San Angelo City Council 4-5-16 Part 2

[0:00:00] years and so there's we're out of line with their costs as well and and they readily agreed with that as well so the survey information is in the background as well. We can do a little bit more research on that as well so we have public comment on these items. When I have a quick question. Yes sir. On these tap fees I want to be clear who absorbs this cost is it truly the builder or does he or she pass it on who the tap fee that's why there's a tap or a meter only fee and a tap and meter fee we have a lot of developments where subdivisions come in the developer the contractor will put in the main that he does the main extension and he also does the services stubbed out to the individual property lines. So in that case when that home water comes to establish service at that resident they would be charged a meter only fee and that the bulk of that cost is to cover that meter and AMR system. But if we had a one building entity that is going to develop on a blank piece property and it just doesn't have a water tap to it that's where the water or the meter and tap he would come into play. Allison, this is where Morgan says that we're in a line and alignment with what other cities are doing or sister. We're right on line with the way that Waco charges fees. Abilene Midlin, Odessa, which at all falls, again, they have a very different fee structure than us and they don't have necessarily the most current information in their fee structure. But Waco is right on track with the way that they do things is very similar to the way that we do things and our fees that are proposed are right in line with how they implement them in their community as well. Morgan I have a question for you and I

[0:02:03] really don't know how this pertains I mean how it's gonna work out but my question is say for instance my meter went bad all of a sudden at home how much would I have to pay to repair or to repair it or to get a new one. Oh that The fee is not one that we're proposing to change. If your meter truly is broken, shall we say, we replace that at our cost. It's just a maintenance. And the reason I'm asking is, because I had a constituent that caused me and said her, she had asked for a new meter, but they had said that it was gonna cost so much money to replace it. Now, if you feel that you're, and it's not on this fee change, But if you feel that your meter is not accurate, say that you feel that you're not using the consumption that's on your bill, you can request, I believe it's $40, don't quote me on that, to have your meter tested for accuracy. So. That's what the $40 is. That's what the $40 is. Any public comment on this before we move on? This is simply a discussion item that will be brought back. Any further questions from Council? Let us then thank you, Morgan. Let's move on now to item number F. Don't leave, you're still up. Public hearing in consideration of a resolution authorizing the adoption of the 216-221 Capital Improvement Plan for the City of San Angelo. So we have had multiple discussions about the Capital Improvement Plan. And what's before you today is the final draft with a resolution and your option to adopt it at this time. And so y'all are familiar with this that we started staff preparation. We've had multiple outreach and meetings and discussion, and so before you today is the plan. I will point out that we have continued to plug the online submissions and received 19 more since our last meeting, and so we're continuing

[0:04:03] to still leave that survey open and continue to gather that input, and no real changes there in the volume of the items that they're weighing in on. Now, I will point out that in the, excuse me, in the plan that's before you today, we did make whatever corrections as we're discussed in the strategic plan. And so for example, the Z-Tron system, the fire cessation alerting system, we had very early estimates on that at $500,000. There are discussions at strategic planning. It was identified that we could estimate those costs at a decreased amount of $250,000. So we did make that update to the plan. There also were two police projects that were corrected. We reminded folks of the policies and procedures that are in place for submitting CIP projects and clean those up and got them in line with what made sense with the scope of the projects that are before the council today. So for example, the dispatch system upgrade, the computer aided dispatch and the records management system that we just issued that for, that is corrected in your plan before you at the $1.5 million amount. What was being included, we had a lot of discussion at the last strategic planning session, that there was a $4.3 million price tag identified. That was because the old, old, old, excuse me, system of intergraph was included as a cost in that, and a future replacement of the Spillman project product, which will need to occur in 10 to 15 years, was included as well. And so we just went back and narrowed the scope of that, that we're only talking about this next five year horizon, and we should only consider the scope of the project that's before us today. So that's been updated and I think is more communicative to the citizens and y'all. And there was another project in police that had a similar mechanism. So we updated that the computer replacement that they have at the $1,020,000 mark which is more in line with the next five-year horizon. We also added a new project, the Contro Avenue reconstruction from 87 to Randolph. And so that is a new project added to the plan since we last talked.

[0:06:09] Eight hundred thousand dollars is the city's portion and I believe there's an agenda item later today to discuss What all would be included in that? It's identified as Undetermined as we work through potential funding sources with staff and the this different stakeholders So with that if it's the council pleasure we can go through each of the projects or if that summary information is acceptable we can The resolution is before you to adopt the plan I'm satisfied with the summary if someone is get what y'all are satisfied I'll entertain a motion to accept this we we've been to it before I'm moved to approve as presented okay anybody gonna second that Charlotte do I have any council discussion on this I have public comment on this all in favor of accepting the 216 to 21 capital improvement plan as presented please say I oppose nay but a 7-0 on that please sir it is 1156 we've got about eight or nine more items here y'all want to break for lunch and come back okay let me read the closed session executive session under division of government code title five open government ethics subtitle a open government chapter 551 open meeting sub chapter D exceptions to requirements that meetings be open under the following sections A, section 551-0711-A, consult with the Attorney with the Government of Body Sexy Advice. If it's Attorney about Pending or Confident Plated, Litigation Regarding, number 1, 213 Seal Coat Program Contract, number 2, Marta Fuhrstville Energy Systems, LSC-ETA-L, number 3, Templeton Construction Incorporated, number 4, SAP Hospitality, Incorporated, DBA NITES-N, Number 5, Denise Kendall v. Cosai ZBA 16C07O-L2, which is located at 3221 Red Bluff Road. The time is 1157, and I take us into executive council.

[0:08:11] I would like to ask for something here if you will approve it. I would like to go ahead and do item number G, which shouldn't take but just a minute, so we can let Margin go home because she feels terrible today. So let's do G and then we can do H and that shouldn't take long because they told me it would be quick So we can do G and H and then I would like to step down to item number N Because we have three people here to speak to the West Consul Avenue So if it's all right, I would like to take G H and then N Is that all right with you Rodney? Marty Johnny All right, let's take G, so we can get Morgan home in bed, so she doesn't be sick anymore, and she doesn't get us sick. And that is the first public hearing and introduction of an ordinance amending the 215-216 budget for grants and capital projects. You are on, ma'am. I just have a few routine items for you all this afternoon. The total expenditures are $5,789,000. All of them are fully funded, so each of these comes with their own funding source. The first thing there is related to the utility assistance program offered through neighborhood and family services. We just had additional funds come in on our at-miss grant. We want to be able to pass that through to users. The next is the emergency management programming, $85,500, that's budgeting for the contribution from Tom Green County. Those contracts have been finalized and we are getting those funds into use at this time. The next item there is the state office building improvements, $50,000 in revenue and $50,000 in expense. This is related to items that the tenants ask for that are above and beyond our contractual obligation. So for example, if a department in there is expanding, they will pay us the $50, whatever the cost is, to move a wall or out of space or whatever it is. And so that's just a pass through. It's revenue neutral for those activities that go on, we just need a budget for it.

