>> HE'S IN HERE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED TO SAVE ON TIME.
[00:00:03]
WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED.[DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER]
[BACKGROUND] I WELCOME OUR GUESTS, VISITORS TO OUR COUNCIL MEETING DATED FOR MAY 24, 2022, AT 6:00 PM.WE'LL HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER WHO WILL BE JOINING US AFTER A WHILE, HIS WIFE WAS IN A RUNOFF RACE TODAY.
HE'LL BE VISITING US LATER ON THIS EVENING.
WE'RE GOING TO DECLARE A QUORUM AND CALLS TO ORDER AT SIX O'CLOCK[NOISE] IF YOU'LL PLEASE RISE WITH US.
WE WILL HAVE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION, [INAUDIBLE]
>> YOU'LL BOW WITH ME, PLEASE.
FATHER, WE COME TO YOU TONIGHT WITH SOME HEAVY HEARTS FOR OUR FRIENDS IN NEW [INAUDIBLE].
I JUST PRAY THAT YOU'D COMFORT AND BE NEAR THEM.
FATHER, FOR THE PARENTS, FOR THE LOVED ONES, FOR THE LEADERS WHO ARE IN TOWN TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE.
FATHER, WE PRAY FOR OUR NATION.
WE PRAY FOR OUR CITY, WE PRAY FOR EACH OTHER HERE TONIGHT, THAT YOU WOULD GUIDE US AND DIRECT US, OR GIVE US YOUR WISDOM, GIVE US YOUR UNDERSTANDING, AND SHOW US THAT YOU LOVE US BECAUSE WE LOVE YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. BOOTH. WE'LL GO RIGHT ON THE END.
I DO SEE SOME NEW FACES HERE TONIGHT.
IF SOMEBODY IS HERE TO SPEAK TONIGHT, THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO SPEAK DURING OUR SESSION, WISH TO ADDRESS COUNCIL.
IF YOU ARE ONE OF THE SPEAKER, YOU HAD TO FILL OUT A FORM, GIVE TO THE CITY SECRETARY, OR IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ITEM THAT'S ON HERE TONIGHT, PLEASE ALSO FILL OUT A FORM AND WE'LL MAKE SURE WE GET YOU TO THE PODIUM WHEN THAT AGENDA ITEM POPS UP.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND START OFF WITH OUR CITIZENS WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL.
I DO HAVE ONE OF THEM, BUT I BELIEVE IT'S FOR ITEM 25.
WE'RE GOING TO HOLD OFF AND WE'LL BRING YOU UP WHEN WE GET TO THAT ITEM.
WE'LL MOVE RIGHT ALONG TO CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS.
[CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS]
NUMBER 1, CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION OF MAIZE, KEEP AND GOT SOME BEAUTIFUL YARD OF THE MONTH, BUSINESS OF THE MONTH.IF YOU ALL GO TO THE PODIUM, IT IS ALL YOURS.
>> OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, BRIAN AND DANA, OUR SONS, PLEASE COME UP HERE IN FRONT [NOISE] DANA [INAUDIBLE] DID I SAY THAT RIGHT?
>> OKAY. THEIR BEAUTIFUL HOME IS AT COMPLEX AFTER NORTHRIDGE AND THEY WERE NOMINATED BY A LOT OF PEOPLE.
WE'RE VERY HONORED. [INAUDIBLE] BEAUTIFUL CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS OF ANGLETON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> WE'RE GOING TO GO UP HERE AND TAKE A PICTURE WITH THEM.
>> YOU ALL STAND THERE AND WE'LL FILL BEHIND YOU. [OVERLAPPING].
>> ANYBODY [INAUDIBLE] WELL, SHERRY STAFF SAYS SHE WAS COMING BUT [OVERLAPPING] WHO KNOWS SOMETHING CAME UP.
IF SHE COMES MAYBE YOU TAKE CARE OF THIS AND IF NOT, I WILL GET IT WITH MEGAN AND TAKE IT TO HER TONIGHT.
THE ABLE TO VET CLINIC IS 1717 IS MULBERRY, THE NEW BUILDING AND THE STAFF IS WONDERFUL AND IF YOU'VE DRIVEN BY, IT'S GREAT, BUT YOU REALLY NEED TO GO INSIDE.
IT'S REALLY SOMETHING TO SEE. REALLY PROUD.
>> AWESOME. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
[APPLAUSE] THANK YOU ALL KAB FOR DOING THAT.
NEXT ONE IS ITEM NUMBER TWO, PRESENTATION OF THE TXU LEADERSHIP SUSTAINABILITY AWARD.
>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
TONIGHT, THE CITY OF ANGLETON RECEIVED THE LEADERSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY BUT BY TXU ENERGY AND WAS INVITED TO RECEIVE THIS AWARD ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 4, AT THE ANNUAL ENERGY SUMMIT IN HOUSTON.
THE CITY ANGLETON IS COMMITTED TO SERVING IT'S NEARLY 20,000 RESIDENTS WITH SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS BY INSTALLING 46 SOLAR LIGHTS, LED PARK LIGHTS ALONG FREEDOM TRAIL AND THE IMPROVEMENT WILL SAY 45,000 KILOWATTS EACH YEAR AND
[00:05:03]
LOWER ELECTRICAL INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS IN COMPARISON TO TRADITIONAL BULBS.IN RECOGNITION OF THIS TXU LEADERSHIP SUSTAINABILITY AWARD, TXU AWARDED MEGAN BAINER AND STUART CROUCH, WHICH WE WOULD LIKE MEGHAN TO COME UP AND RECEIVE FOR US TODAY AND WE HAVE TXU HERE TO PRESENT THEM WITH A CHECK AS WELL SO THAT WE HAVE EMILY [LAUGHTER] TO MAKE THIS PRESENTATION.
>> COUNCIL WENT OVER. [LAUGHTER].
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. [OVERLAPPING].
>> WHO WANTS THIS? [LAUGHTER].
>> I'LL TAKE IT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR PARTNERING WITH THE CITY OF ANGLETON, TX. THANK YOU ALL.
>> WHAT? CAN YOU UPDATE US REAL QUICK?
>> OKAY. I'M SURE YOU ARE ALL PAYING ATTENTION TO THE WAR AND EVERYTHING.
TWO YEARS AGO, CHRIS DECIDED TO DO A 10-YEAR POWER CONTRACT, WHICH WAS THE TREND AT THAT TIME.
A LOT OF GOVERNMENTS WERE DOING 10 YEARS, BUT BEFORE THAT, FIVE YEARS WAS STANDARD.
THERE WASN'T A LOT OF LONG-TERM CONTRACTS, BUT BASED UPON IT BEING ONE OF THE LOW PRICE POINT, THERE WAS A LOT OF DESIRE TO DO THAT.
THE MARKET SINCE THEN HAS GONE WILD.
I'M SURE, IS EVERYBODY SEEING NATURAL GAS IS CRAZY.
POWER PRICES ARE, I THINK I GAVE YOU TWO EXAMPLES.
ONE WAS IN THE 9 CENT RANGE FOR A 10-YEAR DEAL OR NOT.
I MEAN, IT'S A FIVE-YEAR DEAL AND THEN A 7 CENT RANGE FOR A 10-YEAR DEAL.
I THINK YOU GUYS ARE [BACKGROUND] 36.
ABOUT $100,000 WAS BEST-CASE, WORST-CASE, $200,000 IN SAVINGS A YEAR.
>> ALL RIGHT. [OVERLAPPING]. THANK YOU.
>> SHERRY IS HERE. [BACKGROUND].
>> SORRY I APOLOGIZE [INAUDIBLE]
>> THANK YOU, EMILY. I APPRECIATE IT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU'VE GOT TO TAKE CARE OF OUR ANIMALS.
>> YEAH. I JUST HAD AN EMERGENCY. [INAUDIBLE] SORRY.
>>THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS WITH A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING.
>> WE REALLY APPRECIATE IT FROM CITY COUNCIL.
YOU CAN GO OVER THERE AND TAKE A PICTURE.[OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER]
>> BECAUSE IT MAKES ME LOOK TALL.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH [OVERLAPPING] [APPLAUSE].
>> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ALONG TO CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS,
[Consent Agenda ]
PLEASE BEAR WITH ME THERE'S 17 TO READ.NUMBER 3, I'M GOING TO BE PRETTY FAST, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AGREEMENT WITH JUST FOIA FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUESTS, MANAGER SOFTWARE.
NUMBER 4, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION OF POINTING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND APPOINTING ITS REPRESENTATIVES THAT RESIDE IN THE EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON, TEXAS, WHO IS NOT AN EMPLOYEE OR OFFICIAL POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OR GOVERNMENT ENTITY AS AN AD HOC VOTING MEMBER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHEN IT ACTS AS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE PROVIDING FOR REPEAL, PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE.
NUMBER 5, DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION DENYING THE DISTRIBUTION WOULD COST RECOVERY FACTOR RATE REQUESTS OF TEXAS-NEW MEXICO POWER COMPANY MADE ON OR ABOUT APRIL 5, 2022, AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN A COALITION OF SIMILAR SITUATED CITIES AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION UNRELATED RATE PROCEEDINGS REQUIRING THE REIMBURSEMENT OF MUNICIPAL RATE CASE EXPENSES, AUTHORIZING THE RETENTION OF SPECIAL COUNSEL, FINDING THAT THE MEETING COMPLIES WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, MAKING OTHER FINDINGS THAT PROVISION RELATED TO THE SUBJECT AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NUMBER 6, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING AUTHORIZED SIGNATORIES FOR CONTRACTUAL DOCUMENTS AND DOCUMENTS FOR REQUESTING FUNDS PERTAINING TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT, ALSO MITIGATION SUPPLEMENTAL PROGRAM, CDBG-MIT SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT NUMBER 22-119-002-D360, AND PROVIDING THAT THIS RESOLUTION SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE FROM AND AFTER ITS PASSAGE.
[00:10:03]
NUMBER 7, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING AUTHORIZED ADOPTING, REAFFIRMING THE CIVIL RIGHTS POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT MITIGATION, SUPPLEMENTAL PROGRAM ALSO KNOWN AS CDBG-MIT SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT NUMBER 22-119-002-D360 AND PROVIDING THAT THIS RESOLUTION SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE FROM AN AFTER ITS PASSAGE.NUMBER 8, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE DISASTER DECLARATION SIGNED BY THE MAYOR ON MARCH 17TH, 2020 THROUGH JUNE 11TH, 2022, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEPARABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NUMBER 9, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE DISASTER DECLARATION SIGNED BY THE MAYOR ON MARCH 17TH, 2020 THROUGH JULY 10TH, 2022, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS, INCLUDING A SEPARABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NUMBER 10, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR CONTACTING OUR MEDICALLY FRAGILE RESIDENTS DURING AND AFTER A DISASTER OR OTHER EVENTS THAT MAY HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR COMMUNITY.
NUMBER 11, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE LETTER TO THE TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICE REGARDING THE CREATION OF A CITY HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN.
NUMBER 12, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PARKS AND RECREATION AND TABLES IN THE FEE SCHEDULE IN THE CONSOLIDATED SCHEDULE OF FEES OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON, TEXAS, REVISING AND PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE RATES TO BE CHARGE FOR MEMBERSHIPS BY THE CITY OF ANGLETON PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, PROVIDING SEPARABILITY CLAUSE, PROVIDING FOR AN OPEN MEETINGS CLAUSE, PROVIDING A PENALTY, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NUMBER 13, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON ANGLETON RECREATION CENTER HOURS OF OPERATION.
NUMBER 14, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON PARKS AND RECREATION STANDARDS MANUAL.
NUMBER 15, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A VARIANCE TO WAIVE FEES FOR THE JUNETEENTH MASS GATHERING PERMIT.
NUMBER 16, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A PERPETUAL SIDEWALK EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT R JONES DUE TO TREE ROOTS MAKING THE SIDEWALK IMPOSSIBLE AND DANGEROUS.
NUMBER 17, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORTS FOR DECEMBER 2021.
NUMBER 18, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE THE QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORTS FOR MARCH 2022.
NUMBER 19, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A WAIVER OF ALL PERMITTING AND BUILDING FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THE RECONSTRUCTION OF A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AT 317 NORTH PARRISH.
LASTLY, NUMBER 20, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN INNER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH CENTRAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, ALSO KNOWN AS SCPDC, THROUGH ITS AGENT AND THE CAPITAL AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS, ALSO KNOWN AS CAPCOG, FOR THE PROVISION OF MY GOVERNMENT ONLINE SOFTWARE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT. COUNSEL?
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT CONSENT AGENDA, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEMS 3, 4, 16, 20.
I ALSO WANT TO GO BACK TO MOVING EIGHT AND NINE TO DISCUSSION AS WELL.
>> OH, MY GOODNESS. ALSO I CAN HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR POTIM RICE SECOND, BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGH, THAT MOTION CARRIES.
NOW WE'LL GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 3. WHO HAS THAT ONE?
[3. Discussion and possible action on an agreement with JustFOIA for public information requests management software. ]
GO AHEAD, MS. FRANCIS. [NOISE]>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THE AGENDA ITEM IS DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN AGREEMENT WITH JUST FOIA FOR A PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE.
THIS PROJECT IS A JOINT PROJECT WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE'VE REVIEWED OUR PROCESSES AND FELT THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO HELP US IMPROVE.
IT'S DESIGNED TO MANAGE EVERY STEP OF THE PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST PROCESS FROM ONLINE INTAKE TO DELIVERY, INCLUDING WORKFLOW AUTOMATION, REDACTIONS, COMMUNICATION AND REPORTING.
IT'S AN ESSENTIAL TOOL TO STREAMLINE THE PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST PROCESS AND WILL ASSIST IN IMPROVING THE CUSTOMER SERVICE EXPERIENCE WHILE DIGITIZING IN-PERSON SERVICES.
LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A JOINT PROJECT WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
THE FUNDING WAS PROVIDED PARTIALLY BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS WELL.
>> DID WE DISCUSSED THAT IN BUDGET?
>> I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BECAUSE THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WE REVIEWED THIS YEAR.
>> BECAUSE I SEE A BUDGETED AMOUNT, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER US TALKING ABOUT THIS DURING BUDGET LAST YEAR.
>> THAT'S WHY WE BROUGHT IT FORWARD FOR APPROVAL.
>> BUT IT SAYS UNDER THE BUDGETED AMOUNT, IT'S THERE, THAT'S WHY I WAS LIKE, I DON'T REMEMBER THAT.
[00:15:03]
>> WE DIDN'T HAVE IT ORIGINALLY BUDGETED, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO HAVE SOME SAVINGS FROM SWAG IT.
WE WANTED TO UTILIZE THAT MONEY AS WELL AS PD HAD SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR US.
>> WHAT'S THE RESIDUAL? HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE TO DO ANNUALLY FOR SERVICES GOING FORWARD?
>> IT'S A ONETIME COST OF 9,384.86 AND RE-OCCURRING IS 7,344, WHICH IT WON'T BE ADDITIONAL.
>> THE ANNUAL SERVICES CONTRACT.
>> YES, 7,344, BUT IT WON'T BE AN ADDITIONAL I'LL JUST ASSUME IT WITHIN MY BUDGET.
>> HOW DO WE GO WITH THIS, THIS GROUP AND HOW DID WE FIND THEM? WELL, HOW DO WE FIND THIS GROUP TOO?
>> THEY'RE JUST WELL-KNOWN IN THE CITY SECRETARY COMMUNITY.
THEY WORKED WITH CITIES ALL OVER TEXAS ON DIFFERENT SOFTWARE'S, AND USE THEIR SISTER COMPANY, UNICODE FOR OUR CODE OF ORDINANCES.
WE ARE CURRENTLY USING UNICODE FOR AGENDA MANAGEMENT.
IT'S LIKE STREAMLINED FROM THERE.
>> THEN MY NEXT QUESTION, THIS MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT YOUR CHIEF WILL HAVE TO ANSWER, BUT CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THIS IS GOING TO MAKE LIFE BETTER.
>> OUR BIG THING IT'S GOING TO HELP US TRACK IT.
RIGHT RIGHT NOW WE ARE NOT DOING A VERY GOOD JOB OF TRACKING ALL THE REQUESTS THAT WE GET.
ONE THING THAT THIS WILL HELP US IS IT WILL ALLOW US TO SEND SITTING ATTORNEY REQUESTS THAT SHE NEEDS TO REVIEW AND SHE WILL BE ABLE TO REDACT INFORMATION ELECTRONICALLY.
IT WILL ALSO ALLOW THE DA'S OFFICE TO SEND THEIR SUBPOENAS ELECTRONICALLY.
BUT CURRENTLY WE ARE RECEIVING THOSE BY PAPER AND HAVE HAD INSTANCES WHERE THEY HAVE BEEN MISPLACED.
WE FELT THAT THIS WAS A CLEAN WAY FOR US TO UNTRACK THOSE.
>> IS THERE A FEE THAT GOES ALONG WITH THIS THAT IS CHARGED TO THE RESIDENT OR WHOEVER MAKES THE FOIA?
>> THERE ARE PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUESTS FEES THAT WE CAN CHARGE.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN CHARGING THEM ON MANY OF THEM.
IF WE DON'T ACTUALLY PRINT A PIECE OF PAPER OR IF IT'S NOT A LARGE REQUEST, WE CAN BY STATE LAW.
MOST OF THEM ARE DONE ELECTRONICALLY, SO WE DON'T CHARGE.
>> HOW MANY DO WE GET A MONTH?
>> RIGHT NOW, WE'RE SEEING ABOUT 170, BUT IT'S COVID TIME STILL OR COMING OUT OF COVID.
BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH, WE DON'T HAVE A REAL NUMBER.
BUT I WOULD SUSPECT THAT WE ARE GETTING MORE OVER 200 AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE SUBPOENAS.
>> REFRESH THAT AGAIN TOO, WE'RE GETTING OVER 170 WHAT?
>> PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST.
>> WHAT GENERALLY DO THEY ASK FOR?
>> RIGHT NOW, WE ARE GETTING A LOT OF REQUESTS FOR BILLING PERMITS.
WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE INTERESTED.
I'M ASSUMING THIS IS JUST A BIG ASSUMPTION THAT PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT PROPERTY IN THE AREA.
THEY'RE WANTING TO SEE WHAT THE PROPERTY WAS USED FOR SO THEY'RE ASKING FOR SEAT COPIES OF CEOS, COPIES OF PERMITS.
WE GET COPIES OF, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF WHAT OTHER ONES HAVE COME, POLICE RECORDS, ACCIDENT REPORTS, THAT THING.
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR COUNCIL. I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT [NOISE] IF YOU RECEIVE A [NOISE] LOT OF THESE PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUESTS FOR ACCIDENT REPORTS, FOR VIDEOS, FOR BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE, FOR A LOT OF THESE FIRST AMENDMENT AUDITORS COME IN AND JUST FLOOD US SOMETIMES WITH A STACK OF PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUESTS FOR COPIES OF PERSONNEL RECORDS OR COPIES OF CALLS THAT WE TAKE.
WE'RE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH A CHANGE IN OUR RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
[00:20:03]
NOW WOULD BE AN OPTIMAL TIME TO DO THAT SO WE CAN TRAIN OUR NEW RECORDS FOLKS INTO DOING THAT.IT IS MORE EFFICIENT TO GET THIS DONE AND SO THAT WE CAN GET THE INFORMATION OUT IN A TIMELY MANNER.
LIKE SHE SAID, WE CAN TRACK IT.
RIGHT NOW, WE'VE TO HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHECK TO SEE WHENEVER WE DID THAT AND WHAT WE SEND TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND STAFF.
>> THE ONLY THING I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IS, THAT IT'S A NEW COST THAT WE WILL HAVE TO INCUR ANNUALLY EVERY YEAR NOW.
I AGREE THAT IT SHOULD HELP STREAMLINE AND MAKE THINGS A LOT BETTER, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, SOME OF THESE FOIA REQUESTS, I FEEL LIKE THEY SHOULD BE PAYING A LITTLE BIT TO GET THAT INFORMATION.
IF YOU'RE JUST ASKING FOR BUILDING RECORDS AND PERMITS, YOU SHOULD PAY A LITTLE FEE BECAUSE OF ALL THE STAFF TIME THAT'S GOING INTO THESE.
NOW, IF IT'S SOMETHING WHERE A LAWYER IS PROBABLY ASKING FOR VIDEO FOOTAGE OF SOMETHING FOR A TRIAL, I COULD SEE THAT'S LEGITIMATE AND SOME OF THESE FIRST AMENDMENT GUYS ARE JUST REACHING AT US TO LOOK AT SOMETHING, THEY SHOULD PAY A FEE TOO.
IF WE'RE GOING TO ADOPT THIS AND MOVE FORWARD AND GO WITH THE SOFTWARE, WE SHOULD ALSO LOOK AT THE FEE SCHEDULE THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT AS WELL BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT SOMEHOW.
MONEY IS NOT GROWING ON TREES AROUND HERE.
>> THIS SOFTWARE I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH MY CITY STAFF AND I HAVE EXTRA ACCESS.
IT SAVES A LOT OF TIME IN THE LONG RUN BECAUSE CITY STAFF ISN'T RUNNING AROUND.
WHAT HAPPENS IS AN E-MAIL GOES OUT TO ALL DEPARTMENTS THAT HAS RECORDS.
IT REALLY DOES SAVE [INAUDIBLE] IN THE LONG RUN WITH EXPENSE.
THE FEES THAT YOU CAN RECOVER THE GOVERNMENT CODE PUT ON PUBLIC REQUEST IS STATUTORY.
I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT ACROSS THE BOARD, WE SHOULD START DOING THE COST EXPENSE.
YOU DO THE COST ESTIMATE FIRST BEFORE YOU LET THE DOCUMENT, IF THE CLUSTER DOESN'T PAY, THEN YOU DON'T RECEIVE IT.
THE LAST THING, I'VE GOT TWO OTHER CITIES RIGHT NOW THAT ARE IN THE PROCESS OF PLANNING A CONTRACT WITH JUSTIN [INAUDIBLE] GOING TO MOVE FORWARD, WE'LL HAVE FIVE DIFFERENT AND WITH THIS, FOR ALL THE SAME REASON THAT IT DOES SAY.
>> I'M NOT TRYING TO POKE, BUT DOES IT SAVE ON OUR LEGAL FEES AT ALL?
>> YES. THE REASON [NOISE] AS YOU'VE ALREADY POINTED OUT, PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT REQUESTS TO A LOT OF MANPOWER HOURS [INAUDIBLE] WHAT HAPPENS IS I DON'T HAVE TO KEEP E-MAILING MORE LIKE WHERE IS THIS BUSINESS VISIT.
WE HAVE THIS SOFTWARE SYSTEM THAT TRIGGERS EVERYTHING AND IT'S IN THERE AND THEN ONE PERSON WHO'S GOING THROUGH.
I CAN'T EVEN TELL YOU. YEAH, I DO SEE IT AS TWO THINGS.
A COST-SAVING MEASURE, A MEASURE TO FREE UP YOUR STAFF'S TIME, AND LASTLY AN ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURE.
WHEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYS, "WELL, YOU DIDN'T DO THIS ON THAT DAY." WELL, WHAT HAPPENS IS THE REQUEST FOR THE PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT GO THROUGH THIS SOFTWARE AND WE CAN PROVE IT RIGHT AWAY.
OH NO, WE GOT THIS E-MAIL ON THAT DAY INSTEAD OF THE OLD FASHIONED WAY OF EITHER AN E-MAIL, OR A LETTER, OR SOMEBODY COMING IN AND HANDING YOU A PIECE OF PAPER.
IN THE BEGINNING I WAS LIKE MORE SOFTWARE, BUT IN THE LONG RUN I SEE A LOT OF BENEFIT FOR THE CITY.
>> I'M ALL ABOUT JUSTIFIABLE INFORMATION REQUESTS, BUT THERE ARE THOSE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO REQUEST INFORMATION JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO DO.
[LAUGHTER] WELL, THEY OUGHT TO GET TO PAYING FOR IT.
IF IT'S THAT IMPORTANT TO THEM IT SHOULD COST THEM SOMETHING.
>> IF IT COST THEM TOO MUCH, WELL, MAYBE THEY'LL CHANGE THEIR MIND AND LET US GO ABOUT OUR BUSINESS THAT WE'RE HERE TO DO.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, WE WOULD NORMALLY CHARGE THEM, BUT WHEN WE RECEIVE SOMETHING ELECTRONICALLY AND WE RESPOND ELECTRONICALLY AND WE NEVER HAVE TO PRINT ANYTHING AND REDACT ANYTHING THEN THOSE ARE THE INSTANCES WHERE WE'RE NOT CHARGING.
I CAN'T SPEAK FOR PD, BUT THE REQUESTS THAT I SEE WE HAVE ELECTRONIC FILES.
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE WE APPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITH
[00:25:04]
JUST FOIA FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUESTS MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE FOR THE AMOUNT OF $9,384.86.I WOULD ALSO LIKE THAT THE FEE SCHEDULE COME BACK TO US SO WE CAN REVIEW THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE APPROPRIATELY RECOVERING THIS COST AT LEAST 7,000 ANNUALLY.
>> A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND.
>> HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGARO.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE FOR SAME SIGN, MOTION CARRIES.
MOVING ON NUMBER 4, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION,
[4. Discussion and possible action on a resolution appointing the Planning and Zoning Commission as the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee and appointing a representative that resides in the extra-territorial jurisdiction of the City of Angleton, Texas who is not an employee or official of a political subdivision or governmental entity as an ad hoc voting member of the Planning and Zoning Commission when it acts as the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee; providing for repeal; and providing for an effective date.]
APPOINTING THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAS CAPITAL PROVEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE.>> WAS THAT FRANCIS, OR WAS THAT CHRIS?
>> I THINK IT'S ME. OKAY. GO AHEAD, SIR.
>> WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WIDE IMPACT FEE.
IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO ESTABLISH THIS COMMITTEE.
IN ORDER TO DO THAT, YOU ALL NEED TO PROVE THAT.
I THINK IF I'M CORRECT, IT'S REALLY THE P&Z ENDS UP BEING THE MEAT OF IT, BUT WE HAVE TO APPOINT SOMEONE THAT'S A NON CITY RESIDENT WITHIN THE ETJ AND SOME OTHER THINGS, AND THAT GIVES US THE AUTHORITY TO GO OUT AND FIND THAT.
>> WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE SOMEBODY THAT'S NOT INSIDE THE CITY?
>> ITS STATUTORY. IT'S WHAT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SAYS.
IT'S 395058, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
>> SOMEBODY OUTSIDE OF THE CITY IS GOING TO BE HELPING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE?
>> IT ONLY APPLIES IF YOUR IMPACT THE AREA INCLUDES THE ETJ IN IT.
THE CITY'S CURRENT IMPACT FEE AREA DOESN'T INVOLVE THE ETJ.
AS A CITY ATTORNEY SAID THAT'S A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT IF YOU IMPACT THE AREA INVOLVES THE ETJ, YOU HAVE TO HAVE ONE MEMBER OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHO IS A REPRESENTATIVE THAT LIVES IN THE ETJ.
>> YOU WANT TO TAKE THE P&Z AND THEN ADD SOMEBODY ELSE TO IT TO MAKE THIS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
>> FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS ONLYS, YOU'RE NOT JUST ADDING SOMEONE TO YOUR P&Z FOR OTHER P&Z MATTERS, ONLY FOR THIS.
>> P&Z THAT'S COMMON FOR OTHER CITIES TO DO?
>> YEAH. ALL OF OUR OTHER CITIES DO IT THAT WAY ACTUALLY. IT'S STATUTORY.
THE STATUTE SAYS YOU CAN DO THAT.
IT'S ALWAYS THE SAFEST MEASURE FOR ANY CITY TO JUST FOLLOW THE CODE INSTEAD OF TRYING TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
>> IT'S EASIER BECAUSE YOU USUALLY HAVE A P&Z.
>> YOU JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CURRENT P&Z MEETS THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THEIR MEMBERSHIP AS PART OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
THAT I BELIEVE IS THAT AT LEAST ONE MEMBER HAS TO BE PART OF THE REAL ESTATE COMMUNITY AND THE CITY'S CURRENT P&Z HAS TWO MEMBERS THAT ARE PART OF THAT COMMUNITY.
THE LAST CITY I'VE WORKED IN IT WAS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, PLUS ONE MEMBER FROM THE ETJ, MET TWICE A YEAR, SCHEDULED IT FOR 15 MINUTES BEFORE THE P&Z MEETING, BUT IT NEVER SEEMED TO WORK OUT THAT THE P&Z MEETING STARTED ON TIME, BUT THEY HAVE A FUNCTION TO PERFORM, WHICH IS THEY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS THAT ARE THE BASIS OF THE IMPACT FEE.
THOSE ASSUMPTIONS HAVE TO BE RE-EVALUATED EVERY FIVE YEARS AND THEY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
BASICALLY, THE STATUS OF WHAT THE IMPACT FEES HAVE BEEN COLLECTED AND HOW THE BALANCE OF ACCOUNTS ARE FOR THE VARIOUS IMPACT FEES.
IT IS WHAT IT IS UNDER STATE LAW.
>> OKAY. COUNCIL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> IF YOU'RE IMPROVING THE RESOLUTION TONIGHT, WE DO HAVE SOMEONE THAT'S INTERESTED, WILLIAM STEGNER, WE COULD AMEND THE RESOLUTION TO ADD INCLUDE HIS NAME ON THAT IF YOU WANTED TO APPOINT HIM TONIGHT.
>> ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, WE'VE GOT OUR LITTLE BRIEF. WHAT IS YOU-ALL'S PLEASURE?
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE WE ADOPT THE RESOLUTION APPOINTING THE P&Z AS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND APPOINTING WILLIAMS TITCHENER AS THE ETJ REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE CITY OF ANGLETON. THAT'S ABOUT IT.
>> ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION, MAYOR PRO TEM, WRIGHT DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.
[00:30:02]
THAT MOTION CARRIES.ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON, NUMBER 8 AND NUMBER 9.
[Items 8 & 9]
THEY'RE THE SAME, BUT [OVERLAPPING].>> THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO KNOW, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM?
>> YOU'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT DATES, BUT WHY NOT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> GOOD EVENING, I'M STANDING IN FOR GLENN TONIGHT WHO'S OUT OF TOWN, AND HE ASKED ME TO BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
THESE ARE DISASTER DECLARATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY IN EFFECT AND IT'S FOR DIFFERENT EVENTS.
WE WANT TO CONTINUE THOSE BECAUSE WE HAVE STANDING GRANT FUNDING UNDER THESE TWO DECLARATIONS THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE, THAT'S WHY.
I KNOW ONE IS FOR HARVEY, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE OTHER ONES FOR, I'M SORRY.
>> FOR GRANT FUNDING, BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE AN ACTIVE DISASTER. [OVERLAPPING].
>> YEAH, THEY'RE BOTH FOR COVID.
THE REASON WHY WE'RE BRINGING IN BOTH OF THESE AT THE SAME TIME IS WE HAVE TO RENEW EVERY 30 DAYS AND IN RELATION TO THE LAST MEETING, IT PUT US OVER THE 30 DAYS, AND THEN BY THE TIME WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE, THE NEXT ONE WILL BE OVERDUE SO WE WENT AHEAD AND JUST BROUGHT THEM TOGETHER.
>> KETCHUP. NOT HEINZ, BUT KETCHUP.
>> WHY? I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE DOING ON THAT, BUT AT WHAT POINT ARE WE GOING TO STOP EXTENDING THIS DISASTER DECLARATION? NOW WE JUST KEEP EXTENDING IT, WHAT FUNDING ARE WE GOING AFTER THAT [OVERLAPPING] IS ELIGIBLE.
>> THE GOVERNOR KEEPS EXTENDING IT.
IT BEHOOVES US IF THERE'S EVER, LIKE COVID PICKS BACK UP AND WE NEED MASKS AND THERE'S WHATEVER FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR THAT.
THEN WE'RE APPLICABLE TO APPLY FOR IT.
WE ENDED THE DISASTER DECLARATION THEN IT PUTS US IN NO POSITION.
>> I THINK THE QUESTION IS TO ASK, WHAT IF WE DISSOLVE AND THEN SAY SOMETHING ALL OF A SUDDEN POPS UP NEXT WEEK, WELL THEN I HAVE TO DO ANOTHER DECLARATION THAT I CAN DO MY POWER, BUT THEY BRINGING IT BACK TO COUNCIL TO START THAT ALL OVER AGAIN, THE 30-DAY.
>> WE'LL PUT SOME INK ON THE PAPER, I DO KNOW THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> YES, SIR. I THINK WE ALL ARE.
>> I CAN EXPOUND ON THAT. [OVERLAPPING].
>> I THINK THE REASON WHY WE WANT TO CONTINUE IS IF THEY DO SOMETHING BY DATE, WE DON'T EVER WANT THERE TO BE A TIME WHERE WE ALLOW [OVERLAPPING] SUMMERTIME.
>> ARE THERE OTHER CITIES STILL DOING THIS?
>> WELL, I MEAN, WE HAVE A FEW SMALL CITIES THAT WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE ANYWAY FOR OTHER REASONS, SO THEY PROBABLY AREN'T BUT ANY OF THE CITIES THAT HAVE A POPULATION OF GREATER THAN 5 OR 6,000, GENERALLY, YES.
FOR THE SAME REASONS AS YOU'RE SITTING? MOSTLY BECAUSE WE'RE STILL UNDER AN EMERGENCY ORDER, NOT ONLY FROM THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, BUT FROM THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT AS WELL.
I THINK THE ANSWER IS THAT AS LONG AS THE STATE IS STILL DOING IT, I THINK ALL OF THE MUNICIPALITIES ARE GOING TO FOLLOW SUIT.
>> DO THEY ALL FOLLOW THIS 30-DAY RULE?
>> THAT'S STATUTORY BY TEXAS LAW.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU STAFF FOR THE BRIEF.
>> MR. MAYOR, YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THIS.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE EXTEND THE DISASTER DECLARATION SIGNED BY THE MAYOR IN MARCH 17, 2020, THROUGH JUNE 11, 2022, MOTIONED BY MAYOR PRO TEM, WRIGHT. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WE'VE HAD IT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
MOTION CARRIES OUT. ITEM NUMBER NINE.
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE WE ADOPT A RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE DISASTER DECLARATION SIGNED BY THE MAYOR ON MARCH 17TH, 2020 THROUGH JULY 10TH, 2022.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM, WRIGHT, DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> THAT WAS TAKEN BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> IS THIS ALL ON PAPER, IS THIS ELECTRONIC? ARE WERE KILLING TREES? [LAUGHTER]
>> IT'S PAPER, I THINK I ASSIGNED IT. I'M GOING TO SIGN IT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. HEARING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THAT MOTION CARRIES.
[16. Discussion and possible action on a perpetual sidewalk easement agreement with Robert R. Jones, due to tree roots making the sidewalk impassable and dangerous.]
THIS BRINGS US TO NUMBER 16, A DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A PERPETUAL SIDEWALK EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT.R JONES. MR. SI, THE PODIUM IS YOURS.
I'VE COME TO UNITE WITH A DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A SIDEWALK EASEMENT AT 501 EAST MULBERRY.
I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS WHERE THAT, IT IS A BIG OAK TREE, SIDEWALKS ARE UP LIKE THAT.
A WHILE BACK, A BIG OLD TREE FELL OVER THERE.
WE WERE CALLED UP OVER THERE [INAUDIBLE],
[00:35:02]
CUT THE TREE OUT YALL'S SIDEWALKS THAT WE ADD TO MAINTAIN THE SIDEWALKS.THE MAN CAME OUT OF THE HOUSE AT THAT TIME AND WAS TELLING US ABOUT THE SIDEWALKS IN FRONT OF HIS HOUSE, AND HE SAID, "WON'T YOU ALL JUST GO AHEAD AND POUR THE SIDEWALK AND GO AROUND MY TREE." THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T DO THAT.
WE HAD TO HAVE SOME KIND OF AGREEMENT NOW.
HE DID AGREE IF WE BRING UP SOME AGREEMENT THAT HE WOULD SIGN IT. THAT'S WHAT HE SAID.
>> WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE THE SKATEBOARD RAMPS, BUT PUT THE SIDEWALK AROUND IT SO THAT IT'S MAYBE [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING].
>> IS THAT THE TWO-STOREY WHITE HOUSE?
>> I DO HAVE SOME METAL PLATES AND IF WE GET IN TOO MANY ROOTS, I HAVE SPECIAL METAL PLATES TO GO OVER SO WE DON'T DAMAGE THE ROOTS ON PART OF THE TREES THERE.
THE TREES HAVE BEEN THERE A LONG TIME.
>> THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS. THAT'S ONE REASON WHY ON THIS NOT ONLY FOR WONDERING ABOUT HOW THAT WAS GOING TO WORK AROUND THE TREE AND NOT KILLING THE TREE BUT OTHER AREAS OF TOWN WHERE WE HAVE THE SAME ISSUE OVER THERE BY CENTRAL ELEMENTARY WHERE ALL THOSE OAK TREES ARE AND WE HAVE THAT PROBLEM WITH ALL THOSE SIDEWALKS.
WE PUT A NEW SIDEWALK OFF TO THE SIDE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, RIGHT? GOING DOWN ANGLETON?
>> DID WE GET AN EASEMENT FOR THAT?
>> NO, THAT WAS ALREADY IN A CITY?
