City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 10/8/2026 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 10/8/2026 6:00:00AM Original Air Date: 10/8/2026 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [9:59:07 AM] We are meeting in the Austin city council chambers, and I will call to order the October 8th, 2026 meeting of the Austin city council. We're meeting in the city council chambers. As I indicated, they're located in city hall at 301 west second street, and we have a quorum of the Austin city council present. [10:00:27 AM] The order that will go in today is is typical of what we typically do. In a moment, I'm going to read changes and corrections into the record. We will also then go to consent items. We have one item that has been pulled. Only one item has been pulled and that's item number 17. And we will hear from speakers on the consent agenda members. Then what we will do is we will go to the non. We will take up item number 17 which shouldn't take that long. It's changing a date on our proposed calendar. Then we will go to the non consent items of eminent domain. I will take up the Austin housing finance corporation. We will recess the city council meeting to call to order the board of managers meeting of the Austin housing finance corporation. We will take those items up before we take up the public hearing. Item item number 27. Then we will come back to item number 27. But it it needs to be taken up after we finish with a hfc items. My. And I'm anticipating that we will be finished before our 12:00 time. Certain. We will then come back for our 12:00 time certain and and Austin music. What I anticipate is that we will do is is probably between the time that we we have finished the agenda items that aren't time certain. [10:01:49 AM] We will then go to an executive session and we will take up the executive session before we do the 12:00 time. Certain. We'll come back in for that. And then, of course, we have our 2:00 time certain related to zoning and neighborhood planning. Unless there are any questions or comments by the council, we will. I'll now read changes and corrections into the record. We have two things. Item number 27. As I've indicated, the public hearing will be taken up after the Austin housing finance corporation board of directors meeting. And in addition to that, on item number 21, council member Siegel is removing his nominee to the animal advisory commission from those recommendations. So when we take when I call for the motion on the consent agenda, it will not include council member Siegel's nominee to the animal advisory commission. That will be. He is removing that item. Those are the two changes or corrections to the record. And again, unless there's questions or comments by council, we will now go to the consent agenda. Remember, members only item number 17 has been pulled. Unless somebody else has something they want to do right now and doesn't look like it. So I'll turn to the city clerk and ask you to call on folks to speak with regard to the consent agenda. [10:03:11 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor. Beginning with in-person speakers on item two, Zenobia Joseph. [10:03:17 AM] >> Miss Joseph, are you here? Miss Joseph? [10:03:23 AM] >> Moving to item three. Zenobia Joseph. [10:03:27 AM] >> Miss Joseph, if you made it since item two. [10:03:32 AM] >> Moving to item six, Philip Fitzgerald. [10:03:40 AM] >> Mr. Fitzgerald. [10:03:42 AM] >> Also on item six. Zenobia. Joseph. Moving to item seven, Philip Fitzgerald. Also on item ten, Philip Fitzgerald. Moving to item 19. Carlos Leon. [10:04:08 AM] >> Here he comes. You're all right. No need to have a heart attack. [10:04:16 AM] >> Not a chance. [10:04:17 AM] >> Okay, good. [10:04:22 AM] >> I'll city clerk the time is not showing. [10:04:29 AM] >> Thank you. [10:04:39 AM] >> Okay. So, Carlos Leon, first and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak against item 19. Because a P L cannot be trusted. August 6th. Mayor Watson and city attorney Thomas approved proposition B for 35 million for the purpose of designing, acquiring, constructing, expanding, renovating, rehabilitating. Replacing, improving, upgrading, enhancing and equipping library facilities with priority given to the existing Hampton at oak hill branch and a new colony park library branch, end quote. Yet in a P L's September report, Hannah Terrell wrote, quote, Austin voters will consider a 2026 bond measure that would fund a 20 million expansion, $20 million expansion of oak hill branch library and invest 15 million in phase one for a future colony park library. [10:05:44 AM] Because phase one is pre-construction only, APL will almost certainly also push a 2028 bond to raise property taxes yet again for more money to build and open that colony park library over and above their $80 million budget, which they're not telling voters now yet in Luke 14, verses 28 through 30, Jesus warns us not to start a project like this without sufficient funds to finish it. In fact, old quarries library renovation phase two and three problems are why it's still closed more than two years and three months later, and voters are only being asked to approve, quote, 35 million for library facilities, end quote, which could be anything, anywhere. A bull crap bait and switch. Thus, yes, to a colony park library, but no to prop B the wrong way. In time to do this, I'll explain how to do this the right way and the right time during item 21. Thanks, mayor. [10:06:47 AM] >> Thank you, Mr. Leon osman. [10:06:50 AM] >> Item number 19. Zenobia. Joseph. Next item for 21. Mr. Leon and Zenobia. Joseph. [10:07:01 AM] >> Well, I'll call you in order. We start at 10:00. [10:07:10 AM] >> Zo. Carlos. Leon. First and foremost, gracias a dios for letting me speak to item 21 at last month's library commission meeting. Future advocacy, opportunities and development of a framework for commission engagement in the next year was a discussed agenda item. Therefore. City council deploy them to colony park to conduct open meetings there with their community members to hear what they want in a library, what they want it to look like, where they want it to be, and what programs and services they want offered there to collaboratively design with APL staff. A prototype inside and out, unique to and welcomed by colony park residents, those back and forth. 2027 conversations should ground a detailed APL proposal justifying a 2028 bond measure to fully fund phases one, two and three to plan, build and open a colony park library branch with phase one preconstruction discussing project initiation and conceptual conceptualization plans, plus feasibility studies, budgeting and cost estimation, site selection and acquisition with zoning and environmental regulations. Design and planning, including drawings, permitting and regulatory compliance, risk assessment, mitigation and contractor selection. Phase two construction should explain site preparation to ensure that location will be ready for foundation and framing, followed by structural work, mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems, interior finishes, as well as doing quality control and inspections and ensuring safety measures from start to finish. Phase three post-construction synopsis synopsis should include final inspections and testing, punch list and corrections, and post-occupancy evaluations. That's how you build trust with voters. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. Thank you, mayor Watson. [10:09:15 AM] >> Thank you, Mr. Leon. [10:09:19 AM] >> Moving to item 22, Daniela silva and Zenobia Joseph. Item 23. Zenobia Joseph. Oh, sorry. [10:09:39 AM] >> Good morning, mayor and council. My name is Daniel silva. I'm the Austin policy coordinator at workers defense. I'm here to speak in support of item 22. I'm glad to see there's efforts to increase the number of folks who are in department of labor apprenticeship programs. If y'all aren't familiar with the better builder program, which came out of workers defense, our standards actually advocate for 30% of a labor force on any project being department of labor apprentices. So we are very pleased to see that the city is moving in the direction of getting even closer to that 30%, and I hope to see that percentage increase even more over time. Thank you. [10:10:27 AM] >> Thank you. [10:10:29 AM] >> Item 23. Zenobia Joseph, item 32. Madeline Berger. Is Monica Guzman here? She will have time donated would be four minutes. [10:10:46 AM] >> Yeah. [10:11:04 AM] >> Andrew Maggio. [10:11:12 AM] >> Okay. Hello, my name is Madeline brewer and I am a resident of district nine. I'm here to speak today on item 32 and the upcoming bond election. Despite over four years of advocacy from residents and district four, which began in September 2022 with council member and mayor pro tem vela speaking at the bond advisory task force and park board meetings. It's disappointing that both parks and rec and council did not add the Gus Garcia splash pad to the bond priorities list. I'm here to demonstrate the effects of extreme heat and the need for investments in additional cooling infrastructures and district four. Building on years of advocacy around extreme heat and rundberg and summer 2025, the thermal witnessing project started as a community based project in collaboration with go Austin vamos Austin, the UT digital writing and research lab, and the UT city climate colab. The mission of thermal witnessing is to bear witness to extreme heat through sensitizing instruments such as thermal cameras, over a period of time. [10:12:13 AM] In this project, resident leaders residing in Austin's eastern crescent collected field notes and thermal images of their live daily environments using thermal sensors. Collectively, 15 resident leaders captured over 1000 thermal images, 105 field notes and told over 30 hours of stories about heat in their neighborhoods. This past weekend, we put on an exhibition of the photographs in Austin's first exhibition on extreme heat since none of council, though everyone was invited, was able was invited to the exhibition, but none of you all were able to make it. I thought that we could maybe bring the exhibition to you today. You can click. This photo is of the bus stop near dobie middle school off rundberg Laine. As you can see from the thermal photo, the bus stop cover measures 117 degrees surface temperature. As one of the residents said, quote, I felt really, really bad and sad that we have this beautiful, elegant bench but can't use it. It's extremely dangerous. It's made of metal. It gets so, so hot that it can cause serious burns. The roof is useless. If it were to rain, there would be no way to take shelter. So these new beautiful bus stop benches with shade aren't really suitable for the community or the city. Their design isn't well suited for taking a relaxing break when it's very hot. Click. This photo was taken in a neighborhood near rundberg Laine, as the resident who captured this image said, quote, I took this photo while walking down a street lined with trees on both sides and you can see the difference in temperature. [10:13:39 AM] As for everything else in this photo, we want to emphasize that trees are essential. Click this last photo, titled anger, fury and violence on rundberg Laine, was taken at the northgate shopping center on the corner of rundberg and Lamar. The asphalt in this image measures 140°f at 5:54 P.M. These photos are only the surface of how extreme heat impacts residents living in district four. Given this information in the lack of inclusion of the Gus Garcia splash pad, I ask for a meeting with the parks and rec department director to account for why a splash pad and Gus Garcia was not included in the park bond. I hope that you all learned a lot from looking at these images. I'm happy to share more images and resident field notes with you, and I thank you all for your time. [10:14:22 AM] >> Thank you. [10:14:25 AM] >> Moving to item 34. Zenobia. Joseph, item 36, Philip Fitzgerald and Zenobia Joseph. [10:14:51 AM] >> Phil Fitzgerald, district six. So I'm against this six year bond cycle. The reason being is because a lot of people in Austin and across our state in general, are asking for faster changes in our cities. We