Marc Ott's Meetings with Council Member Chris

.!.. ~~ohr.- ,(~c~-..b:4u ~" dz ~,k"., {, ~ If,/,(/~ ::' !

'. ;

/prj ...... /&f-ds/JI) / tQd; ~?, ~L ?'V:Z:;:1'b/!/n.L

/""\

~~-= """'" &r)·~7 L/~~~ M~nz &

/b- ~ ~c?')57? LV ¢tr , ~/b~L ~.a.4&!.rr,,!

MEMORANDUM

To: Mayor and City Council

From: Marc A. Ott, City Manag

Date: March 11, 2010

Subject: Bidwell Training Program

The City of Austin has recently been presented with an opportunity to partner with AISD, Travis County and Dell Corporation to conduct a feasibility study for a dynamic program that would provide educational opportunities and job training to youth and adults in our community.

When I first arrived as City Manager, it was easy to notice the prosperity Austin had experienced over the years. However, like many cities, there was and still remains a void of opportunity for many of our unskilled adult workers and at-risk youth. At the time, I was only somewhat familiar with the work being done by William E. Strickland, Jr. to address similar issues in Pittsburgh, but was interested in his program and attended a presentation ofhis in Boston. At this presentation, I was enlightened and my interests reaffirmed. Through his examples of once desperate single mothers regaining a sense of pride after becoming productive workers to young children migrating from the streets to an afterschool art class, Mr. Strickland gave way to a truly inspirational cause. Mostly, I was inspired by the thought that through collaboration and partnership, we could duplicate the program in Austin and provide our community with an invaluable opportunity. It was also at this presentation that I learned Dell Corporation was interested in Mr. Strickland's program and that they were planning to bring Mr. Strickland to ... Austin for a meeting. I took the opportunity to coordinate other governmental officials to attend this meeting as well.

On Monday, December 7, 2009, the Austin Community Foundation and Tim Mattox of the Dell Corporation hosted a community meeting to introduce a successful trade/arts program developed by William E. Strickland, Jr., to serve disadvantaged youth and unemployed adults in Mr. Strickland's Pittsburgh neighborhood. In attendance at this meeting were Board Trustee Cheryl Bradley, County Judge Sam Biscoe, Mayor Leffingwell, Council Member Cole, representatives from the offices of Council Members Spelman and Riley, and myself.

Strickland is author of the book, "Make the Impossible Possible", about how his life was turned around by a high school art teacher, leading to an art scholarship at the University of Pittsburgh. In 1972, Strickland transfonned a failed vocational center in his home neighborhood into a center that provides after-school art classes (ceramics, digital media, sculpture, etc.) for high school students and vocational education for adults who mayor may not have finished school. The Bidwell's Center model specializes in addressing the training needs of the Pittsburgh commlll1ity. Currently, the program is preparing adults as "pharmaceutical techs", "chemistry techs", gounnet cooks, and photographers. Approximately 200 vocational/academic students attend classes from 9 a.m.-4 p.m. daily.

In addition, 500 public school students, ages 13-17, attend an after-school arts program, where they receive five hours of arts instruction per week. Strickland believes that the arts are crucial to unlocking the students' imaginations, which he says is necessary to unlocking their potential. He said this program has data to show that parent engagement is high, dropout rates and absenteeism are down, and graduation rates are up.

To date, the Bidwell Training Center Program has been replicated in Grand Rapids, Cincinnati and San Francisco. Plans are under way to replicate the program model in such communities as Boston, Charleston, Columbus and Minneapolis as well as abroad in Halifax, Nova Scotia and Israel. The $15 million center in Pittsburgh was built with significant help from the Hienz Corporation, and a large part of its operating budget is provided through state Vocational Education funds.

The Dell Corporation will provide half the $150,000 budget for a planning grant if the Austin Community matches that amOlll1t. AlSO and Travis COlll1ty have agreed to provide $25,000 each to the feasibility study. I have authorized $25,000 from the City of Austin and expressed our commitment to perform the role of Convener, responsible for coordinating the study with the Bidwell Corporation, The 6-8 month planning process would determine the feasibility of replicating the program in Austin.

I am very optimistic that the success of the Bidwell Training Program can be replicated here in Austin. We are in the process of completing the initial required documentation for the study and anticipate the study beginning shortly after all documentation has been submitted. Prior to study implementation, I will provide you with a more detailed briefing of the program.

Please contact me or ACM McDonald if you have any questions. c.c. Assistant City Managers .' Page 1 of 1

Riley, Chris

From: Akwasi Evans [[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 20109:30 AM To: Riley, Chris .• :'j:! -'.. ;1" . .i-.1 Subject: Economic Discrimination : ii: .. I:~ J-j: . . lr,; :;:1:,; ,,"1 Chns, i' : r~ I need help and I would like for you to consider render that aid. The City Purchasing DepartmentPas~~pn using The Villager, NOKOA, La Prensa and Arriba for over 15 years to attract African American and Latino contractor to bid ()~ City projects. I September the City Purchasing arbitrarily dropped NOKOA from the rotation. When we comp.1~~ne9~bout checks being withheld and our being dropped we forwarded our concerns to the City Manager, Mayor and all the City Coun~P.'M¢jijtber. Only you and Council Member Shade responded. We did get paid for the July, August and September ads that we hadr~p, ~U:t;we did not get our ad reinstated. Instead The Villager, LaPrensa and Arriba were also dropped in October. :1 .. ,~ 'V Those publishers contacted me and asked me to join with them in sending a letter to the City Purcqasipt"Department asking that we all be reinstated as of October. I asked them to instead as Purchasing to reinstate all'of us from the tin:).e ~e>W~re dropped since I was dropped in September when all of them still ran ads. They declined so the three of them sent a letter askingto!lb~:Nirstated as of October. All three were reinstated. NOKOA remains left out. I have sent several correspondences to Mr. Benson aSking o/,hy we were dropped and why we were singled outfor this economic punishment, but he declined to respond. I have signed up for CitizeJ,ls Communication of Dec. 16 to discuss what I consider economic discrimination at a time when the City Council had recently comritit~d to Increase business with NOKOA and The Villager as part of its Quality of Life imitative. There is very little quality in my busi;riess life in Austin at this time and when we most need people to help us make conditions better we have people intentionally taking ~cfi6rt~ that make things worse. Below is the editorial that ran in last week's NOKOA. Please let me know if you can, or will, look into this rr(aiterr. I have contacted no other council members about this at this time because of the way they responded (not) to my earlier blanket reqtiest.:·:. M~ . ·;"f.':

.. J ~ Ain't I a :Local Too : ",,'~.~ . By Mwasi Evans .' i' November 26 was "Black Friday". Black Friday is the day when retailers across the country promote their holiciay: -sl\le$ itb spur spending during the long holiday season between Thanksgiving and Christmas. Last Thursday the local daily paper printed one of its largest issues of theyeq( The paper was filled with inserts and ads so plentiful that the paper almost weighed as much as the Thanksgiving turkey. Auto dealers, appliance stores, appai~h*l!ets, novelty shops, salons, supermarket~, liquor stores, bail bondsmen and bookstores were all offering select bargains to seduce citizens to be among the first in;line:i/t 4:00 a.m. to secure the best deals. But, if you look at Austin's Black owned newspapers or listened to its one Black owned radio station last week you saw no Bhi'(:~. If~jday ads or sponsorships. I can't be the only one who gets the irony of ignoring Black media on Black Friday. Corporate Austin wants Black and flio'l//! people to spend lots of green money, but they aren't willing to invest a copper penny into appealing to those consumer markets through those culture's primary'medi~.putlets of choice. Earlier this year I announced that this might well be the last year that we publish NOKOA in Austin. Some reader:~i i.fll#lir~ied that declaration as the latest episode of me "crying wolf'. Others expressed concern about the void that would be left if Austin's only left-leaning m(Jltil'1Jltu!.\\lil?rogressive weekly newspaper ceased to publish. Ultimately, however, the reality is that we simply can't afford to keep printing a newspaper that doesn'.t:Pfi~ll}n¥.ilOugh revenue to pay the bills. To make matters :-V0rse, this is a "work. and wait business": When we do attract advertisement~ we have to first p~int. the~~p;flr>:;~~4~·the client the invoi.ce and t~ar sheet, and then walt for payment. SometImes we have to walt two, three or four months. SomelImes we have to walt fIve, SIX or. Seviln··months and somelImes we Just don't get paid, period, even by clients to whom we have given generous discounts. " I': !:.J;;. ,i,! ,. I just don't get it. I just don't understand how so many activists can walk around in a hallucinafory haze when it com~s !11~il,\~s.ses are unwelcome strangers. But we are local too; it's just that we keep getting left out locally. :, :,:.<,

.:~,:.~;;[: . ":.'-.,"'" T~ ::~i~; .,,~ .... :ii '~::i,' ~!;n' . ~; :.:'.' .~~ ·,1 ; ,[:j ".: ·/1" 12/8/2010 ":~ '~'" .-::.J: .- ," :: .~. [ ; -----~~~-~-----l-'-t!...... f--L-'/.:2~!()-. =~:7iffp~Y-;;~ ~_'---.- __, ______-~--~~;;;~----+- ______t-dl::-_t)~L~==4'..£eU'k:5..!:..j~rr!.....L_P~?'~r~rl:::.E~~zz;;~~.f~~~~~~.:z~~_ 1!.-~------. ,1 / ~~,,-____ ~JL_- -=rn1f1-=:;.f)...Ji(.Q-I-6.$;w,e2J~X?~V~_~ ______11 -,- fl ~-'--'-----1i------"""'"

, ~ Ii

-.-.-~.--- Il~ 'J ---'---"----' --...... ~------~--- tt-~----· ...... --- .. ----.------.------H----~ t .... -.---.---.------I,; ~ II ------ji 11 ~ I , -~-- ~ j ---~------ttn II -n------.------n --~I·+-·~ l' -----'H-'-.II lr---"------Ii 11----·-···-

.1 : I' i· _____.. _1<+:-~ ! n i ~ ----~-lr-~·-·b ..-- , .

Ii _w~'11 . --~--+----~. -_._------i I - __"~ IJ ~~ i, -- ._-- III, .!l l i Ii ------+t ,'j\ l' ------tf------·---·------1 ~ 1!

J 1 MEMORANDUM

TO: Marc A. Ott, City Manager

FROM: Ray Baray, Assistant to the City Manager ~

DATE: November 9,2010

SUBJECT: Council Member Riley 1:1 Follow-Up Items (October 27)

Item 1 No follow-up assignment.

(2) Travis County Downtown Master Plan Process - CM Riley mentioned that he was meeting with County staff on Friday, November 5 to discuss this issue. You indicated that perhaps staff should attend. You asked me to follow-up with ACM Sue Edwards.

Staff Follow-Up: Jim Robertson, the City's urban design officer, attended the meeting with CM Riley and Travis County staff. Apparently, the meeting focused entirely on the county's master planning effort for their Downtown campus. In Mr. Robertson's view, there is a lot to like (from the City's perspective) about the direction the County is headed, for example:

• the restoration of the historic Sweatt courthouse building, including making it open to the public on all four sides; the more public use of the first floor; the possible creation of an outdoor eating area looking out over Wooldridge Square; • the increased level of County activities in the area of Wooldridge Square, thereby further energizing the Square; • the redevelopment of Block 126 (the city block northeast of Wooldridge Square) including the possible creation of a significant public plaza across the middle of the block; the possible creation of retail-type activities at the ground level; • meeting the parking needs through the creation of a significant amount of underground parking; and • the commitment to Great Streets improvements and the general approach of "place making."

There is a big piece of the puzzle that has not been resolved. Travis County has determined that they need a new building (+/- 500,000 square feet) to house a civil/family justice center. This building will likely not be located within or adjacent to their Downtown campus, but is targeted to be in the downtown vicinity. They are currently looking at available sites and hope to settle on one in the coming months. Since this was an informational meeting, there was no indication that City staff to be involved in further meetings.

(2) Ambulance Staffing - CM Riley heard that there was a plan to begin staffing EMS units with 1 paramedic and 1 technician instead of the current practice of 2 paramedics. You asked me to follow-up with ACM Mike McDonald.

Staff Follow-Up: Response from Mike McDonald EMS is currently working on their Strategic Plan. One of the components of this plan is assessing a potential staffing alternative - one that would convert staffing in ambulances from 2 paramedics to 1 paramedic and 1 EMT.

EMS has identified several possible gains in implementing this strategy from a financial, workforce, and clinical perspective. For instance, from a financial perspective, the department asserts this change could allow for the reallocation of some dollars without asking for additional revenues in the budget process. Essentially, it could be cheaper to staff each unit, allowing for more funds to be used elsewhere in the department. From a workforce perspective, it enhances promotional opportunities for staff by providing the ability to promote within the ambulance structure. Previously, staff had to leave the ambulance to promote - this creates an additional step in that promotional chain. Finally, from a clinical standpoint, there is significant research supporting the 1 paramedic/l EMT model and its impact on patient care.

Last week, the EMS department updated the EMS Advisory Board on their strategic planning process, and this was one of the items that was discussed. The board is in strong support of the department's continued evaluation of this change in staffing. Further discussion will occur at the board's next meeting. If the board recommends approval, then staff will craft a summary document that will include an overview of the key issues, possible solutions, and other considerations. Afterward, staff will hold several employee meetings to discuss how the department might implement this change and gather further input from them. EMS staff will continue to discuss this with the Association President to the extent that he represents the workforce and within the context of the City's contract agreement.

It should be noted that if this component of the plan were to proceed, it would not be immediate. The department would create a "phase-in" plan, phaSing the changes in appropriately - likely over the course of a few years. Also} the department has held two meetings on this topic} each between the EMS Director} Medical Director} and President of the EMS Employee Association. The department has and will remain in close communication with the Association throughout the entire process.

2 It should further be noted that this change would not apply to every ambulance unit. For instance, specialized units like those responding to SWAT calls or other high profile incidents would continue with the 2-paramedic staffing model.

Again, these conversations have only recently begun. No finalized staffing decisions have been made. Chief McDonald is aware of EMS' interest in pursuing this course of action and supports this initiative.

(4) Sustainable Food/Community Gardens - CM Riley expressed an interest in the hiring of two FTEs for a sustainable food/community garden program. You asked me to follow-up with Ed Van Eenoo to discuss the funding source for these positions. Also, you directed me to contact Mark Washington to discuss developing job profiles for these same positions.

Staff Follow-Up: According to Ed Van Eenoo, staff has already met twice to determine the funding source for these two positions. There have been suggestions to access funding from SWS, PARD, HHS or WPD. However, no final decision has been made, and staff will be meeting again on November 16th to iron out budget/funding details.

As for the job profile issue, Mark Washington and I had a brief meeting with CM Riley today to get his thoughts on what he envisions as the job duties for these positions. CM Riley believes the skill set should include community outreach, possibly an agricultural background as well as experience with urban farms. Also, he suggested that staff meet with Andy Moore of the Mayor Pro Tem's office for further background information. A meeting with Mr. Moore, that includes HR staff and myself, is scheduled for tomorrow (Wednesday, November 10) to develop a job description that meets the expectations of the Council.

(5) Park Fees - CM Riley wanted to know if a draft proposal had been prepared by staff on the commercial use of City parks. You asked me to follow-up with ACM Bert Lumbreras.

Staff Follow-Up: Response from ACM Lumbreras According to ACM Lumbreras, the park fee issue is still a very fluid process. No formal proposal has been drafted, but one is in the works. Staff is currently working with the Community Input Task Force - comprised of key stakeholders, including fitness groups, rowing and paddle board interests, residents and park advocates - to come up with a range of recommendations. Task Force findings will be discussed with staff at their last meeting scheduled for November 12th. Sara Hensley and PARD staff will review these recommendations, which will form the basis of a recommendation seeking Parks Board approval in the December/January timeframe. A copy of the proposal will be shared with Council at that time. Since the proposed Parks fee is a new fee, it will require Council approval. Council consideration is expected in February 2011.

3 MEMORANDUM

TO: Marc A. Ott, City Manager

FROM: Ray Baray, Assistant to the City Manager

DATE: November 9, 2010

SUBJECT: Council Member Riley 1:1 Follow-Up Items (October 27)

Item 1 No follow-up assignment.

It should be noted that if this component of the plan were to proceed, it would not be immediate. The department would create a "phase-in" plan, phasing the changes in appropriately - likely over the course of a few years. Also, the department has held two meetings on this topic, each between the EMS Director, Medical Director, and President of the EMS Employee Association. The department has and will remain in close communication with the Association throughout the entire process.

14} Sustainable Food/Community Gardens - CIVI Riley expressed an interest in the hiring of two FTEs for a sustainable food/community garden program. You asked me to follow-up with Ed Van Eenoo to discuss the funding source for these positions. Also, you directed me to contact Mark Washington to discuss developing job profiles for these same positions.

As for the job profile issue, Mark Washington and I had a brief meeting with CM Riley today to get his thoughts on what he envisions as the job duties for these positions. CM Riley believes the skill set should include community outreach, possibly an agricultural background as well as experience with urban farms. Also, he suggested that staff meet with Andy Moore of the lVIayor Pro Tem's office for further background information. A meeting with Mr. Moore, that includes HR staff and myself, is scheduled for tomorrow (Wednesday, November 10) to develop a job description that meets the expectations ofthe Council.

(5) Park Fees - CM Riley wanted to know if a draft proposal had been prepared by staff on the commercial use of City parks. You asked me to follow-up with ACM Bert lumbreras.

Staff Follow-Up: Response from ACM Lumbreras According to ACM lumbreras, the park fee issue is still a very fluid process. No formal proposal has been drafted, but one is in the works. Staff is currently working with the Community Input Task Force - comprised of key stakeholders, including fitness groups, rowing and paddle board interests, residents and park advocates - to come up with a range of recommendations. Task Force findings will be discussed with staff at their last meeting scheduled for November lih. Sara Hensley and PARD staff will review these recommendations, which will form the basis of a recommendation seeking Parks Board approval in the December/January timeframe. A copy of the proposal will be shared with Council at that time. Since the proposed Parks fee is a new fee, it will require Council approval. Council consideration is expected in February 2011.

3 l j ! i i i

----_. -_._------_._------_._- --, !,II -~---+l------,

-,_:: -~:. -++--il-~:·- . : II .

II II

------~r_------

11 !

I I MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Rob Spillar, Director Austin Transportation Department

CC: Marc A. Ott, City Manager

DATE: October 14, 2010

SUBJECT: Recommendation to not allow for commuter rail vehicle passage through lower downtown via 4th Street Corridor

City of Austin staff has proposed an Urban Rail System Plan for consideration by Council for designation as a locally preferred alternative. The system plan provides a high capacity rail connection between the end of the current MetroRaii Red Line at 4th and Trinity to the proposed Seaholm station where Lone Star Rail proposes an inter-city rail station. The proposed Urban Rail system uses the Council designated rail corridor (4th Street) to traverse from east to west through the heart of downtown. The plan would construct a double track Urban Rail corridor with stops at both ends as well as points between. The system would serve the Capitol Complex, University of Texas, Mueller, Riverside, and ABIA as well as provide opportunities for future extensions. The proposed technology would be either a modern light rail vehicle such as those operated in Salt Lake City and San Diego; or streetcar technology such as those used in Portland and Seattle. Both of these vehicle types are capable of providing local circulation type services as well as longer distance commuter type services.

The proposed Urban Rail system plan provides a practical and flexible method for serving all parts of Austin (West Austin, South Austin, East Austin, the Airport, and l\Iorth Austin). The proposed Urban Rail system plan enhances and leverages the investments by Capital Metro in the Red Line and also would enhance potential inter-city service provided by the Lone Star Rail District (LSTAR). Access to Seaholm and West Austin rd are provided via a 3 Street alignment, transitioning from 4th Street using San Antonio and Nueces Streets. Access to South Austin is accommodated via a crossing of one of the existing bridges at South 15t or Congress or a new bridge. These alignment options are being considered through an environmental impact analysis. It is envisioned that the Urban Rail would be constructed to provide convenient and reliable transfers between each of the commuter rail lines (LSTAR and Red Line).

Suggested extensions of the existing Red Line west of Congress Avenue (or connections of the LSTAR proposed system east of Shoal Creek) would be detrimental to the implementation of Urban Rail. The Red Line operates a commuter rail technology that is both larger and bulkier then either a Light Rail or Streetcar vehicle. These vehicles, for safety reasons, cannot operate concurrently with either Urban Rail or with buses and automobiles. Hence, on its existing alignment in downtown, the Red Line maintains a semi-exclusive track way in 4th Street. Cars, buses, and other vehicles are not allowed to drive in the lane in which the commuter rail vehicle is operating. Automobile and pedestrian crossing of the Red Line are confined to intersections. The tracks are protected from intrusion at the current station location with fencing and elevated platforms.

If either the redline or LSTAR service were to be extended across town on 4th Street, construction of a double track cross-section for MetroRaii Redline would be necessary (given the length of traverse across the 4th Street corridor). This would take the entire width of 4th Street to provide. With the inability to operate Urban Rail and commuter rail vehicles on the same track, urban rail would be precluded from the 4th Street corridor. Commuter rail in 4th Street would also significantly limit the ability of that roadway to provide any capacity for private automobiles (or any other mode). Note: Urban Rail, unlike commuter rail, can operate in mixed traffic (Le., with automobiles) and can even operate in a pedestrian environment (Le., in streetcar mode as in Portland).

Transfers between the MetroRaii Red line and the LSTAR commuter rail line are anticipated to be light in number. The primary destination for users of commuter rail is and will be the central employment districts of the University, Capitol Complex, and CBD. In fact today, most users of the Red Line walk from the downtown terminal station to their work destination in Downtown Austin. This is a phenomenon that is reported to occur on other commuter rail based systems (Minneapolis). This is not an indication of a broken system, but rather a system that is delivering passengers to the primary regional destination (the downtown central business district).

