=CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS: MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Regular Meeting June 23, 1977 7:00 Ρ.Μ. Council Chambers 301 West Second Street The meeting was called to order with Mayor McClellan presiding. Roll Call: Present: Mayor McClellan, Mayor Pro Tem Snell, Councilmembers Cooke, Goodman, Himmelblau, Mullen, Trevino Absent: None Church. The Invocation was delivered by Father Joe Znotas, St. Julia Catholic FOUNDATION IN EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION DAY Mayor McClellan read a proclamation designating June 25, 1977, as F.E.A. Day in recognition of the University of Texas unique and practical program for the preparation of school administrators known as Foundation in Educational Administration (F.E.A.) and urged all citizens to join in the recognition of the F.E.A. program during the celebration of its twenty-fifth anniversary. KEN MCINTYRE thanked the Council for the recognition. Mr. John Veselka, President, Foundation in Educational Administration Association, also thanked the Mayor and members of the City Council for recognizing the organization and the program. DR. MINUTES APPROVED Councilmember Himmelblau moved that the Council approve the Minutes for the Council meeting of June 16, 1977. The motion, seconded by Councilmember Trevino, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Mayor McClellan, Mayor Pro Tem Snell, Councilmembers Cooke, Goodman, Himmelblau, Mullen, Trevino Noes: None CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS. June 23, 1977 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Mayor McClellan said she had announced last week that several appointments to boards and commissions would be made tonight, but the Council has been out of town for two days and there are a number of applicants who are trying to see Council members prior to appointments. As a result, no appointments will be made tonight. She said they would defer until next week all those that were going to be made tonight. These include the Plumbing Board of Appeals, Status of Women, and Urban Renewal Board. She had announced last week that there was a vacancy on the Ethics Commission, but that is to be appointed by the CPA's, not the Council. PUBLIC HEARING SET Councilmember Trevino moved that the Council adopt a resolution to set a public hearing for July 14, 11:15 A.M. to consider amending Sections 45-31 and 45-32(f) of the Austin City Code, providing for special exception to be granted by the Beard of Adjustment in connection with on-premise church accessory signs located on sites zoned "B" Residence or more restrictive use districts; providing for the discontinuance of non-conforming uses not conducted within a building in "B" Residence and more restrictive use districts. The motion, seconded by Councilmember Goodman, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Mayor Pro Tem Snell, Councilmembers Cooke, Goodman, Himmelblau, Mullen, Trevino, Mayor McClellan Noes: None SENIOR INFORMATION & REFERRAL PROGRAM The Council had before it a resolution to authorize application for $47,143 to the Capital Area Planning Council to renew the Senior Information and Referral Program ($33,000 Federal; $14,143 In-kind). Motion Councilmember Himmelblau moved that the Council approve this resolution. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Trevino. Amendment Councilmember Trevino proposed a friendly amendment to apply for $43,000, on recommendation of the Senior Information and Referral Advisory Committee. Councilmember Himmelblau accepted the friendly amendment. Roll call showed the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Cooke, Goodman, Himmelblau, Mullen, Trevino, Mayor McClellan, Mayor Pro Tem Snell Noes: None CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977 ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION REPORT MR. BRUCE TODD, Chairman of the Electric Utility Commission, presented a report to the Council which referred to his letter and list of items the Commission has developed for review and possible action that they had forwarded to Council members. He asked for comments from the members of the Council concerning their 14 policy and procedure items, which are as follows: 1. Review and input on policies and goals for rate study. 2. Review of the Electric Capital Improvements Program and determination of Commission involvement. 3. Consideration of the current interim credit on electric billings (by July 1, 1977). 4. Review and determination of Commission action on Utility Service Regulations. 5. Consideration of the fuel adjustment and the pros and cons of monthly consideration of changes. 6. 7. Review and comment on proposed Electric Tariffs. Review of the new proposed customer bill format in conjunction with the Touche Ross study. 8. Possibility of public hearings relating to new rates. 9. Review of annual budget. 10. Consideration of field trips by the Commission. 11. Review of Electric Utility involvement in City-wide accounting changes. 12. Public education program. 13. Comparison of Electric Utility budget and operations to private and public utilities. 