Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 (Agenda)
Item 19
>> 19 we indicated we would call up at 11:00.
19, consider and take appropriate action on the draft colorado river corridor plan and planned town hall meeting.
Commissioners Davis and Gomez.
>> georgia judge, I had gotten emails from citizens in del valle who said they would be here.
if they are maybe out in the hall, maybe they need to come in and listen to the discussion.
and if not, I think they can have access to whatever materials there are, plans and then, of course, an invitation to the meeting for more information.
but it mostly I think -- it's mostly north of the colorado river, which is in precinct 1, and then there's another piece for precinct 4.
>> thank you.
I guess, though that is correct -- and with that, Commissioner, thank you because this particular project, well, plan, actually, covers just most north and south of the river of precinct 1 and 4 and all the things that are going on within that particular river corridor, I guess basically from 183, montopolis bridge area, all the way to the bastrop county line.
and, of course, some of this area being from 969 to the north and then highway 71 to the south and in between you have the colorado river.
so there's a lot of things that are going on within that corridor.
and, of course, I'll let you go from there, but it's very significant and important that we have, you know, the public hearing and -- after this particular presentation is given by staff.
so again, a lot of information, a lot of information here that should be shared with the public so let me be quiet.
>> he will explain the purpose of the document, but what we're asking the court for today is your approval to take it out to the public to solicit feedback from them so that we can make any alterations to it.
so randy will give a brief overview of it, the purpose and what's contained in it.
>> good morning, randy nicholson with t.n.r.
appreciate the opportunity to bring to you a draft plan.
this is our first effort to bring this out for subject to your your review and hopefully at the end of the day we'll have a vote to allow a 60-day review period and after that 60-day period we'll bring back the final plan incorporating all those comments and concerns that we had from the citizens as well as other agencies that have been involved.
this project started with an interlocal agreement a little over a year ago between the city of Austin, lcra and Travis County.
jointly funded by those three entities.
and ever since then along with the support of my right-hand man, stefan farris, we have endeavored to pull together a pretty comprehensive evaluation of the colorado corridor as Commissioner Davis outlined.
so I think the important thing here it was a collaborative effort that not only involved city of Austin staff, lcra staff, but some private sector knowledge of what's going on in the marketplace out there.
and that area, that corridor is poised for significant change.
and so as the court recognized last year that we should maybe get out ahead of that curve and work with all the planning and activities that could occur there in the neither future.
so this is a long-range plan, but at the same time we're trying to recognize that there are immediate activities and redevelopment and projects needed in that corridor.
so with that, I'll turn it over to stefan to give you a more detailed analysis on some of the corridor opponents.
we have about a 10-minute presentation, then I'll wrap it at the end of his presentation with some of the goals that is important for the community to understand how we may implement this plan.
with that, I'll turn to stefan farris.
>> thank you, randy.
good morning, judge, Commissioners, stefan farris, a principal with bossly farris.
before I begin my presentation, I would like to take a second to thank county staff, city staff and lace staff for helping us get to the point where we are day which is a draft plan for the colorado river authority.
over the past ten months, because this has been a team effort, has reviewed, analyzed and synthesized volumes of information, maps and statistics to further our understanding, comprehension and knowledge of the colorado river corridor.
the result of this work can be sum advised by six major plan elements that include land use, water quality, water supply, transportation, parks, and land conservation.
and finally the physical plan.
it is from these six elements we have developed our implementation strategies.
the map that is illustrated on the monitor indicates where the colorado river corridor is located in eastern Travis County.
as Commissioner Davis note bounded by 969 to the north, the bastrop county line to the east and 183 to the far west.
according to 2010 tcad records, in 2010 city of Austin land use inventory records, almost 50% of the land in the corridor is agricultural, rural or otherwise undeveloped.
which sounds like a lot and is a lot, but when you factor in almost 42% of the corridor is in the fema 100-year flood plain and many of these areas considered agricultural may have uses proposed, one begins to understand the opportunities and constraints associated within the corridor.
this map here illustrates the current 2010 land use of the corridor.
mining areas are shown in purple, 21.4%.
rural and undeveloped, approximately 50%, is the light green color.
and parkland with the dark green is 3%.