[0:10:14] The next is the airport fire suppression system, the $240,000 contribution from Type B sales tax that was approved by the council February 16. The next item there is the neighborhood blitz, a contribution also from the type B sales tax of $10,000 to continue that program. The Parks and Recreation ballot projects, these are items that were on the 2010 ballot to citizens so 29th Street Complex Fort Concho Visitor Center of $3,358,000 that's simply getting the money out of the type B sales tax into the city's funds so we can begin those capital projects. The next item is related to airport capital projects. This is $32,000. We're going to spend related to the new FAA Grant 34. This is just our local match getting ready early stages of that grant. It was approved by the FAA November 23rd. The next item that there is the anonymous donation for the Fort Contro Barracks and mess halls approved by council in November and March for $2 million. The last item before you is the animal services spay new to program. We received a $10,000 private donation, and we're wanting to put that into implementing this budget year so we can buy supplies and offer that service for fiscal year 16. So a total of $5,789,745 in revenue and expense. Well, this is just housekeeping. And there's no money involved. Thanks for taking care of themselves. Yes, sir. Charlotte, who won't say it? I will. a second from Lucy a motion to approve this as presented with the second any council discussion on this any items any questions of the comment on this item all in favor except in the motion is presented please say aye aye aye opposed nay but a 7-0 on that one buddy thank y'all hope you get a feeling better market castor oil about a court castor oil out of number eight is consider accepting the city of San Angelo's fiscal year 215

[0:12:15] comprehensive annual financial report, Capper, and single audit as presented by the city's external auditor presentation by not Tina. I'm not Tina. I'm Jaime Guerrero, the chief accountant for the city and and Tina's absence. I wanted to bring this for your consideration. The Capper's included in your background and we have a partner from Armstrong Baccas, our external auditors here, Gala Thornton, and she'll provide had some more detail and highlights on our CAFR, but I just wanted to say that there were no big surprises for us in this year's physical audit, as well as no findings. So, basically it's a clean audit. But again, Gail Leforton from Armstrong back is here, and she'll expand on that. Mr. Mayor and Council, I also wanna introduce our audit manager, Aubrey Stewart. She's gonna join me in this presentation. First of all, I wanna thank the Finance staff for helping us this year with the audit. It went very smooth, I think, this may be the soonest we've ever presented to council, so thank you to staff. Jaime pretty much just already told you what I was gonna say. We did have unmodified opinions on all your opinion units, which means it was a clean audit, and we had no material weaknesses or significant deficiencies that we identified during the audit, so it was a very good year. One thing I just wanted to bring to everyone's attention, It's a little different in this CAFR that's different from the previous year is the Government of Accounting Standards Board issued what's called GASB68 and that relates to your pension accounting and previously you only reported a current obligation for your pensions but they changed it to where now your entire pension liability is now on your books and that's a $60 million hit to your ending equity. And that's different. It's happening to governments all across the U.S. It's nothing that nobody can sympathize with, so that is different if you were comparing numbers from prior to current year, that's a big hit.

[0:14:21] We also did a single audit along with the audit of the government, and Aubrey is going to speak to that. Because the city has a little over three million dollars in federal funding we perform internal control and compliance audit on the federal money and it was a very clean year everyone was really good to us and very cooperative and we had no findings though. Well everything is good everything's above board everything is transparent and we have no problems yes sir that's what the audit found that's Well, we won't did fine, Rodney. So we got, we all had a letter that was sent to us a month ago or two months ago about how we were deceiving the public on our funds and our uses of funds. It would be pretty hard for us to do that with your third party, correct? You do not work for the city. Correct. And your job actually is to find things that are wrong in this, correct? Sort of. I mean, you sort of, let me clarify that. Yes, if it falls out into our samples that we pick, because we can't look at every transaction. So we are limited in what we look at, but yes, we do look for things that might be out of the ordinary. Irregularities and things like that. Yes, sir. That are out there. I just wanted to be made clear that it's not as simple as someone running a small mom and pop business where they're writing off something over here illegally. This is a little bit different, and we do have government regulations that are overlooking how we keep our books and how we run the daily operations. Correct. Yes, sir. Thank you. All right. May I take a break, Mr. Mayor, and speak with city manager just out of meeting? About this. I have a quorum. Back today.

[0:16:29] Know any songs? Not that I want to share. I have a question. I have a question, Mayor. Yes. to me again that you said it was a $60 million hit. Oh, OK. So this might bore you a little bit. Two minutes, give it to me in two minutes. OK, here you go. All right. The GASV has come out and said, we want you to report your entire pension liability that you owe on both TMRS and your Farmons pension plan. That hasn't been reported net in such a big number previously. So if you take your total liability that you owe for all of your retirees in the future. Minus the plan assets that come from the contributions that have been submitted. You end up with a net pension liability, and that's currently $60 million government-wide. That's now sitting on your government-wide balance sheet that hasn't been there before. It was a big hit, but it's pretty consistent government-wide across the U.S. Oh, it was there before, it's just what you didn't report it. It wasn't reported, it's always been there. It's always been there. Right. Just show up in here. Sounds better when you say that. It's always been there. It hasn't showed up in your financials previous to this year. I understand. Any further questions from Council? Public comment on this audit? I'll entertain a motion to approve this as presented. Move to approve. Do we have a second? Rodney made the motion. Rodney has seconded. Johnny has seconded. No further discussion. We'll call for the vote. All in favor. Did you have something? I just wanted to commend that team right there. I've been working with them on the audit committee, and they are an outstanding group to work with. Thank you. Thank you. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. What a seven-all nayman, buddy. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Let's move on now to item N, so that we

[0:18:30] can get these people out of here that's here for the S. This is discussion and direction regarding widening of West Country Avenue. Shane Kelton, Director of Operations, and I suppose Michael will be doing this. I'd like to introduce this item. As you, as the Council's aware, First Financial Bank is constructing a new office in San Angelo at Conchio and Konigheim. So at that corner, there's approximately a $7.8 million investment going on. Also at that corner, there have been previous discussions about the alignment and widening associated with the conchio at that intersection. And since the bank was going through all of this effort and investment to come up with a new facility, Mr. Boyd began discussions with Drew Darby about what sort of assistance tech stock could bring to the table to help us with this conchio street issue, which we've discussed previously. And so he has also begun discussions with us in text as well as text dot. And so we thought we'd bring this to you for discussion and introduction. It is in the CIP. It's in the back section for the, we need to do it, but we're uncertain when and how. And so this item is to kind of cover that proposed project and open that discussion with council, so that if you have an opinion, you can give direction. Shane's going to talk to us about the project. It's not the picture I had. Brian can put the picture up, see it on there.

