City Council Regular Meeting Transcript – 3/6/2025 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 3/6/2025 6:00:00AM Original Air Date: 3/6/2025 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. [10:00:04 AM] You're watching a meeting of the Austin City Council Council members >> It's 10:00 in the morning on March 6th, 2025, and I will call to order the meeting of the [10:01:06 AM] to order the meeting of the Austin city council. We have a full council present, and we are meeting the city council chambers, which are located in city hall at 301 west second street. Before we get into even the order of the day, I want to point out that we are joined this morning by student council representatives from idea charter school in Round Rock. I think it's idea tech in round Rock. And we are. They're here not to do anything but observe about how a city council operates at a city council meeting. So we want to say welcome. We're glad you're here with us. That's that's pretty neat and pretty exciting. So with that, what I'm going to do is review the order of the day. We'll in just a moment, I will read changes and corrections into the record. Then we will go to our consent agenda. We will have speakers on the consent agenda and we will take up the [10:02:06 AM] agenda and we will take up the consent agenda after we have heard from council members as part of discussion, or as they want to make comments at that time. And as at 1030 for certain, or 1030 or after, we will recess the city council meeting and take up the board of directors meeting of the Austin housing finance corporation. Once that is completed, we will go to the non consent items. By the way, for the record, no item has been pulled the consent agenda. So if you have something that you want to pull, I need to be bold that we will go to the non consent items, the orders that were the order that we will go in on the public hearing items, which are non consent items will be 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 and then we'll go to 48. We will then take up item number 37, which we've been referring to as site plan light. After that, at or around noon, we will take up public communication and live music. I [10:03:07 AM] communication and live music. I anticipate that what we will do is we will recess at 1230 to 1235 and reconvene at 115, because it's my anticipation that what will happen is, I'm sorry, 110 in my mind, I'm anticipating that we will need to take up discussion with regard to item number 37. And then, of course, at 2:00 we will take up the time certain of zoning. With that, I'll read changes and corrections into the record. Item number one is withdrawn. Items five, six and seven are postponed to March 27th, 2025. Item number 17. It should read funding in the amount of $30 million, which means that one zero needs to be taken out. Just like that, we cut the budget. Item number 32 should read when public hearings are taken up, this item will be postponed to March 27th, 2025. Again, that's item number 32. [10:04:10 AM] Again, that's item number 32. And then on ask item number two. The same thing is what I just said about the council agenda item 17. It should read funding in the amount of $30 million and the removal of one zero. With that we have those are all the changes, the correction to be read into the record. We will now go to the consent agenda before we hear from consent of speakers, consent speakers, members. We have three items on the agenda related to lawsuit settlements. So I would like to the city attorney to give us a briefing on those three items and get that on the record before we then call up consent speakers. >> Thank you. Mayor. We have Jerry Thompson coming to give the presentation. >> Thank you very much, sir. >> Good morning, Mr. Mayor. Mayor pro tem, council members. I'm assistant city attorne Jeremy Thompson. I am here today to recommend that you approve settlement payments in three personal injury lawsuits that appear on your agenda as items 21, 22, and 23, taking them in turn. Item number 21 versus city [10:05:14 AM] turn. Item number 21 versus city of Austin. We recommend that you approve a payment of $250,000 to settle the Dan and Jill Remick versus city of Austin lawsuit. This lawsuit relates to a june2022 car accident involving an Austin police department patrol vehicle, where the remix seek payment for their injuries. In exchange for the payment, plaintiffs will release any and all claims against the city from the accident and will also dismiss their lawsuit filed in the district court for Travis county. The law department recommends that you approve payment based upon these terms. Item number 22, bravo versus city of Austin. We recommend that you approve a payment of $235,000 to settle the Alicia bravo individually and as next friend of Layla Ramirez. Bravo versus city of Austin lawsuit. This lawsuit relates to a February 2021 car accident involving a city truck, where miss bravo seeks payment for her injuries and those of her minor child in exchange for the payment. Plaintiff will release any and all claims against the city from the accident, and will [10:06:15 AM] city from the accident, and will also dismiss her lawsuit filed in the district court for Travis county. The law department recommends that you approve payment based upon these terms and item number 23. Quintanilla versus city of Austin. We recommend that you approve a payment of $240,000 to settle the George Quintanilla versus city of Austin lawsuit. This lawsuit relates to a March 2024 car accident involving an Austin police department vehicle, where Mr. Quintanilla seeks payment for his injuries. In exchange for the payment, plaintiff will release any and all claims against the city from the accident and will also dismiss his lawsuit filed in the district court for Travis county. The law department recommends that you approve payment based upon these terms. I'm available to answer any questions you may have. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Members. Are there any questions of legal counsel at this point? Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. That'll take us to the speakers on the consent agenda. And I'll turn to the city clerk's office to help us out with that. >> Thank you. Mayor. First speaker we have is on item number four. We have Orlowski [10:07:16 AM] number four. We have Orlowski Shaw and Cole weaver for item four. >> Hello. Good morning, Austin city council. My name is Orlowski and I'm the president of the united workers of integral care. I am here today to express our support for the amendment to the contract between the city of Austin and integral care, which will provide a one time, six month funding for the expanded mobile crisis outreach orereach team, m-cat and the 911 mental health crisis call diversion program c3. First and foremost, I want to express our deep gratitude to the city of Austin for its continued investment in alternative first response, the work you are doing here funding mental health crisis teams, expanding non-police responses to crises, and recognizing the value of this approach is setting an example for the rest of the country. This amendment is a testament to the city's commitment to a future where mental health care is [10:08:16 AM] mental health care is prioritized, where crisis response does not default to law enforcement, and where lives are protected instead of lost. Integral care is promised our union that this funding, in combination with existing resources, will allow them to increase shift differentials for second and third shifts, as well as weekends. This is a necessary step to address long standing staffing shortages. These shifts are hard to hardest to fill, and without proper incentives, we have seen consistent gaps in coverage gaps th mean people in crisis are left waiting for help that should be readily available, or not getting it at all. We are glad to see that integral care's executive leadership is taking this issue seriously. The union has conducted its own analysis and our data confirms a staffing crisis. M-cat and c3 are facing significant understaffing and shifts are being left uncovered, and this is corroborated by frontline staff. But we believe that this this increasing shift differentials is a meaningful step in addressing these shortages. It is a sign of progress, but it cannot be the last step. Staffing gaps will persist unless we tackle the underlying issue of low pay. And this goes for all integral care [10:09:18 AM] this goes for all integral care workers. The dedicated professionals of m-cat and c3 are part of a system that prevents crisis before they happen and deescalates them. When T do, they care for and protect individuals in our community, and yet their wages do not reflect the gravity of their work. We must continue to move ford. We must ensure that these teams are fully staffed. >> Thank you very much. We appreciate your being here. >> And mayor. >> Yes. Councilmember alter. >> Wanted to take a quick moment to thank miss Shaw. I know we've met a number of times on this, and I know you've met with some of my colleagues. I do think the conversations we have have helped make this an even better proposal. And I know we both share the same goal. So I just want to thank you for your ntinued advocacy and for integral care, for working with all of us to make this the best possible. >> Thank you, councilmember alter. Thank you very much. Thank you. >> Next speaker item four, we have Cole weaver. >> And Cole weaver. Okay. >> Next speaker, speaking on the merits of the postponement for item five, Jennifer Robishaw. [10:10:19 AM] item five, Jennifer Robishaw. Speaking on the merits of the postponement for item six, we have Jennifer Robishaw as well as speaking on the merits of postponement for item seven. Jennifer Robishaw I don't see her. So we. Next speaker is item 16. Bill bunch. >> Mr. Bunch. >> Good morning mayor. Council members, thank you for your service to our community. Bill bunch, district five. Save our springs alliance. I want to also welcome the students here and maybe let them know that our city council in days past would actually announce what item the subject is so people could follow along and understand [10:11:21 AM] follow along and understand what's going on and participate appropriately. But you know that that kind of basic information. So the meetings effective and engaging with the public is somehow passé. Unfortunately for the great loss to our community and to accountability in our local government, and especially a huge nod towards hiding things and making corruption far more possible. And persistent, this is an item to approve. The city are doing and taking to expand a sewer line along old west oltorf in south Austin, and it'sy $96,000 for this right of way that needs to be bought for thisproject. But the project itself is going to be many, many [10:12:22 AM] is going to be many, many millions of dollars. And we're not being told who it's to serve, what it's really needed for, and how much our ratepayers are going to have to pay for it, versus the developers who are going to be served by it. The community has been begging the city staff, the city manager, the city council for years to do basic infrastructure planning so that we're not just rezoning our whole city for massive upgrades and development without knowing how much it's going to cost. >> Thank you, sir. >> For the infrastructure needed to serve. >> Thank you. >> Next speaker is Zenobia Joseph on item 17. >> Miss Joseph, she's here. >> Good morning mayor. Thank [10:13:27 AM] >> Good morning mayor. Thank you. Council I'm Zenobia Joseph as it relates to item 17. That's $147 million for Austin housing finance corporation. You'll take that item up at 1030 on or about. I just wanted to say, mayor, to remind you that history matters. The pro housing grant that was submitted in 2023 to hud housing and urban development specified that there are fewer than ten affordable homes in west Austin. You've been told, as it relates to rapid rehousing, that that is not a good strategy. Yet here you are once again, increasing the budget of Austin housing finance corporation without any analysis of where affordable housing units are in the city. I want you to remember that it's 80% area median income, which means individuals have to earn approximately $70,000 to live on the light rail lines that are proposed. I want to remind you that the light rail will terminate in Hyde park, which was developed exclusively for [10:14:28 AM] was developed exclusively for white people 1889 and 1924 by colonel Monroe Shipe. I want you to recognize that you maintain the character of the neighborhood, which means it is still segregated today. However, the plan specifies that the light rail will serve north Austin. This is germane, as I see that you are pondering whether my comments are. It is germane in a sense that the affordable housing units that are being placed in the areas are where affordable housing has already been demolished or eliminated. And so I want you to recognize on Riverside, where Austin affordable housing corporation has units that it is notffordable, you've simply replaced the units that were taken away. October 17th, 2019 October 23rd, 2019. You will recall specifically that the UT Austin law professor, Heather way, stated that it didn't have to be that way when you eliminated 1308 units. If you have any. [10:15:30 AM] have any. >> Questions, thank you very much for being here. >> Next speaker is Zenobia Joseph on item 25, followed by Alex stranger and Bryce lakeith Stanfield. >> If your name's been called, please come forward. >> Thank you. Mayor, council. I'm Zenobia Joseph. I just need to read the language for 25. Specifically, it's authorizing youth and family alliance, which is also known as lifeworks, to receive $563,359 for. Lgbtqia added initials to S plus. I would like to ask you, mayor, do you understand what gender non-conforming, genderfluid, genderqueer, and two-spirit [10:16:30 AM] genderqueer, and two-spirit communities means? Do you even know what you're voting on? So this is an Austin public health item, and one of the things I want to say respectfully is people can identify however they choose. However, there is no data in the backup material to state why this funding is being requested. I want you to recognize that African American students in Austin independent school district have the worst outcomes, according to a story that was in Austin chronicle. I want you to recognize that African American males are more likely to enter the criminal justice system. One out of three African American males can expect to go to prison in his lifetime if current trends continue. Yet you have never allocated any money specifically for African American students. Last night I went to the Mac meeting Mexican American cultural center. The commission meeting there. I want you to recognize that you have funded Mexican American teachers, but you have not funded black teachers to the same extent. And [10:17:31 AM] teachers to the same extent. And so what I want you to recognize is that you have carved out this money for this specific group. However, you have not carved out money for veterans. You have not carved out money for African Americans. I will like I would like to recognize yes, six square got some money that was $300,000. But respectfully, mayor, you have $550,000 earmarked in the budget for movability to take elusive cars off the road. If you are not going to equitably distribute the funds, then I'm going to ask you not to approve this item. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. Please come forward. What's your name? Been called to speak. Then please come forward. >> Good morning. Esteemed members of the council and fellow residents of Austin. My name is Bryce lakeith Stanfield. I reside in district three of this amazing city of Austin, Texas. I represent myself as an advocate. And today I stand before you as a proud queer Texan and a disabled veteran living with PTSD. I'm here to express my unwavering support for item 25 and 26 in our city [10:18:32 AM] for item 25 and 26 in our city budget. As someone who has faced challenges in accessing mental health care support, I know firsthand the crucial role that it plays in our well-being. The initiatives proposed in items 25 and 26, partnering with lifeworks and out youth are vital steps towards ensuring that our lgbtqia+ community members receive the mental health care and peer support they deserve. These services will not only provide necessary resources, but will also foster a sense of belonging and acceptance in a world that often feels isolating for many of us. Mental health funding for lgbtqia+ individuals is not just an expenditure, it is an investment in the fabric of our community. With rising rates of anxiety, depression and suicide among queer youth and adults due to social pressures and discrimination, west prioritize their mental health needs. The city funding allocated for these services represents a lifeline for many individuals striving for stability and peace in their lives. In closing, I urge you to all to support items 25 and 26. Together, we can create a more supportive, inclusive and [10:19:33 AM] supportive, inclusive and resilient Austin for everyone, especially the most vulnerable among us. Thank you for your time and consideration. >> Thank you. >> Next speaker we have for item 26 is Zenobia Joseph, followed by Alex stranger and Bryce lucky Stanfield. >> If your name's been called, please come forward. >> Thank you mayor. Council once again, as it relates to the out youth, I just want to recognize that it is $1.1 million. When you combine items 25 and 26. Once again, you are not equitably distributing the resources. And so, yes, the city manager has gone before the black community and appeared in the Austin villager and is going to do outreach as it relates to the budget. But city manager, I want you to recognize this is not an equitable distribution of the resources unless you're going to specifically carve out money for black people, black [10:20:33 AM] money for black people, black students, black people who are sleeping on the benches. Remember, African Americans are over six times more likely to be homeless in Austin than our white counterparts. I want you to recognize that this item goes against the January 30th, 2025 state of the state address given by Greg Abbott. So if you're not willing to just simply comply with what the governor has stated in his state of the state address, then perhaps legislation is what is needed. Mayor, you have many friends in the senate. I recognize that. However, this goes counter to senate bill 17 die. You cannot simply carve out a specific group as opposed to making the funds equitable. So my comments, as they always are in the context of title six of the civil rights act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin. I am here as an African-American to help you recognize that we are the ones who have the worst outcomes, whether it's housing, whether [10:21:34 AM] whether it's housing, whether it's health care, whether it's incarceration. And your own study from echo told you that your housing white people over blacks. Here you are particularly giving mental health funds over $1 million mayor to lgbtqia+ individuals. D I appreciate the veteran who previously spoke. But specifically, you've not done the same for African Americans. Thank you. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> Bryce on item you wish 26. >> You're entitled to speak, but if you've already spoken on 25 and made your point, then you don't need to. Thank you very much. Appreciate your being here. >> Next speaker on item 28 we have bill bunch. >> Mr. Bunch is passing on 28. >> Next speaker on item 29 is Zenobia Joseph. Followed by Janet brand Siebert and bill [10:22:34 AM] Janet brand Siebert and bill bunch. >> If your name's been called and you wish to testify, please come forward so that you'll be ready. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council. This is the item specifically related to art and public places. My opposition is not to the item in particular, but specifically because it does not specify retroactive. And so specifically as it relates to the Austin convention center, you are well aware that I never received a cost estimate, so I'm not sure what it is that you voted on when you voted to deaccession those artworks, specifically John Yancey's work. As you are aware, riffs and rhythms is something that the black community and the community at large has supported. And so I have spoken to miss means and I appreciate that. On February 14th, 2025, you actually created a new arts division, and you will encompass this particular piece of work. I would hope you have stated, mayor, that you're committed to the arts and things of that sort, and those are nice words, but you have an opportunity to actually make this policy, this [10:23:36 AM] actually make this policy, this particular ordinance, retroactive, so that you can, in fact, cover the cost of Mr. Yancey's work. I not know how much it costs to take that piece of work and place it in the new facility. But I do know from your work session that staff you that some of the pieces of work will remain. So what was the process? It was not transparent. I understand you have $17.7 million for the artist. However, I would ask you to recognize the need to be more transparent to table this item and to make it retroactive to cover Mr. Yancey's artwork, and to let us know how much it costs for the other artists as well. And so that is my opposition. I appreciate qadri bringing this forward. However, it falls short. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them at this time. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. >> You're welcome. >> Mr. Bunch. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council [10:24:36 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor. Council members bill bunch, district five. Speaking as a citizen and former long term member of the tourism commission, again, for our students, this item is a resolution by council member qadri, whose district includes downtown, where we're about to leap off a cliff and spend $3 billion over the next 30 years for a convention center we don't need. But yet the council can't find a $000 to save the very specific piece of artwork that miss Joseph was just speaking about. An incredible mural that's in our current convention center by art professor at UT, John Yancey, one of our leading artists. Period. But African American artists with an incredible piece of mural riffs and rhythms that you all should be doing triple backflips to save. Meanwhile, you can find $17.7 million for art in the new [10:25:41 AM] $17.7 million for art in the new $3 billion facility that was awarded to artists in a private process, I believe, and this hasn't been exposed. But most of those artists aren't even local artists. While you're completely disrespecting professor Yancey, the other local artists who have art in the current convention center, that deserves what's a simple rounding error to be saved and relocated to an other appropriate public place? So I'm going to second miss Joseph's request. This needs to be retroactive, and it needs to be specific to saving the riffs and rhythms mural. And just again, as a civics lesson, you might notice not one of them is thank you. Any question? >> Thank you, Mr. Bunch. Mr. Bunch, your time is expired. [10:26:42 AM] Bunch, your time is expired. Thank you very much. >> Next speaker we have on item 29 is Donna Carter. She's remote. Miss Carter, can you hear us? Miss Carter, please unmute. Mayor. That concludes all of the remote speakers and all the speakers on consent. >> Thank you. Members. That concludes all of the speakers. With regard to the consent agenda, please keep in mind that law has also talked to us about three of the items on the consent agenda. You've also been provided a sheet for a motion by council member harper-madison with regard to item number 29. When I take a motion to approve the consent agenda, it will include the direction that is included in item number 20 with regard to item number 29 by [10:27:43 AM] regard to item number 29 by council member harper-madison. So I want to make sure that everybody has that and is comfortable with that. With that being said, I'll entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda as it was read with the change that council member harper-madison has brought forward. Council member Velazquez moves approval of the consent agenda. It is seconded by council member qadri. Discussion I'll first recognize council member Ryan alter, followed by council member Laine. >> Thank you very much. I just wanted to highlight item four, which we spoke about a little bit ago. This is the expansion of Micah, which is the emergency medical crisis outreach team. This is the direct result of a budget that we brought forward back in August, and will help ensure that we have mental health professionals responding to emergency calls where it might have otherwise gone to a police officer or someone who necessarily doesn't have the right training or is the right response professional. So I'm [10:28:44 AM] response professional. So I'm very excited to work with integral care to expand this from five days. That is only kind of working hours to now be 24 over seven and cover all the mental health calls that we need to cover as a community when they're received by 911. >> Thank you, council member, councilmember Laine, followed by council member qadri and then council member Siegel. >> Thank you. I will I will agree and uplift what council member alter has already shared. I find it wonderful how the city of Austin has designed some very innovative pilot programs that have shown success for some of the biggest challenges that we as a city and we as a country are facing. And I wholeheartedly welcome the increased, more robust rollout of these programs. And so I'm also happy to support that item. I also want to highlight a couple of programs and items from the [10:29:46 AM] programs and items from the consent agenda that offer support that I believe to be very essential for Austin's youth. Our youth are experiencing a mental health crisis. The level at which teens are experiencing these challenges is particularly strong. I do support item 25, the agreement with lifeworks and item 26, the agreement without youth, which specifically provides assistance for lgbt youth who have one of the highest rates of suicide risk among teens who are themselves experiencing a mental health crisis. I also want to highlight number 24, which is in support of any baby cans, provision of parenting classes, and early childhood resources for low income Austin families. So many of us are aware and have experienced firsthand the shortage of quality childcare and have felt the crushing weight of all that has been on families for many years. So I absolutely support expanding this access for our low income families. I finally want to [10:30:48 AM] families. I finally want to mention number 18, the flood insurance assistance pilot program with flood insurance and all insurance so costly, this is really essential relief for families who are most vulnerable to the impacts of flooding, especially a F flood plain maps are revised to include more areas. So I do support that as well. And finally, as it relates to items 25 and 26, the agreements with lifeworks and out youth, I will just state that I will be reaching out to both organizations to ask for some disaggregated data, to consider the comments that have been made today. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Council member. Council member qadri followed by council member Siegel and then councilmember harper- madison. >> Thank you mayor. I want to touch on three items today. Kicking it off with item number four. I want to THA Orlowski. Myself and my staff had a chance to chat with her yesterday, and I'm really happy to support this [10:31:48 AM] I'm really happy to support this item. These front line workers do so much to serve our city, but many still do not have enough toe within our city limits. An unfortunate reality for many of our public servants. I think this item is a great step in the right direction, but we should be clear that with the reality that it is only just that a step. If we don't collaborate to make sure vital public servants like these are able to earn a living within the with earn a living serving our community, then we will continue to see vacancies and turnover among our most critical workers. Item 29 public art plays a key role in creating a beautiful and vibrant Austin for all, and I'm proud to live in a city that invests in public art. But we must strive to do better. It's crucial that we support and lift uplift our creative community and their contributions to our city. I invite all my colleagues to join us co-sponsors I know a lot of folks have, as we explore ways to expand our physical support for artists and creatives across the city. Together, this item will make sure that generations of artists will get stronger support and [10:32:49 AM] will get stronger support and greater investments from the city, and I look forward to seeing what new, iconic pieces of public art that Austin artists come up with next. My hope is that this item brings a transparency that is needed and expressed by the advocates, and I just want to thank all the advocates who have reached out to our office. And I also want to thank councilmember harper-madison for her motion, which I happily accepted. And yeah, really appreciate everyone on making a Wright of something that that had happened that was wrong. And then item 30, your touches on your birthday. I have to admit, when I moved to the city about 16 years ago, I thought it was kind of odd that the city of Austin, Texas had a something going onith the Disney beloved Disney. >> We called that weird. >> Yeah, yeah. But you know, after after moving here, I realized I was mistaken as nothing to do with Winnie the pooh and eeyore. Now, I personally don't partake in eeyore's birthday, but I know thousands and thousands. >> Sure he doesn't. Yeah, sure [10:33:50 AM] >> Sure he doesn't. Yeah, sure he doesn't. Yeah. >> But I know thousands and thousands of austinites who do. And I'm sure some council members also partake in your birthday or have in the past or might in the future. So this sponsorship will stay friends of the forest foundation, thousands of dollars bolstering their financial health and giving them the opportunity to invest further in local Austin businesses and nonprofits. This partnership comes at a low cost to the city, but it is big for the organizers, attendees, small businesses and nonprofits involved. They have truly kept keeping Austin weird for the past 60 years, and I'm happy to bring an ordinance to officially co-sponsor this event, because we should be just as proud to host our local grassroots events as our international festivals. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you. Councilmember qadri. Council member Siegel. You're recognized, followed by council member harper-madison and then council member Velasquez. >> Thank you mayor. I guess most of my colleagues have covered the points I wanted it, but just on item four, I want to thank the integral care workers union and their negotiations [10:34:50 AM] union and their negotiations with with leadership integral care to make sure we can fully staff all these shifts and really adding pay to make sure the overnight shift is covered. So I'm really excited to see that work. And, you know, we have some other items coming back in a few months. I really look forward to seeing the positive outcomes from this contract. And also, again, joining councilwoman Laine supporting items 25 and 26. I just want to say I have personal experience working without youth. It's a wonderful organization, serves a very diverse array of students, and I really want to thank director Sturrup from public health for really overseeing a very competitive process. If you look at the backup, over 800 groups were reached out to, there was really a careful scoring of all the applicants. And out youth is really a fantastic program that's providing great outcomes for our local lgbtqia young people community. And finally, council member qadri, I would love to be added as a co-sponsor of your item. 29 thank you. >> Without objection, council member Siegel be shown as a co-sponsor of item number 29. Thank you. Councilmember Siegel [10:35:51 AM] Thank you. Councilmember Siegel council member harper-madison, followed by council member Velasquez and then the mayor pro tem. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate the recognition. I wanted to highlight a couple of items on our consent agenda today. Also, item number 27, flood control restoration project coming to boggy creek to address sediment and erosion issues. I wanted to highlight that one alongside our item number 28, which is boards and commissions. I wanted to say that I'm proud to nominate Justin parsons to the African American resource advisory commission, and look forward to working with you in the future. Also, as spoken about earlier, item number 29 is a is of importance to us all. And for what it's worth, Maya Huy took my now 14 year old to eeyore's birthday one year and it my baby to this day is firmly convinced that she and eeyore share a birthday. And that's all I know. And so it's. I'm happy to be a part of the process to support this Austin tradition, and [10:36:53 AM] this Austin tradition, and really happy that we were to accomplish the mission alongside the friends of the forest. I think moving forward, as much as I wish all our news about preservation for tradition was good news, the truth of the matter is, I think the days ahead of us are going to be tricky, and we're going to have to find the resources to make things work, like we'd like to see them work. And so I'm just really happy that we were able to do that here. And then lastly, Mr. Mayor, I actually would like to take a moment of personal privilege, if I may. I'm a mom. And if my kids got the opportunity to come to city hall today to watch the process, to watch municipal governance at work, I would want them to walk away inspired. I would want them to walk away with the full recognition that as we look into the audience and y'all look at us, we're looking at ourselves out there and y'all should be looking at yourselves up here, because one day this will be [10:37:55 AM] because one day this will be your job. And I want to highlight that by saying. Saying. I really appreciate everybody's contributions T this meeting. But I would strongly encourage that. Speakers moving forward for the remainder of the time that we have our guest with us, not address them directly. I personally like to have some influence over who's talking to my kids, and so I would like to encourage that. I'm obviously not chairing this meeting, but personally and as a mom, I would request we don't directly address our scholars. Thank you. >> Thank you. Council member, council member Velasquez, followed by the mayor pro tem and then council member vela. >> Thank you. Mayor, I want to echo some of the sentiments by by my colleague Natasha harper-madison regarding our students here. Welcome. One day this will be your job. Thank you all so much for joining us. And [10:38:55 AM] all so much for joining us. And you're you're much appreciated. Regarding regarding item number 30, your birth date is one of the events that still keeps Austin very much weird. And I was I was a little taken back that my colleague said that he'd never been. I've never been. And I'm a lifelong austinite, but council member qadri had sent me a text about inviting me to it, so I don't know where he's coming from on that. >> He forgot. >> He parked. He forgot? Yeah. Item number 2029. >> I've been. I just don't remember. >> That. That was probably the first time as mayor. Right on on item number 29, I would be I would like to be added as a co-sponsor. I want to thank council member qadri for bringing this forward. Thank you. A anytime. It it involves our creative community and the ability for us to go and get their back. I am all for it. Thank you to all of our local artists and for all our local creatives. For all the beauty you bring to our city, and I hope that this is a nod, that [10:39:56 AM] hope that this is a nod, that you see this as a nod in in us trying to get your back as best we can. Thank you so much for everything that you do. >> Without objection, council member Velasquez will be shown as a co-sponsor of item number 29. Thank you. Council member Velasquez, mayor pro tem, followed by council member vela and council member duchen. >> Yes. Thank you colleagues, I just wanted to take a moment to highlight one of the items on our agenda that it comes from a budget amendment that I brought forward around flood insurance. I'm really pleased to see this on our consent agenda today, and just wanted to share the importance of this and the significance of this to our district two community, many who are at risk of creek flooding and have experienced some pretty tremendouslooding events. And when we think about building a more resilient community, it's important that we recognize the rise in insurance rates. And so by providing this pilot program around flood insurance, we really will be making a big difference in our community. And I'm pleased that our city is leading the way in this type of innovation and support. So I just want to appreciate all of the staff who have been [10:40:56 AM] the staff who have been involved, including watershed, our housing department, and with my team for their leadership on this item. >> Thank you. Thank you. Mayor pro tem councilmember vela followed by council member duchen. >> Thank you mayor. First, I would like to be added as a I posted on the message board, but just in case to item 29 by council member qadri. >> Without objection, council member vela will be shown as a co-sponsor of item item number 29. >> And I think it will provide important flexibility for the program and bring even more visibility to public art. I also would like to be added as a co-sponsor to item 30 it. I remember as a freshman at the university of Texas, wandering down to Pease park and wondering what the hell was going on there. >> Without objection, council member vela will be shown as reliving his youth. >> Yeah. >> And I've got to say that now multiple. My kids have all been to eeyore's and it's a great [10:41:58 AM] to eeyore's and it's a great time. I look forward to it every year. Can't make it every year, but I do. It was it was honestly a heartbreaker. I think this is the 60th anniversary, and I think the first one that I went to was the 30th anniversary, so that that that hurt. But it's a beautiful thing that it's been arouor 60 years and may continue for, for another 60. And then I have some questions for staff on item number 17, please. If miss. >> Please come forward. Miss Demayo. >> Mandy Demayo, interim director of the housing department. Yes. >> Miss Demayo, I just want to see what we're doing is we're taking existing bond funds that were approved without the 22 bond. >> It's. The voters approved the 350 million in November of 2022. In April of 23, the then city [10:43:00 AM] In April of 23, the then city council appropriated all 350 million. But it was over a five year spend plan. >> Got it. And so what we're essentially doing is advancing $30 million so we can fund current projects, as opposed to kind of waiting down the road for a couple of years. >> Correct. We are taking 30 million from year five of the spend plan and bringing it forward to this year, which is year three. >> Great. And where does that leave us in terms of the balance of the our bond housing funds? >> So again, it was we had allocated over four different programs and the four progms that we deploy through the geo bonds are rental housing development, ownership, housing development, land acquisition and home repair. And we found that this year we had many competitive projects in our quarterly application process. [10:44:01 AM] quarterly application process. We have exhausted all of our rental housing development funding, hence bringing forward the 30 million so that we can accommodate what we anticipate will be some competitive applications coming up this fiscal year that will provide a sufficient funding and rental housing development. Right now, we do have a couple million dollars left this fiscal year in ownership, housing development and some funding in land acquisition. Although you all recently approved the el Gallo acquisition on south congress, we utilized some geo bonds for that as well. >> And in terms of the timeline of exhausting the $350 million that was approved by voters in in 2022, where are what are we looking at? >> We are anticipating now a four year spend plan. So bringing forward some additional funds from that fifth year into next year's