I also want to know the two permitted access points at 1834 and little weberville park.
there are only two access points currently permitted within the corridor.
this next map is the fema 2008 flood plain in blue, it's quite a large area.
the colorado river corridor and great flood plains make it so appeal to go nurseries, farmers, residents and mining interests.
natural resource ex instant traffic shuns, specifically sand and gravel mining, is not knew to the corridor and has been a documented land use since at least the late 1960s.
this map illustrates the known mining operations within the corridor.
this includes existing permitted plans or legacy mining areas within the corridor.
the legacy mining areas are historical mining areas are shown in purple and red is everything else.
that totals approximately 11,000 acres.
the explosion I have growth of sand and gravel mining in the corridor is directly linked to the explosive growth of the central Texas region over the past 12 years.
over time as more and more residents have moved into and around the corridor and as sand and gravel mining have increased, conflicts between these two interests have become more pronounced.
what we're seeing today is these mutually supportive land use uses are now competing for the same land, views and water.
because of the present day physical constraints of the corridor.
simply put, there's not enough land to go around.
this is a development constraints map we put together.
as you can see, anything without a color is what has really no plan for it or is not zoned a particular category and it's really these areas that are circled in this.
they are just -- there's very little land that hasn't been spoken for, haven't had some development associated with it.
surface water quality is affected by the explosive growth.
among these impacts we see as a result of facilities.
within the corridor we have four sewage treatment facilities.
walnut creek, hornsby bend, another small one at Austin's colony.
>> [one moment please] is from the aquifer for communities in the corridor.
although not studied in a comprehensive way, the corridor plan recommends the extent of this issue be studied.
this map right here is illustrating the extent of the utility infrastructure within the corridor.
you can see the bold green lines are electrical utility easements and lines.
the blue lines are -- indicate water infrastructure, and the brown lines indicate wastewater infrastructure.
this next map illustrates the c.c.n.s within the corridor.
you have hornsby bend and city of Austin is the largest and garfield, aqua and manville are the other water providers within the corridor.
there are 1,222 acres of parkland in the corridor.
many of these parks are relatively new.
future park development this the corridor should coincide with protecting and enhancing the creeks of the colorado river.
greenways currently protected through the water protection zones are the most feasible areas to provide linkagees and develop facilities while serve to go protect critical riparian efforts.
as you can see, these are in some cases 400 to 800-foot swaths of land that coincide directly with stream channels of elm, gilleland and wilbarger creek.
while not a regulatory code, the concept plan is a guide for the form and intensity of future development in the corridor.
and it's organized around intensity zones.
there are three major intensity zones in the corridor plan.
these include rural, neighborhood, and urban.
for every intensity zone there's also an applicable conceptual development character illustration or development tran sect.
the development characterizations and cross sections work in many different combinations and scenarios depending where the growth is located within the corridor.
for instance, an urban area may ajoin a rural area with a rural roadway intersecting.
intersecting on this map you'll see the intensity zones illustrated.
red being the most intense or urban area.
the orangish area being the medium intensity or neighborhood intensity.
and then the yellowish area is a rural intensity.
and then furthermore you have the light green representing post-mining open space and the dark green being future open space.
we also have trail locations you will list straight on the conceptual master plan in a reddish color.
they are harder to read on this map.
we also have future roadways illustrated on this map as well.
transportation in the corridor is currently dominated by three major roadways, fm 969, 71, and sh so.
capacity on fm 969 and u.s.
71 is currently stressed and will continue to be stress understand the future as more and more people continue to live and work within and around the corridor.
commuters in bastrop and other areas will also add to the burden of those roadways.
currently they are the only river crossings in the corridor.
a planned project for improving fm 973 will offer some relief to the congestion at u.s.
71 and crossing the colorado river corridor.
future roadway alignments and upgrades and greenways are also illustrated this the concept plan.
roadway alignments are classified by type and further by the intensity zone they fall within.
multimodal trail expansions are illustrated.
in many cases streets and trails work in concert to move pedestrians and cyclists throughout the corridor.
due to the environmental and physical constraints of the corridor and the congestion of u.s.
