Travis County Commissioners Court
January 8, 2008
Item 18
18. Consider and take appropriate action on a total vacation of a subdivision named scenic point, phase 4, resubdivision of lot 14, block "k" of north point phase 1, section 2 recorded in document number 200200136, official public records. Commissioner Davis requested no action be taken. But we lay this out and discuss it.
>> yes, judge and court and members of the public, as you know we have tried to address as much as possible the -- the advent of a lot of issues that are taking place out on -- on johnny morris road, this particular location, that the scenic point subdivision, which is a phase 4 subdivision, of that subdivision, of course, has -- has a -- a requesting that we vacate this phase 4 and allow for other activity other than residential to be -- to be permitted there. I did -- rick vaughan had called, who is overseeing it, he basically had talked with me and told me a few things and of course I think that he needs to come to court and lay out a few things. But I知 requesting that we delay any action on this, number one, because I think the neighborhoods need to be involved with this, this city point and another concern that is also brought up, since this is under a title 30, type of situation, where we have a single law office in with the city of Austin, it's almost as if it's -- as if it's following some of the same procedural type of -- of -- I don't know if they were oversights or whatever. Whereby the neighborhoods are saying they are not notified by the city of Austin and of course the persons were not able to respond. I just think that we need to allow for the neighborhoods to have interaction on any request, especially if you are taking a phase of a subdivision that was scheduled for residential use and then you want to change that use within the neighborhood. I guess there would be notification. I would like to ask staff first of all, do we know who was notified with this particular change that's being requested by the applicant as far as the residents in their community is concerned? Do we know if there were a notification made by the city of Austin? If so, who were they or who are they?
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic] as you mentioned earlier, this application is subject to title 30 where notification is not required. So to answer your question --
>> required by who.
>> by according to title 30, there's no notification --
>> by whom, though. The county.
>> this is a joint code, to answer your question, that would be county and city.
>>
>> the onerous process that we went through dealing with the -- with the sun coast settings, the same similar situation, as far as notification within a certain number of footage, stuff like that, would change -- was not properly handled. If -- as far as we could understand as far as notice is concerned. Now, I -- I really have some concerns about this, number one, is because my name is attached to this particular item. As if I知 sponsoring it. I had no knowledge of this item coming up before the Commissioners court. Number 2 is that if this is the case of notification, if there is no subjectivity, as far as I知 saying as far as folks to be notified, then it always has been encompassed on my office, on my office, position, to notify folk when something is going down in their neighborhood. We have no opportunity to allow that to happen. Of course, number 3 is that the Commissioners court has the discretionary authority to grant a vacation or not to grant a vacation. Now, those are the three things that I think need to be laid out as far as this particular subdivision is concerned. With basically residential. To vacate that residential use. So I just want to make sure that we have persons in the community to notify, be notified where they could have adequate input in this process. It's very, very, very imperative to me and the residents over there that this is done. Another point is that this particular activity, the change is about 500 feet from -- from gus garcia's middle school. About 2500 feet from barbara jordan elementary school. Of course there are several subdivisions that's proposed to come on line. I think there's several opportunities that have not been afforded in the community to participate and talk with the applicants, see what the deal is, see what's going on and have a say in this process. Again, to support or not to support a vacation. So that's -- that's the direction that I知 -- that I would like to go in and -- and hear from the applicant whenever they would like to discuss about it. I told the applicant the same thing that I知 telling y'all basically.
>> let's hear from staff.
>> okay.
>> it is a fairly legally complex subdivision issue.
>> discuss with couple in executive session?
>> absolutely. I am sure the county attorney would want to do that.
>> let me ask you one thing. When I see Commissioner Davis' name on an item like this one, I知 assuming that he's sponsoring it. Are you basically just giving the Commissioner of that precinct the item -- you see what I知 saying.
>> administratively complete for submission to the Commissioners court. It meets our -- it meets the court's adopted regulations.