budget, which would bring us in alignment with a planned comprehensive bond [10:45:02 AM] planned comprehensive bond package to put before the voters in November of 26. >> Great. So essally, if we want to continue supporting various affordable housing bond, various affordable housing projects, we're going to need to provide some additional funding in that November 10th of 26 timeframe. >> We will leave that up to the bond election advisory task force. And you all on the dais. >> Great. Well, I just wanted to signal that would be very supportive, there have been some great housing projects funded. I think staff is doing a great job of selecting the projects. A lot of transit oriented, trying to put affordable housing and transit together. And I definitely want to continue our efforts in creating affordable housing, both on the on the permitting side, on the on the zoning side, but also in the direct funding of affordable housing projects. We've done a lot, but it continues to be a challenge, and [10:46:03 AM] continues to be a challenge, and I really don't want to take our foot off the gas in terms of affordable housing. But thank you very much. Thank you. >> Thank you, councilmember vela. And for the record, without objection, councilmember vela will be shown as a co-sponsor of item number 30. Council member duchen. >> Thank you. Mayor. I just wanted to thank council member qadri for bringing forth item item, item 29. I'm optimistic that this will hopefully prevent further deaccession issues going into the future, and I'd request that I be added as a sponsor to this item as well. >> Without objection, council member duchen will be shown as a sponsor of the item number 29. >> I do share some of the feedback that we've heard today regarding doctor Yancy's artwork. I know wh I spoke with him last about a week ago, we didn't have a specific figure. I think he was waiting on what the actual cost would be to try and address preserving his art, so I'm hopeful that we can get that information soon and figure out a strategy to actually address the other piece of this going forward as well. [10:47:05 AM] of this going forward as well. Thanks. >> Thank you, councilmember members. That's all the discussion on the consent agenda as it is. The motion wasade and seconded. Is there anyone wishing to be shown abstaining from any vote on the consent agenda? Is there anyone wishing to be shown recusing themselves from a vote on the consent agenda? Anyone wishing to be shown voting no on any item on the consent agenda? Without objection, the consent agenda is adopted. Members. Without objection, we will recess the meeting of the Austin city council at 10:47 A.M. In order to call to order the board of directors meeting of the Austin housing finance corporation, [10:54:05 AM] I will now call to order back to order the Austin city council member council meeting for its regular meeting on item number 32. Let me turn to the city clerk and ask, is there is there anyone signed up to speak on item number 32? >> Yes, mayor. We have several speakers. >> All right. On the on item number 32. >> Yes. >> All right. Well, then what I will do is I will without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 32. Item number 32 is being postponed until on the merits until March 27th, 2025. So if you're signed up to speak on this item, please speak just to the merits of the of the postponement. But we will open the public hearing. The public hearing is now open and I will turn to the city clerk. >> Thank you. Speaking on the merits of the postponement, Valerie Menard. Carlos pinion, bill bunch. [10:55:13 AM] bill bunch. >> Mr. Bunch, do you wish to speak? Oh, pass. All right. >> Roy Whaley. Susana Almanza. And Noah Elias. Those are all the speakers signed up to speak on item 32. >> Thank you. Let me ask you for the record, is anyone here that wishes to be heard on item number 32, whose name has been called and you didn't make it to the microphone. All right, without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 32. But members, that's postponed until March 27th, 2025. We will now open the public hearing on item number 33. The public hearing is now open, and I'll turn to the city clerk. >> We have one speaker, Zenobia Joseph. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council branch view apartments, 330 units. Specifically 60% area [10:56:14 AM] units. Specifically 60% area median income. I just want you to recognize, mayor. The backup material shows you that public transportation is over one mile. I would just call to your attention on December 15th, 2020. I actually got Travis county commissioners court to put in backup the distance that people have to walk from affordable housing units. It's 1 to 5 miles. I wonder, mayor, if you've ever walked with your groceries one mile? Probably not. It is disingenuous. These are units that only go up to two bedrooms. Where are families wiheir children supposed to live? This is not even near rapid transit. These are people who are going to be relying on the bus. Route 392 is the nearest bus and it interlines with route 243, which is off of Heather, wild and wells branch. It is disingenuous because you [10:57:17 AM] It is disingenuous because you know that African Americans. According to the 2020 study by city staff, only earn about $42,000. Hispanics earn about $50,000, which by default means that's who's going to live there. Efficiency units, one bedroom units, two bedroom units. Mayor, I would ask you to table this item because, respectfully, this is a developer's dream. The developers explained their strategy when they did the saint John's project. They said if they have to build three bedroom units, that means they have to take away a few efficiencies, which means they make fewer. There's a less return on investment. And so I would just ask you to recognize this is not helping the community. Remember, efficiency, one bedroom, two bedroom units 330. >> Thank you, miss Joseph. Those are all the people that signed up to speak on item number 33in the public hearing. Without objection, we will close the public hearing. The public [10:58:18 AM] public hearing. The public hearing is now closed. Members, I will entertain a motion with regard to item number 33. Council member harper-madison moves approval. It is seconded by council member Ellis. Is there discussion? Without objection? Item number 33 is approved. Item number 34 is also a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 34. The public hearing is now open. I will turn to the city clerk. >> There are no speakers signed up. >> On item. There are no speakers on item number 34. So without objection, we will close the public hearing on item number 34. That public hearing is closed. I'll entertain a motion with regard to item number 34. Is there a motion? The mayor pro tem moves? Approval of item 34 is seconded by council member Ellis. Is there discussion on item 34? Without objection, item number 34 is adopted. Item number 35 is a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing on item number 35. The public hearing is now open. I'll turn to the city clerk. >> We have one speaker, Zenobia Joseph. Item 35. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council, [10:59:25 AM] >> Thank you. Mayor. Council, this is palmer north. 1420 east Howard Laine. Once again, I would ask you to table this item. I want you to recognize. Mayor. This is near crystal bend, which is a huge development that Travis county commissioners court approved several years ago. It is a concentration of poverty. Once again, African Americans and hispanics will have to walk 1 to 5 miles to the busses. I want you to recognize it's in the vicinity of Samsung, but the pickup service doesn't go east west, so there is no access to the three HEB's, the tech jobs or Samsung to apple. But yet you're going to transport poverty to pflugerville because this is where this property is located. It's deeply disturbing because the 392, which is interlined with 243, is the only bus that runs in that area. Once again, it's over a mile. It's heatherwood and wells branch. [11:00:27 AM] heatherwood and wells branch. I've walked it. I've done a recon. Yes, there is a continuous sidewalk, but a mile. Mayor. Wheelchairs, walkers, canes, women with children and strollers that is not meeting Americans with disabilities act. It violates the fair housing act as well. And you're well aware of that? I would ask this council to do better. Yes, there's affordable housing there, but you're going to raise the all the trees. You're going to just clear the land and make it nice for the developers, but you're going to have nothing more than social determinants of health there, because there will be no place for them to go to get groceries, no access to schools, and no access to them to go to the grocery store. It's deeply disturbing, mayor, and it violates title six of the civil rights act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin. That's how you get your federal financial assistance and you need to do better. Thank you. >> Thank you, members. Those are all the speakers on item number [11:01:29 AM] all the speakers on item number 35. So without objection, we'll close the public hearing on item number 35. The public hearing is closed. I'l now entertain a motion with regard to item 35. Council member Siegel moves approval of item number 35. It's seconded by council member harper-madison. Discussion without objection. Item number 35 is approved. Item number 36 is a public hearing. Without objection, we'll open the public hearing on item number 36. The public hearing is now open. Is there anyone signed up to speak? >> No mayor, no speakers. >> There are no speakers on item number 36. So without objection, we will close the public hearing. Public hearing is now closed. I'll entertain a motion to approve item number 36. It's made by council member. Alter is seconded by council member Ellis. Discussion without objection. Item number 36 is adopted. Members that will take us to item number 48. It's a public hearing. Without objection, we will open the public hearing. The public hearing is now open. I'll turn to the city clerk's office. >> There are no speakers, mayor. >> There are no speakers on item number 48. So without objection, we will close the public hearing. Public hearing is now closed. I'll entertain a motion. [11:02:29 AM] closed. I'll entertain a motion. Mayor pro tem moves approval of item number 48. It is seconded by council member Ellis. Discussion. Hearing none without objection. Item number 48 is adopted. That will now take us to item number 37. I going to pass the gavel to the mayor pro tem to open the public hearing. >> Thank you. Without objection, item number 37 is now open. The public hearing is now open. And I will turn to the clerk to see if there are speakers. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem. We're going to start with remote speakers. We have first is Monica Guzman. Miss Guzman, can you hear us? Thank you. >> Good morning. I'm Monica Guzman, policy director at Garza. Go, Austin. Vamos. Austin is opposed to item 37, which would basically remove drainage review requirements for S up to one and a half acres for up to 16 units, and impervious cover may be as high as 65% for each site. Developers would only be required to grade their sites to direct stormwater runoff into the street, with no review to [11:03:29 AM] the street, with no review to determine if the existing infrastructure can handle the drge. There's lack of consideration of existing problem areas in brentwood, allendale a other neighborhoods across Austin already experiencing localized and lot to lot flooding. Yet this item would remove drainage review and requirements from those areas. The proposal assumes each small site has a negligible impact on flooding and drainage, but it ignores the cumulative impacts of multiple developments for analyzes. Excuse me, referenced in this item. Assume that impervious cover would remain constant at 45%. However, this item applies to more zoning categories than previously contemplated, allowing each site to develop up to 65% impervious cover with no drainage requirement. This item is being driven by the desire to remove costs for builders that, under current code, are forced to build small ponds. While these small ponds do add cost, they are based on analyzes that they are needed to address each site's drainage. Hitting delete doesn't fix that. Current [11:04:30 AM] doesn't fix that. Current regional stormwater management is not planning based. Instead, it addresses issues after they occur. A better approach is using context sensitive solutions. Decide which areas have adequate regional stormwater management, and then assess whether it satisfies drainage concerns. State law says that a development cannot affect water flows in a way that, quote, floods your neighbor, unquote. However, this law is also difficult to enforce, requiring both pre and post data engineering analysis and sufficient time and money to enforce legal rights. This messaging downpys the crucial role of city oversight in protecting residents from flooding risks. Current city drainage review protects residents by ensuring these analyzes are done. Approval of this proposal shifts the legal burden to homeowners, and only the. >> Next speaker is Peter Breton. >> Do I have to press star six or am I unmuted? >> Mr. Breton, we can hear you. Great. Thank you. Good morning, [11:05:32 AM] Great. Thank you. Good morning, mayor Watson and council members. My name is Peter Breton. I'm a proud district eight resident, and I'm speaking in favor of item 37 tod this change is a great first step, but it is only a start. Small scale missing middle housing and smaller single family houses are not only more environmentally friendly than the huge apartment compxes and large single family homes that are code currently incentivizes. They are the key to making sure that homeownership for families in Austin is attainable, and that housing for all is affordable. These small infill developments should not have to go through a process built for huge commercial scale buildings, and they should pay for infrastructure proportionate to their impact. Taking T corner lot with one home and creating a few more should not require that the developer rebuild or pay to rebuild the infrastructure for the entire street. A simple fee in lieu that can be used [11:06:33 AM] in lieu that can be used effectively by the city should be always an option. Overall, it's great that this change will support our housing goals without adjusting impervious cover. And let me say that again, no changes to impervious cover. That's key, because the watershed department has been very cooperative throughout the development of this. But we need to look at further steps, especially with utility requirements, to make sure we're supporting the city of Austin's goals that everyone's working together to support infill housing, and that we're in line with what people voted for and support a city that works to make housing more abundant and attainable. Thank you. I hope that soon you'll be able to enjoy the wonderful day outside. Maybe at the district eight jewel silka park. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Reece Armstrong. Reece Armstrong, can you hear us? [11:07:37 AM] you hear us? >> Hello? Can you hear me? >> Yes we can. >> Hello, mayor and council members. I am Reece Armstrong, the former chair of the young democratic socialists of America. I am speaking in a personal capacity, but I'm speaking in favor of item 37, because I believe that this is great step towards building out the housing that we need. We are in a housing crisis here in Austin. Housing prices are through the roof, and it's driving low income people out of our city. This does a great job of allowing us to add infill housing without expanding impervious cover significantly, and without the concerns of tree canopy that more sprawling developments may have. I believe that this is only a step we need to start thinking about how we can build out new, affordable developments within the city. But I believe that, you know, moving towards more missing middle and infill housing allows us to really gain the benefits of building out new affordable units without significantly having the environmental [11:08:38 AM] having the environmental concerns that new developments have. Thank you. >> Next speaker is sreekar nalluri. >> Hello. Good morning, city council and mayor. I would like to speak in support of item 37. The reasons I'm in support is because we've seen, you know, the data showing that it takes a long time to get these kind of developments approved. And as previous speakers have stated, I don't think it makes sense to use the same amount of time reviewing so small developments as it does, like large apartment buildings and large office buildings. In addition, we have the data on how long stuff takes, but what we don't have data on is the people who never tried to build anything because they were uncertain about how long the process would take and if they could afford that. So for those reasons, I support this, and I H that it's, you know, phase one of working and [11:09:38 AM] know, phase one of working and iterating on this to improve this, because I'm sure, like, you know, as we see the results of this, there will be things to improve. So yeah. Thank you. >> That concludes all of the remote speakers at this time. We'll now call in person speakers for item 37. First speaker we have is Sharon Blythe. With time donated from Susan Spataro. Is miss Spataro here okay? Miss Blythe will have four minutes. >> I think you've got the wrong file up. >> There. >> Is it? I think you got the wrong file. Yeah. >> I'll call a few more speakers until we're able to find the correct presentation. Next speaker is Chris Chen Shope, followed by Zachary Faddis and [11:10:40 AM] followed by Zachary Faddis and Ryan pozycki. >> Hi. Chris Chen sappi district ten. Today I'm speaking in favor of item 37. I'm hoping that you approve site plan light and lot subdivision. I have some ballpark costs that developers widely consider some of these things to cost. So right now it's on the order of $200,000 in cost to do a simple lot split going through the lot split process and drainage can cost anywhere from 20 grand to 100 grand just for simple drainage solutions. So these costs are pretty exorbitant. When you think on the scale of two, maybe three units, that's adding tens of thousands of dollars to the cost to build these units. So [11:11:40 AM] cost to build these units. So developers will either, in the end, pass off these costs to home buyers or only do the most profitable projects, which will result in less supply. Limiting supply isn't a good thing for renters, so I have some good news. Austin is no longer the Texas metro with the highest rent prices. This is cut reporting a couple of months ago, Dallas recently edged out Austin for most expensive apartment rent for the first time in the past decade. I also have some bad news. We're still more expensive than Houston, San Antonio and El Paso, so there's a lot more work to do. This council should be proud of the work that it's done to make the city more affordable, but there's still a long way to go, so please vote for item 37. Thank you. >> Howdy, city council, my name [11:12:42 AM] >> Howdy, city council, my name is Zachary Faddis. I'm a resident of district nine and president of aura. So in the city of Austin over long time, E essentially made a two track process for permitting, for building anything. You're trying to build something very low density, super quick, super simple, minimal review. Cheap, easy. The minute that you are trying to that you begin to add density for watershed protection. What we're talking about today more than four units and suddenly it triggers a huge amount of review. And this review is required whether or not you're building 200 units or five units. And if you're building 200 units, a large amount of land, it probably a lot of it probably makes sense. And more importantly, it's feasible because you can divide the cost of this large process that we ask developers to undergo over the larger number of units. And so the per unit cost is not that high. But if you're trying to build five units, you have to undergo the same process. The cost per unit is extraordinarily high. It's infeasible. You're not going to do it. You're just going to build a single family home. [11:13:44 AM] build a single family home. Mid-rise