[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:02]
LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
DECEMBER 4TH, 2024, UH, AT THE PERMITTING AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER EVENT CENTER.
UH, LOCATED AT 6 3 1 0 WIL JIMINO DELCO DRIVE, AUSTIN, TEXAS 7 8 7 5 2.
WE'RE HAVING SOME MIC ISSUES FOR COMMISSIONER KRUEGER.
IF WE GET THAT FIXED OUT, I'LL BE ABLE TO SHIFT THEM DOWN.
WHY DON'T YOU JUST SAY YOUR NAME ON UH, CHE PRESENT
UH, NEXT UP WE HAVE THE APPROVAL OF
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
THE MINUTES.HAVE ALL THE COMMISSIONERS HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THAT? I MAKE A MOTION.
MOTION MADE BY BRISTOL SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR HANDS.
RESI, KRUEGER FER, BEDFORD, BRISTOL, SHERA, AND SULLIVAN.
OKAY, NEXT UP WE HAVE, WELL, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.
NEXT UP WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS
[2. Name: Dredge of Channel Rd. Lagoon, SP-2023-0376D Applicant: Stephen Hawkins, Aqua Permits Location: 4824 Laguna Ln, Austin, TX, 78746 Council District: District 8 Staff: Miranda Reinhard, Environmental Scientist Senior, Watershed Protection Department; 512-978-1537, miranda.reinhard@austintexas.gov Applicant request: Request to vary from LDC 25-8-261(C)(9)(a) to allow more than 25 cubic yards of dredging in Lake Austin. Staff Recommendation: Recommended with conditions]
AND ACTION ITEMS. UH, FIRST UP WE HAVE ITEM TWO, DREDGE OF CHANNEL ROAD LAGOON, SP DASH 2 0 2 3 DASH 0 3 7 6 D.APPLICANT IS STEVEN HAWKINGS AQUA PERMITS AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION.
AH, WE COULD JUST MOVE THAT ONE DOWN MAYBE.
DO YOU WANNA GRAB THAT GUY? YEAH.
DO WE HAVE THE STAFF PRESENTATION UP? OKAY.
CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME NOW? GREAT.
SO GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
I'M MIRANDA RYAN HARD AND I'M ONE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST SENIORS IN THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT.
AND I AM THE WETLAND BIOLOGIST, REVIEWER AND FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION OR ERM REVIEWER FOR THIS CASE.
AND I WILL BE PRESENTING ON THE VARIANCE FOR 25 DREDGING, 25 CUBIC YARDS OF, UH, IN MORE THAN DREDGING, MORE THAN 25 CUBIC YARDS IN LAKE AUSTIN.
AND THE NAME OF THIS PROJECT IS DR OF CHANNEL ROAD LAGOON.
SO THE ADDRESS IS 48 24 LAGUNA LANE, AND THE SITE IS LOCATED IN NORTH, UM, WEST AUSTIN, OUTSIDE OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE AND LOCATED IN THE FULL PURPOSE JURISDICTION.
AND THE PROJECT IS LOCATED EAST OF 360 AND THEN SOUTH OF THE COLORADO RIVER ALONG LAKE AUSTIN.
THE SITE IS IN THE LAKE AUSTIN WATERSHED AND WATER SUPPLY RURAL CLASSIFICATION WITHIN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE, FULL PURPOSE JURISDICTION AND COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT.
AND THE SITE IS IN A LARGE LAGOON IN THE BACK OR BACKWATER SLEW OFF OF LAKE AUSTIN, AND IT IS MOSTLY SURROUNDED BY A CONCRETE BULKHEAD WITH DIFFERENT RESIDENCES AND THEIR ASSOCIATED BOAT DOCKS.
AND THERE IS A CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE THROUGHOUT THE SITE, AS WELL AS 15 WETLAND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ALONG THE LAGOON AND THE TO THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY, THERE IS CHANNEL ROAD AND LAGUNA LANE, AND THEN TO THE SOUTH IS ROCKCLIFF ROAD.
[00:05:01]
NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.SO, UH, THIS PROJECT IS, UH, FOR A DREDGE VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW MORE THAN 25 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGING IN LAKE AUSTIN.
AND LDC 25 8 2 61 C NINE A ALLOWS UP TO 25 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGING IN THE LAKE FOR NAVIGATION SAFETY FOR ONE SINGLE PERMIT APPLICATION.
SO, DUE TO CHANNEL INACCESSIBILITY AND BUILDUP OF SEDIMENT OVER THE YEARS IN THE LAGOON, THE PROJECT IS PROPOSING THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF DREDGE VOLUME TO RESTORE THE LAGOON TO A NAVIGABLE DEPTH AND RESTORE SHORELINE ACCESS TO THE RESIDENCES.
SO THERE'S EXISTING BATHYMETRY SHOWN IN VARYING COLORS FOR DIFFERENT DEPTHS, AND IT RANGES FROM 4 92 UM, FEET TO 487 FEET IN DEPTH.
AND ULTIMATELY THIS VARIANCE REQUEST IS JUST ABOUT RESTORING CHANNEL NAVIGABILITY.
SO THIS IS A NEAR MAP IMAGE DATED JANUARY 6TH, 2024, JUST TO SHOW HOW THE LAGOON IS HIGHLY PRONE TO ACCUMULATING SEDIMENT AND MORE FREQUENT DREDGING REQUESTS OF SMALLER DREDGE VOLUMES WOULD RESULT IN MORE RISKS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND MORE TIME, EFFORT, AND BURDEN BUREAUCRATICALLY TO UNDERGO THE VARIANCE PROCESS MULTIPLE TIMES.
SO APPROVAL OF THIS LARGER VARIANCE REQUEST FOR DREDGING WOULD RESULT IN LESS FREQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND LESS TIME AND EFFORT COMPARED TO PROCESSING MULTIPLE VARIANCES.
SO LDC 25 8 2 61 C NINE A ALLOWS UP TO 25 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGING IN THE LAKE FOR NAVIGATION SAFETY FOR A SINGLE SITE PERMIT.
AND THE PROJECT PROPOSES DREDGING DOWN TO FOUR FEET IN DEPTH, UM, SORRY, DREDGING DOWN FOUR FEET IN DEPTH OR DOWN TO THE ELEVATION OF 4 88 0.8.
AND THIS EQUATES TO APPROXIMATELY 174,000 SQUARE FEET OR FOUR ACRES IN AREA.
AND THEN A REMOVAL OF 11,237 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGE VOLUME IN TOTAL.
SO THE GREEN AREA ON THIS IMAGE IS THE MAXIMUM AREA OF DREDGE, AND THEN THE KIND OF ORANGEISH COLOR AROUND THE BORDER IS THE THREE TO ONE SLOPE OF DREDGING THAT I'LL DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT MORE LATER.
AND THEN THE PINK AND FUCHSIA AREAS, ALL OF THE WETLAND CEFS THAT HAVE BEEN MAPPED.
SO SIMILAR VARIANCES HAVE BEEN GRANTED FOR PROJECTS WITH SIMILAR CODE REQUIREMENTS.
THE FIRST EXAMPLE IS 43 0 1 AND 43 0 7 MICHAEL'S COVE.
AND THIS PROJECT WAS APPROVED IN 2010 FOR DREDGING DOWN TO 489 FEET AND REMOVING APPROXIMATELY 5,000 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGE FROM ANOTHER LAGOON OR SLEW OFF OF LAKE AUSTIN.
AND THEN ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS THE TAYLOR S SLOUGH SILT REMOVAL PROJECT, WHICH WAS ALSO APPROVED IN 1993, AND THAT ALLOWED FOR DREDGING DOWN TO 4 88 0.3 FEET AND OR ELEVATION OF 488.3 AND REMOVAL OF APPROXIMATELY 2,500 CUBIC YARDS ALSO OFF OF ANOTHER BLACK BACKWATER SLEW ASSOCIATED WITH LAKE AUSTIN.
SO THIS PROJECT IS PROPOSING SIMILAR DREDGE DEPTH, UM, BUT AT A MUCH LARGER VOLUME DUE TO A MUCH LARGER LAGOON AREA.
AND SO THEY ARE PROPOSING TO DREDGE DOWN TO THAT 4 88 0.8 COMPARED TO THE 4 89 AND THE 4 88 0.3, AND THEN A TOTAL VOLUME DREDGE OF 11,237 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGE COMPARED TO THAT 5,020 500 THAT I JUST MENTIONED.
SO IN ADDITION TO ALL OF THE REQUIRED WETLAND MITIGATION, THEY'RE ALSO PROVIDING SEVERAL DIFFERENT ENHANCEMENTS.
AND ONE OF THOSE INCLUDES, UH, PROTECTING THE NATURAL SHORELINE AREAS AND THE LARGER WETLAND CEFW 13.
AND THAT IS THROUGH DOING A THREE TO ONE HORIZONTAL TO VERTICAL SLOPE OF THE SHORELINE.
AND THAT IS GOING FROM THE LAKE BOTTOM ELEVATION AT THE SHORELINE DOWN TO A FINAL, THE FINAL DREDGE DEPTH.
AND THAT'S SHOWN IN THAT ORANGE HATCH AROUND THE BORDER OF THE GREEN MAXIMUM DREDGE AREA.
AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO BE LIMITING DREDGING WITHIN THE 25% AND 50% CRITICAL ROOT ZONES OF THE TREES ALONG THE SHORELINE TO OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING CONCRETE RETAINING WALLS THAT ARE PRESENT.
AND THOSE ARE SHOWN IN GREEN AND ORANGE ON THIS SLIDE.
SO IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIRED 2020 WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS, THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING 3,134 ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS ON THE SHORELINE AND ON LAND.
AND IN THIS EXHIBIT, THE WETLAND
[00:10:01]
CFS ARE SHOWN IN PINK.THE REQUIRED WETLAND MITIGATION IS IN PURPLE, AND THAT'S CONSISTING OF SIX DIFFERENT OBLIGATE AND FACULTATIVE WET SPECIES AROUND THAT MAIN WETLAND THERE ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION AS WELL AS SOME ALONG THE SHORELINE.
AND THEN THERE'S ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS ALONG THE SHORELINE IN PURPLE THAT ARE ALSO CONSISTING OF SIX OBLIGATE AND FACULTATIVE WET SPECIES.
THERE'S ALSO ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS THAT ARE SHOWN IN BLUE ALONG THE REMAINING EXISTING 14 WETLAND CEFS.
AND THOSE CONSIST OF SIX DIFFERENT, UM, FACULTATIVE WET AND FAC FACULTATIVE SPECIES.
AND THEN THE GRAY AREA IS SHOWN AS THE AREA OF DISTURBANCE WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE RESTORED WITH 6 0 9 S SEEDING AND PLANTING.
SO THEN THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROVIDING SEVERAL DIFFERENT MEASURES TO MINIMIZE OR AVOID SEDIMENT DISTURBANCE, UH, AND DISCHARGE.
AND THAT INCLUDES A STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, WHICH IS SHOWN IN BLUE AT THE TOP NEAR CHANNEL ROAD ALONG CHANNEL ROAD.
AND THEN THERE IS ALSO A RIP WRAP ACCESS ROAD THAT IS GOING FROM THE ENTRANCE FROM CHANNEL ROAD ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BARGE ACCESS ENTRANCE ALONG THE SHORELINE.
AND THAT'S ALL SHOWN IN THAT LIGHT RED COLOR.
AND THEN THIS CASE IS USING HYDRAULIC DREDGING METHODS, WHICH IS USING SUCTION TO REMOVE SEDIMENT DIRECTLY FROM THE LAKE.
THAT SLURRY MIXTURE IS TRANSPORTED THROUGH A PIPE AND DEPOSITED INTO DEWATERING DREDGE BAGS.
AND SO, UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
YEAH, SO THIS SHOWS THE DREDGE BAGS WILL BE PLACED IN A STABILIZED DEWATERING AREA.
AND SO THAT'S KIND OF THE AREA OUTLINED IN BLACK WHERE I'VE GOT THE GRAY, RED, UM, YELLOW AND GREEN AREAS.
AND THEN I CREATED A CROSS PROVIDED THE CROSS SECTION AND THOSE ASSOCIATED COLORS TO HELP VISUALIZE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
SO THE, THE DREDGE BAGS WILL BE PLACED IN THE DEWATERING ZONE FIRST, WHICH IS THAT LIGHT RED AREA.
AND THEN THERE WILL BE A 10 FOOT BUFFER AREA, WHICH IS THAT YELLOW IN BETWEEN THE DEWATERING ZONE AND THE VEGETATIVE, UM, BUFFER ZONE OF 15 FEET.
AND SO THIS WILL ALLOW FOR THE DREDGE BAGS TO PROPERLY DRAIN OF EXCESS WATER WITHOUT RESULTING IN EXTENSIVE SEDIMENT DISCHARGE BEFORE IT ACTUALLY REACHES THE LAKE.
SO THIS PROCESS ITSELF OF THE DEWATERING CAN TAKE UP TO SEVERAL DAYS OR WEEKS DEPENDING ON SEVERAL FACTORS WITH THE, THE DREDGE BAGS THEMSELVES.
AND SO ONCE THE DREDGE BAGS ARE DRY AND SEDIMENT HAS BEEN SOLIDIFIED, THEN THE DREDGE BAGS WILL BE PLACED IN THE AREA OF DRY DREDGE STORAGE, WHICH IS THE AREA SHOWN IN GRAY.
AND THEN THE DREDGE BAGS WILL BE LOADED ONTO TRUCKS AND TRANSPORTED TO THE LANDFILL FOR PROPER DISPOSAL VIA THAT ACCESS ROAD.
AND THEN IN ADDITION TO ALL OF THIS, THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE SILT FENCING AND MULCH LOGS DOWN SLOPE OF THE STAGING DEWATERING AND STORAGE AREAS.
AND THAT'S ALL SHOWN IN THE BROWN.
AND THEN THE FLOATING TURBIDITY CURTAIN DOWNSTREAM OF THE DEWATERING OPERATIONS.
AND THEN THE ENTIRE ACTIVE DREDGE AREA, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE SHORELINE AREA IS SHOWN IN GREEN.
SO THERE'S MULTIPLE DIFFERENT MEASURES TO HELP PROVIDE, UH, MINIMIZATION OF SEDIMENT DISCHARGE FOR THIS CASE.
SO STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THE FINDINGS OF FACT HAVE BEEN MET AND SIMILAR VARIANCES HAVE BEEN GRANTED FOR PROJECTS, UM, WITH SIMILAR CODE REQUIREMENTS AS MENTIONED IN THE ABOVE.
EXAMPLES, THE VARIANCE IS NECESSITATED BY TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES NOT DESIGNED CHOICE.
THE AMOUNT OF DREDGE REQUESTED IS THE MINIMUM AMOUNT NEEDED TO RESTORE NAVIGATION, NAVIGABLE DEPTH FOR HOMEOWNERS WITH SHORELINE ACCESS TO THE LAGOON.
AND THE VARIANCE IS ALSO THE MINIMUM DEVIATION FROM CODE.
SO THE CODE ALLOWS UP TO 25 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGE FOR NAVIGATION SAFETY.
AND THE AMOUNT OF DREDGE REQUESTED IS THAT MINIMUM AMOUNT IN ORDER TO RESTORE NAVIGATION SAFETY AND APPROVAL OF SMALLER DREDGE VOLUME MAY RESULT IN MORE FREQUENT DREDGING REQUESTS AND THE RISK OF HARMFUL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AS I WAS MENTIONING BEFORE.
SO THE VARIANCE IS LIKELY UNLIKELY TO RESULT IN HARMFUL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.
THE DREDGE WILL REDUCE THE DISTURBANCE OF SEDIMENT DUE TO NAUTICAL TRAFFIC.
BARGE ACCESS FOR LOADING AND UNLOADING OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS WERE WILL OCCUR ALONG THE SHORELINE.
THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT MEASURES TO MINIMIZE OR AVOID SEDIMENT DISCHARGE THAT ARE BEING PROVIDED THAT I MENTIONED ABOVE.
AND THEN THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONDUCTED BY HYDRAULIC DREDGING METHODS.
THERE'S ADDITIONAL WETLAND PLANTINGS THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING ALONG THE LAKE AND THE SHORELINE.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE RESTORING VIA CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
THEY'RE LIMITING THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE IMPACTS OF THE TREES.
AND THEN THEY'RE DENYING, UH, SORRY,
[00:15:01]
DENYING DREDGE TO A NAVIGABLE DEPTH WOULD POTENTIALLY HARM THE LAKE WATER DUE TO CHURNING OF THE LAKE BAD BY BOATS LEAVING SEDIMENT LADEN WATER IN THE WAKE.SO WATER QUALITY WOULD BE EQUAL TO OR BETTER THAN THE WATER QUALITY WITHOUT THE VARIANCE.
UM, JUST LIKE I MENTIONED, ELIMINATING THAT TURNING OF THE, THE LAKE BED WATER LEADING TO SEDIMENT LADEN LAKE WATER AND THEN ALSO BOTH OF THE REQUIRED WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS AND THE ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS IN THE LAKE AND THE SHORELINE WOULD POSITIVELY IMPACT WATER QUALITY.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS VARIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
ONE, PROTECT THE NATURAL SHORELINE AREAS AND THAT LARGER WETLAND CEFW 13 BY PROVIDING THE THREE TO ONE HORIZONTAL TO VERTICAL SLOPE FROM THE LAKE BOTTOM ELEVATION AT THE SHORELINE TO THE FINAL DREDGE DEPTH.
NUMBER TWO, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE SHORELINE TO A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF ONE FOOT.
THREE, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS ON THE OTHER 14 EXISTING WETLAND CFS ON LAND.
FOUR, RESTORE ALL AREAS DISTURBED IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE WITH 6 0 9 S FIVE LIMIT DREDGING WITHIN THE 25 AND 50% CRITICAL ROOT ZONES OF THE TREES.
AND THEN SIX, PROVIDE INCREASED MEASURES TO MINIMIZE OR AVOID SEDIMENT DISCHARGE AS LISTED HERE.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST IS CONDUCT DREDGING VIA HYDRAULIC METHODS USING FLOATING EXCAVATOR UNITS AND BAGGING OF MATERIAL.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
UM, I KNOW THE APPLICANT ALSO WILL BE PRESENTING, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AFTER BOTH OF OUR PRESENTATIONS.
UH, LET'S GET THE APPLICANT'S, UH, PRESENTATION UP AND MM-HMM
IF YOU COULD PLEASE STEP TO THE PODIUM AND JUST, UH, INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
UM, HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? COOL.
I'M A PROJECT MANAGER AT AQUA PERMITS.
UH, I'VE BEEN OVERSEEING THE DREDGING PROJECT.
OUR FIRM SUBMITTED THE SITE PLAN THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY, AND WE'VE SHEPHERDED IT THROUGH THE CITY REVIEW PROCESS LEADING UP TO THIS VARIANCE HEARING.
AND I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THE SCOPE OF THE DREDGING PROJECT AND ALSO LOOK AT THE IMPACT THAT THE PROJECT WILL HAVE ON THE LAGOONS ECOSYSTEM.
SO YEAH, HERE IS WHERE THE LAGOON IS LOCATED, SITUATED DOWNSTREAM FROM THE 360 BRIDGE ON LAKE AUSTIN LAGOON WAS CREATED SOMETIME IN THE FIFTIES AND HAS BEEN POPULATED FOR MANY YEARS BY SEVERAL HOMES ON CHANNEL ROAD, SAN ACRES LANE, LAGUNA LANE, AND ROCKCLIFF ROAD.
IN TOTAL, THERE ARE 27 PROPERTIES ORDERING THE LAGOON THAT WILL DIRECTLY BENEFIT FROM THE DREDGING PROJECT.
THE SPECIFIC CODE THAT WE'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM IS FOUND IN THE LDC CHAPTER 25 8 2 6 1 C NINE A, WHICH STATES THAT YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO DREDGE 25 CUBIC YARDS OF LAKE MATERIAL WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF A BOAT DOCK.
AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THE DREDGING OF THE LAGOON TO A FOUR FOOT DEPTH FROM SEA LEVEL AT MOST POINTS.
UH, AS OF TODAY, THE MOST OF THE LAGOON IS VERY DIFFICULT TO NAVIGATE.
THE SURVEY TEAM AND OUR TEAM USED A CANOE TO SURVEY THE LAGOON, AND EVEN THAT WAS A LITTLE TREACHEROUS.
UM, THE EXISTING BATHYMETRY OF THE LAGOON AS IT SITS TODAY IS ROUGHLY ABOUT TWO FOOT OF DEATH BELOW SEA LEVEL AT MOST SPOTS, WHICH MEANS THAT MOST OF THE LAGOON IS VERY SCARY TO NAVIGATE VIA MODERN WATERCRAFT.
AND AS SUCH, ANYONE GOING IN AND OUT OF THE LAGOON TO OR FROM LAKE AUSTIN IS IN DANGER OF GETTING STUCK AND INCURRING DAMAGE TO THEIR BOATS OR THEMSELVES.
UH, THIS PROJECT PROPOSES A COMPREHENSIVE DREDGING OF THE CHANNEL ROAD LAGOON, WHICH HAS BEEN AFFECTED FOR YEARS OF SEDIMENTATION ACCUMULATING FROM LAKE AUSTIN.
UH, THE HOMEOWNERS WITH PROPERTIES ALONG THE LAGOON HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF THE SEDIMENTATION BUILDUP, UH, WHICH INCLUDES THE DECREASE IN NAVIGABILITY OF WATERCRAFT AND AN OVERALL DECREASE IN WATER QUALITY DUE TO THE SEDIMENT.
SO THE ACCESS TO THE SHORELINE FRONTAGE IS ALSO LEGALLY GUARANTEED.
HOMEOWNERS ARE ASKING TO DREDGE THE LAGOON IN ORDER TO ENSURE A SAFE ACCESS TO THE LAKE FROM THEIR PROPERTY VIA BOAT, AS WELL AS INCREASE VISIBILITY IN THE WATER AND PROTECT THE W UM, WILDLIFE THERE.
AND SEEKING AN INCREASE FROM THE ALLOWED 25 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGING IS NECESSARY FOR PROVIDING A SAFE NAVIGABLE WATERWAY FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE LAGOON.
SO, PROPOSING A COMPREHENSIVE SITE PLAN FOR THE DREDGING OF THE LAGOON IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE METHOD OF MITIGATING THIS ISSUE.
UM, SEEKING INDIVIDUAL DREDGING
[00:20:01]
PERMITS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS WOULD BE PUTTING THE ECOSYSTEM OF THE LAKE AT RISK DUE TO AN INCREASE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCES AND LACK OF BIG PICTURE OVERSIGHT.IN THE SMALLER JUDGE OPERATIONS, LIKE MIRANDA WAS MENTIONING, UM, THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WOULD ALLOW FOR A MORE EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSIDERATE METHODOLOGY OF DREDGING.
AND THE SCOPE OF THIS PROJECT WOULD GREATLY REDUCE DISTURBANCE OF THE LAGOONS ECOSYSTEM BY PROPOSING A SINGLE ONE-TIME DREDGING AS OPPOSED TO MULTIPLE DREDGING PROJECTS.
YOU COULD CALL IT A MORE HOLISTIC APPROACH TO IMPROVING THE HEALTH OF THE LAGOON.
SO OUR SITE PLAN PROPOSES THE REMOVAL OF 11,237 CUBIC YARDS OF JUDGE MATERIAL FROM THE CHANNEL ROAD LAGOON AND SITE PLANS WITH SIMILAR SCOPE HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY COA, INCLUDING MICHAEL'S COVE IN 2010, AND TAYLOR SLOUGH SILT REMOVAL PROJECT IN 1993.
UH, AT THE REQUEST OF WATERSHED, WE'VE SENT THE SITE PLAN TO SEVERAL FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCIES FOR THEIR REVIEW.
UH, THE CONTENTS OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES, CITY OF AUSTIN DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT, UH, TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE, AND THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
AND THE SITE PLAN HAS BEEN FOUND TO MEET THE ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS OF NATIONAL, STATE, AND CITY LEVELS IN PROTECTING AND IMPROVING THE CONDITIONS OF A PROTECTED ECOSYSTEM.
