Jul 21, 2025 City Council

[00:00:05]

ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING. TODAY IS MONDAY, JULY 21ST, 2025. WILL NOW CALL THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TO ORDER AT 6:35 P.M. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS QUORUM OF COUNCIL. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.

ITEM NUMBER THREE IS OUR PLEDGE IS BE LED BY OUR ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE, KEVIN BURLESON.

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 SIR. BEFORE WE GET TO OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS, I THINK I WAS JUST TOLD BY THE CITY SECRETARY WE HAVE TROOP 140 THAT'S HERE FROM CITIZENSHIP IN THE COMMUNITY BADGE. IF Y'ALL CAN STAND UP AND JUST SEE WHO YOU ARE. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING. ITEM NUMBER FOR OUR PUBLIC COMMENT. CITY. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS

[(a) Staff Report - Provide a report on the June 2025 presentation regardin...]

YOU ALL RECEIVED THE FORMAL PRESENTATION AT YOUR JUNE 16TH MEETING. IN THAT PRESENTATION, WE PROVIDED YOU WITH SOME PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CHANGES TO YOUR TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. CHAPTER 380 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

YOU ASKED FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. AS A REMINDER, THAT PROPOSAL INCLUDED THE CREATION OF A MATRIX SYSTEM FOR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF TO THE CITY COUNCIL, AS WELL AS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL POINTS BASED ON LOCATION AND REDEVELOPMENT AREAS FOR CERTAIN DEVELOPMENTS. ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSAL COMBINES THE RESTAURANT PROGRAM AND THE PATIO PROGRAMS AND LIMITS THE PUBLIC SUBSIDY TO A DEVELOPMENT WITHIN A FIVE YEAR PERIOD. SO WITH THAT, THIS WILL NOT BE YOUR ONLY OPPORTUNITY, OF COURSE, TO PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THAT PROPOSED PROGRAM. IT WILL BE PRESENTED TO YOU ALL AGAIN, BUT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO PROVIDE COMMENTS, IF YOU HAVE ANY, AT THIS TIME. OKAY. IF NOT, WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU JOYCE. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER CLOUSER. YES. JOYCE, I THINK I RAISED THIS QUESTION AT THE INITIAL PRESENTATION, BUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH ANY OF THE APPLICATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE QUEUE WITH THOSE, GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AUTOMATICALLY, OR WILL YOU REACH OUT TO THEM TO SEE IF THEY'RE STILL INTERESTED BASED ON THE CRITERIA THOSE WOULD THOSE APPLICATIONS OR APPLICANTS WOULD HAVE TO REAPPLY TO THE PROGRAM AS IT'S RECONSTITUTED STAFF. AND I DO KNOW THAT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS HERE, BUT STAFF WOULD REACH OUT TO THEM ONCE THE PROGRAM HAS BEEN REINSTITUTED TO REAPPLY. I DO. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SOME OF THOSE APPLICANTS MAY HAVE ALREADY DEVELOPED THEIR PROPERTY AS THEY HAD REQUESTED, YOU KNOW, PURSUANT TO THE PREEXISTING PROGRAMS, BUT STAFF WILL CERTAINLY REACH OUT TO ENSURE THAT THEY KNOW THAT THE OPPORTUNITY IS THERE. OKAY. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS, I SAW WHERE THE MARKETING LET ME GO BACK TO IT. I SAW IN THE REPORT WHAT PAGE IS IT? BUT THE PLAN FOR, I GUESS, GETTING THE PROGRAM OUT TO THE PUBLIC. IF I COULD JUST REQUEST THAT YOU WORK WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TEAM BECAUSE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF EMAILS BANKED FROM THE SMALL BUSINESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE, MIXERS AND WORKSHOPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO IF WE CAN UTILIZE THE EMAILS THAT WE HAVE FOR OUR EVENTS THAT WE'VE COLLECTED TO

[00:05:04]

[(b) City Manager Report - Provide an overview of Consent Agenda items and ...]

[00:10:06]

ALONG WITH OTHER PROGRAMS THAT CAN BE PAID OUT OF THAT FUND. SO I WOULD YEAH, I WOULD SAY THAT

[00:15:03]

HOW DO YOU GET TO THAT? GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. JUST TO ELABORATE ON WHAT NICHOLAS SAID, WE ISSUE AN RFQ. WE STAFF SELECTS THE CONSULTANTS, WE LIST THEM ON THE ON THE BASIS OF SCORING, LET'S SAY FROM 1 TO 10. AND THEN WE PRESENT TO THE PDI COMMITTEE. PDI COMMITTEE CONCURS WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. AND THEN AS AND WHEN PROJECTS COME, WE MATCH THEIR EXPERTISE WITH THE WITH THE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN HAND, NOT NECESSARILY IN THE SAME ORDER. AND THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE PRESENTED TO PDI COMMITTEE. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE CLARIFIED WITH THE PDI COMMITTEE, AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS IN THE PACKET THAT'S WITH YOU IS A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS ARE NICHE PROJECTS WE TRY TO MATCH WITH THE EXPERTISE THE FIRM HAS WITH THE NEEDS THAT THE CITY HAS. SO SOMETIMES WE MAY SKIP THE ORDER, BUT OUR GOAL IS TO AWARD PROJECTS TO ALL THESE FIRMS THAT WE HAVE SHORTLISTED. IT MAY BE SOME FIRM MAY COME AT THE FRONT, SOME MAY COME TO THE BACK, BUT WE SEE A NEED FOR ALL THESE FIRMS AND WE WILL MATCH WITH THE PROJECTS AS AND WHEN THEY OCCUR. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID. SO IF YOU ALREADY HOW OFTEN DO YOU DO THAT? HOW OFTEN DO YOU. WE TRY TO DO IT EVERY THREE YEARS, 2 TO 3 YEARS. AND ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAS COME FROM THE PDI COMMITTEE IS WE TRY TO DO IT MORE OFTEN, TWO YEARS, SO THAT WE CAN ROTATE THE FIRMS. SO THE NEXT SET OF CYCLE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR, THE RFQS, OUR GOAL IS TO ROTATE IT ON A TWO YEAR BASIS. OKAY. SO IS IT FAIR FOR ME TO SAY THAT SOMEONE WHO RANKED NUMBER ONE ON YOUR SHORT LIST MAY NOT GET A PROJECT VERSUS SOMEONE WHO'S NUMBER 8TH MAY GET THAT PROJECT, WHATEVER THEY'VE BEEN BASED ON, AND THAT'S BEING BASED ON THE TYPE OF PROJECT THAT'S COMING IN. CORRECT. COULD BE THEY WILL GET THE PROJECT. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF TIMING. WHAT PROJECT? WE SEE A NEED TO ADVANCE IT. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, AS NICHOLAS SAID, I THINK IN THIS CASE WE HAVE ABOUT 15 FIRMS SHORTLISTED. NINE OF THEM HAVE GOTTEN THE PROJECTS. THE OTHERS WERE LOOKING AT HOW THOSE PROJECTS EVOLVE AND OUR GOAL, OUR INTENT IS TO MATCH THOSE FIRMS WITH THE OTHER REMAINING PROJECTS. SURE. AND LAST, MY LAST COMMENT IS I BELIEVE THAT, HOWEVER, WHERE YOU RANK THEM, IT'S STILL UP TO THE BODY OF CITY COUNCIL TO GIVE REWARDS TO WHOEVER THAT IS. BECAUSE IN YOUR IN YOUR NECESSARILY DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDS IS WHO IS ULTIMATELY GOING TO GET IT. IT DEPENDING ON THE BODY AND HOW THEY VOTE, IT'S UP TO THE PDI COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE COUNCIL. THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR. I'M SEEING NO ONE ELSE LOOKING FOR A MOTION. MOTION? MY. OH, IT WAS REPORT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO DOES ANYONE WISH TO MAKE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT? NO. OH I

[6. CONSENT AGENDA]

[(1) Public Hearing - To receive comments for or against proposed amendment...]

JENNIFER THOMAS OKAY, WELL, WE'LL NOW GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 7A1 CITY SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANYONE REQUESTED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NO, MR. MAYOR, WE DO NOT. YOU DO NOT. OKAY, SO THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENTS. THEN WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 7A1. WE'LL GO TO

[(2) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Two Readings - An ordinan...]

[00:20:04]

MARSHALL. I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU. JENNIFER I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU TOTALLY CORRECTLY. THIS TOTALLY REMOVES ANY TYPE OF US REGULATING FURNITURE AND YARDS AND THAT TYPE OF THING. WE'RE TOTALLY, TOTALLY REMOVING THAT TOTALLY REMOVES THAT. WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT RESIDENTS HAVE TO REMOVE THEIR STUFF FROM FROM THEIR YARDS. WE'RE JUST SAYING WE'RE NO LONGER GOING TO REGULATE THIS. CORRECT? OKAY. SO IF I MAY ADD TO THAT, I PUT MYSELF ON THE QUEUE. IS THAT NO LONGER ARE OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT WILL BE GOING INTO ANY NEIGHBORHOOD AND LOOKING AT ANY FURNITURE, WHETHER IT'S PATIO FURNITURE, FRONT PATIO FURNITURE OR WHAT HAVE YOU REGULATING IT. UNLESS IF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD HAS A DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT PERHAPS MAY HAVE SOMETHING, YOU CAN HAVE FURNITURE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT AGAINST IT, WHICH THE HOMEOWNERS, WHEN THEY CLOSED ON THE PROPERTY, THEY WOULD SIGN ON THAT DEED RESTRICTION. SO THEY WILL BE ENFORCING AND NOT THE CITY. CORRECT? OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER OUDERKIRK, THANK YOU. DOES THIS APPLY TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SUCH AS THE SHEDS AND THE GREENHOUSES? SO THIS MAKES NO CHANGES TO OTHER TYPES OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, JUST YARD FURNITURE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER RILEY, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CLOUSER. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER EMERY. SORRY. DOES THIS INCLUDE SWINGS THAT ARE PUT IN TREES IN THE FRONT YARD? IN FRONT YARDS? YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

OKAY. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RILEY, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLOUSER. SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. SURE. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT. THANK

[(3) Public Hearing - To receive comments for or against proposed amendment...]

[00:25:06]

[(4) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Two Readings - An ordinan...]

THANK YOU. WE HAVE A PLENTY OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP. SO I'M GOING TO START WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BONI. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR SHARING THE INFORMATION ON THE EXISTING LOCATIONS, BECAUSE THAT WAS PRIMARILY ONE OF THE KEY QUESTIONS THAT I HAD. BUT I DID WANT TO KNOW YOU MENTIONED ABANDONMENT AND VIOLATION. CAN YOU EXPOUND ON HOW LONG YOU WOULD CONSIDER THAT PROPERTY TO BE CONSIDERED ABANDONED BEFORE THE SWAP WOULD TAKE EFFECT ON THAT, THAT EXISTING LOCATION, AND THEN ALSO ON THE VIOLATION, WHAT VIOLATION? SO ABANDONMENT WOULD BE A PERIOD OF TIME THAT THE BUSINESS CEASES TO OPERATE AT THAT LOCATION. SO IF THAT BUSINESS GOES DORMANT FOR I BELIEVE IT'S 120 DAYS OR MORE, THEN IT'S CONSIDERED ABANDONMENT FOR VIOLATION. THIS IS NOT TALKING ABOUT MINOR, YOU KNOW, CODE VIOLATIONS, BUT THESE WOULD BE MAJOR SIGNIFICANT VIOLATIONS OF THE CODE. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR LISTENING.

[00:30:05]

THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU, JENNIFER, FOR THE DETAILS, BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS AS WELL IN REGARDS TO THE CURRENT GASOLINE STATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN OPERATION.

COULD YOU JUST ANSWER A QUICK QUESTION FOR ME IN REGARDS TO THAT, BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE AS FAR AS THE PROCESS, IF A CURRENT GAS STATION DID NOT MEET OUR NEW. IF THIS PASSES, MEET OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS, WHAT WOULD THAT WHAT WOULD THAT PROCESS LOOK LIKE FOR THOSE GASOLINE OWNERS? SO IF THIS IS ADOPTED AND CHANGES THEY BECOME NONCONFORMING USES. AND THEN ANY OF THOSE CONDITIONS THAT ARE LISTED, IF ANY OF THOSE CONDITIONS TAKE PLACE BEFORE THAT GAS STATION OR BUSINESS CAN REOPEN, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE, MEANING THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME THROUGH THE PROCESS TO RECEIVE APPROVAL. SO GOING THROUGH PRNS AND THEN GOING THROUGH OKAY, SO WHICH LEADS TO ME MY NEXT QUESTION, BECAUSE A LOT OF THOUGHT AND A LOT OF WORKSHOPPING WENT AROUND THIS PARTICULAR REVISION. WE TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WERE YOU RECEIVING ANY COMPLAINTS FROM RESIDENTS? I KNOW I HAD JUST JOINED COUNCIL WHEN THE GAS STATION, YOU KNOW, WAS PERMITTED FOR GRAND PARK AND INDEPENDENCE, WHICH BACKS UP DIRECTLY TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND ACROSS THE STREET FROM A PARK, THERE WERE HUGE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. AND I KNOW AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME THERE WAS A COMMUNITY MEETING HOSTED WITH, YOU KNOW, HUNDREDS OF RESIDENTS THERE, AND THAT WAS THEIR BIGGEST COMPLAINT. SO HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANYTHING FROM THE PUBLIC CONCERNING THIS NOT HAPPENING TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS, YOU KNOW, IN THE FUTURE? SO WE DEFINITELY RECEIVED THOSE COMPLAINTS AT THAT TIME. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED DIRECTLY FROM RESIDENTS AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, BUT I'M SURE THAT THE AMENDMENTS THAT ARE PROPOSED ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS THAT WAS THAT WERE RAISED PREVIOUSLY. AND WITH THAT, DID YOU GUYS MAKE THIS PARTICULAR THIS ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC? WAS IT WAS EVERYBODY NOTIFIED? HOW DID YOU HOW DID YOU GUYS PUBLICIZE THIS. YES. AND SO PUBLICATION NOW REQUIRES NOTICE, DIRECT NOTICE TO ALL GAS STATION LOCATIONS AS WELL AS PROPERTY OWNERS OF THOSE GAS STATION LOCATIONS. SO PUBLIC NOTICE WAS SENT. PLANNING AND ZONING HELD TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS.

AND SO NOTICE WAS SENT AHEAD OF BOTH OF THOSE HEARINGS. OKAY, WE DID ABOUT 30 DAY NOTICE AHEAD OF EACH ONE OF THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS. AND THEN NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED IN THE PAPER, OKAY, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC WAS AWARE THAT THIS WAS TAKING PLACE. THIS WAS A CONSIDERATION BECAUSE IT WAS A REQUEST AND A NEED FROM THE RESIDENTS, FROM THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. CONCERNED ABOUT HOW MANY GAS STATIONS WHERE THEY'RE PLACED AT IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

THE OTHER CONCERN THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IN REGARDS TO WITH ONE OF THE RESIDENTS MENTIONED, WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT YOU CAN'T OPERATE, WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT WE'RE AMENDING THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE FOR THE BETTERMENT OF QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL RESIDENTS. AND THAT I TO MY UNDERSTANDING, IF THIS DOES PASS, I'M PRETTY SURE THAT WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH ALL OF OUR SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS TO HELP THEM TO, YOU KNOW, MEET WHATEVER REGULATIONS THAT WE'RE CHANGING SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THEIR BUSINESS AS WELL AS BE GOOD, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORS TO OUR RESIDENTS AS WELL. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT COMMENT AS WELL. THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. MAYOR. YEAH. THANK YOU. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER EMERY, I HAD MY QUESTION ANSWERED BY THE RESPONSE FROM.

