City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 5/19/2022 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 6 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 5/19/2022 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 5/19/2022 Transcript Generated by SnapStream Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [10:31:12 AM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. With that said, let's go ahead and convene the city council meeting. Today is -- >> Kitchen: Hey, mayor? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Kitchen: I think some of us would love to have a picture with rob and his street sign. We can do it later, it doesn't have to be now. I just wanted to make sure he wasn't leaving. >> Mayor Adler: Let go ahead and do it now so that rob can actually leave if he wants to. [ Laughing ] >> Mayor Adler: Let's come on down here in front. [10:33:45 AM] >> Thank you. >> Congratulations. [10:36:39 AM] >> Mayor Adler: Well, guys, I think that we can start this back up. Today is Thursday, may 19th, 2022. The time is 10:36. We are in the city of Austin council chambers. We have everyone here with us today and on the dais. Colleagues, I'm going to go ahead and read in the changes and correction for people. Item number 5 is going to be postponed to June 16th, 2022. Item number 12, went before the water and wastewater commission, may 11th, but there was no recommendation due to a lack of quorum votes, commissioners Penn and recusing, commissioner [10:37:40 AM] Musgrove absent, one vacancy. On item 13, also on may 11th it was recommended by the water wastewater commission 6-0 vote with chair Lee and commissioners Penn and Michael recusing and Musgrove absent. Item 16, same day, may 11th, recommended by water and wastewater commission, 9-0 vote, one vacancy. Item number 17 has been corrected so that this lease with skate game Austin is just for approximately 5,070 square feet of retail space at 405 and 2,040 square feet at 407 red river street. Item number 36, councilmember harper-madison is being added as a sponsor. 37, councilmembers vela and pool are being added as sponsors. Be advised that when we can take [10:38:44 AM] up items 34 and 50, which we will do after we have public testimony, 54 and 55 rather, these items will be withdrawn. Item number 53 on may 10th, 202 is recommended by the planning commission on a 13- zero vote. Item 69 is withdrawn and replaced with agenda item 95. Item number 88, councilmembers pool and vela are being added as cosponsors. Item number 89, the mayor pro tem alter is being added as a sponsor. Item number 90, councilmembers pool and alter are being added as sponsors. And item number 94 is approved by the environmental commission on an 8-3 vote, may 18th, 2022. [10:39:54 AM] Today we have items being pulled. We have item number 88 being pulled by councilmember Kelly. And I think councilmember Kelly, you wanted to pull item number 18 as well, is that correct? >> Kelly: Yes, it was number 85 that I pulled, not 88. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. 85, pulled. >> Kelly: And 18, yes. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: I'm sorry. I read that wrong. There's late backup in hfc item number 7. Please remind me to say that when we convene that meeting. In our council meeting there's late backup, 3, 5, 19, 32, 48, 59, 54, 60, 65, 67, 70, 75, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 87, and 90 and 94. Colleagues, item number 12 on our dais was the professional [10:40:56 AM] services agreement where the staff had made a recommendation to go down through item number 11. I'd like to read an amendment to that. And if there's no objection, we'll amend that and keep that on the consent agenda. It's been handed out, it's been posted, it's also in late backup at this point. Whereas the list affirms the city staff may negotiate and execute a professional services agreement with or found to include other qualified respondents, the firm submitted, response to statements and qualification of the city in response to the issue, and whereas the city council has the discretion to add these other qualified respondents, because adding these firms will increase the number of firms available in the rotation list as well as add to the type of experience and qualifications available to the city and Austin water, and [10:41:57 AM] whereas the city council decision to add the additional are neither based on nor influenced by rates, prices, or fees, without objection, I would move that we include the other qualified respondents to the request for qualification, solicitation number clmp333, ranked 12 and 13 by city staff per the attached exhibit a. Does anybody have objection to that? Hearing none, that amendment is added. This item 12 will remain on our consent agenda. Councilmember Fuentes, then councilmember Kelly. >> Fuentes: Thank you, mayor. Colleagues, I want to draw your attention, I am offering two motion sheets. One is on item 88, which is -- this motion sheet would amend the second be it resolved to read, be it further resolved the city manager is directed to [10:42:58 AM] develop a reproductive health decision ordinance to prohibit discrimination on the basis of reproductive health decisions in the areas of housing, public accommodations, employment generally and by city contractors. That motion sheet came with consultation from our office of civil rights and adds the words public accommodations and employment by city contractors. The second motion sheet is for item 89 and it's just direction to staff to the extent possible to provide range of sizes for tampons and pads as part of our efforts. >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to those amendments being added? Hearing none, those are added and those items will remain on consent. Councilmember Ellis? >> Ellis: Thank you, mayor. I know I spoke briefly on Tuesday about item number 90. And I don't know the appropriate time, but I would like to be able to postpone that just so I have a little more time to do due diligence and make sure that all my questions are answered. So I don't know if that can be a [10:43:59 AM] postponement on consent. >> Mayor Adler: 90, this is the environmental . . . Yes, this is your resolution. >> Tovo: Yes, I'd like to have a discussion about that. >> Mayor Adler: So we'll pull item number 90. I support that postponement request. >> Ellis: I appreciate that. I know there was a version two posted yesterday, but it doesn't appear to be red lined, so I'm not sure if there's a red lined version that could be posted so we could see what adjustments have been made. >> Tovo: I'd be glad to do a. That. The changes were two or three places incorporating language the staff had recommended changing on Tuesday. I indicated that watershed staff and the water utility had some additional suggestions and the only changes are those to accommodate the staff's requests. So I will certainly have that -- [10:45:00 AM] those changes pointed out. I can either point them out on the dais or have that posted, but they were not substantial and they were staff recommendations. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Item number 90 is pulled. Councilmember Renteria? >> Renteria: I want to postpone item 19 for two weeks. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Is there any objection to postponing item number 19 for two weeks? Hearing none, that will -- the postponement -- >> We don't have a meeting in two weeks. >> Mayor Adler: On June 9th. Postponed to June 9th? Thank you, mayor pro tem. Without objection, the motion to postpone to June 9th will be what is considered on consent. Anything else before we hear from speakers? Yes, councilmember pool. >> Pool: Thanks, mayor. I have two autonomy. Items. [10:46:00 AM] One is 36, the bengali fee waiver for a festival. And we are shy some funds. The total is 4,910 and currently with some additional contributions from councilmember harper-madison, thank you so much, and an increase from mayor pro tem alter we have 2,450. And so if y'all would have a look at item 36 and see if there's any additional contribution you'd like to make. And then hopefully we'll be able to work to increase that -- the amount that is waived. >> Can I say, for the record, I am in already for 300 and my total is 500. >> And I can go ahead and contribute a hundred dollars. >> Pool: Okay. >> Thank you. >> Pool: Make sure the clerk gets all of that information and then it can be added. Thank you all so very much. And I wanted to take a moment to speak on item 40, which is the north burnet gateway code [10:47:01 AM] amendments. And this is an important item specifically for the second downtown up at the domain area, the north burnet gateway area. These code amendments are improvements to the entitlements of the subdistrict that will enhance the area by supporting transit and walkability within the area that is consider's Austin's second downtown. We've made amendments to the north burnet gateway regulating plans several times. It's been done in patchwork style as it has been needed. And so far this approach has worked out, but I prefer that we do a comprehensive update for the regulating plan, as proper forethought and consideration of the growth in this area. It also will not be as much work for everyone if we can make these comprehensive changes. So, I will be bringing an ifc to ensure that we get a [10:48:01 AM] comprehensive update to the north burnet gateway regulating plan that will take advantage of the growing area and I'm hoping to bring that ifc by June 16th. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Pool: Thank you. That's comments for item 40. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Councilmember vela? >> Vela: I would also like to contribute, please. Put me down as 500 for the bengali festival. And I just had a brief question. I'm not sure if staff is present for that. But on items 11 and 12, the rotating list is my understanding of it, is that the rotating list is for smaller firms so that they are able to get a foot in the door with regard to city contracting. And I was just wondering if that is the case. [10:49:01 AM] That was my understanding. I just want to -- I know, for example, on item number 11, I believe hdr's company has an $80 million contract with regard to the mobility program. They're also on the list for item 12, for the rotating list for the -- so I was just wondering what the standards and goals are. We had asked very late yesterday, some questions on the q&a, but I don't know if staff's available. And if they're not, that's fine, but I just wanted to mention that. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Let's come back -- if staff is here and can answer the question quickly we'll go ahead. >> Vela: I do not want to pull the item. I just want some clarification. >> Good morning, Fernandez with the finance department. In regards to your question there's two items, large and small. Previously we had only one contract that encompassed ten [10:50:02 AM] firms for all the services required for Austin water. The idea came about to separate them into two contracts to provide more opportunities. Instead of ten or eleven we're asking for twenty four. We don't set requirements that limit awards to small or large firms. The way we separate the work is based on dollar amount of the anticipated design work that the firm will provide. So we hope that by separating the one into two, and having different expectations in terms of experience, then the larger firms will pursue the large contracts because it's a larger amount and we're asking for higher-level experience, more complex work. The smaller contractors will pursue the smaller assignments because it's lower dollar threshold but less requirements of experience, size of experience. But we don't limit to one or the other. [10:51:02 AM] It's hopefully by the competitive process, setting requirements that accommodate both large and small firms and then having multiple opportunities will provide that avenue for small firms to get on a contract with the city of Austin. >> Vela: I appreciate that clarification and I do want to make sure that there are opportunities available for -- especially for startup firms, frequently minority- and women-owned firms to compete with some of the bigger firms. Just to clarify, when a firm is on that contracting list, number 12, that doesn't guarantee they're going to get a contract? >> Our expectation is that they will get some. The way the list works is as assignments come up, need for work comes up, we'll issue an assignment to the firms and we'll base it on the rank. We'll work you all the way to the last firm. We're adding 13 now. So the 13 will get the last assignment. If there's authorization [10:52:03 AM] remaining, meaning money to provide more support for additional projects, the second pass will be based on the initial assignment that the first firm received. For example, if I was first and you were second, but your assignment was a lot smaller than mine, in the second pass you'll go first and I'll go second so at the end of the day hopefully when the contract is over the firm has had an opportunity to get an equal amount or close to an equal amount of authorization or in this case value of work in terms of dollar amount. >> Vela: Thank you very much for the clarification. I appreciate that. Thank you, mayor, for your motion, adding those two firms to the rotation list. >> Mayor Adler: That sounds good. To be clear for the record, we're adding those firms based entirely on qualifications. It does add to the types of experiences and qualifications that staff has to choose from, but just wanted to add that. >> Vela: To that point, they were very close. There was a half point. The rankings, they were [10:53:05 AM] well-ranked firms, they were just slightly under -- >> Mayor Adler: Very close. Let's get to speakers. Councilmember pool? >> Pool: Mayor, I'm sorry. .I intended to request to be added on item number 37. This is a fee waiver. I offered to put money toward it but it looks like councilmember Kelly has fully funded that item. Thank you so much, councilmember Kelly. Thank you, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: All right. Clerk -- councilmember Ellis. >> Ellis: I just wanted to add $250 from my office budget to councilmember pool's item number 36. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Mayor, I indicated that I'd like to discuss number 17. I have some questions I believe need to be addressed in executive session, though perhaps not. I would like to be added as a cosponsor on number 88. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. [10:54:05 AM] >> Tovo: And I have -- I want to note to my colleagues that Katie powers has distributed the red lined version of number 9 and my staff is posting that online so that you can see any of the changes. There is one addition beyond what I described. I think I characterized that most of the changes came from our conversations with staff about recommendations. There is the insertion of one additional clause and I can't remember whether it's a be it resolved or a whereas that came as a request of poder. And there will be an amendment that I'm going to be making that restores language councilmember Renteria had requested that was inadvertently removed during legal review. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. We'll pull 17 and 18. I'm sorry, we'll pull 17 and 18, and 85 and 90. [10:55:06 AM] All right. Let's hear from the public. I think we have 70 some odd speakers. We're going to go one minute each. We'll begin with the folks that are present and then we'll go to the ones that are remote. Colleagues, just by way of notice, we have a full complement of ten speakers speaking today on public communication. That will be 30 minutes there. And I think we have 20 speakers plus for zoning this afternoon, with an announced time of two minutes each for the speakers this afternoon. We have three items to consider in executive session. 85, 92, and 17. So let's do the speakers here. Let's see how far we can get. Remember we also have music today after speakers. So, clerk, are we ready? [10:56:07 AM] >> We're ready. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> 10:00 A.M. In-person for items 2, 3, 6, and 10, Yvonne Weldon. >> Hi. I'm a first-time speaker here. I have a lot to convey, but I can't do so within one minute. So I would like to use this time to convey that many of us in my district have no voice, nor are we getting clear communications from city leaders. On April 4th, I got a newsletter from our city councilman after 14 months where the last one I received before that was January 29th, 2021. I often get regular updates from other councilmembers in other districts. Since the city council meeting leadership is denying me a reasonable opportunity to speak my concerns through the city [10:57:08 AM] council meeting, I will find other ways to convey my concerns about how the city's mayor, the city council and our leadership is irresponsibly spending our taxpayer dollars, including where nonprofits and other entities can adequately do so, and when city leaders cannot even manage the current operations that is is exasperating the crisis, during this economic crisis where -- while continuing to charge us for fees and services. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> Including ones you've had to suspend. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next speaker is Gus peña speaking on items 3, 5, 19, 27, 28, 44, 49, 57, 59, and 60. >> Mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Tovo: Was the last speaking speaking on the vmu incompatibility conversation, or is that later -- >> Mayor Adler: No. [10:58:11 AM] >> Kitchen: That's item 48. >> Mayor Adler: They could sign up -- >> Kitchen: Are we allowing a full three-minute testimony for those coming to address us on that issue? I would advocate, if it's appropriate, move that we allow those speakers three minutes each. I could say more about it, but let me just leave it at that. I think the speakers who are coming to address us on those potential code changes ought to be afforded the full time. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Anybody have objection to that? Okay. So we'll do that as we go through. Go ahead. >> Gus peña. On deck is Wallace Lundgren. >> Mayor Adler: Would you read the numbers Mr. Peña signed up for? >> He registered on 3, 5, 19, 27, 28, 29, 37, 41, 44, 49, 57, [10:59:13 AM] 59, and 60. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Is Mr. Peña >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Next speaker. >> For item number 6, Wallis Lundgren. >> Good morning, sir. >> I'm here to speak on item number 6, $100,000 for a mural to be painted at some point of some size here in Austin. This is $100,000, which by y'all's standards is not a lot, but it's -- the average price for a mural in Austin after some research is between 15 and $50. So I don't know how big this mural is going to be. I called 12 people yesterday that paint murals. Seven of them were driving me crazy wanting to know when they can bid. So the mural business apparently is kind of tight right now and you have a lot of people wanting to paint [11:00:13 AM] one. I don't think this is a responsible use of our money. I don't think there's any need for it. And I think it should not be considered. Thank you. >> On item 18, Alex stringer. >> Good morning, council. I am speaking against item number 18 and the need to give $41 million for covid services because we have much more pressing issues to attend to. Right now vladamir Putin serves as the greatest threat to our democracy in the history of planet Earth, and we need to give this money to the Ukrainians instead. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is on par with Nazi Germany and vladamir Putin is [11:01:16 AM] literally hitler. Our country was built on diversity and inclusion and there is nothing more diverse than standing with Ukraine and there is nothing more inclusive than supporting those stunning and brave soldiers in the battalion. Our biggest energies are racism, Russian disinformation. If you refuse to stand with Ukraine, if you don't have a shrine of vladamir zelenskyy in your bedroom and if Joe Biden is not the best president in all time then you are [buzzer]. You belong in Guantanamo Bay. Furthermore, vladamir Putin is responsible for inflation because he single-handedly printed 80 percent of our country's money supplies these past two years. Thank you, mayor Adler for hearing me out on this very important issue and I encourage you to put this money to a good cause like sending baby formula to the border to help the Ukrainians. Remember, it's not Ukraine, we crane. [Overlapping speakers]. [11:02:18 AM] >> Next speaker, Joe Santiago speaking on 31. Item 38, Scott Cobb. On deck is Matthew wise. >> Morning. My name is Scott, open water lifeguard, Barton springs pool. I'm in favor of waiving the fee for $20. However, because you are ignoring the unanimous recommendation by the parks and recreation board to raise the living wage to $22 an hour for lifeguards, we will continue to have a lifeguard shortage. I expect it to be around 300 [11:03:19 AM] short. You could still save the summer for those people of Austin who want to swim. Offering a 22-dollar living wage, holiday pay, full benefits, and that way you would be able to open the pools fully. As far as the training fee, we have to undergo 40 hours of unpaid training in order to be a lifeguard. I don't know of any job in the city or in Austin where you have to go to unpaid training for 40 hours to work. When you work this job where they hire you immediately, pay immediately, work for the city of Austin or you donate $300 of your time in unpaid training. [Buzzer]. The people looking for jobs can choose. Thank you. >> Chair: Thank you. >> Matt -- >> Mayor Adler:, thank you,. >> Matthew wise. >> Mayor Adler: What number? >> 38. [11:04:25 AM] >> Thank you. I wholeheartedly support Mr. Cobb. My name is Matthew wise, a former open water lifeguard at Barton springs, including something like a dozen water rescues under my belt. I've also headed a couple of other programs outside of Austin. So as a matter of fact, the bonuses for working the summer did encourage me to come back and apply until my other gig ramps up this summer. Imagine my surprise once I registered the city of Austin aquatic office called me and said, we won't be continuing with your training. And I think I'm still on somebody's [indiscernible] No-no list which I spoke with pard hr and they say they're not supposed to have a list of people. And I think I'm the tip of the iceberg. I know of dozens personally lifeguards who would love to come work, but due to personal issues you [11:05:26 AM] somewhere in management they're on a naughty black list. [Buzzer]. But I think it's more like 100 people and 70% attrition rate between application and getting hired. I think looking under the hood why otherwise qualified applicants have been turned away might be helpful. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Next is Mike gorse on item 48. >> Mayor Adler: You have three minutes. >> Thank you, mayor, mayor pro tem and council. I wanted to speak on this item and I'm glad to hear that -- I'm glad to see that there seems to be a general consensus with most of the council that the current rules that we have aren't compatible with the needs of a large and growing city [11:06:26 AM] that has a housing shortage. I want to say that this change on one hand I'm glad that there's a compromise being proposed that people can agree upon and it's an improvement over not doing anything. At the same time I was reading some tweaks that Mike posted yesterday that pointed out that even with the changes being proposed by the compromise, Austin's compatibility regulations would still be among the most restrictive in the country when compared to peer cities and they also trigger in more cases than in other cities and it is also harder for them to be waived than they are in some other cities. In some cases in other cities that city council can waive the restrictions at [11:07:27 AM] their discretion, whereas in Austin it requires the board of adjustments to grant a variance, and requiring a super majority. I think about what might happen for me if I ever need to move. I have a condo that is fine, for instance, except that I can't have pets, so depending how my life goes that could potentially create an issue for me. I'm feeling fortunate right now that I'm not needing to move because of the way the housing situation is. I hear it's even affected people on council with their rents going up. I wanted to reiterate that there's a need and I believe council member vela has called for an analysis to look at the amount of housing capacity this would generate in comparison with other things that might further adjust the restrictions. And that seems like a good idea to me and seems like data that would be good for [11:08:27 AM] council to have in considering your deliberations. I also wanted to point out that with minimum parking restrictions, all other things being equal they're going to make a property more expensive. Brand I need to be able to be near transit so -- which might mean paying a premium for property in some cases. But at the same time if I'm required to pay for a parking space when I can't even drive a car it further affects affordability. So it's a matter of everything being related to everything else. And council should consider the needs of people who need to move and the needs of future generations. Thanks. [Buzzer]. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Edgar handle for item 48 followed by Daniel [11:09:31 AM] coutherman. >> You have three minutes. >> Hi. My name is Edgar handle. I've lived in Austin for 15 years. I have a two-year-old son and I worry deeply about the effect the housing crisis and the climate crisis will have on his life. Because of this worry, it is maddening to see serious threats to my son's future, to all of our futures, go unaddressed by this council, and I can't help but ask why. We know dense housing is more sustainable and more affordable sew why would this council choose to compromise our future just because of a local minority does not like living near tall buildings? While our council refuses to take housing reform seriously, I've watched friend after friend move farther and farther away. Friends who can't attend these kinds of meetings to tell you how important [11:10:31 AM] housing affordability really is. We have actual pressing crisis to deal with. Crisis that hit the least privileged among us hardest. We must stop protecting compatibility standards and parking minimums that add to the crisis and finally begin to treat these problems with the gravity they deserve. Thank you. >> Daniel cableman on item 48. On deck is Jolene kiolbassa. >> Mayor Adler, mayor pro tem alter, council members, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I am pleased to see that the city council has made the choice to address the severe housing shortage and affordability crisis with the compatibility parking and vmu items. However, the complete elimination of parking mandates and compatibility restrictions will allow these items to reach their full potential. There's an overwhelming consensus among experts that parking mandates are a failed practice that harm [11:11:31 AM] residents and contribute to housing cost increases, urban sprawl, pollution and car crashes. There's an accelerating trend among cities in the United States to remove costly parking mandate and to support affordability, climate and equity goals. Compatibility has been a tool used to separate different kinds of housing and keep the supply of homes in Austin well below what is needed. Projects along the corridors must be able to build to their full height and right size their parking and contribute to and not undermine stint's stated goals on affordability, mobility and climate. Austin city council has the power to choose to reach these goals. These are policy choices. So please consider choosing policies that will move us toward a more affordable and sustainable future. Thank you. >> Harper-madison: Chair, may I ask a question briefly? It's been brought to my attention that there might be folks in the audience who weren't aware of the cutoff time for item 48 and the opportunity to speak to it. [11:12:32 AM] Could I get a small show of hands just to gauge how many folks might not be signed up, but want to speak? How would you ask for them to proceed? These folks? Give the clerk their name and then have the opportunity to speak? How would you like to address that? >> Mayor Adler: Well, you know, it's a recurrent issue and we have some speakers that are here frequently that also come in and say they weren't aware of the rules. We've enforced those rules, generally speaking, just because it's what enable things to move forward. But on these items 48 and 49 there won't be any action taken today so this will also the opportunity for people to speak on June 9th when these items would be coming back to us. So certainly I think council could take a different direction if they wanted to, but otherwise as chair I would be enforcing this rule as I have in the past on other requests. >> Harper-madison: I appreciate that. And with the support of my colleagues I'd like to offer [11:13:32 AM] folks who took the time to come to city hall the time to speak. >> Harper-madison: Is that on all cases? >> I would say generally, but the one brought to my attention today is 48. But generally during the course of our conversations around access to city hall, I think when people take the time to show up we should offer them opportunity to speak. >> Mayor Adler: So on the access question, but not a general stating of the rule that from now on we don't require people to sign up on time? >> Harper-madison: I wouldn't say that. I saw two hands raised, in which case I would say that's not a disruption to the process. If we have two additional speakers that didn't have the opportunity to speak. >> Mayor Adler: Anybody have any objection to those two speakers to be able to speak today? If you -- >> Kitchen: I had a comment, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Councilmember kitchen and then -- councilmember tovo and then councilmember kitchen. >> Tovo: Thank you, councilmember harper-madison, thank you for raising that. I completely agree. And at one point the rule was that you had to have signed up prior to the item [11:14:33 AM] being called. And I'm not sure, I think in the course of the pandemic some of these rules have just shifted a little bit. So I don't know that today is the day to have that conversation, but I would ask that we kind of review some of those things maybe at our next work session. I think maybe the reason the cutoff is applying is because it's on consent, but I'm not sure. So I think as things are getting -- anyway, I think our process has gotten a bit jumbled on a few fronts and I completely agree when people come down to speak on an item they should be able to do that. And as long as they've signed up -- frankly, I think they ought to be able to sign up, as long as they're signing up before they finished talking about it, I would afford them the opportunity to speak. But I think the actual process rule we talked about is they needed to sign up before it got called. >> Mayor Adler: And when we were -- post pandemic when we were figuring out what rules we were going to proceed on we had that discussion and at that point [11:15:34 AM] the council decided to move forward with a cutoff so that [indiscernible]. I support it because it's enabling us as a body to have our agendas done and we're not having people speaking late into the night. But there's nothing to stop us as a group from revisiting at any point any of the rules that we have. But for today if you want to speak on items 48 and 49 and feel like -- again, you were unable to sign up today because you were after the cutoff, come down to the clerk and we'll recognize you. Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I think you said it, but just for clarity's purpose, I want people to know what we're talking about 48 and 49. 48 is the vmu item that I brought. 49 is the compatibility proposals that otherwise brought. There's the connection between the two and I'm not concerned about separating them. I just want people to understand that when we're [11:16:34 AM] talking about allowing people to talk about 48, we're also talking about 49. But I think you mentioned that, mayor. Okay, thank you. >> Mayor Adler: So we'll continue. Next speaker. >> Thank you very much. And thank you for your work on compatibility and vmu. I'm Jolene kiolbassa. I'm the vice-chair of the zap, but I am speaking on my own behalf as a very seasoned veteran of the 2022 vmu process. But first about your compatibility, zap had a similar proposal in 2017 that simplified the code and I see that this follows it quite a bit. But we felt like you do that there's no next slide to keep standards that extend to 540 feet. But different from your proposition right now, everyone does deserve the same level of protection. And one standard is the simplest. In fact, I've been talking [11:17:35 AM] to some people who are in the business and think that it would make the -- it would muck up things to have different standards. So your proposal makes compatibility a little bit more complicated with five categories. I understand what you're trying to do, but it means defining major and medium corridors and what if more row is needed that could change the definition? And the 216 mobility projects also seems to sort of mess it up. But still thank you for working on it. The vmu in 2008 was a big project that produced community buy-in. Neighborhoods were provided maps and I asked for one to be put on the document camera. And for opting in and opting out properties. And we also were [indiscernible] So this is what we worked with in the neighborhoods and businesses [11:18:38 AM] participated. During this we realized some owners realized that vmu was not compatibility or conflicted with their existing businesses. And there was also the need for neighborhood side design standards for all residential, multi-family and single-family, dark skies, lighting, for example, conflicts with people's houses and there are problems with noisy air conditioners and loading docs and noisy trash. So this robust discussion is not happening at this time. And it does come across as a little bit complicated and a top down roach. So I would say take more time so that you do have zoning and compatibility that is not too onerous and I would say include the land use agents and property owners, and I appreciate all the hard work that you've done on it but there is a lot to be learned from some of us who have participated in the past. [11:19:39 AM] Thank you. >> Speaking on item 48, Eleanor Mckinney. On deck is Curtis Rogers. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Mckinney or Mr. Rogers? Okay. Next speaker. I'm sorry, Mr. Rogers is here. Who's on deck after Mr. Rogers. >> Brandon witstruck. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Good morning, council and members of council and mayor. Thank you for this time to talk today. I'd like to start off by reading a list of cities in no particular order. Portland, Oregon. Raleigh, North Carolina, Minneapolis, Minnesota. St. Paul, bridge port, Connecticut. Hartford, Connecticut. South Bend, Indiana. Alameda California. [11:20:40 AM] Dinwiddie, Georgia. Dover New Hampshire. San Francisco California, emoryville California, Branson Missouri. Hudson New York and last but not least bastrop, Texas. This is a list of cities that have completelied eliminated parking requirements. This is not a time where we can easily say that we are addressing our affordability crisis, we are addressing our climate cries if we simply compromise and say that we need some parking requirements. I will say that reducing parking requirements is progress. But it kind of feels like in the 70s when airlines created a smoking section on the airplane. We all knew that was wrong. We all knew where we were going, we all know why we need to be and we can get that today and get there faster if we eliminate parking requirements. Thank you. >> Brendan wit struck. [11:21:40 AM] On deck is Joshua brunsman for items 48 and 49. >> Kitchen: Mayor, I have a question. Did you call -- I think you called someone that we're not seeing it, Ellie Mckinney, is that right? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Was she in person or supposed to be on -- >> She registered in-person to speak in-person. >> Kitchen: Okay. So when she shows up we can circle back around to her? Thank you. >> Jacobly speaking on 48 and 49. On deck is Robert pachula, 48 and 49. >> I live in d4. My wife and eight-year-old son, I hope my son and his peers get to live in Austin in the future. Thank you, mayor Adler and Austin council members for your attention today to the affordability climate and equity crisis that have been mad significantly worse by exclusionary zoning. [11:22:41 AM] Earlier this week president Biden asked you to end the practice of exclusionary zoning such as costly parking mandates or the bizarre idea of compatibility. Limiting the amount of people to live in the city of Austin to our current approximate population 200025% of growth has failed the city of Austin, rapidly driving up housing and transportation costs. Please begin today to change the land development code system to allow for the responsibility that a majority of the region's growth to occur in walkable neighborhoods with access to frequent transit. The only places in our metro region where affordable low carbon lifestyles are possible. There are no known public benefits to costly parking mandates. Compatibility or height restrictions. Parking mandates increase vehicle miles traveled, increase housing costs and increase car crashes. Narrow streets without sidewalks are safer for all users when there are cars parked on the streets. Schools are safer when there's not a ban on living [11:23:43 AM] within walking distance to schools. The affordability crisis in Austin is not a mystery. Where Austin city council has chosen to impose exclusionary zoning housing has become more sense sieve. The university neighborhood overlay has been widely successful at keeping housing affordable in west campus. While nearby neighborhoods saw costs increase by 50 or $60 every year per month between 2010 and 2019, the U.N.O. Neighborhoods only saw a two dollar to seven dollar increase in monthly rent. While adding significantly more homes for more people with many of those units not requiring residents invest in car storage. I support councilmember kitchen's and others desires for planning and for the people of our city to be encouraged in how we grow. However, any such processes should be done with an assumption of at least doubling housing capacity in the city this year and allowing many more people to affordably lien within [11:24:43 AM] walking distance of high quality transit. And finally, I think I'm he speaking on all three things, on the Menchaca zoning place, please allow for people to live within walking distance of our transit system that we're building. Thank you very much. >> Pool: Mayor, I had something for Mr. Crossley. Hi. You were talking about exclusion isnary zoning and I just wanted to comment because that is limited by state law, by the state legislature. I wanted you know that state representative Gina Hinojosa introduced a bill to overrule the Todd Baxter laws that prohibits exclusionary zoning. She introduced it 2019 and again in 2021. The bill moved not at all [11:25:43 AM] that first session. It was scheduled for a hearing and did have a hearing in 2021. This initiative will I trust again be brought by representative Hinojosa in 23 and going forward until we can in fact correct state law to allow for exclusionary zoning, which you discussed in your comments. We need those changes to happen at the state lawyer. Add thank you very much for being here today. That's all I have, mayor. Thank you very much, Mr. Crossley. >> I believe you're talking about inclusionary zoning and I was using the president's words about exclusionary zoning which is things like parking mandates -- >> Pool: She and I discussed all those things and we are working together to make these possible for these sorts of policies to be enacted and implemented [11:26:43 AM] throughout the state. Thanks. >> Robert Ochoa speaking on 48 and 49. On deck is Britta Wallace. >> Good morning, mayor Adler, good morning, council. My name is Robert and I'm the president of Austin habitat for humanity young professionals. I also serve as a non-voting member on the Austin habitat for humanity board. In 2018 and 2019 Austin was ranked as the number one place to live in the united States. We are number three in 2020, we were have been five in 2021 and I'm sure you are all aware that the new rankings just came out for this year and we are now ranked number 13. The reason for that is because of the lack of affordability. In fact, Austin's lack of affordability has become its reputation across this country. CEOs are emphatically tweeting calls for action. Memes of mobile homes [11:27:45 AM] selling for exorbitant prices. Austin has the title of one of the least affordable cities in America. And these are just a few acknowledgments of this crisis. To speak more about our organization, Austin habitat for humanity helps people build more affordable housing with the subgroup Austin habitat for humanity young professionals we help the organization mobilize young people in the community to volunteer by providing labor, fund-raising and Casey on behalf of habitat for humanity. We found that over half of the low income residents are cost burdened paying at least 30% of their monthly income for housing. Affordable home ownership is only -- only helps to alleviate the cost burden of housing and also raises the actually achievement of children that improves health, encourages greater civic engagement and economic activity. There is room for improvement in this city and how we respond to this [11:28:46 AM] crisis. The city's compatibility requirements of big buildings being built near small ones and the parking requirements inhibits how many affordable homes we can build. We strongly encourage the city to increase housing capacity on corridors and expand the construction of vertical mixed use buildings. Thank you. >> Britta Wallace on 48 and 49. On deck is David Whitworth. >> Thank you so much for bringing this forward. I am an infill developer and also the vice-president of the Austin infill coalition. I'm such a housing nerd that my entire Twitter feed has been about compatibility for the last 48 hours. [11:29:46 AM] I bet if you asked any of my fellow housing nerds what the biggest obstacle to getting more housing is in Austin, they would say compatibility. I'm also such a housing nerd that I was up late last night reading other city's compatibility rules. What I learned is that even the proposed amended compatibility rules in Austin keep buildings lower for longer than in many cities. For example, in Denver once you've gone 48 away from a triggering residential property you can hit your max by right building height of 75 feet. Even in Las Vegas which has strict compatibility rules there's a way for multi-family properties that advance affordability goals to be exempt from the compatibility rules. I understand -- under the current proposal, a building in Austin couldn't hit 75 feet even on a large corridor until it was 100 feet from the triggering residential property and even then that height would [11:30:47 AM] only be under a bonus program. I understand that the goal is consensus. So I ask y'all to consider whether scaling back our compatibility rules to where they are still some of the most restrictive in the country shows a true commitment to easing the affordability crisis and I ask that you open a line of communication with the developers that deal with compatibility rules on a daily basis to make sure that the end proposal is simple and actually results in more housing for all kinds of austinites. Thanks for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> David Whitworth on 48 and 49. On deck, Mario Cantu. Mario Cantu. Speaking on 48, 49 and 53. >> You have three minutes. [11:31:48 AM] >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Good evening, council. My name is Mario Cantu. I just wanted to focus on two things. I want to focus on displacement and affordable housing. The reason why I think that's a good focus is because I cannot really get a lot of information regarding those two things. If we have individuals that are living in an apartment complex, R and a developer comes in and wants to buy that property and it's sold and those individuals just get tossed out, let's just say they can't afford any liveable means. And in fact in those apartments let's say it's at 30 to 40% mfi which there's not a lot of that going on. Those individuals get tossed down to Ben white. Then it's stated if we build, build, build, they'll be okay, but they're not okay. So how do we take care of those individuals when [11:32:51 AM] there's displacement of those individuals and I think the solution is not necessarily doing that all the time and providing a bunch of hotels for those individuals to go into, it's working with developers and making some type of lateral move for those individuals to be replaced back into that development that has been built and established on the same property for them to live at either equal or greater than the mfi that they were before. I think that's a good strategy to look at. And again, we do displacement of individuals and it's ongoing. It's only getting worse, and the affordability that we need to be looking at is 30, 40, 50% mfi. I know a lot of people are going to shrug their arms about that that we can't do that, but it can be done. And right now is the time that we need to really be [11:33:51 AM] refocusing on those type of mfis, affordability, and discouraging displacement of individuals. Thank you. >> Monica Guzman speaking on 48, 49, 53, 90 and 94. On deck is Cindy reed. >> I even get to time myself. Good morning, mayor and council. I'm Monica Guzman, policy of gave, go Austin, vamos Austin, and district 4 resident. Thank you, council member Fuentes for responsing items 88 and 90. Thank you to the sponsoring council members as well. Thank you, council for item [11:34:51 AM] 90 moving forward with equitable green infrastructure. We look forward to hearing about it and working with the city on implementation and progress. As for items 48, 49, 53 and 94, gave is opposed and so am I as a district 4 resident. Is Austin experiencing a housing crisis? Yes. Affordability crisis? Absolutely. Is blanket upzoning the answer? Never. These are continued attempts to work around the March 2020 land development code ruling. Work around it so the city can increase entitlements to developers, deny homeowners the right to vial a valid petition of protest on development next door and near their homes and get around a court mandated super majority votes. Development needs to be thoughtful, consider the affordability. Neighborhood. The infrastructure of the area, the needs of diverse stakeholders. The patterns of displacement and the impacts of the different kinds of housing types. Each case is an opportunity for more equitable, resident [11:35:52 AM] centered, resident informed and resident led planning that is achieved through much more than blanket code changes. Speaking of displacement, when was the last time you looked at the project connect anti- displacement maps and dashboard? Austin's eastern crescent lights up the map with the three levels of is displacement. The majority of district 4 is either vulnerable or experiencing active or chronic displacement. Eastern crescent residents have been forced to bear the impact of unmanaged growth, rapid gentrification and displacement. So tell me how will this benefit families earning less than $40,000, less than 30,000. Describe in detail how the vmu resolution, especially if council member vela's amendments are included, how will it decrease displacement for bipoc households who are at risk of displacement. Public transportation does not go everywhere people need to go. How we're removing parking requirements benefit the men and women who need a vehicle to transport tools and other [11:36:53 AM] essential workers who cannot rely on or don't have access to public transportation. I would like you to give examples of other cities comparable to Austin where and how removing park requirements increased the number of affordable units, units affordable to are residents living at or below 40% mfi, 30% mfi. I know the city cannot require builders to build affordable housing and cannot set rent limits so tell us, explain oh us how approval of the resolution, especially if it includes the amendments I previously mentioned, will increase the number of affordable units accessible to eastern crescent residents living at or below 40% mfi? When it comes to -- [buzzer]. Despite what some people may think the idea that a one bedroom is not family friendly is actually true. While there are people who can own a home and have separate bedrooms for every child that is not [11:37:55 AM] [indiscernible]. Gava urges council to slow down the process for community engagement. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. >> Cindy reed. On deck is Taylor Trevino. Cindy reed is speaking on 48, 53, 58, 94. >> I am a native austinite, but not one so naive that knows we cannot remain the same. I've lived in Washington, D.C., Spain, New York City, Minneapolis and Houston. Not only have I seen these cities and visited them, but I've lived in them. They are my experienced experience. And removing parking completely is impractical, it is not rooted in affordable housing. It is actually-- promotes white privilege. It's actually rooted in white privilege and I'm explain to you how. This is not car storage. People need their cars to [11:38:56 AM] get to work. I have a three-year-old too. If any of you have small 13, chef a lot of stuff. Yes, it eventually starts to wind down as they get older, but they have tons of stuff. So I want you to think back to that time when you had small children. You had a stroller, had a car seat. You with all these things, little toys, diapers, for every situation. And I lived in DC with a small child and I lived back here because I knew this was a great place to raise a family. Let's not demonize cars. Let's think about the labor who needs a car. I live in district 4 and they need lots of those. They need it for landscaping, construction. A teacher, who I used to be one, has tons of stuff. We really need to take our time to talk with these people,. Look at who has spoken? The two people of color, visibly of color, that have spoken, said let's take our time with this. All of the other people have [11:39:56 AM] been white, okay? And knowledge workers can easily throw their backpack -- throw their laptop in their backpack and bicycle to work. People of color when we have a chance women we want to buy a car and there's nothing wrong with a car, especially the way we're going electric, we're going hike and bike. I hope to be -- hybrid. I hope my next car to be electric or hybrid. We need to think about the knowledge workers. Yes, if they're a lawyer, a tech worker, an accountant, they can throw their laptop in the backpack and bicycle to work. However, the everyday laborer, the everyday family person, does not have that privilege. And Austin is continuing to forget families. That's part of our lifeguard shortage. I grew up in Austin. That used to be a great summer job for a high schooler. We're cutting that pipeline off of talent because we continue to push families out. And in terms of white [11:40:59 AM] privilege the knowledge worker and those who live in the transit oriented developments. DC I lived in Ana costia east of the river. We did not have access to the amenities of capitol hill and if I wanted to go there to park I was siloed. I felt like I was in a prison because I had to drive across the river -- [buzzer] -- And look for parking. Secondly block and brown people do not feel safe riding a bike. Look at the events of Buffalo. A lot of times we feel like a target. We might bike on an off trial, but a lot of times these laborers that I'm representing they're not here to speak. So we really need to take our time, involve those people in this conversation. My mother-in-law lives off of flat bush avenue in new York City. Her life is dominated by not being able to park. She can't go to church. She says I have to be back by 2:00. All the parking spots are gone. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Are we really having the taxpayers pay for the parking the developers [11:42:00 AM] should be placing. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you for being with us today. We appreciate you speaking. [Overlapping speakers]. >> Mayor Adler: We need to >> The next speaker is Taylor Trevino on item 49. >> Mayor Adler: Ma'am, please. We need to give other people a chance to speak as well. >> Taylor secretary vino speaking on item 49. On deck is will Davis speaking on item 48 and 49. >> Renteria: Mayor, I have one dement. We've been studying -- comment. We've been studying this for years to where we're number 13 in the nation. I want people to know. And we're going to continue to study and it will make me into a multimillionaire. >> Will Davis, item 48 and [11:43:02 AM] 49. On deck is Greg Anderson, 48 and 49. >> Hi council. First of all, thank you so much for giving me the ability to come speak, even though I was late I promise I will not be late again for signing up for this. It's actually my first city council meeting. My name is will Davis. I'm in district 3. And 40% as of April, Austin homes have increased 40%. Shocking but not surprising. Our outdated land use policies are strangling our city, enabling the hollowing out of everything we hold dear. It's vibrant people. My brother is an artist and film maker who has lived here since he was a student at UT. He's been priced out of multiple apartments over the years and about to be priced out of his current one, a modest garage apartment. I went to live -- I want to live in an Austin where a tech bro and artist like my [11:44:04 AM] brother can live next to each other but unfortunately that is becoming less and less likely. I'm encouraged to see that the council has started developing a plan to address these issues, but I ask that you also support a strong vmu 2 that adds minimal to no compatibility regulations or parking requirements. Only then will vmu reach its full potential potential. We're in a full on crisis at this point and I prayed a that most days we will find relief. Thank you all for your service and to your community and thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Greg Anderson on 48 and 49. On deck is ky gray. >> Harper-madison: Mayor, before Mr. Anderson speaks I would like to take a moment to our last speaker for coming down to city hall. It can be nerve-wracking to step up to that podium and present before the board. I appreciate you coming down to city hall. This is in fact the people's chambers, building, podium, and I really love to see [11:45:04 AM] folks for the first time engage and interact with this process. Thank you for coming down. Appreciate it. >> Thank you council members tovo and Madison for making sure we got to speak. Thank you, councilmember kitchen for bringing this item, vmu 2. It's the first time I've had hope in a little while. My name is Greg Anderson with Austin habitat for humanity. I hope that all of you have heard that we have teamed up with Austin independent school district to sell 30 homes to teachers and staff who like to live in Austin. And I want to share that in the first couple of slides, if you would, in the first 48 hours we had 700 unique replies -- hit it two more times. In the first 96 hours we had over 1,000 unique inquiries for 30 homes from aid teachers and staff. On win hand that's amazing, [11:46:05 AM] right, this outpouring of yes, we want a home. On the other hand, wow, it's overwhelming that the demand for housing and people. My guess is each and every one of you want to try to remain here in Austin. Next slide, please. So we take protecting exclusionary zoning very seriously in Austin. And to be clear, there are a lot of things that are within our control when it comes to exclusionary zoning. We're talking minimum lot sizes, F.A.R. Regs, height limits, single-family and -- next slide, please. Right now we allow for exclusionary zoning to bleed on to our corridors, which is the one place where I've heard I think all of you agree that we want to legalize housing that we want it to be easy to build and we can do amazing things with this ordinance if we go to 90 feet, make it by right. And parking is one of those things and we serve a lot of families who definitely need parking. We also serve families who don't need parking. So right now we have that one seize fits all. [11:47:07 AM] You get parking, you get parking. We're just saying open parking options for folks not always to have parking if they can't pay for it and can't afford it. And next slide, please. It's time to take it senior seriously and delete compatibility. It's time for you to legalize unbelievable amounts of housing in Austin. I'm pulling for you all and I know everyone else is as well. Thank you for letting me speak. >> Ky gray. And on deck is Ethan Smith. >> What numbers? >> 48 and 49. >> >> Hi. Thanks for letting me speak. I want to talk about compatibility for a second. And in particular I want to talk about the 25-foot setback you have where you can do nothing in right now. So what's kind of strange I've always thought is if you have a duplex or a house that has to be five feet from the property line. And it can go up two stories. A multi-family property next to it has to do 25-foot [11:48:07 AM] where it can't do anything. It can't have any stories, can't have building, a drivement you can't even do the detention ponds that will be required for multi-family. So that might not sound like a big deal. We're only talking about 20 feet. But it actually is. Let's say you have a property that's 100 feet deep. You're going to lose 20 feet because of this rule, right? So that's 20% of your site. But it's actually going to be more than that because again, you will have to have setbacks in the front, you will have to have some trees, you will have to have critical root Zones around. You will have to have a drive. So now you're talking about potentially if that's going to be a large part of your site you could be talking about losing 50% of your site. And again, I'm not saying that you should be able to go 60 feet up. I'm saying why can't a triplex have this same limits as a house? So a house can be two stories, five feet from your property line. Why can't a triplex be five feet from the property line? I can't understand why the [11:49:09 AM] triplex has to be so much less or any other project. I know in the discussion we're talking about raising five feet, but that 20 feet is substantial and will still have a substantial impact on all projects across Austin. Again, it's not asking for that much. It's literally saying why can't we do -- why can't a triplex do what a single-family house can do and go up two stories in the same way. It feels like some people -- a single-family house has to be protected from a triplex. I don't think that's logical. I don't think -- there's a lot of people on the discussion that lived in triplexes and saying why are people scared of people who living in triplexes? Why can't they live as close to the property line as a single-family house? That's all. Thanks for letting me speak again. >> Chair: Thank you. >> Ethan Smith on 48 and 49. On deck is Christopher page. >> Mayor Adler: And for that last speaker, what was proposed for the council to consider is exactly taking a [11:50:09 AM] look at that 25 feet to see if it's appropriate to relax some of those rules. >> Kitchen: Mayor? Well, we'll take questions, later, right? Because that part wasn't clear to me in the proposal. Okay. >> Good morning. So people going to probably provide some counterparts to some of these other things that people have said. I am pro density. I voted for project connect, six billion dollar project connect is what I voted for. I'm a capitalist. I think if there are people nationally who want to invest billions of dollars in real estate in Austin, bring your money down, we want it. But I don't think that the biggest problem for affordability is compatibility or parking. I think it's actually market consolidation in that when we take all this money and when you increase the height of a building to 100 or 200 [11:51:10 AM] or 300 feet it takes a certain amount of capital to invest in something like that. And the big fish eat the smaller fish. In west campus, American campus already a 10 billion-dollar company, is getting bought out by a 90 billion-dollar company and these are trends that are continuing. And when you have market consolidation like that, the actors, you know, monopolies do not create affordability. Monopolies create a base on price. So just because you're getting density doesn't mean you're getting affordability. So -- but we do need density and we need to support a rail network but I don't think we should go whole hog on this idea that every time we add density, every single thing we do that adds density is going to create affordability. And that certainly hasn't happened here in the last couple of years. And also a lot of these people that spoke against parking I wonder if any of them represent portfolios that have existing parking because when you own parking [11:52:10 AM] and you outlaw the building of new parking, that's an asset that is yours that you're increasing the value of. So I'm a capitalist. I think people should do that, but is that what's happening when people are saying I'm against parking? I've worked for wages my whole life so I understand what that lady was saying earlier about some people actually need parking. That made a lot of sense to me. And I'll be back to talk about the co-ops later. Thank you. >> Christopher page on items 48 and 49. >> [Inaudible]. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, you may. >> I'm Chris page, president of the Homewood heights neighborhood association. My views here today are just my own. I can tell you that in my [11:53:12 AM] own neighborhood there's no shortage of entitlements or developable land. There is an excess of speculation that takes place there, lots of unbuilt potential housing. That's why it becomes more confusing when you see entitlement increases on the vacant lots which ultimately do very little other than spiking the value for potential land transactions going forward. The infrastructure is decrepit. We've had water failures. And there is actually a discontinuous and lack of -- discontinuous sidewalks as well as lack of pedestrian mobility infrastructure and. Infrastructure must precede all density. That happens in every other city. Short-term rentals are eating into our existing housing inventory as well. [11:54:14 AM] And in terms of climate improvement, we will not see significant improvements based on higher density throughout the city. In fact, we'll be increasing the amount of impermeable cover, increasing coverage on recharge, reducing the amount of Tran expiration, which actually reduces the overall temperature of the environment by over 10 degrees and is proven in other cities. The policies that are currently being proposed are very likely to accelerate displacement as has been stated by some other speakers today. By -- this is my last point. My changing these entitlements or improving the feasibility of more [11:55:14 AM] valuable new construction, by right rather than through negotiation with communities, you're gutting neighborhoods' abilities to negotiate community benefits through variances and through rezonings. And those -- it's critical that we have something to bring to those negotiations because otherwise we will get no community benefits from developers and all the costs will be borne on the city, which frankly I don't think could afford them. Thank you. >> That concludes all of the speakers for 48 and 49, so we return to item 53. Are we doing one minute or three? >> Mayor Adler: One minute. How many speakers do we have left in-person? >> 11 in person and 25 remote. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. And of the 25 remote, my count is a little about 10 roughly or more that are three-minute speakers? [11:56:17 AM] Just rough. >> Kitchen: Mayor, we have one speaker who was called earlier who is here now. >> We have eight speakers approximately speaking remotely on items 48 and 49. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. That would be 24. So we have about 35, 40 minutes of speakers remote. And we have about another 10, 15 minutes of speakers here. It's 11:56. Let's see if we can get through these, but be thinking about whether you want to take the speakers who have been on the phone since this morning and hold them until this afternoon or whether we want to try to get them before we go to -- either before or after the public speakers at noon. Before music. But think about that. Let's continue on. Let's begin with the person who you called Erwin center because I think she is also a -- a 48 and 49 speaker. >> I believe it was Eleanor [11:57:18 AM] Mckinney. >> Mayor Adler: Hang on. Ms. Mckinney, would you come up? >> Tovo: Would you state again how many minutes are represented by the speakers online? >> Mayor Adler: It looks as if there's roughly 35, 40 minutes of speakers online. About eight that are speaking for three minutes and another 10 or 12 speakers. >> Looks like there's 12. There's 12 three minutes. >> There are a total of 24, 25 remote speakers. About 12 on 48 and 49, which will provide them three minutes each. >> Mayor Adler: So it's a little bit longer than. Probably closer to 45, 50 minutes. >> And we continue to get registrants for in-person for 48 and 49. >> Mayor Adler: So you're continuing to take people? Okay. >> I was asked -- >> Mayor Adler: That's fine, that's fine. Go ahead, Ms. Mckinney. >> I have one minute, is [11:58:19 AM] that right? >> Mayor Adler: You have . >> Okay. I'm from district five and there's a packet I've handed out in front of you. What we're looking at on south Lamar and burnet road and probably other places in the city, where commercial intrudes into residential. It's not in terms of compatibility and that particular discussion. I'm at the Kenny triangle, as it's called. We'll go through it as you flip through your packet. It's not just one part of the city. It's in various places of the city where angled streets come in to a major corridor. So how -- and what happens with commercial intruding into residential. The third page -- could you [11:59:20 AM] flip that for them, please. Here is burnet road. I got this from Barbara Mcarthur in council member pool's? >> You have two more minutes. >> P going. >> I'm showing how it intrudes. The fourth is like that, starting to show you how much the commercial is at the side, not just at the back of my property. Where it comes in is my back porch. My back porch is on the major -- whatever height building we end up with. So.... So my last slide here if you flip through it. If you can -- there you go. The last one shows the -- medium corridor. [12:00:20 PM] I'm advocating for a medium corridor on south Lamar and showing how at 65 feet is at 150 and that that really kind of makes sense in terms of how it addresses sf-3 with the 90 being outside of the major commercial piece. I forgot to say at the beginning, I think this is an excellent document that Adler, altar, Fuentes came up with. Excellent document. I was so thrilled to see this as a way to come into this discussion. If you look at that and if you look at page 4 where it talks about the medium corridors at the bottom, 65 foot height at 150 distance -- that is what my quick sketch is showing. [12:01:29 PM] That's my brief presentation. I wanted to make sure you understood it's not just at the rear properties. Sometimes they back up to sf-3, sometimes they don't. There are places in the city where it's on the side as well. >> Would you M sending me those images? Poloapologies. I have them in front of me. >> We're talking about the side. I appreciate your consideration. >> Kitchen: Mayor, one quick question. Thank you for providing these drawings. I understand you're e- mailing them to everyone too. I think what I heard you say is that there's still enough distance to build. It's just the importance [12:02:31 PM] here -- thinking about the impact on the side and the medium -- the proposal for median corridors works. >> That's exactly right. I'm sure the staff helped you too. I want to thank y'all for getting down into the details. >> Council member pool? >> Pool: Thank you for coming and bringing the documents with the sketches at the end. My goal with the proposal is to try to find a way for us to move forward related to compatibility and realizing there are so many unique situations across the city for all of us -- we're familiar with our districts, which helpful to get the input. I agree this is a great way to [12:03:32 PM] start the conversation. I look forward to working with everybody. There is an opportunity to move forward with something that will work throughout the city. It will not be the be-all and end-all. That's not every the case but for this point in time, again, thank you for coming and weighing in and giving us the benefit of your expertise. Thank you. >> Brandon armburst Eric -- arm burster -- on deck is Jeffrey Bowen. >> Hi. I'm chief operating officer at St. Andrews episcopal school. We're committed to being a partner to find transportation solutions to west 31st. We feel it's possible to [12:04:32 PM] improve functionality and also safety as we work through the asmp. Safe pick-up and drop-off of K through 8 students is paramount and our primary concern. We need to make sure parking is available to support our faculty, staff, and parents every day. We've been working with atd and council members altar and tovo for the past few years and we are committed to being a partner. We ask that you consider the needs of the school and the neighborhood as we move forward with plans for west 31st street. Thank you. [12:05:44 PM] Council started a resolution in 2020 to put the wheels in motion. Based on the comments, he called this a living document. This amendment is a map with all kinds of issues and it serves -- it encompasses the entire city of Austin. He stated that single family property own irs are not affected by this map or this process. Well, if it doesn't affect single family housing, why is it still on the map? We were told only single family properties would be affected through redevelopment. I provided to the city clerk a document for an ordinance, proposed ordinance by a smart lady that can deal with this. [12:06:46 PM] I would appreciate it if you would take a look at that proposal for this -- for this versus a plain map. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Matthew gaventa for 53. On deck is Bobby. >> Good morning. We are a community focused church. We hope one of the largest food distribution venues for at-risk populations in the region. Our neighborhood has changed drastically but upc remains committed to adapting and pivoting and learning alongside the community around us. [12:07:46 PM] We want to be good neighbors and we're excited about ways asmp and project connect can help the causes of equity and florishing in west campus. We're concerned about the accessibility of parking space. The parking lane on San Antonio for a long time has been the way people in wheelchairs can find their way into our sanctuary. I urge council to think carefully about the corridor. Let's not make the area less accessible in the cause of making it accessible. >> Bobby levenski. >> Thank you. [12:08:47 PM] I'm here helping the west 31st infrastructure. Mr. Armbuster preluded his experience. We want to make sure to highlight this discussion for you. There will be discussions down the road with the plan itself. The recommendation to change the classification from tier one to tier two is helpful. It doesn't preclude any of the options the stakeholders may come to. We were worried there might be weird technicality that might shift it that might not meet the needs of the stakeholders. This is one of the streets where it's being asked to do a lot. It's a narrow, short street. We're going to reach out to your offices to have meetings and you'll have a packet of information in your boxes. [12:09:51 PM] Thank you. >> Janice ranken on 53. >> Greetings, Mr. Mayor. I am Janice ranken. I speak on my own behalf today. I do believe my comments reflect valid concerns and frustrations that many property owners in my neighborhood have had about the asmp. This expansion of right of way is like pulling a rabbit out of the hat. If the city are supposed to believe the idea that it does [12:10:52 PM] not constitute a taking of private property, it lays that foundation. Property owners have not been notified so many are unaware. I urge you to adopt an ordinance that clarifies the nature of the right of way designations and to clarify that these are not going to be the basis for a taking under any legal or equitable claim in thfuture. Please refer to the attachments I submitted to the city clerk. Questions, anyone? >> Mayor Adler: Council member tovo? . >> I believe you e-mailed everyone on council. >> It was yesterday. >> Oh, gosh. That's kind of the way time [12:11:52 PM] works around here, isn't it? We should all have a copy. >> I appreciate you taking a good, strong look . >> My name is Dan Rener. My wife and I live in district 10, west of north Lamar. We live and work there. So it's very important to us that we figure out a way to make the west 31st street shoal creek corridor work with respect to what's taking place with the asmp. Two things I would like to leave you with today. First, we'd urge you to make [12:12:54 PM] sure the asmp is adopted, continues to classify west 31st street, shoal creek, as a level one street. Second, I want to give a sincere thanks to council members altar and tovo and your staff for coming out to see the challenges we're working with on the current pallet project. We look forward to working with you on it. >> On deck is Rick levy on 87. >> Thank you for allowing me to speak on item 53. My name the Jason Tompkins. I'm a residence of west 31st street. In echoing what some of the other speakers have said, [12:13:56 PM] appreciate the opportunity to continue dialogue with members of the Austin transportation department and other interested parties and stakeholders. West 31st street tends to be a unique street and I know in the drive to create simple, unified comprehensive plans, often times difficult or unique conditions in areas can be overlooked. We're working with that on our particular street and look forward to the opportunity to work through the various challenges that are being asked of this tiny street in central Austin. Look forward to speaking with many of you over the course of the next couple of months. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Rick levy on item 57. On deck is Chris zians. >> Good afternoon. I'm the president of the Texas [12:14:59 PM] aflcio, which is a statewide organization of 240,000 members. We speak on issues of workers. I live and work in council member tovo's district. We're here to speak in favor of the item, to thank council member harper-madison for bringing the measure forward that would allow businesses to participate in the downtown density bonus program. We were engaged in a similar project in San Antonio. We were able to convert hundreds of units for seniors right on the river walk affordable housing and we think given where the building is -- we're on the corner of 11st and lavaca that we're well positioned with respect to transit, work places, et cetera to do a project here. Thank you for bringing this [12:16:00 PM] forward. Appreciate your support. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. How many more speakers do we have. >> Three, four -- we still need remote. On deck is holly Mcdaniel. Luke mesiker on 49 and 90. >> Mayor Adler: You have three min >> Thank you. I'm executive director of environment Texas, a nonprofit advocate for clean water, clean air, open spaces, representing about 7500 members, most of them here in Austin. You know, as we grow as a city it's critical we find ways to [12:17:01 PM] accommodate people and businesses into existing neighborhoods. The alternative is a disaster to our environment. It's a no-brainer that we would add housing to the corridors and we should make it easier to build, but at the same time we have to mitigate against localized impacts including storm-water run- off contributing to fee kal bacteria in our creeks. Storm water is contributing to the toxic algae blooms that have killed at least seven dogs in our Lakes. We know nature based infrastructure as called for in council member tovo's resolution is a great solution that can help reduce run-off pollution while reducing the urban heat effect by adding [12:18:02 PM] more green in our communities. We're in strong support of item 49 and item 90. We see them as perfect complements to each other, help ING address the climate crisis while protecting what's so special about Austin, our clean water ways and green spaces. Thank you so much. >> Tovo: I want to thank you for being here. I know you've met with many of us on council about Tse issues for a while now. As you may or may know there is going to be a conversation here today about whether or not to postpone. A couple of my colleagues have indicated they would like to. I wanted to make you aware and wasn't sure if you wanted to weigh in on that. >> Many of the items were proped five years ago and fully vetted through the land development code rewrite process through boards and [12:19:03 PM] commissions, through the council on two different readings. As I've communicated to many of you over the last year or two, you know, we can't wait any longer for action to address the water pollution crisis in this community. You know -- ideally we would do it comprehensively and that was our preference, but, you know, we can't wait longer. It's been years and years and we're not seeing the action we need to clean up the waterways. I don't know which meeting it needs to be addressed at but definitely we need to act quickly to get this process in place because it's going to take time for the staff to come back to council and we don't want to wait any longer. Thank you >> Tovo: Thank you. >> Kitchen: Mayor, I have a question. >> Mayor Adler: Yes, council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: Thank you. I'm wanting to make sure I understood that -- did I hear you say that parts of the resolution -- council has already passed, it's gone fully [12:20:04 PM] vetted and was passed as part of the last land development code. >> That's correct. The functional green which incorporates rain gardens, green roofs -- dense parts of city already vetted and approved by council. >> Kitchen: Council has done a lot of work on functional green. We've had previous resolutions I was lived in and others, of course. And the staff has done quite a bit of work on that. And we've been through quite a bit of processes already. I wanted to confirm that was one of the reasons you were thinking we needed to get this done and move forward. >> Exactly. >> Mayor Adler: You said it would be better to do it comprehensive. Why do you think it's better to do it comprehensively. >> Because -- we wrote a [12:21:04 PM] report in 2017 where we examined the science on the environmental impacts of development. What we found is that -- I think which is kind of a no-brainer sprawl is bad on the environment on every metric, whether climate change, people having to drive long distances, means carbon emissions in the atmosphere, more flooding -- every metric sprawl is worse for the environment. But we know highly dense properties can have localized impacts of water pollution, flooding and those have to be mitigated. From our perspective the best path is to live on a smaller footprint, to accommodate people within a reasonable ground that are not sprawling throughout the community but working to make sure we minimize impacts to water pollution, flooding, heat, et cetera. >> Mayor Adler: I appreciate [12:22:05 PM] that. I think everybody on the dais -- on this dais are campons and -- of environmental goals and what we're trying to accomplish here. In a comprehensive way as part of a larger scheme, as part of land development code, a lot of these items were passed and I support every one of them. Everybody is a champion for affordability and the kind of land development goals we're trying to push forward, and I believe to my core that this is not a forced choice where we have to be for one and not for the other -- that there's a way to make them work together. And it could be, as I know in the comprehensive development code where we passed it before, not only did we pass these kinds of environmental protections but they were offset by greater entitlements or relaxation of certain [12:23:07 PM] requirements such that we didn't have to make a forced choice. We could still -- you were part of the conversations when we were negotiating those things, weren't you. >> I was. >> Mayor Adler: So my reason to request the delay -- I recognize the need for us to move forward quickly and you and I have stood next touch other shoulder to shoulder publicly saying we need to move forward -- is to give us a chance to find the trade-offs such that if we were to I a -- adopt this that we're not adopting in a vacuum. That help assure we're not making a choice but we're -- finding the right waivers or entitlements to make that work. I want to make clear my postponement -- real supportive [12:24:10 PM] of all these things. Want to vote for them again but want to do in the same context where we voted for them before. Council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: Yes, mayor. We can certainly talk about what's appropriate in terms of timeline postponing. I think what I would really find distressing is if we felt we had to postpone to -- you know, to spend a lot of time thinking about the different aspects of this that you just mentioned. I think that we've done a lot of that work already. So, you know, we can talk about whether this is a -- you know, I would want to defer to council member tovo, but whether there's some time-limited, you know, thinking around postponement. I would not want to postpone this while we're thinking of other things from the land development code we might want to bring. [12:25:10 PM] I think we've vetted a lot of this, so I don't want to wait until after the holiday -- not the holiday. We don't have a holiday. After our break because then we're going to be pushing this to where we can't get it done this year. This is to initiate changes. Still has to go through the whole vetting process, with lots of opportunity for conversation before it even gets back to us. So I think there's a built-in vetting process, and we need to be mindful of the amount of time that takes. >> Calderon: . . >> Mayor Adler: I agree. We can say craft as part of the ordinance that would speak to entitlements so it's not a forced choice between affordability and the environment but now is not the time for us to debate that. We can talk about that -- >> Kitchen: Okay. I disagree. [12:26:11 PM] I don't think we're in a forced-choice situation. >> Mayor Adler: I understand. Council member Ellis? I'll come back. >> Ellis: Just a quick question while we have you here. We're happy you're working on issues like this in our city. Is everything in the version two resolution something you suggested or are there other things. >> The items we suggested were the ones included in the land development code rewrite -- functional green provisions, tree islands and parking lots. There are additional measures that didn't come from us but we're supportive of. Some response to the Samsung spill. Making sure we're doing good monitoring. I think it's a great provision. I didn't come up with it. I wish I had but there are other provisions we support. [12:27:14 PM] But we weren't the genesis or didn't recommend them. >> Ellis: I don't think anyone suggested a long postponement but maybe a couple of days to look through it would be appreciated. This came to my attention on Monday and it was a version two posted late yesterday. I just want to make sure I'm asking the right questions so I can make an informed decision. >> If there is a postponement I hope it would be no later than the next June 9th meeting. This has been vetted. The resolution has -- I think the last piece of it directs staff to look at impacts in terms of affordability and costs so that process is already going to be included in this resolution. Hope we won't delay any longer than June 9th. >> Ellis: I know we've had conversations about those previously. My intent for the dais would be only to June 9th. [12:28:15 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Council member harper-madison. >> Renteria: We're having a discussion on an item that has been pulled. I think we should continue our public communication. We have citizen communication that's left. We shouldn't be discussing an issue that's been pulled. >> Mayor Adler: Your point is well taken. We have a lot of people who have been waiting and I'm going to propose we stick here so the public communications people -- we told the music person to come back at 1:30. That's not going to happen. If we can get through this we can get through the speakers who have been waiting since this morning. Anything further. >> Wanted to make sure I heard the statistic correctly. Did you say 33 per cent of our creeks and waterways? >> Mayor Adler: Council member tovo? >> Tovo: Just because you asked that question, council member Ellis, I want to [12:29:16 PM] summarize again my response to your question that was similar on Tuesday which is where -- I wanted to give credit where credit was due. Thank you for environment Texas. Council member kitchen advanced many of those as part of her work. We worked with podair. My senior policy advisor also introduced some good measures that are part of this. Like so many great policy documents that come to us on council, it was the work of multiple stakeholders coming from many different areas of expertise. I hope I didn't miss anybody, but those are the sources that I'm aware of and are top of mind. Apologies for repeating the answer that I provided on Tuesday. >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues, we have folks on the phone. I think we'll try to take those. I would like the clerk to let the people who have signed up for public communication know [12:30:17 PM] that we Eric -- we're not going to get to them until after 1:00 o'clock. At 1:00 o'clock I'm going to ask the clerk to let -- or if you're listening, public communications people -- it's not going to be earlier than 1:00. Hopefully as soon thereafter as we can. Let's continue to take the speakers. >> Alice woods for 48, 49. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Colleagues, we'll continue to let people sign up as they show up. You have three minutes. >> Hi, mayor and council. I live in district 9. I appreciate the opportunity to speak on these items. As someone who works in affordable housing development I don't usually have to consider affordability. However, I also know that the affordable housing we build cannot solve Austin's [12:31:20 PM] affordability crisis alone. We need to build every kind of housing and so, so much of it. With the existing compatibility requirements or the compromise proposed we are tying our hands while we try to solve this pressing problem. We cannot keep building housing at the low rate, high cost and minimal density we have been. Compatibility costs us too much housingen and we cannot afford it anymore. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Mateo barnstorm. On deck is Mary ingle. >> Thank you. I'm speaking on behalf of the board of the congress for the [12:32:20 PM] new urbanism central chapter. I wish to voice strong support. Our city is facing explosive growth, aligning that on the transit corridors is good for affordability, good for the environment, and good for transit investments. Increasing housing options is good planning and smart policy and we should move forward with that. To that end we also remain in strong support of the proposals to eliminate compatibility requirements on transit corridors as well as the elimination of parking minimums. The way we practice compatibility in the city is not good. Compatibility can have utility if it creates Zones of middle density. Our code does not do this. [12:33:23 PM] Properties can kill substantial amounts of housing. Triggering properties a football field or more away can prevent us from achieving our goals. We are on record of supporting the removal of antiquated parking minimums. They're all an incentive to drive. Parking minimums are fertility drugs for cars. A great place to start with eliminating the mandates is along the billions of dollars of transit investment. We hope you'll realize the critical inflection point in the development of our city and embrace the bold vision to align transportation and housing and planning. Thank you so much. >> Mary ingle on 48 and 49? [12:34:26 PM] >> Mayor Adler: She's not here. >> Holly Mcdaniel on 89. >> Hi, everyone. I'm holly Mcdaniel, executive director of Austin diver back. I'm here to talk about the menstrual equity program you have before that. The pilot before that was the bright spot program. We worked to get that off the ground. One of the things we learned in that program is there is a 72 per cent need in low-income families to have access to period supplies. We call that period poverty. Unfortunately one in five people in our community experience that here in Austin. I'm in favor of this. The community is in favor of this. We're looking forward to be able to provide period supplies, pads, tampons, liners at all city buildings and making sure they're in [12:35:27 PM] libraries and community centers. Anybody who walks in a bathroom, regardless of the time of the month, they have the supplies we need. We appreciate the support for individual students and women. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Lee Sherman for item 60. On deck is Toby levy on item 60 as well. I'm going to go to remote speakers. On item 49 we've got Susan pentell. [12:36:29 PM] Susan pentell, please unmute. >> Mayor Adler: How do people unmute on phone. >> They have their devices on mute. Next speaker. >> Can you hear me? I'm a district four resident. I have the honor to serve on zoning and platting commission. I'm asking you to strongly support the changes to the dmu two zoning, specifically with the change from council member vela to eliminate accountability of height and those of parking min mum. These move us to the [12:37:30 PM] comprehensive plan goal. It helps us integrate new people and businesses along our transit corridors to make sure we're getting the most and effective use of aur transit network -- our transit network. This will allow for better and abundant housing, which we need. Beyond increasing entitlements for vmu two -- eliminating compatibility is key. As it stands, less than 50 per cent of the buildings that exist in the vmu area where they're allowed to build can do so because of compatibility. These are thousands of units. Thousands of people could live in the city and how this helps with displacement -- even if all those were the market rate units thousands of people who would go to those units and not [12:38:31 PM] competing with those who are low to moderate income. It's also a way to get cars off the street. People who have to rely on a vehicle to get around, that's more people who are not having to drive competing for road space with the people who do. We should not in a housing crisis be in discussion of how to maybe limit. It is critical we take bold action and every year we stop, every month that we hold this decision off is more time that the value of the housing that can exist in the city goes up and up and up. I'm lucky enough to say I'm going to be a father in June. I'm terrified about what that means but I'm more scared of what it will mean as far as extra space or options or if my son will be able to grow up in this place. [12:39:32 PM] I hope so. I hope all of you can look beyond what we have as far as the desire to help keep a certain view of Austin to move forward to what can be a vision of a better Austin for all of us here. I thank you for your time. I'm not sure I was listening but whichever council member recommended we all have three minutes, thank you. With remaining time I want to say I work a 9:00 to 5:00 job. It is difficult to wait this long or to have the privilege to step away and give you this response. Please weigh that for future meetings -- we may not be able to come speak in favor of things like this but we here out here. E with want to get the word out. If there are other ways we can communicate, we would appreciate those ways to give you our feedback. Thank you for your time. >> Next speaker is Susan pentell on item 49. [12:40:50 PM] Susan pentell? Sandy Ramirez. >> Good day. I'm against continued wasteful spending. We don't need to spend a hundred thousand for arts. Allowed talented students to show off their work. No more covid-19 expenditures. We are way past it. People can afford feminine hygiene projects. Against more funding for the project. With no notice to the rest of them you changed to a 55 year old or older homeless -- with no criminal background checks it poses a threat. It was and is the wrong [12:41:52 PM] location. Has made neighborhoods unsafe and [garbled audio]. Rather than recovering -- you're inviting more people to arrive at Austin. >> Your time has expired. >> Oh, boy. I have ten seconds which will be disastrous. >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead and close. >> I'd like to thank -- thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Go ahead. >> Jeff risenme for items 48 and 49. >> Can you hear me. [12:42:52 PM] >> Yes. Go ahead. >> I'm a resident of district 6. I'm also a homeowner and first time caller into the city council meeting so I appreciate the time. I want to first clarify I selected neutral on these topics. It wasn't clear to me from the agenda what for or against met. I'm strongly against any new restrictions or regulations, even amended restrictions to regulations that make building mid to high density housing in the city more difficult and against regulations that emphasize the need of cars over the need -- over the health and welfare of the people of the city. Across the city I would be in favor of complete elimination of compatibility restrictions and elimination of a parking mandate. Austin is in a unique position [12:43:54 PM] to lead by example in creating a community that emphasizes -- these ultimately I don't feel are difficult questions to answer. We know more housing supply will make housing more affordable. We know reducing car use in favor of biking designs help welfare of people in the city and mitigate impacts on climate change. That's it. I really appreciate your time. >> Megan micenback. >> Hello. I appreciate the time and effort that council is spending on the vmu and compatibility today. I would like to say it's important to consider families, [12:44:56 PM] the infirmed, the disabled when considering parking and I agree with Ms. Guzman who said let us abide by the Acuna case. I encourage you to have extensive time and effort in engaging the public on vmu. For item 53, the asmp amendments we ask council to protect private property owners -- make sure the asmp follows the relevant provisions of chapter one of the Texas property code. I think legislation by web map is not the way to go. Thank you again. Good-bye. >> Anna Aguirre. >> Good afternoon. I serve on the environmental [12:45:59 PM] commission. I am speaking as myself as a resident. First, regarding item 90 I fully support the resolution and thank council members Fuentes, tovo, kitchen addressing equities and working to provide environmental protections with the development zone. Regarding 48 and 49 I appreciate the efforts put forth by the mayor with meeting with representatives. We look forward to continuing [indiscernible], negative environmental impact and other important quality of life factors. [12:47:00 PM] Please ensure current residents are protected and afforded due process during this time. I suggest [indiscernible] With electronic equipment, internet connectivity or familiarity with use of electronic strategies be given the same opportunity to meet with the council members and not be subjected to those (indiscernible). Residents with these challenges should not be discriminated against. Such behavior should not be tolerated. My expectation is these residents should be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of race, ethnicity or economic status. Voices and concerns should be heard. I am more than happy to work with you on this. This plan depending on the [12:48:01 PM] application with individual neighborhoods can be positive or negative. I hope the staff will continue to work with the city's leadership -- that meets the unique characteristics of the neighborhood. Thank you for your time and consideration and service to our community. >> Joyce boteano. >> Can you hear me. >> Yes. Go ahead, please. >> Hello. I'm opposed to this proposed ordinance, number 48, because it gets so few affordable housing units for a rather large increase of the base zoning height of a vmu structure. I would like to see 50 per cent of the additional height units as affordable for those earning less than the 80 per cent mfi with the option to buy rather than just rent. [12:49:01 PM] Homeownership would really help the equity issue in Austin. I oppose fee in lieu for vmu two projects, affordable units should be on site. Compatibility standards and parking requirements are best left out of this ordinance. They are complex issues that require more time for careful analysis. On item 49, I want to change my position from against to neutral now that I finally had a chance to read the proposal. I appreciate the care that went into the creation of this proposal. There are still unanswered questions about how this would apply across the city and I still oppose fee in lieu. On item 53, the asmp is not ready for approval. There are discrepancies and information scattered across the street network story map and the document itself. There was confusion in the community on how access and review the materials and now [12:50:01 PM] there is confusion as to what is being approved for proposal. The right of way acquisitions are a great concern to property owners. The asmp claims to support equity. Cap metro reduced the bus service in east Austin to give white affluent Austin more bus service which it didn't ask for and hardly uses. This would be number 18 and 35 transit priority bus route. This inequity in bus service makes cap metro nonpliant with title VI of the civil rights act, an act that you will find quoted in the asmp. This is a serious disconnect in policy. Please send the asmp back to staff for corrections and clarification. Thank you. >> Mayor? Just -- I'm happy to talk with [12:51:02 PM] you more about the vmu item that I proposed. I did want to let you know my substitute proposes that we not allow fee in lieu. So I wanted to make sure you were aware of that. >> Anna patela on 48, 49, 53. >> Good afternoon. Please show the video I submitted while I speak. I'm the president of the south neighborhood association and cosecretary of Austin neighborhood council. I'm speaking on my own behalf. Please forgive me if this seems disjointed. I thought I would only have one minute. I severely edited my verbiage. I support the comments of Ms. Guzman. [12:52:02 PM] I've created two instructional collages. They couldn't find where to share their comments. The other is to help them find the hidden -- eye icon in round two. These difficult navigate multiple step processes created hardships for neighbors to participate, especially elders and technologically challenged. I entered my comments in my iPad. My experiences I shared with you. I filled in all the comment boxes, turned my iPad and my comments disappeared. I have never experienced such poor programming where all my enters vanished. Why are the existing right of ways not including level one streets, especially tho being upgraded to -- deserve to be fully informed without omission [12:53:03 PM] of information. These proposed required right of way.... Of units that would be affordable but at a lower percentage of mfi so they're not just affluent affordable. Item 49 I suppo honoring the neighborhood plans and maintaining current compatibility. It is not a large corridor and should not be included as such. I do not support the blanket five foot increases and blanket -- I do support lowering parking minimums. The overflow of cars will bleed into the neighborhoods. Austin has moved to 13th place due to affordability, not afford -- affordability, not -- please do not forget the lion's share of that is property taxes. Thank you for your time. >> Francis Acuna? [12:54:29 PM] On 48, 49, 53, 90, and 94. >> I'm a resident of dove springs. I'm an organizer with [indiscernible] -- I strongly support 90. I oppose 48, 49, 53, and 94. But I want to make sure that I say I am for conducting serious public hearings on all these items. These are items that will have huge impact on the communities most impacted by your decision. You cannot get rid of compatibility or parking restrictions because you will get rid of culture and complete residential neighborhoods. The communities we work in are construction workers and they need parking for their trucks. I need parking for my vehicle [12:55:29 PM] to carry and bring information to residents for the events that we have when we serve our communities. Displacement and gentrification of the residents in the zip codes we work in is extremely shocking. It is impossible for residents to have -- that have two or three jobs to advocate for their homes or for better life in being here at city hall. Not everyone is the same, and not everybody's life is the same. I hope that you make the -- you take that in consideration. I second Monica Guzman's comment. This part is my personal opinion, not my work. In my home title states I cannot build anything in front of my house. [12:56:29 PM] You cannot make these huge changes without having community engagement. That is just plain against the law. >> Carmen Pulido -- 48, 49, 90, and 94. Sorry. I just lost connection to my speaker. >> While we get that speaker back -- you may be able to do this. I wonder if it's possible for one of us to clarify something. I think I'm hearing our callers and some of the folks who spoke in person today operate under the assumption that removing parking minimums removes parking and because that's not the case, I wonder if we should clarify that just to make sure [12:57:30 PM] we're coming from the same place. Removing parking minimums affects the overall cost of the project but not necessarily removes parking. The minimum is one of the requirements that can sometimes act as an obstacle to building, but it doesn't eliminate parking. I wanted to make sure everyone is operating from that reality. >> Mayor Adler: It lets a developer build the parking that the ownership or the participants or the residents would like to have. It doesn't have the city dictate a minimum amount of parking, even if that's not what the residents want. So thank you for that clarification. Next speaker. >> Carmen llanes-pulido. >> Hi. I didn't hear my name called. Is it my term. >> Yes. Proceed. >> I want to second many of [12:58:31 PM] the comments that have been made about the process. Eliminating parking requirements -- just to clarify that doesn't reduce costs unless they don't provide the parking. It's not the minimum unless the parking is really unnecessary. I think we can agree on some of those. I think the bigger question here is about public process. You know, I want to very quickly say that -- there's not enough time. Thank you to item 90. I hope we get some environmental equity and our code is not tied to selling out lower-income communities. We need to do this stuff yesterday, and I very much appreciate the work on this. We'll work to make sure it get implements into ordinance and not just for resolution. When it comes to 94, I want to quickly [indiscernible] Commissioners move to reconsider it, myself included. Vote on right of way and takings was taken very late with several amendments. [12:59:32 PM] I made a mistake as a commissioner. There was more to debate. On 94, read the letter can the look at the abysmal community engagement around the plan. When it comes to item 53 in general. We need better public hearings, but look at the online map, look at the changes in terminology. This has been happening over and over again. We're told to refer to connections from 2015 to look buried in there where a new transit priority network terminology has been introduced, where terms are changing every time we put legitimate complaints in about land development code changes. This is not the right way to govern. We need you to regulate our market, not deregulate it for profit in the housing market. Housing is expensive because of speculation, massive demand from the investment market, labor costs, supply chain shortage -- [1:00:32 PM] there are all kinds of things that are the reason that your up-zoning is displacing low-income people. We're watching three cases in councilmember vela's district right now where low-income renters are being displaced by up-zoning. The only reason they're able to negotiate for help as they get pushed out of the city and become the sprawlers is because they have a public hearing where they can talk about it and raise the issue. En you blanket up-zone, get rid of compatibility and all of these other things, you eliminate our ability to negotiate and protect the things about Austin that we love -- protect the people, protect the trees. A lot of these young professionals are terrified about where their kids are going to live in Austin. Welcome to our world. This has been busting up our communities for generations and we have a thing or two to teach you to come together and look at solutions and community planning, like we did when vertical mixed use was [1:01:33 PM] introduced. I'm imploring you all. I know you want the revenue, campaign supporters and friends in the establishment, and I get it. But up-zoning with no public planning process and negotiation is a giveaway to land other othowners. Some of us don't even want it. >> Your time has expired. >> Do the right thing. >> Susan on item 49. >> We need a lot more housing in Austin. And the current vmu2 proposal is not enough. The initial vmu proposal allowed neighborhoods throughout the city to opt out. And that caused -- resulted in large areas of the city not being part of the vmu program, including almost all of Austin west of mopac. If you're going to do this [1:02:34 PM] right, and implement the vmu2 program, you should do it for the city as a whole. When some neighborhoods opt out that means that other parts of the city have to build more and more housing to make up for the parts of the city that are opting out and it's really not fair. These types of policies should be implemented for the city as a whole. We're talking about major transit corridors, not interiors, not interior neighborhoods. I also really disagree with the long list of street corridors that you're planning to eliminate from this vmu2 policy. Those corridors should be included, but you should have more compatibility requirements for those corridors. Many of those neighborhoods really benefit from vmu2, having retail on the ground floor that people can walk to or ride a bike to would benefit a lot of [1:03:37 PM] neighborhoods. I don't think you should exclude so many streets. Many have good transit, frequent transit that would benefit from vmu2. Also, you should absolutely include the project connect metrorapid future corridor in this policy. The whole purpose of the policy is to give developers options for developing on major transit corridors. Development costs are only going up over time. It doesn't make sense to wait on corridors that we have indicate that we want to have major transit on. I also support eliminating the parking minimum and the height compatibility for major corridors. Thank you. [1:04:43 PM] >> Chip Harris, 53. >> I'm speaking today about item 53, amendments to asmp. My request is that morrow street be reduced from a level two to a level one street and St. Joseph, the western portion is proposed to be level two to level three, also be reduced to a level one street. Morrow runs parallel to Anderson, two blocks south of it, blind on both sides, single-family homes occupied by young families with children. In the past, vehicle counts exceeded 9,000 trips per day until the city took steps to reroute the traffic to Anderson. Labels morrow as a level two street sends the wrong message, inviting and encouraging motorists to utilize it as an alternative to Anderson lane. Please classify morrow and St. Joseph as level two streets. [1:05:44 PM] Thank you. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> Anne coffin on 53. >> Good morning, I'm on west 31st street, west of north Lamar, and St. Andrews parent. As such, it's important to me that west 31st street is safe and functional for kids and pedestrians that utilize the street. I appreciate that the asmp will apply across the city but hope that its implementation will not reflect a one-size-fits-all application, especially with respect to our unique street. West 31st street is the subject of a temporary pilot project that expanded the existing bike and pedestrian lane and removed parking along some sections of the street. It has created dangerous conditions. I'm hopeful our association with [1:06:45 PM] work with the transportation department to focus on a creative solution that will better serve all parties. Thank you. >> William on 53, 86, and 94. >> Yes, good afternoon. This is bill bunch with save our springs alliance. On item 53, the asmp, please listen to the other speakers and postpone action and take further public input. I'm specifically asking that you remove the proposed connection of southwest -- sh45 southwest from 1626 to I-35. This stretch of roadway has been tremendously controversial for over 30 years. It was specifically excluded from our campo regional [1:07:47 PM] transportation plan. It should not be included in the Austin plan. I'm almost certain that a unanimous Travis county commissioner court opposes this roadway being built. If it's built, it basically converts mopac from a local commuter highway into an alternative I-35 interregional and interstate freeway. So please remove it. Please don't give another 2 1/2 million dollars blank check to UT -- >> Thank you, speaker, your time has expired. >> The contracts to come back to the city. And please oppose 94 at this time. Thank you. >> Sarah Watkins on 56. >> Good afternoon. My name is Sarah, organizer with Basta, item 56. [1:08:47 PM] I have the privilege of supporting the residents association, some of whom you will hear from later in this session. Residents have lived here since it opened 20 years ago, and told me stories about how Arbors used to be the most beautiful, well-maintained place. It is an understatement to say this is no longer the case. The tax credit application under consideration will make possible long-term fixes that the residents association has been advocating for for five years. Many folks who live there are thrilled that there is finally a plan to address the unacceptable conditions. Others, having lived with the consequences of nearly two decades of disinvestment and broken promises, won't be able to believe it until they see it. It is critically important that engagement with the res residentsassociation continues and concerns are listened to and addressed. I want to thank both council and [1:09:47 PM] staff, especially Patrick Russell and Jenny, for the ongoing dialogue with residents -- >> Your time has expired. >> Thank you for your time. >> Shirley Crossland on 56. Shirley Crossland. Joyce Mcgee on 56. Joyce -- gene luterell, 56. [1:10:57 PM] >> Good afternoon. My name is Jean, I live at Arbors, I am part of the residents association. I support the application to rehabilitate. I've lived here since January 2014 and witness at the slide into filth. Despite cleanings I've had to pay for, the filth returns up into the carpet within one week. My ancient refrigerator makes a lot of noise. The elevators keep going offline for weeks here in building three. The fire department had to carry me down three flights of stairs wrapped in plastic. It was over 100° in the stairwell. The public areas are filthy and smell. Most apartments have mold behind the walls which is causing death. There is a lack of communication from management to the tenants. [1:11:57 PM] No one knows what is going on. We need rehab to make this place livable. Thank you for your time. >> Jennifer Powell on 85. >> Good afternoon. I'm regretfully calling in against item 85. I watched the presentation Monday about the future of candlewood, and it was very good. The landscaping looks beautiful. I couldn't help but feel if you'd begun the purchase with a presentation like this you may have won neighbors over. Instead, you've constantly change plans, made the purchase without consulting Williamson county, and allowed a string of preventable break-ins and andcriminal activity to occur. No one has any reason to trust you with more of our money when [1:12:58 PM] you haven't protected the investments you've already made here. Thank you. >> Crystal Collins on 85. >> Hi. I live in southwest Williamson county. I support item 85. Thank you for adopting a housing-first approach, the most effectiv practice to solving homelessness. I commend the public health department and homeless strategy office for their community input sessions answering many questions about permanent supportive housing. I believe family elder care is a good choice. I followed Austin's commitment to housing first for years. I'm heartened by your patience and determination to continue to bring community members and officials, while not wavering from the goal of permanent [1:14:00 PM] supportive housing. Please continue this approach as you move forward with developments in the city. Finally, please assist businesses in our community who have realized financial loss due to the change. They're our neighbors, too. Thank you. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> Joyce Mcgee on 56. >> Good morning. And I would like to say that -- okay. We need money really bad to restore the units. [1:15:02 PM] Residents are looking forward to this happening soon. I give my vote to this to be passed. Thank you for your time. And may all of you have a blessed day. >> Emily martin on 88 and 89. >> Thank you, I'm deputy director, here to speak in favor of 88 and 89 on behalf of myself and our coalition. The project that allows us to build power at the local level through organizing policy that supports access to abortion care, reproductive healthcare, family leave and more. [1:16:03 PM] We appreciate councilmember Fuentes and the other cosponsors for being such important representatives of the city and their residents. We look forward to seeing a nondiscrimination ordinance in front of council soon that will protect austinites' reproductive health decisions. After the supreme court leak a couple of weeks ago confirmed our fears, we expect abortion access to go from bad to worse. There is already stigma and fear due to the actions of legislators restricting access. With the looming supreme court decision, there will be increased fear and confusion. Protecting reproductive healthcare decisions and stopping any discrimination in employment or housing in its tracks is more important than ever. The Texas legislature has continued to attack access to abortion for years and we've worked alongside the city council to come up with solutions. >> Thank you, speaker. Your time has expired. >> Continue working with comic. Thank you. [1:17:18 PM] >> Andrea, 88 and 89. >> Thank you. I am recovering from covid-19. Thank you for the opportunity to testify virtually. I am here because of agenda item number 88 and 89. As someone who has personally had an abortion, and during my youth have experienced having inadequate access to menstrual products, I believe everyone should have access to healthcare, whether it's abortion or menstrual products. Everyone should be able to have the care that they need. That is all. Also, I wanted to add that I am one of cofounders of the menstrual equity coalition. I'm thankful for councilmember Fuentes for bringing these two items forward. >> Next speaker is Zenobia josephnn items 5, 27, and 28. [1:18:28 PM] >> Mayor, may I speak on 48 and 49? I sent an email to you. >> Mayor Adler: You have three minutes. >> Thank you, mayor, council. I'm Zenobia Joseph. My comments as it relates to 5 is being postponed. I believe you're supplanting the budget with $1.4520000 million a pilot, 24-month pilot for resources for parents and families. And I'm not sure why there's not more transparency. There's communities and schools and the city already pays for aisd's parent support specialist. I'm not sure why we need community coordinators in the schools. As it relates to the African American item, 27, this is another million dollars to the university of Texas at Austin. It relates to mental health and churches for African Americans. [1:19:28 PM] I would ask, as I asked the last time, for the youth, the mental health item, for you to have Austin public health provide measurable outcomes. The data I see is each year, Travis county commissioners court gets the community advancement network report. And it shows African Americans in all of the negative categories. As it relates to specifically to the vertical mixed use item, 48, off-street parking, I call to your attention crestview station where there is no parking and the white choice riders there do not even want the buses because of the noise. I would ask you to do a little bit of research and check with capital metro. We call that the sundown route because after sundown, they don't want the minorities in the neighborhood. The housing capacity on [1:20:29 PM] corridors, 49, I want to respond to councilmember kitchen from a work session on Tuesday. She said she needed feedback as it related to affordable housing. It had 15% reserved for 640% 60% and 12% at 50%. Perhaps a side-by-side would be helpful, but without a side by side, I would call to your attention African Americans earn $42,000, hispanics earn $50,000. That would be in line with the amounts that councilmember kitchen mentioned. 80% continues to be the norm on the corridors for project connect, more than African Americans earn, $55,000. I want to call to your attention, I believe it's disingenuous for you to consider increase to housing on the [1:21:31 PM] corridors. There's a development on Parmer plan, by Samsung. There are over 2,000 apartment units within three miles additional to the units from Travis county commissioners court. >> Your time has expired. >> And there is no transit -- council eliminated metrorapid. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Emily Gatlin on 89. >> Good afternoon, I'm a resident of district 8. I am speaking in support of item 89, the resolution directing the city manager to provide free menstrual products in various city-owned facilities. I serve on the board of flow code, an Austin nonprofit striving to educate, bring awareness to, and end the stigma [1:22:31 PM] of menstruation. This is an exciting step forward. In 2020, the irs officially designated period products as medical necessities. Recognizing that they are necessary to the dignity of those who menstruate as toilet paper is is long overdue. I encourage you to pass this resolution to make products free and available in Austin's libraries, rec centers, and other city-owned sites. The impact it will have on those that find themselves starting a period without having a pad handy to those experiencin poverty will be monumental. >> Your time has expired. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Mayor, we have one in-person speaker left for item 48 and 49, [1:23:32 PM] and then after that our ahfc speakers. >> Mayor Adler: After that what? ? >> Our ahfc speakers that are remote. >> Mayor Adler: How many? >> We have seven, three online and three in person. >> Mayor Adler: Call the in-person speaker now. >> The in-person is Maureen. >> Mayor Adler: This will be our last speaker. We're cut off. Go ahead. Other than hfc. Go ahead. >> I appreciate your time and letting me come at the last minute to finish out this public comment period. I'm here to say a couple things on 49 and 48. I'm neutral. The code is broken. [1:24:33 PM] It takes months to get a permit. Homeowners endure inspections, architects are tired of dealing with the changes to deal with issues in specific parts of town and applying it to the whole code. I get that. But let's make clear, affordability is not the fault of one group of residents in this town who have asked for balance in developing code flexibilities as we move forward. Austin is experiencing hyper-growth. Over a hundred people a day are moving here. The net demand in 2021 was over 20,000, which is unheard of. We are an outlier in the state of Texas and the Texas senate just had a hearing on this yesterday. At the same time, we have seen the rise of platforms that make short-term rentals more prolific. They take market-ready properties off the market in favor of putting them -- [1:25:35 PM] providing housing to tourists. Property tax increases are creating major pressures on rents and leading to less affordable rates, although we may get relief from the 2019 property tax reforms the legislature did. We are seeing a newer phenomenon, investment groups, private equity and other entities from all over the United States, and other parts of the world, buying single-family homes and condos in Austin. A great article, NPR, February, historically 20% of single-family homebuyers in Austin were investors. Last year, it was a third. This is a huge change in a short period of time whereby families are now competing for housing with corporate entities. And a lot of them are not even based here. These are the factors that are driving the cost of housing. But even with all that, Austin has done remarkably well providing housing. [1:26:36 PM] In the last decade, 61% increase in multifamily, which is huge. In January, the 37,000 units of multifamily housing were under construction and those are outdated. I'm sure the numbers have increased. It's disingenuous when folks start blaming consumer protections for the lack of affordable housing. It sows division and mistrust. It creates a barrier to building real consensus and having a serious conversation. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> Families have made investments. Make no mistake, compatibility is consumer protection in the code. People's houses are their investments and when you mess with that and you start taking corporate interests in a onesideed debate -- >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Could she finish her thought? [1:27:37 PM] >> I want you to consider as we go forward with the code that many, many homeowners over the years have invested in their homes along corridors and in neighborhoods. They are the nest eggs. They are the retirement. They are a lot of things. When you put housing against that and don't allow for consent consensus consensus, that impacts their rights. Most neighborhoods use compatibility and the tools in the code to be able to reach a win-win with developers. We do this in my neighborhood. I know many neighborhoods do this. You have to have balance, because you cannot be picking one group of people over another. I get that people want to buy housing here. I get it. But when you have that many people moving here in a short period of time, up-zoning across the city without considerations to the consequences to the [1:28:38 PM] environment or people's livelihoods is not the answer. I would ask you, if you're going to be serious about consensus, invite those people to the table. I don't know that there isn't room to reach agreement on this stuff, but right now it's been too one-sided. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. All right, colleagues, this is what I suggest. Let's take a vote on the consent calendar. Let's see if somebody has any changes. Let's hold off making our standard comments where we talk about the things. We'll try to free up some time to do that later this afternoon. At the end of that I would suggest that we call the ahfc speakers. They're one minute each. And then the public communications people that have been waiting. So, on the consent agenda, the items, 1-47, 85-90. I'm showing as the pulled items 17, 18, 85, and 90. Those four items being pulled. Does anybody have any amendments [1:29:38 PM] or changes or notes they want to make on the consent agenda? Yes, councilmember Fuentes. >> Fuentes: Thank you, colleagues. I got a note from city legal that I need to offer a new motion sheet to item 89 that has some language changes. So for item 89, which is my menstrual equity item, I would like to read into the record that this is a motion to amend item 89 to add a third be it resolved to read, be it further resolved the city manager is directed to the extent possible to provide a range of sizes for tampons and pads. >> Mayor Adler: Any objection to that being included in 89? Hearing none, that is included in 89. It remains on the consent calendar. Legal has four settlements to read into the record. Are they here with us? If you could read the item number and tell us what the amount is, that would be [1:30:39 PM] helpful. >> Good afternoon, Megan. I ran in from the back. For item number 22, on your agenda, this is a request to approve a settlement in the sj Lewis litigation. >> Mayor Adler: What's the number? >> So this is -- the city is receiving money. The agreement involves the city being able to retain just over $1.5 million, retain age. The city will be paid $900,000 by sj Lewis. There will be a release. The city agrees to pull its letter terminating the contract. >> Mayor Adler: Any objections? The consent agenda will reflect that. Next? >> Item number 24, this is a request for a settlement in Kate V city of Austin, $100,000. >> Approved. >> Item 25, a request to pay a [1:31:40 PM] settlement of $85,000 to settle the gall vs. City of Austin lawsuit. >> Mayor Adler: That's included. >> Item number 26, a request that you provide payment of $850,000 to settle the city of Austin lawsuit. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Any objection to that being included? Hearing none, that's included. That remains on consent. Thank you very much. Any other changes we need to make before we consider consent? Councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: I will share my remarks on my fee waiver item, which has to do with the Texas peace officers memorial, but I want to invite other councilmembers to cosponsor. I'd like the clerk to show me as voting no on number 6 and on item 88. I'm also supportive of a postponement on item 30 -- 90 -- as councilmember Ellis and the mayor indicated. If it wasn't noted before, I'd like to contribute $100 to councilmember pool's fee waiver item number 40. >> Mayor Adler: We'll open up [1:32:40 PM] time this afternoon for people to comment on the consent agenda. We're not going to do that now. Further changes or additions, things that need to be of record right now? Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: Thank you. I spoke with councilmember harper-madison and I wanted to offer some friendly direction for item 87. It was distributed via the clerk. I would move to include the following direction. If the city manager identifies any additional recommendations related to the scope or specifics of this code amendment, the manager may bring those recommendations forward, including as a menu of options when the code amendment returns to council. >> Mayor Adler: Not that it's required for the adoption of that amendment, but are you okay with that amendment, councilmember harper-madison? She is. Is there objection to that amendment? Hearing none, it's included and remains on consent. >> Alter: For clarity, it was direction, not an amendment. >> Mayor Adler: Amending it to add a direction. >> Alter: Yeah. [1:33:40 PM] >> Mor Adler: Yes. Councilmember Fuentes? >> Fuentes: Thank you. I would like to be shown as a cosponsor to councilmember Kelly's item, item 37 relating to the Texas peace officersmemorial parade. I'd like to contribute to the bengali fee waiver item, $300 for item 36. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Councilmember tovo? >> Tovo: Thank you. I'd like the record to reflect my recusal on item 87. I filed the necessary paperwork with the city clerk. I have two pieces of very quick direction related to 29 and one other item. Shoot, what was the other item? With regard to 29, I wonder -- I would like -- I hoped to have back and forth with the staff. I expressed these concerns to the director of our human [1:34:42 PM] resources recently. We have a fabulous summer program for youth. And the young people involved get to work across the city in different departments. I'm concerned that the rate of pay for those teens is not allowing some of them to make a great choice to come work for the city of Austin, because we have so many competing places where they could work that are offering much more, to work at target and other places. I would ask, manager, I'm going to support this today. It's a great program. If there is an opportunity to look at wages for our summer interns and see if we can offer slightly better wages, that's appropriate. I have another piece of direction, but I'm going to have to come back to it. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Manager, you'll make that investigation? Thank you. Any further comments on the consent agenda? Councilmember harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, chair. I wanted very much to add my name in support of councilmember Kelly's item, but I didn't hear a financial ask. [1:35:42 PM] Was there a shortage there? >> Kelly: There was not. My office is covering the seven $755. >> Harper-madison: I'd like to be included. >> Kelly: Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Please include me on item 37 and please include councilmember kitchen as well. Please include the entire dais on item number 37 as sponsors. Okay. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? Any further discussion or direction or comments? Yes, mayor pro tem. >> Alter: I just wanted to let you know I'm going to need to step out for a national league of cities meeting. >> Mayor Adler: Let's take a vote. Those in favor, please raise your hand. That passes unanimously. I'm going to need to leave, too, but I'm going to ask councilmember harper-madison to take the chair. I'm going to recess the Austin city council meeting here at [1:36:44 PM] 1:36. I am going to convene the Austin housing finance corporation here on may 19th, 2022, we're in Austin city chambers. We have all the directors present. And we're -- the time is 1:36. We have some speakers that we're going to call. We're going to hear the speakers and then recess the Austin housing finance corporation meeting, go back into the Austin city council meeting and take the public communication speakers, and then break. Councilmember tovo, councilmember kitchen. >> Tovo: I apologize for interrupting you, but before we received and convened I was going to ask if we could postpone another item on the council agenda if it didn't cause concern from staff. I haven't heard back, but that might save us time. It's item 17 that was also scheduled to have some questions in executive session. >> Mayor Adler: Is staff okay -- >> Tovo: It would be inappropriate for me to mention it now, but I did want to wrap [1:37:46 PM] it up. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go into executive session, we can postpone it after we come back out. >> Tovo: I was trying to save our staff time here, but okay. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go to executive session. All right. But we're in the Austin housing finance corporation meeting. Please call the speakers that we have. We're not going to consider any of the items unless it's real fast on consent, in which case you can do that. But let's hear the speakers first. >> The first speaker is Shirley Crossland. >> Harper-madison: Are we going to hear from the speakers? Mandy Demayo is at the podium. >> Hello. >> Mayor Adler: Hang on one second. I would hear from the speakers first. If there's not going to be any debate or discussion and the consent agenda item can be handled in two minutes then I would handle it and pass it and then you can end the -- if there's any discussion, then hold it until aft lunch, [1:38:46 PM] because what you're wanting to do is get out of Austin housing finance to get back into our regular one so you can hear public communications and then take a break. Speakers, please, on ahfc. >> Shirley Crossland. >> Sorry, I lost connection. >> Not replace and repair a lot of things they were supposed to. For instance, the hotwater tanks and the air conditioners. And those will be an ongoing [1:39:48 PM] thing until the renovation starts. Thank you for your time. Again, I support this. >> Next speaker is Sanjay shadari. Sanjay? >> The next speaker is maury shadari. >> Hello, mayor and council, my [1:40:49 PM] name is Marie, owner of the Hampton and Homewood. I am against ahfc zero zero seven. First, the city spent 9.5 million to buy candlewood and now they want to give 3.9 million to family elder care to renovate. Has the city forgotten how much it will cost to repair damage from vandals? Probably a good million. All taxpayer money. Is there a shelter up yet? No. City says, shelter will be up in six months. How can that be when it's been sitting empty for nine months? Was security provided? No. Our wooden fences were damaged. Will city replace? We want this done immediately for our safety. No to candlewood. Thank you. >> Zenobia Joseph. >> Thank you, mayor, council, I'm Zenobia Joseph speaking on item 4, which is the juniper creek development. [1:41:49 PM] I'm opposed to this development because it concentrates poverty near breaker and north Lamar, route 392, 45 minutes to the west side. As it relates to item 7, $3.9 million from the American rescue plan act for candlewood, I oppose this item because you have not treated the permanent supportive housing development equitably. 151 units on Rutland with no bus and here you have only 78 units. I would like to know how much it is per individual at this cost. I would also mention, mayor, specifically that there are students near Rutland. And you have actually engaged staff to create a nonprofit to oversee the candlewood with family elder care. And you've not done the same with espero. May 3rd, you said there would be [1:42:52 PM] 50 units. May 18th you did a switcheroo with S.A.F.E. Alliance -- >> Your time has expired. >> Apple pie hotel. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> The next speaker is Sanjay shadari. >> Dear mayor and council, my name is Sanjay. I'm calling to oppose item ahfc zero zero seven. I manage businesses adjacent to candlewood in district 6. What happened recently to candlewood is unacceptable. However, it didn't happen overnight. And it was unfortunately predictable. Apart from the neighborhood not given notice or due process of the purchase of candlewood, one of our points was being given verbal promises that were not going to be kept. The promise of security didn't happen. Diana gray's apology is not [1:43:52 PM] acceptable. The city of Austin should be transparent and show the email or request for security. Whose fault was it, or was her statement an empty apology? You're discussing the renovation and management budget for the candlewood, but does it include the repairs to fix the damage? I think council should wait to vote on this item until you know -- [ buzzer sounding ] >> The full cost to repair and renovate. When what I have seen, without taking a tour, I think the extra cost will be close to an additional million dollars. Furthermore, I reluctantly don't think six months until it opens anymore. For that I think there should be a real apology to the neighbors and taxpayers. >> Thank you, speaker. Your time has expired. >> Okay. Thanks. >> That concludes all the speakers. [1:44:53 PM] >> Harper-madison: Thank you, clerk. If that is the conclusion of all our ahfc speakers, director -- I almost called you director truelove. Mandy, was there any additional information before we adjourn the ahfc meeting? >> Would you like me to go over the consent agenda? >> Harper-madison: Yes. >> We have six items on the agenda. I'd like to note that item number 7 has been withdrawn. There's late backup for item number 7 withdrawing that item and it is currently on the city agenda, city council jade agenda, number 85. The six items on the agenda include meeting minutes from April 21st and then we have five loans that we're requesting approval of. The first one is $750,000 for Arbors at creekside, 176-unit senior housing project in district 1. The second one is a [1:45:53 PM] $1.09 million loan for ownership, 23-unit housing project, 1905 in district 5. The item number 4 is $3.3 million for a rental project by foundation communities, a family project called juniper creek, 110 units. Item number 5, a $3 million loan for Saison north in district number 7, bringing the total loan to $6.2 million, 116-unit family project. Item number 6 is a $1 million loan for an ownership project called the ivory, that is also in district 1. And item number 7 has been withdrawn. And I'll note that five loans are all the result of the 2018 affordable housing bonds. And I offer all those items on consent. I'm happy to take any questions. >> Harper-madison: Colleagues, do you have any questions for the ahfc consent agenda? We need to vote on this, right? In which case I'll accept a [1:46:54 PM] motion. The motion is presented by councilmember pool. Can we get a second? By councilmember Ellis. We have a unanimous decision with mayor Adler, councilmember alter, and that's it, off the dais. With that, I think we will go ahead and conclude the ahfc meeting at 1:47 P.M. And resume the city council meeting at 1:47 P.M. And we will start with taking our public speakers. >> Councilmember. >> Harper-madison: Yes, ma'am. >> I had an item to pass along to the clerk, just a bit of additional information on the bengali new year festival, which was item 36. We had a number of additional contributions for the waiver from my colleagues on the dais, but there's still an outstanding balance and I wanted to note [1:47:54 PM] that I will pay the final -- councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I don't know if -- I can't remember if I contributed yet. >> Pool: I don't remember. I wrote down some names. >> I'd be happy to give 200 inst of 100. Earlier I accidentally said it was item number 40, but it's 36, so, thank you. >> Pool: Right. How much did you want to give, councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: I'm not sure what you need, but I could give 200. >> Pool: That's great. Thank you so much. And I think that pulls it down to about either 800 or 1,000 additional and I will use my waiver to take care of the rest of that so that we can pay that entire cost for the bengali new year festival this Saturday at fiesta gardens. >> Harper-madison: Can you confirm that is the entirety of the balance, clerk? [1:48:55 PM] >> Sure, one second. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. >> Erica can provide that. >> It should be based off of the comments that councilmember pool just gave, I believe we're covered now. >> Harper-madison: Speaking? >> Pool: I was looking at the analysis and additional information. The total cost for that event is just shy of $7,000. $6,760. When we came into the meeting we had 1850 already ponied up and due to the additional contributions from you all, generous contributions, I raised it up, I think another thousand dollars, but we were still shy about $1,800. And then I think we got additional contributions, which lowered it, but I have not been able to actually keep track of -- >> Harper-madison: From councilmember Kelly and councilmember kitchen cover the remainder? >> Pool: I'm covering the remainder. I'm not clear in my own mind how much that is, but whatever it is [1:49:56 PM] I'm going to pay that. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. That's generous. >> Pool: Thank you for participating. I appreciate it. >> Harper-madison: Absolutely. I believe we're prepared to move forward with our speakers? >> Yes. Our first 12:00 P.M. Communications speaker is dawn Johnson. Alexia leclerqc. >> Hi, everyone, I'm here with poder. I'm going to be speaking on the tank farm issues. This might seem repetitive, as I'm sure you know about the tank farm and the vote that happened a month ago. The residents are also feeling burdened by the pollution next to their homes. It's important to continue addressing this issue. [1:50:57 PM] Therefore, I'm bringing it up to remind everyone it is still ongoing. In the '90 there was a giant tank farm facility in east Austin which caused pollution, groundwater contamination and soil contamination. There was a lot of health issues including cancers. Unfortunately, in 2022, there is a new tank farm that is being built next to communities in southeast Austin. And unfortunately, the resolution was not passed to relocate those tank farms. I want to reiterate we are still working with the community members and they stand firmly behind their demand to relocate the tank farm, and in support of councilmember Fuentes' resolution. The city of Austin has passed a climate equity plan, which promises to center climate equity and environmental issues, however, we have not seen that happen. So we will be continuing to address those issues. Thank you. [1:52:02 PM] >> Paul Difiore. >> Thank you, good afternoon. My name is Paul Difiore, resident of district 7, also here today on behalf of poder. We sent a letter to you all yesterday via email with the support of 14 other local groups laying out demands that I will reiterate for you now regarding Tesla and environmental justice issues. But first, I want to emphasize how much we're counting on you here as our elected leaders. I was born and raised in Texas, and where I'm from in the city of Dallas it's expected that the town is run by business interests. The same goes for Houston. But Austin, what I considered the shining beacon of progress, is better than that, right? We welcome a thriving business community, but we ultimately hold corporations accountable to the public interest, because at the end of the day, they're members of society just like we are. Now, part of the reason that Tesla and its owner Elon Musk [1:53:04 PM] left California for Texas is precisely because they were tired of being held accountable to the public interest. They don't exactly have a stellar track record of corporate social responsibility in their global operations and we've seen that born out in Austin as well. They have been anything but neighborly these past two years. They built their giga factory with little regard for the impact and they are showing no signs of slowing down. But they still need things from you -- a permit for a battery plant which is under review by city staff at this moment. And perhaps more importantly, they need our water -- hundreds of millions of gallons a year of public, city of Austin water that apparently our utility agreed to provide with no discussion from you. Unless you intervene, Tesla will receive a permit to build the factory in people's backyards. We need to talk about where the hazardous waste will go. And if you don't act now, Tesla [1:54:06 PM] will be supplied with city water while nearby neighborhoods are stuck with private companies selling them inreliable water at more than double the price. People deserve public engagement from the council. If your lawyers say you can't touch these items, let's get creative and start asking a few more question. It's past time to get tangible commitments in writing to safeguard the health of environment and people, particularly those who have been harmed by this kind of industrial development in the past, a history which councilmember tovo recognized her resolution that you were slated to discuss later today. I ask you, why are we continuing to give special treatment to the corporate interests of the world's single wealthiest individual? With that question in mind, poder, the Texas antipoverty project, the Hornsby bend alliance and supporting groups collectively demand the council direct the city manager to delay granting any further permits to Tesla until the company degrees agreesto conditions regarding [1:55:10 PM] environmental protection. We hope to work together with you on solutions to the issues we've raised today. Thank you. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. >> Ethan Smith. >> Hello again. First of all, thanks for hearing all those people on 48 and 49. People appreciate that, even though it takes a long time. That's the job, right? I signed up to speak about the coops in west campus, our institutional providers of affordable housing. And I think it would make more sense to table, and come back with people from those organizations to do a presentation, because their bottom lines have been severely impacted by -- beyond covid and all the rest, by city policy that did the opposite of what it [1:56:10 PM] was supposed to do in terms of helping those institutions. You deserve to hear a full presentation on that from the stakeholders so I would expect that sometime soon. Not to be a broken record, the thing that probably makes the most sense to talk about is the Brackenridge tract. If you want hundreds of millions of dollars of affordable housing, you would get that through the Brackenridge tract. The greatest value is if you leverage it. The only way is to preserve the golf course. You have a funny thing where you have to preserve the course to get the greatest value, which is kind of funny. I think it's really funny. [ Chuckling ] But yeah, the other part of that is to get the greatest value, you don't want the value of the parkland, you want the full development value. How do you preserve the course and get the full development value? Especially considering that it's U.T., not city of Austin. [1:57:10 PM] In an update to the Brackenridge development agreement is the answer. What's important to understand is the Richard suttle letter from last year about the 800 acres and tech, and we'll get to six votes by having something over here in pickle and that's how we'll do it -- it's kind of a smokescreen because you don't need zoning. The framework for this should be a Brackenridge development agreement. If you want to be cynical or funny, you say if you do that, Mr. Suttle can build. So maybe there's a framework where we can work something out. And I'm going to take Greg Anderson's idea. We should look at schools that closed down and make them affordable housing. I'm going to take that idea if he doesn't mind. We need to put those on the table in this agreement. You're going to say U.T., build affordable housing for graduate students and piece together enough value to equal the value [1:58:10 PM] of the tract. We're going to get maximum development on the lake Austin side within environmental reason. It's bisected by a river that's important to the golf course as well. So, yeah. I'm looking for a job, probably for a developer but I could work for you guys, anything to get me in that room on the Brackenridge development. >> Harper-madison: What I did not receive from the mayor before his departure was what time we're going to come back after recess. If your phone is down to 14%, juice it up and be on the lookout for a text from me or the mayor as to what time we're going to convene for contingency. It is 1:58. I believe we're going to recess the city council meeting and get prepared for music in just a moment. >> We still have a couple of speakers. >> Harper-madison: I'm sorry, I thought that was the last speaker. >> I'll call th Eileen [1:59:19 PM] mcgerigol. >> I've been here a few hours and feel a little deflated. I get it, we feel overwhelmed by the problem. There's so many other important things on our mind. I read a book, "Saves -- saving us." I'm here to talk about something we can do and that is to get rid of leaf blowers. They impact our water, our air, and ultimately our planet. Come to my neighborhood any day of the week, they are blowing continuously. Taking a walk is out of the question. They're every day. Sitting outside is out of the question -- you breathe the exhaust. It's been shown over and over again -- heart disease, cancer, lung disease. [2:00:19 PM] They're also loud. They penetrate walls, windows. Lots of my friends trying to work home form -- you can't do it. You have to cancel or postpone meetings because they're so incredibly loud. The worst part about it is they're unnecessary. No one has to lose their job. Non-polluting devices are available and for purchase. You can drive down 38th street any time of the day or night and people are blowing leaves into the street, down our storm drains, cars drive by, they go back to the blower. If it wasn't so sad it would be a great snl skit. Leaves are critical. They provide safe haven for insects and criticals to the eco system. They help hold the moisture in the ground. [2:01:21 PM] You can get electric or battery operated. Over a hundred cities has banned their use. Only one in Texas - - not a surprise to me. As of 2024 California has banned their use completely. What do I want the city to do or help do? Talk about it. Maybe start an educational campaign that makes it clear what health dangers these people are dealing with -- not only to them but the homeowners around them. Stop using them as city facilities, please. Or blowing leaves by the water treatment plan? Why? Provide incentives andrebates for people to turn them? [2:02:23 PM] And get something new. >> Thank you, speaker. >> Eva Estrada? Louis penroha. >> [Speaking Spanish] [2:03:35 PM] . >> I'm a member of unite here. She worked in Delaware north airport. She wants to speak today about the challenges that workers are having here, just to live here in Austin. >> [Speaking Spanish] . >> The workers -- they need more affordable housing and we're here to request replacing the hotels with affordable houses for the statements put. [2:04:41 PM] >> That concludes the noon speakers. >> Harper-madison: Thank you so much. We appreciate it. Disregard everything I said before. Looks like we are going to take a half hour break to get some lunch after we have the opportunity to get some music from our musician who has been waiting patiently for us. I think we're going to adjourn -- not adjourn -- recess the city council meeting at 2:05. Enjoy the music. Have a half hour or lunch. Again, I think I will make certain we send out a text to our council members to make sure everybody knows when to come back. >> Kelly: Your Spanish is on fire. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I appreciate that. With that we're going to recess at 2:05 P.M. [2:06:07 PM] Colleagues, do you have a preference -- between 2:45 and 3:00 P.M.? Looks like 2:45 is the consensus. We'll resume at 2:45, hear speakers and recess again to go back for executive session. Thank you. [2:22:45 PM] [Music] [2:24:03 PM] . >> Alter: Testing. Good afternoon, everyone. We are in for a live music treat here at city hall. Today we are featuring the Moriah sisters. They originated in Austin, Texas and have been ministering through song for over 27 years. It's my honor as mayor pro tem Alison alter to welcome them to city hall. Music is a mixture of gospel. Their influences are the legendary clashing sisters, the brown sisters, and many more. The Moriah sisters have been featured on fox 7 news Austin for Thanksgiving and Christmas segments, the city of Austin [2:25:03 PM] June tooent parade. They've ministered in song and gospel segment. They are blessed to have such awesome talented musicians. So we are in for a wonderful treat this afternoon, and then we will come back together as soon as we hear this beautiful music. Thank you. [Applause]. [Music] [2:29:56 PM] . [cheers/applause]. >> Alter: Wow. That was wonderful. It is so great to be back in city hall with music and it's performances like this that make us the live music capital of the world. Thank you for sharing your gift and spirit with us today. We so appreciate it. I want to invite you, if you want to just introduce yourselves really quickly and tell us where we can find you online and where you're playing next in Austin. >> Okay. They don't like to talk. Bear with them. We have been blessed to sing god's gospel for 27 years. I know it's strange because I only look 25. I know. [2:30:57 PM] Thank you. >> Whatever. >> But we are elated and excited that god has allowed us this opportunity to be here with you. We are appreciaive and thankful. You can catch us on Facebook at the Moriah sisters or on our web page at themoriahsisters.com. You can go to that page where you can purchased tickets at event bright. We're bringing in Lisa noels, the brown sicker -- singers. You do not want to miss it. >> Alter: That's the new hope Baptist church, the 27th anniversary show. You can find them online. I would now like to invite my [2:31:57 PM] colleagues around the room, council member vela and Harper Madison to join me in a proclamation to you in your honor. Proclamation. Be it known that whereas council resolution number -- direct to the city manager -- this is -- no, someone gave me the wrong proclamation. Someone gave me the wrong proclamation. This is the anniversary of the grow green. I'm going to ad lib this. That's the kind of day we're having. So whereas we are in the city of Austin live music capital of the world and we are blessed to be joined today by the Moriah [2:32:58 PM] sisters and their band who shared their love of music and god with us and whereas we love to celebrate our musicians and diversity of musical genres that we have we are thankful to you for sharing your gift with us here at city hall. I on this day, may 19th, 2022 do hereby proclaim the Moriah sisters day in Austin, Texas. [applause/cheers]. We will get you an actual proclamation but we'll pretend this is it and take a picture with this one, and the clerk can get us the actual one. If we can get all seven of you and my colleagues. [Indiscernible] [2:34:15 PM] . I got the right one. Sorry, guys. >> Yours was good. [cheers/applause]. >> Alter: Thank you to everyone. Good luck with [indiscernible]. >> Would you give it up for our band? They took off work today. [cheers/applause] . >> [Indiscernible]. [2:35:18 PM] >> Get your tickets. [Multiple voices] . [Music] [2:54:45 PM] . >> Looks like atxn is ready and we are too. >> Alter: Okay. We're going to reconvene the Austin city council meeting. Next on our agenda we are going to take up zoning, and we will hear from our planning and housing department about any postponements, and then we will hear from zoning consent speakers, and I believe the clerk will call that. Ms. Hardin. >> I'm with housing and planning. I will highlight the consent postponements first before we hear from the speakers, and the consent postponements are as follows. Item 63, 7400 south congress. Staff postponement to June 16th. 68 is applicant indefinite postponement. Item 71 is viewpoint drive. [2:55:48 PM] Applicant postponement to June 9th. 73 is postponement to June 9. Item 77 is old San Antonio -- staff postponement. Related ncdd's are staff postponement to June 9th. We can hear from our speakers. >> Alter: Thank you. Clerk, if you want to begin calling the speakers. Thank you. I believe this morning we said two minutes. >> Yes. The first speaker on item 60 is tovin levy. On deck is Lee Sherman. Lee Sherman? [2:56:54 PM] >> Alter: If folks were here to speak on something that will be postponed if they want to speak they should speak to that postponement. Otherwise they should hold off on their comments. Maybe that's some of the people you have called -- deciding not to speak because it's been postponed. >> You don't want me to call the speakers who registered? >> Alter: You can call the speakers who registered. I was just asked to? >> Okay. >> Alter: -- To note if they were talking about an item that's been postponed it should be about the postponement. >> Laura burns? Hugh Hugh corygan? >> This is for item 75? >> Item 75. >> Oh. Hello. My name is Hugh, owner of 2502 parkview drive. I object to the attempts to [2:57:56 PM] rezone the property against my wishes. In addition I believe the testimonials and signatures of my neighbors and the vote to reject the preservation status show the majority of residents feel the same. The efforts to create support for this rezoning were pushed by the residents who campaigned for national preservation, and have used false narratives about myself, the condition of the property, and 2507 and at times, have boarded on impugning our reputations. This process has been stressful and taxing to my mental health. The same resident does not want their home designated and claims because his home has changed too much, it is not worthy of the status. This combined with only two walls being preserved of my home is hypocritical. I live on the same street at 2510 2502 has been vacant since 2019. It hasn't had the original air [2:58:58 PM] conditioning system for 50 years. I bought it with the intention of building a nice modern home on the property that doesn't just sit there. Contrary to narrative from those pushing for preservation, is not salvageable without cost. The foundation is badly damaged. The roof is leaking. The property contains asbestos. The only reasonable course of action is to rebuild a new property, which the engineering report backs up. The social media campaign for preservation misrepresented the state of the house, who I was, and the wishes of the owners, which caused distress. They continually tried to push the narrative that I knew of an existing preservation order which did not exist. This was repeated by a couple members on the zoning and planning committee despite not being true. These members used this to try to convince the other members to vote in favor of designation and argue the role was -- the previous committee recommended. [2:59:58 PM] Despite an unfair hearing, they did not have sufficient votes. Many of my neighbors support the owner's choice, but spot zoning is unjust. I've signed a document saying so. We wonder hard to defeat the historic designation knowing the results like this would occur. I ask you do not vote in favor of the designation and do not subject any other homeowners to a similar ordeal against their wishes. Thank you for your time. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Next speaker. >> Caroline, on deck is Jason Haskins. >> Laura burns was present, and the second person spoke first. She's been sitting here. I would be third. >> Mayor Adler: If you want to let her speak first, that would [3:00:58 PM] be fine. >> And then I'll speak. >> Mayor Adler: Ms. Burns, why don't you come up. You have two minutes. >> Good afternoon. My name is Laura burns. I am the daughter of the developer of the edgewood subdivision, which was the air conditioned village. My father was so proud of this project. He was 28 years old. He managed to get his subdivision to be the place where this came in. It became a national event. It was in all of the newspapers. My mother -- we moved into the house a block away on Addison. And my mother -- I have a picture -- this the first air-cooled house in Austin. It was so enjoyable to be cool. Dad became obsessed with air conditioning and with the air conditioned village. And this is true, we heard about [3:01:59 PM] it -- it was such a success, my dad gave my mother a diamond ring with sapphires. We still have this. This air conditioned village -- I think THA this is important. We know that all the experts think this house is worthy of historic preservation, but the one criteria they didn't mention, what I think it falls under is it's attached to a person of importance. My father was one of the most prominent developers in Austin, and he made thousands of homes for middle-class families that got fha loans on the gi bill. He wanted allandale to be -- what would you say -- this gem of an air-conditioned village with a fantastic park. He saw a park there,ause when he was buying the land from Mr. Wilson, who lived on vine, there was 33 acres along shoal creek and he said, we cannot [3:03:00 PM] build there. Now, the guy wanted that to be a subdivision. My father said no. And he lobbied and lobbied Beverly Sheffield at parks and recreation. He said, we've got to put a park in here. This is going to the core of allandale. And it was and it still is. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> He put in a pool. And I wanted to say, Fred day, who he chose, who was only 27, a fantastic architect, who has made such a difference in the urban environment and what is unique about it in Austin, Texas. You know his buildings. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. >> Carolyn Crum on item 75n. On 75. On deck is Jason. >> Good afternoon. I live near the -- and became aware of it in a tour of the ac village homes. This house stood out as modern within the ac village. Of the 14 test homes remaining, the developer of this property has demolition permits for two [3:04:01 PM] others. After their destruction, only 12 homes will remain. This home is the most distinctive of the original 22, most intact of those that remain, and is the one to save. A building must meet at least two criteria. It's uncommon for a building to meet three. This house exceeds three. Landmark commission chair Meyers said not only is it the best example in the ac village, but one of the best examples of mid- century architecture we've seen at the commission. Commissioner Tollett characterized it as dripping with history and says it comes along once in a few decades. He stated the ac village was a living experiment showing great innovation, and felt our city mustn't take for granted this work. John, before retiring from the city, in talks to builders and the public, showed the village pioneered techniques being revived today in green building. Austin's distinction as an international leader in green building is a key reason why Austin should save this home. The ac village homes [3:05:02 PM] experimented with energy-saving features decades before with the city created energy conservation codes in the 1980s. The energy star program, named after the lone star state, was renamed the green building program. Austin energy gave the energy star name to the federal government for their energy star program. In 1991, aegb created the first green building program in the U.S., influencing the international standard called L.E.E.D., recognized with two awards from the U.N. This home deserves a place among Austin's historic mansions and public buildings. The opportunity to save a house such as this appears quite rarely, and our city should not miss that opportunity. Thank you. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> Jason Haskins on 75. On deck is Sheryl Kelly Ginsburg. >> Mayor, councilmembers, thank you for your time, Jason, a [3:06:03 PM] licensed architect and a board member of mod, local chapter of an organization dedicated to the preservation of modern architecture. I'm sorry this case has become as much of a conflict, but I want to speak to a couple professional items. First, this house far exceeds all relevant criteria for local designation. This was recognized by the hlc, city staff, and professionals with experience, with the definitions of the criteria as professionally applied across the country. I recognize the designation of houses especially against owner opposition needs to be taken seriously. However, when we consider financial hardship, we have to make a distinction between long-term resident families and people buying second and multiple houses for demolition and redevelopment. Historic preservation is struggling to recognize significance beyond the rich and famous, and being a mechanism [3:07:04 PM] for rubber stamping tax breaks. The city is working on a new plan which will prioritize diverse heritage. Preserving this house fits squarely within the priorities and tells that history. My architecture firm has completed numerous restoration projects, including for affordable housing in east Austin. There is no question that renovation of the facade or the entire house with an addition to the back is feasible, including the asbestos mitigation, with some creativity and some competence. Consider that it is common to get an architecture or Rea to say renovation is infeasible, whether because it's not the owner's wishes, or because they stand to make more money from new construction. Thank you for your time. >> Sheryl Kelly Ginsburg on 75. On deck is Barbara Levesque. [3:08:06 PM] >> Good day. I'm Sheryl Kelly Ginsburg, supporting the preservation of the Chrysler home. It was built by Ms. Burns' father, whom we just heard. My parents lived in this home for 60 plus years without flooding or asbestos related issues. The panels on the facade are embedded. Dealing with them would follow state law. The 2020 engineer's report noted no significant issues with this home. Spurious attempts to gather negative opinions of this home have been attempted. This was probably stressful for those purporting to do the research. They failed to collect anything close to significant scientific data. Again, stressful and embarrassing. Importantly, they did not approach all residents. Seven of these residents approached me to be heard and they were adamant. [3:09:07 PM] They said this is the house that defines parkview drive. This house must not be demolished. The emphasis is theirs. The air temp home is an iconic example of mid-century modern architecture. My father, president of Austin's steel company, and my mother, a nationally recognized artist, knew this immediately and bought it for their anniversary. They had recognized the lines, angles, positive and negative spaces and more that Fred day used to create harmony and fluidity. Over a period of 60 years, approximately 40 tours were give ton passers-by who, intrigued by the home's exterior, wanted to see the interior. They were not disappointed. Something about this home [3:10:07 PM] affects people positively. Perhaps they recognize the blending of art and architecture -- [ buzzer sounding ] >> Can I finish? >> Mayor Adler: You can finish your thought if you'd like to. >> Art and architecture which has created a new term, architecture. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you very much. >> Barbara Levesque on 75. On deck is Dominik. [ Off mic ] >> Greetings to all. I am Dominique, a resident of parkview drive, 2507 grand jury 2507, awarded ademolition permit for my house a [3:11:12 PM] year ago. I live in a historic air conditioned village house. It is beautiful from the outside. It is terribly -- it's falling apart on the inside. The foundation is cracking. We have plumbing issues. And we knew this going into the house, so having seen many of the other air conditioned village houses over the years be destroyed, and I played a part in seeing some of these houses rebuilt, I know intimately what these houses have gone through over the years. As a design build professional, I've actually been inside these houses and witnessed many of them in their state. So, I'm here to testify mainly that I don't believe at this point there's a reason for denying Mr. Hugh Corrigan the [3:12:13 PM] right to build on this property, and I think it's wrong to allow this to go on any further. It's been very stressful for ever. I don't have a scripted thing to say here, I'm just pretty much overwhelmed by the whole thing. And I think at this point, I want to show support for Mr. Corrigan and the neighbors who have gone through this process. 71% of us voted, you know, to turn down the national historic registry on September 18th of 2021. This was -- [ buzzer sounding ] >> Something that I feel like is very significant for us all to consider, that while these houses had a place in the past, it's very difficult to move them along at this point, since they are failing structurally. And basically, they're going to cost a lot of -- people money to [3:13:15 PM] restore them. >> Mayor Adler: Sorry. Thank you very much. >> Joseph Reynolds on item 75n. On deck is Kelly sevedra. >> I think I have a slide. >> What is your name? >> Joe Reynolds. [ Off mic ] [3:14:17 PM] >> Mayor and council, I'm Joe Reynolds, I live on 49th street. The air conditioned village was a joint project of the American association of house builders and the university of Texas. It had close financial industry observation, examining suitability of air conditioning in ordinary homes, measuring cost, building materials, and operational energy. Measured social and health impact, risk to mortgages, benefits of various architectural innovations. This air temp house is likely the first with the new version of air conditioning. An experimental chemical replaced ammonia as the heat safer medium. Ammonia is dangerous, but the new stuff was safe. It didn't require a water chilling tower, enabled low-power compressors, and that had major design impacts. Our modern house configuration was developed in the air conditioned village. Cool air is sent to each room in [3:15:18 PM] ducts. A fan recirculates the house air, chilling at each pass. 1950 houses had one-pass heating and cool. Architects at the ac village improved efficiency that kept outside air outside, inside air inside. Seal the house, insulate the walls, ceilings and ducts, shade the windows. This is Austin green building. There's new installation. Fiberglass replaced asbestos. Ac village proved new technologies and markets so manufacturers developed more uses. Millions of window units for cool existing spaces, air conditioners in cars, both of those would not have happened without the ac village. Housing finance, having monitored the village, fha and va offered their mortgage rates for ordinary folks. This price for air temp houses where modern life in our hot climate started. [3:16:19 PM] The new air conditioner labeled development of offices, manufacturing, and more population in areas in the south and west. This house must be preserved. It's where all of that started. There's more detail in your handouts. >> Kelly sevedra on 75. On deck is Kevin Smith. >> Hello, mayor and city councilmembers, my name is Kelly, and I support the preservation of 2502 parkview drive. My family and I lived on the street in a similar house, 2710 parkview. These houses share the same floor plan, square footage, and modern design and they are the same age. They differ in some design details and materials, but the biggest difference is the house at 2502 was built as part of the air conditioned village and ours was not. While ours has some of the same architectural value, 2502 was created as part of the air conditioned village, so it has historical and community value. [3:17:20 PM] We have been here since 2005 and fell in love with this house because the architecture had a unique design. The house needed a lot of work, but we kept the bones intact. We met architects specializing in preservation that told us they believed our house to be one of the best examples in Austin. They helped us update the house while keeping it true to its design. It is still the same house with new windows, siding, and an hvac system to make it energy efficient. No adding onto or knocking down walls. We let the beauty shine through. These things are true of our house and can be true of 2502. We bought because we loved the neighborhood's character. This house is a prime example of how the neighborhood started. We have never found the house to be too small for a family of four. Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation. Three makes an even stronger case, like a three- legged stool. [3:18:20 PM] My home has the architectural merit but lacks the other criteria needed to be deemed historical. Only one leg to stand on. 2502 has outstanding architectural, historical, and community value, a sturdy three- legged stool that you can rest your reputation on. Please reserve this marvelous people of history. There aren't very many of these gems left to save. Thank you for your time and consideration. >> Kevin Smith on 75. On deck is John Tate. >> Mayor, councilmembers, city staff, thank you for your service. My name is Kevin Smith, 2500 parkview drive. I agree with a wide variety of coalition of governments, nonprofits, academic, coalition that I help put together, as well as 250 of my neighbors, 660 residents at Austin and over [3:19:24 PM] 1400 residents nationwide that this house is worth saving. The architecture is a brilliant example of Fred day's work. I'll skip through the rest of the story. This home is the best-preserved example of the village. Although the concept of ac is not new, our village had very specific, unique factors, it was experimental. Not only were the ac units different for each home, but the ductwork and ventwork inside the home is unique. There are multiple layers to these homes outside of the exterior. It goes without saying that just because something didn't make the national registry doesn't mean it's not nationally significant. That is important to remember. I also encourage the city council to help fulfill one of the charges of the charter plan, to help preserve these unique places within our city. You might have heard support of 250 of our neighbors is not enough support as residents do not support the zoning change. Part of this reason is there are [3:20:26 PM] neighbors that would like to support it but are afraid to come forward. There has been a persistent disinformation campaign, towards myself and at least one other neighbor. His aggressive behavior for me has a complete lack of respect. He's recently vandalized by personal property. I have a sworn eyewitness statement saying this is true. And doxing has happened. I'm afraid to walk down my own street because of what is happening on our street. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> That's all. Thank you for your time. >> John Tate on item 75. On deck is James Watson. >> Good afternoon, John Tate. I support preservation of 2502 parkview avenue. My wife and I have long enjoyed seeing the house on walks around the neighborhood and we appreciated the tour of the air [3:21:27 PM] conditioned village offered a few years ago. It's rewarding to know that local architect Fred day and a project in our neighborhood had such a widespread influence. Professional evaluations by city staff, preservation Austin, mid-texas mod and Travis county historical commission and other preservation architects attest to the value of the house and the landmark commissions voted unanimously in favor of historic zoning. The air conditioned villages with a demonstration of the practicality of air conditioning in houses for ordinary middle-class families. Rather than being named for their original owners, like the Scarborough house and similar grand mansions, these houses were named for their air conditioners. 2502 parkview avenue was called the Chrysler air temp house. John points out that houses in the air conditioned village shared features commonly used today in green building, such as roof overhangs, barriers, [3:22:31 PM] buffers against the afternoon sun, and cool systems sized to match accurately calculated cooling loads. Some of these features are incorporated now in Austin's residential energy code that Mr. Um um fhrees worked on. Ks very much for considering the historical value of this house. >> James Watson on 75. On deck is Reuben brooks. >> Hello, mayor and councilmembers. My name is James Watson and I've been an owner -- the owner of 2508 parkview drive for the past 20 years. I do not support a decision to change the current zoning at 2502 parkview drive to a [3:23:33 PM] protected historical landmark home. I do support the permit to demolish the current home so a new larger, modern home can be built. The idea that any home on our street is special in some way or needs historical protection is in my opinion a complete waste of your time. The only thing interesting about the homes in the air conditioned village is they were built with newer, experimental types of hvac systems in each home, all of which have been replaced over the decades. There was nothing else remarkable about these homes. They were all single-story houses designed as starter homes. None of them are very large or efficiently use the large-sized lots they were built on. Builders used the modern materials of the time that were not designed to last more than 75 years. The concrete slab technologies of the time are no longer structurally sound, not as thick as modern slabs, and have sunk to the point that they are below grade. Most have issues with drainage and water penetration during [3:24:34 PM] heavy rains. Most of the original water lines have deteriorated to the point you must replace them. In my home, I have all of these issues as well as the old-fashioned cloth wiring that is ungrounded. You reach a point with these homes in allandale when the cost to renovate or install additional square footage is not justifiable. These are not custom designed or built homes and there's nothing historically significant about the craftsmanship in any of them. There is no reason to protect any home in the village with an historic designation. I'm a Rea. I work in central Austin. When I purchased my home in 2002, my goal was to tear it down and build a dream home. Any homeowner that has invested in a home should have the right to tear down or build new and do whatever they want with their property. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> Thank you so much, you guys. >> Reuben brooks on item 76. On deck is Jay Crossley. [3:25:53 PM] >> Good afternoon, councilmemrs. Several of you may be familiar with me because I appear before various bodies to speak on transportation issues. Today I'm speaking on a zoning issue, because it is intimately tied with transportation. The case is a request for rezoning of a property that's on manchaca road at 7603. It's just across Kyle bar lane from the property you approved funding -- affordable housing funding for earlier today. Okay. Austin's strategic mobility plan calls for, as you are probably well aware, a monstrous increase in the amount of use of public transit. It also makes strong note of the fact that density and transit ridership are intimately related. The only way we will get the [3:26:54 PM] increase in ridership is by an increase in the number of people who live along the transit lines, okay. This particular property is located on the transit priority network and more important it appears that section of manchaca appears on the project connect map approved by the voters in November 2020. And that section of road is scheduled for improvement by increasing the -- by upgrading the bus service to metrorapid service as an extension of the 803 line, okay. The current zoning is sf3, which would allow on the three pieces of property a total of nine units of housing. It has been suggested that the property be rezoned sf6. That would allow 14 units, certainly an improvement over [3:27:55 PM] nine. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> The important thing is the zoning requested by the developer, mf2 zoning would allow 20 units, much more appropriate for something that's on a high-performance transit line. Thank you. >> Jay Crossley on item 76. On deck is Eugene Sutton. >> Hello, mayor and councilmembers, thank you so much for your attention to affordability and climate issues today. I am here to support allowing as many people as possible to live within walking distances of our growing transit network, including in this case. Our regional plan is to grow to a region with 3 million people living in car-dependent places and a million living in walkable urban places. This is an environmental disaster. Our regional plan is to destroy 35 square miles of rural open [3:28:56 PM] space and land every year for the next 20 years. And allowing people to live within walking distance of our growing transit network is one of the most important climate change things that you can do. And also one of the most important things for affordability and equity. So, please approve this request to allow people to live in healthy neighborhoods. Thank you. >> On item 76, Sutton, Eugene. On deck is Reuben Perez. Lee Sherman on the postponement for 83. >> I'm Reuben Perez. Speaking on item 76. I'm against the zoning change [3:30:01 PM] for this density. I agree that we need affordable housing. And I'm not opposed to the one that's across the street. My property is on Kyle Barr lane at the end of the cul-de-sac. And -- but we have a problem with how much density there is in that one spot. The height of the project, and the amount of traffic that's generated from all this development. We've already had rezoning in our street to mf3, which generated I guess a home and an Adu unit, doubling the density in our street. And we just need to have a little bit of control over what's happening down on the [3:31:01 PM] street. Traffic is already becoming a problem with all the construction. But there's limited and no parking available along Kyle Barr. And the developer for this project seems to be generously giving us more parking, but we still have issues with the height and the approach to this neighborhood. I recommend -- I suggest and wish that you do not move forward on this project at this time. Thank you. >> Lee Sherman. That concludes the in-person. I'll move to remote speakers. On items 64 and 65, Hilary Carter. [3:32:04 PM] Hilary Carter. On item 75, Elaine Robbins. >> Yes, my name is Elaine Robbins and I'm a neighbor to 2502 parkview. I first became aware of this house in 2016 when I went on a homeour that featured the village. On other tours, I've seen wonderful examples of historic homes that have been renovated to meet modern needs. As a member of preservation Austin, I know that organization is happy to work with homeowners to achieve solutions that preserve the facade. I would encourage the owner to work with preservation Austin and its network of architects and specialists, including those [3:33:06 PM] with experience in mid-century architecture. I think that 2502 parkview is unique and worth saving. Once you demolish a historically significant property like this one, you'll never get back that connection to the past. If you preserve it, on the other hand, you bring value to our city and enhance the appeal of the neighborhood. Thank you. >> Hilary Carter. >> Hello. Can you hear me? >> Yes, go ahead, please. >> Thank you. Mayor and city councillors, I represent housing partners lp for number 64 for a neighborhood plan amendment and item number 65 for the rezoning of the properties that are owned by the Austin housing finance corporation. I'm just here to answer any [3:34:07 PM] questions that the city council may have about these items. >> On item 75, David herpin. >> Hello. Can you all hear me? >> Yes. Go ahead, please. >> Okay. Thank you. Kind of caught me off guard. Okay. Thank you, each of you, thank you for allowing a call-in option. I'm really sorry I could not join you in person. Also thank each of you for your service and your representation. My family and I live in the neighborhood and we are owners of 6604 Daugherty. We have lived in the neighborhood for almost 25 years. I'm in opposition to historic zoning for our neighbor's property. I'm in support of Hugh's rights [3:35:09 PM] to rebuild a new home. We have two children approaching college in the next few years and my elderly mother-in-law -- my elderly mother needs very extensive nursing homes. With the aggressive campaign to preserve a dilapidated house, Kevin Smith attacked our livelihood. I'm sure this was not his intention to hurt us and other families in the neighborhood, but this is the impact of his actions. This is hard to say, but we feel this is true. I hope you will help defend our families and the other families for the future and property rights. Our home was built in 1950 and is in need of substantial repairs, with past estimates revealing that there's substantial asbestos in the property. There are many other repairs needed. These issues make selling or making full use of our property difficult with the continuous [3:36:09 PM] investment threat of historic zoning. After listening to the story, it's impressive they can walk around our home and find things that were neat in 1950, but none of the cool features that they show on the charts are operational or useful now. Instead, they are a costly eyesore. Some people walking by love to see the old homes, but the opinion of the families living in the homes should matter more. Also, the opinions of those who have to maintain the rotting properties should also count. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> For the sake of progress, for the environment and our neighborhoods, we must allow owners like Hugh to invest in the neighborhoods and bring the standard and modern efficiencies of living up to current standards. >> Thank you, speaker. Your time has expired. >> Thank you. >> On item 75, Victor ecchout. [3:37:13 PM] >> Good afternoon. My name is Victor, speaking as a neighbor of 2502 parkview with a property that comes within five feet of touching that property. Residents of Austin and as a member of preservation Austin. Living in Austin since 2005, I have come to appreciate the various neighborhoods, many with a clear character of their on and I don't like seeing such character gradually being negated. And this house is determining of the character of my neighborhood. If it goes, this part of town loses part of its character. As a member of preservation Austin, this is not just one house, but the work of a local architect with several notable buildings to his name and therefore part of local history. Part of the air conditioned village, it's also part of the history of the modern way of life. We should not erase this. I like that this is not some one-off showcase house, but a piece of people's architecture documenting the design that is [3:38:13 PM] part of the lives of ordinary people. I argue for the historic designation of this house. Thank you. >> On item 75, Natalie friendsley. >> Hello. I'm Natalie friendsley and I want to thank you for protecting our cultural icons. Principle 27 in the congress for new urbanism's charter states that preservation and renewal of historic buildings, district, and landscapes affirmed the continuity and evolution of urban society. Aligned with that, I'm here to ask for your vote to preserve the Chrysler air temp house. Now, most cultural icons are social or political in historical significance, but this house is really unique and rare because it's an Austin [3:39:14 PM] science and tech cultural icon. Now, this house in allandale is as much as austin-wide cultural icon as the oak is in the historic district. In 1937, the city took efforts to preserve that living icon of Texas history. In 1989, the greater Austin community rallied around the oak when a troubled individual tried to destroy it. Now the greater Austin community has rallied to preserve the air temp house. Architectural and preservation experts have spoken about the imminent viability of preserving this house. For the rest of my time, I want to talk about the air temp house as part of Austin's global tech brand. This H is an excellent example of Austin's early tech innovation and it is that same innovation that has made Austin the global tech hub we are [3:40:14 PM] today. Austin has carefully cultivated tech innovation as part of our global brand. Losing this Austin science and tech icon would be an insult to our history as the international tech hub we've become. It would, in a nutshell, hurt Austin's brand value. Please vote in favor of preserving the Chrysler air temp house. Thank you very much for your time and for your service. >> On item 75, Isabel Henderson. >> Hi. My name is Isabel Henderson and I'm speaking in favor of saving 2502 parkview. The other day I got a little bit lost. I ran through allandale almost every morning. But this time I got turned around. The houses I normally use as [3:41:16 PM] landmarks had changed seemingly overnight. I ended up finding my way, but it was a striking example of how rapidly allandale is changing. It's been devastating to watch the houses be demolished one after the other. We have a responsibility to maintain unique historic homes in Austin or you'll regret not doing so. If we don't do this, Austin's neighborhoods will lose their history and charm and start to look like any other overdeveloped neighborhood across America. The air conditioned village houses were built for middle-class people and have relatively modest proportions. Austin is experiencing a housing crisis, as many of you know, in part because houses like these -- smaller, older -- are being destroyed and replaced with houses where the only consideration is maximizing square footage and profit. This house demolished with an [3:42:18 PM] affordable housing unit or many apartments -- rather, what's being proposed is replacing the smaller house with a bigger, more expensive home. It makes no sense to claim it would be too expensive to maintain and repair this home when what's being proposed is building a brand new second home. Razing 2502 parkview would be a blow to the neighborhood and also to the design and architectural community and archive. I can not encourage you enough to designate this house as a historic landmark and prevent its destruction. Thank you so much for your time. >> On item 78, Zenobia Joseph. >> Thank you, mayor, council, I'm Zenobia Joseph speaking on the Howard lane residences. 140 units, 1421 east Howard lane. I want to call to your attention the second and third reading [3:43:19 PM] summary sheet, which specifies the basis of recommendation. She mentioned the neighborhood center that's off Parmer, on the imagine Austin. I want to mention as well that she mentioned the activity corridor in imagine Austin. However, there is no transportation. I went through the trip planner and there are no trips. I want you to recognize once again that on July 27, 2021, you eliminated three met rorapids that would have served each Austin, specifically Samsung to apple, fm969, and dessau to the gold line/red line at Austin community college highland. So it is disingenuous for you to continue to talk about putting density on the corridors when you eliminated the metrorapid. I just want to call to your attention, mayor Adler's quote from Austin transit partnership, [3:44:19 PM] October 20th, 2021. He said it's possible to go to court on proposition a's valid language. Somebody will say wait a second, I only supported this because of the representation you gave me. I want to call to your attention August 7th, 2020 contract with the voters where you falsely stated that project connect is a high-capacity transit system that will improve access to essential services such as education, healthcare, and grocery stores in historically underserved communities. Project connect will improve commuter access, not historically underserved. You conflated ridership and coverage. 2014 project connect locally preferred alternative north corridor study, 14 of the regional growth centers identified in campo's long-range transportation planner in the north corridor, the most in any corridor studied in project connect, yet you -- >> Thank you, speaker. Your time has expired. >> If you have any questions, [3:45:20 PM] I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Mayor, that concludes the remote speakers. I missed an in-person, Pablo Cerna speaking on 95. >> Good afternoon. I'm just here to speak in favor of 95 and answer any questions. I'm representing the architect on the project, and side note, I worked for Fred day when I first moved to Austin in '91. And he was a genius, I'll tell you that right now. Thank you. >> That concludes all the speakers. >> Mayor Adler: Thank everybody that participated. Anyone else in the room that thinks they signed up that we [3:46:22 PM] didn't call? Why don't you come on down to the clerk. What's your name? >> Item 75. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Do you want to come up and speak on item 75? Why don't you come on up. I'm sorry, what? >> Tovo: I think the applicant is the landmark commission. >> Mayor Adler: I'm going to let her speak. >> Thank you so very much, mayor, councilpeople. I represent the property owner and we signed up to speak on his behalf. I'm his attorney. Thank you for having us. And I did prepare and deliver also to Andrew a powerpoint. Is that available? [3:47:22 PM] Raci head. >> I have it right here. >> Yes, ma'am. Sorry about that. May I begin? Thank you. I represent Mr. Corrigan, the propty owner at 2502 parkview drive. Next, please. I'd like to just mention a few [3:48:24 PM] key points here. First of all, there is a valid petition against this. And this was taken before zoning and platting and it was not recommended. We believe that this is sort of something that may sort of rise to the level of spot zoning. This is not a unique property. This is a property that was built during a period of time when air conditioning was being designed. These homes were put up quickly. All of them have been subject to demolition permits. I believe six of them have been demolished already and rebuilt. This is a picture of the house. Like many houses in the era, it was sort of the modern architecture, mid- century and many the homes in the neighborhood are like that. And all over that time period, they're the same. There's nothing unique to that design. These were typical residences. Here's a picture of a sister house that is pretty much the same type of H home down the street. And there's nothing unique about that, either. So our house in question is no [3:49:27 PM] different. Next please. If you take a look, Mr. Corrigan has decided to buy the property in order to rebuild the home, which has significant challenges. He would like to put something beautiful. He lives in the neighborhood down the street and he's already done the same on his home. We believe that the engineering report to tear down -- to rebuild around historic preservation would be extremely burdensome on the homeowner, causing asbestos removal, foundation problems, inability to keep walls in places because of cracking in foundations, the stress and the inability of a homeowner to buy his house and do what he needs to do is very arbitrary. If you could keep going, please. We don't believe the property meets the requirements of land development code for rezoning. [ Buzzer sounding ] >> It doesn't meet all three. We hope that you'll consider taking this down, because we believe that the valid petition and the vote of Z.A.P. That we do not have a situation here that would warrant this sort of [3:50:29 PM] spot zoning. Thank you so much. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Anybody else think they signed up to speak who we haven't called yet? Colleagues, that gets us back to us. Why don't you come on up, >> Housing and planning department, your zoning agenda begins with item number 63, c1420210193. The staff is requesting a postponement of this item to your June 16th council meeting. Item 64, 20210016.05,s item is being offered for consent on all three readings. The related rezoning is item number 65, 20210172. Sh, consent on all three readings. Item number 66 is 20210015.02, offered for consent on all three readings. [3:51:29 PM] The related rezoning, item 67, 20210134, offered for consent on all three readings. Item 68, c1420220007, there is an applicant indefinite postponement request of this item. Item 69 is replaced with item 95 on the addendum. Item 70 is c1485244. This item is being offered for consent. Item 71, c142022, an applicant postponement of this item to your June 9th council meeting. Item 72, c14990069.01. This item is being offered for consent first reading. This is for staff's revised recommendation. I want to note, following the hearing, the request to remove [3:52:32 PM] the requirement was reevaluated by staff and staff is no longer recommending removal of this requirement. So with that I'm offering this for consent approval on first reading only. Item 723, c1420210161. There's a neighborhood postponement request to your June 9th council meeting. Item 74, c1420210189, applicant postponement request to June 9th. Item 75, c14h20210164, this will a discussion item. Item 76 is c1420210150. This item is being offered for consent first reading with the staff recommendation of mf2. Item 77, c1420210188. There's a staff postponement request to your June 9th council [3:53:34 PM] meeting. Item 78, c1420210195, offered for consent second and third reading. Item 79, c1420210155, offered for consent on all three readings. It's the staff recommendation of grmuco and removing the following three prohibited uses from part 2a of the ordinance. Those uses are exterminating services, off-site accessory parking and personal improvement services. And with that, I can offer this item, the staff recommendation on consent on all three readings. Item 80, mpa2020, this item is being offered for consent first reading only. The applicant's revised request of the reducing area, so we can offer this with staff recommendation. The related rezoning is c1420200081. I can offer this for consent [3:54:34 PM] approval on first reading only. Staff recommendation of mp. The applicant reduced the area to be rezoned. Now staff supports the applicant's revised request. 80 and 81, consent, first reading. Item 82, c1420220022 offered for consent on all three readings. Item number 83, c1420210037, this item is being offered for a staff postponement to June 9th. Item 84 is c1420210033. This item is being offered for staff postponement to your June 9th council meeting. And the addendum, item number 95, is c1420220025. This item is being offered for consent on all three readings. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> And that concludes the [3:55:34 PM] reading. >> Mayor Adler: If I understand correctly here, the consent agenda is items 63-84 plus 95, and everything is on the consent agenda with the exception of item 75. >> That is correct, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? Councilmember harper-madison makes the motion, seconded by councilmember Ellis. Any discussion on the consent agenda? Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: So, I want to speak briefly to item 74. And, of course, the agent has left. This is a postponement. This is the second time that the agent has asked for a postponement. And I'm going to allow that postponement today, but I want to make it clear that I am supportive of adding the mu zoning district to the existing lo zoning on this site, but I do not support up-zoning to sf3 in the back of the lot. We've had conversations with [3:56:36 PM] staff and it's clear this site has significant environmental constraints. Adding additional impervious cover entitlements is not something I can support. There's a significant amount of the back with a steep slop. Slope. They're not able to construct what they're proposing. For my colleagues, for future reference, I'm comfortable up-zoning the existing lo so you can allow residential, but I will not support up-zoning the back of the parcel, which is currently zoned for single-family. I've made this clear to the applicant and I've said it in prior meetings and I will honor their second postponement, but I've been very clear about my concerns and if they want this to move forward they need to actually do the work to address the concerns and show that there's a viable project. 74, this at the project on spicewood springs. [3:57:37 PM] >> Item 74, she was speaking to. >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues, item number 60 was up in the nonconsent. That was an item that goes and should be taken with 83 and 84. That's something that's being postponed. So without objection I'm going to add item number 60 to this consent agenda showing it also being postponed. >> To the council meeting of June 9th. Thank you, mayor. >> Mayor Adler: Together with 83 and 84. Further discussion on the consent agenda? Councilmember kitchen. >> Kitchen: I'm supporting consent on first reading for item number 76, which is the property on calivar. I just want to let the person know who came and spoke that had concerns that because it's on consent on first reading, this will allow some additional time [3:58:40 PM] for the applicant to have some more conversation with those neighbors, but I am supporting it and it's going forward on first reading. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Any discussion on this agenda? Councilmember tovo. >> Tovo: Mayor, as I have in the past, I have filed a recusal on 80 and 81, which I think are still on the consent agenda, if I'm correct. >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Tovo: And I am leaving on consent for today item number 71 as director Hardin mentioned, the staff's revised recommendation prohibits access on Barton springs. It is my understanding the staff intend to sit down with the different parties involved including the property owner to talk about access and determine if there's an opportunity for a good resolution. >> Mayor >> Mayor Adler: Item 72 >> Tovo: Correct. [3:59:42 PM] Did I say 70? >> Mayor Adler: 71 >> Tovo: I'll be darned. Thanks for the correction. Ready to -- >> Mayor Adler: Ready to vote? I think that's everybody with council member Renteria off the dais. All right. Let's take care of -- before we go let's see if we can quickly take care of -- what items we can take of so -- actually, we can do that on -- let's call up item 75. >> That's great. Thanks, mayor. I have a couple of quick remarks for my colleagues on the dais. I wanted to thank everybody who came and spoke today and called in to speak on this particular zoning case. My team and I have spoken at [4:00:44 PM] length with our city staff and with members of the community, and so I'm really familiar with this case. And I hear valid concerns and points on both sides. Ultimately with the valid petition in place, nine votes will be needed. And with such a high threshold, I'm not sure the support is there to rezone this property against the owner's wishes. I don't think it would be useful. In addition, I don't think it would be useful for anyone to prolong this case if it's clear that it won't be successful. The owner of this house is opposed to historic designation but there are many Chrysler air tent houses. What I would like to see and what I think would be successful would be for owners of other Chrysler air tent homes to come forward and have [4:01:44 PM] historic designation applied to their homes. With those remarks, mayor, I do not have a motion to make in the case for item 75. >> Mayor Adler: Anyone have a motion they want to make on item 75? Council member tovo? >> Tovo: I have some comments. We have in the history of this council really just rezoned possibly three cases over owner approval. It's a high threshold and I agree were there to be a motion on this item I don't believe it would be successful. I do agree with those who have weighed in that this is a historically significant structure. It meets the criteria in our zoning ordinance. If we have a historic landmark designation ordinance we ought to use it and follow it. I support those of you who have argued for the rezoning to [4:02:45 PM] historic. You know, there were conversations -- thank you for all who participated on every side of the conversation today and we've gotten lots and lots of e-mails over the last couple of weeks about this structure. They have been from adjacent neighbors and nearby neighbors. They've come from architects in different parts of the city. We've gotten e-mail in support from a professor emeritus from UT Austin school of architecture, midtex mod who was here today representing one of their board members advocating for their preservation. The landmark commission -- Travis county historic commission has -- preservation has the green building program at the city of Austin add Vo kated for its -- advocated for its preservation. [4:03:45 PM] In my experience I think we've had more feedback than we have for many other structures I have heard testimony about in the time I've been on the dais. I think it's unfortunate. It sounds as if the owner is very set and determined to move forward with the demolition. I think it's unfortunate preservation in Austin in their letter expressed a willingness to work with that property owner as they have with other property owners to help figure out a path forward to use the structure and to add on to it and accommodate it for modern purposes and to address the other challenges and we see that happen across the city and the nation, including in areas that have stronger cultures of historic preservation. So that's what I wanted to say on this today. Again, thanks to those who participated in the conversation, both here today and in the weeks prior. >> Mayor Adler: Anyone wishing to make a motion on this item [4:04:52 PM] 75? Council member harper-madison? >> Harper-madison: Turn my microphone on? >> Mayor Adler: If there's no motion, it dies. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I'll decline to make a motion. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. In which case this does not move forward. We've taken care of 75. I think that's all the zoning cases we have. Let's turn to nonconsent. 48 and 49 we're going to take up later in the day. We have two eminent domain cases in front of us with respect to items 50 and 51 being nonconsent combination items. Is there a motion to the effect that the city of Austin authorizes the use to acquire thedescribed in the agenda? Council member tovo? Council member kitchen. [4:05:54 PM] Opposed? It is unanimous with council member Renteria off the dais. That gets us to item 53. Is there a motion to approve item 53 which is updates to the asmp strategic mobility plan? >> Tovo: I thought we were posted for discussion today. I don't think we're posted for action today. >> Mayor Adler: In which case we called all the speakers. >> Alter: Do you need to close the hearing? A. >> Mayor Adler: No, it doesn't -- it will be up for action and under action under state law. 53 has been withdrawn and will not be considered today. Someone make a motion to approve the housing tax credits for items 56 and 57. Council member vela makes the motion. Council member Ellis seconds the motion. [4:06:55 PM] Any discussion? Council member vela? >> Vela: I'm familiar with the property. They definitely need some tlc and I'm happy to see this moving forward. >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. Those in favor of this motion to approve items 56 and 57, raise your hand. Those opposed? Council member Renteria off the dais. 58 is the alcohol waiver. Motion to approve the waiver? Council member pool makes the motion. Seconded council member carp er -- harper-madison. Unanimous with council member Renteria off the dais. Motion for item 59? Council member tovo makes the [4:07:57 PM] motion. Second? Council member Ellis seconds the motion. Any discussion? Council member -- mayor pro tem alter? >> Alter: I want to encourage folks who are interested in working this summer to consider being life guards or camp counselors, which is what making us need to do this resolution. >> Mayor Adler: Those in favor of 59, raise your hand. Unanimous on the dais. Council member Renteria off. I think that gets us then to item 91, which is referred from the public health committee, sobering center board of directors. Council member tovo, do you want to lay this out? >> Tovo: Sure. This is the recommendation from the public health committee that we appoint to the board of the local corporation of the sobering center. [4:08:57 PM] I will move approval with my walking motion. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. We'll let that happen. Comes from the committee. It's been seconded. And we had a chance to talk to this individual and I'm excited that he's willing to serve. Any discussion before we vote? Those in favor, please raise your hand? Those opposed? That item, 91 is -- is that what it was, 91 -- is approved unanimously with council member Renteria off the dais. I think that gets us up to 94. Sorry? >> Tovo: There was a request that 90 be postponed. In the interest of time I'm going to move postponement until our next meeting. I think we had six sponsors so we probably have enough votes to pass it, but in interest of accommodating those of you who [4:09:58 PM] would like more time to read it, I'll postpone it for today. >> Mayor Adler: I appreciate it. Any objection to item 90 being postponed to our first meeting in June? Hearing none, item 90 will be postponed. That gets us up to 94. Anybody want to make a motion to approve 94? Council member vela makes the motion. Is there a second? Council member harper- madison seconds. Any discussion? I just want to -- sorry. >> I think the record needs to be clear that it's version two in the back-up and I think it's in the back-up. Just want to make that clear for the record. >> Mayor Adler: I think that's good. I would point out that with respect to item 94 our city is growing quickly. And as we adapt and embark on a number of transformational [4:10:58 PM] projects we have to think differently about how the city does things. We're very committed to our 50/50 mode shift that we have to achieve. Those are our environmental and climate goals. To meet them we have to have mobility projects that are successful and provide viable transportation networks. Voters continue to support these aspirations. Proud to be part of a community that passed the 2016, 2017, 2018 mobility bonds as well as project connect. To deliver on the promises made to them in a timely manner we have to look at the code to make sure that it is appropriate for all of the values that we hold as a city. This code was primarily designed specific development. That's not the only thing we're concerned about in today's world. This ordinance builds in more thorough consideration of horizontal and linear [4:11:59 PM] characteristics of mobility projects often unique. I appreciate that and encourage the work that staff did on this. Please consider the excellent work, collaboration, building recommendations brought to us and further recommendations that allow us to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars. Thank you for the work that staff has done and will continue to do and bring to us. Anybody else on 94? Mayor pro tem alter? >> Alter: I just wanted to ask staff if they could clarify what the changes were in version two. >> Yes, mayor pro tem and council members. I'd be happy to walk you through the changes. Primarily they were clarifications and wording, [4:13:01 PM] legal clarifications, reduction of redundancy. There are two items I would like to bring to your attention. The first one is addition of a public mobility project. That is language used throughout and that was a request to be added by both the codes and ordinances committee as well as the water shed protection department. Staff across the departments agreed with that and has added that in to our staff- recommended draft ordinance. The other item is renaming of the structural control fund for payment in lieu. It was listed previously as a public mobility project structural control fund and has been renamed to align specifically with the water sheds that it is associated with, so it is now called the suburban and water shed supply [4:14:02 PM] structural control fund. >> There was a fund in the prior version. You just changed the name. >> Correct. The substance of the ordinance remains the same. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Council member Ellis? >> Ellis: I'll say a quick thank you. I know this was highly technical. I'm thankful we weble to work through some issues as we try to implement public approved transportation dollars for these bonds and transportation projects. Thank you to everyone who worked on them. >> Yeah. Thank you. There were a lot of different staff across departments who worked on this. >> Mayor Adler: Those in favor of the item, raise your hand. Those opposed? Unanimous on the dais. Thank you, with council member Renteria off. That's 94. Colleagues, I am showing three items we're going to hear in executive session before we can -- three items we're going to hear in executive session. [4:15:02 PM] Those three items I'm showing as 17, 85, 92. 17, 85, 92. When I look at the pulled items, that would enable us to be able to take up item 18, which was pulled by council member Kelly. Do you want to address that, council member Kelly, and we'll go into executive session? >> Kelly: It should be pretty quick. I would like to make a motion for postponement on item 18. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. >> Kelly: If we have a second, I can explain why. >> Mayor Adler: Why don't you explain why first and then ask -- >> Kelly: I was afraid of making a walking motion. >> Mayor Adler: You did it exactly right. >> Kelly: My office requested invoices and the procurement [4:16:02 PM] office was not able to provide those to us before the deadline. There was a teams message to my chief of staff that explained the procurement office was not able to get them before the deadline. The staff did provide somewhat of a responsive request at 9:42 A.M. They said staff are working to compile the requested information but please advised it is voluminous. In the interest of time and in the short term find attached high-level break down of the contracts. Staff will follow up with additional details when they're available. When it comes to me that is an item that is 41.9 million dollars I would appreciate the opportunity to review the information I request before I vote. I requested that so I can view it thoroughly. >> Mayor Adler: Staff is okay with this postponement? Does anyone object? Hearing no objection, we'll [4:17:02 PM] postpone number 18 to first meeting in June as well. That leaves us 17 a and 85 to act on. We're going to consider both those in executive session first. We Eric -- we're also going to consider 92 in executive session. Colleagues, council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: We had a good testimony on 48 and 49. So I don't know if U U were thinking in terms of some time to discuss that -- >> Mayor Adler: I'll call that up after executive session when we come back out to consider things. Yes. Council member Ellis? >> Ellis: When the mayor pro tem mentioned the need for people to look for summer jobs for parks and recreation I had a few notes from the consent agenda that we were told to vote on it and we might be able to circle back on our remarks. [4:18:04 PM] There may be other things people want to say that isn't Q and a but is notes. >> Mayor Adler: We'll call that too. Colleagues, do you want to make comments on the consent agenda before or after we go to executive session. >> Could we think through the times a little bit. We have proclamations in about an hour. And we have three items in executive session. And we also have the consent agenda comments. I'm wondering -- I'm not sure -- I want to make sure we're planning appropriately here because I want to make sure we don't have proclamation folks waiting for proclamations a long time. >> Mayor Adler: We have items 48 and 49 to see people want to elevate additional thoughts. When we come back out we need to vote on 85 and 17. [4:19:04 PM] So we'll vote on those two. And we have the opportunity to make comments. >> Tovo: Could we please make sure -- I know we have two members of our convention center staff who have been waiting here all day for 17. If we could prioritize that but at a minimum it sounds even if they went first in executive session they would still need to way until we're concluded if executive session unless we postpone it. At a minimum could we knock out those items before we start talking about vmu and compatibility. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go back to executive session, knock out these items and come back out. We can better judge time, and I think staff would appreciate that as well. That said, the city council will go into closed session to take up three items pursuant to government code. City council will discuss issues related to 85, 92. [4:20:13 PM] Also pursuant to government code we'll discuss real estate matters with respect to item 71. We're going into executive session on the items understand need. I don't hear objection. I think we can do this presently in the executive session room. I suggest we literally walk straight over there and do that. So here at 4:20 I'll see you in a minute back for executive session. [5:43:43 PM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. We are back out of closed session at 5:43. We discussed legal issues related to items 85 and 92, real estate item 17. I recommend we do proclamations at this point and then come back from proclamations and finish up the agenda. Any objection to that? All right. So, we're going to take a recess at this point. What's the first proclamation up, do we know? >> The grow green, you're doing. >> Mayor Adler: What? >> The list I have has you doing go green first. >> Mayor Adler: Let's go green. >> Ems week, public works week, and Kathleen riding's day. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Is staff ready to assist with the proclamations? >> Got a big mess here. >> Harper-madison: Mayor, I don't know if you had the opportunity to watch when we were doing music, but mayor pro tem alter had to read one on the [5:44:46 PM] fly, which was absolutely impressive. >> Alter: Thank you. >> Harper-madison: Uh-huh. [ Chuckling ] [5:46:27 PM] >> Mayor Adler: All right. How are we doing with TV signals? You know, there are just some things that we do in this city that just feel moreike Austin than other things that we do. [ Laughing ] >> Mayor Adler: And the grow green program we have has got to be something that is representative and visualizing and manifesting just core values of this community. So it's really appropriate that this is an anniversary that we recognize. I'm going to read a proclamation. It's going to be accepted by Sarah Hartley, who in an earlier iteration of her life ran my office when I was brand new elected and I appreciate that, [5:47:29 PM] before the city staff took her back again, which I've never forgiven. [ Laughing ] >> Mayor Adler: And Katie Duffy, and Denise Delaney of the watershed protection department, daphney Richards, members of the Travis county master gardeners, and Meredith Childs. Proclamation, be it known that whereas current resolution 20010503-029 directed the city manager to develop proposals for increasing the use of environmentally sound landscaping practices through a combination of incentives, certification, and increased public awareness, and whereas that resolution planted the seeds of the grow green program which was instituted in 2002 as a gardening education program that promotes sustainable landscaping practices, addresses [5:48:29 PM] water quality and conservation, recycling, intentional planting and least-impact pest control, and whereas this public education program has become a significant interdepartmental collaboration with far-reaching impact throughout the city and beyond, now, therefore, I, Steve Adler, mayor of the city of Austin, Texas, on behalf of the city council, do hereby proclaim may 19th of the year 2022 as 20th anniversary of the grow green program in Austin, Texas. Congratulations. Go green. [ Applause ] >> Appreciate it. Thank you all so much. This is such a great program. And as a pretend gardener myself, I have used so many of the materials that they have created for us over the years. [5:49:30 PM] And this couldn't be possible without a lot of people, over 20 years you get a lot of partnerships in a program this great. But it started, if you'll excuse the pun, the seed was planted by Daryl and some folks at the lady bird Johnson wildflower center in 2001 when they put a council resolution together that then grew into the program that we have now through the hard work of the Texas A&M agrilife extension, and the watershed protection department, and these amazing people you see behind me that are the ones that have grown this program into what it is, which is beloved by landscapers, and master gardeners. And a lot of our folks around the city that are just incredibly very focused on water quality, because that's what this is all about. So I am going to turn it over to [5:50:30 PM] one of those incredible partners, Daphne, with the Texas A&M agrilife extension. Thank you for being here and celebrating this wonderful 20 years of all this great hard work. [ Applause ] >> Well, thank you Sarah, with and Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to say thank you for this partnership. I work for the Travis county office of the Texas agrilife extension. We've been there from the beginning, helping start this program. And it's one of our very favorite partnerships with Texas A&M and the city of Austin and we have a great working relationship with the watershed protection department. And we're so happy that we get to partner and help protect our water, not just conserve it. And Austin is such a great place for that. We do such a good job here and this program helps us get that done and help the public stay educated in how to protect our [5:51:31 PM] precious natural resources that we have. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Mayor Adler: Let's get a picture. [5:52:40 PM] >> I'd like to invite ems down. Is this working again? Okay. We've got a lot of people here. Good evening, everyone. It's my honor to serve as mayor pro tem and represent district 10, central northwest Austin on the city council. I'm joined by our new ems chief and other leaders of ems, city management, and several of my [5:53:41 PM] colleagues on the Austin city council. We are here today to commemorate ems week 2022, which celebrates the dedication and hard work of ems providers in our city and across the nation. I want to note that city hall is just one of many groups pausing this week to thank our ems professionals. And that's not a surprise, because our ems professionals make a difference in many people's lives every single day of the week. The 2022 -- I don't want to go back to 2020 -- [ laughing ] >> Alter: National theme of rising to the challenge is particularly apt. These past few years have presented an enormous challenge for our city as a whole, but especially for our healthcare professionals. Ems workers have been on the front lines of the covid-19 pandemic since it began in March 2020. On top of the life-saving work they engage in, whether that's [5:54:43 PM] on an ambulance or elsewhere, the devotion demonstrated by our ems professionals is unmatched. I'm certain I may speak for every austinite in extending my gratitude. We can always count on our ems, whether it is to save a life or inspire one. I want to share two really brief stories of encounters with ems in my own district. I was on a neighborhood meeting a couple weeks ago and someone came up to me and wanted to extend their gratitude to ems. A few months before that, her husband had been walking on a street, on a sidewalk and collapsed out of nowhere. Some neighbors found him quickly, called 911 and ems arrived within five minutes. Those good samaritans and ems saved his life. He was grateful and pleased at the response. They also mentioned another neighbor had the same experience [5:55:45 PM] a few months later and was also saved very promptly by ems. But ems also inspires in our community. I had a neighbor selling girl scouts and we arranged for her troop to sell girl scouts to honor our first responders and they chose ems. And they came and brought several troops together and sold over 300 boxes of cookies to share with our ems. But our ems didn't just eat the cookies. No, Selina, president of ems a, helped us to make that a real experience for those girls in those troops. So they got to learn what ems does, got to see what a medic does, walk around the ambulance, and be inspired to be a medic one day. So, it is my honor today to offer a proclamation in honor of ems week. Proclamation. Be it known that whereas, emergency medical services is a [5:56:47 PM] vital public service and provides life-saving care to those in need 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year; and whereas the emergency medical services system consists of paramedics, emergency medical technicians, emergency physicians, emergency nurses, first responders, educators, administrators and others who have dedicated their lives to the service of others, and whereas it is appropriate to recognize the value and the accomplishments of emergency medical service providers in Austin and Travis county by designating emergency medical services week, now, therefore, I, Alison alter, on behalf of Steve Adler, mayor of the city of Austin and several of my colleagues, we have almost the whole council here, which says something, I proclaim may 15th-21st 2022 as emergency medical services week. [ Applause ] >> Alter: I would like to invite up the chief. [5:57:51 PM] >> Thank you, mayor pro tem alter, councilmembers, and members of city leadership that have joined us behind here, and everyone else here today. I'm honored and humbled to represent the Austin Travis county ems department, and all of the hard work that our emts, paramedics and support staff do every day. It's been a particularly challenging few years for us in ems, a number of individuals have experienced loss through the covid-19 pandemic, stress. A number of different other things have occurred over the past few years as we tried to truly be the forefront of healthcare in the community. Our providers were out there every day during the pandemic, putting their lives on the line and risking themselves to take care of members of the community. I can't say enough how proud I am of them for the hard work they have done. I thank all of them in the audience today. Thank you very much for coming with us and thank you for sticking with the [5:58:51 PM] I'd like to take a moment to thank everyone else that's joined us here tonight and I appreciate it. So thank you very much. [Applause] [6:00:26 PM] . >> Is this thing on. >> Of course it's chita hanging around being the bad kid in class. Hi, colleagues. Good afternoon everybody. Thanks for sticking with us. We appreciate it. What do you think about that downtown traffic? Somebody should do something about that. Good evening. I'm the proud representative for city council district one. That's east and northeast Austin, and Thi W week I get the opportunity to very proudly celebrate public service, which I did not find out until today that our crossing guards are a part of our faithful, hardworking public servants. That's something that's near and dear to my heart and on my mind this week because we have [6:01:27 PM] one who will literallyhrow her body in front of cars. I'm going to find out her names. Risking her name every day because people go too fast in school Zones. I'm going to find her name. Public works week is an annual celebration recognizing organizations that build, maintain and steward public infrastructure. The roots of Austin public works department reach all the way back to 1874 -- that's nearly 150 years worth of streets, bridges, sidewalks, trails, and pothole repairs thanks to our public works employees. The department is responsible for a range of services and amenities that we austinites see and use every day. You can hardly turn your head without seeing a member of [6:02:28 PM] public works resurfacing streets, removing debris, maintaining bridges, repairing curbs and sidewalks. It might not sound glamorous but they do this work so we can get around safely. Engineers, project managers, inspectors and other professionals deliver hundreds of capital projects each year. From water line relocations to building new rec stations, the department's capital delivery staff bring Austin's public assets to life. Public work staff also build and maintain our urban trail network and partner with neighborhoods to make small community-centric projects a reality. The department employs hundreds of crossing guards. Might have made mention of that -- who help Austin's children get to and from school [6:03:29 PM] safely. This year's public work week's theme -- it feels timely given the role of treating key routes for our first responders during recent winter freezes and their leadership in water distribution operations, during recent boil water notices, and that brings me to a proud moment to get to deliver this proclamation for all their hard work. Be it known that whereas the support of understanding and informed residents is vital to the efficient operation of public work system and programs such as water, sea Eric -- sewers, streets and public buildings and whereas the qualified personnel who staff the public works department contributes to our quality of life through their positive attitudes and understanding of the work they perform and [6:04:29 PM] whereas we are pleased to recognize the contributions they make to our health, safety, comfort and quality of life, now, therefore I, council member harper-madison, along with mayor of Austin, hereby proclaim may 15th through may 21st, 2022 as national public works week. Thank you for all your service. I'm not sure who's going to -- oh, all right. You're going to be the guy? You're going to be the guy. We appreciate your service. You want to take that. >> Certainly. >> Say a few words. >> Okay. Thank you, council member. And hello, everyone. Thank you for being and joining our public works professionals here today. I'm excited to here. [6:05:32 PM] National public works week is celebrated this week all around the country. And it's -- all around the country public works and municipalities and counties are recognizing and appreciating our public service heroes who help keep the community strong by providing infrastructure and services in streets, bridges, sidewalks, trails, transportation, water, storm water, public buildings and spaces like parks, resource recovery, fleet, emergency response, and, yes, in Austin, council member, even crossing guards. Go, crossing guards. Our theme is ready and resilient, and I want to thank my partner departments who also provide public services for the city of Austin. Mayor and council, city manager's office who support our department, but mostly I want to thank the Austin community who have placed their [6:06:35 PM] trust and stewardship of placing their infrastructure in our hands. Thank you again. [Applause] . [6:08:25 PM] . >> Good evening. I'm council member Kathy tovo and have the privilege of honoring one of our Austin heroes. I would invite you, Kathleen, and those gathered with you to join me up here for this proclamation. And if you don't want to come up for the proclamation you can join in for the photograph if you would rather. So tonight I have really a privilege of honoring Kathleen riding on the event of her retirement. I was thinking of some of the things we've worked on over the years and I think one of the first projects happened in [6:09:25 PM] 2012. Of course you had been active and working in the community and serving individuals experiencing homelessness and so many others for decades at that pointen. But you came in with several other social service providers from the trenty center and -- Trinity center and others to advocate for women living unsheltered in our streets, in a year we had several tragedies for women living unsheltered outside. You came in and said we have to do something. We had these acts of violence. Though it was a big lift, weeks before we were about to finalize the bond language, you and the others you advocated alongside were able to convince city council to add very, very quickly -- come up with the research that we needed to add money into that bond package to expand the women and children's [6:10:27 PM] shelter that the city of Austin runs -- or the city of Austin owns and runs with the Salvation Army, and that is just one of so many examples where your work has just fundamentally changed the lives of so many people in the city. So thank you so very much. Again, that is one of multiple examples of the ways in which you have helped our community. So on behalf of my colleagues, many of whom are gathered behind me and a grateful community, I would like to present the following proclamation. Be it known whereas Kathleen rideings as developed her career to serving citizens and advocating for needs of children experiencing homelessness, as the social services director of the Salvation Army over the last 26 years, she and her staff have spearheaded expansions that have benefitted the Austin [6:11:27 PM] community. Whereas she has been instrumental in developing and managing projects that benefit women and children, chronically homeless single women and homeless prevention for families and veterans, she was a leader in response disasters, to winter storm uri and the covid-19 pandemic, and whereas she has been active in community collaboration such as best single source plus, ending community homeless coalition, religious coaligs to assist the homeless and where she has been recognized as a champion for children by helping hand home and received the Salvation Army Texas division mission mover as well as an award for excellence in social work now I on behalf of Steve Adler and my colleaguesclaim may 19, [6:12:30 PM] 2022 as Kathleen rideings day in the city ofstin. Congratulations. [Applause]. We look forward to seeing where your next adventures take you and invite you to say a few words. >> I really appreciate this. It means a lot to me and I would like to thank you and council members, particularly council member tovo has been so supportive over many, many years. As we've worked to open more emergency shelter, more programs for children and families. She has such a heart for children, particularly. I especially wanted to share this recognition today with staff of the Salvation Army, the social services staff that really do the hands-on work of [6:13:31 PM] the army on a daily basis. These folks run the emergency shelters and rapid rehousing programs that the army operates, and it is a daunting task. I can tell you. They run three shifts a day, 160 hours a week, 24/7, 365 days a year. And it is really an amazing responsibility that they do so very well. And they have had a very difficult run of it with the covid pandemic in the last two years and have just done such amazing work during the winter storm. These folks, several of them actually moved into shelters so that our homeless people could be taken care of during all of that. So I'm going to miss them all [6:14:31 PM] and all of you, and it's been an honor to do this work and truly a labor of love for me. So thank you. [Applause] . [People speaking in background]. [6:22:16 PM] >> Mayor Adler: All right, colleagues. We have -- we had our quorum. One, two, three, four, five, six. We got a quorum. All right. So we're out of closed session. In closed session we discussed real estate issues related to item 17, and here we are at 6:22 back -- and legal issues related to 92 and 85. Did we discuss all three of these in the last session we were just in? All three of them? Okay. Thanks. So and here at 6:22 we're back in regular session. >> Tovo: Yes. I was hoping we could take up the item quickly because we [6:23:16 PM] have convention center staff who have been here -- 17. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. I'll call you on item 17 >> Tovo: Thank you. We have good conversation and in the confidential memo and the other. I still believe there's other data that a need for which we are articulated in our real estate executive session. I would like to ask my council colleagues to postpone this to our next council meeting with a request to staff to do some additional work on the commercial appraisal factoring out one of the elements that we discussed in the real estate executive session that I believe is not a factor. I'll just leave it there and to work to get us some comparables for the central business district versus comparables that are outside the central [6:24:17 PM] business district and to also come back to us with perhaps some cost-benefit analysis of a few of the different scenarios we talked about. And I think I'll leave it there because I'm concerned that I might reveal something that we talked about in our real estate executive session. I appreciate the staff after our conversation last time and my raising concerns about the rental rates. They went back and renegotiate and came back to us with a different proposal. I think our due diligence suggests the need to take a look with some additional comparables and I would ask that that's what we do. I'm sorry. One additional consideration as we look at the rates, whether there's an opportunity to stick with retail but to look at other kinds of retail businesses that might be interested in locating in that empty -- in that currently [6:25:19 PM] vacated space that would also fit alongside our palm district planning to get more active vital pe des Yan -- pedestrian uses, not just businesses. >> Mayor Adler: Any second? Discussion? Council member Kelly? >> Kelly: I was wondering if we could hear from staff on what some of the I guess issues might arise with postponing this item and if it's your recommendation or not to postpone for a second time. >> Thank you, council member. I'll defer to our staff that are coming up but it is not our recommendation to postpone. We believe we have spent enough time on this and would prefer an up or down vote. We're happy to continue with dialogue. Staff has worked hard on this and this is the same staff [6:26:20 PM] tasked with some high priority initiatives that council has asked us to pursue, including the work on south central water front, colony park, the convention center discussion. So these are critical programs for our city and I want to make sure they are spending their time appropriately. Mr. Gates, is there anything else you would like to add about the postponement. >> By the next council date, June 9th, we most certainly won't be able to take a look at all the things we discussed in the executive session meeting regarding options and scenarios, and there's a possibility that the current tenant considering the space may wish to renegotiate the terms and we still don't know what those would evolve to. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Further discussion. >> Did you say we will or [6:27:20 PM] won't. >> We wouldn't. It's too quick. >> Harper-madison: Got you. >> Mayor Adler: Council for the discussion? I'd like to hear from colleagues. June 9th is not a significant delay. It's two weeks. At the same time I'm concerned we're not going to have further answers. I don't -- so much of this is a judgment call. And there's not going to be a definitive, objective answer. And I don't know. I'd like to hear what colleagues said, at some point we have to figure out what's the most value for our time and staff to be spending time on. That extra time, I'd like to get another hotel to buy. >> I would too. >> Mayor Adler: So I'm torn on this because I understand the questions and I'm not sure that [6:28:21 PM] we are guided here by anything other than our staff coming in and saying they've done a review and their professional opinion is this is what the right answer is. Council member tovo? >> Tovo: I support our bigger missions, including the ones you've articulated, manager. I would just say that we have money to do those things when we're using our assets well. So I don't see them as unaligned. If there is additional revenue we can extract from this really valuable piece of location, city- owned real estate, I want us to do that so we have the money to invest in the services that are critical and are near and dear to our hearts, including serving those who are experiencing homelessness. I think given this is going to lock us into a rental rate for the next ten years, that is -- that we can certainly disagree [6:29:24 PM] about what seems to be at the very low end of the spectrum at a minimum, at the very low end of the spectrum of central district commercial rates. I would suggest we take the additional time. It's not a lot of time but we do take additional time to see if we can get some better comparables. >> Mayor Adler: Colleagues, any other comments? Motion to postpone this until June 9th? Those in favor of the motion to postpone until June 9th, mraez raise your hand. Council member tovo, council member -- raise your hand. It's the balance of the dais with council member Renteria. The motion to postpone does not pass. Motion to approve the item? Council member vela makes the motion. Is there a second? Council member Ellis seconds. Any discussion? Council member Ellis? [6:30:24 PM] >> Ellis: I'll say briefly I'm sorry I missed the unvailing of this. I was off the dais for a second. We've been able to have these conversations. This one is tricky but what I think is interesting is block by block in the downtown central business district looks a little bit different. So while I know this is street-level walkable, when I think about the activities that are best supported in this particular intersection in this particular street near the convention center, I trust that you and your team are negotiating these things really carefully and vacancies are going to set us back as well if we're not able to find a good tenant. The previous tenant wasn't able to stay in that location. I'm willing to move forward but appreciate the line of questioning, wanting to make sure we're appropriately evaluating our real estate and trying to make sure we're able to balance our priorities at the same time. Council member vela and then [6:31:26 PM] council member tovo. >> Le: . >> Vela: It is a quirky spot there along red river and fourth and with the impending potential reconstruction of the convention center I think that also does affect the attractiveness of the lease. So I would support it. >> Mayor Adler: Council member tovo? >> Tovo: Thank you, council member vela. There's not a but there. The questions I raised last time resulted in some measurable changes to this lease, so I think it is absolutely important that we take a look at these carefully. I can't support this. I think we're renting this, leasing it and locking ourselves into a lease that's well undermarket for the next decade and, you know, council member Ellis, I see it a little differently. I understand what you're saying, that this is a use compatible with the convention [6:32:26 PM] center but it is an area where we've said we don't want the uses to just support the convention center. There's a reason we renamed it. We want the quadrant and have put time and money and energy into reenvisioning that part of downtown to make sure that it's not just frequented by those going to conventions and going to the large convention hotels and so we have an opportunity in our city space to have more vibrant retail uses and that's another additional reason to take more time before we have the additional space taken over down there. I'm going to do some thinking about how we might revision entering into these leases and also since it has a clear relationship and that is part of why we're approaching this with some discounted rent to [6:33:27 PM] support the convention center I'm going to think about ways in which the convention center might become a party here in helping make up some of the gap between the lease and what we have and what would be a market rate lease. >> Mayor Adler: Any further discussion? Take a vote. Those in favor, please raise your hand. Those opposed? I'm seeing council member tovo voting no. Council member Kelly voting no. Were the other votes aye? Council member Renteria off the dais. Eight to one. I'm sorry. Eight -- there's ten of us. Seven. Eight/two. Eight, two, and one off the dais. [6:34:27 PM] Let's go to item 85. Council member Kelly? Want to lay out your motion? >> Kelly: Yes. I have some questions for staff. May I do that before I lay out the motion? >> Mayor Adler: Yes. >> Kelly: Thank you. Thank you for being here. Are you aware of any security measures that were part of the contract with family elder care that will take place during renovations? The proposed contract. >> James may, housing and planning department. The contract with the family elder care for rehabilitation is under development right now. It's part of that rehabilitation -- they will be responsible for making sure the site is safe. I'm not sure of specific aspects that would relate to security, though. >> Kelly: Thank Yo >> Mayor Adler: Question was during reconstruction. >> During reconstruction they would be responsible for ensuring the construction is [6:35:28 PM] safe. I'm not sure if they have specific aspect ins the contract. We have a representative from building services on the line who can answer any questions around security right now. >> Kelly: I think it would be helpful to understand what the security looks like currently before the renovations start and before we approve or not approve the contract for family elder care. I would like to hear from building services. >> I believe he's on the call. >> Mayor Adler: Mr. Alexander. >> Hello. Can you hear me? >> Mayor Adler: Yes, we can. >> Okay. Good evening, mayor, council members. I'm from building services, building services officer. Security right now as it currently stands -- we have an on-site security guard there now and we have 24 hour patrol from the contracted security. [6:36:30 PM] That's the security that is there now until any further contract changes at this point. There's an agreement with APD to carry out and patrol that area also, council member Kelly. >> Kelly: Thank you. And I know I have spoken with the Williamson county sheriff's office and they are doing directed patrols in the area. For item 35 I would like to lay out my motion. For item 35 I'd like to move to authorize negotiation only and provide the following direction relate today the item which the clerk sent out via e-mail which is available in back-up on the agenda item. This is 85, not 35. The contract shall establish terms for safety and effectiveness related renovation including but not limited to the renovation may nod exceed 78 dwellings at the property and during the renovation the contractor must prohibit camping on the property, prohibit drop-ins at the property and provide measures that secure the [6:37:31 PM] property including but not limited to 24/7 camera surveillance, security presence and secure entry ways, provide other -- provide safety and security updates in form of memorandum submitted every 60 days outlining break-ins, successful break-ins, security breaches, any changes to security contracts, any and all important security data regarding council consideration. Provide city staff with notice of 24 hours when a significant incident occurred on site related to safety and security of the property. Provide city staff with incidents that occur on nearby properties or to use their best efforts to do so. The city manager is directed to provide council members with their best efforts with notice within 24 hours when an incident occurs on site related to safety and security of the [6:38:31 PM] property. The city manager is directed to conduct a minimum of two or more listening sessions during project renovations hosted by city staff and made available to the public. >> Mayor Adler: What you posted, you added the phrase, you know, best efforts requirement with respect to the second to last bullet point? >> Kelly: Yes. That is correct. >> Mayor Adler: Did you add that to the first bullet point too? >> Kelly: I did. It's both relate today the contractor and also the -- related to the contractor and the city manager. >> Mayor Adler: Best efforts. Thank you. Council member Kelly moves passage of this item 85 with that direction. Is there a second? Council member pool seconds that. Sorry? Council member kitchen -- >> Kelly: She helped me quite a bit so I appreciate her seconding it. >> Mayor Adler: That's fine too. Go ahead. [6:39:31 PM] >> Kelly: Looking back to some of the earlier discussion had on council related to the property many in our community expressed concerns related to security at the property. I have had many concerns about this property. With on going miscommunications not just with the community but with our own city staff. One example is security not being there and lack of security being there prior to the criminal mischef that took place this month. I cannot see a clear pathway forward. While candlewood and pecan gardens is a resource people experiencing homelessness from all over the city will be able to utilize, it is in a district I represent. District issues are my responsibility as elected responsible for the area. I need to make sure our district's voice and concerns are heard loud and cleared as well as addressed. [6:40:32 PM] For one reason or another as we've seen over the past few weeks there have been massive failures that have caused security concerns. I've spoken with nearby neighbors and business owners who have lost more faith than before. This address those concerns and in an effort to hold staff and contractors accountable so this never happens again. As a council we have to be good spurdz of the dollars. When there is a failure each and every one of us on this dais should ensure there is accountability on behalf of the city staff for that failure. We've been assured the previous situation has been corrected but not without oversight. We cannot let this happen to any vacant city owned property again. Steps should be in place to make sure it doesn't happen. [6:41:35 PM] I urge my colleagues to consider voting in favor of this direction. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: My understanding is that staff and legal are okay with the direction. Any further discussion? Council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: Yes. I appreciate this direction, council member Kelly. I think it will be very helpful and also can just be a -- become a standard of what we do and we incorporate when we purchase property. So -- and I think it's necessary, and it's necessary in a minimum really in terms of trying to rebuild some trust and transparency with the community. So I appreciate you bringing this forward, council member Kelly. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Council member pool? >> Pool: Yeah. Thanks for the belt and [6:42:35 PM] suspenders and the reminders about protecting city assets. I'm sorry that this happened. It's pretty distressing to hear the specifics of what happened at this property. Especially given the contentious nature of the acquisition of this property. So this just sort of makes all of that even worse. I would ask the city manager to confirm that other properties that the city has purchased for these purposes are also specifically checked and secure because it does make me wonder what else might be going on. In particular, district seven was Teed up to have permanent supportive housing at the same time as the district six location and I want to make absolutely sure that nothing is happening at the property that is in my neighbor's backyards. [6:43:42 PM] Thanks, council member Kelly, for being on top of this. Really sorry that this has happened. As I said before, this is extremely disresz thing. Thank you, city manager for ensuring the situation is corrected and doesn't occur. >> Mayor Adler: Council member Fuentes. >> Fuentes: It says it may not exceed 78 dwellings. Can staff speak to why this number. Why would we cap it off. >> It says in the contract 78 dwellings currently andhehe other spaces would be used for office space, for wrap-around services for the individuals staying there. I don't know if staff has more to add to that. >> Kitchen: It's in the back-up that way. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: Council member Kelly, thank you for helping us move forward in a constructive way, representing your [6:44:44 PM] district. Manager and staff, good to see us moving forward on this. I've seen some photos that some of the local leadership in Williamson county have published, indicating there are perhaps even more homeless encampments in Williamson county. We've always known they are there. It doesn't surprise me they're increasing, given the increase in housing prices we're facing. The sooner we can get more apartment buildings to get people off the street and out of tents and into homes, the better it will be for the people and for the community at large. So I appreciate you moving forward. Please move forward quickly. This is exactly the kind of help that this area and this city generally need. All right. It's been moved seconded. Any discussion? Council member harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: I appreciate your words and appreciate you bringing this [6:45:46 PM] forward, council member Kelly. There was one thing nagging at me and I've been trying to express it. You said move forward in a way that's productive. But I keep thinking of some of the opposition we faced during the course of this conversation. I think we all realize and remember vividly how contentious the item sort of became. One thing I want to make sure to remind people of, you know, during that conversation one of the things that was revealed was, you know, we got statistics about community first village, for example, where the neighborhood was hesitant to have this asset in their neighborhood and it turned out that criminal activity that occurred that people had fears of didn't happen by way of the people that were residing at community first. It happened by way of the neighbors who were coming into community first village. I want to make sure that we don't lose the opportunity to recognize the irony of the fact [6:46:46 PM] that it probably was not people that would otherwise be housed at this asset that vandalized the asset and that otherwise, you know, really caused some delay in us being able to develop the asset. I want to make sure we don't lose sight of the opportunity to recognize that during the course of these complicated conversations we have to hold everybody accountable for bad behavior and just, you know, really keep in mind that there always will be nuance to these difficult conversations. And that was the thing nagging at me and trying to figure out how to convey that. I appreciate you bringing this forward in a way that we have some protocol to look forward to moving forward because I think we do have -- even thinking through what d-1 has in the way of city-held assets that are underutilized. I went through the millennium parking lot one night and the parking lot was flooded and it was from a sprinkler head that [6:47:48 PM] busted. We had three foot of water in this part of the parking lot that had a recess. I only found it because I was walking through the neighborhood. Nobody would have found that for days. We would have dumped hundreds of thousands of gallons of waters because there weren't people checking on the the facility regularly. I recognize you daylighting that we need to be better stewards of all our assets of the city. >> Mayor Adler: Council member Kelly? >> Kelly: I want to thank my colleagues for their comments and support. I want to let council member harper-madison know that it is my intention to make sure the community knows we're here to protect everybody, housed and unhoused. It is an on going investigation with APD as to what happened so those details are not clear as to what occurred. We need to protect our assets [6:48:50 PM] and use them for the intended purpose and that they're protected. That's the intention there. So thank you, everyone. >> Mayor Adler: Okay. Further discussion? Take a vote. Those in favor of this item with the direction? Raise your hand. Unanimous with council member Renteria off. Colleagues, that gets us to the last two items, 48 and 49, plus comments on the consent agenda. Let's first call up items 48 and 49, the vmu discussion, corridor discussion. See if anybody has anything they want to elevate or say. Council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: I just thought I would use this opportunity to ask a few clarifying questions. I've been talking with folks from district five and so they [6:49:51 PM] raised a couple of questions that I think I know the answer to, but I just wanted to clarify. So in looking at the draft proposal, the -- one of them has to do with something you raised earlier, mayor, that I think is -- has a lot of opportunity. And that's -- there's language in here about the 25-foot set-back, compatibility set-back, allowing more flexibility for what can be in the set-back. I think there's a lot of potential there. And I'm thinking of things like landscaping, gsi, you know, enhanced buffers, trees, various things like that. So I think that's probably what you all meant, and so I might propose some language to include there or I might just [6:50:52 PM] be looking for you all to bring forward some language there when you bring forward the proposal. I think there's a lot of potential there. And I didn't know if you wanted to speak to that for a moment. >> Mayor Adler: Sure. And I think it's a really good comment, and that one was almost a place holder, I mean really, high-level, broad approach. The intent is to have ifc come back to council. Hopefully we'll have something on the board at the end of next week so everybody has a long time to look at it and make edits and changes and editions. If you have thoughts in the meantime that should be incorporated in that, please post them. Get them out. You're right. We were thinking in terms of other things we could do there that would still be meeting a consensus feel. >> Kitchen: Yeah. >> Mayor Adler: But might enable the property beyond the 20 feet to be used for development that it might not otherwise be, so there's not a [6:51:53 PM] lot of detail but there needs to be. >> Kitchen: What I'm hearing is that there's an opportunity for others to add things on the message board that you all can incorporate into the resolution and that way it can be more of a resolution from all of us. >> Mayor Adler: Absolutely and on everything from all of us, and quite frankly, even if things we're talking about here are things we've all talked about. So there's no real ownership by anybody on anything here. Let's post. >> Kitchen: I have a few more questions, but I can defer if you want to go to someone else first. >> Mayor Adler: Let me go to mayor pro tem and we'll come back. >> Alter: I want to clarify we'll have to determine whether when we go to a resolution, it's not a simple resolution that says come back and do ordinance changes which would be modification taking people's ideas of whoever is putting the resolution forward wanted or if it would be written in [6:52:54 PM] resolution form. We have not decided that. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Alter: It may be clearer to provide the guidance as an exhibit rather than word smithing it in an ordinance so we build off where we started adding where we agree on as a council or what we heard, if that makes sense. >> Kitchen: Okay. I don't know what the proper form is and really I'm not suggesting a particular format. I am suggesting the opportunity for other council members to be a part of it. >> Alter: Absolutely. I didn't want to surprise anyone if we decided to say do it as an exhibit. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Alter: -- A or something like that and it wasn't all resolution language. >> Mayor Adler: Sounds good. Yes, council member vela? >> Vela: One question that comes to mind -- I saw and am working from memory here but [6:53:55 PM] the parking requirements on the proposal -- on the large corridors -- please correct me if I'm wrong, was 20 to 50 per cent. On the smaller I can't remember what the number was. But I guess there's -- I think we need input from builders to basically say kind of what is practical. Again, the sense of if you're going to build parking, you're going to absolutely build, you know, X number of spots. I want to make sure we set that as a range that works as a practical matter and, again, not that we're just out there picking an arbitrary number. In other words, if someone is going to build parking, they would never build less than X number of parking spots or something like that, and I just don't want to set our minimums above let's say like a market minimum or a practical kind of [6:54:57 PM] limitation. I don't feel I'm wording that as strongly as I would like to, but I would -- more than anything I want to get feedback from, you know, vmu builted er -- builders and developers. If you're going to park a project what is a bare minimum number of parking spaces you would include so we can work that into our guidelines. >> Mayor Adler: Council member pool? >> Pool: Thanks, mayor. I also wanted to add that I'm hoping our language includes direction for staff to take a measure annually of how the changes that we propose and then hopefully pass to take a measure of how those changes are working. It could be maybe part of the strategic housing blueprint report we get from staff. I think going forward it would be a good annual report for us to get some feedback in the [6:55:59 PM] early future. We probably need it more often than annually so that if we find that there are concerns that we can unwind them. The feedback piece for the city manager, I'm hoping we'll be able to include in the document to get regular reports from the staff on how these changes are rolling out and the impacts they have on our housing supply so we can help to measure. >> Mayor Adler: Council member Ellis? >> Ellis: I really appreciate that thought, council member pool. You know, as we think about our strategic housing blueprint and just how the cost of materials is increasing I think it's important for us to be able to take that assessment quite often just so we can actually make sure are we on the mark, are we off the mark and what strategies do we have as a city council to be able to step up and make sure there's enough housing, that people don't get priced out or are not [6:57:00 PM] [indiscernible] To having a roof over their head. >> Mayor Adler: Council member Fuentes. >> Fuentes: Thank you. Colleagues, I wanted to ask you all -- especially those who are not in the sub quorum of the proposal for some general thoughts of the distance and heights limits we set out with the large and medium corridors. I want to get a sense of how close we are. This is certainly proposed as a starting point. Just trying to see some colleagues who are comfortable to speak to it thoughts on what is before us. >> Mayor Adler: Council member vela? >> Vela: I think it's a good starting point for discussion. I would say that -- I posted this on the message board but I would reiterate that our compatibility limits are so strict that, you know, we might [6:58:01 PM] be able to cut it down from, you know sh D let's say down 250 feet or something like that. It may not have a practical impact, especially on the smaller corridors where the single family homes are a little closer to the property. So I think as part of the analysis we really need to be making sure that when we adjust compatibility on the corridors it has an actual impact on the ability of people to develop projects, housing, along those same corridors, and what I don't want to get into is some kind of arbitrary negotiations where 200, 150, 175 -- you know, without knowing what the actual impacts are on those. And the other concern -- or one of -- a thought on the proposal is the selection of streets. [6:59:03 PM] One important concern is that it be equitable in the sense that we want west Austin streets also to be included. Again, I'm working from memory but the transit corridors map seems to me to be a much broader selection of streets around the city, the most -- the transit corridors seems to be a more comprehensive and better distributed map of potential -- kind of vmu streets than the ones that were listed. I just want to make sure we're capturing some of the -- like far west boulevard, lake Austin boulevard which are major corridors which have absolutely excellent locations for housing, that those are included within our focus. [7:00:10 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Council member tovo? >> Tovo: I can't answer that question that you posed, council member Fuentes, though I appreciate you raising it. There simply hasn't -- I haven't had enough time to even sift through the voluminous e-mails I'm getting about it. And constituents in my district are trying to sort through it at this point, as am I. I would ask just as you, council member vela asked, to understand the -- I would ask we direct staff to do renderings that would help us have it illustrated and modeled for what some of the changes would look like for the perspective of those living adjacent to it. I don't know what the mechanism is for that but I think we need to see some of this illustrated with just a map of distance changes. It's hard to understand what that looks like. [7:01:15 PM] >> Mayor Adler: Council member harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I appreciate being recognized. I have a lot of thoughts and look forward to having the conversation continue to evolve. I've been having lots of conversations in district. There were multiple articles published, one out of the white house -- talked specifically about density as a whole and some of the implications of sprawl, et cetera. So had me thinking through as a baseline what our -- is somebody's Mike on? My add is distracted by it. Do you hear that? It sounds like we're in a wind tunnel. [Wind sounds]. Is it me? Is it my fan? A-ha. My mom calls it your own personal summer. [7:02:16 PM] I'll turn off my fan. Thinking through some of the most successful programs. They have ground floor active uses, no compatibility requirements, no F.A.R., reduces the base parking requirement by at least 40 per cent with additional reductions for implementation of demand management strategies. I think recognizing that, that we have a working model that's will already vetted and in my mind's eye it makes sense for us to really think about that model as we move into new problematic efforts. I've heard people make reference to that model as the gold standard. I don't think any of us up here are pros. Some of the subject matter you dig into it and realize how obscure it is as you dig through it. Over the last several days as we've had the conversation some things I've heard people agree on -- all the climate science [7:03:17 PM] is real. They've concluded housing built in urban area near transit jobs and services reduce green house emissions more than any other option, including electric cars, which by the way I love my hybrid. Our status quo is a sprawl. We've heard speakers talk about it. There were multiple events. The articles I made reference to. The internet was on fire with implications of sprawl. It's unsustainable. It's the underlying cause for traffic. I had an opportunity to visit Detroit not that long ago and sat in on a conversation that was super interesting. They were saying they couldn't deploy emergency services to the suburbs. They couldn't afford to do it. It was encouraging people to move back to city center, which I thought interesting. I thought how do we apply that [7:04:19 PM] here? It's a different environment and economy, obviously. But thinking through what are they learning that we could deploy here, recognizing that Austin is facing this triple threat -- affordability, transportation, and frankly climate catastrophe that every year grows. It's because of the idea that growth won't happen if you don't let it. I think some of our speakers spoke to that earlier. It touched me because it's some of the things we need to think about. Our restrictive zoning that prioritizes single family homes has only created a seller's market where limited supply of housing goes to the higher bidders. Prospectors -- people who come in and are able to bid the highest. It forces young families and communities of color to the suburbs. That's about stock, in my [7:05:20 PM] mind's eye. I haven't heard to date an argument that convinces me otherwise. I think we have the ability to allow sustainable housing all over the city. With the right policy changes we can ease the pressure. As we allow more housing in all parts of our city and near where people work. That's a conversation that happens in district one as well -- you know, fair wages and access to workforce development comes up in alignment with the conversations around the relationship between housing and transit. I'm finding that third -- somebody made reference to a stool with three legs. The third leg keeps coming back to economic opportunity. Where are people working and what are the wages they're earning? The work needs to be where they live. There's nothing wrong with folks cherishing their neighborhoods. I appreciate that. I think there's something about loving your city and [7:06:21 PM] neighborhood and loving your neighbors. But as a community Austin has to decide who's included and who's left out. I appreciate when we make reference to our budget as our moral document. I think everything we do as a body is to some degree to our morals, to our commitments to our community. Policy changes that allow more homes and opens more access to opportunity to convenience, to quality of life, to schools and jobs and community investments like transit -- you know, I think that speaks to our shared commitments as a body and community. You know, these conversations about consensus as of late really have me thinking a lot about how do we get -- I was at an event yesterday that was talking about the tragic events in Buffalo and, you know, every speaker regardless of what it is that they said, you know, the grounding root was we're more alike than we are different. I think very much our conversations about housing [7:07:21 PM] don't have to be as contentious as they have been. I think, you know, we've reached that tipping point where things are just too ugly everywhere. You know, this much ugliness can't exist in every conversation because you're swinging for the fences every time. I think if we dial in to we're more alike than different and realize we have shared, bottom-line nonnegotiable -- sprawl is not good. Those are things we can agree upon. I appreciate the conversations about how we get there as a group. I think there's enough ugliness going around to last us a lifetime. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: Yes, I would say thank you, council member harper-madison. That's really the kind of conversation I think we're having and that we need to have and we need to encourage our [7:08:22 PM] folks in the community to have because it's not about, you know -- these issues that we're trying to wade through. I am positive we're all on the same page in what we want, and I think we need to have our conversations in a way that we're not vilifying each other. I don't mean us. I mean as a community -- that' we are not assuming ill motives or discounting people's concerns. So I'm pleased at the kind of conversation we're having so far. I expect that that will continue, and I think that's something we can do. So a couple of comments on the question that council member Fuentes asked. I can tell you that I am -- I'm still talking, you know, with members in my community and how their impacted, but I do think this is a very good proposal. [7:09:24 PM] You all heard earlier from one of my constituents, Ellie Mckinney. She held this up and said thank you. That is the kind of comments I'm hearing. I do need to do more analysis shg of course, to determine if there's particular things that are being impacted, like Elli brought forward and we need to think of the angled streets and that sort of thing. On the whole, I think this is good. I appreciate what council member pool said with regard to some regular approach to analyzing what we're accomplishing and also appreciate what council member vela said in terms of wanting to have some information, some data. What are we doing? Part of what I'm going to ask for from our staff is as we -- [7:10:24 PM] over the next couple of months as they're responding to us, whatever direction we give them, that they come back and let us know what is their capacity for doing this kind of analysis for us? We really need to be able to plan our city, which means we need to understand the impact of the changes we're making, and we need to understand with data when we're accomplishing what we're trying to accomplish and when we're not. What we end up doing is we're all talking with, you know, our best -- you know, the best we can but it's not based on data a lot of times because we don't have it. So I think that we need to move in that direction also. I think we need to do the best we can right now and move in that direction. So I have one more question on what was proposed, that looks -- I'm not sure if I'm reading it right but it seems [7:11:25 PM] to be inconsistent to me. I want to make sure I'm reading it right. When I look at the -- you know, when I look at the visual on page five about the compatibility on corridors proposal, I see the 25 feet as the -- I think that's visual -- indicating that 25 foot buffer and you see the various stair stepping after that. When I look on page four, there's a reference to a 15 feet. So I'm not understanding that because it says at a 15 foot or 25-foot distance -- I'm not sure what the "Or" is referencing, and I'm not sure -- it says increase the 35-foot height limit to 35 foot but then when I look at the chart, it has the 35-foot starting at 25 feet, not at 15. [7:12:26 PM] So if someone could help me understand that. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem, do you want to go first? >> Alter: Yeah, and when it's appropriate I have comments on other stuff. >> Mayor Adler: Sure. >> Alter: The chart at the top of page three is our current compatibility, which has a proviso if the site is less than 25,000 feet. >> Kitchen: I was talking on page 5. >> Alter: I understand that. The chart on page 3 is current compatibility, which has the 15-foot set back if it's a small lot. >> Kitchen: Uh-huh. >> Alter: Okay. We did not model that in our larger medium corridor examples, in our diagram. But it is receiving the 5-foot height bump depending -- it depends on the size. So we're just saying give an [7:13:27 PM] existing compatibility you get five feet more. If it was a small lot that had a 15-foot set back, wheu kept moving it would be at the extra five feet steps. >> Kitchen: In other words, you're keeping the current -- >> Mayor Adler: Set-back. >> Kitchen: You're keeping the current set-back and in the case of small lots that's currently 15, right? >> Alter: Yeah. >> Kitchen: All right. Thank you very much. >> Mayor Adler: Mayor pro tem? >> Alter: Thank you. Appreciate everyone reviewing this set of ideas and giving feedback and [indiscernible] To further conversations. I want to make specific comments that have been raised -- my opinion on why we landed where we did on our ideas. But I think it's important for us as a dais and community to understand that this proposal or set of ideas is not meant to be the only thing that we do to [7:14:29 PM] increase housing in our city or to allow for development. It was a set of questions that we asked about how do you increase density on the corridor and we decided to look at two particular tools. There are many, many other things that we already have in the works to add housing, add opportunities for density around our city. We passed at least one of those today, which was adding height in the north burnet gateway area, which is under our regulating plan and is a totally different animal. It's in west Austin, and there is a way to do that. We are currently doing rezoning for four different -- five different UT properties for the five of which are in west Austin. There are different tools. We have in the works allowing residential and commercial with an on-site affordability. That will also have big potential impacts to add [7:15:30 PM] housing in other parts of town. So I think it's really important that we already have in works lots of other things that will add housing around town. When you talk about corridors, the corridors are where the corridors are at some level, and other tools may be more appropriate to achieve the goals of having housing in other places. They may be more effective. One of the things were got around to is looking at imagine Austin center, which far west is an imagine Austin center, and try to understand how you encourage density in an imagine Austin center. It's more complicated and takes more time. There are no boundaries to these imagine Austin centers, so it becomes a much more involved question and not one that you can resolve in a quick way that will have an immediate impact on the community. So I just -- you know, I don't [7:16:31 PM] think any one of us who was any our group of five is expecting that this proposal on its own is the only thing that we are doing. So I want to make that clear. We've talked a lot -- council member pool, council member kitchen have done a lot of work encouraging us to do small area planning. We have areas not in the corridors that are a bunch of warehouses which we're going to do residential and commercial but one could imagine trying to take, you know, areas that have warehouses and say what would we need to do to switch that over? Now we have a warehouse shortage so that may not be as good an idea as before. There are a lot of units in places where we want them. I appreciate council member tovo and council member vela mentioning the renderings and the need for illustrations. We would totally support that. [7:17:32 PM] We did not want to ask staff to start doing renderings if we didn't have a sense this was a valuable way forward for us to think about things. You asked about the parking and suggested we need feedback. I think the reason we have a range is that we felt like the numbers that we were batting around were kind of arbitrary and so we sort of put down, you know, this is the range we think is in the right ballpark. But we couldn't say, you know -- somebody would say it would be 25 per cent and you would be like how did you get that number? And it was hard to pin down why or what would make you differentiate between 25 and 50 on the larger or 50 and 75 and the other direction for the medium. So we put a range because we weren't sure where to put it, but the broader idea of we can have much larger parking reductions on a larger corridor [7:18:32 PM] than we can on a medium was clearly something that we could all agree on. And it wasn't that we even all disagreed so much on where the reductions were. We just couldn't figure out a clear rationale for a number so we didn't put a clear number there. So again, I really want to reiterate that this is not the only -- we're not doing a comprehensive rewrite with this. If we were it would take us years to do. The point is to do things that can be done simply and done quickly and can be implemented, you know, in a way that has marginal difference. I'm hearing feedback from developers that the simple change from doing zoning to use from use to just zoning is going to have an impact on a lot of corridors and, you know, have already sent me a few examples of where that will happen. Some of these things may seem simple. They may seem like nothing, but [7:19:33 PM] in particular cases they do make a difference. >> Kitchen: Just quickly -- I know it's getting late, but I do want to let people know I've been working on a resolution with council member pool to bring forward related to the planning concept, the district level planning concept. I intend to bring it on the ninth. If people need more time from then we can start the conversation then and have more conversations but I want to have it available on the 9th. Basically the point of it is as mayor pro tem mentioned, there are areas in our city that we've already designated as needing some planning. These are town centers, things that have been designated on our imagine Austin plan. And we haven't had a path to comprehensively look at those. [7:20:33 PM] There have been individual efforts but not a path. And I think that it's time to talk about that path and start down that road. So just wanted to let you know I'll be bringing that, and if others are interested, I'll post it on the message board. If others are interested in working with council member pool and I on that, you can let us know. >> Mayor Adler: I love that idea. And I think, you know, depending on what it is that you're doing, if you could publish something by the end of next week that would still be two weeks before the ninth. If you could get something out next week so people can talk about it, ask questions, maybe we can get from here to there. I would urge you to try to get that set up on the message board as quickly as you can so people can see it. I agree with you -- that kind of small-area planning is something we've talked about is collectively a good thing for [7:21:34 PM] us to do. >> Kitchen: It will be out by then. We've been working on it. >> Mayor Adler: Council member vela. >> Vela: I also -- earlier today during public comment there were a lot of folks kind of pushing on -- I don't want to put words in their mouth, kind of saying, no, we don't need to do any of those things. I don't know what the alternative is if we don't, you know, lift some of the strict kind of rules that we have regarding housing in Austin. Our public dollars are limited. I mean, we can't -- we're not a federal government or -- we have unlimited funds to tap and our bond capacity is limited, budget is limited by three and a half per cent caps. We can't do inclusionary zoning. We can't do rent control. The state ties our hands on that. There's not a lot of tools in the tool box from Austin's [7:22:36 PM] perspective. Again, I fully support kind of passing as many, you know, $300 million housing bond two years for the next 20 years. I think we should do that, but that alone may not be enough. I think we have to look at -- you know we have some of the strictest compatibility rules in the country. We have a very high minimum lot size, and we have a very, you know, complex zoning and permitting process. And so I don't know where else to kind of -- you know, how many levers do we have to twist and turn? I feel like we're at the point where, you know, we have to, you know, work on that kind of compatibility, kind of lot size, kind of permitting the site plans -- like, those kind of levers. I just -- if we're not going to do that, I guess the question I would pose, is what are we going to do then about the housing crisis and how do we bring down rents given the limited tools the city has? [7:23:38 PM] >> Mayor Adler: I think collective -- go ahead, council member Ellis. >> Ellis: I just wanted to circle back around before we got too far off the parking discussion, I appreciate council member vela's comments on that and the way the mayor pro tem explained. In our sub quorum we had to nail down what that looks like. But I can't help but think about when we have light rail running through the city -- two different lines of light rail, those projects that are going to be built are what people are thinking about right now. How do I pencil out that project in how do I build something where people can get around town without having to add to the congestion that we currently see right now? I have to give a shameless plug that tomorrow is bike to work day. While we're talking about not using our vehicles I didn't want the evening to get away by showing we're doing these improvements with transportation and planning and building the bonds and we want to make sure we're right sizing [7:24:40 PM] where the housing is built. We would love people to live in the city and not need to use a car for every single trip. I think that's what this exercise is aimed at. >> Mayor Adler: I appreciate the tenor of the conversation we're having. We're in a different place than we were three years ago. I think everybody is trying not to replay where we were before, so we keep constructive conversation moving forward and in advance. But we all see now -- I mean, every day we're losing properties that are being developed as they need to develop under our current rules and as they develop, they won't come back. We're losing those. But I also think -- and I really like the mayor pro tem's comment that this is not the solution. We need to be doing as many different things as we can. But to that end, you know, [7:25:42 PM] hopefully we can move forward on vmu two on June 9th when that comes back to us. That's going to come back to us in ordinance form and hopefully we can move forward on that. I hope that there are some ifc's for us to consider on June 9th. I'll direct the staff to come back to us in September with ordinances that we can then consider at that point, that come back to council in that timing and concerns compatibility and parking minimum relaxations for those larger and medium corridors -- however it is we ultimately define them. Tracks that are taking advantage of affordability benefits. That would be something, based on what I'm hearing, that we have a potential of being able to move forward in that timing [7:26:42 PM] and let it go forward through the process this summer but get back to us so we can move forward. If there's a way for small area planning to fit into that, that would be great too, if that fits. But I think that we kind of owe it to the community while we're all still gathered together to take advantage of the accumulated knowledge and experience we have, having gone through this for varying numbers of years, depending on who we are. But I think we can do things that will be of incremental benefit. Anybody have anything else they want to discuss on this topic? Yes, Ann? >> Kitchen: Just a last quick comment. Yes, with vmu two we have an opportunity on June 9th to vote for that. It's ready. And we can actually get [7:27:46 PM] something done with. -- I'm looking forward to the conversation. >> Mayor Adler: Council member. >> Can you post the -- >> Kitchen: It's in the back-up. It's posted to item 48. >> I didn't see that. >> Kitchen: I'm happy? >> That's fine. I can look. >> Kitchen: Yeah. It's posted with item 48. >> >> Mayor Adler: All right. Let move away from this item. The only thing we have left to cover are comments that people wanted to make on the consent agenda. And when we're done with those comments then we are done for the evening. So I'll open up the floor for anybody that wants to comment on today's agenda, what we passed today. If you can remember. Councilmember Ellis. >> Ellis: Thank you, mayor. I'll go ahead and jump right in because I know it's been a long day for everyday. Item number 38 that we passed earlier today, this [7:28:46 PM] item is the final in the series of lifeguard recruitment efforts. After we passed a resolution in March the parks and recreation department raised hourly pay to $16 an hour, which is the highest rate in the region. They're also offering up to a $1,250 in bonuses and free bus passes. They've waived uniform fees and working with young are lifeguards to place them at pools near their homes to make it easier for families to be able to get their kids to and from work. Today's item waived the training fees that have traditionally been required during the certification process. As of last week parks and recreation department had reported receiving more than 600 lifeguard applications but only about 30 of those are trained and ready to go to work. We're going to need 750 lifeguards total to be able to open all of our pools to full capacity this summer. I know some of our lifeguards have advocated for $22 an hour, and I know we would all really love to be able to make that happen as quickly as possible, but we are very, very close to [7:29:46 PM] the next budget cycle and so I know the conversation around salaries and pay and positions is something that we're going to be discussing together very quickly here. However, with the bonuses that are being Howard with the one-time funding this is effectively going to get a lot of the lifeguards into that range, into the 20s or so, by the time you add in the midyear bonus of 500 and especially the end of year completion bonus of 500. And if you get open water certified there's an additional $250 to be given there. I know we still have a long way to go to get our pools open, including dick Nichols pool, which is the only public pool fully inside district 8, and has been closed for two years. I my ask is to please continue to help spread the word. Think of people you know whether they're high school or college students, teachers or retirees, anyone with extra time over the summer, to help get trained up. It's a great job and great way to get into a public safety field and essentially become a first responder through the training that you're going to receive. [7:30:48 PM] The reproductive health and products items, 88 and 89, thank you, council member Fuentes, for bringing these forward. I'm proud to be a co-sponsor. And with the extremism of the state of Texas right now and the supreme court, it's clear that we need to deaf or hard of hearing in our power locally to protect reproductive health noises and provide for the basic needs of our community. I'm proud to be a part of a community that fully supports access to abortion care and free period products. As for item number 94 that had the code improvements for the public right-of-way projects, I wanted to quickly mention that there are still discussions happening about codes and ordinances, specifically around project connect, so while these were more mobility focused for voter approved bonds, I wanted people to know that there was a little bit of language that was able to be included for things like rail, but there will be another suite of conversations around code and ordinance changes, specifically around that. So I wanted to be very clear that that is still coming. [7:31:49 PM] And then on item number 31, we approved the ability to do self-removable car boots. This is a new incentive that we've talked about a couple of times with mobility committee and it's a really creative way that if a car has to be booted there is a way for the individual to pay the fine and get the boot off their car immediately instead of having to wait around for a technician to come and do it for them. I've had some conversations on the back end with transportation staff and with the applicant's representative. And so similar to the way that we had done some changes to the way that our transportation and watershed specifically is able to reconnect scooters that end up in places they shouldn't be back with the owners and the companies that those scooters belong to. I'm still just going to have some conversations to make sure that as these self-removable boots, which I think are a great way for us to move forward, supported the item fully, but want to make sure if the company is missing their [7:32:49 PM] product that we have some collaboration with city staff to make sure that we're not ending up with those ending up in the waterways as well. I look forward to that technology rolling out and wish the company luck in providing that service. >> Mayor Adler: A lot of good work today. Councilmember Kelly. >> Kelly: Thank you for the recognition. I wanted to highlight item number 37 on the consent agenda today that we all approved. It was a fee waiver for the Texas peace officer memorial parade. I want to thank each and every one of you today who all unanimously decided to co-sponsor along with me. It's very important for me to see it. It warms my heart, but I know it also makes our police officers feel very supported. For those of you who don't know, every year the Texas peace officers' parade memorial ceremony and Texas peace officers's memorial candlelight vigil are held on the capitol grounds at the memorial wall. [7:33:49 PM] The match for which these fees pay for the cost includes honor guard teams, pipe and drum corps, bicycle officers and motorcycle officers from all over the state and remembrance of officers who gave their lives selflessly over the past year in the state of Texas. The Texas peace officer memorial mission it to honor all police officers who die in the line of duty in Texas and have the ceremonies in honor of the fallen. I had the honor of attending this beautiful ceremony. My office has donated the full amount of the fee waiver. I believe it is of the utmost importance as a council that we show support and I thank y'all for doing that. As their families go through the worst situation possible. One last note this just came up to I wanted to reiterate this point, I've become aware of some social media comments from a trusted reporter in our city about item 85 related to the renovations at pecan gardens. I want to remind everyone watching that the approval of the item with my [7:34:49 PM] direction did not include execution of the contract as it was being reported. That piece will come back to council in June. But I also want to once again thank my colleagues for approving my added direction and authorizing the negotiation of the contract. It's very important that we make clear this information because there's a lot of misinformation already out there in the community related to the property. Thanks. >> Fuentes: Thank you. I wanted to share my gratitude, colleagues, fight back for reproductive health agenda. This is all about sending a strong, clear message here locally in Austin that we will do everything that we can to protect reproductive health decisions because we believe no one should face discrimination based on your reef choices in your housing or in employment. Also happy to see the successful passage of our menstrual equity item by [7:35:50 PM] providing free period products in select city sites. That will go a long Wii in ensuring that we destigmatize menstruating. Half the population does it. And certainly we want to reduce barriers. I'm excited that we were able to pass that. We know that our hearts are heavy right now. Not only in Texas, but throughout the country, and so coming forward and actually taking action and bringing forward policy of substance is a big part of that. I just want to extend my gratitude. Thank you. >> Alter: I'll be super quick. I want to thank my staff for the singing telegram and thank mayor Adler for running late so that was in the atrium and not in chambers. Thank you. And it's not my birthday. [Laughter]. >> Mayor Adler: Anything I can do to help. Anything else? I think there were just so [7:36:51 PM] many good things on the agenda today. The community schools pilot I was eed to see. The initial work done on that was done by Dr. Prince in my office going back eight years ago and I really appreciate his work on that at the time to kind of set that in motion and help organize what was already organically happening. I just wanted to recognize him and his efforts for that. The summer internship program, I love the direction to make it something that is even more sustainable for folks, but we need more of that. So if employers are listening and can create summer internship programs or apprenticeship programs, we're in desperate need of that for our students in this community. Thank you to the entire council for the items [7:37:52 PM] dealing with reef rights and access for -- reproductive rights and access for everybody in our community. 94, the public mobility project code amendments I think is going to be real significant and in finding those appropriate balances for us to make sure that all our values are moving forward in a way that enables us to move forward on really big horizontal projects. And we need to find even more things we can do to help with the lifeguard situation. But I'm happy we did something. Mayor pro tem. >> Alter: I'm sorry, I forgot to extend an invitation to the dais to come to an exhibit opening tomorrow at city hall. The opening is from 4:00 to 7:00. The remarks will be will 5:00. It's for the Austin civilian conservation corps, which is a program that we launched in 2020 as a pandemic response program. That has transitioned to be a program to help with [7:38:54 PM] equitable pathways for green jobs and so we'll talking -- you get to hear from corps members. You'll be able to understand the-- more about the thinking process that's going on for these equitable green jobs, which was a corps tenet of the climate equity plan that we passed. The exhibit itself will be up all week, but if you're able to come some time between 4:00 and 7:00 with the remarks about 5:00, we would love to see you tomorrow. And it's in the atrium here. >> Mayor Adler: And it was pointed out to me that itemnumber 5 actually was postponed. We didn't pass it today because it isn't quite ready. So I'll repeat that again on June 9th. All right, with that I think we have exhausted our day. We've handled everything, a lot of hard work today. Appreciate everybody's constructive participation here. And with that at 7:40, this council meeting is adjourned.