=CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS Special Meeting July 25, 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 Absent: Councilmember Trevino Mayor McClellan stated that this was a Special Called Meeting for the purpose of hearing the 1977-82 Capital Improvements Program, which included $572 million for that period. The area to be discussed tonight was the Central Austin Area, which was defined as the area bounded by 29th Street on the north, Oltorf on the south, the City limit line on the west and I. H. 35 on the east. City Manager Davidson stated that at Council request maps indicating Community Development District boundaries had been distributed, some of which were contained in the CIP. A status report indicating the status of 1976-77 projects was being prepared and would be distributed before the next hearing. Mr. Jorge Carrasco, Capital Budget Officer, indicated that the following projects affected the Central Austin Area either directly or indirectly: (Page number refers to the Proposed 1977-1982 CIP) PROJECT DESCRIPTION SERIAL NUMBER PAGE ELECTRIC Environmental Assessment for 76/10-02 3 Operation of Power Production Facilities (Seaholm) Remodeling Offices at Seaholm Plant 76/39-03 13 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ELECTRIC (continued) Holly and Seaholm Security Systems TRAFFIC SIGNALS CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 SERIAL NUMBER 77/39-02 PAGE 14 Most traffic signal improvements have not been designated for specific locations. These improvements will be proposed on the basis of traffic studies that will be conducted during the fiscal year. WATER AND WASTEWATER Southwest Austin Transmission Main 73/40-23 21 South Austin Outfall Relief Main 74/50-08 44 Canterbury Lift Station 76/50-10 45 Govalle Wastewater Treatment 73/59-03 47 Plant Improvements Govalle Wastewater Treatment 76/59-01 48 Plant Tertiary Treatment Facilities PUBLIC WORKS Congress Avenue Improvements 73/62-09 60 1st Street - 10th Street Clarksville Redevelopment 77/62-01 62 MoPac Boulevard Impaat Projects 78/62-11 66 Robert E. Lee Road/Barton Springs 78/62-13 66 Road - Rabb Road West First Street/Loop 1 78/62-18 68 Lamar - 1st Street Interchange 78/65-05 74 Johnson Creek Drainage Improvements/ 76/07-09 76 Enfield Road - Margranita Crescent West 5th Street and West 6th at 78/07-01 76 Campbell Street Deep Eddy Drainage 78/07-04 77 8th Street Pedestrian Mall 77/75-01 79 CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SERIAL NUMBER PAGE PUBLIC WORKS (continued) Street and Bridge Division Central Service Center Improvements 73/97-02 81 EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Construction of EMS Station I (central and south) 78/93-01 91 Construction of EMS Station VII 78/93-02 91 HEALTH Clarksville Public Health Center 76/91-05 100 LIBRARY Renovation to Present Central 75/85-02 113 PARKS AND RECREATION Barton Hills Irrigation and 75/86-24 122 Tennis Courts Butler Softball Field Improvements 75/86-25 122 Eilers Park Improvements 75/86-26 122 Zilker Park Improvements 75/86-31 123 Waller Creek Development 75/86-44 124 Pease Park Improvements 75/86-50 126 Deep Eddy Natural Science 76/86-26 131 Center Renovation Cultural Arts Center 76/86-33 131 Senior Activity Center 76/86-41 132 Zilker Playground Renovation 77/86-05 133 Upgrading Athletic Field Lighting 77/86-14 136 Natural Science Center Building 77/86-15 137 Caswell Tennis Center Improvements 78/86-03 139 Stacy Pool Filter and 78/86-06 140 Restroom Renovation CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS= July 25, 1977 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SERIAL NUMBER PAGE PARKS AND RECREATION (continued) Duncan Park Improvements 78/86-11 141 PARD Administration 78/86-17 143 Building Improvements Lions Municipal Golf Course 75/86-12 144 Mayor McClellan then opened the meeting to the audience for speakers. DICK SUTTLE, 2602 Foxglen Drive, spoke in favor of returning the formerly proposed Barton Skyway Bridge to the CIP. The bridge was needed for access to MoPac, and if approved, the following items deserved serious study: 1. Extension of Barton Skyway east to I.H. 35 should be deleted from the Master Plan. 2. Barton Skyway should not be widened. 3. All environmental factors concerning Barton Creek should be considered. 4. A traffic control device should be installed at Barton Skyway and Barton Hills Drive. The following individuals also spoke in favor of the Barton Skyway Bridge: Dick Scheib, 1706 Barton Cliff Drive Barbara Divine, 2402 Rockingham Circle Tim Hunke, 2605 Foxglen Drive Gail Suttle, 2602 Foxglen Drive Ed Vaughn, 1904 Paramount Pat Smith, 1912 Barton Hills Drive In response to Mayor McClellanss question, Mr. Carrasco stated that $70,000 had originally been in the CIP in the third year for planning and environmental study of the proposed project. BETH SEBESTA, 2600 Rockingham Drive, spoke against the Barton Skyway Bridge. She stated that two years ago, in response to a questionnaire, 84% of the area residents opposed the Bridge. She agreed that it would be convenient to have access to MoPac via a bridge and I. H. 35 by extending Barton Skyway, but felt that the following items were negatives: 1. Detrimental to Barton Creek water, plant and wildlife. 