71 and fm 969, it is critical that interconnectivity and multimodal be within all new development.
mining as a temporary use -- let me back up.
these are the development transects.
this is a schematic showing what form development may take moving from urban to rural.
the urban area being near a major arterial and the closer to the colorado river more open space and buffer from the river.
so putting development closer to the roadways.
these are conceptual street cross-sections.
this would be a across section for what we're calling the colorado river park way.
will you see a multi use trail on both sides of the roadway with an additional right-of-way reserve and bioswale reserve between the sidewalk and the multimodal trail and the travel lanes.
this is another roadway cross-section that may be in a neighborhood area.
neighborhood boulevard includes bike lanes, on-street parking and sidewalks.
another for rural intensity area.
with the multi-usenr trail.
mining is a temporary use of the land.
it is in the best interest of mining companies to conserve and maximize the life cycle value of the land mine.
our best estimate of how mining will progress within the corridor is illustrated in this exhibit.
colors in dark green expected to be completed in the next five years.
of the approximately 11,000 acres of land currently dedicated to mining over 7,000 acres is expected to transition to a different land use within the next five years.
this map is illustrating that -- that fact and we have the dark green areas and you move to a lighter green is five to ten years of mining expected before closure.
yellow being 10 to 15 years.
orange being 15 to 20 years.
red being 20 to 25 years.
dragline mining is a thing of the past.
many of these nuisances associated with mining can be traced back to this technique which creates spoil and unnatural land contours and reclamation more difficult.
this illustration is showing how concurrent reclamation works.
essentially they open up the pit, they dig down, dig the overburden and remove it to dig down and find the sand and gravel layers that economists between 15 to 20 feet below the surface.
then they concurrent move the overburden and shift it back into the pit.
the small area of the pit that's open and you are constantly reclaiming as you move across the land as opposed to having a massive pit open.
some of the new technologies and vehicle options make this affordable and more cost effective for mining companies.
>> so do we know whether t.x.i.
uses that methodology here?
>> it's my understanding they will be using this methodology.
>> what is the incentive as opposed to the old way, dig a big hole and then use.
I understand you are a land use planner and not an aggregate mining representative.
>> I think it's more efficient is my understanding.
they can get -- make better use and be more efficient in extracting the material.
>> perhaps this is a better question for you being a land use planner.
what's the incentive for development at this higher standard that laying out in this corridor plan since as you stated this isn't an ordinance, we don't have ordinance making authority in the e.t.j., and kind of, you know, and being dotely, for instance, t.x.i.
brought rio davita to my office and laid out a beautiful land use plan for the reclamation for what is now a decommissioned mine.
I asked them why are you doing this.
I know you don't have to, why are you doing it.
and their response was that they could sell the property for more money with it encumbered by this plan.
but I'm curious from a land use planning perspective, what tools do you see counties or even cities because this would be -- portions of it this is in e.t.j.
of the city of Austin, but they don't have any more ordinance making authority than we do, in the e.t.j.
what carrots are out there to get developers to buy into this higher standard?
>> I think one of my answers to that, Commissioner, is that if we move forward with a plan that is done collaboratively, right now it's an effort internally.
as we move forward with the community and build some community support for a plan and bring that book to the court, I think that starts to set the foundation for more private sector acknowledgement of the goals not only that the Travis County and the city have set out but also the neighborhood has set out there.
so I think the more collaboration we can have, that starts to provide some incentive.
the court will be looking at funding some projects in there and this fall and later in the years of this project.
so I think the -- we've got certainly on incentivize a certain amount of this.
but setting priorities for that will be important.
the last section of this report speaks to the prioritization of how we'll move forward and that's where really the community is going to be important to collaborate with.
>> thanks for that.
it was a little bit of a rhetorical question.
I appreciate you indulling me.
the.
>> the location works as well.
this is way out in the county where growth hasn't started encroaching upon might not be economically fies I believe.
they could probably make more off the land if they set it up and show people how they could use it in the future.
