Travis County Commissioners Court
October 2, 2007
Item 18
Number 18 is to consider and take appropriate action on request to amend chapter 82 of the Travis County code regarding public notice of nonresidential subdivisions.
>> we were asked by Commissioner Davis to put together change to the subdivision rules that would provide more public notice to , subdivision, nonresidential, that were coming to the court for approval. The way this was drafted by staff, basically we require the applicant of nonresidential subdivisions to notify the home owner associations within the thousand feed of the proposed sub subdivision as well as the emergency service did it of jurisdiction, and there may be one or several of those, and also the fire marshal by certain might mail. This is merely a public notice, and it would not necessarily change the other standards by which staff would recommend approval to the Commissioners court. So, this is in part an outcome of the issue that we've had in recent weeks on adverse land uses that we've heard from our constituents that they did not want particular things located next to them. This would merely provide them information about such an occurrence. You still have the likelihood in some cases that these adverse uses would have met county standard, legally met county standards, and tnr would recommend their approval by the Commissioners court even though your constituents may not agree with the fact that those uses are being driven.
>> you're saying that a subdivision is a subdivision is a subdivision and if it meets state law it comments to us with your recommendation for approva.
>> that's right.
>> okay.
>> we have run this by the county attorney's office. I think they would advise us that this notice would really more appropriately be done countiwide and not just precinct 1. In terms of fiscal impact, we are recommending those notices be done by the applicant. We think the notice per se is fairly benign. Will you have one fire marshal, perhaps one or two e sd's notified and maybe a handful of neighborhood associations notified so that registered mail may amount to ten or fewer letters that have to go out. So that portion of it is not significant. What it will pect, --affect is the amount of time that a nonresidential application will take to move through our processing. And understand that we, even in subdivisions that are predominantly residential, there could be a nonresidential component. We get those pretty regularly where it's mainly residential but there's a parcel that is commercial use. They would be required to post notice before it goes on the court agenda.
>> are we able to quickly address the comments and questions raised before the tail end of ms. B olen's memo? Are we able to quickly address them or do you need more time?
>> I think we will still be getting comments from the capital area contractors and engineers. This was the first wave of comments that we received. So we can discuss these but I think there will be more comments to come.
>> are you suggesting that you wait and deal with all of them comprehensively?
>> I do think also that we need to publish notice in a newspaper of generally circulation before the court don'ts --adopts it. That is another requirement that has to be met.
>> some of these questions, for example, one of the questions in precinct 1, would this be why just precinct 1, as far as that series of questions, of course, it's not just precinct 1. It's as you stated, it is account---county-wide. I guess the requirement of the notice in the newspaper, is that basically an advertisement, per se, saying this is the rule that we will look at to amend chapter 82? So that is, I guess legally, that is the only requirement legally that it be posted as far as a notice is concerned?
>> that's right.
>> as far as advertising.
>> exactly.
>> okay. Like I say, a lot of the other questions, anyway, go ahead. I didn't mean to cut you off, joe.
>> I would add that that requirement would be to get any proposed rule change into chapter 82. In the event that it would be in other e tj's, like in Austin we have e t j. That is something we need to be mindful of as if he would more consolidated codes in the future of the like any other rules, if we want to see that incorporated in, we work towards that end when we negotiate the consolidated rate.
>> also a question, is it anything we can do, I guess legally, after the posting that we can move forward with that doesn't require title 30 involvement? In other words, I guess the 1445 stuff and where the city gets involved in the unincorporated area. That's what I'm talking about, that area has notice posted. And of course, the city of Austin, that's a whole other game there. It doesn't bother me because I think when we looked at this and the situation that happened on johnny morris road, that was actually a single office type situation, meaning that it came up under the auspices of h b 1845. That means the city did have to have some involvement. I think somewhere university here you a--you alluded to at some time city was strictly responsible for notification of residents in the neighborhoods and add adjacent areas. And if code has to be amended under the city of Austin, I don't know how long that process will take. But meantime, if we can, I'd like to move forward as far as what we can do without 1445 involvement, which is the city of Austin under title 30, to proceed, I guess, with the posting of the rule change. I'd like to proceed mthat direction. And then bring in the city whenever the necessary information is available to amend their code under title 30. That is basically what I'm talking about here. And I want to stagnate or stop the improvement of this waiting on another governmental entity per se until, you know, because I don't know how long that process will take. That is the dilemma but not something that we can't, I think move forward with.
>> so, joe, is what we have in your memo dated September 24 the exact language that you propose?
>> that is the language that we are proposing.
>> okay. So we believe that nonresidential land use, do we define that? Or we think it's so commonly used that everybody will know?
>> yeah.