>> Commissioner Davis is requesting this name not be associated unless he's contacted, right? Give request --
>> see, judge, something --
>> I don't have any problem.
>> it appears to me to be
>> [multiple voices]
>> public need to be notified.
>> let me just clarify from the staff's point of view that the -- that the policy that was adopted about notice of non-residential subdivisions within Travis County, as adopted to chapter 82, which applies to the area, unincorporated area outside of the city of -- municipality, in order to affect that same change within the e.t.j., the city and the county both have to amend chapter 30. Then we have adopted policy that with the city or the county, we would do the same notice for a non-residential uses. There was -- the court currently does not have an adopted policy about that notification aside from any informal notification would want to make -- of the residents around that subdivision.
>> the reason for that is because as you stated we have not had an opportunity to amend title 30 with the city, single office, and the county, Travis County as a co-participant in this because of the e.t.j. Type of setting. That hasn't been established. But from that notice that where we did amend chapter 82 as far as what we could end up doing out of the incorporated area of the city of Austin, yes, we -- for the public notification for non-residential use, leaning and leaning and leaning toward that end that you just mentioned as far as amending joint amendment between the county and the city. It hasn't happened yet. But that's the direction that we are -- that I知 pursuing and I hope that you are still pursuing and everybody else is still pursuing to make sure that things like this does not get overlooked otherwise. We are going to continue to have these type of situations where the community is not going to notice, not notified, don't know what's coming up in their back yard or anywhere else. But adjacent to them. In my opinion it's just not a fair position to be in, not letting folks know what's going on down the road.
>> to further complicate.
>> I was trying to deal with a simple issue, though. My recommendation was about to be for the next three or four months, why don't we, if there's an item that comes up in a particular precinct contact the Commissioner and see if it's okay to put the Commissioner's name down there.
>> exactly.
>> I have no problem with items coming forth without a Commissioner name there. See what I知 saying? If I see items from t.n.r. And there's no Commissioner there, that means to me that comes from t.n.r. Staff. So if you can't make the phone call, I would just have a -- have it coming from t.n.r. Which means no member of the court.
>> I知 presuming that you are limiting this just to subdivisions -- where we determine there's administrative completeness. The protocol for putting things on the court agenda. You are saying as an exception to that rule t.n.r. Can place a subdivision on the court's agenda without an endorsement by the Commissioner as long as we deem it's straifl complete.
>> that's my recommendation because we have two today, right.
>> two of them, item 25 and also this one. I had no idea but it appears that I知 sponsoring something in the neighborhood and the folks out there, they see Commissioner Davis --
>> we're trying to follow --
>> Commissioner Davis is sponsoring this item, he hasn't notified us at all. That's not fair to my office nor the residents in the precinct. So we need to correct that. Again I知 going to request that it go through the process and let the folks be involved with that. On discretionary vacation.
>> I understand exactly what issue the Commissioner has. It's probably very similar in terms of the land use issue that perhaps not as severe as any compatible use, but I think in this particular case it's even more complex because the subdivision, the original subdivision had this incompatible use in it. So it's further --
>> legal familiar with it?
>> legal is familiar with it, yes.
>> we are about to get legal advice on it. Do you want to save that? Say that.
>> nope.
>> I understand your point. In the future if there's a matter like this, we don't see a Commissioner's name associated with it, we know it came from staff. Still there's hoops that we have policies governing so those hoops ought to be jumped beforehand if possible.
>> got it.
>> how's that? We can discuss this further in executive session with legal counsel, right?
>> yes.
>> we are to executive session, aren't we?
>> 19. 19. Okay. Why don't we hold off on 18, we will finish that discussion in executive session the legal issues and we have been asked not to take action today anyway. So based on that discussion we will know whether to give directions for a time in the future whether this matter will be on the agenda or what. Is that okay? Remind me to announce this under consultation with attorney.
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, January 9, 2008 8:00 AM