COUNCIL LADY RILEY. SO I'M WITHDRAWING. THANK YOU. I WILL RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER OUDERKIRK. THANK YOU. SO JUST TO CONTINUE A LITTLE BIT WITH WHAT COUNCILMEMBER RILEY WAS TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU MENTIONED A VIOLATION, WHAT CAN YOU GIVE A SOME SORT OF INDICATION OF WHAT HOW DRASTIC A VIOLATION IS THAT'S GOING TO TRIGGER THIS? YEAH. AND SO AND WE DON'T HAVE

[00:35:05]

SO IF THAT DOES OCCUR, THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT. A VERY SPECIFIC PROCESS, WHICH INCLUDES COMPENSATION TO THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE TERMINATION OF THE NON-CONFORMING USE. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND SO A SALE OF THE PROPERTY IS CONTINUING THE CURRENT USE. SO THEY WOULD NOT THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY ISSUE WITH TRANSFERRING OWNERSHIP AS LONG AS THE CURRENT BUSINESS USES MAINTAINED. CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. RECOGNIZING MAYOR PRO TEM BROWNE-MARSHALL THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU, JENNIFER, FOR BRINGING THIS TO US. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH AS WELL FOR GETTING THIS ORDINANCE BEFORE US. THIS HAS BEEN A REALLY LONG TIME COMING, AND WE'VE HAD A MULTITUDE OF CONVERSATIONS AND LOOKING AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING MINUTES. IT APPEARED AT THAT TIME YOU GUYS WERE TRACKING ABOUT 40 GAS STATIONS IN THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY TO DATE. HOW MANY DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE AND HOW MANY PERMITS DO WE HAVE CURRENTLY ON FILE WITH APPLICATIONS PENDING? SO WE HAVE BETWEEN 35 AND 40 GAS STATIONS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. WE DON'T HAVE ANY THAT WELL. WE HAVE ONE THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR A PERMIT. AND THEN I BELIEVE WE HAVE ONE THAT CAME IN FOR PREAPPLICATION MEETING. SO WITH US PLACING THIS TYPE OF ORDINANCE IN PLACE, THAT WOULD KIND OF GIVE THE CITY AN OPPORTUNITY AS WELL, TO GO BACK AND REALLY, TRULY CONSIDER SOME OF THE EV CHARGING REQUIREMENTS AND THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED HERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE. MANY VEHICLES ARE NOW STARTING TO MOVE THAT WAY, ESPECIALLY AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES. AND SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE PREPARE OURSELVES FOR THAT IMMINENT NEED. BUT MY QUESTION AROUND THAT, WILL THIS ALSO ALLOW FOR EXISTING GAS STATION USERS TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONVERT THEIR STATIONS IF THEY NEED TO DO SO? OR WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT WITH THE ABANDONMENT PROCESS, DO THEY HAVE TO SET ASIDE THE GASOLINE AND THEN APPLY FOR THE EV? OR HOW WOULD THAT LOOK? NO. AND SO RIGHT NOW THERE IS A SEPARATE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEING CIRCULATED RIGHT NOW SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING EV CHARGING. AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT KIND OF HOW THEY WOULD WORK IN TANDEM. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, MAYOR, THAT CONCLUDES MY THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER KLAUSER. YES, JENNIFER. AND WE HAVE BEEN TALKING A LOT ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THAT'S LIKE THE BUZZ WORD, I THINK, OF THIS YEAR. AND MY QUESTION IS AROUND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MORE SO FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND HOW DOES THIS ORDINANCE HELP TO VALIDATE OR SUPPORT OUR GOALS FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? DEFINITELY. AND WHERE I WOULD SAY THIS IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MAKING SURE THAT THOSE LOCATIONS THAT ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS ARE IN PROXIMITY, THAT WE'RE PREPARING FOR THOSE IN A SENSITIVE WAY TO MAKE IT MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THOSE EXISTING USES. SO THIS RECOMMENDATION AND THIS AMENDMENT FALLS IN LINE WITH THAT GOAL THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED AT THAT LEVEL. GOOD, GOOD. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR THAT WE DIDN'T JUST PULL THIS OUT OF THE SKY. THIS IS ALIGNED WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH IS OUR NORTH STAR FOR THE CITY. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO I GUESS JENNIFER, MY QUESTIONS ARE I WAS HERE FOR THE PNC MEETING WHEN THIS CAME UP. THERE WAS A LOT MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS DURING THAT TIME FROM, I GUESS, GAS STATION OWNERS AND WHAT HAVE YOU. SO I WAS CONFUSED BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE WAY THEY WERE MAKING THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, AS THAT CITY IS NOT GOING TO ALLOW AND GOING TO STOP, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THEY HAVE, I GUESS MOST OF THEM THAT SPOKE HAVE AN EXISTING GAS STATION. RIGHT. SO WHAT'S THE DISCONNECT? I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE I MEAN, THIS IS CRYSTAL CLEAR WHERE IT IS THAT WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT TAKING ANYBODY'S GAS STATION AWAY. CORRECT. WE'RE NOT YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT DOING ANY OF THAT IF IT'S UNDER THE ZONING. I MEAN, IT REGULATES IT, BUT WHAT'S THE DISCONNECT? WHY ARE THEY FEELING? WHY ARE THESE PEOPLE FEELING LIKE WE'RE TAKING THEIR EXISTING BUSINESS AWAY? SURE. AND I THINK THAT'S MORE, YOU KNOW, COMMUNICATION ON OUR END.

[00:40:01]

NOW, IF A PERSON WHO HAS A GAS STATION THAT'S CLOSER TO RESIDENTIAL, RIGHT, 200FT ADJACENT, ADJACENT, ADJACENT, I SHOULD USE THE WORD. SO IF THEY WANT TO KNOCK THAT GAS STATION DOWN AND REBUILD IN THE SAME SPOT, ANOTHER GAS STATION, AND THAT DURING THAT TIME THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME TO THE CITY AND APPLY FOR SUP. CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. IN THAT SUP THAT WE GAVE SPECULATIONS ON WHAT WHAT YOU CAN HAVE AND WHAT YOU CAN'T HAVE. IF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STILL REMAINS WHERE THAT PARTICULAR LOT OR THAT PLACE CAN HAVE GAS STATION. CORRECT. OKAY.

NOW LET'S SAY THEY'RE NOT KNOCKING THE WHOLE THING DOWN. THEY ARE JUST GOING IN THERE CHANGING THE LIGHT BULBS. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GOING FROM SHELL GAS STATION NOW TO CHEVRON OR TO MOBIL OR WHATEVER IT IS. CAN THEY DO THAT OR DOES THAT COME UNDER. THEY HAVE TO APPLY FOR AN SUP. NO. AND THEY CAN STILL MAKE MINOR ALTERATIONS. THE THRESHOLD WOULD BE THE VALUATION. AND SO THAT'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PARTIAL DESTRUCTION AND A FULL DESTRUCTION. SO ANYTHING THEY DO ON THE INSIDE FOR EXAMPLE YOU'VE SEEN THIS. YOU KNOW, THEY GET A COMPLETE MAKEOVER ON THE INSIDE WHERE THEY CHANGE TILES. THEY DO. WE DO, YOU KNOW, THEIR SHELVES AND ALL OF THAT. SO FOR THAT THEY DON'T NEED TO APPLY FOR AN SUP. THEY NEED TO GET A PERMIT. NO. BECAUSE IT'S LIKELY THE VALUATION OF THAT IS NOT GOING TO MEET, YOU KNOW, THE 50% VALUE OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY.

OKAY. SO I MEAN, BECAUSE I THINK WHEN I LEFT, I WAS CONFUSED BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK THAT THE PUBLIC KNEW WHAT THIS WAS. THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THESE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. NOT THAT I DON'T KNOW, BUT I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR. IF THERE'S PEOPLE WATCHING THIS AT HOME OR WHAT HAVE YOU, THAT WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY OF THIS AWAY. IT'S JUST RESHAPING IT AND REDOING IT.

NOW, ONE THING I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT PROPERTIES THAT HAVE ADJACENT TO GAS STATIONS OR NEW ONES THAT ARE COMING IN, THAT'S ON SEPTIC OR ON WELL WATER, DO WE HAVE RESTRICTIONS FOR THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE PUTTING GAS UNDERGROUND? SO ARE YOU ASKING EXISTING PROPERTIES THAT ARE ON SEPTIC AND A NEW GAS STATION LOCATES NEXT TO IT. RIGHT. SO IF A NEW GAS STATION IS NOT CURRENTLY THEY'RE NOT CURRENTLY IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS. AND THIS CHANGES IT WOULD REQUIRE APPROVAL OKAY. AND THEN SO LIKE THAT CAN BE EVALUATED. SO WHICH MEANS IF SOMEONE IS GOING ADJACENT TO A PROPERTY THAT HAS SEPTIC OR THAT HAS WELL WATER, THEN THAT WOULD BE DURING THE SUP THAT WOULD HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. AND SO WHAT IF IT'S AN EXISTING GAS STATION AROUND SEPTIC AND WELL WATER, IF IT'S EXISTING AROUND SEPTIC AND THERE'S NO OTHER THAN T-C-E-Q REQUIREMENTS, YOU KNOW, ANY OTHER STIPULATIONS THERE. BUT THERE'S NOTHING ON THE ZONING SIDE THAT HAS ANY KIND OF DISTANCE OR SEPARATION. SO WOULD YOU SAY THAT THE IF THERE IS A NEW ONE THAT'S COMING, THE SUP WOULD PROTECT THE RESIDENTS AND THE AND THE AND THAT SO THIS WAY THAT IT GIVES A MORE OF A UNDERSTANDING OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, IF YOU WILL CORRECT. FOR THOSE THAT ARE USING TO PUT GAS. I MEAN, I KNOW MOST OF THE GAS STATIONS NOWADAYS HAVE PUMPS UNDERNEATH IT, AND THAT'S WHERE THEY STORE IT, BUT IS ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY. RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I WANTED TO KIND OF PIGGYBACK ON SOMETHING THAT WAS SAID. YOU MENTIONED THE PREDEVELOPMENT MEETING THAT JUST TOOK PLACE. I'M ASSUMING THAT'S WITH THE PRIME STOP PROPOSED OFF OF LAKE OLYMPIA PARKWAY NEAR THE DRY CREEK VILLAGE ENTRANCE. THE QUESTION, I MEAN, I THINK IT WAS ASKED BY COUNCILWOMAN RILEY IF PEOPLE HAVE CHIMED IN AND RESPONDED, AND I KNOW I'VE GOTTEN SEVERAL RESPONSES ABOUT THAT ONE THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, ONCE THAT WAS DISCOVERED AND SHARED. AND SO WITH THIS, I KNOW THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO READINGS, SO THEY'VE ALREADY HAD A PREDEVELOPMENT MEETING, ASSUMING THAT THEY HAVEN'T HAD AN APPROVED APPLICATION WITH THIS. IF THIS IS APPROVED BEFORE A POTENTIAL APPLICATION IS APPROVED, WOULD THAT BE APPLICABLE TO THAT APPLICATION OR THAT PARTICULAR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT? YES. OKAY. AND WITH THAT, OR HAVE THEY ALREADY BEEN COMMUNICATED THAT THIS IS YES, ON THE HORIZON? YES. THEY WERE

[00:45:02]

[00:50:01]

[(5) Public Hearing - To receive comments for or against a request by Abrah...]

THERE'S A NEIGHBORHOOD BEHIND THIS SHOPPING CENTER, AND THERE IS A 50 FOOT BUFFER. THE MEETING LAST MONTH PRESENTED AS A 16 FOOT BUFFER. SO WE JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THERE'S ACTUALLY A 50 FOOT BUFFER. WE'VE ADDED SOME EXTRA LANDSCAPING TO THE PLAN TO ADD ADDITIONAL SOUND BUFFER.

[00:55:02]

[(6) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Two Readings - An ordinan...]

PROVIDING FOR REPEAL, PROVIDING A PENALTY, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT. OKAY, JENNIFER THOMAS, ALL RIGHT. AND SO THE LOCATION OF THE SHOPPING CENTER IS SHOWN ON THE MAP ON THE SCREEN. THIS IS AT THE INTERSECTION OF FIFTH STREET AND 1092. THERE'S TWO NEW COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTERS THAT ARE THERE. AND THIS WOULD BE THE SECOND TENANT IN THE BUILDING CLOSER TO THE ROAD. THE EXISTING ZONING FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER IS LC3 RETAIL DISTRICT. THE REQUESTED ZONING IS FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THAT LEASE SPACE ONLY. THE PROPOSED USE WOULD BE THE BANQUET FACILITY AND EVENT CENTER THAT WOULD FALL INTO THE CATEGORY OF A PLACE OF ASSEMBLY. THIS WOULD BE A SWAP THAT WOULD COVER THE 3400FT■!S AS DESCRIBE.

THE REQUESTED OPERATION FOR THE CENTER WOULD BE DAILY WITH HOURS FROM 9 A.M. TO MIDNIGHT. AND YOU JUST HEARD AN UPDATE ON THE ESTIMATED OCCUPANCY. SO WHAT WAS REPORTED PREVIOUSLY WAS 280, AND THAT HAS BEEN REDUCED. AND SO I BELIEVE THE ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU DOES HAVE THAT 280 NUMBER. SO IF THERE IS, YOU KNOW, MOVEMENT ON THAT ORDINANCE, IT SHOULD BE REDUCED TO REFLECT WHAT THAT ACTUAL PROPOSAL IS. AND THE NUMBER THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS A MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY OF 180 PERSONS. ADDITIONALLY, AS DESCRIBED JUST IN THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, THERE'S SOME INFORMATION ON ADDITIONAL BUFFERING THAT THE APPLICANT COULD INSTALL TO HELP ADDRESS SOME SOUND AND NOISE CONCERNS, AS WELL AS CONNECTIONS WITH THE RESTAURANT AS DESCRIBED TO ADDRESS ANY TRAFFIC CONCERNS. THE SITE IS FULLY DEVELOPED AND SO THERE'S NO ANTICIPATED IMPROVEMENTS ON DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES. THE ENGINEERING STAFF HAS BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE OWNER ON TRAFFIC CONCERNS AS EXPRESSED AT PLANNING AND ZONING, AND HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THE POTENTIAL TRAFFIC BECAUSE OF THE ACCESS, THE EXISTING ACCESS, AS WELL AS POSSIBLE CONNECTION TO THE RESTAURANT FACILITY TO THE SOUTH. AND ENGINEERING STAFF IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF NEEDED, ON THE TRAFFIC ITEM. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION INCLUDED A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION AS THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A USE WITHIN THE SHOPPING CENTER.

THE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED WELL OVER ABOUT TWO OR SO YEARS AGO, AND THIS IS THE

[01:00:04]

PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL. THE APPLICANT HAS MADE PROPOSALS IN TERMS OF CUSTOMIZATION THAT CAN BE MADE ON THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING TO MUFFLE OR MODIFY ANY KIND OF SOUND TO THE EXTERIOR THAT COULD BE ADDED INTO AN ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE THAT INSTALLATION AS PART OF THE PERMITTING AND CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, AND ALSO PROPOSAL ON ADDITIONAL SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING TO THE REAR TO AGAIN HELP REDUCE VISIBILITY, CONTROL LIGHTING, AND MUFFLE ANY KIND OF NOISE OR SOUND THAT MAY EMANATE FROM AN EVENT SPACE. AND SO THOSE ITEMS CAN BE ADDED TO THAT ESAPI ORDINANCE TO HELP PROTECT POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL AREAS BEHIND THERE. PUBLIC NOTICE HAS BEEN PROVIDED. YOU HEARD THE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND THEN AHEAD OF THE PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I HAVE ON THIS ITEM. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. JENNIFER THANK YOU. WE'RE GOING TO START WITH COUNCILMEMBER CLAUSEN. YES. AND MAYOR, I APOLOGIZE. I FORGOT WE WERE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING EARLIER. SO I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FOR YOU. AND ONE OF THEM HAS IF THE IF THE YOUNG LADY COULD COME BACK UP, THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE BANQUET HALL AND WHILE SHE'S WALKING UP. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BUFFERING INSIDE AND OUTSIDE WOULD BE ADDED TO THE SCP TO MUFFLE THE NOISE. SO THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. THE SECOND THING IS FOR YOU. HOW MANY? NO. MY SECOND QUESTION IS FOR YOU. HOW MANY RESIDENTS WERE NOTIFIED? SO THE SUBDIVISION BEHIND IT IS NOT FULLY BUILT OUT. AND I BELIEVE THAT THE DEVELOPER OWNS THREE OF THOSE LOTS THAT IMMEDIATELY BACK UP. AND I BELIEVE 1ST MAY BE A DIFFERENT OWNER, BUT PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THOSE RESIDENTS WITHIN 200FT OF THAT PROPERTY WERE NOTICED. OKAY. AND NO, NO PROTEST. WHAT TYPES OF EVENTS DO YOU ALL PLAN TO HAVE AT THE LOCATION? SO IT'S MAINLY FOR PRIVATE PARTIES, SMALL EVENTS.

