* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:02] , EVERYONE. GOOD EVENING. [CALL TO ORDER ] THE TIME IS 6:01 PM WE ARE GOING TO CALL TO ORDER THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. IT IS WEDNESDAY, MAY 6TH, 2026. WE'RE AT THE PERMITTING AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER ROOM, 14 0 5 6 3 1 0 WILLAMINA DELCO DRIVE, AUSTIN, TEXAS. AND WE WILL START BY ESTABLISHING QUORUM. WE'LL GO FIRST ONLINE TO VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL PRESENT. COMMISSIONER FLURRY HERE. COMMISSIONER LUKI. HERE. COMMISSIONER MORRISON? HERE. SECRETARY KURESHI. HERE. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. HERE. COMMISSIONER BRIMER HERE. AND I'M CHAIR KRUEGER AND I AM HERE. SO WITH THAT, WE HAVE QUORUM AND WE WILL MOVE NEXT TO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATION. DO WE HAVE ANY GENERAL PUBLIC COMMUNICATION CHAIR? NO ONE HAS SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMUNICATION. ALL RIGHT, GREAT. THANK YOU. SO NEXT [APPROVAL OF MINUTES ] I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PREVIOUS MEETING'S MINUTES. SO MOVED. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BRIMER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND. AND I SEE THAT THAT IS UNANIMOUS. MOTION PASSES. [2. Staff briefing regarding the Barton Springs Road Bridge Project. Presented by Eric Bailey, Deputy Director, Austin Capital Delivery Services.] NEXT WE'LL GO TO A STAFF BRIEFING ITEM NUMBER TWO, STAFF BRIEFING REGARDING REGARDING THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE PROJECT PRESENTED BY ERIC BAILEY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR AUSTIN CAPITAL DELIVERY SERVICES. OH, YEP. OKAY. JUST MAKING SURE THAT, THERE WE GO. UH, GOOD EVENING. I'M ERIC BAILEY. I'M THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CAPITAL DELIVERY SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN. AND I'M HERE TODAY TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE PROJECT. UM, AS A REMINDER, THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE OF THE BRIDGE IS OVER A HUNDRED YEARS OLD. IT WAS EXPANDED IN 1946 TO ITS CURRENT FOUR LANE CONFIGURATION SEASON AVERAGE OF 20,000 VEHICLES PER DAY. IT'S A KEY ENTRANCE TO THE ZILKER PARK AND FOR SOME OF THE CITY'S SIGNATURE EVENTS, INCLUDING THE TRAIL OF LIGHTS, BLUES ON THE GREEN, AND THE AUSTIN CITY LIMITS MUSIC FESTIVAL. THIS PROJECT IS FUNDED VIA THE CITY'S GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS WITH THE BULK OF THE FUNDING COMING FROM THE 2020 BOND, AS WELL AS A RECENTLY AWARDED $32 MILLION FHWA BRIDGE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT GOING TOWARD THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS. NEXT I'M GONNA PROVIDE SOME MORE INFORMATION, UH, WHERE THE PROJECT IS AT IN THE DESIGN PROCESS. BECAUSE OF THE, THAT FEDERAL GRANT FOR CONSTRUCTION, THE PROJECT NEEDS TO GO THROUGH THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OR NEPA PROCESS. AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS, UH, THE ALTERNATIVES PRESENTED IN THE PRELIMINARY BRIDGE REPORT, UM, WILL BE ANALYZED. AGAIN, DETERMINATIONS ARE MADE BY THE ADMINISTER ADMINISTERING AGENCY. IN THIS CASE TDOT IN COORDINATION WITH THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES, INCLUDING, INCLUDING SAVE OUR SPRINGS, WHICH HAS BEEN INVITED TO COLLABORATE ON THE NEPA PROCESS ON WHAT ADDITIONAL STUDIES MAY NEED TO BE COMPLETED, IF ANY. ADDITIONALLY, THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO PROVIDE COMMENT ON THE NEPA DOCUMENT AS WELL. UM, THIS PROCESS SHOULD TAKE AROUND A YEAR AND IS CURRENTLY UNDERWAY. UH, WE'RE LOOKING TO WRAP THAT UP IN LATE 2026, EARLY 2027 AND GET THE PROJECT OUT TO BID AFTER THAT. DURING THE NEPA PROCESS, WE WORK WITH TXDOT ARMY CORPS, TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION TO DEVELOP THE DESIGN AND DETERMINE HOW TO COMPLY WITH THE RELEVANT REGULATIONS. WHOOPS, I'LL GO BACK. ONE, UM, IN ADDITION, UH, TO THE NEPA PROCESS, THIS PROJECT WILL ALSO GO THROUGH THE CITY OF AUSTIN PERMITTING PROCESS AND OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FOR ANY VARIANCES THAT ARE NEEDED. UH, LET'S REVIEW THE CURRENT CONDITION OF THE BRIDGE. UM, THE PHOTO IN THE UPPER LEFT SHOWS CRACKING AND AND EXPOSED STEEL UNDER THE BRIDGE PHOTO IN THE UPPER RIGHT, UH, SHOWS, UH, DEAMINATION AROUND THE BRIDGE COLUMNS. PHOTO IN THE LOWER LEFT IS A CONCRETE CORE SAMPLE FROM THE BRIDGE DECK SHOWING DETERIORATION IN THE CONCRETE. AND THE PHOTO IN THE LOWER RIGHT SHOWS THE CURB SIDEWALK AND GUARDRAIL. THIS CURRENT BRIDGE IS FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE, WHICH MEANS THAT IT DOESN'T MEET CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS. UH, IF YOU'VE BEEN OUT THERE AT THE BRIDGE, YOU'VE SEEN THE NARROW SIDEWALKS, HIGH CURBS, AND LOW GUARDRAILS. UH, THE CONSULTING ENGINEER ON THIS PROJECT UNDERTOOK A STRUCTURAL EVALUATION OF THE BRIDGE IN 2023 AND FOUND THAT, AND THIS IS A QUOTE BASED ON THE CURRENT LEVEL OF DETERIORATION OF THE LONGITUDINAL BEAM AND CONTINUED INTRUSION OF WATER. IT'S ESTIMATED THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF REHABILITATION, SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION COULD PROGRESS TO A POINT WHERE INCREASES IN MAINTENANCE COSTS AND REPAIRS REACH A SIGNIFICANT LEVEL IN FIVE TO 10 YEARS. REPAIR OF THE LONGITUDINAL BEAM ALONE TO LIMIT WATER INTRUSION MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF THE BRIDGE SIGNIFICANTLY. A PREFERRED METHOD TO LIMIT THE WATER INTRUSION WOULD BE TO REPLACE [00:05:01] THE DECK ENTIRELY, ELIMINATE THE LONGITUDINAL AND TRANSVERSE JOINTS ALTOGETHER. IN ADDITION, SINCE THE SPANDREL COLUMNS EXHIBIT LOW COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH AND SEVERAL EXHIBIT SPING AND OR DEAMINATION, ANY BRIDGE REHABILITATION DESIRED INCREASING THE LIFESPAN WOULD INVOLVE STRIPPING THE STRUCTURE DOWN TO THE ARCH RIBS, REBUILDING THE SPANEL COLUMNS, FLOOR BEAMS AND DECK. SO TRANSLATING FROM ENGINEER INTO PLAIN ENGLISH, THIS MEANS THAT THERE'S NO WAY TO HAVE A LIGHT TOUCH REHABILITATION TO THIS STRUCTURE. UH, THE STRUCTURAL ISSUES HERE ARE IN THE DECK ITSELF AND IS BEYOND THE POINT OF REPAIR. IT NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY REPLACED. UH, ADDITIONALLY, DUE TO THE CONCERNS BROUGHT UP BY THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT, SUBSEQUENT TEXTILE INSPECTION REPORTS AND THE CONSULTING ENGINEERS STRUCTURAL REVIEW AND EXPLORATION, THE CITY ENGINEER AND TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SHIFTED TRAVEL LANES TO THE SOUTH TO LIMIT HEAVYWEIGHT TRAFFIC LOADING ON THE OLD PORTION OF THE BRIDGE THAT WAS IN THE WORST STRUCTURAL CONDITION. AS A PART OF THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT, THE CONSULTING ENGINEERS STUDY THE BRIDGE INTERNALLY AS WELL AS EXTERNALLY, UM, LOOKING AT TRAFFIC PATTERNS, A DA ACCESSIBILITY AND THE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF VARIOUS OPTIONS. FINALLY, THE, THE ENGINEER AND CITY STAFF HAVE COORDINATED WITH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AS WELL AS THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION. IT'S IMPORTANT TO EMPHASIZE HERE THAT THE BRIDGE IS A CONTRIBUTING FEATURE TO THE ZILKER PARK LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND THE BRIDGE ITSELF IS NOT A HISTORIC LANDMARK. EQUALLY IMPORTANT IS TO NOTE THAT DURING THE COORDINATION EFFORT UNDERTAKEN BY THE CITY AND ITS CONSULTANT, BOTH THE ARMY CORPS AND THE TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION HAVE A ACKNOWLEDGED, HAVE LET THE TEAM KNOW THAT A FULL REPLACEMENT OF THE BRIDGE IS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE FOR THE PROJECT. SO IN THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT, UH, FIVE OPTIONS WERE EVALUATED. PRESERVING THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WAS ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS DUE TO THE STRUCTURAL CONDITION OF THE BRIDGE THAT AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THREE REPLACEMENT OPTIONS AND ONE REHABILITATION OPTION MOVE FORWARD FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS. DURING THIS PROCESS, STAFF HELD OPEN HOUSES IN PERSON AND ONLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. AND FROM THOSE RESPONSES RECEIVED, REHABILITATION AND REPLACEMENT WERE EVENLY SPLIT IN TERMS OF PUBLIC PREFERENCE ON THE ALTERNATIVES. NOW, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BRIDGE REHABILITATION, UH, THIS IS A SCHEMATIC OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. THE DECK OF THE BRIDGE WILL BE COMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. REPAIRS WILL BE MADE TO THE EXISTING ARCHES AND ADDITIONAL ARCHES WILL BE ADDED TO ACCOMMODATE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE TRAFFIC. THE DECK WOULD THEN BE REPLACED, LESS THAN HALF OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE WOULD REMAIN, AND ALL OF THE OLD ARCHES WOULD BE OBSTRUCTED FROM VIEW BY NEW ONES. THIS OPTION COSTS AS MUCH AS THE FULL REPLACEMENT OPTION, BUT HAS A SHORTER USEFUL LIFE OF APPROXIMATELY 50 YEARS FOR THE REHABILITATION COMPARED TO 75 PLUS YEARS FOR THE REPLACEMENT. THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN BEFORE COUNCIL ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. THE FIRST TIME WAS WITH A 2020 BOND RESOLUTION, WHICH HAS FUNDED THIS PROJECT, AND THAT INCLUDED DIRECTION FOR STAFF TO COMPLETE THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT AND RETURN TO COUNCIL FOR A PRESENTATION ON THE OPTIONS AND DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL WHICH OPTION TO PURSUE. STAFF PRESENTED THE OPTIONS TO COUNCIL AT A WORK SESSION IN DECEMBER OF 2023 AND A SUBSEQUENT COUNCIL MEETING STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FULL REPLACEMENT OPTION. SINCE THEN, THE PROJECT HAS RETURNED TO COUNCIL RELATED TO THE APPLICATION AND ACCEPTANCE FOR THE FEDERAL GRANTS. AND THE NEXT TIME THIS PROJECT WOULD GO TO COUNCIL WILL BE FOR A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARD FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW BRIDGE. AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THIS PROJECT WOULD NEED TO GO TO VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, INCLUDING THIS COMMISSION FOR, UH, VARIANCE APPROVALS AS PART OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS. SO, UM, THIS DIAGRAM SHOWS WHAT THE NEW BRIDGE WOULD LOOK LIKE. UH, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LANES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BRIDGE. SAME NUMBER OF THROUGH TRAFFIC LANES AS CURRENTLY EXIST IN THE ADDITION OF A RIGHT TURN LANE ONTO AZ MORTON TO IMPROVE VEHICULAR CIRCULATION ON THE BRIDGE. THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE IMPROVEMENTS UNDER THE BRIDGE AFTER CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING IMPROVED ACCESS FOR THE ZIL OR EAGLE, AS WELL AS THE TRAIL UNDER THE BRIDGE, INCLUDING SLOPE STABILITY, REINFORCEMENT, UH, ALONG THE STREAM BANK. HERE'S SOME OVERALL SECTIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON. UH, THESE ARE BY NO MEANS FINAL AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE DESIGN PROCESS, UM, BUT WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF, UH, IMPROVEMENTS WHERE THEY CAN BE MADE, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE SLOPE STABILITY IMPROVEMENTS I MENTIONED EARLIER. UH, AND IF YOU'VE BEEN UNDER THE WEST SIDE OF THE BRIDGE, YOU'VE SEEN THE CHALLENGING CONDITIONS, THEREFORE, THE ZIL OR EAGLE, AS WELL AS A SEPARATE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN FACILITY, THE IMP THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS WOULD IMPROVE THE EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA SIGNIFICANTLY. UM, THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE FINISHED PRODUCT AFTER CONSTRUCTION WHERE YOU CAN SEE IMPROVED BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS ACROSS THE BRIDGE AS WELL AS CONNECTIONS INTO ZILKER PARK AND ADJACENT TRAILS. WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH, UH, THE CONSULTANT ON THE NEPA PROCESS HERE, AS WELL AS THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT AND WATERSHED PROTECTION TO REVIEW THE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION USES, AS WELL AS IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PARK DRAINAGE AND WATER RETENTION PONDS IN THIS AREA. THESE IMPACTS ARE NOT FINAL BY ANY MEANS, BUT I WANTED TO SHOW, UH, THE GROUP TODAY WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING IMPROVEMENTS TO, [00:10:01] UH, DRAINAGE AND, UM, WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS AREA, AS WELL AS THE AREAS THAT WE'RE GONNA NEED FOR LAY DOWN, UH, IN THE PARK TO DO THESE, UH, CONSTRUCTION EFFORTS. UM, THIS WILL BE PART, THE PARK USE WILL COME TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD AS PART OF THE CHAPTER 26, UH, APPROVAL FOR THE PROJECT. AND LIKE I SAID, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT NOW. WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR PARTNERS AT THE CITY TO DETERMINE, TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF IMPACT AND THE AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT WE'LL NEED TO BUILD THIS PROJECT. THESE AREAS LIKELY WON'T CHANGE WHETHER WE DO A REHABILITATION OR REPLACEMENT OPTION. THE IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN IN HERE, PARTICULARLY IN PURPLE OR DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. THE GREEN, UH, AREAS ARE, UM, CONTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION USES AND THE YELLOW IS THE IMPROVED WATER QUALITY. SO, UH, AS I MENTIONED A FEW SLIDES BACK, AS PART OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS, WE WILL NEED REVIEW BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION MOBILITY COMMITTEE, PARKS BOARD DESIGN COMMISSION, AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. UH, THE ACTION FROM ALL OF THESE COMMISSIONS WILL COME AT A LATER DATE WHEN WE'RE NEARING THE END OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS. WE'RE NOT THERE YET. UH, THE 90% MILESTONE GENERALLY STARTS THAT PERMITTING PROCESS. WE ARE COORDINATING WITH ALL THE RELEVANT, UH, CITY DEPARTMENTS AS WELL AS THE TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION, UH, AND THE ARMY CORPS RELATED TO THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE'LL NEED TO MEET AND IDENTIFY ANY VARIANCES THAT WE'LL NEED TO GET APPROVED. UM, AND WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS. GREAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. FIRST WE'RE GOING TO GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? YES. CHAIR. WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. THE FIRST SPEAKER IS DAVID WEINBERG. GREAT. DAVID, ARE YOU PRESENT? OKAY. UM, MOVING ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER, GAIL ROTH. HOPEFULLY I PRONOUNCE THAT RIGHT. . GAIL, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. IS THIS ON? YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS GAIL RODDY. I LIVE IN D FIVE AND I LEAD AN ADOPT A CREEK PROJECT IN ZILKER PARK FOR A SMALL CREEK THAT FLOWS INTO BARTON CREEK. OUR VOLUNTEER GROUP WORKS ON THE GROUND IN THE SOIL TO PROTECT THE WATER. THE BARTON CREEK WATERSHED PROJECTS LIKE OURS BUILD A CULTURE OF EN ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP, AS DOES THE WORK YOU DO IN THIS FORUM. AND WE ARE DEEPLY GRATEFUL FOR THAT. REGARDING THE PROPOSED UPGRADE OF THE HISTORIC BARTON SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE, I'M ASKING THIS COMMISSION EITHER COLLECTIVELY OR INDIVIDUALLY TO RECOMMEND THAT COUNCIL TAKE A BETTER INFORMED APPROACH THAN THE ONE THAT IS LEADING US TOWARDS TOTAL REPLACEMENT AND ESSENTIALLY PUTTING A HIGHWAY THROUGH OUR PARK. MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE APPARENT RUSH TO REPLACE THE BRIDGE INCLUDE THE FAILURE TO INVOLVE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION EARLY IN THE PROCESS, AND THE FAILURE TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS THAT COMMISSION HAS IN A TIMELY MANNER. ALSO, THE FAILURE TO INVOLVE THIS, UH, UH, COMMISSION IN A TIMELY, IN, UH, EARLY IN THE PROCESS. OTHER CONCERNS ARE THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY, ESPECIALLY REGARDING ACCESS TO CRITICAL REPORTS. ALSO, THE APPARENT BIAS TOWARDS REPLACEMENT OVER RESTORATION AND THE DISREGARD FOR THAT, FOR INFORMATION THAT SUPPORTS RESTORATION AND THE APPARENT FAILURE TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES THAT PRESENT A LOWER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, A LOWER COST, AND THE MINIMAL TAKING OF PARKLAND ACREAGE. I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OR ALL OF MY CONCERNS MAY BE ADDRESSED IN THE NEPA PROCESS, BUT IF WE HAVE ALREADY NARROWED OUR OPTIONS WITHOUT THE FULL INVOLVEMENT OF CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC AS WELL AS ACCESS TO THE FULL REPORTS, THEN THESE ISSUES HAVE ALREADY BEEN SIDELINED AND THE BOX IS CHECKED. SO PLEASE DO WHAT YOU CAN NOW TO SAVE THE BRIDGE TO SAVE OUR MONEY AND TO SAVE THE PARK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MARK MAY. MARK, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. OKAY. UH, HI THERE. UH, MY NAME IS MARK MAY. I LIVE IN, UH, D FIVE. SO I HAVE SOME, UH, SLIDES THAT I SENT YOU ALL IN YOUR EMAIL, UH, TODAY AROUND NOON. AND SO MY, MY POINT OF VIEW ON THE BRIDGE, I THINK HE SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR THE LIGHTEST TOUCH, UH, POSSIBLE TO SOLVE OF THE PROBLEM. UM, I THINK IT'S OBVIOUS, BUT A LIGHT TOUCH IS GONNA BE LESS DAMAGE TO BARTON CREEK, LESS DAMAGE TO THE PARK, LESS, UH, CONCRETE, AND IT'S GONNA SAVE MONEY FOR OTHER THINGS THAT WOULD BE NICE IN THE PARK. [00:15:01] UH, HOW ABOUT TREES, BATHROOMS, AND WATER FOUNTAINS? SO WHAT DO I MEAN BY LIGHT TOUCH AND PRACTICE? I THINK A GOOD WAY TO THINK ABOUT IT IS THAT THE BRIDGE SHOULD BE NO WIDER THAN LIKE THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IT, UH, THAT IT, UH, CONNECTS TO GOING EAST AND WEST. THIS IS JUST COMMON SENSE. ANYTHING ELSE IS A WASTE OF MONEY AND IS GONNA NEEDLESSLY, UH, DEGRADE THE ENVIRONMENT. SO LET ME, LET ME SHOW YOU SOME QUESTIONS I THINK YOU SHOULD ASK. UH, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, WELL, SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIGURE, WHICH YOU JUST SAW, IT'S ACTUALLY IN, UH, CORRECT. IT SHOWS THREE LANES, UH, CONNECTING TO THE BRIDGE. UM, HEADING, HEADING WEST. UH, YOU CAN SEE, I, YOU KNOW, THAT ACTUALLY NOTED IT. THAT SHOULD BE A TRAVEL LANE, A TURN LANE, AND A BIKE LANE. IT CLEARLY SHOWS THREE TRAFFIC LANE. SO I WENT OUT THIS MORNING AND I TOOK A PICTURE SO YOU CAN TRUST ME. THERE'S A BIKE LANE, A STRAIGHT LANE, AND A LEFT TURN LANE. WE ONLY NEED ONE WESTBOUND LANE ON THE BRIDGE. THERE IT IS, IT'S A PICTURE. NEXT, NEXT PAGE. UH, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE EASTBOUND LANES, THERE'S AN EXTRA LANE THERE TOO. ON THE BRIDGE, THERE'S TWO THROUGH LANES AND ONE TURN LANE, THERE'S ONE TURN LANE, WHICH MAKES SENSE FOR ASIE MORTON. BARTON SPRINGS ROAD IS DOWN TO ONE LANE. SO WE'RE BUILDING A BRIDGE. HAVE TWO THROUGH LANES TO GO TO ONE LANE ON BARTON SPRINGS ROAD. ANOTHER LANE DON'T NEED IT. NEXT PAGE. WHY ARE THE NON-CAR PATHS SO WIDE ONTO THE BRIDGE? ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE BRIDGE, THERE'S A 12 FOOT WIDE CONCRETE PATH THAT'S NEW. ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF THE BRIDGE, THERE'S A NINE FOOT WIDE BIKE LANE. I WENT OUT THIS MORNING WITH MY TAPE MEASURE AND I MADE THE MEASUREMENTS, A FEW OTHER PIECES OF DATA. THE BUTLER TRAIL IS APPARENTLY EXPANDING TO 14 FEET WIDE. UH, THAT INCLUDES THE BRIDGE OVER BARTON CREEK, WHICH IS JUST NORTH OF THIS BRIDGE. THE, THE MOPAC BRIDGE THAT WE ALL USE ON THE BUTLER TRAIL IS ALSO 14 FEET WIDE. THE, UH, PFLUGER BRIDGE, WHICH IS THE MONSTER, IS, UH, 23 FEET WIDE. THESE ARE HEAVY USE BY A DIRECTIONAL AREAS. NEXT, NEXT STEP PAGE. SO THERE'S A FIGURE WHICH THEY DIDN'T INCLUDE. I WOULDN'T HAVE INCLUDED IT EITHER IF I WAS TRYING TO SELL YOU A BRIDGE ALMOST TWICE AS WIDE AS THE ONE YOU NEED. BUT THERE'S 51 FEET OF NON-CAR WIDTH ON THIS BRIDGE. 51 FEET. BUTLER TRAIL IS 14 FEET WIDE. THE MOPAC A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE IS 14 FEET WIDE. THE PFLUGER BRIDGE IS 23 FEET WIDE, 51 FEET. WHAT ARE WE DOING FOLKS? THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS CHRIS FLORES. OKAY, CHRIS, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. UM, A AB UH, TECHNICIANS. I HAVE A, UH, A WEBSITE FOR YOU TO BRING UP. UH, THERE IT IS. I THANK YOU. UM, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. I'M CHRIS FLORES. I LIVE IN DISTRICT 10 AND I'M COMMENTING AGAINST REPLACING THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE AND ASKING YOU TONIGHT TO RECOMMEND COUNSEL POSTPONE ACTION ON THIS BRIDGE UNTIL OTHER OPTIONS CAN BE BID AND EXPLORED BY THE PUBLIC. UM, THE ASSIGNED LIFESPAN OF 75 YEARS SEEMS ARBITRARY TO ME. AUSTIN HAS BUILDINGS OLDER THAN THAT AND CITIES GLOBALLY HAVE FUNCTIONING BRIDGES. HUNDREDS OF YEARS OLD PARIS COMES TO MIND. I THINK THIS, I THINK THIS BRIDGE IS BELOVED BY PARK VISITORS BECAUSE IT IS HISTORIC AND IT IS BEAUTIFUL. I THINK IT SHOULD BE, IT SHOULD BECOME THE PEDESTRIAN BIKE BRIDGE. IT SHOULD BE LIT AT NIGHT. A TEMPORARY TRAFFIC BRIDGE CAN BE BUILT WHILE BOTH THE HISTORIC BRIDGE IS REPAIRED AND A NEW VEHICLE BRIDGE IS BUILT. YES, I AM SUGGESTING A THREE BRIDGE OPTION. THIS WAS DONE IN PARIS IN 1906. THE TWO NEW STEEL BRIDGES THERE STILL FUNCTION. THEY CARRY CARS, METRO RAIL AND PEDESTRIANS. I, UM, I QUESTION HOW A BRIDGE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED FOR OVER 20 YEARS NOW URGENTLY QUALIFIES TO BE REPLACED. I THINK COUNCIL'S DECISION TO DEMOLISH IN 2023 WAS MADE WITH INCOMPLETE DATA AND SHOULD BE RESCINDED. THERE IS NO REASON TO RUSH THIS DECISION. I BRING YOU IMAGES OF A TEXAS BRIDGE DESIGNED IN-HOUSE [00:20:01] BY A TX ENGINEER USING PREFAB CONCRETE ARCHES MADE ON SITE. THIS COULD BE THE NEW TRAFFIC BRIDGE WITH LIGHTS. IMAGINE IT ONE BRIDGE WITH UNDER ARCHES AND THE OTHER BRIDGE WITH OVER ARCHES. IT WOULD BE ARTISTIC, BEAUTIFUL AND UNAFFORDABLE SOLUTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS JOAQUIN HANCOCK JOINING US REMOTELY. JOAQUIN, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX TO PROCEED WITH YOUR REMARKS. DISTRICT FIVE. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS TOMMY JOAQUIN HANCOCK. I LIVE IN DISTRICT FIVE. I SPEND TIME FREQUENTLY AT THE PARK AT BARTON SPRINGS AND WALKING NEAR AND AROUND THE SOKA PARK BRIDGE. THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS DECISION THAT YOU ARE CONTEMPLATING WOULD BE UNDER, UH, OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES MIGHT BE EASIER TO, UH, DISCERN, UM, CONCERNED ABOUT THE, THE WAY THAT THE INFORMATION'S BEEN PROVIDED. I AGREE WITH, UM, MS. RHODES AND MR. MAY WHOLEHEARTEDLY ON THEIR COMMENTS AND APPRECIATE THEIR RESEARCH INTO THE TOPIC. I BELIEVE REHABILITATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FURTHER. REPLACEMENT SEEMS TOO HASTY. INFORMATION HAS BEEN LIMITED QUESTION AND CONTESTED. I FEEL THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN MISLED ABOUT THE ISSUE. I APPRECIATE THE AESTHETIC QUALITIES OF THE ZILKER PARK BRIDGE AND ITS ORIGINAL DESIGN. IT IS ICONIC. I WALK UNDER IT AND I REGARD THE ARCHES AS A PIECE OF AUSTIN'S HISTORY AND A DECIDEDLY APPROPRIATE DESIGN FOR THE BRIDGE, ALSO REGARDED AS A HISTORICAL PIECE OF ARCHITECTURE IN AUSTIN. ANY EFFORTS TO SAVE THIS LANDMARK IS APPRECIATED. I BELIEVE SAVING THE BRIDGE COULD SAVE MONEY. DESTROYING THE BRIDGE WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE CREEK AND PARK ENVIRONMENT. THE REPLACEMENT DESIGN IS COSTLY AND UNATTRACTIVE. THE CITY NEEDS TO PROPERLY MAINTAIN ALL OF OUR HISTORIC BRIDGES, INCLUDING OVERDUE REPAIRS ON THE ZILKER PARK BRIDGE. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS ALSO CALLING FOR SAVING THIS BRIDGE AND EITHER ADDING AN AFFORDABLE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OR EXPANDING THE EXISTING ONE. I URGE YOU TO POSE DEMOLITION IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE BRIDGE, IMPROVE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, MINIMIZE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, AND KEEP MARTIN SPRINGS ROAD OPEN AT ALL TIMES. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS INFORMATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. AND THE NEXT SPEAKER IS TANYA PAYNE. SORRY, IS IT TANYA? OR TANYA? SORRY. UM, TANYA WILL BE RECEIVING DONATION OF TIME FROM WORTHY, UM, FOR A TOTAL OF SIX MINUTES. I HAVE SIX MINUTES WORTH OF THINGS TODAY. UH, TALK SLOWLY. UH, HELLO. MY NAME IS TANYA PAYNE AND I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMUNICATIONS FROM ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. UH, WE, I, I EMAILED YOU A RESOLUTION PASSED BY OUR MEMBERSHIP AGAINST THE REPLACEMENT OF THE ZILKER PARK. UH, SORRY. IT'S OKAY. THE BARTON SPRINGS BRIDGE. UM, DURING OUR DISCUSSIONS AS A NEIGHBORHOOD, NO ONE EVER SAID WE NEED A WIDER BRIDGE TODAY. AND WE USE IT ALL THE TIME, RIGHT? IT'S OUR MAJOR THOROUGHFARE TO MOPAC. IT'S OUR WAY TO WEST AUSTIN. IT IS ALSO OUR WAY TO BIKE TO ZILKER PARK, TO DOWNTOWN TO THE BUTLER TRAIL BECAUSE, UH, NOW AS IT IS, IT HAS A FULL LANE BIKE LANE, WHICH IS REALLY NICE, BY THE WAY. I USE IT ALL THE TIME. IT'S VERY BOUGIE. I'VE EVEN USED IT AT NIGHT AND I'M A LITTLE MORE CONSERVATIVE BIKER. UH, SO, AND THEN, UM, SO WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO ALSO, 'CAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE ALL VERY BUSY, IS READ YOU THE, UM, RESOLUTION, REWROTE RESOLUTION OF THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OPPOSING THEIR REP REPLACEMENT OF THE BAR, BAR BARTON SPRINGS BRIDGE. AND IT WAS ADOPTED THIS WINTER, UH, JANUARY 27TH. UH, WHEREAS THE, THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL [00:25:01] STAFF ARE MOVING FORWARD TO DEMOLISH THE HISTORIC BARTON ZILKER PARK, BARTON SPRINGS BRIDGE ROAD OVER BARTON CREEK AND REPLACE IT WITH A LARGER GENERIC HIGHWAY STYLE BRIDGE AT AN ESTIMATE COST, ESTIMATED COST OF 40 MILLION. WHEREAS SUCH DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE CAUSED FOR SUBSTANTIAL TRAFFIC PROBLEMS DAMAGE TO BARTON CREEK AND REPLACEMENT OF ZILKER PARKLAND WITH EXPANDED, OH, SORRY, EXPANDED, UH, TRANSPORTATION PA PAVEMENT. WHEREAS THE BEAUTIFUL ARCHED BRIDGE OVER BARTON CREEK WAS BUILT IN THE 1920S AND EXPANDED IN THE 1940S TO ITS CURRENT CONFIGURATION AND WAS DESIGNED, DESIGNED TO MATCH THE BEAUTIFUL ARCHAIC CONSTRUCTION OF THE HISTORIC LAMAR BRIDGE OVER THE COLORADO RIVER. WHICH BY THE WAY, WE WENT TO A LOT OF EFFORT TO KEEP THAT RIGHT, LIKE WE'VE BUILT THE PFLUGER BRIDGE IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE BEAUTY OF THE LAMAR BRIDGE. AND SO I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED HOW THIS BRIDGE IS THE ONE OVER BARTON CREEK ISN'T REGARDED AS IMPORTANT, UH, AND I CONTINUE. WHEREAS THE EXISTING, UH, HISTORIC BRIDGE IS A CONTRIBUTING FEATURE TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC PLACES, ZILKER PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT. WHEREAS THE ZILKER, WHEREAS THE EXISTING BRIDGE PROVIDES A BEAUTIFUL GATEWAY TO ZILKER PARK AS WELL AS BEAUTIFUL BRIDGE FOR THOSE PEOPLE PADDLING UNDER THE BRIDGE, HIKING OR WALKING UNDER THE BRIDGE AND VIEWING THE BRIDGE FROM EXISTING BIKE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER BARTON CREEK TO THE NORTHWEST. WHEREAS DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE BRIDGE WITH A LARGER HIGHWAY STYLE BRIDGE WOULD DIRECTLY DISTURB AND DAMAGE ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES IN THE STATE DESIGNATED AND PROTECTED VERA DANIEL ARCHEOLOGICAL, UH, SITE. WHEREAS THE CITY IMPROPERLY HID DOCUMENTS FOR MONTHS FROM PR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE WHILE IT WAS SEEKING FEDERAL GRANT FUNDING UNDER A FALSE CLAIM OF NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION. WHEREAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, UH, TOM CAM, WHO HAS BUILT BRIDGES FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND MANY OTHERS, HAS REVIEWED THE CITY'S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS AND PERFORMED A VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE BRIDGE THAT TOGETHER ESTABLISHED THAT THE BRIDGE MAY BE EFFECTIVELY AND AFFORDABLY MAINTAINED AND OPERATED INDEFINITELY IN MUCH THE SAME WAY AS HISTORIC BRIDGES AROUND THE WORLD THAT ARE MANY CENTURIES OLD AND HAVE BEEN MAINTAINED AND OPERATED. WHEREAS THE RECENT BARTON SPRINGS ROAD SAFETY PILOT, WHICH STAFF DETERMINED TO BE A SUCCESS, HAS GREATLY ALLEVIATED CONFLICTS BETWEEN CAR TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLES. AND WHEREAS MR. CAM HAS PROPOSED A CONCEPT OF A SIMPLE PARALLEL SPAN BRIDGE TO FURTHER INCREASE BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OPTIONS OVER BARTON CREEK IN A WAY THAT WOULD PROTECT EXISTING TREES, BARTON CREEK AND RIPARIAN HABITATS AT A COST OF A FEW MILLION DOLLARS RATHER THAN TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. NOW THEREFORE IT BE RESOLVED, THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION URGES THE CITY COUNCIL TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE THE HISTORIC ZILKER PARK BRIDGE INDEFINITELY TO REVERSE ITS INITIAL DECISION TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING BRIDGE AND TO PURSUE A PARALLEL BIKE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE NEAR THE HISTORIC BRIDGE THAT WOULD AVOID EXISTING TREES AND HARM TO RIPERIAN HABITATS WHILE IMPROVING BIKE PED TRAFFIC FLOW IN THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD CORRIDOR AT A FRACTION OF THE COST OF THE CURRENT PLAN, WITH NO MINIMAL DAMAGE TO THE RECOGNIZED AND UNIQUE RIP AQUATIC HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES THAT WOULD OTHER BE DAMAGED OR ENTIRELY LOST TO BUILD AN UGLY STANDARD HIGHWAY BRIDGE. AND LASTLY, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT I KNOW A LOT OF YOU ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT EQUITY AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PRICE OF THIS BRIDGE BEING PUT IN EAST AUSTIN, I'D LIKE, SORRY, IN WEST AUSTIN, I'D LIKE YOU TO THINK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITIES OF WHAT THAT KIND OF MONEY AND INVESTMENT COULD BE DONE IN THE REST OF AUSTIN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ROBIN. ROBIN RATHER. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS PATRICIA BOBA . [00:30:06] PATRICIA, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. EXCELLENT. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. MY NAME IS PATRICIA BOBBECK. I AM A PHD HYDROGEOLOGIST AND A DAILY SWIMMER AT BARTON SPRINGS. AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST REPLACEMENT OF THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. FIRST OFF, THE HISTORICAL LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS BYPASSED IN THE RACE TO GET THIS PROJECT APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. NUMBER TWO, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ENGINEER WHO ASSESSED THE STRENGTH OF THE BRIDGE WORKS FOR THE COMPANY, WORKS FOR THE BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, WHICH TO ME IS A FLAGRANT CONFLICT OF INTEREST. I SUGGEST WE GET SOME INDEPENDENT ENGINEERS LIKE THE ONE THAT THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER TALKED ABOUT, TO LOOK AT THE BRIDGE, ASSESS ITS ITS STRUCTURAL STRENGTH, AND GIVE US A AN INDEPENDENT VIEW OF THAT. I SUGGEST THAT WE REHAB THE BRIDGE THAT WE HAVE AT THE SAME WIDTH. UH, THE REPLACEMENT OF THAT BRIDGE WOULD CAUSE AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF CARBON, OF, OF CONCRETE POLLUTION, UH, CARBON POLLUTION, UH, WHICH CONTRIBUTES ALREADY TO ABOUT 7% OF THE WORLD'S CARBON POLLUTION IS, IS FROM CONCRETE. SO LET'S NOT ADD TO THAT. AND I THINK THAT SHOULD RESONATE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. I SUGGEST WE ADD SOME BIKE LANES AND PEDESTRIAN LANES AS SEPARATE, AS SEPARATE BRIDGES AS A NUMBER OF THE SPEAKERS HAVE TALKED ABOUT. NARROW BRIDGES SI ON EITHER SIDE OF THE BRIDGE WE ALREADY HAVE. THIS WOULD BE CHEAPER AND IT WOULD BE SAFER BECAUSE IT WOULD KEEP PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS AWAY FROM MOTORIZED TRAFFIC. AND MY NEXT POINT IS ABOUT CONSTRUCTION ON THE CORNER OF AZ MORTON AND BARTON SPRINGS ROAD, WHERE THE LAU STRUCTURE IS. UH, SCULPTURE GARDEN IS, IT IS NOT A GOOD IDEA TO BUILD ANYTHING AT THAT LOCATION. YOU HAVE 50 TO 60 FEET OF THE DEL RIO CLAY, NOT GOOD FOUNDATION MATERIAL, 30 TO 50 FEET OF THE EAGLE FORD SHALE. ALSO NOT A GOOD ROCK TO BUILD ON. AND 40 TO 50 FEET OF THE BUTTA LIMESTONE AND MUDSTONE. THE LIMESTONE IS GOOD, BUT THE MUDSTONE NOT SO GOOD. SO I WOULD, I WOULD, AS A GEOLOGIST, I WOULD ADVISE AGAINST BUILDING OF THE, UH, DOING ANY CONSTRUCTION OF THAT LOCATION. AND MY LAST POINT I'D LIKE TO SAY, HOW ABOUT WE DO LIKE PARIS AND WE MAINTAIN OUR BRIDGES. THE OLD BRIDGE, THE , WHICH IS, IS TRANSLATED AS THE NEW BRIDGE, IS ACTUALLY THE OLD BRIDGE NOW BUILT IN 1570 TO 1620. TOOK THEM 40 YEARS TO BUILD THEIR BRIDGE. 