City Council Meeting Transcript - 11/1/2012

[10:06:06]





[no audio]

[audio problems]

[no audio]





[10:10:03]





[audio problems, please

stand by]

the following items are

pulled off the consent

agenda.



 6 pulled for a

brief presentation by the

law department.



Item 7 will be pulled to be

heard -- at the same time as

 56, which would be

after 4:00 p.m.



Item 13, is pulled by

councilmember spelman.



Item 19 is pulled for

[indiscernible] bylaw.



And 39 is pulled by

councilmember martinez.



The following items were

pulled off the consent

agenda due to the number of

speakers signed up.



Those are items 2 and items

27 and 28, to be heard

together.



That's already pulled to be

[indiscernible]

and those are all of the

items that I have pulled.



Any additional items to be

pulled by councilmembers?



[Audio problems]



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Hearing none, we have two

speakers signed up to speak

on the consent agenda.



They will be allowed three

minutes each.



The first speaker is

[indiscernible]



>> [indiscernible]

[audio problems, please

stand by]



>> you have three minutes

total.



[Audio problems, please





[10:12:00]





stand by]

I think you are signed up on

[indiscernible]

10 and 13.



>> Annexing some property

here in southern travis

county.



I-35 south and i-35, it's

only 114 acres, which may

not sound like a lot, near

slaughter lane, but I see a

bad trend here in the city

of annexing territory

outside, becoming this big

conglomerate.



So you know the original

city of austin when it was

laid out, the original plat

by edwin waller, who was

actually the first mayor of

austin, actually

[indiscernible]

edwin waller laid it out.



[Indiscernible] east avenue,

later becoming i-35, cesar

chavez, first street, then

up to what is today one

[INDISCERNIBLE] 19th

Street.



It's a bad trend.



This causes taxpayers

[indiscernible] this causes

taxpayers to foot the bill

for increased utilities.



As well as just more

government.



So we don't need this

annexation.



And I may have been signed

up also on [indiscernible]

consent, but [indiscernible]

3 minutes on however many

items really limits me

there.



So I just instruct you as my

representative and every one

of you to vote no on item

10.



Thank you very much.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Second speaker to speak on

the consent agenda is

michael whalen.



[Audio not transmitting]





[10:14:03]





>> [indiscernible] zero

waste -- [indiscernible]



>> I believe, I can't speak

for staff, but staff does

agree specifically to

restrict the [indiscernible]

to provide services to

property not currently

served by the austi

resource recovery.



>> Cole: That's the

language in the backup?



>> I believe that is the

language in the rca but the

purchase would be tied with

that language which is what

staff, I believe has

occurred to.



>> Cole: [Indiscernible]



>> Mayor Leffingwell: He's

here.



>> Bob getter, austin

resource recovery.



>> Cole: Can you speak to

the language that is in the

backup, the direct

recommendation?



>> Yes, we have an extended

conversation awac, in the

october swac meeting.





[10:18:10]





>> Bob is already here.



 whalen suggested that

there were good reasons for

suggesting that the private

sector could reduce the

carbon footprint and reduce

the costs of picking up

brush, relative to the

city's doing it because we

are paying a lot more money

for this equipment than the

private sector would have

had to have done.



I wonder if you could

address that.



>> Yeah, the actual intent

of switching over in

equipment achieves those

goals.



Our annual savings in

switching over, it's a

system, it's a series of

boxes and trucks.



I look at a system cost for

the -- this is a residential

service for brush

collection.



And annual savings is

projected to be $380,000.



We will save 115,000 miles

annually.



And the rotation of our

trucks out on the roads with

this new system.



And that's a 33% savings in

carbon footprint based on

this particular system that

we're proposing.



So I feel I'm addressing

those issues with this

changeover.



>> Will the trucks that you

are talking about here be 75

feet long?



>> The trucks, the lineup of

the existing truck is a

crane and three

tractor-trailers back to

back on a residential road

that lines up to 175 feet.



We're trying to reduce that.



We will be significantly

lower.



If we use the box trailers

and boxes on the same street

back to back, it's 120 feet

instead of 175 feet.



Still lengthy, still a

little bit of space.



There was mention of the --

of the braces that's the

street braces for the crane.



The existing system uses

those braces.



So that's not a change.



We're simply trying to be





[10:20:02]





more nimble with a different

type of equipment that will

generate a carbon footprint

savings.



 whalen suggested that

our cost by buying that

equipment through the buy

board was going to be 50%

higher than his costs if his

client bought it on the open

market.



I wonder if you could

address that.



>> We specified instead

of -- the market boxes that

are out there available to

private haulers, we

specified stronger rims on

the boxes, we specified a

larger wheel base and a

rubber base on the edges for

the purpose of not tearing

up the streets.



You will note that in a

rolloff situation in a

parking lot like a grocery

store or a large retail

store, the rolloff boxes

tear up the asphalt.



We are trying to prevent

that so this is a special

order.



>> Spelman: A special

order comparing apples to

mangos if we try to follow

your numbers --

[indiscernible]



>> again, you have no

concerns about the swac

language?



>> No, sir.



>> Spelman: Thank you,

sir.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Okay, that's all of the

speakers that we have signed

up on the consent agenda.



And with the confirmation

make items 23 and 25 will

remain on concept, but with

the swac language, I will

entertain a motion to

approve the consent agenda.



>> So move.



>> Mayor pro tem so moves.



Second by councilmember

morrison.



>> Mayor?



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Mayor pro tem?



>> Cole: [Indiscernible]



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

That's been changed.



All in favor say aye.



>> Aye.



>> Opposed say no?



Passes on a vote of 7-0.



Go to item 6.



Pulled for a presentation by

the law department.





[10:22:03]





Good morning, mayor, mayor

pro tem and councilmembers,

my name is lynn carter with

the city attorney's office,

I am recommending settlement

in the amount of $250,000 to

resolve jasmin ramirez's

property damage claim and

her personal injury claims

in regard to an automobile

accident that occurred on

MAY 9th, 2012, WITH A CITY

Of austin vehicle.



We discussed this

recommendation in executive

session on october 18th of

this year.



And the settlement agreement

will require that there be a

payment of a total of

$250,000, are which will

deduct the amount of the

property damage that has

already been paid, so the

total amount will be the

250,000, which the city --

is the maximum amount that

the city would be liable for

under the tort claims act.



In exchange for these

payments, the city would

receive a release of

liability.



So with that understanding,

the law department

recommends settlement in the

amount of $250,000.



For resolution of this

claim.



Any questions?



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Questions?



I will entertain a motion on

item no. 6.



Councilmember spelman moves

approval.



Seconded by councilmember

morrison.



Discussion?



All in favor say aye.



>> Aye.



>> Opposed say no.



Passes on a vote of 7-0.



Take up one more short item

before we go to our

presentations.



 19 is also -- also

a law department briefing.



Good morning, mayor,

council, jacquelyn kellam on

behalf of the city

attorney's office.



This particular item has

been pulled for the council

to select a bidder who is

not the lowest bidder, but

comes with the statutorially

authorized amount for you to





[10:24:00]





select one other than the

lowest bidder, that being a

local company.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Councilmember martinez?



>> Martinez: Thanks,

mayor.



Yes, I'm going to move that

we authorize the award and

execution of agreement with

kbs electrical

, based

on the fact that the local

bidder, which is kbs, offers

the city the best

combination of contract and

price and in addition to

economic development

opportunities for the city,

created by the contract

award, including the

employment of residents of

the city and increased tax

revenue.



I believe the difference in

price was about $3,000 and

since it's a local company,

I think we should take

advantage of the

opportunities that the

legislature gave us.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Motion by councilmember

martinez to approve the

second highest bidder --

second lowest bidder for the

contract.



Seconded by councilmember

spelman.



Is there any discussion?



>> Spelman: One last

point.



The difference in price is

$268, which is basically a

tie.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: I

feel a lot better now.



All right.



[Laughter]



>> Martinez: Actually,

mayor --



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Councilmember martinez.



>> Martinez: That is true

from second to third.



This is actually the third

place bidder.



So from third to first, it's

109,000 compared to 106,981,

is that correct, jacquelyn?



>> Mayor Leffingwell: So

we have to correct the way i

stated the motion then.



It is the third place --



>> Martinez: It is the

third place.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Third lowest bidder.



And is that all right with

you, councilmember spelman?



Your second still stands?



>> Spelman:

[Indiscernible]



>> Mayor Leffingwell: Did

you have a comment on that?



>> Yes, mayor, just to be

clear, the difference in the

amount of the bid is $2,732.



And that was the third

lowest bidder, that's

correct.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:





[10:26:00]





2,000?



>> $732.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: 732,

the difference between the

motion, the company named in

the motion and the actual

lowest bidder.



>> That's correct.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Okay.



So we've got the official

numbers now.



All right.



All in favor say aye.



>> Aye.



>> Opposed say no.



Passes on a vote of 7-0.



With that, council, we will

go to our morning briefings.



I believe the first one is a

briefing on the land

development code, unless

there's a preference to

change that order.



..



>> Good morning, mayor and

council, [indiscernible]

assistant director of

planning, development and

review.



This briefing is a

discussion we hope with you

regarding a process to look

at revising austin's land

development code.



This is a funded project

with the 2012-'13 budget

that you approved.



This project came out of the

imagine austin comprehensive

planning process, but it's

headed towards george adams'

division, so we're jointly

going to do this

presentation.



So our presentation, mayor

and council are structured

around these questions, why

does the code need a

revision, what's a good time

to do it?



What should be on the table

initially to undertake this

project and what strategy do

we use to focus on the

really important things that

need to be changed?



Who should lead this

project?



And how do we keep the

public informed and engaged.



How will we approach this





[10:28:00]





project and finally how long

might it take?



So why?



Why undertake this

complicated and difficult

project at this time?



You just approved a new

comprehensive plan and it

provides direction that can

be used to consider

revisions to the land

development code.



It also-- the land

development code is an

important implementing tool

for a comprehensive plan.



Our consultant team and our

staff recently completed the

best practices survey of big

cities that had adopted

comprehensive plan.



And out of that best

practices survey, we find

that successful

implementation of

comprehensive plans involved

at least five -- five

strategies.



You talked about a number of

these at your februar

retreat.



Continuous public

engagement, looking at

regulatory reform, making

sure our regulations support

the goals of the plan.



Using the plan to guide

capital investments.



Internal alignment.



Very important.



Making sure all of the

departments understand the

plan and are using it to

guide their decisions.



And finally, partnerships.



There's a whole range of

partnerships that are needed

in order to effectively

implement a comprehensive

plan that is as broad as

imagine austin.



I want to stress that --

that this isn't a linear

chart.



This is simply a chart that

is trying to illustrate how

we gain momentum to

implement the plan.



In other words, we don't

notdo any of these five item.



We do all five at once.



So with that, I would like

to turn it over to george to

talk about the code itself.





[10:30:01]





>> Thank you.



Good morning,

councilmembers.



George adams, planning and

development review

department.



I know a significant portion

of your council agendas are

devoted to zoning and land

development-related issues.



So you are very familiar

with -- with the complexity

of our code.



Its strengths and

weaknesses.



But we thought it was

worthwhile to -- to

highlight a few of the

indicators that point us to

the need to revise our code.



So for example the last

comprehensive zoning code

revision that we did was in

1984.



Which is now about 28 years

ago.



It was at a time when the

population of austin was

less than half of what it is

today.



Since 2005 we've had over

180 proposed code amendments

move to one stage or another

of adoption.



Which really points to -- to

a lot of -- of issues with

our code.



We have multiple overlay

districts that can apply to

any single property, this

can make it very difficult

to kind of unwind the

requirements for developing

on that property.



It's more the norm than the

exception to have a -- have

a somewhat customized zoning

applied to individual

properties, which also

complicates the process

greatly.



We also have multiple

duplicative and conflicting

requirements within the

code.



Once again just makes it

very challenging to sort

through what the specific

requirements are.



In any particular case.



We have over 60 zoning

districts within the code.



Many of which are rarely

used, so a lot of those are

a legacy from -- from many





[10:32:00]





years ago.



It's -- it also kind of --

kind of is -- is a way of

perhaps slicing the pie much

thinner than we need to in

addressing land use issues.



It's not initial to have

some difficult -- it's not

unusual to have some

difficulty finding a staff

person who can in a timely

manner come to a quick

resolution on a question

about the code.



Once again, that relates

back to the complexity of

our code.



All that greatly convolutes

the permitting process, both

for the folks trying to

obtain permits through the

process but also for those

on the outside who are

trying to understand the

process and participate in

it from another perspective.



It's not unusual for us to

use boa variances as kind of

an item of or a -- a last

resort to allow good

projects to move forward

when -- when there's -- when

our code doesn't permit

that.



And then finally, and

perhaps most importantly,

our code isn't user

friendly.



It's -- it's very difficult

to understand.



It's difficult to interpret

and it's difficult to

administer.



The good news is that we --

with the adoption of imagine

austin, we have guidance for

this process.



The comprehensive plan

provides both context and

direction for the code

revision.



This begins with the vision

statement and its focus on

livability, sustainability,

and complete communities.



There are over 70 policies

and actions within the plan

that -- that speak directly

to the code revision and

provide a lot of guidance in

how we move forward on it.



Then finally, most

specifically, we have

priority program 8 which

recommends revising austin's





[10:34:00]





development regulations and

processes to promote a

compact and connected city

and further it provides some

of the goals for that

process, so we want to -- we

want to create complete

neighborhoods and expand

housing choices.



We want to ensure

neighborhood protection of

neighborhood character.



We want to promote household

availability and

environmental protection.



We want to make sure that

we're providing efficient

services and then finally we

want to create a code that

provides clear guidance in a

user friendly format.



So what should be considered

for revision as we move

forward in this process?



As a starting point, we want

to take a holistic look at

all of our development

regulations and processes to

identify what works, what

doesn't work, and what needs

further study.



Once we have that analysis,

we and the council can make

an informed decision about

what should move forward in

the revision process.



And garner is going to talk

in more detail about that

specific element in a few

minutes.



We've also had questions as

to the type of code we

anticipate coming out of

this process.



First it's kind of worth

noting kind of the major

types of codes that are out

there, we have euclidean or

conventional codes, which is

really focused, you know, on

the standard separating of

uses into separate

districts.



We have performance based

codes, which rely on

criteria or some sort of

metrics to measure

performance with the code.



We have form-based codes,

which are really focused on

the built environment and

what's the product that

we -- that's derived from

the code and then we have

hybrids, which are mixtures

of one or more of these

types.



And that's what austin has





[10:36:00]





currently.



The hybrid code.



It's -- it's not necessarily

a consciously developed

hybrid, it's one that has

evolved over the last 28

years.



Circling back to that

original question of what

type of code do we

anticipate, I think the

answer is we don't know at

this point as we get further

in the process, we'll have

better definition of that.



But we know that we're

looking for a code that

is -- that is user friendly,

is easily administered and

one that helps us realize

the vision of im

austin.



So the next question, we're

proposing is who will be

leading the process?



The core team includes the

city council, and the

planning commission, a

steering committee, staff

team and consultant team and

I'll talk in more detail

about those last three in

just a minute.



But I just want to point out

that in addition to this

core team, we'll have a -- a

broad based, iterative

public end imagement process

aimed at key stakeholders

and the general public that

will provide multiple

opportunities throughout the

process for them to engage,

provide input and

participate in this process.



So regarding the steering

committee, we're proposing

a -- an 11-member committee,

we're proposing that council

would appoint seven of those

members, staff would

identify four, and the

steering committee would

meet regularly and

continuously throughout the

entire process and they

would participate in -- in

all of the steps of the

process that we'll dive into

more detail on in a minute.



Just to note, on -- ideally

the types of -- of steering

committee members that we're

looking for, hopefully

someone that is familiar

with the code understands

how it's structured, how it

works, kind of what the

strengths and the weaknesses





[10:38:00]





of it are, we're looking for

steering committee members

who can work collaboratively

and kind of reach across the

aisle and then hopefully

steering committee members

who have the trust and

confidence of -- of a

variety of stakeholder

groups.



So in terms of the staff

team, we have three new

positions within the

planning and development

review department that were

approved with our fy '13

budget.



Those include a division

manager, a senior planner,

and an administrative

assistant and those three

staff members will be

dedicated exclusively to

this project.



We'll also have staff

support from multiple

divisions within pdr and

from other departments on an

ongoing and as-needed basis

throughout the process.



We also have once again as

parted of our recently

approved budget, $2 million

for consultant services and

related expenses.



57600

.. step 2 a.



Which is annotated outline.



When we started looking at

this, I thought that -- i

thought that the diagnosis

and the annotated outline

could proceed together.





[10:46:01]





There really wasn't a need

to go through the process

twice.



Talking to the people that

have done this for a number

of years, they have said you

really can't mix the two

because you need that

opportunity to talk about

what's on the table, the

diagnosis, before you start

organizing the new code.



Until you have a green light

for the diagnosis, meaning

you all telling us what's on

the table, you can't really

organize the code.



So that's when we broke this

into step 2 and 2.



Actually 2 a and b.



After that's complete, the

consultant team would

generate an initial draft of

the code and it would go

through the same process as

the previous steps and then

step 4 would be -- would

be -- the -- the planning

commission holding the

formal public hearings and

making a recommendation and

the council adopting the new

code.



So in summary, austin's

development regulations and

processes need a holistic

view, review.



They -- they've kind of --

they've kind of accumulated

incrementally, and that's

normal for a fast-growing

dynamic city.



I think all fast growing

cities look at issues as

they come up.



I think austin is different

from other fast growing

cities in this regard.



Periodically, there's

absolutely a need to look at

the entire accumulated code

and how well it's working

and how it should be

reorganized to work better.



We think imagine austin

provides an opportunity to

do that.



We think it's important





[10:48:00]





that -- that the consultant

team be given rich input and

then allowed to do their

work.



Because they are the ones

that do this for a living.



We think absolutely the --

the step-by-step process is

needed.



And that the planning

commission and the city

council needs to -- to

endorse the step-by-step

process.



The planning commission

asked us when we got to them

what would success look

like?



So we tried to put some

items together.



We think we need to stay on

time and within budget.



If it bogs down, it probably

won't be that successful.



Absolutely open to all,

provide rich educational

opportunities, engage people

who use the code, focus on

common ground, not make

premature assumptions.



And don't let perfection get

in the way of actually

improving the code.



And then we -- success would

be a clear, predictable,

user friendly code that

implements our community's

vision.



So potential benefits, we

would expect future

development would be --

would more reflect the

community's vision.



The permit process would be

fair, clear, predictable and

timely.



Property owners would know

what they can do and can't

do.



More people able to easily

meet their daily needs with

shorter trips.



That is the focus of our

comp plan is to encourage

development pattern that

allows shorter trips to meet

the daily needs.



Expanded housing choices and

I guess to sum all of this

up, it's an effort to make

it easier to do the right

thing and harder to do what

we don't like.



So I set at the beginning --

I said at the beginning that





[10:50:00]





we would talk about a time

line when this might all be

complete.



The steering committee, if

the steering committee is

appointed by december, end

of this year, and the

consultant is on board by

april 2013, and the

[indiscernible] one

listening sessions are

finished summer 2013, and

the diagnosis approved by

city council by february

2014, the annotated outline

approved by council on

june -- at least summer of

2014, and then the

preliminary draft approved

march 2015 and we think this

schedule is reasonable.



It can happen.



If there's great -- if

there's a great deal of

consensus that this is what

we want to do, an adoption

draft, could be complete by

september 2015.



Now, let me -- let me add

something to this.



Not knowing what changes,

it's hard to predict how

long the adoption itself

will take.



So with that, george and i

are open for questions.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: Any

questions?



Councilmember riley?



>> Riley: Well, first i

 for all

of their work on this.



It's an exciting venture to

launch into.



I know a lot of preparation

has to go into this, i

appreciate all of the

thought and effort that you

have put into it.



I want to ask just a couple

of questions.



First over on slide 14 with

respect to the committee

that we will be putting

together, the committee

will -- is proposed to

consist of 11 members,

council appoint seven

members and staff four

members.



That seems a little unusual

I don't remember a process

in which we had a committee





[10:52:00]





composed of a combination of

staff appointees and council

appointees.



Can you just give me some

idea of the thinking behind

that?



>> Part of the thinking was

that there are seven of you

and each one appointment is

an easy number to arrive at.



There are also experts that

bring subject matter

expertise to the process.



Of the that need to be

identified.



Whether those are identified

and appointed by council or

staff, I don't know if

that's a big issue.



But that's sort of how we

got to the seven and the --

and the four.



>> Riley: So you are

picturing subject matter

experts within the community

and it -- would it be a

matter of staff taking a

look at who council has put

on the table and then adding

to that with some experts

just to sort of round out

the committee?



>> Yes, absolutely.



>> Riley: Okay.



Then on the best practices

assessment, over on slide

20, I was -- I was pleased

to hear about the -- about

your expectations on -- on

bringing folks here to have

ongoing discussions about

experiences in other cities

and other matters related to

best practices for -- for

understanding how this sort

of thing is done.



Could you just give me some

idea of what else did you

expect?



Do you expect that we'll

have more speakers like

chris lineberger coming to

town, experience like in

other cities, what do you

anticipate that we'll be

seeing?



>> Yes, both.



We have gotten some great

suggestions from -- at the

end of the lineberger event,

we invited the community to

identify additional subject

matters and speakers, we

have gotten some suggestions

and we're busy recruiting

some speakers that are going

to start in january.



But we're calling that the





[10:54:01]





headliners.



The best practices were --

has two parts to it.



One is opportunities for

people to really learn about

the present code in-depth.



So we would provide those

forums.



And we'll have that

information in writing,

also.



And secondly, we were hoping

to invite some people that

have recently gone through a

similar experience, both --

both either councilmembers,

planning commissioners,

staff, consultants,

community members, steering

committee members, from

other big cities, that have

undertaken a similar effort

and -- we were thinking,

we're open to idea, but we

were thinking about

convening a panel and just

letting the community

interact with them.



And learn about their

experiences.



>> Uh-huh.



>> Riley: So we could

expect that to go on over

the next year or so?



>> Yes, yes.



>> Riley: Great.



Then lastly I wanted to ask

about the time line for

actual approval and pledges

-- andimplementation of the

proposed code changes.



You have set out the

proposed time line on slide

32 and that goes all the way

through adoption of the

draft code in september

2015.



That's preceded by a

preliminary draft code

approval in march 2015.



Of course that's a long way

off.



This is a complicated

process.



Would you anticipate that

there might be some interim

measures that could be

approved sooner than that?



Or do you picture really

doing this all as -- in one

fell swoop in 2015?



>> It's an excellent

question.



I'm not sure we have the

complete answer.



There are a number of

initiatives watershed has

one, we have one larger

initiative that are ongoing

right now.



We are carefully looking at

those efforts to see, to





[10:56:02]





make sure that they're

coordinated with this

project coming forward.



Whether those efforts need

to be merged with this

broader effort, I think is

very much a question on the

table for planning

commission and y'all when we

come forward.



Whether or not something in

the code after the diagnosis

is identified for an early

win, I think there's a

possibility of that.



Something that is just so

obviously in need of fixing

that doesn't have to wait

two years.



>> In particular I wanted to

focus on one particular

issue that has been a matter

of concern to many in the

community, that relates to

the time that we're taking

for approvals on permitting.



Which is partly a result of

the complexity of the code

and the difficulty of

reviewing applications for

development.



There are many other factors

as well, including staffing.



But to the extents that we

can identify some -- some

potential improvements that

would help us address that

issue, and get permits

approved in a more timely

manner, do you expect that

we may be able to get those

done sooner rather than

later?



>> I'm not so sure.



Most of those fixes are

going to be -- done by an

early code revision or

whether they are done by the

ongoing program of -- which

greg guernsey can address.



With additional staff.



And -- and reorganization of

our processes.



Which is -- which is

intensely being looked at

right now.



>> Riley: I just wants to

emphasize that -- that that

is a real and serious

concern today and I don't

want anyone to get the

impression that we're just

going to --



>> right.



>> Riley: Put off the

solution --



>> oh, no, no, no, good

point, not at all.



>> Riley: There is a real

urgency to addressing issues

related to permitting --



>> right, those don't need





[10:58:00]





to wait for the code

revision.



>> Riley: Right.



Thanks again for all of your

work on this.



>> Cole: [Indiscernible]



>> Martinez: Thank you,

mayor pro tem.



Garner, I wanted to ask, we

got an email from some of

the affordable housing

advocates specifically

asking what would be in the

 as it relates to

rewriting portions of the

land development code and

ensuring that the pros and

cons of affordable housing

are addressed.



More specifically, that

affordable housing can be

achieved through those

rewrites.



The fear, obviously, is that

density doesn't always and

equate to affordable

housing, if we're going to

hire a consultant to help

us, what are their

qualifications, can they

show us clear examples of

what we can do moving

forward and what are you all

contemplating in that regard

as well?



>> Well, the -- we're

working on a draft rfq right

now and that issue has been

highlighted.



As critical in the community

as well as -- as a priority

program in imagine austin.



So -- so it's emphasized

throughout that rfq that we

would be looking at -- at

code revisions with that

perspective.



>> So we'll be specifically

inserted into the rfq as a

qualification that is

necessary for potential

bidders?



>> Yes.



It is -- it is listed as an

item that this process needs

to address and we are

looking for expertise in

that area, yes.



>> Martinez: Thank you.



>> Cole: Councilmember

spelman?



>> Spelman: Thank you,

mayor pro tem.



Garner, you are probably

aware of this, but I wanted

to put on the table so we

are all sitting and thinking

about it, that we have tried

to do this before, the last

time I remember us trying to

do this was in 1999.



 guernsey was

there sitting at the tail

with the assistant city

manager and an art requisite

board with all interest

groups, all stakeholders at

the table.



We actually walked through

the land development code

line by line.



And at the end of the

several month process, we

found we had not changed a

single solitary word of the

land development code.



And the -- the description

for why, that I heard from

the assistant city manager

who was [indiscernible] the

whole process was very

frustrated was behind every

single word in that code

there was a story and

somebody at that meeting

knew the story, as soon as

the story came out, people

shook their heads and said

we're not going to be able

to change that one either.



We went on to the next one

and never changed a thing.



I think it's much better to

have this done by a

consultant who, well, will

not be intimately committed

to the consults of each of

those stories.



The results of each of those

stories, but also a good

idea that you have frequent

check-backs between that

consultants add the public

so that they understand what

the story was in the first

place.



They're going to need to

know this.



The reason that I mentioned

the story was because I was

hartened and dishartened at

the same time, the slide

number of the perfect

consultant.



You are saying that you want

a consultant who is

courageous and

straightforward.



[Laughter]

this led me to have to look

something up on line.



>> Is that an oxymoron?



>> Spelman: Courageous and

straightforward is fine.



There are I'm sure

courageous and

straightforward consultants

out there someplace, they

just don't make very much

money [laughter]

I was looking for a quote

from minister, the older

civil servant is advising

the younger civiller rant as

to how to handle the elected

official.



And the older fella, named

sir humphrey says if you

want to make sure -- give

the minister second thoughts

about the question, tell him

that the decision is

controversial.



If you want to be really

sure the minister doesn't

accept it, you must say that

the decision is courageous.



The younger fella says,

that's worse than

controversial?



And sir humphrey says oh,

yes, controversial only

means this will lose your

votes.



Courageous means this will

lose you the election.



[Laughter]

I think the same thing could

be true here.



