[00:00:01]
WHICH DOES REQUIRE THE DUES.[DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER]
>> I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I GUESS MAYBE I WOULD EXPLORE UNTIL FURTHER MOTION.
I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'LL BASICALLY LEAVE IT.
>> I'LL SECOND YOUR MOTION, COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN, MOTION CARRIES.
ON NUMBER 5, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION TO REPLACE THE FOUR AND OPERABLE ELECTRIC STREET LIGHTS ON COLONY DRIVE WITH NEW LED STREETLIGHTS. MS. WADS?
>> I BELIEVE THERE WAS SOMEONE WHO HAD PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> MR. DUNCAN, YOU WANT TO COME UP TO THE PODIUM? STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE.
>> YES. THANK YOU. I'M FRANK DUNCAN.
I LIVE AT 7 COLONY DRIVE HERE IN TOWN.
ON BEHALF OF MYSELF, MY FAMILY, MY NEIGHBORS IN ATTENDANCE I WANT TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS ACTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO KINDLY ASK THAT YOU REMOVE THE WORD POSSIBLE ACTIONS AND TAKE SOME [LAUGHTER] CONCRETE ACTIONS TO ADD STREETLIGHTS TO THIS CITY.
I'VE LIVED ON THIS STREET SINCE 2010 WITHOUT STREETLIGHTS.
WE DO NOT HAVE SIDEWALKS PARALLEL TO THE ROADWAY, SO PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLE RIDERS USE THE STREET FOR TRAVEL UP AND DOWN THE STREET.
THIS TIME OF YEAR WE'VE KIDS OUT OF SCHOOL, FAMILY NIGHTS OUT LIKE JULY 4TH AND HALLOWEEN NIGHT FOR KIDS OUT ON THE STREET AND SAFETY EXTERNAL FOR DRIVERS LIKE MYSELF THAT WE DON'T HIT A PET OR A PERSON.
WE'D APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. THE SUBJECT OF THESE LIGHTS ON COLONY DRIVE HAS COME BEFORE YOU, I BELIEVE.
WHAT THEY HAVE NOW ARE FOUR ORIGINAL ANTIQUE STYLE ELECTRIC STREETLIGHTS THAT WERE INSTALLED WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
THEY HAVEN'T WORKED FOR SOME TIME AND THEY'RE IN ALL STATE OF DISREPAIR, BROKEN, NO GLOBE, SOME PART OF PARTIAL GLOBES.WE HAD EXPLORED THE IDEA, CHRIS ASKED ME TO GO AND LOOK AT THE STREET AND SEE WHAT WE COULD DO ABOUT MAYBE PUTTING SOME SOLAR LIGHTS THERE.
WELL, IF YOU'VE DRIVEN DOWN COLONY DRIVE, YOU KNOW IT HAS A BEAUTIFUL CANOPY OF TREES, WHICH DOESN'T NECESSARILY WORK WITH SOLAR LIGHTS.
WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO PUT IN ADEQUATE LIGHTING AND TO REPLACE THOSE FOUR AND MAYBE INSTALL UP TO SIX NEW LED STREETLIGHTS.
WE DID HAVE JEFF AND HECTOR, WENT OUT TO TAKE A LOOK AND BECAUSE JEFF HAS HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT'S HAPPENED OVER THERE.
THEN THEY ALSO HAD AN ELECTRIC CONTRACTOR GO OUT AND PROVIDE AN ESTIMATE FOR US.
YOU'LL SEE THAT THE ESTIMATE RIGHT NOW IS $62,550.
IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT LESS BECAUSE OUR SUPER-DUPER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS SAID THEY'LL ACTUALLY TAKE THE OLD LIGHTS OUT AND THAT WILL HELP WITH SOME OF THE COST.
[3. Discussion and possible action on an ordinance adopting a percentage for Homestead exemption from ad valorem taxes and other necessary amendments.]
BUT IT IS GOING TO BE AN EXPENSE, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF COUNCIL WANTS US TO PROCEED WITH THAT ACTION OR [NOISE] NOT.IT WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT OF GENERAL FUNDS; IT'S NOT CURRENTLY BUDGETED.
>> I THOUGHT THIS WAS ONE OF THE STREETS WHERE WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO PUT THE STREETLIGHTS IN.
>> WE DID TALK ABOUT THAT AND THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAN UNTIL WE ACTUALLY GOT THERE AND LOOKED AT IT AND DISCOVERED HOW MUCH SHADE IS THERE AND SOLAR LIGHTS REQUIRE SUNLIGHT.
>> WE WANTED TO COME BACK AND PROVIDE OPTIONS AND SEEK GUIDANCE ON HOW YOU WANT US TO PROCEED BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT ON THOSE SOLAR LIGHT PIECE.
>> IT'S A COMPLICATED PROJECT.
YOU WOULDN'T THINK SO BECAUSE IT'S JUST A FEW LIGHTS, BUT SOME OF THE CABLES AREN'T VISIBLE.
THERE'S UNDERGROUND THINGS OR THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN BROKEN BECAUSE MOLDS HAVE BUMPED INTO THEM.
A LOT OF THAT LINE HAS TO BE REPLACED AND JEFF CAN SPEAK MORE TECHNICALLY ABOUT IT THAN I CAN IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
>> HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU THINK CAN BE SAVED ON US DOING THE DECONSTRUCTION? JUST AROUND ABOUT BALLPARK FIGURE.
>> I THINK ANYWHERE FROM PROBABLY ABOUT 8,000.
SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE 8,000-10,000 MAYBE.
>> IS YOUR INTENTION TO TAKE THE WHOLE STRUCTURE DOWN ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BASE?
>> ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BASE AND MAYBE USE THE SAME BASIS IF WE CAN, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE CONDUIT COMES UP FOR THE EXISTING LIGHTS.
BUT LONG TIME AGO WE DID LOOK OF HAVING DIRECTOR STREETLIGHTS PUT IN THERE,
[00:05:01]
BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO GET EASEMENTS BETWEEN ALL OF THEIR HOUSES AND ALL THAT.THEY WOULD HAVE SET EXTRA POLES AND EVERYTHING OUT.
THAT'S A LONG WAYS FROM THE STREET TO THE BACK THERE.
>> THERE'S FOUR OUT THERE RIGHT NOW AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING TWO ADDITIONAL LIGHT IN TO GET A TOTAL OF SIX?
>> THAT'S WHAT THIS PRICE IS BASED ON, SIX LIGHTS.
>> IN THE DISCUSSION OF MONEY, WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE IN THE BUDGET, BUT WE'RE FIXING TO GET $2.4 MILLION OF WHICH WE SPENT MONEY FOR SOLAR LIGHTS BEFORE.
IF WE DECIDE TO ALLOCATE FOR SOLAR LIGHTS AGAIN, WE COULD CERTAINLY ALLOCATE MONEY AND PUT THAT AS A PRIORITY.
WE'VE HAD REQUESTS FOR RIDGE CREST AND COUPLE OF OTHER PLACES TOO, SO WE WOULD BRING ALL THOSE FORWARD STICKING COLONY DRIVE UP THE TOP SO THAT IT WILL GET FUNDED REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME.
>> I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH US GOING FORWARD WITH THIS, BUT IN THE NEXT BUDGET CYCLE, I DON'T THINK WE CAN PULL ANY MORE MONEY FROM THIS BUDGET.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD COMMIT OURSELVES TO MONEY THAT WE DON'T HAVE YET.
BUT WE CAN FUND IT FROM OUR BUDGET AND MAKE IT A PRIORITY FOR NEXT YEAR, WHICH STARTS IN AUGUST.
>> IT'S A COUPLE OF MONTHS AWAY.
>> YOU'VE WAITED 10 YEARS [LAUGHTER] ALLOW ME TO PUT YOU OFF FRANK. [LAUGHTER].
>> NOW, BUT IT IS TAKING ACTION, BUT SOME WE'RE COMMITTING OURSELVES FOR NEXT YEAR.
BUT HOPEFULLY IF WE GET THIS OTHER 4.2 MILLION.
>> TWO POINT FOUR, WE COULD GIVE IT.
[LAUGHTER] I THOUGHT I HEARD 4.2.
>> WHAT HAS BEEN YOUR TYPICAL COST PER SOLAR LIGHT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FOUNDATION, THE LIGHT FIXTURE AND EVERYTHING.
>> AN UPDATE FOR EVERYONE, PINEY WAY JUST GOT THEIR SOLAR LIGHTS INSTALLED.
I THINK WEST LIVE OAK IS NEXT.
>> WEST LIVE OAK AND THEN BERT?
>> YES. WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THE SECOND LIST THAT YOU ALL GAVE US LAST TIME.
>> I GOT HIT IT FOR ANOTHER ONE, BUT [LAUGHTER] WESTERN AVENUE WAS ALSO BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION.
THERE'S PRESENTLY TWO AT THIS LOCATION.
>> THERE ARE ZERO LIGHTS THAT WORK.
>> THERE ARE PRESENTLY FOUR POLLS UP.
>> IN ONE OF THEM IS AT THE BACK OF THE CULDESAC LIKE IT HAS A LITTLE ISLAND IN IT.
>> YEAH THAT'S WHAT THEY HAVE.
>> I MUST HAVE NOT BEEN LISTENING CLEARLY AND IT'S MY FAULT, BUT SO THERE'S FOUR BASES ALREADY PRESENT.
WE WANT TO REUSE THOSE FOUR BASES AND THEN ADD TWO ADDITIONAL BASES.
>> IF WE DO THE SOLAR LIGHTS THOUGH, I THINK WE'RE JUST GOING WITH SIX LOCATIONS.
BECAUSE IT DOESN'T GO ONTO OUR BASE IT JUST GOES
[2. Discussion and possible action on the election of Mayor pro-tem to serve a one-year term.]
A BRACKET AND THE GROUND SO BASICALLY WE WOULD PLUG THE, OR IF WE CAN'T TAKE THOSE BASES OUT, WE PLUG THE BASE AND THEN PUT SIX ADDITIONAL SOLAR LIGHTS.>> I DON'T THINK SOLAR IS AN OPTION HERE.
>> WELL, I'M JUST SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION FOR YOU'LL TO SAY FROM THE REGULAR STREET LIGHTS LED AT THE $62,000 COST OR DO YOU WANT TO GO SOLAR AND WE'D HAVE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR A LITTLE DIRECTION BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL TASK FROM YOU'LL WAS TO PUT SOLAR LIGHTS THERE AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE COMING BACK AND SAYING, WE DON'T THINK WE CAN, BUT HERE'S THE COST AND SO WHAT'S THE DIRECTION OF COUNSEL AND AS WE HEAR AND PUT IT IN THE NEXT BUDGET OR.
>> PROBLEM IS WE DON'T HAVE ANY, WHY WOULD WE PULL THIS 62,000 FROM THIS YEAR?
>> YEAH, IT'LL HAVE TO WAIT TILL NEXT YEAR.
>> NOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE FUNDS IN OUR REGULAR BUDGET THAT WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE TO COME FROM SOME TYPE OF GRANT OR SOME OTHER FUNDING SOURCE.
>> OR NEXT BUDGET WHICH WE WILL GO OVER AT A BUDGET WORKSHOP ON THAT NIGHT.
>> I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S NEEDED TO BE DONE A LONG TIME, FOR A LONG TIME WE'VE BEEN KICKING IT DOWN THE ROAD.
BUT I THINK IT'S TIME TO FIX IT, JUST NOT SURE IF THIS IS RIGHT NOW.
>> MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS THAT WE TAKING THE GUIDANCE FROM,
[00:10:02]
I'M USING CHRIS WHITAKER'S GUIDANCE, BUT I ASSUME IT'S IN DISCUSSIONS WITH JEFF AND PUBLIC WORKS THAT THE BEST USE WOULD BE TO DO THE ELECTRIC AND NOT THE SOLAR AND WITH THAT BEING THE CASE THEN, LOOK TO NEXT BUDGET CYCLE TO ADD THE SIX NEW LED STREETLIGHTS FOR COLONY DRIVE WITH THE CAVEAT OR UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'D STILL EXPLORE OTHER SOLAR PROJECTS WHEN PRESENTED OR LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY AND HOPEFULLY LESS REPAIR WORK, HOPEFULLY.>> MAYBE A NON-EMOTIONAL THING, BUT JUST DIRECTION TO STAFF IS BRINGING IT UP DURING THE PUBLIC WORKS PORTION OF THE BUDGET ON THE 9TH WHEN WE MEET AND HAD THAT DIRECT DISCUSSION AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT DIRECT DISCUSSION ABOUT CALLING DRIVER.
>> I WANT TO BE ABLE TO COMMIT TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET LIGHTS. [LAUGHTER]
>> YOU HAVE MY SUPPORT, MR. [INAUDIBLE].
>> WHETHER THEY'RE SOLAR POWERED OR ELECTRIC POWERED OR POSSIBLY A COMBINATION OF THE TWO, YOU CAN FIND A GOOD PLACE OUT THERE THAT DIDN'T HAVE MUCH CANOPY THAT MAYBE IN A CULDESAC, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO RECOVER IT DOWN BUT.
>> IF WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MONEY ON SOMETHING I WANTED TO WORK ON.
>> I DO TOO, I DON'T WANT TO SPEND MONEY.
>> PUTTING SOMETHING THAT WE KNOW IS SUSPECT TO WORK IS NOT MONEY WELL-SPENT.
>> EVEN THOUGH ELECTRIC OPTION IS MORE EXPENSIVE, IF IT'S GOING TO WORK, IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK.
>> PLEASE KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS ONE ESTIMATE THEY WILL GO OUT FOR BIDS.
>> THE REASON WHY WE'VE DONE MOST OF THE SOLAR IS BECAUSE THOSE
[4. Discussion and possible action on a Sister City with Belize.]
ARE STREETS WHERE THERE IS NO UNDERGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE THERE.FOR THIS ONE, IT DOESN'T, IF WE ALREADY HAVE THE ELECTRICAL AND WE'RE JUST FIXING THAT AREA WITH SHADE AREA, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO PUT SOLAR ON IF ITS NOT GOING TO WORK, I AGREE.
I THINK YOU'LL HAVE A PRETTY GOOD DIRECTION.
>> I THINK WE HAVE GOOD DIRECTION.
>> TO STAFF AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT ON THE 9TH.
>> NUMBER 6, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON FUNDING TO REVIEW THE ORIGINAL PLAN FOR THE TEXT.TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES GRANT DUE TO THE INCREASING COST OF MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES.
THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING TONIGHT.
>> LAST YEAR, THE CITY OF SINGLETONS SUBMITTED A GRANT APPLICATION TITLED DOWNTOWN ANGLE PIN STREETSCAPE REVITALIZATION UNDER THE TEXT.TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES CATEGORY.
THE PROPOSED PROJECT INCLUDED CONSTRUCTING APPROXIMATELY 3,100 LINEAR FEET OF 6-10 FOOT WIDE REINFORCE CONCRETE PATHS ALONG BOTH SIDES OF BUSINESS TO 88 FROM ON NORTH ALASKA, FROM LOCUST STREET TO EAST ORANGE.
WE HAD A GREAT PLAN. IT ALL WORKS WITH OUR LIVABLE CENTER STUDY AND IT WOULD INCLUDE ADA, CURB RAMPS, AND 16 CROSSWALKS.
WE WERE NOT FUNDED IN THAT CYCLE.
HOWEVER, WE'VE RECENTLY BEEN INVITED TO RE-APPLY, WHICH I THINK IS GREAT NEWS.
BUT SINCE SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS HAVE INCREASED SO MUCH IN COSTS SINCE LAST YEAR AT THIS TIME, WE FEEL IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO GO BACK AND HAVE ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT BUDGET AND SEE IF WE DON'T NEED TO INCREASE SOME OF THOSE COSTS BEFORE WE RESUBMIT.
JUST AS A REMINDER, IT IS A 20 PERCENT MATCH BUT ALL I'M REQUESTING IS APPROXIMATELY WELL LET'S JUST SAY $5,000 FOR AN ENGINEERING REVIEW OF THE BUDGET.