Recommendation

Neither the Red Line nor the LSTAR commuter rail can access the employment districts in the Capitol Complex and University District without limiting the development capability of blocks across which they would need to cut diagonally. Commuter rail vehicles lack the flexibility necessary to interact with the city street network successfully. Because of the size of the vehicles and the lack of flexibility, these vehicles require a 300 foot minimum radius to transition a 90 degree turn. In downtown Austin, this means that these technologies would need to turn diagonally across a downtown city block. Not only would a diagonal crossing of the proposed Austin Energy Control Center block be required, but additional blocks would be required if the system were to be turned northward to access regional employment centers. Modern light rail vehicles or streetcar vehicles can turn within a 66 foot minimum radius; they can typically turn a 90 degree turn within the street rights-of-ways observed in downtown Austin. Because of this flexibility, a connection to Seaholm through the Austin Energy Control Center block is not needed as one can be achieved on 3rd Street. Preserving a connection via 4th Street is not necessary to preserve the connection to Seaholm, assuming the use of modern light rail vehicles or streetcar vehicles as planned under the Urban Rail program.

Given the need to use a rail technology that provides flexibility to make 90 degree turns within the existing street grid and the need to allow intermingling of automobiles, rail, and even pedestrians at some locations, commuter rail technologies are not viable technologies in an urban on-street environment. The light rail or streetcar vehicles proposed as part of the Urban Rail program can provide service attributes, connectivity, and regional connections sought in a regional rail vision. They can enhance the existing and proposed investments in commuter rail while at the same time operating within the existing street grid. Background

Passenger rail connections through lower Downtown have been studied by the City of Austin and Capital Metro in varying detail over the past 12-15 years. While there has been an overarching objective of preserving opportunities for future passenger rail connections between east and west, more recent efforts have made it clear that it is not realistic or prudent to preserve al/ potential opportunities. The City, Capital Metro, and the region - as expressed by CAMPO - have been consistently marching toward a preferred future east-west connection via Urban Rail on 3rd and 4th Streets.

The proposed Urban Rail technology can serve both the shorter- and longer-term connectivity needs for Central Texas' emerging regional transit network. It is practical and scalable, both in terms of operations and alignment.

In contrast, providing for Capital Metro's Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) commuter rail technology and/or for a conventional locomotive-drawn passenger train cross-town connection imposes significant limits on development Downtown, especially within the Seaholm District, as well as on other mode operations. This is due to the physical characteristics of these technologies as well as their maneuverability characteristics.

Physical Issues

There are a number of physical issues with Capital Metro's DMU (which also apply to locomotive-drawn trains) that make this an incompatible technology for at-grade cross town connections, and therefore impractical to continue to provide for. Current vehicle technologies are evolving rapidly and smaller, more nimble vehicles can function effectively under much of the same operating environments as larger, self-propelled vehicles.

• Vehicle Size/Dimensions/Capacity

1.1 Length - at just over 134 feet long, a single DMU car is more than one-half block long (Downtown blocks are 264 feet from crosswalk to crosswalk). Given that Capital Metro will need, and has planned, to run 2-car trains (or consists) at 270 feet long, Downtown blocks simply do not have sufficient length to accommodate those trains without impacting pedestrian mobility and safety at crosswalks. The current Capital Metro Downtown Station at the Convention Center is located on an extended block and is well-suited to the longer vehicle. A potential Urban Rail vehicle, such as the Siemens S70 Ultra Short is only 81 feet long and 2-car trains can fit easily within a Downtown block.

1.2 Coupler - both the presence and height of the exposed coupler make the DMU incompatible with automobiles, bikes, and pedestrians. The center of the coupler is 41.3 inches above the pavement and extends 25.6 inches beyond the cab. In contrast, a typical automobile bumper, according to £\IHTSA, provides "protection in the region 16 to 20 inches above the road ". As evident in the picture, this device should not come into contact with anything other than another coupler. The S70 Ultra Short can be equipped with a retractable coupler, hidden behind the cab's front panel. 59 47 31 1.3 Platform/Boarding Height - the DMU boarding .. -~ height is 23.5 inches above the pavement (or top of rail), while typical Urban Rail vehicles are 14 inches. Therefore, DMU and Urban Rail services cannot share the same platform. Also, this means that o l{") cross-platform transfers will require extra width to co provide an ADA-compliant vertical transition. (V")

1.4 Capacity - the DMU can carry up to 200 passengers, while typical Urban Rail vehicles have about 35% more capacity, at 269 passengers for the S70 Ultra Short. This difference is primarily due to 22 59 d750/ the DMU's on-board power generation equipment 5550 (Le. engine).

• Vehicle Operations 300 1.5 Vehicle Turning Radius - the DMU has a minimum -----+- turning radius of 328 feet at 10 mph, whereas the left side 41, 42 S70 Ultra Short can much more easily navigate city streets with a 66 foot radius. The DMU turning radius requires a diagonal cut across a city block to o 0 achieve a 90 degree turn. N l{") -q (J) (V") N 1.6 Speed - the DMU has a top speed of 75 mph, while the S70 Ultra Short can run up to 66 mph, making it entirely capable of commuter service. Note that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has limited right side Capital Metro's maximum speed to 60 mph. 57,58 &§11 .... __--:- 3-'-08=-.;:9'---__ 1.7 Comparison with typical Urban Rail vehicle

DMU Urban Rail Length (ft) 134 81 Vehicle Height (ft) 12.6 11.8 Coupler exposed hidden Boarding Height (in) 23.5 14 Pass Capacity 200 269 Turning Radius (ft) 328 66 Speed (mph) 75 66

Operational Issues

There are a number of operational issues with commuter rail vehicles (DMU and traditional engine drawn commuter cars) that limit the operational range of this technology within a dense urban network of streets.

• Pedestrian Interaction - whereas Capital Metro places a high priority on pedestrian canalization - steering pedestrians away from train/track interaction, typical Urban Rail/streetcar operations are intended to mix with the urban environment.

• Vehicular Interaction - Capital Metro's DMU operates in exclusive lanes only through Downtown (and exclusive right-of-way elsewhere). This means that cars and even their own buses cannot share lanes with the DMU. Given the limited rights-of-way Downtown, a transit priority east-west corridor through Downtown should accornmodate modes beyond rail. This DMU has been deployed throughout the . world in predominantly exclusive or separate rights-of-way and not in Downtown, mixed-mode environments.

• Incompatibility with Urban Rail- since Capital Metro is under the jurisdiction of the FRA, Urban Rail vehicles will be prohibited from sharing track with the DMU. This makes it difficult to accommodate both services within the 4th Street corridor, since there isn't sufficient width for both lines to have double-track and their own platforms, let alone provide for buses, bikes (Le., Lance Armstrong Bikeway), and pedestrians. And the different platform heights add to the space requirements.

• Incompatibility with Regional Rail/UP - given the limited area and curving geometry of the Seaholm wye, accommodating a cross-platform transfer between Lone Star's planned regional rail service and Capital Metro may not be possible, especially with an accommodation for an east-to-south movement for Capital Metro. Nevertheless, Lone Star service on the current Union Pacific (UP) line will most likely be achieved with FRA-compliant vehicles that can withstand collisions with conventional freight trains, at least until (and if) UP is completely relocated. Therefore, an extension of Capital Metro's service to the south could not be achieved with the DMU. Even though Capital Metro obtained a waiver to operate with their freight line, it was the significantly lower volume of freight traffic that made the temporal (Le. time) separation workable. Union Pacific's alignment through Austin is a mainline track with longer freight trains and higher frequencies.

• Hub and Spoke Network - most passenger rail networks around the country are configured in a hub and spoke arrangement, where the various lines terminateltransfer at the hub. Although there are some networks, notably Dallas-Fort Worth, that continue lines through their downtowns, that is the exception and is not deemed an essential characteristic of a successful regional transit network. Preservation of this kind of option, at great cost, is not realistic. rd a & 4th Streets Rail Planning Timeline The City, Capital Metro, and the region - as expressed by CAMPO - have been consistently marching toward a preferred future east-west connection via Urban Rail on rd 3 and 4th Streets.

1998 Austin Transportation Study (later CAMPO) • Recognizes Seaholm District as potential intermodal hub • Conceptual station location is at 3rd and Lamar • Recommends preservation of 41h Street for rail corridor 1999 TxDOT Commuter Rail Feasibility Study • Recognizes Seaholm District as Downtown Austin station location 2000 Fourth Street Rail Corridor Ordinance • Preserves 41h Street from 1-35 to Rio Grande and 3rd from Shoal Creek to Lamar as designated rail corridor 2001 Seaholm District Master Plan • Recommends rail transition from 41h to 3rd on Nueces to maximize redevelopment potential of Energy Control Center site • Recommends purchase of Wye and Crescent properties from Union Pacific to support Seaholm redevelopment and provide for transit needs 2004 Council Resolution to study changing designated rail corridor from 4th to 3rd • Staff recommended not changing designated corridor due to cost of relocating utilities in 3rd Street 2005 CAMPO 2030 Plan • Capital Metro adds streetcar to Seaholm with 4 111 to 3rd transition we 2006 Capital Metro Future Connections Study - Central Austin Circulator • Recommends use of streetcars transitioning from 41h to 3rd In Nueces on way to Seaholm 2006 Seaholm Station Study • The Study concludes that the Seaholm Development does not preclude future transit connections to the south and east 2006 First Council Briefing on Green Water Treatment Plant Redevelopment (10/19) • Wynn, McCracken and Dunkerley express desire to only consider rail options that are capable of operating within street grid, preserving maximum development potential of Energy Control Center site 2008 Council Resolution 20080214-054 • Initiates solicitation to redevelop the Green Water Treatment Plant and Austin Energy Control Center properties • Encourages "maximized tax-payer value, including guidelines and parameters that are appropriate to encourage and ensure maximum scale, subject to the City of Austin's Waterfront Overlay District reqUirements and Capitol View Corridor" 2008 Downtown Austin Plan: Urban Rail Connections Study • Recommends use of "urban rail" (streetcar) to transition from 41h to 3rd on San Antonio and Nueces 2010 Lower Shoal Creek and I\lew Central Library Task Force Report • Recommends use of urban rail to enter Seaholm District on 3rd 2010 CAMPO 2035 Plan • Updates 2030 Plan with urban rail transition from 4111 to 3rd on San Antonio and Nueces· 2010 Central Austin Transit Study • Recommends use of urban rail to transition from 4111 to 3rd on San ,Antonio and Nueces October 22, 2010 Memo: Sue Edwards, ACM Re: Saltillo Comments to Rudy Garza Fm- ty:;J E:-I- ) un· / Sue

Councilman Riley was unable to meet this morning as p i//tQltj

Per our discussion however, I have attached several doc feedback to Rudy Garza on EGRSO not including CAP discussion, not fullowing the Saltillo Plaza Plan and not ~ address potential gentrification.

The attachments are:

• HUD BEDI Grant information the grant applicaLlull V'4Ul'A) has not been released but I thought you and Marc will want to know what we are seeking. It is job creation and pollution clean up grants. Regarding the application, we started getting the community involved in June so that the concept could be vetted with the residents and businesses early.

• Cap Metro participation - ie Business Cards of the 4 regular participants and also the two consultants they brought from Alexandria, Virginia

• Memo to Mayor and Council

• Saltillo District Redevelopment Plan Citizen Advisory Response to the 1999, 2006 and various city plans. This is the foundation of our grant application. I have highlighted the citizen's specific "asks" and the related Saltillo business projects to implement those requests.

• Plaza Saltillo TOD Area Meeting Agenda - this was our September agenda and lists the four (4) businesses that would like the grants and loans, and what they would do. We estimate 250 - 300 jobs to be created. 51 % have to be low moderate income persons residing in the community.

• East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Plan cover - we are also following this plan as it relates to preventing the displacement of 10cal Hispanic businesses

• Executive SUmmary Plaza Saltillo TOD Station Area Plan - prepared with Cap Metro and the COA Planners

In addition I have provided talking points. These were useful points in getting the endorsement of the Community Development Commission (CDC), and in briefings to LULAC, Hispanic Quality of Life Task Force, and the East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Association. FYI the CDC assigned us two liaisons who work with us monthly.

Lastly as a reminder, this project is federally funded so we will not be seeking municipal dollars.

I hope this is helpfuL

Kevin Talking Points Saltillo

- Recent studies indicate nearly 38,000 people are unemployed in Austin;

- The City's Economic Growth and Redevelopment Services Office is competing against cities nationwide for federal dollars whose purpose is to create jobs for low and moderate income individuals;

- But, we have to convince the federal government to invest in Austin.

- It's no secret that Austin offers a creative and offbeat culture - why not harness the qualities that make the Saltillo community unique while creating up to 300 jobs within walking distance from people's home;

- We believe this type of community development has the potential to become a locally-owned tourist destination as originally proposed by the original community plans (Ole Mexico and ROMA plans) with an emphasis on the Hispanic culture, arts, music and family-owned businesses

- We envision the area becoming a neighborhood where Austinites can walk to for inspiration and to socialize with their neighbors.

- In essence, we are using the arts as an economic strategy to create cultural and vital locations to be enjoyed by residents and tourists;

- Without proactive and carefully guided investment, the area is open to development outside of the community's vision.

- Although the notice of funding availability has not been announced, we have already begun to reach out to the area neighborhood organizations and community development groups to gather and review original master plans for the area. MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Kevin Johns, AICP, Director Economic Growth & Redevelopment Services Office

DATE: September 13, 2010

SUBJECT: Response Regarding Saltillo Plaza

The purpose of this email is to update you on recent media (KEYE) and citizen inquiries about an application opportunity for a US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) federal grant. The grant is not yet available. You may have received emails pressing Council to direct EGRSO to implement the affordable housing recommendations of the Saltillo Plaza Redevelopment Plan. The emails also suggest that a Hispanic business focus on culture, art, music, markets and tourism does not exists in the current Saltillo Plaza Redevelopment plan that we intend to follow.

In the first instance, of course we support the need for affordable housing. However that is not the focus of the grant application. This opportunity is a national competition to create jobs. To be competitive with other U.S. cities I believe three (3) or four (4) local businesses must agree in total to create 250 - 300 jobs and each business must contribute between 50% and 150% of their own money.

In the second instance, EGRSO has committed to the Austin Community Development Commission (CDC), who endorsed our efforts, to explicitly follow the 2006 Saltillo Plaza Redevelopment and 1999 East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Plans' business strategy: "Creation of a vibrant commercial ...... cultural district and tourist draw .... Austin lacks the type of commercial heart through which it could celebrate the music, art, food and culture of its Hispanic population. A neighborhood pantry would be a welcome addition. A Saltillo Mercado should be developed in this area .... .it should have galleries and operate small shops."

The NOFA grant (application announcement) may be available in October. In July, we reached out to the Austin CDC, CAP Metro and the Neighborhood Housing and Community Development Department. Since then, Council approved the CDBG Action Plan enabling us to compete for federal dollars, and the CDC appointed liaisons to guide staff on the grant application and to keep the focus on local business and jobs. In August we mailed letters to all commercial property owners in the Saltillo TOO, to seek their ideas, to give them the scope, and identify who might want to apply. The criteria are: job creation, private investment and brown field (polluted) properties clean up. So far four (4) local firms have indicated their interest.

I hope this summary is informative. Should you have questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 974.7802. Brownfields Economic Development Initiative - CPD - HUD Page 1 of2

Community PI:Il'II)ifl~ & D.:veloprncnt

Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI)

Q:::t InfOmlatign by State Print version

FY 2009 Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) Second Competition BEDI FY 2009 ~

Good Stories Summary: ~ An Inter-Agency Partnership: Helping Communities In New Jersey The Brownfields Economic Development mm::L... Initiative (BEDI) is a key competitive grant program that HUD administers to stimulate and Want More Information? promote economic and community development. BEDI is designed to assist cities Program Information with the redevelopment of abandoned, idled ~ BEDI Quid< Facts and underused industrial and commercial Brownflelds Definition facilities where expansion and redevelopment is BEOIFAQ burdened by real or potential environmental ~ Showcase Cpmrnun1ties contamination. BEDIAwards ~ FY 2009 BEDI Awards Past NOFAs BEDI grant funds are primarily targeted for use ~ FY 2009 SuoerNOFA with a particular emphasis upon the FY 2007 SuooltiOfA redevelopment of brownfields sites in economic FY 2006 SUPerNOFA development projects and the increase of ~ FY 2005 SuperNOFA economic opportunities for low-and moderate ~ FY 2004 SuperNOFA income persons as part of the creation or ~ FY 2003 SuperNOFA retention of businesses, jobs and increases in ~ FY 2002 SUDerNOf'A the local tax base. ~ FY 2001 SuperNOFA ~ FY 2000 SUpeNOFA BEDI funds are used as the stimulus for local Funding Announcements governments and private sector parties to ~ DEDI FY 2009 commence redevelopment or continue phased ~ DEDI FY 2007 redevelopment efforts on brownfields sites where either potential or actual environmental • DEDI FY 2006 • BEDt FY 20Q§ conditions are known and redevelopment plans • BEDI FY 2004 exist. HUD emphasizes the use of BEDI and ~ BEOI FY 2003 Section 108 Loan Guarantee funds to finance ~ DiDI FY 2002 projects and activities that will provide near ~ DEDI FY 2001 term results and demonstrable economic • BEPI FY 2000 benefits. HUD does not encourage applications Related Information whose scope is limited only to site acquisition Related SEDl Web Sites and/or remediation (i.e., land bankIng), where Emal! us Your Questions and there is no immediately planned Comments redevelopment. BEDI funds are used to enhance the security or to improve the viability of a project financed with a new Section 108 Related Publications guaranteed loan commitment. Brownfield!; 2008 Conference Tbe Effects of Environmental BEDI Purpose: ~ • Environmental Insurance The purpose of the BEDI program is to spur the ~ RedeveloDina Srownfie!ds return of brown fields to productive economic ~ An AsHssment of State Brownfle!ds Igltlatlves use through financial assistance to public • Mining Community Tackles entities In the redevelopment of brownfields, Brownfields and enhance the security or improve the viability of a project financed with Section 108-

http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/economicdevelopmentlprogramslbedilindex.cfin 10/2212010 Brownfields Economic Development Initiative - CPD - HUD Page 2 of2

guaranteed toan authority. Therefore BEDI grants must be used in conjunction with a new Section 108-guaranteed loan commitment.

Section 108 is the loan guarantee provision of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The BEDI funds minimize the potential loss of future CDBG allocations. Both Section 108 loan proceeds and BEDI grant funds are Initially made available by HUD to public entities approved for assistance. Such public entities may re-Ioan the Section 108 loan proceeds and provide BEDI funds to a business or other entity to carry out an approved economic development project, or the public entity may carry out the eligible project Itself.

BEDI projects must increase economic opportunity for persons of low-and moderate-income or stimulate and retain bUSinesses and jobs that lead to . economic revitalization. BEDI funds have been made available on a competitive basiS. In FY 2009, instructions for submitting applications will be included in The BEDI NOFA which will be available on HUD's web site. Section 108 funds are available to eligible applicants throughout the year on a noncompetitive basis.

Eligible Applicants:

CDBG entitlement communities and non-entitlement communities are eligible to receive loan guarantees. * A request for a new Section 108 loan guarantee authority must accompany each BEDI application. BEDI and Section 108 funds must be used in conjunction with the same economiC development project.

"'Non-entitlement communities, including those in Hawaii, may also apply for and receive grants under the BEDI program. If a non-entitlement community receives a BED! grant and applies for Section 108 loan guarantee assistance, the applicable state entity (or HUD, in the caSe of Hawaii) is required to pledge Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds as partial security for the loan guarantee.

Content current as of 27 August 2010 o Back to top

FOIA Privacy Web Policies and Important Links U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 7th Street S.W., Washington, DC 20410 Telephone: (202) 708-1112 TTY; (202) 708-1455 find the ilddress of a Hun office near YOu

http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/economicdeveioument/urograms/bedilindex.cfm 10/22/2010 BEDI Quick Facts - Economic Development - CPD - HUD Page 1 of2

Comnl'.Jllitl Planning & Devalopm.el1(

BEDI Quick Facts Amount Appropriated: '::"11 Infonnation by state ~ Print version • $17.5 million In 2010, maximum cap per award TBD

Application Due Date:

TBD

Eligible Applicants:

CDBG entitlement communities and non-entitlement communities eligible to receive loan guarantees*

Section 108 Application:

A request for new Section 108 loan guarantee authority must accompany each BEDI application. BEDI and Section 108 funds must be used in conjunction with the same economic development project.

Eligible Activities and CDBG National Objectives:

Each activity assisted with Section 108 loan guarantees and BEDI funds must meet one of the CDBG Program's three National Objectives:

~ Benefit low and moderate Income persons. t Prevent or eliminate slums or blight. t Address Imminent threats and urgent community needs.

Uses of BED! Grant Funds:

• land Writedowns • Site remediation Costs • Funding reserves • Over-Collaterallzlng the Section 108 loan • Direct Enhancement of the Security of the Section 108 loan • Provisions of Financing to For-Profit Businesses at a 8elow market Interest Rate

Limitations on Grant Amounts:

Minimum BEDI to Section 108 ratio is 1:1 Maximum grant amount is TBD

Rating Factors:

• Capacity of Applicant and Relevant Organizational Experience • Distress/Extent of the Problem • Soundness of Approach • leveraging ResourceS/Financial Need • Achieving Results and Program Evaluation

Program Description

Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grants enhance the security or improve the viability of a project financed with new Section 108 guaranteed loan authority. Section 108 is the loan guarantee provision of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. Section 108 provides communities with a source of financing for economic development, housing rehabilitation, public facilities and large scale phySical development projects. BED! funds may be used for any eligible activities under the Section 108Loan Guarantee program.

htto:llwww.hud.gov/offices/cpdleconomicdevelopmentiPfogramslbedilbedifacts.cfin 10122/2010 BEDI Quick Facts - Economic Development - CPD - HUD Page 2 of2

The purpose of BED! funds is to minimize the potential loss of future CDBG allocations used to secure Section 108 loan guarantees:

1. By strengthening the economic feasibility of the projects financed with Section 108 funds (increasing the probability that the project will generate enough cash to repay the guaranteed loan);

2. By directly enhancing the security of the guaranteed loan; or

3. Through combination of these or other risk mitigation techniques.

HUD intends BED! and Section 108 funds to finance projects and activities that will provide near-term results and measurable economic benefits, such as job creation and increases in the local tax base. BED! funds can support a wide variety of activities. For example, a local government may use BED! fund to address site remediation costs, or a local government may use a combination of Section 108 and BED! funds to acquire a brownfield property and convey the site to a private sector party at a discounted price from its purchase price. The redevelopment focus for BED!-assisted projects is prompted by the need to provide additional security for the Section 108 loan guarantee beyond the pledge of CDBG funds.