want improvements a lot quicker. And moving to this six year bond cadence will restrict our city's ability to address the needs of people in this city, and that includes our parks and our infrastructure, these these big projects that people have come to know. And I understand the reasoning for why we want to move to a six year cadence. It's because right now we're on a on a more of a two year cadence. And we constantly have to pass these bonds to get projects done. And we say, well, we have all this unspent money, and that's why we need to move to a six year cadence. But the problem with that is, is we're not executing projects quick enough. And the reason being is because we're not building capacity at the city level. So we have a bottleneck in planning and designing and executing these projects. If we were to instead build capacity at the city level, we wouldn't have to outsource all of this work to private companies paying an exorbitant price to get these projects done. Some people say this is fiscally smart, right? We're moving. We're moving to a six year cadence where we can ask for less money from people. But the problem with that is if we go from two years to four years, then those bond requests are going to get a lot bigger and those are going to get voted down. And maybe that's the intention of moving to a six year cadence. So instead of asking voters for 200 or $300 million in taxes, we're instead going to come and ask them for $1 billion. I think we know how that's going to turn out. Yeah, I have concerns that if we're restricting our city's ability to to pull together money to address some of these problems, you're going to see a continued decay in our parks and our public infrastructure, especially our libraries. And you have to be honest with your constituents. What that means is if we don't have money to to renovate these parks, these libraries, you're going to start seeing assets get sold off. So people aren't going to be able to go to their local park or the local library, or now we're going to sell it to a private owner, and they're going to be charging people to use those things. So be honest with your constituents about this. [10:16:57 AM] >> Mayor. All speakers have been called for consent. [10:16:59 AM] >> Thank you very much. That concludes all the speakers have been called on the consent agenda members. So let me ask, is there any item that any member would like to pull from the consent agenda now that we've heard from the speakers? All right. In that case, members, I'll entertain a motion with regard to the consent agenda. Council member duchen moves approval of the consent agenda as read seconded by councilmember harper-madison. Now would be time for comments with regard to the consent agenda. Anyone wishing to be heard on the consent agenda. Mayor pro tem. [10:17:34 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor. I just wanted to highlight item six, which is a Rutland round about the contract going out for the roundabout at the corner of Rutland and parkfield and looking forward to that improvement. That's a dangerous intersection. I know staff has put a lot of time and effort into looking at how we can improve both bicycle and pedestrian safety. Just great to see that contract on on the agenda. [10:17:58 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor pro tem, any further comment on any of the consent agenda? Councilmember Siegel. [10:18:04 AM] >> Thank you, mayor, just want to thank you for bringing item 22 and want to be asked to be added as a co-sponsor. [10:18:11 AM] >> Without objection, council member Siegel will be shown as a co-sponsor of item number 22. [10:18:15 AM] >> Thank you, sir, and I just really want to appreciate the work of our mayor and sub quorum to make sure that the department of labor registered apprenticeships and apprenticeship programs continue to grow and be supported. And as we heard from a speaker, these updates, the construction training program, are going to keep us on track to recruit and eqip the workforce we depend on to build up our city. I also want to thank APD chief Davis for item number eight, which is an important contract to continue to kind of improve our response to sex crimes as a city. And this is really shows a lot of institutional learning and progress and just want to celebrate the work of APD on this one. Thank you. [10:18:50 AM] >> Thank you. Council member members, I want to speak on item number 22, and I appreciate council member Siegel bringing it up. And what I'd like to say is, we all know that Austin is building an historic level right now. We're expanding the airport, we're redoing the convention center, we're rebuilding I-35, we're preparing for project connect. We're modernizing water, wastewater, and energy systems, and we have over $25 billion in infrastructure projects that are moving forward. We're creating the infrastructure of a successful, major American city, and it's a tremendous investment. But the most important thing we're creating is opportunity. As part of all of this, the council created the construction training program, or what sometimes referred to as ctp in 2018 to help develop a qualified construction workforce and expand economic opportunity through training. Because the research indicates that when construction contractors employ trained workers, projects are completed more safely, efficiently and with better quality. Item 22 builds on that work with a reasonable, phased approach to strengthening the program and ensuring Austin's historic investment in infrastructure is also an investment in the people and the communities who will help build our city's future. Since taking office, I've worked very closely with workforce development organizations and labor to strengthen our labor, labor, talent and local talent pipeline, and we're making enormous progress. Our registered apprenticeship programs are growing at a pace we've never seen before, with plans to continue that trajectory to meet the tremendous workforce demand that we have ahead, the creation of this council's work of creating the Austin infrastructure academy adds another critical piece by building our human infrastructure, that means career pathways from training to apprenticeships to jobs, and it includes child care, transportation access, partnerships with schools, unions and employers. This is especially important as we work to expand access to these careers for women, people of color and others who have historically been underrepresented in the skilled trades. I've said it before, you've heard me say it many times, but it's crucially important that we think intentionally about who gets to participate in Austin's success, not just how many jobs or w-2s we create, but how many austinites we move into stable, meaningful family supporting careers and get those w-2s. So I appreciate all the work that's gone into this, particularly from our skilled trade unions and helping us put this together. And, and I look forward to council voting on this. Councilmember Laine. [10:21:30 AM] >> Thank you. Number 22 was first on my list, and I'll just limit those comments to thanking you for your work on that and the importance of it and voice my strong support for all apprenticeship programs that I've had the opportunity to tour, and I still have a few more places to get to. So thank you very much also for us to our speakers on that topic as it relates to item 36, which is related to the bond, I'd like to highlight my council member duchen item 36, which I'm co-sponsoring. I think that I know that I learned a lot this bond cycle, and I think that a lot of us did, and I'm glad we're continuing to iterate on our expectations and policies as council so that we are responsible stewards while delivering for our constituents. And I think that as council members, it's very important to hear all the voices that our play, especially when we're working through processes to improve them. And so thank you to council member and council member alter and all those who have spoken on this topic as well. Thank you. [10:22:27 AM] >> Thank you, councilmember. Councilmember duchen. [10:22:30 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor. [10:22:32 AM] >> I want to speak to item 36. And first, thank my colleagues for their support of this item, especially councilmember alter. This item is near and dear to my heart. And to be clear, much of this is based on the mayor's prior work and the audit and the audit and finance committee's prior work developing the bond frameworks. And this item makes the bond planning explicit for 2028 and 2034. And essentially, we're bringing our bond planning policy in line with those existing frameworks, the staff recommendations and the best practices that we see in most cities and counties across the country. One of the reasons for my reluctance to support the bonds this November was my sense that we've asked a lot of voters over the last 18 years, and our own project delivery has fallen short. I know we can demonstrate more fiscal discipline, and that, combined with the work that capital delivery services are already doing to deliver projects and improve the way that we share information with the public, including the new dashboard and tools they released in the last few days. I think we can continue to build trust here. [10:23:35 AM] In 2028, we're going to come to voters with a large bond package that incorporates many of the priorities that we didn't get a chance to address this year, and then we'll have time to assess the city's needs and a bond package in 2034. I think returning to this cadence is going to help ensure that our debt does not grow too quickly. We can continue to keep the city affordable, and that we have time to properly prioritize our infrastructure needs. Thank you. [10:23:58 AM] >> Thank you, councilmember members. That concludes the discussion with. Forgive me. Yeah, those buttons buttons still work. I mean, just because we had a break, they still work. I know council member alter. [10:24:11 AM] >> Just really briefly, item one that probably overlooked by everybody. Item number six is a concrete contract. I just want to thank staff. We've been working on how we can procure low carbon concrete just to have less of an environmental footprint and impact. That work is going to the work necessary to be able to have that low carbon concrete is going to be finished in early 2027. So hopefully contracts like these can result in just a lower climate impact as we are acquiring concrete for a lot of the infrastructure that the mayor talked about that we're going to be building for the next many years. [10:24:50 AM] >> Good. Thank you. All right. That concludes the discussion on the consent agenda. Let me ask, is there anyone wishing to abstain from a vote on any item on the consent agenda? Councilmember duchen. [10:25:01 AM] >> I'm abstaining on 13. [10:25:05 AM] >> Anyone wishing to be shown abstaining other than councilmember duchen, anyone wishing to be shown recusing themselves from a vote on any item on the consent agenda. Anyone wishing to be shown voting no on any item on the consent agenda. Councilmember duchen. [10:25:19 AM] >> I wish to be shown voting no on item two. [10:25:23 AM] >> All right. Anybody else? Without objection, the consent agenda as read is adopted, with councilmember duchen being shown voting no on item number two and abstaining on item number 13. Members, that will now take us to item number 17. That is an item that was pulled by the mayor pro tem, and I'll recognize the mayor pro tem. [10:25:46 AM] >> Thank you mayor, I pulled this item. This is a the schedule our meeting schedule. City council meeting schedule for the next year. We have a very long standing sister city relationship with saltillo, coahuila, Mexico and their anniversary, which is the date that we traditionally an Austin delegation traditionally goes down to visit is July 25th. The. That makes it the. The fact that the budget is now kind of in the middle of July has made the trips very difficult for. Especially for council and for a lot of our senior city staff to go down there this next year. In particular, this is going to be the 450th anniversary of the of the city of saltillo, and I am hoping that I will. I'm planning to go and