IT'S A $3 MILLION PROJECT IN TOTAL AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE 1- $2,516,212 GRANT AND THEN THE REST OF IT IS ABOUT 700,000 WOULD BE OUR LOCAL MATCH.
BUT IT'S OKAY IF WE SUBMIT THE GRANT FOR A HIGHER AMOUNT, WE DON'T NEED TO BE SHY ABOUT THAT.
IN FACT, IT'S EVEN BEEN SUGGESTED TO ME THAT WE LOOK AT DOUBLING THE BUDGET SO IT WOULD BE WELL WORTH OUR INVESTMENT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT IN MY OPINION.
>> [INAUDIBLE] YOU TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE ACCESSIBILITY PROJECT FOR [INAUDIBLE] ROAD?
>> IT IS. I'M ALSO WORKING WITH TXDOT ON AN IDEA THAT THEY BROUGHT FORWARD.
[00:15:03]
THE REASON THEY DID IT IS, AGAIN, BECAUSE OF OUR LIVABLE CENTERS STUDY.THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED IN PARTNERING WITH US ON A PROJECT.
IT'S A CONNECTOR PROJECT, BUT IT INVOLVES MULTIMODAL PATHS FROM THE EAST AND THE WEST SIDES OF 274 FROM MILLER STREET TO MUNSON, AND THEN SOME EAST-WEST CONNECTORS.
FOR EXAMPLE, PEACH, THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT HAVING A PATH ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD TO ARCOLA AND THEN ARCOLA ALL THE WAY OVER TO EAST CEDAR AND THEN NORTH ON EAST CEDAR TO ANDERSON.
WE HAVE A VERY STRUCTURED TENTATIVE PLAN THAT WE WANT TO BRING IN FRONT OF COUNCIL ON JULY 12TH BECAUSE IT WILL INVOLVE SPENDING MONEY TO PURSUE THE GRANT.
WE'VE GOT TO DO RIGHT-OF-WAY STUDIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT ALSO TIES INTO THE CHENANGO DRAINAGE PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE COVERING SOME OF THE SAME TERRITORY.
WHILE TXDOT WON'T PAY FOR MAJOR DRAINAGE OR UTILITY WORK, IT WILL PAY FOR A LOT OF THE OTHER THINGS.
AS YOU KNOW, HDR HAS BEEN WORKING ON THE CHENANGO DRAINAGE PROJECT, AND THEY'VE BEEN HELPING ME WORK WITH TXDOT TO IDENTIFY THE BEST PATHS FOR THE NEW PROJECT AND LOOKING AT WHAT SOME OF THE CHALLENGES COULD BE AND WHAT SOME OF THE COSTS MIGHT BE, THE MONEY WE WOULD HAVE TO INVEST TO PURSUE IT.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT COUNCIL SUPPORTS WORKING WITH HDR ON ALL THREE OF THOSE PROJECTS BECAUSE WHEN YOU INVOLVE MULTIPLE ENGINEERING FIRMS IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD, IT GETS QUITE COMPLICATED.
>> TXDOT IS GOING TO COME AND BRIEF US ABOUT THAT PROJECT.
THEY'RE GOING TO COME PRESENT WHAT ALL THAT WOULD ENTAIL AND HOW THAT TIES TOGETHER.
ALSO, REMEMBER THAT THEY'RE REDOING 288B, AND 274 IS PART OF THE PROJECT THAT START IN THE SUMMER.
THAT WILL FIX A LOT OF THE ROAD PROBLEMS THAT IF WE DO SIDEWALKS, THEN WE'LL MATCH THE CURRENT ROADS, WHICH HELPS US OUT IN THE ADA CATEGORY AND ALL THOSE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT.
>> WE HAVE DONE A VERY IN-DEPTH PRELIMINARY LOOK AT DOWNTOWN ALLEYWAYS AND EVERYTHING THAT COULD WORK AND REALLY TRYING TO AVOID RUNAWAY ISSUES AND PICK THE BEST SIDE OF THE STREET TO CONNECT THE GREATEST DISTANCE.
BACK TO THE DOWNTOWN PROJECT WITH TXDOT, WE WOULD LIKE TO RESUBMIT.
DO I HAVE YOUR APPROVAL TO SPEND THAT MONEY AND PROCEED?
>> I GUESS MY ONLY CONCERN, WELL, THERE'S LOTS OF CONCERNS, BUT THE BIG ONE THAT JUMPS OUT AT ME IS I FEEL LIKE CHARLIE BROWN AND THE FOOTBALL.
WE KEEP SPENDING THE MONEY TO DO THIS BUT WE DON'T GET THE GRANT, WHAT THAT MONEY COULD BE USED FOR IS SOMEWHERE ELSE.
DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE LAST GRANT APPLICATION WHERE WE FINISHED RANKING? WERE WE EVEN IN THE TOP 10?
I CAN'T TELL YOU EXACTLY HOW MANY GRANTS THEY SELECTED, BUT OURS WAS, AND CHRIS CAN CONFIRM THIS.
WE GOT MANY CALLS ABOUT IT ONCE WE SUBMITTED.
THEY HAD QUESTIONS, THEY WERE VERY INTERESTED, WE HAD MEETINGS.
OUR LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES FROM TXDOT WERE REALLY DISAPPOINTED IT DIDN'T WORK, AND THAT'S WHY THEY'VE COME BACK TO US AND INVITED US TO APPLY AGAIN.
THEY HAVE SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE OF OUR PROJECT AND OF OUR TOWN, AND THEY ARE GOING TO PARTNER WITH US.
THAT'S THEIR VERBIAGE TO SUBMIT THIS GRANT.
>> IF WE WERE TO GET IT, WE'RE ON THE HOOK FOR WHAT, $700,000? WHERE WOULD THAT MONEY COME FROM?
>> THIS IS A MULTIYEAR PROJECT THAT WE'D HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT OUR INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS.
WE WILL LOOK AT WATER AND SEWER AND ROADS AND DO WE BOND, FOR EXAMPLE.
THIS PROJECT MAY BE AT THE RIGHT TIME FOR THAT OTHER PROJECT THEY'RE GOING TO COME TALK TO US ABOUT, SO DO WE BOND FOR THE MATCH FOR THAT? PLUS, AGAIN, OUR OVERLAY PROGRAM OR SOME MORE STREETS.
WE JUST NEED TO TAKE A STRATEGIC LOOK AT THAT.
[00:20:04]
THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS WHEN WE HAVE OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING MEETING IN SEPTEMBER.>> HOW MUCH MORE ENGINEERING DOLLARS WILL WE HAVE TO SPEND TO GET A DESIGN FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, OR WILL TXDOT PROVIDE THAT?
>> FOR THE PARTNER PLAN, TXDOT CANNOT FINANCIALLY PARTNER WITH US ON THAT.
I'M GOING TO BRING YOU NUMBERS WHEN I PRESENT THIS AGAIN AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE INFORMATION THERE TO DECIDE FROM.
JUST THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SURVEY IS ABOUT $45,000.
THEN THERE'S THE MATCH, SO IT'S A DECISION YOU'LL HAVE TO REALLY THINK ABOUT AND LET ME KNOW.
>> SO NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING THIS DOWNTOWN STUFF?
>> YES, SIR. WHICH YOU ALL APPROVED LAST YEAR.
>> YOU ADDRESSED BRINGING SOME OTHER SIDEWALKS TO DIFFERENT AREAS OVER HERE.
I WOULD SAY WE COULD LOOK AT THAT, BUT BUILDING SIDEWALKS JUST IN HOPE THAT THEY'LL COME USE THEM IS NOT A GOOD BANG FOR THE BUCK.
YOU GOT PEOPLE THAT WANT TO BE GOING THROUGH THERE TO BUILD A SIDEWALK.
WE JUST BUILD A SIDEWALK FOR THE GRASS TO COME OUT AND GROW ON TOP OF AND CREATE MORE MAINTENANCE ISSUES FOR THE CITY.
THOSE THINGS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED WHEN WE CONSIDER [OVERLAPPING] PUTTING SIDEWALKS TO PLACES WHERE PEOPLE HAVE NO NEED TO WALK NOW ANYHOW.
>> THEY'VE HAD A LOT OF SUCCESS WITH THIS TYPE OF PLAN IN OTHER COMMUNITIES.
I'LL COME BACK TO YOU WITH ALL THE I'S DOTTED AND T'S CROSSED.
>> MY QUESTION IS, DO THEY CHOOSE FOR US OR DO WE GET TO HAVE A SAY ON WHERE THESE [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY CAME WITH A SUGGESTION, AND WE MADE A COUNTER-PROPOSAL.
>> LET'S FOCUS ON THIS AGENDA.
>> DO WE MOVE FORWARD REAPPLYING FOR THIS DOWNTOWN SIDEWALK TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVE? IT'S $5,000 TO GET IN THE GAME AT THIS POINT TO FIND OUT WHETHER WE GET ACCEPTED FOR THE GRANT, AND THEN THAT'S ANOTHER DECISION AGAIN.
DO WE TAKE IT WITH THE MATCH? I'M JUST TELLING YOU THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS HAPPENING.
SOME OF THIS IS MAYBE HAPPENING AT THE SAME TIME.
JOHN, WHEN YOU ASKED YOUR QUESTION ABOUT WHERE DO WE GET $700,000, MAYBE THERE IS A BIGGER PICTURE, BUT WE REALLY NEED TO HEAR FROM TXDOT.
LIKE TO CECIL'S POINT, MAYBE THERE'S SOME OTHER VERSION OF WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT WE ACCEPT.
THAT'S FOR THEM TO PRESENT TO US TO AGREE OR NOT, WHETHER WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.
BUT TONIGHT, WE'RE REALLY JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SIDEWALK GRANT WHICH WE APPLIED FOR LAST YEAR AND THEN DO WE MOVE IT FORWARD.
>> DOES THE ADA CURB RAMPS HELP AT ALL WITH THE GIANT STEPS WE HAVE?
>> THE GIANT STEPS WE HAVE ARE THE GENESIS OF THIS GRANT.
ANYBODY THAT'S WALKED IN OUR DOWNTOWN KNOWS WE HAVE TREMENDOUS PROBLEMS, AND THIS IS MEANT TO RESOLVE THOSE.
>> OKAY. I'M VERY INTERESTED IN THAT BECAUSE IT'S INACCESSIBLE, MOST OF DOWNTOWN AND THE SHOPS AND STORES.
>> WE HAVE CITIZENS WHO EITHER ARE DISABLED OR THEY HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE DISABLED, WHO CANNOT ACCESS OUR DOWNTOWN CURRENTLY.
>> THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE PUSHED THIS LAST YEAR TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS, BUT WE WEREN'T ACCEPTED FOR THE GRANT.
>> THIS IS FUNDS REQUESTED, $5,000.
WHEN WE WENT FOR IT LAST TIME, DID WE PAY $5,000?
>> IF MEMORY SERVES ME, WE PAID A GRANT WRITER FEE TO AN OUTSIDE COMPANY, AND THIS TIME I WOULD BE DOING THAT MYSELF, AND I BELIEVE THAT FEE WAS $7,500.
>> BECAUSE THEY INVITED US TO APPLY AGAIN, DOES THAT INCREASE OUR CHANCES?
>> WAS THERE AN ENGINEERING REVIEW STUDY MADE LAST TIME?
>> YES, SIR. WE JUST NEED TO HAVE IT RE-REVIEWED UNDER THE CURRENT ECONOMIC SITUATION.
[00:25:05]
>> IS IT REVIEWED ANNUALLY? WOULD YOU [OVERLAPPING] COME BACK TO US APPROXIMATE THIS TIME NEXT YEAR AND BE LIKE, "HEY, WE DIDN'T GET IT, BUT WE WANT YOU TO APPLY AGAIN."
>> TXDOT IS KNOWN FOR IT TAKING A COUPLE OF TIMES TO GET APPROVED.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT CONCEPT, BUT I'M ASKING IS THOUGH, WOULD WE KNOW APPROXIMATELY THIS TIME OF YEAR IF WE WERE TO RECEIVE THIS GRANT?
>> WE ALL PROBABLY KNOW IN EARLY SPRING.
>> SO THERE ARE ALL PHASES OF THROWING GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD MONEY OR THROWING BAD, WHATEVER THAT IS.
BUT THE ORDER IN WHICH THAT PROCEEDS, I DON'T MIND EXPLORING AGAIN DOING THIS, BUT AT SOME POINT LIKE JOHN SAYS, IT JUST LOOKS LIKE WE'RE JUST THROWING AWAY MONEY IN GRANT.
SHOT NUMBER TWO, NOT REALLY STRIKING OUT, BUT, THREE STRIKES, YOU'RE OUT.
>> BUT PART OF THE PROBLEM WE HAVE IS IN YOU ALL GET AN UPDATE FROM THE ADA TRANSITION WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON.
EVERYTHING THAT I DON'T NECESSARILY SAY, I'LL AGREE WITH THEIR ADA STANDARDS.
I MEAN, SIDEWALK SLOPED OR IF ADA RAMP IS ABOVE OUR PERCENTAGE, IT'S NOT ADA.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S A LIABILITY, SO IT'S A RISK AND WE RISK THAT NO ONE EVER HAS AN ACCIDENT, NO ONE FALLS, NO ONE GETS HURT, NO ONE SOMETHING.
BECAUSE THEN WE'RE ON THE HOOK BECAUSE WE KNOW IT'S NOT ADA COMPLIANT AND WE CHOSE NOT TO SPEND MONEY ON IT.
AGAIN, NOT SAYING WE CAN'T FIX EVERYTHING AT ONCE AND WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT UPTIGHT SUPPRESSION BUT IT'S A LIABILITY.
WE HAD AN INCIDENT THIS PAST YEAR WHERE SOMEONE FELL ON A SIDEWALK THAT WASN'T ADA COMPLIANT AND HAD CRACKS OR THE DEPTH BETWEEN THE SIDEWALKS OR HEIGHT WAS MORE THAN A HALF AN INCH.
WE HAVE A LOT OF SIDEWALKS LIKE THAT AND WHAT ARE THE ODDS? AND THERE'S A LOT MORE WORSE THAN THAT PARTICULAR SIDEWALK, BUT SOMEONE FELL, SO WE HAD TO GO IN AND BASICALLY FIX THAT ON AN EMERGENCY, BUT IT'S A LIABILITY.
>> ONCE THE COURTHOUSE IS DONE, WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ADDED FOOT TRAFFIC DOWNTOWN.
>> IN THE GRAND SCHEME 5,000 FOR WHAT? I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT WOULD BE.
>> JUST TO REVIEW, WHEN YOU JUST GET THE GRANT, THEN YOU GOT TO GO PAY FOR THE DESIGN.
>> BUT REMEMBER THEY PAY 80 PERCENT.
THE DESIGN WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE GRANT AMOUNT.
I SAY IN IT THE DESIGN IS AN ADDITIONAL MONEY TO THE 5,000.
>> IT'S PRETTY MUCH ALREADY DESIGNED, COUNCILMAN.
>> THEY DIDN'T CHARGE US FOR IT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
>> SEE THAT MONEY TREE AND WE'LL SEE WHERE IT IS.
>> IS THAT A DESIGN CONCEPT OR DESIGNED ENGINEER?
>> I HAVE TO GO BACK AND ENGINEER IT.
THAT WAS A DESIGN CONCEPT WHERE THEY SAID, "HEY, THEY'LL BE BUMP OUTS OR THEY'LL BE SOME SLOPE FROM THE STREET HEIGHT, SIX INCHES UP TO THE BUSINESS AND SO EACH OF THOSE BUSINESSES, BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL PROBABLY DIFFERENT HEIGHTS, WILL ALL HAVE TO BE ENGINEERED IN DESIGN TO MEET THAT."
>> WHEN YOU TRANSITION FROM AN ARTIST'S RENDITION TO SOMETHING A CONTRACTOR IS GOING TO TAKE AN APPEAL AND BUILD YOUR SPENDING MONEY?
