San Angelo City Council 6-20-17 Part 1

[0:00:00] needing to order it is what time Bryan 8:32 if everyone would remember to please turn off their cell phones we're going to start with a prayer and cat ro Walt is going to lead us in prayer today please stand bow your heads please father God we just thank you so much for this opportunity to come together in your name father we thank you for this beautiful day and we ask Oh father we could sure use some rain so if you would bring rain in this direction we would be most appreciative and grateful for it father we thank you for the men and women that you have called to serve our city father we thank you for our first responders and all the men and women that worked to keep us safe every day father we ask that you will guide and direct this meeting today that everything that is said and done will be to your glory Father in Jesus name we pray amen if we could have Keith Manship of Cub Scout come forward and lead us in the Pledge allegiance to the party heightened states of america and to the republic for stands one nation under God

[0:02:04] indivisible with liberty and justice for all [Applause] I would like to have the lake operations crew come forward please the City Council of the city of San Angel hereby recognizes and applauded Lake operations team leader James alley for inspiring and leading his team to make a difference in the community project at Twin Buttes reservoir along with his dedication to embody the very best of what it means to bear the title public servant in witness whereof I haven't to set my hand and have caused the official seal to sit at San Angelo to be affixed this 20th day of June 2017 congratulations James and if you would please go ahead and recognize the rest of your crew and give them a certificate I would appreciate it Oh deonda he's out with surgery sorry

[0:04:13] Hannah I stood in your way Pat lawhon all this Parker David Garcia [Applause] we are now going to recognize cosa dici for receiving the Texas Economic Development councils excellent award was Rowland pinion his group here I'm going to turn it over to Roland and let him talk about why they receive this recognition I'm going to ask our partners who were involved to come up and join us Howard College dr. Cheryl sparks is here with us today she is a president hired College Mike buck with the Contra Belet Workforce Development Board he's a executive director if we have anyone here from Shannon Hospital or community community Medical Center so the Texas Economic Development Council is a trade organization it is a profession of economic development professionals and on the 8th of June we were recognized for our grassroots

[0:06:19] efforts this project recognized by my peers in economic development because of the collaborative effort the teamwork the performance measures and impact that it has on the community in 2015 2015 the healthcare healthcare industry identified to us that we didn't have enough rn's in the industry there were 274 openings at the time and so we knew that healthcare needed to continue to thrive and survive and in order to do that we had to create adequate resources for them skilled nurses and so we applied for a grant with the Texas Workforce Commission Mike buck who led the effort really here in this community to bring all the partners together we rallied and we created startup money of $400,000 so we now needed an institute a program we went to the Board of Nursing Marny de Quinn is very responsible for that for anyone that goes to the Board of Nursing it's no easy task it was a major task to do that we were approved at the time we went there thinking we would have one program and we came back with two programs an associate degree program for RNs and an LPN to RN accelerated program and I want to show you the result of that today so I'm going to ask card college to to bring forth their students this is the first class that will graduate in the next month [Applause] can't see my name

[0:09:36] congratulations [Applause] you two and a half years with the folks for the Texas hunger initiative please come forward the Texas hunger initiative is a collaborative effort both statewide and locally our goal is to end hunger in Texas through policy education research grassroots organizing a community development financial Oh is one of eight Texas cities selected to have a regional office with the dual purpose of promoting child nutrition programs through local outreach and coordination and of working towards the creation of hunger free community coalition's in the communities within our 23 County region and Tom Green County more than one in four families with children had times during the last year when there was not enough money to buy food that is five thousand four hundred households in San Angelo the goal for the Tom Green County and hunger initiative for 2017 is to feed more children during the summer when school is not in session in San Angelo over eight thousand six hundred students receive free or reduced meals

[0:11:39] when school is in session more than sixty percent of all students after school after summer school ends in June local churches ministries organizations businesses and numerous individuals have committed to provide meals in July in August at nine San Angelo neighborhood sites and one site in Carlsbad there now therefore i brenda gunther mayor the city of san angelo on behalf of the city council hereby proclaim july 2017 as kids eat free summer meals initiatives month and financial merged all citizens to support the Nicias initiatives goal for 2017 feed the children our city's future leaders thank you well we are very excited this will be our eighth summer and we do have 10 sites we have still opportunities for volunteers if anyone is interested we have a regional office here as she mentioned in the cactus hotel where he is the regional director and I'm the child hunger outreach specialist and we couldn't do this without all of our volunteers and churches and support through our community and we fed over 12,500 children last summer so July and August is coming up the school district is still doing and send angel and grape Creek till June 30th and I have left some little yellow fliers back on the back table that lists all of our meal sites and the churches participating please share these with your neighbors and friends and churches and appreciate any support y'all can give us [Applause] we are now going into public comments

[0:13:45] issues or items that are not on the agenda may be raised by the public at this time citizens should speak from the podium begin by stating their name and limit remarks to less than three minutes council members may request a discuss item be placed on a future agenda the council takes public comment on all regular agenda items during the discussion of those items do we have any public comment today morning my name is Christina delaio a citizen in the city and I have some large concerns but I know I'm not alone first I'd like to thank you guys because I've been here before but of new faces up there so I thank you for your service we obviously anybody that's on social media has a lot of concern and a lot of emotion and passion about what's going on in the city especially regarding our animals and all the procedures policies everything that happens with those and how it relates to the citizens in the community it takes a village I heard you say that in a previous meeting that I was watching a video back on and it can't be done alone the shelter alone can do it nobody in charge can do it it has to be a joint effort with the community with the shelter with the rescues and I know this has it's been beaten and talked about and nothing has changed and how long is it going to go on how many pets are going to be killed how much outrage is going to be on going on and rumors flying around many that are true some that are and there's so much going on that people start ignoring it and I find that unacceptable the pets deserve better and the communities deserves better with their tax money there is several specific incidents that

[0:15:50] have happened recently and the stories are out there one is misty and there's a lot of news and stories and sides of the stories for that but another one is the outrageous fines and fees that needs to be looked at no one can find that I have talked to and that the studies and search we have done on the city pages we can't find the fees that are all laid out there for the public to see there was an incident lately where two dogs were out of their yard and someone called and by the time the officer arrived dogs were in their yard being held by neighbors but the officer refused to give the owner a chance to comply and laid seven hundred dollars in fines on them for their dogs not having microchips and being in the front yard that is I can't even say what that is it's ridiculous in a meeting mr. Flores the director of the shelter even said that when these signs were laid out they would be given the chance to comply within a certain amount of time their stated incidents where other people have been worked with and have given a chance ten days to comply to the next month to comply and yet this owner was not given an hour to comply without giving those fines it needs to be addressed morning my name is Dylan Meier I'm in mr. Herbert's district and I'm also there talking about animals I was hoping to share this at last week's animal shelter Advisory Council meeting but that meeting was cancelled so to speak so first of all thank you all for serving I know I only have three minutes so here's my story in 2003 there were 29 feral

[0:17:56] cats living in a colony behind a popular restaurant most of these cats were born there and a whole bunch of them were dumped there they were all trapped taken to a vet to be sterilized and immunized and ear notched so they could be identified as having been fixed and then returned to that location this is called TNR Trap Neuter Return TNR every time new cats were dumped there they went through this TNR process and there were a few of them that had them friendly dispositions that were able to be taken off the colony and adopted most of them have just lived out their lights their life there and they kept that restaurants rodent population in check by the way so I helped to provide regular food and water for this colony for many years with my own money because I like cats and because I I don't like seeing any living creatures suffer so by 2013 that's just 10 years later this colony that started with 29 or more cats had dwindled down to four cats that's an eighty eighty five ish percent reduction in the number of wild cats and by last fall that colony was empty because the cats there had been through this TNR process trapped neutered and returned to their their environment this colony did what a properly maintained colony was supposed to do it closed so every single every single neighborhood in st. Angelo has a problem with feral cats living nearby and a lot of people want to be humane and will feed these cats but most people don't bother with trapping them or having them neutered especially these built-in volunteer their built-in volunteer colony caretakers but they need help from the city I think getting resources to for TNR trapping and neutering and releasing according to the American Humane Society this is staggering to cats if left unchecked to reproduce and their offspring continue to breed that's assuming just two litters per year and three kittens per pregnancy those two

[0:19:58] cats become 80 million 80 million cats in just 10 years so in the ten years that I helped care from for my colony behind our restaurant those 29 cats became zero cats using TNR traffic so my question is has nobody what's the nuisance of feral cat infestation why can't send Angelo's Animal Shelter invest more a lot more in TN our work in conjunction with nonprofit rescue organizations and do more to educate the public to train colony caretakers like me instead of just using our tax money to round up and euthanize because thank you oh there was recently euthanize okay however new I won't think I'll for allow is beat misty owner John Strickland and she was euthanized surely after she was taken and I have like multiple pictures of her work she doesn't seem to have life-threatening injuries and writer is a text from eight thirteen that night were like two hours later but that pause st. Robert II is this text never went answer and they say they couldn't find out what was in that building where she was related to the chip that was in her was a file the last interaction that dog had was a file a piece of paper saying they gave her to me but they didn't what I mean I don't know if what we need to do but I mean they killed my dog you know real Larry Santa confirming and finding me was fifty feet away in a falcon that they had from the chief they installed on him and I just want to ask that we can no look at this we need to maybe formulate and promulgate some new policy it's a picture taken or something Donald Oh Phil we take pictures with some of it

