[1. CALL TO ORDER]
          [00:00:03]
          OKAY. TODAY IS MONDAY, JUNE 16TH, 2025. WILL NOW CALL THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TO ORDER AT 6:32 P.M. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS ROLL CALL. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM OF COUNCIL. ITEM NUMBER THREE IS OUR PLEDGE TO BE LED BY OUR POLICE CHIEF, BRANDON HARRIS. PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. CHIEF. ITEM NUMBER FOUR, OUR PRESENTATION AND RECOGNITION. WE 
          [(a) Proclamation - National Parks and Recreation Month]
DO HAVE A PRESENTATION TODAY FOR A IS A PROCLAMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH. 
          IT'LL BE PRESENTED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CLAUSEN. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. 
          CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME? IS THIS ON? OKAY, GOOD. WOULD EVERYBODY WHO IS HERE FROM OUR PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT PLEASE COME FORWARD? OKAY. THEY ARE WORKING OVERTIME AND AFTER HOURS, SO. WELL, THIS ISN'T WORK. THIS IS RECOGNITION. SO Y'ALL COME ON UP. AND LET'S GIVE OUR PARKS AND REC TEAM A BIG HAND. ALL RIGHT? WE HAVE A VIDEO TO SHOW. SO IF WE CAN DIRECT OUR ATTENTION. THROUGHOUT THE NATION, COMMUNITIES ARE CELEBRATING 40 YEARS OF PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH THIS JULY. AND HERE IN MISSOURI CITY, CELEBRATION TOGETHER. TOGETHER, WE'RE BUILDING AND MAINTAINING SUSTAINABLE PARKS AND GREEN SPACES, SPACES WHERE FAMILIES GATHER, CHILDREN GROW, AND NATURE THRIVES. FROM SCENIC PARKS. ERIC ACRE WE CARE FOR IS AN INVESTMENT IN TOMORROW. TOGETHER, WE'RE BUILDING THRIVING COMMUNITIES FOCUSED ON HEALTH AND WELL-BEING. WHETHER IT'S YOUR FIRST FIVE-K, A MORNING YOGA FLOW, OR A DAILY WALK THROUGH THE PARK, WE SUPPORT YOUR JOURNEY TO A HEALTHIER YOU. TOGETHER, WE'RE BUILDING QUALITY PROGRAMS AND SPACES THAT ARE INCLUSIVE AND ACCESSIBLE TO ALL, FROM TODDLERS TO SENIORS. FROM EVERY BACKGROUND, THERE'S A PLACE FOR EVERYONE IN OUR PROGRAMS. TOGETHER, WE HELP PEOPLE PLAY AND CONNECT THROUGH PILATES, ART CLASSES, GAME NIGHTS, SUMMER CAMPS, AND UNFORGETTABLE COMMUNITY EVENTS. BECAUSE HERE WE BELIEVE THAT JOY IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS FITNESS. MISSOURI CITY PARKS AND RECREATION IS MORE THAN JUST PARKS WHERE YOUR NEIGHBORS, YOUR COACHES, YOUR TEACHERS, YOUR CHEERLEADERS. WE BUILD TOGETHER, WE PLAY TOGETHER. WE GROW TOGETHER. THIS YEAR'S NATIONAL THEME, BUILD TOGETHER, PLAY TOGETHER, HONORS THE OVER 160,000 DEDICATED PARKS AND RECREATION PROFESSIONALS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, ALONGSIDE SEASONAL STAFF, PART TIME EMPLOYEES AND THOUSANDS OF VOLUNTEERS WHO MAKE OUR COMMUNITIES BETTER. ONE PARK AT A TIME IN MISSOURI CITY. WE'RE PROUD TO CARRY THAT MISSION FORWARD EVERY SINGLE DAY WITH PASSION, PRIDE, AND PURPOSE. WE BUILD TOGETHER. WE PLAY TOGETHER. THAT'S AWESOME. THIS IS THIS IS THE FUN TEAM. LIKE THEY THEY GO TO WORK AND PLAY LIKE. AND Y'ALL GET PAID TO DO THAT. I LOVE IT, I LOVE IT. I, ESPECIALLY BEFORE I PRESENT THIS PROCLAMATION, WANT TO THANK YOU ALL WHO HELPED TO MAKE THE VERY FIRST TASTE OF MISSOURI CITY A SUCCESS. PARKS AND RECS WAS WAS OUT THERE. Y'ALL WERE ENGAGING WITH RESIDENTS. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY ON BEHALF OF THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS SUCCESSFUL EVENT THIS WEEKEND AND EVERYTHING THAT Y'ALL DO. I'M GOING TO PRESENT THIS PROCLAMATION TO YOU ALL. WHEREAS PARKS AND RECREATION ARE AN IMPORTANT PART OF COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT THIS COUNTRY, SPECIFICALLY THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY. AND WHEREAS PARKS 
          [00:05:05]
AND RECREATION PROMOTE HEALTH AND WELLNESS BY IMPROVING THE PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH OF THOSE WHO FREQUENTLY VISIT OUR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL CENTERS. AND WHEREAS PARKS AND RECREATION ENCOURAGES PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES BY PROVIDING POPULAR SPORTS LIKE PICKLEBALL, MANY OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT PROMOTE AN ACTIVE LIFESTYLE. AND WHEREAS, PARKS AND RECREATION ENSURES THE BEAUTY OF OUR COMMUNITY WHILE PROVIDING A PLACE FOR CHILDREN AND ADULTS TO CONNECT WITH NATURE AND OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES. NOW, THEREFORE, I COUNCIL MEMBER LYNN CLOUSER, ALONG WITH MAYOR ROBIN ELLACOTT AND THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS OF MISSOURI CITY, DO HEREBY RECOGNIZE JULY AS NATIONAL PARK AND RECREATION MONTH IN THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS, DONNY? YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UP HERE YOU HAVE A SMALL SELECTION OF PARKS AND RECREATION STAFF, FROM PART TIME TO FULL TIME STAFF TO VOLUNTEERS AND MANY PARTNERS THAT MAKE RECREATION AND PARKS AND FUN IN MISSOURI CITY HAPPEN. AND SO WE'RE THANKFUL THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR YOU RECOGNIZE JULY AS PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH. WE BELIEVE THAT THROUGH OUR PARKS, THROUGH OUR RECREATION, WE HELP TO MAKE MISSOURI CITY A VIBRANT, FUN, BEAUTIFUL PLACE TO LIVE AND TO GROW. AND SO WE APPRECIATE THE RECOGNITION AND WE APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT AND LOOK OUT FOR LOTS OF JULY ACTIVITIES TO CELEBRATE PARKS AND RECREATION MONTH, OF COURSE, AND ALSO OUR FOURTH, FOURTH FEST THAT'S COMING UP TOO. SO THANK YOU. 
          TELL US WHERE WE CAN FOLLOW YOU ON. YOU CAN CHECK US OUT AT MCT PARKS. SO WE ALSO HAVE A FACEBOOK PAGE, SOCIAL MEDIA WITHOUT A DOUBT OUR WEBSITE, LOTS OF INFORMATION THAT'S AVAILABLE. AND SO OR YOU CAN JUST GIVE US A CALL. WE'D LOVE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO DO. SO THANK YOU. AWESOME. AND I LEARNED HOW TO FISH FROM AN EVENT THAT YOU GUYS WERE YOU DID OVER THE SUMMER. SO THANK YOU. I'M A CAN I SAY I'M A FISHERMAN NOW OKAY. ALL RIGHT. 
          ALL RIGHT, LET'S GET A PICTURE. 
          CONGRATULATIONS. 
          I WOULD JUST ASK CITY MANAGER, CAN WE LOOK AT THE VOLUME ON HERE? BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE CAN'T HARDLY HEAR THE VIDEOS. SO JUST FOR, FOR LONG TERM. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER FIVE, OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS. CITY SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE A DEPUTY CITY CLERK. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR OR IS IT GOING TO BE FOR A CERTAIN ITEM? YES, SIR. ALL OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT REQUESTS ARE RELATED TO ITEM 8A1. OKAY. AND WE'LL TAKE IT AT AT THAT TIME DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL 
          [(a) City Manager Report - Provide an overview of Consent Agenda items and ...]
RIGHT. ITEM SIX ARE STAFF REPORTS. SIX A CITY MANAGER'S REPORT PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE COMMUNITY'S INTERESTS. WE HAVE ANGEL JONES, OUR CITY MANAGER. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. I'LL START WITH ITEM A. THIS ITEM SEEKS CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL TO DESIGNATE SASHI KUMAR AS ADDITIONAL ACTING CITY MANAGER, ALONGSIDE ACM MANGUM. TO SERVE IN MY ABSENCE, WHEN NECESSARY. 
          ITEM B THIS ITEM REQUESTS CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH FORT BEND COUNTY FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES TO KITTY HOLLOW PARK. THIS AMENDMENT LIMITS SERVICE TO FIVE EQUIVALENT SINGLE FAMILY CONNECTIONS TO PROTECT THE CITY'S UTILITY CAPACITY, WHILE UPDATING THE AGREEMENT TO REFLECT NEW FACILITIES TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY THE COUNTY. ALL OTHER ITEMS, INCLUDING COSTS RESPONSIBILITIES, REMAIN UNCHANGED. ITEM C THIS ITEM SEEKS AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH WORLDWIDE POWER PRODUCTS FOR CONTINUED RENTAL OF A TEMPORARY GENERATOR AT THE MUSTANG BAYOU WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. THE TOTAL RENTAL COST IS NOW PROJECTED AT UP TO 69,000. FUNDING IS PROVIDED BY MUSTANG BAYOU CUSTOMERS MUD 47 AND MUD 48. THIS ACTION ENSURES UNINTERRUPTED PLANT OPERATIONS UNTIL THE PERMANENT GENERATOR IS 
          [00:10:02]
INSTALLED. THE NEXT ITEM, D. THIS ITEM, SEEKS AUTHORIZATION FOR THE NEGOTIATION AND EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH WALTER P MOORE IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $450,000 FOR THE UPDATE OF THE CITY'S MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN. THE PROJECT IS FUNDED THROUGH A FEMA HAZARDOUS, A HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT GRANT PROGRAM AWARD, WITH 93.75% OF THE COST REIMBURSABLE BY FEDERAL AND STATE SOURCES. AND FOR THE PUBLIC. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THERE'S BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT THE STATUS OF FEMA. THIS MONEY, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, HAS ALREADY BEEN FUNNELED THROUGH THE STATE. SO IT'S UNLIKELY THAT WE WOULD NOT RECEIVE THESE FUNDS. I SAY UNLIKELY BECAUSE SOMETHING COULD ALWAYS HAPPEN, BUT THE FUNDS ARE THERE AT THE STATE LEVEL. THE UPDATE WILL FOCUS ON KEY FLOOD PRONE AREAS AND GUIDE FUTURE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS. WALTER P MOORE WAS SELECTED THROUGH A QUALIFICATIONS BASED PROCESS AND RECOMMENDED BY THE PDI COMMITTEE. ITEM E THIS ITEM SEEKS AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE A NEW FIVE YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT WITH DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES NOT TO EXCEED $102,000 358 ANNUALLY FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF MOTOR MOBILE DATA TERMINALS, MDTS AND PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES. THE CURRENT MDTS HAVE EXCEEDED THEIR LIFE CYCLE AND LEASE TERMS AND COULD LEAD TO INCREASED DOWNTIME IF NOT REPLACED. ITEM F. THIS ITEM REQUESTS THE AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH NETWORK CABLING SERVICES, NOT TO EXCEED $371,877 FOR THE DESIGN, PROCUREMENT, AND INSTALLATION OF AUDIO VISUAL SYSTEMS AS PART OF PHASE TWO AND PHASE THREE OF THE QUAIL VALLEY CITY CENTER PROJECT. THE FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT WAS APPROVED ON APRIL 21ST, 2025. ITEM G THIS ITEM REQUESTS CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A REIMBURSEMENT PAYMENT OF $13,608 TO RAYMOND W HOWARD, PC, UNDER THE CITY'S FACADE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS APPROVED FOR THE PROGRAM ON DECEMBER 5TH, 2022 AND HAS SINCE COMPLETED ELIGIBLE FACADE IMPROVEMENTS, A THIRD PARTY AUDIT HAS CONFIRMED THE SUBMITTED EXPENSES, AND THE REIMBURSEMENT AMOUNT REPRESENTS 75% OF THE TOTAL ELIGIBLE COSTS. 
          THAT CONCLUDES THE OVERVIEW. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER MONTE. 
          ANYTHING ON THIS ITEM? WELL, YEAH. AS OPPOSED TO PULLING ITEM SEVEN G. I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT ON IT. I SPOKE TO MR. HOWARD, ATTORNEY HOWARD ABOUT THIS BEING ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING. AND I JUST WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR STAYING THE COURSE WITH HIM. THERE'S A LOT THAT HAS HAPPENED. YOU KNOW, HE INITIALLY APPLIED FOR THIS WHEN WE INTRODUCED AND CREATED THE I BROUGHT THIS PROGRAM, THESE PROGRAMS FORTH OUT OF THE TEXAS PARKWAY CARTWRIGHT CORRIDOR COMMITTEE. WE HAD TO WORK THROUGH ALL THE KINKS. SO I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO REVISE IT AND ENHANCE IT. BUT HE HAD TO DEAL WITH COVID. HE HAD A SIGNIFICANT HEALTH CHALLENGE THAT HAS DELAYED HIM. SO FROM GOING FROM MAY 2022 TO NOW, JUNE 2025, TO SEE HIM STICK THE COURSE AND STAFF STICK WITH HIM AND THEN FINALIZE SOME THINGS BECAUSE I KNOW HE'S LOOKING TO DO ABOUT $85,000 WORTH OF IMPROVEMENTS TO HIS PROPERTY RIGHT THERE AT TURTLE CREEK AND TEXAS PARKWAY. SO I'M EXCITED THAT WE'RE ABLE TO MAKE THE DECISION ON THIS ACTION ON TODAY AND JUST ENCOURAGE US TO CONTINUE TO TRY TO GET MORE APPLICATIONS IN ON ALL THESE PROGRAMS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM SEVEN. OUR CONSENT AGENDA. IS THERE A 
          [7. CONSENT AGENDA]
MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA OKAY. SO THERE'S BEEN A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BONEY, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CLOUSER SEEING NO ONE ELSE ON THE QUEUE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THIS ITEM WAS 
          [(1) Public Hearing - To receive comments for or against a request by Katie...]
APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT A PUBLIC HEARING AND RELATED ACTIONS. EIGHT A IS A ZONING, PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE 8A1 IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS OR FOR OR AGAINST A REQUESTED. A REQUEST BY KATIE HOBBS, ATLAS TOWERS FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT APPROVAL ON AN APPROXIMATE 2500 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND OUT OF THE OUT OF A LARGER 15.43 ACRE 
          [00:15:02]
TRACT OF LAND TO ALLOW FOR THE FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A NEW TELECOMMUNICATION SITE CONSISTING OF 155 FOOT TALL MONOPOLE TOWER AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT, AND TO THE EXTENT SUCH ZONING DEVIATES FROM THE FUTURE LAND USE AND CHARACTER MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO PROVIDE FOR AN AMENDMENT. THEREFORE. THE SITE. THE SITE IS LOCATED NORTH OF LAKE OLYMPIA RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF GLEN LAKES AND MISSION VALLEY DRIVE, SOUTH OF COMMUNITY PARK, EAST OF MISSION VALLEY DRIVE, AND WEST OF PARKS EDGE. 
          RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. SO WE'LL NOW GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ITEM EIGHT, A ONE. DEPUTY CITY SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE RECEIVE REQUESTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES, SIR. 
          MR. MAYOR, WE HAVE. OKAY. FIRST UP, WE HAVE A LARRY BELL. AS YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. AND PLEASE ADHERE TO THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT. 
          WHERE'S THE TIMER ON THE SCREEN. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THANK YOU FOR GIVING US YOUR TIME AND SERVICE OVER THE YEARS AND HAVE TO PUT UP WITH PEOPLE LIKE ME EVERY NOW AND THEN. MY NAME IS LARRY BELL. I LIVE AT 1723 CORONA DEL MAR DRIVE, LAKE OLYMPIA RIGHT NOW. I USED TO LIVE IN HUNTER'S GLEN BETWEEN 75 AND 81, WHEN A JOB CHANGE TOOK ME TO CORPUS CHRISTI FOR 32 YEARS. BUT I'M SPEAKING AGAINST THIS TOWER PLACEMENT. WE'VE HAD £0.02 AND Z MEETINGS. 
          IT PASSED ON THE SECOND TO GET TO YOUR AGENDA RIGHT NOW WITH MODIFICATION OF A CONCRETE DRIVEWAY, NO LESS OF. ALTHOUGH THE PLAT NOW SHOWS A LITTLE BIT OF ■GRAVEL AND MOVED IT BACK 100 OR SO FEET. SO IT'S 221FT BACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF MY NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET. 
          YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE 6 OR 7 OF MY NEIGHBORS WITH TRAFFIC ON THAT UTILITY ROAD TO SERVICE THAT UNIT, DRIVING BACK AND FORTH ON THIS ROAD, I OBJECTED IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE OF THE INITIAL PLACEMENT. I ALSO OBJECTED BECAUSE LIVING IN SOUTH TEXAS, WHILE I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE DUST AND DIRT AND GRIME AND THE CHOKING FROM CALICHE OR GRAVEL, BUT THEY DID GO UP A LITTLE BIT ON CONCRETE, WHICH WAS WHEN I ADDED UP 867FT. WHEN YOU MAKE THE TURN AND GO TO THE PAD, WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT. BUT BEYOND THAT, WE'RE LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AWAY. QUITE FRANKLY, WE'RE RIGHT NEXT TO COMMUNITY PARK. WHY DON'T YOU FOLKS TAKE THE END OF GLEN OAKS AND STOP IT THERE? GIVE THEM 202,500FT■!S. LET THEM PUT IT THERE. LET THE PARKS DEPARTMENT COLLECT THE RENT AND DEDICATE IT TO THEM. HEAVEN KNOWS, THEY PROBABLY DON'T GET ENOUGH FUNDING WITH ALL THE NEEDS AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU GUYS HAVE. BUT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE. I HAD A ONE ON ONE MEETING LAST WEEK WITH JENNIFER. SHE'S GREAT. I'VE TALKED TO HER IN THE PAST, KEEP HER HAPPY, KEEP HER. SHE'S GOOD. BUT THAT'S WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW. BUT I'D LIKE TO JUST SEE THIS THING EITHER TAKEN AWAY. WE NEED TOWERS COUNTED UP. WHAT'S HAPPENING IN MY HOUSEHOLD WITH MY EASY. WHATEVER IT IS, I HAVE 10 OR 12 DIFFERENT SIGNALS COMING IN FOR TWO PEOPLE. AND WHEN OUR DAUGHTER, KIDS, GRANDKIDS PLAY. BUT WE'RE GOING TO NEED SOMETHING. IT'S TAXABLE DOLLARS. TAKE IT OFF THE TAXPAYER'S RESIDENCE, PUT IT ON CORPORATE. WE WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. BUT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW. AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION ON THIS TOPIC. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE EDWARD GRAVIS. AS YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. 