>> YOU MAY HAVE AN ARTIST'S RENDITION, BUT THAT'S NOT A REDESIGN OF A PROJECT.
>> I UNDERSTAND AND WE DO HAVE A VERY THOROUGH, [OVERLAPPING]
>> WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HERE IN THE ROOM KNOWS THAT [NOISE] BECAUSE IT SOUNDED TO ME LIKE IT HAD BEEN DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
>> TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE ONLY HAD AN ENGINEER WORK ON THE ONLY ESTIMATES.
>> MAYBE IT'S A QUESTION FOR CHRIS, BUT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ADA TRANSITION? WE COULD EXPLORE THAT AND BUDGET CYCLE AGAIN.
I MEAN, THERE'S NOTHING NECESSARILY PREVENTING US TO
[00:30:01]
START PIECEMEALING SOME OF THESE RAMPS IN DOWNTOWN.>> THAT'S CORRECT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE JUST HAVE TO GET TEXTS DOTS APPROVAL.
>> THAT'S ONE OF MY QUESTIONS. I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THAT WAS BECAUSE WE'RE OKAY.
>> YEAH, WE START DOING ANYTHING IN TEXT DOT MAINTAIN RIGHT-OF-WAY.
YOU HAVE TO GET THEIR BLESSING ON IT.
>> CESSAR, WHAT'S THAT CALLED, THE TRAFFIC?
>> NO, YOU'VE GOT TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC WHEN YOU'RE DOING WORK THERE.
>> ALL THAT STUFF SO IT'S NOT JUST BECAUSE IT HAS TEXTS OUT RULED.
THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF REQUIREMENTS.
[5. Discussion and possible action to replace the four inoperable electric streetlights on Colony Drive with new LED streetlights.]
>> I AM TRYING TO PICK MY WORDS WISELY HERE, BUT I WANT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT SPENDING MONEY.
I FEEL LIKE 5,000 IS PROBABLY A FAIR NUMBER.
OF COURSE, I KNOW THERE'S MORE MONEY THAT COMES WITH IT.
THAT'LL BE EASY IF IT WAS JUST 5,000 DOLLARS.
MY CONCERN GOES BACK TO MY QUESTION EARLIER WHEN I WAS TOLD I WAS GETTING OFF TOPIC WAS JUST TO WHO'S DESIGNER WE'D STUCK WITH, OURS OR THEIRS? I ASSUME WHEN YOU START TAKING SOMEBODY ELSE'S MONEY, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE STRINGS ATTACHED AND TELLING US HOW WE HAVE TO SPEND IT.
>> IN ROCKDALE WE HAD A SIMILAR PROJECT, BOTH SIDES, SIDEWALKS GOING UP TO BUSINESSES, AND IT WAS ALL ENGINEERED BY A COMPANY THAT ROCKDALE SELECTED AND SO THOSE PLANS THEN WENT TO TEXT DOT AND TEXT DOT HAD TO AGREE THAT THE CURBS IN THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT HEIGHT AND THE RIGHT SLOPE AND THE DRAINAGE AND ALL THOSE THINGS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T IMPACTED THE ROAD ALSO SO THEY DO GET FINAL SAY TRAVIS, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT ON.
WE MAY SAY WE WANTED THIS WAY, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND SAY THAT DOESN'T MEET OUR STANDARDS.
>> I'D LIKE WHAT THE EXPENDITURE OF THE 5,000 DOLLARS WILL GET YOU A LOT CLOSER TO AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT ONE MIGHT HAVE TO SPEND TO GET THE PROJECT BUILT.
>> WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE WANTING TO SEE IN ORDER TO GET TO ISSUE A GRANT.
>> COUNCILMAN BOOTH IS THERE A MOTION?
>> I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE MOVE FORWARD TO PREPARING APPLICATION.
THIS $5,000 FOR THE ENGINEERING REVIEW FOR THIS GRANT.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND TO MOVE FORWARD FOR THE $5,000 ENGINEERING REVIEW FOR THE TEXT DOT TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES GRANT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
>> ITEM NUMBER 7. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON COMBINING ABLC AND PARKS BOARD INCLUDING THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. MR. WALKER.
>> THANK YOU. LOOKING AT STAFF INVOLVEMENT IN ALL THE THINGS WE DO, WE'VE GOT MULTIPLE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
WHEN YOU PEEL THOSE BACK TO HAVE A MEETING LIKE TONIGHT, THINK OF ALL THE STAFF TIME THAT WENT INTO PREPARING THE AGENDAS, GETTING THEM REVIEWED.
LEGAL LOOK AT THEM TO MAKE SURE WE'RE HEADING DOWN THE RIGHT PATH, PUTTING ALL THE DOCUMENTS TOGETHER.
WE HAVE BOTH PARKS AND ABLC, PARK'S BOARD WAS FOUNDED IN 1965.
FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT HISTORIANS, CECIL.
[LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] THEN ABLC, AGAIN PROXIMATELY YEAR 2000.
OUR STAFF IS PREPARING FOR TWO BOARDS THAT BASICALLY DO THE SAME THING.
ONE OF THE DIFFERENCES IS THE PARK'S BOARD IS POLICY.
THAT'S THEIR CHARTER ROLE AS A BOARD.
ONE OF THE DIFFERENCES IS ABLC HAS HALF CENTS SALES SACKS, SO THEY CAN PUT INTO ACTION THINGS THAT SUPPORT THE CITY PLAN.
I WANTED TO START THE DISCUSSION.
WE DON'T NEED TO SOLVE ANYTHING TONIGHT BECAUSE THERE ARE IMPLICATIONS.
BECAUSE I KNOW PARK'S BOARD IS A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF OUR CITY, AND ABLC IS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.
WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE ANY MISCONCEPTIONS THAT WE'RE DOING AWAY WITH FUNCTIONS OF THE CITY.
[00:35:03]
BUT WE'RE HERE REALLY TO START DISCUSSION BUT RECOMMEND COMBINING THOSE BOARDS SO THAT WE HAVE MORE EFFICIENCY FOR THE STAFF.THERE'S NATURAL CONFLICTS IN LIFE.
BUT IF ABLC WANTS TO GO ONE DIRECTION AND PARKS GOES ANOTHER DIRECTION.
HOW DO WE RESOLVE THAT? ESPECIALLY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BUDGETS AND PRIORITIES AND THOSE THINGS.
I THINK IT REALLY HELPS THE CITY TAKE A LOOK AT TWO BOARDS THAT HAVE BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR A LONG TIME.
LET'S REVIEW WHAT WE'RE DOING AND HOW WE'RE DOING IT.
AGAIN, THERE'S IMPLICATIONS LIKE IF YOU DO THAT, YOU'VE GOT TO INCLUDE THAT POLICY PIECE WITH ABLC.
THERE'S BYLAWS THAT HAVE TO BE CHANGED TO DO THAT, OR IF THERE'S AGAIN, SINCE 2,000 HAVE THINGS CHANGED OR ARE UNCLEAR.
NOW'S A POTENTIALLY GOOD TIME TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, "HEY, LET'S COMBINE THESE BOARDS.
LET'S BRING UP TWO OR THREE FOLKS FROM THE PARK'S BOARD.
LET'S ADD THEM ABLC, SO LET'S CHANGE THE NUMBER THAT IS IN THE BYLAWS, ADDING THOSE FOLKS.
AGAIN, LET'S ADD THE POLICY, OR LET'S MODIFY SOMETHING ELSE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT WORK IN 2022 AND BEYOND." I'VE JUST HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF A LITTLE BIT, REACH OUT TO CHRIS JUST TO HAVE A PRELIMINARY CONVERSATION AND I THROW IT OUT THERE FOR DISCUSSION.
>> JUST SO COUNCIL'S AWARE, MAYOR ASKED THAT WE TALK ABOUT IT TONIGHT, BUT IF HE COMES BACK, SO NOT TAKE ACTION IF WE POSSIBLY CAN TONIGHT.
>> AGAIN, WE DON'T NEED ACTION.
WE JUST PUT THAT ON THERE SO THAT IF THERE'S DIRECTION THAT WE NEED TO GET, THEN WE'RE HAPPY TO UNDERSTAND THAT AND FOLLOW THAT.
>> JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, ANYTIME WE CAN ELIMINATE REDUNDANCY AND BUREAUCRACY, I THINK IS A GOOD THING.
JUST FOR GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL.
I TRIED TO PAY ATTENTION AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
I'VE WATCHED ABLC MEETINGS AS WELL AS PARKS MEETINGS, AND SOMETIMES I'M WATCHING THEM AND THINKING, YOU ALL ARE DISCUSSING VERY SIMILAR TOPIC MATTERS.
>> IF NOT THE SAME. EACH BOARD SERVES ITS PURPOSE, I GET THAT.
BUT AGAIN, REDUNDANCY AND TO SOME EXTENT BUREAUCRACY.
BECAUSE IF I'M PAYING ATTENTION, THAT WOULD REQUIRE OTHER PEOPLE TO PAY ATTENTION TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BOTH OR WHAT THEIR ROLES ARE.
TO ME, IT SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA IF IT CAN BE DONE LEGALLY.
>> THAT'S WHAT WE NEEDED TO LOOK AT AND MAKE SURE THAT THE CHARTER FOR THE ABLC, OKAYS THIS COMBINATION AND THE STATE LAW FOR THE TAX.
BECAUSE IT TOOK THREE TIMES FOR THE ABLC TO GET VOTED ON THE WORDING, VOTERS TURNED DOWN TWICE.
IT'S VERY SPECIFIC OF WHAT IT COVERS AND TO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STILL HONOR THAT, COMBINING THE TWO.
>> I THINK THE BY-LAWS OR THE OPERATIONAL PIECE IS REALLY DONE BY THE BOARD ITSELF.
AGAIN, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THEIR CITIZEN-APPROVED ROLE IN LARGE, WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT FINE-TUNING POTENTIALLY AND CREATING EFFICIENCIES.
AGAIN, THERE'S PROBABLY OPTIONS THAT ARE ATTORNEY WILL ADVISE US ON ABOUT.
WE CAN CHANGE THE PARK'S CONFIGURATION WHERE THEY BECOME ABLC, BUT LEAVES A CONTINGENCY FOR RE-ESTABLISHING THE PARK'S BOARD AT SOME TIME IF WE NEEDED TO.
IT WOULDN'T MAYBE PUT IT IN A HIGH STATUS OR SOMETHING THAT WILL ALLOW THE PARK'S BOARD TO COME BACK, SHOULD THERE BE A CLEARLY DEFINED AND NECESSARY ROLE FOR THAT.
>> JUDITH, IS THERE ANYTHING IN HERE THAT SAYS THAT ANY CHANGES TO THE BYLAWS OF THE ABLC HAS TO GO BACK BEFORE THE VOTERS OR CAN IT BE AMENDED BY THE COUNCIL?
>> NO, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE VOTERS UNLESS YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE OF ABLC.
[00:40:03]
THE WAY IT IS FUNCTIONING RIGHT NOW, IT'S GOT A LIMITED PURPOSE FOR DRAINAGE IN PARKS.UNLESS YOU WANT IT TO END ABLC AND DO SOMETHING ELSE, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE VOTERS.
>> BUT CHANGING STRUCTURE WOULDN'T BE ADDING ADDITIONAL SEATS TO IT?
>> IF YOU WANT TO ADD, WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO IS COMPLY WITH STATUTE.
AS I RECALL, THE STATUTE SAYS THAT, "YOU CAN HAVE SEVEN BOARD MEMBERS." DO YOU HAVE SEVEN?
>> IS THAT A MAX? CAN HAVE SEVEN BUT NO MORE?
>> RIGHT. I'M NOT SURE I'M ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION, BUT THE ANSWER LIES IN WHAT THE STATUTE SAYS YOU CAN DO WITHIN THE PARAMETERS.
NORMALLY TO CHANGE THE BYLAWS, NORMALLY, THE BOARD CAN DO THAT.
BUT THE STATUTE, I BELIEVE SAYS, "THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE RIGHT TO DO IT." I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THIS YET INTENTIONALLY.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO GENERATE BILLABLE TIME ON THIS UNTIL WE KNOW IT'S READY TO GO.
>> YES. PLEASE PROCEED. KEEP IT BRIEF THOUGH.
>> MR. WHITAKER DID TALK TO ME ABOUT THIS AND HAVEN'T BEEN ON PARKS BOARD FOR 35 YEARS THIS YEAR.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE IS REDUNDANCY, YOU HEAR IT ON THE MEETINGS.
BUT WE TALKED ABOUT AND I'VE BEEN ON ABLC SINCE ITS CREATION.
MY NAME IS ON THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION.
BUT THERE IS A METHOD TO DO THIS AND I READ IT BEFORE IT CAME UP, BUT ABLC CAN GET A WRITTEN PETITION TO THE CITY TO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE OF THE BYLAWS.
YOU HAVE TO PROVE IT BECAUSE YOU HAVE OVERSIGHT ON THIS.
THE OTHER OPTION IS YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO IT YOURSELF, COME IN AND CHANGE IT.
THE BIGGEST SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS PARKS BOARD.
WE DID THE PARKLAND DEDICATION ORDINANCE, WE DO SPORTS ASSOCIATION AGREEMENTS.
WE THINK HAVING AN ORDINANCE COMING UP, NO SMOKING IN CITY PARKS.
[6. Discussion and possible action on funding to review the original plan for the TxDOT Transportation Alternatives Grant, due to the increasing costs of materials and supplies.]
CUTTING BACK ON TWO MEETINGS AND ALL THE WORK THAT GOES IN WHETHER IT'S ME AGAIN, MR. WHITAKER, CITY STAFF, EVERYBODY PUTTING THEM TOGETHER.THERE'S REALLY NOT A BIG ISSUE IN MY MIND FROM READING IT.
WE CAN ASK FOR THAT AND YOU GUYS CAN CHANGE IT.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE VOTERS.
THE REFERENDUMS WE PASSED BACK IN 1999, I BELIEVE.
WE WENT, AS MS. DANIELLE SAID, TO THE VOTERS AND THAT PART NEEDS TO STAY CONSISTENT.
IT'S WHERE WE CAN SPEND THE MONEY.
WE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE THAT, BUT CHANGING THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ON THERE, THE STATE CONTROLLER'S OFFICE HAD A REPRESENTATIVE WHEN WE CREATED THE ABLC AND THE CITY COULD HAVE ZERO OR UP TO FOUR, BUT NO MORE THAN FOUR MEMBERS ON THERE.
RIGHT NOW YOU CURRENTLY HAVE TWO THAT ARE WRITTEN IN THERE.
BUT MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE MAYOR PRO TEM, TO COME TO THE MEETING.
JOE PROBABLY COULD USE THE EVENING OFF AND PUT TWO PARKS BOARD MEMBERS AND THOSE SEATS AND MAINTAIN A SEVEN MEMBER BOARD.
BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO HAVE THE BOARDS AT SEVEN MEMBERS, IT'S JUST SEVEN MEMBERS IS LESS CUMBERSOME THAN 15.
BUT WE COULD EASILY DO WITH ONE ENTITY, EVERYTHING WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW WITH TWO AND IT'S REALLY SIMPLE PETITION TO YOU GUYS.
BUT I AGREE WHY I PUT THE STAFF AND THE CITY THROUGH A LOT OF EXTRA WORK JUST TO REPEAT WHAT WE'RE DOING ON ONE BOARD OR THE OTHER.
I GO TO BOTH OF THEM. HE GOES TO BOTH OF THEM AND MEGAN DOES, AND I'M SURE THEY ARE LIKE ME SOMETIMES.
YOU ALREADY HEARD IT THE WEEK BEFORE WHY WE'RE DOING IT AGAIN.
>> I WOULDN'T ADVOCATE MOVING UP THE ENTIRE PARKS BOARD.
I WOULD ADVOCATE TWO OR THREE AND SEE WHO'S INTERESTED AND WHATEVER AND LET THEM APPLY, OR I MEAN, THERE'S A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT METHODS FOR PICKING THOSE TWO OR THREE.