14. Consideration of public hearings relating to utility customer complaints. Mayor McClellan commented she thought they had done a good job getting out their concerns and interests, and felt there were no problems. She asked him if the Electric Utility Commission had a session an Item 1. on the list. Mr. Todd answered that they had a meeting last Monday night with a member of Touche Ross who laid out some of the general guidelines they were going by. He said that the goals which had been set out in a recent public meeting were being looked at and would be presented to the Council sometime soon... He said the goals were broad and would not be open to too much debate. Mayor McClellan said Touche Ross had indicated a July 15, 1977, deadline for suggested goals to be presented and Mr. Todd indicated there would be no problem with this deadline. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977 Councilmember Goodman said he would encourage the Electric Utility Commission to pursue Item 13 on their list. He felt this could be an ongoing project. Mr. Todd replied that this is one of their foremost goals. Councilmember Goodman also thought public hearings on rates would be a good thing, which is Item 14 on the list. Mr. Todd answered when Touche Ross comes back with their proposed set of rates, there will be a public hearing in front of the Commission. Councilmember Cooke said he thought Item 3 would not be valid by July 1, 1977. Mr. Todd said there had been a lot of discussion on this and if the rates stayed as they are, it would be an ongoing thing, but if the rates are designed properly, there will be no credit necessary and no need to study it. Councilmember Trevino moved that the Council accept the letter and report andproceed on the suggested items. The motion, seconded by Councilmember Cooke, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Goodman, Himmelblau, Mullen, Trevino, Mayor McClellan, Mayor Pro Tem Snell, Councilmember Cooke Noes: None PROPOSED LO-VACA SETTLEMENT The Council had before it for consideration a resolution of the City Council of the City of Austin, Texas, indicated its intent to enter into a certain settlement agreement with its natural gas supplier subject to certain conditions. The Mayor pointed out the Council had been spending a great deal of time, thought and consideration on this issue, and for the past four years the City of Austin had been pursuing every possible remedy both through the courts and at the Railroad Commission to insure an adequate supply of natural gas at the lowest possible prices. She asked Mr. Don Butler, utility legal counsel for Austin, to make public his recommendations to the Council on what action should be taken. MR. DON BUTLER said he appreciated the time the Council has spent on this problem. The proposition is, do we settle the case or do we accept what the Railroad Commission might do. We have a lawsuit pending, we have been to the court house on two other occasions, once to the Supreme Court of Texas and now with the decision in the LCRA case it appears that even thoughtthe Railroad Commission has told us to go to the court house, the people in the court house are telling us to go back to the Railroad Commission. So the question is, what do we do at this stage. Do we resolve this in some way or do we leave it to the Railroad Commission. And the problem at the Railroad Commission is, what can be done at this late date. After four years there is not going to be any reversal of the price of natural gas. I think that has to be accepted, Mr. Butler said. I think the best we can do is to take whatever steps to insure an adequate supply of gas, obtained as much as possible from Coastal States and it's subsidiary, Lovaca, and perhaps establish a company that would be independent of the influences that have brought us to this unhappy condition. We have worked, he continued, for probably five years on a settlement agreement of some kind because even before the issue came to the Railroad Commission, there was concern, and there was an effort to try to solve this problem, but it has only been in the last year to year and a half that any settlement has taken a final form. Most everyone is familiar with that settlement agreement which provides CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977. for spin-off of a new company. There will be a gas search program, a transfer of stock interests, through a settlement trustee who would liquidate the stock over a period of seven years, and pass on the benefits to the various settling parties. With the decision in the Coastal States-LCRA case, there has been very little opportunity to better that settlement agreement, simply because there is not the incentive there for Coastal States to sweeten the pot any further. There are, of course, he continued, some things that have raised questions concerning the internal arrangements and the mechanics of the settlement. We, along with the Mayor and members of the Council, have been working very closely with LCRA and its customers in developing a joint position. "What I am recommending, "he said," is that tonight this Council adopt a resolution which would approve the settlement agreement subject to certain conditions. These conditions are ones which I think