[0:21:59] something happens you know that's all I really I just want everybody to realize it we have a problem and we need to do so about it please about that care of the animals you know apparently she was taken about five thirty and I don't know she was dead at eight o'clock or what but we contacted I would say we had somewhere to take care of her and they ever got a hold of us and they killed my dog and I don't know that's all really I gotta say is that we need to try to look at this and try to do something about it please thank you my name is Laura Harper and I really wasn't prepared to speak today but I was asked to read a letter from the people who were fined because they couldn't be here today so this is their voice my name is Andy Markey and I recently received four citations from animal control in regards to our pets escaping into our neighborhood as a member of the community who has advocated and raised money for animal rescue in San Angelo I was aware of the recent law and changing the requirement to have our pets microchipped and I take full responsibility for not having them compliant my intention is not to complain about these laws but to shed light on what happened to us and hopefully be a part of a much-needed change in the process I've served as a member of the board of contra valley pause raised money for critter Shack rescue and Cassie's place there is no excuse for not having them shipped but like most pet owners I had them collared and tagged with our information and didn't think this would happen to us we have our dogs rarely vetted and was never pushed to get them chipped our dogs recently escaped from the backyard into our neighborhood on shamrock Grove we were notified by our neighbor that they were out and we're in the process of getting help from our very close friend and also our neighbor Kelsey Hall to pick them up during this time animal control was called out because our dogs

[0:24:03] had approached a couple walking their own dog the responding officer police officer was in the area and quickly located our dogs and followed them to our front yard as the dogs were trying to get back in while in our front yard the police officer was joined by a total of three different neighbors willing to take possession of our pets when Animal Control arrived they loaded up our senior dogs into the truck parked in our front yard and were prepared to take them to the pound our neighbors pleaded to take position and were not allowed then they pleaded for enough time for me to arrive from work and were treated with disrespect and told they couldn't wait i luckily arrived in time and was given four citations for not complying with city ordinance one per dog for microchip and one per dog about them being loose I took the tickets and they release the dogs during this process the officer who responded was very kind and suggested to animal animal control that we get a warning for the infractions it was our plan to fight the tickets for the dogs being loose as our neighbors had taken possession of them my husband called the city to find out what our options were on the tickets we could not plead we could plead not guilty and appear in court or we could pay $700 fine associated with the citations I was unable to attend the two options for court dates as I was out of state on business and my husband was not allowed to appear on my behalf the amount of the sign alone was pretty shocking we paid it and were surprised to see there were not fix and dismiss options it made us think about those citizens who have made the same mistake we have but didn't have the means to pay such a fine my husband and I think it's important for Animal Control to hold a bit more compassion for well caring vetted pets there's just a tiny bit more go ahead finish please finished we also think that having a local vet take a stronger action and advocating for compliance of the city ordinance would

[0:26:05] help to educate the public and get more pets compliant and lastly the amount of the fines associated with these infractions is ridiculous a fix and dismiss option should be given to the pet owner so that they can be compliant with the ordinance and afford to keep their pet thank you Andy and Geoff Marquis thank you thank you ladies and gentlemen my name is John Russell and I own and operate North Kanto veterinary clinic I'm here today to tell you about an event that I experienced last week on Monday morning a client came in with their dog that had collapsed and passed away suddenly the dog was 2 years old and had been adopted from the animal shelter in August of 2016 and according to the owner had been spayed by the veterinarian that was employed by the city prior to her adoption the owner was understandably distraught and asked if I could determine the cause of death the external exam showed a seemingly healthy female dog with mark memory gland enlargement I found this odd for a spayed female and made note of it then proceeded with the internal exam internal examination did reveal a cause of death as well as a normal uterus and two ovaries you may or may not know but when a female dog or cat is spayed the entire reproductive tract is removed that is the uterus and the ovaries the reproductive tract played no part in the tragic death of this patient but nonetheless I found its presence concerning I hope that this is a unique incident but I feel it important to let you and the citizens of Santangelo know so they can be sure that any pets that they adopted are in fact spayed otherwise these pets will continue to reproduce leading to more unwanted litters additionally as a practitioner of veterinary medicine is important to know the status of pets I'm treating improper information may lead to potentially life-threatening delay in

[0:28:08] diagnosis and treatment I would put before the council that a letter be sent to all adoptees from the time period involved advising them to have their pets examined by a veterinarian to ascertain that the pets are in fact sterilized I would further suggest that the city pick up any cost inferred by the adoptees for these exams and to have this pet spayed if needed thank you for your time and attention thank you my name is Jim blank I'm a retiree and I chose to spend a significant amount of my time and money towards animals personally I'm not involved with any of the rescues but as one individual I have given several thousand dollars in different ways I have personally one way or another adopted over 40 animals out of that shelter I've done it by paying going to the mobile trailer and paying for dogs there I have walked in the shelter and left money with them to pay for dogs I have probably at my house somewhere around 10 that have came out of that shelter personally so to me it's not about the dog that the other stuff that's going on it's about the dogs I have watched the shelter personally I believe slowly deteriorate to the point they have no desire to work with the local rescues and that's really sad because there was a time when people came in there and the rescues were in taking pictures and videos of the dogs and networking them Jennifer makan who I also gave money to raise over ten thousand dollars in just one event and almost emptied the shelter but the the division between this is our shelter and the rescues are interfering with us and balling us has reached the point where I've decided to stand it and say something I think that shelter has the ability to be one of the finest in the

[0:30:11] country but there's got to be a change I believe in management and attitudes of what go what goes on over there if I I'm almost 70 years old if I were going to run that shelter tomorrow I would have every rescue in this country around here in there and we have been talking about when formulate the plan there wouldn't be none of this I you it would be us and that's not going on that's not going on I have heard remarks I have seen things that slowly have reached that point where outsides I'm going to take a stand and I have done that and one of the things that bothers me a lot is that when this contract was sent out the pause and I have nothing bad to say about pause I was told that it was sent to all the rescues and the rescues did not get a letter I have here a letter from San Angelo on their letterhead that states where those contracts went out to not one local person local rescue got that accept pause and pause had a representative on that animal shelter advisory board now that may be okay but it sure doesn't look good it doesn't look good now I think we're all going to be held responsible when we stand before God for the way we treat each other and we treat our animals and I think that shelter out there could be the finest in the country but there's got to be a change it cannot do them versus us can't be thank you very much very much good morning my name is Sharon Hoffman I too intended to speak before the animal advisory board last Thursday even though I took off work and got there the meeting was canceled so I'm going to say what I was going to say to them to you I planned just say I had not been present

[0:32:14] in the recent board meetings but I understand that y'all advisory board are trying to implement mandatory registration of community cats I wanted to ask them what is their objective in this mandatory registration the current ordinance provides four steps for the city or the shelter to follow the person in the city limits is feeding cats but is not practicing trap neuter return if you believe that the responsible caretakers who are currently practicing TNR and doing their very best to spayed neutered vaccinated cats in their neighborhoods are a problem for the city or for the shelter let me correct your assumption these men and women are not only using their funds and their time to travel to transport to vets to stay under vaccinate recover feed provide medical care for and look out for the these cats well-being they're also doing their best to educate their neighbors and their friends about the benefits of TNR and they're sharing their success stories of people all over town we spoke before the city council several months ago about some of the successes that we have seen at our clinic we work with these caretakers daily to provide to provide low-cost sterilizations for cats we see first hand down dedicated they are we offer advice we offer help we offer assistance it's amazing what education advisor websites of information can do to further people's education about Trap Neuter Return if an effort is underway to try to encourage a no or a local concept here then in any kind of research you see that the first two things that must happen are a citywide supported T&R program because the majority of accad majority animals killed at the shelter are cats feral community time whatever and also it was access to a high volume low cost spay neuter program and the last and most important step according to Nathan Winograd is a hard-working compassionate and control shelter director not content to continue killing implementation of a city supported TNR program and a city supported high volume cosplay neuter program is necessary to reduce these cat numbers and to reduce a total number of animals killed here each month we've been working with community

[0:34:17] cat takers for 16 years we started having free clinics in 2001 we work with caretakers on a daily basis we know these people they are not wanting to register with the city they're not wanting to pay a fee to the city they just want to do what they're doing what we need to do is to offer assistance advice education not not signs and not threats many cities such as Garlin of do what I'm asking that y'all consider doing they the city pays for all sterilizations for a tribe major return program and it working has worked amazingly well we would encourage the city of San Angelo to follow Garland's example when we see what city's caretakers and rescue groups who work together can achieve we're encouraged and we believe that a citywide Kieron program is a real possibility thank you thank you very much morning mayor Gunther and City Council I'm Kristen Stanley I too did not have the opportunity to speak at the Animal Services Committee meeting last week so I'd like to read what I was going to say last week I'd like to address the issue of mandatory registration of community cat colonies that has been pushed by the ASAC for the last few months implementing mandatory registration would result in fewer cats being spayed neutered and vaccinated which are the very goals of TNR Trap Neuter Return mandatory registration of colony cats would only penalize those of us who have opened our hearts and wallets to care for community cats and we are the core of an effective TNR program managed sterilized colonies are small fraction of the total number of our community cats mandatory registration would fail to address the unaltered free roaming community cats found in every neighborhood that do not live in colonies today DNR programs have evolved which operate on an unprecedented scale in Albuquerque New Mexico a community cats project administered by best friends included TNR of thousands of free roaming cats a year for three years cat intake at the local shelter dropped