>> THAT WOULD I GUESS BE ONE OF THE QUESTIONS, DO WE START FRESH? WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS, THERE MAY BE OVER LIKE MISSPELLED HERE IS IN BOTH BOARDS.
I'M CALLING STARTING FRESH, BUT CAN YOU JUST START OVER WITH- I DON'T WANT TO WIPE AWAY THE BOARD.
>> WE HAVE A NORMAL PROCESS OF BOARD COMMISSION AND APPOINTMENTS.
[00:45:04]
IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU WANT TO DO THAT.YOU CAN MAKE IT NATURAL AND JUST DO IT.
WE DO IT ANNUALLY AND YOU CAN REAPPOINT OR IF AND WHEN WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD, YOU ALL CAN MAKE THAT.
>> I HATE FOR PARKS PEOPLE TO FEEL LIKE THEY WERE BEING PUSHED OUT.
IT ENDS UP BEING ALL ABLC PEOPLE.
SEVEN, YOU CAN'T COME UP WITH AN EQUAL NUMBER, BUT YOU CAN GO FOUR AND THREE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE FIVE AND TWO. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I DON'T KNOW.
ONCE YOU ALL DECIDE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, THEN WE'LL BE TASKED TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND PROVIDE OPTIONS FOR YOU.
WHAT MR. PELT THEO SAID IS CORRECT.
THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE ARTICLE. [OVERLAPPING].
>> BUT I WILL SAY THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, THEY PRETTY MUCH TRACK THE STATUTE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MANAGEMENT AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE CONSISTENCY THAT FOLLOWS THE STATUTE.
I CAN ALSO SAY THAT ACROSS THE BOARD FOR MOST OF THE EDCS IN OUR CITIES, THERE'S ALWAYS ELECTED OFFICIALS ON THEM.
I MEAN, I GUESS I CAN GO THAT FAR AND SAY THAT.
I THINK IT WOULD BE IRREGULAR NOT TO HAVE ELECTED OFFICIALS ON THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BOARD.
I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY OF OUR CITIES DOING IT THAT WAY.
>> I WOULD THINK THAT WE WOULD NEED TO KEEP THAT.
JUST TO KEEP THE CONTINUITY BETWEEN COUNCIL'S GOALS AND BOARD GOALS.
>> THANKFULLY IN THE PAST, PARKS BOARD HAS BEEN EASY TO STAFF.
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN CHOMPING AT THE BIT TO GET ON THERE AND THEN, OTHER BOARDS SOMETIMES ARE DIFFICULT TO FILL UP.
SO MANY YEARS AGO WHEN I TRIED TO START GETTING INVOLVED WITH THE CITY, I ACTUALLY WANTED TO GET ON PARKS BOARD, AND I COULDN'T.
IT WAS TOO FULL. I ENDED UP ON PLANNING AND ZONING.
>> LITTLE BIT LESS EFFORT TO HAVE TO STAFF ONE BOARD RATHER THAN TWO.
>> I'M OPEN TO EXPLORING OPTIONS OF COMBINING THE TWO BOARDS.
AGAIN, IF WE CAN LEGALLY DO SO.
TO KEEP NORMALCY OR IRREGULARITIES OR FROM HAPPENING I GUESS MAYBE IS THE RIGHT WORD.
I WOULD ASK FOR AT LEAST ONE ELECTED OFFICIAL, WHETHER THAT'S A DESIGNATED POSITION AS IN THE ALWAYS MAYOR PRO TEM OR IS IT JUST SOMEBODY WHO IS A LIAISON BETWEEN THE TWO, BETWEEN CITY COUNCIL AND- I THOUGHT HISTORICALLY IT WAS THE MAYOR PERMANENTLY.
CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, AND THEN IT JUST ANOTHER LIAISON.
>> THE CLASS OF DIRECTOR IS DEFINED IN THE ARTICLE 8.
I MEAN, IT JUST SAYS COUNCIL MEMBER DOESN'T SAY MAYOR OR MAYOR PRO TEM.
>> [INAUDIBLE] IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S INTEREST THE STAFF TO COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT CONSOLIDATING.
>> PARKS IN ABLC IN SOME FORM AND PROVIDE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS.
THEN ALSO POTENTIAL BYLAWS THAT MAY NEED TO BE REVISED TO FURTHER MODERNIZE THE OPERATIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE TASKS IF WE CAN OF WHAT PARKS BOARD DOES.
>> MY IDEA WOULD BE POTENTIALLY THREE FROM EACH WITH
[00:50:04]
A LIAISON FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND THAT MAYBE IS BALANCED, I DON'T KNOW.OBVIOUSLY MR. PELT HERE, MAYBE HE COUNTS HIS AS PARKS EVEN THOUGH HE'S ON BOTH AND THAT MAKES IT FOR TWO, BUT WHATEVER, THAT WOULD JUST BE AN IDEA.
>> JUDITH, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS AND DEVELOP SOMETHING.
>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE DIRECTION WAS.
>> DIRECTION I THINK IS TO INCORPORATE PARKS FOR PERSONNEL AND, OR POSITIONS INTO ABLC.
THEN ALSO POTENTIALLY REVIEW THE BYLAWS TO EITHER MAKE SURE THEY'RE MODERN AND DOING WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING AND, OR INCORPORATING PARKS BOARD ROLES SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THIS. THANK YOU.
>> DOES YOUR CORPORATION HAVE ANY COMMITTEES?
>> NO, THERE ARE NO COMMITTEES.
>> UNDER PARKS BOARD IS A INFORMAL HIKE AND BIKE COMMITTEE BUT IT'S NOT A COUNCIL DESIGNATED ONE.
>> OKAY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE ARTICLES [NOISE] SAY IS THAT THE BOARD CAN CREATE COMMITTEES.
THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE OPTIONS IS THAT ONE OF THE COMMITTEES WOULD ACTUALLY BE COMPRISED OF YOUR PARKS BOARD OR WHOMEVER YOU THINK SHOULD BE ON THE PARKS BOARD, SO YOU WOULD HAVE THAT COMMITTEE.
>> I WAS WONDERING THAT IF YOU COULD MAKE ALMOST A SUBCOMMITTEE TO THAT. OKAY WE'RE ALL SET HERE.
>> THAT'S FAIRLY STANDARD ACROSS THE BOARD AND MOST CITIES DO THAT.
THEY HAVE A BOARD AND THEN THEY HAVE NUMEROUS COMMITTEES.
THE COMMITTEES ARE SOMETIMES TARGETED LIKE HIGHWAY 90 COMMITTEE.
YOU COULD DO IT THAT WAY AND IT MAY BE A MORE EFFICIENT USE OF YOUR.
>> SO YOU COULD HAVE A PARKS [NOISE] BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE THAT WOULD A POLICY PIECE AND THEN PRESENT TO THE ABLC WHICH WOULD APPROVE IT?
>> RIGHT. IF I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY, YOU ARE GIVING THE CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTION TO COME UP WITH OPTIONS?
>> THE END GOAL STILL NEEDS, THIS IS MY OPINION, TO ELIMINATE SOME OF THE TIME THAT CITY STAFF IS HAVING TO REPEAT.
IF THERE IS A SUBCOMMITTEE, I WOULD NOT WANT THERE TO BE JUST REPLACE THIS INSTANT, SAME PROCESS. I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT.
I DON'T WANT TO GO BACKWARDS TO JUST WHAT WE'RE DOING AND JUST ORGANIZATIONALLY DRAWING IT UP A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.
I WANT IT TO BE THEY MEET INFORMALLY OR SOMETHING.
THEY CAN MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS AND MEET INFORMALLY AND THEN LIKE HE SAID, ADDRESS THE ABLC WHEN THEY HAVE THEIR MONTHLY MEETING.
>> BUT I THINK THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF ADDRESSING THE BYLAWS THEN TO, IS IF YOU SAY YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A PARK'S BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE, THEIR ROLE IS X.
THAT'S ALL WE'LL EVER PUT ON THEIR AGENDA TO ADDRESS.
THEY WON'T THEY WON'T TALK ABOUT BUDGET OR PRIORITIZING SIP OR ANYTHING ELSE.
>> PARK DESIGN, THEY'LL JUST DO POLICY.
>> PARK DESIGN, RIGHT, THEY'LL JUST DO POLICY.
>> AGAIN, AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T REQUIRE US ANOTHER MEETING, DIFFERENT NIGHT SO YOU HAVE TO SHOW BACK UP AND HAVE SOMEBODY, MEGAN FROM THE CITY COMING BACK UP HERE AND GUIDING THE POLICY.
>> WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. I'M NOT SURE.
LIKE HIKING BIKE SUBCOMMITTEE IS SEPARATE.
THEY MEET ON A MONDAY NIGHT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THERE IS A MEETING, BUT THEY'RE VERY AGAIN, LIKE JUDITH SAID, TARGETED TOWARD THAT'S ALL THEY TALK ABOUT.
THERE IS NO DISCUSSIONS OF BUDGET, WHATEVER.
>> HOW OFTEN DOES THE HIKING BIKE BOARD OR SUBCOMMITTEE MEET?
>> IT'S EVERY OTHER MONTH OR SOMETHING.
>> OKAY. IN MY MIND, IF WE REORGANIZE, BUT WE GO BACK TO DOING IT THE SAME WAY THEN WE'VE NOT REALLY ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING.
>> BUT I THINK WE'RE ELIMINATING THOSE DUPLICATE TASKS, AND THAT WE PUT ONLY IN ABLC.
AGAIN, PARKS WOULD NO LONGER TALK ABOUT, LIKE MARK SAID, SIP, BUDGET, WHATEVER IT'S ONLY YOUR CHARTERED OR BYLAW POSITION IS TO BE TALK ABOUT, PARKS POLICIES ONLY.
>> WE WILL REPORT BACK TO YOU AND YOU ALL TELL US WHETHER THAT WORKS OR NOT, RIGHT?
[00:55:02]
>> CAN I GET A MOTION? [LAUGHTER]
>> YOU WANT US TO TAKE MOTION TONIGHT?
>> I THOUGHT JASON ASKED NOT TO TAKE PROPOSAL, BUT GIVEN THE [OVERLAPPING].
WE'LL TAKE SOME GUIDANCE AND THEN MAYBE WE CAN.
>> WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT AT THE END OF JULY WE HAVE OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING.
HOPEFULLY, JASON IS THERE AND WE CAN RUN AN UPDATE TO OUR PROPOSAL.
>> DO WHAT YOU CAN DO WITHOUT US MAKING A MOTION TO TELL YOU WHAT TO DO.
>> ITEM NUMBER 8. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN UPDATE FOR THE CONDEMNATION PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD ON MAY 24, 2022, CONCERNING 316 WEST ROGERS, 320 WEST PEACH, AND 504 FARRER AT ANGLETON, TEXAS.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM AND GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.
CONGRATULATIONS, COUNCIL MEMBER DANIEL ON YOUR ELECTION TO THIS ESTEEMED COUNCIL.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO START OUT BY JUST SAYING THAT IN THE AGENDA OF SUMMARY, I USE THE WORD CONDEMNATION AND THE APPROPRIATE TERM WOULD BE SUBSTANDARD BUILDING ABATEMENT.
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A FOLLOW-UP TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WE HAD ON THESE THREE PROPERTIES ON MAY 24TH.
THAT BEING SAID, WE WENT OUT INTO THE FIELD, TOOK SOME PICTURES ON THE 21ST OF JUNE JUST SO THAT YOU'D HAVE A GO BY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PLAN FOR REMEDIATION AND ABATEMENT THAT WAS RECEIVED BY BOTH PROPERTY OWNERS OF BOTH 320 WEST PEACH AND 316 ROGERS.
WE'VE PRESENTED THESE PLANS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE TIMELINE IS ALSO PROVIDED CONGRUENT WITH THE DIRECTION THAT WAS GIVEN BY COUNCIL ON THE 24TH.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
>> WHAT'S THE TIMELINE ON FARRER RIGHT NOW?
>> FARRER, OUR LEGAL TEAM IS FILING SUIT ON JULY 5TH AT THE EARLIEST, GIVEN THE HOLIDAY.
THE 3RD IS TECHNICALLY THE EARLIEST, BUT IT'S A SUNDAY, SO THE 5TH IS THE EARLIEST IT CAN BE FILED IN DISTRICT COURT.
ONCE AN ORDER IS OBTAINED, WE WILL PROCEED WITH DEMOLITION.
>> OKAY. WHAT WORK HAS BEEN DONE ON PEACH SINCE OUR CONVERSATION?
ON THE TIMELINE, THE PROPERTY OWNER SPECIFIED THAT HE WOULD HAVE MINOR INTERIOR THINGS DONE, HOWEVER, THE PICTURES TELL A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT OF A STORY.
THERE IS NO FLOOR, THERE IS NO ROOF, AND THE EXTERNAL PANELING HAS BEEN REMOVED SO THAT THE INTERIOR OF THE STRUCTURE IS VISIBLE FROM OUTSIDE.
>> BUT HE'S GIVING A SIX-MONTH WINDOW BASICALLY TO FIX THE PEACH HOUSE.
>> HE'S SAYING HE'LL HAVE COMPLETE INTERIOR DEMO AND MINOR INTERIOR REPAIRS DONE BY JULY 1ST.
>> YES. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL.
HOWEVER, THERE IS SOME OTHER ISSUES GOING ON WITH THIS PROPERTY.
AS YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE PILES OF RUBBISH IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY THAT WILL NEED TO BE CORRECTED SO CO-ENFORCEMENT STAFF IS PREPARED TO PROCEED WITH CO-ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS TO ASSIST WITH BRINGING THIS PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE.
>> DO YOU FEEL LIKE THERE HAS BEEN A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO REACH THE STATED GOAL?
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT PEACH STREET RIGHT NOW.
IN MY OPINION, I BELIEVE THAT WEST PEACH WAS POSSIBLY, I DON'T WANT TO ACCUSE ANYBODY OF LYING, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS NECESSARILY FORTHRIGHT FROM THE GET-GO.
I THINK THAT MINOR INTERIOR REPAIRS, JULY 1, THAT'S A PRETTY AGGRESSIVE DEADLINE TO REACH THAT GOAL, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE NO MINOR REPAIRS TO BE MADE, THAT'S SERIOUS WORK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
I'VE ALSO PROVIDED A PICTURE OF THE STRUCTURAL BEAMS WHICH SHOW TERMITE ROT, SO I DON'T THINK THAT THIS PROPERTY CAN BE REASONABLY BROUGHT INTO CODE COMPLIANCE.
>> HAVE YOU HAD A FACE-TO-FACE CONVERSATION WITH HIM SINCE HE'S?
[01:00:04]
>> HE MAY HAVE HAD A CHANGE OF HEART.
I WENT DOWN THIS ROAD WITH A PLACE ONE TIME, [LAUGHTER] IT'S LIKE THIS SHOW THE MONEY PIT THAT YOU KEEP UNCOVERING MORE JUNK THAT YOU GOT TO FIX.
>> WELL, KNOWING THAT THE STRUCTURAL BEAMS HAVE TERMITE DAMAGE, THEY HAVE HOLES IN THEM, THERE'S NO FLOOR, THERE'S NO ROOF, AND WHAT YOU SEE THERE IS PLYWOOD WITH A TARP THAT'S NOT EVEN IN PLACE PROTECTING WHAT REMAINS OF THE INTERIOR.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPERTY COULD BE BROUGHT INTO CODE COMPLIANCE AT 50 PERCENT OF THE PROPERTY VALUE OR LESS, WHICH IS WHY IT MADE THE SUBSTANDARD BUILDING LIST IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>> WHEN WAS THE TIME LIMIT THOUGH, WHEN WAS THE EXPECTED?
>> THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR 320 WEST PEACH HAS STATED INTERIOR FINISHES AND OCCUPANCY BY DECEMBER 31ST THROUGH THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR.
