[00:00:01]
IT, UH, TWO, UH, TODAY IS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 29TH, 2020.THIS IS THE CONTINUATION OF THE AUSTIN CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
I'M ALSO GOING TO, UH, CONVENE THE, UH, SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, UH, SET FOR THURSDAY, OCTOBER 29TH, 2020.
UH, THIS IS CALLED MEETING, UH, TO CONVENE, UH, NO EARLIER THAN SIX.
UH, AND WE ARE CONVENING THIS VIRTUALLY AND RUNNING CONCURRENTLY WITH THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING.
WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT, UM, AND BEFORE
[Items 31 & SP Item 1]
US IS THE, UH, UH, FIGURING OUT HOW BEST TO, UH, HAVE, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY HEALTH, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY MOVE FORWARD WITH THE, UH, SUBSTATION TO BE, UH, CONSTRUCTED, UH, ON THE, UH, ON THE SITE.MY SENSE IS, IS THAT WE ARE ALL JOINED IN THE, UH, UH, EFFORT TO, TO GET THE, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY OUT THERE JUST AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
UH, I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THE URGENCY AND IMPORTANCE OF THIS PROJECT AND GETTING THIS PROJECT DONE.
UH, I S UH, LOOKING AT, UH, WHAT WAS SAID IN FRONT OF US, I WAS CONCERNED THAT THERE MIGHT BE SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT DID NOT WANT TO APPROVE A, UH, USE CHANGE, UM, WITH A, UM, A TEXT CHANGE, UH, MEANING THAT, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET WERE NOT NOTICED AND GIVEN, UH, APPEAL RIGHTS FOR A USE CHANGE.
UM, AGAIN, NO, I PERSONALLY THINK THAT YOU CAN DO THAT.
UH, BUT OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE A CASE NOW UP IN HOUSTON THAT MAY OR MAY NOT RULE ON THAT QUESTION, BUT IN ANY EVENT, UH, IT WAS SEEING THAT, AND THEN RECOGNIZING HOW IMPORTANT AND URGENT IT WAS FOR AUSTIN ENERGY TO MOVE FORWARD, UH, THAT, UH, PUT ON A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING AN ALTERNATE PATH, UH, WHICH WOULD HAVE A COUNCIL INITIATE P ZONING.
UM, IT WOULD GO DOWN TO A PLANNING COMMISSION.
UH, I THINK, UH, WHAT LEGAL IS RECOMMENDING THAT IF WE TOOK THAT ROUTE, WE SHOULD TAKE ITEM 31 AND POSTPONE IT INDEFINITELY RATHER THAN EITHER SAYING NO, OR JUST NOT ADDRESSING IT, BUT TO POSTPONE IT INDEFINITELY SO THAT IT WAS KIND OF HANGING OUT THERE.
IT COULD BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE COUNCIL OR FOR WHATEVER REASON IN THE FUTURE.
IT MADE SENSE TO DO THAT, UH, BY TAKING IT DOWN, UH, IT WOULD BE TREATED LIKE A ZONING CASE FOR A CHANGE OF USING THAT PROPERTY.
IT WOULD BE CLEAR NOTICE AND, UH, THAT ISN'T UNDER ANY DEBATE AND IT'S NOT SUBJECT TO BEING CHALLENGED OR DELAYED OR HELD UP.
IT JUST SEEMED LIKE THAT MIGHT REPRESENT THE PATH WITH THE LEAST AMOUNT OF RISK.
UM, UM, I THINK THAT IF WE DID THAT IN CONVERSATION WITH JACKIE AND I GETTING A CHANCE TO TALK TO HIM SECOND JACKIE, AND ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT THE STAFF MIGHT HAVE, I MEAN, THE COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE, UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT, UH, IF WE FOLLOW THIS PATH THAT, UM, WE FOLLOW IT WITH KIND OF THE UNDERSTANDING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT, UM, THEY SHOULD, YOU KNOW, WORK OUT THE TRAIL ASPECT THAT, UH, I UNDERSTAND, UH, THE JACKIE SAYS, UH, IS SOMETHING THAT, UH, UH, WILL BE WORKED OUT, UH, AT THAT LEVEL.
UH, BUT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT JUST COMES BACK CLEAN WITH JUST THAT, SO THAT IT'S NOT HELD UP, UH, WITH, UH, OTHER KINDS OF ISSUES RIGHT NOW, UH, LIKE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR OTHER KINDS OF ISSUES THAT, UM, IF THAT'S AN ISSUE AND IF THERE'S SPACE, WE COULD DEAL WITH THAT KIND OF THING IN THE FUTURE, BUT TO GET IT DOWN AND GET IT BACK TO US, UH, AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE.
JACKIE, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO ANY OF THESE, UM, ISSUES OR WHAT'S BEFORE US? SURE.
MAYOR COUNCIL MEMBERS, I'M JACKIE SERGEANT GENERAL MANAGER, AUSTIN ENERGY.
UM, WE BROUGHT FORWARD ITEM 31 BECAUSE WE FELT THAT THAT WAS THE CLEAREST PATH, UM, FOR MOVING THIS PROJECT AND ADVANCING IT.
UM, WE UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES THAT ARE BEING BROUGHT FORWARD.
UM, AND IN OUR CONSULTATION WITH OUR LEGAL TEAM, WE BELIEVE THAT, UM, ADVANCING BOTH ITEMS WOULD BE OUR BEST INTEREST, AND THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO SUBMIT A COMPLETE SITE PLAN AND MITZI CAN, CAN ADDRESS THAT WITH THAT SAID, UH,
[00:05:01]
I APOLOGIZE, MY DOG IS CHI-MING IN FOR SOME REASON, UM, WHILE, UH, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO PROCEED DOWN THIS OTHER PATH, UM, WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO MEET THE DEADLINES, UM, THROUGH THAT PROCESS.AND I CAN'T SAY FOR SURE HOW THAT PROCESS WILL BE, YOUR DOG IS INSIDE MY DOG.