[0:36:21] by 83% new forms of TNR have also been developed like returned a field in which healthy free-roaming cats administer admitted to shelters are fixed and returned to their locations rather than being admitted and euthanized Garland Texas has a sponsoring model ordinance similar to our ordinance colony caretakers register with the sponsoring organization possibilities not with the city of Garland registration is not mandatory there's no fee and possibilities the sponsoring organization keeps the colony locations confidential Brenda Jackson a volunteer with possibilities and the TNR coordinator states in an email we have over a hundred and seventy registered colonies there is no fee or application and garland is unique in that the city of Garland pays for all TN our sterilizations El Paso Texas is experiencing a lot of success at curtailing the overpopulation of community cats esti Molina the Community Programs manager for the city of El Paso writes in an email we hired a community cat coordinator a PR rep additional veterinary staff animal control officers stopped picking up cats and less injured and started canvassing to community in order to educate the public on the benefits of TN our rather than issuing citations our updated ordinance permits free roaming community cats and does not require caretaker registration miss Molina goes on it has been proven over and over again that requiring caretakers to register will reduce those willing to care for our community cat colonies legislative schemes such as mandatory registration which over-regulate DNR have the potential of stifling this kind of success and innovation best friends and PetSmart Charities award TN our grants to cities that have innovative TNR practices such as Albuquerque New Mexico El Paso and Garland Texas best friends also has taken the position against mandatory registration the city of San Angelo must not place more restrictions on TN are such as mandatory registration now is the time for our

[0:38:24] city to look toward other cities for progressive innovative TNR programs now is the time for our city shelter to lead the community in adopting TNR thank you thank you for the comment good morning counselor and Kramer superintendent fleet services just wanted to remind our public that we have a surplus vehicle and equipment auction that's active right now it is available for bidding up until June 27th so please look into that if anyone is interested we have one more viewing date physical viewing date and that is this Friday so we would encourage anyone to schedule an appointment to do that that can be found on the website of Renee Bates calm or you can call our office and we can give you more information at 6 5 7 4 3 2 9 thank you I just want to point out that Animal Services Committee meeting did not make because of lack of quorum I just want to make sure that everybody interested it may for the comment on any issues okay we will now move into the consent agenda Lane do you have anything you want to pull from the consent agenda I have nothing to pull but I do have a comment that goes along the line with all of the discussion we've had this morning one thing that comes next to messing with a person's children is nothing with their pets so I'd like to put on for future a discussion for a thorough look at all of our policy and procedures involving our Animal Services and our fees along with the animal shelter I see excuse me I like to pull item date please carry nothing to pull mommy nothing to pull Tommy remember okay

[0:40:38] just an announcement sharp farmer is ill today and that's the reason she is not here today playing you want to discuss or know Lucy or discuss isn't much going to here I more or less morning to know what this was about what did it Intel Carl are you here yeah we need we need to go ahead and pass the rest of the consent agenda person well we're going to take a break here and change the agenda and say the following do I have a motion to approve the rest of the items on the consent agenda we move hollenberg all in favor aye that's a 6-0 okay now Carl would you like to talk about item D yes mr. Wayne nickel has been running his business council cruises at Lake Nan's were there for several years we recently renewed his agreement I think about a year year and a half ago and he has wanted to sell that operation Debbie Albert is the agent that's working that cell they found potential new owners and we can't assign that agreement without City Council's authorization that's why we're bringing - okay I'm going to change owners second thank you any further discussion on item D we'll move to vote all in favor of approving item D I encourage any opposed motion passes we'll move into the regular agenda John James if you want to come forward it'll be the first reading a public hearing for case z170 v an ordinance approving a request for a rezoning from the

[0:42:42] single-family residential rs1 zoning district to the office commercial zoning district located at 1920 South Johnson Street on point for 31 acres thank you john james director Planning development services this is a rezoning as you mentioned from single-family residential to office you can see the location there on the map on Johnson this is it's basically surrounded by the ASU campus the future land use of course for this entire area is campus institutional but the zoning you can see for the area is single-family it's not uncommon for schools and in this case the University to be zoned part of the larger residential neighborhood surrounding but this particular use is no longer allowed within the residential district and so the church we considered a church use it's a student center for religious activities on campus although technically it's it's owned by the church not the university so it's not strictly on campus but the rezoning from the single-family to the office commercial will allow this use to continue legally I will no longer be a non-conforming use and this will allow them to pursue some expansion on the property that they foresee in the near future a rationale for approval again it is campus institutional for the land use designation the use serves the campus and so it just makes sense residential zoning these previously were residential Lots as you can see on the map they were carved up to be developed residential II but but they weren't developed that way and we see no negative impacts we did send out our notifications to the surrounding property owner most of which it is the university

[0:44:44] itself and did not receive any responses in favor or in opposition so what is before you is the rezoning staff does recommend approval as did the Planning Commission unanimously you have to answer any questions I have any questions from Council just one John we're going is it is it normal to go on this type of situation from from the residential to the commercial offices that I guess the the best practice is to do that yes that's the it's a relatively low intensity district that will allow the church use it could you know in the future could allow some office type uses but it wouldn't open it up to more intensive top retail commercial largely if if this use ever went away to go to something else that was going to be met you answered the question and so it's going to keep it at a at a fairly low intensity should the religious activities ever cease to exist there correctly how that office commercial district is is limited to lotta retail and office type uses need for the comment I have a motion to approve move to approve has presented any public comment all in favor say aye aye any opposed passes 6 0 item B first reading and public hearing for case Z 1 704 and the ordinance approving a request for a rezoning from single-family residence zoning district to manufactured housing subdivision located at 20 101 mark Street John thank you again John James Director of Planning and Development Services this is a request from rezoning from single-family to mobile home or

[0:46:50] manufactured home subdivision the location of the corner of marks and 21st Street future land-use map does show this as a neighborhood much of all of the surrounding area in fact is some form of residential development the current property as well as most of the surrounding property is single-family residential zoning you can see there is right across the street a small area a couple of lots of multi-family residential RM one which is the low intensity multi-family could allow things like duplexes or something like that this is the property you can see a mobile home existing on the property so there is a mobile home on the property that is legal non-conforming meaning that it's no longer allowed on the property but the existing use can continue basically grandfathered for as long as it sits there if that is removed under the current zoning on the property a new manufactured home could not be placed onto the property any new home built under the current zoning would have to be a single-family on-site built home or a modular home on the property it's just looking at the surrounding area looking across the street and down march Street and then just this is sort of backing up to that property the property in question is kind of back behind these homes but this is just showing about a block away as a strip of two or three brand new site built homes in the neighborhood our analysis we looked at compatibility with plans and policies the manufactured home subdivision zoning was changed in the year 2000 before that a manufactured home like this could seek council approval as an individual case-by-case review should a manufactured home be

[0:48:54] allowed in the middle of a single-family neighborhood in 2000 the council chose to change the ordinance to say that moving forward manufactured homes should only be allowed within a mobile home park or a manufactured home subdivision in other words an individual manufactured home shouldn't be placed in the middle of a single-family neighborhood but should be part of an overall larger scale development of manufactured homes so in that respect we don't believe this is consistent with the current zoning ordinance given that direction in that ordinance we also don't believe that it's compatible with the surrounding area again the policy direction in the ordinance that we currently have is that manufactured homes should be in their designated areas outside of single-family neighborhoods I just mentioned this to change conditions in 2000s when that ordinance was changed newer homes in the area have been built and so there is a pattern in the area of where either vacant lots or tear downs and reconstructions have occurred with new single-family homes on site you know site built single-family homes and again the development pattern in the area largely is on site stick-built single-family homes this is just a brief overview of the difference between what's a modular home manufactured home and a mobile home modular homes as you know we recently amended the ordinance to make some changes into what modular homes where they can be basically modular home can go anywhere a single-family home is allowed and largely that's because it's built to the International Building Code vs. manufactured homes are built to the HUD code which is a federal requirement which is a different standard for construction and slightly lower standard for quality of construction that's not

[0:50:58] to say that these homes aren't well built it's just a different level of standard that they have to meet mobile home is what we call any manufactured home built before 1977 and at that time is when HUD adopted a federal standard that applies throughout the country for manufactured homes and so anything built before that there was a hodgepodge of standards and so if you think of those older homes those may not have been built to a higher quality standard versus modern-day manufactured homes are built to a higher standard this is just the immediate vicinity you can see in green are the houses the new houses that have been built since 2011 and also in yellow are existing mobile or manufactured homes within the neighborhood so those three yellow show existing manufactured homes that are also legal non-conforming if those go away they would have to be replaced in this neighborhood with a on site built single-family home or a modular home I wanted to zoom a little more to show you the larger area basically showing the same thing but one of the reasons we wanted to zoom out a little more is to show this orange mobile home or manufactured home subdivision that is located relatively nearby it's it's a little ways away you can see the subject property is right here and also the yellow shows other existing non-conforming mobile homes pink those show the special permit mobile homes as I mentioned before 2000 the council could approve a special permit for an individual property to place a manufactured home on that property so all those in pink were those approvals all of those in this area occurred between 1976 and 1984 there's one blue that that was a special permit rather

