CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS AUSTIN MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Regular Meeting January 06, 1955 10:00 Α.Μ. Council Chamber, City Hall ! The meeting was called to order with Mayor McAden presiding. Roll Call: Present: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Absent: None Present also: W. E. Seaholm, City Manager; W. T. Williams, Jr., City Attorney; C. G. Levander, Director of Public Works. Invocation was delivered by FATHER DIEZ, Our Lady of Guadalupe Church. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Councilman Long moved that the Minutes of December 30th be approved. The motion, seconded by Councilman Pearson, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None MR. CARL HARDIN, JR., gave a brief resume of the polio situation in Austin and of the benefits obtained through the money received from the March of Dimes. The goal for Travis County is $60,000, and it has been one of the few counties in the United States that has made its quotas in the past. He invited the Council to be present at the opening of the Drive at 9:30, January 7th, at 7th and Congress. MRS. HATCH was present also. The Council recognized and welcomed MR. DARWIN ECKLUND and MR. JOHN STIMMEL, Fargo, North Dakota. FORMER MAYOR TOM MILLER, Chairman of the committee appointed by the Council to work on facilitating the financing of the bonds to build the Auditorium, reported on the recommendation of this Committee. MR. WILLARD HOUSER explained the recommendation in detail, stating the revenues from parking meters could be pledged to the payment of the Auditorium Revenue Bonds and a simple validating Act passed by the Legislature. The City CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Council would first have to pass a bond ordinance, stating the revenues derived from parking meters would be pledged to the payment of the bonds and interest. The Committee was of the opinion that the bonds (although voted not to exceed 5% interest) could be sold for 34% interest with the pledge of the parking meter revenue--possibly less. The Committee had discussed this means of financing with bond experts, investment firms, and bond attorneys. Councilman Long inquired if all of the parking meter revenue would be tied up. Mr. Houser stated this would be handled as the Water and Light fund which is pledged for its revenue bonds. Councilman Thompson asked if the interest and sinking fund for the Auditorium had a surplus could the bonds be called prior to their maturity. This was answered that it depended on how the Council sold the bonds-- that most municipal bonds had that provision set out. The City Attorney explained that after all payments were made, any excess in the fund could be diverted to other uses. Former Mayor Miller recalled the long requests for an Auditorium and explained why it could not have been built earlier; he stated the people wanted one very badly, and he outlined the necessity and the Benefits He stated this committee was unanimous in making this recommendation. Mr. Houser stated that when bids were taken on these bonds, if the interest was not right, the Pension Board would have the right to purchase some of them, as the Employees Retirement System has the right to purchase government obligations or obligations of the City. Councilman White asked if optional short term bonds would cost more than the 30 year bonds. Mr. Houser explained that there was a little premium on short term option bonds. Councilman Long stated that when the Council was discussing submitting this proposition to the people that she was on record here as well as in the newspaper as having made the statement that she did not feel that the revenues from the Coliseum and those from the parking meters would supply sufficient revenue to retire the bond; and for that reason she did not join the Council members in promoting this bond issue; that despite that fact, the people of Austin knew what she was saying, because the Chamber of Commerce was here and made that proposition and they said it would take $75,000 a year extra to provide the income the way they had it figured out. She stated she had made that statement more than once; and despite thatfact, the people of Austin went ahead and OK'D that four to one, and she did not think they were altogether unaware of the fact that revenues would not retire the bonds; that the Chamber of Commerce was aware of that fact. Having twice voted for the Auditorium, once through tax bonds and once through revenue bonds, the people have indicated that is what they want. Mr. Houser asked Councilman Long if she believed that since the Committee had found a way that the Auditorium could be financed by revenue bonds that the plan was feasible and that the citizens still wanted the Auditorium and if she would be for it? She stated that she felt the people were aware that the revenues would not retire the bonds--some were