SO I'M GOING TO MUTE MYSELF FOR JUST TO TELL MY DOG, MY DOG, YOUR DOG IS NOT IN FACT TALKING TO MY DOG.
UH, I THINK I CLOSED THE DOOR.
I PROBABLY SHOULD'VE LEFT IT LOUD AND LET HIM COME IN JUST A MINUTE.
DIDN'T SAY THE WHINING SIGN IN THE BACK.
THAT'S ACTUALLY FOR MY GRANDDAUGHTER, I HAVE TWO GIRLS AT NANA'S HOUSE, NO GETTING HURT AND NO WHINING.
UM, BUT I WANT TO COMMIT TO YOU THAT MY TEAM AND I SEE THAT SUSAN GROSS HAS JOINED US HAS ALREADY REACHED OUT TO THE RED LINE TRAIL.
UM, WE ARE IN SUPPORTIVE TRAILS.
UM, WE ARE LOOKING AT THE BEST ALTERNATIVES TO ACCOMMODATE A TRAIL ON THE SITE.
UM, THERE ARE OTHER, UH, REQUIREMENTS, UH, THAT WE HAVE AT THE SITE AND THERE ARE OTHER EASEMENTS.
AND SO BEFORE WE CAN FULLY COMMIT TO A SPECIFIC PATH FOR THAT TRAIL.
WE HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES, BUT WE'RE READY AND WE'RE WILLING TO ROLL UP OUR SLEEVES AND TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN BECAUSE WE APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS FOR MOBILITY THAT THIS COUNCIL AND THIS COMMUNITY I'VE BEEN STRIVING TO BRING FORWARD.
SO I DON'T SEE THE TRAIL AS AN ISSUE WE'RE PERMITTED TO IT.
UM, MY TEAM HAS COMMITTED TO IT AND I'VE INSTRUCTED THEM THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO MAKE HAPPEN.
UM, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE UNCERTAINTY WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH THE P'S ZONING PROCESS.
UM, AND WE CANNOT, I CANNOT STRESS IT ENOUGH, BUT WE CAN NOT HAVE ANY MORE DELAYS, UH, FOR THIS PROJECT, UH, THE NEED THAT WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN RELIABLE SERVICE, THE COMMITMENTS WE HAVE, UH, TO SOME OF OUR SPECIFIC CUSTOMERS, UM, AND THE NEED FOR THAT CAPACITY, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE COMING FORWARD FOR SERVICE.
AND WE HAVE TO SAY, I'M SORRY, BUT WE CAN'T SERVE YOU.
SO THIS IS VERY CRITICAL IT'S OF THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE, AND WE NEED A PATH FORWARD.
WHATEVER THAT PATH IS, OUR TEAM IS COMMITTED TO WORKING TOGETHER TO MAKE IT HAPPEN WITH YOUR SUPPORT.
UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IT.
THE, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM, UH, JACKIE WAS TO PASS BOTH 31 AND THE SPECIAL ON THIS ITEM.
AND MAYOR, IF I MAY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE ME.
UM, SO I WOULD LIKE, UH, IF JACKIE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO WHAT THE HESITATION WAS AROUND THE ITEM, UM, IN WHICH CASE I, I THINK ULTIMATELY I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS WHAT IT IS THAT WE ARE PRESENTING.
I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTION IS ON.
SO WE'RE ASKING THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO ENGAGE IN, YOU KNOW, AFTER A LONG DAY OF COUNCIL DELIBERATION, WE'RE ASKING THEM TO ADDITIONALLY, UM, BE A PART OF THIS PARTICULAR MEETING, IN WHICH CASE, CAN WE BE REAL CLEAR ABOUT WHAT IT IS, THE ITEM THAT'S BEFORE US AND WHY WE'RE DELIBERATING IT? SO IN ORDER FOR US TO, UM, CONSTRUCT AND PUT INTO OPERATION IN NEEDED SUBSTATION, WE HAVE TO HAVE A CHECKS CHANGE TO THE CODE TO ALLOW US TO PROCEED AND TO BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THAT THE OTHER IS THE CHANGE IN ZONING
[00:10:01]
AND JERRY RESTS.HOVEN CAN SPEAK MORE SPECIFICALLY, SPECIFICALLY TO THE TEXT CHANGE IN THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE THERE BECAUSE OF THE NORTH, NORTH BURNET, UH, GATEWAY REGULATORY REGULATING PLAN, AND THE CURRENT USE THAT WE HAVE OF THE SITE UNDER TOD ZONING.
UM, UH, OUR ATTORNEY MITZI COTTON CAN SPEAK TO THE DESIRE TO MOVE FORWARD, UH, APPROVING BOTH ITEMS. I THINK YOU'VE MORE OR LESS EXPLAINED EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE UP AGAINST, AND I DON'T THINK JERRY OR MITZI OR ANYBODY ELSE HAS TO.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE PROCEED WITH THESE DELIBERATIONS, THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT IT IS WE'RE DOING.
UM, BUT I THINK YOU ALREADY RESPONDED TO THAT.
