Travis County Commissioners Court
January 22, 2008
Item 16
Number 16, consider and take appropriate action on a total vacation of a subdivision named scenic point phrase 4, resubdivision of lot 14, block k of north point phase 1, section 2 record understand document number 2020136, official public records locate understand precinct 1.
>> hi, anna bolin, Travis County tnr. This vacation application was before you I believe two weeks ago and I just wanted to hopefully clear up some of the questions from then. Originally this plot was land was in the north point phase 1 section 2 diswiks and that was cite understand 1985. There were 95 single lots and one commercial lot in that subdivision. In 2009 the owner of the commercial part, he wanted to redisbied that and change it -- resubdivide that and change it to a more residential use. I believe there were 20 lots and a road and some other lot that wasn't residential. On that plat there were notes that all restrictions and notes from the previous plat would apply to the resubdivision. In 2009 they didn't vacate and replat, and to change a land use you would have to vacate and replat. So if their intent in 2009 was to change the land use. Fast forward to August of last year, we're looking at their application and we're seeing -- we're noticing hey, it appears that it wasn't done properly back in 2009, and. What they're trying to do now is something that was consistent with the original use. Office warehouse. So there's question about public notification. I can see the public notification with scenic point for the subdivision. In 2009 what happens was notice was sent by the city of Austin and Travis County.
>> do we have a record of that.
>> but also to the residents. Residents, of course, -- the notice I think is very critical. And my question, though, is as they asked then in that particular issue. And referring to the above ground storage tanks, the issue was notification. So the question still remains timely notification of when the request was made. Were these residents within the scenic point subdivision, were they notified? And I haven't seen anything in the backup to show me that there was notification from the intent -- after the replat had been done and you're going back to commercial. So I don't understand that. And no one has produced any evidence for me to lean on to let me know that the residents in the scenic point subdivision were notified.
>> certainly. I appreciate your comments. And certainly if I may. Let me tell you about the notice that was done become in 2009 when they were -- I believe they were thinking that they were going to go residential even though they didn't vacate. At the time per the city of Austin code, property owners within 300 feet of the subject property were notified and as were all registered neighborhood associations be registered with the city of Austin. I know that --
>> do we have evidence of that?
>> yes. And I also have evidence of at least one person writing back in opposition to the city. And back at the same time frame under our section of the local government code, what we did was send certified mail to everyone in north point phase 1 section two.
>> when was that done, in 2009? 2009 -- 2001?
>> yes.
>> and we posted signs on site and put a notice in the newspaper. And even though our notice did not reflect the land use, we did get questions about what's going on. We got some comments about -- in the files I saw four comments that we received, and two of them thought that that was supposed to be parkland and two of them thought that there was too many residential lots being proposed.
>> was there a hearing, an opportunity for the person that made these comments, did they have an opportunity to participate in a hearing before the entities that approved or disapproved such actions?
>> yes, sir. We would have held a public hearing at Commissioners court. If you hold on just a second, I can tell you -- on the sign it had -- it would have had a date of when the hearing was at Commissioners court on this item. And that's consistent with how we do -- how we administer the code.
>> was a hearing also held before the city of Austin?
>> that I don't know.
>> we have no idea?
>> but certainly I do know that we had a hearing here.
>> okay. Currently -- I知 not trying to be presumptuous because really I don't really know what the response based on the thing we've been getting is that as you stated earlier, folks have been wanting to be a part of what's happening. And the problem is this: the use of the property, not knowing what's going to go there, not knowing who and what these particular facilities or whatever they're doing there, what will they actually end up being. And of course, I know we don't have authority on some thing, but I think having this particular issue brought before us again, it just appears to me that public input should be warranted. And with the owner of the property on this particular replat vacation. So I understand that there has been another attempt to notify the residents within the scenic point subdivision. Of course, there are other folks involved with this also as far as use is concerned. It just appears to me that there had been a certified letter I think going to certain organizations, but I don't know if that is the proper organization that really need to be contacted. I don't know. So who provided the list to the applicant? Who provided a list of who is to be notified?
>> I gave the owner all of the homeowners association type information that I had in my files based on the above ground storage tank discussions here. I had some information and I passed that along. I also asked that they -- if they were going to do notification, that they check with constituent and get a list of all the interested parties in the area and homeowners associations and whatnot as well.
>> notification without an opportunity to hear what the folks' concerns are, we're talking about two things here. One, notification. What happens after notification? And the concern that I知 hearing in this area is the what after notification. And it just appears to me that the applicant in my opinion should -- I have a list that I want to share with you and also the clerk and the court of the folks in the area who feel they have been left out of the process. And we do not want to travel that road being the court that we have been and still are. It appears to me that just notifying is one thing, but then what happens after notification is two different things. It would be prudent, I think, for the applicant to meet with those folks. And I have a list of name and numbers that I will provide you, the applicant, and also you, staff, and also the clerk and members of this court. I think that's what should take place.
>> is the applicant here? If we could get one of you on the microphone there. I would like to know more about the nature of the project. Commercial eliminates residential, but still leaves many possibilities.
>> good morning, junk and court. My name is rick vaughn representing this project for you this monk. This is the first step in a multistep process. What we're doing today is merely talking about the vacation of the scenic point phase 4 subdivision plat. Priesh to any actual -- prior to any actual development on the site we will wel have to go through the development process with the city of Austin and Travis County. Notice will be sent out again on the site plan to speak to the public hearings on scenic point phase 4. There were public hearings before the subdivision plan and final plat and all of the notification was sent out by the city of Austin staff at that point in time.