not. There was a divided opinion in the Council, and certainly she did not join the four members of the Council, or three--that went out and supported it; she did not appear at any of the meetings, and it was clearly indicated that she was not supporting it and gave her reasons why. She stated she did vote to submit it to the people; but in spite of one member informing them that it would cost them more, they went ahead and voted it. Councilman White stated that Mrs. Long said "four members of the Council", but that he did not take any active part in that bond issue. The majority of the Council did (support it) and he was a part of the Council and when the majority rules, it is the Council. He stated the people were told there would not be any tax money; that it would be purely CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS a revenue bond. Many people had talked to him, and he wanted an Auditorium just as bad as any man in the room, but he thought they should go at it in the right way and be fair to the people and that the Council should ask the people about taking the money out of the general fund--this parking meter money--and if they OK it, it would be fine; that there are a lot of people under the impression that there would be no tax money used. Mr. Houser explained that the parking meter revenue was definitely not a tax money. Councilman White stated it went into the General Fund and if it were taken out it had to be replaced somewhere. Mr. Houser compared this again to the Water and Utility Fund. Councilman Pearson stated they were talking about using this money only if and when the Auditorium did not take in enough revenue to amortize the obligation; and that it may be that the Auditorium will do better than expected and it may not be necessary to touch any of this parking meter money. He thought the chances today were 10-1 better to receive revenues from the display areas where there is a multi-purpose auditorium than from an Auditorium used for auditorium purposes only. As far as he was concerned in the discussions, they were discussing all the time that it would take some additional money to amortize the obligation; and in the discussions, parking meters at all times--parking meters on the lot and on the lot at 4th and Guadalupe. He believed that the people would certainly endorse the Committee's recommen-.. dation. He believed also had the pledging of the parking meter revenue been included in the proposition that the people would have voted just as they did. MR. HOUSER stated the budget was over 10 million dollars; and there had never been over $150,000 in the parking meter revenues to put in the general revenue fund. More parking meters will be installed; additional tax money will be coming in from new buildings. This plan would not be taking tax money out of the general fund, but would be using a revenue which the taxpayers do not pay, as this revenue came from everyone--in the city--out of the City--Canada, Mexico, etc. It is a revenue that everyone pays, and everyone would have a part in the Auditorium; and if you have a tax bond issue, only the people who own real and personal property will pay for the Auditorium. Councilman Pearson did not believe that over $30,000 a year would need to be used, as he believed the Ausitorium would amortize the balance. Former Mayor Miller stated the Committee respectfully recommended this plan, and suggested that it come back and meet with the Council and answer all phases for the members. He thought if Brownwood, Beaumont, Corpus and others could have an Auditorium, certainly Austin could, and that Austin had arrived at the time where an auditorium was a vital necessity. He asked that the interest rates be safeguarded--that he along with some bond men believed the interest could be kept at 3%. He believed the Pension Fund could buy these, and it would benefit the pension fund. He suggested another meeting to go into this Auditorium matter further. Councilman White asked what were the objections of letting the people vote on this. Mr. Houser stated the time element was important; that by the time an election was called the Legislature would be far enough along where a validating enabling act could not be introduced; and if it were not put through now, it would take an additional two years. The Mayor announced that a meeting would be called for 10:00 Α.Μ., January 7th, to discuss the matter further with the Committee. MR. AMOS HARRELL complimented the Committee on working out a plan of financing those bonds and coming up with a unanimous report; that he voted against an auditorium because he felt it would not pay for itself, but he CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 4 believed if this were put up before the people as the Committee suggested, that they would vote for it. Councilman Long suggested that since 30% of the parking meter tickets were collected, that if 100% were collected, more money would be raised. The City Manager submitted the following tabulation of bids: "BIDS ON WHITE LIME FILTER PLANTS TWELVE MONTHS CONTRACT - FEB. 1, 1955 - JAN.31, 1956 Incl. "Sealed bids opened 10:00 Α.