[0:08] >>> all right, good evening everyone.
[0:13] I would
[0:16] like to call the buda city council
[0:17] to
[0:19] order at 6:31. We have
[0:22] an invocation from cole phillips
[0:24] from the connection church. If you
[0:25] would
[0:27] please rise for the invocation and
[0:30] remain standing for the pledges.
[0:31] >>
[0:32] I
[0:34] just want to mention jeremiah
[0:37] 29/7 tells us to seek the
[0:39] peace and prosperity of the city. Pray
[0:40] to
[0:43] the lord for it. If it prospers, you, too, will
[0:45] prosper, so we want to pray for our
[0:46] peace and
[0:47] prosperity tonight. Let's do that. Dear
[0:49] heavenly father, thank you that we
[0:50] can
[0:52] come
[0:54] before you today recognizing you,
[0:55] who you are,
[0:58] that you bless the meeting and guide
[0:59] our leaders with
[1:00] wisdom as they make decisions that
[1:01] will impact
[1:04] so
[1:07] many lives in our community. We ask
[1:08] that you
[1:09] give them understanding to seek the
[1:10] good with
[1:11] integrity and fairness. Help them
[1:13] to work together in unity for the
[1:16] betterment of our city. I pray for
[1:18] their families as well. As they are
[1:20] given their time tonight
[1:22] to serve in this way. And each day
[1:23] that they give,
[1:26] help their decision to be
[1:28] marked with understanding, with empathy,
[1:29] with
[1:30] a true desire to serve our community and
[1:32] we lift up our city to you
[1:35] and all of our residents. We ask
[1:38] for your
[1:43] protection over our city. That you
[1:44] provide
[1:47] with prosperity. Bless
[1:50] us with peace and
[1:53] we ask
[1:55] that buda is well known for its compassion
[1:56] and love. We ask
[1:59] all
[2:02] this in jesus' name. Amen.
[2:53] >> all
[2:54] right, please be seated. Ms. Ramirez,
[2:59] can
[3:02] we have a roll
[3:05] call? The mayor
[3:08] is
[3:10] here, ture, smith, davidson, horne-williams.
[3:11] >>
[3:12] we are
[3:13] all present and a quorum. This brings
[3:17] us
[3:20] to items
[3:22] of community interest. School is back
[3:23] in
[3:24] session and still hot. But things
[3:26] are happening.
[3:27] >> city hall
[3:29] will be closed on
[3:32] labor day,
[3:35] monday, september 1st. There are the
[3:36] upcoming
[3:38] public meetings, remainder
[3:41] of august and
[3:43] going into september. Of note, our
[3:44] next
[3:46] city council meeting will be september
[3:47] 2nd and september
[3:49] 16th and september 17th we will host
[3:50] a joint
[3:53] meeting between the parks and recreation
[3:54] commission
[3:55] and buda bond oversight committee. Bboc.
[3:58] here are some remaining programs for
[4:02] the month of
[4:05] august hosted by our
[4:08] awesome buda public library. As you
[4:11] heard earlier, the buda edc is hosting
[4:12] in partnership
[4:14] with a number
[4:16] of agencies in the area. The future
[4:17] career
[4:20] expo is this thursday, august
[4:23] 31st here
[4:26] at
[4:29] city
[4:35] hall. We are looking for
[4:41] opinions. Help us to identify how
[4:44] we will move
[4:47] forward with our historic guidelines. And then, on
[4:53] friday,
[4:56] august 22nd, we are a, a sun
[4:59] radio southbound series
[5:01] will take place at meridian. On september
[5:02] 13th,
[5:04] this saturday, we are going to be
[5:05] participating in the preparedness
[5:06] fair. I
[5:08] believe this is
[5:11] going to be hosted in kyle. Wendy
[5:12] smith will
[5:14] be at that hosting
[5:17] that. And
[5:20] is
[5:23] currently
[5:24] planning for our presence. September
[5:29] 10th we will be, the buda chamber
[5:30] of commerce
[5:31] will be eaching our honorable mayor
[5:32] who will be
[5:35] given
[5:38] the
[5:41] state of the community. This will
[5:44] be at the ctx center. You are
[5:47] large and in charge there
[5:50] sir. We have a couple
[5:53] of remaining
[5:56] summer concert series. September
[5:59] 20th
[6:02] at
[6:05] the buda amphitheater. The buda
[6:08] arts festival october. Coming up a
[6:11] couple of months. And
[6:14] get ready for buda
[6:17] halloween,
[6:20] the vendor
[6:23] applications are open. We
[6:27] have
[6:30] rail
[6:36] car revival coming back.
[6:39] >> any
[6:45] questions for con sill? Thank
[6:48] you.
[6:51] >>>
[6:54] this
[6:55] is emergency preparedness month. Wendy smith.
[7:24] as the mayor mentioned
[7:27] this
[7:30] is recognizing august as capcog.
[7:33] where
[7:36] it is a political subdivision
[7:39] of the state
[7:42] of texas serving caldwell,
[7:43] fayette. Hays, lee, travis, williamson
[7:45] counties. The state of
[7:48] texas historically leads
[7:51] the nation
[7:54] in
[7:57] federally
[8:02] declared disasters. Where local agency. School. Dedicate
[8:04] countless hours to preparedness. Response,
[8:06] mitigation, to protect the
[8:08] lives, businesses, property, and the
[8:09] environment in
[8:11] their communities. And whereas the
[8:12] efforts of
[8:15] the region's emergency managers
[8:17] have assisted communities to repair,
[8:18] recover, rebuild, and become more
[8:20] resilient in the face of continuing
[8:21] threats,
[8:24] emergencies and
[8:25] disasters. The region's local agency,
[8:27] school, university, previous
[8:30] avenue
[8:33] private sector emergency
[8:35] managers are greatly appreciated by
[8:36] the
[8:38] counties they deserve. We declare
[8:42] the
[8:45] month
[8:48] of august,
[8:51] 2025 as capcog emergency appreciation
[8:53] month. Commitment, dedication, of
[8:57] local agency school,
[8:59] university, private sector manager
[9:01] managers in the capcog region.
[9:02] >> just
[9:03] an observation, we
[9:06] do
[9:09] this
[9:12] every
[9:15] year
[9:18] in
[9:21] august. Leading
[9:24] up to hurricane month. A lot of
[9:27] things. I'm very proud
[9:30] of our
[9:33] county. How we can
[9:35] come together. But, it is impressive
[9:36] how different
[9:39] organizations
[9:42] do work together, come together. For the
[9:43] record
[9:45] I have a cool little badge.
[9:57] we pause in
[10:00] august to look back.
[10:03] am I ready
[10:06] for.
[10:09] >> our focus
[10:12] in texas.
[10:30] all of our
[10:36] [ inaudible ]
[10:42] and then we
[10:48] also have .
[10:54] we feel like it
[10:57] is
[11:00] part
[11:06] of, we look ahead
[11:09] , there,
[11:12] and
[11:15] that will be held.
[11:45] >> all right, that
[11:48] brings us to our public
[11:50] comment and public testimony portion. So,
[11:51] members of the public who
[11:54] wish to participate during public
[11:55] comment must
[11:56] complete a forum and turn that forum
[11:58] into city clerk before this
[12:01] time is called
[12:03] and members of the public who wish
[12:04] to
[12:05] participate must complete a form. And
[12:07] turn that in before that agenda
[12:10] item is called this evening. I
[12:13] do
[12:14] have one public comment form. Only
[12:16] one. So
[12:19] if I could have brandon clark
[12:22] please
[12:24] come to the podium? If you would state
[12:27] your name and address. You have your
[12:28] three
[12:30] minutes, sir.
[12:31] >> hi, good evening. My
[12:32] name
[12:33] is brandon clark. I have been a buda
[12:37] resident since
[12:39] august 23rd, 2019 at 2230 intrepid
[12:40] drive
[12:43] in the meadow
[12:46] park subdivision. Good evening
[12:47] councilmembers, mayor. Brandon clark,
[12:49] I'm proud buda
[12:51] resident and we have been here since
[12:52] I
[12:54] was just before I turned 30. Purchased our
[12:55] home,
[12:58] august 23rd, two days before
[13:00] my 30th birthday which is a proud
[13:01] moment for myself, I was
[13:04] able to move out and
[13:06] own my own home without being 30 living
[13:07] with my parents
[13:10] which was pretty great for me. It
[13:12] is a great quiet neighborhood and
[13:14] we have great neighbors. It is nice
[13:16] to have a place to
[13:19] call my own. But that time was
[13:22] pretty short
[13:25] lived. August 23rd, 2023,
[13:26] at the address 750 f.m. 2001 which
[13:28] is right behind
[13:31] my backyard. We had
[13:32] progress coffee open. And, progress
[13:34] coffee was initially
[13:36] offered as a cafe and coffee shop
[13:40] which was short lived. About
[13:42] a month after they opened, they had
[13:43] switched
[13:46] to a bar. And, within that first
[13:47] day of opening, they celebrated their
[13:49] opening which is great
[13:52] with a five
[13:53] piece band. And, that band was about
[13:55] as loud as you would
[13:58] imagine it
[14:01] being at buck's backyard. So with
[14:02] that band
[14:03] playing very loud, it was something,
[14:04] where
[14:06] doing what we could. Tried calling
[14:07] the business. Got
[14:10] no response from the business. They
[14:13] we ended up
[14:16] calling the deputies for
[14:17] assistance with sound complaints. We
[14:18] initially thought we reached out to
[14:19] the
[14:22] buda police but the deputies
[14:25] which we quickly learned
[14:27] that the buda sound ordinance we had
[14:28] followed up
[14:31] with did not
[14:34] apply to progress. Apparently
[14:37] to the address, they
[14:38] fall in county. The surrounding neighbors
[14:40] all are within the city limits. Not
[14:43] sure if the council
[14:46] is aware, but for county, there is
[14:48] no sound ordinance. Buda sound ordinance,
[14:49] the ordinance for
[14:52] residential is 63 during
[14:55] the day. There is nighttime and
[14:58] die time stipulated
[15:00] for the county. There is an 85-decibel
[15:03] limit any time, any day, no matter
[15:06] what. So with no sound ordinance in
[15:10] place, there is no nighttime, no daytime
[15:12] established. For progress, they are
[15:13] able to
[15:15] come through and play music as loud
[15:16] as they
[15:19] want. It started out on
[15:22] a friday, saturday, sunday. That quickly
[15:25] turned into live music and d.j.s
[15:28] so I'm not
[15:30] sure what bars really have ded.j.s
[15:31] that play outside of a
[15:34] six street
[15:36] bar. But that's what we experienced. I
[15:37] guess
[15:39] we are looking for assistance with
[15:40] annexation to
[15:43] be
[15:45] able to bring their little bubble
[15:46] into buda city
[15:49] limit to
[15:52] abide by
[15:55] the taxes. Thank you.
[15:56] >> thank
[16:01] you. All right, the next section is
[16:03] consent agenda. They are considered routine
[16:04] by the city council
[16:07] and will be enacted by
[16:10] one motion unless
[16:11] separate discussion is required. We
[16:13] have two items on
[16:14] consent agenda. The approval of august
[16:16] 5, 2025 special and
[16:19] regular city council
[16:22] meeting minutes and h2, the
[16:25] approval of the final fiscal year,
[16:26] the
[16:28] budget for the economic development
[16:31] corporation. We had a prior meeting
[16:34] about h2
[16:36] before this meeting in the public. Anyone
[16:37] on council want
[16:40] to pull one of these
[16:43] items or approve them
[16:45] as slate?
[16:46] >> mayor, can we pull h2
[16:47] real quick? But I will
[16:49] make a motion
[16:51] we approve h1.
[16:52] >> second. >> all right,
[16:53] a motion
[16:55] and a second for h1. All
[16:58] in favor say aye. Any
[17:01] opposed? Motion carries on
[17:04] h1. That brings h2
[17:07] as the fiscal year budget
[17:10] for the buda edc. Ms. Storm.
[17:11] >>
[17:13] this will be very quick.
[17:14] >> okay. >>
[17:16] just want the
[17:19] rest of our community to hear
[17:21] the amazing work our edc has done
[17:22] in my experience the last
[17:25] six years
[17:28] alone under the leadership of jennifer
[17:31] storm. Many of her board members are
[17:32] incredible. And the
[17:33] things that they have brought to the
[17:34] community and continue
[17:37] to bring are absolutely
[17:40] astounding. And it will change
[17:43] buda forever. We are
[17:45] still a small town. But we do sit
[17:47] next to austin
[17:48] on the 35 corridor. So this group
[17:50] is charged with
[17:51] ringing right development here in
[17:52] terms of industry, business, so I just
[17:56] want to go on
[17:58] the record saying I appreciate y'all. And
[18:01] thank you for everything you have
[18:02] done for buda.
[18:03] >> thank you very
[18:04] much. But five of you sitting up there
[18:05] have served on
[18:07] the edc and without that guidance and
[18:10] relationship these last few years we would not
[18:11] be
[18:12] where we are today. So thank all of you
[18:14] for your support and our
[18:17] staff. And board and everything
[18:20] they do every day. So thank you
[18:21] with the recognition.
[18:22] >> with that
[18:23] I will make the motion to approve.
[18:24] >>
[18:26] we have a motion and
[18:29] a second. All in favor,
[18:30] aye. Any opposed? Page two carries. That
[18:32] brings us to our first
[18:34] and only workshop this evening so
[18:35] I
[18:38] i1 is west
[18:43] oak public improvement district. Workshop. This
[18:44] is from
[18:47] our city engineer
[18:50] and development service
[18:51] director.
[18:52] >> good evening mayor and
[18:53] council. I
[18:56] want to introduce the
[18:58] west oak development proposed off
[18:59] fm1626. They
[19:02] are here to present a public
[19:05] improvement district concept for the
[19:06] west coke development. And I will
[19:08] pass off
[19:11] the presentation
[19:12] to the development team to bruise
[19:17] themselves and
[19:20] give the workshop.
[19:21] >> good
[19:22] evening. Mr. Mayor, council members. For
[19:23] the record, my
[19:26] name is steven simsick with
[19:29] the west oak development. Our
[19:30] team is here as ms. Kennedy stated
[19:32] to give a pit workshop, but
[19:35] also to give you an update on
[19:36] where the project stands. Since we
[19:37] saw you last in december, we have
[19:38] been
[19:41] working on a lot
[19:42] of details on the project and we think
[19:44] we solved a lot of key
[19:45] elements of the project and we want
[19:47] your feedback on
[19:50] that today. And
[19:51] the public improvement district is
[19:53] a key element of
[19:56] that. We have our full
[19:57] team here. And particularly patrick
[19:59] bourn to wac you through
[20:02] what we
[20:05] are looking at
[20:08] there. So to introduce our team,
[20:09] we are the developers. , derook couldn't
[20:11] be here this evening but
[20:13] he passes on his regards. We added
[20:14] a
[20:15] few members. Corresponding with the
[20:17] pid and some other
[20:20] features of
[20:23] the project. Jeff howard, of mcclain
[20:26] and howard is
[20:28] our development counsel. I mentioned
[20:29] patrick
[20:32] bourn of sun dance analytics. He
[20:35] is our pid
[20:36] financial consultant. Elliot jones
[20:38] is on the
[20:41] residential portion of our
[20:42] project. And bryan grace remains our
[20:43] engineer but he is not available tonight.
[20:53] before
[20:55] we get to the pid, just a few update
[20:59] slides to
[21:02] let you know where
[21:03] the project stands today. West oak
[21:05] was always intended to
[21:08] be a
[21:09] key development, a walkable missioned
[21:11] use development to
[21:12] meet the comprehensive plan. 250 for
[21:14] sale town hole units
[21:17] which will increase the median
[21:20] density housing options in the area. Along
[21:23] with that, 40,000 square foot
[21:25] of retail amenities. We are protecting
[21:26] a large grove of trees,
[21:29] 70 plus trees in
[21:31] the protected signature heritage categories. That
[21:32] is kind of
[21:35] embedded in a two acre park with
[21:37] 5,000 feet of trails weaving through
[21:38] the project. And $19
[21:39] million of infrastructure investment
[21:41] are part of the project. We
[21:44] have other details we will
[21:47] show you, but those
[21:50] are the the key elements. I also wanted
[21:53] to state tonight, we
[21:56] listen to
[21:59] the community. To
[22:02] go back
[22:05] about 16 months march march 26 of
[22:06] 2024. We
[22:08] kind
[22:11] of
[22:14] took the feedback and
[22:17] listens to the reasons
[22:20] why it wasn't
[22:22] approved. We drop it down to 2019. Folks
[22:26] said it
[22:28] was too tall, the four stories would block
[22:29] view
[22:32] of the hill country. We
[22:35] heard that for sale
[22:37] was preferable to rental. Folks also
[22:38] said
[22:40] it was too dense at 20.7 units an
[22:44] acre so we dropped that down to
[22:47] nine units
[22:50] an acre. We heard the impervious
[22:53] cover was too high. We heard that four
[22:54] drive
[22:55] throughs was too many. So we dropped
[22:56] that down to two. And plus the possibility
[22:59] of a drive through
[23:01] attach today the inline building. We
[23:02] did all of
[23:05] this by maintaining the
[23:08] amenities. Open space drops because
[23:11] open
[23:14] space is con figured
[23:17] per the
[23:20] number of residential units. We have
[23:22] a lot of enhanced landscaping along
[23:23] the
[23:26] right
[23:29] of way,
[23:31] coal springs road. Retail did drop
[23:32] from 97,000 square
[23:35] feet down to 40. And I have another
[23:38] slide I will cover
[23:41] the reasons for that. So maybe
[23:44] I'll hold on that topic for
[23:47] now. But we
[23:50] did
[23:53] that maintaining the curb. Keeping
[23:54] a
[23:56] signature restaurant building in
[23:59] the plan. As well as the inline for
[24:00] smaller shops
[24:02] and
[24:05] restaurants that
[24:08] served the community. So the details on
[24:09] the
[24:11] retail program, 40,000 square foot. 9,500
[24:12] square
[24:14] foot family concept. That's the picture
[24:15] on the
[24:18] top. 7,500
[24:19] square foot signature restaurant. That
[24:21] is the picture on the
[24:24] lower left. And we also have
[24:26] 16,000 square foot inline shops. And
[24:27] two
[24:30] 3,500
[24:33] square foot individual buildings.
[24:36] so one of
[24:37] the things asked of us was to look
[24:39] at some of the
[24:40] other successful projects in buda. So
[24:42] we did that and did a bit of
[24:44] a comparison to show where we stack
[24:45] up. And I think
[24:48] when you look at
[24:51] it, we
[24:53] have a really contextual project. We
[24:54] looked at the
[24:56] bend, the corner on main, and compared
[24:57] that with west oak. So if
[25:00] you look at land
[25:02] area for example devoted to commercial. We
[25:03] are at
[25:04] 13 acres in the middle of the pack
[25:06] with others
[25:09] ranging from nine
[25:12] to 14
[25:14] acres. In terms of building area for
[25:15] commercial, we
[25:17] are at 40,000 feet. Right at the middle
[25:21] of the sed, the others
[25:24] are at 50,000,
[25:26] 48,000 or 15,000 square feet. We have
[25:30] a nice anchor. A family concept,
[25:33] the moon water saloon, tap
[25:35] in golf. Same thing with tenants. Food
[25:36] and
[25:38] beverage related. Service for the
[25:39] local
[25:40] community. And then, amenities, some
[25:42] folks have a little bit
[25:44] of amenities. The bend has a nice
[25:48] set. We have a nice
[25:51] set. With parks, trails,
[25:54] outdoor
[25:57] uses like pickle ball. And
[25:59] rural heritage. We will have the 40-foot landscape
[26:00] buffer in the front
[26:03] of our project which helps
[26:05] a lot with curb appeal. And we have
[26:06] a
[26:08] lot of infrastructure we have to bring. A
[26:09] new traffic
[26:12] light. New collector road. Which other
[26:18] projects don't have to do. So those
[26:19] are the metrics, curb appeal is something that
[26:21] we
[26:23] are, that is very important. It is
[26:27] to
[26:29] us, the city, to tenants. This image
[26:33] shows what you
[26:36] can
[26:39] do with landscaping, signage. The
[26:42] highway. This image shows the outdoor
[26:43] family concept. Kind
[26:45] of embedded in the
[26:48] trees and
[26:50] the park to create a sense of place. This
[26:51] shows
[26:53] the restaurant building with outdoor
[26:54] space around it to
[26:57] kind
[27:00] of activate the area. Along coal
[27:02] springs road with a multiuse pass
[27:03] to create
[27:05] a nice boulevard effect. This shows
[27:06] how the
[27:09] whole plan comes together
[27:11] with the two signature buildings framing
[27:12] the
[27:15] pond and coal springs road in
[27:21] a park like setting. So in terms
[27:24] of the
[27:27] residential, the program is
[27:29] 215 town home units for sale. This
[27:30] help it is retail to
[27:33] have this residential
[27:35] behind it. We dropped it down to two
[27:36] stories. Adds to the development
[27:39] of housing options in
[27:45] west buda. And
[27:47] more importantly, it is compatible
[27:48] with commercial. The corridor studied
[27:49] to
[27:50] have commercial along the frontage. And
[27:51] some kind
[27:54] of
[27:57] medium density use behind it. And
[28:00] we
[28:03] are
[28:09] basing the town homes
[28:12] off of harvest meadows but
[28:15] we have
[28:18] made some improvements. One of them
[28:21] being
[28:23] sure we have a 50-foot. A lot of times
[28:24] you don't
[28:26] have the right space for streetscape. And
[28:27] the other thing we are
[28:29] doing is increaseing the setback of the
[28:30] buildings of
[28:33] 25 feet from 20. To ensure that cars
[28:34] and
[28:36] trucks when they park in the
[28:39] driveway
[28:42] don't
[28:48] encroach on the sidewalk.
[28:51] the traffic is
[28:54] reduced by 45%. We are able to
[28:57] maintain all of the
[29:03] traffic improvements that
[29:06] total $6 million. One of each entrance
[29:08] of safety. The new extension of coal
[29:09] springs
[29:11] road. These are public roads we build
[29:12] and dedicate to the
[29:15] city. These
[29:18] all kind of go along, we
[29:21] are
[29:24] building a portion of
[29:25] that. Parks trails and open space,
[29:27] 5,000 feet,
[29:29] trails through the projects. Two acres of
[29:30] open space will be
[29:33] accessible to the public. And
[29:36] a
[29:39] one acre
[29:42] private amenity. So now to infrastructure. This
[29:45] slide shows how west okay kind
[29:47] of fulfills the puzzle. The colony
[29:48] and the reserve
[29:52] are
[29:54] bringing roads, traffic, infrastructure,
[29:55] as well
[29:56] as water and waste water utilities
[29:58] all
[30:01] the way to
[30:03] the f.m. 1626 corridor and west oak
[30:04] completes
[30:05] that. The last piece of the puzzle.
[30:13] so there is a
[30:16] lot of detail on
[30:18] this slide that got cut off. And I
[30:19] didn't intend to
[30:21] go through every number on this page anyway. But,
[30:22] the idea was
[30:24] to show you all the categories of
[30:27] infrastructure that we are bringing. Right? So,
[30:31] we
[30:34] are bringing
[30:36] what utility lines east of f.m. 1626. That is the blue and
[30:39] orange on the page. We are also up
[30:41] sizing utilities through west oak. And
[30:43] that's going
[30:44] west, south, and north. So above and
[30:46] beyond what we are bringing
[30:49] to serve our project. We are up
[30:51] sizing to kind of connect to future
[30:52] development around
[30:54] us. We are also creating a water loop. So
[30:57] that again, other developments can
[30:58] tie
[31:00] in fairly easily. Then we have road
[31:01] and traffic
[31:04] infrastructure
[31:05] we have talked about already. Then
[31:07] there are some categories of
[31:08] other including, you know, the water
[31:10] quality pond and
[31:11] water treatment. And then, a number
[31:13] of items are
[31:15] going to the residential infrastructure. Some
[31:16] of which is public.
[31:24] those become public infrastructure. It's
[31:27] a little unfortunate this slide didn't come through and we
[31:31] had some of this
[31:34] information
[31:40] we provided to staff.
[31:49] some of
[31:51] these categories we are proposing
[31:54] impact fee credits for. These items
[31:58] are for the cip. These
[32:01] projects
[32:04] you would have built otherwise. We
[32:06] have a number that is applied for
[32:07] the pid
[32:10] that patrick is going
[32:11] to explain. And I thought I could
[32:13] read that off the
[32:16] screen
[32:19] but
[32:22] social security not there.
[32:23] >> and
[32:24] steven, I see what you see on the
[32:25] screen. But the link on
[32:26] the website, it shows the full picture.