I WOULD MOVE TO POSTPONE INDEFINITELY ITEM NUMBER 31 SUBJECT TO CALL, UH, AND TO PASS ITEM NUMBER ONE IN THE SPECIAL CALL MEETING, UH, WITH, UH, UH, DIRECTION THAT, UH, TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE THAT GET BACK TO US AS CLEAN AS AGAIN, HAVING WORKED OUT THE TRAIL, UH, ISSUE, UH, UH, NOTICE CASE, UH, AS WE NOTED ZONING CASES ON THE, THE OWNERS WITHIN, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE WHATEVER APPEAL, RIGHTS, AND ALSO NOTING, UH, ANY TEXT CHANGES THAT WOULD BE, UH, REQUIRED, UH, TO AFFECT THE PURPOSE.
SO YOU CAN TO THAT MOTION, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, ALICE SECONDS, UH, ANY DISCUSSION COUNCIL MEMBER, KITCHEN.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO ASK, UM, JACKIE AGAIN.
UM, SO I THINK WE JUST CONFIRMED THAT YOUR THINKING WAS IT WOULD BE BEST TO GO WITH BOTH OF THEM.
IS THAT BECAUSE THAT WOULD GIVE YOU THE MOST FLEXIBILITY TO GET MOVING FORWARD ON THEM? IS THAT THE THINKING, OR CAN YOU JUST SPEAK TO THAT AGAIN? WHEN COUNCIL TO CONSULTATION WITH OUR ATTORNEYS, IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT SCENARIO WE'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SUBMITTING A COMPLETE SITE PLAN, AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO CARVE OUT JUST A SPECIFIC AREA THAT RIGHT NOW WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST LOCATION SO THAT WE CAN ACCOMMODATE THE TRAIL AND THAT, UM, THAT NEED AS WELL AS ALONG WITH, UH, ADDRESSING ALL OF THE UNNECESSARY WATER FEATURES AND DRAINAGE ISSUES WITH THE PROPERTY.
SO, SO MY I'D LIKE TO VOTE ON IF I HEARD YOUR EMOTION CORRECTLY, I THINK YOU WERE PUTTING THE TWO THINGS TOGETHER IN YOUR MOTION, LIKE TO SEPARATE THEM, BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO, I WANTED TO, YOU COULD AMEND THE MOTION TO SAY THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE THE USE CHANGE, UH, UH, NOW, UM, WITHOUT HAVING GIVEN PEOPLE THE, UH, APPEAL, RIGHT.
MAYOR I'D LIKE TO WORK WITH, TO VOTE YES.
AND SO, UM, THAT'S WHAT I'M WANTING TO DO.
AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M THINKING THAT ALL WE NEED TO DO IS JUST SEPARATE OUT YOUR EMOTION.
UM, I'M NOT INTENDING TO, UM, TO AMEND YOUR MOTION SUCH THAT WE WOULDN'T BE VOTING ON, UM, UH, THE ITEM THAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
SO I SAID, I'M FINE DOING THAT JUST TO HERE.
SO THE FIRST PART OF THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE ITEM.
NUMBER ONE, THAT'S IN THE SPECIAL CALLED MEETING.
IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED AND DISCUSSION.
SO WHAT DOES THAT DO WITH ITEM 31 LENDER COUNCIL MEMBER, KITCHEN SCENARIO.
AND WE'RE GOING TO DIVIDE THAT AND WE'LL HAVE A VOTE ON THE 31, UH, AFTER WE HAVE, BECAUSE I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION TO THEM, BECAUSE I THINK THAT THAT GIVES THE MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY AS I THINK IS APPROPRIATE TO OUR STAFF, SPECIFICALLY ENERGY IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AND WITH THE MOST CERTAINTY, WHICH IS CERTAINLY IN THIS CASE TO THIS.
UM, I'M SORRY, SOMEBODY'S TALKING WHILE I'M, SHORT-CIRCUITING MY COMMENTS THERE.
NO, I'M TRYING TO ENSURE THAT IT'S CLEAR WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US.
SO I HAD SUGGESTED ONE THAT HAD HIS HANDLING ITEM, NUMBER 31.
AND NUMBER ONE AT THE SAME TIME, THAT'S A MEMBER OF KITCHEN IN ESSENCE, ASKED TO DIVIDE THE QUESTION.
YOU HAVE A SEPARATE VOTE ON EACH.
[00:15:01]
AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO ASCERTAIN BECAUSE I THINK WHAT THE CITY STAFF IS TO APPROVE BOTH 31 AND ONE THAT'S CORRECT.SO I SAID, WE WENT THAT AND FIRST A VOTE ON NUMBER ONE IN THE SPECIAL, AND THEN WE WILL HANDLE, UH, UH, THE VOTE ON NUMBER 31 IN THE REGULAR CALL.
AND THEN WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY IS YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU THOUGHT 30.
I PROMISE TO GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT, TO CONSIDER NUMBER ONE IN JUST A SECOND.
I PROMISE YOU CONSIDER THEM BOTH.
AS I TOLD AUNT, WE WOULD GET US A LITTLE SHOW BAG.
UM, SO I THINK ACTUALLY THE ROBERT'S RULES PROTOCOL WOULD BE TO TAKE OUT, UH, TO TAKE UP ITEM PRETTY ONE FIRST, BUT I RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS A THUMB ON THIS SCALE.
UM, I DON'T REALLY WANT TO SAY THAT I SUPPORT THE CITY STAFF AND WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR, BECAUSE I HAD AN ICE, THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ABILITY TO MOVE QUICKLY ON THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION.
I'VE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED THAT I SUPPORT BOTH OF THESE.
I MEAN, I S I HAVE SUPPORTED ENERGY MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS CASE SINCE MAY, WHEN THEY FIRST BOUGHT IT TO US.