UH, HYDRAULIC DREDGING METHODS HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE ARMY CORPS AS DESCRIBED HERE.
SO, THE PROPOSED DREDGING WILL NOT ONLY MAINTAIN, BUT WILL IMPROVE THE WATER QUALITY OF THE LAKE BY ADHERING TO STRINGENT DREDGING REQUIREMENTS AGREED UPON BY THE WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT.
SEDIMENTATION WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE LAKE BED USING HYDRAULIC DREDGING METHODS ONLY, UH, APPROVED BY THE WHILE OR WATERSHED, THE COA TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE IN THE ARMY CORPS.
UH, A HYDRAULIC DREDGE UNIT SIMILAR TO THE ONE PICTURED HERE WILL BE USED TO REMOVE SEDIMENT FROM THE LAKE BED, WHICH WILL BE PIPED FROM THE DREDGE UNIT TO LAND INTO THOSE SEDIMENTATION BAGS THAT WILL BE SITUATED AT A DESIGNATED AREA READY TO RECEIVE THE SLURRY.
THOSE DEWATERING BAGS WILL BE ALLOWED TO DRAIN FOR SEVERAL DAYS OR WEEKS BEFORE THE SEDIMENT IS SOLIDIFIED.
AND WHEN THE SEDIMENT HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY DEWATERED BAGS WILL BE LOADED ONTO VEHICLES AND SAFELY TRANSPORTED TO A LOCAL LANDFILL FOR DISPOSAL.
THE DEWATERING AREA WILL HAVE THE APPROPRIATE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS INSTALLED THROUGHOUT THE DREDGING PROCESS AND WILL BE RESTORED TO 6 0 9 S STANDARDS UPON COMPLETION OF THE DREDGING.
THE EROSION SEDIMENTATION PLAN INCLUDED IN THE SITE PLAN AS A STEP-BY-STEP EXPLANATION OF THE DREDGING PROCESS INCLUDED, WHICH WILL BE CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF AUSTIN REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS TO THE FULLEST EXTENT.
THE HEALTH OF THE LAGOONS ECOSYSTEMS IS OF GREAT IMPORTANCE.
UM, PROPOSING A COMPREHENSIVE DREDGING PROPOSAL FOR THE LAGOON ALLOWS FOR A WELL-DESIGNED AND ENVIRONMENTALLY BENEFICIAL REVEGETATION PLAN.
SO THE SITE PLAN INCLUDES A LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT SEEKS TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE EXISTING WETLAND AREAS IN THE LAGOON, BOTH ON LAND AND IN WATER.
AND STAFF CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF THIS VARIANCE HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN THIS SITE PLAN AND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE WILL PROTECT THE LAGOONS ECOSYSTEM AS WELL AS MAINTAINING AT A MINIMUM OR IMPROVING THE WATER QUALITY.
THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE LAGOON HAVE BEEN RECORDED AND INCLUDED IN THE ERI OR ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY THAT IS INCLUDED IN THIS VARIANCE PROPOSAL.
NATURAL SHORELINE AREAS AND CEFS OR CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ARE DOCUMENTED HERE AND IN CITY DATABASES AND ARE TO BE MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ECM WHERE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA, MANUAL AND WETLAND AREAS DISTURBED BY THE DREDGING ARE TO BE RESTORED AND ENHANCED BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA.
PLANTING MITIGATION FOR DISTURBED AREAS WILL OCCUR ON A ONE BY ONE BASIS BASED ON THE EXTENSIVE CALCULATIONS OF AREA DISTURBANCE AND REGURGITATION BASED ON STAFF REQUIREMENTS.
UH, ADDITIONAL WETLAND PLANTINGS ARE PROPOSED AS A PART OF THE CONDITIONS FOR AL OF THIS VARIANCE BY WATERSHED.
UH, WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS ARE TO BE INSTALLED ON LAND AND IN WATER TO RESTORE ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY THE DREDGING AND WETLAND.
W 13 IS TO BE PROTECTED BY A THREE TO ONE HORIZONTAL VERTICAL SLOPE WHILE DREDGING FROM THE LAKE BOTTOM TO SHORELINE ELEVATION.
NO DREDGING IS PROPOSED IN THE AREAS BEYOND THE SLOPE.
AREAS ON LAND ARE TO BE RE-VEGETATED USING 6 0 9 S REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ECM.
THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN WILL MEET CITY STAFF'S
[00:25:01]
REQUIREMENTS FOR SUPPORTING THIS VARIANCE.ALL CONDITIONS FOR SUPPORTING THIS VARIANCE HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN THE SITE PLAN AND VARIANCE APPLICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH INPUT FROM STAFF AND THE DREDGING OF THE LAGOON WILL HELP TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE THE PRESENT ECOSYSTEM NOW AND FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
UH, LET'S OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.
HEY, Y'ALL APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION.
UM, YOU KNOW, I'M FROM, I LIVE ON RA AND MANOR WHERE WE HEAR MORE ABOUT DREGS OF SOCIETY THAN DREDGING OF LAGOONS.
SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S RELATIVELY NEW TO ME, SO I'M GOING TO JUST TAKE THE WORD OF OUR USUALLY INFALLIBLE STAFF HERE.
BUT I DID HAVE A QUESTION, UM, OBVIOUSLY UNLESS CONVINCED OTHERWISE, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THE AMOUNT OF CUBIC YARDS THAT YOU KNOW, HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR DREDGING PROJECTS SEEM TO GO UP.
I DIDN'T REALIZE IT APPLIED TO CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGE MATERIAL TO, UM, I GUESS LIKE WHAT'S TO STOP THE AMOUNT FROM CONTINUALLY GOING UP AND I GUESS WAS THERE, YOU KNOW, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE BEFORE IT WAS LIKE SMALL AREAS NOW WE'RE LIKE DOING ENTIRE LAGOON AGAIN, I'M NOT AN EXPERT, SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF THIS IS LIKE A TREND THAT WE CAN EXPECT TO CONTINUE OR SORT OF WHAT PEOPLE'S FEELINGS ARE.
IS IT OKAY? I WAS LIKE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT WASN'T CONNECTED.
UM, YEAH, SO THE, THE TWO EXAMPLES THAT I GAVE, THEY WERE DREDGING THE SAME EXTENT AS FAR AS LIKE THE ENTIRE LAGOON OR CHANNEL AREA.
IT'S JUST, IT HAPPENED TO BE A SMALLER CHANNEL, SO THERE WAS LESS DEPTH TO NEED TO DREDGE.
SO IT WAS STILL A SIMILAR SITU.
BOTH OF THOSE SITUATIONS, BOTH THE MICHAELS COVE AND THE TAYLOR SLEW ARE SIMILAR SITUATIONS WHERE THE SEDIMENT BUILDS UP OVER TIME AND IT'S SEVERAL FEET OF SILT OR SEDIMENT THAT THEY'RE HAVING TO DREDGE AND REMOVE.
AND THIS JUST HAPPENS TO BE A LARGER LAGOON THAT ALSO HAS SEVERAL RESIDENCES ALONG IT LIKE THOSE OTHER TWO CHANNELS DO.
AND SO OVER TIME IT BUILDS UP SEDIMENT.
UM, SO I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO ARE THERE GOING TO BE SEVERAL OTHER CASES THAT ARE NECESSARILY GOING TO BE OF THE SAME EXTENT, BUT, UM, I CAN SPEAK TO THE TAYLOR SLEW.
ONE IS GOING TO BE COMING AS A FUTURE VARIANCE AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WAS DREDGED 30 YEARS AGO, SO THAT'S HOW LONG IT'S TAKEN FOR IT TO BUILD UP SEDIMENT TO NEED TO BE DREDGED AGAIN.
UH, INTERIM ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER, UH, LIZ JOHNSTON.
JUST TO ADD ON TO THAT, UM, WE DID TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE BENEFITS AND NEGATIVES OF, OF LIMITING THE AMOUNT OF DREDGE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, BUT IT IS THE CASE THAT THESE LAGOONS DO FILL UP WITH SEDIMENT.
AND SO IT'S, UM, KIND OF WEIGHING, UM, DREDGING MAY POTENTIALLY MORE IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, BUT THAT WOULD IN THEORY PREVENT A, YOU KNOW, PUT OUT FURTHER INTO THE FUTURE WHEN IT HAS TO COME BACK AND BE RE DREDGED.
UM, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT WILL, IT WILL HAVE TO EVENTUALLY.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE, WE THOUGHT THAT SINCE THEY'RE IN THERE NOW, I MAY AS WELL, UM, REMOVE AS MUCH AS THEY NEED TO TO PREVENT FUTURE DREDGING OR AT LEAST, UM, PUT IT OFF INTO THE FUTURE FURTHER.
AND THEN, YEAH, ONE OTHER QUESTION I HAD, AGAIN, BECAUSE I'M TOTALLY CLUELESS WHEN IT COMES TO THIS STUFF.
UM, LIKE IF THE SEDIMENT IS JUST LIKE DIRT, WOULD IT NOT BE POSSIBLE LIKE COMBO COMPOST IT? OR IS IT LIKE JUST SO MUCH LAKE AND BOAT CHEMICALS YOU'RE LIKE, NAH, THROW THAT STUFF IN THE TRASH? UM, YEAH, I MEAN THEY, THE SOIL HAS TO BE PUT INTO SOME SORT OF SAFE PLACE.
IT, IT IS A LOT OF IT, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S IN THERE.
UM, AND SO IT GOES TO A, A REGISTERED, UH, PLACE WHERE THEY CAN AT THAT POINT DETERMINE WHETHER IF IT NEEDS TO BE IN A LANDFILL OR IF IT CAN BE REUSED.
UM, BUT IT, IT, YOU KNOW, THE CITY DOESN'T WANT IT AND IT'S TOO MUCH FOR ONE SINGLE LANDOWNER TO, TO HANDLE.
SO I MEAN, IN THEORY THEY COULD PUT IT AND USE IT IN THEIR YARD IF THEY WANTED TO, BUT I DON'T THINK, UM, THE VOLUME OF IT IS JUST TOO MUCH.
SO YEAH, I MEAN, I'VE NEVER KNOWN DIRT TO HAVE A, A BUNCH OF VALUES, SO I TOTALLY FEEL YOU APPRECIATE IT.
OH, IT PROBABLY DOES
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS.
UM, FIRST OFF, JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT I IMAGINE I ALREADY KNOW, BUT THERE'S NO PUBLIC ACCESS TO THIS LAGOON? CORRECT? IT'S JUST 25, 27 PRIVATE HOMES THAT HAVE ACCESS TO THE LAGOON.
[00:30:02]
UM, YEAH, THAT'S THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE'RE SAYING.UM, BUT YOU CAN ACCESS THE LAGOON FROM LAKE AUSTIN PROPERTY.
UH, BUT NOT, NOT FROM THE LAND.
THERE'S NO THERE PUBLIC BOAT RAMP OR ANYTHING.
UM, AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY BECAUSE IN BOTH OF YOUR PRESENTATIONS YOU ALL MENTIONED THIS PROJECT POT POTENTIALLY IMPROVING WATER QUALITY.
UM, AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT SAID IT WOULD IMPROVE WATER QUALITY IN THE LAKE, BUT IN THE TEXT OF THE PRESENTATION IT SAID IN THE LAGOON.
AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING, IS THERE ANY DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THAT WHEN WE IMPROVE THE WATER QUALITY OF THE LAGOON THAT OVERALL HELPS THE LAKE? OR HOW ARE YOU ALL DEFINING AND MEASURING THAT? SORRY, I'M DOUBLE CHECKING THAT IT'S ON
UM, YEAH, SO WE'RE REFERENCING THE WATER QUALITY OF THE LAGOON ITSELF, NOT THE LAKE, BUT IN THEORY SINCE THEY ARE CONNECTED, IT CAN HAVE A BACKFLOW TO THAT.
UM, BECAUSE REALLY THE CONCERN IS MORE OF WOULD IT BE A NEGATIVE IMPACT TO WATER QUALITY OF THE LAKE AND WOULD THERE EVENTUALLY BE SEDIMENT THAT WOULD DISCHARGE INTO THE LAKE? AND BASED ON ALL OF THE EXTENSIVE MEASURES THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING, THAT SEEMS VERY UNLIKELY.
AND WE'VE GOT NOTES ON THE SITE PLAN INDICATING THAT IF SOMETHING WAS TO OCCUR, IF THERE WAS SOMETHING TO BE NOTICED, THAT THEY WOULD IMMEDIATELY STOP WORK AND INVESTIGATE WHAT THAT IS AND MAKE SURE THAT THE SEDIMENT IS NOT CONTINUING TO DISCHARGE.
SO, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT MEASURES IN PLACE HERE FOR THAT.
WHAT, WHAT ARE THE TOP THREE INDICATORS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IMPROVING WATER QUALITY? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN IN, IN REAL TERMS? I, I WOULD SAY THE, THE TURNING UP OF THE SEDIMENT IS THE MAIN ISSUE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S THREE, THAT'S THE MAIN ISSUE.
SO WHEN BOATS GO IN THERE, UM, THE PROPELLERS TURN UP SEDIMENT, WHICH CAUSES A SEDIMENT PLUME TO OCCUR BY DREDGING THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.
UM, SO I WAS CURIOUS, YEAH, WITH THE CURRENT WATER TRAFFIC, UM, ALSO CLIMATE CHANGE, DROUGHT FLOODING, HOW MANY YEARS DO YOU ANTICIPATE IT MIGHT BE BEFORE YOU WOULD NEED TO RED DREDGE AGAIN? WE HEARD ONE PROJECT, IT'S BEEN 30 YEARS.
DO YOU HAVE AN ESTIMATE FOR THIS LAGOON? WELL, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THIS LAGOON HAS NEVER BEEN DREDGED BEFORE AND IT WAS CREATED SOMETIME IN THE FIFTIES, SO I'D SAY 75 YEARS.
ROUGH ESTIMATE, BUT I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT FOR SURE.
UM, FOR THE PLANT REVEGETATION AND MITIGATION, UM, ARE THOSE NATIVE PLANT SPECIES? MM-HMM
UM, AND SO IS THAT, I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE TO HAVE THE MANICURED LAWN LOOK, AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS PEOPLE'S PROPERTY GOING RIGHT DOWN TO THE LAKE.
SO WHEN YOU ALL REPLANT, IS THERE A CERTAIN BUFFER ZONE THAT THE LANDOWNERS AREN'T, YOU KNOW, ALLOWED TO INFRINGE UPON? OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? SO THE WETLAND AREAS THAT ARE NATURALLY OCCURRING ON THE SHORELINE ARE TO BE PRESERVED TO THE BEST POSSIBLE ABILITY, AND IF NOT, RE-VEGETATED UP TO I THINK THREE OR FOUR FEET FROM SHORELINE.
UM, AND THEN OF COURSE ANYTHING IN WATER WOULD BE RE-VEGETATED MM-HMM
WITH THOSE NATIVE PLANTINGS, UM, ON A ONE-TO-ONE BASIS, PLUS THE ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS AS CONDITIONED FOR THE VARIANCE.
BUT OVER TIME THAT THAT THREE TO FOUR FEET AREA THAT'S ON SOMEONE'S PROPERTY, THEY COULD POTENTIALLY REMOVE WHATEVER PLANTS THERE TO EXPAND THEIR LAWN OR DO SOMETHING ELSE.
I WOULD HOPE THEY WOULDN'T MM-HMM
IN THEORY, THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO.
UM, THERE'S, UH, IN REALITY THERE'S LITTLE ENFORCEMENT OF THAT.
UM, IT IS SOMETHING WE'RE AWARE OF, HAVEN'T QUITE FIGURED OUT HOW TO FIX THAT PROBLEM YET.
UM, AND THEN I'M CURIOUS ABOUT DOWNSIDES IF WE DON'T DREDGE.
SO I SEE FOR THESE, YOU KNOW, 27 PROPERTY OWNERS, THE DOWNSIDE IS, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE THEIR PROPERTY VALUE GOES DOWN, THEY CAN'T REALLY NAVIGATE THE WATERWAY AS MUCH.
WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOWNSIDES TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN IF WE DON'T DREDGE, IF THERE ARE ANY, I MIGHT ASK JOHN TO PIPE IN IF HE THINKS OF ANYTHING, OR MIRANDA? UM, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS NECESSARILY AN ENVIRONMENTAL RISK TO NOT DREDGING.
UM, IT IS A RESERVOIR THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LAGOON WAS MORE OR LESS CREATED FOR THESE RESIDENTS.
THEY HAVE A, THEY HAVE BOAT DOCKS, THEY HAVE LAKE
[00:35:01]
ACCESS, AND SO THE CITY HAS LONG HAD A POLICY OF ALLOWING LAKESIDE OWNERS TO HAVE DOCKS AND HAVE ACCESS TO THE LAKE.AND SO IT'S REALLY KIND OF, IT'S THE PRECEDENT OF, OF, UH, THESE RESIDENTS BEING ABLE TO, TO USE THE, THE LAKE AS, AS THE SUBDIVISION WAS INTENDED.
UM, AND THEN LAST QUESTION, I'M, I'M CURIOUS WHAT COST, IF ANY, IS THERE THAT THE CITY IS TAKING ON IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, MOVING THE DREDGE BAGS OR ANYTHING ELSE? IS IT ALL THE APPLICANT WILL TAKE IT TO THE LANDFILL? THE CITY DOESN'T, ISN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF THAT? THAT'S CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER SHERA, I JUST HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE NUMBER OF CUBIC YARDS THAT IS, AND REALLY JUST HOW MANY FEET DOWN THAT IS.
YEAH, IT'S GOING DOWN FOUR FEET IN DEPTH.
SO IT'S, IT'S RANGING FROM THE CURRENT, THE CURRENT BATHYMETRY, THE CURRENT HEIGHT OF THE, THE SEDIMENT BUILDUP IN THE WATER IS AT 4 92 IS THE HIGHEST, AND THEY'RE PROPOSING TO GO DOWN TO 4 98 0.8.
SO I THINK I'VE ASKED THIS QUESTION BEFORE ON OTHER CASES WHERE THERE'S A LONG LIST OF THINGS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TO COMPLY WITH.
HOW DO WE AUDIT THAT? HOW DO WE KNOW AT THE END OF THE PROJECT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY PLANTINGS AND WHATNOT? UM, CORRECT.
SO THE CONDITIONS, UM, WILL BE PUT ON THE COVER SHEET OF THE SITE PLAN.
UM, AND THEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTOR WHO GOES OUT MONTHLY, USUALLY FOR INSPECTIONS AS ALL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, UM, OCCUR, WE'LL HAVE THOSE NOTES.
UM, AND WILL, THEY WILL COUNT EVERY PLANT, UM, BEFORE THEY ISSUE A, UH, A FINAL.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE THEY NEED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TO, I THINK IT'S A, IT'S NOT A CERTIFICATE OF OOC, IT'S LIKE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AND THEN I HAD THE SAME QUESTION ABOUT LAND FILLING THE DIRT WHERE THERE MIGHT BE SOME NEED FOR FILL SOMEPLACE, BUT AGAIN IT MIGHT BE CONTAMINATED.
I JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REALLY AN ARTIFICIAL LAKE.
I MEAN, THIS IS NOT THE CALL THE UNTAMED COLORADO RIVER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THIS IS A MANUFACTURED LAKE THAT WE CREATED.
SAY AGAIN, IT'S NOT LIKE THE COLORADO RIVER DOWN, SO IT'S LIKE MULLER LAKE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR OUR NATURAL CREEKS OR WHATNOT.
I MEAN, WE STILL HAVE TO PROTECT THE WATER QUALITY THERE, BUT AGAIN, IT WAS AN ARTIFICIALLY CREATED LAKE RIGHT.
SECRETARY OF BRISTOL, AS ARE ALL OF THE LAKES IN TEXAS.
AND THAT'S DEBATABLE
WE HAVE POTHOLES, UM, YOU KNOW, BUT THE POTHOLE LAKE'S UP IN THE, IN THE PANHANDLE AND STUFF, BUT WE ACTUALLY HAVE ONLY ONE TRUE LAKE.
SO, UM, I KNOW THAT YOU MENTIONED THIS, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD IN THAT, IN LOOKING AT THESE PHOTOS, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF, UM, INVASIVE PLANTS.
ARE THOSE COMING OUT TOO, OR IS THAT PART OF THE SCOPE? TALK TO ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.
JUST LIKE THERE WAS A LOT OF IB AND STUFF THERE AND THE INVASIVE PLANTS ALONG THE WETLAND SHORELINE MM-HMM
PORTION OF IT ALONG SHORELINE.
NO, THE, THE INVASIVES AREN'T COMING OUT.
THAT WASN'T PART OF THE PROCESS, BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF ADDITIONAL NATIVES GOING IN, ESPECIALLY FOR THAT LARGE WETLAND, CEFW 13 AT THE BOTTOM.
UM, PART OF THAT KIND OF GETS INUNDATED IN AND OUT OF THE WATER.
AND SO THERE WERE, THERE'S A LOT OF AREA THERE THAT'S AVAILABLE TO BE REPLANTED SO THAT THERE CAN BE ADDITIONAL VEGETATION PRESENT TO REALLY ENHANCE THAT FUTURE.
YEAH, I GUESS THAT WAS MY OTHER QUESTION WAS WHAT, UM, KIND OF, YOU KNOW, ONCE THIS IS ALL DREDGED OUT, LIKE WHAT IS, UM, WHAT ARE THE PROPERTY OWNERS KIND OF INVESTING IN TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE DOESN'T JUST CONTINUE TO BE ALL THIS SEDIMENT THEY PILES DOWN IN THERE AND I MEAN, I KNOW IT'S NEAR THE GOLF COURSE UP THERE AND THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER ISSUE, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IS THERE SOMETHING FROM THE LANDOWNERS THAT THEY KIND OF PLAN TO OTHER THAN PLANTS MM-HMM
UM, BUT ANYTHING ELSE THAT THEY'RE KIND OF PLANNING ON THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE DOING IN ADDITION? YEAH, NO, UM, AND I KNOW JOHN CAN SPEAK TO THIS, BUT, UM, THE APPLICANT OR THE OWNER, THE LANDOWNER HAD COORDINATED WITH ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT 27 LANDOWNERS, I
[00:40:01]
THINK IS THE NUMBER HE MENTIONED, UM, THAT THEY'VE ALL BEEN IN, IN AGREEANCE AND IN CONGRUENCE KNOWING THAT ALL OF THESE PLANTINGS ARE GONNA BE PROPOSED AND ARE PART OF THIS PROCESS AND WILL BE REQUIRED.SO THAT KIND OF GOES BACK TO, UM, YOUR QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT HOW WILL THESE BE PROTECTED AT LEAST.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE AGREEING AT THIS POINT AND ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY WILL NECESSARILY CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THEM, BUT, SO IT'S NOT PART OF AN HOA, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A CITY NEIGHBORHOOD, YEAH.
EVERYONE WANTS TO BE ABLE TO USE THE LAGOON AS IT WAS INTENDED WHEN THEY BOUGHT THEIR HOMES, SO, OKAY.
THEY'RE ALL IN CONCURRENCE ON THIS.
NO OTHER QUESTIONS? I CHAIR COFER.
UM, THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR EXPLAINING, UH, SOME OF THAT PROCESS.
THE DEWATERING ZONE HAD ME SCRATCHING MY HEAD WHEN I FIRST LOOKED AT THE PACKET
UM, SO I GUESS MINE, MY QUESTION REALLY JUST GOES TO ENFORCEMENT AS WELL AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE TIMELINE FOR PLANTING AFTER DREDGING? IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD BE A PRETTY DISTURBED AREA.
UM, AS FAR AS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ENDS.
THAT HASN'T BEEN DECIDED IN, IN PART OF THE SITE PLAN PROCESS.
SO IT WASN'T A SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME ADDED TO THE CONDITIONS.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE, COULD BE ADDED IN THIS PROCESS.