hoping to get some other council folks and also city staff there. We're doing great with the sister city relationship. We started the sister wineries again, credit to the Austin saltillo sister city association, you know, Sergio Garcia that have been working on a sister wineries program. A lot of good things going on. I just wanted to move that July 27th date, just to make sure that we have enough time to run down there, come back and then continue with the budget. And it looks like July 28th would work. I just wanted to give a heads up that we would then have back to back budget meetings on the 28th and the 29th, but. [10:27:17 AM] >> Yeah, the I'm gonna recognize councilman Fuentes in just a second. The. That's a good catch because we have not been able to participate in in that aspect of the sister city program because of budget items. So it's a it's a good catch. The motion. I'm thinking that I would take members so that y'all will know would be that we we change the July 27th in. In this item number 17 to Wednesday, July 28th at 9 A.M. Instead of July 27th at 9 A.M. That's. It's currently now on July 27th at 9 A.M. Move that. And there's been discussion with senior staff and the manager's office about moving it to July 28th, and that would work, subject to all of us understanding that on the next day, senior staff is not going to have answers to all the questions we ask on July 28th. And because there's just not going to be enough time, but it would be back to back and with the understanding that we would be able then to have those meetings, not give up a budget meeting, that we all know how important those meetings are and how. And they seem to be becoming more and more important, I think. So that's the motion that I'm playing with. If everybody just get that in your head, and then what we'll do is we'll I'll call for a motion a second. [10:28:33 AM] Councilmember Fuentes, I apologize for taking your time. [10:28:35 AM] >> Thank you. And thank you, mayor pro tem, for flagging the, you know, the conflict there with participating in this celebration and the budget work session. I wanted to take a step back for a second and get a better understanding of from the manager as to, you know, should we expect and I'm looking at the calendar colleagues, if you all want to pull it up on your screens. July 15th is the first budget work session date flagged for next year. Is that. And I just want to refresh our memories on this, is that when we should anticipate that you will be unveiling the base proposed budget at that time, July 15th. [10:29:14 AM] >> Yes, ma'am. [10:29:16 AM] >> And so, colleagues, what I want to offer for discussion and consideration, just knowing that, you know, perhaps we should consider moving the dates in which we adopt the budget back one week to give us an additional week for us to consider the manager's base budget. And that would alleviate us having those back to back work sessions on the 28th 29th. If we moved back budget adoption week to August 18th instead. Now, that would put, you know, a budget adoption week ahead of right before a council meeting week instead of giving us that week in between. But it also could give us an additional week to consider the budget and to work through the questions that we have doesn't compress the work sessions in that in the last week of July. It just gives us more time to to deliberate. And so I just also wanted to offer that. [10:30:06 AM] >> That's a. So how about this? So that we can get a calendar pass for the year, maybe go ahead and make this change. So we also know what we'll be doing with saltillo, but have a more thorough discussion about everybody. Look at this. As you've raised the question, councilmember Fuentes. Everybody look and let's work with staff to see what we might be able to play out with that. [10:30:31 AM] >> Okay. So still move forward with adopting. [10:30:33 AM] >> Adopt the calendar. As it is. We can amend the calendar at a later date. I'm not saying but, but for the rest of the year, we would know what it is and we would know what we're doing with regard to this specific item. On with regard to the saltillo aspect, does that make sense to you? Yeah. Councilmember Laine. [10:30:51 AM] >> Totally fine with whatever process you you want. Of course, mayor, but I did want to first thank council member vela for raising the issue. I'll note that I am one of the council members who would like to participate. So you got a face to go with it. And I really like the suggestion from council member Fuentes. I think we I know that I see the value that could have come from a little bit, even just a couple more days in the process. So I think that that's a good solution. I just wanted to mention it. [10:31:22 AM] >> Thank you. And the only reason I say let's not make that decision right now is because I would like to have input from staff about other dates that might play out, for example. And please, I'm not suggesting there will be a TRE. Okay. I'm just saying that is a date that has to be taken into account on calendars. If we were to decide that was something we wanted to do when we vote on, that would be something we need to consider as part of the budget analysis. It's this dates like that that I don't want us just right now saying, hey, we're going to make those. And then we find out we're conflicting with something. So that's why if we can pass the calendar with the understanding that what we will do is we will work with staff on, on the questions that are being asked and the issues that are being raised. Councilmember harper- madison. [10:32:13 AM] >> Well, actually, I think you just offered the resolution to my the thing that I wanted to not it's not a question necessarily. It was just I just wanted to note for the record that, you know, myself and at least one other council member sitting on the dais today won't be here when this is in effect and when it affects people. So I just I feel funny about voting for something that I won't be here for. And so I appreciate council member Fuentes's point about the additional consideration. I appreciate the opportunity to get a sense of where the folks who will actually be here when this affects your schedule are and defer to them. [10:32:48 AM] >> Thank you. That's a good point. All right, mayor pro tem to close and then I'm going to have your comments. They will suffice as a motion. [10:32:57 AM] >> Thank you, mayor and I, to your point and with regard, I believe and again, this was before my time on council. But the budget was used to be a little bit later because we didn't have to the TRE the possibility of calling a TRE. We started the budget process sooner to preserve that possibility. I would, and I very much appreciate that that that, you know, staff is making sure that to leave all options available to council. I will say, just realistically, I don't think we're calling a you know, in other words, when if the council if the kind of the general sense of the council is that that's not the case. And we could kind of push that back to later in August, per council member Fuentes suggestion, to give everybody a little bit more time. So I just wanted to. [10:33:45 AM] >> And that's why we should have a. We have the message board. We have the opportunity to have more discussion about this, and we can do that. And and I'm glad I'm glad it's brought up. Obviously, it needs to be brought up. But so the motion that's before us. Motion that that I. The chair accepts is that the calendar be adopted with the exception that instead of the meeting scheduled for 9 A.M. On July 27th, that be changed to 9 A.M. July 28th. [10:34:18 AM] >> I believe 10 A.M. I'm getting a signal. [10:34:20 AM] >> From we're getting signals. [10:34:22 AM] >> Well, okay. [10:34:23 AM] >> I like that to Cary Singh. No, she. [10:34:27 AM] >> She's got nine fingers held up in the air. Yeah, and that's director. That's the director. Yeah. So I counted those. Right. Didn't I see that? Yeah. Okay. So the motion is to adopt the calendar with the amendment of instead of July 27th at 9 A.M. Which is a Tuesday, it will be July 28th, Wednesday at 9 A.M. The motion has been made by the mayor pro tem and seconded by council member Fuentes. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Without objection, the calendar item number 17 is adopted. Members. Without objection, we will recess the meeting of the Austin city council at 1030. [10:35:12 AM] >> Excuse me. We had a speaker on item 17. [10:35:15 AM] >> Okay. [10:35:18 AM] >> Monica Guzman. Oh. She passed. [10:35:20 AM] >> All right. Thank you for that, miss Guzman. I'm happy to hear from you after we voted, but yeah, thank. Yeah. Sorry about that. Apologize. I missed it, apologize to you. All right. Without objection, the Austin city council is in recess at 10:35 A.M. Members, that will now take us to item number 27. As I indicated, we would take up item number 27 following the Austin housing finance corporation. I'll turn to the city clerk for speakers. [10:40:34 AM] >> Speaking on item 27, Philip Fitzgerald and Zenobia Joseph. [10:40:40 AM] >> Mr. Fitzgerald, would you want to speak? Yes, sir. Miss. Related to the development of elm ridge preservation lp or an affiliated entity. All right. Mr. Fitzgerald is passing, miss Joseph. Miss Joseph. [10:41:01 AM] >> That concludes all speakers, mayor. [10:41:03 AM] >> Members, that concludes all the speakers. We. By the way, we. I should have opened the public hearing on item number 27. I apologize for the record. Let me open the public hearing without objection. The public hearing is open. Mr. Fitzgerald, you still don't wish to speak, right? All right. And miss Joseph isn't here. So there are no further speakers on item number 27. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 27. And now I'll entertain the council member. Siegel moves approval of the resolution. Is there a second to the motion seconded by council member. Duchen. Is there any discussion with regard to item number 27? Hearing none. Without objection, item number 27 is adopted. Members, that will take us to item number 24 and item number 25. I'll turn to the city clerk to call for speakers on items 24 and 25. [10:41:52 AM] >> There are no speakers for item 24 members. [10:41:57 AM] >> How about number 25? [10:42:03 AM] >> No speakers for item 25. [10:42:05 AM] >> Members there being no speakers on items number 24 and number 25 with respect to those two items 24 and 25. They are both nonconsent condemnation items, and the motion that I'll accept is to the effect that the city council of Austin authorizes the use of the power of eminent domain to acquire the property set forth and described in the agenda for this current meeting. For the public uses that are described therein is. Are there. Is there a motion to adopt items 24 and 25? Subject to what I've read into the record, it's may council member Siegel, seconded by council member Ellis. Is there discussion with regard to items 24 and 25? Hearing none. Without objection, items 24 and 25 are adopted. Members. That leaves us with our 12:00 time certain as the next item that we can take up what I'm going to. Yes, councilmember zo qadri. [10:42:59 AM] >> I just wanted to acknowledge we have students visiting today from UT and the journalism and media pro track program, which sounds very cool. They're grad students are sitting in on the council meeting and writing about some of the items that were deliberating on today. [10:43:14 AM] >> That's great. Well, welcome. Thank you, members, because the next item on the agenda is set for a 12:00 time. Certain my recommendation, unless there's objection, is that we take up an item that we need to take up in executive session. And that being the case, the city council will now go into a closed session to take up one item pursuant to section 55107, one of the Texas government code. The city council will discuss legal issues related to item number 37, discuss legal issues related to Leavens et Al versus city of Austin et Al. D-1-g-26-009327. In the 53rd district court in Travis county, Texas, concerning a legal challenge to dogs head tax increment reinvestment zone number 21 members. This is a private consultation with our legal counsel. Again, as I've indicated, pursuant to section 55107, one of