SO, UM, YOU I'VE, AND I'VE SIGNALED THAT CREDIT.
I THINK THAT WE DON'T GO WRONG BY FOLLOWING THE CITY STAFF'S LEAD IN THIS SPECIFIC INSTANCE.
I'M TRYING TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO ADDRESS THE, THE DEBATE ABOUT HAVING A THUMB ON THE SCALE OR THE SUGGESTION THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS INAPPROPRIATE UNDER ROBERT'S RULES.
I IN FRONT OF US AS NUMBER ONE ON THE SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS, RIGHT? DISCUSSION COUNCIL MEMBER, AUTHOR.
UM, I THINK WE'RE ALL TRYING TO GET TO THE SAME PLACE.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE SUBSTATION BUILT AND, AND DO IT IN AN APPROPRIATE WAY AND GET IT DONE FAST.
UM, I'M WONDERING, UM, IF STAFF COULD SAY, IF IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO PROVIDE ANY, UM, GUARDRAILS FOR THIS PROCESS OR TIMING, UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE HEARD WILDLY DIFFERENT ESTIMATES OF HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE TO MOVE THROUGH THE PROCESS, WHICH I THINK IS THE REAL, UM, CONCERN HERE.
UM, SO I'M WONDERING IF STAFF COULD SPEAK TO HOW LONG THEY THINK THAT THE PROCESS WOULD TAKE, UM, TO BE ABLE TO GET THE SUBSTATION UP AND RUNNING, AND IF THEY COULD ALSO, UH, NOW THAT'S NOT UP AND RUNNING, BUT HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE TO GET THE ZONING CASE BACK TO US.
UM, AND THEN IF THERE ARE ANY ADDITIONAL, UM, DIRECTION THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ZONING CASES FOCUSED ON GETTING THE SUBSTATION AND DOESN'T GET DERAILED IN SOME OTHER FASHION, UM, YOU KNOW, IT IS A LOT OF DANGERS OF A SUBSTATION AND HAVING THINGS TOO CLOSE TO IT.
UM, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN MOVE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
SO IF, UM, JERRY COULD PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.
COUNCIL MEMBER, UM, THE, THE RESOLUTION ON THIS ITEM DOES DIRECT TO SENIOR MANAGER TO ENSURE AN EFFICIENT AND EXPEDITED REZONING CASE.
SO AS NOT TO CAUSE UNNECESSARY DELAY, UM, SO WE HAVE THAT DIRECTION IN THE RESOLUTION, BUT WITH REGARD TO HOW LONG IT WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE, I CANNOT GIVE YOU AN EXACT NUMBER.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE RESOLUTION DIRECTS US TO REZONE THE ONLY THE PORTION IS NEEDED FOR THE SUBSTATION.
SO THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE FOR AUSTIN ENERGY TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHERE THE SUBSTATION IS GOING.
AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO GET A SURVEY OF WHERE THAT AREA IS FOR THE APPLICATION.
AT THAT POINT, THE APPLICATION COULD BE SUBMITTED.
I WOULD THEN HAVE TO DO THE STAFF REVIEW THE NOTIFICATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING.
AND THEN OF COURSE, BRING IT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND NOTIFY FOR CITY COUNCIL AS WELL.
I THINK THAT THE, THE FIRST PART IS, UM, MOST IMPORTANT IS IDENTIFYING THE AREA TO BE REZONED BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE NOTIFICATION WOULD BE BASED, BASED OFF OF.
SO IS THAT REQUIRED BECAUSE OF HOW OUR DRAFT ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN OR IS THAT BECAUSE THAT'S REQUIRED IN THE ZONING PROCESS? CAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GRANT ZONING TO OTHER PEOPLE, WE DON'T TELL THEM EXACTLY WHERE THE BUILDING HAS TO GO, FOR INSTANCE.
SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF GO AHEAD.
IT'S BECAUSE OF THE RESOLUTION SAYS TO INITIATE THE REZONING OF THE AREA NEEDED FOR AN ELECTRIC SUBSTATION.
SO INSTEAD OF THE RESET, THE, THE ITEM NUMBER ONE ON A SPECIAL CALLED DOES NOT SAY REASON ON THE ENTIRE SITE, IT SAYS REZONE, THE AREA NEEDED FOR THE SUBSTATION.
SO I NEED TO GET THAT INFORMATION FROM AUSTIN ENERGY.
THEN I NEED TO GET A SURVEY IN THEN AREA BECAUSE THAT SURVEY WOULD BE DETERMINED, THE AREA THAT WE'RE NOTIFYING, YOU KNOW, 500 FEET AROUND.
SO ONCE THAT'S DETERMINED THAT I CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE, OKAY,
[00:20:01]
SO WOULD THIS ALL GO FASTER IF WE JUST REZONED THE AUSTIN ENERGY PROPERTY AS A WHOLE, LIKE, WOULD THAT ALLOW THIS PROCESS TO MOVE MORE QUICKLY? IT COULD, IF IT WERE LEGAL LOT, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S LEGAL A LOT OR IF IT'S ALREADY BEEN SUBDIVIDED, BUT IF IT WAS YOU ASKED BECAUSE THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE SURVEY PARKLAND, UM, CAN LEGAL SPEAK TO THAT? CAUSE I'M WAY OUT OVER MY SKIS HERE.UM, I DON'T, IN FACT, I'M SORRY.
AND WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH LEGAL AND WAS DRAFTED IN A WAY TO ALLOW IT TO PROCEED AS AGAINST THE WHOLE TRACK, UH, IF, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY NEEDED.