[32:28] >> so you guys are able to see
[32:31] it.
[32:32] >> I'm looking at both all
[32:34] the time. But, we do see that is
[32:37] $19
[32:40] million. 2.6
[32:43] is impact fees. Funded
[32:44] by pid, 7.8 million. It is on the
[32:46] bottom of
[32:48] the screen you can't see, what the developer
[32:49] pays. If you really
[32:52] want to, we can
[32:54] kind of switch it and go and make
[32:55] it. I think this is
[32:58] an important page
[33:01] is what I'm getting to.
[33:02] >> if you are
[33:03] able to
[33:04] do
[33:07] that,
[33:10] that would be great.
[33:11] >> but
[33:12] as we work on that, you can keep moving
[33:13] forward. We will find
[33:16] it on the city's website. It is on
[33:17] the presentation for us. So
[33:19] we have it.
[33:20] >> I
[33:22] think it
[33:25] is a different slide actually.
[33:26] >>
[33:27] is
[33:28] there a different file we can call
[33:29] up
[33:31] up? , is that what you
[33:33] are saying?
[33:34] >> she actually went back to the
[33:35] power point
[33:37] slide.
[33:38] >>
[33:40] these don't line
[33:43] up.
[33:44] >> okay. >> there you
[33:45] go, that's the full picture. We entered
[33:46] comments
[33:49] like the developers
[33:52] posted to
[33:53] build this infrastructure. We also heard
[33:55] comments like be
[33:58] careful about asking for
[34:01] incentives. So this was our plan to drag
[34:02] it ourselves. The
[34:03] city doesn't have the contract to
[34:04] do it. They don't have to manage the
[34:05] construction
[34:06] of any of these items. And again,
[34:07] we are doing this
[34:09] without asking y'all to write any
[34:10] kind
[34:12] of checks for these things. The way
[34:13] we do
[34:16] that again,
[34:19] to cover that 19.3, there's 2.6
[34:22] that
[34:25] come from impact fees. 7.8
[34:28] come from the pid. Patrick and jeff
[34:29] and
[34:31] else yont can
[34:33] explain this better than I. That is
[34:34] like a lower
[34:36] cost of debt for us. That is paid
[34:37] for by the
[34:39] project or paid for by residence. We
[34:40] are actually going
[34:43] to
[34:46] attach that
[34:49] to the retail. Administrative cost,
[34:52] all of that is
[34:54] paid for out of the pid funding and we pay
[34:55] the rest out
[34:57] of our project finance. This is our
[34:58] way to
[35:01] bring all of this
[35:04] infrastructure. And all the benefits. Basically
[35:05] having
[35:07] us drag it
[35:10] and run the project.
[35:16] we can come
[35:18] back to this. But the other thing
[35:19] that we could
[35:21] ask is you know, why should buda do
[35:22] this. We thought it would be
[35:25] good to lay out all of the benefits
[35:26] of
[35:27] west oak on one page. And, go through
[35:28] that before we
[35:31] get into the pid. So, the benefits
[35:34] of west oak again,
[35:37] the $19 million of
[35:40] infrastructure question just mentioned. 8.6
[35:43] of these
[35:45] are public utilities. Traffic improvements. 3.3 of these
[35:46] are already on
[35:50] the
[35:53] cip or the
[35:56] transportation master plan which
[35:58] would lower your cost. They generate
[36:01] fiscal and economic benefits. $88million
[36:03] investment in the corridor. This generates
[36:05] $10
[36:06] million of positive fiscal impacts
[36:08] over 20 years to buda. This is
[36:10] to the city of buda. There's also
[36:11] benefit to the
[36:12] county and the school district. This
[36:14] is 10 million
[36:17] directly to buda. It will
[36:20] generate 40 plus permanent
[36:21] jobs. And the zoning benefits. We
[36:23] designed this to be
[36:26] the realization of the
[36:29] corridor as we mentioned. And we are
[36:32] bringing 40,000 square foot
[36:35] of retail. And
[36:37] diversifying the housing stock. And
[36:38] I think
[36:41] in some,
[36:43] we are trying to just ask for as little
[36:44] as
[36:45] possible and deliver as much as possible
[36:46] so we really trimmed down our ask. We
[36:50] worked with staff to
[36:52] eliminate as many zoning modifications
[36:53] as possible. The old
[36:56] plan had a request of
[36:59] $5 million of incentives with
[37:02] edc. We
[37:04] have taken that out. So we have tried today lower
[37:05] the ask and keep
[37:06] all the benefits and we are asking
[37:08] y'all
[37:11] to
[37:13] look at this comprehensively. Hopefully, you look
[37:14] at it like we do as a good deal for all.
[37:20] so I think I will turn
[37:22] it over to patrick to go over the
[37:23] pid. Unless you
[37:26] want to
[37:28] stop to talk about the infrastructure
[37:29] now.
[37:30] >>
[37:32] let's go ahead and do the
[37:35] pid. We have
[37:37] a couple now. So we do understand
[37:39] the terminology manufacture than we
[37:40] did. Let's put the whole package together
[37:41] and
[37:44] we will
[37:47] circle
[37:48] back with questions.
[37:49] >> mayor, member
[37:50] of council, I appreciate your
[37:52] time. This evening to allow us to
[37:53] go through this
[37:56] presentation
[37:59] with you. My name
[38:00] is patrick horne. I want to reintroduce
[38:02] myself to you and thank
[38:03] you for your time. I know that you
[38:05] have been through the pid process
[38:06] before so I don't want to go through
[38:08] this in a
[38:09] super amount of details. But I did
[38:11] think it would be beneficial to at
[38:14] least
[38:17] touch iten from an
[38:19] overall view as to the way public
[38:20] improvement districts
[38:23] work. As
[38:26] we
[38:29] look at
[38:30] the public improvement district, the
[38:32] way it works putting it in a nutshell
[38:34] is that the developer requests the city
[38:35] to
[38:38] place a lien on their property. That
[38:40] lien is then repaid over a period
[38:44] of time, typically
[38:45] 30 years. The city using those repayment
[38:47] that's are coming
[38:49] over, coming back over that 30 year
[38:50] period is able
[38:53] to issue tax exempt bonds. Which
[38:56] provide a lower interest rate, a lower
[38:58] cost of financing, those bonds are
[38:59] then
[39:01] repaid by the property owners, repaid
[39:02] by those
[39:03] 30 years of payments. Those payments
[39:05] are only made by
[39:07] property owners within the district of
[39:10] this pid which would be coterminous
[39:11] with the boundaries
[39:13] of the project itself. No payments
[39:14] would be placed on
[39:17] any property outside
[39:20] the boundaries of this project to
[39:21] repay
[39:22] the tax exempt bonds being issued
[39:23] by the city. As we
[39:25] look at this, just one of the things
[39:26] I like
[39:29] to remind councils and members
[39:31] of the public is that this lien, these
[39:32] pids have no impact
[39:34] on property outside the boundaries
[39:35] of the pid
[39:37] itself at the project. That lower
[39:38] interest rate, that
[39:40] lower cost of financing is what provides
[39:41] the ability to
[39:43] put in the amount of infrastructure
[39:44] that was
[39:47] being
[39:49] discussed through this presentation.
[39:50] that infrastructure is the
[39:51] lardest hurdle to get any development moving
[39:53] forward particularly when you are
[39:54] looking
[39:56] at a smaller development with large
[39:59] amounts of off
[40:02] side
[40:03] infrastructure. Bringing in regional
[40:04] infrastructure. It is critical to
[40:05] maintain
[40:08] the lowest cost financing
[40:10] as possible. The pid proceeds can't
[40:11] be used for
[40:14] private improvements. They can't be
[40:17] used for vertical. They can only be
[40:18] used
[40:19] for public infrastructure dedicated,
[40:20] conveyed or leased
[40:23] for the benefit of
[40:26] the city. We talked about the
[40:29] type of bonds, not rated. These bonds
[40:30] are in no way
[40:32] on able grace by the city. They
[40:35] are only secured by the property that
[40:36] is within
[40:37] the boundaries of the pid. Though
[40:38] the ponds are issued
[40:40] by tax exempt bonds by the city, the
[40:41] city
[40:44] and its
[40:46] residents have no responsibility whatsoever. It was
[40:47] only secured by
[40:50] the property within
[40:53] the boundaries of the pid.
[41:01] we insist the city create a you said
[41:02] p lick improvement district to help
[41:05] fund the cost for a
[41:08] portion
[41:11] of that public infrastructure.
[41:20] did that move forward? The way we
[41:22] are looking to propose this public
[41:23] improvement district, is that
[41:25] first of all, all costs associated
[41:26] by the pid will be
[41:28] paid by the pid. The city would not
[41:29] come out of pocket for
[41:32] any
[41:35] of the creation costs, or out of pocket
[41:36] for any
[41:37] of the bond issuance cost. It would
[41:38] be paid for by the pid and
[41:41] not be paid by
[41:46] any residents of the city. I know
[41:47] you had experience
[41:50] with other pids in the past. We anticipate
[41:51] that this
[41:54] would be
[41:57] a
[42:03] single pid bond issue.
[42:06] to help
[42:09] assist with the construction
[42:12] financing for
[42:13] the public improvements only. We are
[42:15] currently looking at a
[42:18] tax rate of 299 per $100 of
[42:21] assessed
[42:27] values on the project.
[42:30] one of
[42:33] the things we are looking
[42:35] at, this pid would be a level structure. It
[42:36] would remain
[42:38] approximately level the entire term
[42:41] of that third year period. No escalation. Though
[42:42] home
[42:45] values and values make increase over
[42:46] time, the payments would remain essentially
[42:48] level and not
[42:51] inflate or escalate with the
[42:53] value of the homes. One of the other
[42:54] things
[42:57] we
[43:00] wanted
[43:06] to point out here,
[43:09] annexing in the city
[43:11] boundaries. They are voluntarily taking
[43:15] on the
[43:18] city tax break. In an effort
[43:24] to keep them competitive.
[43:27] we are
[43:28] not requesting this. As mentioned
[43:30] by steven, we are not requesting
[43:33] the benefits
[43:36] from the city. The pid installments
[43:37] would
[43:39] be paid
[43:42] by the
[43:44] property owners. As we move through
[43:45] process, the
[43:47] request would be to work, continue
[43:48] working
[43:51] with
[43:54] the
[43:57] city and their staff.
[44:00] as
[44:02] we go through each one of those steps,
[44:03] approve will
[44:06] be required by city council. As
[44:09] we provide a pid petition. As we
[44:11] go forward with hopefully the creation
[44:12] of the pid. And ultimately,
[44:14] the issuance of the bonds. All of
[44:15] those are different steps where
[44:18] we would be working with
[44:21] staff. The whole time. And continually
[44:23] providing feedback and receiving approval
[44:24] from the
[44:26] city council prior to moving forward
[44:27] with
[44:30] any
[44:33] of those those steps. That
[44:36] kind
[44:39] of
[44:42] wraps up the overview.
[44:54] >> thank you. Thank you patrick. We
[44:55] will,
[44:57] questions
[45:00] from council? We have a few.
[45:01] >> thank
[45:02] you
[45:03] very much for the presentation. I
[45:04] have a couple of
[45:05] questions about the infrastructure. So,
[45:06] if we could go back to the slide where
[45:07] I think you
[45:09] outlined
[45:15] some of the items.
[45:18] so we are talking about
[45:21] a pid to cover the
[45:24] utility
[45:26] lines. The regional water loop. Roads. What
[45:30] else is in here? Residential infrastructure. So,
[45:32] on a typical bill, those are things
[45:36] that
[45:39] you would
[45:42] normally cover half.
[45:43] >> it is
[45:44] common for residential projects when
[45:45] you have this much infrastructure,
[45:47] that you do something with a pid or
[45:48] a mud. We were trying
[45:51] to
[45:54] keep this presentation a little we
[45:55] didn't
[45:57] want to pound you with a lot of detail
[45:58] but we
[45:59] have something we can provide where
[46:00] we
[46:02] looked at west oak versus the other
[46:03] pids and muds that
[46:06] had been done in buda. So
[46:09] like although
[46:12] we
[46:15] are a little smaller. That is
[46:18] similar
[46:21] to projects like
[46:24] persimmon
[46:26] that had done something similar. If
[46:27] there is a
[46:29] lower amount of investment, you might
[46:30] not need
[46:33] a pid or a mud. We were
[46:36] able to spread the
[46:41] infrastructure across the project. But when
[46:42] question drop the
[46:45] number of units, the project
[46:48] doesn't work without a pid or
[46:49] a mud structure.
[46:50] >> okay. So then,
[46:51] my follow-up question would be
[46:54] is if you weren't
[46:56] granted a pid, how would you finance
[46:57] this?
[46:58] >> I don't
[47:00] think we can. I don't know
[47:02] how we would do it. Maybe a further answer to
[47:03] your question is there
[47:06] are some
[47:09] project that's
[47:12] don't have to build the extension
[47:13] of
[47:14] a public road. Maybe they have water
[47:15] and sewer to their property
[47:18] and don't have
[47:21] as many off site. It is really on
[47:22] a site by
[47:24] site basis, whether you have
[47:28] all of those
[47:29] infrastructure items. And how much
[47:31] you spend
[47:35] over your total project. Did I get
[47:37] that right as
[47:38] to why the residential projects need
[47:40] the
[47:46] pids and the
[47:49] muds?
[47:50] >> good
[47:51] evening council. Elliot jones. I heard his
[47:55] answer. I guess if I were to
[47:58] add anything,
[48:01] how would
[48:03] you finance it? The reason behind
[48:04] the
[48:07] request is really what he
[48:09] had described that it provides low
[48:10] cost financing alternative that allows
[48:13] you
[48:16] to put more infrastructure
[48:19] in because of the access to
[48:20] the tax exempt debt. Basically it
[48:21] is lower interest rate. The effect
[48:22] of
[48:25] the pid, it is money that
[48:30] has to be paid back. It is borne by
[48:31] taxpayers to the extent
[48:33] that someone will buy and pay a town
[48:34] home. What they can
[48:36] pay for it, it has to be offset by selling
[48:37] the town
[48:40] home for less for example. To
[48:42] make the same payment. So, but since it
[48:43] is a cost of debt
[48:46] that is lower than what
[48:49] you get, just raising debt
[48:51] or, traditional debt financing through
[48:52] a
[48:53] bank. And equity, it improves the
[48:55] project economics to the
[48:58] extent to allow you to fit more infrastructure
[49:01] in. So
[49:04] sorry
[49:05] for that explanation. But, that's
[49:07] all I got.
[49:08] >> no worries. I have a
[49:09] couple more real quick questions. So,
[49:10] what's
[49:13] the average square foot you
[49:16] are looking as for these 219
[49:19] town homes?
[49:20] >> they
[49:22] are
[49:25] about 2,000 square feet.
[49:26] >> what
[49:28] what is
[49:29] your average price?
[49:30] >> right around 400,000.
[49:36] >> do you think that is viable in the
[49:40] market right
[49:43] now?
[49:44] >> we do. This is
[49:46] an
[49:47] attractive sub market. There's been
[49:49] successful town home project ins the
[49:50] area
[49:51] and they have resold well. When they
[49:52] go back on
[49:55] the market,
[49:56] they are selling very well and there
[49:58] is not a lot of that product here so
[50:01] I think it will be attractive.
[50:07] >> okay. I'm going to trust that
[50:10] you are good with that. Because I'm thinking
[50:11] at 2,000
[50:12] square feet, we have homes right now
[50:13] in neighborhoods
[50:16] that are pretty well established that
[50:17] are 2600
[50:18] square feet and they are not selling
[50:19] for
[50:20] 400,000. I get these are new. I get
[50:22] that you will sell it
[50:25] as a
[50:28] new
[50:29] development. But just keeping in mind
[50:31] once we have this workshop, we
[50:32] have having these conversations, coming
[50:34] back to us will be a whole other
[50:37] conversation if we have
[50:39] to revisit this because that will
[50:40] be your gap. Can you sell
[50:42] it for the price you are selling it
[50:43] for. If we approve a pid,
[50:45] how high can you go on the amount
[50:46] you can charge
[50:49] on that
[50:50] in order to recoop something. And
[50:51] whether or not financially it will
[50:52] work
[50:55] for you guys to build
[50:57] this. So I am going to trust that
[50:58] you are good with
[51:00] that.
[51:01] >> we are good with it. And
[51:02] the
[51:04] project moves
[51:07] forward
[51:10] along with the pid the
[51:11] other financing decisions are made at
[51:13] the same
[51:16] time we initiate the
[51:17] pid funding. We wouldn't go forward
[51:19] with the pid if we weren't going to
[51:20] sell
[51:22] the units. It wasn't as
[51:25] easy
[51:27] as it was in 2020. In 2021. It is
[51:28] a little harder
[51:31] in the housing market. But
[51:34] that is why we need
[51:37] this. We have engineered this as
[51:40] far
[51:46] as we could go.
[51:52] >> affordability is an
[51:54] issue. They are looking for communities
[51:55] south of
[51:57] boston and affordability. If we build 219
[51:58] town
[52:01] homes
[52:04] at 200 square foot each. Maybe two
[52:05] or three
[52:07] or four could squeeze in there and
[52:08] $400,000 is
[52:10] a lot of
[52:13] money for 2,000 square feet. I don't
[52:14] want
[52:15] this to be performative. I want to
[52:16] make
[52:18] sure you guys have buttenned your
[52:19] belts and are coming at
[52:22] us
[52:25] with
[52:28] what's going to be. No bait and switch.
[52:29] >>
[52:30] no, we
[52:31] are not bait and
[52:34] switching. We believe
[52:36] this project works.
[52:37] >> questions? Comments? Mr.
[52:38] smith?
[52:39] >> probably more comments
[52:40] than questions. Thank you for being
[52:41] here tonight. And
[52:43] all the presents for providing an
[52:44] update. This project
[52:46] has
[52:49] been going around and around. Trust
[52:50] has
[52:51] been mentioned. Trust will verify. When
[52:55] I hear words like project doesn't
[52:59] work, we have a developer
[53:02] in front of us. I can
[53:03] respect that. I absolutely can. We all
[53:05] work to make money to
[53:07] support our families. I totally get
[53:08] that. We
[53:09] have no idea. We are working blindly
[53:11] here on what
[53:13] that number truly is. We start talking
[53:15] about public financing, like pids,
[53:20] to change what's out
[53:22] there now, into a medium density residential
[53:26] development, and we are
[53:28] in a year right now where tax rates
[53:29] are going
[53:31] up. Home values are going down. Revenues
[53:35] are tight on the city
[53:38] side. And we look at a $400,000
[53:41] town
[53:44] home and a
[53:46] potential 353500 annual additional
[53:47] cost. If this trend
[53:48] continues that will squeeze the homeowners
[53:50] in the future. It will squeeze them,
[53:52] it will squeeze us as far as what
[53:53] we can expect a
[53:56] homeowner to pay in the form
[53:58] of all kinds of taxes. Whether it
[54:01] is school bonds, city boppeds, property
[54:05] taxes. It just
[54:08] need to
[54:11] be perfect. And the 17
[54:13] months I believe you referenced earlier. A
[54:14] bait
[54:15] and switch was mentioned. That is
[54:17] what we are treading here
[54:18] on this development. We saw something
[54:20] when times were, looked
[54:21] like it was workable and every time
[54:23] it came back, it was
[54:25] a little bit different. And this one,
[54:26] the
[54:27] financial piece of it is already a
[54:29] challenge. It
[54:32] is a
[54:35] challenge for you guys
[54:36] to make the project work. We see the challenge
[54:38] it will be on the homeowners.
[54:41] that is something we will
[54:44] collectively
[54:49] have to work out. I would like to
[54:50] make
[54:52] a recommendation side by side. This
[54:56] speak to
[54:57] that trust factor. At the beginning
[54:59] of the presentation it was
[55:02] a side by side comparison
[55:05] that favored
[55:08] okay let's do this. But then, when
[55:09] councilmember williams was asking
[55:10] about infrastructure, it gets tough
[55:14] to compare
[55:17] side by side
[55:20] right? So setting a precedent comparing
[55:23] the sites,
[55:26] just not a good look. So back to
[55:32] the
[55:35] slide I mentioned. The bend. No residential
[55:40] component whatsoever. The shops at
[55:41] garlic creek. Quarter and
[55:44] main. You
[55:47] have this mixed model
[55:48] okay? My interpretation of you can't
[55:50] compare side by side. Those
[55:53] are not good comparisons. They
[55:59] are sales tax generating
[56:00] commercial retail development. If
[56:02] we are going to compare, I want to
[56:05] compare
[56:07] something apples to apples which you
[56:08] guys are willing to
[56:11] do it. Buda
[56:14] is in a position where
[56:16] every project is unique. Every project should
[56:17] bring something to the
[56:18] community especially when we are going to
[56:19] roll out a pid program when we know
[56:20] the resident ins
[56:21] the future will be wedged between
[56:23] paying what they are
[56:26] required to pay and watching
[56:29] their
[56:30] other tax rates fluctuate. That will
[56:32] be a challenge
[56:35] so we have to nail this. It will be
[56:38] amazing. We said this
[56:40] in our previous pids. They are not
[56:41] just
[56:42] there for regular infrastructure. They
[56:44] are there for amazing
[56:46] blow us away. Which we saw from the
[56:47] very first
[56:48] presentation. I was sitting right
[56:50] here. The drone
[56:53] flying over,
[56:55] the whole thing. It was amazing. On
[56:56] board. Then
[56:59] things changed and we were not on
[57:00] board. I
[57:02] love the workshop environment
[57:05] because it allow
[57:07] this feedback. I'm nowhere near making
[57:08] a commitment
[57:10] on anything. Is there is nowhere you
[57:11] cannot squeeze the homeowners,
[57:13] take on responsibility for the development
[57:14] itself and I'm not
[57:16] talking about the oversized public
[57:17] infrastructure, I understand the impact
[57:18] for
[57:19] your credit. Not talking about that. We
[57:20] are asking you
[57:22] guys to oversize. Where you wouldn't
[57:23] need
[57:26] to. Not even worried about that. That's
[57:27] on
[57:28] us. But if you guys can lessen the
[57:29] future burden
[57:31] on these future home buyers, our future
[57:32] citizens that
[57:35] will come here, you can
[57:37] increase your sales tax generators.
[57:38] you can very much further down on
[57:41] the list behind
[57:44] those two. But, make
[57:47] it unique. I
[57:50] love the buildings further to
[57:53] the south, southeast, the
[57:56] buildings on the south. When you creep
[57:57] back toward the
[57:58] north. I didn't see any elevation
[57:59] on those so I don't know what
[58:02] it looks like from
[58:04] the road. It was all aerial on those
[58:05] but we got
[58:07] nice elevation on those other buildings
[58:08] and they look
[58:11] amazing. If we
[58:14] can match the north side
[58:17] I think we are getting closer to a wow factor,
[58:18] I will leave
[58:20] that up to you guys. But
[58:23] feel
[58:24] free. It is a workshop. There wasn't
[58:26] really a question in there. These
[58:29] were
[58:31] more observations and comments.