          AND PLEASE ADHERE TO THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT. GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU COUNCIL FOLKS. MY NAME IS DOCTOR ED GRAVIS. I WORK AT HOUSTON METHODIST. I'M AN EPIDEMIOLOGIST AND I'VE LIVED IN MISSOURI CITY FOR ABOUT 23 YEARS. AND THE WHOLE REASON I MOVED HERE IS BECAUSE I REALLY WANTED TO HAVE GREEN SPACE AND ACCESSIBILITY TO COMMUNITY PARK, AND THAT'S WHY I MOVED INTO LAKE OLYMPIA SUBDIVISION. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME THAT WE'VE I'VE COME TO PROTEST SO TWICE BEFORE, BUT WAS BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND THE FIRST ONE, IT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS 100FT FROM OUR SUBDIVISION. AND SO THEN IT WAS VOTED DOWN. WE THOUGHT IT WAS GONE. SO THEN IT CAME BACK A SECOND TIME AND THEY MOVED IT TO 221FT. NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE RISK MANAGERS AND THE LAWYERS WON'T TELL YOU ARE THEY PROBABLY ALREADY TOLD YOU IS THAT GOVERNMENT DOESN'T ALLOW THE APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF ANY KIND OF CELL PHONE TOWERS 
          [00:20:03]
BEING INFLUENCING YOUR VOTE? THAT IS BECAUSE FCS, FCC RULES. BUT THEN AGAIN, THERE ARE FCC RULES, INCLUDING SECTION 1.1307 AND 1.1310 THAT STATES THE SIGNAGE HAS TO BE ON THE BROADCASTING SITE AND IT HAS TO SITE INVISIBLE DANGERS. SO WE HAVE AN OXYMORON HERE. THEY'RE TELLING YOU IT'S NOT IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT PUBLIC HEALTH, BUT YET THEN THEY HAVE TO PUT THESE SIGNS UP. SO I THINK THERE'S AN OXYMORON THERE. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT I THINK THIS IS EERILY  & SIMILAR TO THE HAZARDS OF SMOKING THAT WERE TOLD TO US BACK IN THE 60S. AND HERE WE ARE, YOU KNOW, 70 YEARS LATER, AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT THE DANGERS OF SMOKING ARE. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THE LANDOWNER DOES NOT EVEN LIVE IN THIS SUBDIVISION OR IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD OR EVEN IN MISSOURI CITY. SO HOW CAN HE TELL US ABOUT HEALTH AND SAFETY AND THE WELL-BEING OF OUR COMMUNITY WHEN HE DOESN'T EVEN LIVE HERE? WHAT IT BASICALLY COMES DOWN TO IS INFLUENCE, WHETHER MONETARY OR OTHERWISE, SOMEBODY IS TRYING TO PUSH THIS CELL PHONE INTO OUR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. LAKE OLYMPIA DOESN'T NEED ANOTHER CELL PHONE TOWER. IT SHADOWS OUR COMMUNITY AS IT IS. WE DON'T NEED OUR OUR HOME VALUES LOWERED BY 7 OR 8%. AND THAT'S WHAT CELL PHONES WILL DO. I MEAN, CELL PHONE TOWERS WILL DO. IF MOST CITY DOES HAVE TO HAVE ANOTHER CELL PHONE TOWE, THEN AND THEY HAVE TO BE ON THE IN THIS PROPERTY, THEN WHY DON'T THEY MOVE IT 600 OR 800FT TO THE NORTHEAST, STILL ON THE PERSON'S PROPERTY, AND ALLOW THE CITY TO APPROVE AN EASEMENT THROUGH COMMUNITY PARK. AND THAT WAY YOU GUYS GET BUY IN INSTEAD OF PUTTING ALL THE PRESSURE ON THE LAKE. OLYMPIA HOMEOWNERS, I BELIEVE WE NEED TO HOLD AND KEEP THE MISSOURI CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS IS AND VOTE THIS REZONING AMENDMENT DOWN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. 
          NEXT WE HAVE MR. BURT SILVERSTEIN. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, AND PLEASE ADHERE TO THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT. HE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED A PACKET FOR THE COUNCIL TO. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M BURT SILVERSTEIN, 1710 CORONA DEL MAR DRIVE, AND I AM APPALLED. THIS PROPOSED TOWER IS GOING TO STAND 155FT TALL. IT'S THE TALLEST MONOPOLE TOWER IN MORE THAN THREE MILE RADIUS. THE AREA BEGINS ONLY 196FT FROM OUR FENCE LINE. IT DISRUPTS A VIEW NATURE AND CREATES POTENTIAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES IN THE AREA. IT IMPACTS THE OVERALL ESTHETICS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY PARK AREA AS REPRESENTED BY OUR CITY'S LAND USE AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER. NOW, WAS IT JUST AN OVERSIGHT THAT THERE WERE NO PHOTO MOCKUPS PRESENTED? ON MAY 14TH, PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING FROM CORONA DEL MAR DRIVE? THAT'S THE ROAD DIRECTLY BEHIND WHERE THE TOWER IS GOING TO BE LOCATED. AS OTHER PHOTOS WERE CREATED AND SHOWN BY OUR PLANNER, WHICH WERE NOWHERE TO SCALE, I ASKED THAT MOCKUPS BE CREATED FOR VIEWS FROM OUR STREET. I EVEN ASKED A REPRESENTATIVE FROM ATLAS TOWERS WHO ASSURED ME THAT HE WOULD PROVIDE ONE, AND THAT NEVER HAPPENED. SO I CREATED SOME VERY IMPACTFUL, TRUE TO SCALE MOCKUPS BASED ON THE 150 FOOT TOWER AT THE GLEN LAKES POST OFFICE, AND I SENT THEM TO ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ALSO PROVIDED THEM HERE. I HOPE YOU EACH HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THEM WHEN I EMAILED IT, AND I'M SURE YOU WOULDN'T WANT THAT TOWER TO BE IN YOUR BACKYARD NOW. I PROVIDED EACH OF YOU DETAILS REGARDING THE FOLLOWING POINTS. HOME VALUES IN THE NEARBY COMMUNITIES WILL DECREASE BY AT LEAST 2.4%, WITH HOMES WITHIN ITS VISIBLE RANGE CLOSE TO 10%. ONLY REFERENCES TO PAINTING IT AND LANDSCAPING THE TOWER WERE ADDRESSED AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 15 B4 OF THE CITY CODE. THERE'S STILL NO EVIDENCE THAT THE MONOPOLE TOWER WILL BE CONCEALED OR DISGUISED AS A STEALTH STYLE, AS OUR PLANNER HAS STATED IN THEIR PRESENTATION. NOW THE TOWER VIOLATES THE FUTURE LAND USE AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER MAP GOALS TO 4 TO 5, AND THE PARKS AND RECREATION GOAL FOR SIX OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, LAND USE AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER GOALS. REVIEW CITED GOALS ONE, 321 AND 318. NOW, I'VE OFFERED ARGUMENTS IN THE DETAILS I PROVIDED EACH OF YOU, ALONG WITH QUESTIONS REGARDING SOME OF THE CITY CODE STATUTES FOUND IN SECTION 15. THIS FLIES IN THE FACE OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE REPORT, PRESENTED AT THE JUNE 11TH PNC MEETINGS THAT STATES TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES SHOULD BE SITED ON PUBLICLY OWNED LAND OR NONRESIDENTIAL AREAS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TOWERS NEEDED AND MINIMIZE THE IMPACTS ON RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. AND TO SUMMARIZE, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE OPPOSITION THE CONSTRUCTION 
          [00:25:01]
OF THIS TOWER NEAR OUR HOMES. IT REDUCES THE VALUE OF OUR HOMES, STICKS OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB, AND VIOLATIONS OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CITY CODE WILL BE A DANGER TO CHILDREN PLAYING IN THE PARK. AND ALTHOUGH WE CAN'T ARGUE THE POSSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF RF EMISSIONS, PER THE 30 YEAR OLD FCC TOWER, IT CAN BE A SAFETY HAZARD. AND ALSO ATLAS TOWERS CAN APPROVE ADDITIONAL TOWERS THAT THE LANDOWNER WILL NOW BE ALLOWED TO PETITION BASED ON YOUR CODE. SIR, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE. MISS SANDY MALOOF, PLEASE. AS YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, AND PLEASE ADHERE TO THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SANDY MALOOF AND I LIVE AT 1710 CORONA DEL MAR IN LAKE OLYMPIA. I'VE LIVED IN MY HOME FOR OVER 20 YEARS AND ENJOY LIVING IN THE LAKE OLYMPIA SUBDIVISION. I SELECTED MY HOME'S LOCATION BECAUSE OF THE BEAUTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA AND COMMUNITY PARK RIGHT IN MY BACKYARD. NEVER DID I DREAM THAT THE PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO THE PARK WOULD HOUSE 155 FOOT CELL TOWER, THE TALLEST MONOPOLE WITHIN THREE MILES. PUTTING THIS TOWER BEHIND MY HOME WILL DEFINITELY RUIN ALL THE BEAUTY THE COMMUNITY PARK OFFERS. IT WILL LOOK, QUITE HONESTLY, HORRIBLE. JUST GO TO THE 150 FOOT TOWER NEAR THE GLEN LAKES POST OFFICE, AND PICTURE THAT TOWER RIGHT IN YOUR OWN BACKYARD. WHEN YOU INVEST IN A HOME, YOU DON'T EXPECT SOMETHING LIKE THIS TO RUIN EVERYTHING. 
          YOU'VE WORKED FOR MY PROPERTY VALUE, ALONG WITH THE HOMES ON MY STREET, WILL POTENTIALLY DECREASE 10%. I WAS SHOCKED WHE, DURING THE LAST PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, SO MANY MEMBERS VOICED HOW TERRIBLE THE TOWER WOULD LOOK AND HOW IT WOULD AFFECT THE NEARBY HOMEOWNERS. 
          THEY KEPT SAYING OVER AND OVER AGAIN, NOBODY WANTS THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN. BUT THEN THEY ALL VOTED FOR IT. I COULDN'T BELIEVE THAT THE PLANNER DIDN'T EVEN SHOW A PICTURE OF WHAT THE TOWER WOULD LOOK LIKE FROM MY STREET, BUT SHOWED A NUMBER OF OTHER INCORRECT REPRESENTATIONS FROM AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I HOPE YOU CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR YOU AND PUT YOU INTO OFFICE, AND WILL STOP THIS PROPOSAL. MY PERCEPTION IS THAT FOR SOME REASON, THIS TOWER IS BEING PUSHED THROUGH BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING TEAM, REGARDLESS OF THE LOCAL RESIDENTS OPINIONS. I UNDERSTAND THERE'S AN ANTIQUATED FCC LAW FROM 1996 THAT SAYS WE CAN'T STOP THE TOWER BASED SOLELY ON RF SIGNALS, BUT THIS IS WHERE YOU ARE. ELECTED OFFICIALS CAN COME TO YOUR COMMUNITY'S AID AND STOP THIS PROPOSAL DUE TO ALL THEIR OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. WE, YOUR RESIDENTS, HAVE VOICED THERE ARE MANY OTHER COMMERCIAL AREAS WITHIN A COUPLE OF MILES THAT CAN EASILY HOUSE THIS TOWER TURTLE CREEK, FORT BEND TOLL ROAD, AND ALL ALONG THE TOLLWAY. 
          DON'T LOOK AT CONSTRUCTION IN OUR BACKYARDS. YOU ALL HAVE A PLACE TO CALL HOME. WHEN YOU INVEST IN A HOME, YOU LOOK FORWARD TO ENJOYING A SAFE ENVIRONMENT THAT ALLOWS YOU TO APPRECIATE THE BEAUTIFUL SURROUNDINGS IN OUR FINE CITY. THE LOWER THE TOWER WILL BE VERY CLOSE TO THE PARK AND FRISBEE GOLF, WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY SOME KIDS COULD DEFINITELY BE HARMED PLAYING THERE TODAY AS THE LIGHTNING AND LOUD THUNDER CONTINUED, WE COMMENTED, IMAGINE WHAT THAT WOULD BE LIKE IF THE CELL TOWER WAS SO CLOSE TO OUR HOUSE, BECAUSE THEY DO ATTRACT LIGHTNING, AND TO ME IT WOULD BE PRETTY SCARY. TO SUMMARIZE, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS ANTENNA NEAR OUR HOMES. IT REDUCES THE VALUE OF OUR HOMES WILL RUIN THE BEAUTY THAT DREW ME TO THIS AREA. WILL MAKE MISSOURI MISSOURI CITY LESS DESIRABLE FOR FUTURE RESIDENTS. 
          PLEASE DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THE HOMEOWNERS OF OUR AREA. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE JEFF THOMAS. AS YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND PLEASE ADHERE TO THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. MY NAME IS JEFF THOMAS. I LIVE AT 1730 CORONA DEL MAR. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, I ECHO THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE. I OBJECT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THIS TOWER IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I LIVE IN A HOME. SEVERAL HOUSES DOWN THE ROAD WOULD GO RIGHT BEHIND MY HOME, SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. I WAS AT THE ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING WHERE THIS WAS APPROVED, AND THERE WAS A CONCERN RAISED THAT I DON'T THINK WAS ADDRESSED AND NOT A CONCERN, BUT AN ISSUE WAS RAISED. THE TOWER PEOPLE PUT OUT REQUESTS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO OFFER THEIR PROPERTY. FOR THIS TOWER. ONLY ONE PROPERTY OWNER RESPONDED AND THAT WAS THIS HOMEOWNER. I'M CONCERNED THAT THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY DID NOT TAKE AN INTEREST IN OFFERING PARKLAND TO THIS TOWER BUILDER. A COMMENT WAS MADE THAT THE CITY COULD RECEIVE THIS LEASE MONEY INSTEAD OF THIS PRIVATE LANDOWNER. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE COUNCIL, MAYBE, TO LOOK INTO WHY THERE WAS NOT EVEN AN EFFORT MADE BY THE CITY TO OFFER SOME OF THE CITY PROPERTY, WHICH IS RIGHT THERE, PARK PROPERTY, AND MAYBE THAT WOULD ALLOW THE TOWER TO BE MOVED FARTHER AWAY FROM OUR HOMES AND ACCESS THROUGH THE PARK. SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE INVESTIGATION OF THAT ISSUE. 
          ALSO, I'D JUST LIKE TO EXPRESS SOME CONCERN THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE A LACK OF COMPROMISE HERE 
          [00:30:02]
BETWEEN THIS HOMEOWNER AND US AS HOMEOWNERS. THIS HOMEOWNER IS KIND OF DICTATING WHERE HE WOULD LIKE THIS TOWER TO BE PLACED. I FEEL LIKE IF WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW HIM TO PROPERTY BE USED IN THIS WAY, THE TOWER SHOULD BE PLACED ON HIS PROPERTY AS FAR AWAY FROM OUR HOMES AS POSSIBLE. 
          THAT WOULD REFLECT SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE. AT THIS POINT, HE IS BASICALLY GETTING WHAT HE WANTS AND WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO GET WHAT WE WOULD LIKE A COMPROMISE. AND I'VE LOOKED AT THE PLOT PLAN OF THE LAND. THERE'S PLENTY OF PLACES ALONG HIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE FAR AWAY FROM OUR HOMES, RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE COMMUNITY PARK, AND THEN A ROAD ACCESS COULD BE MADE FROM THE PARK TO THAT TOWER ACCESS, AND THAT WOULD PREVENT HAVING TO BUILD THIS LONG ROAD BEHIND 8 OR 10 HOUSES. AND THAT WOULD BE MORE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PARK. IT'S A COMMUNITY PROPERTY. THIS IS A TOWER THAT'S GOING TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY. I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE THEM BE CONSIDERED. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO OBJECTIONS OR CONCERNS I HAVE, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION TO WHAT I'VE HAD TO SAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT, MR. GARY, LEAST AS YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, AND PLEASE ADHERE TO THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT. MY NAME IS GARY. 234 LAKESHORE FOREST DRIVE. I'VE BEEN IN LAKE OLYMPIA SINCE 89. I WAS AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING. THE BOARD. BOARD SEEMED VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS CELL TOWER, BUT THEN VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE IT. WE ARE STILL SCRATCHING OUR HEADS OVER THAT ONE. HOW DO YOU VOTE DOWN THIS ZONING REQUEST IN NOVEMBER AND THEN VOTE IT THROUGH? WHEN THE TOWER WAS MOVED A MERE 120FT, I LISTENED TO AN ATLAS REP SAY, BUT THIS WILL NOT HURT PROPERTY VALUES. ARE YOU SERIOUSLY GOING TO BELIEVE THAT THESE 400 TO $450,000 HOMES WITH A CELL TOWER ACROSS THE FENCE, ACROSS THEIR BACKYARD FENCE WILL NOT HAVE A LOWER PROPERTY VALUE? AND THEN THERE IS THE HEALTH ISSUE. BUT THE GOVERNMENT SAYS, OH, WE CAN'T HOLD THIS AGAINST CELL TOWER OPERATORS. THERE'S NO PROOF OF ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS. 
          WE HAVE A CELL TOWER IN THE OLD DEWALT CEMETERY BORDERING LAKE OLYMPIA AT PARKVIEW LANE AND AT THE END OF CHAPEL LANE. I KNOW OF AT LEAST THREE RESIDENTS ON CHAPEL LANE WHO HAVE HAD CANCER. 