[0:20:38] But Brian, can you, if you can just pull up a word or something like that with a word or two, or are GIS mapping be fine too? I was just going to show you kind of the boundaries of what we're doing. I don't see it on there, or six, I don't know what six F, CFP is, we were doing so good. I have a picture right here. You can explain the project, but it's a whole lot easier with pictures than it is with. Oh, okay. What we have is basically, from Randolph Street to Coenheim, if you can picture a drive as it comes into downtown. And the Coingheim is the North Bront side. And so right there, Conshow Street in the downtown section is approximately 70 feet wide. It's a wider section

[0:22:40] street. And then as it comes in right there where the YMCA is and where the new property development is, it narrows down into about 40 feet. And so the scope of the project would be to actually take that one section between Randolph Street and Coingheim and actually widen it so it more closely matches what is actually into downtown and actually creates a what in the past has been termed as a gateway into historic downtowns and names a little coming in off of off of the brines and so it's a it's a two-phase or two two-fold approach in this process one because Coingheim is a text dot roadway and structure and so it has their right-of-way in it and then of course Consho Street belonging to the City of San Diego so it's kind of a two-fold two-fold project There's text dot text dot portion, and then there's a city portion of it And there are things within the within the text dot portion. There's some underground Or subsurface drainage covert boxes in there, and then we also have The signalized intersection there conheim that would have to be rearranged and reworked as well too From our standpoint and from the city standpoint on the widening Consul Street, of course, it's concrete, it's an existing concrete structure, and it was built in back in the day at such time when the street and the curb and gutter, it was all poured together, it was all poured at once, so there's a little bit more to the to that than just going in there, knocking out the middle of the street, widening to one curb. There we go. Okay, now we can see the scope of the project, starting basically right here and going to right here, would be the the scope of this project and what we're looking at. And you can tell over here back to the east you can see where Consul Street is much wider here and then

[0:24:41] where it next down and narrows down as it comes by the YMCA. The the project would allow us to come in here and basically add an additional 15 feet, oh that's sensitive. Okay. Kind of in this area right here, we would extend the street out. Of course we go back with concrete streets. That way it matches everything that's existing through the middle of the downtown section along Concho and then add sidewalks in that area as well too. And that's kind of the scope of our project. Of course you have the the text out portion here and there's some underground, again underground drainage there and there that would have to be moved and of course the signalized intersection would have to be moved as it rearranged as well too with some upgrades. Estimated cost for the city portion of it and these are these are estimated costs right now because without going in and actually doing some boring and some things like that and seeing exactly what we have underneath the existing conscious street because it is such an old street we don't necessarily know what our substructure is there so we need to do some testing things like that but but we're estimating in that $750,000 range for construction and about $100,000 for design. And these are estimates at this point right now. They're budgetary estimates as we move forward. Until we actually dig a little deeper into it, we won't be able to refine that number. But those are kind of our numbers. Text dots, the scope of their project, their portion of the project visiting with John, and he's here as well if you have any questions for him. Looking at an estimation of that $400,000 to $500,000 range, it's kind of an estimate for what they're doing. Again, a lot of old infrastructure there. So until we actually get into the ground and see what's actually there and look at it, we won't know exactly what those costs are, but that's kind of some ballpark budgetary numbers as we're looking and moving forward.

[0:26:48] Jane, talk to you about really a split in the project where there would be a tech stop portion, which they would execute and fund. We still have to work out the details about how the whole project would be executed, but there would certainly be an element or a side to the project, which would be on the city's burden. And Shane talked to you about the early estimates for what that would cost. Right now, that is not funded. And so we would have to determine where we would get funding for that. So that'd be a process we would need to go through. This might qualify under a couple of different funding options that we'd have to look into for availability. But obviously, in a down year, funding is a tough issue, right? In addition to what you've already heard, I think Mr. Boyd is here to give some his perspective on the project and probably give us better information about what the bank plans on their corner. So unless you have questions for Shane and I, I'd like to invite Mr. Boyd up. Questions? I've got it. Michael, is that the property line for Shane for the why? Is that the green line or what is that? Yes, that's from green line to green line across there is existing city right away. You have all that? Yes. Plenty of them. Very happy to see a sidewalk and but from the looks of various parades and gatherings it needs to be a really wide sidewalk because there's a lot of strollers and a lot of people. Have we planned for any kind of barrier down that line with why because that's right by their gymnasium and I would just want some sort of safety barrier just in case a car decided to go flying through there, whether it's steel poles, huge rocks, I don't care, but I would like for us to consider

[0:28:51] it. The other thing is, isn't there economic dollars available to fund this? Because it is right there along our river, our tourism that it draws and brings to downtown. I would think that we would have some economic dollars to fund that. We would certainly look into that when Council was ready to move forward. If Council was ready to move forward this, we'd certainly look at those options. As far as amenities along the sidewalk, that is kind of a wide range of possibilities from bare basics to be more consistent with a gateway type approach, a much more aesthetically pleasing approach. And in addition to that, Rick and I have been talking, well, Rick has been talking to I think everybody about the possibility of a downtown, help me out, Rick, downtown street skate master plan. And this might be the first step toward something a little more formal like that. We kind of need to work that out too. But we wouldn't want to build something here that was inconsistent with what we might end up with in other areas downtown. Sort of, you know, that may vary from area to area, but this could certainly set that not idea of how things may develop. Of course, ultimately, the decisions we made about those aesthetics would affect the price tag and we would need you right in the middle of that discussion. We decided to move forward with it, how long would it take? The quickest turnaround you probably do is design in probably 120-160 days, probably as close

[0:30:55] as you get for testing and design and then letting and of course we'd have to work and text doc can answer that probably better on their side. They have more things that they have to go through than we do from that standpoint. But I don't see, you know, construction at best in eight months, probably at best to start and that would, and that's, I mean, that's a fast turnaround time. You know, we're going to be closing down one of the, one of the entrances to the line. While it's going on, so I know they're not going to be, they're going to be happy to The roads widen, I imagine, but they're not going to be real happy with the looting, subway access. Construction on a project like this would eight to 12 months. Now it would be phased in sections because a lot of the underground work that has to be done in this area right there would come first and then we would move on from there but again it could be phased out over time before we'd have it as minimal impact there on that one excess as possible. I mean is the why do you predict such a long construction schedule is it the grade I mean what is it I know we've got you know storm water yeah there's there's there's yeah there's storms storms are inlets here and here that would have to be reworked and redesigned and bring them back down or we work them and again if not knowing the condition, the existing condition of those underground units and then the structure around it, the soil and everything around it, not having an idea about that. It just, again, those things just take time and especially if we try to phase it in and create as little congestion in this area as possible. Also, if we're talking about moving that over in a sidewalk remaining or a new

[0:32:59] sidewalk being placed within the right-of-way. What is that going to look like if I'm standing at the front of the Y and I'm looking up toward the street? That's basically a retaining wall, correct? There's a significant between the ground level here and the street. There's a considerable significant drop currently right now. It just brings the traffic in the street a lot closer into into into view as you go along. Now it depends on again if we if we are talking about some kind of barrier to be placed between the sidewalk and the or the street in the sidewalk caribou would want to place it from to provide more safety for the why in case you do get traffic turning or you know that's be running along and maybe hit the curb and bounce you don't want somebody to bounce into the building itself, again, that's just part of the designs and aesthetics at that point. But it will, I mean, it is going to be close. I mean, again, we were talking about moving over 15 feet with the street, and I'm not, I can draw 15 feet on here, but it's, I mean, it's not, it's not on the property line, but it brings it a lot closer into the property line. It will get significantly closer. The traffic will get significantly closer. I know it's the traffic. I'm talking about the grade differential between the. The grade differential is already. I'm just trying to understand what that is going to look like so that we all understand it. Yeah. That's this estimate at this point. It's probably three and a half, four feet. And it's currently, I mean, it already does it slopes with the ground and we just push that over and it'd drop a lot harder, a lot steeper.