HE'S ALSO STATED THAT THERE WILL BE AN APPLICATION FOR PERMITS ON JULY 18TH.
THIS IS NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, A HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION PROPERTY, HE WOULD HAVE TO HIRE A CONTRACTOR TO PULL ANY PERMITS.
>> MY OPINION THOUGH IS SIX MONTHS, IF HE SAYS HE'S GOING TO DO IT AND HE'S PROVIDED, HE MET THE REQUIREMENTS, I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY WE DON'T LET HIM TRY IF THIS IS WHAT HE REALLY WANTS TO DO.
IT'S YOUR OPINION THAT IT'S SUBSTANDARD AND TO MOST OF US, IT PROBABLY IS, AND PROBABLY NEEDS TO COME DOWN, BUT IF THE GUY HAS DONE WHAT WE ASKED AND HE SAYS HE'S GOT A PLAN, SIX MONTHS ISN'T GOING TO KILL US.
>> THE ROGERS STREET, I WAS GOING TO ASK, DID HE JUST COME BACK AND SAY HE WANTS TO DEMO IT?
>> BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I SAW ON THE PROPOSAL.
>> IT SEEMED LIKE IF I INTERPRETED HIS TIMELINE CORRECTLY AND HIS SCOPE OF WORK, IT SEEMED LIKE THAT WAS AN OPTION, IF HE GOT THE OPINION FROM A PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTOR THAT THAT'S THE DIRECTION THAT WAS RIGHT FOR THAT PROPERTY.
>> IT'S NOT VERY CLEAR, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT.
>> GIVEN THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO GATHER SINCE OUR LAST MEETING ABOUT THESE THREE PROPERTIES WITH SPECIFIC CONCERN TO 320 WEST PEACH AND 316 ROGERS, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL DIRECTION THAT I CAN GET FROM COUNCIL OTHER THAN TO LET THE PROPERTY OWNERS ABIDE BY THEIR TIMELINES? MY SUGGESTION TO COUNCIL WAS TO REQUEST STATUS UPDATES FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS, SHOULD YOU FIND THAT NECESSARY.
>> I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I'M OKAY WITH GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY
[7. Discussion and possible action on combining ABLC and Parks Board including roles and responsibilities.]
BECAUSE THEY PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED, COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY AGREED.I THINK IT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT WE STAY BY WHAT WE AGREED TO.
HOWEVER, NO PROBLEMS WITH MONTHLY UPDATE, JUST THAT THEY ONLY NEED APPEAR EVERY TWO WEEKS, BUT IN MY OPINION, AND HOPEFULLY, THAT INCENTIVIZES THEM TO PROCEED.
IF NOT, MAYBE SOMEWHERE IT'LL ALIGN TO THEM LIKE CECIL SAYS, OR MR. BRUCE SAYS, THAT JUST MIGHT REALIZE THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT TOO FAR OVER THEIR BOOTS.
>> WHAT FORM WOULD THAT TAKE? A PHONE CALL?
>> NO, [OVERLAPPING] I THINK THEY HAVE TO INCUR TO COUNCIL.
>> WALK-THROUGH WITH GOOD ENFORCEMENT, WHAT DOES THAT TAKE?
>> IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. [OVERLAPPING] I'M OKAY WITH THEM COMING TO US AND TELLING US WHAT THEY HAVE DONE, STEPS THEY'VE TAKEN, AND WHEN CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO VERIFY WHAT THEY'RE TELLING US AND THEN WE KNOW IF THEY'RE BEING HONEST OR NOT.
>> AT THEIR OWN LEISURE, I KNOW THEY'LL HAVE OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES OF CODE ENFORCEMENT, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO PUT TOO MUCH ON THEIR PLATE EITHER, SO [INAUDIBLE].
>> I THINK A HAPPY MEDIUM WOULD JUST BE AN EMAIL FROM THE PROPERTY OWNERS BY A CERTAIN DATE SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THEIR STATUS UPDATE ON A COUNCIL AGENDA FOR A FOLLOW-UP IN THE SECOND MEETING OF THE MONTH,
[01:05:02]
CONGRUENT WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PRESENTATIONS.>> HOW ABOUT AN EMAIL, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE WITH DOCUMENTATION.
>> PHOTOGRAPHS, ANY PURCHASES, ANY INVOICES -
>> INVOICES FROM CONTACTORS TRADESPEOPLE.
WE SHOULD HAVE DOCUMENTATION OF THAT ON OUR SIDE TOO, JUST FROM THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS.
>> I FEEL LIKE WE'RE TO GET THESE PEOPLE WHERE WE WANT THEM TO BE, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THEM, AND BY DOING THAT BY BEING A LITTLE MORE OVERSIGHTISH, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE RIGHT WORD, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I THINK THAT THESE PEOPLE WILL GET THERE BECAUSE THEY WILL DRAG, IT'S JUST HUMAN NATURE.
IF THEY WERE ALL ABOUT IT, IT WOULD GET DONE.
>> DO WE REQUIRE CITY INSPECTIONS AT VARIOUS MILESTONES ALONG THE WAY ON THESE REHABS?
>> YES. FOR BUILDING INSPECTIONS THAT FOLLOWS THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT.
OUR BUILDING INSPECTORS WILL GO OUT THERE AND INSPECT THAT MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, SO ALL THE TRADES ARE ENCOMPASSED IN THAT TOO.
>> DO YOU JUST MAKE SURPRISE VISITS OR DO YOU WAIT FOR A PHONE CALL FOR THEM TO COME SO THEY COME CHECK THEM UP?
>> WE TYPICALLY DO GET A PHONE CALL THAT INITIATES THAT'S WHEN THE INSPECTOR KNOWS TO GO OUT THERE AND INSPECT THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE STATED ON THE PERMIT.
>> WELL, I THINK THAT'D BE GOOD TO REPORT BACK TO US THE MILESTONES THAT THEY'VE MADE IT.
IF IT'S OBVIOUS, THEY ARE NOT MEETING MILESTONES, IT'S OBVIOUS, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO MEET MILESTONES, SO FOLKS, YOU'RE NOT LIVING UP TO WHAT YOU SAID HE'S GOING TO DO, WE'RE GOING HAVE TO TAKE A DIFFERENT COURSE OF ACTION.
PRONE TO PROCRASTINATE, SO MAYBE ENCOURAGE THEM TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> I CAN USE THE OLD ADAGE, TRUST BUT VERIFY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I MIGHT ALSO, YOU KNOW HOW TIMELINES ARE GOING TO GO IN CONSTRUCTION, SO THINGS MIGHT BE DELAYED AND ALL OF A SUDDEN A LOT OF STUFF GETS DONE.
HE SAYS HE'S GOING TO BE DONE IN SIX MONTHS, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.
FROM A COUNCIL PERSPECTIVE, I PERSONALLY, THAT'S NOT FOR ME TO DECIDE WHAT'S GOING ON DOWN THERE.
IF HE SAYS HE SUBMITTED TO SIX MONTHS PLAN AND THAT'S WHAT HE'S DOING, AS LONG AS THE STAFF IS STAYING ON TOP OF THAT AND YOU'RE WORKING WITH THEM OR THE OTHER GENTLEMEN, I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH IT, BUT I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH REQUIRING THEM TO GIVE YOU A REPORT EVERY MONTH.
I THINK COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE ACTION IN SIX MONTHS FROM NOW, AND THAT'S WHEN WE SHOULD SEE IT AGAIN.
>> SHOULD HIS SCOPE OF WORK CHANGE SINCE NOW WE KNOW THERE'S TERMITE DAMAGE, SO THAT MEANS REMEDIATION NEEDS TO HAPPEN AND THERE'S STRUCTURAL BEAMS AND THAT'S NOT ANYWHERE LISTED IN HIS SIX-MONTH PLAN?
>> BUT DID ANYBODY COMMUNICATE THAT BACK TO HIM, FROM WHAT, YOU MIGHT NOT EVEN KNOW.
>> NO. REALLY, I FEEL LIKE IT'S ALMOST MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE PROPERTY OWNER TO HAVE A FLEXIBLE SCOPE ONLY BECAUSE THERE'S LIMITATIONS ON SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES AND BUDGETS, THERE COULD BE A NUMBER OF REASONS, SO I THINK THIS MAKES SENSE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
>> I DON'T THINK IT'S OUR BUSINESS TO BE INVOLVED IN WHAT THE STAFF AND WHAT YOU-ALL ARE DOING WITH THE LANDOWNER.
WE TOOK ACTION ON DECLARING IT A SUBSTANDARD TO MOVE HIM ALONG AND GET THE TIMELINE GOING, AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT OUR APPROPRIATE ACTION AND THEN LET YOU-ALL FIGURE THAT PART IT OUT WITH HIM.
IT IS HARD TO GET AN OLD HOUSE REHABBED, IT REALLY IS.
>> ABSOLUTELY. I WATCH HGA TV SOMETIMES.
>>IT MIGHT NOT HAPPEN IN SIX MONTHS.
>> IF THIS PROCESS GOING ON AND HE'S MAKING IMPROVEMENTS AND HE'S DOING WHAT HE SET OUT TO DO, IT MIGHT NOT BE ON THE RIGHT TIMETABLE, BUT IF YOU'RE SEEING MONEY IS GOING INTO THE HOUSE AND IT'S GETTING APPROVED, THAT MEANS THE BIGGEST THING IS DRYING THE HOUSE, AND THAT'S FIRST AND FOREMOST.
>> I JUST WANT GOOD FAITH EFFORT.
[01:10:01]
IT COULD BE A QUICKER PROCESS.
BUT IF YOU ALL BELIEVE SOMEBODY IS GIVING A TRUE GOOD FAITH EFFORT, WE WANT PEOPLE TO SUCCEED.
ON THE OTHER HAND, I DON'T WANT TO BE STUCK WITH THIS BLIGHT, AND WE'RE ALWAYS BEING PROMISED TO PAY FOR TWO HAMBURGERS ON TUESDAY.
WE'RE JUST LOOKING INTO THE FUTURE WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THERE.
>> WHILE THIS ITEM WAS PUT ON THE AGENDA AS MORE OF AN UPDATE, A FOLLOW-UP TO SHOW YOU GUYS THE PROPERTY OWNERS TIMELINES AND SCOPES OF WORK, I DO BELIEVE I UNDERSTAND THE DIRECTION AND WHAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN THROUGH THESE TIMELINES.
YOU TOOK THE WORDS RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH.
I WAS FIXED TO SAY GOOD FAITH.
WE SHOULD SEE HIS GOOD FAITH EFFORT AND IF IT BEARS NO GOOD FAITH EFFORT, JUST WALK UP THERE, KNOCK ON THE DOOR AND SAY, "YOU'RE NOT BEING TRUE AND HONEST WITH US." JUST A FACT. YOU SHOWED IT BY YOUR LACK OF EFFORT, SO KNOW, WE'RE WATCHING.
>> ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO ADD ON THAT?
>> NUMBER NINE, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON GETTING THE COOPERATION AND CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE REVIEW OF THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, ZONING ORDINANCE, AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. SWATTER.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL FOR THE BENEFIT OF OUR NEWEST MEMBER.
>> VERY BRIEFLY BACK LATE LAST YEAR, THE CITY HIRED THE CORPORATION TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND EVALUATE THEM ON THEIR CONSISTENCY WITH EACH OTHER AND WITH STATE LAW.
AND IF THERE WERE IMPROVEMENTS THAT COULD BE MADE TO THE VARIOUS PARTS OF THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
WE'RE NOW AT THE POINT WHERE THEY'RE READY TO PRESENT THEIR CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE HAVE A POWERPOINT UP, AND MS. LADA HERE WILL NOW TAKE OVER.
>> THANK YOU, WALTER. GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, MAYOR PRO TEM.
CONGRATULATIONS ON BEING ON THE COUNCIL.
SURE, IT'S GOING TO BE EXCITING.
YOU'VE SEEN ME HERE A FEW TIMES.
SO WHAT I'M GOING TO BE PRESENTING IS NOT NEW.
I GUESS THE LAST TIME BASED ON WHERE WE WERE LAST TIME, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF AND THE ATTORNEY TO COME UP WITH SOME IMMEDIATE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEN SOME LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS.
WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED TODAY IS REALLY THE IMMEDIATE OR SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS.
I KNOW YOU WANTED TO LOOK AT MORE DETAILS, SO THAT'S WHEN I WOULD BE PRESENTING TODAY.
THERE WAS A MEMO WITH ALL THE SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS WITH A PRIORITIZED LIST IN YOUR PACKET AND A DIAGNOSTIC REPORT THAT WE UPDATED IN APRIL.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER THAT, BUT JUST COVER SOME OF THE THINGS BRIEFLY AND I DON'T WANT TO TAKE TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME.
BUT WHEN WE CAME, WE STARTED WORK FOR THE CITY, THERE WERE TWO THINGS THAT WERE SCULPTED DO ONE WAS TO LOOK AT THE CODES THAT WALTER SAID.
BASICALLY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT IN ANGLETON IS GOVERNED BY THREE CODES, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND THE SIGNAGE, AND YOU HAVE NOT HEARD IT.
THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME YOU'RE HEARING IT THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF DISCREPANCIES AND CONFLICTS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID WAS GO THROUGH ALL THAT AND IDENTIFY AREAS THAT NEEDED TO BE IMPROVED, STANDARDS THAT WERE INADEQUATE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THEN THE SECOND PART THAT WE WERE TASKED WITH WAS TO DEVELOP THIS PROCEDURES MANUAL.
WHEN WE STARTED INTERVIEWING PEOPLE, IT SEEMED LIKE WHAT WOULD HAVE THE CITY WAS TO CREATE THIS MANUAL, WHICH WAS A ONE-STOP REFERENCE GUIDE ALL THE WAY FROM WHAT'S THE PROCEDURE TO ANNEX TO GETTING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
THEY HAVE BEEN VERY HELPFUL IN GIVING US SOME INFORMATION, AND SO WE'RE ALMOST THERE.
I KNOW THAT WE ARE JUST IN THE LAST FEW CHAPTERS AND OUR GOAL IS TO HOPEFULLY HAVE IT AVAILABLE TO THE RESIDENCE, TO THE DEVELOPERS AND ANYBODY WHO'S INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING IN ANGLETON.
[01:15:02]
SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID WAS OF COURSE, WE ALWAYS LIKE TO GO AND HEAR FROM THE COMMUNITY.YOU ALL PROBABLY FILL THE SURVEY MONKEY QUESTIONNAIRE THAT WAS OUT IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE TALKED TO MEMBERS OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY STAFF.
WE TRIED TO TALK TO ALL THE DEPARTMENT HEADS TO SEE WHAT THEIR ISSUES WERE.
THEN ALSO THE WEBSITE QUESTIONNAIRE WAS REALLY HELPFUL IN GETTING SOME.
INFORMATION AND THEN WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE EXISTING DOCUMENTS AND THIS DID SOME COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO FRAME SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
THIS IS JUST A SNAPSHOT OF WHEN THE QUESTIONNAIRE WAS OUT ON YOUR WEBPAGE.
IT HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, AND JUST TRYING TO SEE WHAT THE VISION OF THE COMMUNITY WAS.
THEN SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE HEARD FROM THE RESPONSES WERE JUST IN TERMS OF APPLICATION PROCESSING.
THE PROCESSES WERE NOT CLEAR TO THE DEVELOPERS.
ALSO THERE WAS A LOT OF CENTRALIZED LOCATION FOR ALL THE INFORMATION.
THE SECOND THING, WERE JUST THE CODE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS WHICH YOU ALSO HEARD FROM STAFF WAS JUST BECAUSE THESE THREE SETS OF DOCUMENTS WERE ADOPTED AT DIFFERENT TIMES, THERE WAS A LOT OF INCONSISTENCY.
THERE WERE SOME AREAS WHERE DESIGN STANDARDS DEFINITELY COULD BE ELEVATED TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE.
THERE WERE CONFUSION AS TO SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE CODE.