There are certain limitations on the use of BED! grants and Section 108 funds. BEDI funds may not immediately repay the principle of a loan guaranteed under Section 108. BED! funds shall not be used to provide public or private sector entities with funding to remediate contamination caused by their actions. Applicants may not propose sites listed or proposed for listing on EPA's National Priority List (NPL); sites subject to unilateral administrative orders, court orders, administrative on consent, or judicial consent decrees issued or entered under CERCLA, and facilities that are subject to the jurisdiction, custody or control of the federal government. Further, applicants are cautioned against proposing projects on sites where the nature and degree of environmental contamination is not well quantified or are the subject of on-going litigation or environmental enforcement action.

HUD encourages local communities to integrate projects proposed for aSSistance under HUD's BED! and Section 108 program with other federal, state and local brownfields redevelopment efforts.

For a BED! application and/or guidebook to all HUD programs, please contact the SuperNOFA Information Center at 1-800-HUD-8929. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may call the Center's lTV number at 1-800-HUD-2209. Questions regarding the BEDI program may be directed to David Kaminskv in HUD's Office of Economic Development at (202) 402-4612.

Content current as of 16 February 2010 o Backtotop

FOIA Privacy Web Policies and Important links U.S. Department of HousIng and Urban Development 451 7th Street S.W., WashIngton, DC 20410 Telephone: (202) 708-1112 TTY: (202) 708-1455 Find the address of a HUD office near you

htto://www.hud.gov/offices/cod/economicdeveloomentlorograms/bedilbedifacts.cfm 10122/2010 October 22,2010 Memo: Sue Edwards, ACM Re: Saltillo Comments to Rudy Garza

Sue

Councilman Riley was unable to meet this morning as planned.

Per our discussion however, I have attached several documents in response to his feedback to Rudy Garza on EGRSO not including CAP METRO in the Saltillo discussion, not following the Saltillo Plaza Plan and not working with the community to address potential gentrification.

The attachments are:

• HUD BEDI Grant information- the grant application (NOFA) has not been released but I thought you and Marc will want to know what we are seeking. It is job creation and pollution clean up grants. Regarding the application, we started getting the community involved in June so that the concept could be vetted with the residents and businesses early.

• Cap Metro participation - ie Business Cards of the 4 regular participants and also the two consultants they brought from Alexandria, Virginia

• Memo to Mayor and Council

• Saltillo District Redevelopment Plan - Citizen Advisory Response to the 1999, 2006 and various city plans. This is the foundation of our grant application. I have highlighted the citizen's specific "asks" and the related Saltillo business projects to implement those requests.

• East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Plan cover - we are also fo Howing this plan as it relates to preventing the displacement oflocal Hispanic businesses

• Executive Summary - Plaza Saltillo TOD Station Area Plan - prepared with Cap Metro and the COA Planners

In addition I have provided talking points. These were useful points in getting the endorsement ofthe Community Development Commission (CDC), and in briefings to · ,

LULAC, Hispanic Quality of Life Task Force, and the East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Association. FYI the CDC assigned us two liaisons who work with us monthly.

Lastly as a reminder, this project is federally funded so we will not be seeking municipal dollars.

I hope this is helpful.

Kevin Talking Points Saltillo

- Recent studies indicate nearly "38,000 people are unemployed in Austin;

- The City's Economic Growth and Redevelopment Services Office is competing against cities nationwide for federal dollars whose purpose is to create jobs for low and moderate income individuals;

- But, we have to convince the federal government to invest in Austin.

- We envision the area becoming a neighborhood where Austinites can walk to for inspiration and to socialize with their neighbors.

- In essence, we are using the arts as an economic strategy to create cultural and vital locations to be enjoyed by residents and tourists;

- Without proactive and carefully guided investment, the area is open to development outside of the community's vision.

TO: Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Kevin Johns, AICP, Director Economic Growth & Redevelopment Services Office

DATE: September 13, 2010

SUBJECT: Response Regarding Saltillo Plaza

In the second instance, EGRSO has committed to the Austin Community Development Commission (CDC), who endorsed our efforts, to explicitly follow the 2006 Saltillo Plaza Redevelopment and 1999 East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Plans' business strategy: "Creation of a vibrant commercia/ ...... cultural district and tourist draw .... Austin lacks the type of commercial heart through which it could celebrate the music, art, food and culture of its Hispanic population. A neighborhood pantry would be a welcome addition. A Saltillo Mercado should be developed in this area ..... it should have galleries and operate small shops."

The NOFA grant (application announcement) may be available in October. In July, we reached out to the Austin CDC, CAP Metro and the Neighborhood Housing and Community Development Department. Since then, Council approved the CDBG Action Plan enabling us to compete for federal dollars, and the CDC appOinted liaisons to guide staff on the grant application and to keep the focus on local business and jobs. In August we mailed letters to all commercial property owners in the Saltillo TaD, to seek their ideas, to give them the scope, and identify who might want to apply. The criteria are: job creation, private investment and brown field (polluted) properties clean up. So far four (4) local firms have indicated their interest.

I hope this summary is informative. Should you have questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 974.7802. Brownfields Economic Development Initiative - CPD - HUD Page 1 of2

Community Planning & Development

Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI)

4::t InfOrmation by State ~ Print version

FY 2009 Brownflelds Economic: Development Initiative (BIlDI) Second Competi.tlon BIlDI FY 2009 !ll.2!l6.!

Good Stories Summary: ~ An Inter-Agency Partnership: Helping Communities in New Jersey The Brownffelds Economic Development IlI.Ql]b. Initiative (BED!) is a key competitive grant program that HUD administers to stimulate and Want More Information? promote economic and community development. BEDI is designed to assist cities Program Information with the redevelopment of abandoned, idled BEDI Qulc:k Fam and underused industrial and commercial Brownfields Definition facilities where expansion and redevelopment is ., BEDI FAO burdened by real or potential environmental ., Showcase Communities contamination. BIlDIAwards ., FY 2009 BEDI Awards Past NQFAs BED I grant funds are primarily targeted for use ., FY 2009 SupemOFA with a particular emphasis upon the redevelopment of brownfields sites in economic ., FY 2007 SwerHOFA ., FY 2006 SUDerNOEA development projects and the increase of ., FY 2005 SUDerNOFA economic opportunities for low-and moderate income persons as part of the creation or ., FY 2004 SuperHOEA ., FY 2003 SuperHQFA retention of businesses, jobs and increases in the local tax base. ., FY 2002 SuperHOFA ., FY 2001 SuperNOFA ., FY 2000 SUDeNOFA BEDI funds are used as the stimulus for local Funding Announcements governments and private sector parties to ~ BEDI FY 2009 commence redevelopment or continue phased ., BEQI IT 2007 redevelopment efforts on brownfields sites ~ BEDI FY 2006 where either potential or actual environmental ., BEDI IT 2005 conditions are known and redevelopment plans ., BEDl FY 2004 exist. HUD emphasizes the use of BEDI and • BEPI FY 2003 Section 108 Loan Guarantee funds to finance ., BEDI FY 2002 projects and activities that will proVide near ., BEDI FY 2001 term results and demonstrable economic ., BEDI FY 2000 benefits. HUD does not encourage applications Related Information whose scope is limited only to site acquisition ., Related BED! Web Sites and/or remediation (I.e., land banking), where ~ Email us YOUr Ouestions and there is no Immediately planned Comments redevelopment. BEDI funds are used to enhance the security or to improve the viability of a project financed with a new Section 108 Related Publications guaranteed loan commitment. ., Brownflelds 2008 Conference ~ The Effects of Environmental BEDI Purpose: ~ • Environmental Insurance The purpose of the BEDI program is to spur the ., Redeveloping Brownflelds return of brownfields to productive economic ., An ASsessmAAt of state Brownfleld'Inltlatives use through financial assistance to public • MinIng Community Tack/es entities in the redevelopment of brownfields, 8rownflelds and enhance the security or improve the viability of a project financed with Section 108-

htto:llwww.hud.!wv/offices/codleconomicdevelonment/oro!!ramslbedllindex.cfm 1 Ol? ?I? 01 0 Brownfields Economic Development Initiative - CPD - HUD Page 2 of2

guaranteed loan authority. Therefore BED! grants must be used in conjunction with a new Section lOS-guaranteed loan commitment.

Section lOS is the loan guarantee provision of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The BEDI funds minimize the potential loss of future CDBG allocations. Both Section lOS loan proceeds and BEDI grant funds are initially made available by HUD to public entities approved for assistance. Such public entities may re-Ioan the Section lOS loan proceeds and provide BED! funds to a business or other entity to carry out an approved economic development project, or the public entity may carry out the eligible project itself.

BEDI projects must increase economiC opportunity for persons of low-and moderate-Income or stimulate and retain businesses and jobs that lead to economic revitalization. BED! funds have been made available on a competitive basis. In FY 2009, instructions for submitting applications will be included in The BED! NOFA which will be available on HUD's web site. Section lOS funds are available to eligible applicants th~oughout the year on a noncompetitive basis.

Eligible Applicants:

CDSG entitlement communities and non-entitlement communities are eligible to receive loan guarantees. * A request for a new Section lOS loan guarantee authority must accompany each BEDI application. BED! and Section 108 funds must be used in conjunction with the same economic development project.

*Non-entitiement communities, including those In Hawaii, may also apply for and receive grants under the BEDI program. If a non-entitlement community receives a BED! grant and applies for Section lOS loan guarantee aSSistance, the applicable state entity (or HUD, in the case of Hawaii) is required to pledge Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds as partial security for the loan guarantee.

Content current as of 2.7 August 2.010 o Backtotop

Web Policies: and Impgrtant Links: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 7th Street S.W., Washington, DC 20410 Telephone: (2.02) 70B-1112. TTY: (202.) 70B-1455 Find the address of a HUD office near YOU

httn:llwww.hud.!lov/offices/cndleconomicdevelonment/nroQTam~Ih~c111inc1~x ~fin 1 on') I?Ol 0 BEDI Quick Facts - Economic Development - CPD - HUD Page 1 of2

COllllTlunity Plannlng & Development

BEDI Quick Facts Amount Appropriated: G::1 Information by State a Print versiQn • $17.5 million in 2010, maximum cap per award TBD

Application Due Date:

TBD

Eligible Applicants:

CDBG entitlement communities and non-entitlement communities eligible to receive loan guarantees*

Section 108 Application:

A request for new Section 108 loan guarantee authority must accompany each BED I application. BEDI and Section 108 funds must be used in conjunction with the same economic development project.

Eligible Activities and CDBG National Objectives:

Each activity assisted with Section 108 loan guarantees and BEDI funds must meet one of the CDBG Program's three National Objectives:

• Benefit low and moderate income persons. • Prevent or eliminate slums or blight. • Address imminent threats and urgent community needs.

Uses of BEDI Grant Funds:

• Land Writedowns • Site remediation Costs • Funding reserves • Over-Collaterallzing the Section 108 Loan • Direct Enhancement of the Security of the Section 108 Loan • Provisions of Financing to For-Prom Businesses at a Below market Interest Rate

Limitations on Grant Amounts:

• Minimum BED! to Section 108 ratiO Is 1:1 • MaxImum grant amount is TBD

Rating Factors:

• Capacity of Applicant and Relevant Organizational Experience • Distress/Extent of the Problem • Soundness of Approach • Leveraging Resources/Financial Need • Achieving Results and Program Evaluation

Program Description

Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grants enhance the security or improve the viability of a project financed with new Section 108 guaranteed loan authority. Section 108 is the loan guarantee provision of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. Section 108 provides communities with a source of financing for economic development, hOUSing rehabilitation, public faCilities and large scale physical development projects. BEDI funds may be used for any eligible activities under the Section 108 Loan Guarantee program.

httn://www.hud.Qov/offices/cnd/economlcrlevelonment/nroOT~m~!hpnl!hf\{lif~ ....t", ... -Im 1 n/?')/")1"I1 n BEDI Quick Facts - Economic Development - CPD - HUD Page 2 of2

The purpose of BEDI funds is to minimize the potential loss of future CDBG allocations used to secure Section 108 loan guarantees:

1. By strengthening the economic feasibility of the projects financed with Section 108 funds (increasing the probability that the project will generate enough cash to repay the guaranteed loan);

2. By directly enhancing the security of the guaranteed loan; or

3. Through combination of these or other risk mitigation techniques.

HUD intends BEDI and Section 108 funds to finance projects and activities that will provide near-term results and measurable economic benefits, such as job creation and increases in the local tax base. BEDI funds can support a wide variety of activities. For example, a local government may use BEDI fund to address Site remediation costs, or a local government may use a combination of Section 108 and BEDI funds to acquire a brownfield property and convey the site to a private sector party at a discounted price from its purchase price. The redevelopment focus for BEDI-assisted projects is prompted by the need to provide additional security for the Section 108 loan guarantee beyond the pledge of CDBG funds.

There are certain limitations on the use of BEDI grants and Section 108 funds. BEDI funds may not immediately repay the principle of a loan guaranteed under Section 108. BEDI funds shall not be used to provide public or private sector entities with funding to remediate contamination caused by their actions. Applicants may not propose Sites listed or proposed for listing on EPA's National Priority List (NPL); sites subject to unilateral administrative orders, court orders, administrative on consent, or judicial consent decrees issued or entered under CERCLA, and facilities that are subject to the jurisdiction, custody or control of the federal government. Further, applicants are cautioned against proposing projects on sites where the nature and degree of environmental contamination is not well quantified or are the subject of on-gOing litigation or environmental enforcement action.

HUD encourages local communities to integrate projects proposed for assistance under HUD's BEDl and Section 108 program with other federal, state and local brownfields redevelopment efforts. .

For a BEDI application and/or guidebook to all HUD programs, please contact the SuperNOFA Information Center at 1-800-HUD-8929. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may call the Center's TTY number at 1-800-HUD-2209. Questions regarding the BEDI program may be directed to David Kaminsky in HUD's Office of Economic Development at (202) 402-4612.

Content current as of 16 february 2010 o Backtotop

rOtA privacy Web Policies and Important Links U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 7th Street S.W., Washington, DC 20410 Telephone: (202) 708-1112 TTY: (202) 708-1455 Find the address of a HUD office near you

1 O/'}'} /'}()1 () Tral1sp~rtarion Authorit:y 29ro East Fifth Street Austin, Texas 78702 A Administration Annex CAPITAL Craig McColloch, P.~. Vica President 624 Pleasant Valley Austin, Texas 78702 METRO

TEL 512.389-7489 JOHN E. HODGES RA AlA FAX 512_369.6080 Director ofCapital [email protected] Projects Group

Main . (5121912.5100 Fax 15121912·5158 fiR Office {5121912;5178 Cell 15121923-6553 o ~1- ~i, p(',: .)1.· 11 F\ipi!:!J!li

; ), ':i:

; ~:I..:: Pulerl:. BaSil LEEDAP METRO Director, Uroon De'VelopmenISe,vices;. .::;;:=-=--,-:-~.~--.--_-... -- _'--c...... _____...... ---.------.--1 " 1,').(.,".0, JOHN· MICHAEl.. V CORTE Senior ProfessionalAssiiciate ,.2.~)h: hO-o""!' ,'0·, ;,/fI,lltr RetllthldS . ,r:n,;, .,og Sp(, 'tltcr

JOLINDA MARSHAll, AICP Direct 17031518·8504 Cell (70319~7 -3175 1J-amit Oriented -Main {703151B·B5oo Fax (703) 518-6686 . Developmerzt Pfamur 0·

Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2910 East Fifth Street Ausrin, Texas 78702 METRO Till. 512.369.62.08 FAX )12.368.6080 [email protected]

LUCY GALBRAITH lvlanagel; 1J'ansit-Orimted Developmmt

Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authoriry 2910 East Fjfrh Street METRO Austin, Texas 78702 TEL 5I2.369.6515 CELL 512.75°.7°62 [email protected] Plaza Saltillo TOO Station Area Meeting Agenda BEDII108 Regeneration Project 9-14-10

Introductions

Vision for the area (Kevin)

Mercado Mall (Eve, Bill, Hilda, etc.)

a. Los Angeles Mercado Mall

TOD Boundary vs Target Area Boundary (Phase 1) (Dusty)

a. The official boundary are: IH-35 on the West, East ih Street, Chicon and East 3rd Street

b. Target Area Boundaries: IH-35 on the West, North Alley of ih Street, Waller Street and East 3rd Street (Phase 1)

The "Concept" Project: Sites and Descriptions (Dusty)

a. Sandstone Group--44 Unit Hotel, approximately 54,000 sq. ft., includes a restaurant, lounge, bar, bookstore, retail and event space. Jobs Potential = 30

b. Urban Infill Partners--250,000 sq ft of rentable and/or saleable space in a mix of retail, commercial and residential spaces. This would be with on-site structured parking, a high energy efficiency rating and some affordable housing component. Jobs Potential = 300

c. EI Mundo Newspaper-Plant Refurb, Equip Upgrade, Jobs Potential=5+

d. Saltillo Plaza Market Project-provides a number of leased spaces from 200-1500 sq. ft. creating retail outlet for farmers, restaurants, general small businesses, and cultural spaces of varying types. Jobs Potential = 20-30

Status of the Application: Using 2009 forms for trial run. NOFA not yet published.

Disclaimer: This is an internal City of Austin meeting discussing concepts only. Transportation Authority 25HO EaS( Fifth Srreet Austin, Texas 78702

AdmLrl.istration Annelt CAPITAL Craig McColloch. R!'. ,~HIP'D!l.A ~~~~!~~I~c.:.. Vice President 624 Pleasant Valley Austin, Texas 78702 METRO

TEL 512.389.7489 JOHN E. HODGES RA AlA FAX 512.369.6080 Director o/Capital [email protected] Projects Group

Main . (5121912-5100 Fax (5121912-5158 fiR n ... t. ·~taJ. Office (512) 912;5178 Cell (5121923·6553 ""r a 00' u.1 .r) ,.l,•. ·'10" @ ..!.l ;.0' ! rrh \.'; ,-t..L

;~ is: I ,~"

'J,

.;. Q 1..:: ,,l,.< C ~-:;O METRO

, 1,,)."",0 .I("lHN·M!CHAEl V CORT!;' :l ..ll:',' hO'""!"!" 1''0 ,:•• {1/; Re£nti(J,ls .. r):t~', ' .:g Spr.. fItl:t

JOLINDA MARSHALL, AICP Direct (703) 518-8504 Cell {703) 91>7-3175 Ti'unsit Oriented -Main (7031518-8500 fax (703) 518-8686 . Development PLanner @

Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2910 East Fifth Street Austin, Texas 78702 METRO TEL 512.369.6:2.08 FAX >1:1..368.6080 [email protected]

LUCY GALBRAITH Manage,; Ti'ansi ... Oriented Development

Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2910 East Fifth Street METRO Austin, Texas 78702 TEL )12.369.651 > CELL 512.750.7062 [email protected] Plaza Saltillo TOO Station Area Meeting Agenda BEDI/10B Regeneration Project 9-14-10

Introductions

Vision for the area (Kevin)

Mercado Mall (Eve, Bill, Hilda, etc.)

a. Los Angeles Mercado Mall

TaD Boundary vs Target Area Boundary (Phase 1) (Dusty)

a. The official boundary are: IH-35 on the West, East yth Street, Chicon and East 3rd Street

b. Target Area Boundaries: IH-35 on the West, North Alley of yth Street, Waller Street and East 3rd Street (Phase 1)

The "Concept" Project: Sites and Descriptions (Dusty)

a. Sandstone Group--44 Unit Hotel, approximately 54,000 sq. ft., includes a restaurant, lounge, bar, bookstore, retail and event space. Jobs Potential = 30

b. Urban Infill Partners--250,000 sq ft of rentable andlor saleable space in a mix of retail, commercial and residential spaces. This would be with on-site structured parking, a high energy efficiency rating and some affordable housing component. Jobs Potential = 300

c. EI Mundo l\Jewspaper-Plant Refurb, Equip Upgrade, Jobs Potential=5+

Status of the Application: Using 2009 forms for trial run. NOFA not yet published.

Disclaimer: This is an internal City of Austin meeting discussing concepts only. Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group

Response to

Saltillo District Redevelopment Plan Prepared by ROMA Design Group for Capital Metro & the City of Austin

Last Revised April 25, 2006 Table of Contents

Purpose ...... ·...... 1 Introduction ...... ;...... 2 I. Affordable Housing ....:...... 3 Introduction Recommendations II. Business Development and Job Creation...... 5 Introduction Recommendations III. Public Space, Pedestrian Connections, and Scenic Elements...... 7 Introduction Recommendations IV. Land Disposition and Development Strategies...... 9 V. Next Steps...... 10

VI. Community Advisory Group Members ...... ,...... 11

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 11 Purpose

Pursuant to the purpose of the Community Advisory Group (CAG), this report is offered as advice to the Austin City Council and the Cap Metro Board of Directors to assist them with future policy-making and decision-making regarding the form, objectives and implementation of a Saltillo District Redevelopment Master Plan.

The CAG sees the Saltillo District redevelopment as an opportunity to· transform a long neglected, yet truly critical 11-acre tract, located within the East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood, into a national model of urban redevelopment. The redevelopment of the SaltiUo District offers a remarkable challenge to the City of Austin, Capital Metro and Travis County to use publicly held land with responsibility, intelligence, and innovation in order to protect the traditional residents and business owners currently threatened by soaring property values and gentrification.

This report is a response to the draft Saltillo District Redevelopment Master Plan (Master Plan), compiled by ROMA Design Group for Capital Metropolitan Transit Authority and the City of Austin. On April 7, 2006, the Saltillo Community Advisory Group voted unanimously to formally oppose the Master Plan because, in its current form, it would fail to achieve its expressed overarching goal. Although there is considerable common ground, this report defines differences, omissions, and provides more aggressive and specific measures that the CAG believes are essential for a successful project.

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report Saltillo District Community Advisory Group (CAG) Report

Introduction: The consensus of the. Saltillo District Community Advisory Group (CAG) is that the "overarching goal", stated on the first page of the draft Saltillo District Redevelopment Master Plan (Master Plan), should guide and shape al/ as·~cts of the plan. The Master Plan states, "The overarching goal... is to develop a plan that preserves, protects and enhances the unique qualities and socio-economic fabric of the surrounding neighborhood, and that realistically can be implemented through a balanced program of public and private investment with meaningful involvement by the community."