will meet some of the objections which have been voiced in the past and will help make this a viable alternative to bankruptcy for the company which would not be in the best interest of anyone, or to continue to pursue litigation endlessly without any foreseeable results. So, with these conditions, I do recommend this settlement agreement as not being one where anyone can assure the public that the price of gas is going down, because that is not going to happen, but that given the circumstances after four years of rapidly escalating gas prices, this is the most feasible alternative we have at this time and it is the best course of action in the public interest. These conditions which follow, are the same as those adopted by LCRA today, so we will have a united front on this". "WHEREAS, the City of Austin has been engaged, since 1973, in extended litigation and administrative proceedings involving the rate and supply of natural gas to its citizens; and, WHEREAS, after having given proper consideration to all relevant matters, the City Council is of the opinion that it would be in the public interest to reach a settlement of such issues; Now, Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: The City Council of the City of Austin hereby indicates, subject to the conditions stated below, its intent to enter into a Definitive Settlement Agreement which implements without material change the substantive and results contemplated by that certain document dated January 24, 1977, entitled: SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT AND REORGANIZATION PLAN FOR LO-VACA GATHERING COMPANY, COASTAL STATES GAS PRODUCING COMPANY, COASTAL STATES GAS CORPORATION, OSCAR S. WYATT, JR. AND THE CUSTOMERS OF LO-VACA GATHERING COMPANY CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977 (the Summary), PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT this intent is specifically conditioned upon the implementation or occurrence of each and every of the following: (1) That the New Company be relieved of all future liability to deliver gas under all so-called buy/sell or banking agreements at pricesless than that charged other purchasers of gas from the Lo-Vaca system at the time of delivery; (2) That the write-off and release of certain Lo-Vaca receivables mentioned on Page 24 of the January 24, 1977, draft of the Summary include the following: (a) The amount of $4,491,914.80 claimed to be owed by Austin on account of fuel oil deductions made by Austin from gas fillings for the period from January 1, 1972, to the effective date of the Definitive Settlement Agreement; (b) The amount of approximately $39,000.00 claimed to be due from Austin because of a dispute pertaining to the modification of a regulator station; (c) The amount of $95,023.79 claimed to be due from Austin because of a gross receipts tax dispute; (d) The amount of $2,628,000.00 claimed to be due from Austin because of alleged excess deliveries of natural gas in the years 1970 and 1971; (e) The amount of approximately $10,000.00 claimed to be due from Austin for the adjustment of certain pipelines; (f) All interest, if any, claimed to be due from Austin on account of any of the foregoing amounts; (3) That the Attorney General of Texas specifically find and state in writing that in his opinion, the proposed settlement is in the best interest of the consumers of Texas and has his approval; (4) That the Lo-Vaca Interim Rate now in effect be maintained until the settlement has been finally consummated in all respects;* (5) That the initial rate for New Company for the first twelve months of operation net exceed ten cents (10c) per mcf plus the weighted average cost of purchased gas; (6) That all rights of Texas Utilities Services, Inc., under agreement dated September 21, 1970, with respect to gas developed by the Coastal Gas Search Program in thepPermian Basin area be terminated so that no tender of any of such gas to Texas Utilities will be required; CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977 (7) That the initial Board of Directors of New Company will include at least one member who resides in the City of Austin and is approved by the City Council of the City of Austin and no director shall be chosen who does not receive the affirmative approval of at least sixty percent (60%) of the aggregate beneficial interests in the Settlement Trust; (8) That those who will have the option to purchase lignite acquired by the subsidiary of New Company pursuant to the Settlement Agreement consist only of Central Power & Light Company, Austin, LCRA and San Antonio Public Service Board, that such lignite be dedicated to usage as fuel to generate electric energy unless agreed otherwise by all of such entities, and that such option rights be held by such entities in proportion to the respective percentages of each in the total aggregate Volume of gas sold and delivered to such entities during 1975 for use as fuel to generate electric energy; (9) That the Definitive Settlement Agreement provide that without exception all proceeds distributed from the Settlement Krust (net of actual expense incurred by each recipient by way of legal fees and other costs of litigation and administrative