          DID THIS CELL TOWER CAUSE IT? WE DON'T KNOW. THAT'S THE ISSUE THOUGH. IT'S A BIG UNKNOWN. I WILL TELL YOU THAT CELL OPERATORS ARE BECOMING CONCERNED ABOUT FUTURE LITIGATION AGAINST THEIR COMPANIES, AND ARE WARNING THEIR SHAREHOLDERS. THE SEC TEN K REPORT IS AN ANNUAL REPORT THAT PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANIES IN THE US ARE REQUIRED TO FILE WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, CROWN CASTLE INTERNATIONAL CORP, A HOUSTON COMPANY, OWNS AND MANAGES AND LEASES TOWERS IN THEIR 2020 SEC FILING, THEY STATE IF RADIOFREQUENCY EMISSIONS FROM WIRELESS HANDSETS OR EQUIPMENT ON OUR COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE ARE DEMONSTRATED TO CAUSE NEGATIVE HEALTH EFFECTS, POTENTIAL FUTURE CLAIMS COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR OPERATIONS, COSTS OR REVENUES. THEY GO ON TO SAY WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT CLAIMS RELATING TO RADIOFREQUENCY EMISSIONS WILL NOT ARISE IN THE FUTURE, OR THAT THE RESULTS OF SUCH STUDIES WILL NOT BE ADVERSE TO US. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, IN THEIR 2024 FILINGS, STATE. OUR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, OUR WIRELESS BUSINESS, IS ALSO SUBJECT TO LAWSUITS RELATING TO AN ALLEGED ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS OF WIRELESS PHONES AND RADIOFREQUENCY TRANSMITTERS. ANY OF THESE ALLEGATIONS OR CHANGES IN GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, ASSESSMENT OF THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH USING WIRELESS DEVICES, COULD RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT LEGAL AND REGULATORY LIABILITY AND OTHER REMEDIES, AND COULD HAVE A MATERIAL ADVERSE EFFECT ON OUR BUSINESS, FINANCIAL CONDITION AND OPERATING RESULTS. ISN'T IT IRONIC THAT THESE CELL COMPANIES CAN SUE CITIES TO ALLOW THEM TO BUILD CELL TOWERS? AND YET THEY THEMSELVES ARE PREPARING FOR POSSIBLE LAWSUITS AGAINST THEM IN THE FUTURE FOR POSSIBLE HEALTH DAMAGES FROM THESE SAME TOWERS. I HOPE YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY MADE YOUR DECISION TONIGHT, LIKE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD DID BEFORE WE EVEN SPOKE. PLEASE DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE RESIDENTS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE ANNA ALLEN. AS YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND PLEASE ADHERE TO THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT. MY NAME IS ANNA IRENE ALLEN. I LIVE AT 1731 CORONA DEL MAR DRIVE IN MISSOURI CITY. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR ELECT AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY HUSBAND, MITCH AND I HAVE LIVED IN LAKE OLYMPIA ON CORONA DEL MAR FOR 25 YEARS. WE SAW MOST OF THE HOMES BEING BUILT ON OUR STREET. WE WERE EXCITED TO HAVE BUILT OUR HOME ON THIS BEAUTIFUL STREET AND HAVE WONDERFUL NEIGHBORS. AND NOW WE ARE ENJOYING RETIREMENT LIFE. I AM OPPOSING THE CELL PHONE TOWER INSTALLATION FOR THE FOLLOWING 
          [00:35:03]
REASONS. I'LL BEGIN WITH THE ROAD THAT HAS TO BE BUILT TO ACCESS THE PROPOSED CELL PHONE TOWER. HOW LONG WILL THIS TAKE AND WHAT KIND OF MATERIALS WILL BE USED? WILL DEBRIS FROM THE ROAD END UP IN BACKYARDS? AFTER INSTALLATION, THE TOWER WILL NEED MAINTENANCE. WE WERE TOLD THAT THE PREVIOUS PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING THAT IT WILL ONLY BE APPROXIMATELY TWO TIMES PER YEAR, BUT IN REALITY IT WILL BE MORE THAN THAT. I BELIEVE THE TOWER WILL BE INSTALLED WAY TOO CLOSE TO THE HOMEOWNERS BACKYARD FENCES, AND WILL NOT ADD ANY VALUE TO OUR HOMES, BUT WILL BRING THEM DOWN. AND VISUALLY, THIS IS MY OPINION. THE TOWER IS UGLY. WE HAVE ALL WORKED VERY HARD TO PURCHASE OUR HOMES AND WE WANT THEM TO MAINTAIN AND INCREASE IN VALUE. RESPECTFULLY PUT YOURSELVES IN OUR SHOES. WOULD ANY OF YOU WANT TO LOOK OUT OF YOUR WINDOWS OR BACKYARDS EVERY DAY AND SEE SOME HUGE TOWER WHERE TREES AND BEAUTIFUL GREENERY ONCE STOOD? PLEASE JUST THINK ABOUT THAT. THE CITY HAS PUT A LOT OF MONEY INTO MAINTAINING COMMUNITY PARK, WHICH IS CLEAN AND WELL USED. THE TOWER WOULD BE LOCATED TOO CLOSE TO THE PARK. PEOPLE THROW FRISBEES, PLAY WITH THEIR DOGS AND OTHER OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES IN THE NEARBY AREA. IT WOULD BE OUT OF PLACE IN A NATURAL SETTING. I DON'T RECALL ATLAS SHOWING ANY PHOTOS OR MOCK UP OF WHAT THE TOWER WOULD LOOK LIKE FROM CORONA DEL MAR DRIVE AT THE PREVIOUS PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING. WHY NOT? I BELIEVE THAT WAS BY DESIGN. MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONSIDER ALL OF THESE POINTS WHEN MAKING YOUR DECISION TONIGHT. PLEASE DO NOT VOTE TO APPROVE THE CELL PHONE TOWER INSTALLATION AND STAND WITH YOUR FELLOW CITIZENS ON THIS MATTER. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. LASTLY, WE HAVE MISS CAROL THOMAS. AS YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND PLEASE ADHERE TO THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT. YES, MY NAME IS CAROL THOMAS. I LIVE AT 1730 CORONA DEL MAR IN MISSOURI CITY. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. I AM SPEAKING IN FORMAL OPPOSITION TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY ATLAS TOWERS ONE, LLC FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 155 FOOT MONOPOLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER ADJACENT TO FREEDOM TREE PARK. FIRST, THE PROPOSED LOCATION CONFLICTS WITH MISSOURI CITY'S ADOPT ADOPTED PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN, ENACTED THROUGH ORDINANCE 02209 AND INCORPORATED INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS ORDINANCE PRIORITIZES, PRIORITIZES THE CONSERVATION OF GREENWAYS, FLOODPLAINS, AND PASSIVE RECREATIONAL AREAS. THE TOWER IS SITED WITHIN A CORRIDOR FORMED BY FREEDOM TREE PARK, TRESTLE PARK, AND COMMUNITY PARK. THE TOWER IS SITED WITHIN A WITH A CORE CORRIDOR FORMED BY FREEDOM THREE. I SAID THAT ALREADY AND THREE CONNECTED PUBLIC SPACES WITH WALKING TRAILS. THE PROPOSED USE IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THESE OBJECTIVES. FREEDOM TREE PARK ALSO HOLDS SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL VALUE. THE SITE INCLUDES A TREE UNDER WHICH, ACCORDING TO LOCAL ORAL HISTORY AND DOCUMENTATION, SOME OF THE LAST ENSLAVED AMERICANS IN THIS REGION WERE INFORMED OF THEIR EMANCIPATION FOLLOWING THE CIVIL WAR. THE PROXIMITY OF A PERMANENT INDUSTRIAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS STRUCTURE TO THIS LOCATION RAISES SERIOUS CONCERNS REGARDING LAND USE COMPATIBILITY, AND LONG TERM PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC OPEN SPACE. SECOND, THE APPLICATION APPLICATION REMAINS PROCEDURALLY INCOMPLETE UNDER APPENDIX A, SECTION 15 B OF THE MISSOURI CITY ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH REQUIRES SUBMISSION OF STRUCTURAL CERTIFICATION BY A TEXAS LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. AS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, THIS HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE IN THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT THIS HAS BEEN PROVIDED SINCE. THIRD, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT NEW TOWER CONSTRUCTION IS NECESSARY. VERIZON'S JUSTIFICATION LETTER CITES INCREASING DEMAND AND INDOOR COVERAGE CONCERNS WITH VERIZON'S ULTRA WIDEBAND COVERAGE MAPS ALREADY NOW SHOW STRONG COVERAGE. MISSOURI CITY HOSTS OVER 450 SMALL ANTENNA AND 
          [00:40:01]
CENTERPOINT POLES AND 120 FOOT MONOPOLE TOWER ON TURTLE CREEK LOCATION, WHICH IS LESS THAN A MILE AWAY. PROPOSED AND OWNED BY SKYWAY TOWERS, IS CURRENTLY UNOCCUPIED. THERE IS NO DOCUMENTATION SHOWING THAT THE CO-LOCATION ON THIS STRUCTURE WAS EXPLORED. FOURTH, NO INDEPENDENT PROPERTY VALUE IMPACT ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. ONLY A ZILLOW ESTIMATE. FINALLY, UNDER THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS RETAIN THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE TOWER PLACEMENT BASED ON LAND USE, ESTHETICS, PLANNING, COMPATIBILITY, AND HISTORICAL PRESERVATION AS LONG AS DECISIONS ARE BASED ON RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS. DENIAL OF THIS PERMIT ON THESE GROUNDS WOULD BE LEGALLY VALID. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS CONCLUDES THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. 
          ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENTS, WE'LL NOW GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 8A1. 
          [(2) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Two Readings - An ordinan...]
OKAY. ITEM 8A2. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY, TEXAS, GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT AUTHORIZING THE USE OF AN APPROXIMATE 2500 SQUARE FOOT TRACT OF LAND OUT OF A 15.43 ACRE TRACT OF LAND IN MISSOURI CITY AS A SPECIFIC USE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER, PROVIDING LIMITATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, AND CONDITIONS ON SUCH SPECIFIC USE. AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY. PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVIDING FOR REPEAL, PROVIDING A PENALTY, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE HAVE GRACE, OUR PLANNER. COME ON UP. HELLO, EVERYBODY. GOOD. GOOD EVENING. SO AS THE RESIDENTS HAVE STATED, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF COMMUNITY PARK AND EAST OF MISTY HOLLOW. THE APPLICATION IS FOR A CELL TOWER LEASE SPACE, WHICH WOULD BE 2500FT■!S. WITHIN THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE, THERE WOULD BE A CELL TOWER AND SPACE FOR EQUIPMENT STORAGE FOR FOUR CARRIERS. THE RACE. HOLD ON. WHY DID I ALL OF OUR SCREENS WENT BLANK. IS YOUR. ARE YOU SEEING IT? NO, NO, IT SAYS MOTION TO APPROVE. MOTION SECONDED. WHAT HAPPENED TO. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. 
          NO WORRIES. THE LEASED SPACE WOULD BE ENCLOSED WITH FENCING THAT FALLS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY FENCING STANDARD A LITTLE LOUDER SO WE CAN WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY FENCING STANDARDS, WHICH WOULD BE WOODEN FENCING. AND TO ACCESS THE SITE, THERE WOULD BE A ACCESS EASEMENT. THE APPLICANT DID REQUEST A GRAVEL ACCESS EASEMENT, BUT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE HAS DECIDED THAT THEY WOULD PREFER A REINFORCED CONCRETE ACCESS ROAD TO MINIMIZE ANY DUST PARTICLE ISSUES THAT RESIDENTS MAY HAVE. CELL TOWERS ARE GOVERNED BY THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996, WHICH PROHIBITS SOME ITEMS FOR THE CITY TO MAKE DECISIONS ON, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE RELATED TO ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OR RADIO FREQUENCIES. THE CITY DOES HAVE AN ORDINANCE, SECTION 15 B, BY WHICH WE MEASURED THIS APPLICATION AND FOUND IT TO BE WITHIN COMPLIANCE. CURRENTLY, THE PROPERTY IS ZONED SD, WHICH ALLOWS FOR GREEN SPACE USE. THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DOES IDENTIFY THIS AREA AS PARKS AND RECREATION. THE LEASED SPACE COULD CONTINUE WITHOUT INTERFERING WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, AND THE APPLICATION IS SUPPORTED BY OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS 1.3, 2.1 AND 3.1. A. WE PROVIDED THIS APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE AT THE MAY AGENDA WITH A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION. THEIR REVIEW, AND THEY HAVE DECIDED TO FORWARD A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION TO YOU ALL HERE TONIGHT, A SUMMARY OF OUR NOTICES. WE DID PROVIDE A ON SITE NOTIFICATION ON IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR, AND THEN WE SENT OUT NOTICES BOTH IN NOVEMBER AND IN APRIL TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250FT OF THE PROPERTY. WE HAD OUR FIRST PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING IN NOVEMBER. THEN WE HAD A SECOND MEETING FOR THE REVISED SITE PLAN IN APRIL. AND NOW WE ARE HERE BEFORE YOU GUYS TODAY. AS OF TODAY, WE'VE RECEIVED 130 PROTEST LETTERS AND ONE SUPPORT LETTERS. OUT OF THOSE PROTEST LETTERS, 18 WERE WITHIN THE 200 FOOT BOUNDARY ESTABLISHED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS. OKAY. IS THAT CONCLUDES YOUR PRESENTATION. THAT DOES I JUST DO HAVE JUST ONE. WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE. IS THE 
          [00:45:03]
APPLICANT HERE? THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE. THEY YES, THE APPLICANT IS JUST ARRIVED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND START WITH THE FIRST PERSON ON THE QUEUE I RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU. MAYOR, I JUST HAD A QUESTION OF STAFF, YOU, GRACE, OR ANYONE THAT CAN ANSWER ARE THE LOCATIONS THAT THE TOWER CAN BE LOCATED OR ARE THERE ANY OTHER LOCATIONS? SHOULD I SAY THAT THE TOWER CAN BE LOCATED THAT WOULD INCREASE THE DISTANCE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES? I KNOW THAT IT WAS STATED THAT IT MOVED FROM THE FIRST PNC MEETING TO THE SECOND PNC MEETING, BUT I'M ASKING, ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROPERTIES, ANY OTHER LOCATIONS THAT WOULD INCREASE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE RESIDENTS AS WELL AS THE TOWER? AND THEN ALSO THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, ACHIEVE THE APPLICANT'S GOALS IN CONTINUITY OBJECTIVES. THERE IS A GENERAL VICINITY THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO PLACE THE CELL TOWER IN, AND THEY HAVE REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL PROPERTY OWNERS WHO MAY OWN PROPERTY THAT'S ADEQUATE FOR A CELL TOWER. BUT OUT OF THAT PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTY, THIS PROPERTY OWNER IS THE ONLY ONE WHO PROVIDED INTEREST IN PROVIDING A LEASE SPACE. AND AS IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY, THEY DID INDICATE WHICH PORTION OF THEIR PROPERTY THEY WERE WILLING TO LEASE TO ATLAS TOWERS. WHAT IS THAT GENERAL VICINITY? I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE SPECIFICS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. THE APPLICANT, BUT THE REPRESENTATIVE SHOULD HAVE. I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT A WAS IT A ONE ACRE OR TWO ACRE RADIUS THAT YOU GUYS WERE TRYING TO SITE YOUR TOWER IN? MICHAEL TOWERS, REPRESENTATIVE OF ATLAS TOWER FOR THE. COME ON UP. COME ON UP HERE. COME ON UP. THANK YOU. SO IN ORDER TO ESSENTIALLY. FIND THE POSITION WHERE THE TOWER CAN DO WHAT IT NEEDS TO DO, THERE ARE SEVERAL GATING ITEMS THAT HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED. 
          SO FOR TO DESCRIBE THIS, WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS GIVE YOU A TWO MINUTE SYNOPSIS OF HOW WE GO ABOUT GOING GETTING TO A LOCATION. COULD YOU JUST TELL ME? I'M SORRY, I DON'T WANT TO CUT THAT OFF, BUT I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S THE RADIUS? I MEAN, HOW MANY FEET OR WHAT'S THE RADIUS THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED THE RADIUS FROM FROM THE TOWER TO WHO YOU'RE TRYING TO SERVICE. SURE. SO. SO WE ARE TRYING TO STAY WITHIN 1000FT OF THE RF ENGINEERS ORIGINAL LOCATION, A THOUSAND. OKAY. THAT WOULD BE IDEAL. OKAY. A THOUSAND, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THERE'S LIKE IF IT'S A VENN DIAGRAM, THERE'S LIKE 4 OR 5 OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GATING ITEMS. ONE IS ZONING, A SECOND IS GETTING A WILLING OWNER OF LAND THAT'S WILLING TO DO BUSINESS WITH US. IF THERE'S A TOPOGRAPHY ISSUE OR IF THERE'S A LACK OF BACKHAUL IN THAT AREA. 
          IF THE ENGINEERS DON'T LIKE THE SITE FOR SOME OTHER REASON, MAYBE IT'S TOO CLOSE TO ANOTHER ANOTHER NODE. WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH ALL OF THOSE. AND IT'S A REALLY DIFFICULT PROCESS TO FIND A SPOT THAT WORKS. AND IN THIS CASE, WHEN WE DID FIND A SPOT, WE GOT A LOT OF NEGATIVE FEEDBACK, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNITY'S RIGHT. AND WE DID OUR BEST TO FIND ANOTHER LOCATION WHICH WE ARE PRESENTING NOW. I DON'T THINK WE CAN DO THIS AGAIN. I THINK IF THIS APPLICATION IS NOT APPROVED, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. I DON'T HAVE ANOTHER OPTION AT THIS POINT, BUT 1000FT IS THE ANSWER. THAT'S WHAT WAS TALKED ABOUT ON THE WEEKLY MEETINGS. THANK YOU. 
          YEAH. THANK YOU. YOU DONE? YES. I'M DONE. OKAY. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER RILEY. THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU, GRACE, FOR THE INFORMATION. I HAD A FEW QUESTIONS. IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THERE WEREN'T ANY RENDERINGS PROVIDED DURING THE PNC. HAVE THERE BEEN ANY RENDERINGS PROVIDED SINCE? WE DID PROVIDE SEVERAL RENDERINGS IN OUR PRESENTATION, AND ATLAS TOWER PROVIDED ADDITIONAL RENDERINGS IN THEIR PRESENTATION, WHICH WE CAN SEND TO YOU GUYS IF YOU WOULD LIKE. THEY WERE PART OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING PRESENTATION THAT WAS DONE LAST MONTH. OKAY. AND MY OTHER QUESTION IS BASED ON THOSE RENDERINGS, HOW FAR ARE THESE RENDERINGS IN FEET FROM THE PROPOSED TOWER LOCATION? WELL, THE TOWER FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE RESIDENTIAL IS 221FT, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE MEASUREMENTS FROM COMMUNITY PARK PROPERTY 
          [00:50:02]
LINE OR FROM MISTY HOLLOW, BUT WE COULD GET THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU GUYS. OKAY, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD KIND OF NEED. MY OTHER QUESTION IS HOW CLOSE IS THIS PARTICULAR CELL TOWER TO THE NEAREST PROPERTY? THAT WOULD BE 221FT. THAT'S 221 FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY NORTH IS COMMUNITY PARK SO THAT THERE'S NO RESIDENTIAL INTERFERENCE AT THAT LOCATION. SO IS THIS WHAT IS THE CLOSE IS THE CLOSEST PROPERTY TO A RESIDENTIAL. THE 221FT? YES, MA'AM. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU GOT. THE 131 PROTESTED AGAINST LETTERS FROM. WE RECEIVED 130. BUT OUT OF THE BUFFER ZONE THAT YOU CAN SEE ON THAT IMAGE, THERE ONLY 18 OF THOSE PROPERTIES DIRECTLY PROTESTED. THE OTHER PROTEST LETTERS ARE OUTSIDE OF THAT BUFFER ZONE. OKAY. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS. WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED FALL RADIUS OF THIS TOWER? I WILL REFER TO ATLAS TOWERS 150 155FT, 55FT. THANK YOU. SO THE MAXIMUM DISTANCE. 
          OH, WE NEED YOU TO THE MAXIMUM DISTANCE IT COULD POSSIBLY FALL. ASSUMING THE TOPOGRAPHY IS NOT VERY STEEP, WHICH IT'S NOT, WOULD BE 155FT. BUT THAT'S NOT HOW THE ENGINEERING ACTUALLY WORKS. THE TOWER IS DESIGNED TO DEAL WITH THAT VERY UNUSUAL SCENARIO WHERE A CAR, A PLANE, A COMET, SOMETHING SOME SOME, SOME OUTSIDE FORCE HITS THE TOWER. IT IS DESIGNED TO ACTUALLY BREAK AT SPECIFIC LENGTHS, USUALLY IN 20 FOOT INCREMENTS, SO THAT IT DOES NOT FALL COMPLETELY LIKE A TREE GETTING TUMBLED ONCE IT IT CRUMBLES LIKE A CAR. SO THE RADIUS OF A OF DANGER, YOU WOULD SAY IF THERE WAS A, AN EARTHQUAKE OR A CAR ACCIDENT OR AN AIRPLANE IS MUCH LOWER THAN 155FT, SO ARE YOU STATING IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR THIS THING TO FALL JUST FLAT OVER? WELL, IF IT DID FALL FLAT OVER, I'M SAYING IT'S NOT ENGINEERED TO DO THAT, BUT IF IT DID, THE MAXIMUM RADIUS IS 155FT AND WE ARE 259FT FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENCE, 221 225 SORRY. AND SO IF THIS THING WERE TO FALL OVER, YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S WITHIN ITS GUIDELINE AND NO DEBRIS OR ANYTHING, ANY PARTICLES OR ANY LARGE STRUCTURES COULD FALL ON ANYONE'S HOME OR BACKYARD OR PEOPLE WALKING IN THE AREA, PEOPLE WALKING IN THE AREA. I MEAN, I, I CAN'T SAY NO, BUT BUT IN TERMS OF BEING AWAY FROM A, YOU KNOW, ACTUAL RESIDENCES OR BUILDINGS, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. YEAH, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. EXCLUDING WHAT YOU SAID WAS WHAT YOU ASKED ABOUT SOMEONE WALKING BY. I MEAN, THAT'S THAT'S AN IMPOSSIBILITY TO, TO, YOU KNOW, REMOVE THAT POSSIBILITY. BUT THE DESIGN IS ALL INTERIOR. YES, YES, IT'LL COLLAPSE UPON ITSELF IS HOW IT IS DESIGNED, ENGINEERED TO REACT TO SOME KIND OF INCLEMENT. AND SO IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR IT TO FALL ANYWHERE ELSE. SOMEONE'S BACKYARD, NO DEBRIS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THAT'S THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE. THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. THANK YOU. 