Μ. December 15, 1954 Tabulated by O.G. Brush, Purchasing Agent "Invitations to bid sent to: AUSTIN WHITE LIME COMPANY ROUND ROCK WHITE LIME COMPANY TEXAS WHITE LIME COMPANY, CLEBURNE, TEXAS U. S. GYPSUM CO., NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS "ONLY TWO BIDS WERE RECEIVED. EST.QUANTITY 3500 tons AUSTIN WHITE LIME CO. Unit Total $14.66 $51,310.00 ton U.S. ROUND ROCK WHITE LIME CO. GYPSUM CO. Unit Total $14.66 $51,310.00 ton Letter advis- ing unable to bid at this time Less cash disc. NET if pd. by 10th 30 days prox. NET 10th prox. "Bids received Dec. 1953 for 1954 contract (All identical) Unit Total Using todays Est.Quan. $14.41 $50,435.00 Less .254 ton if paid by 10th prox. 875.00 $49,560.00 Bids received Dec.1952 for 1953 contract (All identical) Unit Total Using todays Est.quan. $13.41 $46,935.00 875.00 $46,060.00 W.E.Seaholm, City Manager" After study and discussion, Councilman Thompson moved that the contract be awarded to ROUND ROCK WHITE LIME COMPANY for one year. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None 5 5 CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS The City Manager submitted the following: "Bids were opened December 29, 1954, at 2:00 P.M. for a 69 KV Substation structure for Hancock Substation. These bids are tabulated as follows: Southern States Equipment Corp. $ 23,215.98 6-8 Weeks Line Material Company 24,281.00 8 Weeks Federal-Pacific Electric Company 25,080.00 75 days Priester Supply Company General Electric Company 26,976.80 20-40 days 27,900.00 18 Weeks Delta Star Division of H.K. Porter Company, Inc. 28,249.00 18 Weeks Westinghouse Electric Corporation Electrical Engineers Equipment Co. 28,780.00 18 Weeks 30,550.00 16 Weeks USCO Power Equipment Company 30,703.90 6-8 Weeks "All of the above quotations were F.O.B. point of Shipment freight allowed except the bid of Priester Supply Company which was F.O.B. Austin. All prices were firm. "I recommend that we accept the low bid of Southern States Equipment Corportation of $23,215.98. "(Sgd) D.C. Kinney Superintendent Electric Division Approved W.E. Seaholm City Manager" Councilman White offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, bids were received by the City of Austin on December 29, 1954, for the purchase of equipment for a 69 KV Substation structure for Hancock Substation; and, WHEREAS, the bid of Southern States Equipment Corporation in the sum of $23,215.98 was the lowest and best bid therefor, and the acceptance of such bid has been recommended by the Superintendent of the Electric Division of the City of Austin, and by the City Manager; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the bid of Southern States Equipment Corporation in the sum of $23,215.98 be and the same is hereby accepted, and W. E. Seaholm, City Manager of the City of Austin is hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf of the City of Austin with Southern States Equipment Corporation. vote: The motion, seconded by Councilman Pearson, carried by the following Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 6 Councilman White introduced the following ordinance and moved that it be published in accordance with Article 1, Section 6, of the Charter of the City of Austin: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSIONS OF CERTAIN BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN ADDITIONAL TERRITORY CONSISTING OF 37.46 ACRES OF LAND, SAME BEING OUT OF AND A PART OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND OUT OF THE SANTIAGO DEL VALLE GRANT IN TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, WHICH SAID ADDITIONAL TERRITORY LIES ADJACENT TO AND ADJOINS THE PRESENT BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, IN PARTICULARS STATED IN THE ORDINANCE. The motion, seconded by Councilman Long, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor suggested that the Plan Commission check on the subdivision with reference to the South Austin Loop. Councilman Pearson brought up a question that was to arise when the Leiper Subdivision was to be annexed by the City on January 20th, and suggested that something be worked out where Mr. Leiper will repay the property owners for their water line, and put that in his refund contract. Mayor McAden brought up the following ordinance for its third reading: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN ADDITIONAL TERRITORY CONSISTING OF 38.8 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, SAME BEING OUT OF AND A PART OF THE HENRY P. HILL LEAGUE IN TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, WHICH SAID ADDITIONAL TERRITORY LIES ADJACENT TO AND ADJOINS THE PRESENT BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, IN THE PARTICULARS STATED IN THE ORDINANCE. The