>> THERE WAS ALREADY A CITY. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE MOVED OUT BY THE STREET AND LET THEM IMPORT A NEW SIDEWALK OVER THERE.
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER AREAS WHERE THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN?
>> NOT RUN OFF MY HEAD. THERE IS SOME NEW SIDEWALKS NEEDED TO BE PUT IN, BUT NOT [OVERLAPPING] TREES OR NOTHING LIKE THAT.
>> THEN FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, DOES IT GOING TO BE IN PERPETUAL DEED RESTRICTION OR ANYTHING THAT SOMEBODY CAN'T COME BACK LATER AND SAY I BOUGHT THE HOUSE AND I DON'T WANT THIS HERE, I WANT TO MOVE IT?
>> WELL, IT'S WRITTEN TO BE PERPETUAL.
IF SOMEBODY COMES AND BUYS THE PROPERTY, THEY'RE GOING TO BUY THE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE PERPETUAL EASEMENT.
IF THEY DON'T WANT TO BUY THE PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE EASEMENT AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO, BUT YOU BUY IT AS IS.
>> IT'S BASICALLY NO DIFFERENT THAN WHEN WE GET AN EASEMENT FROM A PIECE OF PROPERTY OWNER AND WE ASKED TO GO ONTO IT AS PART OF THE PACKAGE?
>> WHEN YOU BUY A HOUSE AND YOU GO TO CLOSING THAT SAID, "OH, BUT THERE'S A COM-CAST EASEMENT AND THERE'S THIS EASEMENT," WHEN THEY GO TO CLOSING ON UPON PURCHASE, THEY'RE GOING TO BE NOTIFIED, "BY THE WAY, THE CITY HAS THE EASEMENT THAT'S ALLOWING THEM TO HAVE THAT SIDEWALK AROUND THE TREE."
>> COUNCIL, WHAT'S [INAUDIBLE] PLEASURE ON ITEM 16.
>> MR. MAYOR MOVES THAT WE ADOPT A PETROL SIDEWALK EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT R. JONES.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM. MAY I GRAB A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NUMBER 20.
[20. Discussion and possible action on an interlocal agreement with South Central Planning and Development Commission (SCPDC) through its agent, the Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG), for the provision of My Government Online software for the Development Services Department.]
>> JEFF, ITEM NUMBER 20 INNER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH CENTRAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.
MS. LINDSAY, THE PODIUM IS YOURS.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING.
LAST YEAR WE GAVE YOU GUYS A HEADS UP THAT WE WOULD BE SEARCHING FOR NEW SOFTWARE IN THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE ALL OF OUR AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY, NOT JUST PERMITTING AND BUILDING INSPECTIONS, BUT THE GAMUT OF WHAT WE DO IN THE DEPARTMENT.
WE WERE SUCCESSFUL IN LOCATING THIS ONE AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED TO PRESENT A VERY COMPETITIVELY PRICED SOFTWARE.
IT IS CALLED AN INNER LOCAL AGREEMENT BECAUSE IT IS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HELPING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WHICH SAVES MONEY.
THIS CAN SUPPORT EVERYTHING THAT WE DO AND THE BENEFIT TO THE CITY IS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO TRACK ALL THE THINGS THAT WE DO THROUGH PERFORMANCE METRICS, AS WELL AS GO FULLY PAPERLESS.
THE WAY WE ENVISION THIS WORKING OUT IS EVENTUALLY HAVING A KIOSK WHICH WE WILL PUT INTO NEXT FISCAL YEAR'S BUDGET REQUEST THAT GOES IN FRONT OF THE CITY HALL LIBRARY, ATRIUM AREA.
THAT WAY PEOPLE CAN COME IN AND HELP THEMSELVES, DO FULLY PAPERLESSLY AND RENDER PAYMENT AT THE TIME.
WE FALL INTO THE CATEGORY OF THE 501-1,000 PERMITS CONSERVATIVELY, AFTER A REVIEW OF HOW MANY PERMITS WE'RE PROCESSING, WE'RE UNDER 400 RIGHT NOW, SO THAT GIVES US SOME ROOM TO GROW.
WE'RE IN A COMPETITIVE RATE AND I DO HAVE THE VENDOR ONLINE WHO IS ATTENDING VIRTUALLY.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONTRACT.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. LINDSAY OR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES?
[00:40:01]
THIS ISN'T A BUDGETED ITEM THIS YEAR.
>> THAT'S WHY I'M BRINGING IT TO YOU.
>> IS THIS SOMETHING THAT CAN WAIT FOR BUDGET WITH THE KIOSK?
>> IT COULD. WE DID FIND AN AREA WHERE THERE IS FUNDING THAT WE DON'T ANTICIPATE FULLY UTILIZING IN THIS FISCAL YEAR.
WE FELT IT MIGHT BE A BIT MORE JUDICIOUS TO DO IT NOW, AS OPPOSED TO WAIT AND INCORPORATING IT INTO THE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.
>> THAT'S MY ACCOUNT. I HAVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ACCOUNT AND I'VE BUILT A LOT OF THINGS LIKE WE'VE HAD TO DO THE RE-PLANNING OVER THERE BY THE REC CENTER AND THE REPLANTING OF THAT, WHICH I'VE CHARGED TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FUND.
TECHNICALLY, IF YOU WANTED TO PUT EVERYTHING IN THE RIGHT BUCKETS, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL HAVE THE MONEY AND THAT WOULD JUST GET CHARGED AGAINST MY ACCOUNT.
BUT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES, WE WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT TO SAY, RIGHT NOW, THE MONEY IS AVAILABLE IN THE CITY MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONAL FEE ACCOUNT.
>> WHAT'S THE ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE FOR THIS?
>> THE ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGE, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME STARTUP FEE AND THAT'S WHERE THE ACH PAYMENT PROCESSING, WHICH I BELIEVE IS $600 OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
THERE IS NO UPFRONT FEES TO START.
WE WOULD JUST START PAYING THE MONTHLY RATE.
WE DO NEED TO REIMBURSE THE TEAM WHO WOULD BE CREATING THE SOFTWARE AND TRAINING US.
I WAS TOLD TO ANTICIPATE THREE TRIPS FROM LOUISIANA.
AT ABOUT $2,000 A PIECE, WE'RE ANTICIPATING ANYWHERE FROM $6,000 -$8,000 FOR THEIR PEOPLE TO BE REIMBURSED FOR THEIR TRAVEL EXPENSES.
>> THAT'S NOT INCLUDING THE $20 [NOISE] OR IS IT?
>> THE $26 THAT YOU SEE THERE WOULD BE AN EXTREMELY CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE ALL OF THE TRAVEL EXPENSES AS WELL AS AN ESTIMATED FULL YEAR OF SERVICES.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOWHERE NEAR A FULL YEAR LEFT IN THE FISCAL YEAR.
>> I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE BREAKDOWN OF THE $20,000 ON THE IMPLEMENTATION UPFRONT PLUS THE SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE FEE OR YOU'RE GOING TO BE BILLING THAT MONTHLY OR IS THAT AN ANNUAL CONTRACT THAT YOU PAY ONCE?
>> IT'S BASED OFF OF MONTHLY FEES.
IF YOU LOOK ON PAGE 12 OF THE AGREEMENT, WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE $500 AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING MODULE FOR $156.25 AS WELL AS THE CODE ENFORCEMENT, WHICH IS $99, AND THE ADDRESSING GIS INTEGRATION FOR $230.
THE SUM OF THOSE FOUR FIGURES WOULD BE THE MONTHLY CHARGE GIVEN HOW MANY PERMITS WE PROCESS RIGHT NOW.
>> JOHN, YOU MENTIONED BEFORE.
WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE FEE SCHEDULE.
THAT PROMISE HADN'T BEEN UPDATED IN LIKE HOW LONG.
>> YEAH. WE'RE VERY COMPETITIVE IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, BUT WE'RE NOT ACCOUNTING FOR OUR COSTS, AND JUST LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT OTHER THINGS, SO THAT NEED TO BE COVERED.
>> OKAY. THESE JUST GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE BEGINNING AND COME BACK [LAUGHTER] 70 PAGES. [INAUDIBLE]
>> THIS LOOKED LIKE YOU'RE SAYING IT'S APPROXIMATELY $13,800 A YEAR.
>> THIRTEEN EIGHT HUNDRED A YEAR.
>> NOW, WE'VE BEEN SHOPPING AROUND FOR QUITE A WHILE AND FELT THAT THIS WAS ABSOLUTELY THE SOFTWARE THAT FIT OUR NEEDS, NOT ONLY THE BEST, BUT IT WAS THE MOST COMPETITIVELY PRICED.
I WILL SAY THAT ANOTHER SOFTWARE PROVIDER QUOTED US $50,000 A YEAR AND DIDN'T DO HALF OF WHAT THIS DOES.
I WAS PRETTY EXCITED TO BRING THIS TO YOU GUYS.
>> WHAT'S THE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE? WHEN DO YOU EXPECT IT TO BE LIVE?
>> I WOULD ANTICIPATE THREE MONTHS.
>> IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE USING THIS SOFTWARE PACKAGE AROUND HERE? LIKE JACKLINE, COULD YOU CALL AND ASK AND GET A REFERENCE?
>> YES. PFLUGERVILLE USES IT AND THEY'RE VERY HAPPY WITH IT.
>> YEAH. MOST OF THEIR CLIENTS ARE MORE IN THE CENTRAL TEXAS AREA JUST FULL TRANSPARENCY.
BUT EVERYTHING THAT I'VE HEARD HAS BEEN VERY GOOD.
>> TO THE AVERAGE CITIZEN, WHAT WILL THEY SEE?
>> THEY'LL SEE A REDUCTION IN PAPER.
[00:45:02]
THEY WILL BE ABLE TO BE MORE INDEPENDENT.THERE WILL BE END-USER INTERFACE SO THAT THEY CAN SEE WHERE IN THE WORKFLOW PROCESS THEIR PERMIT REQUEST IS OR THEIR INSPECTION, OR EVEN THEIR PLANNING STUFF, WHETHER IT BE A ZONING CHANGE OR ANY OF THE NORMAL THINGS THAT WE DO DICHOTOMIZED AT SHORT-TERM BEING THE DAY-TO-DAY THINGS WE DO, AND LONG TERM, EVEN HEALTH INSPECTIONS.
THEY CAN ALSO RETRIEVE INFORMATION HISTORICALLY.
IT'S GOING TO BE A HUGE IMPROVEMENT FROM WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW.
>> WILL THIS TAX OUR IT STUFF MUCH OR IS IT BASED OUT OF SOME OTHER PLACE AND WE TAP INTO IT OR THEY HOG UP OUR SERVER CAPACITY OR?
>> THAT'S ALL. PRETTY MUCH COOL.
WHERE'S JASON? WE DON'T DO A LOT OF CLOUD HERE.
MOSTLY WE DO HOUSE OUR OWN SERVERS HERE.
BUT I THINK THIS COMPANY WOULD BE PROVIDING THE SOFTWARE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, SO THEY WOULD BE HOUSING THE DATA.
>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR LINDSAY OR STAFF? IF NOT COUNCIL WHAT IS YOU-ALL'S PLEASURE?
>> I NOW MOVE WE EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT, UNDER THE LOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ANGLETON AND SOUTH CENTRAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR THE ONLINE SOFTWARE WE DISCUSSED TONIGHT.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SVOBODA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THAT MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MISS LIZZY.
>> THAT WILL CONCLUDE OUR CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS AND WE'LL MOVE RIGHT ALONG ON TO OUR PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER 20, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING IN ACCORDANCE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE
[21. Conduct a public hearing in accordance to determine whether the structure located on the property at 316 W. Rogers Street, Angleton, Brazoria County, Texas 77515 complies Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations and Chapter 11 - Housing of the Code of Ordinances; and whether such structure shall be demolished in accordance with Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations, Article XII - Substandard Buildings, Sec. 5-572 - "Authority regarding substandard building" of the Code of Ordinances. (Part 1 of 2)]
STRUCTURE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY AT 316 WEST ROGERS STREET, ANGLETON BRAZORIA COUNTY, TEXAS 77515 COMPLIES WITH CHAPTER 5 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATION AND CHAPTER 11 HOUSING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND WHETHER SUCH STRUCTURE SHALL BE DEMOLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 5, BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS ARTICLE 7 SUBSTANDARD BUILDING SECTION 5-572, AUTHORITY REGARDING SUBSTANDARD BUILDING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
>> MAYOR, I MOVE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
MOTION CARRIES. GO AHEAD NOW MS. LINDSAY.
>> FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, MR. COLTON, DO YOU MIND PULLING UP 316 WEST ROGERS IN THE DOCUMENTS ON THE OVERHEAD, PLEASE? LAST YEAR FOR FY22, YOU GUYS GRACIOUSLY APPROVED $45,740, AS I RECALL FOR DEMOLITION.
STAFF HAS DONE A DILIGENT JOB OF GOING CITYWIDE TO IDENTIFY SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURES AND MOVING TO ENFORCEMENT.
SO EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1 THIS YEAR, WE RAMPED UP THE ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY THESE STRUCTURES THAT WOULD BE DEEMED UNFIT FOR HUMAN HABITATION AND DON'T MEET CODE AND WOULD LIKELY COST MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE PROPERTY'S VALUE TO REMEDIATE AND BRING TO CODE STANDARDS.
IN DOING THAT, WE'VE PARTNERED WITH LEGAL AND PREPARED A DOCUMENT THAT YOU HAVE AND IT SHOULD BE IN YOUR PACKETS.
BASICALLY, WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO ONCE WE GET TO IT, WE'LL GO THROUGH THIS CHECKLIST.
THIS CHECKLIST WILL GUIDE US THROUGH WHAT CONSTITUTES A BUILDING THAT SHOULD BE DECLARED CONDEMNED.
THIS IS BASICALLY AN ORDER THAT WE'LL BE USING TO GAUGE THE DEGREE OF SUBSTANDARDNESS.
RIGHT HERE, THIS IS THE COMMUNICATION THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AT 316 WEST ROGERS.
I BELIEVE THAT'S FIVE PAGES TOTAL AND IT SHOWS OUR COMMUNICATION LOG FROM THE ENTRY OF THE COMPLAINT AGAINST THE PROPERTY.
YOU HAVE PICTURES, I BELIEVE, IN YOUR PACKETS THAT SHOW THIS PROPERTY.
AS YOU MAY RECALL FROM OUR MEETING, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE SECOND MEETING IN MARCH, WE DID REQUEST TO HAVE THESE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THIS DATE AND PRESENTED THAT EVIDENCE AT THAT TIME.
AGAIN, IT'S IN YOUR PACKETS AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS,
[00:50:04]
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK ON 316 WEST ROGERS.>> THIS IS PART OF A FORMAL PROCESS THAT INCLUDES NOTIFICATION AND WE HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS IN ORDER TO GO THROUGH THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FOLLOWED ALL THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO DO CITY BUSINESS.
>> IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON IT? WE'RE IN A PUBLIC HEARING SO ANYBODY CAN APPROACH THE MIC IF THEY HAVE A QUESTION ON IT.
>> MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GAGORE.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THAT MOTION CARRIES.
WE'RE NOW OUT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOW ANYTHING ELSE NEEDS TO HAPPEN NOW MS. LINDSAY, JUST THE PUBLIC HEARING, RIGHT?
>> YES, MAYOR. WE ALSO NEED TO GO THROUGH THE ORDER REGARDING SUBSTANDARD BUILDING LOCATED AT 316 WEST ROGERS.
AS FAR AS WHAT PAGE THAT IS IN YOUR PACKET, BEAR WITH ME JUST A SECOND.
>> WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT AND BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO YOU, I WILL START THIS OFF BY SAYING, I DON'T RECOMMEND DOING ANY 90-DAY EXTENSIONS, BUT SINCE NOBODY HAS COME TO SPEAK AGAINST ORDERING A CONDEMNATION ON THIS PROPERTY, I THINK THAT WE'RE SET TO GO.
SO IN STARTING THIS OUT BEAR WITH ME, THIS THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER DONE THIS.
>> LET ME JUST INTERRUPT YOU FOR ONE MINUTE.
I JUST WOULD REALLY LIKE FOR YOU TO SHARE ON THE SCREEN THE PROOF OF RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF THIS HEARING FOR THIS PROPERTY OWNER.
IT'S PROCEDURAL BECAUSE THIS IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING.
IT'S NOT JUST A PUBLIC HEARING LIKE YOU NORMALLY VIEW A PUBLIC HEARING IN CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS.
I KNOW THAT YOU'VE GOT THAT GREEN CARD THAT PROVES THAT THIS PROPERTY OWNER HAS RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND I'D LIKE TO SHARE THAT WITH THE PUBLIC.
>> THERE IT IS. THEY SIGNED UP FOR IT.
>> THEN THE REST OF THE HEARING, LINDSAY WILL GO THROUGH THE STATUS AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THIS PROPERTY, AND THEN YOU WILL HAVE TO MAKE FINDINGS, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE GOT IN FRONT OF YOU.
>> IN GOING THROUGH THE FINDINGS AND RESULTING ORDER, WE HAVE A SELECTION THAT YOU CAN MAKE.
IS IT A STANDARD BUILDING? WELL, WE PRESENTED EVIDENCE THAT SHOWS THAT THE SIGHTING IS ROTTED, THE ROOF IS CAVING IN.
THERE'S SOME PRETTY SIGNIFICANT ISSUES STRUCTURALLY WITH THIS STRUCTURE AT 316 WEST ROGERS.
>> CAN WE SHARE THAT WITH THE PUBLIC, PLEASE? BECAUSE I KNOW ALL OF OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS HAVE IT IN FRONT OF THEM ON THE COMPUTER, BUT ANYBODY ELSE ATTENDING EITHER HERE OR ONLINE DOES NOT KNOW WHAT THAT PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE.
>> CAN YOU SCROLL THE PICTURES.
COLTON, DO WE HAVE THE AGENDA PACKET AVAILABLE? THAT IS WHERE WE'LL SEE ON PAGE 429, BEGINNING IMAGES OF THIS PROPERTY.
>> WELL, HE'S BRINGING THAT UP.
I MEAN, I CAN GO AHEAD AND START TALKING TO YOU ABOUT IT.
I AM VERY AWARE OF THIS HOUSE.
IT'S RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD FROM MINE AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY NEAR AND DEAR TO MY HEART BECAUSE THE HOUSE I LIVE IN WOULD'VE BEEN CONDEMNED UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS AND I TOOK A LOT OF PAIN TO BRING THAT HOUSE BACK UP TO STANDARD.
[00:55:04]
HE'S MENTIONED HE HAS A HARDSHIP.DID HE SAY THAT BEFORE HE RECEIVED THE RECEIPT OF THAT LETTER?
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS DURING THE CORRESPONDENCE ONCE WE MOVE TO ENFORCEMENT OF SENDING LETTERS AND WARNINGS, YES, THAT WAS ONE OF THE RESPONSES THAT STAFF RECEIVED FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER.
>> OKAY. BECAUSE YOU AND I HAD THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS PROPERTY, IT WAS ABOUT A YEAR AGO, I GUESS.
>> WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED SENDING THE EMAILS THAT HAD THE LISTINGS, BY THE WAY, I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT IN A LONG TIME.
>> PLEASE, AND I THINK AT THE TIME YOU TOLD ME THAT THIS GUY WAS THINKING HE WAS GOING TO TEAR IT DOWN ANYWAYS. WHAT CHANGED?
>> WELL, I'M NOT REALLY SURE IF ANYTHING HAS SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGED.
WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S ANYBODY RESIDING IN THE HOME CURRENTLY.
>> I JUST KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE AROUND THAT HOUSE JUST OVER THE WEEKEND WORKING ON STUFF, SO I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT SURE.
I DON'T LIKE TO SEE US BULLDOZE ANYBODY'S HOUSE.
THAT'S QUITE THE HARDEST THING I THINK YOU'D HAVE TO DEAL IN COUNCIL IS TO SAY YOUR HOUSE IS SUBSTANDARD AND WE'RE GOING TO TAKE IT DOWN.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE EXHAUSTING EVERY SINGLE EFFORT BEFORE WE TAKE SOMEBODY'S HOUSE DOWN.
I KNOW HE'S PROBABLY NOT LIVING IN THERE.
BUT IF HE OWNS A HOUSE, TO ME, THAT'S HIS HOUSE AND EVEN IF I HAVE TO GO OVER THERE TO HIS HOUSE AND KNOCK ON THE DOOR, I WANT TO TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT.
I WISH HE WOULD COME HERE TONIGHT.
THERE IS A SYSTEM FOR GRANTING RELIEF WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT.
YOU DO HAVE THE POWER TO SELECT WHAT METHOD YOU THINK IS THE BEST REMEDY FOR THE COMMUNITY, AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY OWNER.
WE'LL WALK THROUGH ALL THAT IN HERE SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE THE BEST DECISION POSSIBLE.
>> YEAH. THE LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT TAKING SOMETHING DOWN WAS PROBABLY 2008, WHERE IT'S STILL BEEN SITTING AND THAT WOULD BE THOSE APARTMENTS BEHIND [INAUDIBLE]. MAYOR?
>> THEY'RE STILL THERE. WE'VE NEVER TAKEN THEM DOWN.
>> WELL, THAT WAS DONE BY THE OWNER THEMSELVES.
>> MC LINDSAY, I SEE ON EXHIBIT A, YOU'VE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH HIM IN OCTOBER, THEN APRIL.
THOUGH NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO THE STRUCTURE.
SEEM LIKE WE'VE BEEN ON THIS SINCE FEBRUARY, 2021, STARTED THE PROCESS WITH HIM.
>> LINDSAY, WHILE WE TALK ABOUT THIS, CAN YOU UPDATE THE COUNCIL ON NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT WE'VE RESOLVED WHERE THE OWNER IS.
>> WE TYPICALLY TRIED AND RESOLVE ENFORCEMENT AS A LAST RESORT.
THIS IS NOT A VERY FUN CONVERSATION AS MAYOR PRO TEM RIGHT HAS ILLUSTRATED, FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE, AND CERTAINLY NOT FOR PROPERTY OWNERS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE IS PARTNER WITH THE COMMUNITY OF SOME OF THESE OWNERS HAVE SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURES.
WHEN WE DID THE CITY-WIDE EFFORT IN JANUARY 2021, TO IDENTIFY THESE PROPERTIES THAT WERE SUBSTANDARD.
WE STARTED COMMUNICATING WITH RESIDENTS, CREATING PLANS, ACCEPTING PLANS.
WE APPROACHED IT WITH A LEVEL OF EMPATHY I THINK THAT HAS BEEN VERY WELL RECEIVED.
BY THAT I MEAN, WE INITIALLY HAD 56 HOUSES THAT WE HAD IDENTIFIED AND THESE ARE LIMITED TO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES, NOT COMMERCIAL.
THERE'S NO COMMERCIAL INVOLVED.
OF THOSE 56, APPROXIMATELY 35, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO NEGOTIATE, REACH OUT, COMMUNITY EFFORTS, ALL THAT STUFF WITH PROPERTY OWNERS TO GET THEM VOLUNTARILY DEMOLISHED.
OVER THE LAST YEAR-AND-A-HALF THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS, THE CITY'S ONLY EXTENDED $3,400 PER ONE STRUCTURE, AND THAT WAS A DILAPIDATED DETACHED GARAGE AND WE DID THAT.
OF COURSE WE GO THE LEGAL ROUTE.
WE APPLIED LEAN AND THOSE THINGS SO THAT THE CITY IS NOT TECHNICALLY OUT
[01:00:06]
THAT MONEY WHERE IT CAN BE RECUPERATED AT A LATER TIME IF THE PROPERTY SELLS OR THE OWNERSHIP CHANGES.I THINK THAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO AS MUCH AS WE CAN FOR OWNERS OF SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURES, BUT THEN THERE COMES TO BE A TIME WHEN WE HAVE TO DRAW THE LINE IN THE SAND AND SAY THIS IS NOT FIT FOR HUMAN HABITATION.
IT NEEDS TO BE REMEDIED OR IT NEEDS TO COME DOWN.
>> HAVE YOU BEEN INSIDE THIS HOUSE?
>> NO. WE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO GO INSIDE THE HOUSE UNLESS WE WERE INVITED.
>> I HAVEN'T ASKED TO BE EITHER.
THE INSIDE IS ANOTHER. TRY AND LOOK AT IT.
JUST FROM MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE THAT'S ONE THING THAT DEFINITELY HAS TO BE LOOKED INTO.
>> HAVE YOU SPOKE TO THE NEIGHBORS OF THIS HOUSE AND WHAT'S THEIR TAKE, IF YOU HAVE?
>> GIVE ME JUST A SECOND ON THAT.
>> I HAVE HAD COMPLAINTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS TO THE POINT WHERE THEY CALL AND SCREAM AND CURSE AT ME ABOUT THAT HOUSE.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. WERE THEY NOTIFIED ABOUT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS TONIGHT?
>> NO. I THINK IT MAY BE A DIFFERENT SET OF NEIGHBORS THERE NOW.
>> THANK YOU, MS. BRANDY. BRANDY IS OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WHO IS TAKING CHARGE ON DOING THE OUTREACH EFFORTS TO PROPERTY OWNERS.
>> WE DON'T HAVE PHOTOS OR ANYTHING.
I THINK THE SAME GENTLEMAN WHO OWNS IT.
HAD LIKE A WHOLE WALL MISSING ON THE BEDROOM AND I'VE BEEN IN IT JUST TO LOOK AT STUFF, THEN I THINK HE WAS RESIDING THERE AT THAT TIME.
BUT IT'S BASICALLY IN THE SAME SHAPE.
FLOORS, WALLS, SHEET ROCK, MISSING AND BASICALLY THE SAME SHAPE AS THE OUTSIDE.
THAT WAS THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, SO [OVERLAPPING] LIKE I SAID, HE WAS LIVING THERE AT THAT TIME.
>> I'M ALL FORGETTING HIS ATTENTION AND DOING SOMETHING ON IT, BUT I'M STILL SHORT OF TEARING IT DOWN.
JUDITH, WHAT OPTIONS DO WE HAVE?
>> [NOISE] LINDSEY THEY HAVE THIS IN FRONT OF THEM, RIGHT?
>> OKAY. IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 2.
THE FIRST THRESHOLD IS YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT AND WHAT I'M HEARING FROM CITY STAFF IS THAT THE BUILDING IS SUBSTANDARD AND WHEN I SAY SUBSTANDARD, IT MEANS IT'S NOT SUITABLE PURSUANT TO CITY CODE.
IF YOU MAKE THAT FINDING THAT IS IN VIOLATION OF CODE WHICH STAFF HAS TOLD US IT IS, THEN YOU MOVE ON AND GO THROUGH THE CHECKLIST BASICALLY.
I'M UNCLEAR, I'M NOT HEARING AND PERHAPS LINDSEY, YOU CAN CLARIFY BECAUSE I'M HEARING CONFLICTING EVIDENCE, I'M HEARING YOU SAY THAT THERE'S NO ONE LIVING THERE AND I'M HEARING MR. WRIGHT SAID THAT HE SAW SOMEONE THERE THIS WEEKEND [OVERLAPPING].
ARE WE CERTAIN? DO WE KNOW WHAT THE STATUS IS? AS WHETHER OR NOT IT'S BEING INHIBITED? [BACKGROUND]
>> THE STAFF TELLS ME THAT THEY WERE DOING YARD WORK, WHOEVER WAS SEEN THERE OVER THE WEEKEND.
[BACKGROUND] BUT WE DO BELIEVE THAT HOME IS UNOCCUPIED.
>> THEN THAT'S THE WAY WE GAUGE THE PRIORITY OF WHAT WE'RE BRINGING IN FRONT OF YOU BECAUSE WE DO NEED TO RESOLVE THE REST OF THAT LIST BUT WE PREFER TO BRING STRUCTURES TO YOU THAT ARE UNOCCUPIED.
IT MAKES THINGS A LOT MORE STREAMLINED.
>> CAN I ASK YOU TO CONFIRM OR DENY AT SOME POINT WHETHER THEY HAVE ACTIVE WATER ACCOUNT?
>> BACK TO THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION ON THE TOP OF THIS SECOND PAGE, YOU CAN GIVE THEM 30 DAYS TO TRY AND COME INTO CODE.
>> I DON'T THINK THEY'LL BE ABLE TO COME INTO CODE WITHIN 30 DAYS, BUT I THINK AN ACTION PLAN WOULD BE SUITABLE.
>> THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE WILL ALLOW YOU TO GIVE THEM MORE TIME.
YOU CAN GIVE THEM 90 DAYS, BUT THE CODE ALSO SAYS THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE 90 DAYS THAT THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR THEM TO GIVE YOU A WORK PLAN, A WRITTEN WORK PLAN ON HOW THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT, AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REPORT IN WITH THE FREQUENCY THAT CITY COUNCIL DICTATES.
>> THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID WITH THOSE APARTMENTS, THAT CONTINUES TO THIS DAY TO BE AN ISSUE.
[01:05:04]
>> I'M TOLD THAT THIS PROPERTY DOES HAVE AN ACTIVE WATER ACCOUNT.
>> SO THEY'RE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE? IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN SAY THE BUILDING IS SUBSTANDARD.
YOUR DETERMINATION THAT IT'S SUBSTANDARD DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS DEMOLITION.
>> BUT THAT WAS MY WHOLE ARGUMENT.
A LONG TIME AGO WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT ESTABLISHING THE SUBSTANDARD LISTING WAS WHETHER A SUBSTANDARD WAS NOT AND THEN YOU'RE BASICALLY GOING TO EITHER BULLDOZE SOMEBODY'S HOUSE OR NOT BASED OFF OF YOUR SUBSTANDARD LISTING, AND IT'S TO EACH THEIR OWN OF WHAT THEY THINK AND IDENTIFY AS SUBSTANDARD.
>> IF YOU DON'T THINK YOU'VE GOT THE EVIDENCE, THEN HAVE YOUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER GIVE IT TO YOU.
THAT YOUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER STANDS UP AND TELLS YOU, THIS IS SUBSTANDARD AND THIS IS WHY.
YOU MAKE THE DETERMINATION WHETHER IT IS AND THEN YOU CAN DETERMINE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO ONCE YOU MAKE THE DETERMINATION THAT IT'S SUBSTANDARD.
>> LIKE YOU JUST SAID, YOU CAN MAKE THEM COME BACK WITH AN ACTION PLAN AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT I'M GOING TO DO OVER THE NEXT WHATEVER YEAR OR SOMETHING [OVERLAPPING] IN WRITING.
I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF THE CITY DETERMINING ON WHICH HOUSES TO PULL THOSE DOWN OR NOT, AND I DO WANT THE CITY TO EXHAUST ALL OPTIONS AND EVEN IF THAT IS AFTER THIS POINT, WE DO GIVE THEM A NOTICE, SAY THIS WILL HAPPEN, THESE ARE YOUR OPTIONS AND HAVING A PLAN, AN OPTION FOR THEM TO COME BACK WITH A PLAN.
IF THEY CAN'T DO THAT, THEN WE DO WHAT WE HAVE TO DO AFTER THAT BUT [OVERLAPPING] EXHAUST ALL OPTIONS.
>> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE WHAT I'VE CALLED THE CHECKLIST TO THE ORDER IN YOUR PACKET.
WE RECEIVED IT AFTER THE PACKET WAS PUBLISHED SO BRANDY IS MAKING COPIES.
SHE'S MAKING THREE COPIES FOR EACH OF YOU BECAUSE THERE ARE THREE PROPERTIES ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT.
IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK TO THAT AND DO THE CHECKLIST AFTER THE COPIES ARE MADE.
MAYOR, IF YOU FIND IT APPROPRIATE I'M READY TO MOVE ON TO 22, IF YOU'RE GOOD WITH THAT.
>> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 22.
[22. Conduct a public hearing to determine whether the structure located on the property at 320 W. Peach Street, Angleton, Brazoria County, Texas 77515 complies Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations and Chapter 11 - Housing of the Code of Ordinances; and whether such structure shall be demolished in accordance with Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations, Article XII - Substandard Buildings, Sec. 5-572 - "Authority regarding substandard building" of the Code of Ordinances.]
FIRST, WE'LL START WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING THEN WE'LL GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY AND THEY WILL LET YOU DO YOUR BRIEF SO.I WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER STRUCTURE LOCATED AT THE PROPERTY OF 320 WEST PEACH TREE LOCATED IN MISSOURI COUNTY, TEXAS 77515 REQUIRES, CHAPTER 5, BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS AND CHAPTER 11, HOUSING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND WHETHER SUCH STRUCTURES SHALL BE DEMOLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 5, BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 12, SUBSTANDARD BUILDING SECTION 5, DASH 572, AUTHORITY REGARDING SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.
SO WE NEED TO GO TO A PUBLIC HEARING, FOLKS FELLAS, SO I HAVE A MOTION.
>> MOVED ON OPEN PUBLIC HEARINGS.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECOND BY, WHO WAS THAT?
>> COUNCILMAN GONGORA. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED [INAUDIBLE], THAT MOTION CARRIES.
NOW WE'RE AT A PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER 22 THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET OUR GAME GOING HERE IN A SECOND NOW WE'VE GOT THE BALL ROLLING.
IS ANYBODY HERE WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM NUMBER 22, [NOISE] POINTERS SPEECH. GO AHEAD, SIR. COME ON UP.
>> BRICE [INAUDIBLE], THE OWNER OF 320 PEACH.
THERE IS NO ONE LIVING THERE, IT'S AN INVESTMENT PROPERTY.
THIS HOUSE IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REPAIRED SLOWLY.
IT'S A PROJECT I'VE TAKEN ALL WITH MY KIDS SO IT'S DEFINITELY A WORK IN PROGRESS.
LIKE THIS HOUSE, EVEN THOUGH I COULD HAVE DEMOLISHED IT WHEN I GOT THE PROPERTY, I THOUGHT ABOUT IT.
I'VE RESTORED MANY HOUSES, IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I DO.
WITHOUT SEEING THE INSIDE, YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW.
THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE THAT I HAVE HAS 80 PERCENT OF THE SHIP LAP IS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION, ALL THE EXTERIOR WALLS HAS FLOORS, WOOD FLOORS THAT COST A FORTUNE TO REPLACE THAT ARE IN EXCELLENT CONDITION, ABOUT 75 PERCENT OF IT.
[01:10:03]
WE HAVE PLANS TO REDO THE HOUSE AND WE'VE WORKED ON IT.WE HAD TO CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY.
WHEN I GOT THE PROPERTY IT HAD BASICALLY BECOME A DUMPING GROUND.
I THINK WE HAD THREE BOLTS REMOVED ABOUT 80 TIRES AND A VARIETY OF OTHER THINGS.
THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN CLEANED UP ABOUT 95 PERCENT AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO ON WEEKENDS AND WHEN MY TWO BOYS COME HOME FROM COLLEGE WE WORK ON IT, SO WE JUST FINISHED.
IT'S BEEN ONE OF THOSE THINGS, IT'S DOWN HERE IN ANGLETON I LIVE IN MISSOURI CITY.
WE GET DOWN WHEN WE HAVE TIME TO WORK ON IT.
I'VE SECURED THE PROPERTY SINCE THEN.
IT HAS A LOCK ON THE DOOR BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE.
I NOTICED THAT SOMEONE HAD INHABITED IT AT ONE TIME AND WE PUT A ELECTRONIC LOCK ON IT WHICH IS PROBABLY THE MOST EXPENSIVE THING ON THE HOUSE RIGHT NOW.
[LAUGHTER] THEN JUST RECENTLY IN THE LAST MONTH OR SO, I NOTICED THAT SOMEONE HAD BROKEN INTO THE WINDOWS, IT COULD HAVE BEEN KIDS, WHOEVER, BUT IT'S A COUPLE OF BROKEN WINDOWS WHICH YOU PROBABLY NEED TO BOARD UP.
ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS WAS THERE WAS A TREE, A REALLY TALL TREE RIGHT NEXT TO THE HOUSE GROWING UP AGAINST THE FOUNDATION WHICH HAS CAUSED A COUPLE OF ISSUES.
THEN THERE WAS A BIG HOLE IN THE ROOF FROM THE BRANCH, IT HAD FALLEN OFF THE TREE.
WE PATCHED IT UP AS BEST WE COULD UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE PLANS THAT I HAVE IN REDOING THIS HOUSE, WE'RE GOING TO ADD A GAVEL ON THE FRONT, SO I DIDN'T WANT TO RECOVER THE ROOF AND SPEND THAT MONEY AND THEN HAVE TO REDO IT LATER.
WE JUST COVERED IT WITH A TARP, DID PATCH IT UP SO IT WOULDN'T LEAK INSIDE, PUT A TOP OF IT BUT THOSE THINGS DON'T LAST FOREVER, SO I THINK WE'VE REPLACED IT TWICE, IT'S PROBABLY IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT AGAIN, AND THAT'S ABOUT IT.
>> WELL, DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE DON'T INTERACT BUT WHEN WE GET TO THE MEAT OF THE SUBJECT WE MAY HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR THAT FOR YOU TO COME UP AND ANSWER.
>> ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON BEFORE WE GET ONTO ITEM NUMBER 21 SPEECH? THIRD CALL, COUNCIL.
>> MR. MAYOR MAY WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA, DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
WE HAVE NOW CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE ARE ON TO THE ACTUAL HEARING PORTION OF OUR ITEM 22, NOW THAT WE KNOW THE ROADMAP NOW.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MAYOR.