[0:53:02] than just give them a permit indefinitely that permit actually had an expiration date and that one expired in nineteen 85 we did send out dawn can be let's go back one slide sure it's just for clarification yeah all of these in the yellow and pink and then one individual in blue if those homes should should go away they would not be allowed to have a mobile or manufacturing home on that particular property for the ordinance is that correct well for the yellow and blue for the pink they do have a permit to permit a mobile home on that property and check with Rebecca but I believe that those special permits allow them to replace those homes so those were an indefinite approval for a manufactured home on that property if those go away they can be replaced that me sounds a little inconsistent on how how we we moving forward I mean this neighborhood or this area that we've got shown on the map have a number of those those special permitted spots where there are a number of other ones that are not the yellow and of course the one we're talking about this morning so I think whatever decision this council makes today we need to go back and revisit how we how we do the manufacture mobile homes whatever the case may be sure and just just to follow up on that a bit I think that's the thought the council had in 2000 and when they looked at it at that time they said no let's let's get away from approving these individually let's just go back to strict straight zoning that says in these areas you have manufactured homes in these areas you have mobile homes and and the two shouldn't mix and that's you know there's no magic in that that's not the

[0:55:06] way we have to do it as a city but that's the way in the past our current ordinance has been written is to basically separate those two types of uses but with the exception of allowing those that had already gotten those special permits to continue in definitely you see do you have a comment yes I want to know James I need to ask you so what do we need to do do we need to go back and do a case by case to where we can give this constituent a special permit to move in this modular home since he has been living there what he was asked to replace to his 1959 mobile home with it that's what he's wanting to do he's worn into a place in 1959 mobile home with a new 130,000 had certified manufacture home which really to me and the way I see it is I know that he got grandfather did I know that you know y'all did all this but now 17 years later I want to see it be spected can be approved a special use so that he can update where he lives for the new modular home and I've seen pictures of it and it's really nice and I don't think that we have gotten any people saying that they didn't want this and I also understand that we want we don't want to keep making that residential area into a mobile home also that's why I'm asking if we possibly could do a special permit and do it from now on to the case-by-case what people may bring before us and we can say yes you can do this versus no absolutely not yeah and in just a second I'll get to a slide that talks about some options and one of those options is asking staff to come back with with some changes to the ordinance do you know if we've denied any requests saying the past five seven

[0:57:10] years to put in a mobile home in this area and we do not you know what I'm looking at is consistency here I'm not always since I've been here we've not had one of these come up I will say that we've had we get a number of requests so while this is fairly unique we do get questions two or three a month of people wanting to place a manufactured home in a neighborhood where they're not allowed and generally when we tell that they say well okay it's it's not worth the hassle I'll either find someplace else or build a site built home but okay it sounds like we have not had any within that last few years again this is a fairly onerous process we understand to go through to get approval for something like this and I don't say that to disparage the process I say that that the council purposefully put in this process at the time to discourage manufactured homes in neighborhoods like this and if happened back to miss Gonzalez question if if that's something you no longer think is the appropriate ordinance for the community then we can definitely go back and look at options including case-by-case review or more broadly allowing manufactured homes in neighborhoods similar to how we just recently changed the ordinance for modular homes yellow and pink are mobile homes not manufactured homes well that's mobile not necessarily we in some ways we use that term interchangeably but these on this on your previous slide you show the difference between mobile homes and manufactured homes right the ideas are no so are these non-conforming I would guess that most of them given the age of the neighborhood are mobile homes yes the pink are all mobile homes because those were those old special permits from the 70s and 80s but some of the yellow could be newer homes but they would have been before 2000 because that's when the ordinance changed mobile

[0:59:14] home not manufactured home the majority of them are likely mobile homes correct there doesn't have a specific we don't know for sure because when you looked at a slide that specifically talked about the difference between manufactured and mobile so when we look at this slide we need to know that this slides information ties back into the slide that said mobile versus manufactured because there's differences right and for this slide we surveyed the neighborhood to see if there was a manufactured or mobile home on the property we didn't for each of those homes we did not go back and find out the age of the home when it was permitted to know whether it was a mobile or manufactured home so John the mobile versus manufacturer really has to do with the age of that particular unit is that correct when the unit was constructed so in some sense yes the age because of a mobile home technically hasn't been constructed since 1977 okay so that we get clarification right I mean I think I think if we were talking about a modular home we would not be having this lot of discussion because a modular home based on what we've learned and what the council did is back in April or May is something that's built to stouter requirements in the bottom line is it can be placed in any RS 1 or RS 2 with with a few qualifications is that correct Rick all right so difference between the manufacturing and modular simply has to do with the way it was constructed correct and the standard yet the standards to which it had to meet meet at that time we did send out our notifications to the surrounding properties we did not receive any responses in favor or in opposition and so here really the options before you if you believe that manufactured homes are inappropriate for

[1:01:16] single-family neighborhoods similar to what the council adopted in 2000 then you would simply deny this request and keep the ordinance as is and move on if you believe this manufactured is how homo is okay at this location and also meets that general purpose of the current ordinance you would just approve this request and we'd be done on the other hand if you believe that manufactured homes should generally be allowed in single-family neighborhoods then what we would ask is that you approve this request but then direct staff to go back and revisit the manufactured home regulations and we would come back to you at a future date with some recommendations if if that's your option we'd like a little bit of feedback on whether you would prefer case-by-case review or more generally opening up neighborhoods to manufactured homes in general but again that would largely be a discussion for another day we would just seek that direction to come back in the future it's brought before the Planning Commission this item was brought before the Planning Commission they did not have they had very little if any discussion on this option because at the time they believed that this was the appropriate response they recommended denial of the request now I will say they didn't believe it was their job to question the council's direction in terms of the ordinance so I I wouldn't go so far to say that they believed that manufactured homes shouldn't necessarily be allowed in in all single-family neighborhoods they thought that was more of a question for this council rather than themselves so what is before you is a rezoning for this one property from single-family residential to manufactured home subdivision staff did recommend denial based on the previous policies of the council and the Planning Commission also recommended denial though it was a 4-2 vote I will note that a supermajority is

[1:03:19] required any time the Planning Commission recommends denial of a case it triggers a supermajority vote of the council that supermajority is of the entire Council which would be six of seven even though there are only six of you here it does we still require six votes to approve you go back to the previous screen please right I would move that we look at it as far as ask you to go back and look at the changes for the ordinance to be a case-by-case situation that we can we could be told ahead of time what is going to be moving into that residence this gentleman that is wanting to upgrade as soon as a UNAM veteran he's 100% disabled I think that our community we have always gone that to do our best to help these veterans out and I believe now is the time to help him in my district and do this the guys never lived anywhere else and I know that 17 years ago we could couldn't change the fact that he had this mobile home now he's updating mr. Breen has been helping him out he has taken interest in him and I find that to be great for this gentleman I want to do what we can as it help this man out and that's I'm asking if we could possibly go back and look at the changes of the ordinance to either single-family neighborhood either by right or case-by-case I agree with Lucy I view this as a case-by-case no I don't

[1:05:29] want to see and set the precedence of having a single-family home going to manufactured but this has been been a manufactured / mobile home before so going back with a newer improved one would be an improvement essentially in this district in that neighborhood so I need to go back and look at for a special case by case that way it doesn't set a precedent citywide but to approve this to allow him to upgrade from what he has now to a newer better build manufacture home further commenting do you think that this I'm sorry do you think that this is going this wouldn't have anything to do with decreasing the property value in the surrounding area do you think knowing given the the home that he's proposed and the you know the values in the surrounding area I wouldn't think that this would devalue surrounding properties this will be put on the foundation it does not have to be that's one of the differences between manufactured homes and site-built homes so we don't we don't currently have requirements for that just a question out of curiosity on my part on did did was there any discussion as to the amount of money to be spent and why it would be spent on this and not to build the you call it as you call it the stick home foundation subject international building code standards and said did what did any of that come out there hasn't been at the Planning Commission level there wasn't much discussion of that aspect of it although either the applicant or a representative the applicant is here today and they may be able to answer that question why they chose that that route yes I would ask their similar questions I mean we just did the modular thing at $130,000 extra at home is a lot of money I suspect that