ordinance was read the third time and Councilman White moved that the ordinance be finally passed. The motion, seconded by Councilman Pearson, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor announced that the ordinance had been finally passed. CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS Councilman White offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: (RESOLUTION) WHEREAS, bids were received by the City of Austin on January 4, 1955, for the paving of Sylvan Drive from the east property line of Summit Street to the south property line of Woodland Hills, Section 3; and WHEREAS, the bid of Giesen & Latson Construction Company in the sum of $6,999.73 was the lowest and best bid therefor, and the acceptance of such bid has been recommended by the Director of Public Works of the City of Austin, and by theCity Manager; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: That the bid of Giesen & Latson Construction Company in the sum of $6,999.73 be and the same is hereby accepted, and W. E. Seaholm, City Manager of the City of Austin is hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract on behalf of the City of Austin with Giesen & Latson Construction Company. vote: The motion, seconded by Councilman Pearson, carried by the following Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The proposal of HAROLD F. WISE & ASSOCIATES, as Planning Consultant, was before the Council. Councilman Thompson moved that the recommendation of the Plan Commission be accepted and HAROLD F. WISE & ASSOCIATES be employed as Planning Consultant. After discussion, the Council thought it would be well to have an interview with Mr. Wise, and asked the City Manager to arrange a time with him. Councilman Thompson withdrew his motion at this time. Mayor McAden brought up the following ordinance for its second reading: AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AND MAKING APPLICABLE TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN THE PROVISIONS OF STATE LAW RELATING TO WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE FOR CITIES, TOWNS, AND VILLAGES; PROVIDING THAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN SHALL BE SELF-INSURING; PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION THEREOF; ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF AUSTIN WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACCOUNT; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The ordinance was read the second time and Councilman Long moved that the ordinance be passed to its third reading. The motion seconded by Councilman Thompson, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None MR. BARNEY TRAYNOR and MR. BOB MEEK appeared in the interest of obtaining space at the airport for rent-a-car services, and stated they would send the Council a statement of their veiws so that it would have it for consideration the following week. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Discussion of the wage and salary ordinance, and civil service ordinance was held. Councilman Long moved that a 40-hour week be established for all city employees except the firemen which would be an average of 63-hours per week, and the policemen who would have a 48-hour week; and that it was the intent of the Council that they retain the same take home pay, except the policemen. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson*, White, Mayor McAden Noes: Councilman Thompson** *Councilman Pearson made the following statement regarding his vote: "I am going to vote for this because I think it will conform to what is being practiced by all other large governmental bodies and also a lot of the larger commercial firms, and I think it is only fair to all city employees to make them all on an equal basis. I think they will do a better job, and there is no reason why they should not work harder now." **Councilman Thompson made the following statement regarding his vote: "Because I cannot succumb to the illusion that they are all going to break their necks working hard because they are getting a few less hours a week; and because I cannot go along following a precedent set by a super-liberal national administration to practically wreck this country with its socialistic philosophy; and because of the fact that I cannot, with good sincerity, load $280,000 more on to the now burdened shoulders of the Austin tax payers, I am going to vote 'no'." Councilman White wanted to be assured this applied to the Sanitation and all employees, and it was stated it did. In further discussion of the wage ordinance, Councilman Pearson inquired if in no case would this adjustment make the hourly scale way above the average being paid by the average business and commercial firms in this community; that in accordance with previous records, we would still be 9% below, but he wanted to reconfirm that in making these adjustments it would be a move to bring it up on a better position. The