the government code. Is there any objection to going into the executive session on the item announced? [10:44:17 AM] Hearing none. Council will now go into an executive session. It is 1043. What will happen is I anticipate we will finish the executive session before the 12:00 time. Certain. I will come back and announce when we are out of executive session just so that the public will know we are waiting on council to be here, I think. So it may be that we're actually don't start the executive session for a few more minutes. I just want the public to know that we may. It may be a shorter executive session than what it appears, but I'll come back out and let everybody know when we're out of executive session. As I indicated, we're going into executive session is 10:44 A.M. Thanks, everybody. See you in a few minutes. [11:23:33 AM] It's 1123 and we're out of the closed session. And in closed session, we discussed legal issues related to item number 37. The city council will be in recess until 12:00 noon, when we will take up our 12:00 time certain again, it's 1123 and we'll come back in at 12:00 noon. [11:24:38 AM] >> Far away from here. Put on a poncho, play for mosquito's and everywhere in between. Yeah, okay. We get along. So what if right now everything's wrong? If it makes you happy. It can't be that bad. If it makes you happy. Then why the hell are you so sad? If it makes you happy. It can't be that bad. If it makes you happy. Then why the hell are you so sad? [11:26:45 AM] Boy? Little fool. Why can't you see Ed Rohan man will never ever be. It's too late now. I'm too close to change my mind. It's just a matter of time. I know I make you mine someday. He'll break your heart. He'll [11:59:19 AM] yeah, I would like to have another. [11:59:28 AM] >> 100 and. [11:59:32 AM] >> Selig. And. [11:59:58 AM] >> Good afternoon everybody. It's noon at 12:00 and I will call back to order the Austin city council for the record, at the close of the Austin housing finance corporation, we adjourn that meeting and we obviously call back to order the Austin city council and passed item number 27. We are also. For the record, I announced in public that we had completed the executive session and we're in recess until noon, so I'll call us back to order. And that is for our general public communication time. Certain. And I'll turn to the city clerk. Let me say to those that have signed up to speak, you know that you've signed up to speak. She's going to call names and you know, 3 or 4 of you at a time. Go ahead and make your way up, and that way you'll be ready to go. And in the order that she calls you, all we ask is that you state your name for the record. So with that, I'll turn it. I said she, but I messed that up. No, that's only the first mistake I've made today. [12:00:57 PM] >> So first we will have serene and all in person. [12:01:07 PM] >> Hi. Do you need me to state my name, please? Okay. I'm serene and all. Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor. And city council members. Who here would want a five storey building built directly behind their home with 800 new neighbors? I am a district five resident and a homeowner living in Independence park, less than 300ft from the 6200 Menchaca site. I'm also a licensed real estate agent. For me, that question isn't a hypothetical. It's what my neighbors and I are facing right now. I strongly oppose the density and scale of the city's proposed rezoning of Menchaca 6200, Menchaca to M, F four and P. The proposed rezoning would allow up to 275 units on 4.9 acres. That's roughly ten times the density of a single family block like mine, with an estimated 800 new residents or more. Only a quarter of the site faces Menchaca, the other three quarters border streets of one and two story homes. I invite each of you to come to our neighborhood, walk our streets. You will have no doubt how inappropriate a. A development of this size is. [12:02:32 PM] And while you're here, try turning left onto Menchaca at 5 P.M. There is no traffic signal at the site and no center turn Laine. Drivers who can't make that left turn will turn right and cut through a quiet residential street, and yet, the city is not required to complete a traffic study before seeking a rezoning of this magnitude. Based on my experience as a real estate agent, a five story development of this scale could significantly and negatively impact the value of immediately surrounding homes. When a neighbor asked the lead Austin housing representative at the September 23rd open house whether their homes value could be affected, the response was simply no, which I believe simply isn't the case. That same lack of understanding applies to many of our other concerns. It's easy to look at a site on a computer screen and pursue maximum density, but too many key facts, concerns and impacts have been inadequately evaluated and under-researched by the city, a decision this permanent deserves a full understanding of its impact on our neighborhood and residents, which should have come before the city applied for and actively pursued this rezoning. [12:03:54 PM] Our neighborhood plan is in place precisely to protect established neighborhoods from incompatible developments of this scale. I ask the city council to oppose this radical rezoning, and I ask the city to pause its current rezoning application. [12:04:13 PM] >> Thank you very much. [12:04:14 PM] >> Thank you. [12:04:15 PM] >> Next speaker will be remote Jeremy Gannon. [12:04:23 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor Watson and council members. My name is Jeremy Geoghegan and I live in Independence park in south Austin, district five. My partner Tiffany and I bought our home there in 2017 while we were still living in the San Francisco bay area. We were visiting Austin and happened to look at a house in Independence park. From the moment we entered the neighborhood, it felt different. It felt like home. We knew we had to figure out a way to buy that house. And we did. At the time, I worked for an architectural firm as an architectural designer. Much of my more than 20 year career has involved large multifamily, affordable housing projects. So I want to be very clear I support affordable housing. I believe it can give people dignity, stability, autonomy and opportunity. But the successful projects I worked on also respected the communities around them. We took great care to design buildings that responded to the scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood. That's why I was so concerned when I learned what is being considered. At 6200 Menchaca, directly adjacent to Independence park, a five story apartment building can be entirely appropriate in an urban or higher density context, but Independence park consists of one and two story homes, as do the other residential properties surrounding this site. A roughly 60 foot building immediately behind those homes would create an abrupt transition in scale, with upper floors overlooking backyards and homes that were never designed for that relationship. [12:06:02 PM] I worried that this approach will unnecessarily create conflict between existing neighbors and the future residents of the supporting affordable housing development. It doesn't have to. What if Austin did something better here? What if the city reduced the scale and created a community of townhomes and low rise housing that integrated affordable housing into the existing neighborhood? Imagine a project where new residents felt that they were part of the community, rather than placed in a development physically separated from it. That could become a model for how Austin integrates affordable housing into established residential neighborhoods. And my support for affordable housing isn't theoretical. I voted for Austin affordable housing bonds because I believe deeply in their purpose. We did our part as voters. Now I'm asking the city to do its part by building that housing thoughtfully. I respectfully ask council not to approve the proposed zoning change until a solution is developed that provides meaningful limits on height and density and creates an appropriate transition to the surrounding neighborhood. We can build affordable housing at 6200 manchaca. We can also be good neighbors. Those goals do not have to be in conflict. [12:07:16 PM] Thank you. [12:07:18 PM] >> Thank you. [12:07:19 PM] >> Moving back to in-person speakers, Robert Gonzalez, Tara Carr, Jerry floor, Brian powers. [12:07:38 PM] >> Good morning, Mr. Mayor and honorable council members. Thank you for affording the 6200 manchaca neighbors an opportunity to speak with you today. To quote a famous line from star trek, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. This quote seems appropriate today as we discuss the city's plans for a high density, affordable apartment complex. Some of my group will share how out of scale, a five story building next door to single family homes is, and how this zoning request violates the very premise of the south Austin neighborhood plan to preserve unique neighborhood cultures. Others in our group will question whether city traffic planners made an inadvertent error on the last traffic study, and will request a new traffic study. But I want to speak to something else. We are here today to ask you to consider the needs of the many. Check Facebook and next door posts, and you will see a plethora of posts, with the overwhelming majority saying we are not against affordable housing, but we support a lower number of units that will not add traffic congestion and invade the privacy of adjacent homeowners. [12:08:48 PM] We have an unofficial online petition of more than 500 signatures. These are the names and addresses of people who live in south Austin, people who care about a proposed 275 unit apartment complex that is squeezed onto less than five acres. Imagine a family barbecue in your own backyard, just 25ft away from your back fence is a 60 foot tall apartment building with prying eyes. Listen, I totally understand the balancing act you were trying to accomplish before retiring to Austin 12 years ago, I served on a small housing authority board of directors. I understand your advocacy and desire for affordable housing. However, my purpose today is to make a very reasonable request. Will you hit the pause button on the project and let our group sit down with city officials? We would welcome a meeting with Mr. Alter and city planners to find middle ground. We've already heard the platitudes and placation at open houses and focus groups. Let's check those appeasements at the door and begin serious conversations that start with four words. We hear your concerns. After speaking to scores of people my colleagues and I heard over and over from the public, you're wasting your time. The real estate developers control the city council. I ask you to give those doubters a reason to believe in you. Again, please pause the rezoning application until after the new council is seated in January 2027. What's the hurry? Interest rates are at 7.25%. Give us the time and opportunity to coauthor a compromise that is a win win for the city and south Austin neighborhoods. Together, we can find a fair solution that will serve the needs of the many, the few, and the ones time. May you live long and prosper. [12:10:37 PM] >> Well done. [12:10:37 PM] >> Sir, can you please state your name for the record? [12:10:40 PM] >> My name is Robert Gonzalez. I live at 2417 Moore drive. [12:10:43 PM] >> Thank you sir. Mr. Smith. [12:10:50 PM] >> Who is it next? [12:10:51 PM] >> It doesn't matter. Whoever wants to go, just say. Say your name so we don't. I don't I don't think you're Mr. Smith and I think you're. [12:10:58 PM] >> My name is Jerry florey. [12:10:59 PM] >> Good. [12:11:00 PM] >> Thank you. Good afternoon, council members. I live directly across the street from 6200 manchaca road in the garrison park neighborhood. I'm here today to oppose the proposed rezoning of the property from sf two and P to mf four. Let me be clear about what I'm asking. I do not oppose affordable housing on this site, I support it. What I oppose is the density being proposed up to 275 units, and especially the 330 units. The city's own appraisal says the zoning would allow. I live this impact every single day. Cut