LIKE WE SAID, THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY IS GOING TO BE ABOUT 180 PEOPLE WITH BANQUET STYLE TABLES. SO MEETINGS, BIRTHDAY PARTIES, BABY SHOWERS IS WHAT WE EXPECT. OKAY. AND IN REFERENCE TO THE PARKING, BECAUSE YOU'RE CORRECT THAT THE MEXICAN RESTAURANT PARKING CAN BE QUITE HECTIC. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE AN EVENT? IT'S A SATURDAY NIGHT AT THE RESTAURANT AND THE RESTAURANT. PATRONS WANT TO START SHARING YOUR YOUR SPACE. WHAT HAVE YOU ALL THOUGHT ABOUT, LIKE WHAT THAT PLAN WOULD BE OR WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WHEN IT'S, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT IT AND ALL THAT WE CAN DO FROM WHAT WE KNOW IS PUT UP A SIGN THAT THIS IS PRIVATE PROPERTY. WE DON'T WANT TO BE USED AS OVERFLOW PARKING, BUT IF YOU'VE DRIVEN PAST THERE ON A SATURDAY NIGHT, YOU KNOW THAT THEY'RE PARKING ALL OVER THE PLACE, IN THE GRASS AND EVERYWHERE, SO WE CAN'T PREVENT THEM FROM COMING. BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY TRY TO ENFORCE A TOWING POLICY. ALL WE CAN DO IS PUT UP WARNING SIGNS. UNLESS THE CITY HAS OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS.

WE WOULD LOVE TO PREVENT THAT RESTAURANT PARKING INTO HERE, BUT TO ASSIST WITH THE TRAFFIC FLOW IS WHY WE NEED TO OPEN UP THE, YOU KNOW, OPEN IT UP. RIGHT? RIGHT. MY RECOMMENDATION IS JUST TO BE IN GOOD NEIGHBORS, AND YOU PROBABLY HAVE ALREADY THOUGHT ABOUT THAT IS JUST TO TALK TO THE RESTAURANT OWNER SO THAT SO THAT THEY UNDERSTAND. AND, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL CAN GO INTO THIS WITH A GREAT PARTNERSHIP. SURE. YEAH. AND HOPEFULLY THEY CAN USE OUR FACILITY AS WELL.

THE OTHER TWO THIRDS OF THE BUILDING, WHICH IS A GROCERY STORE, IS ALSO OPERATING A CAFE RESTAURANT INSIDE. SO THIS IS ALSO TO SUPPORT THAT CATERING BUSINESS. AND YOU KNOW, IF THE

[01:05:02]

SO THE ONLY WAY THAT I CAN SEE THAT THEY'RE GETTING A 50 FOOT BUFFER TO THE RESIDENTIAL AREA IS BY THEM COUNTING THE 16FT OF ACCESSORY SPACE. OTHERWISE IT'S YOU'RE REALLY ONLY LOOKING AT ABOUT 30. RIGHT. AND THE WAY WE WOULD LOOK AT IT WOULD BE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO BASICALLY WHERE THAT FENCE WALL IS AND WOULD INCLUDE THE DRIVEWAY AREA OKAY. SO IS IT 50 OR IS IT LESS THAN 50 SO THAT IT'S REQUIRED TO BE A MINIMUM OF 20 OKAY. IS THE MINIMUM NUMBER THE DRIVEWAY IS SHOWING ON THIS PLAN IS 24FT OKAY. AND THAT'S THE PAVED WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY. AND SO THEN THE GREEN SPACE PORTION BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAY, INCLUDING THE FENCE OR TO THE FENCE WOULD BE THAT BUFFER. OKAY. I GUESS THE ONLY REASON WHY I WAS MENTIONING IT IS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT EVENTUALLY THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEHIND IT WILL EVENTUALLY BE FULLY DEVELOPED. AND SOMETIMES WHAT HAPPENS IS IF WE DON'T GET THE RIGHT BUFFERING IN PLACE TO PROTECT FROM NOISE, THEN IT ALL KIND OF GETS, YOU KNOW, PUSHED BACK OVER ON COUNCIL. WHAT CAN WE DO? IT'S TOO MUCH NOISE. IT'S JUST TOO LOUD. SO I SEE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO WRITE IN THAT ADDITIONAL SCREENING WOULD BE REQUIRED AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL SOUND BUFFERING OR MITIGATION OF NOISE. BUT IN TERMS OF WHAT TYPES OF ADDITIONAL SCREENING COULD THERE BE? THERE'S ALREADY A BRICK WALL. I SEE THE GREEN FOLIAGE, BUT IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT, JENNIFER, THAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND OR EVEN THAT YOU GUYS COULD COME UP TO ENSURE THAT SOUND IS MITIGATED? SO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING TO THE BRICK WALL PROPERTY LINE IS 36FT AND THE MINIMUM IS 20. SO THEY'VE ALREADY THE BUILDING ITSELF HAS ALREADY TAKEN THAT PRECAUTION, BEING MINDFUL OF THE NEIGHBORS TO THE WEST. THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 16FT THAT PREP SPACE WITH THE RESTROOMS, WHICH IS WHY WE COUNTED THAT IN AS KIND OF AN INDIRECT BUFFER, BECAUSE THE PARTIES GOING ON IN THE FRONT, RIGHT. SO THAT 16FT PLUS THE 36FT IS WHY WE'RE SAYING IT'S A GOOD AMOUNT OF GOOD 50FT FROM ANY KIND OF SOUND THAT WOULD EVEN POTENTIALLY COME OUT. BUT THERE'S ALREADY FOAM INSULATION IN THE BUILDING. THEY ARE DURING THEIR BUILD OUT, PUTTING IN ADDITIONAL FOAM, AND WE'RE OKAY WITH WRITING THAT INTO THE ORDINANCE AS WELL, OR PUTTING IN AN ADDITIONAL TWO INCHES OF FOAM INSULATION. THERE WILL BE PANELING, SOUND BARRIER PANELING ON THE CEILING AND ON THE WALL THAT SEPARATES THE BANQUET HALL FROM THE RESTROOMS. OKAY. SO THAT SO FROM THE BANQUET HALL TO THE BLUE AREA IS WHERE YOU'RE OKAY. THERE'S ADDITIONAL. THAT WALL WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL SOUND PRECAUTIONS, AND THEN THE CEILING ITSELF WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL WILL HAVE IT THERE. AND THEN MY LAST COMMENT IS I'M SORRY. WHAT I WOULD ADD TO THAT IS YOU CAN ADOPT BECAUSE THE WAY THEY HAVE THE PREP AREA POSITION IS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WITH THAT ORDINANCE LACKING IN THAT, THAT AREA IS WITHIN THAT AREA OF THE FLOOR PLAN, SO THAT AS THEY GO THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS, THAT AREA DOESN'T SHIFT, YOU KNOW, DUE TO OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. AND THEN ALSO THE POSITIONING OF THE STAGE, YOU KNOW, WHERE, YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF, YOU KNOW, SPEAKER SYSTEMS OR, YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF SOUND SYSTEMS ARE LOCATED THAT YOU PUSH THAT, YOU KNOW, TOWARDS THE FRONT. THAT'S A WAY FURTHER AWAY, YOU KNOW, FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN THE BACK. AND YOU CAN KIND OF POSITION THAT. SO THEY'VE SHOWN YOU KIND OF A MOCK UP OF WHAT IT COULD BE LAID OUT AS. OKAY, BUT YOU CAN KIND OF POSITION THOSE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS FLOOR PLAN SO THAT THOSE AREAS REMAIN AT A DISTANCE AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. OKAY. I DO SEE THAT HERE NOW ON THE MAP. SO IF THE STAGE WAS BASICALLY TO THE RIGHT, AS WE SEE IT HERE IN THE PINK, THEN THAT KIND OF PUSHES SOME OF THE SOUND. UNLESS YOU

[01:10:04]

THANK YOU. JUST TO I APPRECIATE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE SOUND INSULATION. SO I PERSONALLY HAVE USED CLOSED CELL FOAM INSULATION IN PROJECTS THAT I'VE HAD. AND THE SOUND BARRIER IS GREAT. SO I APPRECIATE YOU USING CLOSED CELL FOAM. JUST ONE OTHER SOUND MITIGATING THING IN VACATION RENTALS AND THINGS YOU CAN USE, THERE'S A DECIBEL MONITOR THAT YOU CAN PUT IN THE BUILDING, AND IT WILL ALERT THE PROPERTY OWNER OR WHOMEVER IS IN CONTROL, AND THEN THEY CAN INTERVENE IF THE NOISE LEVEL GOES TOO LOUD, SO YOU CAN CRANK UP THE MUSIC HIGH VOLUME AND GO IN, SAY, OKAY, THIS IS THE LEVEL THAT I CAN HEAR IT BEHIND THE BUILDING, AND THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO DISTURB A NEIGHBOR. AND THEN YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY DON'T GO OVER CERTAIN DECIBEL LEVEL. SO JUST AS THIS BUILDING STANDS, JENNIFER, IF THEY COME IN AND WANT TO PUT A RESTAURANT IN THIS EXACT SAME SPACE AND IT SEATS THIS NUMBER OF PEOPLE AND THEY ON A DAILY BASIS WANT TO HAVE A BIG BAND INSIDE PLAYING MUSIC, ARE THEY ABLE TO DO THAT WITHOUT COMING TO COUNCIL? SO THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE THAT PREP AREA WOULD TURN INTO A KITCHEN.

SURE. AND SO THERE WOULD BE THE CONFIGURATION OF THAT PREP AREA WOULD CHANGE, MAYBE A LITTLE LESS SPACE, RIGHT. FOR SEATING. CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. SO MAYBE, YOU KNOW, WE CHOPPED OUT A, A HANDFUL, MAYBE 50 SEATS. SO SOME FEWER PEOPLE, BUT THEY COULD COME IN THERE AND PUT A RESTAURANT THAT'S MAKING NOISE AND HAVING MUSIC AND HAVING THE THINGS IN THERE. AS IT STANDS TODAY WITHOUT PERMISSION. SO RESTAURANT IS A PERMITTED USE IN THE LC3 DISTRICT. AND THEN THIS WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL USE ON TOP OF THE LC3 USES. OKAY. BUT ESSENTIALLY A LOT OF BODIES, A LOT OF NOISE COULD HAPPEN IN THIS IDENTICAL SPACE IF THEY WANTED TO SELL THIS SPACE OR RENT THIS SPACE TO A HIGH END RESTAURANT THAT SAYS, WE LOVE MUSIC AND WE LOVE THE THINGS.

AND THIS THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR MORE PROTECTION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S THAT HELPS.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER RILEY THANK YOU. MAYOR. A LOT OF OUR QUESTIONS, MY QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED. BUT I DO WANT TO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PATIENCE. I HAD A QUICK QUESTION, JENNIFER, IN REGARDS TO PNC, GAVE THIS A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE OF PARKING. HOW DID Y'ALL ADDRESS THE PARKING? WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE LOT OF OVERFLOW FROM THE RESTAURANT, YOU KNOW, NEXT DOOR AND THEN THE GROCERY STORE AND AN EVENT CENTER AND THE REST OF, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER OTHER RETAIL COMES IN THAT PARTICULAR SPACE. AND THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT 180 OCCUPANCY. YEAH. AND SO IT'S LOOKING AT IT FROM A SHARED PARKING RATIO. AND SO KIND OF THE PEAK PERIODS FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE USES. SO WE KNOW CASTLE PEAK AREA IS VERY POPULAR. I THINK THEY GET CROWDED AT THE LUNCH HOUR. THEY DEFINITELY GET CROWDED AT THE DINNER HOUR. BUT THEN MORNINGS, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THEY'RE PRETTY QUIET. AND SO IT'D BE SIMILAR WITH ALL OF THESE OCCUPANCIES. THE RESTAURANT HAS ITS PEAK, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TIMES. AND SO THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAT THEY HAVE BETWEEN BOTH OF THOSE BUILDINGS, BASED ON THE CALCULATIONS WE HAVE, CAN SUPPORT THOSE PEAK HOUR TIME FRAMES. SO IT'S BASED ON THE PEAK HOURS, RIGHT, THAT YOU GUYS DETERMINED THAT. SO WAS THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WAS IT REQUIRED FOR

[01:15:02]

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WAS DONE FOR THE WHOLE COMPLEX WHEN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT CAME ON.

AND AGAIN, WITH THIS ONE, THERE SHOULD BE IMPROVED CIRCULATION BECAUSE THERE IS ONE ACCESS COMING OFF OF THIS RETAIL CENTER WITH THE CONNECTION THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE TO THE RESTAURANT, THERE WOULD BE A SECONDARY ACCESS. SO THIS SHOULD IMPROVE CIRCULATION. AND 1092 IS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE, AND IT HAS THE CAPABILITY TO HANDLE THAT TRAFFIC. AND THE REASON I'M ASKING THAT BECAUSE DURING PEAK TIME, YOU KNOW, AFTER 5 P.M, TRAFFIC 1092 IS EXTREMELY BACKED UP AND IT TAKES A WHILE TO GET TO THE RED LIGHT. SO MY CONCERN WOULD BE ANYONE ATTEMPTING TO COME OUT OF THAT PARKING LOT AND TRYING TO EASE OVER INTO THE FAR LEFT LANE TO MAKE A U TURN OR WHATNOT, AND MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY BACKUP OF THAT NATURE. NOW, INTERNALLY, THERE IS ADEQUATE PARKING, ADEQUATE QUEUING. THE PARKING LOT IS BIG ENOUGH. THAT'S NUMBER ONE. AND YOU WILL HAVE TWO ACCESS. ONE IS A SIGNALIZED ACCESS WHERE PEOPLE CAN ENTER. THE OTHER ONE IS THE UNSIGNALIZED ACCESS, WHICH IS TO THE SOUTH. SO THE ENGINEERING TEAM FEELS THAT THIS ADDITION SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE TRAFFIC. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR CLARIFYING THAT. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION TO YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU SPOKE ABOUT DOING A SOUND BARRIER IN THE BACK OF SOME SORT. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING DOING AS FAR AS LIKE FENCING OR LANDSCAPING BACK THERE? MASONRY. WHAT? SO THERE'S ALREADY A MASON MASONRY WALL BETWEEN THIS BUILDING, AND IT'S ON THE PROPERTY LINE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. SO WE WOULDN'T CONSIDER PUTTING UP ANOTHER WALL THAT WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE THE BEST, BUT WE HAVE PUT IN THE DRAWING TO ADD IN A GREEN BUFFER, JUST EXTRA LANDSCAPING WITH THESE TREES. I THINK THEY CAN GROW UP VERY TALL, SO THAT WILL HELP. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WE'RE PREPARED TO DO AS WELL. SO THERE'S A GREEN SPACE BETWEEN OUR FIRE LANE AND THE MASONRY WALL. SO WE CAN DEFINITELY PUT IN TALL TREES THERE TO ALSO HELP WITH ADDITIONAL BUFFER. OKAY.