          RECOGNIZING COUNCIL MEMBER KIRK. THANK YOU. SO I'M GOING TO KIND OF PIGGYBACK ON WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER RILEY HAS ASKED. SO DO WE KNOW THE TALLEST TOWER WE HAVE IN MISSOURI CITY CURRENTLY? THE TOWER THAT'S MOST OFTEN REFERRED TO IS THE TURTLE CREEK TOWER, WHICH IS 120FT. THIS ONE WOULD BE 155FT. BUT THOSE TWO TOWERS ARE NOT APPLES TO APPLES BECAUSE THE TOWER, THE HEIGHT OF THE TOWER DEPENDS ON THE ELEVATIONS AND THE TOPOGRAPHY, BECAUSE CELL TOWERS HAVE TO COMMUNICATE TO EACH OTHER. SO IF YOU WERE TO PUT A 120 FOOT CELL TOWER LOWER THAN SURROUNDING CELL TOWERS, IT WOULD BE OF NO POINT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER. SO DEPENDING ON THE ENVIRONMENT THAT IT'S IN, IT'S GOING TO PREDICT THE HEIGHT THAT'S NEEDED FOR IT TO BE EFFICIENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THE TOWER THAT YOU REFERRED TO AT TURTLE CREEK AND OTHERS HAD MENTIONED IN THEIR PUBLIC COMMENTS, IS THERE A REASON THAT WE CAN'T PIGGYBACK ON THAT TOWER? I KNOW THAT CELL PHONE COMPANIES HAVE PARTNERSHIPS AND USE THE SAME TOWERS. AND WHAT'S 
          [00:55:04]
THE ANSWER THERE? YEAH, THE ANSWER IS IT DOESN'T WORK. AND WHAT'S HAPPENING JUST GENERALLY IS ALL OF THE ALL OF THE USERS AND ALL OF THE DATA THAT'S GOING THROUGH THROUGH THE MOBILE NETWORKS. NETWORK NEEDS TO BE CLOSER TO THE USER IN ORDER FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO GET THE KIND OF CONNECTIVITY AND EXPERIENCE THAT THE CARRIERS ARE TRYING TO CREATE. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          AND PLEASE CHECK MY FACTS IF I'M WRONG. BUT CHECK, CHECK, CHECK FACT CHECK ME. BUT BUT I BELIEVE THAT RIGHT NOW THE CLOSEST TOWER IS ALMOST A MILE AWAY. THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. THAT'S A AN INCREDIBLE DISTANCE FOR A MODERN. SORT OF DENSE POPULATED PLACE. SO YOU STATING THAT WE SHOULD EXPECT TO HAVE A CELL TOWER WITH, YOU KNOW, EVERY MILE OR MORE, BUT NOT CLOSER? NOT ALL OF THEM WILL BE TOWERS. I MEAN, THERE ARE SOMETIMES WAYS TO PUT THINGS ON ROOFTOPS OR PERHAPS ON FACADES OF BUILDINGS OR ON A BILLBOARD. I MEAN, ACROSS THE COUNTRY, THIS IS THIS IS A VERY COMMON SCENARIO. I DON'T BECAUSE I'M IN THE INDUSTRY AND MY BRAIN JUST WORKS THIS WAY. WHEREVER I WALK, WHEREVER I DRIVE, I ALWAYS SEE, SEE, SEE THE EQUIPMENT. IT'S EVERYWHERE AND IT'S EVERYWHERE BECAUSE EVERYONE WANTS THEIR PHONE TO ACTUALLY WORK EVERYWHERE. WE CAN'T PUT THE ANTENNAS A MILE AWAY AND HAVE THE NETWORK WORK THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO. WHEN THE PEOPLE IN THEIR DEVICES A MILE AWAY, THAT'S JUST NOT NOT REALISTIC. OKAY, SO THE LAST QUESTION, SEVERAL OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY MENTIONED THAT IF THIS WAS JUST A LITTLE BIT FURTHER FROM THEIR PROPERTY LINE, THAT THEY MIGHT BE MORE AGREEABLE. DID YOU SPEAK TO THE CITY YOU REFERRED TO PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS? WAS THE CITY ASKED ABOUT CITY PROPERTY? WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS SITE FOR A LONG TIME. WE'VE EXPLORED EVERY OPTION. THERE REALLY AREN'T THAT MANY, OR THERE'S REALLY JUST ON, ONE PARCEL THAT'S AVAILABLE TO US THAT'S WILLING TO LET US GO THROUGH THE PART THAT THIS THIS PORTION OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS. IN OTHER WORDS, WE HAVE TO HAVE A RIGHT TO UTILIZE SOMEONE'S LAND FOR THIS PURPOSE. AND THESE ARE THE ONLY TWO SITES WE WERE ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER AS A BUSINESS DEAL. SO THIS IS IT. AGAIN. WAS THE CITY SPECIFICALLY ASKED, CAN THE CITY ANSWER THAT QUESTION? I'M NOT SURE IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION IN PARTICULARITY. I ASKED IF CITY PROPERTY OR THE CITY WAS ENGAGED AFTER THE NOVEMBER MEETING. I DID INQUIRE WITH MISS HARMS AS TO WHERE OR HOW THEY ENGAGED THE CITY. THERE WAS A LETTER THAT WAS SENT OUT TO THE CITY. I DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS AS TO WHO RECEIVED IT, WHAT THE RESPONSE WAS, BUT IT WAS PROVIDED TO THE CITY. BUT I DO KNOW THAT AFTER THAT RESPONSE, I DIDN'T GET ANY FURTHER INFORMATION AS TO, YOU KNOW, PARTNERING WITH THE CITY IF THAT WAS AN OPTION. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. RECOGNIZING MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN, THANK YOU, MAYOR GRACE. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, SIR, SO THAT I CAN BE CLEAR. WHO DO YOU REPRESENT? IS IT ATLAS, VERIZON, ATLAS TOWER IN IN IN IN TANDEM WITH VERIZON. SO BASICALLY IN THE US FOR THE LAST MAYBE 15 YEARS, ABOUT 80% OF ALL CELL TOWERS ARE OWNED BY WHAT YOU WOULD CALL A TOWER CO. 
          IN OTHER WORDS, VERIZON, AT&T, T-MOBILE, DISH. THEY WOULD MUCH PREFER TO HAVE A THIRD PARTY GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS TO BUILD THE TOWER, OWN THE TOWER, MANAGE THE TOWER, MAINTAIN THE TOWER, AND BASICALLY PAY FOR THE TOWER. THEY THE CARRIERS NOW USE A MODEL WHERE THEY'RE TAKING THAT LARGE CAPITAL X, THAT THAT LARGE CAPEX THAT IT TAKES TO BUILD THE SITE AND MANAGE IT, AND THEY'VE TURNED IT INTO A RENTAL PAYMENT. SO IT'S A MONTHLY EXPENSE THAT IS THE PREDOMINANT BUSINESS MODEL IN THE US. I'D SAY MORE THAN 80% OF ALL TOWERS IN THE US HAVE THIS SORT OF TWO PARTY BUSINESS DEAL, WHERE THE TOWER IS MANAGED BY A TOWER COMPANY, AND THE MOBILE NETWORK FOCUSES 
          [01:00:06]
ON THE TECHNOLOGY AND THEIR CUSTOMERS. SURE. AND THAT BRINGS ME TO THE SECOND QUESTION. WHERE IS YOU'RE STATING THAT 80% ARE USING THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS MODEL? DO YOU KNOW HOW SOON IT WOULD BE BEFORE YOU START TO SEE CELL PHONE COMPANIES MOVE TO SATELLITE? YEAH, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE IN A PRETTY, PRETTY INTERESTING PLACE IN THE WORLD, RIGHT? WE'RE STARTING TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME THINGS THROUGH SATELLITE. SATELLITE HAS A LOT OF CHALLENGES, PARTICULARLY WITH LATENCY, BECAUSE THE SIGNAL HAS TO GO VERY FAR INTO SPACE AND BACK DOWN AGAIN. AND THAT CREATES A LOT OF ISSUES. ELON MUSK'S MODEL HAS SHOWN POSSIBILITY, BUT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THE TECHNOLOGY THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE IS VERY DEPENDENT ON FIBER OPTIC CABLES, ON ANTENNAS THAT ARE NEAR THE NEAR THE USER AND SO ON. ALMOST EVERY BY THE WAY, ALMOST EVERY MUNICIPALITY IN THE US HAS SOME KIND OF REMOVAL CLAUSE IN THEIR IN THEIR PERMITTING, WHICH SAYS IF THIS TOWER DOES IN THE FUTURE BECOME UNUSED, THE TOWER COMPANY IS FORCED TO REMOVE THE TOWER, SOMETIMES BY A BOND. EVEN SO, SURE, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S IN THE FUTURE. BUT IF THESE TOWERS TURN OUT TO BE LEGACIES TEN YEARS FROM NOW, OR FIVE YEARS NOW, OR 50 YEARS, THEY WILL BE REMOVED. OKAY. AND MY FINAL QUESTION IS, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER CELL TOWERS WITHIN THE CITY THAT MATCH OUR CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCES? NO. SO YOU DON'T HAVE ANY? I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY. ACTUALLY, TO BE TOTALLY HONEST, I KNOW THAT WE REACHED OUT TO THE CITY. WE DID NOT GET ANY REALLY RESPONSE, WHICH IS TYPICALLY TYPICAL. MOST CITIES PREFER TO AVOID THESE TYPES OF CONTROVERSIAL, YOU KNOW, GOVERNMENT, PRIVATE PROJECTS. WE I WOULD SAY 50% OF THE HEARINGS THAT I'VE GONE TO WHERE WHERE THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT A TOWER ON GOVERNMENT LAND, WHETHER IT BE A LIBRARY OR A SCHOOL OR A FIRE STATION OR, OR A PARK, THEY MOST ABOUT 50% OF THOSE REFUSED TO, TO OFFER UP THEIR LAND FOR THAT USE. SO OUR ZONING ORDINANCES ARE LOCATED ONLINE SO THEY'RE READILY AVAILABLE AND ACCESSIBLE. AND THE REASON WHY I ASKED YOU IF YOU HAD ANY OTHER CELL PHONE TOWERS WITHIN OUR CITY WHERE YOU HAVE MET OUR ZONING ORDINANCES, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE A CRUCIAL INFORMATION TO KNOW, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE PROXIMITY IN WHICH YOU'RE ASKING TO PLACE THIS SO CLOSE TO THESE RESIDENTS WITH REGARDS TO ESTHETICS AND DESIGN ISSUES, AS FAR AS THE FENCING IS CONCERNED, AND JUST MAKING IT LOOK, LOOK A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, WELL, WE'RE WILLING TO DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO, TO MITIGATE SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT. BUT IN TERMS OF NOT NOT WORKING WITH MISSOURI CITY OR WORKING WITH MISSOURI CITY, OUR PROCESS STARTS WITH AN AGREEMENT OF SOME KIND THAT THERE WOULD BE A REAL ESTATE ENTITLEMENT THAT WOULD THAT WE COULD EITHER BUY OR RENT OR LEASE. AND IN THIS CASE, WE SENT OUT INFORMATION TO EVERYONE THAT OWNED A PROPERTY THAT MIGHT MEET THE ZONING CODE AND ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD. AND THAT INCLUDED THE CITY. AND WE DID NOT GET A RESPONSE. SO THAT'S THAT'S HOW WE NORMALLY DO THIS. AND I HEAR YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING LOGICALLY, WELL, IT MIGHT WORK IF THIS, THIS AND THIS HAPPEN, BUT RIGHT NOW THAT IS NOT AN OPTION TO IT FOR US BECAUSE WE HAVE NO VISIBILITY AS TO ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY WHERE THE LANDOWNER OF THAT PROPERTY WOULD ALLOW US TO MOVE THROUGH THE PROCESS, AND IT WOULD ACTUALLY PASS ALL OF YOUR YOUR ORDINANCE REGULATIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. GRACE, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. OKAY. NEXT THERE WAS A DOCUMENTATION THAT WAS PASSED ON TO MEMBERS OF COUNCIL THAT SHOWS THAT THERE WAS NO PHOTO MOCKUP PRESENTED FROM CORONA DEL MAR DRIVE. IS THAT TRUE? SO THE CITY DID NOT CREATE ANY RENDERINGS. WE DON'T HAVE A PROGRAM TO DO THAT. BUT ATLAS TOWERS DID PROVIDE RENDERINGS THAT WERE A PART OF BOTH THE ATLAS TOWER PRESENTATION AND THE STAFF PRESENTATION FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, THERE WERE SEVERAL RENDERINGS, AND I DO BELIEVE ONE OF THEM WAS FROM AT 
          [01:05:03]
LEAST THE INTERSECTION THAT INCORPORATED CORONA DEL MAR. SO I GUESS MY I GUESS I'M ASKING IS THERE WAS TWO PRNS MEETINGS, CORRECT? ONE WAS LOCATION THAT WAS CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY. 
          SECOND ONE WAS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AWAY. RIGHT. SO I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS, WAS THERE ANY PHOTO MOCKUPS THAT SHOWS FROM, I DON'T KNOW, 50FT TO WHATEVER THE IT IS TODAY? NO. 
          THE RENDERINGS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY ATLAS SHOW FROM THE STREET, SO THEY WOULD NOT HAVE SHOWN FROM ANYBODY'S PRIVATE PROPERTY. THEY WOULD NOT HAVE SHOWN WHAT THE TOWER WOULD LOOK LIKE FROM SOMEBODY'S BACKYARD, BUT THEY WOULD SHOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE STREET. AND THERE THERE WERE NO PRESENTATION. THERE WERE NO MOCKUPS AT THE NOVEMBER PRESENTATION, BUT THERE WERE MOCKUPS PROVIDED AS PART OF THE MAY PRESENTATION. SURE. WERE YOU THE PLANNER OR ON THIS? ON THIS CELL TOWER? YES. OKAY. SO THIS IS ATLAS IS A SO I GUESS I WOULD ASSUME THAT THIS IS COMING FROM HORIZON TO ATLAS IS WORKING WITH OR IN JUNCTION WITH VERIZON AND FOUND A PROPERTY OWNER THAT WOULD DEDICATE OR OFFER THEIR PROPERTY TO HAVE THIS TOWER. 
          CORRECT? CORRECT. VERIZON HAS INDICATED THAT THERE'S A GAP IN COVERAGE IN THIS AREA. AND IN AN EFFORT TO IMPROVE THEIR SERVICES, THEY REACHED OUT THROUGH ATLAS BY WAY OF FINDING A LOCATION WHERE THEY COULD CONSTRUCT A CELL TOWER TO IMPROVE THE OVERALL SERVICE THAT THEY PROVIDE. IN ADDITION, THAT TOWER WILL ALSO HOUSE UP TO THREE MORE CARRIERS FOR A TOTAL OF FOUR CARRIER SERVICES. SURE. WAS THAT SOMETHING VERIZON REACHED OUT TO YOU OR THEY REACHED OUT TO ATLAS? VERIZON REACHES OUT THROUGH THEIR CONNECTION WITH WHEN THEY FILED AN APPLICATION. THEY CAME BEFORE YOU AND SAID WHAT YOU JUST TOLD ME. THE APPLICATION CAME FROM ATLAS, BUT IT REFERENCED THAT VERIZON IS LOOKING TO IMPROVE THEIR SERVICE. YES. CORRECT. SO DID YOU EVER HAD A MEETING WITH VERIZON? NO, YOU NEVER HAD IT. SO WHAT YOU JUST TOLD ME IS BASICALLY WHAT HE TOLD YOU IN THAT PRE-APPLICATION. WELL, WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION FROM VERIZON INDICATING THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR THEIR SERVICE TO BE IMPROVED. IT'S FROM VERIZON TO ATLAS, NOT FROM VERIZON TO MISSOURI CITY. SO THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMENT THAT I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION TO THAT THE TOWER SAYS THE TOWER VIOLATES THE FUTURE LAND USE AND CHARACTER MAP. ANY COMMENT ON THAT? WELL, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOESN'T SPECIFY WHERE CELL TOWERS WILL GO SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THEY NEED TO COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER. SO WE CAN'T IDENTIFY THOSE SPACES. IT'S GOING TO CHANGE AS THE DENSITY OF OUR POPULATION CHANGES. SO BUT IN ORDER FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, IT INDICATES THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE GREEN SPACE AND COMMUNITY PARKS. AT LEAST SPACE FOR A CELL TOWER CAN OPERATE WITHOUT VIOLATING THE CONTINUATION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, WHICH SHOWS THAT TO BE COMMUNITY SPACE AND GREEN SPACE. 
          SO, SIR, I JUST HAVE 1 OR 2 QUESTIONS FOR YOU. SO WHEN YOU CAME THROUGH CITY FIRST AND I THINK TOWER WAS GOING TO BE CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY, RIGHT. WHAT MADE YOU MOVE TO THE BACK OR WERE YOU PROPOSING TODAY? WE MOVED TO THE BACK BECAUSE THERE WAS AN OBJECTION FOR THE LOCATION, AND WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT TO TRY TO MAKE IT MORE PALATABLE, ESSENTIALLY. OKAY. SO THAT'S THE REASON YOU REAPPLY, RIGHT? YES. SO YOU WENT THROUGH THE P AND Z. 
          AND IF I MAY, YOU MENTIONED MAYBE SOME OTHER WANTING TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THE CARRIER WORKS WITH THE WITH THE TOWER CO ATLAS TOWER HAS A MASTER LEASE AGREEMENT WITH VERIZON, T-MOBILE, AT&T AND DISH. AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN VERIZON WHEN ANY OF THOSE COMPANIES HAVE A NEED TO FIX A PROBLEM IN THEIR NETWORK, THEY BASICALLY GIVE OUT THESE OPPORTUNITIES THROUGH THE MASTER LEASE AGREEMENT TO SEE IF THE TOWER COMPANY. IT'S NOT ALWAYS ATLAS, BUT CAN CAN FIX THE ISSUE THAT THEY HAVE IN THEIR NETWORK BY BEING ABLE TO LEGALLY PLACE ANTENNAS AT SPECIFIC PLACES. SO THERE IS ACTUAL CONTRACT AND THE CONTRACT IS AT ALL TIMES REGULATING WHAT ATLAS IS DOING FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE MOBILE NETWORK CARRIER THAT'S, YOU KNOW, INTERESTED IN HAVING THE TOWER FIXED BUILT. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO AS WE UNDERSTAND IT, THIS TOWER IS 155FT TALL. RIGHT. AND I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER RILEY HAD ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT THE FALL. YES. SO YOU SAID THAT IT WOULD IT WOULD FALL UP LITERALLY TO THE GROUND WHERE IT IS. SO IF THE WHOLE POST I'M TALKING ABOUT THE BASE OF THIS TOWER, WHERE TO GO THIS 
          [01:10:07]
WAY. RIGHT. SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT WOULD BE ABOUT 155FT OF DROP. RIGHT. WELL, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S THAT'S JUST BASIC PHYSICS. I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE A PENCIL THAT'S 12IN AND I'M TRYING TO GET SOMEWHERE. OKAY. SURE. YEAH. FALL THAT WAY. RIGHT. IT'S A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT. BUT THE MAXIMUM DISTANCE IGNORING LIKE HEAVY WINDS OR OR A CAR THAT PUSHED SOMETHING FURTHER THAN 155FT. YES. OKAY, SO NOW ALL OF THESE POLES HAVE A BREAKING POINT DURING HURRICANE OR DURING ANY TORNADOES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AT SOMEWHERE ABOUT MIDPOINT. IS THAT TRUE? IT CAN BE DESIGNED IN DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT BUT BASICALLY THE BREAK POINT TECHNOLOGY IS, IN MY MIND WAY SIMPLER THAN THAN PROBABLY THE ENGINEERS. BUT BASICALLY IMAGINE ALL THE BOLTS THAT BOLT THE SECTIONS OF THE TOWER TOGETHER HAVE A STRENGTH OF, LET'S CALL IT 100. AND THE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE STRENGTH IS 80. THEY'LL HAVE A SEVERAL, MOST OF THE BOLTS OVER A HUNDRED, AND THEN THEY WILL HAVE BOLTS THAT ARE ABOVE THE TECHNICAL NEED ABOVE 80. SO THEN IF IT'S HIT BY LIKE A PLANE FOR INSTANCE, THEN THEN THAT ALLOWS THE WEAKER BOLTS TO BREAK IN A SPECIFIC WAY. JUST LIKE A CAR IS DESIGNED TO BREAK OR CRACK. OH, I GOT IT. I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY ABOUT THAT PLANE EXAMPLE EARLIER. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS TO REALLY DO WE HAVE THE PARKS DIRECTOR HERE? I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR HIM. SO. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, EVEN IF YOU'RE AT MIDPOINT OR IF YOU'RE EVEN HIGHER, SOMEWHERE AROUND 155FT TO A 55 CLEARANCE THAT WOULD FALL APART, YOU HAVE YOUR WITH THE SITE THAT'S LOCATED TODAY. HOW FAR IS THE DISC GOLF PLAYER IS LOCATED TO THE SUBJECT SITE? IF THIS WERE TO FALL, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DISTANCE, BUT I WAS. CAN I CLICK BACK? WELL, BUT IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS CURRENT LOCATION, THERE IS A DISC BACK THERE. THERE ARE ABOUT THREE DISC BASKETS THAT ARE FAIRLY CLOSE TO THAT PROPERTY LINE HEADING ALONG THAT NORTH SIDE. WELL, THE WEST AND HEADING NORTH ALONG THAT SIDE. SO IT WOULD BE FAIRLY CLOSE TO WHERE THAT CELL TOWER IS LOCATED. WHAT ABOUT A TRAY? I THOUGHT WE WERE IN THE. WASN'T THERE SUPPOSED TO BE A TRAIL OR SOMETHING THERE? THERE IS AN EASEMENT THROUGH THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT COMES. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT THAT ANGLED PIECE THAT IS BETWEEN THE TWO HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS THAT'S COMING FROM FREEDOM TREE. THERE IS AN EASEMENT ALONG THERE THAT REACHES THIS PROPERTY AND THEN GOES EXACTLY ALONG THAT SOUTH SIDE UNTIL IT GETS TO THE BAYOU AND THEN GOES ALONG THE BAYOU UNTIL IT GETS INTO COMMUNITY PARK. SO, DANNY, THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THAT'S MY INFORMATION I NEEDED. SO, GRACE, I GUESS WE INITIAL APPLICATION, THEY MOVED IT FURTHER BACK TO PREVENT WHOLE BASE AND EVERYTHING ELSE FALLING INTO PEOPLE. BUT NOW WHERE THE LOCATION IS NOW, THERE'S A THERE'S A SAFETY CONCERN FOR ME, AS I THINK OF WITH THE DISC GOLF. AND THEN YOU HAVE YOU HAVE PEOPLE THERE THAT COULD BE PLAYING THIS AND IT COULD FALL, FALL ON THEM. AND THEN ALSO FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WALKS ON THE TRAIL. CORRECT. I'M SORRY, WHAT DID YOU SAY? PEOPLE WHO WALKS ON THAT TRAIL OR IF THERE'S THAT, ONCE THAT TRAIL BE BUILT? WELL, THE TOWER WOULD BE DESIGNED IN A WAY THAT WOULD BE APPROVED SO THAT IT WOULD NOT POSE AS A CONCERN UNLESS THERE WERE SOME KIND OF EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, SUCH AS A HURRICANE, WHERE THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANYBODY ON THE TRAIL OR AT THE DISC PARK. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO. BUT IN GENERAL, IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN UNDER NORMAL DAY TO DAY CONDITIONS TO WHERE THE TOWER WERE TO FAIL, IT WOULD FAIL INTERNALLY AND IT SHOULD NOT AFFECT ANY OF THOSE AREAS INDICATED. SO YOU'RE SAYING IT WOULD NOT AFFECT ANYBODY ON THE ON THE DISC PEOPLE WHO ARE PLAYING GOLF? I'M SAYING IT SHOULD NOT. IF ENGINEERING HOLDS UP THE WAY THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO. BUT SO WHEN YOU SAY SHOULD NOT, I'M TRYING TO MAKE A DECISION. ARE YOU AN ENGINEER BY TRADE? NO I'M NOT. YOU'RE NOT. 