missing middle development is the often the cheapest kinf housing that we can build. In the city of Austin. It is much more environmentally friendly when we say no tople trying to build six units in the middle of our city, those five and instead of single family home is built instead, those five families have to go farther outside the city. We have to build new roads to get them there. We have to build new infrastructure. They are taking up more impervious cover because of five single family lots instead of one infill development. It is terrible for our city. We are stronger because we grow stronger from having more neighbors. Missing middle infill development is a community benefit. Housing is a community benefit. We need more of it and we've made it the hardest to build, the most affordable, most environmentally friendly kinds of housing that that we are capable of building. We have made what we N the most. The hardest thing to do in the city of Austin. This item before you today is a small but significant step towards making a better process. Thank you all. >> Good morning council and city [11:14:52 AM] >> Good morning council and city manager. My name is Ryan Vicki and I'm a resident of district one and a board member of aura. I'm here to speak in support of item 37. I first want to recognize the commendable reforms that council has undertaken in the past two years to expand missing middle housing options in Austin. Today's item recognizes that for missing middle projects between 5 and 16 units, however, the review process is lengthy and costly, making many projects infeasible. Similarly, the existing subdivision process incurs high fees and long delays that have made the home two ordinance largely unusable. A missing middle housing bridges the gap between the single family homes and large scale apartment buildings that typify development in our city, providing a greater diversity of options for different incomes and family configurations. Missing middle housing is supportive of affordability of families, of schools, of transit, and of our city's broader sustainability goals. We need much more of it, especially in the central city. While item 37 is a very good first step, I would also encourage you to support the amendments before you today as well. Also, I hope city council will take further [11:15:53 AM] city council will take further action to address our city's infructure needs in a more holistic, citywide manner to see that sees the provision of affordable, family friendly and sustainable housing as part of the solution. Thank you so much for your support. >> Miss Blythe. Are you ready to come back up? And again, Sharon he will have four minutes to speak. >> I'm Sharon Blythe, I'm. I live in district six. Today I'm going to talk about the drainage in the valley behind my house. It's going to affect us as a community. This is what the valley looked like before the construction started. Very treed, very beautiful. Very serene. This is what it looks like today. They've taken out all the trees. They say it's 300 trees. They've taken out. They've taken out a lot more than 300 trees out of the [11:16:55 AM] than 300 trees out of the valley. And destroyed our property values. Another view of what they're doing up there. Another view. They say it's 300 trees. It's more than that. They've taken out 1000yd T of Boulder rock to Torino park across the city. This is an overview of it. This is about a third of what they've done. This is this is there's about two thirds more that they're destroying northwest Austin. This is called the old lampasas dam modernization project. That watershed started. They gave the neighborhood no heads up that this was even being contemplated until it was almost done. We were annexed in 1997 with the promise that our canyon would always be parkland. Well, we stated that in the hearing that there would be no construction. The city has almost broken its [11:17:55 AM] The city has almost broken its promise, destroyed. The one thing that brought us to Austin in this area, this is one fourth of a mile from the balcones canyonlands. There's not any. There was not any section 26 hearing for this project in violation of the law. Watershed protection refused to set a section 26 hearing because they had to get this project done. Really, they have to always have because it's always been parkland. There was never any flood risk in this valley before, and now there is. We asked the city to compensate our neighborhood of the devastation of our properties. Hold a section 26 hearing according to the law. Restore our parkland across the street used as a staging area. Do not think that 26 replanted two inch trees will be enough to remediate this site. We asked for more trees to restore our canyon. This project is not necessary. Cost $18 [11:18:55 AM] is not necessary. Cost $18 million. All they needed was a new pipe. Cost maybe a few thousand. This will become a skate park. What else does the city plan? We don't think they've given us all the whole story yet. Thank you very much. Appreciate your comments and your concern about this as we do. >> Thank you. >> Next speaker is Ty jovanka, followed by Jeff Dickerson and Barbara Macarthur. >> Hi. I'm Trejo Vicki, a resident of district five. I'm speaking in support of item 37. We've made real progress with home one and two, but permitting and subdivision costs remain prohibitively, prohibitively high for missing middle housing if long delays and fees make home to unattainable and unattainable. For most austinites, what should have [11:19:55 AM] austinites, what should have been a historic course correction will end up as a footnote. We have seen how adding tens of thousands of apartments led to a 22% drop in rents from the peak, according to Bloomberg. We should aim for the same success with missing middle housing. Theesson is clear when you build more, you see rents drop, you see prices come down. Unfortunately, with the increasing materials costs brought about by the tariffs coming up, it's more crucial than ever that we streamline these processes and reduce the cost of construction. Some might fear neighborhood change of additional missing middle housing, but it fits naturally into existing communities, just as it did in Austin's older neighborhoods. When I walked around zilker, the neighborhood I live in, and Bouldin creek, the multiplexes fit right in and in my opinion, they add to the charm of those neighborhoods. This isn't about high rises, it's about small multi-family homes that provide options for families, young professionals and retirees. Of course, there's concerns about infrastructure [11:20:56 AM] concerns about infrastructure strain with additional density, but they overlook a key fact sprawl is more costly. More homes near jobs, shops and transit means less cars on the road, lower emissions and more efficient use of existing infrastructure. Instead of pushing development further out, which burdens taxpayers with expensive new roads and utility extensions. If we're serious about affordability, we need to embrace a site plan light, and this has to just be a first step. More reforms around permitting will be needed if we want housing construction to continue to boom to boom in Austin, Texas, it maximizes every lost potential while cutting red tape and ensuring home two delivers home. The home initiative delivers real results. Let's build a future where austinites can afford to stay in Austin. >> Thank you. First, my name is Jeff Dickerson from district five. Let's talk about numbers. Rather than [11:21:58 AM] about numbers. Rather than banning numbers around being thrown around by developers, let's look at the cost justification from staff members reports. There's the claim that proposed drainage regulation amendment will reduce 40% of total project costs. This is on page five of the staff presentation and page three of the ordinance. I would note that 2023 city council also proposed fee. Scheduleicates fee of large projects with only 4.5%. So there is a discrepancy between 40% savings and an actual number 4.5% used by staff reports. I'm hoping one of you council members. I'm looking at you. Council member alter will ask questions, which I can't do. Where these numbers come from. Let's talk about planning commission suggestions. City of Austin planning commission [11:22:58 AM] Austin planning commission proposal is to eliminate drainage review of all these properties for one units, up to 16 units. This recommendation does not consider existing localized flooding issues or Austin FEMA floodplain. This would exacerbate flooding in all vulnerable areas. I might point out that council member Fuentes is supporting flood insurance, but you all are introducing more localized flooding from lot to lot, and putting this flooding on the backs of the homeowners who do not have the resources that the large developers do to contest. What happens when flooding occurs across properties. So my city council, they need to prioritize transparent, accurate data and equitable solutions. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Hi, my name is Barbara [11:24:03 AM] >> Hi, my name is Barbara Macarthur and I live in brentwood in district seven. I'm here today to ask you not to pass item 37 without further amendments. Brentwood is number two city wide in the localized flood problem areas, where we have two riverine flood areas and have significant 25 and 100 year flood plains. I've seen significant flooding at the end of my street with water to the tops of cars, but luckily we've had no human loss of life, a study the city did in 2016 said that storm grade upgrades in brentwood would have an adverse downstream impact and cost $192 million. At a meeting with the city staff in 2019, we were told the city does not map storm drain issues and they don't think about fixing our problem, the staff said the city priority was upping housing density and not solving our drainage or flooding problems. According to the watershed protection department, impervious cover or man made surfaces impenetrable by rainfall placed additional strain on the city's drainage system by increasing the volume and speed of stormwater runoff. When I moved to brentwood, the [11:25:03 AM] When I moved to brentwood, the average impervious cover on the properties was 15%. Small houses, large lots. In recent years, there have been 714 demolitions of these modest houses, replacing them with large duplexes, increasing the impervious cover 300%. That, combined with inadequate drainage from large developments on canyon and burnet, have provoked significant flooding that was minimal in the past. A recent academic study showed that for every 1% of increased impervious cover, it increases flooding by 3.3%, suggesting that it is enough to direct water to the right of way. Where storm drain capacity is inadequate is not a public safety solution. It is turning our streets into rivers. I think it will take a whole lot of fees in lieu to raise the 200 million necessary to fix brentwood, and the billions needed to fix the city drainage problem. You're putting a band-aid on a heart attack. How about spending money to map storm drain capacity issues and not implementing policies that will create more flooding in areas? [11:26:05 AM] flooding in areas? >> Thank you. >> Next speaker is felicity Maxwell, followed by Carmen Lianes. >> Good morning. Mayor pro tem council members, felicity Maxwell, d5 resident and aura board member. I'm here today to express my strong support for item 37. First, I'd like to thank council member Ellis and council member alter for their leadership on this issue, and to thank council member vela for the impactful amendments he'll be offering today. And of course, council staff, city council staff and the team from dsd and watershed who have been tireless in their efforts to create common sense and safe changes contained in the proposed ordinance. As you all are aware, despite the excellent work done last year on home one and home two, it's still quite difficult to build missing middle housing in Austin. Item 37 is an essential first step to removing these units from potential to reality. We often ask you, as council members, say yes to new housing in our city, yes to additional homes, more [11:27:07 AM] yes to additional homes, more flexibility in our land development code. Today, we're asking you to say yes to infill projects, to small local developers, to smaller, more affordable homes in our central core, saying yes to more students in aisd schools, saying yes to much needed and additional tax revenue for our city. Say yes to new citizens who want to settle, settle in our city, contribute to our community, and make Austin their home. Infill housing. Take advantage of existing infrastructure, and adds new homes to our essential established neighborhoods. Ensures the highest and best use of our land and our central core. This is a critical issue because these lengthy reviews and long timelines add significant cost to these infill missing middle projects. This is also true for subdividing lots in the city, which is why this item is critical not just for drainage reviews, but also for simplification of subdivision in Austin. I firmly believe that revisions being proposed to the site, plan and subdivision today are crucial. First step in the right direction and I urge all of you to support the additional these changes and the amendments offered on the dais. We look forward to additional council action on the issue related to impact fees, infrastructure [11:28:07 AM] impact fees, infrastructure needs and utility requirements. Finally, thank you for saying yes to making middle missing middle housing from the lines of our municipal code to the neighborhood streets of our city. Future residents of these missing middle houses. Thank you for making the creatof their homesore straightforward, less less costly, and in line with appropriate regulations. >> Next speaker is Bobby Levinsky, with time donated from bill bunch and Mr. Levinsky will have four minutes. >> Thank you, mayor and council members. My name is Bobby Levinsky with save our springs alliance. Item 37, being referred to as site plan light, pertains to removal of drainage review and regulations for residential site plans up to 1.5 acres. Engaging in this item has been a bit tricky, because the subdivision and site plan changes continue to get conflated, and my comments are directed at the site plan changes. The item is based upon the assumption that each small site has minimal impact on flooding, but it ignores the cumulative impacts of multiple developments, sometimes stacked next to each other. To avoid [11:29:07 AM] next to each other. To avoid regulatory compliance. When drainage isn't addressed, the combined runoff can overwhelm existing infrastructure and creeks, especially in areas already prone to localized and lot to lot flooding, and especially where creeks are experienced significant erosion. Under this change, developers are only need to grade their site to direct stormwater into the street, with no review for whether the street has adequate drainage infrastructure. This could worsen flooding in vulnerable areas and create downstream erosion problems. State law is often cited as a fallback, but it's a false sense of security. Yes, the state law says that you can't change water flow in a way that will harm your neighbor. Her, enforcing those state laws require neighbor neighboring property owners to hire. Engineers have perfect foresight to document pre and post construction conditions, and bear the cost of legal actions for most residents, especially lower and middle income families. That is simply not accessible. Regional stormwater management is also not a perfect [11:30:08 AM] management is also not a perfect solution, at least not yet. The major problem is that our smp is often done as a response to existing problems. Water is tricky. Every time youave flows over a path, the problem gets incrementally worse. When a similar proposal was considered back in the codex days, the localized areas, localized flooding areas were removed. This should be done here as well. Also, areas without adequate stormwater infrastructure so that you aren't pointing drainage to streets where curbs and gutters don't exist. Similar reliance on. Similar to the reliance on state law, it is waiting for a problem to occur. Instead of maintaining drainage review and requirements that are protective of Austin's residents, putting in place relatively small drainage controls to avoid increasing issues with localized flooding. Not to like flooding, will protect residents proactively, while those small ponds are difficult to inspect, it doesn't change the fact that there were engineering evaluations that determined that they were necessary in the first place. I want to make sure to say that I'm not saying that it's that. I'm saying it's understood that triplexes that [11:31:09 AM] understood that triplexes that are using the same amount of impervious cover as single family homes. That's not the issue. You know, 45% is 45%. I agree with that general premise, but this that premise is misleading because this site actually this proposal applies to sites that are as large as 1.5 acres and 16 units. If we still have single family homes using 45% of a 1.5 acre site, that's a different issue. I don't think that would be allowed under subchapter F, so it's just an apples to pavement comparison. It's just it's not applicable. The prior analysis during code next assumed that the impervious cover levels would be maintained at 45%. Those studies are being referenced, but they're just again, not applicable because you just get a zoning change to increase your impervious cover from, say, 345% to sf6 or a multifamily category that allows 65% impervious cover. So, I mean, I think it should be just acknowledged that this item is increasing impervious cover and that there will be problems. And so I want to end on a, on a productive. Well, first I want to say that I want to acknowledge that the staff recommendation is better than the planning commission [11:32:10 AM] the planning commission recommendation. The planning commission recommendation was, I think the staff report said it would be the weakest drainage regulations in the entire state of Texas, which is a little bit odd in a flash flood alley. Please remove areas with areas of localized flooding. Limit impervious cover to 45%. Just put that in the ordinance. Say lock it at 45%. And also please follow this item up with some developing some resources that low and middle income families can access to help with engineering and legal assistance when they need to encounter. Address the problems that this will create. >> Next speaker is Aleem Virani. And last speaker is Roy Whaley. I don't see either. Speaker. And so mayor pro tem, I believe that concludes all speakers on item 37. >> Thank you. Just one more final check. Any speaker. If your name has been called, please come to the front. Okay. Thank you colleagues. Without [11:33:11 AM] Thank you colleagues. Without objection, I will close the public hearing portion of item 37. Any objection? Yes. Council member Ellis. >> No objection. Just wanted to make some opening remarks, because I know there's a few amendments that have been proposed. >> Good deal. Any objection to closing the public hearing portion? Seeing none. The public hearing portion of item 37 has been closed. Colleagues, what I propose, being that the mayor is off the dais right now, is that we go into recess until public communication at noon, at which time we will then go back into recess until 110, reconvening at 110. We will then take opening comments, as well as the opportunity to lay out amendments. Any objection to going into recess at this time until noon? Communication. Seeing none, the Austin city council will stand at recess until public communication at 12 P.M. The Austin city council I went. I'll tell you later. All [12:02:17 PM] I went. I'll tell you later. All right, colleagues, it is 12:02 P.M, and the Austin city council is now back in order. Thank you all so much. It is. We reconvened for our noon public communication time. Certain. And with that, I will turn it over to the clerk to call the speakers. >> Thank you, mayor pro tem. First speaker is Harold schmalbach Schmucker. I apologize if I mispronounce your last name, followed by Cecilia rza Trevino. Yes. Please make your way to the podium. >> Hello. Harold Schmucker Austin. I'm here to request that the council act to prohibit the purchase