[58:32] >> councilmember
[58:33] smith,
[58:35] I appreciate the
[58:38] feedback. That
[58:41] is what this is for. There is a lot
[58:44] in what you
[58:47] said. So I want to
[58:50] respond. Maybe first on
[58:52] the trust thing. We just can't do
[58:54] what we showed you
[58:57] back then. We have been trying
[59:00] to put this
[59:03] together. It ends up being,
[59:06] I'll call it a contextual
[59:07] project. Something that is similar
[59:08] to the other retail projects and I
[59:09] will
[59:12] get to the side by side
[59:15] thing in a minute. I asked
[59:17] the staff some questions on this. Like
[59:18] what
[59:20] should this look like. We went back
[59:21] on
[59:22] forth on rural heritage. And they
[59:26] talked about some examples, circle
[59:30] c onslaughter lane was one. That
[59:32] is mentioned in the comprehensive plan. So
[59:33] I took
[59:34] a look at that. You have setbacks
[59:36] for trees
[59:39] which
[59:41] I have. We said okay. We were resisting a
[59:42] bit
[59:45] on rural
[59:48] tore damage. It is very
[59:51] specific. It is
[59:53] very specific about design criteria. We
[59:54] have
[59:55] a few tweaks for rural heritage. But
[59:57] we said okay, is it
[1:00:00] okay if
[1:00:03] we do
[1:00:06] that? Kind of yeah. So, I get it
[1:00:07] on the wow factor. It is just that
[1:00:09] is
[1:00:12] not something that we can do so
[1:00:15] we are trying to
[1:00:16] do something that is contextual. And
[1:00:21] when you drive around, you see
[1:00:24] a
[1:00:27] lot
[1:00:30] of stone. You see that
[1:00:36] rule character. And we have, we are
[1:00:38] trying to manage how much detail we
[1:00:39] gave you all. But we have
[1:00:40] elevations of the other buildings. They
[1:00:42] match up with the
[1:00:45] udc. They match up
[1:00:47] with rural heritage. So, we are happy
[1:00:48] to do
[1:00:50] that. And, we wanted a mix. An inline
[1:00:51] building
[1:00:53] looks like an inline building but
[1:00:54] if you
[1:00:57] look at circle c, they are like inline
[1:00:58] buildings. They are inline buildings
[1:01:00] with stone. With a lot
[1:01:03] of landscaping around them. So
[1:01:05] we can do that. And when you mentioned
[1:01:06] the side by
[1:01:09] side,
[1:01:10] the infrastructure thing is kind of
[1:01:15] a tricky thing to look
[1:01:16] at. Someone said how much infrastructure
[1:01:18] went into those? And
[1:01:20] we just didn't know. We put the presentation
[1:01:21] together and we have to do it
[1:01:24] like a week out to give it to
[1:01:25] you all. So we can look at that and
[1:01:27] see how much did they
[1:01:30] have to put in for that? Did they
[1:01:31] do
[1:01:33] a traffic
[1:01:34] light or new roads? So, it is kind
[1:01:36] of case by case. You
[1:01:42] know. We have another analysis
[1:01:45] and looked at projects and
[1:01:46] why they needed pid. So we can go
[1:01:48] through that with staff and you all. But
[1:01:51] we are trying to
[1:01:54] get over that hurdle of where we
[1:01:57] were. I have to do some
[1:02:00] math. Two
[1:02:03] years
[1:02:06] ago, something like that. We are trying
[1:02:07] to
[1:02:08] put the pieces together. Responding
[1:02:09] to staff
[1:02:11] comment. And to the zoning and then,
[1:02:12] putting together
[1:02:14] the financing of it. Right? So, we
[1:02:15] are happy
[1:02:16] to kind of walk staff through that
[1:02:18] a little bit more if that's
[1:02:21] the best way to
[1:02:24] do it. So, we hear you. I think we
[1:02:25] have
[1:02:26] addressed it. It is just sometimes,
[1:02:27] we haven't had a chance to talk about
[1:02:28] it. And you know, we have gone through
[1:02:30] a lot of detail
[1:02:33] in the past nine months with this. And
[1:02:34] it
[1:02:35] is hard to get it all in here. Maybe
[1:02:36] after
[1:02:38] this session, we'll talk with staff
[1:02:39] about what's the best
[1:02:42] way to get you folks that information to
[1:02:45] get the
[1:02:51] answers to those questions.
[1:02:53] >> more questions? >> one more question
[1:02:57] on the
[1:03:00] financial side. And
[1:03:03] I appreciate
[1:03:06] that most of what I was going
[1:03:08] to ask was by smith and horne-williams.
[1:03:09] >>
[1:03:10] : would
[1:03:11] they be charged the same $3,500 that
[1:03:12] would be attach
[1:03:15] today the retail units or
[1:03:18] is that split
[1:03:21] up differently? Would that make it
[1:03:22] lower for
[1:03:23] homeowners?
[1:03:24] >> the way we take a look
[1:03:27] at that. By law, payments have to
[1:03:28] be allocated in equitable
[1:03:30] fashion based on the benefit they
[1:03:32] receive from the public infrastructure. When
[1:03:36] we were looking at the $3,500 on average we
[1:03:39] thought just so you guys
[1:03:42] could get an idea. When we
[1:03:45] say
[1:03:47] 88 cents per assessed value, so the way
[1:03:48] you look at
[1:03:50] it from the retail, the retailers
[1:03:51] would be paying
[1:03:54] their fair share based on
[1:03:57] their estimated value as
[1:04:00] well. Of 88 cents per
[1:04:03] assessed value. That way it
[1:04:04] is being equitable. Consistent with
[1:04:06] the legal requirements that we have
[1:04:07] to
[1:04:09] pursue when
[1:04:12] creating a public improvement district.
[1:04:13] >> okay. >>
[1:04:16] we just don't have that
[1:04:18] on a per unit basis.
[1:04:19] >> just a couple of
[1:04:20] other comments and stuff. I was remembering
[1:04:25] back
[1:04:27] to the last workshop. This is, you have the
[1:04:28] last piece
[1:04:31] of the puzzle
[1:04:34] for this whole corridor. To
[1:04:37] me this is really setting
[1:04:40] a
[1:04:42] precedent for that corridor. I want
[1:04:43] this to have that
[1:04:46] wow factor, we want
[1:04:49] to get it right. I know there is that
[1:04:50] presentation to the community at the
[1:04:52] garlic creek
[1:04:55] center tomorrow. I
[1:04:56] was hoping that would happen before
[1:04:57] this workshop. I was interested in
[1:04:58] the
[1:05:03] feedback from the community. I will
[1:05:04] be
[1:05:06] following up on that. And things that I
[1:05:07] think
[1:05:10] this was very
[1:05:11] financially based, this workshop. But
[1:05:13] concerns I had from the
[1:05:14] last one, you know, turning out or
[1:05:16] not having a way to get
[1:05:19] to that light from the brewery,
[1:05:22] I still see
[1:05:25] that as
[1:05:31] a problem for me. And
[1:05:34] then, I saw
[1:05:36] you did an extra five feet of setback
[1:05:37] on the
[1:05:40] driveway to accommodate large
[1:05:41] trucks for parking in the front. I
[1:05:43] know parking in the street, parking
[1:05:46] in stuff is a problem
[1:05:49] in
[1:05:52] a lot
[1:05:55] of communities. 2,000 square
[1:05:58] foot. Family of four. I see
[1:06:01] two vehicles in the driveway
[1:06:03] and that quickly becomes more. I saw a thing
[1:06:04] there there was
[1:06:06] parking in the back to keep the parking
[1:06:07] in the streets better
[1:06:10] and a cleaner look up front. That
[1:06:12] is something that I know has been
[1:06:13] talked
[1:06:16] about. But something that I would
[1:06:17] look
[1:06:19] at.
[1:06:20] >> so, we have
[1:06:21] extra parking kind of dispersed through
[1:06:25] the
[1:06:28] project
[1:06:30] about 30 spaces. Throughout the project
[1:06:31] each unit will
[1:06:34] have a garage. Even if folks put
[1:06:37] things in the garage,
[1:06:38] they'll have two. Space for two car
[1:06:40] ins the driveway. And
[1:06:43] some spaces kind
[1:06:45] of integrated into the project.
[1:06:46] >>
[1:06:47] okay, thank
[1:06:49] you.
[1:06:50] >> and, let's talk also about the, you
[1:06:52] said getting in and
[1:06:55] out
[1:06:58] of the brewery location?
[1:07:04] do you mean turning left into
[1:07:06] the project?
[1:07:07] >> it is a busy road
[1:07:08] and it is getting
[1:07:10] busier and busier. So whereas
[1:07:12] all the other commercial, they can
[1:07:13] go up. I don't know what the
[1:07:15] name of that street will be. But they
[1:07:16] can come out and go
[1:07:19] to the light. If they are turning
[1:07:20] left
[1:07:21] going northbound, they are protected. But,
[1:07:22] coming out of there, there is no
[1:07:25] way to get to that
[1:07:28] main road. So, folks that are going
[1:07:29] north,
[1:07:31] they will cut across a pretty
[1:07:34] busy intersection
[1:07:36] there.
[1:07:37] >> yeah. You know, we don't
[1:07:38] have our
[1:07:39] traffic here today. We went through
[1:07:40] all
[1:07:43] of this with tex
[1:07:45] dot and hayes county. Let me get a
[1:07:46] little more
[1:07:49] detail
[1:07:52] on how
[1:07:54] that works.
[1:07:55] >> mr. Ture, go ahead. >>
[1:07:58] thank y'all for the presentation. Some
[1:08:01] things have
[1:08:02] already been said, including your
[1:08:04] question just there, I
[1:08:07] was
[1:08:10] going to check on that split so thank
[1:08:13] you for
[1:08:16] that walk through. Is it 30-year is
[1:08:17] expected on the installments? Like,
[1:08:19] basically, the pid would be
[1:08:22] paid down in 30
[1:08:25] years?
[1:08:26] >> yes. >> based
[1:08:28] on this current
[1:08:30] preliminary but 3500? Per unit? Estimated?
[1:08:31] >>
[1:08:32] that is correct. And that
[1:08:33] is consistent with most of the pids that
[1:08:34] you see throughout the
[1:08:37] state
[1:08:40] of texas. That 30 year term.
[1:08:41] >> that question
[1:08:42] and that question
[1:08:43] for my key to finalizing my understanding
[1:08:44] of the pid. You
[1:08:46] have gotten a lot of feedback already. I
[1:08:49] will sum mine up by saying
[1:08:51] some agreement and just caution. But
[1:08:55] broadly, I
[1:08:58] think what really is key is what y'all came
[1:09:00] back with based on the feedback you
[1:09:02] got. So, you know, you had
[1:09:05] it on I think the
[1:09:08] second
[1:09:09] slide. Reduction in units. Reduction
[1:09:11] in height. Going to
[1:09:14] for sale
[1:09:17] from rental. The
[1:09:20] density. Impervious
[1:09:22] cover. Drive throughs, open space. While
[1:09:25] keeping some of the signature buildings. It
[1:09:26] is so obviously
[1:09:28] key or we made it key is keeping some
[1:09:29] of
[1:09:32] these signature trees in
[1:09:33] the environment? Terms of just the
[1:09:35] heritage aspect of
[1:09:37] that project. And what's around that
[1:09:40] house that is there today. The point
[1:09:41] is that
[1:09:43] grove, if you will. Just a lot of
[1:09:47] things I think y'all came
[1:09:48] back with. Which is good. I want to
[1:09:50] see the retail number
[1:09:52] go up. I understand the pressures. But
[1:09:53] if it is workshop and
[1:09:56] you are looking
[1:09:57] for that feedback, that is one that
[1:09:59] is I think you have made
[1:10:02] a lot of good moves. That
[1:10:05] retail portion is important
[1:10:08] to us. To see it go down
[1:10:10] that much is tough. But I understand
[1:10:14] where you are at. The pid, I
[1:10:17] can generally see and get
[1:10:20] behind. It is
[1:10:23] super tight
[1:10:29] on that three cents.
[1:10:32] just being at 299 is right
[1:10:34] up against and y'all are aware of
[1:10:35] that. I'm not telling
[1:10:38] you anything you don't know. It is
[1:10:41] tight. And our pid policy is
[1:10:44] a
[1:10:46] pretty bright line there. So, I think
[1:10:50] some
[1:10:51] of the cautioner you heard. That makes
[1:10:53] it sound like motions are happening
[1:10:54] when
[1:10:56] I second
[1:10:59] it. I will
[1:11:01] echo. Some of the caution. We are
[1:11:02] not interested in
[1:11:03] moving that policy number. Just know
[1:11:05] that is where we
[1:11:06] are at. And so, y'all are up against
[1:11:08] it but came back with
[1:11:11] a lot of the changes that
[1:11:14] you heard feedback on. So, as far
[1:11:16] as workshop, I think that those are
[1:11:17] some of
[1:11:18] my notes. I would appreciate a bunch
[1:11:20] of those moves working
[1:11:23] to make something
[1:11:25] that still matches our tmnp. And,
[1:11:26] our master plan. And a
[1:11:29] lot of the responses you got in
[1:11:30] the original design. While coming
[1:11:32] back
[1:11:33] with something. So yeah. Thanks.
[1:11:34] >>
[1:11:35] all right. I appreciate that. And
[1:11:36] to that,
[1:11:38] we wanted to keep a close eye on that
[1:11:41] line. And I think as you
[1:11:43] mentioned, the pid rate overall as
[1:11:44] a line,
[1:11:47] we are looking at that $3,500 as well
[1:11:50] as the pid rate and looking at communities
[1:11:53] in and around buda as well to make
[1:11:54] sure
[1:11:56] that we are not boxing ourselves
[1:11:59] out from a competitive standpoint. We
[1:12:01] wanted to make sure we were competitive
[1:12:02] with other
[1:12:03] project ins the area. The other thing
[1:12:05] we wanted to look at as we
[1:12:07] are doing this and coming back. I
[1:12:08] would like
[1:12:10] to just kind of reiterate item is
[1:12:11] we are voluntarily
[1:12:14] annexing the property
[1:12:17] into the
[1:12:20] city to bring property tax revenues
[1:12:22] into the city of buda. We wanted to
[1:12:23] keep that rate where
[1:12:26] it is without having to request
[1:12:27] any tax increment reinvestment zones. We
[1:12:29] didn't want the city to have to
[1:12:32] participate to
[1:12:34] buy that down further. So we were
[1:12:35] trying to hit a
[1:12:38] spot
[1:12:41] we thought was competitive
[1:12:44] in the mark without
[1:12:47] requesting any city assistance. We
[1:12:49] are trying to juggle all of those
[1:12:50] while having
[1:12:51] a project we can produce. It doesn't
[1:12:53] do to set a rate where we can't
[1:12:56] sell the units so we are being very
[1:12:57] careful with
[1:12:58] that as well. So thank you for bringing
[1:12:59] that up and
[1:13:02] I appreciate your comments. Thank
[1:13:04] you.
[1:13:05] >> certainly. And got notes.
[1:13:06] there is not just our cap
[1:13:08] but
[1:13:13] the markets.
[1:13:14] >> exactly. >> acceptability. Good notes. Very helpful. Thanks.
[1:13:17] >>
[1:13:21] looking left and
[1:13:24] right. Anyone else? Ms.
[1:13:25] davis?
[1:13:26] >> I will just add being on
[1:13:27] here when
[1:13:29] we saw the original plans, very much
[1:13:33] what everyone has said. It is
[1:13:36] a very
[1:13:39] different look
[1:13:41] from original. Pictures we saw while
[1:13:42] I
[1:13:45] appreciate the
[1:13:46] reduction and density. Not excited
[1:13:51] about the
[1:13:52] retail space. And while the market
[1:13:54] will do
[1:13:57] what
[1:14:00] it
[1:14:02] is going to do, we didn't quite understand
[1:14:03] what
[1:14:05] they bought into. They got approved. And,
[1:14:06] they
[1:14:09] started
[1:14:12] seeing
[1:14:15] the bills come in. Similar
[1:14:18] to what the councilwoman stated, being
[1:14:21] careful about the
[1:14:24] product
[1:14:27] we put out there. From a pit
[1:14:29] standpoint, it has already been said. I
[1:14:30] don't know what the
[1:14:33] wow factor is for us to go
[1:14:34] down this path. The infrastructure
[1:14:36] is
[1:14:39] fantastic. That
[1:14:41] would come anyway eventually. I'm
[1:14:42] just real
[1:14:44] neutral on this right now. I just
[1:14:48] wanted to get that feedback
[1:14:51] to you. Thank you.
[1:14:52] >> well, this is
[1:14:53] a workshop so there will be no action
[1:14:54] taken this evening but
[1:14:57] we bounced around a bunch of
[1:15:00] feedback and concepts back
[1:15:03] with you. This item is heavy
[1:15:06] on the pid piece of it. Most of
[1:15:08] my questions are on the planned development
[1:15:09] side
[1:15:12] as well as the details of what are
[1:15:13] you
[1:15:15] asking for as far as
[1:15:21] mitigation on other things?
[1:15:23] that comes with more vetting out the
[1:15:24] process. As far as
[1:15:26] the pid, we talked about that one
[1:15:27] quite a bit. We
[1:15:30] have
[1:15:33] been through a few now. But we did
[1:15:35] voice our concerns about the viability. And
[1:15:36] that is
[1:15:39] the developers, that's your problem
[1:15:40] to sell them. But we are just doing
[1:15:42] the math and trying to
[1:15:45] figure out it is going to
[1:15:48] be a big murder
[1:15:49] on that individual homeowner. And
[1:15:51] fast forward
[1:15:52] a couple of years, they come and find
[1:15:54] us and ask why their
[1:15:56] taxes are so high. Because you bought
[1:15:57] into a
[1:16:00] pid. What's a pid? We have those conversations. And
[1:16:03] those are real conversations
[1:16:06] I
[1:16:09] am expecting to happen. I do appreciate
[1:16:12] the
[1:16:15] changes
[1:16:20] that have been made. There has been
[1:16:21] some
[1:16:24] significant movement
[1:16:27] toward what you listened. We listened
[1:16:29] to the complaints and the input from
[1:16:30] us
[1:16:33] and the public. And you put yourself
[1:16:34] out
[1:16:36] there. I'm looking to see
[1:16:39] how
[1:16:41] the neighborhood meetings go. Because
[1:16:42] I will get feedback from those as
[1:16:43] well. I appreciate you guys putting
[1:16:45] yourself out there and getting
[1:16:47] in front of the tomatoes in some cases and taking it.
[1:16:54] more of
[1:16:57] my
[1:16:59] questions are that financial page. If
[1:17:00] you would flip back to the
[1:17:03] one we are trying to expand. I hate
[1:17:04] to use
[1:17:06] the
[1:17:08] word color of money. But, in this
[1:17:09] role together,
[1:17:12] so I can see that the wet utility
[1:17:15] line, you are pulling the water
[1:17:17] and the sewer from where elliot had stopped
[1:17:18] on
[1:17:21] the west
[1:17:24] side. Pulling
[1:17:26] it under the freeway. That is absolutely something
[1:17:27] that we should help you
[1:17:30] with. I
[1:17:36] get that is infrastructure.
[1:17:42] it is the bottom
[1:17:45] section of that that gets fuzzy. What
[1:17:47] is funded by the pid and what is funded
[1:17:48] by you as a
[1:17:51] developer. And so when we
[1:17:54] have this conversation, going forward,
[1:17:55] it
[1:17:56] would be beneficial to look at where
[1:17:58] that is being funded at
[1:18:00] least in your mind for conversations. I
[1:18:01] understand
[1:18:02] that it is all dollars and accounts
[1:18:04] and all
[1:18:07] of those things. But I don't
[1:18:10] think
[1:18:13] that
[1:18:16] pid should pay
[1:18:19] for
[1:18:20] excavation and grating. There are
[1:18:21] details in that bottom section I would
[1:18:22] like to see
[1:18:24] what part of our seven is going into
[1:18:25] that
[1:18:27] and what part of your eight goes into
[1:18:28] that. That is not clear the
[1:18:29] way that is presented right now.
[1:18:30] >>
[1:18:31] mr.
[1:18:33] mayor, we have that. And, weed ad
[1:18:37] that to the presentation
[1:18:38] after we submitted the slides. It
[1:18:40] just
[1:18:43] didn't make it
[1:18:46] into tonight. I have it right here.
[1:18:47] >>
[1:18:49] this was a workshop. I
[1:18:52] am
[1:18:55] glad
[1:18:58] you have that answer. I
[1:19:01] said this from
[1:19:02] the very beginning. Through the projects
[1:19:04] we have on coal springs. The
[1:19:07] bridge on coal springs. All
[1:19:10] of those
[1:19:13] things are creating the avenue
[1:19:16] to pull it
[1:19:19] across 1626 which
[1:19:20] would rejuvenate, accelerate this whole
[1:19:22] area. And the
[1:19:25] water loop
[1:19:28] doing the same thing. What you are
[1:19:31] offering I don't take lightly, I appreciate the
[1:19:32] infrastructure you are bringing to
[1:19:34] the area. It is not four stories,
[1:19:37] 600 units
[1:19:40] that
[1:19:46] we were looking at. The
[1:19:49] first time
[1:19:51] around. It seemed heavy. I would like
[1:19:52] to understand
[1:19:53] it a little more. As to what goes
[1:19:55] in the pid and
[1:19:58] you
[1:20:01] guys. In
[1:20:07] your mind at least.
[1:20:10] what is impact fee items that could
[1:20:13] be
[1:20:19] and should be used. You came
[1:20:22] to this
[1:20:25] meeting with a list of list
[1:20:28] of wishes and goals. Do you
[1:20:31] need something
[1:20:33] else from us?
[1:20:34] >> I think there is
[1:20:35] just rolling your sleeves up
[1:20:37] to work on it. And we had a
[1:20:40] call with y'all, you have a pid consultant. We
[1:20:43] had patrick. A call last week to start
[1:20:44] that
[1:20:46] dialogue. There is probably
[1:20:49] a little more
[1:20:52] financial
[1:20:55] engineering to get that
[1:20:57] right. There will be a little more
[1:20:58] work for you all to tease that
[1:21:01] out to optimize that and
[1:21:04] get it
[1:21:06] where it should be. So one request,
[1:21:07] we will get
[1:21:10] the pid right. The other one will
[1:21:12] be, we understand the comments about
[1:21:13] what we had showed y'all
[1:21:16] a few years ago right? And I think
[1:21:18] we have had this cross to bear since
[1:21:19] then. And we are
[1:21:22] trying to do good work
[1:21:25] to bring
[1:21:28] back a good
[1:21:31] project. Nobody can tell
[1:21:34] us
[1:21:40] what it will be.
[1:21:49] nobody is elsing us if you do it
[1:21:51] in this buildings, it will work. Even
[1:21:52] if we are following the
[1:21:54] corridor study and the comprehensive
[1:21:55] plan. So
[1:21:58] it would
[1:22:00] be good to get, and I'm not asking
[1:22:01] y'all to do that here. I would
[1:22:03] be good to get a little more guidance
[1:22:04] on okay, we
[1:22:07] like this. If you
[1:22:10] guys can change
[1:22:12] that. It will work. We do have some
[1:22:13] modifications but we
[1:22:16] have cut the modifications. We had over
[1:22:17] 30
[1:22:18] modifications in the other project. Because
[1:22:20] it was
[1:22:23] apartments
[1:22:24] and more complicated project. If question
[1:22:26] can look at it and live
[1:22:29] with it, we cut
[1:22:32] it
[1:22:35] out as a
[1:22:36] modification. What you want the buildings to
[1:22:38] look
[1:22:44] like and what works.
[1:22:45] >> that's
[1:22:46] what I was talking about. This is
[1:22:47] more of
[1:22:49] a financial discussion. But that is
[1:22:50] a
[1:22:52] question that I have is exactly that. If
[1:22:53] it
[1:22:56] is a planned development,
[1:22:59] it has a list of the wants and tweaks. If
[1:23:00] you walked in and said I will build
[1:23:02] everything according
[1:23:05] to your zoning book and
[1:23:07] everything is fine, I think the road
[1:23:08] sizes and
[1:23:09] the density and the driveway sizes
[1:23:11] and some of
[1:23:13] that other stuff plays into a little
[1:23:14] bit. But that is further
[1:23:17] in this conversation than
[1:23:20] this
[1:23:23] evening is planned for.
[1:23:24] >> we have
[1:23:26] a couple of tweak to
[1:23:32] the town home roads.
[1:23:41] it
[1:23:43] is 100% stone. And you will see this
[1:23:44] building for example. As
[1:23:46] stone, but also some wood. And some
[1:23:47] metal
[1:23:48] panels. So we ask for some flexibility
[1:23:50] in design
[1:23:53] on that. But it is really
[1:23:54] not a dramatic modification we were
[1:23:56] looking for before.
[1:23:57] >>
[1:23:58] that is good to know. This is all
[1:23:59] a workshop. I'm looking
[1:24:02] left
[1:24:05] and
[1:24:10] right. See if anyone else.
[1:24:11] >> the
[1:24:12] applicant will be going
[1:24:14] back and forth through zoning commission
[1:24:15] for their pid. That would be coming
[1:24:17] back at some point in
[1:24:20] the next few months. They have
[1:24:22] not officially applied for a pid yet. So
[1:24:26] we have had a
[1:24:28] few conversations with them with our
[1:24:29] pid consultant who has not been
[1:24:31] engaged to start a pid review with
[1:24:32] them. I believe that is
[1:24:33] happening very soon. They want him
[1:24:35] to get the pulse and temperature
[1:24:38] from
[1:24:41] city council before doing that. If
[1:24:43] city council is open to the idea of
[1:24:44] exploring pid more, it will be
[1:24:47] to
[1:24:49] make the pid application. We partner
[1:24:53] or contract with
[1:24:55] p3 works. P3 works will come in along
[1:24:56] with our financial
[1:24:58] advisers and that entire team. And
[1:24:59] they will do
[1:25:02] a
[1:25:04] really deep analysis of this pid and make
[1:25:05] sure
[1:25:08] it
[1:25:09] will pay for itself. And, that built
[1:25:11] in look
[1:25:12] at the bonds themselves, and start
[1:25:14] setting that
[1:25:17] up for success. So that
[1:25:20] if council if and when the
[1:25:23] pid comes to city council,
[1:25:26] you'll have all that information
[1:25:29] to make an informed decision. The concepts
[1:25:32] of the public
[1:25:34] cost and infrastructure presented
[1:25:35] and get the temperature check on whether
[1:25:38] a pid would be supported. That
[1:25:41] would
[1:25:44] be the next steps.