City Manager stated we were 19% low, and this raised the base 10%, and the present employees would take home the same amount. Mayor McAden introduced the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THAT CERTAIN ORDINANCE ENTITLED: "AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AND ESTABLISHING A WAGE AND SALARY PLAN AND SCHEDULE FOR OFFICES AND EMPLOYMENTS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN; DEFINING THE SCOPE OF THE WAGE AND SALARY PLAN; CREATING THE WAGE AND SALARY COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR THE CONTROL OF WAGE AND SALARY ADMINISTRATION; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE, AND DECLARING AN CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS EMERGENCY," WHICH ORDINANCE WAS PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL JULY 12, 1951, AND IS RECORDED IN BOOK "Q", PAGES 362-370 OF THE ORDINANCE RECORDS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS, AS THE SAME HAS BEEN FROM TIME TO TIME AMENDED, IN SUBSECTION (a) (1) OF SECTION 5 THEREOF, AND IN SUBSECTION (a) (3) (a) OF SECTION 5 THEREOF, RELATING TO THE MASTER WAGE AND SALARY SCHEDULE; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The ordinance was read the first time and Councilman White moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its second reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman Long, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: Councilman Thompson The ordinance was read the second time and Councilman White moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its third reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman Long, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: Councilman Thompson The ordinance was read the third time and Councilman White moved that the ordinance be finally passed. The motion, seconded by Councilman Long, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: Councilman Thompson The Mayor announced that the ordinance had been finally passed. Mayor McAden introduced the following ordinance: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THAT CERTAIN ORDINANCE ENTITLED: "AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING BASE SALARIES AND LONGEVITY PAY FOR CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY," WHICH ORDINANCE WAS PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 9, 1953, AND IS RECORDED IN BOOK "S", AT PAGES 418-420, OF THE ORDINANCE RECORDS OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN, IN SECTION 1 THEREOF, RELATING TO TRAINING PAY FOR CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES OF THE POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS, AND IN PARAGRAPH A OF SECTION 2 THEREOF, RELATING TO BASE MONTHLY SALARIES FOR CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The ordinance was read the first time and Councilman Pearson moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its second reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 10 10 Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The ordinance was read the second time and Councilman Pearson moved that the rule be suspended and the ordinance passed to its third reading. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The ordinance was read the third time and Councilman Pearson moved that the ordinance be finally passed. The motion, seconded by Councilman White, carried by the following vote: 3. Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor announced that the ordinance had been finally passed. Councilman Thompson made the following statement regarding his vote: "I vote 'aye'for the reason I consider the Austin Police Department to be superior in many respects as related to other police departments in Texas; as demonstrated by their performance, they are an excellent department manned by conscientious officers; and because they deserve a raise in pay because of their performance and because of the nature of the personnel in that Department, I approve a raise in their wages." The City Manager presented his new schedule for the working hours at the City Hall as from 7:45 A.M. to 4:45 P.M. He believed more people would be convenienced by having the City Hall open earlier than by having it open after Five. He stated a study had been made and that more people came by earlier. Councilman Long reported a traffic matter, in that the people working at Bergstrom Field were running late to their work, as their bus was held up by the traffic on Montopolis Bridge. She stated there had been a mannally operated light there for a while, but since it is not being operated in that way now, the traffic is stacking up. She asked that the Traffic Engineer be asked to study that and see if it can be straightened out. The City Manager stated it might be well to go back to the manually operated light. Councilman Long inquired about the rush in requiring people living on the Manor Road to be out by April 1st; that it seemed that was short notice particularly for the business men. The City Manager stated some of the houses would have to be moved, as the contract for the airport expansion would be let around that time. The City Manager did not think the businessmen would have to be bothered now. In this connection, Councilman Long stated Mr. John H. Arldt, 2211 Nolen and eight families northwest of Manor Road, wanted to rebuild their homes; and she suggested that the appraisors let them know what to expect as soon as possible. Mr. Arldt rents a variety store and it will be hard to reestablish his business, and this should be considered in determining the worth of his business. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 11 Councilman Long asked about the architectural and engineering services in the Zilker School plan, and asked if an outside engineer could not be engaged to arrange the playgrounds area. The City Manager stated it would be worked out and be in by spring. The Architects were working on the Pan American Center, and would have a meeting with the Recreation Board and go over the preliminaries with the school authorities next week. Councilman Pearson inquired about the Rosewood swimming pool. It was stated bids would be taken the following Tuesday. The City Manager reported that bids would be received also on the lith of January for the widening of Brazos between 7th and 8th. Councilman Thompson asked that a study be made by the Traffic Department on the idea of prohibiting parking along the wall on Brazos between 8th and 9th Streets. The City Manager gave a report on the dedication of the extension of North Loop westward from Burnet Road west, with the exception of a little more to tie into Hancock, and stated this would make North Loop and Hancock Drive a good north-east street. Councilman Pearson inquired about the extension of Oltorf Street going west. The Director of Public Works stated the surveying was completed, and they were about ready to go on excavating, and that everything was moving along. The City Manager reported there was $85,000 in the Street and Bridge Bond Fund, left from purchase of right-of-way, although there were some cases pending in Court, but he believed there would be about $85,000 that could be used for paving. Councilman Pearson suggested appropriating about $100,000 for paving. Councilman Thompson stated he would favor this if the Council would vote to reduce the City's participation. Councilman Thompson moved that the City Manager be instructed to have the City Attorney draw an ordinance reducing the city's participation in paving down to 10% so that the city could proceed with the program if the City Manager can find $100,000 anywhere. The motion was seconded by Councilman Pearson. After discussion, the City Manager stated he would have a report to submit on this; that there may be some boulevards in which our participation may be more than 10%. Councilman Long asked that an alternative be given as she was for paving but not for 10% participation. Councilman Pearson stated the subdivision ordinance, a good one and under which there would be many fine subdivisions, put the responsibility of the paving on the owner of the subdivision. (No roll call taken) The City Manager stated he had a petition wherethey were going 100%; with eight volunteers at 100% and the 9th to be assessed. The City Manager explained the program, stating the Council would select the streets to be paved in the various sections. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Pursuant to published notice thereof the following zoning applications were publicly heard: TOM GRAHAM 2260-70 & 2300-22 South Lamar Blvd. From "C" Commercial 2nd Height and Area Το "C-1" Commercial 2nd Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission The Mayor asked those who wished to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to vote "aye"; those opposed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor announced that the change had been granted to "C-1" Commercial 2nd Height and Area and the City Attorney was instructed to draw the necessary ordinance to cover. HUBERT E. ROSSY 506-08 West 15th Street & From "B" Residence 2nd 1501-03 Nueces To Height & Area "0" Office 2nd Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission The Mayor asked those who wished to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to vote "aye"; those opposed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor announced that the change had been granted to "0" Office 2nd Height and Area and the City Attorney was instructed to draw the necessary ordinance to cover. W. C. SCHULLE 5204-08 Eilers Avenue 707-11 Bruning Avenue From "A" Residence 1st Height and Area To "LR" Local Retail lst Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission The Mayor asked those who wished to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to vote "aye"; those