'CAUSE THEY WERE DOING IT ALL BY HAND. WELL, AT THE END OF THE 18 HUNDREDS, AND AGAIN IN THE 19 HUNDREDS, THEY DID SOME REPARATION AND REPAIR ON THAT. AND THEY'RE STILL USING THE, UM, THE , WHICH IS WHAT, 500 YEARS OLD. SO I SAY, LET'S MAINTAIN ALL OF OUR BRIDGES AND ESPECIALLY KEEP OUR BEAUTIFUL LITTLE GEM, THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE BUILT IN THE 1920S. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS TED EUBANKS RECEIVING A DONATION OF TIME FROM ROBIN, RATHER. TED, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES. I REALLY HADN'T PLANNED TO SPEAK TONIGHT. THAT WAS ON MY, NOT ON MY LIST, BUT, UH, A A, AFTER HEARING THE EARLIER COMMENTS, I THOUGHT I WOULD TRY TO ADD SOMETHING TO, TO THIS DISCUSSION. UM, I WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR, YES, I'M A MEMBER OF THE AUSTIN PARKS AND REC BOARD, BUT I'M NOT SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THEM. I'M HERE AS AN INDIVIDUAL. THIS PLAN WILL COME BEFORE US AND I EAGERLY AWAIT THE PRESENTATION. WHAT I WANNA DO IS TALK BRIEF BRIEFLY ABOUT WHERE THIS PROJECT IS, BUT I WANNA REDIRECT IT TOWARD THE ENVIRONMENT. THIS IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AND IT'S GREAT TO HEAR ABOUT ENGINEERING, BUT I ALSO THINK WE NEED TO HEAR ABOUT SOME ASPECTS RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENT. YES, THIS BRIDGE WAS BUILT IN 1926. IT PREDATES THE 1928 [00:35:01] CITY PLAN. IT PREDATES THE LAMAR BRIDGE, WHICH IS A LATE NEW DEAL BRIDGE, WHICH WAS BUILT IN THE LATE FORTIES. THIS PREDATES ALL OF THOSE BRIDGES. AND THE LAMAR BRIDGE ACTUALLY ACTUALLY WAS DESIGNED TO SORT OF MIRROR THIS OPEN SPANDREL BRIDGE, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. THIS PREDATES IT. DO WE HAVE OLDER BRIDGES? ANYBODY DRIVE ACROSS WEST SIXTH OR SHOAL CREEK DAILY? BUILT IN 1887, THAT MAY SEEM RE BRIDGE IS STILL BEING USED AND IT HAS A SIMILAR TRAFFIC COUNT. IN FACT, IF YOU GO UP SHOAL CREEK, YOU'LL FIND MOST OF THOSE BRIDGES BUILT IN THE NEW DEAL IN THE LATE TWENTIES, SOMETIMES 1930S. SO WE HAVE MANY BRIDGES THAT ARE OLDER IF WE'RE TRYING TO DATE THESE. SO WHERE ARE WE IN THIS PROCESS? WE'VE HEARD THE COMMENTS ABOUT NEPA, BUT SPECIFICALLY WE'RE IN SECTION 1 0 6 OF THE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT. WE'RE DOING THE HISTORIC RESOURCE ASSESSMENT. WE BEING THE CITY UNDER THAT ACT. AND WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR WITHIN THE A PE, WHICH IS A BIG CIRCLE DRAWN AROUND THE BRIDGE, ARE THE HISTORIC RESOURCES AND HOW REPLACING THE BRIDGE WOULD IMPACT THAT. THIS INCLUDES THE VARA DANIELS ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE. I HOPE YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH IT. IT INCLUDES A GREAT LAWN, THE RUGBY FIELD. IT'S ONE OF THE LARGEST PA LARGEST PALEO INDIAN SITES IN THE STATE. HAVE CORES BEEN DUG TOWARD WHERE THIS BRIDGE WOULD BE? YES, THEY HAVE BEEN. SO WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT HISTORIC RESOURCE ASSESSMENT. IT'S NOT COMPLETED. ONE WAS COMPLETED IN 2013. NEGATIVE IMPACTS WERE FOUND, BUT IT WAS A VERY BRIEF REPORT AND IT DIDN'T EVEN INCLUDE RA DANIELS. SO FINALLY, AN EXTENSIVE REPORT IS BEING DONE AS WE SPEAK. THAT FIRST RESOURCE ASSESSMENT WAS DONE IN 2023. AND WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT FOR HISTORICAL SITES? WELL, WHAT WE USE IS THE SAME CRITERIA THAT ARE USED FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORICAL PLACES. EITHER IF YOU'RE LISTED OR YOU'RE ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING, YOU QUALIFY. THIS IS IN THE ZILKER PARK HISTORICAL DISTRICT, WHICH IS LISTED. THIS IS A CONTRIBUTING ELEMENT, THE BRIDGE. AND IT IS EXTENDED THE SAME PROTECTIONS AND THE SAME BENEFITS AS THE DISTRICT AS A WHOLE. SIR, WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS, WOULD THE REPLACEMENT OF THE BRIDGE HAVE AN IMPACT WITHIN THE A PE AND THE DISTRICT? I WOULD ARGUE TO MEASURE THAT IMPACT. YOU CAN'T HAVE THESE CUTE LITTLE BRIDGE DIAGRAMS FROM THE GROUND SURFACE OR ABOVE THE GROUND. YOU NEED TO GET TO THE WATER, YOU NEED TO GET ON THE CREEK. YOU NEED TO TAKE A KAYAK OR CANOE UP BARTON CREEK THROUGH THE ARCHWAY TO BARTON SPRINGS AS PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DOING FOR A CENTURY. AND THAT'S WHERE YOU GET A SENSE OF INTEGRITY, WHICH IS PART OF THE NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA. THERE'S SEVEN DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF INTEGRITY, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY FOR, FOR YOU ARE SETTING AND FEELING, SETTING AND FEELING. NO, THIS ISN'T ABOUT CARBON SEQUESTRATION. NO, THIS ISN'T ABOUT ENDANGERED SPECIES. THIS IS ABOUT THE HUMAN ECOLOGY. THIS IS ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE, WHICH IS IN YOUR CHARTER. THIS IS ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE. WHAT DO YOU EXPERIENCE WITHIN THAT SETTING? DOES IT RECALL THAT HISTORICAL TIME? HAVE THINGS CHANGED? WELL, I CAN SHOW YOU AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH FROM THE 1930S WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING THE POOL, WHEN IT'S ALL TORN UP AND YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT TORN UP. THAT RIPERION CORRIDOR THAT EXTENDS FROM ABOVE THE BRIDGE TO AT THAT TIME THE RIVER, NOW THE LAKE. THAT'S THE IMPACT. THE IMPACT OF REPLACING THIS BRIDGE IS ON THE SETTING AND THE FEELING. AND WHEN IT COMES TO MEASURING THIS WITHIN THIS PROCESS, THAT'S OFTEN THE MOST IMPORTANT THING WE MEASURE. WHAT'S THE IMPACT? VERY SIMPLE. IF TDOT DOESN'T SIGN OFF OF IT, YOU DON'T GET FEDERAL MONEY. THAT'S WHAT THIS IS [00:40:01] DEPENDENT. THIS IS WHAT'S DEPENDENT ON THIS REPORT, IS THE FEDERAL FUNDING THAT COMES FROM THIS. AND WE'RE IN THE PROCESS. WHEN WILL THIS PROCESS BE FINISHED? YOU'LL HAVE TO ASK THE CONSULTANTS. YOU HAVE TO BE, HAVE THE TRIBAL COMMUNITY INVOLVED. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE INVOLVED. YOU HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC INPUT. AND THAT'S STILL ONGOING. BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO EMPHASIZE OVER AND OVER AGAIN, BEAUTY AND AESTHETICS OR A QUALITY OF, OR QUALITY OF LIFE ASPECTS THAT ARE IN YOUR PURVIEW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BILL BUNCH, RECEIVING A DONATION OF TIME FROM BOBBY LEVINSKY. BILL, YOU WILL HAVE SIX MINUTES. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR COMMISSIONERS. I'M BILL BUNCH, UH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND ATTORNEY FOR SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. UM, HERE TO SPECIFICALLY ASK THIS COMMISSION TO WORK TOGETHER TO PUT THIS ON YOUR NEXT AGENDA FOR ACTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY IN FACT MATCH THAT FEDERAL NATIONAL REGISTER, HISTORIC DISTRICT PROTECTION WITH LOCAL HISTORIC ZONING AND DESIGNATION. UM, WE HAVE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION. AND SO WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT FOR THAT. SO THAT'S MY SPECIFIC REQUEST FOR YOUR ACTION. UM, AND YOU CAN DO THAT. AS YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY HEARD, THE COUNCIL ACTED HASTILY WITH MISLEADING AND INCOMPLETE INFORMATION. WE KNOW TODAY THAT WE CAN SAVE THIS BRIDGE. UM, IT'S STRUCTURALLY SOUND AND CAN BE SAVED FOR LESS MONEY THAN WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IT'S GONNA COST TO TEAR DOWN AND REPLACE IT TODAY. AND THAT NUMBER NOW IS AT 54 AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS. AND THAT MEANS THE FEDERAL GRANT, EVEN IF WE CAN GET IT. AND I THINK WE'RE GONNA FIND OUT THAT WE CAN'T QUALIFY FOR THAT BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL PROTECTION. UM, BUT WE SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO DO IT SO WE CAN DO THE RIGHT THING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. THAT'S YOUR, YOUR DOMAIN. AS YOU WERE HEARING FROM TED EUBANKS. THIS PART OF THE CREEK IS INCREDIBLY BEAUTIFUL. THE BRI THE BRIDGE ITSELF IS ARCHITECTURALLY SUBSTANTIAL AND SIGNIFICANT AND BEAUTIFUL. UM, IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN THERE AND WALKED. SO WE HAVE THE TRAILS THAT ARE THE EXTENSION OF THE LADY BIRD LAKE TRAIL ON BOTH SIDES. WE HAVE THE ZILKER TRAIN ALSO PASSING UNDER. AND THEN WE HAVE HUNDREDS, SOMETIMES THOUSANDS IN A WEEK. PADDLERS RENTING BOATS AT, AT THE ZILKER BOATS AND THE OTHER PADDLERS PADDLING UNDER IT. AND IT'S JUST, IT'S A TRULY SPECIAL PLACE IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE NEED TO SAVE IT. WE SHOULD NOT BE REPLACING IT WITH A GIANT UGLY BRIDGE. SO I HAVE TWO INVITATIONS. I HAD MADE THE REQUEST TWO INVITATIONS TO YOU. ONE IS IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN OUT THERE, PLEASE MEET US OUT THERE. WE'VE BEEN DOING WALKS AND TALKING ABOUT THE BRIDGE, LOOKING AT IT AND HOW IT IS, LOOKS LIKE IT'S VERY MUCH REPARABLE. WE HAVE MULTIPLE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS, EXPERTS RETIRED FROM TEXDOT, CURRENT TEXDOT ENGINEERS SAYING THIS CAN BE SAVED. UH, IT'S NOT BEYOND REPAIR AND AND BLUNTLY DISAGREEING WITH WHAT YOU'RE HEARING FROM THE ENGINEERS AND THE CONSULTANTS, UM, WITH THE CITY. SO PLEASE COME OUT, WALK WITH US, RENT A BOAT, PADDLE UNDER IT, GO FOR A SWIM UNDER IT, AND EXPERIENCE HOW SPECTACULAR THIS IS. THERE'S INCREDIBLY RICH AND DIVERSE FISH COMMUNITY THERE. THAT'S BEEN FULLY DOCUMENTED ALSO BY OUR FISH EXPERT FISH BIOLOGISTS AT UT. UM, AND, UH, AND SO, UH, THAT'S WORTH PROTECTING AS WELL. THE REPAIRING CORRIDORS. WE CAN DO A PARALLEL CHEAP SPAN BRIDGE AND AVOID ALL TREES. UH, RATHER THAN THIS GIANT EXPANSION THAT WILL WIPE OUT TREES, TAKE AWAY PARKLAND, PAVE PARKLAND AND CONVERT IT TO TRANSPORTATION. UH, A SCALE, A BRIDGE THAT'S DESIGNED TO INCREASE CAR DEPENDENCY AND IS THAT GREAT AND DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE POLICIES THAT THIS COMMISSION IS ADOPTED. OUR CITY COUNCIL COMMISSION IS ADOPTED TO REDUCE CAR DEPENDENCY, TO SLOW TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY THROUGH OUR PARKS, UH, AND TO SUPPORT BIKE AND PED COMMUNICATION. UM, MY [00:45:01] SECOND, UH, INVITATION TO YOU, AND THIS IS STILL IN THE PANIC PLANNING STAGES, BUT IN THE PETITION TO PROTECT LOCALLY, UM, UH, AS HISTORIC, UH, THERE WAS SOME AMAZING RESEARCH DONE AND THIS BRIDGE WAS COM UH, THE RIBBON CUTTING WAS JUNE 21ST, 1926. AND WE HAVE THE ARTICLE FROM THE NEXT DAY IN THE STATESMAN TELLING ABOUT THE BIG PARTY AT BARTON SPRINGS ON ON JUNE 21ST, 1926. SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE A PARTY, THE HUNDREDTH BIRTHDAY PARTY FOR THIS BRIDGE ON JUNE 21ST, 2026. THAT'S A SUNDAY. IT'S THE SOLSTICE AND IT'S FATHER'S DAY. SO WE HAVE LOTS OF REASONS TO CELEBRATE ON THIS SPECIAL DAY. WE'RE TRYING, WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME OF THOSE DETAILS. BUT WE'D LOVE TO HAVE YOU THERE WITH US AND WE'D LOVE FOR YOU TO BE A PART OF SAVING THIS HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL PARK. ARCHEOLOGICAL AND, AND, AND, UH, SCENIC TREASURE OF OUR COMMUNITY. UH, THAT DESERVES I THINK YOUR SUPPORT AND ALL OF OUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BILL OLIVER. BILL, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. PARDON? I'M BILL OLIVER, LIVE IN SOUTH AUSTIN AND BEEN BEEN, UH, VISITING THIS PLACE FOR QUITE A WHILE, MOSTLY BY WATER. I THINK I'VE BEEN UNDER THE BRIDGE MORE THAN I'VE BEEN OVER IT. AND I'D LIKE TO ECHO TED EUBANKS AND BILL BUNCHES, UH, RECENT AT TRIBUTE TO THE OTHER QUALITIES THAT IT BRINGS US. 'CAUSE WE HEAR THE BRIDGE. WE FEEL THE BRIDGE. IT HAS A REVERB TO IT THAT PAUL WINTER WOULD'VE BEEN PROUD TO HEAR. IT HAS A SOUND. AND, UH, WE HAVE A MOONLET FLOATS, UH, OUT OF, UH, OUT OF A ZILKER BOAT. RENTALS, OCCASIONALLY A SERIES. AND WE GET INTO THERE AND STOP AND ENJOY THE REVERB, THE SOUND OF THAT BRIDGE. IT'S VERY SPECIAL. IT'S DIFFERENT. TRY THAT AND FOR A SWEET MOMENT ON PARKING CREEK. SO THIS PULLS OUT AND PULLS IN ON THIS WHOLE ZILKER PARK. LITTLE SHUFFLE HERE. HERE COMES THE DOZERS. HERE COME THE CREWS. HERE COME THE WRECKING BALLS TO DO WHAT THEY DO. HERE COMES THE CONCRETE. IT NEVER ENDS. IT'S NOW OR NEVER AGAIN. IT IS NOW OR NEVER. HERE IT EVERY DAY. A PLACE YOU THOUGHT WAS SACRED. SOMEONE ELSE ONCE RAISED. EVERYBODY LOVES THIS PARK, BUT WE'RE DIGGING ITS OWN GRAVE. IT'S NOW NEVER AGAIN. IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO TAKE YOUR SECOND, SECOND WIND. TAKE A DEEP BREATH, LET IT OUT. SUCK IT IN. THIS DEVIL'S GOT NINE LIVES AND HERE COMES NUMBER 10. IT'S NOW OR NEVER AGAIN. IT'S NEVER EASY. IT'S NEVER FAIR TICKET MASTER NATION. IT'S YOU. BY THE SHORT HAIRS, THEY SELL THEIR MONOPOLY LIKE IT'S OUR ONLY PLAN. [00:50:01] MOVE IT TO THE RACETRACK. GIVE US BACK OUR LAND. THIS HISTORIC BRIDGE TO OUR BELOVED PARK OVER TROUBLED WATERS, ECHOES FROM OUR HEARTS. PARK BY PARK. PART BY PART SEEMS TO BE THERE. PLAN. THIS ONE'S A BRIDGE TOO FAR. WE WANT TO SEE IT STAND. THIS ONE IS A BRIDGE TOO FAR. WE WANT TO SEE IT STAND. THANK YOU. AI. A I KNOW. AND NO MORE MOPAC. THANK YOU FOR THE SONG. UH, THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM CHAIR. YES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THANK YOU FOR THAT MUSICAL INTERLUDE. I ALSO WANNA NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT WE HAVE COMMISSIONER CHIANG SU ON THE DAAS AND ALSO COMMISSIONER MUTA JOINING US REMOTELY. ALRIGHT, SO NEXT WE'RE GOING TO GO TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS AND I WILL START WITH COMMISSIONER MORTA ORES QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. HELLO EVERYONE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATIONS AND FOR, UM, GIVING US MORE CONTEXT ON WHAT THIS BRIDGE MEANS TO ALL OF YOU. UM, SO I THINK THIS QUESTION IS MORE FOR THE ENGINEERS. WAIT, IS THIS A MOMENT WHERE THEY, WHERE THEY CAN ANSWER MY QUESTIONS IF LIKE THE ENGINEERS CAN ANSWER MY QUESTIONS? YES. RIGHT? YES. OKAY, PERFECT. MM-HMM . SO, UH, THIS BRIDGE WAS BUILT IN 1926, AND I AM AWARE THAT THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE AGE OF THE BRIDGE AS MUCH AS, UH, WE HAVE. EVERYONE HAS LIKE TALKED ABOUT IT. IT'S NOT THE AGE OF THE BRIDGE THAT'S THE PROBLEM. IT'S THE CONDITION OF THE BRIDGE AND THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE WHO USE IT, WHO ARE, WHO IS AT THE END AS RIGHT. UM, I ALSO UNDERSTAND HOW BE, UH, BUILDING A BRIDGE THAT IS MORE FRIENDLY WITH, UH, CARS, UH, MAKE IT MORE AVAILABLE FOR THEM, MORE ATTRACTIVE. SO IT, UH, KIND OF LIKE INCENTIVIZES THE USE OF OF CARS, WHICH AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WE, UH, ENCOURAGE, UH, TO USE MORE. UM, LIKE . HOW WOULD YOU SAY THAT GREEN, UH, TRANSPORTATION, UH, METHODS. SO MY QUESTION IS, I UNDERSTAND ALL OF THAT. I, UM, BUT AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL, AS A, AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER, DO WE KNOW WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW BRIDGE? AND WHAT IS THE MAIN REASON OF THE RUSH TO MAKE THIS DECISION? UH, I ALSO KNOW THAT THERE IS EXPOSED RIVER IN THE CONCRETE THAT IS RUSTING IN THAT BRIDGE. UH, IS IT POSSIBLE TO KNOW HOW DEEP THAT RUST GOES? AND DOES THAT AFFECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE BRIDGE? I KNOW I A BRIDGE. I KNOW I ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS. I'M SO SORRY, BUT WE CAN GO ONE BY ONE. . UH, SURE. UH, ERIC BAILEY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CAPITAL DELIVERY SERVICES. AGAIN, UM, I'LL START WITH THE REBAR QUESTION 'CAUSE I'M GONNA HAVE TO HAVE YOU RESTATE THE OTHER QUESTION. UM, IN GENERAL, IT DEPENDS ON THE, UH, STRUCTURAL CONDITION AND HOW, UH, EXTENSIVE THAT DETERIORATION IS. UM, THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER ON THIS PROJECT HAS CONDUCTED EXTENSIVE, UM, EXPLORATION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. AND THAT IS ONE OF THE ISSUES, LIKE YOU MENTIONED. IT'S NOT JUST THAT THE BRIDGE IS OLD, IT'S A IS IN A DETERIORATING STRUCTURAL CONDITION. IN FACT, THE, AS I MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION, THE TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY ENGINEERS HAD TO SHIFT, UH, WHERE HEAVY TRAFFIC CAN DRIVE ON THIS BRIDGE. AND SO THAT IS WHY THERE'S AN EXTENSIVE NEED TO, UM, TO REPLACE THE BRIDGE, REHABILITATE THE BRIDGE, DO SOMETHING WITH THE BRIDGE. JUST DOING NOTHING IS NOT AN OPTION BECAUSE AT SOME POINT YOU WILL GET TO THE AREA WHERE HEAVY VEHICLES, SUCH AS FIRE TRUCKS AND BUSES ARE NO LONGER ALLOWED TO DRIVE ACROSS THE BRIDGE BECAUSE THEY WILL BE OVERLOADING IT. SO, UM, AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, PARTICULARLY THROUGH THE, THE NEPA PROCESS, EXACTLY [00:55:01] WHAT THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WILL BE IS WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON EXPLORING NOW. AND AS WE MOVE FORWARD THROUGH THE PROCESS, THERE'LL BE MORE DETAILS RELATED TO THAT. UM, IN TERMS OF THE, UH, YOU MENTIONED THE RUSH TO REPLACE THE BRIDGE. THIS PROJECT WAS VOTED ON BY THE COMMUNITY AS PART OF THE 2020 BOND PROGRAM, UH, APPROVED FOR FUNDING THROUGH THAT PROGRAM. UH, MOVE FORWARD THROUGH THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING WITH THE DECISION BY COUNCIL IN 2023 TO GO WITH THE REPLACEMENT OPTION. UH, IT IS FAIRLY UNUSUAL FOR COUNCIL TO DETERMINE THE, UM, METHOD OF A PROJECT THAT WE'RE GOING FORWARD WITH, BUT IS VERY EXPLICIT IN THAT BOND LANGUAGE THAT STAFF IS TO CONDUCT THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, EVALUATE THOSE OPTIONS, AND THEN COUNSEL IS THE ONE THAT CHOOSES WHICH OPTION THAT WE'RE GOING WITH. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERED ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS, BUT LET ME KNOW IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE. YES. SO IF, YEAH, I WAS ALSO, I WAS THINKING ABOUT IT, UH, IF IT STOPS WITH TIME, YOU LESS PEOPLE, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO RESTRICT WHAT CARS CAN GO ON. LIKE THE BIG TRUCKS CANNOT GO, CANNOT PASS IS, IS WE GET TO, IF WE SAY YES TO WHAT PEOPLE WANT AND WE DON'T, WE, WE DON'T TORTURE, LET'S SAY. UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER WAYS WHERE BUSES OR FIRE TRUCKS OR AMBULANCES CAN LIKE, CAN AVOID THAT AND LIKE GO, I MEAN, IT IT, AND STILL MAKE IT, OR IT, IT, IT'S POSS IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT IT EXTENDS THE RESPONSE TIMES FOR THOSE FIRE TRUCKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT PRETTY EXTENSIVELY AS WELL AS FOR THE BUS ROUTE. THERE'S A PRETTY WELL TRAVELED BUS ROUTE THAT RUNS THROUGH, UH, THE PARK THERE AS WELL. SO THERE ARE ALTERNATE ROUTES TO GET AROUND, YES, BUT YOU HAVE TO GO PRETTY FAR SOUTH OR PRETTY FAR NORTH, UH, IN ORDER TO, TO DO THAT. THANK YOU. ANOTHER QUESTION, , WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE IN COST OF, UH, REHABILITATING THE BRIDGE VERSUS HAVING TO MAKE A NEW ONE? YEAH, THE, BECAUSE THE REHABILITATION THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY IN, IN TERMS OF, UM, ENSURING, UH, LONG LIFE STRUCTURAL STABILITY, THE DIFFERENCE IN COST IS NEGLIGIBLE AT THIS POINT. WHEN YOU'RE DOING ESTIMATING ON THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS, THERE'S A MARGIN OF ERROR OF ABOUT PLUS OR MINUS 50%, WHICH IS A PRETTY WIDE MARGIN. UM, BUT ALL OF THE ESTIMATES ARE WITHIN, WELL WITHIN THAT MARGIN OF ERROR. UM, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, YOU KNOW, ENGINEERING ECONOMICS OF A PROJECT LIKE THIS, UH, IF ALL OTHER THINGS ARE HELD ASIDE, YOU WANT TO CHOOSE THE ESTIMATE THAT THE METHOD THAT GIVES YOU THE LONGEST STRUCTURAL LIFE, THE LONGEST LIFE FOR THE MONEY THAT YOU'RE SPENDING. THANK YOU. HAVE YOU READ THE REPORT OR HAVE THE DEPARTMENT READ THE REPORT THAT THE OTHER ENGINEER HAS WRITTEN OR SAID OR HAVE SOMETHING BECAUSE I, I DO NOT HAVE THAT, BUT I'VE HEARD FROM OTHER, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENTS MM-HMM . ABOUT THIS PERSON WHO SAYS THAT IT CAN BE RE REHAB. HAVE YOU READ THAT AND HAVE YOU TAKE, LIKE WHAT, WHAT ARE YOUR OPINIONS ON THAT? DO YOU THINK IT'S LEGIT? DO YOU THINK IT'S BECAUSE WHAT I CARE MORE THAN THE ENVIRONMENT I WILL SAY, UH, IS PEOPLE, AND I DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO BE AT RISK. AND I THINK I CARE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT, UH, UM, A BIOLOGIST MYSELF AT DEVOTE MY ENTIRE LIFE TO TAKE CARE OF WHERE WE LIVE. BUT I, I THINK WE'RE PART OF A COMMUNITY WHERE WE ALSO CARE ABOUT OUR SAFETY AND THE SAFETY OF CHILDREN AND PEOPLE THAT GO AND PASS THIS BRIDGE. SO WHAT ARE YOUR OPINIONS ON THIS OTHER, UH, UH, REPORT AND WHY ARE WE NOT DOING THAT? IF THIS PERSON SAYS THAT IT, WE CAN. YEAH. THE, THE REPORT FROM, UM, THE OTHER ENGINEER DIDN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, UH, THE LEVEL OF DETAIL THAT WE'VE UNDERTAKEN WITH OUR CONSULTANT, THAT HE DID NOT EVALUATE THE CONDITION OF THE DECK OF THE BRIDGE IN TERMS OF THE INTERIOR CONDITION OF THAT BRIDGE. HE DID A VISUAL EX, UH, VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRIDGE. UM, AND IT'S JUST, IT DOESN'T HAVE AS MUCH INFORMATION OR AS MUCH DETAIL, UH, THAT'S IN THERE, UM, TO DRAW THE, AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS FROM THAT. OKAY. UM, OKAY, LET ME, I WROTE, I WAS TAKING NOTES, UM, . OKAY. SO YOU TOLD ME THAT WE, UNTIL NOW, WE DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE, THE BUILDING, THE NEW BRIDGE, RIGHT? LIKE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THE, THE BENTOS COMMUNITY REPAIRING COMMUNITY. WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING YET. WE'RE, WE'RE WORKING ON THE DETAILS AROUND THAT AS A PART OF THE NEPA PROCESS TO DEVELOP THAT REPORT FULLY. COOL. AND, UH, IS THERE LIKE AN ESTIMATED DATE WHEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT? YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING TO COMPLETE THE NEPA PROCESS IN LATE 2026, EARLY 2027. UM, THERE'S QUITE A BIT IN FLUX AT THIS POINT IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT [01:00:01] OF REPORTING AND, UM, THE LEVEL OF INVESTIGATION THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO SUPPORT THOSE REPORTS AND THOSE FINDINGS. OKAY. AND, UH, UH, PLEASE CHAIR, TELL ME IF THIS IS, IF I CAN ASK FOR THIS, BUT CAN WE REQUEST A, SOMEONE FROM THE TEAM WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THIS, UH, EVALUATION TO TALK TO US LATER? I DON'T, I, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR WE CAN GO IF WE DON'T KNOW HOW BAD THIS CAN BE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, BESIDES OF COURSE, THE OBVIOUS CONSEQUENCES OF BUILDING ON TOP OF A RIVER. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. OF COURSE, THAT'S GONNA BE PART OF THE, THE PROCESS AS WE GO THROUGH WITH, UH, NEPA AND PERMITTING. UM, OBVIOUSLY WE CAN'T REALLY TALK ABOUT ANYTHING UNTIL WE'VE DONE THE RESEARCH INTO WHAT GOES INTO IT. SO AT THIS POINT, SITTING HERE TODAY, I CAN JUST TELL YOU THAT IT'S, IT'S, UH, BEING WORKED ON. AND ONCE WE HAVE A PRODUCT THAT'S READY TO, TO SHARE, WE WILL OF COURSE COME BACK TO Y'ALL AND, AND TALK THROUGH THAT AND WALK THROUGH THAT. AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE AS WELL, PART OF THAT PROCESS IS, UM, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AROUND THE PROJECT AS WELL AND THE FINDINGS AND RELEASING THAT NEPA REPORT TO THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL. SO, AND IF WE TRY TOITY THIS, THIS, THE BRIDGE, UH, AND YOU PUT ALL, WE PUT THE BEST AUSTIN BRAINS ON THIS, WE BRING PEOPLE, IMPORT PEOPLE TO TRY TO MAKE THIS THE BEST BRIDGE. AND WE CAN, LIKE, DO WE REALLY TRY, HOW LONG DO YOU THINK, WHAT IS THE LIFE, HOW CAN I FRAME THIS EXPECTANCY? MM-HMM . OF LIKE A BRIDGE THAT HAS BEEN REHABILITATED. IS THERE SOME, IS THERE EVIDENCE IN THE PAST THAT IF YOU REHAB A BRIDGE AND YOU PUT ANOTHER POLE? I DON'T KNOW, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT YOU TRY, UH, IT WORKS. AND FOR HOW LONG WOULD THAT BE GOOD FOR? YEAH, GENERALLY REHABILITATION PROJECTS HAVE A LIFESPAN OF AROUND 50 YEARS, OBVIOUSLY DEPENDS ON THE DESIGN AND SOME OF THE PARTICULAR, PARTICULAR, UH, ELEMENTS THAT ARE THERE. GENERALLY FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, THAT'S AROUND 75 YEARS. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT, SORRY, I DIDN'T GET THAT. SO 50 YEARS FOR NOW. LIKE IF WE REHABILITATE THAT AND THEN 75 YEARS FOR A NEW BRIDGE? YES. THE, THE LIFESPAN ON A NEW BRIDGE IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER. THE, SORRY, THE EXPECTED LIFESPAN ON A NEW BRIDGE IS SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER THAN WHAT IT WOULD BE ON A REHABILITATED BRIDGE OF 25. THE DIFFERENCE IS 25 YEARS. ABOUT 25 YEARS. YEAH. AND AGAIN, THIS IS ESTIMATES, IT DEPENDS ON THE PROJECT AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT THAT'S GENERALLY THE, THE, UM, THE GUIDELINES. SO WE HAVE 25 YEARS TO GET ANOTHER $40 MILLION TO TO BUILD ANOTHER ONE THEN, UM, WELL, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S GETTING QUITE A BIT, QUITE A BIT AHEAD OF OURSELVES, YOU KNOW, 50 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD. OKAY. SO, OKAY. OKAY. I GET IT. UM, YES, I THINK FOR NOW I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENT AND YOUR ANSWERS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER C***K. SET. HI. UM, THANKS SO MUCH BOTH TO THE PUBLIC. OOPS. YEAH. YES I CAN. UM, IS THAT, THAT'S FINE. OKAY. UM, I WAS JUST SAYING THANKS SO MUCH TO THE PUBLIC FOR THEIR COMMENTS AND THAT BEAUTIFUL SONG. UM, AND THEN ALSO THANKS TO YOU FOR YOUR, UM, PRESENTATION EARLIER. I HAVE QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS. UM, I FEEL LIKE SOME YOU MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER SOME MAYBE NOT. UM, FIRSTLY, I'M, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT WHERE WE ARE, LIKE IN THIS PROCESS AND HOW IT WORKS IN TERMS OF A, A TIMELINE. LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHY DOES IT SEEM LIKE WE'RE SORT OF DOING THE NEPA, UH, REPORT AFTER IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL? YEAH, SO THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THE, THE WHOLE REASON THAT WE'RE DOING THE NEPA REPORT IS BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL GRANT THAT WE RECEIVED. UM, AND THAT FEDERAL GRANT WAS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND THAT WAS AWARDED TO THE CITY AFTER CITY COUNCIL HAD MADE THE DECISION TO REPLACE THE BRIDGE. SO THAT'S WHY IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A LITTLE BIT WONKY IN TERMS OF THE WAY THE PROCESS IS WORKING. BUT THEN IF THE, UM, PRODUCT OF THE, THE NEPA REPORT MM-HMM . UM, SUGGESTS THAT THE BRIDGE IS HISTORIC, THEN WE DO NOT RECEIVE THOSE GRANT FUNDS, CORRECT. THAT'S NOT NO, OR THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY TRUE. YEAH. UM, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE NEPA DOCUMENT SAYS, UH, COULD POTENTIALLY AFFECT THE GRANT FUNDING, BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY A, A GIVEN. UM, THE PRO, THE PURPOSE OF THE NEPA PROCESS IS TO DO THE THINGS, [01:05:01] UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXISTING, UM, YOU KNOW, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURAL REGULATIONS AS WELL AS TEXT OUT IN THE ARMY CORPS AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE OUT THERE IN ADDITION TO, UH, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC COMMENT AND INVOLVEMENT OF ALL INTERESTED PARTIES IN THAT DOCUMENT AS WELL. OKAY. SO PUBLIC COMMENT IS INCLUDED IN THE NEPA? YES. OKAY. YES. UM, KIND OF ALONG WITH THAT, I JUST WANNA SORT OF, I KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT ENTIRELY YOU, UM, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE THE ONE STANDING BEFORE, SO HERE WE GO. I'M SORRY. BUT, UM, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE'VE HAD TONIGHT AND JUST THE ENTHUSIASM FROM THE PUBLIC, UM, THERE IS KIND OF LIKE A CONTINUED ISSUE OF TRANSPARENCY BETWEEN I THINK THE CITY AND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE CITY. UM, PARTICULARLY, UH, THERE WAS MENTION OF CERTAIN DOCUMENTS BEING HIDDEN DUE TO NATIONAL SECURITY. UM, I THINK AS A WHOLE, AND I'VE MADE THIS POINT BEFORE WITH A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT, BUT I THINK AS A WHOLE, AS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT WHERE OUR JOB IS SOLELY TO SUPPORT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE, WE NEED TO DO WE BETTER JOB OF COMMUNICATING EVERYTHING WITH THE PUBLIC. AND MAYBE THAT IS ALREADY PUBLISHED. TECHNICALLY, I'M ALSO A SCIENTIST AND SO I DEAL WITH THIS AS WELL. WE PUBLISH IT, BUT IT'S NOT IN A WAY THAT IS ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC. SO IT NEEDS TO BE ACCESSIBLE. AND THAT MEANS, YOU KNOW, LIKE USING LAYMAN'S TERMS AND HAVING THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE AT DIFFERENT PLACES, NOT JUST LIKE HIDDEN IN A NOOK ON THE WEBSITE. MM-HMM . YEAH. THE FULL, THE FULL BRIDGE ENGINEERING REPORT HAS BEEN RELEASED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ITEMS THAT DO HAVE CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPACTS. UM, AND THAT IS ONE THING THAT WE RUN THROUGH OUR RISK DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT ABOUT WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT RELEASE THIS. ISN'T ERIC MAKING THE DECISION THAT THIS IS SPECIAL? NO, I, SO, UM, THOSE DOCUMENTS WERE PRESENTED AS A PART OF THE, UM, COUNSEL DECISION IN 2023. THEY WERE ALSO INCLUDED IN THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ON APRIL 1ST. UH, AND VARIOUS OTHER LOCATIONS, I BELIEVE THEY'RE AVAILABLE ON THE PROJECT WEBSITE AS WELL. SO, UM, THE, THE DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HIDDEN DOCUMENTS IS A BIT OF A MISNOMER. UM, THE DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE THAT ARE PUBLICLY RELEASABLE HAVE BEEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. AND LIKE I SAID, THE ONE EXCEPTION IS THERE ARE SOME CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE ITEMS INVOLVED IN THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING REPORT OF A, UM, AGING BRIDGE THAT HAS STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO RELEASE TO THE PUBLIC. RIGHT. AND I GET THAT THEY'VE BEEN PUBLISHED. I JUST WANNA REITERATE MY POINT, THAT EVEN THOUGH SOMETHING IS PUBLISHED IN A SMALL CORNER OF OUR GOVERNMENT WEBSITE, THAT DOESN'T EQUATE TO BEING ACCESSIBLE FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS. UM, AND I THINK OVERALL THIS IS NOT LIKE TARGETED AT YOU, BUT I THINK OVERALL WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB SO THAT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE AND THAT USE THIS EVERY DAY CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE THE CITY IS EVEN COMING FROM. MM-HMM . IN MY OPINION, I, I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT THE NEPA REPORT SHOULD BE DONE AFTER CITY COUNCIL HAD ALREADY APPROVED IT. IF WE KNEW THAT IT WAS GOING TO COME UP WITH THE ACCEPT OR WITH THE, THE GRANT APPLICATION. I MEAN, THAT IS PRETTY CLEAR THAT THAT IS A REQUISITE OF THAT GRANT. AND SO I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHY IT WAS PUT OFF OTHER THAN AS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE FOR COUNSEL, BUT THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE. UM, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE $54.5 MILLION FIGURE, WHERE THAT COMES FROM AND WHY IT'S SO DIFFERENT FROM THAT ORIGINAL, UM, ESTIMATION. I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW. THE, THE COST OF THE BRIDGE PROJECT ITSELF IS AROUND 40, $45 MILLION. UM, AND THAT INCLUDES, UM, ADDITIONAL WORK IN THE AREA RELATED TO OTHER UTILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE MADE, UH, VIA OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. RIGHT. UM, SO WHERE DID THAT INITIAL FIGURE COME FROM? BECAUSE PART OF, I THINK THE FRUSTRATION FROM THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN THAT THE COST HAS LIKE MASSIVELY INFLATED. SO WHY ARE WE SEEING THAT? I DON'T KNOW WHERE $54 MILLION [01:10:01] CAME FROM. WHERE, SO WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL COST ESTIMATE IN 2020? I'D HAVE TO LOOK IT UP TO GET THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT IT'S AROUND 40 OR $45 MILLION. OKAY. SO I THINK THAT IS A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE OF OUR COMMUNICATION MEETING TO . WELL, I GET, I, LET'S, LET'S BE CLEAR HERE. THE CITY NUMBERS HAVE NOT CHANGED. MM-HMM . I THINK OTHER SPEAKERS HAVE BROUGHT UP NUMBERS THAT I DON'T KNOW WHERE THOSE NUMBERS ARE COMING FROM. OKAY. SO, UM, OKAY. SINCE 2020, HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS BEEN, UM, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, UH, COUNSEL APPROVED THIS IN 2020. RIGHT. COUNCIL APPROVED THE BOND ELECTION LANGUAGE IN 2020, WHICH FUNDED THIS PROJECT YES. AND SORT OF GOT IT ROLLING. THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING BRIDGE REPORT WAS COMPLETED IN 2023, WHICH SPARKED THE COUNCIL DECISION TO D DETERMINE TO GO FOR THE REPLACEMENT OPTION. RIGHT. UM, SO SINCE THEY DECIDED TO REBUILD OR YEAH. REBUILD RATHER THAN, UH, REHABILITATE THE EXISTING ONE. MM-HMM . UM, HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT? NO, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE DESIGN SINCE THEN. IN TERMS OF PROGRESSING THAT THROUGH, THERE'S NOT REALLY BEEN ANYTHING TO COMMENT ON UNTIL WE HAVE REACH A LEVEL OF DESIGN WHERE WE CAN MAKE A PRESENTATION. IT'S A LOT OF PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING TYPE OF WORK. WE'VE RECEIVED COUNCIL DIRECTION ON WHAT THE ALTERNATIVE, UH, THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH, AND THAT'S BEEN THE DIRECTION THAT WE'VE BEEN OPERATING UNDER. OKAY. UM, ALSO, I JUST WANNA NOTE THAT BECAUSE THE INITIAL BOND WAS APPLIED FOR, IN 2020, WERE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ABLE TO COMMENT ON THAT? ON THE, THE BOND ELECTION? YEAH. LIKE, UH, SORRY, MORE LIKE ADVOCATE FOR THEIR, THEIR POINT OF VIEW IN A PUBLIC SETTING LIKE THIS, FOR EXAMPLE. YEAH. I MEAN, THE PART OF ANY BOND DEVELOPMENT AND BOND ELECTION PROCESS INVOLVES PUBLIC INPUT, UM, IN TERMS OF WHAT PROJECTS ARE PUT FORWARD AND THE VALUE OF THE DOLLARS THAT ARE PUT FORWARD TO, TOWARDS THOSE PROJECTS. BUT THAT, UH, DECISION WAS SAYING, OKAY, THIS BRIDGE NEEDS TO BE FIXED. MM-HMM . NOT NECESSARILY WE NEED A NEW BRIDGE OR WE ARE FIXING THIS OLD ONE. CORRECT. CORRECT. THE LANG THE LANGUAGE IN THE 2020 BOND LISTED A BUCKET FOR MAJOR CIP PROJECTS, AND THERE WERE, I THINK, FIVE PROJECTS THAT WERE LISTED UNDER THERE, AND A TOTAL DOLLAR VALUE, UH, WHERE THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD BRIDGE WAS AT THE TIME IS WE HADN'T EVALUATED, WE HADN'T DONE THE, THE BRIDGE ENGINEERING REPORT YET TO DEVELOP THOSE ALTERNATIVES TO PRESENT TO COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT DECISION. AND AGAIN, THAT WAS PART OF THE BOND LANGUAGE, IS THAT STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PERFORM THE PRELIMINARY BRIDGE REPORT AND COME BACK TO COUNCIL, AND COUNCIL WOULD MAKE A DECISION ON WHICH, UH, OPTION TO PURSUE. OKAY. UM, SO SINCE THEN, SINCE COUNCIL MADE THAT DECISION MM-HMM . THE PUBLIC HAS NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE INPUT ON WHETHER IT IS RECONSTRUCTED OR THAT IN TERMS OF THAT DECISION DIRECTION HAS BEEN GIVEN FROM COUNSEL TO STAFF. MM-HMM. SO STAFF HAS BEEN PURSUING THE REPLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE BECAUSE THAT IS THE DIRECTION THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN FROM COUNSEL. I KNOW, I'M, I'M JUST ASKING ABOUT THE PROCESS. MM-HMM . SO THE PUBLIC HAS NOT HAD THE CHANCE TO GIVE THEIR INPUT ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE REBUILT OR THERE HAVE BEEN UPDATES, PROJECT UPDATES TO LIKE MOBILITY COMMITTEE TO LANDMARKS COMMISSION TO THIS GROUP. I'M GONNA BE AT, UH, PARKS BOARD IN A COUPLE WEEKS TO TALK THROUGH IT. SO FROM WHEN THAT DECISION WAS MADE UNTIL NOW, NO, THERE HAVEN'T, BUT WE'RE SORT OF IN THAT PROCESS RIGHT NOW. OKAY. UM, OKAY. I THINK THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS FOR RIGHT NOW. ACTUALLY, WAIT, I THOUGHT OF ONE MORE. SORRY. UM, YOU'RE LIKE, OH, MAN. UM, THE HYDROGEOLOGIST THAT SPOKE EARLIER, UM, WAS MENTIONING THE ROCK STRUCTURE IN THE AREA. I'M CURIOUS IF THE CITY, UH, WORKS WITH A GEOLOGIST AS A CONSULTANT BEFORE THEY DO THESE SORTS OF PROJECTS, OR IF IT'S SOLELY A MECHANICAL ENGINEER AND NO, THE ENGINEER. UH, YES, WE DO. AND SO IT'S NOT JUST THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER DESIGNING THE BRIDGE MM-HMM . THERE'S AN ENTIRE TEAM THAT'S INVOLVED. UM, HYDROGEOLOGISTS GEOLOGISTS DO CORE SAMPLES OF THE ROCK, FIND OUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WHERE TO TIE THE STRUCTURE INTO THE ROCK, HOW TO DESIGN IT, TO MAKE IT STRUCTURALLY SOUND. ALL OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS ARE UNDERTAKEN AS PART OF THE CONSULTANT TEAM THAT'S WORKING ON THE PROJECT. OKAY. AND IS THAT INFORMATION RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC? UM, I BELIEVE SO. I BELIEVE THAT'S IN THE, THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT. UH, THERE'S A SECTION IN THERE ON AREA GEOLOGY AND THINGS LIKE THAT. OKAY. UM, AS PART OF THAT, IS [01:15:01] IT ONE SINGULAR ENGINEER THAT WORKS AS THE CONSULTANT, OR IS IT A TEAM? 