Travis County Commissioners Court
January 2, 2007
Item 21
21. Receive staff briefing and legal advice regarding -- there is a supporting memo by the way that would be good to carry into executive session -- regarding city of Austin proposal to amend the balcones canyonlands conservation plan 10(a) permit, issued to the city of Austin and Travis County by the u.s. Fish and wildlife, concerning the construction of water treatment plant no. 4 on the cortaņa tract. This is posted ungd the consultation -- under the consultation with attorney exception. We will discuss this in executive session with legal counsel but will not take any action. We will return to court. Actually this item is not posted for action anyway. But we do need to decide probably whether to do anything in a subsequent meeting or not. Quickly we will discuss in open court, also. John neeley says yes, sir. All right. That's under the consultation with attorney exception to the open meetings act.
we have returned from executive session where we discussed only one item, number 21 regarding the bcp 10-a permit and a city of Austin request regarding the cortana tract. We did not post this item for action today. Any member of the court that wants it back on the agenda in the future can submit wording and we'll have it on. Any other comments today? Okay.
except for that one executive session item, I think that we have covered our Commissioners court agenda. Therefore I move that we recess --
>> one question.
>> [inaudible - no mic] the county attorney had -- had raised a concern whenever I came out that he wanted to make sure that the language that the staff had suggested on number 21 receive staff briefing and legal advice, that he wanted to make sure that it was clear that if there was going to be any staff briefing, that needed to happen out here in open court now and joe gieselman is available for you on that point. But whenever we took that in we were advising you under legal advice. So I'm giving you that opportunity now if you want any further staff briefing, I believe there was a staff memo that has been circulated, previous to today's meeting, but if you want any staff briefing now is the time to get it. If not, then --
>> for the --
>> perhaps legal.
>> the legal advice that I received was more than I wanted to hear.
>> yeah.
>> to the point and comprehensive. If there are additional comments that the -- that the staff would like to make -- john, we did get the six-page sort of backup memo from staff.
>> I realize that you had that. I didn't know if you had any questions off of that, if there was anything further that staff wanted to provide you. This is just the opportunity for that.
>> any time further? Anything further, staff?
>> nothing new to add. John kuhl environmental officer with Travis County. Just that we attended a meeting with the city of Austin staff and came away with the -- essentially the same conclusions as we reached in the past, that there are other feasible and prudent alternatives to the cortana site and that all reasonable plan to minimize harm resulting from the taking has not occurred. So our staff recommendation is we do not have enough
>> [indiscernible] finding under chapter 26.
>> what are the other reasonable and prudent feasible and prudent alternatives?
>> there are others including potentially the lucas tract that has smaller capacity, there are others along 620. The county gets down to how you interpret -- it kind of gets down to how you interpret prudent.
>> reasonable and prudent.
>> yes.
>> in what way did the mitigations not rise to an actual mitigation and the loss of mitigation.
>> the potential take would be 5 territories of black capped vireos of which we only know about 15 in the total preserve at this time. Our primary job to you, we feel, is to -- to preserve the sanctity of the permit itself. The permit is a development permit that allows western Travis County to be orderly developed while simultaneously preserving the endangered species there. We feel that the take of one third of the known population of the vireo would jeopardize it.
>> and the property that's been offered as the additional properties to dedicate to the balcones con canyon land preserve, in your opinion are they appropriate or possible for recreating or supplementing black capped jury I don't habitat? Would they be good black capped vireo habitat.
>> certainly not of the caliber, the birds have the best -- are the best choice, they are there, on edwards limestone. The little Barton Creek tract is glen rose limestone has little to no potential for having valuable habitat for the vireo.
>> okay.
>> so -- so in essence we have looked at this once before and I think in court -- the court did vote not to support the suggested site from the city as far as the cortana tract as far as what I'm hearing now that still appears to be what I'm hearing as far as not getting
>> [indiscernible] as far as what the city is recommending on the cortana tract.
>> our staff recommendation is essentially the same, Commissioners.
>> stays the same. I want to make sure that that is a point of record. Thanks.
>> thank you very much.
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, January 2, 2007 6:14 PM