FOR SOUND AND LIGHT. LAST QUESTION, JENNIFER, IF THIS IS APPROVED, WHO IS ARE WE GOING TO IS THIS WOULD THIS BE IN WRITTEN IN THERE. ARE WE RESPONSIBLE FOR INSPECTING THAT. THEY HAVE THIS, YOU KNOW, EXTRA LANDSCAPING AS WELL AS THE SOUND CUSHIONS. I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU CALLED THEM OFFICIALLY INSIDE OF THE BUILDING. IS THAT PART OF THE CITY'S REQUIREMENT TO INSPECT, SINCE THIS IS SOMETHING ADDITIONAL THAT THEY'RE DOING. RIGHT. AND SO TYPICALLY WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING OUT A LEASE SPACE, THEY DON'T USUALLY SUBMIT A LANDSCAPE PLAN BECAUSE THAT'S USUALLY IN PLACE. IF THAT'S A REQUIREMENT THROUGH THE ORDINANCE, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A LANDSCAPE PLAN SHOWING THIS DETAIL IN THE PLAN, AND THEN THEY'D BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL IT AS PART OF THE BUILD OUT OF THE SPACE. GOTCHA. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING CONSIDERATE OF ALL THE DETAILS SUCH AS THIS, BECAUSE THAT PARTICULAR AREA, YOU KNOW, AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, THAT RESIDENTIAL AREA IS NOT BUILT OUT. SO WE HAVE NO IDEA OF WHO'S COMING BACK THERE. AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN YOUR BUSINESS AND BE GOOD NEIGHBORS WITH ANY RESIDENTIAL AREA THAT'S CONNECTING TO A RETAIL AREA. SO THANK YOU FOR KEEPING ALL THOSE DETAILS IN MIND. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, MY MAIN CONCERN WHEN I FIRST SAW THIS WAS ABOUT CONSISTENCY, BECAUSE I KNOW THE TWO EVENTS CENTERS THAT WE APPROVED ON CARTWRIGHT ROAD. THESE WERE SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS LIKE THAT. THEY HAVE SECURITY, WHICH I SEE IS IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT ALSO THE DAYS AND TIMES. SO I KNOW YOU ADDRESSED THAT, BUT I SEE THAT IT STATES WHEN THEY END. BUT I WANT TO SAY I THOUGHT THAT WE HAD SOME TIMES OF OPERATIONS FOR WHEN THEY BEGIN AND END. SO IF WE DON'T HAVE A BEGINNING TIME, THEN, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD START RIGHT UP AGAIN AT 1201. YOU KNOW, IN ESSENCE, I MEAN, SO YOU SAY YOU HAVE TO SHUT DOWN AT 12, BUT WHEN DO YOU BEGIN AND ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE EVENTS? SO I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE IN THERE AS TO A START TIME TO DO THE OTHER EVENT CENTERS, OR DID THE OTHER EVENT CENTERS IN THERE HAVE A TIME OF OPERATION? START RECOLLECTION IS THAT THEY DID NOT. AND THIS LANGUAGE WAS TAKEN FROM THE PREVIOUS SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. SO MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT THEY DID NOT. THE CONCERN WHEN THE TIMING WAS BROUGHT UP WAS AGAIN PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL. AND THAT EVENING TIME WHEN FOLKS KIND OF GO HOME AND GO TO SLEEP AND WHETHER THERE WOULD BE NOISE DISTURBANCES IN THE EVENING. AND

[01:20:05]

[01:25:01]

HONESTLY, TO MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS FOR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND SUCH THAT DON'T HAVE A MORNING BREAKFAST MEETING PLACE, THIS WOULD BE AN IDEAL AREA FOR THEM TO MEET AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHY

[01:30:02]

THERE ARE THINGS THAT TODAY THAT THEY USE SIMILAR TO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAVE THEATERS AND ALL THAT BEING BUILT OUT AND PROTECTING THAT SOUND FROM BOUNCING OFF. SO I HOPE THAT WE CAN PUT THAT IN AND THEN NO LONGER THIS WILL BE AN ISSUE IN THE MOVING FORWARD. BUT THANKS FOR BRINGING THIS BUSINESS. THANK YOU. AND THEY ARE TAKING EVERY PRECAUTION THAT THEY CAN FOR THE SOUND BARRIER OKAY. ALL RIGHT. RECOGNIZING COUNCIL MEMBER EMERY. YEAH. THE THING THAT I KNOW WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT, IT WAS THE PARKING AND WHAT SOME OF THE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS MIGHT BE BECAUSE OF THAT. WHEN WE HAVE A IS IT A GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT TO ALLOW A THROUGH. INPUT INTO CASA VAQUEROS PARKING LOT, OR IS THAT SOMETHING LIKE SAY, A GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S IN WRITING OR CAN BE INFORMAL OR FORMAL AGREEMENT. AND SO THERE'S PROVISIONS FOR SHARED PARKING IN A FORMAL WAY. SO SOME OF THAT OVERFLOW PARKING, YOU KNOW, SO THAT THEY CAN ACCOUNT FOR MAINTENANCE AND USE AND SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT PARKING FOR BOTH PROPERTIES. BUT IT'S A FORMAL AGREEMENT, AND THERE'S PROVISIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT AGREEMENT, BECAUSE ON CERTAIN NIGHTS. CASA VAQUEROS IS JUMPING, IF YOU WILL, AND THEY'RE PARKING NOT ONLY ON THE STREET, THEY'RE PARKING IN THE ADJACENT GROUNDS. I'M NOT SURE WHO THAT BELONGS TO, BUT. AND WHEN THEY START FILLING UP. CASA VAQUEROS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A POTENTIAL THAT IT COULD SPILL OVER INTO YOUR AREA BEFORE YOU HAVE YOUR EVENTS, YOU KNOW, TO START. SO THEY MAY BE TAKING SOME OF THE PARKING SPOTS THAT YOU HAD HOPED YOU'D HAVE FOR, YOU KNOW, YOUR CLIENTS. SO MY ONLY POINT IS, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, PARKING COULD BE A REAL ISSUE FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. SO LIKE I SAY, WHATEVER'S.

[01:35:09]

SO THERE'S LANDSCAPING THERE. WE KNEW THAT WE EVENTUALLY HAD TO OPEN IT UP. OKAY. IT IS WHAT IT IS. SO WE KNOW IT'S COMING, WHICH WE JUST DON'T WANT THAT HELD AGAINST US BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO END UP BEING USED AS OVERFLOW PARKING FOR THE MEXICAN RESTAURANT. WE DON'T WANT THAT TO HINDER AN APPROVAL OF A BANQUET HALL. AND THE REASON WHY I ASKED YOU THAT IS BECAUSE YOU CLOSED OUT BY THANKING US AND THEN ASKING FOR HELP, YOU KNOW, SHE SAID THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT, LIKE A FORMAL AGREEMENT. WE CAN WE CAN HELP THEM WITH THE SHE CAN HELP US. THE PARAMETERS OF SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT. WAIT. OKAY. SO SHARED OF SHARED PARKING. SO US HELPING THEM WITH THE COME UP WITH A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT. IS THAT US? MANDATING IT OR ENFORCING OR OR.

GO AHEAD. THE CITY'S ORDINANCE PROVIDES GENERAL PARAMETERS FOR A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT. SO ALTHOUGH JENNIFER'S UTILIZING THE WORD HELP, THE CITY WOULDN'T ACTUALLY BE PROVIDING THEM WITH ANY TYPE OF SERVICES OR ADVICE. BUT THE CITY HAS REQUIREMENTS FOR SHARED PARKING AGREEMENTS THAT'S PUBLICLY AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE WEBSITE. YES, I GOT IT, AND I'M JUST A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT IT BECAUSE I GET IT THAT THAT PARKING, ESPECIALLY ON FRIDAY NIGHTS AND SATURDAY NIGHTS FROM THE RESTAURANT, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS ARE OKAY AND THAT THERE'S AN AGREEMENT BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S COMING. AND LIKE I SAID, THEY'VE ALREADY MADE CONTACT WITH THE RESTAURANT, AND WE DO HOPE THAT AT SOME POINT THEY ACTUALLY UTILIZE OUR FACILITY FOR THEIR LARGE PARTIES. THEY CAN DO THEIR CATERING HERE, YOU KNOW, SO WE DO WANT A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. AND PART OF THAT IS OPENING UP OUR PARKING TO THEM.

ALL RIGHT. SOUNDS GOOD. SO I WOULD SAY MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU'RE ASKING YOUR QUESTION. YOU ONLY HAVE ONE. ONE FACILITY THAT RENTS OUT TO PEOPLE. CORRECT. IN THAT WHOLE THING. YES. OKAY. SO THE REST I WOULD ASSUME WOULD BE INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES, DIFFERENT STOREFRONTS, RETAIL, WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN SURE, BUT KIND OF COME AND GO, COME AND GO, COME AND GO IN AND OUT. SO BUSINESS HOURS.

SO ONLY ONE, ONE BIG SPACE THAT PEOPLE COULD RENT, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE WOULD BE YOUR TYPICAL SHOPPING CENTER CONGREGATION, RIGHT? I MEAN, SO IT'S ALL RETAIL STOREFRONTS IS WHAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING THERE. SO IT SHOULD BE PRETTY IN AND OUT. MAYBE THEY'RE IN THERE FOR 2 OR 3 HOURS, SO NO ONE SHOULD BE STICKING OUT, YOU KNOW, STAYING AROUND FOR SEVERAL HOURS LIKE THEY WOULD AT THE BANQUET HALL. OKAY. EVEN THE GROCERY STORE IS PRETTY IN AND OUT.

OKAY. BUT BUT AS FAR AS SO IF THERE'S ANOTHER SPACE THAT COME UP IN THAT OTHER BUILDING, THE BUILDING, WHATEVER THE OTHER BUILDING DOWN TO THE RESTAURANT, CLOSER TO THE RESTAURANT. SO IT LET'S SAY IF SOMEONE COMES IN AND SAYS THEY WANT TO EVENT CENTER. OKAY, THEY WOULD REQUIRE

[01:40:01]

AND COUNCILMEMBER RILEY. DOES THAT MOTION INCLUDE THE LIMITATION OF THE FACILITY TO 180 PEOPLE? ACOUSTIC PANELS ARE REQUIRED OR RELATED OR EQUIVALENT MATERIALS. THE MINIMUM OF THE 12 FOOT CYPRESS TREES OR THE EQUIVALENT OF THE FOOD PREPARATION LOCATED IN THE BACK, AS WELL AS A PROHIBITION ON OUTDOOR PATIO SPACE. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU. THAT IS MY SECOND. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER RYDER, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN.

MARSHALL, SEEING NO ONE ELSE ON THE QUEUE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NEXT FRIDAY NIGHT WE HAVE JOINING US. ITEM EIGHT OUR ORDINANCES 8A8A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY TEXAS

[(a) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Two Readings - An ordinan...]

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THAT'S THAT'S IT. SO MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS WHY ARE WE PUTTING THIS PARTICULAR MEASURE. WHY ARE WE UPDATING THE TRUCK ROUTE IF IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY ENFORCE, MONITOR OR SO FORTH? SURE. SO THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE THAT WAS APPROVED IN

[01:45:01]

START TIME, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS 8 A.M. TO 4 P.M. SO IS THIS FEASIBLE TO INCREASE TO 300 TRIPS WITHIN THAT? EIGHT TO 8 TO 4, 8 TO 5, 8 A.M. TO 4 P.M. SO IS THIS FEASIBLE AS FAR AS FEASIBILITY? I WOULD DEFER THAT TO THE APPLICANT. HI, HOW ARE YOU? GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL STAFF. I AM ALVIN SAN MIGUEL WITH JOHNSON DEVELOPMENT. I AM HERE REPRESENTING THE OPERATOR, WHICH IS DEWALT SAND COMPANY. IT'S NOT FEASIBLE TO INCREASE TO 300 WITH THE TRUNCATED TIME FROM 8 TO 4 P.M. THAT'S WHY THEY CONTINUE TO ASK FOR 630 TO 4. IN SOME INSTANCES, IT MAY EVEN BE TOUGH TO GET THE 250 TRUCKS IN THAT TIME FRAME. SO KIND OF REALLY DEPENDS ON THE DAY WHERE WHERE THE TRUCKS ARE GOING. A MAJORITY OF THE TRUCKS DO COME INTO SIENNA TO SUPPLY BUILDERS AND VARIOUS CLIENTS WITH THE MATERIALS, BUT SOME TRUCKS DO GO OUT TO DIFFERENT PARTS OF STAFFORD AND MISSOURI CITY BEYOND SIENNA. SO FROM THE OPERATOR'S PERSPECTIVE, THE TIME FRAME BEING PROPOSED BY STAFF IS NOT FEASIBLE FOR THIS OPERATION.

OKAY, AND WHAT TYPE OF IMPACT WILL YOU GUYS HOW HOW WILL THIS DECREASE IF THE TIME IS APPROVED FOR THE 8 TO 4, BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE ORIGINALLY DOING WHATEVER THE TIME FRAME WAS WITH UP TO 250 TRIPS REQUESTING TO INCREASE TO 300. WHILE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING WE REDUCE THE TIME FRAME, WHERE DOES THAT PUT YOU GUYS AS FAR AS PRODUCTION? CURRENTLY THEIR PRODUCTION HOURS ARE 630 TO ABOUT 5 P.M. THERE'S CERTAIN INSTANCES WHERE THEY COULD GO OVER 250, BUT BASED ON THE SUV THAT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE, THEY HAVE TRIED TO WORK WITHIN THE BOUNDS AND THE TENANTS OF THAT SUV. SO THEY JUST SHUT OFF THEIR TRUCKS. IF THEY GET TO 250, WHERE THEY COULD INDEED DO MORE WORK ON THOSE DAYS, BUT THEY'VE THEY'VE CHOSEN NOT TO. SO THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY LIKE TO DO MORE ON THE DAYS THAT, THAT THE WORK IS THERE. BUT DON'T BELIEVE THEY COULD DO THAT WITH THE, THE TRUNCATED HOURS. AND HERE'S WHERE I'M CONFLICTED. AND I WANTED TO HEAR FROM YOU SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE WANT TO BE A FRIENDLY, FRIENDLY BUSINESS CITY. BUT HERE'S THE ISSUE THAT I'M CONCERNED WITH, WHICH SOME OF OUR RESIDENTS, THERE'S SO MUCH TRAFFIC ON THAT PARTICULAR, THAT AREA. AND, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE RESIDENTS AND EVEN OTHER BUSINESS OWNERS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT CONGESTION DURING THAT TIME FRAME. REALLY AROUND THAT TIME WHEN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WORK LIKE THAT SEVEN, SEVEN, 30 ISH TIME FRAME, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU GUYS CAN WORK AROUND THOSE PARTICULAR TIMES TO REDUCE OR LIMIT SOME OF YOUR TRIPS DURING THOSE PEAK HOURS WHERE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WORK, AND THEN WHERE PEOPLE ARE PICKING UP THEIR KIDS IN SCHOOLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT WITH BUSSES AND, YOU KNOW, PICKUP TIMES FROM A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE. AND SPEAKING WITH THE OPERATOR AND HIS PARTNER, THERE'S NOT REALLY A FEASIBLE MANNER TO, HEY, LET'S ONLY RUN 20 TRUCKS FROM 630 TO 8 AND THEN WE CAN ROLL UP MORE TRUCKS. YOU KNOW, THE BUSINESS OPERATION IS MEANT AS MOST TO GET THE MOST PRODUCTION THAT YOU CAN OUT OF THE TIME YOU HAVE. AND SO SORT OF STOPPING OR STARTING OR STARTING SLOW, THEN PICKING UP PACE AND THEN STOPPING, YOU KNOW, DOESN'T REALLY WORK, MAINLY DUE TO THE TRUCK DRIVERS. SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE PAID BY THE LOAD. SO IF YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO WORK THE 4 OR 5 HOURS DURING THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CARRY ANY LOADS. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE A PAYCHECK TO TAKE HOME TO YOUR FAMILY. SO THE BUSINESS HAS BEEN OPERATING WITH THESE HOURS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO COMPLAINT. WE WERE ASKED TO PROVIDE ANY COMPLAINTS FROM FROM RIVERSTONE, EVEN SUGARLAND. YOU KNOW, WE PROVIDED ALL THE DOCUMENTATION THAT STAFF ASKED FOR AND THAT P AND Z REQUESTED WITH REGARD TO COMPLAINTS. AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT STAFF AND THE CITY ARE DOING THEIR DUE DILIGENCE ON ON MOBILITY. WE UNDERSTAND THAT MOBILITY, YOU KNOW, IS AN ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED ON SIENNA PARKWAY.

BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE MAYBE SINGLING OUT ONE BUSINESS DUE TO THIS SUV TO SAY, LET'S TAKE SOME OF THEIR TRUCKS OFF THE ROAD. SO WITH THAT, I APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR VERSION OF THAT EXPLANATION. I'VE GOT TO DO THE ASK, YOU KNOW, GOT TO ASK WITH THAT. THE OTHER ASK IS VERY

[01:50:02]

SO THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS AND I THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION. I WOULD LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, ADD ONE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE TAKE IN CONSIDERATION THE LIMITED TIME WHEN YOU'RE WHEN BUSINESSES ARE ASKING FOR ADDITIONAL LOADS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. AND THEN WE'RE ASKING TO CONSOLIDATE THE TIME FRAME. THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME TYPE OF A WORKAROUND. EITHER WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO KEEP IT THE WAY THAT IT IS WITH WHAT THEY'RE DOING, AND LOOK AT THE TIME FRAMES THAT WE'RE DOING THAT IN. BUT THIS LOOKS LIKE KIND OF A, YOU KNOW, A CATCH 22 INCREASING ON THEIR END. BUT THEN WE'RE LIMITING ON THAT END.