YEAH, I THINK JUST, I WAS MORE CURIOUS ON THAT.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AFTER THE MONTHLY INSPECTIONS ARE, ARE BEING DONE DURING CONSTRUCTION OR DURING THE DREDGING, HOW LONG AFTER THAT ARE THOSE INSPECTIONS? 'CAUSE I KNOW THAT SOME OF THESE PLANTS CAN TAKE A WHILE TO ACTUALLY ESTABLISH AND, AND FIND OUT IF, IF WE'RE ACTUALLY BEING, YOU KNOW, UM, A BENEFIT TO THIS AREA.
UM, SO THERE'S USUALLY QUITE A BIT OF IMPETUS OR, UM, UH, DESIRE AMONGST APPLICANTS TO GET THEIR PLANTS IN AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE THAT IS THE LAST STEP USUALLY, UM, BEFORE THEY CAN GET THEIR FISCAL BACK.
SO THEY DO HAVE TO POST FISCAL WITH THE CITY THAT THEY THEN GET BACK AND GET THEIR, UH, THEIR FINAL SIGN OFF.
UNFORTUNATELY, AFTER THE FINAL INSPECTION AND AFTER THE FISCAL HAS BEEN RELEASED, THERE AREN'T FOLLOW UP INSPECTIONS, SO EVERYTHING HAS TO BE ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTOR WILL, UM, SIGN OFF.
THAT MEANS THAT THERE CAN'T BE A, LIKE A LARGE AREAS OF UNVEGETATED SOIL LEFT.
SO IF IT TAKES A WHILE FOR THE SEED SEED MIX TO COME UP, THEN THEY, THEY'LL WAIT UNTIL, UNTIL THOSE HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED SUFFICIENTLY SUCH THAT THEY CAN RELEASE THE, THE PROJECT.
SO, UM, AT THE TIME OF FINAL, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED THERE AND THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY BARE SPOTS.
SO THERE'S NO REAL WAY TO ENFORCE THEM BEING REMOVED AFTERWARDS? NO, UNFORTUNATELY NOT.
IS THAT ACROSS THE BOARD OR IS IT JUST BECAUSE IT'S IN THE LAGOON? NO, THAT'S EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY.
LIKE LANDSCAPING, ANY KIND OF INSPECT ANY KIND OF WETLAND RESTORATION, WHAT HAVE YOU, THERE, THERE ISN'T, THERE ISN'T STAFF TO FOLLOW UP ON ALL THAT UNFORTUNATELY.
I JUST HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
UM, IS THERE EVER LIKE A SITUATION THAT WOULD WARRANT YOU, UM, TESTING THE DREDGE MATERIAL THAT COMES OUT? OR IS IT JUST TYPICAL THAT YOU JUST, JUST DISPOSE OF IT? UM, I AM NOT SURE.
THEY MAY DO SOME TESTING OF IT BEFORE IT GOES TO THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE LANDFILL OR WHOEVER TAKES IT MAY DO SOME TESTING.
UM, I WILL SAY THAT WATERSHED PROTECTION, UM, ALONG WITH, UM, LCRA DOES SOIL SEDIMENT SAMPLING OF ALL THE RESERVOIRS, UM, MAYBE NOT NECESSARILY IN THIS LAGOON, BUT AT THE BASIN OF EACH RESERVOIR TO, YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT WHAT KIND OF POLLUTANTS ARE THERE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I I EXPECT THAT WHATEVER'S IN THE LAGOON WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WHAT THE SOIL SEDIMENT SAMPLES SHOW FOR ALL OF LAKE AUSTIN.
AND, UM, ANOTHER QUESTION THAT I WAS WONDERING ABOUT WAS, ARE THERE ANY KIND OF RESTRICTIONS ON FERTILIZERS OR PESTICIDES RUNNING OFF FROM LIKE THE HOUSE, THE HOMEOWNERS THAT MAY TREAT THEIR LAWNS? I GUESS I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF, UM, BLUE GREEN ALGAE OR ANYTHING.
WE DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE THEM TO USE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, BUT THERE'S NO REGULATIONS FOR THAT.
UM, THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE THAT HAVEN'T BEEN ANSWERED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION I'M GONNA FOLLOW UP WITH WHAT, UM, UH, CHAIR PERRY JUST ASKED.
UM, I, WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR COMMUNICATING WITH THOSE LANDOWNERS OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT NOT TO USE ON THEIR LAWNS AND WHAT IS SAFE AND WHAT IS THAT PROCESS?
[00:45:02]
THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.WE HAVE AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY, UM, OUTREACH EDUCATION TEAM, UM, THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY DO TABLING EVENTS, THEY HAVE SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS, THEY HAVE, UM, GROW GREEN GUIDES.
THEY AT ONE POINT HAD, UM, LAKESIDE, UM, PROPERTY OWNER AND CREEKSIDE PROPERTY OWNER CARDS THAT WERE, UM, A, THEY MADE AVAILABLE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S LIKE TARGETED, UH, OUTREACH TO LAKESIDE HOMEOWNERS OR CREEKSIDE HOMEOWNERS SPECIFICALLY.
THAT WOULD BE PRETTY COSTLY, UNFORTUNATELY.
SO, UM, THEY ARE A VERY, UH, DEDICATED AND GREAT TEAM.
I DON'T KNOW HOW WELL, UM, IT REACHES EVERYONE AND I'M SURE IF WE HAD SOMEBODY HERE, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK A LOT MORE ABOUT IT, UM, THAN I I CAN, BUT I I, I DO KNOW WE HAVE AN ENTIRE DIVISION DEDICATED TO THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH OF THIS SORT.
SO YEAH, I MEAN, THOSE GO GREEN, UM, GUIDES ARE REALLY HELPFUL.
I'M WONDERING, SINCE WE HAVE 27 PROPERTIES, IF MAYBE 27 OF THOSE COULD BE SENT TO EACH OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.
I MEAN, THAT SEEMS LIKE A DOABLE NUMBER.
I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE 2,700, UM, YOU KNOW, AS, AS PART OF THE PROCESS.
YEAH, WE COULD, WE COULD PUT TOGETHER SOME, UM, INFORMATION ABOUT IPM OR, AND OTHER, OTHER BEST PRACTICES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HANDS.
NOW, DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THE ITEM WE DO IN THE, UM, LIZ, UM, IN THE MOTION? SHOULD I PUT THE GO GREEN IN THERE OR DO WE JUST REACH AGREEMENT WHILE WE'RE HERE? UM, YEAH, I MEAN, YOU COULD PUT THAT AS A CONDITION.
UM, SUBJECT IS THE DREDGE OF CHANNEL ROAD, UH, LAGOON SP DASH ZERO THREE, SORRY, 0 2 0 3 2.
HOW ABOUT THAT?
WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO VARY FROM LDC 25 DASH EIGHT DASH 2 61 C NINE A TO ALLOW MORE THAN 25 CUBIC YARDS OF DREDGE IN LAKE AUSTIN, WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE SITE IS LOCATED, UM, IN THE LAKE AUSTIN WATERSHED WATER SUPPLY RULE CLASSIFICATION AND DESIRED, UM, DEVELOPMENT ZONE.
WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE VARIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
NUMBER ONE, PROTECT THE NATURAL, NATURAL SHORELINE AREAS AND LARGER WETLANDS.
UM, CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES W DASH 13 BY PROVIDING A THREE TO ONE, UM, HV SLOPE WITH THE LAKE BOTTOM ELEVATION AT THE SHORELINE TO THE FINAL DREDGE DEPTH
[00:50:01]
TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS.UM, 2,125 PLANTINGS COMPRISED OF AN EQUAL NUMBER OF SIX DIFFERENT SPECIES OF, UH, THE FACW AND OBL SPECIES WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE SHORELINE TO A MAXIMUM DEATH OF ONE FOOT, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS 1,321 PLANTINGS COMPRISED OF AN EQUAL NUMBER OF SIX DIFFERENT SPECIES OF FAC AND FACW SPECIES.
UM, ON THE OTHER 14 EXISTING WETLANDS CEFS, UM, ON LAND RESTORE, ALL AREAS DISTURBED IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE CWQZ PER STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS 6 0 9 S FIVE LIMIT JUDGING WITHIN THE 25% AND 50% CRITICAL ROOT ZONE, UM, OF A TREE OF TREES ALONG THE SHORELINE TO OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING CONCRETE RETAINING WALLS.
SIX, PROVIDE MEASURES, UM, TO MINIMIZE, AVOID, UH, MINIMIZE SLASH AVOID SEDIMENT DISCHARGE, INCLUDING ONE STABILIZE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND ACCESS ROAD FROM THE, FROM CHANNEL ROAD ENTRANCE TO THE BARGE ACCESS LOCATED, AND TWO SILT FENCING AND MULCH LOGS DOWN SLOPE OF STAGING, UH, STORAGE AND DEWATERING AREAS.
THREE DESTABILIZED DEWATERING AREAS FOR DREDGE BA BAGS.
FOUR FLOATING, UH, TURBIDITY, CERTAIN DOWNSTREAM OF THE DEWATERING OPERATION.
AND FIVE, FLOATING TO TURBIDITY CURTAINS SURROUNDING ACTIVE DREDGE AREA.
CONDUCT DREDGING SEVEN CONDUCT, UM, DREDGING VIA HYDRAULIC METHODS USING FLOATING EXCAVATOR UNITS AND BAGGING OF MATERIALS.
THEREFORE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE VARIANCE REQUEST WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION, SUPPLY INFORMATION, UH, ABOUT BEST PRACTICES IN MAINTAINING THE PLANTS AND AVOID USING CHEMICALS THAT CAUSE ALGAE BLOOMS. EACH OF THE PROP OWNERS WILL RECEIVE A, A PACKET THAT INCLUDES THE GO GREEN MANUAL.
SECOND, BUT ALSO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY FOR THE STAFF CONDITION NUMBER SIX.
UH, WAS THAT STABILIZED DEWATERING OR WAS THAT STABILIZED DEWATERING AREA.
UM, AND I WANTED TO BRING SOMETHING UP THAT I WISH I'D THOUGHT OF DURING QUESTIONS, BUT I'M THINKING NOW ABOUT THE ENDANGERED AND NEAR ENDANGERED MUSCLE SPECIES MM-HMM
AND HOW THEY'RE OFTEN IN, IN THE EMBANKMENTS.
AND WHEN WE HAD THAT PRESENTATION FROM, I'M FORGETTING WHERE THEY'RE FROM NOW, BUT THEY SAID THAT FOLKS SHOULD REALLY CHECK IN THAT AREA WHEN THEY'RE DOING, UM, WHEN THEY'RE CLEANING DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT PROJECTS.
AND SO I'M WONDERING IF WE SHOULD ADD SOMETHING ABOUT ENSURING PROTECTIONS FOR MUSCLE SPECIES.
SO, UM, THE RESERVOIRS ARE, UM, WHILE THEY DO HAVE NATIVE MUSCLES, THEY'RE UM, VERY UNLIKELY TO HAVE ANY OF THE CANDIDATE OR ENDANGERED LISTED, UH, SPECIES BECAUSE, UM, THEY ARE MORE PICKY WITH THEIR HABITATS AND LIKE FREE FLOWING WATER.
SO VERY UNLIKELY THAT YOU'LL FIND A, A FAT MARKET IN THE LAGOON.
UM, FOR DREDGING, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PARKS AND WILDLIFE HAS, UH, PERMITS FOR MUSCLE RELOCATION REQUIREMENTS.
UM, I'VE DONE MUSCLE SURVEYS ON THE LAKE AND I, UM, EVEN, EVEN NATIVE MU HAVE A HARD TIME EXISTING IN REALLY, UH, DEEP SEDIMENT LIKE THIS BECAUSE THEY, UM, NEED TO BE UP CLOSEST TO THE SURFACE AND THE SEDIMENT, THEY JUST TEND TO SINK.
SO, UM, WHILE THEY MAY RUN INTO THEM THAT THAT'S A TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE REQUIREMENT THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE, UM, ALREADY COORDINATED WITH THEM ON, SO.
YEAH, I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA SAY WE DID HAVE A MARINE BIOLOGIST VISIT THE LAGOON AS PART OF THE CONDITIONS FOR TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE, AND THEY FOUND NO MUSCLE SPECIES ENDANGERED OR OTHERWISE IN THE LAGOON.
COMMISSIONER RESI, WERE YOU GONNA ADD SOMETHING? YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY MAYBE I SPACED OUT AND DIDN'T HEAR IT IN THE, THE VARIANCE CONDITIONS, BUT MAYBE WE COULD ADD A VARIANCE CONDITION THAT'S LIKE, IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO COMPOST THE, THE SEDIMENT THAT'S AFTER IT'S DRIED OR WHATEVER THAT WE ASK THAT THEY DO.
SO, UM, DO YOU WANT IT, UM, RECYCLED AFTER IT'S, UM, DRIED AND EVALUATED FOR TOXINS? GOT IT.
[00:55:18]
SO TWO ON OUR CONDITIONS, WILL WE FIND A WAY, UH, TO REUSE THE SEDIMENT AFTER IT IS DRIED AND EVALUATED FOR TOXINS? I THINK, DOES THAT NEED TO BE SECONDED? 'CAUSE WE ADDED IT DOESN'T MATTER.ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE ON ALL THAT'S BEEN STATED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE CONDITION, I MEAN OF THE MOTION.
RESI KRUEGER COFER BEDFORD, BRISTOL SHERA SULLIVAN.
[3. Name: Loyola Flats, SP-2024-0147C.SH Applicant: Allison Lehman, Kimley-Horn Location: 6700 Decker Lane, Austin, TX, 78724 Council District: District 1 Staff: Miranda Reinhard, Environmental Scientist Senior, Watershed Protection Department; 512-978-1537, miranda.reinhard@austintexas.gov Applicant request: Request to vary from LDC 25-8-261(G) to allow floodplain modification in the Critical Water Quality Zone (CWQZ) Staff Recommendation: Recommended with conditions]
HEARINGS AND ACTION ITEMS. NUMBER THREE, LOYOLA FLATS SP DASH 2 0 2 4 DASH 0 1 47 C SH UM, APPLICANT IS ALLISON LAYMAN AND KIMLEY HORN.SO, UM, YEAH, SO I AM ALSO THE WETLAND BIOLOGIST REVIEWER AND FLOOD PLAIN MODIFICATION REVIEWER FOR THIS CASE AS WELL.
AND I'LL BE PRESENTING THE VARIANCE FOR FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE FOR THIS CASE.
SO THE ADDRESS FOR THIS CASE IS 6,700 DECKER LANE AND IT IS LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE AS WELL, ALSO IN THE FULL PURPOSE JURISDICTION.
AND IT'S LOCATED IN EAST AUSTIN BETWEEN 180 3 AND UM, ONE 30.
SO THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED AND SUBURBAN CLASSIFICATION.
IT'S LOCATED IN THE DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND FULL PURPOSE JURISDICTION AND COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE NEXT SLIDE.
THIS SITE IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DECKER LAKE ROAD AND LOYOLA LANE AND TRAVIS COUNTY EXPO CENTER AND LAKE WALTER ELONG ARE BOTH TO THE EAST ACROSS LOYOLA LANE AND THEN TO THE WEST IS COLONY PARK.
JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A GENERAL VIEW OF IT.
AND THE STAR IS THAT PROJECT LOCATION AREA.
SO THIS CASE IS A MOSTLY UNDEVELOPED PIECE OF PROPERTY WITH TWO WETLAND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON THIS SITE.
THEY'RE BOTH WITHIN EXISTING DRAINAGE CHANNELS WITH INLETS ON EITHER SIDE.
ONE IS ON THE NORTH SIDE NEAR COLONY LOOP DRIVE, AND THEN ONE IS ON THE SOUTHWESTERN SOUTHEASTERN CORNER ALONG LOYOLA AND A DECKER LAKE.
AND THERE IS A CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE ON THAT SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A, WHAT I'VE SHOWN IN GOLD IS WHERE THERE WAS A PARTIALLY EXCAVATED DETENTION POND FROM A PREVIOUS SITE PLAN.
AND THEN THERE ARE STANDARD 150 FOOT SETBACKS FOR THE WETLANDS AND THERE'S ALSO A ATLAS 14 CITY OF AUSTIN 100 YEAR FULLY DEVELOPED FLOODPLAIN.
THAT'S NOT SHOWN ON HERE, BUT I'LL SHOW IT ON A, ON ONE OF THE NEXT SLIDES.
SO THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THIS PROJECT IS TO VARY FROM THE LDC 25 8 2 60 TO ALLOW FOR FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
THIS IS A IMAGE OF THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE AND THE FULLY DEVELOPED EXISTING 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN IS SHOWN IN THAT LIGHT BLUE OR TEAL COLOR.
AND THEN THE PROPOSED 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN IS SHOWN IN IN THE DARK BLUE COLOR.
AND THEN ALL OF THE GRAY AND HATCHED GRAY ARE BOTH AREAS WHERE THERE'S PROPOSED GRADING OR PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION ON THE SITE.
AND THIS SITE IS, UH, PROPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BIOFILTRATION AND DETENTION POND WITHIN THE, UH, FLOODPLAIN AS WELL AS PROVIDING COMPENSATORY FLOOD STORAGE FOR WITHIN THE EXISTING ENGINEERED DRAINAGE CHANNEL.
AND THIS IS A SMART HOUSING OR AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
SO ANY FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATIONS ARE PROHIBITED WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE UNLESS IT MEETS ONE OF THREE EXEMPTIONS AND IN THIS CASE IT DOESN'T MEET ANY OF THOSE THREE EXEMPTIONS.
SO THERE'S A VARIANCE REQUIRED FOR, UM, NEEDING TO VARY FROM THIS SECTION OF CODE TO ALLOW FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION
[01:00:01]
WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.SO THE FLOODPLAIN HEALTH IS MEASURED BY A FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FLOODPLAIN HEALTH OR FAFH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPENDIX X IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL OR ECM AND THE FLOODPLAIN IS ASSESSED.
THE FLOODPLAIN THAT IS ASSESSED IS THE 100 YEAR CRITICAL, AH GOODNESS, I'M MIXING ALL OF MY WORDS UP TODAY.
UH, NOT CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, THE CITY OF AUSTIN 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND THE CONSULTANT USED APPROPRIATE METHODOLOGY TO ASSESS THE, THE FLOODPLAIN.
AND THIS IS A PICTURE OF WHAT THEY DID FOR THEIR ZONE ONE AND ZONE TWO SAMPLE PLOTS.
AND THEY ASSESSED THE CONDITION TO BE IN FAIR CONDITIONS.
SO IT RANGES FROM EXCELLENT TO GOOD, TO FAIR TO POOR THIS SITUATION, IT WAS FAIR.
AND SO THAT SCORE FROM THAT FAFH DETERMINES THE RESTORATION OR MITIGATION RATIOS THAT ARE REQUIRED.
SO FOR FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION, EITHER FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION ON SITE OR FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION, OFFSITE IS REQUIRED.
AND ONSITE RESTORATION IS BASED ON THE ECM 1.75 RATIO RATIOS.
OFFSITE MITIGATION IS BASED ON THE RATIOS AND ECM 1.7 0.6.
AND SO ONSITE RESTORATION RATIOS ARE EQUIVALENT TO THE OFFSITE MITIGATION RATIOS.
AS I'VE SHOWN HERE, ONSITE RESTORATION IS PRIORITIZED WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN OF THE, SORRY, WITHIN IS PRIORITIZED.
ONSITE RESTORATION IS PRIORITIZED FOR THE FLOODPLAIN WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
AND THEN SECONDLY, IT IS PRIORITIZED AFTERWARDS IN THE FLOODPLAIN OUTSIDE OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE OR ZONE ONE.
AND SO IN THIS CASE, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH AREA TO RESTORE ONSITE TO FULLY MEET THE RESTORATION RATIOS.
AND WHAT THEY DID PROVIDE IS THAT 0.61 ACRES.
AND SO IN LIEU OF THE REMAINDER, REMAINDER OF REQUIRED RESTORATION, THE APPLICANT CAN PAY A FEE INTO THE RIPARIAN ZONE MITIGATION FUND.
AND UM, THAT'S BASED ON THAT THE MITIGATION RATIOS IN THE ECM 1.7 0.6.
SO IN THIS CASE THE APPLICANT PROPOSED 0.61 ACRES OF ONSITE RESTORATION AND THEN THEY'RE PAYING THE FEE FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE 8.63 ACRES REQUIRED VIA OFFSITE MITIGATION.
SO FOR THIS SITE, THE TOTAL FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION AREA IS 1.96 ACRES AND THE AREA OF FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION IN ZONE ONE OR THE FLOODPLAIN OUTSIDE OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE IS SHADED IN GREEN HERE AND IT EQUATES TO 0.84 ACRES IN TOTAL.
THAT ZONE ONE AREA WAS SCORED AS FAIR BY THAT FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF FLOODPLAIN HEALTH.
AND THEN THAT EQUATES TO A RATIO OF THREE TO ONE USING THAT ECM 1.7 0.5 RESTORATION, UM, RATIO.
AND SO THAT RESULTS IN 2.52 ACRES OF TOTAL REQUIRED RESTORATION OR MITIGATION REQUIRED FOR THAT ZONE ONE AREA.
AND THEN THE AREA OF FLOODPLAIN MODIFICATION IN ZONE TWO OR THE FLOODPLAIN WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE THAT'S SHOWN IN PURPLE, THAT EQUATES TO 1.12 ACRES.
IT GETS A SIX TO ONE RATIO BASED ON THE ECM 1.7 0.6 AND OR SORRY, 1.7 0.5.
AND THEN IT RESULTS IN THE 6.72 ACRES OF RESTORATION OR MITIGATION AREA REQUIRED.
SO COMBINING THOSE TWO NUMBERS TOGETHER FOR THE ZONE ONE AND THE ZONE TWO TOTAL REQUIRED RESTORATION AND MITIGATION AREAS, THAT EQUATES TO THE 9.24 AREA.
AND SINCE THOSE RESTORATION RATIOS AND MITIGATION RATIOS ARE THE SAME, THIS TOTAL AREA IS NOT JUST FOR RESTORATION, IT'S FOR RESTORATION AND OR MITIGATION DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU'RE PROVIDING OR ABLE TO PROVIDE ON SITE.
SO THIS IS SHOWING WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DID PROVIDE.
SO THEY HAVE AN AREA OF FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION IN THAT ZONE TWO, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANNA PRIORITIZE THE FLOODPLAIN WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
AND THAT'S SHADED IN PURPLE AND THAT EQUATES TO THAT UH, 0.61 ACRES OF RESTORED AREA.
AND SO SUBTRACTING THAT FROM THE TOTAL REQUIREMENT OF RESTORATION AND MITIGATION AREA, THEY'VE GOT A REMAINDER OF 8.63 ACRES.
AND SO THAT'S THEIR MITIGATION THAT THEY HAVE TO BE REQUIRED.
THAT'S WHAT DETERMINES HOW MUCH OF A FEE THEY NEED
[01:05:01]
TO PAY.AND SO THEY CALCULATE THAT FOR THE RIP PERIOD ZONE MITIGATION FUND AND THEIR TOTAL REQUIRED FEE IS THAT 382 UM, THOUSAND DOLLARS FEE.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE IN THESE LANDSCAPE SHEETS, THEY'RE REALLY MAXIMIZING THEIR RESTORATION AREA WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
THIS IS INCLUDING BOTH THE WETLAND CEF MITIGATION AND THE FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION AREAS.
AND SO THE REMAINING OPEN AREA THAT WAS LEFT AFTER THEY HAD DONE ALL OF THEIR WETLAND MITIGATION, UM, PLANTINGS IS THAT 0.61 ACRES AND THAT'S WHAT THEY FILLED UP WITH THEIR FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION PLANTING.
SO THEY'RE MAXIMIZING THE AMOUNT OF AREA IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE THAT THEY CAN PROVIDE.
SO IN ADDITION TO 49,000 SQUARE FEET OR 1.13 ACRES OF REQUIRED MITIGATION, WETLAND MITIGATION, THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING SEVERAL ENHANCEMENTS INCLUDING AN ADDITIONAL 44,000 SQUARE FEET OR ONE ACRE OF ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION.