>> when I went through the and looked at it and had a lot of conversations with randy and others and we've looked at this as we've gone through this process, of course I -- just an example, something that's recently gone on in precinct 4 for an example, stabilization of the bank in this particular area where folks will be probably losing their homes if we don't to anything.
that came up last week, Commissioner Gomez's precinct, but she's been fighting for that for how long, Commissioner?
>> since '95.
>> an example like that and there are other major projects that are going on currently.
rio davita just being one.
there are other things that I think will be going on within this area within that north-south boundary for this 30,000-plus acres that I just think need to be highlighted and, of course, that's one of many that should be included.
and as I've stated earlier, and I know the land planner may not have looked at some of these things, but he did mention in example the other bridge there adjacent to -- that would serve, you know,, of course, the colorado river, folks going down 973.
that's a big deal.
so we want to make sure that all the projects that are within this particular plan are highlighted and given just as much emphasis as what we are talking about.
of course, environmental aspects came up and, of course, yes we would like to see how and what the surface water looked like out there.
yes, we want to see what the underground water looks like out there, and, of course, we would like to see and monitor the air quality with all of these add vents of things going on.
so it's a lot of moving parts in this thing.
but, of course, the public has to be exposed not only to cut the presentation off, but since someone else asked questions, I want to make sure that those things you are it relating to us is also brought up in the public again even with the event of the stabilization of the embankment on the southern boundary of the colorado river.
which is in precinct 4 so those folks don't lose their home.
I'm making sure we're all inclusive.
go ahead.
>> it would be important for us in our public settings make note of those projects that are active in that area like the 973 bridge and we'll make sure we present that to the community.
and say things are happening as well as things --
>> the bond initiative, those kind of things.
there's bond initiatives in a make impact.
go ahead with your presentation.
>> I'm almost finished, Commissioner.
thank you.
this next slide is a series of illustrations showing how concurrent reclamation works.
you have a raw piece of land.
raw piece of land here.
the mining company would open up the pit and start construction.
they would construct a perimeter berm that would help screen views.
is shely vegetate that berm.
it would begin construction of the pit area and slowly but surely as they take out the overburden, fill it on the back end and move across the land in a very linear fashion, and then they in one end may create a small wetland area and reclaim the land for other land uses.
whether it's commercial, residential, orchard crops, hay field, et cetera, the land does transition to another land use once it's done.
that planning needs to take place before the mining starts, clearly not after it.
we need to be to front edge of encouraging mining companies to think about what the future of this land is once they are gone.
this is my last slide.
it's showing what the anticipated land uses are within the corridor.
these are very conceptual.
these are projections.
we're really talking about the intensity and form of the development.
and so with that, we have about 23% more open space anticipated in the corridor than currently exists.
we have about 19% less mining or only 2% of the area would be mining in the future.
we're anticipating a 25 to 30-year time frame for this.
we would have lots of post-mining open space and increase in residential double the commercial area and increase in residential area as well.
and the bottom charts are comparing it to what the corridor was in 2010 and then what the city of Austin is citywide in 2008.
those are all contained in the report as well.
before I turn it back over to randy, I just want to say this has been a great process.
it's really the beginning I think and not the end, even though it feels like the end, it's the beginning of a much larger process to thank you.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
you did a great job.
I guess with that, we're looking forward to a public hearing.
of course at east side service center, I guess, with the particular agents involved, hopefully the city of Austin, lcra, of course Travis County.
with the public having input, and I guess at some point, Commissioner, we'll have to disclose I think some of those things that we're looking at that's happening within the corridor.
>> I think everything that t.n.r.
has in place and can be presented to folks.
>> so I guess the timing of it, of the when of the public hearing I guess is when you maybe look at that to make sure that all the folks, I guess, have a way to be notified of the public hearing since we'll have to gather public input.
at some point.
as far as the public meeting rather, not public hearing, but the public meeting for such disclosure as presented to the court today.
