN INITIATIVE PASSED WHAT THE PEOPLE WANTED WAS NONDEGRADATION. THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE ORDINANCE TO PROTECT THE WATER QUALITY IN THE EDWARDS AQUIFER THAT FEEDS BARTON SPRINGS DEVELOPERS AND EVEN SOME ELECTED OFFICIALS TRIED ALL KINDS OF POLITICAL QUESTIONABLE, AND IN SOME CASES ARGUABLY ILLEGAL THINGS TO PREVENT THE ORDINANCE FROM PASSING. YET HERE WE ARE STILL GIVING AWAY PIECE BY PIECE THAT WHICH THE PEOPLE OF AUSTIN FOR OVER 34 YEARS HAVE SO CLEARLY STATED THEY WANT SAVED. WE ARE ESSENTIALLY BEING TOLD BY THE DEVELOPER, DO IT OUR WAY OR WE WILL DO IT WORSE. ARE YOU GONNA ADVERTISE THAT TO YOUR BUYERS? SID MILLER, OUR REPUBLICAN STATE AGRICULTURAL COMMISSIONER HAS SAID THAT TEXAS IS RUNNING OUT OF WATER. LAST MONTH WAS ONE OF THE DRIEST SEPTEMBERS EVER RECORDED IN AUSTIN WITH 0.4, UH, FOUR TENTHS OF AN INCH OF RAIN. LAST FALL WHEN AUSTIN WENT TO STAGE TWO WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES, AUSTIN WATER USE ACTUALLY WENT UP. THE AUSTIN WATER UTILITY IS NOT YET RELEASED. INDEPENDENT STUDY ON WATER LOSS IN OUR POTABLE WATER SYSTEM. WE KNOW IT'S AROUND 7 BILLION GALLONS PER YEAR ON THE OTHER SIDE. HURRICANE HELENE HAS JUST SHOWED US WHAT CLIMATE CHANGE CAN DO. A HURRICANE LIKE THAT COULD VERY EASILY COME OVER THE TEXAS COAST AND HIT AUSTIN. HOW DO YOU BELIEVE OUR STORM STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE WOULD HOLD OUT UNDER THAT LEVEL OF STRESS? YET HERE WE ARE ARGUING OVER ALLOWING MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER, BUILDING MORE WATER USE AND SEWER SYSTEMS, AND ALLOWING MORE INTENSIVE DEVELOPMENT OVER THE BARTON SPRINGS WATERSHED. I NEVER THOUGHT I'D SAY THIS, BUT I ADVISE YOU TO CHANNEL NANCY REAGAN AND JUST SAY NO OR BETTER YET, CHANNEL GANDALF ON THE BRIDGE OF KAZA DOM, THIS AMENDMENT SHALL NOT PASS. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. THANK YOU. AND I BELIEVE LAST WE HAVE ROY WHALEY. HOW DO Y'ALL MY NAME IS ROY WHALEY. I'M THE CONSERVATION CHAIR FOR THE AUSTIN REGIONAL GROUP IN THE SIERRA CLUB. AND THIS CERTAINLY IS IN THE AUSTIN REGION. UM, I WANT TO COMMEND, UH, WATERSHED STAFF WATERSHED STILL MY [01:00:01] FAVORITE DEPARTMENT IN THE WHOLE CITY. I JUST DISAGREE WITH THEM THIS TIME. UM, WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, THE FIRST THING I THINK ABOUT IS JEREMIAH VENTURES. NOW THEN I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ACTUALLY SEE AN OFFICIAL SURVEY OF THIS PROPERTY, BUT WHAT I HAVE SEEN REMINDS ME OF JEREMIAH VENTURES, WHICH THE CITY REJECTED AND THEN BOUGHT, AND IT'S IN OUR WATER QUALITY LAND NOW. THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING WITH THIS. AND IT'S NOT LIKE WE'D BE TAKING THE ONLY DEVELOPMENT THAT MILESTONE HAS TO DO THAT THEY ARE BUILDING ALL OVER CENTRAL TEXAS. THEY CAN CERTAINLY FORGO BUILDING ON THIS VERY ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LOCATION. AND WHY WOULD THEY WANT TO BUILD ON THE MOST SENSITIVE OF SITES ANYWAY AND SAY WE'RE GONNA COMPROMISE FROM 15% TO 25% IMPERVIOUS COVER. WE'VE ALREADY HEARD ABOUT THE CONDOS. MIKE SAID THAT I JUST GET UP HERE AND CHAT WITH Y'ALL. I DON'T NEED TO REPEAT ALL OF THE GREAT INFORMATION THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN STATED, BUT THERE ARE WAYS THAT THIS CAN WORK. AND I SEE THAT NOT ONLY AS AN ENVIRONMENTALIST, BUT AS A REALTOR. I LOOK AT THIS AND I CAN ALMOST SEE HOW THEY'RE GOING TO ADVERTISE IT AS LIVING IN THE PRISTINE HILL COUNTRY, UH, OF, OF CENTRAL TEXAS. NOT SAYING WHEN YOU MOVE HERE, THIS WILL PROBABLY SCREW UP THE PRISTINE HILL COUNTRY OF CENTRAL TEXAS, BUT IT WILL. AND SO JUST TO WRAP UP, ONE OTHER THING THAT I DID HEAR, AND I HOPE Y'ALL WOULD HELP CLEAR THIS UP. UH, YOU SAID THAT THIS WOULD, UM, NOT BE DONE IN MOST SENSITIVE SITES. DOES THAT MEAN MOST SENSITIVE SITES WOULD BE PROTECTED OR ALL THE MOST SENSITIVE SITES? I APPRECIATE Y'ALL CLARIFYING THAT WHEN Y'ALL BRING YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS BACK. AND AS FAR AS THE, UH, THE TRAIL FOUNDATION, OR NOT THE TRAIL FOUNDATION, BUT THE TRAIL, UH, GROUP, ALL OF THOSE TRAILS WOULD BE ALLOWED ANYWAY IF IT WAS PART OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN WATER QUALITY LANDER IN OUR OPEN SPACE. SO WHILE, WHILE THEY SAID YES TO THAT, AND I LOVE OUR FRIENDS AT THE PARKS, UH, ON THE PARKS BOARD, BUT THEY DON'T LOOK AT THIS THROUGH AN ENVIRONMENTAL LENS BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT THROUGH AN ENVIRONMENTAL LENS, I REALLY DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN HELP BUT SAY, NO, WE WANT THIS TO BE PUT INTO OUR OPEN SPACE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH Y'ALL. THANK YOU. UM, LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS. UM, LET'S START WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER KARAHI. HEY, Y'ALL, UH, APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION. IS THERE A REBUTTAL? UH, NO QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW. I THINK, UH, OBVIOUSLY THE SITUATION TO ME KIND OF SEEMS LIKE IT'S NOT, UH, PERHAPS IN THE BEST ENVIRONMENTAL INTEREST TO APPROVE THIS. THE ARGUMENT TO APPROVE IT IS, HEY, IT COULD BE WORSE. UH, WE COULD JUST, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE INFINITE WISDOM OF OUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES, AND I'M SURE THERE WAS NO BRIBERY FROM DEVELOPERS INVOLVED, UH, NOW WE'VE GOT THIS, UH, YOU KNOW, SENT STATE BILL THAT ALLOWS, UM, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPERS TO LEAVE THE ETJ. UM, SO YEAH, AN INTERESTING SITUATION AND, UH, I'LL DEFER FROM ASKING QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. APPRECIATE IT. I'M ALSO WONDERING IF Y'ALL CAN COME BACK TO ME. COMMISSIONER SHERA. THANK YOU. UM, I'LL GO A LITTLE SLOWLY, I GUESS. UH, HOW MUCH OF THE BARTON CREEK ZONE IS IN THE ETJ? UM, ONE MOMENT. I MAY HAVE THAT INFORMATION. UM, LET ME PULL THAT UP IF I CAN'T. OR MAYBE, MAYBE HE HAS IT OKAY. AND THEN I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. UM, WAS THERE A REASON THAT THIS MUD AMENDMENT CAME TO THE ROUTES OF THE, THE COMMISSION ROUTE AS OPPOSED TO GOING STRAIGHT TO CITY COUNCIL? UH, LIZ JOHNSON, WATERSHED PROTECTION? UH, UM, THERE WERE NO, UH, [01:05:01] CITY COUNCILED OFFICES THAT, UM, STEPPED UP TO INITIATE THE ORDINANCE. OKAY. THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. UM, ABOUT THAT. AND, UM, JUST OVERALL, I DON'T REALLY FEEL LIKE I'VE HEARD, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE AMENDMENT REQUEST SO FAR SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION WHERE WE'RE ASKING FOR DEVELOPMENT OVER WITHIN THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE. UM, AND, AND I, I DO WANNA TAKE IT VERY SERIOUSLY. UM, JUST OVERALL, I, I HAVE NOT HEARD THE VALUE, LIKE WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE VALUE? AND I JUST HAVE NOT HEARD THAT REALLY VERY MUCH AT ALL. I, I AM VERY MUCH PRO HOUSING AND, AND, AND, UH, ALSO SUBSCRIBE TO THE IDEA OF IMAGINE AUSTIN, AND, AND I DON'T SEE THAT REALLY FITTING INTO THAT. SO I'M REALLY TRYING TO LOOK FOR THE VALUE HERE AND, AND I'M NOT, NOT SEEING IT. SO IF, UM, YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. SURE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, JEFF HOWARD AGAIN FOR THE APPLICANT. COULD WE TURN TO SLIDE NUMBER NINE ON THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION? AND I'LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. UM, AND, UH, I, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS FROM, FROM THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSED. UH, AND, AND I ALSO APPRECIATE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY OF THE SITE. AND I THINK THOSE COMMENTS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY ACTUALLY ARE WHY YOU SHOULD INITIATE THIS AMENDMENT. IT ACTUALLY MAKES THE CASE, IF YOU GO TO SLIDE, I, I'M SORRY, UH, MAYBE IT'S SLIDE EIGHT. SLIDE EIGHT, I'M SORRY. THERE WAS NO DISPUTE. IT'S 298, 290 ACRES. BY THE WAY, COMMISSIONER IS IS IN THE AUSTIN ETJ CURRENTLY THAT'S IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. UH, UH, THERE ARE, AND, AND SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 400 AND OVER 450 ACRES IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. AND YOU CONSIDER THE, UH, THAT AREA TOO. BUT THERE'S NO DISPUTE THAT THIS PROPERTY COULD LEAVE THE ETJ. THERE'S NO DISPUTE IF IT LEFT THE ETJ, THAT IT, UH, THAT IT WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY CITY REGULATIONS, ANY ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS. THERE'S NO DISPUTE THAT ONCE IT'S JUST IN THE COUNTY, IT COULD BE DEVELOPED COMMERCIALLY. IT COULD BE DISTRIBUTION CENTER, IT COULD BE A FULFILLMENT CENTER, IT COULD BE MULTIFAMILY, IT COULD BE A, A COMMERCIAL RETAIL CENTER. UH, THERE'S NO DISPUTE ABOUT THAT. THERE'S NO DISPUTE THAT IF IT WAS DEVELOPED THAT WAY, THAT YOU COULD HAVE, UM, UH, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT WE CITED MORE THAN DOUBLE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. THERE'S NO DISPUTE THAT IF WE LEFT THE ETJ THAT WE WOULD BE DOING TCEQ PONDS AND NOT SOS PONDS. AND THIS SHOWS YOU EXACTLY WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN. SO THERE'S NO DISPUTE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS A REDUCTION IN IMPERVIOUS COVER. IT IS LESS, IS LESS THAN HALF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT COULD BE ALLOWED OUTSIDE THE ETJ. IT IS ONE 20TH OF THE POLLUTANT LOAD THAN, THAN, THAN THE ALTERNATIVE. THAT'S THE REASON TO DO IT, IS IF YOU CARE ABOUT IMPERVIOUS COVER, IF YOU CARE ABOUT POLLUTANT LOADS, IF YOU CARE ABOUT THEIR IMPACT ON THE SPRINGS, YOU CAN'T REALLY SUPPORT THIS GOING OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S ETJ AND BECOMING NOT SUBJECT TO SOS. UM, AND SO, AND I THINK IT'S NOT JUST TAKING MY WORD FOR IT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WATERSHED PROTECTION AND THE DIET TRACE, AND I SEE NICO HOWARD HERE, AND, BUT I ALSO SEE LIZ JOHNSTON HERE. CITY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS TO YOU. THEY'VE THOUGHT THIS THROUGH. THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE, UH, AND THERE'S NO DISPUTE THAT CITY STAFF, THE EXPERTS RECOMMEND THIS TO YOU. FINALLY, THERE'S NO DISPUTE THAT THIS IS NOT THE END OF THIS DISCUSSION. IT'S JUST THE BEGINNING. YOU'LL GET TO SEE IT AGAIN, COMMISSION, YOU'LL GET TO HEAR THESE DETAILS. YOU'LL GET TO DIVE IN DEEPER, AND YOU WILL. AND IF YOU DON'T THINK IT MERITS YOUR APPROVAL, THEN YOU CAN RECOMMEND AGAINST IT WHEN IT COMES BACK. UH, SO I THINK THAT'S THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION. THAT GRAPH RIGHT THERE SHOWS YOU 20 TIMES MORE, UH, TSS, UM, WITH THOSE TCE COUPON PONDS, IF THESE 500 ACRES ARE OUT OF THE, UH, CITY'S JURISDICTION, AND THIS GETS DEVELOPED COMMERCIALLY, IT WON'T GET DEVELOPED WITH THREE QUARTER ACRE LOTS. IT WON'T GET DEVELOPED WITH ONE ACRE. LOTS. THE, THE, THE DEVELOPER'S NOT GONNA DO THAT. THAT'S A FICTIONAL OPTION. IT'S NOT A REAL ALTERNATIVE IF THE OWNER WON'T DO IT. SO I THINK THE, THE CHOICE IS CLEAR. IT, IT'S AT LEAST MERITS A, A, AN, YOU KNOW, MORE CONVERSATION. SO HOPEFULLY, UH, I, HOPEFULLY I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE VALUE IN THIS. I THINK IT'S DEPICTED RIGHT THERE IN THAT GRAPH. [01:10:02] COMMISSIONER SHEER WAS YOUR QUESTION, YOUR PREVIOUS QUESTION RELATED TO HOW MANY ACRES OF IN, OF THE BARTON SPRING ZONE IN THE UTJ FOR THE ENTIRE BARTON SPRING ZONE? OKAY. IT'S, UH, ABOUT 36% OF THE BARTON SPRING ZONE IS IN THE, EITHER THE TWO OR THE FIVE MILE ETJ. THANK YOU. THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. OKAY, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. HOWARD. SO IF YOU DON'T GET THE MUD, WHERE WOULD YOU GET THE WATER AND WASTEWATER? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. UH, COMMISSIONER. SO THERE ARE THREE WELLS, UM, ON THE SITE. UH, TRINITY, TRINITY WELLS, THEY HAVE EXCELLENT WATER QUALITY, AND THEY ALSO HAVE EXCELLENT WATER QUANTITY. UM, WE'VE LOOKED AT THEM AND WE'VE ANALYZED THEM, AND WE THINK THAT THOSE WELLS, UH, WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO GIVE US 750 L LUE OF WATER. UM, AND SO WE WOULD, UH, GET GROUNDWATER WOULD BE THE ANSWER ON THE WATER, UH, SITUATION. ON THE, UM, ON THE, UH, WASTEWATER SIDE, WE HAVE A T LAP. AND THE, AND, UH, AND I KNOW, UH, UH, MR. K KUBIC, UH, MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A TOUGH ROAD THERE. WE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE CONTESTED TO THE TAP. UM, BUT WE, IT WILL GET APPROVED. IT MEETS ALL OF THE TCEQ REQUIREMENTS. AND WHILE THERE MAY BE DELAYS AS WE GO THROUGH A CONTESTED CASE PROCESS, IT WILL GET APPROVED. SO BETWEEN, AND BY THE WAY, THERE'S NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE CONCERNS OVER USING WELL WATER IN A T LAB. I THINK EVERYONE IS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT THIS PROPOSAL WOULD ELIMINATE THAT. UH, YOU KNOW, THE, WE MENTIONED THE CITY OF HAYES. THE CITY OF HAYES IS NOT OPPOSED TO THIS DENSITY OR THE PROJECT. THE CITY OF HAYES WAS OPPOSED TO THIS. TA HAYES COUNTY WAS OPPOSED TO THE T LAB. THIS ELIMINATES THAT T LAB, IT ELIMINATES, UH, THE USAGE OF THE, OF THE WATER WELLS IN THE TRINITY AQUIFER. UH, AND WE CAN APPROPRIATELY SIZE THOSE, THOSE UTILITIES. UH, SO I, I MEAN, I THINK, AGAIN, MUCH BETTER ALTERNATIVE FROM A UTILITY PERSPECTIVE. ALL RIGHT. ONE, ONE CONCERN THAT I HEARD WAS THAT, UM, NOT TO DISPARAGE ANY CITY UTILITIES, BUT IT WOULD BE LIKELY THAT THE, UM, WATER UTILITY WOULD OVERSIZE THE SERVICE IN ANTICIPATION OF MORE SERVICE IN THE FUTURE. NOT IF CITY COUNCIL DOESN'T WANT THEM TO. UH, AND I THINK THE, SO, SO AT THAT'S A CONVERSATION WE CAN HAVE WHEN WE COME BACK. IT'S WHAT'S THE APPROPRIATE SIZING OF THE UTILITIES. WE DON'T WANT THEM OVERSIZED. MM-HMM. , WE DON'T PARTICULARLY WANT TO BUILD AND PAY FOR, UH, OTHERS TO GET UTILITY SERVICE. WE, IT COSTS, COSTS US MORE MONEY. IT, IT LEAVES US, UH, UH, FEWER DOLLARS THAT WE CAN GET REIMBURSED FOR OTHER THINGS. AND SO WE ARE IN ALIGNMENT THERE. RIGHT. WE WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN OVERSIZING MM-HMM. , UM, THE FACILITIES. BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE WATER UTILITY MAY HAVE SOME PLANS TO SERVE AREAS OUTSIDE THE AQUIFER. 'CAUSE WE ARE RIGHT ON THE EDGE. UH, AND SO THEY, THEY'RE GONNA WANNA HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT. AND I THINK THAT'S A CONVERSATION FOR, UH, STAFF AND THE POLICYMAKERS TO HAVE. OKAY. THANKS. COMMISSIONER BRIER. THANK YOU, UH, FOR ALL YOUR PRESENTATIONS I HAVE. MY FIRST QUESTION IS RATHER BASIC, UH, I HEAR THAT YOUR REQUESTING THE SERVICE EXTENSION REQUEST FROM THE CITY. IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO WHAT'S THE VALUE OF THE MUD THEN? THE VAL? SO, UH, IN ORDER, THE VALUE OF THE MUD IS THAT, UM, DEVELOPMENT'S VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE THESE DAYS. AND SO WHAT THE MUD GIVES US IS IT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO FINANCE EXTENSION OF, UM, A WASTEWATER LINE TO THE MARBRIDGE LIFT STATION. IT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO FINANCE WATER IMPROVEMENT, WATERLINE IMPROVEMENTS, UM, THAT WILL BE NEEDED TO, TO, TO REACH THE PROPERTY. WE DON'T HAVE THE UTILITY LINES RIGHT TO THE PROPERTY. UM, AND SO THE COST OF THOSE FACILITIES, UM, UH, MAKE IT ESSENTIAL THAT WE HAVE A MUD TO HELP FINANCE THAT. SO YOU WOULD BE USING THE MUD TO PAY FOR THE EXTENSION OF THE UTILITIES? THIS CITY IS PROVIDING THAT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THE, THE MUD, THE MUD WOULD BOTH, UH, UH, HELP FUND THOSE, UH, THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, OPERATE MUD THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, MUD FACILITIES AS WELL. OKAY. RECENTLY, UH, SEVERAL APPLICANTS HAVE COME TO US FOR SCRS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS. AND WE'VE TURNED THEM DOWN BECAUSE, WELL, THEY'RE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS AND THE CITY'S NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. YES, SIR. SO WHY DON'T YOU REQUEST TO BE ANNEXED FULL PURPOSE INTO THE CITY THAT IS NOT INTO THE ETJ, WHICH YOU'RE REQUESTING? IT'S [01:15:01] A VERY GOOD QUESTION. AND, AND, UH, AND SO LET ME A, UH, ANSWER IT THIS WAY. UH, WE ARE REQUESTING TO BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY FOR LIMITED PURPOSES. NO, I'M ASKING INTO THE CITY FOR FULL PURPOSES, RIGHT. FOR FULL PURPOSE, RIGHT. WITHIN THE, JUST WANTED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY, NOT ETJ. YEAH. NOTHING. RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR ON THE RECORD. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. I'M ASKING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. SURE, SURE. SO THE REASON IS, IS BECAUSE OF A, OF A DOUBLE TAXATION ISSUE. WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU HAVE A MUD MUDS, UH, PAY FOR THEIR BONDS TO REIMBURSE FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH TAXATION, THEY, THEY HAVE AVALOR TAXES. AND IF YOU HAVE AN IN CITY, WHAT THEY CALL AN IN CITY MUD, YOU WILL HAVE THOSE MUD TAXES ON TOP OF CITY TAXES THAT RESULTS IN DOUBLE TAXATION. AND SO THAT'S, THOSE TWO TAXES COMBINED WILL CREATE AN EFFECTIVE TAX RATE THAT'S TOO HIGH FOR THE MARKET TO BEAR. AND SO PEOPLE WON'T MOVE THERE IF THE TAXES ARE TOO HIGH. BUT IF YOU MOVED, IF YOU WERE PART OF THE CITY, UH, YOU, THE, THE REGULATIONS THAT YOU WOULD BE REQUIRED TO OBEY AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE PRETTY CLEAR. CORRECT. WE, AS FAR AS OBEYING THE SOS ORDINANCE AND EVERYTHING ELSE, IT'D BE PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. THERE WOULDN'T BE A REQUIREMENT TO GET, YOU KNOW, UH, MAYBE MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. YOU'RE SAYING IF, IF I JUST SIMPLY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, CORRECT. ALL THE, YOU'D, YOU'D BE SUBJECT TO ALL THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS AND ALL THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY, CORRECT? YES. BUT, BUT BY ANNEXING FOR LIMITED PURPOSES, WE ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS. THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE TO GET ZONING, WE'LL BE SUBJECT TO BUILDING REGULATIONS, WE'LL BE SUBJECT TO LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS. WE'LL BE SUBJECT TO TREE ORDINANCE REGULATIONS. WE'LL BE SUBJECT TO ZONING REGULATIONS. WE'LL BE SUBJECT TO THE FULL SUITE OF CITY OF AUSTIN REGULATIONS BY BEING ANNEXED FOR LIMITED PURPOSES. GET EVERYTHING. OKAY. UH, THAT'S WHAT OUR PROPOSAL WOULD, WOULD, WOULD DO. THE, UH, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH, YOU KNOW, THE CITY IS REACHING A HOUSING CRISIS RIGHT NOW, UH, BUT ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE CITY, INCLUDING THIS COMMISSION, PUSHED THE HOME INITIATIVE WAS TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO MOVE TO AREAS TO OF DENSER HOUSING. YES, SIR. THIS SEEMS TO ENCOURAGE URBAN SPRAWL. THE, UH, THERE'S NO MASS TRANSIT LOCATED NEAR THERE. THE, UH, I'M NOT SURE YOU DIDN'T MENTION IT, BUT THE BUS STOP THAT YOU REFERENCED DOES NOT SEEM TO HAVE A PARKING RIDE CAPABILITY THERE. RIGHT. SO PEOPLE HAVE NO PLACE TO DRIVE THEIR VEHICLES TO GET INTO THE CITY. UH, THIS DOESN'T SEEM TO BE KIND OF IN THE SPIRIT OF MINIMIZING URBAN SPRAWL AND THAT TYPE OF THING. SO THIS IS NOT SORT OF THE DIRECTION THE CITY'S TRYING TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT. SO I, I THINK, I, I THINK I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT COMMISSIONER ON THIS BASIS. UH, UH, AND THAT IS THAT BECAUSE OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS, IT'S HARD TO HAVE DENSITY IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN. UH, AND, AND SO WHAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE IS YOU HAVE TO STRIKE THE RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN, BETWEEN, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, SMALLER LOTS, MEDIUM-SIZED LOTS, THREE QUARTER ACRE LOTS, ONE ACRE LOTS. THAT'S SUBURBAN SPRAWL. THAT'S MORE SPRAWL. THAT'S VERY LOW DENSITY. IT'S TWO TO $3 MILLION HOMES. THAT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH OUR HOUSING POLICY AT ALL. BUT, SO THE QUESTION IS, HOW DO WE HAVE A HOUSING POLICY IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN BECAUSE EAST AUSTIN IS, IS BEARING THEIR BURDEN OF HOUSING. NORTH AUSTIN'S BEARING THEIR BURDEN OF HOUSING. HOW DO WE GET HOUSING TO SOUTHWEST AUSTIN THAT IS BALANCED, THAT, THAT TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION THE ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS? AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT DOING CLUSTERED HOUSING WHERE WE HAVE CLUSTERED DEVELOPMENT, UH, AND HAVE SMALLER LOTS, UH, AND HAVE LARGER OPEN SPACES, IS ACTUALLY CONSISTENT WITH BOTH IMAGINE AUSTIN FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVING, UH, MORE DIVERSE HOUSING TYPES AND RECOGNIZING THE ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY OF THE AREA. SO IT STRIKES THE, THE BALANCE. YOU MENTIONED TRANSIT, NO QUESTION. UM, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF TRANSIT IN SOUTHWEST AUSTIN. UH, AND, AND SOME OF THAT'S A FUNCTION OF OUR LOWER DENSITY AND, AND, AND ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS, I'D HAVE TO SAY. UM, BUT WE DO CONNECT TO TRAILS. UH, WE ARE, WHERE THERE ARE SOME EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, THERE IS, THERE IS ROADWAY FACILITIES. I KNOW IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT, UH, BUSES, BUT, BUT IT IS ADJACENT TO THE CITY LIMITS. SO THIS IS, THERE'S NOT MANY FIVE, 800 ACRE EMPTY GREENFIELD PARCELS IN CENTRAL AUSTIN WHERE YOU'RE GONNA GET, YOU KNOW, UM, HOUSES. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY. PEOPLE ARE NOT GONNA HIKE TO DOWNTOWN AUSTIN TO WORK EVERY DAY. THEY MIGHT RIDE, THEY MIGHT RIDE YOUR BIKE. SO I DON'T THINK THAT THE TRAIL SYSTEM AS, AS NICE [01:20:01] AS IT IS, IS AN ADEQUATE SUBSTITUTE FOR MASS TRANSIT OR ANY SORT OF OTHER CRIMES. I, I UNDERSTAND. I UNDERSTAND IT. SO THAT'S KIND OF NOT A, I'M NOT ARGUING FOLKS ARGUMENT. I'M NOT ARGUING. FOLKS WILL, WILL, WILL HIKE, BUT I THINK THEY MIGHT RIDE THEIR E-BIKE. UM, RIGHT. AND, AND SO, UH, I, I DID, UM, DURING THE PANDEMIC, UH, I, YOU KNOW, RODE IT ALL THE TIME. UM, UH, SO I, IN ANY CASE, I, I RECOGNIZE THAT IT'S, IT'S TRUE THIS IS NOT A CORRIDOR IN CENTRAL AUSTIN. UH, BUT HOW DO YOU HAVE A BALANCED, UH, HOUSING PROJECT THAT RECOGNIZES THAT WE DON'T WANT ONE ACRE LOTS OR THREE QUARTER ACRE LOTS? THAT'S CLEARLY AGAINST OUR POLICY. BUT HOW DO YOU BALANCE THAT WITH, WITH THE, WITH THE, UM, WITH THE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY? WE THINK WE'VE GOT A BALANCED PLAN. WELL, THE HOME INITIATIVE HAS, IS A PUBLIC POLICY THAT THE COUNCIL THIS PASSED TO DRIVE DEVELOPMENT TO A DENTURE STRATEGY, IMPROVING THIS DEVELOPMENT RUNS COUNTER TO PUBLIC POLICY AS PASSED IN THE PAST YEAR ON SEVERAL TIMES BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THIS COMMISSION, BY OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSION, INCLUDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR WHICH THIS WILL GO BEFORE AND REQUEST TO BE APPROVED. SO IT SEEMS TO BE, TO BE COUNTERINTUITIVE, TO REQUEST PEOPLE TO, UH, IMPLEMENT ONE POLICY AND THEN TURN AROUND AND SAY, NO, I'M SORRY. WE REALLY DIDN'T MEAN THAT. WE ACTUALLY MEANT WE ARE SUPPORTING URBAN SPRAWL BETWEEN AUSTIN AND SAN ANTONIO. AND BY THE WAY, WE'RE GONNA BUILD IT ON TOP OF THE MOST EC, YOU KNOW, THE MOST ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE AREA IN TOWN. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT, YOU SAY THAT IF WE DON'T GIVE YOU THIS, WE'RE GONNA PAVE IT OVER WITH SOMETHING ELSE. BUT FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO LOOK AT IT FROM A CITY OF AUSTIN PERSPECTIVE RIGHT HERE. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CAN BUILD A NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP OUT THERE IF YOU WANT TO, IF WE DON'T GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO BUILD A HOUSE OUT THERE. BUT I CAN'T REALLY BE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. I'VE GOTTA LOOK AT THE PROPOSAL AS PUT FORTH HERE AND MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON THAT. I CAN'T PREDICT THE ACTION OF A STATE AGENCY, THE LEGISLATURE, OR FOR THAT MATTER, THE COUNCIL GOING FORWARD. I CAN ONLY LOOK AT THE INFORMATION THAT PRESENTED HERE AND EVALUATE THAT. AND IT'S DIFFICULT WHEN A APPLICANT COMES BEFORE US AND SAYS, WELL, IF YOU DO THIS, THIS IS THE BEST WE CAN DO. AND IF YOU DON'T DO THIS, WE'RE GONNA DO SOMETHING REALLY TERRIBLE TO THE AREA, WHICH IS WHAT IS KIND OF BEING PLACED BEFORE US. AND I THINK THAT'S KIND OF A BAD SALES PITCH. WELL, WELL, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER, I, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT I, I GUESS THIS PROJECT WILL BE 40 FOOT LOTS, 50 FOOT LOTS, AND 60 FOOT LOTS. THIS IS NOT A LARGE LOT SUBDIVISION. THESE ARE, THESE ARE ON THE SMALLER SIDE OF, OF YOUR SUBDIVISION. THE REASON THE DENSITY'S NOT MORE IS THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. I MEAN, I THINK IF THE COMMISSION WANTED TO RECOMMEND 55% IMPERVIOUS COVER, YOU'D HAVE THAT GREATER DENSITY THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. BUT WE'RE TRYING TO BALANCE THE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS WITH, UH, HOUSING CONSIDERATIONS. I THINK THE, THE SOS AMENDMENT BALANCES THAT IT SAYS, UH, WHAT 15% COVER. THAT'S THE BALANCE. AND YOU KNOW, WHEN SOMEONE REFERENCED, AND I DON'T REMEMBER WHO IT WAS, BUT SOMEONE REFERENCED THAT THAT WAS THE DEAL, WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE LAND, IT WAS 15%. AND THAT'S THE WAY IT GOES. YOU ROLL THE DICE AND YOU TAKE YOUR CHANCES. I I MEAN, I CAN RESPOND TO THAT AND ANSWER THAT. THAT'S NOT ENTIRELY CORRECT. BUT, BUT I, WHAT I WILL SAY IS, IS THAT IF YOU GO TO 15%, YOU'RE GONNA LOSE, WHAT, 300 HOMES? HOW IS THAT CONSISTENT WITH OUR HOUSING POLICY? THAT'S CALLED THE HOME INITIATIVE. AND THAT ALLOWS INCREASED DENSITY. YOU CAN BUILD PROPERTY, YOU CAN BUILD MULTIPLE HOUSES ON ONE ACRE. LOTS. THAT'S THE DIRECTION THE CITY IS PUBLIC POLICY OF THE CITY IS TO DO THAT. WELL. AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT PUBLIC POLICY HAS DONE. THAT IS WHAT EVERY BOARD AND COMMISSION IN THIS CITY HAS VOTED FOR, INCLUDING THE COUNCIL. WELL, WELL, WELL, PERHAPS, PERHAPS WHEN WE, IF WE CAN COME BACK, WE CAN, WE CAN, WE CAN INCREASE OUR DENSITY AND WE CAN HAVE EVEN SMALLER LOTS IF YOU'LL GIVE US THAT OPPORTUNITY PERHAPS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. CREW CHAIR. I JUST HAVE TO CORRECT SOMETHING THAT MY COLLEAGUE SAID. THE HOME ORDINANCE DOES NOT, THE CITY POLICY IS NOT TO HAVE HOME ON EVERY LOT. IT'S ANOTHER WAY TO HAVE HOUSING. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE [01:25:01] 10,000 SQUARE FOOT SF ONE LOTS. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER KRUEGER. YEAH, THANK YOU ALL, UM, FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS. THANK YOU FOR THE FOLKS WHO CAME TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS IS CLEARLY AN IMPORTANT ISSUE AND AN INTRICATE ONE. AND SO I APPRECIATE EVERYONE BEARING WITH US WHILE WE MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND. AND SO, UM, I WANTED TO START WITH A QUESTION FOR CITY STAFF. UM, 'CAUSE WE'VE HEARD FROM PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE APPLICANT ABOUT THE LIKELIHOOD OF A TLA P BEING APPROVED. AND GIVEN YOUR RECOMMENDATION, I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU ALL FELT THAT THERE IS A SOMEWHAT HIGH LIKELIHOOD THAT THAT COULD BE AN ISSUE, GIVEN THAT 16% OF THE LAND IN THE ETJ HAS ALREADY SECEDED. IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, THAT IS ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE CONSIDERED AS A POSSIBILITY. UM, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE PRECEDENT SETTING ON THE TCEQ SIDE TO GRANT SUCH A TLA. UM, BUT IT IS WITHIN THEIR PURVIEW, AND SO IT WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER. UM, SO IT, IT'S A, IT'S A POTENTIAL, UM, FUTURE FOR THE PROJECT. MM-HMM. , AND WHEN YOU SAY IT WOULD BE PRECEDENT SETTING, SETTING, IT'S BECAUSE OF THE PRISTINE NATURE. IT'S BECAUSE THEY HAVE NEVER, UM, GRANTED SUCH A, UH, TYPE OF PERMIT WITH AT THIS SCALE BEFORE. OKAY. GREAT. UM, AND THEN ANOTHER JUST PROCESS CLARIFYING QUESTION. SO IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT, DOES THAT MEAN THAT IT DIES WITH US, OR DOES IT STILL GET TAKEN UP WITH THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE? SO, RIGHT. THE, THE, THIS WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WOULD TRAVEL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHO WOULD MAKE THE DECISION ULTIMATELY, UM, TAKING IN YOUR, YOUR RECOMMENDATION AS WELL AS THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE. OKAY. SO REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT WE RECOMMEND THIS TONIGHT, IT'S HEADED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AFTER THIS. CORRECT. THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE PLAN. OKAY. GREAT. UM, OKAY. AND THEN ANOTHER QUESTION JUST TO CONFIRM, SO IF THIS MUD IS APPROVED, UH, WITH THE CONDITION OF LIMITED CITY ANNEXATION, IT COULD NEVER IN THE FUTURE REVERT BACK TO THE ETJ OR SECEDE IN ANY WAY, CORRECT. UNDER CURRENT STATE LAW? YES, THAT IS RIGHT. OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. UM, AND THEN I GUESS I JUST WANNA TALK TO THE APPLICANT. I THINK COMMISSIONER SHIRA WAS GETTING AT A QUESTION THAT I WAS ALSO THINKING MYSELF. UM, THE, THE, WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS? AND, AND THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE COMMUNITY VALUE HERE? UM, AND BASED ON YOUR PRESENTATION, WHAT I'VE HEARD TONIGHT, THINGS THAT I MIGHT PULL OUT ARE, YOU MENTIONED A TRAIL SYSTEM. YOU ALSO TALKED ABOUT SOUTHWEST AUSTIN DOING ITS SHARE OF, UM, YOU KNOW, BEARING THE BRUNT OF SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT. CERTAINLY WE'VE SEEN EAST AUSTIN, UM, HAVE TO WEATHER A LOT OF, A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS OUR CITY HAS GROWN. UM, AND THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT I THINK ABOUT. IF WE HAD A BLACK LAND PRAIRIE ORDINANCE AND THE WAY THAT WE HAVE A SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE, I THINK OUR CITY WOULD'VE DEVELOPED QUITE DIFFERENTLY. SO, UM, IN THAT REGARD, I, I UNDERSTAND AND CAN APPRECIATE THE NEED FOR SOME DEVELOPMENT IN, IN WEST AUSTIN SO THAT IT DOESN'T ALL FALL ON THE EAST SIDE OF AUSTIN. UM, BUT THAT, THAT BEING SAID, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING TO US ABOUT, UM, WHY YOU'RE DOING THIS, WHAT I HEARD IS, WELL, IF WE DON'T DO THIS, UM, THEN, YOU KNOW, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER WILL JUST BE MORE, UM, BUT THAT'S THE DEVELOPER'S DECISION. YOU ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP A PROPERTY AT LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM VALUE. SO I DON'T REALLY APPRECIATE THAT TONE OF SAYING WE WILL JUST DO WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, THE REGULATIONS REQUIRE US TO DO. UM, AND SO TO BE FRANK, LIKE WHAT I'M NOT HEARING IS A CONCERN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, FOR THE COMMUNITY, FOR THE NEIGHBORS. I AM HEARING CONCERNS ABOUT YOUR BOTTOM LINE. AND SO IF YOU CAN JUST SPEAK TO THAT. SURE, SURE. AND I, I'LL SPEAK TO THAT LAST POINT, AND I THINK I WANT, UH, ROBERT, UH, WANTED TO MAKE A, A COMMENT AS WELL ON THAT POINT. I, I GET IT. IT'S NEVER A POPULAR THING FOR A DEVELOPER TO SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE IN IT FOR THE MONEY. BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, THIS IS A FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS. IT HAS INVESTORS, IT HAS AN OBLIGATION TO MAXIMIZE ECONOMIC RETURN. MM-HMM. . AND SO, UH, BUSINESS PEOPLE, INVESTORS MAKE ECONOMIC DECISIONS PRIMARILY. MM-HMM. . NOW, THAT'S NOT TO SAY WE HAVEN'T CONSIDERED THE ENVIRONMENT OR THE FEELINGS OF THE COMMUNITY, NOT AT ALL. I'M JUST MERELY POINTING OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, FICTIONAL OPTIONS THAT ARE NOT REALISTIC ECONOMICALLY ARE NOT GOING TO BE CONSIDERED. HOWEVER, WHAT WE CAN DO IS WE CAN TALK ABOUT [01:30:01] THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND THE MERITS OF IT, AND THE COMMUNITY VALUE IT HAS. IT'S NOT JUST THE TRAILS. IT'S ALSO THINGS LIKE CONSERVATION EASEMENT. THERE'S 157 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT. THERE'S LOTS OF CONSERVATION LANDS IN THIS AREA. THERE'S OVER 200 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE, INCLUDING PUBLIC PARKLAND. THIS PARKLAND EXCEEDS THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S PARKLAND SUPERIORITY REQUIREMENTS. THERE'S TRAILS CONNECTIVITY TO THE GREAT SPRINGS TRAILS. YOU HAD A PRESENTATION AT YOUR LAST MEETING FROM THE GREAT, UH, SPRINGS, UM, TRAIL FOLKS, UH, AND YOU RECOMMENDED WHAT THEY WERE DOING. SO I THINK YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WE, WE HAVE VISITED WITH THE COMMUNITY FOR A LONG TIME. WE'VE WORKED WITH THE CITY OF HAYES FOR YEARS, TRYING TO GET A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THEM WHERE IT BROKE DOWN THE T LAP. IT WASN'T, YOU KNOW, THE SIZE OF OUR LOTS. IT WASN'T THE NUMBER OF OUR LOTS, IT WASN'T THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER, UH, UH, I THINK THE CITY OF HAYES WOULD BE HAPPY, UH, FOR YOU TO INITIATE THIS CODE AMENDMENT SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A TLA NEXT TO THEM. MM-HMM. . SO, I, I, ALL THAT'S TO SAY, COMMISSIONER, I HEAR YOU AND I UNDERSTAND, UH, WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO OUR INVESTORS TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THEM. AND ALL I'M TELLING YOU IS, IS THAT THE THREE QUARTER ACRE PROPOSAL IS NOT RIGHT FOR THESE INVESTORS. WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE ECONOMIC VALUE. MM-HMM. , I MEAN, THE ENVIRONMENTAL VALUE. WE'VE TRIED TO ADDRESS COMMUNITY CONCERNS. THAT'S WHY WE'VE PUT TOGETHER WHAT WE THINK IS A VERY THOUGHTFUL, UM, AND BENEFICIAL, UM, PROPOSAL. SO I'LL LET ROBERT ANSWER. I HOPE I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION. MM-HMM. , SORRY. I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO SAY A FEW MORE THINGS THAT I HAD ORIGINALLY HAD IN MY PRESENTATION, AND THEN IN AN EFFORT TO TRIM IT DOWN TO A BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME THAT HAD CUT OUT. BUT THEY DIRECTLY ADDRESS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND AS A, AS A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WHO HAS DEEP, DEEP CARE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WHO DOES A LOT OF WORK FOR DEVELOPERS WHO MANY OF WHOM HAVE CARE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT TOO, BUT OBVIOUSLY HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO THEIR BOTTOM LINE AND TO THEIR INVESTORS, UM, I'M FREQUENTLY NAVIGATING THAT EXACT SPACE IN, IN THE WORK I'M DOING, TRYING TO