>> that is my way of asking, I think you need to define that.
>> yes.
>> the other thing, the local emergency service district, when I think of exm six--e ms, 13 come to mind. You mean in the area?
>> yes, jurisdiction within a thousand feet.
>> is that set forth somewhere?
>> the esd of jurisdiction within a thousand feet of this site as well as a home owner association within a thousand feet would be required to be notice the.
>> that's in another place, that is not here I'm looking at your memo dated September 24.
>> right. It says Travis County fire marshal, local emergency service district, Travis County fire marshal and all neighborhood and homeowners within a thousand feet of the development.
>> all right. One thousand feet.
>> right.
>> where do we get a thousand feet from?
>> we have used similar distances in our solid waste ordinance. It was the opinion I think of the community that 300 feet, the notice provided by the city to the lenny subdivision was inadequate. We thought certainly any impact should be felt, the attenuation of the impact, certainly a thousand feet should capture it.
>> a thousand feet is roughly one p one fifth of a mile?
>> right.
>> if I were concerned because something was planned for my neighborhood and I wondered how far it was, I would get into my car and drive. I don't know that I would be able to figure out a thousand feet as the crow flies. I would drive one fifth or one fourth of a mile. And if I were--
>> do you want that translated into miles?
>> I'm trying to make it workable.
>> yeah.
>> because we are shifting this to the applicant, right?
>> that's right.
>> I don't think the applicant will have trouble. These an engineers making application. Whether a quarter mile or a thousand feet, I think it's more for the public.
>> homeowners associations in the urban area. This is unincorporated.
>> this is unincorporated. We have no jurisdiction in incorporated areas. It's only outside the city.
>> in the etj.
>> in the e the tj.
>> do most rural areas have homeowners associations.
>> some do.
>> some do, some don't.
>> normally inside the city, the city of Austin that is the list.
>> actually they have it outside the city as wellment they have it within their etj. They maintain the record and that would be the record we would use for notification purposes.
>> if an applicant asks are there any home owner associations we should be concerned about, we have a list we can hand them.
>> we'll hand them the city list. The city has a formal process for maintaining the list. We are not recommending the county start such a process. That would take some labor. The city has a roster and keeps it updated. We would use that list. It's our understanding that it covers both the extra territorial jurisdiction as well as the corporate.
>> notification letter, site location map. A plan of the budget, and the mailing list. What's the mailing list?
>> what homeowners associations that the mail will be sent to along with which esd, you know, there may be more than one, and the fire marshal.
>> if somebody doesn't have a homeowners association, then you mail them to everybody.
>> no.
>> you don't mail them to everybody within a thousand feet?
>> no.
>> that's not the responsibility?
>> that's one of the reasons why this is doable, because we are not notifying individual parcels or homeowners within that distance. If we went there, you're talking about a significant amount of staff time.
>> and money for somebody for registered letters.
>> right.
>> all right. We say by certified mail to the affected parties. We really mean to those identified in categories set forth.
>> that's correct.
>> don't we need to better define that?
>> that probably would be good to tighten that up, yes.
>> which one, judge?
>> affected parties.
>> affected parties, it would be fire marshal, esd.
>> neighborhood association, homeowners association, stuff like that.
>> well, the folks that appeared before us, are they all members of homeowners associations or have they been individual homeowners?
>> the folks that came here before?
>> the folks that came here before.
>> homeowners.
>> yes, ma'am.
>> so under they they are not going to get notified they are individual homeowners.
>> no, but the neighborhood associations were the once actually notified. The city has a notification list also. They also go to the neighborhood association of you remember during that course of discussion--
>> are we including neighborhood associations?
>> yes, yes. Directly.
>> okay.
>> yes.
>> we don't want to, the applicant to produce proof of notification. We want that proof to be filed with the county as part of the application process. A little difference there. What we are saying k we want to approve the development application , we won't aapprove the development application until that is on file. We are saying file it with us as part of your application process in that last sentence. I am not having fun wordsmithing this just a matter of habit.
>> precisely.
>> the recommendation is what? That we keep working on doing our part, that is what I hear you saying.
>> yes, judge, in fact, if the we can, go ahead.
>> we need to come back with slightly more precise language.
>> right.
>> and we immediate to advertise it as we would any other rule making by the county, allow some opportunity for public comment.
>> you want to do that after we tighten up the wording or do you want us to do it with what you see in this?
>> I would tighten up the wording because that way it looks like at least we have given it--
>> let us bring it back again next week with instructions to advertise in the newspaper and the option the first two weeks out.
>> would there have to be any language change because of the advent of, I guess this is part of the backup, as far as the ties the--advertisement, because the language remains the same, as far as legal?
>> we can have it as is.