2. Detrimental to citizens using the greenbelt, creek and park. 3. Detrimental to Barton Hills neighborhood. 4. Detrimental to apartments on north side of Barton Creek. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 She asked that the Barton Skyway Bridge and the entire Barton Skyway arterial system be removed from the CIP. In response to Councilmember Mullen's question, Mrs. Sebesta stated that at least 12 people designed the questionnaire. There was further discussion between Councilmember Mullen and Mrs. Sebesta regarding how much traffic would increase on Barton Skyway if the bridge were built and where the traffic would come from. 73/86-46 ED HESS, 9005 Collinwood Drive, spoke in support of the Walnut Creek Park Development. He cited the lack of existing facilities in the immediate area. 76/86-07 Mr. Hess also spoke in favor of the Northwest Park Swimming Pool Cover and Park Improvements. Mr. Hess also supported the City Manager's statement in the CIP letter of transmittal regarding the use of bond money on projects which may qualify for HCD monies. He pointed out that with regard to a future bond election for parks, people might not support it unless facilities were earmarked for their areas. 75/62-09 SONYA ASHWORTH, representing We Care Austin, supported the funding which had already been allocated for Congress Avenue Improvements, but felt that the description in the proposed 1977-82 CIP was incomplete, since it reflected only drainage improvements. She urged the Council to endorse the original scope of the project and seek funds to complete it. JIM BANNEROT, 2301 Forest Bend, spoke against building the Barton Skyway Bridge for the following reasons: 1. Detrimental effect on neighborhood integrity 2. Barton Creek intrusionn 3. Safety aspect of Barton Skyway RON ANDREWS, 1001 Robert E. Lee Road, stated that at 8:00 a.m. traffic backed up beyond his house and that he could not get out of his driveway, which was about 3/4 mile from Barton Springs Road. He favored building the bridge, but opposed widening Robert E. Lee Road. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 75/62-09 BOB BINDER, speaking for the Congress Avenue Improvements, asked the City Manager what the likelihood was that the project would be funded by HCD funds. The City Manager stated he did not have the answer now, but was checking on it almost daily. There was some likelihood that the area from 6th Street south to the river would be funded by HCD; however, the City had requested that the entire drainage project be funded by HCD. At the time the City Council made decisions on HCD funding, it was understood that adjustments would be needed to some other projects qualifying for HCD funds so that regular bond funds could be used for Congress Avenue. The present Council had not decided the matter. Mr. Binder asked what was the status of the ramps and landscaping for Congress Avenue. City Manager Davidson stated that no landscaping was included in the current proposal. Putting in the drainage was of primary importance. After the drainage was in, then the ramps could be considered to see if money was available for them. Insofar as landscaping was concerned, the City Manager felt that private enterprise should examine it, and that in the future Congress Avenue improvements should be supplemented by private enterprise. There was further discussion regarding the ramps and the possibility of tunneling for the drainage. It was stated that the tunneling concept was substantially higher than putting in a box or pipe. The drainage and the ramps should be handled in separate contracts, with the drainage going in first. City Manager Davidson stated that prior to the next CIP public hearing, he would have an updated cost estimate for the ramps if the City Council wanted to include the ramps with the drainage as part of next year's program. 74/50-09, 72/50-17, 74/50-08 KEN MANNING, 213 West 41st Street, representing the Sierra Club, stated that the following proposed CIP projects did not conform to the Master Plan: 74/50-09 (Bull Creek Lateral A) 72/50-17 (Barton Creek Interceptor) 74/50-08 (South Austin Outfall Relief Main) Mr. Manning cited Chapter 2, Section 4 of the Master Plan and stated that encouraging growth toward the northwest and southwest conflicted with the Master Plan. The City Manager stated that he did not agree with Mr. Manning and felt that the City Council should schedule a work session to examine what the Master Plan means with regard to the extension of utilities under the CIP. Councilmember Cooke stated that he saw the Master Plan as a vital and important tool to be used as a guide, not as a final document. Mayor McClellan stated that she felt that part of one of the previously scheduled public hearings or a separate work session should be held to address the Master Plan. It was her understanding that the Master Plan encouraged growth in certain areas, but did not prohibit growth in other areas. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 77/86-115 DAVID DAVENPORT, 1st Vice President, Austin Natural Science Association, spoke in favor of constructing the new Natural Science Center Building. The project had been approved by the Goals Assembly, the Parks and Recreation Board, the Citizens Board of Natural Resources and Environmental Quality and the Planning Commission. Present facilities at the Deep Eddy Bath House could not adequately handle the over 200,000 adults and children served annually by the Center. 73/62-29 STROUD KELLEY, 3408-A Cedar Street, spoke against the street widening as proposed. He suggested that the two projects (38th Street Widening/GuadalupeDuval and 38-1/2 Street Widening/Red River-I.H. 35) be recombined as follows and proposed the following language for Project 73/62-29, 1977-82 Proposed CIP: 38TH STREET IMPROVEMENTS/GUADALUPE-DUVAL AND RED RIVER-IH 35 In fiscal 1977-78, environmental and neighborhood impact studies will be carried out in cooperation with area residents and neighborhood groups. The final design of any improvements will be submitted to the Urban Transportation Commission, the Planning Commission, and the City Council for final approval prior to right-of-way acquisition or construction of improvements. Mr. Kelley stated that he had discussed the proposed language with Joe Ternus and Mr. Ternus had suggested after "In fiscal 1977-78" the following wording be used: "....anstudy to include preliminary engineering, environmental and neighborhood impact factors..." be substituted, and Mr. Kelley agreed to that suggestion. Mr. Kelley also recommended that Project 78/62-28 (Red River Street Widening/38-1/2 Street-41st Street) be included in the proposed study. 77/86-16 Mr. Kelley spoke in support of Project 77/86-16 (Removal of Barriers at Swimming Pools). He asked that the Council either fund the project for the proposed 1978-79 time period or move it up to 1977-78. MRS. DOROTHY RICHTER, 3901 Avenue G, requested that neighborhood input be used for the proposed widening of 38th Street. 75/86-09 MRS. RICHTER also spoke in favor of Shipe Park improvements. In addition to the proposed children's play area improvements, she requested that a security light be left on at the Park and that a higher fence be erected around the pool. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 MRS. BERTHA CASEY, 305 West 38th Street, objected to the widening of 38th Street between Guadalupe and Duval Streets MICHAEL ORRIS, 4510 Avenue G, a member of the Hyde Park Neighborhood Association, requested that renovation of the Elizabet Ney Museum be reinstated into the CIP. The item had been withdrawn over a controversy between the City and Texas Fine Arts Association. BARBARA CILLEY, representing the Citizens Budget Task Force, a group composed of about 10 members, made the following recommendations: 1. Start the annual Planning Commission CIP review a month earlier. 2. Include an index listing projects with a good summary by geographical regions. 3. Each department should try to cut down on unspecified projects submitted to the Council. 4. Boards and Commissions associated with a particular department should develop a master plan for that department which implements the larger portion of the Master Plan. Ms. Cilley also made the following points: 1. Appreciated the continued recommendation and support of Community Development Districts and the decision to pave Webberville Road. 2. Commended the City for obtaining $300,000 to implement the Safe School Sidewalk Program. 3. Regretted the City's decision to fund or support William Cannon Drive. 4. If Federal funding is unavailable to implement the MoPac Impact Study, then CIP funds should be made available for the implementation. 5. Opposed the removal of Congress Avenue improvements from the CIP. 6. Delete the widening of Robert E. Lee Road from the CIP. JOE RIDDELL spoke against the following wastewater projects: 1. 74/50-09 Bull Creek Lateral A 2. 72/50-17 - Barton Creek Interceptor 3. 74/50-08 - South Austin Outfall Relief Main Mr. Riddell referred to the use of utility extensions versus the Master Plan as a development tool and stated that other development restrictive tools could be used (Building Code, Subdivision Ordinance, Septic Tank Ordinance). _ CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 Regarding the Bull Creek Lateral A sewer extension, Mr. Riddell stated that the extension would have to cut across an environmentally sensitive area containing steep slopes. Mr. Riddell felt that the Barton Creek Interceptor should be deleted from the CIP for the following reasons: 1. It would promote development contrary to the recently adopted Master Plan. 2. Danger of polluting part of the Edwards Aquafer recharge zone. 3. The sewer was not needed to take care of area septic tank users and Travis Country, both of which were in the County. 4. Construction of the sewer would cause destruction in Barton Creek canyon. 5. It would be a drain on the wastewater utility budget, and would only be profitable if the area were developed intensively. 