          SO YOUR OPINION IS NOT GOING TO BE VALIDATED. THAT'S TRUE. RIGHT. SO BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING SHOULD NOT SO. SO I NEEDED TO MAKE SURE PUBLIC SAFETY IS OUR MOST CONCERN. RIGHT. AND I GET 
          [01:15:05]
IT. EVERYBODY WANTS TOWERS. EVERYBODY WANTS ACCESS TO PHONES AND ALL THAT. BUT Y'ALL THE INITIAL IT WAS PUTTING A SAFETY CONCERNS ONTO THE STREETS AND TO PEOPLE'S ROOFS AND PEOPLE'S BACKYARD. NOW THE LOCATION THAT YOU MOVED IT TO, I SEE IT AS ANOTHER CONCERN FOR PEOPLE WHO WHO USES OUR COMMUNITY PARK AND PLAYS DISC, YOU KNOW, DISC GOLF AND THOSE USE THOSE TRAILS AND I GET THE INCIDENT THAT HURRICANE, A TORNADO OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD CAUSE. WHEREAS WE HAVE ALSO SEEN THESE KIND OF LONG STANDING STRUCTURES THAT WOULD JUST FALL FOR, FOR WHATEVER REASON, BECAUSE THE BEAM GAVE UP OR GAVE OUT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO WE'RE MOVING IN NOW CLOSER TO THE PARK, WHERE I FIND THAT THERE'S A SAFETY CONCERNS ALSO FOR ME, THAT I'M LOOKING AT THE CITIZEN SAFETY TO PUT SOMETHING ELSE UP HERE. NOW, I GET THE FACT THAT IF THIS WAS NOT HERE, ANY ACCIDENTS COULD HAPPEN. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE PUTTING NOW MORE CLOSER TO WHERE YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT COULD BE USING THIS PARK. AND WITH THAT COMMENT, I WILL YIELD BACK. AND THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE ON THE ON THE DIES THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH TO BOTH OF YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER EMERY. YEAH, I'LL LEAVE THIS UP. I SEE THAT YOU KNOW WHERE YOU HAVE THE TOWER LOCATED. WHAT KEPT YOU FROM TAKING IT UP EVEN FURTHER TO GET IT CLOSER TO COMMUNITY PARK AND FURTHER AWAY FROM THE HOMES? I MEAN, WHY'D YOU PICK THAT PARTICULAR SPOT IN THIS TRACK AGAIN? WE DID NOT HAVE A WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GET A REAL ESTATE ENTITLEMENT OF ANY KIND THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO BUILD A BUILD IT, THIS CONSTRUCT, THIS PROJECT ON THEIR LAND. THAT'S GENERALLY THE FIRST THING THE MOBILE NETWORK OPERATOR ASKS OF THE TOWER CO IS, CAN YOU FIND A SPACE WHERE THIS LEGAL BUSINESS IS ABLE TO MEET ZONING, MEET THE BUILDING CODE, AND MEET THE LONG RANGE PLANS FOR THE COMMUNITY AND BE ABLE TO BE APPROVED BASED ON THE RULES THAT HAVE HAVE BEEN SET IN PLACE BY THE MUNICIPALITY? AND IN THIS CASE, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANOTHER PLACE TO GO TO. SO YEAH, THAT'S REALLY WHAT STOPPED US. I'LL JUST SAY ON THE RECORD, IF WE COULD MOVE TO A MUNICIPAL SPACE THAT STILL WORKED FOR ZONING AND BUILDING PERMIT AND VERIZON, WE'VE HAD ALWAYS BEEN AMENABLE TO CHANGING OUR APPLICATION, AS WE DID BEFORE WE CAME TO THIS HEARING. WHO DO YOU USE TO TRY TO FIND AN APPROPRIATE SPACE FOR THE TOWER? YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, SO OUR TEAM HAS A WE HAVE A LEASING TEAM. THERE'S PROBABLY ABOUT 12 PEOPLE ON THE LEASING TEAM. THEY'RE ALL REAL ESTATE EXPERTS. WHAT WE GENERALLY DO FIRST IS WE FIGURE OUT WHAT IS THE CIRCLE ON THE MAP IN WHICH THE RF ENGINEER CAN PUT AN ANTENNA AND FIX THE ISSUE. THAT'S OUR FIRST THAT'S OUR FIRST VENN DIAGRAM. AND IT'S LITERALLY A CIRCLE ON THE ON THE GROUND. THE SECOND CIRCLE ON THE GROUND IS WHAT DOES THE ZONING OF THE COMMUNITY, THE MUNICIPALITY, THE BOROUGH, THE COUNTY, WHAT ARE THE RULES SO THAT THE RULES OFTEN REMOVE MORE THAN 60%, MORE THAN 70% OF ALL PARCELS WITHIN THAT CIRCLE? BECAUSE IT'S RESIDENTIAL, IT DOESN'T MEET SETBACK. IT IT'S OWNED BY A BIG COMPANY THAT DOESN'T WANT TO DEAL WITH US. 
          THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF THINGS THAT GO INTO BEING ABLE TO BRING TO A BODY LIKE THIS. AN APPLICATION FOR A LEGAL BUSINESS THAT MEETS YOUR CODE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING, AND WE'RE DOING IT ANOTHER TIME BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO DO OUR BEST TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY AND DO OUR BEST TO BASICALLY ALLOW THIS INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE AT LEAST MINIMIZED AS AS MUCH AS IT CAN. BUT LIKE A TELEPHONE POLE, THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT INVISIBLE. YOU CAN'T HAVE ELECTRICITY WITHOUT VISIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THAT'S HOW THIS IS. WE DON'T HAVE 155 FOOT TELEPHONE POLE, SO UNDERSTOOD. IT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF UTILITY. BUT YES, I TAKE THAT. I TAKE THAT POINT. THANK YOU. YEAH. THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS THE IF YOU'LL GO WITH THE PICTURE OF THE TOWER THAT YOU HAVE THAT SHOWS ALL OF THE SERVICES THAT ARE ATTACHED TO 
          [01:20:07]
THE, TO THE POLE YOU HAVE. I THINK YOU'VE GOT THAT. SURE. WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PAGE YOU WANTED TO TALK ABOUT. YEAH. WHO HAS THE IS THIS? I CAN PUT IT ON THE SCREEN OR, OR THIS ONE HERE. 
          ARE YOU LOOKING FOR A VERTICAL? A VERTICAL? YEAH. THERE'S ANOTHER I'M SURE YOU HAVE A SLIDE, A VERTICAL. I ONLY HAVE FOUR SLIDES. THIS ONE SHOWS THE TOWER AS THE CALL OUT BOX. NO, I THOUGHT THERE WAS A SLIDE THAT SHOWED THE. THERE'S A PAGE THAT WILL SHOW THE TOWER ON IT. LIKE LIKE STANDING UP. THAT'S THAT'S THIS ONE HERE. THAT'S THAT'S THE CALL OUT BOX RIGHT THERE WITH THE TOWER VERTICALLY. THAT'S THE ONLY SLIDE THAT THERE IS WITH THAT. OKAY. YEAH. THERE YOU GO. 
          I MEAN THAT'S NOT MAYBE AS DETAILED AS YOU MIGHT LIKE, BUT ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE THERE. 
          YES. HOW MANY USERS DO YOU NORMALLY. HAVE AFFIXED TO THE TO THE TOWER. GENERALLY SPEAKING WE START PROJECTS WITH ONE CARRIER, EVEN THOUGH A LOT OF TIMES IF ONE CARRIER HAS AN ISSUE, THERE'S ANOTHER CARRIER THAT HAS THE SAME SAME PROBLEM IN THAT AREA. GENERALLY SPEAKING, I THINK OUR METRICS ARE THAT BETWEEN 10 TO 14 MONTHS POST OPERATIONAL TOWER, WE GENERALLY GET AT LEAST ONE SECOND TENANT. THESE THIS THIS STRUCTURE WOULD BE BUILT TO HOUSE AT LEAST FOUR FOUR SETS OF ANTENNAS. OKAY. AND THAT'S BOTH A CONCRETE BALLAST AND ALSO STEEL ENGINEERING THING THAT WE DO WHEREBY THE TOWER IS READY TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY WITH MORE, MORE CONNECTIVITY, WHETHER IT'S FOR FIRE, POLICE, ANOTHER CARRIER, ETC. ONCE YOU PUT IT UP AND DO YOU ADD ADDITIONAL USERS TO THAT, TO THAT, THAT POLE? YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S HOW IT WORKS. YEP. SO AT THIS POINT, HOW MANY ARE YOU ORIGINALLY TALKING ABOUT PUTTING ON THE POLE. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH VERIZON. SO ONE ONE USER. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE HAVE BUILT HUNDREDS OF TOWERS IN THE US AND, AND MANY MORE WORLDWIDE. AND OUR, OUR METRICS SHOW THAT PRETTY MUCH ALMOST ALL TOWERS, UNLESS THERE'S AN EXISTING CLOSER TOWER FOR SOME REASON, WE'LL GET ANOTHER CARRIER, AT LEAST ONE MORE CARRIER WITHIN TEN TO 14 OR 18 MONTHS. OKAY, THAT'S VERY COMMON. AND IT'S DRIVEN BY CODE BECAUSE ALL ACROSS THE WORLD, ALL ACROSS THE US, ALL THE PLANNERS DON'T WANT TO HAVE A LOT OF TOWERS. SO THEY FORCE THEY FORCE THE INDUSTRY, THE TELECOM INDUSTRY TO ALLOW CO-LOCATION. SO THAT'S THAT'S THE GREAT PART IS IF WE GET A TOWER HERE AND NOT GOING TO GET ANOTHER APPLICATION FOR A LONG TIME IN THAT AREA, MAYBE NEVER. 
          YEAH. WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS TRYING TO GET TO PROBABLY THE WRONG WAY AT IT, BUT THE ROAD THAT'S BACK BEHIND THE, THE, THE HOME SITES, THAT'S I GUESS A MAINTENANCE ROAD THAT GOES TO THE. YEAH. TO THE TOWER, YOU KNOW, THE USE OF THAT. HOW OFTEN IS THAT ROAD USED? EXCEPTIONALLY INFREQUENTLY. YOU'D BE QUITE SURPRISED. I MEAN, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWER ITSELF IS PROBABLY TEN, TEN WEEKS OF, OF HEAVY MOVING OF THINGS. BUT ALL OF THESE MOBILE NETWORK OPERATORS, EVEN THE SIMPLEST WI-FI COMPANIES, ARE ABLE TO RESET THEIR EQUIPMENT, CHANGE THEIR EQUIPMENTS, CODING AND SO ON FROM ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. SO FOR THE MOST PART, ONCE THE ANTENNAS ARE BOLTED ON AND THEY'RE WORKING WELL, IT'S JUST A PHYSICAL SORT OF INSPECTION THAT ATLAS WOULD SHARE WITH WHOEVER THE CARRIERS ARE THAT ARE ON THE TOWER, AND THAT WOULD TYPICALLY BE LIKE 1 OR 2 PEOPLE IN A PICKUP TRUCK. THEY SHOW UP, THEY HAVE TO LOG IN. THERE'S A CHECKLIST THEY HAVE TO LOOK FOR, YOU KNOW, A OVERGROWN GRASS, ANY ANY PHYSICAL ISSUES WITH THE SITE GRAFFITI. AND THEY JUST PUT THAT INTO THE SYSTEM. AND THEN THAT GETS DIRECTED TO US AS TOWER OWNER. AND WE ARE BY CONTRACT, REQUIRED TO FIX IT. YEAH. BUT THE, THE IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC TO THE SITE, ONCE THE SITE IS ACTUALLY BUILT, THERE'S ALMOST NO TRAFFIC. THERE WON'T BE ANY TRAFFIC. NO, I DIDN'T SAY I'M SAYING IN, IN, IN IN COMPARISON 
          [01:25:07]
TO THE FOLKS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, HAVING A FAMILY LIKE I HAVE A FAMILY, YOU'RE DRIVING YOUR CAR IN AND OUT ALL THE TIME. I'M TALKING ABOUT LIKE MAYBE FOUR VISITS A YEAR. OKAY. WELL, WAS THE ROAD WAS ORIGINALLY SET UP AS COLLEGIATE. AND IS IT IS IT STILL GOING TO BE THAT CONSISTENCY OR IS IT GOING TO BE A CONCRETE ROAD. WHAT'S THE WE HAVE AGREED TO, TO MAKE A CONCRETE ROAD. IT'S NOT NECESSARY. IF THIS BODY DECIDED THAT YOU DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS THE BEST SURFACE FOR THE ROAD, WE WERE OPEN TO ANYTHING THAT WILL. ALLOW YOUR FIRE TRUCK OR OTHER FIRST RESPONDERS TO DRIVE TO THE SITE. THAT'S OUR THAT'S OUR ONLY TECHNICAL NEED AND THAT'S PRETTY LOW. SOME MUNICIPALITIES PREFER CRUSHED GRAVEL BECAUSE IT DRAINS WATER BETTER. IT IT REDUCES A THE RUNOFF ISSUE A LITTLE BIT. BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO MAKE IT CONCRETE. 
          YEAH. WELL YOU'RE IN PEOPLE'S BACKYARDS JUST ABOUT WITH THAT ROAD. SO YOU KNOW YOU HAVE TO TAKE PRECAUTIONS FOR DRAINAGE. ANY KIND OF, YOU KNOW, SITUATION WHERE, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT CREATE SOME FLOODING SITUATIONS IN THOSE BACKYARDS. SO I, I JUST WAS CURIOUS AS TO UNDERSTOOD THE ROAD WILL BE ENGINEERED. OKAY. IF THE COMMISSION WOULD LET ME I COULD GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT SAFETY OF TOWERS. I KNOW THE MAYOR HAD SOME QUESTIONS EARLIER AND YEAH, WE CAN GET TO THAT. WE HAVE PLENTY OF PEOPLE ON THE QUEUE AGAIN, I'M SURE. SO LET HER FINISH. SO THEN WE'LL COME BACK. THAT'S THE EXTENT OF MY QUESTION OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. 
          RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER CLOUSER. YES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AS WE ASK OUR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. YES. MY QUESTION WAS KIND OF ALONG THE LINES OF. COUNCIL MEMBER EMERY, WITH THE MORE CARRIERS YOU ADD, THAT MEANS MORE TRAFFIC TO THE TOWER. BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT HERE, BUT I WOULD THINK THAT EVERYTHING IS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE CONTROLLED REMOTELY. SO I'M THINKING ABOUT MORE. THE MORE CARRIERS, THE MORE TRAFFIC FOR WHATEVER, FOR WHATEVER THEY NEED. BECAUSE YOU'RE JUST WITH VERIZON. TRUE. YOU CAN'T SPEAK FOR ANY OF THE OTHER CARRIERS. WELL, I, I'VE BEEN IN THIS INDUSTRY FOR 16 YEARS NOW, AND SO I KNOW WHAT THEIR HABITS ARE AND THEIR HABITS ARE, IS THAT THEY MOST OF THE NETWORKS THAT WE WORK WITH, LIKE VERIZON, AT&T, T-MOBILE, YOU KNOW, THE PREMIER'S NOT THE NAME YOU NEVER HEARD OF. THEY ARE PUTTING IN. IT COSTS SO MUCH TO BUILD THIS SITE AND GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND HAVE THE STRUCTURE AVAILABLE. THEY WILL MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THEY DELIVER, WHEN THEY PUT THEIR EQUIPMENT ON, THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE, THEY'RE GOING TO USE THE BEST THEN AVAILABLE EQUIPMENT IN TERMS OF ANTENNAS AND, AND THE, THE REST OF THE, THE COMPUTING GEAR, IF THAT DOES GO OUT OF USE BECAUSE THERE'S A BETTER, BETTER SET OF EQUIPMENT THAT COULD GO ON THERE, USUALLY IT'S ACTUALLY GROUND EQUIPMENT THAT'S BEING CHANGED. THAT'S LIKE THE SWITCHING EQUIPMENT, BASICALLY LIKE THE COMPUTERS, IF THE ANTENNAS ARE NEED TO BE REMOVED AGAIN, THAT'S A THAT'S, THAT'S A LIKE A THREE DAY EVENT. THEY COME IN WITH A CRANE OR A LIFT. 