>> yeah, subject to Commissioner Gomez and Davis' schedules, we would like to schedule something in August, hopefully the third or fourth week in August, and as soon as we can work with your staff to nail that schedule down.
it will be an evening meeting generally starting at 6:00 p.m.
going to about 7:30.
we'll work with your staffs and subject to court approval today, we'll post the draft plan on our website and we also have an extensive email list that we'll send that information out to all the stakeholders that we met with earlier last year and make them aware that we're putting together the plan and the plan for the upcoming meeting with the community.
>> I would like to move approval.
>> second.
>> and, of course, I need to also maybe provide a list of persons and neighborhoods within their boundaries of what we're talking about.
I know Commissioner Gomez probably wants to do the same thing.
so in addition to what you are saying, we would like to assist as much as possible.
but again, where would the posting be as far as the general public would like to look at this particular rendering today that was given to us, where could they go to Travis County to look at this particular plan?
>> today we'll work with i.t.s.
to post this document on our external web page and we'll also have hard copies available in t.n.r.
office.
for review.
subject to your approval today.
>> it's all right to give the bossy farris draft --
>> I'm sorry in.
>> it's currently on the bossy farris website.
>> no, it will be moved to the county.
>> any comments?
yes, sir, please come forward.
>> well --
>> name please.
>> richard mcdonald.
I live in the area.
I'm a stakeholder.
I have a few things I want to bring up and I guess I'll start with the most simple and move on from there.
I read the document off the website.
it's very impressive document.
you know, beautiful, good job.
the one simple thing I notice in the back of the -- the bacteria -- what are they called, the appendixes, t.x.i.
has noted on their hornsby east plan that they are not going to mine the gilleland cemetery.
there's an unregistered cemetery about 400 feet out in that field where james gilleland was buried.
he was shot in the battle of brushy creek and carried a bullet like ten days before he died.
this was 1839.
he and his wife were one of the first settlers to come to the area.
she lived another 50 years and is also buried along with their daughter and granddaughter.
the farmers have never done anything with that cemetery.
it not registered.
there's been some letters going back and forth between a richard subtle, a friend of your, Commissioner Huber, a neighbor of yours richard --
>> sc r.b.i.'s ns.
>> there's a little fence and stuff like that.
is there going to be an easement or is there going to be anybody that's going to actually enforce them from bulldozing through this cemetery?
although it's not in their -- you know, all it is is a line on the plan.
>> you know, we could investigate that through the Travis County historic commission to get that registered so that it falls under the Texas statutory requirements.
>> it needs to be.
this is like one of the earliest settlers.
he owned all this land originally.
>> I would be surprised if the Travis County historic commission isn't aware of this.
we could find out where they are.
>> I think the individual he was talking about has been working on trying to --
>> he's been talking to the Texas historical commission and stuff like that.
but anyway.
I think it should be dealt with and something should be done about that.
in the plan so that this -- set aside, there is some kind of easement.
I can't believe t.x.i.
can't afford since they are not going to mine it anyway to have that.
>> very good point.
>> when this whole thing came up, I came out here and said I thought this was a huge conflict of interest to have t.x.i., the same group that has been helping t.x.i.
to come up with this development plan from rio davita to come up with a development plan for the rest of the county.
it seemed to me like there was -- the county residents versus t.x.i.
and all of a sudden, you know, we brought 200 people out to the Travis County service center to say this is the way we would like it.
we don't want a mine in our neighborhood, you know.
and I understand your constraints of land use authority, but there was no land use planning or future planning, you know, none of those voices were heard.
and then all of a sudden here comes bossy farris the same day this got approved on the 16th of August last year, there was a newspaper article in the newspaper with mr. Bossy and mr. T.x.i.
barry bone walking on the land, and to me it was an obvious conflict of interest.
but as I look at the plan, there's a few things, you know, it's basically taking the eastern Travis County hornsby bend area and turning it inside out.
and one of the main things they put in this plan is they are asking to move the campo projected activity centers from 2035 or something to the middle of rio davita in the next two years.
in other words, they want you to declare that the center of all those pits and mounds and dirt and stuff, which is nothing now, to be the activity center of that area.
but it's not.
all the people live both sides of 969.
they go to the texaco, they go to the little markets.
there's that new meat market open up, a dollar general opening up.
it's not much, but, you know, to say that this plan isn't directing the county resources towards to the advantage of t.x.i., they've already been given the mine.
when they were given the mine, we were told that you were going to buy the ricin tract and we've never been told you weren't she but it's not happening in this plan.
so that's my second big thing is I think this all along has been a big huge economic development process for rio davita, and I just don't understand why the county is advantaging t.x.i.
so much.