We hire a really courageous

consultant, he probably

won't stay our consultant

too long.



When you actually get to the

point of the inevitable

interview, talking to these

fellows, one of the things

we are going to be looking

is tact and diplomacy and a

lot of interest groups often

at odds with one another in

a tactful way.



It's good that they know to

tell us the truth.



Also good to know they tell

us the truth in such a way

that actually are actually

pre disposted to hearing it.



That said I like that you

add the check back, in

different places, 2 a and 2

b strikes me as a really

good idea.



It does seem to me that you

have your head screwed on

straight with the idea that

just because it comes back

to the city council in the

fall of 2015 doesn't mean

that it will necessarily be

adopted in the fall of 2015

because things happen when

you get back to the elected

officials as you have found

in the last few months of

your life.



I'm sure.



I also feel a need to

mention that it is extremely

likely that none of the

people on this dais are

going to be on the city

uncil that ends up

adopting this code on the

fall of 2015 or afterwards.



If the charter changes, we

are all going to be term

limited out.



Councilmember tovo will not

be term lated out but she's

got a migraine headache so

she's not here right now.



Those of us that are here

could say great let's hand

this off to the next city

council.



I will be handing this off

to the next city council

with the assumption that

they would be in the same

situation as well and i

would not want to hand this

off in any other way to

myself.



I think we're doing the

right thing for the next

generation of city council

members.



>> Councilmembers, the 99

was more of a recodification

of what we already had.



It wasn't really looking at

new code or possibly

changing a lot of the code i

think at that time.



That was really, I think,

looking back, a possibility

of doing that, but I think

it was more of a

recodification.



I also want to mention for

councilmember riley, we are

looking at those issues of

repermitting now.



I have already organized a

portion of our residential

review selection.



We are adding the staff that

you were kind enough to

grant me earlier in this

year and I'm still using

overtime and temporary

employees to try to catch up

and bring us back.



So we are meeting those

deadlines that are stated in

the code.



>> Spelman: We have to

have a longer conversation

about that at some point,

too.



Thanks.



>> Cole: Councilmember

morrison, a courageous

councilmember?



>> Morrison: Are you

talking about my prospects

for reelection?



[Laughter]



>> Cole: No, your

integrity and familiarity

with this issue.



>> Morrison: Thank you,

mayor pro tem, I appreciate

that.



We did have a conversation

with this, at the same time

we had talked about how we

didn't want to just do a

code diagnosis and then send

the consultant back and come

back with a draft.



I gather what you have added

here, tell me if this is a

correct.



After the code diagnosis,

before we move on, we'll

start looking at

alternatives.



We'll have a discussion

about alternatives and then

again during the code

rewrite, could you just

review that a little bit?



>> Yes.



Actually, we're proposing

both.



We're proposing that -- that

the steering committee

engage with the consultant

team to -- [indiscernible]

approaches to the

controversial issues that

are coming out of the

listening session.



Before they do the code

diagnosis.



And then we're also talking

about that -- that that

conversation continuing

after the diagnosis.



>> Morrison: Great, i

appreciate that.



Because I think that that's

going to help the

productivity once it gets

back to council because we

will already have hashed

through, we will have had at

least some discussion about

that.



I do want to follow-up on

councilmember spelman's

point about actually walking

through the code line by

line.



I don't want to go to the

part about not having made

any progress there.



But I believe we had a

conversation, one of the --

one of the things that i

understand the consultant or

staff is going to help with,

there will be concern about

how do we know that we're

not just dropping certain

things out.



I understand that there's

going to be some kind of

tracking mechanism so that

we can actually see where

certain concepts that are in

the code end up or not.



In the new code.



Is that correct?



>> Yes.



>> Consultant's job or --



>> it's critical for the --

[sound cutting out]

tradeoffs need to be made.



I'm not saying that the

community will choose to

keep every single item, or

requirement.



>> Morrison: Correct.



>> But there needs to be a

tracking so that people can

see what happened to it.



>> I think that's going to

help quite a bit.



Then I -- -- I believe there

was some discussion at the

commission levels and

perhaps some other input --

about the idea of having the

steering committee seated

 is

finalized.



So that the steering

committee could have some

 and i

believe that that was a lot

of that -- a lot of that

discussion came as a lesson

learned from -- from the

comprehensive plan process

that we just went through in

terms of the task force

being seated after we had

the r.f.p.



Could you enter he to that a

little bit?



Because that's not exactly

what's going on there?



>> Yes, councilmember.



We did hear that at the

planning commission.



I think that we also

discussed it as the cpt

meeting.



But the -- but the points

that we tried to make there

were -- were that the

four-step process that

garner just walked through

is -- is essentially what we

just presented as a broad

outline of the rfq and so

it's true that the steering

committee wouldn't come on

until after we issued the

rfq.



But they are involved in all

of those steps and the

definition of those steps.



In step 1, they are involved

intimately in the diagnosis

and outline process and then

drafting of the code, so we

feel like the details of

those steps are not -- are

not the details in the

rfq, we have the

opportunities to involve the

steering committee in that

in a very meaningful way.



>> Morrison: That's good.



I hope that we can have a

little more that -- that

are -- that our consultant

selection process, maybe

we've got some lessons

learned that we can be a

little more efficient than

with the comprehensive plan.



And I think one of the

things really is -- really

is -- related to what

councilmember martinez was

talking about.



And that is are we going to

be asking explicitly for

tell us your experience in

developing code that

promotes affordable housing.



So that we've got specifics

and I -- so that's one

question.



But I would also like to say

that we have several goals

and vision, visions and

priority programs, in the

comprehensive plan, like a

healthy austin and

environmentally sensitive,

so I think that -- that in

terms of efficiency, you

know, because we did a

second round of questions to

the consultant.



Consultant applicants last

time.



I wonder if it would be

possible just to make sure

that we serve through the

vision statements that we

have and programs and

specifically ask them if

here you have a code that

relates to the does is that

we have.



That's -- we have -- I spoke

with someone with the

creative alliance, they want

to be part of this

discussion.



So I think it really touches

all of the building blocks

and codes.



So if we do that I think it

will be a lot more efficient

because I bet people are

going to be asking that.



>> I think what we can do is

send a summary forward, the

rfq itself is confidential.



Until it's released.



But we certainly address all

of those issues in our

request.



So far in our draft.



I think that's well known

because those are the issues

in imagine austin.



Those are the priority

programs.



I also -- affordability,

creative economy.



So, yes, it -- they, it's

not only in the rfq, but

it's -- but it's stated --



>> Martinez: The

foundation of our --



>> Morrison: The

foundation of our going

forward here.



As long as we get explicit

responses I think that it's

going to be real helpful and

then just lastly, one of the

reasons that you mentioned

george that we are doing

this is because of the

multiple overlays that we

have, all of that, when you

were mentioning the cs 1

muvconp, zoning that we

might have, I was wondering

if we might have a contest

to see who can find the

piece of property that has

the most letters on its

zoning.



I bet greg guernsey would do

that.



Might -- nitrogen

rate a lot of enthusiasm for

this project.



>> Morrison: Exactly.



Might be the foundation of

our research.



As you can tell this is

going to be a lot of fun

[laughter]



>> Cole: We had this

presentation in a

comprehensive planning and

transportation, so pleased

to have it again to see you

tighten up a lot of the

items that we had comments

about.



The staff wanting to appoint

four subject matter experts,

I think that's a very good

idea.



I wasn't sure at what stage

in the process that you were

going to make those evident

to council.



I'm not sure, the idea was

that council would appoint

their appointments then we

would have a privity who

might be missing.



>> Okay.



I think councilmember riley

asked that.



Okay.



Thank you.



Any other comments or

questions?



Okay.



We'll have the next briefing

on the riverside corridor.



Thank you.



>> Good morning,

councilmembers, my name is

erica leak, with the

planning development and

review department.



This morning I'm going to

provide you with a hopefully

relatively short briefing on

the east riverside corridor

regulating plan that will be

coming to city council next

week for potential adoption.



And giving you the

background on the process.



Through which we arrived at

the regulating plan and some

of the details of the

regulating plan itself.



So -- so today I'll talk

about the east riverside

corridor context, why we

feel like we needed a plan

for the area in the first

place.



What's included in the

master plan vision that

council adopted in 2010 and

is the basis for the

regulating plan.



And then going to the

regulating plan details and

adoption process.



So I'm sure most of you are

aware, the east riverside

corridor is a gateway to

austin between downtown and

the airport.



It's an area that's actually

fairly similar in size to

downtown austin.



So -- so it's a pretty large

area.



So east of 35 and south the

lady bird lake.



It is identified as an

activity in the

comprehensive plan.



And the regulating plan will

be one step to helping to

implement the comprehensive

plan in creating a more

complete community in that

area.



Potential urban rail

corridor, that's also been

obviously a part of the

discussion.



Zooming in in a bit more

detail, it overlaps with two

neighborhood planning areas.



The east riverside oltorf

combine neighborhood

planning area and the

montopolis neighborhood

planning area and it does

have great parkland to the

north of the corridor, with

roy guerrero park and along

lady bird lake, but you will

notice that within the

corridor itself, there's --

there's basically no small

scale parkland.



So just to get into a little

bit of the background of why

council directed staff to

begin a master plan process

for the area in the first

place, one of the reasons is

that the corridor was -- was

basically designed for cars.



[One moment please for

change in captioners]

.. the type of

environment that really

encourages pedestrian access

in the city.



The other main reason

council directed staff was

that change was on the way

already.



And I want to be really

clear on this point.



Displacement was starting to

occur in the area before the

planning process even

started.



And it will continue if this

plan were stopped.



And so I'll talk about what

things the plan can do to

help mitigate displacement,

but I just want to be really

clear that if we do nothing

the trend will continue.



It won't just stop.



So in terms of the master

planning process itself, we

had a very active community

planning process in 2008 and

2009 and then as I mentioned

council adopted the master

plan as revision for the

area in 2010.



These are some of the public

input opportunities that

took place during the master

planning process.



So out of that process we

arrived at the community's

vision for the area and some

of the things that came out

of that process were really

pretty basic.



Increased pedestrian safety

and comfort.



More transportation options

for people using a whole

variety of different ways of

getting around including

bicycling, walking,

et cetera.



Better and more neighborhood

open space, especially

really internal, the

neighborhood.



More housing and housing

types.



Right now in the area there

is generally single-family

homes.



Outside of the area and

within the corridor itself

pretty much the only type of

housing that exists there at

present is garden-style

walkup apartments.



So it's a very limited

housing type.



So just to give you an idea

of what the area could look

like in the future, this is

a view of present and a

rendering of what it could

potentially look like in the

future with new development

that meets the regulations

in the regulating plan.



Getting into just a few more

concepts included in the

master plan, one of the

important concepts is that

of the hubs or areas of

concentrated development

that really create

neighborhood centers where a

lot of people can live,

work, you know, find a small

park to sit in during their

lunch hour, et cetera.



And this hub concept is

really important because

research shows that retail

and commercial spaces do

better when they are

concentrated rather than

located along a long linear

path way.



And the other reason the

hubs are important is that

many of the concepts

included in the master plan

vision are really contingent

on having a lot of people

being able to live in close

proximity to one another but

also in close proximity to

retail and commercial

establishments to be able to

support those businesses.



So the big question is how

do we get from here as

riverside is at present to

there where we would like to

see it in the future.



The master plan actually

includes a number of

implementation strategies to

help move the vision along.



One of those is setting the

rules for new developments.



And those rules are going to

be in the form of what's

called a regulating plan,

which is basically a

combination zoning and

design tool.



It is tailored to meet that

vision that the community

created and it integrates

both design and -- and use.



It also includes a

development bonus tool to

help insure that some of the

needs of the community can

be met in exchange for

additional building

entitlements.



So you may have seen a

graphic, something like this

in the past.



It's -- it's an illustration

of the differences between

conventional zoning and

designer form based

regulations and I believe

george mentioned that

earlier, there are different

types of code and the east

riverside code is heading

into the design based

direction.



As I go through the details

of the regulating plan, I'll

be talking about three

general areas.



Those are design and land

use, the public realm, and

the development bonus

program.



In terms of design and land

use, one of the things that

the regulating plan does is

it tries to create more

clarity in terms of having

people be able to understand

the requirements for a

particular property.



So on the -- what we're

calling the subdistrict map,

each subdistrict is

identified by a different

color and then those colors

are carried through to other

parts of the regulation to

show what a -- what could be

built on a particular piece

of property.



So there are summary pages

that talk about generally

what uses would be allowed,

building heights, their

relationship to streets,

things like that.



There are five different

subdistricts.



The more intense ones are

located near riverside drive

and major intersections and

then -- let me go back a

couple.



And then the lighter purple

and lighter blue are

residential only

subdistricts that serve to

transition from the more

commercial areas into nearby

single-family neighborhoods.



This is the land use table

that does go along with the

subdistricts.



Again, color coded.



Although we feel like there

is much more opportunity to

have a mix of uses in those

commercial areas, we did

want to be clear about what

is allowed and what isn't.



So that's still included in

the regulating plans.



There are also design based

regulations that help to

create not only a more

people-friendly environment

but also can enable more

eyes on the street to help

increase safety in the

neighborhood.



There are particular areas,

and these are generally in

the hubs that I spoke of,

where there are requirements

for ground floor spaces that

could be used commercially

if or when the market is

there to support those.



And so those are in place

again to help really

encourage mixed use

environment so that people

can have all their needs met

in a smaller and, you know,

potentially even walking

distance.



We are proposing

compatibility standards that

are specific to the east

riverside corridor.



They are intended to protect

single-family homes and

provide a buffer between

single-family homes and more

intense development while at

the same time ensuring that

we can get enough density

and enough vibrancy in these

hubs to really make them be

the walkable places that

we're hoping to achieve.



So this is what a building

looks like, could

potentially look like using

the proposed east riverside

corridor compatibility

standards.



Connectivity is also a huge

issue in the area because

there are many very large

parcels that are not

currently broken up.



So the regulating plan

includes a collector street

plan that will ensure that

as new -- new development

comes in, that they will be

expected to provide public

streets to ensure there is

at least somewhat of a

street grid in the area.



There are also other site

specific requirements to

break up -- to break up

large sites regardless of

whether there's a

recommended collector street

on a parcel or not.



And again focusing a bit

more on the public realm,

one of the things that can

create a more

people-friendly environment

is ensuring that the

relationship between the

buildings and the sidewalk

is one where the building is

designed so that people will

go into it and directly from

the sidewalk rather than

having to walk across a

block of asphalt parking

area to get to the building

itself.



So there are requirements

for certain portion of the

buildings to be built up to

the sidewalks and then there

are requirements for

improved sidewalks with

street trees in some of the

locations to make them be

more pleasant places to be.



So you can see some of the

differences between some of

the sidewalks that we have

right now and what we're

hoping to see in the future.



In terms of open space,

there are a couple of

mechanisms for helping to

provide future open space in

the area.



One of them is a development

bonus program.



Another one is

encouraging -- site --

on-site parkland for the

parkland dedication

requirements.



And now moving into the

development bonus program

itself, the basis for the

development bonus program is

starting with the

entitlement by subdistrict.



And these entitlements are

very similar to existing

zoning that's in the area at

present.



So there's no major upzoning

that happens through the

regulating plan itself.



But if a property owner

would like to build a taller

or more dense building, then

they would be required to

participate in the

development bonus system and

provide community benefits

in exchange for that

increased height or density.



And the development bonus is

proposed to only be

available for properties

that are within these hub

areas, and that's, again, to

focus development near

riverside drive and near

major intersections to

create that nexus of people

and services.



One thing I wanted to

quickly point out is that

based on public input, there

are different heights to

which buildings could be

built in the different hubs.



In the montopolis area,

there are nearby

single-family houses and

there was less support for

having taller buildings.



So buildings in that hub

would only be eligible to go

up to 120 feet or

approximately 10 stories

rather than in the hub at

pleasant valley or the

highway, which could

potentially go up to

160 feet or approximately 13

stories.



So the proposed development

bonus program is, you'll

notice, similar in format to

the downtown density bonus

program, and that is

intentional.



We're trying to create more

consistency across the

various density bonus

programs that we have in the

city.



And so there are two

required community benefits,

those being affordable

housing and open space.



And then there's a menu of

other items from which a

developer could choose.



And basically then they

would accumulate bonus

density through the

provision of these various

community benefits.



So to get -- zoom in a

little closer on the

affordable housing item,

it -- a developer would have

to basically earn 50% of

their increased entitlement

through the provision of

either on site affordable

housing or through an in

leiu fee, and we've split

that into two parts.



One is for buildings that

would be under 90 feet in

height, and that's because

buildings that are generally

under approximately 65 feet

are generally less expensive

to build because it's wood

frame construction.



And so there's generally

additional value that can

be -- that can be given to

affordable housing and still

make projects be successful.



And so there's an on-site

requirement for affordable

housing for those -- for

those shorter buildings.



We're proposing that for

projects over 90 feet that

there would be an in lieu

fee.



We have a place holder of

50-cent per square foot in

lieu fee but we feel it's

appropriate to continue that

conversation so staff and

planning commission

recommend we remove that for

now and we will come back to

council and talk about a new

proposed method to figure

that fee in lieu.



We don't think that having a

set fee in there at present

will be problematic because

based on our analysis it

seems very unlikely that

there would be any buildings

over -- well, really over

about five stories built in

the east riverside area in

the near future.



Basically because they are

just much more expensive to

build and the rents that

could be charged can't

really pay for the higher

cost of construction at

present.



So that is one of the things

that we'll propose to

change.



However, the development

bonus program is obviously

only one potential tool to

help deal with the

affordable housing issue in

the area.



So other ways that the

regulating plan helps is by

increasing the housing

supply in the area.



There are a number of

properties that are

currently zoned commercial

though they cannot be used

residentially, so those will

be rezoned to allow

residential within them.



You know, we all know that

it's a very difficult time

to be a renter in austin

when occupancy rates are at

96% or so, basically

property managers can charge

nearly as much as they want

for apartments.



So increasing supply may to

some extent help with that

issue.



Another way that it helps is

by creating transit-friendly

neighborhoods, and that

results in lower overall

costs for a family because a

family can spend less money

on transportation.



And then obviously the

development bonus program

itself will help create

affordable housing that will

be there in the neighborhood

for the foreseeable future.



In addition, there are

citywide discussions about

other things that the city

needs to be doing to help

create affordable housing

throughout the city.



So obviously we have a vote

going on now and next week

about potential bond

funding.



There has been discussion

for quite some time about a

geographic dispersion

policy.



Also the potential for a

preservation policy,

relocation policy, tenant

protection and land banking

opportunities.



So what we'll be asking you

specifically to do next week

is to approve a new zoning

category just called erc,

and what it would mean is

that properties that are

rezoned to erc would be

subject to the regulating

plan and not to the general

zoning standards for the

city.



There are some properties

that we are proposing to not

rezone.



Those include h.u.d.



Properties, properties zoned

p, public, and then there

are duplex properties that

were zoned -- that are

currently zoned

single-family, and there was

discussion about those

properties when the master

plan was adopted and we

decided not to rezone those

as part of the property to

help -- as part of the

process, excuse me, to help

ensure that there's

continuing single-family in

the area.



We'll also be asking the

council to approve a change

of the future land use

designation to srd or

specific regulating

district.



This would basically point a

developer to the regulating

plan.



It identifies that there are

different regulations in

this area and that they need

to go take a look at those.



The regulating plan has been

developed through a public

input process over the last

two years, approximately.



The planning commission

looked -- there was a

planning commission public

hearing about the draft

regulating p

october 23rd and they

unanimously recommended

adoption of the regulaing

plan with a few discussion

items that we'll probably

get into next week unless

you want to get into them

today.



So to sum up, on

november 8th we'll be

asking you to consider the

erc zoning and neighborhood

plan amendment and we'll

have -- we can get into some

of the details of the

planning commission

recommendations at that

point.



And I'm happy to answer any

questions that you have.



>> Cole: Thank you.



Great job.



Questions?



Councilmember morrison.



>> Morrison: Thanks,

erika.



I know this has been a long

haul, in fact, I was trying

to remember how long it's

been.



I remember mayor pro tem at

THAT time McCracken saying

we need to do a [inaudible].



That might have been 2006?



>> 2007.



A good while ago.



>> Morrison: Thanks for

sticking with us.



I have a couple of

questions.



In terms affordability, i

appreciate you taking that

into a different discussion

so we can move ahead.



Is there a lev

affordability already

contemplated?



>> Yes, families making 60%

of the median family income

and be affordable for 40

years and that the for sale

units would be affordable at

80% of the median family

income for 99 years.



>> Morrison: So that's

pretty much standard what

we're doing, so that's good

to hear.



Is there anything in it?



I know the neighborhood plan

calls for encouraging and

prioritizing having more

ownership.



Is there anything in the

plan that's going to help us

with that, do you think?



>> That --



>> Morrison: It's a tough

thing, I know, with the

market.



>> I have not yet heard of a

way that the city can

actually require -- I mean i

don't know if there would be

any way we could encourage

it through a development

bonus, but I don't know if

someone else wants to speak

to this, but I don't believe

we can actually require --



>> Morrison: Clearly we

wouldn't be able to require

it, but I just wonder if

there might be ways we might

be able to encourage this

sort of to align this with

the neighborhood plan

priorities set.



And I know that's in the

east riverside plan and i

don't know if it's in the

montopolis plan.



It might be different there.



>> I know -- greg guernsey,

planning and development

review.



When we did the east

riverside plan, we actually

left tracts out.



The question was going to be

addressed perhaps by this

corridor plan, but it was a

very difficult thing.



We have an aging -- a great

number of aging multi-family

units that are down there.



I think part of it has to do

also with the market back in

'06 and '07.



We still had the potential

of doing condominium

development.



Those financing tools have

dried up since the last

recession or the ongoing

recession that we have and

they really haven't come

about to allow that.



We continue to work with

neighborhood housing on

options and there is

single-family product on the

ground and I think that's

still going on.



But it really is a difficult

thing to do, regulatory way

to somehow encourage that

type of development.



I think really through the

multi-family, the greater

density in the long run

along the corridor itself

which is the subject of this

if we can get those hubs.



It won't happen right away

but I think further down the

road you will see that

happen.



>> Morrison: I do think

it's an interesting

question, and also having a

variety of housing types is

going to make for a healthy

yes environment too.



Not shaking, but nodding, so

we can continue that

conversation.



How does this regulating

plan interact with -- and

maybe if there's no overlap.



Is there overlap with the

waterfront overlay?



>> There is some overlap

with the waterfront overlay

and it's clearly stated that

the waterfront overlay

supersedes any requirements

in the east riverside

regulating plan.



In addition those properties

won't be eligible for the

east riverside development

bonus program because the --

the plan is anyway that

there will be development

bonus provisions within the

waterfront overlay

ordinance.



>> Morrison: You can't

double dip, so to speak.



>> Right.



>> Morrison: What about

the somebody wants to do a

planned unit development.



How does that play with

being in the area, the

corridor area?



>> Well, I'd love to be able

to say that they are

prohibited, but I don't

think that's within -- i

believe, anyway, that it's

council's prerogative to --

to potentially look at

 on a case-by-case

basis.



If that's incorrect, I'd be

more than happy to be

corrected on that one.



>> Morrison: Because it's

interesting because -- with

this plan we're putting in

place some good framework

and structure and details

about a density bonus

whereas with planning and

development it's a lot more

[inaudible] and so we have

so much discussion about

these things, I just wonder

how we can encourage people

to [inaudible] guidelines

and I think maybe greg

[inaudible].



>> I think the idea is that

we would try to put in the

bonus provision so someone

would not probably file a

p.u.d.



They would opt to do the

density program rather than

coming in and trying to

design unique regulations

through a p.u.d. process.



So I think that's what we're

trying to set up, make it

actually easier than to go

through an alternate route

rather to go through the

p.u.d. process.



>> Morrison: It has been

at times lengthy and

painful.



So that makes a lot of

sense.



And also I guess it gives us

guidance as council because

if something is supposed to

be superior to be a planned

unit development and we have

some -- we already have some

clear definitions of why we

would want to be bonussing

something, if that's a word,

that could provide some

guidance there.



Then the last question about

overlay is how does this --

greg, you might not want to

go.



How does this -- how is this

going to play in our new

code?



Are we going to throw it all

out or in this place and

other it will just fit right

in it.



>> Generally staff, as you

heard earlier during the

presentation, talk about

densities or process, we're

trying to make them so they

are similar throughout the

city as far as -- they may

not be exactly the same but

the practice would be

similar.



It's easier to administer

the code, easier to

understand.



I think you will probably

see that in the future.



As I said previously about

the code rewrite, I think

everything should be looked

at.



We're not necessarily

throwing away anything,

we're not necessarily

keeping everything, but i

think we certainly take that

into consideration as we

spring forward airport, we

finish riverside, downtown,

when that comes around, i

think those topics will be

discussed again.



>> Morrison: And they are

all approached in a much

more modern fashion than the

code that was essentially

written in past --



>> there might be more of a

comfort level as we get to

the code rewrite as looking

at different things as

riverside airport and do you

want in the past because we

have examples we've already

been working on.



>> Morrison: Great.



And then I guess two more

comments.



One is in terms of

relocation and displacement

of tenants and all, the

university of texas law

school community clinic did

a study over the past year

and just recently released

that study and there's some

really good, great things

coming out of it that i

guess if you'll look at the

agenda for next week you'll

see that there are some

followup work that we're

going to have an opportunity

to discuss all of that at

the city because there's

real improvement.



I think there's some real

lessons learned from the two

cases where we have

[inaudible] and lake shore

so I'm looking forward to

that.



Lastly, could you give us a

suggestion of what we might

be hearing that's still

controversial in the

community?



>> Sure.



Absolute.



A few of the issues that

came up at planning

commission, one is actually

that -- the question of

whether the city should have

density or some various

minimums to ensure that we

do get the type of density

that is needed to help

realize the vision.



The regulating plan already

has a requirement for a

two-story minimum in the

corridor mixed use sub

district, which is the most

used subdistricts.



In the planning commission

there was discussion about

whether there should

posteriorlyly be broader

minimums and -- potentially

be broader minimums so

that's something they asked

staff to look at and to

bring forward to you all.



So we will have some

recommendation on that next

week.



So I will say it's a tricky

issue because if you set the

minimums too high, then it

could make development of

properties more difficult.



It could mean that some

properties aren't -- aren't

developed for quite some

time until there's enough

market to support that.



And so I think there are --

I think there are pros and

cons with that.



So I look forward to more

discussion about that one

next week.



Another request that's come

from the neighborhood that

we're still looking into is

a question about whether

there could be notification

for alternate equivalent

compliance applications.



And that's basically if --

if a development feels that

they can't comply with

particular regulations

within the regulating plan,

then they would apply for

this alternative [inaudible]

to -- to do something else

that should theoretically be

equivalent.



And where -- we're looking

into that.



That one is a bit

complicated because

notification doesn't

necessarily mean that

there's a process for people

to provide input, and then

if there is a process for

people to provide input,

then it can extend the

review time even more.



And as I've heard today,

obviously the long review

time is one of the concerns

that we have with our

current code.



So that's something that

we're looking at and trying

to figure out the pros and

cons of that.



And those are really --

those were really the only

two big things that came up.



There are a few property

owners who would like

different subdistricts and

things like that and i

imagine you will hear from

them.