>> what we're doing is up and beyond anything at Travis County for notification of subdivisions. We have not only taken the list that tnr has provided us, but we have also gone back and met with notification staff at the city of Austin.
>> notification both back in the 20071 back in fo the preliminary, the final plat and today have been -- the preliminary plat and today have been set. I do want to say that renotification will go would you the site development permit once the site plan is determined and submitted for review.
>> what project do have you in mind?
>> the exact uses are up in the air right now. What we are discussing would be more construction type office warehouse where you would need for a landscaper, a surveyor, some type of a cabinetmaker. Typically small manufacturing, light manufacturing, office storage.
>> what's before us is a request to vacate what's on file.
>> right.
>> and what I hear you saying is you will start over basically. Including notifying fealghted parties of what you plan. I guess at that point you will have more specifics about what you plan to do.
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> go ahead.
>> I listened to you patiently and I want you to do the same thing and I want you to stop cutting me off also.
>> you cut me aif, a lot.
>> you do that.
>> I listen to you.
>> but go ahead.
>> if you want to be county judge, run for the office.
>> no, I don't want to be county judge.
>> then act like it.
>> don't dictate to me like that, judge.
>> we have here seven more name that we want to you add to the list. And if you basically want to vacate what's on file, if seems to me to be done, we have notice requirements and seven other people that went to you notify if they're not on your list.
>> we'll be glad to notify them.
>> do you have this list already?
>> no, I do not.
>> I need to ask him a question also.
>> okay. Some of these --
>> sir, would you let Commissioner Davis finish his question. I値l stop, Commissioner Davis, you have the floor.
>> thank you. What I was going to say to the judge is that I had a list to present to you an also staff and to the clerk, the same list I gave the court. That's what I was trying to get across. So at least we would be on the same page. My question, to you, sir, would you have any problems meeting with these particular individuals?
>> as far as I know --
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> pardon me?
>>
>> [inaudible - no mic].
>> we will be glad to meet with these people once we get the site plan developed and the final layout because then we can sit down and actually show them something.
>> but see, right now, the question was asked what are you going to be using this property for. You said it's up in the air. The folks are saying that Commissioner Davis, you represent this area. And you are our spokesperson for this area, and I知 going to continue to do that for them. But their concern is this, is that they feel strongly is the material, the storng, anything that would be out of the appropriate land use adjacent to a residence. We just went through this with as I stated earlier, with the above ground storage tank folks, sun coast. We just went through this. And what we're trying to avoid is a repeat performance after the fact. So what I知 asking you, would you want to meet with -- will you meet with these particular folks like right now? If you have something sp have something specific that we can show them, meet with them.
>> but see that's after the fact. You know basically what you want to do with the property. You know that as you sit there.
>> in general.
>> and they need right now, but we don't have --
>> that's all I知 asking is for you to meet -- as an applicant meet with the affected parties within the subdivision. Those persons on that list there. Are you willing to do that?
>> yes. We're willing to do that.
>> all right. I think that's the direction that they're trying to get me to go in, and that's the kind of direction that I知 trying to get here this morning. So that's why I知 posing the question to you the way I知 posing it to you.
>> and what's good is that as I look at the list, I see name on the list and organizations on the list that were included in our notification. So that will work out well.
>> remember I stated earlier, notification one thing. On the other hand, the other thing as far as after notification. So I think that the after portion is what the folks are looking to entertain. The residents in that presick. Preprecinct.
>> we're more than happy to sit down with them and discuss the plans for that tract.
>> when can they be arranged?
>> we're flexible.
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>> why don't you give him yaur they contract you. They are saying they will have more specifics about the and then meet with interested residents and contact you directly about that meeting. Okay? Anything else today?
>> I知 concerned becausei'm sorry, I don't understand exactly what is going on but sounds like they are going to change the status of the property today if you vote to vacate. I am an owner of 49 properties in the subdivision and I was not notified, nor was the president "ej homeowners association. And I was always under the assumption thiahu(adgoing to be used as residential develop the, future homes and not commercial, and in the rules and regulations of the subdivision that it didn't allow for commercial development.
>> wasn't notified.
>> we had a public hearing on this in March 1 of '02, the good news is whatever was up the this point they are vacating and basically is have another project in mind and we will have more specifics about the project. When those specifics become available, in my view it would be appropriate for y'all to meet with effected residents and also the others on the list and the other who need to be notified. We recently adopted a rule indicating that affected neighborhood associations should be contacted. If you all would notify shows individup&ahurqri think we can make progress.
>> yes, sir, we have that. Irndennis, were you involved with had public hearing date? Did you still own the property and were you, you probably weren't the president of the association at the time.
>> no, sir.
>> but did you have the lots back then?
>> no.
>> so in other words, this, what happened then, public hearing
>> no.
>> okay. That at least clears up for me as to how you didn't know. I can see where this stuff you didn't know abarbut back then the notice and the public hearing was done, and that careers it --clears it up for m.
>> thank you for those comments. My reason for the opposition is the fact that the folks have not been involved enough in the process and also after the notice has not been adhered to. No w'y he world I can@&hceiek" this thing passes they can do just about anything they want to do without the input. So the people give input, so what. S not what action we took.ik"eurqhp(urjrwe took toda-
>> anyway, mr. Mcclintock, thank you for coming down.
>> thank you all 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:
Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:09 PM