[1:25:50] it was june of
[1:25:53] last year, when count till previous
[1:25:55] took action on this project. And the
[1:25:56] developer
[1:25:59] is hoping and anticipateing to
[1:26:02] have direction to
[1:26:05] move forward with the
[1:26:08] development.
[1:26:09] >> thank you for
[1:26:13] the clarification. More questions, comments? Workshop? Anything
[1:26:17] else? Steven, thank
[1:26:19] you.
[1:26:20] >> thanks everybody. Appreciate it.
[1:26:23] >> that
[1:26:26] was
[1:26:29] our workshop. One
[1:26:31] presentation. J1. Presentation on
[1:26:32] state
[1:26:34] highway 45 gap study findings. Ms.
[1:26:35] kennedy again.
[1:26:36] >> this item
[1:26:39] is an update on the findings
[1:26:42] of the 45
[1:26:45] gap study. That the city
[1:26:46] supported. With bond dollars. I am
[1:26:48] here to introduce aaron
[1:26:51] gonzalez
[1:26:54] to give the
[1:26:56] presentation.
[1:26:57] >> thank you very much. Good
[1:26:58] evening. My name is erin gonzalez,
[1:27:00] I'm with bge. I
[1:27:03] serve as the gec
[1:27:04] project manager representing both
[1:27:06] hayes county and the city
[1:27:07] of buda.
[1:27:08] >> : overseeing the works
[1:27:11] being done by the design team. We
[1:27:12] were here
[1:27:15] to give you an update to
[1:27:18] the
[1:27:21] work we were doing. We
[1:27:23] have try today come back, at this
[1:27:25] time, I will hand it over to paul who
[1:27:27] will give you
[1:27:28] an update on those items. Ly come
[1:27:30] back and we will talk through
[1:27:33] next steps at the end. And open
[1:27:39] it up for questions.
[1:27:40] >>
[1:27:42] thank you erin. I
[1:27:45] was part
[1:27:48] of the study team. We
[1:27:51] did
[1:27:54] want the
[1:27:55] presentation last january. The purpose of
[1:27:57] the
[1:28:00] study
[1:28:03] began
[1:28:06] in
[1:28:12] fall of 2022. Local partners,
[1:28:14] we are working in collaboration to
[1:28:15] develop a solution that
[1:28:17] works well for the area and considers
[1:28:18] the
[1:28:21] interesting concerns of all
[1:28:24] involved. The goals of the
[1:28:26] study, do things in a productive and
[1:28:27] clear way. We
[1:28:30] collected input from wide range
[1:28:32] of stake holders that identify conceptual
[1:28:33] route
[1:28:35] options and work to minimize impacts
[1:28:36] on current and
[1:28:38] future development. We also wanted
[1:28:39] to identify strategies to
[1:28:41] protect the environment and follow
[1:28:42] best practices for doing so.
[1:28:48] consistent with that, the study we
[1:28:50] met with staff from several cities
[1:28:51] and surrounding agencies,
[1:28:54] we
[1:28:57] had
[1:29:00] three meetings with staff. We had
[1:29:02] met with various property owners. Had
[1:29:03] a total
[1:29:06] of 26 of those meetings. We
[1:29:08] conducted three open houses, june
[1:29:09] and december of
[1:29:12] 2023. And
[1:29:15] then in
[1:29:18] august of 2024. What we
[1:29:19] learned from that, this was about
[1:29:21] a year on this
[1:29:23] map. It is not 100% up to date. What
[1:29:24] we learned during
[1:29:27] that process from the landowners
[1:29:29] is that the yellow hatched areas are
[1:29:30] areas
[1:29:33] that are planned
[1:29:36] to be developed. That included nearly
[1:29:37] 900
[1:29:38] acres. 27% of the study area was planned
[1:29:39] for development
[1:29:42] as of that
[1:29:43] time. So, that underscores the need
[1:29:44] to develop what the infrastuckture
[1:29:45] needs
[1:29:48] will be for this
[1:29:50] area as that development continues. The
[1:29:51] first open
[1:29:54] house is conducted june of 2023 at
[1:29:56] sunfield station. We had both an in-person
[1:29:57] open
[1:30:00] house and a virtual online one. We
[1:30:01] had
[1:30:03] more than 60
[1:30:06] people
[1:30:09] in the in-person one. We had 615
[1:30:12] unique views
[1:30:14] on the website. We responded to all
[1:30:15] the
[1:30:16] comments received and summarized that
[1:30:18] in a pronounced summary report that
[1:30:21] included a matrix of all those comment
[1:30:22] responses. That
[1:30:24] was posted on
[1:30:27] the website. In addition to that,
[1:30:28] we have
[1:30:30] large maps we put input on
[1:30:33] the public. I
[1:30:36] will
[1:30:39] show
[1:30:41] you those here. The in-person open
[1:30:42] house. They
[1:30:45] are kind of magenta shading. What
[1:30:48] we
[1:30:51] got from the
[1:30:53] in-person. We took all the comments,
[1:30:54] we put
[1:30:57] them together. Created one, all inclusive
[1:30:58] map
[1:31:03] of all the
[1:31:05] suggestions. What you see, aggregated
[1:31:06] those. Almost all of
[1:31:07] them reflected similar concept. You
[1:31:09] see in the light blue. One exception
[1:31:12] was in the red. We got one
[1:31:15] suggestion for a more northerly route. All
[1:31:16] other
[1:31:18] suggestions were kind of
[1:31:21] had a similar concept there toward
[1:31:22] the southern
[1:31:24] or central part of the study
[1:31:27] area. After that, we worked to apply
[1:31:30] engineering standards to these suggestions
[1:31:31] and develop
[1:31:34] actual routes that we
[1:31:37] could apply our analysis
[1:31:39] to. So what you see here is those
[1:31:40] route
[1:31:43] suggestions with
[1:31:47] the engineering criteria applied.
[1:31:55] would
[1:31:57] have had three residential displacements. Also
[1:31:58] the
[1:31:59] engineering technical side of that
[1:32:01] was less desirable mainly
[1:32:02] because it crossed, as you can see
[1:32:04] there,
[1:32:07] toward the
[1:32:10] middle of the large bend. And
[1:32:11] crossed large floodplain areas in
[1:32:13] onion and garlic creeks. As
[1:32:16] an effort to minimize the
[1:32:17] impacts, we modified that red alignment to
[1:32:19] what
[1:32:22] you see in the yellow. That
[1:32:25] removed
[1:32:28] the crossing of the
[1:32:30] bend. The crossing of the floodplains
[1:32:31] for
[1:32:33] the eastern side there. The blue route
[1:32:35] represented all the other suggestions. That
[1:32:37] route had no displacements as of
[1:32:40] the
[1:32:46] time of the study.
[1:32:49] avoided that
[1:32:52] bend in little bear creek.
[1:32:55] from that
[1:32:58] analysis, we recommended
[1:33:01] for
[1:33:04] further study, in the blue. That was presented
[1:33:07] at the second open house
[1:33:10] in december. As of that time, had
[1:33:13] no displacements. Had
[1:33:14] that more desirable engineering perspective
[1:33:19] and less
[1:33:20] of that floodplain impact. And then
[1:33:22] for those reasons
[1:33:23] we eliminated from further consideration
[1:33:28] in
[1:33:31] black those northern routes.
[1:33:33] the preliminary recommendation, it was
[1:33:34] not
[1:33:37] finalized at this time. And
[1:33:38] subject to further retirement assumeing
[1:33:40] the project
[1:33:42] would continue into future phases. Along that
[1:33:43] line, you see
[1:33:46] we looked at a couple of
[1:33:49] different options, what that
[1:33:52] configuration
[1:33:55] would look like. Consistent with
[1:33:57] what it looks like. We assume the
[1:33:58] gap project
[1:34:00] would be controlled access. Which
[1:34:01] means no
[1:34:04] direct driveways or cross
[1:34:07] streets
[1:34:10] crossing the lanes. And we looked
[1:34:11] at
[1:34:12] two options. One with and one without
[1:34:13] frontage roads and
[1:34:16] the
[1:34:18] final concept could include some frontage
[1:34:19] roads
[1:34:22] or not. Also
[1:34:25] note,
[1:34:28] the shared use path
[1:34:29] which would accommodate the users
[1:34:31] along the route. So, with these
[1:34:34] concept, we created two right away
[1:34:36] footprints. One would be about 250
[1:34:37] feet ride. At the
[1:34:38] top there. Without frontage roads. And
[1:34:40] if you had the frontage
[1:34:43] roads that
[1:34:46] was about a 400-foot wide. So,
[1:34:48] we took those footprints. Applied
[1:34:49] some
[1:34:51] criteria to those. And then looked
[1:34:55] at what the evaluation of those would
[1:34:58] be. The table here shows impacts
[1:35:01] from the two scenarios. Would
[1:35:04] result again in no
[1:35:07] residential or commercial
[1:35:09] displacements. Also, no impacts were
[1:35:10] being anticipated
[1:35:12] to facilities like schools, hospitals,
[1:35:13] emergency services,
[1:35:16] dedicated parkland cemeteries, short
[1:35:19] properties, oil gas wells
[1:35:22] or other
[1:35:28] hazardous material site sites.
[1:35:33] we had an in-person component there. We
[1:35:34] had the
[1:35:37] online option as well. We
[1:35:40] had a few
[1:35:43] more
[1:35:46] attendees to that one. 797 unique
[1:35:48] views on the website. It is as with
[1:35:49] the first open house,
[1:35:52] we
[1:35:55] got all
[1:35:58] those
[1:36:01] comments responded no those. Coming
[1:36:04] out of
[1:36:07] that second open house,
[1:36:08] we provided refinements. What you
[1:36:10] see in
[1:36:13] blue there
[1:36:16] is the preliminary route. We refine
[1:36:19] that to the
[1:36:22] pink shading. One was to avoid utilities
[1:36:24] out there. The transmission line more
[1:36:25] toward the western side
[1:36:28] of the study area. And then, we also
[1:36:29] aligned the route with the right of
[1:36:31] way that was being used for the
[1:36:34] per year
[1:36:37] road extension
[1:36:40] on the
[1:36:43] east end. With no anticipated
[1:36:46] displacementss
[1:36:49] a
[1:36:52] of that time. We took
[1:36:55] that corridor. Applied more engineering
[1:36:57] to that. Created an access assessment
[1:36:58] to look at how
[1:37:01] would users access that facility. First,
[1:37:02] we
[1:37:04] started with the changes at each end of
[1:37:05] the route
[1:37:08] one on the
[1:37:11] west you see there. Sh45
[1:37:13] southwest ends at f.m. 1626. That would
[1:37:14] be an interchange
[1:37:17] and access to the new route. And
[1:37:20] then on the east
[1:37:23] side would align with where sh45
[1:37:24] comes in at I-35. Between those, we
[1:37:26] assessed
[1:37:29] and saw that you could
[1:37:30] have two additional inner changes
[1:37:32] in the middle of the route
[1:37:35] essentially dividing up
[1:37:41] the corridor into one-third.
[1:37:44] full access to
[1:37:46] and from the route. We looked at where
[1:37:50] frontage
[1:37:53] roads could
[1:37:54] be located. Basically, the main lanes
[1:37:58] would connect to existing sh45 on
[1:37:59] the west. And
[1:38:02] sh45
[1:38:05] southeast on
[1:38:08] the east side. At each
[1:38:11] one
[1:38:13] of those intermediate interchanges. Proposed
[1:38:14] development, would be
[1:38:16] needed for the eastern third from
[1:38:17] the interchange just
[1:38:20] east of
[1:38:22] the railroad there. Over to I-35. And
[1:38:23] again,
[1:38:24] that note, these are preliminary subject
[1:38:26] to
[1:38:29] change
[1:38:30] based on future development. As well. Once
[1:38:32] we have
[1:38:35] had that access assessment,
[1:38:38] we
[1:38:41] conducted a traffic study. In
[1:38:43] an origin destination study. We share
[1:38:47] the
[1:38:50] traffic study, they reviewed
[1:38:53] that. The destination
[1:38:56] study what you
[1:38:58] see here, we took data from origin
[1:38:59] and destination
[1:39:02] of trips along
[1:39:05] the sh45 existing corridor. We
[1:39:08] looked at both directions. Where trips
[1:39:09] would begin and end. The origin of
[1:39:11] each trip is shown
[1:39:14] there in blue. And,
[1:39:17] the
[1:39:18] destination is shown in orange. It
[1:39:20] represents a
[1:39:22] higher number of trips. Looked at
[1:39:23] a.m. And p.m. Peaks
[1:39:26] as well as both directions
[1:39:28] along sh45. And, what you may expect,
[1:39:29] the main take away
[1:39:32] there is that there is
[1:39:35] heavy movement in
[1:39:37] the a.m. Period from northern hayes
[1:39:38] county
[1:39:41] and the southern
[1:39:44] mopak area. From south austin
[1:39:47] back into northern hays county. Second
[1:39:50] part of the
[1:39:53] traffic study was conducted. Looked
[1:39:56] at the travel demand model. And evaluated
[1:39:59] that with the
[1:40:02] access
[1:40:05] points
[1:40:08] that you saw before.
[1:40:11] the traffic would
[1:40:13] increase regardless. Improvements
[1:40:14] we
[1:40:16] saw along the road network that would
[1:40:17] result
[1:40:20] in
[1:40:23] building the gap network. In the study
[1:40:25] network. We see reduction in traffic
[1:40:26] volumes
[1:40:29] and increase in speeds on
[1:40:32] most
[1:40:35] of the arterial streets.
[1:40:38] would
[1:40:41] be increased by up to five miles per
[1:40:44] hour by f.m. 967 and robert s
[1:40:46] light boulevard and we see a reduction
[1:40:47] of traffic
[1:40:50] volumes depending on the time
[1:40:53] of day. About a 20 to
[1:40:56] 30% in volumes on robert. Then,
[1:40:59] if you go to f.m. 1626, we
[1:41:01] would see reduction volumes there. Depending
[1:41:02] on time
[1:41:04] of day. 10 and 15% reduction and you
[1:41:05] can see speed
[1:41:06] increases up to 10 miles per hour
[1:41:08] on average during those
[1:41:11] peaks. And then, finally
[1:41:14] on I-35, we saw an increase from the
[1:41:15] model results of travel speeds up to
[1:41:17] about four miles per
[1:41:19] hour. Once you got 45 where you saw
[1:41:20] that traffic
[1:41:23] coming off. 35 and going over
[1:41:26] to what
[1:41:29] would be sh45. So those are the improvements
[1:41:30] we
[1:41:31] saw. A couple of the impacts. Sh45
[1:41:32] the existing route
[1:41:34] to the west would stay at or near
[1:41:38] capacity
[1:41:41] for most
[1:41:44] of the day. And start to
[1:41:47] exceed
[1:41:49] capacity in the p.m. Peak. We see that
[1:41:50] begin to
[1:41:53] use
[1:41:59] all of its compass capacity. Once
[1:42:01] you got north of slaughter we saw
[1:42:02] the effects of the gap
[1:42:04] project go away and not have much notable
[1:42:08] effect of the travel
[1:42:09] speeds. And then, mopac as expected
[1:42:11] already would remain at
[1:42:14] or
[1:42:17] near its design capacity. And
[1:42:19] the other effect we saw, it would
[1:42:20] still have
[1:42:23] some sections
[1:42:26] that are over
[1:42:29] capacity even with
[1:42:31] the project. Between 45 southwest. With
[1:42:35] all that information, we presented
[1:42:36] that at the
[1:42:38] open house about a year ago. Like
[1:42:39] the
[1:42:41] first two we had both the
[1:42:44] in-person meeting and a virtual online,
[1:42:47] we had 70 attendees at
[1:42:50] that in-person open house. 95 comments. And
[1:42:51] 655
[1:42:53] unique
[1:42:56] views on the website. And
[1:42:59] then,
[1:43:02] responded to
[1:43:05] all the comments. The overall findings
[1:43:06] we
[1:43:08] had from the study, a few of those
[1:43:09] included
[1:43:11] the
[1:43:14] project assuming
[1:43:17] that full 400-foot wide right of way foot
[1:43:20] present would require 190
[1:43:23] acres. It would be generally
[1:43:25] supported by the affected property owners. Based
[1:43:26] on our discussions
[1:43:29] with them. And the project would not
[1:43:30] displace
[1:43:32] any existing homes or bids or impact
[1:43:38] parks, recreation areas. And
[1:43:41] incorporate environmental
[1:43:44] best practices and controls. Now I
[1:43:45] will,
[1:43:47] bear with me, I will go back
[1:43:50] to
[1:43:53] one of the maps. I will
[1:43:56] read through
[1:43:59] the bullet
[1:44:02] point. We created a preliminary scheme
[1:44:03] attic design. We are not display tag quite yet. But
[1:44:06] I will show
[1:44:09] you
[1:44:13] on the map here. So you get a visual. But
[1:44:15] a few
[1:44:18] of the things
[1:44:20] included, the connection to the main
[1:44:21] lanes. Great
[1:44:24] separations at that
[1:44:27] intersection
[1:44:30] as well
[1:44:33] as
[1:44:36] across over f.m. 1626. The two
[1:44:37] intermediate interchanges with the
[1:44:39] buda city
[1:44:41] of transportation plan. We had future
[1:44:45] arterial locations again in
[1:44:47] line with master plan. One of those
[1:44:48] arterials would
[1:44:51] remain west
[1:44:54] of the union
[1:44:55] pacific railroad. And one of those would connect
[1:44:57] to
[1:45:00] the
[1:45:02] east of the railroad. Between cullen
[1:45:05] boulevard and hailey's way. The other
[1:45:06] future
[1:45:09] arterial
[1:45:12] that was
[1:45:15] east of the
[1:45:18] railroad the
[1:45:21] connection was for
[1:45:23] that western arterial near cabella's drive. The
[1:45:24] frontage roads
[1:45:27] as I mentioned would
[1:45:30] extend from that
[1:45:33] eastern interchange
[1:45:36] to I-35 to address
[1:45:39] access
[1:45:42] needs for
[1:45:44] the existing development. Then we
[1:45:45] would have the
[1:45:48] sh45 southeast
[1:45:51] connect to the
[1:45:54] main lanes. Finally, we would
[1:45:57] have flyover ramps from
[1:46:00] I-35. We
[1:46:03] developed
[1:46:06] consensual designs allowing
[1:46:09] them in all
[1:46:11] directions between that footprint. With
[1:46:12] that, I will let
[1:46:15] erin
[1:46:21] go through next steps.
[1:46:22] >> so
[1:46:24] currently, what paul mentioned,
[1:46:27] the study
[1:46:30] is complete. The
[1:46:33] reports are complete and
[1:46:36] schematic is final review ready
[1:46:42] to be published. The process
[1:46:44] doesn't stop. We continue to provide
[1:46:46] them information on our lay-outs and
[1:46:48] trying
[1:46:51] to work with them
[1:46:52] on their developments. We are looking to identify
[1:46:57] the
[1:47:00] right of
[1:47:02] way needed. And create documents moving forward but
[1:47:03] that's
[1:47:05] where the scope of our work on this contract ends
[1:47:06] so we
[1:47:08] will be looking for hays county and
[1:47:09] the city overby
[1:47:12] da for any next steps
[1:47:15] on how to
[1:47:18] move forward. But our
[1:47:21] project
[1:47:23] concludes here with the feasibility I
[1:47:24] will open it up for
[1:47:27] questions.
[1:47:28] >>
[1:47:29] you want to go first?
[1:47:30] >> sure. Thank
[1:47:31] you
[1:47:33] very
[1:47:36] much for
[1:47:37] the study. Help me understand if you
[1:47:39] would go
[1:47:41] back to that preliminary access map
[1:47:42] that
[1:47:45] was just up. Okay. So, we are
[1:47:48] at 1327 and 35. And, it looks
[1:47:51] like the roadway is being
[1:47:53] proposed to extend out past 1327. So
[1:47:57] I'm thinking about all
[1:48:00] of the new apartments and homes being built off of
[1:48:03] old san antonio road. There will
[1:48:06] be
[1:48:09] additional
[1:48:12] stuff put back there. That whole makeup
[1:48:15] of the way it looks now in five
[1:48:18] years will
[1:48:24] not be there.
[1:48:25] >> yeah.
[1:48:27] subject to
[1:48:30] change but as the preliminary design, there
[1:48:33] would be no direct
[1:48:35] access to that. So, does it necessarily
[1:48:36] take its consideration. Some
[1:48:39] of the development. But I guess it
[1:48:42] doesn't preclude it or
[1:48:48] doesn't
[1:48:50] do anything negative toward difficult.
[1:48:51] >>
[1:48:52] is
[1:48:54] plan is to go
[1:48:57] up correct?
[1:48:58] >> we had a couple of
[1:49:00] concepts going up above or below without
[1:49:01] showing it to
[1:49:03] you. Probably not going to make
[1:49:06] a lot of sense. It would not cross
[1:49:07] directly
[1:49:09] with old san antonio. The sh45
[1:49:12] lanes would
[1:49:18] be either above or
[1:49:24] below.
[1:49:25] >>
[1:49:26] okay. That would affect the slide
[1:49:27] that you had
[1:49:30] that talked
[1:49:33] about having access roads. You
[1:49:35] are going to stick to the concept
[1:49:36] of it
[1:49:39] being maybe elevated roadway that
[1:49:40] goes above that
[1:49:42] area,
[1:49:45] I could probably get there. If
[1:49:48] you
[1:49:51] are talking in access roads. There's
[1:49:54] a lot in that space. It is super dense
[1:49:55] back
[1:49:57] there right now and it is
[1:50:00] just continuing
[1:50:02] to be built. These feasibility studies
[1:50:03] are
[1:50:06] done
[1:50:07] with current conditions. Hopefully,
[1:50:09] there has been some thought in what
[1:50:10] the
[1:50:12] city of austin is doing. Because,
[1:50:13] they
[1:50:15] are building on every piece of property that
[1:50:16] is back there
[1:50:18] this they can get their hands on. And
[1:50:19] then
[1:50:22] of course, the city of
[1:50:25] buda, we have our school
[1:50:28] down there with buda
[1:50:30] elementary. And you will have potentially heb or some
[1:50:33] other business built off that road. So I
[1:50:36] think when we start thinking about
[1:50:37] going up,
[1:50:40] up
[1:50:41] would be a better choice. Then trying
[1:50:43] to put everybody
[1:50:46] in that same compacted space.
[1:50:49] what we will create
[1:50:51] is another 162-6967.
[1:50:52] >> I'll also
[1:50:55] just
[1:50:57] mention on, we talked about what the
[1:50:58] city
[1:51:01] is doing. The per
[1:51:04] year
[1:51:07] road right of way. This
[1:51:13] fits within that width
[1:51:14] . That will fit in the space that
[1:51:16] is already reserved.
[1:51:17] >> I get
[1:51:19] that it
[1:51:22] will fit. But if you
[1:51:25] drive it, it doesn't fit. They have
[1:51:26] done some improvements. They put a
[1:51:28] bunch of apartments back
[1:51:29] there. They created a light signal
[1:51:31] there but
[1:51:32] again, we are talking about a windy
[1:51:34] two lane road that people
[1:51:37] are used to
[1:51:38] not having large volumes of traffic. And
[1:51:42] anything that happens on 35 pushes everybody
[1:51:43] off
[1:51:46] of old
[1:51:49] san antonio road.
[1:51:50] >> we coordinated
[1:51:52] with some
[1:51:53] of the regional partners. Travis county,
[1:51:55] if
[1:51:58] the
[1:52:01] project were to continue,
[1:52:04] there
[1:52:05] would be additional coordination. What
[1:52:07] is
[1:52:10] the
[1:52:11] impact from traffic being added and
[1:52:13] just working with them
[1:52:15] on how to best facilitate.
[1:52:16] >> great
[1:52:17] idea. We need to make sure
[1:52:18] they are on board with this. Because
[1:52:19] if
[1:52:22] they have a lot of impact
[1:52:25] on what
[1:52:28] moves forward because of what
[1:52:31] they are already doing to
[1:52:34] date. I appreciate it.
[1:52:35] >> ms.
[1:52:37] davidson.
[1:52:38] >> a lot
[1:52:39] of information. I know you guys have
[1:52:40] spent a lot of time on
[1:52:43] this. Could you go
[1:52:46] to the a.m. P.m. Flow? I
[1:52:49] want to make sure
[1:52:52] I'm understanding.
[1:52:53] >> the
[1:52:55] origin destination study?