I understand you wanted to have good quality development in that area, but right now it seems like all the resources are going not towards the people that live out there, you know, as far as economic development in my neighborhood, just like we told you when this mine as approved, property values are going down, houses are for sale and unable to being sold in chapperal crossing and Austin colonies.
I've had two people walk away you because their house is worth 25,000 less than they paid for it and this isn't happening in the rest of Travis County.
this is right there.
>> let me say this to you.
, mr. Mcdonald.
there is significant investment in this area, no doubt bit.
in fact, this recent bond election hopefully will come up will even improve the investment from Travis County in this area.
>> the bond election is talking about -- hold on.
let me speak if you don't mind.
you'll have another access route which will come out around through that sandifer area, where that cool is down there.
so folks will have another major league investment.
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>> thinking that we're -- specially me, that I'm not looking at the big picture and trying to make sure that the voters in Travis County support these particular bond elections.
you have folks that have come and have served on the bond committee.
and have supported and I'm saying the citizen advisory bond committee.
that are supporting some of these same things that I'm bringing before you now.
so -- so again I want to make sure that -- that it comes across that we are doing something about major league problem and we are all addressing a whole lot of situations out there.
we just installed left turn -- left turn areas.
synchronized lights, a whole lot of things that we are trying to do to bring some attention to that area.
again, I don't want to come across that we're not doing anything.
>> I support those issues, too.
I think that's great.
>> well, that's --
>> the sidewalk that's I --
>> [multiple voices] I see those kids every day because I drive home that way.
after dark --
>> I'm 100% for that.
what I'm not hundred% for is all of a sudden out of nowhere, once rio devido gets out there, it looks great, you know, the projected according to the plan here that 15 to 16,000 people are going to live there, even the campo 2035 population projections in the appendixes say 6,000 people.
so they are using campo figures and saying, well, they are way underestimated and yet we want campo to call this our -- the center of the county right here.
and that road, 969, they call it the river road, has been the center of that area for 200 years or something.
and so now you are wanting to turn it on, turn it around and put the center of -- of that neighborhood where all of those people live now, be something like the mueller airport or Sunset Valley or something where there's all of these big box stores and stuff.
>> mr. Mcdonald, you -- your assessment is very astute, you have been watching this so closely for so long, I want to commend you for representing your neighbors so well.
and frankly, you are correct.
as we've discussed before.
we don't have sticks with regard to our power and the county and frankly neither does the city to the extent that it's in the etj, we only have carrots.
your perception that carrots are being thrown in order to raise the standard of development and mitigate the negative effects of the -- you are absolutely right, we are throwing arrest rots.
you are -- carrots -- your assessment is 100% spot on.
>> three points, mr. Mcdonald.
any additional points that you want to make today.
>> were you all under the perception when you approved the money for this -- for this river corridor study that I had an existing permit, development permit on that land?
because when we found out recently that that permit expired like a year ago, October 1st and was now renewed on June 2nd, so --
>> so we entered into this study with the knowledge that there was virtually no probability that we could construct under which txi did not continue andeco frankly other aggregate industry didn't continue mining that corridor.
so we entered into the study not happy, but secure in our assessment that mining was going to occur and continue to occur for at least two or three more decades.
but I wanted to dove tail on what Commissioner Davis said --
>> let's let mr. Mcdonald finish his statement.
anything else?
>> it was just such a shock to me that after all of that rigamarole that we went through in the court to get that permit and get it as soon as possible and having us done here to testify before thanksgiving that they let their permit expire after six months, and I think it was because txi realizes whatever they want, the county is going to let them give it back to them.
they let their permit expire.
don't worry about it, you are going to change to a conveyor, renew the permit the way it is now, we will review that later.