'CAUSE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WAS BROUGHT UP. IS IT A TEAM OF ENGINEERS THAT WORK ON THE PROJECT? IT'S A TEAM. IT'S A TEAM OF ENGINEERS. THE ENGINEER THAT WE'VE HIRED IS A FIRM CALLED URS THAT'S BEEN ACQUIRED BY AECOM, WHICH IS ONE OF THE LARGEST ENGINEERING FIRMS IN THE WORLD. THEY'VE GOT A VARIETY OF EXPERTISE FROM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, NEPA DOCUMENTS, STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, ALL THE SPECIALTIES THAT THEY NEED, UH, IN ORDER TO, UM, DESIGN THIS PROJECT. IN ADDITION, THEY CONTRACT WITH LOCAL ENGINEERING FIRMS THAT BRING LOCAL EXPERTISE FOR SPECIFIC AREAS AS WELL TO PROVIDE THAT, UM, LOCAL INPUT FOR ANY SPECIFIC OR UNIQUE, UH, LOCAL FEATURES. IN TERMS OF THE, THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER, UM, THE COMMENT I BELIEVE WAS THAT THE ENGINEER AND THE CONTRACTOR ARE THE SAME PERSON. WE HAVEN'T HIRED A CONTRACTOR TO BUILD THIS PROJECT AT ALL. THE ENGINEER THAT WE'VE HIRED IS NOT A CONTRACTOR, AND IF THEY WERE, THEY WOULD BE INELIGIBLE FOR BIDDING ON THE PROJECT BECAUSE THEY HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND THEY COULDN'T BID ON IT EVEN IF THEY WANTED TO. OKAY. SO WE USE A CERTAIN, UH, ENGINEERING FIRM, BUT IS THERE ONE SINGULAR PROJECT MANAGER THAT IS THE CONSULTANT FOR THIS PROJECT, OR DO WE HAVE A SECOND SET OF EYES THAT ALSO YEAH, SO THERE'S A PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE DESIGN ENGINEER MM-HMM . WHO SORT OF HEADS UP THE TEAM THAT DOES ALL THE INVESTIGATION. IN ADDITION, ON THIS PROJECT, WE ACTUALLY HAVE A THIRD PARTY, UM, A THIRD PARTY QUALITY ASSURANCE ENGINEER THAT IS UNRELATED TO, UH, URS EIGHT, THE URS AECOM TEAM, WHO IS THAT SECOND SET OF EYES TO DO THAT QUALITY CHECK ON THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE BY URS AECOM. OKAY. AND HAVE THEY CONSIDERED THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE? YES. THAT'S, THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WAS LOOKED AT IN THE, IN THE BRIDGE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT. YEAH. OKAY. UM, THAT'S IT FOR RIGHT NOW. THANKS. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER FLURY. YEAH. UH, THANK YOU. UM, MY COMMENTS ARE GONNA MAINLY BE AROUND, UH, WHAT WE HEARD, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING THE IMPACT, THE, THE, THE VALUE OF THIS FROM, ITS THE EXPERIENCE, THE SETTING FROM THE PUBLIC'S VIEW, HOW THEY USE IT. UM, AND, AND SO, UH, I, I GUESS I SEE THIS AS A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN A BRIDGE. IT'S THE ENTRANCE PORTAL, IT'S THE WELCOME MOMENT, YOU KNOW, BOTH FROM ABOVE AND BELOW. AND IT IS THE, YOU KNOW, SUBTLE DISTINCTION THAT YOU'RE NOW ENTERING A SPECIAL PLACE. IT'S A, AN, AN OLD BRIDGE SOMETHING, EVEN THE CASUAL OBSERVER GOES, THIS IS NOT A OP BRIDGE. THIS IS, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING, SOMETHING ELSE. AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR BEHAVIOR SETTING, HOW PEOPLE ARE GONNA LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENT, HOW WE CREATE THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTER. AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT RELATES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION AS WE HEARD. UM, AND SO I'M CURIOUS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE, I I NEED TO PHRASE IT AS A NEPA PROCESS OR THC, UM, CONCURRENCE, WHAT KIND OF FEEDBACK HAVE YOU GOTTEN ON WHAT THE BRIDGE DESIGNS SHOULD LOOK LIKE IF REPLACED? IN PARTICULAR? THE SCALE SEEMS VERY DIFFERENT, AND I CAN IMAGINE THC AND OTHERS ARE, ARE GONNA BE LIKE, WHOA, THAT'S, THAT'S GONNA COMPLETELY CHANGE THE CHARACTER. YEAH. WE'RE WORKING OUR WAY THROUGH THAT PROCESS. SO WHAT KIND OF FEEDBACK HAVE, HAVE YOU GOTTEN ANYTHING FROM THC? NO. I MEAN, WE'VE SUBMITTED, WE'VE HAD INITIAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM, BUT WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY OFFICIAL FEEDBACK FROM THEM. SO I WOULD, UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, WE'VE HEARD THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE CHANGE IN CHARACTER. WHAT, WHAT ARE Y'ALL DOING TO ADDRESS THAT? YEAH, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THROUGH THE NEPA PROCESS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE PRESENTED IN THE NEPA PROCESS. SO YOU CAN SEE FROM MY PREVIOUS COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS ABOUT TRANSPARENCY, THAT THIS JUST SOUNDS LIKE A COMPLETE DIVERSION, THAT THE PUBLIC RIGHT NOW IS GONNA BE SCARED WHEN WE HEAR TECH STOP BRIDGE TWICE THE SIZE OF ITS SCALE. AND YEAH, WE'RE GONNA GET TO THAT. YEAH. WE'RE GONNA GET TO THAT AT LEAST, I WOULD THINK FOR SURE WE WOULD GO, OH, THC OR OUR BEST PRACTICES FROM OUR ARCHEOLOGISTS, OUR PRESERVATION SPECIALISTS ARE, IT'S GONNA HAVE TO MAINTAIN CHARACTER. IT'S AN IMPORTANT RELATIONSHIP. IT'S A, IT'S MORE THAN A BRIDGE, BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE, IS, IS THERE ANYONE ADVOCATING FOR THE BRIDGE FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE? WELL, UNTIL YOU DEVELOP THE REPORTS THAT SURROUND THAT BRIDGE IN TERMS OF THE HISTORICAL RESOURCES IN THE REQUIREMENTS AND THE ARCHEOLOGIC ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND THOSE REQUIREMENTS, THERE'S NOTHING TO COMMENT ON. RIGHT. AND THAT'S THE PLACE THAT WE'RE AT NOW, IS WE'RE DEVELOPING THOSE REPORTS. AND SO UNTIL THOSE REPORTS ARE DEVELOPED AND THAT INFORMATION IS COLLECTED, RIGHT, THERE'S NOTHING FOR THC TO COMMENT ON AND PROVIDE INPUT ON. SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW. AND I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT A SATISFYING ANSWER TO HEAR THAT WE JUST DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION YET, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION YET. WELL, I WOULD HOPE TO SEE THAT THERE'S, UM, PLANNERS OUT THERE THAT ARE TRYING TO ESTIMATE THE, THE APE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT. AND WHERE DOES THAT START? YOU KNOW, I THINK IT MIGHT BE ON THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AS YOU'RE EXPERIENCING IT, LOOKING OVER, UM, OR GOING UNDER. AND SO I, I, I'M, I'M JUST CONCERNED WE HAVEN'T CAPTURED [01:20:01] THE, THE AREA THAT THE APE, UM, HAVE Y'ALL ESTIMATED THAT YET? NOT, I DON'T HAVE THE, THAT REPORT IN FRONT OF ME, SO I, I CAN'T TELL WHETHER WE HAVE OR NOT, BUT I, LIKE I SAID, IT'S IN PROCESS. ONCE WE HAVE A DOCUMENT THAT WILL BE, UH, UH, READY TO GO AND VETTED AS PART OF THE, AGAIN, AS A PART OF THE NEPA PROCESS, THAT DRAFT IS THEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC FOR COMMENT AND REVISION. UM, AND LIKE I SAID, WE'RE WORKING, UH, YOU KNOW, HAND IN HAND WITH THE HISTORIC COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE ARMY CORPS AND THE OTHER, UM, YOU KNOW, FEDERAL PARTIES HERE THAT HAVE INPUT ON, UM, YOU KNOW, THE GRANT FUNDING AND THOSE ISSUES. OKAY. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE WAY TO WORD IT. UM, BUT YOU, YOU MIGHT'VE TOUCHED ON IT. HOW DID IT GET IN THIS CONDITION? WHO'S, UH, WAS THERE REPORTS, YOU KNOW, IN 2020, I THINK IT MIGHT'VE BEEN IDENTIFIED, IT WAS DETERIORATING OR MAYBE BEFORE THAT, BUT WHEN WAS THE FIRST, YOU KNOW, INDICATION THAT THIS BRIDGE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED OR SERIOUSLY REHABILITATED? YEAH, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. UM, TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS, UM, HAS, UH, PRETTY EXTENSIVE INFORMATION ABOUT THE REPAIR AND REHABILITATION, UH, EFFORTS THAT HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN AT ALL KINDS OF FACILITIES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME. I WAS TRYING TO JUST, UH, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF COORDINATION'S BEEN DONE WITH THE CITY ON THE ZILKER VISION PLAN THAT WAS DONE, BUT THE, THE BRIDGE ISN'T IDENTIFIED THERE IN ANY WAY AS ENHANCEMENTS, UH, UNLESS I'M MISTAKEN. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW, BUT IT, IT'S JUST MISSING FROM THE INITIAL ZILKER PARK VISION PLANS. WELL, I THINK THE ZILKER PARK VISION PLAN IS SOMETHING THAT HAS, UH, RECEIVED A LOT OF PUBLIC INPUT ON AND HAS ULTIMATELY BEEN, UH, BEEN PUT TO THE SIDE, I GUESS IS THE BEST WAY TO, TO SAY THAT. AND SO RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO VISION PLAN FOR ZILKER PARK. SO I UNDERSTAND, AND I UNDERSTAND THE REPORT THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, UM, BUT ULTIMATELY RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE THAT WASN'T AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT AND WAS NEVER ADOPTED OR ENACTED, IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY EFFECT. YEAH. I'M, I'M NOT TRYING TO HAVE ITS EFFECT, BUT JUST TRYING TO GATHER WHEN DID THE, THE SENSE OF URGENCY OR HOW DID THE, THE, THE PUBLIC DURING THAT, THAT EFFORT IDENTIFY IT AS A NEED. AND IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE THAT WAS SALIENT IN THE REPORT IN ANY WAY. SO I'M TRYING TO JUST GAUGE OF WHEN, UH, THIS CAME ON THE SCENE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER PHRASE. YEAH, THAT'S PROBABLY A QUESTION THAT WE NEED TO ASK FOR TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS, AND I THINK THAT WE CAN COORDINATE THAT RESPONSE THROUGH THE, UH, COMMISSION LIAISON ON EXACTLY WHAT THE, UM, REPAIR DOCUMENTS AND WHAT THE SERVICE DOCUMENTS LOOK LIKE FOR THAT BRIDGE, UM, TO GET YOU PROBABLY THE CLOSE TO THE LEAST OF THE ANSWER THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. YEAH. UM, AND THEN I THINK THIS MIGHT BE MY LAST QUESTION ON, ON JUST NEXT STEPS IN THE PROCESS. SO, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT TO REPLACE A BRIDGE AND IS, AND THE METHOD OF, OF CONTRACTING, I GUESS. UM, BUT THEY'RE GONNA THEN APPROVE A DESIGN? NO, THERE'S NO STEP FOR THE, FOR THE COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE. OKAY. THE COUNCIL ACTION AS LAID OUT IN THE, UM, UH, THE BOND ELECTION DOCUMENTS WAS THAT STAFF WAS TO GO BACK TO COUNCIL FOR COUNCIL TO SELECT THE, THEIR, UH, OPTION THAT THEY'D LIKE TO GO WITH OF RE REPLACEMENT VERSUS REHABILITATION. THEY SELECTED THE REPLACEMENT OPTION. UM, AND THEN THAT'S, LIKE I SAID, WHAT STAFF HAS BEEN MOVING FORWARD WITH, UM, ASIDE FROM THE NEPA DOCUMENT, THE NEXT STEP IN THE PROJECT WOULD'VE THEN BEEN TO COME THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS ONCE THE DESIGN IS COMPLETE, WHICH WE WOULD GO TO THE VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, DESIGN, REVIEW AND APPROVAL, AS WELL AS, UM, YOU KNOW, VARIANCES AND THE THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT WE DO TO GET A PERMIT. SO, OKAY. UM, THE REASON THAT WE'RE, LIKE I SAID, THE REASON THAT THINGS SEEM A LITTLE BIT OUT OF WHACK IN TERMS OF THE WAY THE PROCESS HAS WORKED IS BECAUSE OF THAT, UM, FEDERAL GRANT THAT WE RECEIVE FOR CONSTRUCTION AND THE STEPS THAT WE HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT FEDERAL GRANT. OKAY. UM, THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS. UM, I WILL JUST GO ON RECORD. IT JUST DOES SEEM LIKE SOMETHING IS GLARINGLY MISSING IN, IN THE, THE, THE, THE CONCEPT OF REPLACING THIS HISTORIC BRIDGE, UNLIKE OTHERS IN, IN, IN THE CITY AT, AT A SCALE THAT IS JUST VERY DIFFERENT IN THAT, THAT JUST SEEMS JARRING TO ME THAT SOMETHING, SOMETHING IS OFF. MM-HMM . BUT THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER LUKI. GREAT, THANK YOU. UM, I'M CURIOUS, UH, ABOUT, UH, JUST STRUCTURAL THINGS AT THE MOMENT. HOW WIDE IS THE BRIDGE NOW? HOW MANY FEET IS IT? UM, I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD RIGHT NOW. CAN YOU GUESS? I DON'T WANT TO GUESS. UH, SO IT'S FOUR LANES. FOUR LANES, YES. AND THEN SIDEWALKS ON SIDEWALK ON THE OTHER SIDE, TWO SIDEWALK. SO, UM, 50 TO 60 FEET WOULD BE MY ESTIMATE, BUT AGAIN, I, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER. IT'S, IT'S A GOOD, IT'S A GOOD GUESS. AND, AND WHAT'S THE WIDTH OF THE, THE, [01:25:01] THE NEW DESIGN THAT, THAT YOU, WE SAW THREE DESIGNS NOW FOR A NEW VERSION. AND HOW WIDE WOULD THAT BE? UM, IF YOU COULD PULL UP THE PRESENTATION, I THINK IT MIGHT BE ON THERE. I'VE BEEN LOOKING ON HERE. I DON'T SEE ANY WIDTHS. OKAY. LET ME KNOW IF I CAN, IF I MAY. IT'S 59 FEET WIDE NOW, SO IT'S PRETTY CLOSE, MY GUESS. VERY CLOSE. NICE. YEAH. UM, , IT'S ABOUT, LET'S SEE, THE 11, 22 15 IN THE MIDDLE. UM, I'D SAY IT'S CLOSE TO 60 FEET, OR SORRY, CLOSE TO A HUNDRED FEET NOW. I, OR IN THE PROPOSED DESIGN, I GUESS I WOULD GUESS, BUT AGAIN, THAT'S A LOT OF, UH, 109. OKAY. 109. UM, AND AGAIN, THAT'S MAINLY DUE TO THE ADDITION OF THE, UH, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE LANES ON THE OUTSIDE. UM, THE RIGHT HAND TURN LANE ADDITION ONTO AZ MORTON IS THE, THE MAIN TRAFFIC DIFFERENCE ON THE WAY THROUGH THERE. OKAY. UM, I, I KNOW THAT WE'RE TRYING TO, UM, MAKE AUSTIN MORE WALKABLE AND, UH, MORE, UH, TRAIL CENTRIC AND, AND HAVE THAT AREA OF AUSTIN TO BE VERY ACCESSIBLE. UM, UH, I'M CURIOUS AS TO, TO WHY IT IS THERE'S SO MUCH WIDTH ON THAT. IS THAT BASED UPON ANY KIND OF, UM, UH, STUDIES ON USE OF THAT AREA BY, UH, HIKERS OR, YEAH, THERE'S, UH, INFORMATION IN THE, IN THE BRIDGE ENGINEERING REPORT ABOUT THE USAGE OF THAT BRIDGE IN TERMS OF BOTH TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIANS AND THINGS IN, IN AND AROUND THE AREA. AND, UH, I'M, I'M ASSUMING THAT, UH, ON, ON A REBUILD, UM, THEN WE'RE BASICALLY COMPLETELY REMOVING WHAT WAS THERE. AND THEN WE'RE GONNA PUT IN SOMETHING ALMOST TWICE AS BIG, PRETTY CLOSE TO TWICE AS BIG AS I, AS I SEE IT RIGHT NOW. UM, I FEEL LIKE THAT'S GONNA HAVE SOME SERIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT THERE ON THAT PART OF THE CREEK. IS THERE SOME KIND OF WAY TO NOT DESTROY THAT PART OF THE, THE CREEK WHEN YOU DO THIS? I MEAN, THE, YOU CAN SEE FROM THE SECTIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. OBVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTION HAS, UM, YOU KNOW, AN IMPACT WHILE CONSTRUCTION IS GOING ON, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, UM, YOU KNOW, THE REPLACEMENT AND THE IMPROVEMENTS AROUND THE CREEK, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE CROSS, CROSS SECTION, ARE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT COMPARED TO THE EXISTING CONDITION NOW VERSUS WHAT THE FUTURE CONDITION WOULD BE. YEAH. I'LL ADMIT, UM, GOING UNDER THAT BRIDGE, UH, BY FOOT IS, IS A LITTLE SKETCHY AT THE MOMENT. I, I LIKE THE IDEA OF IMPROVING THOSE THINGS. UM, I, I, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A, UH, A BITTY A HEAVY HAND VERSION. UM, AND, UH, I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S A WAY TO DO THIS WITHOUT, UH, WITHOUT, UH, IN BEING SO HEAVY. UM, BUT I'M, UH, I, I KNOW THAT WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH BUSES AND FIRE TRUCKS, UH, THE SAFETY OF THOSE IS, IS PARAMOUNT AND, AND THEY ARE BIG MACHINES AND, AND, UM, UH, I'M, I'M KIND OF SHOCKED THAT A NEW BRIDGE WOULD ONLY LAST 75 YEARS ACTUALLY. UH, BUT, UH, I GUESS, UM, THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT, UH, YOU, YOU FIGURE OUT WHEN YOU GET TO IT. UM, UH, I DON'T HAVE, EVERYBODY'S BEEN COVERING THIS PRETTY WELL. I, I JUST WANNA HAVE ONE OTHER COMMENT. I JUST WANTED TO THANK, UH, BILL OLIVER FOR SHOWING UP WITH HIS GUITAR TODAY. UH, I'VE BEEN ON YOUR MIDNIGHT CRUISES MANY TIMES, AND, UH, I'VE HAD A GREAT TIME DOING THAT. AND IT'S ONE OF THE BETTER THINGS ABOUT AUSTIN IS TO HAVE THAT KIND OF TALENT FOR FREE ON ANY GIVEN FULL MOON, UH, OUT, OUT THERE. AND I HIGHLY RECOMMEND GOING AND DOING THAT. SO, UH, UH, AS FAR AS, UH, COMMISSIONERS GO, MAYBE WE SHOULD SET ONE OF THOSE UP RIGHT, BILL. ALRIGHT. CHEERS. THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER MORRISON. THANK YOU. UM, [01:30:03] I, I KNOW WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE WIDTH OF THE BRIDGE, BUT CAN WE TALK ABOUT WHETHER THERE ARE, I GUESS I'M STILL NOT CLEAR ON THE REASON FOR THE WIDTH, THE PROPOSED WIDTH OF THE BRIDGE, AND I THINK IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN ONE OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS ABOUT THE EXISTING BOTTLENECK ONCE YOU ACTUALLY GET BACK ONTO BARTON SPRINGS ROAD. SO WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF WIDENING IF ALL THE CARS HAVE TO GO INTO A NARROWER, UM, LANE OF TRAFFIC ANYWAY, IF YOU'RE TRAVELING, UM, EAST AND ARE THERE FUTURE PLANS TO WIDEN BARTON SPRINGS ROAD? UH, AND IF NOT, UH, YOU KNOW, ARE, WHAT ARE THE WAYS THAT YOU GUYS ARE TRYING TO FUTURE PROOF THE YEAH, I THINK THAT'S, I MEAN, FUTURE, FUTURE PROOFING IS A GREAT WORD TO USE HERE IN THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE BUILDING A STRUCTURE THAT WE'RE PLANNING TO HAVE A 75 YEAR LIFE ON IT, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO, UH, ACCOMMODATE FUTURE POTENTIAL GROWTH. UM, IN TERMS OF WHAT EXACTLY THAT LOOKS LIKE, YOU'D HAVE TO TALK TO TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS ABOUT THEIR GROWTH PROJECTIONS AND THE USE OF BARTON SPRINGS ROAD. UM, BUT WE DON'T WANNA BUILD, UH, A STRUCTURE IN THIS AREA THAT IS, YOU KNOW, RELATIVELY IMMEDIATELY OBSOLETE, UM, AND DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR FUTURE POTENTIAL GROWTH, UH, IN THE POPULATION AND VEHICULAR CIRCULATION AROUND TOWN. GOT IT. SO ONE OF THE RE ONE OF THE REASONS TO WIDEN THE BRIDGE IS BECAUSE YOU ALL EXPECT THE REST OF BARTON SPRINGS ROAD TO WIDEN AT SOME POINT. THAT FAIR? I, I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD GO THAT FAR. I DON'T KNOW WHAT, LIKE I SAID, IF THAT SPECIFIC QUESTION WOULD NEED TO BE ANSWERED BY TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS, BUT YOU DON'T WANT TO BUILD A STRUCTURE THAT IS GOING TO BE THERE FOR A LONG TIME THAT HAS A POTENTIAL SIGN, POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LIMIT ON RIGHT. WHAT'S POSSIBLE IN THE FUTURE. OKAY. SO THEN WHAT IS THE MAIN, WHAT IS THE PRIMARY SORT OF ON THE RECORD, UH, REASONING BEHIND THE WIDTH THAT WAS DECIDED? UM, BASED ON THE TRAFFIC COUNTS AND THE PROJECTED TRAFFIC COUNTS OF, OF GETTING, UH, BOTH VEHICULAR, TRANS, UH, YOU KNOW, CARS AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE AND BICYCLES THROUGH THERE AND THE PEDESTRIAN COUNTS. OKAY. THAT'S THE, THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE RECOMMENDATION IN THE BRIDGE ENGINEERING REPORT BASED ON THOSE COUNTS. OKAY. GOT IT. AND THEN HOW LONG, IF YOU ARE TO PROCEED WITH FULL RECONSTRUCTION, HOW LONG DOES THAT TAKE? AND, UH, IS TRAFFIC DIVERTED? UH, IN THE INTERIM? NO, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE IS ABOUT TWO YEARS, UH, DURING CONSTRUCTION. ONE LANE IS GONNA BE OPEN IN EACH DIRECTION TO MAINTAIN VEHICULAR CIRCULATION, UH, ACROSS THE BRIDGE. OKAY. UM, OKAY. I THINK THAT'S, THOSE ARE MY ONLY QUESTIONS, BUT I GUESS I WOULD JUST REQUEST, UM, AND WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT ONCE THE REPORTING ON THE, YOU KNOW, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE BRIDGE BECOMES AVAILABLE, THAT, THAT'S OBVIOUSLY SENT TO THIS COMMISSION, UM, AS WELL AS, UH, YOU KNOW, A CURRENT REPORT ON THE ECOLOGICAL BENEFITS OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY STANDING. UM, AND THEN, UH, WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE, UH, UH, AN ANALYSIS OF THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF WHAT CURRENTLY EXISTS. AND I'D BE INTERESTED IN, UM, SEEING MORE OF THAT IF IT'S AVAILABLE OR WHEN IT BECOMES AVAILABLE. YEAH. THE, THE INFORMATION THAT'S AVAILABLE ON THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS IS INCLUDED IN THE, IN THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT FOR THE BRIDGE. OKAY. I'M HAPPY TO EMAIL YOU ALL THAT LINK IF YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE IT. IT'S AVAILABLE, I THINK, UH, LIKE I SAID, AS PART OF SOME OTHER COMMISSION DISCUSSIONS AND THINGS, BUT I'M HAPPY TO SEND THAT DIRECTLY TO Y'ALL. YEAH, IT'D BE GREAT JUST TO HAVE IT ALL CONSOLIDATED. MM-HMM . OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO THINK I, AND I, I'LL POINT OUT TOO THAT TONIGHT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE. I'VE GOT DOZENS OF EMAILS ABOUT THIS, AND I'M SURE YOU ALL HAVE ALSO, AND I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY IN ANY OF THE EMAILS OR ANY OF THE TESTIMONIES SAY THAT WE SHOULD REBUILD THE BRIDGE. IT WAS ALL ABOUT SAVING THE BRIDGE. UM, AND I WROTE DOWN HERE ON MY PAPER, HOW ABOUT WE KEEP IT AS IS AND WHEN THE BRIDGE IS NO LONGER SAFE, CLOSE IT TO MOTOR VEHICLES, BUT KEEP IT OPEN FOR BIKES AND PEDS, SO WHEN IT COMES AROUND, I MIGHT MAKE THAT MOTION. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. COMMISSIONER BRIMER. YEAH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR, UH, PRESENTATION. I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS OF THE, UH, PUBLIC ON ALL THIS. UH, I'M GONNA START GOING BACK TO WHAT ONE OF THE, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SAID THAT, UH, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENT, IT'S EASY TO POINT OUT, UH, EROSION [01:35:02] AND, UH, RIPARIAN AREAS AND OAK TREES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT A LARGE PART OF THE ENVIRONMENT IS THE SENSE OF PLACE THAT WE HAVE WITH, YOU KNOW, WHEREVER WE ARE. AND IF YOU CANOE UNDERNEATH THAT BRIDGE GOING EITHER DIRECTION, YOU GET A UNIQUE SENSE OF PLACE, YOU'RE ENTERING A SPECIAL PLACE, WHICH IS ZILKER PARK. IT'S LIKE NO OTHER PLACE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN. PLACING THAT BRIDGE WITH SOMETHING ELSE DESTROYS THAT SENSE OF PLACE, THE ENVIRONMENT THAT MAKES THAT SPECIAL. NOW, THAT MAY NOT, IT IS A CONTRIBUTING ELEMENT OF, YOU KNOW, THE NATIONAL LANDMARK, WHICH IS ZIL PARK. SO IT'S NOT LITERALLY PART OF THE LANDMARK, BUT IT CONTRIBUTES TO THAT. AND REMOVING THAT BRIDGE DESTROYS WHAT PART OF WHAT MAKES ZILKER PARK A SPECIAL PLACE. IT DESTROYS PART OF THE ENVIRONMENT THAT MAKES ZILKER PARK A SPECIAL PLACE, THE ENTRYWAY. ANOTHER THING ABOUT THIS IS THAT THERE'S A RUSHED JUDGMENT IN EVALUATING THIS FOR A REPLACEMENT OF THE BRIDGE. COMMISSIONER FLORY MENTIONED THE PARK VISION PLAN. IF YOU GET IN THE WAY BACK MACHINE, AND YOU GO BACK TO THAT ZILKER PARK VISION PLAN, THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN ADVOCATED AT THAT TIME TO PUT BARTON SPRINGS ROAD WITHIN THE PARK ON A DIET, AND THEY WERE GONNA PUT ONE LANE EACH DIRECTION WITH A RAISED MEDIAN IN THE MIDDLE. THEY WERE GONNA SEPARATE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC FROM VEHICULAR TRAFFIC FROM BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC BY ERECTING BRIDGES, EXPANDING THE ONE THAT IS NORTH, AND THEN CORRECT, BUILDING A NEW BRIDGE THAT WAS ACROSS FROM THE UMOFF SCULPTURE GARDEN. THIS WOULD IMPROVE SAFETY AND, AND STILL ALLOW THROUGHPUT ON THE BRIDGE. THIS WAS NOT EXAMINED AS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO PUTTING A NEW BRIDGE. AND AS COMMISSIONER FLORE MENTIONED IT, THE BRIDGE ITSELF RECONSTRUCTING THE BRIDGE WAS NOT EVEN PART OF THE DISCUSSION. IT'S PART OF THE ZILKER PARK VISION PLAN. THERE WAS A PLAN PUT IN PLACE IN 2023. IT WAS A SAFETY PLAN THAT THE CITY IMPLEMENTED, WHICH RESULTED IN, UH, BARTON SPRINGS ROAD FROM LAMAR OVER TO ZILKER PARK. IT WAS IMPLEMENTED TO NARROW IT TO ONE LANE IN EACH DIRECTION TO IMPROVE SAFETY FOR BICYCLISTS GETTING TO AND FROM ZILKER PARK. YET WE'RE BUILDING A BRIDGE THAT HAS TWO OR THREE LANES IN EACH DIRECTION TO SUPPORT VEHICULAR TRAFFIC THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE THERE. AND IF THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT BACK IN, I DON'T KNOW, 20 23, 20 22 HAD ITS WAY, BARTON SPRINGS ROAD THROUGH ZILKER PARK WAS ONLY GONNA BE ONE LANE EACH DIRECTION. SO WE'RE BUILDING A BRIDGE THAT IS LARGER THAN THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT WANTED. IT'S LARGER THAN WHAT BARTON SPRINGS IS EAST OF THE, THE THING THE PLAN YOU'VE GOT BUILDS A SIDEWALK THAT'S ONLY PARTIALLY UP TO UL SCULPTURE GARDEN, WHICH IN ITSELF CREATES A HAZARD FOR PEDESTRIANS WALKING UP THAT SIDE OF THE ROAD. SO WE HAVE A LOT OF, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE DIDN'T REALLY THINK THIS THING THROUGH AS FAR AS THE ALTERNATIVES GO. THE I WOULD ENCOURAGE, AND ANOTHER THING THAT DISAPPOINTS ME ABOUT THE BACKUP MATERIAL THAT WAS SUPPLIED WAS I HAD TO GO OVER TO THE HISTORICAL LAND COMMISSION MEETING FOR APRIL 1ST TO GET THE BACKUP DOCUMENTS THEY HAD TO READ THAT WASN'T PROVIDED TO US. AND THAT CONTAINED A WEALTH OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE SCOPE OF THIS PROJECT, YOU KNOW, THE SCOPE, ALL THAT OTHER SORT OF STUFF. AND I WOULD'VE APPRECIATED IF THAT HAD BEEN PART OF THE BACKUP MATERIAL YOU PROVIDED TO US. IT MADE IT REALLY KIND OF TEDIOUS FOR ME TO HAVE TO GO TO MY COLLEAGUES IN THE HISTORICAL LAND COMMISSION TO FIGURE ALL THIS STUFF OUT AND GET THE INFORMATION FROM THEM. THE QUESTION THAT THEY SUBMITTED [01:40:01] A MONTH AGO THAT YOU PROVIDED FOR US AT THREE O'CLOCK THIS AFTERNOON, I WAS DISAPPOINTED AT THE LATE ARRIVAL. IF THEY ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS, SOME OF THEM HAD TO DO WITH THE, UH, ERO OR THE, UH, RUST THAT WAS REFERRED TO AT THE EXPOSED REBAR. AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE PEOPLE TO COMMISSION THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TO LOOK AT THE APRIL 1ST VIDEO, WHERE THIS WAS DISCUSSED WITH A CIVIL ENGINEER ON THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION IN HIGHLY DETAILED DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS. AND I WILL NOT DO IT JUSTICE BY TRYING TO SUMMARIZE THAT DEBATE, PLUS THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE HERE, YOU KNOW, ANSWERED LATER IN THE DAY. UH, TODAY THE BRIDGE ITSELF IS RATED A SIX, WHICH IS GOOD. MOST OF THE BRIDGES IN THIS COUNTRY ARE LESS THAN SIX. THE REAL ISSUE, AS BROUGHT OUT IN THIS HISTORIC LAND COMMISSION IS THE DECK, THE ASPHALT, AND THERE ARE TWO SUBSTRUCTURES UNDERNEATH THAT. IF THE DECK WERE REMOVED, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED. BUT WE DRIVE ON ASPHALT THAT IS REGULARLY PULLED UP ON ROADS ALL THE TIME AND REPLACED. THIS IS NOT SEEN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DRIVE AROUND ROADS OF THE CITY, THE CITY IS REGULARLY TEARING THIS STUFF UP AND PUTTING DOWN NEW ASPHALT. THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL. BRIDGE IS REPAIRABLE THEIR EXISTING PLANS FROM THE ZUCK PARK VISION PLAN TO REDIRECT PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE TRAFFIC. OTHER PLACES. THE OUTER LANES OF THE BRIDGE WERE BUILT IN 1946. THAT'S WHERE THE BUSES ARE GOING ON THE EASTBOUND SIDE, I BELIEVE THAT YOU REFERENCED EARLIER. SO THOSE ARE THE STRONGER SECTIONS OF THE BRIDGE. THE FIRE STATION CLOSER TO SILK PARK IS OFF MOPAC, A COUPLE OF MILES, MAYBE A MILE SOUTH OF THERE. SO IF THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY, THE FIRE STATION AND THE AMBULANCE WOULD COME FROM THAT DIRECTION. IN ANY EVENT, THE BUSES COULD DO, THE OUTER LANES HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING THE RATIONALE FOR TEARING DOWN A HISTORICAL BRIDGE, GETTING BACK TO THE BOND. THE BOND WAS ON, YOU KNOW, THE BOND ASKED THE PUBLIC, THE, YOU KNOW, WAS REALLY FOR A STUDY AND A PROPOSAL NOT TO TEAR DOWN A BRIDGE. THE BOND DIDN'T CALL FOR PEOPLE TO TEAR DOWN THE BRIDGE. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW, WHERE WE ARE NOW, WHAT THE BOND PROPOSED INITIALLY. NOW, IN THE HISTORIC LAND COMMISSION MEETING, I BELIEVE $10 MILLION HAS BEEN SPENT ALREADY ON THIS PROJECT. IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T HAVE THE, THAT EXACT NUMBER ON. I THINK THAT HEARD, THAT WAS WHAT WAS SAID IN THE HISTORIC LAND COMMISSION, LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, MEETING. AND THIS IS GONNA BE A $45 MILLION PROJECT JUST FOR THE ROAD OR THE BRIDGE APPROXIMATELY. OKAY. SO WE SPENT 25% OF THE MONEY, AND WE HAVEN'T TURNED A SPADE OF DIRT. SO I HAVE A HARD TIME FIGURING OUT HOW WE'RE GONNA REBUILD A BRIDGE FOR $35 MILLION. SO JUST TO CLARIFY ON, ON THAT. OKAY. YEAH, PLEASE CLARIFY. YEAH, THE, THE CONSTRUCTION COST IS INDEPENDENT OF THE DESIGN COST. SO IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TOTAL PROJECT COST, IT'S 50, IT'S THE 45 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BRIDGE, PLUS THE DESIGN COST. GENERALLY INDUSTRY STANDARD ON DESIGN COST IS, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, 15 TO 25, 30% OF THE OVERALL TOTAL PROJECT COST. OKAY. WELL, SOMETIME EARLIER IN THE DISCUSSION, WE WERE THROWING AROUND THE NUMBER OF $55 MILLION, AND, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THAT WASN'T QUITE EXACTLY RIGHT. BUT NOW WE'RE REACHING SOME CLARIFICATION STAGES WHERE, WELL, YOU KNOW, SEE THIS IS WHERE THINGS AREN'T CLEAR. THE PUBLIC IS TOLD IT'S 45 MILLION, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT 45 MILLION. BY THE TIME YOU THROW IN THE DESIGN COST, IT'S REALLY 55 MILLION. BUT WITH INFLATION, IT'S REALLY NOT 55 MILLION, INCLUDING THE DESIGN. WE'RE REALLY TALKING LIKE 65 MILLION. AND THEN WE GET TO THE VERA DANIEL SITE. OKAY. SO THIS IS A FLOODPLAIN. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE VERA DANIEL SITE, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PICKING UP ARROWHEADS OFF THE GROUND. [01:45:01] THIS HAS BEEN A FLOODPLAIN FOR 10,000 YEARS. SO WHEN YOU START DIGGING DOWN DEEP, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DIGGING 20 FEET DOWN. SO THAT'S WHERE THE, THE HISTORICAL ARTIFACTS ARE, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE DOING. YOU'RE DIGGING DOWN. THAT'S ONE ISSUE. THE OTHER ISSUE IS THERE'S AN ORGANIZATION CALLED Z OR 3 5 1, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO BE TAKING UP TO SEVEN ACRES OF LAND PERMANENTLY OUT OF THE PARK, IS WHAT I'VE HEARD. I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT'S REFLECTED IN THE FIGURE IN THIS. UH, WELL, I, IT, I'VE BEEN, I'VE BEEN TOLD IT'S UP TO PERMANENTLY SEVEN ACRES, BUT I'VE ALSO HEARD THAT IT'S A COMBINATION OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEVEN ACRES. SO I'VE HEARD DIFFERENT THINGS. BUT THE POINT IS THAT SOME OF THAT LAND WILL BE TAKEN OUT OF ZILKER PARK PERMANENTLY TO HANDLE THE EXPANSION OF THE BRIDGE. SO ZILKER PARK WILL BE VICTIMIZED BY THE EXPANSION OF THE BRIDGE. SO THAT'S AN ISSUE. SO, YOU KNOW, I, I HAVE A REAL HARD TIME SEEING THE LOGIC IN ALL THIS. WHAT THE BENEFIT TO THE PARK, WHAT THE BENEFIT TO THE CITIZENS. UH, THE ENGINEER WHO SPOKE AT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS NOT CONVINCED OF THE NECESSITY OF REPLACING THE BRIDGE. HE FELT IT WAS COM IT WAS REPAIRABLE, AS IS. YOU MENTIONED THE NEW BRIDGE WOULD LAST 75 YEARS. THE ISSUE WITH THE CURRENT BRIDGE IS THAT IT WAS NOT MAINTAINED. A NEW BRIDGE WILL LAST 75 YEARS IF THE CITY SPENDS THEIR MONEY TO MAINTAIN IT. IF THEY DON'T, IT TOO WILL LAST 50 YEARS. SO IT REALLY DEPENDS UPON THE CITY'S INTEREST IN MAINTAINING THE FACILITY. IF THEY DON'T MAINTAIN THE NEW BRIDGE, IT'S GONNA FALL DOWN TOO. UH, THIS JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THE CITY HAS LEAPT FORWARD WITH A SOLUTION BEFORE EVALUATING ALL THE OPTIONS. BY THE WAY, I LOOKED AT THE CITIZEN INPUT THAT YOU HAVE. IT DATES BACK TO 20 13, 20 14, 20 15. THE, IF YOU ADD UP ALL THE CITIZEN INPUT, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WANT THE BID REPLACED WAS 30%. EVEN THE ZILKER PARK VISION PLAN, WHICH WAS CANCELED, HAD BETTER SUPPORT THAN THAT . SO, YOU KNOW, THIS JUST, YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY, I DON'T SEE THIS. NOW. COUNCIL MAY OVERRIDE WHATEVER WE DO AND IGNORE WHATEVER WE SAY AND WHATEVER THE CITIZENS WANT, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ELECTED OFFICIALS. BUT I'M NOT CONVINCED. THAT'S WHAT I'VE GOT. APPRECIATE THAT. UM, WELL, I'M THE CAPTAIN NOW AS, UH, CHAIR OF LEFT , SO IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT, UH, IT'S MY TURN NOW. UM, YEAH, APPRECIATE, UH, Y'ALL'S PRESENTATIONS. UM, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY I THINK WE'VE HEARD FROM THE CITIZENS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CONCERN FOR WHAT'S HAPPENING, UH, TO PUT IT LIGHTLY. UM, YOU KNOW, I WAS DOING, UH, I WAS DOING SOME READING TO TRY TO SEE WHAT I COULD FIND ABOUT THIS. UM, I SAW AN ARTICLE FROM, UH, AUSTIN FREE PRESS AND FROM AUSTIN CHRONICLE ABOUT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AND THEIR INTERACTIONS WITH THE BARTON SPRINGS BRIDGE. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? AND I KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER BRIMER ALLUDED TO IT, UH, AS WELL. IT'S A PRETTY BROAD, BROAD TOPIC. UH, WE'VE BEEN TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ON TWO OCCASIONS, UH, TO DISCUSS THIS PROJECT. UM, AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION ON APRIL 1ST. IT WAS ROUGHLY THE SAME AS THIS, TALKING ABOUT THE, UM, THE PROJECT NEXT STEPS, THINGS LIKE THAT. UH, THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING REPORT, UH, WHICH, YOU KNOW, STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING IS NOT A POP QUIZ, SO IT DOES TAKE TIME TO DEVELOP THOSE RESPONSES AND GET THOSE BACK. THOSE WERE, UH, RETURNED AS SOON AS THEY WERE AVAILABLE, WHICH WAS YES, THIS AFTERNOON. UM, IS THERE SOMETHING SPECIFIC ABOUT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION? UM, YEAH. WELL, I SAW THAT THERE WAS ONE APRIL 1ST, SO I WAS CURIOUS, YOU KNOW, I'M ASSUMING THEY HAD LIKE, SOME KIND OF RESOLUTION. I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THE COP FROM AT LEAST WHAT I'M READING, RIGHT, AND JUST SORT OF, YOU KNOW, GOING THROUGH MINUTES TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SORT OF, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'RE AT AS [01:50:01] FAR AS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE CITY OF AUSTIN, RIGHT? CITY COUNCIL, DIFFERENT CITY DEPARTMENTS, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS AND WHATNOT. UM, JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, SORT OF DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS AND, AND HOW PEOPLE FEEL, YOU KNOW, UM, I'LL READ SOME OF THE STUFF THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN READING, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS ONE, UH, COMMENT THAT THE CHAIR MADE AT THE FEBRUARY 4TH MEETING THAT SAID THEY'RE REVIEWING A PROCESS THAT WOULD'VE BEEN VERY, AND THIS IS PART OF THE CHRONICLE THAT WOULD'VE BEEN VERY NICE FOR US TO HAVE BEEN A PART OF. IT WOULD'VE MADE A LOT MORE SENSE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS, NOT TELLING US HOW THEY GOT HERE AT THE END. UH, THERE'S A, A COMMENT THAT COMMISSIONERS WERE FRUSTRATED NOT ONLY BY THEIR LATE ENTRY INTO THE PROCESS, BUT ALSO BY THE LACK OF INFORMATION, THEIR BRIEFING MATERIALS, THEN DOCUMENTATION FOR A PANEL OF ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, AND CIVIC ACTIVISTS BEING ASKED TO MAKE A CONSEQUENTIAL DECISION. UH, COMMISSIONERS WERE EQUALLY DISMAYED AT ALTERNATIVES, REHABILITATING THE BRIDGE, OR ADDING A SEPARATE PATH FOR CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS WERE NEVER ON THE TABLE FOR THEIR REVIEW. UM, THEY POSTPONED DECISION TILL THEIR MARCH 4TH MEETING. UH, THERE'S LIKE A AUSTIN FREE PRESS ARTICLE THAT CAME OUT, I THINK, UH, A LITTLE BIT, UH, AROUND THAT TIME THAT SAID SORT OF SIMILARLY. UM, SO YEAH, I WAS JUST CURIOUS, LIKE WHAT HAS THE HISTORIC COMMISSION SORT OF LIKE SAID ABOUT THIS PROCESS? BECAUSE I MEAN, CLEARLY, RIGHT, THIS IS A BUILDING THAT, UH, IS NOT A HISTORIC, UH, AS FAR AS LIKE, YOU KNOW, CERTIFIED BY THE, YOU KNOW, AUSTIN HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSIONER OR WHATEVER. BUT I MEAN, CLEARLY THERE'S DIALOGUE ABOUT THIS AT THE SAME TIME THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PLANNING TO POTENTIALLY, UH, TEAR DOWN AND RECONSTRUCT THE BRIDGE. UM, SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS AS FAR AS LIKE FEEDBACK YOU ALL DONE. YEAH. SO IN TERMS OF THE, THE DIALOGUE WITH THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION, UM, WE WERE ON, WE WERE ON THE INITIAL AGENDA IN ERROR AS A DEMOLITION APPLICATION. UM, IT WAS INTENDED TO BE A STAFF BRIEFING SIMILAR TO THIS NO ACTION REQUIRED BY THE LANDMARK, BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AT THIS TIME. UM, AND THAT WAS PART OF THE CONFUSION AROUND THE EARLIER, I THINK THAT WAS THE FEBRUARY, UH, MEETING. WE CAME BACK IN APRIL WITH THE STAFF BRIEFING. UH, NO ACTION REQUIRED AT THAT POINT. UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION FROM THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION, UH, BUT AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL, IN TERMS OF THEIR DESIRE TO CHOOSE THE ALTERNATIVE FOR THIS PROJECT, UM, ALTERED THE PROCESS THAT WE NORMALLY GO THROUGH BY COUNCIL CHOOSING THE REPLACEMENT OPTION IN 2023. THAT WAS DIRECTION TO STAFF ON WHICH WAY TO GO WITH THIS PROJECT. AND THAT'S THE DIRECTION THAT WE'VE BEEN OPERATING UNDER. YEAH, FOR SURE. UH, I FEEL LIKE I'M YELLING NOW, OR MAYBE MAYBE I'LL, MAYBE I'LL JUST NOT TALK DIRECTLY TO THE MIC. UM, SO YEAH, I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT MADE ABOUT THIS FEDERAL GRANT, RIGHT? I'M LOOKING HERE AT SOME OF THE NUMBERS. UH, IT SEEMS ABOUT, UH, $32 MILLION. AND SO FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED CITY STAFF THAT, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO REHABILITATE THIS, OR, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO RECONSTRUCT THIS BRIDGE. UH, THIS GRANT MONEY ONLY SHOWS UP IF WE DESTROY THE BRIDGE AND REBUILD IT. NOT NECESSARILY, UM, THE GRANT APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. PART OF THAT APPLICATION WAS RELATED TO THE FULL REPLACEMENT PROJECT. BUT AS WE GO THROUGH, UH, THE NEPA PROCESS AND IF, UM, A DIFFERENT DECISION IS MADE SOMEHOW BY COUNSEL WHO OR WHOEVER ELSE WE WOULD LOOK TO REVISE THE GRANT APPLICATION, THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THE GRANT APPLICATION FOR US TO GET THAT MONEY THOUGH. YEAH, I GUESS, UH, YOU KNOW, AND CERTAINLY I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WIDENING IT AND MAKING IT MORE, UH, ACCESSIBLE FOR PEDESTRIANS AND, AND, YOU KNOW, BIKE RIDERS OR SOMEONE THAT RIDES MY BIKE ON THE TRAIL A LOT. UH, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WHY WE WANT TO INCREASE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS. I ALSO FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, UH, IN CASE LIKE A CAR IS STUCK ON THE BRIDGE OR SOMETHING, RIGHT, IT'S PROBABLY GOOD TO NOT HAVE STUFF SUPER TIGHT SO THAT, YOU KNOW, EMERGENCY PERSONNEL WOULD EVER HAVE SOME SPACE TO, TO OPERATE. UM, AND I UNDERSTAND TOO THAT, YOU KNOW, THINGS DO FALL APART AS THE, UH, NOVEL BY CHINUA CHABE GOES. AND SO, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY YOU WANT TO PUT MONEY INTO MAKING THINGS NICE. HOWEVER, IT DOES SEEM THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE A LOT OF EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT TO THE BRIDGE. I MYSELF DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT IT. HOWEVER, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER RESIDENTS OF AUSTIN, UH, THE IMPORTANCE THAT THE BRIDGE CLEARLY HAS TO THEM. UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY AND THERE'S A LOT OF TIME AND MANPOWER THAT'S ALREADY GONE TO THIS DECISION MAKING PROCESS. I MEAN, ULTIMATELY CITY COUNCIL ARE JUST PEOPLE, RIGHT? THEY'RE JUST SYSTEMS. SOMETIMES SYSTEMS MAKE MISTAKES. I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IN PARTICULAR IS A MISTAKE, HOWEVER, IT DOES SEEM THAT LIKE SOME THINGS WERE, UH, NOT NECESSARILY DONE IN SORT OF WHAT PEOPLE EXPECT TO BE A NORMAL PROCESS, RIGHT? COMING TO ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, HISTORICAL LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, [01:55:01] BEFORE A DECISION IS MADE RATHER THAN AFTER. UM, SO CLEARLY THERE ARE A LOT OF, UH, FEELINGS AROUND THIS. UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK ULTIMATELY, UM, YOU KNOW, WHILE IT'S GOOD TO HAVE BRIDGES THAT LAST FOR A LONG TIME, A LOT OF PEOPLE ALSO LIKE BRIDGES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME AS WELL. UH, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, WEIGHING THAT ALONG WITH, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, UH, IS IMPORTANT. HOWEVER, I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW HOW MUCH INFORMATION Y'ALL HAVE PROVIDED TO US RIGHT NOW TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK UPON THAT, UH, INTELLIGENTLY. UH, AND I THINK, UH, THOSE ARE PROBABLY ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. APPRECIATE IT. VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL. THANK YOU, CHAIR. UM, FIRST I WANNA SAY THANK YOU TO ALL THE CITIZENS THAT TOOK THE TIME TO COME OUT TODAY. UM, WE KNOW THAT YOU'RE BUSY AND, UM, AND HAVE LOTS OF OTHER PRESSING OBLIGATIONS. AND SO YOU SPENDING THE TIME TO COME SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS, YOU'RE VERY, VERY WELL EDUCATED THOUGHTS, UM, YOU KNOW, REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. UM, NORMALLY I'M KIND OF THE REFEREE FOR BRINGING THINGS BACK TO, HEY, LET'S LET YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES OF, OF THIS PROJECT. BUT SINCE WE WEREN'T REALLY GIVEN ANY, I HAVEN'T SAID ANYTHING, UH, IT'S KIND OF ANNOYING, I GOTTA BE HONEST. LIKE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT, AND WE WEREN'T REALLY GIVEN ANY KIND OF ENVIRONMENTAL PRESENTATION. , I'M LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT AND I'M LIKE, THIS LOOKS LIKE IT GOT HANDED TO AN ENGINEER, AND I'M SORRY, I'M, I'M KIND OF ANNOYED RIGHT NOW. UM, IT, IT GOT HANDED TO AN ENGINEER, AND I APOLOGIZE TO THE ENGINEERS IN THE ROOM, BUT NOT REALLY, UM, THAT, AND SAID, HEY, BUILD A BRIDGE. AND THE PERSON SAID, OKAY, GREAT. AND THEY BUILT A BRIDGE, YOU KNOW, THEY DESIGNED A BRIDGE AND THEY DIDN'T TAKE IN COUNT. ANYTHING ELSE, HOW THIS CONNECTS TO THE STREET BEFORE IT OR AFTER IT, THE SIDEWALKS, ANYTHING. I MEAN, IT REALLY, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IF THIS CUT BUILT TODAY THE WAY THAT IT'S DESIGNED, I WOULD BE EMBARRASSED FOR IT. AND I, I'M JUST SAYING THAT OUT LOUD. I MEAN, IT REALLY, I, IT'S KIND OF, IT'S A MONSTROSITY AND, AND, AND SEEMS SO UNNECESSARY AND SEEMS TOTALLY DRIVEN BY THE FACT THAT, UM, AS YOU CONTINUE TO SAY, WE GOT THIS GRANT, WELL, YOU DON'T JUST GET A GRANT. YOU APPLY FOR A GRANT AND YOU TAKE THE TIME WITH A GRANT. AND THOSE THINGS TAKE A LONG TIME FOR THE GRANT. SO THIS WAS THOUGHT OUT WELL BEFORE, UM, YOU GOT THE GRANT. UM, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO TURN IN ALL OF THE DIFFERENT FINDINGS AND FACTS AS YOU, YOU KNOW, TO APPLY FOR, HEY, WE WANT THIS GRANT. SO, UM, YEAH, I, UH, I I, I FEEL LIKE THIS STAFF BRIEFING I IS, UM, PROBABLY NOT GOING THE WAY THAT YOU LIKE IT. UM, AND DEFINITELY NOT, UM, DEFINITELY NOT, UH, GOING WELL, UH, I THINK HERE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, UH, EITHER I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'VE BEEN GIVEN MUCH TO CHEW ON, UH, FOR, UM, THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THIS PROJECT. SO, WITH THAT SAID, UM, I FEEL LIKE WHATEVER MOTION WE BRING FORWARD, WE'RE GONNA BRING FORWARD, AND IT'S GONNA HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT MAYBE DON'T PERTAIN TO THE ENVIRONMENT. UM, AND, AND LIKE I SAID, NORMALLY I WOULD NOT BE OKAY WITH THAT. BUT I THINK TODAY, I FEEL OKAY WITH THAT. UM, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BECAUSE I REALLY, I ALSO WANNA SAY THAT I REALLY, UH, HONOR AND RESPECT ALL THE WONDERFUL QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS THAT THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE MADE. COMMISSIONER BRIMER, THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR REALLY IN DEPTH, UM, INSIGHTS, UH, IN THIS, UH, COMMISSIONER FLORY, I, I VERY MUCH AGREE WITH WHAT YOU, UH, ALLUDED TO WITH THIS AS THE GATEWAY TO ZILKER PARK. AND THERE'S A, THERE'S A FEELING THAT'S THERE. UH, I, I THINK, UH, TED, YOU BANKS, UH, MADE THAT AS WELL, THAT THAT IS THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT. AND, AND YES, THE BRIDGE HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN THERE, BUT IT HAS BEEN THERE IN OUR LIFETIME. IT'S BEEN THERE FOR A HUNDRED YEARS, AND IT WELCOMES US, AND IT HAS A CERTAIN FEELING, AND IT, IT PRESENTS, THIS IS HOW YOU'RE GOING TO PARTICIPATE WITH THIS PARK, UH, AND THIS CITY. AND I, I VERY MUCH, UH, APPRECIATE THAT AND I REFLECT THAT STATEMENT AS WELL. UM, YEAH, I, I HONESTLY, I MEAN, I, I JUST DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL LIKE I'VE BEEN GIVEN ANYTHING TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT. I, I JUST, THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS FOR YOUR QUESTIONS, YOUR COMMENTS. I WILL ECHO WHAT VICE CHAIR BRISTOL JUST SAID, WHICH IS Y'ALL'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS WERE SO GOOD THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE MUCH. AND WE'LL ALSO ECHO WHAT SHE SAID ABOUT IT'S DIFFICULT TO COMMENT AND QUESTION FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL STANDPOINT WHEN WE HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN A LOT OF INFORMATION. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WHERE YOU ALL ARE IN THE PROCESS, YOU DON'T NECESSARILY MAYBE [02:00:01] HAVE THOSE DETAILS TO GIVE. I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S YOUR FAULT, BUT THAT'S JUST, THIS IS, THIS IS THE SETTING THAT WE'RE IN. YEAH. JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THE TASK HERE TODAY WAS NOT TO PRESENT THE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FOR YOUR REVIEW OR INPUT. IT WAS TO PROVIDE A STAFF BRIEFING TO Y'ALL OF WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE PROCESS, WHAT THE NEXT STEPS ARE, AND HOW WE GET THROUGH THAT AND TALK ABOUT NEPA PROCESS AND THINGS LIKE THAT WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WE WE'RE NOT READY TO, TO TALK ABOUT THAT. WE DON'T HAVE THE DOCUMENTATION READY TO GO WITH THAT. IT'S BEEN A WHILE. THIS ISSUE IS COMING UP THROUGH VARIOUS OTHER COMMISSIONS. AND SO RATHER THAN HAVING Y'ALL HEAR ABOUT IT THIRD HAND FOR SOMEBODY ELSE, YOU GUYS ARE A VERY KEY, UH, APPROVAL PIECE OF THIS PROJECT. AND THE INTENT TODAY WAS TO LET YOU KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT, THAT WE'RE COMING BACK ONCE WE HAVE THE INFORMATION READY TO GO, AND THAT THERE IS AN APPROVAL PROCESS THAT'S GOING TO BE A, A REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS THAT'S GONNA BE CRITICAL FOR THIS PROJECT AS A PART OF THIS COMMISSION. MM-HMM . OKAY. UM, WELL, WITH THAT, I WILL TRY AND TAKE A LEAF OUT OF COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN'S BOOK AND, AND BE BRIEF. , YOU WERE CONCISE, BUT ALSO MADE, MADE A GREAT POINT. WHAT COMES TO MIND FOR ME IS A, A QUOTE THAT MY FATHER WOULD OFTEN SAY BY JOHN RUSKIN, WHO IS A 19TH CENTURY ARCHITECT AND AUTHOR, UM, PHILANTHROPIST. AND HE SAID, AND I'VE QUOTED IT HERE ON THIS COMMISSION BEFORE, WHEN WE BUILD, LET US THINK THAT WE BUILD FOREVER. AND I'VE SOMETIMES ADDED TO THAT AND FOR EVERYONE. UM, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT PERSPECTIVE OFTEN IN MODERN CONSTRUCTION. THAT IDEA OF BUILDING NOT JUST FOR THE HERE AND NOW, BUT FOR ALL OF THOSE TO COME IN THE FUTURE. AND THERE'S A REASON WHY WE AS PEOPLE GRAVITATE TOWARDS PLACES LIKE PARIS THAT HAVE BEEN REFERENCED TONIGHT. UM, OXFORD AND ENGLAND, WHERE JOHN RUSKIN IS FROM ANCIENT PALEOLITHIC SITES. THERE WAS JUST, THERE WAS A LEVEL OF CARE, UM, AND CREATIVITY AND ARTISTRY THAT I THINK WAS, WAS BROUGHT TO THE PROCESS THAT I THINK IT'S, I IMPORTANT TO PRESERVE. AND I REALLY APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER FURRY'S POINTS ABOUT HOW THE BRIDGE SETS THE TONE FOR THE PARK AND OUR, AND SETTING SETS THE TONE. HAVING A MEETING IN A ROOM LIKE THIS IS GOING TO EVOKE A CERTAIN TYPE OF BEHAVIOR AND FEELING, VERSUS IF WE ARE MEETING AT THE STATE CAPITOL AND THE SANDSTONE VERSUS THE US CAPITOL OR INSIDE NOTRE DAME, OUR, OUR ENVIRONMENT IMPACTS US, INCLUDING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT. SO I WILL SAY HERE AT THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TONIGHT, THAT THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IS, IS PART OF THIS BROADER ENVIRONMENT. UM, YEAH, I, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO ADD OTHER THAN THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF TOWN THAT I THINK ALL OF US HAVE BEEN TO HAVE, HAVE AN AFFINITY FOR, NOT ONLY JUST FROM A, A CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE, BUT OF COURSE THE SPRINGS ARE HOME TO ENDANGERED SPECIES THAT ARE OF VITAL IMPORTANCE. YOU KNOW, THE RIVER AND THE SPRINGS ARE SO IMPORTANT THAT WE INCORPORATED IT INTO THE NEW CITY OF AUSTIN LOGO. SO WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PROTECTING THE ASSETS THAT MAKE AUSTIN WHAT IT IS. UM, AND SO I, I HOPE TO SEE THIS, THIS FUNDING GO TOWARDS GOOD USE. HUMAN SAFETY IS OF COURSE, OF, OF CRITICAL IMPORTANCE. IF THIS BRIDGE IS UNSAFE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED. BUT I THINK WE NEED TO DO SO WITH, UM, AS MUCH CARE AND AS LITTLE INVASION INTO THE SURROUNDING PARKLAND AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA AS POSSIBLE. UM, AND ULTIMATELY WHAT IS BEST FOR HUMAN SAFETY IS BEST FOR THE, IN THE SAFETY OF THE ENVIRONMENT TOO. 'CAUSE WE'RE ALL, WE'RE ALL INTERCONNECTED. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE. ARE THERE ANY, OH YES. VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL. THANK YOU CHAIR. UM, AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF. UH, WHEN IS THE EARLIEST DATE THAT WE COULD HAVE, UH, INFORMATION FROM THAT NEPA REPORT? WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? I'D HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT AND CHECK WITH THE PROJECT TEAM AND SEE WHAT THE SCHEDULE LOOKS LIKE. I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION HERE, BUT I'M HAPPY TO, UM, GET WITH THE TEAM AND GET BACK TO YOU HERE IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO. I THINK EARLIER TONIGHT YOU SAID YOU THOUGHT THE END OF THIS YEAR, 2026. YEAH, THAT'S GONNA BE THE END OF THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE PROCESS. BUT I THINK HER QUESTION WAS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO, UM, WE CAN, I CAN CHECK WITH THE PROJECT TEAM AND SEE KIND OF WHAT THE SCHEDULE IS ON THE DIFFERENT REPORTS AND THINGS THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON. WELL, SO MY, MY THINKING HERE IS, I MEAN, COULD WE HAVE A SECOND UPDATE ON THIS? IF, IF, CAN WE HAVE A SECOND UPDATE ON THAT? I MEAN, THIS IS MY QUESTION TO STAFF, ALL STAFF SITTING THERE. YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK WHAT I JUST HEARD FROM Y'ALL IS THAT WITHOUT THAT ENVIRONMENTAL INPUT AND THAT DATA, IT'S NOT MUCH [02:05:01] USE COMING TO YOU GUYS TO TALK ABOUT IT. UM, SO I'M HAPPY TO COME BACK AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT AS MUCH AS YOU WANT, BUT UNTIL WE HAVE THAT DATA, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S WHAT YOU, Y'ALL ARE REALLY LOOKING FOR. SO WE NEED TO HAVE THAT PREPARED AND READY TO GO. IT SEEMS LIKE BEFORE YOU ALL WOULD BE INTERESTED IN EVEN IN HEARING BACK FROM US. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? YES, COMMISSIONER BRIMER? YEAH. THANK YOU. I HAVE TWO MORE, UH, BRIEF COMMENTS. FIRST IS, UH, TED EUBANK MENTIONED SEXTON 1 0 6 REPORT. UH, THE, THERE WAS A BRIEF INTRODUCTORY SECTION 1 0 6 REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE DOCUMENTATION, UH, SUBMITTED TO THE APRIL 1ST, UH, HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION REPORT. IT SAID IN PART, REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING BRIDGE WOULD HAVE A, A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON ZOO PARK AND THE LARGER MASS SCALE OF THE BRIDGE AND NEW DESIGN ELEMENTS WOULD NOT BE COMPLIMENTARY TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT'S EXISTING PHYSICAL AESTHETICS AND WOULD IMPACT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT'S IN INTEGRITY OF DESIGN SETTING. PHYSICAL AESTHETICS WOULD IMPACT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT'S INTEGRITY OF DESIGN, SETTING, MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP FEELING AND ASSOCIATION. AS SUCH, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT OPTION WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE N-A-R-H-P LISTED ZILKER PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT. NOW, MY FINAL COMMENT IS THAT I WAS PASSED A NOTE THAT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION IS MEETING AT THE SAME TIME. WE ARE, THEY PASSED A RESOLUTION AGAINST DESTROYING THE BRIDGE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY. OH, YEP. VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL. SO, UM, WE HAVE, I I, WE KINDA HAVE A MOTION TO SET FORWARD TODAY AND, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE ALSO NEED, UM, THE NEPA INFORMATION. AND I, SO THIS IS A QUESTION TO COMMISSIONERS. I MEAN, DO WE WANNA PUT A MOTION FORWARD TODAY THAT REPRESENTS WHAT WE'VE SPOKEN ABOUT TODAY AND THEN HAVE THE NEPA REPORT AND HAVE A SECOND MOTION THAT COMES FORWARD WITH THAT INFORMATION? I'M JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE. OR DO WE WANNA WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE ALL THE RIGHT INFORMATION CHAIR? LET ME INTERJECT A BIT. THIS IS LIZ JOHNSTON, ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER. SO THIS WAS NOT POSTED FOR DISCUSSION IN ACTION. IT'S A BRIEFING. SO, UM, YOU COULD BRING ANOTHER, IF YOU WANTED TO HAVE A MOTION, YOU'D HAVE TO BRING ANOTHER ITEM FORWARD AT A DIFFERENT DATE. THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY. I FIGURED IT MIGHT BE . ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU THAT, THAT IS HELPFUL. ANY OTHER FINAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I ALRIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. I, UM, REAL QUICK, QUICK, I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT, UM, THAT I, THAT WE HAVE HIM COME BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING MM-HMM . UM, IF, IF THAT CAN BE PREPARED BY THEN WE COULD DISCUSS THAT DURING FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS LATER IN THE MEETING. GREAT. GREAT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. WITH THAT, WE WILL GO TO, WELL FIRST ARE FOLKS FEELING LIKE THEY NEED A LITTLE FIVE MINUTE BREAK OR DO WE KEEP GOING? SIX, SIX MINUTE BREAK? WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK? YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT, SO THE TIME IS 8 0 9. LET'S COME BACK HERE AT 8 8 17. LET'S SAY EIGHT 17. IT IS EIGHT 18 AND I'M CALLING THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER. [3. Name: SoLa Mixed Use, SP-2024-0397C ] NEXT, WE'RE GOING TO PUBLIC HEARINGS. ITEM NUMBER THREE, THIS IS THE SOLA MIXED USE SP 20 24 0 3 9 7 C. APPLICANT HANNAH, ER, PE, LJA ENGINEERING INCORPORATED LOCATION TWENTY SEVEN HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT HUNDRED SOUTH LAMAR BOULEVARD, CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE. WE'LL HAVE STAFF PRESENTATION FROM DAVID MICHAEL, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SPECIALIST AUSTIN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND THEN WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. GOOD EVENING. UH, ACTUALLY MY NAME IS MIKE MCDOUGALL. DAVID, MICHAEL WAS NOT AVAILABLE THIS EVENING, SO HE ASKED ME TO FILL IN FOR HIM. UH, MIKE MCDOUGALL, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY PROGRAM MANAGER, AUSTIN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. AND YES, THE PROJECT IS SOLA MIXED USE. IT'S THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. AND THE ADDRESS IS TWENTY SEVEN HUNDRED AND TWENTY EIGHT HUNDRED SOUTH LAMAR. AND IT'S CASE NUMBER SP 2 2 4 0 3 9 7 C. [02:10:01] ALRIGHT, THERE WE GO. OKAY, SO THREE TOPICS, UH, THREE MAIN TOPICS, UH, ON THE PRESENTATION TONIGHT. THE, THE SITE ITSELF, THE CODE, AND THEN THE PROJECT FIRST THE SITE. SO THE PROJECT IS LOCATED ON SOUTH LAMAR, JUST A LITTLE BIT NORTH OF BEN WHITE. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE AND IN THE URBAN WATERSHED CLASSIFICATIONS. SO THE WATERSHED BOUNDARY DOES CROSS THE PROJECT SITE. THE PROPERTY, THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE EDWARDS AFER RECHARGE ZONE, AND THIS IS AN AERIAL IMAGE OF THE PROPERTY. SO IT'S EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, UM, PRETTY, PRETTY SUBSTANTIALLY DEVELOPED, UH, COMMON FOR, FOR THIS PART OF LAMAR. A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE PAST. AND SO TO RECAP, THE PROPERTY IN THE BARTON CREEK WATERSHED AND THE WEST BOULDER CREEK WATERSHED. THE BARTON CREEK WATERSHED IS A BARTON SPRING ZONE CLASSIFICATION WATERSHED. AND THE WEST BOULDER CREEK WATERSHED IS AN URBAN WATERSHED. THE PROPERTY IS IN THE EDWARDS, A RECHARGE ZONE. IT'S IN THE FULL PURPOSE JURISDICTION COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE. AND THE PROPERTY IS ALL UPLANDS. THAT IS, THERE'S NO CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE OR NO WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE ON THE PROPERTY AND THE CODE. SO THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION IN THE CODE THAT IS SECTION LDC, EXCUSE ME, LDC 25 8 AS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AS THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. AND IT ALLOWS REDEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES OR REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY WITH COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE BARN SPRINGS ZONE. AND SO 25 8 26 SUPERSEDES ARTICLE 13 INCLUDING SOS TO THE EXTENT OF THE CONFLICT. AND THERE ARE MANY REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE, WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. BUT IN BRIEF SUMMARY, THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION RESETS THE WATERSHED. IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT EQUALED THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER CURRENTLY ON THE SITE. SO, UH, WHEN APPLICANTS CALL, CALL ME UP AND ASK ME, WHAT IS THIS ABOUT? I BASICALLY SAY, WELL, THE WA THE, IT'S A KEEP WHAT YOU'VE GOT ALLOWANCE IN THE CODE. SO THAT IS, IF A SITE HAD 80% IMPERVIOUS COVER, THEY COULD USE THE REDEVELOPMENT SECTION AND HAVE 80% IMPERVIOUS COVER. AGAIN, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE STANDARD IMPERVIOUS COVER MIGHT BE. SO KEEP WHAT YOU GOT. UM, SO THE REDEVELOP EXCEPTION ALLOWS A DEVELOPER TO REMOVE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER AND BUILD BACK UP TO THE SAME AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. AND TO BE CLEAR, THERE ARE OTHER REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING REGULATIONS THAT PROVIDE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT ASSOCIATED WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. SO WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE EXCEPTION? SO THERE ARE NINE BASIC REQUIREMENTS. NUMBER ONE, CAN'T INCREASE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. THAT IS, WE CAN'T HAVE MORE WITH THE NEW PROJECT THAN IS ON SITE CURRENTLY. MAY INCREASE NON-COMPLIANCE IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE, OR WITHIN CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES. THEY MUST COMPLY, UH, OR THEY MUST PROVIDE AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY. THEY MUST PROVIDE EROSION SEDIMENTATION CONTROL AND THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH PHYSICAL REQUIREMENTS. AND THE WATER QUALITY CONTROLS ON THE REDEVELOPMENT SITE MUST PROVIDE A LEVEL OF WATER QUALITY TREATMENT THAT IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THAT WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED. AND ITEM NUMBER SIX PROVIDES ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS. NUMBER FIVE, THEY MUST ALSO OBTAIN A BARTON SPRINGS ZONE OPERATING PERMIT FOR THE PONDS. NUMBER SIX, IF THE SITE HAS MORE THAN 40% NET SET AREA AND PREVIOUS COVER, THEY HAVE TO HAVE SET SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION PONDS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE, OR SOS PONDS AND SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION PONDS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE. THAT IS, THEY HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST SAID FILL PONDS, OR THEY HAVE A MIX OF SOS PONDS AND SAID, FILL PONDS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE. A SITE WITH 40% OR LESS NECESSARY PREVIOUS COVER MUST HAVE SOS PONDS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE. AND NUMBER EIGHT, THEY MUST MITIGATE THE EFFECTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT IF THE SITE HAS A SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION POND. AND MITIGATION CAN INCLUDE PAYING IT INTO A MITIGATION FUND, TRANSFERRING LAND OR RESTRICTION OR PROVIDING, UH, OR EXCUSE ME, OR RESTRICTING DEVELOPMENT ON LAND. UM, AND THE PROPERTY MAY NOT BE LOCATED IN THE EROSION HAZARD ZONE UNLESS PROTECTIVE WORKS ARE PROVIDED. SO TO SUMMARIZE, UH, THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION DELETES THE GRADING LIMITS IN CONSTRUCTION ON SLOPES LIMITS IN 25 8 SUB CHAPTER A, IT RESETS THE WATERSHED IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT TO BE EQUAL TO THE IMPERVIOUS COVER CURRENTLY ON THE SITE WITH SOME REQUIREMENTS. AND IT PROHIBITS DEVELOPMENT AND DISTURBED AREAS OF THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE OR WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE. CONTINUING ON WITH THE SUMMARIZATION, UH, IT ALSO PROHIBITS THE REDEVELOP EXCEPTION, ALSO PROHIBITS DEVELOPMENT AND UNDERSERVED WETLAND CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FUTURE SETBACKS REQUIRES BARTON SPRING ZONE MITIGATION AND REQUIRES WATER QUALITY PONDS. AND SO THAT BRINGS THE QUESTION, WHY, WHY ARE WE HERE TO DISCUSS THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTIONS? SO WELL, 25 8 26 F OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STIPULATES THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED IF THE REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSES MORE THAN 25 DWELLING UNITS. THIS PROJECT PROPOSES 305 UNITS. SO COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION IN THE BURTON SPRING ZONE IS REQUIRED. AND THEN 25 8 26 G OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STIPULATES THAT CITY COUNCIL SHALL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING FACTORS IN DETERMINING WHETHER TO APPROVE A PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT. NUMBER ONE, BENEFITS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT TO THE COMMUNITY. NUMBER TWO, WHETHER THE PROS MITIGATION OR MANNER DEVELOPMENT OFFSETS THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT. [02:15:01] NUMBER THREE, THE EFFECTS OF OFFSITE INFRASTRUCTURE, REQUIREMENTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT. AND NUMBER FOUR, COMPATIBILITY WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND SO THE PROJECT ITSELF, EXISTING CONDITIONS, THE SITE HAS APPROXIMATELY, EXCUSE ME, THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 4.67 ACRES IN SIZE. THE, UM, THE PROJECT WILL CONSIST OF MIXED USE, MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL. THE PROJECT REDUCES THE IMPERVIOUS COVER FROM 3.8, EXCUSE ME, THAT SHOULD BE 3.8 ACRES, NOT SQUARE FEET. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. 3.8 ACRES TO 3.4 ACRES. UM, AND SO THE BOUND EXCEPTION MAY NOT INCREASE THE EXISTING AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER ON THIS SIDE. THE PROJECT DOES COMPLY. THE PROJECT WILL REDUCE IMPERVIOUS COVER FROM 3.8 ACRES TO 3.4 ACRES OF IMPERVIOUS COVER. THE REVEAL EXCEPTION MAY NOT INCREASE NON-COMPLIANCE WITH CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE RESTRICTIONS OR CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES OR WATER QUALITY TRANSITION ZONE REQUIREMENTS. THERE ARE NO CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES, CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONES OR WATER QUALITY TRANSITIONS ZONE ON THE PROPERTY. SO THE SECOND REQUIREMENT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION IS NOT APPLICABLE. UM, THE REDEVELOPMENT MUST COMPLY WITH 25 81 21 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY REQUIREMENTS. THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE EROSION, MENTATION CONTROL AND FISCAL SURETY IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. THE PROJECT DOES COMPLY WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. EROSION MENTATION CONTROL IS PROPOSED IN COMPLIANCE CODE AND CRITERIA, AND A FISCAL POSTING IS REQUIRED, UH, FOR THE SITE OR PRIOR TO SITE PLAN PERMIT ISSUANCE. UM, NUMBER FOUR, THE FOURTH REQUIREMENT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. THE WATER QUALITY CONTROLS ON THE REDEVELOPMENT SITE MUST PROVIDE A LEVEL OF WATER QUALITY TREATMENT THAT IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN THAT WHICH WAS PREVIOUS PROVIDED. YES, WATER QUALITY IS PROVIDED PER CURRENT CODE NUMBER FIVE FOR A COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY REDEVELOPMENT. THE OWNER OR OPERATOR MUST OBTAIN A PERMIT UNDER LDC 25 8 2 33 FOR BOTH SFI PONDS AND OS BONDS. THIS, THE PROJECT DOES COMPLY WITH THIS AND OS OPERATING PERMIT IS A REQUIREMENT OF THE SITE IS A REQUIREMENT PRIOR TO SITE, PRIOR TO SITE PLAN PERMANENT ISSUANCE. AND NUMBER SIX, FOR A SITE WITH MORE THAN 40% NET SET AREA IMP PREVIOUS COVER, THE ULT MUST HAVE SAID FILL PONDS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE, OR AS I SAID PREVIOUSLY, A MIX OF SOS PONDS AND SELF. IT SAID FILL PONDS. THE PROJECT DOES COMPLY WITH THIS. IT HAS MORE THAN 40% NET SET AREA, AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION PONDS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE. NUMBER SEVEN SPEAKS TO IF THE SITE HAS LESS THAN 40% NET SIDE AREA, THEY HAVE TO, THEY'D HAVE TO HAVE SOS PONDS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE. THEY HAVE MORE THAN 40% NET SIDE AREA. SO NUMBER SEVEN IS NOT APPLICABLE. AND NUMBER EIGHT, THE PROPERTY OWNER MUST MITIGATE THE EFFECTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT IF REQUIRED BY AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUBSECTION H OF THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. AND THIS IS THE, UH, BARTON SPRING ZONE MITIGATION FEE, AND IT'S CALCULATED USING ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA MANUAL, UH, TABLE Q4. AND THAT'S, IT'S BASED ON, UH, THE ACREAGE OF, UH, THE IMP PREVIOUS COVER, THE ACREAGE OF THE SITE. AND SO THE CALCULATION LEADS US DOWN TO COMPLIANCE. THE APPLICANT WILL PAY INTO THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE MITIGATION FUND INTO THE AMOUNT OF $534,927 AND 24 CENTS PRIOR TO SITE PLAN PERMIT ISSUANCE. SO THE SITE PLAN WOULD NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL THE APPLICANT PAYS THIS LITTLE OVER HALF A MILLION DOLLAR, UH, MITIGATION FEE. AND NUMBER NINE, REDEVELOPMENT MAY NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN THE EROSION HAZARD ZONE UNLESS PROTECTIVE WORKS ARE PROVIDED AS PRESCRIBED IN THE DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL. THAT IS NOT APPLICABLE. THERE IS NOT AN EROSION HAZARD ZONE ON, ON THE SITE. AND SO THIS BRINGS US TO WHAT THE CODE ASKS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. SO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED IF 30 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSES MORE THAN 25 DWELLING UNITS, WHICH IT DOES. AND CITY COUNCIL REQUESTS A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION. AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS ONLY A VOTE FOR OR AGAINST REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION ON THE PROPERTY. AND HISTORICALLY, CONDITIONS HAVE NOT BEEN APPLICABLE TO THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION REQUEST. UH, WHEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW TEAM BRINGS VARIANCES, OFTENTIMES WILL BRING CONDITIONS, SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF THE VARIANCES. THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WILL ALSO HAVE CONDITIONS WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. THE CONDITIONS ARE TRADITIONALLY NOT PART OF THE, UH, THE DECISION OR THE RECOMMENDATION. UM, AND HERE IS WHAT THE CODE DIRECT CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. SO, NUMBER ONE, THE BENEFITS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT TO THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY. AND SO THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT, UM, WILL INCLUDE, UH, WELL, THE BENEFITS WILL BE THE SITE PLAN WILL HELP FURTHER A NUMBER OF CITY GOALS AND PROVIDE MEANINGFUL COMMUNITY BENEFITS, INCLUDING SUPPORT, UH, OF PUBLIC TRANSIT ALONG A CRITICAL CAT METRO CORRIDOR SUPPORT WALKABILITY ALONG SOUTH LAMAR, UH, PROVIDING, UH, HOUSING UNITS INCLUDING 28 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AND PROVIDING WATER QUALITY TREATMENT. AND THE SECOND CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE PROPOSED MITIGATION OR MANNER DEVELOPMENT OFFSETS THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT. UM, THE SITE HAS APPROXIMATELY 3.8 ACRES OF EXISTING IMPERVIOUS COVER AND NO WATER QUALITY TREATMENT. THE PROJECT PROPOSES TO REDUCE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER TO 3.4 ACRES AND TO PROVIDE SET OF INFILTRATION WATER QUALITY PONDS. UH, THE THIRD [02:20:01] CONSIDERATION FOR COUNCIL IS THE EFFECTS OF OFFSITE INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT. THE, LET'S SEE, THE PROJECT IS EXPECTED TO INCREASE INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS. OFFSITE INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE UPSIZE, WASTEWATER WATER AND STORM SEWER LINES THAT WILL SERVE THIS DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS OTHER FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS. AND THE FOURTH CONSIDERATION IS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO THE, IMA IMAGINE AUSTIN GENERALLY DIRECTS GROWTH TOWARD DESIGNATED CORRIDORS, WHICH SOUTH LAMAR IS AND PRIORITIZES COMPACT AND CONNECTED INFILL GROWTH OVER SPRAWLING LOW DENSITY GRIN FIELD DEVELOPMENT. AND SO THIS SECTION OF SOUTH LAMAR IS A DESIGNATED IMAGINE AUSTIN CORRIDOR. AND THIS SITE PLAN WILL HELP IMPLEMENT THE IMAGINE AUSTIN PLAN. AND WITH THAT, UM, UH, THANK YOU. AND WITH THAT, SO, UH, STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE REDEVELOP EXCEPTION OF THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. AND STAFF RECOMMENDS THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION BASED ON THE REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN LDC 25 8 26. THERE IT IS. AND THEN WITH THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT I THINK HAS A PRESENTATION AS WELL. THANK YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS HANNAH REAMER. I AM WITH LJA ENGINEERING. WE'RE THE CIVIL ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER. UH, THANK YOU MIKE FOR THAT PRESENTATION. I THINK THAT WAS A PERFECT SUMMARY OF WHAT WE'RE PRESENTING TODAY. AND THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME. UM, I, I REALLY DON'T HAVE A LOT TO ADD BEYOND WHAT WAS ALREADY PRESENTED. I DO JUST WANT TO MENTION ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IS RELATED TO THE REQUIREMENT TO ADD WATER QUALITY CONTROL. AND I WANNA NOTE THAT IN EXISTING CONDITIONS, THE SITE HAS NO WATER QUALITY CONTROLS AT ALL. SO WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, THAT 3.8 ACRES OF IMPERVIOUS COVER AND NO WATER QUALITY. AND IN PROPOSED CONDITIONS, WE'RE PROPOSING TO REDUCE THE IMP THE IMPERVIOUS COVER AND ADD THOSE WATER QUALITY CONTROLS IN ADDITION TO A SLEW OF OTHER IMPORTANT THINGS THAT I THINK HELP MEET SOME OF THE OTHER SOPHOMORE COURT OR, UM, GOALS INCLUDING MIXED USE, MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, UH, COMPACTING THAT SPRAWL INTO SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS GOING TO HELP PROVIDE A, A BETTER, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST BETTER PROVISION OF MORE HOUSING IN THAT AREA. IN ADDITION TO A BUNCH OF THINGS THAT YOU DIDN'T SEE ON THE SCREEN INCLUDE LANDSCAPING TREES THAT ARE BEING PLANTED, UM, SIDEWALKS OBVIOUSLY ALONG THAT CORRIDOR. AND I, UH, DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD, BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION. AND IF I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NICOLE. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? YES, CHAIR. WE HAVE SOME SPEAKERS SIGNED UP. OH, IS YOUR MIC ON NICOLE? OH, IS IT? OKAY. OKAY. SORRY. I JUST COULDN'T TELL. UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER IS ROBIN, RATHER ROBIN, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. MY NAME IS ROBIN, RATHER. I LIVE IN D NINE. I'M ON THE EXCOM OF THE ER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A FORMAL POSITION ON THIS PROJECT. UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS TO LIKE ABOUT THIS PROJECT. THEY'RE COMPLYING, UH, WITH THE IMPORTANT CONDITIONS. I JUST WANNA POINT OUT, UM, SOUTH LAMAR IS ONE OF THE DENSEST CORRIDORS IN THE CITY. WE HAVE, WE THINK WE HAVE MORE DENSITY THAN MUELLER. WHAT WE DON'T HAVE IS A LOT OF AFFORDABILITY. AND I NOTICED THAT THIS PROJECT HAS A FEW AFFORDABLE UNITS, BUT REALLY NOT AS MANY AS AS ARE ABSOLUTELY NEEDED. AND SO I KNOW THIS IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT YOU ALL HAVE OFTEN SPOKEN ON THE INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENT AND AFFORDABILITY. AND I JUST WANNA SAY, UM, MY WISH WOULD BE THAT, THAT THE APPLICANT GO AS FAR AS THEY CAN POSSIBLY GO TO PROTECT OUR WATERSHEDS AND TO GO FARTHER IN THE PROVISION OF ACTUALLY AFFORDABLE UNITS IN THIS, WHAT OTHERWISE LOOKS LIKE A GOOD DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BILL BUNCH. BILL, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. YEAH. THANK YOU. UH, BILL BUNCH. AGAIN, LET SAVE OUR SPRINGS ALLIANCE. UM, WE DO APPRECIATE THAT THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. UM, AND WE HAVEN'T CHECKED ALL THOSE, BUT WE, WE, WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S ACCURATE. UM, THAT ORDINANCE WAS A COMPROMISE. [02:25:01] YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT IDEAL. AND WE DO ALSO SORT OF JOIN IN WHAT, UH, ROBIN WAS SUGGESTING THAT YOU NOT JUST COMPLETELY LOOK AT, AT THIS IN ISOLATION. THERE ARE SOME TRAFFIC AND ACCESS ISSUES THAT ARE, UH, OF CONCERN AT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION. UM, THIS IS A MAJOR CORRIDOR WHERE OUR IMAGINE AUSTIN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR THIS KIND OF, UH, MORE INTENSIVE DEVELOPMENT. UM, AND GENERALLY THE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE BEEN VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. UH, WE ARE, THERE'S SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE, UH, BECAUSE JUST NOT TOO FAR DOWN FROM LAMAR, THERE, UH, AN UNDERGROUND GARAGE HIT A SPRING AND IT CAUSED A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH DRAINAGE, UH, ON LAMAR ITSELF. UM, AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S MORE OF A SITE SPECIFIC THING THAT THEY NEED TO BE CAREFUL OF. UH, BUT, UH, WE DO URGE YOU TO, UH, CONSIDER THAT AND MAKE CLEAR THAT IF YOU'RE GONNA ENDORSE THIS, YOU'RE NOT, UH, SETTING ASIDE IN ANY WAY THOSE OTHER IMPORTANT CONCERNS THAT ARE NOT CAPTURED BY THE REDEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS WORTHY, ETTE WORTHY. YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. HOLD IT DOWN. OKAY. UM, UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AND GEN LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. UM, I RISE UP, UH, JUST TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS. UM, I DO APPRECIATE AT A VERY MICROSCOPIC LEVEL THE ATTENTION TO DETAIL ON THE WATER QUALITY. I APPRECIATE ALL THAT WORK. I WANT TO RAISE THIS OUT TO A MACRO, UM, TALK ABOUT HOW THIS WILL IMPACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR. UM, BARTON SKYWAY AND LAMAR IS A MAJOR CORRIDOR. THEY'RE LOOKING AT 700 CARS. THEY'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING IN WHERE THEY EXIT INTO SIDE STREETS. UM, TO GO ONTO THAT, RIGHT NOW, THAT INTERSECTION IS ALL IN THE NAME OF, WITH THE NAME OF WALKABILITY AND MOBILITY. ADDING 700 CARS IN AN INTERSECTION THAT ALREADY TAKES 10, 15 MINUTES TO WALK THROUGH IS NOT, OR TO DRIVE THROUGH, IS NOT GONNA MAKE IT ANY SAFER. UM, WE'VE ASKED VERY NICELY AND PROPOSED A-A-T-I-A TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. WE ASKED THEM TO DO THIS. THIS CORRIDOR IS IMPORTANT FOR US BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF OUR MAJOR EXITS FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IN BARTON HILLS TO EXIT IN CASE OF A FIRE. MOST OF THE TAP THAT THEY KEEP TALKING ABOUT FROM THE A FD IS, UM, BRODY YOS, WHICH IS RIGHT THROUGH THIS INTERSECTION. AND IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC OR NOT PLANNING FOR LACK OF TRAFFIC, IF IT DOES INCREASE, THAT CAN MEAN LIVES. AND I'M HOPING THAT, UH, THAT THIS INCREASED DESERTIFICATION COMES WITH, UM, PLANNING FOR THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC THAT IS GOING ON IN THAT CORRIDOR. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS CHAIR. THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. GREAT. WITH THAT, WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS, AND I'LL START THIS TIME WITH COMMISSIONER BRIMER. I'M CAUGHT BY SURPRISE. I, SO, UH, DAVID, YOU SAID TRADITIONALLY, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NOT, YOU KNOW, PUT IN HERE. THAT MEAN ALWAYS OR DOES IT MEAN, I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THE WORD TRADITIONAL? UH, MIKE MCDOUGALL, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY PROGRAM MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. UH, SO WELL I HAVE NEVER SEEN RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, TO COUNCIL FOR REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION INCLUDE CONDITIONS. UH, LIZ JOHNSON, UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, SO, YOU KNOW, CITY STAFF LOOK AT THESE AND BRING THE, THE PRESENT, THE, THE APPLICATION FORWARD IF IT MEETS CODE, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT Y'ALL CAN'T HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS, ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE ITEMS THAT, UH, THE CODE SAYS COUNCIL SHOULD, UM, CONSIDER. AND THOSE WERE IN HIS POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, BUT, YOU KNOW, DOES IT, DOES THE, UH, DO YOU FIND THAT IT, THE, THE COMMUNITY BENEFITS ARE, UH, GOOD ENOUGH FOR TO RECOMMEND COUNCIL? OR DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? YOU KNOW, ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD SAY NEED TO BE ADDED TO MITIGATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? SO, YOU KNOW, SO THOSE THREE ITEMS, UM, THAT'S UP, THAT'S UP TO YOU IF YOU HAVE ANY [02:30:01] ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS. OKAY. I ASKED BECAUSE THE WAY IT, WELL, THE WAY THE BACKUP MATERIAL READ TO ME ANYWAY, IT WAS LIKE A BINARY DECISION, YES OR NO. AND, AND THEN HE SAID, WELL, TRADITIONALLY, AND THAT SEEMED TO LEAVE A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM THERE FOR THE WAY WE DO THINGS WHERE WE SAY YES OR NO, BUT MAYBE, RIGHT. I, I I DON'T THINK IT'S A JUST STRAIGHT UP AND DOWN VOTE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WHAT WE WERE DOING THERE. WHAT'S THE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY? A COMBINATION OF MF SIX AND DB 90 ON AN MRM, UH, GRMU. OKAY. ALRIGHT. AND WE'RE DOWNSIZING THE IMPERVIOUS COVER BY HALF AN ACRE? YES, SIR. SOMETHING THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. UH, THE UNDERGROUND PARKING, IS THAT, WHERE IS THAT RELATIVE TO THIS PROPERTY? I AM GOING TO NEED TO ASK THE ENGINEER TO SPEAK TO THAT. YEAH. DID YOU HAVE A SLIDE? COULD YOU COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE FOR FOLKS ONLINE? WAS THERE A, I THINK THERE WAS A SLIDE JUST, AND THEN IF YOU CAN ALSO INTRODUCE YOURSELF JUST FOR THE AUDIO RECORD. I'M HANNAH REAMER WITH LJA ENGINEERING. OH, NO, THANK YOU. OKAY, LET'S SEE IF WE CAN FIND IT. OH, IT'S GOING BACKWARDS. OKAY. SORRY, Y'ALL, THERE WAS A SLIDE. OKAY, THERE WE GO. SO IF YOU LOOK HERE AT THE, BASICALLY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCREEN, THERE'S SOME PARKING STALLS THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT REPRESENTS WHERE THE PARKING GARAGE IS LOCATED. AND THAT'S GONNA BE UNDERGROUND PARKING. I BELIEVE THIS ONLY GOES DOWN ONE LEVEL, SO IT IS UNDERGROUND FOR A PORTION, AND THEN THE REST WILL BE ABOVE GRADE AND WRAPPED BY THE REST OF THE MULTIFAMILY. OKAY. SO WHAT'S THE GEOLOGY THERE? I MEAN, THERE WAS A REFERENCE TO ONE OF THE, UH, PUBLIC SPEAKERS MADE A REFERENCE TO, UH, HITTING A SPRING THERE. UH, CAN YOU EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THAT DISCUSSION IS ABOUT? I THINK THAT REFERENCE WAS TO ANOTHER PROJECT ENTIRELY. OKAY. SO HAS ANYONE DONE ANY DRILLING THERE OR ANYTHING TO DISCOVER THE RISK OF, UH, HITTING A SIMILAR SPRING OR A VOID OR ANY OTHER GEOLOGICAL ODDITIES THAT MIGHT COME UP OTHER THAN JUST THERE'S ROCK THERE? UH, YES, THERE'S A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT THAT IS DONE PRIOR TO THE STRUCTURAL PLANS BEING DEVELOPED. AND SO THAT'S REFERENCED AS THE STRUCTURAL IS, IS, UM, DEVELOPED AS THE STRUCTURAL PLANS ARE WORKED, WORKED ON FOR THE BUILDING. WE DID NOT DO THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT OR THE STRUCTURAL PLANS THOUGH. OKAY. BUT THERE'S NO, RIGHT NOW ANY GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS AT THAT PARTICULAR SPOT? NO, THERE'S NOTHING FOUND. ARE YOU GONNA COME BACK BEFORE US IF YOU NEED ANY VARIANCES OR IS THIS ONE AND DONE? UH, UNDER THE REDEVELOPMENT SECTION, VARIANCES ACTUALLY DON'T EXIST. SO, UM, IF, UH, SORRY, MIKE MCDOUGLE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. UH, AND SO, UH, THE REDEVELOPMENT SECTION BASICALLY SAYS THAT, UH, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SUBSECTION DO NOT APPLY IF AND, AND THE IF ARE THE LIST OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. AND WHEN IT SAYS THIS SUBSECTION DOES NOT APPLY, IT'S REFERRING TO 25 8 SUBSECTION A. AND SO WHAT THE REDEVELOPMENT SECTION DOES IS IT DELETES LDC 25 8 SUB CHAPTER A OR SUBSECTION A AND REPLACES THOSE REQUIREMENTS WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ITSELF. SO THAT'S HOW IT DELETES THE WATERSHED IMPERVIOUS COVER AND REPLACES THE WATERSHED IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT WITH THE LIMIT OF WHAT'S ON SITE ALREADY. AND WHEN IT DELETES SUB CHAPTER, A 25 8 41 IS WHERE THE VARIANCES LIVE IN CODE. AND THAT'S IN SUB CHAPTER A. SO A PERSON COULD NOT DO THE UPSHOT TO GET TO THE POINT, A PERSON COULD NOT ASK FOR A VARIANCE AND THE REDEVELOPMENT SECTION AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T EXIST UNDER THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. OKAY. WELL, THE REASON I'M ASKING IS THAT, UM, I UNDERSTAND ABOUT WHAT YOU JUST SAID EXCEPT FOR, I'M ASKING REALLY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE, UH, UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE AND WHETHER OR NOT, UH, IF DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARKING GARAGE, WHICH IS UNDERGROUND, IF THERE'S ANY THINGS THAT ARE DISCOVERED WHEN YOU'RE DIGGING A HOLE IN THE GROUND YES. THAT YOU FIND AN ISSUE WITH THE HOLE YOU'VE DUG AND THAT CREATES UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD NORMALLY REQUIRE YOU TO COME BACK HERE AND SAY, WELL, WE NEED A VARIANCE. 'CAUSE WE FOUND A, SOMETHING WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, UM, AT MIKE MCDOUGALL ENVIRONMENTAL [02:35:01] REVIEW? UM, SO WHEN THE REDEVELOPMENT SECTION DELETES 25 A SUB CHAPTER A AND REPLACES ITS OWN SET OF REQUIREMENTS, ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IS NO INCREASE IN NONCOMPLIANCE WITH CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE REQUIREMENTS. AND SO IF SOMEBODY DISCOVERED A VOID OR, OR A RECHARGE FEATURE DURING THE CONSTRUCTION, AND THEY, IF THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE AND THEY WANT TO BUILD ON THAT, THEN IT WOULD BE A QUESTION OF DOES THAT CONSTRUCTION REPRESENT AN INCREASE IN NON-COMPLIANCE? AND SO AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE THE, THE, THAT THAT BASIC, UH, ALMOST SLANG OF KEEP WHAT YOU'VE GOT CONCEPT COMES INTO PLAY. SO IF SOMEBODY HAD DEVELOPMENT IN THE CRITICAL, THEY COULD POSSIBLY REMOVE AND REPLACE IT IN THAT SAME AREA, IN THE CRITICAL WATER QUALITY ZONE OR WITHIN CEF. SO, SO THAT IS THE IMPACT COULD NOT INCREASE. AND SO IF THEY DISCOVERED, UH, A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE DURING CONSTRUCTION, IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO DETERMINE, AND THIS WOULDN'T BE DONE BY MY TEAM, IT'D BE DONE BY A TEAM THAT REPORTS TO LIZ JOHNSTON. BUT IT, IT WOULD BE THE TEAM'S TASK TO EVALUATE IS DOES THIS PRO PROPOSE CONSTRUCTION REPRESENT AN INCREASE IN NON-COMPLIANCE TO CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE PROTECTIONS? AND SO IF IT DID, THEN IT WOULD NO LONGER MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION BECAUSE THAT IS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS. AND SO THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD BE TASKED WITH SEEKING POSSIBLY AN ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE OR LAND USE COMMISSION VARIANCE 'CAUSE THEY'RE OUT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION PROCESS TO THAT CF REQUIREMENT. THE PROBLEM WITH THAT THOUGH IS THAT THEY WOULD BE WAY OVER THE BARTON SPRING ZONE WATERSHED PREVIOUS COVER LIMIT UNDER TYPICAL CODE. SO IF THEY ENCOUNTER ENCOUNTERED A CEF AND COULD NOT BE PART OF THE REDEVELOP EXCEPTION, THEN THEY'D HAVE TO REDUCE THE IMPERVIOUS COVER TO THE BARTON SPRING ZONE LIMITS. AND SO OF COURSE THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE AN SOS AMENDMENT. SO IT WOULD, UM, IT WOULD, IT WOULD, UH, SNOWBALL ESSENTIALLY IF THEY FOUND A-A-C-E-F, IT'D BE A SNAKE PIT. IT IT, YES SIR. YES. OKAY. SO YOU, YOU'RE BASICALLY COUNTING ON, THERE'S NOTHING UNDER THAT, BUT ROCK SOLID ROCK. WELL, LET'S SAY THE ENGINEER'S COUNTING ON IT, BUT YES SIR. WELL, YEAH, WHATEVER. OKAY. UH, BUT IF IT REQUIRED A SOS VARIANCE, THEN I WOULD CHARACTER, OH YES SIR. EXCEPTION OR WHATEVER THE SPECIFIC TERM IS YOU'D SHOW UP HERE AT SOME POINT I WOULD SHOW UP HERE AND IT WOULD ALWAYS, IT WOULD GO HERE AND IT WOULD GO TO COUNCIL AND I WOULD CHARACTERIZE AN IMPERVIOUS COVER SOS AMENDMENT AS EXTREMELY UNLIKELY. UH, I, I, I THINK I'VE SEEN ONE IMPERVIOUS COVER VARIANCE EVER GO THROUGH, AND THAT WAS IN THIS WATER SPLICE OF BOURBON WATERSHED. IT'D BE VERY, VERY UNLIKELY FOR, FOR THE BARTON SPRING ZONE TO, UH, EXCEED THE WATERSHED IMPERVIOUS COVER LIMIT FOR A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. BUT YES SIR, WE WOULD COME BACK HERE. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IF SOMETHING ON UNFORESEEN HAPPENS THAT IT SHOWS BACK UP HERE THAT WE HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW WHATEVER THE ISSUE IS AND MAKE A, YOU KNOW, JUDGMENT CALL ON WHATEVER IT IS. YES, SIR. THAT SHOWS UP. YES, SIR. OKAY. UH, ALRIGHT. UH, OKAY. UH, YEAH, I HAVE A, YEAH, THERE WAS A THING IN THERE ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE AND ONE OF THE SPEAKERS, UH, ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE POPE BROUGHT THIS UP. UH, YOU'RE GONNA PUT 400 UNITS IN THE AREA WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY. UH, HANNAH RAMIR, THE CIVIL ENGINEER WITH LJA ENGINEERING, UH, THERE ARE ANTICIPATED ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY. THEY DON'T EXCEED THE LIMITATIONS FOR THE TIA FOR THIS AREA. THE, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A TIA WITH THE SITE PLAN APPLICATION, WE SUBMITTED THE A DETERMINATION, UH, FORM AND WENT THROUGH ALL OF THAT WITH, UH, WELL IT WAS 2000 I IS WHAT IT SAID ON THE, ON THE THING. AND I GUESS MY, I'M TRYING TO GET TO, IT'S LIKE 400 UNITS AND YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE 2000 VEHICLE TRIPS A DAY. I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT, THAT'S CORRECT. SEEMS ODD TO ME, BUT YEAH. OKAY. UH, HOW FAR IS THE NEAREST, UH, METRO STOP TO THIS? THERE'S A BUS STOP RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE PROJECT. IT'S, UM, RIGHT THERE KIND OF AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER IN PLANVIEW. ON, ON THE SCREEN? YEAH. OKAY. UM, LET'S SEE HERE. THE, UH, THIS CHANGE, DOES IT REQUIRE SUPER MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL OR JUST A MAJORITY? LIZ JOHNSTON ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER? THIS IS A, A MAJORITY NOT, NOT SUPER MAJORITY. OKAY. UM, ALRIGHT. UH, NOW THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE SOME FOURPLEXES OR SOMETHING TORN DOWN BEHIND THERE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. MIKE MCDOUGALL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. YEAH. AND ARE THOSE, UH, AFFORDABLE [02:40:01] HOUSING OR HOW ARE THOSE CAT CATEGORIZED? I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. DO YOU? I DON'T HAVE THAT. I, I DO NOT KNOW THAT INFORMATION. OKAY. I CAN FIND THAT OUT, BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT IN BE LIKE THAT. OKAY. AND THEN ALSO MY, I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION IS, UH, IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME THAT THERE'S A NUMBER OF TREES THAT ARE, BE, BEGIN, TAKEN DOWN FROM ALL THAT. DOES. ARE ANY HERITAGE TREES PART OF THAT? UH, MIKE OODLE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW? UH, THERE ARE NO HERITAGE TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED BASED ON THE ENGINEER'S CALCULATIONS. OKAY. THERE ARE TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED, BUT NO HERITAGE TREES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. VERY GOOD. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOLKS. APPRECIATE IT. YOU DID A GOOD JOB ON YOUR PRESENTATIONS. THANK YOU, SIR. I APPRECIATE THAT. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. YEAH. SO LIKE WITH YOUR WATER QUALITY PONDS, IS IT ONLY GONNA COLLECT RAIN WATER FROM YOUR PROPERTY OR COULD IT ALSO COLLECT WATER FROM OTHER PROPERTIES ALONG SOUTH LAMAR? THANK YOU. IS IT PUSHED HANNAH REAMER WITH LJA ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER? UH, THE WATER QUALITY POND IS PROPOSED TO CAPTURE ONSITE RAINWATER. RIGHT, BUT ONLY FOR YOUR PRO PROPERTY COLLECT ONLY FOR THIS PROPERTY. IT WON'T COLLECT OFFSITE RAINWATER. OKAY. UM, AND THEN HOW IS THAT WATER, WHAT THAT WATER TREATED BEFORE RELEASE? WE ARE PROPOSING A SEDIMENTATION FILTRATION POND. IT'S GOING TO BE A UNDERGROUND POND. IT'S LOCATED AT THE, UH, IN THIS PLANNED VIEW. IT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SCREEN AND IT WILL TREAT AND RELEASE THE WATER TOWARDS THE EXISTING OUTFALL LOCATION. OKAY. THANK YOU. GO COMMISSIONER MORRISON. NO QUESTIONS FROM ME. THANK YOU SO MUCH. COMMISSIONER LUKI. I'M CURIOUS HOW MANY TREES ARE GONNA BE REMOVED. MIKE MCDOUGAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. UH, SO ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEER'S CALCULATIONS, UM, THERE ARE GOING TO BE 338 INCHES OF APPENDIX F TREES REMOVED, 218 INCHES OF NON APPENDIX F REMOVED AND 70 INCHES OF INVASIVE. THE TOTAL OF THAT IS 626 INCHES OF TREES REMOVED AND THE APPLICANT IS SHOWING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PROVIDE 255 INCHES OF MITIGATION PLANTING ON SITE. UM, I NOTICED THERE'S A MITIGATION FEE OF $534,000. WHAT IS THAT REGARDING? UH, NOT EXACTLY, NO, SIR. UH, MIKE MCDOUGALL IN NORTHVIEW , THE, IN THE, UH, IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE AND A FEW OTHER WATERSHEDS. WHEN AN APPLICANT WANTS TO USE THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION, UH, THERE IS A MITIGATION FEE TO, UH, UH, TO OFFSET THE IMPACT OF THE WATER QUALITY OF THAT IMPERVIOUS COVER. UH, SO THE, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER IS GOING DOWN A LITTLE BIT AND THERE WILL BE WATER QUALITY PONDS, BUT THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION PER CODE ALSO REQUIRES, UH, THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE, UH, LAND RESTRICT, MITIGATE, RESTRICT DEVELOPMENT ELSEWHERE OR PAY INTO A FUND. AND THAT'S TO OFFSET THE WATER QUALITY IMPACTS OF THE IMPERVIOUS COVER. IT'S KIND OF A COMPLICATED CALCULATION. UM, BUT UH, IT'S BASED ON THE NET SIDE AREA, EXCUSE ME, THE GROSS SIDE AREA OF THE PROPERTY. UH, THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER PROPOSED TO BE BUILT AND IT'S BASED ON ABOUT $51,000 PER ACRE OF, UH, OF, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER. AND SO WHEN YOU RUN ALL THOSE NUMBERS TOGETHER, IT'S $534,000 IN SOME CHANGE, UH, FOR, UH, THE WATER QUALITY MITIGATION OFFSET FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. AND YEAH. THANKS MIKE. AND TO ADD ONTO THAT, SO THAT MONEY GOES TO WATERSHED PROTECTION AND WE USE IT TO, UM, PURCHASE LAND IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE, UM, TO HELP, UM, PROTECT LAND THAT HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED FROM DEVELOPMENT. GREAT. UM, UH, I SAW THAT THERE WERE 305 HOUSING UNITS, OR IS THAT CORRECT? 'CAUSE COMMISSIONER BRIER WAS SAYING 400, UH, HANNAH, FAMILIAR WITH LJA ENGINEERING, THE, I THINK 305 IS THE AMOUNT IN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. WE ARE ON A WATERSHED DIVIDE. THE TOTAL IS 399 UNITS WITH 28 AFFORDABLE. GOTCHA. HOW DID YOU ARRIVE AT THE 28 AFFORDABLE? THE A THE DEVELOPER ELECTED TO PROVIDE 28 AFFORDABLE UNITS. THERE IS A DB 90 ZONING COMPONENT TO THIS THAT REQUIRES FOUR AFFORDABLE UNITS AND THEY'RE PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL 24. UM, DO YOU KNOW IF THOSE ARE TWO BEDROOM, THREE BEDROOM, ANY IDEA HOW YEAH, IT'S, IT'S REGARD TO BE A, OH, I'M SORRY, HANNAH REAMER, THE LJ ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEER. UH, IT'S REQUIRED TO BE A MIX BASED ON THE MIX OF AFFORDABLE NEEDS TO APPROXIMATELY MATCH THE MIX OF, UM, NON AFFORDABLE UNITS. SO IT'S A COMBO OF STUDIO ONE BEDROOM, TWO BEDROOM TO MATCH THE NON AFFORDABLE, BUT NO THREE BEDROOM. [02:45:01] THERE MIGHT BE THREE BEDROOM. I NEED TO VERIFY THAT I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME. I MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN THAT, THAT INFORMATION. UH, I'M, I'M A MEMBER OF THE MILLER COMMISSION. SOME PEOPLE SAY MUELLER, I SAY MILLER. UM, POTATO. POTATO. UH, OUR GOAL THERE IN, UH, WITH OUR COMMISSION IS 25% AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, UH, AS A, A, A GOAL FOR ACTUALLY REACHING WHAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN NEEDS. BOY, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT NUMBER IN EVERY PROJECT. I, I, I HEAR THAT YOU SAY YOU ONLY WERE REQUIRED TO DO FOUR AND YOU ADDED 24 MORE. THAT'S FANTASTIC. MULTIPLIED BY SIX, I GUESS. UH, UH, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S REALLY FALLEN SHORT, UM, AS FAR AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING GOES. UH, THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER FLURRY. YEAH. UM, I GUESS, I GUESS I'LL BUILD OFF, UH, UM, COMMISSIONER'S PREVIOUS COMMENTS AND LOOKING AT THE, WHERE OUR COMMENTS SHOULD FALL IN BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY. AND SO YES, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS SEEM JUST STRIKINGLY LOW, CLEARLY LESS THAN 10%. WHY NOT 25%? SO, UM, JU JUST ADDED BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY. UM, I'M CURIOUS IF YOU'VE GONE INTO THE DESIGN OF THE STREETSCAPE, WHAT DOES THE SIDEWALK LOOK LIKE? HOW MUCH BUFFER IS BETWEEN SOUTH LAMAR AND WHERE IS THAT HALF ACRE, UH, THAT WE'RE GAINING IN PERVIOUS COVER? UH, HANNAH REAMER, LJA ENGINEERING, THE STREET SCAPE INCLUDES A BIKE LANE AND A SIDEWALK. THEY'RE GOING TO BE SEPARATED FROM THE CURB ALONG SOUTH LAMAR, AND THEY'RE, UM, SEPARATE FOR THE MOST PART, THEY'RE SEPARATE LANES, UH, TO HELP PREVENT BIKES AND PEDESTRIANS FROM INTERMINGLING. AND THE HALF AN ACRE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER THAT'S COMING BACK OR HALF AN ACRE OF PERVIS COVER THAT'S BEING RETURNED, IT'S GOING TO BE OPEN SPACE. UM, JUST SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THIS, THIS PROJECT. SO IT'S SCATTERED. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY, THERE'S A COUPLE OF, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT THE BUILDING AND THEN ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF THAT IT'S LANDSCAPE AREAS. YEAH, YEAH. THAT KIND OF THING. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS HOPING TO HEAR WHAT YOU SAID, BECAUSE THAT SIDEWALK IS MUCH REMOVED FROM SOUTH LAMAR AND IT IS JUST A BETTER, SAFER EXPERIENCE AND SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO MATCH THAT. YES. WE'RE I, I WILL NEED TO DOUBLE CHECK THE PLANS. I'M SORRY THAT I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER IN FRONT OF ME. YEAH, BUT IT'S PULLED OFF THE STREET, IF I REMEMBER. I THINK IT'S FOUR FEET OFF THE BACK OF CURB. OKAY. UM, I AM, I'M CURIOUS, UH, LOOKING AT, I I, IF Y'ALL LOOK AT THE CONNECTIVITY BEYOND THE SITE, WHAT, WHAT STANDS OUT TO ME THINKING IF I WANTED TO LIVE THERE, THAT THE BARTON CREEK GREENBELT ISN'T TOO FAR AWAY AND IT DOES LOOK LIKE THERE'S AN INFORMAL ACCESS POINT. I DON'T KNOW IF CITY OF AUSTIN PROMOTES IT OFF THE NEIGHBORHOOD STREET. HOW'D THAT STAY? RAYDELL AVENUE. UM, AND I'D BE CURIOUS IF THAT MITIGATION FUND COULD IMPROVE YOU, YOU KNOW, FOLKS LIVING HERE, UH, A SAFER, LESS INFORMAL, SO IT'S NOT LIKE A SOCIAL TRAIL ACCESS. UM, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. THE MITIGATION FUND IS REALLY SPECIFIC FOR PURCHASING LAND. YEAH, YEAH. IS, WOULD IT BE IN THE PURVIEW OF ONE OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS TO, FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT TO EXPLORE ENHANCING THAT CONNECTION FOR THE LARGER, YOU KNOW, REGION, UH, AS YOU WISH? YEAH. UM, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE TO ME A CLEAR BENEFIT TO THE OTHER MULTI-USE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE GOING IN THAT IT'S SUCH AN AWESOME EXPERIENCE TO GET ON THAT GREEN BELT. SO LET'S LEAN INTO THAT. UM, WE'VE OVER, I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. CH I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR RIGHT NOW. THANKS, COMMISSIONER. MORTA ORES. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. THANK YOU. SECRETARY KURESHI. HEY, Y'ALL APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION. UM, YEAH, SO FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IT'S 2,700 SOUTH LAMAR, 28, UH, HUNDRED SOUTH LAMAR. SO THE WHOLE PROJECT WOULD SORT OF EXTEND, LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW ABOUT FROM DIXON DRIVE TO LIKE RIGHT BEFORE BARTON SKYWAY, IS THAT CORRECT? SO LIKE WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW? PROPERTIES, I GUESS? YEAH, ANNA REMER, LJA ENGINEERING CURRENTLY IT, WELL, PREVIOUSLY THERE WAS A GOODWILL BUILDING, A VARIETY OF OFFICE, UM, YEAH, OFFICE BUILDINGS, UH, THE FOURPLEXES THAT WERE MENTIONED AND A RESTAURANT DOWN THERE AT, UH, DIXON DRIVE. MM-HMM . IT USED TO BE THE GODO DONUTS. I, IT'S NOT RIGHT NOW, BUT, UM, THOSE ARE THE EXISTING USES. [02:50:01] THE, SOME OF THOSE HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEMOLISHED THROUGH THEIR OWN DEMOLITION APPLICATIONS. AND, UH, HOW TALL IS THE, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT? HENRY MUR, LJ ENGINEERING, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT? IT GOES UP TO 90 FEET. I GUESS I SHOULD SAID THIS BECAUSE I'M A A DUMB LAY PERSON, SO I THINK IN TERMS OF LIKE WINDOWS, SO LIKE HOW MANY FLOORS? I DON'T KNOW WHY I YELLED WINDOWS LIKE THAT EITHER. , IT'S NINE FLOORS. UH, I, I'M SORRY, I I BELIEVE IT IS SIX FLOORS AND I CAN VERIFY THAT. OKAY, GOTCHA. UM, YEAH. AND THEN YOU SAID PARKING WOULD BE UNDERGROUND FOR THIS? THERE'S ONE LEVEL OF UNDERGROUND AND THEN THE REST IS ABOVE GROUND. I'M ASSUMING Y'ALL ARE PLANNING TO HAVE LIKE ELECTRICAL, UH, PARKING SPOTS OR, YOU KNOW, SORT OF ELECTRICAL CHARGING SPOTS. THAT'S NOT PART OF THE, NOT ANTICIPATED IN THE SITE PLAN. I THINK THAT WOULD COME IN WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT. GOTCHA. UM, YEAH, THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. APPRECIATE IT. MR. BRISTOL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. WHAT IS THE CLOSEST PARK TO THIS, UM, LOCATION HERE? I'M LOOKING ON THE MAP AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S QUITE FAR TO KIND OF GET TO ANY REAL GREEN SPACE UNLESS YOU HOP ACROSS THE LAMAR, IS THAT RIGHT? MIKE MCDOUGAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW? I, I BELIEVE THE CLOSEST GREEN SPACE WOULD BE THE BARTON CREEK GREEN BELT. UM, I, I CAN DO SOME RESEARCH, UH, IF YOU WANNA ASK OTHER QUESTIONS, UH, CHECK ON THE COMPUTER, BUT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, . YEAH, THE REASON I'M ASKING IS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS DREAM, UM, THAT ALL, UM, CITIZENS, UH, OR RESIDENTS, UM, WOULD BE WITHIN, YOU KNOW, A, WHAT IS IT, A QUARTER OF A MILE OR HALF A MILE WALKING DISTANCE FROM A PARK. THIS ONE SEEMS A LOT FURTHER, AND I BRING THAT UP BECAUSE THIS IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IT DOES OFFER AFFORDABLE HOUSING. UM, AND, AND WHAT IT ALSO SOUNDS LIKE IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S GEARED TOWARDS MAYBE, UH, TOWARDS FAMILIES. IS, DOES THIS PROJECT, IS THAT SOMETHING, UH, THAT Y'ALL THINK ABOUT THAT IT WOULD BE GEARED TOWARDS FAMILIES? HENRY? SORRY, MIKE, I'M ASKING YOU TWO THINGS AT ONCE, , WOULD YOU MIND REPEATING THE QUESTION YOU SAID IS, WOULD IT BE GEARED TOWARDS FAMILIES? YEAH. IS THIS PROJECT KIND OF GEARED TOWARDS FAMILIES OR IS IT MOSTLY TOWARDS INDIVIDUALS? UH, THERE'S A VARIETY OF UNIT MIXES, SO I, YOU KNOW, IT'S IN, IN THE RANGE OF PEOPLE FROM INDIVIDUALS WANTING TO LIVE IN STUDIO ONE BEDROOM TO ANYBODY WHO MAY WANT TO LIVE IN THREE BEDROOM. UH, THERE'S STUDIO ONE BEDROOM, TWO BEDROOM, AND THREE BEDROOM UNITS PROPOSED. OKAY. OKAY. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I, UM, I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE GONNA MEET THAT GOAL, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT THE WALKABILITY, UM, OF THIS PROJECT. UM, WHEN, UM, YOU WERE ASKING EARLIER IF THERE'S WHAT TREES WOULD BE REMOVED, BUT YOU ALSO MENTIONED THAT YOU'D BE PLANTING TREES. UM, HOW MANY TREES ARE Y'ALL PLANNING ON? WHAT'S THE INCREASE THERE? WHAT WAS THAT NUMBER? 2 55? MIKE, MIKE MCDOUGLE AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW? UM, THERE WAS THE, UH, CALCULATION, SO 255, UH, INCHES OF MITIGATION REQUIRED, EXCUSE ME, 200, 2 55 INCHES OF MITIGATION REQUIRED, 266 INCHES OF MITIGATION PLANTED. UM, TYPICALLY TREES PLANTED, UH, WELL, THEY HAVE A MINIMUM DIAMETER USUALLY OF, OF AN INCH AND A HALF. UH, AN APPLICANT CAN CHOOSE TO UPSIZE THEM, BUT AS FAR AS THE QUANTITY, I'D HAVE TO DEFER TO THE ENGINEER, UM, I DID, UH, LOOK IN GIS QUICKLY LOOKS LIKE, UH, THE, AS THE CROW FLIES, UH, THE BARTON CREEK GREEN BELT IS ABOUT 2200 FEET TO THE WEST. AND THEN AS THE CROW FLIES, UH, THE CITY OF AUSTIN, SOUTH AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IS ABOUT 3,300 FEET TO THE EAST. UH, TO, TO GET AN ACTUAL DIRECTION THOUGH, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'D BE A LITTLE FURTHER TO THE EASTERN ONE BECAUSE, WELL, JUST FOLLOWING THE ROADS, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'D BE NECESSARY TO GO UP LAMAR, UH, EAST ON RF AND THEN CUT SOUTH. UH, SO THE BART CREEK GREEN BELT WOULD BE THE CLOSEST, BUT, UM, IT IS, YEAH, ABOUT 2200 FEET. UH, IF AS THE CROW FLIES, MIKE, I LOVE IT THAT YOU THINK I CAN DO THE MATH, UM, TO HELP ME BREAK THAT DOWN TO, UH, YARDS AND , BUT HELP ME OUT A LITTLE BIT. UH, SO, UM, ABOUT SEVEN HUNDRED AND TEN, SEVEN HUNDRED FIFTY YARDS TO THE BARTON CREEK GREENBELT AND ABOUT 1100 YARDS AS THE CROW FLIES TO THE SOUTH AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD PARK. [02:55:01] OKAY. SO, UH, ON BOTH ACCOUNTS ABOVE AND BEYOND HALF A MILE ON BOTH THOSE? UH, YES. YES. YEAH. YES. THE CLOSEST IS 2200 FEET, AND THAT'S DIRECT AND THERE'S NO, AND UNLESS SOMEONE'S FLYING, IT'S GONNA BE MORE THAN HALF A MILE. OKAY. UM, SO, UM, I MEAN, I APPRECIATE IT THAT THERE'S A REDUCTION IN IMPERVIOUS COVER, BUT IT DOES SEEM LIKE IT'S, IT'S NOT, UM, AS, AS COMMISSIONER FLURRY WAS ASKING ABOUT EARLIER, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THAT, HOW DOES THAT FLOW THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY? AND IT'S GONNA BE LITTLE POCKETS OR LITTLE CHUNKS HERE AND THERE. UM, IS THERE ANY WAY TO, TO REDUCE THAT PREVIOUS COVER MORE? AND THE REASON I'M ASKING AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE DESIGNING THIS FOR FAMILIES, YOU KNOW, WHERE WHERE DO THE KIDS PLAY? UH, WHAT NATURE DO THEY HAVE CONNECTION WITH IN THIS PROJECT? UH, HANNAH REER, LJ ENGINEERING, UH, YEAH, THE SITE, IF, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT, WE ARE PROPOSING A BUILDING THAT HAS, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S VERY TIGHT AT THIS, THIS SITE WHEN WE HAVE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND THE, UM, DRIVEWAYS ACCESSING THE PARKING, THEN YOU'RE DOWN TO SIDEWALKS, LANDSCAPING TREES, UM, DOG PARK AREA, SOME, A SMALL AMENITY, BUT IT'S, IT IS MINOR. YOU KNOW, I, I WILL AGREE WITH YOU THERE, BUT THE ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION EARLIER ABOUT THE STREET SCAPE, UH, IS THAT THERE ARE SOME TREES. WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH A LICENSE AGREEMENT PROCESS TO ALLOW SOME STREET TREES AND OTHER, UM, AMENITIES OUT ALONG THE FRONT OF SOUTH LAMAR. THANK YOU. YEAH. UM, YOU KNOW, WE CONTINUE TO SORT OF DESIGN THINGS THAT ARE NOT EXACTLY, UM, HUMAN FRIENDLY. THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT GREAT HUMAN HABITATS. UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NICE HABITATS FOR CARS AND THEY'RE KIND OF NICE HABITATS FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND DESIGN, BUT, UM, DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THERE'S A SUPER HUMAN ELEMENT IN THIS ONE. UM, AS FAR AS LIGHTING GOES, ARE Y'ALL PLANNING ON USING DARK SKY LIGHTINGS THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT? YES. GREAT. WHAT ABOUT ANY KIND OF BIRD FRIENDLY DESIGN ELEMENTS? I, THAT WILL BE A BUILDING PERMIT QUESTION, I BELIEVE. UH, SO YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. JUST PLANTING THE SEED, HOPEFULLY. UM, SOMETHING THAT, UM, THAT Y'ALL CAN THINK ABOUT, UM, ON THE MITIGATION, UM, IS THAT, I, I KNOW IT'S A CALCULATION, BUT I, I WONDER, YOU KNOW, UM, HOW DO I WANNA SAY THIS IS A CALCULATION THAT GOES TO A FUND TO PURCHASE NEW LAND, AND, BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IT'S THE, THAT LAND IS ALSO SUPPOSED TO BE CLOSE TO THE PROJECT. IS THAT CORRECT? UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT DEPENDS, BUT NOT, NOT NECESSARILY. IT'S, IT'S, UH, USED WITHIN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. SO IN THE PAST WE'VE COMBINED IT WITH BOND MONEY FOR WATER QUALITY PROTECTION LANDS, FOR EXAMPLE. BUT IT'S, IT'S ANYWHERE WITHIN THE BARTON SPRING ZONE. SO, UM, JUST TO PROTECT THAT WHOLE AREA FROM, UH, YOU KNOW, DEGRADATION FROM DEVELOPMENT. AND IS THERE, I MEAN, IS THERE MUCH LAND LEFT? I MEAN, I'M JUST CURIOUS. UH, I'M PROBABLY NOT THE RIGHT PERSON TO ANSWER THAT SINCE I'M NOT EXACTLY IN THE WEEDS ON, ON THAT. IT'S GETTING, I'VE HEARD IT'S GETTING HARDER AND HARDER TO FIND LAND, BUT I, YOU KNOW, THERE'S STILL SOME PARCELS OUT THERE. YEAH. I WONDER WHAT HALF, HALF A MILLION DOLLARS WOULD, UH, HOW MANY FEET, UH, THAT WOULD BUY IN THE, WE WOULD NEED TO COMBINE IT WITH OTHER MONEY PROBABLY, BUT YEAH. YEAH. EVERY LITTLE BIT HELPS. YEAH. OKAY. IT DOES, IT DOES. BUT SOMETIMES IT SEEMS LIKE A LITTLE BIT, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING. UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. UM, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DON'T DO THINGS LIGHTLY THAT ARE CLOSE TO OR ON TOP OF, UM, YOU KNOW, THE BARTON SPRINGS ZONE. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I DEFINITELY HEAR, UH, OUR CITIZENS' COMMUNICATIONS ON THIS WITH CONCERNS ABOUT INCREASED TRAFFIC FLOW AND, YOU KNOW, UM, AND ALL THE OTHER, UM, THINGS THAT COME WITH, WITH THE LARGE SCALE 400 UNIT, UM, APARTMENT PROJECT. SO THANKS Y'ALL. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE PRESENTATION. MOST OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ASKED AT THIS POINT. I WAS ALSO GOING TO HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT WHILE HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IS NICE, THE NUMBER OF PARCELS OF LAND AVAILABLE THAT WE HAVE TO EXCHANGE FOR THAT ARE, ARE EVER SHRINKING. UM, SO I THINK THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT UTILITY THERE AND, AND BALANCE. [03:00:01] UM, BUT I, I DID WANNA INQUIRE FURTHER ABOUT THE TREES. SO WE'RE LOSING ABOUT 600 INCHES CALIBER INCHES OF TREES, IS THAT RIGHT? ALRIGHT. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND CAN YOU REMIND ME, MAYBE MIKE, UM, OF THE CALCULATION, HOW DO WE GO FROM LOSING 600 INCHES TO THEN JUST GETTING 255 INCHES IN MITIGATION? MIKE MCDOUGAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW? UH, THAT'S, UH, UH, WELL, TO JUMP BACK, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW USED TO DO TREE PRESERVATION AND MITIGATION REVIEW YEARS AGO, BUT THAT IS A MOVE TO THE CITY HARBOR'S REVIEW. SO I'M, I'M RELYING ON 10-YEAR-OLD MEMORY. UM, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, UH, UM, APPENDIX F TREES 90 10 INCHES AND GREATER ARE FULL MITIGATION. IF IT'S, UM, EIGHT TO 18 INCHES, IT'S 50% MITIGATION. AND I THINK IF IT'S NOT APPENDIX FI BELIEVE IT'S 25 AND 20% MITIGATION. UH, BUT, BUT TO, TO GET TO THE POINT, UM, IF A TREE IS AN APPENDIX F TREE, WHICH THE, THE HIGHER VALUE TREE SAY LIKE A CEDAR ELM OR, OR A LIVE OAK, UM, IT, THE MITIGATION RATE CAN BE A HUNDRED PERCENT IF IT'S 19 INCHES OR GREATER, IF IT'S A HERITAGE TREE, IT CAN BE I THINK UP TO 300%. UH, IF IT'S LESS THAN 19 INCHES, IT MIGHT BE 50%. SO, SO THE MITIGATION AMOUNT REQUIRED IS BASED ON THE TREE SPECIES AND THE SIZE OF THE TREES BEING REMOVED. RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. IN THIS CASE, THE MITIGATION IS HAPPENING, HAPPENING COMPLETELY THROUGH DIRECT PLANTING AND NOTHING BEING PAID INTO THE URBAN FOREST MITIGATION FUND. UH, OH, YEAH. YEAH. THANKS. . YES, THAT'S CORRECT THERE. IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, UH, ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEER'S CALCULATIONS, THANK YOU, UH, THAT, UH, THAT ALL THE MITIGATION REQUIREMENT IS BEING ADDRESSED WITH ONSITE PLANTING. OKAY. SO WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE IN ACTUALITY? HOW MANY TREES IS THAT? I THINK SOMEONE MIGHT HAVE ALREADY ASKED THAT AND YOU WEREN'T SURE. UM, BUT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF TREES AND THEN WHERE ON THE MAP THOSE WERE GOING AND, AND THE POTENTIAL TO PROVIDE SHADE FOR PEDESTRIANS OR IF IT'S MORE INTERNALLY PLANTED TO THE PROPERTY. HANNAH REMER CIVIL ENGINEER WITH LJA ENGINEERING, THE EXACT NUMBER OF TREES, I WILL NEED TO VERIFY THAT AND I CAN GET BACK TO YOU. BUT THE LOCATION IS DEFINITELY GEARED TOWARDS MAKING SURE THOSE ARE ALONG THE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY ROUTES, PROVIDING THAT SHADE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. UM, THERE'S A DIVIDE DOWN THE PROJECT WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF PAVEMENT ON THE SITE. THERE'S JUST ONE DRIVE THAT, UM, GOES BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS WHERE THERE'S SIDEWALKS ON EITHER SIDE AND TREES PLANTED ALL THE WAY ALONG AND IT'S A CORRIDOR FOR PEDESTRIAN. UM, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY A ALONG SOUTH OF MAR WE HAVE THE LARGER SIDEWALKS WITH THE SHADE TREES THAT ARE PLANTED THROUGH A LICENSE AGREEMENT PROCESS. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND I'M GONNA MENTION SOMETHING THAT I'VE STARTED MENTION MENTIONING, UH, IN A RECURRING FASHION. JUST WHILE I HAVE YOU IN FRONT OF ME, EVEN IF IT'S JUMPING THE GUN, WANNA ASK FOR DENSE NATIVE PLANTING, NOT JUST ONE BUSH, AND THEN A LONG LINE OF MULCH, AND THEN ANOTHER TINY BUSH AND A LONG LINE OF MULCH. PLEASE DO AS DENSE OF PLANTING AS YOU CAN. UM, AND WITH THE TREES, NO VOLCANO MULCHING, WHICH I SEE ACROSS DEVELOPMENTS EVERYWHERE. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THAT TERM, BUT IT'S PILING A WHOLE BUNCH OF MULCH RIGHT UP, UM, TO THE TRUNK OF THE TREE, WHICH ACTUALLY KILLS IT BECAUSE IT GETS IN THE WAY OF THE ROOT CROWN AND ROOT BULB. UM, SO WOULD LOVE FOR MORE LANDSCAPERS TO COME BEFORE US, BUT AS MUCH AS YOU CAN RELAY THOSE MESSAGES TO WHOMEVER YOU HIRE, I WOULD, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. ALSO, WANT TO ECHO SUPPORT FOR BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDING DESIGN WHEREVER POSSIBLE. UM, OR LET'S JUST MAKE IT POSSIBLE, NOT WHEREVER POSSIBLE. LET'S HAVE BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDING DESIGN. WE'RE THIS CLOSE TO MAKING IT AN ORDINANCE IN THE CITY. LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND DO IT. IS THERE ANY PLANS FOR SOLAR IN THIS PROJECT? NO, NOT THAT I KNOW OF. OKAY. COULD THAT BE A POSSIBILITY TO INCORPORATE THAT SOMEWHERE? IF SO, IT'S DURING THE BUILDING PERMIT PHASE. OKAY. UM, GREAT. ALSO WANTED TO, UM, ADD A NOTE ABOUT ROOF PLANTING, EITHER NATIVE PLANTS AND OR MAKING SPACE FOR A COMMUNITY GARDEN. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE FOOD PLAN, WHICH IS THAT LESS THAN 1% OF THE FOOD THAT WE CONSUME IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN IS GROWN LOCALLY. UM, AND ONE OF THE MANY THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO TO COMBAT THAT, TO BUILD FOOD RESILIENCE, CLIMATE RESILIENCE, WHEN THE NEXT DISASTER STRIKES IS TO HAVE MORE URBAN AGRICULTURE, INCLUDING ON SMALL SCALE. SO I THINK THE PROJECT COULD REALLY BENEFIT FROM A COMMUNITY GARDEN, WHETHER THAT'S ON A ROOF OR THE GROUND LEVEL. WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT AND WOULD PUT THAT UNDER THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT UMBRELLA, UM, FOR TODAY. [03:05:01] AND YEAH, JUST WANNA ADD, I MEAN, I'M GRATEFUL THAT THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER IS GOING TO BE IN SHRINKING WITH SHRINKING WITH THIS PROJECT. I THINK THAT'S GREAT. GRATEFUL TO HAVE THE FILTRATION POND ON SITE. I THINK THAT'S AN ADDED BENEFIT, UM, HOPEFUL THAT THIS BOOSTS THE WALKABILITY OF THAT AREA WILL ECHO WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID. TO HAVE LESS THAN 10% OF THE PROJECT BE AFFORDABLE UNITS IS JUST EGREGIOUS. IT'S JUST, IT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE. UM, AND ALL OF THEM ARE RENTAL, IS THAT CORRECT? OR ANY CONDOS FOR PURCHASE? I DON'T WANNA ANSWER THAT WITHOUT KNOWING, I BELIEVE IT'S RENTAL, BUT I CAN CONFIRM THAT AS WELL. OKAY. AND PART OF THE DB 90 IS THAT THOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE AT 50 OR 60% MFI, IS THAT CORRECT? MM-HMM . OKAY. AND THEY'RE ALL AT THAT LEVEL. ARE THERE ANY AT 30% OR 90% OR 80%? THEY, THE 50 TO 60% MAYBE. OKAY. OKAY. THERE AGAIN, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE MORE AT THE LOWER END TOO. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? YES, COMMISSIONER SALMAN, I, I'LL MAKE THE POINT THOUGH, THAT WHEN YOU LIVE ON A MAJOR CORRIDOR AND YOU CAN USE MASS TRANSIT, YOU SAVE A BUTTLOAD OF MONEY FROM THAT. MM-HMM . I LIVE IN A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE'RE A ONE CAR FAMILY BECAUSE I CAN WALK ONE BLOCK TO CATCH THE NUMBER 18 BUS, SO MM-HMM . THE FACT THAT IT, THEY'RE NOT PROVIDING IT IN THE RENT, THEY ARE PROVIDING IT IN THE TRANSPORTATION. OKAY. WELL, I, I COULD GET INTO A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, BUT I THINK I WON'T , UM, AS YEAH. A LOW INCOME RENTER MYSELF. BUT THAT'S OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY. UM, ALRIGHT. HEARING NONE, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION CLOSE. SECOND. OKAY. MOTION BY BRIMER, SECONDED BY SULLIVAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND. AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS. PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. SO FROM HERE WE CAN HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION. CAN ALSO HEAR A MOTION, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I'LL RECOMMEND MO STAFF RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. WHICH INCLUDES THE, ALL OF THE THINGS THAT MR. MCDOUGALL MENTIONED ABOUT THOSE SEDIMENTATION POND, THE REDUCTION IN IMPERVIOUS COVER, UH, THE TREES, ET CETERA. OKAY. WE DO HAVE THAT AND WE HAVE ONE WRITTEN OUT WITH SOME OTHER CONDITIONS, BUT BECAUSE THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, I WILL WELL, NO, NO, NO. I MEAN IF YOU ALREADY HAVE ONE, DO THAT. OKAY. WE WERE JUST BEING MYSTERIOUS COMMISSIONER, SO, OKAY. , . I WAS TRYING TO SPEED THINGS ALONG. I WILL SHOW MY HAND. OKAY. UM, A SECOND. ALRIGHT, SO WE'LL QUESTION, WE'LL FOREGO THAT. YOU'LL RESCIND THAT MOTION. OKAY. I HEAR A QUESTION. YES. COMMISSIONER BRIER WITH THE ONES YOU KNOW THAT WE HAD THERE, ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS WE WANT TO APPLY? ARE THERE ANY THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE? WE HAVE SOME WRITTEN UP BASED ON THE DISCUSSION. OKAY. WELL THEN OKAY. IF YOU'VE TACKED THEM ON, THEN I'LL HEAR AND THEN COMMENT. OKAY. YEAH, LET, LET'S HEAR THE MOTION AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A LITTLE MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT. YEAH. SO THIS IS RECOMMENDATION 2 0 2 6 0 5 0 6 DASH 0 0 3. UH, THIS IS THE, SO LAW MIXED USE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION SP DASH 2 0 2 4 DASH 0 3 9 7. WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THAT THE APPLICANT APPLICANT LJA ENGINEERING IS REQUESTING A REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION. AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE SUIT, THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THE EDWARDS FER RECHARGE ZONE WITHIN BARTON CREEK WATERSHED AND WEST BULLETIN CREEK WATERSHED. AND WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOGNIZES THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION NOW THEREFORE BE RESOLVED. THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THE SO LOT OF MIXED USE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, UH, TO AUGMENT COMMUNITY BENEFIT AND TO PROMOTE ALIGNMENT WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE VISION PLAN AND THE COMPREHENSIVE AUSTIN TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD PLAN TO INCREASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS TO 25% OF ALL UNITS FROM 30 TO 60% MFI TO UTILIZE BIRD FRIENDLY BUILDING DESIGN TO INCORPORATE A COMMUNITY GARDEN ON THE GROUND OR ROOFTOP LEVEL TO INCORPORATE DENSE NATIVE PLANTINGS THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY AND UTILIZE NO MO AND NO LEAF BLOWING PRINCIPLES YEAR ROUND. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION, IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BRIMER. ALRIGHT, WITH THAT WE'RE OPEN TO DISCUSSION. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? DOES ANYONE HAVE SOMETHING THEY WANT TO ADD? [03:10:02] I DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT LANGUAGE, BUT JUST TALK THROUGH IT OUT LOUD. I THINK THE WALKABILITY COMMENTS THAT WE, WE TALKED ABOUT IN, UH, SPECIFICALLY THE GREEN BELT, I THINK WE, IT IS WITHIN THAT HALF MILE DISTANCE AND BARTON SKYWAY HAS NICE BIKE LANES AND SIDEWALKS AND SO IT'S NOT, IT'S JUST LOOKING AT, AGAIN, IT'S AN INFORMAL ACCESS POINT THAT THE PUBLIC'S USING ON CREST RAY OR A STREET THAT, UM, I THINK OUR GENTLEMAN HAS SPOTTED IN GIS. OKAY. SO HOW, HOW COULD THIS PROJECT ENHANCE THAT? SO ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICATION, THE MITIGATION FUNDS LOCALLY? IS, IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? OR? SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S LIKE THE CITY, IF IT'S PART OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IS THAT THIS CONNECTS TO THE CITY'S, UH, VISION PLAN OR SOMETHING THAT WAS LIKE THE, THE FOURTH POINT. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY'S PLAN RIGHT NOW CONSIDERS CONNECTING TO THE GREEN BELT AT ALL. IT, IT'S AN INFORMAL DEAD END ROAD THAT YOU CAN TELL THE PUBLIC IS JUST ACCESSING 'CAUSE THEY'VE MADE A SOCIAL TRAIL AND YOU CAN FOLLOW THE HEAT MAPS ON ALL TRAILS IN STRAVA AND SEE THAT FOLKS ARE USING THIS EVERY DAY. UM, AND SO IT'S CLEARLY A, A DESIRE AND IT'S NEARBY AND THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE MOVING IN OFF OF LAMAR. UM, AND IT, IT FEELS LIKE A GAP THE CITY SHOULD EXPLORE. I GUESS I'M WONDERING IF THAT CONNECTIVITY CAN HAVE HAPPEN WITHIN THIS FOOTPRINT OR IF YOU'RE LIKE, HOW CAN, HOW CAN THIS PROJECT? YEAH, SO I WAS KINDA ASKING LIZ ABOUT HOW WE CAN PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS, YOU KNOW, CONNECTING TO PARKS OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT BOUNDS MM-HMM . UM, IF THAT'S, OH, AND NOW WE'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. YEAH. SO , UM, I SEE JEN'S GOT HER HAND RAISED. MAYBE SHE'S GOT A YEAH. VICE CHAIR BRISTOL. YEAH. SO, UM, SO TWO THINGS. UH, UM, ONE THAT PERHAPS THAT LIVES IN THE SITE PLAN TWO. UM, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY, UM, THAT IT, THAT I, I FEEL LIKE WE COULD PUT IT ON THIS RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS A GOAL TO CONNECT ALL RESIDENTS, UH, WITHIN A HALF MILE, UH, WALKING DISTANCE TO PARKS. AND SO IF THAT'S THE CLOSEST PARK, UM, THAT'S A WALKING DISTANCE, THEN THAT, YOU KNOW, UM, ENHANCE OR MAKE THAT A FORMAL ENTRY POINT FOR NOT ONLY THIS PROJECT BUT THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT. OKAY. IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING? I LIKE HOW YOU EXPLAINED THAT. YES, EXACTLY. BY CONNECTING IT BACK TO THE CITY'S GOAL, UH, FOR WALKABILITY FOR ITS RESIDENCE. OKAY. VICE CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE LANGUAGE FOR THAT THAT WE COULD DO FOR AN AMENDMENT? WELL, I'D LIKE TO JUST THROW IN A COMMENT WITH REGARD TO THAT. YEAH. UM, I UNDERSTAND THE GOAL OF ALL THIS, BUT I DON'T SEE HOW THAT FITS IN DIRECTLY TO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. THE CITY ALREADY HAS, AS SOMEONE MENTIONED, A GOAL TO CONNECT PARTS AND WALKWAYS AND ALL THIS. SO THIS IS ALREADY PART OF, YOU KNOW, THE CITY'S POLICIES AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. UM, SO I'M NOT REALLY SURE THAT WE CAN LEGITIMATELY ATTACK THIS ON TO THIS PROJECT. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. MM-HMM . IF, IF YOU UNDERSTAND, I MEAN, I, I AGREE WITH THE GOAL AND ALL THAT, BUT YOU KNOW, TO BURDEN THIS RECOMMENDATION DOWN, YOU KNOW, THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT DOWN WITH SOMETHING THAT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING THEY CAN INFLUENCE, I THINK IS UNFAIR TO EVERYONE INVOLVED. I THINK WE SHOULD DO SOMETHING ELSE AT SOME OTHER TIME. MM-HMM . YOU KNOW, KIND OF LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER WITH THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE BRIDGE THING. COME BACK AND SAY THE CITY NEEDS TO DO THIS AND BRING THAT UP AS A SEPARATE TOPIC AND, YOU KNOW, OR SOMETHING. I, I DON'T KNOW. I JUST, I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE TACKED ON MM-HMM . TO THIS PARTICULAR THING. 'CAUSE IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO THIS PROJECT. BUT THAT'S MY OPINION. WHAT ABOUT, UM, AND MY BRAIN IS BLANKING ON THE WORDS, BUT SOMETHING TO ATTACH BICYCLES TO, LIKE, SOMETHING THAT'S STILL PROMOTING BIKEABILITY AND WALKABILITY, BUT IS ACHIEVABLE ON SITE, OR MAYBE LIKE CONDUITS WITHIN THE SITE PLAN. AND I FORGET THE, THE NAMES OF THE ROAD THAT IT STRADDLES, BUT MAYBE THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR CONNECTIVITY, YOU KNOW, FOR A PATHWAY ACROSS THE SITE ITSELF. THAT ISN'T THE EXACT AREA THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT STILL, YEAH, I GUESS TO COMMISSIONER ER'S POINT, MY COMMENTS ARE MORE DIRECTED AT THE CITY, UH, UH, HOW IT'S PLANNING FOR THIS AREA THAT I THINK, AND, AND MAYBE I'M WRONG, BUT WHEN I GOOGLE, YOU KNOW, BARTON CREEK ACCESS POINTS, THIS IS NOT A FORMALIZED [03:15:01] ONE. UM, AND, AND SO THIS WAS ASKING THE CITY, BECAUSE NOW WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF PEOPLE MOVE IN, YOU KNOW, THESE HUNDREDS OF UNIT HOMES NEARBY. WELL, MAYBE THE CITY NEEDS TO RESPOND AND RETHINK ITS ACCESS POINTS TO THE GREEN BELT. AND ALTERNATIVE MIGHT BE, AND AGAIN, THROWING THIS OUT FOR DISCUSSION, IS TO SHIFT THE RESPONSIBILITY IS TO SAY SOMETHING LIKE, AND ENCOURAGE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO CONSTRUCT A TRAIL FROM HERE TO THERE. MM-HMM . WHATEVER HERE TO THERE IS. AND THAT WAY IT INCORPORATES YOUR INTENT, BUT IT SHOVELS IT OFF ONTO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO FIGURE IT OUT, WHICH IS WHERE IT BELONGS, OR THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, OR, I DUNNO, SOMEONE ELSE, BUT IT DOESN'T PUT THE BURDEN ON THESE FOLKS WHO ARE JUST TRYING TO BUILD WHATEVER THEY'RE TRYING TO BUILD. I ALSO AGREE. YEAH. I'M GONNA PUSH BACK ON THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT. UM, COMMISSIONER BRIER, BECAUSE IT, IT'S NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. IT IS, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF, OF THE DEVELOPERS TO MEET THE GOAL THAT ALL RESIDENTS HAVE, UM, THAT CAN HAVE ACCESS, A WALK OF WALKING DISTANCE, SAFE WALKING DISTANCE, I THINK IS ACTUALLY WHAT IT SAYS, UM, TO A PARK. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, THIS IS A HOUSING UNIT THAT'S GONNA HAVE AROUND 800 PEOPLE IN IT. THAT'S A BIG NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMING INTO THIS AREA. UM, AND IF THEIR, YOU KNOW, CLOSEST ACCESS POINT, UM, TO A PARK IS BARTON CREEK GREENBELT, YOU KNOW, THEN THAT NEEDS TO BECOME A SAFE, UH, A SAFE ROUTE AND A SAFE ACCESS POINT. SO THAT, THAT'S WHERE MY THINKING IS. OKAY. I GUESS, YEAH, I'M PERSONALLY, WHILE, WHILE I SUPPORT ALL OF THIS, STRUGGLING TO SEE HOW THIS FITS WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION, BUT IF SOMEONE HAS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, WE CAN HEAR A MOTION, GET A SECOND, AND THEN VOTE ON INCORPORATING IT. YEAH. JEN HAD SENT ME SOMETHING, BASICALLY SAYING, UM, HELPING MEET THE CITY'S GULF OF CONNECTING ALL RESIDENTS WITH THE PARK BY WORKING WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO ENHANCE AND FORMALIZE THE ACCESS POINT ON THE BARTON CREEK GREEN BELT. HOWEVER, I DO HEAR PEOPLE SAYING THAT, WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THIS ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT? SO MM-HMM . CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY FAIR. OKAY. DO YOU THINK THAT LANGUAGE CAPTURES WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY? I, I DO. AND WHERE I SEE IT FITTING INTO THE, IS THE VERY FIRST POINT OF HOW DOES THIS BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY? UM, AND YES, IT'S THIS PROJECT, BUT IT'S THE STREETS SCAPE, IT'S THE ADDITIONAL SURROUNDING INFRASTRUCTURE WITH 800 PEOPLE GOING IN. YOU KNOW, THAT SECOND POINT IS WHAT IS IMPACTS? IS THIS GONNA HAVE ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE WHERE THERE'S GONNA BE MORE PRESSURE ON THAT INFORMAL ACCESS POINT? AND WHEN THINGS ARE INFORMAL, THEY'RE DANGEROUS. THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT MONITORED, THEY'RE NOT PLANNED FOR, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, UH, DIY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO, CAN I, LET'S GO AHEAD AND JUST FORMALIZE IT A LITTLE BIT. SO, UH, VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL, WILL YOU GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION SAYING THAT, UH, WE'LL JUST TAKE WHAT SECRETARY KHI JUST READ AND THEN SECRETARY KHI, CAN I TAKE THAT AS A SECOND? THAT YOU'LL SECOND IT? OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ADD THE LANGUAGE. HELP MEET THE CITY'S GOAL OF CONNECTING ALL RESIDENTS WITH A PARK BY WORKING WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO ENHANCE AND FORMALIZE THE ACCESS POINT ON THE BARTON CREEK GREEN BELT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ADDING THIS, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND. OKAY. AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S BEEN ADDED IN. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? OKAY. WITH THAT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE IT TO A VOTE. AND AGAIN, THIS IS THE VOTE ON THE OVERALL, UH, MOTION ITSELF. AND WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL VOTE. I'LL START WITH ONLINE FOLKS. VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER MORTA, OR IN FAVOR AS WELL? COMMISSIONER CHANG. SET IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER FLORY FOR COMMISSIONER LUKI FOR COMMISSIONER MORRISON FOR SECRETARY REI. FOR COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN IN FAVOR, COMMISSIONER BRIER. FOUR. AND I AM ALSO VOTING FOR, SO THAT IS A 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10 OH OH VOTE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU GUYS. PARDON ME. CHAIR. YES. JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. SO THE MAIN MOTION MAKER WAS SECRETARY KREI. THE SECOND WAS COMMISSIONER BRIMER. YES. THE MOTION MAKER FOR THE AMENDMENT WAS VICE CHAIR BRISTOL. VICE CHAIR BRISTOL. AND WHO WAS THE SECOND FOR THE AMENDMENT? WE SAID SECRETARY KSI. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. [03:20:02] ALL RIGHT. SO NEXT WE'RE [4. Discussion on the MoPac South Project. Presented by Mike Sexton, Director of Engineering, Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA), and Charlotte Gilpin, General Engineering Consultant, CTRMA. ] GOING TO GO TO DISCUSSION ITEMS. NUMBER FOUR, DISCUSSION ON THE MOPAC SOUTH PROJECT. PRESENTED BY MIKE SEXTON, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING, CENTRAL TEXAS REGIONAL MOBILITY AUTHORITY, C-T-R-M-A. AND CHARLOTTE GILPIN, GENERAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT, C-T-R-M-A. PARDON? DID YOU VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT AND THE ORIGINAL MOTION? YES, BOTH. OKAY. WE DID. YEAH. CAN I, CAN I ASK A QUESTION BEFORE WE GET STARTED ON THIS? SURE. SO IT IS, UM, NINE 30. I'M JUST GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT OF A TIMEKEEPER HERE, AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS A BIG ISSUE. WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME, UH, TO GIVE TO THIS ISSUE, THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS? MM-HMM . UM, NICOLE, CAN YOU REMIND US HOW MANY PUBLIC COMMENTERS WE HAVE ON THIS ITEM CHAIR? THERE ARE 11 SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM. OKAY. UM, ALRIGHT. I COULD SEE ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST THAT. I, I DO WANNA HONOR PEOPLE'S TIME WHO HAVE WAITED THROUGH THREE AND A HALF HOURS ALREADY, WHO CAME TO SPEAK. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT, UH, INCLUDING THE PRESENTER. WE'RE SO GRATEFUL THAT YOU'RE HERE. UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY ACTION THAT WE CAN TAKE TONIGHT ON THIS. WE DID PREPARE A MOTION, HOWEVER, THAT WE COULD CONSIDER AT THE NEXT MEETING. SO I THINK FOR TONIGHT, IF WE WANT TO AT LEAST HEAR THE PRESENTATION, HEAR OUR PUBLIC COMMENTERS, TRY AND LIMIT OUR QUESTIONS, UM, TO A REASONABLE AMOUNT, I THINK THAT'S THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION. DOES THAT SOUND GOOD TO FOLKS AT, AT 10? WE'D HAVE TO VOTE TO EXTEND THE MEETING. YEAH, BUT NO, NO FORMAL CUTOFF. WELL, I, I HAVE A QUESTION. YEAH. UM, IF WE'RE GONNA LISTEN TO PRESENTATIONS AND INPUT FROM THE, YOU KNOW, THE CITIZENS, BUT THE PRESENTERS AREN'T GONNA BE HERE NEXT TIME, SO WE WON'T BE ABLE TO ASK THEM QUESTIONS DURING OUR DISCUSSION IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE A MOTION. MM-HMM . IT'S GONNA MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT AWKWARD FOR US TO YEAH. WE SHOULD ASK QUESTIONS TONIGHT. MAYBE THIS KIND PERSON WOULD BE WILLING TO COME BACK AGAIN. I DON'T KNOW. BUT, UM, WELL, WE'LL HAVE TO ASK HER TONIGHT, . YEAH. BUT LET'S JUST ALL TRY AND BE THOROUGH, YET CONCISE AND, AND TRY TO, YOU KNOW, HONOR EVERYONE'S TIME HERE. AND, UM, BUT NO MATTER WHAT, WE CAN'T TAKE ACTION TONIGHT BECAUSE IT'S LISTED UNDER DISCUSSION ITEMS, RIGHT? NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT. I JUST, YEAH. BRIEF AND MOPAC CANNOT BE USED IN THE SAME SENTENCE. . WELL, THIS IS, THIS IS A START OF A CONVERSATION, AND THERE THERE COULD BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE DOWN THE LINE. WE DON'T KNOW, UM, IF THIS PERSON WOULD BE WILLING TO COME BACK AGAIN, BUT WHILE THEY ARE HERE AND HAVE WAITED ALL THIS TIME, I DO WANNA NO, I UNDERSTAND. TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT. I, I UNDERSTAND THAT. I JUST, YEAH. OKAY. LET'S, LET'S GO AHEAD THEN. UM, PLEASE TAKE IT AWAY. UH, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CHARLOTTE GILPEN. I'M PART OF THE CTR MAS, UH, GENERAL ENGINEERING CONSULTING TEAM AND PART OF THE MOPAC SOUTH ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY. SO, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION TO BE HERE TONIGHT. UM, WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY. WE'VE PREPARED A SUMMARY. I'LL GET CLOSER. WE'VE PREPARED A SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION. THE SLIDES ARE DENSE. WE WON'T COVER EVERY WORD ON THEM, BUT THEY'RE MEANT TO BE HELPFUL AS A LEAVE BEHIND. UM, HOPEFULLY HELP ANSWER SOME, SOME QUESTIONS, DISPEL SOME MISINFORMATION. UM, DO I NEED TO POINT THIS IN A PARTICULAR RECEIVER? OKAY. IT'S JUST A LITTLE SLOW. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO, THE MOPAC SOUTH PROJECT, UM, LIMITS OF THE PROJECT ARE FROM CAESAR CHAVEZ TO THE SLAUGHTER LANE AS THE LOGICAL TERMINI WITH, UH, TRANSITIONS BACK TO EXISTING SECTIONS ON EITHER END OF THAT. UH, WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RECENTLY THAT WAS, UH, PUBLISHED AND WE CONCLUDED THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, JUST THIS PAST SUNDAY. AND WE'RE GOING GONNA GO INTO SOME CURRENT ACTIVITY AND NEXT, NEXT STEPS HERE. SO, OVERVIEW ON THE PUBLIC HEARING. UH, AGAIN, VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FROM MARCH 9TH TO MAY 3RD. THAT'S A 55 DAY, UM, PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WAS ACTUALLY POSTED PRIOR TO THAT, UH, ALLOWING A 79 DAY REVIEW PERIOD ON THAT. UM, WE'VE LISTED OUT ALL THE WAYS THAT WE WERE ABLE TO RECEIVE A COMMENTS, UM, AND ALL COMMENTS AGAIN, [03:25:01] UH, HAVE BEEN RECEIVED, AND WE ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THOSE, UH, TO THEN POST RESPONSES. THAT'S JUST A TYPICAL PART OF THE, OF THE NEPA PROCESS. UM, WE HAVE GONE AHEAD AND POSTED THOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON OUR WEBSITE. THOSE ARE AS RECEIVED AND DO NOT HAVE, UM, AGAIN, BENEFIT OF RESPONSES AND INFORMATION TO HELP E EXPLAIN, UM, EXPLAIN RESPONSES. ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT WAS IN THE PUBLIC HEARING MATERIALS? THIS INFORMATION IS ALL STILL AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE. IT'S JUST NOW MOVED, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING SITE TO THE PAST EVENTS PAGE ON THE, ON THE PROJECT WEBSITE. THE EA IS STILL ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY PAGE, SO THAT WILL STILL APPEAR THERE ALONG WITH ALL OF THE, UM, TECHNICAL, UH, REPORTS THAT ACCOMPANY THAT. UM, SO AGAIN, INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE, IT'S THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, THE ACCOMPANYING TECHNICAL REPORTS, PROJECT HISTORY. UM, AND, UH, I, I THINK SOMETHING THAT IS ALSO HELPFUL. SOMETIMES SCHEMATICS ARE DIFFICULT, UM, IF YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT THEM ALL THE TIME TO REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT. I, AGAIN, LEANING TO A COMMENT EARLIER ABOUT MAKING THINGS DIGESTIBLE. THERE IS A VIDEO FLY THROUGH THAT HELPS EXPLAIN THE PROJECT, SO YOU CAN PAIR THAT WITH THE MATERIALS. ALL RIGHT. SO I'M GONNA GO INTO, THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION, A FEW COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS THAT CONTINUE TO, TO ARISE MOST FREQUENTLY. UM, FIRST ONE IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. WHY WE'RE DOING ONE, AND THAT IS THAT THE, THE STUDY TYPE AND PROCESS THROUGH THE, THROUGH, UH, NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OR NEPA, IS, IS DETERMINED BY A, A SET OF, OF CRITERIA AND RECOMMENDATIONS. SO THE STUDY TYPE AND THE PROCESS ARE DETERMINED BY TECH DOTS ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DIVISION, WHO HAS NEPA ASSIGNMENT THROUGH THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION. AND THE DETERMINATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IS BASED ON FACTORS SUCH AS, UM, ALL OF THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE LOOKED AT HAD, YOU KNOW, MINIMAL RIGHT OF WAY NEEDS. UM, NONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES BEING STUDIED HAD DISPLACEMENT. UM, AND I WILL SAY THAT WHAT ENDED UP BEING THE, UH, BUILD ALTERNATIVE HAS NO RIGHT OF WAY, BUT JUST IN GENERAL, WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING AT HOW TO CLASSIFY A PROJECT, THESE ARE THE PRIMARY FACTORS AMONGST THE PRIMARY FACTORS, ADDITIONAL THAT IT'S ON AN EXISTING, UM, DEVELOPED CORRIDOR. ANOTHER KEY POINT HERE IS THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE OFTEN ASK THE QUESTION WHEN PEOPLE ARE LIKE, WHY AREN'T WE DOING AN EIS? WE ASK, WHAT IS IT THAT YOU DON'T FEEL THAT YOU'RE SEEING REPRESENTED IN THE PROCESS? UM, I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT THERE ARE NO DIFFERENCES IN THE RESOURCES THAT ARE STUDIED BETWEEN AN EA OR AN EIS. AND, UM, ANOTHER QUESTION HERE IS IF THERE'S A, A DIFFERENCE IN HOW WE ENGAGE IN THE ENDANGERED SPECIES CONSULTATION WITH THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, THAT IS THE SAME AS, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT GOVERNED BY NEPA, BUT IT IS GOVERNED BY THE, BY THE ESA, THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT. AND LAST I WANT IT TO BE CLEAR, IS THAT WHEN WE SAY WE ARE LOOKING AT, UH, A NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, IF, IF THE PROJECT GETS TO A FINDING, SO, UH, AN EA HAS A FINDING, AN AN EIS HAS A DECISION, BUT BOTH ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS CONSIDER NOT JUST THE PROJECT, BUT THE PROJECT WITH THE PROPOSED MEASURES TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE IMPACTS. UM, AND THEN LAST AS TEXT DOT. UH, SO AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS OF REVIEWING, UH, CONSIDERING COMMENTS, ADDING ADDITIONAL MITIGATIONS CONSERVATION MEASURES, WHATEVER MIGHT COME UP, AND THEN WE PREPARE THE, THE FINAL EA AND SUBMIT THAT TO T DOT, UM, AGAIN, THEY HAVE THE OVERSIGHT THROUGH, THROUGH NEPA TO REACH A FINDING THAT IS IN NO WAY A PRECLUSION THAT THIS PROJECT WILL RECEIVE A FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. IT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE AS THE PROJECT GOES ON, IF THEY DETERMINE THAT AN EIS IS NECESSARY. THAT'S, THAT'S THE FINDING. ALL RIGHT. SO I WANNA HARKEN BACK TO PURPOSE AND NEED AGAIN, I'M NOT GONNA READ THROUGH IT, BUT I THINK, AGAIN, HIGHLIGHTS ARE REALLY JUST, IT'S A RELIABILITY OF THE CORRIDOR THAT RELIABILITY IS CRITICAL TO BOTH EMS AND TRANSIT, AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, GETTING TO WHERE YOU NEED TO GO O ON TIME WITH REGION REASONABLE BUFFER. THAT PURPOSE AND NEED WAS REEXAMINED. UM, IN 2024 WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS TO UPDATE TO THE CAMPO 2045 MODEL. THAT CAMPO 2045, UH, MODEL THAT COMES THROUGH OUR REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS IS THE REQUIRED MODEL BASED ON AT WHEN THIS PROJECT WAS BEING STUDIED AND, AND, AND THE MODEL THAT'S REQUIRED TO USE AS, AS THE BASIS FOR OUR TRAFFIC, UM, ANALYSIS. ALL [03:30:01] RIGHT, THE PUBLIC INPUT, IT IS JUST A, IT'S AN ETHOS OF THE CTR MAY TO ALWAYS HAVE VERY ROBUST PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ON ANY PROJECT WE'RE DOING. THIS PROJECT'S NO EXCEPTION, AND HAS CERTAINLY, UM, GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND MINIMUMS FOR NEPA. UM, THROUGHOUT PROJECT PROCESS. UH, WE'RE TRYING TO WORK AND HIGHLIGHT THE SHARED COMMUNITY VALUES AS WE'RE IMPLEMENTING. WE ARE ALSO, UH, HERE'S A, A LIST AND AN EXAMPLE. THIS ONE COVERS, UH, PRIMARILY SCHEMATICS, GEOMETRY. WE HAVE GET TO ANOTHER, UM, OTHER SIDE OF INPUTS ON THE NEXT SLIDE, BUT, UH, WE ARE CONTINUALLY LISTENING TO THE COMMENTS RECEIVED AND MAKING ADJUSTMENTS. UM, SOME HIGHLIGHTS HERE THAT JUST WERE NEW AND PRESENTED IN THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, AT THE REQUEST OF ADJACENT MUNICIPALITIES WERE THE BARTON SPRINGS PEDESTRIAN, UM, BRIDGE. UM, THAT WAS A, SOMETHING NEW THAT WAS ADDED. AND THEN ALSO THE B CAVES ROAD INTERSECTION. SO A NEW CONCEPT THERE THAT WAS ADDED. AGAIN, JUST EXAMPLES OF, OF HOW WE'RE ENGAGING WITH, WITH PUBLIC, WITH STAKEHOLDERS. UM, SOME OTHER EXAMPLES HERE THAT I THINK MAYBE OF INTEREST TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION ARE AS WE WENT THROUGH A TECHNICAL WORK GROUP PROCESS WITH CITY OF AUSTIN, UM, STAFF IN LAST SUMMER, WE DID INCREASE THE DESIGN WIDTH OF SHARED USE PATHS FROM WHAT WAS PLANNED AS 10 TO 12 FEET. NOW, UM, AGAIN, THROUGH CONTINUED COORDINATION OF THOSE WORKSHOPS AND CONTINUED COORDINATION WITH TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC WORKS, WE'VE ADDED ADDITIONAL, UM, SHARED USE PATHS AND SIDEWALKS TO BOTH, TO NOT JUST ONE SIDE OF THE CORRIDOR, BUT TO BOTH SIDES OF THE CORRIDOR. UM, SO CLOSING THE GAPS WITHIN THE CORRIDOR, AND WE'VE PROVIDED IT'S NEAR EIGHT MILES OF NEW SHARED USE PATH. SO THAT'S NOT SHARED USE PATH. IT'S BEING, UM, JUST REBUILT TO BE THE WIDTH, BUT JUST NEW AND ADDITIONAL SIDEWALKS AND SHARED USE PATH. UM, ALL RIGHT, SO OTHER PUBLIC INPUT. I MEAN, IT'S, UH, AGAIN, A, A PARAMOUNT VALUE FOR THE RMA IS IS BEING AN ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARD. AND SO WITH THE INPUT THAT WE'VE, WE'VE LISTENED TO, NOT JUST ON THIS PROJECT, BUT THAT WE'VE CARRIED FORWARD FROM PREVIOUS PROJECTS, UM, IN TERMS OF WATER QUALITY, THAT IT'S BECOME ESSENTIALLY A STANDARD BASELINE TO EXCEED TCEQ STATE STANDARDS FOR WATER QUALITY AND TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVAL. AND TO MAXIMIZE TREATMENT TO GET AS CLOSE AS WE CAN TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN, SAVE OUR SPRINGS, UM, WATER QUALITY APPROACH IN TERMS OF TREATMENT AND CONSTITUENT REMOVAL IN TERMS OF TREES AND VEGETATION. IT'S, UH, LONGSTANDING COMMITMENT THEN FOR PLANTINGS TO BE NATIVE. UM, DURING THE DESIGN PHASE ON, ON, UH, STARTED ON 45 TOLL, WE HELD, AGAIN, TECHNICAL WORK GROUPS FOR WHICH CITY OF AUSTIN, BARTON SPRINGS, EDWARDS AFER CONSERVATION DISTRICT IN TRAVIS COUNTY WERE PART OF, UM, WE HAVE COMMITTED TO. SO ALL THESE THINGS THAT I'M SAYING WE'VE CARRIED FORWARD, THESE ARE ALREADY DOCUMENTED AS, AS COMMITMENTS WITHIN THE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT. UM, BUT WE EXPECT THESE FUTURE DESIGN PHASE, UH, WORK GROUPS TO COVER TOPICS SIMILAR TO WHAT WE COVERED WITHIN ENVIRONMENTAL. AND THOSE ARE WATER QUALITY. IT'S PARKLAND, IT'S MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION, IT'S UTILITIES. IT'S, UM, IT REALLY COVERS THE, THE GAMUT OF WHAT IS ENGAGED IN A PROJECT. AND THEN DURING THE ENVIRONMENTAL, DURING, SORRY, DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE, IT'S A COMMITMENT FOR AN INDEPENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE MANAGER. UM, WHAT THAT TERM MEANS IS THAT ONSITE, THE RMA HAS, UH, ENGAGED A PROCESS OF HAVING A, UH, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS STOP WORK AUTHORITY THAT IS THERE TO EVERY DAY MONITOR AND MANAGE THE COMMITMENTS AND MAKE SURE THAT THOSE ARE BEING CARRIED OUT ON SITE. AND IF ANYTHING IS SEEN TO BE, UH, WAVING OUT OF COMPLIANCE, UH, THEY HAVE AUTHORITY TO STOP THE SITE. UM, SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT HAS BEEN CARRIED FORWARD. WHAT'S NEW ON MOPAC SOUTH, WE'VE GOT, UM, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT TO, AGAIN, DOCUMENTED WITHIN THE, THE EA IS TO REMOVE, UH, A HUNDRED PERCENT OF TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS PER TCEQ CALCULATIONS WITH A GOAL, UM, THAT'S BEEN EXPRESSED WHEN WE GET TO DESIGN PHASE THAT THROUGH THESE T WGS WILL WORKSHOP WITH THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO SEE HOW MUCH BETTER WE, WE CAN DO, UM, IN TERMS OF TREES AND VE AND VEGETATION. WE'VE WRITTEN INTO THE DOCUMENT A COMMITMENT FOR TREE REPLACEMENT RATIOS TO BE, UH, EQUIVALENT TO CITY OF AUSTIN. WE'RE LOOKING AT INCREASING THAT, MAKING IT BETTER. WE'LL, WE'LL SEE. UM, BUT THE MINIMUM COMMITMENT IS EQUIVALENT TO CI CITY OF AUSTIN. AND THEN FOR PARKLAND, UM, WHILE THERE'S NO RIGHT OF WAY, THERE ARE [03:35:02] TEMPORARY USE CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS. UM, AND SO WHAT THOSE WILL INCLUDE ARE PERIODIC CLOSURES AT NIGHT. SO THAT'S BEEN A COMMITMENT THAT WE HEARD OF CONCERN FROM CITY OF AUSTIN PARKS AND REC, UH, STAFF. AND SO WE DID DOCUMENT THAT INTENT OF PLAN CLOSURES TO ONLY BE AT NIGHT WHEN THE PARKS ARE CLOSED ANYWAY. AND SO CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THESE AREAS WOULD BE LIMITED TO THAT TO, UM, MINIMIZE AND AVOID DISRUPTION TO PARKLAND USE. SO AGAIN, THESE ARE, THESE ARE NOT THAT, THESE ARE ALL OF THE ENVIRON ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS OR ANYTHING. THIS IS, UM, A SLIDE TO HELP HIGHLIGHT PUBLIC INPUT AND HOW THAT'S BEEN INCORPORATED. THIS IS, OF COURSE, BACKED UP BY ALL OF THE STANDARD, UM, BEST PRACTICES AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS. SO IN TERMS OF BACKING OUT NOW TO WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, HERE'S A LIST OF ALL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED. UM, THE EA IS A SUMMARY DOCUMENT THAT OUTLINES, UM, YET THAT SUMMARIZES THE DETAILED TECHNICAL REPORTS. AGAIN, THOSE DETAILED TECHNICAL STUDIES ARE POSTED ON THE WEBSITE. THE RMA PREPARES THESE REPORTS, AND THEY ARE SUBMITTED TO OUR PARTNERING OVERSIGHT AGENCIES, UH, WHETHER THAT'S FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, UM, TDOT ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS. SO I'M GONNA HIT ON A COUPLE OF THE, AGAIN, THE TOPICS WHERE WE'VE RECEIVED THE MOST, UH, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, AND WHAT WE WERE KIND OF GIVEN A HEADS UP MIGHT BE OF INTEREST TO THIS, THIS GROUP. SO IN TERMS OF WATER QUALITY, UM, WHAT YOU'LL SEE HERE IS A LIST OF THE COMMITMENTS AND THE DETAILS FOR WHAT IS DOCUMENTED WITHIN THE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. A COUPLE OF HIGHLIGHTS THAT I WANNA POINT OUT IS THAT WITH THE WATER QUALITY THAT I ALREADY MENTIONED, IN TERMS OF, UM, EXCEEDING, UM, LIKE MEETING THAT NONDEGRADATION STANDARD OF, OF A HUNDRED PERCENT TSS REMOVAL, I THINK IT IS OF NOTE THAT THE NORTHERN SECTION OF THIS PROJECT, NOT MANY PEOPLE REALIZE THAT, BUT THE NORTHERN SECTION OF THE PROJECT, SO ROUGHLY NORTH OF TWO 90 OR, OR GAINES, UM, CREEK HAS NO EXISTING WATER QUALITY TREATMENTS ON SITE. IT'S JUST TIMING OF WHEN THE CORRIDOR WAS DEVELOPED. SO THIS PROJECT WOULD BRING TREATMENTS TO THAT AREA. UM, THE SOUTH SECTION, I WOULD SAY, UH, OFFER DOES HAVE WATER QUALITY TREATMENTS, BUT ARE LIKELY TO BE SEEN AS, AS NOT PERFORMING AS DESIGNED. AND THAT'S JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE, UH, A TYPE OF TREATMENT THAT WE DON'T USE ANYMORE CALLED VERTICAL SAND FILTRATION. UM, AGAIN, THE COMMITMENT OF WATER QUALITY BEING THE A HUNDRED PERCENT, SO AT LEAST AS GOOD AS EXISTING, BUT THE GOAL IS TO EXCEED THAT A HUNDRED PERCENT. AND THEN WE'VE GOT A LIST HERE OF THE TYPES OF BMPS, OR SORRY, BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES THAT ARE GOING TO BE, UH, PROPOSED RIGHT NOW TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON THE PROJECT. THAT INCLUDES, INCLUDES PERMEABLE FRICTION COURSE PAVEMENT, UM, VEGETATIVE FILTER STRIPS, UM, PROPRIETARY TREATMENT UNITS CALLED JELLYFISH AND SET SAND SEDIMENTATION, FILTRATION PONDS AND BATCH DETENTION PONDS. IN TERMS OF KARST RESOURCES, UM, WE ARE ALL VERY AWARE OF THE ENVIRONMENT, THE ECOLOGY THAT THIS CORRIDOR RUNS THROUGH. AND THERE ARE MANY, MANY SENSITIVE FEATURES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AROUND THE RIGHT OF WAY. UM, AREA WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY ARE GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT, WHICH IS A DETAILED ONSITE WALKING AND INVESTIGATION OF THE PROJECT, IDENTIFIED FIVE SENSITIVE FEATURES WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY. UM, THREE OF THOSE ARE WITHIN CREEK BEDS. SO WE'LL NATURALLY BE PROTECTED BY, UM, SPANNING AND NOT CONSTRUCTING WITHIN THAT AREA, PUTTING UP BUFFERS AND, AND BMPS AROUND THE CREEKS TO PROTECT THEM. TWO OF THEM ARE WITHIN, UM, CONSTRUCTION AREAS THAT, AGAIN, WILL BE PROTECTED. UM, AND SO I THINK THAT'S OFTEN BEEN A QUESTION ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT, HOW MANY FEATURES ARE WE EXPECTING TO ENCOUNTER? AND, UM, SO FAR FROM OUR INVESTIGATIONS, THAT NUMBER IS, IS VERY, VERY LOW FOR WHAT'S BEEN IDENTIFIED. FOR THOSE THAT ARE UNIDENTIFIED, OF COURSE, THE MITIGATIONS ARE THE, UM, STANDARD VOID MITIGATION PROTOCOLS. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THERE'S ANY VOID THAT'S, YOU KNOW, A SIX BY SIX INCH FOUND ON SITE THAT'S LOOKED AT, THAT'S DOCUMENTED. AND WE GO THROUGH THAT COORDINATION, THAT ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE MANAGER HELPS MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S HAPPENING. UM, AND SO WE CAN CALL OUT THE HYDROGEOLOGISTS OR BIOLOGISTS AS NEEDED. UM, WE EXPECT WITH THIS PROJECT THAT, UH, MOST COMMON SCENARIO MIGHT BE ENCOUNTERING AN UNKNOWN VOID DURING DRILL SHAFTS FOR BRIDGES AND WHATNOT. [03:40:01] AND THOSE VOID MITIGATION DETAILS INCLUDE, UM, DOING VIDEO SURVEY OF THOSE, OF THOSE SHAFTS FOR BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. UM, AGAIN, SO HERE, UH, I THINK THAT THE SAFETY OF THE BIOLOGIC RESOURCES IS FOUNDED IN THE WATER QUALITY AND HOW WE'RE, HOW WE'RE TREATING THE WATERSHEDS. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT THAT'S DOCUMENTED THERE. UM, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF, UH, WORKING TOWARDS INITIATING THAT FORMAL CONSULTATION WITH THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. SO IN ADDITION TO ALL OF OUR STANDARD PRACTICES LISTED, AGAIN IN THE EA, UM, ANYTHING THAT COMES OUT OF THAT CONSULTATION WITH THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, WE'LL BE DOCUMENTED WITHIN THE FINAL E EIGHT AND THOSE COMMITMENTS, UM, THAT THE PROJECT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW. AND THEN LAST PROTECTED LANDS. UM, AGAIN, I TOUCHED ON THIS A LITTLE BIT. SO THERE ARE TEMPORARY EASEMENTS IDENTIFIED. THESE ARE TEMPORARY. THERE IS NO CONVERSION OF USE. THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD BE A PERMANENT CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THESE EASEMENTS ARE SHARED USE PATHS THAT HAVE LARGELY BEEN REQUESTED BY CITY OF AUSTIN TO EITHER HELP COMPLETE CONNECTIONS WITH A CONCRETE SHARED USE PATH WHERE PERHAPS THERE'S ONLY A, UM, GRAVEL PATH TODAY, OR A DIRT PATH, NOT A PATH, A FOOTPATH. UM, OR LIKE THE NEW, UH, PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE WE, WE MADE REFERENCE TO. UM, PRIMARY ITEM HERE IS THE NIGHTTIME CLOSURES, I THINK, AGAIN, JUST TO HELP PRESERVE THAT. UH, SO MOVING TO ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED, UM, THIS SLIDE LISTS OUT ALL OF THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE CONSIDERED, UH, AS THE PROJECT WENT THROUGH EVALUATION. AGAIN, THESE ARE BASED ON THE 20, UM, 24 TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS POSTED IN MARCH OF 2024 WITH THE UPDATE TO THE CAMPO 2045 MODEL IS OUR BASELINE. THIS INCLUDED HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANES, IT INCLUDED GENERAL PURPOSE ONLY, TRANSIT ONLY EXPRESS LANES, AND THEN SOME, UH, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT EVALUATION CRITERIA. UH, AGAIN, TO HIGHLIGHT, UH, THESE ARE CONSISTENT WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH PURPOSE AND NEED AND COMMUNITY INPUT IS HOW THIS WAS DEVELOPED IN THE PROCESS. UM, RELIABILITY, AGAIN, I THINK IS A, A PRIMARY FUNCTION, AGAIN FOR BOTH EMS AND TRANSIT. SO THE Y EXPRESS LANES, AGAIN, IT'S RELIABILITY, IT'S TIME SAVINGS. UM, OUR PRIMARY BENEFITS HERE, THE PROJECT, UH, TO THE NORTH MOPAC NORTH, WHEN THAT OPENED, THOSE EXPRESS LANES SAW A TREMENDOUS INCREASE IN THE RIDERSHIP ON THE TRANSIT LANES. AND SO THAT'S A, THAT'S AN EXPECTATION HERE. IF, IF THIS PROJECT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD. SO ONCE, UH, THE EXPRESS LANES WERE IDENTIFIED AS THE REASONABLE BUILD ALTERNATIVE, THERE WERE A SERIES OF WHAT WAS TERMED OPERATIONAL CONFIGURATIONS, UH, WHICH ARE JUST THE CONNECTIONS TO DOWNTOWN. SO FOR EACH OF THESE, THE CORRIDOR WAS THE SAME FROM BARTON SKYWAY SOUTH, BUT THIS IS JUST HOW EXPRESS LANES WOULD CONNECT TO DOWNTOWN. UM, PRIMARY REASON WHY TWO C WAS, WAS SELECTED HAD TO DO WITH PUBLIC INPUT AND CONCERNS OVER SAFETY OF WEAVING AND MERGING FOR DIFFERENT OPTIONS, CONNECTION TO CLOSE TO AUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL ELEVATION, UM, WITHIN PARKLAND. SO, UH, OR ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY. AND SO, TWO C IS THE BUILD ALTERNATIVE, UH, HAS THE DETAILED ANALYSIS WITHIN THE EA AND THAT IS WHAT YOU MAY HEAR AS SOMETIMES WE CALL IT THE WISHBONE RAMPS, BUT THESE ARE RAMPS THAT, UM, ARE EXTENDING FROM BARTON SKYWAY TO AROUND THE, UM, B CAVE AREA AND ALLOW A, A MORE SAFE, FEWER LANE MERGING OPTION TO DOWNTOWN FROM THE EXPRESS LANE. AND THROUGH THAT MECHANISM ALSO HELP IMPROVE SAFETY JUST ACROSS THE BRIDGES IN GENERAL. SO, AGAIN, WHY THE THE TWO C OPTION? IT AGAIN, COMES DOWN TO PUBLIC SUPPORT, SAFETY AND OPTIMIZATION IN TERMS OF TRAVEL TIME, UM, AND FEWER IMPACTS IN TERMS OF, OF PARKLAND AND RIGHT OF WAY PROJECT RESULTS. UM, AGAIN, I JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT HERE THE DEPENDABLE ROUTE FOR TRANSIT. WE HAVE COORDINATED SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE COURSE OF THE PROJECT WITH CAP METRO. UM, THEY HAVE LOOKED AT THE PROJECT ENOUGH TO, UM, AGREE THAT WHERE THE PROJECT IS SHOWING ENTRANCES AND EXITS TO THE EXPRESS LANE SEEMS REASONABLE TO SUPPORT TRANSIT. THEY'VE COMMUNICATED THAT THEY DO HAVE IN THEIR LONG-TERM [03:45:01] PLAN, UM, A TRANSIT ROUTE. AND SO WE'D EXPECT THAT, UM, IF THIS PROJECT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, IT WOULD MAKE A TRANSIT ROUTE MORE VIABLE. AND PERHAPS THAT COORDINATION FOR BOTH A ROUTE AND A POTENTIAL PARKING RIDE WOULD MOVE FORWARD. UM, TRAVEL TIME SAVINGS, AGAIN, I THINK A LOT OF TIMES WE HEAR, UM, IS THE VALUE PROPOSITION WORTH IT FOR TIME SAVINGS? AGAIN, MODELS OR MODELS, THE TRENDS ARE SHOWING US THAT CONGESTION IS JUST GETTING WORSE. THE REGION CONTINUES TO GROW. SO THERE IS A PROJECT NEED. UM, NONT TOLD IMPROVEMENTS, I SUPPOSE, HERE. I MEAN, IT'S A LONG LIST OF, OF THINGS THAT ARE NONT TOLD, BUT, UH, A HIGHLIGHT WOULD BE, AGAIN, THE WATER QUALITY, PARTICULARLY IN SEGMENTS WHERE THERE IS NOT CURRENTLY TREATMENT. UM, CAP METRO AND CARTS DO TRAVEL FREE WITHIN TOLL LANES ON ANY OF THE ARMY'S FACILITIES TO HELP SUPPORT TRANSIT. AND THEN AGAIN, THE ADDITIONAL, UM, NEAR EIGHT MILES OF SUP TO DELIVER MORE THAN 16 MILES IN TOTAL FOR THE CORRIDOR. UM, NEXT STEPS. SO AS I'VE MENTIONED, WE'RE REVIEWING AND RESPONDING TO ALL OF THE COMMENTS RECEIVED THROUGH, UH, THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS. AS WE DO THAT, WE CONTINUE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT CONVERSATIONS, CONSIDER PROJECT ADJUSTMENTS, AND THEN WE MOVE FORWARD PREPARING A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT TO SUBMIT TO TECH O FOR REVIEW WITH THEIR PARTNERING AGENCIES. THE OPTIONS THAT MIGHT HAPPEN WITH TECH STOP MAKING A, OR ISSUING AN ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING ARE THAT THE PROJECT MAY RECEIVE A FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. AGAIN, IF THAT OCCURS, THERE WOULD BE ADDITIONAL CHOICES OF WHETHER THE PROJECT MOVES TO DESIGN PHASE OR NOT. UM, IF WE DO JUST WANNA REITERATE THE TECHNICAL WORK GROUPS, THAT WOULD BE A, UM, THAT WOULD BE A, A PROCESS THAT THE ARMY CONTINUES USING, AND THAT'S WHEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION WOULD BE HAPPENING WITH, WITH CITY STAFF ON QUESTIONS WE JUST CAN'T ANSWER NOW. 'CAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE IN AN ENVIRONMENTAL PHASE AND NOT DESIGN. WE'VE ALSO RECEIVED A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT NOISE WALLS THAT WERE SHOWN ON WHERE THEY MAY BE WARRANTED WITHIN THE EA. THAT IS A PROCESS THAT MOVES FORWARD WITH THOSE IMPACTED PROPERTY OWNERS AS THEY HAVE THE FINAL, UM, THEY HAVE THE FINAL VOTE ON THAT. UM, SO, SO AGAIN, NOT A PRECLUSION THAT, UH, THE FINDING MAY BE THAT AN EIS IS REQUIRED OR THAT THE FINDINGS ARE NOT INSIGNIFICANT. AND SO WITH THAT, I'LL ANSWER, HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. I DON'T KNOW IF THE PROCESS IS QUESTIONS OR PUBLIC COMMENT, HOWEVER YOU GUYS WANNA DO THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. WELL, FIRST I'M GONNA ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO EXTEND THE PUBLIC HEARING TO 10:45 PM IT IS NOW 9:57 PM SECONDED. SO I'M ENTERTAINING A MOTION MOVED BY BRIMER, SECONDED BY RESI. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HANDS. OKAY, WE'VE GOT, OKAY, WE SAW SOME STRAGGLERS IN THE HANDS. I WAS PREPARING FOR NO VOTES. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'VE GOT 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. COMMISSIONER MORRISON. ARE YOU OKAY? SO THOSE ARE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, ALL THOSE AGAINST. WE'VE GOT ONE. AND THEN ANY ABSTENTIONS? NONE. SO MOTION PASSES. WE'LL BE EXTENDING THE PUBLIC HEARING TO 10:45 PM UM, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. NEXT, WE'RE GONNA GO TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. UH, THE FIRST SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM IS DAVID WEINBERG DAVID SHOW. OKAY. UM, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS GAIL ROY. OKAY, GAIL, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS GAIL ROADIE REGARDING THE PROPOSED MOPAC SOUTH, UH, EXPANSION PROJECT. I'M HERE TO ASK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. AND HERE IS WHY I HAVE, UM, UH, SLIDES HERE OF A, YOU CAN SEE A, OOPS, SORRY. DIDN'T MEAN TO DO THAT. THIS, UH, EVENT THAT HAPPENED IN DECEMBER, 2018. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU REMEMBER IT OR EVEN AWARE OF IT WAS CALLED A TURBIDITY EVENT. EVENT. THERE WERE THESE PLUMES OF SEDIMENT THAT CAME INTO THE POOL OVER A DAY. SEVERAL DIFFERENT PLUMES CLOUDED UP THE POOL VERY BADLY. ALSO, EVEN THE ELIZA SPRINGS STREAM AND THE UPPER BARTON SPRING AREA. SO A LOT OF SEDIMENT CAME INTO THE POOL. IT WAS VERY UNUSUAL, POTENTIALLY VERY DAMAGING, VERY CONCERNING. [03:50:01] AND THE QUESTION, OH, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK SLIDES HERE. JUST SHOWING THESE PULSES OF, UH, TURBIDITY, THAT'S THE RED LINE. THREE PULSES OVER THAT FIRST DAY. AND THEN I THINK 10 DAYS LATER WITH SOME RAIN, THERE WAS ANOTHER PULSE, UH, INTO THE POOL. SO, UH, THE QUESTION WAS, WHERE DID IT COME FROM? UH, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT, UM, IT CAME FROM A HOMEOWNER, UH, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO WAS PUTTING IN A WELL FOR GEOTHERMAL HEATING. UM, THAT WAS ABOUT THREE QUARTERS MILE FROM THE POOL. SO ONE HOUSE, ONE LOT, ONE, WELL, LESS THAN ONE MILE FROM THE POOL. THIS WAS UNFORESEEN, PERHAPS UNFORESEEABLE, UH, SOME OF THE DAMAGED MEASURABLE, SOME NOT, BUT ALL OF IT DESERVING AND ALL OF IT REQUIRING CAREFUL CONSIDERATION. NOW, MULTIPLY THIS KIND OF ACTIVITY UP AND DOWN MOPAC AND ASK HOW WE COULD FIND, POSSIBLY FIND, UH, GET A FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. HOW COULD THAT BE JUSTIFIED? ONLY BY IGNORING WELL-DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE THAT INCAR SYSTEMS THE POTENTIAL FOR DEVASTATING IMPACTS ON THE SPRING FLOWS, ON THE WATER QUALITY AND ON SALAMANDER HABITAT AND POPULATION, UH, ON SALAMANDER HABITAT AND POPULATION . SO AGAIN, I ASK YOU EITHER, UH, COLLECTIVELY OR INDIVIDUALLY TO REQUEST THAT THE MOBILITY AUTHORITY NEVER CONSIDER A FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FOR THIS PROJECT AND PREPARE A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MARK MAY MARK, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. OKAY. UH, HI THERE. UH, MY NAME IS MARK MAY, UM, I LIVE IN D FIVE. UM, JUST SOME, UH, COMMENTS HERE. YOU KNOW, I THINK MANY TIMES THE MOST ENVIRONMENTAL THING YOU CAN DO IS NOTHING. RIGHT? MANY TIMES THAT'S ACTUALLY THE BEST ANSWER. SO, SO I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY CLEAR THAT THIS, UH, PROJECT IS OVER A, A SENSITIVE PART OF, OF THE TOWN, AND WE NEED TO BE INCREDIBLY CAREFUL. UM, SO I'M GONNA CHOOSE TO FOCUS ON, UH, YOU KNOW, UNLIKE OTHER TRAFFIC. 