[0:34:59] I don't propose building a retaining wall. I think we can still do it with a dirt slope. We're looking at probably Michael have his bank building built before we get the road built. Yes, sure, we can probably, yeah, I mean, if we started right away, we could be finishing up kind of just a couple three months, maybe after he finishes his, but we will definitely push past his grand opening. That was my question, because I know the bank has already cleared all that property, but Mike, really, your timeline is what, in conjunction with the idea of widening the street, what? If you ought to get in the current building that we occupy, our agreement with is no later than July 22nd of 17th. I'll occupy that new building sometime in May of 17th. Our contractor's 13 months dead set to get it done. And since we are y'all approve the moving of the one tree this morning, we should have people on site by the end of the week to get started. Let me kind of go into this and regress a little bit and I don't mean to do that. But go back about nine years. We talked about somewhere between seven and nine years selling in that property that we currently occupy and demolishing the drive-ins and building those. We moved our main ingress and egress on the bank building north of those trees that you see those five or those six trees up there, working with plan department and tech start from our perspective from a safety issue, is people stopping and slowing down to make a right turn. The other thing that's been approved on the current new location is two ingress and egress units entrances on Concho Street. To me, the widening of that street not only has a aesthetic value and how we lead to down to historic downtown but it's also a

[0:37:00] safety issue on people with pick-ups and so forth, ingress and ingressing on the south side of the bank on Concho Street. Originally when we talked we had businesses that had committed verbally, not financially, to do improvements to downtown along Concho Street by doing the specific type of lighting something that you see very similar to what we have in front of City Hall today. The old-timey black lights that are LED or the black metal lights are LED's that's what we're doing our entire facility and if you hadn't seen the pictures of our facility they mirror something of a turn of the century the 1900s look it's it's a rough-cut stone and tin roof and we'll do that type of lighting throughout our parking lot and we'd also like to be able to do that on the south side of Concho whether we start with some type of specific paving project that would match the master plan that we've looked at over the last several years in lighting to do so. We had talked to some of the businesses along Concho, A.E. Tom's Tire World, Kendall Hurstfield West takes the fire about dressing up their front and that would they be willing to sit down and talk to us about a public private partnership to help get that avenue started. So that's a little bit of the history. We should be through, we will be through by May, period. That would hurt us on the south side, but I'm meeting with architects tomorrow. What we'll do is just not use those entrances at all. We've made a modification to our plan. If y'all decide to go through with the improvement to Conchow Street, you know, ingress will be off of Bryant up north, and then the alleyway, course that's the city all allowed us to widen that off a Randolph side too so it will impact us for a few months I would hope that we could get it done before the initial word we had was January of 18 you get out there with shovels and rakes we'll help do that. Questions I can answer for you about about the building. You're going to start construction exactly the next month

[0:39:03] this month? Next week I hope after my meeting tomorrow they're all on standby Yes, sir. Do you have a question? Yes, I did. It was for Shane and Michael, Mr. Ward, as well. Are we adding a turn lane? How many feet are you adding? Is there going to be a turn lane there at the intersection, because that's where it really, right now there's no turn lane, but people will go all the way to the curb to turn right. Are you adding a lane? is this would allow correct it would allow for an additional lane it would allow for basically a continuous left turn lane all the way down if that's what's desired and we can configure based on traffic patterns as we move forward and especially once the new building is constructed and we look at the entrances and kind of there we can luckily lanes are nothing more than paint on the ground so we can and we have a little bit of room to move them over time if we need to, yeah, based on traffic patterns and what we need, but yes, we would be adding enough roadway to add an additional lane, and a continuous left turn lane. They're not necessarily that you're only gonna turn right on that road, but you understand where there'd be a left turn lane. We're putting that much room in, and as you come down, However, that's- An additional lane, yes. Okay. I understood you. That thought- I thought it was how about- that I'm heading north on Brian right there at the Y to make a right. I would recommend you add some kind of right turn lane right there to go downtown. Right. Because I- there. Yeah, people would just slow down to the curb just to- You know, we have a few engineers in the room, so I'm happy with them doing the design work. So is the action here today to direct them to do such design work, to get a better cost

[0:41:03] estimate, et cetera? Can I add one more thing, please, Elizabeth? We go back to the history of trying to get this Consul Street done. One of the roadblocks that we had was the money from TechStop to be available to do that. They're 30% of the project because they had a hard time and I'll let John come up and speak to trying to determine why is it needed from text-offs point of view. Well, as we've had these meetings in the last two months meeting with Representative Darby and the temporary district engineer that we had, then John and his group, they have committed, and he can tell you that they've committed that roughly 30% of that funding to get that done to further the development and the issue of what we're doing on Concho Street. So you might want him to address that if that would help you. Yes, the logistics are such that TechSlot does not have currently a funding mechanism to fund work on city streets off the state system. In partnership with the city and Representative Darby, as Mike said, we have elected and we do have the capacity internally in the discretion to spend money within our state right of way on Corningheim Street. And that's what we're looking at here. There's no required match amount. It is going to roughly work out to probably at least a third of the project value. I think that's a good, uh, good place to start the conversation, but it is strictly a elective thing on Tech Stott's part to assist the city with this goal. Um, and we'll take that into consideration. So I'd be glad to address any other questions you may have of the state on this issue too. But I have a question for John. What you need for most things changes direction to go ahead and get this thing started that we are in approval obvious? And the proposed design cost on this is about 100,000 is estimated for design costs.

[0:43:07] Again, we won't know that until we actually sit down and define a scope and but just based on the the initial cost of the entire project, we're looking at approximately 100,000 for design. You need consensus of Council to move forward on this? Design and not construction costs, right? It's strictly design costs. Design first. Well, I'm in favor of this. I think it needs to go. I think for the safety of the why this should have been done long long ago that's a that's dangerous that's really no there's really no approval this direct discussion and direction I would say with the consensus of the council we would say go ahead and go forward with the design phase of this and get us some figures together but it would be it's something I would like to see happen we would have to look at funding of course and yeah for the initial part of it but We do have a direction from here. We can start doing that at this point. Are you in favor of direction to move forward, Elizabeth? Yes, Lucy. I'm fine. Johnny? The estimated cost, let me, it's estimated design cost is 100,000, so that means about 500,000. It won't be over 100,000. Again, through 500,000 I'm only improving. We might need to go up on some fees. Well, let's, let's talk for a second. with Council authorized you guys to begin negotiations with engineering firms for other design issues can we jump right into that and begin with somebody and do we have to bring that contract back to council you can execute without having to bring a hundred thousand dollar contract back to council I think we got to bring that back to council so this item if you authorize us to move ahead with a design you need a voter you need consensus I mean it's not an action item over on the agenda do you need a vote consensus to move forward would be fine what consensus to move forward would be fine you all right with Johnny yes Marty