of industrial hazardous waste by any city department. I sent some documents to you and want to review them with you. First three pages are copies of invoices of purchases by the city of a hazardous waste product called hydrophilic acid. Page four is a summary showing [12:03:19 PM] Page four is a summary showing the total spent in 2024 at over 315,000 worth of hazardous waste. Page five starts the data safety sheet that validates hydrophilic acid as an extremely dangerous hazardous waste product, possibly one of the worst in existence. This sds is not disclosed to the public by the city. If it were, there would be no question the public would be strongly against it. Next, I've included a screenshot of the product information page on the website for your distributor, univar solutions, where it clearly discloses that there are 50 parts per million or more of arsenic in the product you purchase. It doesn't make a lot of sense to treat the water, to remove arsenic, and then add it back in via untreated toxic hazardous waste. The maximum contaminant contaminant level goal for arsenic is zero. Next is an intro from a research study and petition to the EPA by American university, where they take a neutral stance on fluoridation. But ask the EPA to ban the use of hazardous waste in favor of a food grade fluoridation product. [12:04:20 PM] food grade fluoridation product. Their studies show that if municipalities switch to a food grade product, it would reduce cancer treatment costs by up to $6 billion a year due to 100 times less arsenic found in a food grade fluoridation product. Next are the answers to questions that I submitted to the Austin water in regard to the significant harm that hazardous waste ingestion causes. Several of my questions were answered with. The city of Austin does not have the staff expertise to determine whether fluoridation causes harm or to review safety studies. If you don't have the expertise, should you be purchasing a hazardous waste product at all? Groups that support this practice, like the dental industry, also do not have the expertise to determine harm. Those with the expertise, like the national toxicology program just last year agreed that it causes harm by lowerin iq in children. Expert at the EPA trial all agreed that it causes harm. Last, I've included a 2023 Cochrane study showing that a review of 157 studies [12:05:21 PM] that a review of 157 studies post 1975 on the effectiveness of community water fluoridation showed between 0 and 4% reduction in dental caries, which they deem insufficient evidence to make a claim either way. If you care about children, you'd be using a food product, not a waste product. I ask you to prohibit all city departments from purchasing any hazardous waste products, and stop providing hazardous waste disposal services for industry. The law of the land currently is fluoridation causes harm, so I hope that you guys will act. Thank you very much. >> Next, speaker, Cecilia Garza Trevino. >> Ladies and gentlemen. I am Cecilia Garcia Trevino, district ten. Can you hear me? Okay. And in regard to the arts commissions, I'm very proud to introduce a movie shot in Austin [12:06:22 PM] introduce a movie shot in Austin 43 years ago. Manifest. >> Burt, Mr. Gilbert. Mr. Gilbert. >> What is it? John? What's the matter? It's David he's taking sick. Come on, let me get him. All right. [12:08:05 PM] All right. >> Peter, this is no time to get upset. He's just a child. >> Here comes doctor Harris. Take it easy, pet think about what you're going to tell him. >> Micah. Amanii. Come on. Let me ride it. I'm gonna ride. Come on. All the way. >> To know me. To know me. [12:09:13 PM] >> To know me. To know me. Llama. Llama. Llama qui sont TREs Mok. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. >> Mayor pro tem, that concludes all of the new public communication speakers. >> Thank you. Colleagues. As the clerk mentioned. This concludes the public communication portion of the agenda. We will now head into live music. As a reminder, we will reconvene Austin city council meeting at 1:10 P.M, where we will then take up the amendments on item 37, the site plan light item. At this time it is 12:10 P.M. And we will now go into recess. I hope everyone can join us for live music featuring artist Bobby Terrell. Thank you. Good afternoon everyone. Vanessa [12:20:43 PM] Good afternoon everyone. Vanessa Fuentes proud to serve as mayor pro tem for the city of Austin. We are here today to have a special performance by Bobby Terrell. Bobby Terrell has played sax in Austin and internationally for over 50 years, playing with the likes of Etta James and classic Austin blues artists jabu jabu, blue boys, Hubbard, Jose Hargrove, Matthew Robinson. Draeded into the Marine Corps, he joined the fifth marine expeditionary brigade band and played in the field band, the stage band, and the rock band. Upon completion of his tour service, he returned to San Antonio and performed with spider in the midnight movers and toured with Etta James. In 1979, he relocated to Austin and performed with George Underwood, Willie Sampson, Willie Wynn, Clarence pierce, John Washington, James Gebhard Houston, Jose Hargrove, blue boys, Hubbard, and the late great Solomon Burke. While performing with jabu, jabu and the old dogs in 2023, they [12:21:43 PM] the old dogs in 2023, they recorded the nationally and internationally acclaimed jabu blues. He is now with the Matthew Robinson band and with Johnny Lee and the arctic blue band. At the ripe young age of 75 years old. >> Sorry at the ripe young age of 75 years old, Bobby says. I have. >> No idea how long I will be blowing this horn. With god's blessing, I'm going to blow until the wheels fall off. That's right. So with that, please join me in welcoming Bobby Terrell. >> Hello. One. Two. One. Let me. Let me. [12:23:48 PM] Let me. Let me. Get. Let me. [12:25:35 PM] Get. Let me. Let me. Get. [12:27:51 PM] Get. Let. Me. >> Do one more round of applause [12:31:55 PM] >> Do one more round of applause for Bobby Terrell. Incredible. So where where can we find your next show? Where can we go? C-boy's. >> Great classic. >> Austin venue. And when? When's the next show? >> The last Saturday of this month. >> The last. >> Saturday of the month. So if you want to hear again from Bobby Terrell and others this last Saturday of the month at c-boy's, please go check him out. And yes. And are you on social media by chance? >> Kazanoff. Ralls Gebhard. >> Well. We I'm here with my colleague, councilwoman Natasha harper-madison, and we are going to present you with a special proclamation on behalf of the mayor. Thank you. Be it known that whereas the city of Austin, [12:32:57 PM] that whereas the city of Austin, Texas is blessed with many creative musicians whose talents extends to virtually every musical genre, and whereas our music scene thrives here in Austin because we have the best audiences and our support for good music produced by legends, our local favorites and newcomers alike. And whereas we are pleased to showcase and support our local artists. Now, therefore, I, Vanessa Fuentes, mayor pro tem for the city of Austin, alongside my colleague, council member Natasha harper- madison, on behalf of the mayor, Kirk Watson, the mayor of the live music capital, do hereby proclaim March 6th, 2025, as Bobby Terrell day in Austin, Texas. >> Yeah! Woo woo! Yeah, you're right. Yeah you're right. >> Thank you all so much. Thank you so much. First of all, I'd [12:33:57 PM] you so much. First of all, I'd like to thank my family and friends and all the great musicians I've played with throughout the years. But wow, over 50 years. Wow. But I tell you, time flies when you're having fun. Thank you all so much. Thank you. >> Thank you. We're gonna do a quick little. >> Group photo with y'all. >> Sure. Good afternoon everybody. It's [1:10:13 PM] Good afternoon everybody. It's 1:10 P.M. On March 6th, 2025 and I will call back to order the regular called meeting of the Austin city council for this date. We are on item number 37. Public comment has closed and the public hearing has been closed on item number 37. So we will now take up the substance of the item. And the chair recognizes council member Ellis on item number 37. >> Thank you mayor. I just wanted to give a quick layout of how we got here. When we first passed our resolution in December of 2022, the standard was that anything three units or higher had to go through the full site plan process, just like a large scale apartment complex building. So the phase one of that was to allow three and four units to follow what was already happening with the single unit and duplex style of housing developments. So now all of those four units and below are following a residential review process. So phase two is to create the site plan light [1:11:14 PM] to create the site plan light which is 5 to 16 units. And it doesn't change current zoning for anyone. It merely allows for a faster and more cost effective pathway to building these types of structures. Over the two plus years of work by staff. There's a lot of stakeholder input and a lot of staff work that's gone into this. So I want to say thank you to development services and watershed protection in particular, that have been the lead team players here trying to make this happen. There is still work to be done with some of the other conversations that folks that spoke to us earlier today had mentioned, which were talking about issues like utilities and some other things that affect how quickly and cost effectively these units can actually turn into a home for somebody. So I also want to make sure to mention that the reason there were a few more things to iron out in the later phases of this was because we had also past home phase one and two along the way, and so the interaction between these different regulations that affect the triplexes and the quadplexes and [1:12:15 PM] triplexes and the quadplexes and then into your more missing middle, smaller style of housing all of a sudden were just easier to do, and we had to figure out how to make sure we're leveraging the ability for those courtyard styles and missing middle. And so there's been a lot of conversations. Our teams have been working for hours. We haveeaeally, really good staffers that have been with us, and the departments have been answering our questions very diligently. So I appreciate all of the effort that's gone into this, and I'm excited that we're actually getting to discuss this as a dais today. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Ellis moves adoption of item number 37. >> I sure do. >> And it's second. Seconded by council member harper-madison. Members we have. >> Version staff. >> The version that you're moving approval of is the staff version right? Yes. Yes. Good. For clarity purposes, the motion and second by council member harper-madison is to adopt the staff version of item number 37. [1:13:16 PM] staff version of item number 37. With that being said, we have a couple of proposed amendments members. The order that I think I'll go just so that everybody can get them in front of them is vela amendment number one, vela amendment number two, Velasquez amendment number one, and then Velasquez amendment number two, and then alter amendment, whi, as I understand it, there is just one amendment on that. So it would be alter amendment number one. That's the order. I'll go in. We have a motion. And a second. I want to make sure before I move to the first amendment. There's not anything else I need to recognize. Council member alter. >> If I could just for one second to piggyback on what council member Ellis said, just to level set.he other half of this is the subdivision element, not just the site plan element that tries to allow for a simplified subdivision process. [1:14:18 PM] simplified subdivision process. Also, having now home pass subsequently to that initial resolution, making sure everything works uniformly, but also recognizing as some of the speakers mentioned, that these things all work together. And so we're going to have to continue to have discussions about how everything can move forward and work together, not against each other, to make to achieve the goals that we're trying to achieve. >> So thank you, councilmember. Councilmember Laine, do you want to be recognized before we go to the amendments? Okay. >> I just want to make kind of a general statement on site plan light, especially being fairly new to the dais. And people may be wondering where my thoughts are. It is a very high priority to me to increase the efficiency of our city so that we can realize the savings that we need to be able to invest into our staff and into our community values. And we will only get there if we can streamline things. It has long been the situation in this city that when we try to put up housing or really anything else inside the [1:15:20 PM] really anything else inside the city limits, it is extremely expensive. It takes a very long time and that means we get very large corporations and consultants making the money off of those projects. For these smaller projects, I wholeheartedly submit support streamlining the process so that our individual property owners, our families, and our small owners have the opportunity to make full use of their properties within the restrictions of deed restrictions and other kinds of limitations, but that they can not only do things like more easily accommodate multigenerational households, which are quite common up in district six. But also when we talk about te value of the property that they, the current and longtime owners have access to that rather than the property. So often getting sold to a middle man investor and then on to the corporate developer. So I wanted to mention those benefits because I believe in them very strongly. But I also am quite concerned about the flooding potential, and I really support looking at [1:16:21 PM] and I really support looking at not property by property solutions, but more area wide solutions and investment in that way so that we can address the environmental concerns as well. But just putting a strong voice forward that I'm supportive of this. >> Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember vela, the chair recognizes you on vela amendment number one, members. That is vela amendment number one, change the review threshold to 17,780ft S. Councilmember vela, you're recognized. >> Thank you very much, mayor. As you mentioned, it's a very simple amendment. The current threshold is set at 11,500ft for the subdivision portion of it. And I appreciate council member alter distinguishing because there are kind of two separate portions of this. This amendment focuses on the subdivision of smaller lots and getting essentially eliminating any kind of drainage review for subdivisions under 17,780ft S. [1:17:23 PM] subdivisions under 17,780ft S. Again, just to put a little context on it, right now, single family homes are exempt from any kind of drainage review. No flooding, no water quality, no nothing like that. But again, as a council member mentioned, once you get to that three unit or higher, I mean, it has it's begun to change and the process becomes very complex and very expensive. We've set it at that 17,780 number, because if you take 45% of that number, you end up with 8000ft S of impervious cover. And in a separate section of the code, 8000ft S of impervious cover would trigger a water quality review. So what we've done is tried to align the drainage reviews and the water quality reviews. At 8000ft S of [1:18:26 PM] quality reviews. At 8000ft S of impervious cover. That way, essentially, if you're building whatever on the single family context, whether you're building three homes or six homes or whatever thease may be, as long as you're under that 8000 square foot impervious cover, there would not be either water quality or a drainage review. Once you go above that, it does get a little bit more complex, so that just in brief, is the nature of my amendment. >> Council member vela moves adoption of vela amendment number one. Is there a second? Seconded by council member Ellis. Discussion on vela amendment number one. Hearing none. Yes. I'm sorry. Council member Siegel. Yes. Mayor. >> It would be okay if I ask staff to comment. >> Please. >> If watershed would come forward to comment on this item, please. Or the on the amendment. >> Good afternoon, George morales. I'm the director of the [1:19:27 PM] morales. I'm the director of the watershed protection department. Yes, I see the rationale for that. And we can work with that number as we move forward. We do plan to evaluate as these applications come in and will be reporting back to council on a regular frequency. As noted in another motion sheet. >> And director morales, would you comment on whether this amendment would change your analysis in terms of potential flooding impacts of this item? >> So as it relates to fldiding, we spoke a little bit during the work session, but I'll repeat that. We assume a certain impervious cover already single family or this amendment. And so I don't see an impact on that when it comes to the flood modeling that we do already when it comes to the localized flooding, some of the situations that are already out there are things that as a drainage utility, that's our responsibility to address and correct. And we are working on we have priorities as we've discussed before, and we're working through that to implement those solutions for those localized flooding areas throughout the city. >> Thank you. So would you have any concerns you'd flag about this amendment? >> I don't. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember Siegel. Any further discussion without objection. Vela [1:20:29 PM] without objection. Vela amendment number one is adopted. That will take us members to vela amendment number two labeled direction to explore fee in lieu options. Council member vela you're recognized to speak to vela amendment number two. >> Thank you very much, mayor. And again, and I think the there was some great answers in the Q and a on these topics. And again, what we're trying to do is currently the current process is essentially when you are going to subdivide a lot, even at a very small scale, you have to go through a really detailed and rigorous and expensive analysis to. Mitigate essentially water impact, where you may have to put a tiny little retention pond on your property or something like that. This can make up a very significant portion of the cost for this small scale development. And in prior [1:21:30 PM] development. And in prior conversations with staff, you know, when you're putting a small pond on a on a small lot, the effectiveness of that is really questionable. So we're incurring a lot of costs. Unclear what the actual mitigation impacts on flooding are with the amendment. Essentially, it's a two part amendment, but on the one hand, it directs staff to look at fee in lieu options that instead of going through this kind of long, complex process where you're either going to make a large payment or put build something on site, can we have a standardized, for example, per square foot or per unit fee in lieu that is paid into the city funds that the city can then use for watershed and drainage improvements? Again, just direction. I know that that was an excellent answer on the q&a about potential concerns around it, but directing staff to study this and report back. And then the other portion of the [1:22:32 PM] the other portion of the amendment deals with kind of the second aspect of the original site plan light item that council member Ellis brought, which relates to, you know, the water is not the only impediment for these small scale developments. Utilities in particular have been pointed out both water and electric utility connections can be extremely difficult, extremely expensive. So also looking at directing staff to look at, can we get a fee in lieu options for other areas where we would be otherwise incurring, you know, substantial fees for very small scale projects, which essentially dissuade those projects from ever getting going. And again, just let's look at the fee and lieu options again, directing staff to do that and then report back. >> Council member vela moves approval of vela amendment number two, seconded by council [1:23:33 PM] number two, seconded by council member Velazquez. Discussion on vela amendment number two, discussion without objection. Vela amendment number two is adopted. We will now turn to Velazquez. Amendment number one, inclusion of residential infill project metrics in the annual home report. Councilmember Velazquez, you're recognized. >> Thank you. Mayor Velazquez. Motion sheet number one ensures that we are tracking the impact of our housing policies in a clear and transparent way by incorporating residential infill project metrics into an annual home report, we will gain valuable insights into production of missing middle housing and the effectiveness of our right sized drainage regulations. This data is to help us make informed decisions when holding our and holding ourselves accountable for our housing goals. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember Velazquez moves adoption of Velazquez amendment number one, seconded by council member Ellis. Discussion on Velazquez. Amendment number one [1:24:33 PM] Velazquez. Amendment number one hearing none without objection. Velazquez. Amendment number one to item number 37 is adopted. We will now go to Velazquez. Amendment number two, a watershed protection department reporting on process and drainage criteria. Manual changes. Councilmember Velazquez, you're recognized. >> Thank you. Mayor. This directs watershed protection department to report back on process improvements and drainage criteria, updates that they have committed to. Timely implementation of these changes is key to balancing housing growth and responsible stormwater management, and I ask for your support on these amendments. >> Councilmember Velazquez moves approval of amendment number two to item number 37. Is there a second? Seconded by council member harper-madison discussion on vquez. Amendment number two to item number 37. Hearing none without objection. Velazquez. Amendment number two to item number 37 is adopted. Members that will now take us to alter proposed amendment number [1:25:34 PM] alter proposed amendment number one to item number 37. And the chair will recognize council member alter. >> Thank you very much. This amendment is really focused on trying to understand what is going to drive developer behavior and drive decisions that are being made. I think we can all recognize that if someone is trying to decide how they W want to proceed, wheth it's three units or four units or six units,y're going to look at the costs associated and the timeline associated, and then proceed on the path that is likely to be the most profitable. And so what I would like to better understand is now that we're making these changes, what are the costs and fees associated with, let's say, staying underneath a site plan and only doing up to four units or wanting to do five, 6 or 7. But maybe those costs or timelines are making it so that it's just not attractive. And they continue to do four, even though we might all W to try [1:26:36 PM] though we might all W to try to promote those additional units within the same impervious cover limitations and other limitations that are already in place. So this will allow for or ask the manager to come back to us later this year with that cost estimate so that we can review the fee structure and make sure that it's not disincentivizing the type of housing that we'd all like to see. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember alter moves approval of alter amendment number one to item number 37. It is seconded by council member Ellis. Discussion with regard to alter amendment number one hearing none without objection. Alter amendment number one to item number 37 is adopted members that will take us back to the main motion, as amended by those five amendments. So the discussion will be on the main Moton on item number 37 as it's amended. Is there discussion? Yes. Council member duchen. I first want to say I'm grateful [1:27:39 PM] first want to say I'm grateful for the work of the sub quorum and staff and trying to find solutions for streamlining, permitting and reducing the cost of building out these kinds of infill developments. I do want to raise a couple of points that we both heard from today around flooding, as well as really just comes down to, I think from my perspective, the cost benefit here. I do feel like there might be some opportunities, maybe, obviously not now, but going forward to figure out how do you carve out particularly sensitive or vulnerable areas in town that have significant flooding issues, maybe places that are in the 1400 year floodplain? Maybe that's a way to accommodate some of the flooding concerns that we've heard about. And then I also just worry about, in general, of how climate change is going to continue to compound flood risks here in the area. I think we heard from Mr. Levinsky from sos about concerns on regarding the impermeable cover on lots and how I want to build on his point, actually, and just [1:28:42 PM] on his point, actually, and just say, I think there's a separate concern that we really don't doesn't really get much attention, which is you've got a lot of neighborhoods that we have that have homes that were built there decades ago that don't go to the maximum amount of ick on those lots. And so we talk about, well, we haven't changed the ic max, but as we go through the redevelopment and we scale that redevelopment across dozens, hundreds, thousands, potentially of lots talking about going up to the max, particularly if we're talking about denser redevelopment. So I'm just wary of scaling this in a way that shifts the conversation from not changing the ic max, but in practice, changing the real ic on those lots and what the impact then is on water quality, on flooding, etc. And I'll just say to build on that, there's, you know, ic isn't the only component there. There's also trees that are potentially getting removed. We're seeing that in neighborhoods in mytrict. That and we're already seeing [1:29:43 PM] That and we're already seeing reports from watershed that indicate that that's changing water quality issues, that's changing water flow issues, and we're having to accommodate those issues as a result of just the tree component. So all of these suggest to me that there's legitimate risk, particularly for areas that are in flood, you know, flood prone neighborhoods or in the 100 year floodplain. And then one thing I'll also add is I think there's some doubt in my mind about the benefit piece of this, the cost benefit piece, which is I know I asked staff, and I think the answer we've heard was it could be up to 40% of savings, but we've heard some testimony today that that suggests that might be a different perspective. And then I think the data I'm really missing is what the median savings would be, because that's, you know, that to me is a lot more indicative of what we can expect. I know in the conversations I've had with the infill developers and architects last year in the times that we [1:30:45 PM] last year in the times that we discussed how to streamline permitting and bring down the cost of this kind of development, I was surprised that drainage really never came up. In those conversations. We talked about bringing back, you know, the one stop shop permitting. We talked about trying to clear up code that had ambiguity in it that required multiple inspections, but somehow drainage never came up. Which is not to say there's not an opportunity here, but to say that there's plenty of other opportunity that might be not life safety issue related to try and address the same underlying problem. So all to say, I'm at this point probably going to abstain or vote no on this, but I'm grateful certainly for the work that people have invested here. And but do also want to try and factor in the, the, the flooding and other issues that people have raised. So thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember duchen. Councilmember Siegel. >> Thank you, mayor. And also, I want to thank staff, understand, it's a tremendous amount of work to get us this far. And the sub quorum ofncil member Ellis [1:31:48 PM] quorum ofncil member Ellis Velasquez vela and alter, I really appreciate you all. As one of the members who's only been on the dais for about two months, this has been a pretty steep learning curve to catch up on. Councilwoman Natasha Madison Harper told me. This has been a six year labor of love, so just forgiveif I'm just still in the learning phases here, but I wanted to ask if staff could come up and I guess respond to a couple of questions that have really been a focus of members of my district. >> Please. >> Director morales. And as you're coming up, director, I think you might have heard the public comment earlier and you might have seen my message board post focusing on, you know, brentwood, crestview, where there is this documented drainage need. And I guess if you could comment a little bit on the cost to fix that one area from a capital improvement perspective, and also how many other projects might like that might be needed across the city. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Yes, that's a great point and is complex, right. And just [1:32:48 PM] complex, right. And just speaking on the different types of flooding, we have the creek flooding that's caused by the overflow of creeks, right. And then localized flooding where we don't have systems where the systems that are there don't have adequate capacity. Right. So the neighborhood that you're referring to, we do have a preliminary engineering report that we're reevaluating. And some of these neighborhoods flooded since the 1981 floods. Right. So we've been dealing with some of these. So the complexity that our mission is to protect lives, property, environment from flooding, erosion and water quality. That's our mission. And so we can't fix one area and expose another area to the same risk, because we made one area more effective or efficient to get the water down. And so depending on where you are in the watershed, we have to detain the water. We have to mitigate the impacts of the efficiencies of what we're doing in the storm systems. And so that's part of the complexity of our projects. And so we talk about some of that in the in the website that you posted N your, in your, in your, your posting as well. And so we understand and we definitely hear the community and we that's our mission is to protect from that. So we have numerous projects in the pipe pipe work of actually getting no [1:33:49 PM] pipe work of actually getting no pun intended. Sorry about that. The pipeline there to fix Wright, but it is costly. As you heard some of the community members comments this morning, some some of it could be over $100 million because it's not just fixing that system, but chasing it all the way down to where the confluence of the river or the major river creek that it's touching. So once again, it's complicated, but we're working through solutions throughout the city, and we've already done projects throughout the years with various bond fundings in the past. We are primarily funded by the drainage utility fund, and we do lean on these larger scale projects to go through the bond process because they are just larger in magnitude. >> But is it fair to say that, you know, it'll be in the tens of millions at least to address the one project in brentwood, crestview, and there's probably dozens of areas that have similar needs? >> That's correct. And if you go to the watershed website, you'll see all the projects that we have in the queue, and you'll see some of them. We reference those larger numbers and they're we're going through the process. >> Great. Thank you. And then if you could also address a different issue which is a [1:34:49 PM] different issue which is a concern about lot to flooding. And I mean I've heard the term deregulate, you know, drainage so to SP but if you could just assure the public that there will be safeguards to protect against lot to lot flooding and to stop projects from moving forward, if, for example, they don't have proper grading or an appropriate drainage plan. >> That's correct. Council member. So that is a different type of flooding that sometimes is created because a neighbor does something to their property that impounds water on another neighbor. It is a private matter. But as part of the process improvements that we're doing and that you you're voting on, the development services department has checks and balances along the way. And so we did talk about that. And so in some cases, if you're making modifications, there are certain criteria. But that is being addressed as part of the building permit process versus the subdivision part of it. So we just shifted some of the liability or the responsibility. But it's being evaluated and the regulations do exist. And we do have 311. And we do have an opportunity for us to come out and evaluate stuff as needed on a case by case basis. But our goal here was just to create an [1:35:49 PM] goal here was just to create an efficiency, but not look away from that situation. >> Thank you. And then going to the capital improvement question, you know, department right now are working on their capital needs. And is it fair to say that watershed will be proposing some items that could be voted on as part of a potential bond package next year? >> Yes, sir. We're one of the all the departments that are going through the process and going through the batf, and it will come to you as well for decisions later on. >> And the last point is, I want you to comment on is that this idea that some of our drainage investments have been driven by a complaint based process, so that, for example, in neighborhoods where there's more active citizens, if they make complaints that some of our investments have been driven in that way. But that watershed is now taking steps to make sure we have a more equitable approach that really evaluates the drainage needs citywide. >> Yes, sir. And our strategic plan and how we prioritize projects in watershed is on our website. So you can go look at it and look at the formulas and all the information that we have [1:36:49 PM] all the information that we have in there for the localized flooding type projects. Historically, complaints was the driving factor that helped us identify where there was problem area. And then we do a deeper dive once we get there. But some of the other areas we use modeling for the creek flooding is a little bit easier to model where the water is going to go when it leaves the creek. And so we do have different ways of measuring those risks. And we are in the process. And council did approve a contract for us that we moved forward recently, where we're bringing in consultants to do more sophisticated two dimensional modeling so we can start identifying all the localized flood risk based on modeling techniques, not just complaints. So that's something we're actively working on, and we'll be providing more updates as we move through that process. >> Thank you very much. And that's it for the questions for you. Thank you director. So I just wanted to share just a couple thoughts on my mind. I mean obviously we have huge infrastructure needs in the city, including with drainage, and we need some major investments in the future. And I'm hoping this dais will support that next year. I also just want to focus on this idea of the equity with the drainage studies. I feel privileged that [1:37:49 PM] studies. I feel privileged that in district seven, brentwood, crestview is has benefited from this drainage study. But I don't want that to be, you know, a privilege over other areas of town. And so I want to make sure that we equitably do, you know, have these processes to make sure that all parts of the city are well understood. So I'm very much in favor of this overall effort. I very much support the work of watershed and all the engineers that are making these assurances for us. I think the status quo basically favors mcmansions over affordable sized homes. We want to incentivize building homes that working people Austin workers can afford. I am assured that there's still checks and balances in place to protect against lot to lot flooding. And I think we have this opportunity in our capital budget to make sure that we strengthen our drainage infrastructure in our bond program. So I will be voting yes. Thank you. Mayor. >> So councilmember Siegel recognizes the labor of love and brings puppy love to the to the vote. So yeah. Thank you. Council member. Appreciate that. Any any further discussion. And then I'm going to ask council [1:38:49 PM] then I'm going to ask council member Ellis to close when we finish discussion. So council member alter then council member vela. >> I just want to take a quick second to thank some of the staff who's in the room and some who are not. I know this has been a very long, drawn out process. Brant, I know you've had many conversations with many of our staff, as well as director morales and Jose, and I just appreciate the work you all are doing. And, you know, none of this is perfect. And we will certainly, probably revisit with you at another time about how we figure out some of the elements that maybe we want to see differently, but we can't overstate how much of it was getting here. And there is a dramatic change in some of the regulatory structure, just how we think about things to get here. And I appreciate your work ushering in that change. So just wanted to thank you very much. >> Councilmember vela. >> That's exactly what I wanted to do as well. This was honestly [1:39:50 PM] to do as well. This was honestly maybe the most difficult issue in terms of complexity and the moving parts that I've confronted. And on my time here. It's extremely complex. We would not have been able to get here without the support of staff. Brant Lloyd, Matt Holland, director morales, thank you all so much. And council staff too. And again, I got Sam Galvez, Julie Montgomery, Luis brinsmade, Timothy bray, Ben Leffler, crystal Weatherford been on a lot of calls with them, done a lot of work with them. We've been through this over and overgain. Just appreciate y'all's work in the background. And we got this to a good place and excited to see it finally get past the finish line. >> Thank you. Council member. Council member. Velasquez. >> Thank you mayor. So I wanted to also thank all of the folks that that jv1 just thanked our teams, councilmember vela and his staff, mayor Watson and their staff, councilmember alter [1:40:51 PM] their staff, councilmember alter and his staff, and of course, councilmember Ellis and her staff. And I would like to thank my team, Sam Gervais and Victoria hall, for all of their efforts on this and countless hours that have been poured into this. Our action here today is another step in the right direction to make it easier to build small units at a more affordable price point and make homeownership in Austin more accessible to more austinites. And I think that cannot be stressed enough. We're making it easier for people to buy more affordable homes. >> Thank you for that, council member Ellis, I'll recognize you to close on item number 37, as amended. >> I feel like saying I'd like to thank the academy. >> Yeah. >> There's a whole a whole bunch of good love and hard work that's been going on trying to get this initiative to the finish line. At this point in time. I hear I hear some of the concerns and comments that other folks have made. We obviously do have issues that we need to be looking at, like a future [1:41:51 PM] looking at, like a future incorporation into our bond package of doing drainage improvements. I know that council member Siegel had put that on the message board, but when I look at our impact on our community, I look at who gets to live here. I look at what has changed over the central Texas region over my 40 years of being in this area and realizing that we can't just focus on ourselves, we have to look at the impacts that our policies have on people upstream, downstream, south along I-35, you know, all all of those different angles that our region is having to work together and to try to understand how can we be stronger as a region, how can we do better and not outpricing people from our community? So they have to move further and further out and then have these really long hour long commutes each direction. That's really hard on families. And when I look at certain policies that say, you can have a really big house or duplex, but someone can't put a five plex with that same amount of impervious cover. That's the problem I'm trying to [1:42:52 PM] That's the problem I'm trying to solve for, and I think we're getting to a really good place, and I want to