SO THIS PROPERTY [NOISE] WAS OBVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED BECAUSE OF THE EXTERIOR, THERE'S A GIANT HOLE IN THE ROOF, IT'S APPROXIMATELY SIX FOOT WIDE IF I HAD TO GAUGE FROM THE ROADWAY.
I HAVE SEEN THAT THERE'S EXTENSIVE DAMAGE TO OTHER AREAS OF THE HOME AS WELL, AND WITH A HOLE THAT LARGE, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT HOLE'S BEEN THERE, IT'S BEEN THERE FOR QUITE AWHILE, BUT A LOT OF WATER INTRUSION HAPPENS WITH THAT.
I WOULD BE WILLING TO BET THAT THE INSIDE IS PROBABLY NOT A WHOLE LOT BETTER THAN THE OUTSIDE, HOWEVER, I DO KNOW THAT STAFF HAS MADE NUMEROUS ATTEMPTS AT REACHING MR. SPADY.
IN SOME INSTANCES WE'VE ACTUALLY SPOKEN TO MR. SPADY, WHILE WE DON'T HAVE A GREEN CARD ACKNOWLEDGING HIS RECEIPT, HE DID CALL CITY HALL LAST WEEK AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT HE HAD RECEIVED IT.
HE'D RECEIVED HIS PUBLIC NOTICE OF THIS HEARING HENCE HIS PRESENCE, AND THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING, SIR, AND THAT GIVES YOU GUYS WHAT YOU NEED TO HEAR, ALL SIDES OF IT.
I WOULD BE AMENABLE TO WORKING WITH THIS PROPERTY OWNER SO LONG AS MR. SPADY CAN PRODUCE A PLAN WITH TIMELINES AND ADHERE TO THOSE TIMELINES BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN THE POINT OF CONTENTION HERE, IS THAT WE HAVE NOT SEEN HIM MEET ANY DEADLINES THAT HE HAS STATED PREVIOUSLY.
>>THANK YOU, MA'AM. ACCORDING TO OUR PACKET, HOW OLD IS THIS PHOTOGRAPH THAT WE'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW? IS THIS TWO WEEKS, FOUR WEEKS, A MONTH? LINDSEY IF YOU KNOW.
>> THIS COULD BE ONE OF SEVERAL PICTURES I'VE TAKEN OF THIS PROPERTY ANYTIME BETWEEN JANUARY 2021 AND MARCH LEADING UP TO THE SECOND MEETING IN MARCH IN PREPARATION FOR REQUESTING THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
>> HAVE YOU ALL BEEN OUT THERE, LET'S SAY WITHIN THE LAST 2-3 WEEKS, HAVE YOU ALL GONE AND INSPECT THE PROPERTY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF THREE WEEKS?
>> MY BAD, SORRY. WE'VE BEEN BY THE PROPERTY.
SO THERE'S A TAP OVER THE ROOF, THERE IS A CONTAINER OUT FRONT FOR TRASH, THERE'S TRASH PILED UP OUTBACK, INCLUDING A TOILET, IT'S BEEN THERE.
[01:15:02]
I'VE SEEN ABSOLUTELY NO PROGRESS ON THE PROPERTY.I'VE MADE CONTACT WITH HIM SEVERAL TIMES, APRIL OF 2021 HE WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A FOUNDATION GUY COMING AND LOOK AT IT AND DECIDING AND GIVING ME AN ANSWER BY APRIL 16TH, 2021 ON WHAT HE WAS GOING TO DO, AND HERE WE ARE A YEAR LATER WITH NOTHING [NOISE] EXCEPT FOR A TARP ON THE ROOF.
>> GOT YOU. WHEN YOU SAY A TRASH BIN, IS THAT A ROLL-OFF?
>> THERE'S A BIG ROLL-OFF, GOOD.
>> THIS IS THE HOUSE ON PEACH GOING BACK TO ASK WHEN YOU MAKE THAT CURVE RIGHT THERE ON THE LEFT?
>> NOW THAT WE KNOW [NOISE] SOME GUIDANCE NOW, THIS IS THE SECOND ONE, NOT THE FIRST ONE.
AT LEAST THE GENTLEMAN IS HERE TO A CERTAIN DEGREE, WE WOULD APPRECIATE MAYBE IF COUNCILOR IS LOOKING AT THIS, OBVIOUSLY, THE MAN CARES ABOUT HIS PROPERTY SO HE'S HERE TONIGHT, COME WITH AN ACTION PLAN.
JUDITH, JUST HELP ME OUT HERE, DO WE SET THAT ACTION PLAN UP HERE? CAN WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH HIM AND SEE WHAT HIS POSSIBLE TIMELINE SO HE UNDERSTANDS OUR CONSTRAINT OR OUR CONCERNS?
>> LET ME JUST ASK A QUESTION FIRST.
>> BRANDY, WHAT OTHER CONTACT HAVE YOU HAD BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT EXHIBIT A TO THE APRIL ORDINANCE?
>> I SENT A LETTER REGULAR AND CERTIFIED MAIL ON FEBRUARY 8TH, 2021 TO THE GARZA ESTATE, IT WAS SIGNED FOR FEBRUARY 11TH, MR. SPADY CALLED ON APRIL 13TH, 2021.
>> I CALLED MR. SPADY ON MAY 18TH TO MOW, HE ADVISED HE WAS COMING THAT WEEKEND.
I CALLED HIM AGAIN ON THE MAY 27TH, 2021 TO MOW, LEFT A VOICEMAIL.
CALLED MR. SPADY ON AUGUST 17TH, 2021, HE STATES HE'S PATCHING THE ROOF TODAY TO STOP THE WATER AND START ON HOME, HE STATES HE WILL GET THE PERMITS.
ON DECEMBER 8TH, 2021, MAILED A WRITTEN WARNING, REGULAR AND CERTIFIED MAIL TO MR. SPADY FOR THE ABOVE LISTED INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE VIOLATIONS, GIVING 30 DAYS FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION.
HE SIGNED FOR THE CERTIFIED LETTER ON DECEMBER 11TH.
FEBRUARY 16, 2022, ISSUED CITATIONS FOR THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE 304.1 THROUGH THE MUNICIPAL COURT.
ON APRIL 25TH, MAILED LETTERS, REGULAR AND CERTIFIED MAIL TO MR. SPADY AND TO THE PREVIOUS OWNERS BECAUSE IT IS STILL IN THEIR NAME UNDER CAD TO THE ESTATE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THE HUBERT DELILAH ESTATES LETTER WAS SIGNED FOR ON APRIL 27TH, MR. SPADY'S WAS NOT.
HE DID CALL THE OFFICE ON MAY 11TH AND STATED HE DID GET THE NOTICE AND HE WANTED TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE BEFORE PUBLIC HEARING AND HE WAS TOLD TO COME TO THE HEARING AND BRING ALL OF HIS INFORMATION AND EVERYTHING HE HAD.
>> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, WERE YOU GIVEN A WRITTEN SCOPE OF WORK FOR WHAT'S PLANNED?
>> HAVE YOU EVER BEEN GIVEN A WRITTEN SCOPE OF WORK FOR WHAT'S PLANNED?
>> SO CITY COUNCIL, YOU'VE HEARD WHY THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CALLED, SO YOU MAKE THE DETERMINATION WHETHER IT'S SUBSTANDARD, AND THEN AFTER YOU DETERMINE THAT, WHETHER OR NOT YOU THINK YOU'VE GOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO DEEM THE PROPERTY SUBSTANDARD PURSUANT TO YOUR CODE.
THEN IF YOU LOOK ON THE SECOND PAGE, YOU'VE GOT SOME OPTIONS, I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE STATUTE, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SAYS, IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW 90 DAYS OR MORE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, THAT IS STATUTORY REQUIREMENT IS THAT HE HAS TO GIVE TO YOU IN WRITING THE SCOPE OF REPAIR AND DATES AND HOW IT'S GOING TO OCCUR, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE THAT THIS EVENING FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER, WE DO NOT.
>> WE CAN TALK TO HIM THOUGH, RIGHT?
>> I'D REALLY LIKE TO TALK TO HIM.
>> NO, YOU CAN ABSOLUTELY TALK TO HIM BUT THIS IS QUASI-JUDICIAL SO WHATEVER DETERMINATION YOU MAKE WE'VE GOT TO GET IT OUT, WHICH IS WHY I GOT IT OUT.
[LAUGHTER] SO YES, I WOULD SUGGEST YOU DO THAT.
>> THAT'S WHERE I WAS GETTING TO, SAY AT WHAT POINT CAN WE BRING HIM UP BECAUSE NOW HE'S [OVERLAPPING] AND WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO ASK HIM QUESTIONS?
>> THANK YOU, SIR, FOR BEING PATIENT WITH US.
>> THE FIRST QUESTION IS ON, PROBABLY MOST OF OUR MIND IS UP HERE IS, YOU SAID YOU WANT TO WORK ON IT, YOU WANT TO TRY TO GET IT TO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO WITH IT.
A REASONABLE TIMELINE THAT YOU THINK YOU CAN GET THIS TAKEN CARE OF, WE'VE BEEN OBVIOUSLY AT THIS FOR OVER A YEAR, SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GIVE YOU AN ADEQUATE TIMELINE THAT WE CAN BE SATISFIED WITH.
>> FIRST OF ALL, LET ME JUST MAKE A COMMENT, THAT THAT PICTURE IS PROBABLY A YEAR OLD.
[01:20:02]
>> THAT HOLE WAS REPAIRED LAST PROBABLY IT WAS RIGHT BEFORE HURRICANE SEASON, I BELIEVE.
IT WAS SEPTEMBER, I'M NOT SURE OF THE TIMELINE BUT IT WAS DEFINITELY LAST YEAR, SUMMER OR EARLY FALL, THAT THAT WAS REPAIRED.
AS MATTER OF FACT, WE TORE OFF PRETTY MUCH MOST OF THE FRONT HALF OF THE [NOISE] TO REPAIR THE WOOD THAT WAS UNDER THERE, THE DECK BOARD.
THAT WAS DONE, THEY CAN GO OUT TOMORROW AND TAKE A PICTURE, AS A MATTER OF FACT I THINK I DO HAVE A PICTURE ON MY PHONE OF THE REPAIR.
>> YOU SAY THERE'S A BLUE TAP UP THERE RIGHT NOW?
>> IT WAS. BUT I WAS THERE THIS WEEKEND CHECKING AND THOSE TAPS AREN'T MADE TO LAST VERY LONG, ACTUALLY, IF YOU DON'T MIND I HAVE A PICTURE.
>> WE DON'T HAVE A PICTURE, I THINK YESTERDAY, OF COURSE GOING DOWN THE ROAD 100 TIMES.
THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT ROOF, I NOTICED, IT'S NOT COMPLETE, THERE'S NEW PLYWOOD ON IT THAT IT LOOKED LIKE TAP IT'S NOT DONE.
>> THERE'S NO PERMITTING ON THIS ADDRESS.
>> GO AHEAD, SIR. [BACKGROUND]
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK [OVERLAPPING].
THE REASONING IS THE ONE I KNOW WE'RE MOVING A LITTLE SLOW, BUT AGAIN, I DIDN'T WANT WHEN YOU HAVE AN OLD HOUSE LIKE THIS AND YOU START WORKING ON OF COURSE YOU STARTED OPENING THINGS UP AND YOU FIND OTHER PROBLEMS, SO FIXING THE ROOF TOTALLY.
AT THIS POINT, IT WOULD NEED FIXING AGAIN BECAUSE THERE WAS WATER PENETRATING THROUGH THE SIX-FOOT HOLE, TOWARD THE FLOOR, AND JUST IN THAT FRONT ROOM RIGHT THERE IN THAT AREA.
THE REST OF THE HOUSE WAS FINE.
THERE WAS NO WATER PENETRATING ANYWHERE ELSE.
I CHOSE NOT TO SPEND MONEY FIXING THE ROOF TOTALLY BECAUSE I'D HAVE TO REDO IT AGAIN LATER.
THAT'S WHY I PUT THE TOP ONE AS A TEMPORARY MEASURE.
[NOISE] THE PLAN RIGHT NOW IS THAT WE WILL BE PULLING PERMITS.
FIRST OF ALL, I'VE A GC LICENSE AND INSURANCE SO I COULD PULL PERMITS AT ANY TIME.
THERE WASN'T THE ISSUE WAS TRYING TO DECIDE WHICH APPROACH I WAS GOING TO TAKE OF THE HOUSE, AND LIKE I SAID, IT WAS A PROJECT OF THE FAMILY BASICALLY RESTORING IT.
IT WASN'T TOP PRIORITY I'LL BE VERSUS SAY THAT HERE.
THE NEIGHBORS ARE ALL BY THE WAY, I WAS SPOKEN TO EVERY NEIGHBOR ON THE STREET.
THEY ALL COME OVER WHEN I'M DOWN THERE, TALK WITH THOSE TRYING TO HELP OUT.
AS MATTER OF FACT, I WAS THERE COUPLE OF WEEKENDS AGO AND THE ONE NEIGHBOR CAME OVER AND WAS LIKE, HEY, I WAS CLEAR IN SOME OF THE BUSH TREE, AND HE CAME OVER AND WAS HELPING ME CHOP IT.
I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S COMPLAINING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
FROM THAT STANDPOINT, THEY SEE THAT THIS MAKING PROGRESS, AS FAR AS TIMELINE GOES, I'D SAY PROBABLY IN THE NEXT 3 -4 WEEKS, I'LL PROBABLY GO AHEAD AND PULL PERMITS.
I'LL KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I'M GOING TO DO WITH THE HOUSE AT THIS POINT.
THERE IS A BIG BEEN OUT THERE THAN I DID SO THAT WHEN WE DO THE DEMO WE CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO.
I'D SAY THE ROOF, WHICH WILL BE ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS WE DO, I SHOULD PULL PERMITS WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH AND DEFINITELY BEFORE SUMMER IS OUT, PROBABLY IN LATE JUNE OR JULY.
IT'LL PROBABLY BE THE ROOF WOULD PROBABLY BE DONE, AND THE SITE WILL DO THE SAME TIME WE DO THE ROOF.
>> OKAY, SO I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO IS FOR YOU PURCHASED FOR A RENTAL PROPERTY YOU GOING TO RENT, JUST QUESTION, WHAT IS YOUR PLANS FOR THE RESIDENTS?
>> HONESTLY, I JUST HAVEN'T MADE UP MY MIND YET.
I MEAN, ONE OF MY KIDS MIGHT TAKE IT. WHO KNOWS? I DON'T KNOW.
>> BUT WHAT'S YOUR TIME FRAME OF HOW LONG YOU WANT TO HAVE THIS ALL DONE BY A YEAR OR TWO YEARS?
NO. MY WIFE HAS GOT NO ON ME ABOUT THIS HOUSE AS WELL.
[LAUGHTER] TOUGHER THAN YOU GUYS? DEFINITELY BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR. IT'LL BE DONE.
[01:25:03]
I CAN'T IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT'S HANGING OVER MY HEAD AT THIS POINT.BUT ONCE THE WORK STARTS, IT'LL GO PRETTY QUICKLY.
>> SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.
HOW MANY TIMES YOU'VE BEEN ON THE PROPERTY WORKING ON IT UNTIL TODAY?
>> WELL, THIS IS PROBABLY NOT A GOOD YEAR, AZURE YOU'D LIKE, BUT I WOULD SAY AT LEAST, 6 - 7 WEEKENDS, AT LEAST.
>> OKAY. YOU'RE STILL NOT THE PROPERTY OWNER?
>> YOU ARE SO THE STATE ISSUE IS NOW RESOLVED.
>> THE ISSUE WITH THE STATE RESOLVED?
>> YES. IF YOU CAN IMAGINE HAVING 15 FAMILY MEMBERS SIGN, IT TAKES A WHILE TO GET EVERYBODY TO SIGN ONE AT A TIME AND FINDING THOSE WHO ARE LOST EVERYTHING.
I HAVE ALL THE PAPERWORK I JUST HAVEN'T FILED WITH THE CITY YET.
>> QUESTION. WELL, GUESS WHAT? CODE ENFORCEMENT OR WE'RE LOOKING FOR THIS TO GET DRAGGED IN.
WHERE WATER DIDN'T POUR IT INTO PLACE TO KEEP THE RATS OUT, AND THE OWLS FROM LIGHTING IN THERE AND NESTING, OR TO WHAT EXTENT ARE WE LOOKING ASKING FOR THIS HOUSE TO BE REMEDIATED? I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO ASK HIM TO BUILD THE TAJ MAHAL IN HERE, BUT WE'VE GOT TO GET IT TO SOME POINT AND BE AGREED UPON WHERE WE WILL WHAT'S THE GOAL OVER HERE?
>> MY GOAL IS TO HAVE THE OUTSIDE CORRECTED?
>> THE OUTSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE CORRECTED.
HE CAN TAKE AS LONG AS HE NEEDS TO GO ON THE INSIDE.
I NEED THE OUTSIDE TO LOOK CORRECTED, SO IT'S NOT A BLIGHT?
>> YEAH. WELL, THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE SEE WHEN THEY DRIVE BY.
BUT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO REMEDIATE.
>> BUT LET'S BE SPECIFIC ON THE OUTSIDE.
ARE YOU ASKING FOR PAINT, CAULKING, WINDOWS TO BE FIXED? I MEAN, EXACTLY WHAT DO YOU WANT?
>> WHAT'S ON OUR NATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE. ANY ROT.
>> THE ROOF, ANYTHING THAT CAUSE A LEAK? I SEE. I DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME.
>> SO AS COUNCILMAN BOOTS SAYS, DRIED IN.
>> DOESN'T HAVE TO BE PAINTED, JUST HAS TO BE DRIED IN?
>> NO. ANY ROT ON THE WINDOW SILLS, THE DOORS, THE WALLS, THE ROOF, ALL OF THAT HAS TO BE REPAIRED.
>> DRAW IT IN. YES, BASICALLY OR WINDOWS BUSTED OUT, AT LEAST.
THEY CAN BORED THEM UP WITH HER FOR A YEAR, THEN YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT BUT YES, DRIVE IN.
I MEAN, WE DON'T DO PRETTY PAINT, WHATEVER THEY HAVE TO PAINT.
>> YES. BUT YOU DON'T SEE A WHOLE ON ROOF AND A BUSTED.
WHAT IT IS OR HOLES IN THE SIDE WHERE IT'S ROTTEN, JUST.
>> WHAT'S YOUR TIMEFRAME FOR IT TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT.
>> THAT'LL DEFINITELY BE DONE BEFORE SUMMER ENDS. IT'LL BE DONE.
>> NINETY DAYS YOU CAN HAVE IT DONE?
>> WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT 90 DAYS IS NOT DONE, FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN.
>> CAN I ASK THAT HE SUBMIT THAT IN WRITING?
>> BECAUSE I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF WORKING WITH SOMEONE THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE AND DO IT.
THEN WHY SHOULD WE TEAR A HOUSE DOWN IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE THE FIXES? BUT IF YOU SAY YOU'RE GOING TO DO IT AND YOU GOING TO DO IT ON THE CLOCK.
>> BUT AGAIN, WE APPRECIATE HIM COMING INTO PLAY IN THIS SITUATION WHICH WE CAN'T DETERMINE ON OUR OWN.
>> EXACTLY. I THINK WE'VE GOT RESOLUTION ON THIS ONE.
WE JUST NEED TO TAKE ACTION COUNCIL.
>> SOUNDS LIKE THAT WE'RE LEADING TOWARD A, GIVE US SOME GUIDANCE.
>> YOU NEED TO GIVE A DEADLINE ON THE WRITTEN.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE 90 DAYS IN WHICH I THINK YOU ARE, THEN YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REQUIRE A DETAILED WRITTEN PLAN ON EXACTLY WHAT WORK IS GOING TO BE DONE AND DEADLINES IN THAT WRITTEN PLAN, SO YOU NEED TO IMPOSE THE DEADLINE OF WHEN THAT'S DUE.
YET YOU HAVE TO FIND IT SUBSTANDARD.
YOU HAVE TO REQUIRE THE WRITTEN SUBMITTAL WITH THE DETAILED WORK THAT WILL BRING IT BACK INTO CODE, AND YOUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, WERE YOU ABLE TO DETAIL WHAT THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE: AND YOU NEED A DEADLINE FOR WHEN THAT SHOULD BE DO AND I WOULD SUGGEST PRONTO LIKE TOMORROW.
>> THE DETAILED PLAN WILL SET OUT IN THE 90 DAYS BENCHMARKS FOR WHAT WILL BE DONE IN THOSE 90 DAYS.
>> REMEMBER WE REVIEW THAT 90 DAYS.
[01:30:03]
>> [OVERLAPPING] THE NEEDS OF THE AGREEMENT.
>> YOU CAN OR YOU CAN SAY IT HAS TO BE DONE IN 90 DAYS OR WE DEMOLISH.
DOESN'T SOUND LIKE YOU WANT TO DO THAT, BUT YOU HAVE THAT OPTION.
>> THEN I RECOMMEND WE BRING IT BACK IN 90 DAYS SO THE PLAN PRESENTED IS IN THE PACKET.
WE ALL CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
>> SEE THE PROGRESS YOU'VE MADE.
>> OKAY, COUNCIL. YOU HEARD THAT WE'RE ALL LEANING TOWARD A 90 DAY WINDOW.
AS MS. JUDITH SAID, WE NEED TO PUT SOME BENCHMARK DATES IN THERE SO HE KNOWS THE EXPECTATION.
WHAT TO HIT THE MARK ON AND HE'S GOT TO SUBMIT THAT WRITING TO US.
>> CAN WE ASK FOR A WRITTEN PLAN OF ATTACK DUE HERE ON THE 1ST OF JUNE?
>> DO WE HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY? IS IT TONIGHT?
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IN MY MOTION.
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY SEVEN DAYS.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING. SEVEN DAYS TO COME UP WITH A PLAN, SUBMIT IT, CLOCK START SEVENTH DAY.
THE CLOCK STARTS FROM 90 DAYS. ALL RIGHT, JOHN?
>> WHERE'S HE AT? WILL THAT BE OKAY?
>> I THINK JOHN NEEDS TO MAKE A MOTION SO WE CAN FILL THIS PAPERWORK OUT.
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE ASK THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO SUBMIT WITHIN SEVEN DAYS A WRITTEN PLAN OF ACTION THAT WILL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 90 DAYS AT 320 WEST PEACH STREET.
THAT COMES BACK TO US IN 90 DAYS FOR REVIEW.
>> NINETY DAYS FROM THIS EVENING.
>> FROM THIS EVENING OR FROM THE SEVENTH DAY?
>> WILL THAT WORK, JOHN? HOLD ON. GO AHEAD, WALTER.
>> YEAH. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT ON YOUR TIME LIMIT, YOU MAKE IT BY THE END OF BUSINESS, WHETHER THAT'S MAY 31ST OR JUNE THE 1ST AND BY END OF BUSINESS I MEAN 5:30 PM.
IF YOUR PREFERENCE IS JUNE THE 1ST AND BY 5:30 PM ON JUNE THE 1ST, SO THAT THERE'S NO DEBATE ABOUT WHEN THE PLAN IS SUPPOSED TO BE SUBMITTED.
>> SURE. MR. MAYOR, I'LL AMEND MY MOTION TO STATE THAT THE ACTION PLAN MUST BE RECEIVED BY BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT BY 5:30 PM ON JUNE 1ST.
>> OKAY. WILL THAT FULFILL WHAT SHE NEEDS TO DO TO FILL THIS DOCUMENT?
>> THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, IS CITY COUNCIL FINDING IN LINE WITH WHAT CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS SAID? ARE YOU FINDING IT TO BE A SUBSTANDARD BUILDING?
>> I'M NOT TAKING THAT ACTION AT THIS MOMENT.
>> THAT'S WHAT WE NEED IN THE MINUTES.
YOU'RE NOT TAKING THAT ACTION AND PUT THEM ON.
>> MY MOTION, I'M NOT TAKING THAT ACTION.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. WE NEED TO HAVE THAT IN THE MINUTES.
>> FOR THIS PROCESS TO BE ON LINE OR TO BE CORRECT, DOES IT HAVE TO HAVE THAT IN THERE OR NO?
>> IT'S YOUR CHOICE. IF YOU WANT TO FIND THE BUILDING SUBSTANDARD AND DEMOLISH IT, YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN.
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO.
THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION BECAUSE I DON'T WANT SOMEONE TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES LATER AND SAY, WELL, WHAT DID THEY DETERMINE?
>> OKAY. I KNOW WE'VE HAD A MOTION STARTED, BUT I JUST HAVE A QUESTION TO ASK.
AS A COUNCIL WE'RE JUST MAKING A MOTION TONIGHT.
WHAT MEAT DO WE HAVE TO BACK US UP IF HE DOESN'T MEET THIS 90 DAY WINDOW? THEN THIS GOES INTO A FORCE AND WE START THIS PROCESS?
>> NINETY DAYS FROM NOW WE CAN TAKE THE ACTION.
>> YOU HAVE TO FIND IT SUBSTANDARD.
>> NINETY DAYS FROM NOW YOU CAN FIND IT SUBSTANDARD IF YOU CHOOSE.
>> THAT'S WHY IN MOTION I SAID IT COMES BACK TO US IN 90 DAYS.
>> YES. YOU HAVE TO DO THE PROCESS OVER AGAIN.
>> WE START THE PROCESS OVER AGAIN.
>> THAT'S JUST WHAT I WANT TO GET TO.
OKAY. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO BE AMICABLE TO WORK WITH THE OWNER FIRST TO SEE IF WE DO THAT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT S WHAT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME AS WELL.
>> I'M WALKING WITH YOU. HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR [INAUDIBLE] FOR WHAT HE JUST SPOKE. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> MIKEY. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SVOBODA.
ANYMORE DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED. SAME SIGN.
THAT MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, SIR.
THANK YOU, MS. LINDSEY. THANK YOU, STAFF.
THANK YOU, JUDITH. THANK YOU, CHRIS.
NOW LET'S BOUNCE BACK TO 21, RIGHT? BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT.
[21. Conduct a public hearing in accordance to determine whether the structure located on the property at 316 W. Rogers Street, Angleton, Brazoria County, Texas 77515 complies Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations and Chapter 11 - Housing of the Code of Ordinances; and whether such structure shall be demolished in accordance with Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations, Article XII - Substandard Buildings, Sec. 5-572 - "Authority regarding substandard building" of the Code of Ordinances. (Part 2 of 2)]
>> ALL RIGHT. WE'RE TRYING TO, NOW WE KNOW THE PROCESS, GET A BETTER START.
WE'VE ALREADY DONE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO WE'RE DONE WITH THAT ONE.
WE NOW HAVE TO DETERMINE WHERE WE WANT TO MOVE ON THIS ONE.
THERE IS NOBODY HERE FROM THIS RESIDENCE.
>> BECAUSE I SEEMED TO UNDERSTAND MAYBE WHERE YOU ALL ARE HEADED, THAT MAYBE WE IN THIS PROCESS FORMALLY ASK FOR AN ACTION PLAN.
>> IN ONE OF THE LETTERS TO THEM, HEY, YOU'RE HEADING DOWN THIS ROAD, THE NEXT IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
YOU HAVE A WEEK TO WHATEVER TO SUBMIT A 90-DAY ACTION PLAN.
[01:35:07]
THAT WAY WE'RE PUTTING THEM ON NOTICE THAT THAT'S THE CLEAR DELINEATED REQUIREMENT.>> THAT WAY WHEN WE GET TO THIS PART, IT'S HEY, HERE'S THE MEMO OR LETTER WE SENT THEM, THEY RECEIVED IT.
WE DIDN'T HEAR BACK FROM THEM OR THEY SAID THIS, THIS, AND THIS BUT THEY FAILED TO COMPLY.
THEN IF THEY SHOW AT THE HEARING THEN YOU HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, YOU DIDN'T SUBMIT IT, YOU WERE TOLD TO SUBMIT IT.
WE WERE TRYING TO GIVE YOU AN OUT AND YOU DIDN'T DO IT.
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT THE OWNER OF THIS PLACE.
I DON'T KNOW THEIR FINANCIAL STANDING, I DON T KNOW THEIR MEDICAL ISSUES, LIFE ISSUES THEY MAY HAVE.
YOU FIND FOLKS THAT JUST CAN'T DO.
WHAT DO YOU DO WITH THOSE FOLKS? YOU LOOK FOR THEIR KINFOLK TO TRY TO HELP OUT SOME WAY NOT TO JUST ABANDON THESE PEOPLE.
BUT BY THE SAME TOKEN, THEY NEED TO BE CONTACTED PERSONALLY.
APPARENTLY, THIS PERSON IS NOT VERY CONVERSIVE.
IN AN EXAMPLE OF ANOTHER PROPERTY, I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT TO DATE, WE HAVE SPENT $3,400 ON DEMOLITION OUT OF THE 45,000 YOU GUYS APPROVED FOR US.
REASON BEING IS BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE IN GETTING PEOPLE TO VOLUNTARILY DEMO.
WE HAVE FOUND AN INSTANCE OF A RESIDENT WHO WAS INCAPABLE PHYSICALLY AND PRESENTED A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP.
IN THAT SITUATION, WE WERE ABLE TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR US TO COME IN AND DO THE DEMOLITION AND PLACE A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY WITH HER CONSENT.
THERE WAS A PARTNERSHIP THERE THAT WE DID.
NOW, AS FAR AS MAKING THE REPAIRS, WE DON'T HAVE AN OUT FOR THAT YET.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE CHARITY GROUPS IN THE COUNTY THROUGHOUT BRAZORIA COUNTY.
>> BUT ISN'T IT THE HOME PROGRAM TOO?
>> WHY DON'T YOU TALK ABOUT THAT FOR A SECOND? IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE OFFER.
>> THE COUNTY IS A PASS-THROUGH ENTITY FOR HUD FUNDING, HUD HOUSING, AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
HOWEVER, THE WAITLIST IS EXTREMELY LONG.
WHEN WE SOUGHT TO GIVE RESIDENTS THIS INFORMATION, WE FOUND THAT THE WAITLIST WAS APPROXIMATELY THREE AND A HALF YEARS.
YOU GUYS GRANTED A PERMITTING BUILDING PERMIT WAIVER FOR 317 NORTH PARRISH STREET.
THAT'S A FULLY DILAPIDATED STRUCTURE THAT IS GOING TO BE REBUILT WITH HUD FUNDING.
ON THE RARE OCCASION, THOSE TYPES OF RESOURCES DO EMERGE.
BUT AGAIN, THE WAIT-LIST IS VERY LONG AND SO THE RESOURCES ARE LIMITED.
THERE'S ALSO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, SOMETIMES THEY HAVE RESOURCES.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE CITY, AS A CITY, WE DON'T OFFER THOSE RESOURCES. MAYBE SOMEDAY.
>> ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE BACK ON THIS 316 ROGERS STREET, SO COUNCIL, WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE?
>> HE'S NOT HERE. TO ME I WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW THE SAME PROCESS WE JUST DID ON THE PREVIOUS OWNER.
EVEN WITH HIS ABSENCE I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT HE UNDERSTANDS THAT HE HAS 90 DAYS AND WE'RE HERE.
BUT I'M GOING TO GO BY THE HOUSE. I WANT TO TALK TO THE GUY.
>> I'D RECOMMEND THAT COURSE OF ACTION IS THAT YOUR MOTION ISN'T [OVERLAPPING].
SEND THEM A LETTER DO WITHIN A WEEK WITH AN ACTION PLAN WITHIN THE NEXT 90 DAYS AND WE CAN COME BACK AND REVIEW THAT LETTER OR NOT OR SOMETHING TO HIDE.
WE'LL GET SOME MORE INFORMATION.
>> HE HAS SEVEN DAYS UPON RECEIPT OF THE LETTER.
>> I THINK WE SHOULD BE THERE AND EVEN TO ALL THESE GUYS, BUT WE SHOULD BE WORKING TO GET THIS RESOLVED AND MOVE FORWARD AT THE SAME TIME, SHOWING THEM THAT WE DO CARE ABOUT THEIR HOUSES AND WE DON'T WANT TO JUST TAKE UNILATERAL DECISION TO TAKE THEIR HOUSES DOWN.
>> IN SOME OF MY OTHER CITIES, WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH GETTING THE WRITTEN NOTICE AND I JUST ACTUALLY SEND MY PD OFFICERS AND HAVE THEM KNOCK ON THE DOOR AND SAY, HEY, CAN YOU GO TALK TO THIS PERSON FOR ME? CAN YOU MAKE SURE? I DON'T KNOW, AND IT COULD BE YOU GUYS DID THAT ALREADY.
BUT SOMETIMES YOU JUST LITERALLY HAVE TO KNOCK ON THE DOOR.
>> YEAH, IF YOU KNOW WHERE THEY'RE AT, IF SOMEBODY IS LIVING THERE.
>> WE HAVE SPOKE TO HIM IN PERSON.
HE ACTUALLY CAME IN AFTER I SENT HIM A WRITTEN WARNING ONE DAY, SAID HE HAD SOME HEALTH ISSUES AND I'M LIKE, WE HAVE TIME.
TRIED TO WORK WITH HIM, NOTHING HAPPENED.
FINALLY, I CALLED HIM, HE WAS IN THE HOSPITAL.
[01:40:05]
SOUND LIKE YOU'RE GOOD.I CONTINUED TO CALL AND CHECK UP ON HIM, FINALLY HE WAS OUT OF THE HOSPITALS, BUT HE COULDN'T WALK YET.
YOU'RE GOOD AND THEN HE QUIT ANSWERING THE CALLS.
I'VE HEARD RUMORS THAT HE'S TRYING TO SELL THE PROPERTY.
WHAT IN WITH IT BEING CLEANED UP, IT'S A POSSIBILITY, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO AND WE'LL HAVE TO START THE WHOLE PROCESS OVER.
>> YES, I'M PRETTY AWARE OF HOW THAT WORKS.
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE APARTMENTS BEHIND WHATABURGER.
>> THE NIGHT WE WENT TO TAKE ACTION, HE SOLD IT THE DAY BEFORE SO WE COULDN'T [OVERLAPPING].
>> I DID CHECK ON THE COUNTY CLERK WEBSITE AND [INAUDIBLE] CARD AND IT'S STILL IN HIS NAME CURRENTLY.
>> SURE. BUT IT'S NICE TO KNOW THAT YOU FOUND OUT HE HAD HEALTH ISSUES.
>> THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF.
>> YEAH, WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUSH ANYBODY WHEN THEY'RE HAVING AN ISSUE.
>> TO FIX ANYTHING, AND LIKE I SAID, THE NEIGHBOR CALLED AND SHE WAS NOT VERY HAPPY.
SHE SAYS THERE'S RATS AND SNAKES AND EVERYTHING ELSE UNDER THAT HOUSE SHE CAN SEE FROM HER HOUSE.
>> THAT WAS THE PREVIOUS PERSON.
>> I BELIEVE IT WAS A PREVIOUS PERSON NEXT DOOR TO THAT.
THE WATER BILL, THEY DO HAVE A WATER ACCOUNT, THEY DO PAY IT, BUT THERE'S ZERO USE.
IT'S NOT BEING USED, IT'S JUST TURNED ON.
>> I THINK WE HAVE GOOD COURSE OF ACTION.
>> [NOISE] CAN WE GET THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION?
>> GOT IT. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE TAKE ACTION ON 316 WEST ROGERS STREET TO REQUIRE THE LANDOWNER TO GIVE US WRITTEN NOTICE BY JUNE 1ST AT 5:30 PM, AND HE HAS TO SUBMIT AN ACTION PLAN THAT WILL BE COMPLETED WITHIN 90 DAYS AND IT WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR REVIEW UPON 90 DAYS.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO-TEM, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MARK GONGORA.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSING SAME SIGN.
THAT MOTION CARRIES. NOW WE GO TO NUMBER 23.
[23. Conduct a public hearing in to determine whether the structure, located on the property at 504 Farrer Street, Angleton, Brazoria County, Texas complies with Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations and Chapter 11 - Housing of the Code of Ordinances; and whether such structure shall be demolished in accordance with Chapter 5 - Buildings and Building Regulations, Article XII - Substandard Building]
WE WILL FOLLOW THE STEPS THAT WE DID FOR 22.CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE STRUCTURE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY OF [INAUDIBLE] FAIR STREET, ANGLETON, BRUNSWICK COUNTY, TEXAS COMPLIES WITH CHAPTER 5 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER 11, HOUSING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND WHETHER SUCH STRUCTURE SHALL BE DEMOLISHED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 5 BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 12, SUBSTANDARD BUILDING SECTION 5-572-AUTHORITY REGARDING SUBSTANDARD BUILDINGS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.
WE NEED TO GO INTO A PUBLIC HEARING. CAN I GET A MOTION? I GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN [OVERLAPPING] SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, HEARING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
WE ARE NOW IN A PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER 23.
IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WANTED TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? ITEM 23, I WILL FOR FAIR STREET.
SECOND CALL. THIRD CALL. COUNCIL.
>> MOVES CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO-TEM WRIGHT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO I HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
HEARING NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THAT MOTION CARRIES.
WE ARE NOW OUT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW ONTO THE HEARING PORTION. GO AHEAD MS. LINDSEY.
>> THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
I THINK YOU'LL FIND THIS ONE A LOT MORE EASIER TO MOVE ON.
GIVEN THE ADVANCED DEGRADATION OF THIS PROPERTY, THE ENTIRE BACKSIDE HAS COLLAPSED.