SO ALMOST TWICE AS MUCH OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY REQUIRED, THEY'RE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND WITH THAT.
UM, IT INCLUDES SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS.
SO THEY'RE DOING NATIVE PLANTINGS IN THE SEDIMENTATION AND FILTRATION BASINS, WHICH ARE SHOWN IN THE LIGHT AND DARK PINK RESPECTIVELY.
THEY'RE DOING LOW GROWTH GROSS SEED MIXES IN THE DETENTION POND SHOWN IN RED.
THEY'RE PROVIDING, UM, AN ENHANCED NON EROSIVE CONVEYANCE OUTFALL OF A DISTILLING BASIN WITH FOUR DIFFERENT ROWS OF STAGGERED NATIVE BUNCH GRASSES AROUND THE PERIMETER, WHICH IS SHOWN IN GREEN.
THEY'RE PROVIDING NATIVE TREES AND BUNCH GRASSES AROUND THE WETLAND CFS THEMSELVES SHOWN IN YELLOW.
THEY'RE PROVIDING NATIVE BUNCH GRASSES AROUND THE WETLAND CFS IN THE WASTEWATER EASEMENT SHOWN IN ORANGE.
THEY'RE PROVIDING NATIVE TREASON SHRUBS IN THE CF SETBACK AND LIGHT BLUE.
THEY'RE PROVIDING NEED OF SHRUBS IN THE CEF SETBACK IN THE WASTEWATER EASEMENT IN DARK BLUE.
AND THEN THE OTHER GRAY AREAS, THEY'RE PROVIDING 6 0 9 S SEATING FOR ALL OF THAT.
AND THERE IS DISCUSSION OF A POTENTIAL FUTURE TRAIL CONNECTION TO COLONY LOOP, WHICH IS ON THE NORTHERN WETLAND CEF AREA.
HOWEVER, NOTHING HAS BEEN FINALIZED, BUT I JUST WANTED Y'ALL TO BE AWARE OF.
THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE INCLUDING IN THE CONDITION STATING THAT THE DIRECTOR OF WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT MAY REDUCE THE WETLAND MITIGATION REQUIREMENT ADMINISTRATIVELY TO ALLOW FOR THAT FUTURE TRAIL CONNECTION TO COLONY LOOP DRIVE.
SO, UM, ADDITIONALLY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE PROVIDING NATIVE POLLINATOR SPECIES IN BOTH THE WETLAND, CEF MITIGATION, PLANTINGS AND FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION PLANTINGS.
SO THERE'S ALSO AN EDGE BARRIER OF LIMESTONE BLOCKS THAT'S GOING TO BE PROVIDED AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE MODIFIED CEF SETBACK AREAS AND RESTORATION AREAS TO PREVENT MOWING AND OR ENCROACHMENT IN THOSE AREAS.
AND THAT'S SHOWN IN BROWN ON THESE IMAGES.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO WETLAND, CEF SIGNAGE THAT'S GOING TO BE PROVIDED AROUND THE, AT THE EDGE OF THE CEF SETBACK RESTORATION AREAS SHOWN IN GREEN.
SO, STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THE FINDINGS OF FACTS HAVE BEEN MET.
UH, SEVERAL VARIANCES HAVE BEEN GRANTED FOR PROJECTS WITH SIMILAR CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES TO ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SITE.
THE VARIANCE IS NECESSITATED BY TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES, NOT DESIGN CHOICE.
THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DESIGNED WITH TO FOLLOW EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY TO PRES PRESERVE NATURAL DRAINAGE PATTERNS AND MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO THE WETLAND CEFS CRITICAL ENVI CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND FLOODPLAIN.
AND THEN THE VARIANCE IS ALSO THE MINIMUM DEVIATION FROM CODE.
THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO PRESERVE WETLAND CEFS, RESTORE THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, AND MODIFY THE FLOODPLAIN AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.
WITH THE DEVELOPMENT, THE VARIANCE IS UNLIKELY TO RESULT IN HARMFUL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES.
IT'S MINIMIZING THE IMPACT TO THE WETLAND CEFS CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND FLOODPLAIN BY PRESERVING, CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE PATTERNS AND PROTECTING SURFACE WATER QUALITY AND QUALITY.
IN ADDITION TO MEETING THE WETLAND MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS, THIS PROJECT WILL PROVIDE 44,000 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION.
AS MENTIONED ABOVE, THE PROJECT WILL PROVIDE FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION PLANTINGS OF NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS FOR THE REMAINING OPEN AREA OF THAT 0.61 ACRES, MAXIMIZING RESTORATION WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE, AND ENHANCING THE FLOOD PLAIN ADDITION FROM FAIR TO EXCELLENT.
AND THE APPLICANT WILL PAY THE FEE INTO THE RIPARIAN ZONE MITIGATION FUND FOR THE REMAINING REQUIRED FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION USING THE APPROPRIATE RATIOS.
AND THEN WATER QUALITY WILL BE EQUAL TO OR BETTER THAN WATER QUALITY WITHOUT THE VARIANCE.
THE PROPOSED DESIGN IS PROVIDING ECM COMPLIANT WATER QUALITY TREATMENT.
IN ADDITION, THE PROPOSED DESIGN PRESERVES THE NATURAL DRAINAGE PATTERNS, PROTECT SURFACE WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY, AND THEN BOTH THE ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTINGS AND THE FLOOD PLAIN RESTORATION
[01:10:01]
PLANTINGS WILL FURTHER PROTECT WATER QUALITY AND THE RECEIVING STREAM.SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS VARIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
ONE, PROVIDE THE 44,000 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION, INCLUDING ALL OF THOSE THINGS LISTED BELOW.
AND THEN THAT'S THAT LANGUAGE ABOUT THE DIRECTOR OF WATERSHED PROTECTION MAY REDUCE THE AREA FOR THE FUTURE TRAIL CONNECTION.
NUMBER TWO IS PROVIDING THE NATIVE POLLINATOR SPECIES FOR BOTH WETLANDS, CEF MITIGATION AND FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION PLANTINGS.
NUMBER THREE, PROVIDE THAT EDGE BARRIER OF LIMESTONE BLOCKS AROUND THE CEF MITIGATION AREAS.
NUMBER FIVE, PROVIDING THE FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION PLANTINGS FOR MAXIMIZING THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE AND ENHANCING THAT FROM FAIR TO EXCELLENT.
AND THEN NUMBER SIX IS PAYING THAT FEE INTO THE RIPARIAN ZONE MITIGATION FUND FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE FLOODPLAIN MITIGATION REQUIRED.
AND I KNOW THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PRESENTING FOR THIS ONE.
SO AGAIN, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AFTER THEIR PRESENTATION.
UH, LET'S GET THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION UP.
SO APPLICANT IS NOT PRESENTING.
UM,
UH, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER RESI.
UM, YEAH, I WAS WONDERING, UH, LIKE WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING BUILT HERE.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S WORK BEING DONE, BUT I WAS CURIOUS WHAT WAS BEING BUILT.
USUALLY THE APPLICANT TALKS ABOUT THAT, BUT MAYBE WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT NOW.
YOU, UH, UH, DWAYNE CHOPPA WITH KIMLEY HORN, UM, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
SO, UM, YEAH, LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROJECT.
SO, UM, AS MIRANDA MENTIONED, IT'S A, UH, SMART HOUSING AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED PROJECT THAT'S PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AUSTIN.
UM, WE'RE PROPOSING 208 UNITS, UM, ON THE SITE MULTIFAMILY.
SO, UM, THAT'S GENERALLY THE, THE, THE GIST OF THE, OF THE PROJECT.
AND SO, UH, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WE HAVE QUESTIONS WE ASK THE APPLICANTS.
I THINK USUALLY IT'S ALONG THE LINES OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, ARE Y'ALL LOOKING INTO, YOU KNOW, SORT OF SOLAR PANELS ON TOP? ARE Y'ALL THINKING ABOUT HAVING, YOU KNOW, SORT OF ELECTRICAL CAR CHARGING, SORT OF WHERE Y'ALL ON THAT? UH, YES.
SO WITH THE, UM, AFFORDABILITY LOGS, SMART HOUSING, WE ARE, WE ARE DOING, UM, AUSTIN ENERGY GREEN BUILDING, UH, ONE STAR, CORRECT, ALLISON, UH, ONE STAR.
UM, AND WE DO HAVE SOME, UM, ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING, UM, REQUIREMENTS.
AND WE ARE LOOKING INTO SOLAR AS WELL, SOME SOLAR PANELS.
UM, THE SOLAR'S NOT FINALIZED IN OUR SITE PLAN.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEING LOOKED AT FOR THE PROJECT.
AND, UH, I DO BELIEVE THAT, UH, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE ON LIKE THE METRO RAPID EXPO ROUTE.
UM, SO IT'S NICE TO SEE, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT ALONG SORT OF TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS.
UH, THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW.
COMMISSIONER SIERRA, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT LIKE, RESPONSIBILITIES, WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IT IS TO KEEP THE WATER QUALITY DETENTION POND CLEANED OF LITTER DEBRIS, UH, AS WELL AS WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
UM, SO THAT'LL BE, OBVIOUSLY ANYTHING THAT'S ON SITE WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF, UM, OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.
UM, SO THAT'LL BE MAINTENANCE, UM, FOR ONSITE MAINTENANCE WILL BE THE PROPERTY OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY, LIKE, UM, LIKE THE PONDS THAT WE DESIGN ON ALL OF OUR DEVELOPMENTS IN, IN AUSTIN.
WELL, YOU HAVEN'T, YOU HAVEN'T MENTIONED WHO THE CLIENT IS.
IS IT LIKE HABITAT OR FOUNDATION COMMUNITIES OR, UM, IT'S ELLINGTON CAPITAL.
UM, SO IT'S A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPER THAT, UH, FOCUSES ON, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UM, THIS IS OUR, I THINK, FIFTH PROJECT WE'VE WORKED WITH THEM ON, IN AUSTIN, UM, IN THE AUSTIN AREA.
SO, UM, THEY'VE BEEN PRESENT IN THIS MARKET FOR THE LAST FIVE YEAR, FIVE OR SIX YEARS, SO, OKAY.
WHO, WHO WOULD BE THE OPERATOR OF THE FACILITY?
[01:15:01]
UM, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY.SO THEY WOULD, UM, THEY WOULD BE THE, THE OPERATOR OF IT AS WELL.
WELL, ONE THING I WAS INTERESTED IN, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE ABOUT THE TRANSIT ACCESS.
THERE'S, UH, YOU KNOW, THREE BUS LINES THAT ARE OUT THERE ON LOYOLA LANE RIGHT NOW.
IS THERE GONNA BE EASY ACCESS? ARE THERE SIDEWALKS ALONG LOYOLA LANE THERE? OR YOU WOULD HAVE TO, YOU WOULD HAVE TO BUILD THEM IF THERE ARE NOT, RIGHT? CORRECT.
THERE ARE EXISTING SIDEWALKS ALONG LOYOLA AND DECKER.
UM, UM, THERE'S SIDEWALKS, THERE'S PRETTY GOOD, UM, EXISTING SIDEWALKS IN THOSE AREAS.
UM, WE ARE MAKING SOME IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH SIDEWALKS ALONG LOYOLA MM-HMM
UM, AND THEN THERE WILL BE SITE, THERE WILL BE SIDEWALKS CONNECTING OUR SITE TO BOTH OF THE, THE, THE RIGHT OF WAYS AS WELL AND PROVIDING ACCESS FOR THE RESIDENTS.
ALL THANK YOU SECRETARY BRISTOL.
UM, THANKS FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
UM, SO I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A PROBLEM WITH THIS PROPERTY JUST BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN IT THAT INTERSECTION FLOOD SO BAD MULTIPLE TIMES.
AND WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE FOCUSING ON THIS CORNER AND IF WE MAKE ALL THESE ALTERATIONS, THEN WHAT HAPPENS TO THE DOWNSTREAM FOLKS? THAT PROPERTY AND THEN ALSO TO THE ROAD THERE.
I JUST DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT IT'S REALLY GONNA MITIGATE ADDITIONAL FLOODING ONCE YOU ADD THAT MUCH MORE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON TOP OF THE HILL AS IT COMES DOWN.
SO I'VE GOT, I'VE GOT SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT.
UM, I HAVE CONCERNS, AND I THINK, I THINK COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN, THIS IS MAYBE WHERE YOU WERE GOING, WAS SOMETIMES WHEN, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS GET IN, THEY HAVE A WINDOW OF TIME, UM, THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, ONCE THEY MEET THE 15 YEAR REQUIREMENT OR WHATEVER, OR 10 YEAR REQUIREMENT, THEN THEY ARE OUT.
UM, AND THEY NO LONGER HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY IN THE WAY THAT IT WAS AGREED TO AT THIS TIME.
SO, UM, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE KIND OF COME UP AGAINST, UM, AS WELL.
SO WHAT IS THE TERM, IF YOU WILL, FOR THE PROPERTY AGREEMENT? UM, I DON'T KNOW THE OFFICIAL TERM OF THE PROPERTY AGREEMENT, BUT NO, I KNOW WORKING WITH THIS CLIENT, THEY'RE NORM, THEY ARE, BECAUSE WE WORK, WE WORK WITH BOTH TYPES OF, UM, UH, MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPERS WHERE, UM, SOME ARE OWNER OPERATOR, UM, AND THEY KEEP THE PROPERTIES, UM, FOR, I, I WOULDN'T SAY FOREVER, BUT THEY KEEP 'EM FOR LONGER DURATIONS.
AND THERE'S OTHERS THAT, UM, THAT WE'VE, OTHER CLIENTS OF OURS THAT WILL DEVELOP AND SELL 'EM WITHIN, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE YEARS.
UM, THIS CLIENT IS AN OWNER OPERATOR, UM, AND, AND DOES OPERATE THEIR PROPERTIES.
THEY HAVE PROPERTIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, UM, THAT THEY'VE DEVELOPED AND OPERATE, UM, FOR, FOR LONGER DURATIONS.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT THE EXACT TERM IS, UM, BUT I KNOW THEY'RE NOT A, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT A A, A DEVELOPER THAT'S FLIPPING PROPERTIES RIGHT.
AS SOON AS THEY GET 'EM OCCUPIED.
BUT I CAN ANSWER THIS QUESTION.
I'M ON THE CITY'S HOUSING INVESTMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE, SO IT'S GENERALLY 40 YEARS FOR RENTAL AND 90 YEARS FOR OWNERSHIP, BECAUSE THERE WAS ONE THAT WAS 15 YEARS.
IT WAS REALLY A QUICK TURNAROUND THAT I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ONE THAT SHORT A TIME PERIOD.
BUT IF THEY'RE GETTING ANY CITY MONEY AT ALL, THEN THEY HAVE TO GO WITH THE LONGER PERIODS.
UM, LEMME GET TO MY OTHER QUESTIONS HERE.
I SHOULD WRITE THEM ALL ON ONE PAGE TO MAKE IT EASIER.
I
UM, HOW, HOW TALL WILL THAT BE? OR IS THAT SET INTO THE GROUND? IS THERE, WHAT IS STRUCTURALLY WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? I'M, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION? YEAH, SO THE RETENTION POND, THAT'LL BE THERE, IS THAT, IS THAT KIND OF LIKE A BIG STRUCTURE? IS IT A BERM? KIND OF DESCRIBE WHAT ALL THAT'LL LOOK LIKE THERE.
YEAH, THE BIO, THE BIOFILTRATION POND AND DETENTION POND THAT THEY'RE CONSTRUCTING.
IT, IT IS GONNA HAVE WALLS AND UM, DWAYNE CAN SPEAK TO THAT MORE, BUT IT, IT'S A NORMAL WHAT YOU THINK OF WHENEVER YOU SEE A NORMAL DETENTION OR RETENTION POND THAT, THAT HAS WALLS.
SO THERE'S A SET, SO IT'S NOT JUST A BERM.
SO THERE'S A SET HEIGHT FOR THAT MM-HMM
AND, AND WITH ALL THE PLANNINGS OVER THERE, THAT'LL BE SCREENED PRETTY, PRETTY WELL FROM, UM, FROM THE, FROM THE, FROM THE ROADWAYS.
UM, AND I DID WANT TO ADDRESS, YOU DID MENTION THE, THE FLOODING CONCERNS AND, YOU KNOW, THE PROJECT IS REQUIRED.
WE DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, IN ADDITION TO THE WATER QUALITY PONDS, WE DO HAVE A DETENTION POND, UM, YOU KNOW, PER, PER CITY CODE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT, UM, ADVERSELY IMPACTING ANY, UM, ANY DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES.
[01:20:01]
IS DESIGNED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT INCREASING ANY FLOWS FROM, FROM THE PROPERTY OR FROM THE SITE.AND THEN, UM, AND THAT GOES THROUGH THE APPROVAL FROM THE FLOODPLAIN REVIEWER, SO MM-HMM
SO THEY'VE ALREADY WORKED THAT OUT OKAY.
UM, I HAVE A LITTLE CONCERN, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS IN THE PRAIRIE, UM, IT DOESN'T HAVE GREAT SOILS TO SUPPORT LARGE TREES, UH, WHICH IS WHY THEY'RE NOT THERE RIGHT NOW,
UM, AND, UM, AND YOU KNOW, IT'S A LOT OF TREES TO TRY TO GET TO ESTABLISH IN SOME SOIL THAT'S NOT EXACTLY GREAT FOR THAT.
UM, SO KIND OF TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.
LIKE WHAT'S THE, WHAT WILL BE THE MANAGEMENT PLAN, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT FOR LIKE, UM, ATTRITION AND DIE OFF? ARE THEY GONNA RE REPLANTED IF THEY DON'T MAKE IT AFTER TWO YEARS A YEAR? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? YEAH.
UM, LIZ KIND OF SPOKE TO THIS EARLIER JUST TO THE EFFECT THAT, THAT WE DO HAVE INSPECTION STAFF THAT DOES COME OUT AND MAKE SURE THAT THE PLANTINGS ARE INITIALLY ESTABLISHED AND THEY DO HAVE THE NORMAL, UM, LIST OF NOTES ON THEIR SITE PLAN WITH REGARDS TO, LIKE, THEY HAVE TO IRRIGATE FOR A, I THINK IT'S A YEAR, UM, TWO GROWING SEASONS, I BELIEVE.
SO THERE'S, THERE ARE, AND YOU KNOW, MOST OF THESE WILL HAVE, UH, IRRIGATION SPRINKLERS, UM, TO GET THEM ESTABLISHED.
AND I THINK THAT, UM, LIKELY THERE ARE NO TREES THERE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN MOWED INTERMITTENTLY.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE WASN'T MOWING, WE WOULD LIKELY SEE SOME SORT OF TREES, WHETHER IT BE A HACKBERRY OR MESQUITE.
UM, SO THERE, THERE WOULD PROBABLY BE TREES THERE IF IT WEREN'T FOR THAT.
AND THERE ARE SOME LARGE TREES, EXCEPT FOR IT IS IN A BLACK LAMB PRAIRIE
THERE, THERE ARE SOME LARGE TREES.
SEE A LOT OF VERY TREES STILL ON THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S LIKE A LARGE WILLOW AND A LARGE COTTONWOOD TREE OVER THERE TOO.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE THERE AREN'T ANY TREES THAT ARE ABLE TO, TO BE, THAT ARE DOWN ON THE WETLANDS.
ONE, TWO OF THEM ARE AWAY FROM THE WETLAND.
THEY'RE JUST LIKE CLOSER TOWARDS A LITTLE DETENTION OUTFALL THAT'S COMING ACTUALLY OUT FROM THE, THE RESIDENCES TO THE NORTH.
BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO SEVERAL TREES THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT LARGER ALONG BOTH OF THE WETLANDS THAT ARE LINED THERE.
SO THEY'RE PROVIDING A LOT OF SHADES, SO THERE'S NOT MUCH UNDERSTORY SPECIES, WHICH IS WHAT WE TYPICALLY SEE IN WETLANDS.
AND, AND IF YOU LOOK, UM, ON THE AERIAL JUST TO THE, UH, THE, THE WEST, THERE ARE AREAS WHERE LIKE IN THE COLONY PARK AREA THAT ARE PRETTY HEAVILY WOODED, UM, JUST DOWN, YOU KNOW, JUST NEARBY.
UM, SO YOU CAN DEFINITELY TELL WHICH PROPERTIES ARE MOWED AND WHICH ONES ARE NOT BY BY THAT.
I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THIS AREA FOR ABOUT 40 YEARS, SO, UM, I, I KINDA KINDA KNOW IT WELL.
UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR THIS TIME.
THANKS FOR YOUR VERY WELL WRITTEN REPORT BY SARA COFER.
I THINK ALL OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN CLEARED UP, SO THANK YOU MISS, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE DETAIL.
I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION, UM, ABOUT HOW MANY TREES WERE GOING TO BE PLANTED? I THINK I MISSED THAT NUMBER.
SO FOR THE WETLAND MITIGATION IN TOTAL, THERE'S GOING TO BE 32 TREES IN ONE SECTION, ANOTHER 573 TREES IN ANOTHER SECTION, AND THEN THE FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 264 TREES.
SO, AND WITH ALL OF THAT, THERE'S ALSO SHRUBS OF THE SAME CALIBER, SO.
UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OH, COMMISSIONER KRUEGER.
YEAH, I JUST, I WANTED TO ADD ONE THING.
UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE AWARE, AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL RECENTLY PASSED THE AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE FOOD PLAN, WHICH IS A VISIONARY DOCUMENT, UM, THAT'S SUPPOSED TO GUIDE US FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
AND PART OF THAT, UM, INCLUDED RESEARCH THAT SHOWED THAT LESS THAN 0.1% OF THE FOOD THAT IS CONSUMED IN AUSTIN IS GROWN LOCALLY.
AND, UM, SO THERE'S GOING TO BE A BIG ATTEMPT AND INVESTMENT, UM, IN HAVING MORE COMMUNITY GARDENS IN THE CITY, MORE FOOD FOREST, MORE SMALL SCALE AGRICULTURAL, AS WELL AS SETTING ASIDE LAND FOR LARGER SCALE AGRICULTURAL PROJECTS.
SO I'M HOPING THAT WHEN WE, AS A COMMISSION ASK, DO YOU HAVE EV CHARGING STATIONS? ARE YOU DOING
[01:25:01]
SOLAR PANELS? I WOULD ALSO LOVE FOR US TO REALLY START ASKING, DO YOU HAVE COMMUNITY GARDENS? IS THAT A PLAN? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE INCORPORATED FOR THE HEALTH AND WELLBEING OF THE RESIDENTS WHO ARE GONNA LIVE THERE? UM, THAT HAS NOT BEEN A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION TO, TO DATE, UM, SINCE IT WASN'T, UM, ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS AND WE, WE USED UP A LOT OF OUR LANDUH, SO THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED, UM, TO, TO THIS POINT.
SO I'M WONDERING IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER.
'CAUSE THEY REALLY DON'T HAVE TO BE A LARGE MM-HMM
AND, UM, I THINK CAN REALLY BE A BONUS TO THE FOLKS LIVING THERE, PARTICULARLY PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO HAVE THAT KIND OF AUTONOMY OVER THEIR FOOD SUPPLY TO A LIMITED EXTENT AS WELL.
I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN TALK TO THE, THE, THE CLIENT ABOUT THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER.
BUT I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE AN AMENITY THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, I, I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THE AMENITY, SO MM-HMM
I'M WONDERING, I SEE YOU WRITING OVER THERE.
ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HANDS.
AND WE HAVE A MOTION THAT'S STILL BEING DRAFT, UH, MIRANDA, FIRST OFF, I WANNA JUST REALLY PAY YOU A COMPLIMENT THAT, UM, IN, IN YOUR BACKUP MATERIAL AND THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN, IT WAS VERY, VERY EASY FOR ME TO MAKE THE MOTIONS.
AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH I APPRECIATE THAT.
I WAS LIKE, OH, THIS IS SO EASY TODAY.
LOYOLA FLATS SP DASH 2 0 24 DASH 0 1 4 7 C, UM, S SH WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO VARY FROM LDC 25 DASH EIGHT DASH 2 61 G TO ALLOW FLOOD PLAIN MITIGATION IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE.
AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE PROJECT IS, UH, PROPOSING MODIFICATION OF THE CITY AUSTIN, OF CITY OF AUSTIN, 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN WITHIN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE TO CONSTRUCT A BIOFILTRATION AND DETENTION POND AND PROVIDE COMPENSATORY FLOOD STORAGE WITHIN THE EXISTING ENGINEERING ENGINEER DRAINAGE CHANNEL FOR A SMART HOUSING AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THERE ARE TWO WETLAND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, UM, ON THE SITE LOCATED WITHIN EXISTING DRAINAGE CHANNELS.
AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE ELM CREEK WATERSHED, SUBURBAN CLASSIFICATION, DESIRED DEVELOPMENT ZONE, UM, WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE STAFF RECOMMENDS VARIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
NUMBER ONE, PROVIDE, UH, 44,000 SQUARE FEET OR ONE ACRE OF ADDITIONAL WETLAND MITIGATION, INCLUDING NUMBER ONE NATIVE PLANTINGS AND SEDIMENTATION AND FILTRATION BASIN OF THE BIOFILTRATION POND TO LOW GROW NATIVE SEED SEEDING IN THE DETENTION POND TO AN ENHANCED, UM, NON EROSIVE POND OUTFLOW.
UM, FOUR, PLANTING A NATIVE TREE SHRUB AND BUNCH GRASSES IN THE, UM, CEF SETBACKS AND MITIGATION AREAS.
TWO, PROVIDE, UH, POLLINATOR SPECIES FOR WETLAND CEF MITIGATION AND FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION PLANTINGS.
THREE, PROVIDE AN EDGE BARRIER OF LIMESTONE BLOCKS AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE MODIFIED CEF SETBACKS, RESTORATION SLASH RESTORATION AREAS TO PREVENT MOWING AND OR ENCROACHMENT IN THESE AREAS.
FOUR, PROVIDE WETLAND CEF EDUCATIONAL SIGNAGE NEXT TO THE CEF SETBACKS RESTORATION AREA.
PROVIDE FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION PLANTINGS OF THE NATIVE TREES AND SHRUBS WHERE THE REMAINING AREA, UH, REMAINING OPEN AREA OF 26,349 SQUARE FEET MAXIMIZE RESTORATION WITHIN THE CWQZ AND ENHANCING THE FLOODPLAIN FROM AN EXISTING CONDITION, UH, OF FARE TO EXCELLENT SIX, PAY 382,157
[01:30:02]
AND 63 CENTS INTO THE RIPARIAN ZONE MITIGATION FUND FOR THE REMAINING, UH, REQUIRED FLOOD PLAIN MITIGATION OF 376,326 SQUARE FEET, OR 8.63 ACRES USING THE APPROXIMATE RATIO PER EC M1 0.7 0.6.THEREFORE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZE RECOMMENDS THE VARIANCE REQUEST WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
NUMBER ONE, RECOMMEND FINDING A SPACE FOR A COMMUNITY GARDEN AND TO RECOMMEND PLANTING NATIVE PECAN TREES.
SECOND, BUT I WANTED TO ALSO ADD ON
JUST, UM, ALSO IF THERE'S A WAY TO, UM, THAT THEY COULD PROVIDE EDUCATION WITH THE COMMUNITY GARDENS MM-HMM
I KNOW WE HAD ANOTHER, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT THAT CAME THROUGH IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND I BELIEVE THEY WERE PARTNERING WITH, UH, WHAT IT WASN'T BLACK LIVES VEGGIES.
WHAT WAS IT? WAS IT URBAN EATS? YEAH.
I THINK I WAS CROSSING UBER EATS WITH THE
SO YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, PARTNERING WITH LOCAL NON-PROFITS TO EDUCATE YEAH.
SO THOSE NOW, UM, READ, RECOMMEND FINDING A SPACE FOR A COMMUNITY GARDEN AND PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMMING AND SIGNAGE TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
PARTNER WITH LOCAL NONPROFITS ON COMMUNITY GARDENING AND RECOMMEND PLANTING NATIVE PECAN TREES.
UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON IT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION RESI KRUEGER FER BEDFORD, BRISTOL SHERA, AND SULLIVAN.
I WOULD LIKE, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY ONE THING, THOUGH.
I AM RELUCTANT TO PILE ON MORE REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT NEVERTHELESS, I VOTED FOR IT.
[4. Discussion and recommendation on strategies to improve the tree canopy in Austin – Environmental Commissioners Richard Brimer and Melinda Schiera]
ACTION ITEMS, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE THE TREE CANOPY IN AUSTIN ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONERS, RICHARD BRIMER AND MELINDA SHERA.THIS LONG AWAITED MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER BRIER AND I WORKED ON THIS, ON THIS MOTION TOGETHER AND, AND, UM, WHAT'S IN THE BACKUP HAS ACTUALLY BEEN UPDATED A BIT.
HAVE DEFINITELY, UH, RECEIVED, YOU KNOW, FEEDBACK, UH, FROM COMMISSIONER BRISTOL AND WORKED TOGETHER ON THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE TO ALSO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS MOTION OR TO THIS RECOMMENDATION.
UM, YOU KNOW, JUST IT, I FEEL LIKE AS A CULMINATION OF EVERYTHING BEFORE EVEN BEING ON THE COMMISSION AND JUST SEEING THE HACKBERRY TREES FALLING DOWN IN NORTH AUSTIN AND WANTING TO REALLY, UM, IDENTIFY HOW WE CAN BE MORE PROACTIVE ON PLANTING MORE, MORE TREES IN AUSTIN.
UM, YOU KNOW, SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION THAT I REALLY JUST, WE HEAR A LOT ABOUT THE 50% TREE CANOPY GOAL, AND AS A, I GUESS A PROJECT MANAGER, I'M REALLY LIKE, OKAY, HOW ARE WE GONNA GET TO THAT 50% GOAL? SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I I HOPE THAT THE INTENT OF THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO TRY AND BE MORE AGGRESSIVE TO, TO REACH THAT GOAL.
UM, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, BY REALLY IDENTIFYING THE, THE LOCATIONS THAT WE CAN PLANT TREES.
UM, I, I, IN MY EXPERIENCE TOO, I DEFINITELY THINK THAT, THAT WE ARE NOT BEING TARGETED.
UM, I THINK ONLY LIKE FOUR OR FIVE YEARS AGO, TREES WERE PLANTED IN OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY SCHOOL PARK AND THEY, THOSE COULD HAVE BEEN PLANTED THERE 50 YEARS AGO.
SO, UM, YEAH, I DEFINITELY THINK THAT WE COULD BE MORE AGGRESSIVE AND I THINK THAT A LITTLE BIT OF THE INTENT IS ALSO TO PROTECT NEWLY PLANTED TREES AND EXPAND UPON HOW WE CAN GET THE FUNDING TO DO THIS AS WELL.
[01:35:01]
WITH THAT, I THINK I CAN START READING THE MOTION SUPER LONG, UM,DO YOU NEED YOUR PRESS
SO THE SUBJECT OF THE DATE I HAVE TO START WITH, THE DATE IS DECEMBER 4TH, 2024.
UH, SUBJECT CITY OF AUSTIN TREE CANOPY ORDINANCE MOTION BY MYSELF, MELINDA SHIRA.
WHEREAS THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE RECOGNIZES COUNCIL APPROVED ON AUGUST 8TH, 2019, A RESOLUTION DECLARING A CLIMATE EMERGENCY IN THE CITY.
AND WHEREAS THE COUNCIL APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2021, THE AUSTIN CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN, SETTING A GOAL, A 50% CITYWIDE TREE CANOPY BY 2050.
AND WHEREAS COUNCIL APPROVED ON MARCH 21ST, 2024, A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPLORE A RIGHT OF WAY DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT PLAN TO PROMOTE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, INCLUDING STREET TREES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, WHILE ENSURING THE SAFETY AND RELIABILITY OF UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND WHEREAS COUNCIL APPROVED ON NOVEMBER 21ST, 2024, A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO DEVELOP AN INCENTIVE PROGRAM TO ENCOURAGE THE PRESERVATION OF TREES THAT HAVE A DIAMETER BETWEEN EIGHT AND 18 INCHES ON RESIDENTIAL LOTS THROUGH THE PROVISION OF A CREDIT TOWARD DEVELOPMENT FEES AND DIRECTING FUNDING AND ELEMENTS OF THE PROGRAM.
WHEREAS CURRENT DATA SHOWS 41% CANOPY COVER CITYWIDE BASED ON SATELLITE IMAGERY CAPTURED IN THE SUMMER OF 2022.
THEREAFTER, IN FEBRUARY, 2023, 30% OF THE TREE CANOPY WAS IMPACTED BY WINTER STORM MARA HIGHLIGHTING THE NEED FOR UPDATED SATELLITE IMAGERY.
AND WHEREAS THE TREE CANOPY IN THE BLACKLAND PRAIRIE ECO REGION OF AUSTIN ARE LESS THAN EDWARDS UPLIFT ECO REGION OF AUSTIN.
AND WHEREAS AN EXPENSIVE, EXPANSIVE TREE CANOPY IMBALANCE WITH UNDERSTORY PLANTS AND PRAIRIE ECOSYSTEMS MITIGATE HEAT ISLAND EFFECTS, SEQUESTER CARBON, IMPROVE COMMUNITY HEALTH AND, AND IMPROVES BIODIVERSITY.
AND WHEREAS FEEDBACK FROM URBAN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS TO ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONERS AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN FUNCTIONAL GREEN WORKSHOP THAT TREES PLANTED FROM SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT SURVIVING.
AND WHEREAS THE MITIGATION PAYMENT RATES TO THE URBAN FOREST REPLENISHMENT FUND DEFINED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL 3.4 IN LIEU OF REPLACEMENT OF PRESERVATION HAVE NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2010.
AND THEREFORE THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS COUNCIL ADOPT.
UM, AND WE CAN DISCUSS THIS I GUESS IN A MINUTE HERE, BUT I'M WONDERING IF WE NEED TO UPDATE THAT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNCIL ADOPT THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS TO EXPAND, PROTECT, AND ENHANCE THE CITY'S TREE CANOPY BY ONE.
RECOMMEND REVIEWING THE CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN OF REACHING 50% CANOPY BY 2025 TO FIND WAYS TO REACH THAT GOAL BY 2040 TO AUGMENT THE CURRENT INVENTORY PLANS TO CAPTURE SATELLITE IMAGERY, TO CALCULATE THE CITYWIDE CANOPY COVER BI-ANNUALLY INSTEAD OF EVERY FOUR YEARS IN ORDER TO EVALUATE THE TREE CANOPY PERCENTAGE IN A MORE COST EFFECTIVE MANNER, AND GAINING THE ABILITY TO TRACK PROGRESS TOWARDS THE TREE CANOPY GOAL.
THIS ALSO CAPTURES TREE CANOPY ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, WHEREAS MANUAL TREE INFRA INVENTORY DOES NOT.
THREE, IN ADDITION TO THE PROMOTION OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, PROMOTE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE WITH NATIVE PRAIRIE GRASSES AND UNDERSTORY WOODY PLANTS AND UTILITY EASEMENTS.
FOUR, REQUIRE THE CITY ARBORIST AND THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
DOCUMENT THE NUMBER AND SCOPE OF UNPERMITTED, REMOVAL OF PROTECTED AND HERITAGE TREES REMOVED EACH YEAR BY ADDRESS AND ACTIONS TAKEN.
PROVIDE A REPORT OF THESE ACTIVITIES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL ANNUALLY.
IMPROVE INCENTIVE PLANS FOR DEVELOPERS TO ENCOURAGE RETENTION OF EXISTING TREES USING NON-FINANCIAL INCENTIVES, DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS, DENSITY, INCREASED FAR, ET CETERA.
REQUIRE THE URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT DEVELOP A PLAN TO DOUBLE THE TREE CANOPY
[01:40:01]
IN EAST AUSTIN, EAST OF INTERSTATE I 35.THIS PLAN WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE NEED TO PRESERVE AND RESTORE BLACK LAND PRAIRIE ECO, THE BLACK LAND PRAIRIE ECOSYSTEM.
CORRECTION, THE PLAN SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND COUNCIL IN FISCAL YEAR 20 25 7.
ADJUST THE MITIGATION PAYMENT RATE TO THE URBAN FORESTRY REPLENISHMENT FUND BI-ANNUALLY BASED ON INFLATION OVER THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS AS CALCULATED BY THE US GOVERNMENT.
CPI EIGHT REQUIRE THE CITY ARBORIST AND THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO CALCULATE THE NUMBER OF TREES WHICH NEED TO BE PLANTED ANNUALLY TO REACH THE 50% CANOPY GROWTH TARGET BY 2050, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT GROWTH RATES, STANDARD MORTALITY RATES, AND OTHER RELATED FACTORS.
THIS CALCULATION WILL BE SHARED WITH THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND COUNCIL BI-ANNUALLY.
INCORPORATE THE TREE CANOPY GOAL INTO THE SITE PLAN MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS BY IMPLEMENTING A REQUIREMENT OF MEETING THE 50% CANOPY OR AT MINIMUM CURRENT CANOPY.
INCREASE OVERSIGHT OF SITE PLAN MITIGATION TREE PLANTINGS BY REQUIRING SITE INSPECTIONS UNTIL TWO YEARS AFTER REPLANTING 10 REQUIRE AUSTIN ENERGY AND THE WATER WASTEWATER DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE IN BILLING STATEMENTS NO LESS THAN QUARTERLY INFORMATION IN, IN SPANISH AND ENGLISH, AT A MINIMUM ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF FREE TREE PLANTING PROGRAMS SUPPORTED BY NONPROFITS AND OR HOW THE CITY AND HOW TO ACCESS THEM FOR THOSE RECEIVING BILLS VIA EMAIL.
THE SAME INFORMATION SHALL BE INCLUDED AT THE SAME FREQUENCY.
11 REQUIRE THE URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT TO WORK WITH CITY FUNDED NONPROFITS TO MORE AGGRESSIVELY MEET THE 2050 GOAL.
12 REQUIRE THE URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT TO IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL VENDORS, INCLUDING NONPROFITS FOR NATIVE TREES TO EXPAND LOCAL TREE NURSERIES TO ENSURE A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF PREFERRED TREES, INCLUDING NATIVE FRUIT AND NUT BEARING TREES AND SHRUBS.
REQUIRE URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT TO CONDUCT A SURVEY AND IDENTIFY ANY CITY OWNED PROPERTY 0.25 ACRES OR GREATER, INCLUDING RIGHT OF WAY SETBACKS AND EASEMENTS THAT ARE SUITABLE FOR PLANTING TINY FORESTS OR MICRO HABITATS.
THERE ARE THEY THAT ARE APPROPRIATE, SORRY FOR THEIR SOIL TYPE PLANT COMMUNITY.
AND USE 14 REVIEW ALL CITY PARK AND CEMETERY MASTER PLANS TO ENSURE THEY ARE ADVANCING THE CLIMATE GOALS BY REPLACING DEAD TREES.
DEVELOP AN OAK WI WILT ANNUAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM TO CITIZENS LIKE THAT, LIKE THAT UTILIZED IN LAKEWAY, TEXAS TO PREVENT FURTHER LOSS OF OAK TREES.
OFFER OAK WILT ABATEMENTS OR REBATES TO HOMEOWNERS WITH LIMITED MEANS TO REMOVE INFECTED TREES TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF NEIGHBORING TREES.
INCREASE COMMUNICATION WITH PROPERTY OWNERS, BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, ABOUT MAINTAINING HEALTHY TREES AND HOW TO PREVENT TREE KILLING FUNGUS, FUNGI OR INSECTS.
18, INCREASED DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT URBAN FORESTRY BUDGETS TO MEET THESE GOALS.
19, AN ANNUAL REPORT ON ALL OF THESE EFFORTS WILL BE DELIVERED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND COUNCIL EACH FALL AROUND ARBOR DAY.
SO THAT IS THE COMPLETE MOTION.
WELL, AT, AT THE BEGINNING YOU MENTIONED CHANGING THE DATE FROM UH, 2050 TO 2040, BUT IN SOME OF THE POINTS YOU MENTIONED YOU WERE STILL REFERRING TO 2050.
SHOULD THOSE ALL BE 2040? I I THINK THEY SHOULD BE 2040 AND LIKE IN POINT NUMBER I OR WE COULD GENERALLY SAY THE, THE GOAL YEAR, DEPENDING ON WHETHER THAT'S THAT'S A BETTER, THAT'S A BETTER THING TO DO.
ANY OTHER, YEAH, 'CAUSE I THINK ON ONE OF 'EM WE SAY WE'D LIKE FOR THEM TO TRY TO SPEED THAT UP, BUT STILL RECOGNIZING THAT 2050 IS THE GOAL YEAR.
[01:45:08]
OKAY.I THINK THAT WAS ACTUALLY ONLY IN ONE PLACE.
WELL, IT WAS IN POINT NUMBER EIGHT AND THEN I, I HEARD IT AGAIN LATER, SO.
I GUESS I'LL SECOND IT SO WE COULD DISCUSS IT.
WELL, I MEAN, WELL SECONDED PERIOD.
I KNOW, RIGHT? I MEAN THERE WAS, I WAS POINTING OUT LIKE A TYPO BASICALLY.
SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, QURESHI? SURE.
I JUST, I JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT, UM, IT'S NUMBER NINE IN THE BACKUP.
I'M NOT SURE IF IT STAYED NUMBER NINE IN THE EDITED, UH, VERSION.
UM, SO HERE IT READS, ADJUST THE MITIGATION PAYMENT RATE TO THE URBAN FOREST REPLENISHMENT FUND BI-ANNUALLY BASED ON INFLATION OVER THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS AS CALCULATED BY THE US GOVERNMENT, CPL.
UH, I JUST WANNA SAY HOW EXCITED I AM ABOUT THIS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I WAS REALLY
'CAUSE WE LEARNED IN THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE AND MAYBE, MAYBE IT WAS PRESENTED HERE TOO, I DON'T RECALL, BUT THAT THE TREE MITIGATION RATE HASN'T BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2010 AND I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING IN MY LIFE THAT HAS NOT CHANGED IN COST SINCE 2010.
SO I JUST WANNA GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO THAT POINT AND THANK YOU FOR PUTTING IT IN THERE.
I WISH THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT WERE SOLD THE PRICE OF 2010, UM,
I MEAN, THEY REALLY, URI AND THEN THE OTHER ONE, I DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME.
UM, DID Y'ALL TALK AT ALL ABOUT, UM, AFTER ONE OF THESE BIG STORMS, LIKE IS THERE A MECHANISM THAT GOES OUT IMMEDIATELY OR AUTOMATICALLY THAT LOOKS AT THE CANOPY? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT TRIGGERS AUTOMATICALLY OR IS IT JUST LIKE, OH, THERE'S A STORM AND WE BETTER GO LOOK? OR WE DIDN'T DISCUSS THAT.
I THOUGHT THAT THE TEXAS A AND M REVIEW OF THAT HAPPENED FAIRLY QUICKLY AND MAYBE CITY STAFF CAN SPEAK TO, UM, HOW QUICKLY THAT OCCURS, BUT I THOUGHT IT HAPPENED PRETTY QUICKLY AND WHILE YEAH.
WOULD STAFF LIKE TO SPEAK TO IT? YES, IT IS.
UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UM, JIM MCKOWSKI, I'M THE DIVISION MANAGER FOR THE COMMUNITY TREE AND PRESERVATION DIVISION.
UM, THE STATE DOES MOVE QUICKLY.
UM, I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN EXACT TIME, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, BASED ON, UH, THE STORMS THAT WE'VE SEEN HERE IN TA, YOU KNOW, IN AUSTIN AND ALL AROUND THE STATE, UM, THEY DO GO AND, UH, GIVE A PRETTY COMPREHENSIVE REPORT.
LIKE YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN, UM, THAT PREVIOUS ONE FOR MARA, UM, IT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS, WE SAW A LOT OF DAMAGE AND YOU SEE A LOT OF DEBRIS.
UM, I THINK THAT ONE SAID IT WAS ABOUT 30% OF THE OVERALL CANOPY WAS AFFECTED.
UH, ONLY ABOUT ONE OR 2% WAS SEVERELY AFFECTED.
MOST OF IT WAS IN A VERY LIGHT TO, TO MODERATE, UH, PERCENTAGE AS FAR AS THE CANOPY.
NOW THAT LOOKS LIKE A LOT, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR EVERYWHERE.
UM, BUT THE OVERALL CANOPY, UH, YOU KNOW, WHILE IT DID TAKE A HIT THAT REPORT DID NOT HAVE IT AS, YOU KNOW, AS SEVERE AS WHAT YOU WOULD THINK FROM WHAT YOU SAW ON THE, ON THE STREET.
I ALSO JUST WANTED TO ASK COMMISSIONER SHIRA, UM, IF YOU AND COMMISSIONER BRIMER HAD A CHANCE TO TALK MORE WITH DSD STAFF ABOUT THIS.
'CAUSE I KNOW IN OUR LAST URBAN FORESTRY MEETING, THEY HAD SOME THOUGHTS AND NOTES ABOUT IT, THINGS THAT THEY WANTED TO TALK WITH YOU ALL ABOUT, AND I'M WONDERING IF THAT TOOK PLACE.
NO, UM, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF THE MEETINGS, THERE WAS NO ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATION.
AT OUR LAST ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MEETING, WE HAD THE PRESENTATION, I THINK, TO HELP ENSURE THAT ALL THE COMMISSIONERS WERE AS INFORMED AS THEY COULD BE FROM CITY STAFF.
SO I THINK THAT WAS WHAT THE INTENT OF THAT LAST PRESENTATION WAS.
SO THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME KNOW.
[01:50:07]
OH, OH, OH YEAH, GO AHEAD.IS THERE AN URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT? NO.
UM, THE, THE, THE, THE DIVISION THAT WE HAVE FOR THE CITY IS THE COMMUNITY TREE AND PRESERVATION DIVISION, UM, THAT IS SPLIT BETWEEN THE REGULATORY SIDE AND THE MONITORING, UH, COMMUNITY OUTREACH URBAN FORESTRY SIDE.
SO THE, THE REGULATORY SIDE IS, UH, UH, RUN BY NAOMI CHEEL, WHO IS HERE, WHO'S OUR CITY ARBORIST, UM, WHO YOU MET.
AND, UH, THE, THE MONITORING OF THE CANOPY.
UM, THE, UH, UH, HEALTH OF THE URBAN FOREST IS, UH, MONITORED AND RUN, UH, UNDER EMILY KING, WHO IS OUR URBAN FORESTER AND HER STAFF.
SO IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO IT, YOU COULD REFER TO EITHER THE URBAN FORESTER WILL DO OR THE CITY ARBORIST, UM, OR JUST THE DIVISION IN GENERAL.
UM, SOME OF WHICH Y'ALL HAVE HERE TONIGHT IN THE, IN THE RECOMMENDATION.
UM, OUR DIVISION DOES NOT HAVE CONTROL OVER.
SO IF WE'RE LOOKING, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT, UM, PLANTING OR WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING WORK OR POTENTIAL WORK IN SOME OF THESE OTHER AREAS, THEY'RE CONTROLLED BY OTHER DIVISIONS AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS IN THE CITY, WHICH WE CAN COORDINATE AND WE CAN COLLABORATE WITH.
UM, BUT WE MIGHT NOT HAVE THE WORDING EXACTLY
I MEAN, MY, THE INTENT IS COMMENDABLE AND I LIKE THAT THIS HAS EVOLVED AND HOW MUCH TIME YOU GUYS HAVE PUT INTO THIS.
I'M WORRIED ABOUT FEASIBILITY OF A LOT OF THIS.
UM, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO BE MORE PROACTIVE IN PLANTING TREES, AND I LIKE THAT THIS IS TRYING TO LAY OUT THE PLAN TO GET US TO OUR GOALS.
BUT A LOT OF THESE SEEM TO GET INTO CRITERIA, MANUAL CHANGE, NOT CODE OR ORDINANCE.