[0:45:09] you all right with it yes right near you all right you got seven says that says consensus just right to move forward okay when Shane develops a proposed contract he will have to come back this item for design only will be back in in front of you at some point in the near future. Giddy up, my friend. Real fast. Yeah, hurry, because I would like it to be finished in May and next year. We need to get this so we can get that alley behind the bank that we bought, get that finished, maybe at the same time. And no more tree removes, right, Mike? Mike, you're not going to take out any more trees, right? You'll never know about it. I love it. Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Let's move forward on this. Let's now move back to item number I, which is consider adopting a resolution English Spanish meeting exhibit A to the resolution ordering a general election to be held on May 7, 216 for a purpose is of amending designation of election day polling places, Brian Kindred. Yes, normally this is something that we just put on consent agenda, but because we're changing a location for election day, we wanted to have a public discussion about this. St. Paul Presbyterian heads and this makes Daniel a little upset because it's close to his house but there's some connectivity, some backup connectivity issues there that's been identified and so they want to move that location to MHMR which is a good location provides the redundancy for the connectivity and we're also taking this opportunity to allow for there to be a early voting branch location for the wall independent school district for their election so that's really all there is to it just wanted to make public notice of it need to vote on it need to vote yes move approve you have a second do have a motion from Marty I do have a second from Charlotte any council discussion on this item public comment on this item all in favor please say aye aye opposed nay

[0:47:14] I oppose nay, none, so it'll be a 6-0 vote. Johnny has left the building. Adam J is considered authorizing staff to negotiate a contract for fee and scope of services with Antonora Architects under FC0116 for the reservation and expansion of a Fort Concho Visitor Center that barracks one and two. Robert Bluthard, you are on, sir. Afternoon, Mayor Council. FC0116 represents the planned and future innovation and expansion of the visitors center in barracks one and two. 27 invitations to submit were sent out to architectural firms in San Angelo, Concho Valley State of Texas, even the Southwest. Only six were returned, regrettably no local firms applied. Antinora may be familiar to you two years ago When we thought we needed a feasibility study for this project, Antonora was the unanimous and highest rated firm. We decided that we were smarter than we thought we were, and so we passed on the feasibility study and decided to jump right into the architectural planning. And again, Antonora, with their experience in frontier forts, visitor services, traffic flow, and gift shops ahead of the list, they were far and away the best of all the rated firms. The ratings are attached a short summary each of the six firms that were under consideration attached and they stand ready with any questions. You did send it out for local bids and there were no local proposals. We identified four architects and firms. We established two sessions for anyone to come and visit and discuss the project and one firm formally sent a please do not consider and we did not hear from any of the other three firms or individuals. It is, of course, possible that some work may be subbed out, but that, of course, is up to the eventual selectee.

[0:49:14] And Tanora is where? They are based out of Austin. They have other offices with their subs elsewhere, but they're off main offices. They are Texas farm. Sir? They are at Texas farm. They are located in Texas, that's correct. I'm going to make a motion to approve this. Motion to approve? Okay. Do I have a second? Elizabeth and Marty and this is a grant that we've been given to do this am I correct in this well not exactly that's the other barracks that's barracks three and four of it I came to you earlier this is the half since sales tax money project we do have a funding source for a million dollars council comment anything further needs to be asked or said public comment on this item all in favor the motion to accept as presented please say aye. I oppose nay but 6-0 on that one buddy. Thank you. Appreciate you. So you were contract time. Okay. Item K is update and discussion concerning commercial dumpsters and associated windblown waste. Shane Kelton you are up sir. Councilwoman Farmerhead had mentioned in two or three council meetings go about issues that she was seeing along the loop and about dumpster over filling dumpsters and specifically some wind bone waste in those areas. I wanted to just quickly bring back to y'all today and update on what staff is doing and some of the things that we're looking at as we're moving forward on this. Of course, if y'all have seen some of these commercial dumpsters around town, you know, overfilling is a constant problem that we have. And of course, we have quite a bit of, say, illegal use of dumpsters where we have people using the dumpsters that aren't paying for them so and they're over filling them just dumping them at the sides at the base and it's not in general looking well and then of course the wind blowing waste issues as we as we move along and the issues along especially the loop and those bigger more open areas around our commercial

[0:51:14] developments some of the things that from staff that we are currently working on we're working with repot well first and foremost we're in the process of hiring an individual right now to kind of be our enforcement arm for not only commercial commercial trash but also anything that's related trash wise to kind of be our enforcement arm and to be our go-between with with the people that are either having an issue or creating an issue and the city to to move that along. And with that, we're working with Republic to really start identifying these really consistently problematic areas, the ones that we're seeing time and time again. They actually, Republic now has these little phone type devices. They're actually, they can take pictures, they can actually take video recordings, voice recordings, and GPS coordinates of all of this and share that that with city staff. And so as these areas are identified, we will be sending our staff out to visit with these businesses or whether it's a commercial business or even if it is a residential area homeowner, we'll be able to send our staff out and directly visit with those people that are either having issues or causing the issues and try to work out some solutions with those. One of the things we wanna make sure that we do, when we find these is actually, We wanna not be punitive when we start off, but we wanna work with people and try to, when we have issues, explain to them, have our staff explain to them all of the options they have available to them. Whether that's multiple pickups a week, whether that's different size dumpsters that are available, lockable dumpsters, things like that. We wanna explain all the options that they have available to them to try to correct the issues that we're having as we're moving forward. And again, and I said we're hiring for our enforcement arm of this,

[0:53:14] and that's exactly what they'll be. If we continue to have repeat violators that after we visited with them and tried to help them out, if they just continue to violate ordinance, we will start actually enforcing the ordinances that we actually have on the books. We're not here asking for any more ordinances. We're here just to tell you that we're actually gonna start more aggressively going after in addressing ordinance violations. The issue of enforcement really has nothing to do with the contract. No. This has been going on for years and years and years. You and I probably talked about it eight years ago. Yes. So why don't we enforce? I mean why do we think by doing nothing we're really going to change the economy? I'm not sure what the answer is. Liz, I know that my house is a half block away from Bloop. And I had a major issue with the dumpster. We had styrofoam. We had all of our alley into the Bloop area as well. I did contact code enforcement. And the code enforcement came in, worked with that group. I actually got a bigger dumpster with a lock on it. And that problem is completely gone out. And that's what basically we're trying to do here is make sure that especially those businesses on the loop because with spring here in summer and the mowing it's going to become a major issue again on the loop area I'm you know Charlotte may be interested in the loop but you know I used to get calls from Johnny's area down down on the east side of downtown wherever there's residential in proximity to commercial someone's getting someone else's blowing trash and lots get it from the blowing trash and one thing that we did We had an employee that was on light duty for a little while in our health division, and while he was on light duty and couldn't actually do the inspections in the restaurants, we actually had him in a pickup going around and basically patrolling commercial dumpster issues at the time, and we did start seeing compliance at that time.