UPON A SITE VISIT, STAFF AND I OBSERVED EVIDENCE OF VAGRANTS STAYING INSIDE THE FRONT PORTION OF THE HOME.
THIS HOME COULD COLLAPSE AT ANY MINUTE AND POSES A SIGNIFICANT RISK TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.
WE DID MAKE A SITE VISIT TO INVESTIGATE A COMPLAINT OF RODENT AND INSECT HARBORAGE.
IT'S ADVANCED STATE OF DISREPAIR.
I JUST DON'T SEE THAT THERE'S ANY WAY TO REPAIR THIS STRUCTURE, IT'S SO FAR GONE.
THERE'S NOBODY LIVING INSIDE OF IT LEGALLY, SO THERE'S NO TENANT, THERE'S NO OCCUPANT THAT WE'RE AWARE OF OTHER THAN VAGRANTS GETTING INTO IT.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
THIS HAS BEEN A CONTINUAL ISSUE FOR STAFF SINCE 2015.
>> MS. LINDSEY IS THERE ELECTRIC METER THERE, POWER TO THE PLACE?
>> NO. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I THINK THE METER IS COMPLETELY RIPPED OFF THE STRUCTURE ON THE BACKSIDE, JUST LIKE THE HOT WATER HEATERS SOMEWHERE ACROSS THE BACKYARD NEAR THE BACK FENCE.
>> I'LL DO A LITTLE DIGGING ON THIS, I GUESS THE GUY GOT THE DATA OF THIS PROPERTY 21 YEARS AGO.
HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO FIX IT UP IF HE'S ON ANYTHING.
>> TO YOUR POINT. COUNCIL MEMBER BOOTH, THE PROPERTY OWNER OWNS SEVERAL 100 RENTAL PROPERTIES, SEVERAL OF WHICH ARE IN THE SAME STATE OF DISREPAIR.
[01:45:03]
>> BEYOND HIS FIVE PROPERTIES IN BRAZORIA COUNTY FOR AND ALVIN AREA ONE HERE.
I LOOKED HIM UP ON HARRIS COUNTY HAS GOT 337 PROPERTIES, ONE OF WHICH IS HIS HOME.
HIS HOME WAS A LITTLE BIT BETTER SHAPE THAN THIS.
BUT A HALF-A-MILLION DOLLARS MODE BOTH SAID IN THIS [INAUDIBLE]
>> DID HE SAY HE WAS GOING TO FIX IT UP?
>> WE HAVE NEVER HAD ANY RESPONSE FROM MR. FURMAN.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THERE ARE NUMEROUS DOZENS OF LIENS ON THIS PROPERTY.
I DON'T BELIEVE WE'VE TABULATED AT THE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF LIENS FOR MOWING, FOR ADDRESSING COMPLAINTS, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
I THINK THAT GETTING RID OF THIS WOULD SAVE THE CITY'S TIME AND EFFORT.
>> I DID GO PAY THIS HOUSE A VISIT A WEEKEND AGO AND PUT MY OWN EYES ON IT BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE LET A HOUSE GET TO THIS POINT.
IT'S FROM THE ROAD SIDE, IT JUST LOOKS OLD AND NOT TAKING CARE OF.
BUT ONCE YOU GO INTO THE BACKYARD, AND THERE'S A TREE GROWING IN THE LIVING ROOM I THINK, IT'S BEEN LIKE THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
IT'S ABOUT TO FALL OVER AND I LOOK FOR THE METER AND OF COURSE IT WAS NOT ON THE WALL.
THEY PULLED IT OFF, SO IT'S NO POWER.
THERE IS A VEHICLE THAT'S HAD A PRETTY CAR, [INAUDIBLE] WAS ABOUT SIX MONTH OLD REGISTRATION STICKER ON IT THAT WAS PARKED IN THE FRONT YARD.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FOR THAT HOUSE OR THE NEIGHBOR JUST USING IT FOR A PARKING LOT. I DON'T KNOW.
BUT IT'S HORRIBLE, LIKE I COULD PUSH ON THE WALL AND IT MOVES THE WALL, ACTUALLY MOVES[NOISE] ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
>> YES. AS YOU CAN SEE, WHERE THE WINDOWS ARE SMASHED AND YOU HAVE A LINE OF SIGHT INTO THE HOUSE AND THE CEILING IS COMPLETELY CAVED IN.
THERE'S THERE'S NO COMING BACK FROM IT, IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
>> LIKE YOU SAID THIS ONE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE EASIER.
>> I MOVE THAT WE DEEM 504 OF FAIR STREET AS SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE WITH THE CITY OF ANGLETON AND APPROVAL TO HAVE IT DEMOLISHED.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO-TEM WRIGHT, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MS. JUDY? [OVERLAPPING].
>> PLEASE LAUNCH WITHIN 30 DAYS.
THAT'S WHAT THE STATUTE SAYS, WITHIN 30 DAYS.
>> YOU GO WITH THEM COUNCIL GONGORA?
I HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, ANY MORE DISCUSSION?
>> I WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH IS OWED THE CITY, IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS?
>> THOUSANDS. IF WE TABULATED IT UP, I BELIEVE WE'D BE IN EXCESS OF 5,000 IN LANES.
>> NOW, I TABULATED ON TODAY'S DATE THEY'RE DUE $2,796.39 ALL FOR MOWING.
EVERY ONE OF THEM FOR MOWING, AND THEY DATE BACK TO 2015.
>> THEN WE'LL END UP HAVING A LANE OF APPROXIMATELY $8,500 MORE FOR THE DEMO AND WHATEVER CLEANUP HAS GOT TO BE DONE THAT LAWN.
>> THEY DO SIGN FOR EVERY LETTER, THEY GET SENT TO HIS OFFICE.
EVERY LETTER HAS BEEN SIGNED FOR AND THERE HAS BEEN NO CONTACT WITH ANY OF US.
>> I BELIEVE IN REHABBING A HOUSE.
[LAUGHTER] THERE'S NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE WITH THIS ONE.
>> NOT A PLASTIC SURGERY JOHN?
>> YOU'D BE BETTER TAKING THIS THING ALL THE WAY DOWN THE GROUND AND BUILD IT.
>> THAT'S THAT THING WHERE THERE'S TWO NICE HOUSES ON EITHER SIDE OF IT, SO IT'S GOING TO BE A NICE PIECE OF PROPERTY ONCE IT'S LEVELED.
>> TRUE AND WE WILL SHOP AROUND 8,500 IS JUST A PLACE MARKER.
THAT'S JUST WHERE WE GAUGE BASED ON OTHER DEMOS THAT WE'VE DONE FOR OTHER AREAS, SO WE'LL GET A COMPETITIVE PRICE ON THAT SO THAT SOMEBODY CAN PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY HOPEFULLY AT A COMPETITIVE PRICE.
>> WELL, A THIRD OF IT IS MISSING SO IT SHOULD BE LESS.
[LAUGHTER] SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO JOKE [OVERLAPPING] I APOLOGIZE. IT'S BEEN A LONG DAY.
>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION FOR A CALL FOR THE VOTE?
>> HOLD ON. BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION ON THIS, I WANT TO ASK YOU'RE GOING TO SUBMIT ME THE LIST OF ALL THE OTHER ONES OR TO THE WHOLE COUNCIL.
>> YEAH, I WANT TO KNOW WHAT ELSE IS COMING UP AT US AND SPECIFICALLY THOSE APARTMENTS.
>> MAYBE MOVING THIS FORWARD THAT PRIOR TO DOING THIS, WE SUBMIT A LIST AND SAY, THESE ARE OUR TOP THREE FOR THE YEAR, THESE ARE THE ONES WE'RE WORKING WITH, AND ORGANIZE THAT SO WE CAN PICTURE AND BRING THEM RIGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION AND THEN THAT WAY, WE'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF GUIDANCE IN THAT AS FAR AS THE COMMUNICATION PIECE AND SOME OF THOSE.
>> BEFORE ALSO, THANK YOU ALL STAFF.
I KNOW THIS IS A LOT OF WORK AND PLEASE DON'T BE FRUSTRATED WITH US.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO WORK WITH THE OWNERS WITH YOU GUYS.
I KNOW YOU HAVE DONE A LOT OF WORK.
SOMETIMES THE DAY IS COMPROMISED AND JUST GETTING IN FRONT OF US.
DON'T THINK IT'S GONE UNNOTICED BECAUSE YOU'RE HERE TO ALSO MAKE OUR COMMUNITY LOOK GOOD TOO, SO WE APPRECIATE THAT.
[01:50:01]
>> TURNS INTO [OVERLAPPING] GETTING TO THIS POINT SO WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU. I THINK STUFF REALLY APPRECIATES THE KIND REMARKS AND EVERYTHING AND WE'RE DOING WHAT WE CAN MOVE THIS FORWARD.
WHILE WE DO HAVE AN UPDATED LIST COUNCIL MEMBER WRIGHT, WE ALSO PLAN ON DOING ANOTHER CITYWIDE SEARCH BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN 18 MONTHS SINCE LAST TIME WE DID IT, SO WE DO TRY TO CONTINUOUSLY UPDATE IT, BUT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A FRESH ONE EACH YEAR.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANY LAST COMMENTS? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE SAME SIGN.
THAT MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, ALL.
MOVING RIGHT ALONG, ITEM NUMBER 24,
[24. Conduct a public hearing, discussion, and possible action on an ordinance rezoning an approximate 2.748 acres in the J. De J. Valderes Survey, Abstract No. 380, City of Angleton, Brazoria County, Texas, from the Commercial General (C-G) District to the Single Family Residential-7.2 (SF-7.2) District. ]
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE ORDINANCE REZONING IN APPROXIMATELY 2.78 ACRES IN THE JDJ VALDEZ SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 380.CITY OF ANGLETON, MISSOURI COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL, ALSO KNOWN AS CG DISTRICT, TO THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 7.2, ALSO KNOWN AS SF 7.2 DISTRICT.
WE NEED TO GO INTO A PUBLIC HEARING SO THEY ENTERTAIN MOTION.
MOTION BY PATEL SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MARK GONGORA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, HEARING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
WE'RE NOW IN A PUBLIC HEARING.
WALTER IS GOING TO GIVE US A QUICK BRIEF AND THEN WE'LL CALL ANYBODY UP TO THE PODIUM.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THIS IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
DOCTOR AND PATRICK AND GAIL THOMAS ARE REQUESTING TO REZONE 2.7 ACRES FROM THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL ZONING DISTRICT OUT OF LITTLE OVER SEVEN ACRES THAT THEY OWN FROM THE CG ZONING DISTRICT TO THE SF 7.2 ZONING DISTRICTS SO THAT THEY CAN CONSTRUCT A HOUSE ON THE TWO ACRES THAT THEY WANT TO REZONE.
YOU HAVE IN YOUR BACKUP, THE ANALYSIS OF THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST, WHILE IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, IT IS SUPPORTED BY TWO GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THE REZONING ITSELF IS NOT OUT OF KEEPING WITH THE REST OF THE AREA, AND FOR THAT REASON, STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY THE 5TH AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY OF THE REQUESTED REZONING.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. WE ARE AT A PUBLIC HEARING, SO IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST ITEM NUMBER 24? SECOND CALL ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST? THIRD CALL. HEARING NONE. COUNCIL.
>> MOVING CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO-TEM WRIGHT.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.
NOW WE HAVE AN ACTION ITEM JUST REAL QUICK.
IS THIS THE PROPERTY BEHIND THE CHURCH THERE? THAT'S THE THEME OF THE HOUSES.
>> THEY ARE GOING TO ACCESS THE PROPERTY OR I GUESS FOR A LONG DRIVEWAY, THEY GET TO THE REAR?
>> THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE YEAH.
>> A CONCRETE DRIVEWAY AFTERWARDS.
>> THAT WOULD BE THE WAY TO DO IT.
OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A SUBDIVISION.
THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO CREATE THE LOT, IN ORDER TO BUILD THE HOUSE ON.
WHEN WE MET WITH THE THOMAS'S, WE ADVISED HIM THAT IT MAKES SENSE TO DO THE REZONING FIRST BECAUSE IF THEY DON'T GET THE REZONING, THEY CAN'T BUILD THE HOUSE, SO MAKE THE REZONING REQUEST.
AFTER YOU GET THE REZONING, IF IT'S APPROVED, THEN GO THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS AND DIVIDE THE PROPERTY.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS YOU DO HAVE?
>> DOES THE DESCRIPTION OF THIS TWO POINTS SOMEWHAT ACRES, IT'S JUST BECAUSE I'M A SURVEYOR, BUT THE SECOND COURSE OF THE DESCRIPTION, AFTER THE BEGINNING POINT, THE DIRECTION IN THE BEARING GOES SOUTH EAST.
>> YOU NEED TO CORRECT THE DESCRIPTION.
WE'RE GOING TO INCLUDE THIS CORRECT DESCRIPTION IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
>> WE'VE HAD ONE MINOR CORRECTION THAT WE NEED TO SEE.
COUNCIL WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE ON THIS ITEM NUMBER?
>> EXCUSE ME, MR. BOOTH, IS THAT ON THE BAKER AND LAWSON?
>> YES, MA'AM IT'S A MIXING THEM DOWN DESCRIPTION [NOISE] AREA BEING IN THE SECOND CALL [OVERLAPPING]
[01:55:04]
>> IT SAYS GO SOUTH 89 DEGREES SOUTH TO THE EAST.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO GO SOUTH, 89 SOUTH DEGREES TO THE WEST.
>> IT'S AN OWNED PROPERTY TO BE ZONED COMMERCIAL.
>> YEAH. THERE'S NOTHING BUT HOUSING ALONG THAT.
>> COUNCIL FOR ACTION, WHAT WOULD YOU ALL LIKE?
>> MAYOR, I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE REZONING IN APPROXIMATE 2.748 ACRES INTO JDJ VALDEZ SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER 380 CITY OF ANGLETON, MISSOURI COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL CG DISTRICT TO THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 7.2 SF 7.2 DISTRICT.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO-TEM WRIGHT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE SAME SIGN.
WE ARE NOW ON THE OTHER NUMBER 25,
[25. Conduct a public hearing, discussion, and possible action on an ordinance authorizing a Specific Use Permit for use of a recreational vehicle as a residence on property described as Lot 24, Block 134, of the Lorraine Subdivision. ]
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE USE OF A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AS A RESIDENCE ON PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOCKED 24 BLOCK 134 OF THE LORRAINE SUBDIVISION, MR. WALTER?>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
SECTION 14103 PROHIBITS LOCATED AND MAINTAINING AN RV WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, OUTSIDE OF A LICENSE RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK.
BUT THAT SECTION ALSO PROVIDES FOR AN EXCEPTION IF THE RV IS NOT CONNECTED TO WATER SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM SERVING THE PREMISES IN WHICH THE RV IS LOCATED, MEANING THAT YOU CAN PARK YOUR RV THERE.
WE CAN'T USE IT AS A RESIDENCE.
SECTION 14103 B3 ALLOWS FOR TEMPORARY PLACEMENT OF AN RV FOR SIX MONTHS WITH APPROVAL OF AN SUP, WHICH SHALL BE BASED UPON.
THEN THERE ARE SEVEN CRITERIA THERE BECAUSE IT'S AN SUP, WE ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CRITERIA BOUND IN AND THAT'S ACTUALLY A TYPO, IT'S SECTION 2863.
BASICALLY THE PROPOSED SCP DOESN'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS THE CRITERIA FOR GRANTING OF AN SCP STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEY UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED DENIAL AS WELL.
THAT BEING SAID, AS OF YESTERDAY OR CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL INSPECTOR AND INFORMED ME THAT THE ROOF ON THE HOUSE HAS BEEN REPLACED.
I'M GOING TO JUST SAY THE ROOF ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE HAS BEEN REPLACED AND THERE HAS BEEN SOME WORK DONE ON THE EXTERIOR WALLS OF THE STRUCTURE.
THAT BEING SAID, THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND IT CAN'T CHANGE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.
IF YOU ARE INCLINED TO GRANT THIS SCP, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSIDER TWO CONDITIONS.
ONE BEING THAT THERE'LL BE A TIME LIMIT FOR THE SCP SO THAT IT EXPIRES, AND THE SECOND BEING THAT MUCH LIKE THE LAST THREE, THAT THERE'S A PLAN FOR WHEN THIS CONSTRUCTION IS GOING TO BE COMPLETED.
I'M TURNING IT BACK OVER TO YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. WALTER. THANK YOU FOR THAT BRIEF.
I MIGHT THINK I'VE WE HAVE THE INDIVIDUAL THAT IS ATTACHED TO THIS PROPERTY.
HE DID FILL OUT A REQUEST TO SPEAK TO COUNSEL.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND LET HIM COME UP AND SPEAK.
MR. GOLD, IF YOU'D LIKE, THE PODIUM IS YOURS, SIR?
>> TO BEGIN WITH, I WOULD LIKE TO APOLOGIZE TO PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING BECAUSE I MISSED THE MEETING BECAUSE I THOUGHT OF THE SIX AT NIGHT LIKE THIS AND IT WAS AT 12.
I ARGUED WITH THE SECRETARY AND TOLD HER I GOT A LETTER HERE SAYS AND SO I'M READING IT TO HER AND I HAD TO APOLOGIZE.
I BLEW IT AND I CALL IT A SENIOR MOMENT.
[LAUGHTER] ANYWAY, THERE'S MUCH MORE THAT GOES WITH THIS PROPERTY THAN WHAT I JUST HEARD.
NUMBER 1, WHEN I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY, IT WAS BOARDED UP.
I DID NOT REALIZE THE CONDITION WAS IN, BUT I BOUGHT IT TO BE NEAR ONE OF MY DAUGHTERS BECAUSE I HAVE FIVE GRANDKIDS THERE AND I LIKE TO DO WITH THEM.
I GO AND WE TEAR BUNCH OF TRASH OFF OF THE PROPERTY AND EVERYTHING.
I HADN'T MOVED IN THERE YET AND THEN I DISCOVERED THAT IT WAS A CLUBHOUSE FOR TEENAGERS, AND I BOARDED IT UP AND THEY LITERALLY KICK THE WALL OUT TO GET IN.
[02:00:04]
I PUT SIGNS ON IT SAYING THAT PRIVATE PROPERTY, NO TRESPASSING AND ALL THAT.IT CONTINUED, THEY BROKE THE WINDOWS.
THEN I SAID, I'LL PUT MY RV ON THERE AND I'LL LIVE THERE AND I'LL FIX IT.
I WENT AND GOT POWER HOOKED UP AND EVERYTHING.
BUT WHAT I DIDN'T KNOW, DAO BUILT THIS HOUSE 50 YEARS AGO.
THEY BUILT A BUNCH OF THOSE HOUSES ON THAT STREET ARCOLA.
BUT WHAT THEY DID WAS BECAUSE IT HAD HARDWOOD FLUORINE, I THOUGHT, WOW, THIS IS GOING TO BE ALRIGHT.
IT'S GOING TO BE EASY TO FIX UP.
JUST NEEDS A WHOLE FIXING THE ROOF.
WHAT I DIDN'T KNOW WAS IT'S BEEN FLOODING THAT CORNER LOT FLOODS ALL THE TIME.
WHEN I WAS THERE TRYING TO WORK ON IT, IT WOULD FLOOD UNDER THE HOUSE, THE WHOLE BACKYARD RUN UP TO THE FRONT EVERY TIME WE HAD A BAD RAIN.
I ENDED UP I HAD TO GET A SUMP PUMP TO GET THE WATER OUT SO I COULD WORK ON THE HOUSE.
DURING THAT TIME NOT TO CRY TOO MUCH, I HAD SOME HEART ISSUES, VERY SERIOUS AND MY DOCTORS TOLD ME THAT YOU CANNOT EXERT YOURSELF, AND IT HAD BEEN RAINING; 2019, WE GOT A REAL BAD FLOOD COME DOWN THERE.
YOU'D EVEN GOTTEN MY NEIGHBOR ON LAURENE, SO I CAN WORK ON IT.
THEN I GET FEELING BETTER NOW MY HEART'S DOING GOOD.
THEY DID SOME THINGS TO IT AND MADE IT WORK BETTER.
THEN I'M BACK TO WORKING ON IT.
IT FLOODS AGAIN, AND THEN COVID COMES ALONG AND I DON'T GET COVID ONCE.
I GOT IT TWICE, AND I COULDN'T WORK.
PLUS I HOLD A POSITION WITH LIVE FOURSQUARE CHURCH.
I WORK HALF A DAY EVERY DAY EXCEPT FOR WEDNESDAYS WHEN I COOK ALL DAY.
I HAVE OTHER WORK I HAVE TO DO, BUT I TRIED TO WORK EVERY DAY, HALF A DAY THAT I'M NO, THAT'S MONDAY, TUESDAY, THURSDAY, FRIDAY, AND SATURDAY.
BECAUSE IT TOOK SO LONG, I ENDED UP WITH MORE DAMAGE.
BUT THE HOUSE WAS SO FLOODED THAT WHEN I STARTED GOING INTO IT, I REPLACED EVERY BEAM ON THE PEERS OF THE HOUSE BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO MESS WITH THE ROOF UNTIL HALF HIS LEVEL BECAUSE YOU CAN'T [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] ANYWAY, I GOT ALL THAT DONE AND NOW I'VE GOT THE ROOF ON.
NOW, THE WINDSTORM INSPECTOR WANTS ME TO GO HURRICANE CLIP EVERYTHING AND I AGREED TO IT.
I'M GOING IN THERE ANCHORING THE BEAMS TO THE PEERS AND I'M PUTTING CLIPS FROM THE RAFTERS ALL THE WAY DOWN AND I REPLACE ALL OF THE FLOOR JOISTS.
THERE THINGS I DIDN'T REALIZE, BUT ONCE YOU'RE IN, YOU'RE STUCK WITH IT.
I DON'T HAVE MONEY TO THROW AROUND.
ANYWAY, THAT'S MY PLAN AND THE REASON I WAS COMING TO ASK YOU GUYS, I WISH I'D MET THE OTHER ONE.
THE PLANNING, ZONING, MAYBE THEY WOULDN'T HAVE RULED AGAINST ME, BUT THEY DID AND I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO DO A JOB.
IT'S EXEMPTION ON THE RV BECAUSE I'LL HAVE IT ALL DONE.
THEY CAN ALREADY SEE INSPECTOR HAS BEEN INSIDE AND SEEING WHAT I'VE REPLACED AND IT'S DRY NOW, SO I'LL JUST FIX EVERYTHING.
I'M ALREADY PRICED MY WINDOWS AND DECIDING THE ROOF.
I SPENT 10 GRAND ON IT TO GET IT ON THERE.
I'M JUST WANTING YOU TO GIVE ME THE EXEMPTION FOR SIX MONTHS AND I'LL BE DONE.
>> SORRY. WE APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> DURING THE PUBLIC WE MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS HERE IN A MINUTE.
>> NO, BECAUSE WE MAY HAVE SO FOR STAFF WITH THE CALL. THANK YOU.
NOW WE'VE HAD THIS ITEM ON THE BOOKS.
NO RV, NO LIVING ONLY BECAUSE THERE'S JUST THINGS YOU HAVE TO TAKE PLACE WHEN THEY'RE ATTEMPTING TO OUR SEWER.
LET THEM WORRY ABOUT BACKFLOW PREVENTERS AND WHATNOT SO THEY DON'T GET INTO THE WATER SYSTEM AND THOSE TYPE OF THINGS.
[02:05:01]
I DON'T KNOW HOW ELECTRICITY SETUP IF THERE'S A POLL OUT THERE, DOES HE RUN OFF AN EXTENSION CORD OR POWER TO THE HOUSE? I KNOW I UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAVE CERTAIN THINGS ON THE BOOKS AS THIS BEING ONE OF THEM, BUT IT IS THE TRAILER AND THE BACKYARD, EASY TO GET OUT ONCE THE BUILDING IS COMPLETE OR IS THERE LIKE A DRIVEWAY TO GET BACK THERE? HOW DID IT GET BACK THERE TO BEGIN WITH, IS HE ON WHEELS? IS IT MOVABLE? RARELY MOVABLE.>> I'M SURE HE PUT IT IN THROUGH THE ALLEY.
>> YEAH, HE'LL GO. THERE'S THE ALLEY. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THERE'S AN ALLEY BACK THERE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> NORTH ARCOLA [BACKGROUND] IN THE HOUSES ON THERE.
>> YEAH. I DIDN'T KNOW WHO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS, BUT YES, SIR.
IF YOU DON'T MIND. [OVERLAPPING].
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS ABOUT THE POWER,.
>> THAT'S NOT WITH AN EXTENSION CORD.
MY BACKGROUND IS CONSTRUCTION.
COMMERCIAL, AND I'VE BUILT SEVERAL HOUSES HERE.
BUT I DIDN'T LIKE DEALING WITH THE CUSTOMERS, SO I QUIT.
[LAUGHTER] ANYWAY, I RAN THE WIRE, DIRECT BERRY FROM THE POWER AND PUT A BOX AND EVERYTHING SO I WOULD HAVE POWER.
I RAN THE PLUMBING THE SAME WAY.
I MADE THE CONNECTION THE WAY YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BECAUSE I'VE BEEN AROUND FOR THIS ALONE.
I'M 78 YEARS OLD AND THERE'S NOT MUCH I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT CONSTRUCTION.
WHEN I'M DONE, IF THEY WANT ME TO MOVE IT, I WILL.
I WAS JUST GOING TO DISCONNECT IT AND HAVE FOR WHEN TOO MUCH FAMILY COMES.
>> SURE. LIKE STEPH SAID, YOU CAN PARK AN RV, JUST CAN'T HAVE IT HOOKED UP TO CITY SERVICES.
I'M ASSUMING OTHER THAN I DO SEE PEOPLE THAT HAVE POWER ATTACHED TO IT, MAYBE TO RUN THE AIR CONDITIONER JUST TO KEEP IT SET AS AN AGE QUICKER.
>> THE REASON I MOVED IT THERE IS BECAUSE I WAS WORKING ON MY DAUGHTER'S HOUSE OVER ON VALDEZ.
I KEPT ALL THE TIME I WAS GOING THERE.
I SAW THESE RVS PEOPLE WERE LIVING IN.
THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I DID IT.
THEY'RE ALL OVER THE AREA THERE AND THERE GOT THEIR STEPS DOWN, YOU SEE THE WATER HOLES.
[LAUGHTER] THAT'S WHY I DID IT OR I WOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT.
I THOUGHT IT WAS OKAY UNTIL THEY CAME HERE LATELY, I DIDN'T KNOW. I THOUGHT I WAS GOOD, BOY.
>> WELL, THANK YOU FOR, MADAM STEPH IS LISTENING, SO WE APPRECIATE IT.
>> WE DO HAVE A PRECEDENT SET ON THIS.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER THIS MAYOR, BUT WE HAD A PROBLEM ON ALINA AT ONE POINT WHERE A GENTLEMAN'S HOUSE HAD FALLEN OFF OR BEEN DAMAGED AND, IT WAS HELPING HIM AND HIS MOTHER AND LIKE 90 DAYS TO STAY IN THE RV, WHY THEY FIX THEIR HOUSE.
THEN ONCE 90 DAYS WAS UP, THEY HAD TO UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T THINK THEY EVER WERE ABLE TO FIX THE HOUSE, BUT WE DID HAVE A PRECEDENT SET THERE.
>> WE ALSO DID POST A STORM, DIDN'T WE? WE DID A STORE ON THE HIKER RV OR SOMETHING, WE ALLOWED VARIOUS PEOPLE TO LIVE IN RV.
>> I MEAN, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE CODE AND WHILE WE SHOULDN'T HAVE THAT AND WE SHOULDN'T ALLOW THAT.
THERE ARE CERTAIN HARDSHIPS SOMETIMES WHERE I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO HELP WITH THAT WE HAVE SET A PRECEDENT AND ALLOWED.
I MEAN, IN MY MIND, IT IS NOT IDEAL, BUT I DO THINK THAT THE GENTLEMAN IS I THINK, PRETTY FORTHRIGHT AND COMING WITH US.
I WOULD ASK YOU SAY YOU DID IT RIGHT.
>> YES, HE'S HAD PROBABLY AT THE ROOF WAS A LOT OF PROGRESS AND HE'S PERMITTED HAS AN ENGINEER I THINK DONE INCLUDE OR SOMEWHERE I DON'T REMEMBER, BUT HE'S PERMITTED EVERYTHING IS RIGHT ON THAT.
>> EVERYTHING'S GOING ABOVE BOARD? [OVERLAPPING]
>> HIS INSPECTIONS BY THIRD PARTY.
>> DID YOU WITNESS HOW HE'S CONNECTED TO THAT RV; IS IT DONE?
>> YEAH. I MEAN, IT'S NOT A CORD IS DONE AS RIGHT AS YOU CAN DO IT, SEWER LINE, DIRECT BEARING WIRE WITH A BOX, RVS PLUG IN.
AS FAR AS THE HOUSE HE IS PERMITTED GETTING IT DONE.
WINDS AND STORM INSPECTIONS REALLY HADN'T BEEN ANY OF OUR INSPECTIONS YET.
IT WILL BE ALONG THE WAY, BUT MOSTLY WINDSTORM.
[02:10:01]
I DIDN'T MEAN TO LIKE A STANDARD EXTENSION CORD.
I MEAN, I'VE SEEN THE HEAVY-DUTY CORDS COMING FROM AN RV INTO SOMEBODY'S HOME JUST BY ATTACHMENT NOTE.
I DIDN'T MEAN TO DISRESPECT, SIR. I APOLOGIZE.
>> IT'S OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY TO YOU ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I'VE BEEN- [OVERLAPPING]
>> MICROPHONE, IT'S ALL RECORDED. I'M SORRY.
>> ONE OF THE REASONS IT'S BEEN SLOW, NOT JUST MY INJURIES AND ALL THAT, BUT IT CONSTANTLY FLOODS.
IT FLOODS ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT STREET, WHEN IT RAINS.
IT COMES DOWN THE ALLEY TO ME.
THEY DON'T HAVE A CATCH BASIN ON THE ALLEY DOWN THERE.
IT'S OVERGROWN GRASS AND PEOPLE KNOW IT.
THAT MAY BE WHY AND I CAN'T GO.
I DON'T ASSUME A LOT TO GO THERE AND FIX IT.
>> THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT, CHRIS, IF YOU'LL MAYBE HAVE SOME I PUT DOWN THE RADAR, JUST CLICK IN THAT AREA, SEE WHAT'S UP THERE.
>> I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM STAFF OF WHAT, IF WE WERE TO GIVE HIM 90 DAYS.
I MEAN, HE'S ASKING FOR SIX MONTHS.
I'M SAYING 90 DAYS AT THIS MOMENT.
YOU CAN'T GET IT DONE IN 90 DAYS?
>> HE ASKED FOR A BENCHMARK AT 90 AND EXTENT RATHER 90?
>> I WORK AFTER DAY, EVERYDAY.
I'M DOING IT MYSELF, I DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO GET MUCH LABOR.
>> IS IT POSSIBLE THAT JUDITH THAT HE CAN COME BACK AND GIVE AN UPDATE AND IMPROVES IN 90 DAYS.
AS WALTER SAID IN THE BEGINNING, HE SUGGESTS THAT A CONDITION OF GRANTING SUP BE A TIME PERIOD.
FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE SUP ORDINANCE, THAT'S ALL YOU CAN DO IS THAT CONDITION IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANOTHER CONDITION ABOUT REPORTING?
>> I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW THAT THAT WOULD ACCOMPLISH MUCH OF ANYTHING.
I THINK THAT WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, LIKE I SUGGESTED, IS TO ESTABLISH A TIMEFRAME FOR THE SUP.
IF YOU WANT A CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM ON, WHEN THIS IS GOING TO BE DONE, THEN YOU SHOULD REQUIRE THAT AS WELL.
BUT YOU LET THE STAFF DETERMINE IF THOSE BENCHMARKS ARE BEING MADE OR NOT AND IF THEY'RE NOT BEING MADE, WE CAN BRING THIS BACK AGAIN TO YOU.
>> I'M NOT ASKING FOR THAT, I'M JUST ASKING FOR TIMEFRAME OF IT'S FAIR.
>> I AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT.
I DON'T THINK 90 DAYS IS ANYWHERE NEAR ENOUGH.
[LAUGHTER] I THINK SIX MONTHS, IF HE'S OUT THERE WORKING DILIGENTLY AT IT WILL PROBABLY GET THE JOB DONE TO THE POINT WHERE THE BUILDING COULD BE HABITABLE AGAIN, BECAUSE IT'S NOT RIGHT NOW.
>> WE TELL PEOPLE ALL THE TIME TO FIX THEIR PLACES AND DO IT.
WE HAVE A GENTLEMAN HERE TRYING TO DO IT.
I'D LIKE TO SUPPORT THE GENTLEMAN IF HE'S TRYING TO GET IT DONE.
>> I THINK IT'S SIX MONTHS, I MEAN 90 DAYS IS NOT GOING TO DO IT.
I MEAN, UNLESS YOU JUST HAD SOMEBODY IN THERE EVERY DAY, BUT SIX MONTHS SHOULD BE.
>> BUT I THINK THAT ONE OF THE RECOMMENDED QUALIFICATIONS IS THAT HOOK IS HARVEY RVC FACILITIES IN SIX MONTHS?
>> REPORTER CAN ADD. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THANK YOU, COLLIN WALTER FOR THAT INFORMATION.
>> ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, YOU'VE HEARD THE BACKGROUND AND SEE WHERE YOU ALL WANT TO MOVE TO.
>> I'M VERY GLAD YOU CAME TONIGHT.
I GET RID OF THE STROKE WHEN PEOPLE COME ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS AFTER THEY'VE DONE SOMETHING THAT THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE.
[LAUGHTER] IT'S TONGUE IN CHEEK, BUT IT APPEARS TO ME THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO MAKE AMENDS FOR WHAT'S HAPPENED.
[LAUGHTER] I'VE DEALT AT ENOUGH OH, I'M SORRY.
YEAH. I DON'T MIND GRANTING A SIX-MONTH SUP THAT'S.
>> YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT A FORMAL MOTION?
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE GRANT SUP CONTINGENT UPON SIX MONTHS.
>> I CAN USE A PUBLIC HEARING. I'M NOT SURE YOU DID IT.
>> WE DID IT, REALLY ALL THERE WERE TWO.
>> YEAH, WE OPEN TO CLOSE THAT.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTHS.
>> IT GOES GOES KNOW, SUPPOSEDLY. THANK YOU.
COUNCIL [INAUDIBLE] HAS ANY FURTHER DISCUSSIONS.
HEARING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
>> WE HAVE ONE NAY. THAT MOTION DOES CARRY.
[02:15:01]
>> MOVING RIGHT ALONG. ITEM NUMBER 26, CONDUCTIVE PUBLIC HEARING,
[26. Conduct a public hearing, discussion, and possible action on an ordinance annexing an approximate 20.00 acres into the City of Angleton and an annexation service plan. ]
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE AND THAT KIND OF AN APPROXIMATE 20 ACRES IN THE CITY OF ANGLETON AND AN ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN.MR. WATSON, LET YOU DO THE BRIEF, BUT THEY WILL GO TO A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I'LL BE REALLY BRIEF. THAT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
YOU HAVE A PETITION FOR ANNEXATION TO 20 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD TO 220 AND BUSINESS 288.
YOU HAVE IN YOUR BACKUP THE ANNEXATION ORDINANCE AND ANNEXATION SERVICES PLAN THAT HAS BEEN SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION.
THAT PETITIONER IS HERE WITH HIS REPRESENTATIVES.
YOU ALSO HAVE WHAT THEY ARE ENVISIONING IS A LAND PLANT FOR THE PROPERTY.
JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT YOU ARE AWARE, THE PROPERTY UPON ANNEXATION WILL ENTER THE CITY IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT, AND THEN IN ORDER FOR THEM TO PROCEED WITH THEIR PLAN, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SUBMIT REZONING APPLICATIONS IN ORDER TO RESOLVE THE PROPERTY.
YOU WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO DECIDE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY WHEN IT GETS TO THAT POINT.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION ORDINANCE AND THE ANNEXATION SERVICES AGREEMENT.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. WE NEED TO GO INTO A PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HAVE A MOTION?
>> IT'S ALL GO. SECOND MOTION BY MAYOR [INAUDIBLE] SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TEMPLET.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THAT MOTION CARRIES.
WE'RE NOW IN A PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER 26.
IS THERE ANYBODY HERE WHAT DOES SPEAK ON FOUR GETS OUT OF NUMBER 26.
>> WE SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
>> [LAUGHTER] I APPRECIATE THAT. SECOND CALL?
>> THANKS FOR GIVING VOICE UP.
>> THIRD CALL? WE CAN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING OF MOTION.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO-TEM WRIGHT, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSING SAME SIGN. THAT MOTION CARRIES.
WE ARE NOW OUT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COUNCIL, WE NOW HAVE AN ACTION ITEM. CORE DISCUSSION.
>> I'M STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE IT'S AT.
>> YEAH. I WAS LOOKING AT THE MAP.
>> THAT'S THE L-SHAPED PIECE OF PROPERTY.
HAS ACCESS ON OLD ANGLETON ROAD 220.
>> THAT SAYS STATE HIGHWAY 288 [OVERLAPPING] OKAY.
I KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT NOW. I KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT NOW.
>> RIGHT ACROSS 220 FROM THE OLD GARDEN SOIL PLACE THAT MOVED OUT.
>> IT'S NEXT DOOR TO THE OLD [INAUDIBLE] PLACE TOO?