>> Morrison: I appreciate

your work and I think you

mentioned for the most part

it doesn't change any of the

base zoning that's already

in place --



>> well, it doesn't change

the general entitlement.



>> Morrison: Of what could

be built there and I think

that's a great way to go

because it helps in terms of

acceptance and what people

can be comfortable with, but

also will be able to

maximize even in the benefit

to the community when they

do engage in the density

program.



So I appreciate your take on

that.



Thank you.



>> Cole: Any other

questions?



I have a question question.



Erika, I don't know if this

 guernsey, the

development bonus as to

affordable housing, I was

really curious for the

areas, for this area.



Is there a set definition

for affordable housing?



>> Well, the definition is

generally that a family

can't spend more than 30% of

their income on housing.



And so then based on

whatever the sort of median

family income is, then the

amount they would be able to

pay for housing would vary.



And I don't know if --



>> Cole: I guess I'm

trying to make sure

permanent supportive housing

is included within that

definition.



That we are awarding or

potentially awarding in high

density areas, that that is

a possibility.



>> I'll do my best on that.



Permanent supportive housing

is affordable housing by

definition and so I'm not

aware of anything that would

preclude permanent

supportive housing to be a

eligible use for affordable

housing because it is an

apartment with a lease and

all those things, all the

permanent supportive housing

the difference is the

ability for an individual to

have services, but it's not

mandated the services being

on site.



So basically permanent

supportive housing is

affordable house.



Coal cole I just usually

don't hear it connected with

our density bonus.



Okay.



Thank you.



Any other questions,

colleagues?



I would like to ask erika

and greg that you guys hang

around.



We had some councilmembers

who had to step out but i

think they have some

additional questions to

perhaps this afternoon we'll

follow up with those

questions.



Okay?



>> Sure.



>> Cole: Now we'll take up

item number 13 and I believe

 clay dafoe you are

signed up as a speaker.



Councimember spelman pulled

that.



>> Thank you, austin city

council.



Number 13 is approve an

ordinance excepting

$1 million in grant funds

 department of

justice, office of justice

programs, bureau of justice

assistance in amending the

fiscal year which was

already day adopted

2012-2013 police department,

operating budget special

revenue fund to appropriate

$1 million from the federal

government for the austin

police department project

entitled city of austin

byrne criminal justice

innovation program.



I did no have the

opportunity to look at

backup.



I know councilmember

morrison likes a lot of

details and facts, but i

will say just the overall

trend of accepting money,

there's nothing wrong with

that, that's good.



The overall trend of

accepting a million dollars

from the federal government

is a huge mistake.



As we've spoken many times

before, austin needs to

become much more

self-sufficient as a city.



I think it is possible, you

guys can step up and say no

and I'm afraid maybe this

grant could be used as a

payoff to, you know, have

things like fusion centers

here in austin.



There were safeguards put on

those and we can revisit

that at a later date.



But I'm just afraid that

this money is going to be

used to have creeping

federal government

influence.



I want you, members of the

austin city council, to take

the power of the purse and

the sword away from the

federal government because

they are abusing their power

and you know it.



And you know, you guys,

america was founded on local

government.



And each sector of

government whether it's the

city level, the county

level, the state level or

the federal government is

autonomous to a certain

degree.



The feds just can't give you

the money and then you get

the money.



You actually have to vote on

accepting the money.



So that proves that you are

in some respects an

autonomous body when it

comes to this kind of

decision making and I urge

you to reject this

$1 million grant which will

further bankrupt our nation

and lead to further

gentrification of austin,

further government spending.



It will hurt small business,

families, the poor, senior

citizens, and many others in

our community.



So please vote no.



I instruct you on item 13.



Thank you.



[Applause]



>> Cole: Thank you, clay.



Next we have ronnie

reeferseed.



>> Thank you, yes, I'm

ronnie refer side and i

wanted to make the point

that my articulate good

buddy clay dafoe has already

made.



And I echo clay's ideas and

his worries about this

creeping federal government

continual abuse of power.



And if you don't believe

that's happening, just think

about the whole idea of

homeland security where

people like me, concerned

citizens actively involved

in what's going on, we're

the enemies.



They've written it up, ron

paul supporters, boy, we've

got to look out for those

ron paul supporters.



Ron paul is the one and only

peace candidate for the last

presidential election cycles

to really be serious about

bringing an end to all that

senseless killing and all

that brings nothing but

hatred and future senseless

killing on us.



We've got to stop the

killing.



We've got the face the

facts, kiss off these slimy

budget deals that we get

because they are slimy.



There's a hidden cost to all

of us.



We have to give in to yet

more federal abuse of

powers.



As clay said our government

here, the federal government

was a creation of the state

government.



And instead it's totally

turned around now and these

couple hundred years later

we're so totally confused

that we're allowing the

mighty federal government to

just peer up and destroy our

constitution which is, in my

mind, the greatest

contribution our nation has

made to the history of life

on this planet.



It's what good government,

what leaders all around the

world pay attention to.



Wow, the constitution of the

united states.



They put the people, it's

the people who make these

decisions, not the

government, not any of you

elected officials and all

that.



It's the people.



We have the power with the

constitution if we would

just stick to it to keep out

of these endless idiotic

wars, keep out of these

smarmg do gooders.



It's going to cost local

businesses out the wazoo

with these ideas like we

want more windows on

buildings.



That doesn't come cheap.



And these businesses are

struggling, all businesses

are struggling thanks to the

ongoing depression, real

depression that we're living

through and we're down here

making these smarmy, well,

kind of sounds good.



No, we've got to think more

seriously on behalf of the

taxpayers, the businesses

right here.



>> Cole: Thank you,

ronnie.



[Applause]



>> Cole: Questions,

comments?



Councimember spelman.



>> Spelman: Thank you.



The only do gooderrism is

try and reduce crime in the

rundberg area.



I believe the deputy chief

is here and I would like to

ask him a couple question

you can talk to me

afterwards if you want to,

ronnie.



>> Assistant chief shawn

mannix.



>> Spelman: One is

increased police operations

in the rundberg area,

another is to increase

social services in the

rundberg area, and a third

is to research and

evaluation component being

supplied largely by the

university.



Is that roughly right?



>> That is correct.



>> Spelman: Okay.



My primary concern, it

sounds like a wonderful

grant, a terrific

opportunity and the fact it

is a grant I think is

important because that means

that the actions will be

directed by you and not by

the federal government.



You take the million dollars

and this is a largely

hands-off transaction.



They give us a million

bucks, we figure out what to

do with it in order to

reduce crime in the rundberg

area and we say thank you

very much.



Is that about right?



>> Yes, we're always excited

when we can get some of the

federal tax dollars back

that our community

contributes to the federal

government.



To bring back to do some of

these things.



>> Spelman: And if we

don't get this byrne grant,

somebody else will.



>> Yes.



And we have to give them

aness a today.



>> Spelman: I hope we can

give them an answer in just

a couple of minutes.



I have one concern and this

is based on what's happening

at least a couple other

cities that have received

large grants to do something

similar as what we're

proposing to do here.



That is they receive a

million dollars, they spend

a million dollars on social

services, on evaluation, on

surveys, knocking on lots of

doors and asking questions

on police operations and

they solve the problem.



Then the problem comes up

someplace else in town and

they think, well, we know

how to solve the problem.



We got a million dollars in

our pocket.



We haven't got a million

dollars in our pocket, now

we don't know what to do.



How are we going to address

that issue, presuming we

won't get another federal

grant in two or three years

to solve the problem.



>> We are going to look at

what is successful, what

isn't successful and those

kinds of things.



It doesn't necessarily mean

down the road we have to get

another million dollars to

replicate those things.



The research will have been

done, we will have learned

from best practices that

have been adopted throughout

the three years of the

program.



So yeah, we think that we

could take lessons learned

from what we do in this

initiative and bring it to

other places.



>> Spelman: So a lot of

what we're doing is

experimenting, some things

will work, some won't.



The things that do work, we

can verify will work.



The things that are cost

effective, those are the

ones we'll take elsewhere

when we need them.



>> Absolute.



And the title of the grant

program it's an innovation.



We are trying to experiment

and find new ways of

policing in different parts

of the city.



>> Spelman: This is purely

addictive, but I want to say

I'm really happy that we're

doing this.



I'm very happy that we're

willing to experiment

with -- with finding new

ways of solving old

problems.



Rundberg I think is exactly

the right area to be to go

this kind of experimentation

and I'm particularly happy

that you've engaged some

people in the sociology

 who

have been through this drill

at the university of

chicago, they have a pretty

good idea what you are going

to be doing, what the social

service agencies are going

to be doing, what procedures

are necessary to get a good

handle on what's going on

and how well what you are

doing is working.



So everything looks like

it's firing on all

cylinders.



I'm really happy that we're

working this that direction.



>> Thank you.



>> Spelman: Mayor pro tem,

I move approval of this

item.



>> Cole: Councimember

spelman, this is an

ordinance and so we're going

to need five councilmembers

to approve it so I think

we -- on all three readings.



I think that we need to have

you withdraw your motion and

perhaps make a motion to

table.



>> Spelman: I move to put

this on the table and take

it up immediately after we

come back from recess.



>> Morrison: I have a

question before we table it

coal cole let's go ahead and

second the motion to table.



I'll second the motion and

proceed with the question.



>> Morrison: We just won't

vote on it.



>> Cole: Exactly.



>> Morrison: Great points

by councimember spelman and

I just wanted to ask about

one aspect of it.



I know that you all have

said that you are going to

work with city departments

and really fill in the

details and all and I think

that's great because

innovative solutions to this

obviously need some holistic

perspectives.



And I just wanted to note

that we have several plans

that have already been, you

know, gone through by the

community and -- for the

areas and so I just wanted

to get some assurance that

those plans will be

integrated into the mix and

the conversation as the

grant goes forward.



>> I'm not sure specifically

what plans you are talking

about.



>> Morrison: The

neighborhood plans.



>> Okay, yeah, this grant is

not meant in any way shape

or form to supplant or

change anything.



>> Morrison: I'm asking if

they will be taken as sort

of --



>> we [inaudible] that are

within the area and we're

going to use them.



>> Morrison: That is what

I wanted to make sure that

there's already been some

work done, I want to make

sure we leverage that work

with the community.



Great.



Thank you very much.



>> Thank you.



>> Cole: Chief, I just had

a quick question about how

the charlie sector was

chosen.



>> Well, that particular

area we looked at under

several different aspects.



High levels of poverty,

disinvestment, unemployment

and criminal activity.



From the police department

standpoint, the criminal

activity piece really jumped

out at us in that particular

operational area accounts

for 11% of our violent crime

and 7% of property crime in

the city which is a very

high percentage for such a

small footprint.



>> Cole: Thank you.



Any other questions?



Okay, we'll leave this on

the table.



Councimember spelman i

believe we have to vote on

the motion.



>> Cole: Motion made by

councimember spelman to put

this item number 13 on the

table and seconded by

councilmember morrison.



All in favor say aye.



That motion passes on a vote

of -- a unanimous vote with

councilmember martinez,

riley and mayor lee

leffingwell off the dais.



Next we'll is citizens

communication.



00 noon and time

for citizens communication.



Robert morrow.



>> Hey there, council,

robert morrow, resident of

austin, texas.



Today I'll be speaking in

opposition to central health

prop 1.



Our water bills are going

up.



Our electric bills are going

up.



Toll road rates are going

up.



Recently there was an

article in the austin

american-statesman said

there had been massive drops

in donations to the greater

united way of austin and

drops in disbursements from

united way of austin because

people simply can't afford

to give.



Yet some fool thinks we need

a massive property tax

increase to fund a billion

dollar med school boondoggle

that may or may not ever get

built.



[Applause]

folks, even as I speak the

voters of travis county and

austin, texas are projectile

vomiting up central health

prop 1.



This thing is radioactive.



I give it a 1% chance of

passing and that's why I'm

here to talk to the greater

austin community.



Central health prop 1 was

put on the ballot by nine

unelected communists that

nobody can remove by the

ballot.



A recent article in the

austin american-statesman

[inaudible] records showed

and one of those executives

is a lady named amy shaw

thomas who is the wife of

robert thomas who is running

for state rep of the

republican party in district

48.



She makes a fluffy, puffy

salary of $343,000 a year.



She's the vice chancellor of

health affairs at university

of texas.



She, amy thomas, amy shaw

thomas, the wife of robert

thomas, is one of the people

charged with bringing a med

school boondoggle to austin.



It's empire building on the

backs of travis county and

austin, texas property

owners, families and

citizens.



If central health prop 1

passes, it will be a

[inaudible] of a half

billion dollars over the

next ten years from every

single person in travis

county and it will be given

slackers, druggies, welfare

queens, illegal aliens and

the communist themselves who

are pushing this outrageous

property tax increase.



On top of all that, one of

the top spokesmen for the

people pushing central

health prop 1, mark nathan,

said this recently.



Let's disavow everyone of

that notion.



We agree proposition 1 will

not fund a medical school.



[Buzzer sounding]

says nathan.



>> Cole: Thank you,

mr. morrow.



[Applause]

mr. button.



Is mr. button here?



Jon button?



You can give it to

councilmember tovo and pass

it down.



Thank you, mr. button.



>> It's been a few years

since I've been here so I'm

trying to remember how

everything works.



Let's see if we can lighten

it up a little bit.



Where is the timer?



>> Cole: Three minutes.



>> I thought they had a

timer up here I could see.



Looking for help.



That's one reason I'm here.



I'm crying for help.



Lawyers, law firms, civil

rights groups, animal

rights, investigative

reporters, information on

treating, call me at

(512)538-7961, email jb

killer and these phone

numbers.



I would like to file charges

of official oppression

against animal control april

moore, officer april moore.



I would like to sue the city

of austin for no less than

$1 million for emotional and

physical damages resulting

from the wrongful death of a

dog named tempo which april

moore claimed was tempo

alias rufus.



By perjuring herself about

critical evidence that would

have established kempo was a

different dog.



Rufus had a chip which kempo

did not.



She lied about the critical

evidence to acquire a

warrant from [inaudible] to

pick up the dog from a

san marcos veterinarian.



She lied about this evidence

under oat saying a chip had

never been placed in rufus

and kempo was the same dog

as rufus.



The dog was wrongfully

labeled a dangerous dog by

activity of april moore.



She tried to delete

information of a chip that

had been inserted by

austin-travis county from

town lake computers.



I was here a year ago about

this.



I do suffer from

post-traumatic stress

disorder from the wrongdoing

done to me.



The holding of this dog for

39 days from december 6 to

january 18.



I have two [inaudible] that

the dog was not dangerous

and I was working on

completing a pill, I had

paid my money not to kill

the dog.



I also blame kenneth, the i

peels judge, chris perry and

oglesbe.



But april moore was the one

that did all.



This she was the one upon i

guess it was about 2006 in

my apartment some people

came in there, got nipped.



When she heard this she went

back to a lady four months

ago and claimed --

[inaudible] and that is

totally wrong, totally

corrupt.



She had it out for me

because earlier I told the

animal control department

they are harassing me.



There was some manipulation

of the system.



This is official oppression

and this led to the death of

an innocent dog and it led

to me being put on a

criminal category and the

dog that I lost which

happened to him.



It let to him being labeled.



I just want to say this, get

this out of my system.



You need to fire that bitch

april moore and that will

make her holler.



>> Cole: We don't have

that kind of conversation.



>> I was going to make it

funny.



I screwed that up.



She need to be investigated.



>> Cole: ronnie

reeferseed.



Your time is up.



Put her on a polygraph.



[Applause]



>> Cole: Ronnie

reeferseed, are you ready?



>> Yippee, yes, I'm ronnie

reeferseed echoing all of

robert morrow's great ideas.



And yelling at judge biscoe

wherever you are.



What part of the first

amendment has always been

protected here in the usa,

freedom of political speech.



Two days ago at

approximately the 200th

time and attended the weekly

travis county commissioners

court session, judge biscoe

for thers if time ever

decided to pull a

leffingwell on me.



He had his own hisy fit and

threw me out of the building

because he didn't like what

I had to say.



Remember leffingwell's hisy

fit was ruled to be wrong

and has been universally

scolded for his half baked

attempt to demy me my

constitutional right by how

I choose to pronounce my

name.



Tuesday judge biscoe threw

me out of the court session

because he didn't like what

I had to say about the

communist red chinese

regime's ongoing war on the

unborn and only the chinese

delegation feverishly

applauded.



For your information, red

china for decades now has

been brutally enforcing a

tyrannical state policy to

execute especially female

infants and no other nation

can even come close to this

barbaric policy to murder

babies.



Supposedly a final solution

to all our problems.



No killing totally innocent

babies is not a solution,

it's evil.



Stop the killing.



Love life, people.



Do not -- I believe you do

not have the right to kill

your babies.



No tyrannical governments,

you do not have the right to

kill anybody any time no

matter what religion other

people choose to practice.



And the other part of -- the

other part of the first

amendment is the freedom of

religion and that includes

islam and, of course,

rastafarianism.



Now I am proudly a parish

near of the bee creek united

methodist church that leads

the world by example, not

bombs.



Including cash, housing

et cetera, not only here but

my church has been for years

helping some poor people in

guatamala, demonstrating

appreciation for the love of

christ.



To learn more read your

bible, read your koran,

study the belief systems of

others.



God's love for all living

things including miraculous

hemp marijuana plant.



It's in the bible.



Yes, I even love the

sociopathic tyrants with all

their brain dead tag alongs

because they don't know what

love is.



♪♪ You will a you need is

love, love is all you ♪♪♪♪



>> Cole: Thank you,

mr. reeferseed.



Next mr. dave kelly.



>> Thank you mayor pro tem

cole and the rest of

council.



I'll be pretty brief today

because I know the council

is aware of the problem in

the city code as far as the

length of time drivers can

work, but I had to sign up

for this two weeks ago.



So I want to make a few

comments anyway.



Basically a code that allows

drivers to work almost 24

hours a day is inadequate

and I think the council is

aware and will make some

changes.



And I just wanted to point

out the importance of this

issue, especially with the

30 cab issue coming up.



I mean if these go out,

that's even longer guys will

work.



I think the impact study

showed that we are working

more and more hours,

although it has its problems

also.



When you come up with

something as far as changing

the code or I don't know how

you want to handle this, but

that's why you all is

council and I am but a cab

driver.



But it is important that

this gets taken care of

because -- and the bad part

is as far as tda goes, in

fact, I'm here speaking as a

citizen, not as a represent

of tdaa because to be honest

they are split on it.



Some drivers want to work

even more hours.



Personally I think it's

pretty unsafe to go more

than 12 hours average shift,

but -- thank you.



[Applause]

thank you.



And I do think that safety

should be our primary

concern, especially with

driving our city streets.



They are dangerous enough as

it is and we are out there a

lot.



Whatever you come up,

another key is enforcement.



Whatever the new christ is,

it needs to be monitored and

it needs to be enforced, not

wait till we have a tragedy

close to what we nearly had

a couple weeks ago when the

guy passed out after pushing

himself too hard.



But anyway, I just urge the

council to take action on

this issue and let's get our

streets a lot safer.



Thank you.



>> Cole: Thank you,

mr. kelly.



[Applause]

next we have dave passmore.



>> Good afternoon, mayor

pro tem, councilmembers.



Dave passmore, current

president of the taxi

drivers association.



And this afternoon I would

like just to first thank you

for allowing me to speak and

giving me this opportunity

to do so.



However, I would like to

address the issue concerning

the 30 permits that are on

consideration on today's

agenda.



We understand that some

council are trying to work

with the drivers and trying

to resolve this issue.



Today I just have two things

I would like to say to that.



The tdaa will accept the

fact that if there is more

time needed to look at the

numbers that are coming out

for october, the tdaa is

more than willing and

welcome to allow the council

more time to do that.



However, it affects the

driver's income if there is

more cabs added to the

street.



I think you have heard this

long enough.



I don't want to take over

all the time going over

issues already discussed so

we will accept either a no

to the vote or delay to the

vote.



Really appreciate your time.



>> Cole: Thank you very

much.



Next we have carlos leon.



>> Thank you mile an hour

cole and I'm here to speak

for what's right.



You can put that quote up

there.



I'll get to it in a sec.



Chem trails have appeared in

our sky today even outside

city hall 30 minutes ago.



You know, these man made

sick geo aerosols continue

to poison our clear skies

and our clear skies are like

blank -- in the 2006 prolog

of the audacity of hope,

obama wrote I serve as a

blank screen of which people

of vastly different stripes

project their own views.



In 2008 news week

interpreted that quote to

mean obama was a screen on

which people project their

visions and hopes.



Now, let's decode this.



Notice he stands for nothing

in his quote.



He just wants you to project

yourself on to him.



That's how a coward behaves,

not a leader.



Second of all -- thank you.



Second of all, notice how

this is a cold psychological

trick he's playing on us

americans.



You see, if you project your

hopes and views on to him,

then when you look at his

horrible presidential record

the last four years and want

to reject him based on his

record, you are actually

forced to reject yourself.



That's sick.



That's psychotic.



Can we please go to the

second slide.



Now, donald trump hinted at

this in his recent statement

on facebook.



Because the sensors tried to

stop this information from

coming out you have to speak

in code.



He said if barack obama

agrees to give all his

records, he will give

5 million to a charity of

his choice.



Why done donald trump list

three examples of a charity.



Donald knows what a charity

is, so does obama, so does

the public.



This is code.



By innercity children, i

believe trump is calling

obama a child.



By american cancer society,

I believe that trump is

saying that he's a cancer,

that obama is a cancer to

american society.



And by aids research, i

believe he certainly saying

that obama is ill and sick

and needs help.



This is the kind of

censorship we have to fight

in today's world.



These last four years of his

administration.



It is wrong.



We have a first amendment

american right to be able to

speak what we want freely

without dealing with this.



You know, I'm reminded of

another quote as I look at

all this and that is thomas

jefferson.



I have sworn upon the alter

of god eternal hostility

against every form of

tyranny over the mind of

man.



[Applause]

now, perhaps that's why

obama keeps court female

voters because --



>> Cole: Thank you,

mr. leon.



>> Thank you.



>> Cole: Miss linda green.



Linda green.



There you are.



Good morning.



Can you read the title of my

speech?



Usually the mayor reads the

title.



>> Cole: Who is pugh and

why are they hell bent on

quashing and quashing and

act I fluoride movement.



>> When we think of pew

charitable trust found we

think of public television

and all the things they do

for us.



There's some things good

they do and there's some

things that are down right

dangerous to us.



And a year ago almost to

this date libby doggett, who

works for the benefit of the

pew charitable trust and has

been around a long time

wrote the mike martinez on

city council a letter which

 mike, I understand

that a proposal that would

require the austin utility

department to place a notice

on our consumer water bills

is being raised during the

public health and human

services committee on

october 18 meeting.



We were going to both city

council, as you remember,

and health and human

services asking you all to

put a warning label our our

water bill urging parents

not to use city water,

fluoridated water in the

baby formula and here comes

libby doggett.



She says I strongly oppose

the proposal putting a

warning label on water bills

is both unnecessary and

misleading.



Ocontrare.



I think the pew charitable

foundation a and libby

doggett are misleading.



She says you know I helped

get the campaign up and

going.



So -- then I wrote back her

husband, I am in shock and

dismay that your wife libby

doggett sitting on the board

of the pew charitable trust

would urge city council to

refrain from putting a

warning label on our water

bills and asked him to look

instead at the 4,000

doctors, dentists and

medical and environmental

professionals who have been

calling for an end to water

fluoridation.



And before I get to the

basics of the pew charitable

trust who have been pushing

both portland, oregon and

wichita, kansas to floor

date their water, as the pew

trust is pushing -- in 29

days clean water portland

raised 43,236 signatures so

their citizens can vote on

this issue in november.



Also good news is that we

have fluoride free houston.



So maybe fluoride free

com and clean water

org and fluoride

com can all get

together and convince you

all of the --

[buzzer sounding]

-- sense of ending water

fluoridation.



>> Cole: Thank you.



[Applause]

thank you, miss greene.



Next we have charlene franz.



>> Hello.



How are you guys doing

today?



Okay, I'm here to give a

speech about the museum of

fine arts austin.



It needs a permanent

location.



We have been doing

international, national and

local art shows for 21

years.



We have shown at our state

capitol, the driscoll, 823

congress and 50 other

locations all over austin.



The city has supported the

mexican-american cultural

arts center, the carver and

many other arts

organizations.



We would like to work with

the city's arts commission

in accomplishing our goal.



We have requested peter

macc, doctor gau from china

and many local artist such

as jeanine hicks and john

corey and shown bluebonnet

paintings and longhorns and

please support the museum of

fine arts austin.



We have worked very hard

throughout the years.



Thank you.



[Applause]



>> Cole: Thank you.



Thank you, ms. franz.



We do not have any items to

discuss in executive session

and that's the end of our

citizens communication so

without objection I will

recess -- oh, I'm sorry.



Carla harrison.



-- Paula harrison.



I didn't see caroline rose.



Are you here?



Okay.



Paula harrison.



I'm sorry.



I didn't look at page 2.



>> Okay, mayor and -- he's

absent, and city council.



I'm here to suggest the

closing of 6th street and

the buildings being

remodeled to be a junior and

senior high school.



An arts homeless shelter

become a randall remarkable

grocery store and the

structure on trinity and

cesar chavez in front of

lake side apartments become

a park with a playground and

equipment for children.



Also one of the buildings on

congress have a food court

with a pizza, egg roll and

taco counters and long john

silver's and a candy store

inside.



I'm happy the government can

focus attention to

[indiscernible] and the

state capitals sbc capitals

now that romney is soon in

the white house, governors

can pass a law called the

[indiscernible] law.



It will allow only the more

mormon race, sometime called

the white race,

[indiscernible] downtown

area and buy remodeled homes

in surrounding areas.



Also the government leasing

housing lease only to

mormans who are sometimes

ca the white race lake

side and downtown area.



All other citizens will have

to live in areas of the

suburbs and on farms or

ranches.



I have got support of

citizens now with the help

of my son vincent.



I a housing in

the lake side to live in the

downtown, to continue my way

for the passage of the

empirical law.



Thank you.



>> Cole: Thank you, miss

harrison.



Caroline rose.



I don't believe I see her.



Okay.



That is the conclusion of

our speaker citizens for

citizens communication.



Without objection, I will

recess this meeting until

2:00.



Eye



>> Mayor Leffingwell: We

are out of recess and i

understand that item number

13 was laid on the table

just prior to recess.



So all the speakers have

spoken so without objection

we'll take item 13 off the

table and gun with council begin with council

discussion for a motion on

that order.



>> Spelman: As you

mentioned, we discussed this

item to some extent and move

approval on all three

readings.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Motion by councimember

spelman to approve on all

three readings, seconded by

councilmember morrison.



Discussion?



All in favor?



Opposed?



Passes on a vote of 7-0.



So without objection we'll

go back to regular order for

a while and take up item

number 2.



Item 2 was pulled for

speakers so we'll go

directly to speakers.



Paul saldana.



Is carol hadnot here?



I don't see juan.



Aletta banks.



So you have up to nine

minutes.



>> I have a presentation

here.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Great.



>> Good afternoon, mayor and

councilmembers.



The name is paul saldana

speaking on behalf of the

minority trade association

contractors alliance.



We've been here before to

talk about this particular

item so we wanted to present

you some information.



First of all, I kind of

wanted to give you an

overview of the data related

to the construction industry

and more specifically the

economic impact and

contributions to the

workforce.