[1:52:56] >> yes. Thank
[1:52:59] you. So explain this to me please. Specifically
[1:53:01] I want
[1:53:03] to know how this affects buda. Our
[1:53:07] traffic coming
[1:53:08] through the downtown.
[1:53:09] >> it is not
[1:53:10] so much showing what the effect of
[1:53:13] the project will be. But
[1:53:16] what the current trips, how
[1:53:19] they are organized
[1:53:22] I should say. The
[1:53:24] darker shades in blue are where trips are coming
[1:53:25] from. You can see
[1:53:27] in the a.m. Peak. You can see a lot
[1:53:28] of trips coming
[1:53:30] from areas just north of buda. You
[1:53:31] can
[1:53:33] see the dark blue there. And then
[1:53:34] those trips, a
[1:53:37] lot of them end up in south austin
[1:53:38] there along
[1:53:40] mopac and oak hill area. That is
[1:53:43] really
[1:53:46] what this
[1:53:49] is
[1:53:51] showing is how people are currently
[1:53:52] moving about the area. Eastbound,
[1:53:54] you don't see quite as many of the
[1:53:55] heavy shades because there
[1:53:57] are not quite as many trips going
[1:53:58] on. You flip it on
[1:54:01] the p.m., you see more
[1:54:04] of that heavy trips originating from
[1:54:07] that
[1:54:08] oak hill area. South austin. Coming
[1:54:10] back in
[1:54:13] orange
[1:54:16] on the
[1:54:19] right there. The
[1:54:22] orange darker shades
[1:54:25] is where they
[1:54:27] are getting into buda. You see light
[1:54:28] central shadeing
[1:54:30] in buda in the p.m. It is less in
[1:54:31] other areas. So what
[1:54:34] we are seeing is maybe not quite
[1:54:37] as
[1:54:40] many
[1:54:43] people in the sh45,
[1:54:45] it is central to the study area. It
[1:54:46] is a
[1:54:49] road that as
[1:54:52] proposed, the
[1:54:53] gap would connect to we thought it was
[1:54:55] a good way to look at
[1:54:58] who may use this facility and
[1:55:01] how it could
[1:55:02] benefit the community.
[1:55:03] >> just to
[1:55:04] add to that, origin destination is
[1:55:05] important to understand
[1:55:06] where people are coming from and going. All
[1:55:07] of
[1:55:10] you probably have a
[1:55:13] pretty good idea because
[1:55:16] they
[1:55:18] are your constituents. But when a road doesn't
[1:55:19] exist like this one today
[1:55:22] it is harder to model the
[1:55:23] traffic without completely understanding
[1:55:25] where everyone is comeing from and
[1:55:26] going to. The origin destination helps
[1:55:28] us to understand
[1:55:31] that and the next
[1:55:34] steps
[1:55:36] are the traffic results. Which you
[1:55:37] might be asking how
[1:55:40] will this impact. Why don't
[1:55:43] we
[1:55:46] go to that results?
[1:55:47] >> we
[1:55:49] have
[1:55:52] the
[1:55:54] bullets here. The traffic report. The
[1:55:55] full tables
[1:55:58] and maps and everything. It
[1:56:01] may be hard to fathom it more
[1:56:03] without seeing some visuals. But I
[1:56:04] guess, you
[1:56:06] have a question specifically on it?
[1:56:07] >>
[1:56:08] I guess to summarize here, we
[1:56:10] are seeing a lot of the
[1:56:12] traffic reduction in the arterial
[1:56:13] roads
[1:56:16] and the smaller neighborhood roads
[1:56:19] by making this connection. We'll see
[1:56:22] more folks that are
[1:56:25] making the
[1:56:28] trip in the
[1:56:31] morning or the
[1:56:32] evening. Using smaller roads, arterials
[1:56:34] and local roads.
[1:56:35] >> I guess that is kind
[1:56:37] of where I'm getting at
[1:56:40] understanding
[1:56:42] the east west traveling. The way it
[1:56:43] looks, we talk
[1:56:46] about okay, the
[1:56:49] south
[1:56:53] traffic
[1:56:54] is pushing through. It is east buda. And
[1:56:56] sun field
[1:56:58] area pushing through our downtown
[1:56:59] and get to
[1:57:00] pilpac in the mornings. Same thing
[1:57:01] coming home. There is no other alternative
[1:57:02] unless
[1:57:04] you are going to try to come down
[1:57:05] 35,
[1:57:06] cut through any of those things. Whatever
[1:57:11] you
[1:57:14] want
[1:57:17] to do with
[1:57:18] that. This study reflects that east
[1:57:20] west
[1:57:23] main street traffic
[1:57:26] being
[1:57:29] moved faster. Not just the 1626
[1:57:32] to robert
[1:57:35] s. Light. While still a
[1:57:37] big problem.
[1:57:38] >> maybe. >> is east
[1:57:41] buda the problem
[1:57:44] also? Moving
[1:57:47] west? And west back to east?
[1:57:48] >>
[1:57:49] make sure I understand the question. Talking
[1:57:53] about buda east of
[1:57:55] 35. Is that an issue and is this addressing that
[1:57:56] issue?
[1:57:57] >>
[1:57:59] could it?
[1:58:00] >>
[1:58:01] could it address that issue?
[1:58:02] >> a
[1:58:03] lot of reasons
[1:58:05] we look at that destination. Are
[1:58:07] there currently people using sh-45
[1:58:08] southwest
[1:58:11] from the areas? You can see
[1:58:13] some light shading there. East of
[1:58:14] buda. Not
[1:58:17] as much as west. Sorry, east of
[1:58:19] 35. Not as much west of 35. You can
[1:58:23] see
[1:58:26] a
[1:58:28] little bit more there. In those peak.
[1:58:29] >>
[1:58:32] if you look
[1:58:35] at
[1:58:38] the left top figure.
[1:58:44] there are a number of vehicles that
[1:58:46] are traveling from that area over
[1:58:47] to the orange
[1:58:48] area. That is where they are headed. And
[1:58:50] that's
[1:58:53] the traffic that you are seeing
[1:58:54] through downtown and other connections
[1:58:56] to get them
[1:58:58] to that orange area. And so, by making
[1:59:00] this connection with state highway
[1:59:02] 45
[1:59:05] at the gap, it aleves that
[1:59:07] traffic. Some of that traffic. It
[1:59:09] reduces the capacity on those existing
[1:59:12] roads and increases the speeds on
[1:59:13] those existing roads.
[1:59:14] >> the first
[1:59:15] part
[1:59:16] is there a need. I think the second
[1:59:17] part
[1:59:20] is
[1:59:21] could this project help that? The
[1:59:26] key to that
[1:59:29] is the 35 interchange. People
[1:59:31] coming on 35 could take directly to
[1:59:32] the gap project without
[1:59:35] having to get on the local access
[1:59:36] roads.
[1:59:37] >>
[1:59:38] right. And if they are willing to pay
[1:59:39] a toll fee.
[1:59:40] >> thank you
[1:59:41] very
[1:59:47] much. That was very helpful.
[1:59:49] >> more questions? Mr. Bowles? >>
[1:59:51] similar question. I drive that corridor. I
[1:59:53] drive very frequently and it
[1:59:55] currently backs up on the 45 now at
[1:59:56] peak
[1:59:59] times
[2:00:05] in the mornings specifically.
[2:00:11] where is that in bullet two
[2:00:12] on the bottom paragraph there where
[2:00:14] you will see a slight increase
[2:00:16] in traffic where there need to be
[2:00:17] south of slaughter? Is
[2:00:20] that what that is
[2:00:23] saying? By
[2:00:29] having the new gap?
[2:00:35] >>
[2:00:38] the new bridges where the
[2:00:41] new mopac lanes go. The lanes that
[2:00:44] are two lanes each direction.
[2:00:50] giving up, mostly to
[2:00:52] slaughter. That is where they are
[2:00:53] destined for
[2:00:56] some of those areas. You see
[2:00:59] folks traveling on
[2:01:02] there. Taking exits
[2:01:05] to slaughter and to win
[2:01:06] cannon. People are getting to, folks
[2:01:08] that
[2:01:10] have beened added to the network are
[2:01:11] starting to exit and
[2:01:13] get where they are going to go.
[2:01:14] >>
[2:01:15] I guess,
[2:01:16] by tying in the 35, I imagine there
[2:01:17] is some amount of traffic
[2:01:20] that is
[2:01:23] not currently coming through from
[2:01:25] sun field or other places. I believe we
[2:01:29] would get some
[2:01:31] 18 wheelers which would make mopac
[2:01:32] more fun but I imagine that
[2:01:34] would back up. If it is already backing
[2:01:38] up where
[2:01:41] the valor school is. The
[2:01:44] 45 turning into the mopac section. By
[2:01:45] adding more
[2:01:47] capacity off of 35 and everything,
[2:01:48] I imagine that section there would
[2:01:50] back up as well. I guess
[2:01:53] I
[2:01:55] didn't see that specifically here. Maybe
[2:01:56] I'm missing
[2:01:58] it.
[2:01:59] >> getting a little more to the
[2:02:00] nuance
[2:02:02] on the travel demand model, that
[2:02:04] is what is the basis for these results. One
[2:02:05] thing we
[2:02:08] didn't note is that does
[2:02:11] assume certain other projects
[2:02:14] will happen by the study year which
[2:02:15] was
[2:02:16] 2045. Study year we were working under
[2:02:20] when
[2:02:23] this study was done. So that does assume
[2:02:24] the
[2:02:26] additional lanes would be
[2:02:28] added by that time. That handle traffic,
[2:02:29] that will
[2:02:30] increase regardless of whether the
[2:02:32] 45 gap were built or
[2:02:35] not. But
[2:02:38] also increases the capacity to
[2:02:39] accommodate some additional demand
[2:02:41] there.
[2:02:42] >> thanks. >> mr.
[2:02:43] ture.
[2:02:44] >> thank y'all throughout. I
[2:02:45] will try to be quick with my questions
[2:02:47] and feel free to be quick
[2:02:49] with your answers. And I can have
[2:02:50] some more questions
[2:02:53] to follow
[2:02:56] up. Just
[2:02:59] real quick, stv?
[2:03:00] >> the
[2:03:01] company name. The consultant working
[2:03:02] for
[2:03:05] hays county.
[2:03:06] >>
[2:03:08] sub to bge?
[2:03:09] >> it
[2:03:10] is a separate contract. They have
[2:03:14] individual
[2:03:17] contacts with hays county. Overseeing
[2:03:18] the design
[2:03:20] work being performed by
[2:03:23] stv.
[2:03:24] >>
[2:03:26] got you. Great. This
[2:03:28] is helpful throughout. The adjustment
[2:03:32] on the transmission lines. And,
[2:03:35] I think, there
[2:03:38] is
[2:03:40] adjustment per your lift station. To
[2:03:41] fly a little further south on the
[2:03:43] east end of the project. Am I tracking
[2:03:44] what some of the feedback
[2:03:47] you got in the coordination
[2:03:52] study?
[2:03:53] >> some of it was feedback. Some of
[2:03:54] it looking at
[2:03:55] the quarter a little closer. What
[2:03:57] we saw kind
[2:04:00] of
[2:04:02] in that intermediate period was that plat
[2:04:06] was
[2:04:09] approved
[2:04:15] for the road extension.
[2:04:27] that footprint
[2:04:30] was
[2:04:36] reserved for a roadway.
[2:04:39] it
[2:04:42] doesn't
[2:04:45] go past the
[2:04:47] creek there. What we were planning
[2:04:48] for was compatible for
[2:04:49] that. And when we shifted there. What
[2:04:51] you see
[2:04:52] on that curve, that curve that is
[2:04:53] going further south is more just to
[2:04:54] meet the
[2:04:57] design speed of the
[2:04:58] facility. Can't make quite as sharp
[2:05:00] of a curve if we have already
[2:05:01] kind of turned to the south. So it
[2:05:03] was kind of
[2:05:06] a domino
[2:05:07] effect there. And then, the transmission
[2:05:09] towers was looking at
[2:05:12] where those existing
[2:05:13] facilities are at. And just trying
[2:05:15] to impact
[2:05:18] those as little
[2:05:21] as possible.
[2:05:22] >>
[2:05:23] it's helpful. It's good. The tie ins are
[2:05:24] key so
[2:05:27] thank you for those. Good
[2:05:28] comments previously from the councilmembers
[2:05:30] on the east portion of the
[2:05:33] project and just awareness
[2:05:36] there. So
[2:05:39] I appreciate those
[2:05:42] notes. Is the per similar
[2:05:48] monoproject aware and planning
[2:05:50] simmon project working on the purple
[2:05:51] or the
[2:05:53] blue? There is a road being built
[2:05:54] there
[2:05:56] that presumably becomes the frontage
[2:06:00] road of 45.
[2:06:01] >> correct. We
[2:06:03] have
[2:06:05] been working on persimmon. Facilitating
[2:06:06] that. So we are
[2:06:07] aware of their latest plan and have
[2:06:09] shared the latest line
[2:06:12] with them so
[2:06:14] they can preserve the correct footprint
[2:06:15] assuming
[2:06:17] the project were to move forward.
[2:06:18] >>
[2:06:19] is that just footprint
[2:06:21] or am
[2:06:23] I correct that east west road they
[2:06:24] are putting
[2:06:27] in their project.
[2:06:28] >>
[2:06:29] it would be compatible now. Still
[2:06:33] based on the
[2:06:34] final details. It would generally
[2:06:36] be compatible with a future
[2:06:39] 45
[2:06:42] gap.
[2:06:43] >> that is
[2:06:44] helpful. Did the traffic study, I
[2:06:45] appreciate councilmember davidson's
[2:06:46] questions and notes
[2:06:48] on the traffic study. Did you
[2:06:49] kind of isolate the north south traffic
[2:06:51] and it
[2:06:54] is
[2:06:57] primarily
[2:06:59] looking alternative east west?
[2:07:00] >>
[2:07:01] it
[2:07:02] is very much a network based. It is
[2:07:03] a
[2:07:06] demand model. It is not
[2:07:09] really looking at
[2:07:10] say, individual vehicles. Like a micro
[2:07:12] simulation more. It is
[2:07:15] more of a
[2:07:18] macro simulation. It is
[2:07:20] a macro level assessment of what the network
[2:07:24] looks like. What
[2:07:27] could
[2:07:30] be
[2:07:32] added to it. Kind of running where
[2:07:33] vehicles shift
[2:07:35] around to based on purely looking at
[2:07:36] what the demand would be.
[2:07:37] >> one
[2:07:39] thing just to add to that, we look
[2:07:40] at
[2:07:42] a study area for that. Not necessarily
[2:07:43] isolating
[2:07:45] east west or north south. Connections. Or,
[2:07:46] movement. It
[2:07:47] is really the study area. And the
[2:07:48] movement
[2:07:51] that happens
[2:07:54] within that study. Area.
[2:07:55] >>
[2:07:56] helpful notes throughout. Yeah. Okay. That helps
[2:07:57] me to understand
[2:07:58] and interpret it. Is new apartments
[2:08:00] on the
[2:08:02] west side of the project. Talk to
[2:08:03] me about that interchange
[2:08:05] on the west side with those apartments
[2:08:08] where they are being built.
[2:08:09] >> what
[2:08:10] you see there,
[2:08:12] mentioned there would be the 45 main
[2:08:13] lanes, the
[2:08:15] controlled access would go over the top
[2:08:16] of six and
[2:08:18] 26
[2:08:21] and connect into
[2:08:23] the existing 45 facility. And then,
[2:08:24] we would
[2:08:27] have some ramps
[2:08:29] that would also go. The name of that
[2:08:30] area is big
[2:08:33] valley. It is for a reason. It
[2:08:36] sits pretty low. So, even with
[2:08:39] ramps would
[2:08:42] kind
[2:08:45] of fly over that quote unquote valley
[2:08:46] and be
[2:08:48] at a level above that terrain. As
[2:08:49] far as
[2:08:51] the apartments, that is an
[2:08:54] active thing going on
[2:08:57] now. Again, yeah.
[2:08:58] >> I can
[2:09:00] touch on that. So, the need for preserving
[2:09:03] the right of way, this is one
[2:09:06] example of that. And so,
[2:09:09] in this case,
[2:09:12] that
[2:09:13] development did not exist. We could
[2:09:15] not stop them from continuing their
[2:09:17] development. We have had multiple
[2:09:18] coordination meetings with them. Ensuring
[2:09:19] that we
[2:09:21] are able to maintain access
[2:09:24] for them. In the final footprint of
[2:09:28] the project. While you won't see
[2:09:30] that on the schematic because we don't identify
[2:09:31] connections
[2:09:33] for thing that's don't exist at the
[2:09:34] time. We have
[2:09:37] worked through the
[2:09:39] design effort to ensure that they
[2:09:40] can access their
[2:09:43] property from
[2:09:46] this
[2:09:48] roadway in the future. There is a portion
[2:09:49] of their
[2:09:50] property that has been displaced. Because
[2:09:52] we are not ready
[2:09:55] to purchase at the time of their
[2:09:57] development. We were not able to avoid
[2:09:58] that. And so,
[2:09:59] the purpose of the preservation of
[2:10:01] right of
[2:10:04] way as you all know. But, so
[2:10:06] at the end of the schematic phase,
[2:10:07] there were no displacements. That
[2:10:10] is in fact a displacement that
[2:10:12] will occur in the future if right, it
[2:10:13] will occur in the
[2:10:16] future if and when the
[2:10:19] project moves
[2:10:22] forward.
[2:10:23] >>
[2:10:24] helpful throughout I guess. How bad? How
[2:10:25] much is
[2:10:26] the displacement or unclear? Unclear is
[2:10:28] okay if
[2:10:31] you don't have an answer.
[2:10:32] >> it is, I don't
[2:10:33] have a clear number. It is a portion
[2:10:34] of
[2:10:37] a building and
[2:10:40] some of the parking lot. We have
[2:10:41] identified where their water quality
[2:10:43] is. It would
[2:10:44] not put them into non-compliance when
[2:10:49] and if that would happen. So it
[2:10:52] is a portion of the property and a
[2:10:55] structure and some of
[2:10:58] the parking
[2:10:59] lot. But I don't have a number or
[2:11:01] a value for that.
[2:11:02] >>
[2:11:04] even
[2:11:05] that is helpful. Thank you. Yeah. Well
[2:11:07] let's talk about the project not
[2:11:10] if but when. No more use of the
[2:11:13] word if. When on
[2:11:16] this project. Even if it is
[2:11:19] 2045 or when ever. Ultimately, what
[2:11:22] it shows for the traffic
[2:11:24] counts and from the traffic study
[2:11:25] is
[2:11:28] what is so
[2:11:31] key. That
[2:11:32] massive reduction on 1626 through
[2:11:34] downtown, reducing it to
[2:11:36] those that want to go downtown. Key
[2:11:40] aspects of this project. Thank
[2:11:42] you for your work. I guess, just one
[2:11:43] last high level
[2:11:46] question. If there is one thing that
[2:11:49] would change that
[2:11:52] would make travis county look
[2:11:55] more
[2:11:57] favorably on this project. Any takes
[2:11:58] more
[2:12:00] from a technical study standpoint? Are there
[2:12:01] any particular
[2:12:03] things that travis county brings directly
[2:12:04] to the
[2:12:07] table from a technical and study standpoint that
[2:12:08] is
[2:12:10] the
[2:12:13] number one
[2:12:15] thing to change?
[2:12:16] >> the biggest thing
[2:12:17] is having additional open communication
[2:12:19] with them so we can
[2:12:25] explain to them the
[2:12:31] edwards
[2:12:34] edwards aquifur zone. This
[2:12:37] portion of the project is in the
[2:12:40] transition zone. It is in the
[2:12:42] least environmentally sensitive and
[2:12:43] very
[2:12:46] much less
[2:12:48] environmentally sensitive than the
[2:12:49] prior
[2:12:51] state highway 45 project. Conversations
[2:12:52] like that are important
[2:12:54] to help them understand we are doing
[2:12:55] everything to make
[2:12:58] this a sensitive project to
[2:13:01] the environment. And,
[2:13:04] to any edwards aquifer
[2:13:06] regulated areas or non-regulated areas. It
[2:13:07] is really just that communication. Beyond that,
[2:13:10] I don't have an answer for
[2:13:13] you.
[2:13:14] >> that was a
[2:13:16] great answer. Do
[2:13:23] you want my mic? Thank
[2:13:29] you.
[2:13:30] >> any
[2:13:31] questions? Comments? Most of my questions asked. I'm
[2:13:32] trying to
[2:13:35] stay with the study
[2:13:36] scenario going on. I have 190 acres
[2:13:38] of land required
[2:13:41] for the new right of way. You
[2:13:42] have one of your meetings. I think
[2:13:44] I went to
[2:13:47] two of the three. And,
[2:13:50] the
[2:13:51] build no build scenarios. What it
[2:13:53] does to main
[2:13:56] street and 967 and
[2:13:59] robert
[2:14:02] s. Light. By the numbers, that
[2:14:05] is how
[2:14:08] it works. If you live in
[2:14:11] kyle. If
[2:14:14] you are south of 1626, check
[2:14:16] near the google apps and try to figure out,
[2:14:17] do
[2:14:19] I go 35 and work my way over to south
[2:14:20] austin
[2:14:23] or up 1626 and work
[2:14:24] my way to south austin? And that is
[2:14:26] I, don't know how you
[2:14:29] guys did it. I don't know. It's challenging
[2:14:30] to
[2:14:32] know those people
[2:14:34] that make that decision. There are multiple
[2:14:35] different
[2:14:38] ways and we
[2:14:41] are
[2:14:42] creating another meandering third
[2:14:44] way. If you can say east kyle,
[2:14:47] they make
[2:14:48] that choice every day. They take 1626
[2:14:50] or where this thing is
[2:14:51] built. They will take 35 further. And
[2:14:53] then cut across to the west
[2:14:56] to
[2:14:59] get
[2:15:05] to the same place. The
[2:15:07] political side of the conversation, it may
[2:15:08] be in
[2:15:10] the bond and may not be in the bond
[2:15:11] for the
[2:15:14] county side and
[2:15:17] I'm
[2:15:20] trying to
[2:15:22] understand why. That's not the study. It
[2:15:23] is
[2:15:26] all fascinating at
[2:15:29] this point. Funding,
[2:15:32] is there any funding
[2:15:33] available conceptual? Is there any
[2:15:35] funding identified through your
[2:15:37] conversations that would push this
[2:15:38] thing
[2:15:41] into a
[2:15:43] construction? Into next steps?
[2:15:44] >>
[2:15:45] there is currently no
[2:15:46] construction funding for this project. We
[2:15:47] have identified that
[2:15:49] a project of this nature would likely
[2:15:50] need a
[2:15:53] larger partnership with
[2:15:55] regional partners. The funding that
[2:15:56] was
[2:15:58] identified in the hays county bond
[2:15:59] was
[2:16:02] for design and right of way
[2:16:05] preservation. And that as
[2:16:08] you are aware has
[2:16:10] been removed. How they are moving
[2:16:11] forward with
[2:16:14] their
[2:16:17] bond. From the co process. The information
[2:16:18] we
[2:16:20] are receiving from hays county, specifically from
[2:16:21] commissioner smith
[2:16:22] who was here and apologizes for having
[2:16:23] to leave is that this
[2:16:25] is still a priority for him and they
[2:16:26] are looking for
[2:16:29] ways
[2:16:32] to continue
[2:16:34] to advance. The right of way preservation. It is
[2:16:35] so important to
[2:16:38] preserve this right of way. It becomes
[2:16:39] more challenging to purchase that
[2:16:41] right of
[2:16:44] way with
[2:16:46] the funding identified.
[2:16:47] >> nothing
[2:16:48] is getting cheaper. It is
[2:16:50] all going up in reality now. And
[2:16:53] being one of the items,
[2:16:56] it is
[2:17:01] not getting cheaper. Further questions?
[2:17:05] it is certainly fascinating and I
[2:17:06] hope there
[2:17:08] is some way to
[2:17:10] make this a reality. Because I think
[2:17:11] it helps a
[2:17:14] lot of our roads
[2:17:15] within buda and the transportation
[2:17:19] hurdles we are dealing with now. I
[2:17:20] want to see how the
[2:17:23] conversation keeps going
[2:17:25] from this point. Seeing no more comments or questions
[2:17:27] I will say thank
[2:17:30] you. I appreciate your time and
[2:17:33] the
[2:17:39] work in the study.
[2:17:42] >>
[2:17:45] all right that moves us into
[2:17:48] our regular agenda items. K1 is
[2:17:50] deliberation and possible action to
[2:17:54] approve the austin
[2:17:56] street reconstruction 30% schematic
[2:18:02] design.