>> IT'S CADDY CORNER ACROSS THE HIGHWAY.
>> OH, CADDY CORNER. GOT IT NOW. I'M IN THE MAP.
>> THERE WAS A FIREWORKS STAND THERE ON THE CORNER FROM A LITTLE WHILE, THEN THERE'S ANOTHER FIREWORKS STAND PERMANENT [OVERLAPPING] THERE.
>> A LITTLE FARTHER UP. OKAY. I'M IN THE MAP NOW.
>> IT STRETCHES ALL THE WAY OVER TO OAKLAND ROAD.
>> WHY WOULD WE WANT TO ANNEX THIS THING?
>> YEAH, WHAT DO WE GAIN? WHAT'S THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY?
>> THE BENEFIT TO THE CITY IS THAT YOU GET LAND-USE CONTROL OVER THE [NOISE] PROPERTY.
IT'S NOT ANNEXED INTO THE CITY, THEN THERE'S NO LAND USE CONTROL AND ANYTHING CAN GO OUT THERE.
ALL THAT HAS TO BE DONE AS FOLLOWING THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND THAT'S IT.
>> IT WOULD COME IN AS AG, RIGHT?
>> IT WOULD COME IN AS AGRICULTURAL, YES.
>> THEN REZONING WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH US.
>> AT THAT POINT, WOULD IT GO TO P&Z FOR REZONE? RIGHT NOW IT DOESN'T BECAUSE IT'S JUST AN ANNEXATION.
>> NO, THE CITY'S CODE SAYS THAT UPON ANNEXATION OF THE PROPERTY IS PLACED IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT, AND THEN IT'S UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNER TO MAKE THE APPLICATIONS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO THE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT THEY WANT IN ORDER TO DO WHATEVER PROJECT IT IS THEY WANT TO DO THERE.
THAT PROCESS WOULD BE TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL.
>> DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHAT THE IDEA BEHIND THE USE OF THAT PROPERTY IS?
>> HE'S GOT JUST A SMALL SHOPPING CENTER, A GAS STATION, AND A STORAGE FACILITY.
>> CAN YOU COME ON UP, SIR? STATE YOUR NAME.
>> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS NOAH.
I'M ACCOMPANIED BY THE OWNER AND RON OUR ENGINEER.
[02:20:03]
THE PLAN WOULD BE TO MAKE THE GAS STATION FIRST ACCOMPANIED BY A SHOPPING CENTER, MAYBE A STORAGE FACILITY IN THE BACK, AND RESIDENTIAL FOR THE REST OF THE 18 OR 17 ACRES THAT REMAIN.MAYBE A MOBILE HOME PARK, ANY TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL.
>> JUST IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS, REMEMBER, WE HAVE ABOUT A THOUSAND-ISH WATER CONNECTIONS.
RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NO PLANS TO INCREASE THAT, SO WHATEVER YOU PUT THERE YOU TOOK THAT OPPORTUNITY.
BUT HAVING SAID THAT AGAIN ON THE ANNEXATION PIECE WE GET TO CONTROL WHAT THAT IS AND SO WE HAVE THAT SAY OF AS HE DESCRIBED, WHETHER THAT'S 70-FOOT LOTS OR MOBILE HOME PARK.
>> THE ONLY THING THAT TURNS ME ABOUT THAT IS ARE WE BEING DISINGENUOUS.
HE HAS AN IDEA OR A PLAN IN PLACE THAT WE WOULD ACCEPT IT BUT THEN WOULD NOT ALLOW HIM TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS PLAN IN PLACE. I DON'T KNOW.
>> BUT HE HASN'T PRESENTED A PLAN.
HE'S JUST PRESENTED A CONCEPT.
>> I UNDERSTAND. BUT I MEAN, I IMAGINE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THERE'S AN EXHIBIT THAT DESCRIBES WHAT WE WOULD WANT TO BUILD. YOU'RE CORRECT.
>> ALL RIGHT. [OVERLAPPING] I DON'T WANT TO DO A BAIT AND SWITCH ON YOU.
TAKE YOU IN AND THEN EXPECT YOU TO DO SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE NO PLANS TO DO.
>> OUR CONNECTIONS ARE LIMITED.
THE GAS STATION, THE SHOPPING CENTER, THE STORAGE FACILITY, THOSE ARE, MAYBE THE GAS STATION IS PROBABLY A HIGHER WATER USE.
BUT THE MOBILE HOME PARK WOULD REALLY EAT INTO OUR THOUSAND CONNECTIONS.
>> WE'RE ENVISIONING MAYBE UP TO 99 LOTS.
>> WE'RE LOOKING AT A TOTAL OF 106, 107 LUES THAT WE WOULD BE REQUESTING.
>> THAT INCLUDES THE SHOPPING CENTER AND GAS STATION?
>> THE PROXIMITY OF THIS, IS THIS CLOSE TO THE NEW OTHER-
>> I WAS THINKING OF THE MOBILE HOME PARK.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ONE THAT WE TURNED DOWN THE DEVELOPMENT [OVERLAPPING]
>> WEST TO THIS, ACROSS OAKLAND ROAD AND ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS.
>> THE RESERVE IS TO THE WEST AT THE INTERSECTION OF COUNTY ROAD 220.
>> I MEAN, I GUESS THERE'S TWO WAYS TO LOOK AT IT.
>> THANK YOU. IN MY MIND, THERE'S TWO WAYS TO LOOK AT IT.
ONE, THAT AREA OF TOWN WILL JUST BECOME A MOBILE HOME PARK AREA.
OR THE OTHER WAY IN MY MIND IS MAYBE WE OUGHT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN MOBILE HOMES.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO PICK MORE AND MORE OF THEM.
>> I MEAN, THAT'S LIKE FIVE STEPS DOWN THE ROAD.
>> THAT GOES BACK TO MY ORIGINAL POINT THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO ACCEPT THEM, BUT EXPECT HIM TO DO SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT HE INTENDS TO DO, THAT SEEMS DISINGENUOUS TO ME. THAT'S JUST ME.
>> ARE YOU DEAD SET ON A MOBILE HOME PARK OR HAVE Y'ALL GOT ANY OTHER AVENUES FOR THAT PIECE OF LAND?
>> THERE'S EIGHT RESIDENTIAL IN THE BACK.
WE DO INTEND TO DO A MOBILE HOME PARK, YES.
IT LOOKS LIKE THE CITY PREFERS SOME OTHER RESIDENTIAL SITUATION.
>> I'M NOT SAYING THAT. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
I'M JUST SAYING WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION WITH THAT PART OF OUR TOWN.
ARE WE JUST GOING TO BE HEAVILY, IT'S LIKE SOME PARTS OF TOWN HAS SINGLE-FAMILY, SOME HAVE MULTIFAMILY, AND I GUESS SOME COULD BE COULD BE MOBILE HOME.
OR IS THAT TOO MUCH OF A BURDEN? DO WE WANT A DIVERSITY THERE AND NOT JUST MOBILE HOMES? THAT'S THE QUESTION.
>> MY OPINION IS LAND USAGE SHOULD NOT BE MOBILE HOME PARK.
>> IT WILL BE COMMERCIAL LAND AND MOBILE HOME. COMMERCIAL. [OVERLAPPING]
>> NO, I MEAN, THE GAS STATION, SHOPPING CENTER, STORAGE FACILITY [OVERLAPPING] I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE WITH THE SHOPPING CENTER OR STORAGE FACILITY.
BUT DEFINITELY, WHEN IT COMES TO THE MOBILE HOME PARK, WE HAD A GENTLEMAN THAT CAME TO US MANY TIMES TRYING TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY FOR A MOBILE HOME PARK, AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, IT WASN'T ACCEPTED.
I FEEL THAT IT'D BE THE SAME SITUATION HERE.
I UNDERSTAND THERE WERE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THAT ONE WITH, YOU KNOW-
>> I THINK WHAT HE SAID WAS, IT WAS LOOKING TO THE COMMUNITIES WHO DIDN'T WANT TO BE ANNEXED.
>> THAT'S A DIFFERENT ONE. THAT'S A DIFFERENT ONE.
>> OH, THERE'S MULTIPLE. WOW. WE'RE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH YOU IN EXACTLY HOW YOU WANT IT TO BE BUILT. HOW WIDE THE LOTS ARE? I BELIEVE THEY'RE 40-FOOT WIDE LOTS.
[02:25:01]
WHATEVER FACILITY YOU WANT IN THE MOBILE HOME PARK.WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE A BLIGHT IN THE CITY.
I THINK IT'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT THE CITY NEEDS.
>> I AGREE WITH WHAT COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND IS TELLING YOU.
HE'S SAYING WE CAN ACCEPT AND WE CAN SAY, YEAH, WE'LL ANNEX YOU IN.
BUT WHEN YOU DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO AND YOU PUT IT DOWN ON PAPER, IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE MIGHT NOT ACCEPT.
I'M JUST ONE PERSON, BUT THE REST OF THEM CAN VOTE HOWEVER THEY'D LIKE TO.
BUT THAT'S THE THING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION BECAUSE ONCE IT'S IN, IT'S IN.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OUR NATION IS NEEDING VERY BADLY IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
YOU CAN LOOK AT EACH ONE OF THESE MOBILE HOMES AS A SINGLE-STORY APARTMENT BUILDING.
THEY'RE ON LOTS, SO YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF GREEN SPACE WHEN YOU ENVISION SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AS I WAS DRIVING THROUGH THAT AREA OF TOWN TODAY, AS BEST AS I CAN ESTIMATE, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 75 PERCENT TO 80 PERCENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES IN THAT GENERAL AREA WERE MOBILE HOMES.
IT IS AN AFFORDABLE PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE AND IT'S AN ASSET TO THE CITY PROVIDED THAT MAINTENANCE IS THERE AND MAINTENANCE IS ESSENTIAL.
WE HAVE ABOUT 15 PERCENT OF THIS PROPERTY THAT WILL GO TOWARDS STORM WATER DETENTION, AND DRAINAGE.
SO AS WE MITIGATE THAT IMPACT TO THE CITY, WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT SALES TAX REVENUE FROM THE RETAIL AND FROM THE CONVENIENCE STORE WITH FUELING STATION THERE.
THERE ARE SOME BENEFITS TO THE CITY.
ON THE INITIAL RUN, THE CITY IS GOING TO GET A SIZABLE CHUNK OF MONEY IN THE PURCHASE OF LUES.
HOPEFULLY, THAT WILL BE DEPOSITED SO THAT IN THE FUTURE YOU CAN START LOOKING AT EXPANDING ON THE CITY'S NEED FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER BECAUSE Y'ALL ARE IN A GROWTH PHASE.
>> YES. MOST OF WHAT YOU TOLD US IS PRETTY STANDARD WHAT WE'VE HEARD.
I AGREE WITH YOU TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS A LOT OF GROWTH IN THIS AREA AND WE ARE LOOKING FOR AFFORDABLE, BUT I WOULD ALSO CHALLENGE THE TERM AFFORDABLE.
I THINK WE'VE FOUGHT THAT TERM A LOT UP HERE. WHAT IS AFFORDABLE?
>> I'M GOING TO ECHO I'M SORRY. THIS IS WHY I STOP HERE, BECAUSE EVERYTHING YOU'VE SAID HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO US AND THEY'RE DIFFERENT, WHICH IS GREAT.
I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT, I SEE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING TO, CUSTOMERS SHOULD LOOK INTO SATISFY, BUT THE IDEA OF THIS IS ONE LOOKING AT THEM AS APARTMENTS, WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS.
I MEAN, SO EVERY MEMBER ON THIS COUNCIL IS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE CONCEPT OF WHICH WE ARE PUTTING FORTH, IT'S NOT NOVEL TO US.
IT'S SOMETHING WE'VE HEARD BEFORE, AND THEN THE IDEA OF THEM IS REPEAT WHAT JOHN SAID THAT THE IDEA OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN SELLING IT TO US.
WE'VE BEEN DOWN THAT ROAD MULTIPLE TIMES AND WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY NEEDED A DIVERSITY OF HOUSING OPTIONS.
WE UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT JUST ONE SIZE FITS ALL, WE GET THAT.
BUT I FEEL WHEN DEVELOPERS PUT THE WORD AFFORDABLE HOUSING TOWARDS US, FOR ME IT FEELS LIKE A SALES PITCH AND I FEEL I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I ANTICIPATED THIS WAS GOING TO BE THE DISCUSSION ON THIS.
THE CITY MANAGER IS CORRECT, I THINK WE HAVE SLIGHTLY MORE THAN A THOUSAND UES OF CAPACITY IN THE WATER SYSTEM, BUT BASED ON MY DISCUSSIONS WITH HDR, WITH THE COMPLETION OF THE WATER PLANT, I BELIEVE AT FREEDOM PARK, THE UES ACTUALLY GO UP TO ABOUT 1400, SO IT'S A LITTLE MORE CAPACITY, IT'S NOT A LOT MORE CAPACITY.
[02:30:02]
THE THING THAT YOU HAVE TO BALANCE WHAT THIS IS, IF WE DON'T ANNEX THEN REALLY WHAT HAPPENS? WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT THEY CAN LITERALLY COME IN AND PLANT IT AS ALL ONE LOT.IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO ANNEX, THEN WE CAN PROBABLY ASSUME THAT YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO ALLOW AN EXTENSION OF WATER AND SEWER SERVICE TO THE PROPERTY; WHICH MEANS THAT ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS GET A TREATMENT PLANT, A PACKAGE PLANT ON-SITE, AND PERMISSION TO DRILL WELLS, AND THEY CAN DO THE DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY WANNA DO WITHOUT ANY OTHER CONTROLLED BY THE CITY OF SINGLETONS, SO YOU'RE BALANCING THAT AGAINST THAT.
I CAN'T REALLY OFFER YOU A WHOLE LOT OF INSIGHT ON WHICH WAY TO FALL ON THAT.
MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE BECAUSE I THINK CONTROLLING THE LAND USE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN NOT CONTROLLING LAND USE THERE.
I MEAN THAT'S BUSINESS 288 IS A TWO LANE ON ROAD 220 IS A HIGHLY TRAVELED OUT.
DO YOU OR DO YOU NOT WANT TO HAVE THAT PROPERTY UNDER YOUR CONTROL? AS FAR AS LAND USE GOES.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS YOU OR NOT.
>> THANK YOU, WALTER. WHAT ARE THE TIMELINE THAT YOU LOOKING AT? 12 MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD TO GET SOMETHING GOING ON THE GROUNDS, 18 MONTHS.
>> WE'RE GOING TO SUBMIT PERMITS HOPEFULLY BY FALL, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR THE CITY OF ANGLETON TO PROVE THE PERMITS, BUT AS SOON AS YOU ALL DO, WE'LL START CONSTRUCTION WITHIN MAYBE THREE MONTHS OR LESS.
WE JUST SEND OUT THE BIDS AND THE APPROVED DRAWINGS.
THAT'S WHERE THE GAS STATION, THOUGH, HOWEVER, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND, MAY BE A GAP YEAR BETWEEN THE GAS STATION AND RESIDENTIAL IN THE BACK.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BUT IF THE GAP YEAR FILLS IN BY THE TIME THE CONSTRUCTION ZONE FOR THEIR STORES, MAYBE EVEN SIX MONTHS AFTER THE GAS STATION WOULD BE BUILT AND WE WOULD START THE MOBILE HOME.
BUT PHASE 1 WOULD THE GAS STATION, PHASE 2 WOULD EITHER BE PROBABLY THE RESIDENTIAL AND THEN THE SHOPPING CENTER COMES NEXT TO THE GAS STATION SITE.
>> BUT WE GOT IT. THERE'S A LOT OF WORK.
>> DO YOU ALREADY OWN THE PROPERTY, JUST HAVE A CONTRACT ON THE PROPERTY?
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE ALREADY OWN PROPERTY AND I THINK WE WILL SEND OUT THE DRAWINGS WITH THE GAS STATION AND MOBILE HOME ALL AT THE SAME TIME, JUST SO WE CAN HAVE IT PERMITTED TO GO.
REZONING WOULD HAPPEN AS SOON AS I REPLOT THE PROPERTY, THAT COULD HAPPEN MAYBE WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.
>> I DON'T MIND ANNEXING THE PROPERTY AND AS WALTER MENTIONED, HAVING CONTROL OVER THE PROPERTY.
BUT MY TAKE IS THAT VOTE TO ANNEX THE PROPERTY, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE CONTINGENT OR BE IN AN IMMEDIATE ALLOWANCE THAT YOU GET TO DO ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO DO IS.
I'M REPRESENTING THE CITY OF HAMILTON.
THIS IS THE FIRST I'VE HEARD OF THIS, SO WE WILL HAVE TO GET INPUT FROM A RESIDENCY, THE CONSTITUENCY THAT WE REPRESENT, WE AREN'T JUST A GAVEL UP HEAR THAT EVERYBODY DOES WHAT WE SAY TO DO.
AND WITH CITIZEN, WHAT WE HERE SAYS, THEN IT'S GOING TO BE NO, AND UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU CONTINUE WITH YOUR REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION, IT'S OKAY.
YOU MIGHT HAVE TO COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT PLAN OF WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
>> IT LOOKS LIKE I'M NOT SURE IF I CAN TELL BY THE LOOKS OF Y'ALL FACES, IF Y'ALL HAVE ALREADY MADE UP Y'ALL'S MIND, IF THE MOBILE HOME PARK IS GOING TO COME OR NOT.
>> I'LL JUST GIVE YOU MY PERSPECTIVE.
I LIKED THE IDEA OF ANNEXING, I DON'T LIKE THE PLAN, SO.
>> IT LOOKS LIKE I'LL GET ANNEX GOOD FOR THE CITY.
WHEN I SUBMIT THE PLANS FOR MOBILE HOME PARK, IT'S GOING TO LOOKS LIKE, MAYBE GET REJECTED, WHICH SHOOTS MYSELF IN THE FOOT. RIGHT, JOHN?
>> WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS ANNEXATION, NOT THE PLAN.
>> THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU CAME TO ASK FOR ANNEXATION?
>> YES. BUT IN MY HAND EVERYBODY HAVE A PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY.
IF WE ANNEX, IT WOULD GO THROUGH WITH IT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THE REST OF THE 18 ACRES, WE'RE A FAMILY BUSINESS, WE'RE NOT ONE OF THOSE BIG GIANT COMPANIES [INAUDIBLE], IF WE WILL SAY, WE'RE GOING TO BUILD LUXURIOUS HOMES.
>> [OVERLAPPING] TO SPECULATE ABOUT.
>> WE PLAY IN OUR PLATTER, ANYTHING. [OVERLAPPING]
[02:35:01]
>> IT JUST ANNEX BUT IT LOOKS LIKE.
>> I WAS TRYING TO YEAH. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I VERY DO MUCH APPRECIATE THAT, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A GOOD TO KNOW THAT NOW RATHER THAN WHEN I SUBMIT THOSE PERMITS.
>> YOU WEREN'T TOLD ABOUT THAT.
>> THE MOBILE HOME PARKS, THEY'RE UNLIKELY TO HAPPEN? NO.
>> I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD ADDITION TO THE CITY.
>> IF I MIGHT ASK THE CITY COUNCIL, WHAT'S THE POSSIBILITIES OF PRESENTING TO P&Z THE PLANS INTENDED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT TO GET P&Z INPUT, BEFORE CITY COUNCIL ACTUALLY ANNEXES THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THAT CONSIDERATION.
THEN WE COME FORWARD WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
UNDER PUBLIC HEARINGS AND GET THE CITIZENRY INPUT.
COUNCILMAN BOOTH, I AGREE WITH YOU, THE CITIZENS NEED TO HAVE THEIR INPUT INTO THIS PROJECT.
>> TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, THERE'S A SECTION IN THE CHAPTER 23, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ABOUT SUBMITTING A CONCEPT PLAN, A MASTER PLAN OR A SITE PLAN FOR A PIECE OF PROPERTY.
WHERE SOMEBODY CAN COME IN, AND SUBMIT AN APPLICATION, AND INVEST TO WHATEVER VARIOUS PARTS OF WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY WANT TO VEST TO SEE AND GET INVESTING ON.
THAT WOULD BE ONE APPROACH THAT THEY COULD TAKE BECAUSE THAT WILL GO TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND WOULD COME TO YOU ALL WITH A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ABOUT IT.
THEY [NOISE] MIGHT ASSIST THEM IN THEIR DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.
IT MIGHT ASSIST YOU ALL IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS.
THAT IS NOT REALLY A PART OF THE ANNEXATION PROCESS THOUGH.
IF THAT'S A ROUTE THAT YOU WANT TO GO, I WOULD SAY THAT YOU SHOULD CONTINUE THIS ITEM.
I WOULD RECOMMEND TO A DATE CERTAIN, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO NOTICE AGAIN BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T, THEN WE HAVE TO DO NOTICE AGAIN, AND ALL THAT THAT IMPLIES FOR AN ANNEXATION.
MY FEELING ON IT IS THAT, I THINK THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING ON A PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY.
THEY PROBABLY ARE IN A POSITION WHERE THEY COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT FAIRLY RAPIDLY.
I CAN'T GET IT ONTO THE PNZ AGENDA FOR NEXT NEXT WEEK BASICALLY, JUNE 2ND, BUT CERTAINLY FOR JULY, IT COULD BE ON JULY AGENDA.
IF YOU GET THAT STUFF INTO ME IN THE NEXT 10 DAYS OR SO.
>> BE ON A JULY AGENDA PNZ, THE END OF JULY AGENDA FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THEY CAN HAVE SOMETHING THAT SAYS,"YES, WE THINK THAT'S GOOD, THAT ISN'T GOING TO WORK FOR US." THEN THEY CAN DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANT TO TO PROCEED FORWARD WITH THE ANNEXATION OR WHETHER THEY WANT TO WITHDRAW THE ANNEXATION.
BECAUSE IF THEY DECIDE IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK FOR THEM, THEN HOW DOES CONTINUING ON WITH ANNEXATION [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT SEEMS LIKE A REASONABLE RECOMMENDATION TO ME.
>> YOU GOOD WITH THAT, JUDITH?
>> I'M SURE THEY HEARD PART OF THAT AS THEIR TEAM CONFERS OVER THERE.
I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION, YOU DID SAY MOBILE HOME PARK AND WE KNEW HOW MANY UNITS YOU WOULD USE FOR WATER.
WHAT ARE YOU-ALL LOOKING AT IN THE TRAILER PARK ACTUAL LOTS OR ACTUAL HOMES? WHAT'S THE NUMBER? 65? 75?
>> RIGHT NOW WE ARE ON 11 ACRES, A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN 11 ACRES, FOR THE MOBILE HOME PARK.
I'M MAXED OUT AT 99 LOTS, AND IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO START COMING DOWN FROM THERE, AS WE START TWEAKING OUT CERTAIN AREAS, AND LOOKING AT TRAFFIC CIRCULATION IS IMPORTANT.
LOOKING AT HAVING AT LEAST TWO CONNECTIONS BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT YOU HAVE FOR FIRE SAFETY, PERSONAL SAFETY, AND WORKING WITH STAFF AND MASSAGING THIS INTO SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD BE AN ASSET TO THE CITY.
>> I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A GRASP ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS.
IT COULD COME DOWN FROM 99 TO MAYBE 88 OR 86, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW.
I WILL JUST SAY THE LAST TRAILER PARK WAS GOING TO BE LIKE IN THE RANGE OF 400-500. [OVERLAPPING] YEAH.
IT WILL BE A VERY LARGE TRAILER PARK, AND SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A GOOD NUMBER IN MY HEAD,
[02:40:01]
SO I DON'T CLOSE THE IDEA, BUT I WANT TO KNOW CONCEPTUALLY WHAT THAT MAY LOOK LIKE.>> WE ARE LOOKING AT COMMERCIAL BEING ALONG BUSINESS 288, WITH NO CONNECTIONS AT ALL FOR ANY OF THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.
THE RESIDENTIAL TO THE STREET TO THE NORTH AND ALSO TO THE WEST.
WE ALSO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT PARK LAND DEDICATION AND OTHER THINGS TOO.
AS WE GET INTO THIS PLAN, WE NEED TO, I GUESS MASSAGE AND GET STAFF INPUT.
WE HAD A VERY GOOD MEETING WITH THE DOG GROUP, AND BY THE WAY, I HAVE TO COMPLIMENT YOUR STAFF OUTSTANDING INPUT.
THEY REALLY LAY OUT EXACTLY WHAT THE CITY REQUIREMENTS ARE.
VERY GOOD DIALOGUE WITH THEM, AND IN THE PROCESS OF GOING BACK AND FORTH, TRY TO MASSAGE A PLAN THAT THEY THINK THEY CAN SUPPORT BEFORE CITY COUNCIL.
>> DID YOU HEAR WHAT WALTER WAS SAYING IN REGARDS TO THE WHOLE LET'S GO TAKE A STEP BACK AND GO THROUGH THE PNZ PROCESS, AND THEN BRING IT BACK FULL CIRCLE.
>> WE'RE NOT GETTING ANNEXED TODAY, WE'RE GOING TO REVISIT A DIFFERENT ROUTE.
>> JUST WORK WITH STAFF, WITH WALTER, TO GET IT.
>> THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT IT.
>> SINCE THAT LOOKS LIKE THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO GO HERE, I WOULD SAY THAT YOU SHOULD CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST.
>> ALSO IF YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, REOPEN IT AND [OVERLAPPING] AND CONTINUE IT.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DATE THE FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST IS SO-
>> CAN I ASK WHAT THE DISTANCES BETWEEN THE LOTS?
>> [NOISE] THE LOTS, [OVERLAPPING] THEY'RE BASICALLY A MINIMUM OF 40 FOOT WIDE.
I'VE GOT ONE LOT IN THERE THAT IS 60 FEET WIDE, AND THOSE ARE THE LOTS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE PUBLIC ROAD WAYS.
THEY'RE ALL MINIMUM OF 100 FOOT, AND I'M LOOKING AT TRAFFIC CIRCULATION IN THERE.
>> MR. MAYOR WILL BE OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> THAT WAS SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GUNGORA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE [NOISE] AND WE WILL KEEP THAT PUBLIC HEARING OPEN UNTIL WE CAN READ THIS ITEM.
>> WE'RE ALL GOOD, GOOD ON THAT END.
WE'RE GOOD ON THIS END? I'M SORRY, WALTER.
>> THE FIRST COUNCIL MEETING IN AUGUST IS AUGUST 9TH.
I THINK IT PROVIDED THEY CAN GET EVERYTHING TURNED IN, AND THE APPLICATION TURNED IN BY THE END OF NEXT WEEK.
THAT CAN CERTAINLY BE ON THE PNZ AGENDA FOR JULY AND THEN YOUR SECOND MEETING IN JULY, WHICH THEN STILL ALLOWS ANOTHER TWO WEEKS OR SO TO THE RE-REOPENING OF THESE ANNEXATION QUESTION.
>> THANK YOU ALL FOR WORKING WITH US. THANK YOU-ALL.
>> MOVING RIGHT ALONG, I HAVE NUMBER 27,
[27. Conduct a public hearing, discussion, and possible action on the preliminary replat of Riverwood Ranch Sections 3 & 4. ]
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE PRELIMINARY REPLAT OF RIVERWOOD RANCH SECTION 3 AND 4. MS. LINDSAY?>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS IS SECTION 3 AND 4, PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RIVERWOOD RANCH.
IT'S CONSISTING OF 144 LOTS TO THE BEST I RECALL, AND MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT GENTLEMEN, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR STAFF? [NOISE]
>> I'M SORRY. THANK YOU FOR REMINDING ME, SIR. PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.
>> A MOTION BY MAYOR [INAUDIBLE] SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GUNGORA FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN, THAT MOTION CARRIES.
WE ARE NOW IN A PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR AGAINST ITEM NUMBER 27? COME ON [INAUDIBLE] [NOISE] EXCUSE ME.
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
[02:45:01]
I WAS SURPRISED WHEN I OPENED THE AGENDA TO SEE THAT WE'RE REQUIRING A TIA FOR THIS SECTION 3 AND 4.WE ARE PROVIDING ANOTHER BOULEVARD ACCESS OFF OF [INAUDIBLE] AND THEN WE HAVE A BOULEVARD ACCESS OFF OF DOWNING AND A THIRD ONE OFF OF HOSPITAL.
I DON'T KNOW MUCH MORE WE COULD DO TO FACILITATE TRAFFIC.
I THINK IT'S A LITTLE LATE IN THE GAME TO DO A TIA.
I THINK WHEN WE ORIGINALLY DID THE CONCEPT PLAN, WE DETERMINED IT WASN'T NECESSARY, SO I'M ASKING FOR CONSIDERATION TO WAIVE THE TIA REQUIREMENT.
>> CAN SOMEBODY FROM STAFF ANSWER THAT QUESTION? [OVERLAPPING]
>> FROM PUBLIC HEARING. [NOISE] ] [OVERLAPPING]
>> [NOISE] SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK, I APOLOGIZE GOING TWICE.
>> ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER? YOU WANT TO SPEAK?
>> DID SOMEBODY WANT TO SPEAK TO PUBLIC HEARING? COME ON UP.
>> COME UP TO THE PODIUM. [BACKGROUND]
>> I HAVE THE MAP AND I SEE THAT THERE'S A 20 FOOT SOMETHING BETWEEN THE HOUSES ON THE BACK, ON THE NORTH SIDE FROM THE ROAD THAT GOES BACK TO THE DITCH AND I'M CURIOUS WHAT THAT IS.
IS THAT A 20 FOOT DITCH GOING BACK TO THE BACK DITCH THAT GOES DOWN OR IS THAT A COVERED AREA WITH CUL-DE-SACS UNDER THERE? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LITTLE STRIP IS.
>> COME ON. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK THIS PART FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING IS SPEAKING ON FOR AGAINST, WE GET TO THE NUTS AND BOLTS WILL BE IN THE OTHER PART OF IT BUT IF YOU WANT GO AHEAD AND QUICKLY JUST GIVE US A BRIEF ONE.
>> VERY BRIEFLY, WHEN WE DEVELOPED A MASTER PLAN FOR THIS, THE CITY ASKED THAT THE DEVELOPER TO DO 60 FOOT LOTS THE NORTH SIDE BACKING ON TO [OVERLAPPING] COLONY SQUARE.
ALSO, TO PUT A DRAINAGE RESERVE WHICH WILL BE A SHALLOW SWALE BETWEEN THEIR BACKYARDS AND THESE LOTS BACKYARDS TO PICK UP ANY BACKYARD DRAINAGE SO WE DON'T BLOCK ANY.
THAT'S WHAT THAT IS. IT DRAINS FROM THE WEST END ALL THE WAY OVER TO BUCHTA, WHERE THERE'S A STUB OUT FOR THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. [NOISE] BLESS YOU.
>> ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THE ITEM NUMBER 27? THIRD CALL? [NOISE] [BACKGROUND] COME ON UP, SIR. STATE YOUR NAME.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. EDDIE GARCIA [INAUDIBLE].
I'M A RESIDENT OF COLONY SQUARE.
IN FACT, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD BACKS UP TO MY HOME.
SO I WAS LOOKING AT THIS PLAT AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S GOING TO BE YOU SAID A 20 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT BEHIND THE HOUSES? IS THAT CORRECT? [NOISE] IS THAT GOING TO BE GRASSY EASEMENT? HOW DEEP IS IT GOING TO BE? WHO'S GOING TO MAINTAIN IT? WHO'S GOING TO MOW IT? HOW'S THAT GOING TO BE MAINTAINED?
>> WE'LL ANSWER THAT SHORTLY, BUT GOOD QUESTIONS. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'LL PUT THAT IN THE PARKING LOT AND WE'LL GET TO IT.
>> AND ARE THESE ALSO GOING TO BE SINGLE STORY, TWO STORY HOMES BACK HERE? POTENTIALLY, I COULD HAVE THREE OF THESE HOUSES OVERLOOKING IN MY BACKYARD. THANK YOU.
>> ONE THING WE'LL DO IS WE'LL SHOW THE MAP [NOISE] THAT'S ATTACHED TO OUR AGENDA.
[NOISE] THAT CAN BE SEEN BECAUSE THIS SHOWS THE LOTS ON THE COLONY SQUARE SIDE VERSUS THE NEW SIDE.
>> ANYBODY ELSE ON FOR OR AGAINST ITEM NUMBER 27? LET'S CALL COUNCIL.
>> MAYOR, MOVING CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?
>> MOTION BY MAYOR [INAUDIBLE] SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIDE. THAT MOTION CARRIES.
WE'RE NOW OUT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND GOING INTO OUR DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS. GO AHEAD [INAUDIBLE]
>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS IS THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MENTIONED BY DEVELOPER MICHAEL FOLEY IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW.
THE COMMENTS PROVIDED BY HDR, THE CITY'S ENGINEER, NUMBER 3 STATES, A VARIANCE REQUESTS WAS PROVIDED [NOISE] BY MR. MICHAEL FOLEY REGARDING A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TIA FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE REQUEST HAS BEEN DENIED BASED ON THE THRESHOLD REQUIREMENT FOR EXCEEDING PEAK HOUR TRIPS OF MORE THAN A 100 VHP AS LISTED IN THE ANGLETON LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTION 23-2.5.
[NOISE] THIS IS INTERPRETED FROM THE NUMBER OF TRIPS GENERATED FROM THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT NOT PER DRIVEWAY.
[02:50:01]
THEREFORE, A TIA WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THIS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AND SCOPING MEETING WILL BE COORDINATED ACCORDINGLY TO REVIEW THIS INFORMATION.>> WE ALSO HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS COMING OUT OF THE [BACKGROUND] PUBLIC HEARING.
CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE ANSWER [NOISE] THOSE FOR US?
>> MR. DOUG? DOUG GRACER WITH BAKER NELSON.
THE 20-FOOT DRAINAGE RESERVE WILL BE A SWALE.
PROBABLY START OUT TWO FOOT DEEP OR A FOOT DEEP AT THE WEST END.
THAT'S NOT THAT LONG A DISTANCE MAYBE TWO AND HALF FEET AT THE OTHER END.
IT WILL BE [NOISE] MAINTAINED BY THE HOA OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
THE BACKYARD FENCES OF THE HOUSES, THEIR LOTS END AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF THAT 20-FOOT SWALE.
THEIR FENCES WILL BE ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
THERE'LL BE A 20-FOOT GREEN SPACE BETWEEN YOUR HOUSE AND THE FENCE BUT THE HOA WILL MAINTAIN THAT.
[NOISE] I WOULD ASSUME THERE WILL BE TWO FOOT, NOT TWO FOOT, EXCUSE ME, MIDGETS, SMALL PEOPLE.
[LAUGHTER] TWO STORY HOUSES AS YOU SEE ON THE FIRST SECTION.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE ALL TWO STORY BUT IT APPEARS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE.
THESE ARE 60 FOOT LOTS, SO I DON'T KNOW.
CAN I CONTINUE TALKING ABOUT A FEW THINGS? [NOISE]
>> CONCERNING THE TI, THE VARIANTS THAT WAS REQUESTED BY MICHAEL HAD IN THERE THAT BUCHTA ROAD AND DOWNING ARE TWO LANE ROADS, ONE IN EACH DIRECTION WITH A CONTINUOUS TURN LANE.
THEY CARRY A LOT OF TRAFFIC AND THE IMPACT TO THOSE TWO STREETS IS NEGLIGIBLE FOR THIS SMALL OF A SUBDIVISION.
WALTER AND LINDSEY ARE CORRECT.
WE DON'T NEED THOSE THRESHOLDS THE WAY IT'S LAID OUT IN THE LDC.
THE SHOE DOESN'T FIT EVERY SUBDIVISION.
IT'S JUST THAT [NOISE] THERE NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF COMMON SENSE ABOUT IT.
THESE ARE HUGE STREETS AND THERE'S JUST NOT THAT MUCH TRAFFIC THERE.
THIS IS ONE OF THE LAST AREAS THAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED, SO THE TRAFFIC THERE IS THERE NOW.
THE ONLY THING LEFT IS THE DOWNING PROPERTY TO THE WEST, WHICH IS THE LAST AREA THAT'S GOING TO HAVE MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND IMPACT THESE ROADS.
THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMENT IN THE ENGINEER'S REPORT CONCERNING SOILS INVESTIGATIONS THAT WE DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH GEOTECHNICAL BORES TO SATISFY.
I HAD A HARD TIME FINDING WHERE THEY FOUND THAT BUT IT'S IN THE SUGAR LAND DEVELOPMENT MANUAL.
[LAUGHTER] THAT I HAD TO SEARCH THROUGH BECAUSE IT'S A PRETTY LARGE THING TO FIND.
THEY REQUIRE BORES EVERY 500 FEET TO DETERMINE LIME STABILIZATION FOR THE SUB-GRADE [NOISE] AND COMPACTION FOR UTILITIES.
WE DIDN'T DO IT ON SECTION 1 AND 2.
WHAT WE HAVE ALWAYS DONE IN THE PAST IS WE HAVE CONTRACTORS AND INSPECTORS THAT KNOW THAT SOIL HERE IS PRETTY MUCH CLAY.
IT'S GOING TO TAKE SEVEN PERCENT LIME.
AS YOU GO THROUGH AND CUT YOUR SUB-GRADE IN THE FIELD YOU'LL SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, WE'RE IN 300 FEET LENGTH OF SANDY MATERIAL.