opposed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following vote: CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 133 13 Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor announced that the change had been granted to "LR" Local Retail 1st Height and Area and the City Attorney was instructed to draw the necessary ordinance to cover. CHARLES M. GOODNIGHT, 2515 So. Ist St. 0. D. BRADSHERE & J. W. BIRD, By Jesse Bartlett 2601 So. 1st St. From "A" Residence lst Height and Area To "GR" General Retail 1st Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission The Mayor asked those who wished to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to vote "aye"; those opposed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor announced that the change had been granted to "GR" General Retail lst Height and Area and the City Attorney was instructed to draw the necessary ordinance to cover. JAMES R. ALLEN 3400-02 Lamar and 1000 West 34th St. From "C" Commercial 5th Height and Area To "C-2" Commercial 5th Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission Mr. Allen appeared in his own behalf for this change. Opposition was expressed by Mr. Alfred Spanton, 1002 West 34th Street, as it would give one person in the neighborhood a privilege that the others would not have. The Mayor asked those who wished to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to vote "aye"; those opposed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: Councilman Thompson The Mayor announced that the change had been granted to "C-2" Commercial 5th Height and Area and the City Attorney was instructed to draw the necessary ordinance to cover. : CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 14. PLANNING COMMISSION Nw 100' of Lots 1-5, Gullett Gardens (4601-05 Bolm Rd) From "A" Residence lst Height and Area & "D" Industrial 3rd Height and Area To "C" Commercial 6th Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission The Mayor asked those who wished to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to vote: "aye"; those oppossed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor announced that the change had been granted to "C" Commercial 6th Height and Area and the City Attorney was instructed to draw the necessary ordinance to cover. PHILLIP BASHARA & C. C. GULLETT 901-03 Springdale Rd. 4600-02 Lyons Rd. 900-08 Chote Avenue 4601-05 Bolm Rd. To From "A" Residence list Height and Area & "D" Industrial 3rd Height and Area "C" Commercial 6th Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission The Mayor asked those who wished to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to vote "aye"; those opposed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None The Mayor announced that the change had been granted to "C" Commercial 6th Height and Area and the City Attorney was instructed to draw the necessary ordinance to cover. T. T. TALLEY 501 Arlington Street From "A" Residence 1st Height and Area To "LR" Local Retail 2nd Height and Area NOT RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission Opposition to the Mr. Trueman E. O'Quinn represented the applicants. change was expressed by Mr. Lee Booth, 503 Arlington; Mr. Robert E. Lee, 2003 CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 15 15 Lake Austin; Mr. Harry O'Dell, representing himself and Mr. Merton R. Rundell; and others by communications. The Mayor asked those who wished to uphold the recommendation of the Plan Commission and deny the change to vote "aye"; those opposed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following vote: Ayes: Councilman Pearson Noes: Councilmen Long, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Councilman Pearson voting against the change as he believed the lot too small to put a business there and encroach on the residents in that neighborhood The Mayor announced that the change had been granted to "LR" 2nd Height and Area and the City Attorney was instructed to draw the necessary ordinance to cover. MRS. B. E. GIESCKE, ALAMETA & ELOSIE YETT, By James A. Bennett 3301-07 Guadalupe 505-07 West 34th St. 504-06 West 33rd St. From "A" Residence lst Height and Area To "BB" Residence ist Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission Mr. Julius Franki; Mr. Harris, architect; and Mr. W. Sale Lewis represented the applicants; Mr. Grady Chandler, Mr. Joe Dacy, Dean T. H. Shelby, C. H. Walling, Dr. F. L. Charlton, Mr. O. N. Bruck, and Mrs. Beatrice Blewett spoke in opposition. Mr. Chandler filed a protest signed by more than 20% of the property owners within 200', and other papers. The Mayor asked those who favored upholding the recommendation of the Planning Commission to vote "aye"; those opposed to vote "no". Roll call showed the following vote: Ayes: Councilman White Noes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, Mayor McAden Councilman Long made the following statement regarding her vote: "I vote against the change simply