It is crucial, therefore, that the Master Plan include innovative and challenging proposals for affordable housing, significant participation by small, minority-owned businesses, links with the adjacent streetscapes and sidewalks, and design elements that reflect the traditional character of the surrounding neighborhood. By failing to pay sufficient attention to these elements, it becomes far more likely that the plan will fail to be a resource, " .. .that preserves, protects and enhances the unique qualities and socio-economic fabric of the surrounding neighborhood." It may also miss the mark toward creating a "well designed transit village." It is crucial that the plan coordinate with parallel efforts in the community toward preventing displacement of the neighborhood's traditional residential population and business enterprises, protecting its unique culture.

The current draft Master Plan does not give adequate consideration to the resources and potential beneficial impact and of House Bill 525 and the proposed Homestead Preservation District, the Community PreserVation and Revitalization Program (CP&R). gentrification reports by the City of Austin and PODER. and the ability of non-profit organizations to significantly increase affordability and protect the existing population. According to City staff and Cap Metro conSUltants, the draft Master Plan is formulated on a premise that the development will result in a successful transit oriented district that is self-sustaining. In other words, the development proposed in the Master Plan, for the most part, could finance itself. This approach would be fine if there are no other goals. However, because the paramount goal is to preserve, protect and enh~nce the unique qualities of surrounding neighborhood, there needs to be serious and extensive exploration of all the available resources. Providing a Master Plan for a development that pays for itself is not acceptable if it does not also strengthen the "fabric of the surrounding community."

If left uncorrected, the redevelopment is unlikely to gain support from the community it will most heavily impact. In fact, it very likely will increase the growing antagonism that exists between long time residents and the trend for higher density, non-affordable projects in the area.

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 2 I. Affordable Housing

Introduction The current Master Plan proposes redevelopment that may help create a successful Transit Oriented District, but it does so at the expense of the neighborhood. Whereas the Master Plan increases the heights and density that would trigger requiring affordable housing, the percentage of units and the ranges of median income persons served do not reflect the " ... unique qualities and socio-economic fabric of the surrounding neighborhood." The Master Plan also fails to make any recommendations related to the percentage of rental versus ownership units; and offers nothing regarding units types, such as one, two, three and four bedrooms. These are critical issues that should be addressed in the Master Plan, both as requirements and as goals. It is essential to establish such requirements and goals before a request for proposals for development partners or a master developer is released.

The CAG, therefore, has adopted rather detailed affordability requirements and goals that more clearly frame the percentages and levels of income that should be targeted in the Saltillo Redevelopment District. Because the CAG wants a project that will succeed, it recognizes the need for flexibility as the implementation process moves forward. Yet, at this point, requirements and goals must be established that wi" gain significant support from the impacted community.

Furthermore, discussions sometimes have revealed what appears to be a fundamental conflict between achieving the density of development that typically sustains transit-oriented projects and development that is affordable to a low-income population and with a predominance of micro enterprises ("mom and pop shops"). Is it possible to develop moderately dense, mix-used projects with expensive structured parking while also providing a significant percentage of spaces that are affordable to low-income families and small, homegrown businesses? Lessons need to be learned from recent projects developed by the Austin Revitalization Authority where massive government subsidies have provided much needed and long-awaited redevelopment, but has largely priced out the traditional businesses and residents. Creating class-A office space, essentially extending the central business district market into East Austin, means it either will be extremely costly to the public or next to impossible to include the traditional residents and businesses of East Austin.

A serious effort needs to be made to make use of the numerous tools and harvest from all available resources to achieve the requirements and goals being recommended by the CAG. Organizations with the best practices in the City and region regarding affordable housing and successful small businesses need to be brought into the project as partners. And, perhaps most importantly, Capital Metro, the City of Austin and Travis County must have resolute determination to redevelop the Saltillo District in a way that makes it a model to the country. The final Saltillo District Redevelopment Master Plan needs to include clear objectives that not only redevelop a neglected area into a successful transit district, but also it ••• preserves, protects and enhances the unique qualities and socio economic fabric of the surrounding neighborhood."

Affordable Housing Recommendations Overall Percentage: At least 50% of all the new housing units in the Project area should be affordable to households below 80% of the Austin Median Income. The percentage of these affordable units at various· income-levels is provided below. In addition, specific ratios of housing use [ownership or rental] and unit type [number of bedrooms] is provided below. For illustrative purposes, it is assumed here that 600 residential units are planned for the entire Saltillo District. Under this scenario 300 of the units in the Saltillo District would be set aside as affordable housing.

Housing Use Mix: The CAG recommendation is that the Saltillo District Redevelopment will create permanent affordable rental and ownership housing. Theref()re, it is reasonable to require that the affordable rental housing: wi" be owned by one or more non-profit corporations and that a significant portion, perhaps even all of the land used for rental units, will be placed in a community land trust (CLT). Ideally, a significant percentage of ownership units, perhaps 25%, would participate in a CL T.

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 3 This means the owners would own the dwelling, but not the land beneath it, similar to condominium arrangements and, at the time they sell the home, they would be required to sell it to another low to moderate-income buyer. Community Land Trusts are one of the most effective means to ensure lasting affordability. Other units would initially be rental, but would offer tenants an opportunity to purchase after a specific time period-. Rental units offering a lease-to-own opportunity could also have land that is placed in a land trust The Project would start with approximately 60% of its affordable units as Rental units (180 units) and 40% owner-occupied (120 units). Yet, several years after initial occupancy, the ratio could be reversed'so the Projectwould have apprOXimately 60% of the affordable units as owner occupied and 40% as permanently affordable rental housing. This would closely mirror ratios in the surrounding East Austin neighborhoods.

Recommended percentages for the mix of uses (Adopted by the CAG 1~20.2006): • Ownership- maximum of 40% [120 units] • Rental in perpetuity- minimum of 40% [120 units]* .. Rental wi rent':to-own option- minimum of 20%* [60 units] *This would be for properties where the land is in a Community Land Trust.

Home Ownership Income Percentages (Adopted by the CAG 1-20-2006) • 25% of the units at 70-80% MFI [30 units at $1,150 - $1,325] • 25% at 60-70% MFI [30 units at $995 - $1,150] II 20% of the units at 50-60% MFI [24 units at $825 - $995J • 20% at 40-50% MFI [24 units at $660 - $825] • 10% below 40% MFI [12 units at $495 - $660]

120 UNITS

*Mortgages at 6.5% interest, taxes & insurance at $275 to $325 would range from $34,800 to $158,200. If taxes were essentially removed, as with a Community Land Trust, and insurance is figured at $50 per month, the mortgages would range from $69,600 to $201,000.

Rental Percentages (Adopted by the CAG 1-20·2006) • 50% between 50% and 60% Austin MFI [90 unitsJ • 25% between 30% and 50% Austin MFI [45 unitsJ • 25% below 30% Austin MFI [45 units]

180 UNITS Unit Mix: Home Ownership • 5% maximum one-bedroom units [6 one-bedroom units] • 20% maximum two-bedroom units [24 two-bedroom units] • 75% minimum three-bedroom or larger [90 3-bedroom or larger]

Rental • 15% maximum one-bedroom units [max. 24 1-bedroom units] • 25% maximum two-bedroom units [max. 45 2-bedroom units] • 60% minimum three-bedroom or larger [min. 108 3-bedroom units]

Other affordable housing standards (Adopted by the CAG 1-20-2006) The CAG also endorsed an affordable housing goal that, whenever possible, there should be an integration of affordable housing units with market rate units in specific projects. Also, that there. be, whenever possible, and a uniform quality of construction with the affordable housing units and market rate units throughout the district.

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 4 II. Business Development and Job Creation

Introduction Plaza Saltillo was created in lawe part because of an initiative called Ole Mexico organized in 1992 by business owners in the East 6 and East ih Street area. The dream of Ole Mexico was to create a vibrant commercial district, evoking the Hispanic heritage of this particular area of Austin, that would serve both as a cultural district and tourist draw. It appeared then as it does today that, despite a historic presence of the Hispanic community since its founding, Austin lacks the type of commercial heart through which it could celebrate the music, art, food and culture of its Hispanic population. Plaza Saltillo was meant to be a catalyst for the development of such a commercial and cultural district The redevelopment of the Cap Metro site and the surrounding community is the opportunity to realize the dream begun over a decade ago with Ole Mexico.

Just as the CAG recommends that City Council and Cap Metro look at the broader neighborhood when implementing housing components for the Saltillo District, the existing commercial context must be used as a springboard for future development. The goal should be to ensure that eXisting businesses are not displaced by new development. The new development should enhance the good qualities, respect the cultural heritage and revitalize within a community context rather than in isolation. It must be recognized that creating a successful transit district is not the main goal. Instead, th~ overarching goal is to create a cultural district with a vital transit component that enhances the socio-economic fabric·of the existing community.

It is critical that the agencies overseeing the redevelopment offer non-compete agreements with local existing businesses. It must be an expressed high priority goal that displacement of eXisting businesses will be avoided.

Part of the redevelopment's goals must be to provide much needed neighborhood services andgoods for existing residents. A neighborhood pantry grocery would be a welcome addition. Preserving space for the Farmers' Market and improving its facilities is recommended.

Sidewalk, streetscape and other improvements along the rail corridor east of Comal Street should be made part of the redevelopment process. Infrastructure improvements and beautification efforts should extend along East 5th Street to Pleasant Valley Road and adjacent streets north of the Saltillo District need improvements if the Project is to mesh and !ink successfully with the surrounding commercial activities. Cap Metro's funding set-aside, administered through the Austin City Council ("Build Austin"?), should be used to target needed improvements in these areas.

The creation of a lively commercial district should focus on the area closest to Plaza Saltillo. A Saltillo Mercado should be developed in this area. The eastern side of Tract D through Tract H and the Plaza are viewed as the most appropriate place within the district for the Hispanic community and others to perform live music, host open air events, hold markets, have galleries and operate small shops. The end result should be a district that draws people not only from East Austin but from the region and state. •

A small community center at this location would be essential for providing a cooler indoor venue for such events as well as for stage performances and film presentations. Tract F is ideal for an enclosed community space, a small business incubator and an administrative office for the Saltillo District itself. Tracts E. G and H are also well suited for commercial development; ideally small, minority-owned and women-owned businesses. The eastern edge of Tract D should also be developed in a way that coordinates with the small business and Latino emphasis and themes created closer to and within Plaza Saltillo. Tract H has a loading dock and garden area that can be adapted for performances. It also has some of the .oldest structures in the area, reminders of the importance of the railroad to Austin and the immediate neighborhood. An Austin railroad museum might be a point of interest for the district. .

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 5 Recommendations

The CAG makes the following flexible recommendations regarding the development of civic and commerCial/flex space development: • Recognize the need for and benefits of developing a Hispanic cultural and commercial center for Austin to be located in the Plaza Saltillo area. • Develop and design Tracts E, F, and G in a way that facilitates their function as the heart of a Hispanic commercial and cultural district.. .. Develop a plan to protect existing businesses in the area that includes a nonMcompetition element. .. While serving civic functions. Tract F should be a viewed as a source of revenue, a place for job creation and increased tax base.

R Develop a program to educate and assist existing'local businesses on the futUre markets that the District will bring so they can be prepared to adjust and accommodate these markets.

II Set aside at least 50% of the commercial/flex space within Tracts E, F, G and H, and 15% of the commercial/flex space within Tract D for small businesses and vendors at below market rates.

II Develop a plan for and identify funding for infrastructure improvements to the north and east of the Saltillo District as far as East 6th Street on the north and Pleasant Valley to the east. Earmark Cap Metro funds managed by the City Council for this purpose. .. Develop several kiosks or other notification methods to announce events and activities in the district. • Redevelop Tract F at three to four stories (rather than 5 in the Master Plan) for Civic and Commercial uses and without residential uses. • Consider covering Tracts G, slated for detention ponds in the draft Master Plan, to be used for parking and other needs.

Of this 50%: • Develop 15% percent of the commercial/flex spaces with a maximum of 500 square feet. .. Develop 35% of the commerciallflex spaces with a maximum of 1000 square feet. • Develop 25% of the commerciallflex spaces 'with a maximum of 1500 square feet • Develop 25% of the commercial/flex spaces with a maximum of 2000 square feet. .. Set aside 30% of the commerciallflex spaces in Tract F as a smarr business incubator.

II Develop a tax adjustment, abatement or freeze system for existing businesses in the T.O.D. area .. Establish a program to assist local businesses to locate within the Saltillo District if they are displaced by increased taxes or lease termination.

Incentives: • Reduce on site parking reqUirements in Tract E, F, G and H to 60% of the Land Development Code requirement and Tract D to 60% • Provide 50% property tax abatement in the form of a refund to owners of property where 25% or more of the commercial space is leased at rates at or below 80% below market rates (and 50% of owners/employees/staff are minorities) • Provide 75% property tax abatement in the form of a refund to owners of property where 25% or more of the commercial space is leased at rates at or below 60% below market rates (and 50% of owners/employees/staff are minorities).

II Provide 100% property tax abatement in the form of a refund to owners of property where 75% or more of the commercfal space is leased at rates at or below 60% beloW market rates (and 50% of owners/employees/staff are minorities).

II Provide 100% property tax abatement in the form of a refund to owners of property where 50% or more of the commercial space is leased at rates at or below 50% below market rates (and 50% of owners/employees/staff are minorities).

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 6 m. Public Space, Pedestrian Connections, and Scenic Elements

Introduction Attention to the outdoor environment of the Saltillo redevelopment is critical to the success of the district. Public space·connects buildings to each other, the project to the neighborhood, and will define the look and. feel of afuture Saltillo District. The treatment of these outdoor spaces and relationships will in part determine· the nature of this future transit viI/age.

Currently, the Saltillo District's outdoor environment is the byproduct of its former use as a rail corridor and rail yard, and decades of historical neglect, both public and private. East 5th Street is unpaved and incomplete. A locomotive roundhouse once stood just west of Plaza Saltillo, but very few structures remain from Southern Pacific Railway. Adjacent warehousing operations are gone, with the exception of cotton warehouse owned by Reji Thomas at Waller and 5th Street and the two timber frame warehouses owned by Lorelei Bela Brown. All of these buildings sit on land owned by Cap Metro.

Half a decade after the East Cesar Chavez and Holly neighborhood plans were adopted, only developer Perry Lorenz, with City assistance, is meeting the challenge of implementing desired "great street" type sidewalks along 5th Street. This kind of good practice should not remain isolated and disconnected. As the Saltillo redevelopment Master Plan is refined, broader corridor issues should not be neglected. It is vital to the community that Cap Metro and the City not limit the Saltillo redevelopment only to the 11 acres owned by Cap Metro.

Recommendations

Lance Armstrong Bikeway alignment The Lance Armstrong Bikeway (LAB), essentially a bike and pedestrian street, emerges from under IH35, where a significant gateway should welcome visitors to our unique cultural community. 4th Street at IH35 should be considered as a dramatic entry into the Saltillo District, with a similar "gateway" element at 5th Street. Following the commuter rail alignment, the bikeway should def1ne the Saltillo redevelopment south side as a green edge. The expansive design of the proposed 4th Street R.OW. should be compensated by the planting of semi-mature trees, native plantings, and diminutive fences.

Bikeway improvements under IH35 and -TO- the Convention Center should be completed concurrently with this plan, so as to immediately capture convention visitors and tourist dollars by functionally and creatively linking the Saltillo District with downtown. An "Arts in Public Places" program should be launched including partnerships with local non-profits, community artists, and the IH35 Makeover Coalition to create culturally and enVironmentally relevant installations at IH35 and throughout the Saltillo District.

Medina Paseo The Medina Paseo, at the center of the Saltillo redevelopment, is perhaps the most critical provision of open space proposed in the Master Plan. Linda Johnston has deSigned the "Austin Spanish Steps" pocket park concept for the 500 block alongside T.O.P.S. building and 1000 block of 5th Street. This pocket park has been funded. Looking south across the Cap Metro property, the former foundry smokestack looms as an iconic element central to a district way-finding program.

Execution of thoughtful architectural designs should include enhancing the Medina Paseo as the prominent Saltillo District open space. The buildings facing this space should reflect the centrality of this public space within the district. .

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 7 Attayac Paseo As the rail alignmenftransitions from 4th to 5th Streets, a "triangle" south of the rail R.O.w. between Waller and Navasota is created. This area should become a unified green-space including (parcel I), the Attayac Paseo, parcel H, and detention ponds (parcel G), embracing Red Scoot Inn. The timber framed warehouses at 1300 E. 4th Street owned by Lorelei Bela Brown, on land owned by Cap Metro (parcel H), should be preserved for creative reuse. The bikeway becomes a unique human-scale street through this triangle connecting the Medina Paseo with Plaza Saltillo.

Design Guidelines The redevelopment should establish architectural and design standards that embrace and reflect local culture and character; including materials, colors, structural elements, covered esplanades, clerestories, raised roof peaks, and other elements found throughout the neighborhood and along the rail corridor. The Design Guidelines in the East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Plan should serve as a starting point.

It should be a goal to encourage and facilitate district-wide uniform "great streets" sidewalks and streetscapes appropriate to the neighborhood, including a "Saltillo Corridor" initiative similar in nature to the City of Austin's "great streets" program

Significant features of the Saltillo rail corridor should be incorporated into broader open space and streetscape through "Art In Public Spaces", way-finding devices and historical interpretation strategies. This initiative should be coordinated through the entire Saltillo District and the larger rail corridor. These could or should include: 1) IH35 Lance Armstrong Bikeway under-crossing 2) Austin Foundry Smokestack, 3) the Medina "Austin Spanish Steps" pocket park, 4) Medina and 4th Street view of the Balcones Escarpment to the west, 5) the view from 4th and Attayac of the Our Lady of Guadalupe Church steeple, 6) 1300 East 4th Street timber-frame buildings and adjacent "Triangle", and 7) the site of former locomotive roundhouse.

The following are issues outside the 11-acre Saltillo District that need to be addressed by Cap Metro, the City of Austin, and those involved with Station Area Planning: • Cap Metro rail crossings are primarily ADA non-compliant: Only crossings at Comal, Tillery and Webberville (north side only) would meet the letter of an ADA compliant crossing. Pleasant Valley has uneven pavement and sidewalk obstructions.

• Require/incorporate sidewalks into projects per Saltillo District design guidelines. Pedernales Lofts and Saltillo Lofts projects received COA Smart Growth "great streets" and Cap Metro 1/4 cent funding respectively. The proposed Medina "Austin Spanish Steps" pocket park is also funded through Cap Metro 1/4 cent. It is unfortunate that no similar arrangements were made for the "Villas on Sixth Street" project, espeCially to improve the north side of 5th Street.

• Implement a Saltillo corridor "great streets" type program throughout Cap Metro rail corridor. A Saltillo "transit village" must see corridor-wide pedestrian infrastructure improvements concurrently with, if not preceding, redevelopment of any particular adjacent private parcel.

• Create an accurate inventory of corridor rail R.O.W. remnants and former rail spurs.

• Consider 5th Street rail wye as additional neighborhood pocket park and community garden space, as desired by Holly Neighborhood Plan

• Make the reconstructed Pedernales rail crossing ADA compliant

• The pedestrian-way along 4.50 Camacho St. at rear of Saltillo Lofts project should be encouraged per developer agreement to comply with ECC planning team

• Improve the Cal,les Street pedestrian crossing of Cap. Metro rail R.O.w. (topographical conditions suggest future underpass), as desired by Holly Neighborhood Plan

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 8 IV. Land Disposition and Development Strategies

Introduction . The initial draft Master Plan, presented in September 2005, recommended a disposition strategy in which all the Cap Metro land would be sold to a master developer. It also stated that the master developer Umight" partner with a non-profit to do affordable housing and other community services on the tract. The CAG received. a briefing by ROMA and Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) in September, 2003 regarding disposition strategies and EPS sent a report to staff on November 12th outlining 4 strategies: Master Developer, Fee Developer, Non-profit Developer, and Organic Development. The CAG received a copy of this report, briefly discussed it and asked many questions on December 2,2003. A follow-up meeting on disposition was scheduled for January 2004; however, due to time restraints, CAG never fully developed a recommendation and no formal vote was taken by the CAG regarding this issue.

When the CAG reviewed the first draft of the Master Plan two years later in September, 2005, it objected to this being listed as the disposition recommendation since the CAG never had time to fully discuss, understand and make a recommendation regarding the different strategies offered by EPS. The CAG therefore requested that ROMA revise the draft Master Plan to, at a minimum, add the option of leasing the land rather than selling the entire tract to a Master Developer. That was the only revision to the disposition strategy that the consultants and staff were willing to make to the final draft. CAG continued to ask for disposition discussion time on the agenda but time always ran out.

At a January 2006 meeting, CAG members agreed to make our own recommendation regarding disposition of the land and strategies for development. It appears that the EPS report from November 2003 cannot be used to form a recommendation because East Austin's real estate market has dramatically changed in the last 3 years. Graduate students in the UT School of Architecture's Center for Sustainable Development, led by Sergio Palleroni, at the request of the East Cesar Chavez Neighborhood Planning Team presented alternate land use plans at a December 2005 CAG meeting. Many of their ideas have shaped this recommendation.

Recommendations The CAG recommends the Saltillo redevelopment project be implemented with and Organic Development Strategy. This strategy seems best suited to slow or counteract the gentrification of East Austin. OrganiC, phased development, is also far more likely to involve smaller, local developers and non-profits. In contrast to a master developer strategy, it will be easier to focus development that is phased in over time, tract by tract, on providing opportunities for both eXisting East Austin residents as well as for new members of the community. An organic strategy will bring a larger group of stakeholders into the project than Capital Metro draft Master Plan suggests. The CAG puts major Importance on involving loealinvestors, architects, craftsmen, business people, non-profit community organizations, and the residents of East Austin. Using a phased and organic development strategy will benefit all stakeholders without alienating anyone of these groups.