[0:55:23] we really think if we're actually visiting with people, working with people, reminding them of their responsibilities and what the ordinance says. And also letting, I think, also one thing, to let them know what options are available. Maybe they haven't gone online and haven't looked. Or maybe they haven't visited with the commercial sales folks over at Republic to learn all of their options. Maybe, again, we can help with that. But again, too, I do think that at some point, time enforcement is going to be necessary. I think that's I think that's where we are and I think that's why this person's going to be vital because again Code enforcement is stretched so thin as it is so far and they have so many different areas that they have to look at that This position is going to focus primary on trash issues and and yeah Commercial yeah and and again with and with residential or any any needs that they see or they find out there They're going to deal with them I think in, I would say that a problem is undersized commercial dumpsters, okay, and y'all, I know y'all will help with that or encourage them to right size, but if the commercial dumpster still doesn't have a secured lid, the one in our parking lot has the kind of the floppy plastic, I can tell you what happens with that, and so it seems like the equipment itself is not really conducive to our environment here. And to me, it doesn't matter what part of the city you're talking about, if the wind's gonna blow, we know what's gonna happen. One of the things that we're also looking at and I've visited with John James about this is looking at an ordinance through the development process actually requiring screens at commercial properties, dumpster screens at commercial properties. A lot of other municipalities around the state have this, It's something that we do, that we don't require a new development, but I think it's something

[0:57:24] that we should look at and we're exploring that right now and we started those conversations and hopefully we'll be bringing something to council. If council's good with that, as we move forward and to try to again, create opportunities to help, create an opportunity to help these businesses contain their trash and to also hopefully if it's a gated screening system, they can also stop some of the illegal use of their dumpster. I think as well too, something that we're looking into right now is the feasibility of and moving into budget seasons, perfect time to do this. There may be ways that we can, if we have target areas that we feel are having more issues than others, look at maybe offering some kind of incentive type program to help them retroactively build a screen for their facility, especially in areas where we're doing. And going into budget season, that kind of gives us the time to try to find funding for that program. Other things that maybe, you know, you could look at maybe what weighting permit fees for the construction of those things, things like that just to incentivize people to actually go back and build screens. That's awesome because I don't think for the most part, But it's the business owners, negligence, I think a lot of times it's, as you say, it's the illegal use of it. They can't be watching that if they're inside watching their register all the time. That's correct. Those are great ideas. And so, again, these are things that we're working on, something else we've been talking with Republic Services about maybe establishing if we have repeat offenders and people that aren't wanting to comply, start actually having a punitive fee associated with collection. On that, if they document, they take a picture of it, they document it, and have a punitive fee of so much per cubic yard over what is overfilled in the

[0:59:24] dumpster or stacked around the dumpster. Because republic, you know, if they're collecting that trash that's on the ground or it's overfilled or there's some other issue and they're collecting that trash, you know, it's costing them additional time, money, and manpower to do that and slowing them down on the rest of the route. And so, that may be something else that we can look at is adding a punitive fee associated with the overfill to hopefully coax proper use and behavior. You have a question? Commercial businesses, I think, have a responsibility to make sure their trash is being disposed of But a lot of times, you know, the strip centers, malls, you know, the owner of the business is an absentee owner, and you've got store managers who could care less. Or it's just not in their time of day to take care of. And the easiest thing is to lock them, lock them down. And for overfills, a lot of it is people on the streets who go by a dumpster and dump their trash, those lids are not that heavy. They're easy to lock. All you gotta do is have it unlocked at the time that your dumpster truck's gonna arrive that morning or evening, whatever it is, but it controls a lot of trash. But we're going to risk, by doing this, where it will risk a lot of people just dumping it on the street. You know, all I want to do is beg for a citizen appreciation for a beautiful city we have here on the river, and be aware of the trash, be aware, and properly dispose of it, and businesses need to be really aware. I know if we would look from the beginning from any new commercial construction, if we would require a screen or some sort of privacy like the McDonald's has, and stuff like that,

[1:01:24] if we required it, it maybe wouldn't be a problem after the fact. Rashes a problem and all you gotta do is travel. We see other cities and the beauty of those other cities, especially if you've got a tourist type city. And we do and we need to be aware and take care of our trash. We're gonna come down. This was an update for council to let you know the concerns that were brought forward and what we're doing moving forward and what we're looking at moving forward and if y'all have any other suggestions we would be glad to take those or and again we will be again looking at the ordinances from the development side of things as far as the screens and commercial developments things like that moving forward and we'll bring that back to you any further questions for Shane public comment on this item thanks Shane moving on item number L which is consider adopting a resolution enacting drought stage one of the city water conservation drought contingency plan presentation by assistant director of water utilities Alison Struby afternoon mayor and council this item is to adopt or pre-all to consider adopting resolution to enter into drought level one the same presentation was provided to the water advisory board last Tuesday as by unanimous vote that they recommend I bring this same presentation and resolution to you. This next slide, I think you got a preview of previously. But you can see, according to these sources labeled on that picture, we aren't a lot better placed than we were in September of 2011. But this next picture is pretty telling of our local supplies. Whereas the state of Texas, as of April 1, The reservoirs are 86.8% full, but y'all received the lake level reports put out on a

[1:03:31] daily basis, IVs at 12%, OC Fisher at 15%, Twin Buttes at 12%, and NASworthy at 80%. So it's pretty telling why all our reservoirs are in the red and we just haven't received the inflow like the remaining reservoirs across Texas have. As all of you are aware, the conservation plan that's in the ordinance, how the different stages of drought plans are enacted are based on water supply calculations. These calculations on this slide were performed on March 28th, that's week and day or two. This calculation takes into account our current and available surface supplies coupled with be minimum daily hickory pumping. Some key criteria regarding this calculation. One, OHIV, that calculation is provided to us by CRMWD. They have told us by January 2017 that IV may no longer be available to us. So that's when we start utilizing the other sources. The other criteria of this calculation takes into effect is it includes zero inflow, whether that's stream inflow or precipitation. We don't know how much it's going to rain or when it's going to rain, so that's another assumption this calculation makes. The third that every available gallon is available for utilization when we say for instance when we go to use OC Fisher water, basically everything that's in that source at that time will be available and be able to be sent to our intake structure at the water plant. And lastly this calculation does include evaporation rates provided to us by Texas Water Development Board for this area.

[1:05:31] These are broken out by month and what the evaporation rate is for that month in this area. I want to stress that this isn't an exact science. There's been many variables to this number, including we could very well go through a very hot and dry summer where evaporation rates are more escalated than what is predicted. Those are all variables to this calculation. Under the current drought level, which is not a drought level, a conservation stage that we are in, watering is allowed twice every seven days starting April 1st, so five days ago. You are allowed to water every twice, every seven days. Under drought level one, this goes to what we were at prior to April 1st, that's one watering every seven days. So that's why we want to bring that to you. We feel that this is urgent that we be proactive and it's responsible enough of us to recommend that we go into drought level one at this time. So this is just kind of restating what's in the resolution that we start the conservation measures starting as of next Monday, April 11th, and the water rate adjustments would be applicable and enforced May 15th. I'm ready for any questions you may have. I think you want to start this. You've kind of been an advocate of this. Do not. It wants to start on this. I'm not crazy about going to drought level. It raises the rates of people that water but it's totally what we don't have and we are

[1:07:32] dependent on surface levels and what little bit we have in hickory and we need to conserve to conserve the hickory water and look at I hope the board is looking seriously at what we can replace in 2017 with IV. I'll make the motion that would go into level one. Is there any way that we could go to watering once a week instead of twice a week without going in to drive level one or do we have to go to drop level one to change the watering. I would really like to see the watering patterns change from twice a week to once. And the other item that it's related to this that was taken to the advisory board was proposed changes to the conservation plan, including the watering schedule. Goes more into depth about drip irrigation. Some of the items that haven't been addressed by the conservation plan. So those are, we did a slight preview of that with the water advisory board. got some feedback from them. And so we are going to come back with those proposed changes of what they're looking at. So that is something we are looking at this time. Well, I could support what Charlotte has said, if that's the only way to do it. If we could just go to watering once a week instead of two, and then doing the charges maybe six months down the road if it doesn't rain, I'm not wanting to penalize our people, but I would like to go to once a week watering and not two. So is there some way that we can amend that to make that work? Or do we have to go to one before? Sorry, the way the ordinance is when we adopted the ordinance. You have to amend the ordinance that you adopted. Or if I could, my understanding of those rate changes were not to penalize folks, but to replace revenue, which would be lost through reduced water sales.