UH, BUT I THINK TO YOUR POINT OUTS, I THINK THE GOAL IS TO GET THIS DONE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHY IT COULDN'T BE INITIATED AS TO THE WHOLE TRACK AND AS AUSTIN ENERGY, MORE AND MORE EXACTLY WHAT LANDED NEEDED.
YOU COULD, YOU COULD AMEND THE CASE.
I MEAN, I THINK DON'T, WE AMEND TO, TO PULL BACK THE, THE AREA THAT'S INVOLVED IN OTHER ZONING CASES WHERE WE COULD DO THAT.
I MEAN, SO, SO YOU COULD START IMMEDIATELY, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE NOTICE, YOU COULD START IMMEDIATELY.
I MEAN, THE GOAL HERE IS TO, IS TO NOT WAIT AND TO MOVE FORWARD ON EVERYTHING THAT YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD ON AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD ON.
BUT IF THERE'S A LANGUAGE CHANGE TO, TO COUNCILMEMBER AUTHOR'S POINT, UH, WE WOULD CERTAINLY MAKE ANY, THIS WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT ALL OUR PARTS, MY UNDERSTANDING AND, AND THE NOTES FROM, FROM MY STAFF THAT WERE WORKING ON THIS WAS IF THIS WAS DISCUSSED WITH MITZI AND, UM, THAT THE ZONING CASE WOULD ALLOW FOR THE WHOLE SIDE TO ALLOW FOR PART OF THE SITE.
UM, UM, BUT THE GOAL HERE IS TO MOVE IT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
LET ME JUST SAY THAT THE, THAT THE RESOLUTION IS DRAFTED FOR THE PORTION OF THE SITE.
CAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THERE WAS A, UM, AN INTEREST IN IT ZONING JUST THE PORTION, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO KNOW WHERE THAT PORTION WAS.
UM, WE CAN IT'S, IT'S, YOU'RE INITIATING IT.
SO IF YOU WANT TO INITIATE SOMETHING DIFFERENT, WE CAN TALK ABOUT CHANGING THE LANGUAGE IN THAT RESOLUTION, UM, TO SAY SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO SAY THE ENTIRE TRACT OR THE PORTION, WHICHEVER IS THE LANGUAGE.
I THINK THE GOAL AND WE'LL TAKE WHATEVER LANGUAGE YOU SUGGEST IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COVER THE GREATEST NUMBER OF CONTINGENCIES.
SO AS TO ALLOW AUSTIN ENERGY TO GET THIS BACK TO US AS QUICKLY AS IT POSSIBLY CAN, AS, AS ACCORDING TO WHATEVER IT IS THAT IT DETERMINES THAT IT, THAT IT NEEDS COUNTS, REMEMBER, SORRY, CAN I FINISH MAYOR? I WAS STILL GOING DOWN A LINE OF REASONING.
SO IF, UM, OKAY, SO IT'S WRITTEN TO GET THE FASTEST THROUGH THE PROCESS SINCE THIS IS NOT ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT A SUBSTATION OR NOT, IS THIS DRAFTED TO GET IT THE FASTEST THROUGH THAT PROCESS? BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME, IF IT WAS THE WHOLE THING, WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR THEM TO DO OTHER THINGS.
I MEAN, THIS IS JUST LIKE ANOTHER ZONING CASE THAT WE CHANGED THEY USE, AND WE DON'T GET TO SEE THE FANCY MODELS AND OTHER KINDS OF STUFF WITH THAT.
UM, AND EVEN, YOU KNOW, A TRAIL WOULD COME AT THE SITE PLAN STAGE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, UM, FOR MOST OF OUR ZONING, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT MAKING THIS CONTINGENT ON THEM DOING A TRAIL.
WE'RE SAYING WE AS A COUNCIL, IF THERE'S A SOLUTION THAT ALLOWS WE WOULD LIKE A TRAIL, BUT THAT SEEMS TO ME TO BE A SITE PLAN ISSUE, NOT A ZONING ISSUE BECAUSE WE ALL AGREE THAT WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE USE.
UM, IF WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THE ROAD OF ZONING, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SKIP THROUGH ZONING PRETTY QUICKLY AND GET TO SITE PLAN.
UM, SO THAT THE QUESTIONS COME UP, THEN ASSUMING THAT MAKES IT FASTER, IT DOESN'T MAKE IT FASTER THAN THEN.
I CAN SUGGEST SOME, UH, LANGUAGE CHANGE IF YOU WANT IN THE FIRST BE IT RESOLVED.
YOU COULD SAY THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATES THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 24, 12 KRAMER LANE TO ZONE THE PROPERTY AS NEEDED FOR AN ELECTRIC SUBSTATION, TAKE OUT THE PORTION OF, AND THEN IF IT TURNS OUT THAT IT'S A MORE RESTRICTED AREA, THAT'S FINE.
BUT I MEAN, I'M IMAGINING, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT LIKE I'M IMAGINING THIS IS A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD ZONING CASE AND WE'RE JUST GRANTING THE USES AND I'M NOT SURE WHERE ALL THE OTHER DISCUSSION COMES IN THE PROCESS.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT WOULD BE, UM, AT SITE PLAN, NOT IN THE ZONING, MY, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ADDING THE GOAL HERE IS NOT TO ADD MUSCLES TO THIS PROPERTY.
IT'S TO GET THE SUBSTATION DONE.