So this is some data

 census

bureau.



It's third quarter 2011

data.



And according to this data,

a little over 40,000

employees work in the

construction industry.



You've heard egrso and, of

course, you've read before

that austin continues to

lead the nation in a wide

variety of areas.



One, of course, is we

continue to lead the nation

in small business vitality

rankings and so for the last

three years consistently

we've been ranked in the top

five.



Most recently we've been

ranked number 1.



There are about 40,000 small

businesses in austin and at

least half of those are

minority women owned

businesses.



And below there sort of the

characteristics and criteria

that the business journal

considers in ranking

austin's small business

vitality.



To give you a national data

profile about minority owned

businesses, minority

business ownership is

increasing more than twice

the national rate.



It's 45.6% to 20.1%.



You'll notice a commonality

in hispanic,

african-american, women and

asian owned businesses and

that is a third or in some

cases -- a quarter to a

third, excuse me, are

businesses that have -- are

small business owners that

have businesses in the

construction or

construction-related

industry.



The city of austin currently

has a little over 1,000

's and

's and nearly half are

construction-related

businesses.



You may recall that during

the last city of austin

disparity study which was

conducted in '07-'08, these

were the latest and are the

latest minority and business

goals for the four commodity

codes.



The first column in red

represents the m.b.e./w.b.e.



Goals for construction.



This particular chart here

illustrates what the city's

participation has been for

the last three fiscal years

or almost three full

physical years, going back

to '09 to '11.



Notice the percentages

represented in red indicate

the annual goals that have

not been met by the city of

austin.



And once again you will see

consistently what the city

has failed to meet the goals

in the construction area for

the last three fiscal years.



The next slide here

basically talks about the

payments that the city has

issued on contracts for the

last two fiscal years and

you'll notice that in the

last two fiscal years over

50%, one year 50%, the other

53%, there's been a great

deal of contracts that were

awarded with no availability

and they were noncompetitive

contracts.



If I can take my

construction trade

association hat off and put

on my texas association of

mexican chambers of commerce

hat, I serve as the

legislative chair for the

texas association of

mexican-american chamber of

commerce where an hispanic

chamber organization with

over 30 chambers from the

state of texas.



Earlier this year we

partnered with the

university of texas and ic

squared where we performed a

survey and study of hispanic

owned businesses of the

state of texas.



We had nearly 3,000

participants participate in

that survey.



And one of the critical

challenges that was pointed

out by these hispanic owned

businesses is that in order

to keep consistent and

sustain and grow that they

have challenges and

overcoming lack of training

and management,

communication skills, and

really gathering -- gaining

better access to markets.



One particular finding,

austin was included in the

survey, indicated they

continue to have challenges

and issues when it comes to

government contracts like

the city, county, the state,

et cetera.



22% Of the firms that

participated in this survey

were construction-related

businesses.



Now, with regards to the

contract that's before you

here today, one of the

things I wanted to point out

is essentially what egrso

has done is negotiated on

noncompetitive sole source

contact.



Citing chapter 791.



We know the purpose of this

chapter is supposed to be to

increase efficiency and

effectiveness of local

governments.



One of the things we want to

point out is they are

proposing in this particular

36-month contract for

$783,000 is that the hourly

rate we will pay per class

for the three-hour classes

is $916.66 an hour.



For the six-hour classes the

hourly rate is $458.33.



Going back to the purpose of

this chapter, I don't think

that's sufficient and i

certainly don't think that's

effective of the taxpayer

dollars.



The other issue is the fact

that the city of austin's

current process, whenever a

department wants to

entertain an interlocal

agreement, it's our

understanding they go to the

law department and basically

they say we want to enter

into a local agreement for

these types of services.



The process we believe is

subjective and doesn't

include review and

authorization by the

purchasing department and

smbr.



And our last point on this

slide is the fact we

circumvent the m.b.e./w.b.e.



Ordinance.



On monday all of our

associations participated in

one of biennial meetings

and we asked what's the

process for departments

requesting interlocal

agreement for contract

services, and she basically

says, well, they just

contact the law department.



We asked does the purchasing

department have any

jurisdiction?



Do they review that process,

and her response was no.



Maybe there's somebody here

from purchasing department

that can clarify that.



I thought that was important

to point out to you all.



The services being

contributed in this proposed

interlocal agreement is not

inclusive.



It's not addressing the

needs of the m.b.e./w.b.e.



Businesses.



Going back to the previous

slide, this chapter 7091

speaks to the need to be

efficient and effective so

what we basically have is an

exclusive contract.



It doesn't represent the

needs of all small

businesses in austin.



As you heard us say before,

98% of the budget is coming

from austin energy.



And as you know, the egrso

currently funds the chamber

and greater minority chamber

of commerce and part of that

goes to develop

organizational capacities

for economic development

activities, more

specifically chambers are

allowed to use this money to

grow their membership, they

are allowed to use this

money to basically create

greater.



Greaterresources for doing

business in austin and

develop opportunities and we

would like to have that

opportunity as well.



There continues to be

disparity in the source of

the funding for the minority

trade associations.



The last point here that i

wanted to make on this

particular slide is that

 johns suggested

that we might pursue

potential eda federal grant

money for a construction

incubator, and while we

certainly believe that's a

great idea, it really

doesn't address our

immediate needs and more

importantly it doesn't do

anything to sustain the

existing construction firms

we have now in austin.



And the last point is which

is a good idea why didn't we

pursue the eda grants for

these training classes.



I think that would be

something that would be a

good idea.



And finally the last slide

here is that we're

requesting that you vote no

on this particular

interlocal agreement and you

direct our city manager to

facilitate a to you

comprehensive needs and

study on the needs of all of

our small businesses in

austin, not just half of

them, not just a quarter of

them but all of them.



And that you direct the city

manager to develop a fair

and equitable funding plan

for all small business

service providers.



One of the things that's

listed in the section 791

talks about the use of --

[buzzer sounding]

-- austin energy fund.



I'll stop there.



I'll be happy to answer any

questions.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Questions?



Councilmember tovo.



>> Tovo: I wonder if you

could address your point

about austin energy funds if

you think it's relevant.



>> Yes, ma'am.



Section 791 talks about if

moneys are being used from a

municipally owned utility

organization that there

should be -- there's an

additional step, there has

to be a study to quantify

that that's a good use of

money that's coming from the

utility.



And so I don't know whether

or not that process has

taken plays with this so i

wanted to just basically put

that on the table.



I think that's a question we

need to ask city staff.



Thank you, councilmember.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: Next

speaker is clay dafoe.



Clay dafoe is not in the

chamber.



Walter lake.



>> Hello, my name is walter

leach and I'm president much

leach financial group.



I'm here to -- first as a

small business owner I've

taken several course and

left each class eager to

implement what I had learned

as soon as I arrived back in

the office.



Second is instructor for the

past three years, I've seen

firsthand how the business

owners' lives are

[inaudible] by taking these

classes.



A couple of examples.



Last night I received an

email from a couple of

former female students whose

business plan I [inaudible]

over a cup of coffee.



They told me after running

their business by themselves

for several months they had

just hired their first two

staff members and had begun

serious discussion about

opening a second site.



A former student who had

been running a business for

several years grilled me

after class, thank you for

the real world insight into

running a small business.



I see now why I've been

struggling all these years.



I wish I had taken this

class before I had opened my

business.



It would have prevented a

lot of sleepless tonight's

staring at the ceiling

wondering how I was going to

stay afloat and if I was

going to lose my home.



I personally had the

opportunity to attend

several former students'

business openings including

a high-end salon in downtown

austin a few blocks from

here, a business that

provides nonchemical lice

removal for school aged

children, internet

entrepreneurs and several

others.



This is often quoted in

business literature 80 to

90% of small businesses fail

in the first five years.



In contrast there are

studies that indicate that

small businesses that are

part an incubator program

or where owners receive

training such as provided by

the city of austin

[inaudible] 80 to 90% of

those business entrepreneurs

are successful after five

years.



The main difference is the

opportunity for

entrepreneurs to get started

on the right foot and learn

how to be successful from

instructors or successful

entrepreneurs themselves.



I once

had the privilege to

interview austin prep

richard garriet.



When I asked richard to sum

up what made a successful

entrepreneur, he said an

entrepreneur is someone who

sees opportunities where

everyone else sees only

obstacles.



He went on to say on a real

world basis, entrepreneurs

see a row of open doors

where most people see only a

brick wall.



This perhaps is the most

important thing we do as

instructors aside from the

technical training we

provide.



From our personal business

experiences we show students

that they really are open

doors at the sight of others

telling them what they are

looking at are brick walls.



I often read in fortune,

forbes and other financial

periodicals that austin is

ranked at the top of small

business development in the

country.



I believe that this program

and the dedication of city

 staff are

what gives austin the great

reputation and urge you to

continue without delay.



Thank you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Thank you.



Michael sullivan.



Donating time is

lilia benezola.



So you have up to six

minutes.



>> Hello, I'm michael

sullivan here today

representing the leadership

of continuing education at

the university of texas at

austin.



We have a staff of upwards

of 250 people in austin and

our main mission is extend

the resources of the

university into the

community which we have done

for over 100 years.



I'd like to briefly give an

overview of some of the

unique offerings we put

forth, one of which is

through our professional

development center whose

contract to provide for

small business owners.



I would like to play a short

one minute video from a

couple of participants in

the program offering

testimony from their

experience.



>> So when I decided to open

my own busy had no knowledge

how to do that.



So I got online and found

the small business

development center and once

I started taking classes, i

was really sold.



They were excellent classes.



>> Our business has been

around ten years so one of

the best things about being

able to come to these

classes it doesn't matter

whether you are just

starting a business or

looking to expand a

business, there's always

something interesting you

can learn as a business

owner.



>> And all the instructors

have years of experience.



That's so much better than

the book or course online.



>> You get to meet people

from all different walks of

life, all the different

businesses out there from

pretty sophisticated

business to coffee shops and

all different people.



So it's nice you exchange

business cards, you exchange

knowledge.



>> Every day in our mailbox

we get some piece of

marketing literature from

some company that wants to

put on a seminar for 500 or

1,000 or $1,500 a day to

teach us the same things

that we can learn in these

classes offered by the

professional development

center for 35 or 40 or

50 dollars.



And taught by somebody who

is already in that field.



It's hugely invaluable, yes.



>> So I know it a cliche but

clearly in austin small

business is big business.



>> That was actually the

mayor.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: I

recognize that guy.



>> Mayor leffingwell came to

the ceremony [inaudible]

completed the program and

we're very grateful for

that.



As you can see, we're very

proud of our partnership

with the city of austin on

this vital program.



It's highly rated.



I think the satisfaction

rating came in around 95% in

the last survey that we

conducted on it.



I've also brought along

copies of our annual report

which I've left up here with

councilman riley and I hope

he will pass them out to

you.



It gives a good overview of

the some of the other

programs that we offer which

provide a lot of good vital

services to the community.



We have a migrant student

program that has been around

for 25 years which helps the

children of migrant workers

complete high school on time

while staying on the

regional migrational path

with their families.



The individual who is a top

performer in our migrant

program this year went on to

harvard university.



I would like to extend an

invitation to the

councilmembers to come to

the graduation ceremony next

spring.



I think you will find it's a

very powerful moment.



And it shows some of the

unique populations that

we're good at serving.



We have a program which

helps spanish speaking

students coming from mexico

transfer credits to texas

schools which help improve

on time graduation rate and

save school districts in

texas upwards of $10 million

in otherwise replicated

funding.



We have a university of

texas charter school that

teaches special student

populations ranging from

students living in

[inaudible] homes to those

in drug and alcohol

rehabilitation centers and

children recovering from

neurological trauma.



We create safe places for

these children to learn

while they are in crisis and

this also changes lives in

the community.



We offer safety trainers for

coal miners and oil workers

as well.



We run a life-long learning

program for senior citizens

and also run popular

informal [inaudible] classes

you may have heard of.



Last week we participated in

the texas conference for

women where we provided

interactive training for the

visitors to our booth which

helps women that are

transitioning back into the

workforce learn better

interview skills.



We have programs for

veterans that help them

 funding to

complete some of our

certificate programs that we

offer.



Ranging from paralegal

programs to farm tack to

human lee sources to medical

interpreter training

programs.



These are a few of the

programs that we offer that

we feel enrich this great

city and we hope that you

will give our division at

 the opportunity to keep

working with the city of

austin on this small

business development program

that we're discussing today.



That is our overview in a

nutshell and regardless of

how things work out in

general today we look

forward to working with city

of austin on future

collaborations and we hope

you will give this contract

some consideration today.



Thank you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Thank you.



Jennifer chenowith.



Not here.



Ronnie reeferseed.



>> Thank you, yes, I'm

ronnie reeferseed and I'm

here to talk about the

unfortunate mixture of

public funds here on a local

level again with the -- the

huge cash cow called the

university of texas and for

us to be locked up in these

boondoggles of cash wasting

money.



We don't have the

taxpayer -- we're all poor.



Everybody I know the poor.



And we just don't have the

money for these peripheral

kind of expenses that are

not necessary and I totally

agree with our previous

speaker there are so many

other really valid programs

that need to be well funded

and there are good things to

spend taxpayer money on.



This does not seem to be one

of them in my estimation.



And so I didn't make notes

of the myriad of great

things he was talking about,

but I know from my personal

experience that we need to

make more moneys available

to all these poor people

that live here and we really

have to -- we are a rich

city.



We're a rich country.



We are blessed to live in

the rich nation state of

texas.



And if we can instead of --

instead of wasting money

here on these kind of

programs, we should instead

try to reinvest in our

people who are really

struggle and it's not their

fault most of them.



And if any of them.



And so I know there are

outlets that I'm proud to

say the city of austin

already has set up, things

for helping poor people eat

food and help them with

housing and help people try

to keep up with these

ridiculous utility costs.



Like for example my company

that charges me is southwest

water company.



We should definitely

withdraw from giving them

any more money.



They just chose to quadruple

the price of water where i

live and then they stuck

fluoride in it whichist a

crime.



I'm hoping you are all

learning about this, this is

poison and it's killing

people and gardens and pets

and babies.



It's nightmarish.



And austin has so many

wonderful resources, great

things about living here in

 mayor, and as

you know, but putting

fluoride in the water --



>> Mayor Leffingwell: Can

we get back to the subject?



>> It's all related and i

don't know if you have the

proper authority to tell me

what I can say.



I mean I've got my time to

speak here and I'm not going

to go over my time and these

subjects are related.



Political speech is root of

all of our blessings.



It's what our founding

fathers knew above all else

to give to the citizens.



[Buzzer sounding]



>> thank you so much.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Those are all the speakers

that I have signed up.



 dafoe, you were called

earlier.



Do you want to speak?



All right.



>> Thank you, mr. mayor.



You usually have a right to

speak on this case.



It's almost like a small

privilege.



Thank you.



I oppose this deal, as you

can guess.



It's a 36-month interlocal

agreement with the

university of texas

professional development

center to develop and

deliver training to small

business owners not to

exceed $470,000.



You know, it's a good idea,

the ends it is trying to

reach is a great goal and

one I agree with.



And this presentation that

the gentleman gave, it's

obviously they are doing

good things, but what about

the means.



Do the means justify the

ends?



And I think robbing the

taxpayers of half a million

dollars to do this is not

the right way.



I think a private charity or

a company can do this.



I'd be happy to give a

donation on my own dime, but

instead we're being forced

as john bush would say at

the barrel of a gun to give

this money.



And I don't think it's fair.



And you know, people are

like, clay, why are you

opposing this, this is for

small businesses, for jobs.



I just did an interview with

 spelman about small

business and development and

yeah, I'm for small

business, but I can't

support this because it's

from the taxpayers.



I'll leave with one last

thing, I'll keep it short.



And this quote has often

been taken out of context

and applied to only foreign

policy when it was meant to

be a quote to apply around

to everything.



A very wise man said it,

barry goldwater said

extremism in the defense of

liberty is no vice.



In moderation in the pursuit

of justice is no virtue.



Thank you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Okay.



That's all the speakers that

we have signed up.



Corinna james is signed up

but not wishing to speak.



>> Martinez: I wanted to

ask as I understand or cindy or veronica.



Good afternoon, cindy.



So I know we're heading into

a disparity study.



The reason I know this is

because the mayor and I have

an item on next week to add

in the disparity study a

request by a veterans group

to see if there's a

disparate impact on

veterans.



Do we have anything on the

small business in the study?



>> Cindy crosby with the law

department.



The disparity will look

specifically at minority and

women owned businesses and

we can ensure there's a

component that looks at

small business separately,

but the disparity study does

look at the statistics of

available minority

businesses in the austin

marketplace.



>> Martinez: I apologize.



I'm looking through this

presentation right quick.



There's a specific request

and I don't know if it would

apply to the disparity

study.



We're undergoing a needs

assessment and study on the

needs of all small

businesses.



Do you think that's

something that could be

incorporated into the

disparity study that we're

doing or do you feel like

that's a separate request?



>> It would be separate

because the disparity study

will be more of a

statistical analysis of the

businesses available, not

necessarily looking at the

needs.



The consultant that would be

retained would do

stakeholder outreach and

talk to them and find out

what their needs were and

how it relates to the city

procurement program, but it

may not cover all of that.



>> Martinez: Okay.



So if we wanted to do that

study, it would have to be a

separate action item from

council, not necessarily

incorporated with the

disparity study that we're

doing?



Because the scope of work

sounds like it's different

in our disparity study

[inaudible].



>> The focus and the end

results are also a little

different because the

disparity study will help us

defend the city's m.b.e.



Program divorce what I'm

hearing is maybe looking at

specific needs of the

business community.



>> Martinez: Okay.



Thanks.



Thank you, mayor.



>> Spelman: If somebody

from egrso could talk about

what the small business

community looks like.



>> Kevin johns, director of

economic growth.



There's approximately 43,000

small businesses in the

city.



The small business

development program focuses

on citywide support for

those businesses.



We have a -- a large amount

of documentation of the

16,000 we work with on a

regular basis.



At least 2,000 businesses

participate, small

businesses, the

documentation of the success

rate from the teaching

courses.



Pretty good -- cities are

mandated [inaudible]



>> Spelman: You are

anticipating my next

question.



Let me back you up.



I'll get to where you ended.



We have 43,000 small

businesses in the city of

austin.



I presume they are in a wide

range of different kinds of

industries, different

industrial sectors.



Do you have a sense of about

what personal of them are in

the construction business?



>> Yes, sir, I think you saw

in paul saldano's

presentation there were

about 500.



>> Spelman: About 500 --



>> minority businesses.



I think his presentation

showed there were about

10,000 minority businesses

that were certified and

about 500.



I think that perhaps

veronica could tell you how

many are in the actual

membership of [inaudible]



>> Spelman: I'm less

interested -- let me tell

you why I'm interested.



We've got 43,000 small

businesses and your charge

is in part to give them

assistance to become big

businesses or at least

profitable businesses.



>> That's correct.



>> Spelman: Some of those

are in construction and what

 saldana talking

about perhaps they were not

getting the resources from

the university of texas

programs, perhaps they are,

perhaps they are not but

there may be specific needs

this the construction

business.



I wanted to get a sense how

big a construction business

was relative to to small

businesses that it's your

job to take care of.



>> That's a very good

question.



Because the dsmbr focuses on

the construction industry

and procurement of

construction procurement,

our department has not

focused on that at all.



We're just not experts in

the construction industry

[inaudible] procurement.



That is entirely up to

dsmbr.



So the documentation and the

programs have been citywide

and would not suffice for

any type industry.



Some construction companies

do come, but the course work

which you have seen in the

past is in some cases highly

technical as to how to do

social media marketing, how

to expand to a second

location, how to do business

planning, which as i

understand it is completely

different from the training

that's provided by the

[inaudible] contractors.



>> Spelman: Sure.



Some of it, on the other

hand, would be very broadly

applicable.



How to write a business

plan, which I imagine a

construction contractor

would need to know.



Small business accounting,

quick books I want immediate

I can't tell introductory,

so on.



It's looking a the the class

 offerings

it seems there is a lot of

stuff a construction courter

would find valuable.



Would that be a fair

statement?



>> Yes, that would be a very

fair statement.



I think [inaudible]

construction contractor or

retail or whatever the

company is do need that set

of skills.



And so it is the -- the

course work from the

university of texas of

course does cover that

[inaudible]



>> Spelman: Miss leafy, do

you have something you need

to tell me?



>> I just wanted to state

that we do have construction

firms that do attend the

business classes that we

offer.



Our focus is developing

businesses and not

necessarily procurement, you

know, helping them reach

procurement and access

government contracts.



>> Spelman: That would be

a very specific nature, it

would be extremely important

to some businesses.



>> Very much.



57600

[captioning disconnect].



>> One is customer

satisfaction and the other

is in actual attendance.



And over the last three

careers the customer

satisfaction rate has grown

from 92%, 94 to 96%.



We did open the contract for

competition initially about

four years or five years

ago.



We were dissatisfied with

the production as well as in

the area of efficiency as

well as effectiveness that

the highest customer

satisfaction rate that we

received in those years was

at 87% or 86%.



So that was one bucket.



The other bucket of

performance measures we

actually looked at was the

usage, that is class

attendance.



And we've experienced over

the last three years a 73%

increase in attendance in

our classes.



We've grown from 581

participants in fiscal year

'09 to more than 1,000 last

fiscal year.



We were able to deliver more

than 4500 training hours

this particular fiscal year.



So we're anticipating with

this interlocal that we will

be teaching or reaching

1,000 students per year.



>> Spelman: Has anybody in

your shop tried to go back

to businesses after they've

taken the class, maybe two

or three months later to see

whether or not they learned

something which they were

actually able to put to use?



>> Yes.



We go back every year we do

an annual performance

survey, if you will, and we

ask them as a result of

the -- as a result of the

services that you use

through sbet which includes

the training did you

experience what we label as

productive growth.



And one of those christ is

increase in the number of

people that you've hired,

did you use a new

technology, did you move

into a larger space.



In other words, anything

that our services that they

help you grow.



So we do that on a regular

basis.



We do that on an annual

basis toward the end of the

calendar year.



This group of people who

take the classes, they also

are surveyed.



We're going to be

trafficking more

specifically I think through

the african-american

resource commission has

asked us through

councilmember morrison's

office as well as she has

asked us to track

demographics in the

participants in the classes

which we're not currently

capturing, and we will be

capturing that data.



And we will also then be

tracing and doing more

intensive followup with

those particular individuals

to see, you know, what the

productive growth was

specifically on the

african-american community

and probably the minority

businesses in the classes.



>> Spelman: This is a

tantalizing thing that you

are giving me.



You are telling me all the

things you have done but you

are not giving results.



Do we have results is this.



>> The results beside the

fact the number of

businesses have experienced

productive growth?



>> Spelman: Tell me that.



I don't think I got that

number.



Got lost somewhere along the

line.



Maybe other people on the

council got that.



I got 96% of the people

saying they were really

happy they attended the

classes and attendance was

way up.



Beyond that evidence of

productive growth in terms

of people, new technologies,

new business sites, I didn't

get that part.



>> I have it, I didn't bring

my performance measure

report back with me to

council, but I can certainly

give you that information.



>> Spelman: Could you

qualitatively describe it

for me?



Is it good?



>> Oh, it's very good.



How many jobs --

[inaudible].



About 200 or 300 jobs were

created as a result of the

services that we delivered

through our sbdp -- I'm kind

of at a quandary because i

don't have my report with

me.



>> Spelman: The exact

number is immaterial

relative to getting it

right.



200 Jobs about right.



>> Small businesses owner

that go through our services

are generating jobs, people

are starting businesses that

come and use our services

and they are also entering

into new markets.



We had several of them that

have started taking their

markets globally.



We've had businesses that

have come here that are u.s.



Businesses that are now

expanding into global

markets.



We've seen growth and

activity.



>> Spelman: If we're

talking just a very rough

cut, half a million dollars,

and we're getting 200 jobs

out the other end for half a

million dollars, that's

$2,500 a job.



Which is not bad for that

one-time investment.



And that job presumably

would continue for several

years afterwards so we're

not having to pay $2,500 a

year, we pay $2,500 once for

a class and get jobs out at

the other end.



Sound very good to me.



Is that what you are talking

about?



>>> 156,000 Per year.



The total.



>> Spelman: Okay.



And over what time period

are we talking about 200

jobs?



>> In a -- I would say

probably a year.



Our small businesses

generate jobs annually.



When I said 200 jobs, that

was one fiscal year.



>> Spelman: And this is

participants in this program

are generating 200 jobs.



>> Right.



>> Spelman: For $150,000

we're getting 200 jobs.



That's less than $100 a job.



That sound better than

chapter 360 agreement.



>> Well --



>> Spelman: 380 Agreement.



>> For every $25,000 of a

sba loan they expect you to

generate one job.



>> Spelman: That's good to

know.



Except facebook was cheaper

than that.



I'll give you that.



I have more questions but i

always have more questions,

mayor, I should probably be

quiet and call the question.



I move approval.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Councimember spelman moves

approval.



Is there a second?



I guess I should ask if

there's any objection to

calling the question.



Hearing none.



Are you the second,

councilmember morrison?



And let me just ask one more

question about this.



[Inaudible] and those are

very good statistics, but

obviously satisfaction with

the program and I think I'm

on record a few minutes

earlier as saying how

important I think small

business is to the city.



But we've heard some

concerns and I would just

like to know if we have the

ability to go to the

contractor, the university

of texas in this instance,

and say we would like for

you to include a little

training on this or that,

whatever deficiencies might

be identified.



>> We can identify and

earmark a session or two or

have a session that would --

within the contract amount

specifically targeting

construction businesses.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Okay.



And I think we should always

be willing to talk to

people --



>> absolutely.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: --

who have complaints about

deficiencies and be willing

to change the program.



>> Yes, sir.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Thank you.



All in favor say aye.



Opposed say no.



Motion passes on a vote of

7-0.



So we'll go now to item 39,

if there's no objection,

pulled by councilmember

martinez.



There are no speakers.



>> Martinez: Item 39 is

regarding some of the

multi-family structures that

have integrity problems

forcing property owners to

shut down buildings and

folks to scramble for

replacement housing.



This item just directs the

city manager to help us as a

community and as a council

come up with a strategic

emergency response plan

moving forward.



When and if those incidents

arise.



As I mentioned at the last

councilmember meeting, a

DEVELOPER FROM THE '70s

Was really laying some

warnings to me that we will

see more moving forward

because of the aging

infrastructure and the way

that construction standards

EXISTED BACK IN THE '70s

AND '60s WHEN THESE

Properties were built.



What I wanted to do was take

it further because we know

that catastrophic incidents

don't just happen to

multi-family complexes, they

also happen to folks in

single-family homes.



And so we don't have, shall

we say, a hardship

application process.



A family recently lost their

entire life-long contents in

a house fire.



Children were in school,

lost all of their

schoolwork, really created a

disruption.



They had to find temporary

housing.



And then they had a house

that was about to fall over,

they needed to move forward

with rebuilding and, of

course, because of the

wonderful times that we're

having in terms of

development they were put in

a cue of a severe waiting

period just to demo their

house and to get started on

rebuilding their lives and

rebuilding their homes.



All I'm asking is for a

brief amendment.



You should all have a copy.



If you don't, pass one down.



It's one whereas and it says

whereas single-family

residences may be impacted

by catastrophic event such

as a fire or flooding.



Any new policy should also

help those residents get

back in their homes as soon

as possible and/or begin the

rebuilding process.