[2:18:03] >> yes, sir, howdy mayor,
[2:18:05] goodnight council. We are very excited
[2:18:08] as the bond team to come forward with
[2:18:09] the update. It has
[2:18:11] been quite a while since we brought
[2:18:14] it back toward council. Over the past
[2:18:18] year, staff has been meeting
[2:18:19] and improving the design. Meeting
[2:18:21] with property
[2:18:24] and
[2:18:26] business owners along the street. Encountering
[2:18:28] changes and more details. And they
[2:18:30] have gotten it
[2:18:33] to what we consider
[2:18:36] a good 30% schematic design
[2:18:39] and
[2:18:42] reach that
[2:18:43] milestone. There's still a lot more
[2:18:45] coordination needing to be
[2:18:47] done. However, staff believes that
[2:18:48] a higher
[2:18:50] level of detail in the plan sets moving
[2:18:51] forward with
[2:18:53] the design would help us better answer
[2:18:54] those unknowns and
[2:18:57] it is with
[2:18:59] that, that staff is recommending approval
[2:19:00] the
[2:19:02] design has presented and allowing
[2:19:03] the associates
[2:19:06] to proceed with
[2:19:07] the next design phase. This recommendation was
[2:19:09] taken to
[2:19:11] the bond oversight committee on the
[2:19:12] july 31st meeting
[2:19:15] and they
[2:19:19] concurred with that recommendation.
[2:19:21] rj
[2:19:23] will walk through the more technical
[2:19:24] bits. Walk
[2:19:26] through with what we encountered,
[2:19:27] public
[2:19:30] comments, what
[2:19:32] has been incorporated. Parts of the design
[2:19:33] aspects. I will give it
[2:19:35] over to rj.
[2:19:36] >> thank you. I want to
[2:19:37] appreciate it. Thank
[2:19:38] you mayor council. So yeah. A lot
[2:19:39] has happened since
[2:19:42] june was the last time of last year
[2:19:43] we presented and the effort since
[2:19:45] then has been a lot
[2:19:46] of public outreach. A lot of intentional
[2:19:48] engagement with the property owners
[2:19:50] as you all are aware. It is pretty
[2:19:51] difficult to convert back
[2:19:53] of house to front of house. There's
[2:19:54] a lot of challenging areas
[2:19:56] so we have progressed what we have
[2:19:59] been able to progress. And so, the
[2:20:00] next three
[2:20:01] slides will summarize what that looks
[2:20:03] like with blue being comments we
[2:20:05] have received from the engagement
[2:20:06] process that
[2:20:07] still unresolved gray that our items
[2:20:09] we have already
[2:20:11] been able to resolve. We have incorporated
[2:20:14] it into the design. And the red is
[2:20:15] items we have
[2:20:16] identified through owners meetings
[2:20:18] that are going
[2:20:21] to
[2:20:24] follow
[2:20:27] up with design changes. So
[2:20:30] we can kind of work 27, 72, to
[2:20:31] san antonio street here moving south
[2:20:33] to north. Where
[2:20:35] you can see some of the dumpsters
[2:20:36] we had intentionally thought were
[2:20:37] going
[2:20:38] to be outside of the right of way
[2:20:39] will have to remain in the
[2:20:41] right of way. And in other areas. We
[2:20:42] will
[2:20:45] have to
[2:20:46] rework and relocate some poles within it.
[2:20:54] similar space, the design hasn't changed
[2:20:57] a whole bunch but it starts to identify
[2:20:59] and solidify what is happening between
[2:21:00] peach and
[2:21:03] live oak there
[2:21:06] with some of the relocations there
[2:21:09] with the modify the design. Moving
[2:21:11] to some shared dumpsters at a couple
[2:21:12] of those places. Some of these
[2:21:14] properties are working through the
[2:21:15] redevelopment ha has been
[2:21:18] a piece that is an ongoing discussion,
[2:21:20] moving a property on the west side
[2:21:24] to the alley
[2:21:26] way and crossing live oak street. And
[2:21:27] at the end
[2:21:29] here on the last slide here, similar
[2:21:30] is just really showing and
[2:21:32] highlighting some of the areas that
[2:21:35] are slightly different. If you guys
[2:21:36] do
[2:21:39] recall in the schematic phase, what
[2:21:40] was
[2:21:42] presented, other
[2:21:47] areas that were combined dumpsters,
[2:21:48] they have gone into slight
[2:21:50] different lay outs or slight different
[2:21:51] designs. So that is where we
[2:21:53] are at in the process. And are able
[2:21:54] to be
[2:21:57] able to get
[2:21:59] to at this point. Looking back you
[2:22:00] know at
[2:22:01] the overall the design from where
[2:22:03] we are going to where we are trying
[2:22:04] to get and understand what is driving
[2:22:06] a lot of the decisions and the
[2:22:09] issues to get to the final
[2:22:10] design is this dumpster decision and
[2:22:12] how we work through with
[2:22:15] each
[2:22:18] of the property owners is the litmus
[2:22:19] for
[2:22:21] making
[2:22:27] sure it
[2:22:29] works effectively. We have a better
[2:22:30] handle on
[2:22:33] what is to be expected. And move through
[2:22:36] that relatively quickly. It
[2:22:39] is right back to
[2:22:41] you.
[2:22:42] >> thank you rj. To expand a
[2:22:43] bit, what rj was
[2:22:45] talking about with the pec bit, we
[2:22:47] have this very wordy slide here, there
[2:22:48] is
[2:22:50] a lot of information. And the staff
[2:22:51] is met
[2:22:54] with pec multiple times
[2:22:57] to discuss what
[2:23:00] options are
[2:23:03] possible
[2:23:06] with following
[2:23:09] our city
[2:23:11] code. Our waste water treatment plant
[2:23:12] needing that constant power and the
[2:23:13] texas childrens we
[2:23:15] are all aware of
[2:23:17] needing that dedicated double stack
[2:23:18] three-phase line. It
[2:23:21] limits where we can go underground. We
[2:23:24] have a most likely result that will
[2:23:27] happen is
[2:23:30] pec will install an upgrade, the overhead on
[2:23:33] market street which will
[2:23:36] allow them to install
[2:23:39] underground electric between peach
[2:23:40] and san antonio. Pec
[2:23:43] would reconnect all the
[2:23:44] services. We wouldn't leave anybody
[2:23:46] hanging and
[2:23:49] pec would remove
[2:23:50] the old overhead electric between
[2:23:51] peach and san antonio. To do this,
[2:23:53] we need an agreement with pec. Most of
[2:23:55] the funding would come from the
[2:23:58] bond program or
[2:24:00] this project. And we need additional
[2:24:01] easements for the
[2:24:04] new transformer pads that will
[2:24:07] be servicing
[2:24:10] the underground services. So,
[2:24:12] where we are going, there is still
[2:24:13] a
[2:24:16] lot to do. We believe a
[2:24:18] higher level of design will allow
[2:24:19] us to see
[2:24:20] these constraints more quickly. So that
[2:24:22] is chi we
[2:24:25] are asking we do
[2:24:28] proceed with the next design phase. When
[2:24:30] we get the 60% we will get a cost
[2:24:31] estimate
[2:24:32] of potential phasing of the project
[2:24:34] and look at
[2:24:37] additional funding sources for
[2:24:40] it. It will give a better detail
[2:24:43] for the reservation
[2:24:46] of
[2:24:50] improvements, along the alleys. We
[2:24:55] will
[2:24:57] keep the public engagement going. Working
[2:24:58] with the
[2:25:01] edc
[2:25:04] on the dumpster
[2:25:06] relocations. Once again, recommendation
[2:25:07] is to improve
[2:25:09] the design as presented. That conclude
[2:25:10] it
[2:25:13] is staff report. We are here to
[2:25:16] answer
[2:25:19] few questions y'all might
[2:25:21] have.
[2:25:22] >> questions from council? >>
[2:25:23] any chance I get
[2:25:24] talking to the business owners on
[2:25:25] austin street, I'm
[2:25:28] trying
[2:25:31] to
[2:25:37] talk them into this. In order
[2:25:40] to make the back an
[2:25:42] entrance to. And the back of house
[2:25:43] operations they
[2:25:45] have been doing for years. And not
[2:25:46] wanting to shake
[2:25:48] up their apple cart very much. Trying
[2:25:49] to
[2:25:52] encourage more people to access
[2:25:55] their businesses. It
[2:25:58] is
[2:26:01] a dual
[2:26:02] edged approach. I have been interested
[2:26:03] in austin street for another main street
[2:26:04] for as
[2:26:06] long as I have been sitting up here. This
[2:26:07] is a
[2:26:08] fascinating and great thing. I'm happy
[2:26:10] to see we are
[2:26:13] moving forward
[2:26:15] on the design side. We will discuss funding
[2:26:16] at some point in the future
[2:26:17] because we don't have the funding
[2:26:19] for
[2:26:21] the construction piece at this point. But
[2:26:22] we will,
[2:26:25] I will be encouraging
[2:26:28] folks to try to get that option
[2:26:31] on
[2:26:32] the table. Questions from council? Anyone? Everyone?
[2:26:34] everybody
[2:26:36] loves it?
[2:26:37] >> I don't really have any
[2:26:38] questions
[2:26:39] at this time. I just have a, the real
[2:26:40] question is keep
[2:26:43] the
[2:26:44] high level of engagement. Echoing
[2:26:46] some of what you said. It
[2:26:49] is only going to help the experience
[2:26:50] for
[2:26:51] everyone for us to keep our ears open
[2:26:52] and incorporate
[2:26:54] as much or mitigate as much of their
[2:26:55] concern as we possibly
[2:26:58] can of the existing folks. I
[2:27:00] am hesitant to phrase it this way. But
[2:27:01] short term
[2:27:03] pain, long term gain. Short term,
[2:27:04] it will be some
[2:27:07] painful months when we
[2:27:09] do kick it off. It is major overhaul. When
[2:27:10] we look back on it,
[2:27:13] it will be
[2:27:16] a
[2:27:19] years long process of pain. But
[2:27:21] in the large scheme of things when
[2:27:25] we look at
[2:27:26] the improvement that's will happen
[2:27:28] when we look at what is happening
[2:27:29] across the street between main street
[2:27:31] and the railroad tracks and the long
[2:27:33] term view there and you add in this
[2:27:34] element of austin street
[2:27:37] and what city park is
[2:27:40] continuing to bring. In
[2:27:43] that whole area long term. I believe
[2:27:46] in the project 100%. I
[2:27:48] just wanted, if nothing else, give
[2:27:49] you guys
[2:27:51] a little bit of motivation. Know you
[2:27:52] still have the support to
[2:27:54] continue to work. To the mayor's point,
[2:27:55] we are still
[2:27:58] away from funding and turning dirt
[2:28:01] out there. But,
[2:28:03] this is where we go. To me it is obvious
[2:28:04] this
[2:28:07] is the way to shape downtown into
[2:28:08] keeping
[2:28:09] the charm that we currently have. Which
[2:28:10] is creating a little
[2:28:13] bit more of it
[2:28:16] for everyone
[2:28:18] to enjoy. So, but I absolutely understand
[2:28:19] that the short term pain is real
[2:28:22] and it will be channeling. So just
[2:28:23] stay engaged and
[2:28:25] keep trying to mitigate
[2:28:27] where you can. Thank you guys.
[2:28:28] >>
[2:28:29] what's the
[2:28:31] plan for texas
[2:28:33] children's hospital at this point?
[2:28:34] >>
[2:28:35] micah might
[2:28:37] know more than me. But,
[2:28:39] the plan is currently delayed. They
[2:28:40] have not broken ground up there. I don't
[2:28:41] know
[2:28:42] if there is a given time line on when
[2:28:43] they will
[2:28:45] actually start initiating the improvement.
[2:28:46] >>
[2:28:47] do you have an
[2:28:48] idea about roughly where that would
[2:28:49] be?
[2:28:50] >> the
[2:28:52] hospital itself? Yes, ma'am. It
[2:28:54] is located near per year and old san
[2:28:55] antonio.
[2:28:56] >> okay. I just need
[2:28:58] to make sure I told somebody
[2:29:01] else
[2:29:04] that correct information already. Thank
[2:29:05] you.
[2:29:06] >> do
[2:29:07] you mind flipping back to the pec
[2:29:08] slide again? Thank
[2:29:10] you. And
[2:29:13] I caught most of it. I mess maybe
[2:29:15] a simple question. High level is just
[2:29:16] how much does this factor into the
[2:29:19] potential
[2:29:22] cost of the project?
[2:29:23] >> could be a
[2:29:24] good deal of it. Yes, sir.
[2:29:25] >> that
[2:29:26] is
[2:29:34] >> I'll say,
[2:29:36] most well-oriented downtown you could
[2:29:39] make it for the long-term future ,
[2:29:40] right? It's valuable. I appreciate
[2:29:41] these conversations as well as all
[2:29:43] the businesses.
[2:29:46] just like you have outlined,
[2:29:50] this is helpful. Thanks for watching
[2:29:52] these through.
[2:29:58] budget once we
[2:29:59] get a cost estimate we will get a
[2:30:01] better eye on what these
[2:30:02] improvements would likely mean. One
[2:30:04] thing I did not quite emphasize
[2:30:07] on here,
[2:30:08] we would use the texas children's
[2:30:10] aspect as much as we could to positively
[2:30:12] position some polls, that would be beneficial
[2:30:13] for
[2:30:16] the project
[2:30:18] with these other aspects.
[2:30:19] >> good notes.
[2:30:25] >> that's a good point.
[2:30:28] since
[2:30:31] the new
[2:30:32] transmission line is in the works
[2:30:34] to do this, we are not going to
[2:30:42] be excited about them coming into
[2:30:43] main street. So,
[2:30:44] if we can push -- I want to say this
[2:30:46] is a negotiating tool for
[2:30:49] us, but, stopping short
[2:30:50] of saying we don't want anything on
[2:30:52] main street. We spent a lot of money
[2:30:53] to
[2:30:54] clean up main street. It was kind
[2:30:55] of a sucker punch
[2:31:00] when they come in and say, let's put
[2:31:01] a big transmission
[2:31:02] line where you just spent millions
[2:31:03] of dollars to put it underground.
[2:31:04] all of that
[2:31:06] being said, if we can combine the effort
[2:31:07] ,
[2:31:10] and I would say a win-win,
[2:31:18] they could find a way to work the
[2:31:19] two projects together, and benefit
[2:31:21] both sides. I think that is an opportunity
[2:31:28] .
[2:31:32] >> any other questions or comments?
[2:31:34] public testimony on this item? Well,
[2:31:36] I will make the motion that we approve
[2:31:40] the reconstruction 30%
[2:31:41] schematic design for austin street,
[2:31:43] as presented. Emotion and a second?
[2:31:44] all
[2:31:46] in favor? Any opposed?
[2:31:49] motion carries. Thank you.
[2:31:52] all right, k 2.
[2:31:55] possible deliberation to avoid
[2:31:57] a master service agreement for general
[2:31:58] engineering services
[2:32:01] not to exceed
[2:32:04] $562,003.76 .
[2:32:07] to
[2:32:10] hdr engineering,
[2:32:13] executing
[2:32:14] task order number one for fm 2770
[2:32:16] wastewater improvements
[2:32:19] , not to exceed amount of $562,003.76,
[2:32:22] in conjunction with the
[2:32:24] interlocal agreement between the city of
[2:32:28] buda and buda
[2:32:29] economic development corporation to
[2:32:30] design and construct utilities along
[2:32:31] fm 2770.
[2:32:34] >> thank you, mayor. Didn't make it
[2:32:35] short
[2:32:37] on you. This is both
[2:32:40] a recommendation to award
[2:32:43] an msa, with
[2:32:46] hdr engineering
[2:32:49] , or master services agreement
[2:32:50] for general engineering services,
[2:32:52] and then, to also secure
[2:32:55] task order number one, which would
[2:32:57] be those fm 2770 wastewater improvements.
[2:32:58] y'all may recall
[2:33:00] that back in april, 2025, you executed
[2:33:04] and il-8 with the edc,
[2:33:13] and interlocal agreement
[2:33:15] and allowing the city and edc to enter
[2:33:16] into a cooperative purchasing program,
[2:33:17] to
[2:33:18] fund engineering design services related
[2:33:19] to construction of water and wastewater
[2:33:20] lines to save properties along
[2:33:22] fm 2770. This project, itself,
[2:33:25] the cip is focusing solely on the
[2:33:28] wastewater aspect
[2:33:31] . Blake and I
[2:33:33] are currently working on the water side
[2:33:34] and we will bring that to you, soon,
[2:33:37] as well. Hdr was
[2:33:40] selected using our prequalified
[2:33:43] consultants list, it is the same resolution
[2:33:48] , and it should be noted that the
[2:33:49] msa is a general
[2:33:50] engineering services contract. It
[2:33:52] includes all of the services that hdr
[2:33:55] offers within
[2:33:58] what they submitted for that rfq .
[2:34:01] and then
[2:34:04] this task order itself is
[2:34:07] the one focusing solely on the wastewater.
[2:34:09] the scope that they presented to us
[2:34:10] involves designing about
[2:34:13] 8200 linear feet
[2:34:16] of hopefully gravity wastewater
[2:34:19] maine, adjacent to
[2:34:22] 2770 and neighboring roads. The scope
[2:34:24] has been broken down into seven main tasks,
[2:34:28] with the main goal
[2:34:29] ending with a construction plan set
[2:34:31] at the end of it which is ready to
[2:34:32] go
[2:34:33] to bed, and hdr providing construction
[2:34:34] phase services with that,
[2:34:37] as well.
[2:34:40] total cost for the msa is $562 --
[2:34:47] $562,003.76,
[2:34:49] to match the amount proposed in task
[2:34:53] order 1.
[2:34:55] this is a time and materials contract
[2:34:56] with
[2:34:57] a not to exceed amount. No funding
[2:34:59] is requested right
[2:35:02] now, and
[2:35:05] any
[2:35:06] future additions to this msa will
[2:35:07] come as amendments to council. So,
[2:35:08] if
[2:35:09] we do want to engage another project
[2:35:10] with hdr to expand that msa, it would
[2:35:14] come as an amendment
[2:35:18] , because right now, we are asking
[2:35:19] that it just be included to the scope
[2:35:21] of task order 1. That is why those
[2:35:23] are the same amount. The buda adc
[2:35:24] has pledged 540,000 for this design
[2:35:26] project under the ila, and
[2:35:34] the pros and cons with this project,
[2:35:36] the city will continue its partnership
[2:35:37] with the edc, increasing the develop
[2:35:38] ability along
[2:35:41] the 2770 corridor.
[2:35:45] following along with the future conference
[2:35:47] of plan and land
[2:35:48] use map , so that the identified parcels
[2:35:50] along this roadway,
[2:35:55] most of which are light industrial
[2:35:56] in our land use map,
[2:35:57] but several large properties along
[2:36:04] fm 2770 and 1626 are identified as
[2:36:05] a corridor commercial,
[2:36:06] which could bring several different
[2:36:07] types of businesses to buda that we
[2:36:08] would potentially be
[2:36:11] able to offer city
[2:36:14] services, too.
[2:36:17] the cons being that
[2:36:20] $552,003.76 is
[2:36:22] more than the 540 we initially scoped
[2:36:23] for the
[2:36:26] cip. However,
[2:36:28] public works director blake nevin
[2:36:29] both and I thought it would
[2:36:30] be prudent to ask hdr to throw in
[2:36:32] a feasibility report for
[2:36:33] this project. There is potentially
[2:36:35] a few
[2:36:37] alignments we could take with this project,
[2:36:43] and some are constrained on capacity.
[2:36:44] they are different sizes,
[2:36:45] and if we are wanting to design this
[2:36:47] for the
[2:36:49] long term master planning of this area
[2:36:59] , to ensure that we do not have to
[2:37:00] go in and redesign it when it does
[2:37:02] get fully developed, we want that
[2:37:03] for
[2:37:04] the feasibility report to show us
[2:37:05] the ideal alignment which will benefit
[2:37:06] us in the
[2:37:07] future and the constructibility and
[2:37:08] mary those two.
[2:37:10] alternatives, if council would like,
[2:37:11] we can go
[2:37:14] back and renegotiate with
[2:37:17] the scope if it does not match counsel's desire.
[2:37:20] I will note that we
[2:37:23] have gotten this
[2:37:25] about three turns with the scope,
[2:37:26] blake and I,
[2:37:28] with hdr , there is a real good collaboration
[2:37:29] on
[2:37:30] talking through some of the parts that
[2:37:34] we thought may not be unnecessary,
[2:37:41] streamlining the scope and we
[2:37:42] believe we got it to a point that
[2:37:43] it meets all of our expectations and
[2:37:44] can deliver
[2:37:46] quality product. With that, staff
[2:37:47] recommends the approval of the msa
[2:37:48] which with hdr engineering inc. For
[2:37:53] services in an amount not to exceed
[2:37:56] 562,000
[2:37:59] dollars,
[2:38:02] approving task order 1
[2:38:05] for that same amount for 2770 wastewater
[2:38:06] improvements.
[2:38:07] >> thank you. Questions on this one?
[2:38:10] >> just one, thank you. The question
[2:38:11] is just,
[2:38:17] I guess
[2:38:18] they think it was around the whole presentation
[2:38:19] with the work here, but specifically
[2:38:20] including the
[2:38:22] feasibility, because there is a lot
[2:38:23] of
[2:38:26] different potential
[2:38:29] around that corner,
[2:38:30] and the end of this line, or along
[2:38:32] the line, I should say. The whole
[2:38:33] thing.
[2:38:35] what will that tell us
[2:38:37] that the original study would not?
[2:38:38] I think in the
[2:38:39] original study, there is some degree
[2:38:41] of incorporating some buildout, I think.
[2:38:44] the feasibility
[2:38:47] is just telling you about even
[2:38:48] more potentials on the buildout. What
[2:38:50] is the difference between that
[2:38:51] and the baseline?
[2:38:52] >> so, the buildout
[2:38:53] has, to my knowledge
[2:38:58] , stayed roughly the same it is just
[2:38:59] that we have
[2:39:00] more areas we could connect to, and
[2:39:01] they all offer varying degrees of
[2:39:02] capacity.
[2:39:05] some above
[2:39:08] railroad
[2:39:09] crossings, some involve potentially
[2:39:10] the need for another lift station.
[2:39:11] we would like to
[2:39:14] look through
[2:39:16] the feasibility, and see what makes sense
[2:39:17] now, and what can serve
[2:39:18] the city long-term.
[2:39:19] >> okay. And,
[2:39:20] is that with different degrees of
[2:39:23] potential lue
[2:39:26] at the
[2:39:28] south end of that line?
[2:39:29] >> we have
[2:39:30] asked hdr
[2:39:32] to do
[2:39:35] , is to take the future land
[2:39:37] use map and assume the most aggressive
[2:39:38] form of lue,
[2:39:41] that is
[2:39:44] where we would have the line itself
[2:39:45] to
[2:39:46] want to design to, and in the feasibility study
[2:39:47] it
[2:39:48] would execute which alignment would
[2:39:49] serve that purpose.
[2:39:50] >> cool, thanks.
[2:39:53] >> questions, comments?
[2:39:56] does
[2:39:58] anyone want to make a motion for this one?
[2:40:01] >> mayor, I will make a motion that we
[2:40:02] award the msa
[2:40:05] as presented.
[2:40:07] >> we have a mission and a second.
[2:40:08] all those in favor? No
[2:40:10] public testimony? A missionary second,
[2:40:11] all those in favor?
[2:40:14] any opposed? All right.
[2:40:17] motion carries.
[2:40:19] >> do we need to execute the task
[2:40:20] order, too?
[2:40:23] no? All right.
[2:40:26] >> it was as presented. >> awesome.
[2:40:27] thank you.
[2:40:29] >> good question, thank you. All right.
[2:40:32] k3.
[2:40:36] adopt resolution establishing a policy
[2:40:38] related to artificial intelligence systems
[2:40:47] used by or on behalf of the city
[2:40:49] of buda to guide the ethical and responsible
[2:40:50] use of artificial intelligence technologies,
[2:40:51] and providing
[2:40:52] for an effective date. Mr. Cameron?
[2:40:53] >> good evening, mayor
[2:40:56] and council. Recent state bills that
[2:40:57] were passed
[2:40:59] , house bill 150, 3512,
[2:41:02] 149,
[2:41:05] and the senate bill 1964, set
[2:41:08] the groundwork for a regulatory structure for
[2:41:11] local governments
[2:41:14] .
[2:41:20] sorry.
[2:41:23] groundwork for local governments in
[2:41:26] the regulation of a.I. Systems.
[2:41:29] outlined to the dir.