[NOISE] LIME IT DON'T HELP IT AND SO YOU BRING OUT A LAB AND YOU TEST IT AND YOU MAKE THAT DECISION IN THE FIELD.
YOU DON'T GO OUT AND DO RANDOM 500 FOOT TESTING TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO [NOISE] GET BY IN THE FIELD.
THERE'S NO USE LIME AND SAND AND SO IT'S TAKEN CARE OF IN THE FIELD.
IT IS IN THE SUGAR LAND DESIGN MANUAL, WHATEVER IT IS.
THEIR PUTTING THAT IN THERE IS CORRECT.
WE DIDN'T DO IT. WE DON'T HAVE THAT MANY BOARDS OUT THERE.
WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT PROBABLY ON ANY SUBDIVISION WE'VE BUILT AT THE LAST FIVE OR SIX.
THAT'S WHAT I HAD TO SAY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. [NOISE] ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? [NOISE]
>> PUT THE AUDIENCE TO SLEEP EARLY [INAUDIBLE] YOU GET TO LISTEN TO YOU.
[02:55:04]
A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT ASPECT THAT MR. GRACER TOOK ABOUT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.[NOISE] NUMEROUS YEARS AGO IN THE CITY OF ANGLETON, THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDED TO BUILD THESE MAJOR ROADS THROUGH HERE, DOWNING ROAD, ONE LANE EACH DIRECTION WITH A CONTINUOUS TURN LANE DOWN IT.
THE SAME TYPE OF SECTION WITH HOSPITAL DRIVE AND WITH BUCHTA ROAD.
ALL THIS WAS DONE IN ANTICIPATION OF ALL THESE LAND OUT THERE BEING DEVELOPED.
[NOISE] THE DAVIS TRACK, THE DOWNING TRACT EVERYTHING, SO THEY WENT AHEAD AND BIT THE BULLET AT THAT TIME, SPENT THE MONEY, BUILD THE STREETS AND WE'RE GOING TO ACCOMMODATE ALL THESE.
I SAY THAT OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DOES NOT ADDRESS THINGS THAT ALREADY EXIST.
IT LOOKS AT THIS ONE SPOT AND SAY, THIS SUBDIVISION REQUIRES A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS BASED UPON THIS, BUT DOESN'T GIVE ANY CREDENCE TO WHAT'S BEEN DONE PRIOR TO THE SUBDIVISION.
THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS ONLY GOING TO ADDRESS THE DOWNING HOSPITAL AND BUCHTA ROAD.
THEY'RE FULLY DEVELOPED TODAY FROM STOP SIGN TO STOP SIGN.
I REALLY SEE NO NEED IN TAKING ON THAT ENDEAVOR.
I THINK AUSTIN COLONY IS GOING TO PROBABLY REQUIRE ONE AS IT COMES OUT ONTO A ROCK.
BUT A LOT OF WORK WAS DONE AHEAD OF TIME YEARS AGO IN PREPARATION FOR THIS THING.
WE DID ADDRESS THIS EARLY ON IN SECTIONS 1 AND, I DON'T KNOW.
[NOISE] THIS CONVERSATION [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE WAIVE THIS BECAUSE [NOISE] IT'S COME BACK UP AGAIN.
ODDLY, IF YOU WANT TO SAY ODDLY, IF YOU WERE TO TYPE THE FOUR CORE BOARDS THAT WERE TAKEN OUT THERE ON RIVERWOOD RANCH PROPERTY AND LOOK AT THEM SIDE BY SIDE, YOU WOULD THINK THEY WERE QUADRUPLE.
[LAUGHTER] THEY LOOK EXACTLY ALIKE.
I'LL TELL YOU, IF YOU TAKE ANOTHER CORE BORE YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THE SAME SOIL THAT YOU'VE ALREADY FOUND OUT THERE.
JUST TO GET ANOTHER CORE BORE BECAUSE THE COURT SAYS TO, THE CORE BORES ARE TO INDICATE WHAT'S ON THE GROUND.
WHAT THE CORE BORES THAT THEY'VE TAKEN ALREADY INDICATES WHAT'S ON THE GROUND.
>> I'LL SUGGEST THAT WE WAIT TO PROVE THIS PLAN BUT TAKE OUT THOSE TWO ITEMS ABOUT THE TIA AND GEOTECHNICAL STUFF.
>> LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION ON TIA.
>> I UNDERSTAND WAIVING IT ON THE FIRST PHASE, SECOND PHASE MAYBE, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE THIS ALL BUILT OUT, DOES THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS GOING TO TELL US IF WE NEED TO HAVE A TRAFFIC CONTROL LIGHT AT DOWNING AND BUCKTON OR HOSPITAL IN BUCKTON, OR BUCKTON AND DOWNING, THE HOSPITAL AT DOWNING.
IS THAT GOING TO TELL US THAT? BECAUSE I THINK WE MIGHT BE GETTING CLOSE TO THAT WITH ALL THOSE HOUSES GOING IN AT THIS POINT, AND WOULD THAT GIVE US AN IDEA? WOULDN'T IT BE BETTER TO HAVE THAT STATED THEN SO WE KNOW WHAT'S COMING?
>> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MAYOR PRO TEM, YES, I DO BELIEVE IT WILL SHOW YOU WHERE THOSE NEEDS ARE FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS.
I'M NOT AN ENGINEER SO I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT HAS BEEN ENUMERATED BY OUR CITY ENGINEER.
I JUST GO BY EXACTLY WHAT I KNOW OF IT AND WHAT'S WRITTEN HERE.
>> I'M WITH YOU ON THE GEOTECH.
I THINK JUST TO START WHERE WE'RE AT IN THIS CLIMATE AND OUR TERRAIN BUT ON THE TIA, I'M STILL LEANING TOWARDS REQUIRING BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT LIGHT CONTROL BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THAT'S AN ISSUE IN THAT AREA RIGHT NOW, ESPECIALLY ON THE DOWNING SIDE.
>> BETWEEN THAT INTERSECTION CANAAN?
[03:00:03]
>> YEAH, AND THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO TO FIX THAT.
>> I'LL TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENS WITH TRAFFIC.
WATER FOLLOWS [BACKGROUND] THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WITH TRAFFIC.
[LAUGHTER] YOU DO THE SAME THING.
MY DAUGHTER WAS AT THE HOUSE SO THEN SHE LOOKED ON HER PHONE, HOW AM I GOING TO GET HOME IN HOUSTON? DO I BUST IT UP THIS WAY OR GO AROUND [NOISE] ANOTHER WAY? THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO DO, IS TRY TO FIND. [NOISE]
>> HOW DO I KNOW ABOUT THE NUMBER OF HOUSES GOING IN, THE NUMBER OF TRIPS THAT IS TRIGGERING? BECAUSE I DON'T WANT US TO BE IN THE SAME POSITION WE'RE AT WITH HENDERSON, WHERE WE WAITED FOREVER AND NOW WE HAVE TRAFFIC ISSUE.
THE ROAD NEEDS TO BE FIXED BUT IT NEEDS A TRAFFIC CONTROLLER.
>> MORE ON THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TO TRAFFIC.
ONE OF THE BIG THINGS IS THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ADDRESSES IS A PEAK HOUR FLOW OF TRAFFIC.
YOU'LL HAVE A PEAK HOUR FLOW IN THE MORNING AND YOU'LL HAVE A PEAK HOUR FLOW IN THE AFTERNOON AND THE REST OF THE TIME IT'S PRETTY CALM.
SUSPECTED WARRANTING A STOPLIGHT AT ANY INTERSECTION IN TOWN BASED UPON A ONE-HOUR PEAK DEMAND IS NOT GOING TO FLY.
>> HAVE YOU HEARD THAT, I'M SORRY, IT'S REALLY NOT PART OF THIS SITUATION.
[LAUGHTER] I'VE HAD SO MANY CITIZENS COMPLAIN TO ME ALREADY ABOUT THE BLINKING LIGHT NOW AT WILKINS AND DOWNING.
THEY WISH THEY WOULD GO BACK TO [LAUGHTER] THE GREEN AND RED BECAUSE THEY SAY AS GREEN MAP MOST OF THE TIME, NOW I HAVE TO STOP EVERY TIME.
>> THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE USED TO.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BEFORE THE LIGHT.
>> THAT'S MY QUESTION ON THIS IS THE TRAFFIC CONTROL.
>> I TAKE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT.
I APPRECIATE CECIL'S POINT AND JOHN'S POINT.
MY LITTLE VIEWPOINT IS THE FREQUENCY AT WHICH WE GRANT VARIANCES.
THAT'S ALL. THAT'S MY CONCERN.
[OVERLAPPING] SET STANDARDS AND THEN SOMEBODY ASKING, LET'S BE HONEST, THEY'RE GOOD AT ASKING AND THEY TELL US THE REASON WHY AND THERE'S PROBABLY A LEGITIMATE REASONS WHY.
I KNOW WE HAVE TO BALANCE THOSE.
ANYWAY, THAT'S JUST MY OWN LITTLE POINT..
>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I'M JUST LEANING A LITTLE BIT TOWARDS YOU CECIL.
THE ROADS BUILT CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT, CAN'T EXPAND, IT, CAN'T MAKE IT WIDER, CAN'T MAKE IT BIGGER.
[BACKGROUND] I KNOW WE'RE THERE BUT I DO SEE JOHN'S POINT AT SOME POINT DO WE DO A TRAFFIC STUDY ALL UP AND DOWN DOWNING STREET JUST BECAUSE OF NOW, DOWNING IS BECOMING A MORE THOROUGH FARE ROAD, WHICH IS GOING TO CONNECT THE HENDERSON AND SO WE MAY HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT NORTH SIDE SECTION AS A WHOLE AND NOT THIS ONE ROAD OR ONE THREE ROADWAY TRACK, SO TO SPEAK.
>> YES MR. MAYOR, WELL, WE DID IT.
I DID TRAFFIC STUDY TO A CERTAIN DEGREE ON HENDERSON ROAD.
WE'RE COMPILING ALL THIS TOGETHER.
ULTIMATELY WHEN YOU GET TO THE POINT, IT ALL NEEDS TO WORK TOGETHER AS A SYSTEM AND NOT JUST LOOK AT ONE ROAD AND JUST TREAT THAT ROAD BY ITSELF AND FORGET THE OTHER ONES.
THEY ALL NEED TO PLAY IN TOGETHER.
>> WE HAVE AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA WITH SOME TALKING POINTS.
COUNCIL, WHAT IS YOUR ALL'S PLEASURE? [BACKGROUND]
>> BEFORE WE MOVE ON, DID EVERYONE IN THE AUDIENCE GET THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED? I THINK THERE'S A FEW. IS ALL GOOD?
>> OH, YEAH. HE GOT HIS GO TAKE CARE OF THIS WELL, TOOK CARE OF THE HEIGHT AND THE FENCE AND WHATNOT, TWO-STORY POTENTIALLY ONE STORIES, MOST PROBABLY TWOS.
>> SURE. THANK YOU FOR MAKING SURE WE DOUBLE BACK.
[03:05:03]
>> MISS LINDSEY, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION MENTIONS NOTHING ABOUT AN ADDITIONAL CORE BORE.
>> NO, IT DOESN'T. UNLESS IT'S THEIR CITY ENGINEER COMMENTS.
>> NO, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVE SUBJECT TO CLEARING ALL ENGINEER COMMENTS AND HAVING THE TIA.
>> WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN ALL FOUR OF THEIR COMMENTS?
>> WELL, TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT MAKES THE MOTION ON HERE.
>> IF YOU HAD A LOOK AT IT IT'S ON PAGE FIVE.
>> OKAY. MAY I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE RIVERWOOD RANCH SECTION 3 AND 4 PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBJECT TO THE CITY ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATION LESS, HERE'S ITEMS 3 AND 4, WHICH ARE THE VARIANTS WITH NO TIA REQUIRED AND NO ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL BORING REQUIRED.
>> MOTION FROM COUNCILMAN BOOTH, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> I WILL SECOND BY COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE].
>> I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU, COUNCILMAN, TELL US ABOUT THE VARIANCES.
WE ARE GOING TO ADDRESS THIS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND WE'RE GOING TO HOPEFULLY GET AWAY FROM THIS STUFF.
IS WHAT HAPPENS IF WE ADOPTED SOMETHING.
I PROMISE, I'LL STAND ON MY HIND FEET AND SAY THIS, WE ADOPTED SOMETHING THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULDN'T ADOPTED AND IT'S BITING US NOW.
>> [LAUGHTER] WE'VE SEEN THIS SEVERAL TIMES NOW.
>> EVERY DEVELOPMENT IS THAT DIFFERENT.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS BEFORE WE FOR CALL FOR THE VOTE?
>> THE TIA WOULD AFFECT ALL OR IT WOULD BE A STUDY ON A THREE ROADS?
>> FOR ME, MY BIGGEST SINCERITY WOULD BE DOWNING.
IF THERE IS CONCERN ON TRAFFIC, IT WOULD BE DOWNING BECAUSE IT'S A MAIN THOROUGHFARE CONNECTING THE HENDERSON.
AND FOR THAT REASON I DON'T THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A TIA DONE ON HOSPITAL BECAUSE I JUST DON'T SEE A TRAFFIC FLOWING THAT WAY AS MUCH AS DOWNING.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? HEARING NONE, I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
>> THERE ARE FOUR YESES, TWO NAYS, MOTION CARRIES. [NOISE] THANK YOU.
WE'VE BEEN AT THIS FOR ABOUT THREE HOURS AND EIGHT MINUTES.
PROBABLY NEED TO TAKE A LITTLE BREAK.
SO LET'S TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THE TABLE,.
>> TO THE REGULAR AGENDA. [LAUGHTER] WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL EVERYONE BACK AT THE TABLE AT 9:19.
THANK YOU THOSE ONLINE FOR THE PATIENTS, FOR IT TO GO A LITTLE BREAK.
[NOISE] WE'RE BACK AT THE TABLE.
WE'LL START NOW WITH OUR REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS TO THE NUMBER 28,
[28. Discussion and possible action on an ordinance authorizing the issuance and sale of the City of Angleton, Texas, Combination Tax and Revenue Certificates of Obligation, Series 2022; levying a tax and providing for the security and payment thereof; and enacting other provisions relating thereto.]
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF THE CITY OF BINGHAMTON, TEXAS COMBINED TAX AND REVENUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION SERIES 2022, LEVYING A TAX AND PROVIDING FOR THE SECURITY AND PAYMENT THEREOF AND IN ACTING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED THERE TOO. TANISHA.I HAVE HILLTOPSECURITIES HERE, THE CITY'S ADVISORY COMPANY, AND THEY WILL BE SPEAKING TODAY REGARDING THE 2022 BONDS.
IT'S ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO SEE YOU.
HAVE GOOD LUCK FOR US. GOOD NEWS.
>> I HOPE WE CAN CONTINUE THAT TRICK.
I THINK IT'S PRETTY GOOD NEWS GIVEN WE'VE BEEN IN THE MARKETS RECENTLY, SO THANK YOU MAYOR.
COUNCIL, JOE MORROW, WITH HILLTOPSECURITIES.
WE DID GO INTO THE MARKET THIS MORNING AND TOOK COMPETITIVE BIDS.
LEADING UP TO THAT PROCESS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALWAYS DO IS GO THROUGH THE RATING PROCESS.
YOUR RATING THIS TIME WAS CONFIRMED AT THE AA MINUS WITH A STABLE OUTLOOK.
WE DID HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF HESITATION AND PAUSE GOING IN.
BECAUSE OF THE DRAWDOWN IN FUND BALANCE, TANISHA WAS ABLE TO LOOK IN AND DRILL DOWN IN SOME OF THOSE SPECIFICS.
[03:10:02]
IT TURNED OUT THAT A LOT OF [NOISE] WHAT SHOWED UP IN THE AUDIT AS A DECREASE IN FUND BALANCE, ABOUT 900,000 WAS ATTRIBUTED TO PROCEEDS FROM A CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION ISSUED IN 2019 AND THOSE WERE CARRIED IN THE GENERAL FUND, SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN, BUT THAT'S WHERE THEY LIVED.THAT ARTIFICIALLY MADE THE FUND BALANCE LOOK A LITTLE BIT HIGHER.
THEN ALSO THERE WAS, I BELIEVE IT WAS SOME [INAUDIBLE] MONEY, SO AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT MONEY THAT WAS ALSO LIVING IN THERE WHERE IT COULD HAVE BEEN CARES ACT ONE OF THE TWO, MAYBE A LITTLE OF BOTH.
BUT THAT WAS SPENT DOWN AS WELL.
THEN YOU DID HAVE A REAL DRAWDOWN IN FUND BALANCE AND I THINK THAT WAS NORTH OF 600,000.
TANISHA CAN BETTER ADDRESS THAT.
>> AS FAR AS THE DRAWDOWN IN THE GENERAL FUND WE DIDN'T HAVE, IT WAS OVEREXPRESSED AS FAR AS LEGAL FEES WERE CONCERNED.
ALSO, SOME WINTER STORM EXPENSES.
WE ALSO HAD ABOUT A 110,000 THAT WAS UNEXPECTED.
FOR A GRANT THAT THE CITY HAD WENT FOR HIM WAS DENIED FOR, SO THOSE FUNDS THAT WERE SPENT DID COME FROM THE DRAWDOWN AS WELL.
>> WE'RE GOING TO GET THE AUDIT AMENDED.
WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH MEETING WITH AUDITOR BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THAT IN OUR AUDITS.
>> WE DID COME OUT WITH THE STABLE RATING, AFFIRMED THAT THE AA MINUS AND A STABLE OUTLOOK.
ALL IS WELL WITH YOUR RATING AT THIS POINT.
IF YOU'LL TURN TO TABLE 1, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE TAB 1.
LET'S TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT THE MARKET.
AS YOU KNOW, THE MARKET HAS BEEN BACKING UP SINCE THE START OF THE YEAR AND WE CONTINUE TO SEE IT RISE.
THE FED IMPLEMENTED A 50 BASIS POINT RISE IN THE FEDERAL FUND RATE IN EARLY MAY.
EXPECTATION AND WHAT THEY HAVE SIGNALED IS THEY'RE GOING TO DO ANOTHER 50 IN JUNE AND ANOTHER 50 IN JULY.
THE MARKETS BUILDING THAT INTO THEIR EXPECTATIONS.
IT IS ALSO BEEN HINTED AT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABOUT PLUS TWO PERCENT IN THE FEDERAL FUNDS RATE BY THE END OF THE YEAR.
WE'VE GOT ANOTHER ONE PERCENT TO GO IN THE NEXT 60 DAYS AND THEN OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT FIVE MONTHS, PROBABLY ANOTHER ONE PER CENT, WHICH COULD BE DONE A QUARTER AT A TIME.
BUT WE ARE IN A CHANGING MARKET.
AS YOU KNOW, WE ALL SEE THE NEWS AND IF YOU GO TO THE GROCERY STORE OR FILL YOUR TANK, YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
THAT'S THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN.
IF YOU TURN THE PAGE BEHIND TAB NUMBER 2, YOU CAN SEE OUR BIDS THAT WE RECEIVED TODAY.
WE HAD FOUR BIDDERS SUBMIT BIDS.
WE ACTUALLY HAD FIVE BIDDERS THAT SIGNED [NOISE] THAT DIDN'T PARTICIPATE.
BUT 4185 WAS THE WINNING BID FROM SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS.
JUST AS A COMPARISON, CITY OF MAGNOLIA, WHICH IS IN WESTERN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, SOLD $20 MILLION TWO WEEKS AGO ON THE 11TH.
THERE ARE ALSO A AA MINUS, VERY SIMILAR PROFILE TO ANGLETON AND THEY SOLD AT A 4215.
TWO WEEKS LATER, YOU ALL ARE SLIDING IN THREE BASIS POINTS UNDER HIM.
I TELL YOU WHAT, I HAVE SEEN THIS MARKET THE WAY WE'D BEEN BACKING UP, GO FROM MONDAY TO WEDNESDAY AND WE HAVE A FIVE PERCENT BASIS POINT MOVE.
IT'S JUST BEEN STEPPING UP AND OUR TRADERS HAVE BEEN TELLING US THAT IF YOU CAN MOVE YOUR SALE TO A MONDAY, DO IT BECAUSE BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THURSDAY, MONDAY IS LONG GONE.
WE'RE FINALLY SEEING A LITTLE BIT OF A CATCH HERE MAYBE.
I HOPE THIS IS SOME GOOD NEWS THAT OUR MARKET IS FINDING A LITTLE BIT OF MOVEMENT HERE.
WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF MONEY OUTFLOW OF MUNICIPAL BONDS FOR ABOUT 78 STRAIGHT WEEKS.
MAYBE WE'RE FINALLY GETTING THE PART WHERE WHEN THE EQUITY MARKETS GO DOWN,
[03:15:01]
PEOPLE GO FOR SAFETY INTO BONDS.I HOPE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BEGINNING TO SEE.
JUST AS A PASSING STATEMENT AS WELL, YOU MAY RECALL WHEN WE SHOWED THIS EARLIER, WE HAD A LOT MORE PREMIUM.
WE'RE GETTING MORE BACK TO A PARSE STRUCTURE NOW AS WE'RE SELLING 995,000,000 AND PUTTING 10 MILLION INTO YOUR CONSTRUCTION ACCOUNTS.
A PREMIUM STRUCTURE IS STARTING TO CHANGE ON US.
BUT ALL IN ALL, I'M VERY PLEASED THAT WE GOT THE BID FROM SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS THAT THEY CAME THROUGH AND BEAT EVERYBODY ELSE BY ABOUT SEVEN BASIS POINTS BECAUSE EVERYBODY ELSE WAS RIGHT AROUND THAT 425 MARK.
THEY STEPPED UP AND PUT AN AGGRESSIVE BID OUT THERE.
WE DO RECOMMEND THAT YOU AWARD THE BONDS TO THEM.
REAL QUICKLY, IF YOU'LL TURN THE PAGE TO TAB 3, YOU CAN SEE THE DEBT SERVICE.
THE ESTIMATED DEBT SERVICE IS APPROXIMATELY 600,000 A YEAR.
THAT IS GOING TO BE A TOTAL INTEREST AMOUNT OF 8,066,000 THAT YOU PAY OVER THE LIFE.
THEN FINALLY, THE BACK PAGE IS A CASH-FLOW WITH THE ACTUAL NUMBERS OF WHAT WE HAD PRESENTED BACK IN JANUARY.
I THINK WE MAY HAVE BEEN BACK IN MARCH AND INDENTED AGAIN AS YOU ALL WERE APPROVING THE NOTICE OF INTENT.
BUT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
THE VALUE ON THE TABLE THAT HAS THE BLUE HEADER WITH THE YELLOW LINE UNDERNEATH, THAT 1 BILLION 286 IS A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN THE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF VALUE THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, BUT THAT IS A CONSERVATIVE VIEW OF IT.
I THINK THEIR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE CAME IN AROUND ONE 1.4 BILLION.
YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A LITTLE BIT OF AN UPTICK.
[NOISE] IF YOU SETTLE IN WHEN ALL OF THE PROTESTS AND EVERYTHING ARE DONE, THAT 12 CENTS, THERE'LL BE JUST UNDER 12 AT 11 SOMETHING.
THAT'S YOUR CERTIFICATE ISSUE AND YOUR IMPACT.
AGAIN, WE WOULD RECOMMEND YOU ACCEPT THE BID OF SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS AND AWARD THE CERTIFICATES TO THEM.
MR. FRILL IS HERE TONIGHT FROM BRACEWELL, HAS PREPARED THE LEGAL DOCUMENTS AND IS PREPARED TO ADDRESS ANYTHING, ANY QUESTION YOU [NOISE] HAVE.
HE'LL BE SHEPHERDING THESE DOCUMENTS THROUGH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, AND WE WILL BE TARGETING A JUNE 15TH FUNDING DATE.
ON JUNE 15TH, WE EXPECT TO DELIVER THE FUNDS INTO YOUR ACCOUNT.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME OR JONATHAN, WE ARE HERE.
>> [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION.
WHAT WAS THAT NUMBER, THAT PERCENTAGE? DO YOU REMEMBER?
>> YEAH. I JUST WANT TO COMPARE FROM THE LAST YEAR.
>> MY MEMORY IS STARTING TO FAIL ME HERE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE [INAUDIBLE] GRAY HAIRS THERE. LET ME JUST TAKE A PEEK BACK HERE.
I'VE LEARNED TO CARRY MORE THINGS WITH ME TO MEETINGS.
>> WHILE HE'S LOOKING, AVLC IS LOOKING TO BOND AND SO I'VE GOT JOE DOING AN ANALYSIS TO BRING THAT THE AVLC. WE CAN FIGURE OUT [INAUDIBLE]
>> I WILL SAY THE QUALITY PACKET.
>> WELL, GOOD. OUR LAST SALE OCCURRED ON OCTOBER 26TH, AND WE DELIVERED THE MONEY ON NOVEMBER 1, AND WE SOLD AT A 2.248.
>> JUST COMPARING NINE MONTHS. WOW.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR JOE OR HIS COUNTERPART?
>> WELL, LOOK THE DEBT SERVICE HERE ON THIS SHEET THAT YOU HAVE PREPARED.
[03:20:04]
I SEE THE 604,122,92, WHICH IS THE ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT FOR THE FIRST YEAR.THEN ON YOUR SCHEDULE HERE AT THE TOP, YOU HAD AT FIVE PERCENT ANNUAL GROWTH.
>> THE FIVE PERCENT ANNUAL GROWTH IS FOR THE ASSESSED VALUATION.
>> YEAH, JUST SO THAT WE CAN SHOW THE PROJECTION OF WHAT YOUR ASSESSED VALUE WILL BE DOING WHICH WILL IMPACT YOUR TAX RATE.
>>YEAH, BUT WHAT I WAS GOING TO GO FOR SPECIFICALLY WAS THIS IS LOADED WITH THESE NUMBERS ON THE PREVIOUS SCREEN.
THIS IS WHAT THE 4.18 PERCENT.
>> BUT WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET BACK, THE EXISTING NET TAX SUPPORTED DEBT SERVICE.
YOU TAKE THE EXISTING PLUS THE NEW BOND TO GET TO YOUR ESTIMATED NEW NET TAX SUPPORTED DEBT.
THEN YOU SAID IT'S GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE AROUND 11 PERCENT.
BECAUSE YOU SAID IT RIGHT NOW IT'S AT THE 0.12.
UNDER 12 AND 11 POINT SOMETHING.
>> IF YOU LOOK IN 2023 THAT VALUE UNDER THERE, ONE BILLION 286.
THE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE IS IN AT ONE BILLION-FOUR.
IF I WERE TO CALCULATE OFF THE ONE BILLION-FOUR, INSTEAD OF 1,205, YOU'D BE LIKE 118 OR SEVEN SOMETHING.
>> THERE'S A POTENTIAL THAT THIS IS GOING TO GO DOWN.
YOU'RE GOING TO KNOW LATE JULY WHEN BRAZORIA COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT CERTIFIES.
>> RIGHT NOW EVERYBODY'S GOING THROUGH PROTESTS.
THEY FILED IF THEY'RE GOING TO PROTEST AND THE APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD IS WORKING THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
I WOULD HOPE THAT THAT ONE BILLION-286 GOES UP.
YOUR TAX RATE GOES DOWN A LITTLE BIT, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
>> MY QUESTION THAT I WAS ALSO GOING TO GET TO WAS, OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS WE'VE SEEN MORE THAN FIVE PERCENT ANNUAL GROWTH.
WE'VE SEEN CLOSER TO 10 PERCENT ANNUAL GROWTH.
AT LEAST LAST YEAR WE DID, I THINK IT WAS SEVEN PERCENT THE YEAR BEFORE THAT.
I THINK FIVE PERCENT IS A VERY CONSERVATIVE NUMBER.
>> ESPECIALLY WITH THE GROWTH RATE TRENDS THAT WE'RE SEEING IN THIS AREA.
>> JUST WITH WHAT WE KNOW IN [NOISE] TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE LOTS COMING ONLINE, WE'LL SEE WHAT [NOISE] HAPPENS WITH A RECESSION, HOW IMPACTED HOME-BUILDING MAY BE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY.
APRIL SHOWED A DECLINE ALREADY.
I THINK I READ IT WAS SOMEWHERE AROUND 20 PERCENT DECLINE.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MORTGAGE RATES?
>> MORTGAGE RATES GO UP AND THE COSTS OF HOMES.
PEOPLE ARE STILL WAITING ON APPLIANCES TO COMPLETE HOMES.
THEY'LL HAVE A MALL BUILT OUT, AND THEY ARE WAITING ON THE REFRIGERATOR TO GET IN OR THE OVEN.
WE STILL HAVE SOME OF THOSE ISSUES TO WORK THROUGH.
I THINK THE GOOD NEWS FOR TEXAS IS WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE MOVING HERE, AND DEMAND FOR HOUSING STILL SEEMS TO BE VERY STRONG HERE IN TEXAS.
WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF JOBS TOO, WE HAVE JOBS MOVING TO TEXAS.
>> THANK YOU, JOE. IT'S ALWAYS A PLEASURE ONCE AGAIN.
>> WHAT DO WE NEED FROM US TONIGHT TO ACCESS.
>> THE ACTION YOU'LL NEED TO TAKE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE COS THAT HAS THE PURCHASER LISTED IN IT, AND ALL THE INFORMATION THAT JOE ADDRESSED.
>> GOT YOU. I'M SORRY. I JUST AUTOMATICALLY POINT TO YOU, BUT YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT.
>> I DO NEED THE ORDINANCE NUMBER.
>> SO [OVERLAPPING] 202205050524028.
MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE 10 MILLION AND COMBINATION TAX AND REVENUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION SERIES, AND AWARD THAT BID TO SAMCO CAPITAL MARKETS AT THE INTERESTS OF 4.18587 PERCENT,
[03:25:04]
WHICH IS A PART OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 20220524-028.>> I GOT A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONE GORE, AND FURTHER DISCUSSION.
HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN THAT MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER 29,
[29. Discussion and possible action on the sale of property within the City limits.]
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE SALE OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, MS. MEGAN?>> YES MAYOR AND COUNCIL AT THIS ITEM IS COMING BACK TO YOU ALL AFTER WE'VE GONE BACK OUT FOR PUBLIC SURVEY, WITH RESPECT TO THE MUNICIPAL POOL SITES.
IF YOU GUYS RECALL, WE DID GO OUT FOR A PUBLIC SURVEY REGARDING PARK DEVELOPMENT BACK IN SEPTEMBER OF 2021.
SOME OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTED FROM SOME OF THE NINE RESPONDENTS INCLUDED A MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS WHO'D LIKE TO SEE THIS SITE USED FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT.
TOP THREE PARK AMENITY IDEAS INCLUDE A SPLASH PAD, PLAYGROUND, FOR VARIOUS AGES 5-12, AND THEN ALSO 2-5.
AND 74 PERCENT OF THOSE RESPONDENTS WERE IN FAVOR OF THIS SITE [NOISE] BEING USED AS A SPECIAL USE PARK, SOMETHING LIKE A SKATE PARK.
ALSO, A MAJORITY OF THE RESPONDENTS WERE NOT IN FAVOR OF SELLING THIS PROPERTY, AND IF THERE WAS SIDEWALK CONNECTIVITY THESE INDIVIDUALS WE WOULD MOST LIKELY BIKE OR WALK.
WHEN WE WENT BACK OUT TO THE PUBLIC, WE DID GET SOME DIFFERENT RESULTS.
AND THE REASON THAT WE DID THAT JUST FOR A PUBLIC INFORMATION IS BECAUSE WE HAD RECENTLY ACQUIRED LAND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TOWN, THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE MENTIONED AMENITIES INCLUDING A SPLASH PAD POTENTIALLY IN THESE PLAYGROUND UNITS.
AND SO WE DID HAVE INPUT FROM BOTH PARKS BOARD AND AVLC.
THE MOST RECENT INPUT FROM THE PARKS BOARD ON AUGUST 9TH OF 2021, WAS THAT THEY HAD CONCERNS ABOUT REDEVELOPING AT THE MUNICIPAL FULL SITE JUST DUE TO THE SIZE.
AND THEY WANTED US TO RESEARCH DIFFERENT OPTIONS, AND ALSO THAT ALIGNED WITH OUR COMMUNITY SURVEY ON WHAT AMENITIES THE COMMUNITY DESIRED.
ALSO, AVLC ON OCTOBER 18TH OF 2021, RECOMMENDED THAT THE SITE BE UTILIZED FOR A NEW ANIMAL CONTROL CENTER AS A POTENTIAL USE, AND ON MARCH 8TH IS WHEN CITY STAFF BROUGHT THIS ITEM TO EITHER CONSIDER DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY OR EVEN POTENTIALLY SELLING THIS PROPERTY, TO HELP WITH THE PAYMENT OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TOWN.
WE WENT BACK OUT TO THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC SURVEY WITH THE NEW INFORMATION OF HAVING RECENTLY ACQUIRED LAND, WE HAD 179 PEOPLE TAKE THE SURVEY AND ABOUT 86.
THIS WAS A TWO-PHASED SURVEY, WE HAD OVERALL HOW THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT WAS DOING, AND THEN WE HAD A SECONDARY SURVEY THAT PEOPLE HAD AN OPTION OF TAKING OR NOT.
AND SO OF THOSE 179, 86 DID RESPOND, AND NEARLY 63 PERCENT OF THE RESPONDENTS NOTED THEY WOULD RECOMMEND THE CITIES OF THE MUNICIPAL POOL PROPERTY FOR FUTURE LAND ACQUISITION AND 93 RESPONDENTS SKIP THIS QUESTION.
ABOUT 59 PERCENT OF THE 86 RESPONDENTS KNEW THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MUNICIPAL POOL SITE DEVELOPS INTO A FOOD TRUCK PARK.
AGAIN, 93 RESPONDENTS SKIP THIS QUESTION.
ABOUT 52 PERCENT OF 86 RESPONDENTS KNOW THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MUNICIPAL POOL SITE DEVELOPS ENTITY ESCAPE PARK.
AGAIN, 93 RESPONDENTS SKIP THIS QUESTION AND WHEN ASKED IF THE RESPONDENTS WOULD RATHER SEE THE SITE DEVELOPED AS A FOOD TRUCK PARK OR SKATE PARK, ABOUT 41 PERCENT OR 35 TOTAL RESPONDENTS SAID THEY PREFER A FOOD TRUCK, AND ABOUT 45 OR 38 RESPONDENTS RESPONDED WITH A SKATE PARK.
ABOUT 14 PERCENT NOTED OTHER AND DID NOT RESPOND TO EITHER.
STAFF IS WANTING TO BRING THIS BACK TO CITY COUNCIL FOR RECOMMENDATION ON HOW TO PROCEED WITH THIS SITE, AS IT RELATES TO FUTURE PARK DEVELOPMENT, WHAT THAT PRIORITY IS FOR YOU ALL AND/OR THE SELL OF THIS PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF SOME PEOPLE ARE READING OUR MINDS, BUT I HAD TWO PEOPLE READY TO REACH OUT AND ASK FOR A SELL TO PURCHASE THAT, HAVE YOU GOTTEN ANY BECAUSE I'VE TOTALLY CONTACT YOU.
>> I'VE HAD TWO PEOPLE REACH ME OFFLINE AND SAID HEY, WE GOT TO DO THE SKATE PARK THEY WANT TO PUT A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS THERE.
>> THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DID INCLUDE THE SURVEY, SO IT DOES HAVE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THIS SITE, AND THIS WOULD BE A COMMERCIAL CELL.
MARTHA AND I TALKED VERY BRIEFLY ABOUT PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT, AND WE DON'T HAVE A GREAT IDEA OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE.
BUT THERE'S A PRETTY BIG RANGE WITH
[03:30:01]
THE MOST RECENTLY SOLD PROPERTIES THAT ARE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.IT JUST TAKE A LOOK OR CONSIDER EVEN THE COUNTY ACQUISITION THAT OCCURRED ON CEDAR.
WHILE IT'S MORE CENTRALLY LOCATED IN TOWN, IT IS STILL ON BUSINESS TODAY.
SO THAT'S ONE COMPARABLE THAT YOU COULD UTILIZE.
I WOULD ASSUME IT WOULD BE LESS FURTHER SOUTH, BUT AGAIN, IT'S STILL A FAIRLY LARGE RANGE.
>> I WILL REACH BACK OUT TO THOSE TWO INDIVIDUALS AND SAY, HEY, JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, DEPEND ON WHAT HAPPENS TONIGHT BUT IT'S FUNNY THAT TO FOLKS REACHED OUT AND ASKED.
>> ONE WAS TO RELOCATE TO ANGLE TIME, SO WHO'S HERE.
THANK YOU ALL FOR DOING THAT BECAUSE THAT GIVES US A BETTER IDEA SINCE NOW THE SOUTH SIDE PARKS IS MOVING ALONG.
WE CAN GAUGE WHAT THE CITIZENS WANT.
DWYER STREET SEEMS TO END AT THE PROPERTY LINE.
>>I'M SORRY. CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN?
>>THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY [OVERLAPPING] IT'S A PROPERTY LINE.
IF WE WERE TO SELL IT, WHOEVER BUYS IT CAN JUST SHUT OFF DWYER. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> [OVERLAPPING] PROBABLY A SEE-SAW ON A LEGAL QUESTION.
>> I THINK COUNCILMAN THIS ONE [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING].
>> I DON'T SEE HOW YOU'RE GOING REALLY JUST SHUT OFF DWYER STREET.