because I think the people in Aldrich place 100% are against this, and I think the wishes of the people should be considered." Councilman Thompson made the following statement regarding his vote: "I votes against the decision of the Plan Commission because it looks like the property values, by the zoning of 'BB' and the permission of this big apartment house, is going to depress the property values in this addition of fine homes populated by fine people; and left under 'A', these property owners who are seeking to put the land to the highest and best use and get the largest amount of revenue which is a laudible purpose, can attain partially their ambitions by the use of duplex apartments and both parties to the controversy can be at least partially satisfied by leaving it 'A' and the use of duplex apartments rather than multiple-unit apartments." Councilman Pearson stated he voted against the change with the idea in mind that four apartments were permitted under this 'A' zone. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 16 16 The Mayor made the following statement regarding his vote: "There is placed upon this Council a tremendous responsibility in this case. This lady is not be condemned for wanting to make as much money out of her premises which she has owned for a number of years--she and her sisters. They are the daughters of a former Mayor of this city. We may be making a mistake, but I am going to vote against the Plan Commission in this recommendation. There are three votes against it before it comes to me, and I will go along with the majority in this instance." The Mayor then announced that the change had been DENIED. CRUZ GALINDO, By Josephine Nieto 1114-18 East 8th & 800-10 Lydia Street From "C" Commercial lst Height and Area To "C-1" Commercial 1st Height and Area RECOMMENDED by the Planning Commission Strong opposition was expressed by JESSE GUAJARDO, 111l East 8th Street, as although the neighborhood was in commercial zone, it was a neighborhood of homes, schools and churches; MRS. ROCHA, 803 Lydia, and others through letters, and petitions. The Council deferred action until the following week in order that some of the members might make a personal inspection of the area. FRANK C. BARRON 3701-3703 Manorwood 3130-3138 Manor Road 3700-02 Manorwood Road To "GR" General Retail From "B" Residence Ist Height and Area 3112-3118 Manor Road 6th Height and Area NOT Recommended by the Planning Commission Councilman Long moved that the application be referred back to the Plan Commission for change to "0", as there seemed to be a misunderstanding in the use classification applied for. The motion, seconded by Councilman Thompson, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Long, Pearson, Thompson, White, Mayor McAden Noes: None Mr. Barron requested consideration for the "0" zone. M. H. CROCKETT & HUMBLE OIL & REFINING COMPANY, By Trueman O'Quinn 5300-5538 Airport Blvd. 5301-5539 Middle Fiskville Road and 714-22Bruning Ave. From 1st Height and Area To 2nd Height and Area RECOMMENDED 5th Height and Area CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS 17 17 At the request of Mr. Trueman O'Quinn, the Council postponed action on their request for change of height and area until the Plan Commission rearranged some streets and worked it out with the property owners. The Mayor suggested that the Plan Commission notify the people on this. Councilman Long inquired about the population figure of 180,000. The City Manager stated the compilation would be completed very soon. Councilman Long stated the Bus Company was to furnish a report every six months, and she was anxious to know if they had done any spending to take care of this 180,000. She had not received a report. The Finance Director stated they had filed a report in July. The Mayor announced reappointment of MR. HUBERT JONES and MRS. LOUISE HAYNIE to the Austin Housing Authority for a two year period ending December 23, 1956. The Council received notice from the City Manager that the following applications for change of zoning had been referred to the Plan Commission: DR. T. R. McNEELY 2905-07 Duval. 501 Bellvue Place To From "A" Residence 1st Height and Area "0" Office 1st Height and Area JACK ANDREWARTHA 2101-2117 Inter- regional Highway From "A" Residence 1st Height and Area To "LR" Local Retail 6th Height and Area The Council received notice from the City Manager that the following application for change of height and area was set for public hearing at 11:00 A.M. January 27th: H. J. WATSON & 1000-1002 Lambie CAL MARSHALL By Bob Bright 51-55 San Marcos 1004-08 & 1100-1102 From To 1st Height and Area 2nd Height and Area as recommended Lambie Or 6th Height and Area as applied for (Change to "0" granted 12-16-54--ordinance pending height and area) There being no further business the Council adjourned at 4:05 P. M. subject to the call of the Mayor. ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED Mayor