6. Any decision about sewer in the Barton Creek watershed should await completion of the Barton Creek Watershed Study. 7. Leaving the project in the CIP would increase area real estate prices, encourage development and decrease the amount of parkland that could be bought due to highereprices for the land. 8. Higher priority projects are available within the City limits. Mr. Riddell cited the same reasons for not constructing the South Austin Outfall project, since it was related to the Barton Creek Interceptor project. 72/50-17 ROGER DUNCAN also spoke in opposition to the Barton Creek Interceptor. He felt that the area was not suitable for high density development and that the project might open up the entire watershed for development. Dedication of Parkland Mr. Duncan stated that the subdivision ordinance should contain a provision that developers dedicate parkland. Acquisition of Flood Plain Areas Mr. Duncan felt that the City was paying too much money for flood plain land to be used as greenbelt. He stated that the City should buy land from the edge of the flood plain outward from the creek to act as a buffer between the creek and developed areas and require dedication of flood plains as greenbelt areas. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS. July 25, 1977 77/86-15 Mr. Duncan felt that the Natural Science Center should be constructed, but objected to the Zilker Park location due to increased traffic. Mayor McClellan felt that the Council should review the history of the proposed Zilker Park location for the Natural Science Center. City Manager Davidson stated that he would get the reports and re-present them to the Council. Councilmember Cooke stated that at this stage he did not need to review the evolution of the Center, but as the City was attempting outreach by locating parks throughout the City, he felt that the consolidation of facilities in one park had some negative effects. Tennis Facilities PHIL MOSS, representing the Capitol Area Tennis Association, stated along with his Association that the Austin Women's Tennis Association and the Austin Tennis League had reviewed the CIP budget as related to tennis and had made the following recommendations: 1. Drop Project 77/86-12 (Pleasant Valley Tennis Center) 2. Enlarge Pharr Tennis Center to 16 courts by adding 8 new courts. 3. Build a 4-lighted court center in South Austin at a site to be designated by Parks and Recreation in conjunction with citizen input. 4. Speed up renovation of Caswell Center resurfacing and upgrading of lighting at the Center. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Snell's question as to what was wrong with the Pleasant Valley location, Mr. Moss indicated that it dealt with the principle of going beyond 8 courts. Facilities at either Caswell or Pharr could be enlarged more efficiently. In response to Councilmember Cooke's question as to the justification for eliminating the Pleasant Valley Tennis Center, Mr. Moss stated that 12 courts could be added for an estimated $520,000 cost (8 courts at Pharr, 4 courts at an undetermined South Austin location), which was under the estimated $600,000 cost to build the Pleasant Valley Center, which would have only 8 courts. Mr. Moss felt that it was better utilization of available funds. 75/86-14 LYNN MURRAY, representing the Whispering Oaks Neighborhood Association, spoke in favor of playground acquisition and development for the Pleasant Hill School - Whispering Oaks Subdivision for the 1980-1981 time period. He requested the following changes: 1. Advance the project to FY 78-79 2. Include a swimming pool into the budget. =CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 Mr. Murray cited the following statistics to justify the requested pool: 1. Garrison Pool is the only pool south of Ben White Boulevard. From May through August, 1976, 105,488 people used the pool. There were 829 learn-to-swim participants in 61 classes. 2. There were 166,152 participants for all of South Austin, with 1,406 learn-to-swim participants in 108 classes using 5 pools. 3. One new pool was proposed for south of Ben White Boulevard in FY 81-82. One other new pool was proposed for South Austin in FY 77-78. 4. Total population in Austin south of Ben White Boulevard is 32,150. Total population of South Austin is 91,888. Total population of Austin in the 1976 census is 308,087. South Austin has 29.79% of the total population. 5. South Austin has 5 existing pools, 2 planned and 4 planned for renovation. The remaining portion of Austin has 20 existing pools, 4 planned and 4 planned for renovation. 6. Austin had a total of 507,033 participants, with 4,060 learn-to-swim participants in 349 classes. Garrison Pool had 20% of that total. 