THEN ONE BIG THING WAS THEY WERE A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS THAT JUST REFERRED TO OTHER CITIES, AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF WOULD LIKE TO SEE UPDATED AND EVEN THE DEVELOPERS SO THAT THEY HAVE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO ANGLETON.
SOME SUBDIVISIONS, AMENITIES, DESIGN STANDARDS, LACK OF HOUSING DIVERSITY WAS A BIG THING THAT WE HEARD.
THEN JUST PLOTTING, WE HEARD A LOT ABOUT PLOTTING AS TO HOW IT WAS UNCLEAR.
THEY WERE JUST TOO MANY TYPES OF PLOTS THAT DIDN'T NEED TO BE THERE.
I'LL DISCUSS THAT A LITTLE MORE IN DETAIL.
THEN, OF COURSE, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE THEN, THE REGION HAS SEEN A LOT OF GROWTH.
THE NEED TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT UPDATING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THEN WE DID HEAR FROM DEVELOPERS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROCESS.
I KNOW THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE WILL ADD IN OUR DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK, SOME KIND OF A STANDARD TEMPLATE.
I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER HAS ASKED US TO LOOK AT THAT AND AT LEAST MAKE THE PROCESS MORE TRANSPARENT SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO GET A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
THE PHASE ONE OF THE DIAGNOSTIC WAS JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE LOOKED AT.
NUMBER ONE WAS THIS CONFORMANCE TO TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES DONE, ESPECIALLY THE PAST THREE YEARS.
TRYING TO MAKE SURE IN TERMS OF PLOTTING AND SHOT CLOCK PROVISIONS THAT THOSE WERE INCORPORATED.
LOOKED AT AREAS WHERE THERE WAS SOME ABILITY TO IMPROVE THE PROCESSES, THE FORMAT, HOW TO MAKE IT MORE USER-FRIENDLY, AND THEN JUST LOOKING AT THE CONTENT AND LIKE I SAID, STANDARDS SPECIFIC TO ANGLETON AND LOOKING AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OBJECTIVES.
WE LOOKED AT THE LAST COMP PLAN AND OBVIOUSLY, LIKE I SAID, WHAT WE HEARD WAS, HEY, THE COMP PLAN NEEDS TO BE UPDATED, SO LET'S JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND.
THEN JUST CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE THREE SETS OF DOCUMENTS THAT ARE THERE.
THAT WAS CAUSING A LOT OF CONSTERNATION AMONG THE DEVELOPERS TO PUBLIC AND STAFF.
WHAT WE DID NOW IS SINCE WE MET LAST TIME WE PRIORITIZE THE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH STAFF'S HEALTH AND CAME UP WITH SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM.
THE SHORT-TERM. AGAIN, WHAT WE HAVE ARE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS.
THIS IS ONE OF THE WORK SESSION TO REVIEW THE RECOMMENDATION AND GET INPUT FROM YOU ALL.
THEN IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED, THEN THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE TO ACTUALLY DROP THE RED LINE FINAL AMENDMENTS AND THEN GO THROUGH THE ADOPTION PROCESS AND JUST GET IT ADOPTED.
THE FUTURE LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS, THEY ARE LISTED FOR MORE REVIEW AND IMPLEMENTATION AND PROBABLY GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS, THAT WE WOULD DO WITH THE SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE FIRST THING WAS JUST THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE WOULD BE TALKING TODAY WOULD BE JUST A LOT OF PLOTTING ISSUES.
HOW DO YOU CONSOLIDATE THE PLOT TYPES, CLARIFYING THE SEQUENCING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
I KNOW THERE'S AN AGENDA ITEM AFTER THIS WHICH ALSO TALKS ABOUT A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE BOND ISSUE, TALKING ABOUT EXPIRATION DATES.
THEN THE NEXT ONE WAS JUST PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS, TRYING TO INCORPORATE SOME CONSISTENCY.
[01:20:03]
AGAIN, THEY WERE ISSUES LIKE WHEN THE CITY ADOPTED SOME OF THESE REGULATIONS, THEY WERE JUST COPIED FROM OTHER CITIES.ONE BIG DEAL IS A COLOR OF STREET SIGNS, FOR EXAMPLE.
JUST PROVISION OF FIBERS, JUST TRYING TO JUST GO THROUGH WHAT IS THERE AND JUST CLEAN IT UP, NOT REALLY CHANGING TOO MUCH THERE.
THEN THE LAST ONE WAS EDITED STREET REVISION.
WHEN WE TALKED TO STAFF AND THE DEVELOPERS, THE GENERAL FEELING WAS THAT, YES, WE NEED TREE PRESERVATION, BUT TRY TO MAKE IT MORE MEANINGFUL AND I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT.
AS YOU CAN SEE THERE ON THE TOP IS THE TYPES OF PLOT THAT YOU DO HAVE NOW.
THE FIRST FIVE UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL ARE WHAT CAN BE APPROVED BY STAFF, THEY DON'T COME TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL.
THEN YOU'LL SEE THE NEXT FOUR THAT COME TO THE P&Z.
IT GETS A LITTLE CONFUSING AS TO WHEN IS THIS REQUIRED? FOR EXAMPLE, A MAJOR CONSOLIDATION PLOT, A MAJOR AMENDING PLOT.
THOSE ARE, TO BE HONEST, I HAVE NOT SEEN THEM IN OTHER CITIES.
WHEN YOU GO BACK TO THE STATUTES ON WHAT YOU SEE AS BEING PROPOSED IS JUST CONSOLIDATING THAT THREE TYPES OF PLOTS ARE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
SOME OF THEM ARE ALREADY THERE.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE MINOR PLOT AMENDING AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DIVIDE.
THOSE ARE ALREADY THERE, BUT JUST TAKING AWAY THE MAJOR MINOR PARTS OF IT.
THEN PRELIMINARY, FINAL, AND RE-PLOT WOULD TYPICALLY GO TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, SO JUST MAKING IT CLEARER FOR THE APPLICANTS.
THE SECOND ONE WAS JUST CLARIFYING THE SEQUENCING OF A SUBDIVISION, THIS IS FOR LARGER SUBDIVISIONS THAT REQUIRE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND WE DISCUSSED THIS A LITTLE BIT LAST TIME SO THE FIRST STEP IS, SAY THERE'S A 100 LOT SUBDIVISION, A PRELIMINARY PLAT IS APPROVED, AND THEN THE PROCESS INCLUDES AT SOME POINT, THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS HAVE TO BE APPROVED FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, WATER, SEWER, DRAINAGE, THINGS LIKE THAT, AND THEN THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION HAS TO HAPPEN AT SOME POINT AND THEN THE FINAL PLOT GETS APPROVED, AND THEN THE PLAT NEEDS TO BE RECORDED AND PLAT RECORDATION IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE ONCE THE PLAT IS RECORDED, THE LOTS CAN BE BOUGHT OR SOLD, SO AT THAT POINT, PEOPLE CAN START BUYING THE LOTS.
THEN, THE LAST STEP IS THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUE AND SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE OVERALL STEPS THAT PLATTING A MINOR, MAJOR PLAT PROCESS ENTAILS, SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE DIAGRAM AND THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE RED ARROWS AGAIN, WE WORKED WITH STAFF ON THIS AND WE TALKED TO THE DEVELOPERS AND I THINK THE GENERAL CONSENSUS WAS AFTER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS APPROVED, OF COURSE, IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS BEFORE THE FINAL PLAT IS DONE AND THEN INSTEAD OF REQUIRING A SURETY OR ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BEFORE A FINAL PLAT IS APPROVED, THE THOUGHT WAS, IF THE DEVELOPER CAN MOVE FORWARD AND GET THE FINAL PLAT APPROVED, THEN EITHER CONSTRUCT THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND PUT A SURETY IN PLACE, AND THEN, IF THEY'RE CONSTRUCTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, IF THEY'RE ACCEPTED, THEN THEY CAN RECORD THE FINAL PLOT.
IF THEY WANT TO PUT A SURETY, THEN THEY COULD GO AHEAD AND RECORD THE FINAL PLAT AND ONCE THE PLAT IS RECORDED, AGAIN, CONSTRUCT, NO MATTER WHAT, A BUILDING PERMIT IS NOT GOING TO BE ISSUED BEFORE THE PLAT IS RECORDED AND ALL THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IS COMPLETE AND ACCEPTED, SO THAT'S THE ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT WOULD BE THE FINAL STAGE.
WHAT WE LEARN THROUGH THIS PROCESSES, FOR THE DEVELOPERS, FINANCING IS A BIG DEAL AND WHAT WE LEARN IS TO GET A SURETY OR EVEN GET FINANCING FOR CONSTRUCTION.
UNTIL THE FINAL PLAT IS RECORDED, A LOT OF COMPANIES ARE NOT LENDING THEM MONEY, SO THEY ARE LIKE, WHAT IS THE GUARANTEE THAT THIS FINAL PART IS GOING TO BE APPROVED? THAT WAS A BIG THING THAT CAME UP, SO THAT'S WHY THE THOUGHT WAS GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO GET A FINAL PLAT APPROVED AND RECORDED, BUT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY IS SAFE GUARDED, ENSURE THAT THERE IS A BOND IN PLACE FOR A SURETY THAT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE DONE.
[01:25:01]
BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, ONCE THEY RECORD THE FINAL PLAT, THEY CAN SELL THE LOT AND I KNOW THAT CITY CAN STILL HOLD THE BUILDING PERMIT, BUT IT'S ALWAYS GOOD NOT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BUY OR SELL LAND UNLESS IT'S BUILDABLE AND IF YOU REMEMBER THE CRISIS WE HAD A FEW YEARS BACK WHERE FINAL PLATS WERE APPROVED, PEOPLE HAD BOUGHT AND SOLD LAND AND THEN THE DEVELOPER JUST WENT BANKRUPT AND THE PEOPLE WERE LEFT WITH THESE LOTS THAT THEY HAD BOUGHT LEGALLY AND THEN THE CITIES WERE FORCED TO HELP OUT AND BUILD THE STREETS, OTHERWISE, THESE LOTS ARE WORTHLESS.JUST TO PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING,
[8. Discussion and possible action on an update for the condemnation public hearings held on May 24, 2022, concerning 316 W. Rogers, 320 W. Peach, and 504 Farrer in Angleton, Texas.]
I GUESS IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE SOME SURETY IN PLACE, SO WORKING WITH STAFF AND PLEASE, WALTER, IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS JUST JUMP IN, WE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD COMMON GROUND, A WIN-WIN SOLUTION FOR BOTH WHERE THE DEVELOPERS, IF FINANCING IS TIED ON THE FINAL PLAT RECOMMENDATION, THEN THEY CAN RECORD THE FINAL PLAT AS LONG AS THE CITY HAS THE SURETY IN PLACE AND SO THAT'S WHY THE AMOUNT OF SURETY NOW BECOMES IMPORTANT, YOU HAVE TO SAFEGUARD YOURSELF AGAINST INFLATION AND MOST OF THE PEOPLE WE TALKED TO SAY, EVEN THOUGH THE SURETY IN PLACE IS NOT AS EASY TO GET THE WORK DONE, SO YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL AS DEMAND OR SURETY YOU HOLD.HOWEVER, ALSO, YOU CANNOT BE UNREASONABLE, LIKE YOU CAN'T SAY 200 PERCENT BECAUSE THAT'S FROWNED UPON TO.
I THINK THE NUMBER THAT WE HAVE SEEN IS ANYWHERE FROM, OF COURSE, A 100-150 PERCENT OF THE COST OF IMPROVEMENTS.
THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY.
THE RECOMMENDATION, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES, WAS WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE BOND RIGHT NOW THE CITY REQUIRES 100 PERCENT AND ALL OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH CITY STAFF AND ATTORNEYS SAID THAT THAT 100 PERCENT DOES NOT CAPTURE INFLATION AT ALL SO THAT'S WHY THE THOUGHT WAS 125, LIKE I SAID, SOME CITIES GO TO 150.
WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING MORE THAN 150 BECAUSE DISTRIBUTE, I GUESS, JUST NEED TO BE REASONABLE.
THAT'S THE PERFORMANCE BOND, AND THE SECOND THING IS, I WAS TALKING TO WALTER.
I PROBABLY HAVE MY NUMBERS WRONG, BUT I KNOW THAT THE MAINTENANCE BOND IS NOT 100 PERCENT IN ANGLETON, IT'S EITHER 20 PERCENT OR 25 PERCENT, I THINK.
INSTEAD OF 25, IT SHOULD BE 20 PERCENT.
WE WERE DOING THIS FOR A NUMBER OF OTHER CITIES AND ONE OF THE CITY MANAGERS ARGUMENT WAS ACTUALLY TO HAVE MORE AND TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S HELD FOR A LONGER TIME.
THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT MAY BE DONE BUT AS YOU NOTE, SUBDIVISIONS TAKE TIME TO BUILD AND IN ONE YEAR, NOT ALL ALL HOMES ARE CONSTRUCTED.
SOMETIMES IT TAKES FIVE YEARS, SO WHAT HAPPENS IS IF YOU RELEASE THE MAINTENANCE BOND AND THESE TRUCKS CAUSE DESTRUCTION, THE DEVELOPER MIGHT BE OUT OF THE PICTURE, IT'S THE HOME BUILDER SO THE CITY IS LEFT WITH FIXING THE BROKEN CURVES AND THE STREETS BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION HAPPENING, SO THAT CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION WAS TO HOLD THE MAINTENANCE BOND TILL THE LAST HOUSE IS BUILT.
I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR YOU ALL WANT TO GO THAT MIGHT BE A STRETCH, BUT DEFINITELY IT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT AS ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND MAY NOT BE ENOUGH IF THE SUBDIVISION IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION, ESPECIALLY FOR LARGE SUBDIVISIONS.
>> [OVERLAPPING] EXCUSE ME, BUT WHEN YOU SAID SUBDIVISION IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION, THAT'S MEANING THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS STILL BEING CONSTRUCTED OR ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE HOMES ARE BEING CONSTRUCTED?
>> YEAH, SO IN THIS CASE, IT'S THE HOMES BECAUSE THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THE PERFORMANCE BOND WILL COVER IS, THE PERFORMANCE BOND IS RELEASED ONCE THE CITY ACCEPTS ALL THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BUT THE HOMES ARE STILL BEING BUILT AND THAT IS THE ISSUE WITH THE MAINTENANCE BOND.
THE PERFORMANCE BOND WOULD BE RELEASED AND THE MAINTENANCE BOND IS HELD FOR A YEAR AFTER THE ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, SO THE MAINTENANCE BOND IS NOT TIED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOME SITES.
>> IF WE GO THAT ROUTE, REQUIRING THAT THE CONTRACTOR BE LIABLE FOR THINGS THAT HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH, BREAKING CURVES, BREAKING SIDEWALKS, KNOCKING OVER STUFF.
IF THAT HAPPENS, WHOEVER DID THAT SHOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT.
>> WHEN THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS ACCEPTED BY THE CITY, IT'S DONE.
[01:30:03]
>> YOU MOVE INTO YOUR HOUSE, BRAND NEW HOME, OKAY, BUT IF YOU BREAK A WINDOW, IT'S NOT THE BUILDERS FAULT THAT YOU BROKE THE WINDOW. [LAUGHTER]
>> IT'S YOUR FAULT THAT YOU BROKE THE WINDOW.
>> RIGHT AND I AGREE WITH YOU.
>> THAT'S THE LINE OF THINKING THAT I HAVE.
>> THIS IS THE CITY MANAGER THAT WAS TALKING TO ME AND THAT'S WHAT, FROM HIS PERSPECTIVE, THE CITY WAS NOT SAFE GUARDED IN ANY WAY, SO I'M NOT RECOMMENDING DEFINITELY THAT YOU HOLD THE MAINTENANCE BOND TILL THE LAST HOUSE IS BUILT BUT I'M JUST TELLING YOU FROM A CITY SIDE, JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
WHAT IS A GOOD TIME TO RELEASE THE MAINTENANCE BOND? SOME CITIES WILL SAY TILL 50 PERCENT OF THE HOMES IS BUILT.