through traffic to. William cannon already backs up our streets so badly that it can take me 15 minutes just to get out of my own driveway. Adding density at this scale means significantly more cars, congestion, and honestly, it scares me to think about how long it would take or how safely I would be able to back out of my own driveway. If this is a if this is approved. Street parking isn't a problem today, but I deeply. I'm deeply concerned that mf four density will push parking overflow up through parkside Laine and affect the entire garrison park neighborhood. This isn't just a traffic concern, it is inconsistent with the city's own planning documents. The imagine Austin Austin comprehensive plan designates the area as neighborhood core and neighborhood node. This is nothing. There is nothing nearby built anywhere near the scale being proposed, and it is my understanding that the city approved to update this comprehensive plan in 2027. [12:12:36 PM] Approving a zoning change of this magnitude ahead of that update seems premature and out of step with your own process. The south Austin combined neighborhood plan is even more specific. On page 48, it states that development of residential core should maintain, and this is a quote. Maintain the residential character of the district and be compatible with existing neighborhood. On page 52, it actually recommends the missing middle housing where possible. Mf four is not missing middle, stating plainly that this type of development should not be zoned larger than mf one, and that the mass, height and development of the residential core could be, quote, visibly and physically compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Mf four is not that 275 units is not that, and 330 units is certainly not that. [12:13:38 PM] I'm asking you to honor your own neighborhood plan. Respect the timeline of your planning process, and bring this proposal back in line with the missing middle and fxsf6 density would actually look like on this site. Affordable housing and neighborhood compatibility are not mutually exclusive, and I'm asking you to require both. [12:14:01 PM] >> Thank you. Thank you. [12:14:07 PM] >> How's it going, Brian powers? Good afternoon, mayor and city council members. My name is Brian powers. I live in district five, and my property directly backs up to 6200 manchaca. When I open my back door every morning to let my dog out, I see trees, owls, foxes, hawks, cardinals, and even the occasional armadillo. For almost seven years, that backyard has been one of my favorite things that I love most about living in south Austin. And I do want to make this clear. Like many of the other people that are here, we're not against affordable housing, just not against at the scope of where it's at. We're asking you to work with us on the scale of this project before making a decision that can't be easily undone right now, the proposal allows up to 275 units, and the buildings are 4 to 5 stories tall. There's no final design. There isn't even a selected development partner yet. So my question is simple why are we rushing to rezone first? Especially when recent reports found that Austin has up to 4500 unified units classified as affordable, with a 16% vacancy rate. So there's 720 affordable, affordable, available units right now. That doesn't mean that Austin doesn't need affordable housing. [12:15:17 PM] It absolutely does. But it does mean that we have time to get this particular project right. My neighbors and I have attended meetings, we've written emails, we've asked questions, and more than 500 people have signed our change.org petition, and yet we still don't feel heard. I've asked some very basic questions. How close could this development be to my fence? And I've heard answers from different setbacks, buffers, buildings, parkings and drainage. And eventually the answer comes back as we don't know yet. And that's to my point. If we don't know yet, then why are we rezoning it now? We've watched battles happen in rosedale, circle C and other Austin neighborhoods. Residents show up, they organize, they ask for change, and the rezoning still moves forward. Rosedale was rezoned just weeks ago, despite a valid petition opposing the rezoning. That leaves people wondering whether community engagement actually changes anything. Councilman alter you recently quoted saying outreach matters, but elected officials don't. [12:16:17 PM] Elected officials cannot simply follow public opinion. You can't always cater to the loudest voice. You can't even do the thing that is most popular. If we only did things that everyone agreed upon, we would never take that big step forward. When I first read that, I thought our fight was done and we had no chance. Y'all already made up your mind and this was going to be another yes to rezoning. Then I started thinking, 6200 could be your big step. 6200 manchac can give you the opportunity to do something different, to show the public that you can work with the people and to build something that's great for all of Austin. So I ask you this. Give us a chance to sit down with the actual developer, find a solution that somebody that can be proud of. We're here. We're willing to work. Please show us that we can be heard and actually change the outcome. Thank you. [12:17:07 PM] >> Thank you. Please. [12:17:13 PM] >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Tara Carr. Today I have the privilege of having my son and some of his classmates from university of Texas elementary school here with me. They are experiencing council elections for the first time. So we've been talking about civic duty and one of its most important lessons showing up. So that is what I'm doing today. I'm showing up again. I've spent time this year participating in the lake Austin stakeholder group, and in 2025 attended numerous meetings, town halls, and spoke publicly about the return of hydrilla to lake Austin. Despite this time spent, the problem is far from resolved. In fact, it is significantly worse. I understand that city staff do not consider a lake drawdown an effective hydrilla management tool. Watershed protection said as much in their July 2025 memo and identified grass carp stocking as the city's preferred management strategy. I understand that what I do not understand is how we went from 74 acres of hydrilla in June of 2025 to current conditions. [12:18:13 PM] Lake Austin is now covered in almost 600 acres of hydrilla, a non-native, highly invasive, federally listed noxious weed. All of this led up to a drawdown announced with 53 days notice, causing residents, businesses and lake users to spend weeks scrambling for a major disruption, only for it to be canceled. Those are two separate issues, but together they illustrate the same problem. Lake Austin needs a clear, coordinated, proactive management strategy. And while I have been frustrated with the stakeholder process, I firmly believe effective stakeholder engagement needs to be part of that strategy. I am asking the entire council to care about this. Not only district ten and not only the members of the climate, water, environment and parks committee. I grew up in what is now district eight, although it wasn't in the city limits then. And over my almost 40 years, I've lived and worked in every single council district. Like most austinites, I do not exist in a single district, and lake Austin doesn't only belong to the district where it is located. [12:19:14 PM] It is a drinking water source, a recreational, economic and environmental resource. And part of what makes Austin Austin your constituents use it. Some rely on it, and they all deserve to know there is a plan to protect it. So I'm asking all of you to be the squeaky wheel. Ask city staff what are our hydrilla management targets? What triggers additional intervention? How are we coordinating with tpw, lcra and other agencies? What did we learn from this year's planned and canceled drawdown? And most importantly, what happens next and when? Please ask those questions before too late means a preventable hydrilla related emergency or worse, a tragedy. I don't ever want to show up here and say I told you so. After nearly two years of showing up, I'm still asking one very simple question what is the plan? And I will keep showing up because it's the right thing to do. I hope these kids learn something here today that's showing up matters. But the other half of representative government is that eventually someone has to listen and act. [12:20:15 PM] >> Appreciate you being here. [12:20:18 PM] >> Tristan. Hyde. Ryan Guthrie. [12:20:24 PM] >> Tristan. Hyde. Ryan. Guthrie. [12:20:27 PM] >> All right, mayor, we will move to a remote speaker. Ethan Smith. [12:20:35 PM] >> Hello. Good afternoon. I wanted to talk about the idea of decentralization and kind of liberal democracy. [12:20:45 PM] >> Could you state your name for the record? [12:20:47 PM] >> It's interesting to. Yes, sir. Ethan Smith, district nine. Thank you. Yes. Talking about lake Austin and, you know, our the way we have representative government in Austin where there are these districts with kind of like a mini mayor of each district, in a way, you know, you have a certain kind of a problem. You go to your your council person. It might be an interesting idea if we had a council that was mixed, that was some people that represented districts and some people that were at large. And just something to think about. How would it be different? Because yeah, like, like often there are some things that are, they don't really belong to one district, but they're pretty important to everybody. And I also think it creates, I don't want to say problems, but if people want to run for government, but like, maybe they like their council person, they don't want to run against them. It would kind of give an opportunity for people to participate, not have to run against an incumbent or something like that. But yeah, I think decentralization good in some things, not good in some things. But like, I always appreciate the institution of, of public input that's really decentralized, that saying, we're going to take public input and how that happens and how much of that for various issues. Because if that energy is there, it has a way of coming out one way or another that if if there's a process and all the public input doesn't really happen, you might wind up with a court challenge on something and the timeline can get stretched out. [12:22:45 PM] And it kind of just feels nicer to have public input. But also it's, it's, it's an institution. We think of our institutions as like, you know, like a business or a public thing. But it's also these processes where people participate. Thank you. [12:23:05 PM] >> Thank you. [12:23:07 PM] >> Mayor. All speakers for public communication have been called. [12:23:10 PM] >> Great. Thank you very much, members, as you just heard, all the speakers on our 12:00 time, certain public communications have been called, there being no business until our 2:00 time certain we're going to recess, although I want to encourage everybody to stay, because when we recess, we're going to set up for our live music, which we typically have after our general public communication, that that will occur momentarily, but we will be in recess. And unless there's an objection, the Austin city council is in recess until 2:00 pm. It is 1223. Thanks, everybody. Thank you all for being here. [1:59:54 PM] >> Good afternoon everybody. It's 2:00 on Thursday, October 8th, 2026, and I will call back to order the Austin city council to this regular meeting of the Austin city council. The item that we have on our agenda is our 2:00 time, certain zoning items and neighborhood planning. And so, miss harden, it's 2:00. It's your time. [2:00:27 PM] >> Here by comparison. In front of you. [2:00:33 PM] >> Mayor and council. I'm joy Hahn, interim assistant director of Austin planning. Your zoning agenda begins with item 28c14h20260039. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. [2:00:49 PM] >> This. Ever got the phone on? Please turn it off. [2:00:53 PM] >> This is a historic rezoning item built in 1912. The James Harvey and pearl Caldwell house is an exceptional, intact example of a neo-classical bungalow. The couple hosted regular meetings of the Austin association for the blind there, where members organized support for legislation affecting blind Texans. With that, again, this historic rezoning item is offered for consent on all three readings. And we also have people here in support of this item. Item number 29 is C one 420 250089. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. There is a valid petition filed for this item, so a minimum of nine votes are required for passage just for council information. The majority of the speakers on this item are residents of lost creek, which is distant from our city. I also have a motion to read into the record and that motion reads. Amend part to the draft ordinance to read as follows. The property within the boundaries of the conditional overlay combining district established by this ordinance is subject to the following conditions. The following uses are prohibited. [2:02:07 PM] Uses of the property offsite accessory parking, service station, petty storage and dispatch. Again, this item is offered for consent on all three readings and we have opposition speakers here for this item. [2:02:19 PM] >> Let me let me interrupt you there. Members. Also, council member Ellis has a proposed amendment on item 29. The way I'll do this is depending upon how things go with the discussion and that sort of thing at the time. I seek any sort of motion. If this is still on the consent agenda and remains on the consent agenda, I will ask council member Ellis to read her proposed amendment and the motion that we will have on consent again, if it remains on consent, will include her motion to amend. As part of that, what we'll do is we'll vote on the motion to amend and take it to the full consent item at that time. [2:03:01 PM] >> So it is just direction to staff. So we worked on it very carefully that what we wanted to do did not work as an amendment. [2:03:09 PM] >> Okay. Then what we will do is we'll take it up separately. Thank you for that clarification. So we'll take it up that way as part of direction after we address the consent agenda. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. I'm sorry to have interrupted you. [2:03:21 PM] >> No problem. Item 30 is c14h20260045. This is another historic rezoning item offered for consent at all three readings. The Doris Miller auditorium has served east Austin since its construction during World War two as a USO center for black service members. The auditorium is named for Doris Miller, the Waco native who was the first black service member to receive the Navy cross. The building has hosted B.B. King, James brown and big mama Thornton, along with countless community events, giving east Austin residents a gathering place they were often denied elsewhere in the city during segregation. With that, again, this is a historic rezoning item offered for consent on all three readings. And lastly, item 31 is C one 420 260008. This item is offered for consent on all three readings, and this concludes the reading of the zoning agenda. And as always, this is at your discretion. [2:04:20 PM] >> All right. Thank you members. The consent agenda will be items 28, 29, 30 and 31 on all three readings. Item number 29 has a valid petition. And recall that miss harden has read a motion into the record as part of item number 29. With that, I'll entertain a motion on the consent agenda and we will go to the speakers. Motion is made by council member harper-madison. Second by council member Siegel to approve the consent agenda. And now we will go to speakers on items on the consent agenda. [2:04:56 PM] >> Thank you mayor. We'll begin with Jean Marie Hurd speaking remotely on item 29. [2:05:10 PM] >> Good afternoon. My name is Jean Marie Hurd and I live at 6209 Augusta national drive in lost creek. I'm here about cassie 14, 2025 0089. I'm not opposed to redevelopment, but this rezoning is moving forward without a complete traffic study, without txdot coordination, and without an emergency access plan for a neighborhood that has only three ways out, the current property is nearly empty today. Yet the paperwork treats it as fully occupied. To avoid the very study we need. It's not walkable, it is far from public transit, and it feeds directly onto one of Austin's most dangerous highways, the traffic and safety studies that should come first have not been done, so please deny this rezoning. [2:06:16 PM] Thank you. [2:06:16 PM] >> Thank you. [2:06:19 PM] >> We'll now move to in-person speakers anil mahendra, Katy Taylor, Marvin Hecker, Walt Richardson. [2:06:30 PM] >> If your name has been called, please come forward, find a place to sit and just identify yourself. For the record, please state your name for the record and then begin speaking. [2:06:40 PM] >> For anil mahendra. Is Jim Chapman. [2:06:43 PM] >> Here he is. [2:06:45 PM] >> Anil will have four minutes. [2:06:47 PM] >> Okay. [2:06:50 PM] >> Good afternoon mayor. City council members, this is a Neil mahendra. I live in the woods of Westlake, which does happen to be part of city of Austin. I'm here today to talk mainly on the safety issues that we experience at the woods of Westlake. So I'm speaking as a father, as a neighbor, and as a citizen of of that community. Next slide please. Currently, we already have a major issue with with safety in our in our neighborhood, we have overwhelmed infrastructure. It's it's, it was stated earlier by the, by the prior lady that txdot back in 2020. Already did a study saying that the infrastructure was beyond capacity. We have issues with obstructed emergency access during covid when we had a influx of visitors coming to the hill of life, which at that time was free access to our neighborhood, we would have cars parked on either side of the of the street and emergency vehicles. There was numerous incidents where a fire truck couldn't even get through our neighborhood because of that. [2:08:03 PM] Those obstructions, and I think the most concerning is the pedestrian vulnerability for our children, elderly neighbors, and basic people that walk in the neighborhood. Just me as an everyday American, I, I don't even feel comfortable having my kids walk to Westlake high school because of the danger crossing across Scottish woods. So next slide please. This is just a representation of where this proposed development is going to be. As you can see, it's it's kind of right on the corner here of our neighborhoods, as well as the elementary school and Westlake high school. So, I mean, we are kind of adding fuel to the fire with, with this possible development with, you know, influx of 500 plus residents and all the vehicular traffic that that will be initiated from that. Next slide, please. [2:09:02 PM] This just shows you today what the prior lady said, that this is what city view looks like today. This is at 2 P.M. It's mainly empty, but if you go to the next slides, I'm sorry if you could go one one street over this. This is what we see on a on a daily basis in in our neighborhood, this happens to be in the morning. But this is also very evident in the afternoon. Next slide please. You can just see the piling up of cars. And what happened specifically here is people get frustrated with this traffic. They start making u-turns through our neighborhood, illegal turns where our kids are trying to walk through school. So it's highly dangerous. And we've I have personally, with my kids been in the car, they've seen two traffic deaths. We've driven up on two traffic deaths. So pretty, pretty alarming. And if this development goes through, I'm almost guaranteed that we will see more of that. So with that I will I will rest my time. [2:10:04 PM] But I, I hope you you consider voting against this. Thank you so much. [2:10:08 PM] >> Thank you sir. [2:10:09 PM] >> For Katy Taylor is chuck swallow here? [2:10:12 PM] >> He is. [2:10:14 PM] >> Okay. She will have four minutes. [2:10:16 PM] >> Okay. [2:10:16 PM] >> Good afternoon everyone. My name is Katie Taylor. I moved to the woods of west lake approximately three years ago. One thing that attracted us to the area was that it was very landlocked. What I want to focus on is that this development does need to happen in Austin, but not at this location. My daughter also goes to forest trail elementary. It's very, very hard to get out of there or, you know, children safely transporting back and forth. We also have a lot more transfers with aid closing some campuses that are now going over to these schools. So that's creating more traffic as well. The big impact level it is wildfire. Wildfire. I'm sorry. Evacuation routes. Excuse my voice is an allergy. Whatever's going in the environment right now. So as he already spoke about the vehicle crash safety, we always have issues right at the light leaving woods of Westlake, whether going to the high school, turning left or right, there is a lot of risk there. [2:11:20 PM] And I just don't think that for the amount of units that this development is looking to do, that is enough benefit to the city citizens and the city as well. And that's it for me. [2:11:31 PM] >> Thank you very much. You're welcome. [2:11:32 PM] >> For Marvin Heckers Galen Hecker here. [2:11:38 PM] >> Galen Hecker. Yeah. [2:11:40 PM] >> My time. [2:11:42 PM] >> Yeah, I understand that's why we were asking to make sure you were here. To be able to do that, you have to be here. And so we just want to verify. [2:11:49 PM] >> Marvin Walkes four minutes, please. [2:11:51 PM] >> Honorable council members. Mayor Watson, I'm Marvin Hecker. I'm asking you to not deny this zoning request. Full disclosure, I've lived in lost creek for 30 years. My house backs up to this development. 1319 Wilson heights drive. We know that there are hard feelings about our neighborhood this annexing from the city of Austin. We do understand why, and I'm in favor of it. But this decision you're being asked to make today is not just about the impact on my neighborhood. It directly impacts nearby Austin district eight neighborhoods, as well as city of Austin services. I'm in favor of putting more housing density and affordable housing in Austin, including district eight, but is now clear that this particular plot of land is absolutely the wrong place to do that. There is no public transportation within two miles of the site and no plans to provide it. There are no sidewalks or bike paths at this site to access amenities, schools, etc. And there is no plan to provide them. Txdot does not have those improvements in the current ten year plan has no funding for them. Anyone living in this proposed development will have to have a car. So much for affordability. But again, the major factor is safety. Txdot has designated loop 360 between bee caves road and westbank drive above average. In terms of traffic dangers, fire department has indicated that adding 475 apartments would greatly increase danger of ingress and egress, and negatively impact response times. The increased traffic congestion will greatly impact eanes ISD school bus safety and time schedules, but it's very important for you to understand that one of the major reasons that 91.3% of lost creek residents voted to dis annex from the city of Austin was the inability of APD to provide police patrols and response. [2:13:45 PM] When we were annexed by the city, Austin neighborhoods directly adjacent to lost creek are experiencing the exact same issues. APD can only respond to the most serious crimes. There are no police patrols at all, and the city sporadically enforces the parking restrictions for the hill of life in woods of Westlake, and typically not on weekends when the crowds are at their peak. This area is unfortunately an island when it comes to police presence and crime prevention, adding 475 apartments plus retail and office in this particular location will greatly exacerbate the situation. Lost creek boulevard is already designated as a dangerous roadway in case of emergency, such as wildfire. It is already beyond the planned capacity. There are many other concerns about this site, including no plan to deal with sewage that's currently designated to flow into the lost creek system, which does not have the capacity. It's in the scenic roadway corridor adjacent to a dark skies community and an environmentally sensitive watershed and aquifer area. As we hear repeatedly from city hall. What makes the most what matters most to all of us is the safety of the citizens. [2:14:58 PM] County commissioner Anne Howard, a member of the campo board, has written this council and mayor twice to indicate that the rezoning request should not be granted until the proper analyzes can be completed to ensure the safety of the city. If these studies have been done initially, it would have shown clearly this is the wrong place in district eight for apartments and retail. Bottom line if this request is approved, the city of Austin will be assisting a fortune 500 company to offload their low vacancy property while risking the safety of the citizens. Once again, I ask you to deny this zoning request and do what's in the best interests of the citizens. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you, sir. [2:15:39 PM] >> For Walt Richardson. Is Ben hogan here? Yes. We'll have four minutes. [2:15:46 PM] >> Mayor Watson and members of the Austin city council. My name is Walt Richardson. I've been a lost creek resident for 33 years. I would like to read an email sent yesterday by Travis county commissioner Anne Howard to you regarding the city view rezoning. In it, commissioner Howard reiterates her concerns about the development and its potential impacts on lost creek and the woods of Westlake. Please give her concerns the consideration they deserve. As you consider this rezoning request, she wrote. Thank you for delaying your decision on the zoning case in the weeks past. It is on your agenda again this week. I wrote to you previously to delay the rezoning to dense multifamily in the city until the impact on the safety of resulting residential traffic on 360 at the intersections of lost creek county road and neighborhood and Scottish woods trail, city road and neighborhood can be analyzed and mitigated. To my knowledge, you have no information on this to review at this time. I spoke with txdot leadership, who said they would need to see impact studies in order to advise and participate on mitigation. I have been told that it is known that this stretch of 360 has more crashes than others, and is considered one of the most dangerous sections of 360. As a campo board member, I have already begun to raise these issues and will continue to do so. I understand it's not your usual process, but perhaps traffic analysis could be completed and shared with txdot and then and the neighbors to learn the mitigation strategies before the up zoning is realized. Sincerely. Anne Howard, Travis county commissioner. [2:17:49 PM] >> Thank you sir. [2:17:51 PM] >> Next we will have Devlin Duval, Carrie Baldwin, Scott Smith, Christy Schultz. For Devlin Duval. Is Mike Duval here? Devlin will have four minutes. [2:18:17 PM] >> Mayor and council members. My name is Devlin Duval and I live on Wilson heights drive, the first road in lost creek. I'd like to briefly touch on three rezoning concerns. Number one and two are the environment in your packets is a letter from save our springs alliance urging denial of this rezoning. To summarize, the letter sos argues that the proposed db90 zoning runs against the city's own imagine Austin comprehensive plan and its growth concept map. It fosters car dependent sprawl rather than compact connected growth. And because this project will be located along a very wide, high speed highway with inadequate public transit and unsafe infrastructure, it will attract hundreds of new cars to an environmentally sensitive area, the eanes creek watershed, a watershed that the comprehensive plan intentionally directs growth away from sos states that these negative impacts and planning contradictions contradictions are avoidable. By rejecting this proposal and supporting growth in areas with existing sustainable infrastructure. Sos also attached a list of at least six Austin comprehensive plan policies this rezoning contradicts. I ask that you please read them as they are not trivial. The third concern is the danger along this section of 360. I personally have driven upon two fatal accidents at the intersection of lost creek in 360. The first incident will haunt me forever. [2:19:46 PM] I witnessed a car wrapped around the center light post engulfed in flames, and later learned that the person could not be pulled out in time. The second accident I saw ems working with the victims and upon getting home, I watched from my back windows for hours as the southbound 360 traffic was diverted through city views parking lot while the police closed the fatal scene. We all have dangers. Stories of the dangers. Eight weeks ago, I came very close to having my own accident due to the u-turn situation. It's routine to see drivers do dangerous, illegal things to save time. Turning at west bank drive, they use the fire department's emergency turnaround or make illegal u-turns in the middle of the Scottish woods entrance between bee cave road and west bank drive, we have two ghost bike memorials. One is our intersection. A while back, I purposefully pulled on to 360 from the city view lot to simulate entering the highway from what would become this proposed developments main entrance, and I was shocked by how unsafe I felt. There is not a light to offer protection at this point, and there is no light planned because every light cycle at lost creek has southbound traffic. These residents will be entering a highway unprotected, waiting on a gap in traffic. It is. This isn't a question of if another fatality of some sort happens. [2:21:14 PM] Again, it is a question of when. I cannot stress enough that this rezoning decision affects much more than our neighborhood. It also affects adjacent neighborhoods, nearby offices, and it will most definitely affect every single person who would visit and live at this redevelopment. Please keep in mind the concerns outlined by sos the fact that the rezoning goes against the city's own comprehensive plan, and mostly the impact that you will have on people's safety. Please deny the rezoning of this property. I thank you for your time, and I thank you for your consideration. [2:21:49 PM] >> Thank you. [2:21:50 PM] >> Is Carrie Baldwin okay? Is J.R. Chatfield? Yes. Okay. Carrie will have four minutes. [2:22:00 PM] >> And I have a slide deck. All right. Thanks. Perfect. Good afternoon, mayor Watson and council members. My name is Carrie Baldwin, and I live in lost creek. As our community has raised concerns about this project, particularly around traffic safety, drainage and the environment, we keep hearing essentially the same response that will be addressed at site plan traffic at site plan, safety at site plan drainage and environmental concerns at site plan. But slide two please. Here's the problem. Site plan is a staff review. There is no public hearing and the neighbors are not invited. So you are now being asked to approve the increased density and height. While some of the most important questions remain unanswered, these are questions that could determine whether our homes flood and whether our children are safe. Slide three. We have already lived through what can happen when drainage concerns are deferred. This spring. Homes in lost creek flooded. I want you to hear directly from one of our homeowners who experienced it. [2:23:08 PM] This is our neighbor, Alan Tsai. Good start that. Thanks. [2:23:13 PM] >> Hello. My name is Alan Tsai and I'm a resident in lost creek. I'm sorry I couldn't be there today, but I wanted to share an experience with you. All that I had recently with with the development in the community. I live on Quaker ridge drive, which backs up to a milestone development in the neighborhood. And a few months ago when it rained, the development flooded my backyard. I believe there's some video that seems is sharing with you and you know, when during the site planning and development phases, we shared our concerns about potential flooding issues. They promised that they addressed it, but clearly it didn't didn't help. Now, I don't know the development company at the site in question, but I wanted to share this message to illustrate the potential issue of making important decisions based purely at the site planning stage alone, because that didn't work out very well for me. Thank you. [2:24:08 PM] >> And on the next slide, there's a couple of more pictures that you can see of his backyard. So this isn't theoretical. This is already happened in our neighborhood. Texas law prohibits redirecting stormwater in a way that causes a neighbor's property to flood. But once somebody's home is flooded, the damage is already done. The time to prevent that damage is now before the vote. My greatest concern is safety commissioner Lonnie stern asked for an actual safety study. He asked transportation and public works to look at actual current traffic, driveway site distance, wildfire evacuation and the traffic queues at loop 360 and lost creek boulevard. The commission has to require that study before approving the rezoning. They refused. On the screen is a quote from commissioner stern. To sum it up, he warns about the possibility of a child being killed as a result of allowing this development, saying the blood will be on our hands. That warning came from a commissioner who voted to deny this rezoning, and I want to be clear we are not asking you to stop housing. The site already allows housing and retail. We are asking you not to approve additional density and height before you know whether this corner can safely support it. [2:25:24 PM] Six people have already been killed on this stretch of 360 between bee cave road and Walsh Tarlton. Since 2021, seven more have been seriously injured and dozens more have been hurt with flooding. The potential cost is people's homes and property. With traffic and evacuation, the potential cost is people's lives. Please don't defer these questions to a process. Whether the. Where the public no longer has a voice, deny this rezoning or at the very least, postpone until the safety and drainage questions have actually been answered. Thank you for your time. [2:26:00 PM] >> Thank you. [2:26:01 PM] >> For Scott Smith. Is jack Spradlin here? Yes. Thank you. Scott will have four minutes. [2:26:09 PM] >> Hello, mayor Watson and council members. My name is Scott Smith. I'm a lost creek resident, but I'm also a member of the lost creek neighborhood association board. And it's in that capacity on behalf of our hundreds of members, that I ask you to deny the city view rezoning request. At an absolute minimum, we ask that you require a full traffic impact analysis before approving it. Today's vote concerns the safety of existing residents, but just as importantly, it would eventually affect the lives of the nearly 500 people living in the nearly 500 apartments as currently planned. From our first conversations with city staff, with the group, with commissioners, with council offices, and many of you met with us, we've repeatedly raised the exact same concern. The traffic analysis waiver rests on a baseline that does not reflect conditions on the ground. The city's worksheet credits the existing office complex with 3013 daily vehicle trips. Based on the traffic those buildings would generate at full occupancy. It then subtracts those theoretical trips from the proposed developments, traffic and reports only an increase of 1000 or so trips. Those offices are nowhere near full. Anybody can drive by and see that today. [2:27:21 PM] Substantial space has been available for lease for literally years, maybe as far back as covid. Our July submission documented approximately 200,000 plus square feet currently on the market today. So documentable it's not full. The neighborhood's parking survey found only 113 vehicles within 1059 spaces. Now I know parking snapshot is no substitute for professional traffic study. That's why we think this is compelling evidence. The council needs one traffic that could exist in a fully occupied office complex is not the traffic our families encounter today. Subtracting theoretical traffic makes the proposed increase appear smaller without establishing the actual impact, and daily trip totals alone cannot answer the safety questions here. We need to really understand peak hour, congestion turning movements, u-turns. I cannot stress