I THINK THERE WAS CONCERN INITIALLY WITH HOW MUCH LAND, BECAUSE
[00:25:01]
THERE'LL BE A COMPANION TEXT AMENDMENT TO TAKE WHATEVER PORTION OF WHATEVER AMOUNT OF LAND IS ZONED P WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE PLAN, THE GATEWAY, THE NORTH BURNET GATEWAY PLAN.SO I THINK THERE WAS SOME CONCERN FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE TO LIMIT THAT, BUT WE'LL WRITE IT IF WE USE THE LANGUAGE I SUGGESTED, I THINK THAT ALLOWS IT TO BE THE WHOLE TRACT OR IF WE KNOW WHAT IT IS.
AND IT'S THE SMALLER TRACTOR RUN INTO ISSUES WITH DOING THE WHOLE TRACK.
AND IT'S FASTER TO DO A SMALLER PORTION.
HE WAS BRINGING OUT WHAT THAT WORDING WOULD BE.
I WOULD GLADLY TAKE THAT WORD.
ALISON, DID YOU HAVE MORE BEFORE WE WENT TO SOMEONE ELSE? UM, I GUESS I'M JUST WONDERING, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE NEED TO REZONE IT.
I'M JUST WONDERING WHY IT HAS TO BE REMOVED FROM THE PLAN AND YOU COULDN'T JUST CHANGE THE PLAN FOR THAT ONE THING.
IT'S, JERRY MAY HAVE A BETTER ANSWER THAN I, BUT SINCE P'S ZONING, DOESN'T EXIST IN NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO AMEND THE NORTH BURNETT GATEWAY PLAN TO CHANGE USES THERE.
IT HAS TO BE, IT CAN'T BE BOTH IN THE NORTH BURNET GATEWAY PLAN AND HAVE THE TOD SUBDISTRICT ZONING THAT IT HAS NOW AND HAVE PEAS ZONING.
SO THE AMENDMENT TO THE GATEWAY NORTH GATEWAY PLAN WAS CHANGING.
THE PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE DISTRICT THAT THE, THAT THIS AREA IS AS OPPOSED TO CHANGING THE PLAN TO ADD P TO THE PLAN.
AND I THINK THAT IS MORE COMPLICATED.
SO IT'S ALL JUST A MATTER OF THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE.
HOLIDAYS AND MISSY, DO YOU HAVE, WHEN YOU HAVE THAT LANGUAGE, RAISE YOUR HAND AND I'LL READ THAT INTO THE RECORD.
I THOUGHT I READ IT BEFORE, BUT I MUST'VE BEEN ON MUTE.
SO I'M LOOKING AT I'VE GOT IT ON MY SCREEN.
UM, THE FIRST BE IT RESOLVED, I WOULD JUST CHANGE IT TO SAY THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATED THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 24 12 KRAMER LANE TO ZONE THE PROPERTY AS NEEDED FOR AN ELECTRIC SUBSTATION TO PEA ZONING DISTRICT.
SO WE'RE REMOVING THE PORTION OF THE AZ BETWEEN PROPERTY AND NEEDED ANY OBJECTION TO THAT CHANGE BEING MADE, HEARING NONE, THE CHANGES MADE FURTHER DISCUSSION COLLEAGUES.
UM, I'M GOOD WITH EVERYTHING WE JUST DID.
IS THERE ANY, IS THERE ANY REASON TO NOT JUST ZONE THE WHOLE PROPERTY WE OWN P WILL THAT SAVE PEOPLE TIME? IS THAT, IS THERE A SCENARIO WHERE THE SMALLER THING IS ACTUALLY FASTER? NO.
SO WE HAVE TO HAVE A SURVEY FOR THE CASE TO GET STARTED IF WE DO THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, IF WE CAN GET STARTED SOONER.
SO THE FASTEST THING WOULD JUST BE TO ZONE THE WHOLE THING, BUT MITZI, IF THE LANGUAGE YOU JUST READ TO US THAT WE JUST INCORPORATED IT CAN ACHIEVE THAT AND WE DON'T NEED TO CHANGE IT.
I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK BECAUSE I HAVE NO PROBLEM JUST KNOWING THE WHOLE PROPERTY EVERY BIT WE OWN.
AND THEN YOU DON'T HAVE NO, YOU HAVE NO QUESTIONS YOU HAVE TO ASK, BUT IF WHAT YOU, IF WHAT WE JUST DID COVERS THAT, THEN I THINK WE'RE GOOD.
UM, UH, UH, THEN I THINK I KNOW THE THING OKAY.
WITH DAD THERE, UH, COUNSELOR KITCHEN.
I MEAN, IT SOUNDS GOOD TO ME ALSO, BUT, UM, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
SO, UM, SO WHAT WE'RE DOING IS, UH, SO MITZI, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS, UM, INITIATING IT FOR THE, HOW DID YOU PUT THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE, UM, OF THE SUBSTATION? IS THAT RIGHT? UM, I HAVE TO GO OVER HERE TO UNMEET THE DOCUMENT NOTES.
SO WHAT I HAD PUT IN THERE WAS INITIATING REZONING OF THE PROPERTY AT 24, 12 KRAMER LANE TO ZONE THE PROPERTY AS NEEDED FOR AN ELECTRIC SUBSTATION.
SO THAT MEANS THAT THAT'S THE LIMITATION ON WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
I THINK THE MAYOR MENTIONED THAT EARLIER, BUT THAT IF I HEARD HIM RIGHT, BUT LET'S PUT THE FOCUS HERE IS HERE.
SO IT'S NOT FOR DOING ANYTHING ELSE AS PART OF THIS PARTICULAR, UM, SONY ACTION WILL BE ONLY FOR THAT PURPOSE.
FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCIL MEMBER ALTAR.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, UM, DAIRY, IS THERE, ARE THERE, IS THERE ANY OTHER LANGUAGE THAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE THEM TO FOCUS ON SIMPLY GETTING THIS SUBSTATION, LIKE THE ZONING NEEDED FOR THIS SUBSTATION THROUGH SO THEY CAN DO THERE'S A PLAN AND MOVE TO THE NEXT STAGE?
[00:30:01]
UH, NO COUNCIL MEMBER THAT I CAN THINK OF WITH THIS ONE.AND THEN THE SITE PLAN DOES THAT HAVE TO GO BACK TO, OKAY, WELL, UNDER P'S OWN, AFP'S ANYWHERE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL.
THIS IS INITIATING THE ZONING, BUT PRESUMING THE COUNCIL LATER APPROVES THE PEASE ZONING THAT WOULD REQUIRE AN APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BECAUSE ALL USE IS OVER ONE ACRE ZONING REQUIRE THE APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, A DECISION THEY MAKE AS APPEALABLE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND WOULD THE, UM, IF IT WAS JUST ITEM 31, THEN IT BECOMES A WITH A STAFF RECOMMENDATION, IT BECOMES A PERMITTED USE AND IT WOULDN'T REQUIRE ANY FURTHER APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IF YOU WENT WITH THE PLAN, COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION DOWN 31, IT WOULD STILL REQUIRE A RETURN TRIP TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE.
SO THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON 31 DOES NOT REQUIRE A RETURN TRIP TO PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE SPECIAL ONE DOES REQUIRE A TRIP BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THAT PLAN IS APPEALABLE TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
SO IF WE, I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY WE DON'T DO BOTH, BUT IF, LET ME JUST GO DOWN THIS PART FIRST, IF WE, UM, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE OUGHT TO BE PROVIDING AS DIRECTION TO CITY, TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FOCUS ON THE SUBSTATION PIECE AND DON'T ADD, SAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR ADD WEIRD THINGS, UM, WITH REGARD TO THE ZONES, WITH REGARD TO THE ZONING CASE, YOU KNOW, SEPARATE FROM ITEM 31 IS THEY'VE ALREADY MADE THE RECOMMENDATION ON 31, BUT WITH REGARD TO THE ZONING CASE, THE RESOLUTION JUST DIRECTS US TO, UM, ENSURING EFFICIENT AND EXPANDED THE ZONING PROCESS.
SO IT'S NOT CAUSE UNNECESSARY DELAY, THAT'S THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY MANAGER.
UM, WE WOULD OF COURSE HAVE TO TAKE TO THE CASE, TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE RECOMMENDATION TO YOU, BUT IT WOULD BE UP TO THEM AS TO WHAT THEY, WHAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS.
AND THERE'S NO DIRECTION WE CAN PROVIDE BECAUSE THEY'RE A SOVEREIGN BOARD.
IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE SO.
BUT I THINK MITZI COULD ADDRESS THAT.
WELL, IN THE END DATE THERE THEY'RE SOVEREIGN BOARD AND SUBDIVISIONS, BUT ON THIS, THEY'RE JUST PROVIDING YOU A RECOMMENDATION ON THE ZONING.
FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM.
ONE SPECIAL CALLED MEETING COUNCIL MEMBER KITCHEN.
I JUST DID SO, UH, SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IT GOES BACK THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEY PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION, BUT ISN'T THERE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE SCOPE OF THE RECOMMENDATION SET, ALL THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU JUST SET, WHICH IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS FOR THE SUBSTATION, RIGHT? UH, YES, CONSTANTLY WITH REGARD TO THE ZONING CASE, UM, WE WOULD TAKE IT BACK TO THEM, YOU KNOW, AS A P YOU KNOW, ZONING CASE.
AND THEY WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL BY POINT, WAS THAT WHEN THE, IF THE P'S ANYMORE APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEY USED ITS OWN ANY PROPERTIES, ITS OWN P AND HE USED INSIDE OF IT, THIS OVER AN ACRE WOULD REQUIRE YOUR APPROVAL OF THE PLAN COMMISSION AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN.
SO THEY'D MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE ZONING CASE, BUT IF YOU APPROVE THE ZONING CASE, THEN THE SITE PLAN WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD.
BUT THE SCOPE OF WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD DO WITH THE SITE PLAN IS SOMETHING THAT IF WE FELT LIKE WE WANTED TO PUT PARAMETERS ON IT, WE COULD DO THAT ON THE ZONING CASE CAME TO US.
WELL, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN PUT PARAMETERS ON THE, UM, UM, WHETHER IT GOES BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR NOT.
I JUST MEANT ON THE SCOPE OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD BE LOOKING AT.
I DON'T KNOW YOU COULD DO THAT WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BUT IF THE COMMISSION WERE TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN IN A WAY THAT SOMEBODY WANTED TO APPEAL IT TO COUNCIL, THEN Y'ALL COULD MAKE CHANGES TO IT.
SO MR.
IF I DIDN'T WORK AT 31 WERE APPROVED TODAY AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF, UH, THE SUBSTATION WOULD BECOME A PERMITTED TO USE ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDINANCE, WHICH WOULD BE 10 DAYS FROM TODAY.
AND IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH A SPECIAL QUALITY, WHAT'S THE TIMEFRAME, UH, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS AND GET THE, UM, P ZONING APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND THE SYPRINE WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE.
AND WE'RE ALL ASSUMING THAT IN THE END, WHAT WE WANT IS TO HAVE WESTERN ENERGY, TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT.
UM, THAT'S SORT OF A RHETORICAL POINT,
[00:35:01]
BUT I THINK, I THINK THAT PRETTY MUCH SUMS UP THE INTENT OF THIS COUNCIL IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, WITH THIS PROJECT.SO THE QUESTION IS SOONER OR, OKAY.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS SPECIAL CALL NUMBER ONE, THAT'S NUMBER ALICE.