>> joe mentioned the language rules.
>> I'm sensing the court wants us to bring back a tightened up wording for what gets circulated in the newspaper.
>> exactly.
>> and I'm presuming that we will bring that back next week and then circulate in the newspaper.
>> exactly. Okay.
>> after the circulation of the newspaper, then you have the concerned parties having the ability to get to the staff, to the table, the court and whatever to weigh in.
>> what we are circulating in the newspaper is the rule. And then once you adopt that in your rule, then the applicant from that point forward will be sending out the notices to the fire marshal and the homeowners associations. We will want that as part of the application before we submit it to the Commissioners court. By that time, the time you get a nonresidential subdivision, you will be assured that it not only meets Travis County guidelines for the subdivision, you will slow no these entities have been formally notified.
>> I'm concerned about making sure that all the parties, neighborhood folks, developers, whatever, that potentially have, will be impacted with this, that they will have the ability to sit down with you all, us, whoever wants to sit down this women, and say let's go with these questions 1 had-12 that we had to--1-12 that we had to determine how we are at least going to feel bit. I mean, that's what the ad will be. The ad will be, we are anticipating making a change in this.
>> I'm for making the change, Commissionerment I'm not anticipating. I'm for making the change, period.
>> I know you are.
>> what I har you saying, I hear you, but I hear the residents of all of Travis County also. What they are telling me is that they would like to be involved in a notification process. The city kind of failed, pointing to the city more than the county. But when we look at this, they come down here and testify before us, and we have an opportunity since title 30 and since we have to deal with hp 1445, then I think the county has a role in what we are doing also. So I'm basically for, you know, moving forward with this as quickly as we possible can and assure that the residence of Travis County have an opportunity to have notice.
>> I'm not in opposition to that at all, Commissioner.
>> okay, well--
>> I think that you, with what what you want, you would like to have some buy in on the way this is going to go down. I don't think any of us would say we don't want people to know what is going on.
>> no, no, no, no, no , I'm not saying that. I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm saying dur this process, an example, as you advertise in the newspaper, of course once that hits I think persons will have opportunity to come in and say hey, yea, no, I'm concerned about this, I'd like to bring this to the attention. I think during the posting of the agenda when this comes back, questions that want to weigh in will have a golden opportunity. That the all I'm saying.
>> and that, sorry, commissione.
>> the goal for me, we are going to educate the public on the business that we do and we are going to include citizens in this goal, then I think it also means we educate them regarding Travis County's lack of legal authority to require land use. And then also to educate them on knowing that the county needs to meet state law. And once it meets that state law then we are required to take action. What I don't want to do is give people the false hope that they are going to be able to stop, you know, certain things from going in. Because this is subdivision, and in the unincorporated area, everything is a subdivision and comes under certain laws that we have to follow regarding subdivisions and so, I don't want to create false hope in anyone's minds. I think there is a wonderful opportunity to educate the public about what, well, county government, but in this particular case, Travis County, and why we make decisions the way we do. We are not a city. We are not home rule city. And so, I think it's a wonderful opportunity to include the public and educate them on what county government does.
>> exactly.
>> but no, I don't want to give people any false hope whatsoever. I think that would be as frustrating and as madening to people if we did that.
>> and Commissioner, I want to just think, just trying to recall neighborhood night out, visiting several of the neighborhood associations out during that night. And this particular concern came up. Of course, we heard the testimony from the folks when we had to deal sunco, thinking as a service station instead of storage tanks. And meeting with neighborhood associations in those meetings, they felt the process could be improved upon as far as notification is concerned. Of course, working directly with the city, especially when you come to the single office type scenario under hb 1445 and also title 30, we e think kind of relied on the city to do sort things as far as note case is concerned, which they did do. But according to what, they are saying it wasn't sufficient. So what we are trying to do here what role can the county play in all of this. Well, this is what is on the table right now, is the role that the county can play as far as what people would like to see in Travis County as far as notification is concerned. And that is basically a notification.
>> we'll have it back on next week. Refine that language for us and we will proceed from therethank you all very much.
>> threat.
>> thank you all very much.
>> I think it would be a good yesterday to address those comments that we get. I am thinking it really can be simple. Some of these notices are sent out anyway to the fire mar shar. You will notify anyway in unincorporated areas. Will it help to come up with a form is this.
>> probably. We also have to come up with how to amend the current development applications to get the information that will be required to be in this notice.
>> I can hardly wait until next week. Thank you all very much.
>> thank you all.
>> we'll have it back on next week.
>> appreciate it.
>> if this language is fine we will have the same thing. If we need additional language we'll work on that too, okay.
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:
Wednesday, October 3, 2007, 18:30 AM