>> they do have considerable latitude with tceq.
>> and t.n.r.
>> it's -- we do not have the statutory -- what we do is ministerial with regard to approval of the permits to a great degree.
we don't have discretion in providing the permits if they meet the state requirements.
so that's the reason why, as we talked before, we're throwing carrots here because we have no sticks.
but I do want to say in addition to the bond money, I mean, you are right, it's the unfortunate truth is that you're right.
in addition to the bond money, we've also dedicated funds towards monitoring efforts, around the properties, to -- to ensure that we do everything we can do under statute by -- I concede that it isn't much that we have under statute but we're wielding what we have to the greatest extent that we can.
>> finally, I went to the first meeting about the -- about the -- about this eastside corridor study back in December and the comment that I made was why is it not mentioned anywhere that txi is involved in this study, that they are a sponsor, that -- that, you know, tom I think said well I don't think they're a sponsor.
but I went back and looked at the -- at the original recommendations for the request to put this on the thing and txi, it says project -- you know, where is it right here?
they are listed -- anyway, txi is listed as one of the sponsors, a sponsor, the sponsor, sponsors and project teams, Travis County, city of Austin, lcra, txi, I think the people that -- the meeting that you are going to set up, which I guess I thought that you were going to set up today, but you're not, you know, last time of the thousands and thousands of people who live in this corridor, I think there were actually 20 residents out there to look at this plan and the website doesn't say -- give your input.
it says this thing is important to you because you can see how -- how professionals and selected landowners are going to plan the future of your, you know -- it doesn't even say come out and put in your two cents.
it says come and see how the pros do this.
so if you are really going to set up and get some input from the people, I say let's do it and not just pretend and have another 20 people out there or something and then call that approved and yeah, we put it before the county.
because you are doing the same thing as txi did when they held those meetings at the hotels, they sent out a post card, they kept saying throughout the process, we sent out 1500 post cards, the post cards said come hear about the txi hornsby bend project.
they didn't say anything about we're going to put a mine in your neighborhood so you better come out and pay attention.
so I think that -- I'm just stating if you're going to stand up and say we're going to get the public involved in this, then don't just pretend and figure out a way to do it.
because it didn't work last time at all.
as far as I'm concerned.
that crowd that was at -- that just doesn't cut it.
so --
>> well, again, I appreciate your comments and I appreciate what you're saying, it's a matter of record for those folks that don't remember.
I didn't support the txi permit, so I want to still --
>> I still don't understand that because half the council says they didn't have the authority to vote against it and half the council voted against it.
>> well, that's -- that's my discretion, I didn't support the permit.
all right.
but -- in regard to what you just illustrated and laid out, I want to make sure that you -- when we do have this meeting, I think that you heard me comment earlier that I would like to have the citizen participation in this because I think that it's very important as we walk and go through this particular plan, I'm going to do as much as I possibly can that you and others in the area get a notice of that.
I'm looking forward to --
>>
>> [indiscernible]
>> pardon me?
>> I don't want it to be just a notice.
I will be there, I find the notice --
>> [multiple voices]
>> go there --
>> notify.
>> --
>> [multiple voices] people are going to listen --
>> will be notified.
hopefully you can have your input and say then as you are doing here today.
but of course this is just a plan and of course we need all of the input.
it's possible that we have several moving parts, we have agencies, plus we have the community involved in this.
so -- so I'm looking murder ford to the meeting in the -- I'm looking forward to the meeting in the near future.
>> how do we determine what is a good date for a public meeting for residents?
>> I poll the Commissioners and try to see what their staff will give me in terms of the dates.
I know that it's --
>> what's our fall back.
>> it's like herding cats sometimes, but yes.
we would -- we would certainly Commissioner Gomez and Davis --
>> okay.
mr. Mcdonald's point is that we provide input and we receive it.
so what language do we -- let's come up with language that comes close to doing that.
and --
>> seems to me that -- I'm sorry, I don't want to interrupt.
but to have it at the end of August when all of these people are just getting their kids back in school, I mean to try to push this thing without having some time, that's exactly what happened with the txi meetings, they were held in may, right during graduations and stuff.