BUT THERE ISN'T A TREE CANOPY CODE, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.
UM, THE, THE CITY'S, THE CITY'S CODE REQUIRES MITIGATION FOR TREE REMOVALS.
UM, AND THAT IS THEN DESCRIBED WITHIN THE CRITERIA MANUAL.
AND RIGHT NOW THAT IS AN INCH FOR INCH TYPE REPLACEMENT.
UM, IF WE WERE LOOKING AT, UH, IF WE WERE LOOKING AT A CANOPY REQUIREMENT FOR, UH, A, A NEW CLASSIFICATION OF A TREE THAT WOULD REQUIRE A CODE CHANGE.
UM, BUT THE MITIGATION ASPECT OF, OF WHAT MIGHT BE ASKED, UH, WOULD BE WITHIN THE CRITERIA MANUAL CHANGES.
SO I GUESS THAT'S MY CONCERN IS THAT ANY OF THESE THAT WOULD REQUIRE A CODE CHANGE, I THINK SHOULD BE POTENTIALLY CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
UM, I THINK THERE'S ALSO SOMETHING TO BE SAID, AND MAYBE I'M OPERATING OUTTA FEAR RIGHT NOW ABOUT THE TIMING RIGHT NOW, UM, AND WHAT'S GONNA BE HAPPENING IN JANUARY.
I DON'T WANT, UM, THERE TO BE THE POTENTIAL FOR, FOR OUR CURRENT TREE ORDINANCE BEING TAKEN AWAY AT THE STATE LEVEL.
UM, AND SO ADDING MORE REQUIREMENTS INTO IT RIGHT NOW, UM, AND POTENTIALLY PUTTING WHAT WE, THE PROTECTIONS THAT WE DO HAVE IN JEOPARDY.
I'M CURIOUS IF Y'ALL HAD CONVERSATIONS AROUND THAT.
I'M GONNA JUMP IN HERE AND I'M GONNA, UM, ADDRESS THAT PART OF IT BECAUSE, UM, ON NOVEMBER 21ST, COUNSEL DID, UM, PASS A TREE RESOLUTION, UM, THAT AUGMENTS, UM, UH, THE HERITAGE TREE AND IT'S A RESOLUTION TO LOOK AT ALL THE DIFFERENT PARTS OF IT.
IS THAT YOU'RE SHAKING YOUR HEAD NO.
PAST YOU NAOMI, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT? UH, ON THE 21ST, I WASN'T AWARE THAT ANYTHING WAS PASSED OTHER THAN, UH, UH, THE ONE, UH, RESOLUTION FOR, UM, SORRY, I'M NOT
UH, YEAH, THERE WAS A RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO LOOK INTO, UM, ALLOWING, UM, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS TO, UH, UH, NOT HAVE TO PAY AS MUCH INTO THE TREE MITIGATION FUND.
IF CERTAIN SMALLER TREES WERE PRESERVED, IT WOULD PROBABLY REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT THE STAFF WOULD HAVE OVERALL.
YEAH, IT WAS, IT WAS ACTUALLY, I THINK TO INCENTIVIZE, YEAH, THE REDUCED APPLICATION FEE BY FORMULATING A, A FORMULATING A PROCESS TO LOOK AT THOSE SMALLER TREES AND PROVIDE A POTENTIAL FINANCIAL INCENTIVE ON THE APPLICATION FEE.
[01:55:01]
OKAY.AND, BUT THE DISCUSSION WAS THAT THE IDEA IS THAT YOU CAN'T GET A HERITAGE TREE IF YOU DON'T HAVE YOUNG TREES GROWING.
AND SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE IDEA WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO GIVE, GIVE TREES A START SOMEWHERE.
IT WAS LOOKING TO INCENTIVIZE PRESERVATION OF THE UNDERSIZED TREES FOR FUTURE GROWTH.
I GUESS I'LL ALSO JUST CHIME IN THAT I SHARED THIS MOTION WITH, UM, MY DISTRICT FOUR CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE VELAS OFFICE AND, AND HAD SUPPORT FOR THE MOTION.
SO I, I DON'T HAVE ANY POLITICAL CONCERNS ABOUT IT AT THIS TIME.
I'M CURIOUS, UH, COMMISSIONER COFER, IF YOU HAVE CERTAIN NUMBERS, LIKE IF YOU COULD SAY, OH, I'D WANT, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT NUMBER FIVE, NUMBER SEVEN, WHICH ONES YOU MIGHT WANNA REMOVE, BECAUSE I THINK I, I HAVE SIMILAR CONCERNS MAYBE JUST BASED OFF OF CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY ARBORIST IN, IN OUR MEETINGS WHERE THEY EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS.
SO THAT'S WHY I WAS CURIOUS, UM, YEAH, IF MORE CONVERSATIONS HAD HAPPENED BEFORE THIS DRAFT.
YEAH, YEAH, I WOULD DEFINITELY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THE CITY ARBORIST WAS, WAS ON BOARD WITH THESE MM-HMM
BUT I, I WOULD SAY THE NUMBERS CHANGED A LITTLE BIT.
SO I THINK THE TWO THAT GIVE ME THE MOST HEARTBURN, UM, YOU KNOW, FROM ADDITIONAL REGULATION LEVEL WOULD BE, I THINK THE NEW NUMBER NINE, THE INCORPORATE TREE CANOPY GOAL AND THE SITE PLAN MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS.
UM, AND THEN, AND THAT WAS SORT OF THE BIGGEST ONE, I THINK THE REQUIRING THEM TO DOUBLE THE EXISTING CANOPY COVERAGE IN EAST AUSTIN BY 2040.
UM, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT LESS FOR THAT REASON.
I'M JUST WORRIED ABOUT FEASIBILITY OF THAT ONE.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE BIGGEST ONE.
AND AGAIN, I DON'T WANNA NECESSARILY LIKE PICK THIS APART, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S REALLY STRONG WHENEVER IT IS PASSED AND THAT IT'S FEASIBLE AND SOUND AND, AND SUPPORTED BY STAFF, UM, WHO ARE ULTIMATELY THE ONES THAT ARE GONNA BE ASKED TO CARRY THIS OUT.
CAN YOU READ COMMISSIONER CHAIR, UM, THE ONE THAT SAYS, UH, ADDRESSES EAST AUSTIN? DO WE TAKE OUT THE TIME? TELL ME, REMIND ME WHAT WE DID ON THE TIMEFRAME WHEN WE MAKING THERE'S NO TIMEFRAME.
REQ SIX REQUIRE THE URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT TO DEVELOP A PLAN TO DOUBLE THE TREE CANOPY IN EAST AUSTIN, EAST OF INTERSTATE I 35, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION BLACKLAND PRAIRIE.
YEAH, I GENERALLY THE ONES AROUND GATHERING DATA AND MAKING PLANS, I'M SUPPORTIVE.
UM, OVERALL, I THINK THAT THE IDEA, THE INTENT OF THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO TRY AND FIND TARGETED LOCATIONS IN EAST AUSTIN THAT WE COULD ACTUALLY MAKE MOVEMENT TOWARDS THAT GOAL.
SO IF THE CONCERN IS, IS, UH, YOU KNOW, DOUBLING, YOU KNOW, I MYSELF AM JUST WANTING TO REALLY FOCUS ON JUST, UM, THE, THE PART OF JUST FOCUSING ON EAST AUSTIN AND FINDING THOSE TARGETED LOCATIONS.
SO, UM, OVERALL, YES, STILL TRYING TO MEET THAT 50% GOAL WHILE, WHILE DOING THAT.
SO I AM HAPPY TO, TO UPDATE THIS TO, TO REFLECT THAT.
AND I, I GUESS I WOULD SAY, UM, TO DEVELOP A PLAN, UH, TO, I GUESS VERY MORE STILL GENERAL TO, UH, UM, INCREASE THE TREE CANOPY SPECIFICALLY IN EAST AUSTIN.
[02:00:02]
SORRY, TALKING TO MYSELF OVER HERE.UM,
IS THAT, AND THAT'S HOW I READ THAT.
AND I, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE SPIRIT OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CONVEY IN THAT, THAT WE WANT EAST AUSTIN TO BE PRIORITI PRIORITIZED BECAUSE IN SO MANY WAYS IT HAS NOT BEEN PRIORITIZED, UM, FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
HOWEVER, WHAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM CITY STAFF, AND I DON'T KNOW, YOU MENTIONED A COMMUNITY PLAN, I DON'T KNOW ALL THE EXACT NAMES, BUT WHAT, WHAT I'VE GOTTEN IS THAT THERE IS A, A THOROUGH FORMULA THAT'S BEING USED THAT'S HAPPENING THROUGH AN EQUITY LENS.
SO I THINK A LOT OF THE, A LOT OF EAST AUSTIN IS BEING PRIORITIZED ALREADY WITH EXISTING POLICIES AND LANGUAGES, EVEN IF IT'S NOT SAID NECESSARILY IN THAT EXPLICIT WAY.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF IT IS A LITTLE REDUNDANT AND IF WE WANT TO, YOU KNOW, SHORTEN THIS RESOLUTION, OR EXCUSE ME, RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE IT, UH, A LITTLE MORE POINTED ON WHAT WE THINK IS IS ALREADY MISSING.
UM, AND I, AND IT MIGHT JUST COME DOWN TO, YOU KNOW, TRUST IN CITY INSTITUTIONS AND IN TERMS OF PEOPLE WE'VE HEARD FROM, WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS WE HAVE A LENS OF EQUITY.
WE ARE ABSOLUTELY FOCUSING ON THE EASTERN CRESCENT AND LOW INCOME AREAS, AND AS OF RIGHT NOW, I'M TAKING THEM AT THEIR WORD.
BUT ANYWAY, I JUST THINK THAT'S SOMETHING FOR US TO CONSIDER.
THAT WAS ONE THING THAT I WAS KIND OF WONDERING ABOUT IS, UM, I GUESS JUST OPINIONS FROM LIKE STAFF.
LIKE WHAT IS IT IN THE, IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT CAN BE LIKE, OKAY, WE CANNOT DO THIS, OR THIS IS NOT LIKE WE DO NOT HAVE THE MANPOWER TO DO THIS.
WE CANNOT IMPLEMENT THIS BECAUSE I'M LIKE, WHY WOULD WE LIKE PUTTING IT INTO A RECOMMENDATION AND THERE'S NO POSSIBLE WAY TO DO IT.
IT'S GONNA JUST LET US, WE'RE GONNA BE LET DOWN BY IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL LOOKED AT THE, UM, THE BUDGET DOCUMENT THAT CAME OUT WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, BUT THEY DID HAVE A LITTLE TABLES FOR EACH OF THE RESOLUTIONS THAT WE HAD ALL PASSED ABOUT WHETHER STAFF AGREED WITH THEM OR NOT.
AND I'M, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF AGREES WITH THE ENTIRE RESOLUTION OR NOT, BUT THAT WAS ONE THING THAT I FIGURED, BOB, I DIDN'T, THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I HAD LOOKED THAT CLOSELY AT THE BUDGET DOCUMENT APPLIED TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S A GOOD NOTE.
NOW I WANNA TAKE A LOOK AT THAT EMAIL.
UM, I, I DO PUT A LOT OF FAITH AND TRUST IN OUR CITY STAFF.
THEY'RE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THIS WORK DAY IN AND DAY OUT, AND THEY'RE EXPERTS.
AND I ALSO THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR US AS A COMMISSION TO BE A VOICE FOR CITIZENS.
THAT IS ANOTHER CHECK ON THE SYSTEM, IF YOU WILL, OR AN OUTSIDE PERSPECTIVE.
SO I DO THINK IT'S OKAY FOR US TO BE ASPIRATIONAL SOMETIMES IN OUR LANGUAGE OR TO DIFFER FROM CITY STAFF.
AND PERSONALLY, I JUST TRY TO, TO BALANCE THE TWO BECAUSE I ABSOLUTELY PUT A LOT OF STOCK IN THEIR EXPERT OPINIONS AND KNOW THAT WE ARE HERE FOR A REASON AS WELL.
I THINK IF WE'RE GONNA REALLY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE EQUITY ISSUE, SO, UM, YOU KNOW, MY INITIAL COMMENT ON THE EAST AUSTIN VERSUS WEST AUSTIN, LIKE THAT'S AN INAPPROPRIATE LOOK, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ECOSYSTEMS HERE, RIGHT? AND SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT KIND OF ECOSYSTEM SUPPORTS TREE CANOPY, WHICH ONES DON'T.
AND WHEN YOU PLANT TREES IN AN AREA THAT DOESN'T TRADITIONALLY SUPPORT THEM, YOU HAVE TO USE A LOT OF RESOURCES, WATER, FERTILIZER, BRING IN MORE SOIL.
YOU GOTTA DO A LOT OF THINGS TO GET THOSE TREES TO REALLY ESTABLISH AND STAY THERE.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, YOU GOTTA BALANCE THAT OUT.
LIKE, DO YOU WANNA SPEND THAT MUCH RESOURCE ON THEM? YOU KNOW? UM, AND, AND WHAT'S THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE REAL OUTCOME THERE? ARE WE SUPPORTING AN ECOSYSTEM OR ARE WE JUST SUPPORTING A GOAL OF, HEY, LET'S HAVE MORE TREES NO MATTER WHERE THEY ARE? YOU KNOW, SO I, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, TO ME THAT'S NOT A FAIR LENS TO LOOK AT THINGS I WOULD SAY
[02:05:01]
IN THAT, AND IN THINKING ABOUT THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, I WOULD SAY HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES, BECAUSE I ALSO THINK ABOUT SOUTH AUSTIN.UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S AN AREA THAT AUSTIN, YOU KNOW, OFTEN GETS OVERLOOKED.
THERE'S PORTIONS OF NORTH AUSTIN THAT ARE NE NORTHEAST AUSTIN, YOU KNOW, THAT DON'T, YOU KNOW, AREN'T ON ANYBODY'S RADAR.
UM, AND AGAIN, THOSE ARE AREAS THAT WE HAVE LIMITED PUBLIC LANDS, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE, HAVE BEEN, UM, FARMS AND RANCHES AND, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE BEEN LARGE TRACKS OF LAND UNTIL VERY RECENTLY.
SO WE HAVEN'T NECESSARILY HAD TO REALLY LOOK AT THOSE THINGS.
UM, SO I WOULD SAY LIKE, MAYBE ON THAT SAYING HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES, YOU KNOW, IT, IT STILL DOESN'T ADDRESS THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE LIVE IN IT, YOU KNOW, THE AUSTIN SITS ON THESE TWO CONVERGENCE ZONES OR THIS, THIS ZONE OF HERE'S THE UP, YOU KNOW, EDWARDS UPLIFT, HERE'S THE BLACKLAND PRAIRIES, THERE'S A CONVERGENCE ZONE IN THE MIDDLE.
AND THOSE ARE VERY, VERY DIFFERENT PLANT COMMUNITIES, YOU KNOW, OVERALL.
I DON'T KNOW, COMMISSIONER, SHE, IF YOU WANNA, I JUST FEEL LIKE, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE SPLITTING THAT MOTION, THAT RECOMMENDATION INTO TWO DIFFERENT ONES.
UH, ONE WHERE I HAVE ALSO HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU WANT, YOU WOULD LIKE THE PLAN TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE NEED TO PRESERVE AND RESTORE THE BLACK LAND PRAIRIE, AND THEN A SECOND ONE WHERE IT'S, UH, TO DEVELOP A PLAN TO INCREASE TREE CANOPY IN HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES.
SO I WOULD DO EXACTLY THAT TO SEPARATE THE TWO.
AND I DID CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO JUST SAY INCREASE.
IT'S NOT AS SPECIFIC AS DOUBLING.
UM, DO YOU WANT TO INCREASE AND PRESERVE YES, BECAUSE WE, DID WE TALK ABOUT PRESERVATION LATER MM-HMM
UM, ON THAT, SO JUST TOSSING A WORD IN THERE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FER, DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT NUMBER SIX? NO, I THINK I'M GOOD ON THAT ONE NOW,
THANK Y'ALL FOR BEING SO THOUGHTFUL ON THAT ONE.
I GUESS I WANNA GO BACK TO NUMBER NINE.
NINE, I THINK, YEAH, THAT'S MY BIGGEST ONE OF CONCERN.
AND TELL THAT ONE STARTS WITH
SO RIGHT NOW, UM, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THE SITE PLAN INSPECTION IS UP TO THREE MONTHS AFTERWARDS.
IS IT, UM, THE TWO YEARS THAT IS CAUSING CONCERN? NO, I'M ACTUALLY GOOD WITH ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT.
IT IMPLEMENTING A REQUIREMENT OF MEETING A, A MINIMUM CANOPY.
IS THE, UH, IS MY CONCERN AS FAR AS ADDING REGULATORY TEETH INTO THIS, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY TIE INTO CODE AND, AND MIGHT BE, I CAN AGREE WITH THAT, HONESTLY.
I MEAN, IT IS, IT'S VERY AGGRESSIVE.
IT WOULD CAUSE IT WOULD CAUSE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE AUTOMATICALLY NOT BEING ABLE TO MEET THAT GOAL AND HAVING TO PAY INTO THE REPLENISHMENT FUND, UM, WHICH IS A GOOD THING.
BUT I DO THINK IT IS, IT IS AGGRESSIVE AND, AND I AM HAPPY TO TAKE IT OUT AT THIS TIME.
UM, BUT I, I GUESS I SHOULD EDIT IT.
IF YOU'RE, IF YOU KNOW THERE'S NO OTHER OBJECTIONS TO THE TWO YEARS OF SITE INSPECTIONS, THEN I WOULD JUST CHANGE IT TO INCREASE THE OVERSIGHT OF SITE PLAN MITIGATION, TREE PLANTINGS.
AND THEN I GUESS JUST, I, ARE THERE ANY OTHER OF THESE ITEMS THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED WITH AS STAFF ON THE REGULATORY STANDPOINT OR FEASIBILITY? I, UM, I MEAN ULTIMATELY, LIKE, LIKE THE ONE YOU JUST MENTIONED, UM, THE, THE INSIDE INSPECTION IS DONE AGAIN BY A DIFFERENT DIVISION.
UM, WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS FEASIBLE, UH, BUDGET WISE, PEOPLE WISE, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT, I'M NOT ABLE TO TO TELL YOU THERE, UM, THAT COULD BE INVESTIGATED, UM, FROM A REGULATORY STANDPOINT.
A AGAIN, ULTIMATELY, LIKE Y'ALL HAVE SAID, COUNSEL WILL MAKE THE DECISION
[02:10:01]
AS TO HOW TO INSTRUCT THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF, UM, IF CODE CHANGES ARE, ARE NECESSARY.IF NOT, THEN WE'LL BE INSTRUCTED TO PURSUE THE CRITERIA MANUAL CHANGES.
YEAH, I THINK THAT'S SOME, SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT TO SAY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE MAKE A MOTION FROM OUR COMMITTEES OR FROM THIS BODY, YOU KNOW, WE ARE NOT NECESSARILY TASKED WITH UNDERSTANDING ALL OF THE DEPTH OF THINGS.
UM, AND THEN THAT'S UP TO STAFF TO BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE DOES THAT FIT IN OR CAN IT FIT IN, UM, AND THEN COMING BACK TO US AND SAY, WE CAN'T DO THIS.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, SO THAT'S PERFECTLY OKAY.
I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO FEEL OKAY ABOUT THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, I MEAN, WE'VE EDITED THIS QUITE A BIT.
UM, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO COME BACK, BRING IT BACK AT OUR, AT OUR NEXT MEETING? AND ALSO BRI'S NOT HERE.
I'LL BE HONEST, I'M NOT SURE IF HOW MUCH LONGER I'M GONNA BE ON THE COMMISSION.
SO, UM, THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO YOU GUYS, BUT I, I'LL HAPPILY TAKE THE CREDIT FOR THIS ON IT TODAY.
SAY WHAT? I FEEL LIKE WE CAN VOTE ON IT TODAY.
UM, I, I WILL SAY I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT YEAH.
TO KEEP UP WITH THE CHANGES AND I ALWAYS LIKE TO KNOW MM-HMM
UM, I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE ORIGINAL NUMBER SIX IN THE BACKUP, WHICH IS DEFINE A NEW CATEGORY OF PROTECTED TREES BASED ON THE BREADTH OF THE CANOPY IN ADDITION TO THE DIAMETER AS MEASURED FOUR AND ONE HALF FEET ABOVE NATURAL GRADE.
CAN YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT THAT? I WILL ADMIT THAT THIS, THAT PARTICULAR POINT WAS MORE, UH, COMMISSIONER BREMER'S CONTRIBUTION.
UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT ON THAT ONE, THAT WAS THE ONE THAT I WAS REALLY SORT OF LIKE, I'D LIKE TO GET THAT ONE OUT OF THERE.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT ACHIEVES, BUT YEAH, I THINK IT WAS TAKEN OUT ON THE CURRENT MOTION, CURRENT RECOMMENDATION.
I WAS LOOKING FOR IT ON MINE IN FRONT OF ME AND I WAS LIKE, WHERE IS THAT? YEAH, THE ORIGINAL NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE I THINK WERE, OR, UH, FIVE AND SIX.
SO NUMBER FOUR IS REQUIRE THE CITY ARBORIST AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DOCUMENT THE NUMBER AND SCOPE OF UNT REMOVAL.
NUMBER FIVE, IMPROVE INCENTIVE PLANS FOR DEVELOPERS TO ENCOURAGE RETENTION.
SORRY, I DO THINK FOR THE RECORD, WE'LL HAVE TO, WE'RE THIS FOR A LONG TIME.
I, I THINK WE HAVE MADE A LOT OF CHANGES.
I, I DO THINK THAT FOR THE RECORD WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO READ IT AGAIN.
HEY, YOU GUYS READY?
SO DID THAT LAST ONE STAY OR COME OUT? OUT? OKAY.
THE UH, YEAH, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN A CODE CHANGE, SO NO, NO, I DON'T HAVE ANYMORE.
'CAUSE WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANYWHERE ELSE.
THOSE OTHER, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION INSTEAD OF THE URBAN FOREST.
SO IT WOULD BE EITHER CITY ARBORIST OR URBAN FORESTER OR JUST OUR DIVISION IN GENERAL.
SO WHERE IS THAT? YOU SAID THERE'S NO URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT? THERE IS NO URBAN FORESTRY DEPARTMENT.
THERE IS AN URBAN FORESTER AND THERE'S A CITY ARBORIST, OR YOU CAN, YOU CAN SAY OUR DIVISION, WHICH IS THE COMMUNITY TREE AND PRESERVATION DIVISION ONE, OLD NUMBER EIGHT.
[02:15:01]
JUST CONTROL F YEAH.BIG THANKS TO SHE BRIER FOR SPEARHEADING.
UM, JUST LET ME KNOW IF I DON'T CATCH IT.
THEREFORE, THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS COUNCIL ADOPT THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS TO EXPAND, PROTECT, AND ENHANCE THE CITY'S TREE CANOPY BY ONE.
RECOMMEND REVIEWING THE CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN OF REACHING 50% CANOPY BY 2025 TO FIND WAYS TO REACH THAT GOAL BY 2040.
WELL, WHAT I THINK, UM, IT WAS EDITED SOMEWHAT WAS TO REVIEW BY 2025.
TO AUGMENT THE CURRENT INVENTORY PLANS TO CAPTURE SATELLITE IMAGERY TO CALCULATE THE CITYWIDE CANOPY COVER BI-ANNUALLY INSTEAD OF EVERY FOUR YEARS IN ORDER TO EVALUATE THE TREE CANOPY PERCENTAGE IN A MORE COST EFFECTIVE MANNER AND GAINING THE ABILITY TO TRACK PROGRESS TOWARDS THE TREE CANOPY GOAL.
THIS ALSO CAPTURES TREE CANOPY ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, WHEREAS MANUAL TREE INVENTORY DOES NOT.
THREE, IN ADDITION TO THE PROMOTION OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, PROMOTE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE WITH NATIVE PRAIRIE GRASSES AND UNDERSTORY WOODY PLANTS AND UTILITY EASEMENTS.