[1:07:36] there are some many modular homes out there that you can get for that particular amount so I guess I'd have to ask that question we know how big this particular unit is that is being proposed but not off the top of my head but yes the applicant can can address that they we we have that information or they have that information I believe this manufactured home is okay at this location and meets the purpose of the zoning ordinance any further comment well as we sit and look at this I mean council went through and they made ordinances and I think when you sit back and we look at the overall picture we make an ordinance for a population not for a specific person okay and I wonder if we've denied any people that have also wanted to do something similar that it doesn't show any consistency or maybe we have maybe we have it so we don't know if we've been consistent or not consistent which is a concern there now I do agree with you the one special this gentleman special condition and where he's lived is a huge thing in here Marek but I just kind of sit on the air and I wonder you know what we open ourselves up to in the future I mean we've said this we want to be consistent we've made this for a population in the community not for one specific place I just think we need to keep that in mind as we move forward but I do understand the unique situation with this one person that's just it it's unique and that's why I think that when we look at things you need to look at our case-by-case situation that would prevent having a single-family home being torn down to put a modular home or a manufactured home in that spot if it's owned for a single-family resident and it's going to be considered that but because this has been a manufactured home already in one of that in 1959 was

[1:09:42] that when this was built you can you can consider this an upgrade appearance-wise and potentially appraisal eyes I drove around last night and looked at the surrounding properties as well as the block that the home sits on and I truly believe that this $130,000 modular home manufactured home would increase the value of surrounding properties at this point in time I don't believe it I think it's very difficult to collect to create an ordinance that applies to all single-family neighborhoods because all neighborhoods and surrounding areas are not the same the case-by-case also would give the council the opportunity to consider all those things we've talked about the surrounding neighborhood what has taken place in the past five years but also over the past 50 years so I am leaning toward option number three myself just because I think we need I think we need that opportunity to have a little more input into the process because there could be some cases that they're just totally not appropriate in like this one that are appropriate Tommy you're suggesting that we approve this request and then that we direct staff to look at appropriate changes to the ordinance down the road that's my songwriter okay do you want to make a motion of that I'm mayor oh so I can we actually have that exact motion from thanks member Gonzales and I'm not Carter so we will need a second thing and you got it 90 second dude and then we need a comment let me

[1:11:46] make one point along those lines the one of the benefits of the case-by-case is that you could place conditions on those approvals with dis rezoning although this particular applicant has a particular home in mind you're simply by approving this you're approving manufactured home zoning on this property there's no guarantee that they wouldn't couldn't put a different home smaller home less expensive home so I know they've got pictures of the home in question and we know the value is one hundred thirty thousand this action does not guarantee any of that it's simply rezoning the property for any manufactured home that they would want to put on there what do we need are you saying that we need to put some stipulations on this specifically well today with straight zoning you're not allowed to play stipulations and so that would be the benefit of in the future changing the ordinance for an individualist review that could allow for conditions so John is my understanding then that the individual has not purchased this home yet my understanding was that they have but I think the applicant can speak to that better than I can that was my understanding of what they said at the Planning Commission meeting but I may have heard that incorrectly I guess I what I'm trying to say is this if they haven't purchased it maybe they ought to look at the modular situation which already fits in our ordinance and that's something that the applicant I'm sure can answer we have any further public comment on this issue good morning I just have I've been listening to all this and coming and going and we certainly everything please do what nothing your name please oh my name is Armando luscus and I am one of the past presidents of the Contra

[1:13:48] valley Vietnam veterans and our motto stands for what we are we're together in war and went out together in peace and so we went as individuals and came back his brother so we're going to do everything we can for any one of our veteran brothers that's just the way we are but if this just kind of reminds me the gentleman over here Tom also said something about we need to look at what this is going to lead to us in the future once before I've heard this from the City Council and that's when we wanted the Vietnam veteran memorial to be placed or we were going to build it at the sunken gardens run across the bridge where the our only peel wmia lewis barge owns that bridge was dedicated to him and that word was said and then it broke out into well look at the kind of people we're going to have downtown looking at this meaning us you were kind of scag lee at that time we had some of us had beards long hair whatever in peace signs everywhere but look at the people that are going to be hanging around there do we want this and we've got voted down we're going to vote it down twice eventually the city gave us that little property right out right at the interests of the airport that's where our memorials stands it shouldn't have to have been out there but that's fine we're grateful and we're grateful for what you have done for us we're grateful for the American people what they finally have accepted us not as a stepchild but if somebody that thought for our country whether we liked it or not we've come a long ways and because of love

[1:15:53] what we have done for each other and our benefits and all the new veterans now coming home have all these benefits that took us so long to get including when they come home some said you stay focused on this conversation please on the manufacturer at home okay she's not a broader scale this conversation the question was asked did it has he bought the house yes he won't sit home he's ready to go he lives in a little trailer house I mean it's more of a camper he added a little room to make it into a living room this is what he's got all this time and now he wants to make something nice his benefits has finally come in after all these years he's gotten a hundred percent disabled and he's had several surgeries and he wants to make it right so we are asking you to just consider the the fight that this man has gone through and what he wants to do he wants to make something beautiful that is not in you know any kind of each others thank you thank you thank you for your service and thank you for all a fill in the audience for your service hey I'm till I can pass it out I'm gonna need some help up here oh well let's leave that use these I'm a photographer not an audio-visual guy um I need to tell you on good morning mayor and

[1:17:56] council my name is Jim Beam I'm very proud of San Angelo it's my hometown and I'm going to take a little break from Mike and presentation remind you to ask me any questions you want at the end of this this is a very fragmented project there's a lot of different value aspects has a lot of different issues with definitions if you haven't researched it thoroughly it won't make a lot of sense and it can be distracting so meanwhile back to my presentation we have the opportunity to talk to someone that has moved to San Angelo or visit San Angelo perhaps is retired in San Angelo they all say the same thing you heard it here's what they say they say the people here are friendly most importantly they say everyone is helpful you've heard that except for four years serving in the United States Navy Otis Woodson lived his entire life at the same address on mark Street in 21st in North San Angelo mr. wood fent is a hundred percent disabled veteran he's living in a 1959 era mobile home we've already discussed 130,000 budge certified manufactured home that's a definition that's important later if you have some questions he wants to replace his current dwelling if council were to approve this request there would be no problems with the neighborhood or the city as a matter of fact to the best of my knowledge 100% of the neighbors there 100% of the landowners are in a hundred percent agreement this process these are

[1:20:02] some signed affidavits from the property owners I'm going to read one to you - OH Garcia am the sole owner of the following property - zero to two marks I welcome the owner of the property at two one zero one mark Street here in San Angelo to locate a manufactured home on his property I want the San Angelo Planning Department the San Angelo Planning Commission and the San Angelo City Council to know that I am in total agreement with this project let me share a few similar facts that are in the overall plan of San Angelo the purpose and final result of this request is consistent with the plans and policies put forth by our City Council mr. Woodson is upgrading an existing family residence to a much more modern more safe and more aesthetically pleasing structure this upgrade will enhance the visible impact the curb appeal of the existing neighborhood that's when you're supposed to look at that picture 17 years ago and that's important technology is advanced things have changed times have changed definitions have changed or should be changed seventeen years ago the ordinance were modified and no longer allow a very common thing it was called remove and replace those were options for homeowners also - my understanding is that they also remove council's ability to offer an option of variants according to our planning department and that's how this began mr. wood fins only option is for Council to

[1:22:05] approve this simple small-scale zone change that will accommodate the needs of our city the neighborhood and the property owner a failure of our ordinances is not your failure technology moves far faster than the most progressive city government any or three minutes is up can you wrap it up yes I'll just disarray it up here then John Jones James scuse me have been calling Jones for two I'm sorry John John James our planning director has several good ideas for addressing similar future needs to allow manufactured homes within certain specific neighborhoods here in San Angelo I suggest that you offer him the opportunity to research other cities approaches and basically cut to the end I'm asking you to vote for this and I'm asking the person that makes the motion to also suggest to other council members to vote unanimously to approve this reinforcing our city's reputation of supporting our citizens neighborhoods and especially supporting our veterans questions any further questions thank you make it real quick comment especially since the mando was here I'm also vietnam-era veteran disabled not a hundred percent like this gentleman is out here so I feel for what what he's going through right now we've got to make a decision that will allow him to stay on that property upgrade that neighborhood but in the same token we've got to do it in such a way that we don't make this automatic to every place in the community and I run through these images right quickly there's only ten or eleven okay that's the an interior

[1:24:08] another interior this is an upscale property there are no issues of code there we go pretty nice place this is the person across the street that has a variance or the variable prop zoning that 100% azeema Soto supports this here are the neighborhoods across the street not going to spend all day some commercial you see you know where this turns off 14 years familiar with that there are the rent properties that we're talking about new construction thank you for the opportunity thank you very much for the public comment please good morning my name is Tom bride yes and we know this gentleman he's been there since 1959 that's his only home he's ever had and he'll probably die there he could go to the orange area up there where all the trailer houses are already but I think he feels like he's been sent from his home to the reservation why does he want a manufactured home like this maybe it's the first time in his life that he could actually have something when he dies that he could give his family and they think they could take it and put it wherever they want to maybe that's one of the people in the orange area have mobile homes should areas happen that they can't stay here or need to move that they could and we have to go to the hassle of trying to sell a home as the market is kind of sorry right now for doing that if you look at that house he molded it's clean the the law is not up to your eyeballs and weeds or anything else he takes care of that he takes care of his neighbor's so it's it's just an idea for us that he wants something nice