The CAG recommends that, rather than having one master developer, there should be multiple developers and investors working on the project under the direction of an expanded Community Advisory Board. This board would include volunteers with expertise in business, real estate development, financing, and construction implementation with technical support provided by City of Austin and Capital Metro project managers (or a consulting project manager/team). The CAG's revised Land Use Plan (?) describes the desired mix of uses on each tract and developers who competitively bia for a ,tract should either work with local non-profits to provide affordable housing, and/or non-profits should act as developers for various tracts. Developing organically over time, with multiple and diverse development and investment firms that includes local companies and non-profit organizations, will ensure the Saltillo District will not have a generic, "redevelopment project" look. Whereas this type of development strategy is more complex than a master developer approach, it is far more apt to reflect the unique and eclectic mix of buildings in the surrounding neighborhood.

Saltillo District Redevelopment 'Community Advisory Group Report 9 The Saltillo tract was bought with federal funds for a public purpose. Similar to the Robert Mueller Municipal Airport redevelopment, the CAG recommends the property be treated as surplus land. And. as with RMMA. a percentage of tax revenue should be dedicated as a means to fund public purposes such as infrastructure. affordable hoUSing, small business development and public spaces. Additionally. the net $ale proceeds of any tract of land should be dedicated to meeting the affordable housing unit mix and commercial space subsidies recommended by the CAG. It is worth noting that the EPS report states. ('...• the use of a Master Developer approach may limit the public sector's ability to maintain kmg-term control of the land. For assuming substantial risk, Master Developers typically will want to own the land rather than leasing it, as the land can serve as some security in the event of an underperforming project. In other disposition approaches, the public sector can maintain ownership of the land, and offer long-term (perhaps 99 year) ground leases to vertical developers." Considering the healthy real estate market and current growth in East Austin and Austin in general. the developers will have relatively low risk of producing an underperforming project. Land values are so high and this tract is so valuable, that local developers probably would jump at the chance to invest in the vertical development of the buildings with lease payments built into the financing plan.

City staff and Cap Metro Consultants have told the CAG that the only way to cover the costs of infrastructure on the tract may be the through sale of the land to a master developer. This explanation is not acceptable to the CAG. Historic neglect of this tract by Capital Metro and its failure to develop the property for almost 20 years leaving the neighborhood blighted is a major contributing factor behind why the costs of infrastructure are now close to $10 million dollars. Whereas Cap Metro directed ROMA to develop a Plan that could pay for itself. and the use of utility revenue bonds, certificates of obligation. and setting aside Capital Improvement general revenue bonds are reasonable ways to pay for infrastructure improvements. We believe that the taxpayers and ratepayers would support a creative combination of infrastructure financing to make the Saltillo Project a model for true public-private partnerships to develop the most interesting. affordable and diverse Transit Oriented Development Project in the nation. This project can serve as an international model for public redevelopment that alleviates gentrification and celebrates cultural diversity.

Finally. although the EPS report never discussed using a Community Land Trust to ensure long-term affordability for extremely low to moderate-income residents. it is recognized around the country and is currently being proposed here in AUstin as perhaps the best means to ensure long-term affordability. Since EPS released its report, the City Council has begun exploring the benefits of the Community Land Trust concept and has even used it to prOvide low-cost commercial space for the Austin Children'S Museum in the downtown Block 21 development. The City·s Neighborhood Housing and Community Development Office is considering using the ComlJlunity Land Trust In an 81-unit single family development in Montopolis. The CAG recommends that Cap Metro transfer some of the tracts to the City of Austin to be put into a Community Land Trust so that the CAG's desire for low-cost housing and commercial space is provided for generations to come.

V. Next Steps It is of the utmost importance that Cap Metro and the City commit funds to complete the planning process. The CAG was extremely'disappointed that funds for revising the Master Plan are not in place. Therefore. itis not known how "or if CAG recommendations and ideas that result from a Community input process in response to ROMA's draft Master Plan will be incorporated. To give justice to the importance of the redevelopment of Cap Metro's 11-acre site means a balanced and sincere effort must be made to modify and shape the Master Plan in ways that reflect the ideas, goals and sensibility of the impacted community. It is doubtful that one Community input meeting will be sufficient to gather a meaningful sense of what is important to the residents and business owners who have the greatest stake in the redevelop process. Funds must be allocated to enable consultants to execute a meaningful input process and then to be able to revise the Master Plan based on that input.

Secondly, the financial"feasibility of a Master Plan that. incorporates the CAG recommendations as relates to hOUSing, business and infrastructure needs to be explored. There is no question that

SaI~Jlo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 10 implementation of a Master Plan that includes the levels of housing affordability, small business development and infrastructure improvements cannot be financed through the redevelopment itself. The City of Austin's Neighborhood Housing and Community Development Office has engaged Diana Mciver and Associates (DMA) to perform a feasibility study for the affordable housing component proposed in the. Transit Oriented Development zones. This contract should be expanded to include a response to the CAG recommendation for the Saltillo T.O.D. Specifically, it would be beneficial to have DMA report not only oh feasibility, but on what tools are available that could achieve or move towards achieving the goals recommended by the CAG.

Finally, the City and Cap Metro should commit to continuing some formal community advisory or oversight group as'the planning moves forward into implementation. The Austin Revitalization Authority was established not simply as an advisory ~roup, but as a non-profit co-developer for the planning and implementation of the East 11th and 12 Street corridors. Something similar should be considered for the Saltillo District.

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 11 Community Advisory Group Members:

Mr. John Limon - Chair E-mail Address:

Ms. Susana Almanza - Co-Chair E-mail Address:

Mr. Eric Anderson - E-mail Address:

Ms. Rachel Mary Davila - E-mail

Mr. Ray Ramirez - E-mail l1ri,iroc• ."

Lori Cervenak-Renteria - E-mail Address:

Mr. Eddie Rodriguez - E-mail Add

Mr. Mark Christopher Rogers - E-mail Address:

Ms. Catherine Vasquez Revilla - E-mail Address:

Capital Metro Project Manager: Dr. Dianne Mendoza Phone: (512) 369-6239 Email: [email protected]

City of Austin Project Manager: George Adams Phone: (512) 974-2146 Email: [email protected]

Saltillo District Redevelopment Community Advisory Group Report 12 ) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PLAZA SALTILLO TOO STATION AREA PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PLAZA SALTILLO TOO STATION AREA PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The first Capital MetroRailline is under construction with passenger service to begin at the end of 2008. The 32- mile Red Line will connect downtown Austin to Leander on existing rail tracks with nine initial stations planned. The City, in support of the Capital Metro '1\11 Systems Gol" Long Range Transit Plan, initiated a broad public engagement effort to develop station area plans around several of these future MetroRaii stops. The first station areas to undergo the station area planning process were Plaza Saltillo, Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (MLKL and N. Lamar Boulevard/Justin Lane (a.k.a. Crestview Station).

New development that takes advantage of its location near transit is often referred to as "Transit-Oriented Development" (or TODL and it is an important part of the City's goal to manage growth in ways that reduce reliance on automobile use, promote transit use, walking and biking, and create lively and safe areas around transit stations. The City of Austin developed the TOD station area plans to leverage this significant public transit investment to achieve these broad community goals.

To rea Iize these benefits, the City fi rst adopted a TO D Ordi na nce, wh ich identified specific station a rea bou nda ries, interim land use and design requirements, and a commitment to develop station area plans. Planning for the Plaza Saltillo TOD was begun in February 2007 by a team of consultants led by PB Americas. Public education and involvement meetings were held over the course of the next ten months to draft a plan that incorporated TOD principles and best practices and was shaped by the community input gathered throughout the planning process. The planning work was integrated with a professional assessment of market conditions and finance, affordable housing, and basic public infrastructure facility needs. The plan includes recommendations for open space, street and other infrastructure improvements, and affordable housing and is intended to guide future development and the provision of public improvements.

The implementation strategy describes a variety of key actions that will contribute to the successful redevelopment of the station area. The responsibilities for implementation not only rest with the City, but its agency partners, development community, and citizens. A primary element of the implementation program is the Plaza Saltillo TOD Station Area Regulating Plan. It is based on Subchapter E: Design Standards and Mixed Use of the Austin Code, which applies citywide. The Regulating Plan provides development standards with a specific focus on the context of the Plaza Saltillo Station Area and the vision articulated in this plan.

2 PB PLACEMAKING TOD DISTRICTS e Northwest Park & Ride 8 North IH-35 Park & Ride 8 Lamar 9htdJJus1in Lane o MtKJt 81'1C1 " Pial.!! SaltHIo o Convenllon Center • DistrIct BoundarI FUTURE TRANSrr /'V Urban Commuler Rail /\./' Rapid Bilo Slatter lme

~., ,...... ,..--~---, <:.r't 1>.>

Cily olAuslin FIGURE ES.l: TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD) DISTRICTS TRAlsn IIIERTEIIIEVEUIPMINT Sf ATlON AREA PLANNING 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Plaza Saltillo station planning area was identified in the TOO Ordinance to include the orea generally bounded by E. 3rd Street to E. 7th Street and between 1-35 and Chicon Street. It includes portions of three Neighborhood Planning Areas .. Central East Austin, East Cesar Chavez, and Holly.

PLAN ORGANIZATION The consultant team, informed by community input throughout the planning process, developed the Plaza Saltillo TOO Station Area Plan, which: .. Is summarized below and described in more detail in Chapter 1 i .. Includes an implementation strategy described in Chapter 2; .. Followed transit-oriented design principles and Austin planning policy as described in Chapter 3; " Featured an inclusive public involvement process as described in Appendix Ai and • Utilized background information and studies presented in the Appendices.

PLAN SUMMARY

The Plaza Saltillo TOO Station Area Plan includes three primary elements: • Land Use and Design Concept Plan, which describes the desired land uses and development characteristics in the TOO. e Circulation Concept Plan, which identifies the functional and design elements for streets and walkways. e Open Space and Trails Concept Plan, which describes the important open space components of the TOO.

The concept plan maps and summary of the key elements are presented on the following pages.

4 PO PLACEMAKING FIGURE ES.2: lOCATION MAP OF PLAZA SALTILLO WITH NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNNING AREAS

IIIANSn 81IEIlUIIIEvnO'MENI SHHION AREA PLANNING 5 LAND USE AND DESIGN CONCEPT PLAN

The Land Use and Design Concept for the Plaza Saltillo TOO Station Area Plan includes four land use designations:

• TOO Mixed-Use. This is the highest density designation, which encourages urban-style development including active ground floor uses with commercial, office, or residential uses on the upper floors. Residential densities may exceed 45 units per acre if a specific level of affordable housing is provided. Moderate height bonuses allowing a total building height of 60 feet may also be granted with additional affordable housing. These areas are located in the closest proximity to transit and are intended to become neighborhood centers.

• Corridor Mixed-Use. This allows a slightly more liberal mix of uses compared to TOO Mixed-Use. These properties are farther from the transit station and have less of an urban character compared to TOD Mixed Use. Normal residential densities may reach 45 units per acre, and additional density may be permitted when affordable housing is provided.

6 PI PLACEMAKINS • Live/Work Flex. This encourages ground floor business activity with residential units on the upper floors. Residential uses are required and a ground floor business is optional. Residential densities range from 17 to 45 units per acre, and additional density may be permitted when affordable housing is provided.

• Low Density Residential. This designation also provides a transition between the higher density center of the station area and surrounding neighborhoods. Residential densities range from 9 to 16 units per acre.

TRANSIT BRIEITEI IEVEUPMENT Sf AliON AREA PLANNING 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

LAND USE AND DESIGN CONCEPT PLAN

The Land Use and Design Concept Plan includes the following primary elements:

1. High density mixed~use development cOr.lcentrated near the Capitol Metro station along E. 5th and 6th Streets. This would be the center and primary pedestrian activity area in the station area. 2. Active edges, which create a more lively and pleasant pedestrian environment by requiring that buildings along specific street frontages be built up to the sidewalk with the ground floor designed to accommodate active business uses. The active edge designation is only used with the TOO Mixed-Use designation. 3. Corridor mixed-use development that allows an urban form. This is slightly more auto-oriented than the mixed-use areas along E. 5th and 6th Streets. 4. Live/work uses where small businesses would be allowed with residential units above. This is in response to neighborhood support for this type of use and for creating a transition between the higher density core and the lower density neighborhoods surrounding it. 5. Low Density Residential uses in the southwest portion of the TOO to provide a transition to existing single family homes that face the TOO district.

8 PI PlACEMAKINI LAND USE AI\ID DESIGN CONCEPT PLAN - .".~",."" -...... ,. ' ...... ? I .". " ... .- ,- " , ;' " "- .- ;' .- " ...... , .- ... .- ,;-" I "'~ '\ ~ liar. " I \ I \ I \ I \ I \ I \ r \ I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

N . ~(;)WQENSrrv MStb.¢NM~ . .~-.,....=-+ ~.... 200· -:~~:------!fur ~. :: ". " EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CIRCULATION CONCEPT PLAN

The Circulation Concept Plan for the Plaza Saltillo TOO Station Area Plan includes the following primary elements:

1. An integrated street and pathway network to provide safe and convenient travel for all modes. 2. TOO Core Transit Corridor design standards for E. 7th Street which require wider sidewalks and enhanced pedestrian facilities to support existing and planned transit service and redevelopment activity. 3. TOO Pedestrian Priority Streets, which are also required to have enhanced pedestrian facilities because they will serve as the primary pedestrian routes in the station area. E. 5th, E. 6th, Waller, Comal and Chicon Streets and Chalmers Avenue are so designated. 4. New pedestrian connections on Medina, Attayac, and Onion Streets to provide easier access befween the E. 7th Street corridor, the station, and the neighborhoods to the south. For larger blocks on the east side of the TOO, these types of connections are also highly encouraged to break-up the large block structure and improve connectivity and efficiency for all modes of transportation. 5. A new TOO Pedestrian Priority Street to connect the northern and southern segments of Chalmers Avenue to enhance circulation and convenience for all modes. 6. Lance Armstrong Bikeway as a key east-west bicycle connection through the station area. 7. On-street bicycle facilities to encourage bike riding and make it safe and efficient to ride around and through the TOO. A direct route from the ·Station Area to Town Lake and the trail system is recommended along Comal Street with signage indicating the pathway.

10 PO PLACEMAIINII

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

OPEN SPACE AND TRAilS CONCEPT PLAN

The Open Space and Trails Concept Plan for the Plaza Saltillo TOD Station Area Plan includes the following primary elements: 1. Paseo Parks to provide linear open spaces to complement the pedestrian connections on Medina, Attayac, and Onion Streets and to link-up with existing pork space in and around the TOD. Paseo parks could provide a number of open space functions and meet various needs, from a passive sitting/gathering space with benches, fountain, and public art, to a grassy area for active play, to a playscape for young children. Paseos are also strongly encouraged on larger blocks on the east side of the TOD between Comal and Chicon Streets. 2. Pocket park to the west of the station to pravide convenient active recreation opportunities for local residents. The park is recommended to be a minimum of one-half acre. 3. Lance Armstrong Bikeway as on integrating element to help tie the paseos, pocket park, and other local open spaces together with this pathway connection and to link the TOD via bicycle to Downtown and deeper East Austin. 4. Comal Street*Lady Bird Lake Pathway to provide a direct connection via Comal from the Station Area to Lady Bird Lake and the Town Lake trail network. Signage along the route is recommended as a wayfinding device and to publicize the presence of the on-street path and connection.

IMPLEMENTATION

Chapter 2 Implementation describes a variety of important steps the City, its agency partners, and development community should take to realize the full potential of the station area: • Planning and Administration. The critical element is the formation af an inter-agency working group ond designated staff to oversee all implementation activities. • Transit-Oriented Development Catalyst Projects. Catalyst projects, both public infrastructure and private development, will be necessary to stimulate market and development interest in the station area. • Circulation and Streets. Streetimprovements, including pedestrian facilities and amenities, can have a dramatic positive impact upon a place's identity and can create the framework for creating a truly transit oriented development that is less auto-dependent. • Open Space and Trails. Building upon the n.otural resources in the area, integration of the Parks and Recreation Department in planning and development review decisions, and creatian of usable open spaces are essential. • Supporting Infrastructure. Key public-private investments will need to be mode to support the development proposed.

12 PB PlACEMAIING

·~--.~-

! 1 *' izdf IJuab /Wt~ /...j-- ..o;i'z: ~ 6m -r7:J {P£i~~

(VII/W:z L6-:JU = t3-04 f ti d LZb:; a/~)ry 1£1

IIL.mk127ct.l.oO, ! ~ L-4z ~- If

I! ..? . 7 II 15V7F~ #'/AL4 ~aD..... ______II . I - jI II. ! II

II 11 !J

------

11 , I MEMORANDUM

TO: Marc A. Ott, City Manager

FROM: Ray Baray, Assistant to the City Manager

DATE: October 26, 2010

SUBJECT: Council Member Riley 1:1 Follow-Up Items

(1) Shoal Creek Trail Project (Gap) - CM Riley inquired about a gap in the Trail, approximately 1/2 block long, that cuts into the North/South bike route. He said it's been a problem for the last 30 years. Riley asked for a status report on this project.

Staff Follow-Up: As a way of background, the completion of the Shoal Creek Trail south of 5th Street would be a major addition to the City's trail system. Closing the gap would allow a continuous trail for bicyclists/pedestrians from central Austin neighborhoods to Lady Bird Lake.

According to ACM Bert Lumbreras, CM Riley is concerned about the delay in getting this project underway. The original completion date of Spring 2012 was pushed back to September 2012 for two reasons: (1) the field work for the feasibility engineering report fell behind by one month due to wet weather in February 2010; and (2) additional work for a third alternative option (different from the two original options) to bring the Trail out of the two-year floodplain as much as possible.

To reconcile for these delays, the consultant (HNTB) has developed an aggressive and revised design schedule. Staff is considering the offer of a bonus incentive to the contractor to accelerate construction. However, given the location of some of the work in the creek channel, that portion will be highly susceptible to weather impacts, adding uncertainty to the overall time schedule. In any event, staff feels confident of meeting the September 2012 completion date.

ACM Lumbreras and PARD staff met with CM Riley last week to review the project schedule, and Riley was pleased with the selected alternative and timeline. A more detailed summary ofthe project is attached for your review.

Let me know if I can provide you with any additional information. Thanks! Memorandum

To: Bert Lumbreras, Assistant City Manager

From: Ricardo Soliz, Division Manager Parks and Recreation Department

Subject: Status Report on the Design of Shoal Creek Trail south of 5th Street

Date: October 27, 2010

The following is a summary of the status of the engineering design for closing the gap along Shoal Creek Trail south of 5th Street. As we covered at the meeting today, the project is behind its original schedule due to two factors:

• The field work tied to completing the feasibility engineering report fell behind a month due to the wet weather during the month of February 2010. Instead of meeting a March 2010 date, the report was submitted to PARD in April 2010.

• A second factor was additional work requested by Staff for a hybrid option different from the original two options to bring the trail out of the 2 year floodplain as much as possible. The Staff from Watershed Protection Department (Drainage Engineers) were very concerned that the preferred option (which was Option 2) left so much of the trail within the 2 year floodplain.

Just to remind you of the cost estimates submitted by the consultants, the cost for Option 1 is at $800,000. This option is not ADA compliant due to the steps included in the design. The cost estimate for Option 2 is at $1,800,000. Even though Option 2 is almost twice the cost, (but still within the budget) it is ADA compliant and leaves a good portion of the trail within the 2 year floodplain. What this means is that the trail will be extremely susceptible to flooding. Below is a more detailed chronology of the project to date as well as an estimated completion date.

• December, 2009 - A consultant (HNTB) was hired and was issued a Notice To Proceed.

• January, 2010 - Surveying was completed as part of Preliminary Design Phase.

• February, 2010 - Geotechnical work was performed in Shoal Creek (Preliminary Design Phase). Originally scheduled for January, 2010.

• April, 2010 - An on-site walk-through was conducted by the consultant, Watershed Protection (WPD) and PARD staff. Watershed Protection provided flood-study and environmental data to consultant for review and incorporation into study and Preliminary Design. Originally scheduled for March, 2010.

• April, 2010 - The consultant submitted a draft Preliminary Engineering Report to PARD and WPD for review. The report identified two possible routes: Option 1, which took the trail out of the flood zone and tied it in to the existing sidewalk at street (Bowie, West Ave.) level. This sidewalk ended at West Avenue near a bridge with no marked or safe crossing available across West Avenue. Option 1 was estimated to be cheaper and faster to build, but was not ADA compliant due to stairs that had to be added at the south end of the trail section.

Option 2, which followed the creek along the west/south side and tied in to the existing trail approximately 50' west of West Avenue. Option 2 was estimated to be more than twice as costly as Option 1, due to longer distance, demolition and restoration of a stabilized embankment system and retaining walls. Option 2 was also susceptible to flooding after rain events. Option 2 was designed to be ADA-compliant and allowed trail users to continue under West A venue unhindered.

• May, 2010 - WPD provided additional profile samples of Shoal Creek to the consultant to study, in an attempt to identify another route that would bring the trail out of the flood zone as much as possible and be ADA-compliant.

• July, 2010 - Consultant submitted a third route option, a variation of Option 1 (hybrid). This route was identical in orientation; the stairs had been eliminated and replaced with a continuous ramp for the entire length of the trail section. This Hybrid Option provided easier access to bicyclists, but was still not ADA compliant, due to a slope that exceeded ADA standards. No other routing option was identified as feasible. • August, 2010 - PARD completed its review of the possible routes with extensive field visits from the drainage engineers from WPD. Staff directed the consultant to design for Option 2.

September,2010 The consultant submitted the fmal Preliminary Engineering Report to PARD for review. The consultant had already begun work on the 30% (schematic) drawings. Originally scheduled for May, 2010. The delay was due to the attempt to identify a hybrid option. • NEXT STEPS (REVISED SCHEDULE):

In an attempt to reconcile for delays, the consultant has submitted an aggressive revised Design Schedule:

• October 22,2010 30% drawings to be submitted to PARD for review

• December 24,2010 60% drawings to be submitted to PARD and PMO for review

• February 11, 2011 90% drawings to be submitted to PARD, Permitting and PMO for review

March 25,2011 100% drawings to be submitted to PARD and Permitting Originally scheduled for October, 2010.

• April, 2011 Project expected to be advertised for Bidding

• June,2011 Estimated Bid Opening

• July,2011 RCA

• August,2011 Council approval

• September, 2011- Work begins.