proceedings associated with the settlement) be credited directly to reduce adjustments for cost of gas punchased in the case of gas utilities or cost of fuel in the case of electric utilities for the next billing period after receipt;** (10) That Coastal/Lo-Vaca consummate all obligations regarding the provision, maintenance and operation of a certain pipeline referred to in a contract dated March 21, 1968, between the City of Austin and Lo-Vaca Gathering Company; (11) That Southern Union Gas Company specifically state in writing that the proposed settêement is in the best interest of such Company's ratepayers in the City of Austin and has the approval of such Company; and, (12) That (a) the City Council of the City of Austin shall determine if all conditions hereof have been met and (b) that any final settlement agreement shall be subject to approval of the City Council of the City of Austin." *In his reading and explanation of the conditions, Mr. Butler pointed out that under (4) the Lo-Vaca Interim Rate now in effect is the cost of gas plus 5¢ break-even rate. He said it would probably be the first of the year before everything can be ironed out and wants to be sure the rate cannot be raised through any action of the Railroad Commission or otherwise. **Mr. Butler explained that in (9) benefits from the settlement should go to the rate-payers of the company involved rather than be maintained for stockholders of that company. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977 Mayor McClellan summarized a few of the conditions Mr. Butler reported on as being most important! 1. Four-way split of the lignite interests among LCRA, Austin, San Antonio, and C.P. & L. In other words, keep the option on that lignite with those who are in the business of generating electric energy. 2. The point concerning the write-off of over $7,000,000.00 claimed to be owed to Lo-Vaca by Austin. 3. Assurance that all benefits from settlements be passed on to the ultimate rate payer. 4. Concurrence by the Attorney-General and Southern Union Gas Company. Councilmember Goodman said we can only guess at this particular stage but he surmised the settlement would mean $30-$40 mkilion dollars over the next ten years. Mr. Butler replied this is the best estimate one can make, but it probably is on the conservative side. Councilmember Goodman asked how big of a variable the lignite would be. Mr. Butler answered that it's possible, if the lignite turned out to be valuable, the projected amount would go up a great deal because lignite has a fairly low book value on it at this time. One cannot predict as to how it will turn out. It depends on the development of the art as far as burning the lignite and it depends a great deal on development of other types of fuel and also depends on being able to get enough lignite together to build a unit to burn this type of fuel. Mr. Butler commented the City of Austin would be very foolish to not attempt to obtain the fullest possible participation in the lignite. Mayor McClellan felt it was important to reiterate the price of gas will not go down, therefore, the only course of action left is one which assures a firm gas supply from an independent company at a price that will not increase at a dramatic rate. She said that if rates do increase over the next ten years, the rate payers will pick up the benefits of the estimated $30-$40 million dollars. Mr. Butler commented that this is a long range look and even if we were to try all the lawsuits and win all the lawsuits, the only result would be bankruptcy for the company and there would not be enough assets in the company to even begin to meet the types of claims being talked about. We would have a bankrupt supplier who would have a difficult time obtaining gas, even at the lowest possible price. Lovaca has no gas of its own and only gets 5% or 6% from Coastal States. They buy gas from producers and only have a contract with that producer. Prices from the producer to the gathering company are not going to go down. We are stuck with the price of gas, he said, plus a transportation charge. The damage, he said, has already been done during the past four years and cannot be reversed. Councilmember Goodman asked Mr. Butler for clarification concerning Condition (9), 1.e. customers of Southern Union Gas Company would receive a benefit. Mr. Butler informed him that every time there is a settlement, in the next billing period there would be a refund to its customers, if the settlement is a benefit. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977 MR. ROBERT M. LACZKO, District Manager, Central Texas District, Southern Union Gas Company, serving Austin and environs, appeared before Council and presented the following statement: "For the record, my name is Bob Laczko and I am the Central Texas District Manager for Southern Union Gas Company, serving Austin and environs. The decision which the Austin City Council must necessarily make with respect to a tentative settlement agreement with Coastal States Gas Producing Company and Lo-Vaca Gathering Company is a most complex and important one both for the present and future of the City of Austin and its citizens and rate payers. The City Councils and City administration, both past and present, have devoted many long hours (official as well as personal time) toward deliberating and participating in the decision-making process of what is best for Austin. I am authorized by my company to respectfully recommend, with certain observations, that the City Council of Austin accept the tentative settlement offer being considered as a resolution of the Coastal States/Lo-Vaca gas controversy. It is imperative that the citizens of Austin have a stable and viable natural gas supply for the present and future and at prices which are reasonable and competitive and delivered by a firm fully regulated as a gas utility under the laws of the State of Texas. As the Council knows, Southern Union has an appeal pending in the district courts of Travis County from an order of the Railroad Commission of Texas wherein Southern Union has been unable to collect some 2.27 million dollars paid to Coastal States/Lo-Vaca for past purchases of gas. This failure to collect is the result of a change in the purchase price adjustment clause during the period of time Southern Union was paying to Coastal/Lo-Vaca prices in excess of its contract prices as a result of the orders of the Railroad Commission of Texas under Dockets 500 and 578. Southern Union must necessarily protect its customers and rate payers, its company and stockholders under any settlement agreement, and in stating our recommendation to the Council I must, on behalf of my company, protect its position in this lawsuit. A settlement at this time with Coastal/Lo-Vaca will eliminate future anxiety, the possibility of bankruptcy, the uncertainty of litigation and the cost of consultant and legal fees which must necessarily have to be incurred in connection therewith. The City, in view of the type of the proposed federal energy legislation and the status of such legislation, must necessarily protect itself to the maximum degree in its contract so that its position may be viable and preserve to the City the greatest degree of flexibility, both as to stability and availability of reserves of natural gas, priority for the use of such reserves, and the cost thereof. Lastly, any overall settlement with Coastal/Lo-Vaca should protect the customers and rate payers of Southern Union, the company and its stockholders, so that it may maintain the stability of natural gas reserves available for its Austin customers, consistent with its franchise requirements, at reasonable prices while being properly regulated as a gas utility under the laws of the State of Texas by the City and the Railroad Commission to permit it to earn a fair and reasonable rate of return on its plant and equipment used and useful in rendering natural gas service to the people of Austin. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977 In conclusion, as your local manager and on behalf of my company's management, you may anticipate our cooperation in this matter and we will be available to cooperate with the City with respect to further discussions, negotiations and any implementation of contract settlements." Councilmember Cooke moved that the Council adopt a resolution to enter into a certain settlement agreement with its natural gas supplier subject to certain conditions as recommended by Don Butler, Legal Counsel. The motion, seconded by Councilmember Goodman, carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Himmelblau, Mullen, Trevinot Mayor McClellan, Mayor Pro Tem Snell, Councilmembers Cooke, Goodman Noes: None *Councilmember Trevino made the following statement when casting his "Aye" vote: "This settlement represents a practical solution to a long-standing problem which has meant much hardship for our citizens. Fortunately, Austin's energy future looks brighter; the availability of a mmix" of fuels should produce less reliance upon natural gas for Austin in the early 1980's. This mix can secure stable fuel costs and supply for our utility customers during the next decade. But this bright future will materialize anly if this and future Councils remain vigilant that a Lovaca type situation does not develop in relation to our other fuel sources. Certainly the City now has good fuel contracts--but a contract was not much protection to us in the natural gas situation. Our City must continue to push for better, more equitable regulation of energy suppliers at the State and Federal level. In addition, it must remain a constant Council policy--strongly carried through by City legal, financial and utility staff--to monitor developments in uranium and coal markets and to keep a tight watch over the fulfillment of our fuel contracts. As to the natural gas situation, after much deliberation, I believe this settlement is in our best interests, therefore, I vote Yes." ZONING ORDINANCE Mayor McClellan brought up the following ordinance for its second reading: AN ORDINANCE ORDERING A CHANGE IN HEIGHT AND AREA AND CHANGING THE HEIGHT AND AREA MAPS ACCOMPANYING CHAPTER 45 OF THE AUSTIN CITY CODE OF 1967 AS FOLLOWS: LOTS 1 THROUGH 14, BLOCK "D," R. C. LAMBIE RESUBDIVISION OF VOSS ADDITION IN OUTLOT NO. 71, DIVISION "OÇ"" INECLUDING ALL THE ALLEY ADJACENT TO SAID LOTS, LOCALLY KNOWN