Then one other resolve that

 in the event of a

fire, flood or other

catastrophic event,

homeowners should have the

opportunity to apply for

hardship consideration to

allow expedited permitting

and building.



Not every home that burns

down necessarily creates a

hardship.



It could be through

negligence, through some our

means that the event

occurred.



So I want to staff to help

us come up with the best

policy for that hardship

application.



That's the amendment.



I'll move approval and

hopefully the seconder will

see that it's friendly.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: I'm

going to take your motion to

say you move approval of

item 35 with the

modification that you

just --



>> Tovo: I'm going to

second it.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Seconded by councilmember

tovo.



I think it's item 39.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: Is

there any further

discussion?



>> Tovo: I just wanted to

ask staff about this.



I guess my first question

 smart if

he's here.



>> Carl smart, director of

code compliance.



>> Tovo: Thanks for being

here and I know you had an

opportunity to talk with --

talk over the resolution

that's on today's agenda.



Does this amendment concern

you at all, extending -- as

I understand it, I think it

would just be tied to the

expedited demolition and

building permit.



>> It does not.



We are already working with

stakeholders and

interdepartmental tasked

teams to look at an

effective tenant

displacement policy.



Councilmember martinez is

correct, we've been having

some difficulties, issues

with multi-family complexes

where they have structural

collapses that's been

occurring.



And as a result a lot of the

tenants are being displaced

so we're having to take some

immediate action, immediate

response to deal with that.



So we are okay with the

resolution.



 guernsey

may be able to respond also

because you are talking

about hardship for

expediting permitting for

those particular cases.



>> Tovo: Thank you.



>> We're okay with it.



>> Tovo: guernsey,

would you minue weighing in

on the expedited permit if

you think that's applicable.



>> Yes.



Right now we already offer

an ex permitting dated

permit review process where

homeowners a catastrophe

might occur, a gas leak,

middle of summer and their

air conditioning unit goes

out.



They had a waterline break

or a major sewer backup that

would occur in the house or

something structural.



It could be stairway in the

house or if there is a

failure, we already have

provisions that are built in

the code to do that.



I think what councilmember

martinez is suggesting and

we can certainly look into

that and work and see what

we can do to help those

homeowners where there's

probably more than just a

simple loss, where the

individual has to leave the

structure and it's not a

matter of fixing something

in it, it's more probably

rebuilding and taking and

looking and see if we can

come up with a similar

provision for those I guess

catastrophes that may occur

through no fault of their

own.



>> Tovo: Thank you.



And I just wanted to say i

really appreciate the work

 smart and others in

our other -- in various

other city departments have

been doing to come up with a

really well integrated

response plan to meet the

needs of the families who

have been forced to relocate

very quickly from the

woodridge apartments and

also los palmos and this is

attempt to make sure we have

community stakeholders

speaking with staff and

asking any feedback they

have.



I have an opportunity to

speak with several of them

who had been assisting

residents at both site and

they had ideas and feedback

for staff and I appreciate

your willingness to -- you

know, your responses and

feedback on the resolution.



I think that the work that's

already gone on is very good

and extremely important, as

councilmember martinez said.



Unfortunately, this is a

circumstance we may see

again in austin and it's

really important that the

city be able to respond

appropriately and to make

the disruptions in the lives

of those tenants as little

as possible to make the

transition into more

permanent safe housing as

easy as possible for those.



Thank you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Other comments?



All in favor say aye.



Opposed say no.



Passes on a vote of 7-0.



And council, before we take

up the next items, which

will be 27 and 28 together,

at -- after the second

reading on these items i

suggested that the council,

since we've heard the

discussion and public

comment, so many times in

the last few months, that we

would -- I was going to

suggest that we limit

discussion to 15 minutes per

side on these two items

combined.



So if there is no objection,

you might want to huddle.



I don't think there's too

much more than that

scheduled, but if there's no

objection, we'll allow 15

minutes for those for, 15

minutes for those against.



With that we'll go to those

for first.



Henry gilmore.



And if you want, you can

restrict your comments to

either or both of these, but

we are taking them -- public

comment for both at the same

time.



>> Yes, mayor.



Thank you.



Mayor, members of the

council, I'm henry gilmore

representing lone star cab.



For the record, I'm

supporting lone star with

approval of item 28, but I'm

also supporting item number

27, that item as well.



I understand that there may

be some consideration of

postponing this for another

30 days and respectfully,

council, we would request

that the council not

postpone this for another 30

days.



And just approve this item

on third reading today.



We have -- this item has

already been delayed to lone

star's detriment.



Council, when you approved

10 months ago awarding lone

star 50 official permits

last december in two phases,

30 permits in february and

the remaining 20 in june,

the first phase of 30

permits was delayed by a

postinger ron and didn't get

finalized until april, which

was after sxsw.



The second phase of the 20

permits was spoked to be

awarded in june, well in

time for acl and the f1

race.



Because of significant

delays, lone star will miss

the benefit of having these

20 cabs on the street for f1

and acl and won't be able to

place the cars into service

before january 1.



Additional delays just work

to lone star's detriment.



Council, the reason this

item is before you is

because lone star was

underpermitted from its

inception.



Having three healthy

competitive taxi cab

franchises should be of

paramount concern to the

city.



Otherwise you are

encouraging a monopoly for

one franchise that not only

takes away choice for the

traveling public but

eliminate the choice drivers

have to work for another

franchise which may have

better equipment, better

management.



Lone star has been asking

for 75 additional permits

for over two years now

because it's been

underpermitted from the

beginning.



This item represent your

recognition that the city

didn't award lone star

enough permits from the

inception and represents a

one-time adjustment in order

to allow the company to

effectively compete in the

marketplace.



Council, this is an

expensive, bewildering and

frustrating process for a

small business like lone

star trying to compete.



Not only does lone star have

to compete with other

franchises, but it competes

with pedicabs who don't have

the insurance costs and

maintenance obligations,

compete with limo services

and capital metro bus

shuttle services and now

helicopter flight to and

from the f1 race.



Solomon is asking for a fair

chance to compete and even

though it's the smallest

franchise, lone star

channels into technology and

we've made a substantial

investment in the latest

technology where every new

vehicle is equipped with a

navigation system with audio

turn by turn direction.



This is state-of-the-art --



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Sorry to interrupt.



That is three minutes.



Maximum of three minutes per

person.



If you want to wrap up

quickly.



>> Council, I just ask that

approve this on third

reading.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Thank you.



If you want to just start

over with three minutes,

I'll just keep track and add

those up to 15.



So the next speaker is joan

cabelli for and donating

time bertha means.



Is bertha means?



There she is.



So you will have six

minutes.



And that will be --



>> yes.



I'm in support of austin cab

receiving 10 additional

permits.



In order to meet the

reporting requirements of

the city and in order to

improve our company's

service not only to our

passengers but also to our

drivers, we are going

through the process of

making a costly investment

in a state-of-the-art

computerized system.



It turned out to be a much

more complex and costly

exercise than we could ever

have imagined.



And it's almost impossible

for us to plan and budget.



We've been waiting almost a

year since december of last

year to find out if we're

going to get the additional

permits.



In a way we're piggybacking

off of lone star because the

practice of the city has

been if the smaller

franchises [inaudible].



After all we've been in

business for almost 29

years.



And we've never had an

opportunity to be given

additional permits because

we have too few permits.



We started with too few and

we had too few for many,

many years.



And now that lone star has

this great opportunity, the

city has felt that, yes,

austin cab should have

additional ones at the same

time.



We shouldn't just stand

still and then eventually we

are even.



We've been working for many,

many years.



So the reason I'm saying

it's difficult to plan and

budget is that there's

certain things with this

computerized system that we

really need to purchase, but

if we know we have these 10

additional permits which has

been approved on first and

second reading and this is

the third, then we can say

yes, we can afford to add

this little feature which

will enable us to know where

our cabs are at all times.



A very important feature in

order to meet the city's

requirements.



And so hoping this would

come through, we've gone

ahead and have the software

purchased but there's

several other features we

need to purchase.



And if we know we're getting

these 10 additional permits,

then we can go ahead and

invest in those additional

features that will satisfy

the city and our own

requirements as well.



It's been a long time.



It seems we've come here so

many times.



And we were patient when

lone star had to redo its

first and second reading.



A few months ago we said,

okay, we'll wait because we

realized that we're getting

additional permits because

lone star is getting

additional permits.



And both of us are in the

same position, small

companies trying to improve

the technology.



In the city's case it's for

reporting.



In our case it's so that we

can get our drivers better

contacts with the dispatch

system so that our customers

will be able to find out

which -- we will know

immediately which cabs they

left their purse, their

wallet, their cell phones.



I mean, there will be so

many benefits foru

passengers as well as our

drivers as well as our

company and the city.



So it's been quite -- quite

a long wait and we d hope

that these additional

permits will come along.



And I believe the last time

I stood here, we found out

that perhaps austin cabs has

been short changed a little

bit.



Perhaps lone star ha been

short changed as well

because this is almost a

year and we haven't even

looked at the need -- the

need for additional cabs

under the old system, the

old formula.



And I remember somebody

saying that, oh, yes, austin

cab is a little behind, but

I don't have the figures on

that.



So, of course, that

additional income can enable

us to more quickly meet the

requirements that the city

is putting on us to improve

our dispatch system.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Thank you.



There's a total of six

minutes left on the for side

so -- and I have a total of

seven speakers signed up so

only two more speakers are

going to be allowed to

speak.



 casa, is

there any objection to --

okay.



Go ahead.



You have three minutes.



And there will be three more

after you.



>> My name is solomon

[indiscernible].



Mayor and councilmembers,

I'm speaking in support of

additional service to lone

star.



I don't want to repeat what

[indiscernible] and prepared

to speak today but due to

the lack of time we're going

to keep -- true and genuine

feelings lone star cab.



What lone star cab means to

them and how the

[indiscernible] changes

their lives.



I would like to point out

first the memo from

transportation department

indicated [indiscernible]

materials are not included.



The driver income was in a

positive way.



We all know without any

doubt [inaudible] will

significantly increase.



We can argue about drivers'

income the whole day but we

may not reach a [inaudible]

because we don't know the

number.



Our city has the lowest

unemployment rate in the

nation.



This is because of the great

policies and direction we

have given over years.



For lone star cab, the

additional permits are about

creating a job opportunity.



My second point is about

[inaudible].



Lone star cab includes --

per week this year.



Mayor and councilmembers,

you heard me saying that a

company has give back

thousands of dollars to

drivers.



You also heard drivers'

testimony.



As of today, each of those

drivers of the 30 new

permits received 1,800 which

is total of 54,000 over the

last four months.



The [indiscernible] and have

stayed the same since then.



We also don't have any plans

to increase for the next six

months even though we made

huge investment in

technology.



The $60 per week increase is

absolutely [indiscernible]

because we never had 190

settlement to begin with.



Last week I attended the

94th international

conference of -- para

transit officials.



That will take lone star cab

service to the -- not only

improve service but generate

drivers' income.



The pilot program will begin

next week on 20 vehicles for

one month.



At the completion --

remaining will be made.



[Inaudible].



Critical to our operation.



[Buzzer sounding]

thank you very much.



God bless you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: I'm

just going to go in order.



If you want to pass, just

give me a signal you want to

pass in favor of somebody

else, but there's only three

more minutes of speaking

time on the for side.



Next speaker is gabrielle

anye.



He's going to take the three

minutes.



And that will be all.



>> Good evening, council.



Gabrielle anya.



One of the beneficiaries you

give to lone star cab.



Since you gave that my life

has changed.



I have the rest of mind

because of the management

system.



The policy that allows us to

[indiscernible].



Also I have had good

compliments from customers.



Customers say we respond

more rapidly than any other

company in austin.



I think that lone star needs

more -- because they have --

looking for jobs.



I don't see why -- I've

driven for other companies

in austin but lone star has

been the best.



We need more permits also

because customers are not

getting cabs on time.



During the rush hours of the

morning, there will be a lot

of trips -- they need cabs.



The afternoon rush hour,

cabs.



Why can't they get more

permits?



[Inaudible] need jobs to

balance it I think we need

more cabs for customers.



Thank you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Thank you.



Now, we also have more

speakers signed up against

and neutral than we have

time for.



And so if you want to pass

in favor of somebody else,

signal me, otherwise I'll go

in order.



I'll give you the names

first, thomas marksit,

joseph.



Ly, david kelly, dave pass

degrees more, daniel ija,

and virga de.



Demera and clay dafoe.



The first speaker is thomas.



He is passing.



Joseph ily.



And joseph, you'll be

allotted three minutes.



>> Good afternoon, mayor and

members of council.



I'm here as part of the taxi

drivers association of

austin.



I request that you vote

against the extra permits

for the fact that drivers

are working longer hours and

making less money due to the

impact study.



If not we request you

postpone and study the

the third would be for

austin city council to fix

the problem created by the

earlier council created with

the unequal distribution of

taxis by reducing the

outstanding permits by 10%

when the permits come at the

end of the year.



Please consider the impact

of your decision on working

people in austin.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Thank you.



David kelly.



And you have three minutes.



>> Thank you, mr. mayor.



Members of council, I'll be

brief.



Concerning the 30 extra taxi

permits, the other day we

got the impact study and all

the data is clear, right?



Hardly.



It's a very complicated

subject.



But there are a couple

statistics that stand out

and I would like to point

them out.



One is the average income

per taxi down almost 6%.



Almost equal to the extra

amount of taxis put on the

line.



The other is the taxi hours

on duty, which w

14.38%.



And no matter how or why

that this is off, I know the

festival was a different

month last year, but still

that's a 14, almost 15%

increase in time worked.



More cabs -- I mean will

always cause this percentage

to go up.



The more cabs there are, the

longer it takes to make the

same amount of money.



[One moment, please, for

change in captioners]

I'll bet you most of them would

say no.



As we have contended in the

past, the drivers, at 13-66 an

hour with 600 to $700 in

expense, that is less than

minimum wage and we feel like

that happens at least half the

time.



The festivals are good, yes,

football games are good, but

those are only a few weekends

per year.



That's all I have for you today.



Please vote no against 30 extra

taxis.



Thank you.



>> Dave.



>> Good afternoon, may, I don't

council members, city manager.



My name is dave fastmore,

current president of the taxi

driver's association.



Today I'm here before to you ask

you, sir, please do not issue

these 30 permits.



We are more than willing to wait

for the council to get the

additional numbers to come in so

you can see what the numbers are

actually reflecting.



Right now, based on the numbers

show the driver's income is

already down.



If you need the other numbers

and you need the extra time, we

are more than willing for you to

wait to have the numbers so you

can actually see the real impact

that this is having.



Thank you so much for your time.



Have a great day.



>>Mayor leffingwell: thank you.



Not here.



Verga.



You will have three minutes.



>> Thank you, mayor and thank

you, council members.



My name is verga, the taxi

driver's association, and i

stand before you today that you

will vote no against these 30

permits because, first of all,

it would -- again, this is a

formula, second of all, you, the

council members set a goal of

impact, the growth you set for

yourself, and the impact study

shows the growth for the drivers

is down, so, for that reason, i

think you should -- the council

should stick to your rule to

vote this thing down.



Another thing is you know, i

hear a lot about minority

business.



Yes, minority business help the

drivers 900 -- over 900 drivers,

a small minority drivers, which

most of them are immigrant, they

came here for, like, american

dream like anybody else.



When you take the driver's

income and add more permits on

the street, that means you --

the council is reviving or

making vibrant the few owners

minority company and the cost of

majority-minority driver's

business.



So, I ask that you vote no to

these 30 permits and I ask you

to vote no again.



Thank you.



[Applause]

 so, one

more three-minute segment.



Left with the against, signed up

neutral, you have three minutes.



>> Thank you so much, austin

city council, thank you so much

for being here, drivers, on both

sides.



This is a very important issue

in our city that the council has

been mulling over now it seems

like every two or three months

there's more permits being

considered or an appeal or

something of that nature, which

leads me to believe, which was

my initial inclination when i

first saw this topic on the

agenda over a year ago that

austin city council shouldn't be

regulating permits at all.



These drivers are hardly making

ends meet, and as they were

telling me outside the chamber

here earlier today, it is very

difficult to make a living

minimum wage even driving a cab

in austin, texas, working 12 to

13 hours.



So, I think we need to listen to

the working class people of this

city.



I'm one of them and proud to be

it because it is the backbone of

america and they're being

ignored in our government,

local, state, federal.



I just wanted to add to the

discussion that austin city

council is creating these

problems.



Now, these companies are

franchiseees of the city, as i

understand it, why aren't they

their own business with their

own right to do what they want

it seems pretty change.



You don't see franchise

businesses serving ice cream.



Amy's ice cream isn't a

franchiseee service, maybe at

the airport, seems strange.



I would like to see the drivers

form their own companies and

their own small business, then

we could have 10, 15, 20 taxi

businesses have real competition

in this industry in austin

instead of this highly

monopolized, yellow cab enforced

duopoly, tripoly, whatever you

want to call it.



Look at pedi-cab, they're

regulating fair business, unfare

to the taxiways, even though

they have a cartel of their

known yellow cab, it is unfair

to them because these other

companies, electric cab, now the

bikes are going through the

ringer with the pedi-cabs and

that is wrong.



We should go back to the

founding fathers and what they

advised, let freedom work its

magic and maybe some of these

drivers can go out and form tear

own companies and make -- form

their own companies and make a

decent wage and reinvest in the

city of austin.



Whether they build a house or

give money to another business,

that's how the economic growth

works and that's what we want.



I want to see them succeed like

they want and anybody else in

any other business.



I think this is the wrong thing

now to add more permits.



You need to go back to the

entire permit scheme and

reconsider whether this it s

good for our city.



Thank you.



>> That's all the speakers.



There are a number of other

speakers signed up before or

against, either not wishing to

speak or timed out so those are

all the speakers we have.



And, we'll take them separately,

separate motions.



Item 27 first.



Is there a motion on item 27?



Council member spelman moves

approval on third reading, item

27.



Second by council member

martinez.



All those in favor, please say

aye?



[Chorus of ayes]

council member morrison.



 thank you, I wanted

to make comment because I was

very interested in the

discussion that we had at work

session about looking at these

numbers that had come out and

the fact that we didn't have

really an equal footing in the

numbers we were looking at

because we included the month of

acl in 2011, but not in 2012.



And, so I was really going down

the path of thinking that maybe

it would make sense to delay and

wait until that I would support

delaying and waiting until we

get octobers so we could look at

that.



But, on the other hand, I really

didn't want to do that because i

know this has just been in front

of us for to long.



, So I went back to see if i

couldn't get some meaning out of

the numbers.



Did I take a look at number -- i

did take a look at the numbers

again and looked at september

and that's where we get thrown

off.



When you exclude september, it

is interesting, what we have,

for instance, income per cab,

the tdaa folks in their report

said it had gone down by 20% but

that's only if you look at

september so that's not really

something that makes sense to me

to do right now because

september is when there was acl

in 2011 and not in 2012.



If you look at the staff, they

report it went down by 6%, and

that's when you include

september.



If you look at just july and

august, it is actually positive.



As I looked at all those numbers

again, I decided it really does

make sense to go forward today,

you know, another month of

waiting, another month of data,

it just going to be more

juggling around.



I think being committed to

really the, as we discussed, the

viability and strength of all

three franchises, I will be

supporting this motion today.



[Applause]



>> mayor.



 I will just

say that -- and I think I talked

about this at the preview -- on

second reading when we had a

discussion period that I'm very

concerned about the complaints

that the drivers have, and i

think we need to take another

look at this and I personally am

committed to saying I'm not

going to address any more

franchises or any more drivers

for these franchises until we've

sorted this out, and so i

suggest that we get busy on

doing.



In a year or so, this subject is

going to come back again.



But, it will catch up, the

numbers will catch up to where

we are right now.



I know we're using some reserve

positions and so forth, and i

think it's something that we

have to pay some serious

attention to.



The other issue that we

discussed some in the work

session was we need to have some

effective limitations on duty

hours for cab drivers, and this

is so the system can't be game,

so someone can't work almost 12

hours and take short break and

come back on again.



I think this is a safety issue

we have to address that, as

well.



>> May york I have mayor, I have a couple

questions.



 mayor pro

tem.



>>Cole: thank you, gordon.



I know this has been a long

process but I just need to be

clear on a couple of things.



The formula we are deviating

from the farm la in these

addition -- formula in these

additional permits.



Can you give me an estimation

what that formula is or educate

us on the formula and how it

would have worked.



>> As far as we're concerned,

the formula still continues, is

that I believe for this year the

formula would have said 51.



We would have put some permits

into reserve.



The other permits would have

been available for the

franchises.



We're currently above that curve

and our recommendation to the

council would likely be reduced

until we get back to the curve,

over the next, hopefully, year

or two.



The data we have at this point

with population growth and taxi

operations at the airport would

say that this year, it's not

going to be anywhere near 51.



In fact, it will be pretty flat.



But, we still don't know what

the impact is of formula one,

what that kind of operation

might do.



We certainly know there will be

a lot of people flying in and

potential taxi trips from the

airport.



>> Well, when we originally came

up with the formula, there was a

rationale behind that to balance

all these interests, and so now,

to the extent that we're

considering deviating from that,

I'm trying to make sure that we

haven't abandoned that in the

process.



And we've heard from the

drivers, and I'm very concerned

about the issues they have

raised and I appreciate the fact

the acl has not been included.



Maybe if they were included

maybe there wouldn't be as many

of these problems, but still,

the interest of the drivers and

owners and the business and the

new festivals that we will have

to be considered in some type of

systematic fashion, so you're

still planning to use the

formula to make the

recommendations to council, is

that correct?



>> Yes.



And we have a precedent because

previously, when roy's taxi went

out of business, we kept the

formula.



We went above the line for a bit

with the additional permits that

were provided to austin cab, and

then, we slowed the growth so

that we got back on the curb

itself.



 so, the additional

permits that we are considering

issuing today are with your

recommendation?



>> I'll say they're with --

they're in accordance with the

council action of last december.



[Laughter]



>>cole: that's kind of scary.



I guess when I say with your

recommendation, having been

professional staff working with

these issues and knowing that we

have the concern of the drivers

at stake but it was really due

acl taking that out of

consideration that, in the

future, as you balance the

interests and you make

recommendations to council,

you're not feeling like the

action we're taking today is in

any way putting that in

jeopardy?



>> I think we've heard

throughout this discussion the

last few months is the council

would like to go back and look

at the formula, how we derive

the formula, how we use that in

the future and we and staff are

looking at that now.



 what we and staff are --

I should ask it differently.



What wear doing today is not

preventing from you looking at

the issues thus far and they do

need to be tweaked because we're

still having some trepidation.



>> We understand that yes.



>>



>>cole: thank you.



>> Mayor.



 council

member tovo and then council

member spelman.



 I want to be very clear,

the formula would have issued 50

permits this year?



>> That's correct,.



>>Tovo:



>> So with the previous

allocation, austin received 15,

lone star received 30.



The formula would have yielded

19 and 19 in reserves so we've

taken some reserves and

allocated them to the two

franchises which was an action i

supported for the reason some of

the speakers today have

articulated because do we need

to have three viable cab

franchises, I think that is the

best interest of the community.



But, what we are contemplating

today, to get back to mayor pro

tem's question, takes us beyond

the number of permits that would

be released in the formula so

there's no confusion, that takes

us beyond the 53 that would have

been allocated this year through

the formula.



>> That's correct.



 so we can say we're

going to follow the formula in

the future, look at the formula,

but the action today goes beyond

the numbers that would have been

released under the annual

formula.



And, again, I just want to

verify something we talked about

the other day, but in this

period of time, we also had

several rate changes, correct?



Rates per mile went up 10-cents?



>> Yes.



The fare was increased a couple

of different elements in the

fare, and we also implemented

the council action to allow,

during the evening hours,

additional sir charge for

passenger -- surcharge for

passengers.



>>Tovo: thanks.



There no doubt this is a

complicated equation to figure

out but we know there have been

some increases that should have

resulted in cab drivers taking

home more income per hour.



The numbers we have before us,

flawed though they are because

they don't have acl, reflect

that they're taking in less than

they have in the past.



And we know they're working 14%

38% more, you know, and

I'm not sure how that would be

different by acl, once the acl

numbers are factored in or not.



We all hope november is going to

be a great month, but cab

drivers have to work 12 months

out of the year and not rely on

acl and things like formula one

to make their payments.



And, I completely agree with the

mayor's point, I think safety is

a very considerable, a very

important issue to consider and

I'm not sure that we're

enhancing safety when we are

being presented with information

that suggests that it is very

difficult to make a living as a

cab driver.



And, I don't think individuals

out there working 16, 18-hour

days are trying to game the

system, I think they're just

trying to feed their families

and pay their bills and to do

that requires them working in

excess of what most of us would

consider to be a normal day's

work.



And, a safe, you know, a safe

working condition.



So, I'm not going to support the

motion.



I would, if I thought I would

get a second, pronice we at

least take some time to see the

next couple months of numbers

and see if that makes any

difference and allows us to have

any -- well, I'll just make that

as a substitute motion, we

postpone this today and take a

look at the next few months.



I understand and -- I understand

it's a hassle for all of you who

is v come out on this side of

this issue multiple times and

posting errors and timing issue

that needed to be extended for

lone star and matched up with

the permits and it has taken a

long time to resolve this

question but taking another

month or two is important.



I'm going to move we postpone

this meeting until december.



>> Substitute motion by council

member tovo to postpone until

the first meeting in december.



Let's see what that is.



That would be the 6th of

december.



Second by council member riley.



Is there any more discussion of

that?



>> Mr. mayor.



 council

member spelman.



 I was going to hold

but I may as well address the

original motion and substitute

motion.



I would ordinarily support a

motion like that.



We would only have to wait about

month, we will get information

on this acl issue.



I wasn't sure the acl issue was

figured out.



But almost exactly the same

analysis council member morrison

did, you should never allow two

people who know how to do

calculus and statistics to sit

next to each other.



We did the same thing

independently and came up with

the same answer which is that

acl appears to increase the

amount of paid mile, passengers,

total fares between 25 and 30%.



We had that in september last

year, we're having it in october

this year, so in 15 days or

thereabouts, we will get the

information for october, which

I'm pretty sure is going to show

there was 25% increase in paid

miles, passengers and fares,

relative to october last year

when we did not have acl.



That seems to be to be

consistent with what we know

about acl, what we know about

cab demand, and I don't feel a

need to wait a month for us to

make a decision with that in

mind.



Let me say one other thing, and

this is actually a question

since you're close by the mic,

and getting closer by the

moment.



The argument in favor of this is

not because it is in the good of

the cab drivers or the good of

the cab companies, it is

primarily because it is good for

the public.



The public is going to get

better service on having 30 more

cabs on the street.



Lone star and austin will be

able to afford a better dispatch

operation.



If those 30 cabs just gets in

line at the airport, we're not

doing the public any good at all

because nobody has to wait for a

cab at the airport and all we're

doing is adding to the queues

and substantialing from income.



This those cabs are going to

hotel cab ranks or picking

people up around 6th street it

might be the public's benefit

because people won't have to

wait so long for a cab, but if

it is going to a radio dispatch,

it is almost certainly for the

public benefit because people

aren't going to have to wait so

long for a cab to pick them up.



What will happen to not

necessarily these 30 cabs but

how the lone star and austin cab

operations have changed or will

change with the addition of

additional drivers.



