Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, February 22, 2011,
Item 11
Number 11.
considering take appropriate action on the following amendment to chapter 82 to require notification --
>> this was pulled last week because of persons needing enough time to look at the additional attitude, amendments to the particular letter that we had the home builder's association to look at and who they basically had agreed.
and of course with start.
and of course, out of that one courtesy there may have been changes.
so I just would like to just hear what staff have to say as far as this is concerned.
>> okay.
>> anna bowen and steve miller, Travis County t.n.r.
the note that we read last week is the following note.
it's the Travis County consumer protection notice for home buyers.
if you were buying a lot or home you should determine whether or not it is inside or outside the city limits depending on state law and other factors plans outside the city limits may be subject to fewer local government controls over the development and use of the land than inside the city limits.
because of this local governments may not be able to restrict the nature or extent of development near the lot or the home nor prohibit nearby land uses that are income patible with a residential neighbor wood.
Travis County requires this notice to be placed on subdigs plats.
it is not a statement or representation of the owner of the property, the subdivider or their representatives.
the note will be placed on a cover sheet with new plats.
this is what was proposed last week.
>> okay.
>> judge fix may.
I would like to ask for another week because I have just received this draft right before court last week.
and it had changed in some substantive content from what staff originally proposed based upon what the home builders had proposed to have included or not included.
I feel personally that this is the one shot that we get at the county to let people really know and understand the impact of the lack of land use authority that we have in the county.
I personally would like to see what was in the proposed language that was taken out, put back in, the one phrase "this can affect the value of your property." I think that we need the strength of this language to send a signal.
I think without that the rest of this is just sort of a little weak in what we're trying to accomplish.
I would propose that we accept the language as offered but include back in that this can affect the value of your property.
>> let's look at that.
>> well, okay.
I have no problem with that particular language being added to this particular agenda item.
I think it has the same impact and again I'll accept that motion to -- I'm not trying to be the judge here.
but it is an item I wanted to make sure that came across and all could see, I have no problem with that particular addition to the original letter that we had here last week.
so if that is the amendment to the original letter, I can accept that.
but I still would like to make the motion of the overall letter after this particular portion has been added to the letter.
>> I'd like to say thank you for even putting this on the agenda early on.
it's a laudable effort.
and I respect whatever your end result is.
I just wanted to add this.
>> which I have no problem having it added to the version, the original version that we looked at last week.
there's no problem.
but I just want to make the motion for the amended portion, I separate motion I guess is the way you do it.
>> I'll withdraw my second so we can make this cleaner.
>> all right.
>> judge, I move that we accept Commissioner Hubert's entry?
that motion is seconded.
it's friendly.
so it can be friendly amenned.
>> I withdraw the motion so she can withdraw her second in order for him to make the motion.
>> anybody else on this side that would like to speak at this time?
>> okay.
we should have this language with the home builders?
>> yes, we have.
>> what did they say?
>> I prefer that they were here to speak for themselves on this, but I don't think that they were extremely comfortable with this line being added in.
>> okay.
so this means what?
>> is this your language?
>> this sentence?
>> "this can affect the value of your property." "this" refers to?
>> oh, just the nature of being in the county.
>> and not being inside of corporate limits with land use control.
>> so if you were going to put this in would you state it this way and would you put it after the first three paragraphs?
>> yes, it would be the fourth paragraph.
>> that's where that line goes?
>> that's where it goes.
>> speaking for the home builder or for yourself?
>> this is myself.
just kind of a comment as a landowner that I'm not objecting per se, I'm just saying I'd also add "either way" because I think it's wrong to em ply that value is somehow improved by having to submit to the city of Austin.
frankly sometimes not too advantageous rulings and stuff like that.
and so like I mentioned before but I'm very happy to live in a part of Travis County that does not have floured ated water.
and it's such a life and death issue.
and people just kind of blow it off.
it's poison they put in your water in the city of Austin.
so I'm real darn pleased not having to put up with that.
so again, the word "either way" or "neither way." it's not a definite add-on benefit to have to submit to the city of Austin draconian rules, in my opinion.
>> okay.
well, --
>> anybody else here on this item?
if so please come forward.
there's a motion to approve and a second and a friendly amendment to add the underlined sentence.
any more discussion on the motion?
Commissioner Davis?
>> no.
I think, judge, and I'd like to thank number one the staff, the home builders association who has worked hard with.
this and I would like to thank our county attorney, assistant coin attorney tom nichols who has worked diligently with us.
and I'll thank the court after we vote.
>> any more discussion on the motion?
all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you, court.
>> judge, we did have one --
>> that's a and b, right?
>> yes, that's a and b.
>> mr. --
>> there's an order associated with this that would need to be revised to reflect the new language.
could we get the court to allow you to sign off on that order?
>> get it to us later today, let the whole court sign it.
>> okay.
>> that way it will look more official.
>> yes, sir.
>> and a letter of notification needs to be sent to the city of Austin to get their consideration of including this language in title 30.
>> thank you all very much.
>> that's part of Commissioner Davis' motion.
>> yes.
>> and that's all right.
no objection to that being considered as part of the motion?
okay.
thanks.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, February, 2011 2:19 PM