THAT'S GOING TO OPEN UP ANOTHER BITE.
>> AGAIN, NOT ASKING THE LEGAL QUESTION YET, BUT MY THING WOULD BE KEEP THE ROAD, YOU GIVE IT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER OR THEY GIVE US AND HENCE PART OF THE STREET AND WE KEEP THAT.
>> YEAH. MAYBE, REPLY OF PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY.
>>YEAH. MAYBE THE SALE IS [OVERLAPPING] EVERYTHING ELSE BUT THE STREET.
>> WE MAKE IT OFFICIAL STREET THROUGH.
>>YEAH. FINISHING ON THROUGH [OVERLAPPING] AND PROBABLY STRAIGHTEN IT OUT TOO.
>> WE CAN'T STRAIGHTEN IT ALL THE WAY OUT BUT WE CAN [INAUDIBLE].
>> YEAH. I SUSPECTED IF YOUR PERSONS [LAUGHTER] CLOSE TO, THEY WOULD NOT WANT AN S CURVE STREET COMING THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY, THEY WANT TO GO STRAIGHT ON OUT TO THE HIGHWAY, WHICH MAKES NO SENSE.
JUST STRAIGHT AND DRIVE RIGHT ON OUT TO THE HIGHWAY AND TIE IT IN.
>> MAYBE THAT'S A PARTNERSHIP THAT WE SAY [OVERLAPPING] WHAT YOU GOT TO DO TO HELP THE CITY OUT AND HELP YOUR FUTURE PROPERTY.
>> A STREET WOULD OCCUR TO SPEC STREET WILL HAVE TO BE CONSTRUCTED THROUGH THERE TO REPLACE THE ZIGZAG.
ESTABLISH A RIGHT AWAY FOR THE NEW LOCATION ON DWYER STREET AND ALL OF THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO COME INTO THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING].
>>YOU'LL COME INTO THE NEGOTIATION.
>>WE COULD FIGURE THAT OUT. YEAH.
>>IF WE CAP IT, WHAT IS THE SKATE PARK POSSIBILITY.
>>I THINK IT'S A GREAT LOCATION FOR A SKATE PARK.
>>WE ACTUALLY, IF YOU GUYS RECALL, WE WERE IN TALKS WITH A CONSULTANT FOR OUR SKATE PARK BECAUSE THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS PROPOSED THAT HOW TO PROPOSE SKATE PARK AND SO WE INITIATED SOME CONVERSATIONS.
WE MENTIONED THIS AS A POTENTIAL SITE BECAUSE OF THE VISIBILITY.
SOME OF THE CONCERNS WITH SKATE PARK ARE YOU WANT TO ENSURE THAT IT'S HIVE SO THAT IT DOESN'T BECOME AN AREA THAT'S RUN DOWN OR HIDDEN.
YOU WANT TO HAVE EASY ACCESS FOR PD TO SEE AS THEY'RE GOING THROUGH, AS YOU WOULD WITH ANY PARK SYSTEM.
THEY DID RECOMMEND THAT AS BEING A POTENTIAL SITE.
THERE IS ENOUGH SPACE THERE AND JUST SOME THINGS THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO CONSIDER IS ENSURING THAT WE CAN MEET THE MINIMUM PARK STANDARDS.
WE DO HAVE A PARKING LOT ON SITE CURRENTLY THAT YOU COULD UTILIZE, BUT WE WOULD NEED TO PUT A RESTROOM FACILITY OUT THERE.
YOU HAVE UTILITIES ON SITE THERE.
THEY EXISTED WITH THE PREVIOUS MUNICIPAL POOL. IT WOULD BE FEASIBLE.
>> YEAH. BECAUSE IT'S ALMOST TOO SMALL OR DO ANYTHING ELSE WITH AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD A ROAD, YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE ALL YOUR MONEY SELLING IT DOING THAT.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS TO KEEP IN MIND THAT WAS DISCUSSED WITH PARKS BOARD, ABLC, AND EVEN IN THE PUBLIC SURVEY IS ACCESSIBILITY PERIOD.
ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TOWN, WE REALLY STRUGGLE WITH THAT.
THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF WALKABILITY OR EASY ACCESS FOR PEDESTRIAN USE.
[03:35:05]
THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER WHEN YOU'RE [OVERLAPPING] LOOKING AT DEVELOPING THAT SITE.>> EVERY SKATE PARK, I KNOW EVERYBODY DRIVES TO IT ANYWAY.
>> BUT I ALSO LIKE THAT IF ME AND CHRIS TALKED ABOUT RELOCATING THE ANIMAL SHELTER THERE BECAUSE IT'S MORE VISIBLE.
I'M JUST SAYING IT'S A SMALL PIECE OF PROPERTY AND WITH THAT ROW GOING THROUGH IT I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WITH THAT.
>> SOMETHING I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT AS WELL IS TYING ON WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE].
THE SELLING OR TAKING THE ANIMAL CONTROL AND MOVING IT TO THAT LOCATION WOULD FREE UP A WHOLE LOT MORE PROPERTY AT ANDERSON TO BE SOLD AND GET RID OF THE ANDERSON PROPERTY INSTEAD.
THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED INTO SOMETHING ELSE, HOUSES OR WHATEVER ELSE.
BUT TAKE A SMALL PIECE OF PROPERTY AND GET A BIGGER CHUNK FOR THE BIGGER.
>> IT'S NOT AN AGENDA ITEM SO I WON'T TALK ABOUT IT VERY MUCH.
BUT THERE'S SOME OTHER THINGS IN PLAY WHICH I'LL BRING TO YOU THE NEXT MEETING THAT MAY NOT NECESSARILY MAKE THAT THE BEST LOCATION FOR A CURRENT OR SIZE.
SKATE PARK HAS BEEN ALWAYS AT THE TOP OF THE LIST FOR PARK SYSTEMS.
>> IT'S ALREADY GOT A PARKING LOT?
>> YEAH. IT'S JUST LIKE YOU SAID, ACCESSIBILITY.
I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE TALKING POINTS.
WHEN IT WAS GOING TO BE ON THE HIGHWAY GETTING TO IT.
FROM JUST PAST CONVERSATIONS NOT DYNAMICS CHANGE.
BUT BECAUSE I THOUGHT ABOUT SAME THING.
>> IT'S NOT NOW. AGAIN, MARTHA AND I HAD SOME ROUGH NUMBERS JUST BASED ON WHAT WE UNDERSTAND HAS BEEN PURCHASED RECENTLY.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT A RANGE FROM AGAIN, THIS IS NOT AN APPRAISAL. [LAUGHTER].
>> BUT UP TO ANYWHERE FROM THREE DOLLARS A SQUARE FOOT AND BEYOND.
I'D HESITATE TO USE THE COMP OF THE COUNTY JUST BECAUSE THAT IS MORE CENTRALLY LOCATED, BUT I BELIEVE THAT WAS [BACKGROUND] QUITE A BIT FOR JUST A LITTLE OVER 1,700 SQUARE FEET.
SEVENTEEN THOUSAND EXCUSE ME, NOT 1,700.
SEVENTEEN THOUSAND SQUARE FEET AND THIS SIDE IS MUCH MORE THAN THAT.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT A LITTLE OVER TWO ACRES, BUT YOU HAVE A BARRIER BEING THE ROAD.
>> HOW MUCH DOES THAT ROAD CUT INTO THAT? WHAT'S LEFT ONCE YOU PUT THAT ROAD ONTO IT?
>> I WOULD SAY, [BACKGROUND] IT'S A LITTLE OVER AN ACRE ON THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE.
>> [INAUDIBLE] FOR THAT TWO ACRES
>> GIVE ME A MUTUAL PROJECT THAT THEY GIVE MORE SPACE OUT OF THAT LAND.
>> I GET THERE'S A LIFT STATION ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THERE'S A SEWER LIFT STATION RIGHT THERE AT THE END JUST AS YOU GO PAST THE LAST HOUSE.
>> I CAN'T BE CERTAIN, BUT I DO BELIEVE IT IS.
>> ARE YOU ATTRACTED TO THAT HOUSE?
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE NEED TO CHEW ON IT A LITTLE BIT [LAUGHTER] BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF IDEAS RUNNING AROUND.
>> CAN I GET AN APPRAISAL? I MEAN, I THINK THAT WILL HELP.
>> I THINK WE NEED A SURVEY FIRST TO UNDERSTAND.
WE ALL TALKED ABOUT WHAT THE ROADS TAKEN UP.
>> WHAT'S AVAILABLE, OR IF THE ROAD MOVE POTENTIALLY WHAT COULD BE AVAILABLE, AND THEN WE'D NEED AN APPRAISAL.
>> WELL, IF IT'S JUST A SMALL BUSINESS OR SOMEBODY WANTS TO RELOCATE, YOU CAN GET IT REPAIRED TO WHERE WE TAKE THE ROAD OUT, AND JUST HAVE THAT WHOLE CORNER ACRE AND CORNER.
>> CAN THOSE ARE ALL THINGS FOR CONSIDERATION AND FUNDING OR NOT?
>> I'M HEARING MAYBE WE NEED TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE WORK TO
[03:40:02]
SEE IF WE WANT TO GO THAT ROUTE TO SELL OR TO KEEP BECAUSE THE SURVEY AND MAYBE AN APPRAISAL WILL GIVE US, MAYBE IT'S WORTH MORE THAN WE THINK. [OVERLAPPING]>> WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SURVEY AND AN APPRAISAL?
>> ARE THOSE VERY EXPENSIVE? BECAUSE I MIGHT ASK THE QUESTION BEFORE JOHN DOES.
>> THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THOUSAND I'M NOT SURE WHY I HAVE THE FUNDS.
>> THERE'S A BUCKET SOMEWHERE THAT YOU CAN SHAKE?
>> WELL, THERE'S A C MANUAL BUCKET THERE [LAUGHTER].
>> JOHN IS SHAKING HIS HEAD OVER HERE.
>> SOUNDS LIKE HE HAS THE PASTURE DISCRETIONAL FUND.
>> MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE, THIS IS NOT AN URGENT THING BECAUSE I THINK IN THE SCHEME SOUTH SIDE NUMBER 1.
FREEDOM PARK NORTH AND FREEDOM PARK NUMBER 2 AND 3.
WHATEVER MAY WE APPROACH THIS AS, LET'S PUT IT IN THE BUDGET OR HAVE MEGAN PUT IT IN THE BUDGET FOR CONSIDERATION ABOUT GETTING THE SURVEY, GETTING WHATEVER, AND SEE HOW WE MOVE THIS FORWARD.
>> MAYBE ASK THE GUYS THAT CONTACTED YOU WHAT THEY WOULD DO WITH THAT ROAD?
>> WELL, CERTAINLY IF WE'RE INTERESTING CONCERNING PROPOSALS, WE CAN ASK SOME OF THEM TO COME FORWARD AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, AND I'M NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING WITH THE ROAD OR WHATEVER AND JUST SEE WHAT'S OUT THERE THAT'S AN OPTION.
>> I CAN MAKE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM AND ASK AND SEE WHAT'S UP.
I KNOW WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, BUT JUST TO SAY NOW IT'S ON THE TABLE NOW LET'S START TALKING SERIOUS CONVERSATION.
>> I THINK SOMEWHERE WE CAN RUN THROUGH THE VARIOUS BOARDS AND SEE WHAT THEY ALL THINK.
>> BECAUSE WE ALSO THOUGHT THAT THE SELL OF THIS CAN HELP SUPPORT THE SOUTH SIDE PARK A LITTLE BIT QUICKER AND GET SOME FUNDING FOR THAT TOO.
>> IT'S NOT A FOOD TRUCK PARK, IS IT?
>> NO, IT'S NOT A FOOD TRUCK, BUT IT'S A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS, IT'S A BRICK BUILDING, FOR WHAT THEY TOLD ME, SO IT'D BE A BUILDING.
>> THAT COMMENT CAME OUT OF ANGLETON UNIVERSITY ACTUALLY.
>> THIS DRAWING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE WAS PREPARED IN JUNE OF LAST YEAR, SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST SOME ADDITIONAL.
>> WORK NEEDS TO BE DONE TO MAKE IT A FINAL SURVEY THAT COST THAT MUCH MONEY.
>> I MEAN, IT'S PROBABLY IN A COUPLE OF THOUSAND DOLLARS [OVERLAPPING].
>> MOST OF THE WORK'S ALREADY DONE.
>> MARGARET PAUL SAID YOU GOT TO SPEND MONEY TO MAKE MONEY.
>> I THINK IN OUR CASE, WE SPEND MONEY TO SPEND MORE MONEY.
>> WE SPEND MONEY, SO WE CAN SPEND MORE MONEY.
>> WE'RE GOVERNMENT JOHN. WHAT DO YOU EXPECT? [LAUGHTER].
>> I CAN REMEMBER THE DAYS [OVERLAPPING] WHEN THE CITY DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY TO SPEND THE MONEY.
>> IF WE DECIDE TO MAKE IT A PARK, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MONEY TO REALIZE THAT WE WANT TO KEEP IT, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH HIRE SOMEONE FOR DESIGN AND BUILD ONCE WE DECIDE ON WHAT IT IS, AND SO POTENTIALLY THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY OR MONEY TRAIL.
>> WHERE DO WE WANT TO GO GUYS, SO WE CAN MOVE THE MEETING ALONG?
>> I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE ANY ACTION. RIGHT?
>> [OVERLAPPING] I JUST COULDN'T GET ENOUGH.
[30. Discussion and possible action on the Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) Transportation Improvement Program Grant (TIP) for Henderson Road Improvement Project]
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE HOUSTON GALVESTON AREA COUNCIL, ALSO KNOWN AS H-GAC, TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT, ALSO KNOWN AS A TIP FOR HENDERSON ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, MS. PATTY.>> THANK YOU. HENDERSON ROAD, SOMEONE MENTIONED THAT EARLIER, SO IN THE INTEREST OF PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, AND VEHICLE SAFETY, HENDERSON ROAD IS, I THINK WE WILL ALL AGREE, IN AN IMMEDIATE NEED OF IMPROVEMENT.
INFORMATION HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED TO YOU ALL BY JOHN PETERSON OF HDR, REGARDING THE PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY AND TRAFFIC STUDY.
SINCE THAT TIME, ADDITIONAL WORK'S BEEN DONE TO IDENTIFY THE PROBABLE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH OBTAINING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR ROAD EXPANSION.
AT THIS POINT, THE ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COSTS WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 32,500,000 THAT'D [OVERLAPPING] BE A DEAL.
>> [INAUDIBLE] FOR THAT. [LAUGHTER]
THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT CAN ACCOMMODATE A MAJOR PROJECT SUCH AS THIS.
I'VE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM, WE'VE QUALIFIED ON A FEW POINTS.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS IS A 7525 GRANT, SO THE MATCH WOULD BE 25 PERCENT.
THEN THE GRANT AMOUNT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 24 MILLION.
THE TIP CALL FOR GRANTS WILL BE ANNOUNCED SOMETIME BETWEEN JULY AND OCTOBER.
[03:45:05]
THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING SOME REVISIONS TO WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN THE PAST, AND PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN WITH THEIR MANAGERS, HAS BEEN ENCOURAGING.THERE'S ALSO BEEN A MEETING WITH COUNTY COMMISSIONER RYAN CADE, CHRIS AND I MET WITH HIM AND HE'S PLEDGED HIS POLITICAL SUPPORT FOR THE HENDERSON ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND TIP GRANT.
>> WE ARGUED THIS WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO THE COUNTY BECAUSE OF THE INCREASED TRAFFIC AT THE COURTHOUSE AND THAT THEY MIGHT FALL APART.
>> JUST A QUICK HISTORY ON THIS STREET.
WHEN THE CITY OR THE COUNTY, ONE OF THEIR 50 MILLION ROAD BOND PROGRAM IN 2006, 7, THE CITY ACTUALLY SUBMITTED THIS ROAD AS ONE OF THE ONES FOR THAT AND THE COUNTY TOOK IT OUT, BUT THEY GOT US THE COUNTY ROAD 220 EXPANSION INSTEAD.
WE WERE GOING TO GO WITH TWO OR THREE ROADS, I BELIEVE IN THAT BUT WE ONLY ENDED UP WITH ONE.
THE COUNTY WOULD CALL THAT A CITY ROAD ALL DAY LONG AND IT IS 8.1 MILLION THAT WOULD BE OUR PORTION TOO.
I CAN'T WAIT FOR OCTOBER TO GET HERE.
>> IS THERE A LOT OF MONEY COMING IN OCTOBER?
>> WELL, THEY'LL BE ANNOUNCED SOMETIME BETWEEN JULY AND OCTOBER.
>> NO, THE CALL FOR APPLICATIONS WILL BE SOME TIME BETWEEN JULY AND OCTOBER, BUT WHEN WE DO APPLY, WHEN THAT MOMENT COMES, WE'LL NEED TO BE ABLE TO VERIFY HOW WE'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH THAT MATCH.
>> WHEN WILL WE FIND OUT IF WE'RE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS GRANT?
>> OKAY. I SAID OCTOBER, NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER.
>> IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE CAN APPLY.
WE CAN SAY WE'RE GOING TO FUND IT OUT OF COS OR SOMETHING AND SEE WHAT COMES BACK, AND IF WE DON'T GET IT, THEN NO HARM, NO FOUL, WE TRIED.
IF WE GET IT, THEN THAT'S THAT WE GOING TO MAKE THAT STEP.
>> IF WE'RE ABLE TO GET 32 MILLION OR 75 PERCENT OF 32 MILLION, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE GOT TO JUMP ON AND GET MOVING I DON'T KNOW.
HOW WE FUND THAT WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT.
>> WOULD WE BE ABLE TO GET UP ON THAT SOON, AND THEN GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AGAIN THAT SOON?
>> WELL, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE THIS SIMILAR PROCESS IN THE SPRING, WE GO THROUGH ALL THE ACTION ITEMS TO GET FUNDED PRIOR TO THE TAX FOLKS TO GET IT INTO OUR TAX RATE AND ALL THAT.
>> BECAUSE THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY WE DON'T WANT TO PASS UP BECAUSE HENDERSON ROAD HAS BEEN ON THE RADAR FOR TOO MANY YEARS AND WE FINALLY GOT TO GET THERE.
>> OUR DECISION POINT IS REALLY LIKE PATTY SAID DECEMBER, TO FIND OUT IF WE GOT IT OR NOT.
>> THEN WE HAVE TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS, GET IT IN THE TAX RATE.
>> THE INS WILL DEFINITELY GO UP AND WE'D HAVE TO FIGURE SOMETHING OUT FROM THAT POINT.
>> I THINK THE RESIDENTS WOULD SWALLOW HENDERSON ROAD IMPROVEMENT A WHOLE LOT BETTER THAN ANYTHING, THAT'S A HUGE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT.
>> IT'S A HUGE SAFETY IMPROVEMENT.
>> THAT'S TECH STOCKS IS ON BOARD WITH THIS.
THEY'RE PARTNERING WITH H-GAC ON THIS GRANT AND THEY'D BEEN ON A COUPLE OF PHONE CALLS WITH US ABOUT IT.
WE QUALIFY ACCORDING TO TECH STOCK BECAUSE THEY'VE IDENTIFIED HENDERSON AS A CONNECTOR BETWEEN 288B AND STATE HIGHWAY 35, AND THEN THERE'S THE NORTH AND SOUTH CONNECTORS TO IT TOO SO IT'S DEFINITELY ON EVERYONE'S RADAR.
>> WHAT DO YOU NEED FROM US TONIGHT?
>> I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU SUPPORT OUR PURSUIT OF THE H-GAC TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT GRANT FOUNDATION.
>> I'M ASKING FOR YOU TO SUBMIT MOTION FOR US TO APPLY.
>> OKAY. I MAY HAVE JUMPED ON GUYS.
IT'S NOT TYING US TO ANY MONEY RIGHT NOW, BUT AT LEAST IT'S GETTING THE BALL ROLLING.
>> YOU DON'T GET ANY MONEY IF YOU DON'T ASK FOR IT, YOU'RE APPLYING.
>> WE JUST WANT TO BE BORED ABOUT SAYING WE HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY.
IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY, AS JOHN SAID, WE WANT TO APPLY FOR IT KNOWING THAT THERE COULD BE A POTENTIAL COMMITMENT DOWN THE ROAD.
>> USUALLY WITH SOME OF THESE, YOU APPLY THE FIRST TIME YOU WON'T GET IT, YOU APPLY THE SECOND TIME YOU WON'T GET IT, THE THIRD TIME, YOU MIGHT GET IT.
WE JUST GOT TO GET THAT BALL ROLLING AND GET THOSE FIRST APPLICATIONS IN AND START MOVING FORWARD.
>> A GRANT, THIS SIZE, THEY MAY REQUIRE SOME KIND OF VERIFICATION OF THAT.
>> WE'LL CROSS THAT BRIDGE WHEN WE GET THERE.
[03:50:01]
>> I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER CADE'S SUPPORT, BUT I WOULD SOLICIT THE SUPPORT OF THE ENTIRE COMMISSIONERS COURT?
>> COUNTY JUDGE LIVES IN THE SAME ZIP CODE AS WE DO SO HOPEFULLY, HE'LL GET ON BOARD WITH THIS ALSO.
>> [OVERLAPPING] LIVES ON THE ELM, HE IS ON THE TAIL END OF THAT STREET.
>> IT IS IN THE SAME ZIP CODE.
[LAUGHTER] REMIND US THAT COUNCIL HAS TAKEN ONE STEP FORWARD AND TWO STEPS BACK YEAR AFTER YEAR.
I KNOW WE HATE CONSIDERING RAISING TAXES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE NO OTHER WAY TO DO IT, BUT TO BOND IT.
>> EIGHT MILLION IS CERTAINLY BETTER THAN [INAUDIBLE].
>>WHO KNOWS. IN 16-18 MONTHS, WE MAY HAVE MORE HOMES ON THE GROUND, MORE REVENUE COMING IN, AND SO THAT MAY SUPPORT SOME OF THAT TOO.
BUT I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS, ALL OF US TRY AND LOOK FORWARD.
LIKE JOHN SAID, AND I SAID IT, WE GOT TO GET THE BALL ROLLING.
WE GOT TO DO SOMETHING. WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT THIS ROAD. [NOISE].
>> YES. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE PURSUE THE HDAC TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM GRANT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF TO SUBMIT A GRANT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON FOR THE HENDERSON ROAD TIP GRANT.
>> I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNSELOR GAN GOH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN? THAT MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
[31. Discussion and possible action on Riverwood Ranch private park.]
>> MOVING RIGHT ALONG. I HAVE NUMBER 31, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RIVERWOOD RANCH PRIVATE PARKING.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
AS YOU RECALL, BACK ON MARCH THE 30TH OF 2021, WE HAS A SPECIAL MEETING IN THIS VERY ROOM WHERE ALL THE DEVELOPERS OF PROJECTS AT THE TIME CAME TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHATEVER ISSUES THEY FELT THEY HAD WITH THEIR PROJECTS AND YOU ALL PROVIDED THEM DIRECTION WITH WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO TO RESOLVE THEIR ISSUES.
THAT DIRECTION IS IN YOUR BACKUP.
THAT'S THE MINUTES FROM THE MEETING.
THIS PROJECT WAS INSTRUCTED TO SUBMIT PLANS [NOISE] SO THAT THE PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR COULD DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE PARK THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND IT'S A PRIVATE PARK, IT IS NOT DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC, MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY'S PARKS DEDICATION SECTION OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHERE A YEAR PLUS LATER NO PLANS HAVE EVER BEEN SUBMITTED.
THE PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR, CANNOT MAKE A DETERMINATION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER WHETHER ALL, SOME OR NONE OF THE PARK SHOULD BE CREDITED TOWARDS THE REQUIRED DEDICATION OR PAYMENT OF FEE-IN-LIEU.
[NOISE] WE'RE HERE BECAUSE THE [NOISE] DEVELOPER FEELS THAT AN EMAIL FROM THE FORMER CITY MANAGER SOMEHOW CONSTITUTES A COMMITMENT BY THE CITY TO ACCEPT $189,000 AS BEING SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE PARK'S DEDICATION AND OR PAYMENT OF FEE-IN-LIEU REQUIREMENT.
[NOISE] MY COMMENT ON THAT AND THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN CONFIRM IT, IS THAT THAT EMAIL DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OBLIGATION ON YOUR PART TO ACCEPT THAT.
WHERE WE ARE AT RIGHT NOW IS THAT FOR PHASES 1 AND 2, THE $575 PARK FEE-IN-LIEU OF DEDICATION HAS BEEN PAID FOR BOTH THOSE SECTIONS.
THIS PROJECT IS VESTED UNDER SECTION 245 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TO THE REGULATIONS THAT WERE IN PLACE, WHICH IS THE OLD PARKS DEDICATION OR REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, NOT THE NEW ONES THAT WERE ADOPTED IN FEBRUARY.
THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON THIS ISSUE AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THAT PRIVATE PARK NOT BE CREDITED TOWARDS ANY DEDICATION REQUIREMENT OR ANY PAYMENT OF FEE-IN-LIEU.
>> THANK YOU SIR. MR. FOLEY, I KNOW YOU'RE HERE, SO WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. GO AHEAD.
[03:55:02]
>> FOLLOWING ALL THIS THROUGH, SO THE PID AND SO THAT PID IS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CITY, WHICH IN CASE OF LIKE AUSTIN COLONY WOULD BE TAKING A ROAD AND SUCH AND SUCH.
ESSENTIALLY WE ARE GIVEN A PID THROUGH A PRIVATE PARK AT SOME POINT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT, SIR. GO AHEAD MR. FOLEY.
>> I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT, CHRIS, ARE YOU SAYING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE REIMBURSED THROUGH OUR PID FOR THE PRIVATE PARK? BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
OUR PRIVATE PARK IS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PID, IT'S INDEPENDENT.
>> I DON'T WANT TO GET OFF ON A TANGENT AND OBVIOUSLY WE NEED TO SPEAK TO OUR ATTORNEY.
BUT AGAIN, WHAT DEFINES THE PID PURPOSE? THAT'S I'LL SAY.
>> IF YOU DON'T MIND, I DO HAVE ONE HANDOUT.
WE JUST GOT THE INVOICE FROM OUR LANDSCAPER FOR WHAT WE SPENT TODAY.
I THINK THIS MIGHT HELP CLARIFY SOME OF THE ITEMS AND COST TODAY.
>> YES, PLEASE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> [INAUDIBLE]. TALK ABOUT THAT.
>> ON THE FIRST PAGE, IT'S JUST AN OVERALL BREAKDOWN OF WHAT WE SPENT TODAY ON DESIGNING THE PARK, HARDSCAPE, IRRIGATION AND LANDSCAPING.
THEN ON THE SECOND PAGE, THAT'S OUR MOST RECENT INVOICED WE RECEIVED FROM THE CONTRACTOR.
TODAY WE'VE SPENT $328,000 ON THAT PARK AND WE HAVE PAID A TOTAL OF $117,000 IN PARK FEES.
THAT'S FOR SECTIONS 1 AND 2, AND WE HAVE A REMAINING $88,000 OF PARK FEES FOR SECTIONS 3 AND 4.
ON YOUR NEW PARK ORDINANCE, LET ME PULL THAT UP SOMEWHERE IN HERE.
CREDIT FOR PRIVATE PARK AMENITIES.
IN YOUR NEW CODE, IT SAYS THAT UP TO 50 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL FEE IN LIEU AND THE PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES REQUIRED FOR THE SECTION TO BE PAID BY DEVELOPER, MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR REIMBURSEMENT IF THE DEVELOPER PROVIDES PRIVATE PARK AMENITIES.
UP TO DATE, WE'VE PAID 60 PERCENT OF OUR TOTAL PARK FEES, WHICH IS THAT 117,000 OF THE 200,000.
WE HAVE A REMAINING 40 PERCENT OF OUR PARK FEES.
I WOULD LIKE TO ARGUE THAT IT'S IN YOUR CODE THAT YOU ALLOW REIMBURSEMENT TO DEVELOPERS.
I THINK THAT'S AN EQUITABLE SOLUTION WHERE WE'VE PAID A PORTION OF OUR PARK FEES BECAUSE OUR HOMEOWNERS WOULD BURDEN YOU-ALL'S, PARK SYSTEM, OF COURSE, THEY'RE GOING TO USE IT.
BUT WE'VE ALSO PROVIDED PARK AMENITIES FOR THEM.
I THINK THERE'S A BALANCE OF THAT.
LAST YEAR DURING THE DEVELOPMENT MEETING, THERE WAS SUPPORT FOR WAVING A PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT FEES.
I THINK US PAYING 60 PERCENT OF THE FEES AND WAVING THE REMAINING PORTION AND IS A FAIR SOLUTION TO THIS.
>> WHERE DO YOUR RESIDENTS PLAY BASEBALL?
>> THAT'S THE TRADE-OFF. THERE IS A BURDEN FROM OUR RESIDENTS.
I DO AGREE WE SHOULD PAY A PORTION OF THE PARK FEES, AND THAT'S WHY I THINK IT IS FAIR THAT WE HAVE PAID 60 PERCENT OF OUR TOTAL PARK FEES.
BUT I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOME CONSIDERATION THAT WE'VE DONE ALL THIS WORK TO PROVIDE A PLACE FOR OUR RESIDENTS TOO, WITH THE WALKING TRAILS, OR THE LANDSCAPING, THE WET DETENTION POND THAT THEY ARE GOING TO UTILIZE.
I THINK YOU WANT TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPERS TO WANT TO PROVIDE THOSE FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S GOOD LOOKING, AND THAT'S WHY I BELIEVE IT'S IN THIS CODE OF ORDINANCES THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE UP TO 50 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL FEES IN LIEU OF REIMBURSED.
I THINK WE MEET THAT CRITERIA, AND I THINK WE'VE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND ON OUR PART AS YOU CAN SEE.
I'M NOT SO MUCH CAUGHT UP ON THE E-MAIL, IT'S PUT DOWN A PATH.
[04:00:02]
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND WHAT'S AN EQUITABLE SOLUTION BETWEEN THE CITY AND WHAT WE'VE BUILT OUT THERE AS A PARK.>> HAVE WE RECEIVED $117,875 FROM THEM?
>> THEY WERE SHAKING THEIR HEAD. AFFIRMATIVE.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EXACT AMOUNT IS, BUT 575 TIMES THE TOTAL NUMBER OF WATTS PER SECTION 1 AND 2, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS, BUT YES, IT'S BEEN PAID.
I'M JUST LOOKING AT WHAT'S ATTACHED TO THE MARCH 30TH MEETING MINUTES, AND THEN WHAT HE JUST GAVE ME, AND I WAS TRYING TO TIE BACK THE NUMBERS.
I SEE THE 55,200 FOR PHASE 1, BOTH NUMBERS TIE.
I SEE YOU HAVE PARKLAND DEDICATION FEE SECTION 2, 62,675.
I SEE HERE PHASE 2 WAS 39,100, BUT REMAINING PHASES WOULD BE 88,550, BOTH CAME UP TO THE SAME NUMBER, NOT SURE HOW.
>> I DRIVE BY THERE. I SEE WHAT YOU'VE GIVEN US AS ALL THE STUFF THAT GOES TO IT, IS THAT ALL INSTALLED NOW? BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT ON THE GROUND.
>> WHICH PART ARE YOU REFERRING TO IN PARTICULAR?
>> YOUR ATTACHMENT THAT YOU GAVE US WITH ALL THE ITEMS.
>> IF YOU LOOK AT IT, THERE'S PORTIONS THAT WERE REMOVED.
>> YEAH. YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A COLUMN THAT SAYS, REMOVE.
>> SOMETHING THERE HAS BEEN TAKEN OUT.
>> YOU REMOVED 88,825 BASICALLY TO TIE OFF THE NUMBERS WITH THE PARKLAND'S DEDICATION FEE.
>> YOU HAVE LESS OF A PART NOW?
>> BASICALLY, YOU JUST HAVE A WALKING TRAIL, AND YOU HAVE GREEN SPACE.
>> RIGHT. WE'VE DONE ALL THE ITEMS EXCEPT FOR ITEM C ON OUR BUDGET, WHICH WAS THE PLAYGROUND OF PLACE, THAT WAS A TOTAL OF 88,000.
BUT WE'VE DONE THE TRAILS, WE'VE DONE THE SOFT SCAPE, WE'VE DONE THE HARD SCAPE, WE'VE DONE THE IRRIGATION, THE SAUTEING, THE CONCRETE TRAIL OR SUBGRADE.
AS WE PAID THE PARK FEES, WE HAD TO REDUCE OUR BUDGET JUST BECAUSE THAT WAS PART OF THE CONCEPT PLAN OVERALL.
>> BUT YOU WOULD HAVE DONE THAT REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU HAD.
YOUR PEOPLE NEED A GREEN SPACE, AND YOU WOULD HAVE DONE THAT NO MATTER WHAT BECAUSE THEY NEED THAT RECREATION AREA TO GET AROUND IN THAT SUBDIVISION.
>> WE FEEL THAT WAY, OF COURSE, BUT WE LIKE TO PROVIDE A BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT OTHER PROJECTS, NOT EVERYONE THINKS THE WAY WE THINK, WHY WE DO THAT.
IF YOU GO UP TO 88 TO BONNIE AND YOU LOOK AT WAYNE BRIDGES PROJECT, THEY JUST HAVE A BIG FALL ON THE GROUND. WE'D LIKE TO PROVIDE [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT'S A BAD EXAMPLE. [LAUGHTER]
BUT I'M JUST SAYING THERE'S A SPECTRUM OF WHAT YOU CAN PROVIDE AS A DEVELOPER.
I THINK WE'VE DONE A GREAT JOB.
>> ALL I CAN DO IS COMPARE TO WHAT WE'RE REQUIRING THE CITY OF ANGLETON.
IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE NEW SUBDIVISIONS COMING IN, EITHER THEY PAY THEIR PARKLAND DEDICATION FEE OR THEY PUT SOMETHING IN, AND ACTUALLY, TO THIS DATE, NOBODY HAS.
[NOISE] I CAN'T COMPARE OURSELVES TO BONNIE NOR DO I WANT TO, BUT THE STANDARD THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SET HERE IS TO BRING UP THESE NEW SUBDIVISIONS THE WAY WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM BUILT, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE PLACES FOR OUR CURRENT PARK SYSTEM TO UTILIZE, BECAUSE THEY ARE COMING TO THE CURRENT PARK SYSTEM, AND THAT'S WHERE I AM LIKE, WE HAVE TO BE HARD AND FAST ON THIS, JUST MY OPINION.
>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF ISSUES WITH YOUR TABULATION HERE.
ONE, THE AMOUNT OF PLANTS THAT YOU'RE SAYING WENT INTO THE PARK, IT'S 1174 PLANTS, TREES, AND SHRUBS.
IT'S A LOT OF PLANTS. I WAS SAYING THAT.
BUT I'M NOT SURE IF ALL THOSE [NOISE] WOULD BE IN THE PARK AREA.
THEY MAY BE SOMEWHERE ELSE ON THE PROPERTY. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING.
THEN THE ENTRY MONUMENT, THAT'S MORE FOR YOUR DEVELOPMENT THAN PARK, ISN'T IT? THAT'S $32,000.
HE JUST SENT ME A PDF FOR THE FINAL INVOICE ON IT, SO THAT WAS JUST ATTACHED.
BUT IF YOU WANT TO BREAK IT DOWN FOR ITEMS THAT ACTUALLY APPLIED TO THE PARK, AND IF YOU WANT TO PUT INTO ADDITION HOW WE BUILT THE POND
[04:05:01]
TO GET INCREASED CAPACITY TO DO A WET [INAUDIBLE] DETENTION, WHICH WAS A GUIDANCE, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROJECT.WE WENT AND EXCEED A COUPLE OF $100,000.
I'M JUST TRYING TO WEIGH IT BASED OFF OF, WHAT HAVE WE SPENT, AND BASED ON YOUR CODE, YOU HAVE A PRIVATE PARK REIMBURSEMENT CLAUSE IN THERE.
SHOULD WE BE ABLE TO GET SOMETHING REIMBURSED BECAUSE WE HAVE SPENT MONEY TO BUILD A PARK, AND WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE EFFORT TO DO THAT.
I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT OTHER PROJECTS SPECIFICALLY, BUT I THINK WE'VE PROVIDED SOMETHING MORE SO THAN OTHER DEVELOPMENTS YOU'VE SEEN TO THIS POINT.
I THINK IT'S EQUITABLE FOR US TO GET SOME CONTRIBUTION BACK FOR WHAT WE'VE SPENT.
>> I CAN SEE THAT ARGUMENT. I'M JUST SAYING THE NUMBERS PRESENTED TO US OF THAT 328,000 OVER $100,000, MAY OR MAY NOT BE IN THE PARK.
>> WELL, SO THE ONLY ITEMS THAT WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE PARK WOULD BE OUR TREES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BOULEVARD.
EVERYTHING ELSE WAS MAINTAINED IN THAT DETENTION AREA AND AROUND THE WALKING TRAIL OF THE DETENTION.
>> I WOULDN'T CONSIDER THAT A PARK ITEM AT ALL. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WELL, IT'S TABULATED, I THINK.
>> WE WERE GOING TO BUILD THAT REGARDLESS.
BUT THAT WAS JUST PART OF OUR CONTRACTOR THAT DID ALL THE LANDSCAPING.
THAT WAS ONE OF HIS BUDGETARY ITEMS [NOISE].