I THINK WE ALL WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AUSTIN ENERGY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
WE'RE ALL SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT IT IS THEY NEED TO DO TO, TO, TO MAKE THEIR DEPARTMENT AND THE CITY RUN REALLY WELL.
UM, I THINK FOR ME, ESPECIALLY TALK ABOUT DOING BOTH DOESN'T QUITE MAKE SENSE BECAUSE ONE KEEPS IT IN THE REGULATING PLAN AND ADDS A PERMANENT USE TO THE WHOLE REGULATING PLAN AND THE OTHER REMOVES IT SO THAT IT DOES HAVE THAT PIECE ZONING AND STILLS.
THEY BOTH WILL ALLOW FOR THAT USE, BUT I THINK THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT UNDERSTANDING THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS AND MAKING SURE THAT THIS PARTICULAR SITE CAN BE USED FOR THIS PARTICULAR INFRASTRUCTURE WITHOUT NECESSARILY CHANGING THE WHOLE PLAN IN THE PROCESS.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M APPROACHING THIS.
UM, BUT I THINK WE ARE ALL IN AGREEMENT THAT WE WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD.
I THINK I JUST PREFER TO SEE THIS PARTICULAR USE IN THIS PARTICULAR SPOT, NOT NECESSARILY CHANGING, CHANGING THE WHOLE PLAN FOR IT.
FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS NUMBER ONE IS TAKE A VOTE, BUT COUNCIL MEMBER POOL.
I JUST WANTED TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT.
ARE WE CHANGING THE WHOLE PLAN BY CHANGING ONE USE THAT APPLIES ACROSS THE MR.
WHAT W WHAT 31 DOES, IS IT IMMENSE, A PREPAID USE TABLE FOR THE K WAY PLAN? SO WOULD ALLOW THAT USE THOSE TWO USES WOULD ALLOW THEM IN ANY PLACE THAT HAS SIMILAR ZONING, SO, RIGHT.
AND HOW MANY, HOW MANY DIFFERENT PLACES TO YOUR DATA? WE HAVE UTILITIES ZONING LIKE THIS.
OH, WELL, NONE BECAUSE IT'S A CIVIC USE, SO WE'RE REQUIRED TO BE A GOVERNMENT AGENCY, RIGHT? SO THE POINT IS THAT IT WAS ONLY A SPACE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I'M FINE WITH, YOU'RE ALL VOTING AGAINST 31, WHICH IS WHAT THE STAFF WANTS AND FOR A SPECIAL CALLED ITEM ONE, WHICH IS WHAT THE MAYOR HAS ADVANCED, BUT I JUST WANT YOU ALL TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT WILL DELAY ANY KIND OF ACTION ON BOSTON ENERGY MOVING FORWARD, THIS CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT BY PROBABLY FOUR TO SIX OR NINE MONTHS.
AND SO I LEAVE THAT WITH YOU ALL.
AND AS I HAVE SAID, MANY TIMES, THIS IS NOT MY FIGHT.
I DID NOT BRING THIS, THIS AS A STAFF PROPOSAL.
I SUPPORTED THE STAFF PROPOSAL AS FAR BACK AS MAY, WHEN THEY FIRST DID ADVANCED IT.
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW IT HAS GOTTEN SO FRIGGING COMPLICATED FOR ME.
WE SHOULD ENDORSE BUS ENERGY MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PIECE, WHICH IS GOING TO PROVIDE ELECTRICITY SUPPORT FOR THE UPCOMING SOCCER STADIUM AT MCCALLUM PLACE AND FOR THE 6 MILLION SQUARE FOOT DEVELOPMENT, UH, TO THE OLD IBM CAMPUS, WHICH IS THE BRANDYWINE DEVELOPMENT.
AND FOR THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT IS HAPPENING, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST IN DISTRICT SEVEN, BUT IN THE NORTHERN NORTHEASTERN NORTHWESTERN PART OF THE CITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT MY FIGHT.
I, I THINK, I THINK WE MOVED ON WITH THE QUICKEST PATH THAT'S POSSIBLE, WHICH IS ITEM 31 IT'S COMPLICATED, UH, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS NECESSARILY HELPFUL OR NECESSARY.
SO IF WE CAN STEP BACK FROM ALL OF THAT, UM, MAYBE WE CAN MAKE, UM, THE APPROPRIATE PUBLIC POLICY, RATIONAL DECISION, WHICH IS TO ENDORSE THE REQUEST FROM AUSTIN ENERGY TO MOVE FORWARD EXPEDITIOUSLY ON THIS CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT FOR THE DISCUSSION ON ITEM, NUMBER ONE IN THE SPECIAL CALL, HEARING ON THOSE, TAKE A, VOTE THOSE IN FAVOR OF ITEM.
NUMBER ONE, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
THOSE OPPOSED THOSE ABSTAINING COUNCIL MEMBER POOL ABSTAINS.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE VOTING.
AND WITH A TEN ONE VOTE, UH, ITEM NUMBER ONE IN THE SPECIAL CALLED, UH, PASSES.
IT'S ALL THE BUSINESS IN THE SPECIAL CALL.
SO I'M GOING TO ADJOURN THE SPECIAL CALL MEETING HERE AT, UH, WELL, NO, MY MOM I'LL KEEP IT OPEN JUST IN CASE PEOPLE.
WELL, I'M GOING TO CLOSE AT SIX 41.
UH, THAT MEETING IS ADJOURNED.