FOUR REQUIRE THE CITY ARBORIST AND THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
DOCUMENT THE NUMBER AND SCOPE OF UN UNPERMITTED REMOVAL OF PROTECTED AND HERITAGE TREES REMOVED EACH YEAR BY ADDRESS AND ACTIONS TAKEN.
PROVIDE A REPORT OF THESE ACTIVITIES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL ANNUALLY.
IMPROVE INCENTIVE PLANS FOR DEVELOPERS TO ENCOURAGE RETENTION OF EXISTING TREES USING NON-FINANCIAL INCENTIVES, DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS, DENSITY IN INCREASED FAR, ET CETERA.
REQUIRE THE COMMUNITY TREE AND PRESERVATION DIVISION DEVELOP A PLAN TO INCREASE AND PRESERVE THE TREE CANOPY IN EAST AUSTIN, EAST OF INTERSTATE I 35.
THAT WILL TAKE INTO THE CONSIDERATE THE INTO CONSIDERATION THE NEED TO PRESERVE AND RESTORE THE BLACKLAND PRAIRIE ECOSYSTEM.
THIS PLAN SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND COUNCIL AND FISCAL YEAR 20 25 7 REQUIRE THE COMMUNITY TREE AND PRESERVATION DIVISION DEVELOP A PLAN TO INCREASE AND PRESERVE THE TREE CANOPY IN HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES.
THIS PLAN SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND COUNCIL AND FISCAL YEAR 20 25 8.
ADJUST THE MITIGATION PAYMENT RATE TO THE URBAN FORESTRY REPLENISHMENT FUND BI-ANNUALLY BASED ON INFLATION.
INFLATION OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS AS CALCULATED BY THE US GOVERNMENT'S CPI NINE REQUIRE THE CITY ARBORIST AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO CALCULATE THE NUMBER OF TREES WHICH NEED TO BE PLANTED ANNUALLY TO REACH THE 50% CANOPY GROWTH TARGET BY THE GOAL YEAR, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT GROWTH RATES, STANDARD MORTALITY RATES, AND OTHER RELATED FACTORS.
THIS CALCULATION WILL BE SHARED WITH URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND COUNCIL BI-ANNUALLY.
10, INCREASE OVERSIGHT OF SITE PLAN MITIGATION TREE PLANTINGS BY REQUIRING SITE INSPECTIONS UNTIL TWO YEARS AFTER REPLANTING 11 REQUIRE AUSTIN ENERGY AND THE AUSTIN WATER WASTEWATER DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE IN BILLING STATEMENTS, NO LESS THAN QUARTERLY INFORMATION IN SPANISH AND ENGLISH, AT A MINIMUM ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF FREE TREE PLANTING PROGRAMS SUPPORTED BY NONPROFITS AND OR THE CITY AND HOW TO ACCESS THEM FOR THOSE RECEIVING BILLS VIA EMAIL.
THE SAME INFORMATION SHALL BE INCLUDED AT THE SAME FREQUENCY.
12 REQUIRE THE COMMUNITY TREE AND PRESERVATION DIVISION TO WORK WITH CITY FUNDED NON-PROFITS TO MORE AGGRESSIVELY MEET THE GOAL.
YEAR 13, REQUIRE THE COMMUNITY TREE PRESERVATION DIVISION TO IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL VENDORS, INCLUDING NONPROFITS FOR NATIVE TREES TO EXPAND LOCAL TREE NURSERIES TO ENSURE A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF PREFERRED TREES, INCLUDING NATIVE FRUIT AND NUT BEARING TREES AND SHRUBS.
[02:20:01]
COMMUNITY TREE AND PRESERVATION DIVISION TO CONDUCT A SURVEY AND IDENTIFY ANY CITY OWNED PROPERTY 0.25 ACRES OR GREATER, INCLUDING RIGHT OF WAY SETBACKS AND EASEMENTS THAT ARE SUITABLE FOR PLANTING TINY FORESTS OR MICRO HABITATS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR SOIL TYPE PLANT COMMUNITY.AND USE 15 REVIEW ALL CITY PARK AND CEMETERY MASTER PLANS TO ENSURE THEY ARE ADVANCING THE CLIMATE GOALS BY REPLACING DEAD TREES.
DEVELOP AN OAK WILT ANNUAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM TO CITIZENS LIKE THAT ARE UTILIZED IN LAKEWAY, TEXAS TO PREVENT FURTHER LOSS OF OAKS.
OFFER OAK WILL ABATEMENTS OR REBATES TO HOMEOWNERS WITH LIMITED MEANS TO REMOVE INFECTED TREES TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF NEIGHBORING TREES.
INCREASE COMMUNICATION WITH PROPERTY OWNERS, BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, ABOUT MAINTAINING HEALTHY TREES AND TO PREVENT THE TREE KILLING FUNGI OR INSECTS.
19, INCREASED DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT URBAN FORESTRY BUDGETS TO MEET THESE GOALS TO 20.
AN ANNUAL REPORT ON ALL OF THESE EFFORTS WILL BE DELIVERED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND COUNCIL EACH FALL AND AROUND ARBOR DAY.
THERE'S JUST ONE THING THAT I WAS GONNA ASK ABOUT.
UH, WHERE WHEN IT STARTS ON THE, THEREFORE, ARE WE DOING THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION? ARE WE DOING THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE IN THE VERY FIRST, THEREFORE, RIGHT.
I PERSONALLY THINK IT SHOULD BE THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
WELL, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS TO THE AMENDED, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON IT IF YOU'RE READY.
WELL, I'LL SECOND OR DID SOMEBODY ELSE SECOND? I SECONDED EARLIER, BUT, OH, ALL RIGHT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HANDS.
RESI, KRUGER, COFER, BEDFORD, BRISTOL, SHERA, AND SULLIVAN.
DID Y'ALL WANNA DO A BREAK OR JUST GO STRAIGHT TO THE NEXT ITEM? OKAY.
THEY'RE SAYING POWER THROUGH GUYS.
[5. Discussion and recommendation on the Austin Energy Resource, Generation, and Climate Protection Plan – Environmental Commissioners Haris Qureshi and David Sullivan]
HAVE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE AUSTIN ENERGY RESOURCE GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN.YEAH, GUYS, SO, UH, I WAS LAZY IN THE NOT EMAIL, UH, THE UPDATED VERSION OF THIS THAT ENDED UP PASSING SO BIG SHOUT OUT TO ELIZABETH FUNK FOR PROVIDING Y'ALL A NEW COPY OF THE DRAFT.
AND I APOLOGIZE TO THE TREES THAT WERE MURDERED FOR THIS
UM, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND READ THROUGH THIS REALLY QUICKLY IN ORDER TO RESPECT EVERYBODY'S TIME.
UH, DECEMBER 4TH, 2024, ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMEND, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20 24 12 0 4 DASH ZERO FIVE.
WHEREAS ON AUGUST 8TH, 2019, THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION DECLARING CLIMATE EMERGENCY AND CALLING FORWARD AND IMMEDIATE EMERGENCY MOBILIZATION TO RESTORE A SAFE CLIMATE AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE A NUMBER OF STEPS TO ACCELERATE LOCAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS, INCLUDING FROM AUSTIN ENERGY.
AND WHEREAS IN 2020, THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE ENERGY AUSTIN ENERGY RESOURCE GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN IN 2030, WHICH STATES THAT AUSTIN ENERGY WILL MAINTAIN AN ENERGY SUPPLY PORTFOLIO SUFFICIENT TO OFFSET CUSTOMER DEMAND WHILE ELIMINATING CARBON.
OTHER POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FROM ITS ELECTRIC GENERATION FACILITIES IS RAPIDLY AS FEASIBLE WITHIN THE LIMITATION SET BY THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL AND STATES THAT, AND ALL GENERATION, GENERATION RESOURCES WILL BE CARBON FREE BY 2035.
AND WHEREAS THE AUSTIN ENERGY RESOURCE GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN IN 2030 ALSO STATES THAT THE AUSTIN ENERGY WILL NO LONGER PURCHASE CONTRACT FOR OR BUILD LONG-TERM GENERATION OR STORAGE RESOURCES THAT EMIT NEW CARBON.
THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE AUSTIN CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES COMMUNITY-WIDE GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION GOALS TO ACHIEVE NET ZERO EMISSIONS BY 2040 WITH ABOUT 75% REDUCTION BY 2030.
AND WE'RE ASKED, ELECTRIFICATION IS A KEY STRATEGY FOR REDUCING AND ELIMINATING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN MANY SECTORS AND CARBON FREE ELECTRICITY IS NEEDED TO ACHIEVE THESE GOALS, THOSE GOALS, AND WE'RE ASKED ON JUNE 8TH, 2023, THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED A RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE FOSSIL FUEL NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY, AND A PLAN FOR TRANSITIONING TO A HUNDRED PERCENT CLEAN ENERGY ECONOMY, PHASE OUT FOSSIL FUEL PRODUCTION
[02:25:01]
AND INVEST IN COMMUNITIES ON THE FRONT LINES OF ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICE.AND WHEREAS GROUND LEVEL OZONE IN PARTICULAR MATTER, AIR POLLUTION IN THE AUSTIN REGION ALREADY EXCEED THE HEALTH BASED STANDARDS SET BY THE US UH, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
AND CAP COG HAS IDENTIFIED THAT INCREASED NO NOX EMISSIONS FROM ELECTRIC GENERATION ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, INCLUDING AUSTIN ENERGY'S POWER PLANTS AS HIGHLY CORRELATED WITH HIGH LOCAL OZONE MEASUREMENTS.
AND WE'RE ASKED AUSTIN ENERGY RESOURCE GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN IN 2030.
REFERENCES AN AFFORDABILITY GOAL AND AFFORDABILITY REMAINS IMPORTANT TO MANY CUSTOMERS.
BUT THE WORKSHOPS THAT AUSTIN ENERGY HOSTED AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS TO UPDATE THE AUSTIN ENERGY RESOURCE GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN REVEALED THAT A LARGE MAJORITY OF PARTICIPANTS ARE SUPPORTING, UH, SUPPORTIVE OF ALLOWING RATE INCREASES BEYOND THE CURRENT GOAL OF 2% PER YEAR.
SO LONG AS LOW INCOME CUSTOMERS ARE SHIELDED FROM GREATER INCREASES.
AND WHEREAS AUSTIN ENERGY OPERATES AS A PARTICIPANT AND THE ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL OF TEXAS AKA ERCOT GRID AND IS THEREFORE NOT POSSIBLE FOR AUSTIN ENERGY TO FULLY ENSURE RELIABILITY, ESPECIALLY DURING EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS.
AND WHEREAS, UH, CUSTOMER SIDE GENERATION AND ENERGY STORAGE THAT CAN OPERATE INDEPENDENTLY FROM THE GRID DURING ADAGES CAN MITIGATE ONGOING GRID RELIABILITY CHALLENGES FOR MEDICALLY VULNERABLE CUSTOMERS AND OTHER CRITICAL CUSTOMERS SUCH AS HOSPITALS, NURSING HOMES, FIRE STATIONS AT GROCERY STORES AMONG OTHERS.
AND WE'RE ASKED CUSTOMER SIDE INVESTMENTS IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND DEMAND RESPONSE IS ANOTHER EFFECTIVE WAY TO HELP MITIGATE RELIABILITY CHALLENGES FOR ALL CUSTOMERS, INCLUDING MEDICALLY VULNERABLE CUSTOMERS AND OTHER, OTHER CRITICAL CUSTOMERS SUCH AS HOSPITALS, NURSING HOMES, FIRE STATIONS, GROCERY STORES AMONG OTHERS, AND WHERE AS IS NECESSARY TO INVEST IN TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION IMPROVEMENTS THAT INCREASE THE CAPACITY TO MOVE ELECTRICITY IN AND OUT OF AUSTIN ENERGY'S LOAD ZONE TO LOWER PRICES AND REMOVE RELIABILITY.
RENEWABLE ENERGY AND ENERGY STORAGE COSTS HAVE DECLINED SIGNIFICANTLY OVER THE PAST SEVERAL DECADES AND ARE PROJECTED CONTINUED DECLINE AND WE'RE AS CARBON CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION IS TECHNOLOGICALLY CHALLENGING, ENERGY INTENSIVE AND EXPENSIVE IS NOT WELL SUITED FOR USE OF PEAKER PLANTS BECAUSE OF THEIR INCONSISTENT OPERATING PATTERNS.
AND WE'RE ASKED AUSTIN ENERGY'S EXISTING GAS BURNING POWER GENERATORS AT THE DECKER CREEK POWER STATION AND THE SANDHILL ENERGY CENTER ARE LOCATED IN EAST AUSTIN IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO LOWER INCOME COMMUNITIES OF COLOR, AND A SCHOOL THAT PREDOMINANTLY SERVES CHILDREN OF COLOR AND ADDING MORE GAS BURNING GENERATORS WOULD INCREASE THAT WOULD INCREASE POLLUTION.
EITHER OF THOSE COMMUNITIES WOULD BE ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICE AND WOULD BE CONTRARY TO COM OF THE AUSTIN CLIMATE EQUITY PLAN.
NOW, THEREFORE, TO BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THAT THERE IS SIGNIFICANT UNCERTAINTY WITH MANY VARIABLES THAT GO INTO MODELING PORTFOLIOS AND SCENARIOS, AND THAT THE AUSTIN ENERGY RESOURCE GENERATION CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN AND RESOURCE PLAN IS A VISION FOR THE UTILITIES FUTURE.
AND ACHIEVING THAT VISION REQUIRES CONTINUAL EVALUATION OF MARKETS, TECHNOLOGIES, AND OTHER FACTORS TO ENSURE THAT RELIABILITY, SUSTAINABILITY, AND AFFORDABILITY ARE ALL ACHIEVED.
THE RESOURCE PLAN SHOULD DO THE FOLLOWING.
ONE, MAINTAIN THE EXISTING GOAL TO MEET A HUNDRED PERCENT OF AUSTIN ENERGY LOAD WHILE ACHIEVING ZERO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY THE END OF 2035, WITH REDUCTIONS IN EMISSIONS BETWEEN NOW AND THEN WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT ADDITIONAL TECHNO TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT AND DEPLOYMENT, INCLUDING LONG DURATION STORAGE OR NEED TO ACHIEVE THIS GOAL, AND TWO, MAINTAIN THE EXISTING COMMITMENT TO NOT CONTRACT FOR OR BUILD LONG-TERM GENERATION OR STORAGE RESOURCES THAT EMIT NEW CARBON.
AND THREE, STATE THAT AUSTIN ENERGY'S PORTION OF FAYETTE, THE FAYETTE COAL POWER PLANT, WILL BE SHUT DOWN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND COMMIT TO QUARTERLY UPDATES TO THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL ON PROGRESS BEING MADE TO ACHIEVE THIS GOAL.
AND NUMBER FOUR, ACHIEVE ESTABLISH METHODS TO REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM ALL OF AUSTIN ENERGY'S NATURAL GAS UNITS STARTING IN JANUARY 20, 25 AND FIVE.
ESTABLISH A GOAL OF REDUCING LOCAL AIR POLLUTANTS, INCLUDING NITROUS OXIDES OR NOX FROM, UH, OR NOX, I GUESS, UH, FROM AUSTIN, ENERGY OWNED AND CONTRACTED GENERATION TO GET NEAR ZERO BY 2035 WITH REDUCTIONS BETWEEN NOW AND THEN.
AND SIX, MAINTAIN THE GOAL TO MEET 65% OF LOAD WITH RENEWABLE OR NUCLEAR ENERGY BY 2027, INCLUDING SOLAR BUILT WITHIN THE AUSTIN ENERGY LOAD ZONE AND ADD A GOAL OF TO MEET 75% OF LOAD WITH RENEWABLE OR NUCLEAR ENERGY BY 2030 AND 85% OF 2035, INCLUSIVE OF ALL RENEWABLE RESOURCES, WHETHER LOCATED IN OR OUTSIDE THE LOAD ZONE.
AND NUMBER SEVEN, MOVE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE TO INVEST IN TRANSMISSION IMPROVEMENTS THAT WILL IMPROVE THE INFLOW AND OUTFLOW OF ENERGY FROM AUSTIN ENERGY'S LOAD ZONE, THEREFORE, IMPROVING RELIABILITY AND LOWERING COSTS.
AND EIGHT, ESTABLISH ROBUST GOALS AND CONTINUE TO INCREASE INVESTMENTS IN AND MAKE POLICY RATE AND PROGRAM UPDATES TO MAXIMIZE DEPLOYMENT OF LOCAL CARBON FREE RESOURCES, INCLUDING LOCAL SOLAR ENERGY EFFICIENCY, DEMAND RESPONSE AND STORAGE THAT CAN HELP REDUCE DEMAND AND INCREASE LOCAL GENERATION WITHOUT CONTRIBUTING LOCAL AIR POLLUTION.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL REEVALUATE THE AFFORDABILITY GOAL FOR AUSTIN ENERGY AND ESTABLISH A NEW GOAL THAT ONE REFLECTS AUSTIN ENERGY'S PAST SUCCESS AND CONTINUE TO EMPHASIS ON
[02:30:01]
ENERGY EFFICIENCY BY TYING THE GOAL OF TOTAL BILLS WHILE ACCOUNTING FOR BENEFICIAL ELECTRIFICATION INSTEAD OF RATES, AT LEAST FOR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS.BECAUSE USING LESS ELECTRICITY AT A HIGHER SLIGHTLY HIGHER RATE CAN RESULT IN LOWER BILLS AS IS CURRENTLY THE CASE FOR THE AVERAGE AUSTIN, UH, RESIDENTIAL AUSTIN ENERGY CUSTOMER.
AND TWO, REFLECTS THE REALITY OF PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE INFLATION.
AND THREE REFLEXIVE REALITIES OF COST DRIVERS WITHIN THE ELECTRIC UTILITY SECTOR THAT ARE BEYOND AUSTIN ENERGY'S CONTROL AND FOUR CONTINUES TO AIM FOR.
ALL IN SYSTEMWIDE ELECTRIC RATES ARE BELOW THE TEXAS AVERAGE SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED THAT THE AFFORDABILITY GOAL SHOULD BE REVIEWED AS PART OF EACH UPDATE TO THE AUSTIN ENERGY RESOURCE GENERATION CLIENT PROTECTION PLAN, BE IT FOR THE RESOLVE THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RE RECOMMENDS A REVIEW OF THE RESOURCE GENERATION CLIENT PROTECTION PLAN BE CONDUCTED EVERY TWO TO THREE YEARS TO HELP TAKE ADVANTAGE OF, UH, EMERGING OPPORTUNITIES TO ADVANCE THE TRANSITION TO CLEAN, AFFORDABLE, AND RELIABLE ELECTRICITY AND BE RESPONSIVE, CHANGING MARKET CONDITIONS.
AND I'LL SECOND, CAN YOU READ IT?
UM, YOU KNOW, I'LL MAKE ANOTHER POINT TOO.
UM, IT'S MY GROUP AT UT THAT'S DOING THE WORK ON CARBON SEQUESTRATION.
I COULD GET SOMEBODY TO COME IN HERE AND TALK TO US ABOUT THAT.
PROBABLY IT WOULD BE VERY INTERESTING BECAUSE WE ARE MAKING ADVANCES IN THAT Y'ALL COULD PROBABLY TALK TO THE JSE AND MAYBE, UH, THE ELECTRIC UTILITY PEOPLE TOO.
I'LL SECOND THAT WHEN WE GET TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. OKAY.
AND THIS RECOMMENDATION IS ASKING THAT IT BE REVIEWED BECAUSE MODELS CHANGE, SCENARIOS CHANGE, AND SO YOU'RE REAFFIRMING CERTAIN THINGS THAT WERE IN THE ORIGINAL 2020 PLAN, UM, AND THEN ALSO ADDING SOME ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OR THINGS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, SO BASICALLY THE IDEA IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN UH, PEOPLE AT THE JSC AND VARIOUS COMMISSIONS WERE READING THIS PLAN, THEY WERE JUST LIKE, HEY, YOU KNOW, WE COULD MAYBE DEPRIORITIZE THE USE OF THESE GAS, UH, PEAKER, UM, PEAKER PLANTS, I BELIEVE THEY'RE CALLED, UM, AND MAYBE TRY TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, LIKE MORE BATTERY STUFF.
BUT THEN THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATION BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN WHETHER INVESTING IN BATTERIES IS REALLY GREAT OR NOT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF TECHNOLOGY THAT STILL NEEDS TO DO.
AND THEN THE PRICES, THE PRICE IS ALWAYS PLUMMETING.
SO THEN PEOPLE ARE LIKE, SHOULD WE INVEST WHILE THE PRICE IS STILL PLUMMETING OR WAIT TILL WE CRATERS, SO TO SPEAK? UM, SO THERE'S A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THAT.
UM, ALSO ABOUT, YOU KNOW, REDUCING KNOCKS.
UM, YOU KNOW, UH, OBVIOUSLY THE FAYETTE POWER PLANT IS SOMETHING THAT'S ALWAYS A SUPER HOT TOPIC.
UM, AND THEN ALSO JUST TALKING ABOUT, SO BASICALLY WHAT AUSTIN ENERGY WAS SAYING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, LIKE WITH ELECTRIFICATION AND WITH THE, UH, THE GRID AND STUFF LIKE THAT, AND I'M DEFINITELY NOT A SCIENTIST, SO PLEASE DISREGARD EVERYTHING I'M SAYING, WHICH IS STUPID 'CAUSE I'M ABOUT TO SAY THIS.
BUT BASICALLY WHAT THEY WERE SAYING IS BECAUSE THERE AREN'T NECESSARILY, LIKE THE TRANSMISSION FOR, FOR ERCOT INTO AUSTIN IS LIKE WE CAN GENERATE MORE ELECTRICITY, BUT THE TRANSMISSION, LIKE THE GRID THAT IT KIND OF COMES IN ON IS SORT OF LIKE STUCK AT A CERTAIN CAPACITY.
AND SO THAT'S WHY THEY WERE LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE NEED THESE, THESE LOCAL PEAKER PLANTS TO ENSURE THAT, YOU KNOW, DURING TIMES OF LIKE REALLY HIGH PEAK USE, ESSENTIALLY LIKE A WINTER STORM OR, YOU KNOW, SUMMER HEAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WE NEED THESE PEAKER PLANTS.
AND PEOPLE ARE LIKE, WELL, IF WE JUST FOCUS MORE ON TRANSMISSION IMPROVEMENTS AND WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO FOCUS ON, UH, NON-RENEWABLE SOURCES OF ENERGY AS MUCH FOR THESE PEAK TIMES.
UM, AND THEN PEOPLE ARE ALSO SUGGESTING THAT IF WE, YOU KNOW, COME UP WITH MECHANISMS TO, UM, WHAT WOULD BE THE WORD, I GUESS, INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO USE LESS ELECTRICITY, THEN WE CAN CHARGE A HIGHER RATE.
BUT IF PEOPLE ARE SPENDING LESS ELECTRICITY OVERALL WITH LOWER EMISSIONS RIGHT, THAN THE OVERALL THAT THERE'LL BE A LOWER COST AND A BENEFIT TO EVERYBODY.
UM, I FEEL LIKE MAYBE I'M MISSING SOMETHING, BUT I THINK THAT WAS GENERALLY, UH, THE LAY PERSON'S WAY TO INCORPORATE OR TO INTERPRET ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT SORT OF RESOLUTIONS THAT ARE IN THERE.
'CAUSE THE, THE CONTENT SOUNDS GOOD TO ME.
I'M JUST UNDER, IT'S A LOT JARGON, I'M NOT GONNA LIE.
I'M JUST WONDERING ABOUT THE WHY.
SO WE ALREADY HAVE THIS AUSTIN ENERGY RESOURCE GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN.
DID IT LAY OUT A, A MORE ROUGH OR VAGUE GUIDELINE AND
[02:35:01]
THEN THE JOINT SUSTAINABILITY COMMUNITY, UH, COMMITTEE TOOK A DEEP DIVE AND THEN CAME UP WITH THESE SPECIFICS, MORE RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THAT? YEP.SO IT'S KIND OF PARAMETERS FOR IMPLEMENTING THIS PLAN.