[1:26:12] and he wants to share it thank you very much thank you for the comment hello my name is merely Sneed and of course I'm asking you to approve this request first of all I'd like to say I'm very impressed with the discussion of the council you've really raised some good issues one of the questions was why he wants us manufactured home versus a modular home this man is a hundred percent disabled he suffers from tremendous post-traumatic stress my husband works with him and they're going to combat that counseling he does not want the hassle of having to move somewhere or stay somewhere why a modular home is being set up 100% disabled all he wants to be able to do is get the old home moved out moving the new one when all this started I asked him why are you going to do this just put in a modular home and he explained why and I said well why don't you just move out of the city he said no he loves San Angelo and this is important it's two Lots but it is land and on his father's deathbed he asked mr. Winfred to take care of his property did you speak into the mic okay did you hear that I was just bad his father asked him to please take care of his property it is his family's legacy and he is very proud of it thank you good morning my name is Susie Soto I own the property immediately across the

[1:28:19] street to the east from the property you are discussing today my property is thank you my property is owned one multi-family residence and it's among the nicest more upscale properties within this neighborhood I am a hundred percent in favor of this zone change it is a good thing for our neighborhood please vote to allow this man to bring his new home into our neighborhood our area needs these upgrades and welcomes this example of safe and affordable house thank you thank you very much for the comment though for the comment we will take a vote and I understand that we need a 6-0 vote in order for it to pass the motion that has been presented is that we approve this manufactured home to be put on mr. Whitfield's property and that at the same point time we ask that the Planning Department relook at this ordinance and address some changes in the ordinance moving forward all in favor say yes hi any opposed motion passes [Applause] all right we moved two items see first reading public hearing for case z1 703 an ordinance approving a request for a rezoning from the general commercial heavy commercial CG ch zoning district to the heavy commercial CH zoning district located at 1604 South Bryant

[1:30:21] Boulevard John James you're on mr. John or mr. James it could supersede fewer things there Jones house I might be mister gentleman for all we know thank you to the right presentation again I'm John James director planning developers this is a request for rezoning from CGC H which is a combination district of general and heavy commercial to straight heavy commercial zoning at the corner of Bryant and Avenue L and you can see here the general location on the map the designated future land use in our comprehensive plan is for commercial in this area you can see neighborhood center and neighborhood which are lower intensity zoning districts but then are not zoning but future land use designations but then the this larger area is largely commercial designation part of why that's relevant as you can see here there's lot manufacturing zoning as well as the the general and heavy commercial zoning the idea in the adopted comprehensive plan is that this area has developed over time as commercial not heavy commercial or lot manufacturing and so the more appropriate zoning long term is for this to be the commercial zoning this is just the general area as I mentioned the uses in the area largely have been general commercial in nature you can see here is the sign for the existing business on the subject property and again just looking up and down the street hotels restaurants commercial activity and so I just wanted to give a brief comparison of the cgc H zoning which is the current zoning and the heavy commercial that's being requested the retail sales and service some of that would not be

[1:32:23] allowed in the heavy commercial zoning so if we were to zoom the whole area heavy commercial much of what's there now would no longer be allowed in the proposed zoning these are all uses that are not currently allowed or at least not without a special approval but that would now become allowed if we resume this property to heavy commercial so then the summary of that is the heavy commercial zoning allows a more intensive heavier type of use on the property that generally don't exist in this area and would be creating basically an island of heavy commercial in an area that we don't believe is appropriate for heavy commercial zoning the best the primary reason for this is not to do heavy commercial activity on the property the primary reason is that in the past the council has adopted a policy that billboard signs only be located in the areas shown on the corridor shown in red on this map or in heavy commercial and industrial areas the idea was that the the clutter of signs and billboards should not be as pervasive outside of these primary highway corridors or in industrial and heavy commercial areas again we don't believe this is a heavy commercial area regardless of the zoning and so based on that prior council direction in terms of our Sun ordinance again at least similar to the previous case a previous council has determined this particular area to be inappropriate for billboards and so what they're asking for is a rezoning specifically to allow a billboard on this property again I'm not going to read through all these that's in your staff report but I basically just summarized our rationale for why we recommend a denial of this rezoning we don't believe it's

[1:34:26] appropriate to rezone a single property to a different zoning district number one simply for the purpose of a sign and number two something that's inconsistent with the existing uses in the surrounding area we did send out our notifications did not receive any responses and so what comes to you is a recommendation from staff for either denial or approval of general commercial instead the Planning Commission did vote to approve however it was a 42 vote you happy to answer any questions into this is in my area what I'd like to say is is I believe that denial of this particular application is probably appropriate I don't want to see more signs in that particular area so I would move to deny this I second that motion one question that I think of yesterday when you and I spoke John if we did even rezone this for appropriate for the sign wouldn't that clearly conflict with the sign ordinance anyways so you would have to go through two different motions to amend that well based on that map where you saw right there remember though that the sign ordinance says in any commercial district you can have a billboard in these red corridors but if you're in heavy commercial or industrial you can have a billboard also the idea was in general commercial areas the policy is signs should only be allowed in these red areas but if you get into a heavier commercial and industrial type area then billboards may be appropriate in those areas as well so if you rezone this heavy commercial under the sound ordinance then it becomes appropriate for a building and one thing I didn't say is if you think that a billboard is appropriate in this location the our preference would be for you to look at

[1:36:31] modifying the sound ordinance to make that change in this is an area where billboards are okay rather than sort of a backdoor approach by zoning at a district we think is incompatible I do not support changing the zoning for this I don't believe it should be a CH I believe that it opens up the door to many other issues some that were addressed a couple years ago and I don't want to open that door again so I would not be in support of changing to CH mayor I agree with you all right any further questions comments public comment good morning mayor council Russell with skg engineering if you look and dive deeper into the zoning ordinance what's allowed there we're not bringing in a heavy commercial zoning it already exists on the property the CGC a zoning allows having commercial property if if you read through the the use table of the zoning ordinance it talks about manufacturing and production light and it has a little hash mark there and it says see other categories you flip over to the other categories and what it says that's allowed in this CGC a zoning is food and beverage processing drug processing tobacco manufacturer building material processing light metal fabrication so there is the opportunity and under this CGC a zoning for some heavy activity to take place so what

[1:38:34] we're asking for actually is to go to the CH owning one which would now prohibit all of this stuff that I just read to you and allow for the Billboard to be placed there I don't know if we can go back if I I don't know if I'm qualified to operate this but maybe go back to the map this map here as John mr. Jones James spoke about so if if we were in the light manufacturing district we could place the billboard at this location you know the other map where the red lines go you can have them as he said irregardless of the zoning district but but within in areas outside of those red lines you have to have this specific zoning so across the street is the light manufacturing zoning and there's a billboard there across Bryan across Avenue L it's the light manufacturing zoning and there's a billboard over there so this area fits you have because this is on a textile corridor you have to go to textile and get a permit from them and in this location is the really the only location in this area that meets the textile separation so so this property because of its location fits in and we're representing that chicken you know there's a new chick-fil-a at the at the corner this this developed and they were looking for signs to point people to their direction so they've gone to our client and asked for a billboard in this area so this billboards going to generate revenue for the city so in some resting for zoning that would allow for the installation of an off-site sign and still allow for the current business to operate all being cohesive with the surrounding properties so we're truly downgrading ever-so-slightly

[1:40:39] this property and so it's a small property some of the activity that mr. James pulled up this property so small it wouldn't be conducive for a business to run their tough shine is going to continue to operate as it is so we would ask we have the motion ahead of us so we have the headwinds here we ask that you vote against that and have a motion to to approve it as a CH Sony thank you I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have we found this is on the northbound side right correct all right so and if it's chick-fil-a that's what we put up a sign it's behind them correct it's a Elvia double-sided sign and up high so the other side so so you'll be able to see it as you're headed south okay our client is here is that to talk about maybe some specifics to the sign and a little bit of what he has envisioned with respect to taking down the existing sign and placing there their sign as well the chicken that's free coupon we gotta go beyond three we could be in

[1:43:08] trouble I apologize are really good you should see me at the office just we trying to move up for that together by the way okay so my name my name's Doug Cooper and I own Southwest outdoor advertising small business here in town been a part of San Angelo for ten years now so basically what I do is I obviously build billboards and least amount and it's a basically it's a cost-effective means for people in town to advertise right so we talked about chick-fil-a so Rob Watkins he our local chick-fil-a owner he called me last fall and said he needed to build work for the new for his new location that he was building on Knickerbocker so he's um I said well okay I'll see what I can do and he told me the location and everything and so what I did was I I drove the location everything and made sure that everything was okay I said that there was there was a antiquated part of the language that says you can't build a billboard north of San Jacinto on on South Bryan I'll tell the to we can do whatever so anyways um location that meets all the rules and regulations and when I say all the rules rules regulations it meets all the text all rules and regulations it meets the city of st. Angelo - this old cutoff rule um so it's it's currently it's currently zoned CG CH which allows for billboards and all the other areas of town it's more than 500 foot away from other billboards text not only calls for 300 foot it's more than 100 foot from any residential zone and it meets all the setbacks um so Paul Paul Ostrander and his wife own tough shine and I approached them and they wanted to agreed obviously it helps them generate