[2:41:35] the policy that we
[2:41:38] have created for you, is based
[2:41:41] on the template from
[2:41:44] geo vai
[2:41:46] , a coalition of city governments,
[2:41:50] some other cities within texas that
[2:41:53] have used them, this
[2:41:56] template specifically san antonio,
[2:41:59] austin, round rock
[2:42:01] and waco. With relevance to a.I.,
[2:42:02] it is important to get ahead
[2:42:06] of it.
[2:42:08] it is a rapidly changing and emerging
[2:42:09] technology, it is
[2:42:10] important to have some form of policy
[2:42:12] in place for how we treat it.
[2:42:15] the policy ensures social good
[2:42:18] , ethical,
[2:42:21] non-discriminant
[2:42:24] agent, and
[2:42:26] use in government services. The policy in
[2:42:27] front
[2:42:30] of you,
[2:42:33] a couple wave
[2:42:34] tops on it, it has some definitions
[2:42:35] to include what we consider artificial intelligence
[2:42:41] , the scope of who it applies to,
[2:42:42] staff, interns,
[2:42:43] consultants, contractors, basically
[2:42:44] anyone performing work on behalf of
[2:42:45] the city of
[2:42:47] buda. Outline responsibility of the
[2:42:48] users,
[2:42:49] and addresses what is considered pii
[2:42:51] , specifically on how not
[2:42:53] to use it within the a.I. Systems.
[2:43:00] identifies prevented and preapproved
[2:43:01] a.I. Platforms and creates a process
[2:43:03] for requesting new ones, and
[2:43:05] this will be incorporated into the
[2:43:09] employee handbook .
[2:43:12] any questions ?
[2:43:15] >> first of all, thank
[2:43:18] you for looking out for
[2:43:19] us, and making our changes as we need
[2:43:21] to, as the world changes
[2:43:24] around us. Weston from counsel?
[2:43:27] ms. Williams?
[2:43:33] >> good evening, cameron, thank you
[2:43:34] very
[2:43:35] much for sharing this information.
[2:43:36] I have a couple of really quick questions.
[2:43:38] in the analysis, you're saying that
[2:43:39] the policy is
[2:43:40] going to outline what constitutes
[2:43:42] an incident?
[2:43:44] and, in response to an incident that
[2:43:45] results from improper use?
[2:43:48] how do you control that
[2:43:50] with a consultant and contractor?
[2:43:51] >> that is something that we
[2:43:54] will have to work with
[2:43:56] purchasing on working into our contract
[2:43:57] language. It would
[2:43:59] be relatively the same process , isolating
[2:44:03] the offending device, whether
[2:44:04] that is a laptop, desktop server,
[2:44:09] isolating it and addressing it from there,
[2:44:14] seeing what has been affected, and
[2:44:15] how
[2:44:17] we need to rollback to get to a functional
[2:44:18] state.
[2:44:19] >> can you give me
[2:44:20] an example of what a negative incident
[2:44:21] would be?
[2:44:27] >> say that a contractor comes in
[2:44:30] with a
[2:44:32] platform that have developed to use
[2:44:33] for the city, and it
[2:44:36] goes out and
[2:44:43] gets access to our shared drives.
[2:44:44] we would want to isolate that, obviously,
[2:44:45] pull
[2:44:46] it off the network, see what it has
[2:44:48] gotten access to, see whether the
[2:44:49] data
[2:44:50] is stored or shared, make sure nothing
[2:44:51] has been deleted or
[2:44:54] copied down.
[2:44:56] and address it in that capacity.
[2:44:57] >>
[2:44:58] we are more concerned about
[2:44:59] whether or not they gain access to
[2:45:00] secured information that should not
[2:45:01] have
[2:45:03] access to?
[2:45:05] >> yes, ma'am, that is just one sample.
[2:45:06] >> okay. Thank you.
[2:45:09] >> questions, comments?
[2:45:15] >> I got the button
[2:45:18] to work. Thank you
[2:45:21] . Overall, I think it is a very responsible
[2:45:24] comprehensive policy. As we start
[2:45:27] to explore and mess around a
[2:45:30] little bit with a.I.
[2:45:33] ,
[2:45:36] when I first went through
[2:45:37] and read this I thought it was a bit
[2:45:39] too restrictive,
[2:45:42] I know there are a lot of capabilities we could
[2:45:43] potentially
[2:45:45] use for automation, but pii and automation
[2:45:46] has a
[2:45:47] bit of conflict there, so, I think
[2:45:48] I am good with
[2:45:53] it as written, but I think that when
[2:45:54] you start to get
[2:45:56] those exceptions and requests like
[2:45:57] a, we want to
[2:45:59] do this and it meets all these criteria,
[2:46:00] and state policies and everything
[2:46:01] else, we
[2:46:03] are protecting pii, which is
[2:46:10] super important, that is maybe when
[2:46:12] we come back and look to amend it
[2:46:14] and loosen it up a bit, we will have more
[2:46:15] experience with it as well. Other
[2:46:16] than that, just general comments,
[2:46:18] I think you are already doing this,
[2:46:19] but,
[2:46:20] make it easy for people to do the
[2:46:21] right thing ,
[2:46:24] sedlock devices,
[2:46:26] lock the network and do whatever you
[2:46:27] can to prevent people from doing the
[2:46:29] wrong thing on accident. And then
[2:46:30] training is critical. So, both
[2:46:33] from what not to do, but also from
[2:46:36] a, hey, here's how to prompt the best
[2:46:37] way, here
[2:46:39] is how to use these things.
[2:46:42] I think you can do a
[2:46:45] lot of good. And see where things
[2:46:46] evolve.
[2:46:48] thank you.
[2:46:49] >>
[2:46:50] any public testimony on this one?
[2:46:54] anyone want to make
[2:46:57] the motion?
[2:47:06] >> moved to approve k3
[2:47:09] as presented.
[2:47:12] >> we have a motion
[2:47:13] and a second. All those in favor?
[2:47:15] any opposed? Motion
[2:47:18] carries. Thank you.
[2:47:21] k for .
[2:47:24] deliberation and possible action to
[2:47:25] award
[2:47:27] rf p 25-255
[2:47:30] buda sportsplex softball and soccer
[2:47:31] field
[2:47:33] complex to g hyatt construction
[2:47:36] inc., and to authorize the city manager
[2:47:37] to
[2:47:38] negotiate and execute a contract. Tony?
[2:47:42] >> good
[2:47:44] evening, counsel. How y'all doing?
[2:47:48] I'll try to keep this as short as
[2:47:51] I can. For the project,
[2:47:54] obviously we went out to bid once
[2:47:57] , there was an issue, we had to do
[2:48:00] some things, the
[2:48:02] last few weeks we have been working
[2:48:03] on trying to get a contract
[2:48:05] done, thankfully with the help of dcs
[2:48:06] and staff, we got
[2:48:09] it done. These are
[2:48:11] some of the cost savings on the project
[2:48:13] that we negotiated
[2:48:15] with the contractor. Utility contractor
[2:48:16] is based
[2:48:19] in buda
[2:48:20] waves the mobilization fee which is
[2:48:22] nice. Have used them on
[2:48:23] several of our projects, so they gave
[2:48:25] us a big contract discount.
[2:48:28] we reduced
[2:48:31] --I reduced the contract,
[2:48:33] I allowed 50 more days because they
[2:48:37] had already liquidated built
[2:48:38] into the contract so extended that
[2:48:40] 50 days to get rid of the
[2:48:41] $100,000 they would bill us for, which
[2:48:43] does not cost me anything,
[2:48:45] it still gets me what I need to get
[2:48:47] completed, so I think that was a win
[2:48:49] for both of us.
[2:48:52] electrical's implications,
[2:48:59] clarification issued after bid, there
[2:49:00] were some things we were negotiating,
[2:49:01] and then on tuesday
[2:49:02] was the deadline, and then afterwards,
[2:49:06] he called to say hey, I got extra
[2:49:07] money from my
[2:49:08] electric engineer, my electrical companies,
[2:49:09] so he gave us a bit of a discount.
[2:49:13] we also sympathize the
[2:49:15] traffic control. It is not nearly as rigorous
[2:49:17] as what we had put, but it is definitely
[2:49:19] stupefied. We have eliminated
[2:49:22] masonry
[2:49:23] walls for the dugouts and replaced
[2:49:25] chain-link posts and fences .
[2:49:27] physically I got an interior that
[2:49:28] is brick
[2:49:31] and they concrete
[2:49:35] exterior, for the dugouts I went to
[2:49:37] one of his offense instead of a
[2:49:38] cmu wall which delivered a lot of
[2:49:40] cost savings on that aspect
[2:49:43] of it. I can get
[2:49:46] the markup through
[2:49:47] my board and contractors, we are taking
[2:49:49] that on.
[2:49:53] eliminated in its entirety which we
[2:49:55] did not need per our
[2:49:58] engineering staff.
[2:50:00] for the city of buda . We eliminated
[2:50:01] the
[2:50:04] masonry walls ,
[2:50:06] replaced with metal studs. We eliminated
[2:50:07] the stainless steel
[2:50:10] wall panels , replaced by frp,
[2:50:13] which is a huge savings, there.
[2:50:16] obviously, there working
[2:50:17] for the city so they will not pay
[2:50:21] any permanent fees, that's a nice
[2:50:22] little savings there
[2:50:25] as well put city of buda purchases
[2:50:27] the field tarps, hoses, dugout benches, helmets,
[2:50:31] racks and bats
[2:50:33] and fun stuff, we can buy that through
[2:50:34] our own
[2:50:37] catalog and that it's cheaper.
[2:50:43] rs three, reduced the root zone to
[2:50:45] medium depth, we cut it to 4 inches.
[2:50:49] hyatt cost savings received after the
[2:50:51] bid, so after we had some talks on
[2:50:52] the final
[2:50:55] day, tuesday, I needed to
[2:50:56] get this to micah so he could make
[2:50:58] a decision about what we are doing.
[2:50:59] he passed on more cost savings. I
[2:51:01] will tell you, and I have a
[2:51:04] couple of more,
[2:51:07] pre-engineered
[2:51:08] metal sightings and batting cages
[2:51:10] to match the roof,
[2:51:12] that's a small savings, and delete
[2:51:13] wet
[2:51:16] fire sprinkler
[2:51:17] through the concession stands, we
[2:51:19] just did it for the
[2:51:22] canceled system only. With
[2:51:23] all those savings there, that was
[2:51:25] quite a bit of savings, for us. The
[2:51:28] biggest ones, just to give
[2:51:31] you an example,
[2:51:40] is the --I
[2:51:41] don't know where I put it. Cost savings
[2:51:43] received after bid
[2:51:46] , that was $1 million. The electrical
[2:51:51] was 1 million. So, hyatt did a great
[2:51:52] job, they were
[2:51:54] very upfront, I don't feel like they
[2:51:58] were ripping us off
[2:51:59] or taking advantage of us or however
[2:52:01] you want to say it, I
[2:52:04] think they --justin has a lot of
[2:52:05] integrity, he talked to us straight
[2:52:06] up, we were straightforward with each
[2:52:07] other on what
[2:52:10] we needed to do, and it was a
[2:52:11] pleasure doing business with them
[2:52:13] and having conversations. There was probably
[2:52:19] some conversation on his part
[2:52:20] and our part because there is a number
[2:52:22] we need to get to, and we
[2:52:23] were having some difficult conversations,
[2:52:24] but, with darren's help and his team,
[2:52:25] who did a fantastic
[2:52:26] job, we started on thursday, having
[2:52:28] discussions if we were talk on friday,
[2:52:31] and
[2:52:33] we did not stop until tuesday, so
[2:52:34] that a saturday, sunday, all
[2:52:35] his team doing the electrical, doing
[2:52:37] the structural,
[2:52:41] doing whatever we needed on any of
[2:52:43] these things, to make sure we weren't giving up
[2:52:45] quality and we were getting what we
[2:52:46] were supposed to get that we wanted.
[2:52:49] and so,
[2:52:51] I think we have done that. I think
[2:52:52] we have done
[2:52:54] a heck of a job to keep the integrity
[2:52:55] of what our original vision is
[2:52:57] with some adjustments. And then, here
[2:52:58] is the proposal, the base bid
[2:53:01] and the being
[2:53:04] 12 million,
[2:53:07] and
[2:53:08] I missed the alternative earlier today,
[2:53:10] so I apologize for that.
[2:53:12] we did the maintenance building , 600,000,
[2:53:16] bleachers at 56,
[2:53:21] the additional parking lot is 751
[2:53:22] and the batting cages are
[2:53:23] 879, so that gave us a total proposal
[2:53:25] of 14,982,000
[2:53:28] 997.25.
[2:53:31] getting that
[2:53:32] charge taken care of, that's 572,000,
[2:53:34] and the total with lighting
[2:53:37] would be a
[2:53:40] 15,558,000.
[2:53:43] here is our funding sources.
[2:53:46] we have 2024 co bond,
[2:53:49] which is 5.15, the
[2:53:52] buda
[2:53:54] edc is 1.5, once you send this, opposed
[2:53:58] 2026 co bond is
[2:54:09] 11,250,000. And that can change if
[2:54:10] you choose to, the annual debt
[2:54:12] estimated is 814,000 per year for
[2:54:13] 25 years.
[2:54:19] for a total of 17.9 million. With
[2:54:20] all the work
[2:54:21] that we have had to do since the bid
[2:54:22] has ended, it is probably around
[2:54:25] 1.6, and we have 16.3 available for construction.
[2:54:28] >> thank you. Questions?
[2:54:31] accolades?
[2:54:37] >> just want to reiterate, this does
[2:54:38] not
[2:54:40] happen without
[2:54:43] darren's staff and his team, because
[2:54:44] we all put in
[2:54:46] long nights to make
[2:54:49] this
[2:54:51] happen. Answering emails and phone calls,
[2:54:52] that's all taken care of, I just want
[2:54:53] to
[2:54:54] make sure that it is us as a team
[2:54:55] getting this done. It was
[2:54:57] no individual, definitely a team effort
[2:54:58] to make this happen.
[2:55:02] >> mr. Smith? >> appreciate it.
[2:55:08] it feels good, it will feel even
[2:55:10] better when we see it. Right? See
[2:55:11] them out there
[2:55:13] playing ball. So, scaling back and
[2:55:17] going to --going from this
[2:55:20] concrete blocks
[2:55:23] into a plastic polymer
[2:55:26] finish, you mentioned quality ,
[2:55:29] I am thinking longevity.
[2:55:31] what is the lifespan on the material
[2:55:32] versus
[2:55:35] single block?
[2:55:36] >> center block
[2:55:40] is obviously 20 or 30 up to 50 years
[2:55:41] depending
[2:55:43] on how you take care of it. The way
[2:55:44] that we move, probably
[2:55:47] 25 years , if we take care
[2:55:49] of it, we don't beat the crap out
[2:55:51] of it, we take care of it and clean
[2:55:53] it, it is
[2:55:55] all about taking care of what you
[2:55:59] got, right?
[2:56:03] we are truly blessed in being able
[2:56:04] to do this. So, we will take care
[2:56:06] of it like it is supposed to be taken
[2:56:08] care of and like it is supposed
[2:56:09] to stay.
[2:56:10] >> appreciate that. What
[2:56:11] I was looking for is, the
[2:56:12] 25 year mark or beyond, if we take
[2:56:14] care of it is what
[2:56:15] I was looking for. Because we will
[2:56:17] have to do some things over
[2:56:18] time, right? But we can at least get
[2:56:20] paid off or
[2:56:23] improve later .
[2:56:29] I want it to last out there,
[2:56:31] because it is a huge investment we
[2:56:32] are putting in, we
[2:56:33] don't want to put in another 10,000,005
[2:56:35] years from now because it's
[2:56:38] falling apart.
[2:56:39] >>
[2:56:41] it's just us making
[2:56:42] sure we have a schedule and we are
[2:56:44] taking care of it. It is on
[2:56:45] me to make sure that we have maintenance
[2:56:47] schedules taken care of, we are replacing
[2:56:48] things when they're supposed to be
[2:56:50] replaced, retaining them the way they
[2:56:52] are supposed to be maintained. Checklists
[2:56:53] and
[2:56:54] recipes, those kinds of things will
[2:56:56] be reiterated
[2:57:02] , the stuff that
[2:57:03] micah and lindsay have been on the
[2:57:05] about, so we will have to work harder
[2:57:06] at getting them all done, right? But,
[2:57:08] it is treating it like it is
[2:57:09] supposed to be treated. We hope that
[2:57:11] it lasts for
[2:57:14] 100 years, but
[2:57:15] obviously we will have to take care
[2:57:17] of it at some point.
[2:57:18] >> perfect,
[2:57:19] thank you. Just to continue thinking
[2:57:20] about quality,
[2:57:23] with every aspect, two
[2:57:26] areas quick, the root zone depth
[2:57:30] ? Obviously they wouldn't do it if
[2:57:32] they were not comfortable. What do
[2:57:34] we do on the soccer field?
[2:57:35] >> the
[2:57:36] same. 6 inches
[2:57:37] on the soccer field.
[2:57:38] >> so we are
[2:57:39] pressing our
[2:57:41] luck?
[2:57:42] >>
[2:57:46] we went thick. We went 8 inches, and
[2:57:47] I wanted 8 inches
[2:57:48] just because I wanted more stability.
[2:57:49] it is not that afforded inches is
[2:57:50] bad, it
[2:57:51] is normal for what they do on normal
[2:57:53] fields, high school fields, but
[2:57:54] I was trying to go for that little
[2:57:56] extra, so
[2:57:58] a little more security and a better
[2:57:59] foundation for us.
[2:58:05] we hire it out as far as
[2:58:10] over seeding and fertilization, so
[2:58:11] it will
[2:58:13] be taken care of, we will have a good
[2:58:14] system to keep
[2:58:17] it watered.
[2:58:19] I am not worried about the 4 inches,
[2:58:20] I was hoping for more
[2:58:22] is all.
[2:58:23] >> okay. I imagine the high-traffic areas
[2:58:26] on the soccer field
[2:58:28] are different than high-traffic areas out
[2:58:29] here, and most highest traffic will
[2:58:30] be on
[2:58:32] the dirt ,
[2:58:34] the infield.
[2:58:35] >> I'm trying to get
[2:58:40] on the leads but the mention of the
[2:58:41] board, we're talking about the backstop?
[2:58:43] so, those will stay. It will be a
[2:58:44] pony wall backstop, it will just stop
[2:58:45] the dugouts and then chain-link will
[2:58:47] take over
[2:58:49] around? I don't find out as much because
[2:58:50] you start bridging
[2:58:52] those dugouts , it gets really steamy
[2:58:55] in their. You keep it open with chain-link
[2:58:58] and the air flows through and I think
[2:58:59] they are equally as safe.
[2:59:02] >> absolutely.
[2:59:07] cmu as a better foundation makes it
[2:59:08] look a little better but
[2:59:10] it is more aesthetics than functionality.
[2:59:16] chain-link fence, they do it everywhere. There's
[2:59:17] a bunch of colleges that have
[2:59:18] it. I was okay with changing that.
[2:59:20] >> very good. Appreciate all the work,
[2:59:21] team
[2:59:23] wide, and I'm excited to see it, now.
[2:59:26] thank you.
[2:59:32] >> any public testimony on this one?
[2:59:33] go ahead.
[2:59:34] >>
[2:59:35] thank you. Very much respecting that
[2:59:38] quick work, to get to --
[2:59:41] did you say
[2:59:46] win-win? I guess I will say it. Trying
[2:59:47] to find that spot.
[2:59:49] can you go back through the lists,
[2:59:50] and
[2:59:53] flip slowly? Of
[2:59:55] changes? I am trying to catch something,
[2:59:59] I think I happen to
[3:00:01] know here, is that the first one or is there
[3:00:02] one before
[3:00:05] it? There we go. And the
[3:00:08] next one? Okay. Thank you.
[3:00:13] it makes a lot of sense, and I appreciate
[3:00:14] you walking through it the
[3:00:17] irrigation pump is
[3:00:20] primarily for show
[3:00:23] and disturbing the
[3:00:25] water, so it is not so still of water
[3:00:26] or didn't have a bigger function?
[3:00:27] in other words, removing that, what
[3:00:29] will it change?
[3:00:30] >>
[3:00:32] so, what we did is
[3:00:35] the existing
[3:00:43] water quality pond, and proposed water quality pond, we
[3:00:44] wanted to make them wet bottom ponds
[3:00:46] for anesthetic feature but at the
[3:00:47] end of it
[3:00:49] , it was $1 million just on the pond.
[3:00:50] the irrigation system and so, reevaluating,
[3:00:52] we changed the method of treatment
[3:00:53] to meet water quality parameters for
[3:00:54] batch
[3:00:55] treatment, so we had fountains in
[3:00:57] their, future fountains,
[3:01:00] with the irrigation pumping station
[3:01:02] and that drove the cost. So, still
[3:01:03] gets
[3:01:06] water quality, but
[3:01:07] it is much lower cost.
[3:01:08] >> sounds good.
[3:01:14] tell me a bit more about batch treatment.
[3:01:15] I know
[3:01:16] what we do with some other ones, but
[3:01:18] I guess
[3:01:21] --yeah, talk a
[3:01:22] bit about that.'s budget is a must
[3:01:23] the same thing. So, if the original
[3:01:24] approach
[3:01:27] was a wet bottom pond,
[3:01:31] we would have four or five feet with fountains
[3:01:33] in it for more of anesthetic
[3:01:34] feature, what we did instead is take
[3:01:36] out the wet bottom, we raised
[3:01:38] the bottom by four or five feet, so we
[3:01:39] did not excavate
[3:01:41] quite as much, and then replant native
[3:01:42] grasses in there so we
[3:01:45] have to mow
[3:01:48] once per year, low maintenance.
[3:01:49] on batch treatment, what happens is
[3:01:50] that when the storm water comes through,
[3:01:51] it holds,
[3:01:54] in our case, about
[3:01:58] four feet to six feet of water. The
[3:01:59] irrigation system would have to commit
[3:02:00] water and
[3:02:02] spangled out on the grass. The batch treatment,
[3:02:05] a valve opens from the bottom of the
[3:02:06] pond after
[3:02:07] a set period of time and lets the
[3:02:09] water flow out into the creek.
[3:02:10] so, that is where we don't have to
[3:02:12] pump it. The same
[3:02:15] goal and time period with
[3:02:19] water running off the property before
[3:02:20] it goes to the creek.
[3:02:21] >> awesome,
[3:02:22] thank you.
[3:02:24] then, the electrical, tell me a
[3:02:25] bit more about how much of a downsized.
[3:02:31] is that the one transformer for the
[3:02:33] park?
[3:02:34] >>
[3:02:35] is a great question, I'm glad you
[3:02:36] asked.
[3:02:37] they had about 2.5 million on electrical
[3:02:39] , in
[3:02:42] totality, and that excluded
[3:02:45] the 1 million for the
[3:02:46] irrigation pump station. What we ended
[3:02:48] up doing is, when we took
[3:02:51] out the irrigation pumping
[3:02:52] station, that took out how we were routing
[3:02:54] the conduit around the site and running
[3:02:57] the wires , and that changed how we
[3:02:58] were
[3:02:59] setting up our transformers, because
[3:03:00] we had 14,000 volt power coming into
[3:03:03] the site ,
[3:03:04] and we were stepping it up and stepping
[3:03:06] down on voltage. So, that reduced
[3:03:08] transformers, which, they are generally
[3:03:09] 100 grand per pop,
[3:03:12] so that reduced how we are using power
[3:03:14] and we were able to simplify things.
[3:03:15] the phasing of the project
[3:03:18] that we broke it up into one, two, three,
[3:03:22] if you all saw our plans, there were
[3:03:24] hundreds, if not thousands of exes
[3:03:27] we were crossing out.
[3:03:32] in the interim period we went back
[3:03:33] and cleaned up all the
[3:03:35] plans, we took out all the letter exes,
[3:03:36] we took all
[3:03:37] the text under that out, and we basically
[3:03:39] clarified, tremendously,
[3:03:42] because the
[3:03:45] letter exes
[3:03:46] really confused the contractors. Once
[3:03:48] we clarified that,
[3:03:51] we
[3:03:52] could see the script much more clearly, and
[3:03:54] that allowed them to say, this is what
[3:03:57] you want, and then as tony mentioned,
[3:03:58] we started
[3:03:59] redesigning the electrical system
[3:04:00] at about noon on friday, and we finished
[3:04:03] around 2:00 on sunday, and
[3:04:06] send
[3:04:07] that to the contractor, you got it,
[3:04:09] they started praising it, and
[3:04:10] by monday, around 10:00 a.m., we had
[3:04:12] a price
[3:04:20] .
[3:04:21] >> and that was a reduction of how
[3:04:22] much?
[3:04:23] >> about 1.3
[3:04:24] million.
[3:04:25] >> those were the two big
[3:04:26] ones. Just looking at the list quickly,
[3:04:27] it seems
[3:04:28] like those are the two.