          THEY COME IN WITH CREW AND THEY'LL REMOVE THOSE TOWERS, PUT THEM, PUT THEM ON THE GROUND AND PUT THE NEW ONES UP AND PLUG THEM IN. IT'S HONESTLY THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT THAT ARE LEGITIMATE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO BE WORRIED ABOUT. BUT THE NUMBER OF CARS GOING TO THE SITE IS PROBABLY REALLY NOT ONE OF THEM. OKAY. AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION, YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU Y'ALL HAVE A TEAM OF REAL ESTATE AGENTS THAT ARE THAT WORK WITH ATLAS. THEY'RE NOT REAL ESTATE AGENTS. THEY'RE MOSTLY THEY'RE MOSTLY YOUNG LAWYERS OR OTHER PEOPLE FROM THE INDUSTRY THAT HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH REAL ESTATE, REAL ESTATE. IT'S NOT A I MEAN, WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE THAT HAVE REAL ESTATE LICENSES, BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS PRETTY BASIC IN THE WORLD OF REAL ESTATE. WE'RE HAVING THESE THE TEAM, THE LEASING TEAM KNOW THE CODE. THAT'S THAT'S LIKE A MANTRA IN THE OFFICE. KNOW THE CODE OF THIS PLACE WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO DO THIS THING AND MAKE SURE YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THIS USE MIGHT BE ALLOWED. THAT'S I WAS GOING, SO I WAS GOING WHERE 
          [01:30:08]
I WAS GOING WITH THAT WAS, YEAH, THE PROPERTY VALUES. HAS ATLAS COMPLETED ANY TYPE OF ANALYSIS THAT WOULD SHOW THE IMPACT THAT THE TOWER MIGHT HAVE ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES? SO FOR YEARS WE'VE BEEN WATCHING ZILLOW PRICES OF HOUSES THAT WE BUILT A TOWER NEARBY TO TRY TO SEE WHAT THE TRENDING IS IN THAT SITUATION. AND TO BE HONEST, WE'RE WE'RE ASTOUNDED TO SEE ACTUALLY ALMOST NO, NO DIFFERENTIAL. I MEAN, IF THERE'S A IF THERE'S AN AREA WITH 30 HOUSES AND TEN OF THEM ARE CLOSER TO THE TOWER THAN THE OTHER, THE OTHER 20, THE TRENDING THAT YOU CAN SEE FROM RESOURCES LIKE ZILLOW SHOW THAT THEY'RE SELLING AT THE SAME RATE, AT THE SAME PRICING. THE OTHER THING IS, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE ON HOMES THAT ARE REAL YOUNG. ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE WANT CONNECTIVITY. SO I HAVE A HOUSE IN THE MOUNTAINS WEST OF BOULDER THAT I RENT. IT'S REALLY HARD TO RENT. IT DOES NOT HAVE CONNECTIVITY. SO SOME PEOPLE WILL THINK OF THIS AS A IS AN EYESORE AND A DEMERIT. BUT THERE ARE MANY, MANY, MANY PEOPLE THAT MAYBE AREN'T HERE TODAY THAT WANT THIS AWESOME CONNECTIVITY. AND THEY THEY RECEIVE IT AS, YOU KNOW, A PART OF THE ASSET. WHAT WHAT MAKES THAT HOUSE GREAT IS BEING ABLE TO HAVE EXCELLENT CONNECTIVITY. SO Y'ALL, THAT'S HOW YOU SELL A HOUSE IS BY THE CONNECTIVITY. THAT'S HOW YOU ALL I'M NOT SELLING HOMES OKAY. EVERY BUYER HAS GOT A DIFFERENT DIFFERENT YOU KNOW THING THAT THEY WANT TO GET OR MIX OF THINGS. BUT I'M SAYING THAT THAT BEING IN THE REAL ESTATE WORLD FOR 15, 16 YEARS NOW, I'M SAYING THIS DOES NOT SEEM TO BE AN ISSUE FOR BEING ABLE TO BUY AND SELL THOSE SITES. SO THOSE HOUSES NEAR THE TELECOM SITES, I HAVEN'T SEEN ONE REPORT THAT ACTUALLY PROVED ANYTHING OTHERWISE. AND THE OTHER THE OTHER THING TO THINK ABOUT A&D, AND, AND I JUST WANT TO FALL BACK ON IS THIS IS A LEGAL BUSINESS. IT'S IT IS IT IS REGULATED BY THE FCC AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT. AND THERE ARE RULES THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW, AND WE'RE FOLLOWING THE RULES. WE'RE GOING WHERE YOUR CODE TOLD US TO GO. IF THIS BODY DIDN'T WANT TOWERS IN A SPECIFIC PLACE, THEN YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THE CODE. BUT TO SAY THAT EVERY APPLICATION THAT COMES BEFORE THIS BOARD, THIS COMMISSION HAS TO CREATE A NET OF A NET DOLLAR AMOUNT BETTER FOR THEIR HOUSE NEARBY, THEN YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO ANY ZONING. THE NATURE OF ZONING IS YOU BRING IN AND ALLOW CERTAIN THINGS, AND YOU DON'T ALLOW OTHER THINGS, AND THE MARKET DOES WHAT THE MARKET DOES. SO THIS IS NO DIFFERENT. I MEAN, SOME PEOPLE WOULDN'T WANT A MCDONALD'S NEAR THEIR HOUSE BECAUSE IT SMELLS LIKE GREASE. SOMEBODY ELSE MAY BE REALLY EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO WALK OVER, WALK OVER ONE BLOCK AND GET A GET A HAMBURGER. I MEAN, THAT'S NOT A GOOD PLACE IN MY MIND FOR THIS COMMISSION TO DECIDE WHERE TO SITE THE TOWER. WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THE CODE. THANK YOU. 
          RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. REAL QUICK, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW I HAVE A QUESTION SURROUNDING OUR CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE CONFORMANCE TO IT, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO THE VISIBILITY OF THE TOWER. WHAT MEASURES COULD YOU WOULD YOU PUT IN PLACE TO DISGUISE, CONCEAL, IF THAT'S THAT'S NOT EVEN POSSIBLE TO TRY AND CONCEAL AND DISGUISE THIS TOWER AND ENSURE THAT IT, I GUESS, IS BLENDING IN WITH THE SURROUNDINGS. AND AS ONE OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS CALLED TO HIDE THE UGLINESS OF THE TOWER. OKAY, SO LET'S LET'S BREAK THIS DOWN INTO TWO, TWO THINGS. WHAT'S ON THE GROUND AND, YOU KNOW, VISIBLE AT EYE LEVEL OR, YOU KNOW, EYE LEVEL OR BASKETBALL PLAYER, SOMEONE TALL. WE CAN DO A LOT WITH FANCY FENCING, LANDSCAPING, CONCRETE, ROAD, STUFF LIKE THAT. IT'S NOT GOING TO HIDE 150 FOOT. YEAH. SO THAT 
          [01:35:03]
WAS PART ONE. PART ONE IS EASIER THAN PART TWO OKAY. PART TWO IS YEAH. THIS IS LIKE A TELEPHONE POLE. IT CAN'T DO ITS THING IF IT DOESN'T HAVE HEIGHT FROM THE GROUND. SO IN A SITUATION WHERE WE WERE BUILDING OR ATTEMPTING TO, TO GET A ZONING APPROVAL FOR, LET'S SAY, AN 80 FOOT OR A 60 FOOT TOWER, WE CAN PUT PINE TREES, PINE TREE BRANCHES ON IT. WE CAN MAKE IT TO LOOK LIKE A CLOCK TOWER. WE COULD DO A, YOU KNOW, A FEW THINGS THAT MIGHT MAKE IT LOOK LIKE SOMETHING ELSE. SOMETIMES WE DO IN IN RURAL PLACES, THEY'LL DO LIKE A FAKE WATER TOWER. BUT IN THIS CASE, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. I'M JUST GOING TO BE HONEST. AND THIS IS MY OPINION. SO IT'S NOT FACT. I'M JUST TELLING YOU AS A AS AS A AS THE APPLICANT, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN DISGUISE SOMETHING THAT'S THIS TALL, EVEN AT 80FT, IF YOU PUT BRANCHES ON IT OR MAKE IT A CLOCK TOWER, IT'S GOING TO LOOK WORSE. THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT MAN. ALL RIGHT. 
          RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER RILEY. THANK YOU. MAYOR GRACE, I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO THE OPPOSITION LETTERS. IT WAS MENTIONED BY THE APPLICANT THAT THERE WERE NO OPPOSITION LETTERS THAT HE RECEIVED. DO WE HAVE ANY THAT WERE WERE SENT IN? WE RECEIVED OUR PROTEST LETTERS, BUT THOSE LETTERS WERE NOT SPECIFICALLY FORWARDED TO ATLAS. THEY WERE PART OF THE PRESENTATION THAT WERE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE PORTAL, AND THEY WERE PROVIDED A LINK TO THE PORTAL, SO THEY DID HAVE ACCESS TO THEM THAT WAY. SO NO ONE SENT IN A WRITTEN PROTEST IN AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ZONING, WE RECEIVED 130 PROTEST LETTERS AND ONE IN SUPPORT, BUT THEY WERE SENT TO MISSOURI CITY, AND WE PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION AS PART OF OUR PACKET. YES. AND IN REGARDS TO THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED EARLIER IN REGARDS TO THE PROPERTY VALUE, THE REPRESENTATIVE MENTIONED THAT THEY DID AN ANALYSIS, BUT WASN'T THERE A REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONAL AT THE PNC THAT ADDRESSED HOW THIS WOULD IMPACT THE PROPERTY OWNERS? AS FAR AS THE HEIGHT OF THIS BEING OUTSIDE OF OUR NORMAL, THERE WAS A DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIVE FROM ATLAS TOWERS WHO WAS AVAILABLE AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, AND HE DID GO INTO DETAIL ON HIS ASSESSMENT RELATED TO PROPERTY VALUES. BUT THAT WAS NOT A SOURCE FROM THE CITY. SO THAT WAS ATLAS INFORMATION THAT THEY PROVIDED. SO NO ONE FROM THE PUBLIC ADDRESSED PROPERTY VALUE OR HOW IT IMPACTS THE ESTHETICS ON THE HEIGHT AND THE DISTANCE FROM THE RESIDENCE. WELL, THE TOWER DOES FOLLOW ALONG WITH THE ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE IN OUR ZONING APPENDIX. AND A STEALTH TOWER IS AN ALLOWABLE TOWER TYPE. SO THE TYPE OF TOWER THAT THEY ARE INDICATING THEY WANT TO BUILD ESTHETICALLY IS ALLOWED BY OUR CODE. WE DO ALSO REQUEST THAT THEY SHIELD THEIR TOWER, BUT IF THERE ARE HEIGHT RESTRAINTS THEN WE CANNOT HAVE 155 FOOT PALM TREE. IT WOULDN'T WORK. SO THE STEALTH TOWER IS AN ALLOWABLE TYPE OF TOWER, 450FT FOR IF THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT CANNOT BE MET BY THE DISGUISED TOWER. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE A POINT TO MENTION TO THE REPRESENTATIVE, YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS THING WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO FALL OVER. NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE, AND I JUST KIND OF DISAGREED WITH THAT STATEMENT. JUST BECAUSE WE'RE DEALING WITH, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS THAT THE RESIDENTS HAVE, THE CITY HAS. AND SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTOOD NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE. ABSOLUTELY. AND ACCIDENTS HAPPEN ALL THE TIME. WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY WHERE PLANES HAVE HIT STRUCTURES AND DESTROYED CITIES. 
          AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT GOING FORWARD WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS, OUR QUESTIONS ARE VALID, OUR CONCERNS ARE VALID. AND I JUST WANT YOU TO BE REALISTIC GOING FORWARD. WHEN YOU'RE DISCUSSING AND ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS TO THAT, IF YOU WOULD, I CAN GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION TO DIGEST. AND THAT IS THAT LET'S GO BACK TO 1970 OR 1960 WHEN WE HAD A LOT OF SHE SAID THAT SHE WAS HAPPY WITH YOU. OH, I'M SORRY I MISINTERPRETED. SHE WAS HAPPY. SORRY. NO, NO. AND I'M THE NEXT ONE. I'M JUST GOING TO I THINK. 
          COUNCILMEMBER, ARE YOU ARE YOU ON AGAIN? OH, NO, I JUST WANTED TO. I HAD MADE A MOTION THERE. 
          OKAY, LET'S CALL THE QUESTION. OKAY. IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING. YEAH, YEAH I DO. SO I THINK THERE WERE SEVERAL FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETINGS AND ALL THAT. PEOPLE HAD TALKED 
          [01:40:05]
ABOUT PROPERTY VALUES, PROPERTY VALUES GOING DOWN. IS THERE EVIDENCE OR ANALYSIS SHOWING ANY OF THE IMPACT? OR IS THAT A QUESTION FOR ME? YEAH, YEAH. HAVE YOU SEEN OUR INTERNAL TRACKING OF THESE METRICS. WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DISCERN ANY ANY TRAJECTORY IN A GRAPH OR OTHERWISE THAT SAYS THAT, THAT THE OR IS GOING TO CHANGE THE, THE, THE WHAT THE HOUSE MIGHT SELL FOR BEFORE OR AFTER. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. NOW INSTEAD OF BUILDING ANOTHER TOWER SUCH AS THIS, CAN YOU ATTACH ANTENNAS TO OTHER TOWERS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO PICK UP THE SIGNAL? IF WE DID, WE I WOULDN'T BE HERE. SO PART OF PART OF THE MOBILE NETWORK OPERATORS FIRST LINE OF INQUIRY WHEN THEY HAVE A NETWORK ISSUE IS THEY LOOK FOR TOWERS THAT ARE ALREADY BUILT THAT THEY CAN CO-LOCATE ON. AND IF THERE ISN'T, BECAUSE THE TOWER IS TOO FAR AWAY, LIKE IN THIS INSTANCE, IT'S A MILE AWAY. THEN THEY TAKE THEY TAKE IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL, WHICH IS WHAT CAN WE LEGALLY BUILD TO FIX THE PROBLEM. SO IN THIS CASE THERE ISN'T. THERE IS NOT AN, THERE IS NOT A. OPTION TO FIX THE NETWORK CONNECTIVITY. THE WAY THAT VERIZON IS ATTEMPTING TO DO THAT WITH ANY EXISTING STRUCTURE OR ESSENTIALLY ANYTHING A LOT, LOT SHORTER, YOU KNOW, 60 OR 80FT OR SOMETHING. IT'S ALL BEEN IT'S ALL BEEN VETTED OUT VERY, VERY, VERY THOROUGHLY. RIGHT. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A FEDERAL LAW. I KNOW THERE'S A COMMENT FROM HEALTH RELATED, BUT THERE'S A FEDERAL LAW THAT STANDS WITH THAT. BUT, SIR, ONE LAST QUESTION I HAVE IS, WOULD YOU BE OKAY TO HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN YOUR BACKYARD? WHEN YOU LOOK AT I LIVE IN BOULDER, COLORADO AND BEHIND MY HOUSE, I'M NOT EVEN FROM HERE. PARDON? YOU'RE NOT FROM HERE? YOU'RE IN COLORADO. NO, I GO I GO ALL OVER THE PLACE. OH, OKAY. YEAH. SO. 
          YEAH. OKAY. YEP. BUT I'VE BEEN TO TEXAS A FEW TIMES AND I'VE DONE A FEW HEARINGS IN TEXAS. 
          BUT NO, I'M NOT I'M NOT A MEMBER OF YOUR COMMUNITY. I WISH I COULD BECAUSE WOULD BE BECAUSE THEN MAYBE WE COULD, YOU KNOW, MAYBE HAVE MORE INFORMAL CONVERSATIONS IN A IN A WAY THAT WOULD MAKE THESE HEARINGS WHEN THEY OCCUR. YEAH, GO A LITTLE SMOOTHER, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS. 
          YEAH. BUT YEAH, I LIVE IN BOULDER, COLORADO. I'M VERY CLOSE TO THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND MEASUREMENTS, AND THEY HAVE SEVERAL TOWERS, NOT JUST FOR SCIENTIFIC USE BUT ALSO FOR PUBLIC USE. I ALSO HAVE IN ANOTHER DIRECTION FROM MY YARD, I CAN SEE A TOWER THAT IS USING A VERY SPECIAL FREQUENCY TO MONITOR A WATER PROJECT. IT'S ESSENTIALLY AN UNDERGROUND. 
          VESSEL OF WATER, AND THEY USE A TOWER THAT TALKS TO THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A SAFETY ISSUE OR WHATEVER. THEY CAN CONTROL THAT. AND THEN IF I TURN IN THE OTHER DIRECTION, I CAN SEE THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, WHERE THE ENGINEERING BUSINESS IS OR, OR SCHOOL IS, AND THEY HAVE SEVERAL ON ALMOST ALL OF THEIR. SO YOU GOT THEM ALL SURROUNDED BY YOU. YEAH. AND THAT'S NORMAL. 
          I GO ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND THE WORLD. THIS THIS IS NORMAL. IT'S PART OF THE UNFORTUNATELY THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF WIRELESS. YOU HAVE TO HAVE ANTENNAS AND THEY HAVE TO BE PUT SOMEWHERE. 
          SO IF YOU, YOU STARTED OFF EARLIER WHEN YOU STARTED YOUR CONVERSATION, YOU SAID IF THIS DOESN'T WORK OUT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. SO I GUESS I'LL JUST ASK ONE QUESTION. IF FOR SOME REASON, IF THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION DOESN'T WORK OUT, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER LOCATION THAT YOU CAN CHOOSE FROM? IF THIS DOESN'T WORK OUT, TYPICALLY IN THAT SCENARIO, WE WOULD GO BACK TO THE CARRIER AND ASK THE QUESTION THAT WE'VE ALREADY ASKED THEM LIKE SIX TIMES ALREADY FOR THIS SITE AND IS AND IS, IS THERE AN ACCEPTABLE OTHER LOCATION THAT MEETS YOUR NEEDS? WE'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THAT ON LIKE MANY, MANY MONDAY CALLS WITH WITH VERIZON. THEY GAVE US THE RING. THEY SAID WE HAVE TO STAY IN THE RING OR ELSE IT DOESN'T WORK. SO THERE'S TWO POSSIBILITIES GOING FORWARD. ONE POSSIBILITY IS THAT THEY JUST LET THE LET THE NETWORK PROBLEM PERSIST FOR A WHILE, AND MAYBE THEY'LL COME BACK A YEAR OR TWO LATER AND TRY IT AGAIN. OR THEY MIGHT TRY TO DO A LIKE MICRO SORT OF ANTENNAS IN THE MOST AWFULLEST PART OF THIS AREA JUST TO GET SOMETHING LIMPING ALONG IN TERMS OF MAKING THEIR CUSTOMERS NOT LEAVE THEIR, YOU 
          [01:45:06]
KNOW, LEAVE THEIR SERVICE. BUT, I MEAN, THIS FALLS BACK TO THE FEDERAL LAW WHERE IT IS A IT IS A FEDERALLY REGULATED BUSINESS. IT IS LEGAL. WE MEET YOUR ZONING CODE, WE CAN MEET YOUR BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE DOESN'T LIKE SOMEONE ELSE'S HOUSE BECAUSE OF THE COLOR OR THE SIDING DOESN'T MEAN IT SHOULD BE SHOULD BE DENIED. WELL, SINCE YOU SINCE YOU SAID THAT SINCE THE LAW WAS PUT IN PLACE IN 1996, THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL JOURNALS OF MEDICINE THAT TALKS ABOUT THIS. BUT WE GET THE LAW. I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE ON THE LAW, BUT LET'S NOT TALK ABOUT THE LAW SO WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE LAW IS. LET'S LEAVE THE LAW. HEY, WE'RE AMERICANS. WE HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT. WE CAN TALK ABOUT ANYTHING WE WANT IN THIS HEARING THAT'S TOTALLY LEGAL. THE FEDERAL LAW DOES NOT DOES NOT STOP ANYONE IN THIS ROOM TO TALK ABOUT SAFETY AND HEALTH. THERE IS MANY FEDERAL LAW FEDERAL CASES THAT HAVE INTERPRETED THE FCC'S CODE TO SAY, THAT CAN'T BE A PART OF YOUR DECISION MAKING. SO I WANT TO JUST SAY THIS ONE THING. THE 1996 TELECOMMUNICATION ACT IS KIND OF LIKE THE CONSTITUTION FOR WIRELESS. IT'S A BIG ACT THAT CREATED A STRUCTURE WHEREBY THE FCC, WHICH IS AN EXECUTIVE BOARD TO RUN, TO RUN TO, TO, TO NOT RUN TO REGULATE THIS INDUSTRY. THE THINGS DIDN'T STOP IN 1996. THE FCC HAS CONSTANTLY, CONTINUOUSLY MADE NEW RULES TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EQUIPMENT IS SAFE FOR HUMANS. AND WHENEVER YOU READ SOMETHING ONLINE THAT SAYS THAT THAT WE HAVEN'T THAT THAT THE GOVERNMENT HASN'T REGULATED THIS OR LOOKED AT OTHER THINGS OR STOPPED MAKING SURE THAT IT'S SAFE, THAT IS JUST PATENTLY WRONG. GOT YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE ONE LAST PERSON. MAYOR PRO TEM. MAYOR, I CALL THE QUESTION. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BOWEN. THERE'S A WHAT IS THE MOTION, SIR? YES. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT MY MOTION WAS CLEAR WITH THE DEPUTY CITY SECRETARY IN THAT I MOVED TO DENY THE PROPOSED APPLICATION FOR THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF THE 155 FOOT TALL MONOPOLE CELL TOWER, AND AUTHORIZE. YOU GOT ME. OKAY. AND AUTHORIZED CITY STAFF TO PREPARE A WRITTEN DENIAL BASED UPON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CONTAINED IN THE FOLLOWING. THE APPLICANTS SUBMITTED MATERIALS. THE RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. 
          THE INFORMATION PRESENTED DURING TONIGHT'S MEETING, AND RELEVANT DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING. AGAIN, THAT IS A MOTION TO DENY, NOT APPROVED. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER EMORY IS THAT. GOING TO VOTE? LET ME CLEAR THE SCREEN. COUNCILMEMBER MORALES. YES. 