AND SO I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN ENTERTAINING MAYBE DOING 730 TO 430 OR SOMETHING TO GIVE THEM THAT EXTRA HOUR TO SEE IF WE CAN MAKE SOME TYPE OF A BETTER COMPLIANCE WITH THESE 300 TRIPS, OR MEET SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE, 275 TO 80 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SURE. SO THAT'S IT FOR ME.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER KLAUS. AND MY QUESTION WAS AROUND THE TIME WHICH YOU PROACTIVELY BROUGHT UP AND SO WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND THE STAFF'S YOUR REQUEST, ALVIN, AND THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WHERE, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? WHAT WHAT IS WE GOT TO FIGURE SOMETHING OUT, YOU KNOW, MY OFFER WOULD BE TO IF WE WANT TO STICK TO THE CURRENT TENANTS OF THE LCP REGARDING TIMES AND TRUCK TRAFFIC, THEN THAT IS THE NEXT BEST THING FOR THE OPERATOR IS WHAT? WHICH WOULD BE TO STICK WITH THE TIMES, WHICH IS REGULAR WORK TIMES IN MISSOURI CITY. AND WE WOULD STICK WITH THE 250 MAX TRUCK TRIPS. ALL RIGHT. SO I WILL SAY THAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS BASED OFF OF THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS. AND IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN CALL UP PUBLIC WORKS TO PROVIDE SOME MORE BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON WHY THEY ESTABLISHED THAT TIME FRAME. AND MAYBE THAT WOULD HELP ANSWER ANY CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. YEAH, WE JUST WE JUST HAVE SO MUCH CONGESTION ON THAT ROAD AND THAT IS IT. THAT WAS ALL OF OUR CONCERN WHEN THIS ORIGINALLY CAME, CAME BEFORE US. AND SO JUST THAT THE, THE, THE TIME OF OPERATION, THAT IS WHAT, WHAT I'M HAVING AN ISSUE WITH OR A PROBLEM WITH. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT'S PUZZLING ME. THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER OTTO KIRK. THANK YOU MAYOR. SO A LARGE PORTION OF THIS TRAFFIC, IF IT HITS MISSOURI CITY, IS IN MY DISTRICT AND RESIDENTS ARE ABSOLUTELY OVERWHELMED BY THE TRAFFIC SITUATION THAT HAS RESULTED, BASICALLY DUE TO SOME KIND OF CRUMMY PLANNING ON DEVELOPER PART. AND SO ADDING 50 TRUCKS, IT STINKS. IT'S NOT A GOOD OPTION. AND SO, YOU KNOW, EVERY 1.9 MINUTES YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A TRUCK ON THE ROAD BASED ON 630 TO 4 AND EVEN LESS IF WE MINIMIZED IT TO 8 TO 4. YOU KNOW, I DON'T I DON'T SEE ANY COMPROMISE ON YOUR PART. I MEAN, IF YOU RAN A NIGHT OPERATION, YOU'D RUN TRUCKS ALL NIGHT. I MEAN, IS THERE ANY WAY TO, YOU KNOW, GET THESE TRUCKS OFF THE ROAD DURING THESE PRIME HOURS? NOT IN RUN A VIABLE BUSINESS. SO WHERE ELSE ARE THESE TRUCKS GOING? YOU MENTIONED STAFFORD. YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING OUT TO SIENNA. THE LITTLE ARROWS GO BOTH DIRECTIONS. SO THIS IS NOT JUST SIENNA NEED. SO SIENNA IS SUPPOSED TO BE BUILT OUT IN FIVE

[01:55:05]

YOU KNOW, IN FRONT OF THAT, THERE'S VERY FEW CONSTRUCTION OPERATORS THAT ARE GOING TO BE VERY SUCCESSFUL IF THEY'RE WORKING 6 OR 7 HOURS A DAY, YOU KNOW, FOR LIMITED PROJECTS LIKE HAPPEN UP AND DOWN THE PARKWAY OR OTHER ROADWAYS, AND YOU HAVE TO SHUT DOWN OR THEY'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO WORK SORT OF AFTER RUSH HOUR IN THE MORNING. WELL, THEN THOSE ARE BID PROJECTS AND THE CONTRACTORS CAN BID THAT WORK, YOU KNOW, BASED AROUND THE LIMITED HOURS THEY'RE GOING TO WORK ON A DAILY BASIS. THIS IS AN ONGOING BUSINESS THAT'S BEEN OPERATING FOR ABOUT 25 YEARS.

AND SO TO TRY TO CHANGE THOSE WORK HOURS, ALONG WITH WHO THEY DELIVER TO, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE THERE TO RECEIVE THOSE MATERIALS TO SPREAD THEM OR WHATEVER THEY'RE GOING TO DO, DO WITH THEM WHEN THEY RECEIVE THEM DOESN'T REALLY SOUND FEASIBLE. SO THEY'RE DELIVERING TO NOT JUST IN MISSOURI CITY, THEY'RE DELIVERING ALL OVER. THEY DELIVER TO A CERTAIN PROXIMITY.

I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY MILES AWAY, BUT THEY ARE ONE OF THE MATERIAL SUPPLIERS AND THEY GO OUT A CERTAIN RADIUS. SO MISSOURI CITY, STAFFORD, SUGARLAND, AT SOME POINT IT GETS TO BE TOO FAR. AND THERE'S ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, QUARRY OR MINING OR MATERIAL DELIVERY OPERATION THAT PICKS UP ONCE IT GETS FURTHER AWAY. SO IS THE ISSUE MORE THE NEED TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF TRUCK DELIVERIES, OR IS IT THE HOURS OF OPERATION? THE HOURS OF OPERATION ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO THE OPERATOR THAN THE NUMBER OF TRIPS. SO INCREASING IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD SAY, WE'LL WE'LL BE OKAY WITH THAT IF IN FACT, WE'RE ABLE TO OPERATE IN A TIME FRAME THAT WOULD BE MORE FEASIBLE FOR US. CORRECT. THE INCREASE IN TRUCKS FROM 2300 WAS AN ASK, YOU KNOW, IF THEY COULD GET IT. THAT WOULD MAKE THE DAYS THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO PUSH THAT MANY TRUCKS, THAT THEY'RE OPERATING WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE SUV AND NOT GOING OUTSIDE OF IT. THANK YOU. OKAY. RECOGNIZING MAYOR PRO TEM BROWNE-MARSHALL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR. MY FIRST QUESTION WILL PROBABLY GO OVER TO THIS SIDE OF THE TABLE. CONSIDERING THAT THE CURRENT.

APPLICATION HAS EXPIRED, ARE WE CURRENTLY OPERATING UNDER WHAT WE CONSIDER A NONCONFORMING USE? SO IF THE OPERATION IS NO LONGER AUTHORIZED, THEN IT'S NOT NONCONFORMING. IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN NONCONFORMING WHEN THE CHANGE OCCURRED. THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SOME SORT OF ACTION. AND I THINK IT WAS 22, 20, 22, BUT THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SOME PREVIOUS ACTION PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION. OKAY. AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION SURROUNDS THE UP TO UPDATE THE ACREAGE FROM 857 ACRES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS TO 837 ACRES. SO WE'RE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE THAT'S GOING TO BE USED FOR THIS CURRENT, FOR THE NEW SITE. THAT'S CORRECT. IT WAS A REDUCTION IN ACREAGE WITHIN CITY LIMITS. AND WITH THE I GUESS I'M HAVING I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE MATH HERE. SO WITH THE REDUCTION IN ACREAGE, BUT THE INCREASE IN TRUCK USAGE, YOU GUYS DON'T NEED THAT SPACE ANYMORE. DID YOU ABANDON THAT SPACE TO GO TOWARDS SOMETHING ELSE? WELL, IT WAS A VERY IT'S A VERY SMALL SPACE THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY UTILIZING. I BELIEVE IT WAS A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP THAT CAUSED THE CHANGE IN ACREAGE, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO CHANGE

[02:00:03]

SO ANY TYPE OF OVERNIGHT TRUCK ROUTE OR RUNNING OF STUFF WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO GO DELIVER TO OR PICK UP FROM, THEY WOULD NOT BE OPEN. CORRECT. OKAY. I THINK I THINK THE BIGGEST ANGST AND THE BIGGEST PAIN HERE IS DEFINITELY TRAFFIC. AND I'M APPRECIATIVE THAT YOU ARE IN TALKS WITH STAKEHOLDERS, WITH TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO HELP US EASE SOME OF THE TRAFFIC THAT IS COMING FROM OUT OF THE AREA, AND I ALWAYS WANT TO BE BUSINESS FRIENDLY TOWARDS, ESPECIALLY AN EXISTING BUSINESS OWNER WHO HAS BEEN THERE FOR OVER 20 PLUS YEARS. IT'S JUST TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO MANAGE IT. IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT THE NEW ROUTE AND THE NEW LOCATION, I REALLY, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE BIGGEST, BIGGEST CHANGE IN THIS IN THIS ROUTE HERE THAT WE SEE YOU'RE ALREADY PRETTY MUCH GOING THE SAME ROUTE. BUT I CANNOT DECIPHER WHAT THE BIGGEST CHANGE IS. THE BIGGEST CHANGE WOULD BE THE GOING FROM LJ PARKWAY TO UNIVERSITY. INSTEAD OF USING OIL FIELD ROAD. THAT WOULD BE PROBABLY THE BIGGEST CHANGE. AND THEN I BELIEVE PREVIOUSLY THEY WERE USING SIENNA RANCH ROAD. BUT ARE THEY ARE THEY STILL GOING TO BE USING SIENNA RANCH ROAD OR IS THAT A NO MORE. SO. IT'S FROM SIENNA SPRINGS TO RANCH AND I BELIEVE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO OKAY SIENNA PARKWAY. I DO SEE THOSE GREEN DOTS NOW COMING. I THINK BEFORE THEY WERE GOING THROUGH THE FORT BEND TOLL. BUT EVEN THEY'LL STILL BE ON THE COMING ACROSS THE NEW FORT BEND, YOU KNOW, COMING ACROSS THE FORT BEND TOLL, I BELIEVE. I GUESS WHAT'S KIND OF CONFUSING A LITTLE TO ME IS TO MY LEFT, WHERE YOU SEE THE ORANGE. I GUESS AT THAT TIME NOTHING WAS DEVELOPED THERE. OKAY. AND THEN WHEN I MOVE OVER TO MY RIGHT, WHERE THE GREEN IS NOW, ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED. AND SO WE'RE NOW OPENING UP, OPENING THERE. HOW MUCH MORE DEVELOPMENT DO WE FORESEE? GODLY. THAT THAT'S OKAY. BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO STOP ME. NEVER MIND. I'LL STOP. THANK YOU. OKAY. RECOGNIZING COUNCIL MEMBER OUDERKIRK. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO ASK OUR POLICE. CAN WE DO SOME RANDOM DAILY COUNTS? DO WE HAVE THE BANDWIDTH? DO WE HAVE THE. YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T DO IT EVERY DAY. WE CAN'T BE ON TOP OF THIS. BUT CAN WE DO SOME RANDOM CHECKS? COUNTS EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE HERE? WE CAN DEFINITELY WORK ON DOING THAT. OKAY, IN THE PAST, WE HAVEN'T REALLY FOCUSED ON COUNTS, BUT WE CAN DO THAT. YES. YEAH. I MEAN, IF WE'RE ALLOWING 250 TRUCKS, WE NEED NO MORE THAN 250 TRUCKS. IF IT'S 300 THAT WE ALLOW, IT SHOULD BE NO MORE THAN 300. AND THERE HAS TO BE SOME WAY TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE. SO I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT AT SOME LEVEL. RECOGNIZING COUNCIL MEMBER EMERY IN RESPECT TO THAT, I WOULD ASSUME THAT YOU COULD TAKE A LOOK AT THE TRIP TICKETS THAT YOU MIGHT BE USING ON A TRUCKS TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE HOW MANY TRIPS YOU'VE MADE, AS OPPOSED TO HAVING SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, TRY TO SIT OUT THERE AND VISUALLY. COUNT THE NUMBER OF TRIPS THAT HAVE TAKEN. SO WHY ISN'T THERE SOME TYPE OF RECORDING OF THE TRIPS THEMSELVES THAT ONE COULD LOOK AT TO AUDIT, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE ONLY DOING 250 AND NOT 275? YES, COUNCILMAN. THAT'S THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COMPANY COULD LIKELY PROVIDE.

HAVE WE DONE ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO, JUST TO, TO KIND OF POLICE YOURSELVES THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE STAYING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES? I HAVE NOT, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE COMPANY PROBABLY HAS. AND THAT'S WHY THEY ASKED FOR THE INCREASE TO 300. SO THEY WEREN'T BUSTING THE, THE TENANTS. OKAY. THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAD IS YOU'RE MOVING THINGS OFF OF OIL FIELD ROAD OVER TO LJ PARKWAY. IS. FROM A STANDPOINT OF RESIDENTIAL. ARE WE GOING TO BE RUNNING TRUCKS NOW OVER AREAS THAT WE'VE NEVER RUN BEFORE? AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT RESIDENTS LOOKING OUT AND NOW THEY'VE GOT TRUCKS HAULING SAND OR WHATEVER IT IS DOWN LG, LJ PARKWAY, OR IS THAT AN ISSUE? I DON'T FEEL IT'S AN ISSUE. THEY'VE BEEN RUNNING

[02:05:07]

THANK YOU. SO, CITY MANAGER, MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT. THESE ARE THE TIMING I FEEL THE STAFF CAME UP WITH IS FINE WITH ME. AND PART OF THE ISSUE WITH THIS IS IN THE MORNING, WHETHER YOU'RE USING LG PARKWAY OR OIL FIELD ROAD NOW IS KIND OF CLOSED AND IT'S NOT EXTENDING INTO LG PARKWAY OR SIENNA RANCH ROAD OR SIENNA PARKWAY. YOU HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT'S TRYING TO GET TO WORK, AND SAME THING IN THE EVENING COMING BACK INTO IN HOME. AND IT'S BEEN ONE OF THE BIGGEST FRUSTRATION IN THIS CITY, ESPECIALLY ON SOUTH OF HIGHWAY SIX, THAT PEOPLE HAVE HAD. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE WORKING WITH COMMISSIONERS AND LIDS AND JOHNSON AND ALL THESE OTHER PEOPLE TRYING TO COME UP WITH A PRACTICALITY, A WAY OF WORKING, OPENING UP SOME OF THE DEDICATED RIGHT LANES, DEDICATED LEFT LANES. SO THIS WAY THE PARKWAY CAN, YOU KNOW, STRAIGHT GO THROUGH WITH TWO PARKING SPACES. WHILE I STILL UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A BUSINESS, THEY NEED TO GET THEIR BUSINESS DONE AND, AND CREATE, YOU KNOW, THESE TRUCKS TO COME BACK INTO THOSE AREAS WHERE THEY NEEDED TO. SO WE'RE REALLY ASKING FOR A 630 WAS THAT THAT'S WHAT IT WAS TO 8:00. RIGHT. IS THAT IS THAT WHAT THE NEW PROPOSAL IS? I THINK THE ORIGINAL THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE SAID SUN, SUNRISE TO SUNSET. SO IT DID NOT SPECIFY A TIME.

RIGHT. SO I THINK WE NEED TO FRAME IT IN A WAY WHERE IT HELPS OUR CITIZENS TO GET OUT AND THEN COME IN. AND I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO MENTION THE WEAR AND TEAR. AND WHO TAKES THE OWNERSHIP OF THOSE ROADWAYS AND ALL OF THAT, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS,

[02:10:03]

WE NEED TO BE MAKING SURE THAT THESE ARE THE RIGHT THINGS TO DO. SO I WOULD, I WOULD MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO STICK WITH WHAT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDING FOR NOW. AND I WOULD CONCUR WITH MAYOR PRO TEM ON NOT EXTENDING IT ALL THE WAY TO 2034 OR 2035, BRINGING IT BACK TO AT LEAST 2030 SO WE CAN REEVALUATE THIS AND RELOOK AT THIS AND SEE WHERE WE NEEDED TO GO FROM. WITH THAT, I YIELD MY COMMENT. I'M GOING TO GO TO COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I HAD A QUESTION. SHASHI, PEAK HOURS AGAIN. WHAT ARE THE PEAK HOURS THAT I'M ASSUMING THIS IS BASED OFF OF A ANALYSIS OF SOME SORT. CAN YOU EXPOUND ON WHAT THAT ANALYSIS ENTAILED? WHO DID IT AND HOW DID YOU COME TO THESE THIS RECOMMENDATION? WELL, ANY MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT MEASURES THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC, HOW THE INTERSECTION IS OPERATING. IT'S JUST A GREAT STARTING FROM A THROUGH F NOW ON SIENNA PARKWAY. THE BIG CULPRIT IS THE PMP COVER AM. WHEN YOU'RE HEADED NORTHBOUND, THERE ARE A FEW INTERSECTIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY FAILING F GRADE COMING DOWN DURING THE PEAK HOUR. SOUTHBOUND TRAFFIC. ALMOST ALL INTERSECTIONS ARE FAILING, SO IT IS. THE PROBLEM IS MORE PRONOUNCED IN THE EVENING PEAK HOURS THAN THE AM PEAK HOURS, BUT STILL AM PEAK HOURS. THERE ARE A FEW INTERSECTIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING AT WHAT WE CALL FAILED CONDITIONS. BASED ON THE LATEST TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. SO AS IT RELATES TO THE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC, HAVE WE BEEN ABLE TO ATTRIBUTE THIS HEAVY BACKUP AND THIS HEAVY TRAFFIC TO THIS COMPANY? NO, WE DO NOT HAVE THAT KIND OF INFORMATION. THIS IS THE OVERALL TRAFFIC. IT'S NOT JUST TRUCK TRAFFIC, IT IS THE ENTIRE TRAFFIC, A COMBINATION OF ALL TRAFFIC. SO PRIOR TO THIS COMING TO OUR ATTENTION AND COMING BEFORE US, THEY WERE OPERATING

[02:15:03]

SO I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO WHY, IF IN FACT, THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING THAT WAY, HOW DO WE BELIEVE THAT REDUCING THE NUMBER OF TRUCKS THAT ARE FLOWING BETWEEN THAT TIME FRAME, EVEN IF WE SHAVE OFF THAT TIME, IT'S GOING TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT OR AT LEAST ADD, YOU KNOW, TO THE REDUCTION OF TRAFFIC OR CONGESTION. TEN, 15 YEARS AGO, SIENNA PARKWAY DID NOT CARRY THE SAME TRAFFIC THAT IT CARRIES TODAY. IT PROBABLY WORKED 10 OR 15 YEARS AGO. BUT IF YOU'RE OPERATING TODAY, I MEAN, IF ANYBODY WERE TO ADVISE YOU ON A PARKWAY IN THE MORNING, A AND M PM, IT'S NO BRAINER. THERE IS SEVERE, SEVERE TRAFFIC CONGESTION. THERE IS NOT A PARTICULAR WEEK IN PUBLIC WORKS WHERE THE TRAFFIC WHERE THE STAFF DOES NOT RECEIVE COMPLAINTS OR CONCERNS. BUT WE DON'T KNOW THAT BY REDUCING THE TIME FROM SIX OR CHANGING THE TIME FROM 630 TO 8 IS GOING TO HAVE ANY TYPE OF IMPACT ON CONGESTION. WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT TRUCK, BUT COMMON SENSE SAYS IF YOU ALREADY HAVE A TRAFFIC CONGESTION IN A AND M PM DURING PEAK HOURS, IF YOU WERE TO PUT MORE TRUCK TRAFFIC, IT CAUSES IT WORSENS THE SITUATION. THAT'S COMMON SENSE, RIGHT? BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT COMMON SENSE, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT DATA. WE DO NOT HAVE THE TRUCK DATA. THANK YOU.

THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE ENTIRE TRAFFIC. BUT WE DO NOT HAVE DATA BROKEN UP BY TRUCK TRAFFIC. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND AS IT RELATES TO YOU, SIR, AS YOU KNOW, FROM 8 TO 4, IF IT WAS CHANGED TO THAT, I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO, YOU KNOW, HOW WOULD THAT IMPACT THE BUSINESS AS FAR AS HOW MANY TRUCKS WOULD BE ABLE TO RUN FROM THAT TIME TO THE BUSINESS OWNER TOLD ME THAT THE BUSINESS MAY NOT BE FEASIBLE TO RUN FROM 8 TO 4. SO IF THAT'S WHAT THE S U P COMES BACK AT, THEN I GUESS THEY HAVE A BUSINESS DECISION TO MAKE WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE THE BUSINESS OR SHUT IT DOWN. SO, SO, SO THIS DECISION IS GOING TO IMPACT WHETHER THEY CHOOSE TO CONTINUE BUSINESS AT ALL OR IN MISSOURI CITY. NOT SURE. WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T CROSS THAT BRIDGE. IT WOULD PROBABLY BE HELPFUL TO HEAR FROM THEM RELATIVE TO THAT MATTER. I THINK THIS IS THE FIRST. I MEAN, IF THEY DON'T CONTINUE THE BUSINESS HERE, IT WOULDN'T CONTINUE IN MISSOURI CITY BECAUSE TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE'S NOT ANOTHER LOCATION WHERE THEY COULD MINE MATERIALS AND THEN BRINGING THEM INTO THIS LOCATION THAT WOULD BE FEASIBLE.

SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, IF IT WAS MODIFIED TO 8 TO 4, YOU SAID MORE THAN LIKELY THEY WOULD BE MAKING A BUSINESS CASE DECISION AS TO WHETHER THEY CONTINUE TO OPERATE HERE. CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL. RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER EMERY. YEAH, JUST FOR MY OWN EDIFICATION, HOW MUCH DO WE CHARGE OR HOW MUCH DOES EACH TRUCK PAY IN TAXES OR. BY TRIP OR, YOU KNOW, IS THERE A REVENUE STREAM THAT THAT WE HAVE COMING FROM THE TRIPS THAT THAT THESE TRUCKS ARE MAKING? HOW HOW AGAIN, WHAT IS THE REVENUE & STREAM, IF THERE IS ANY, THAT HELPS US MAINTAIN STREETS AND DO SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS BECAUSE OF THE USE BY THE TRUCKS? DO WE KNOW THAT OR KNOWLEDGE ON THAT? COUNCIL MEMBER I'M SORRY, I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE ON IT. ONE WOULD THINK THAT IF THEY'RE USING OUR TRUCKS ARE USING OUR STREETS, THERE SHOULD BE. MAYBE IT'S JUST THROUGH LICENSING, I DON'T KNOW, BUT ANYWAY, IT'D BE NICE TO KNOW. SO. SO IF YOU'RE GETTING 50 MORE TRUCKS, YOU KNOW THAT COULD EQUATE TO X NUMBER OF DOLLARS MORE REVENUE THAT YOU COULD USE TO DO SOME OF THE STREET IMPROVEMENTS IF, WHEN NEEDED. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I HEAR. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO ALL RIGHT I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. SO PRIOR TO THIS AGREEMENT, I MEAN IT WAS KIND OF A NO MAN'S LAND, RIGHT? I MEAN, IT WAS THEY WERE OPERATING THE WAY THEY WERE OPERATING. SO WHEN THIS WAS BEING BROUGHT BACK INTO WHAT TYPE OF ASSESSMENTS DID YOU GUYS DO? WAS IT JUST AN AUTOMATIC LET'S JUST RE-APPROVE OR WAS IT WAS THERE ANY, ANY CONDITIONS OR ANYTHING THAT YOU LOOKED AT? YEAH, I WOULD SAY ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT WE LOOKED AT WHEN RECEIVING THE APPLICATION FOR THE AMENDMENT IS THE TRUCK ROUTES, CONSIDERING THE BUILD OUT OF THE AREA IS SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED SINCE THE ORIGINAL TIME IT WAS APPROVED. SO THIS WAS THE PROPOSAL THAT STAFF

[02:20:01]

WE'VE GONE TO CITY MANAGER ASKING SAYING WHAT CAN WE DO? CAN WE WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS AND HELP? SO I THINK WE BUTCHERED THIS INTO ALL TYPE OF WHAT'S THE TRUCK COST AND WHAT'S THIS? I THINK IT'S JUST SIMPLE, MAN. IT'S JUST THE FACT THAT WE'RE GIVING WE'RE NOT TAKING THE BUSINESS AWAY. WE'RE JUST SAYING IT WOULD HELP OUR RESIDENTS THAT PAYS TAXES INTO OUR CITY, THAT ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE TRAFFIC, ONGOING TRAFFIC EVERY DAY, AND THE FACT THAT IF WE CAN HELP THEM TO NAVIGATE TO SO THEY CAN GO TO WORK AND THEY CAN CONTINUE TO STAY IN THEIR HOME AND PAY TAXES, WHICH WE NEED AND, AND TO LIVE OUT. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER RILEY, BEGINNING OF THIS, ASKED ABOUT SOME FLEXIBILITY TO SEE THAT IF IT WOULD WORK. AND I'M NOT SEEING ANY FLEXIBILITY FROM YOU. AND, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE SPEAKING ON FOR SOMEONE ELSE AND SAYING IF THERE'S IF THE SAND COMPANY STOPS TOMORROW AND SAYS THEY'RE NOT DELIVERING SAND, THESE BUILDERS WILL FIND SOMEBODY ELSE. THERE'S NOT ONLY ONE PERSON IN THE BUSINESS THAT DELIVERS SAND. SO ALL I'M LOOKING FOR IS IT'S NOT BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THOSE TRUCKS OR WE DON'T WANT THESE BUSINESSES. IT'S THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO GET OUR PEOPLE OUT. IF THERE IS A ACCIDENT ON ON SIENNA PARKWAY OR SIENNA RANCH ROAD, IT TAKES LITERALLY HOUR AND A HALF TO FOR OUR PD TO CLEAR UP. AND THAT JUST TAKES THE WHOLE ROCK. AND IF WE'RE FIXING A POTHOLE ON ONE OF THOSE LANES, OR WE'VE SHUT IT DOWN FOR SOMETHING OR STRIPING OR WHATEVER IT IS, IT TAKES ANOTHER WHOLE HOUR AND A HALF OF PEOPLE COMPLAINING BECAUSE IT TAKES LITERALLY FROM THE ROUNDABOUT BACK IN SIENNA TO COME BACK TO THE FRONT OF HIGHWAY SIX IS LITERALLY 25 MINUTES ON A GIVEN GOOD DAY. SO ON A DAY THAT'S HORRIBLE, YOU HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO GET TO HOME. SO WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT BEING THE BAD GUYS HERE, TRYING TO SAY THAT WE DON'T WANT THIS BUSINESS OR WE DON'T WANT THESE TYPE OF TRUCKS COMING IN AND HELPING YOU BUILD. I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOME SORT OF UNDERSTANDING TO SAY THAT WE HAVE THE TIME ZONE IN THE MORNING THAT WOULD HELP AND TO GET OUT NOW, IF I'VE SEEN THESE TRUCKS, HOME DEPOT TRUCKS, ALL THESE BUILDER TRUCKS, THAT BRINGS IN TWO BY FOURS AND BRINGS IN ALL THESE MATERIALS, YOU CAN SET IT UP WHERE THEY BRING IT IN AT 6:00, OR THEY BRING IT IN EARLY IN THE MORNING LIKE EARLY 6:00 IN THE MORNING. THEY DELIVER AND THEY WAIT TILL WHEN THE TRAFFIC'S ARE DONE BY 9:00 OR 930 TO DELIVER. I'M IN THAT BUSINESS. I DO THIS BUSINESS ALL DAY LONG. I'M NOT A BUILDER OF BUILDING A SUBDIVISION, BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO HELP OUR RESIDENTS. WE WANT TO WORK WITH YOU. WE WANT TO WORK WITH YOU. WE APPRECIATE THE PARTNERSHIP THAT WE HAVE. GIVE US SOMETHING TO WORK WITH. AND I THINK YOU'RE JUST SAYING. NOPE.

WELL, YOU KNOW, WE WON'T HAVE ANY BUSINESSES HERE IS NOT WHERE I THINK THIS COUNCIL IS LOOKING FOR. WE WANT TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS. AND THAT'S THIS IS MY OPINION.

I'M JUST SPEAKING FOR MYSELF. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE ALSO HAVE OUR RESIDENTS THAT PAY TAXES IN THIS CITY ARE CONSTANTLY COMPLAINING ABOUT IN AND OUT. YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO GET OUT AND GET IN AND GET OUT. AND NONE OF US ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FACT THAT IT'S A TWO LANE ROAD ON SIENNA PARKWAY. WE WEREN'T HERE, BUT TODAY WE'RE HERE. IT'S OUR PROBLEM. WE GOT TO DEAL WITH IT. WE CAN'T JUST BLAME, YOU KNOW, PREVIOUS COUNCIL OR THE FORMER COUNCIL.

THAT'S NOT WHAT WE DO. THAT'S NOT PROFESSIONAL. THAT'S NOT WHO WE ARE. WHEN WE'RE SITTING UP HERE, SEVEN OF US ARE SITTING UP HERE. WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO WORK WITH ALL OF ALL OF OUR PARTNERS AND OUR RESIDENTS TO MOVE FORWARD. SO I WOULD ASK,

[02:25:03]

ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT AFTER PUSHING THEM NUMEROUS TIMES, CAN WE CHANGE THE HOURS? HE WAS LIKE, IT'S NOT REALLY FEASIBLE, BUT LET'S JUST SEE WHAT HAPPENS. SO I'M NOT HERE TO SAY IF THEY DON'T GET THE SUNRISE TO SUNSET OR 630 THAT THEY'RE OUT OF HERE, THAT THEY WERE JUST SAYING THAT THAT'S TOUGH. THAT DOESN'T REALLY WORK FOR US, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE A HARD LOOK AND SAY, WELL, YEAH, THAT STILL WORKS FOR US. FINE. WE'RE STILL GOING TO DO BUSINESS. I'M NOT HERE TO SAY THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO BUSINESS. I'M JUST HERE TO SAY THEY SAID IT WASN'T FEASIBLE, BUT THAT'S ALL I CAN SAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. I WANTED TO JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, I DID HEAR YOU SAY THAT IT WAS A TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT, YOU KNOW, SITUATION THAT IF IT WAS 8 TO 4, THEN THEY HAVE TO REALLY LOOK AT THIS. AND SO IN MY FOLLOW UP, YOU KNOW, I SAID DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEY'LL EITHER SHUT DOWN OR MOVE SOMEWHERE ELSE. AND YOU SAID YES. SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THEM. I DON'T WANT YOU TO BE IN A SITUATION WHERE YOU'RE BEING THIRD PARTY TO A CONVERSATION THAT THEY SHOULD BE ANSWERING.

SO I KNOW THIS IS A FIRST READING. SO, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHATEVER HAPPENS TODAY, THIS MAY COME BACK BEFORE US OR SHOULD COME BACK BEFORE US. BUT I DO WANT TO SAY, MAYOR, I DISAGREE. I THINK THAT WE DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW, NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT MADE THESE DECISIONS THAT PUT US IN THE TOUGH SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN TODAY. THERE WERE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE PRIOR TO US GETTING HERE, ALTHOUGH WE'RE NOW HAVING TO DEAL WITH IT. YOU KNOW, WE'RE HERE NOW, BUT THOSE DECISIONS HAVE PUT US IN THIS POSITION, STAFFING THIS POSITION. AND SO, YOU KNOW, US HAVING TO MAKE THIS DECISION THAT IMPACTS, YOU KNOW, THE RESIDENTS AND IMPACTS OUR, OUR, OUR BUSINESSES LIKE YOURS OR THE ONE YOU REPRESENT IS REALLY A CHALLENGING SITUATION. BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE HEALTHY BALANCE BETWEEN OUR BUSINESSES AND OUR AND OUR RESIDENTS AND OUR RESIDENTS, AND THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE IS IMPORTANT. THEY'RE THE PEOPLE THAT PUT US IN OFFICE. BUSINESSES DON'T PUT US IN OFFICE. IT'S THE PEOPLE THAT ELECT US TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT IMPACT THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.

AND SO FOR ME, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, TO MAYOR'S POINT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S NO MODIFICATIONS THAT THIS BUSINESS CAN MAKE TO HAVE A GREAT AND HEALTHY PARTNERSHIP, TAKING THESE RESIDENTS INTO CONSIDERATION IS DIFFICULT. YOU PUT US IN A TOUGH SPOT. YOU PUT US IN A TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT TYPE SITUATION. AND, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO ALWAYS DECIDE ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS AND THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IMPACTED BY THIS VERSUS ANY BUSINESSES, REGARDLESS OF, YOU KNOW, THE IMPACT THAT THEY HAVE ON OUR CITY. IT'D BE A TOUGH DECISION. BUT, YOU KNOW, NOT REALLY TOUGH AT ALL WHEN IT COMES TO THE TO THE PEOPLE THAT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE REPRESENT. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY, I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO GO BACK TO THOSE, THOSE DECISION MAKERS AND, YOU KNOW, HAVE THIS TOUGH CONVERSATION WITH THEM AND HAVE THEM COME BEFORE US AND HAVE A CONSIDERATION AS TO MAYBE HOW THEY COULD MODIFY THEIR BUSINESS MODEL THAT COULD WORK WITH THE PARAMETERS THAT WE'RE SEEKING TO, THAT WE'RE SEEKING TO PUT IN PLACE, CONSIDERING OUR SITUATION, CONSIDERING THE RESIDENTS SITUATION, WE HAVE TO HAVE EMPATHY AND UNDERSTANDING FOR THEM, NOT JUST ABOUT PROFITABILITY, BUT WE'VE GOT TO PUT PEOPLE OVER PROFITABILITY, AND THAT'S WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO ME. SO THANK YOU, MAYOR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RILEY. THANK YOU. MAYOR JOYCE, DO WE HAVE TO DO A MOTION AND SECOND AND VOTE ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM BECAUSE IT'S POSSIBLE CONSIDERATION, CONSIDERATION OF ACTION. IF THERE IS A DESIRE TO HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNER OR ANOTHER REPRESENTATIVE APPEAR BEFORE THE

[02:30:02]

AND NOT GETTING WITH THE WITH THE WITH THE PARTY OWNERS OR WHOEVER THIS IS. RIGHT. STAFF DID COMMUNICATE WITH THE OWNER WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER. OKAY. WELL, THEY'RE NOT THE OWNERS. RIGHT. AND SO I WOULD SAY IS IF WE CAN TABLE THIS AT LEAST COME TO SO WE DON'T HAVE A TWO HOURS GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH THIS. SO IF Y'ALL CAN WORK WITH WHOEVER IT IS, REPRESENTATIVES, OWNERS, WHOEVER IT IS, COME UP WITH A PRACTICAL TIME THAT WOULD BENEFIT THE CITIZENS AND BENEFIT THE BUSINESSES, THEN PUT THAT ITEM ON THE AGENDA AND WE CAN VOTE ON IT. NOT SITTING HERE FOR 30 MINUTES BACK AND FORTH. I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT WE WERE GETTING, BUT APPARENTLY NOT. SO I WOULD JUST SAY CITY MANAGER MOVING FORWARD WHEN WE HAVE THESE, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST GETTING A DATE OR JUST GETTING A TIME DOESN'T HELP CITY COUNCIL. IF THERE'S A UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN ALL THAT, IT WOULD HELP US TO MOVE FORWARD. UNLESS IF THERE'S A WILD CARD QUESTION FROM COUNCIL THAT CHANGES THE EFFECT OF WHAT'S HAPPENING, DOES THAT THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. COUNCILMEMBER.

MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO SAY THERE IS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR CONSIDERATION. SO DO YOU WANT TO I MEAN, WHAT IS YOUR MOTION? I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THIS MATTER UNTIL STAFF CAN WORK WITH THE OWNER TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARIFICATION. IS THAT YOUR SECOND? MY SECOND. SO DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THIS? YES. YEAH OKAY. THE MOTION THE MOTION TO POSTPONE CARRIES 7 TO 0. ALL

[(b) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Two Readings - An ordinan...]

[02:35:01]

AS A MOTHER OF SEVEN, I'VE BEEN DOWN THAT ROAD. AND SO THE BIGGEST CONCERN FOR ME IS SAFETY. WHERE EXACTLY IS IT LOCATED? WHERE PEOPLE HAVE TO PARK. THEY HAVE TO CROSS, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE PARKING LOT TO GET THEIR KIDS IN AND OUT OF THE DAYCARE CENTER. SO WHAT OTHER TYPE OF BUSINESSES DO YOU ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT ARE INSIDE THE SHOPPING CENTER? SO THE BUILDING THAT THE SHOPPING CENTER IS SEEKING TO LOCATE IN ITSELF, THERE'S A SLIVER ON THE END CAP THAT'S AN ITALIAN ICE OR DESSERT BUSINESS THAT'S ALREADY OPEN, THAT HAS A DRIVE THROUGH ON THE END CAP OF THAT BUILDING. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S A BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CHILDCARE, WELL, NOT CHILDCARE, BUT THERAPY FOR CHILDREN THAT ARE THAT WILL LOCATE OR IS ALREADY LOCATED IN ONE OF THE OTHER BUILDINGS WITHIN THE SAME CENTER. I BELIEVE THERE'S A GYM THAT'S ALSO PROPOSED OR ALREADY OPENING WITHIN THAT SAME CENTER AS WELL. DO YOU KNOW THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE CHILDCARE CENTER? I DON'T OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. I WILL SAY IT'S THE MAJORITY TENANT IN THE IN THE BUILDING. THE ITALIAN ICE IS ABOUT, I THINK IT'S ABOUT 1100FT■!S, AND THE CHILDCARE WOD TAKE OVER THE REMAINDER OF THAT SAME BUILDING. WHERE WHERE IN THIS CENTER IS IT CLOSER TO THE END CAP? IS IT IN THE MIDDLE? SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS SCREEN, WHAT'S IS OFF SCREEN TO THE RIGHT. TO MY RIGHT, THE ITALIAN ICE WOULD BE THE END CAP OF THAT VERY FIRST BUILDING CLOSEST TO WHAT'S. AND THEN THE CHILDCARE WOULD LOCATE WITHIN THE REMAINDER OF THAT. AND THEN THERE'S A GREEN SPACE SEPARATION BETWEEN THAT ONE BUILDING AND THEN THE NEXT SHOPPING BUILDING ON THE OTHER SIDE. SO WERE THEY NOT NOTIFIED THAT PRIOR TO THEM? I DON'T KNOW IF THIS THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT'S REQUIRED TO NOTIFY THEM THAT THEY'VE GOT TO, YOU KNOW, GO THROUGH THE PROPER CHAINS TO GET THIS BUILD OUT. WERE THEY WERE THEY NOTIFIED OR WERE THEY JUST NOT AWARE? I BELIEVE THERE'S LACK OF COMMUNICATION THERE THAT THEY WEREN'T AWARE THAT THEY WERE SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS PARTICULAR ZONING IS NOT APPROVED? WHAT HAPPENS? THEY WOULD NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, YOU KNOW, IS IT

[02:40:03]

SO I WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU, CITY MANAGER. WELL, FIRST I'LL SAY THAT I AGREE TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE. BUT OF COURSE, THAT'S GOING TO COME WITH THE QUALIFIER THAT PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, BECAUSE IN SOME CASES, IT'S DELIBERATE THAT THEY TRY TO AVOID THE REQUIREMENT. SO THERE'S ISSUES ON BOTH SIDES IN TERMS OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS. BUT PART OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TIGHTEN UP OUR PROCESSES, TIGHTEN UP OUR PROCEDURES, ENSURE THAT WE'RE BEING MORE DILIGENT IN HOW WE'RE REVIEWING INFORMATION, AND ALSO FROM A FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE IN ENSURING THAT WE KNOW WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, BECAUSE I WOULD BET IN THIS CASE, MAYBE WE HAD STAFF THAT WEREN'T AWARE THAT THIS PROPERTY WOULD FALL UNDER THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS AS A PART OF THE AGREEMENT. AND SO IT'S MAKING SURE THAT EVERYONE THAT'S A PART OF THE PROCESS UNDERSTANDS WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, AND THAT WE HOLD STAFF ACCOUNTABLE FOR THOSE PROCESSES. SO WHEN THEY CAME FORWARD FOR THEIR PERMITTING, THEY WERE ALLOWED TO GET THEIR PERMITTING WITH THE WITH THE CITY KNOWING THAT THIS WAS A DAYCARE. SO WE DON'T PERMIT. SO THEY DIDN'T SUBMIT A PERMIT APPLICATION. OKAY. SO IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. IF THEY CAME FORWARD FOR PERMITTING, THEN THAT WOULD HAVE COME UP THROUGH THE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS. BUT BECAUSE PERMITS ARE ISSUED FOR THIS AREA, THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE PROCESS. IS THE CHILDCARE CENTER HERE TODAY? NO, THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY IS OUT OF THE COUNTRY. BUT ALVIN'S HERE TO REPRESENT. YOU RANG ALVIN. SO I CAN'T ANSWER ONE OF THE QUESTIONS. I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THE EMAILS. IF YOU THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING, THERE'S THREE BUILDINGS ON THE SITE. THE SOUTHERN END CAP IS ABOUT 9000FT■!S. 1400 IS THE IS THE DRIVE THROUGH WITH THE ITALIAN ICE. AND THEN THE DAYCARE IS ABOUT 7600FT. AND SO I GUESS TO TRY TO TRY TO ANSWER ANOTHER QUESTION, AS JENNIFER SAID, THERE'S NO PERMITTING HERE. THE BUYER WAS NOTIFIED. AND ALL OF OUR CONTRACTS WE HAVE THAT YOU'RE BEHOLDEN TO A DA. THE LAND IS UNDER A DA. WHETHER THEY LOOKED CAREFULLY THROUGH THAT DA, I ALWAYS TELL ALL BUYERS, BASICALLY, IF YOU READ FAR ENOUGH, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SAYS YOU'RE GOING TO DEVELOP JUST LIKE YOU'RE IN THE CITY LIMITS OF MISSOURI CITY. SO GO LOOK AT THE CITY ORDINANCES. THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO ADHERE TO. EXCEPT FOR THAT THE FACT YOU ALSO HAVE TO ADHERE TO FORT BEND COUNTY STANDARDS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE ACTUAL PERMITTING COMES FROM. BUT YOU DON'T PERMIT FROM THE CITY. THE TENANT DIDN'T GET GOOD INFORMATION, SO HE CAME

[02:45:05]

AND I ALSO HAD CHILDREN IN DAYCARE RIGHT NOW IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, WE HAVE WE ARE AT A CRITICAL TIME WITH CHILD CARE CENTERS. WE ARE LOSING CHILD CARE CENTERS LEFT AND RIGHT. AND WHEN WE CAN PROVIDE A MORE AFFORDABLE OPTION FOR THEM TO OPERATE IN, WHICH WOULD BE SHARED WALLS, SHARED SPACE, THEY ACTUALLY DO MUCH BETTER. THEY'RE SURVIVING. THEY'RE NOT SURVIVING RIGHT NOW. IN OUR CURRENT CLIMATE, INCREASED INSURANCE, ALL INCREASED INCREASED TAXES AND ALL THE THINGS THAT THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH. BUT THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY ORGANIZATIONS RAISING RED FLAGS ABOUT THESE BUSINESSES CLOSING, AS WELL AS BUSINESS REPRESENTATIVES. WHEN THE TWO COME TOGETHER, WE'VE GOT TO REALIZE THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE AND THAT THEY NEED OUR SUPPORT. SO ASIDE FROM THE PERMITTING, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ONE OF THE ONLY CITIES THAT DOES THIS. WE'RE ONE OF THE ONLY CITIES. THAT'S WHY THESE GUYS, YOU KNOW, WHO ARE BUILDING CHILD CARE CENTERS, COME IN AND THEY'RE LIKE, WAIT A MINUTE. WHAT, YOU GUYS DON'T ALLOW CHILD CARE CENTERS AND STRIP CENTERS? BECAUSE WE INITIATED THIS ORDINANCE. REACTIONARY, BECAUSE SOMETHING DID HAPPEN. BUT WE CAN'T WE CAN'T OPERATE ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THIS IS NORMAL OR THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN REPETITIVELY BECAUSE IT'S ALL OVER THE PLACE. OTHER CITIES ALLOW THESE STRIP CENTERS TO HAVE CHILD CARE CENTERS OPERATING IN THEM. SO WE'RE ONE OF THE FEW, AND I REALLY THINK WE'VE GOT TO CHANGE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, BECAUSE PARENTS WILL AND CAN PROTECT THEIR CHILDREN. WE'RE MAKING AN ASSUMPTION THAT THEY CAN'T WALK THEIR CHILD INTO THESE CENTERS. AND I JUST I THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS FROM FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE. THANK YOU. RECOGNIZE AND COUNCILMEMBER.

THANK YOU. MAYOR, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE SIENNA 325 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? CITY MANAGER OR CITY ATTORNEY AS TO WHO WHO I GUESS ORCHESTRATED THESE AGREEMENTS AND CERTAINLY BACK IN 2016, THE SIENNA 325 GROUP AND THE DEVELOPER REQUESTED THAT A PORTION OF LAND BE ANNEXED FROM THE CITY BECAUSE THAT PORTION WAS PREVIOUSLY LOCATED IN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY LIMITS. SO PART OF THAT DEAL IN 2016 WAS THAT ONCE THE LAND WAS ANNEXED, LIKE THE LARGER SIENNA DEVELOPMENT, IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS SIGNED AND EXECUTED IN 2016, AND THAT SUBJECTED THE LAND TO THE LARGER

[02:50:01]

MAYOR, I HAVE A QUESTION. DO WE HAVE EXACTLY WHERE IS THIS CENTER GOING TO GO? IS IT ON AN END CAP? IS IT TAKE THESE ARE THREE SEPARATE BUILDINGS, RIGHT. ARE THEY TAKING UP AN ENTIRE BUILDING? THEY'RE TAKING UP. SO THE BUILDING BASICALLY IN THE FOREGROUND HERE IN THE PICTURE CLOSER TO WHAT'S THERE TAKING UP THE MAJORITY OF THAT SPACE. AND I THINK ALVIN STATED THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF IT. THE ONLY PORTION OF THAT BUILDING THAT'S NOT THEIRS IS THE ITALIAN ICE, AND IT'S UNDER 2000FT■!S. OKAY. I'M SORRY, I'M EXTREMELY VISUAL PERSON. SO EVERYTHING TO THE LEFT. IS THERE A DIVIDER IN BETWEEN? YEAH. SO IN THIS VIEW THERE'S THREE BUILDINGS OKAY.

AND SO IN THIS VIEW THE LIGHT POLE KIND OF MID SCREEN OKAY IS THE END OF ONE BUILDING. ALL RIGHT. AND THAT'S THE BUILT EVERYTHING TO THE, THE RIGHT OF THAT OR. WELL TO THE RIGHT OF THAT IS THE BUILDING THAT THE CHILDCARE WOULD BE LOCATED IN EVERYTHING TO MY RIGHT OR MY LEFT, EVERYTHING TO. WELL, IF YOU'RE LOOKING STRAIGHT AT THE IMAGE, EVERYTHING TO THE RIGHT WOULD BE THE CHILDCARE WITH THE ITALIAN ICE ON THE END. SO WHERE THE PARKING LOT WRAPS AROUND,

[02:55:01]

COUNCILMEMBER. COUNCILMEMBER WRITING. THANK YOU. I WANTED TO MAKE A STATEMENT IN REGARDS TO THE. I'VE NEVER BEEN A PROPONENT FOR CHILD CARE CENTERS IN RETAIL CENTERS. IT'S NOT JUST THE SAFETY, IT'S THE TRAFFIC. IT'S THE VARIOUS AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE WALKING AROUND MOVING AROUND. AND IT'S JUST A VERY COMPLICATED SITUATION. IT WAS MENTIONED THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS REACTIONARY WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS CHANGED OR PUT INTO PLACE BECAUSE THERE WAS A SAFETY ISSUE OR SOMETHING HAPPENED. WELL, NOW WE'RE JUST BEING REACTIONARY AGAIN. UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE WE DON'T HAVE THE PRIVILEGE, OR AT LEAST WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO MAKE EMOTIONAL DECISIONS UP HERE BASED ON WHAT THE TRENDS ARE OR WHAT'S NECESSARY FOR CHILD CARE AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE HAVE TO FOLLOW OUR POLICIES, OUR ORDINANCES. AND THEREFORE, ALTHOUGH I AM VERY SYMPATHETIC FOR WHAT THE BUSINESS IS GOING THROUGH, WE HAVE A DUTY TO UPHOLD WHAT WE'VE SET IN PLACE.

IT'S NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO COMMUNICATE THAT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. THEY SHOULD HAVE, AS IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU GUYS DID, GUIDED THEM TO CONNECT WITH ALL THE NECESSARY ENTITIES SO THAT THEY CAN DO THE PROPER BUILD OUT. IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED, IT SETS A PRECEDENT, AS COUNCILMEMBER BONNIE SAID, FOR OTHER BUSINESSES, NOT JUST CHILD CARE, BUT OTHER BUSINESSES.

OOPS, I MADE A MISTAKE. OH, I DIDN'T KNOW. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUOUSLY GIVE THAT GIVE THAT, YOU KNOW, OLIVE BRANCH ALL THE TIME, YOU KNOW, THEN WHY DO WE HAVE RULES, REGULATIONS, ORDINANCES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE? I'M A HARD NO. AS I SAID AT THE LAST MEETING IN REGARDS TO THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC, AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BUSINESS. I CAN'T MAKE AN EMOTIONAL DECISION BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY BUILT OUT. THEY'VE SPENT THEIR MONEY.

THAT'S PART OF BEING IN BUSINESS. YOU'VE GOT TO HIRE THE PROFESSIONALS TO DO THE LEGWORK, TO GET ALL THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTATION, TO GO THROUGH THE PROPER CHAINS AND PROCESSES, SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE A SMOOTH TRANSITION IN BRINGING YOUR BUSINESS TO ANY CITY, FOR THAT MATTER. AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS CLARIFIED. WE'RE NOT HERE TO

[03:00:03]

CITY MANAGER, WE HAVE GOT TO DO A BETTER JOB WITH COMMUNICATING WITH THESE PROPERTY OWNERS.