[1:45:11] revenue from their property right to build a 300 square foot sign so it's a smallest sign basically billboard sign that you can build in Texas so I applied for the textile permit at the location today's text dot sent out their building inspector everything meets their rules and regulations they issued me a building permit and that's in y'all's hand out there and so knowing that it's just bad business to just apply for a zone change without giving you all a reason for why we're doing the zone change my scheduled meeting with John and Al Torres and we tried to figure out a way okay how can we put a sign here okay this is um so anyways during the meeting there were two options basically it was a text amendment to the sign code okay or is own change because for some reason you can't just get a signed variance in city of San Angelo to allow for a billboard okay so we went with the zone change option so this isn't a new deal you guys actually and that's aniele's um hand out there y'all approved the zone change for billboard in December okay the exact same situation it was the whole that case in December they wanted to place a billboard on a piece of property that wasn't his own correctly okay so knowing that that's their only remedy to allow for us off site sign in that location they had to go for the zone change it was approved you all approved the zone change and so that's that and it wasn't actually mr. holmvik it was a company called sign add which is the largest billboard company privately owned in Texas that did that so that was approved so that y'all approved that in December so there can be a sign over there on 3:06 anyways um so this is a commercial corridor I know and I'm going to wrap it up I'm gonna wrap it up okay you see a picture right there of an existing pole right that's an old sign it's a 24 inch column 30 foot tall that's sitting there so

[1:47:13] what I'm proposing is I'm going to take that pole down so it's just a dilapidated it's sign we're removing that sign and replacing it with a 24-inch column for a sign for frigate fillet okay and so it's really a net zero I mean I'm taking one sign down taking one sign down putting another sign up and it's a better looking time right so you know really what we have here is two local companies samples outdoor chick-fil-a that we're just trying to figure out a solution to the problem here and this is our only remedy for the solution is a zone change or text amendment to the sign ordinance so I just ask you to approve this and and you know can I ask you to answer any questions I may not under knowledge here in terms of what I'm sure you all have questions someone had further question just have a question for John maybe it's for both Doug and John I'm not sure let me ask the question I'm the issue you just addressed you're going to take down that one pole I guess John this is for you I guess they utilize that pole they have just set this sign on top of this existing pole with no issues whatsoever no because our ordinance regulates on-site signs differently than billboards that are intended to advertise for something that's off-site and so in this location under this current zoning all that's allowed is an on-site sign so the only sign you can put on the property is advertising a business on that property it seems sort of dramatic to have to have a zoning change to get a sign on the other hand I don't believe that this area should become heavy manufacturing so the question is is is it lot specific only for zone change and should we be looking

[1:49:21] at sign change versus zone change because when you get into zone changing I think you open up the door to other conversations about other things that could be brought to the table and put there and that very much concerns me in terms of zone change tonight as I'm sorry as I said that was that would be our preference if you think this sign is appropriate for a billboard our preference would be to modify the sign ordinance to make this a corridor where billboards are okay I'm in the sonorants to allow billboards today basically we're making a decision about a zoning change correct the only thing you can do today is the zone change an option would be to deny this as we've recommended but ask us to come back with changes to the sound Wiggins okay again if you think billboards are appropriate for this corridor and while I'm here let me make one comment about the he mentioned the zone change that you all approved recently I'll note that that is in this corridor and so that's a big difference in our minds is it that one was in an area that the sign ordinance generally specifies as okay for billboards I have any further public comment microphone on it works a little better if you backed it up to like manufacturing on the request would that not comply and everything and give us some protection what they could do there light manufacturing it allows higher intensity of uses than heavy commercial so in the in the spectrum general commercial is is less less intense then heavy commercial then light manufacturing and then heavy manufacturing of course you answer that thank you Russell with skg the other case for a whole bag we went to we did a PD a planned development district zoning tour a week it get very specific on what was allowed there and what was not allowed

[1:51:24] there that one went through it was under one acre we made output we were going to make application for this one as a PD so we could tailor the zoning to it but there's a little caveat in the ordinance that says you can't do a PD for property under one anchor so if we're going to be lucky at some zone some changes to some ordinances maybe we need to look at what's magical about doing a PD you why couldn't you do on for property under one acre if it could fit a niche or a need so maybe we can direct staff to look at that one as well thank you yes they're simply assigned variance for you know or a special use permit for situations like this where the thing is is that for mr. Watkins there are no other signs in the air that entire stretch of South front he cannot advertise on any other signs there okay so the s there's another there's other old offsite signs there but those are owned by lamar outdoor advertising okay and so they're called rotary they're on the rotary program which means that it's national advertisers and/or local advertisers that are okay with switching their location forever you know wherever Lamar wants to put them so Rob needs to have off site sign directing traffic people go on down south bryant to turn on to Knickerbocker or a or you turn on so-and-so Internet so he has no other option there are no other signs that he can advertise on so it seems yes it does seem crazy to have to get a zone change to allow for a sign when it seems like there's a lot other less drastic measures that there should be less drastic measures to allow for a special use situation like this thank you for the comment Kim yes my name is Jim Turner I'm on the Zoning Board and

[1:53:30] this doesn't have to do with my time on the Zoning Board but one of the things that it takes you have to watch when you're doing these small zone changes Texas law also doesn't allow what's called spot zoning where you just kind of for one special circumstance it's on that they're very different from the rest of the area zoning is supposed to be for a broad policy for an area if a sign ordinance or some other ordinance there doesn't allow a user would be appropriate there then that ordinance needs to be changed probably not the zoning the sign ordinance probably is due for being reviewed again it's been probably 10 15 years since major changes we're doing to it they've done a lot of tinkering with it since then but especially on an area like this where you have as type of sign it's not a constantly changing billboard but it also doesn't fit in with the current sign ordinance it would be very appropriate there it's the probably the best sign you could have there in a lot of ways then we probably need to fix the sign ordinance and not do what it basically amounts to a spot zoning of one little small a lot and then see of other times owning thank you thank you any further comment all right I have a motion and a second to not I should say make sure I say this right to deny the request for rezoning from general commercial heavy commercial to heavy commercial I'll take a vote all in favor of not approving the rezoning say aye any opposed I think people are requesting a break so let's just do it

[1:55:38] quick but ten minutes and we'll be back thank the council meeting back to order and we are going to move on to Section D first reading and public hearing of an ordinance approving a request for the vacation and banned amount of approximately 0.416 acres segments of the north harrison street public street right-of-way generally located between Woodlawn Drive and Forest Park Avenue John James and mr. Jones and John James Director of Planning and Development Services this is a street abandonment as you can see from the graphic here it is running through a park and so it's basically a although it is technically a city street it's it's running through the middle of a park as part of the parks departments plans for that park and including construction of trails and some other things you've seen they are asking to abandon this as a public street through the middle of the park so that they can do some different things you can see here it is all parkland it is a continuation of Harrison Street which basically tees into Webster at this point as we've we held a meeting with the neighborhood had a couple people come or a few people come and ask questions not any opposition so to speak so in fact we notified I don't think we have that on the map but we notified a much larger area than we normally do two to three blocks out in either direction just to make sure that people in the neighborhood if this is a street they use every day they had an opportunity to come and speak and give us input if this was something they didn't want to see closed now when we say closed we're abandoning it as a public street that doesn't necessarily mean that the street will be closed to traffic one of the options that Carl is looking at is is basically keeping it for parking keeping it as a internal park drive but maybe

[1:57:41] doing some things to you know restrict the width or other things to keep through traffic from from cutting through there again as we looked at the area it's it's very lightly utilized mostly from Park users there's not a lot of through traffic it's not a major through Street so we don't think it'll affect the surrounding neighbors significantly that you can see this is the area we notified 157 total notices to everyone in this blue area that's really the area we thought residents that might use this street on a daily basis again we did not receive any formal responses as I mentioned we did hold a public meeting also no opposition from the neighborhood at that point so what's before you is a recommendation from staff and the Planning Commission unanimously to abandon that 382 foot segment of north Harrison Street we did recommend a condition of approval and that's simply to replant the property to make it all one tract of parkland that'll be happy to answer any questions they want any questions ok I have a question before you my concern is is there isn't a final yes or no in terms of traffic on that street because if you're going to allow parking one of the issues with needing to abandon that is the safety issue for kids running through from one side to the other and if it's not quote being closed to the public but it might be used for parking are you really addressing the bigger issue and that issue is the safety issue that exists was that running through the middle of the park and I know that Carla's is aware of that issue and they're in the process now of designing the trails and improvements to the park and we'll definitely take that into account in terms of their design and how they orient the parking and where the trails cross and all of that will be considered I just wanted to make the