          MEMBER. EMORY. YES. YES. MEMBER. CLOUSER. YES. MAYOR. YES. MAYOR PRO TEM. YES. MEMBER. KIRK. YES. 
          THE MOTION TO DENY IS APPROVED SEVEN ZERO. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. SO ITEM. EIGHT THREE IS 
          [(3) Public Hearing - To receive comments for or against a request by Jake ...]
ALSO A PUBLIC HEARING IS TO RECEIVE COMMENTS FOR OR AGAINST A REQUEST BY JAKE BURGERS, TBG PARTNERS TO MEANT SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 143 TO EXTEND THE EXPIRATION DATE. DECREASE THE ACREAGE WITHIN WITHIN CITY LIMITS, AND UPDATE OPERATIONS. DETAILS RELATED TO THE QUARRY, MINE, SAND AND MINERAL EXTRACTION, AND TO THE EXTENT SUCH AS ZONING, DEVIATES FROM FUTURE LAND USAGE AND CHARACTER MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO PROVIDE AN AMENDMENT. THEREFORE, THE SUBJECT SITE IS SUB NUMBER ONE, 43 IS 83.88 36.295 ACRE TRACT LAND LOCATED SOUTH OF ALGER PARKWAY AND WEST OF SIENNA RANCH ROAD. WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM. 
          883 DEPUTY CITY CLERK. DO WE HAVE ANY REQUEST TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NO, SIR. MR. MAYOR, 
          [01:50:05]
WE DO NOT. WE DON'T. ALL RIGHT. THERE ARE NO FURTHER COMMENTS. WE'LL NOW GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE 
          [(4) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Two Readings - An ordinan...]
PUBLIC HEARING. 83, ITEM EIGHT A FOR ITEM EIGHT, A FOR AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY, TEXAS AMENDING AND RESTATING SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 143, REDUCING THE TOTAL ACREAGE SUBJECT TO SUCH PERMIT. AUTHORIZING AUTHORIZING THE USE OF AN APPROXIMATELY 836.30 ACRE TRACT OF LAND FOR A SPECIFIC USE. QUARRY, MINE, SAND AND MINERAL EXTRACTION. 
          DESCRIBING SAID 836.30 ACRE TRACT OF LAND PROVIDING LIMITATIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS ON SUCH SPECIFIC USE. AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY. 
          PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. PROVIDING FOR REPEAL. PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING THERETO. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A STORY. OR A SENIOR PLANNER. YES. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. 
          GOOD EVENING. WE RECEIVED AN APPLICATION FROM JAKE FERGUS OF TBG PARTNERS TO AMEND SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 143. CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME? OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. THE SUBJECT SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 836 ACRE TRACT LOCATED ALONG THE BRAZOS RIVER SOUTH OF LJ PARKWAY AND WEST OF SIENNA RANCH ROAD. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR THE LCP INCLUDE EXTENDING THE OPERATION THROUGH 2034, UPDATING THE ACREAGE IN THE LCP, UPDATING THE TRUCK ROUTES, AND INCREASING THE MAX DAILY TRIPS TO 300. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAVE FORWARDED A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT. THE LCP ALLOWS FOR QUARRY MINING, SAND AND MINERAL EXTRACTION. THE QUARRY OPERATIONS ARE REGULATED THROUGH THE US, EPA, THE BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY AND THE T-C-E-Q, AND THE OPERATION DOES HOLD A CURRENT LICENSE FOR APPROXIMATELY 52 ACRES OF LAND DISTURBANCE. AS PART OF THIS AMENDMENT, THE TRUCK ROUTES ARE BEING UPDATED AND THE PROPOSED TRUCK ROUTES INCLUDE FROM THOMPSON FERRY TO SIENNA SPRINGS TO SIENNA RANCH, AND SOUTH TO FORT BEND TOLLWAY OR TO SIENNA PARKWAY, AND THEN THE SECOND ROUTE WILL BE FROM THOMPSON FERRY WEST ON LJ PARKWAY TOWARDS UNIVERSITY AND UP TO HIGHWAY SIX. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID PROVIDE A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS OR THE CONTINGENTS, AND THE APPLICANT HAS. HAS MET ALL OF THE CONDITIONS. AND SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE AND TO PROVIDE A APPROVE THE AMENDMENT. IS THAT IT? YES. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. SO I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT TO MY COLLEAGUES BECAUSE OF SIENNA PARKWAY. AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CAN WE GO BACK TO THAT ROADWAY REAL QUICK RIGHT HERE, LJ PARKWAY, UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD, HIGHWAY SIX, THE WAY WE HAVE IT TODAY, WE CAN GO FROM SIX IN THE MORNING ALL THE WAY TILL AT TEN AT NIGHT. I WOULD ASK THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL TO SEE IF WE CAN HELP TO REDUCE THE TRAFFIC TIMES, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. CAN WE PUT IN A, A SORT OF A TIMING REGULATIONS? YES, SIR. THE ORDINANCE CURRENTLY INCLUDES HOURS OF OPERATION. SO IT WOULD JUST BE AMENDING THE CURRENT HOURS OF OPERATION. WHAT IS THE CURRENT HOURS OF OPERATION? NO EARLIER THAN SUNRISE. NO LATER THAN SUNSET. SO I WOULD ASK WHOEVER IS MAKING THE MOTION TO PLEASE PUT IN A TIME BECAUSE OF OUR CONGESTION ON THE ON THE SIENNA PARKWAY AND OUR ESPECIALLY TOLL ROAD AND ALL THIS PARKWAY UNIVERSITY AND ALL OF THIS. SO THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I OH I'M SORRY, COUNCILMEMBER EMERY. AND THEN WE'LL GO TO COUNCILMEMBER NO. 
          COUNCILMEMBER BONNIE. GO AHEAD. SO IN LINE WITH WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, MAYOR, I DON'T TRAVEL THAT ROADWAY IN THE MORNING OR IN THE EVENING. WHAT IS A GOOD TIME FRAME OF REFERENCE THAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND? I KNOW THEY I DON'T KNOW WHEN SUNSET IS NOW OR WHEN SUN RISE IS NOW, BUT I WOULD USUALLY SAY THE TRAFFIC TIME IS ANYWHERE BETWEEN LIKE 630. IT STARTS THE PARK FORT PATROL ROAD STOP BACKING UP TILL ABOUT 830, AND THEN AFTER THAT IT'S SIENNA PARKWAY AND PARKWAY. 
          ALL THAT IS WIDE OPEN TILL IT STARTS AROUND 330 AGAIN TILL ABOUT 6 P.M. YOU HAVE TRAFFIC TRYING TO COME INTO PEOPLE COMING INTO THEIR RESIDENCE AND THEN OR THOSE THAT ARE GOING OUT TO GET FOOD OR WHATEVER. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EXACT TIME FRAME OR VERBIAGE THAT WE NEEDED TO HAVE, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING. SO THAT WAY WE CAN RESTRICT THIS. SO ENJOYS A STORY. THESE TYPES OF OPERATIONS. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY NEED FROM A TIME PERSPECTIVE. I MEAN WHEN THEY NEED TO START OR WHEN THEY NEED TO END, OR WHAT TYPE OF TIME FRAME THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T LIMIT THEM TO A CERTAIN TIME. I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE DEALING 
          [01:55:04]
WITH HERE FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT. YEAH. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR AND COUNCIL, IN TERMS OF THE PEAK HOUR RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC FOR SIENNA, IT'S USUALLY BETWEEN 630 AND 830 IN THE MORNING AND EVENINGS IS BETWEEN 330 AND 630. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND FOR THE COUNCIL, BECAUSE YOU'RE LOOKING AT PUTTING SOME KIND OF A RESTRICTION, IS CAN IT BE ENFORCEABLE? AGAIN, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT TRUCK TRAFFIC TRAVERSING THESE ROUTES THROUGH SIENNA PARKWAY. I DO AGREE WITH THE MAYOR THAT SIENNA IS CONGESTED. WE HAVE A LOT OF CONGESTION AND THIS POTENTIALLY COULD ADD ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALSO HAVE TO LOOK INTO, THE FACTOR IS CAN WE ENFORCE THIS RESTRICTION. AS IT RELATES TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THIS IS LAND USE IN TERMS OF WHAT THE CITY CAN RESTRICT. SO THE CITY CURRENTLY RESTRICTS THE ABILITY OF THIS OPERATION TO OPERATE WITHIN THE CITY. AGAIN, THAT'S AT SUNRISE TO SUNSET. SO THIS WOULD JUST BE A CHANGE TO THAT CURRENT ALLOWANCE. I DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO TESTIFY AS TO WHAT THEY REQUIRE FOR THEIR BUSINESS OPERATIONS, BUT AS IT RELATES TO THE CITY'S AUTHORITY, THIS IS BASED ON THE LAND USE THAT'S BEING ALLOWED OR AUTHORIZED BY THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S ALLOWABLE. SO LET ME ADD ONE MORE THING. I DID PLACE MYSELF IN THE QUEUE. SO SUPPOSEDLY THIS APPROVAL OR OR THIS PERMIT IS EXPIRED. IT'S BEEN EXPIRED. SO WHICH MEANS UNTIL THIS CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, UNTIL THIS IS NOT WE PUT INTO PLACE, THEY'RE DOING WHATEVER TODAY. SO IT'S NOT EVEN SUNRISE OR YOU KNOW, SO THIS HAS BEEN ASKED OF US TO PUT SOMETHING SO THEY HAVE THE PERMIT SO THEY CAN FOLLOW THE PERMIT. AND THE ONLY THING I'M ASKING IS PUT SOME KIND OF RESTRICTION. SO THIS WAY WE DON'T KILL THAT TRAFFIC. SO THE APPLICANT IS HERE. THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE. BUT IF I MAY I DON'T HAVE THE MINUTES IN FRONT OF ME. BUT IN THE MINUTES THE APPLICANT WAS PRESENT AT THAT MEETING AND THEY STATED THAT THEY DO THEIR TRUCK OPERATION BETWEEN 7 A.M. TO 4 P.M. SO IF THAT GIVES YOU A TIME REFERENCE. COUNCILMEMBER EMERY. YEAH. DO WE KNOW HOW MUCH TRAFFIC WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? YOU KNOW, WE TALK ABOUT WE GOT INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR TRUCKS AND YOU GOT ROUTE ONE AND TWO. WHAT KIND OF VOLUME OF VEHICLE. SO THEY'RE THEY'RE CURRENTLY OPERATING AROUND 250 TRUCK TRIPS TODAY. THAT'S WHAT THE ORDINANCE CURRENTLY ALLOWS. 
          AND THEY'RE REQUESTING TO GO UP TO 300 DAILY. HOW MANY. 300. SO THERE'S 250 NOW AND THEY WANT TO GO TO 300 CORRECT. YEAH. WHAT KIND DO WE KNOW OR HAVE ANY KIND OF FEEL WHAT KIND OF IMPACT THAT MIGHT HAVE ON THE TRAFFIC ISSUE THAT WE NOW HAVE? WE HAVE STUDIED SIENNA PARKWAY BECAUSE OF THE CONGESTION AND ALL THE ISSUES. WE HAVE A LOT OF THE INTERSECTIONS, INCLUDING SOME OF THESE INTERSECTIONS THAT YOU HAVE THERE, CURRENTLY OPERATE DURING PEAK HOURS AT WHAT WE CALL UNACCEPTABLE LEVELS. SO THEY'RE NOT OPERATING AT THE LEVELS WE WANT TO OPERATE. SO POTENTIALLY HAVING THIS TROUGH COULD ADD TO THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION. SO I GUESS I WOULD ASK IS TODAY THAT THERE'S NO RESTRICTIONS OR THERE IS SUNRISE TO WHATEVER THAT IS. I GUESS THE QUESTION THAT WE WOULD ASK IS I SEE CHIEF HARRIS IS HERE, SIR. WELL, I GUESS SOMEONE HAD ASKED IF WE CAN MONITOR THIS OR TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT OF VIOLATIONS BECAUSE THAT PARKWAY GETS IT'S ACTUALLY BUSIER THAN FORT BEND TOLL ROAD AND DURING THOSE TIMES, AND THERE'S A LOT OF CARS THAT ARE TRYING TO TURN IN TURN OUT. AND THEN WE'VE SEEN THESE TRUCKS FLYING THROUGH THERE. SO I'M ASKING MY COLLEAGUES TO THINK OF SOMETHING TO DO WITH THAT, BECAUSE WE KEEP EVERYONE KEEP TELLING US THAT THERE'S, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC'S ARE ISSUES. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT RESTRICTING THEM FROM DOING ANYTHING, BUT WE HAVE TO COME TO SOMETHING. AND IF WE DO COME TO SOMETHING, WE NEED TO MONITOR THIS. AND I'VE SEEN SIGNS OUT THERE THAT SHOWS CLICK IT OR TICKET OR YOU HAVE YOUR SPEEDING RIGHT. THOSE THOSE SIGNS ARE OVER THERE. AND I'VE SEEN MOTORCYCLE OUT THERE THAT'S PATROLLING OR PULLING PEOPLE OVER THAT. THAT'S NOT FOLLOWING A RULE. I MEAN THE RULES. BUT IS THERE ANY WAY CAN WE MONITOR THIS BECAUSE IT'S A NO MAN'S 
          [02:00:02]
LAND TODAY? WELL, AS YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST GOING TO TAKE RESOURCES WHICH WE HAVE LIMITED. 
          BUT AS FAR AS COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES, WE HAVE TWO OFFICERS THAT ARE TRAINED AND AUTHORIZED TO ENFORCE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTIONS, CITATIONS. AND THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENTIRE CITY, NOT JUST THESE AREAS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO WE ARE LIMITED IN RESOURCES AS FAR AS COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES. OKAY. AND COUNCIL MEMBER BONNIE, YEAH, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY MAYOR. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, YOU I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE CONDITIONS ARE ON THE GROUND. 
          AND I APPRECIATE YOU FOR BRINGING IT TO OUR ATTENTION. BUT DO YOU HAVE A POTENTIAL RECOMMENDATION OF TIME THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE CAN DELIBERATE AND TALK THROUGH AND THEN KIND OF COME TO A DECISION? YEAH, I WOULD SAY BASED ON WHAT SHE SAID, IF THEY CAN DO AS EARLY AS THEY CAN UNTIL AROUND 630 AND THEN GET BACK AFTER 830 AND GO ALL THE WAY TILL 330, AND THEN THEY CAN START BACK AT 630 BECAUSE THEY'RE RUNNING THOSE TRUCKS EVEN TODAY AS 730 AND 8:00 PM, I'VE SEEN THEM. I DRIVE THROUGH THERE. SO I WOULD SAY IF WE CAN RESTRICT THOSE TIMES OF HEAVY TRAFFIC WHEN WE KNOW THAT TRAFFIC, I THINK FROM YOUR YOU ALL THOSE SIGNALS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SYNCHRONIZE, YOU KNOW, THE TIMES IS JUST AS WELL AS I DO OF THE TRAFFIC PATTERNS. SO I THINK MY, MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE IF WE CAN PUT SOME TYPE OF RESTRICTION AT THOSE TWO TIME WINDOWS AND SEE IF THAT WORKS, I DON'T I MEAN, I DON'T I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS. I THINK WHEN IT CAME DOWN TO THE ENFORCEABILITY OF IT. SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW DO WE BECAUSE THIS IS, IS THIS DAILY THAT THEY'RE RUNNING OR IS THIS MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY? WHAT IS THEIR OPERATION TIME? IT'S DAILY. IT'S MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY. OKAY. SO I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE WEEKEND MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY DEFINITELY. BUT IT IS DAILY, UP TO 250 TRUCKS RIGHT NOW. AND THEY'RE TRYING TO INCREASE THE 300. YES. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT I'M JUST TRYING TO WRAP MY MIND AROUND HOW DO WE HAVE THEM START AT ONE TIME, STOP AND START BACK. YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE IF IT'S POSSIBLE, MAYBE WE START BECAUSE YOU SAY WHAT THEY REQUESTED WAS 730. THAT'S THEIR TIME. THE APPLICANT STATED THAT THEIR HOURS OF OPERATION ARE BETWEEN 7 A.M. TO 4 P.M, SEVEN AND FOUR, MAYBE 8 TO 3. THERE YOU GO. 8 A.M. TO 3 P.M. IF IT'S ENFORCEABLE. I MEAN, IT MAKES IT MAKES NO SENSE TO COME UP WITH THIS IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO, TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST WITH YOU, IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO ENFORCE WITH HAVING TEN OFFICERS ON DUTY AT A TIME, WITH EVERYTHING ELSE THEY'RE DOING TO KEEP TRACK OF THESE TRUCKS IS GOING TO BE IT'S GOING TO TASK US MORE THAN WE'RE ALREADY TASKED. YEAH, I AGREE, CHIEF, I JUST WANTED I MEAN, IF IT'S IF IT'S REALLY A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED, THEN I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION IF WE HAD TO COME UP WITH A DECISION. BUT, YOU KNOW, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DO OR MUST DO AT THIS STAGE OR DO CITY MANAGER? I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE ALREADY HAVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR SUNSET TO SUNRISE, HOWEVER WE DEFINE THAT. SO ENFORCING IT WILL BE NO DIFFERENT THAN FORCING THE SPEED LIMITS THAT WE HAVE THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND OTHER ISSUES. THIS WOULD ALSO FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY. AND KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS IS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME THAT FAR EXCEEDS RIGHT NOW WE'RE TALKING TEN YEARS FROM NOW, WHICH WE COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE MORE RESOURCES WITHIN THAT TIME. SO I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD TAKE ALL OF THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. AND IF IT'S A PRIORITY SET TO SET A SPECIFIC TIME TABLE, I WOULD PREFER A SPECIFIC TIME RATHER THAN SUNSET AND SUNRISE, BECAUSE WHO KNOWS WHAT THAT IS. DO YOU BELIEVE 8 A.M. TO 3 P.M. IS A SUFFICIENT TIME FRAME OR SOMETHING? BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD TODAY, I'M GOING TO DEFER TO A TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC PERSON THAT WOULD KNOW BETTER THAN ME. SO AGAIN, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, A FEW THINGS TO CONSIDER. SIENNA PARKWAY HAS A NUMBER OF SCHOOLS. IF YOU'RE DOING EIGHT, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE GO TO 830 BECAUSE OF A LOT OF SCHOOLS AROUND THAT ZONE. 
          THE NUMBER TWO THING THAT YOU WANT TO CONSIDER IS IN THIS TRUCK ROUTE, YOU NOT ONLY HAVE SIENNA PARKWAY, BUT OTHER ANCILLARY ROADS THAT CONNECT TO SIENNA PARKWAY. SO YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT AS WELL. THE THIRD POINT IS THE CURRENT TRUCK LIMIT PER THEIR SUP IS 250. THEY'RE 
          [02:05:03]
ASKING FOR 300. THAT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU MAY ALSO WANT TO CONSIDER. SO I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. SO IS OUR MAYOR I'M SORRY I HAVE A QUESTION. SO IS OUR IS THIS ORDINANCE OR THIS CHANGE TO ALSO INCREASE FROM 250 TO 300, OR IS IT JUST FOR THE TIME FRAME. NO. SO IT'S ALSO INCLUSIVE OF THE. SO CAN WE RESTRICT THAT FROM GOING FROM 250 TO 300. YES. OKAY. WELL I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A. WELL I'M SORRY. LET ME THERE'S LIKE THREE MORE I MEAN I'LL, I'LL WAIT. COUNCILMEMBER. IT SEEMS LIKE EMOTIONS ALREADY. YEAH. I GUESS ACTUALLY IF WE MAKE THIS A RESTRICTION, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO THAT. THAT THE BUSINESS, THE COMPANY'S BUSINESS, ARE THEY GOING TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE STILL? AND, YOU KNOW, OPERATE EFFECTIVELY? LET ME PUT IT THAT WAY. AND YOU KNOW, WHERE DID WHERE DOES THE SAND I GUESS IT'S SAND AND GRAVEL. WHERE DOES THAT WIND UP? I MEAN, IS THAT THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY OR LET ME ANSWER, TRY TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. IT'S PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. HE'S NOT HERE, BUT A LOT OF THAT MATERIAL IS USED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. YOU KNOW, THE ONGOING CONSTRUCTION IN SIENNA AND OUR ETJ. SO WHAT? HOW WOULD THIS AFFECT THEIR BUSINESSES? I'M NOT THE RIGHT PERSON TO ANSWER. THAT'S PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER ODEKIRK, THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR RECOGNIZING THIS HUGE CONCERN OF OUR CONSTITUENTS IN SIENNA. PROBLEM THAT I HAVE WITH LIMITING HOURS IS THAT CRAMMING AN ADDITIONAL 50 TRUCKS, WHICH I UNDERSTAND WE CAN LIMIT INTO A SMALLER TIME FRAME, IS GOING TO CREATE EVEN MORE TRAFFIC DURING THOSE THAT TIME BLOCK. AND I KNOW THE HORRIFIC SITUATION, THAT RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC IS IN SIENNA AND IT HAS TO BE ADDRESSED SOMEHOW. BUT AS FAR AS MONITORING, THERE ARE OTHER TRUCKS THAT ARE HAULING THROUGH SIENNA CONSTANTLY BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION IN THERE. SO HOW DO WE DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THESE TRUCKS ON THEIR ROUTES TO WHATEVER THEIR DESTINATION IS AND THE TRUCKS COMING IN TO WORK ON THE HOMES BEING BUILT IN SIENNA. SO WHAT'S WHAT'S THE SOLUTION THERE? AND THAT IS EXACTLY THE QUESTION I BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COUNCIL THE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE. SO AND I THINK THE CHIEF SPOKE TO IT. AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE COUNCIL WILL ALSO CONSIDER. YOU CAN PUT THE RESTRICTION, BUT HOW WOULD YOU ENFORCE IT? ARE YOU OKAY? ARE YOU DONE? OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER EMERY, ARE YOU. NO. OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER RILEY. 