7. People from such surrounding areas as Manchaca, Oak Hill and Sunset Valley, which were not included in population figures for Austin, also used Garrison Pool. 75/68-56 VIC MYERS, a member of the Board of Directors, Austin Softball Association, distributed a letter to the Council citing statistics and the need to improve and increase softball facilities throughout the City. He asked that the building of new fields be speeded up, and that a 4-field complex be added to the Craig complex. In response to Councilmember Cooke's question as to where the proposed complex would be located, Jack Robinson, Parks and Recreation Department Director, stated that it be built at Pleasant Valley adjacent to the Craig complex. In response to Councilmember Himmelblau's question as to the large amount of engineering money and delay if the project was to be at the Craig complex, Mr. Robinson stated that last year the Council did not have the money for construction of the project but did put in engineering funds so as not to delay the project further. In response to Councilmember Cooke's question, Mr. Robinson stated that the $220,000 proposed for FY 81-82 was for planning and site acquisition if parkland were not used, not for construction of more fields. In response to Councilmember Himmelblau's question, Mr. Robinson stated that if both engineering and construction were done in FY 77-78, then some projects would have to be eliminated. ) =CITY OF AUSTIN. TEXAS- July 25, 1977 Councilmember Mullen read the following statistics for three sports facilities operated by the City: Tennis participants Golf participants Softball Participants - 22,000 - - 70,000 9,000 Loss to City $ 40,000 Loss to City - $210,000 Loss to City - $144,000 He then asked at what point would it be fair for the participants to pay more of the cost. Mr. Robinson stated that none of the team registration fees went to the City. Operation of the facilities came out of the operating budget. City Manager Davidson stated that the last time the City proposed to raise some softball fees which would have increased revenues to the City, the Softball Association asked the Council to defer raising fees. The Council did not raise the fees. In response to Councilmember Mullen's question as to whether the Association would fight raising the fees, Mr. Myers stated that there would always be opposition to raising fees. In response to Councilmember Himmelblau's question regarding residency of team members, Mr. Myers stated that no records were kept as to whether participants were City residents. Councilmember Mullen suggested that softball fees be raised and that the City receive part of the revenue. Mr. Myers stated that players might be more sympathetic toward an increase if the money could be earmarked for softball, rather than going into the City's general revenue fund. In response to Councilmember Goodman's question, Mr. Myers stated that there were no supporting figures to indicate that a huge proportion of the players came from lower income groups. DEAN RINDY, former Planning Commission member, stated that swimming and softball participants probably drew a larger percentage of working class people than the other sports offered by the City. He also felt that those two sports drew a higher percentage of people residing within the City limits. Hancock Fire Station DR. CHARLIE ALLISON requested that funding be reinstated to keep the Hancock Fire Station open. City Manager Davidson stated that the request would be part of the operating budget which would be considered around August 20, 1977. Mayor McClellan stated that it would be necessary to put $197,000 into the operating budget or cut that amount from another part of the budget to keep the Hancock Station open. 78/65-01 Dr. Allison inquired about the proposed Grade Separation/Stassney Lane at MoPac Railroad. He had been told by City staff that the project was set up to go in March, 1978, but saw no mention of it in the proposed CIP. John German, Director of Public Works, stated that the project was funded in the current CIP, but that several pieces of right-of-way still needed to be purchased and would require 4 to 6 weeks. CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS July 25, 1977 Temporary Road Dr. Allison stated that his office was at 2908 North Interregional. East 30th Street deadended in front of his office and the street behind his office had been closed when 26th Street was built. The resulting situation created a traffic bottleneck in the area. He asked if some temporary relief could be provided such as opening 30th Street temporarily and gravelling it. Joe Ternus, Urban Transportation Department Director, stated that solution of the problem was tied to the relocation of Red River Street and that he preferred to proceed with the permanent plan, which would require at least a year to complete. Barton Skyway Bridge CARL NEWSOME, 2604 Briarcrest Drive, spoke in favor of building the Barton Skyway Bridge. He also felt that if the Bridge were funded that consideration be given to cutting down some of the hills from where Barton Skyway now deadends back to Lamar Boulevard. He stated that from 1972 to 1976 there had been a 32% increase in traffic on Barton Skyway, while on Robert E. Lee Road there had been a 117% traffic increase. ATTEST: ADJOURNMENT The Council adjourned at 11:10 p.m. Grace momoe City Clerk APPROVE: Corleo ele Mayor