WE'RE STILL GOING AHEAD AND I THINK OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS JUST, AS YOU CAN SEE, ONE YEAR, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR AGENDA REQUEST, SO YEAH.
I WAS JUST BRINGING UP THE PROS AND CONS AND JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT BUT DEFINITELY THE PERCENTAGE, I THINK OUR RECOMMENDATION AND JUST TALKING TO OTHER CITIES WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S MORE THAN 100 PERCENT BECAUSE THAT IS BASED ON TODAY'S COST.
THE SECOND THING WAS JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CLARIFIED ALL THE EXPIRATION DATE, THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF DISCREPANCY IN THE ORDINANCE SO REALLY MAKING SURE THAT THIS IS, AGAIN THE RECOMMENDATION, ALL PLATS EXCEPT FINAL PLAT, THEY WOULD BE VALID FOR ONE YEAR WITH AN ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR OF EXTENSION.
NOW, WHAT THAT MEANS IS IF A PLAT IS RECORDED, IT'S RECORDED, THERE'S NO EXPLORATION TIED TO IT.
IT'S ONLY WHEN SOMETHING IS PREVENTING THE PLAT FROM BEING RECORDED.
FOR FINAL PLAT, ONE YEAR WITH AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS OF EXTENSION, CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS, TYPICALLY ONE YEAR WITH AN ADDITIONAL SIX MONTHS OF EXTENSION AND COMPLETION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND ACCEPTANCE, AGAIN, ONE YEAR WITH AN ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR OF EXTENSION.
JUST AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE SURROUNDING CITIES AND THIS WAS RECOMMENDATION TO START OFF THIS DISCUSSION, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WILL SEE HERE.
THEN LIKE I TALKED ABOUT THIS, THIS IS, AGAIN, A RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS ARE DEVELOPED FOR THE CITY OF ANGLETON.
THE NEXT ONE WAS JUST TREE PRESERVATION OR TREE MITIGATION ORDINANCE.
AGAIN, TALKING TO DEVELOPERS' STAFF, IT REALLY HELPED US, AND HEARING FROM THE CITIZENS.
OBVIOUSLY, EVERYBODY AGREES THAT TREES SHOULD BE PRESERVED.
IT'S NOT JUST A PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, IT'S ALSO A MITIGATION ORDINANCE.
THE QUESTION IS, WHAT SHOULD BE PRESERVED AND WHAT CAN BE MITIGATED? RIGHT NOW THE PROBLEM WAS THAT, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, THERE IS NO LIMIT ON MINIMUM DIAMETER.
EVERY TREE THAT IS WITHIN THOSE TWO SPECIES NEED TO BE PROTECTED.
THERE IS NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO PRESERVE VERSUS WHAT CAN BE MITIGATED.
TYPICALLY, HERITAGE TREES ARE THE ONES THAT YOU WANT TO PRESERVE, WOULD BE HARD WAS MITIGATION IS TOO STRINGENT AND COMPARING IT WITH OTHER CITIES, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THERE IS NO CLASSIFICATION BASED ON DIAMETER OR SPECIES, EVERY TREE THAT'S TAKEN OUT, THERE'S A 3:1 MITIGATION.
IT BECOMES A LITTLE BIT MORE CUMBERSOME.
THEN WHAT IS ALSO INTERESTING TO NOTE IS ONLY TWO TYPES OF TREES ARE CONSIDERED AS SOMETHING THAT ARE WORTHY OF BEING WELL PRESERVED.
THE REPLACEMENT HAS TO BE THE SAME TREES, WHICH GOES BACK TO A LARGER ECOLOGICAL BALANCE ISSUE WHERE IT JUST LACKS THE DIVERSITY OF SPECIES.
I MEAN, YOU DON'T WANT ALL YOUR TREES TO BE OAKS OR MAPLES BECAUSE OF THE BLIGHT ISSUES.
THEN ALSO JUST LIKE I SAID, PROTECTION.
IF THE COMMUNITY CHERISHES LARGE TREES THE WAY THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN, IT DOESN'T PROTECT THEM.
WHAT ARE RECOMMENDATION? AGAIN, TALKING TO STAFF, AND WOULD BE HARD BUT TRY TO IDENTIFY WHAT ARE TREES THAT THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO KEEP AS HERITAGE TREES? THEN WHAT ARE THE SIGNIFICANT TREES THAT NEED TO BE MITIGATED? YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE BALANCE HERE.
ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MITIGATION WAS PROPORTIONATE TO THE CLASSIFICATION AND NOT REALLY REQUIRE THREE TO ONE REPLACEMENT FOR EVERY TREE THAT'S TAKEN OUT.
[01:35:02]
THEN MAYBE LOOK AT THAT.THEN THE PROTECTED TREE SPECIES.
THE HERITAGE TREES ONLY APPLY TO OAK AND PECANS RIGHT NOW, I THINK.
MAKE SURE THAT THAT LIST IS EXPANDED BUT EVERYTHING IS NOT PROTECTED.
THEN JUST EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE, IF YOU'RE HARVESTING TIMBER LANE OR ORCHARD OR IF A TREE IS DAMAGED OR DISEASED, THOSE WOULD BE EXEMPT.
THEN JUST HAVING A CERTIFIED ARBORIST DETERMINE THE DAMAGE OR DISEASED TREE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE CHART THERE, THE FIRST COLUMN JUST TALKS ABOUT THE PROPOSAL.
THE SECOND COLUMN IS FOR HERITAGE TREES AND SIGNIFICANT TREES.
ANY TREE THAT'S LARGER THAN 24 INCHES WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS A HERITAGE TREE AND ANYTHING BETWEEN 10-23.9 INCHES WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT.
WHICH ALSO MEANS THAT A TREE THAT'S LESS THAN 10 INCHES IT CAN BE REMOVED WITHOUT ANY MITIGATION.
THEN THE PERCENTAGE OF CALIPER INCHES TO BE PRESERVED ON SITE.
THIS ALSO ASSUMES THAT SOMETIMES IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO PRESERVE EVERY HERITAGE TREE.
AS LONG AS 50 PERCENT OF THE HERITAGE TREES ARE PRESERVED, THE OTHER 50 PERCENT CAN BE MITIGATED.
THEN FOR SIGNIFICANT TREES, PRESERVING 35 PERCENT OF SIGNIFICANT TREES.
I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW THE PRESERVATION ASPECT IS NOT CLARIFIED IN THE CODE.
THEN THE MITIGATION RATIO FOR HERITAGE TREE, OF COURSE, IT'S 3:1, WHICH IS WHAT YOU HAVE FOR EVERY TREE NOW.
BUT IF IT'S A SIGNIFICANT TREE, THE MITIGATION IS FOR EVERY CALIPER INCH THAT YOU REMOVE, YOU HAVE TO PLANT A CALIPER AND A HALF.
THEN ALSO REPLACEMENT PLANTING, THAT DIDN'T CHANGE.
I THINK MINIMUM TWO AND A HALF CALIPER INCH OF TREE TO BE REPLANTED AND IT HAS TO BE FROM THAT PROTECTED SPECIES LIST.
WHAT IT DOES IS IT GIVES THE PEOPLE MORE OPTIONS ON WHAT TO PLANT INSTEAD OF JUST OAKS AND PECANS.
SAME THING WITH SIGNIFICANT TREES.
IF YOU DO REMOVE A SIGNIFICANT TREE, THEN YOU HAVE TO PLANT TWO AND A HALF CALIPER INCH BACK FROM THAT LIST.
THEN THERE IS A FEE IN LIEU OFF.
FOR 50 PERCENT OF THE REMOVALS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE HERITAGE TREES, IF YOU DO REMOVE 50 PERCENT, THE FEE IS $200 PER CALIPER INCH AND FOR SIGNIFICANT TREES, IT'S A 100 PER CALIPER INCH.
LIKE I SAID, THE GOAL WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE EQUITABLE AND ENCOURAGE PRESERVATION OF LARGER TREES.
NOT EVERY TREE BECAUSE THE LAND HAS TO DEVELOP, BUT ALSO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS SOME MITIGATION REQUIRED.
JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
LIKE I SAID, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID WHEN WE DID THIS WAS LOOKED AT ALL OTHER CITIES ALL THE WAY FROM NEW BRAUNFELS TO JACKSON.
ONE OF THE DEVELOPERS AND ENGINEERS WE TALKED TO SAY [INAUDIBLE] ALVIN BECAUSE THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE CLOSER JUST AS A COMPARISON SO THAT YOU KNOW WHERE OUR PROPOSAL STANDS.
THOSE WERE THE ONES THAT ARE SHORTLISTED FOR THIS SET OF AMENDMENTS IN THE FUTURE.
LIKE YOU SAW IN THE REPORT, I THINK THE FIRST THING THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT IS CONSOLIDATING THE THREE [NOISE] DEVELOPMENT CODES THAT I TALKED ABOUT.
THOSE ARE THE THREE SECTIONS OF YOUR ORDINANCE.
WE HAVE REDLINE BUILD ON ALL THREE OF THEM AND THEN ALSO MADE A LONG LIST TO LOOK AT IN THE FUTURE.
THERE WERE SOME QUESTION ABOUT THE APPLICABILITY OF THE CODES IN THE ETJ AND PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT.
SOME THOUGHT THAT MAYBE IT'S NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE TO REVIEW THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT IT IS IN CONFORMANCE.
YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THE COLUMN LISTS TO RECOMMENDATION, THEN THE NEXT COLUMN NEXT TO IT IS THE SECTION OF THE CODE THAT WOULD NEED TO BE ABANDONED.
SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES MANUAL.
JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT TOO.
THEN THE COMMENTS IS WHERE TO LOOK FOR IF IT'S RELEVANT.
THE OTHER ONE WAS JUST LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT CREATING SPECIFIC DESIGN CRITERIA FOR ANGLETON AND THEN JUST CLARIFY ALL THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS.
[01:40:03]
I THINK ONE THING WE HEARD WAS WHEN THE DEVELOPER COMES TO THEM, THEY DON'T KNOW ALL THE APPLICABLE CODES, ORDINANCES, APPROVAL AUTHORITIES, WHAT IS THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT LOOKING AT? WHAT IS TEXAS APPROVING? WHAT IS THE COUNTY OF PROVING? WE'VE PREPARED A LIST, IT'S CALLED A RACI LIST.WHO'S RESPONSIBLE? WHO'S APPROVING IT? WHO'S CONSULTED? WHO'S INFORMED? YOU WILL SEE THAT IN THE APPENDIX D AND APPENDIX E OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES MANUAL SO THAT WHEN SOMEBODY IS COMING TO TOWN, AT LEAST THEY KNOW WHAT ARE THE AGENCIES TO GO AND TALK TO.
JUST A LITTLE BIT ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES MANUAL, LIKE I SAID, THESE ARE THE CONTENTS.
WE START FROM THE OVERVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS TO HIGHLY ENCOURAGING THEM TO HAVE A PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE.
THEY OFFER IT TO THE DEVELOPERS FREE OF COST.
JUST MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF THAT AND THEN TALK ABOUT THE APPLICATION PROCESSING.
IF I WANT A ZONE CHANGE, WHAT IS THE PROCESS? WHERE DO I FIND THE APPLICATION? WHAT DOES THE FLOWCHART LOOK LIKE? WHO'S GOING TO PROVE IT? WHAT ARE THE DEADLINES? THINGS LIKE THAT. THEN HOW MUCH FEES DO I HAVE TO PAY? WHAT STAFF CAN I CONTACT? WHAT ARE THE MINIMUM STANDARDS AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT STAFF HAS BEEN HELPING US.
SAY, HEY, THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT WE HAVE FACED, CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS ADDRESSED? THAT'S WHAT THE TABLE OF CONTENTS LOOK LIKE.
WHAT WE'VE ALSO DONE IS, LIKE I SAID, FOR EXAMPLE,
[9. Discussion and possible action on Gunda Corporation conclusions and recommendations regarding their review of the City’s Land Development Code, Zoning Ordinance and other development regulations.]
THE FINAL PLOT PROCESS.WE HAVE FLOWCHARTS SAYING, WHAT IS THE PROCESS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH, WHAT ARE THE PREREQUISITES, AND WHAT ARE SOME OF THE TIMELINES? I THINK WHAT WE CAME UP WITH, AGAIN, TALKING WITH STAFF IS, AS YOU CAN SEE THE PAGE THERE ON THE RIGHT SIDE LISTS ALL THE PERMITS AND APPLICATIONS THAT IS REQUIRED IN ANGLETON FOR DEVELOPMENT-RELATED ACTIVITY.
THERE ARE ABOUT 50 APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS, AGAIN, FROM MEP TO ZONING, TO ANNEXATION, TO FUNNEL PLOT, AMENDING PLOTS.
WHAT THIS APPLICATION DOES IS, IT'S A UNIVERSAL APPLICATION.
YOU'LL START HERE AND YOU CHECK THAT BOX OFF.
IT ALSO ALERTS PEOPLE THAT THESE ARE THE PERMITS REQUIRED.
IT'S A VERY TRANSPARENT PROCESS.
ONCE YOU CHECK THE BOX AND THE GOAL IS TO HYPERLINK IT, YOU CLICK ON THAT AND IT'LL TAKE YOU TO THE SPECIFIC APPLICATION.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF I'M JUST LOOKING TO DO A MINOR PLOT, ONCE I CLICK ON THE BOX, ALL THE GENERAL INFORMATION IS THERE.
THEN HERE IT GIVES ME A CHECKLIST OF WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR ME TO DO A MINOR PLOT.
THAT HELPS WITH THE APPLICATION.
I TALKED ABOUT HUB HYPERLINKING.
IF I'M LOOKING AT ZONING, I GO TO THE TABLE OF CONTENTS, CLICK ON ZONING.
IT TAKES ME TO THE CHAPTER ON ZONING AND IT HAS WALTER'S NAME AND THEN [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] NAME TO CONTACT THEM.
JUST KNOWING HOW TO PROCEED AND THEN SUBMITTAL CALENDARS IS A BIG DEAL, ESPECIALLY WITH THE SHORT CLOCK PROVISIONS WHERE VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE CITIES TWO THINGS LIKE THE COMPLETENESS CHECK HAS TO BE DONE ON TIME WITHIN 10 DAYS AND THE PLOTS HAVE TO BE ACTED ON WITHIN 30 DAYS.
THIS JUST GIVES THEM AN IDEA AS TO WHAT IS THE JOURNEY OF THEIR APPLICATION.
WHO'S GOING TO REVIEW WHAT? WHEN ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO BRING BACK YOUR COMMENTS TO THE CITY? AT WHAT COUNCIL MEETING IS IT GOING TO GO, AND JUST A LOT OF DISCLAIMERS THERE AND TELLING THEM THAT IF YOU MISS ONE MEETING, WHAT HAPPENS TO YOUR PLOT? JUST A CHECKLIST.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT A PLOT, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS? THIS HELPS WITH JUST MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S CONSISTENCY AMONG STAFF.
AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE REALLY USED A LOT OF CHECKLISTS THAT ALREADY WERE IN PLACE AND JUST COMBINE THEM INTO ONE DOCUMENT.
THE NEXT STEP REALLY WOULD BE TO, LIKE I SAID, COMPLETE THE ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES MANUAL, WHICH WE HOPE WITHIN A FEW WEEKS IT SHOULD BE DONE, AND THEN POST IT ON THE WEBSITE.
THEN JUST DISCUSS FUTURE STEPS FOR THE SHORT-TERM CODE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE PRIORITIZED, AND THEN ALSO LOOK AT FUTURE CODE AMENDMENTS.
JUST THE THINGS THAT I TALKED ABOUT, CONSOLIDATION, UPDATES, UPDATE OF CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS.
ON THE RIGHT SIDE, YOU CAN SEE A LIST OF STANDARDS THAT THE CITY OF ANGLETON IS USING NOW, AND ALL OF THESE ARE BASED ON OTHER CITIES.