AS 801-907 CLERMONT AVENUE; 800-906 FLORES STREET, AND ALSO BEING BOUNDED BY EAST AVENUE AND SAN MARCOS STREET, FROM "GR" GENERAL RETAIL, SECOND HEIGHT AND AREA DISTRICT TO "GR" GENERAL RETAIL, THIRD HEIGHT AND AREA DISTRICT; SAID PROPERTY BEING LOCATED IN AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Campbell McGinnis, Robert C. McGinnis, Robert Clift McGinnis, and Mike McGinnis, Cl4-77-033) CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS June 23, 1977 The ordinance was read the second time, and Councilmember Cooke moved that the ordinance be passed to its third reading. Councilmember Himmelblau, carried by the following vote: The motion, seconded by Ayes: Councilmember Mullen, Mayor McClellan, Councilmembers Cooke, Himmelblau Noes: Councilmember Trevino, Mayor Pro Tem Snell, Councilmember Goodman The Mayor announced that the ordinance had been passed through its second reading only. ZONINGS SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING The City Manager reported that the following zoning applications had been referred to the Planning Commission for recommendation and had been set for public hearing before the City Council on July 28, 1977: MECON PROPERTIES 908 Romeria Drive By Dr. Walter Meyer C14-77-062 IRA F. and EVELYN W. COLLINS By Florence Cecil C14-77-063 BALCONES ASSOCIATES By Hoyle Osborne C14-77-064 WILLIAM S. WINN & JOSEPH C. ZERN By Hoyle Osborne C14-77-065 NPC REALTY COMPANY By Phil Mockford C14-77-066 E. L. SHEPPARD, ET AL By Donald Bird C14-77-067 1014-1018 Justin Lane 3301-3309 Northland Drive 5400-5618 MoPac Boulevard 1530-1544 East Anderson Lane 7801-7813 Old Cameron Road 1316-1408 Kramer Lane 10906-11200 Pecusa Drive 12003-12005 Bell Avenue 12001 U.S. Highway 183 From "A" Residence To 1st Height and Area "B" Residence 1st Height and Area From "A" Residence 1st Height and Area Το "LR" Local Retail 1st Height and Area From "LR" Local Retail To 1st and 2nd Height and Area (Taact 1) "A" Residence 1st Height and Area (Tract 2) "GR" General Retail 2nd Height and Area From Interim "A" Residence 1st Height and Area To "GR" General Retail 1st Height and Area From Interim "AA" Residence To 1st Height and Area "A" Residence 1st Height and Area From Interim "AA" Residence 1st Height and Area To "GR" General Retail 1st Height and Area CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXASJune 23, 1977 AUSTIN NATIONAL BANK, 2200 Theo Drive EXECUTOR AND TRUSTEE By Donald Bird C14-77-068 From "GR" General Retail 1st Height and Area "C" Commercial 1st Height and Area To From "A" Residence IRWIN R. SALMANSON, ET AL 812 East 32nd Street By Robert O. Smith C14-77-069 To ADON SITRA C14-77-070 J. M. RICHARD By James J. City C14-77-071 C. L. REEVES C14-770072 CITY OF AUSTIN By Planning Department C14-77-073 BULLARD COMPANY By W. H. Bullard C14-77-022 3859 Dry Creek Drive 1704 Redwood Avenue 9484 Old Jollyville Road and also bounded by Loop 360 and U.S. Highway 183 All land zoned Interim "A" within an area generally bounded by Manchaca Road on the east, William Cannon Drive on the north, Cherry Creek Subdivision on the west and Whispering Oaks and Cherry Creek Subdivisions on the south 10602-10702 Middle Fiskville Road 604-606 & 605-607 East Grady Drive OMEGA INVESTMENT COMPANY 2330 Bergstrom Highway By Roy Bechtol C814-76-012* 1st Height and Area "O" Office 1st Height and Area From Interim "A" Residence 1st Height and Area "0" Office To 1st Height and Area From "A" Residence 1st Height and Area To "BB" Residence 1st Height and Area From Interim "AA" Residence 1st Height and Area To "GR" General Retail 1st Height and Area (Tract 1) "BB" Residence 1st Height and Area (Tract 2) From Interim "A" Residence 1st Height and Area To "A" Residence 1st Height and Area From Interim "AA" Residence 1st Height and Area "C-1" Commercial 1st Height and Area To A 640-unit residential Planned Unit Development called, RIVER HILLS *The application listed above appears before the City Council in accordance with the amended Austin Development Plan, which allows City Council review of Planned Unit Developments in the ExtraterritorialJJurisdiction area. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS- June 23, 1977 HEIERMAN BUILDING Joe Colbert, owner C14h-74-013 I. V. DAVIS HOMESTEAD Mr. and Mrs. Cater Joseph, owners C14h-77-010 WALTER TIPS BUILDING Heritage Society, owner C14h-77-012 FRANZETTI STORE BUILDING OF WHEATVILLE Emma Franzetti, Louis Franzetti 115 East 5th Street 1610 Virginia Avenue 710-712 Congress Avenue 2402 San Gabriel Street From "C-2" Commercial 4th Height and Area Το "C-2-H" Commercial-Historic 4th Height and Area From "A" Residence 1st Height and Area To "A-H" Residence-Historic 1st Height and Area From "C-2" Commercial 4th Height and Area Το "C-2-H" Commercial-Historic 4th Height and Area From "C" Commercial 1st Height and Area Το "C-H" Commercial-Historic 1st Height and Area and Josephine Franzetti Powers, owners C14h-77-015 BERTRAM STORE BUILDING Taylor Gaines, owner C14h-77-016 1601 Guadalupe Street From "C" Commercial 3rd Height and Area Το "C-H" Commercial-Historic 3rd Height and Area ATTEST: ADJOURNMENT The Council meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Monroe City Clerk APPROVE len Mayor