• September, 2012- Trail Completed

The completion of the Shoal Creek Trail south of 5th Street will be a major addition to the trail system. This gap will allow a continuous trail system for pedestrians and cyclists from Central Austin neighborhoods to Lady Bird Lake. If you have any question, please let me know at 974-9452. MEMORANDUM

TO: Marc A. Ott, City Manager

FROM: Ray Baray, Assistant to the City Manager

DATE: October 26, 2010

SUBJECT: Council Member Riley 1:1 Follow-Up Items

ACM Lumbreras. and PARD staff met with CM Riley last week to review the project schedule, and Riley was pleased with the selected alternative and timeline. A more detailed summary of the project is attached for your review.

Let me know if I can provide you with any additional information. Thanks! Memorandum

To: Bert Lumbreras, Assistant City Manager

From: Ricardo Soliz, Division Manager Parks and Recreation Department

SUbject: Status Report on the Design of Shoal Creek Trail south of 5th Street

Date: October 27,2010

Just to remind you of the cost estimates submitted by the consultants, the cost for Option 1 is at $800,000. This option is not ADA compliant due to the steps included in the design. The cost estimate for Option 2 is at $1,800,000. Even though Option 2 is almost twice the cost, (but still within the budget) it is ADA compliant and leaves a good portion of the trail within the 2 year floodplain. What this means is that the trail will be extrem\?ly susceptible to flooding. Below is a more detailed chronology of the project to date as well as an estimated completion date.

• December, 2009 - A consultant (HNTB) was hired and was issued a Notice To Proceed.

• January, 2010 - Surveying was completed as part of Preliminary Design Phase.

• February, 2010 - Geotechnical work was performed in Shoal Creek (Preliminary Design Phase). Originally scheduled for January, 2010.

• May, 2010 WPD provided additional profile samples of Shoal Creek to the consultant to study, in an attempt to identify another route that would bring the trail out of the flood zone as much as possible and be ADA-compliant.

September, 2010 - The consultant submitted the final Preliminary Engineering Report to PARD for review. The consultant had already begun work on the 30% (schematic) drawings. Originally scheduled for May, 2010. The delay was due to the attempt to identify a hybrid option. •

NEXT STEPS (REVISED SCHEDULE):

In an attempt to reconcile for delays, the consultant has submitted an aggressive revised Design Schedule:

• October 22,2010 - 30% drawings to be submitted to PARD for review

• December 24, 2010 - 60% drawings to be submitted to PARD and PMO for reVIew

• February 11,2011 - 90% drawings to be submitted to PARD, Permitting and PMO for review

March 25, 2011 - 100% drawings to be submitted to PARD and Permitting Originally scheduled for October, 2010.

• April, 2011 - Project expected to be advertised for Bidding

• June, 2011- Estimated Bid Opening

• July, 2011 - RCA

• August, 2011 - Council approval

• September, 2011 - Work begins.

• September, 2012- Trail Completed

I II, RESOLUTION NO.

WHEREAS, on August 31, 2006, the Austin City Council approved the Design Standards and Mixed Use Subchapter, or "Commercial Design Standards," which became effective on January 13,2007; and

WHEREAS, Commercial Design Standards include an Alternative Equivalent Compliance section to accommodate certain projects where the particular site conditions or the proposed use prevent strict compliance but still meet the intent of the Subchapter; and

WHEREAS, in November of 2007, the City Council passed Resolution No. 20071129-046 mandating that plans for all municipal buildings and associated site development be reviewed by the Design Commission "to ensure they demonstrate compliance with city design and sustainability standards, and that this presentation take place early enough in the development process to enable incorporation of improvements that result from this consultation;" and

WHEREAS, Design Commission reVIew of plans for municipal buildings and associated site development prior to issuance of Alternative Equivalent Compliance ensures the proposed project meets the City design standards, while allowing the Commission the opportunity to propose potential changes that could alleviate the need for Alternative Compliance or influence how Alternative Compliance IS accomplished; NOW THEREFORE,

1 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN:

For municipal buildings and associated site development, the City Manager is directed to defer approval of any site plan or building permit that includes elements approved via Alternative Equivalent Compliance under Section 1.5 of City Code Chapter 25-2, Subchapter E (Design Standards and Mixed Use) until after the Design Commission reviews the proposed project in accordance with Resolution No. 20071129-046. Input provided through the Design Commission process should be considered in all phases of project review, including decisions on proposed Alternative Equivalent Compliance.

ADOPTED: _____, 2010 ATTEST: ______Shirley A. Gentry City Clerk

2 RESOLUTION NO. 20071129-046

WHEREAS, Envision Central Texas outlined the community's vision of sustainable land use through weB-planned, compact development; and

WHEREAS, the Design Standards and Mixed Use ordinance requires new commercial development to support this vision through high-quality development with an emphasis on connectivity, green building, to a mix of uses and best practices in urban design including wide sidewalks and street trees; and

WHEREAS, this compact development can be further supported and enhanced by green infrastructure, the use of native landscapes for carbon sequestration and stormwater management, and other innovative stormwater facilities that simultaneously protect water quality and the quality of the urban experience; and

WHEREAS, the City of Austin already puts its sustainable building values into practice through a commitment to achieve a Silver Level or higher rating on the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) green building rating system on all city buildings; and

WHEREAS, the Design Commission's ongoing analysis of major private developments in Austin have resulted in a higher-quality urban realm; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN:

The City Manager is directed to take the steps necessary to ensure that all future city buildings and site developments meet all provisions of Subchapter E of Chapter 25-2 of the Land Development Code, with the enhancement that all City building projects within the urban roadway boundaries be built to Core Transit Corridor streets cape standards; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:

The City shal J demonstrate its ongoing commitment to sustainabi lity by developing City buildings and sites to meet or exceed the standards of all other city sustainability initiatives, including water conservation, energy efficiency, and watershed protection; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:

The development process for any City buildings and associated site development shall include consultation with Watershed Protection and Development Review to look for opportunities to include green infrastructure and innovative stormwater facilities such as biofiltration ponds, rainwater harvesting, porous pavement, vegetative filter strips for disconnected impervious cover, non-required vegetation, native landscapes to achieve carbon sequestration, and others as developed by the department, and that these facilities be designed and implemented in such a way that enables ongoing monitoring; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:

City statf shall present plans for all municipal buildings and associated site development to the Design Commission to ensure they demonstrate compliance with city design and sustainability standards, and that this presentation take place early enough in the development process to enable incorporation of improvements that result from this consultation.

ADOPTED: November 29 ,2007 ATTEST: _.L-..:.-="~~~~~.:!.4 Shirley . Gentry City Clerk :;;;;'" Fall Fitness _ •..!-_ On Safe Starts Seplemher 15 SsveManey Win Pri.«!s G&tFI[

BOULDER'S FIRST CICLOVIA! Turning Streets into Public Parks

Over 50 FREE public classes, demonstrations and workshops!

5 Activity Zones featuring cycling, dancing, yoga, music, food and more!

8-9AM FREE Healthy Breakfast station & Kids Bike Decorating, Parade & Rodeo

Plus Big Prizes and Giveaways!

~~NE the'·iii

1:.~ .- Camera oxo IIIlEEHut!llU V1lU8PAPSt.Y'OIJAflEWS.

:"~ RclJirect yoga~d Lillab~,~ ,~ ~Guide .' ...... ,..... • c 15 TH ST 16 TH ST 17TH ST 18 TH ST

DO Restrooms Experience the route in new ways! Demos, bike share 8:00AM Morning Yoga with YOGA POD station, tandum trials, bike repair, DIY workshops, obstacle course, safety clinics & more. 9:00AM Gymnastics with Boulder Parks & Rec I) ~ Zero Waste ~StaUon 10:00AM Rollersoccer (I 8:00AM Run the Route with One World Running! 11 :OOAM Kickball, Yoga, Nia, Pilates, Fitness, Clay & Mo G Kid Friendly 9:00AM Kids Bike Rodeo & Bike Parade - YMCA (I Activities 12:00PM Hoop Dance In the Park (3 10:00AM Outdoor Divas Sanitas Hike for women 1:OOPM Eastons Brazilian Jiu Jitsu & Women Self 10:00AM Rollersoccer Demo & Pick up (I Defense Clinic 11 :OOAM Kids Run the Route (I ALONG THE ROUTE! 3:00PM Pick Up Ultimate Frisbee -GRU 12:00PM Skate Park Demos with the 'Y'. (I 3:30PM Activity Awards Announced Main Stage! BAM-gAM Kids Bike Decorating & Bike Parade & Bike Rodeo 12:00PM Ciclovia- VAMOS EN ESPANOL - Intercambio Gymnasflcs, Nia, Pilates, and Skillasflcs - Boulder Parks & Rae 2:00PM Bike Obstacle Course Climbing, Mountaineeling, Hoop Dance, Flisbee & Winter Sports 3:00PM Pick up Street Hockey DANCE & MOVE! Kayak Tank & Climbing Wall Station with Avid 4 Adventure Skate Park Station & Roller Soccer Demonstration And Games Get your groove on all day with LIVE MUSIC & Boulders Streetside Gym, Cardio Sculpt & Group Pwr - One Boulder FItness Best Dance Studios - Alcherny of Movernen~ street Side SUSTAINABILITY & WELLNESS A Place to Be, ODance studio, Salsa Co &Yoga Pod

Nia, Zumba, Salsa, Belly Dancing, Hip Hop, Jazz, Hoop SI Sweat, Sarnba, Capoiera, African, Bali-wood, Yoga & mOl i I i i i!

II £J.k~ / d."n.,.. I' il r/dj,'&7 v -'-1 ~

I. ~, ~G

!1 I 1 I j , 1

I i! ! I

--~---++--~------~------II ! I ! I j i f! I i )i eM Riley One on One Wed, September 8, 2010

1. What is the PARD plan for the Trail of Lights this year? Will we host the same

condensed version like last year or will we go back to the previous version?

What is the cost for each event version? Has there been any consideration for

charging fees to generate revenue? See attachment. The Parks and Recreation department plans to hold a scaled-down holiday festival, similar to the one developed last year. We will not be charging admission for this year's event because the scaled-down version lacks many of the amenities and attractions that the full scale version has.

Attached is the 2010 calendar, which shows the comparison of last year features and this year's features. Also attached is the cost comparison provided to the City Manager on the different scenarios last year related to the options and general fund impact. The document has been edited to show the 2008 (FY2009) event actuals, the proposed returned to full trail requirements column (Column A) and the 2009 event actuals (Column B). 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Tree Li ghting Run Ceremony 630p 6:00 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Holiday Festival Holiday Festival Holiday Festival Holiday Festival Holiday Festival Holiday Festival Holiday Festival 6p - lOp 6p - lOp 6p - lOp 6p - lOp 6p - lOp 6p - lOp 6p - lOp Note ~AISD Last 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Holiday Festival Holiday Festival Tree Lit Tree Lit Tree Lit Tree Lit i Tree Lit - 1 6p - lOp . City Holiday City Holiday 26 27 28 29 30 31 Tree Lit Tree Lit Tree Lit Tree Lit Tree Lit

C OMPARISON CDA RT - 2010 P ropose d versus 2009 D 0 liday F estiva . I E vent Items 2010 proposed 2009 Events • Tree Lighting Ceremony • Tree Lighting Ceremony • 5KRun • Fun Run • 9 festival event nights • 9 festival event nights • Zilker Tree lit nightly thru Dec 31 • Zilker Tree lit nightly thru Dec 31 • Festival Entertainment - 2 stages • Festival Entertainment - 2 stages • Festival Vendors and 23 rd Street Market presence • Festival Vendors and 23rd Street Market presence • Santa's House, post office, and letter writing station • Santa's House, post office, and letter writing station • depends up strong Departmental commitments for staffing and permitting • involves community sponsorships and in-kind donation component I • depends upon strong volunteer component TRAIL OF LIGHTS 2009 (TOL)

$293,000 $813,000 ($520,000) ($300,033) In-Klnd Dono/Ion. $209,000 $209,000 $62,000 :';;t1i~P.lff!ili'ij!fi,[ij~):ql!!!_mi1~~llg.,,~~~\1~.\fi:&If!1I~rf,;'{~J~~~~~~~jj)\~i~i.g;rjIi11m;f~~\\im;,,\}\1]>~JW,'@%&.:\t~~~1~ilit{%!~i~ft![il!1Q:.:i3l:1;Jl1laBl~lfjj la/best) II ~ ~ /,. ~ Cdr ,,-;Z- 5£l~~~ kke. ... ~ ! ;c;- ~

I ;? =:=::=:::-·Ie:~~ ~~~~}! :;~~ _II &-4.~A'~ ~ ?h .fl:t:{J6::zrr~,u~ .- . . --fI ~~ i I r I =.. ~ . '" 2010-2011 PROPOSED BUDGET RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

DEPARTMENT: Parks and Recreation

REQUEST NO.: 27

REQUESTED BY: Riley

DATE REQUESTED: 8/11/10

REQUEST: The Parks and Recreation Department (PARD) states an expected revenue reduction of $814,693 based on a projected decline in revenue from entry fees, parking fees, concessions sales and facilities rentals. Can you explain why there is an expected decline in revenue? Can you break down more specifically the declines for each of the areas mentioned above?

RESPONSE:

The Parks and Recreation Department (PARD) projects some decline in revenue in FY 2011 primarily due to a decrease in entry fees, parking fees, food and concessions, and contributions associated with the Trail of Lights. In FY 2010, revenue for the full Trail of Lights Festival was budgeted in the amount of $596,000, mostly derived from a $5 entry fee. However, in a decision to keep the entry cost free to the public, the scaled down Zilker Holiday Festival was implemented and the $5 entry fee was not charged. Revenue from the event was about $90,000, significantly less than budgeted. Preliminary plans for 2011 include continued implementation of the scaled-down Zilker Holiday Festival and the FY 2011 budget includes a $500,000 decrease in revenue, more closely reflecting estimated revenue for the event.

Another significant decline in projected revenue for FY 2011 includes the temporary cloSing of Bartholomew Pool for renovations. The Department projects about $31,000 less revenue from pool entry fees.

Further, due to the continued economic downturn, revenue derived from indoor and outdoor facility rentals are expected to decline in 2011 by approximately $85,000. Other miscellaneous recreation entry, parking, concessions and program fees are also expected to decline by a total of approximately $12,700 until the economy shows signs of improvement.

The total revenue decline of $814,693 reported on the significant changes page includes the revenue declines described above totaling approximately $628,693. However, the page also includes $186,000 of negative revenue change that should not have been included. In f(i\ merging Softball Enterprise Fund Revenue with the General Fund, $186,000 of transfer was . included on this page by mistake. The PARD significant changes pages will be corrected as part of the FY 2010-11 Errata Document.

eM Riley One on One Tuesday, August 17, 2010

1) Community Court - would like to add 2 Additional Case Managers: He stated that he is meeting with ACM McDonald on Monday to share statistics on the court and demonstrate that it has not been as effective as it could be. Presented information to show that over the past 10 years 76 individuals have been regulars at the court, and that 250 specific individuals have over 25 citations each. Based on information provided to him, he believes that two additional case managers will help with processing cases and providing support assistance (housing, social security/unemployment benefits, etc).

ACM McDonald met with CM Riley on Monday to discuss the above. ACM McDonald responded that CMO had thoroughly reviewed all budget enhancement requests and only selected the ones with the greatest impact due to budget constrains. ACM McDonald further stated that we would discuss with the City Manager.

2) Parks - Stated that he had previously received a response from Sara Hensley regarding Community Gardens where she stated that it would be helpful to have a single point of contact staff position to assist with Community Gardens. He would like to review this further for possible inclusion in the budget.

See attached memo (backside).

3) EMS - Would like to add a Demand Unit which would come on board mid-year.

4) Health/Housing - The Oaks: wants to make sure that if we proceed with this, that the announcement be packaged with how this will help address issues related to getting tough on panhandling, and other downtown issues, including community court.

5) Chief Sustainability Officer - Stated that Paul Robbins is suggesting that AWU Conservation and AE Climate ControljSustainability Offices be reorganized and report directly to C50. He wasn't sure if this needed to be done in the budget. I informed him that the plan always called for the C50 to coordinate all sustainability efforts but that at this time there was not a plan in place to change reporting structures. I also informed him that there was no need to rush to make this happen in the budget; he seemed to agree that there was no need to rush. MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor and Council

FROM: Sara L. Hensley, CPRP Director, Austin Parks and Recreation

DATE: June 17.2010

SUBJECT: Community Gardens and Urban Farms in the City of Austin

On November 19, 2009, Council approved a resolurian supporting sustainable urban agriculture and community gardening and directed the City Manager to cake certain actions in support of urban farms and qualified community gardens. A cross-departmental team was organized to determine the proposed program scope and identify procedural and budgetary requirements for implementation. Over twelve departments in collaboration with representatives of the Susminable Food Policy Board participated in framing the scope and preliminary recommendations for these programs. This memorandum highlights the staff proposal for FY 2010-2011 implementation. Staff Recommendations:

I. Include "community gardells" as an appropriate land use for all loning. The current "Qualil1ed Community Garden" ordinance 8-4 is unnecessarily restrictive on locations for community gardens and is no longer relevant for accessing potential funding. A proposed code amendment is currently in draft. II will include requiremems for license agreements for community gru'dens on public property, and a mechanism for site plan waivers, parking and water tap fees.

Currently. a license agreemenl for citizens to use public land is required for all properties othel' than Austin Energy and Parks & Recreation departments, As part of the streamlining process. all department lands will require license agreements to become community gardens. Current agreements for community gardens require 16 reviewers, costs $425, and can take several mOl1lhs to complete. Such requirements include a blueline construction drawing, sealed engineer plans, a survey, and documentation showing Resolution of Corporate Allthority. which add to overall cost

Staff recognizes the prohibitive nature of the ClIli'ent license requirements in both time and money for gardening on city pl'Operly and are in disclIssion regarding reducing the fee, reducing the number of required reviewers. and replacing the surveys with GIS coordinates obtained by department slaff after staking is done by the community group. Reasonahle design requirements might require a simple concept sketch for a basic garden plan, rather than blLleline consrrLlclion drawings. Additional development requiremems should continue to be triggered for Slructures larger than 10' x. 8', or those that include fences that exceed 6' in height, impervious cover. and for installation of in·jgation and water taps. 2. Tnclude "urbaJ/ Janns" ill the Sustainable Urban Agriculture ordinance, as "n beneficia/use of land suitable for all zoning to be implemenled thl'Ougb concession bids".

3. Create and maintain a database or city land parcels that meet the criteria for potential community gardens and urban farms, The database includes the identification and contact pel'son of the cOiTesponding managing departments. Community gardens and urban farms criteria which is used to screen city lands specify lilat the parcel have limited stope. limited tree canopy, road access, and is located more than 100' from waterways. An initial database seal'ch was conducted using the stated criteria, resulting in 46 land parcels that occupy 23 areas in the city. These lalld parcels have been flagged and mapped, and are now maintained Ell Real Estate Services. Staff recommends Ihat a database on these properties be maintained by GIS staff in each managing department, and that this data be merged onto an online citywide map, and updated pedodica/ly by the managing depaltmenls.

4. Review and update the Community G

5. Hire a Conservation Program Coordinator (CPC) position as the Sustainable Urban Agriculture Coordinator to serve as the Single Point of Contact (SPOC) I'or the city. The CPC will interface with Department Single Points of Comacts (DSPOC) to help interested public consumers. The CPC would periodically monitor community gardens on City propelty for adherence to all applicable code ordinances, tOl' staying within established Garden boundaries, for the incorpomtion of sllstainability values and best practices. and for reviewing the annual report updates to keep the license agreements renewed. There is cUl"I'ently no fuuding in place to have H CPC.

6. Approve dedicated funding to support the proposed Community Gardens and Urban Farms Initiative in an amount not to exceed $108.958 for year one of operation. This funding will support 1.5 FTE, along with additional staff time to process garden appHcations and agreements and for the signage to be installed at approximately 15 community gardens annually. No funding is available in the budget of Parks and Recreation or revenue producing departments to fund the FTE, commodities or contractuals required for the positions.

The Parks & Recreation and Watershed Protection departments are prepared to assist and support the Council's commitment to promoting sustainable urban agriculture. Please do not hesitate to contact me it' you have any questions.

CC: Marc A, Ou, City Manager Bert Lumbreras, Assistant City Manager Kelly Snook, Assistant Director, Parks and Recreation Department

2 ...... ~+~~

>~~~,.,'l;~..;;~;;;,.~-llIl!iM1 . ;. l' ",.

location CoA

R,JiN'J ~ r-J4 tJu's..s 2111 Travis Heights (N E corner of Travis Heights/Live Oak ______.______.. _... ______...... -- .. -.... C~~~.. Cte..r:..-.7.--.d.. ..':':::-±.-- ... -.. -Z':...-"!{~- if---.~~.-- .. --~-s:-~.Q-.-.-.-.. ~..:-.~-C'--.. -_.__ ._._. __._ ...... _... _. ___ .______.. _. __ ._. ______.______~___ ._~~_'~..£~.L _____ e.'!:.c.. _. __.__ ~~~_C~.z:::-.-.----r:~~-:-.-.-~.--::.t.-. __ .. _._. __ ._ .. _. __ .____ _

._._ .. _._. ___ ._... _. __ .. _. ____ .______..c.~_~~~..E~--.~_,_._. __ ._.LLc-... ~"!-e~-~d.. ___ ._.~~_~!:""._.~~~_~ ______._____ ._._. __ ._... . _. ______._._. ___ .... ______._ ... ___ .~e...?.b~L~'L.!~~~_·_ .... .__ b.__ .. ___ ~ct!..£.L ___ ._. ___z. _____ ~..!f..":::?._ ... _.. ~~_.~._._ ... __ ...... __ ._____ .___ .__ .. . ______.______.______.__ c.~ ~__ _t:_. ___ .__ E~£~.z_L_.S!..~_c. ___ .. ___ .£~.~_t;;.~ _____ .~c.~~LL~___ . _ ___ .______.__ ._ ... _.. _____ ._._ ... __Z---=._. __ r...~ ~_e__ .__ A_c___ ._. ___ .£§____ L~~_~_-:!.~_ ...... ~.!!_d. .. ______.. _. ___ .. __ ._____ . __ .. _. ___ ._. ______. __ .. _. ___ ...______... _ .. _.__ .... ~~.~-~s::'~-7- ... -.J"~.. ..r ~.c_ ... _.... L!"-~~~_ .... _. __ 2!::.6~tX. __ .? .. ~::2~---.--_ ... --. ... __ . ____ ._ ... _...... _...... ~4:I_~'L_ .._..!i..~-:!-~_ £.7 .-. --~~~~,-. __ ...... -... ---- .... -.--_. ___ .... _ ... _. ___ ... _.... _._ .. _... _. ______..