>> we don't want to --
>> [indiscernible] we want to get a date that's convenient and if most of the parents will be worried more about school than our study, I say let's delay it until -- until we think that it's a good date.
>> we were advocating before the labor day weekend, that usually is definitely a stay away from that schedule there.
so we could go into the next second week in September would be --
>> my recommendation is that on that we get some input from residents.
>> okay.
>> if -- and is the service center a good location to have it?
>> that's what we had it at before, judge.
I mean, if mr. Mcdonald, your folks, it was just overwhelmed.
folks were standing --
>> [multiple voices] good -- lot of space.
had a place -- chance to -- where people could display the information and of course we had an opportunity for folks to come up and -- and speak and -- on their behalf.
so -- so that's -- it appears -- Commissioner Gomez, do you have any objection to the service center?
>> eastside service center.
>> yes, east --
>> I would be real flexible on it.
in my view if our goal is really to get as much public input as possible, then I would have residents help determine when we have it and where.
>> where, okay.
>> yeah, I mean, as long as it's big enough.
>> yeah.
that's the point.
>> our service center is -- is our place.
so we can get it rent free and control the air and heat and there's plenty of parking.
if there's other places as convenient, I would just defer to residents on it.
our goal is really more resident input than our making a presentation, right.
>> exactly.
>> there's a whole lot of good here like mr. Mcdonald said.
there's a different perspective that many residents will probably have.
if we really receive input to give them an opportunity to voice, you know, the different perspectives.
>> may I also request that our -- that our e.t.j.
appointees to the imagine Austin effort be invited to this?
because I think that our tenge appointees to that -- our e.t.j.
appointees to that project really need to -- to be in the loop on the presentation and the neighborhood feedback.
because I think that there is -- there is -- we have a real opportunity here to have -- to have a really substantive conversation about what we would like to see happen versus what is actually happening and to what extent we have the ability to -- to modify our future.
>> would that -- would that be the place that the city adopts this program, the plan?
I mean I understand that the county, if they bring this back after the feedback, the county will adopt it.
it's not law.
it's a plan, right?
>> it's a-- an aspiration, really.
>> but it can affect how variances are given and different thing -- it's a plan.
>> does the city have the same process, a vision thing --
>> my understanding, not to speak for the city, but the city is currently engaged in their Austin imagine planning effort -- Austin imagine -- one of that is the planning for the extra territorial jurisdiction.
most of this is in the city of Austin e.t.j.
>> before we go there --
>>
>> [multiple voices]
>> before we go there with that idea, I would like to maybe talk to the representative that I have because we -- there's a few different views on.
as far as what the city doing it and their attempts and of course what we're trying to do outside and to the county area.
so -- so let me -- before I visit that, I would like to maybe talk to my representative and then we will go from there.
but right now let me do that and see what their position is on that.
I would appreciate that.
>> unless there's objection, we will authorize that you proceed with the travis plan, put together the specifics of a public meeting or some public meeting and whatever that is, bring those back to the court for approval, at the appropriate time, right?
>> yes, sir, that would be fine.
>> anything else on this item today that you need from us?
>> no, sir.
>> okay, thank you very much.
>> thank you, mr. Mcdonald
>> [multiple voices]
>> let me ask you this.
is there like a seven or eight pager that really summarizes the highlights of the report?
>> yes.
what we'll be posting up there is an executive summary about eight pages, then everything behind that.
>> that's good, because there's a lot of information here.
>> move that we recess until 1:45.
>> second.
>> you have a motion.
>> oh, yeah.
>> motion and second on the --
>>
>> [multiple voices]
>> actually, I need to withdraw my second since I think that it's not in my --
>> Commissioner Gomez.
>> all right.
>> what is the motion?
>>
>> [indiscernible]
>> [multiple voices]
>> public hearing.
>> forward.
>> moving forward.
>> move forward with the plan to --
>> all in favor?
that passes by unanimous vote.
>> thank you.
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.