          MY QUESTION IS, WELL, IT'S MORE LIKE A COMMENT. IF WE IT SEEMS LIKE AN OXYMORON IF WE'RE GOING TO RESTRICT YOUR TIME AND THEN TELL THEM THEY CAN'T DO THE EXTRA DELIVERIES AS WELL, THE ADDITIONAL 50. I'M OKAY WITH THE TIME FRAME, BECAUSE THE ONE THING I THINK WE'RE MISSING IS WE CAN'T PUT RESTRICTIONS IN AND THINGS THAT WE CAN'T ENFORCE AND WE CAN'T HAVE OUR OFFICERS, YOU KNOW, CHASING DOWN THESE SITUATIONS BECAUSE WE NEVER KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT TIME THEY'RE ON THEIR SHIFT AND WHEN THEY'RE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA TO ENFORCE IT, NOT TO MENTION THE IMPACT IT WILL HAVE ON THE BUSINESS, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO WE'VE GOT TO GIVE THEM SOMETHING. I'M NOT REALLY FAVORABLE WITH THE ADDITIONAL DELIVERIES 250 A DAY. THAT'S A LOT TO INCREASE IT TO AN ADDITIONAL 50 TO BE 300 IS GOING TO CREATE A LOT MORE CONGESTION ON THAT. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT WHAT YOUR MOTION IS GOING TO BE BECAUSE THIS THIS SEEMS LIKE IT'S NOT COMPLETELY FLESHED OUT. AND WE HAVEN'T CONSIDERED ALL THE LOGISTICS AND HOW IT IMPACTS THE BUSINESS. AND THEN TWO, HOW DOES IT IMPACT OUR, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC SAFETY AS WELL AS THE RESTRICTIONS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PUT ON THERE? IT HAS TO MAKE SENSE FOR THE BUSINESS AND FOR THE CITY. AND SO MY ONLY THING WOULD BE TO LEAVE IT AS IS WITH JUST DOING THE 250, OR IF WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE OR LIMIT THE TIME FRAME, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE THEM THE ADDITIONAL 5050 TRIPS OUT OF ALL FAIRNESS, BECAUSE IF NOT, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THEIR PRODUCTION AND MEET WHATEVER EXPECTATIONS THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET, AS WELL AS NOW. THEY COULD BE RUSHED, CREATE A TRAFFIC JAM, ACCIDENTS, RUSHING, SPEEDING AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M KIND OF CONFLICTED ON THAT. SO I'M INTERESTED TO SEE WHAT THE 
          [02:10:02]
MOTION IS GOING TO BE. OKAY. RECOGNIZING MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MARSHALL OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. DO WE KNOW THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF TRUCKS THAT ARE ACTUALLY GOING THERE? NOT THE NUMBER THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TOLD US. HE SAYS THEY'RE DOING THE MAX RIGHT NOW. AND THE MAX IS WHAT, 250? OKAY. DO WE KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES EACH TRUCK TO EITHER LOAD OR UNLOAD? I DO NOT, BECAUSE I THINK SOME OF THAT WILL PLAY A FACTOR INTO HOW WE CALCULATE IF WE'RE GOING TO SET REGULATED TIMES OR NOT, IF THEY'RE ALREADY RUNNING SUNSET TO SUN UP AND IT'S TAKING THEM 250 TRUCKS, THEN IF WE TAP IT DOWN BETWEEN 8 AND 3, IT'S GOING TO DECREASE IT DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF ROUTES THAT THEY NEED. I'M ALMOST AT THE POINT WHERE IT'S ALREADY A NONCONFORMING USE. IS THAT CORRECT? BECAUSE IT EXPIRED. SO THE ORDINANCE IS STILL PRESENT, BUT THE ALLOWANCE AND THE TIME FRAME IN WHICH THEY WERE TO CONTINUE THAT USE HAS EXPIRED IN THE ORDINANCE. OKAY. YES. SO WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE THAT MAYBE WE COULD GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION BACK BEFORE US SO THAT WE CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION ON WHAT TYPE OF HOURS WE CAN? SURE. YOU ALL YOU ALL COULD MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE JULY 21ST MEETING AND THEN HAVE IT RECONSIDERED AT THAT TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU. I JUST HAVE A COMMENT FOR THE CITY MANAGER. CITY MANAGER, AS YOU WALKED IN TO THIS JOB. SIENNA PARKWAY IS A SCENIC PARKWAY THAT'S TODAY NO ONE I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL, WHO'S THE APPLICANT? YOU KEEP SAYING HE HE HE WHO'S HE? SO JAKE BURGESS OF TBG PARTNERS FILED THE APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF JOHNSON DEVELOPMENT AND THE APPLICANT WHO CAME TO THE PNC MEETING, ALVIN SAN MIGUEL. AND WHY WERE THEY WEREN'T HERE TODAY? THEY DID NOT SHOW UP. THEY WERE NOTIFIED OF THE MEETING, BUT THEY DID NOT SHOW UP. OKAY. SO I GUESS GOING BACK TO MY POINT IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH SANTA PARKWAY. OBVIOUSLY THEY WANT TO BUILD MORE HOMES IN THE BACK. 
          THE MORE HOMES THEY SELL, THE MORE MONEY THEY MAKE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, BUT THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS NO ONE'S CONTRIBUTING TO THE SIENNA PARKWAY ROADWAYS. THAT ROAD TAKES A LOT OF TIME AND WEAR AND SIGNAL INTEGRATIONS. WE HAVE ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT. WE HAVE ARTERIES THAT NEEDS TO PUSH PEOPLE OUT, ESPECIALLY IN A IN A HURRICANE OR A TORNADO OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WE HAVE ISSUES NOW. I GET THE FACT THAT THEY WANT TO, YOU KNOW, 521 IS ANOTHER THING, ANOTHER ROADWAY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN IN LINE WITH THE SIENNA PARKWAY AND FORMING THIS. SO I SEE THIS AS A SIT DOWN CONVERSATION CITY MANAGER THAT WE NEEDED TO HAVE. 
          WE HAVE A LONG THAT'S IN A PARKWAY. WE HAVE DISTRICT C AND DISTRICT D. THOSE REPRESENTATIVES NEED TO UNDERSTAND. AND IF WE ARE PUSHING THIS OUT TO THE 21ST, MAYBE, PERHAPS THEY NEEDED TO HEAR FROM THEIR CONSTITUENTS AS FAR AS TRAFFIC WISE, AS FAR AS TIMING WISE AND WHAT'S GOING ON. AND I'D LIKE TO SEE THE APPLICANT HERE NEXT TIME TRYING TO EXPLAIN THIS AS TO WHAT'S GOING ON. SO WE HAVE TO HAVE WE CAN'T KEEP JUST MAKING SUNRISE TO SUNSET. WE CAN'T KEEP TELLING PEOPLE THAT WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE AGENCIES TO ENFORCE. I MEAN, OUR CITY IS GROWING. IT'S NOT 85,000 ANYMORE. I THINK I HEARD SOMEONE SAID IT'S ABOUT 104,000 SOMETHING SOMEWHERE ON THAT LINE. BUT IT'S GROWING. THE DEMAND IS THERE, WHICH IS A GREAT PROBLEM. BUT WE CAN'T JUST KEEP CLOSING OUR EYES ON THESE PROBLEMS AND SAYING, YOU KNOW, WOULD IT BE ALL RIGHT? IT'D BE OKAY AND IT'S NOT OKAY. SO I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN APPLICANT HERE. I WOULD LIKE TO GET THIS INPUT FROM THEM AS TO WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR. AND AT LEAST US AS COLLEAGUES, UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT IS THAT WE NEEDED TO DO. BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SO MANY PERCEPTIONS, I THINK COUNCILMEMBER RILEY EMORY MAHONEY ALL ASKED THE QUESTIONS OF WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING? AND WE NEEDED TO HEAR THAT BACK FROM THEM. I JUST KNOW WHAT I WHAT AND THE REASON I ASKED IS BECAUSE THIS IS COMING BEFORE US. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO SIT AND PUT SOME GUIDELINES AND SEE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE WITH THIS, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE ANYONE, ESPECIALLY IN THE CITY LIMITS, TALKING ABOUT TAKING OWNERSHIP OR EVEN HELPING US WITH THOSE ROADWAYS AND ALL THAT, AND IT'S TEARING IT UP AND WE GOT TO FIX IT. WE GOT TO MAINTAIN IT. WE LOOK FOR OTHER AGENCIES. WE WORK CLOSELY WITH FORT BEND COUNTY, BUT THERE'S ONLY ENOUGH MONEY THAT THEY CAN HELP US WITH. SO WE GOT TO LOOK AT THIS AND WE GOT TO COME BACK WITH IT. THAT'S MY SUGGESTION. COUNCILMEMBER BONIN. JUST JUST FOR THE PUBLIC, 
          [02:15:04]
WE DO INVITE THE APPLICANTS TO THESE MEETINGS, WHETHER THEY CHOOSE TO COME OR NOT. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN CONTROL. UNDERSTOOD. ALL RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER, I JUST WANTED TO SAY ONE THING AS A RECOMMENDATION AND ENCOURAGEMENT TO THE APPLICANT. IF THEY SEE THE VIDEO OR THAT CAN BE PASSED ALONG TO THEM. YOU KNOW, HAVING BEEN AN ENTREPRENEUR, BEING AN ENTREPRENEUR, AND HAVING WORKED WITH ENTREPRENEURS FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, ONE THING THAT THEY KNOW HOW TO DO AND WE KNOW HOW TO DO IS PIVOT. AND I THINK THAT THIS IS A CONVERSATION THAT WE SHOULD HAVE WITH THEM ABOUT POSSIBLY CHANGING THEIR BUSINESS MODEL, IF, IN FACT, THEY CAN'T GET THEIR ROOTS DONE DURING THE DAY, MAYBE THEY SHOULD DO IT LATE AT NIGHT OR OVERNIGHT AS A CONSIDERATION. IF THEY'RE WANTING TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR OVERALL GOALS, THAT WILL HELP US, OF COURSE, AS A CITY TO TRY TO REDUCE TRAFFIC, BUT ALSO IT WOULD HELP THEM TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR OVERALL GOALS. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CONVERSATION HAS BEEN HAD, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS WORTHY OF A CONVERSATION. MOTION, MR. TABOR. THAT'S IT. MAYOR. YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN. MARSHALL, WHAT IS YOUR MOTION? MAYOR? THANK YOU. MAYOR. MY MOTION IS TO SUSPEND THIS ITEM AND MOVE IT INTO THE POSTPONE. POSTPONE THIS ITEM TILL JULY 21ST. OKAY, SO THAT'S COUNCIL MEMBER RILEY'S SECOND ALSO. SO DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THIS? YES, SIR. YEAH. LET ME GO TO THAT THING. THIS MOTION CARRIES TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO THE JULY 21ST REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THANK YOU. ITEM 8B1 IS ALSO ANOTHER PUBLIC 
          [(1) Public Hearing - To receive comments for or against an ordinance grant...]
HEARING AND RELATED ACTIONS 8B1 PUBLIC HEARING IS TO RECEIVE COMMENTS FOR OR AGAINST AN ORDINANCE GRANTING CENTERPOINT A GAS FRANCHISE ENJOYS. OUR CITY ATTORNEY. YES, SIR. IS THERE ANYONE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING? PUBLIC HEARING? OH, YEAH. IT'S ANYONE FROM PUBLIC HEARING? NO, SIR, MR. MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS ITEM. 8B2, AN ORDINANCE OF 
          [(2) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Three Readings - An ordin...]
THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY, TEXAS, GRANTING THE CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCES CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS CENTERPOINT ENERGY. TEXAS GAS OPERATIONS. THE RIGHT PRIVILEGE AND FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, INSTALL, EXTEND, REMOVE, REPLACE, ABANDONED, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN ITS FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY OF THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY FOR THE TRANSPORTATION, DELIVERY, SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF NATURAL GAS. CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE FOREGOING SUBJECT. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. THERE'S NO FORMAL PRESENTATION FOR THIS ITEM. THIS IS THE PROPOSED FRANCHISE ORDINANCE FOR CENTERPOINT ENERGY FOR THE GAS OPERATIONS. THIS PROVIDES FOR A 20 YEAR TERM WITH ONE ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR TERM THAT RENEWS AUTOMATICALLY A REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN PERMITS. OTHER PERMITS OTHER THAN THE RIGHT OF WAY PERMITS TO DO WORK. AND SO, BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE PAYING A FRANCHISE FEE, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY IF THEY HAD OTHER PERMITS FOR OTHER CITY ITEMS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY CAME IN FOR AN SUPP FOR A UTILITY PROJECT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO PAY THAT FEE, BUT THEY JUST WOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY THE CITY'S RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT FEE TO DO WORK IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE PAYING THE CITY QUARTERLY. THIS 4% FRANCHISE FEE BASED ON THE GROSS THAT THEY'VE COLLECTED. SO THE CITY IS CURRENTLY RECEIVING 3%. SO THIS WOULD BE AN INCREASE IN REVENUE. OKAY. IS THERE A MOTION? IT'S BEEN A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MARSHALL, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER O'DEKIRK. WHAT'S YOUR STATE YOUR MOTION PLEASE. MY MOTION IS TO HOLD ON JUST ONE SECOND TO GRANT AN ORDINANCE TO CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCES FOR GAS FRANCHISE, MOVING OUR FEE TO 4%. OKAY. AND YOU ALSO SIGNED UP TO ASK A QUESTION I DID. WAS 4% THERE OFFER OR WAS THAT OUR REQUEST? SO THEIR OFFER WAS 4% UNLESS THE CITY GAVE UP ITS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION, IN WHICH CASE THEY WOULD HAVE INCREASED IT TO 5%. HOWEVER, GIVING UP THE CITY'S ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM THIS BODY THE ABILITY TO CONTEST AND SUSPEND RATE INCREASES AND PARTICIPATE IN RATE CASES. MY MOTION STANDS OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO ONE ELSE ON THE QUEUE, 
          [02:20:03]
WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MARSHALL, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER O'DEKIRK. LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THE MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ITEM NINE OUR 
          [(a) Consideration and Possible Action - A resolution authorizing the submi...]
RESOLUTIONS 9AA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY, TEXAS, APPROVING AND SUPPORTING THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S 2025 TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES SET ASIDE TO CALL FOR PROJECTS AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED THERETO. SHASHIKUMAR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. YES, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES WHERE WE CAN GET GRANTS AND FUNDING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE INITIATIVES. THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ANNOUNCED THE STATEWIDE TOTAL PROJECTS FOR WHAT THEY CALL TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM FUNDING, THEY CALL IT ESSENTIALLY, IT IS TO MITIGATE CONGESTION IN AREAS WHERE YOU CAN DO ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION, PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE AND THOSE KIND OF STUFF. SO THIS RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION AND THE AREA THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS A PROJECT WORTH $5 MILLION. AND WE HAVE A MAP OF. AND I WILL JUST GO OVER THE LOCATION, AS YOU KNOW. VIENNA CORRIDOR ALONG NITRO IS WHERE POTENTIALLY FUTURE GROWTH IS GOING TO HAPPEN. WE HAVE THE METRO GARAGE THAT'S BEEN CONSTRUCTED. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A TEN FEET WIDE, WHAT WE CALL A SHARED USE PATH FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE CONNECTING FROM HIGH SCHOOL ALONG HURRICANE LANE, COMING CONNECTING TO THE METRO GARAGE, GOING SOUTH INTO MCKEEVER AND CONNECTING IT TO THE SIENNA CROSSING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. AGAIN, THIS IS A GRANT APPLICATION AND 5 MILLION IN FUNDING COST, WHICH IS APPROVED. THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHARE IS $1 MILLION. AND WE'RE ALREADY TALKING TO METRO ABOUT POTENTIALLY FUNDING THE CITY SHARE OF THE PROJECT AND MAYBE UPFRONT COSTS IN THE INITIAL PHASES. BUT AT THIS POINT, ALL WE'RE ASKING IS YOUR SUPPORT FOR SUBMITTING THE RESOLUTION. BY OR SUBMIT OUR APPLICATION FOR THIS. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER RILEY A SECOND. THAT MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER RILEY, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER O'DEKIRK SEEING NO ONE ELSE ON THE QUEUE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THIS MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ITEM NINE BE A 
          [(b) Consideration and Possible Action - A resolution to apply for and acce...]
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY, TEXAS, APPROVING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES FOR FUNDING UNDER THE FISCAL YEAR 2025. LAW ENFORCEMENT, MENTAL HEALTH AND WELLNESS ACT IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS GRANT PROGRAM DESIGNATING THE POLICE CHIEF AND MAYOR IS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED THERETO. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE BRANDON HARRIS, POLICE CHIEF. YES, MAYOR. COUNCIL. THANK YOU. 
          THIS GRANT IS TO THE US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COPS OFFICE. AND THE GRANTS THIS IS APPROVED. THE FUNDS WILL BE USED FOR MENTAL HEALTH, WELLNESS SERVICES AND TRAINING FOR OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, OUR POLICE OFFICERS, OUR FIREFIGHTERS AND OUR 911 OPERATORS. THE TOTAL GRANT AMOUNT IS 100,000 AND THERE IS NO REQUIRED ACTIONS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM BROWNE-MARSHALL, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER RILEY. SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THIS MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT. 
          [10. CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION]
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER TEN CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION. DO WE DO HAVE A CLOSED TWO ITEMS ON CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO THE TIME IS 8:55 P.M. AND CITY COUNCIL WILL NOT CLOSE INTO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO 55 1.071 AND 55 1.074 OF THE  JACKET 
          [11. RECONVENE]
TOO HOT? THE JACKET WAS TOO HOT. THE TIME IS 9:09 P.M. AND THE CITY COUNCIL IS NOW BACK IN TO REGULAR MEETING. I'D LIKE TO ASK ANY MEMBERS IF THERE'S A MOTION RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER BONNIE. YES, MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO COLLABORATE WITH THE FORT BEND COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON POTENTIAL ENFORCEMENT WITHIN THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S AUTHORITY AGAINST THE JUBILEE APARTMENT COMPLEX AND ITS OWNERS FOR VIOLATIONS OF ANY TYPE AT THAT COMPLEX, AND FILE A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE APPROPRIATE PARTIES OF THE JUBILEE COMPLEX UNDER CHAPTER 54 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, AS APPROPRIATE FOR ORDINANCE VIOLATIONS RELATED 
          [02:25:04]
TO DANGEROUSLY DAMAGED STRUCTURES OR IMPROVEMENTS. ALL RIGHT. THERE'S BEEN A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER MAHONEY, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MARSHAL, SEEING NO ONE ELSE ON THE QUEUE. 
          LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THAT MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WITH NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE TIME IS 9:10 P.M. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HAS ADJOURNED,
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.