. ______. _____._._. ______.. _ .. _ ._._ .• ____ ':_. _._~:e?_~--... ~e' .. _._._c_~_(_::_:...5_. __ ~~~~~_=-_.~._ .. _~L.~_ .. _.. .__ .... _ ------.-.. -.. ------.... ----.--.--.-.------.L-:::.~~-~.-.~.~---.- .... ~----- .. -.~-~~.~--p.-~-- .... -..... -..... -...... -.. --.-.-----.- .. --.--- .. . ___. ___ ...... __ .____ . __ ... _____ .______LL~~z_. ___ .Lf::.~_=_ _~_~_ .. _ ... _.... ______.

/ tfi/V I aile 1

L!P.c!/J/el~~mdl~ afCael[ rfNft

.. . ~~/~ t!, Jtj(~1 ~ri£s/"'-,- 'Z lit.. . @:,,(0 Plt~A_3g;/X~~ $.:r7n~ .

~,.£rA4l~Qh (it/VI)

- (l)' 6"7 4~,,-%:r. Ckht2 ,*.~j;r?!ZJA4' {::Uz. .... Martinez, Rose Marie

From: Matthews, Douglas Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 1 :51 PM To: Nathan, Mark Cc: Snipes, Anthony Subject: RE: official distribution memo resolution draft for 6/10 - short and sweet. Your thoughts please?

We've been working with Law to determine the appropriate language that defines the policy purpose while leaving the implementation responsibility/specifics to the staff side of the house. We also need to discuss memos to Mayor and Council (those that may not be OD memos). I'm inclined to try and get this addressed operationally, rather than though Council resolution, if we can. Do you have some time this week to discuss?

Doug.

From: Nathan, Mark Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 11:47 AM To: Matthews, Douglas Subject: official distribution memo resolution draft for 6/10 - short and sweet. Your thoughts please?

WHEREAS:"Official Distribution" memoranda are regularly distributed to the Mayor and City Council by City staff via email;

WHEREAS: "Official Distribution" memoranda often contain information of immediate value to the public and the media;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The City Manger is directed to begin, as soon as practical, posting all "Official Distribution" memoranda on the City of Austin website no later than the next business day after distribution.

Please advise.

Thanks Doug.

Mark Nathan Office of Mayor Lee Leffingwell Phone: (512) 974-3368 Fax: (512) 974-2337 301 West 2nd Street Austin, Texas 78701 www.MayorLeffingwell.com

1 Kind

Jennifer Walker Director of Marketing Communications Austin Convention & Visitors Bureau V: (512) 583-7209 - F: (512) 583-7282

www.austintexas.org

DISCLAIMER; This message may contain confidential or proprietary information and is intended only for the use of the individual or group named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you should no! read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this e-mail or any part of it. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete it and any attachments from your mailbox, The Austin Convention and Visitors Bureau (ACVB) does not accept liability for any statements that are clearly the senders own opinion and not made on behalf of ACVB.

From: John Sent: Wednesday, To: Jennifer Walker Subject: Re: RE: Retirement

Would you mind sending me the mail address as email, if possible.

Thanks,

John Pierce

May 26, 2010 10:52:35

Certainly. >Contact information is as follows:

Mayo!' >Lee Leffingwell's Office:

512-974-2250

Mayor >Pro Tem Mike Martinez:

512-974-2264

Council >Member Bill Spelman:

512-974-2256

Kind >regards,

Jennifer >Walker > Director >of Marketing Communications > Austin >Convention & Visitors Bureau 2 > > www.austintex3S.0rg > > DISCLAIMER: >This message may contain confidential or proprietary information and is intended >only for the use of the individual or group named above. If you are not the intended >recipient. you should not read. print. retain. copy or disseminate this e-mail >or any part of it. If you received this e-mail in error. please notifY the sender >immediately by reply e-mail and delete it and any attachments from your mailbox. >The Austin Convention and Visitors Bureau (ACVB) does not accept liability for >eny statements that are clearly the sender's own opinion and not made on behalf >ofACVB. > > >

From: John > > Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 5:22 PM > To: Jennifer Walker > Subject: Re: Retirement

Thanks for your >reply.

I should like to >communicate to the City Public Information office as well. I would like to >understand why they are choosing this course of action.

Thank you!

John S. Pierce

From: >class=" garsedErnail">Jennifer Walker

Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 >2:19 PM

Subject: FW: Retirement

John,

We appreciate >your comments and thank you for your feedback. We further understand the tremendous >amount of frustration surrounding this controversial issue and respect your individual >rights and choices about where and when to travel and live.

We regret you >feel this way about our position and sincerely hope you consider Austin at another >time.

I have also passed >along your feedback to the City Public I nformation office. Should you like to contact

3 >the City directly, please let me know and I will provide the appropriate contact >information.

Kind regards, >

Jennifer >Walker > Director >of Marketing Communications > Austin & Visitors Bureau

F: (512) 583-7282 > > www.austintexas.org > > DISCLAIMER: > This message may contain confidential or proprietary information and is intended >only for the use of the individual or group named above. If you are not the intended >recipient, you should not read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this e·mail >or any part of it. If you received this e·mail in error, please notify the sender >immediately by reply e-mail and delete it and any attachments from your mailbox. >The Austin Convention and Visitors Bureau (ACVB) does not accept liability for >any statements that are clearly the senders own opinion and not made on behalf >ofACVB.

From: John Pierce > > Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 9:00 AM > To: VC requests > Subject: Retirement

Good morning. I had recently visited your fine city and >was planning on buying a home in Austin and retiring. I just heard that Austin >is boycotting Arizona because of it's stance on immigration. I totally disagree >with your cities approach to this issue. All Arizona is doing is protecting >its citizens from an out of control illegal immigration problem with the federal >govemment has proved over and over that it is not willing to enforce cun-ent laws. >If Austin continues their insane opposition to immigration enforcement, I will >not move to Austin and instead move to Arizona. > > John S. Pierce > 108 237th PI. SW > Bothell, Washington 98021

4 ~,,!d. /tJ

-~I"I"------·-·---"- ,-j

--'-'-~l!~------"""-II I, --++--11Il ------.---- lj -'--+·1+---1--·---- .------... -. ---- II II .. ~ n-- ......

Ij := . :jJ:~":: -"" , , ' .'" ~-.. '.. _. _ .. - ..... ~-

--, 11 --=:: ':::" .--': =~::":: ":=::::::':: -v-.. -1+------II --. . - -.----- _. .~,~-"' -- ... ~ . ----_..... - li II -~.----"l! ... -".-~-... --.---.----.--.----.-... ~--~-->--... -.~~.~.-.--~-- ,I J I -.--~. ---... IT .. ~.. ·-·--~--· ..·---· ..~ .... -. .-.-.~.--.---. ~--~".. ----.-.. ---- 1I SUSTAINABLE FOOD POLICY BOARD Marla Camp, Chairperson Vince Cobalis, Executive Liaison 1415 Newning Avenue Austin/Travis County HHSD Austin, TX 78704 P. 0. Box 1088 Austin. TX 78767

M E M 0 RAN D U M

TO: Austin City Council

FROM: Marla Camp. Chair Austin/Travis County Sustainable Food Policy Board

DATE: April 26,2010

SUBJECT: Support for Sustainable Urban Agriculture Program Coordinator City of Austin FTE recommendation - Resolution No. 2009119-065

By action at its regularly scheduled April 26, 2010 monthly meeting, the Sustainable Food Policy Board (SFP8) strongly supports the recommendation by the cross-departmental team of City of Austin (COA) staff members to create a COA PTE to serve as the related single point of contact in the City, coordinating the establishmenl and oversight of sustainable community gardens and urban farms and implementing the recommendations the city council approves related to Resolution No. 20091110-065.

The SFPB would also like to acknowledge the extraordinary leadership and accomplishments of the many staIf members who came together from diverse city depa11ments to ensure that the goals of the resolution are reached effectively, particularly recognizing Parks & Recreation Department representative, Margaret Russell.

The SFPB is voicing support for the FTE prior to the final report to council on this resolution due to the fiscal impact this recommendation will have that will need consideration in the budget process. cc: H.G. (Bert) Lumbreras, Assistant City Manager Sara Hensley, Director, Parks & Recreation Department David Lurie, Director, Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Vince Cobalis, Asst. Director, AustinITravis County Health and Human Services --- -62iIS~8-T3~ 17516

-.--+1------.------.--~------.- !l1 f 1 j' ! ; ~ ;

II11 /~ ____ r~/J-I .- -" .,~, ...... --

Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0124 (2003) -- Greg Abbott Administration Page 1 of 4

.. £~".::: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT

November 18, 2003

The Honorable David Swinford Opinion No. GA-0124 Chair, Committee on Government Reform Re: Whether municipal hotel Texas House of Representatives occupancy tax revenue may be used P. O. Box 2910 to fund certain programs at a county Austin, Texas 78768-2910 senior center (RO::Q065.::~81

Dear Representative Swinford:

On behalf of the City of Dumas (the "City"), you ask whether a municipality may use

municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue to fund certain programs at a senior center. I ill

The City has inquired whether it may pay a portion of its hotel occupancy tax revenue to the Moore County Senior Center (the "Senior Center,,).·(2) The Senior Center believes it is a permissible recipient of the tax revenue because people from other communities, including some from outside an "easy driving time," come to eat or to participate in other activities at the center, including quilting and crafting:

The [C]enter has a need for additional funding to perpetuate the programming efforts including the quilting room, which is open to the public. Quilts are always on display and anyone who visits can see actual quilting being done. Funding for craft expenses; bringing in outside entertainment and brochure development, especially for the new Visitor Center here in Dumas [sic]. This funding request reflects a close relationship to the funding of Dumas' Crabb Art Center and the Window on the Plains Museum.·Ql

The City asks whether a payment to the Senior Center would be Ita legal use of" its municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue. City of Dumas Letter, supra note 2.

Any incorporated municipality "by ordinance may impose a tax" on certain persons who pay to use or possess "a room that is in a hotel, costs $2 or more each day,

and is ordinarily used for sleeping. II Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 351.002(a) (Vernon 2002); see a/so id. § 351.001 (1), (4) (defining the terms "municipality" and "hotel"). Section 351.101 of the Tax Code restricts the use of the revenue:

(a) Revenue from the municipal hotel occupancy tax may be used only to promote tourism and the convention and hotel industry, and that use is limited to the following:

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/50abbott/op/2003/htm/ga0124.htm 3/23/2010 Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0124 (2003) -- Greg Abbott Administration Page 20f4

(1) the acquisition of sites for and the construction, improvement, enlarging, equipping, repairing, operation, and maintenance of convention center facilities or visitor information centers, or both;

(2) the furnishing of facilities, personnel, and materials for the registration of convention delegates or registrants;

(3) advertising and conducting solicitations and promotional programs to attract tourists and convention delegates or registrants to the municipality or its vicinity;

(4) the encouragement, promotion, improvement, and application of the arts, including instrumental and vocal music, dance, drama, folk art, creative writing, architecture, design and allied 'fields, painting, sculpture, photography, graphic and craft arts, motion pictures, radio, television, tape and sound recording, and other arts related to the presentation, performance, execution, and exhibition of these major art forms;

(5) historical restoration and preservation projects or activities or advertising and conducting solicitations and promotional programs to encourage tourists and convention delegates to visit preserved historic sites or museums:

(A) at or in the immediate vicinity of convention center facilities or visitor information centers; or

(6) located elsewhere in the municipality or its vicinity that would be frequented by tourists and convention delegates; and

(6) for a municipality located in a county with a population of 290,000 or less, expenses, including promotion expenses, directly related to a sporting event in which the majority of participants are tourists who substantially increase economic activity at hotels and motels within the municipality or its vicinity.

(b) Revenue derived from the tax authorized by this chapter shall be expended in a manner directly enhancing and promoting tourism and the convention and hotel industry .... That revenue may not be used for the general revenue purposes or general governmental operations of a municipality.

Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 351.101 (Vernon Supp. 2004); see id. § 351.001 (2), (4), (8) (9) (Vernon 2002) (defining various terms). The term !ltourism" is defined as "the guidance or management of tourists," and the term "tourist" is defined to mean lIan individual who travels from the individual's residence to a different municipality, county, state, or country for pleasure, recreation, education, or culture." Id. § 351.001 (5)-(6) (Vernon 2002).

The crucial issue is whether allocating the tax revenue to the Senior Center promotes "tourism and the convention and hotel industry" and is within the permissible uses listed in section 351.101 (a) of the Tax Code. See Tex. Attty Gen. Op. No. DM-394 (1996) at 3 (stating that a municipality may use municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue only for the uses set out in section 351.101 ).

http://www.oag.state.tx.lls/opinions/opinions/SOabbott/op/2003/htm/ga0124.htm 3/23/2010 Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0124 (2003) -- Greg Abbott Administration Page 3 of4

The City may not allocate any tax revenue to fund meals at the Senior Center because meals are not within any permissible use listed in section 351.101 (a). See Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 351.101 (a) (Vernon Supp. 2004).

This office ultimately cannot determine whether funding other Senior Center activities are permissible under section 351.101 because fact issues are involved. See Tex. Att'y Gen. LO-92-51, at 2 (stating that determining whether section 351.101 (b) permits a particular expenditure is a question of fact); Tex. Att'y Gen. LO-92-16, at 3 (same). Rather, it is for the city's governing body to determine in the first instance whether a proposed expenditure is among the permissible uses section 351.101 (a) lists and will"directly enhanc[e] and promot[e] tourism and the convention and hotel industry." Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 351.101 (b) (Vernon SUpp. 2004); see Tex. Att'y Gen. LO-92-51, at 2. A municipality could find, for example, that subsidizing a quilting exhibit or demonstration at a senior center is permissible as encouraging, promoting, improving, and applying the arts, although the municipality would also have to find that the subsidy would IIdirectly enhanc[e] and promot[e] tourism and the convention and hotel industry.1I Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 351.101 (a)-(b) (Vernon Supp. 2004). But any use of the funds that would not directly enhance and promote tourism and the convention and hotel industry would be impermissible under the statute: "[WJhen money is spent for one of the [uses] listed in subsection (a), it should be done ... in a manner that promotes tourism and the convention and hotel industry." Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. JM-965 (1988) at 2.

SUMMARY

Under section 351.101 of the Tax Code, a municipality may expend its municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue "only to promote tourism and the convention and hotel industryll and only for the specific uses listed in the statute. Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 351.101 (a) (Vernon Supp. 2004). Whether a particular proposed expenditure of municipal hotel occupancy tax revenue is a permissible use and wlll"directly enhanc[e] and promot[e] tourism and the convention and hotel industrytl is for a municipality's governing body to determine in the first instance.

Very truly yours,

GREG ABBOTT Attorney General of Texas

BARRY MCBEE First Assistant Attorney General

DON R. WILLETT Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel

NANCY S. FULLER

http://www.oag.state.tx.lls/opinions/opinions/50abbott/op/2003/htrn/ga0124.htm 3/23/2010 Tex. Atey Gen. Op. No. GA-0124 (2003) -- Greg Abbott Administration Page 4of4

Chair, Opinion Committee

Kymberly K. Oltrogge Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee

Footnotes

1. See Letter from Honorable David Swinford, Chair, Committee on Government Reform, Texas House of Representatives, to Nancy Fuller, Chair, Opinion Committee, Texas Attorney General's Office (June 11,2003) (on file with the Opinion Committee).

2. Letter from Vince DiPiazza, City of Dumas City Manager, to Honorable David Swinford, Chair, Committee on Government Reform, Texas House of Representatives (May 27,2003) (on file with the Opinion Committee) [hereinafter City of Dumas Letter].

3. Letter from Lisa Underwood, Executive Director, Moore County Senior Center Inc., to City Commission, City of Dumas (Mar. 10, 2003) (on file with the Opinion Committee); Letter 'from Lisa Underwood, Executive Director, Moore County Senior Center Inc., to City of Dumas City Council Members (Jan. 16, 2003) (on file with the Opinion Comm!ttee).

POST OFFICE BOX 12548. AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL: (512) 463-2100 WWW.OAG.STATE,TX.US An Equal Employment Opportunity Employer ---'~------'-'------

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/50abbott/op/2003/htm/ga0124.htm 3/23/2010 Page 1 of 5

Riley, Chris

-----'----~~------.. ---.----.-. From: Leff, Lewis Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 10:02 AM To: Riley, Chris Subject: RE: URGENT ARTS FUNDING ISSUE - Fwd: Update: Important application requirement for Cultural Arts Funding Programs

Chris, I've spoken with Vincent and with Leela Fireside in Law.

Let me know if you need further information.

Lewis Leff Policy Aide to Council Member Chris Riley [email protected] 512.974.6055

~ Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

------.. ---.--~----.---.-,--.. -----.. -.--.-.-.--.----. .---..,.------"'---.----'''---,,~.-~--.,------..... ------From: Riley, Chris Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 11:21 PM To: Leff, Lewis Subject: FW: URGENT ARTS FUNDING ISSUE - Fwd: Update: Important application requirement for Cultural Arts Funding Programs

Lewis --

In his email below, Vincent Kitch mentions recent Attorney General rulings on the use of Hotel Occupancy Tax revenues for cultural and art organization funding.

3/23/2010 Page 2 of 5

I see GA-0124, www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/50abbott/oW2-003/htm/ga0124.htm . Could you find out whether there are other recent AG opinions or other authorities I should review to get up to speed on this? Laura M. has been looking into this, so Barbara or Bobby may have the info or know the contact in the law dept.

Chris

-.---~-"'-~""------'''''-'--''-''''''-''-.--.--''-''''''''''--'''''~-''''''''"''--'--~''-''''''''~----.------.--,----.-.----.-~. From: Shade, Randi Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 5:28 PM To: 'Ann Graham'; Leffingwell, Lee; Martinez, IVlike [CounciIIViember]; Spelman, William; Morrison, Laura; Riley, Chris; Cole, Sheryl Cc: Karen LaShelle; Kitch, Vincent; Edwards, Sue; 'Brett Barnes'; Kennard, Karen Subject: RE: URGENT ARTS FUNDING ISSUE - Fwd: Update: Important application requirement for Cultural Arts Funding Programs

Ann,

Thanks for your note. Yes, we are getting a lot of email from the Arts community today. I wasn't sure why, but seeing the email you have included below that came from EGRSO Cultural Affairs Director Vincent Kitch last week certainly sheds some light on the deluge of emails Council offices are receiving today. Thanks very much for sharing it with us. .

I support the arts and agree with your comments below about the importance of arts funding in Austin. As the email below explains, however, eligible uses for Hotel Occupancy Taxes collected by the City are governed by State law not City ordinance.

Best, Randi

Randi Shade Austin City Council Council Member Place 3 (512) 974-2255 (phone) (512) 974-1888 (fax) http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/shade.htm

From: Ann Graham [ Sent: Monday, March 22, To: Leffingwell, Lee; Martinez, Mike [Council Member]; Spelman, William; Shade, Randi; Morrison, Laura; Riley, Chris; Cole, Sheryl Cc: Karen LaShelle Subject: URGENT ARTS FUNDING ISSUE - Fwd: Update: Important application requirement for Cultural Arts Funding Programs

Dear Mayor Leffingwell, Mayor pro tern Martinez, and Council members Spelman, Shade, Morrison, Riley, and Cole:

I think you may be about to receive an onslaught of email from the arts community (I HOPE so, alas) ... but it came to our attention in an email from EGRSO, Cultural Affairs Director Vincent Kitch last week that the City is considering narrowing its interpretation of the use of the Hotel Occupancy Tax in Cultural Contract funding ... which will all but eliminate any arts programming that does not include

3/23/2010 Page 3 of 5

"tourism" and "public programming". That means an end to City of Austin support for arts and education and much community based programming - of which all of our children across the Greater Austin area benefit!

One of the key elements of the Create Austin Plan - not to mention the wealth and breadth of artistic programming across our community - is teaching, sharing, motivating, growing our young children in a culture rich with a diverse array of opportunities in the arts and world of creativity, not to mention other creative arts programs that serve largely under served populations such as the elderly, lower income and people of color in housing complexes, senior centers, community recreation centers, libraries and more.

Even AlSD just included I!Increase access and support for high quality Fine Arts instruction as part of a strong core academic curriculum for all students. If as one of its primary goals in its new 5-year Strategic Plan? How do we accomplish all of this incredible programming for our young and often under-served citizens? Much of it us supported through the generosity of the City of Austinfs Cultural Funding Program.

How do we attract businesses to invest and move here to Austin? One of the ways is by having a rich cultural environment and by providing opportunities for creativity at all ages and for all citizens.

What shortsighted gain do we have to get from restricting funds to projects that MUST have tourists in the mix?

I do not know at what level this decision was made, but as a progressive and family-oriented Austin City Council, I urge you to see that these restrictions are not put in place.

Many kind regards, Ann Board Member, Theatre Action Project

Ann S. Graham People + Art = Building Community Producer - Consultant - Liaison

(512) 914-8096

------Forwarded mess'age ------From: Vincent E. Kitch Date: Fri, Mar 12,2010 at 1:55 PM Subject: Update: requirement for Cultural Arts Funding Programs

Arts Alert March 2010

3/23/2010 Page 4 of 5

Dear Ann,

I am writing to give you an update on the application process for the FY 2011 Cultural Arts Funding Programs, deadline May 1, 2010.

We are in the process of finalizing the gUidelines and application forms and I wanted to make you aware of a new requirement for next year's applications. As a result of recent Attorney General rulings on the use of Hotel Occupancy Tax revenues for cultural and art organization funding, the City of Austin is adding an additional requirement for programs funded with these revenues.

For all core program applications, you are required to identify specific public activities and/or services in your proposal that directly enhance and promote tourism. You will also be asked to estimate the number of total audiences for your proposed activities and how many tourists are expected to attend.