>> We have some data, at this

point.



We know from talking to the

airport folks that only two of

the additional lone star permits

have signed up to serve the

airport, so, the rest are

finding trips elsewhere.



So, some of that will get

secondary data to support that

as we move forward with

electronic dispatch and

electronic reporting.



I think we will have a much

better feel about where all the

trip ends are and times of the

day so we can start to craft,

over the next year or so, some

policies to mike sure we got --

make sure we got service that

matches up with the demand.



>> When will we have access to

those electronic data?



>> Two of the companies

currently and the third is

moving towards that rapidly, so

I think by the beginning of --

by january, we should be getting

monthly reports that will have

more detailed information that

we can track things like special

events and see the exact

day-by-day activity.



>> Go ahead.



>> So, I think that better data

and our better understanding of

the operations will really help

us to craft this in the future

and strike that balance between

the franchises, the drivers and

the people who do need taxi

trips in our city.



>> Let me ask you a real

specific question.



Are you saying two of the three

franchises are now providing

electronic data?



I've got 252,000 trips,

presumably paid trips, taken by

cab in september 2012.



Is there a way of breaking down

that 252,000 to figure out how

many of them came out of the

airport, how many of them came

out of people flagging down a

cab in the street or a cab rank

and how many of them were

dispatched?



Is there a way of finding that

out?



>> I believe in the data and

word changes in our data

requirements and franchises so

we can get that information.



>> Okay.



>> So, they should have it

within their -- be able to

gather that.



We're asking them a lot more

specifics about time of day and

method of the trip was

originated so we can get that.



Because, as we know, you all

want more data to be able to

look at.



>> The reason I want more data

is base because I want to verify, if

we ever go here again, I can

verify the public has benefited

from any decision we make,

whether it is more permits or

fewer permits or moving them

around and the only way I know

to do that is look at the origin

of those permits.



The airport, cab rank or

dispatch.



We will have those data going

forward but we do not have those

data going backwards, never my

first choice, but the evidence

we've got from the lone star

folks and the austin cab folks

is sufficiently compelling to

make sense to do this here now

and we will be able to verify

this is the right thing to do

going forward.



Thanks.



 and I'll

just say that council member

spelman makes an important point

that I think bears repeating in

that what this is also about,

and really justification for it,

is service to the public.



This whole initiative, and now i

think this is -- we've heard

public comment and had this item

before us withins last year at

least 12 times so I think the

issues are framed but it has all

along been about creating a

viable third franchise.



The numbers, as you pointed out

will catch up, in a year or two,

back on schedule with three

franchises and, as I've said,

without justification that i

don't know about right now, i

would not support deviating from

the formula again, whatever that

formula might look like in the

future, now that we are about to

establish three viable

franchises.



So, with that, the vote is on a

substitute motion which is

postponement to december 6.



All in favor of that, say aye.



Opposed say no

[CHORUS OF NOs]



>> That fails on a vote of 2-5

with martinez, myself, spelman,

cole voting no.



And that brings us to the main

motion which is to approve on

third readings additional

franchises for lone star cab.



All in favor of that, say aye

[chorus of ayes]

opposed, say no

[CHORUS OF NOs]



>> That passes on a vote of 5-2

with council member riley and

tovo voting no.



[Applause]

 now that

takes us to item 28, same item,

additional franchises for austin

cab.



Council member spelman moves

approval on third reading.



Second by council member

martinez.



Any further discussion?



All in favor, say aye.



[Chorus of ayes]

opposed, say no

[CHORUS OF NOs]



>> That passes on votes of 5-2

with council members riley and

tovo voting no.



And, so, we were through our

morning agenda, except for item

77, which can't -- item 7, which

can't be heard until after 4:00.



So, that takes us to our zoning

cases.



>> Mayor and council, greg

guernsey, planning, development

rain view department.



I'll run through the items I can

offer through consent today, the

public hearings are open,

possible action.



First I am I would like to offer

for consent is number 43.



This is for the property located

at 902 houston and 5527 sunshine

drive.



The staff and the applicant are

both asking for postponements of

these items to your november 8

agenda.



Item number 44, the property

located at 828 houston and 5527

sunshine drive, staff and

applicant are requesting

postponement of these items for

one week to your november 8

agenda.



Item number 45, case c

01, prompt located

at 5536 to 5540 north lamar

boulevard, postponement request

by staff and am dance year

november 8 agenda.



Item number 46, the property

located at 19 and 10 1/2 wichal

lane.



Post is postponing to -- staff

is requesting postponing to the

november 14 agenda.



Item 47, property located at

2905 dell kurto road and 1814

light c road and -- excuse me, a

neighborhood request for

postponement to december 6 on

this item.



Item number 48, property

locating at 11003 fm 3333, to

grant the gr-co combined

district zoning with conditions.



Ready for consent approval on

all three readings, item 49,

prompt located at 416 west

11th street to rezone the

property to downtown mixed use,

central redevelopment district.



Planning commission's

recommendation was to

unanimously approve the downtown

mixed use combine cure zoning

district, ready for consent

approval on all three readings,

item number 50, property located

at 408 west 11th street.



Zoning case request to downtown

mixed use, dmu-cure, combined

district zoning.



Planning commission

recommendation was to grant the

cure, ready for consent approval

on all three readings.



Item number 51, property located

at 300 east 5th street.



Staff is requesting postponement

of this item one week, we're

still working with the applicant

regarding issues regarding the

restricted covenant so we will

ask a one-week postponement by

staff on item number 51.



Item number 25, the property

located at 7600 wynne lane,

rezone to family resident, sf-3

district zoning.



Zoning and platting commission

recommendation was to grant the

zoning.



I spoke with the applicant, he

did sign in to speak but he is

happy if you allow this item to

gone consent and will wave

speaking on this item.



The last item, item number 53,

for the property located at 2707

hemphill is a discussion

postponement item.



>> Council member morrison.



>> I do have some questions

about 49 and 50.



I'm having a hard time figuring

out which exactly is which and

what the future holds for each

one, so just in order to answer

my questions, if we can pull

those off consent, please.



>>Mayor leffingwell: okay.



So the consent agenda for the

zoning items is to close the

public hearing -- excuse me,

postpone item 43 until november

8, postpone items 44, 45 until

november 8.



To postpone item 46 until

december 13.



Postpone item 47 until december

6.



To close the public hearing and

approve item 48 on all three

readings.



Postpone item 51 until november

8.



And, to approve item 52, close

the public hearing and approve

on all three readings, item 52.



Is that creditis that correct?



>> That's correct.



>> I'll entertain a moment to

approve the consent agenda.



All in favor, say aye

[chorus of ayes]

opposed, say no.



That passes on a vote of 7-0.



So, council, we can now move to

our -- to postponement

discussion item, which is item

number 53, and I understand that

there -- staff may be requesting

a postponement and the applicant

opposes so we will hear -- I'll

give you three minutes to talk

about the request for

postponement and the applicant

will have three minutes to

discuss why he opposes

postponement.



If we don't hear the postpone --

if we don't approve the

postponement, we will hear the

case tonight.



>> Good afternoon, mr. mayor.



Mayor pro tem, council members.



Historic preservation office

planning and development review.



Staff is requesting a one-week

postponement on item number 53

to the historic zoning case at

2707 hemphill park.



Just this week, we have heard

from curby house school in the

same general neighborhood they

are interested in obtaining this

house and relocating it to a

property they own in the same

neighborhood, on the corner of

29th and hemphill park, so

about a block away.



The board members of kerby hall

went through the house just

yesterday, they are having a

board meeting this weekend and

staff is requesting a

postponement to november 8 to

see if we can work this out.



If this is, we would drop the

historic zoning case upon the

relocation.



So staff believe as one-week

postponement will allow this to

occur.



If this doesn't happen, we will

proceed with the case on

november 8.



>> Mayor?



 council

member martinez.



 I just wanted to

ask, if they decide to take

this, won't we have to deny

historic zoning anyway for it to

be moved?



>> Staff would change the

recommendation, we will

recommend relocation.



>> So why wouldn't we proceed

today?



It has a valid petition, I don't

believe it is going to be zoned

historic, why wouldn't we

proceed with the assurances

nothing would happen to this

house until after this week

kirby house board meets.



>> I think it would be cleantory

allow this association meeting

to take place it just occurred

starting monday, it is very new

and thing would be a cleaner

process to postpone the public

hearing on this case for a week

to see if kirby hall is actually

able to accept this property or

accept this house on its

property.



>> I understand.



Can I ask the agent

representing --



>> he's going to make a

three-minute presentation

anyway.



>> So speak to that in those

three minutes.



>> Members of the council, I'm

here on behalf of the owner of

the house.



First, let me tell you this

process has been going on since

june.



The offer has always been out

there to allow somebody to come

move this house, and of course,

it as always happens, somebody

at the very last week says which

might want to do it.



Here is my client's commitment

to you.



If the vote today is to not zone

it historic, and we get our

demolition permit, we won't

exercise under that demolition

permit for at least 30 days so

that if the kirby lane folks

decide they want to do this,

they will have time.



Why is it important for us not

to postpone is because it is --

it balls up the whole system.



You're dealing with a fraternity

house, nonprofit it, they can't

do anything until they know the

outcome of this case and it

balls up and keeps going and

going and going and has since

june.



In the case of a university use

when you lose a week here, week

there, it turns into a semester,

and so the owner would like to

get on with it.



I don't believe it's historic.



John has got a very good

presentation to show why it

shouldn't be zoned historic, the

neighborhood doesn't think it

should be zoned historic, we

would like to be cut loose today

with the commitment we won't

exercise under the demo permit

under the agreement that we

won't do anything for 30 days if

kirby lane decides they want the

house.



 council

member martinez I think kind of

summed it up, it doesn't make

any difference if we hear the

case today or we hear it next

week, it's still got the -- the

historic zoning still has to be

denied if the house is to be

moved.



>> That's correct.



 that's

correct.



So, I'm having a hard time

seeing the conflict here.



>> I have a question for them.



I'm trying to speed through my

e-mail here.



I thought that we had a request

from one of the neighborhood

associations.



I don't know if it was an

official request from an

association or just an

individual who is part of a

community development

corporation within the area but

have we received an official

request from any of the

neighborhood associations for

postponement today?



I know several of the neighbors

think it is going to be

postponed and were supportive of

postponing it.



>> Nothing beyond the e-mail you

received from the central austin

community development

corporations.



>> Would you consider that to

be -- I mean, I would consider

that to be an official request

for postponement from a

neighborhood group, which we

typically honor from a

neighborhood group and I would

suggest do we so today.



That awethat's true but either way you

look at it, I think it should be

granted.



 suttle, I have a question

for you.



Was your client aware when they

purchased the property it was a

1915 structure?



>> I don't know the answer to

that.



He knew it was old.



>> That I ask because --



>> it obviously was old.



I can tell you that -- I don't

know the answer.



Do you know the answer?



>> We better get one of the guys

up here.



 we have to

get you on the record.



>> Kent collins, speaking on

behalf of the purple owl house

corporation.



The fraternity sold the land to

the brown family in 1914 for

them to build their house.



We've owned the surrounding

properties that at one time went

from 27th street to 29th

street beginning in 1906.



>> Okay, thanks.



I think that says to me, more or

less --



>> we purchased the property

back from the them from 1995.



>> Thank you, mr. collins.



The reason I ask that question

 suttle point the

out they've been in process

since june and I think that's

pretty consistent with what

happens if there is going to be

a historic zoning case and if

you purchase a house that is

almost 100 years old or

structure that is almost 100

years old, I think you all the

to expect that there lab city

process to consider whether or

not that house is historic.



It is one of the values we have

in our city, and you know, you

don't -- no one in the city has

right to automatically demolish

a house or a structure that is

that old.



So, I take your point you've

been in process a long time but

said say another week to allow

this piece to be figured out is

really appropriate and I would

honor the staff request to

postpone it a week, as well as

the comment that we received

from the central -- from the

individual associate with the

central austin community

development corporation asking

that we allow that dialogue to

take place before in essence,

enabling the release of a

demolition permit.



>> I second council member

tovo's motion.



>> Motion by -- did you make

motion to postpone until

november 8?



>> I didn't but I should have.



>> Spelman.



Let me just say, I'm not going

to support this, and there are a

lot of reasons.



One, I think there is general

agreement there is a valid

petition and this property is

historic zoning is not going to

be granted, and even if the

property is moved to another

location, historic zoning has to

be denied.



There is also the fact that, on

this, we have the rare

concurrence with --s -- as i

understand it,s adjoining

neighborhood association.



I don't know if that has ever

happened before but I certainly

want to take advantage of this

opportunity to exploit it if

that's the case, so I won't be

supporting a motion to postpone.



Mayor pro tem.



 I would just like to say

that it's not very often that

staff comes before us and asks

for a postponement and we

routinely give a postponement at

the first request of either

side, so I will be supporting

the postponement simply because

it is for a seven-day period and

I don't think that will be undue

hardship and it is the first

request for a postponement.



 any

other -- council member

morrison.



 the motion is to

postpone, right?



I'm not going to support the

motion to postpone because i

truly believe the so you can

going to --

the outcome is going to be the

same either way so it is

reasonable to move along with

that.



I appreciate the staff wanting

to be more formalized but we

know where to find you guys.



 council

member riley.



>> I have a question for you.



A couple times I heard the

comment we couldn't move this if

it were historic.



Haven't historic homes been

moved?



>>



>> yes so we could move it and

we've done that before and no

reason we couldn't do that

again.



I wanted to get that straight.



I've heard to the contrary

several times.



I have a question for someone

representing -- it is not the

applicant, but the, I guess it's

the owners.



>> I went by to look at this

property this weekend, one thing

is to consider the way the

property relates to the

surrounding area and then the

extent to which it contributes

to the surrounding area.



It was a little hard to see

that, because when I went by,

they were, as you know, there

are vehicles that are parked

immediately in front.



IN FACT, SUVs AND PICK-UPS

Parked occupying the entire

space, not only the sidewalk

area but jetting into the

street.



So, if you're trying to walk

down the street, you're forced

by those vehicles out into the

middle of the street just to get

around this property it struck

me as odd because eight vehicles

parked in front in the way I've

described, just looked around

the side of the house, there are

nine empty parking spaces around

the back and the side of the

house, just struck me as odd.



I guesses question I'm getting

at is, just for my own peace of

mind with respect to the future

of this site, I just want to

gauge, if this property were to

go away, whether it's to be

moved or demolished, could we

expect that whatever replaces

this building might overissue

something of an improvement in

terms of a pedestrian

environment or would the

paternity continue to completely

prevent any pedestrian activity

in front of this site?



>> We're getting a little bit

into the discussion of the case

here instead of discussion of

the postponement but you can

relate it to the postponement,

go ahead and answer.



>> Very briefly, there would be

two levels of underground

parking which is the reason why

we're pursuinginging this addition, if

and when you do hear the case

regardings removal or demolition

of the house, yes, the addition

would con ten van much more, --

contain and have much more

parking and we would have a

sidewalk and open space, which

doesn't exist today, you're

right.



Pedestrians and others are

forced into the street and it is

a little bit of a dangerous

curve right there because you

have guadalupe and the park and

a bit of a blind area,

especially for pedestrians.



>> Okay.



Well, mayor, I will say that i

do have concerns about it case,

I think we need to give it

careful attention but I don't

know that circumstance will be

all that different one week from

now so I think this case has

been pending for some time and i

understand the need for a timely

action on this, so I won't

support the postponement.



>> So all in favor of the motion

to postpone, say aye.



[Chorus of ayes]

and, those opposed say no.



[CHORUS OF NOs]

So I believe that motion fails

on a vote of 4-3 with myself,

council member martinez, council

member morrison and council

member riley voting no, so we'll

hear the case.



Before we hear the case, it's

00, and I understand

that there are a number of --

don't go too far away, this is

going to be real quick.



There are a number of cases on

00 public hearings that

are going to be withdrawn or

postponed.



If we could go through those so

that anybody that's waiting for

those to go home, we'll go

immediately back to this.



>> Thank you, mayor and council.



I can go through some of these.



Item number 54 and 55 both deal

with cheer up charlie's, the

owner, I understand they're out

of town.



It is the property owner's first

request regarding these two

there was no date specified for

the postponement.



You could consider your next

meeting as a possibility based

on, when I say I've been called

out of town unexpectedly and

respectfully request a

postponement of items 54 and 55.



Tamara hoof every, owner of

cheer up charlies.



 council

member morrison, you have a

question about that?



>>Morrison: I have a question.



Are there people in the audience

now?



Are neighbors notified this was

likely to happen?



 john plyler

because he was the appel land

only the other item laws laura

morrison.



>>Morrison: okay.



 if you have

objection to postponing that on

consent, november 8.



Okay go on to the next.



>> Item number -- I can't.



Number 56.



Item number 57 is a public

hearing.



Item number 58 is a

postponement.



This is an item dealing with

outdoor ampitheaters.



Staff is requesting postponement

of this item to december 13.



I understand the planning

commission is now back in the

sub committee and they're

discussing ampitheaters again.



Items number 59 and 60 speak to

the university neighborhood

overlay.



And staff is requesting

postponement of both of those

items to just next week, along

with item number 60, which has

to do with special exceptions.



So 59, 60 and 61 a postponement

to november 8, and item number

58 postponement to december 13.



>> What was the last one?



>> Item number 58, postponement

to december 13, item 59, 60 and

61 to november 8.



>> If we can, we can take all

those in one motion to postpone

items 54 and 55 until november

8, postpone items 58 and 59 --

excuse me, 58 until december 13,

59, 60 and 61 until november 8.



>> So moved.



 mayor pro

tem so moved.



Second by council member

morrison.



All those in favor, please say

aye.



Opposed, say no.



Passes on a vote of 7-0.



Now we can go back to item 53.



>> I'll turn it over to our

historic preservation officer.



>> Can we get our presentation

up here, please?



This case is historic zoning

case recommended by the historic

zoning commission but not the

planning commission.



It ises will reallied by staff.



It is c14h-2012-0009, the leroy

and josephine brown house.



There is a photograph of the

house, built in 1915.



Good view of the side there

showing the dutch or flemish

gable on the side, which is one

of the things which makes this

house unique in the city.



I want to first talk about the

process, because the process has

been under question, at least at

the planning commission and go

through and make sure you all

understand everything was done

according to the book.



The demolition permit for this

property was filed on june 4,

2012, under section 2011-213f.



An application has to be placed

on the landmark commission

agenda within 45 days after the

date of filing.



Application was filed june 4.



It was placed on the plan mark

agenda june 25.



The landmark commission

initiated the historic zoning

case with a vote of 5-0.



It would come back for a

recommendation.



It came back july 30, 2012, but

there was a question of a quorum

in order to decide the case, and

the case was postponed to august

27.



On august 27, the landmark

commission recommended historic

zoning by a vote of 4-0 with one

member recuesing.



I knew that we were going to

have a membership issue here, so

I asked the law department to

clarify this, and because the

landmark commission has to take

action on an application in 75

days, we were questioned whether

we could go to a regular hearing

on this or a special meeting.



The august 27 date is 63 days

after june 25 so we're well

within the 75 days that the

landmark commission has to make

a recommendation about the case.



Code requires a vote of

two-thirds of the members of the

landmark commission and historic

cases with opposition.



August 27 there was one recuesal

and two absent members.



The vote was four in favor of

hills

historic zoning and one

recuesal.



The recuesal of cause reduced

the number of the members of the

hlc for purposes of determining

the super majority requirement,

so it was two-thirds and it was

a legal vote.



The house is being recommended

for its -- or is being

recommended for designation

because it meets two criteria.



The first for architecture, and

I put the code language up on

the screen for you.



The property with the

distinguishes characteristics of

a style, type of method of

construction, displays high

artistic value with folk art or

construction or represents a

rare example of an architectural

style in the city.



Here is the brown house.



It is dutch colonial revival,

these are the walls that go up

and cover the chimney.



This form is a variant.



There are two forms, the first

that we're all very familiar

with is a gamblo house, a two

move story house with lam

barn-like roof to it and that is

the general interpretation of

dutch colonial revival but this

sort of architecture we see on

the brown house is much more

akin to the real dutch colonial

from colonial times,

architecture you find in new

jersey, new york, pennsylvania

and delaware.



And this featured shaped

paparets, you can see one from

the netherlands and one from

belgium, this is a distinctive

style ornamentation.



This architecture came over to

the new world.



Another shot from curacao.



This is a house in new york

built in 1662 and shows the

flemish gable on the sides of

the house.



The old princeton bank and trust

company in princeton, new

jersey, one of the most exunion

pacific rant forms in the united

states, and this is the only

other house in austin that has a

flemish gable, located at the

corner of east 2nd and waller

street.



You can see it is a brick house,

one story of the flemish gable,

the own one.



Clearly, the brown house meets

the criteria of architecture.



A good example of its particular

style, it is a rare form within

the city.



As I said, these are the only

two.



The owner of the property who

filed the application for

demolition talks about other

examples of -- colonial revival

in austin, but pointed out these

gamble roof houses, which are

also dutch colonial revival but

not the same variety.



Here is one on enfield road,

niles road, parks avenue.



You can see it forms the side

gable.



They have also said that it is

not the only example of shaped

parapet in austin but the only

other examples we have in this

city are on spanish colonial

revival houses.



These are both landmark

properties.



One is on bonnie road.



This is the only walsh house,

definitely not the same sort of

architecture, and the one on the

bottom is at 30th and

washington square, which

everyone remembers to as th

alamo house because of the

shaped parapet.



But that does not make it dutch

colonial revival, the two are

not necessarily together.



Our other designation criteria

involves historical association.



Again, I'll read from the code.



The property has long standing

significant with persons,

groups, individuals, businesses

or events of historic importance

that contributes significantly

to the city, state or nation.



Talk about the long-standing

association.



This house was built in 1915.



Leroy brown lived here until his

death in 1966.



51 Years.



His wife had passed away in

1959.



She lived here for 44 years.



Here is a photograph of

dr. brown.



Let me talk briefly about his

career.



Dr. brown was born in indiana.



I have to get to my notes here.



And, joined ut's department of

physics in 1912.



He was a very prominent

professor of physics at ut until

HE RETIRED IN THE 1960s AND HE

Has two points that really make

his life and contributions and

associations with austin and ut

extremely important.



Excuse me.



First of all, he established the

first radio station in austin in

1915.



And, it was known as kut and I'm

going to say right now and

repeat it, this is not the same

kut that exists today.



That was founded 10 years later.



But, the first radio station in

austin was known as kut, it was

on the university's campus.



As first, all they broadcasts

was crop reports and things like

that, but it was the infancy of

radio and the first commercial

broadcast station in austin, if

not all of texas.



Second of all, he invented a

high speed mechanical calculator

which he called the multi

harmonograph in 1939.



This high speed mechanical

calculator could perform

multiple mathematical operations

at the same time.



He designed it to solve

technical difficulties, with

telephone and radio networks,

and it could be used to

calculate seismograph

recordings.



Here is a clipping from

dr. brown's obituary in 1966.



You can see he gained worldwide

recognition for building a

high-speed mechanical

calculator.



The machine was, in some ways, a

forerunner of modern digital

computers.



He serves as professor of

physics until his retirement.



This is from the university of

texas memorial resolution which

the university puts out after

professors pass away.



This goes into the fact that he

built the first broadcasting

station in austin, which was

first known wcm, later known as

kut, and also conceived and

built the complex mechanical

harmonic synthesizer

and analyzer which led to the

development of modern computers.



Finally, from the handbook of

texas, which is put out by the

texas state historical

associationing, the entry on

radio in texas, it says

university of texas physics

professor built radio equipment

and began broadcasting radio and

crop reports from a physics

laboratory on the ut campus in

1915.



They used the call letters kut,

it then went to the division of

extension who used brown's radio

equipment and then thats would

ut, ended up selling that radio

station it then become know

which was broadcast from the top

of the norwood tower.



Then, kut as we know it today,

was founded in 1925.



I want to make sure there is no

 brown

is associated with is not the

kut of today.



So, staff believes, as did the

landmark commission that this

house has the requisite

 brown for

over 40 years, 50 years with

 brown, over 40 with his

wife.



It is a very, very rare example

of this type of architecture in

austin.



It meets the two criteria that

are necessary for this body to

consider it for landmark

designation.



Staff and the landmark

commission both recommend

historic zoning for this

property.



>>Mayor leffingwell: thank you.



Before we hear from the

applicant, if there is no

objection, council, I would like

to lay this on the table just

for a minute to recognize some

visitors that we have from

germany.



Which is our sister city.



We had a little celebration on

monday night recognizing the

20th anniversary of our city

sister relationship with the

city of koblin, executed by then

mayor bruce todd, and I believe

the burgermiddle easter is not

here but the deputy is here.



Would you stand up so we can

recognize you and appreciate

your visit to austin.



[Applause]



>>mayor leffingwell: all of you.



Thank you.



Very long and mutually

magnificent relationship that

we've had with the city.



So, now we will hear from the

applicant.



We normally get five minutes.



You got a donor so you can take

up to eight minutes, if you

would like.



>> Thank you, mayor.



we're not the

applicant, I'm here on behalf of

the owner.



>> You still get eight minutes.



>> Thank you, I hope not to use

it all.



Here on behalf of the purple owl

house corporation and fiji

fraternity.



Let me say how thankful we are

after being in this process in

june and literally begging for

someone to help work with us to

find a relocation option for

this structure.



We heard from council member

riley's office, someone had

gotten in touch with his office

and put us in touch with the

good folks at kirby hall school

and we had a wonderful meeting

with them yesterday.



We showed them the house.



We took them to see the lot --

I'm sorry, they showed us the

lot that they are considering

for the house which is at 29

hemphill park and it looks very

promising.



Really, the only contingency is

them doing their due diligence

on their ability to, you know,

make the financial investment in

the structure, but we're very

excited about it and looking

forward to working with them on

that.



Let me give you a little context

on the case that is before you.



This is the registered texas

historic land market that is

home of the fraternity at 27th

and hemphill park this structure

was built in 1902 and it was

purchased by the fraternity in

1908.



The reason we're here is because

we need to relieve pressure off

this historic structure.



This property was registered as

a texas historic landmark in

1972, that is before there was a

city of austin historic program,

so the fraternity, which I think

was a wonderful -- as a

preservationist, is a wonderful

move for them to protect their

own structure.



If other fraternities had done

that at the time, it was not a

popular thing to do, it would

really increased our inventory.



But, it speaks a little bit to

why we're here.



We don't have the act to

redevelop an add on to this

property in the way that we

would if we were not designated.



So, that's why we got into the

permit process here.



The addition that we're talking

about would be to the rear of

the property, and it is

consistent with the neighborhood

plan, existing zoning and the

neighborhood nccd district.



If we were to retain the

structure, it would really make

the act to do the addition, it

would really take that away, and

that is why you see neighborhood

support for this.



There are components in this,

including two levels of under

ground parking, 26 units for

members of the fraternity to

live, study halls ax party room

for lack of a better word that

is enclosed, which I think the

neighborhood sees as improving

the ambience in the

neighborhood.



The texas his historical commission

has looked at this plan because

it is a registered texas

historic landmark and they've

approved the addition, stating

their appreciations new facility

would lessen the intensity of

uses.



They're in support of the

demolition permit as are

neighboring property owners.



Over 650 individuals submitted

letters and got in touch with

either the historic landmark

commission or pc in support of

what we are' asking for, and

today marks, I guess, the triple

crown for us involved with these

hearings.