[1:59:45] point that your action today simply removes it as a public street the decision of how to reorient or to you know what to do with the actual pavement on the ground is a decision for later down the road okay Lucy did you have motion yes ma'am I need to previous visited do I have a second okay do I have any public comment yes sir my name is Clint Dooley I live in the area I just have a question really two years ago a little two years ago there's a huge rain habit in Angela came through that Park area and I lived close to this area and I've talked to Lucy about some concerns on this the part of the road was washed out in part of munroe for the down was washed out Harrison Street was repaired and fixed up and badging is now open for traffic when roaster you still closed off cannot go through you spent this money to it filled up this road and fix it now you're going to close down to the public when zeldo is still not usable it's kind of an understand why the one it's actually been taken who brought this up Tucson that's the only question I have thank you thank you further public comment just answer that partly by saying that the parks department is the applicant in this case and so the city has applied for this closing on behalf of the parks department all in favor say yes I am any negatives no thank you item e first reading and public hearing of an ordinance amending chapter 11 point O two point O for three raw water permit and appendix eight article a 8.000 untreated water rates

[2:01:49] and raw water permit C director bill Reilly you're on Jamil mayor council good morning I want to have a couple of issues here this morning one is to delete from the ordinance an outdated language pertaining to using water from the lake and the other one is to look at the actual rate for the use of the raw water from the lake just as a matter of a little bit of history prior to 2011 in order to use water from the lake it was not metered but you had to pay an annual fee of 360 dollars and then you could pump water from the lake to use for for irrigation unfortunately are the fact of the matter is is the use of that water from the lake is actually counted against us against our water right for the the water that we have allocated out of Twin Buttes and Lake is worthy and so we have to report that usage too to the TCEQ on a monthly basis in fact we have to tell them how much we're going to take and then we threw that up after we read all the meters so that water had to be metered and we had to report that ok so beginning in 2011 in order to account for that I would begin to install meters for the use of that the at that time the feed was changed and looking and trying to recognize the value of that water a tiered rate structure like most irrigation rate structures was put in place that the more the water you used the more than worthy cost per thousand gallons when we went through the rate study one of the things we looked at course was all of the rate structures and and that one in particular did not have enough usage to justify all of the rate tiers and those are difficult to manage and for our building system so there's no reason to continue to that so just in its simplest form what we did was we took the revenue that was being generated and developed a flat rate to basically make that revenue neutral what it did though as it did make that rate somewhat more than the residential raise use so backing up just a minute and

[2:03:56] looking at the what's currently in the ordinance is the it's still in the ordinance that we charge the way it was done over six years ago that we charge a flat fee a permit annual permit and so we just need to remove that language and so that's the first thing that we need to do is just take that out because it's no longer applicable at all and so then the second part of this would be to look at what we do with the with the current rate structure since I do understand that there it does have some concern that people would say I'm sorry I'm using raw water out of the lakes not being treated and it costs more than than the other so I think that that's a legitimate question and one that we need to address and what do we need to take a look at but I think it's also important to understand that the use of that water does take away part of the water that we use to serve the citizens of st. Angelo so the use of that water is not really any different than using what it deletes our removes of water from our portfolio so we need to make sure that we price it appropriately and that we recognize that it is being used for irrigation I mean it's been put on the ground so we need to recognize that and in assets we have a landscaping rate that is in in place so it seems appropriate that we would just apply the landscape rate to that since it's being used accordingly the other thing that is important to note with this is that when the chicory project was built as part of the easements that were were granted for that line there were the opportunity for individuals to get meters and tie onto that line the rate structures for most of those contracts tied directly back to a row water raked so this isn't just the lake water it's also the use of the chicory line and quite frankly we just don't need to encourage that it could have an impact on the amount of water that we have again it is taken away from our portfolio so we need to price it appropriately and recognize the value of

[2:05:58] that water so what we're recommending is that we change the the raw water rate from the flat fee that we had to the landscape rate which would lower the rate from 565 flat fee to the 509 for the first 89 thousand gallons and then as the landscape rate as you can see here as you get over eighty nine thousand gallons it goes up considerably again recognizing the use of that water and the value of that water now in doing that we would see probably overall about a $10,000 a year decrease in the revenue that's generated from from the lake use but just in the full understanding of the impacts of this there are a few accounts about eight accounts that would actually see an increase because they routinely use more than eighty nine thousand gallons and so of course one of those is golf course they would probably see the largest impact Church that owns property out on Lake Nazareth and then to homes that have that have gone over 89 thousand gallons and so they would see a increase in their their monthly rate if we switch to this however they do have the opportunity under under this scenario to keep their usage under the eighty nine thousand gallons a month and see a decrease in their in their monthly bill so with that we would recommend to you that we change that rate to the landscape rate and be effective August first well question I have a question bill I think I heard you say so many words but maybe for clarification for me with the water that is used the raw water that is used is included all of that is included with the household use as well in terms of having to pay for that and the same thing so our

[2:08:04] thickheaded here are we changing just that raw water are we changing that what they're paying for raw water plus the treated water no we're just recommending with what for the raw water the raw water usage out of the lake is kept completely metered separately and kept completely separate than any of the other use we still have to account for that we do with TCEQ we have to report that monthly to the TCEQ thanks there's been some other questions of way that concerning the how pertain that same question the company Burt is do we use that water when we when we apply the sewer rate and we do not that's completely separate it's not used that that consumption is not used in setting the the winter average for the sewer they're completely separate and we don't we do not even instances where we have four individuals all throughout town have a separate sprinkler meter that sprinkler meter that's the reason we do that is that they're not that usage is not used in calculating the winter average for sewer there and the homeowners it like knives worthy have said what most of them have no we have heard that there's some concerns from some that not understanding why they would pay more for untreated water than they do for treated water and that's the legitimate question so hints it is now being lowered yes yes I'd received a letter from a constituent that there in he had mentioned that he was not he didn't understand why he was drink why he was being charged more for raw water than drinking water well you and I had this conversation last fall on a couple of constituents out there and you certainly explained it to me and I was able to relay that information to

[2:10:07] them about why the raw water at that point in time was was higher and they didn't understand that that that we had to report all at usage to TCEQ and state agencies so they were they were not happy but they were they were satisfied we were able to answer the question anyway I mean for the comment question do I have a motion oh I would comment and no more public comment not emotions we didn't have a motion move to processes it again Panama's oh yeah sorry do I have a motion please go to the proof is presented to have a second okay all in favor all right any opposed all right we're going to get a teenager ski is going to give us an update on self tax revenue please good morning mayor council city manager I'm Tina deer skiing the Director of Finance and I just have a quick update for you you did see this in your Friday packets a couple weeks ago but we want to update the public as well we saw sales text up in June at twelve point two five percent compared with the same month in the prior year we are still however under our original revenue budget by five hundred seventy four thousand dollars a year to date I also want to point out that one hundred and eighty thousand dollars of our sales tax revenue for the month of June was due to an audit adjustment by the State Comptroller and so we feel like our numbers may not have been quite as positive if we didn't

[2:12:09] include that in our calculations it would been closer to about three point six percent up you have any questions I'll be happy to you that's actually for the month of April collections in April yes ma'am so net effect is a 3% increase month twelve point two five percent but that we may not immediately audit adjustment yes ma'am about three point six percent and once a good one oh yeah well thank you we're not going to decline it decided well take some more next month to do you get any bimonthly reports we do not any questions thank you very much thank you been moving this direction yes positive all right we're going to have a second reading and adoption of an ordinance removing the purchasing policy from the code of ordinance in requiring the policy to be adopted by City Council through resolution and to a resolution adopting the June 2017 purchasing policy J and Tilley I'd Julianne Antley purchasing manager and just to kind of go over what we discussed last time this will be cleaning up our city's code of ordinance by removing policy level details and then we'll be adopting the full purchasing policy by resolution and that was included in the background and key changes for council as we discussed last time they'll actually be done and per the code and set aside by the state law all purchases over 50,000 are required to be approved and authorized by City Council so you'll continue to see those and then the council will still be approving the purchasing policy it would just be by resolution rather than ordinance and then these are the key changes that the internal customers will see our staff there'll be quotes now required on purchases over three thousand dollars and and we will be requiring three quotes now which will just kind of give us a better and value pricing rather than and two quotes we'll be able to see a little bit more about

[2:14:11] and whether or not the pricing seems to be reasonable and managers will now be authorized to approve items up to $15,000 and then the last three items are really just housekeeping will be outlining methods for and purchasing computers furniture and uniforms which were not previously included and then the next two are set by the state will be remembering any sort of statutes that have been previously misnumbered and then we'll be doing construction bids by lowest responsible bidder so when you say outlines purchasing method for computers furniture and uniforms how is that different and previously those just were not addressed and so we've added those to the policy Arisa question for you are we able do we do we need to approve one in two separately and individually so Brian was yet saying we need to need to improve the way that's first than the policy second move to approval is presented number one any questions comments I would comment all in favor aye any nays no all right and then to a resolution adopting the June 2017 purchasing policy of approval number two okay all in favor aye any public comment approved as presented we're not going to move into closed session executive session and the provision of Government Code title five open government ethics subtitle a government open government chapter 551 open meeting subchapter D exceptions to requirement that meetings be open under the following sections a section five

[2:16:14] five 1.07 one a consult with attorney when the governmental bodies sixty advise of its attorney about pending a contemplated litigation regarding I'll say incorporated versus city of San Angelo Texas Corallo engineers city of San Angelo versus filmin Technologies B section 55 107 to deliberations about real property regarding 703 South Chadbourne and Lake nads worthy residential lot leases and will be gone for about 20 minutes

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=5nyT3DMDjSs