[3:04:29] >> yeah. One
[3:04:30] thing the contractor did pass on
[3:04:31] is, when they were getting their fresh
[3:04:32] quotes from contractors, tony and
[3:04:33] I both
[3:04:35] said hey, we got to have this by 11:00
[3:04:36] a.m. 11:00 I am,
[3:04:38] you hear me? And so, he was getting
[3:04:39] quotes in and he sent his first
[3:04:40] quote from the illogical setups, on
[3:04:42] the west coast
[3:04:45] --pardon
[3:04:46] me, they were on the east coast and
[3:04:48] west coast hadn't woken up yet because
[3:04:49] they
[3:04:50] were two hours behind, so the first
[3:04:51] quote was like 700,000,
[3:04:54] but after two hours, he was saying,
[3:04:57] they had been talking to each
[3:04:59] other and saying they were bidding
[3:05:00] and that came
[3:05:03] down to 400. Nothing changed,
[3:05:08] they were just using tariffs and just
[3:05:09] doing business, trying
[3:05:10] to push the numbers as high as they
[3:05:12] can, but as soon as they find out
[3:05:13] that they have competition, that drives
[3:05:15] the price down. So, there was a lot
[3:05:16] of
[3:05:17] that going on. It is common for the
[3:05:18] speed of the project,
[3:05:20] and the fact we were able to work
[3:05:21] in an open
[3:05:24] dialogue with contractor, and we were
[3:05:27] able to
[3:05:31] project based on our personality we would
[3:05:33] be firm, but fair, we want quality
[3:05:34] and
[3:05:35] we will not compromise that. But,
[3:05:36] we need an open dialogue to have a
[3:05:37] successful
[3:05:38] project. So, there is a lot of nonverbal's
[3:05:39] with good teamwork
[3:05:41] and I believe we have a really good
[3:05:42] team
[3:05:45] and contractor.
[3:05:48] >> vilsack
[3:05:51] thank you.
[3:05:53] >> you all did an amazing amount of
[3:05:54] work. So, hats off,
[3:06:00] I know where
[3:06:01] that bid started and what you were
[3:06:03] able to get to, working for the weekend,
[3:06:04] that's awesome. I am struggling with
[3:06:06] the cost, just in general.
[3:06:09] so, we're looking
[3:06:12] at 800,000 in debt servicing.
[3:06:15] do you have some general projections on
[3:06:18] revenue from field
[3:06:19] rentals, from tournaments, from any
[3:06:21] of that,
[3:06:24] for phase
[3:06:27] one?
[3:06:28] >> phase one, I have
[3:06:30] done some preliminary,
[3:06:33] with a total of 24
[3:06:38] tenants per year. What I did from
[3:06:39] that is, you know, we
[3:06:42] have concessions
[3:06:44] , somebody is running I have us running
[3:06:45] concessions 100%. And then
[3:06:48] we get
[3:06:51] late fees at 20%, we get a parking,
[3:06:52] 20%.
[3:06:53] concession stands , if somebody else
[3:06:54] runs it, at
[3:06:56] 20%. I have run multiple numbers, and
[3:07:00] I appreciate the question, because
[3:07:01] I finally get to
[3:07:02] actually talk about these numbers. So,
[3:07:03] just on
[3:07:08] the eight fields for softball on a
[3:07:09] revenue basis, we have
[3:07:12] eight fields, per our fee
[3:07:14] schedules, $500 per day to rent, there's
[3:07:15] eight of them, times two
[3:07:18] days, that's
[3:07:21] a
[3:07:23] grand. We line the seals for two days
[3:07:24] is $480.
[3:07:30] this is where it gets kind of confusing
[3:07:31] in some
[3:07:32] aspects, because you have to understand
[3:07:33] where the numbers come from. So
[3:07:35] on the eight fields for softball you
[3:07:36] can run 56 teams in
[3:07:39] the weekend. So, saturday sunday tournament
[3:07:40] you could run 56
[3:07:42] teams. Well, there's different ways
[3:07:43] of doing it,
[3:07:44] so, the numbers I am using for this
[3:07:45] comes straight from
[3:07:50] the sports field management association.
[3:07:52] I did not want
[3:07:55] to use
[3:07:58] --obviously I'm not
[3:07:59] just pulling numbers out of my hat,
[3:08:00] I use the book that everybody uses
[3:08:02] two project where we are going. It's
[3:08:03] the sports field management association.
[3:08:04] they do it
[3:08:06] as this, the city shares the gate,
[3:08:07] so 56 teams
[3:08:10] on average with
[3:08:13] 15 spectators per team,
[3:08:16] so they times that out,
[3:08:17] 15 spectators and then the gate fee is
[3:08:19] $10, and then you have two days
[3:08:21] and we get 20% of that, so that is
[3:08:28] 3360 docs.
[3:08:32] 3360, and then the same thing with
[3:08:34] the parking lot.
[3:08:37] they say on average it is
[3:08:38] $10 per team for 56?10, times five
[3:08:40] dollars for cars
[3:08:43] to park, two days, we get 20%
[3:08:45] of that, that is 1120. And then we
[3:08:46] share
[3:08:48] the concession stand. Now, you take
[3:08:49] the same
[3:08:52] amount of spectators, 56?15, and then
[3:08:55] multiply that by five,
[3:08:57] because the average spent per person is
[3:09:00] five dollars, that is what they are using,
[3:09:04] over two days, times 20%, we
[3:09:07] will get $1680,
[3:09:10] if
[3:09:11] we split the concession stand. The
[3:09:12] total intake for attornment on a two
[3:09:13] day tournament
[3:09:16] is $16,240.
[3:09:20] that is somebody else running concession
[3:09:22] stands, doing the gate
[3:09:23] fees and all of that. And running
[3:09:24] the retirement. For the soccer fields,
[3:09:25] four rentals,
[3:09:28] 500 bucks,
[3:09:30] per field, times two, that's 4000.
[3:09:31] lights
[3:09:34] are 400.
[3:09:37] lining the field is 240. The
[3:09:38] same aspect, not changing from 56 teams,
[3:09:40] to when you have
[3:09:42] four fields, you can do 28 teams because
[3:09:43] of the hours
[3:09:46] of the day. 28
[3:09:47] teams you can handle with four fields, times
[3:09:48] the same 15 spectators, times 10,
[3:09:49] that
[3:09:52] is 1620
[3:09:54] , and then the same for the parking,
[3:09:55] it
[3:09:58] is $560.
[3:10:02] if we did the concession stand it's
[3:10:04] only 840. So, on the soccer side,
[3:10:07] we make $7660. So, if you take
[3:10:10] those and you do the
[3:10:13] 16,240?12,
[3:10:18] and sacraments, that's 194,008 80
[3:10:22] . And if you did the soccer,
[3:10:25] it is 91,920. A
[3:10:28] total of
[3:10:31] 286,800,
[3:10:33] running per year splitting concession
[3:10:37] stands with everyone else. That is not
[3:10:40] us running 100%.
[3:10:41] >>
[3:10:42] and that is just for tournaments?
[3:10:43] >>
[3:10:46] that is 12 weekends in a
[3:10:49] 52-week year.
[3:10:50] just 12 weekends. I was being conservative
[3:10:52] but I hope to run
[3:10:55] more.
[3:10:56] >>
[3:10:57] normal field rental, what is that
[3:10:58] for the softball
[3:10:59] field specifically?
[3:11:00] >> well, anything over
[3:11:04] six hours is a full day, so that's
[3:11:05] $500
[3:11:06] but if not it's $75 per hour. On average
[3:11:07] we get
[3:11:10] right now,
[3:11:16] it's almost all day
[3:11:18] on a saturday or sunday. It's almost the
[3:11:19] exact same amount of money that
[3:11:21] we are doing right now. The only difference
[3:11:22] is that we give a
[3:11:24] cost break for hyd essay to use it,
[3:11:25] and then capital city
[3:11:28] uses it
[3:11:31] .
[3:11:32] >>
[3:11:33] okay. I know we don't have it tonight,
[3:11:34] but not just for phase one, but
[3:11:35] phase two and three, because of the
[3:11:37] master plan,
[3:11:39] is fantastic, but understanding the
[3:11:43] revenue and expenses all the way
[3:11:46] down to the batting cages that
[3:11:48] we can rent, we have knuckleball courses
[3:11:49] we
[3:11:52] can rent.
[3:11:54] with what the revenue and expenses
[3:11:55] are,
[3:11:58] to put
[3:12:01] together a big picture,
[3:12:07] but I think I heard
[3:12:09] all in, we are looking at 286 dollars
[3:12:13] .
[3:12:15] >> if we split it. If we take 100%
[3:12:16] changes the numbers. So, if we don't
[3:12:17] split any concession stand, we don't
[3:12:19] split the gate with parking, it changes
[3:12:20] it.
[3:12:22] >> okay.
[3:12:28] we are still not
[3:12:29] half of what the overall debt service
[3:12:31] is projected to be?
[3:12:32] >> correct. >>
[3:12:33] okay.
[3:12:34] I am still struggling there. I
[3:12:37] am hoping , I would like
[3:12:40] to get the big picture,
[3:12:43] especially as we look towards
[3:12:45] future budgets and future phases,
[3:12:46] that kind of stuff. But
[3:12:47] I do appreciate all the hard work that
[3:12:49] you and the team have done to get
[3:12:50] us
[3:12:52] to a better place, but,
[3:12:54] I think that for me, it is still quite
[3:12:55] a bit
[3:12:58] more than
[3:13:00] what we were originally going into.
[3:13:01] thank you.
[3:13:02] >> you bet.
[3:13:04] >>
[3:13:07] , just ask a quick question. That is
[3:13:13] 16,000 on a
[3:13:15] two day, on the baseball side, with
[3:13:16] eight fields?
[3:13:17] >> yes,
[3:13:18] sir.
[3:13:19] >> thanks. And then a question
[3:13:20] to mike,
[3:13:22] I think, the
[3:13:25] item tonight , is it
[3:13:28] impacted
[3:13:36] --the funding sources in the presentation
[3:13:37] is the plan, but the item tonight
[3:13:38] is
[3:13:39] related to contract. So if we change
[3:13:40] funding sources or the
[3:13:43] amount --
[3:13:46] if we change funding sources that
[3:13:47] would not be
[3:13:48] impacted by our decision tonight,
[3:13:49] right?
[3:13:50] >> that is correct.
[3:13:52] tony, can you go to that
[3:13:55] slide?
[3:13:56] >> yes, sir. >> this is
[3:13:58] how we have put together the funding
[3:14:01] based on
[3:14:04] what we already had available for
[3:14:05] the project, and
[3:14:07] knowing what that gap was.
[3:14:10] counsel in july past a
[3:14:13] reimbursement resolution,
[3:14:18] so you have taken a step already to
[3:14:19] say that any expenses we incur are
[3:14:21] going to be reimbursed from this proposed
[3:14:22] seo, but you have not taken any
[3:14:25] actions to issue a proposed seo.
[3:14:31] it has been
[3:14:32] talked about with the budget process,
[3:14:34] you might remember it was originally
[3:14:35] 2025 seo and
[3:14:37] then a 2026 seo . Based on the timing
[3:14:38] of
[3:14:39] how this will work out we are just
[3:14:40] proposing to do one 2026 seo
[3:14:42] in the spring, and the number we have
[3:14:43] been telling you since the april presentation
[3:14:44] on
[3:14:46] the sports complex was about
[3:14:51] 8.25 million. That is the number we
[3:14:52] have been carrying. Does that answer
[3:14:54] your question?
[3:14:55] >> I just want to make
[3:14:56] sure that we understand,
[3:14:58] this number that I gave you, the 286 is
[3:15:01] just running tenants. This does not
[3:15:02] include
[3:15:05] weekly rentals ,
[3:15:06] for field rentals monday through friday.
[3:15:08] which I will
[3:15:11] have next.
[3:15:14] >>
[3:15:15] good point, and I am glad we had that
[3:15:17] conversation to break it down
[3:15:18] that way, but it also doesn't include
[3:15:20] hotel stays, restaurants,
[3:15:23] all the other things , the
[3:15:26] intangibles that ,
[3:15:28] there are ways to try to figure it
[3:15:31] out, but it is hard, even with the
[3:15:36] netting and self and tabulation to find
[3:15:38] out where people go and ask
[3:15:39] for hotels, who is staying where,
[3:15:40] it brings people to buda, and it is
[3:15:41] going
[3:15:44] to bring people to buda ,
[3:15:47] which has carry-on
[3:15:48] effects of retail sales tax across
[3:15:50] the board
[3:15:51] . Do we have any public testimony
[3:15:53] on this item?
[3:16:03] thank you. Working over the weekend
[3:16:05] doing your thing, I know you're
[3:16:06] passionate about this, and this is
[3:16:07] your project, but we appreciate the
[3:16:08] energy
[3:16:09] and the work that went into getting
[3:16:11] us here.
[3:16:14] because, we
[3:16:16] were a little defeated not too long ago
[3:16:17] , and now we
[3:16:19] have options in front of us. So I
[3:16:20] appreciate
[3:16:22] that energy and that effort. Does
[3:16:23] anyone
[3:16:25] want to make this motion?
[3:16:26] >> mayor,
[3:16:27] if
[3:16:29] I could, can you go to the slide that
[3:16:32] shows the costs.
[3:16:35] just as a reminder, there is
[3:16:37] a basement with alternatives, so you
[3:16:38] can award
[3:16:40] base bid with certain alternatives
[3:16:41] for all
[3:16:44] of them.
[3:16:47] we have a contingency built into
[3:16:48] this, so that is something counsel
[3:16:50] wants to authorize as well, a contingency of
[3:16:53] 3% or 5% or if you want
[3:16:54] to come back to city council, that
[3:16:56] is at your discretion, is 20 mentioned that
[3:16:59] this 14.98 million does not have a
[3:17:02] contingency built into it.
[3:17:05] >> there are
[3:17:08] two parts to the contingency,
[3:17:11] you are saying the funding is
[3:17:13] not there but you still have the authorization
[3:17:14] as manager to approve a number above
[3:17:16] the contract, but you are saying there
[3:17:17] is no
[3:17:19] funding available?
[3:17:20] >> there is proposed
[3:17:21] funding, based
[3:17:23] on the
[3:17:25] proposed issuance of 11.25 million,
[3:17:26] we
[3:17:28] have treated projects where counsel has
[3:17:32] issued a not to exceed amount, so
[3:17:33] unless
[3:17:34] counsel authorizes the city manager to
[3:17:38] approve some change orders,
[3:17:43] every change order would come back
[3:17:44] to council put a
[3:17:45] lot of our construction contract have
[3:17:47] a contingency of, depending on
[3:17:50] the amount, 3% or 5%, I can review
[3:17:53] those review those with staff
[3:17:58] , but if you just approve the base
[3:17:59] bid without any contingency, any change
[3:18:01] order would come back to counsel.
[3:18:02] >> good clarification.
[3:18:08] mr. Smith, were you ready
[3:18:09] for something?
[3:18:10] >> I was preparing
[3:18:11] a motion until that last comment.
[3:18:12] I understand the
[3:18:14] flux ability that allows, but given
[3:18:17] how far we have come and where we
[3:18:20] are today, I wouldn't mind authorizing
[3:18:23] what we have in front of us
[3:18:26] and fit with no change orders.
[3:18:29] maybe what we have to do is a
[3:18:32] number of them at a time.
[3:18:41] I think this is being engineered as
[3:18:43] far as it possibly can and be planned
[3:18:44] out as far as it possibly can.
[3:18:45] I know there will always be changes,
[3:18:47] there will be unknowns, there needs
[3:18:48] to
[3:18:49] be a contingency there, but I think
[3:18:50] that we
[3:18:52] address that as it comes in our primary
[3:18:53] goal is to
[3:18:55] get this straight on. So with that,
[3:18:59] I will motion to approve
[3:19:05] , to award rf p number
[3:19:11] 25-255 sportsplex as presented, up
[3:19:12] to the
[3:19:14] dollar amount in the item, which
[3:19:17] is the total proposal
[3:19:23] .
[3:19:24] >> I have
[3:19:25] a question.
[3:19:26] >> for the discussion.
[3:19:29] miss williams?
[3:19:30] >>
[3:19:31] on other things to keep in mind is
[3:19:32] the timeline
[3:19:35] . We only have so many
[3:19:37] days to get this done, and bring this
[3:19:38] back to counsel
[3:19:43] on the change order is not going to
[3:19:44] be efficient, that we will end up
[3:19:46] being behind schedule. So one of the
[3:19:47] things to think about is to
[3:19:48] authorize the city manager to hit
[3:19:49] change orders that do not exceed the
[3:19:50] state required a maximum
[3:19:53] of 25%. Then when we are done and they
[3:19:54] can move
[3:19:55] this project through as quickly as
[3:19:56] possible. Because time is money in
[3:19:59] this instance.
[3:20:00] >> I have a
[3:20:02] question, as well.
[3:20:05] do we need to include
[3:20:08] the lighting, so it needs to be 15
[3:20:14] --now?
[3:20:15] >> there will be a separate
[3:20:16] action, to counsel for the lighting
[3:20:17] in a future meeting.
[3:20:20] >> valid point.
[3:20:29] >> I am up
[3:20:32] for an amendment,
[3:20:35] on this one, I feel like if we are
[3:20:36] going to stand firm
[3:20:37] on any project, this is one. They
[3:20:38] give us a timeline,
[3:20:44] down to the dollar, and if they have
[3:20:45] to come
[3:20:46] back for a change they are making,
[3:20:51] --
[3:20:52] >>
[3:20:53] that is not the change order. Change
[3:20:54] order is a change that we are making,
[3:20:56] unless there is an unknown. If there
[3:20:57] is no contingency
[3:20:58] and they get out there and they start
[3:21:00] working and something happens
[3:21:06] , or there is something in the
[3:21:07] ground that they didn't know was there,
[3:21:08] then that means they have to stop
[3:21:10] work, wait to get on the agenda for
[3:21:11] counsel, comebacks, and he has already
[3:21:12] given away
[3:21:13] all of our ld days, 50 days, and how
[3:21:15] much per day
[3:21:18] was that?
[3:21:19] >> 2000. >> yeah. So,
[3:21:21] we don't want to
[3:21:22] give away more days, because they
[3:21:24] have to wait to come back to us,
[3:21:25] when the city manager can easily resolve
[3:21:27] the matter.
[3:21:36] now, if you want to set
[3:21:37] it and say, only 10%, I am cool with
[3:21:39] that, right? But we
[3:21:40] want to make sure that we are not paying
[3:21:42] for the inefficiency of waiting for it
[3:21:43] to come back for counsel, for us to
[3:21:44] have to make that decision on the
[3:21:46] change order.
[3:21:47] >> okay. I hear you.
[3:21:48] I didn't mention this earlier, but
[3:21:49] there is
[3:21:51] the design factor. 15%, we
[3:21:53] went to 16 and all of a sudden it
[3:21:54] 21.6. I am
[3:21:57] hoping the 1.6 is worth
[3:21:58] it and there aren't any unknowns.
[3:22:00] with other
[3:22:03] projects when there are
[3:22:04] lives at stake and buildings and that
[3:22:06] kind of stuff, I get it.
[3:22:08] this is pretty plain jane out there.
[3:22:12] 1.6 to design a field and
[3:22:15] softball field, you
[3:22:18] know, my patience for that
[3:22:21] --but I hear you, as far as not wanting
[3:22:22] to
[3:22:24] delay the project, as well. So,
[3:22:27] let me ask the city
[3:22:30] manager down there,
[3:22:32] how tight can we make that, to where
[3:22:33] you will not lose
[3:22:36] sleep over it
[3:22:39] ? 10%?
[3:22:40] >> if you make it
[3:22:41] 14.9, then it will be 14.9 , and we
[3:22:42] will work within
[3:22:45] the confines of that , and something
[3:22:46] comes
[3:22:47] up we will bring it to you and there
[3:22:48] will be some delays. If you
[3:22:51] do a 3%, I think that is about
[3:22:54] $500,000, that is a good amount to get
[3:22:56] started on. I would recommend 10%
[3:23:00] ,
[3:23:03] if we don't have the budget
[3:23:06] >> okay, so building and 3.5? Okay.
[3:23:09] I hear you completely and I
[3:23:10] don't want to slow down unnecessarily, but
[3:23:12] at some point in time, we have to
[3:23:15] hold these plans, and
[3:23:21] one of these days, we will
[3:23:22] hit what we plan on the money. That
[3:23:24] is why we spend the money to
[3:23:25] planet upfront, right? If we can do
[3:23:27] it I feel like this is the project
[3:23:29] to do it on. With that, I will amend
[3:23:30] the motion to include the 3%
[3:23:31] contingency. As well. And to confirm,
[3:23:33] it is the 14.98 and change. Thank
[3:23:35] you.
[3:23:36] >> all right, we have a motion
[3:23:37] and a second.
[3:23:39] are we good?
[3:23:42] all those in favor?
[3:23:45] any opposed? Motion carries.
[3:23:51] congratulations.
[3:23:56] >> thank you all very much. >> k5
[3:23:57] is deliberation of possible action
[3:23:58] to accept the resignation and appointed
[3:24:00] the 2025 members on the city's boards,
[3:24:03] commissions, and committees
[3:24:06] , arts commission, main street advisory
[3:24:07] board,
[3:24:09] and planning and zoning
[3:24:12] commission.
[3:24:14] miss ramirez?
[3:24:15] >> yes, mayor. The nominations committee
[3:24:16] met last week, and we have
[3:24:17] filled all the vacancies to date.
[3:24:18] we did have an additional
[3:24:21] one on the arts commission
[3:24:23] which opened up another vacancy. So,
[3:24:24] the nominations are as follows.
[3:24:27] for arts commission, yvette
[3:24:29] hurst. For main street advisory board,
[3:24:30] ellen cates and
[3:24:33] erika wasik goes.
[3:24:36] and for planning and zoning, valerie moya
[3:24:38] >> thank you. Anything from our committee
[3:24:42] ? Questions or comments?
[3:24:43] >> what was that last appointment?
[3:24:45] >> lori moya
[3:24:48] to planning and zoning.
[3:24:49] >> thank you.
[3:24:51] >> questions or comments?
[3:24:54] >> real quick, who rolled
[3:24:57] off arts , do you know? Whose term
[3:25:00] ended?
[3:25:01] >> it didn't end, he resigned.
[3:25:03] steve mccord.
[3:25:04] >> okay.
[3:25:06] thank you.
[3:25:09] >>
[3:25:12] just as a really quick note,
[3:25:15] the applications that we reviewed
[3:25:21] , the nominations
[3:25:23] committee had a lot of people that
[3:25:24] were interested in a lot of the same
[3:25:26] boards and commissions , and being
[3:25:27] able to balance
[3:25:30] out folks who live
[3:25:33] in the
[3:25:36] number that
[3:25:38] can be added to the board or commission
[3:25:39] was quite the process to get
[3:25:41] through, so, the final result that
[3:25:42] was presented tonight has really
[3:25:45] been thoughtfully selected
[3:25:48] . We did interviews last time, just
[3:25:51] to make sure that we had good fits
[3:25:53] , so we have done due diligence, and
[3:25:54] hope that you guys would
[3:25:57] be accepting of the candidates that
[3:25:58] we put forward.
[3:25:59] >>
[3:26:00] thank you.
[3:26:03] >> exactly
[3:26:05] what I was asking for. Comments from
[3:26:06] the committee. I appreciate the time
[3:26:09] --I know you
[3:26:11] did interviews, we are taking steps
[3:26:12] further than we did in the past, but,
[3:26:13] that
[3:26:15] is good. It is a good thing
[3:26:18] you do.
[3:26:21] public testimony on this item? I
[3:26:23] will make a motion that we accept the
[3:26:24] resignations and the appointments
[3:26:26] as presented in k5.
[3:26:27] >> second. >>
[3:26:28] motion and a second. All
[3:26:30] those in favor? Any opposed?
[3:26:33] motion carries. That brings
[3:26:36] us into l1. Council will recess
[3:26:40] regular session and convene into
[3:26:43] executive session
[3:26:44] to deliberate on agenda items pursuant
[3:26:45] to texas government code chapter 551,
[3:26:49] section 551.071, consultation
[3:26:50] with city attorney regarding her a,
[3:26:53] hayes commons proposed development,
[3:26:55] and b,
[3:27:01] section 551.087,
[3:27:02] deliberation regarding economic development
[3:27:03] negotiations regarding performance
[3:27:04] agreement negotiations, performance
[3:27:10] agreement
[3:27:11] obligations for project feathered
[3:27:12] flames, project san antonio, and project
[3:27:13] leather boots. With that, we
[3:27:15] will get into executive session at 9:57.