Not a single person showed up in

support of historic zoning at

the historic landmark

commission, at the planning

commission and from miss gentry,

I understand no one is here

today in support of historic

zoning.



>> I have mary engle signed up

in favor.



>> Well, her letter on behalf of

the neighborhood --

 if she is

here, schedule her.



You're in favor of historic

zoning?



You're signed up in favor.



We'll correct that.



>> Thank you.



The triple crown is preserved.



Thank you.



[Laughter]

 sadowsky made mention of the

vote at historic landmark

commission, and not to get

bogged down in legalities, just

to say this is the first

historic zoning case you've sign

since 2006 where we adopted the

provision you have four votes

sending it up.



Your planning commission

unanimously recommended against

historic zoning.



This is the -- this gives you an

item of how the lots are

configured.



The structure to the bottom in

orange is the historic

structure, and so the ability to

kind of redevelop or add to the

property in that area is

severely impacted by the

designation.



The hatched area at the top is

where the addition would go and

the red area is the brown

structure.



There is a nonhistoric portion

on the back, and that's in blue.



This is a shot, congratulations

 sadowsky for getting the

shot without the cars.



It is typically double stacked

with vehicles.



Another shot of the structure.



Again, it's a neat and

interesting structure and

certainly has character.



Here'ses side view.



You can see the nonhistoric

addition there to the rear.



But, let's look a little more

closely at the criteria.



The property designates

significance in at least two of

these.



 sadowsky,

he is asking you to embrace

both.



It is a rare example of dutch

colonial architecture in austin.



I'm working off the report he

submitted to the land mark

commission and planning

commission and to you in the

back-up, so this is what the

basis of the recommendation was

made on.



Again, the code provisions says

it needs tore recognized

architectural style and rare

example in the city.



As he told to you, there are a

number of dutch colonial revival

structures already and they're

already protected they're within

your inventory.



That is 11 niles road, 1205

enfield and 217 sparks, which in

the bark-up, -- back-up, when

that was adopted by council was

described as an excellent and

rare example of the dutch

colonial revival style of

architecture.



This is a picture of that house.



This is the schmidt house, just

a little north of eastwood park,

right by the law school on

sparks avenue.



This is the kind of

quintessential dutch colonial

revival structure with the use

of the dormers and the flaired

eves and the grammable roof.



This is another one here on

niles road which also shows

those --

[beeping]

-- provisions of those uses.



But, then, washington square and

the parapet on that.



I ran through eight minutes?



 that was

your time.



Believe it or not.



>> Okay.



>>Mayor leffingwell: thank you.



>> Okay.



 unless miss

engle wants to donate her time

now you want to speak for

yourself.



Mary engle is the next speaker.



>> Good afternoon, council.



My name is mary engle and I'm

the token representative from

north university neighborhood

and it is always good to have a

neighborhood representative at

one of these types of hearings.



The neighborhood actually wrote

a letter of support for the

redevelopment of this property,

and notice I don't say

demolition of the property.



And we're really hoping it can

be relocated, however, we didn't

discuss that as a neighborhood.



That's something that kind of

turns out at the end.



But, as many of you know, or

maybe don't know, not everyone

in austin has the good fortune

to live with a fraternity in its

midst and boundaries, its

neighborhood boundaries, and

this also presents some

challenges for those of us who

live with fraternities.



We feel that the proposed

development for the fiji house

will actually provide quality of

life benefits, like under ground

parking and parking is a big

deal for us, and it will also

have an indoor party room, which

will mitigate some noise that we

have problems with.



So, all in all, the benefits

outweigh saving the structure as

a historic structure in tact,

however forecast it could be

moved that would be most

preferable, and I will say in

defense of the city staff, yes,

this is a unique structure, the

architecture is unique, but is

it a landmark?



And that's something that you

determine the, architectural

guidelines don't dictate, but

you determine that.



I don't think it is a landmark

but I think it is kind of cute

and unique and it could provide

somebody a great structure.



Thank you.



>>Mayor leffingwell: thank you.



Those are all the speakers that

we have signed up.



All speakers were against, so

I'll entertain a motion on this

item.



Pro tem cole.



>>Cole: I had a question.



I believe you said that the thc

approved.



Can you basically tell us what

happened there?



>> The texas historical

commission is charged with

looking at any addition to a

registered texas historic

landmark.



They didn't pass judgment on the

brown house itself, but they

recognized that there was really

no other area for us to develop,

except in that area.



So, they have review authority

over anything that happens on

that property.



 okay, so they support

your intentions?



>> Yes, ma'am.



>>Cole: okay.



 council

member riley.



 just a follow-up on the

question I was asking

previously.



I just want to be very clear

about this.



If the fraternity is allowed to

redevelop this property, can you

describe what kind of pedestrian

environment we could expect to

see there along that sidewalk?



And ski this because it is

significant in terms of the

affect on the neighborhood of

losing that house and replacing

it with something else, so i

just -- I would like to get some

clarity on that.



>> Yes, and I would like to ask

ken collins to come forward who

is more involved in the design

aspects of this so he can speak

to that.



>> Thank you.



Ken collins.



You saw the photograph ofs cars

and cars that are double parked

there just the nature of going

through the site development

process, we will be basically

connecting a much more

pedestrian-friendly sidewalk

there with trees and the

difference between the -- what

you're seeing today at that very

busy one-way street and what

you're going to see is going to

be much more positive, both for

the pedestrians that are going

to be traveling on the east side

of hemphill park and also for

the people that are using that.



And, we will have an additional

25 or 26 parking spaces so you

will not have -- you will not

have the option of having that

parking situation that currently

exists there now.



 collins, one thing that

puzzled me I saw this past

weekend, if you just look down

around the side and back of the

house in the area that he was

showing in the slides, I counted

nine empty parking spaces there

at the same time that there were

eight large vehicles on

strucking all access across the

front of the house, so I'm pus

he willed as to why -- puzzled

as to why the current users of

the building building would prefer

obstructing the sidewalk opposed

to making use of the year down

below.



The reason I consider that

relevant is it speaks to

whatever we might expect to

replace this building.



>> First of all, there is not

going to be a parking lot three

that on the west side of the

structure, but by custom, what

happened is the employees park

in that lower lot, and so

probably you saw it at a time

when the employees had either

left or weren't there, and so --

and those front spaces are all

taken up, and its eat double

parking that's done.



They all put their keys in a

bowl in the front hallway so you

can move someone else's car if

you have to get out, so that's

just bam custom of the way they

do that, but just the

limitations of the site

development that's going to take

place, they won't be able to do

that.



>> You expect there will be a

useable sidewalk that is clear

of vehicles.



>> Right.



What's going on there in front

of the house, that's not even a

parking lot.



That was basically the front

yard.



I mean, I think it might have

ban parking lot for the typing

service, but most of their

customers were walk-in.



>> And you do expect there will

be a useable sidewalk there and

clear of vehicles if the

property is redeveloped?



>> Definitely.



>> Okay, thanks.



 is there a

motion on item 53?



Council member martinez moves to

close the public hearing and

deny the request for historic

zoning.



Second by the mayor pro tem.



Further discussion?



All those in favor, please say

aye

[chorus of ayes]

opposed, say no.



>> No.



>> Passes on a vote of 6-1 with

council member tovo voting no.



Or two, tovo and spelman voting

no, the vote was 5-2 in favor.



Thank you.



Without objection, counsel

shrill council will

now take up item 49.



49, All the speakers are in

favor.



Council member morrison.



 I would be happy to

ask the questions of

mr. guernsey.



 we have

four speakers signed up that

wish to speak.



 oh that do wish to

speak.



>>Mayor leffingwell: yes.



They are fall favor but they

wish to speak.



If you would like to ask your

question first, go ahead.



 I would appreciate

it if we can get an overview,

and particularly, do we have

the --



>> I think we have a map.



 yeah, and I just

don't understand which property

is which and which the county is

involved with and all of that.



So I just need a little

orientation.



>> Mayor and council, I can

offer both of these very quickly

and give an overview.



Item number 49 is case

c-14-2012-0103 at 416 west

10th street.



And, that's at the southwest

corner of west 11th and

san antonio.



The other case, which is item

50, case c-14-2012-0102 at 408

west 11th is the middle of the

block on the north side which is

directly next door, if you look

at the exhibit, there is a green

box and would be the other half

of that and kind of a

reddish-brown roof where subject

tract points up to it is the

smaller tract, but it is right

next door and that is between

guadalupe and san antonio on

WEST 11th.



Both properties are part of

properties that would be

purchased by travis county for

the expansion of their

facilities.



Their courthouse and the

criminal justice center are

running out of room and they

need additional space.



They are both recommended to you

unanimously by the staff and

commission for dmu-cure zoning,

and there is a letter of support

from judge bisco, which is in

your back up.



Alsoss original austin

neighborhood association is also

in support with some conditions,

which are articulated in your

ordinance.



They have agreed publicly travis

county tax meet the great

streets standards.



I think that was done in a

public meeting before them.



 blake tolette is also -- i

don't think he is speaking for

any association but he was also

in favor of this request.



So, portions of they are in the

capital view quarter, which you

can see, it is kind of the -- i

guess you could says highlighted

area that crosses this, so it is

already restricted.



Building heights, I think, would

only be allowed about 94 feet

height over the majority of the

land being rezoned.



The county not proposing any

change to the capital review

corridor with that, I think I'll

pause, if you have any

questions.



 council

member morrison has a question.



 so the dmu-cure is

going to take it to 6.5?



Is that right?



The far?



>> I believe that is correct on

the property at 408 west 11th

street.



The other property is also going

to 6.5.



 and I guess that was

something that didn't quite make

sense to me.



If it is limited to what you

say, 90 feet or something?



>> That's correct.



The construction is going below

grade, all the parking, i

believe, is going to be under

ground.



As I understand by the county.



So, you will not have an

above-grade parking garage.



 and do parking

?



>> No, they do not.



 my question is, how

5 with a 90-foot

height?



>> I believe that is part of the

contractual arrangement between

the property owner and the

purchaser, the county.



It's going to be limited by the

capital view quarters and the

height limits established by the

ordinance, so if they're not

able to achieve that, as long as

they stay within the bounds of

the other portions of the

ordinance, then that will have

no effect.



 and I guess there

was one thing that I understood

maybe came out of a discussion

at the downtown commission about

this.



Are you familiar with the

discussion they had there?



Because it was suggested that

there might have been yet -- i

don't have any problem with

these, but there was a

discussion there was a -- a

suggestion there was another

piece of property that was maybe

just, there was just an interest

in up zoning for the future, but

there was no actual plan for it.



>> Council member, I'm not aware

of that.



I know --

 and the concern that

has been raised is that --



>> the representative on the

case is here and I think I might

be able to address that better

than i.



 that will be great,

and I will let you know the

concern that would have been

raised with that was this is

outside the downtown plan

process, because we don't have

it implemented yet and there was

concern about doing unnecessary

zoning before we have the

downtown plan in place.



>> The downtown commission, our

original request was ddd.



It is currently dmu and they

were looking at the project as a

whole.



At the last minute we separated

two tracts from a traffic impact

analysis requirement.



 so they were

considering a cbd request.



>> At that time.



We met with staff and degreed to

the dmu-cure.



>>Morrison: okay.



Thank you very much.



 so, while

you're up there, you are the

applicant so you're entitled to

a presentation if you need it.



>> That's correct.



Mike wilson with garrity and

civil years.



>> We're on 49 and 50, by the

way.



>> We started this process

almost four years ago.



I've got jerry reid here to

answer any questions, as well as

the executive director of texas

pta, kyle ward, and the

president of texas pka, karen

slay.



We started this about four years

ago.



Originally started out of office

lease but the county chose to

purchase the property instead,

and, at that point, we started

the rezoning request.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

 slay, I was just advised

by judge biscoe to make sure

that I called on you first

to tell everybody that you

came all the way down from

lubbock to speak on this

case.



So karen is giving up her

time as is jerry reid.



Is jerry reid here.



You're giving up your time,

is that correct?



There is no one issue signed

up wishing to she.



John white meyer is signed

up, but is not wishing to

speak.



Councilmember morrison.



>> Morrison: I would like

to make a motion that we

close the public hearing and

approve on all three

readings if we can do at

once.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: One

at a time.



>> Morrison: On item 49,

I'm looking forward to the

county's development plans

there.



>> Item 49, councilmember

morrison moves to close the

public hearing and approve

on all three readings.



Seconded by councilmember

martinez.



All in favor say aye oppose

said no?



It passes seven to zero.



And on item 50?



Councilmember morrison moves

to close the public hearing

and approve on all three

readings.



Seconded by councilmember

martinez.



All in favor say aye?



Opposed say no.



It passes on a vote of seven

to zero.



>> Mayor and council, that

concludes the zoning items

for today.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Let's go to item number 56,

and we are going to be

hearing -- the public

hearing on 56 and we'll

consider 56 and then item

57.



So go ahead.



>> Mayor and council, fred

evans, economic growth

redevelopment services

office.



Item number 56 is a public

hearing on the change of use

of dedicated parkland at

shoal creek beach and the

legal findings for this are

that there is no feasible

and prudent alternative to

the use of the dedicated

parkland, which includes all

reasonable planning to

minimize harm to such lands.



The dates of the public

notification in the austin

"austin american-statesman"



were october 7th, 14th,

21st of 2012.



No mitigation is being

requested for this in

connection with this use.



We do have the related item

7 that would put in place a

license agreement should

this item be approved by

council and that would set

out the parties responsible

for construction, operation,

maintenance, repair and

replacement of the planned

improvements.



That concludes staff

presentation.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Questions for staff?



Okay.



We have two speakers signed

up in the public hearing,

clay dafoe signed up

against.



Clay dafoe is not here.



Clay dafoe is here.



Okay.



You have three minutes.



>> All righty.



This is 56 and 7

concurrently -- together, i

mean?



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Correct.



>> Thank you.



Yeah, this is to authorize

negotiation and execution of

a license agreement with the

development partner seaholm

power developments to

install, operate, maintain,

repair and replace the

rainwater storage and water

quality system for the

seaholm power plant

redevelopment project

related to item 56.



I'm not going to read that

one.



So we're trying to do an

agreement with the seaholm

power development company,

and rainwater storage is a

great thing.



Again, something I'm a

complete supporter of.



I think it shows true

sustainability instead of

corporate sustainability,

which is united nations

agenda 21 style stuff that

we see in a lot of the

density development, the

cure zoning and a lot of the

things included in the

imagine austin comprehensive

plan, much like the 1928

comprehensive plan, which

moved african-american

people in austin, forcibly

removed them from their

homes and forced them to

live in east austin.



We're going to see it done

in a much more sly indirect

way with the imagine austin

comprehensive plan which

this is related to because

you're redeveloping seaholm

area and it's going to be a

huge chunk of downtown.



I know they're going to

build hi-rise condos.



It will make life more

expensive for the working

class here in austin, texas.



And I'm opposing this deal

specifically because it will

aid and abet in the theft

that's going on with seaholm

redevelopment.



So I think if we really

cared about the environment

we really cared about parks,

we wouldn't be tearing down

wooldridge square, we

wouldn't be tearing down

waterloo park and pease park

and be focused on creating

seaholm and the new park of

austin, texas.



And one thing I love about

austin is all the green

space.



When I was living in

minnesota I was really

bummed out because there

were some lakes that were

really nice, but there

weren't really many parks.



And maybe we should consider

making it a park.



I know you guys are already

moving forward with the

infrastructure to develop

seaholm as a major area for

high priced people that

make, you know, 100,000,

$250,000 a year to live in.



Unfortunately I'm not in

that club, but all power to

'em.



It's not that we're against

making money, we're against

the special deal which is

going to sellout our

city-owned territory to

developers, to trammell

crow, which you guys did

some months ago.



Unfortunately I was unable

to come that day.



Hopefully we can reverse

course here and vote no and

realize that the seaholm

redevelopment project is a

huge mistake.



Thank you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: Next

speaker is ronnie

reeferseed.



>> I am ronnie reeferseed

and I struggle to keep up

with clay because he is so

articulate and on top of

these issues that I can't

top on what he's saying

here.



I agree that the rainwater

collection is a great thing.



We should encourage that

sort of thing on everybody's

part.



And I also have trepidation

about the imagine austin

kind of agenda 21

schemology.



We've got to fight that in

every way.



But from an economic point

of view as a poor person,

keep driving up the property

value is driving out people

like me.



And so I would hope that

y'all would just say no to

this for the sake of

preserving more truly

affordable housing.



In our city because it's a

wonderful place to live, but

gosh, if we just keep

jacking up the price, the

cost for every -- all

regular people, you know,

nonmedical mayor types to

make austin their home, it

will make our cultural

environment all the less i

think advantageous to

everybody.



Rich people are fine.



I don't have anything

against rich people or

development, per se, but

this is a good example of

where we can put our foot on

the brakes a little bit and

just say no, just say well,

maybe not this, maybe not

right now.



That's about all I have.



Thank you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Okay.



That's all the speakers we

have signed up to speak in

the public hearing.



So we can take up item 56

and then consider 57.



Councilmember morrison?



>> Morrison: I do have

some questions of staff.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Sure.



>> Morrison: I appreciate,

 evans, I know you've

been answering a lot of

questions because this is a

really interesting project

that we're looking at here.



And I wonder do you have

this map?



Could you put this map up?



>> Certainly.



>> Morrison: So we could

just get a brief overview of

what we're talking about

here?



>> Yes.



The affected parkland areas

in the graphic, this is the

southwest quadrant of

downtown, lady bird lake on

the bottom portion and then

the shoal beach park at town

lake is pictures 8ed along

there.



-- Pixel 8ed along there.



And then we have the seaholm

power plant on the

right-hand side of the

tracks and the two parkland

areas affected are the area

between cesar chavez and the

water intake facility and

then a portion of the shoal

beach at town lake park that

is in front of the gables

park plaza redevelopment.



>> Morrison: Can you say

what's going to happen?



You're capturing the water

from seaholm and it's going

into the decommission --



>> I have some other slides.



This is showing the site

again, the seaholm power

plant and the shoal beach

and the water tank facility.



This is the most current

rendering of the proposal.



This is showing the historic

powerpoint and the new

development behind it.



The green area to the right

along cesar chavez is what

we call the south lawn.



And so this planned view is

looking at that south lawn

with the seaholm power plant

on the north side and cesar

chavez below t the seaholm

power plant when it was in

operation relied upon lake

water for cooling purposes,

which was piped underground

from the water intake

facility to seaholm power

plant.



There's a series of pipes

and weirs under the great

lawn area, including 42-inch

pipes that extend still

across cesar chavez and into

the water intake facility.



Part of our request would

allow us to use the water

intake facility to release

the air that would be forced

out of the pipes as they're

filled up with rainwater and

allowing us to extend over

there would allow us to

increase the capacity on the

system by about 42 percent

from 223,000 gallons to

about a little over

317,000 gallons.



So that's the first

component of our -- of the

request would be to utilize

the water intake facility to

increase the capacity of the

storage system.



More just to be clear, the

water intake, the pipes will

be capped off.



The water won't flow into

the lake.



>> And I have a picture.



They are currently capped

off from the

decommissioning.



And are just visible inside

the I am take structure.



All of these are really

excited about the potential.



The water intake allows for

adaptive reuse that supports

the parks.



We're trying to be careful

not to do anything in this

process that would inhibit

the park's ability to move

that along.



So what we're proposing has

no impact on the exterior of

the building or on the

grounds of the building.



This is a shot from the

water intake facility below

where the pipes are into the

facility.



They've been capped off with

the metal plates.



Since they are at the high

end of the straw that forms

the pipes, as they're filled

up with water we need to be

able to release the air out

of the top end so that they

can fill up.



So what we're pro is

what we think is a minimally

invasive addition of pipes

that would connect together

the intake

pipes to another pipe that

already exists in the

building that would allow

the air that would otherwise

be trapped to exit the pipes

and get out of the building.



The schematic shows them in

red.



They wouldn't have to

we think that their

positioning creates the

least interference in the

structure, but we

what the future of the

structure is.



And one thing that the

developer will be agreeing

to is that should the future

adaptive use of the facility

conflict with these pipes

that they would be

responsible for revising the

piping to accommodate the

future use.



We were asked if they could

put those vents out

exterior.



They would result in a

series of five of these kind

of candy cane tops, which

would either be in the

seaholm south lawn if

stopped there or would be in

front of the intake facility

and that would involve some

trenching and digging around

the trees and also would put

new improvements in an area

that might be needed for the

redevelopment.



The second component is--

has to do with this field,

this open field area in the

sand beach -- the shoal

beach park.



This other would be used to

release excess rainwater.



The system that we were

looking at -- excuse me.



The system we were looking

at serves two purposes.



First to collect rainwater

for water conservation

purposes to remove the

project as much as possible

from use of drinking water

for irrigation.



The second part is water

quality to provide the code

required water quality for

the new and impervious cover

on the site.



And to satisfy that it not

only needs to be captured,

but also filtered.



So the second component of

our request is to allow us

to pipe water from the

rainwater collection over to

the shoal beach park and

distribute there for

filtration through the

parkland rather than

filtering it on site and

then taking it straight to

lady bird lake.



The reason we would have

water that would need to be

discharged as a water

quality structure, the code

requires that if it was

topped out during a rainfall

that within 72 hours there

would be enough water

released from this system to

be prepared to accept the

next rainfall.



So the proposal would be to

allow us to type over to the

shoal beach park f to a

sprinkler system that would

distribute any water that

needs to be released from

the system and we would be

doing that during curfew

hours on the parkland so as

not to impede recreational

uses.



>> Morrison: If I could

break in right there, that's

one piece that I don't quite

understand.



If it fills up, but it's not

completely filled up, and so

we are not forced to release

it, how else is it going to

be -- is it going to

evaporate eventually?



Where does the water go?



>> The water that is

retained in the system will

be used for irrigation on

site for the landscaping,

both in that south lawn as

well as we have about a one

acre public plaza, much of

which is a green roof and

other landscaping around the

project, street trees and

others that will receive --

will be using the rainwater

in lieu of drinking water.



>> Morrison: And as i

understand it, it will also

be irrigating the shoal

beach at town lake park, is

that correct?



>> Yes.



>> Morrison: Okay.



How is that -- it's my

understanding that that's

actually the

responsibility -- irrigation

right now is the

responsibility of the gables

as part of their agreement

to be -- we let t do the

bio filtration piece on

parkland.



>> That's correct.



That current parkland is

irrigated with drinking

water.



Gables has responsibility

through the public-private

agreement to maintain and

pay the utility bills.



The release from your system

would be in a separate pipe

system, purple pipe, since

it's not drinking water, and

the controller on that

system would be tied to

gables such that they

wouldn't run at the same

time.



And what our system would do

is essentially extend a rain

event on the parkland and

reduce the need for drinking

water irrigation.



>> So you're saying that in

general it won't be used for

irrigation, our system, of

the town lake at the shoal

beach, it's just going to be

released there if there's a

big rain event.



>> Correct.



It would just supplement the

existing system that's on

the site.



>> Morrison: So gables is

still -- that was sort of a

big picture deal that was

made with gables.



They still are going to have

the need to be irrigate irrigating

that land.



>> That is correct.



>> Morrison: And then --

okay.



So that helps me understand

it quite a bit then.



And I do -- I guess I do

want to just comment if i

could just break in here,

because I think maybe we've

gotten a big enough picture

here.



But it is a really creative

reuse of some old -- of some

old pipes.



As I understand it, there

are some additional benefits

too in that they will be

capturing rainwater from

some of the public streets

on here?



>> That's correct.



>> Morrison: So that's

actually a positive.



Could you also talk about i

understand that there's

actually some concern about

maintenance and the risk of

damage or repair

requirements that might come

up because of the pipes that

are old and the developer,

as I understand it, is

taking that responsibility?



>> Yes.



The pipes that I showed you

that went under cesar

chavez, if this application

is not approved, they would

be capped there at the

property line and those that

go south across cesar chavez

to the intake building would

be left unused and

unmaintained and

uninspected.



And when we met with the

public works department they

were very pleased with the

idea that some party would

be responsible for ongoing

maintenance, inspection and

repair of those -- that

infrastructure so that it

wouldn't did he grade our

roadway in the -- degrade

our roadway in the future.



That was another benefit in

that the private developer

in carving that into a

system that they have

responsibility for will also

maintain.



>> Morrison: And as you

mentioned, the developer

understands that we're not

quite sure what the facility

is going to be in the

future, but it's a really

cool facility and hopefully

that it can be something.



And so they understand

that -- and in the agreement

that they will accommodate

whatever it is that we want

them to.



>> That's correct.



>> Morrison: And lastly,

one other thing, there's no

impact to surface -- the

surface, any of our

parkland?



>> It will extend the rain

event, but we are limiting

the distribution of that

water to curfew hours, so

during non--- when the park

is open, the sprinklers

would not be going and we do

not believe -- based on the

permeability tests that have

been run we do not believe

it would adversely affect

the park use.



>> Morrison: Thank you.



I guess I just want to say

that I'm supportive of this.



I think it's a -- sometimes

with chapter 26 hearings

there is an exchange of

money.



And there isn't any in this

case, as I understand it.



So it's more a matter of

looking at what are the

benefits, the more holistic

benefits we're receiving and

it seems there are very

several exciting and

creative ones, so I'm very

supportive of this.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Councilmember spelman.



>> Spelman: Quick

question.



Briefly we're taking water

from the seaholm site and

we're using to to irrigate

seaholm site and also to

irrigate the site next door.



>> Its primary purpose would

be for irrigating the

seaholm site.



It's only when there's

excess water in the system

that needs to be released

that it would be pumped over

to the parkland.



>> Spelman: Approximately

how much of it will be

pumped over to the parkland?



Do you have a sense for how

many gallons?



>> Let's see.



I have that, I believe.



I also have my engineers

here in case I don't.



But the required volume is a

little over 21,000 cubic

feet and that is the maximum

amount that would be -- if

the system was topped out

that's the maximum amount we

would have to release to

free up that required volume

for the next rain event.



>> Spelman: That's the

total amount that's in all

of those pipes.



>> No.



The -- we have over

300,000 gallons.



With approval of this

request we would be able to

increase the capacity of the

system to 317,000 gallons.



>> Spelman: What I'm

really getting at and you

may not know the answer to

this question, but under

ordinary operations given

what our usual climate looks

like, how often it usually

rains, what this would do is

allow us to either

supplement the amount of

water that is used to

irrigate the park next door

or alternatively to irrigate

the park next door with

rainwater -- with rainwater

that would be drained off

from these pipes rather than

with drinking water.



>> Correct.



>> Spelman: Do we have a

sense for how much drinking

water we would not need to

use because we have the

rainwater available next

door at seaholm?



>> I have not seen that

calculation.



>> Spelman: Has anyone

done that calculation?



Don't hold up approval of

this extremely interesting

item for that, but if

somebody's done the

calculation I would like to

know.



Perhaps more out of morbid

curiosity than anything

else.



>> Jonathan mckee, gary

partners with the civil

engineers with on the

project.



As far as how much we would

actually save, I don't know

that we have a daily

irrigation numbers from the

gables, who is currently

operating that system.



The total volume that would

be pumped thereafter a rain

event is the 22,000 cubic

feet, which is -- multiply

5, whatever the

gallons is.



So that theoretically is

what you would be saving as

far as rain is concerned.



>> Spelman: That's the

maximum amount we could save

anyway.