NAVIGATE THE SPACE BETWEEN MAXIMIZING VALUE ON A PROJECT AND MAXIMIZING THE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS OF THE PROJECT. AND I'VE BEEN REALLY ENJOYING WORKING ON THIS PROJECT BECAUSE THOSE INCENTIVES ARE SO WELL ALIGNED, BECAUSE THE PATH THAT IS BEST FOR THE DEVELOPER ECONOMICALLY IS THE PATH THAT, UM, LEADS TO THEM COMING INTO THE CITY AND NOT LEAVING THE CITY. THE PATH THAT LEADS TO ALL THE T LAB DELAYS, THEY TALKED ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE GONNA MAKE THAT PROCESS SLOWER AND HARDER ARE THE REASON THIS OPPORTUNITY EXISTS FOR THE CITY. THE REASON THE CITY HAS THE CHANCE TO BE ACTUALLY THE PATH OF A LITTLE BIT LESS RESISTANCE THAN, THAN, THAN THE OTHER PATH AVAILABLE TO THE DEVELOPER. AND THAT LEADS TO A PROJECT THAT REALLY DOES BRING ALL THESE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS INTO PLACE THAT I GET TO USE AS I DESIGN THE PROJECT IN DETAIL TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS PROJECT IS, IS THE KIND OF PROJECT THE CITY WANTS. AND I HAVE OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAVE LEFT THE ETJ BECAUSE THE, THE CITY WAS NOT WILLING TO BE THE, THE, THE PATH OF LEASE RESISTANCE. AND, AND THE DEVELOPER MADE THAT DECISION, RIGHT OR WRONG, THEY MADE THAT DECISION. AND NOW I DON'T HAVE A TREE ORDINANCE TO FALL BACK ON ANYMORE. MM-HMM. . AND SO I'M STILL TRYING TO MAKE, I'M STILL TRYING TO ADVOCATE FOR THE TREES, BUT I HAVE LESS TOOLS TO DO SO. AND SO, UM, I THINK THAT THERE'S A GREAT ALIGNMENT HERE BETWEEN WHAT THE DEVELOPER NEEDS AND WHAT THE CITY WANTS FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A TRAGEDY TO PUT UP ROADBLOCKS AND CAUSE THEM TO LEAVE THE TABLE. AND SO I'M ADVOCATING PERSONALLY FOR YOU NOT TO DO THAT. UM, AND IT DOESN'T MEAN THIS IS THE FINAL DEAL, AND IT DOESN'T MEAN THERE ARE NOT NEGOTIATIONS IN THE FUTURE, BUT SEND THIS TO THE NEXT STEP AND LET US KEEP HAVING THIS CONVERSATION. LET US KEEP HAVING THIS CONVERSATION WITH STAFF SO THAT WE CAN COME TO THE RIGHT, RIGHT SPOT ON THIS PROJECT FOR WHAT THE CITY NEEDS AND WHAT THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO MAKE THIS THE RIGHT PROJECT FOR THEIR INVESTORS, AS WELL AS THE FUTURE RESIDENTS THAT WE ALSO CARE ABOUT AS WE DEVELOP THESE PROJECTS. MM-HMM. . SO THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO SAY. THANK YOU. THANKS. SO FOR THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS THAT YOU ALL DID HIGHLIGHT THE, THE TRAILS, THE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS, THE PARK LAND, WHY COULDN'T YOU JUST DO THAT WITH THE ENTIRE LOT, SELL IT TO HAYES COUNTY, TRAVIS COUNTY, THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AND, AND TURN THE ENTIRE THING INTO PARKLAND OR TRACE TRAIL SYSTEM? WELL, I, I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE HOW TO ANSWER THAT. THE, THE CLIENT OWNS THE PROPERTY, RIGHT? CLIENTS PAID FOR IT. THE CLIENT'S INVESTED IN IT, AND, AND ITS INVESTORS ARE EXPECTING A RETURN. I MEAN, IT, YOU KNOW, IIII SO YOU THINK IF YOU SOLD IT TO THE CITY, YOU'D BE SELLING IT AT A LOSS? I I, I, I MEAN, I THINK IF THE CITY, UM, I, I, NO, CERTAINLY NOT, CERTAINLY NOT. BUT I THINK IF WE SOLD AT THE CITY, UM, I, I GUESS MAYBE I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 31 YEARS. I, I'D BE SURPRISED THE CITY, UM, UH, SHOWED UP WITH, UM, THE, THE MONEY THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO, TO ACQUIRE THIS PROPERTY. RIGHT? I'M SURE, I'M SURE THEY CAN'T COMPETE. AND I'M ALSO SURE THAT IT WOULD STILL COME AT A PROFIT. AND THIS IS WHERE I THINK THERE'S A VALUES DIFFERENCE. YOU KNOW, THE INVESTOR COULD STILL ABSOLUTELY MAKE A PROFIT AND GIVE SOMETHING TO THE BROADER PUBLIC BENEFIT, BUT INSTEAD THEY'RE JUST LOOKING TO SEE, YOU [01:35:01] KNOW, THE, THE BIGGEST PROFIT MARGIN THAT THEY CAN. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S JUST NOT A COMPELLING ARGUMENT FOR ME. WELL, WELL, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, UH, IF, IF THE CITY WANTS TO MAKE A PROPOSAL TO ACQUIRE IT, THEN, THEN LET'S, LET'S RECOMMEND THIS AMENDMENT AND CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION AND, AND LET THE CITY COME FORWARD WITH WHAT, WHAT THEY'RE WILLING TO DO. I, I, AGAIN, I'M JUST, UH, 31 YEARS. I KNOW, I, I DON'T, I KNOW I LOOK YOUNG, BUT I WAS HERE IN 1992. MM-HMM. . UM, I WAS HERE IN 1986, ACTUALLY. AND SO I'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR A WHILE. I'D, I'D JUST BE SURPRISED IF THE CITY WAS ABLE TO COME UP, BUT IF THEY ARE, WE WOULD HAVE A CONVERSATION. I JUST, UH, WE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO BEGIN THIS CONVERSATION. WHEN YOU SAY IF THEY'RE ABLE TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING, YOU MEAN TO MATCH THIS NUMBER OR JUST TO MAKE A PROFIT? I, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT MY CLIENT WOULD, WOULD, WOULD, WOULD NEED IN ORDER TO PART WITH THE, WITH THE PROJECT. SO I, I, I DON'T KNOW. ARE YOU ABLE TO NAME YOUR CLIENT? UH, MY CLIENT IS, WELL, THE OWNER IS HAYES COMMONS, LAND INVESTMENT INC. UHHUH , UH, THE BUILDER WOULD BE MILESTONE BUILDERS. RIGHT. I'M JUST CURIOUS YEAH. WHO THE INVESTORS ARE THEMSELVES, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S INTERESTING THAT YOU ALL ARE HERE ON THEIR BEHALF, WHICH IS TYPICAL, BUT SOMETIMES WE DO SEE THE OWNERS THEMSELVES COMING, SPEAKING, SPEAKING. WELL, WE HAVE, WE HAVE SOME REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE COMPANY HERE. MM-HMM. , UH, WE HAVE ANDREW CORTEZ, WE HAVE SHAWNEE ARMER THERE, UM, UH, EMPLOYEES AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE, OF THE OWNER. MM-HMM. . OKAY. I THINK THAT'S ALL FOR NOW. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. VICE CHAIR CO. UH, I MEAN, MY, MY FIRST REACTION TO ALL OF THIS WAS JUST OBVIOUSLY KNOWING THIS SPACE VERY WELL, THAT THE LOCATIONS AND SENSITIVITY IS EXACTLY WHY WE WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD FACILITATE, YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTY BEING BROUGHT INTO, YOU KNOW, FULL CITY ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS. UM, EVEN WITH THE INCREASE, WHICH IS, UM, LARGER THAN WOULD MAKE ME COMFORTABLE. BUT IF WE SAY ALL OR NOTHING, WE GET NOTHING IS, UM, MY FEAR HERE. BUT OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT OUR JOBS TO OPERATE OUT OF FEAR. AND I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE WAY MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS RIGHT NOW. THE PROBLEM IS THAT ALL OF MY QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT, UH, THE MUD. UM, AND SO I GUESS JUST FOR CLARIFICATION FROM CITY STAFF. SO TONIGHT, THE ACTION IS ONLY ON THE SOS INITIATION FOR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER CHANGE. CORRECT. THAT IS WHAT IS BEING VOTED ON THIS EVENING. BUT I THINK IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MUD THAT WOULD HELP YOU COME TO, UH, AN UNDERSTANDING THAT WOULD GET YOU TO A YES OR NO, THAT I THINK THAT WOULD BE FAIR TO ASK THEM. OKAY. BUT WE COULD THEORETICALLY PUT CLARIFICATIONS IN ABOUT IF IT WERE TO COME BACK, WHAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE IN THE MUD. YEAH, I THINK SO. OKAY. UH, SO THE CUT AND THE FILL, THE INNER BASE AND DIVERSION AND THE SE SCRS ARE ALL GOING TO COME BACK WITH THE MUD ITSELF? CORRECT. OKAY. YEAH. ALONGSIDE THE ACTUAL SOS AMENDMENT. YES. OKAY. UH, THAT'S HELPFUL TO KNOW. OKAY. UM, I GUESS I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER, WELL, OKAY. ONE MAP , UH, ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT. UM, I DON'T KNOW WHICH MAP YOU CAN BRING UP. IT DOES SHOW A ROAD CROSSING WHAT LOOKS LIKE A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE, UM, POTENTIALLY THROUGH AN EASEMENT, MAYBE SLIDE 12. SLIDE 12, I GUESS, ON THE STAFF PRESENTATION IF WE CAN. UH, SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IS THERE A ROAD CROSSING, A STREAM , AND IS THAT WITHIN AN EASEMENT, OR IS THAT PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER? ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE WESTERN, UM, END OF THE, UH, NEAR, UH, CARPENTER LANE? COULD WE BRING UP THE MAP SOUTHWESTERN? YEAH. UM, UH, JACKSON, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO BRING UP THE STAFF PRESENTATION MAP? UH, I GUESS TWO MORE SLIDES DOWN, YOU CAN SEE THE ROAD A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEARLY, SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THERE'S A ROAD PUT IN THERE THROUGH TWO OF THE GREEN SORT OF HIGHLIGHTED AREAS, WHAT LOOKS LIKE EASEMENTS. YEAH. MAYBE IF YOU GO TO THE, UM, LAND PLAN PAGE, UM, YOU'LL SEE IT ON, I THINK IT'S YOUR, YEAH, THERE YOU GO. IF YOU CAN ZOOM IN OR NOT. BUT I THINK, I THINK I SEE WHERE YOU'RE TALKING. YOU'RE TALKING OVER ON THE SORT OF WESTERN SOUTHERN, UH, THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE SOUTHERN PIECE. CORRECT. OKAY. UM, YEAH. THE, THE, THE, THE CURRENT PROPOSAL IS THAT THERE WILL BE SOME ESTATE LOTS THERE, UH, OFF OF CARPENTER LANE, THAT WOULD BE A PUBLIC ROAD. IS THERE A REASON THAT, THAT THOSE, THAT THAT PIECE OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS PARCELED OUT AND [01:40:01] JUST SURROUNDED BY CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES RATHER THAN BEING CLOSE TO EVERYTHING ELSE? UH, IT, IT'S, IT, UH, NO REASON OTHER THAN IT'S OWNED BY THE DEVELOPMENT. AND, UH, AND THAT THOSE AREAS SHOWN IN YELLOW ARE OUTSIDE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES, UM, AND OTHERWISE DEVELOPABLE LAND. OKAY. THAT'S HELPFUL. THANK YOU. AND THEN, UM, WHEN Y'ALL KIND OF PARSE OUT, AND, AND APOLOGIES IF YOU SORT OF EXPLAINED THIS, BUT, YOU KNOW, OPEN SPACE PARKLAND AND CONSERVATION EASEMENTS. I ASSUME THAT THE EASEMENTS WOULD BE HELD BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN WHO OWNS THE OPEN SPACE? UH, I BELIEVE THE OPEN SPACE WILL PROBABLY BE THE MUD, UH, OR POTENTIALLY A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, BUT, BUT THE AREAS THAT ARE NECESSARY TO BE CREDITED TOWARDS PARKLAND WILL BE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. OKAY. SO I THINK THINK IT'LL BE A MIXTURE OF PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE OPEN SPACE AND SOME HOA OPEN SPACE, WHICH WILL BE, UM, YOU KNOW, GREEN AREAS, UM, BUT MAYBE NOT NECESSARILY ENTIRELY PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE. OKAY. YEAH. AND IT, IT WASN'T SO MUCH PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE THAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT, ALTHOUGH THAT WOULD BE NICE. UM, IT'S MORE JUST WHAT ARE THE, WHAT ARE THE ACTUAL PROTECTIONS THAT EXIST ON THOSE OPEN SPACES THAT IS THAT JUST DEFINED WITHIN THE MUD? YEAH. WHATEVER THAT WILL BE. THAT'S, THAT'S RIGHT. IT'LL BE, IT'LL BE SET FORTH IN THE MUD CONSENT AGREEMENT. OKAY. AND THEN THE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS THEMSELVES, A LOT OF TIMES CONSERVATION EASEMENTS ARE NEGOTIATED TO ALLOW FOR A LIMITED AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. IS, IS IT UNDERSTOOD THAT NONE OF THESE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS WOULD ALLOW ROADS THROUGH THEM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? THAT WOULD THERET BE ANY ROADS COMMISSIONER? UH, THERE WILL BE A TRAIL, UM, BECAUSE I THINK PART OF THE TRAIL CONNECTIVITY, UM, THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE CITY STAFF AND EVERYONE WANTED WAS, UH, TO HAVE A, A JOINT USE TRAIL, UH, THROUGH THAT CONSERVATION AREA. SO OTHER THAN THAT, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER IMPERVIOUS COVER UNLESS, UM, THAT, THAT WOULD GO THROUGH THAT AREA. OKAY. UH, THANK YOU. I THINK THOSE ARE MY ONLY QUESTIONS. YOU'RE WELCOME. APPRECIATE IT. I THINK I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION THAT HASN'T BEEN ASKED YET. UM, I KIND OF SHARED THE SAME CONCERNS, UM, AS THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS AS FAR AS LIKE H HOW HOUSING BEING ON THE PROPERTY SINCE IT'S SO ENVIRONMENTAL, ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE. UM, HAS THERE EVER BEEN ANYTHING ELSE PROPOSED FOR THAT PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF HOUSING? YES, SIR. UH, I, I DON'T KNOW, UH, SO MUCH ABOUT KIND OF THE NORTHERN PIECE, BUT IF YOU, UH, IF YOU GO TO, AND, AND MR. CAMP MENTIONED THIS AS WELL, UH, IN HIS, IN HIS REMARKS, BUT IF YOU, UH, SORRY. IF YOU GO TO SLIDE IN THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION, IF YOU GO TO SLIDE THREE, UM, THERE WAS PROPOSED, UM, BY MR OR BY BY WALTER SOUTHWEST, THERE WAS PROPOSED A REGIONAL, UH, SHOPPING CENTER. MM-HMM. , UM, THIS WAS THE SAME DEVELOPER THAT DEVELOPED THE SUNSET VALLEY SHOPPING CENTER. SO IT WAS PLANNED TO BE, I THINK, UH, TWO PLUS MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL. AND IT'S ON THAT SORT OF PINK AND, AND, AND, UH, RED, UH, AREA ON THAT PORTION. IT WAS, IT WAS INTENDED TO BE A REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER, UH, AT THE, YOU KNOW, AT THE TIME IT WAS IN THE CITY OF HAYES, ETJ. IT HAD A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF HAYES. UM, AND SCR WAS SOUGHT FROM, FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN, AS MR. CAMP MENTIONED, VERY DIFFERENT SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES. RIGHT. UH, STATE LAW WAS IN A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION, UM, THAN IT IS TODAY, BUT THAT WAS WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY POSED. AND I THINK THE, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE ENGINEERS THAT WORKED ON THAT PROJECT IS THE REST OF IT WAS PROPOSED TO EITHER BE SOME FORM OF RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL, BUT WE, WE DO KNOW THAT THAT PLAN WAS PROPOSED. OKAY. UM, THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE THAT HAVEN'T BEEN ASKED ALREADY. UM, LEMME CIRCLE BACK. ARE THERE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER KRUEGER? UM, I GUESS I JUST WANNA RETURN TO CITY STAFF. I'M LOOKING AT, UH, YOUR PRESENTATION WHERE YOU LIST YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND, AND WHY. UM, BUT JUST TO PUT IT SUCCINCTLY, LIKE, ARE YOU ALL RECOMMENDING THIS BECAUSE YOU SEE IT AS A WAY TO BRING THIS PROJECT MORE UNDER THE PURVIEW OF, OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WHICH GIVES US KIND OF MORE CONTROL OVER HOW THE PRODUCT OR THE PROJECT DEVELOPS AND YOU SEE IT AS A HARM REDUCTION APPROACH? OR CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE MORE ABOUT YOUR RATIONALE? OH, YEAH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT, UM, THE, THE BENEFITS OF, OF THE PROJECT, ALL OF THE CREEK BUFFERS, ALL OF THE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL [01:45:01] FEATURE BUFFERS, ALL OF THE OPEN SPACE, THE PARKLAND WATER QUALITY TREATMENT STANDARDS, TREE PROTECTION, UH, NIGHT DARK SKY, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. UM, IT, IT DID SEEM LIKE THE BEST, UM, ALTERNATIVE OPTION, UM, POSSIBLE, UH, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTOOD THAT LIKE OTHER SCENARIOS COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE LOWER IMPERVIOUS COVER. UM, THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE CREEK BUFFERS, ESPECIALLY, WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE OPEN SPACE. UM, SO WE, WE DO THINK THAT THIS IS A, UH, A, A GOOD DEAL ENVIRONMENTALLY. YEAH. I'M JUST, I'M THINKING ABOUT OTHER APPLICANTS THAT, THAT WE HAVE COME BEFORE SOMETIMES WHO IN THEIR PRESENTATIONS OR VOLUNTEERING, LIKE WE, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY WANT TO DO IS WE WANNA HAVE THE NATIVE PLANTINGS, WE WANNA HAVE THE DARK SKY PROTECTIONS. THEY'RE SHOWING AN INTEREST UPFRONT IN THESE THINGS. AND WHAT I'M HEARING OR READING BETWEEN THE LINES IS THAT THERE JUST ISN'T REALLY THE TRUST NECESSARILY WITH THIS APPLICANT THAT IF WE DON'T REQUIRE IT OR BRING IT UNDER THE CITY SO THAT THEY HAVE TO ADHERE TO THESE THINGS, THAT IT'S JUST NOT GONNA HAPPEN ON THEIR OWN VOLITION. AND I GUESS I OPEN THAT TO BOTH CITY STAFF AND THE APPLICANT TO COME OUT. I MEAN, I, I THINK THAT IS TRUE OF ANY APPLICANT. I WOULDN'T SAY IT'S NECESSARILY THIS APPLICANT. UM, PEOPLE ARE LEAVING THE ETJ IN DROVES SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO MEET CITY STANDARDS. DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? I MEAN, I, I, I, I MEAN, I THINK THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, MY CLIENT WOULD SAY WE, WE, WE DO GOOD PROJECTS. WE WOULD DO A, A GOOD PROJECT. IT'S NOT LIKE WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD A TERRIBLE PROJECT THAT NO ONE WANTS TO LIVE IN. WE WANNA BUILD A GOOD PROJECT THAT PEOPLE WANNA LIVE IN. UH, YOU KNOW, HAVING SAID THAT, IF YOU'VE GOT THE ABILITY TO PUT MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER, THAT ABILITY TO PUT MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER IS, IS, IS SOMETHING, UM, OF VALUE TO, UH, A COMPANY THAT'S IN THIS BUSINESS. UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN DO A DIFFERENT SET OF PAWN REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE LESS COSTLY, THAT'S, THAT'S A BENEFIT. SO, SO ALL I WOULD SAY IS, IS THAT AS, AS, AS MS. JOHNSTON MENTIONED, IT'S SORT OF NATURAL AND YOU SEE IT IN THE FACT THAT PEOPLE ARE LEAVING ETJ TO WANT TO HAVE A LESS RESTRICTIVE SET OF RULES APPLY TO THEM, AND THAT GIVES THEM GREATER FLEXIBILITY AS THEY'RE, AS THEY'RE DOING THEIR PROJECTS. SO, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, YOU KNOW, STAFF ASKED US ABOUT, UH, BIRD DETERRENTS AND WE AGREED TO IT. STAFF ASKED US ABOUT DARK SKY SANDERS. WE AGREED TO IT. WE, WE NEGOTIATED OUR EI BUFFERS, WE, WE AGREED TO ADDITIONAL, UM, BUFFERS. SO WE DEFINITELY ARE OUR INTERESTED IN, IN MAKING A GOOD PROJECT, IN ADDING VALUE IN THAT REGARD. BUT I THINK IT'S ALSO, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST NATURAL THAT APPLICANTS WOULD PREFER TO HAVE FEWER RULES AND REGULATIONS ON THEM. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND. SECOND. SECONDED BY KRUEGER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HANDS. RESI, KRUEGER, FER BEDFORD, SHERA SULLIVAN, AND BRIER. I. OKAY. LET'S, LET'S READ THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAVE, WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WAS PRESENT, UH, WAS PRESENTED THE INFORMATION TO INITIATE A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE CHAPTER TWO FIVE DASH EIGHT, SUB CHAPTER EIGHT, ARTICLE 13 OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE FOR HAYES COMMONS. AND WHEREAS ALTHOUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION IS NOT CONSIDERING THE HAYES COMMONS MUNICIPAL, UH, UTILITY DISTRICT AT THIS TIME, THE COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD PASS A MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL TO FIND THE HAYES COMMONS MUD APPLICATION IS SUPERIOR WITH RESPECT TO PARKLAND DEDICATION. AND WHEREAS, OOPS, I LIKE SKIPPED DOWN. AND WHEREAS, ALTHOUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION IS NOT CONSIDERING THE HAYES COMMONS MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT AT THIS TIME, THE COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION PASSED A MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL TO FIND THAT THE HAYES COMMONS MUD APPLICANT, UH, UH, UH, THAT'S GET THE WORD TO FIND THAT THE HAYES COMMON, UH, COMMONS MUD APPLICATION IS SUPERIOR. SORRY ABOUT THAT. AND WHEREAS A LARGE PORTION OF THE HAYES COMMONS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY OUTSIDE OF THE CITY'S JURISDICTION, AND THEREFORE NOT SUBJECT TO AUSTIN'S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS SENATE BILL SB 2 0 3 8 ALLOWS PROPERTIES [01:50:01] WITHIN THE ETJ TO PETITION FOR RELEASE FROM THE ETJ AND AT LEAST 16% AND COUNTING OF BARTON SPRING ZONE IN THE ETJ HAS ALREADY BEEN RELEASED OF THE CITY'S JURISDICTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS. AND WHEREAS A NON-CITY OF AUSTIN DEVELOPMENT, UH, THE PRO, AH, AND WHEREAS AS A NON-CITY OF AUSTIN DEVELOPMENT, THE PROJECT WOULD BE ALLOWED MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER THAN PROPOSED, BE SUBJECT TO LOWER WATER QUALITY STANDARDS THAN SAVE OUR SPRINGS, HAVE SMALLER BUFFERS AND SETBACKS, HAVE NO TREE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS, HAVE LESS TRAIL AND OPEN SPACE PARKLAND ACCESSIBLE TO PUBLIC, NO CONSERVATIVE EASEMENT, AND BE SERVED WITH GROUNDWATER WELLS AND ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND TEXAS LAND APPLICATION PERMIT AFFLUENT DISPOSAL SYSTEM. AND WHEREAS UNDER THE CITY'S JURISDICTION, THE SITE WOULD HAVE LESS IMPERVIOUS COVER THAN ALLOWED IN THE NON-CITY ALTERNATIVE ALLOWED UNDER THE STATE LAW MEET FULL SOS WATER QUALITY TREATMENT STANDARDS HAVE CURRENT CITY CODE CEF BUFFER AND CREEK SETBACKS, COMPLY WITH TREE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS, MEET AND EXCEED THE CITY'S PARKLAND SUPERIORITY REQUIREMENTS, BUT EXTENSIVE TRAIL CONNECTIVITY AND OPEN SPACE PROVIDE A 157 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT TO THE CITY, CONNECT TO APPROPRIATELY SIZED CITY UTILITIES, AND THE PROPERTY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE FULL SUITE OF CITY LAND USE ZONING PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. AND WHEREAS THIS IS ONLY AN INITIATION OF A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 2 5 8, SUB-CHAPTER A ARTICLE 13 OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE FOR HAYES COMMONS, AND IS NEEDED TO START THE PROCESS TO LOOK INTO GREATER ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY IN PLACE FOR THE PROPERTY. AND THEREFORE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION SUPPORTS INITIATING A SITE SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE CHAPTER TWO FIVE DASH EIGHT SUBCHAPTER. A ARTICLE 13 OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE FOR HAYES COMMONS AS PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING STAFF CONDITIONS. THE SOS AMENDMENT IS A CONDITION OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF SUPPORT FOR THE HAYES COMMONS MUD. THE HAYES COMMONS MUD WILL REQUIRE CURRENT CITY OF AUSTIN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, EXCEPT THE MODIFIED, UH, ACCEPT AS MODIFIED BY THE MUD, INCLUDING SOS NONDEGRADATION WATER QUALITY TREATMENT, CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE PROTECTION CREEK SETBACKS, TREE PRODUCTION, FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS, EROSION HAZARD ZONE, ET CETERA. THE, UM, UH, THE HAYES COMMONS MUD WILL REQUIRE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY TO BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY'S ZONING JURISDICTION, WHICH WILL PREVENT FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS FROM USING SB 2 0 3 8 TO RELEASE FROM THE CITY'S EJ THE HAYES COMMONS MUD WILL PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 157 ACRES OF CONSERVATION LAND AROUND LITTLE, UH, BEAR CREEK, THE HAYES COMMONS MUD WILL REQUIRE LIGHT POLLUTION REDUCTION AND BIRD FRIENDLY DESIGN BUILDING STANDARDS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS. UM, CONTINUE TO CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARINGS, OUTREACH, INCORPORATE PUBLIC COMMENTS, AND PRESENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION DURING THE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE SITE. SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE CHAPTER TWO FIVE DASH EIGHT, SUB CHAPTER A ARTICLE 13 OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS INITIATIVE FOR HAYES COMMONS AS THESE BECOME MORE DETAILED AND FINALIZED. ANYTHING ELSE Y'ALL WANT TO ADD TO THAT, COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN? WELL, ONE CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS THAT ALL, UM, CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, INCLUDING SEEPS AND WHATNOT ON THE PROPERTY MAY NOT HAVE BEEN, UH, CATALOGED. OKAY. AND SO I WOULD CALL FOR A, UH, VERY, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PUT THIS, BUT, UH, MAYBE A THIRD PARTY, UH, AUDIT OF THE, UH, CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON THE PROPERTY. [01:55:01] THERE WOULD BE A THIRD PARTY AUDIT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITICAL, UH, FEATURES OF THE PROPERTY AS ONE OF OUR CONDITIONS. RIGHT. OKAY. HOW DID THAT, ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONERS? I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE CAN LIKE, TALK, TALK AMONGST OURSELVES BEFORE WE VOTE A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE I'M FEELING LIKE WITH SO MANY OF OUR VOTES JUST TORN RIGHT. REALLY WANTING TO DO THE RIGHT THING MM-HMM. AND HAVING SO MUCH UNKNOWN AND SO MUCH UP IN THE AIR, IT, IT'S FEELS HARD TO ME TO MAKE A DECISION BECAUSE THERE'S CERTAINLY A WAY THAT I WOULD OR WOULD NOT DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY AND THIS ISN'T IT. RIGHT. EVEN WITH, WITH THESE RECOMMENDATIONS. AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE CAN LIKE, TALK AS A GROUP ABOUT THE PROCESS. 'CAUSE I THINK MY FEAR IN NOT APPROVING THIS TONIGHT IS THAT AS WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT, THEY'RE LOOKING FOR MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY IN THEIR PROPERTY. AND IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS, THEN DO THEY GO AHEAD AND, AND DEVELOP IT ANYWAY WITHOUT ALL OF THESE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE JUST PUT IN? OR IS IT TRUE THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF THEM BEING ABLE TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY CITY APPROVAL THROUGH A TAP OR SOMETHING ELSE, RIGHT. IN FACT IS MINIMAL. AND SO BY VOTING NO. NOW WE ARE, YOU KNOW, PREVENTING THE DEVELOPMENT DOWN THE LINE. YEAH. SO THAT'S JUST WHERE I'M, I'M WRESTLING, WRESTLING WITH THAT, WANTING TO DO THE BEST THING, NOT WANTING US TO GIVE UP OUR POWER. ABSOLUTELY. UM, AND, AND THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE CAN EXPRESS THAT POWER TONIGHT, AND I JUST WANNA DO IT IN THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE. I THINK WITH ME IT'S LIKE WE NEED THE INITIATION PROCESS JUST TO START TO OPEN UP MORE OF THE CONVERSATION TO WHAT CAN BE DONE WITH THE PROPERTY. AND SO THAT'S KIND OF TYING US TO LIKE, IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING, IT'S KIND OF LIKE, WELL, I MEAN, IT'S STILL GOING FORWARD. LIKE IT'S STILL ON THE, LIKE STAFF ALREADY TOLD US IT'S GOING TO, IS IT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION NEXT? THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE THE CODES AND ORDINANCES JOINT COMMITTEE. OKAY. I DO THINK IT'S INTERESTING THOUGH THAT NO CITY COUNCIL OFFICE TOOK THIS UP. YEAH. SO THAT TO ME SHOWS THAT THERE MIGHT NOT BE THE SUPPORT FOR THIS THAT WE COULD, THAT WE THINK THERE MIGHT BE. SURE. AND SO I JUST DON'T KNOW PLANNING COMMISSION WELL ENOUGH TO SAY HOW THEY MIGHT LAND ON THIS PROJECT. 'CAUSE I THINK A LOT OF IT COMES DOWN TO THAT. CORRECT. I DON'T THINK THAT THE MOTION AND AGREEING TO THE MOTION AS THE CITY HAS PRESENTED IS REALLY REFLECTS THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE. AND I WOULD, UM, I, I, YOU KNOW, SO FAR FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD, I'M OKAY WITH THE, THE TAP AND DEVELOPING ABOUT 700 UNITS ON THE SITE FOR PER, UH, STATE STANDARDS. SO RIGHT NOW, I, I STILL FEEL LIKE I'M LEANING INTO THAT AND NOT, UM, AGREEING TO THE MOTION. OKAY. AND I GUESS IF THE TAP HAPPENS THOUGH, THEN IT WOULD BE A 30% IMPERVIOUS COVER FOR TRAVIS COUNTY UP FROM THE 25 THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TONIGHT. AND THEN WE ALSO WOULDN'T HAVE ALL OF THESE CONDITIONS, UM, THAT WE'RE PLACING NOW IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN REGULATIONS, THOUGH, I MEAN, THAT IS A CONCERN. LIKE YOU SAID, THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T SEEM TO BE WANTING TO ADHERE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, EXCEPTIONAL STANDARDS, ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS, AND THAT'S UNFORTUNATE. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT I SHOULD BE AGREEING TO SOMETHING, UH, JUST BECAUSE OF THAT. I THINK YOU ASKED OH, A COUPLE OF THINGS TO COMMISSIONER KRUEGER'S POINT. THIS IS GONNA GO THROUGH A PROCESS. YES. WE'RE NOT THE END OF THE LINE. MM-HMM. , WHETHER WE APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE, IT'S GONNA GO TO THE NEXT COMMISSION FOR REVIEW. AND IT'S GONNA GO THROUGH THIS CYCLE REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE SAY, WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS OUR RECOMMENDATION HERE AND VOTE WHAT WE FEEL IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. AND THAT'S THE WAY I INTEND TO VOTE. UH, SO, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT COUNCIL HAS NOT TAKEN IT UP, THAT MAY BE PARTLY BECAUSE THERE, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A COUNCIL DISTRICT THAT THIS IS IN. AND SO THEY MAY NOT FEEL THEY HAVE A SKIN IN THE GAME, AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE ANY SKIN IN THE GAME, THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE RISK IN RECOMMENDING SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO OVERTURN PART OF THE SAVE OUR SPRINGS ORDINANCE AND CATCH THE FLACK FOR THAT WHEN THEY HAVE NO CONSTITUENTS WHO LIVE THERE. SO THIS COULD BE A, SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE LOOKING [02:00:01] AT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, AND THEY JUST TOSSED IT TO US AND LET US MAKE THE DECISION ON OUR OWN THE WAY WE MIGHT. AND THEN WHEN IT GETS UP TO THEM, SHOULD IT BE APPROVED AND THEY WILL DO WHATEVER IN THEIR WISDOM SEEMS TO BE THE APPROPRIATE THING TO DO, YOU KNOW, AT WHATEVER THAT TIME IS. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY BE THE RATIONALE THAT THEY HAVE WITH THE WHOLE THING. I FEEL IN PART, AS I STATED, THAT I CAN'T BE HELD HOSTAGE BY WHAT SOME OTHER GOVERNMENT ENTITY MAY CHOOSE TO DO A YEAR FROM NOW, TWO YEARS FROM NOW, 10 YEARS FROM NOW. WE, YOU KNOW, IT'S UNLIKELY THE NATURE OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE'S GONNA CHANGE IN FIVE YEARS, TWO YEARS, WHATEVER IT IS. BUT I CAN'T PREDICT THAT. I CAN'T PREDICT WHAT TCEQ IS GONNA DO WHEN THEY GET SOMETHING SITTING IN FRONT OF THEM. SO I NEED TO VOTE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED HERE TONIGHT AND THE FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED, AND THEN GO WITH THAT. AND THEN LATER THINGS HAPPEN THE WAY THEY HAPPEN. AND THAT'S THE WAY IT GOES. SO I'M VOTING BASED UPON, YOU KNOW, THE INFORMATION THAT I HAVE AVAILABLE, AND CERTAINLY THE DEVELOPER HAS THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP IN A LEGAL MANNER HOWEVER THEY SEE FIT. AND AS YOU POINTED OUT, AND OR MAYBE IT WAS, UH, COMMISSIONER SHERA POINTED OUT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THE, THE ABILITY TO AS BE ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS, AS THEY SO CHOOSE DEVELOPING THE WAY THEY, THEY WANT TO, REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER WE PUT IN A RESOLUTION, THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, PUT TWICE AS MANY ACRES OF PARK LAND AVAILABLE IF THEY SO CHOOSE. WE'RE NOT RESTRICTING THAT. THAT'S A CHOICE THEY MAKE. MAYBE THEY FEEL THAT THE ADDED PARKLAND IS AN INDUCEMENT TO SELL BETTER HOMES, AND THEN MAYBE THEY WILL GET, YOU KNOW, MORE MONEY FOR THEIR HOMES BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE OPEN SPACE. I DON'T KNOW. BUT THAT'S NOT MY DECISION EITHER, THAT'S THEIRS AND THEY WILL MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON THAT. I MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TONIGHT, AND ONLY BASED UPON THAT, NOT ON FUTURE ACTION BASED UPON PEOPLE I DO NOT KNOW. I WILL NEVER KNOW AND I CAN'T PREDICT THE FUTURE. SO ANYWAY, THAT, THAT'S THE WAY I FEEL. YEAH. UM, I'LL ADD MY THOUGHTS IF, UH, IF IT'S COOL. UM, I THINK BASICALLY WE'RE IN A SITUATION NOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO INCREASINGLY FIND OURSELVES IN MM-HMM. PLAYING CHICKEN AGAINST A BUNCH OF DEVELOPERS. RIGHT. UH, WHO BLINKS FIRST, UH, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY GOING TO CRASH A, UH, PROVERBIAL TRAIN OF CONCRETE AND NUCLEAR WASTE AND, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER, UH, YOU KNOW, FAR OIL, WHAT WHATNOT, UH, INTO THIS ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE PROPERTY. UM, OR ARE WE GOING TO ACQUIESCE AND, UH, LET THEM DEVELOP WITH THE PROMISE THAT IT WILL NOT BE AS BAD AS IT COULD POSSIBLY BE. UM, OF COURSE, THEY'RE A DEVELOPER WHO IS BOUND BY NOTHING OTHER THAN PROFIT. UM, I FEEL LIKE I'M SPOILING WHICH WAY I'M LEANING ON THIS. UM, BUT THOSE ARE BASICALLY MY THOUGHTS ON HOW I VIEW THE SITUATION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARI. I THINK BRINGING THE DEVELOPER IN THIS IS KIND OF SHORTSIGHTED. YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS ASSUME THE, THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR THAT LIKE, THEY CAN SELL THIS AND THEN IT'S GONNA BE HELD TO WHATEVER STANDARDS THAT IT'S BEEN LEFT IN. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, AS MUCH AS WE MIGHT NOT BE HEARING WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO HEAR FROM, FROM THEM RIGHT NOW, I JUST, UM, I I STILL FEEL LIKE EVEN THOUGH WE THINK THAT MAYBE IT WILL CONTINUE DOWN THE LINE, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE SOME VOICE IN HOW IT CONTINUES DOWN THE LINE AND WHAT WOULD COME BACK TO US RATHER THAN JUST ASSUMING THAT IT'S COME BACK TO US, UH, IN THE WAY THAT WE WANT AND WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE WANT. BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE, WELL REALLY ANY OF IT, UH, AS FAR AS THE MUD IS CONCERNED, UH, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED TO US. IF WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THE MUD, WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT ITSELF. UM, I MEAN, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO MOVE IT FORWARD IF, IF ONLY TO HAVE THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION LIKE HAVING THE SURVEY OF THE CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES. AND I MEAN, READING INTO THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT, WHOEVER BROUGHT THAT UP, I APPRECIATE THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF FEAR ABOUT HISTORIC FLOODS IN THE AREA, YOU KNOW, AND, AND REQUESTING MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT. AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE VOICE INTO THAT IF WE JUST CURRENTLY SAY, NO, WE DON'T WANT THIS TO MOVE [02:05:01] FORWARD AT ALL. CHAIR WAS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? THERE WASN'T A SECOND YET. ANYONE WANT A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT. SECONDED BY OVER ANY OTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS OR SHOULD WE VOTE? CAN WE ADD SOME ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS? I'M GAME MIKE FOR NO REASON. THAT'S . UH, ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAD, DO WE NEED TO VOTE IN THE AUDIT OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON THE PROPERTY? OKAY. WAS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO THE, UM, THERE WILL BE A THIRD PARTY AUDIT OF THE, OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITICAL FEATURES OF THE PROPERTY? NO OBJECTIONS IS ADDED. OKAY, SWEET. UM, I'D LIKE TO ADD TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, REMOVE ANY ROAD CROSSINGS OVER CRITICAL WATER QUALITY FEATURE BUFFERS IN THE ASSOCIATED MUD APPLICATION. OH, SAY THAT AGAIN, . ALRIGHT, I CAN EMAIL IT TO YOU. OKAY. YOU WROTE IT DOWN. UM, DO YOU WANT ME TO JUST GIVE YOU ALL OF THEM AT ONCE? SURE. UH, PROVIDE EXTENSIVE DATA REGARDING FLOOD MITIGATION EFFORTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND THE PROPOSED MUD APPLICATION. AND THEN, UM, CONSIDER LIMITS TO SIZING OF UTILITIES TO BE APPROPRIATE WITH THE PROPOSED LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT AND NOT BEYOND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO THOSE THREE. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO ADD THOSE THREE TO THE, UM, STANDING MOTION COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. THOSE THREE GET ADDED. ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. AND LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WITH THE, UM, ADDED ON CONDITIONS, RAISE YOUR HAND. FER BEDFORD SULLIVAN, ALL THOSE AGAINST KRUEGER. SHERA. BRIMER. ALL THOSE ABSTAINED RESI MO MOTION FAILS. THANK YOU EVERYBODY. OKAY, LET, IT IS 8 0 8. LET'S TAKE A QUICK RESTROOM BREAK. UM, LET'S COME BACK AT EIGHT 15. HEY EVERYBODY, IT'S UH, EIGHT 15. LET'S COME BACK FROM THE BREAK. LET'S SEE, 2012, RIGHT? AND COMMISSIONERS CREATED A BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. WE'RE COMING BACK FROM BREAK. OH, I'M SORRY. OH, NO WORRIES. . ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER RES, ARE YOU THERE? WHAT? KNOW THAT? YEAH, I'M HERE. OKAY, SWEET. THERE YOU GO. OKAY, COMMERS, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE, GET BACK ON TRACK. UM, NEXT UP WE HAVE DISCUSSION [3. Presentation and discussion on listed endangered and potentially listed species in Travis County – Michael Warriner, Supervisory Fish & Wildlife Biologist, Fish and Wildlife Service] ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER THREE, PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION ON LISTED ENDANG, ENDANGERED AND POTENTIALLY LISTED SPECIES IN TRAVIS COUNTY. UM, DO WE HAVE MICHAEL WARNER IN THERE? UM, MICHAEL WARNER. I AM, UH, WITH THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE HERE IN AUSTIN, SPECIFICALLY THE AUSTIN ECOLOGICAL SERVICES FIELD OFFICE. UM, IF I COULD GET THE NEXT SLIDE. UM, I'M GONNA NOT, I'M GONNA, I'VE GOT SEVERAL SLIDES, BUT I'M GONNA BE SUCCINCT. OOPS. OKAY, THERE WE GO. SO, JUST SOME BACKGROUND ON THE SERVICE. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IS DIVIDED UP INTO EIGHT DIFFERENT REGIONS. TEXAS IS IN THE SOUTHWEST REGION OR REGION TWO, WHICH INCLUDES ARIZONA, NEW MEXICO, AND OKLAHOMA. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. IN TEXAS, WE HAVE TWO PRIMARY ECOLOGICAL SERVICES FIELD OFFICES. UM, THERE IS THE AUSTIN OFFICE AND OUR JURISDICTION IS IN THE WHITE. IT'S BASICALLY FROM SOMEWHERE AROUND BASTROP OUT TO EL PASO. THEN THERE IS THE LARGER TEXAS. THIS IS NEWLY NAMED TEXAS CENTRAL COASTAL AND CENTRAL PLAINS OFFICE, AND THERE ARE SUB OFFICES TO THAT. THERE'S A FORT WORTH SUB OFFICE, A HOUSTON, AND THEN A CORPUS. AND SO WHAT ECOLOGICAL SERVICES FIELD OFFICES DO IS THEY ADMINISTER OR WE ADMINISTER THE [02:10:01] ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT. WE LOOK AT SPECIES THAT HAVE BEEN PETITIONED FOR LISTING. WE DO ASSESSMENTS ON THOSE. WE WORK ON THE RECOVERY OF THOSE SPECIES THAT ARE ALREADY LISTED AND ALSO DO CONSERVATION PLANNING, WHICH INCLUDES SECTION SEVEN OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT, HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANS, AND SO ON. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO, IN TERMS OF OUR OFFICE, UM, OUR HEADQUARTERS, OUR, OUR WE COFACE IN AUSTIN WITH THE USGS ON CAMERON ROAD. UH, THAT'S THE BREAKDOWN OF THE LEADERSHIP IN THE OFFICE ALONG WITH EMAILS. UM, I SUPERVISE THE BRANCH OF LISTING AND RECOVERY. SO WE WORK ON RECOVERY OF SPECIES IN OUR JURISDICTION AS WELL AS THOSE SPECIES IN THIS AREA THAT HAVE BEEN PETITIONED FOR LISTING. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, JUST SOME BACKGROUND TOOLS FOR LOOKING AT LISTED SPECIES. THE SERVICE HAS A WEB PORTAL CALLED ECOS, WHERE YOU CAN SEARCH FOR INDIVIDUAL SPECIES. YOU CAN SEARCH FOR, UM, SPECIES WITHIN CERTAIN COUNTIES, AND THE WEB ADDRESSES THERE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THEN FOR PROJECT PLANNING, THIS IS MORE USED BY DEVELOP THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AS IPAC, WHERE YOU CAN LOG INTO THIS SYSTEM, BRING IN A SHAPE FILE OF A PROJECT, LOOK AT THE POTENTIAL SPECIES THAT ARE THERE, THE CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS THAT COULD BE THERE, BUT THESE ARE ALL PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, FOR OUR OFFICE, THE BRANCH OF LISTING AND RECOVERY, WE COVER ROUGHLY 70 TO 80 SPECIES IN CENTRAL AND WEST TEXAS. WE HAVE 51 ENDANGERED 12, THREATENED FOUR THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED FOR ENDANGERED, UH, STATUS, AND THEN SIX THAT ARE CURRENTLY PETITIONED FOR LISTING CONSIDERATION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, IF, FOR THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN OUR OFFICE, WE HAVE STAFF THAT ARE ASSIGNED TO SPECIFIC SPECIES. AND THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A SPREADSHEET THAT IS AVAILABLE. IF FOLKS ARE INTERESTED, IF THEY WANT TO KNOW WHO'S RESPONSIBLE OR WHO IS THE LEAD FOR A SPECIFIC PLANT OR ANIMAL IN OUR OFFICE, YOU EMAIL ME AND I CAN SEND YOU, UM, THIS SPREADSHEET. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO I'M JUST GONNA RUN THROUGH THE LISTED PETITION PROPOSED SPECIES IN TRAVIS COUNTY, BUT I'M ALSO GOING TO MENTION THE DELIVERABLES THAT WE HAVE ON OUR PLATE FOR THOSE SPECIES THIS FISCAL YEAR, FY 25, WHICH JUST STARTED FOR US, AND THEN MAYBE FY 26. SO IN TRAVIS COUNTY, WE HAVE AROUND SIX LISTED KARST INVERTEBRATES, UM, WHICH INCLUDE HARVESTMEN, MOLD, BEETLES, PSEUDOSCORPIONS, SPIDERS. UM, THIS YEAR WE ARE DUE TO COMPLETE, UM, THREE, FIVE YEAR REVIEWS. AND ONCE A SPECIES IS LI IS LISTED, WE ARE TECHNICALLY SUPPOSED TO COMPLETE A REVIEW FOR THAT SPECIES EVERY FIVE YEARS, WHICH WE UPDATE ANY NEW SCIENCE CONSERVATION ACTIONS. HAVE STRESSORS OR THREATS GOTTEN WORSE? HAVE POPULATIONS BECOME EXTRICATED OR NOT? ONE THING THAT COMES OUT OF THE FIVE-YEAR REVIEW IS A RECOMMENDATION IN TERMS OF THE SPECIES LISTING STATUS. YOU KNOW, SHOULD IT REMAIN THE SAME, SHOULD IT BE DOWN LISTED DE-LISTED UP LISTED? UM, THE DECISIONS ABOUT CHANGES IN LISTING STATUS ARE, ARE MADE ABOVE THE, THE FIELD OFFICE LEVEL, GENERALLY AT THE REGIONAL OFFICE AND THE HEADQUARTERS, UM, UH, LEVEL. BUT EVERY YEAR WE NOTICE, UM, THESE FIVE-YEAR REVIEWS IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER. AND WE REQUEST INFORMATION, YOU KNOW, FROM ANY ENTITY, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE CITIZENS, GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS, NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS TO, AND WE ALSO REACH OUT TO LOCAL EXPERTS AND ALSO, UM, GOVERNMENT STAFF ON THESE TO GET DATA. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SALAMANDERS THREE LISTED SALAMANDERS IN TRAVIS COUNTY, THE AUSTIN BLIND BARTON SPRINGS AND JOLLYVILLE PLATEAU. UM, WE'LL BE DOING FIVE YEAR REVIEWS FOR THE AUSTIN BLIND AND BARTON SPRINGS SALAMANDER. UM, THIS YEAR WE WILL ALSO BE COMPLETING WHAT'S CALLED A RECOVERY OUTLINE. AND RECOVERY OUTLINE IS KIND OF A, IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH A SPECIES RECOVERY PLANT, IT'S LIKE A LIGHT VERSION. IT'S A SYNOPSIS. SO WE'RE GONNA PRODUCE [02:15:01] THAT FOR THE JOLLYVILLE, BUT THEN ALSO LATER THIS YEAR COME OUT WITH A FULL DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN FOR THAT SPECIES WHERE WE OUTLINE, UM, RECOVERY ACTIONS THAT COULD BE TAKEN TO DA, UH, DE-LIST THAT SPECIES BECAUSE IT'S THREATENED. SO WE WILL HAVE DE-LISTING CRITERIA IN THERE THAT WE SET. AND SO THAT DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN WILL BE POSTED ON THE WEBSITE ECOS FOR, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THEN NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WE'LL DO A FIVE YEAR REVIEW FOR THE JOLLYVILLE PLATEAU SALAMANDER. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. ONLY A SINGLE, UM, ENDANGERED OR LISTED BIRD THAT OUR OFFICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR, AND THAT'S THE GOLDEN CHIEF WARBLER. UM, THIS YEAR WE WILL COMPLETE A FIVE YEAR REVIEW FOR THAT SPECIES, UM, AND ALSO WE PLAN ON REVISING AND UPDATING THAT SPECIES RECOVERY PLAN AS IT'S AN OLDER, UM, PLAN. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, INDIVIDUAL FROM OUR OFFICE CAME AND PRESENTED ON MUSCLES. THERE'S A SINGLE LISTED MUSCLE HERE IN TRAVIS COUNTY. UM, THIS YEAR WE'LL BE COMING OUT WITH A RECOVERY OUTLINE FOR THAT SPECIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. ONLY A SINGLE PLANT LISTED, UH, THAT WAS JUST LISTED WITHIN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. UH, BRACK DID TWIST FLOWER, IT'S LISTED AS ENDANGERED. AND NEXT FISCAL YEAR WE WILL COME OUT. THERE'S ALREADY A RECOVERY OUTLINE THAT'S BEEN PRODUCED FOR THIS SPECIES AND WILL COME OUT WITH A DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN IN FY 26. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THAT KINDA ROUNDS OUT THE LISTED SPECIES THAT PRIMARILY OCCUR HERE IN TRAVIS COUNTY. UM, WE HAVE A PROPOSED SPECIES. UH, THE TRICOLOR BAT HAS A REALLY WIDE RANGE ACROSS EASTERN US. UM, IT'S PROPO, IT WAS PROPOSED AS ENDANGERED IN, UH, 2022. UM, A FINAL RULE SHOULD COME OUT AT SOME POINT, UH, BUT AGAIN, THERE ARE POPULATIONS OF THAT BAT IN TRAVIS COUNTY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, IN TERMS OF PETITION SPECIES, UM, THE AGENCY HAS A NATIONAL LISTING WORK PLAN BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY SPECIES THAT HAVE BEEN PETITION NA NATIONWIDE, WE PRODUCE A WORK PLAN IN TERMS OF WHEN WE WILL ASSESS AND COME OUT WITH A DECISION ON WHETHER A SPECIES MERITS LISTING AND THAT'S AVAILABLE ONLINE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. UM, THIS IS JUST THE FIRST PAGE OF IT. THIS IS, UH, THE MOST UPDATED VERSION FROM MAY OF THIS YEAR. AND THIS GETS UPDATED PERIODICALLY TO, UH, REFLECT WORKLOAD PRIORITIZATION LITIGATION. IF THERE'S NEW SCIENCE, UM, UH, SOMETIMES PETITIONERS WILL PULL PETITIONS IF THERE'S NEW SCIENCE. UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. JUST TO KINDA RUN THROUGH THAT PROCESS. UM, ANY INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATION CAN PETITION THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE TO CONSIDER LISTING A SPECIES AS THREATENED IT OR ENDANGERED. ONCE WE RECEIVE THAT POSITION PETITION, WE ARE, UH, SCHEDULED TO THEN COMPLETE WHAT'S CALLED A 90 DAY FINDING, WHERE WE LOOK AT THE PETITION, WE LOOK AT INFORMATION IN OUR FILES AND WE DETERMINE DOES THAT PETITION PRESENT SUBSTANTIAL INFORMATION THAT LISTING IS WARRANTED. IT COULD ALSO BE NOT SUBSTANTIAL. IF IT'S NOT SUBSTANTIAL, THAT'S THE END OF THE PROCESS. IF IT'S SUBSTANTIAL, IT THEN MOVES TO A SPECIES STATUS ASSESSMENT. AND THERE'S ALSO OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE 90 DAY FINDING. BUT A SPECIES STATUS ASSESSMENT IS AN OVERARCHING REVIEW OF THE SCIENCE REGARDING A SPECIES ITS CURRENT CONDITION, ITS THREATS AND ITS POTENTIAL FUTURE CONDITION. SO THAT DOCUMENT IS COMPLETED, IT GOES OUT FOR PEER AND TECHNICAL REVIEW. IT COMES BACK, WE HOLD WHAT'S CALLED A RECOMMENDATION TEAM MEETING, WHICH IS LEADERSHIP FROM THE REGIONAL OFFICE THAT'S PRESENTED THIS INFORMATION. AND THEY MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHETHER THE SPECIES SHOULD BE LISTED AS ENDANGERED, THREATENED, OR DOES NOT WARRANT LISTING. ONCE THAT DECISION'S MADE, WE COME OUT WITH A 12 MONTH FINDING. AND IF LISTING IS NOT WARRANTED, THAT'S THE END OF THAT PROCESS. UM, IF IT IS [02:20:01] WARRANTED, IT COULD EITHER BE IT WE COME OUT WITH A PROPOSED RULE, WHICH COULD BE THREATENED OR ENDANGERED, THERE'S A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, AND, AND THEN IF WE MOVE FORWARD, THEN IT'S A FINAL RULE TO LIST THAT SPECIES AS ENDANGERED OR THREATENED. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, THE PETITION SPECIES THAT OCCUR IN TRAVIS COUNTY, SEVERAL OF THESE ARE WIDER RANGING SPECIES LIKE THE MONARCH BUTTERFLY. IT'S, UM, ACROSS GOOD CHUNK OF NORTH AMERICA. UM, WE ARE EXPECTED TO COME OUT WITH A 12TH MONTH FINDING THIS FISCAL YEAR. IN FACT, IN DECEMBER, WE HAVE A COURT MANDATED DEADLINE TO PUT OUT A 12 MONTH FINDING, UM, IN DECEMBER. AND THEN TWO BUMBLEBEE SPECIES THAT WHOSE RANGES INCLUDE TRAVIS COUNTY. UH, WE EXPECT TO PURDUE THE 12 MONTH FINDING A LISTING DECISION BY FY 27 CARELL'S. FALSE DRAGON HEAD IS A, UH, PETITION PLANT. THIS IS A PICTURE FROM, UM, LADY BIRD LAKE. UM, IT HAS A VERY ODD DISTRIBUTION. IT HAS A PA OCCURS PATCHY IN DIFFERENT COUNTIES OF TEXAS. ONE OF THOSE IS TRAVIS COUNTY, AND THEN IT OCCURS IN TWO COUNTIES IN LOUISIANA. UM, AND THEN FINALLY THE PETAL IS RIVER SPRING SALAMANDER. THIS IS ONE THAT OCCURS IN SOUTHWESTERN TRAVIS COUNTY BLANCO AND NORTHWESTERN HAYES AT A HANDFUL OF SPRINGS. AND THAT ONE IS SCHEDULED FOR FY 28, BUT THAT THIS, THE PET RIVER SPRINGS IS GROUPED, IS IT IN THE SAME GROUP AS THE JOLLYVILLE PLATEAU SALAMANDER AND THOSE OTHER YIA? THIS IS JUST AN UNDESCRIBED, UM, SPECIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. OH, THERE WE GO. THAT'S ALL QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION. LET'S OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER QURESHI. HEY Y'ALL, UH, APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION. IT'S, UH, ALWAYS COOL TO LEARN ABOUT THE BIODIVERSITY IN THE AUSTIN AREA. IT'S, UM, OBVIOUSLY SOMEWHAT CONCERNING. THE WAY YOU FIND OUT ABOUT THE BIODIVERSITY IS TO SEE WHAT ANIMALS AND PLANTS ARE LISTED AS THREATENED OR ENDANGERED. BUT I SUPPOSE THAT'S THE STRUGGLE WE ALL DEAL WITH. UH, NO QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. APPRECIATE IT. COMMISSIONER KRUEGER. COMMISSIONER SHERA, I THANK YOU. UM, IS THERE ANY CONCERNS THAT, THAT YOU KNOW OF THAT WE SHOULD HAVE CURRENTLY, LIKE FOR THE MONARCH BUTTERFLY? I KNOW THAT WAS IN THE NEWS, UM, WITHIN THE PAST FEW YEARS, AND IT, IT SEEMS LIKE THE PUBLIC GENERALLY IS TRYING TO, UH, BE VERY INTENTIONAL ABOUT NATIVE PLANTING AND SO FORTH IN RESPONSE TO MONARCH BUTTERFLIES ALSO, YOU KNOW, BEES AS WELL. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS OVERALL YOUR, YOUR EXPERT OPINION ON, ON, UH, THE RESPONSE I GUESS TO, OR, OR, YOU KNOW, LIKE ARE THOSE, UM, INSECTS THREATENED? OH, WELL THERE'S, UM, ICI COULDN'T SAY BECAUSE I'M NOT IN ON THE NO, IN TERMS OF WHAT'S, WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THE MONARCH. OBVIOUSLY THERE'S GOING TO BE A, A 12 MONTH FINDING AND IT'S EITHER GONNA BE ONE OF THREE OUTCOMES. IT'LL BE NOT WARRANTED FOR LISTING THREATENED OR ENDANGERED. THOSE ARE THE POSSIBILITIES. UM, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE MONARCH THERE'S BEEN POPULATION DECLINES DUE TO ISSUES ON THE WINTERING GROUNDS DUE TO WINTER, YOU KNOW, SEVERE WINTER STORMS AND ALSO, UM, REDUCTION OF THE HABITAT DUE TO LOGGING. AND THEN UP IN THE US ESPECIALLY IN THE UPPER MIDWEST, THERE'S BEEN WIDESPREAD LOSS OF, YOU KNOW, UH, PRAIRIE MILKWEED RESOURCES. AND SO THERE'S THAT CONCERN. WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE SAME CONCERN AS YOU GET FROM KANSAS DOWN TO TEXAS. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A MILKWEED ISSUE. IT'S MORE OF LIKE A NECTAR SOURCE ISSUE BECAUSE TEXAS IS A, IS THE FLYWAY, THEY COME UP THROUGH TEXAS IN THE SPRING, THEY DO DO SOME BREEDING AND THEN THEY COME BACK THROUGH THE FALL. SO THEY REALLY NEED NECTAR SOURCES. AND SO AS YOU HAVE AREAS THAT ARE CONVERTED TO NON-NATIVE, UH, RANGE LAND, YOU LOSE NECTAR SOURCES. UM, [02:25:01] BUT YEAH, I THINK CERTAINLY PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF MONARCHS AND YOU KNOW, THE POTENTIAL OF A LISTING OF THE MONARCH. UM, BUT THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT POLLINATORS IN GENERAL. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN? YEAH. UH, IS THE BLACK CA BLACK CAP VERIO COME OUT OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES STATUS? IT WAS DELISTED, I WANT TO SAY THREE TO FIVE. ACTUALLY. IT WAS PRE COVID. IT WAS DELISTED, RIGHT? 'CAUSE I REMEMBER SEEING A, UH, A GRAPH SHOWING THE NUMBERS GOING UP AND THINKING, WOW, THAT'S A SUCCESS. SO DO WE HAVE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THAT? OF SUCCESSES? YEAH. IN TEXAS WE DO, UM, SEVERAL OF THEM INCLUDE PLANTS. UM, AND IT'S PARTIALLY DUE TO LEARNING MORE ABOUT THEM. YOU KNOW, ONE ISSUE WITH LOOKING FOR LISTED SPECIES IS OFTENTIMES LANDOWNERS DON'T WANT THOSE SPECIES TO BE FOUND ON THEIR PROPERTY. AND SO GETTING ACCESS MM-HMM, . BUT ONCE YOU HAVE WILLING ACCESS, WE FOUND BIGGER POPULATIONS OF SOME PLANTS. UM, ALSO PROTECTIONS FOR SOME PLANTS INCREASE. UM, YOU KNOW, BIG BEND NATIONAL PARK'S, A GOOD BIG, BIG BEND NATIONAL PARK. A GOOD IS A GOOD EXAMPLE WITH EXPANSIONS. WE HAVE SEVERAL LISTED CACTI OUT THERE. UM, TOOSH FISH HOOK CACTUS, WHICH IS LIKE A WIDESPREAD SPECIES ACROSS THE EDWARDS PLATEAU. WE SIMPLY FOUND MORE MM-HMM. IN MORE PLACES. AND THAT SPECIES WAS DOWN LISTED FROM ENDANGERED TO THREATENED. SO I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY YOU COULD GO BACK TO BALD EAGLES BEEN D DELISTED ON A NATIONAL SCALE, YOU KNOW, MORE CHARISMATIC TYPE SPECIES. COOL. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BYER? YES. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. ONE OF THE THINGS WE DO FREQUENTLY WHEN WE HAVE APPLICANTS COME HERE AND DO THINGS, WE, WE SAY PLANT MORE OF THIS AND DO MORE OF THAT. UH, AND THERE IS A LIST OF PLANTS THAT WE, THAT WATERSHED SAYS WE SHOULD PLANT AND WE TELL THEM TO PLANT WHATEVER THEY HAVE ON THEIR LIST. UH, ARE THESE ENDANGERED SPECIES AND I WILL ASSUME THAT THEY ARE SUITABLE TO BE PLANTED IN AUSTIN. ARE THEY ON THE LIST OF PLANTS THAT WE ARE TELLING DEVELOPERS TO PLANT? AND IF THEY ARE NOT, SHOULD WE ENCOURAGE OUR, UH, FRIENDS AT THE, UH, HEAD OF THE TABLE THERE TO INCLUDE THEM ON OUR LIST OF, UH, PLANTS SO THAT WHEN WE TELL, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPERS TO PLANT ALL THIS GOOD STUFF THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, PLANT THOSE THINGS AS OPPOSED TO YEAH, I THINK SOMETHING ELSE, I THINK ONE LIMITING FACTOR IS THERE'S PROBABLY NOT, FOR SOME OF THESE RARE PLANTS THAT ARE LISTED, THERE'S PROBABLY NOT AN EXISTING SEED SOURCE TO, YOU KNOW, TO CULTIVATE. RIGHT? I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT AWARE OF TWISTED BRECK FLOUR EVER BEING ON SOMETHING THAT IS ABLE TO BE PURCHASED AND PLANTED. UM, THE KS FALLS DRAGON HEART. THERE MIGHT BE SOME PLACES WHERE YOU CAN GET THAT, BUT YOU HAVE TO PLANT THAT. IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S A VERY, IT'S A, I THINK IT'S AN OBLIGATE WETLAND PLANT, SO IT NEEDS TO BE ALONG THE, A RIVER OR CONSTANT WATER SOURCE. SO IT WOULD BE UNLIKE, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME, A PLACE THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP IT AND SUSTAIN IT IF, IF POSSIBLE. SO, UM, NOT, NOT TYPICALLY. YEAH. WITH, WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME THINGS ARE ONLY SUITABLE TO BE PLANTED IN WETLANDS OR RIGHT. YOU KNOW, CERTAIN THINGS. BUT I GUESS MY POINT IS ASSUMING SUITABILITY FOR A CERTAIN SPECIFIC HABITAT, I, YOU KNOW, I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE, YOU KNOW, THESE THINGS TO BE PART OF THE, OF THE THING THAT WE'RE TELLING THE, UH, DEVELOPERS TO, RIGHT TO THE POINT OF, UH, NECTAR SOURCES. UM, OUR NATIVE PLANT MIX HAS A, A NUMBER OF POLLINATOR PLANTS. UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS BUNCH GRASSES ARE ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT FOR MULTIPLE DIFFERENT TYPES OF POLLINATORS AS WELL. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE A VERY DIVERSE, UH, SEED SEED LIST. UM, I'M NOT NOT AWARE OF ANY ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES IN THE LIST RIGHT NOW. I'D HAVE TO LOOK. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, CHAIR FER. UH, I MEAN, I THINK JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN'S, I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THE PROCESS FOR DELISTING. I MEAN, WHERE IS THE THRESHOLD? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD BE SPECIES SPECIFIC. YEAH, SO THAT'S, YEAH. SO IF WE WERE TO GET TO A DELISTING, [02:30:01] IT WOULD BE BASED ON A PRIOR ANALYSIS OF THE SPECIES CONDITION. IT MIGHT BE A FIVE YEAR REVIEW. UM, ALSO, UM, IF WE FEEL LIKE THERE'S, YOU KNOW, A, A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, WE WILL DO A FULL BLOWN SPECIES STATUS ASSESSMENT AND PULL THE SCIENCE TOGETHER. AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, LOOK AT THE THREATS. WHAT'S THE CURRENT POPULATION, WHAT DO WE EXPECT IN THE FUTURE? AND THAT INFORMATION WOULD AGAIN, GO TO A RECOMMENDATION TEAM MEETING REGIONAL LEADERSHIP. THEY WOULD CONSIDER THE SCIENCE AND THEN REC MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, WHICH WOULD THEN GO UP THE CHAIN TO OUR REGIONAL DIRECTOR. WE BRIEF HEADQUARTERS AND BASICALLY GET ALL THOSE LAYERS OF SIGN OFF. IF WE DECIDED TO MAKE A CHANGE IN STATUS, WE WOULD THEN PUBLISH A PROPOSED RULE TO EITHER DOWN LIST OR DE-LIST. AND THAT WOULD BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. WE'D HAVE TO RESPOND TO ALL THOSE COMMENTS. AND IF WE CONTINUED, WE WOULD GO WITH THE FINAL, FINAL RULE. FASCINATING. THANK YOU. AND THEN I'M SORRY IF YOU WERE CLEAR ON THIS, BUT, SO WHEN WILL WE FIND OUT ABOUT THE MONARCH BUTTERFLY? WILL WE FIND OUT IN FISCAL YEAR 25, OR IS IT AFTER THAT 12 MONTHS? OH, IT'S, WE HAVE A, IN FACT, I JUST, I LEARNED TODAY WE HAVE A COURT MANDATED DEADLINE OF, I WANT TO SAY MID-DECEMBER OF THIS YEAR. OH, GREAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO IT, WELL, I'M SURE THERE'LL BE A MEDIA, WE DO OUTREACH, UM, AND IT'LL BE IN THE MEDIA, BUT YEAH, WE HAVE A COURT MANDATED DEADLINE OF MID-DECEMBER. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION. I WAS KIND OF WONDERING IF THERE'S BEEN ANY, UM, CONSERVATION EFFORTS TO TRY AND, UM, UN ENDANGERED SPECIES , UM, LIKE IF THAT, IF THAT'S EVER KIND OF, IF YOU HAD ISSUES DOING ONE THING TO KIND OF HELP ONE SPECIES GROW AND THEN OFFSET THE GROWTH OF ANOTHER SPECIES, AND LIKE, HOW DO YOU KIND OF MITIGATE THAT? LIKE HOW DO YOU BE LIKE, OH, OKAY, WELL WE'RE HELPING THE BUTTERFLIES, BUT WE'RE KILLING THIS PLANT, OR VICE VERSA. YEAH, I, I DON'T, I, I'M HARD PRESSED TO COME UP WITH AN EXAMPLE. I'M SURE THERE IS. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, WITH THE MONARCH, LET'S JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, MILKWEED IS WIDESPREAD. UM, IT'S HEAVILY PROPAGATED IN THE TRADE SEEDS AVAILABLE. SO PROMOTING MONARCH CONSERVATION WOULD NOT NECESSARILY NECESSARILY LEAD TO THE IMPERILMENT OF A MILKWEED SPECIES NECESSARILY. UM, JUST GIVEN THERE IS SO MUCH INTEREST IN, UM, PRODUCTION OF MILKWEED. NICE. ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONERS. OKAY. WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEARING WITH US AND THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION. THANK YOU. YES, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT STEP, WE [4. Presentation and discussion on Balcones Canyonlands Conservation Plan (BCCP) and covered species – Sherri Kuhl, Environmental Resource Officer, and Kimberlee Harvey, BCCP Officer, Austin Water] HAVE A PRESENTATION DISCUSSION ON THE BALCONES CANYONLANDS CONSERVATION PLAN AND COVERED SPECIES SHERRY COLE. GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. I'M SHERRY COLE. I'M THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE OFFICER FOR AUSTIN WATER, AND MY GROUP INCLUDES THE WILDLAND CONSERVATION DIVISION, WHICH INCLUDES THE BAI'S CANYON LANDS PRESERVE AND ALSO THE WATER QUALITY PROTECTION LANDS THAT WERE MENTIONED EARLIER. SO I'M HERE TO INTRODUCE, UM, KIMBERLY HARVEY, WHO'S OUR BAI'S CANYON LAND'S CONSERVATION PLAN OFFICER BCCP OFFICER. WE USE TWO DIFFERENT ACRONYMS AND TRY TO CLARIFY THAT BBCP IS THE BAS CANYON LANDS PRESERVE LAND, AND THE BCCP IS THE ACTUAL PERMIT AND THE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN THAT CREATED THAT. SO KIMBERLY IS, HAS A UNIQUE POSITION AT THE CITY WHERE SHE'S FUNDED HALF BY TRAVIS COUNTY BECAUSE SHE ADMINISTERS THIS PERMIT THAT'S HELD BY BOTH THE CITY AND TRAVIS COUNTY. SO I'M HERE TO HELP ANSWER QUESTIONS, BUT I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO KIMBERLY. THANK YOU, SHERRY, AND THANKS FOR GOING OVER THE BCCP VERSUS BCP. IT'S ALWAYS THE ACRONYMS THAT GET EVERYBODY BCCP, THE PAPERWORK BCP, THE LAND. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO TODAY I'M GONNA TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE BCCP PERMIT, AND THEN WE'LL INTRODUCE YOU TO THE COVERED SPECIES OF THE PERMIT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE VALCON CANYON LANDS CONSERVATION PLAN, INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT IS DESIGNED TO PROTECT ENDANGERED SPECIES AND THEIR HABITATS IN THE BALCONES CANYONLANDS REGION OF CENTRAL TEXAS, [02:35:01] WHILE ALLOWING FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHED IN COLLABORATION WITH THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. THE BCCP AIMS TO CONSERVE KEY HABITATS FOR SEVERAL PROTECTED SPECIES BY PERMITTING INCIDENTAL TAKE, WHICH IS THE UNINTENTIONAL HARM OR KILLING OF THESE SPECIES, RESULTING FROM LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES. THE PLAN OUTLINES SPECIFIC CONSERVATION MEASURES, HABITAT RESTORATION EFFORTS, AND LAND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR THE BALCONES CANYON LANDS PRESERVE TO MINIMIZE IMPACTS ON ENDANGERED SPECIES AND ENSURE THEIR LONG-TERM SURVIVAL BY BALANCING ECOLOGICAL PRESERVATION WITH ECONOMIC GROWTH. THE BCCP SERVES AS A MODEL FOR REGIONAL CONSERVATION EFFORTS PROMOTING BIODIVERSITY WHILE ACCOMMODATING THE NEEDS OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE BCCP PERMIT WAS ISSUED TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND TRAVIS COUNTY BY THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IN 1996, AND IT PROVIDES A STREAMLINED WAY FOR LANDOWNERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDERS TO COMPLY WITH THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT FOR BCCP LISTED SPECIES, WHILE PROTECTING HIGH QUALITY HABITAT IN THE PRESERVE FOREVER. MITIGATION THROUGH THE BCCP HELPS TO PROVIDE REGULATORY CERTAINTY TO INDIVIDUAL LANDOWNERS, DEVELOPERS, AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDERS. TRAVIS COUNTY ISSUES BCCP INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMITS FOR LANDOWNERS WHO CHOOSE TO MITIGATE THROUGH THE BCCP RATHER THAN DIRECTLY WITH THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN ADMINISTERS THE INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING PROCESS FOR THE BCCP. THE BCCP QUANTIFY ALLOWABLE TAKE OF COVERED SPECIES IN TERMS OF LOSS OF HABITAT. SO IN THE 28 PLUS YEARS SINCE THE BCCP WAS CREATED, MORE THAN 1500 PRIVATE LANDOWNERS AND DEVELOPERS AND MORE THAN 400 PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS HAVE RECEIVED BCCP PERMITS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AN IN EXCHANGE FOR THE AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMITS. THE CITY AND COUNTY COMMITTED TO ACQUIRING AND MANAGING BIRD AND CAVE HABITAT ESSENTIAL TO SPECIES SURVIVAL. THIS COMMITMENT CONTINUES IN PERPETUITY AND THESE CONSERVATION LANDS AND CAVES WILL BE MANAGED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE SPECIES AND PROTECTED FOREVER. NEXT SLIDE. THESE ARE THE SPECIES COVERED BY THE BCCP PERMIT. I'M GOING TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF EACH ONE AND DISCUSS SOME OF THE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES PERFORMED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE SPECIES. NEXT SLIDE. SO THIS IS OUR STAR. THIS IS THE GOLDEN CHEEK WARBLER. IT'S A SMALL MIGRATORY SONGBIRD NATIVE TO CENTRAL TEXAS WHERE IT BREEDS EXCLUSIVELY IN OUR REGION'S OAK JUNIPER WOODLANDS. SO EVERY GOLDEN CHEEK WARBLER IS A NATIVE TEXAN. THEY RELY ON MATURE ASH JUNIPER TREES FOR NESTING MATERIALS AND THE WARBLER WINTER AND THE PINE OAK FOREST OF CENTRAL AMERICA, PARTICULARLY IN MEXICO AND NORTHERN CENTRAL AMERICA, LISTED AS ENDANGERED DUE TO HABITAT LOSS FROM URBANIZATION, AGRICULTURE, AND LAND DEVELOPMENT. CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOCUS ON PROTECTING ITS LIMITED BREEDING AND WINTERING HABITATS TO ENSURE ITS SURVIVAL. NEXT SLIDE. AUSTIN WATERS WILDLAND CONSERVATION DIVISION STAFF, ALONG WITH TRAVIS COUNTY'S TRANSPORTATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES STAFF, AND MANY OTHER BALCONES CANYON LANDS PRESERVE LAND MANAGEMENT PARTNERS SUPPORT THESE CONSERVATION EFFORTS BY CONDUCTING LONG-TERM MONITORING OF THE GOLDEN CHEEK WARBLER, AND BY PROTECTING, MANAGING, AND CREATING HIGH QUALITY HABITAT FOR THEM. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS, THIS GRAPH IS SHOWING THE NUMBER OF TERRITORIAL MALE WARBLERS IDENTIFIED ON THOSE LONG-TERM MONITORING PLOTS AND NOT FOR THE ENTIRE BCP. YOU'LL ALSO SEE THERE WAS A DECLINE IN ABUNDANCE AS A RESULT OF A STRONG EL NINO EVENT, WHICH REALLY HIGHLIGHTS JUST HOW FRAGILE THIS SPECIES IS TO MANY ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS. NEXT SLIDE. THE BLACK CAP RIO WAS ONE OF THE EIGHT ENDANGERED SPECIES THAT THE BCCP AND BALCONES LANDS PRESERVE WERE CREATED TO PROTECT. IN MAY OF 2018, THE RIO WAS REMOVED FROM THE FEDERALIST OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE. THE DELISTING DOES NOT AFFECT THE PRESERVE. THE LAND WILL CONTINUE TO BE PRESERVED IN PERPETUITY. HOWEVER, LANDOWNERS WHO WISH TO REMOVE BLACK CAT RIO HABITAT FROM THEIR PROPERTIES ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO MITIGATE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THAT HABITAT. NEXT SLIDE. STAFF SUPPORT CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOR THE VARIO BY CONDUCTING LONG-TERM MONITORING OF THE SPECIES, INCLUDING COLOR BANDING AND COLLECTING DNA TO ASSESS GENETIC DIVERSITY AND VIABILITY AND BY PROTECTING, MANAGING, AND CREATING HIGH QUALITY HABITAT FOR THEM AS WELL. NEXT SLIDE. THE KARST INVERTEBRATES COVERED BY THE BCCP PERMIT WERE LISTED AS ENDANGERED IN 1988. THEY'RE A UNIQUE GROUP OF SMALL CAVE DWELLING SPECIES THAT RELY ON THE REGION'S FRAGILE KARST ECOSYSTEMS, WHICH CONSIST OF POROUS LIMESTONE FORMATIONS. THESE INVERTEBRATES ARE ADAPTED TO THE DARK, HUMID, AND NUTRIENT SCARCE ENVIRONMENTS FOUND IN CAVES AND UNDERGROUND VOIDS. DUE TO THE RESTRICTED RANGES AND HIGHLY SPECIFIC HABITAT REQUIREMENTS, THEY'RE VULNERABLE TO THREATS SUCH AS HABITAT, DESTRUCTION FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT, GROUNDWATER POLLUTION, [02:40:01] AND CHANGES IN WATER AVAILABILITY. CONSERVATION EFFORTS ARE CRITICAL TO PROTECT THESE ECOSYSTEMS AND PREVENT FURTHER DECLINE OF THESE SPECIALIZED SPECIES. CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOCUS ON PROTECTING THE DELICATE CAVE AND CAR ECOSYSTEMS THAT THESE SPECIES DEPEND ON. KEY INITIATIVES INCLUDE HABITAT PRESERVATION THROUGH LAND ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT, ESPECIALLY IN AREAS FACING RAPID URBAN DEVELOPMENT. STAFF AND PARTNERS WORK TO MAINTAIN THE NATURAL HYDROLOGY OF THIS. THESE SYSTEMS MONITOR CAVES AND RESTRICT ACCESS TO PREVENT DISTURBANCE AND CONTAMINATION. PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGNS ALSO HELP ENSURE THAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ON THESE SPECIES AND HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECTS AIM TO REPAIR DAMAGED ECOSYSTEMS. THESE EFFORTS ARE ESSENTIAL TO THE LONG-TERM SURVIVAL. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE BEE CREEK CAVE HARVESTMAN IS A RARE ILIS ARACHNI FOUND EXCLUSIVELY IN THE KARST CAVE SYSTEMS OF TRAVIS COUNTY. IT IS HIGHLY ADAPTED TO LIFE IN COMPLETE DARKNESS, RELYING ON SENSORY HAIRS TO NAVIGATE AND DETECT FOOD. THEY THRIVE IN HUMID, STABLE ENVIRONMENT OF UNDERGROUND CAVES, FEEDING ON DECOMPOSING ORGANIC MATTER. DUE TO ITS HIGHLY SPECIALIZED HABITAT, IT IS VULNERABLE TO HABITAT DESTRUCTION FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT, POLLUTION, AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION. NEXT SLIDE. PLEASE STAFF SUPPORT CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOR THE BEE CREEK CAVE HARVESTMEN BY MONITORING AND SURVEYING LITTLE BEE CREEK CAVE. AND BY SEARCHING THAT KARST FUNNEL REGION IN HOPES OF FINDING MORE CAVES WHERE THEY ARE PRESENT STAFF WORK TO PROTECT, MANAGE, AND RESTORE CAVES TO CONSERVE AND CREATE HIGH QUALITY HABITAT FOR THEM AS WELL. CAVE RESTORATION IS A COMMON CONSERVATION THEME SHARED BY THESE INVERTEBRATES. AND I'LL TALK A LITTLE MORE ABOUT CAVE RESTORATION LATER IN THE PRESENTATION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE BONE CAVE HARVESTMAN IS ALSO A SMALL ILIS ARACHNI THAT INHABITS THE KARST CAVES AND UNDERGROUND VOIDS OF CENTRAL TEXAS, PARTICULARLY IN TRAVIS AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES. IT IS ESPECIALLY ADAPTED TO COMPLETE DARKNESS, RELYING ON TOUCH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CUES TO NAVIGATE AND FIND FOOD, WHICH TYPICALLY CONSISTS OF DECOMPOSING ORGANIC MATERIAL. ITS HIGHLY RESTRICTED HABITAT MAKES IT VULNERABLE TO THREATS SUCH AS URBANIZATION, LAND DEVELOPMENT, AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOR THE BONE CAVE HARVESTMAN HELP TO PROTECT ITS DELICATE CAVE ECOSYSTEMS FROM DESTRUCTION, ENSURING CLEAN GROUNDWATER AND MAINTAINING THE NATURAL CONDITIONS THAT SUPPORT ITS SURVIVAL. ONE OF THOSE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES INVOLVES REDUCING PREDATORY RED IMPORTED FIRE ANTS WITH BOILING WATER. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. STAFF CONDUCT CAVE FUNNEL SURVEYS IN MULTIPLE CAVES FOUND IN NORTHWEST AUSTIN. AND THANKS TO EXCAVATION AND RESTORATION EFFORTS, THE NUMBER OF CAVES AND BONE CAVE HARVESTMEN CAN BE FOUND HAS INCREASED IN RESTORED CAVES SUCH AS PERSEPHONE CAVERNS, THEIR ABUNDANCE HAS ALSO INCREASED. THIS IS DUE TO NUTRIENTS NOW BEING ABLE TO ENTER THE CAVE, ESPECIALLY FROM CAVE CRICKETS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THE KRETCHMAR CAVE MODE BEETLE IS A TINY ILIS BEETLE FOUND EXCLUSIVELY IN THE CE CAVE SYSTEMS OF TRAVIS AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES. IT IS A HIGHLY ADAPTED TO THE DARK, HUMID CAVE ENVIRONMENT, RELYING ON ITS HEIGHTENED SENSE OF TOUCH AND SMELL TO LOCATE FOOD WHICH CONSISTS PRIMARILY OF FUNGAL GROWTHS AND OTHER ORGANIC MATERIAL. THE BEETLES RESTRICTED HABITAT MAKE IT VULNERABLE TO THREATS SUCH AS HABITAT, DESTRUCTION FROM URBAN DEVELOPMENT, POLLUTION, AND CHANGES IN GROUNDWATER FLOW. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOCUS ON PROTECTING ITS SENSITIVE CAVE ECOSYSTEMS AND ENSURING THE PRESERVATION OF THE NATURAL HYDROLOGY AND HUMIDITY LEVELS THAT ARE CRUCIAL TO ITS SURVIVAL. THIS BEETLE IS FOUND IN SOME OF THE SAME CAVES AS OTHER LISTED SPECIES. SO THE RESTORATION OF ONE CAVE BENEFITS MULTIPLE LISTED SPECIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE TOOTH CAVE GROUND BEETLE IS AN ILI BEETLE THAT INHABITS THE KARST CAVES OF TRAVIS COUNTY. IT HAS ADAPTED TO THE COMPLETE DARKNESS OF THESE UNDERGROUND ENVIRONMENTS, RELYING ON ITS KEEN SENSES OF TOUCH AND SMELL TO NAVIGATE AND FIND FOOD, WHICH CONSISTS OF ORGANIC MATTER AND DETRITUS, WHICH IS DEAD ORGANIC MATERIAL SUCH AS THE REMAINS OF DEAD ORGANISMS AND FECAL MATTER. THIS SPECIES IS HIGHLY SENSITIVE TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES AND ITS LIMITED HABITAT RANGE. MAKE IT PARTICULARLY VULNERABLE TO THREATS LIKE URBAN EXPANSION, HABITAT DESTRUCTION, AND GROUNDWATER POLLUTION. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOCUS ON PROTECTING AND MANAGING ITS FRAGILE CAVE AND ECOSYSTEMS PRESERVING WATER QUALITY AND LIMITING HUMAN DISTURBANCE. IN ADDITION TO THE CAVE FUNNEL SURVEYS, STAFF WORK TO ENHANCE AND PROMOTE NATIVE VEGETATION FOR A HEALTHY SURFACE. HABITAT CAVE CRICKETS ARE A KEYSTONE SPECIES FOR THESE KARST INVERTEBRATES AND CRICKETS DEPEND ON A HEALTHY SURFACE. HABITAT CAVE RESTORATION WORK HAS LED TO AN INCREASED NUMBER IN SPECIES ABUNDANCE AND IN KNOWN CAVES IN WHICH THIS BEETLE IS FOUND. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. [02:45:03] THE TOOTH CAVE PSEUDO SCORPION IS A SMALL ILIS AR ILIS ARACHNI NATIVE TO THE KARST CAVES OF TRAVIS COUNTY. DESPITE ITS SCORPION LIKE APPEARANCE, IT LACKS A STINGER AND INSTEAD USES ITS PINCHERS TO CAPTURE TINY PREY, SUCH AS MITES AND OTHER INVERTEBRATES IN THE DARK, HUMID CAVE ENVIRONMENT. IT HAS ADAPTED TO LIFE UNDERGROUND, RELYING ON TOUCH AND CHEMICAL CUES TO NAVIGATE AND HUNT. ITS SURVIVAL IS TIGHTLY LINKED TO THE STABILITY OF ITS KARST HABITAT, MAKING IT HIGHLY VULNERABLE TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT, HABITAT FRAGMENTATION AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE TOOTH CAVE PSEUDO SCORPION BENEFITS FROM CONSERVATION EFFORTS AIMED AT PRESERVING ITS DELICATE CAVE ECOSYSTEM AND MAINTAINING THE NATURAL PROCESSES THAT SUPPORT ITS EXISTENCE. STAFF CONDUCT CAVE FUNNEL SURVEYS IN NORTHWEST AUSTIN, AND THIS SPECIES ALSO BENEFITS FROM THE PROTECTION ENHANCEMENT OF A HEALTHY SURFACE HABITAT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. . THE TOOTH CAVE SPIDER IS A TINY ILIS ARACHNI FOUND EXCLUSIVELY IN THE KARST CAVE SYSTEMS OF TRAVIS COUNTY ADAPTED TO COMPLETE DARKNESS. THIS SPIDER USES HEIGHTENED SENSE OF TOUCH TO NAVIGATE AND CAPTURE SMALL PREY, SUCH AS MITES AND OTHER INVERTEBRATES IN THE HUMID, STABLE CONDITIONS OF THE CAVES. IT IS HIGHLY SPECIALIZED FOR LIFE UNDERGROUND AND RELIES ON THE DELICATE BALANCE OF ITS CAVE ECOSYSTEM FOR SURVIVAL. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. CONSERVATION EFFORTS FOCUS ON PROTECTING ITS FRAGILE CAST HABITAT AND MAINTAINING AND RESTORING THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS NECESSARY FOR ITS SURVIVAL BY CONDUCTING CAVE FUNNEL SURVEYS AND MANAGING FOR A HEALTHY, NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. THIS SPECIES HAS ALSO BENEFITED BY THE LABOR INTENSIVE CAVE RESTORATION WORK OF STAFF AND PARTNERS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. CAVE RESTORATION WORK IN CENTRAL TEXAS IS CRUCIAL FOR THE SURVIVAL OF ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES THAT DEPEND ON THE UNIQUE CONDITIONS OF KARST ECOSYSTEMS, SUCH AS CONSTANT HUMIDITY, STABLE TEMPERATURES, AND CLEAN GROUNDWATER. RESTORING CAVE ENVIRONMENTS BY REMOVING DEBRIS, MANAGING WATER FLOW, AND REDUCING HUMAN IMPACTS HELPS REESTABLISH THE NATURAL ECOLOGICAL PROCESS THAT SUPPORT THESE SPECIES. A RESTORED CAVE ENVIRONMENT NOT ONLY BENEFITS THE ENDANGERED SPECIES, BUT ALSO ENHANCES GROUNDWATER RECHARGE, PROTECTS BIODIVERSITY, AND HELPS MAINTAIN HEALTHY ECOSYSTEMS THAT ARE CRITICAL FOR THE REGION'S OVERALL ENVIRONMENTAL STABILITY. THESE PHOTOS ARE FROM MIDNIGHT CAVE. UH, BCP BIOLOGISTS WORK WITH VOLUNTEERS FOR SIX YEARS TO CLEAN UP THIS CAVE, AND YOU CAN SEE WHAT A DIFFERENCE THAT MAKES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. HISTORICALLY, CAVES IN OUR AREA WERE FILLED TO REDUCE HAZARDS TO LIVESTOCK, DISPOSE OF TRASH, OR MAKE LAND MORE MARKETABLE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. MODERN CAVES ALSO RESSEM OFTEN RESEMBLE PILES OF ROCKS, TRASH PILES, OR SOIL COVERED DEPRESSIONS. DUE TO THE LACK OF PLANT LIFE UNDERGROUND, THE SUBTERRANEAN ENVIRONMENT IS EXTREMELY NUTRIENT POOR FILLED CAVES IN AN URBAN LANDSCAPE HAVE FEW NUTRIENTS ENTERING THE CAVES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. REMOVING DEBRIS AND MANAGING FOR A HEALTHY NATIVE SURFACE ENVIRONMENT INCREASES THE AMOUNT OF NUTRIENTS ENTERING THE CAVE AND BENEFITS ALL THE SPECIES WHO LIVE AND DEPEND ON THIS CAR ENVIRONMENT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. CAVE CRICKETS ARE AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THE SUBTERRANEAN ECOSYSTEMS IN CENTRAL TEXAS WHERE THEY INHABIT VARIOUS CARC CAVES. THESE NOCTURNAL INSECTS PLAY A CRUCIAL WAR ROLE IN THE NUTRIENT DYNAMICS OF CAVE ENVIRONMENTS BY FEEDING ON ORGANIC MATTER AND SUBSEQUENTLY EXCRETING NUTRIENT RICH DROPPINGS. THIS PROCESS NOT ONLY AIDS IN THE DECOM DECOMPOSITION OF ORGANIC MATERIAL, BUT ALSO ENRICHES THE CAVE ECOSYSTEM SUPPORTING THE GROWTH OF FUNGI AND BACTERIA THAT ARE VITAL FOR OTHER CAVE DWELLING ORGANISMS. ADDITIONALLY, CAVE CRICKETS SERVE AS A FOOD SOURCE FOR VARIOUS PREDATORS CONTRIBUTING TO THE FOOD WEB WITHIN THESE UNIQUE HABITATS. THEIR PRESENCE HELPS MAINTAIN THE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE, MAKING THEM AN ESSENTIAL SPECIES FOR THE HEALTH AND SUSTAINABILITY OF CENTRAL TEXAS'S CAVE ECOSYSTEMS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THAT'S IT FOR ME. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO HIGHLIGHT THE BALCONES CANYONLANDS CONSERVATION PLAN AND THE COVERED SPECIES. I'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. AND THERE ARE ALSO SOME LINKS ON THE WEBSITE LISTED HERE THAT YOU CAN GO TO FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE LAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS FOR AUSTIN WATERS WILDLAND CONSERVATION DIVISION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION. UM, LET'S OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER QURESHI, UH, ELIZABETH MONK WATERSHED. BEFORE WE DO THAT, WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENTER. THANK YOU. I TOTALLY FORGOT ABOUT THAT. I APOLOGIZE. SORRY. SORRY ABOUT THAT. CRAIG NAZAR, IF YOU COULD JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS CRAIG NAZER, CONSERVATION CHAIR OF LONE STAR CHAPTER SIERRA CLUB. AND FIRST OF ALL, I WANNA SAY THAT WAS A GREAT PRESENTATION. I LOVED IT. IT WAS REALLY [02:50:01] GOOD. UM, I HAVE BEEN, AND THERE'S ONE OF REASONS I STAYED LATE, IS THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TRICOLORED BAT. THE TRICOLORED BAT MAY SOON BE DECLARED ENDANGERED. AND WHAT THEY HAVE FOUND OUT, I'VE HEARD IN OUR AREA IS THAT WHEN YOU CLEAR OUT CAVES, THAT'S ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT COMES BACK IS THE TRICOLORED BAT. UH, SO THIS THING THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT CLEARING OUT CAVES THAT HAVE BEEN FILLED IN IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CONCERNS ME SOMETIMES IS NOT ALL THE CAVES ARE ON, UH, WATER UTILITY LAND. SOME OF THESE CAVES ARE ON PARD LAND, AND THE WAY THESE ARE TREATED IS NOT EXACTLY THE SAME BECAUSE THEY'RE TWO DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS. NOW, ONE PROPOSAL I HAD, I'M WORKING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, AND I'M JUST TOSSING THIS OUT HERE. I PERSONALLY THINK THE CITY SHOULD HAVE A BAT BIOLOGIST. WE HAVE ENOUGH BATS AND ENOUGH, YOU KNOW, TRICOLOR BAT AND EVERYTHING. UM, BUT THE CAVES ARE IN ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT PLACES AND DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS. UH, SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PERSONALLY I'M WORKING ON THAT YOU MAY HEAR MORE ABOUT. I'M WORKING WITH CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THAT. UM, SO I JUST, I THINK THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. SOMETHING TO KNOW IS IT'S NOT ALWAYS EASY TO FIND THESE CAVES THAT HAVE BEEN FILLED IN. THEY'VE BEEN FILLED IN FOR A LONG TIME. AND I HAVE HEARD THERE ARE SOME CAVES ON THE HAYES COMMONS THAT HAVE BEEN FILLED IN THAT WE JUST HEARD TALKED ABOUT. UH, I ALSO KNOW THAT THERE'S ONE CAVE THAT'S HAS BEEN FILLED IN AT ZILKER BOTANICAL GARDEN. AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THESE, I I, THE IDEA OF OPENING UP THESE CAVES AND HAVING PLACES WHERE THESE CREATURES CAN LIVE IS BETTER RATHER THAN WORSE FOR THE ENDANGERED SPECIES, YOU KNOW, AND IT TAKES A PRESSURE OFF DEVELOPMENT WHEN IT HAPPENS. BUT I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT AND I WANNA THANK YOU THIS VERY GOOD PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. CAN I ASK GREG A QUESTION? DOES, DOES THE CITY HAVE SPECIFIC SPECIALISTS AS, UH, YOU KNOW, INSECT BIOLOGISTS AND PLANT BIOLOGISTS OR, UH, I, I, I CAN TELL YOU, WE, THEY HAVE AN INCREDIBLE GOLD SHEIK WARBLER BIOLOGIST. I KNOW THAT. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT INSECT BIOLOGISTS. THERE IS NO, THERE IS AN ALGAE BIOLOGIST, THE WATERSHED PR YOU MAYBE HAVE TALKED TO HIM. HE'S INCREDIBLE. BUT GO AHEAD. WE, UH, SHERRY KOOL AGAIN, WE DO HAVE, UM, CAVE SPECIALISTS, CAVE INVERTEBRATE SPECIALISTS THAT WORK WITH THESE SPECIES. I WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE COLIN STRICKLAND, WHO'S ONE OF OUR BIOLOGISTS WHO TOOK MOST OF THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THOSE TINY LITTLE CAVE CRITTERS IN THOSE VIDEOS. UM, HE'S AN AMAZING PHOTOGRAPHER. AND DOWN IN THOSE CAVES, GETTING THOSE, UH, PICTURES IS AMAZING. BUT WE DO HAVE, WE HAVE BOTANISTS, WE HAVE, UM, BIOLOGISTS THAT DO KNOW ABOUT BATS. THERE IS A BAT SPECIALIST AT TRAVIS COUNTY, DEBORAH SCOTT, WHO DOES A LOT OF THINGS THERE. SHE DOES GRANTS AND, UM, SHE'S WORKING NOW AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NEWLY, UH, POTENTIAL FOR THESE NEWLY LISTED SPECIES THAT MICHAEL TALKED ABOUT. UM, SO IT IS SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. WE HAVE BIOLOGISTS THAT KNOW ABOUT BATS, BUT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, NOT THEIR ONLY SPECIALTY. RIGHT? YEAH. I JUST WONDER ABOUT HOW MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF SPECIALTIES WE WOULD NEED. YEAH. SOME OF THEM ARE, KNOW A LOT ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS. YEAH. THAT ONE, ONE OF THE MAY ADD, ONE OF THE REASONS FOR, IN MY OPINION FOR A BAT BIOLOGIST IS THEY'RE TEARING DOWN I 35. YEAH. THERE ARE MILLIONS OF BATS UNDER BRIDGES ON I 35. AND WHAT THEY FOUND, I, I'VE BEEN GOING TO THOSE MEETINGS JUST AS A VOLUNTEER, YOU KNOW, CONCERN OF THE, THE, THE DOUBLE DECKER AREA BY UT UNDERNEATH THERE IS FI THEY FOUND ALL THESE BATS. THEY DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THEY WERE THERE, REALLY. AND THESE ARE MOSTLY MEXICAN FREE TAIL BATS. BUT WHAT ARE THEY DOING TO MITIGATE THAT AS THEY TEAR IT DOWN AND BUILD IT UP? THEY, YOU KNOW, I, THE CITY, IN MY OPINION, COULD USE AN EXPERT KEEPING AN EYE ON THESE THINGS. THANK YOU. OKAY, LET'S GO BACK TO QUESTIONS. UM, COMMISSIONER RESI. HEY, Y'ALL APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION. SUPER COOL. SUPER INFORMATIVE. DID NOT SHOW UP IN PERSON TODAY BECAUSE I WAS AFRAID Y'ALL WOULD BRING SOME BUGS IN FOR LIVE DEMONSTRATIONS. SO I'M SLIGHTLY SAD AND HAPPY THAT THAT'S NOT THE CASE. UH, NO PRES, UH, NO QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THANKS COMMISSIONER KRUEGER. YEAH, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT FASCINATING [02:55:01] PRESENTATION. AND I LOVE HOW YOU SORT OF PERSONIFIED ALL OF THE DIFFERENT CREATURES AND TOLD US, YOU KNOW, FACTS ABOUT THEM. I JUST THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR, FOR RAISING AWARENESS AND, AND UNDERSTANDING THE IMPORTANCE OF THEM. UM, DO WE HAVE A MAP OF ALL THE CAVES IN AUSTIN? UM, THERE ARE, WE DO KNOW WHERE ALL THE CAVES ARE. WE DON'T GENERALLY PUT THAT OUT A LOT OF TIMES JUST BECAUSE IF CAVES AREN'T GATED OR PROTECTED, THEN THERE CAN BE ISSUES WITH PEOPLE GOING IN THE CAVES AND HARMING THE CAVES. BUT WE DO, UM, FOR OUR PERMIT, THE BAIS CANYON LANDS PERMIT, WE HAVE 62 SPECIFIED CAVES THAT WE WERE, UM, REQUIRED TO PROTECT. AND WE'VE GOT ABOUT 52 OF THOSE UNDER SOME LEVEL OF PROTECTION. SOME OF THEM WE HAVE TRIED TO ACQUIRE. AND THE PRIVATE, UH, LANDOWNERS DON'T WANNA SELL THEM. SO WE ONLY DO ACQUISITION WITH WILLING SELLERS. SO WE ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO SUBSTITUTE A CAVE IF WE CAN FIND ANOTHER CAVE THAT HAS THE SAME SPECIES IN IT. MM-HMM. . BUT YEAH, THERE ARE, WATERSHED HAS A LOT OF DATA ON CAVES AS WELL, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T, WE DON'T GENERALLY BROADCAST. THERE ARE SOME CAVES THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS WHERE THEY ARE AND THEY'RE, UH, GATED OR PROTECTED IN SOME WAY. MM-HMM. . BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU DO HAVE AN AWARENESS AT LEAST OF SOME CAVES THAT ARE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AS WELL. YES. MM-HMM. . AND, UM, LIKE DO YOU ALL WORK TO DEVELOP RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE PRIVATE LANDOWNERS IN TERMS OF, HERE'S THE RATIONALE WHY IF THE CAVE ON YOUR PROPERTY IS COVERED, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER UNCOVERING IT OR ALLOWING US OR SOMEONE ELSE TO COME IN TO CLEAR THE CAVE? WE DO SPECIFICALLY JUST FOR THE CAVES THAT ARE ON OUR PERMIT, BUT WATERSHED PROTECTION, I DON'T KNOW, LIZ, IF YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT, THEY DO IT MORE BROADLY. UM, YEAH. AND I, I DON'T HAVE ANYONE FROM THAT TEAM HERE, BUT THEY HAVE HAD PROJECTS SPECIFICALLY WHERE THEY HAVE, UM, HYDROGEOLOGY STAFF AND AQUIFER SCIENCE STAFF HAVE, HAVE IDENTIFIED, UH, CAVES THAT, UM, AND THEN GO OUT AND THEY, UM, YOU KNOW, UN UNCOVER IT. UM, SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, THAT DOES HAPPEN FAIRLY REGULARLY. AND THERE ARE STAFF IN THAT TEAM THAT DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, GREAT CONTACTS IN THE COMMUNITY AND, AND, UM, WITH LANDOWNERS. AND SO TRY TO KEEP THAT DIALOGUE OPEN TO THE, THE LANDOWNERS WHO ARE WILLING AND INTERESTED FOR SURE. AND OF THE CAVES YOU'RE AWARE OF, WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU ESTIMATE ARE CURRENTLY COVERED? , I, I, I DUNNO THAT I COULD GIVE AN ESTIMATE OF THAT. OKAY. THE ONES THAT ARE ON THE PRESERVE, WE'VE LARGELY EXCAVATED. UM, UH, BUT THERE'S MORE, THERE'S ALWAYS MORE THAT ARE FILLED IN. UM, THERE WERE SOME ON THE PRESERVE THAT WERE NEVER FILLED IN, BUT A LOT OF 'EM THROUGHOUT, UH, THE COUNTY WERE FILLED IN. I DON'T KNOW THE DATA ON THAT. I DON'T HAVE THE DATA ON THAT PARTICULAR, UH, THING EITHER. BUT I, I WILL SAY THAT THERE IS SOME REALLY GREAT SCIENCE HAPPENING WHERE THEY'RE USING LIDAR TO HELP DISCOVER DEPRESSIONS THAT MAY BE CAST FEATURES. SO WE CONTINUE TO LOOK MM-HMM, . THAT'S GREAT. UM, AND I IMAGINE ON THE PRESERVE, IS THE DEFAULT POLICY THAT YOU ARE WANTING TO UNCOVER ALL OF THE CAVES, OR WHAT RATIONALE GOES INTO THE DECISION TO UNCOVER A CAVE FOR THE BCCP PERMIT? UH, WE'RE CHARGED WITH PROTECTING 62 FEATURES. AS SHERRY MENTIONED, THERE'S SOME LEVEL OF PROTECTION FOR 52 OF THOSE. UM, IT IS VERY LIKELY THAT SOME OF THOSE 10 THAT DON'T HAVE ANY LEVEL OF PROTECTION LEFT WILL NEED TO BE SUBSTITUTED. AND IN THAT CASE, UNCOVERING, RESTORING, FINDING ADDITIONAL CAVES BECOMES VERY IMPORTANT. SO ABOUT, CAN YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT WHAT SUBSTITUTION MEANS? YES. SO THERE'S, UH, A SUBSTITUTION POLICY IN THE BCCP. UH, THE PERMIT LISTED 62 CAVES BY NAME. SOME OF THOSE CAVES HAVE BEEN LOST TO DEVELOPMENT. UH, SOME OF THOSE CAVES. AS SHERRY MENTIONED, WE DON'T HAVE WILLING, UH, SELLERS, SO WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ENTER INTO MANAGEMENT AGREEMENTS OR AFFORD THAT FEATURE ANY TYPE OF PROTECTION. BUT OUR COMMITMENT REMAINS, WE STILL MUST PROTECT 62 CAVE KARST FEATURES FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE SPECIES. SO IF THERE'S A CAVE WE CAN'T ACQUIRE, OR THAT'S BEEN TAKEN BECAUSE OF DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S ONE OF THOSE ORIGINALLY NAMED CAVES, THEN WE MUST FIND A SUBSTITUTE FOR THAT CAVE TO PUT ON THE LIST INSTEAD. AND, UH, THERE ARE SOME REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT SUBSTITUTION. UM, YOU KNOW, MUST HAVE THE SAME, UH, SPECIES BE IN CARON AREAS. UM, BUT WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT. GOOD WORK TO GET TO THAT 62. [03:00:01] OKAY. AND I'M SORRY IF YOU SAID THIS ALREADY, BUT THE 62 THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO ARE ALL IN AUSTIN OR TRAVIS COUNTY, OR WHEN YOU SAY PERMITTED, LIKE, I'M CURIOUS WHY THOSE 62, HOW THOSE 62, AND I KNOW YOU, YOU CAN'T DIVULGE EXACTLY WHERE, WHERE THEY ALL ARE, BUT JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, THEY'RE IN TRAVIS COUNTY. YEAH. AND UM, THEY WERE KNOWN FEATURES IN THE NINETIES, KNOWN SENSITIVE FEATURES IN THE NINETIES. AND SO AS PART OF OUR CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE TAKE OF THE SPECIES, WE COMMITTED TO PROTECT 62 FEATURES WITH THOSE SPECIES. OKAY. AND THAT WAS A COUNTY DECISION? THAT'S THE, IT WAS PART OF THE BCCP PERMIT, WHICH IS THE CITY AND THE COUNTY. WE ARE JOINT PERMIT HOLDERS. THAT WAS ISSUED BY THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. SO IT WAS A NEGOTIATION IN THE NINETIES BETWEEN CITY AND COUNTY STAFF, THE SERVICE, UH, PUBLIC, UM, YOU KNOW, STAKEHOLDERS, ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS, UM, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE GROUPS, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY AT THE TABLE IN THE NINETIES MAKING THAT DECISION. YEAH, I I WAS JUST GONNA ADD, THERE ARE JUST A FEW, THERE WERE A FEW UP IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY. UM, A COUPLE OF THOSE, THE COUNTY, THIS IS THE CITY AND THE COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITIES. SO TRAVIS COUNTY, UM, MANAGES, OWNS AND MANAGES A NUMBER OF THESE CAVES AND THEY BOUGHT A TRACK ONE OF THE MORE RECENT TRACKS, THE UNIT, WHICH IS UP KIND OF BETWEEN, UM, OUR PRESERVE AND THE BA CANYON LANDS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE. AND IT HAD A, UH, ONE OF THE BCP CAVES ON IT. AND THEY ALSO HAVE SOME OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTITUTE FOR SOME THAT WERE FILLED IN UP THERE. GREAT. THANK YOU. UM, AND THEN LASTLY, I'M WONDERING IF YOU CAN COMMENT ON, ON CRAIG'S COMMENT ABOUT HOW SOME OF THESE CAVES ARE ON CITY, UH, OR EXCUSE ME, PART LAND, SOME ARE ON AUSTIN WATERLAND AND THE WAY YOU APPROACH TAKING CARE OF THOSE CAVES. OR THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ILLUMINATE ABOUT HIS COMMENTS ON THAT? UM, SURE. WE DO HAVE A CAR, UH, LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT'S PART OF THE BACO CANYON LANDS CONSERVATION PLAN. LAND MANAGEMENT PLANS, THAT'S A MOUTHFUL. AND, UM, WE DO WORK WITH PART ON SOME OF THOSE CAVES. THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT HAVEN'T BEEN, UM, EXCAVATED YET, BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER ONES THAT WE WORK WITH THEM. FOR INSTANCE, MIDNIGHT CAVE IS ONE IS ON PART LAND, AND THAT'S ONE THAT WE WORKED, UH, TO CLEAN OUT AND PROTECT. WE DO THINGS LIKE WORKING WITH THE SOCCER CLUB THAT, AT THE SOCCER FIELD TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT USING, UM, FIRE RAMP BAIT. AND WE DO THE HOT WATER TREATMENT THAT KIMBERLY TALKED ABOUT. SO WE DO PARTNER WITH PART ON HOW THOSE CAVES ARE MANAGED. OKAY. AND RESTORED. BUT WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO ALL OF THEM. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN LAST THING, IF WE WERE TO WRITE, UH, A RECOMMENDATION TO SUPPORT YOUR EFFORTS, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY THE CITY OF AUSTIN OR CITY COUNCIL COULD DO BEYOND WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY DOING THAT WOULD HELP YOU ALL, IF ANYTHING? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I'D HAVE TO POND PONDER THAT MAYBE WE, WE HAVE GOOD SUPPORT FROM CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. UH, COUNCIL MEMBER LESLIE POOLE IS THE CURRENT MEMBER ON THE BA CANYON LANDS COORDINATING COMMITTEE ALONG WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER BRIDGET. SHE MM-HMM. . UM, BUT WE'VE, THEY'VE VOTED FOR ALL OF OUR RECENT COUNCIL ITEMS THAT HAVE COME FORWARD TO COUNCIL. SO I HAVE TO PONDER THAT. OKAY. THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SHERA. NO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. WELL, I, I WANTED TO JUST OFFER AN IDEA, WELL, IN 2026 WE'RE GONNA GO OUT FOR ANOTHER GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ELECTION. SO, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS IN 1994 THAT WE DID THE PURCHASE FOR THE BALCONES AND ALSO THE WA BARTON CREEK WATERSHED, UH, LAND PURCHASES THAT WE DID. 92, I BELIEVE. UM, I COULD BE WRONG, DAVE. I'M NOT SURE. WELL, I'M, I'M ONLY THINKING 94 BECAUSE I WAS TELLING SOMEBODY HERE EARLIER THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING THEM ON AN EVERY SIX YEAR SCHEDULE AND, BUT IT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN THAT ACCURATE BACK THEN. BUT THE POINT IS THAT WE COULD GO OUT AGAIN IN 2026 FOR MORE LAND FOR THIS REASON. THE SAME REASON BECAUSE WE'VE DONE IT BEFORE. MM-HMM. . YEAH, CERTAINLY WE, UM, WE ARE LOOKING AT THAT OPPORTUNITY IN THE 2026 BOND ELECTION. WE, BACK IN THE NINETIES, THERE WAS A CITY BOND ELECTION THAT PASSED THAT YOU MENTIONED FOR THE BCP AND ALSO FOR THE BARTON CREEK WILDERNESS PARK. RIGHT. AND THEN TRAVIS COUNTY HAD A BOND ELECTION THAT FAILED. AND SO THE CITY WAS ABLE TO BUY A LOT OF OUR PRESERVE SYSTEM BACK IN THE NINETIES DURING WHEN THE BANK CRASH AND EVERYTHING. YEAH. SO THAT WAS GREAT. [03:05:01] BUT THE COUNTY HAS BEEN KIND OF MAKING UP FOR TIME, BUT THEY ALSO HAVE ANOTHER FUNDING MECHANISM. THEY HAVE A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING MECHANISM. SO THEY'VE HAD MORE FUNDING IN RECENT YEARS AND WE'VE ACTUALLY LOOKED TO THEM TO PURCHASE MORE OF THE PRESERVE LAND IN THE RECENT, UH, PAST. BUT THERE ARE A FEW KEY PARCELS, THOSE 10 CAVES MM-HMM. THAT WE MENTIONED. THERE'S A, UH, WE HAVE MORE THAN THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE GOLDEN CHEEK WARBLER HABITAT, BUT WE HAD A REQUIREMENT FOR CONFIGURATION WHERE YOU WANT A LARGE PRESERVE WITH LESS EDGE. AND WE HAD REQUIREMENTS IN EACH, UM, MACRO SITE, WHICH ARE LIKE THE WATERSHEDS. THERE'S A COUPLE OF AREAS WE STILL NEED SOME LAND. SO WE MAY BE PUTTING THAT FORWARD. BUT THAT WOULD BE A DECISION FOR AUSTIN WATER, UH, MANAGEMENT, YOU KNOW, FIRST TO MAKE ON WHICH ITEMS WE'RE GONNA PUT FORWARD FOR AUSTIN WATER, UM, IN THAT POTENTIAL BOND. OKAY. WELL GOOD. COMMISSIONER BRIER, THANK YOU. THAT'S EXCELLENT PRESENTATION. I HAVE A KIND OF A REAL GENERAL QUESTION. THERE'S A LOT OF CAR FEATURES THAT ARE ISOLATED FROM EACH OTHER, AND WHEN YOU GO THROUGH ALL THESE THINGS, YOU FIND LITTLE CREATURES THAT ARE IN THERE. IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT BECAUSE OF ISOLATION OF THESE CREATURES, ALMOST EVERY TIME YOU FIND A SIMILAR ONE, IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT SPECIES BECAUSE OF ISOLATION. IS THAT NOT GENERALLY KIND OF CORRECT. THERE THERE IS A LOT OF DIVERSITY. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE DIVERSITY WITH SO MANY OF THESE SPECIES. AND THEY ARE, THEY'RE ALL VERY LIMITED TO SMALL AREAS. THAT'S WHY THEY TEND TO BE ENDANGERED OR THREATENED. UM, THERE ARE SOME OF THESE SPECIES THAT ARE ONLY KNOWN FROM A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT CAVE SYSTEMS. SO YES, IT'S TRUE. IT'S ONE OF THE WAYS THAT THEY DIVERSIFY, I THINK. SO THAT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT TO PROTECT THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE ISOLATED. 'CAUSE EACH ONE IS IN THIS LITTLE SINGLE CAVE AND THEN 50 FEET AWAY IS A DIFFERENT CAVE THAT'S ISOLATED FROM THE OTHER ONE. SO YOU HAVE A SIMILAR CREATURE, BUT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN ISOLATED, IT SPINS OFF ITS OWN LITTLE THING. AND SURE THEY DO MOVE THROUGH, UM, JUST TINY LITTLE FISSURES IN THE ROCK. SO SOMETIMES WE WILL FIND THE SAME SPECIES IN DIFFERENT CAVES THAT, BUT THEY'RE USUALLY IN WHAT, UM, KIMBERLY MENTIONED AS THESE KIND OF CARAL AREAS. SO YOU TEND TO FIND THE SAME SPECIES IN KIND OF A SAME GENERAL AREA. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. , VICE CHAIR COOVER. UH, YEAH. THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. I'VE BEEN LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS ONE. I FEEL BAD THAT COMMISSIONER BRISTOL IS NOT HERE FOR IT. . UM, UH, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE MONTHS AGO WHEN WE WERE HEARING ABOUT THE PART NATURAL AREAS MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HEARD SOME CONCERNS FROM A, A COUPLE FOLKS IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY ABOUT SPECIFICALLY THE MANAGEMENT OF THE BLOWING, UH, BLOWING ST CAVE, I BELIEVE IT WAS. UM, WHICH AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, IT'S ONE OF THE ONLY PLACES WHERE, YOU KNOW, THE BLINDS SALMAN ARE, CAN BE STUDIED IN AN AQUIFER ENVIRONMENT. IS THERE ANY KIND OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, UH, OR INTERDEPARTMENTAL AGREEMENT, I GUESS THAT'S BEEN MADE WITH PART FOR THAT SO THAT THERE'S MORE, UM, RESEARCH BEING DONE IN THAT AREA? WE, WE DO HAVE A MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THAT TRACT IS NOW CALLED THE WILLIAM H. RUSSELL OR BILL RUSSELL CARS PRESERVE. AND WE DID DO A MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THAT TRACT. UM, AND WE WORK WITH PART ON GOING INTO THOSE CAVES WHEN, FOR RESEARCH AND RESTORATION. OKAY. THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU. UM, AND I GUESS THIS KIND OF GOES ALONG WITH JUST THE FUNDING QUESTION, BUT DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE ADEQUATE RESOURCES FOR, YOU KNOW, THOSE, THOSE CAVE RESTORATION EFFORTS THAT YOU'VE DISCUSSED? ? HOW SHOULD I ANSWER THAT QUESTION? , WE, WE HAVE AN ANNUAL BUDGET THAT WE PUT TOGETHER, YOU KNOW, TO MEET THE NEEDS OF OUR, OUR DIVISION AND YOU KNOW, WITH THE, IT'S BASED ON HOW MUCH MONEY WE FUNDING WE HAVE ON HOW MUCH WORK WE CAN DO. BUT WE TRY TO FIND A BALANCE BETWEEN ALL THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO, UM, TO MEET OUR PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER GOALS FOR OUR LAND MANAGEMENT. I APPRECIATE SIDESTEP, , . UM, OKAY. AND THEN JUST, UH, I APOLOGIZE, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT IGNORANT, BUT ARE THERE ANY DEVELOPMENT OFFERS BUFFERS OR EASEMENTS AROUND THE BCP LAND? UM, I'VE JUST BEEN SEEING A LOT OF CLEARING ON PROPERTIES IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT RECENTLY. THAT JUST IS ALWAYS A LITTLE BIT HEART, HEART WRENCHING. UH, THE BCCP DOES NOT GIVE US THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE WHAT'S HAPPENING OUTSIDE OF THE, UM, PROPOSED PRESERVE BOUNDARIES. IT'S INTENDED TO HELP DEVELOPMENT HAPPEN. AND SO NO, WE DON'T HAVE, UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THAT, BUT [03:10:01] WHAT WE DO HAVE IS, UH, THE ABILITY TO MAKE RELATIONSHIPS WITH NEIGHBORS. UM, BOTH THE CITY AND THE COUNTY HAVE A VERY ROBUST, WHILE DONE URBAN INTERFACE, UH, MANAGEMENT AND OUTREACH INITIATIVES. AND SO, UM, WE TRY TO MAKE FRIENDS WITH OUR NEIGHBORS WHEN WE GET NEW ONES. GREAT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. I WAS WONDERING IF THERE WAS, UM, LIKE AN AGENCY TO THAT WOULD DO, UM, STEPS SIMILAR TO IMMINENT DOMAIN. I GUESS I KIND OF THINK OF LIKE TXDOT AND THEIR IMMINENT DOMAIN OF LIKE THE PROPERTIES TO KIND OF EXPAND THE HIGHWAY. AND SO I WAS CURIOUS IF THERE WAS A, THERE WAS SOMETHING SIMILAR, BUT IN LIKE MAYBE ACQUISITION TO CAVE SYSTEMS THAT MAY BE ON PUBLIC, UH, PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT WHERE THE SELLER, UM, THE OWNERS AREN'T TRYING TO ALLOW THE CITY TO INCORPORATE THEM. UH, UH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THERE'S A STATE LAW THAT PROHIBITS US FROM USING IMMINENT DOMAIN FOR PRESERVE PURPOSES. OKAY. AND I ALSO HAD ANOTHER QUESTION. UM, WE CURRENTLY HAVE, WELL WE CURRENTLY HAVE AN ATTORNEY GENERAL THAT'S SUING THE FEDERAL, UH, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, UH, WITH A, UM, ENDANGERED SPECIES TO ALLOW COMPANIES TO DRILL OR OIL. SO I WAS CURIOUS IF YOU'VE ENCOUNTERED ANY KIND OF SIMILAR ISSUE OR LIKE HOW DO Y'ALL, IF, IF YOU HAVE LIKE SOMETHING TO WHERE YOU COULD BE LIKE, OKAY, THEY'RE COMING FOR US, LET'S FIGHT THIS . IF YOU CAN ANSWER THAT DON'T WANT TO HELP THEM . UM, I'LL JUST SAY, I MEAN WE, WE'VE HAD CHALLENGES OVER THE YEARS. WE DO HAVE TO WORK TO TRY TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE LANDS THAT THE CITY HAS INVESTED SO MANY RESOURCES IN, UM, ROADS, SOMETIMES OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS BECAUSE IT CAN BE EASIER SOMETIMES TO JUST CONDEMN THE CITY RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER LANDOWNERS. BUT WE, WE TRY TO PARTNER WITH THE OTHER ENTITIES IN OUR AREA AND LUCKILY FOR THE TRACKS THAT HAVE ENDANGERED SPECIES ON 'EM, THAT HELPS, YOU KNOW, TO PROTECT THOSE LANDS. BUT IT IS A CONSTANT, UM, CHALLENGE TO BE MANAGING A PRESERVED SYSTEM IN AN ESSENTIALLY URBANIZED AREA NOW. WE USED TO HAVE A LOT LESS NEIGHBORS AND A LOT MORE WILD SPACE AROUND THE PRESERVE. SO WE HAVE A LOT OF CHALLENGES JUST FROM HAVING A LOT OF NEIGHBORS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR PARTNERSHIPS AS WELL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND THANK Y'ALL FOR THE PRESENTATION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. THANK Y'ALL FOR COMING OUT. THANK YOU. I'LL JUST SAY ANOTHER KUDOS TO COLIN STRICKLAND. THOSE PHOTOS WERE AWESOME. YEAH, I KNOW. I WAS HOPING FOR SOME CRITTERS, BUT , I GUESS CRUSHY RUN OUT . OH. CAN YOU UH, DO THE MICROPHONE? NO WORRIES. ADD, IT WASN'T A LINK ON THE PRESENTATION, BUT THE CITY'S WILDLAND CONSERVATION DIVISION DOES HAVE A YOUTUBE CHANNEL WHERE YOU'LL FIND A LOT OF THOSE REALLY COOL CARSON VERTEBRATE VIDEOS. AWESOME. THANK YOU. I WILL, I WILL ADD, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER JOHNNY CARSON, WHEN HE HAD GUESTS ON THAT SPECIALIZED IN ANIMALS, HE ALWAYS HAD THEM BRING ANIMALS ON, YOU KNOW, SNAKES AND BOBCATS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO NEXT TIME YOU COME, YOU'RE REQUIRED . I, I, I DON'T THINK SO. SO, BECAUSE YOU WERE REQUIRED TO BRING, YOU KNOW, CAVE CREATURES? NO, I, I FELT, I FELT ITCHY ANYWAY, JUST BY WATCHING THEM. SO YOU DON'T NEED TO BRING IT . I THINK THAT WOULD BE HARASSMENT OF ENDANGERED. WE'LL, EXCUSE DAVE FOR THE PRESENTATION. HE CAN WATCH IT VIA VIDEO, BUT WELL THANK FOR COMING OUT. KEEP THE ANIMAL SAFE. . UH, NEXT [5. Review and approve the draft 2025 Environmental Commission Regular meeting schedule] UP WE HAVE ACTION ITEMS, REVIEW AND APPROVE THE DRAFT 2025 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE. I THINK YOU ALL HAD THAT IN THE BACKUP DOCUMENTATION. SO IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT SCHEDULE OR ANY DATES ON THAT SCHEDULE? SO IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE IT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR HAND. ALL SECOND. OH, THANK YOU FOR A SECOND. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR HAND. WE HAVE RESI. I THINK I COULD TELL YOUR HANDS UP. . OKAY, I SEE IT. WE WAVE IT DOWN. KURESHI KRUEGER, FER, BEDFORD, SHERA SULLIVAN AND BRIER. MOTION PASSES. NOT TO PUT TOO FINE A POINT ON IT, BUT IS THAT REALLY CORRECT, ? I I SEE THAT. I SEE THAT HAT AND I SEE THE GLASSES. WELL, THE HAT AND THE HAIR, BUT I MEAN, YOU KNOW, REALLY [03:15:01] THAT I HAVE, I HAVE BEEN SPEAKING, SO I, YEAH, HE IS BEEN SPEAKING ANALYSIS ON THAT. I GUESS . UH, OKAY, NEXT UP WE HAVE, UH, [6. Update from the Urban Forestry Committee on the rescheduled meeting – Richard Brimer ] COMMITTEE UPDATES. UM, UPDATE FROM THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE ON THE RESCHEDULED MEETING. COMMISSIONER PRIME. WE'VE BEEN RESCHEDULED SO MANY TIMES. I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER . UH, I THINK NEXT WEEK WE HAVE A MEETING, UH, COMMISSIONER SHERRA'S NODDING YOUR HEAD. SO I'M GONNA GO WITH THAT. UH, BUT, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER KRUEGER AND COMMISSIONER SHERA AND MYSELF AND COMMISSIONER NICHOLS, AND I'M SPEAKING FOR HIM IN ABSENT, UH, WHEREVER HE MAY BE HIDING. UH, BUT, UH, WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH OUR, UH, THING THAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO REACH AGREEMENT ON WHEN WE HAVE A MEETING, AND THEN ONCE WE GET THAT VOTED ON, WE WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO VOTE IN TOTAL. SO THAT'S WHAT WE THINK WE'RE GONNA DO, ASSUMING THAT, UH, WE DON'T HAVE EVERYONE SICK OR TRAVELING OR WHATEVER GOES ON. AWESOME. THANKS FOR DOING THE WORK, Y'ALL. UM, ANY FUTURE [FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS] AGENDA ITEMS? NOT SPECIFICALLY A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM, BUT IF THE MUD IS COMING BACK TO US IN A MONTH, IT FEELS LIKE VERY SHORT, UH, . IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION TO DIGEST. IF Y'ALL COULD JUST KEEP US POSTED AS IT PROGRESSES THROUGH THE PROCESS SO THAT WE CAN BE TRYING TO KEEP OURSELVES UP TO DATE ON THE MATERIALS THAT ARE PROVIDED, UH, AT THOSE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. THAT'D BE CORRECT. THANK, YES. WE'LL, THANKS. YEAH, LIZ, ONE MORE THING. UH, AND THIS WAS, THIS APPLIED TO MUD, BUT THE OTHER STUFF AS WELL, SEVERAL OF THE, UH, PRESENTERS HAD ADDITIONAL MATERIALS. IT WOULD BE NICE IF YOU, YOU KNOW, IF PEOPLE HAVE STUFF, IF YOU COULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO PROVIDE IT, YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO THE MEETING SO THAT WE COULD HAVE IT BEFOREHAND. BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANYONE ELSE, BUT I LIKE TO REVIEW THE PRESENTATIONS PRIOR TO THEM. GIVING THEM THAT WAY GIVES ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO, YEAH, BETTER PREPARE FOR IT. UH, ELIZABETH FUNK WATERSHED, I ENCOURAGE THAT. UM, IT JUST DOESN'T ALWAYS HAPPEN. DOESN'T HAPPEN. I DO KNOW THIS ONE, PARTICULARLY TONIGHT. THEY WERE WORKING ON IT UP UNTIL THE MEETING, BUT YES, AGREED. . OKAY. THANK YOU, MA'AM. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. WELL, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, IT IS 9 25. SO LET'S ADJOURN GUYS. TAKE CARE. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.