I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION FOR THAT WHEN YOU'RE DONE HERE.
I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE, SO AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED AUSTIN ENERGY TO WORK WITH THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION AND RELEVANT EXPERTS TO UPDATE THE RESOURCE GENERATION CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN.
DO YOU REMEMBER? LIKE WAS, SO IS THIS IN RESPONSE TO THEIR, BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN WORKING FOR THE LAST YEAR? YEAH.
SO TO DO THE UPDATES, KY WHITE, WHO'S THE CHAIR OF THE JSC, SHE'S ON THE EUC.
UH, SO SHE'S SUPER TAPPED IN, NO PUN INTENDED.
SHE'S SUPER PLUGGED IN TO WHAT'S GOING ON.
UM, SO SHE WAS DEFINITELY A, A DRIVER IN SORT OF THIS RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN THERE WAS A BUNCH OF ROBUST DISCUSSION.
UH, 'CAUSE APPARENTLY IT'S A BUNCH OF, UH, BATTERY HEADS ON THE JSC THAT KNOW WAY MORE THAN I DO ON, ON THESE TOPICS.
UM, SO THAT WAS SORT OF LIKE THE, HOW THIS CAME FORTH.
SO THEY WERE PART OF THAT STAKEHOLDER PROCESS OVER THE LAST YEAR.
I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT THAT ACTUALLY DOVETAILED AND NOT SILOED.
IT WAS A CRASH COURSE FOR ME FOR SURE.
SO I, I THOUGHT THAT THE DECKER CREEK POWER PLANT WAS CLOSED.
NO, I THINK THEY, THEY HAVE THE, THE PEAKERS THERE, THEY HAVE THE PEAKERS THERE AND AT THE SANDHILL ENERGY CENTER.
THE WAY THE, THE WAY ELECTRIC ENERGY WORKS IS YOU HAVE BASE LOAD, WHICH IS LIKE POWER, UH, COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS, NUCLEAR PLANTS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT THEN WHEN YOU HAVE PEAK USAGE, THEN THEY FIRE UP THE GAS POWERED, UH, POWER PLANTS.
THEY'RE OSTENSIBLY ONLY GOING TO RUN DURING PEAK TIMES, WHICH IS BASICALLY WINTER STORMS AND, UH, SUMMER HEAT.
I'M GONNA LOOK THAT UP BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT THE WHOLE REASON THAT THERE WAS A, UM, A MASTER PLANNING PROCESS OF DECKER LAKE WAS BECAUSE THAT POWER PLANT WAS CLOSING AND THEY WERE LOOKING AT THEM.
WHAT DO DO YOU DO WITH THIS LAKE THAT'S NO LONGER A COOLING UNIT FOR THIS POWER PLANT? YEAH, I MEAN, I, I, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR AUSTIN ENERGY, BUT, AND SO I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THAT PLANT COMING OFFLINE.
UM, I, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT HAS DONE SO DONE, DONE YET.
UM, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE LATEST, WELL MAYBE, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, REIA, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT IS JUST FOR PEAK, PEAK TIMES I'M LOOKING NOW, IT SAYS NATURAL GAS AND STEAM.
WELL, I DO ALSO SEE HERE THAT THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN THE AUSTIN MONITOR BACK IN 2020 THAT SAID THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO CLO WELL, THE OLDEST STEAM UNIT DECKER PLANT UNIT ONE WAS CLOSED IN 2020.
SO MAYBE NOT THE PLANT AS A WHOLE.
I MEAN, YOU BURN NATURAL GAS TO GENERATE STEAM TO TURN, PULL IT TO TURN A TURBINE THAT GENERATES ELECTRICITY.
IT SAYS HERE THAT IT'LL BE RETIRED.
THE WHOLE THING'S RETIRED IN OCTOBER.
LET ME, LET ME CROSS REFERENCE THIS, BUT WELL, YEAH, I SEE THIS, UH, THAT UH, THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO CLO THEY SHUT DOWN THE REMAINING UNIT AS GUEST FIRE DECKER CREEK FACILITY, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT THEY STILL HAVE THE PEAKER UNITS BECAUSE THEY DID SAY THAT AT THE LAST, UH, AND THEY ALSO SAID THAT, UH, IN 2024, EARLIER THIS YEAR THAT UH, THE DECKER CREEK POWER PLANT COULD PRODUCE ENOUGH WATER VAPOR, BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SNOW.
SO IT DOES SEEM LIKE IT'S STILL OPERATIONAL.
HERE'S THE, FROM AUSTIN ENERGY, IT SAYS THE DECKER TRANSITION BACKGROUND, UM, D ONE STEAM UNIT SEEDS OPERATION IN THE FALL OF 2020 D TWO IN FALL OF 2021.
FOUR GAS TURBINE O'BRIENS REMAIN ONLINE.
THOSE ARE SCHEDULED TO BE PHASED OUT AS WELL.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT NUMBER THREE.
JUST AUSTIN ENERGY'S PORTION OF FAYETTE THREE OH AND THE, THE FIRST THREE
WE'LL BE SHUT DOWN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
UHHUH,
[02:40:02]
UM, SUPER WHAT'S, I WAS GONNA SAY AGRO, BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE RIGHT WORD THAT I WANT TO USE TO CONVEY THIS SUPER PASSIONATE ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, AUSTIN ENERGY DIVESTING FROM THE FAY COAL POWER PLANT IS, IT'S NOT LIKE THE POWER PLANT IS JUST SUDDENLY GONNA BE SHUT DOWN.BUT IT DOES MAKE OUR METRICS LOOK WAY BETTER AS FAR AS LIKE OUR EMISSIONS, LIKE AS A, THE CITY OF AUSTIN AS LIKE AN ENTITY, IT'S CARBON EMISSIONS.
WE'LL BE SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED FROM NOT BURNING COAL.
UM, SO I THINK THAT'S LIKE, IT'S NOT LIKE WE DON'T SAVE THE WORLD, RIGHT? LIKE THIS COAL PLAN WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST, BUT US AS THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WE ARE NOT FUNDING THIS COAL PLANT.
IT'S ESSENTIALLY MY UNDERSTANDING RIGHT.
WHICH IS STILL BETTER THAN, AND THERE IT IS.
IT IS THE CASE THAT WE'VE TRIED TO GET OUT.
THE CONTRACT IS JUST LIKE HORRIFICALLY SCREWED.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S EVER GONNA HAPPEN, BUT I'M ALSO A PESSIMIST AND LIKES TO, UH, DREAM OF A BRIGHTER FUTURE.
I WOULD NOT PUT YOU IN THE PESSIMIST CATEGORY.
UM, SO ONE THING THAT, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PHRASE THIS AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT FITS IN HERE.
SO DURING, UM, THE WINTER STORM AND THEN ALSO DURING, UM, LAST SUMMER WHEN IT WAS, YOU KNOW, WE HAD THE INSANE HEAT.
UM, THERE WAS IN OTHER COUNTIES, UM, THEY HAD VERY PRE OR, OR ENERGY DISTRICTS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE REFERRED TO AS PREDATORY PRACTICES THAT THEY GOT BILLS THAT WERE JUST INSANE.
SAME PLACES WITH, WITH MORE DEREGULATED ENERGY PROVIDERS ESSENTIALLY.
AND I FEEL LIKE I WANNA SALUTE AUSTIN ENERGY FOR KEEPING THAT.
THEY DID A VERY GOOD JOB WITH THAT.
THEY'VE DONE A GOOD JOB WITH THAT.
AND SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE SOMEHOW COMMEND THAT, BUT ALSO SAY, YOU KNOW, CONTINUE TO PROTECT US FROM THOSE THINGS.
CAN THAT GO SOMEWHERE? I'M NOT SAYING IT VERY WELL 'CAUSE I JUST GOT TIRED ABOUT 10 MINUTES AGO.
PROTECTIONS FROM PRICE GOUGING DURING CLIMATE EMERGENCIES.
BUT YOU GOT ME THERE REI, CAN YOU YEAH, I CAN BREAK IT DOWN AND AT IT.
JUST GIMME A SECOND WHILE I LOAD UP.
I AM CURIOUS WHAT STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS EXIST TO PROTECT PEOPLE DURING CLIMATE EMERGENCIES FROM PRICE GOUGING.
'CAUSE I KNOW IN DIFFERENT PLACES THERE ARE SOME THAT EXIST.
HOTEL ROOMS AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND TRUTH, I'M JUST FILLING TIME WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, BUT, RIGHT.
I ALWAYS LIKE TO BE THINKING ABOUT THE STATE LAW WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CITY LAW.
I'M LIKE, OH, WHAT PROTECTION USUALLY IN TEXAS, THAT ENDS UP BEING PRETTY DEPRESSING.
SO SHOULD WE PUT THE THING ABOUT THE, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY IT.
UH, THE, THE APPROVAL OF NOT, NOT GOUGING THE CITIZENRY, THE RESIDENCE.
I THINK COMMISSIONER KRUGER SAID IT REALLY WELL JUST A MINUTE AGO.
UH, COMMEND AUSTIN ENERGY FOR, WELL THIS IS, IF WE WANNA SAY THE THANK YOU PART, COMMEND AUSTIN ENERGY FOR THEIR LEGACY OF PROTECTING CUSTOMERS FROM PRICE GOUGING DURING CLIMATE DISASTERS, AND ASK OR REQUIRE CONTINUED PROTECTIONS FOR CUSTOMERS IN FUTURE CLIMATE DISASTERS.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THAT SHOULD BE IN LIKE THE, THE WHEREAS OR LIKE, DO WE PUT IN THE RESOLVED? NO, I THINK YOU CAN PUT IT ON, UH, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED.
I FEEL THAT MORE
[02:45:01]
ENERGY'S PAST SUCCESS AND CONTINUED EMPHASIS ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY.SO IT, IT GOES ALONG WITH THAT, THE TRUTH.
SO MAYBE WE, WE MAYBE WE COULD REALLY ROLL IT IN.
NUMBER FOUR CONTINUES TO AIM FOR ALL IN SYSTEM WIDE.
ELECTRIC RATES ARE BELOW THE TEXAS AVERAGE.
AND INSULATE THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN FROM, I I WOULD MAKE IT ITS OWN THING.
AND JUST SAY LIKE, CONTINUE USE TO CONTINUE TO PROTECT CUSTOMERS FROM PRICE GOUGING DURING CLIMATE DISASTERS.
I, I LIKE WHEN YOU SAID HONOR THEIR LEGACY OR MM-HMM
BECAUSE THEN THAT REC RECOGNIZES THAT THEY'VE DONE A GOOD JOB, RIGHT? MM-HMM
BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DEREGULATE MM-HMM
AND WE LIKE, NO, HONESTLY, WHEN I THINK OF LEGACY NOW, I JUST THINK OF THE MIKE TYSON INTERVIEW, YOU KNOW,
SO CONTINUE THE LEGACY OF PROTECTING, PROTECTING AND AUSTIN ENERGY CUSTOMERS, INSULATING CUSTOMERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE CITY.
AUSTIN FROM GOUGING, FROM PRICE GOUGING, BEHAVIORING.
DO WE WANNA SAY, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY THERE'S CLIMATE DISASTERS, THERE COULD ALSO BE OTHER KINDS OF DISASTERS.
DO WE WANNA GO THERE, RIGHT? MM-HMM
WE COULD SAY DURING EXTREME WEATHER AND OTHER DISASTERS MAYBE CONTINUES.
AUSTIN ENERGY'S LEGACY OF PROTECTING AND INSULATING THE CUSTOMER'S RESIDENCE OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN FROM PRICE GOUGING BEHAVIOR, OFTEN SEEN FROM OTHER ENERGY PROVIDERS DURING STREAM WEATHER EVENTS OR OTHER DISASTERS.
I JUST HAD ONE LITTLE THING ON, UH, NUMBER FIVE, HOW LIKE NITROGEN OX KNOX IS MENTIONED.
LIKE DID YOU WANT TO ALSO MENTION LIKE CARBON MONOXIDE AND YEAH.
WE CAN DO, UH, AND OTHER POLLUTANTS THAT LEAD TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF CARBON MONOXIDE THOUGH.
I MEAN GENERALLY IT'S CO2 H2O KNOX PARTICULATE INCLUDING NITRIC OXIDE.
I'LL NEVER FORGET THE TIME WE WERE DOING MOBILE MONITORING AND WE PASSED A FEW MILES NORTH OF THE PA FAYETTE POWER PLANT AND GOT A HIT OF SO TWO AND THEN WE CONTINUED DOWN THE ROAD.
WE TURNED, WE CAME BACK A FEW MILES FARTHER DOWNWIND, WE GOT ANOTHER HIT.
I WENT BACK, I LOOKED AT A MAP STRAIGHT LINE BACK TO FAYETTE, BUT THEN THEY SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT.
THEY NOW TREAT FOR SO TWO NOW.
WHAT'S SO TWO SULFUR DIOXIDE SULFOXIDE.
NOTHING LIKE GETTING A FRESH WHIFF OF SULFUR TO START THE DAY OFF.
YOU ALREADY SECONDED, RIGHT? COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN? YEAH, I DID.
ARE WE READY TO VOTE ON IT? COMMISSIONERS OR ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS AMENDED.
BE RESI, KRUEGER, COFER, BEDFORD, BRISTOL, SHERA AND SULLIVAN.
[6. Update on the Balcones Canyonlands Conservation Plan Coordinating Committee on November 1st – Jennifer Bristol]
UPDATES NEXT, UM, ES CAN, UH, ES CANYONLANDS CONSERVATION PLANS COORDINATING COMMITTEE MEETING.WAS I SUPPOSED TO GIVE AN UPDATE? I WAS, WASN'T I
UH, WELL WE HAD A MEETING
I HAD TO GET, LET MY BRAIN WARM BACK UP ON THAT.
UM, WE HAD A WONDERFUL MEETING AND THANKED, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER, UM, LESLIE POOLE FOR HER SERVICE, UM, ON THE COMMITTEE.
AND THAT WAS HER LAST AND FINAL MEETING, UM, FOR THAT.
[02:50:01]
AND SO TO BE SEEN OF WHO WILL TAKE HER SPOT ON THAT.UM, AND THEY GAVE US, UM, AN OVERALL UPDATE ON SOME OF THE RESTORATION PROJECTS AND STUFF THEY HAVE GOING ON.
UM, AND THEN, UM, THEY ASKED THIS LADY THAT, UM, USED TO BE A COUNTY COMMISSIONER, UM, TO TELL A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY OF THE BALCONES AND THAT WAS REALLY FUN TO HEAR MY MOM TALK ABOUT THAT.
SHE WAS, THEY JUST ASK HER AND SHE, IT, IT WAS REALLY, REALLY GREAT TO HEAR, UM, HOW ALL OF THE BALCONES CANYON LANDS BOTH AT THE COUNTY AND THE CITY CAME TOGETHER IN A TIME THAT WAS REALLY, UM, KIND OF THE, THE WILD WEST, UM, AND NEW IN PROTECTING ENDANGERED SPECIES IN THIS BIG SORT OF COLLABORATIVE WAY.
UM, LIKE THAT, WAS IT VIDEOTAPED OR ANYTHING OR? I THINK IT WAS BECAUSE IT'S A FORM OF MEETING.
SO IT IS THE CASE THAT ONE, ONE OF THE TWO BIRD SPECIES IS NOW OFF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THE BELL COUNTY'S CANYONLANDS ACTUALLY, UM, PROTECTS EIGHT DIFFERENT SPECIES CURRENTLY.
ONE WAS TAKEN OFF, SO THERE'S SEVEN NOW.
HOWEVER, UM, IF THE BATS ARE, UM, BEING CONSIDERED, AND I THINK THERE'S ONE MORE CAVE SPECIES THAT WOULD BRING IT EITHER BACK UP TO EIGHT OR NINE, BUT YES, THE BLACK CAT VERIO WAS DELISTED IN 2018, I THINK IT WAS.
UM, WHICH IS A SUCCESS OF THE IT'S A SUCCESS.
TO MANAGE THOSE, THOSE LANDS IN A WAY THAT ALLOW FOR BETTER NESTING, UM, AND SUCCESS AND NESTING, UM, IS, IS GREAT.
UM, GOLDEN CHIEF GOBLER IS STILL, UM, YOU KNOW, HIGH A HIGHLY THREATENED SPECIES, ENDANGERED SPECIES, UM, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, SO THE CANYON LANDS REALLY OFFER, UM, NESTING HABITAT FOR THAT.
AND THEY SHOWED US, UM, WHERE THE SUCCESSFUL BREEDING PAIRS WERE, WHICH WAS REALLY COOL, UM, TO SEE THOSE MAPS AND, UM, AND SEE, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH THEY DON'T REALLY CARE TO BE NEAR HUMAN ACTIVITY.
UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE BIRD WHO REALLY, UM, CONTINUES TO NEST NEAR, UH, ONE OF THE HIGHWAYS AND THEY CAN COME BACK TO THE, YOU KNOW, EVERY YEAR.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S NOT ANY PREDATORS THERE OR WHAT, WHAT THEIR DECISION IS ON THAT, BUT
UM, ANYWAY, IT WAS, IT WAS A GREAT MEETING.
UM, WE WON'T HAVE ANOTHER ONE UNTIL THE SPRING.
UM, I'VE ASKED THAT THEY, UM, LOOK AT MAYBE DOING, UM, A PRESENTATION WITH US, UH, ON THE FUTURE.
UM, JUST TO KIND OF BRING US UP TO SPEED ON THE ACREAGE, NOT, NOT JUST FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN MANAGED LANDS, BUT ALSO THE TRAVIS COUNTY AS IT IS AS A WHOLE, AS A PRESERVED SYSTEM.
UM, A LOT OF PEOPLE GET IT, UM, CONFUSED WITH THE NATIONAL BALCONES CANYON LANDS NATIONAL WILDLIFE PRESERVE, WHICH IS ALSO IN TRAVIS COUNTY, UM, WHICH WAS THE FEDERAL ANSWER TO HELPING PRESERVE THE SPECIES, UM, IN WESTERN TRAVIS COUNTY.
SO, UH, IT IS 32,000 ACRES, UM, AND IT, IT SERVES MULTIPLE DUTIES IN, UM, HABITAT PRESERVATION FOR THE ENDANGERED SPECIES THAT ARE TERRESTRIAL OR AVIAN.
THEN ALSO THE CAVE SYSTEMS, UM, WITHIN ALL OF THOSE, WHICH THEN ALSO PROTECT THE AQUIFER.
SO IT REALLY HAS THIS, YOU KNOW, UM, EXPANSIVE, UH, ECOSYSTEM SERVICE THAT IT DOES FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS IN TRAVIS COUNTY.
SO IT'S, IT'S THE ONLY ONE OF ITS KIND.
I WILL SAY THIS TOO, THAT WAS, UM, SOMETHING THAT, UH, WAS SHARED, UH, AND THAT I FOND REMEMBER, UM, THAT THE, UM, ONCE TRAVIS COUNTY AND THE CITY OF AUSTIN FIGURED OUT HOW TO DO THIS, UM, THANKS TO MY MOM, UH, VALLEY BRISTOL, UM, THE TEXAS LEGISLATOR SAID, WOW, THAT'S A REALLY GREAT PLAN.
NO ONE ELSE CAN DO THIS THIS WAY.
AND SO NOBODY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS GETS TO USE THE SAME SYSTEM THAT WE GET TO USE HERE.
NOW THEY HAVE COME UP WITH OTHER WAYS TO DO IT IN OTHER COUNTIES, UM, TO HAVE, UM, MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR THE ENDANGERED SPECIES.
BUT, UM, WE ARE STILL THE ONLY ONE IN TEXAS LIKE THIS.
HOWEVER, IT IS THE NATIONAL MODEL FOR ALL THE OTHER STATES TO USE.
SORRY, MY MIND'S KIND OF GOING A LITTLE BIT TOO, BUT, UM, LET'S MOVE ON TO FUTURE
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
GEN ITEMS. ANY SUGGESTIONS OR I'LL LOOK IN TO SEE IF I CAN GET SOMEBODY TO COME AND TALK TO US ABOUT CARBON SEQUESTRATION.[02:55:01]
I'LL SECOND THAT.I REMEMBER YOUR SECOND
I KNOW
WELL WE COULD
UM, THERE'S ONE THING THAT I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT FOR A MINUTE, UM, THAT KIND OF, AND IN MY MEMORIES JOGGED THIS TONIGHT WAS WHEN THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH TEAM WAS MENTIONED.
UM, I GUESS BECAUSE WE ALWAYS HAVE SOMETHING TO WHERE SOMETHING HAPPENS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD PEOPLE COME OUT AND THEY'RE LIKE, WE DID NOT KNOW THIS WAS GOING ON.
AND I'VE ALWAYS BEEN LIKE, I NEED TO MAKE A, LIKE, SUGGEST THAT MAYBE THE PEOPLE COULD COME OUT THAT ACTUALLY REACH OUT TO THE PEOPLE AND TELL US HOW, HOW THEY DO THAT.
SO ON DEVELOPMENT CASES, THAT'S KIND OF A DIFFERENT MM-HMM
PROCESS THAN WATERSHEDS COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND EDUCATION FOLKS.
UM, SO LIKE NOTICE GETS SENT OUT, BUT NOT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION NOTICE GETS SENT OUT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION'S APP OR CITY COUNCIL, AND THAT'S PART OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
UM, SO THERE, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR ADDITIONAL OUTREACH FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION.
WE DO HAVE, UM, WE GO ABOVE AND BEYOND, I GUESS BY, BY HAVING, MAINTAINING A, A LIST OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE ASKED TO BE, UM, NOTIFIED FOR THINGS.
SO WE, WE, WE TRY THAT, BUT THAT'S KIND OF A DIFFERENT THING WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPMENT CASES THAN OUR, OUR OUTREACH PEOPLE.
BUT, UM, SO JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF THAT WHEN YOU DECIDE WHO YOU WANT TO COME SPEAK.
YEAH, WE'LL THINK ABOUT IT MORE.
AND I, I WOULD LIKE TO FORMALLY ASK THAT, YOU KNOW, BACH'S CANDY LANDS COME AND GIVE A JUST A BIGGER OVERALL YEAH.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT LANDS, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES IT ALL DO? BECAUSE SOME OF THEM ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, SOME AREN'T, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT GOING ON THERE.
DO WE GET A SECOND? SECOND? PERFECT.
DID YOU NEED A SECOND? 'CAUSE I NEED TO SECOND YOU THEN,
I KNOW MY DAYS ARE LIMITED WITH THIS, SO I HAVE TO SAY IT AT LEAST ONCE,
BUT YEAH, I'LL JUST THINK ABOUT, LIKE, I'LL THINK ABOUT IT MORE AND ASK Y'ALL AGAIN LATER.
IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, OH, THERE IS SOMETHING ELSE.
UH, THE PARTY, UH, ON THE 18TH.
UM, JUST BRING YOURSELVES AND BRING WHAT YOU WANT TO, UH, IBE, UM, UH, LIBATION OF YOUR CHOICE.
AND UM, WE'LL KIND OF LIKE LAST YEAR WE'LL HAVE SOME PRIZES FOR QUESTIONS OH YEAH.
OR SOME SORT OF GAME OF SOME SORT.
UM, BRING YOUR PARTNER, YOUR FRIENDS, BRING YOUR PARTNER.
AND ELIZABETH WILL SEND OUT THE, THE DETAILS MORE AS WE GET CLOSER.
I MEAN, IT'S ON THE 19TH RIGHT? OR WHATEVER THAT WEDNESDAY.
IT WOULD BE OUR NEXT MEETING IF WE HAD ONE.
I KNOW, RIGHT? SO IF I DON'T SEE Y'ALL LATER, HAVE A GOOD HOLIDAY
AND, UH, I, I'LL TELL YOU THAT A GUY CAME UP TO ME AND HANDED ME A BUSINESS CARD FOR, UM, VOLUNTEER SANTA CLAUSES.
I MEAN, ALL YOU NEED IS JUST A FAT SUIT, MAN.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS PERFECT UNDER MY SHIRT.
WELL, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, IT'S 9 0 1.