[1:09:32] And that is a significant part of the financial side of the water rate strategy. And we just implemented it. And we think my own opinion is that we're creating a financial crisis that we already have, we've just implemented a solution for. So my recommendation would be that if the water is that scarce, then we need to implement the rates necessary and call for in the ordinance. We're here to tell there is a change and it's on the books. We need to adhere to what is there. We rarely hear you. I'm sorry. You know, when you have to listen to your list and everybody here, you tend to talk lower because you can hear yourself so loud. I'm sorry. Well, I think we do need to amend the ordinance. And I've said this all along that I thought that water in the twice a week and going back to twice a week. I don't I don't like and so I would like to do that. I do realize that cost us money We lose money by not bringing in the money over here on this side, but then To say how we're gonna make up that difference one of the time The ordinance are you through Rodney? I guess I am now. I'm gonna speak we're gonna start speaking one at a time No more than no, I'm it blurt me in and speaking over that's that needs to end Do you you still have the floor Rodney? Okay, Charlotte, you have your hand up your next. We don't have an agenda item to amend the drought level is what I'm trying to say. If we approve this today and then you come with us with the changes, then we can amend it. And if it's within the timeframe before the rates go up, it doesn't affect anyone. The rates go up May 15th.

[1:11:34] I don't know that they can get it on the agenda to get it amended before May 15th, but let me hear from Bill. You were hoping to meet with the Water Advisory Board one more time, which is on our next schedule meeting is May 10th, and bring these to talk about the proposed changes to the different drought levels at that time. Let me point out that what Mike was saying is that we need to be really cautious about, that if we enact a constant one-week water and which which I agree with I think we and that's part of what we're looking at that we're going to permanently lower our usage and that is a good thing that's our objective but that's also why we put the multipliers in there so that when we did that we enacted the drought stages we would stay revenue-neutral and we need to be real careful if we start removing that we're going to see an impact there we're going to need to adjust for that one thing to point out that in the drought Level 1, the low water users up to 2,000 gallons, there's no change under the proposed multipliers that were presented to you today. And it really doesn't start to get up to the 10% or 20% until we get into the much higher users. So the drought level 1 tried to take into consideration that just the normal usage would not be impacted that much, but just more the higher users would be. So just want to say as we look through this, we need to keep that in mind that we did set out a five-year plan that didn't take into consideration these drought-level stages. Elizabeth, any other further council comment on this? There is a motion on the floor and a second that we go to this. The Water and Water Advisory Board did recommend that it was unanimous. That's right. They did it was. public comment on this item and I understand what you're saying Michael but when you write

[1:13:44] that check down at the end of the month you know you're looking at that total figure and we start going up on people it's I'm very concerned especially in economic downturns that we continue to go up on people so the citizens it's the citizens bear the final brunt of this so that's my concern but I do think we need the water once a week that's enough and I suppose people can regulate that. No public comment, no further comment from Councillor Colle for the vote all in favor of accepting as presented, please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. What is 6-0 on that one? Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Stribby. Item O is an update on the removal of traffic control signals, Washington Street and Chadburn Street and MLK at 14th Street. Ryan Ward, you are up, sir. Good afternoon, Council, Mayor. We've kind of gone over one of these before, about the same time last year we had a removal of Maine and Cobraland, real similar to what we're looking at today. I just really wanted an update to let everybody kind of get any concerns or comments that they had on kind of the procedure and what we're looking at. And so I'll just jump in and I'll try to go through these slides fairly quickly. We have two intersections that are actually on the table today. First one is Washington and Chadburn, that we're looking at removing an old existing strand pulse signal. This map kind of shows you approximately where we're looking for those of you that aren't familiar with this area. A lot of our signals throughout town, I know that's one of the things on the CIP, but we We do have infrastructure tied to signals that are well past their lifespan, and with Councilman Silva's request to look at these intersections, that's kind of how it began. This is what's out there on the ground right now at this intersection. So we're using an AEP poll to span wire, the signals across the intersection to know lattice

[1:15:48] work, steel derrick that are no longer compliant as far as, you know, you don't see those things used anymore. It's well past its life span and also AEP is no longer allowing us to put any of our, any of the basic signal items on to their polls anymore. So per Councilman Silva's request, we did a traffic signal study in accordance with MATCD chapter four of the warrant study for the federal 2009 requirements and regulations. This one was, This particular study was done January 5th through the 8th. And then basically here was the findings. We have warrant 1, 2, and 3, or the typical warrants we look at out of the 8. The other ones don't necessarily apply to this particular intersection. Some of those are pedestrians, gap timing, some of the things. But these are the three we typically look at. None of those, as you can see, were met. The data that we used was from January 6th through 2016, which was a 24-hour study period that we looked at to this next slide. So what we have out there existing as far as, when I talk about ADT, the average daily traffic that we have on those roads, you can see the side street numbers, which in this particular case is Washington Street, was very low. We had 223 cars from the eastbound direction, 288 from westbound traffic movements. And of course, Chadburn is our main through affair on that street with 2,130 vehicles northbound, southbound 2,230, and so you can kind of see that a lot of the movements and the traffic patterns that were probably there previous when the signal was put in are no longer there. And I'll go through these, I know I gave you just a real brief representation of what warrant going is but it's it's an eight hour vehicle volume study so we look at

[1:17:48] all eight hours and in that eight hour time period there's some constraints we look at to see if those things meet that was not met the for maybe I may have pulled the next slide out so basically all of those weren't looked at them I'm missing a few slides here but our recommendation is obviously remove those signals in this particular one that's no longer meeting the warrants. Our typical cost savings is about 900 a year in electricity maintenance. Those type of things to upgrade. Most of those intersections and we use kind of a rough generic because every one of those is a little bit different. But anywhere between 200 and 250,000 that we have in here to upgrade an intersection that's a four way intersection like that. And currently, like I mentioned, AEP no longer lets us put any any of our amenities on their poles. If approved, which is really, this is just an update, but what we'll do is we'll run a 90-day traffic four-way flash condition at that signal. In that time period, we'll also put outside and say, hey, this signal's under a warrant study. So any concerns or complaints and any kind of citizen has out there or sees, they're welcome to call. Once completed, all the signal items will be removed along with the meter service. And in this particular location, stop signs will be placed on the minor traffic movement, which is Washington on both the side streets. I don't know if y'all have any questions in regards to this particular intersection. Questions, Council? Oh, I just have a comment, Mr. Mayor. I'm wanting to, I'm the one, oh, I'm sorry, I should wait to guess to the MLK one. Yeah, I can jump to the next one. Washington Champion, but the MLK in 14th, I find that to be a very busy intersection still. I mean, I read on here about your study and stuff,