All funding projects must have public performances, events, services, etc. that involve both tourists and residents. You will be required to track this information throughout the project period and report participation as part of your final report. There are a number of ways an organization can track out-of-town participants, including:

• Tracking participating artists who are from out of town • Including a guest register at events or exhibits • Using audience surveys at performances and events • Tracking zip code information from surveys, online ticket purchases, etc. • Asking for a show of hands at project activities from people who live outside Austin • Advertising your events and activities on NowPlayingAustin.com . I wanted to let you know about this issue so you may incorporate this requirement as you begin to prepare your FY 2011 applications. Staff will finalize the guidelines and provide them online as soon as they are available. We will also be scheduling workshops by the end of the month to go over Changes, including tourism preformance, for next year's applications with current contractors.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at 974-9310.

Sincerely,

Vincent E. Kitch Cultural Arts Program Manager City of Austin Economic Growth and Redevelopment Services Office 301 W. 2nd Street Ste 2030 Austin, TX 78701 (512) 974-9310 v (512) 974-6379 f

3/23/2010 Page 5 of 5

Become a part of CREATE AUSTIN - our cultural planning process! http://www.cityofaustin.org/culturalplan

Forward email [[J Email Marketing by This email [email protected]@cLaustin.tx.us. [[J Update ProfilelEmail Address I Instant removal with SafeUnsubscrlbe™ I Privacy Policy. City of Austin EGRSO I City Hall I 301 W. Second Street I Austin I TX I 78701

3/23/2010 ·1 II eM Riley One on One Wed, March 10, 2009

1. Update on Congressman Doggett's Waller Creek Trail Project. See attached email for update.

FW fed funding for E Austin trails. msg

2. Do we have a Chief Electrical Inspector? We have a Supervisor position that functions as a Chief Electrical Inspector but is not officially titled. Randy Haydon is currently appointed as acting in that capacity. The position is housed at the Planning & Development Review Department. eM Riley One on One Wed, March 10, 2009

1. Update on Congressman Doggett's Waller Creek Trail Project. See attached email for

update.

FW fed funding for E Austin trails.lT6g

L.-.---.-.. -.. --.------.---.---... -----.---.--... --... ---~--"-- -

_•.... _------_ .. _-_ ..._ .. -. • _____ • ______~ __"_ •• w_,w______• __~.~_. __••

Page 1 of 4

Fernandez, Rolando

··EM~f*wB:\iv~fa"~?) .~ Sent:. :~'glliQ~~r~

Howard S. Lazarus, PE Director, Public Works Department City of Austin 505 Barton Spl'ings Road - Suite 1300 Austin, TX 78704

T: 512.974.7190 F: 512.974.7084 E: [email protected]

From: Lazarus, Howard Sent: TuesdaYI March 02/ 2010 7:10 AM To: Riley, Chris Subject: FW: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

CMRiley:

I'm forwarding the e-mail chain below to follow-up our brief conversation yesterday concerning the Walnut Creek trail project. Significant progress has been made since PWD took over management of the project and all of the moving parts are now in sync. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.

Howard S. Lazarus, PE Director, Public Works Department City of Austin 505 Barton Springs Road - Suite 1300 Austin, TX 78704

T: 512.974.7190 F: 512.974.7084 E: [email protected]

From: LindseYI Louis Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 4:33 PM To: Lazarus, Howard; Beaudet, Annick Cc: Curtis, Michael; Juarez, Keri Subject: RE: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

3/5/2010 Page 2 of4

Howard, Below is the detailed status report you requested. I don't know of any issues that Congressman Doggett can help resolve at this time. There may be when we get into the TxDOT reviews of the project. Let me know if this is sufficient detail for what you had in mind.

The survey and geotechnical work is ongoing and should be completed in March 2010. Detail design is in progress on segments of the trail where the survey work is complete. A 60% complete set of design documents is expected in April 2010. Work is progressing on the Programmatic Categorical Exclusion document that will address environmental and cultural resources issues. This should be completed in April and submitted to TxDOT for their review.

The City's Real Estate Services Division is negotiating with Union Pacific Railroad for a tract of land that is required for the preferred trail alignment. Union Pacific has tentatively agreed to the City's offer for the property. This is the only tract of land that must be purchased for the trail. We have verbal commitments from TxDOT, Cap Metro, and other public entities to cross their properties with the trail and formal easement documents will be prepared after the 60% set of design plans are completed.

The plan is to finalize the design documents and obtain the required permits by the end of 2010. The completed documents will then be turned in to TxDOT for their review. That usually takes about 6 months so the project could be advertised for bids in mid 2011.

From: Lazarus, Howard Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 3: 10 PM To: Beaudet, Annick; Lindsey, Louis Cc: Curtis, Michael Subject: RE: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

I ran into CM Riley today. Congressman Doggett would like to know if there are any issues he can help resolve as he would like to see this project move forward. Please provide a detailed status report as well as the monthly update. I do know that Mr. Doggett reads these personally, so we need to keep the monthlies coming. Thx.

Howard S. Lazarus, PE Director, Public Works Department City of Austin 505 Barton Springs Road - Suite 1300 Austin, 'IT 78704

T: 512.974.7190 F: 512.974.7084 E: [email protected]

3/512010 Page 3 of4

From: Beaudet, Annick Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 2:44 PM To: Lazarus, Howard Cc: Curtis, Michael Subject: FW: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

Howard, Louis lindsey is managing the Southern Walnut Creek project which is the Doggett project for which we provide monthly updates. I am involved in the project as a sponsor, and Louis keeps me well informed. He can provide more details on status if needed per this request. Recall that Congressman McCaul provided funding for a continuation of Doggett's trail from Daffon Lane to the City of Manor. That is moving along as wel" but is not as far along as the Doggett section, and we may not be able to get all the way to City of Manor with the existing funds. We hope to have the entire trail functional by 2014.

The Doggett Southern Walnut Creek Trail and McCaul is Bicycle Route 913 in the adopted City of Austin Bicycle Plan.

From: Riley, Chris Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 12:21 PM To: Lazarus, Howard; Beaudet, Annick Cc: Martinez, Mike [Council Member]; Ballas, Marisa Subject: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

Howard/Annick:

This morning, several of us on the CapMetro Board met with Congressman Doggett and discussed a number of issues. One subject that came up was the project described below that he secured funding for back in 2005. He mentioned that Howard has been providing updates, which he appreciates.

The Congressman would like to get some additional info on this project: where it stands, how it ties into the City's overall bike plans, and -- to the extent it is proving to be problematic -- whether there is any way to redirect the funding to other, less problematic projects.

We agreed to get him some information addressing these and other issues, focusing mainly on Rails with Trails projects. We'll be working with Cap Metro on getting info from their Side, and we're hoping you can help on the city side. Mike and I will be visiting him in DC in mid-March, and we'd like to get him some info before then if possible.

Could you provide some info on this project that we can pass on to the Congressman, or suggest someone else who we should contact?

Chris

News:AugustS,200S

Austin Stories • Austin Rep. Lloyd Doggett announced last week that he's bringin' home the bacon to the tune of $7.S million. The big bucks are coming from the recently passed federal transportation bill, with most of it designated for an expansive hike and bike trail system in Doggett's East Austin district. An avid cyclist himself, he has long struggled to secure funding for the trails. They'll run along Walnut Creek in East Austin and intersect with the proposed Lance Armstrong Bikeway, which proceeds west through downtown and ties into the Town Lake trail system's more than 30 miles of paths, said Austin PARD Planner Butch Smith. The trails also tie into Capital Metro's Rails With Trails project, initially designed to create about 10 miles of north-south hike and bike paths along its Commuter Rail line. Smith added that Doggett's funding will benefit trail networks near McKinney Falls

3/5/2010 Page 4 of4

State Park as well as along Onion and Williamson creeks in the Dove Springs neighborhood of Southeast Austin. "These trails will mean less cars on the road, more healthy children, less pollution, and more economic development," Doggett said. - Dan Mottola

3/5/2010 Page 1 of4

Fernandez, Rolando

&Vi~fjk· ... Sent: ;;:i~j.~t~~tQ6~Q4\\t20~f()';14;'52~AM:'· To: . Fernandez, Rolando; Beekley, Taja Subject: FW: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

Howard S. Lazams, PE Director, Public \Varks Department City of Austin 505 Barton Springs Road - Suite 1300 i\ustin, 1]( 78704

T: 512.974.7190 F: 512.974.7084 E: [email protected]:.us

From: Lazarus, Howard Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7: 10 AM To: Riley, Chris Subject: FW: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

CMRiley:

I'm forwarding the e-mail chain below to follow-up our brief conversation yesterday concerning the WahlUt Creek trail project. Significant progress has been made since PWD took over management of the project, and all of the moving parts are now in sync. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance.

Howard S. Lazams, PE Director, Public Works Department City of Austin 505 Barton Springs Road - Suite 1300 Austin, 1]( 78704

T: 512.974.7190 F: 512.974.7084 E: [email protected]

From: Undsey, Louis Sent: Monday, March 01, 20104:33 PM To: Lazarus, Howard; Beaudet, Annick Cc: Curtis, Michael; Juarez, Keri Subject: RE: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

3/512010 Page 2 of4

From: Lazarus, Howard Sent: Monday, March 01, 20103:10 PM To: Beaudet, Annick; Lindsey, Louis Cc: Curtis, Michael Subject: RE: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

Howard S. Lazarus, PE Director, Public Works Depal."tment City of Austin 50S Barton Springs Road - Suite 1300 Austin, TX 78704

T: 512.974.7190 F: 512.974.7084 E: howard.laz

3/512010 Page 3 of4

From: Beaudet, Annick Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 2:44 PM To: Lazarus, Howard Cc: Curtis, Michael Subject: FW: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

Howard, Louis Lindsey is managing the Southern Walnut Creek project which is the Doggett project for which we provide monthly updates. I am involved in the project as a sponsor, and Louis keeps me well informed. He can provide more details on status if needed per this request. Recall that Congressman McCaul provided funding for a continuation of Doggett's trail from Daffon Lane to the City of Manor. That is moving along as well, but is not as far along as the Doggett section, and we may not be able to get all the way to City of Manor with the existing funds. We hope to have the entire trail functional by 2014.

The Doggett Southern Walnut Creek Trail and McCaul is Bicycle Route 913 in the adopted City of Austin Bicycle Plan.

From: Riley, Chris Sent: Sunday, February 28,2010 12:21 PM To: Lazarus, Howard; Beaudet, Annick Cc: Martinez, IVlike [Council IViember]; Ballas, IViarisa Subject: fed. funding for E. Austin trails

Howard/Annick:

We agreed to get him some information addressing these and other issues, focusing mainly on Rails with Trails projects. We'll be working with Cap Metro on getting info from their side, and we're hoping you can help on the city side. Mike and I will be visiting him in DC in mid-March, and we'd like to get him some info before then if possible. .

Could you provide some info on this project that we can pass on to the Congressman, or suggest someone else who we should contact?

Chris

News:August5,2005

Austin Stories • Austin Rep. Lloyd Doggett announced last week that he's bringin' home the bacon to the tune of $7.5 million. The big bucks are coming from the recently passed federal transportation bill, with most of it designated for an expansive hike and bike trail system in Doggett's East Austin district. An avid cyclist himself, he has long struggled to secure funding for the trails. They'll run along Walnut Creek in East Austin and intersect with the proposed Lance Armstrong Bikeway, which proceeds west through downtown and ties into the Town Lake trail system's more than 30 miles of paths, said Austin PARD Planner Butch Smith. The trails also tie into Capital Metro's Rails With Trails project, initially designed to create about 10 miles of north-south hike and bike paths along its Commuter Rail line. Smith added that Doggett's funding will benefit trail networks near McKinney Falls

3/5/2010 Page 4 of4

3/5/2010

Page 1 of 4

Fernandez, Rolando

From: Alexander, Jason Sent: Friday, February 05,20101 :53 PM To: Fernandez. Rolando Subject: FW: EMS Issues

Rolo,

Around the end of January, Marc and Mike received an email from CM Riley with the below questions (black). This afternoon, I submitted the following to CM Riley with EMS' responses in red. Just FYI for Marc.

Thanks,

Jason Alexander

From: Alexander, Jason Sent: Friday, February 05, To: Riley, Chris Cc: Leff, Lewis; Shamard, Subject: EMS Issues

Good afternoon Council

Per your request. EMS has ":",mnn,,, you had about Medic 23 & 29, Job Reel n is helpful, but please do not hesitate to contact me with

A. Medic 23 & Medic 29

I understand that within the units that they have been paying for (Medic 23 and in the County, and the City has no budgeted units to and the Harris Ridge/Parmer Ln. area with only part-time 'n\l,"" ..""rI by overtime. A couple questions:

1. How will we mitigate the losses of ambulances and staff at these two locations?

2. Should we examine our planning process to ensure that we anticipate changes like this in the future? I understand the County has been providing services at Harris Branch & 290, at its own expense, for about seven years since the area was annexed.

M~dIc ~9 B.acl:cgro!,lnd: The Harris Glen (Medic 29) annexation station construction was completed in July of 2005. Because Travis County did not have a station for their southeast unit the City allowed the Travis County to place the unit in the Harris Glen station.

M~~lic 23. Saokground: Travis County also funds Medic 23. The County's original plan over ten years ago was to place the unit in the City of Manor, but was unable to secure a station location in Manor. The City allowed the unit to be stationed at the

2/5/2010 Page 1 of4

Fernandez, Rolando

From: Alexander, Jason Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 1 :53 PM To: Fernandez, Rolando Subject: FW: EMS Issues

Rolo,

Thanks,

Jason Alexander

From: Alexander, Jason Sent: Friday, February 05,2010 1:51 PM To: Riley, Chris Cc: Leff, Lewis; Shamard, James Subject: EMS Issues

Good afternoon Council Member,

Per your request, EMS has prepared the following information in response to questions you had about Medic 23 & 29, Job Reclassification/Salary Increases, and Fleet issues. We hope this information is helpful, but please do not hesitate to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.

A. Medic 23 & Medic 29

I understand that within the next few months, Travis County will be moving two units that they have been paying for (Medic 23 and Medic 29) from current City locations to other areas in the County, and the City has no budgeted units to replace them. This will leave the Harris Branch/290 area and the Harris Ridge/Parmer Ln. area with only part-time units for emergencies, with staffing needs to be covered by overtime. A couple questions:

1. How will we mitigate the losses of ambulances and staff at these two locations?

MedJc 29 ~acl:

Medic,23 E:tackground: Travis County also funds Medic 23. The County's original plan over ten years ago was to place the unit in the City of Manor, but was unable to secure a station location in Manor. The City allowed the unit to be stationed at the

2/512010 Page 2 of4

Harris Branch Fire station, which of the available options provided the best access to Manor at the time.

During the years that followed, the EMS Department attempted to plan for the Travis County units to move each year but Travis County was never able to find a suitable facility in the desired locations so no replacement units were budgeted by the City.

During the first quarter of FY -2010 Travis County began aggressively pursuing station options in Manor and southeast Travis County for the first time.

Travis County entered into an agreement with the City of Manor on November 17, 2009 to use a remodeled post office as an EMS station. Currently the remodeled post office has no sleeping quarters so Medic 23 is stationed from 7am to 7pm at the Manor station and 7pm to 7am at the Harris Branch fire station. The anticipated date for sleeping quarters to be added is March 2010. At that time the unit would move to Manor full-time.

Travis County has also secured land on south U.S. 183 and is in the process of moving a temporary structure on site to be used as a station. The anticipated move date for Medic 29 is April 1, 2010.

Two new ambulances are in the purchasing process and in the interim two reserve ambulances will be staffed with overtime if necessary to maintain coverage in the Harris Branch area and insure no degradation to service occurs. Additional personnel and equipment for the new stations will be included in next year's budget request.

B. Job reclassification and salary increases

The association has learned that at least some division chiefs in EMS have received increases in their salaries as recently as last month. This has raised a few questions.

1. Which positions have received recent increases in their salaries, and what is the total amount of money?

2. Where has the additional funding come from?

3. When additional funding becomes available, what's the process for determining how that money is spent (salary increases, funding vacant positions, new vehicles, etc.)?

In July of 2008 the City began Meet and Confer negotiations with the EMS Association. The City proposed removing Division Managers from the bargaining unit. The Union then raised a concern that these Division Managers compensation and pay practices needed to be reviewed. The Union agreed to remove these positions from the bargaining unit and as a result the City agreed to review the compensation of the Division Managers.

When the contract was re-opened early in 2009 the review had not been completed and the Union again raised the issue. The City Labor Relations Office completed the review after the re-opened contract was approved and made recommendations to EMS management.

As a result of the recommendation from the Labor Relations Office, EMS management and the Human Resources Department agreed to upgrade the pay scale of the Division Managers and they received the pay increase that the union had consistently advocated for during both negotiating sessions. The funds, which amount to approximately $43,000 annually, were appropriated from the savings accrued when a decision was made not to fill a vacant non-uniform position.

Emergency Medical Services first priority when additional funds are available; is for those initiatives that have a direct impact on the community and improve patient outcomes. In this instance, we responded to repeated requests made by the union to review these payrates.

C. Fleet

Fleet Services has reportedly cut this year's funding for replacing EMS vehicles from $1.2 million to $400,000.

2/5/2010 Page 3 of4

1. The original number would have allowed the replacement of four ambulances that have reached over 200,000 miles.

2. With the lower number, current plans reportedly call for no new ambulances, and spending $400,000 to replace ancillary, take-home vehicles -- replacing Ford Escape hybrids with Chevy T ahoes.

3. How can we justify leaving older ambulances in operation and just replacing take-home vehicles for staff?

4. If we're going to replace the ancillary vehicles, why would we replace hybrids with less efficient, more fuel-intensive SUVs?

5. How many EMS staff have take-home vehicles, and has this number increased over the past few years?

6. Have we examined the geographic distribution of those take-home vehicles -- e.g., how many are being driven home to other counties? Do we have any policies in place that would make take-home vehicles more readily available to those living close in than those living two counties away?

Due to the economic impact to the City Budget, the FY-2010 fleet replacement budget for EMS and all City Departments was reduced. The EMS Department has continued to work closely with the Fleet SeNices Department, the Budget Office and the City iVlanagers Office to insure critical needs are addressed.

Currently three ambulances are being purchased from the City budget and two ambulances from the Travis County Budget. The highest mileage ambulance being replaced has 178,084 miles.

No Ford Escape Hybrids are being replaced with Chevy Tahoes, The preference is to utilize Hybrid Vehicles whenever possible. Four larger vehicles that range in age from 12 to 16 years old are being replaced this year with Ford Escape Hybrids due high mileage and poor reliability.

Two of the six front-line Command trucks are being replaced due high mileage and poor reliability. These Command vehicles are on-duty 24/7 and respond with lights and Siren (code 3) to emergency calls throughout Austin and Travis County. They are typically replaced or remounted between 100,000 and 150,000 miles. The mileage on the two that will be remounted is 213,000 and 168,207. Several other high mileage emergency response Command vehicles that range from 8 to 12 years old are also being replaced with comparable vehicles.

The only vehicles that are allowed to be taken home are emergency response vehicles staffed by on-call Command Personnel or Physicians that may be dispatched to a major incident or critical event directly from their home. Only 10 of the 467 EMS employees routinely take an emergency response vehicle home. The number has not changed in the last few years.

Both the City and Travis County have done a complete review of each vehicle that is driven to an employee's home, including miles driven, the reason the vehicle is taken home and the location. The EMS Department is in compliance with the City of Austin Vehicle Policy and Travis County Vehicle Policies.

Have a wonderful weekend

Jason Alexander, MPA Executive Assistant Assistant City Manager, Michael McDonald City of Austin, City Manager's Office P: (512) 974-2194

2/5/2010 Page 4 of4

F: (5 r 2) 974-2833 E: jason.

2/5/2010 ,i !j ;i/ . ji/.a:~--L-~(i?J- .. -..-. .. ------;-~--~, --/-- ______!+-______~ !._ !.d______...... •. ~ •. =_ ~lj~A:~~~~~~~~.=~~~~::dh'._....~.. _ II -ilii~~~~=M£p:; &;;;-~Z;;;~==·::·-·-~=·· ...... ------II---rx;::-e2--CJ::-L2:t-----P-?21t)J!lf~-r:1#./id~LO.:i------~~L)------.------i 12Z]------~;;;_];L ------.- --- -.------.------...... ···~tl··J~27-.- .~ " .-.-.. --~~.------.----.------,I =-_~_~:~~~_:_-_:=~-~:=~_]t~=~---~~~~-==------._~=~=_~=~=_===_====.~=~~=~~= ______III' _ -______-______.-- ______-______.______

------.---~j-.------.------.------~------_.------ri---II ------tl------~~..--=::~ ..:J:~.~~ ~=--==.===:==:.... ~==::===-~:.~====:==: ..=-. --.------.-.. ------H------II .. ------.------.------Ii ----.------.. -- --- .-.---.... ------.. ---H-II -.. --.------.------.------.---- -.... ------.---.. --.... -.. -.. Ii ··--··--l-!-·-~--··---··---··---·~-·-·------·------.. ------.. ----.--.-.------.----.----._------.--.-- Ii

- - I .------·------4-----·------.-.------.-.------.------.------.---'[' II . ------.------... ------1+------I' ------.------.. ------.-- -. ------,,- ._. ····I~·-~·· -.- ~~------.------.------~ ------_. --14------.------.------.. --.-,-~------.------.-~--.------.---~------.------.------.- - ~--- ..---j j------. ------.. ------.------.----.------.. -.-.----.- II .------.. -- ~lr------·-----·------.-- ft- .------.------.------.------.------.. ------.------.. --.---- .... -- ---.-.---.--.------.------,,--.-.... ------,i, r- ii ------_. p.------.. --.. --~------.-.------.----.-,,---.-----_ .. _.... _------_._--_._---_._------._._----_ .. _---.. __ .. _-... _------.. -- "..

"'-rj'-ii --.- ~ - ... '-.' .. _. '--'~' ... ---'--" .------.-.--- ... --.-.~.---.-.------~-..----.-.-- -.'-~-~-'- .--~-----... ---.. - .. ------.-... -.~- _._-- .-...... _-- '--~'------'-'------.. -- ... . Ii