see how this information comes back to us as a die is to be able to evaluate how useful are these initiatives, who is using them, or are there any blind spots that we need to be aware of? So these are some of the complex questions that we've all been struggling with over a couple of years to get to this point, but I'm really proud of the work that we've done. I thinke've landed in a fantastic place, and on to the next project where we can help our community even more. >> Thank you. Council member members. The vote is to approve item number 37, as amended. Without objection. Item 37 is as amended is adopted, with council member duchen being shown voting no. Everybody good with that? All right. It is. It is adopted with council member duchen being shown voting. No thank you. We've said it. Several of us have said it, but it deserves repeating and being reiterated. We really deeply appreciate all ee appreciate all the hard work [1:43:52 PM] ee appreciate all the hard work of our professional staff and the staffs of the council. But thank you very much. With that being said, members, the next item on our agenda is a time certain of 2:00. So without objection, we will be in recess until 2:00 pm. Without objection, we are in recess at it's 2:00 on March 6th, 2025. [2:00:56 PM] it's 2:00 on March 6th, 2025. I'll call back to order. The Austin city council members. The next item on our agenda is our 2:00 time certain which are the zoning items? The chair recognizes miss Hardin to talk to us about those items. >> Thank you, mayor and council. I'm joy Hardin with the planning department. Your zoning agenda begins with item number 38. Npa 2024 0008.02. This item is offered as an applicant. Postponement to your April 10th council meeting. The related rezoning is item number 39 c1 for 2024 0107. Again, this item is offered as an applicant. Postponement to your April 10th council meeting. Item number 40 is c1 for H 2024 0162. This will be a discussion item. Item 41 is c1 four. H 2024 0171. This item is offered for consent on all three readings. Item 42 is c1 four 2024 0118.8. This item is [2:01:58 PM] four 2024 0118.8. This item is offered consent on all three readings. Item 43 is c1 four 2024 0173. This is a city initiated item. On September 12th, 2024, council passed a resolution requesting that staff formulate a rezoning classification for this property. The zoning and planning commission recommended no neighborhood office. The staff recommendation was geo general office. Staff is prepared to present this item for the geo zoning classification. For first reading only. Item 44 is npa 2024 0005.01. This item is offered as an applicant postponement request to your March 27th council meeting. The related rezoning is item 45 c1 for 2024 0099. Again, this item is offered as an applicant postponement request to your March 27th council meeting. Item 46 is c1 for 2024 0164. This item is offered for consent [2:02:58 PM] item is offered for consent second reading only, and this item will be returning for third reading consideration at your March 27th council meeting. And this concludes the reading ofthe zoning and npa agenda. And as alway this is at your discretion. >> Members, any questions to miss Hardin at this point? All right. Members, the chair will recognize a motion to approve the consent agenda, which will be items 38 and 39, postponement to April 10th, 41 and 42. All three readings 43. First reading only 44 and 45. Postponement to March 27th and 46. Second reading. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda as read? Councilmember qadri moves approval. It is seconded by council member Ellis. Members. I'll now look to the clerk to see if there's anyone signed up on the consent agenda. >> Thank you. Mayor. First speaker is on item 45. Speaking on the merits of the postponement, Susana Almanza. [2:04:00 PM] postponement, Susana Almanza. Next speaker, is speaking on item 46. Zenobia Joseph. >> Thank you. Mayor. Council. I'm Zenobia Joseph. Item 46 is asking for a liquor sales on north Lamar. It mentions the equitable transit oriented development. It mentions Masterson station and chinatown. I just want to call to your attention, mayor, the language on page four of the staff report is false as it relates to project connect being the extension of the rail project. And so I would remind you that fraud is trying to get something of value through willful misrepresentation. That's the GAO definition from 2017. Government accountability office. Specifically. I would [2:05:01 PM] office. Specifically. I would ask when you read this on the third reading, that you recognize that the staff needs to update that report and make it accurate. We don't even have sidewalks there. Mayor, I just want you to remember that in 2009, the city of Austin, your transportation department, housing department, the police, as well as capital metro and Texas department of transportation met for 20 months to actually analyze the pedestrian access on north Lamar. It's been that way for decades. And so I would ask you to recognize that while I certainly don't have a vested interest in the liquor being sold there. The staff report actually justifies putting the liquor sales there because it's compatible with the commercial real estate in that area. So in other words, it's depressed. And sore just going to keep depressing the people who live there. There needs to be an infusion of something positive in that area in that corridor. And so I would ask you to recognize the sidewalks are not [2:06:01 PM] recognize the sidewalks are not Ada compliant. I've talked to your assistant city manager, Stephanie hayden-howard, about the lack of transportation, the lack of sidewalks all the way to Parmer Laine. And specifically in this area you cannot get from chinatown to baker if you're in a wheelchair, walker or cane if you're a female or a male, if you have a baby in a stroller because it's just a trail that's there. So when you read it on the third reading, I can bring pictures. If you have any questions, I'll gladly answer them. Thank you. >> Mayor, that concludes all the speakers members. >> Those are all the speakers on the consent agenda as it's been proposed. Discussion with regard to the consent agenda, is there anyone wishing to abstain from an item on the consent agenda? Anyone wishing to show themselves recusing themselves from one of the items on the consent agenda. Anyone wishing to be shown voting no on an item on the consent agenda. Without objection, the consent agenda is adopted. That will now take us [2:07:02 PM] adopted. That will now take us to item number 40. >> Thank you. Mayor and council Colin Contreras, planning department for this case. Just so you all know, I will be representing both staff and the applicant, who in this case is the historic landmark commission. Item 40 C 14 H 2024 0162 is an owner opposed historic zoning case initiated by the commission after their review of a relocation permit at 7304 Knox Laine. Known historically as running rope ranch. The commission found that a portion of the property met the landmark designation criteria outlined in ldc section 20 523 52 for historical associations, archeology, landscape features, and community value. Their recommendation is shown on the map. That does. Let me put the map up for y'all. If y'all get a map up there in a second. [2:08:06 PM] map up there in a second. Development is already limited in this wetland area by environmental regulations, but the hlc intends to provide explicit protection for the archeological landscape features that surround the site's natural springs. The rationale behind the two types of regulations is different as they protect different elements. Should environmental regulations change, H, zoning will still protect the property's historic resources. The staff recommendation is similar, which will be shown in red in the map. Here we go. Except it excludes space for a drainage area and detention pond as requested by the applicant. The property was identified as an archeological site back in 1969 by the university of Texas, so staff verified with the Texas historical commission that the identified native American middens and other settlement features were still within the staff recommended area. The Texas historical commission does not release the exact locations of identified archeological resources to prevent vandalism, but we know they are within that general area of the red staff recommendation because this site [2:09:08 PM] recommendation because this site is not designated as a state archeological landmark, no legal protections for archeological findings therein are afforded by the state. Finally, both staff and the hlc support the applicant's proposal to move the intact historic buildings, a log cabin and a tack barn from outside the H zone area to within its boundary. That concludes the staff presentation. I am available for questions if y'all have any. >> Members. Questions. Council member duchen. >> Thanks for your work on this. Can you help me understand what a midden is? And we are not talking about middens, right? >> Yes. Council member. A midden is basically a collection of discarded or accumulated items that show evidence of past human habitation. So it can be old building materials, shells,broken pots, bones, and basically what's left behind after folks have lived in an area for a while. [2:10:08 PM] area for a while. >> And how valuable are they from an archeological perspective? >> So I am not an archeologist. So, you know, please take this with a grain of salt. But they are basically all that remains in some cases to show us what happened on a site and that there were even people there to begin with. And in this case, it is a native American midden, specifically around the area of the springs that the Texas or the Texas historical commission let us know we're on this site somewhere. >> And in your experience thus far, how unusual is it to have a property like this that has not one, but two middens on it? >> Gosh, council member, this is the this is certainly the first case that I have had with any middens at all. And I do not remember any in the last ten years that I've worked with the historic preservation office that has had this level of archeological findings that were known. >> And last question, have you [2:11:09 PM] >> And last question, have you seen any what I would call written evidence that would contradict the archeological findings that you've seen? The hlc has seen that there was, I think, a professor from UT, doctor Mok, that produced have you seen any other written evidence that would suggest that there's an alternative interpretation of what's going on with this site? >> I have not. However, the initial university of Texas survey of the site was very preliminary. It was allowed as a courtesy from the property owner at that time back in 1969. And as far as we could tell, and as far as the Texas historical commission was able to let us know, there was not further research done on that site by the university at that time. >> Got it. Thank you so much. Thank you. >> Other questions at this point? Yes. Council member harper- madison. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I actually have a brief question for I was going to say for the applicant, but you already told us you're doing both. So I am [2:12:10 PM] us you're doing both. So I am curious about, given that archeological relevance, one of the things that and I want you to correct me if I'm wrong. One of the things that I was under the impression of is that the applicant is open to further assessment from an archeological perspective, I'm just curious what happens. So if this, then what? So if we continue to conduct those shovel tests, if we find something, I guess I don't know enough about what are the parameters for the historic relevance of what we find. And then we do what. >>. Council member. So this is a really it's a complicated case. And there are two kind of considerations here. So first in talks with the applicant or with the property owner I guess I'm the applicant, the property owner agreed to shovel tests on this whole tract. Only if the historic landmark commission did not initiate historic zoning. So [2:13:11 PM] not initiate historic zoning. So they will continue to do shovel tests only if there is not H zoning on this site. >> Understood. >> However, there is no requirement by the state for notification or anything like that. If they were to find anything, it's the property owners purview. It is their responsibility to manage whatever they find in their land however they want. >> And that's state law. >> That is state law. And I have a quote here from their the thc publication of property owners guide to archeological sites that says by law, archeological sites and the artifacts within them are the personal property of the landowner. Their presence does nothing to limit the property rights of landowners. So it's a lot to consider. >> Thank you, I appreciate that. >> Certainly. >> Thank you. Members. The way the unless anybody has. Okay. Council member vela. Thank you. [2:14:13 PM] Council member vela. Thank you. I'm just curious what the. >> Historic designation is. Not for the structures. We're not talking about the structures here, are we? >> So there are three structures on the lot that have come into play during this case. Council member. The first is the house that the Knox family originally used. But through gosh, over a year of historic landmark commission interaction and a very well known architectural historian and preservationist that was contracted by the property owner. We discovered that that house no longer had the integrity that it took to be a historic landmark. However, she did find two other buildings on the site. One is a historic tack barn that was part of the ranch that was there from the 40s onwards, and the other is a much older log cabin that I don't think they had an exact date for, but it was probably there from the original. I think German American settlers of the [2:15:15 PM] German American settlers of the area and spicewood springs. And the property owner has agreed to take those two historically intact buildings and move them off of the site where they plan to build a subdivision. And staff and the hlc support the applicant's proposal to move those buildings to where they can be safe. And if the area in the red, as shown on the map were to be zoned historic, they are completely fine and staff is in agreement with them moving those buildings onto that H zoned part of the lot. >> Okay. So they're going to keep those buildings on the property as kind of part of the display kind of part of the development F for lack of a better word. >> I think so, yes. >> Council member. Okay. And the springs that. >> Hang on a second. >> Okay. Oh sorry. Joy harden again. They'll keep the structures only if they don't get the H zoning. >> Okay. >> Yes. Okay. >> And the and I know we've [2:16:16 PM] >> And the and I know we've talked about it as, like the tail end of the property because there's kind of a long, narrow portion of the property. Is that the environmentally sensitive portion of the property with the springs and the archeological. Archeological value? >> That is, that's part of it. >> Okay. Is that because, I mean, again, I'm just looking at it on the map. It looks like it's covered in heritage trees, and it's also, you know, extremely kind of a narrow portion going, is that developable at all? >> So I can't speak to that with utmost knowledge because I am not a tree expert, but council member, I do know that it is protected. The environmental elements of the property are protected by what's already there, but the historic resources are kind of a fringe benefit of that, and not explicitly. >> But the historical resources are in the environment. I mean, we're not we're talking about. [2:17:17 PM] we're not we're talking about. >> Not yet. >> I don't understand. >> If the applicant were to be able to move them, then they they could be in that area. >> All right. Could we ask the applicant? >> Yeah. I was going to try to lay out a process, but y'all started asking questions. >> Thank you. >> Mayor. I was thinking it would only just be 1 or 2, but here's here's the situation, the way we typically do this would be we would allow for the applicant to give five minutes. The applicant's represented by the person in front of you. So if you're asking can we do that. That's how that was set up. Then we typically have five minutes from someone representing opposition. And then we hear from speakers. We didn't have anyone sign up to represent opposition, and we don't have any speakers that are signed up as my understanding. We have one speaker for or against. >> For. [2:18:19 PM] >> For. >> Okay. So typically what I would do at this point is go ahead. And because we don't have anyone signed up to be the representative in opposition, I would I would allow for you to ask questions of the person that's in opposition. And in this case, it might be actually the representative of the applicant. So you might get what it is that you're after. But I want to hear because I want to follow some process here. I would like to go to the speaker that has signed up in favor. Take care of the speakers. But we do have two people that have indicated they want to questions. So I'll ask council member Siegel and Laine. Do you want to wait till we finish that process? And then we can have a ee for all regarding questions of these folks. >> Thank you mayor. Yeah, my comments are more discussion than questions. >> Very good. >> I was just hoping to restate my understanding of the situation. >> Okay. Well, let's let's let's hear the speakers as they've signed up, and then I'll recognize you after that. All [2:19:20 PM] recognize you after that. All right. Will you please call the speakers? >> Yes, mayor. We have one speaker signed up. Noah. Elias. >> You'll have two minutes. >> Thank you. All right. Good afternoon, city council. Mayor, I'm Noah Elias. I'm here to speak in favor of item 40 to designate part of the running rope ranch property as historical landmark. Due to the archeological resources. The running rope ranch property has evidence of springs that may may have been used by original indigenous inhabitants of the area and later by anglo settlers and their descendants. I'm asking you to vote in favor of the staff recommendation, and also to make sure that if there are any artifacts that are found at this site, that they are returned to the people that they belong to. The significance of springs to our indigenous communities go beyond just their use as a source of fresh drinking water. Indigenous peoples of central Texas [2:20:21 PM] peoples of central Texas consider these springs as sacred, a sacred place, a place of deeply connected to identity. Springs were a place of spiritual ceremonies and a place of healing practices. I would also like to add that there are other numerous culturally significant sites in Austin that should also be considered historically significant for their archeological resources. A lot of these sites are in east Austin, and as the history of this city has shown us, these sites have had very few protections. East Austin has many creeks like boggy creek, country club creek, walnut creek that are being affected by development. East Austin also has springs that are hold cultural significance, such as oak springs. My community of montopolis also has springs around the Roig Guerrero park, some of which have already been damaged by developers. If you look at a case from a while back of 600 Kemp street in montopolis, you can see that they damaged some of the springs above the circle acres nature [2:21:21 PM] above the circle acres nature preserve. So we know the importance of water. We know that water is life. And I ask you to support this item and take the steps to protect other similar sites, especially in our east Austin community. Thank you. >> Thank you sir. All right, members, that concludes all the people that have signed up to speak on this item. So effectively. That puts us in the position of council, being able to ask questions if it would like to ask questions. And because I want us to be able to get to the decision that the council wants to get, even if it's someone that didn't sign up to speak. But they can answer your questions. I'm going to allow that and feel like I'm bending, bending, bending. But I won't break. Council member vela you said you had a question, so let me ask who you might want to talk to. >> If I