SO IT'LL SAY CITY OF SUGARLAND STANDARDS FOR THIS, AND CITY OF SOMETHING ELSE, THE STANDARDS FOR THAT.
AT SOME POINT, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY TO SAY, "HEY, ARE THESE EVEN RELEVANT FOR OUR AREA?" THEN JUST LOOKING AT ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS IS
[01:45:02]
TO START LOOKING AT COLDER OVERLAY DISTRICTS.IF YOU HAVE CERTAIN AREAS IN THE CITY THAT ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN OTHERS, MAYBE HAVING SPECIAL GUIDELINES AND THEN LIVABLE CENTER ZONE AS YOU KNOW THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR, AND TO MAKE SURE TO REVIEW THE CODES TO SEE THAT THE CODES WILL ACTUALLY PROMOTE WHAT YOUR VISION FOR THE LIVABLE CENTERS IS.
THEN SIGNAGE IS A BIG ONE THERE.
ACTUALLY, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
>> THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WHILE YOU WERE TALKING CAME TO MIND.
WE HAD A COUPLE OF DEVELOPMENTS SOMEWHERE HERE IN TOWN.
WHERE IN OUR CODE IT SAYS TO GO TO THE CERTAIN PERSON IN CHARGE OF FLOODING OR SOMETHING.
THERE IS A FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR OR WE DON'T HAVE A FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR SO WHAT'S THE DEVELOPER SUPPOSED TO DO WHEN THE CODE TELLS HIM TO GO TO THIS AND WE DON'T HAVE IT.
THINGS LIKE THIS SO THIS CAME ABOUT FROM ADOPTING SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE ADOPTED.
GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS IS GOING TO ELIMINATE SOME OF THIS AS I SEE IT EMBARRASSMENT FOR THE CITY TO SAY TO DO THIS IN SIGNAGE.
WE ARE MAKING THIS UP OR YOU WILL HAVE PINK NO CROSSING SIGNS ANYWHERE.
IT DOESN'T CONFORM TO THE TEXAS MANUAL UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES.
THAT NEEDS TO BE MORE OF THE CODE THAT WE ADHERE TO IN STREET SCIENTIST TERMS, SO GETTING THERE.
>> I THINK PROBABLY THE BEST THING IS FOR THE COUNCIL TO PUT A MOTION FOR STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON THIS.
>> I THINK THERE'S THE SHORT-TERM TASKS, THAT'S WHERE WE CAN WORK ON.
THE LONGER-TERM TASK WILL COST US MONEY TO REWRITE OR DO SOME OF THESE OTHER PROGRAMS, BUT WE CAN ACCOMPLISH THE SHORT-TERM TASKS, PUT TOGETHER A CHECKLIST AND CAPTURE ALL THE GOALS THAT WE SET OUT TO DO.
>> SO THOSE SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS ARE ON THAT MEMORANDUM, MAYOR JASON?
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO SEEK TO IMPLEMENT THE SHORT-TERM GOALS AS LAID OUT AND TO ALLOW THE REST OF THE ENTIRE BIGGER PICTURE ITEMS TO BE VIEWED BY PLANNER, CITY MANAGER, AS WELL AS CITY ATTORNEY.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA.
THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK PUT IN ON THIS.
>> IT'S REALLY EYE-OPENING TO SEE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF A FEE ON THE HERITAGE TREE.
THAT'S GOOD. HOPEFULLY, THAT DISSUADES SOME PEOPLE FROM CLEAR-CUTTING.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU. NOW, TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ACTION ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER 10.
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 23-98, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT, ACCEPTANCE OF CHAPTER 23 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON, TEXAS.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
FOR THE BENEFIT OF OUR NEWEST COUNCIL MEMBER, I'M GOING TO BRIEFLY GO THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THIS.
THE CITY'S CURRENT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HAS A TWO-STEP PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE PROCESS.
THERE'S A PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE THAT'S DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY WITH AT LEAST A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND FOR THAT PARTICULAR PART OF THE PROCESS, AND THEN THERE'S A FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH IS DONE BY THE COUNCIL, AND THAT HAS A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
THE STAFF HAS BEEN PROCESSING FOR AT LEAST A YEAR,
[01:50:06]
PROBABLY CLOSER TO A YEAR AND A HALF, A WAIVER OF THE PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, AND A FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE CITY'S CURRENT $25,000 OR 20 PERCENT OF THE COST, WHICHEVER IS GREATER MAINTENANCE BOND AND ACCEPTING THOSE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SO THAT THE PLAQUE CAN GO FORWARD AND BE RECORDED.PROBABLY BACK AROUND THE FIRST OF THE YEAR, COUNCIL EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO HAVE THAT PROCESS AMENDED, AND SO LAST MONTH I BROUGHT A PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF YOU ALL TO AMEND THAT PROCESS TO JUST AN ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
I HAD RECOMMENDED A TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND, 100 PERCENT ON THE MAINTENANCE BOND, AND THAT IT'D BE AN ADMINISTRATIVE ACCEPTANCE DONE BY THE STAFF.
COUNCIL MEMBER BOOTH MADE A MOTION THAT COVERED THE STAFF ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND THE 100 PERCENT MAINTENANCE BOND WITH THE MAINTENANCE BOND BEING ONE YEAR.
BECAUSE THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, IT'S GOT TO GO TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR RECOMMENDATION AND PUBLIC HEARING, AND THEN TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL AT A PUBLIC HEARING.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING EARLIER THIS MONTH.
THEY ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH ONE CONDITION, WHICH IS THAT THE MAINTENANCE BOND SHOULD BE FOR TWO YEARS RATHER THAN ONE YEAR.
THEIR REASON FOR THAT RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THEY FEEL THAT A TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND BETTER PROTECTS THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
HAVING SAID THAT, THE ORDINANCE THAT'S IN YOUR BACKUP REFLECTS THE DIRECTION THAT YOU ALL GAVE US LAST MONTH, WHICH IS A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND.
IF YOU ARE INCLINED TO CONTINUE IN THAT DIRECTION, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS MOVE TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS IT'S WRITTEN, IF YOU FEEL THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAKES A GOOD POINT AND THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS BETTER SERVED BY A TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND, THEN YOUR MOTION SHOULD BE TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE TO REFLECT THAT TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE OPEN TO PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.
MOTION CARRIES. WE'RE NOW IN A PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? CALL FORWARD AGAIN.
ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? COUNCIL?
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.
MOTION CARRIES. COUNCIL NOW WE CAN TAKE ACTION.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 23-98, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ACCEPTANCE, ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND, 100 PERCENT FOR ONE YEAR, AND STAFF ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
>> MAYBE I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED, BUT THE PRESENTATION THAT WAS JUST PRESENTED, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT A MAINTENANCE BOND, BUT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING THAT THEY WERE PROPOSING OR THEY WERE AT LEAST DISCUSSING AS A POSSIBILITY?
>> THEY SUGGESTED, I GUESS A 125 PERCENT MAINTENANCE BOND?
>> THAT WOULD BE 125 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST TO THE PROJECT.
YOU'LL BE COVERING THE ENTIRETY OF THE CONSTRUCTION.
ALL THE UNDERGROUND SANITARY SEWER, ALL THE WATER MAINS, ALL THE STREETS, DETENTION POND CONSTRUCTION, EVERYTHING INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT.
THE CHANCES OF ALL THAT LOITERING AFTER BEING INSPECTED AND COVERED BY BUILT IN CONFORMANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS, WATCHED OVER BY THE CITY ENGINEER, THE ENGINEER OF RECORDS INSPECTOR,
[01:55:05]
THE CITY'S INSPECTOR, WE WANT TO GO TO 125 PERCENT.IT'S JUST GOING TO COST THE HOMEOWNER A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO CHARGE IT TO THIS.
COSTS OF THINGS GO UP, BUT WE'RE MOST LIKELY GOING TO REQUIRE THAT THE CONTRACTOR THAT DID THE WORK IS GOING TO COME BACK AND FIX THE WORK.
HOWEVER, THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO HAVE TO HAND YOU THE MAINTENANCE BOND NOT THE CONTRACTOR BECAUSE THE DEAL IS WITH THE DEVELOPER.
THEN YOU'LL PROBABLY GO BACK TO HIS CONTRACTOR TO FIX WHAT WENT AWRY AND AGAINST YOU.
>> IF MY UNDERSTANDING IS CORRECT, JUST WRITTEN HERE IN THE NOTES, A 100 PERCENT WOULD ACTUALLY BE AN INCREASE AS THE CURRENT.
>> FROM WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, YES SIR.
>> IT WILL NOT RISE TO THE 125 PERHAPS PRESENTED BY GUNDA, BUT IT WOULD DEFINITELY BE GREATER THAN WHAT WE'RE REQUIRING PRESENTLY.
>> IF I CAN CLARIFY JUST A LITTLE BIT, THERE'S A PERFORMANCE BOND WHICH IS WHAT'S GETS PROVIDED TO COVER THE COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION AS THE CONSTRUCTION IS BEING DONE.
IF THIS WERE A PERFORMANCE BOND, I WOULD RECOMMEND A MINIMUM OF 125 PERCENT, AND PROBABLY MORE OF THAT.
COUNCIL MEMBER OF BOOTH IS CORRECT.
IT WOULD BE VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE ENTIRETY OF ALL THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS TO FAIL SO 100 PERCENT ON THE MAINTENANCE BOND SHOULD BE MORE THAN TO COVER ANYTHING THAT FAILS DURING THE PERIOD OF THE MAINTENANCE BOND.
I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BOOTH, 100 PERCENT ON THE MAINTENANCE BOND SHOULD BE ENOUGH.
IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A PERFORMANCE BOND, I WOULD BE STARTING AT 125 PERCENT.
>> THANK YOU. THE OTHER IDEA I JUST WANT TO DISCUSS I'M NOT JUST THROWING THIS OUT HERE.
WAS IT PLANNING AND ZONING WANTED TO MAINTAIN TWO YEARS, AND DID THEY EVER STATE WHY? DID ANYBODY EXPLICITLY STATE WHY?
>> THEY FELT THAT TWO YEARS BETTER PROTECTED THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
>> OKAY. HERE'S WHEN PRIOR TO MOVING TO ANGLETON AND I'LL USE MY ANECDOTE, WHETHER ANECDOTE HAS ANY BEARING.
I LIVED IN A MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY IN PEARLAND, AND SOME PEOPLE MAY REMEMBER THE 2008, 2009 DOWNTURN.
[LAUGHTER] I WAS FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO LIVE IN A HOUSE THAT BACKED UP TO A PLANNED AREA THAT HAD NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED SO IT WAS AN OPEN FIELD BASICALLY BEHIND ME.
BUT THE DOWNTURN HAPPENED AND WHAT TURNED FROM PROBABLY WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE FOLLOWING YEAR TO SIX YEARS BEFORE THEY WERE ABLE TO BREAK GROUND AND START CONTINUING WITH THE DEVELOPMENT.
NOW OF COURSE, TWO YEARS, IF IT'S SIX YEARS, DOESN'T REALLY COVER ANYTHING, BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS FOR THIS TYPE OF BEING PREPARED FOR WHAT PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO ALREADY PROJECT IS MAYBE ANOTHER RECESSION COMING AND WE KNOW CONCRETE IS BEING POURED IN ANGLETON ON NEW SUBDIVISIONS.
I'M JUST THROWING THIS OUT THERE.
I'M NOT ARGUING, JUST THE IDEA.
>> MR. BOOTH, WHY ARE YOU AGAINST HAVING IT FOR TWO YEARS?
>> TRADITIONALLY, THAT WAS THE WAY THINGS HAVE BEEN DONE, BOTH IN PRIVATE CONSTRUCTION AND IN PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION.
WELL, I MADE THE POINT LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS THAT THE CITY GOES IN AND BUILDS A BRAND NEW STREET SOMEWHERE.
THEN THEIR MAINTENANCE BOND THAT THEY REQUIRE IS A YEAR BUILT BY THE SAME STANDARD, BUILT BY THE SAME SPECIFICATIONS, WATCHED OVER BY THE SAME PEOPLE, IF NOT MORE SO THE CITY REQUIRES OF ITSELF ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND.
NOW THE SAME PRACTICES ARE DONE IN THE PRIVATE END, MAYBE EVEN MORE EYES ON THE PROJECT.
I THINK IT'S ONLY FAIR TO REQUIRE OF THEM WHAT WE REQUIRE OF OURSELVES.
OVER THE YEARS, IT'S BEEN A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND FOR EVERYTHING I'VE EVER BEEN INVOLVED WITH.
[02:00:08]
VISIONS, MAJOR PROJECTS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECTS WITHIN CITIES AND SUCH SO THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION FROM MY END, AND THAT'S WHY I MADE THE MOTION THAT WAY.WILL THE CITY INTEND TO GO TO A TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND ON ITS CONSTRUCTION?
>> NO, I APPRECIATE YOUR THOUGHTS.
>> THANK YOU, WILL BECAUSE THAT BOND IS EXPENSIVE.
WE'RE IN THE THROES OF SOME ECONOMIC ISSUES RIGHT HERE SO WHEN THE DEVELOPERS ARE REQUIRED TO FURNISH A TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND, WHAT YOU'RE DOING, JUST GOING TO RAISE THE PRICE OF THE HOUSE.
IF IT HASN'T BROKEN IN A YEAR, I JUST CAN'T SEE IT BREAKING.
>> THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM.
>> I'M TORN BECAUSE I APPRECIATE MR. BOOTH'S EQUITY, BEING EQUITABLE TO BOTH SIDES THE PUBLIC SECTOR AS WELL AS THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
I JUST ALWAYS WANT TO LOOK AT WHAT I THINK FOR THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY AND NOT THAT YOU DON'T I'M NOT SAYING THAT.
I APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO IMPLY YOU'RE NOT.
BUT THE TWO YEARS WOULD GIVE A LITTLE MORE INSURANCE, SO TO SPEAK. THAT'S ALL.
>> I'M JUST COMING FROM PAST EXPERIENCE.
>> COUNCILMAN BOOTH HAS MADE A MOTION WITH THESE STIPULATIONS DOES ANYBODY WANT TO SECOND THAT?
>> IF IT HELPS YOU, THE MOTION IS BASED ON THE ORDINANCE.
IT'S IN THE PACKET. SAME LANGUAGE.
IT'S THE ONE THAT WE'VE ALREADY PREPARED.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA.
DO I HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> IF THIS IDEA GOES SOUTH, WE'LL CHANGE THE ORDINANCE, WE'RE OPEN TO THAT.
BUT I HOPE THAT WITH EVERYBODY WATCHING OVER THE PROJECT AS IT GETS CONSTRUCTED, THAT WE CAN WALK AWAY AND SLEEP WELL AT NIGHT.
>> MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE RAISED THIS QUESTION BEFORE BUT WHERE DID THE IDEA OF THE TWO YEARS COME FROM ORIGINALLY? IS IT THAT SOME SORT OF BEST PRACTICE?
>> IF YOU RECALL, FROM LAST MONTH I HAD A SURVEY OF SIX CITIES IN THE AREA.
I THINK THREE OF THEM HAD A TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND AND TWO OF THEM HAD A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND.
THERE'S NOT REALLY AN INDUSTRY BY INDUSTRY, I MEAN A PLANNING STANDARD, ONE YEAR, TWO YEAR.
THAT'S A LOCAL DECISION MADE AS LOCAL NEEDS REQUIRE.
I HAVE NOT SEEN A MAINTENANCE BOND FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS, BUT I HAVE SEEN TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE BONDS.
>> YOU MAY RECALL WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION AND I WAS ASKED ABOUT OTHER CITIES I REPRESENT AND IT'S SPLIT.
>> OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SAY.
WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO NOT GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TONIGHT.
THAT'S GOING TO BE TABLED FOR THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING SO WE WILL MOVE TO ADJOURNMENT.
WE WILL ADJOURN AT 8:35.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.