'CAUSE I THINK THAT THAT HAS A LOT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT LIKE, I THINK ARE OBVIOUS. SO YOU WOULD THINK IF WE WERE CONSIDERING A LARGE, UH, PROJECT LIKE THIS, THAT WE WOULD BE GETTING A LOT OF, A LOT BACK FOR LIKE THE RISK THAT LIKE WE'RE TAKING. HOWEVER, IT SEEMS LIKE, YOU KNOW, UNLESS YOU'RE IN THE TOLL LANES, THAT YOU'RE ONLY GONNA SAVE FIVE MINUTES PER, PER DAY IF YOU DRIVE THE WHOLE WHOLE LENGTH OF THE TOLL ROAD. THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A VERY BIG WIN, UH, TO ME FOR LIKE THE RISK THAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO TAKE. BUT THEN WHAT ABOUT THE DOWNSIDES OF THE PROJECT? THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE THINGS I CAN THINK OF THAT SHOULD BE PART OF THE, UH, REPORT THAT I DON'T THINK ARE, SO FIRST, HOW MUCH TIME DO WE LOSE DURING, UH, THE BUILDING PHASE? HOW MUCH TIME ARE WE IN THE HOLE FOR THOSE YEARS? THE PROJECTS BEING BUILT BEFORE WE GET FIVE MINUTES A DAY BACK, RIGHT? HOW BIG IS THAT HOLE? UM, UH, SECOND, WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR AUSTIN HIGH? I WAS, UH, SURPRISED THAT NO ONE ACTUALLY ADDRESSED THE INCREDIBLY CONCERNED PARENTS THAT, THAT WERE AT THE AUSTIN HIGH THING A FEW WEEKS BACK. AND THEY SEEMED TO THINK THERE'S GONNA BE CHAOS WITH, UH, PEOPLE EXITING GOING BY BY THE SCHOOL AND TRYING TO GET BACK ON ON THE FREEWAY. THAT'S THOUSANDS OF, UH, FAMILIES IMPACTED. WHY ISN'T THAT ACTUALLY ADDRESSED? UM, WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR THE, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR THE BRIDGE THAT GOES UNDERNEATH A MOPAC THAT'S PART OF, OF THE BUTLER TRAIL? THOUSANDS OF FOLKS RUN ON THAT EVERY DAY. WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR THAT? WHAT'S THE COST OF THAT? WHY ISN'T THAT PART OF IT? THAT'S, UH, QUALITY OF LIFE. THAT'S A VERY POPULAR PATH FOR NON-CAR, UH, COMMUTING. WHY ISN'T THAT PART OF THIS, RIGHT? WHY AREN'T WE SHOWN THESE THINGS? SO I HAVE A LOT OF, UH, [03:55:01] CONCERNS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER WAS, UH, TOMMY JOAQUIN HANCOCK. HE WAS JOINING US VIRTUALLY, BUT HE DROPPED OFF AND I PROVIDED HIS COMMENTS TO YOU ALL VIA EMAIL. UM, SO THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER, TANYA PAYNE, UH, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. HELLO, MY NAME IS TANYA PAYNE AND I AM THE VICE PRESIDENT OR THE, UH, VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMUNICATIONS FOR ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE, UH, ALSO PASSED A RESOLUTION AGAINST, UH, OR OPPOSING THE MOPAC SOUTH PROJECT, AND I'M GOING TO READ IT TO YOU REAL QUICKLY. UH, WHEREAS THE ZILKER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PREVIOUSLY OPPOSED THE CT RA'S MOPAC SOUTH PROJECT IN A RESOLUTION DATED JULY 1ST, 2024. WHEREAS WHILE SOME DETAILS HAVE CHANGED, C-T-M-R-A HAS RECENTLY RESURRECTED THIS PROJECT TO AGAIN PROPOSE ADDING TWO TOLL LANES IN EACH DIRECTION, TOTAL OF FOUR NEW LANES FROM CAESAR CHAVEZ TO SLAUGHTER RAIN LANE. WHEREAS AS PROPOSED, THE, UM, THE BRIDGE OVER LADY BIRD LAKE, ZILKER PARK, AND AUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL WOULD BE EXPANDED FROM EIGHT LANES TO 13 LANES, WHICH IS A LOT THAT MAKE THAT PATH REALLY SHADY . WHEREAS C-T-M-R-A HAS EXPANDED THE PROJECT PROPOSING TO ADD BETWEEN ONE AND THREE NEW AUXILIARY AND FREE LANES IN EACH DIRECTION ALONG THE EIGHT MILE ROUTE. WHEREAS IF CONSTRUCTED, BOTH CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE PROJECT WOULD DO DIRECT HARM TO LADY BUR LAKE PARKLAND, AUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL, LADY BIRD LAKE, ZILKER PARK, BARTON SPRINGS, THE BARTON CREEK GREEN BELT, BARTON CREEK, GAINES CREEK, WILLIAMSON'S CREEK, THE BARTON SPRINGS, EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE, AND OTHER PARKLAND AND NEIGHBORHOODS ALONG THE PROJECT ROUTE. WHEREAS TRAVEL PATTERNS AND CONGESTION HAVE DROPPED SINCE THE PANDEMIC AND MORE PEOPLE ARE TELECOMMUTING AND OTHERWISE AVOIDING PEAK HOUR COMMUTING. WHEREAS HAYES COUNTY, OVER THE OBJECTION OF THE TRAVIS COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S COURT, AND WITH A CONTRACTOR LED BY THE FORMER C-T-M-R-A EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, IS SIMULTANEOUSLY MOVING FORWARD WITH STUDIES AND PLANNING AIMING AIMED AT CONNECTING STATE HIGHWAY 45 SOUTHWEST TO I 35, WITH ROUGHLY HALF THIS PROJECT LOCATED IN TRAVIS COUNTY. WHEREAS IF THESE TWO PROJECTS ARE BOTH COMPLETED, MOPAC WILL HAVE BEEN CONVERTED FROM A LOCAL COMMUTER HIGHWAY TO AN ALTERNATE INTERSTATE I 35, INVITING LARGE AMOUNTS OF INTER-REGIONAL AND INTERSTATE TRAFFIC, INCLUDING TRUCK TRAFFIC INTO MOPAC WITH HARM TO THE ENVIRONMENT NEIGHBORS AND LOCAL COMMUTERS FROM TRAVIS COUNTY, NORTHERN HAYES COUNTY, AND WILLIAMSON COUNTY. WHEREAS CTMR, ESTE EAST CTMR STAFF AND CONTRACTORS ARE CONTINUING TO USE OUTDATED TRAFFIC MODELING METHODS, AN OLDER TRAFFIC POPULATION AND PROFITS. AM I, IS THAT ME? , BUT PLEASE CONTINUE. PLEASE LOOK AT, UH, PROVIDING A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY AND THE REST OF THE RESOLUTIONS IN YOUR EMAIL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ROBIN, RATHER ROBIN, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES, ROBIN, RATHER A RESIDENT OF A D NINE. ALSO SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE ZORA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE OF AUSTIN, PRETTY MUCH THE LAST THING I WISH FOR IS AN EXPANDED AMOUNT OF TOLL LANES ON MOPAC BEING BUILT SIMULTANEOUSLY TO WHEN WE'RE ALREADY EXPANDING. I 35. WHEN I THINK ABOUT AUSTIN, I, I USED TO THINK ABOUT AUSTIN AS A GREEN OASIS, A GREEN LEADER. I NOW THINK OF US AS A LEADER IN DYSTOPIAN DATA CENTERS, DETENTION CENTERS, AND TOLL LANES. AND I DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE THERE. AND I'M, I CAME HERE TONIGHT. I REALLY RESPECT Y'ALL. I I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR THIS PARTICULAR CONFIGURATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION, [04:00:02] AND I THINK YOU HAVE A LOT OF, UM, WISDOM, AND I THINK YOU HAVE MORE POWER THAN YOU THINK YOU DO. I DON'T THINK YOUR ROLE IS JUST TO ADVISE OUR COUNCIL, RIGHT? I THINK YOUR ROLE IS TO STAND UP WITH US WHEN WE HAVE A SITUATION LIKE THIS AS A BODY AND ALSO AS INDIVIDUALS AND SAY WHAT HAS TO BE SAID. I THINK WE HAVE TO SAY NO TO THIS WHOLE IDEA. AND I THINK WE HAVE TO SAY NO TO THIS. I'M SORRY Y'ALL, BUT THIS IS A VERY INADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. BRIDGET SHEA COMMISSIONER, UH, TRAVIS COUNTY COMMISSIONER, WHO WAS JUST REELECTED IN A FORMER, UM, SOS EXECUTIVE SAID THE, THIS WHOLE THING WAS FULL OF LIES. THIS HAS AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ON BARTON SPRINGS, ON ZILKER PARK, ON US, ON ON US. I WAS, UM, HONORED TO MODERATE THE TOWN HALL AT AUSTIN HIGH WEEK BEFORE LAST. AND IT WOULD'VE MADE YOU WEEP IF YOU'D BEEN THERE TO SEE THESE HIGH SCHOOL KIDS BUSTING THEIR BUTT, ORGANIZING THIS TOWN HALL AND BEGGING US, BEGGING US TO FIND A WAY TO GET THE FULL EIS AND ULTIMATELY TO STOP THIS THING. THESE ARE 18-YEAR-OLD KIDS, LITERALLY STAYING AFTER SCHOOL, WRITING THEIR POSTERS, MAKING THEIR SPEECHES. THIS IS AN ABOMINATION. I I JUST CAN'T EVEN PRETEND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD GO ALONG WITH. AND I'M ASKING YOU TO DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN ASK FOR THE FULL EIS NOT THE SKINNY. COMPLETELY INADEQUATE. IF YOU THINK FOR ONE SECOND, THIS PROJECT'S NOT GONNA AFFECT US, NOT GONNA HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN LOOK EACH OTHER IN THE EYE. THAT'S JUST NOT, THAT'S JUST NOT TRUE. SO PLEASE DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN. PLEASE HELP US. THIS IS NOT RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BOBBY LEVINSKY. BOBBY, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. UH, I'M BOBBY LEVINSKY, SAVE SPRINGS ALLIANCE. UM, I'VE SPOKEN TO YOU ABOUT THIS BEFORE. I'M GONNA BE REALLY LAY AND START BY QUOTING THE LORAX, WHICH I DON'T TYPICALLY DO, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT HERE. LOOK, LORAX, CALM DOWN. THERE'S NO CAUSE FOR ALARM. I JUST CHOP DOWN ONE TREE. I'M DOING NO HARM. THAT'S WHAT THE CTMA WANTS US TO BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE DOING. NO SIGNIFICANT HARM, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING TO REMOVE 70 ACRES OF URBAN TREE CAN CANOPY PAVING AN ADDITIONAL 110 ACRES OF THE RECHARGE ZONE AFFECTING LADY BIRD LAKES, ER, PARK, THE GREEN BELT, BARTON CREEK, ES CREEK, WILLIAMSON CREEK, SO MANY CREEKS, UM, EXPANDING A HIGHWAY THAT FACILITATES A 64% INCREASE IN VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED BY 2049. THAT'S APPROXIMATELY A HUNDRED, UH, MILLION VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ABOVE THE NOBU SCENARIO. AND BY THE WAY, TRAVIS COUNTY HAS RECEIVED A FAILING GRADE IN AIR QUALITY FROM THE AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION. YOU'VE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM ME WITH THE BETTER MOPAC COALITION COMMENTS. UM, SO SEA TERM MAY JUST POSTED THE 8,000 COMMENTS THAT THEY RECEIVED. I KNOW THAT AT LEAST 6,200 OF THOSE COMMENTS ARE VERY MUCH AGAINST THIS PROJECT 'CAUSE THEY CAME THROUGH OUR PORTAL. SO THIS IS NOT A PROJECT THAT'S BEING VERY MUCH SUPPORTED BY THE COMMUNITY. IF YOU GO OUT THERE, NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE SUPPORTING IT. UM, THE CITY OF ALLISON CITY COUNCIL, SINCE THE LAST TIME I SPOKE TO YOU, THEY'VE NOW PASSED A RESOLUTION CALLING ON CTMH TO DO A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. TRAVIS COUNTY'S DONE THAT. THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION'S DONE THAT. I'VE GIVEN YOU EXPERT REPORTS FROM DR. LAUREN ROSS ON WATER QUALITY. SHE POINTS OUT THAT 44% OF THE RUNOFF IN THE SENSITIVE AREAS ARE NOT BEING TREATED, AND THEY'RE ONLY BEING TREATED, UH, FOR TSS, NOT FOR MOST OF THE HIGHWAY, UH, RELATED POLLUTANTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH HIGH HIGHWAYS. UM, CRYSTAL DRE AND, UH, NICO HOWARD HAVE REPORTS IN THERE FOR OUR ENDANGERED SPECIES IMPACTS, AS WELL AS IMPACTS TO OUR KAR SYSTEM. UM, WE HAVE A CHAPTER ON PARKLAND IMPACTS. YOU CAN SEE WHERE THERE'S NOT EVEN CONSISTENCY FROM ONE DOCUMENT TO THE NEXT ABOUT HOW MUCH PARKLAND'S BEING AFFECTED. UM, THE AIR QUALITY IMPACTS DR. UH, JOHN ZAMER, WHO WAS A FORMER NEW YORK DOT, UM, UH, LEAD. HE, UH, HAS DONE A AIR QUALITY, LIKE WHAT'S LACKING IN IN THAT ANALYSIS. HE POINTS OUT THAT REALLY THEY'RE NOT LOOKING AT PM 2.5, UM, OR OZONE. UH, THE NOISE IMPACTS ARE IN A CHAPTER IN THERE AS WELL. WE'VE GOT AN EXPERT REPORT FROM NORM MARSHALL, WHO'S POINTING OUT THAT THE DATA'S INCONSISTENT FROM ONE TO THE NEXT. THE, THE PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT, WHICH DISMISSED A LOT OF THE INITIAL ALTERNATIVES WAS BASED OFF OF [04:05:01] A 2012, UM, DATA. UH, AND THEN YOU HAVE, UM, UH, A REALLY GREAT, UH, LAST MINUTE EDITION FROM, UH, SYDNEY DWOSKIN, WHO'S AT A LOCAL ARBORIST. SHE DID A, UH, CAD OVERLAY OF THE HIGHWAY WITH, UM, THE URBAN TREE CANOPY. AND, AND THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO THAT 70 ACRE FIGURE. UM, AND SHE ALSO POINTS OUT THAT IT'S AFFECTING AFFECT AFFECTING A LOT OF THE PARKLAND. UM, YOU CAN'T. AND THEN, UH, THE SPREAD OF OAK QUILT. THERE'S WAY TOO MUCH, UM, TO SPEAK WITHIN THREE MINUTES, BUT PLEASE READ THOSE REPORTS. IT'S A LOT OF GREAT STUFF. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BEATRICE ANDERSON. BEATRICE, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. GOOD EVENING, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. UH, BEATRICE ANDERSON, THE SAVE SPRINGS ALLIANCE. UM, SO AS THE COMMISSION WELL KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN EA AND AN EIS IS NOT INSIGNIFICANT. UM, THE EEIS REQUIRES MUCH MORE THOROUGH ANALYSIS, WHICH IS SORELY LACKING IN THIS EA AND WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL FOR A PROJECT OF THIS SCALE. AND AT THIS LOCATION, EIGHT MILES OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE, IT'S ENTIRELY OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE. SO AN OVERVIEW WHICH IS PROVIDED WITH THE EA IS JUST SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH. AND THEN IN THE EA IT IS, UH, THERE ARE SWATHS OF UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS, GAPS IN ANALYSIS AND CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS ON IMPACTS THROUGHOUT. BUT, UM, I ONLY HAVE THREE MINUTES. I'M GONNA FOCUS ON TWO MAIN POINTS OF CONCERN. ONE, WATER QUALITY, AS BOBBY MENTIONED, UM, IT, THIS FOCUS IS ONLY ON TSS REMOVAL. UM, AND IT CLAIMS THAT IT, THEY WILL ACHIEVE A HUNDRED PERCENT REMOVAL THAT IS NOT SUPPORTED IN THE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS, UM, FOR THAT SECTION. AND THEY ALSO TALK ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, PUTTING IN, UH, MITIGATION MEASURES ON THE NORTHERN PART OF THE PROJECT, BUT THEN ELSEWHERE, THEY ARE REMOVING ALL EXISTING, UH, LIKE RUNOFF, UH, MITIGATION MEASURES AND THE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS DO NOT GIVE A CLEAR REPLACEMENT FOR WHAT THOSE MEASURES ARE GONNA BE. THERE IS A MAJOR OVERRELIANCE ON THIS, UH, JELLYFISH FILTER TECHNOLOGY, WHICH AGAIN, IS THE DATA FOR THE EFFICACY OF THAT IS JUST NOT PRESENT IN THE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS. AND SO WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT EIGHT MILES OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE, AND WE ARE NOT SEEING CLEAR SCIENTIFIC DATA THAT'S BACKING UP HOW THEY'RE PREVENTING THAT RUNOFF FROM JUST GOING DIRECTLY INTO THERE. UM, IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH. UM, AND THEY'RE ALSO ON THE, UH, STORMWATER AND, UH, WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES SECTION. A DISTURBING AMOUNT OF MENTIONS TO THINGS THAT WERE USED ON THE, UM, HIGHWAY 45 PROJECT, UM, THAT IS JUST NOT EVEN COMPARABLE. UM, AND THEIR USE OF THING, YOU KNOW, REFERRING TO TECHNOLOGIES OR MEASURES THAT WERE USED FOR THAT PROJECT, UM, AS A SIGN THAT THEY CAN JUST BE COPY AND PASTED OVER TO THIS WITHOUT THAT ADDITIONAL STEP OF ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR DOING THIS OVER THE RECHARGE ZONE AND ALL THE PARKS AND ALL THE TREE CANOPY. AGAIN, THAT IS JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH. WE NEED A, A, A MORE TECHNICAL, UM, AND MORE, UH, ROBUST ANALYSIS THERE. UM, AND THE NEXT QUICKLY ON, UH, NOISE POLLUTION. SO THEY, THEY TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, BUT IN THE TRAFFIC NOISE, UH, SECTION OF THE EA THEY FLATLY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS. THERE WERE OVER ALMOST 1000 INDIVIDUAL RECEPTORS THAT HAD SIGNIFICANT NOISE IMPACTS. UM, AND THERE ARE ONLY FIVE SITES THAT THEY'RE RECOMMENDING FOR NOISE BARRIERS. ALL OF THE OTHER SITES THAT THEY ANALYZE TO PUT UP NOISE BARRIERS TO PROTECT FROM ALL OF THIS INCREASED TRAFFIC THEY'RE SAYING IS GONNA BE MOVED HERE. UM, IT WAS TOO COSTLY. SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO MITIGATE, BUT THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, BUT FROM THEIR ANALYSIS, THEY DON'T HAVE TO MITIGATE IT 'CAUSE THE COST. PLEASE RECOMMEND A FULL EIS WE NEED SO MUCH MORE TECHNICAL DATA TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT LIKE THIS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BILL BUNCH. BILL IS RECEIVING A DONATION OF TIME FROM WORTHY LAFOLLETTE. BILL, YOU'LL HAVE SIX MINUTES. THANK YOU. I DON'T THINK I'LL USE ALL OF THAT, BUT, UH, ANYWAY, THANK Y'ALL AGAIN SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY. UM, THIS PROJECT OBVIOUSLY IS, UH, DIRECTLY IN YOUR JURISDICTION. UM, THE OFFICIAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD DID CLOSE ON SUNDAY AT MIDNIGHT. BUT, UM, THIS ISSUE REMAINS A LIVE ISSUE FOR THE C-T-R-M-A BOARD, UH, IN THE MONTHS AHEAD. AND THEN ALSO WITH THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION. SO WE DO ASK THAT YOU WEIGH IN FORMALLY BY RESOLUTION, UH, AT YOUR NEXT MEETING OR WHEN, WHEN IT MAKES SENSE FOR YOU SOON. AND THEN TO CAN [04:10:01] TAKE THAT IN PERSON, IDEALLY TO THE BOARD ITSELF. UM, AND WHERE THEY MEET WHEN THEY HAVE THEIR, THEIR MONTHLY MEETINGS, UH, THEY'VE BEEN HIDING FROM THE PUBLIC. UM, THEY HAD NONE OF THEM ATTENDED THE ONE PUBLIC MEETING THAT THEY HAD. UM, THEY NEED TO HEAR FROM YOU AND FROM ALL OF US DIRECTLY. UM, UH, ONCE THEY, UH, BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN THEY DECIDE, IT WILL TAKE THE STAFF SOME PERIOD OF MONTHS BECAUSE THEY ARE REQUIRED TO RESPOND TO ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT THEY GOT. SO IT'S NOT URGENT, BUT, UM, SOONER IS BETTER. UM, YOU'VE HEARD ALL THE TESTIMONY TO TONIGHT ABOUT THE INCREDIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. UM, AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, WE NEED SOME BASIC INTEGRITY IN OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND, AND IT JUST BEYOND, UH, IT'S UNFATHOMABLE THAT PEOPLE WHO PURPORT TO, UH, SERVE US IN A PUBLIC WAY, UH, STAFF CONSULTANTS, BOARD MEMBERS AT C-T-R-M-A WOULD TELL US OVER AND OVER WITH A STRAIGHT FACE THAT THERE'S NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS FROM A PROJECT OF THIS SCALE, UH, IN THIS LOCATION. AND THEN READING THEIR OWN DOCUMENTS WHERE OVER AND OVER, UH, THEY ADMIT THERE'S GONNA BE HARM DONE, NOISE, WATER POLLUTION, ENDANGERED SPECIES, UM, IN THIS ONE STRETCH IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR CITY, NOT ONE, NOT TWO, NOT THREE, NOT EVEN FOUR, FIVE ENDANGERED SPECIES ARE UNDER IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BE CLEARING AND DESTROYING HABITAT. UH, RIGHT IN THIS CORRIDOR, OR IMMEDIATELY DOWNSTREAM, LESS THAN HALF A MILE FROM BARTON SPRINGS. THE AQUIFER FLOWS DIRECTLY UNDER IT WHERE THERE'RE SALAMANDERS IN THE AQUIFER ITSELF, NOT JUST AT THE SPRING OPENINGS. UM, WE OFTEN TAKE IT FOR GRANTED, BUT WE LIVE IN THIS INCREDIBLE PLACE. IT'S A, A GLOBALLY RECOGNIZED BIODIVERSITY HOTSPOT RIGHT HERE IN THE HEART OF OUR CITY. THERE'S NOT ANOTHER CITY ON THE PLANET THAT HAS A GIANT FRESHWATER SPRING LIKE BARTON SPRINGS THAT'S STILL CLEAR AND CLEAN AND BEAUTIFUL. AND THEY'RE PUTTING ALL OF THIS AT RISK FOR WHAT THEY SAY, A FIVE MINUTE SAVINGS IF YOU DRIVE THE ENTIRE 8.8 MILES AT PEAK RUSH HOUR. AT PEAK HOUR. THIS IS A FRACTION OF THE, THE SAVINGS THAT THEIR MODELING TOLD US WE'D GET WHEN THEY DID THE INITIAL ANALYSIS BACK IN 20 13, 20 14. TRAFFIC PATTERNS ARE CHANGING, TELECOMMUTING IS HAPPENING. THIS IDEA THAT WE NEED SOMETHING LIKE THIS SO WE CAN DRIVE A LITTLE BIT FASTER FOR A FEW MINUTES A DAY AND DO ALL OF THIS RECOGNIZABLE AND SUBSTANTIAL HARM, SOME OF IT LIKELY IRREVERSIBLE. UH, WE NEED TO HAVE YOUR OUTRAGE WITH US. WE NEED TO HAVE YOUR EXPERTISE WITH US, YOUR KNOWLEDGE. UH, SO, UH, PLEASE CONSIDER THAT. AND, AND THANK YOU AGAIN FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BARB LAFOLLETTE. BARB, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS BARB LA FLETT. I'M PRESIDENT OF THE BARTON HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I'M ALSO PARENTS TO TWO TEENAGERS AT AUSTIN HIGH. SO I COMMIT THIS FROM TWO DIFFERENT ANGLES. I WOULDN'T WANT YOUR JOBS FOR ANYTHING IN THE WORLD BECAUSE I'VE LISTENED TO THREE PRESENTATIONS THIS EVENING AND ALL THREE OF THEM YOU'VE BEEN LIED TO . I WOULD NOT WANT TO HAVE TO TRY AND PARSE OUT WHAT'S TRUE AND WHAT'S LIES FOR ANYTHING. UM, WHAT BILL SAID, WE LIVE IN A UNIQUE PLACE THAT ONCE IT'S GONE, YOU CANNOT REPLACE IT. YOU CAN'T GO BACK IN TIME. UM, THEY DID C-T-R-M-A DID AN INTERNAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY, NOT A FULL IMPACT STATEMENT, AND [04:15:01] THEY WOULDN'T EVEN MAKE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. THEY SAID THEY WERE CONFIDENTIAL IF THEY WOULDN'T EVEN MAKE WHAT THE PUBLIC SAID ABOUT THE PROJECT PUBLIC. WHAT MAKES THEM, WHAT MAKES US BELIEVE THAT THEY WOULD MAKE BE FORTHCOMING WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE MIGHT NOT WANT TO HEAR? I BESSE YOU. PLEASE INSIST THAT THEY DO A FULL EIS IT IS THE ONLY WAY TO KEEP OUR CITY AND KIDS SAFE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE AND FOR THE TIME TO SPEAK CHAIR. THAT CONCLUDES THE SPEAKERS FOR THIS ITEM. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS FOR THE PRESENTATION. IT'S 10:25 PM SO WE'VE ALL BEEN HERE ABOUT FOUR AND A HALF HOURS NOW. UM, THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE. THESE ARE IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT DESERVE OUR TIME AND ATTENTION. SO I DID WANT TO MAKE SPACE FOR THE PRESENTER WHO HAS BEEN WAITING THIS WHOLE TIME FOR THOSE OF YOU GIVING PUBLIC COMMENT. AND AT THE SAME TIME, WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THE LATENESS OF THE EVENING AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVEN'T STARTED COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. SO I'M NOT SEEING OUR PRESENTER, CHARLOTTE. OH, THERE. UM, CHARLOTTE, I APPRECIATE YOU SO MUCH BEING HERE TONIGHT, AND JUST WANTED TO ASK YOU DIRECTLY IF YOU'D BE WILLING TO COME BACK TO OUR NEXT MEETING SO THAT WE CAN KIND OF BE FRESH AND APPROACH QUESTIONS THEN, RATHER THAN EXTENDING TONIGHT AND HAVE IT BE ITEM NUMBER ONE ON THE AGENDA. CORRECT? CAN YOU ANSWER THE, AT THE MIC JUST FOR EVERYONE TO HEAR? PERHAPS IF YOU PROMISED TO BRING COOKIES FOR HER, , I HAVE COOKIES FOR YOU NOW. ALSO, . I'M NOT BRIBING THOUGH, BUT , UH, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE JUST TO CONTINUE AND FINISH OUT THE MEETING TONIGHT? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY QUESTIONS THERE ARE, BUT WHAT WE CAN ANSWER THAT WE HAVEN'T ALREADY SHARED MM-HMM . AND THAT IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE ANSWERED AT THIS POINT DURING AN ENVIRONMENTAL PHASE. LET ME DO A STRAW POLL FOR COMMISSIONERS. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO STAY TONIGHT AND ASK QUESTIONS. . OKAY. COMMISSIONER BRIER, RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU WOULD PREFER DOING THIS AT A, A FOLLOW UP MEETING. FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. WELL, CHAIR YES. AT A FOLLOW UP MEETING. IT COULD BE LISTED FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION. CORRECT. WHICH IS NOT TONIGHT, WHICH COULD GIVE US A LITTLE MORE LATITUDE RIGHT. IN WHAT WE CAN DO. YEAH. WELL, I DON'T MIND COMING, YOU KNOW, CALLING A DAY NIGHT. MM-HMM . THE DISADVANTAGE TO THAT IS IF CHARLOTTE'S UNABLE TO ATTEND NEXT TIME, THEN, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE A QUESTION, THEN YOU KNOW, SHE CAN'T ANSWER IT. MM-HMM . AND THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY REASON WHY, YOU KNOW, I WOULD NOT BE INTERESTED IN DEFERRING IT, IS I I WANT TO GIVE HER A FAIR SHOT AT BEING ABLE TO ANSWER A QUESTION THAT RIGHT. WE CAN'T, YOU KNOW? YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. SO THE NEXT MEETING IS AT MAY 20TH, NICOLE. IS THAT RIGHT? UM, AND I KNOW IT'S A LIGHTER AGENDA. AGAIN, WE WOULD PROMISE TO PUT YOU UPFRONT. I KNOW YOUR TIME IS VALUABLE TOO. I'M REALLY TRYING TO DO THIS OUT OF THE RESPECT FOR EVERYBODY'S TIME AND, AND WELLBEING. SO I HOPE, I HOPE THAT'S EVIDENT. UH, VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL, I SAW YOUR HAND. YEAH, I JUST, UM, YOU KNOW, IT FEELS LIKE THIS IS A REALLY, FIRST OFF, YOU KNOW, UH, WE DON'T HAVE THIS SET UP TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A MOTION THIS EVENING, AND I, I WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. UM, SO IF WE SET IT UP FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION, UM, AT THE NEXT MEETING, I THINK THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, I I WOULD BE MORE IN FAVOR OF THAT. I ALSO FEEL LIKE THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT ISSUE AND I WANNA BE ABLE TO GIVE IT, YOU KNOW, OUR FULL MIND. UM, WE'VE HAD A LOT TO DIGEST, UM, TODAY, AND I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO DIVE IN IN JUST A FEW MINUTES, UH, JUST DOESN'T REALLY QUITE GIVE IT THE QUALITY THAT WE NEED. CAN WE, UH, GIVE THE PRESENTER THE OPTION TO JOIN US VIRTUALLY NEXT TIME? UH, SO WE CAN GET THROUGH JUST THE QUESTION PORTION REMOTELY IF SHE DOESN'T WANNA, UM, ABSOLUTELY. THERE'S ALWAYS THAT OPTION. MM-HMM . YEAH. THANK YOU FOR HIGHLIGHTING THAT. AND IF, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, A COLLEAGUE WHO COULD JOIN IN YOUR STEAD, YOU KNOW, WE WELCOME THAT AS WELL. BUT I THINK HEARING THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE COMMISSIONERS TONIGHT, NOTICING THE VACATING OF THE AUDIENCE, I, I THINK FOLKS ARE, ARE READY TO GO. SO I, I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS OUT OF RESPECT FOR EVERYONE HERE. I AM GOING TO GO AHEAD AND THEN CONCLUDE DISCUSSION ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR NOW, AND GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UM, AND HOPE THAT WE CAN, OH, YEAH, YOU SHOULD MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE IT AND THEN [04:20:01] TO, TO NEXT WEEK. OKAY. THAT SOUNDS GOOD. I SO MOVE TO, UM, POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO NEXT WEEK AND PICK IT UP THEN, OR TO THE NEXT MEETING, BUT I HAVE LISTED FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTION. OKAY. SO MOTION TO MOVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR TO THE MAY 20TH AGENDA FOR, HAVE IT AT, AT BE AT THE TOP OF THE AGENDA. AND AS A DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEM MOVED BY VICE CHAIR BRISTOL. IS THERE SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ALL RIGHT. SECONDED BY SULLIVAN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND. AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS. ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL DO THAT. UM, AGAIN, THE TIME IS 10 30. WE'VE EXTENDED TO 10 45. WE GOT THIS. WE'RE GONNA FINISH THIS UP. UM, DISCUSSION, [5. Approve a nomination of a member of the Environmental Commission to the Urban Forestry Committee.] ACTION ITEMS. NUMBER FIVE. IT'S A SHORT ONE. APPROVE A NOMINATION OF A MEMBER OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TO THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE WHO'S INTERESTED. YES. YES. WE HAD SOMEONE RESIGN, AND I'M GONNA NOT GONNA NAME THAT PERSON 'CAUSE I WOULDN'T WANNA PUBLICLY EMBARRASS THEM, BUT THEY GIGGLE A LOT. , I HAVE TO GRADUATE, MAN. I, I GOTTA FOCUS ON MY, ON MY DEGREE. . EXCUSES. EXCUSES. . I THOUGHT YOU MADE A CAREER OUT OF THAT. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, LIKE, YOU RETIRED 65 IS COMMISSIONER REMER. CAN YOU, SO I IS THE POINT IS, I GUESS WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO JOIN US TO BE ON THE, UH, URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE. MM-HMM . UH, SO, UH, WE ARE TAKING APPLICATIONS. THE ONLY CRITERIA IS THAT YOU CAN IDENTIFY A TREE FOUR OUT OF FIVE TIMES AND THAT YOU HAVE A PULSE AND WELL, YOU'RE REALLY SELLING IT. IF YOU HAVE BOTH OF THOSE QUALIFICATIONS, WE WILL WELCOME YOU WITH OPEN ARMS AND COOKIES. IS THIS A URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE OR LIKE A GOOGLE CAPTURE, YOU KNOW? YEAH. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. UH, SO, UH, CAN YOU REMIND US WHO ALL IS ON IT CURRENTLY? WELL, IT'S, UH, MYSELF AND IT IS, UH, MR. LUKI, LUKI AND FLORY. AND, UH, ALL RIGHT, ANNIE. OKAY. OKAY. SO WE ALREADY HAVE FOUR. WE HAVE FOUR, BUT WE, WE ARE SEEKING A, A FIFTH ONE JUST TO MAKE IT MORE FUN. GOT IT. OKAY. , WHO'S INTERESTED IN ADDING THE FUN TO THE URBAN FORESTRY COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE, EXCUSE ME. AND WE DO, WE, WE, WHAT HAPPENS IS WE MEET GENERALLY DURING THE DAY, AT LUNCHTIME, FOUR TIMES A YEAR, MORE OR LESS. WE HAVE TO HAVE AT LEAST ONE MEETING A QUARTER. WE DO REMOTE MEETINGS SO YOU CAN DIAL IN FROM THE OFFICE, YOU KNOW, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME IN. WE MEET FOR ABOUT AN HOUR, HOUR AND A HALF AT MOST. SO WE KEEP THINGS PRETTY QUICK AND, UH, YOU KNOW, SO IT, IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, A PRETTY QUICKLY PACED THING AND OUR AGENDA'S NOT AS QUITE AS HEAVY AS THE THINGS THAT WE DO HERE. SO, UH, THAT'S THE TYPE OF THING THAT WE DO. SO THAT'S, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO DECIDE NOW THINK ABOUT IT. EMAIL ME WITH IT. UH, WELL, WE HAVE, WE HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM HERE TONIGHT. SO ELIGIBLE FOLKS HERE COULD BE VICE CHAIR, BRISTOL, IT COULD BE COMMISSIONER MORRISON, SECRETARY KURESHI, IT COULD BE ME OR IT COULD BE COM COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN. THOSE ARE OUR OPTIONS. SO ANY OF THOSE FOLKS, AND I WOULD LOVE TO SAY COMMISSIONER RETO LES, BUT THIS IS HER LAST MEETING, WHICH WE WILL GIVE SPACE TO AT THE END OF IT. UM, ANY OF THOSE FOLKS INTERESTED RIGHT NOW IN JOINING? OKAY. ALRIGHT. BE ANTISOCIAL, , THEN THIS IS GONNA TURN INTO AN EMAIL CAMPAIGN FOR YOU. YES, I KNOW, I KNOW I HAVE TO BUY MORE COOKIES. OKAY, THAT'S FINE. SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND SEGUE THEN INTO COMMITTEE UPDATES. [6. Update from Urban Forestry Committee regarding the meeting on April 28, 2026. ] ITEM NUMBER SIX, UPDATE FROM URBAN FORESTRY COMMITTEE REGARDING THE MEETING ON APRIL 28TH, 2026. WE DIDN'T HAVE A MEETING. UH, SO THAT GETS INTO THE NEXT THING WAS, UH, I NEED EVERYONE, UH, NICOLE AND I NEED EVERYONE TO RESPOND TO THE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT OUT, UH, REQUESTING ATTENDANCE ON AT, YOU KNOW, WE SENT OUT AN EMAIL THAT SAYS, HERE'S SOME DATES. SO WE NEED YOU TO RESPOND BACK TO THAT EMAIL IF, IF YOU HAVE NOT DONE SO, RESPOND BACK TO THAT EMAIL SO WE CAN GET THE NEXT MEETING SET UP. OKAY. GREAT. FUTURE AGENDA [FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ] ITEMS. I KNOW WE TALKED TONIGHT ABOUT SOME THINGS THAT'LL BE IN THE NEXT AGENDA. YEP. YEAH, NO, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, YOU KNOW, I THINK OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, MOPAC SOUTH AND BARTON SPRINGS ROAD. MM-HMM . WELL, WE WANNA DO AN ACTION ON THE BARTON SPRINGS ROAD THING TOO, RIGHT? YES. YEAH. BOTH OF THEM AS ACTION ITEMS. YEAH. AND RECOMMENDATIONS. GREAT. ANYTHING ELSE? UM, YEAH, I COULD GIVE YOU A LITTLE SUMMARY OF WHAT WE DID AT THE BOND ELECTION ADVISORY TASK FORCE. UM, YES, SOME OF THAT IS RELATED, LIKE THE STORM WATER, UH, WORK GROUP COVERED [04:25:01] A LOT OF STUFF ABOUT WHAT WE DO ABOUT FLOODING AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THAT SOUNDS GREAT. I'D LOVE TO HEAR ABOUT THAT. SO I CAN GIVE YOU A SUMMARY OF THAT. PERFECT. ANYTHING ELSE FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? JUST TO CLARIFY, ON BARTON SPRINGS ROAD, DON'T WE, AREN'T WE INTENDING TO WAIT SEVERAL MONTHS FOR THE, LIKE, ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS TO BE DELIVERED TO US? SO THE THINKING WAS TO DO A RECOMMENDATION SOONER RATHER THAN LATER, AND THEN REVISIT AGAIN ONCE THERE'S MORE INFORMATION. BUT RIGHT NOW TO RECOMMEND WHATEVER IT IS WE RECOMMEND, WHETHER IT'S MOVING FORWARD AS CURRENTLY PLANNED OR TAKING ANOTHER PATH. UM, AND THEN IF THEY PROCEED ON THE CURRENT PATH, AND I THINK THAT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT BECOMES MORE RELEVANT FOR THEM TO BRING BACK. OKAY. AND LET US DISCUSS IT THEN. YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY OTHER FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS? OKAY. WITH OH, AND YEAH, BEFORE WE CLOSE, PERSONAL PRIVILEGE. LAST LAST MEETING FOR COMMISSIONER RETO. LES, YOU'VE BEEN WONDERFUL. I'M REALLY SAD THAT WE'RE LOSING YOU, BUT DO YOU WANNA SAY A FEW WORDS? I HAVE QUESTIONS THAT I MIGHT SEND TO NICOLE, SO MAYBE IF SOMEONE IS INTERESTED IN ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS, UH, ON THE LAST PRESENTATION WE HAD, MAYBE YOU CAN ASK ONE FOR ME. SURE. PLEASE. AND, AND, UH, I WANNA SAY CONGRAT, I WANNA SAY CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR GRADUATION AND THEN ALSO, UM, I THINK YOU WON AN AWARD . I DID. UH, I GOT THE, THE OUTSTANDING DISSERTATION AWARD FOR THE, UH, FOR THE BIOLOGY DEPARTMENT, LIFE SCIENCES. SO YEAH, IT WAS, THAT'S VERY COOL. IT'S BEEN GREAT. UH, BUT I AM JUMPING INTO THIS NEW HUGE THING, WORKING WITH WOMEN IN NATURE NETWORK, PLUS LOOKING FOR A JOB. SO IT'S A LOT AND I, YEAH, BUT I, I HAD A LOT OF FUN HERE. AS MUCH FUN AS YOU CAN HAVE FOR FOUR HOURS AND A HALF, BUT, UH, BUT IT HAS BEEN AMAZING AND I, I, I AM EXCITED TO COME BACK. UH, SO YEAH, SOON YOU'LL SEE ME. SOON I'LL BE KNOCKING ON DOORS. GOOD. YES, PLEASE. WE WELCOME YOU BACK WHENEVER YOU CAN COME BACK AND CONGRATS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU EVERYONE. I'VE THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. THANKS. AND CONGRATULATIONS, NEW CHAIR. THANK YOU, . ALRIGHT, WITH THAT, IT IS 10:36 PM MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU GUYS. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.