>> Correct.



>> Spelman: If you have an

opportunity to do that

calculation, I'll tell

you're I'm interested is

because one of the great

values of this thing from my

point of view is that it

allows us to not have to use

drinking water to irrigate a

public park.



That's always something

which I'm interested in and

if we could put a number to

it and get a sense for how

much drinking water we were

able to save and continue

using for its primary

purpose, which is potable

water, I would like to know

that number.



But I don't need to know it

now, mayor.



I move approval -- to close

the public hearing and move

approval of item 56.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Councilmember spelman moves

to close the public hearing

and approve the resolution,

item 56.



Seconded by councilmember

martinez.



Councilmember riley?



>> Riley: I'm going to

support the motion, but can

I just ask a couple more

questions.



Where is the rainwater being

collected from?



Is it the entire seaholm

side or the plant itself?



>> It's within the

development area as well as

the adjoining right-of-way

areas.



>> Riley: Throughout the

development area.



So that will include --



>> well, the area that we're

having seaholm power

construct for us.



It isn't picking up -- you

might recall on the gables

park plaza we had to pick

up -- we had the capacity to

pick up the contributing

area outside the

contributing areas.



It's picking up the water

that it's our development

site as well as the

surrounding roads that

they're putting in.



>> Riley: Okay.



So it will be some from the

rooftops, some from the

grounds, it will be quite a

mix.



And it will be used -- i

know when there's excess

rainwater it will be used on

shoal beach next door, but

be available for irrigating

the seaholm site itself?



>> Correct.



That's the -- from a water

conservation standpoint

that's the primary purpose

was to provide he irrigation

water on-site.



Because of the water quality

requirements and the next

rain event, that's the

release that we're talking

about going to the parkland.



Rail I'll I appreciate you

showing the photo of the

venting pipes at the lower

level of the intake

facility, but where will it

actually vent out to?



>> There is an existing

pipe -- I'm going the wrong

direction.



If you look at the shot on

the lake side about

halfway -- about in the

middle of the building and

you see pipe protruding,

that's the existing pipe

that we would be tapping

into that already exists --

already protrudes through

the exterior.



>> Riley: And last

question just relates to

what we can expect from

this.



The rainwater when rainwater

is stored for some period,

especially if it's combined

with some organic material,

it can actually generate

some smells.



I say that based on

experience with my own

rainwater system.



I know it can get smelly

when the water sits there

over time.



So I just wanted to make

sure that considering the

volume of the storage system

that we're talking about,

which is very significant,

would you expect that either

trail users or future users

of this -- of the intake

building or anyone else in

the area might be noticing

any particular smells

generated by this system?



>> I have not had that

discussion, but I would

invite the engineers back up

to address that.



>> I'm greg strmisky, one of

the principal partners.



I think the turnover rate on

water that we would collect

is often enough that you

wouldn't experience that.



The main events will be

discharged over the parkland

as we discussed within 72

hours or somewhere in that

range.



The rest of it would be

turned over frequently

enough that you wouldn't

have that type of issue.



>> Riley: Great.



Great.



So you don't expect the

rainwater to be stored for

any significant length of

time so smells should not be

an issue.



Great.



Okay.



With that I'll be glad to

support the motion.



>> Mayor Leffingwell: Let

me just say I think we've

kind of gotten diverted a

little bit.



This is really a storm water

capture system that we're

talking about that's

required on all development.



It just is a side benefit,

serendipitous benefit, that

we're able to get rid of

this rainwater instead of

discharging it into lady

bird lake periodly after

it's captured, after the

rain event has stabilized,

we're able to get rid of it

in a better way.



So it's not technically a

system that's designed to

capture rainwater and

irrigate, it's a system

that's designed to capture

storm water, which is

something we've had in place

for a very long time.



The second thing is I just

want to reiterate again that

the structure, the intake

structure is not part of the

seaholm development.



We specifically excluded

that when we approved the

seaholm project so that it

would be available for some

kind of other public -- as

another public amenity.



So I just wanted to make

those two points.



All in favor of

councilmember spelman's

mowing say aye much opposed

say no.



It passes on a vote of seven

to zero.



And item 7?



Councilmember spelman moves

approval.



Seconded by councilmember

martinez.



All in favor say aye.



Opposed say no?



It passes on a vote of seven

to zero.



That takes us to the last

item, item 57.



Or do you want to come back

after 7:00 and take this up.



>> I think now sounds good.



Mary and council, I'm larry

rusthoven with the planning

and review department.



Item 57 is to create a new

definition called pedicab

storage and dispatch.



This case was initiated by

the landmark commission.



The reason this case was --

by the planning commission.



The reason that this was

initiated was a couple of

years ago there was a red

tag of a pedicab storage

place in east austin.



Staff was asked to determine

what land use it was.



Contrary to common sense we

determined that it was the

automotive rental land use,

which of course is not

automotive or rental, but to

defend the decision, because

I made it, the reason we

called it that was in the

definition of automotive

rental it used automotive

taxi stand.



If you think about it it is

like an old-fashioned taxi

cab stand.



People go there, pick up the

vehicle and leave.



To avoid calling it

automotive rentals which

made nobody happen, staff

initiated this amendment.



It's allowed in lr, less

restrictive districts and

will be in cbd and dmu.



It's recommended by the of

course and I'm available for

any questions.



>> We have one speaker

signed up.



Ronnie reeferseed.



Three minutes.



>> Thank you.



Yes, I'm ronnie reeferseed.



And I wanted to say --

demonstrate here I'm kind of

mellowing out.



I'm really -- I'm kind of in

favor of this all of a

sudden and I don't see any

real problem with it.



So I just want to be happy

and go along with it.



It's not, you know -- it

rubs me the wrong way in

some ways, but just being

that way, but I really don't

see any point in being

against this.



This is good for everybody,

I think.



I'll cut my time short.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Okay.



Thank you.



So those are all the

speakers that we have signed

up in this public hearing.



I'll entertain a motion to

close the public hearing and

approve the ordinance.



Councilmember martinez so

moves.



Seconded by councilmember

riley.



And this is on all three

readings.



All in favor say aye say

aye.



Opposed say no.



It passes on a vote of --

did you have a comment?



Okay.



It passes on a vote of seven

to zero.



So it would appear that we

have no more items on our

agenda.



So without objection, we

stand adjourned at 5:20 p.m.



We do have live music and

proclamations to go.



>> Hello, everyone.



We have a bit of a dance

floor here.



Right about there.



And you're all welcome to

dance.



And you in the back, we want

to see you clap.



>> Rattle your jewelry.



>> Morrison: Okay.



Welcome, everybody and

welcome to the eggmen.



We're very fortunate to have

them here today.



Joining us are john cuomo,

nigel, davis and basil,

collectively known as the

eggmen.



Originally formed in 1992,

this year marks their 20th

anniversary of the eggmen.



Voted number one for nine

years in the best cover band

category in the austin

chronicle music poll.



The eggmen see themselves as

the keepers of a

particularly important

claim, live performance of

the greatest music of this

century in their opinion.



[Applause]

the band treats the

composer's musical ideas

with a respectful rendition

of the original piece,

playing live versions of

music from the beatles, the

who, the kinks, the rolling

stones and more.



The eggmen researched

musical instruments of the

60's to find their sound and

they haul vintage guitars,

afterwards and drums to

every gig.



They understand how

important the instruments

are in capturing the sound,

tone and feel of that 60's

thing and their liver -- how

do you say this word?



Accuse vents and vocal

ability abilities are

without equal.



Please help me welcome the

eggmen.



[Applause]



>> everyone clap along.



Oh, you're already started.



Here we go.



♪♪♪♪

♪♪♪♪

♪♪♪♪

[ cheers and applause ].



>> Thank you.



Thank you very much.



>> Eggmen.com.



>> Are we allowed to do

that?



Can we say that?



>> Morrison: We have a big

gig coming up.



Do you want to tell us about

that?



>> The 20th anniversary

concert and celebration,

that's what we're calling

it.



This sunday, just in a few

days.



It's at the scottish rite

theater at eight p.m.



com if you want

to find out more about it,

but that is the show to go

to.



We'll have a string section,

horns an special guests and

food and cake, perhaps.



>> Cake.



>> There will be cake.



>> Come for the cake.



>> There will be a party and

a lot of fun.



So please come.



>> We'll see you in 10 more

years.



>> Morrison: And what

about b if they want to get

some of your music into our

homes?



>> We're coming out with an

original cd, a new single

coming out on sunday

hopefully.



If it comes through.



[Laughter]



>> depending on u.p.s.



>> It was manufactured in

new jersey and we're just

going to give them a break.



com is the place

to go.



com and we'll answer

all your questions.



>> Morrison: That's

terrific.



And just to close up I have

a proclamation here.



It says be it known that

whereas the city of austin,

texas is blessed with many

creative musicians whose

talent extends for virtually

every musical genre and

whereas our music scene

thrives because austin

audiences support good music

produced by legends, local

favorites and newcomers

alike.



And whereas we are

especially pleased to

recognize austin's premier

beatle tribute band as they

celebrate their 20th

anniversary.



Now therefore i, lee

leffingwell, mayor of the

live music capitol of the

world, do here by proclaim

NOVEMBER 1st, 2012 AS THE

Eggmen day in austin, texas.



[Applause]

#.



>> Thank you.



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm

austin mayor lee

leffingwell.



I want to welcome you to the

city of austin public

service employee memorial

ceremony for timothy james

louviere.



♪♪♪♪

(bagpipes playing).



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Ladies and gentlemen, please

rise for the presentation of

the colors and the pledge of

allegiance.



Present the colors.



Please join me in the pledge

of allegiance.



I pledge allegiance to the

flag of the united states of

america.



And to the republic for

which it stands, one nation,

under god, indivisible, with

liberty and justice for all.



Retire the colors.



Please be seated.



Today the city of austin

celebrates the life of

timothy james louviere and

recognizes his invaluable

service to the citizens of

austin.



Tim was a senior pipeline

technician with the austin

water utility and had worked

for the utility for 22

years.



He passed away march 2nd

of this year in an accident

in the barton creek

greenbelt area, and today he

he will be inducted into the

city of austin public

employee memorial.



The city established this

memorial in may 2011 to pay

tribute to all employees who

have lost their lives while

serving with dedication for

the city of austin.



And now please welcome city

manager marc ott.



Mayor, councilmembers,

ladies and gentlemen, the

city of austin is dedicated

to honoring the lives and

service of our friends and

colleagues to this public

service employee memorial.



The memorial contains unique

carvings created by retired

police captain john vasquez.



He's been inspired to embody

the spirit of those

individuals whose lives were

taken all too soon while

providing service to our

city.



On behalf of the city i

extend our heart felt

condolences to tim's family,

I appreciate your presence

here today as we pay tribute

to an outstanding public

servant and remember his

impact on our community.



I also thank you for sharing

your memories and stories of

tim's life so that his

contributions and service

may never be forgotten.



Finally, thank you to the

departments and staff who

have worked on this project.



Your efforts are truly

appreciated.



At this time I invite austin

water utility director and

the austin utility director

george calhoun here for the

unveiling of the figurine

for timothy james louviere.



This likeness will be placed

in the memorial along with

tim's biography so that

future generations may learn

about this honorable

employee who personified the

term public servant.



Gentlemen?



Now we'll have a few words

from director mazorus.



>> Is an honor to be here

representing all the great

men and women of austin

water, and particularly

tim's family.



I know I spoke today and met

again with his father, his

brothers and sisters, his

wife sandra, their children,

grandchildren and all the

other relatives.



As I look upon the figure of

tim I'm struck not only by

its resemblance to him, but

how it reminds me of the

character and attributes he

brought to austin water.



When you think about tim you

think about hard work, about

quality work, about

commitment, about his

compassion.



Tim never left a customer in

the lunch.



He never left a customer

without water.



He stayed to finish the job.



He knew the essential

services that we provided

and he was always committed

to that.



Not only committed to that

in himself, but he expected

that of his co-workers, his

managers, his directors,

city managers, mayor and

council.



He made all of us a better

public servant.



I can tell you on several

occasions tim didn't

hesitate to tell me when i

wasn't working hard enough.



[Laughter] but that's what

we loved about him.



He aspired to higher heights

and had us all aspire to

higher heights.



Our customers were better

off of it, our community was

better off for that.



Certainly his dad taught him

the hard work of working in

the sugar cane fields, that

hard work ethic, that was

passed on to your son.



You should be proud of that.



He carried that with him his

whole life.



What we think about the loss

of somebody like tim,

certainly the premature loss

of them and we're all

diminished.



All of austinites are

diminished with his loss.



Our water utility won't be

quite as customer service as

it was.



Our water system won'ting

repaired quite as high

quality or as fast as it

was, and the list goes on

and on.



Tim added value to all of

our lives everyday, day in

and day out.



And we'll miss him terribly.



We grieve for you.



Austin water, our family

lost a family member just

like you lost a family

member too.



We'll remember tim always.



We'll remember not only his

tough exterior and his hard

work, but his tender heart.



I was sharing with george

calhoun and he told me a

story, george knew tim for

many, many years and told me

a story about how one time

he went out to a job site

and there was tim working, a

cold, wet winter day and tim

was working without his

jacket.



And george taking an

opportunity to give tim a

hard time, said tim's

where's your jacket?



And tim really wouldn't give

him an answer and said you

know, it's basically none of

your business where my

jacket is.



I'm working without a jacket

today.



[Laughter]

well, later it came to

george's attention a

co-worker shared that on

wait to a job site tim saw a

young lady walking down the

road in short sleeves in the

cold wet winter day and he

couldn't bear it.



He stopped his truck, pulled

over, gave her his jacket

and went on to work without

his jacket that day because

she needed it more.



And that was the tender

heart that he showed.



He would never admit that,

he would never tell his boss

that's what happened to his

jacket, but that was what

was in his heart and you all

know that too as his family.



These are all the things

that we'll miss from him,

and we'll remember him

always.



This memorial will always be

there for others in the

future to remember tim and

the high standards he set as

a public servant.



So we honor all of you

today.



Thank you so much.



[Applause]



>> Mayor Leffingwell:

Thank you, greg, city

manager.



And now I would like to

invite interested members of

the family to come join me,

behind me at the podium here

for the reading of the

distinguished service award.



Followed by photographs.



So if you would like to,

please come up.



It's my privilege to present

this distinguished service

award.



This certificate is

presented in recognition of

timothy j louviere of the

water utility for his

dedicated service for the

city of austin and its

citizens and above all for

having given his life inhe

performance of his duties on

MARCH 2nd, 2012.



The city established its

public service employee

memorial in may 2011 to

honor all men and women who

have lost their lives while

serving faithfully in their

capacity as city employees.



To celebrate the life of

 louviere and to honor

his great personal sacrifice

on behalf of the citizens of

austin, timothy louviere has

been commemorated on this

day in the city of austin

public service employee

memorial presented this 7th

day of november, the year

2012, signed by myself,

mayor lee leffingwell and

the city manager marc ott.



Congratulations.



Who will accept the award?



[Applause]



>> Mayor Leffingwell: Once

again, thank you to tim's

family and friends for your

presence here today.



The city of austin will

always be indebted to you

for tim's commitment to

public service.



And thank you to all city

employees who dedicate their

lives to serving the

citizens of austin.



Thank you very much.



This concludes our ceremony.



[Applause]



>> some of you may not know

that the city council

directly hires, fires and

supervises a handful of

employees.



Among those are the

municipal court clerk and

the municipal court judges.



Judges are appointed now for

four years, and we have a

number of them that do great

work for the city of austin

under sometimes trying

circumstances.



So the proclamation reads as

follows.



Be it known that whereas

more citizens come into

contact with municipal

courts than any other courts

in the state, so the

public's impression of the

entire judicial system is

largely dependent on their

experience in the municipal

courts, and whereas

personnel in the austin

municipal court and the

downtown austin community

court have pledged to be

ever mindful of their

neutrality and impartiality,

rendering equal service to

all and conforming to

standards set by the canons

of judicial conduct, and

whereas being we're pleased

to recognize our court

personnel, including eight

full-time judges, 13

substitute judges, and one

131 operational and support

personnel, and to salute

their critical role in

preserving public safety,

protecting the quality of

life for area residents, and

deterring future criminal

activity.



Now, therefore, i, lee

leffingwell, mayor of the

city of austin, texas, do

hereby proclaim november 5

through the 9th, 2012, as

municipal courts week in

austin, texas.



So congratulations to you,

judge.



This is all yours.



Thank you for your service.



[Applause]

and you have the podium.



>> Well, I'd like to thank

the mayor and council for

giving us this proclamation.



Our mission statement at

municipal court is to be the

most effective of, efficient

and impartial municipal

court in the state of texas,

and there are many, from

large cities like houston to

very small cities like

manor.



Our court is one that i

think our citizens should

rightfully be proud of.



Our 165 or so personnel that

work there, including the 20

judges, are -- they're

dedicated.



We know that most people who

come to see us are not happy

to do that, but we try to

make the experience as

efficient and as least

wasteful of your time as we

can.



And so we work very hard for

that.



00 at

night, monday through

thursday.



We close at 6:00 on friday.



We have two substations, one

north and one south where

citizens can conduct their

business.



And so we are looking

forward to our new

courthouse, one of these

days.



[Laughter]

and we appreciate the

recognition that the council

and the mayor have given us.



Thank you.



 thank

you.



[Applause]

take a picture?



>> Good evening, I'm kathie

toafy, council member in

place 3 and I'd like to

welcome those who are here

to be recognized for austin

adoption day to come up.



We're going slightly out of

order so I apologize for the

short notice.



So november is national

adoption month, and this

provides our community with

a great opportunity to

educate ourselves and our

community about the

thousands -- hundreds of

thousands of children

throughout our world, and

many of them here in the

united states who await

permanent families.



Some of you may know that my

husband and I have been

blessed to become parents

through adoption, so this is

a topic very close to my

heart and I'm so grateful

that we are in austin really

blessed with having so many

individuals and so many

organizations who help

children find families

through foster and adoption,

and also provide services to

adoptive families who live

here.



Today we are recognizing

those who have been involved

in a very special event that

took place this morning

called austin adoption day,

and this is a collaboration

that involves our judges

here, several nonprofits,

and I'll name some of those

groups here in a minute.



And today you see -- you'll

see the faces of several

children who are awaiting

permanent families, and

we're grateful for the hart

gallery of texas for making

these available today to

emphasize and to illustrate

to our community just a few

of the many, many children

who are awaiting permanent

families.



So on behalf of the whole

city council I'd like to

extend our best wishes to

the families and children

who have begun their new

lives together this morning

and a great thanks to the

organizations who are

involved in making that

event possible.



And also to those

organizations for the great

work they do every day for

families and children in our

community.



So to the folks behind us i

would like to present this

proclamation.



Be it known that whereas

there are 100,000 foster

children nationwide and

close to 158 in travis

county awaiting adoption

through child protective

services, with many more

entering the foster care

system each year, and

whereas the austin bar

association, the texas

department of family and

protective service, gardner

bets juvenile justice

center, the adoption

coalition of texas, casa of

travis county, travis county

office of child

representation and travis

county children's protective

services board encourage

more families to give these

children the safe and

permanent homes they

deserve, and whereas, these

groups sponsor an annual

austin adoption day to

celebrate and encourage

foster care and adoption,

and whereas 29 central texas

children joined their

forever families today and

participated in a special

celebration to finalize

their adoptions.



Now, therefore, i, lee

leffingwell, mayor of the

city of austin, texas, do

hereby proclaim november 1,

2012 as austin adoption day.



Thank you.



[Applause]

and I'd like to -- and I'd

like to -- I'd like to

invite judge andy hathcock

one of our travis county

judges to come up and say a

few words, please.



>> Thank you, council member

tovo.



My name is andrew hathcock,

I'm an associate judge for

the travis county district

judges, and with me here is

marie chanow and sally

campbell from the adoption

coalition of texas.



Denise hyde, who is the

chair of the austin adoption

day planning committee.



She put all this together

and helped get everybody

organized and she's done

this now for 11 years.



This was our 11th annual

celebration, and it was just

wonderful this morning and

this afternoon.



We helped create permanent

families for 28 children.



And I personally had the

honor to preside over the

creation of five of those

families.



Also with me today is keith

richardson from casa, travis

county, and stephanie white

with the department of

family and protective

services.



And this is -- this was the

11th annual austin adoption

day held in conjunction with

national adoption day, and

we really gathered to

celebrate and honor those

families who choose to

adopt, and also to

illustrate the need for

adoptive families and foster

families for children.



In this state there are over

6,000 children who are still

waiting to be adopted, and

in this community 158

children are still waiting

for their forever families.



28 Found theirs today, but

we still have -- are

searching for families for

158 more, and some of those

children you see here

pictured.



The hart gallery of central

texas enlists professional

photographers who volunteer

their time and talents to

photograph each of these

children and to bring out

their personality, and for

many of these kids this is

the first time they've ever

had a photograph of

themselves, a portrait like

this.



And so it's something very

special for them, and it

helps communicate something

of who they are to

prospective families.



So I would certainly

encourage you to visit the

hart gallery of central

texas web site for more

information about these

kids.



Five of the kids that were

adopted today were teenage

boys, and several of those

were in the hart gallery of

central texas.



So again, thank you to mayor

and council members for

recognizing this worthy

celebration today.



Thank you.



[Applause]

 I am very pleased

to stand before you today to

give certificates of

appreciation for some very,

very thankless work that has

been done, but we're going

to thank them today and let

the community know about

that.



This summer irit, ann and

sharon approached council

member tovo and morrison and

I about safe sleep shelter

facilities for women,

because it had become an

emergency problem.



The conditions on our

streets are were simply

unsafe.



The murder of a homeless

woman in a park earlier in

the year highlighted the

vulnerability that is placed

on women on the streets.



By working with six

different churches who

generously opened their

buildings overnight they

began to provide a safe

place to sleep.



The city in turn provided

security for this effort.



I often talked about the

need for collaboration

between governmental

entities, faith-based

community and social service

providers.



This is truly evidence of

that and a very forward step

for our city.



I also want to thank all of

the service providers that

have been involved and the

faith-based organizations

and everyone who stepped up

to the plate.



The city recently approved a

state grant to pay for

renovations for the

salvation army's downtown

shelter that will provide 32

beds for women, and while

that goes a long ways

towards providing shelter,

it will not completely do

the job.



So we are thankful for the

work that you have agreed to

continue, and next week

council member tovo and i

will be bringing forth a

resolution to further

facilitate these efforts.



And I want to thank council

member riley for also

standing fast with us as we

try to work on this issue.



So right now I want to ask

all of you to come forward,

and council member tovo to

come forward if she has any

comments.



 there's very little

I want to add except just to

say a big thank you for

making us aware of this need

and for working together to

meet the needs so

beautifully and to help

educate our community about

what needs to be done in the

future.



So thank you for being here

today.



 we have

certificates of appreciation

for the nonprofits, and I'm

only going to read the first

one, and then I'll name the

others.



The city of austin

distinguished service award,

presented to erit emanie in

appreciation of your work

with the safe sleep shelter

for women.



Thank you for being a part

of the solution to assist

single homeless women in the

austin area.



We are grateful for your

commitment to serve those in

need.



[Applause]

and this certificate is --

where did she go?



This certificate is

presented to you again in

appreciation for your work.



>> Thank you.



Thank you.



[Applause]



>> this is a certificate to

david gomez.



Oh, he's not here.



Okay.



Well, he's still got a

certificate.



David evans, I didn't see

him.



There you are.



Please come forward.



A distinguished service

award for you and all you do

with salvation army.



[Applause]

susan, did I see susan?



There you are.



You're no taller than me.



[Laughter]

a distinguished service

award for you for all your

work.



>> Thank you.



[Applause]



>> thank you.



 next we have -- do

you want to bring those --

distinguished service awards

for the churches.



St. david's, billie tweety.



[Applause]

and also vicki knipp.



We want you to get all your

papers.



[Laughter]

we want to recognize from

university united methodist

john elford pastor susan

sprag and marianne tyson.



[Applause]

and first baptist, we want

to recognize tommy chito and

anita gordon.



[Applause]

thank you for your work.



You all have been doing some

heavy lifting for the city.



This is for first united

methodist, pastor kathie

stone, and libby -- there

you are.



Come on up.



[Applause]

 martin's lutheran,

pastor pete sandoval, pastor

jennifer teaman, connie

growslop and jason galip.



[Applause]

and I also want to recognize

university baptist church,

olan clemons.



And we'll get that to him.



And then for the -- from the

foundation for the homeless,

sharon lowe.



We also want to recognize

their work.



[Applause]



>> cole: okay.



Are you all ready to take a

picture?



This is the best part.



[Laughter]

kathy, are you ready?



Okay, let's go.



>> I want to just say, first

of all, thank you to

everybody for this -- who

put this effort together,

and I think we should become

a case study.



Never doubt what a group of

citizens can go when they

put their minds together to

work as one, and we actually

changed a situation of

homeless women in austin by

working.



All service providers were

called together to make

sure -- everyone was at the

meeting.



Churches came through, the

city came through, and when

we all put our mind into

making a change, change

happens.



So thank you all, and thank

you.



[Applause]



>> cole: thank you guys.



>> Greg, do you want to come

down and any other members

of the workers defense

project?



We have come to recognize

that in austin, as we

prosper, we are often

becoming seen as two

 a very prosperous

austin and a not so

prosperous austin.



The workers defense project

has worked tirelessly to

make labor a part of the

equation and the amount of

salaries and working

conditions that labor

receives.



And this is their 10th

anniversary, and for all the

work that they do I wanted

to present them with a

proclamation.



Be it known that whereas the

workers defense project was

founded here ten years ago

with a few volunteers

helping at an east austin

homeless shelter, and now is

a statewide organization

working on behalf of the

rights and well-being of

low-wage workers, and

whereas, workers defense

project provides training

and services to thousands of

low-wage austinites while

also advocating for policies

that will create pathways to

good jobs for our

disadvantaged residents, and

whereas, workers defense

project work inspired

council to pass an historic

rest break ordinance for

construction workers and for

living wages and job

training to be required on a

variety of construction

projects, and whereas

workers defense project is

dedicated to ensuring that

our city development is

safe, sustainable and

provides opportunities for

all austinites.



Now, therefore, i, lee

leffingwell, mayor of the

city of austin, do hereby

proclaim november 2012 as

workers defense project 10th

anniversary.



[Applause]



>> thank you.



Well, we just want to thank

all of council and also

especially mayor pro tem

cole for not forgetting that

while austin grows and we

know austin is such a fun

bustling city, that

buildings have to get built

and buildings have to be

cleaned and we really

appreciate that the council

has not forgotten that we

need to make sure that we

have jobs in austin, but

also good jobs, jobs that

people want to keep because

they can provide for

themselves and provide for

their families and have a

path upward, and so we

appreciate you all

remembering that and taking

that into consideration, and

for listening to us so that

we can sort of remind

everybody else about that

too.



And I'll have one of our

worker members give a little

thanks as well.



>> Well, thank you very much

for this important reading

to bring workers in llano to

the council and many

members -- people, also on

the city.



The -- see the situations

are outside, like low wages,

and how dangerous they are,

and thanks for working the

project to help us to pick

up all these wages and thank

you, council, for letting us

apply for these members, and

this is only the beginning.



We plan to do more and bring

everybody else on safe

workers and making sure

everybody is safe.



Thank you.



[Applause]

[ ♪♪ music playing ♪♪ ]

ecl)