THEY'VE OWNED THIS LAND. THEY'VE OWNED THESE PROPERTIES FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS. THEY'RE USED TO DOING THINGS THE SAME OLD WAY THAT THEY DID BACK IN THE 80S AND 90S AND SO FORTH. WE ARE IN 2025 AND WE DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY NOW. WE'RE FOLLOWING OUR REGULATIONS AND HOW WE HAVE SET THINGS IN PLACE. WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO TAKE THE BRUNT OF THE HEAT WHEN SOMEONE DOES NOT FOLLOW WHAT WE SET IN PLACE. IT IS THEIR JOB AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO FOLLOW WHAT WE HAVE SET IN PLACE, AND IS THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE WHO THEY CAN RENT TO AND WHO THEY CANNOT RENT TO, AND FOR THEM TO GUIDE THEM. THAT'S NOT PART OF OUR JOB AS, AS AS AN ORGANIZATION. IT'S A COURTESY THAT WE DO AS CUSTOMER SERVICE, BUT ULTIMATELY WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION IN REGARDS TO SOMEONE ELSE'S, YOU KNOW, FLAWED, YOU KNOW, MISTAKE THAT THEY DID NOT COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR TENANTS. SO AGAIN, PLEASE, YOU KNOW, COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR STAFF ON HOW THEY CAN MAKE BETTER CONNECTIONS WITH THESE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE COMING, THAT ARE HERE NOW AND THAT ARE TO COME IN THE FUTURE SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THESE SITUATIONS AND WE'RE NOT PUTTING THESE VERY COMPLICATED DECISION MAKING, YOU KNOW, POSITIONS TO MAKE HARD DECISIONS AND HAVE THE WRONG PEOPLE OR THE RIGHT PEOPLE UPSET OR NOT UPSET WITH US. SO I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE, YOU KNOW, FOR THIS BUSINESS. BUT UNFORTUNATELY, I TOOK AN OATH AND I'M GOING TO HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT. AND IT'S GOING TO BE A NO, THANK YOU. I GUESS I'M NEXT. ALVIN, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. SO YOU CAN SIT. SO MY QUESTIONS ARE FOR JOYCE. SO I THINK WHEN COUNCIL MEMBER ASKED THE QUESTION, YOU SAID THAT IT WAS DE-ANNEXED. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THAT MEANS? YES, SIR. SO BACK IN 2016, A REQUEST WAS MADE OF THE CITY TO REMOVE THIS LAND FROM THE CITY'S TERRITORY. SO THAT BY WHO? BY THE DEVELOPER AT THAT TIME. OKAY. AND WHO WAS THE DEVELOPER ON THIS PROPERTY? IT WAS SIENNA. 325 OKAY. SO I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING ON THAT POINT. SO WE ORIGINALLY WENT IN AND ASKED FOR ANNEXATION OF THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. THAT'S ALL WE ASKED FOR. AND THEN IN DISCUSSIONS IT WAS DECIDED TO ANNEX MORE. BUT ORIGINALLY ALL WE ASKED FOR WAS THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. SO UPON ANNEXATION, THE ENTIRE AREA BECAME SUBJECT TO A STRATEGIC A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. OKAY. AND SO THAT'S WHERE THESE REQUIREMENTS COME FROM IS THE DEVELOPMENT. SO IT USED TO BE UNDER CITY LIMIT. CORRECT. AND THEN NOW IT'S NOT CORRECT OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO IT'S STILL LIMITED PURPOSE AREA. IT'S LIMITED PURPOSE IS WHERE IT WHERE IT GOES INTO RESIDENTS CAN. BUT SO CITY MANAGER I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS FOR YOU.

AND MY CONVERSATION IS REALLY TOWARDS YOU MOVING FORWARD. WHEN YOU PRESENT THESE THINGS, CAN YOU MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE VISUAL? SOMEONE ASKED FOR AN AERIAL SHOT. SOMEONE ASKED FOR THESE THINGS. GETTING SOMEONE TO SHOW IT ON THEIR PHONE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE, SO WE NEED TO HAVE THOSE THINGS IN PLACE. IF WE ARE TRULY THE DECISION MAKERS MAKING THE DECISIONS. NUMBER TWO, I WOULD ASK IF THE STAFF FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OR OR PRE-DEVELOPMENT OR WHEREVER IT IS, IF THEY ACTUALLY HAVE GONE OUT TO THIS PROPERTY OR WHATEVER THE PROPERTY, AND KIND OF SEE IT FOR YOURSELF, BECAUSE I DO NOT BELIEVE BEHIND THIS AS I'VE GONE THROUGH THERE, AT LEAST WHERE I CAN COUNT ON MY BOTH HANDS. THERE IS NO SPACE FOR A PLAYGROUND IN BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS. IT'S NOT EVEN AS BIG AS THE 3400 SQUARE FOOT THAT JUST CAME BEFORE US. THAT

[03:05:01]

BUT TODAY WE TALK ABOUT 20 YEARS, 25 YEARS OF CHALLENGES THAT WE HAD OFF OF SIENNA PARKWAY. IT'S BEEN BUILT AND BUILT AND BUILT, CONTINUE TO BUILD, AND IT'S BEEN ANNEXED BY THE FORMER COUNCIL THAT'S BEEN UP IN HERE. WITHOUT LOOKING INTO WHAT'S HAPPENING. AND THEY KEEP GIVING, AS I CALL IT, KEEP GIVING IT AWAY. AND SIENNA ASSOCIATION AND RIVERSTONE ASSOCIATION ARE THE TWO ASSOCIATIONS THAT ARE TOUGH TO DEAL WITH. WHEN I SAY, WHETHER IT'S BUSINESS OR RESIDENTIAL HOA. BUT OVER HERE YOU HEAR THAT IT'S OKAY FOR THEM ON CERTAIN THINGS, BUT IT'S NOT OKAY WHEN THE CITY GETS INVOLVED IN IT. SO I WOULD SAY FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING IN SIENNA, THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE IN SIENNA, WE DON'T NEED ICE CREAM SHOPS.

AND THIS PEOPLE ARE ASKING FOR REAL BUSINESSES TO COME INTO THESE SHOPPING CENTERS, NOT DAYCARE, NOT INDIVIDUALS. WHAT THEY WANT TO PUT. THE CITIZENS WERE PROMISED A TOWN CENTER. I DON'T SEE IT AND PEOPLE DON'T SEE IT. SO WE NEEDED TO MAKE SURE AT LEAST THE PAST IS THE PAST. AS COUNCIL MEMBER BONNIE SAID, LET'S NOT FORGET THE PAST. I'M NOT ASKING TO FORGET. THE PAST. I'M TALKING ABOUT IS MOVING FORWARD, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ONE THING THAT WE GET OUT OF TALKING ABOUT THE PAST, BECAUSE THE PAST IS ALREADY IN THE BACKWARDS, IN THE. I'M INTERESTED IN TALKING ABOUT THE FUTURE. SO THE SIENNA PARKWAY, SIENNA RANCH ROAD, ALL THIS TRAFFIC, ALL EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE, INTERSECTION LIGHTS, I TECHNOLOGY, YOU KNOW, PUTTING PANELS IN THERE, SIDEWALKS, ALL OF THESE THINGS, SHOPPING CENTERS, ALL OF THESE THINGS HAS TO BE DISCUSSED THROUGH YOUR OFFICE AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND ACM'S MAKING SURE THAT WHEN THIS IS COMING BEFORE US AS MEMBERS OF COUNCIL TO BE VOTED ON, THAT WE HAVE THE TRUE PICTURE. NOT PUTTING A PD FOR THIS AND PD FOR THAT, AND WHICH IS A NON-DISCLOSURE AND THIS AND THAT. WE DON'T NEED THAT KIND OF PACKAGING. WE HAVE OUR RESIDENTS THAT'S HOLDING US ACCOUNTABLE.

AS YOU HEARD IT EARLIER, THEY WANT QUALITY. THEY WANT THEY WANT PRODUCTS. THEY WANT PRODUCTS THAT THEY CAN BE PROUD ABOUT. AND SIENNA IS A GREAT COMMUNITY. BUT IT'S TIME THAT WE GET THINGS THAT WE NEED. THE CITY NEEDS FOR SIENNA TO PUT IT BACK IN THAT OPTIONS, NOT JUST

[03:10:01]

COUNCIL MEMBER. BONNIE, YOU HAVE OR EMERY. I'M SORRY. EMERY, I HEAR YOU KNOW ON THE DISPLAY THAT SOME OF THE STANDARDS ARE OUTDOOR ACTIVITY. SO IS THERE A SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE IN THE ORDINANCE? THERE IS GOVERNED BY THE STATE, THE STATE LICENSING REQUIREMENTS. AND I THINK IT'S LIKE 80FT■!S PER CHILD. BUT IT'S CLEARLY IT'S NOT. IT MATCHES THE STATE LICENSING REQUIREMENT. I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THAT THIS FACILITY MET THAT STANDARD. I, I DON'T HAVE CERTIFICATION ON THAT. IF THEY'RE A CHILD CARE FACILITY THAT'S LICENSED BY THE STATE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE STANDARDS OF THE STATE. I'M TRYING TO GET SOMETHING THAT THAT'S THE MAYOR TALKED ABOUT THAT HE GOES AROUND THE BACK AND HE SAW IT, DIDN'T THINK THERE WAS ENOUGH ROOM FOR AN OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREA. AND SO MY QUESTION WAS, OR IS IF THERE'S NOT THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF, OF OUTDOOR ACTIVITY FOR THIS? CHILD CARE, IT WOULDN'T, IT WOULDN'T BE APPROVED. RIGHT. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY.

IT WOULDN'T BE LICENSED. IT WOULDN'T BE LICENSED. AND WE'RE NOT AT THE LICENSING PART OF THE PROCESS YET. WE DON'T PARTICIPATE IN THEIR THEIR LICENSING PROCESS. OKAY.

JENNIFER I'M SORRY. YOU JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, SO HOW WOULD YOU HOW WOULD THE STATE KNOW HOW MANY KIDS ARE GOING TO BE IN HERE BASED ON. NO, I'M SAYING WE DON'T PARTICIPATE IN THEIR LICENSING REQUIREMENTS. SO IF THEY'VE SUBMITTED, THE QUESTION WAS ASKED WAS NOT WHAT IT IS THAT IF YOU SAID PER CHILD, A CERTAIN SQUARE FOOT IS NEEDED, RIGHT. THAT SHOULD DETERMINE THE OUTSIDE SPACE, CORRECT? CORRECT, CORRECT. SO DO WE LOOK AT THAT? DID WE LOOK AT THAT. WE HAD. NO WE HAVEN'T WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THAT. WHY NOT. BECAUSE I'M CHALLENGING ALL OF YOU SITTING UP HERE AND SITTING DOWN HERE TO DRIVE BY THERE TOMORROW AND TAKE A LOOK AT AND SEE IF THIS SPACE FITS. SO I'M ASKING THEM, WHAT ARE WE PERMITTING IF WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THAT SPACE? SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO NOT AMEND THE DA. SO IT'S NOT IT'S NOT AN ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT, BUT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS NOT TO AMEND THE DA. AND BASED ON THE ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE BASED ON THE CITY'S EXISTING ZONING ORDINANCE. OKAY. I SEE THERE'S A MOTION. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS. MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MOTION. THANK YOU. MY MOTION IS TO REMAIN CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE THAT'S IN PLACE. IS THAT YOUR SECOND SEEING? NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE? LET'S VOTE. MAYOR, QUESTION. CAN YOU CAN YOU CLARIFY JUST FOR WHAT THE CURRENT. WHAT THE CURRENT. OH MY GOSH. I JUST HAD A I HAD A BRAIN

[03:15:04]

MOTION CARRIES 6 TO 1. OKAY. THANK YOU. ITEM NINE A RESOLUTION, A RESOLUTION OF THE

[(a) Consideration and Possible Action - A resolution authorizing the City ...]

THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER. EMERY. YEAH, YOU CAN SEE IT HERE. THE FENCE LINE SEPARATES, YOU KNOW, THEIR DRIVEWAY FROM THE GOLF CART CART PATH. WHAT YOU CAN'T SEE IS THAT COMING FROM HOLE 16 TO 17 WHICH THIS CART PATH GOES TO, THERE ARE TWO EXITS FROM THE 16TH HOLE. SO IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'VE GOT A STRAIGHT LINE FROM THE EXIT OF THE 16TH HOLE. YOU'VE GOT, YOU'VE GOT AN OPTION. YOU COME OUT, YOU CAN COME OUT TWO SEPARATE WAYS, BUT YOU CAN ONLY GET INTO THIS ONE CART PATH. AND THE, THE EXTENDED FENCE LINE DELINEATES WHERE THE CART PATH IS AND WHERE THE. OWNERS DRIVEWAY IS. YOU MIGHT ALSO NOTICE THAT THE IF YOU LOOK OVER THE SOUNDWALL FOR THE PATIO HOMES BACK THERE, HIS. THE EXTENSION IS EVEN WITH THAT. SO YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT'S REALLY A BUDDING OUT AND IS UNSIGHTLY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

IT FOLLOWS THE SAME PROPERTY LINE OR THE SAME LINE. SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU REALLY ISN'T, YOU KNOW. YOU KNOW, OBJECTIVE NOT OBJECTIVE. EXCUSE ME. PEOPLE HAVE OBJECTION TO THE, THE FENCE

[03:20:12]

THANK YOU. WHAT WAS HERE BEFORE THIS FENCE? WAS IT A FENCE? YES, MA'AM. THERE WAS ALREADY AN EXISTING FENCE. IN FACT, IF YOU IF YOU LOOK AT IT, YOU CAN SEE WHERE ELSE. BECAUSE I BRACED IT.

BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IT FELL IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS BECAUSE. BECAUSE IT WASN'T BRACED PROPERLY. AND SO IT, IT EXTENDED ACTUALLY ABOUT TWO FEET FURTHER THAN WHAT THE WHERE THE FENCE IS NOW. IT'S. SO YOU REALLY COULDN'T IT IT WOULD HIDE MORE THAT TELEPHONE POLE.

SO IT EXTENDED BEYOND THAT. AND I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST TOO CLOSE TO THE SEWER THERE. AND ALSO I, I KNEW BECAUSE I HAD SEEN WHERE THEY, WHERE THEY MARKED THE, THE GAS LINES AND SUCH THAT IT WAS GETTING REAL CLOSE TO THAT. SO I BACKED IT OFF. SO IT'S ACTUALLY ANOTHER TWO FEET, YOU KNOW, AWAY FROM THE STREET. OKAY, OKAY. DID YOU GIVE YOU APPROVAL? I'M SORRY. DID YOUR HOA GIVE YOU APPROVAL. NO THEY DIDN'T NO THEY DIDN'T. AND THE THING IS, IS I WAS JUST CAUGHT UNAWARE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I WAS JUST JUST SIMPLY DOING A REBUILD. A PARTIAL REBUILD OF WHAT WAS ALREADY THERE, USING THE SAME MATERIALS AND SUCH. SO IT MAKES SENSE TO ME. THANK YOU SO MUCH, I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. THANK YOU. IF I COULD I TALKED TO THE HOA.

THEY SAID AS LONG AS THE WHEN THE COLORING OF THE FENCE WAS, WAS PUT BACK, IF IT WAS A STAIN, IT WOULDN'T BE AN HOA VIOLATION, A DEED RESTRICTION. AND AS LONG AS IT WAS SIX FOOT SIX IN HEIGHT, IT WOULDN'T BE A VIOLATION EITHER. AND I THINK THE MEASUREMENT IS ANYWHERE FROM SIX 6 TO 6 EIGHT. SO I WOULD HOPE THAT THERE WOULD BE A SOMEWHAT OF A VARIANCE GIVEN. AS FAR AS THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER. I THINK, YOU KNOW, I JUST I SIGNED MYSELF TO MAKE A COMMENT. I THINK I DIDN'T REALIZE HOW THIS HOW GOOD THIS FENCE LOOKS VERSUS THE FACT THAT I DID GO TO THE HOA MEETING. AND I HEAR THERE'S 3 OR 4 PEOPLE THAT DID THIS KNOCKING. I MEAN, WE HAVE BIGGER ISSUES. WE HAVE BIGGER ISSUES IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE GRASSES UP AND YOU HAVE STUFF THAT'S GOING ON WITH, YOU KNOW, NO ONE PRESSURE WASHING THE SIDINGS AND, YOU KNOW, TONS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT. AND IF SOMEONE IS FIXING THEIR FENCE, THEN IT LOOKS LIKE THE WAY IT LOOKS. COME ON. YEAH. AND THE OTHER PIECE AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF IS GOING TO BE LOOKING AT, IS AMENDING THE ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR EXCEPTIONS LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE NEAR A CART PATH, BECAUSE YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO DELINEATE BETWEEN THE CART PATH AND A DRIVEWAY. AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING, WHICH IS WHY I AM REQUESTING THE WAIVER, IS BECAUSE THAT JUST TO ME, THAT MAKES PERFECTLY GOOD SENSE TO BE

[03:25:05]

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER TEN. OUR CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. WE DON'T HAVE ANY.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, SINCE THERE'S NO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION WITH NO FURTHER BUSINESS AND HEARING. NO OBJECTION. TIME IS 10 P.M. THE MEETING

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.