>> ONE THING THAT I DO WANT TO KNOW WHEN WE HAD OUR MOST RECENT MEETING WITH RIVERWOOD, THAT WAS WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING WHAT PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW.
I DID PROVIDE MICHAEL WITH THIS SECTION REGARDING THE CREDIT, BUT THAT WAS WITH THE NEW ORDINANCE THAT WAS ADOPTED IN FEBRUARY.
AS WALTER MENTIONED IN HIS AGENDA SUMMARY, THIS DEVELOPER IS VESTED, AND THAT ALLOWS HIM TO, WHETHER MAYBE AN ADVANTAGE OR DISADVANTAGE, DEPENDING ON WHICH WAY YOU LOOK AT IT.
HE IS BEING HELD TO THE OLD PARKLAND'S DEDICATION ORDINANCE, WHICH DOES NOT HAVE A DEVELOPER CREDIT, YOU CITY COUNCIL HAVE THE ABILITY TO GRANT WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE.
BUT WHAT HE'S REFERENCING IS A NEW PARKLAND'S DEDICATION ORDINANCE, AND HE'S VESTED, HE WOULD FOLLOW THE OLD PARKLAND'S DEDICATION ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS.
THERE'S A COUPLE THAT I WANT TO MENTION BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY APPLICABLE WITH RESPECT TO THE AREA THAT HE'S DESIGNATED AROUND HIS DETENTION AREA.
SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 2320 IN THE OLD PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE INCLUDED LOCATION.
THIS IS 2320 D3 PARKLAND SHALL LOCATED ADJACENT TO POND AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE USABLE SPACE FOR RECREATION.
DRAINAGE MAY BE ADJACENT TO THIS IS OPERATIVE WORD HERE.
ADJACENT BUT NOT INCLUDED IN THE DEDICATION REQUIREMENT CALCULATION.
IN 2320 D4 PARK IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS, PARK IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED TO MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE ACM, AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT, ADA, AND THE US CONSUMER PROTECTION REPORT, 325 STAFF WAS NOT GIVEN PLANS TO REVIEW, SO WE HAVE NO WAY OF VERIFYING IF THAT WAS DONE.
2320 D5, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED, ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES AND ROUTE SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR PARKLAND WITH ACCESSIBLE ROUTE INTO THE PARKING INTERIOR COMPLIANT WITH ALL ADA/TAS CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS.
THERE WERE NO ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES PROVIDED AT THIS SITE AND 2320 D6, DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS, THE SUB-DIVIDER OR DEVELOPER SHALL DEDICATE A SITE OR SITES TO THE PUBLIC FOR PARKLAND AT A RATIO OF 1.5 ACRE OF PARKLAND FOR EVERY 100 PERSON IN THE CITY OF EAGLETON.
THE SUB-DIVIDER OR A DEVELOPER SHALL DEDICATE A SITE OR SITES TO THE PUBLIC FOR PARKLAND AT THE RATIO OF 1.5 AS I'VE MENTIONED, BUT BASED ON THE NUMBER OF LOTS OF DEVELOPERS SHOULD HAVE CONVEYED MINIMALLY, 5.75 PLUS ACRES OF PARKLAND, NOT INCLUDING THE DETENTION AREA.
JUST BASED ON THOSE FOUR ITEMS [NOISE] ITSELF, IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT THE LAND HAS NOT BEEN CONVEYED, THIS IS A PRIVATE PARK.
HE HAS NOT MET MINIMALLY FIVE REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO BE CONSIDERED FOR PARKLAND DEDICATION.
I JUST WANTED YOU TO BE AWARE OF THAT AS IT RELATED TO THE OLD PARKLAND'S DEDICATION ORDINANCE, HE'S NOT BEING HELD TO THE NEW STANDARD WHERE THERE IS A CREDIT.
>> ONE NOTE ON THAT. I THINK IT IS A BENEFIT TO THE CITY THAT WE'RE NOT
[04:10:03]
DEDICATING THIS PART BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE HOA, SO THERE'S NO BURDEN ON THE CITY TO GO OUT THERE AND MAINTAIN IT.>> I DON'T SEE THE USE OF OUTSIDE PEOPLE GOING TO YOUR SUBDIVISION TO USE IT.
>> WE DID HAVE THIS DISCUSSION LAST YEAR, BEFORE WE HAD EVEN SOLD A HOME, THE NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET WERE SENDING ME PICTURES OF PEOPLE RUNNING IT ON THE WALKING TRAILS SO WE WERE NOT GOING TO GO OUT THERE AND POLICE IT.
I FEEL LIKE PEOPLE WITHIN RUNNING DISTANCE ARE GOING TO GO OUT THERE AND RUN AROUND IT.
I THINK IT'S A BENEFIT TO THE CITY THAT WE'VE BUILT IT.
IT'S NOT A LOT OF PARK FEES LEFT, BUT I THINK IT'S JUST EQUITABLE THAT WE GET SOME TYPE OF CONSIDERATION FOR IT.
EVEN THE WALK AND CHILD SELF WAS 100,000 AND WE HAVE 88,000 OF PARK FEES LEFT.
>> DOES YOUR PITCH CHANGE IF YOU DIDN'T GET THE CREDIT?
>> NO, WE CAN'T GET ANY OF THAT REIMBURSE FOR THE PID.
IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MUCH WE SPENT ON IT, THAT WAS JUST MONEY THAT WE WANTED TO DEDICATE TO MAKE THE [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF YOU WE WERE TO GIVE A CREDIT, SO YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY THIS FEE.
DOES YOUR PID GET REDUCED TO THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT IN THERE OR DOES THAT GO TO THE DEVELOPER?
>> THE PID IS ONLY GOING TO USE FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, BECAUSE THIS IS A PRIVATE PARK AMENITY, WE'RE NOT USING IT TO REIMBURSE ANY OF THE PART WE BUILD.
>> THE PID LIKE FOR THE STREETS, THE UNDERGROUND, THE SEWER, WATER, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS.
>> [NOISE] THERE'S NOTHING TO EXCLUDE ANYBODY FROM WALKING IN THERE AND PARTICIPATING IN YOUR PARK?
>> NOBODY IS STANDING OUT THERE TO GUARD, CHECKING TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE A RESIDENT OR NOT.
>> I CAN VOUCH FOR MR. FOLEY, BEFORE THE VERY FIRST PERSON MOVED IN, I DID WITNESS PEOPLE WALKING AROUND THE LAKE OR THE POND THAT WERE COMING FROM WHEREVER.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY CAME FROM, WHERE THEY WANT PEOPLE WALKING AND I THINK I HAVE A PICTURE ON MY PHONE AND I TOOK A PICTURE OF THE COUPLE THAT WAS HOLDING HANDS WALKING ON THE TRACK. I DID SEE THAT.
THAT WAS BEFORE THE FIRST HOUSE WAS COMPLETED, BUT THE SIDEWALK WAS THERE.
HAVEN'T SEEN ANYBODY PLAYING IN THE WATER OR THE SOCCER FIELD YET, BUT I'VE SEEN PEOPLE WALK INTO THE TRACK.
>> PLEASE, SIR. WELL, HE'S LOVING WHEN DOUG COME TO THIS.
>> I'M TAKING MY ENGINEERING HAT OFF, [LAUGHTER] IT WAKES UP WHEN I'M INVOLVED.
WE'VE DONE I DON'T KNOW, FIVE OR SIX SUBDIVISIONS THIS PAST YEAR, AND I'M THINKING OF RED [INAUDIBLE].
GRAY STONE, [INAUDIBLE], WHAT WAS THAT?
>> I'M NOT SURE WHO DID GIFFORD? SANSEO, WE HAVEN'T DONE AUSTIN COLONY MAYBE THAT WILL HAPPEN.
BUT THOSE THREE PAID COMPLETE PARK FEES.
YOU JUST GO LOOK AT THEIR DETENTION PONDS.
THEY'RE WHAT YOU GET BECAUSE THEY'VE SPENT THEIR MONEY ON PARK FEES AND THEY'VE DUG A HOLE.
[NOISE] THESE GUYS HAVE REALLY DONE A NICE PARK.
IT'S RIGHT THERE, VISIBLE ON ONE OF THE BUSIEST STREETS.
IT'S A NICE POND, THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT.
IN MY OPINION, THAT IF A DEVELOPER IS GOING TO DO A NICE DETENTION POND THAT SERVES THEIR COMMUNITY AND IT IS AVAILABLE TO PUBLIC, THEY SHOULD GET SOME CREDIT.
NOT AS THEIR CLIENT OR THEIR ENGINEERS, IT'S REALLY A NICE PARK TO DRIVE BY AND LOOK AT THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. LET'S LAUNCH SMITH'S POND IS A PIPER CATCHER FOR ONE THING, THERE'S ALL KIND OF TRASH THAT GOES OUT AND THEY FINALLY WENT AFTER.
>> MODE IT AND DRUG WHATEVER JUNK OUT THERE THAT WAS IN THERE.
ONE [INAUDIBLE] I'LL GIVE HER IT IS JUST I GUESS THEY'LL GET GRASS GROWING IN IT EVENTUALLY BUT IT IS JUST THE POND.
>> I DON'T GO BUY GREEN [INAUDIBLE] SO I DON'T SEE THAT.
[04:15:02]
>> IT'S ALL BRICK AROUND THE SIDE AND FENCED IN.
>> WHERE YOU CAN'T WALK AROUND THAT, THE ROCK IN THERE OR SOMETHING, BUT THAT'S [INAUDIBLE].
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT MR. [INAUDIBLE] POND LOOK LIKE, BUT IT'S PROBABLY JUST A POND.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE VALUE IS, WE COULD POSSIBLY CREDIT THIS.
BUT I DO BELIEVE PEOPLE WILL WALK.
PEOPLE WILL GO THROUGH THEIR METERS.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS A WHOLE LOT OF PLAY AND IT CAN GO ON, BUT ARE THERE ANY BENCHES OR BEACHES PUT OUT THERE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT?
>> I HAVEN'T BEEN INVITED HER TO SEE.
>> FOR SECTIONS 1 AND 2, ALL PARK FEES WERE PAID AND NOTHING WAS WAIVED? IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YOU HAVE 88,000 LEFT TO PAY AND YOU'RE ASKING TO BE CREDITED SOME OF THAT 88,000?
>> STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DO NOT GIVE THE CREDIT?
>> THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT'S LEFT HANGING OUT THERE.
ALL THE OTHER ONES ARE COMPLETE.
AS FAR AS WE KNOW, WE'RE DONE WITH ALL OF THEM.
THIS IS THE LAST OF THE LAST OF THE SAGA, IF YOU WILL.
>> THE 88,000 IF YOU ARE TO PAY IT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO INCLUDE THOSE ITEMS THAT WERE DEDUCTED IN YOUR PART?
>> AT THIS TIME WE DON'T HAVE PLANS TO BUILD THOSE.
JUST FROM THE INITIAL PAYMENT OF THOSE PARKING FEES, WE HAD TO REDUCE OUR BUDGET ON THE ALLOWABLE EXPENSES WE HAD FOR THE COST.
>> OKAY. IF WE DIDN'T GIVE YOU THE CREDIT, YOU STILL WOULDN'T PUT THIS STUFF IN?
>> WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AROUND. THERE'S ANOTHER DETENTION PONDS SCHEDULED IN THERE OR ONE OR TWO MORE IN SECTIONS 3 AND 4, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WE HAVE ONE MORE AND YOU ALL SAW THE PLOT FOR SECTIONS 3 AND 4.
[NOISE] WHAT'S ANGULAR'S DEAL CALLED?
>> WHERE THEY HAVE [INAUDIBLE].
>> WHERE THEY HAVE HOUSES SURROUNDING THE LAKE.
>> THAT'S OUR PLAN. THE WET DETENTION POND WITH HOUSES SURROUNDING THE LAKES DUE TO PREMIUM LOTS THERE.
>> BUT WE NEED SOME RESOLUTION BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BULB AGREEMENT, WE GOT TO DO THE PAGE, ALL THAT STUFF [INAUDIBLE] WAS TALKING ABOUT.
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE NOT CREDIT THE PRIVATE PART TOWARDS DEDICATION REQUIREMENT OR PAYMENT OF FEE IN LIEU OF DEDICATION.
>> HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM, DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> HAVE A SECOND BY COUNSELING ANGOA.
>> EXPLAIN YOUR MOTION, PLEASE SIR.
>> THAT HE STILL HAS TO PAY THE DEDICATION FEE.
>> HE HAS TO PAY THE REMAINING [OVERLAPPING]
>> GET NO CREDIT FOR WHAT HE'S DONE OUT THERE.
>> CLARIFICATION OF THE MOTION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY THE SIGN.
>> THAT'S A 3, 2 SO I HAVE THE MOTION DOES CARRY. MOVING RIGHT ALONG.
[32. Discussion and possible action on the Austin Colony Development Agreement]
POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE AUSTIN COLONY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.>> THE GOOD NEWS IS AS OF FRIDAY WE HAD A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT EVERYBODY AGREED TO.
THE BAD NEWS IS THAT IT WAS TOO LATE TO GET INTO THE PACKET FOR THIS MEETING SO IT'LL BE IN YOUR PACKET FOR THE JUNE 14TH MEETING.
>> WE'RE ALMOST THERE, WE JUST NEED LEGAL REVIEW.
>> FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH I KEEP GETTING QUESTIONS.
WHEN AM I GOING TO SEE THAT FLYER UP THERE?
[04:20:02]
>> I'M TOLD YOU'RE ALMOST THERE.
[33. Discussion and possible action on Heritage Park Section Three Final Plat. ]
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON HERITAGE PARK SECTION 3, FINAL PLAT, MS. LINDSAY.>> [NOISE] GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL AGAIN.
A COUPLE OF LITTLE CHANGES THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN BRIEF.
WE MET WITH THE DEVELOPER LAST WEEK AS WELL AS HIS CONSULTANTS.
THE DEVELOPER IS HERE TONIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR WAITING AND STAYING WITH US.
WE DID PREVIOUSLY ASK FOR SOME CLARIFICATION ON WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IT IS TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING WET AND DRY BOTTOMED DETENTION POND OUT THERE.
WE DID GET DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS OF HERITAGE PARK SUBDIVISION AND DEDICATORY INSTRUMENTS.
THERE IS AN HOA OUT THERE, SO WE HAVE FORWARDED THOSE DOCUMENTS ONTO LEGAL.
HOWEVER, WHEN IN THAT MEETING WAS A NEED TO SEPARATE THIS SUBDIVISION PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS HERITAGE PARK 3, WHICH YOUR PACKET SAYS HERITAGE PARK 3, BECAUSE WE DID NOT GET THE UPDATED PLAT AND PLAN UNTIL AFTER THE FACT.
THE REASON WE NEEDED AN UPDATED ONE IS BECAUSE THE NAME NEEDS TO CHANGE SO THERE IS NO ATTACHMENT TO THE HERITAGE PARK SUBDIVISION ALTHOUGH IT'S GEOGRAPHICALLY STILL THERE.
THAT DOESN'T CHANGE, IT'S JUST THE NAME, CHANGES TO ELM ESTATES.
OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO CORRECTING ALL COMMENTS PROVIDED BY THE CITY ENGINEER, RECEIPT OF THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS THAT ARE UPDATED, WHICH HAVE BEEN RECEIVED, THEY STILL NEED TO BE REVIEWED BY THE CITY ENGINEER AND SOMETHING THAT REFLECTS THAT THOSE PLANTS HAVE NO ATTACHMENT BETWEEN THE FUTURE POND THAT IS PROPOSED IN WHAT IS NOW ELM ESTATES AND THE EXISTING POND.
>> WELL, AND THERE WAS THE OTHER CONDITION OF YOUR CITY ATTORNEY BEING ABLE TO.
>> CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW [OVERLAPPING].
>> I HAVE TO REVIEW WHETHER OR NOT THE DEVELOPER'S POSITION IS WHAT IT IS REGARDING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND I JUST GOT THEM YESTERDAY.
BUT I HAVE A PRELIMINARY OPINION BECAUSE I'VE LOOKED AT THEM BEFORE BUT I DO NEED TO REVIEW.
>> YES, BECAUSE THERE NEEDS TO BE A SEPARATION, NO ATTACHMENT BASICALLY TO HERITAGE PARK SUBDIVISION.
OUR RECOMMENDATION UNANIMOUSLY WAS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A DIFFERENT NAME OF THE SUBDIVISION AND NO ATTACHMENT TO THE EXISTING POND FOR OUTFALL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
>> GOT YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
>> OF COURSE. THE CITY LEGAL COUNCIL NEEDS TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THOSE THINGS TOO.
A LOT OF MOVING PARTS HERE BUT THEY ALL CAME IN AFTER THE FACT.
>> COPY THAT. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
>> IT IS AN ACTION ITEM SO WHAT IS YOUR ALL'S PLEASURE?
>> [NOISE] YOU HAVE A PRELIMINARY OPINION BUT NOT A FINAL ONE.
>> NO, I DON'T BECAUSE I'M NOT REALLY CLEAR ON WHAT THE DEVELOPER IS ARGUING BECAUSE I WASN'T IN THAT MEETING AND I JUST BECAME AWARE OF THIS YESTERDAY.
>> I'LL TRY AND PROVIDE SOME ENLIGHTENMENT.
WHEN WE MET WITH MR. PELTIER LAST WEEK HE BROUGHT HIS ATTORNEY WITH HIM AND HIS ATTORNEY MAINTAINS THAT AS THIS HAS PROCEEDED THROUGH THE PROCESS, THAT THE CONDITION HAS BEEN THAT THE EXISTING DRAINAGE POND HAS NOT BEEN MAINTAINED AND THE RESIDENTS IN THE TWO EXISTING SECTIONS HAVE CONTENDED THAT THERE'S NEVER BEEN A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ESTABLISHED TO DO THE MAINTENANCE OF THE COMMON AREAS FOR THOSE TWO SECTIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION.
BASED ON OUR MEETING MR. PELTIER'S ATTORNEYS ASSERTED THAT THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, HE DOESN'T OWN ANY PROPERTY IN IT, HE HAS NO WAY OF BEING A PARTY TO THE EXISTING HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION THAT'S OUT THERE AND HAS NO LEGAL ABILITY TO EITHER RESTART THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OR INFLUENCE THAT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ON DOING THE MAINTENANCE FOR THE EXISTING DETENTION POND.
WE PROVIDED THE CITY ATTORNEY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AGREEMENTS,
[04:25:07]
I THINK IT WAS YESTERDAY, ACTUALLY AND SHE HAS NOT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT.THE ATTORNEY MAINTAIN THAT BECAUSE OF THE DEDICATION STATEMENT IN THE HERITAGE PARK SECTION 2, WHICH DEDICATED THE DRAINAGE DETENTION POND TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, THAT THAT SOMEHOW TRANSFER THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
NEITHER THE CITY ATTORNEY NOR I AGREE THAT THAT INTERPRETATION IS CORRECT.
THE ACTUAL OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY IS BY PELTIER'S BEST INVESTMENTS.
IF THE CITY ATTORNEY CONCLUDES IN HER REVIEW THAT THERE IS NO MECHANISM FOR MR. PELTIER TO EITHER RESTART THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OR HAVE ANY WAY TO INFLUENCE THE MAINTENANCE OF THE POND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO PURSUE A CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ON THE OWNER OF THE POND IN ORDER TO PROCEED WITH ANY MAINTENANCE OF THE POND.
IN THE MEETING THE SOLUTION THAT WE CAME TO WAS THAT IF WHAT MR. PELTIER'S ATTORNEY SAID WAS TRUE THEN THIS NEW SECTION IS GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE ITS OWN SEPARATE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
THE DRAINAGE FOR THIS SECTION SHOULD NOT BE CONNECTED IN ANY PHYSICAL WAY TO THE EXISTING POND BECAUSE THEN THAT CREATES A PROBLEM WITH WHO'S DOING THE MAINTENANCE OF THE WHOLE THING.
THAT POND NEEDS TO BE SEPARATE SERVING ONLY THIS SECTION AND THAT THERE BE A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION CREATED TO ADDRESS MAINTENANCE OF THAT POND SO THAT THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY CONFUSION PUDDLE ALL THAT, THERE WOULD BE A NAME CHANGE TO THE PLAN.
THAT'S WHY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ARE WHAT THEY ARE, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT AND CONFIRM WHETHER OR NOT WHAT WE DISCUSSED IN OUR MEETING LAST WEEK WAS ACTUALLY CORRECT, THAT THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE DETENTION POND BE REVISED SO THAT THERE IS NO PHYSICAL CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TWO PONDS AND THAT THERE BE A NAME CHANGE AND OF COURSE, ALL THE CITY ENGINEER'S COMMENTS HAVE TO BE CLEARED AND THERE BE A NAME CHANGE SO THERE'S NO CONFUSION ON THAT ISSUE.
>> I LOOK AT ALL YOUR FACES LIKE, WHAT? I GET IT. IT'S BEEN A LONG MEETING.
>> WE DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT YET EITHER, WHICH IS NOW GOING TO HAVE TO BE CHANGED AS WELL BECAUSE IT'S A DIFFERENT NAME AND THERE'S OTHER ISSUES REGARDING HOA AND DETENTION POND.
>> WHY DID WE HAVE THIS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT IF IT'S NOT READY?
>> IT'S ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT BECAUSE THERE'S A 30-DAY SHOT CLOCK AND IF IT ISN'T ON THE AGENDA ENACTED UPON THEN IT BECOMES APPROVED BY OPERATION OF LAW.
>> BUT WE'RE PROVING SOMETHING THAT'S NOT FULLY VETTED YET.
>> WELL, THAT'S WHY YOU APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS.
WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE PLAT APPROVAL, STATE LAW SAYS YOU CAN EITHER APPROVE, [NOISE] DENY, OR APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS.
IF YOU DO NOTHING TONIGHT BY OPERATION OF LAW DUE TO OUR LOVELY LEGISLATORS IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS TWO YEARS AGO, I'VE DECIDED THAT IF YOU DON'T ACT BY OPERATION OF LAW WITHIN 30 DAYS IT'S AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED.
>> GOOD FOR THEM. WE'VE SEEN ENOUGH OF THIS STUFF HAPPEN WHERE PEOPLE JUST SHRUG IT OFF AND HOPE IT GOES AWAY. IT'S NOT FAIR.
>> IT'S STATE LAW. I MEAN IT BY OPERATION OF LAW WOULD BE APPROVED IF YOU TAKE NO ACTION.
>> I REALLY HATE THE IDEA OF CHANGING A NAME OF THE SUBDIVISION JUST TO DO THIS.
CREATES CONFUSION FOR EVERYBODY.
>> BECAUSE THERE GOING TO ACTUALLY BE SIGNAGE OR IS IT JUST GOING TO BE BY PLOT? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.
>> SECTION 3 IS GOING TO PAY FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT POND? [LAUGHTER]
>> OF THAT POND. THEY'LL HAVE TO FORK IN ONE AND TWO TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH THEIR PLAN, IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.
>> IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A BROTHER AND SISTER, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO CO-OPERATE.
IT IS HOW THE CARDS FELL, AND I GET IT.
BUT MOVE [NOISE] THINGS ALONG AND EITHER WE TAKE ACTION OR LET AUSTIN TAKE ACTION.
>> WELL, I RECOMMEND A MOTION,
[04:30:02]
WE APPROVE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CORRECT ALL COMMENTS PROVIDED BY THE CITY ENGINEER AND RECEDE OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND PLAN TO REFLECT NO ATTACHMENT TO THE HERITAGE PARK SUB DIVISION OR DETENTION POND, AND A SUBDIVISION NAME CHANGE AS PRESENTED TONIGHT.>> SUBJECT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW. [OVERLAPPING]
>> SUBJECT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW.
>> MOTION BY COUNSELOR BOOTH, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM WRIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
>> I KNOW THE INTENTION IS GOOD TO HAVE DETENTION, AND TO PROVIDE PROTECTION THAT DETENTION PONDS ARE SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE.
BUT WHAT STAKE DO YOU HAVE TO GO OUT THERE AND CAUSE THESE PEOPLE TO MAINTAIN THEIR PONDS? YOU'LL SEE THEY'RE GOING TO WAIT TILL THE LAST MINUTE, THEN SOMEONE'S GOING TO COME OUT THERE AND CODE ENFORCEMENT HAVE TO ONCE AGAIN INVOLVED, YOU JUST WAIT AND SEE.
I GUESS THIS ONE HASN'T BEEN MAINTAINED VERY WELL.
>> FIRST POND HADN'T BEEN MAINTAINED VERY WELL, SORRY BUT THAT'S WHAT COMES ALONG WITH ALL THESE DETENTION PONDS.
>> JUST HOPEFULLY YOU RECTIFY THEIR ISSUES, AND JUST GET IT ON THE RIGHT PATH.
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS?
>> WE SAY THAT IT'S GOING TO BE SUBJECT AND THE SUBDIVISION NAME CHANGE.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, THAT'S ON THE PLAN ONLY.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT CITIZENS SEE.
THEY'RE GOING TO DRIVE IN THE HERITAGE PARK AND THAT'S WHAT EVERYONE IS GOING TO SAY.
NO SIGNS, JUST GOING TO SAY ELM COURTS SUBDIVISION.
>> THEY'RE PLANNING ON PUTTING THE SIGNAGE OUT.
>> I DIDN'T SEE ANY SIGNAGE IN THE PLANS.
THE STREET NAME ITSELF IS ELM COURT, NO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY MONUMENTATION SIGNAGE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT WOULD INDICATE THE NAME ELM ESTATES.
>> BUT AT CLOSING, THERE WILL PROBABLY BE A DOCUMENT THAT SAYS THEY'RE LIVING IN THIS ELM WHATEVER?
>> THE RESIDENT WILL KNOW THAT AND UNLESS THE OTHER RESIDENTS SPREAD THE WORD OUT, HEY, WE LIVE IN ELM WHATEVER, NOBODY WILL NEVER KNOW UNLESS THEY START.
>> WELL, ON SEPARATE HOAS TOO.
>> LIKE I SAID, I HOPE THAT THEY JUST GET ON THE RIGHT PATH, EVERYBODY GETS ON THE RIGHT PATH.
>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? HEARING NONE.
I CALL FOR THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
WE'RE TO THE LAST ITEM DISCUSSION OF
[34. Discussion and possible action to provide staff direction on amending the public acceptance process.]
POSSIBLE ACTION TO PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION ON AMENDING THE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROCESS, WALTER..>> I'M SORRY, ACCEPTANCE NOT ASSISTANCE [BACKGROUND].
>> COUNSEL, AS [OVERLAPPING] A COUPLE OF TIMES INDICATED THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE THE PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE PROCESS REVISED.
I'VE REVIEWED THAT AND I THINK IT'S NOT THAT COMPLICATED A THING TO DO, BUT THERE ARE SOME ITEMS THAT I NEED SOME DIRECTION ON, AND THOSE THREE ITEMS ARE ONE, DOES THE COUNCIL WANT TO CONTINUE TO BE THE BODY THAT DOES THE PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OR DOES IT WANT TO DESIGNATE THAT TO STAFF TO DO? TWO, GIVEN THAT THE CITY'S CURRENT MAINTENANCE BOND AMOUNT IS $25,000 OR 20 PERCENT OF THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS, DOES IT WANT TO CHANGE THAT MAINTENANCE BOND AMOUNT TO SOMETHING ELSE, AND IF SO WHAT? NUMBER 3, JEEZ, I'VE ONLY BEEN SITTING HERE THINKING ABOUT THIS ALL NIGHT LONG, NUMBER 3 WAS [OVERLAPPING] ONE YEAR'S BOND. YES.
>> LENGTH OF THE BOND. THE AMOUNT OF THE BOND.
>> WHETHER YOU WANT [OVERLAPPING] ONE YEAR, WANT TO KEEP IT AT ONE YEAR OR GO TO SOME OTHER NUMBER OF YEARS? [NOISE] IT WILL HELP TREMENDOUSLY IN DOING THE AMENDMENT TO KNOW THOSE THREE ITEMS. [NOISE]
>> WHAT IS THE GOLDEN STANDARD OR THE COMMON STANDARD PRACTICE IN OTHER CITIES?
>> THERE'S AN ATTACHMENT THERE THAT [BACKGROUND] SHOW SEVERAL CITIES.
>> I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T GO TO THE LAST PAGE.
>> YOU OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T READ YOUR AGENDA.
>> [LAUGHTER] NO, I DID. I STOPPED AT THAT PAGE, RIGHT AFTER I SAW THE RECOMMENDATION.
>> SIX HUNDRED PAGES, IT'S UNDERSTANDABLE.
>> THANK YOU SIR, I APPRECIATE THAT.
IT'S WHY IT'S CALLED LOCAL REGULATION.
YOU GET TO DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT.
[04:35:02]
I JUST NEED YOU TO TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT.>> YOU HAD A PREFERENCE? [BACKGROUND]
>> YES, I DID. I HAD A PREFERENCE.
I THINK IT SHOULD BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE ACCEPTANCE BY THE STAFF.
I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE 100 PERCENT ON THE MAINTENANCE BOND AND I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE FOR TWO YEARS.
>> WELL, EXPLAIN YOUR REASONING WHY YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE TWO YEARS RATHER THAN SOMETHING ELSE?
>> BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF REAL THAT ONE YEAR IS REALLY LONG ENOUGH TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT EVERYTHING HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED TO STANDARD UNTIL YOU START GETTING TRAFFIC ON THE ROADS AND YOU START TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM THAT I THINK TWO YEARS IS FAIR.
BUT THAT'S YOUR CALL. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION AND THANK YOU.
I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHERE STAFF POINT WAS COMING FROM TO SUGGEST TWO YEARS BECAUSE HERE'S WHERE I'M GOING TO WITH THE REST OF MY COMMENTS.
AS FAR BACK AS I CAN REMEMBER, WE HAVE HAD ONE YEAR MAINTENANCE OR MORE DAYS ON MOST PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS, WHETHER THEY'D BE PRIVATE OR PUBLIC.
THAT'S BEEN VERY COMMON PRACTICE AND WHAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE PAST SEVERAL SUBDIVISIONS SINCE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HAS BEEN ENACTED IS THAT, THE RECOMMENDATION HAS BEEN TO WAIVE THAT SECOND YEAR.
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE STATES A PRELIMINARY YEAR AND THEN ANOTHER MAINTENANCE YEAR, WHICH IS BASICALLY A TWO YEAR PERIOD.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT PROMPTED THAT, BUT THAT'S WHAT CAME IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
WHEN THESE PROJECTS ARE CONSTRUCTED, THEY'RE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARD CITY TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS THAT HAD BEEN ADOPTED BY THE CITY.
THESE ARE THE SAME TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS THAT ARE USED BOTH IN PRIVATE CONSTRUCTION AND IN PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION.
THE RICHMOND STREET, SOUTHSIDE DRIVE, OTHER THINGS, THOSE WERE DONE WITH THE SAME TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.
THEY WERE WATCHED OVER BY CITY STAFF, THEY WERE WATCHED OVER BY THE CITY ENGINEER.
THE PRIVATE WORK IS ALSO WATCHED OVER BY THE ENGINEER OF RECORD, WHICH IS THE ENGINEER WHO DESIGNS THE PROJECT.
THERE'S PLENTY OF EYES WATCHING THIS STUFF BE DONE.
SO THAT WHEN YOU GET TO THE END OF THE PROJECT, EVERYBODY IS CONFIDENT THAT IT'S BEEN DONE ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS, IT'S BEEN DONE ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS, AND ANY KIND OF IRREGULARITIES HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AND AT THAT TIME, THE WARRANTY PERIOD STARTS.
SO WHEN IT'S A CITY PROJECT, AND THE CITY DOES THE JOB, IT'S A ONE-YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD.
WE IMPOSE A TWO-YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD ON PRIVATE THEN REQUIRING THEM TO PLAY BY DIFFERENT RULES THAN THE CITY IS PLAYING BY.
BUT MY POINT IS, THE STANDARD PRACTICE IN MANY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IS A ONE-YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD.
I'M NOW WORKING AT PORT FREEPORT.
I HAVE BEEN THERE GOING ON EIGHT YEARS AND I'LL TELL YOU OUR PROJECTS DOWN THERE ARE IMMENSE.
[LAUGHTER] FIVE BILLION DOLLARS PARKING LOT, A SIX-AND-A-HALF MILLION PARKING LOT, ONE BEING 25 ACRES ANOTHER ONE BEING 20 ACRES, A $21 MILLION RAILROAD PROJECT.
RIGHT NOW WE HAVE 120 SOMEWHAT MILLION DOLLAR WORTH OF EXPANSION.
[04:40:06]
EACH ONE OF THESE PROJECTS HAS A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE PERIOD, ONE-YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD AFTER IT.WE'VE GONE BACK TO THE CITY THOUGH, IT'S WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE CITY, OUGHT TO BE GOOD FOR THE PRIVATE DEVELOPER TOO.
IT'S ALL DONE BY THE SAME STANDARDS, ALL DONE BY THE SAME SPECS.
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS YOU GET AFTER IT PAST THE ONE-YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD AND SOMEONE IS GOING TO DRIVE THROUGH THERE AND SAY, WELL, THAT SIDEWALK IS SINKING.
WHAT CAUSED THAT SIDEWALK TO SINK? WELL, WHAT ELSE HAS BEEN GOING ON OUT HERE BESIDES JUST PEOPLE LIVING HERE? WE'VE GOT ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS OUT THERE RUNNING CONDUITS HERE AND THERE YONDER.
COMCAST AND THERE'S OTHER FOLKS ARE COMING OUT HERE PUTTING COMMUNICATION STUFF IN AND THEY'RE DISRUPTING WHAT THE CONTRACTOR PUT IN.
SO THEN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A FIGHT.
WHOSE FAULT IS IT? WHO'S THE CULPRIT IN MAKING? [NOISE] MY RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO GO TO A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE LONG, 100 PERCENT AND THAT TIME PERIOD STARTS AS SOON AS THE CITY ENGINEER DECLARES THAT IT'S COMPLETE.
YOU WRITE A LETTER OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION, NOT SUBSTANTIAL, BUT COMPLETION TO THE CONTRACTOR.
I DON'T THINK THAT NEEDS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COME.
ALL WE'RE DOING IS SAYING YES TO WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN SAID, YES.
IF THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ENGINEER AND EVERYBODY HAS GOTTEN TOGETHER AND LOOKED AT THIS, IS THIS DONE ACCORDING TO WHAT WE ASKED THEM TO DO? THEN THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR BOTH.
ALL WE'RE DOING IS YESSING WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY SAID.
>> IS THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION, MR. BOOTH?
>> DO I HAVE A SECOND? [OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL RIGHT, GO AHEAD, SIR.
>> WILL THAT BE FROM THE DATE THAT IT'S COMPLETED OR CONVEYED?
>> WARRANTY USUALLY STARTS WHEN THE PROJECT IS DONE.
>> THAT MEANS THE CITY ACCEPTS WHAT WAS DONE.
>> GOOD, WELL, I SAY THIS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD THIS ISSUE IN WORDING [OVERLAPPING]
>> WELL, IT MIGHT BE A WEEK OR TWO.
>> IN ACCEPTANCE OF THE FINAL PLAN?
>> THAT WOULD BE AT THE END OF THE PLAN TOO.
ACCEPTANCE? IF ACCEPTANCE OF THE FINAL PLAN IS THE BEST WAY TO GO, THEN WE CAN USE THAT.
>> THE WARRANTY IS USUALLY WHEN THE WORK IS COMPLETE.
>> OKAY. WELL, AS FAR AS IT'S TIED TO THE PLAN ACCEPTANCE TO [OVERLAPPING]
>> WHEN IS THE WORK COMPLETE? [OVERLAPPING]
>> WHEN THE ENGINEER SAYS IT IS.
>> NOW THE PROCESS IS THAT THE CITY ENGINEER GOES OUT, INSPECTS THE CONSTRUCTION, THERE'S A PUNCH LIST THAT'S PUT TOGETHER.
THE CONTRACTOR GOES OUT AND ADDRESSES THE PUNCH LIST ITEMS AND IF EVERYTHING'S GOOD TO GO THEN, THAT WOULD BE THE POINT THAT STAFF WOULD SEND THE LETTER SAYING IT'S ACCEPTED FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND THE DATE OF THIS LETTER IS WHEN THE MAINTENANCE BOND SHOULD BEGIN.
>> SO THAT'S HOW THAT WILL WORK.
>> OKAY. I DIDN'T WANT TO MESS UP ACCEPTING THE PLAN AND STARTING THE TIME PLAN.
>> THE PLAN PROCESS, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT SEPARATE FROM THE ACTUAL PROCESSING OF THE PLAN BECAUSE THE FINAL PLAN CAN GO THROUGH UNDER THE CITY'S CURRENT REGULATIONS.
ALL THAT HAS TO HAPPEN IS THAT THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER BEFORE WE CAN ACCEPT ANY APPLICATION FOR A FINAL PLAN.
IT'S AFTER THE FINAL PLAN IS APPROVED, PLAN CAN'T BE RECORDED UNTIL THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED.
>> CLEARED IT UP FOR YOUR MARK?
>> ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE AT FIVE MINUTES TO 11:00.
[OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] ALL THOSE IN FAVOR [INAUDIBLE] SAY AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
IT BRINGS US TO THE PART OF THE AGENDA IN BIG BOLD LETTERS, ADJOURNMENT AT 10:55.
[BACKGROUND]
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.