[1:19:50] but you've got, and the reason I'm saying this, because I go to Franco's on Sunday. So I know how much driving it is on Sunday because the people from church are in that area, coming out from church, you got people from the restaurant, and you got people at Lowe's. You got people from the Midgada that's right in the corner of the Azteca, and then you got the theater now. And then of course, on the other side, you got Waterburger, and I just think that there's still a lot of traffic there to remove that signal. And you may be referenced in 19th Street and MLK, which is the one. Oh, am I getting the wrong one? I'm working the same. War-tenths is the one where, look, it's a little bit further south. Yeah, I don't even I can't remember exactly what's on that other corner. I know there's a pond store. I believe on one corner I'm so sorry. The old fence coming used to be on one comment. Yeah, if you want me to I'll jump ahead of this I'm so sorry. I was okay. That's okay. That one's actually gonna stay that is a text-op facility not teeth and MLK and let me If there's any other question of this one, I'll jump to the next is what does your question on Washington and Chadford? Yes, sir it is. I had a couple of people call me about this. They saw it in the news and they were concerned about movement between Santa Rita elementary and Fort Concho for parents who are going back and forth between there that crossing the Bryant's is difficult. It's traffic in our community has grown and that Washington provides them the crossing through the right that's that's safe and signalized so I respect the ME-TCD and the process that you've gone through and I was wondering or I guess worried about the timing if that was if the dates that you did the study were those during school was in session or was that Christmas break well what we waited till after Christmas break because we it's not

[1:21:51] allowed and we try to stay away from that because that is in M-E-T-C-D. Try to stay away from those holiday dates. Anywhere there's a week that has a major holiday because traffic movements tend to change during those times. So we've tried to do it on weeks when it's not during a Christmas holiday or some sort of event time kind of around town to get consistent data that is week in and week out is typical to that intersection. Well, I think that if there are a lot of people who feel this way, we'll hear about it during the 90-day study. Right. Yeah, I think that gives people time to kind of voice their concerns if they see some issues. I know that is one of the feeder schools from around town. That's why you don't see as many kids in that area walking anymore, because I think most of those kids that go to Fort Concho over there, which is Oaks and Chadburn, that next intersection over on Washington or I guess that's Washington and Oaks, you know you do see that you know you don't you don't see the the volumes of people walking and the kids walking anymore because that school is you know most of them are bust or parents bringing their kids there so the questions on Washington and Chapman you want to move on then to 14th and MLK to the next one my slides of another oh Anthony was going to clean it up a little. I had some slides similar to that. The next intersection, I'll just skip through basically exactly like this one. 14th and MLK. This one was actually not brought to us by Councilman Silva, but it was asked of us because we're looking at some CIP projects and MLK is on the list to be redone. And so as part of the design criteria, the consultants are looking at that and they're trying to figure out what signals we're going to have to put back.

[1:23:52] how we're going to have to make this ADA pedestrian compliance. So we did take a look at this intersection and it actually has less volumes than the one I just showed you as far side streets. It doesn't even project out on the charts anymore because of the side street numbers are just so low. And it's basically as far as all three studies, since I don't have those slides here, I can't tell you exactly what the ADT volumes were, but they were a lot last and it was done in December according to the same M.E.T. same guidelines all three warrants were not met. This particular intersection we're looking at because the actual volumes and the minor it was real similar as far as traffic volumes from all four directions but we're looking at actually doing the stop condition on MLK there and 14th would be your thoroughfare at that particular intersection, you know, based on those traffic volumes. So, real similar to cost, $900, basically, a year for maintenance. That's if we don't have anything major happen to that intersection. And to upgrade something that's no longer warranted, like I mentioned, is about $250,000. So, you know, if it's something that we don't need to add in and impact on a CIP project and save some there, I think that's a good thing. That is real slow intersection. Yeah, I move we remove both of them. Have you had any comments from the Lucy? Have you had any comments from your district? No, sir. It was my fault. I was thinking of a different intersection. I know in regards to your comments on that. That has been looked at before several years ago. And with that being a text stop facility, they decided to keep it. And probably with, like you said, the theater and things there now, there's probably more pedestrian traffic and more traffic in general over there, so it will stay. This is just an update actually, so it doesn't require anything. It doesn't require anything, just if you had comments or concerns.

[1:25:52] Just for the record, Johnny said he was in favor of removing the voice to the chat room. Okay. Yes, ma'am, do you have another comment, Charlie? No, I was waiting at Marty. Anyone that's having comments on this? Good job. Have a comment on this? Thank you, Ryan, we appreciate you, buddy. Okay, follow up at the administrative items. Number A, consider possible action on matters discussed. In executive closed session, if needed, we discussed nothing that needed any update or anything to talk about. We voted on that. We voted on that. It wasn't about just the discussion update, because they're going to go ahead and put the signs out and we'll take the. That's why I was waving at you, we tried. Oh, fine. Thank you. B, consider approving various board denominations, civic events, Stephen McAfee from SMD5 to an unexpired term ending October 216, Park Commission, Allison Watkins to an unexpired term ending January 219, zoning boards of adjustment, Raymond Banner to SMD4 to an unexpired term ending January 217, I'll entertain a motion for these. I'll take your motion and I'll take your second, Marty. I have any public comment from the council on this public comment on this item all in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay put a six so on that one as well which leaves us to announcements consideration a future agenda item start with you miss grind staff I have nothing mayor I'm going to write that down please do I was ready to write right Miss Lizzie Miss Charlie I have something I'd I'd like the council to consider, received a phone call, a gentleman not in my district, but he would like to know if the city is ever considered the amount of water we don't have when we approve new construction permits for hotels and so forth and wanted to know if we would be willing

[1:27:56] to appoint a group, a citizens group and staff group, to look at what we could do or what could be allowed, and I told him I would mention it. It counsels discretion. But water advisory board, I mean, is that something that wouldn't suffice? It would be great. I didn't even think of the water advisory board, but if it's a task that we could put there. We could definitely do that. It'd be done. Marty? Nothing. Rodney. Nothing. I will entertain a motion for a judge. Yes, Brian. To make just one announcement, that there's two days left to register to vote for the election. So April 7th. That is May 8th, isn't it the election? May 7th. May 7th and early voting is at dead be keys. Yes. And April 7th is the last day to register to vote if you want to vote in this one. Mr. Mayor, please note I will not be here next meeting. I'll be in Washington DC with ports to planes on business for this city. Very well. I'm going to adjourn. I'm going to adjourn. I'm waiting for a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. It is 230. Right on the nose. Dude he's about to start

Transcribed 2026-07-27 with faster-whisper (base.en) · source: youtube.com/watch?v=N6sUEcCz2sI