could talk to a representative of the property [2:22:22 PM] representative of the property owner. >> Okay. Is there somebody here that could do that? Would you please identify yourself for the record? >> Hello, mayor and council, I'm Leah bojo with a group here on behalf of the applicant. I appreciate your question very much. So this. I'm sorry. You should go ahead. >> Well, just what? Just for context. What are the plans with this piece of property? How did we get here? >> Absolutely. So this has been going on for a very long time. I'm going to try to keep it quick out of respect for your time. So as you know, it's a long, long, thin property with sort of a bubble at the end. There is a subdivision planned for the bigger round part toward the western side of the property. The long what I've been calling the tail or the flagpole or whatever is where all of these environmental features are located. There's a spring, there's several critical environmental features with setbacks. There's water that goes through the spring. There are critical water quality setbacks. There's that entire sort of tail part. Thank you. Is completely undevelopable because of the environmental features [2:23:24 PM] of the environmental features that are there and the protections that are in place for them. This started off as, as a before I was involved as a case considering historic for the entire site. We had Donna Carter on our team came with us to hlc, was able. She was actually surprised herself when she went out there to find that the house was not historic. And ly what it came down to is, as miss Contreras mentioned, these two outbuildings that are currently on the big part, but that are actually the only part that sort of has some historic significance. And then the spring primarily where there could there there was likely some native American activity way back, which was found in that registered site with the state. What we are requesting is, you know, so, so sorry, let me back up. So, you know, initially it was the whole site. Then it kind of came in a little bit. Then we talked about this is where our water quality pond is going to be. And it came in a little bit more. And we talked with watershed about repairing the spring. I have a picture if you'd like to see it. I think Mr. Elias mentioned it's been closed in. So what we what we [2:24:24 PM] closed in. So what we what we really want to do and need to do with the site is we want to repair the environmental features, bring the spring back to a functioning feature. Right now it's got cement around it. So it's like a mosquito haven. We have support from watershed to do that. We want to keep the site environmentally, responsibly sustainable, and we also want to make a series of commitments toward the historic significance, which would be relocating those those two outbuildings to that part of the of the site, providing a historical marker to tell the story. Both of the of the indigenous peoples history on the land, as well as the Knox family and the camp, which was the original thing that kind of started this process. We want to make a path through that area so that residents can get down to Knox Laine, or from Knox Laine to chimney corners, going past these items with sort of a narrative telling this entire rich history of the site. And specifically, we've agreed to do shovel tests on the whole site, which is not something that's required by either historic zoning or by the state registry. Those are things that we have we have agreed to make, agreed to [2:25:24 PM] have agreed to make, agreed to commit to if we don't have the historic overlay. And the reason we don't want the historic overlay is because we have already found several conflicts, which staff has worked with us on, even at this preliminary stage, where environmental regulations and historic regulations are going to conflict. And so, so far, when we've brought these up, staff has sort of made allowances for them, the historic staff, which we appreciate, but we are inevitably going to find more of them and it will be too late because the site will be zoned and we're going to be putting these two things against each other. So we feel like we are both honoring the environmental and the historic nature of the site by this, these commitments and not the actually the historic zoning at all. Thank you. >> Do you remember your question? >> Sorry. >> Is the once developed once the especially the tail portion? Yes. Will that continue to be private property? Will the public have access to that? >> No, it's private property. >> It's going to. So it would continue to be private property. It does go all the way to the property touches. That was that chimney corners. Is that is that correct? That's correct. And [2:26:26 PM] correct? That's correct. And what are the environmental protections that are currently in place? I know they've been mentioned, but I'm not sure WHA they are. >> Sure. So any any body of water that's considered a critical water quality water feature with a certain amount of acreage of water that flows through it, is subject to environmental setbacks this, this spring, and this area is subject to those so critical water quality zone setbacks and cover the entire. You can kind of see it on the survey actually that gray part is all overlays. And then also each of the cefs the primary one is the spring, but there are a couple of other small ones each have a 50 to 150 foot setback from them. So that whole tail is covered in multiple environmental regulations. >> And then one more. I don't think I've seen a case that is a historic case that doesn't involve a structure. And I'm just I don't really understand what that means. What how does that work? >> I mean, it's just it's a zoning overlay. So, you know, what historic zoning does, I [2:27:27 PM] what historic zoning does, I would say, and maybe you can explain this better, but it kind of freezes usually a structure. So it would have the same effect on this part of the property. It kind of freezes it. >> Miss Contreras. >> Yes. Council member. So this is definitely an atypical historic zoning case. We very seldom use the criterion for archeology. And, you know, typically we have a structure that requires routine maintenance. If people want to make changes, they require a certificate of appropriateness, which is an application to our office for review against the historic design standards. So that would apply here. But our historic design standards are mostly geared toward structures. And there are sort of three that would apply to this site. One is if they wanted to do any major grading or filling or excavation, excluding changes to drainage, they would need to apply with the historic preservation office for [2:28:27 PM] preservation office for certificate of appropriateness. They would need to retain any permanent landscape features that define the property's character. So the springs, you know, any of the middens that were identified and they would need to avoid painting or covering masonry or site walls, which I'm not sure if there are any left on this property from the historic period, but we could assess that, you know, if they wanted to do work on those. So those are the three things that would immediately trigger a certificate of appropriateness from our office. And if they were to do work, they would apply for that. You know, at the same time, they were applying for other work permits from development services. >> And just to confirm a historic landmark commission, what was the vote to designate this? Was it unanimous? >> Yes, sir. It was. >> And then zoning and planning heard it. And if I'm looking at this correctly, it was 3.7 to 1 against the historic. >> Yes. So we had no recommendation from the zoning [2:29:28 PM] recommendation from the zoning and planning. Three in favor, seven against and then one abstained. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Other questions. Council has other questions. Okay. Do you consider you're entitled to rebuttal as the. You done. No, no, I'm sorry I wasn't talking to you. All right. With with there being no further questions, I'm going to get a motion. I want to ask for a motion. Get a motion on this item, and then I'll open it up for discussion. Council member Siegel. >> I moved to approve historic landmarks. Sorry, I moved to approve the application. >> All right. Council member Siegel moves approval of the application. It's seconded by council member duchen. Discussion. Here's the here's the order I'm going to go. Based [2:30:28 PM] the order I'm going to go. Based on what happened a minute ago, I'm going to go Siegel Laine Ellis. And if you want to speak, hit your light. Okay. Siegel Laine and Ellis then followed by duchen. >> Thank you mayor. And I just want to thank staff for identifying and working to protect this archeological resource and the heritage of indigenous peoples in the Austin area, and also to the community members. If you look at the backup, a lot of folks spoke up to protect these resources. After I saw this file, I reached out to university of Texas experts, including from the native American and indigenous studies department, as well as the Texas archeological resource research laboratory. I asked them to attend with late notice. They're not able to be here today, but they could attend on a second or third reading to help supplement the record and show how important this site is. But I just want to highlight the staff report at pages 2 to 3, which documents the archeological features, including preliminary research by the university of Texas. Indicates a high probability of [2:31:29 PM] Indicates a high probability of significant archeological data, including evidence of middens and springs purported to be used by native American residents of the land. And I just want to offer a slight correction to this concept of the middens. I found a really good article that basically has this one sentence long thought to be quote, quote unquote, Indian dumps by local residents and early archeologists. Recent work demonstrates that these sites middens are a rich archive of past lifeways and environments, and a cultural touchstone for the region's indigenous inhabitants. The staff report also notes that the property has served human inhabitants of the spicewood springs area for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Many communities from the area's original native American inhabitants to the children served by the day camp there in the mid 20th century, have valued this site for its natural springs. I would just remark that I think it's pretty rare that we have an opportunity to protect indigenous archeological resources here in Austin, and I hope we take advantage of this opportunity. I hope we can protect this resource through landmark status. I'd also like [2:32:30 PM] landmark status. I'd also like to explore, and this gets at one of the questions of one of my colleagues, how we can do more than just regulate the use of this property, but also make sure there is additional infrastructure to protect and even restore the archeological resources on an ongoing basis. So I would vote in favor. >> Thank you. Councilmember Siegel council member Laine followed by Ellis and duchen. Okay. Council member Ellis, followed by council member duchen and council member vela. >> Thank you mayor. I appreciate the questions and answers that we were able to get from our city representatives, as well as the property owner. I struggle with this one because I am also understanding what it means to designate something as historic, when we have always used those for specific, like home structures or other structures that have certain design styles. And obviously that's not necessarily the case here. I also know when you're dealing with environmental issues and historic issues and water issues, there's a lot of other regulations that help protect [2:33:32 PM] regulations that help protect streams, salamanders, other endangered species, the critical environmental features that were referenced earlier. And so I know that there are some rules that already apply. Another one is tree heritage or heritage tree ordinance. So I know that we do have those robust environmental protections already in place. Some of them also qualify for state or federal protection depending on the issue. Learning that private property owners don't necessarily have to follow the same level of regulation that, for instance, if you have a highway expansion in an area that used to be an old ranch, you they do have an onus on them to make sure that they do that environmental, the archeological assessments and that there further documenting everything and handling it appropriately for the state or federal level of entities that are utilizing that space. So I struggle with this because I get that we all want to preserve the natural elements and the historic [2:34:33 PM] elements and the historic cultural elements that are already there, but I'm just not sure that the level of what a historic designation at the city level would actually do to help us reach that end goal, other than having those conversations with the property owner, and they've already said, we will abide by these things, we Wil work with you collaboratively on these things to reach the same goal. So that's where I struggle with this. I typically haven't supported a zoning against the property owner's wishes. For a lot of these reasons. I'm going to stick with that vote today, but appreciate this very interesting line of questions that that we were all able to participate in. >> Thank you. Council member. Council member duchen, then council member, Zavala and harper-madison. >> I just want to add a couple of points on this. One is while I am grateful that the developer or owner is eager to help out, I do worry that in the event that this land is sold to somebody [2:35:35 PM] this land is sold to somebody else, or some other circumstance happens where they are no longer the people maintaining it, that the. It seems to me that a historic designation would be a way to make sure that this is protected in perpetuity, rather than an agreement with the single party. So that's one reason that I feel like this would be an improvement over the status quo or the alternative. The other thing I want to just add is, and I was trying to get to this, and I'm glad my colleague, council member Siegel touched on it. But these middens, from what I can gather, are pretty rare. There are, from what I can tell, and I think this is corroborated. I inadvertently hired somebody that was a an archeological bachelor's degree, and I've got also people in the neighborhood that are now what, I guess, volunteer archeologists as a result of this case. But what it seems to me is that these middens are kind of like treasure troves for archeologists. They're the even [2:36:36 PM] archeologists. They're the even though they are, as my colleague pointed out, prior trash dumps, they are how we understand what people, you know, basically all the rich history that the people had when actually occupying in a day to day basis. So to have two of them, an opportunity to preserve them seems like, seems like a rare opportunity for the city this council. And then I think the last point really is, you know, there's this is something that has, from what I can tell, pretty broad community support. If you all looked at the backup, there was a lot of people supporting this. And my hope is that this is a way for us to preserve what's a again, I've been here all of two months, but from what Kellen said earlier, that this is a fairly rare circumstance. So I see it as an opportunity for us to engage. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Councilmember vela followed by council member harper-madison. >> Thank you, mayor. This is a [2:37:38 PM] >> Thank you, mayor. This is a very interesting case. A lot of different elements kind of coming together here. I will say I still don't really understand what the historical designation is going to do, how it will interact with the environmental regulations that are already in place, absent a deeper understanding, absent more information, I'm going to abstain, just again, based on my not understanding how what exactly the historical designation would mean. >> Councilmember harper-madison. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And, you know, I could say ditto to both of my colleagues, both council member Ellis, who I think she and I have a general position about not voting in favor of designation against the owner's designation, against the owner's wishes. In fact, just earlier today, I was penning a [2:38:39 PM] earlier today, I was penning a letter to a constituent asking me a question about a zoning case in east Austin and why I supported it against or why I didn't rather support it against the owner's wishes. And just generally speaking, I like to be consistent with policy. But also I frankly very much believe in property owners rights. That said, this one for me, much like council member vela, is a little trickier than that. It's not simple as the owner doesn't want it zoned historic, and then some other entity wants it zoned historic. Here there are the implications of the archeological component, which I haven't had to consider yet. So, Kellen, thank you for pointing out that in your ten years here that you hadn't seen this either, because it's not one that I've had to consider. So originally I was going to be a no vote on this one, just in accordance with my prior history with H cases. But with this one I'm going to abstain. But I do subsequently have some questions around. I always find myself [2:39:40 PM] around. I always find myself scratching my head. So if this were if there was some acknowledgment about the historic relevance in 1969, why are we back at determining H designation in 2025? I don't understand that. And so it's things like that where although I'm a I'm an abstention here, I still would like to see how we get better by these complicated votes, because something clearly is not right in terms of how the system works, what gets engaged, what triggers get alarmed if we can find ourselves in this position? And that said, just for a more comprehensive conversation moving forward, you know, in the six years of determining H or no H, I still find myself wondering if we have compiled all these lists of historically relevant assets I the city. Why don't we preemptively designate H before we let somebody privately purchase the property? And I [2:40:40 PM] purchase the property? And I want to say let it makes it sound like the city owns it and we're selling it. I recognize that that's not the case. I just don't understand why we always get to here. I don't understand why there's not more in the way of preemption for determining which properties are historic. I personally wouldn't appreciate purchasing a piece of property that I had ideas and plans for, and then being told later that that's not going to come to fruition. It would feel to me as though the municipality failed to do their due diligence prior to me making the purchase. So I can certainly understand, I think everybody's position in the matter. So those are some of the rambling quandaries I have around how we keep finding ourselves here in the first place. If we have a comprehensive list of what'sconsidered historic. >> Thank you. Councilmember. Before any further discussion. What I'm going to point out is this is a motion to approve this on first reading only. And as a result of that, if with abstentions and no's, it has [2:41:43 PM] abstentions and no's, it has six. There's six abstentions or nos. It will die on first reading only. So I just I just point that out. If you if there are additional questions, we won't be able to ask those at a future date. So just I point that out. All those in favor of the motion to approve item number 40 on first reading only, raise your hand. All those opposed raise your hand. And then and then the are you voting okay? They're being they're being one, 2345 in favor. Those being [2:42:47 PM] 2345 in favor. Those being Velasquez mayor pro tem mayor duchen and Siegel there being three nos. That being alter Laine and Ellis, and there being three abstentions vela, qadri and harper-madison. The motion to approve it on first reading fails members there being no further business to come before the Austin city council at this regular called meeting of the city council. Without objection, we will be adjourned. It is 2:43 P.M. Thank you everybody. Thank you. Council. Austin.