the u-turns enough. If you drove by there, you'd see there is no easy left and right access anywhere in this site. In emergency responses has been so well put out. Earlier, nearly 500 apartments at this location, with limited transit and few practical alternatives to driving, will put substantial demands on an already dangerous intersection at loop 360 and lost creek boulevard. As my neighbors have rightfully said, this is a very dangerous intersection. It's between 2021 and 2026, the well documented six fatalities. I mean, you can just drive by today and see the number of white bikes up and down this road. It's it's pretty scary stuff. Las creek boulevard is, as has been said, is our primary neighborhood gateway. Approximately 1300 homes depend on just three exit routes during a wildfire or a gas leak, which we had recently, or a serious collision congestion becomes pretty serious. It's an emergency access problem, and that's again, impacting the potential families that would be in the 500 homes. They need to make sure that emergency access can get to their property as well. [2:29:13 PM] And again, with two points of entry and exit, that would be very difficult. We've repeatedly been told that the traffic will be addressed when the site plan is submitted, but our conversations have confirmed that surrounding neighbors will not have the same public hearing, visibility or meaningful opportunity to participate at that stage. We will study this later is not an adequate answer. When you're asked to authorize the development's intensity today, even the city's own worksheet indicates that a neighborhood traffic analysis is needed. Council should insist on seeing that analysis alongside a full traffic impact analysis grounded in current conditions, before voting to approve. Douglas Becker September 8th letter, which has been in your packet as a brief, also identifies some unresolved concerns about protest rights. A commissioner's participation despite his employers tenancy at city view and notice of the amended application. Those concerns deserve independent review. A supermajority vote does not answer those. Thank you very much. [2:30:13 PM] >> Appreciate you. Thank you. [2:30:14 PM] >> For Christy Schultz. Is pat Chapman here? [2:30:18 PM] >> Yes. [2:30:18 PM] >> Chris Christie will have four minutes. [2:30:21 PM] >> Mayor Watson, council members, thank you for having us here today. I'm a native austinite. I grew up in allendale and I have lived in the woods of Westlake in district eight, which is in the city of Austin since 2011. I'm raising four children as a single mom in Westlake. I came here prepared to read off slides, but I can summarize them in one sentence because I'm the developer, because the developer represented how many trips this site misrepresented how many trips this site currently generates. No traffic impact analysis was ever triggered. That's the summary. I'll ask you to advance my slides as my script doesn't mirror it any longer. I this this was skipped. This traffic impact assessment was skipped along the stretch of loop 360 that against txdot own data that ranks it among the most dangerous corridors that it oversees anywhere in Texas. I trust you have reviewed the slides and already know this. [2:31:26 PM] The slides matter and they're in your packet. But there is a higher calling today than slides. Let me start with your duty. Under Texas law, local government code section 211.004 requires that zoning be designated to lessen congestion in the streets, secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers, promote health and general welfare, and facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewers and schools. That is the legal test, not whether a developer wants it, not whether it adds units on this site. The rezoning fails every one of those tests. Could you advance my slide, please? This area has not received infrastructure improvements in over 40 years, and it is woefully underserved in catching up to the extraordinary development that has already taken place. Development for the sake of development is not an improvement, and it is not what section 211 asks of you. I trust that council has read our submissions so I don't, so it doesn't serve anyone for me to read them again. These facts are already known to you. [2:32:35 PM] What's left today is a gut check. Whether this council does what its citizens want or what the developer wants. Could you advance my slide? This developer has visited city hall hundreds of times this year. We can't do that. We are normal people. We work and volunteer in our schools for our kids, and we try to be good citizens, trusting that our representatives will do what is in our best interest and not give outsized consideration to private entities that don't know us at all, or the area. Just because we can't get up here as often as the developers lobbyists doesn't mean we aren't. We aren't interested. It doesn't mean we are ambivalent. Short term satisfaction for folks who have had an outsized voice in these halls over the last year doesn't translate to care. This district is firmly against rezoning. I say that as the president of the woods of Westlake neighborhood association for very solid reasons not frivolous, not vanity, deep concerns over our safety. If you vote in favor of this, you are out of touch with your constituents, and any perceived gain in affordability is simply uninformed. [2:33:46 PM] Affordability is a misnomer in this area. I know as a single mom, and it does not become reality by writing it into a zoning case. Ultimately, every decision comes to two core origins facts and feelings on both fronts. We hope we've presented the facts along with the facts still unknown to us, that are essential in making this decision. The new day will be tomorrow, and at the end of that day, you either vote with the right decision for these citizens or you don't. And we won't be quiet if this is the wrong decision. We thank you for your time. [2:34:24 PM] >> Continuing on item 29. Douglas Keenan. [2:34:30 PM] >> Mr. Keenan has passed. [2:34:33 PM] >> We'll now move to item 31. Michael Whalen. [2:34:40 PM] >> I saw him earlier. He doesn't appear to be here. [2:34:43 PM] >> Now that concludes all speakers on zoning. [2:34:47 PM] >> Thank you members. As you've heard that concludes all the speakers on the zoning items. So that will take us back to the main motion. We have a motion and a second to approve. The consent agenda is read. I'll call for any discussion on the consent agenda. All right. Is there anyone wishing to be shown abstaining from any vote on any item on the consent agenda? [2:35:12 PM] >> Mayor, did you want me to read? My direction? [2:35:14 PM] >> I was going to do is take that up as direction after we. So we vote on it as a separate item. Okay. Is that okay? [2:35:21 PM] >> That works for me. [2:35:22 PM] >> All right. Is there anyone wishing to be shown? I want to make sure anyone wishing to be shown abstaining from any vote on any item on the consent agenda, anyone wishing to be shown recusing themselves from a vote on any item on the consent agenda. Anyone wishing to be shown voting no on any item. Councilmember duchen. [2:35:41 PM] >> Thank you mayor. I wish to be voting shown voting no on 29. [2:35:46 PM] >> All right. And I wish to be shown voting no on item number 31. Anyone else wishing to be shown voting no on any item? Okay. In that case, without objection, the consent agenda is adopted and there are. Okay. And councilmember vela is voting virtually. Mayor pro tem vela is voting virtually. And that's all that needs to be said about that. Okay. Very good. Now, councilmember Ellis, you are recognized for a proposed motion with regard to item number 29, and that is direction to staff. [2:36:26 PM] >> I'll I'll read the motion and then I'll have some comments if there's a second to it. On item number 29, I move approval with the following direction included. The city manager is directed to coordinate with the Texas department of transportation, the lost creek limited district, Travis county, the city of Westlake and eanes independent school district to explore transportation safety improvements along highway 360 from lost creek boulevard to Scottish woods trail and west bank drive, with a focus on safe routes to school improvements, including signal timing. Addressing the illegal u-turns on lost creek boulevard and Scottish woods trail, crosswalk safety improvements and building a sidewalk along west bank drive to Westlake high school, which that last piece has been in conversation for a couple of months now with staff, and if there's a second, I will have closing comments. [2:37:11 PM] >> Well, second is made by councilmember harper-madison councilmember Ellis, unless anybody else wish to speak on that. I'll turn to councilmember Ellis for closing. Councilmember Ellis, you have the floor. [2:37:20 PM] >> I do. I really appreciate all the neighbors coming out for this. I know there's been some discussion about lost creek's participation, since there are homes that are not in the city limits that do backup to this property. My first and foremost concern is to make sure that the traffic safety issues are handled. I live in this area. I live in an apartment on 360, so I understand the issues with signal timing and things like that. I've been in my zip code for 15 years, so I'm no stranger to this part of southwest Austin, but I do think I do think the speakers have a point in that there is confusion around how and when these safety issues are addressed. I know that it is. It's not something you want to hear when you say, we'll talk about this at site plan, and then they feel like they have no control over what is actually going to happen in their neighborhood. But unfortunately, without having a site plan, it's hard to address the exact issues that are going to come up because there's not really a formed plan at this point in time. And so I, I want to acknowledge that frustration. I think that it's valid. I even worked really hard with city staff for them to let me require a traffic impact analysis or a neighborhood transportation plan to be conducted as part of this. But legally, I can't put it into the ordinance because it's not where that direction goes. But I did sit down with staff a couple of times, and especially this afternoon, to lock in this language and get their firm commitment that those conversations with all these entities will happen. This is a very difficult neighborhood entrance. It is on a highway. It is on txdot right of way. [2:38:50 PM] There is a strip that the city of Austin owns because it has land on both sides of this intersection. The limited district has the median. The county is maintaining the road. There are a lot of issues to be addressed here, and my main commitment is to make sure that people in southwest Austin are safe, regardless of whether they live in the city limits or not. I still think we need to have our our piece of making sure that housing is being built and smaller footprints are being built for people that want to have that type of housing in, in southwest Austin. [2:39:18 PM] >> Thank you, councilmember members. Councilmember Ellis has closed on her motion for direction to city staff. Without objection, councilmember Ellis's motion is adopted. Members and with councilmember with the mayor pro tem voting virtually. I want to point out one other thing. Before we adjourn the meeting. We're joined today. She didn't sign up to speak, but she's here because of item number 30. And that's miss Dolores Duffy. We are happy to have her join us. And. Yeah, yeah, I'm talking about you. Why don't you stand up and let us say thank you for all you mean to our community? Yeah. We're very honored that you gave us time today. And for those that don't know, the Dolores Duffy rec center at rosewood park is a major part of Austin, Texas, and you're a major part of Austin, Texas. [2:40:21 PM] And I just wanted to make sure we all recognized you. So thank you for being here with us. With that being said, there being no further business to come before the Austin city council at this regular meeting of the city council on Thursday, October 8th. Without objection, the Austin city council is adjourned at 2:40 P.M. Thank you everybody.